6.5 yards...

[SmilinAssasSin27]

...is the average distance traveled in the air for every completed pass in the NFL last year. This according to NFLNetwork.

If the average is so short, is it possible that the actual importance of the QB position is a bit overrated? If you have a QB who makes very few mistakes and has weapons who can create big plays, does that stat prove those are more important than the physical specimen gun slinger?

[MOtorboat]

No.

[Northman]

Short passes might be the average but watching Foles with the bombs last year were difference makers.

[Hawgdriver]

This isn't to disprove Assassin, because I agree with his conclusion that arm strength is rated above anticipation and awareness too often. But it's a pretty simple formula. The greater the arm strength, the closer a defender needs to be to a receiver in order to negate a receiver's separation. A stronger arm forces schematic compensation. Same with deep ball accuracy. These schematic changes relieve pressure closer to the LOS. It's why Seattle wasn't concerned about Manning in SB 48.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

This isn't to disprove Assassin, because I agree with his conclusion that arm strength is rated above anticipation and awareness too often. But it's a pretty simple formula. The greater the arm strength, the closer a defender needs to be to a receiver in order to negate a receiver's separation. A stronger arm forces schematic compensation. Same with deep ball accuracy. These schematic changes relieve pressure closer to the LOS. It's why Seattle wasn't concerned about Manning in SB 48.

I'm not stating i believe this to be true...simply trying to begin a discussion that is a bit outside of the current norm.

I like to ask questions and see what everyone thinks.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

No.

Show your work

[slim]

I agree that arm strength is overrated. Same for 40 times and most every other measurable

[MOtorboat]

Show your work

The importance of the quarterback is not overrated, even slightly.

I still think size, arm strength and pocket mobility (essentially having a specimen) are important characteristics of a good quarterback, but doesn't necessarily mean that person can be a good quarterback. There's only a finite number of people in this world who can be a top quarterback, five to 10 people at any given time.

[SmilinAssasSin27]

The importance of the quarterback is not overrated, even slightly.

I still think size, arm strength and pocket mobility (essentially having a specimen) are important characteristics of a good quarterback, but doesn't necessarily mean that person can be a good quarterback. There's only a finite number of people in this world who can be a top quarterback, five to 10 people at any given time.

Gold star

[Hawgdriver]

I think MO's inclusion of pocket mobility is perhaps the most important. Adding a couple seconds to a play and occasionally negating a pass rush while delivering from a mobile platform is incredibly difficult to negate from a defensive coordinator's point of view. This is the main reason why I think the Keenum signing is kosher.

[slim]

The importance of the quarterback is not overrated, even slightly.

I still think size, arm strength and pocket mobility (essentially having a specimen) are important characteristics of a good quarterback, but doesn't necessarily mean that person can be a good quarterback. There's only a finite number of people in this world who can be a top quarterback, five to 10 people at any given time.

I think he was mainly talking about arm strength, which is overrated when considering QB play. Mannings arm strength was medicore, for example.

[slim]

:drinking:

[topscribe]

I think he was mainly talking about arm strength, which is overrated when considering QB play. Mannings arm strength was medicore, for example.
So was that of Joe Montana and Kurt Warner. And Tom Brady's arm isn't as strong as some think.
Moreover, none of those guys had superior mobility. What is underrated, I think, is what exists
between the ears . . .

[slim]

So was that of Joe Montana and Kurt Warner. And Tom Brady's arm isn't as strong as some think.
Moreover, none of those guys had superior mobility. What is underrated, I think, is what exists
between the ears . . .

Not just in football, but in life :drinking:

Of course, this makes it hard to explain Big Ben.

[Hawgdriver]

So was that of Joe Montana and Kurt Warner. And Tom Brady's arm isn't as strong as some think.
Moreover, none of those guys had superior mobility. What is underrated, I think, is what exists
between the ears . . .

whoa...Montana and Warner had great mobility homes.

