Pete Prisco ranks NFL starting QBs

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-02-2016, 08:00 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Dalton comes in at #13, after Romo and Matt Ryan, and ahead of Bortles and James Flacco.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/priscos-top-100-players-ranking-all-32-nfl-starting-quarterbacks/

Thoughts?

Personally I think Dalton should be ahead of Ryan and perhaps Eli. I also think #3 for Ben and #7 for Luck are too high after the seasons they just had.

Dalton was a top 5 QB last year before the injury.

Brady, Rodgers, Newton, Palmer and Dalton were the top 5 last season IMHO. Honorary mention, Russell Wilson.

To put him at 13 must be only cause of the injury or media bias but Prisco usually isn't that bad.

Gotta be the injury, kind of unfair but it is what it is.

[*Nately120*]

(06-05-2016, 02:23 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Dalton was a top 5 QB last year before the injury.

Brady, Rodgers, Newton, Palmer and Dalton were the top 5 last season IMHO. Honorary mention, Russell Wilson.

To put him at 13 must be only cause of the injury or media bias but Prisco usually isn't that bad.

Gotta be the injury, kind of unfair but it is what it is.

I think Dalton could be higher on the list, but it might be a combo of the injury AND the fact that his 2014 campaign had some not-so-hot stats.  Plus, he's going into this season with different weapons on offense, a different OC, and sans Eifert for who knows how long.

It is interesting that 6 of the 12 ahead of him have their down seasons, injuries, or bad games specifically mentioned.

[*Nate (formerly eliminate08)*]

(06-05-2016, 02:49 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I think Dalton could be higher on the list, but it might be a combo of the injury AND the fact that his 2014 campaign had some not-so-hot stats.  Plus, he's going into this season with different weapons on offense, a different OC, and sans Eifert for who knows how long.

It is interesting that 6 of the 12 ahead of him have their down seasons, injuries, or bad games specifically mentioned.

All true and that is interesting.

[BengalChris]

(06-05-2016, 02:49 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I think Dalton could be higher on the list, but it might be a combo of the injury AND the fact that his 2014 campaign had some not-so-hot stats.  Plus, he's going into this season with different weapons on offense, a different OC, and sans Eifert for who knows how long.

It is interesting that 6 of the 12 ahead of him have their down seasons, injuries, or bad games specifically mentioned.

Like last year and the year before and the year before that Dalton needs to show up and play well in the post season. If he can get that done he'll be higher on everyone's list.

[bengalguy71]

(06-05-2016, 04:37 PM)BengalChris Wrote: Like last year and the year before and the year before that Dalton needs to show up and play well in the post season. If he can get that done he'll be higher on everyone's list.

I don't think this makes any difference. He's not on a team that's a media darling. I think if the Bengals won the SB this year, including stellar stats from Dalton, the majority of the media would say they won in spite of him. That the defense and weapons were the difference.

[*Nately120*]

(06-05-2016, 06:49 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: I don't think this makes any difference. He's not on a team that's a media darling. I think if the Bengals won the SB this year, including stellar stats from Dalton, the majority of the media would say they won in spite of him. That the defense and weapons were the difference.

I'll agree Dalton doesn't get the credit he deserves BUT what teams do you consider media darlings to the point that their QBs are puffed up?  

I'd call the Packers, Patriots, Steelers, Seahawks, and Cowboys as "media darlings" but in all fairness those teams account for 8 of the recent SB wins and feature 3 HOF QBs and 2 guys who are Cinderella story types.  It's really hard to say if the Steelers and Packers are just darlings for their history or their current success.

Then we have QBs like Newton, Palmer, Brees, Rivers, who are high on this list but play for some historically irrelevant franchises.  Hell, Brees is one of the people who pulled the Saints into relevance after his first team let him go, so if the Aints can do it, why can't we?

Anyways, I know bias exists but the fact that the Bengals aren't "media darlings" but also have 0 playoff wins in 25 years, 0 SB appearances in 28 years, 0 HOF QBs ever, doesn't help.  Add to the fact that we haven't been relevant past week 1 of the playoffs as long as the current regime has been around and it's clear winning can make a team a darling.

Dalton is also the first QB listed who has 0 playoff wins, and other than Romo I think the other 11 ahead of him have actually taken their team to the Conference Championship game at the very least.  

