If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ESPN)   ESPN's QBR scores have Philip Rivers behind such greats as Tannehill, Cutler, Dalton, Fitzpatrick, Palmer, Cassel, Freeman, Gabbert, Hasselbeck, and even Russel Wilson. At least he beat Mark Sanchez, if there's any consolation in that   (espn.go.com) divider line 108
    More: Amusing, QBR, Blaine Gabbert, Philip Rivers, Matt Cassel, Elisabeth Hasselbeck, ESPN, solace, NFL  
•       •       •

1332 clicks; posted to Sports » on 24 Oct 2012 at 10:02 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



108 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-24 11:08:53 AM  

roc6783: Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL, now, and ever. It's not even close anymore.


Rodgers is definitely sniffing my top 10 list all time. Best now and ever? Not yet.
 
2012-10-24 11:11:03 AM  

thecpt: oh so Wilson equals even with Karma. Wisconsin equals owed 2 by Karma.

Unless those two equal the Antonio Freeman catch for whatever reason.


I love that one, but I still think the catch where he broke his arm was better, but I can't find video on it.
 
2012-10-24 11:11:30 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Football stats don't even out over a season the same way baseball stats do.


Yeah, but if ESPN hadn't invented QBR last year, what would Merrill Hoge and Ron Jaworski argue about on Monday mornings?
 
2012-10-24 11:14:31 AM  

This Looks Fun: roc6783: Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL, now, and ever. It's not even close anymore.

Rodgers is definitely sniffing my top 10 list all time. Best now and ever? Not yet.


Then your list is wrong. The only QB that you could argue tops him is Steve Young, but he is a lefty and Mormon, therefore, disqualified.

///Ya, not really. Rodgers and Young are 1a and 1b right now, once Rodgers surpasses Young in years played, he will be the unequivocal #1.
 
2012-10-24 11:15:38 AM  

thecpt: oh so Wilson equals even with Karma. Wisconsin equals owed 2 by Karma.

Unless those two equal the Antonio Freeman catch for whatever reason.


That clip didnt show my favorite part, where the vikings defender was running down the field doing the raise the roof arm pump and then turned at the last second to see Freeman score. I wish there was a close up of his face at the moment of realization.
 
2012-10-24 11:15:48 AM  

roc6783: Rodgers and Young are 1a and 1b right now, once Rodgers surpasses Young in years played, he will be the unequivocal #1.


Steve Young isn't even the best QB in the history of the 49ers.
 
2012-10-24 11:17:31 AM  
Didn't we just have a thread saying that the QBR is dead?
 
2012-10-24 11:17:39 AM  

roc6783: thecpt: oh so Wilson equals even with Karma. Wisconsin equals owed 2 by Karma.

Unless those two equal the Antonio Freeman catch for whatever reason.

I love that one, but I still think the catch where he broke his arm was better, but I can't find video on it.


I don't remember that one, Then again I was 8. Found a better video of the aforementioned catch including a driver hug. Link
 
2012-10-24 11:19:23 AM  

roc6783: ///Ya, not really. Rodgers and Young are 1a and 1b right now, once Rodgers surpasses Young in years played, he will be the unequivocal #1.


Quit getting him jinxed!

/he's a great QB and, provided that he continues to play at his current level of production, he will hopefully have at least another SB to his credit, and we'll compare people after their careers are over
//it's as annoying as when people say that the '92 Dream Team is more accomplished than the current team...no sh*t, we've seen everything they were capable of.
///FWIW, I said he was going to be the best prior to the SB season and MVP season, so I suppose you can take my criticism with a grain of salt
 
2012-10-24 11:19:32 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Because a baseball season has 10x the sample size and teams play everyone in the league at least 6-7 times. It'd be nice if we could do real meta-statistical analysis on football, but the limited sample size means we're abstracting from a wildly-variant set. Let's stick to the counting stats (QB rating is even a bit of a stretch).


There's also more variables with HOW exactly other teams play each other in football as compared to baseball.

