Plummer vs Brunell...and also Marino...Elway and Manning

[budski]

I hate statistic filled threads.

the only one that counts is the W-L column gentlemen.

Brunell and Plummer are probably about even, they aint great but can win games.

[bubba9497]

I figured it out...

hoofer here is Peter King, still trying to get that MVP award for Jake, he predicted.

:laugh:

[bubba9497]

I hate statistic filled threads.

the only one that counts is the W-L column gentlemen.

Brunell and Plummer are probably about even, they aint great but can win games.

nothing wrong with stats if they are relevant to the argument, unlike the skewed figures trying to be passed off in this thread.

[Dalecitymike]

Plummer vs. Brunell

Rank rating

20 Jake Plummer DEN 77.9

25 Mark Burnell WAS 84.8

According to NFL as of week 5

(*side note Michael Vick was ranked 30th )

You did note not based on the numbers. I would say Brunell simply based on the fact that Plummer used to be an arizona cardinal, and we all know everyone on that team sucks. (side exception the late war-hero who died for our country, may he rest in peace).

Brunell was hand picked by a hall of fame coach to lead this team to the Super Bowl. I pretend to know a lot about football, but Gibbs has proven he knows a great deal about it. I trust him on this matter. The real question will come down to the offensive line. If they can give Brunell time to throw, and Portis holes to run through we will win!

Marino vs. Elway

That is a tough one. Elway went to superbowls. I pick Elway. Marino had a quick release, but Elway picked almost all the plays from the huddle or the line himself. A lot like Manning. I would say if Manning goes to the superbowl he could beat Elway on the list.

:point2sky

[bubba9497]

Lets do a "fair" comparison of winning percentage

Plummer vs Manning

Since Hoofer wants to use only Plummers time in Denver, we will use the same time frame for Peyton

The Colts record from:

2003- 12-4

2004- 12-4

2005- 4-0

28 Wins 8 losses or 78%

The Bronco's record from:

2003- 10-6

2004- 10-6

2005- 3-1

23 wins 13 losses or 64%

but Hoofer says he started 22-9 or 70% still well below Mannings of the same time frame

[bubba9497]

Plummer vs. Brunell

Rank rating

20 Jake Plummer DEN 77.9

25 Mark Burnell WAS 84.8

According to NFL as of week 5

:point2sky

Ranking is based on total yards and since Plummer has played in 4 games, and B runell 2 2/3rds, obviously his total yards would be higher, but Brunell has fewer Ints. 2 to 3, same TDs in fewer games 4, Same Completetion percentage, 59.7 and a higher yards per attempt avg. 7.0 to 6.1

[number twenty-eight]

I hope he plays just well enough to give you his special salute again. You're obviously near and dear to his heart.

[Goaldeje]

Dear God, are all Denver fans this stupid? I have a couple of friends that claim to be Broncos fans, but they seem so intelligent that I am questioning their alliegence.

[gentry000]

I certainly hope we don't have any Redskins fans over on their board looking as foolish as hoofs...

Good Job Bubba letting the stats show for themselves.

Mark Brunell's completion percentage = 59.6

Jake Plummer's completion percentage is 56.9

Last year's 49.8 for Brunell was largely due to him playing with an injured hamstring which didn't allow him to step up into the pocket to get any zip on the ball.

Plummer is a good QB in my opinion, but come on..... To even put him mention him in the same breath with Marino...

Year Team G GS Att Comp Pct Yards TD Int Rate

1984 Miami 16 16 564 362 64.2 5,084 48 17 108.9

2004 Denver 16 16 521 303 58.2 4,089 27 20 84.5

Here are Marino's and Plummers best years in comparison. NICE TRY!!

[G-Prime]

So you're suggesting that Jake was the reason we got blown out in Indianapolis? I'm sure you're not that stupid. We lost because we didnt' have the defensive backfield or pass rush to contend with the Colts passing game. Both those problems seem to have been rectified if early returns are indicative of future results. The fact we got destroyed on defense has nothing to do with how well Jake has been changing his game since his arrival in Denver.

