RG3 posts the highest QBTG ever.

[Jumbo]

sf2K, you apparently missed my directive, but I'll suspend it if you're actually going to engage like this now, in productive conversation. So go ahead.

[skinsmarydu]

my hubby always wondered why I hang out in bars in the middle of the afternoon...more knowledge gained by older gentlemen. Hail to Oldfan!

[Chachie]

I really think you should add a vision category.

Good one. I was thinking a game management category too. Pre-snap, clock savvy, audibles, etc.

[Oldfan]

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?

As a result of Brady's absence? Sure, I'll concede that. But if Matt Cassel had been able to start with eight years in the scheme, rather than making his first start since high school, who knows what he might have done?

As it was, Belichik had to run the football for the first five games -- which cut into Cassel's stats. It took half a season to get the guy up to speed, but once there, Belichik found out that he had a more athletic QB who could throw on the move. I've read that Cassel's second half DVOA was better than Brady's average. His performance was good enough to reward the team with a #2 pick and Cassel with a lucrative deal. Cassel owes a lot to the Patriot's support system.

Of course production will go up with better receivers, as what happened when the Pats got Moss and Welker.

Well, ask yourself, if just two players can make a 33% difference in Brady's OB rating, what would happen to it if you took away a couple of good O-linemen and replaced them? Or how about one of their good TEs?

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 course not. I won't concede that any team achievement is Brady's personal accomplishment. In fact, I recall broadcasters saying that 2006 might have been Belichik's finest coaching job because he didn't have a legit WR on the roster, but compensated by using two good TEs.

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.

The rest may have helped the team win more games? Then why would you claim in the previous paragraph that "he (Brady) won 3 SBs?"

I'm willing to concede that most of the supporting cast were on the defense. I said that Brady benefited from an outstanding support system. From my OP: Definition: "quarterback support" includes receivers, protectors, coaches, scheme, defense and special teams.

As for the offensive numbers, we haven't mentioned the biggest factor in Brady's support package -- the scheme. Belichik has stayed at the leading edge of strategy. When he saw the success that Tom Moore and Peyton had using the shotgun as a base, he put even more shotgun in for Brady.

Matt Bowen called the Pats scheme a "WCO out of the shotgun." Very QB-friendly, it featured high-percentage passes. In 2007, the Patriots offense was he first in the NFL to throw more than half their offensive passes from the gun.

The QB position is the most important on the team, but the Bandwagon gives QBs way, way too much credit for wins and much too much blame for losses.

Brady is a grade A pocket passer. Way overrated.

---------- Post added November-20th-2012 at 11:49 PM ----------

my hubby always wondered why I hang out in bars in the middle of the afternoon...more knowledge gained by older gentlemen. Hail to Oldfan!

Thank you, Ma'm

[Laron Burgundy]

I'm curious when you say grade A pocket passer but then call him overrated. Would seem like grade A would be the cream of the crop, the highest praise. But Brady has never had athleticism, so there are things he can not do. Likewise taking away scouting the mental aspect of a player's game does a disservice to pocket passers. Sure, learning a playbook may only take average intelligence, but recognizing coverages as well as blitzes/stunts, making decisions based on that and choosing the correct target are all the mental side of the game and arguably just as important as arm talent, and more important than leg talent. Some people are much faster at disseminating information and reacting to it.

[NLC1054]

Okay, let's just cut to the chase...


Oldfan's bottom line:

Tom Brady is overrated. The only reason Tom Brady has ever been anything is because Bill Belichick is the greatest coach in the history of the NFL, who perfectly crafted a system around Brady that mask all his flaws. Guys like Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Montana, Young, Eli are really only good because their teams had coaches that coached them past relevative mediocrity and put advanced support systems around them; you could drop guys like Marc Bulger, Matt Cassel and John Skelton and the like into those support systems and they would perform just as well if not better, because those guys really aren't that good.

Quarterbacks like Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III and Jay Cutler are better by default because their physical skillsets far outweigh most of those guys, and they can carry more of the burden of their football team on their backs without said supporting cast. If you put Jay Cutler on the Patriots, they'd win even more Super Bowls than Brady just because Cutler is a flat-out better quarterback on a physical level, and combined with the top notch coaching of Belichick Cutler would have more success. Meanwhile if you dropped Tom Brady into the Bears (or for the arguments sake, the Broncos), Brady wouldn't be half the quarterback he is now without the coaching of Belichick.

