Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
End of the "Dalton Scale"?
#41
Hmmmm my rough rankings of NFL QB's. Maybe a few are interchangeable. I think lumping them into classes probably works better as a ranking style but whatever lol

1. Aaron Rodgers
Best in the NFL in terms of success, ability, and age.

2. Peyton Manning
He's on his last leg, but he is still playing very well. Always in the postseason. He does choke in some big games, but he won a Super Bowl and has been to 3, not just anyone can do that. Plus all those records.

3. Tom Brady
Why 3rd? I mean cheating scandal yeah I do believe they cheat and they cheat a lot. Still though 6 super bowl appearances and 4 rings? That's still impressive. Plus I think most of the cheating is minor advantages. Plus he's always a little lower on my list because I believe he's a pretty good player playing in a great system.

4. Drew Brees
Kind of like my generation Brett Farve. I watched Farve play a lot too, but I've seen pretty much all of Brees prime. High octane offense a big gunslinger. Lots of passing yards, touchdowns and interceptions. I also think he plays in a strong offensive system.

5. Ben Roethlisberger
I think that great defense helped him to that first Super Bowl, but he really came on the last half of his career. I think he's going to have a huge season this year. For years now the Steelers have been carried by Big Ben.

6. Philip Rivers
Never really had the postseason success (he does have a win courtesy of us now). For the most part always put up big numbers. He was really good, then had a stretch of a few years where he was kind of average, and now he's having really good efficient seasons.

7. Tony Romo
I've never thought Romo was a bad QB. I think he's carried some very average teams and he's not post season clutch, but he's still really good. I don't understand how a guy like him puts up the stats he does and people think he sucks. I guess it's just a part of being on the Cowboys.

8. Russell Wilson
I think Wilson is an above and very smart/efficient QB playing on a very strong team. I usually would rank him a little lower than most, but hey two straight Super Bowls with a win isn't easy.

9. Andrew Luck
Luck has the potential to end up at the top of this list in a few years. He really is that good. I think he plays on some pretty piss poor teams. No great defense, no running game, and not a very good offensive line and they are getting into the postseason? That's because of Luck. Put a halfway decent offense and team around him and he'll be a monster I think.

10. Matthew Stafford
Another good QB that I think is on a bad team. He's had an okay offensive line with serviceable running backs. Then again he also has the services of the NFL's best and most beastly WR. Never much of a defense though they had guys like Suh carrying a lot of the load. I think Stafford has the physical talent and a good enough of a head to stick around the top 10 of NFL QB's. I'd love to see them get a halfway solid team around him.

11. Matt Ryan
Finally getting a postseason win was good for Ryan. Not sure how he went from having a decent team to a crappy one out of nowhere. He's still a really good starting QB, he just needs to actually earn that "Matty Ice" nickname. If they could give him a good RB and TE Atlanta could probably get back into the postseason. They also have a lot of work on defense. He's never had a very good defense but it's pretty bad now.

12. Joe Flacco
Ugh I hate Joe. Really I just hate his homers. He's like the opposite of Peyton Manning (at least for one postseason). Really average during the season and lit it up like a HoF QB for one postseason run that got him a ring. If I don't penalize Peyton then I can't penalize Joe.

13. Colin Kaepernick
I still think Kaepernick was always an okay QB on a really good team with a really good coach. For now I'll keep him hovering halfway since he QB'd the 49ers to all that postseason success, but this season is where we'll see just how good he is.

14. Nick Foles
Not sure why Chip Kelly traded him. He might have had a chance of trading Foles and a first rounder or two for Mariota if he really wanted him. He still has a lot to prove, but he had a great first season as a starter and did okay last year amid injuries he was dealing with. Not sure how he'll do this season. He has offensive weapons around him, but they need a offensive line bad.

15. Cam Newton
Have to admit Cam carries this team on his shoulders. Bad offensive line and no running game and he still gets wins. Albeit he got lucky seeing as how they won what 7 games and got into the playoffs (actually he only won 5 of those games he missed the other two). If they could give him a healthy RB, about 4 good offensive linemen and a speedy quality receiver I think he'd be a beast.

