I want to believe this but....
-
Again, 5000 yards means fukall. Ben also led the league in interceptions. Bulk yardage stats are misleading.
And what does the system have to do with these ratings? No correlation that I see....
Hmm....that was the same argument that Vagitroll made about Landry...that he was just a "volume" pass catcher, and naturally, his conclusion was that Landry was not very good....and that you can get 20 Landrys in any given draft. Of course that is a horeshit argument, and I also believe that it is somewhat horseshit when it comes to BR.
And I don't know about these particular ratings....but I do know that a particular system can help a QB with certain kinds of number. Take the QB passer rating system. For a long while the guys that were the career leaders in that statistic were all seemingly "West Coast" QBs. Sure, you had Joe Montana and Steve Young up there....but you also had the likes of Jeff Garcia and Trent Green among the career leaders. That has dissapated somewhat.....but the fact is, of the Top 40 QBs in history.....one single QB played his career at any point prior to 1979....which was just after the big rule change regarding contact with receivers. (fyi...that one had the intitials of O.G).
Hmm....that was the same argument that Vagitroll made about Landry...that he was just a "volume" pass catcher, and naturally, his conclusion was that Landry was not very good....and that you can get 20 Landrys in any given draft. Of course that is a horeshit argument, and I also believe that it is somewhat horseshit when it comes to BR.
And I don't know about these particular ratings....but I do know that a particular system can help a QB with certain kinds of number. Take the QB passer rating system. For a long while the guys that were the career leaders in that statistic were all seemingly "West Coast" QBs. Sure, you had Joe Montana and Steve Young up there....but you also had the likes of Jeff Garcia and Trent Green among the career leaders. That has dissapated somewhat.....but the fact is, of the Top 40 QBs in history.....one single QB played his career at any point prior to 1979....which was just after the big rule change regarding contact with receivers. (fyi...that one had the intitials of O.G).
So Greg Little could have been a “volume” guy. If he could have caught the ball.
Running routes crisply and having great hands. Yep..... “dime a dozen” as one would say.
-
...still a ways to go. Baker ranked ahead of Ben makes me chuckle though.
I focus on the "tiers", the groupings not the 1-40 order.
Only Tier1 I'd argue against is Mahommes due to it being one year and the fall off in the playoffs. With the loss of weapons in KC it's hard for me to see him repeating.
Tier 2??? Wentz... still waiting for him to make it thru a season and into the playoffs.
Tier 3? Weirdly small and a weird mix, e.g., Trubs in same group as Watson and Prescott???
Tiers 4 thru whatever... laughable mish mash.
-
I would certainly not put Ryan ahead of BR.
And Wentz is way to high based on his abilities, including availability
I would put Newton at about 10, not 19 and certainly above the likes of Goff, Wentz, Stafford, Garropolo, Prescott, Trubisky.
And Foles at 24? Huh. no. About 12-14 at minimum....certainly over guys who have done nothing like Winston/Mariota, Darnold, Cousins, Prescott. etc.
While Eli has fallen, I would still put him at about 20...over some of the never haves.
And I certainly am not ready to put Mahomes at #1 over Rodgers/Brady/Brees/Wilson and maybe a few others. Maybe in a couple of years. (but I am hoping that it is Baker, not he that proves to be the better QB)
I would certainly not put Ryan ahead of BR.
And Wentz is way to high based on his abilities, including availability
I would put Newton at about 10, not 19 and certainly above the likes of Goff, Wentz, Stafford, Garropolo, Prescott, Trubisky.
And Foles at 24? Huh. no. About 12-14 at minimum....certainly over guys who have done nothing like Winston/Mariota, Darnold, Cousins, Prescott. etc.
While Eli has fallen, I would still put him at about 20...over some of the never haves.
And I certainly am not ready to put Mahomes at #1 over Rodgers/Brady/Brees/Wilson and maybe a few others. Maybe in a couple of years. (but I am hoping that it is Baker, not he that proves to be the better QB)
Where would you have Baker? You didn't mention him in that.
Not that it will happen, nor that it looks like that, but we have seen QBs do really good things in 1st year and then fall off. Nothing I have seen would tell me that, but there is history. Even though he is a different QB than some of them.
Certainly not just you Gip, wherever you have him ranked, but people want to point out flaws for others and not use them for their guy. Again that doesn't mean you, and not just about Baker.
-
I would certainly not put Ryan ahead of BR.