Sure, in baseball you can focus on pitching certain guys a certain way, align your infield/outfield depending on the opposition, and various other tactics. However, the difference between man-to-man and zone coverages, zone-blocking vs power-blocking, etc are SO large, that the closest baseball equivalent I could think of would be changing your defensive alignment to only a shortstop and 1B in the infield, 4 outfielders, and two catchers behind the plate for one game, and radically doing something else the next.
 
2012-10-24 11:22:57 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: roc6783: Rodgers and Young are 1a and 1b right now, once Rodgers surpasses Young in years played, he will be the unequivocal #1.

Steve Young isn't even the best QB in the history of the 49ers.


Ok, who is better? Montana? Not nearly as accurate or mobile. Anyone who played before Montana? No way any of them can take their skill set and insert it into today's game. I love Bart Starr as much as the next Packer fan who never saw him play, but he would get absolutely shredded in the league today, if he was even drafted. There is no way to effectively compare pre-80's QBs to post-90's QBs, the game is too different. Era comparisons work in baseball, not football.
 
2012-10-24 11:23:10 AM  

IAmRight: FWIW, I said he was going to be the best prior to the SB season and MVP season, so I suppose you can take my criticism with a grain of salt


The moment I saw his real debut in a competitive game (the Dallas game where he lead a comeback until that other guy felt threatened) I knew we were better off with him instead of ol man favre. Call it relative deprivation, but I thought it was against the rules for a QB to run for a first down and be an accurate deep passer.
 
2012-10-24 11:24:32 AM  

Yanks_RSJ: Dr Dreidel: Football stats don't even out over a season the same way baseball stats do.

Yeah, but if ESPN hadn't invented QBR last year, what would Merrill Hoge and Ron Jaworski argue about on Monday mornings?


Hopefully, it would mean Jaws replaces Chucky in the MNF booth. Either that, or they assign Jaws to be his wrangler - every time Groods starts in with one of his useless time-fillers, Jaws bashes him over the head with a life-size Tim McCarver bobblehead* and wraps a Cris Collinsworth Fathead around his face.

Merril Hoge would be shown Jeremy Schapp footage until he goes crazy. Then they take him, Lou Holtz, Dick Vitale, Schapp, Bob Ley, and the rest of the useless chuckleheads who contribute nothing (I'm thinking we'd be left with Trey Wingo and Scott van Pelt - maybe whatsherface also - on Prime/2, with Dari Nowkah all alone at ESPNews) and make them into a low-cost, high-nutrition sports drink sold by ESPN.

*in a pinch, you can use Actual Tim McCarver (it's tough to tell him apart from the bobblehead...)
 
2012-10-24 11:26:02 AM  

IAmRight: roc6783: ///Ya, not really. Rodgers and Young are 1a and 1b right now, once Rodgers surpasses Young in years played, he will be the unequivocal #1.

Quit getting him jinxed!

/he's a great QB and, provided that he continues to play at his current level of production, he will hopefully have at least another SB to his credit, and we'll compare people after their careers are over
***snip***


:) I get what you are saying, but the fact is right now at this current point in his career, Rodgers is maybe slightly barely below Young only due to the fact that he hasn't played as many games. He is still better than every other NFL QB.
 
2012-10-24 11:26:48 AM  

FriarReb98: Didn't we just have a thread saying that the QBR is dead?


Yep. But as soon as they QB Rating numbers shake out to "Two Mannings and a Brady" (the holy Trinity of sportscenter spooge-mining) we're supposed to care again.

This system has, and always will be, total shiat.
 
2012-10-24 11:27:49 AM  

roc6783: This Looks Fun: roc6783: Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL, now, and ever. It's not even close anymore.

Rodgers is definitely sniffing my top 10 list all time. Best now and ever? Not yet.

Then your list is wrong.


I stand corrected. That settles it then.
 
2012-10-24 11:31:49 AM  

Orgasmatron138: Also, avoiding the sack would have a loose definition. Is stepping up in the pocket avoiding a sack?


Not passing out at parties.
 
2012-10-24 11:32:14 AM  

Dr Dreidel: Yanks_RSJ: Dr Dreidel: ***snip***
Hopefully, it would mean Jaws replaces Chucky in the MNF booth. ***snip***


Oh man, that would be sweet. I can't stand Gruden, and when Jws isn't trying to overhype terrible games, he actually seems like he says worthwhile, intelligent things.
 