You still don't have a defensive backfield

[G-Prime]

Tell me how many playoff games have you seen in the last few years? It takes a team to win a playoff game not a QB.

moronic.

It does take a team effort but you HAVE to have a good QB to get to the playoffs and beyond.. To say the QB position doesn't matter(which in essence is what your saying) is just ignorant.

[G-Prime]

So you consider Brunell solid when his career stats, including winning percentage are mediocre, but Plummer with HOF stats and a 70% winning percentage with Denver sucks?

Not quite the Rhodes scholare are ya? A "little better than he used to be" means he is currently putting up numbers superior to what HOFers Marino, Manning and Elway did. Doug Williams won a Super Bowl for you. Wanta see his stats? I knew you did:

+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

| Passing | Rushing |

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

| Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD |

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

| 1978 tam | 10 | 73 194 37.6 1170 6.0 7 8 | 27 23 1 |

| 1979 tam | 16 | 166 397 41.8 2448 6.2 18 24 | 35 119 2 |

| 1980 tam | 16 | 254 521 48.8 3396 6.5 20 16 | 58 370 4 |

| 1981 tam | 16 | 238 471 50.5 3563 7.6 19 14 | 48 209 4 |

| 1982 tam | 9 | 164 307 53.4 2071 6.7 9 11 | 35 158 2 |

| 1986 was | 1 | 0 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 0 0 0 |

| 1987 was | 5 | 81 143 56.6 1156 8.1 11 5 | 7 9 1 |

| 1988 was | 11 | 213 380 56.1 2609 6.9 15 12 | 9 0 1 |

| 1989 was | 4 | 51 93 54.8 585 6.3 1 3 | 1 -4 0 |

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

| TOTAL | 88 | 1240 2507 49.5 16998 6.8 100 93 | 220 884 15 |

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

Not exactly awe inspiring is it? Doug threw an INT every 26.9 passes he threw...barely better than Jake IN PHEONIX, and easily inferior to him in Denver. TD's? One every 25 passes, far behind Jakes rate. Completion percentage? A horrible 49.5%...LOL...Oh but that's right...he beat a DAN REEVES defense in the Superbowl....LOL

Like THAT'S never been done before...:laugh:

Bottom line: Plummer is MUCH better than you thinnk.

Yet Doug Williams has a Superbowl ring? Where is Jake's?

Stats don't win games little fella.

[G-Prime]

Duh...you must have missed the obvious: I said in the first post I wasn't concerned about his AZ numbers...he doesn't play in Arizona NOW does he? Plummer was stuck on a horrible team in AZ with no weapons to work with, no consistent offensive coaching, nothing to help him succeed...that's obvious. So "talent has helped Plummer's numbers" huh?...LOL...congradulations Captain Obvious...Do you think it helps Manning also? Think it helped Marino? That's the whole point...a QB needs to have talent around him and the right system to succeed. Jake was asked to beat teams by himself in AZ, something he's not being asked to do in Denver.

Got anything better than that?

You know I really don't like your attitude.. This is our house, you could post and address us with a bit more respect. Instead of trapsing around getting mud all over our carpet. You need to check yourself and display some manners in our house.

[Art]

That Brunell played horribly last year is clear and entirely not part of this discussion. Brunell is a different player right now, likely due to feeling better physically. He may decline if he gets hurt again, but, at the moment, he's doing just about what you'd want out of a veteran QB. Brunell is better than Plummer for the simple reason that Brunell has always been better. Historically he's been more mobile, more accurate, more effective, a better leader, smarter and all the rest.

Plummer had a very solid year last year for Denver. He was good his first season there. He's fine this year, but, Plummer has not played well this year. A 78 QB rating is football you will likely not win with over the course of a season. Brunell's rating is one you win with. Brunell's superior arm strength and intelligence to this point in the year have allowed him to play better to this point in the year compared to Plummer. More, though, when Brunell has been tasked with taking the team on his shoulders and win, he's done so. Jake struggles when it's put on him much of the time, though, he's long had the flair for dramatic fourth-quarter play.

