(07-24-2018, 06:45 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Biggest talk in the NFL today is the just released QB tier ratings by ESPN, The list is compiled by 10 general managers, five head coaches, 10 coordinators, 10 senior personnel executives, five QB coaches and 10 others with job titles ranging from assistant coach to salary-cap manager to analytics director.

Our boy Andy comes in at #22, but hey; that's 10 spots higher than the QB we parted ways with.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/91gkze/espns_2018_nfl_qb_tiers_rankings/

Tier 1:

T1. Aaron Rodgers
T1. Tom Brady
3. Drew Brees
4. Ben Roethlisberger

Tier 2:

5. Matt Ryan
6. Russell Wilson
7. Matthew Stafford
8. Philip Rivers
9. Carson Wentz
10. Andrew Luck
11. Cam Newton
12. Derek Carr
13. Jimmy Garoppolo
14. Deshaun Watson

Tier 3:

T15. Kirk Cousins
T15. Alex Smith
T17. Eli Manning
T17. Dak Prescott
19. Jared Goff
20. Jameis Winston
21. Marcus Mariota
22. Andy Dalton
T23. Joe Flacco
T23. Case Keenum
25. Tyrod Taylor
26. Blake Bortles
27. Ryan Tannehill
28. Sam Bradford

Tier 4:

29. Mitchell Trubisky
30. Josh McCown
31. Patrick Mahomes
32. AJ McCarron

something I just noticed about this list....
 Lamar Jackson isn't on it....

I understand you can't give him points for a career he hasn't yet started but....
his potential is so high...
 if I was starting a franchise today, i'd pick him as my QB over EVERY QB on this board....

(07-25-2018, 07:44 PM)Steve Wrote: something I just noticed about this list....
 Lamar Jackson isn't on it....

I understand you can't give him points for a career he hasn't yet started but....
his potential is so high...
 if I was starting a franchise today, i'd pick him as my QB over EVERY QB on this board....

No rookie QB is. 

(07-25-2018, 07:32 PM)YsCascadia Wrote: Your opinion is duly noted and is just as valid as my list is.

Let me ask you though, would you take winning 1 or 2 SBs with a QB that has Manning stats or would you rather have Marino or Rivers' stats and no SB?

Now Manning didn't just win 2 SBs due to defense and "breaks", he did it against the NE Patriots led by Belicheck and Brady who have only lost 3 of the 8 SBs they have been in.  I would also argue that his 1st SB win was even more spectacular since they as a WC team went on the road to beat the NFC and then the 18-0 NE Patriots that you know wanted that perfect season more than anything.

I have never seen any other QB do that.  Let alone any on this list.

He's overrated.  He's on everyone's WORST QBS TO WIN A SB list, just like Marino is on everyone's BEST QBS NOT TO WIN A SB list.

You can have mediocre QBS win SBs because of the teams around them, I know I don't need to make a list, but Dilfer, Johnson, Flacco, and Namath come from the top of my head.

Marino never won a SB because he just didn't have the team around him.

(07-25-2018, 07:24 PM)YsCascadia Wrote: The point is that my list is just as valid as the one posted.  Your opinion is just as valid as mine so no real argument.

WTS.

Yes I am biased toward veterans.  They have ACTUALLY did something.  You want to look at the future fine, but I am not sold until Wentz, Carr, Mariota and the rest have done more.  Especially Jimmy G, Watson and Mahomes.  You can't say Mahomes is better than McCown when he has thrown a meaningful pass in the NFL.  For all we know Mahomes could throw 20 INTs to 10 TDs his entire career. 

On paper and potential won't amount to anything until it is actually witnessed in games.  Not just college games either.  As many great college players have had mediocre pro careers.  Some are bad systems, others are bad players.

I guess the way I see ranking the QB's is if someone said to me "Nate, you are making a football team and you have one year to win it all...which QB would you pick to lead your team?"  In my mind I'd take Pat Mahommes or Jimmy Garoppolo over Josh McCown.

I assumed people rank QBs is to talk about the upcoming season and try to figure out who will be better than so and so.  If you are an NFL GM who'd legitimately trade a QB like Mahommes/Waston/Garoppolo for McCown then our lists are going to look very different, yes.  Nothing against McCown, but I'll take a promising rookie or 2nd year guy over a guy who hasn't made the playoffs in his entire 15 year career.

