I feel bad for Andy

[Brownshoe]

(12-27-2016, 11:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: At the risk of looking Super Silly it shows no such thing. It simply shows players perform differently in various systems. The league is littered with players that did not work out at spot A, that excelled at spot B. We cut James Devlin in 2012; he has been the Pats Fullback ever since, wouldn't that mean we have a LOT better weapons. Yes, I really should let go of MY bias. 

Lol LaFell was working well in the Patriots system. He got cut because they had better receivers. If he was better than what they have then they would have kept him. If LaFell wasn't working out for them then you would have a point, but unfortunately he had about 1k yards and a decent amount of TDs for them as a #3 WR the year he was healthy. Now he's our best receiver. Anyone with common sense would be able to figure out from just that fact that they have better weapons than us. But keep doing what you're doing and ignore the obvious.

[*bfine32*]

(12-27-2016, 11:29 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Lol LaFell was working well in the Patriots system. He got cut because they had better receivers. If he was better than what they have then they would have kept him. If LaFell wasn't working out for them then you would have a point, but unfortunately he had about 1k yards and a decent amount of TDs for them as a #3 WR the year he was healthy. Now he's our best receiver. Anyone with common sense would be able to figure out from just that fact that they have better weapons than us. But keep doing what you're doing and ignore the obvious.

"LOL" where did I say LaFell was not working out well in NE? I said players often perform differently in different systems. The likes of Hogan and Edelman work out better than LaFell in the NE system, if they went to a different system, they may not. 

Quick question for you, being as you are such a non-biased, good judge of talent. Would you trade AJ Green, Brandon Lafell, and Tyler Eifert for Edelman, Hogan, and Gronk? 

[Brownshoe]

(12-27-2016, 11:42 PM)bfine32 Wrote: "LOL" where did I say LaFell was not working out well in NE? I said players often perform differently in different systems. The likes of Hogan and Edelman work out better than LaFell in the NE system, if they went to a different system, they may not. 

Quick question for you, being as you are such a non-biased, good judge of talent. Would you trade AJ Green, Brandon Lafell, and Tyler Eifert for Edelman, Hogan, and Gronk? 

You implied he didn't work out for NE. If it wasn't implied then what you said was completely irrelevant to the conversation. I was just assuming that you were trying to be relevant to the conversation we were having.

I would trade our OL, RBs, WRs, and TEs for NEs any day of the week. The only one of those positions we have better is one receiver. Their receiving core as a whole is better than ours. Just because we have Green doesn't mean that our receivers trump theirs. Edelman is arguably one of the best slot receivers in the league. Gronk and Bennett are easily the best TE duos in the league. Their RBs are better than ours and their OL is a lot better than ours. Just keep pretending their not though. Lol

[*bfine32*]

(12-27-2016, 11:53 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: You implied he didn't work out for NE. If it wasn't implied then what you said was completely irrelevant to the conversation. I was just assuming that you were trying to be relevant to the conversation we were having.

I would trade our OL, RBs, WRs, and TEs for NEs any day of the week. The only one of those positions we have better is one receiver. Their receiving core as a whole is better than ours. Just because we have Green doesn't mean that our receivers trump theirs. Edelman is arguably one of the best slot receivers in the league. Gronk and Bennett are easily the best TE duos in the league. Their RBs are better than ours and their OL is a lot better than ours. Just keep pretending their not though. Lol

Is there perhaps one other position you are leaving out?

I see you didn't answer the question posed? Would you trade AJ, LaFell, and Eifert for Edelman, Hogan, and Gronk.

Either answer the question posed or not; however, don't keep changing it. 

[Brownshoe]

(12-28-2016, 12:58 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Is there perhaps one other position you are leaving out?

I see you didn't answer the question posed? Would you trade AJ, LaFell, and Eifert for Edelman, Hogan, and Gronk.

Either answer the question posed or not; however, don't keep changing it. 

Edelman, Hogan, and Gronk aren't their only weapons. But AJ, LaFell, and Eifert are pretty much our only weapons. So that question is almost irrelevant to the conversation. The conversion is about who has better weapons and it's clearly NE.

[*Wyche'sWarrior*]

Who would you rather have.....Andy with NE and Belichick/Kraft....or Brady with Cin and Marv/Mike Clown?

