Whether it's your first Bonnaroo or you’re a music festival veteran, we welcome you to Inforoo.
Here you'll find info about artists, rumors, camping tips, and the infamous Roo Clues. Have a look around then create an account and join in the fun. See you at Bonnaroo!!
Against the Colts the defense lost 3 starters by the early 3rd quarter and were playing guys out of position. In the 4th quarter Peyton held the ball for 9 of the first 12 minutes in 2 drives that totaled 160 yards (and 10 points). The team was overmatched and lost to a better team, but Mark played well.
Against the Steelers the team had one of the single worst gameplans I've ever seen (spread them out and try to have Sanchez beat the blitz), which lead to Mark getting absolutely destroyed by an overload blitz and the fumble being returned for a TD. The team went into the half down 24-3 and Mark engineered 4 scoring drives in the frigid cold (1 TD, 3 FG's) and then got them to the goal line where the Jets had an OL tip a play off with his stance, Dustin Keller miss what should have been the go-ahead TD and then two boring HB dives against the one of the best run defenses since the turn of the century. Terrible coaching lost that game, not Mark (who brought the team back against a great defense on the road).
Now let's stop talking about this, Mark stinks, the point is clutch performances aren't very strong deciding factors.
True plus most often the qb is the best player on the team but take ap away from minnesota and they're terrible
They're terrible now. They needed a tremendous amount of luck to make the playoffs last year.
But let's play pretend. Peterson is the best RB in the NFL, that's not up for debate. Can we say that Aaron Rodgers is the best QB? Just for this exercise, we will. Now let's assume that Ponder is an average QB - which he's not, he's worse than that. Now, replace Ponder with Rodgers and Peterson with . . . Shonn Greene? I don't know, some "average" running back. Do you think the Vikings are better?
Yes i would say the vikings are better that way but i suppose the point i was ultimately trying to say is that winning isn't exclusive to having the best quarterback. You still need to have a team built around you. Peyton was the best qb in the league for a decade before he got to hold the trophy and when he did win he squared off against rex grossman who was carried to the superbowl by his defense. You can have a great qb and win 10-11 games every year but you need something else to get over the hump at the end.
Shew, that was mostly a miserable game for Washington. Especially since I'm pretty sure Philadelphia still isn't anything special. Hopefully that took care of all the rust. Great 4th quarter for the offense.
You're just too young to grasp how stylin' I really was. All the boys wanted to do me when I was 5. Actually the girls did too. My haircut was confusing.
the point is clutch performances aren't very strong deciding factors.
So what are the strong deciding factors in your mind?
Accuracy, Y/A, TD/A, INT/A, DVOA, accuracy percentage, passing under pressure, DYAR, and QB rating (which has a surprisingly high correlation to winning, despite everyone always hating on it and ESPN trying to make it seem shotty in order to use their own rating system).
Chip's come out and said he doesn't do anything new. The real interesting aspect IMO though is how easy it all looks. I could have run some of those plays.
I'm not watching the game b/c I don't have cable. Is the Eagles D actually good? Or is something wrong with the Redskins offense?
This is the one aspect of the game that's tough to get a read on. Early on, we completely shut down the Redskins running game. RGIII was visibly rusty, and the whole team really didn't have much confidence left after the first few series. We got excellent pass rush, and forced some sloppy plays. Once it was 33-7, Chip admitted that he pulled the plug way too early. We went into basic cover 4 and 2 deep man and let RGIII pick us apart in the short game. We probably won't be a good defense this year, but I have a feeling we're going to bring lots of pressure, and try to force as many TO's as possible. Think the Saints defense the year they won it all.
Shew, that was mostly a miserable game for Washington. Especially since I'm pretty sure Philadelphia still isn't anything special. Hopefully that took care of all the rust. Great 4th quarter for the offense.
We weren't even playing defense in the 4th quarter. Some of it had to do with rust, but certainly not all of it. You really didn't see anything special while a previously 4-12 team massacred the reigning division champs with a new roster and coach? Yes, the division looks sloppy. I expected it to. The real takeaway here is that we actually looked the least sloppy. Did you watch the rest of the games this week? Most teams looked underprepared. We did it with a new coach and a new team, running a brand new system on both sides of the field.
Chip's come out and said he doesn't do anything new. The real interesting aspect IMO though is how easy it all looks. I could have run some of those plays.
