Oldfan Posted September 1, 2009 Author Share Posted September 1, 2009 As an engineer, I'm having a problem with the overall premise. A percentage represents a ratio - what is the ratio here? If a quarterback is 10%, what is he 10% of? From the OP: Importance to winning = 100% 10% is an estimate of the value of the QB position as a factor in winning NFL football games. Second, the guidelines presented might be interesting if you were starting teams from scratch. But we're evaluating the difference an upgrade in QB would make to a team that keeps the rest of its players. As I said earlier, the estimate I presented has a limited value. It enabled me to communicate more precisely my position on the value of the position. That's it, nothing more. But, if my estimate is close to being right. Then, when I say that the QB is the most important position, but he's still a minor factor in winning or losing, you have a much better idea of what I mean. Moreover, you are free to challenge my estimate if you think it's out of line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Hell, take a guy like Chad Pennington. He's got the arm strength of a left handed two year old. But he is deadly with the football because of his ability to read defenses and get the ball into the soft spot of the defense, despite never having much of a receiving corps and playing in different schemes. That is what a QB can do for you. All of a sudden, the coaches look like genius's... simply because their QB is making the correct reads. Something that is probably the toughest thing in all of professional sports to do... as there are probably only 6 people or so in the entire world who can really do it. ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilkyDiamonds Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Why stop at Brady, how about Campbell and oh let's see Manning, or maybe Montana, or maybe Kelly, hell while we're at it Marino. You get the picture I think highly of Jason, and want to see him succeed, but honestly at this point in his career it does him a dis-service to compare him with Brady. I've put in another thread if you to compare Jason compare him to Vinny Testeverde, big strong quarterback, who requires a good line, and receivers who can go get it, and the wildcard of having a disciplinarian type coach that can squeeze as much as possible out of him (Parcells, Belicheck) How many wins is a great quarterback worth over lesser peers, debatable for sure, but maybe it should be looked at as how losses can be attributed to quarterback play. Does a better quarterback allow you to stay in contention for longer (Elway,Marino, Montana, Brady, Manning all known for 4th qtr heroics in which their team was kept alive by great QB play) As opposed to quarterbacks who throw late interceptions, incomplete passes on crucial downs, or take sacks at inopportune times, or plain just no gutsy enough to take a calculated risk. I'd like to hear some discussion on this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted September 1, 2009 Author Share Posted September 1, 2009 its more baffling to me that others find this to be a meaningful and interesting debate. l That you're baffled is not surprising. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 That you're baffled is not surprising. maybe i should have used the word "astonished"? and it doesnt matter, cause technically im only baffled about 7.9% of the time as opposed to astonished 8.6% of the time. so theyre kinda interchangeable, just like quarterbacks! :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 I completely agree with Oldfan. One thing that he is not accounting for is Brady's mental apptitude. He is VERY smart at reading defenses, calling audibles, being able to go through his progressions quickly and other various mental processes that go with playing QB. Much of that of course can be attributed to his years of experience in the same offense, but I do think that those are things that some are better at than others, and if the difference is large enough, it can mean much more than just a couple of games. Do I think Brady's mental apptitude is far reaching JC's; right now, yes. Do I think JC can close the gap significantly if he masters a system like Brady has; absolutely. And much like Oldfan has stated, I think though JC's mental apptitude may never reach someone like Brady, I do think his physical abilities could put him past Brady in terms of production. A couple of intangibles that go into a teams success like New England is the system. How do players respond to the coaches. How they buy into the system. How do the leaders on the field step up. Knowing the game is one thing. Getting players to respond to you is another. There is a human element in football that will always be there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Your pointing to one game over a 3X super bowl winning career.And just food for thought: Brady was sacked over 100 times over the first three years of his career. Maybe to put it differently, I took your post as a slam on Campbell's leadership. Yeah he can get more fired up, etc. But the team clearly likes him and he does seem to play better with good protection. IMO Campbell's personality isn't holding him back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 From the OP: Importance to winning = 100%10% is an estimate of the value of the QB position as a factor in winning NFL football games. Sadly you keep ignoring the fact that some are always going to be better than others. Therefore that 10% cannot be applied uniformly.Then it has been pointed out several times that Belichick is a .400 coach with out a particular QB and an .800 coach with him, in an almost equal number of games. So simple math shows that the right QB can be as much as a 40% value for the right coach. 6 more wins a year. An extreme case to be sure, but it blows your theory out of the water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 I completely agree with Oldfan. One thing that he is not accounting for is Brady's mental apptitude. He is VERY smart at reading defenses, calling audibles, being able to go through his progressions quickly and other various mental processes that go with playing QB. Much of that of course can be attributed to his years of experience in the same offense, but I do think that those are things that some are better at than others, and if the difference is large enough, it can mean much more than just a couple of games. Brady stepped in as a rookie 6th round pick and won the Superbowl. So time in system = a few weeks? .