RG3 posts the highest QBTG ever.

[skinnyskins]

If I find at least one more fact than you did proving that he had outstanding support, will you concede you're wrong?

No, of course not.

If it was strong enough evidence to counter what I already know then I would surely change my opinion. That is what intelligent people do.

[Oldfan]

If it was strong enough evidence to counter what I already know then I would surely change my opinion. That is what intelligent people do.

Okay, let's try this. Will you concede that Bill Belichik is the best coach in the NFL?

[Hitman21ST]

If it was strong enough evidence to counter what I already know then I would surely change my opinion. That is what intelligent people do.

I'll take a stab at it, although I'll probably miss a few of OF's points.

He has said that Brady is a Grade A passer, which I think everyone on here can agree with. When he talks about "support system" he not only means other players, but also coaches, front office, etc.

While Brady's players have changed more often than a politician's stance, his front office and head coach have remained the same (the OC has changed, but the offensive system is Belichick's - therefore the OC rotation would not have as much an effect). This stability provides Brady with a familiarity of the system that will accentuate his strong points and hide his weaknesses (as any good offensive system would do - Brady's gets pointed out though because of the length of the stability).

Brady "looks" better than a quarterback of similar physical attributes who is in an offense that is always in flux because of this familiarity.

I wouldn't say Brady is overrated in terms of "he sucks but people say he's great" but rather "he's very good and has flourished in an offense that makes him look even better".

Mind you, this could be said for just about any QB who has been in the same system for years and years. A QB like Brady isn't going to do well in an offense that requires him to move, just like a QB like RG3 isn't going to be as good in a system like Brady's, that is designed to keep him protected in the pocket.

Any QB in the right system could be said to be "overrated" because the system accentuates his abilities and hides his deficiencies, and any QB in the wrong system could be said to be "underrated" because is does not allow him to do what he does best.

Oldfan, how did I do?

[skinfan2k]

I must be losing touch. Seems to me I used to warrant a higher grade of drive-by poster.

This thread is obvious. You dont need to make a system to grade Qbs

[skinnyskins]

Okay, let's try this. Will you concede that Bill Belichik is the best coach in the NFL?

For the sake of this argument, sure.

[Oldfan]

...Oldfan, how did I do?

I'll give you an A.

[skinsmarydu]

Okay, let's try this. Will you concede that Bill Belichik is the best coach in the NFL?

Never. He cheated.

[Hitman21ST]

I'll give you an A.

OK, I'm done.

[Oldfan]

For the sake of this argument, sure.

Will you concede that

Matt Cassell's finest year was in 2008 with the Patriots and that..

a 33% increase in Brady's QB rating from 2006, when he had the worst receivers in the NFL, to 2007 when Welker and Moss were added to the roster indicates that receivers make a big difference to a QB's performance?

I have to leave you now but...

Will you concede that Brady was supported by 20 players (I probably missed a few) who made the All Pro squad. Several of them multiple times and several who were first team all pros in multiple years?

Seymour
Welker
Law
Viniateri
Gotkowski
Light
Mankins
Mayo
Moss
Samuel
Verabel
Harrison
Izzo
Merriweather
Bruschi
Carter
Koppen
Brown
Wilfork
Milloy

[DogofWar1]

Will you concede that

Matt Cassell's finest year was in 2008 with the Patriots and that..

a 33% increase in Brady's QB rating from 2006, when he had the worst receivers in the NFL, to 2007 when Welker and Moss were added to the roster indicates that receivers make a big difference to a QB's performance?

The short answer to your question is "yes" in that receivers make a difference, but it's more complicated than that.

In 2006, even with bad WRs, Brady still completed 61% of his passes, and had a 2-1 TD-INT ratio, and ended with an 87.9 rating.

His average rating is a 96 over 10 seasons, and his worst season where he played most of the games was an 85.7 rating in '02. My point here is that, good WRs or bad, Brady has consistently put up very good statistics. As you said, in 2006 he had crappy support, while in 2007 he had great support, and saw a huge improvement in his rating and stat-line, but his stat-line in 2006 was still very good.

I think some people here do undervalue team support, but at the same time, I think you might be overvaluing team support a little bit as well. QBs like Brady will still play well in almost every situation, almost regardless of the support around them. They play better with great support, but even without it, if they have an average team they'll still do well.

Also, being a little nit-picky, but Cassel's finest year, in terms of rating, and TD-INT came in 2010 with the Chiefs. He's been inconsistent though, and looks done now.

[Oldfan]

...Also, being a little nit-picky, but Cassel's finest year, in terms of rating, and TD-INT came in 2010 with the Chiefs. He's been inconsistent though, and looks done now.

