Josh Allen 2019 Regular Season at 58.8% Completion Percentage

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

If you take age, potential, contracts etc. into account as HB mentioned, and establish that we are talking about going forward. The guys I trade him(Allen) for right now, subject to change in the future, Hapless is thinking like me.

 

I get Mahomes, Watson, Wilson....I'm leaving Lamar out, you can put him here if you want.

 

Not trading him for the old  HOF guys: Rodgers, Brees, Ben, Brady, Rivers

 

Not trading him for Vets on the decline: Ryan, Stafford, Dalton, Newton, Fitz

 

Not trading him for these Young guys: Mayfield, Brissett, Minshew,,Trubisky, Darnold, Haskins, Jones, Murray, Lock, Wentz and Prescott(contracts)

 

Not trading him for these JAGs Winston, Goff, Garapollo, Carr, Tannehill, Cousins(contract)

 

It would be interesting to sample a group of NFL GMs privately and see what they came up with. I think many Allen haters would be surprised how few QBs they would trade Allen for. Likely more than the 3, I bet a hell of a lot less than 20. So taking the high road, middle ground-getting to double digits(10+) is trying way to hard.

 

Edited December 18, 2019 by D. L. Hot-Flamethrower

[CincyBillsFan]

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

I view Jackson's playing style as being much more sustainable than Allen's. 

 

Jackson rarely receives big hits. He's extremely smart in the way he runs. 

 

Allen gets teed up all the time when he runs. When linebackers and safeties see him in the open field, they often go for the kill shot.

 

I don't care how smart you think Jackson is at running with the football if he keeps running iti as much as he does he will take big hits.  Just ask Micheal Vick.  This is the NFL.

 

 

[Teddy KGB]

2 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I view Jackson's playing style as being much more sustainable than Allen's. 

 

Jackson rarely receives big hits. He's extremely smart in the way he runs. 

 

Allen gets teed up all the time when he runs. When linebackers and safeties see him in the open field, they often go for the kill shot.

 

Yikes.     Weren’t you a Tyrod was awesome guy too 

[jrober38]

2 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

Are you really sure Jackson will be a perennial top 10 guy?  The proof will be next year when defenses have had a chance to catch up with him.  Cam Newton had a Jackson like year when Carolina went 15 - 1 and lost the Super Bowl.  But defenses caught up and while Newton remained a very good QB he didn't dominate the league again.  That may be Jackson's future.  We just don't know.

 

As for Allen being a franchise guy?  We don't know yet but I like the signs so far.  It will take 4 - 5 years before we know for sure.  But right now I'm cautiously optimistic that Allen is the guy.

 

 

 

I think Newton is a good comparison to Allen.

 

Both big, strong, mobile QBs. Newton ran more early in his career, but they both shared a physical running style that resulted in them absorbing a ton of big hits both in and out of the pocket. Newton was never a very efficient passer either. 

 

I think Newton's play has declined because his body has broken down. Hopefully the same doesn't happen to Allen. 

1 minute ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

I don't care how smart you think Jackson is at running with the football if he keeps running iti as much as he does he will take big hits.  Just ask Micheal Vick.  This is the NFL.

 

 

 

What about Russell Wilson?

 

Why ignore the success and longevity he's had?

[Cripple Creek]

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

I view Jackson's playing style as being much more sustainable than Allen's. 

 

Jackson rarely receives big hits. He's extremely smart in the way he runs. 

 

Allen gets teed up all the time when he runs. When linebackers and safeties see him in the open field, they often go for the kill shot.

Then, you will be proven wrong.  It's ok to be wrong, not so ok to try to refute every single point various people bring up about a player.

 

Jackson is having an extraordinary year.  His chances of sustaining that success (architect of the team is retiring, OC will move on etc etc etc) is not great.  Lock this post away in a time capsule and pull it out in seven years and we'll talk.

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, Teddy KGB said:

 

Yikes.     Weren’t you a Tyrod was awesome guy too 

 

I was a Tyrod is way better than EJ Manuel guy. 