And Wentz is way to high based on his abilities, including availability
I would put Newton at about 10, not 19 and certainly above the likes of Goff, Wentz, Stafford, Garropolo, Prescott, Trubisky.
And Foles at 24? Huh. no. About 12-14 at minimum....certainly over guys who have done nothing like Winston/Mariota, Darnold, Cousins, Prescott. etc.
While Eli has fallen, I would still put him at about 20...over some of the never haves.
And I certainly am not ready to put Mahomes at #1 over Rodgers/Brady/Brees/Wilson and maybe a few others. Maybe in a couple of years. (but I am hoping that it is Baker, not he that proves to be the better QB)
Where would you have Baker? You didn't mention him in that.
Not that it will happen, nor that it looks like that, but we have seen QBs do really good things in 1st year and then fall off. Nothing I have seen would tell me that, but there is history. Even though he is a different QB than some of them.
Certainly not just you Gip, wherever you have him ranked, but people want to point out flaws for others and not use them for their guy. Again that doesn't mean you, and not just about Baker.
Where would you have Baker? You didn't mention him in that.
I didn't bother, didn't realize I was obligated to. My honest answer is: I don't know.
Not that it will happen, nor that it looks like that, but we have seen QBs do really good things in 1st year and then fall off. Nothing I have seen would tell me that, but there is history. Even though he is a different QB than some of them.
There is history for the opposite as well. See above my post about BK....led the team to the best record in the AFC...and to the AFC title game (and almost Super Bowl)...in his second year.
Certainly not just you Gip, wherever you have him ranked, but people want to point out flaws for others and not use them for their guy. Again that doesn't mean you, and not just about Baker.
You go ahead an point out what you think would be Baker's flaws, and I will determine if I agree with them.
-
Where would you have Baker? You didn't mention him in that.
I didn't bother, didn't realize I was obligated to. My honest answer is: I don't know.
Not that it will happen, nor that it looks like that, but we have seen QBs do really good things in 1st year and then fall off. Nothing I have seen would tell me that, but there is history. Even though he is a different QB than some of them.
There is history for the opposite as well. See above my post about BK....led the team to the best record in the AFC...and to the AFC title game (and almost Super Bowl)...in his second year.
Certainly not just you Gip, wherever you have him ranked, but people want to point out flaws for others and not use them for their guy. Again that doesn't mean you, and not just about Baker.
You go ahead an point out what you think would be Baker's flaws, and I will determine if I agree with them.
Well one, I never said anything about his flaws, but if you think he is perfect then go ahead. I don't care if you agree with them, I certainly know my knowledge, and it's also not a peeing contest.
And if you think that asking where you would rank him was somehow wrong, then I can't help you. Nobody said you were obligated to. But it is funny you don't know where you would rank him, yet have no issue with ranking others.
And of course there are cases both ways, nobody ever said different.
-
Well one, I never said anything about his flaws, but if you think he is perfect then go ahead. I don't care if you agree with them, I certainly know my knowledge, and it's also not a peeing contest.
And if you think that asking where you would rank him was somehow wrong, then I can't help you. Nobody said you were obligated to. But it is funny you don't know where you would rank him, yet have no issue with ranking others.
And of course there are cases both ways, nobody ever said different.
Well one, I never said anything about his flaws, but if you think he is perfect then go ahead. I don't care if you agree with them, I certainly know my knowledge, and it's also not a peeing contest.
And if you think that asking where you would rank him was somehow wrong, then I can't help you. Nobody said you were obligated to. But it is funny you don't know where you would rank him, yet have no issue with ranking others.
And of course there are cases both ways, nobody ever said different.
My answer would also have to be- "we don't know". He repeats what he did in his rookie year- he's top 10. Has the sophomore slump- and its Blake Bortles territory.
-
Well one, I never said anything about his flaws, but if you think he is perfect then go ahead. I don't care if you agree with them, I certainly know my knowledge, and it's also not a peeing contest.
And if you think that asking where you would rank him was somehow wrong, then I can't help you. Nobody said you were obligated to. But it is funny you don't know where you would rank him, yet have no issue with ranking others.
And of course there are cases both ways, nobody ever said different.
My answer would also have to be- "we don't know". He repeats what he did in his rookie year- he's top 10. Has the sophomore slump- and its Blake Bortles territory.
My answer would also have to be- "we don't know". He repeats what he did in his rookie year- he's top 10. Has the sophomore slump- and its Blake Bortles territory.
I get that, I'm not saying anyone has to have a spot for him. I don't know where I would put him. That was just a question, no right or wrong answer.