Brunell is the least of our problems now where a year ago he was chief among them. Counting on his play in November of last year to define this game is unlikely and silly.

[Hoofbeats]

exactly where did I criticize Jakey boy in this thread.....or that he brought down Denver in any thread

thanks for showing you haven't a clue..... :laugh:

I'm using the "corporate" you...as in "you" Redskin fans. I assumed it was obvious.

I'll type slow for you.. so maybe you can comprehend this.... For a matter of fact, yes there are stats kept on all positions by the quarter, how many wins when a RB gains a 100 yards etc...

Show me a stat kept by the NFL on career wins for a running back. Stats kept on team performances include stuff like that...for example; "Bill Parcells is 77-0 when leading by 10 points in the 4th quarter". Not the same thing at all. The NFL refers to things like "the NFL's all-time winningest quarterback", not "the NFL's all-time winningest free safety.

...but Think for a second (I know it will be hard, but try ) A QB is only as good as the team around him. The OL blocking, WR catching, RB etc...., plus he has to have a defense that can stop the other team... And Special teams as well. If it was solely passed on QB stats... then Guys like Manning & Marino would be wearing Super Bowl Rings, instead of someone like Trent Dilfer or Brad Johnson. If it was solely up to a QB's ability, The Snake would have made the Cards a constant winner... wouldn't he?

Uhhhh...you're making my pont for me. How is it that on the one hand you ("corporate you") readily admit this and on the other hand you criticize Jake for the performances he had in AZ when he had none of the things around him you mentioned?

Oh and trying to pass off three years in Denver compared to the entire careers of Manning & Marino... will obviously bring their % down.... To have a "fair" comparison it would be Plummer's ENTIRE career % not just his time in Denver. But since you want to spin only those Bronco years it confirms exactly what I said... That a QB winning % is based on the team around him.

Guess READING isn't your strong suit huh? The ENTIRE POINT of this thread is that people who are still blasting Plummer for his inconsistent play and mistake prone behavior are not looking at the improvement he's made in Denver on a REAL team with a REAL coach with REAL players around him, but only at what he was in Arizona. Thanks for taking credit for "the QB's winning percentage is based on the team around him", something I've been saying since the first post...duh. Now maybe you can let it sink in that ARIZONA JAKE no longer exists and is IRRELEVANT for this game/season. As I SPECIFICALLY STATED...I DON'T CARE what Jake did in Arizona. I also don't care what he did at Arizona State or in high school or pee wee football either. The fans on this board are criticizing Plummer for his career which has been largely defined in Arizona, and failing to recognize there's been a change in him under Shanahan.

Like shooting fish in a barrel... too easy :laugh:

Yea...you shot yourself in the foot.

Oh... why are you trying to put down Brunell... again I ask... where is this thread where I or anyone is trying to compare him to These great QB's ... well??? In fact I felt Ramsey should have remained the starter and still do. It is painfully obvious you are trying to convince yourself that Brunell can help the Skins win. If it makes you sleep better... lie to yourself... no skin off my nose, but don't peddle that BS in here.

I shouldn't have to continue to repeat the same thing over and over for the short bus riders...but here goes: My criticism of Brunell is based on what YOU...IE; "SKIN FANS"...are doing with Plummer. You suggest Brunell is a winner, he's perfectly fine for your team, he's this and that...but in fact he's actually shown nothing more than Plummer has if you look at what he's actualy done. He's never won a championship including a conference title, even though he had ample opportunity with the right talent around him in Jax. Or do you think taking a 14-2 team with the NFL's best record and losing at home should be above criticism? At least Jake has an excuse...he's NEVER had the talent Brunell had in Jax during the two years he went to the AFC title game and basically choked....(but let's not mention that one OK???)

It must be tougher than you think, because you keep striking out.

It's tough because there appears to be a very high adult illiteracy rate in DC.

Skewing numbers, and facts... bringing up stats from years ago... ignoring the present.... hardly convincing arguments... in fact you would be laughed off the stage in a real debate.