2012-10-24 11:34:20 AM  
All-time best game QBR scores? C. Palmer and M. Vick.

/facepalm.
 
2012-10-24 11:37:22 AM  

This Looks Fun: roc6783: This Looks Fun: roc6783: Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL, now, and ever. It's not even close anymore.

Rodgers is definitely sniffing my top 10 list all time. Best now and ever? Not yet.

Then your list is wrong.

I stand corrected. That settles it then.


I'm glad you have seen the error of your ways. Setting snark aside momentarily, you will not find a QB that has the same combination of throwing velocity, on field decision making, accuracy, and mobility anywhere else on your list, unless your list has Steve Young as #1, then you have an argument. Every other "top 10 QB of all time" has holes in one of those areas that Aaron Rodgers doesn't.
 
2012-10-24 11:46:35 AM  

roc6783: This Looks Fun: roc6783: This Looks Fun: roc6783: Aaron Rodgers is the best QB in the NFL, now, and ever. It's not even close anymore.

Rodgers is definitely sniffing my top 10 list all time. Best now and ever? Not yet.

Then your list is wrong.

I stand corrected. That settles it then.

I'm glad you have seen the error of your ways. Setting snark aside momentarily, you will not find a QB that has the same combination of throwing velocity, on field decision making, accuracy, and mobility anywhere else on your list, unless your list has Steve Young as #1, then you have an argument. Every other "top 10 QB of all time" has holes in one of those areas that Aaron Rodgers doesn't.


Its amazing that you can still type with Rodgers Dong in your mouth.
 
2012-10-24 11:47:22 AM  

roc6783: Ok, who is better? Montana?


Yes. He was an effective scrambler in his younger days (similar to Rodgers in that respect) and in an era when fewer QBs completed 60% of their passes, Montana was consistently in the mid-high 60s. He was also better in the playoffs than he was in the regular season, which you cannot say for Steve Young. In 15 playoff starts, Young threw 20 TDs and 13 INTs. In Montana's 23 playoff games, it was 45 TDs and 21 INTs.

And I'll grant you this, I farking HATE Steve Young, but this isn't even close.
 
2012-10-24 11:47:34 AM  
Nobody uses or cares about QBR outside of Bristol, Connecticut. So QB ratings have weird minimums and maximums. Deal with it.
 
2012-10-24 11:50:42 AM  
I think I read the other day that Rivers QB rating in the 4th quarter is 2.2. Yikes.

Still, what would you expect playing behind a starting undrafted rookie free agent left tackle? Rivers looked pretty good when Gaither was in there (with the obvious exception of when Gaither was so hurt he was 100% ineffective.) If Gaither can stay healthy, you'll see a much better Rivers.
 
2012-10-24 11:51:50 AM  

roc6783: Setting snark aside momentarily, you will not find a QB that has the same combination of throwing velocity, on field decision making, accuracy, and mobility anywhere else on your list, unless your list has Steve Young as #1, then you have an argument. Every other "top 10 QB of all time" has holes in one of those areas that Aaron Rodgers doesn't.


Somewhat comedically, I judge past qbs on body of work more than skillset because I'm too young to have watched them play. So, what I was saying (specifically to how I would compare QBs of different eras) was that with a larger body of work, Rodgers will definitely be in the running, but if he dies tomorrow, he'll be Len Bias.

/Based on skillset alone, I couldn't really say and I'll be upfront about that.
 
2012-10-24 11:58:11 AM  

hbk72777: Eli at number 2, while Rodgers is all the way down at number 7. The cracks in the armor are starting to show. Aaron is a good qb, but not the next Brady, or Eli.


hahahahahha 8/10, you almost got me.
 
2012-10-24 12:10:49 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: roc6783: Ok, who is better? Montana?

Yes. He was an effective scrambler in his younger days (similar to Rodgers in that respect) and in an era when fewer QBs completed 60% of their passes, Montana was consistently in the mid-high 60s. He was also better in the playoffs than he was in the regular season, which you cannot say for Steve Young. In 15 playoff starts, Young threw 20 TDs and 13 INTs. In Montana's 23 playoff games, it was 45 TDs and 21 INTs.