It was really just about saying so and so hasn't done anything, so they would be lower than so and so.
-
Well one, I never said anything about his flaws, but if you think he is perfect then go ahead. I don't care if you agree with them, I certainly know my knowledge, and it's also not a peeing contest.
And if you think that asking where you would rank him was somehow wrong, then I can't help you. Nobody said you were obligated to. But it is funny you don't know where you would rank him, yet have no issue with ranking others.
And of course there are cases both ways, nobody ever said different.
Well one, I never said anything about his flaws, but if you think he is perfect then go ahead. I don't care if you agree with them, I certainly know my knowledge, and it's also not a peeing contest.
And if you think that asking where you would rank him was somehow wrong, then I can't help you. Nobody said you were obligated to. But it is funny you don't know where you would rank him, yet have no issue with ranking others.
And of course there are cases both ways, nobody ever said different.
I never said that you said anything about his flaws....though you did ask others what his flaws are. And I never said he was perfect....I just said that it is not my responsibility to point out his flaws. Why would you want to make it MY responsibility...if you are unable to take on that task yourself.
And I don't think that you asking me where I would rank him is wrong.... its just, again, not my duty to do that.
But, if you fell that is is absolutely my duty to do so....whether or not I believe what I say...just to satisfy your craving for my opinion, I will say: OK, just put him where the article puts him. Why not?
And no, I didn't really rank others much...I just stated whether I thought they were properly ranked.
-
Well one, I never said anything about his flaws, but if you think he is perfect then go ahead. I don't care if you agree with them, I certainly know my knowledge, and it's also not a peeing contest.
And if you think that asking where you would rank him was somehow wrong, then I can't help you. Nobody said you were obligated to. But it is funny you don't know where you would rank him, yet have no issue with ranking others.
And of course there are cases both ways, nobody ever said different.
I never said that you said anything about his flaws....though you did ask others what his flaws are. And I never said he was perfect....I just said that it is not my responsibility to point out his flaws. Why would you want to make it MY responsibility...if you are unable to take on that task yourself.
And I don't think that you asking me where I would rank him is wrong.... its just, again, not my duty to do that.
But, if you fell that is is absolutely my duty to do so....whether or not I believe what I say...just to satisfy your craving for my opinion, I will say: OK, just put him where the article puts him. Why not?
And no, I didn't really rank others much...I just stated whether I thought they were properly ranked.
I never said that you said anything about his flaws....though you did ask others what his flaws are. And I never said he was perfect....I just said that it is not my responsibility to point out his flaws. Why would you want to make it MY responsibility...if you are unable to take on that task yourself.
And I don't think that you asking me where I would rank him is wrong.... its just, again, not my duty to do that.
But, if you fell that is is absolutely my duty to do so....whether or not I believe what I say...just to satisfy your craving for my opinion, I will say: OK, just put him where the article puts him. Why not?
And no, I didn't really rank others much...I just stated whether I thought they were properly ranked.
It was just the smugness it seemed to have when saying you weren't obligated.
You kinda did rank some of them: Cam, Foles, Eli and said so and so would be behind them.
And if you can't see how people, not just this forum, not just Browns fans, not just football fans, etc tend to ignore the flaws when it is something they like, have, etc then I don't know what to tell you. I'm not even saying it is wrong to do so. Beauty/worth is in the eye of the beholder. A perfect example that you have even referenced is the Steeler guy and how he changed up on Brown.
-
I never said that you said anything about his flaws....though you did ask others what his flaws are. And I never said he was perfect....I just said that it is not my responsibility to point out his flaws. Why would you want to make it MY responsibility...if you are unable to take on that task yourself.
And I don't think that you asking me where I would rank him is wrong.... its just, again, not my duty to do that.
But, if you fell that is is absolutely my duty to do so....whether or not I believe what I say...just to satisfy your craving for my opinion, I will say: OK, just put him where the article puts him. Why not?
And no, I didn't really rank others much...I just stated whether I thought they were properly ranked.
It was just the smugness it seemed to have when saying you weren't obligated.
You kinda did rank some of them: Cam, Foles, Eli and said so and so would be behind them.
And if you can't see how people, not just this forum, not just Browns fans, not just football fans, etc tend to ignore the flaws when it is something they like, have, etc then I don't know what to tell you. I'm not even saying it is wrong to do so. Beauty/worth is in the eye of the beholder. A perfect example that you have even referenced is the Steeler guy and how he changed up on Brown.
