Nostradamus Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Behind Rothlisberger is the funny part. That Superbowl win really goes a long way doesn't it. 865388[/snapback] Um... yeah. Winning a SuperBowl is kind of a big deal
bizell Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Um... yeah. Winning a SuperBowl is kind of a big deal 866555[/snapback] yeah, but the point is they're grading roethlisberger for his team's accomplishments last year. he's sucked this year and is leading the league in interceptions.
Nostradamus Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 yeah, but the point is they're grading roethlisberger for his team's accomplishments last year. he's sucked this year and is leading the league in interceptions. 866565[/snapback] Well, if the rating are for who is playing better this year, I'd go with Losman. However, we seem to be forgetting a long stretch where he was virtually useless. But, if we're talking about who you would rather have as a starting QB, I'd have to say Roethlisberger. He has proven he can win in the playoffs and on the biggest stage. I guess time will tell, but I can't fault the rating system for not yet giving Losman the accolades we feel he deserves. Once he starts performing and winning at a high level consistently, I guarantee he'll start flying up those charts.
bizell Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Well, if the rating are for who is playing better this year, I'd go with Losman. However, we seem to be forgetting a long stretch where he was virtually useless. But, if we're talking about who you would rather have as a starting QB, I'd have to say Roethlisberger. He has proven he can win in the playoffs and on the biggest stage. I guess time will tell, but I can't fault the rating system for not yet giving Losman the accolades we feel he deserves. Once he starts performing and winning at a high level consistently, I guarantee he'll start flying up those charts. 866573[/snapback] the qb ratings goes on a week-by-week basis, at least i thought, and was supposed to pretty much be a 'who's hot' kind of list. yeah, roeth has proven he can win in the playoffs.. but as for the biggest stage thing? he had the lowest qb rating EVER for a super bowl winning quarterback. antwan randle-el had the only touchdown pass that game for the stillers.
Nostradamus Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 the qb ratings goes on a week-by-week basis, at least i thought, and was supposed to pretty much be a 'who's hot' kind of list. yeah, roeth has proven he can win in the playoffs.. but as for the biggest stage thing? he had the lowest qb rating EVER for a super bowl winning quarterback. antwan randle-el had the only touchdown pass that game for the stillers. 866585[/snapback] Fair enough. I defintly think they stole that SuperBowl anyway. That game should really have been a black mark on the NFL for the quality of the officiating. However, since the media is in bed with NFL, they completely overlooked the shoddy officiating. It's gonna be interesting to see the hierarchy of that QB draft class. How do you think it will pan out? I think Rivers seems to have taken a lead in that regard, while Manning has dropped significantly. If Losman continues to quietly improve, he may climb to the top of that ladder.
bizell Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Fair enough. I defintly think they stole that SuperBowl anyway. That game should really have been a black mark on the NFL for the quality of the officiating. However, since the media is in bed with NFL, they completely overlooked the shoddy officiating. It's gonna be interesting to see the hierarchy of that QB draft class. How do you think it will pan out? I think Rivers seems to have taken a lead in that regard, while Manning has dropped significantly. If Losman continues to quietly improve, he may climb to the top of that ladder. 866599[/snapback] It's hard to say how that (this?) class of QBs will pan out. Everyone seems to have levelled off, with Rivers, Eli Manning, and Roethlisberger exhibiting hot starts and cooling off somewhat. Losman started off horribly, and he's getting to be pretty good. Sooo.. I'm going to be a homer and say Losman is going to be best, Rivers and Manning in the middle, and Roethlisberger the worst because I dislike him. :shrug:
MDH Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Sooo.. I'm going to be a homer and say Losman is going to be best, Rivers and Manning in the middle, and Roethlisberger the worst because I dislike him. :shrug: 866666[/snapback] I'd say Manning is on his way to being the worst of the bunch unless he can turn it around pronto. If he continues at his present pace I'm not sure he'll last in New York past next year. The guy has loads of talent but he's as inaccurate a passer as I've seen in recent years.
bizell Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 I'd say Manning is on his way to being the worst of the bunch unless he can turn it around pronto. If he continues at his present pace I'm not sure he'll last in New York past next year. The guy has loads of talent but he's as inaccurate a passer as I've seen in recent years. 866697[/snapback] and it looks like his running backwards and throwing off his back foot isn't working this year like it was last.
AnthonyF Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Can't help myself.... 15 pass attempts, only 4 games over 200 yards and 30th ranked pass offense is not going to move you up the list.... Sorry to state the obvious..... All that said he is playing better, but still not seeing enough to see if we have something.... Remember this is the offensive coordinators fault not JP's....
Wraith Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 Can't help myself.... 15 pass attempts, only 4 games over 200 yards and 30th ranked pass offense is not going to move you up the list.... Sorry to state the obvious..... All that said he is playing better, but still not seeing enough to see if we have something.... Remember this is the offensive coordinators fault not JP's.... 866751[/snapback] Gee, ordinarily, you would think that the only thing required of you to move up the list would be to PLAY BETTER THAN THE PEOPLE AHEAD OF YOU ON THE LIST. I wasn't aware there was some kind of statistical criteria that needed to be met...
