Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by shamegame13, Aug 25, 2015.
There go your ample panties getting filled again.
It's a continuation of his argument. Notice he said "then."
He's complaining this is becoming a QB league. The pay, the news about Hoyer, the coddling.
Well I think most people are afraid of saying why, but we all know why.....
I already pointed out the "then." Regardless, his argument is not that QBS should get hit more because they're paid more. He was ranting about the QB position all around. They get paid too much, they get special treatment. The two weren't linked, by Bennett, other than both being qualities of mediocre QBs.
If I remember right, Balt started rushing 4 and dropping 7 and still managed to get an ungodly amount of pressure from the front 4.
They took away all the short underneath stuff and the OL couldn't provide the protection to go deep.
Players are worth what teams are willing to pay them. A mediocre QB can still get you to the playoffs. A mediocre DE doesn't. It's that simple. The QB is responsible for how many impact plays? A DE gets 20 sacks in a season and it's great. Your just not that important Bennett.
Ah yes, it's all becoming clearer. I remember raging in gameday threads over this stuff.
When wasn't it a QB league? The 1950s?
Amazing that I agree with you but you are spot on in this case.
QB play is very mediocre and while it is a vitally important position, players who are poor to middling at the position are getting way too much money for not producing. And, if RT does not produce some strong playoff contenders, it will have been a gamble gone wrong. I think the gamble was worth it at this juncture (and they can get out of the deal in a couple of years if he does poorly) but at this point we are just hoping he continues to progress.
Actually the league was built on running the football, good defense and field postion up until around 8-10 years ago. Then they realized touchdowns and passing excited the common fan more and tailored the game to ensure that would happen. The league has transitioned into a passing league, thats why you cant even hand check a WR after 5 yards. Why do you think 4k yards passing has went from "holy shnit" to "nice year"....the rules favor QBs and that is pretty obvious.
This was the top thing 10 years ago.
I guess Bennett should be complaining about the iPod too.
Hell most of the rookies were pre-teens 10 years ago.
(Insert CiF joke)
You could basically break this down into eras of change. There were major changes in the 50s. Then major changes in the late 70s. Then you have 2004-present, which has seen a multitude of rule changes.
I'm not sure you can really point to a definitive point in time, but rather an ascension to the current state of the NFL.
Actually the league had it's biggest moves to a passing league in the late 70's. Before then there really wasn't pass interference. You can look up the stats from most of the games from the time before P.I. and see things like Griese going 7 for 9 in completions in a game and that was the norm across the league. Never much more than 14 passes from a QB a game and that was a lot. That's also why you really cannot compare QB's from different eras, You have to start from the time before PI in one group, Qb's from PI until around 2004 and the last group what we have now. That's why many of us say that Marino would feast on defenses with these rules. And why a guy from the past that never gets talked about impresses the crap out of me when you look at his numbers, Fran Tarkenton. To put up the numbers he did against that style of play is crazy.
I agree but even as far back as the 1970s the QBs were the golden boys of the team.
The Tom Brady cry baby era
I think your time frame is just a bit off there. It's true that the basics of the NFL are founded on a good running game and defense but this has been a passing game since the creation of the AFL. Rules have evolved and stats have increased over the years to favor the QB to WR relationship but make no mistake, this goes back to the end of the 50's/beginning of the 60's. not 8-10 years ago.
Since 2007, here's the QBs who have hit 4k (some multiple times):
Of those, only a few are not considered to be top 10 QBs: Jon Kitna, Jay Cutler, Matt Schaub, Josh Freeman, Andy Dalton, Ryan Tannehill (maybe Matt Ryan, depending on who you're arguing with). Point? That while getting 4k may be more attainable than it was prior to 2007, it's still generally only the top eschelon of QBs that are getting it. Realistically, when Kitna got it that year, he played lights out. Even Freeman looked awesome that year. So, while it may be a different league, this idea that average QBs are tossing it for 4k doesn't really hold all that much water. Bear in mind, I didn't list guys multiple times for when they hit 4k, so right now, this list would look like 7 out of 22 guys were average...but, when looking at multiple 4k guys, like Brady, Brees, Favre, etc, it becomes even more apparent that average QBs aren't throwing it for 4k regularly.
IMO it doesn't have anything to do with Tom Brady or Peyton Manning. Has everything to do with making Fantasy Football more entertaining for the common fan.
Nothing you said contradicted what he wrote. He didn't say it went from holy schnit to meh. He said it went from holy s to "nice year." And it did. When 1/3 of your list is NOT top 10, that lends credence to the idea that 4k is nice, but not as great as it used to be.
Well, yes and no. Those numbers that year were atypical for Marino too. He only had one other season that was even remotely close (1986). For most of his career his numbers were right about where Lomax/Krieg/Montana were that year.
Kind of my point, Josh Freeman hit 4k yards, Job Kitna the same. Its not because they are great passers of the ball as much as it is because of the new rules/systems they were in.