16. Eli Manning
God how did this guy ever win 2 Super Bowls. He's kind of the quintessential average QB. But I guess he's just got that clutch factor. Must have stole some from his brother. He's certainly talented and I guess his offense around him hasn't been all that impressive during the last few seasons. I'm worried about his offensive line now at least for the first half of the season.

17. Andy Dalton
17. Andy Dalton
17. Andy Dalton
Yep I'd still classify him solidly in that average scale. Could be better could be worse. I don't think it's fair to judge him so much off of last season. Defense was worst than it has been in a long time with him at QB plus his WR2 missed the whole season, WR1 missed time and dealt with an injury, TE2 missed the whole season as well. Had some line injuries as well. Still he got the team into the postseason even if his stats were the worst he's had.

18. Ryan Tannenhill
He's been on some not great teams. Not sure how they are going to improve down the road with a hundred million dollars invested in two players, but we'll see. I didn't realize how good he did last season so if he continues that trend maybe he will start to move up on this list.

19. Carson Palmer
Still think he's pretty darn good considering he turned into a journeyman QB of sorts. Hasn't had much offense around him since he left here. Now it looks like he might have a solid offensive line. If he can stay healthy I can see him putting up a big season and maybe even getting a playoff victory.

20. Jay Cutler
People hate on him, but he's not that bad. Of course he's no Tony Romo either. Still the best QB the Bears have had in a while. It's there fault for overpaying him. At this point with all the controversy I think he's pretty much a ruined QB for Chicago and it probably would have been best for both of them if he moved on. Maybe could be a good QB elsewhere. Jets should look at him if they can't get someone else.

21. Teddy Bridgewater
Pretty good rookie season. Obviously need to see more out of him. They might have made the playoffs if they had Peterson. Considering he did what he did without him is even more miraculous. If he's back I'll be interested to see how Bridgewater does. Unlike Geno Smith I thought Teddy was a decent QB worthy of going somewhat early in the first.

22. Robert Griffin III
Lots of talent. A great head on his shoulders, and completely capable of being a super efficient QB. His low ranking is due to the injuries keeping him off the field and keeping him from being as good as he can be. Can he go the Stafford route and start staying healthy or is he another Bradford, a talented QB that just can never play.

23. Alex Smith*
Very average QB although he still capable of leading a good team into the playoffs. I just would never trust him to be able to do anything spectacular to win. Pure game manager at this point. With talent around him and a good coach (He's kind of got that in Kansas City) he can be an okay QB. After his horrid rookie season he should be proud that he's even that good.

24. Brian Hoyer*
Hoyer's a very average QB, but he has a lot of fire and passion and a surprising amount of IT factor for a journeyman backup. Maybe with what seems like a solid team in Houston he can break that mold and become a starting caliber QB, or at least viewed as one. He's got a good offense around him, a good defense, and at least a good QB friendly coach.

25. David Carr
Liked Carr a lot coming out of the draft last year. Thought he'd be a good pickup at the bottom of the first if someone wanted to trade up or even better at the top of the second for a team skipping the position in the first. He didn't disappoint me at all considering the team that drafted him. They seem like they might be on the rise here the next couple of seasons. I'm excited to see what he can do with that rookie WR and TE.

26. Jameis Winston*
I think he certainly has all the physical attributes I want out of a franchise QB. I'm just not convinced he has the head on his shoulders. He's made some stupid mistakes (I'll ignore the rape allegations), but he's very Johnny arrogant about them. Still though he's got some crazy good receivers so I'm definitely intrigued at how he'll do even if I personally want him to fail.

27. Marcus Mariota
Not sure if Mariota will be an NFL QB. He's got tons of talent, but I'm worried if he's a product of that Oregon system. I definitely want him to be good for the Titans, but I'm unsure about him. He's got a good young offense around him in Tennessee and a good coach so he should have every opportunity to succeed (They better keep Whisenhunt even if they do subpar this season I think it could workout down the road).

