Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
KempBolt

Your All Overrated Team

Recommended Posts

I think what we're learning here is that 'better' is an incredibly subjective term

Its really not.

 

Megatron is better than Big Ben. Period.

 

Big Ben is better at improving a team's chances to win the SB, (according to some people, I would still take Megatron for value). That doesn't make Big Ben a better player. The word is being misused.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Better' is one of the most subjective terms in all of language.

Big Ben is better than CJ. Bush was better than Obama. Orange juice is better than grape juice.

The word implies an opinion is attached. Subjectivity at its purest form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But I think you guys have revealed something important in how we argue about sports in general. I would agree that CJ is more skilled at WR than Ben is at QB, but I also agree that Ben adds more value to the Steelers than CJ does to the Lions. The fact is since CJ was drafted, the Lions have gone 36-76 with a whopping 1 season with more than 7 wins and one playoff appearance (that same season). So yea I think you can argue better value or better skill, but it's tough to do both at the same time.

 

Just my opinion though.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not going to do every position, but I'll name a few.

 

QB: Matt Ryan

RB: Adrian Peterson (not because he's not as good as advertised, but because the RB position can't consistently carry a team to the playoffs--AP's skills aren't overrated, but his every game impact is. The Vikings are bad QB play from losing most games, no matter how well AP plays)

WR: Torrey Smith

WR: Mike Wallace

TE: Jason Witten--Again, a great player who is as good as advertised, but I don't see him as the game changer he's depicted as.

 

I disagree about Matt Ryan. He was 4th in the NFL in completion percentage and yards last season. Yes he did throw too many interceptions last year, but he didn't have his best receiver last season, which sure doesn't help. He was also sacked 44 times (3rd most in NFL), which shows you how weak his offensive line was. I wouldn't throw him in that top tier with Peyton Manning, Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, etc., but I would him in the tier right below.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty self-explanatory. I'll just mention that I'm thinking overrated in terms of general consensus opinion on a guy (rather than just the TGP take on him). This should stir up some hard feelings :devious: .

 

Quarterback:

 

1st Team: Andrew Luck :Colts: Might come as a surprise given my recent defense of Luck, but he's broadly treated as though he's already an elite QB and he simply is not.

 

2nd Team: Alex Smith :Chiefs: This is probably less surprising. A below average QB who is treated as a good starter because of circumstances on his teams that have led to good records over the past few seasons.

 

 

Running Back:

 

1st Team: Arian Foster :Texans: Less of an elite player than just a good fit for a RB friendly system that gave him a lot of carries.

 

2nd Team: Ben Tate :Browns: Came into the offseason with really only 1 year to his name that was better than average (3 years ago, no less) but was viewed as a plug and play, high level starter.

 

 

Wide Receiver:

 

1st Team: Eric Decker :Jets: A solid starting outside receiver who put up WR1 numbers in an offense that inflates receiving statistics.

 

2nd Team: Desean Jackson :Redskins: Saw career highs after being featured and placed in great position by Chip Kelly. A correction awaits him in Washington.

 

 

Tight End:

 

1st Team: Jermaine Gresham :Bengals: It would seem that draft hype is still clinging to this guy in the public arena, but on the field he's among the worst starters at the TE position.

 

2nd Team: Antonio Gates :Chargers: A HOF caliber career is a good reason to think highly of a guy, but he's always been rather one dimensional, and that one dimension is fading.

 

 

Offensive Tackle:

 

1st Team: Jake Long :Rams: Injuries have robbed him of his once dominant abilities, but my sense is that a lot of people think he's still as good as he once was with the Dolphins.

 

2nd Team: Sam Baker :Falcons: Parlayed one decent season (our of 5) into a 6 yr 41M$ contract that, at least in part, has created the impression that he's a good starter.

 

 

Guard:

 

1st Team: Carl Nicks :Bucs: His Saints days and a mammoth contract lend the impression of dominance, but the reality is that his toe injury has really limited him.

 

2nd Team: Zane Beadles :jags: Playing offensive line for Peyton Manning can make you look better than what you are; Beadles is average or worse in pretty much every facet.

 

 

Center:

 

1st Team: Maurkice Pouncey :Steelers: His rookie year was by far his best, and he's often been mediocre or worse since (when he's not hurt, that is).