We dont have that problem, our QB will throw 4k in his sleep so this isn't a Ryan thing as much as it is just a different era. Babe Ruth was hitting 50 hrs when 20 was considered elite....Now?? 20 will get you sent to the minors if you dont posses other tools.
How did I know it would be you that would say it was 1/3 of the list? I already addressed this. It's not 1/3 of the list, because I didn't list every season when each guy did it it. It might be 1/10 of the list.
Freeman and Kitna hit 4k playing lights out football, not because they were coddled or overpaid. The system may have helped, but the overwhelming majority of 4k passers are the dominant QBS in the game. The Mark Sanchez's of the world aren't throwing for 4k. It's pretty silly to devalue the 4k number.
That's farcical. NBA players with fully guaranteed deals can also be offered signing bonuses up to 15% of their deals. A lot of NFL players don't even get signing bonuses. The lower level players often don't get any guaranteed money at all outside an injury provision so they can at least claim some money in the even a non-guaranteed stint turns into a season ending injury. Pointing at Suh or some other monster deal is what allows players to get screwed. Most players fall under the bell curve of salary and the bell curve isn't that heavy on signing bonuses/guarantees.
Horrible point here. You're trying to tell me that the owner can renege on a deal to pay a player but still make hundreds of million dollars by buying cheaper replacements is analogous to a player decimating his earning potential by not playing in the NFL anymore? This scenario 100% favors the owners because they have all of the leverage. Sure, a player can quit, but his earning potential becomes next to nothing. Owners only ostensibly care about wins and losses because they drive revenue but due to revenue sharing, the worst teams still make baseline $200 million per season. If Suh retired tomorrow, sure we'd be out some talent, but do you think this would help any player?
Lol, seriously? If you feel you're being mistreated, you can reduce your salary by orders of magnitude and this somehow puts you on equal footing with owners who have no shortage of people willing to play in the NFL? Sure, a child who hates veggies doesn't have to eat broccoli, they can just go outside and eat dirt instead, or eat nothing at all. Do you see why with no other avenues to truly compete for a similar salary, players are totally screwed and are not on a two-way street?
Because it's ridiculous. If you're getting mistreated at Goldman Sachs, you don't quit and go to McDonald's, you go to J. P. Morgan. Since NFL teams have been operating a cartel, there is no competition to sign with. NFL players will use whatever they can to be treated equitably as their union has not made much of an effort to put formal mechanisms in place for their equitable treatment.
Lol. **** the team for a second. The same team that will uproot him and his family if they feel a trade is worth it or cut him if he doesn't perform how they want? Or, the same team that will see him performing consistently, but want to add another piece and ask him to take a pay cut because it's good for the team? That team? The team that cuts you with a form letter and checked boxes? The same team that comprises an organization that lies about head injuries and withholds health care for the people who made the teams rich once they retire? The team that will fine you for missing a meeting or not talking to reporters? The teams that keep players like Josh Gordon out of games due to fake injuries so he doesn't accrue enough games to hit free agency (not that it matters now)? Or the same teams that withheld $3 million from Trent Richardson for being 3 pounds overweight? In what other jobs do people sacrifice their right to fair compensation because it would hurt the bottom line of their billionaire boss? As for fans, I hate to say it, but we don't really pay players' salaries, TV deals do. Caps are usually tied to TV revenue. If you want to make the case that players owe you because you sit down on Sunday and watch TV in your house and gain enjoyment from watching them play, then go ahead. I hope you realize how ridiculous that would sound if it were your contention.
Nobody does this is any job. It's up to management to jettison underperformers. Coaches who lose games don't quit. They get fired. But, they have guaranteed contracts, usually with hefty buyout clauses anyway.
In a sport so susceptible to devastating and life altering injuries, with no fully guaranteed deals outside of some rookies, where players can be cut or traded with 0 notice or remorse, and owners find ways to withhold contractually agreed on funds for any and every reason, if this is what would make you sympathetic then you might need to reevaluate some things.
I actually loved Kitna and thought it was a shame he didn't get a chance to keep QB'ing the Bengals after he lead them to 8-8 in Palmers rookie season but he was pretty much a low end starter who often got the best backup QB in the league label similar to Matt Moore in that regard. Kitna did hit 4k in 06 and 07 but he threw at least 20 picks in both years, not exactly lights out football. In fairness those Detroit olines were Dolphins 13-14 level bad though, outside of Dominic Raiola at center.
When you have a list of people, you can't put them multiple times on the list, unless they're two different people with the same name. That's a list of QBs.
Why is it silly to devalue? It's been devalued. We're not devaluing it.
How many pre-2004 seasons are on there above 4k? Not a lot. There have been 130 individual 4k seasons. I counted ~47 seasons before 2004. So ~83 after. In just 11 years, the mount of 4k seasons increased by 200%. Since 2004, there have been 83 or so 4k seasons. Before that, just 47 (all rough numbers as I may have missed a couple).
How is this silly to devalue the 4k number?
Not devalued, simply easier to do than it used to be.
