Rookie QB or Veteran QB for "Next Season"??? (I didn't bump this, but I ended up being wrong anyway....)

[CobraCommander]

Just now, goskins10 said:

 

I get what you are saying- he just had more chances. I see that as flawed though. Let's start with Bree's and Brady are #1 and 2. I promise you there were not behind as much as even Rodgers, especially Brady. Also, when you are a ****ty team and always behind it's even harder to come back in the 4th - because well you suck as a team. With a good team you were probably better than the other team anyway and should have won.

 

Last but not least - it's the wide gap that bothers me and seeing him fail late in games. If you remember they had a chance to come back on us that Monday night game. Rodgers came up short. I like Rodgers don't get me wrong. But when you look at the entire picture - not just how good a pure passer he is - it's just not the right move for this team. 

 

Yeah I get it, I just thing that stat is incomplete. I went through and read the three articles that were posted in regards to 4th quarter comebacks, I just think it's a mistake for it not to be a percentage. The problem with the stat is that we don't know how many times Brees, Brady, Rodgers and Stafford have gone into the 4th behind. We can do the work ourselves but I don't have the time or the patience. Anecdotes aside, I don't think it shows a complete picture of what each QB is capable of, just what each quarterback has done.

[RWJ]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Much of the national media has annoited Stafford to the Colts since the rumor of him being on the trading block started weeks back.  Like I said over the weekend, the whole thing is nauseating to me.  It comes off like they believe they deserve Stafford.  The Colts do good QBs its in their DNA, etc so he belongs there..  

 

We should get Stafford just to spite them.  😀    They will be outraged that the mighty hallowed Colts don't get their man...

 

That's the media for ya!  We watch it on TV or some of us do everyday.  They drive or think they drive the narrative.  Let them think what they want to think.  IF we get Stafford we get him.  We shouldn't mortgage our future away because of other needs this team has.  If we draft our QB of the future and he takes us down playoff roads and eventually to the SB than even better. 

[goskins10]

8 minutes ago, BruceAllenIsFootballGenius said:

He doesn’t have a lot of comebacks because they usually not trailing in the 4th

 

Then why are Brees and Brady #1 and #2?  Ben #3?  

Edited January 25, 2021 by goskins10
Removed unnecessary commentary.

[Skinsinparadise]

Some hyperbole here but I mostly agree with the point

 

Washington Football Team

The notion with Washington was that they were just a decent quarterback away from jumping away from playoff pushover and into the playoff competitor category.

The rotating quarterback carousel that occurred this season in Washington was really the only negative to their squad. Terry McLaurin and Antonio Gibson both broke out to have phenomenal seasons. The defense finished among the top in the league in nearly every statistical category. The only thing truly holding this team back was their lack of talent at the quarterback position. Grabbing Stafford would push this team above that hump, further solidifying their playoff chances next season. Washington is a recovering franchise and this is who they need to bring in.

Those who are looking to trade for Stafford sit in the position of playoff hopefuls, somewhere the Football Team will likely be next year even with a below-average QB at the helm. Insert Stafford and I think it’s safe to say that they instantly become the leaders in the NFC East. I think this is a move that Washington needs to make, rather than a move they could make.

 

 

 

 

 

[goskins10]

1 minute ago, Florgon79 said:

 

Yeah I get it, I just thing that stat is incomplete. I went through and read the three articles that were posted in regards to 4th quarter comebacks, I just think it's a mistake for it not to be a percentage. The problem with the stat is that we don't know how many times Brees, Brady, Rodgers and Stafford have gone into the 4th behind. We can do the work ourselves but I don't have the time or the patience. Anecdotes aside, I don't think it shows a complete picture of what each QB is capable of, just what each quarterback has done.

 

I don't think it's complete either which is why I added that seeing him fail when it counted most last night and other times, added to his age and the cost of getting him ,the entire picture is that he is too much.  

 

As for the %, you really think that Brady, Ben, and Brees were behind as much as Stafford? If Stafford were leading and Brees, Brady and Ben were behind with numbers closer to Rodgers, I would say you have a point. But with those 3 in the top 3 active and top 5 all time, it suggests that it's of little impacts how often they were behind. And again, they all had better tools to come back from. So there's that.  

[BruceAllenIsFootballGenius]

4 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

Then why are Brees and Brady #1 and #2?  Seriously do you guys even read before you post? 

Because Packers score more points than the pats and saints over the last decade

[Rufus T Firefly]

16 hours ago, FootballZombie said:

GB is 30 Mil over the cap next yr. trading Rodgers would be a 31M dead cap hit.