 

2nd Team: Scott Wells :Packers: Was a very nice player in Green Bay, and perhaps he's still viewed as that in STL (not that many people think about centers to begin with), but he hasn't been on that level since he joined the Rams.

 

 

Edge Player:

 

1st Team: Paul Kruger :Browns:

 

2nd Team: Connor Barwin :Eagles:

 

I'll just write one blurb for both of them, because they essentially have the same story: Fluky seasons with their former teams and bloated contracts have led to these guys both being really overrated edge pass rushers.

 

 

Interior Defensive Line:

 

1st Team: Darnell Dockett :Cardinals: The elite disruptor that lives in the mind of the public hasn't really existed since ~2010.

 

2nd Team: B.J. Raji :Packers: An elite 2010 season created a very high opinion of a player who has been average or worse ever since.

 

 

Off-LOS Linebacker:

 

1st Team: Dannell Ellerbe :dolphins: A great run during the 2012 playoffs brought on star status and a ridiculous 5 year 35M contract for a pretty middling player.

 

2nd Team: D'Qwell Jackson :Colts: The general surprise at his release, and the ensuing 4 yr 22M contract that he received let me know that there are some opinions of Jackson out there that haven't caught up to who he is at this point in his career.

 

 

Cornerback:

 

1st Team: Richard Sherman :Seahawks: A system that fits him like a glove and elite safety play make Sherman looks better than what I think he is (a top 5 corner who is widely regarded as the uncontested best in the league).

 

2nd Team: Cortland Finnegan :dolphins: At one time a very effective man corner, Finnegan's play fell off a cliff last year.

 

 

Safety:

 

1st Team: Dashon Goldson :Bucs: The beneficiary of a great front 7 in San Fran that allowed him to take risks, Goldson was exposed last year not as a bad player, but as one that's not close to the elite status he garnered with the Niners.

 

2nd Team: Mark Barron :Bucs: Barron was billed incorrectly as an elite S prospect coming out and has been a middling player since entering the league. Arguably worse than that even in coverage. Sorry Bucs fans, it's nothing personal.

 

 

 

By the numbers Andrew Luck is overrated, but you can't overlook his impact on that team. The season before he got there they won 2 games and each season he has been there they have made the playoffs. His team was trailing 38–10 a few minutes into the third quarter and they scored 35 second half points for the second biggest comeback victory in NFL postseason history. That's awfully impressive. He also lost his best receiver last year and didn't have the best receiving core, which was upgraded in the offseason.

 

Jackson is a pretty good receiver, but he is definitely not in that top tier of receivers. He finished in the top 10 in receiving yards and had the 2nd most catches of 20 yards or more. Chip Kelly's system definitely helped, but he's a top 15-20 receiver in this league. And he will be our second best receiver behind Pierre Garcon, who is a much more complete receiver. Jackson is not the best blocker, but he is one of the best deep threats in the NFL.

 

Gates isn't overrated for me because I don't see him as a great tight end anymore. Maybe some thing he is still great, but he has clearly lost a step. I guess it depends on your perspective on him.

 

Sherman certainly benefits from Earl Thomas over the top, but you have to give him props. The defense he plays in certainly helps, but he is the best corner in the game. He's not nearly as athletic as Patrick Peterson, but he is the best in the NFL at playing man-to-man. He was rated #7 in NFL Network's top 100 players and the top defender in the NFL. He has 20 interceptions in 3 NFL seasons. He talks the talk, but he also walks the walk. I'm not a big fan of his, but he is not overrated. Just ask Eric Decker how good he is- you didn't even hear Decker's name during the Super Bowl. Yes Sherman wasn't on Denver's best receiver, but he lined up where he was told and shut down the man in front of him. So how does he do against elite receivers? In 2012 he lined up against Calvin Johnson and only surrendered 3 catches (tied for a season low for Johnson that year) and 46 receiving yards (2nd lowest of the season for Johnson that year). Wow that is impressive against Megatron.

 

Foster isn't overrated for me. Throw out his first season where he didn't play much and last season because he was injured. From 2010-2012 he dominated. 2010- 1,616 yards and 16 touchdowns. 2011- 1,224 yards and 10 touchdowns, 2012- 1,424 and 15 touchdowns. He is also a good receiver out of the backfield. You can say he's a system guy, but offensive coordinators pick players that will cater to their system. I don't really care what system he plays in he produces. Now we'll see how he bounces back from his injury last season, but at 27 (almost 28) he should have a few more years of good production left in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, just because someone is overrated doesn't make them bad.