I was defining "finest year" in terms of his reputation, but I didn't make that clear.

I regard Brady as the best of the pocket passers. They don't get any better, but all QBs on winning teams are overrated, IMO.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Will you concede that

Matt Cassell's finest year was in 2008 with the Patriots and that..

a 33% increase in Brady's QB rating from 2006, when he had the worst receivers in the NFL, to 2007 when Welker and Moss were added to the roster indicates that receivers make a big difference to a QB's performance?

I have to leave you now but...

Yes, but there's a definite ceiling to how good the WRs can make the QB.

Matt Cassel in 2008 with Brady's supporting cast: 21 TDs, 11 INTs, 89.4 QBR, 6.9 YPA, 10-5 record as a starter:
Brady in 2006 with the pre Moss/pre Welker supporting cast: 24 TDs, 12 INTs, 87.9 YPA, 6.8 YPA, 12-4 record as a starter.

So yes, Brady's performance was drastically improved by going from having the worst WR corps in the NFL to the best. But his performance with the worst WR corps in the NFL was essentially equal to Cassel's performance with the best WR corps in the NFL.

[skinnyskins]

Will you concede that

Matt Cassell's finest year was in 2008 with the Patriots and that..

a 33% increase in Brady's QB rating from 2006, when he had the worst receivers in the NFL, to 2007 when Welker and Moss were added to the roster indicates that receivers make a big difference to a QB's performance?

I have to leave you now but...

Will you concede that Brady was supported by 20 players (I probably missed a few) who made the All Pro squad. Several of them multiple times and several who were first team all pros in multiple years?

Seymour
Welker
Law
Viniateri
Gotkowski
Light
Mankins
Mayo
Moss
Samuel
Verabel
Harrison
Izzo
Merriweather
Bruschi
Carter
Koppen
Brown
Wilfork
Milloy

Yes, Cassel's best year was with the Pats in 2008. However, we have covered this before to say the Pat's offence production dropped dramatically when Cassel took over compared to the year before. Cassel was working with the same receivers and system at that time. Will you concede that the drop in ~1200 yds passing, 29 passing TDs, and an increase in 8 INTs is a result of Brady's absence?

Of course production will go up with better receivers, as what happened when the Pats got Moss and Welker. But, that does not account for the production he put up prior to 2006, when he won 3 SBs. Will you concede that Brady was very successful without premier receivers?

Of those players you listed only 6 played offense Welker, Light, Mankins, Moss, Koppen, Brown. The rest may have helped the team win more games but did not account for offensive production.

[Jumbo]

This thread is obvious. You dont need to make a system to grade Qbs

Make that your last post in this thread.

And don't PM me.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is no trolling going on here re: the OP, Laron Burgundy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's what I see (and it's nothing new):

OF can be wrong, annoying, and obstinate at any given time (few are exempt from this comment). OF has a definite style, one I've explained in threads and PM in the past, that involves more the classical forms of debate and logic that are alien to many posters. He is good at it--perhaps not as good as he thinks he is, but better than most of his challengers. That style can be particularly frustrating if you're on the short end---just like in actual debates.

Some people do seem to get "extra" attitudinally erect when engaging him in argument and some more dense (to pick a term) than is their norm. Some contest him quite well, and do just fine win/lose/draw, or go with not even looking at it in such terms.

When and where, all or any of this, is occurring is immaterial as long as there are no board management issues in the view of any moderator.

Many well recognized posters have one or more signature aspects to their style, and of varying values (liked/despised--cool/sucks) to various members. Several such are active in this thread. OF is always knowledgeable (football-wise and just general intelligence) and interesting, IMV. He usualy gernetas a lot of solid football talk, which is our primary raison d'être. There is a reason he has the specialty id tag under his name.

This will be the last time I interrupt this thread for some sort of "management" post. In fact, it's the last time I intend to make these comments on such a matter, as I have already made more than a few times over the years.

I want no one to respond to this post. If you do it will be a week off. Read it and heed or reject whatever you choose.


Now---carry on....there's some very good and fun discussion in this now-20-page thread, especially when no one's tantruming or grousing.

[skinfan2k]

OF you are right in everything you say but my question is how do we apply this against certain coaches, schemes and personnel? Thats where i might have misfired earlier. Optimally you want someone with Vick Speed, Peyton Manning Brain, Tom Brady Coolness in the pocket, and Aaron Rodgers accuracy.

How we do use your model and would this model be more applicable to use in college when looking at QB talent at the high school ranks?