[topscribe]

whoa...Montana and Warner had great mobility homes.
Great mobility was Fran Tarkenton, Russell Wilson. Our own Paxton Lynch has great mobility.
John Elway had great mobility. Montana's and Warner's mobility was limited. They just knew
how to maneuver in the pocket. Which was just as effective for the most part, at least in their
respective cases. Fortunately, we have an incoming QB who knows how to maneuver and
even run on occasion.

[Hawgdriver]

Great mobility was Fran Tarkenton, Russell Wilson. Our own Paxton Lynch has great mobility.
John Elway had great mobility. Montana's and Warner's mobility was limited. They just knew
how to maneuver in the pocket. Which is just as effective for the most part. Fortunately, we
have an incoming QB who knows how to maneuver and even run on occasion.

Old Montana, sure. Wait, you are older than me. Montana was a scrambling QB. As they age they retain the pocket awareness, if not the explosiveness. I'm not sure you are on point here, top.

[topscribe]

Old Montana, sure. Wait, you are older than me. Montana was a scrambling QB. As they age they retain the pocket awareness, if not the explosiveness. I'm not sure you are on point here, top.
Okay, young Montana had good mobility. But not Tarkenton, Wilson, Elway mobility.
I just don't use "great" that loosely. :)

[BroncoJoe]

Marino was judged to be a top mobile QB on an NFL show of top 10's. At first I was like WTF, but kind of understood it once they explained.

I still don't agree with their assessment, but understand it.

[Hawgdriver]

Okay, young Montana had good mobility. But not Tarkenton, Wilson, Elway mobility.
I just don't use "great" that loosely. :)

Montana was incredible when he was young. His rushing stats compare with them.

[topscribe]

Montana was incredible when he was young. His rushing stats compare with them.
Yes, but their offensive lines didn't compare with his. But I surely wouldn't turn a young
or old Montana away. He is one of the G.O.A.T. :)

But I'll tell you, nobody, but nobody could scramble with Tarkenton. And there's another:
Archie Manning. When it comes to mobility, those guys defined greatness.

[Hawgdriver]

My point is that Montana and Warner had that scrambling/elusive athletic component that made them difficult to stop. It doesn't have to be Vick/Kaepernick in your face 70 yard gain athleticism, but they evaded the rush with rare canniness better than nearly all of them.

[topscribe]

My point is that Montana and Warner had that scrambling/elusive athletic component that made them difficult to stop. It doesn't have to be Vick/Kaepernick in your face 70 yard gain athleticism, but they evaded the rush with rare canniness better than nearly all of them.
That's what I said. :)

Not to pound the table (well, I am, I guess), but if you have seen any of last year's Vikings
games, Keenum has that kind of elusiveness. It's going to be exciting . . .

[Hawgdriver]

That's what I said. :)

Not to pound the table (well, I am, I guess), but if you have seen any of last year's Vikings
games, Keenum has that kind of elusiveness. It's going to be exciting . . .

Keenum has it too.

[topscribe]

Keenum has it too.
I think you posted this before you saw me add that as an afterthought . . .

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

I think MO's inclusion of pocket mobility is perhaps the most important. Adding a couple seconds to a play and occasionally negating a pass rush while delivering from a mobile platform is incredibly difficult to negate from a defensive coordinator's point of view. This is the main reason why I think the Keenum signing is kosher.

Dan Marino was possibly the slowest man on the field at any given time. Yet his ability within the pocket was amazing

[topscribe]

Dan Marino was possibly the slowest man on the field at any given time. Yet his ability within the pocket was amazing
He had one of the quickest releases, if not THE quickest, I have ever seen . . .

[Poet]

Not just in football, but in life :drinking:

Of course, this makes it hard to explain Big Ben.

Exceptions to rules.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Great mobility was Fran Tarkenton, Russell Wilson. Our own Paxton Lynch has great mobility.
John Elway had great mobility. Montana's and Warner's mobility was limited. They just knew
how to maneuver in the pocket. Which was just as effective for the most part, at least in their
respective cases. Fortunately, we have an incoming QB who knows how to maneuver and
even run on occasion.

I wouldn’t say Paxton has great mobility. He’s fast for a big guy, but not quick. He’s no Russel Wilson, in fact I’d say he’s slightly more mobile than Brockweiler.