[fredtoast]

(12-27-2016, 09:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I didn't introduce the criteria of clearly, someone else did.

No.. You were the first one to bring it up.

(12-26-2016, 12:21 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What is funny is that Andy is finishing his 6th year as an NFL QB and his passer rating in seasons he has completed is:
20th
13th
15th
25th
15th (Currently)

and folks suggest he has been anything other than mid-tier.

[Hoofhearted]

(12-27-2016, 11:02 AM)fredtoast Wrote: First of all, I am not upset.  I am just telling you that you are wrong.  

Second, it is not just semantics.  You claim Stafford and Luck are clearly better than Dalton and that just is not true.

Average yearly rank among qualifying QBs
Dalton......15.2
Stafford....16.0
Luck.........18.2

Career passer rating
Dalton......88.9
Luck.........87.3
Stafford....86.7

I don't think anyone here is saying that dalton is elite.  But you are ranking him behind other QBs who are not as good.

Your claim that someone has to "blindly give Dalton the benefit of the doubt" to assume he would rank in the top 10 in passer rating if he had played the entire '15 season shows how silly your analysis is.

How do you figure that Luck and Stafford are "not as good"? He may not be clearly better than them, but I would not say he's better either. 

[fredtoast]

(12-28-2016, 11:46 AM)Hoofhearted Wrote: How do you figure that Luck and Stafford are "not as good"? He may not be clearly better than them, but I would not say he's better either. 

Actually I agree.  I was just criticizing Bfine for claiming that these two guys were clearly better than Dalton when based on his own criteria they were not as good.

[*bfine32*]

(12-28-2016, 11:23 AM)fredtoast Wrote: No.. You were the first one to bring it up.

The 2 posts you quoted have zero to do with each other. You asked to list QBs clearly better than Andy in post 44. Not sure what that has to do with my posting numbers to show Andy consistantly finishes mid-tier in passer rating. I did see that you used Luck's and Stafford's career ratings to dispute the claim (actually you used it as proof to call someone wrong, but we've all grown to understand that's just a Fred thing)


STILL waiting on your list of 20-24 QBs that are clearly worse than Andy. I've done all I can to be of assistance.

[fredtoast]

(12-28-2016, 04:50 PM)bfine32 Wrote: STILL waiting on your list of 20-24 QBs that are clearly worse than Andy. I've done all I can to be of assistance.

All you did was post a list of 18 QBs you said were better than Andy and then claimed you rannked him somewhere between 13-17.  Made no sense at all to me.

Personally I think these are the only QBs who are clearly better than Dalton

Brees
Brady
Rodgers
Rivers
Roethlisberger
Wilson
Ryan

Dalton falls into a second group that would also include

Alex Smith
Cam Newton
Stafford
Cousins
Luck
Carr
Palmer


Guys like Prescott and Mariota are still in the "Nick Foles" category as far as I am concerned.

I say dalton ranks in the 8-15 range.  You have him ranked 13-17.  So there really is not a huge discrepancy (although you still refuse to say exactly which 12 are better than Andy).  The difference is that I consider the 8th best QB in the league much more than just a "serviceable starters" 

[Socal Bengals fan]

(12-29-2016, 04:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: All you did was post a list of 18 QBs you said were better than Andy and then claimed you rannked him somewhere between 13-17.  Made no sense at all to me.

Personally I think these are the only QBs who are clearly better than Dalton

Brees
Brady
Rodgers
Rivers
Roethlisberger
Wilson
Ryan

Dalton falls into a second group that would also include

Alex Smith
Cam Newton
Stafford
Cousins
Luck
Carr
Palmer


Guys like Prescott and Mariota are still in the "Nick Foles" category as far as I am concerned.

So I say dalton ranks in the 8-15 range.  You have him ranled 13-17.  So there really is not a big discrepancy.  The difference is that I consider the 8th best QB in the league much more than just a "serviceable starters" 

We here in California arrest people for being on meth ,  11550 H&S.  I've seen meth destroy families.  Please stay off that stuff.  Dalton at #8?

[fredtoast]

(12-29-2016, 04:45 PM)Socal Bengals fan Wrote: We here in California arrest people for being on meth ,  11550 H&S.  I've seen meth destroy families.  Please stay off that stuff.  Dalton at #8?

Yes.

