JDG

I must have missed the posts where somebody was saying that JP Losman did not look like an NFL QB yesterday and that we should draft a new QB in the first round this year.... Maybe you could link to them for me? I'd be very interested to see them.... As for myself, I know that my post actually emphasized how much he has progressed since last season.... While it is nit-picking one pass, that pass is emblematic of what over the last couple weeks has been the biggest weakness in JP Losman's game - the still too frequent pass to an open receiver thrown into the dirt, along with the lack of touch he showed on his implosion on the last drive against the Jets. As I have noted many times, however, it is certainly a major improvement that we are no longer talking about his sub-.500 completion percentage or sub 6.00 Yards Per Attempt. He has made great strides, and is a much better QB than we saw last year. Unfortunately, unless I annoit JP Losman as the second-coming of Tom Brady (Peyton Manning apparently not being good enough), and bow down before his altar of glory, people will just remain absolutely convinced that I somehow hate Losman, and that I know nothing about football. Go figure... JDG

I guess that everyone can rate QB's however they want....

Which gripes are those? That his accuracy is much improved? That his mistakes are no longer outweighing the good things he is doing? That's easy. Peyton Manning. JDG

You clearly have a deep visceral hatred of JP Losman....

I love how the response is not - "Yes, Losman made a terrible throw that had no business resulting in a TD, but should have set up 3rd and Goal from the 8 in a game we ultimately only won by 4 points" and instead the reaction is "How dare you criticize Losman in any way, you obviously know nothing about football." JDG

Losman's accuracy is certainly up from where it was last season by *any* measure. I do notice, however, that our game plan seems very reliant upon WR screens and swing passes, though - almost unusually so. That certainly is helping Losman's apparent accuracy, beyond the improvements he has made from last season. He still, however, sometimes makes me completely shake my head. For example, on the Peerless Price touchdown - that pass should be so routine, it almost seems inexcusable to throw it that badly. A play like that doesn't outweigh the other good things he did today, but it does point towards things that Losman still needs to improve before we can truly call him a "good" NFL QB. JDG

The classic example of this would be benching Bledsoe in favor of Brady, especially had Bledsoe's injury not intervened. I disagree. While the fans have only limited looks at a player, mostly in preseason games, the coaches have hours upon hours of looks at a player in practices, meetings, the film room, and in minicamp and training camp. I haven't gotten any sense that anybody who has watched these things has seen anything other than Losman cleary beating Nall. This is especially significant given that Losman is an "old regime" guy, and Nall is a "new regime" guy. Losman then went on to play well in the preseason games to cement his hold on the job. While Losman hasn't been particularly good in our three regular season games so far, he is significantly ahead of where he was last year. At an objective level, his level of performance has not been at a level where I would consider benching him simply to have change for the sake of change - particularly not for the sake of change to someone whom I think he has beaten. JDG

That hardly seems fair. There seems to be ample evidence that Losman was a first-round QB talent, and would have been taken in the first round by some other GM, if not by Donahoe. JDG

Kelly, Thanks for taking the time to make such a comprehensive post on what is admittedly a somewhat tired topic. The two questions I have, are: 1) Why, when looking at Losman's first 9-12 games are you so positive and optimistic about what the future holds, but when looking at Brees' first 9-12 you only had negative things to say? 2) How are the basic conclusions of what you have to say so different from my own basic conclusions? For example, here: http://www.stadiumwall.com/index.php?showtopic=52318 As another example, I could agree with this quote: "I think he has been at times horrible, bad, average, fair, good and once in awhile great. Much more bad than good but getting better and better, and he no longer seems to play horrible...." (You add "or bad" at the end of it - but I'm not quite ready to go there yet, especially after just three games this season where he was 1-2, and made some serious negative plays in both the losses, and played just barely well enough to win in the one win. But still, that's pretty glose agreement.) As another example: "I have seen him with terror in his eyes, totally in over his head, and unable to do even the simplest of things. That was last year, when things were falling apart in front of him and he wasn't able to handle it. " I would totally agree with this as well. Indeed, that's one reason why have regularly defended the decision to bench Losman after four games last season - in my mind it was the only thing *to* do, because, as you note, he couldn't handle it. As another example: "On the other hand, I have seen him throw dozens of passes right into the dirt with no pressure and an open reciever. Those passes are getting much more infrequent the more he plays." Not only would I agree with that, but it is very similar to one of my most recent posts on Losman - where I noted that while there were a few passes in the dirt against the Jets, his accuracy had improved, and I was hopeful that it would continue to improve. As another example: "I have yet to see him just win a game all by himself. I have yet to see him make the one play he needs to make that is a W in the books. I have yet to see him lead the perfect come from behind last second march down the field to victory. Some guys have a knack for that. I have yet to see him take the team on his back. He has yet to show it. It is my hope that he has it in him. I am not sure." This is very similar to my take after the Miami game - it was great that we managed the game around him ala Ravens-era Trent Dilfer, I expressed the hope that our investment in him would produce a QB who would make the rest of his team better and that would win games for us, rather than having wins managed around him. This is also very similar to my take after the Jets game, that while he does good things, he isn't quite good enough for us to win with yet - and he has not yet shown the knack for the 4th Quarter comeback. About the biggest difference I can see is that if you are looking at potential in a QB, the first thing you look at are physical tools and the first thing that I look at is decision-making. You seem to have a more optimistic view of Losman's exhibited decision-making so far than I do, but I think that's a fair difference of opinion - and I have also noted that he has certainly improved in this area. Anyhow, thanks again for your post, and I guess I don't see where all the vitriol from you (and others, like AK Darin, etc.) comes from...... JDG