[C.Biscuit97]

20 minutes ago, section122 said:

 

Lamar Jackson is passing for 206.4 ypg.  1 full yard per game than Josh Allen.  Jackson hasn't had to play from behind and the Ravens lean on the run game and strong defense for success (sound familiar).  The Ravens are #1 in the league in rush ypg by 55.1 ypg over the next closest team.  To put that in perspective they are farther ahead of the #2 team than the #2 team is ahead of the 22nd team (Lions).  Lamar is playing lights out this year no doubt but where does he project long term?  Why is Josh Allen Blake Bortles but Lamar can't be Colin Kaepernick?  Both of these guys have their whole careers in front of them.  Both guys took tremendous leaps from year 1 to 2.  It will be interesting to see where they go...

 

As for stats...

 

Ryan Tannehill is ahead of Lamar Jackson in almost every category (comp %, ypa, ay/a, y/c, ypg, QB rating, ny/a, any/a, 4th quarter comeback, and game winning drives).  So by your "logic" you would take Tannehil over Lamar Jackson right?  He is top 5 in a bunch of passing categories and ahead of Lamar in all the ones listed above.

Because they are never behind, Jackson doesn’t really get to pad his stats every game.  And he is the biggest reason their run game is so good. 

[Teddy KGB]

2 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

I was a Tyrod is way better than EJ Manuel guy. 

 

Naaa.  You were a full fledged church of Tyrod guy.      

 

If only Benjamin didn’t push off, amirite? 

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

Btw, it is okay to have 2 good players, it doesn't have to be this one is good, the other one sucks. Sign of the times.

[C.Biscuit97]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I think we wouldn't play to Jackson's strengths because for much of the season we haven't played to Allen's strengths.  It's very clear if you watch the games carefully.  We wanted him to develop as a pocket passer.  It wasn't until he took a clear step as a pocket passer (clear to people who look past the score at the end of the game and the completion %) that we started putting back some plays that better suit his skills and giving him the green light to run.

Some of Jackson's passing skills are better, but he's also bailed out a lot by elite TE who can catch balls that sail and who go down for balls.  He makes his living passing over the middle.  He is not as good of a passer as Allen on those sideline throws.  We don't have the pieces for that here.  You acknowledge as much yourself elsewhere.  It shows in that we're leading the league in drops, a conservative stat that does not track "balls elite targets around the league hold on to"

 

Jackson is truly a far, far better runner than Allen - a "generational talent at RB", but his elite RB skills play best in the style of offense he's running.  We lack the hosses and the system.  You also acknowledge this above - our linemen are not mobile enough.  In addition, as previously noted, our best pass catching threat TE is not the run blocker Jackson's TE are.  Singletary may emerge as a great RB, but he's not there yet, and a lot of Jackson's yards are facilitated by the need to defend the "two headed hydra" of Ingram/Edwards or Jackson.

 

I'm up in the air about whether you're a Sky-Diver class Troll or actually believe what you say.  Either way, I think it's crystal clear at this point that you can't acknowledge a point (even one you've yourself made elsewhere) and aren't actually interested in discussion, so I'm outta here.  

Just nit picking here but Jackson didn’t inherit an elite TE like Gronk or Kelce.  Andrews was drafted in the 3 round. Jackson deserves a lot of credit for his success since they both came into together.

 

this isn’t really directed at you because you are very reasonable with your posts. But people work really hard to discredit Jackson. Yes he is in a good system.  But maybe the Heisman trophy winner who is going to be the NFL is just a good qb.

12 minutes ago, CincyBillsFan said:

 

Are you really sure Jackson will be a perennial top 10 guy?  The proof will be next year when defenses have had a chance to catch up with him.  Cam Newton had a Jackson like year when Carolina went 15 - 1 and lost the Super Bowl.  But defenses caught up and while Newton remained a very good QB he didn't dominate the league again.  That may be Jackson's future.  We just don't know.