"Skewing numbers" huh? Which numbers did I skew? The ones you don't want to deal with? Prove a single number I listed is bogus. I'll wait. "Bringing up stats from years ago"...ummmm yea....because that is what YOU ARE DOING by tossing Plummer to the scrap heap based on his game in Arizona. Nothing wrong with contradicting your propaganda by showing it to be what it is...wrong.

come back when you have something that the parameters aren't skewed to show a advantage to your argument.

Yea...I know facts that don't jibe with your Skin heaven delusions are tough to swallow...things like the fact that you guys would like to avoid giving Plummer any credit for improvement but Brunell gets a free pass cause he's one a yours...so I ask again...What "parameters" are "skewed"? Show me a single statistic I quoted that's inaccurate...

ONE.

[Hoofbeats]

I was among those who thought Plummer would really excel in Denver. I lived in AZ for awhile, so I followed the Cardinals a tiny bit. Plummer was always forced to throw like crazy in the 3rd and 4th quarters that no doubt inflated his interception totals. But, he made bad decisions, something he's shown he can still do in Denver. Didn't he even flip off the Denver crowd because they were so hard on him?

Plummer is decent, but he'll never be great. Comparing ANYTHING about Plummer to Marino or Manning is ridiculous. As far as what Brunell has accomplished? He led his team to the AFC Championship (including a win over the Broncos), and simply drubbed the Dolphins and Marino in another playoff game. He hasn't won the superbowl......yet

As far as Plummer...yeah he threw for over 4000 yards, but his TD/INT ratio was 1.35, not a great number. For his career, he's got a 0.94 ratio (although in Denver its 1.53)! :doh: Marino had a 1.67 over his career, Manning has a 1.92 ratio, and Brunell has a 1.65 ratio. I'm not sure if that was one of your stats or not, but its a very telling one. And you can't really blame all of that on Arizona, either, as Brunell played for an expansion team for crying out loud! Manning's Colts were awful 2 of his first 4 years or so in the league, and Marino never had a running game to complement his game. Plummer had Murrell and Pittman in Arizona. Not exactly a hof duo, but definitely better than anything Marino had.

Plummer is decent, but he'll never be great. Comparing ANYTHING about Plummer to Marino or Manning is ridiculous. As far as what Brunell has accomplished? He led his team to the AFC Championship (including a win over the Broncos), and simply drubbed the Dolphins and Marino in another playoff game. He hasn't won the superbowl......yet

How bout we compare the number of Super Bowl championships won by Marino, Manning and Brunell combined with those won by Plummer...I guess that would be ZEREO huh? But of course that's unfair to Marino since all he's had to work with was a HOF coach, the best pass blocking offensive line in the modern era, and two of the best wide receivers of his day...plus he played in the weaker AFC during the 80's when getting there wasn't as difficult...oh yea...I forgot it was Elway who was always there. Or maybe we could compare the number of conference championships won by Manning and Brunnell to Plummers...Mmmmm....no....that won't work either will it? But of course Manning and Brunell never had enough talent around them to win even that did they? Oh wait...sorry...they did.

As far as Plummer...yeah he threw for over 4000 yards, but his TD/INT ratio was 1.35, not a great number. For his career, he's got a 0.94 ratio (although in Denver its 1.53)! :doh: Marino had a 1.67 over his career, Manning has a 1.92 ratio, and Brunell has a 1.65 ratio. I'm not sure if that was one of your stats or not, but its a very telling one.

Actually it's a meaningless stat. What it says is what kind of offense you played in. Marino and Manning played in offenses that throw the ball all over the field, even on the goal line. Plummer's playing in an offense based on the run. TD's to INT's is meaningless because it doesn't define the "system" the QB played in. INT's to attempts is far more useful as a measure of accuracy and decision making, which is why I used it.

And you can't really blame all of that on Arizona, either, as Brunell played for an expansion team for crying out loud! Manning's Colts were awful 2 of his first 4 years or so in the league, and Marino never had a running game to complement his game. Plummer had Murrell and Pittman in Arizona. Not exactly a hof duo, but definitely better than anything Marino had.