And I'll grant you this, I farking HATE Steve Young, but this isn't even close.


And here's the hang up, should postseason numbers be separate from regular season, rolled into regular season, or discarded since not every QB goes every year?

//FWIW - Rodgers has 15 TDs and 4 INTs in 6 postseason starts.

If you put them into a per game stat -

Montana - 1.96 TDs and .91 INTs
Young - 1.33 TDs and .87 INTs
Rodgers - 2.5 TDs and .67 INTs
 
2012-10-24 12:28:10 PM  

roc6783: And here's the hang up, should postseason numbers be separate from regular season, rolled into regular season, or discarded since not every QB goes every year?


They should surely be considered, particularly when you have sample sizes as large as Young and Montana and are making a head-to-head comparison. They DID go there every year.

It's undeniable that Joe Montana was a better QB in the postseason than he was in the regular season. It's also undeniable that Steve Young was worse in the postseason than he was in the regular season. And in many of Young's best seasons, the NFC West was the worst division in football, unlike Montana, who faced much better Rams and Saints teams during his era, plus was competing with the Redskins, Giants and Bears defenses to reach four Super Bowls.

The Cowboys and Packers (the best teams of the early/mid-90s) ate Young's lunch.
 
2012-10-24 12:34:53 PM  
Sports journalists are morons. They only care about NOW, as in what's happening on the field right now. Did you just throw 3 interceptions? You're a piece of trash. Oh, now you lead your team to a comeback win? QUARTERBACK JESUS! We told you! Quick release! Fiery temperment! They'll flip opinions at the drop of a dime. You do get pity points if you've won a super bowl though, as Peyton got during the first half of the Chargers-Broncos game.
 
2012-10-24 12:37:06 PM  

natmar_76: Did you just throw 3 interceptions? You're a piece of trash. Oh, now you lead your team to a comeback win? QUARTERBACK JESUS!


*cough*EliManning*cough*
 
2012-10-24 12:42:04 PM  
And Treygreen enters and mentions Eli Manning for the millionth thread in a row. Get over it, already.
 
2012-10-24 12:53:55 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: roc6783: ***snip***

It's undeniable that Joe Montana was a better QB in the postseason than he was in the regular season. It's also undeniable that Steve Young was worse in the postseason than he was in the regular season. And in many of Young's best seasons, the NFC West was the worst division in football, unlike Montana, who faced much better Rams and Saints teams during his era, plus was competing with the Redskins, Giants and Bears defenses to reach four Super Bowls.

The Cowboys and Packers (the best teams of the early/mid-90s) ate Young's lunch.


Again, you are holding things outside of Young's control against him. Wins, postseason, and which teams are good or not has nothing to do with how well a QB performs on the field. Those are all team-based things that you are applying to one guy.
 
2012-10-24 01:05:39 PM  

roc6783: And here's the hang up, should postseason numbers be separate from regular season, rolled into regular season, or discarded since not every QB goes every year?

//FWIW - Rodgers has 15 TDs and 4 INTs in 6 postseason starts.

If you put them into a per game stat -

Montana - 1.96 TDs and .91 INTs
Young - 1.33 TDs and .87 INTs
Rodgers - 2.5 TDs and .67 INTs


And yet, with all that, it's laughable to think that Rodgers would ever be favored again in a playoff game against Eli Manning, even with a 15-1 team at home.
 
2012-10-24 01:09:18 PM  

poughdrew: roc6783: And here's the hang up, should postseason numbers be separate from regular season, rolled into regular season, or discarded since not every QB goes every year?

//FWIW - Rodgers has 15 TDs and 4 INTs in 6 postseason starts.

If you put them into a per game stat -

Montana - 1.96 TDs and .91 INTs
Young - 1.33 TDs and .87 INTs
Rodgers - 2.5 TDs and .67 INTs

And yet, with all that, it's laughable to think that Rodgers would ever be favored again in a playoff game against Eli Manning, even with a 15-1 team at home.