28. Sam Bradford*
I think he's a talented franchise caliber QB, but he just can't stay on the field. He had that great rookie season and that's the last we've seen of him. He never really had much around him in St. Louis, but still if healthy I think he'd be really good. Oh well he's close to being out of the league soon if he can't put a season together.

29. Blake Bortles
A little disappointed in him last season, but it's the Jaguars and there were a lot of rookies on offense with him. They're all a year older and they've added even more young talent. I'm not convinced he'll do great this year, but if they stick it out with everyone I think he'll be primed to make a leap next year after what is hopefully a decent sophomore campaign. To be fair he was a little raw coming out of college so it should have been expected for him to not quite do so well if thrown into the fire early.

30. Geno Smith*
He has no excuse this season. Lots of talent around him now. Good offensive line okay running backs and good receivers. It's now or never. Thought he was a good pick in the second round, but New York can't seem to find and coach up a QB.

31. EJ Manuel*
Hated him as a pick and thought he was way overdrafted. He has a lot of physical talent, but he was a project player and he has never broken that mold. He needs to go and sit on the bench behind a good QB and a good coach and he might be able to salvage his career. Unlikely though.

32. Johnny Manziel*
Blech terrible. He might be turning his life around I don't know. Hopefully he does then I won't have to hate him anymore. He pretty much was everything I expected. He thought he could pull off that crazy crap he did in college and found out the hard way it don't work that way in the NFL.

*Guys I wouldn't want as a QB whether it's age, mediocrity/not good at all, or troublemaker.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#42
(05-21-2015, 11:26 AM)PhilHos Wrote: From a pure talent perspective, Terrell Pryor >> Tannehill AND Dalton. Are you saying you want Pryor to start for the Bengals? Obviously, the higher talent = better production, right?

What defines QB talent to you? Pryor has athletic ability to be sure, but I'm not sure why a guy who was a 3rd round supplemental pick by a senile Al Davis so obviously has zounds more talent than a second round QB and another QB who was an 8th overall pick. Don't get me wrong, draft order isn't a fail-safe method to rate talent, but Pryor is going on his what...4th year as a total project and "unknown" sort of player.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#43
(05-21-2015, 11:26 AM)PhilHos Wrote: One last thing about Dalton (for now), I find it very telling that the usual standards for judging a QB are thrown out the window when it comes to Dalton. Other QBs are judged on wins and stats, for the most part. But, because those would indicate Dalton is a good QB, people bring up other things. They may be valid criticisms (playoff and prime time performances, for example), but still are generally solely only used to knock Dalton down.

This just isn't true, at least not for everybody.

There are a lot of us that don't think W/L is on a QB whether his name is Peyton Manning, Andy Dalton, or Joe Montana. Wins and losses are team accomplishments, and it's not as simple as giving them 100% of the credit for every single win or loss. There are certainly games that I would say Dalton had more to do with the W than most other players, and there are certainly games that I would say Dalton had more to do with the L than most other players. For the most part, it's the media that clings to W/L (or Andy homers that need something positive to look at). They do that because the media is what feeds the casual fan, and that type of fan is obsessed with illogical reasoning for why their favorite player is better than your favorite player.

Now, if you want to say "Andy Dalton put up some impressive performances in those 5 wins, he was really good!", I have no issue with that, especially if you have substance to back that up. What I have a problem with is the people that push "40 wins" on Andy as if he was the main reason we won every last one of those games.

Stats will never tell the entire story, but they point you in the right direction. Passer rating is the one easy stat to look at to tell if a QB is good or not. How many guys do you see with high passer ratings that suck? How many guys do you see with low passer ratings that are great? The fact is, whether Andy homers and haters like it or not, his passer rating hovers around mediocre by the time the season is finished every damn year. What does that mean? It means he's somewhere around average, which isn't a bad thing, but it's not great either. It's gotten to the point where it's just dumb to nitpick each other over the exact terminology to use to describe him, as long as we can all acknowledge that he isn't terrible but he isn't great either.
Reply/Quote
#44
(05-21-2015, 11:32 AM)Nately120 Wrote: What defines QB talent to you?  Pryor has athletic ability to be sure, but I'm not sure why a guy who was a 3rd round supplemental pick by a senile Al Davis so obviously has zounds more talent than a second round QB and another QB who was an 8th overall pick.  Don't get me wrong, draft order isn't a fail-safe method to rate talent, but Pryor is going on his what...4th year as a total project and "unknown" sort of player.

