QB Index by Gregg Rosenthal

[djs7685]

(09-15-2015, 10:22 AM)CoCoNuT Wrote: FYI NO ONE PLAYED BETTER THAN ANDY DALTON WEEK 1! 

Not many other guys did. It was wonderful to see. If he continues to play better than most for an entire season it will be very impressive and the entire narrative of him being an average to good QB will change to him being a great one.

I just find it amusing that a guy that's trashing A.J. Green in one thread while ignoring what his peers do is playing the victim card for Andy in this thread and crying his eyes out that people are "ignoring" what his peers are doing (even though nobody on here is ignoring anything).

Like what in the actual hell kind of logic is that?

[GreenCornBengal]

Bumping this thread based on the new QB index released this week.

Dalton moved up from 'stuck in the middle' to 'next level'.. where he should be. Although, I would argue it is still low based on this seasons performance. Their rational is that yaaaaa Dalton goes on hot streaks but he will come crashing down eventually... a reasonable expectation based off his career. He is ranked #19.

The thing that made me laugh is that Sam Bradford is 1 below Dalton at 20. Somebody showed that Bradford has 0TDs, 4INTs and a 20QBR rating... why does this guy garnish so much respect? It is undeserving.

[type_stripe]

(09-24-2015, 03:19 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Bumping this thread based on the new QB index released this week.

Dalton moved up from 'stuck in the middle' to 'next level'.. where he should be. Although, I would argue it is still low based on this seasons performance. Their rational is that yaaaaa Dalton goes on hot streaks but he will come crashing down eventually... a reasonable expectation based off his career. He is ranked #19.

The thing that made me laugh is that Sam Bradford is 1 below Dalton at 20. Somebody showed that Bradford has 0TDs, 4INTs and a 20QBR rating... why does this guy garnish so much respect? It is undeserving.

It's just perspective built on bias. Nothing more nothing less.

[GreenCornBengal]

(09-24-2015, 03:38 PM)type_stripe Wrote: It's just perspective built on bias. Nothing more nothing less.

Ya. That's good and all. Only a monkey could have the perspective that Bradford is worth something... (Chip Kelly)

[*Nately120*]

(09-24-2015, 03:19 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Somebody showed that Bradford has 0TDs, 4INTs and a 20QBR rating... why does this guy garnish so much respect? It is undeserving.

Dalton is way low when you consider how well he is playing (better than 9 or so of the guys in front of him).  Bradford has 2 TDs, not 0 but those are garbage time and pointless.  Not good, just saying it's more than 0.

[GreenCornBengal]

(09-24-2015, 03:54 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Dalton is way low when you consider how well he is playing (better than 9 or so of the guys in front of him).  Bradford has 2 TDs, not 0 but those are garbage time and pointless.  Not good, just saying it's more than 0.

I didn't fact check it, thank you. Either way to say he is the QB one step below Dalton is absurd.

[type_stripe]

(09-24-2015, 03:54 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Ya. That's good and all. Only a monkey could have the perspective that Bradford is worth something... (Chip Kelly)

werent there also a few posters on these Boards who mentioned Kelly switching Foles with Bradford in order to "win now". I think it was during one of the comparisons/debates of McCarron and Dalton and how the Bengals need to make a similar move (change the QB) to win now. All based on how the preseason went. LOL.

[wolfkaosaun]

(09-24-2015, 04:32 PM)type_stripe Wrote: werent there also a few posters on these Boards who mentioned Kelly switching Foles with Bradford in order to "win now".  I think it was during one of the comparisons/debates of McCarron and Dalton and how the Bengals need to make a similar move (change the QB) to win now. All based on how the preseason went. LOL.

I also remember when people wanted us to trade for Bradford. Bradford has never been good. He misses throws, has terrible pocket presence, and is just overall a below average quarterback. Foles > Bradford and it's not even close. Eagles were dumb in getting rid of Foles and it's going to bite them in the rear. More so than it already has.

[GreenCornBengal]

(09-24-2015, 04:42 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: I also remember when people wanted us to trade for Bradford. Bradford has never been good. He misses throws, has terrible pocket presence, and is just overall a below average quarterback. Foles > Bradford and it's not even close. Eagles were dumb in getting rid of Foles and it's going to bite them in the rear. More so than it already has.

Foles is a good young QB. I'm not sure what all the hate on the guy is. Guess he has Dalton-syndrome O_o

[ItsOdellThurman]

Carson is being rated and benefits by his supporting cast. People seem to forget that his last few full seasons he was terrible.

Dalton should be rated and benefit by having his healthy supporting cast. People seem to forget how good he was 2 years ago when he had mostly healthy guys around him.

I don't trust either QB, but there's a double standard.

[BigPapaKain]

Most turnovers since week 1 last season and somehow Luck is ranked 4th (or whatever; I just glanced).

I'm really buying into the idea that Irsay pays certain talking heads to be as deep into Luck's ass as they are.

