FireChan
-
Posts
14,609 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by FireChan
-
-
So kind of like how Eli and Big Ben have been playing worse, they should be ranked worse than Ryan? You're contradicting yourself now. No comment on Steven Jackson?
Obviously Brady is ahead of Ryan, I was just using him as an example.
But their history is why they are ranked higher. I didn't say if Brady had a bad year or two he'd be ranked 32, he'd just move higher on the list, maybe above or below Ryan.
Steven Jackson hasn't been playing nearly as well as he used to. Along with no real accomplishments or relevance in the post season, why would he ever rank high? Eli won the Superbowl last year with tremendous play, won it in 2007 with tremendous play, 1 year of so-so play doesn't abolish that.
I'm not gonna argue on how I, ESPN, NFL.com and every other poster does the ranking system, it's just the way it is. Maybe it's unfair to Ryan to place him behind people who did great things a year or two before he was in the league, but it'd be unfair to them to disregard everything they did earlier for one guy. Russell Wilson would be top 5 if we just counted the years he's been in the league. That's why you have to go by career.
-
Tom Brady wont be the same player when he's 40 as he was when he was 28. Just because a player was once great, doesnt mean they wont deteriorate. So if you were ranking RBs right now, would you put Steven Jackson in your top 5? No.. you wouldnt because he isn't as talented as he was when he was 25. Even though he's the active career leader in rushing yards, he isnt in the top 5 or probably even the top 10 anymore.
The same goes for QBs. If you're ranking the current best QB, than you're ranking them on their current merits, not their past ones.
When Tom Brady starts playing worse, he'll be ranked worse. When he's out of the league, he won't be ranked at all. He's playing at a higher level than Matt Ryan and has done more than Matt Ryan. That's why Tom is ranked higher than Peyton, past accomplishments are included.
-
Brady, Manning and Rodgers are ahead of Ryan because over the last 3 years they have played better than Ryan. In the past 3 years, neither Eli Manning nor Ben Roethlisberger have played better than Ryan, so right now, Ryan is the better quarterback.
I dont know whats so hard to follow about that logic.
Flacco isnt #1 because football is a team sport and just because 1 team is better than another, doesnt mean that team's Qb is better.
Well, I think every sports group on the planet disagrees with you.
I've never seen someone ignore past accomplishments when comparing QB's or else consistency wouldn't even be considered.
-
It makes absolutely no sense to count the entire careers of the QBs you are ranking.. we arent talking about the all time best QBs, we're talking about the current best QBs.
We are talking about the best QB's playing. Or else Flacco should be number one after winning the Superbowl. Because Brady, Manning and Rodgers have all proved themselves, that makes them better than Ryan, who has not. Or else why would they be higher than him?
-
Its unfair to count a QBs accomplishments that happened before Ryan was even in the league. What is your time frame for determining the rankings of QBs? The last year? The last 3 years?
Lets say the last 3 years for the sake of argument..
Rodgers, Eli and Flacco won superbowls. So would you put all of those guys ahead of Ryan because of that? In the last 3 years...
Eli: 86 TDs, 56 INTs, 61.5% comp%
Ryan: 88 TDs, 35 INTs, 64.1% comp%
Ryan has brought his team to the playoffs 3 times, Eli only 1 time. I'd rather have Ryan on my team right now.
Roethlisberger: 65 TDs, 27 INTs, 62.7% comp%
Ryan: 88 TDs, 35 INTs, 64.1% comp%
Roethlisberger has missed 8 games in the last 3 years, Ryan has missed 0. Roethlisberger has had 2 playoff appearances with a 2-2 record in the last 3 years, Ryan has 3 appearances with a 1-3 record. Based on his durability and better production, I'd rather have Ryan right now.
Obviously Brady and Bree's are ranked ahead of Ryan, you could argue against Peyton if you're looking at the last 3 years, but because of his production when he has played I'm going to rank him ahead of him.
Based on everything I just said, this would be my ranking:
1. Rodgers
2. Brady
3. P Manning
4. Brees
5. Flacco
6. Ryan
7. Roethlisberger
8. E Manning
Who else would you put ahead of Ryan and why?
You don't rank based on the last 3 years. It's based on the careers of everyone still playing. That's how all rankings are done. Why would you ignore what someone else has done already? Rodgers didn't make the playoffs, shouldn't he be less than Ryan in your "system" of analysis.
I did last year alone, and careers of everyone in the league. That's how it's always done, or Peyton wouldn't be in the top 5 after missing a full year. C'mon now.