Right. Gruden literally said that he showed Chip a play during the week and they ran it during the game (when Vick started under center and threw the play-action TD to D-Jax). Let's not confuse the fact that the Iggles took advantage of a terrible secondary and some new looks to run up the score early, but they slowed considerably later in the game. It's like anything else, once other teams get tape on them it'll become harder to do what they do best.
It's similar to Rex when he came to NY, where he was blitzing the ever-loving sh*t out of the league and giving up like 7 points a game for 2-3 months. Teams figured it out and he had to adjust.
The thing about Chip's offense that will keep it running (besides the pace) is the OL. They played exceptionally last night. One thing Chip does is use a lot of different OL splits and overload lines. It keeps the defense guessing, but I really have a hard time seeing Vick lasting 16 games if he takes hits like he did last night. Some of those were just brutal. The same goes for RGIII, fwiw.
QB rating (which has a surprisingly high correlation to winning, despite everyone always hating on it and ESPN trying to make it seem shotty in order to use their own rating system).
In total agreement there. Not sure why everyone always feels they need to vehemently dismiss that stat. It's not as if the stat complete misconstrues that fact a majority of the time.
To be fair, I feel like Washington wasn't nearly as good as their record suggested last year. I think they overperformed by a win or so? Reigning champs or not, I think that division is wide open.
Of course, trying to take anything away from one week of play is madness. Are the Eagles that good, or was Washington just caught unaware? Or is Washington's defense terrible?
Yes i would say the vikings are better that way but i suppose the point i was ultimately trying to say is that winning isn't exclusive to having the best quarterback. You still need to have a team built around you. Peyton was the best qb in the league for a decade before he got to hold the trophy and when he did win he squared off against rex grossman who was carried to the superbowl by his defense. You can have a great qb and win 10-11 games every year but you need something else to get over the hump at the end.
Post by jumpinjamesbrown on Sept 10, 2013 11:40:42 GMT -5
The fact that it is really hard to win was all i'm saying. You can look at all of the quarterbacks you have listed that won a title and i think you would agree that they all had solid teams built around them. You made the perfect point with dilfer amd johnson although johnson wasn't terrible he at least had a few 3000 yard seasons but he would never be considered elite. Also take 2007 for example who was the better qb that year brady or eli? I'm sure you would say brady but why did the giants win? Mostly because osi and strahan kept him on his ass for most of the game. Also 2010 aaron rodgers had a great year throwing the ball but got in the playoffs as a wild card and then his defense got hot and suddenly john starks could run the ball. Winning means all 11 guys on the field have to play at a high level but the the qb always gets the glory. How many defensive players have won the superbowl mvp? Ray lewis and? However guys like richard seymour and simeon rice could certainly have been considered for the award.
The fact that it is really hard to win was all i'm saying. You can look at all of the quarterbacks you have listed that won a title and i think you would agree that they all had solid teams built around them. You made the perfect point with dilfer amd johnson although johnson wasn't terrible he at least had a few 3000 yard seasons but he would never be considered elite. Also take 2007 for example who was the better qb that year brady or eli? I'm sure you would say brady but why did the giants win? Mostly because osi and strahan kept him on his ass for most of the game. Also 2010 aaron rodgers had a great year throwing the ball but got in the playoffs as a wild card and then his defense got hot and suddenly john starks could run the ball. Winning means all 11 guys on the field have to play at a high level but the the qb always gets the glory. How many defensive players have won the superbowl mvp? Ray lewis and? However guys like richard seymour and simeon rice could certainly have been considered for the award.
I guess you weren't lying about watching the Knicks/Rockets final.
The fact that it is really hard to win was all i'm saying. You can look at all of the quarterbacks you have listed that won a title and i think you would agree that they all had solid teams built around them. You made the perfect point with dilfer amd johnson although johnson wasn't terrible he at least had a few 3000 yard seasons but he would never be considered elite. Also take 2007 for example who was the better qb that year brady or eli? I'm sure you would say brady but why did the giants win? Mostly because osi and strahan kept him on his ass for most of the game. Also 2010 aaron rodgers had a great year throwing the ball but got in the playoffs as a wild card and then his defense got hot and suddenly john starks could run the ball. Winning means all 11 guys on the field have to play at a high level but the the qb always gets the glory. How many defensive players have won the superbowl mvp? Ray lewis and? However guys like richard seymour and simeon rice could certainly have been considered for the award.
