Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

Regarding QB talent, can the 2012 NFL Draft eclipse THE best ever NFL QB Draft of 1983?

deejaydana

By deejaydana
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

JMS

JMS

Posted
Posted

To me they play different positions...

Laurence Taylor was an outside linebacker who dominated the league with his pass rush like no other defensive player before or since... That's how he won the NFL MVP which Lewis never has.

Sacks and destroying offenses and quarterbacks.. ( Thiesman)

  • Tackles 1,088,
  • Sacks 142

Lewis plays inside linebacker. He's a monster, but he can't and doesn't dominate a game like Taylor did... Lewis -

  • Tackles 2,050
  • Sacks 41.5.

I know that's unfair to just look at the sacks , because Lewis isn't about sacks but those tackles., but to my mind the sack is the most dominant stat for defenses.. It makes your secondary stronger and changes the game more than any other state...

Taylor did that, he could change offenses and take away weaknesses.. Lewis doesn't. Lewis is the guy who plugs up the middle. A dominant defensive force; but even at his best, can't dominate a league like Taylor did..

Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
terpskins10

terpskins10

Posted
Posted
^^^^^^ and he made a HORRIBLE head coach in SF (but to his credit he put together an incredible defense that Harbuagh now gets full credit for). Hey, I just recalled he's a fellow Baylor Bear alum along with our current QB. He was a terror on the field.

As a terp, I credit Singletary for saving Vernon Davis's career. So there's that. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JMS

JMS

Posted
Posted
Taylor caused the Redskins to change their offense to protect the blind side with the H-Back. Lewis has not caused an offense to change.

Lawrence Taylor

  • 2× Super Bowl champion (XXI, XXV)
  • AP NFL MVP (1986)
  • 3× AP NFL Defensive Player of the Year
  • 2× UPI NFC Defensive Player of the Year (1983, 1986)
  • 10× AP First Team All-Pro
  • AP NFL Defensive Rookie of the Year (1981)
  • Ranked 3rd by The Top 100: NFL's Greatest Players

Ray Lewis

  • 1 Superbowl victory
  • 1 Superbowl MVP
  • 2 x defensive player of the year
  • 3× AFC Defensive Player Of The Year
  • 7× AP First Team All-Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AsiaticSkinsFan

AsiaticSkinsFan

Posted
Posted
but to my mind the sack is the most dominant stat for defenses.

LT is better than Lewis, but this is wrong. Sacks are probably the most overrated stat for a defender. OB pressures and hurries are a much better indicator. A pass rusher getting 10 pressures and no sacks in a game is much better than a pass rusher who got no pressures, but somehow got one sack.

Fortunately for LT, he got a lot of pressures, hurries, and sacks and changed how pass rushers are viewed. Special, special player.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Enter Apotheosis

Enter Apotheosis

Posted
Posted
He was in the 3rd round not the first... If you throw him in then that expands the number of QB's from 1983.....

Seriously though if Luck, RG3 and Wilson can't win more than 2 super bowls in the next 12-15 years, I think we will all be amazed.... We have to believe the 2012 class will eclipse the accomplishments of the 1983 class based upon SB victories alone.

It doesn't expand the number of successful QBs from the 1983 class. All of the talent in that QB class went in the first round, which is why only the first round is discussed.

Personally, I think you have to take the 2012 draft in its entirety for the comparison. Same thing for when people make a case for the 2004 class possibly eclipsing 1983, you have to throw Schaub in there with Eli, Roethlisberger, and Rivers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pjfootballer

pjfootballer

Posted
Posted
LT is better than Lewis, but this is wrong. Sacks are probably the most overrated stat for a defender. OB pressures and hurries are a much better indicator. A pass rusher getting 10 pressures and no sacks in a game is much better than a pass rusher who got no pressures, but somehow got one sack.

Fortunately for LT, he got a lot of pressures, hurries, and sacks and changed how pass rushers are viewed. Special, special player.

Not only that, but Taylor was well rounded. He could cover a back or TE coming out for a pass or sniff out a run, especially a draw. But we all know that his nose was wide open from all the blow he was doing, so sniffing out a play was easier for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JMS

JMS

Posted
Posted
LT is better than Lewis, but this is wrong. Sacks are probably the most overrated stat for a defender. OB pressures and hurries are a much better indicator. A pass rusher getting 10 pressures and no sacks in a game is much better than a pass rusher who got no pressures, but somehow got one sack.

Fortunately for LT, he got a lot of pressures, hurries, and sacks and changed how pass rushers are viewed. Special, special player.

I see and agree with your point that hurries and pressures are important too. But I disagree that sacks aren't a good indication of hurries and pressure. If you "somehow get 1 sack" but no hurries and pressure then you will have 1 sack and that's indicative of not much pressure. However nobody lucks into 10, 15 or 22.5 sacks in a season without putting a heck of a lot of preasure on the QB. Also if they got pressure 3 or 4 times that's not as good as 1 sack. Pressure still indicates the QB was able to get rid of the ball and maybe even made a play, sacks by definition are loss of down, and loss of yardage.