Instead of just throwing out schoolyard insults I will ask you exactly which of those QBs I have listed in the same tier as Dalton are clearly better than him.

I can see where some people would rank Newton clearly higher, but he is not a better passer than dalton, and that still just drops Andy to #9.

[Shake n Blake]

(12-29-2016, 04:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes.

Instead of just throwing out schoolyard insults I will ask you exactly which of those QBs I have listed in the same tier as Dalton are clearly better than him.

I can see where some people would rank Newton clearly higher, but he is not a better passer than dalton, and that still just drops Andy to #9.

I think the problem is people WANT to believe Andy should be ranked around 14-19 or so, but when they look at the list of 32 starters, it dawns on them that there really aren't that many unquestionably great QBs that clearly belong ahead of Dalton. 

You have your elites, then you have your 2nd tier with Dalton, Cam, Stafford, Luck types. I can't argue with having Dalton around 13th, as long as people realize Dalton probably belongs in that 2nd tier group.

[*bfine32*]

(12-29-2016, 04:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: All you did was post a list of 18 QBs you said were better than Andy and then claimed you rannked him somewhere between 13-17.  Made no sense at all to me.

Personally I think these are the only QBs who are clearly better than Dalton

Brees
Brady
Rodgers
Rivers
Roethlisberger
Wilson
Ryan

Dalton falls into a second group that would also include

Alex Smith
Cam Newton
Stafford
Cousins
Luck
Carr
Palmer


Guys like Prescott and Mariota are still in the "Nick Foles" category as far as I am concerned.

I say dalton ranks in the 8-15 range.  You have him ranked 13-17.  So there really is not a huge discrepancy (although you still refuse to say exactly which 12 are better than Andy).  The difference is that I consider the 8th best QB in the league much more than just a "serviceable starters" 

STILL waiting on you to list the 20-24 QBs clearly worse than Andy

[*bfine32*]

(12-29-2016, 06:47 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I think the problem is people WANT to believe Andy should be ranked around 14-19 or so, but when they look at the list of 32 starters, it dawns on them that there really aren't that many unquestionably great QBs that clearly belong ahead of Dalton. 

You have your elites, then you have your 2nd tier with Dalton, Cam, Stafford, Luck types. I can't argue with having Dalton around 13th, as long as people realize Dalton probably belongs in that 2nd tier group.

What is the difference between 2nd tier and mid-tier.

[Shake n Blake]

(12-29-2016, 06:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: What is the difference between 2nd tier and mid-tier.

Mid tier suggests there's only 3 tiers. Great, ok and bad. Personally I think there's 4 or more:

Elite
Good but not elite
Just getting by, but you should keep looking
Bad

The possible 5th tier would be young QBs in their 1st or 2nd season.

[Brownshoe]

(12-29-2016, 06:51 PM)bfine32 Wrote: STILL waiting on you to list the 20-24 QBs clearly worse than Andy

Shouldn't you be able to easily figure out who he thinks is worse than Dalton by the list he gave, or do you need someone to hold your hand through the process?

[*bfine32*]

(12-29-2016, 08:22 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Shouldn't you be able to easily figure out who he thinks is worse than Dalton by the list he gave, or do you need someone to hold your hand through the process?

I just need a list. No hand-holding required. 

[Nicomo Cosca]

(12-29-2016, 04:41 PM)fredtoast Wrote: All you did was post a list of 18 QBs you said were better than Andy and then claimed you rannked him somewhere between 13-17.  Made no sense at all to me.

Personally I think these are the only QBs who are clearly better than Dalton

Brees
Brady
Rodgers
Rivers
Roethlisberger
Wilson
Ryan

Dalton falls into a second group that would also include

Alex Smith
Cam Newton
Stafford
Cousins
Luck
Carr
Palmer


Guys like Prescott and Mariota are still in the "Nick Foles" category as far as I am concerned.

I say dalton ranks in the 8-15 range.  You have him ranked 13-17.  So there really is not a huge discrepancy (although you still refuse to say exactly which 12 are better than Andy).  The difference is that I consider the 8th best QB in the league much more than just a "serviceable starters" 

I agree with this. Dalton is in the 8-10 range, imo.

Three of the guys on the elite list are getting up there in age too. I think Dalton's stock only goes up even more in the next few years.