So, this is one of those numbers that sounds like it means something important, but on examination is completely irrelevant. Sure, the dead hit on Rodgers would be over 31 mil. Crippling. Except that Rodgers has a cap figure of over 37 mil to start with. SO the team would save about 5.5 mil on their cap by getting rid of him. That's not a lot, and they'd probably spend a couple mil of it to bring in a vet back-up, but still they'd actually net cap space on a move. It's a little like someone offering to pay you $10 to take a couch off their hands and you saying "nah, I can't afford it, I'm broke".

 

Now, to be clear, I don't think there's really any chance he gets traded anyway. But it's not because of cap ramifications. 

[CobraCommander]

Just now, goskins10 said:

 

I don't think it's complete either which is why I added that seeing him fail when it counted most last night and other times, added to his age and the cost of getting him ,the entire picture is that he is too much.  

 

As for the %, you really think that Brady, Ben, and Brees were behind as much as Stafford? If Stafford were leading and Brees, Brady and Ben were behind with numbers closer to Rodgers, I would say you have a point. But with those 3 in the top 3 active and top 5 all time, it suggests that it's of little impacts how often they were behind. And again, they all had better tools to come back from. So there's that.  

All I'm saying is that I don't know if those guys were playing from behind more than Stafford and that's why I don't care for that statistic. It's a great glory statistic for measuring just how good great QBs are. All of these QBs are great IMO. 

[kingdaddy]

2 hours ago, UK Skins said:

Based on Rodgers performance against the Buccs I wonder if he's lost it already. That was an absolute embarrassment. Wasn't it three chances to win it after interceptions and just never looked like getting it done.

 

Stafford or Watson would be awesome. I just don't want anything to do with Rodgers.

Yes sir, Heinicke had no trouble moving the ball against the Bucs, Rodgers pales in comparison to our folk hero Heinicke. I'm with you, thanks but no thanks on Rodgers. 

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

Stafford. Now!

[goskins10]

2 minutes ago, Florgon79 said:

All I'm saying is that I don't know if those guys were playing from behind more than Stafford and that's why I don't care for that statistic. It's a great glory statistic for measuring just how good great QBs are. All of these QBs are great IMO. 

 

We were doing well until here. You just don't care for the statistic? Its a glory statistic? 🙂  I have to interpret that is it goes against your narrative of wanting Rodgers but since you have no real data to refute, you will dismiss out of hand as a bad statistic. I hope that's not true. 

 

Also, I made it clear this is NOT the only statistic I was using. Other top QBs on teams as good as GB (or better) had more 4q comebacks. It's not "just a glory" statistic. It's a part of a larger picture that shows how a QB responds to pressure. While Rodgers is a really great QB (easily top 10 all time maybe higher), this suggests - no it's NOT the only measure - but it does suggest he is not good under pressure of needing a win. When you ADD that to how old he is, and how much he will cost it does not seem like a good investment. 

 

[Koolblue13]

I'm warming to the idea of Stafford.

[Skinsinparadise]

Not that Casserly's take means much to me, he was one of the 4 media guys that constantly pushed that Haskins was a franchise QB.  Had many checkered drafts here.  just a week ago he said his sources told him Stafford won't be traded.  But what the heck...

 

 

 

Edited January 25, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[goskins10]

12 minutes ago, BruceAllenIsFootballGenius said:

Because Packers score more points than the pats and saints over the last decade

 

First my apologies for the not reading the comment statement - you did not deserve that. I removed in the main comment. 

 

However, I disagree with your contention. I normally let others do their own work, but I got you started here. Here are the last 4 yrs of scoring by QB

 

GB 2017:320, 2018:376, 2019:376, 2020:506

NO 2017:448, 2018:504, 2019:458, 2020:482

Brady 2017:458, 2018:436, 2019:420, 2020:492

 

So at least for the last 4 yrs, GB has not nearly as many pts as Bree's and Brady. 

[CobraCommander]

9 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

We were doing well until here. You just don't care for the statistic? Its a glory statistic? 🙂  I have to interpret that is it goes against your narrative of wanting Rodgers but since you have no real data to refute, you will dismiss out of hand as a bad statistic. I hope that's not true. 

 

Also, I made it clear this is NOT the only statistic I was using. Other top QBs on teams as good as GB (or better) had more 4q comebacks. It's not "just a glory" statistic. It's a part of a larger picture that shows how a QB responds to pressure. While Rodgers is a really great QB (easily top 10 all time maybe higher), this suggests - no it's NOT the only measure - but it does suggest he is not good under pressure of needing a win. When you ADD that to how old he is, and how much he will cost it does not seem like a good investment. 