MAXIMUM TROLLING

remember the year before when they played at lambeau.

Link


Its almost like every game is an independent occurrence involving a myriad of other factors!
 
2012-10-24 01:15:52 PM  

poughdrew: roc6783:***snip***


When Eli Manning has several consecutive seasons of above average play, I will begin to think he is great. Until then, I will continue to credit the defense for making up for his inconsistent, turnover prone play.

//Eli is very good, and in fact is all but assured a spot in the HoF due to his team's success, but he will never appear on any all time great QB list not put together by a NYG fan.
 
2012-10-24 01:26:48 PM  

Yanks_RSJ: roc6783: Rodgers and Young are 1a and 1b right now, once Rodgers surpasses Young in years played, he will be the unequivocal #1.

Steve Young isn't even the best QB in the history of the 49ers.


I think Young's skillset outweighs Montana's. Montana also had slightly better teams, or at least slightly worse opponents. As mentioned in this thread, Young often lost to better teams in the postseason, whereas Montana often bean worse teams. Montana's rightly famed for leading 4th quarter / last possession drives, which is important. It's not the only important thing, despite how many people highly value success "when it counts."

It's a pretty tough comparison. To me, I don't think postseason play is THAT important, given how reliant on the players around you it is. I certainly don't remember watching Steve Young and thinking, "gee, this guy throws bad passes in the playoffs." Steve Young's numbers are a little better across the board, even adjusted for era (in my opinion. And by qb rating+, according to pro-football-reference).

But, Montana played a bunch more for the Niners. 4600 pass attempts to 3600. Does that mean something? If it means we bump up Montana's value by that proportion, he's obviously ahead.
 
2012-10-24 02:23:09 PM  
What about Cave McNown?
 
2012-10-24 02:24:06 PM  

Orgasmatron138: I have a better QB rating system. There's Great, Good, and Bad.

Every QB falls into one of these three categories. Arguing placement within the category is useless because of how much of a team sport football is.


There's a few more categories than that. "Great", "Good", "Competent". "Bad", "Rex Grossman".

/Fark it! I'm goin' deep!
 
2012-10-24 02:27:09 PM  

Jubeebee: hbk72777: Eli at number 2, while Rodgers is all the way down at number 7. The cracks in the armor are starting to show. Aaron is a good qb, but not the next Brady, or Eli.

You're a funny guy. And obviously not a fan of a team that has to play Rodgers twice a year.


Funny like a clown. Like he amuses us. And the Bears still suck.

Rodgers went first in our draft and that team is now 6-1. His numbers are nuts. Reminds me of Marshall Faulk in his heyday.
 
2012-10-24 02:32:33 PM  
You know, it took me until this thread to realize that SLFF and roc are black and white versions of the exact same guy.
 
2012-10-24 02:34:02 PM  

Incorrigible Astronaut: You know, it took me until this thread to realize that SLFF and roc are black and white versions of the exact same guy.


SLFF isn't even really black.
 
2012-10-24 02:37:26 PM  

Dafatone: I think Young's skillset outweighs Montana's. Montana also had slightly better teams, or at least slightly worse opponents. As mentioned in this thread, Young often lost to better teams in the postseason, whereas Montana often bean worse teams.


That's wrong. The late 80s were really top heavy with good teams. Probably moreso than at any other time in league history. The Bears, Giants, Redskins and 49ers were all all-time great teams. Steve Young had Dallas and then the Packers to deal with and neither of those teams was really great at the same time. And at the skill positions, Young probably had better weapons overall. The 94 team had no weaknesses.
 
2012-10-24 02:51:15 PM  

SuperChuck: Dafatone: I think Young's skillset outweighs Montana's. Montana also had slightly better teams, or at least slightly worse opponents. As mentioned in this thread, Young often lost to better teams in the postseason, whereas Montana often bean worse teams.

That's wrong. The late 80s were really top heavy with good teams. Probably moreso than at any other time in league history. The Bears, Giants, Redskins and 49ers were all all-time great teams. Steve Young had Dallas and then the Packers to deal with and neither of those teams was really great at the same time. And at the skill positions, Young probably had better weapons overall. The 94 team had no weaknesses.