[wolfkaosaun]

(09-24-2015, 04:52 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Foles is a good young QB. I'm not sure what all the hate on the guy is. Guess he has Dalton-syndrome O_o

Doesn't have the best deep ball accuracy. He misses some throws by under-throwing them or completely missing the mark. It's a bit worse than Dalton's.

[Rhinocero23]

(09-10-2015, 04:24 PM)djs7685 Wrote: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000524987/article/qb-index-ranking-the-starters-132?campaign=fb-nf-sf12966187-sf12966187

Interesting, sort of.

He puts Aaron Rodgers at 1 by himself.

This is the "top shelf" under Rodgers.

2. Ben Roethlisberger
3. Andrew Luck
4. Tom Brady
5. Matt Ryan
6. Philip Rivers
7. Drew Brees
8. Tony Romo
9. Russell Wilson
10. Peyton Manning

This is the "next level".

11. Cam Newton
12. Joe Flacco
13. Matthew Stafford
14. Ryan Tannehill
15. Eli Manning
16. Sam Bradford
17. Carson Palmer
18. Teddy Bridgewater
19. Colin Kaepernick

Andy is included with the "stuck in the middle" crowd.

20. Alex Smith
21. Jay Cutler
22. Andy Dalton
23. Blake Bortles
24. Nick Foles

"The rookies"

25. Jameis Winston
26. Marcus Mariota

Finally, "the question marks"

27. Derek Carr
28. Kirk Cousins
29. Ryan Fitzpatrick
30. Tyrod Taylor
31. Josh McCown
32. Brian Hoyer

People always seem to have interesting things to say about Rosenthal's objectivity. I'm not sure if he's being biased, but I disagree with a handful of his rankings. Some of these seem strange. I won't get to really look much more into this until later though, but figured I'd post it before I had to go for a while.

His 1 simple statement about Andy Dalton is "Dalton is a poor man's Smith", and I'm not so sure how accurate that is.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000537625/article/qb-index-ben-roethlisberger-joins-big-three

updated on 9/24/15

[BengalChris]

(09-24-2015, 03:19 PM)GreenCornBengal Wrote: Bumping this thread based on the new QB index released this week.

Dalton moved up from 'stuck in the middle' to 'next level'.. where he should be. Although, I would argue it is still low based on this seasons performance. Their rational is that yaaaaa Dalton goes on hot streaks but he will come crashing down eventually... a reasonable expectation based off his career. He is ranked #19.

The thing that made me laugh is that Sam Bradford is 1 below Dalton at 20. Somebody showed that Bradford has 0TDs, 4INTs and a 20QBR rating... why does this guy garnish so much respect? It is undeserving.

Here's the link of the latest QB index: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000537625/article/qb-index-ben-roethlisberger-joins-big-three

I'm not a big Dalton fan. I know he's not a top tier guy, but this Rosenthal dude is a complete moron.

[Joelist]

I think we'll have to wait a while to see how Sam Bradford works out. Lest we forget he missed half of 2013 and all of 2014 with injury and then the Eagles erred by not playing him enough in preseason (really he should have been in most of the time). Right now he is beyond just rusty and having to get back into NFL trim on the playing field in real games.

[type_stripe]

(09-24-2015, 07:01 PM)Joelist Wrote: I think we'll have to wait a while to see how Sam Bradford works out. Lest we forget he missed half of 2013 and all of 2014 with injury and then the Eagles erred by not playing him enough in preseason (really he should have been in most of the time). Right now he is beyond just rusty and having to get back into NFL trim on the playing field in real games.

I can't disagree with this statement.

[StLucieBengal]

Around the nfl guys have a jilted view of Dalton.

[TSwigZ]

i think he should be 16 honestly ahead of Bridgewater Kap and Smith

[Shake n Blake]

(09-24-2015, 08:08 PM)TSwigZ Wrote: i think he should be 16 honestly ahead of Bridgewater Kap and Smith

Agreed. I'd put him ahead of Stafford too at this point.

Btw, why am I not surprised Rosenthal is slobbering all over Ben? And my goodness...Palmer 7th? I understand he's posted some good stats...if you combine parts where he was healthy and subtract half a season where he wasn't playing so hot. Seems like it's jumping the gun a bit to put him all the way up to 7th though.

[*Nately120*]

(09-24-2015, 04:42 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: I also remember when people wanted us to trade for Bradford. Bradford has never been good. He misses throws, has terrible pocket presence, and is just overall a below average quarterback. Foles > Bradford and it's not even close. Eagles were dumb in getting rid of Foles and it's going to bite them in the rear. More so than it already has.

Anyone who looks at Bradford's resume notices the seasons where he plays most or all of the games he ends with a very average statline.  He plays out of his mind and gets hurt in 4 games, otherwise.  Also, I'm not sure I'd say Foles is better than Bradford because the Eagles managed to fall fairly flat with Foles, too and the Rams don't look like they are going to get a lot done with him, either.

Foles is better than Bradford when you take their salaries into play, though...THAT makes it obvious.