I also don't really get the whole "it's just opinion, so it's all correct" argument. It can be your opinion that the Browns are going to win the SB, but that doesn't make it as valid as opinions that are based somewhat in reality.

Here is how each of these 2 finished each year among all the other QBs.

Manning          Rivers

2006 - 20          3
2007 - 18         15
2008 - 6           10
2009 - 7            3
2010 -13           9
2011 -10           9
2012 - 9           26
2013 - 27          2
2014 - 14         10
2015 - 16         18
2016 - 27         14
2017 - 22         11

What does logic tell you if a QB is finishing like Rivers has and has never won a SB?  He doesn't have either/or/and, the horses on both sides of the ball, good drafting, or solid coaching.

(07-25-2018, 08:34 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: Here is how each of these 2 finished each year among all the other QBs.

Manning          Rivers

2006 - 20          3
2007 - 18         15
2008 - 6           10
2009 - 7            3
2010 -13           9
2011 -10           9
2012 - 9           26
2013 - 27          2
2014 - 14         10
2015 - 16         18
2016 - 27         14
2017 - 22         11

What does logic tell you if a QB is finishing like Rivers has and has never won a SB?  He doesn't have either/or/and, the horses on both sides of the ball, good drafting, or solid coaching.

Eli certainly knew which franchise to avoid. 

(07-25-2018, 07:41 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I suppose if anybody considers the singular opinion of YsCacadia to be on par with that of a average of 10 general managers, five head coaches, 10 coordinators, 10 senior personnel executives, five QB coaches and 10 others with job titles ranging from assistant coach to salary-cap manager to analytics director; then you have a point.


Outside of that your list has less validity. 

It has just as much validity as your opinion on my opinion.  Just like the list of QB rankings of these people that you list.  I mean any GM that would put a guy that has never played a single game of football ahead of a guy that has played and even came close to winning a playoff game doesn't sound like a guy that knows what he is talking about.

Hell anyone that would put a guy with 7 starts ahead of a 2 time SB winner should be looked at as someone that doesn't know what he is talking about.

I mean if we are going by hype then why not list the young QBs much higher?  Why not put Watson ahead of Brady?  I mean he COULD be better and has the talent to win 5 SBs, but odds are he won't win 1.  He may have a good but so did Carson Palmer.

(07-25-2018, 07:58 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: He's overrated.  He's on everyone's WORST QBS TO WIN A SB list, just like Marino is on everyone's BEST QBS NOT TO WIN A SB list.

You can have mediocre QBS win SBs because of the teams around them, I know I don't need to make a list, but Dilfer, Johnson, Flacco, and Namath come from the top of my head.

Marino never won a SB because he just didn't have the team around him.

Yet people are quick to say that he took his team to the SB....  Can't have it both ways.  Can't give him credit for taking his team to the SB then claiming he "didn't have a team around him to win one".

Hate Dilfer, Johnson, Flacco and Namath all you want but the fans of those teams would rather have those "mediocre" QBs and win the SB than Marino and have the claim of the "Best QB to never win".

Just like Dalton, when he wins, it is because of the talent around him.  He loses and it is because of his play alone.

It isn't outside the realm of possibility that those guys did what was required to get the job done, which is to win the SB.  Sometimes you don't have to be spectacular you just have to know what is needed and to do it.

Eli didn't just do it once though, he did it twice.  If not for him Brady would have 7 wins.  Thanks to another QB that would be disrespected by you, Foles, Brady would have 8. 

(07-25-2018, 08:04 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I guess the way I see ranking the QB's is if someone said to me "Nate, you are making a football team and you have one year to win it all...which QB would you pick to lead your team?"  In my mind I'd take Pat Mahommes or Jimmy Garoppolo over Josh McCown.

I assumed people rank QBs is to talk about the upcoming season and try to figure out who will be better than so and so.  If you are an NFL GM who'd legitimately trade a QB like Mahommes/Waston/Garoppolo for McCown then our lists are going to look very different, yes.  Nothing against McCown, but I'll take a promising rookie or 2nd year guy over a guy who hasn't made the playoffs in his entire 15 year career.

I also don't really get the whole "it's just opinion, so it's all correct" argument.  It can be your opinion that the Browns are going to win the SB, but that doesn't make it as valid as opinions that are based somewhat in reality.

Then take your rookie that is MORE likely to fail in that 1 year then a proven vet that you know what his limitations are and build to cover those limits up.

