PDA

View Full Version : Cutler has Elway beat, for starters



Tned
11-21-2007, 09:56 AM
Ok, first the article and then some comments:


http://www.denverpost.com/ci_7519830?source=rss

Cutler has Elway beat, for starters
By Mike Klis
The Denver Post
Article Last Updated: 11/21/2007 02:43:38 AM MST

Hold on. Don't crumple the newspaper and throw it at the cat just yet. For the sake of posterity, the first comment will be revised. Ready?

Jay Cutler is way better than John Elway.

Look it up and compare. Cutler has played in 15 NFL games. Put his numbers against Elway through 15 games. It's not close.

All right, all right. It's time to get serious. It's already established Elway overcame his early NFL struggles and became one of the best quarterbacks to have his bust bronzed in Canton. Cutler may have been more polished early, but is it realistic to expect him to lead his team to five Super Bowls?

If he does, Cutler will become only the second quarterback to do it. Elway was the first.

The reason the comparison is brought up is because Monday night was the first time Cutler played like Elway.

"I give Jay a lot of credit for hanging in this first 15, 16 games," Steve Young, the Hall of Fame quarterback and ESPN analyst, said after the network's Chalk Talk luncheon Monday to promote its telecast. "He's been asked to go through a lot. Legacy. Expectations."

The legacy of John Elway never was accurately depicted through stats. He didn't complete passes. He darted and twisted to escape the pass rush. His eyes bulging, Elway would seek greater open space to operate. He would scramble this way, gun it that way. The crowd would go berserk, the players would get an emotional lift, and momentum was colored orange.

Stats don't measure improvisation. Elway was the one of the best improvisational quarterbacks ever.

In a 34-20 victory Monday night against the Tennessee Titans, Cutler improvised. Before, he had shown poise, accuracy and a ball hard enough to squeeze between defenders, but not so hard he took skin from his receivers' hands. But Cutler also had seemed programmed, a cutout from Mike Shanahan's playbook.

Not Monday. On his first two completions to Brandon Stokley, Cutler looked

like he was a kid again, playing with his buddies at Holly Park in Santa Claus, Ind.
"Me and Brandon kind of drew both of those in the dirt," Cutler said.

Sweet imagery, drawing plays in the dirt. Sweet because it's fun.

"He's got the ability to make something when nothing is there," Shanahan said. "The sign of a good to great quarterback is he can make something happen when the play breaks down."

Cutler had the impressive stats to support his fine play Monday. But his 48-yard touchdown pass to Stokley cannot be found diagrammed in the Broncos' playbook. By design, Cutler rolled right. But no one was open. Oh, oh. Cutler stayed alive. He kept his feet moving and eyes searching.

"The first touchdown to me was kind of a broken play," Stokley said. "I broke my route off and he found me, and he made a great throw, right over a linebacker. And it kind of set the momentum for the game."

A scrambling quarterback performance was expected from the Titans-Broncos game. But the athletic demonstration was supposed to come from Vince Young, Tennessee's second-year quarterback. No disappointment there. Young combined for 379 yards of passing and rushing. But Cutler gave him company.

Cutler didn't just put up efficient numbers. He had fun doing it.

"Jay's mentally tough," said Steve Young, who also brought improvisational characteristics to his game. "Like all young quarterbacks, he sometimes does stupid things. Has he lost a bunch of games? He's maybe lost a couple. Has he won a few? Yeah, he has. But from an offensive perspective, Tennessee doesn't ask nearly as much of Vince Young as Jay Cutler. Not even close."

Don't feel bad, Vince. It's tough to find a quarterback who is comparatively close to Cutler through 15 games.

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2007/1121/20071121_124658_BronxChart112107.jpg

Tned
11-21-2007, 10:26 AM
Ok, now the comment.

As I have said before, I don't think you can compare Elway and Cutler easily, because even with all the injuries this year, Cutler has more talent around him than Elway.

However, there is another thing to consider. Can anyone remember a more dominant time for QBs in the NFL?

Through 12 week, there are 24, yes 24, out of the 30 QBs with completion percentages OVER 60%. Of those, 22 of them have at least 1100 yards passing, so that number isn't padded by a bunch of backup QBs that through a couple passes. That is from the list of qualified (14 passes per game average).

There are two more that are over 59%, and only Alex Smith is below 56%.

Contrast that with Hall of Famer Troy Aikmen, who was under 60% 6 of his 12 seasons. Only twice was he over 65%, but this season we have 13 QBs at 64.9% or higher.