Rodgers - SB win
Brady - 4 SB wins
Pig Ben - 2 SB wins
Newton - SB appearance
Palmer - NFC Championship appearance
Brees - SB win
Luck - AFC Championship appearance
Wilson - SB win
Rivers - AFC Championship appearance
Eli Manning - 2 SB wins
Romo - 2 Divisional Round appearances
Ryan - NFC Championship appearance


It just seems like relevance is heavily dependent upon being left standing when the entire country is forced to watch the last 4 or so teams playing.  Not to sound like a downer, but as Bengals fans we haven't seen an actual playoff push from this team since 1990 so...so what do we actually remember about being on a playoff run, really?  It's super important, I think.  

[bengalguy71]

(06-05-2016, 08:54 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I'll agree Dalton doesn't get the credit he deserves BUT what teams do you consider media darlings to the point that their QBs are puffed up?  

I'd call the Packers, Patriots, Steelers, Seahawks, and Cowboys as "media darlings" but in all fairness those teams account for 8 of the recent SB wins and feature 3 HOF QBs and 2 guys who are Cinderella story types.  It's really hard to say if the Steelers and Packers are just darlings for their history or their current success.

Then we have QBs like Newton, Palmer, Brees, Rivers, who are high on this list but play for some historically irrelevant franchises.  Hell, Brees is one of the people who pulled the Saints into relevance after his first team let him go, so if the Aints can do it, why can't we?

Anyways, I know bias exists but the fact that the Bengals aren't "media darlings" but also have 0 playoff wins in 25 years, 0 SB appearances in 28 years, 0 HOF QBs ever, doesn't help.  Add to the fact that we haven't been relevant past week 1 of the playoffs as long as the current regime has been around and it's clear winning can make a team a darling.

Dalton is also the first QB listed who has 0 playoff wins, and other than Romo I think the other 11 ahead of him have actually taken their team to the Conference Championship game at the very least.  

Rodgers - SB win
Brady - 4 SB wins
Pig Ben - 2 SB wins
Newton - SB appearance
Palmer - NFC Championship appearance
Brees - SB win
Luck - AFC Championship appearance
Wilson - SB win
Rivers - AFC Championship appearance
Eli Manning - 2 SB wins
Romo - 2 Divisional Round appearances
Ryan - NFC Championship appearance


It just seems like relevance is heavily dependent upon being left standing when the entire country is forced to watch the last 4 or so teams playing.  Not to sound like a downer, but as Bengals fans we haven't seen an actual playoff push from this team since 1990 so...so what do we actually remember about being on a playoff run, really?  It's super important, I think.  

Pittsburgh is huge in the NFL, media darlings because of Rooney. There's no way I will ever believe that Rooney didn't have any serious influence in getting a Steelers/Bengals game in one of the first 3 games. (Burfict out).
If Rooney had his way he would have had games 1 and 3 Pittsburgh/Cincinnati contests, so they wouldn't have to face Burfict.
Cincinnati is not a media town. The ONLY reason they couldn't ignore the Reds in the 70s was because what they accomplished, was impossible to ignore.

Look at Romo. He has won 1 playoff game! However, the media acts like he's invincible!

As a matter of fact, when the Panthers came to Dallas and ONLY because Romo was scheduled to play, the media had them favored to win!

Panthers 33 Cowboys 14

Romo 11/21, 103 yds, 0 TDs, 3 Int

[MrRager]

(06-05-2016, 02:23 PM)Nate (formerly eliminate08) Wrote: Dalton was a top 5 QB last year before the injury.

Brady, Rodgers, Newton, Palmer and Dalton were the top 5 last season IMHO. Honorary mention, Russell Wilson.

To put him at 13 must be only cause of the injury or media bias but Prisco usually isn't that bad.

Gotta be the injury, kind of unfair but it is what it is.

Woah, what now? You don't think Wilson was a top 5 QB last year? That's asinine to me. Wilson was top 3 last season and better than Rodgers 100%. This is without even adding his rushing ability.