[Poet]

Arm strength is a nice bonus, and you want to have enough to be able to make all of the throws. But, the real benefit IMO is when you have a very strong arm and can make some great long throws under duress, make tough throws in bad weather, and can lead your fast WR down the field and not make him stop. That also requires accuracy and timing, but strength of arm is part of that equation.

Intellect is massively underrated.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

He had one of the quickest releases, if not THE quickest, I have ever seen . . .

Agreed-

Have you noticed how much Rivers release looks like Marino? I’ve thought that for years. I then heard a couple of years ago that his favorite qb growing up was Marino. Fascinating..

[Hawgdriver]

Him and Manning.

[topscribe]

Agreed-

Have you noticed how much Rivers release looks like Marino? I’ve thought that for years. I then heard a couple of years ago that his favorite qb growing up was Marino. Fascinating..
And Rivers became a very good QB. He's probably, what, about 90% of Marino?
He can't negotiate the pocket like Marino could though, IMO.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

And Rivers became a very good QB. He's probably, what, about 90% of Marino?
He can't negotiate the pocket like Marino could though, IMO.

He didn’t have Marino’s arm talent either

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

And Rivers became a very good QB. He's probably, what, about 90% of Marino?
He can't negotiate the pocket like Marino could though, IMO.

He doesn’t have Marino’s arm talent either

[topscribe]

He doesn’t have Marino’s arm talent either
I heard you the first time . . . :D

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

I heard you the first time . . . :D

Did I say that? I got up at 5:20 today and worked about 10 hours. The cognitive skills are a little faded right now.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Oh, ha ha, just saw the double post. This I will also attribute to mental fatigue

[Simple Jaded]

...is the average distance traveled in the air for every completed pass in the NFL last year. This according to NFLNetwork.

If the average is so short, is it possible that the actual importance of the QB position is a bit overrated? If you have a QB who makes very few mistakes and has weapons who can create big plays, does that stat prove those are more important than the physical specimen gun slinger?
If this were true they wouldn’t have to pay $18 M/per.

[Simple Jaded]

I think MO's inclusion of pocket mobility is perhaps the most important. Adding a couple seconds to a play and occasionally negating a pass rush while delivering from a mobile platform is incredibly difficult to negate from a defensive coordinator's point of view. This is the main reason why I think the Keenum signing is kosher.
Translation; when you’re 6 years into your career and still can’t get past your first/preferred receiver you better be able to buy time for your receivers to make it easier for you.

[TXBRONC]

Marino was judged to be a top mobile QB on an NFL show of top 10's. At first I was like WTF, but kind of understood it once they explained.

I still don't agree with their assessment, but understand it.

I remember that top 10, and remember that left Elway off the list.

[chazoe60]

Intelligence and accuracy are the two most important qualities in a QB by magnitudes of 100.

[topscribe]

Intelligence and accuracy are the two most important qualities in a QB by magnitudes of 100.
And field vision, footwork, and performance under pressure.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Translation; when you’re 6 years into your career and still can’t get past your first/preferred receiver you better be able to buy time for your receivers to make it easier for you.

If he doesn’t run backwards under pressures and turn the ball over 2-3 times a game, sign me up.

[Simple Jaded]

Arm strength is not overrated when you got a popgun like CK, Chad Pennington and Kyle Boreton.

I love it, when Kubiak was running this offense with NFL arm talent it was the worst thing ever, but if you run it subpar QB talent it’s practically virtuous. All measurables become overrated.

Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!

[Poet]

If he doesn’t run backwards under pressures and turn the ball over 2-3 times a game, sign me up.

Why do you want to be signed up for average play at best.

You know what some of you mofos would love? Andy Dalton. That's what!

IT'S TRASH! YOU DON'T WANT THAT!

[topscribe]

If he doesn’t run backwards under pressures and turn the ball over 2-3 times a game, sign me up.
Well, since Keenum had the #1 QBR in the league under pressure, he will apparently satisfy you there.
And his 7 INTs averaged out to one every 2 games. So you have that. And he just refused to fumble.
Which is a big reason he led the Vikings to a 12-4 record in all the games he started last year. Consider
yourself signed up . . .