 

I'm not overlooking what Luck has done. He's great and will probably be elite in time. But he's not there yet, and the public likes to act as though he is. Hence, overrated.

 

Sherman is great in man coverage, but he definitely isn't the best man corner in the league. First of all, he only plays man coverage about 25% of the time. The rest of the time he's in zone. And secondly, he plays almost exclusively the LCB position and covers whoever lines up across from him. As opposed to a guy like Patrick Peterson, who spent 11 out of 16 games last season shadowing the WR1 wherever he went on the field. I don't want to diminish what Sherman is, but you calling him the best CB in the game is exactly why I noted him as being overrated. That Seattle system, made possible by Earl Thomas and a good pass rush, really puts him in a position to thrive. And to his credit, he does indeed thrive. But it doesn't ask nearly as much of him as systems that require the top corner to play man against the team's best receiver on an island without safety help.

 

On Foster- so system should never be a consideration? Should we look at the 5082 yards Derek Carr put up last season at Fresno State and say he's really as good as the numbers look? Or should we consider that a system can inflate numbers? Because Shanahan/Kubiak's zone approach has been juicing RB numbers for years and years. And not without cost. That offense makes life easy on the right type of RB, but it sacrifices a lot of offensive flexibility to commit so thoroughly to a zone rushing attack. If Foster comes right back in O'Brien's offense and slays, I'll bite my tongue. But I'm not sold that it's in him to do that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RE: "Bill Cowher QB route"

 

2000 Ravens are the shining example, but the 2002 Bucs aren't that far off.

 

2012 Ravens had Flacco.

 

'Close but no cigar' to the 2006 Bears, who had Rex Grossman. 2009-10 Jets had Sanchez.

 

In the 90's you had Jeff Hostetler, Mark Rypien, Stan Humphries, Neil O'Donnell, and Chris Chandler make/win Super Bowls. Harbaugh, Slash and Testaverde made AFCCGs while Erik Kramer and Shaun King made NFCCGs.

 

In the 20 years since the institution of the salary cap GMs/coaches have learned some tricks.

 

Now we're seeing something of a shift to 'cost reductive QBs' now and it's sort of a hybrid of the 'Cowher model' (which itself is certainly a takeoff of some older coaches original schematic). Kaep, Wilson and Dalton were later picks than the likes of Stafford, Bradford, Luck, RGIII, etc.

 

Even the new CBA reduced the cost of top picks (often QBs). Since QB is the most 'valuable' position, the advantages of exploiting cost effective ones has the potential to become the NFL's 'moneyball'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the plan that works once a decade?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Better' is one of the most subjective terms in all of language.

 

Big Ben is better than CJ. Bush was better than Obama. Orange juice is better than grape juice.

 

The word implies an opinion is attached. Subjectivity at its purest form.

The issue is that your counter argument isn't actually "Big Ben is better than Megatron." It is "Big Ben is more value than Megatron and the fact that his position is far more important than CJ's somehow makes him a better player."

Edited by Thanatos19
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be clear, just because someone is overrated doesn't make them bad.

 

I'm not overlooking what Luck has done. He's great and will probably be elite in time. But he's not there yet, and the public likes to act as though he is. Hence, overrated.

 

Sherman is great in man coverage, but he definitely isn't the best man corner in the league. First of all, he only plays man coverage about 25% of the time. The rest of the time he's in zone. And secondly, he plays almost exclusively the LCB position and covers whoever lines up across from him. As opposed to a guy like Patrick Peterson, who spent 11 out of 16 games last season shadowing the WR1 wherever he went on the field. I don't want to diminish what Sherman is, but you calling him the best CB in the game is exactly why I noted him as being overrated. That Seattle system, made possible by Earl Thomas and a good pass rush, really puts him in a position to thrive. And to his credit, he does indeed thrive. But it doesn't ask nearly as much of him as systems that require the top corner to play man against the team's best receiver on an island without safety help.

 

On Foster- so system should never be a consideration? Should we look at the 5082 yards Derek Carr put up last season at Fresno State and say he's really as good as the numbers look? Or should we consider that a system can inflate numbers? Because Shanahan/Kubiak's zone approach has been juicing RB numbers for years and years. And not without cost. That offense makes life easy on the right type of RB, but it sacrifices a lot of offensive flexibility to commit so thoroughly to a zone rushing attack. If Foster comes right back in O'Brien's offense and slays, I'll bite my tongue. But I'm not sold that it's in him to do that.