[*Nately120*]

(06-05-2016, 09:47 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: Pittsburgh is huge in the NFL, media darlings because of Rooney. There's no way I will ever believe that Rooney didn't have any serious influence in getting a Steelers/Bengals game in one of the first 3 games. (Burfict out).
If Rooney had his way he would have had games 1 and 3 Pittsburgh/Cincinnati contests, so they wouldn't have to face Burfict.
Cincinnati is not a media town. The ONLY reason they couldn't ignore the Reds in the 70s was because what they accomplished, was impossible to ignore.

Look at Romo. He has won 1 playoff game! However, the media acts like he's invincible!

As a matter of fact, when the Panthers came to Dallas and ONLY because Romo was scheduled to play, the media had them favored to win!  

Panthers 33 Cowboys 14

Romo 11/21, 103 yds, 0 TDs, 3 Int

I agree Romo is puffed up because he plays on the Cowboys AND because he's an UDFA done good.  Even with that being said, we can scoff at his ONE playoff win but...that's more than we've had in a quarter of a century.  The Bengals are less than loved because of the following things:

1.  we haven't won outside of the regular season in a LONG time
2.  we are a small market
3.  our owner doesn't seem too liked or respected by his peers/the NFL
4. we don't make big splash moves or roster/coaching moves the media loves

but the bottom line is that the Bengals just haven't been relevant when it counts and we don't have some sort of popular legacy upon which to rest, ala the Cowboys.

[MrRager]

(06-05-2016, 10:32 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I agree Romo is puffed up because he plays on the Cowboys AND because he's an UDFA done good.  Even with that being said, we can scoff at his ONE playoff win but...that's more than we've had in a quarter of a century.  The Bengals are less than loved because of the following things:

1.  we haven't won outside of the regular season in a LONG time
2.  we are a small market
3.  our owner doesn't seem too liked or respected by his peers/the NFL
4.  we don't make big splash moves or roster/coaching moves the media loves

but the bottom line is that the Bengals just haven't been relevant when it counts and we don't have some sort of popular legacy upon which to rest, ala the Cowboys.

Also, all of this Romo puffing up in very recent. It wasn't very long ago Romo was seen as a bad QB and a major choker. Fans and media used to destroy the guy until they looked at his numbers and the terrible teams around him. Romo is solid and deserves high praise. 

[*Nately120*]

(06-05-2016, 10:39 PM)MrRager Wrote: Also, all of this Romo puffing up in very recent. It wasn't very long ago Romo was seen as a bad QB and a major choker. Fans and media used to destroy the guy until they looked at his numbers and the terrible teams around him. Romo is solid and deserves high praise. 

In all fairness, I think Bengals fans claiming Dalton is unfairly hated and then turning around and jumping on the "trash Romo" wagon are misguided at best, but I also believe any Cowboys QB gets a push.  It's just good business. 

[bengalguy71]

(06-05-2016, 10:44 PM)Nately120 Wrote: In all fairness, I think Bengals fans claiming Dalton is unfairly hated and then turning around and jumping on the "trash Romo" wagon are misguided at best, but I also believe any Cowboys QB gets a push.  It's just good business. 

It's America's team!

Seriously, my posts aren't about Dalton, it's about other QBs who, IMHO, get schmoozed by the media because of markets and biased media.

Many things I agree with Lewis on and 'Ignore the Noise' is one of them!

[*Nately120*]

(06-05-2016, 11:05 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: It's America's team!

Seriously, my posts aren't about Dalton, it's about other QBs who, IMHO, get schmoozed by the media because of markets and biased media.

Many things I agree with Lewis on and 'Ignore the Noise' is one of them!

I agree to an extent.  Chicago has a huge market and they simply can't make the public accept Jay Cutler as being good OR tolerable, for one.  The Cowboys haven't done much in the past 20 years, but they are America's team and blah blah blah.  The rest of the teams the media talks about seem to be either good, or at least interesting (in the case of the Browns it was Manziel bad-news mania).

[bengalguy71]

(06-05-2016, 11:29 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I agree to an extent.  Chicago has a huge market and they simply can't make the public accept Jay Cutler as being good OR tolerable, for one. ....

The fact that Cutler has the personality of a rock doesnt help much either.

Sidebar: Don't forget the '85 Bears who had another QB who made the 'Worst SB Champion QBs' list. (Jim McMahon).

They won with Walter Peyton and an outrageous defense!