[Poet]

Don't do it, Al. His 3,500 yards and 22 TDs aren't big time numbers, and QBR favors game managing QBs. He also played on one of the best rosters on the team, and was a game manager. Don't do it, Al. Don't settle. You're a beautiful woman and you deserve a man who will really make you happy.

[topscribe]

Don't do it, Al. His 3,500 yards and 22 TDs aren't big time numbers, and QBR favors game managing QBs. He also played on one of the best rosters on the team, and was a game manager. Don't do it, Al. Don't settle. You're a beautiful woman and you deserve a man who will really make you happy.
You don't understand QBR. And it was not one of the best rosters in the offensive line.
That has already been established.

[Poet]

You don't understand QBR. And it was not one of the best rosters in the offensive line.
That has already been established.

Since we're playing the "you don't understand," game, if you don't think the Vikings have a loaded roster than you don't understand a lot yourself. You can do the research yourself, but you'll consistently find the Vikings ranked as having one of the best rosters in football. Goodness.

[topscribe]

Since we're playing the "you don't understand," game, if you don't think the Vikings have a loaded roster than you don't understand a lot yourself. You can do the research yourself, but you'll consistently find the Vikings ranked as having one of the best rosters in football. Goodness.
Keenum was the 3rd most pressured QB in the league on pass plays last year, having been
pressured on 39.5% of his throws. That does not smack of a "loaded" roster along the O-line.

And your comment that QBR "favors game managing QBs" shows you do not have an understanding
of quarterback rating. First of all, you must differentiate QBR from passer rating (PR).

The QBR rates a quarterback’s performance by difficulty. So he gets more credit in more difficult
situations and not as much in less difficult ones. So it credits the QB for the more difficult, clutch
throws as opposed to, say, easier swing and screen passes. Also, many non-passing measures are
considered.


According to the PR, all passes are equal when calculating PR formula. So the relative difficulty
among the passes is not considered. It also focuses on passing only, excluding a QB’s running plays,
sack avoidance, and other performance factors that are not necessarily passing but just as important
for a QB.

Now, I mentioned that Keenum had the best QBR in the league under pressure. He had to, as much
as he was pressured, if they were going to win any games. Anyway, just as a yardstick, the #2 QB
was Tom Brady, hardly a "game manager" in the sense you apparently mean it (although the best
QBs are the best true game managers. That is what a QB does.)
.

[Poet]

I'm talking about the total team and you're trying to say "but the line wasn't load," that doesn't negate a loaded roster. Then I see you're trying to tell me what I do and don't know about QB rating. Also, the nod to Brady isn't a logical one - Brady is a big time QB and is asked to win games - just because one stud QB was ahead on a stat doesn't mean another QB, one below the stud, gets to lay claim to that.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Why do you want to be signed up for average play at best.

You know what some of you mofos would love? Andy Dalton. That's what!

IT'S TRASH! YOU DON'T WANT THAT!

Don’t put words into my mouth.

I will take average over embarrassing and awful.

Do I want a franchise guy in the near future? Absolutely!

Do I hope we land an elite prospect this year or next? Absolutely!

[Poet]

Don’t put words into my mouth.

I will take average over embarrassing and awful.

Do I want a franchise guy in the near future? Absolutely!

Do I hope we land an elite prospect this year or next? Absolutely!

For the love of god it's a joke.

This betrayal of yours will not go unpunished.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

For the love of god it's a joke.

This betrayal of yours will not go unpunished.

I just interwebz slapped you with a white glove.

Duel with pistols!


FWIW, I think my retort was worded in a way that may have been a little over the top, and not what I meant to convey.

[topscribe]

I'm talking about the total team and you're trying to say "but the line wasn't load," that doesn't negate a loaded roster. Then I see you're trying to tell me what I do and don't know about QB rating. Also, the nod to Brady isn't a logical one - Brady is a big time QB and is asked to win games - just because one stud QB was ahead on a stat doesn't mean another QB, one below the stud, gets to lay claim to that.
Keenum had the #1 QBR under pressure. Brady had the #2. Now, you can argue with those
facts if you want, but you are not going to change the facts by lauding Brady as G.O.A.T.