When I speak of talent, I'm speaking of the physical. Pryor has the all the physical tools to be an outstanding QB. The problem with him (and with a lot of "talented" QBs) is that the mind may not match the talent. Ryan Leaf is always the first that pops into my mind as an example.

Dalton was not the most talented QB in his draft, yet, he had a pretty good mind and that's why he was basically equal, statistically with Newton (a far more talented QB) in their rookie seasons and arguably the best QB in that draft (don't get me wrong, Newton is the better QB; I'm just saying a case can be made that Dalton's career has been better, ergo he's better. It may be a weak case, but a case nonetheless).

(05-21-2015, 11:37 AM)djs7685 Wrote: This just isn't true, at least not for everybody.

There are a lot of us that don't think W/L is on a QB whether his name is Peyton Manning, Andy Dalton, or Joe Montana. Wins and losses are team accomplishments, and it's not as simple as giving them 100% of the credit for every single win or loss. There are certainly games that I would say Dalton had more to do with the W than most other players, and there are certainly games that I would say Dalton had more to do with the L than most other players. For the most part, it's the media that clings to W/L (or Andy homers that need something positive to look at). They do that because the media is what feeds the casual fan, and that type of fan is obsessed with illogical reasoning for why their favorite player is better than your favorite player.

Now, if you want to say "Andy Dalton put up some impressive performances in those 5 wins, he was really good!", I have no issue with that, especially if you have substance to back that up. What I have a problem with is the people that push "40 wins" on Andy as if he was the main reason we won every last one of those games.

Stats will never tell the entire story, but they point you in the right direction. Passer rating is the one easy stat to look at to tell if a QB is good or not. How many guys do you see with high passer ratings that suck? How many guys do you see with low passer ratings that are great? The fact is, whether Andy homers and haters like it or not, his passer rating hovers around mediocre by the time the season is finished every damn year. What does that mean? It means he's somewhere around average, which isn't a bad thing, but it's not great either. It's gotten to the point where it's just dumb to nitpick each other over the exact terminology to use to describe him, as long as we can all acknowledge that he isn't terrible but he isn't great either.

You're missing my point, djs. I agree that not everybody judges QBs in the manner described, but the fact remains that the media and most fans still judge QBs based on wins and stats, but then decry Dalton as a QB even though those same standards say otherwise.
[Image: giphy.gif]
Reply/Quote
#45
(05-20-2015, 10:40 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: RECEIVING TAR REC YDS TD LG
G. Bernard 9 8 46 0 13
R. Hewitt 5 3 37 0 14
R. Burkhead 3 3 34 0 26
M. Sanu 7 3 31 0 11
K. Brock 2 1 7 0 7
B. Tate 5 0 0 0 0
G. Little 1 0 0 0 0

31 yards from one receiver, 0 from any else.  While Burkhead may have not literally been the #1, it's pretty safe to say that the receivers as a whole were downright pathetic.  The point that I was trying to make was that Dalton didn't regress last season.  If he was "average" before why would he be well below average now?  The D got worse, receivers were injured, new O scheme, but pretty much the same hot/cold Dalton.
Because stats! Ninja
Zac Taylor 2019-2020: 6 total wins
Zac Taylor 2021-2022: Double-digit wins each season, plus 5 postseason wins
Zac Taylor 2023: 9 wins despite losing Burrow half the season
Zac Taylor 2024: Started 1-4. If he can turn this into a playoff appearance, it will be impressive.

Sorry for Party Rocking!

[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#46
(05-21-2015, 12:04 PM)PhilHos Wrote: You're missing my point, djs. I agree that not everybody judges QBs in the manner described, but the fact remains that the media and most fans still judge QBs based on wins and stats, but then decry Dalton as a QB even though those same standards say otherwise.