 

If there is any corner that can compare to Sherman it is Patrick Peterson. He is more valuable to his team since he plays special teams and doesn't have as much talent around him. Sherman definitely benefits from having one of if not the best safety tandem in the NFL.

 

Here is a quote from http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/is-patrick-peterson-a-better-cornerback-than-richard-sherman/

 

"Looking at their component stats, there’s no area where Peterson beats Sherman: Since 2012, Peterson has allowed a higher completion percentage (53 percent to Sherman’s 49 percent) and a much higher touchdown percentage (7 percent to Sherman’s 2.8 percent). Peterson also has a lower interception percentage (5.4 percent to Sherman’s 11 percent) and a much higher Adjusted Yards per Attempt figure (6.3 to Sherman’s 2.9). Even if you subscribe to the theory that a good cornerback’s primary value is in preventing passes from ever being attempted — which I do — opponents threw at Peterson once every 11.8 snaps, and at Sherman once every 13.7 snaps."

 

The Cardinals have also been the 2nd best team in the NFL against the pass over the past two years, so Peterson has plenty of help as well. It's so hard to compare corners because they show there value often when qbs don't throw to them. There are a lot of arguments on both sides. Julio Jones and Deion Sanders think that Peterson is better. Maybe he is I'm not sure, but all the numbers are in Sherman's favor. The Cardinals defense isn't too shabby either. They are number one against the run and are the only team over the past few years to win a game in Seattle. A big part of winning that game was playing great defense.

 

As far as Foster yes a system does matter, but it isn't the be all end all. Carr's numbers are inflated by the system he plays in for sure, but that's college where it's much easier to throw up crazy numbers. Just look at Colt Brennan and many others. The system certainly aids Foster, but you still need a good running back to put up those kind of numbers. Here is a guy that went undrafted and has had a great career so far. There are backs with better vision, backs who are bigger, and backs who are more elusive and have better cut back ability, but not many can do all of those things pretty well. He definitely isn't as good as Shady, AP, Charles and some of those guys, but he is pretty good. To play in the zone blocking scheme you still need a back with great vision and cut back ability. Some like Foster and Alfred Morris fit in great, while others don't. Morris is another player that people can say is just a scheme player, but he is pretty darn good as well. He is similar to Foster with great vision and cut back ability. He is 5th all time for most rushing yards in a players first 18 games. My point is that the scheme does help for sure, but you also need good players to fit the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Foster is pretty good. I called him overrated because he's been regarded as elite. At least up until this last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RE: "The plan that only works once a decade"

 

Peyton Manning has one ring in 15 years. Favre only got one in 19. Marino never got one. Neither did Fouts or Moon.

 

The idea that 'franchise' QBs rip off title runs is false. Any QB/team is lucky to make two or three SBs, much less win multiple.

 

Bill Cowher's Steelers made four AFCCGs and a SB in eight years with the likes of Neil O'Donnell and Slash. In that same time someone like Favre made one more SB and one less CG. Over his 15 year career Peyton has four AFCCGs (three wins).

 

That is not cherry picking examples either as Tom Landry rode Danny White to three straight NFCCGs, Chuck Knox's Rams made four NFCCGs and a SB in six years, Ditka's Bears made three NFCCGs and a SB (winning one) in five years and Schottenheimer's Browns made three AFCCGs in four years. Those teams did not sport HoF QBs either.

 

The overall difference in QB doesn't matter if the team is good and the breaks of the game determine outcome just as much as who is behind center.

 

Having a 'franchise QB' does not automatically give one better odds at winning than a well constructed team with a 'game manager'.

 

I'm not saying QB doesn't matter, I'm saying it doesn't matter as much as we, and especially the media, thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue is that your counter argument isn't actually "Big Ben is better than Megatron." It is "Big Ben is more value than Megatron and the fact that his position is far more important than CJ's somehow makes him a better player."

Would you put the best kicker ever above a top 7 QB? What about punter? Long snapper? Value matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you put the best kicker ever above a top 7 QB? What about punter? Long snapper? Value matters.