And the Vikings were "loaded" on defense. On offense, not so much, although still good at
WR and TE. But the line was found wanting, and the RBs were "average" after the injury
to Dalvin Cook. (His 4.8 Y/A fell to 3.9 after his injury, and the 3.9 was for the entire year,
so it was padded by his numbers.) So I maintain, backed by this documentation, that the
Vikings offense was not as "loaded" as popularly conceived, at least on this board.

[Poet]

I just interwebz slapped you with a white glove.

Duel with pistols!

Well, considering you spent all offseason arguing with me over TS, only to concede defeat later, you are a bit beneath me. I personally detest violence, so I'll just tell Talib that you're actually his ass.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Well, considering you spent all offseason arguing with me over TS, only to concede defeat later, you are a bit beneath me. I personally detest violence, so I'll just tell Talib that you're actually his ass.

I was wrong about TS. I gave up half way through the season and wanted Brock to finish the year. Unfortunately Brock was bad, which was a slight improvement over what we had in the first 8 games.

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

Well, considering you spent all offseason arguing with me over TS, only to concede defeat later, you are a bit beneath me. I personally detest violence, so I'll just tell Talib that you're actually his ass.
I think you missed my edit above. I’m sorry for choosing my words poorly.

[topscribe]

Well, considering you spent all offseason arguing with me over TS, only to concede defeat later, you are a bit beneath me. I personally detest violence, so I'll just tell Talib that you're actually his ass.
He should not have conceded defeat, IMO. Trevor was beaten to death, and his confidence
was crushed as a result. I have seen this happen to more than one young, inexperienced
QB over my 50+ years of football.

[Poet]

He should not have conceded defeat, IMO. Trevor was beaten to death, and his confidence
was crushed as a result. I have seen this happen to more than one young, inexperienced
QB over my 50+ years of football.

Your optimism is astound, Top.

[Poet]

I think you missed my edit above. I’m sorry for choosing my words poorly.

This is actually Jaded's fault.

[Poet]

Keenum had the #1 QBR under pressure. Brady had the #2. Now, you can argue with those
facts if you want, but you are not going to change the facts by lauding Brady as G.O.A.T.

And the Vikings were "loaded" on defense. On offense, not so much, although still good at
WR and TE. But the line was found wanting, and the RBs were "average" after the injury
to Dalvin Cook. (His 4.8 Y/A fell to 3.9 after his injury, and the 3.9 was for the entire year,
so it was padded by his numbers.) So I maintain, backed by this documentation, that the
Vikings offense was not as "loaded" as popularly conceived, at least on this board.

The Vikings had an average offensive line, a solid TE, and a WR Corp that is considered to be one of the best in the league. Their defense is brutal. I literally googled best NFL rosters and the Vikings were sitting in just about everyone's top five. I'm sorry if you think the talent around CK didn't impact him, but it very obviously did.

You can continue to compare CK to Brady (I'm sorry I misread and had Brady at one and CK at two) but I'm not disputing the fact. I'm disputing how much weight you put into it and act like it proves something. You wanna know why QBR is generally a worthless stat? I'll give you a hint -if you look atop the lists every year you're going to see some QB's who were very efficient while putting up monster numbers, some second tier (still very good QBs) on the list, and then you'll see guys with overall average production like Alex Smith and Dak Prescott on the lists. Most modern iterations have efficiency ratings built in, which favor QB's who are actually being asked to do less.

Every single season we see QB's hit high QBR's in various contexts while not actually being big time QB's. It's partially because of the era. It's partially because of how the stats are weighed.

[topscribe]

The Vikings had an average offensive line, a solid TE, and a WR Corp that is considered to be one of the best in the league. Their defense is brutal. I literally googled best NFL rosters and the Vikings were sitting in just about everyone's top five. I'm sorry if you think the talent around CK didn't impact him, but it very obviously did.