How about Marino? Only 5 times in his 17 seasons was Marino over 60%, and never cracked 65% (64.1% and 64.2% were his two highest seasons). So, based purely on judging 'current' stats against those from another era, Joe Kitna, Garcia, Garrrard, Pennington, Breese, etc. are all 'greater' starters or have 'beat' a QB like Dan Marino or Troy Aikmen.

The inflated QB stats don't stop with completion percentage. There are 10 QBs averaging over 250 yards a game (4000 yards over 16 games). Only 8, yes 8, of Marino's 17 years did he average over 250 yards a game. The NFL all time leader in passing yards averaged over 250 yards a game less than half of his seasons, yet this year we have 10 QBs averaging over 250 yards a game.

Another interesting stat. There are 12 QB's averaging over 7.5 yards per attempt. Again, comparing that to the 'great' Marino, only 6, yes 6, of his 17 years did he average over 7.5 yards per attempt. Only twice did he have a YPA over 7.6, but this year we have 7 QBs that are at 7.7 or higher, including some dominant names like: Garrard, Kitna and Schaub, with Cutler, Anderson and Garcia at 7.6, which equals Marino's best in all but two of his seasons, and is better than Marino did in 13 of his 17 seasons.

Conclusion? You cannot compare QB stats from a rookie season 24 years ago, to today. For whatever reason, we are experiencing a 'juiced ball' type era, when it comes to QB stats. It doesn't end with completion percentage, YPA and yards per game, there are 11 QBs with passer ratings over 90. A slew of QBs with TD:INT ratings approaching or way over 2:1. It goes on and on.

QBs like Garcia, Kitna, Schaub, and many others (not to mention the Palmer's, Brady's, Manning's and Romo's) are having years that approach the greatest years of our greatest Hall of Fame QBs.

So, while I am a huge Cutler fan, and think he will likely be one of the 'great' ones in time, comparisons like the Cutler to Elway stat comparisons can be very deceptive, because QB stats are inflated like no other time in NFL history.

Lonestar
11-21-2007, 02:39 PM
good post :salute: to you.

speaking of which?

Tned
11-21-2007, 03:12 PM
speaking of which?

Good question, why ask me?

Medford Bronco
11-21-2007, 03:27 PM
Tned

I also think the NFL has evloved so much since the early 1980s
when Elway came up

the Qbs with a completion % over 60 is different because the league is a copycat league. Back then there was no West Coast Offense (except in SF with Bill Walsh) and teams now throw to set up the run.

back in the day the running set up the pass, especially in the NFC.
Its a whole new league now and I think that is part of the better stats etc

Also the wideouts, you so much sneeze on them its a flag. Remember the Colts vs pats game a few weeks back, the pats got screws on 2 very marginal calls that the colts wrs were barely touched.

Just my take

TXBRONC
11-21-2007, 08:48 PM
That was a terrific article Tned.

omac
11-21-2007, 08:53 PM
Nice posts, tnedator! :salute:

On the why's, I pretty much agree with Medford Bronco that the innovations in offenses, as well as the changes in the rules to favor offense over defense, has helped make quarterbacks much more efficient and effective.

Another thing to add; professional players usually do get better with every generation. The bar is set higher, and they become better skilled, as well as better athletes. In basketball, compare the ball handling skills of a typical point guard from the 80s to today and the difference is big; compare the athleticism of the shooting guards and small forwards of the 80s to today and the difference is astronomical, as is easily seen in the frequency with which they play above the rim. A flashy dunk in the 80s is a very average dunk today. Does any forward even lay-up nowadays, when he's close enough to dunk it all the time?

That leads me to believe that the receivers now are better athletes, faster in general, bigger, and their ball catching skills are at a higher level too. The skills education they learn while playing college football is at a pretty high level; a bunch of colleges run pro-style offenses, and a lot of college innovations are being implemented in some form in the pros. With some of these complex offenses, receivers learn a lot even before going pro. In general, the receivers are better.

It stands to reason that quarterbacks in general are also much better today than in the 80s, for most of the same reasons as with the receivers.

A lot of that has to do with the greater popularity of the sport, the greater population pool to choose from, as well as a ton of great high school and college football programs to better develop players. College coaches get paid big money, so a lot of the best brains coach college; I'd assume some high school coaches get paid pretty well too.

The only really big advantage I see with the players from the 80s and previous is that they're used to a whole lot more contact, so in general, they're probably a much tougher group.

So aside from the innovations on offense, and changes in rules to favor offense over defense, the receivers and quarterbacks in general are better too.