(08-07-2021, 10:37 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Burrow right now is potential,  he was slightly behind  Dalton if you compare 1st years but he is expected to be better than Dalton. I think his 2nd year will be a strong indicator if his potential turns into real results of a franchise Type QB especially with quality of WR/RB we have.

1st year.

Dalton 58.1 comp%
Burrow 65.3 comp%

Dalton 212.4 ypg
Burrow 268.8 ypg

Dalton 3.9 TD%
Burrow 3.2 TD%

Dalton 2.5 INT%
Burrow 1.2 INT%

Dalton 6.6 YPA
Burrow 6.7 YPA

Dalton 80.4 rating
Burrow 89.8 rating

Who was slightly behind?

(08-07-2021, 11:00 PM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: No he wasn’t. He was on pace to put up better numbers in every statistical category. And that was with the easiest part of the schedule coming up. Burrow would have absolutely feasted against teams like Dallas, NY, and Houston.


- Burrow

65.3 cmp%
89.8 rating
1.2 Int %
56.2 QBR


- Dalton

58.1 cmp%
80.4 rating
2.5 Int %
49.5 QBR

1. Why are you using QBR? You're better than that.

2. Passing is drastically easier now than it was 10 years ago. Put simply, Dalton's 80.4 passer rating ranked 20th, while Burrow's 89.8 rating ranked 24th.

Completion percentages have also skyrocketed. Dalton's 58.1% ranked 22nd. Burrow's 65.3% ranked...also 22nd.

To truly judge their rookie seasons, you have to compare them to their peers at the time. Passing is just soooooo much easier now.

(08-08-2021, 12:34 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: 1st year.

Dalton 58.1 comp%
Burrow 65.3 comp%

Dalton 212.4 ypg
Burrow 268.8 ypg

Dalton 3.9 TD%
Burrow 3.2 TD%

Dalton 2.5 INT%
Burrow 1.2 INT%

Dalton 6.6 YPA
Burrow 6.7 YPA

Dalton 80.4 rating
Burrow 89.8 rating

Who was slightly behind?

Burrow is slightly behind. See my above post.

That doesn't mean I think Dalton was a better QB. Burrow has far more potential for greatness. But strictly looking at their rookie seasons, it's 100% accurate to say Dalton was slightly better compared to his peers...which is how comparisons across eras should be made.

(08-08-2021, 01:24 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Burrow is slightly behind. See my above post.

That doesn't mean I think Dalton was a better QB. Burrow has far more potential for greatness. But strictly looking at their rookie seasons, it's 100% accurate to say Dalton was slightly better compared to his peers.

*Sorry, i had a bunch of other stuff typed out, but i'm just not feeling the Burrow vs Dalton debate anymore. My following statement is the only original thing left of what i typed.


I'm not trying to argue with you. In this thread, i'm just saying that Burrow is a more talented QB and i don't get how anyone can debate that. A full season with a moderate amount of health will bear that out. 

(08-07-2021, 01:38 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: But i'm sure you see the distinction between Dalton's last year in college and Burrow's. Yes?

Sure.  Burrow's team had an all-time record 20 players taken in the NFL draft including 5 in the first round.  They had the best O-line in the country (Joe Moore Award).  The best college WR (Bilitnikoff Award winner) and another WR who won NFL Rookie of the Year.

Dalton's team had only 5 drafted players.  Zero in the first round, and Dalton was the only one selected higher than the 5th round.

(08-08-2021, 09:48 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sure.  Burrow's team had an all-time record 20 players taken in the NFL draft including 5 in the first round.  They had the best O-line in the country (Joe Moore Award).  The best college WR (Bilitnikoff Award winner) and another WR who won NFL Rookie of the Year.

Dalton's team had only 5 drafted players.  Zero in the first round, and Dalton was the only one selected higher than the 5th round.

Poor way compare considering Dalton played in the MWC and Burrow played in the SEC. Yes Burrow had NFL caliber players on his squad but he was going against NFL caliber talent from Alabama, Georgia, Auburn, Florida, Clemson.

(08-08-2021, 09:58 AM)Synric Wrote: Poor way compare considering Dalton played in the MWC and Burrow played in the SEC. Yes Burrow had NFL caliber players on his squad but he was going against NFL caliber talent from Alabama, Georgia, Auburn, Florida, Clemson.

Dalton was MVP of the Rose Bowl where TCU beat #4 Wisconsin.

(08-08-2021, 10:21 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Dalton was MVP of the Rose Bowl where TCU beat #4 Wisconsin.