You can continue to compare CK to Brady (I'm sorry I misread and had Brady at one and CK at two) but I'm not disputing the fact. I'm disputing how much weight you put into it and act like it proves something. You wanna know why QBR is generally a worthless stat? I'll give you a hint -if you look atop the lists every year you're going to see some QB's who were very efficient while putting up monster numbers, some second tier (still very good QBs) on the list, and then you'll see guys with overall average production like Alex Smith and Dak Prescott on the lists. Most modern iterations have efficiency ratings built in, which favor QB's who are actually being asked to do less.

Every single season we see QB's hit high QBR's in various contexts while not actually being big time QB's. It's partially because of the era. It's partially because of how the stats are weighed.
You see, you say I am comparing Keenum to Brady, whereas I was just reporting the QBR.
I showed the FACTS concerning Keenum being the 3rd most pressured QB in the league.
You cannot argue that that is not on the offensive line.

You can argue against the facts until the cows come home, but you cannot alter the facts,
despite whatever hypothetical argument you present. Keenum was what he was last year,
and the numbers show he was among the best in the league. Despite your spin. :coffee:

[topscribe]

Your optimism is astound, Top.
It's not optimism. I'm not a fan of Trevor's any more than I am of Aaron Rodgers or Tom
Brady or Phillip Rivers, if you know what I mean. I just try to look below the surface and
look beyond the "whats" to discover the "why's." There is a reason for everything. I'm a
deep thinker, and that tends to cause differences with those who don't appear to think so
deeply.

[Poet]

Yeah, I'm the one who is spinning? It's okay, Top. We've seen this before - you dumped out every last argument you could for Orton, and then when he bombed it was because he was injured. Then, when he went to Dallas and was healthy and played due to Romo's injury, it didn't matter that he sucked. When Cutler was drafted you thought he was the bee's knees. Then, when TS started, you raved about him, even though he was bad for two years, you still think he can be good. You get emotional attachments to players and you're a homer. That's fine.

But when you cling to things like QBR rating, and the people (and you know it to) understand how those ratings work, we don't ignore the fact that guys with game manager productions have higher, or congruent, ratings with some of the absolute best in the league. And in general, when you have to pimp something as obscure as 'best under pressure,' while completing ignoring the great team around CK (imagine if that defense wasn't so great at stopping the other team, improving field position, and letting the Vikings run the ball to set up the QB play despite the run game's poor production) it's a bit of a joke.

[Poet]

It's not optimism. I'm not a fan of Trevor's any more than I am of Aaron Rodgers or Tom
Brady or Phillip Rivers, if you know what I mean. I just try to look below the surface and
look beyond the "whats" to discover the "why's." There is a reason for everything. I'm a
deep thinker, and that tends to cause differences with those who don't appear to think so
deeply.

You don't think deeper than anyone else and the implication that you do is astounding - last offseason I tore apart the numbers that 'supported' TS because they were being compared to QB's from the early 2000's when the rules were different. That's actually looking deeper. I'm going to put you on ignore now, because your ego is crazy, and you're unfortunately bordering on sophistry. I like you much as a person, but this is just sad to see. I wish you well.

[topscribe]

Yeah, I'm the one who is spinning? It's okay, Top. We've seen this before - you dumped out every last argument you could for Orton, and then when he bombed it was because he was injured. Then, when he went to Dallas and was healthy and played due to Romo's injury, it didn't matter that he sucked. When Cutler was drafted you thought he was the bee's knees. Then, when TS started, you raved about him, even though he was bad for two years, you still think he can be good. You get emotional attachments to players and you're a homer. That's fine.

But when you cling to things like QBR rating, and the people (and you know it to) understand how those ratings work, we don't ignore the fact that guys with game manager productions have higher, or congruent, ratings with some of the absolute best in the league. And in general, when you have to pimp something as obscure as 'best under pressure,' while completing ignoring the great team around CK (imagine if that defense wasn't so great at stopping the other team, improving field position, and letting the Vikings run the ball to set up the QB play despite the run game's poor production) it's a bit of a joke.
So now it's Orton. Who's next? Tebow? So you think you have an argument against Keenum
by bringing up Orton? I was always right concerning Orton, and I don't change my argument.
His worst fault was weak ankles. I already revealed his stellar production when healthy.