 

Yes, on a list of most valuable players. If one is simply wanting to make a list of players ranked by who the author thinks is best at their respective jobs, then is might be appropriate to put a kicker or punter above a QB. Depends on what type of list you want to make. I made one like that, but I excluded the kicker, punter, and long snapper positions because people don't really find them interesting.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NFL needs a "win value" "+ or -" stat like the NBA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RE: "The plan that only works once a decade"

 

2013: Russell Wilson

2012: Joe Flacco

2011: Eli Manning

2010: Aaron Rodgers

2009: Drew Brees

2008: Ben Roethlisberger

2007: Eli Manning

2006: Peyton Manning

2005: Ben Roethlisberger

2004: Tom Brady

2003: Tom Brady

2002: Brad Johnson

2001: Tom Brady

2000: Trent Dilfer

1999: Kurt Warner

1998: John Elway

1997: John Elway

1996: Brett Favre

1995: Troy Aikman

1994: Steve Young

1993: Troy Aikman

1992: Troy Aikman

1991: Mark Rypien

1990: Jeff Hostetler

1989: Joe Montana

1988: Joe Montana

1987: Doug Williams

1986: Phil Simms

1985: Jim McMahon

1984: Joe Montana

1983: Jim Plunkett

 

Last 30 years of Superbowl Winning QB's. How many Dalton/Smith type game managers are there on this list? 4 or 5? And even in the cases where the QB was something of a game manager, the Super Bowl run/season was almost without fail the period in which said player was playing his best football.

 

Your argument is flawed because you're holding up the entire game-manager model against ​specific quarterbacks (like Peyton). You can't compare/contrast an individual with your whole philosophy. If you want a fair comparison, then look at the success of teams who had above average QB play vs those that had average or worse and look at the results:

 

Above average QB's: ~25 rings over a 30 year span

 

Below average QB's: ~5 rings over a 30 year span

 

Better success than the once/decade rate I suggested, but regardless it remains the much less successful model. And as you move up from 1983 towards 2013, it seems to become less successful over time.

 

Now if you want to reference teams from the 60's and 70's, or use teams that didn't win (or even make it to) the Super Bowl to support your argument, be my guest. But formulas from 40+ years ago have little relevance to today's game. And the fact that a team with sub-average QB play made it to an AFCCG does nothing for your argument. Unless you believe the ultimate goal in the NFL is to make it into your conference's respective championship game.

Edited by KempBolt
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You clearly don't get it.

 

Because playing up your comment as true would mean that Matt Ryan has an overall bigger positive influence on his team than Calvin Johnson... Not sure that's possible when talking about a QB who is clearly best when being propped up by the other players around him and who wears the mantle of "Matty Slush".

 

 

 

Old comment, but again this one always grinds my gears. I'm one of the biggest critics of Matt Ryans ability to do the wrong thing at the worst times... But....

 

Most of you that share this opinion that Favre4Ever is talking about here are also showing me how much influence the main stream media has on your opinions as it relates to how much you guys actually watch opposing football teams. You can talk about how terrible Matt Ryan was last year to make points all you want, but if that was a BAD year, I'm absolutely freaking stoked for what the future brings. He was standing behind one of the worst lines in ALL of football. We had a back-up right tackle playing left tackle, a free agent off the street starting at RT, and a back-up starting at center in Peter Konz. Not to mention, we were relying on starting our #3 and #4/5 receivers on the field each week. Yet, through all of this, Matt Ryan still throws 4500 yards and 26 TDs and completed 67% of his passes. Inflated INT rate? Sure, look at what he had to deal with. So the notion that Matt Ryan was terrible last year is completely wrong and an uninformed opinion.

 

 

Now, to the list:

 

QB Joe Flacco - He got the Ravens to the Superbowl and performed well. It was the equivalent of catching lightning in a bottle.

 

RB Trent Richardson - Need I explain? He may very well be the definition of production by bulk work load.

RB Chris Ivory - I know he's shown promise, but the media jumps on Ivory as if he's the next Adrian Peterson. What has this guy done to achieve this glory?

 

WR Eric Decker - I'm not saying Decker isn't good. He absolutely is. I don't believe he's as good as Peyton Manning makes him look though. I think we will see a different Decker once he's in green and white. A guy who can't separate at the LOS, I don't view him as a #1 receiver.