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted September 1, 2009 Author Share Posted September 1, 2009 Oldfan, I think you ought to go to a couple 'Skins games this season and watch the plays develop from on-high. I realize how easy it is to spot open receivers from up there. And, I know how difficult it is from ground level behind the line. I also know that reads get easier when a QB has spent a few years in a scheme. Brady's working in a scheme that is easier to learn than the WCO and he's been doing it for quite a while. But, if he came here, he'd start all over, making some bad reads at first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darrelgreenie Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 ... and more often than not, Campbell is making the incorrect read with the football and throwing it to the wrong guy.... Now, I really don't want to turn this into a bash campbell debate Isn't that kinda unfair since you're a mod. If Campbell made the wrong read more often then not Collins would be the starter. Anyway i don't think Oldfan is saying that JC is anywhere near as good as Brady. Just that he believes the impact of a QB is overrated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Hell, take a guy like Chad Pennington. He's got the arm strength of a left handed two year old.But he is deadly with the football because of his ability to read defenses and get the ball into the soft spot of the defense, despite never having much of a receiving corps and playing in different schemes. That is what a QB can do for you. All of a sudden, the coaches look like genius's... simply because their QB is making the correct reads. Something that is probably the toughest thing in all of professional sports to do... as there are probably only 6 people or so in the entire world who can really do it. ..... I completely agree, but it makes me wonder how much of someone like Pennington's ability to read defenses comes from coaching. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Brady stepped in as a rookie 6th round pick and won the Superbowl.So time in system = a few weeks? .... theyre just gonna come back with the typical "but he was sitting and learning it for over a year". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted September 1, 2009 Author Share Posted September 1, 2009 Sadly you keep ignoring the fact that some are always going to be better than others. You aren't reading my posts. Then it has been pointed out several times that Belichick is a .400 coach with out a particular QB and an .800 coach with him, in an almost equal number of games. So simple math shows that the right QB can be as much as a 40% value for the right coach. 6 more wins a year. An extreme case to be sure, but it blows your theory out of the water. That's a worthless argument. I've already countered it in a response to zoony. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Isn't that kinda unfair since you're a mod. :doh: I'm also a member ya dipstick :slap: Feel free to engage in any argument you wish with regard to my post, just don't be surprised when I ignore you, as I stated in my post. Now, can we get back to arguing with Oldfan? I much prefer someone like him that doesn't stoop to the lowest common denominator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 I completely agree, but it makes me wonder how much of someone like Pennington's ability to read defenses comes from coaching. I often wonder how deadly he could be if he had the physical skills of say, a Jeff George. Yikes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Brady stepped in as a rookie 6th round pick and won the Superbowl.So time in system = a few weeks? .... First of all, he wasn't a rookie. But you are right there wasn't much time in the system. If you recall, Brady had a very good team around him as well as a very good kicker. His QB rating was 86.5 during the regular season and 77.3 that postseason with 1 TD and 1 INT, which is not impressive at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldfan Posted September 1, 2009 Author Share Posted September 1, 2009 But he is deadly with the football because of his ability to read defenses and get the ball into the soft spot of the defense, despite never having much of a receiving corps and playing in different schemes.. There are probably 25 QBs in the NFL who can read defenses as well as Chad, there are none that can throw a football as accurately for short-to-medium routes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 theyre just gonna come back with the typical "but he was sitting and learning it for over a year". Or how about how Brady wasn't as impressive as one would think but he just managed the game well. Like I said, I think are intangibles that Brady has which seperate himself. Some of these are God given, others are taught. How much more of these intangibles does someone who is more physicaly gifted need to close the gap need? Its a combination of things. But I agree with the underlying sentiment that Oldfan is proposing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilkyDiamonds Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 There are probably 25 QBs in the NFL who can read defenses as well as Chad, there are none that can throw a football as accurately for short-to-medium routes. Ummm Phillip Rivers? Just throwing that out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zoony Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 First of all, he wasn't a rookie. But you are right there wasn't much time in the system.If you recall, Brady had a very good team around him as well as a very good kicker. His QB rating was 86.5 during the regular season and 77.3 that postseason with 1 TD and 1 INT, which is not impressive at all. So what changed from Bledsoe? Why couldn't he get it done? (my bad I thought he was a rookie that year) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thirtyfive2seven Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 I think that's a lot of hype. Belichik is the star of that program. I think evidence of that is supported by Matt Cassell coming in and playing quite well when he's not on the same level as Tom Brady. Or is he Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IbleedBnG83 Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 So what changed from Bledsoe? Why couldn't he get it done?(my bad I thought he was a rookie that year) I conceded that there are certain intangibles. I agree that Brady is beyond JC and other players in the mental processes that go with playing QB. My suggestion is that many of these can be coached. My question to my own comment is how much of it can be coached, and how much of increase in these mental aspects is needed to bridge the gap if you include extra physical abilities? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I_Bleed_B&G Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 Brady stepped in as a rookie 6th round pick and won the Superbowl.So time in system = a few weeks? .... while campbell is in his 5th year and we are still wondering if he is a franchise player who hasn't taken us to the playoffs. We had to have a guy who was a journeyman QB step in and get us into the playoffs. For God Sake, a lot of people on this board were talking about replacing JC with Colt or Chase. How could one really compare JC to Brady. To me it makes no sense whatsoever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Lloyd Christmas Posted September 1, 2009 Share Posted September 1, 2009 So what changed from Bledsoe? Why couldn't he get it done?(my bad I thought he was a rookie that year) good question. why could brady do better than bledsoe if they had the same supporting cast, system, and coach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.