I gave you my list earlier in the topic, you can check it out.
Is this discussion only regarding post-season performances or does regular season count too?
Regular season counts, but I'd rather win 3 playoff games and the Superbowl than have a 16-0 record and be eliminated in the first round. So post season performance counts more.
-
Ask him why his other, albeit lesser-known, nickname is 'Shredder'
Maybe because its a team sport?
Team sport, yeah but Flacco has had better play in the post season than Ryan and Ryan has equal or probably better offensive weapons. Flacco has better stats, and less turnovers, directly correlating to wins.
-
He's one of the best right now -- that's what I said. Stats don't lie when you're completing almost 70% of your passes, especially w/ a horrid run game.
Stats don't lie 1-4 in the playoffs. 5 turnovers in 2 games.
-
Let's play this game!
Who would prefer Matt Ryan as their starter:
NE - no
Jets - yes
Miami - yes
Bills - oh, God, yes
Cle - yes
Pit - no (and with the beatings that BR is taking, that's not an easy no)
Balt - no
Cincy - yes
Indy - no
Jax - yes
Houston - gonna say yes
Tenn - yes
SD - Rivers has had a nice career but looks on the downside. Yes
Den - no, but for how long?
KC - I think so, over A. Smith - yes
Raiders - yes
NYG - no, but would put MR in Eli's class
Philly - yes
Dal - yes
Wash - no
Chicago - no, but would put MR in Cutler's class
GB - no
Vikes - yes
Detroit - yes (Stafford can play, but MR more consistent)
NO - no
TB - yes
Carolina - this one is close. Maybe?
SF - no
Ariz - yes
Rams - yes
Seattle - no
So, I'm pretty certain 18 teams would be better off with Ryan. I am not sure about the Giants, Pitt, Carolina or Chicago, or Denver, long-term. And Kaep, Luck, RGIII and Wilson all look like stars but we need to see more than 16 games from these guys before they really reach the upper echelon. Kaep hasn't even had that many, and RGIII might not survive his coach.
Thanks for doing the research for me, luckily I just guessed at 18.
Sounds to me like you just want to be right, Matt Ryan is a great player and any team would be happy to have him.
Contrary to wanting to be wrong? I don't understand...
I think you're right. Would definitely put them in the same class. I don't know where Cam Newton fits into this conversation. He's a dynamic player but he hasn't done sh-- yet. I would put Ryan over him in this top 10, no question.
Obviously Flacco's postseason play greatly increases his quality as of right now. Time will tell if he can ever get it done again. Keep in mind, RF had a good 5 games and OBD thought he deserved a bigger contract. Then his "stock" fell and they all looked like fools. You can't predict the future, Ryan may win 5 SB's and change up the list completely.
-
This past season, Ryan ranked"]http://espn.go.com/n...sAttempt]ranked seventh[/url] in yards per attempt. He also had a TD/INT ratio of better than 2:1. San Jose Bills Fan made a good point in that Ryan has good weapons--a fact which will tend to inflate his stats. But Tony Gonzales is no spring chicken, and some of the other QBs in Ryan's general statistical neighborhood have good weapons too. I think it's fairly safe to conclude Ryan is a top-10 or top-12 QB.
Exactly, not top 6. Bingo Bango.
That corps might even make Fitzpatrick serviceable. But I still think Ryan is a very good QB and would give my left nut to have him on the Bills.
So would 18 other teams. Bet the Falcons would rather have Brady or Rodgers.
-
Exactly. And about 95% of people would have said he was a better QB than Flacco. He still is but the Ravens have a better all around team.
He's not a better QB then Flacco, play off wins are more important than a regular season record. Flacco has recorded less picks than Ryan in the post season.
Thats not my argument.. my argument is that just because Ryan hasn't won a superbowl in his first 5 seasons, does mean he isnt a good QB and doesnt mean that he will never win a superbowl.
In this past 2 years only 2 QBs have won the superbowl (Eli and Flacco). Thats just how it is, all the good QBs cant win a superbowl every year. Ryan is still a good QB and right now he is definitely in the top 8, probably #6.
Oh so your argument is based on hopes and dreams? You get ranked higher when you do more, that's the point of a ranking. I didn't say the guy was a bad QB or he would never win a Superbowl, you're putting words in my mouth. If Matty Ice wins the SB and goes 19-0 next year after putting up tremendous numbers, he'll get ranked higher. Based on his accomplishments, there are 9 other QB's who are better than him in production.
"You can't rank Matt Cassel 30th just because he never won a Superbowl, he still might"
C'mon now.