WR Danny Amendola - I've never really understood the aura around Amendola. He hasn't got size, he hasn't got ankle-breaking quickness, and while he has good hands it's not like he's got the best. He's played a full season once in his five year career - 85 catches on 123 targets | 689 yards | 2 TDs - nothing to write home about. He had a great 4 game run in 2012 and then just as the clock always strikes 12 again, he went to the IR. There's just nothing here. Maybe I'm missing something?

WR Denarius Moore - Clearly the top option on the Raiders when healthy. He's got breaking speed, but put him on another roster and he would never make #1 receiver depth. Much more so, I'm not sure he wouldn't be absolutely grasping onto the #2 position by the skin of his teeth.

 

TE Jermaine Gresham - Highly regarded coming out of college, hasn't done jack in the NFL yet is still highly regarded. Figure that one out. Media darling.

 

I'm not going to do the lines, it's too subjective IMO.

 

LB Paul Kruger - Kind of similar to my Joe Flacco explanation. The guy caught lightning in a bottle one season and got a pay day.

LB Curtis Lofton - He's a 2 down linebacker being asked to play 3 downs. The media loves Lofton when he's on the field. He's a liability in coverage.

LB Bruce Carter - During one of the first Cowboys games of the season, I listened to the broadcast team talk about how great this guy was and that he was going to fill Sean Lees role in that defense. Wrong. Why do they love this guy?

 

CB Brandon Carr - This guy is being paid like a top corner in the league, in fact I don't even think he plays corner anymore, didn't they move him to safety? He's horrible. #2 and #3 receivers find their way behind his coverage routinely.

CB Brandon Browner - Jeckyll & Hyde. Some days he'll look good. But others, he's terrible. And more often than not it's the later of the two. Everyone thinks that because he was on the Seahawks that he's some elite force at corner, I disagree. You watch him play and you'll see how receivers eat him up play after play. He's got inflated stats because QBs are afraid to throw elsewhere.

 

S Thomas DeCoud - Thank almighty he's no longer a Falcon. He is easily one of, if not the most over rated defensive back in the league. He somehow quickly became a media darling, always finding his way on ESPN, NFL Network, and other primetime shows for interviews. Being talked about like he's a top safety in the league. He had one good season, even I was fooled. The guy looked like an undrafted free agent off the street all year last season. I'm not sure he could have covered ME.

S Dashon Goldson - Man, this guy fell off a cliff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Below and above average QB" is a subjective at best baseline.

 

Hall of fame (or potential) vs. non-Hall of fame seems simpler and better.

 

I would rate the following QBs as "below average" (compared to the Hall of Fame caliber QBs who have won multiple titles or who are expected to):

 

Plunkett, McMahon, Simms, Williams, Hostetler, Rypien, Dilfer, Johnson, Flacco. That's nine (at least eight depending on how Flacco's career finishes).

 

The reason why you have to count SB losers and AFC/NFCCG QBs is because in many cases one or two plays makes those 'average QBs' Super Bowl winners.

 

If not for Montana's drive, Boomer has a ring. If not for Larry Brown, Neil O'Donnell has one. If John Kasay doesn't kickoff out of bounds maybe Jake Delhomme has one. If not for the refs maybe Matt Hasselbeck has one.

 

They call it a 'game of inches' for a reason.

 

Hall of Famers like Marino only ever made three AFCCGs. Drew Brees, always ranked as a top player in the game, has only ever made two NFCCGs.

 

To say that "only Super Bowls matter" since they're the "ultimate game" ignores the degree of difficulty to get to the final four and makes it sound like Super Bowl winning QBs were somehow preordained.

 

So again, QB is an overrated position because the common thought is that you need a 'franchise' one to get near or win a Super Bowl. All a 'franchise QB' does is give you slightly better odds, because 'non-franchise' guys get close all the damned time.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mark Rypien was a pro bowler who threw for 3,564 yards and 28 touchdowns the year that he won a SB with Washington (as the MVP). Those were big numbers in 1991.

 

Phil Simms?? The NFL MVP, pro bowler, SB MVP Phil Simms? That guy fits your below average category?

 

Brad Johnson was a pro bowler the year that the Bucs won it all. And his numbers were above average for his era.

 

Flacco remains to be seen.

 

And again, you can't argue against the reality of what the results show by criticizing individuals. Who cares what Marino did? Teams with good QB play still win the SB about 3X as often. A little bit more than slightly better odds ;).