Even if you're going to talk about the people that look at stats, then you have to go with the most popular statistic to look at by those people...passer rating. Andy has ended every year with a passer rating right around average, with I believe 1 year a little below and 1 year a little above and 2 years directly in the middle of the pack.

What I'm saying is, it's not like the people calling him average are wrong even by those metrics, he's still average if you look at stats and average if you watch him play. Judging solely by wins (which would be ridiculous for an individual player) is the only way that Andy could be considered "good". The standard of statistics doesn't really say otherwise, they say he's just as average as a lot of people will say about him.
Reply/Quote
#47
(05-21-2015, 12:19 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Even if you're going to talk about the people that look at stats, then you have to go with the most popular statistic to look at by those people...passer rating. Andy has ended every year with a passer rating right around average, with I believe 1 year a little below and 1 year a little above and 2 years directly in the middle of the pack.

What I'm saying is, it's not like the people calling him average are wrong even by those metrics, he's still average if you look at stats and average if you watch him play. Judging solely by wins (which would be ridiculous for an individual player) is the only way that Andy could be considered "good". The standard of statistics doesn't really say otherwise, they say he's just as average as a lot of people will say about him.

Remind me again why Terry Bradshaw is in the HoF?
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#48
(05-21-2015, 12:04 PM)PhilHos Wrote: When I speak of talent, I'm speaking of the physical. Pryor has the all the physical tools to be an outstanding QB. The problem with him (and with a lot of "talented" QBs) is that the mind may not match the talent. Ryan Leaf is always the first that pops into my mind as an example.

We can agree to disagree on this one, though I think it's more about how we define these tools. Pryor can run really fast, but the guy tends to have a hard time digesting a full playbook, seems to make a single read and then rolls to the right and tucks and runs if his first option isn't open. Ok, you mentioned the mind not matching the talent, and I suppose we agree on that. Pryor just doesn't seem to have enough physical talent to be a "good" QB much less an outstanding one. Perhaps he has a bit of a resurgence here, but the fact that he hasn't caught on with a team that has even the slightest bit of opening for a starting QB sort of shows he might be running out of "Oh, why not?" jobs.

(05-21-2015, 12:23 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Remind me again why Terry Bradshaw is in the HoF?

Ahh, minimizing the skill of Terry Bradshaw...about the only thing Bengals and Steelers fans agree to be wrong about!
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#49
(05-21-2015, 12:19 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Even if you're going to talk about the people that look at stats, then you have to go with the most popular statistic to look at by those people...passer rating. Andy has ended every year with a passer rating right around average, with I believe 1 year a little below and 1 year a little above and 2 years directly in the middle of the pack.

What I'm saying is, it's not like the people calling him average are wrong even by those metrics, he's still average if you look at stats and average if you watch him play. Judging solely by wins (which would be ridiculous for an individual player) is the only way that Andy could be considered "good". The standard of statistics doesn't really say otherwise, they say he's just as average as a lot of people will say about him.

I'm not talking about the people that call him average.
[Image: giphy.gif]
Reply/Quote
#50
(05-21-2015, 12:23 PM)Brownshoe Wrote: Remind me again why Terry Bradshaw is in the HoF?

Because he was an okay QB with name recognition on teams that won multiple Super Bowls in an era where passing stats weren't anything like they are today?

Is that the answer? I think that about sums it up. If Brandon Weeden (not saying Bradshaw = Weeden) happened to be on 4 SB winning teams, he would be in the Hall of Fame regardless of his stats. That's just how the HoF works. That's not what this discussion is about at all, we're talking purely about QB skill, not name recognition or Hall of Fame status.

(05-21-2015, 12:47 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I'm not talking about the people that call him average.

Well then it looks like we agree more than I have always thought.

Sounds good ThumbsUp
Reply/Quote
#51
(05-20-2015, 07:56 PM)bfine32 Wrote: IMO Tannehill is more talented and nothing he did caused Andy to have an absolutely terrible year. I assumed you were a huge fan of a young Mark Sanchez.

Not really cause im not a jets fan...