 

As for Allen being a franchise guy?  We don't know yet but I like the signs so far.  It will take 4 - 5 years before we know for sure.  But right now I'm cautiously optimistic that Allen is the guy.

 

 

Newton was off to the best passing season of his career in 2018 before he got hurt. 

[Teddy KGB]

Mark Andrews isn’t a monster ? 

[C.Biscuit97]

1 hour ago, PaattMaann said:

 

I would also not trade Allen for Jackson. Allen is a better passer than Jackson, Jackson is schemed for success (and great on the Ravens for doing that). Allen can make all of the NFL throws, Jackson can not (count how many 10 yard outs he has completed, or any throw to the outside for that matter). He has lived with easy completions, and good for him and them. He has played OUT OF THIS WORLD this year. I don't think it continues. Ill take Allen's progression over Jacksons flash in the pan. I just think thats how it will work out.

I think Josh has the potential to develop into a regular top 3 QB in this league, AND has insane mobility, which many other QBs dont have. Ill take that potential all day. 

 

(I was also a HUGE Jackson advocate coming out of college. Thought he would make a really good NFL quarterback. Still think he will, but he wont be this MVP caliber every year.)

 

I liken this debate to who would you rather have, Peyton Manning or Tom Brady. For me, its easily Peyton Manning. Reason being, you could put Peyton Manning on any team in history and he will find a way to make everyone better in a season. He was his own offensive coordinator, could make every throw, and was a brilliant QB. Tom Brady's success came because of ability for sure, but mostly due to perfect time in the perfect situation. 

 

My opinon. 

Again nit picking, why is it a given that Allen is a better passer than Jackson? He has never been a better passer at any level than Jackson. Not when Jackson was passing in ACC and Allen was in the MWC.  And not so far in the nfl.  Allen certainly has the stronger arm and could be.  But he has not been so far.  And given that Jackson will be the mvp, it’s not even a knock.  But man, if We had Jackson, people would be falling all over themselves praising him.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

 

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

I think Newton's play has declined because his body has broken down. Hopefully the same doesn't happen to Allen. 

 

I think Allen has already learned to be more selective about how and when he runs than Newton ever was.

 

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

What about Russell Wilson?

Why ignore the success and longevity he's had?

 

Russell Wilson rushed more than 100x only twice in his career, and from the start focused on smart running: running OOB and sliding.  Wilson as a ML baseball prospect came into the league with a world-class slide, neat and sweet, and he used it from the start.

 

Jackson is incomparably better than Wilson as a rusher - he's got the elusiveness and speed of a genuine top-line RB.  He gives the team more as a rusher than Wilson does.  He's rushing almost exactly 2x a game more than Wilson has done (consistently) over his career (11.4 APG vs 5.6 APG), and while Jackson does run out of bounds when he can, he also goes hard for the yardage and takes more hits with it.

 

 

[Pokebball]

40 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Should I add you to the list?

 

Are you another who wouldn't trade away Josh Allen for Lamar Jackson?

 

I didn't misrepresent anything.

 

You seem to think Allen is a better player than Lamar Jackson and have gone to great lengths to make up excuses for why you think that's true. 

 

Jackson is a better passer and a better runner than Allen. It makes zero sense to think we wouldn't be scoring more points with a better QB under centre. 

Let's try this explanation for you.  Think about buying a QB similar to buying a stock or other security.  The theory is to buy low and sell high.  An investor wants the greatest return on their investment.  What you're wanting to do here is to buy a QB at their high and sell a QB that most all of the experts say is a QB with a high ceiling, or in other words has a significant opportunity for a better ROI than the QB already at or close to the high. 

 

Your question, would you trade straight across, is a silly hypothetical to begin with.  That's not how this would work.  The Bills would have to pay for the higher QB at that higher value, and therefore give up the potential ROI.  Business men and women do not do that.  The Pegulas and Beanes are making what they consider to be the best ROI for the organization.