Matty Ice is easily a top 6 QB. I don't even have to say anything else.
You mean like any kind of argument, thanks for letting me know.
To answer your question: Look at his last 3 seasons.... http://www.pro-footb...R/RyanMa00.htm.
He had a 68.6 completion percentage last year. He's one of the best in the league right now, and he's only 27. His rating has improved every season in the last four. How can you argue a 99 rating? Jesus, this topic is stupid.
Because putting up numbers doesn't make you the best. Just ask Cam Newton, he puts up tremendous numbers and still loses. There's this part of the season, at the end, where all of the good teams compete against each other. Whoever's the best of the best wins this end-goal game called the Superbowl. I think that matters a little bit when considering QB play.
Peyton is on the list because he's won the Superbowl with great long-term production. Matty Ice has not won the Superbowl, but still has some good production. Peyton is better.
-
I wonder what you might be saying about him if he was our QB & led our team to the AFC championship game ??
My personal faults don't make my criticisms invalid. I just said he's not number 6. I've already warned people about derailing this topic; of course he's still a good QB, he just can't get it done in the playoffs.
Dont forget about his run game.. which is average at best.
The interesting part comes in closer to the bottom where he compares Ryan's career to Peyton Manning (who also had no playoff success in his first 8 years) and to Tom Brady. In the case of Brady, if you were to reverse his career, people would be calling him a choke artist. Right now nobody does that because of his wins early in his career.
Also, its easy to look at W/L record in the playoffs to criticize a QB.. but that isnt always the best way. In AFC championship 2 years ago, Flacco played well enough to beat the pats, but his kicker blew the game for him. The same goes for Ryan in this years playoffs. He played well enough to win, but because of the defense and a stumble from a receiver, he was the loser.
Flacco didn't turn the ball over twice, Ryan did. You can't blame the receiver for one mistake and not Ryan for two costly ones. Watch how the situation plays in reverse, "Douglas played well enough to win, but because of the defense and two picks from the QB, he was the loser"
Mistakes are costly, Ryan made too many. He should've lost that Seahawks game that he basically gave away.
And I didn't get down to the playoff reverse thing earlier, here's my take on that.
Matt Ryan has made the post-season 4 times, he's 1-4 in the postseason. He has 7 picks in his post season career, more than a pick a game average. 9 touchdowns.
Tom Brady in reverse, so the last 4 years 2012, 2011, 2010, 2009. 3-4, 10 picks, 16 TD's. Even though the averages are around the same, Brady won two more games. Luck, skill, timing, he still won 2 more games.
And yeah, of course he's inflated because of his early wins, but those early wins did happen. It's those damn hypotheticals again He's not playing in reverse, he's won big before. Matt Ryan hasn't won big before, and loses games for his team on big stages more than he wins. He doesn't hold a candle to Brady.
"If Brady didn't win those Superbowls and play great, no one would think he was great" is a silly argument.
-
I think you need to read this... http://www.grantland...e-championships
I gave it a shot, the author tries to be funny, but I can't tell which paragraph is the real argument with the sarcastic quips every two seconds.
One part I just love, it really sticks out to me.
"In the second half, Atlanta had five drives. Two ended on Ryan turnovers, one was a three-and-out, one ended on downs, and the fifth was the one in which Ryan threw a Hail Mary 40 yards too short. It wasn't just that one wheel route. Ryan had a bad second hal— But it is that wheel route! If Douglas doesn't fall down on the wheel route, he scores a touchdown and the Falcons probably win."
This is the worst picking at straws to spread the blame I've ever seen. If Atlanta scores on one of those 5 drives, the author says they probably win the game. 1 of those 5 drives ended with someone other than the QB making a mistake. 4 of the 5 drives ended with the QB making a mistake, or not getting it done. Obviously it's all Douglas' fault, not the QB!
Give me a break. That author is just trying to defend a QB who couldn't get it done. Hypothetical are ridiculous. "If CJ Spiller ran for 24 TD's and 2500 yards this season, we would've made the playoffs!"
-
It is in no way a reach to put him in any top 6 QB list..
Rogers, Peyton, Brady, Brees, Big Ben, Matt Ryan, Flacco/Eli...
You are for some reason completely ignoring his regular season success, which has been amazing.... and he won a Playoff game this year and almost made it to the Big game.
Who the hell are you putting ahead of him if you say he is barely top 10???