This is so laughable I'm picking myself off the floor...the "expansion" team Brunell played on lasted one season and the NFL let them sign free agents during this period of time, unlike the Tampa Bay/Seattle teams before FA even existed. In Jacksonville's 2nd season in '96 the roster included besides Brunell...Keenan McCardel, Jimmy Smith, Derek Brown (all 3 caught over 80 passes and had well over 1100 yards each) plus Andre Rison, Natron Means, James Stewart (both over 700 yards rushing), Clyde Simmons, Tony Brackens, Kevin Hardy, Tony Boselli...they were 9-7 that year...hardly an expansion team at that point.

Hard to believe your suggesting Adrian Murrell and Michael Pittman belong in the same sentence with Mark Duper, Mark Clayton, Tony Nathan, Nat Moote, Don Johnson...and the best pass blocking offensive line in the modern history of the NFL. That's just crazy...Murrell and Pittman were most definitely NOT "better than anything Marino had". LMAO! Obviously you don't know what you're talking about since you are 25 years old when these guys started playing together...:slap: ...might want to re-think that one since you just got caught talking about something you never saw. Just so you'll know...Adrian Murrell=Sammy Winder.

That's not a compliment.

[Hoofbeats]

Brunell was hand picked by a hall of fame coach to lead this team to the Super Bowl. I pretend to know a lot about football, but Gibbs has proven he knows a great deal about it.

I know you don't seriously think you're going to the Superbowl with Mark Brunell...do you? Tell me you don't honestly expect me to believe that Gibbs thinks this 35 year old nearly finished, average QB who has never won a game any kind of championship game can take this team to the Bowl.

Please tell me that. I'll worry otherwise. The guy wasn't even a starter till Ramsey sucked so bad he had to be. Gimme a break...

[H-O-G]

Comparing Plummer to Elway and Marino is funny, thanks for the laughs

[Dah-Dee]

Doug Williams won a Super Bowl for you. Wanta see his stats? I knew you did:

+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

| Passing | Rushing |

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

| Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD |

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

| 1978 tam | 10 | 73 194 37.6 1170 6.0 7 8 | 27 23 1 |

| 1979 tam | 16 | 166 397 41.8 2448 6.2 18 24 | 35 119 2 |

| 1980 tam | 16 | 254 521 48.8 3396 6.5 20 16 | 58 370 4 |

| 1981 tam | 16 | 238 471 50.5 3563 7.6 19 14 | 48 209 4 |

| 1982 tam | 9 | 164 307 53.4 2071 6.7 9 11 | 35 158 2 |

| 1986 was | 1 | 0 1 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 | 0 0 0 |

| 1987 was | 5 | 81 143 56.6 1156 8.1 11 5 | 7 9 1 |

| 1988 was | 11 | 213 380 56.1 2609 6.9 15 12 | 9 0 1 |

| 1989 was | 4 | 51 93 54.8 585 6.3 1 3 | 1 -4 0 |

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

| TOTAL | 88 | 1240 2507 49.5 16998 6.8 100 93 | 220 884 15 |

+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+

Not exactly awe inspiring is it? Doug threw an INT every 26.9 passes he threw...barely better than Jake IN PHEONIX, and easily inferior to him in Denver. TD's? One every 25 passes, far behind Jakes rate. Completion percentage? A horrible 49.5%...LOL...Oh but that's right...he beat a DAN REEVES defense in the Superbowl....LOL

Like THAT'S never been done before...:laugh:

Bottom line: Plummer is MUCH better than you thinnk.

I agree that Plummer has generally played better in Denver than he did in Arizona.

I also believe that if you want this Plummer/Williams comparison to have merit you should remove the Tampa stats from the equation and make it apples/apples, Plummer in Denver vs. Williams in Washington.