AJ1 Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 The list is the dipstick writer's idea of the QB's reputation TO HIM at the time. It's essentially worthless because the only criterion is the writer's opinion, as far as I can tell.
BuffaloBob Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 I've previously voiced my observational limitations, Bob. But given the tools available to me, and years of watching this stuff, I remain firm in not agreeing with this thread's main assertion - that JP is going to tear up the league next year.865909[/snapback] Sorry, I didn't read that as the main assertion of the thread. Also, I believe what I was taking issue with was your opinion that JP hasn't yet demonstrated, based on your observation of stats and play-by-play summary sheets, the ability to play the role of a field-general. I remain firm in my belief that intangibles such as leadership ability, coolness under fire, proper decision making with the game on the line (all traits I equate with the role of a field-general) are not something that can be gleaned from even the most careful parsing of the stats and "result-of-play" summaries. I didn't get to see either the Jax or Texan games unitl I saw them on NFL Network replay. I did hear them on the radio, and I parsed the stat sheets. Until I got to actually watch JP direct those game-winning drives, I was really suprised that it was inspiring on no level I could achieve through the other media. What would you have me, and we other expatriates do? Turn our back on the club and dismiss them from interest because we not are not able to see every snap they execute? Take for gospel the new crowd that watches every game but wouldn't recognize a trap play unless one of their grandparents knocked them in the head? 865909[/snapback] Frankly, I don't get all this stuff about turning from the team. All I was saying is that your assessment that JP hasn't demonstrated the ability to act the role of field-general is simply missing some very important observational information. Of course you are entitled to your opinion however you come by it. I simply disagree with your assertion that stats and play summaries in the right hands are sufficient to properly support the assessment of such an intangible quality in a QB. I also submit that had you had the opportunity to see JP in action over the last 4-5 games, your opinion would likely be significantly different in this regard.
Rico Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 I've previously voiced my observational limitations, Bob. But given the tools available to me, and years of watching this stuff, I remain firm in not agreeing with this thread's main assertion - that JP is going to tear up the league next year. What would you have me, and we other expatriates do? Turn our back on the club and dismiss them from interest because we not are not able to see every snap they execute? Take for gospel the new crowd that watches every game but wouldn't recognize a trap play unless one of their grandparents knocked them in the head? 865909[/snapback] Link
MartyBall4Buffalo Posted December 14, 2006 Posted December 14, 2006 I'd say Manning is on his way to being the worst of the bunch unless he can turn it around pronto. If he continues at his present pace I'm not sure he'll last in New York past next year. The guy has loads of talent but he's as inaccurate a passer as I've seen in recent years. 866697[/snapback] Eli has played pretty damn good his last 2 games. He also has had some tough breaks losing his lt, strahan, osi for a time, arrington, toomer and a #1 wr who doesn't help him out much. Compared to last year he's improved on his completition pct 52.8 to 58.5. The yards are down a lot but he's also throwing less 126 less passes so far. His qb rating has gone up as well. Is he playing great ball no, but I wouldn't say he's gone next year if he doesn't improve. The injuries the giants have suffered have played a toll. People expect the guy to be Peyton because of his name. He's good enough in his own right with flaws.
Dibs Posted December 15, 2006 Posted December 15, 2006 (edited) To me, this is akin to saying that you liked a book when you only read the reviews. Sure, you'll be informed about the book and will know the story and some of the themeatic value, but that doesn't mean that you would have agreed with the reviewer's opinion of the book (or perhaps gotten something else entirely out of it.) There are things you just can't get from reading someone else's opinion about a subject. That first hand experience is essential in formulating your own, informed, opinion. 866533[/snapback] I totally disagree that it is essential. It is obviously preferred....but it is a bit insulting to say..... "OK, you listened to the game, you read every review you could, you analysed the play-by-play, you read every persons opinion & you saw the important plays on replay....but.....your opinion that JP did well in the game is not valid because you didn't see the game." I think perhaps you are talking about specific areas of analysis yet referring to all areas. There are certain elements of the game that I simply(wisely) chose to have no opinion on because I have not seen the game & there is no obvious consensus amongst all other analysts. There are other areas where relying on only seeing the game can actually result in opinion that is erroneous....i.e. that Schobel pads his sacks(more than his peers) in junk time. Many people have come to this conclusion...probably based on how he comes across in the games. The stats show however that he is no better/worse than his peers in this regard. I formulated my opinion on Schobel based solely on statistical analysis. When I've seen him in games I have had no opinion either way in this regard. Opinions should be viewed as valid/not valid based on the reasonings behind the opinion. If someone didn't watch the game & because of that could not formulate a reasonable opinion on a certain issue....that would be an invalid opinion. On the other hand, if someone didn't watch the game......but could formulate a rational opinion based on everything else.....they would have a valid opinion. If you went blind.....you'd still have your football smarts & still have you're ability to analyse things. You might find you ask for more descriptions of things since you couldn't watch yourself but that shouldn't stop you from having valid opinions on issues.....with the ability to rationally back them. IMO an invalid opinion is one that the only rationale for it is along the lines of "I saw the game....it's what I saw." P.S. I don't need to eat schit to have the opinion that it tastes terrible. Edited December 15, 2006 by Dibs
Recommended Posts