I'm actually not ignoring it. I just think he's a regular season hero, who can never get it done in the playoffs. Hell, the only reason the team he beat for his only playoff win was even in the game was because of his turnovers. If Pete Carrol didn't call that time out, another Falcons playoff loss would've been all his fault.
Flacco also wins in the playoffs. Consistently. How anyone can put Ryan over Flacco now, especially after this year, is ridiculous.
-
Before entering into this debate (and you know I will), I'd be interested to see your top 10.
Yes please. If you're going to start a thread and make your stand that he's "barely top 10" you had better bring your top 10 list along with you. I'll start.
Brady, P. Manning, Rodgers, Brees, E. Manning, Big Ben, Flacco, Ryan, Schaub, Cutler (with the last two likely to be supplanted by RG3, Wilson, and/or Luck with their continued success)
Do we want top ten last year or top ten overall in the league now?
Last season, 1 year of play, including post-season. (Ben not included because of injury)
Rodgers, Peyton, Brady, Brees,(interchangeably, not looking up the stats) Flacco, Wilson, RG3/Newton, Luck/Kaepernick, Ryan/Cutler
In the league, (Rookies and Kaepernick not in this list, too early.)
Rodgers, Peyton, Brady, Brees, Eli(interchangeably, not looking up the stats) Big Ben, Flacco, Newton, Rivers, Cutler/Ryan.
Don't expect to see RF at number 8, Marauder, although I'm sure you're half expecting it.
-
I don't get it one bit. All I hear is Brees, Rodgers, Mannings, Brady as the big 5 with Flacco, Matt Ryan and others close behind. Matt Ryan is barely top 10, probably number 10. It just baffles me, Matty Ice, a clutch player with 1 playoff win under his belt. I just don't see it.
Obviously, some of you are not going to think he is, this is directed towards the others who do. And please, don't muddle up the topic with "I'd take him over RF" and then 6 others guys give you a thumbs up post, it's off-topic and you know I can't resist a good RF debate, so we'll get derailed in 10 minutes.
-
Ahhh...It's all good...Somebody has to go down with the ship...
Hope he leaves when Fitz does. or sooner. or now. An embarassment to Bills nation.
Don't worry, you'll all hate whoever we pick next to be our QB then do this whole thing all over again. At least I can make an argument, you're an embarrassment to people who can function cognitively.
-
Nope...I think he is serious. He and his dad probably have a heated discussion about it every time he goes upstairs to shower.
A Hitler reference? Wow. Stay classy.
A basement joke? Stay original.
At least I use my analogies to make a point, not to troll nonsensically.
-
Dude , he is pulling our chain. let it go. His nonsensical responses prove he's either a kid or just pulling our chain. I do know that if he is on the Fitz bandwagon, it could get a ticket for trying to use the carpool lane.
Because how many people agree with you dictates if you're right or not. Hitler had a ton of support, I guess he was right too, huh?
-
I got it. Welcome back, PDaddy. As important as Spiller? You are effing crazy.
He scored more. Kept us in games more. Had way more yards. How was Spiller quantitatively more of a contributor than RF? Or are you gonna start name calling when I throw out more and more facts?
-
OMG. I get the feeling you aren't being serious but first off Manning, Brees and Brady have all been to and won Superbowls soooooo WTH.
Second, we are NOT going to play better with Fitz and his turnovers. Turnovers cannot be overrated, they are a vitally important stat.
Third, if a team is worried that they may pick another Trent Edwards then they should just fold the franchise and quit fooling the fans that they are trying to win.
And though our 'D' is not good........ they wouldn't be on the field near as much if we didn't have such pathetic play from our QB.
Are you suggesting that we build up the rest of the roster so it is Fitz proof ? I submit that that notion is incredibly naive and quite impossible. And just how many free agents (that want to win) will come here knowing what a pathetic organization this is, i.e. having Fitz as their QB ?
Get them a QB and the players (winners) will come. You simply have to keep trying to solidify the QB position. that is priority 1,2 and 3. Or management could just put their head in the sand and say "Buddy, we have no confidence in you at finding a QB so... let's just stop trying".. Brilliant !!!!
You said the point of playing is winning a Superbowl. Obviously those 4 guys couldn't get it done, and those teams need to look for upgrades.
I'm suggesting we build the roster so it is anyone proof, yeah. I'm suggesting instead of cutting a manageable playmaker and replacing him with someone worse, we focus on our defense. Who broke records. No one on this team broke a negative record except the defense. The Jets had more turnovers and didn't break any records. They have Mark S. and won just as many games as us, because of our awful defense. RF is better than Mark, their defense is better than ours. RF on the Jets, 8-8 atleast, with a playoff berth. Mark S. on the Bills 0 -16. RF won us all 6 games in spite of the rest of the team.