I wouldn't touch hyped up 1st round QBs (Ponder, Locker, Russell, RGIII, Tebow, Quinn, Leif, ect... ect...) or the Patriots Back Up (Cassell, Mallett, Huard, Hoyer) just because of what they possibly could do in the one year that we have.  Now if I were building a team for the future then that is where I would consider these guys. 

Win now means you have all the pieces, which means you want someone that you know can succeed in the league.  Since football is a team sport, let us look at why McCown never made the playoffs.  Maybe it was the system he was in, maybe injuries, maybe other players not doing enough.  I doubt his reason for not making the playoffs is solely because he can't.  I mean Keenum and Foles made the NFCCG last year and the year before that was with Fisher and on the Rams and went, 1-15, I think, so the HC and system is a HUGE factor to a players success, more so than having "promise".

The reason that the opinion is valid is because I can't really argue that Watson is garbage if he hasn't had a chance to really play.  In the limited time he did play he did some nice things, but so did RGIII and now he is considered a bust.

(07-25-2018, 10:12 PM)YsCascadia Wrote: Yet people are quick to say that he took his team to the SB....  Can't have it both ways.  Can't give him credit for taking his team to the SB then claiming he "didn't have a team around him to win a SB"

Just like Dalton, when he wins, it is because of the talent around him.  He loses and it is because of his play alone.

This is plain ignorant.  Making these statements generically! ?

If a QB takes a team to a SB and doesn't win, it's the QB's fault??

LOL (Matt Ryan responding to generic ignorance)

Wait .... it's been 7 years now of ad nauseam Dalton criticism, and I stated I wouldn't get baited into anymore foolishness!

(07-25-2018, 10:55 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Wasn’t arguing Wilson shouldn’t be there. Quite the contrary. Was pointing out he had an awful Oline last year and still won 9 games. So you can’t put it ALL on a bad line wrt Dalton last couple years. He also needs to play better.

Ok.  Again, what is the excuse for Manning, Stafford, and Luck?  They seem to have that crutch for their play but it doesn't seem to be allowed for Dalton, who plays in a tougher division than any of them as well.  I agree that Dalton needs to play better, but I just see a huge disparity in the allowance for poor line play.  

(07-26-2018, 06:49 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Ok.  Again, what is the excuse for Manning, Stafford, and Luck?  They seem to have that crutch for their play but it doesn't seem to be allowed for Dalton, who plays in a tougher division than any of them as well.  I agree that Dalton needs to play better, but I just see a huge disparity in the allowance for poor line play.  

Dalton is the Rodney Dangerfield of the NFL.

(07-26-2018, 06:49 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Ok.  Again, what is the excuse for Manning, Stafford, and Luck?  They seem to have that crutch for their play but it doesn't seem to be allowed for Dalton, who plays in a tougher division than any of them as well.  I agree that Dalton needs to play better, but I just see a huge disparity in the allowance for poor line play.  

Not sure I agree the AFC North is tougher at this point. You have Jacksonville in the AFC South, Vikes in the NFC North, and the SB champs in the NFC East. If anything I’d say our division is the weakest of the 3 atm because of Cleveland.

(07-25-2018, 06:38 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: There's another QB who benefited from a stellar defense.

Part of what makes Pig Pen as successful as he is, is his elusiveness, partly do to his size.

Partly due to his good attorney and some fat payoffs....

(07-26-2018, 07:04 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: Not sure I agree the AFC North is tougher at this point. You have Jacksonville in the AFC South, Vikes in the NFC North, and the SB champs in the NFC East. If anything I’d say our division is the weakest of the 3 atm because of Cleveland.

Luck didn't play against the Jags last year at all.  And they weren't a playoff team two years ago.  The Vikings are definitely getting there, but have not been the consistent team that pitt and Baltimore have been during those guys tenure.  The NFC East had the Eagles climb in to the playoff race and go all the way to win the big game.  Manning had a dreadful year when facing their improved defense.  See where I am going?  Dalton has, year in and year out, faced very tough pitt and Baltimore teams.  Two really good defenses, every year of his career.  Yes, Jax and Vikes are on the climb...and we will see how they (Luck, Stafford) fare against them.  But Jax was so bad for much of Luck's career they were almost like a bye week.