So let's get past your attempted distraction and get back to Keenum. And, yes, I cling to the
FACTS. That is exactly right. You cling to your uninformed imagination because you believe
what you want to believe. And then you absolutely misrepresent what I have said, and I
wonder whether that is intentional--after all, you're trying to become a lawyer. :lol:

So I present facts, and you present spin and hypotheses. And you still think you're right. And
then you come back and denigrate my stand on the facts. It won't work, King . . .

[Al Wilson 4 Mayor]

This is actually Jaded's fault.

Well, yeah...

[Poet]

Well, yeah...

He runs the show now.

[Shazam!]

Why in the name of hell would a fan of the Broncos condemn their new QB who hasnt even thrown the ball yet, i do not know. Its like games werent even watched last year.

[Poet]

Why in the name of hell would a fan of the Broncos condemn their new QB who hasnt even thrown the ball yet, i do not know. Its like games werent even watched last year.

The people who weren't or are not high on CK tended to be the ones who saw the (obvious) light regarding TS very early. Why would I celebrate a contract with a game manager QB, especially when this draft has several legitimate first round prospects?

[Shazam!]

I have a wonderful TS jersey from China 2X if anyone wants it. Its really nice.

[Poet]

I have a wonderful TS jersey from China 2X if anyone wants it. Its really nice.

Burn it.

[Simple Jaded]

Why in the name of hell would a fan of the Broncos condemn their new QB who hasnt even thrown the ball yet, i do not know. Its like games werent even watched last year.

I guess I’m not a fan, I can live with that.

:rolleyes:

We’ve seen him throw a football since high school.

It’s like CK games weren’t watched UNTIL last year.

[topscribe]

You don't think deeper than anyone else and the implication that you do is astounding - last offseason I tore apart the numbers that 'supported' TS because they were being compared to QB's from the early 2000's when the rules were different. That's actually looking deeper. I'm going to put you on ignore now, because your ego is crazy, and you're unfortunately bordering on sophistry. I like you much as a person, but this is just sad to see. I wish you well.
You should have stopped trying to take the pride. You're no match for the old lion . . . :coffee:

[Simple Jaded]

Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!

I remember getting into an argument over passer ratings back in the day, my point was they’re mostly stupid because of the way people present the passer ratings they tell us that LaDanian Tomlinson and David Garrard are better QB’s than PFM, Brett Farve and Tony Romo.

I’m just going to go ahead and assume that deep down inside everyone knows Case Keenum isn’t the best QB in the league under any circumstances, as his passer rating suggests.

[Poet]

Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!

I remember getting into an argument over passer ratings back in the day, my point was they’re mostly stupid because of the way people present the passer ratings they tell us that LaDanian Tomlinson and David Garrard are better QB’s than PFM, Brett Farve and Tony Romo.

I’m just going to go ahead and assume that deep down inside everyone knows Case Keenum isn’t the best QB in the league under any circumstances, as his passer rating suggests.

They have efficiency ratings in them that boost game managers. A 100 rating from a big game via Brady or Manning gets matched by someone whose a game manager, and it's absurd. To then take that absurd number, ignore that the types of WRs the Vikings have are going to excel in short yardage situations and go 'see how good he is in pressure' without that context is also absurd. We've gotten to the point where we just cherry pick stats and go "see, this guy is good," and ignore everything else.

Some people look at stats to answer a question, and others go in looking to justify something they WANT to be true.

[slim]

Orton and Siemian. Lol

[topscribe]

Rudy! Rudy! Rudy!

I remember getting into an argument over passer ratings back in the day, my point was they’re mostly stupid because of the way people present the passer ratings they tell us that LaDanian Tomlinson and David Garrard are better QB’s than PFM, Brett Farve and Tony Romo.