Which is what got him to a top 2nd round pick but Dalton didn't have to face College Footballs top defenses like Burrow. 

Burrow versus Dalton doesn't matter. Burrow is here, Dalton is gone.

Zac Taylor is an anchor for a QB (Dalton's play dropped noticeably after Taylor arrived). After seeing Burrow in the NFL what kind of year do you think he would have had if he had the 2015 coaching staff? Just as a point of comparison or even the 2011 coaching staff.

The OL last year was anything but QB friendly. It wasn't RB friendly either. It just, well, sucked.

(08-08-2021, 10:21 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Dalton was MVP of the Rose Bowl where TCU beat #4 Wisconsin.

Wow. I wish Burrow could have been MVP of the Rose Bowl, instead of a record setting QB in the best conference in college football who was MVP of the National Championship game. 

(08-08-2021, 10:53 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Wow. I wish Burrow could have been MVP of the Rose Bowl, instead of a record setting QB in the best conference in college football who was MVP of the National Championship game. 

And I wish Burrow could win more than 3 games in a season as an NFL starter without a record-setting amount of talent around him.


Burrow has the potential to be a better NFL QB than Dalton. I don't disagree with that at all.  I just think it is funny to see so many fans here backpedalling like crazy on the old "Great QBs don't need talent around them because they make everyone else better" argument.

(08-08-2021, 09:48 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sure.  Burrow's team had an all-time record 20 players taken in the NFL draft including 5 in the first round.  They had the best O-line in the country (Joe Moore Award).  The best college WR (Bilitnikoff Award winner) and another WR who won NFL Rookie of the Year.

Dalton's team had only 5 drafted players.  Zero in the first round, and Dalton was the only one selected higher than the 5th round.

Jefferson was not OROY.

(08-08-2021, 10:30 AM)Synric Wrote: Which is what got him to a top 2nd round pick but Dalton didn't have to face College Footballs top defenses like Burrow. 

But if Dalton had had the same success with the same team around him the Andy Haters would be saying "He was only able to do that because he had the most talented offense in college history around him."

I am not trying to talk bad about Burrow.  I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of many people around here.  They trashed Dalton for having success with a lot of talent around him, but refuse to acknowledge that Burrow has never accomplished anything of note without one of the most talented teams ever around him.

(08-08-2021, 11:07 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Jefferson was not OROY.

Oh well, that changes everything doesn't it.  All he did was finish 4th in the league in receiving yards.

(08-08-2021, 11:16 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Oh well, that changes everything doesn't it.  All he did was finish 4th in the league in receiving yards.

It’s not about “changing” anything. I just corrected your mistake. You’re barking up the wrong tree if you think I’m downplaying how good Jefferson was. I thought he should have won.

The ghost of Daltons past strikes again.

(08-08-2021, 11:05 AM)fredtoast Wrote: And I wish Burrow could win more than 3 games in a season as an NFL starter without a record-setting amount of talent around him.


Burrow has the potential to be a better NFL QB than Dalton. I don't disagree with that at all.  I just think it is funny to see so many fans here backpedalling like crazy on the old "Great QBs don't need talent around them because they make everyone else better" argument.

I don't know about anyone else, but i've not backpedaled because i've never wavered from believing great QBs don't need as much talent around them because they can make others better. 

(08-08-2021, 12:15 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I don't know about anyone else, but i've not backpedaled because i've never wavered from believing great QBs don't need as much talent around them because they can make others better. 

This is what I have always believed as well.

With a great qb, weapons aren’t what’s most important. It’s the 5 guys up front, and the running game.

(08-07-2021, 04:14 PM)Frank Booth Wrote: Nate’s the only person who thinks the offensive line is good lol

C’mon Nate

Admit there’s some delusion there

I said they will be muchly improved and yeah, the OL could be good this year.

You say they are bad and say they are the same OL as last year. Pollack, Reiff, Carman, Spain, XSF, Jonah, Hopkins, D'Ante Smith,
Trey Hill is better than Turner, Hart, Redmond, Jordan. 

I say the starters are decent but the depth is bad. Who is deluded again?

(08-08-2021, 01:38 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: I said they will be muchly improved and yeah, the OL could be good this year.

You say they are bad and say they are the same OL as last year. Pollack, Reiff, Carman, Spain, XSF, Jonah, Hopkins, D'Ante Smith,
Trey Hill is better than Turner, Hart, Redmond, Jordan. 

I say the starters are decent but the depth is bad. Who is deluded again?

The depth is awful, and the starters aren’t good.

The line with spain and reiff is still a bottom 5-7 o-line

If thinking that makes me delusional, so be it.