 

Just how I feel man. I think it would be a much better statistic if it referenced percentage of 4th quarter comebacks that were succesful. 

 

My narrative has not been about wanting Rodgers, I'd actually rather roll with Stafford because of his age and quite frankly his Ego does not seem to be an issue whereas I believe Rodgers ego is an issue.

 

 

Edited January 25, 2021 by Florgon79

[Est.1974]

5 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

I'm warming to the idea of Stafford.

Hopefully Stafford can warm to the idea of the WFT.

[Skinsinparadise]

The mysterious career of Matthew Stafford in Detroit—zero playoff wins in 12 seasons—is likely over.

Arguments are about to ensue over the value of Stafford, who turns 33 on Super Sunday. Fact is, he’s been a highly productive quarterback who’s never won a damn thing. Whose fault is that? The Lions’ mostly. With a revolving door of coaches, GMs and cultures, Detroit has not surrounded a very good quarterback with equitable talent. But if you draft a quarterback first overall, and that quarterback plays for your team for 12 years and is mostly healthy and a good locker-room guy, and he has a good receiver group in most seasons, what would you think about paying him $219 million and he never won a game in the postseason?

I can hear it now: Quarterback wins isn’t a stat. Here’s a few stats. It’s 2013. Thanksgiving Day. Lions maul the Packers 40-10, and after 12 games of the season, Detroit is 7-5 with a 1.5-game lead on the Packers entering December. In the final month of the season, Detroit goes 0-4, averages 17 points a game, and with a defensive wall of Ndamukong Suh and Nick Fairley, has one of its best teams of the Stafford era. The Lions finished third in the NFC North at 7-9.

That’s one snapshot. It should not damn Stafford to a legacy of losing. He’s been a shining light for a bad franchise and deserves to have a chance to win in the last few years of his career.

Stafford reportedly personally asked owner Sheila Ford Hamp for a trade after the season. If the Lions do trade him—per Tom Pelissero of NFL Network, they will try (and Pelissero is absolutely correct)—what sort of market will there be? Robust, I would think. But with not quite the pot of gold in return. The likely prospects, plus what would be equitable for each franchise:

1. Colts. Easy pick. Frank Reich needs a quarterback and with the likelihood that Carson Wentz will stay in Philly, Stafford is the best option for a cap-rich team. Compensation: 21st overall pick in the 2021 draft.

2. Broncos. Doubt new GM George Paton, who has watched Stafford closely for 12 years while in Minnesota, would be sold on Drew Lock. Competition needed. Compensation: Two second-round picks (including 39th overall this year). Or Lock plus this year’s second-rounder.

3. Patriots. Bill Belichick, as he did when he first got to New England, got his cap in decent shape with one lousy year as payment. But would he be willing to pay the 15th overall pick for Stafford? He should be. Compensation: 15th overall pick.

4. Niners. Intriguing. San Francisco talks a big game about loving Jimmy Garoppolo, and maybe the franchise does. We’ll see. Compensation: Garoppolo and a 2022 second-round pick.

5. Washington. WFT has the defense to compete at a high level now. If I’m Ron Rivera, I try to convince Comeback Player of the Year Alex Smith to stay and back up a franchise passer like Stafford for the next couple of years. Compensation: 19th overall pick. (If I’m Detroit, signing free-agent-to-be Taylor Heinicke would be some interesting, and smart, insurance.)

6. Steelers. Not Pittsburgh’s style to nudge Ben Roethlisberger into retirement, but did you see the Statuesque One in the last month of the season? Compensation: 24th overall pick in the draft.

7. Saints. The cap is strangling New Orleans, but let GM Mickey Loomis figure that out. Sean Payton is gutsy and loves the splash and has the guts of a burglar. Compensation: 28th pick in the draft (and Detroit should backstop the future by signing Jameis Winston in free agency).

 

 

 

[goskins10]

4 minutes ago, Florgon79 said:

Just how I feel man. I think it would be a much better statistic if it referenced percentage of 4th quarter comebacks that were succesful. 

 

Wouldn't that tell you more about how ****ty a team you had around you? I don't think anyone could argue Stafford has ever had the team around him that Rodgers had. Again, and you keep ignoring this very important part of the argument - if what you say has that much impact, why would Bree's, Brady and Ben be at the top both the active list but also all time list? In no rational world would any of those teams be behind more often than Stafford yet they all are above him. In fairness, in terms of games played they probably average out to close the same. 