It was just the smugness it seemed to have when saying you weren't obligated.
It wasn't smugness. It was a mere statement of fact. I am not obligated to give an opinion if I choose not to....nor if I do not have one. In this case it was more the latter than the former. We all really have not had enough opportunity to judge how good of a QB Baker will be. We think we know, but we don't really know.
You kinda did rank some of them: Cam, Foles, Eli and said so and so would be behind them.
I did...because we have had a lot more opportunity to judge those longer term, veteran QBs.
And if you can't see how people, not just this forum, not just Browns fans, not just football fans, etc tend to ignore the flaws when it is something they like, have, etc then I don't know what to tell you.
If you don't know what to tell me, then say nothing about it. I am not saying I don't see that....I just think it is a natural tendency of people to ignore the flaws or people they are rooting for. Not sure, again, that it is necessary for me to point that out just to satisfy your curiosity about what I think. You just are going to have to accept the fact that sometimes I don't have a definitive opinion on something. I am not trying to be smug or churlish about it. I just sometimes don't have the answers...or even the thoughts about a particular situation
I'm not even saying it is wrong to do so. Beauty/worth is in the eye of the beholder. A perfect example that you have even referenced is the Steeler guy and how he changed up on Brown.
-
It was just the smugness it seemed to have when saying you weren't obligated.
It wasn't smugness. It was a mere statement of fact. I am not obligated to give an opinion if I choose not to....nor if I do not have one. In this case it was more the latter than the former. We all really have not had enough opportunity to judge how good of a QB Baker will be. We think we know, but we don't really know.
You kinda did rank some of them: Cam, Foles, Eli and said so and so would be behind them.
I did...because we have had a lot more opportunity to judge those longer term, veteran QBs.
And if you can't see how people, not just this forum, not just Browns fans, not just football fans, etc tend to ignore the flaws when it is something they like, have, etc then I don't know what to tell you.
If you don't know what to tell me, then say nothing about it. I am not saying I don't see that....I just think it is a natural tendency of people to ignore the flaws or people they are rooting for. Not sure, again, that it is necessary for me to point that out just to satisfy your curiosity about what I think. You just are going to have to accept the fact that sometimes I don't have a definitive opinion on something. I am not trying to be smug or churlish about it. I just sometimes don't have the answers...or even the thoughts about a particular situation
I'm not even saying it is wrong to do so. Beauty/worth is in the eye of the beholder. A perfect example that you have even referenced is the Steeler guy and how he changed up on Brown.
I don't know how to respond to certain spots like that, so I am just going to reference it.
As for smugness, that may not have been your intention, but it was how it came off. When a question is asked, when the response is "I didn't know I was obligated..." it comes off a certain way.
I said that about ranking them because you said you didn't. So you actually went from "I didn't really rank others much" to yeah I did, but here's why. Those are 2 different things.
And I obviously said that I don't even see anything wrong with having that bias, its certainly understandable. Most things that would be deemed flaws would occur in comparison, thus really can be argued and opinion. The point was that people sometimes wont point out those flaws. Everyone has flaws, its just I have so many less than everyone else lol jk
-
I don't know how to respond to certain spots like that, so I am just going to reference it.
As for smugness, that may not have been your intention, but it was how it came off. When a question is asked, when the response is "I didn't know I was obligated..." it comes off a certain way.
I said that about ranking them because you said you didn't. So you actually went from "I didn't really rank others much" to yeah I did, but here's why. Those are 2 different things.
And I obviously said that I don't even see anything wrong with having that bias, its certainly understandable. Most things that would be deemed flaws would occur in comparison, thus really can be argued and opinion. The point was that people sometimes wont point out those flaws. Everyone has flaws, its just I have so many less than everyone else lol jk
I don't know how to respond to certain spots like that, so I am just going to reference it.
As for smugness, that may not have been your intention, but it was how it came off. When a question is asked, when the response is "I didn't know I was obligated..." it comes off a certain way.
I said that about ranking them because you said you didn't. So you actually went from "I didn't really rank others much" to yeah I did, but here's why. Those are 2 different things.
And I obviously said that I don't even see anything wrong with having that bias, its certainly understandable. Most things that would be deemed flaws would occur in comparison, thus really can be argued and opinion. The point was that people sometimes wont point out those flaws. Everyone has flaws, its just I have so many less than everyone else lol jk
It is also not my obligation to figure out how you were going to react to anything I say so what do you think something is smug when it isn’t that’s on you pal.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login