Brady has been made into what he is not because he's any good, but because he lucked into getting drafted by Belichick. Without him he'd be nothing, and the same goes for just about any quarterback Oldfan doesn't hold in the highest regard.

This is the world according to Oldfan, without all the wishy-washy need for fake QB ratings.

[Oldfan]

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?

My QB grades are based on looking at the same things that scouts look for, so it can be used at any level. I'm not a scout, but I was interested in QB mechanics long before NFL coaches recognized the value. I don't actually use the numbers. I thought they would help in the presentation.

---------- Post added November-21st-2012 at 12:48 AM ----------

Okay, let's just cut to the chase...

(Isn't he cool?)

Oldfan's bottom line:

Tom Brady is overrated. The only reason Tom Brady has ever been anything is because Bill Belichick is the greatest coach in the history of the NFL, who perfectly crafted a system around Brady that mask all his flaws. Guys like Manning, Rodgers, Brees, Montana, Young, Eli are really only good because their teams had coaches that coached them past relevative mediocrity and put advanced support systems around them; you could drop guys like Marc Bulger, Matt Cassel and John Skelton and the like into those support systems and they would perform just as well if not better, because those guys really aren't that good.

(The boy loves his strawman arguments. Doesn't he?)

Quarterbacks like Andrew Luck, Robert Griffin III and Jay Cutler are better by default because their physical skillsets far outweigh most of those guys, and they can carry more of the burden of their football team on their backs without said supporting cast. If you put Jay Cutler on the Patriots, they'd win even more Super Bowls than Brady just because Cutler is a flat-out better quarterback on a physical level, and combined with the top notch coaching of Belichick Cutler would have more success. Meanwhile if you dropped Tom Brady into the Bears (or for the arguments sake, the Broncos), Brady wouldn't be half the quarterback he is now without the coaching of Belichick.

(He's still building that straw devil)

Brady has been made into what he is not because he's any good, but because he lucked into getting drafted by Belichick. Without him he'd be nothing, and the same goes for just about any quarterback Oldfan doesn't hold in the highest regard.

This is the world according to Oldfan, without all the wishy-washy need for fake QB ratings.

(This strawman wasn't even close to NLC's best effort. A while back, he started a thread. The entire OP was a full-page strawman argument. I kid you not. And he thoroughly thrashed that devil.)

[NLC1054]

I'm not being cool, I just don't find the point in humoring you and pretending what you say actually has some sort of merit.

Feel free to tell me the bits you disagree with.

[Oldfan]

I'm curious when you say grade A pocket passer but then call him overrated. Would seem like grade A would be the cream of the crop, the highest praise.

I have explained that I think the QB position is way overrated. When QBs tell us that they get too much credit for wins and too much blame for losses, I agree. Since the position is overrated, QBs on winning teams get far too much credit.

Likewise taking away scouting the mental aspect of a player's game does a disservice to pocket passers. Sure, learning a playbook may only take average intelligence, but recognizing coverages as well as blitzes/stunts, making decisions based on that and choosing the correct target are all the mental side of the game and arguably just as important as arm talent, and more important than leg talent. Some people are much faster at disseminating information and reacting to it.

I don't grade what I can't see. If I could get impartial grades from OCs, I'd use them

---------- Post added November-21st-2012 at 01:04 AM ----------

...Feel free to tell me the bits you disagree with.

Not worth my time.

[NLC1054]

Not worth my time.

Tell me where I've misrepresented your opinion on anything I said. Where did I build some giant strawman?

The only thing I've done, is simply stated what you have said.

Brady has been made into what he is not because he's any good, but because he lucked into getting drafted by Belichick.

Tom Brady was lucky to have been picked by Belichik in the sixth round. If he had been picked by the lowly Saints, who picked Bulger instead, and Bulger had been picked by NE, Bulger would now be healthy and a shoo in for a first ballot HOF selection while skinny Tom Brady would be lucky not to be in a wheelchair from the pounding he would have taken in Bulger's shoes.

This is the crux of your argument. This is not a strawman.

You view some guys as overrated system quarterbacks. And guys like Cam, RG3 and Cutler as better than those quarterbacks because they have better physical attributes. That is not a strawman argument. That is the entire basis of your quarterback rating system.