 

But think about that, with the awful teams Stafford has had, he has been able to lead 4Q comebacks on average just about as often as Bree's Brady, and Ben. Let's forget Stafford for a minute, do you really think that those 3 have had that many more opportunities than Rodgers? Then you add Stafford back in with the ****ty teams he has hadm and and in terms of games played he has kept up with the big boys. 

 

I will leave it that. We can agree to disagree. But I think you are dismissing a very telling statistic over a lurking variable that IMO would have little impact on the outcome since there are other HOF QBs to be considered that also have a high number of 4th Q comebacks.  

 

 

[Darrell Green Fan]

5 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

The mysterious career of Matthew Stafford in Detroit—zero playoff wins in 12 seasons—is likely over.

Arguments are about to ensue over the value of Stafford, who turns 33 on Super Sunday. Fact is, he’s been a highly productive quarterback who’s never won a damn thing. Whose fault is that? The Lions’ mostly. With a revolving door of coaches, GMs and cultures, Detroit has not surrounded a very good quarterback with equitable talent. But if you draft a quarterback first overall, and that quarterback plays for your team for 12 years and is mostly healthy and a good locker-room guy, and he has a good receiver group in most seasons, what would you think about paying him $219 million and he never won a game in the postseason?

I can hear it now: Quarterback wins isn’t a stat. Here’s a few stats. It’s 2013. Thanksgiving Day. Lions maul the Packers 40-10, and after 12 games of the season, Detroit is 7-5 with a 1.5-game lead on the Packers entering December. In the final month of the season, Detroit goes 0-4, averages 17 points a game, and with a defensive wall of Ndamukong Suh and Nick Fairley, has one of its best teams of the Stafford era. The Lions finished third in the NFC North at 7-9.

That’s one snapshot. It should not damn Stafford to a legacy of losing. He’s been a shining light for a bad franchise and deserves to have a chance to win in the last few years of his career.

Stafford reportedly personally asked owner Sheila Ford Hamp for a trade after the season. If the Lions do trade him—per Tom Pelissero of NFL Network, they will try (and Pelissero is absolutely correct)—what sort of market will there be? Robust, I would think. But with not quite the pot of gold in return. The likely prospects, plus what would be equitable for each franchise:

1. Colts. Easy pick. Frank Reich needs a quarterback and with the likelihood that Carson Wentz will stay in Philly, Stafford is the best option for a cap-rich team. Compensation: 21st overall pick in the 2021 draft.

2. Broncos. Doubt new GM George Paton, who has watched Stafford closely for 12 years while in Minnesota, would be sold on Drew Lock. Competition needed. Compensation: Two second-round picks (including 39th overall this year). Or Lock plus this year’s second-rounder.

3. Patriots. Bill Belichick, as he did when he first got to New England, got his cap in decent shape with one lousy year as payment. But would he be willing to pay the 15th overall pick for Stafford? He should be. Compensation: 15th overall pick.

4. Niners. Intriguing. San Francisco talks a big game about loving Jimmy Garoppolo, and maybe the franchise does. We’ll see. Compensation: Garoppolo and a 2022 second-round pick.

5. Washington. WFT has the defense to compete at a high level now. If I’m Ron Rivera, I try to convince Comeback Player of the Year Alex Smith to stay and back up a franchise passer like Stafford for the next couple of years. Compensation: 19th overall pick. (If I’m Detroit, signing free-agent-to-be Taylor Heinicke would be some interesting, and smart, insurance.)

6. Steelers. Not Pittsburgh’s style to nudge Ben Roethlisberger into retirement, but did you see the Statuesque One in the last month of the season? Compensation: 24th overall pick in the draft.

7. Saints. The cap is strangling New Orleans, but let GM Mickey Loomis figure that out. Sean Payton is gutsy and loves the splash and has the guts of a burglar. Compensation: 28th pick in the draft (and Detroit should backstop the future by signing Jameis Winston in free agency).

 

 

 

 

Someone posted this earlier but it bears repeating.  Does Stafford have final say even if the Washington offer (higher 1st than Indy) is higher?  Lions have to do what's best for them and take the better offer.  

[CobraCommander]

1 minute ago, goskins10 said:

 

Wouldn't that tell you more about how ****ty a team you had around you? I don't think anyone could argue Stafford has ever had the team around him that Rodgers had. Again, and you keep ignoring this very important part of the argument - if what you say has that much impact, why would Bree's, Brady and Ben be at the top both the active list but also all time list? In no rational world would any of those teams be behind more often than Stafford yet they all are above him. In fairness, in terms of games played they probably average out to close the same. 