How many free agent QB's wanna come here with our WR talent? How many free agent defensive players wanna come here with our record breaking awful defense?
RF is just as important to this team as Freddy, Spiller, and Stevie Johnson.
-
It all starts with the Qb.
They could have Larry Fitzgerald, and Calvin Johnson, and they might have won a game or two more. If the guy can't get the ball to them, they are useless. What's so hard to understand about that?
A game or two more and we make the playoffs. A non record breaking defense and we make the playoffs.
Great post
:worthy: 
:thumbsup: . We cannot win with a turnover machine @ QB. We have zero chance, of winning a Superbowl with him. That's the point of playing isn't it ? Is Geno Smith the answer ? Matt Barkley ? Tyler Wilson ? (yes) 
. We don't really know. But we DO know, POSITIVELY know that Fitzpatrick isn't. Therefore he must go. Draft a Qb and if he proves he doesn't have what it takes, go get another one.you don't put on underwear that has a turd in it because you're afraid the next pair may have two turds in it. you try on another pair. Let's say goodbye to "The Turd".
Yes, let's keep giving up on QB's in hopes we get the next Peyton Manning, Brees, Brady. Oh wait, none of those guys made the Superbowl. I guess they aren't worth it either, huh?
Our team is awful all around. The better we play and are seen as a franchise, more players will not hate coming here. But let's get the next Trent Edwards and win two games next year, then start it all over after 3 years.
Do you guys seriously have faith in the Bill's drafting choices? It's like you think Nix is gonna find the next superstar, yet you bash him in every other thread. The problem at OBD is the same at TBD. You all hope we'll find the next Brees who can carry an awful defense. Except only Brees and Brady have had defenses as bad as ours in the history in the NFL, that's 2 guys out of how many ever?
But yeah, Nix will find the guy, cut RF.
-
You are correct. In the literal sense of "arm strength", my description was inaccurate. Allow me to be more specific. Ryan Fitzpatrick does not have the physical skill set to consistently complete a football 20 yards or further past the line of scrimmage during an NFL game. His lack of said physical attributes cause him to be highly inaccurate when throwing passes this distance. In fact, Ryan's inconsistency in this regard has allowed teams to game plan accordingly, meaning they jump shorter routes Fitzpatrick is more apt to throw, given the afore mentioned lack of physical traits. This is not a quality I wish for the quarterback of my favourite team. Therefore, it would please me if Ryan were released and set free to pursue employment with another franchise in the National Football League (or Arena Football League).
In terms of arm "strength", Mr. Fitzpatrick certainly can throw a ball 20 yards and further, a notion your superbly researched video supports. In fact, he can even be accurate on occasion, which is also evident in your video. As an avid Bills fan since 1979, I am ecstatic that a man we have paid $21 million dollars in a new contract has the arm "strength" to hurl a piece of leather that far every so often.
My apologies for "warping" the definition of arm "strength". In future posts, I will defer to your not-so-subtle lesson in the English language and be sure to be much more careful with my words. Also, thank you for your checking my condescending attitude. It was highly inappropriate to act like someone who would post a video from 2009 to prove that Ryan Fitzpatrick indeed has the arm "strength", in its literal form, to throw a football 20 yards. I appreciate it.
Let's be serious marauder. You and I both know there are people who agree with you that are a lot less eloquent and reasonable. I suppose I projected that image onto you.
I personally think, in a now new offensive scheme, RF has the attributes to be a non factor to positive factor more often than not. With a better recieving core and defense this team would be manageable. However, I'm not blind enough to think we'll win a Superbowl with the guy, unless he plays like he did against the pats in 2011, for the entire season.
I just don't understand the blind hatred, not from you, but the others. If there's a better guy, put him in, if not keep RF. Restructure or cut him if he won't restructure as a backup.
Why does there need to be a debate on where we send his arms and legs after some TBD posters disembowel the guy?
I also don't understand how the people who are so gung ho about driving Fitz out, can make excuses for the rest of the team. Let's look at some other offensive guys.