 

Good QB play gives you a significantly better chance to win a superbowl. That much is clear. If you want to play the what if game about lost game or teams that never even got there, that's cool. But it's also irrelevant. We have a large enough sample size to show that the "game manager" model is way less successful.

 

Look, I get it. You're into the old school, hard ass teams that play awesome defense and don't turn the ball over. That's cool, but you can't manipulate reality to try and say that that approach is more successful than it really is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Old comment, but again this one always grinds my gears. I'm one of the biggest critics of Matt Ryans ability to do the wrong thing at the worst times... But....

 

Most of you that share this opinion that Favre4Ever is talking about here are also showing me how much influence the main stream media has on your opinions as it relates to how much you guys actually watch opposing football teams. You can talk about how terrible Matt Ryan was last year to make points all you want, but if that was a BAD year, I'm absolutely freaking stoked for what the future brings. He was standing behind one of the worst lines in ALL of football. We had a back-up right tackle playing left tackle, a free agent off the street starting at RT, and a back-up starting at center in Peter Konz. Not to mention, we were relying on starting our #3 and #4/5 receivers on the field each week. Yet, through all of this, Matt Ryan still throws 4500 yards and 26 TDs and completed 67% of his passes. Inflated INT rate? Sure, look at what he had to deal with. So the notion that Matt Ryan was terrible last year is completely wrong and an uninformed opinion.

Yeah I'd have to agree. Ryan is a top 10 QB for sure. Incredible accuracy. Seemed like there were people just waiting for last year's confluence of events so that they could jump all over him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not manipulating reality. I'm observing a bias toward certain types of QBs either based on the 'Super Bowl win only' result and/or the 'elite/franchise QB only' arbitrary tag (a QB having a lone good season does not make him 'good' for the rest of his career, see: Rypien, Mark).

 

The stats speak for themselves... In the salary cap era (1994-present):

 

18 different QBs have made an AFCCG. 11 of those made multiple trips. Only six won SBs.

Meanwhile in the NFC the #s are 23, 10 and nine

27 different SB QBs in 20 years and only seven multiple SB QBs

13 different in 10 years with only four multiple SB QBs

Eight different SB QB winners in 10 years

Nine different SB QB winners in 13 years

10 different SB QB winners in 14 years

 

Sure, Brady won three SBs in four years. He hasn't won one since in 10 years. Brees, Peyton and Rodgers only have one. Those facts are inconsistent with a 'count da ringz' argument. People don't realize this because of media/fan narrative bias.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not manipulating reality. I'm observing a bias toward certain types of QBs either based on the 'Super Bowl win only' result and/or the 'elite/franchise QB only' arbitrary tag (a QB having a lone good season does not make him 'good' for the rest of his career, see: Rypien, Mark).

 

The stats speak for themselves... In the salary cap era (1994-present):

 

18 different QBs have made an AFCCG. 11 of those made multiple trips. Only six won SBs.

Meanwhile in the NFC the #s are 23, 10 and nine

27 different SB QBs in 20 years and only seven multiple SB QBs

13 different in 10 years with only four multiple SB QBs

Eight different SB QB winners in 10 years

Nine different SB QB winners in 13 years

10 different SB QB winners in 14 years

 

Sure, Brady won three SBs in four years. He hasn't won one since in 10 years. Brees, Peyton and Rodgers only have one. Those facts are inconsistent with a 'count da ringz' argument. People don't realize this because of media/fan narrative bias.

Rypien was a two time pro bowler and an all pro. And when his team won a SB, he was far more than a game manager. Like I said... manipulating reality.

 

And all this information is irrelevant. Teams with good QB play win superbowls 3X as often as teams without (at least). Nothing you've added here has anything to do with that.

Edited by KempBolt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty self-explanatory. I'll just mention that I'm thinking overrated in terms of general consensus opinion on a guy (rather than just the TGP take on him). This should stir up some hard feelings :devious: .

 

Quarterback:

 

1st Team: Andrew Luck :Colts: Might come as a surprise given my recent defense of Luck, but he's broadly treated as though he's already an elite QB and he simply is not.

 

2nd Team: Alex Smith :Chiefs: This is probably less surprising. A below average QB who is treated as a good starter because of circumstances on his teams that have led to good records over the past few seasons.

 

 

Running Back:

 

1st Team: Arian Foster :Texans: Less of an elite player than just a good fit for a RB friendly system that gave him a lot of carries.