 

But think about that, with the awful teams Stafford has had, he has been able to lead 4Q comebacks on average just about as often as Bree's Brady, and Ben. Let's forget Stafford for a minute, do you really think that those 3 have had that many more opportunities than Rodgers? Then you add Stafford back in with the ****ty teams he has hadm and and in terms of games played he has kept up with the big boys. 

 

I will leave it that. We can agree to disagree. But I think you are dismissing a very telling statistic over a lurking variable that IMO would have little impact on the outcome since there are other HOF QBs to be considered that also have a high number of 4th Q comebacks.  

 

 

 

 

Here, I found what I'm looking for

 

https://www.footballperspective.com/guest-post-4th-quarter-comeback-percentage/#:~:text=The numerator is Successful 4th,have a 19% success rate.

 

I think this is a much better list as it shows percentages. Stafford ranks 16th whereas Rodgers ranks 124th. It's as you suspected but with actual numbers instead of us all going back and forth making assumptions.

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

Someone posted this earlier but it bears repeating.  Does Stafford have final say even if the Washington offer (higher 1st than Indy) is higher?  Lions have to do what's best for them and take the better offer.  

 

From what I've heard Stafford doesn't have a no trade clause.  What might be interesting is he apparently is close with the Lions ownership so maybe they'd do him a solid where everything being equal they'd trade him to a preferred spot.

 

Was just listening to the Lions beat guy for the Athletic.  Nothing that revealing.  He said that Stafford was beloved in the locker room.  And believes that he had a good relationship with Mayhew. 

Edited January 25, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[goskins10]

2 minutes ago, Florgon79 said:

 

 

Here, I found what I'm looking for

 

https://www.footballperspective.com/guest-post-4th-quarter-comeback-percentage/#:~:text=The numerator is Successful 4th,have a 19% success rate.

 

I think this is a much better list as it shows percentages. Stafford ranks 16th whereas Rodgers ranks 124th. It's as you suspected but with actual numbers instead of us all going back and forth making assumptions.

 

Thanks for finding this but I think it proves my point even more. The order of them with %s is not much different than it is without. The only real differences are Brees is a little lower and Rodgers is even worse - isn't that what I am seeing...  🙂 

 

Don't get me wrong, this just like every bit of data helps make the picture but you could also make the argument that the high number of opportunities for Stafford is becasue he is on a team that sucks. And that the other QBs should be higher because while they fall behind, they have the better team and should catch up - a premier QB is not necessary. 

 

Anyway, I believe this makes my point, which you acknowledge, so thanks for finding it and posting. 

[CobraCommander]

Just now, goskins10 said:

 

Thanks for finding this but I think it proves my point even more. The order of them with %s is not much different than it is without. The only real differences are Brees is a little lower and Rodgers is even worse - isn't that what I am seeing...  🙂 

 

Don't get me wrong, this just like every bit of data helps make the picture but you could also make the argument that the high number of opportunities for Stafford is becasue he is on a team that sucks. And that the other QBs should be higher because while they fall behind, they have the better team and should catch up - a premier QB is not necessary. 

 

Anyway, I believe this makes my point, which you acknowledge, so thanks for finding it and posting. 

It absolutely proves your point. All I wanted was the percentage to backup the claim.

[Ball Security]

Are the Colts really going to go four years without a first round pick?  If they offer two 1s for Stafford, that’ll be the case.

[88Comrade2000]

2 hours ago, UK Skins said:

Don't get me wrong I've loved watching Rodgers over the years. People are asking themselves why he's only won one Superbowl though. I think last night showed that. 

 

Do i want that for two first rounders? Absolutely not.

 

Watson's young so still improving. I also happen to agree with the view that Stafford has had crap to deal with for his entire career. There's more upside to both of them. Even if you disagree that Rodgers is getting old.

GB has been a disappointment year in and year out since winning that Super Bowl in 2010. He’s on the tailend off his career.  Maybe he’s got a couple of years left in him; if he doesn’t get injured. It wasn’t too long ago where had major injuries.

If you get him; you will need to have successor on the roster either in 21 or 22 and ready to take over when Aaron is done.

 

I prefer someone younger. Might as well give the picks for Watson.

2 hours ago, Florgon79 said:

 I think the opposite. I think the rumor was that Pederson is out because he wants Wentz and the organization wants to role with Hurts. Wentz reuniting with his old OC in Frank Reich makes the most sense especially if Philly can get a good trade.

Actually, I think the rumor was the opposite. Doug wanted to go with Hurts and the owner wanted to go with Wentz.

Edited January 25, 2021 by Rdskns2000