[Brownshoe]

(06-05-2016, 10:07 PM)MrRager Wrote: Woah, what now? You don't think Wilson was a top 5 QB last year? That's asinine to me. Wilson was top 3 last season and better than Rodgers 100%. This is without even adding his rushing ability.

lol Wilson was no where near the top 3. He was doing sup-par until he had a streak of horrible defenses at the end of the year. He had 10 TDs and 7 INTs and only averaging 235 yards a game until he started facing a bunch of teams with no defenses.

[MrRager]

(06-06-2016, 12:28 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: lol Wilson was no where near the top 3. He was doing sup-par until he had a streak of horrible defenses at the end of the year. He had 10 TDs and 7 INTs and only averaging 235 yards a game until he started facing a bunch of teams with no defenses.

You have always had a bias against Wilson and refuse to accept any rate stat. 

Wilson this year:
1st in passer rating
4rd in Y/A
6th in TD
2nd in TD%
Only threw 8 INTs (PFR didn't sort out the players with like 15 attempts so I can't find a good ranking)
6th in INT%
2nd in AY/A
4th in ESPN's QBR
3rd in ANY/A
Had three 4th quarter comebacks, which was one behind the leader.

Anyway you slice it he had a great year. If you want to say he played bad defenses, fine. Other QBs played bad defenses throughout the year and none of them put up the end of year numbers or the performances he did. He did have a poorish start to the year, but he and Cam were the best QBs down the stretch last year. He was a big reason why the Seahawks were able to secure another division title.

If you want any context on how well he played you can also watch the games. He has an amazing ability to avoid sacks and extend plays to find the open man. He is like the NFL version of heisman Johnny Manziel. He has quite possibly the worst offensive line in football and was still able to produce the best passer rating in the NFL. He also did all of this with hurt best play maker hurt (Graham) and with his star RB hurt. People bashed the Seahawks receivers for years and he made Baldwin look like an absolute star this year. 

Let's also remember his 553 yards rushing as well. 

I still cannot believe there are people in this world who don't buy into Russel Wilson. He is a future HOFer and one of the best, most efficient, most exciting players the league has seen in years. 

He has played great his entire career and has done nothing but improve, yet people still doubt how incredibly well he has played without an offensive line or receiving weapons. The dude is a baller. 

Anyway I'll just leave it as this because I have discussed Wilson with you in the past and I know you're too stubborn to admit he was one of the best QBs in the NFL this year and the best young QB in the NFL since he was drafted. 

[Joelist]

(06-06-2016, 12:28 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: lol Wilson was no where near the top 3. He was doing sup-par until he had a streak of horrible defenses at the end of the year. He had 10 TDs and 7 INTs and only averaging 235 yards a game until he started facing a bunch of teams with no defenses.

Add Newton to the QBs who inflated their stats playing bad defenses, although in his case he has made a career out of rarely playing decent or good defenses (as has Andrew Luck). 

[*Nately120*]

(06-05-2016, 11:43 PM)bengalguy71 Wrote: The fact that Cutler has the personality of a rock doesnt help much either.

Sidebar: Don't forget the '85 Bears who had another QB who made the 'Worst SB Champion QBs' list. (Jim McMahon).

They won with Walter Peyton and an outrageous defense!

McMahon wasn't a super QB but it's funny that the Bears managed to have all those great defenses, Gayle Sayers, Walter Peyon etc and only win win with the one QB who didn't listen to the coach and could do his own thing on the field.  McMahon is better than he gets credit for, mostly because he was able to NOT be coached into being a crap QB like so many of their other QBs.

Anyways, Chicago is a huge market and the Bears are one of those hallmark teams BUT the powers that be either can't, or don't try to make it seem like the Bears and Cutler are awesome.

[*Nately120*]

(06-06-2016, 01:07 AM)MrRager Wrote: He was a big reason why the Seahawks were able to secure another division title.

Psssst....the Cardinals won the NFC West by 3 games.

[Essex Johnson]

(06-05-2016, 10:07 PM)MrRager Wrote: Woah, what now? You don't think Wilson was a top 5 QB last year? That's asinine to me. Wilson was top 3 last season and better than Rodgers 100%. This is without even adding his rushing ability.

So my question to you is you don;t think Dalton was a top 5 QB last year ?