I’m just going to go ahead and assume that deep down inside everyone knows Case Keenum isn’t the best QB in the league under any circumstances, as his passer rating suggests.
If you're referring to me, I haven't said much about passer ratings. I talked about quarterback
ratings. May I refer you to Post #51 (http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php/607928-6-5-yards?p=2745026#post2745026) in this thread.

But I talked about much more than just that. The post I went to all the trouble to write (http://www.broncosforums.com/forums/showthread.php/607858-Why-Case-Keenum-May-Turn-Out-To-Be-The-Steal-Of-The-Century?p=2740869#post2740869) that
you said you didn't bother to read demonstrates that.

[Simple Jaded]

I’m sorry that you think passer ratings vs QB ratings makes a damn bit of difference.

They’re useful, not a Ranking.

[topscribe]

I’m sorry that you think passer ratings vs QB ratings makes a damn bit of difference.

They’re useful, not a Ranking.
You know, Jaded, I love you, man. But to debate with someone who doesn't even read what
I write or to acknowledge facts is a waste of time. Let's talk about something else from now on.

/Debate

[Simple Jaded]

6 pages and counting about how the offense that y’all love to hate is now, not only allowed, but celebrated.

When it’s necessary because of a proven Championship OC/HC the philosophy is dated and the game has passed him by ... but when you’re trying to justify the CK hype to yourself it becomes “I can not believe a Broncos fan would dare to doubt this great QB before he’s ever thrown a football”.

Coolbeans, I’m not a fan. Point taken.

[topscribe]

6 pages and counting about how the offense that y’all love to hate is now, not only allowed, but celebrated.

When it’s necessary because of a proven Championship OC/HC the philosophy is dated and the game has passed him by ... but when you’re trying to justify the CK hype to yourself it becomes “I can not believe a Broncos fan would dare to doubt this great QB before he’s ever thrown a football”.

Coolbeans, I’m not a fan. Point taken.
Speaking for myself, I never once proclaimed Keenum as a "great quarterback," and I never
made any predictions. All I did was to say, in effect, "hey, there's hope for this guy," and
produce some facts and figures and history to show why I felt that way.

It's okay to have doubts. I have a few of my own, believe it or not. Only performance on the
field can assuage those doubts. But I'm not ready to pronounce him a scrub until he proves
he's a scrub, and he hasn't proven it yet. Once he does, I'll say, "Yes, he's a scrub." Until then,
I'll present the optimistic side since nearly all the rest being presented here is negative.

There are some cons, but why should I point them out when you already have ad nauseam?
Meanwhile, I have taken a fusillade of shots for trying to be positive. That's okay. I'm a big boy.
I can take it. Besides, I'm pretty good at giving it back. :D

[Simple Jaded]

“Case Keenum is the Franchise QB Denver has been looking for”— Top

That’s a prediction.

[topscribe]

“Case Keenum is the Franchise QB Denver has been looking for”— Top

That’s a prediction.
Link please.

[topscribe]

“Case Keenum is the Franchise QB Denver has been looking for”— Top

That’s a prediction.


Link please.
I highly doubt that you will provide the link because you know you tore that out of context.
What I said was that IF Keenum continues the same kind of performance he put in last year,
then we have a franchise quarterback. So if you call that a prediction, it's a heavily qualified
one.

[Simple Jaded]

I highly doubt that you will provide the link because you know you tore that out of context.
What I said was that IF Keenum continues the same kind of performance he put in last year,
then we have a franchise quarterback. So if you call that a prediction, it's a heavily qualified
one.

Oh, I’m sorry but I don’t speak Spin.

[topscribe]

Oh, I’m sorry but I don’t speak Spin.
I think you did when you tore that out of context and made me say something I didn't say.
Quintessential spin.

[TXBRONC]

Oh, I’m sorry but I don’t speak Spin.

What Top said is conditioned based, he never said that Keenum is the franchise quarterback that Denver is looking for. His premise seems to be that if Keenum puts up numbers similar to last season then Denver has their franchise quarterback. I disagree with his premise because I don't think those are not kind of numbers for from a franchise quarterback.