[Hoofbeats]

Lets do a "fair" comparison of winning percentage

Plummer vs Manning

Since Hoofer wants to use only Plummers time in Denver, we will use the same time frame for Peyton

The Colts record from:

2003- 12-4

2004- 12-4

2005- 4-0

28 Wins 8 losses or 78%

The Bronco's record from:

2003- 10-6

2004- 10-6

2005- 3-1

23 wins 13 losses or 64%

but Hoofer says he started 22-9 or 70% still well below Mannings of the same time frame

Take a little tiime to at least look something up so you're accurate...OK? Plummer didn't start all their games in '03 because he was hurt. He missed 5 games. I already told you that he's 23-9...look it up if you doubt it. So he's "only" 70% compared to Mannings 78% with a much better team during their three year run...well he sucks then! Obviously...

How 'bout we take Tom Brady's 4 year run as a starter...3 Superbowl championships? Would that be fair? Well brady is 48-16 during that stretch...or a 75% winning percentage...not to bad...and only 5 points above Plummer record in Denver, who according to some on this board is one of the most overrated QB's in NFL history...LOL

Facts...Why bother?

[NoCalMike]

I compare Jake Plummer in Denver to Bledsoe in Dallas and Collins in Oakland. You can surround them with better talent all day, and it might improve their stats a bit, but they were veterens by the time they got to those new teams and are already showing the characteristics that made them average QBs. They both put up a lot of numbers, but fail when it comes to making those big time throws in the 4th quarter.

With Plummer it is no different, you can run 100 bootlegs and screen passes a game, to help his stats out, but in the end it will be the same ol' Plummer that can't get the job done.

[H-O-G]

Take a little tiime to at least look something up so you're accurate...OK? Plummer didn't start all their games in '03 because he was hurt. He missed 5 games. I already told you that he's 23-9...look it up if you doubt it. So he's "only" 70% compared to Mannings 78% with a much better team during their three year run...well he sucks then! Obviously...

How 'bout we take Tom Brady's 4 year run as a starter...3 Superbowl championships? Would that be fair? Well brady is 48-16 during that stretch...or a 75% winning percentage...not to bad...and only 5 points above Plummer record in Denver, who according to some on this board is one of the most overrated QB's in NFL history...LOL

Facts...Why bother?

:troll:

[Hoofbeats]

Ranking is based on total yards and since Plummer has played in 4 games, and B runell 2 2/3rds, obviously his total yards would be higher, but Brunell has fewer Ints. 2 to 3, same TDs in fewer games 4, Same Completetion percentage, 59.7 and a higher yards per attempt avg. 7.0 to 6.1

1) Ranking isn't "based on total yards"

2) TD's per game is a meaningless stat, much like INT's per game. Marino threw more INT's than he the number of games he played in...ratio of INT's to attempts is the vital stat, not INT's per game or TD's per game...obviously Manning throwing 50 times a game including on the goal line will hit more TD's than a guy throwing 20 times a game and running in the red zone.

3) INT's to Attempts for THIS YEAR (since you are using stats from '05 only here) look like this:

Brunnell 84 attempts/ 2 INT's= 1 INT per 42 passes

Plummer 129 attempts/3 INT's= 1 INT per 43 passes

Basically a push...but it should show you once again...that Jake today is not the Jake of the AZ Cardinals...not in '05.

4) Completion percentage and yards per pass attempt 3 or 4 games in reveal more about what kind of routes the team is running than they do anything else. We run a west coast offense....short passes mostly...

[Hoofbeats]

I certainly hope we don't have any Redskins fans over on their board looking as foolish as hoofs...

Good Job Bubba letting the stats show for themselves.

Mark Brunell's completion percentage = 59.6

Jake Plummer's completion percentage is 56.9

Last year's 49.8 for Brunell was largely due to him playing with an injured hamstring which didn't allow him to step up into the pocket to get any zip on the ball.

Plummer is a good QB in my opinion, but come on..... To even put him mention him in the same breath with Marino...

Year Team G GS Att Comp Pct Yards TD Int Rate

1984 Miami 16 16 564 362 64.2 5,084 48 17 108.9

2004 Denver 16 16 521 303 58.2 4,089 27 20 84.5

Here are Marino's and Plummers best years in comparison. NICE TRY!!

Still didn't read the post huh?

[H-O-G]

Hoof your not going to convince this board that Plummer is just as good as Marino or Elway...that would make him a canidate for the hall of fame...........lol