That '94 team would have lost to the Cowboys in the NFC Championship if the football gods hadn't spotted the 49ers 21 points in the first 7 minutes.
 
2012-10-24 02:57:14 PM  

Treygreen13: SuperChuck: Dafatone: I think Young's skillset outweighs Montana's. Montana also had slightly better teams, or at least slightly worse opponents. As mentioned in this thread, Young often lost to better teams in the postseason, whereas Montana often bean worse teams.

That's wrong. The late 80s were really top heavy with good teams. Probably moreso than at any other time in league history. The Bears, Giants, Redskins and 49ers were all all-time great teams. Steve Young had Dallas and then the Packers to deal with and neither of those teams was really great at the same time. And at the skill positions, Young probably had better weapons overall. The 94 team had no weaknesses.

That '94 team would have lost to the Cowboys in the NFC Championship if the football gods hadn't spotted the 49ers 21 points in the first 7 minutes.


It wasn't the football gods that threw interceptions and forced fumbles. That game was won on the field.
 
2012-10-24 03:04:11 PM  

Incorrigible Astronaut: You know, it took me until this thread to realize that SLFF and roc are black and white versions of the exact same guy.


Who is SLFF? Am I the white guy? I hate typecasting.
 
2012-10-24 03:17:39 PM  

Treygreen13: Incorrigible Astronaut: You know, it took me until this thread to realize that SLFF and roc are black and white versions of the exact same guy.

SLFF isn't even really black.


Oh, I know. He's an alt, but I thought the resemblance was funny.
 
2012-10-24 03:39:37 PM  

Incorrigible Astronaut: Treygreen13: Incorrigible Astronaut: You know, it took me until this thread to realize that SLFF and roc are black and white versions of the exact same guy.

SLFF isn't even really black.

Oh, I know. He's an alt, but I thought the resemblance was funny.


I feel like I am being insulted, but not sure how...
 
2012-10-24 03:53:17 PM  
I know Cutler is easy to mock/hate with his stoic face and dislike of all things jovial, but I was a bit surprised to see this:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-suh-cutler-vo t ed-least-popular-in-fan-survey-20121024,0,6931186.story

Suh is the least liked NFL player with Cutler close behind, even behind Vick. Funny that Vick was one of the most reviled players after The Incident and now Cutler is more hated. I guess whining is more offensive than making dogs murder each other for some folks.

/hope those ribs hold up
 
2012-10-24 04:00:23 PM  

roc6783: Incorrigible Astronaut: Treygreen13: Incorrigible Astronaut: You know, it took me until this thread to realize that SLFF and roc are black and white versions of the exact same guy.

SLFF isn't even really black.

Oh, I know. He's an alt, but I thought the resemblance was funny.

I feel like I am being insulted, but not sure how...


SLFF = Spike Lee's Favorite Farker. Rumors abound that he is actually white and playing a role but I've never seen proof. Incorrigible Astronaut is implying that your stance that A-Rodg is the GOAT is as ridiculous as SLFF's general stance that [some pretty good black athlete] is better than [any other comparable white athlete].

At least I think that's the gist.
 
2012-10-24 04:20:13 PM  

This Looks Fun: roc6783: Incorrigible Astronaut: Treygreen13: Incorrigible Astronaut: ***snip***
SLFF = Spike Lee's Favorite Farker. Rumors abound that he is actually white and playing a role but I've never seen proof. Incorrigible Astronaut is implying that your stance that A-Rodg is the GOAT is as ridiculous as SLFF's general stance that [some pretty good black athlete] is better than [any other comparable white athlete].

At least I think that's the gist.


Gotcha, thanks for the clarification, I guess... The thing of it is, I'm not wrong though. There's actual facts that back me up and I am not just making up random crap. I get that many people disagree, and that's fine. I at least make an attempt at humor and snark when I disagree. Also, I really do think that by the end of his career, assuming it is at least 5 years away, there will be few who will disagree with me.

//That obviously excludes any fanbois that LOVE their guy no matter the evidence that he is not the best.
 
Displayed 50 of 108 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report