Is Donovan McNabb a top 10 QB?

[SplashHit25]

Quiet down with the intangibles talk....Oldfan is in the thread

But in all seriousness, the SB's are where I disagree on with you on Brady.

How many SB's have the Pats won since he started really putting up the gaudy numbers? Zero.

They won 3 with a great defense and a remarkably clutch kicker.

I can't argue with you there.

[Conn]

You can also say Drew Brees' system has manufactured his completion percentage. It wouldn't be correct or smart, but you could.

Except that it would be very true.

Every great QB in the league plays in a system that (obviously) plays to their strengths. Think about that.

[pimpumd]

Except Brees has put up good numbers in another system, so you can't say the system has manufactured his completion percentage. Think about that.

[Conn]

Except Brees has put up good numbers in another system, so you can't say the system has manufactured his completion percentage. Think about that.

I'm not saying that the system he's in now has made him the QB he is, completely.

I'm saying its always a factor. It is on the Saints, and it was on the Chargers.

And it is for every elite QB, and that's not debatable.

You can debate how MUCH, but that's impossible to know as a fan. That's what Oldfan is saying, and that's why he ignores pretty much everything but throwing ability when grading QB's. I can see why people hate it, but I can also see the merit in it, to a degree.

[SplashHit25]

What's to say both coaches didn't tweak said system around Brees' strengths? Think about that.

[Oldfan]

The youth coach analogy is just plain ignorant. You can also say Drew Brees' system has manufactured his completion percentage. It wouldn't be correct or smart, but you could.

ALL smart coaches "manufacture" the completion percentage. When Mike Holmgren worked for Bill Walsh, his job was to analyze the passing game in the offseason. One year, he discovered that one of Joe Montana's favorite plays, a pass over the middle, had resulted in three interceptions, so Walsh took it out of the playbook.

Steve Young's and Joe Montana' career completion percentage were identical down to the fourth decimal. That's not entirely due to coincidence.

Oh... I won't dig out links for those facts either.

And don't you think if the Colts were limited by the throws Peyton supposedly can or cannot make, teams would pick up on this and start to stop them?

A smaller plabook is more predictable, but the offense can execute those plays better, so they don't beat themselves with mistakes.

[SplashHit25]

Steve Young's and Joe Montana' career completion percentage were identical down to the fourth decimal. That's not entirely due to coincidence.

Oh... I won't dig out links for those facts either.

.

It's slightly different here than "identical down to the fourth decimal"

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_cmp_perc_career.htm

[Buck812]

You would really take Bradford, Sanchez, Kolb, Stafford, Henne, and Young straight up for McNabb? You would trade the 3rd winningest QB over the last 10 years for those 6 QBs who have proven nothing in the NFL?

I would... The problem would be the Rams, Jets, Eagles, Dolphins and Titans wouldn't. Actually the Rams and Eagles have pretty much proved they wouldnt since they already had their chance to do just that.

Edit: The Titans is a close call.

[pimpumd]

ALL smart coaches "manufacture" the completion percentage. When Mike Holmgren worked for Bill Walsh, his job was to analyze the passing game in the offseason. One year, he discovered that one of Joe Montana's favorite plays, a pass over the middle, had resulted in three interceptions, so Walsh took it out of the playbook.

Steve Young's and Joe Montana' career completion percentage were identical down to the fourth decimal. That's not entirely due to coincidence.

Oh... I won't dig out links for those facts either.

A smaller plabook is more predictable, but the offense can execute those plays better, so they don't beat themselves with mistakes.

I gotta give it to you Oldfan, you have a counter argument to everything, no matter how ridiculous the counter argument is. Using your logic, a coach could run one pass play over and over, but because the team practices it so much and doesn't "beat themselves with mistakes", the opposing defense won't be able to stop it. Ridiculous.

Let's clear up somthing else. I think we can both agree that Drew Brees and Peyton Manning have both put up elite numbers over their careers, whether you put much into those numbers or not. However, you watched a Sports Science show where Drew Brees hit a moving target 10 out of 10 times, right? And so, he is an elite quarterback while Peyton is not because he throws ducks, right? Do you have any data to back up your asertion that Manning isn't accurate?

[Oldfan]

It's slightly different here than "identical down to the fourth decimal"

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_cmp_perc_career.htm

I saw the four digit number in the same article that told the Holmgren story.

[pimpumd]

It's slightly different here than "identical down to the fourth decimal"

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_cmp_perc_career.htm

I guess we need to start fact-checking all of Oldfan's posts. More than a whole percentage point difference there.

[fnkdctr(007)]

McNabb is top ten or close to it. Factor in INT's and win loss and his stats are better.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

I guess we need to start fact-checking all of Oldfan's posts. More than a whole percentage point difference there.