 

Additionally, you can't consider one player, in your case the QB, without looking at the other assets around that one player.  You have to consider the synergy created by when you surround good players with other good players (you know, the 2+2=5 dynamic).  The Bills put one guy on the pro bowl.  The Ravens put 12.  I think this considerations discounts your argument most significantly.

 

Just a few thoughts for you to consider.

[C.Biscuit97]

3 hours ago, Doc said:

Brady was a game manager until about his 7th season starting.

Not true Doc.  He was 2nd in passing attempts and led the nfl in tds his 2nd year as a starter.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

9 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Because they are never behind, Jackson doesn’t really get to pad his stats every game.  And he is the biggest reason their run game is so good. 

 

Um....if you've watched the Ravens play, they never take their foot off the gas.  The Ravens will be ahead and Lamar will still be slinging it.

[Pokebball]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Um....if you've watched the Ravens play, they never take their foot off the gas.  The Ravens will be ahead and Lamar will still be slinging it.

The point is valid, though, either way right?  Game plan for the Raven's offense is to always play like they're behind.  McD's game plan couldn't be further from this strategy than it is.

[jrober38]

1 minute ago, Pokebball said:

Let's try this explanation for you.  Think about buying a QB similar to buying a stock or other security.  The theory is to buy low and sell high.  An investor wants the greatest return on their investment.  What you're wanting to do here is to buy a QB at their high and sell a QB that most all of the experts say is a QB with a high ceiling, or in other words has a significant opportunity for a better ROI than the QB already at or close to the high. 

 

Your question, would you trade straight across, is a silly hypothetical to begin with.  That's not how this would work.  The Bills would have to pay for the higher QB at that higher value, and therefore give up the potential ROI.  Business men and women do not do that.  The Pegulas and Beanes are making what they consider to be the best ROI for the organization.

 

Additionally, you can't consider one player, in your case the QB, without looking at the other assets around that one player.  You have to consider the synergy created by when you surround good players with other good players (you know, the 2+2=5 dynamic).  The Bills put one guy on the pro bowl.  The Ravens put 12.  I think this considerations discounts your argument most significantly.

 

Just a few thoughts for you to consider.

 

That's one investment strategy. Another is to take the sure thing and bank the dividends every year. 

 

Do you think the Ravens would have 12 guys in the Pro Bowl if they weren't 12-2 and the leading scoring offense in the NFL?

[whatdrought]

1 minute ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Just nit picking here but Jackson didn’t inherit an elite TE like Gronk or Kelce.  Andrews was drafted in the 3 round. Jackson deserves a lot of credit for his success since they both came into together.

 

this isn’t really directed at you because you are very reasonable with your posts. But people work really hard to discredit Jackson. Yes he is in a good system.  But maybe the Heisman trophy winner who is going to be the NFL is just a good qb.

 

 

Good point on Andrews, but definitely hard to say who helps who the most. I was really high on Andrews coming out and figured he would be pretty good wherever he went. Still funny to me that they took Hurst in the first and he has been largely outplayed by the third rounder. 

 

I don't think Hap is trying to discredit him. I think it's a fair point to question if he could have the same success here in such a different system and with such a comparably bare cupboard. Jackson is a good football player and does alright at throwing the ball. If he can manage to stay healthy and not have to change the amount that he runs, he'll be good for a long time. He doesn't (i think) fit under the same grouping of gimmicky, running QB's that can be figured out by Defenses easily and then stopped for two reasons: 1- he runs like no other QB ever has, better than most RB's ever have. 2- He does have really good arm talent and if you sell out to stop him, he can make enough throws to make you pay (see pass to Hurst as example). That being said, if his game is forced to change where he can't run, or he loses his elusiveness, he will need to develop an ability to go through reads (so many passes right now are 1 reads because the offense is so efficient) and the capability to pass outside the numbers. As of yet, we haven't seen that. Doesn't mean it can't happen. 

[Pokebball]

Observation - I appreciate all of the comparisons of Josh to the best of the best.  I consider that a very good thing.  That's the kind of team I think McD and Beane want to build.