There's some real truth to that. Well, everyone's opinion of Eli Manning is a bit clouded because a) he's a Manning and b) he's a productive Fantasy QB. I certainly believe that Losman rightfully is and should continue to be our starter, and should hopefully get better. Thanks for the post. JDG

What's interesting, is that I don't seem to remember ever saying that.... Maybe there's someone else saying that around here (I only read a portion of the posts here), but that person isn't me..... This gets closer to what I have been saying, but isn't quite right. The closest I have come to saying that "Losman does not have the tolls" has been when I have questioned his decision-making abilities - which IMHO, even Kelly the Dog has questioned. He certainly has plenty of physical tools. As for saying that "he is not an NFL quarterback", I certainly have not said that this season. In fact, I've said repeatedly this season that he is the best QB on our roster, that he won the starting job fair and square, and that I can't imagine any single-game performance that should cause Losman to lose that job. I did say that about Losman early last season in defending the decision to bench him because, well, for at least a three game stretch last year he *wasn't* an NFL quarterback. I'm very happy that he has improved from that nearly off-the-charts bad level he was at early last season. I think that's one of the fairest self-assessments I have seen. I know that I felt the most push-back last season when I would see some post of the general format "Yes, Losman has played badly, *but* QB X also played badly when he first started" and I would point out that no, while QB X did play badly when he first started, Losman was actually playing significantly worse than that bad level! - and that that makes it harder to force-feed Losman starting experience the way QB X was given starting experience. Of course, almost all of those discussions happened last season - so it doesn't seem to explain the reactions I am getting this season. JDG

O.k., if this is all about word games, then, let's go back to start. Given the following opinion: What's your opinion of JP Losman's 9 games in the 2005 season, then? JDG

I'm just curious as to why you believe that 16 games is a magic number, and why you have opinions of QB's after 16 games, but not before 16 games? Are there any circumstances under which you would have any opinions at all of a QB with less than 16 starts? JDG

But why one year and not two - or as the case of Drew Brees may indicate, three? JDG

touche! JDG

I agree. Hence why I don't consider Losman's rookie-season stats - they don't represent a full game's performance. I don't see how that's an issue here... JDG

So, you're saying that while you could write several sentences describing Drew Brees' first season, you feel that you cannot say anything meaningful about JP Losman's first season because he got benched? Is that accurate? JDG

First, I don't think you are right that the QB rating tool should not be used for single-game performances. It seems to me that it is used for single-game performances all the time. At the very least, perhaps you could explain why you only consider aggregate QB rating, and not comparing single-game performances? Secondly, perhaps you can explain why you won't consider any other measures of QB performance, but view *aggregate* QB rating as trumping all of them? JDG

So, how would you describe Losman's first season, then? JDG

Shirley, you can't be serious.... No, I just don't believe in you... JDG

And I can't help you if you won't respond substantively to any other method of comparing QB's than aggregate QB rating. But if QB rating is all you will listen to, then maybe you will listen to this: First Twelve Games: Games with 100+ QB Ratings: Losman - 2 (124 and 102) Brees - 2 (137 and 110). Games with sub-40 QB Ratings: Losman - 3 (33.8, 34.0, 33.6) Brees - 0 (lowest were 41.5 and 58.7, with a 40.6 game in his 13th game) JDG

So you are saying that Brees was "not any good" in his second year? JDG

And reduces everything to a single number. Maybe you find that the be-all and end-all, but I prefer to look at a bigger picture. As for other factors, there isn't too much difference in this time period in terms of TD to INT ratio or really in Yards per Attempt (although Brees is a bit better there as well if you want to push it), so I'm not bringing up stats that don't highlight much of a difference. I agree that it is a tool, just not the be all and end all you make it out to be. I am speaking of the fact that the NFL QB rating combines Completion Percentage, Yards Per Attempt, TD Pass Percentage, and INT Pass Percentage. Who decided that TD Pass Percentage counts the same as Yards Per Attempt, and not half as much or twice as much? That factor is completely arbitrary, and IMHO, needlessly biases in favor of QB's that are asked to pass in the red zone more frequently vs. QB's on teams that prefer to pound the ball in the red zone. JDG

Maybe someday you'll graduate from being dumber than a doorknob to maybe being the whole door....

Immediately? While Brees did begin losing some games at the end of his first year as a starter, I'm not so sure that he was playing badly. For example, in one of those losses he threw for 320+ yards in 3TD's in a game they lost 31-28. In another game, he went 26 of 40 with 2TD's in a game they lost 24-22. This seems like a classic case of where the fans would just look at the scoreboard and knee-jerk blame the QB. Now, there may be arguments that Brees began playing poorly at this time, and I'd be open to hearing those, but on the surface, that does not appear to be the case to me. In his 3rd year in the League, Brees did have a rough season. In fact, the whole Chargers team fell apart. I'd be very interested to delve deeper into that, as it really is looking like a true anamoly.... the year before the Chargers were very nearly a playoff team. The year after, the Chargers won the tough AFC West. Part of me wonders if Brees was fighting an undisclosed nagging injury that year, or if there was some serious David Boston negative karma hanging around. Certainly their defense had some issues. What's really interesting is that Drew Brees essentially didn't play as a rookie, had a solid first year as a starter, and then had a bad year as a third year - a year that was nevertheless better than Losman's year last year. And so San Diego made the tough call the bring in a replacement at the position. The point is that football is a constant process of evaluation, and while you would always like to have perfect information when you make your decisions, you nevertheless have to make calls based on the best information available to you. JDG