But please dont take my comments out of context. my tannenhill comment is directly related to the OP. in saying dalton was the measuring stick of average and now cannot be even considered the measuring stick.

To that i said. thats weird because a less successful tannenhill was just signed. Whos career so far has been less successful on the field than dalton who can no longer be a measuring stick according to the orignal post therefore Tannenhill should be replaced not signed. (according to that article which i dont really agree with anyways)

This isnt an attack on tannenhill or trying to elevate dalton. Its purely relative to the article at hand.

While you probly can find some stat that was better. i could too.
Reply/Quote
#52
(05-21-2015, 01:22 PM)djs7685 Wrote: Because he was an okay QB with name recognition on teams that won multiple Super Bowls in an era where passing stats weren't anything like they are today?

Is that the answer? I think that about sums it up. If Brandon Weeden (not saying Bradshaw = Weeden) happened to be on 4 SB winning teams, he would be in the Hall of Fame regardless of his stats. That's just how the HoF works. That's not what this discussion is about at all, we're talking purely about QB skill, not name recognition or Hall of Fame status.

I don't think the Steelers win 4 Super Bowls with Terry Hanratty and Cliff Stoudt as the QB, though. Bradshaw was a no-brainer first overall pick that has 4 Super Bowl rings...why do some people insist there is some sort of doubt about his viability? I can see a QB lucking his way into 1 Super Bowl win (ala Pig Ben in 2005) but not 2+ (ala Pig Ben in 2008, unfortunately).
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#53
(05-21-2015, 01:50 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I don't think the Steelers win 4 Super Bowls with Terry Hanratty and Cliff Stoudt as the QB, though.  Bradshaw was a no-brainer first overall pick that has 4 Super Bowl rings...why do some people insist there is some sort of doubt about his viability?  I can see a QB lucking his way into 1 Super Bowl win (ala Pig Ben in 2005) but not 2+ (ala Pig Ben in 2008, unfortunately).

I'm just saying that Bradshaw isn't Marino, Montana, or Manning even if he has the rings. His overall stats aren't impressive for his career, but he's not a bad QB. It's really hard to compare statistics with modern athletes to guys from the older eras, but here is something interesting to note.

In Bradshaw's SB runs, his playoff passer rating was 104, 98.5, 95, and 68.4. While he may have been busy throwing 25 INT in the regular season of '79, he decided to turn it on in the playoffs with a 98.5 passer rating leading to a Super Bowl victory.

Now, it reminds me more of a guy like Joe Flacco or Eli Manning than anything else. A lot of people (around here at least) don't give Joe or Eli much credit because they aren't the most fancy regular season QBs, but they've both had absurd playoff runs and they look like completely different QBs.

If Bradshaw's only Super Bowl ring was where he had a sub 70 rating, things would be a lot different. Even in that 3 game run, he had a 4th quarter game winning drive though.

I wasn't trying to say that Bradshaw lucked into the rings, but if you look at career stats alone, his aren't too pretty. You don't NEED good stats to be a good QB, but how often do great QBs have mediocre or worse statistics? That's my point. Some wacky homers try to say Andy's good, but there isn't much proof of that, at least yet. He threw a lot of TDs 1 year in his career and people cling to that like it's the greatest accomplishment of all time. He doesn't have the stats, he doesn't have the big wins, and he doesn't have the playoff performances. You can't have 0 of those 3 things and be considered a good QB. I don't know how anyone could disagree with that. As I always say, it's a team sport so I'm not really hung up on W/L for a QB, but even if you are, he hasn't won anything past some regular season games while having mediocre stats and shitty playoff performances. Even if you're a casual fan that's totally bonkers for stats and wins, he's STILL not in the "good" category. There's almost no possible way to make him seem like a good QB unless you say your only criteria is 2013 TD passes and regular season win totals.
Reply/Quote
#54
(05-20-2015, 07:41 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: And has won less games and thrown less tds than Dalton (first 3 years )ie less successful. Not saying tannenhill is bad are you saying he's better than Dalton?