I don't agree that every SB winning QB had a great team around him. Aaron Rodgers won with one of the 5 worst OL's in the league that year. Same with Eli (the 2nd time). Sieve-like defenses, injured players, old players, and so on are always part of deep playoff runs in today's NFL.
Teams win the Super Bowl by getting hot at the right time (which is why so many low-seeds in recent years have won it). The common thread with those low-seed SB winners? The QB's going all Atlas on the NFL and putting their team on their back and carrying them to the 'ship.
Elite QB's can bring flawed teams deep into the playoffs far, far, far more often than the opposite.
First, you seem to be making the assumption/argument that if QB is so important, why doesn't the team with the best QB just win every year? That's simple - because winning a Super Bowl (or any championship in any sport, I guess) is really, really hard. A ton of things need to break right. And yes, there are teams that achieve some measure of success with mediocre QBs - the one that comes to mind pretty much every time are the 2000 Ravens with Trent Dilfer at the helm. I suppose Brad Johnson in 2002 might also qualify.
But in the modern NFL, there is no position more important and more able to change the tone of a team/game/season than QB. Here are the QBs who have won the Super Bowl, in reverse order, from most recent to least, over the last 17 years:
- Flacco - E. Manning - Rodgers - Brees - Roethlisberger - E. Manning - P. Manning - Roethlisberger - Brady - Brady - Johnson - Brady - Dilfer - Warner - Elway - Elway - Favre
Peyton, Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Elway and Favre account for nine out of seventeen championships. Another six from Eli, Roethlisberger, Flacco and Warner. The first group are (in all likelihood) first-ballot hall of famers. The second are among the upper tier of their contemporaries (or have demonstrated the ability to play that way, even if maybe they aren't today). Only Dilfer and Johnson stand out. In particular, the modern NFL is built around the passing game - the protections QBs and WRs receive, the penalties levied on defenses for excessive contact, certain types of hits, etc. It's always been true, but now more than ever the QB is the hinge for every team.
Think about it another way - when discussing the relative greatness of quarterbacks, it's almost certain that someone will bring up titles (Jimmy, I swear this is not a shot at you). For instance, even though Dan Marino is, statistically speaking one of the greatest passers in NFL history, he's always questioned for his lack of a ring. Meanwhile, Barry Sanders is unquestionably one of the greatest running backs ever, yet nobody ever brings up the fact that he hasn't won a Super Bowl. The reason for that is simple - even the greatest running backs don't have the same impact that a quarterback will. Adrian Peterson had one of the all-time best seasons last year and I don't think there's a single intelligent Vikings fan that wouldn't trade him straight up for Aaron Rodgers (or several other young franchise QBs).
So of course there will be superlative defensive units that carry a less-than-stellar QB to victory, or an all-world running back who can push things forward, or whatever, but to suggest that anything other than QB is the most important position is absurd.
I agree. RB's are not really important to a teams success.
We weren't even playing defense in the 4th quarter.
What? Why not? That seems like bad strategy to me. Philadelphia won, though, so egg on my face.
Chip is used to college football where you can coast on most teams with a lead like that going into the 4th. He admitted to letting off the gas far too quickly. We went into prevent defense, and passed the ball a ridiculous four times. Can't disagree with you, as it was a terrible strategy, but Chip would probably agree with us as well. Hopefully it doesn't happen again.
The Fox affiliate here (and I presume national feed) switched from Packers/Redskins to Cowboys/Chiefs - as Washington was doing so horribly, the network decided to air a more competitive game.
Meanwhile, the CBS affiliate in Orlando admits having to disappoint many. Manning Bowl? Nope.
Last Edit: Sept 15, 2013 14:47:17 GMT -5 by LD - Back to Top
This Saints game better not have any more delays. Breaking Bad's "best episode ever" starts in 3.5 hours! I'm not going to be able to handle all this stress
You're just too young to grasp how stylin' I really was. All the boys wanted to do me when I was 5. Actually the girls did too. My haircut was confusing.
Denver is going to be scary good when they get their whole defense back. I know the Giants aren't a really good team right now but with Von Miller and Champ Bailey coming back soon I think they will scare the sh*t out of just about anybody.