 

2nd Team: Ben Tate :Browns: Came into the offseason with really only 1 year to his name that was better than average (3 years ago, no less) but was viewed as a plug and play, high level starter.

 

 

Wide Receiver:

 

1st Team: Eric Decker :Jets: A solid starting outside receiver who put up WR1 numbers in an offense that inflates receiving statistics.

 

2nd Team: Desean Jackson :Redskins: Saw career highs after being featured and placed in great position by Chip Kelly. A correction awaits him in Washington.

 

 

Tight End:

 

1st Team: Jermaine Gresham :Bengals: It would seem that draft hype is still clinging to this guy in the public arena, but on the field he's among the worst starters at the TE position.

 

2nd Team: Antonio Gates :Chargers: A HOF caliber career is a good reason to think highly of a guy, but he's always been rather one dimensional, and that one dimension is fading.

 

 

Offensive Tackle:

 

1st Team: Jake Long :Rams: Injuries have robbed him of his once dominant abilities, but my sense is that a lot of people think he's still as good as he once was with the Dolphins.

 

2nd Team: Sam Baker :Falcons: Parlayed one decent season (our of 5) into a 6 yr 41M$ contract that, at least in part, has created the impression that he's a good starter.

 

 

Guard:

 

1st Team: Carl Nicks :Bucs: His Saints days and a mammoth contract lend the impression of dominance, but the reality is that his toe injury has really limited him.

 

2nd Team: Zane Beadles :jags: Playing offensive line for Peyton Manning can make you look better than what you are; Beadles is average or worse in pretty much every facet.

 

 

Center:

 

1st Team: Maurkice Pouncey :Steelers: His rookie year was by far his best, and he's often been mediocre or worse since (when he's not hurt, that is).

 

2nd Team: Scott Wells :Packers: Was a very nice player in Green Bay, and perhaps he's still viewed as that in STL (not that many people think about centers to begin with), but he hasn't been on that level since he joined the Rams.

 

 

Edge Player:

 

1st Team: Paul Kruger :Browns:

 

2nd Team: Connor Barwin :Eagles:

 

I'll just write one blurb for both of them, because they essentially have the same story: Fluky seasons with their former teams and bloated contracts have led to these guys both being really overrated edge pass rushers.

 

 

Interior Defensive Line:

 

1st Team: Darnell Dockett :Cardinals: The elite disruptor that lives in the mind of the public hasn't really existed since ~2010.

 

2nd Team: B.J. Raji :Packers: An elite 2010 season created a very high opinion of a player who has been average or worse ever since.

 

 

Off-LOS Linebacker:

 

1st Team: Dannell Ellerbe :dolphins: A great run during the 2012 playoffs brought on star status and a ridiculous 5 year 35M contract for a pretty middling player.

 

2nd Team: D'Qwell Jackson :Colts: The general surprise at his release, and the ensuing 4 yr 22M contract that he received let me know that there are some opinions of Jackson out there that haven't caught up to who he is at this point in his career.

 

 

Cornerback:

 

1st Team: Richard Sherman :Seahawks: A system that fits him like a glove and elite safety play make Sherman looks better than what I think he is (a top 5 corner who is widely regarded as the uncontested best in the league).

 

2nd Team: Cortland Finnegan :dolphins: At one time a very effective man corner, Finnegan's play fell off a cliff last year.

 

 

Safety:

 

1st Team: Dashon Goldson :Bucs: The beneficiary of a great front 7 in San Fran that allowed him to take risks, Goldson was exposed last year not as a bad player, but as one that's not close to the elite status he garnered with the Niners.

 

2nd Team: Mark Barron :Bucs: Barron was billed incorrectly as an elite S prospect coming out and has been a middling player since entering the league. Arguably worse than that even in coverage. Sorry Bucs fans, it's nothing personal.

 

 

My pick for overall team was the obvious one - last seasons Texans.

The most under-rated one is the Arizona Cardinals - last season they finished with a 10 - 6 record but missed out because they are in the toughest division in football. On the flip side of that, Packers scraped into the playoffs with an 8 - 6 - 1 record and home field ad.

I pity the Rams, who also are also in that division and will give grief to many opponents this season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NFL needs a "win value" "+ or -" stat like the NBA.

 

I agree, but thinking about it, that would be so hard in the NFL. Players don't sub in and out as much as they do in the NBA, and their are so many wildcards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×