Unless the completion percentages cited in the story and OF's post had to do with games played under Walsh/with SF?

[Conn]

I guess we need to start fact-checking all of Oldfan's posts. More than a whole percentage point difference there.

I guess you've stopped responding to my posts. I'll admit, it is definitely easier to just attack others' ideas than it is to put together a coherent opposing response using your own research. That seems to be the route you've taken.

[CG]

McNabb is right there in the same level as Romo sits to pee, E Manning and Roethlisburger. I'd say he's a step below Rodgers and Rivers and 2 steps below Brees, Peyton and Brady. He can play at the top level when he's on his game, but he's not always consistent from game to game or even drive to drive. The accuracy seems to come and go.

[pimpumd]

I guess you've stopped responding to my posts. I'll admit, it is definitely easier to just attack others' ideas than it is to put together a coherent opposing response using your own research. That seems to be the route you've taken.

What post are you referring to? I don't want to neglect you if you're looking for some attention. I was originally debating with Oldfan, and I didn't see whatever post you're referring to.

[RiggosMohawk]

Michael Vick is an excellent example of why I would not rate QBs based solely on tangible (i.e. mobility, velocity, accuracy, touch) evidence. His tangibles give him a much higher rating than his play warrants.

[Oldfan]

I gotta give it to you Oldfan, you have a counter argument to everything, no matter how ridiculous the counter argument is. Using your logic, a coach could run one pass play over and over, but because the team practices it so much and doesn't "beat themselves with mistakes", the opposing defense won't be able to stop it. Ridiculous.

You can make any tactic sound ridiculous if you take it to the extreme as you did. It's a lot tougher to say it doesn't make sense when you leave it as it is, in the realm of the reasonable.

Do you have any data to back up your asertion that Manning isn't accurate?

No. No such data exists (despite your claim to the contrary).

My opinion is a logical deduction based on physics which I understand only enough to know that a spiral can cut through air much like a streamlined car cuts through the air in a wind tunnel.

[Conn]

Unless the completion percentages cited in the story and OF's post had to do with games played under Walsh/with SF?

Exactly what I was going to say. I'd say that's very likely.

[pimpumd]

By the way, I just found the article I beleive Oldfan was referring to. It says that Young and Montana's interception percentage is the same to the fourth decimal point. And Holmgren goes on further to say that Montana is arguably the greatest quarterback whoever play. I don't know how he comes to that conclusion when Montana clearly lacked elite throwing skills.

[pimpumd]

Exactly what I was going to say. I'd say that's very likely.

Nope. Wasn't the case at all.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80358f1f&template=without-video&confirm=true

[pimpumd]

You can make any tactic sound ridiculous if you take it to the extreme as you did. It's a lot tougher to say it doesn't make sense when you leave it as it is, in the realm of the reasonable.

No. No such data exists (despite your claim to the contrary).

My opinion is a logical deduction based on physics which I understand only enough to know that a spiral can cut through air much like a streamlined car cuts through the air in a wind tunnel.

Here again you have no data to back this up. How do you know how many ducks Manning throws, or what percentage of ducks he throws compared to non-ducks. Lol. You don't.

[Conn]

What post are you referring to?

This one:

I'm not saying that the system he's in now has made him the QB he is, completely.

I'm saying its always a factor. It is on the Saints, and it was on the Chargers.

And it is for every elite QB, and that's not debatable.

You can debate how MUCH, but that's impossible to know as a fan. That's what Oldfan is saying, and that's why he ignores pretty much everything but throwing ability when grading QB's. I can see why people hate it, but I can also see the merit in it, to a degree.

The bolded portion is the most important, since you're having a discussion with Oldfan.

I don't want to neglect you if you're looking for some attention.

Ah, there it is. Making my point for me. You're all about debating as long as it entails trying to make someone else's point look stupid, while barely supporting your own. We'll see how you do with a good counter-post.

I'm betting that you won't be able to A) not insult and not try to make a mockery of the post you're responding to by trying to imply that it means something it doesn't.

Please prove me wrong. Its nice to have a debate where everyone is not only rational, but accepts that the opposing view COULD be correct, if it were proven so.

[Conn]

Nope. Wasn't the case at all.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d80358f1f&template=without-video&confirm=true

Okay, so the statistic that Oldfan remembered being about completion percentage was actually about interception percentage.

Well, he IS old :evilg:

[Conn]

And Holmgren goes on further to say that Montana is arguably the greatest quarterback whoever play. I don't know how he comes to that conclusion when Montana clearly lacked elite throwing skills.

A) Holmgren was one of his coaches.

Its one of the prevailing popular opinions that that is true. Its hard to go against the grain and say otherwise (See: ESPN's coverage of the Cowboys being SB contenders. The popular thought is the one that gets reported, in many cases)