(07-26-2018, 07:13 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Luck didn't play against the Jags last year at all.  And they weren't a playoff team two years ago.  The Vikings are definitely getting there, but have not been the consistent team that pitt and Baltimore have been during those guys tenure.  The NFC East had the Eagles climb in to the playoff race and go all the way to win the big game.  Manning had a dreadful year when facing their improved defense.  See where I am going?  Dalton has, year in and year out, faced very tough pitt and Baltimore teams.  Two really good defenses, every year of his career.  Yes, Jax and Vikes are on the climb...and we will see how they (Luck, Stafford) fare against them.  But Jax was so bad for much of Luck's career they were almost like a bye week.

And he’s been mostly owned by one of them so far. So I’m not sure why that should help his ranking. If he had a decent record against the elite teams like Pitt that would be a different story. He does usually play the Ravens tough (except that 1st game last season oof...), but they’re much less consistent than the Steelers in recent years. And you can’t get a bigger “bye week” game than the Browns since Hue took over. Dalton is probably better than a few of those guys ahead of him, but I don’t really question where they have that much. He still has a lot to prove, and after 7 seasons that itself says a lot.

(07-26-2018, 08:56 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: And he’s been mostly owned by one of them so far. So I’m not sure why that should help his ranking. If he had a decent record against the elite teams like Pitt that would be a different story. He does usually play the Ravens tough (except that 1st game last season oof...), but they’re much less consistent than the Steelers in recent years. And you can’t get a bigger “bye week” game than the Browns since Hue took over. Dalton is probably better than a few of those guys ahead of him, but I don’t really question where they have that much. He still has a lot to prove, and after 7 seasons that itself says a lot.

I get what you are saying, but when you look at what he did with a decent offensive line (not great), and some weapons at WR (not exactly the stable at the Falcons or steelers), and a solid OC (I still like Hue) he(Dalton) at year 5 was in the discussion for league MVP.  

Luck, Stafford, and Manning have all been in the league longer and have had ample time as well.  Only Manning won a couple Super Bowls, but since has taken such a decline he was benched in favor of (GULP!) Geno Smith?

I think Dalton will show he belongs in the top 10 after this season, but most of the pundits will give credit to the arsenal around him, or the defense.  

None of it bothers me, but I am amazed at the lack of respect he gets Nationally.  It is almost like when someone says the Bengals are all criminals....Have they been on a desert island since 2005?

(07-26-2018, 08:56 AM)Nicomo Cosca Wrote: ... (1) but they’re much less consistent than the Steelers in recent years.  (2) Dalton is probably better than a few of those guys ahead of him, but I don’t really question where they have that much. He still has a lot to prove, and after 7 seasons that itself says a lot.

(1)  Steelers should be in the AFC championship game EVERY year, barring any major season ending injury.

The reason they aren't is because they have an average coach who lets the prima donnas rule the roost.

Not to mention they can't beat the Pats. (Both of Pig's SBs were won because they didn't have to face the Pats)

(2)  Has a lot to prove to who?  YOU???      He is eternally secure, has a great wife and son, and is financially set for life. I don't think Nicomo Cosca is anywhere on his radar!!

(07-26-2018, 09:51 AM)bengalguy71 Wrote: (1)  Steelers should be in the AFC championship game EVERY year, barring any major season ending injury.

The reason they aren't is because they have an average coach who lets the prima donnas rule the roost.

Not to mention they can't beat the Pats. (Both of Pig's SBs were won because they didn't have to face the Pats)

(2)  Has a lot to prove to who?  YOU???      He is eternally secure, has a great wife and son, and is financially set for life. I don't think Nicomo Cosca is anywhere on his radar!!

Umm...his peers? GMs around the league? Everyone else who voted on these rankings?

(07-25-2018, 10:29 PM)YsCascadia Wrote: The reason that the opinion is valid is because I can't really argue that Watson is garbage if he hasn't had a chance to really play.  In the limited time he did play he did some nice things, but so did RGIII and now he is considered a bust.

All I'm saying is that you have a list where you place Josh McCown, a QB that you say shouldn't even be in the NFL ranked in the same tier or above 10 QBs that franchises are building around.  This is just an informal list on a football message board so it's ok to make some actual predictions.  I just don't get the point of waiting until 2021 to rank the 2018 QBs since we have no idea about anyone who hasn't been in the league for less than 4 years.

Should we be making a ranking of the QBs from 2013 instead?