TJ Graham - runs the wrong routes, stone hands, quick
Scott Chandler- stone hands, slow, somehow gets open sometimes, drops drive sustaining passes
Offensive Line- gives our QB an average of 2 seconds to throw the ball, damn shame we have to throw short with that much time. QB gets hit every play. Yet good run blocking
Running backs- really the only good part of the offense
Stevie Johnson - slow, can't get open deep, single handedly eliminated us from our first playoff game in 10 years, yet good hands, great ability to get open
And finally,
Ryan Fitzpatrick- inconsistent, not great arm "strength/accuracy" deep. Somehow makes plays and scores, not considered "clutch"
That's really not a great squad all together, yet somehow if we get Barkley or anyone else, Chandler will develop hands, Stevie will be faster on the deep routes and TJ will have learned the offense. And our line will be able to pass block for 5 seconds consistently. Except none of those things will happen because of the QB.
Mark my words, if another QB starts that has a slower release than RF, he's dead. Like Vick's
concussion filled season.
-
I guess, in "football speak", saying one cannot throw the ball 20 yards implies they are wildly inaccurate in that range or farther and they do not have the arm strength to get the ball to a receiver on a consistent basis as one would expect a QB to be able to do in the National Football League. Since this is a message board for an NFL team and the discussion revolves around, you know, football, I figured the readers of that comment would understand my implication. It appears I am incorrect.
"do not have the arm strength" to define arm strength? Strange explanation. I conceded consistency, but he has the strength as in he can throw the ball that far. Strength in the form of muscle power, you know, that strength? Don't warp the definition of strength into accuracy/consistency, and then act all condescending, and assume I know nothing about football because I don't share your irrational, red hot fiery hatred of a guy on your favorite sports team.
Contrary to you all agreeing with each other in a circle-j*rk about our "worst QB ever!!!!!!!hate him kill him mrs rf you suck he sucks", everyone on this board doesn't have to agree; that's why it's an opinion board. I can give you the definition of opinion if you'd like, and maybe condescending, but I think I just gave you a good enough example.
I'll continue to argue further, but if you keep up with "words mean what they mean in my head" babble, I'm done. Words mean specific things. Seeing as this is an English board, I assumed readers knew the definitions of words. It appears I was wrong.
-
This, alone, speaks volumes. Why didn't you include the more recent picks vs the Giants in 2011? Wide open Stevie, Fitz under threw him twice. Cost us the game, as he admitted after.
I remember my ex wife being great in bed in 2010 as well, but that doesn't excuse her for being a total b** ch. saying he was "not the biggest reason", as you state, means he is still a reason, correct? If you've ever coached (I have for twenty five years, successfully), you would know that you don't defend what the other team is incapable of doing. Our QB cannot throw deep, so the Jets saw no need to defend it. Same with every other team.
I plan on letting Marrone sort things out. By cutting that lame duck of a QB.
OK, so in one post, you blame coaching (see above), but now Gailey knew what he was doing by picking Fitz over TJax? It seems Gailey sucks only when it's convenient to your argument.
Any video evidence from 2012 to back up your claim? By NFL standards, he does NOT have arm strength. Every QB coming out in the draft can throw the ball 58 yards. Do they all have strong arms? By your standard, yes....by NFL standards, no.
Keep setting your bar really low. Then when Fitz leads us to 5 wins over the bottom feeders of the league, you can say, "See! We won and Fitz threw for 3 TDs!"
If we keep Fitz, I and others here will see it for what it is. A team mired in mediocrity for the foreseeable future.
What makes a strong arm then? I was under the impression you all called him "noodle arm" because he can't throw 20+ yards. Which I have provided video evidence to the contrary. Either he had a ligament tear without the fans knowing, or he can still throw far. Inconsistent, perhaps, but to say he doesn't have the capability to get the ball there is flat out wrong.
Why does everyone think Matt Ryan is a top 6 QB?
in The Stadium Wall Archives
Posted · Edited by FireChan
It's not just about post-season success, I've said this 16 times. AP plays leagues better than Steven Jackson. It's a conglomeration. Besides, you and I both know that wins and losses ride more on QB's than RB's, it's a silly comparison. QB's take the credit and the blame in almost every case. If Peyton puts up numbers exactly the same as Ryan next year, he'd rank higher because of his other accomplishments. That's how it works. If Peyton played like Mark Sanche next year, he wouldn't rank as high as Matt Ryan.
Success and failure act more as a way to tip the scales, normally the top 4-5 put up almost identical numbers. It's why Tom Brady always ranks 1st. He may not have the highest in every category of play, but because of his history.
How do you not get that?
Your comparison is silly because not one QB has experienced the same decline as Steven Jackson. Peyton didn't have an awful year that's why he's still top 5.
I see you ignored my Russel Wilson comment. He's a top 5 QB in your eyes right? Because it'd be unfair to rank people who've had more time playing, right?