If Tannenhill had our wide receiver core and team, I would say Yes. Without a doubt in my opinion she is right i do believe!!
Reply/Quote
#55
Wow, there's definitely a lot of strong opinions being tossed around. I really don't like to argue, which is why I don't post very often. I do like to discuss, however--the difference being one method of conversation is kinda heated, while the other is more level headed.

That being said, I'm understanding the consensus is that Dalton is really bad and Tannenhill is above average. Like I stated previously, I'm on the fence about Dalton. He's won us some games and lost us some games. He's looked great at times, average at times, and pathetic at times. When the bright lights go on, I agree, he hasn't performed well most of the time--but the same could be said of the whole team.

I feel like we have a pretty talented team, but we have underperformed. That's why I've really started to question the coaches in the last couple years. The year we lost to San Diego we were pretty healthy going into that game; ya, we didn't have Geno or Leon, but for the most part we were pretty darn healthy. Since then I really haven't cared what we do in the regular season anymore, and I'm tired of getting embarrassed in prime time.

Anyway, regarding Tannenhill vs. Dalton. I'm not a stats guy. I think quarterbacks should be judged by more of an eyeball test than a stats test, which makes comparison very hard--and rather pointless. They are both hovering around average. I realize any QB is better than Dalton to most Bengal fans, so I might as well be talking to a brick wall when I suggest Dalton is better than this guy or that guy.

Wishing you all a great day, it's nice out over here so I'm gunna try and do something outside before work.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#56
Man I put up that big write up of 32 starting QB's just for another argument to erupt right after it Cry
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#57
(05-21-2015, 04:40 PM)CarolinaBengalFanGuy Wrote: Man I put up that big write up of 32 starting QB's just for another argument to erupt right after it  Cry

Alex Smith was too low, Nick Foles was too high.. I think Andrew Luck could have also been higher. Peyton Manning isn't the second best anymore either.

I think if the Bengals had Alex Smith we would have gone deeper in the playoffs for sure, so I would not put him below Dalton
Reply/Quote
#58
(05-21-2015, 05:48 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Alex Smith was too low, Nick Foles was too high.. I think Andrew Luck could have also been higher. Peyton Manning isn't the second best anymore either.

I think if the Bengals had Alex Smith we would have gone deeper in the playoffs for sure, so I would not put him below Dalton

Manning might not be the most solid guy in the playoffs but he posted the third most touchdowns of his career in a single season last year only behind his two record setting year one of which was the 55 he threw the year before. I don't see why he can't be considered second best still.

Nick Foles yes but he's lumped in with that entire middle section of QB's and I personally like him so his ranked higher.

Alex Smith I wouldn't argue is better than Dalton at all. He's a very average QB. He's not terrible or anything but he's not noticeably better than the QB's around him.

Andrew Luck is also lumped in with a top 10 all who are pretty close with one another.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote
#59
When the Irritating smug face sh** Rosenthal said Geno Smith has a chance to be better than Dalton and Bortles already is. You know to turn off the podcast and move on.

And then when they said Teddy Bridgewater was ahead of Dalton and Winston also ....

These guys are smoking crack.
Reply/Quote
#60
(05-20-2015, 11:00 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: I'd probably take Tannehill over Dalton. Dalton is better than Sanchez though.


I have little doubt that Dalton will rebound from last year. The receiving core is healthy and Denarius Moore provides depth. I also think Eifert will prove to be a better receiver than Gresham. I honestly think last year will prove to be fluky. That said, the issue I have with him is consistency. His bad games are TERRIBLE.

If he can raise his passer rating in bad games from 50 and below to say...somewhere in the 70's, I'd feel a lot better about him and his end of season stats would look much better. As for the playoffs, that's an entirely different discussion for me because I'm not sold that the QB is the main problem there.

I am with you Shake. That is the big problem with Dalton, when he has a bad game
it don't look much worse than that, except as you mentioned, a guy named Sanchez.

Needs to get more consistent and not throw the interceptions, this will undoubtably
improve with the likes of Eifert and MLJ healthy and i like that Kroft kid the more i
read up on him.
Reply/Quote





Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)