---------- Post added December-13th-2012 at 10:40 AM ----------

Why are we talking about defensive players in this thread?

Yes this class has the potential to outshine the 1983 class. If I were a stok broker, I'd buy the class of 2012 on this one. Are we certain? not yet.

If Seattle or Indi or DC wins the superbowl this year then to my mind the class of 2012 is already half way there. The 1983 QB class for as accomplished as they were only won 2 superbowls between 3 hof QB's and 2 other long time franchise QB's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JMS

JMS

Posted
Posted
^^^^^ That last part of your post seems off to me. Sure, they won only two but how many were they in? And Marino is a king of many, many stats. This statement of yours holds true if Super Bowls rings is THE ONLY determinant.

I hear you... and maybe I'm a small minority in my opinion. But to me the ultimate metric for any QB is Super Bowl victories. That's the ultimate goal of any season, and that's the ultimate metric I would use to judge a QB. To me John Elway was a far better QB than either Marino or Kelly even though perhaps their statistics weren't all that far off. The big difference is Elway won 2 and Marino and Kelly didn't. Another example, I don't care how many TD's Romo sits to pee throws every year. If he chokes in the playoffs every year he's not a good QB, I don't care if he's first team all pro or league MVP, If he lays down in the playoffs he's not doing his job. So I think judging the the class of 83 ultimately on super bowl victories is fair. I think you still look at all the other statistics, but it's a glaring hole in their argument about all time greatest QB class that those guys combined to only win 2 super bowls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MattFancy

MattFancy

Posted
Posted
I hear you... and maybe I'm a small minority in my opinion. But to me the ultimate metric for any QB is Super Bowl victories. That's the ultimate goal of any season, and that's the ultimate metric I would use to judge a QB. To me John Elway was a far better QB than either Marino or Kelly even though perhaps their statistics weren't all that far off. The big difference is Elway won 2 and Marino and Kelly didn't. Another example, I don't care how many TD's Romo sits to pee throws every year. If he chokes in the playoffs every year he's not a good QB, I don't care if he's first team all pro or league MVP, If he lays down in the playoffs he's not doing his job. So I think judging the the class of 83 ultimately on super bowl victories is fair. I think you still look at all the other statistics, but it's a glaring hole in their argument about all time greatest superbowl class that those guys combined to only win 2 super bowls.

So you're saying the 2004 class is better since Eli and Ben have combined for 4 Super Bowls already?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JMS

JMS

Posted
Posted
So you're saying the 2004 class is better since Eli and Ben have combined for 4 Super Bowls already?

Yeah I think I am.. Elway cancels out Eli, and Ben has two more super bowl victories than Marino, Kelly, Obrian and blackledge combined..

I equate it with looking at a pitchers wins over his ERA when deciding for the Cy Young award. Yeah a guy could have a 1.70 ERA; but if he only won you 10 games;

the guy with a 2.50 ERA who won 20 is more valuable to your franchise and the league. It is common place in baseball to favor wins over all other statistics when

awarding the cy young. I think super bowl wins are a similar over arching metric for judging a QB. Or NBA championships when judging NBA players...

To elaborate on this a bit more... There is this all star mentality for many fans. They think they can take the best stat guy at any position and assemble a team or make a team better.

We here in Washington who have lived through the last 13 years should realize the error of this belief. There is often self sacrifice in winning. There are also intangibles in winning.

How you treat your fellow players, how you bond with them. I guess the point is if winning the championship is the ultimate goal for every team every year, judging their team leaders ( QB's)

on that metric is fair and reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MattFancy

MattFancy

Posted
Posted
Yeah I think I am.. Elway cancels out Eli, and Ben has two more super bowl victories than Marino....

I equate it with looking at a pitchers wins over his ERA when deciding for the Cy Young award. Yeah a guy could have a 1.70 ERA; but if he only won you 10 games;

the guy with a 2.50 ERA who won 20 is more valuable to your franchise and the league. It is common place in baseball to favor wins over all other statistics when

awarding the cy young. I think super bowl wins are a similar over arching metric for judging a QB. Or NBA championships when judging NBA players...

I find it hard to base anything solely off wins. Marino was a great QB, one of the best, but those Dolphin teams didn't have much else around him. One player can only do so much by himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JMS

JMS

Posted
Posted
I find it hard to base anything solely off wins. Marino was a great QB, one of the best, but those Dolphin teams didn't have much else around him. One player can only do so much by himself.

I'm not saying base it solely on wins. I'm saying tough super bowl wins is the most important metric of many metrics.

Look at Joe Montana, Payton Manning, Johnny Unitas or Tom Brady; guys who regularly put their teams on their backs and carry them over the line.. Dan Marino passed for a record 420 TD's at the time, to Montana's 273.

If the game is on the line who would you rather have running our offense?

No question Montana who earned his nickname "Joe Cool" by orchestrating 31 fourth quarter comebacks in 15 years and went 4-0 in superbowls would be anybody's first pick. Because it's not the total statistics which matters,

It's ultimately whether you step up when the game is on the line and the pressure is on, or you step back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...