Perhaps I misinterpreted your point...the 4k mark was devalued by posters on here after this season, with people saying it was easy to do, or implying that average QBS are throwing for 4k. I happen to think, based on who is actually throwing for 4k, that it is still a big feat for a QB. Yes, more doing it since 2007, but it's still the top QBS doing it the majority of the time.
Of course. It used to be really really hard. Like one for every two years, since the NFL began. Since 2004, it's about 7-8 per year.
Is not silly, because each season has had around 10 throwing for 4k. So, regardless of whether it's the same guy, the raw number of guys throwing for 4k since 2007 is around 80 QBs. You can't toss out 6 seasons for Brady simply because it was still Brady.
You are ranking QBs. If you are now saying, Brady needs to be listed 6 times, well Tanny is not top 10 anymore, he's like top 80.
10 years ago was 2005. The Mel Blount, pass blocking, and double touching rules came about in 1978. If you don't give credence to those, did Joe Montana play up until 10 years ago? Dan Fouts? Warren Moon? Jim Kelly? Dan Marino? Fran Tarkenton? Joe Namath? Otto Graham? The NFL has always salivated at the prospect of a QB who could sling it. Until recently, the number of star QB's in the NFL was low so teams did what was necessary. Running and defense were what you did because you didn't have Marino or Fouts. Every time a team realized they had a gunslinger, they adjusted their offense. Otto Graham played until 1955 and has the same career passer rating as Andrew Luck and actually better than Marino. Coaches very early on realized the power of a star passer, they just didn't have one.
I'm not ranking QBs. I listed the names so you could see who actually hit 4k. How many QBS hit 4k in 2007? 2008? 2009? Etc. I'm not asking how many different QBs. It's the same top of the league QBS hitting 4k every season. Right now, Tannehill isn't the same as Brady, cause Brady did it like 6 times, and Tannehill only once. Maybe it's his only one, no one knows right now. It's still not something that average QBS are accomplishing with any amount of regularity.
You can and you should. It's statistics so you need to include the frequency of the occurrences to infer anything. Outliers exist and you include the frequency that these players have met the criterion in order to figure out if they really mess with the perceived trend. If the 1/3rd not considered top 10 only did it 1-2 times each and the rest have done it 5-6 times on average, then the 1/3rd of the list make up a much smaller percentage of the frequency data and are outliers that you can pretty much ignore. Their meeting of the criterion wouldn't be statistically significant to the trend.
There have been multiple rule changes that have had a hand in inflated numbers, and an overall change in philosophy. It's all relative. It's a passing league now, it certainly wasn't back in 1979.
You did rank them. You included which ones you consider top 10 and which you didn't. You are arguing it's only the top echelon who have gotten 4k but a significant chunk of the list are not.
Matt Stafford has 5k. That's how devalued the yard totals have become. Before the rule changes only Dan Marino has eclipsed it. Now Matt Staffford has done it. He with 83 qb rating
I'm not saying it's Ho hum. It's nice. Where it used to be great n
First of all, not my ranking. QBS conside red by must people to be top QBs. Secondly, NOT a significant chunk are not upper echelon. Are you purposefully trying to twist this? If 4 guys over a span of 8 years or up 4k yards one time, and ate not coated to QBs, vs every year there being 6-8 top level guys doing it, why are you putting as much weight on the three or fourban who are the exception? It doesn't matter that Brady did it multiple times, or Favre, or whoever. You just look year by year. ..and what you see are the guys who are considered to be the best are the guys consistently hithing 4k. Once in awhile you have a Kitna who hasaid an aberration of a year, where everu thing comes together, and they have a great year. But that is not the norm.
And I NEVER said that only the top echelon got 4k. I said that it is abnormal for a QB not considered a top QB to hit that number.
I think he is trying to say if you toss out the names there have been 80 4000 yd passing seasons. If you figure in the percentage of those that have done it more than once compared to the Josh Freemans on the list the story changes.
I don't know if devalued is the right word, but 4000 yds is the new 3000 yds, and 40 TDs is the new 30 TDs.
All of the rule changes have made it easier for QBs, especially 2004 rule changes and reaffirmation of old rules that had not been being enforced, particularly the 5 yard chuck rule, prior to 2004 that rule was not being enforced, which meant a CB could sit back, and chuck the WR at 15 or 20 yards, or just at the break, basically killing the route, that is probably the most significant change that led to what we're seeing since then.
It's a combination of all the changes, but that one in particular has helped the QBs.
Think about it this way - Ryan Tannehill needed 590 attempts and 392 completions just to barely eek out 4k yards. Dan Marino? 564 attempts 362 completions and 5,084 yards. You look at the sheer volume of attempts all the guys who broke 4k yards in 2014 and it's not hard to figure out it's become a league heavily predicated on the passing game.
The 4k yards are kind of a fluff piece for Tanny and nothing to write home about seeing as how many passes it took him to do it. I will give him credit for keeping his INT's down though.
Good point. Tanny sucks because he didn't best the single greatest season in QB history.