[cphil006]

Dude, come on. The premise is a physical grade on physical traits. Not statistics. Therefore, statistics don't prove your point in THIS debate. You may be right, and I'd tend to agree, that he's overall one of the best of all time. But that's not what the premise or purpose of this thread is. It's based on the physical.

Doesn't the fact that he has had that much success indicate he can make all of the throws in every situation as well as elude when he needs to? He's got 10+ years of greatness. That should indicate he absolutely is better at every throw than most of the other QBs in his self-proclaimed "physical trait" talent grading system. If he thinks his physical traits are not up to par, that's one thing, but to call him overrated and he's not great is another... yet he can't back that up...

The whole basis of this arguement was based on physical abilities, but it's loosely called talent, which it is not... if being a great QB was strictly physical abilities, then Dan Kendra would be one of the greatest QBs ever... heck even Kyle Boller...

Stop calling it talent... it's one man's view of a couple of physical traits... otherwise known as Oldfan's flawed ratings...

This does nothing to combat the supporting cast/system quarterback opinion. People think the term "system quarterback" is a dirty word. It's not. It means the system and the quarterback melded well. It's a good thing.

---------- Post added November-20th-2012 at 05:17 PM ----------



Too easy.

Dan Marino.

Peyton Manning.

---------- Post added November-20th-2012 at 05:18 PM ----------



Why do you guys keep pushing this? It's a grading system for physical ability only.

Because he states it's a rating of talent, which it is not... talent includes mental (among others), which he admits is not part of his equation therefore it's not a total measure of talent, which again he alludes that his rating is a measure of talent... only this rating is for some physical tools only...

even as much, he stated Brady is overrated, I stated Brady is great. I presented facts to back up my arguement and he did not.

[CjSuAvE22]

Tomm, RGIII will make or break my year if WE can WIN tomm THEN you best believe this team can go on a run, nothing has gone right for me the past two months lol even the girl im seeing has a 40 year old fiance and we are only 25....RG III Will fix it all tomm right before thxgiving YUM.

[Oldfan]

...This is the crux of your argument. This is not a strawman.

You view some guys as overrated system quarterbacks. And guys like Cam, RG3 and Cutler as better than those quarterbacks because they have better physical attributes. That is not a strawman argument. That is the entire basis of your quarterback rating system.

Well, you're right. The paragraph you just wrote is not exactly my position, but it's close enough that I wouldn't call it a strawman. But, your Post 306 sure as hell was.

The part you got wrong here is that I don't "...view some guys as overrated system quarterbacks." I view ALL players as system players and the quarterback position as greatly overrated. Since the QB position is overrated, QBs on winning teams get vastly overrated, even grade A QBs like Brady.

You are right that I generally grade the athlete-QB higher than pocket passers. To me, that's just common sense since pocket passers can't do as much on their own to threaten defenses. Shanahan can scheme to use RG3's legs to help him cover the weakness of his O-line, just as he did in Denver with Cutler in 2008.

If Mike Shanahan built around Tom Brady, he would need five big boys in front to protect him. The ZBS running game would not be possible with Brady because those smaller linemen couldn't protect him. That, and the fact that Brady couldn't run Mike's signature boot off the stretch well. He doesn't move well and doesn't throw on the move well.

[MustangSteve]

Introducing the Quarterback Talent Grade (QBTG) --

Definition: "quarterback support" includes receivers, protectors, coaches, scheme, defense and special teams.

Please consider this hypothetical:

Identical twins, Tom and Dave, were born to be NFL quarterbacks. Physically and mentally, they have identical skill sets. In the NFL draft, Dave unfortunately was drafted by a team that gave him poor support his entire career. Tom was lucky. The team that drafted him gave him outstanding support throughout his career.

You and I know that Tom and Dave are absolutely equal in ability because I told you so. But, how would anyone else know? They won't be able to see it in their performances. And since statistics measure performances, they won't be able to judge from quarterback statistics. Tom's QB rating for his career will be higher; his team will win more games; he will win MVP awards and Super Bowls. Lucky Tom will go into the Hall of Fame, while his identical twin Dave, absolutely his equal at the QB position, will not.

The truth is -- we cannot grade and compare quarterbacks based on their performances. The only intelligent way to grade Tom and Dave is to learn to grade their skill sets. If we do it right, we should discover that they are equal in talent.

This is well said oldfan and I think this method should be taught to the NFL, It's much better than any I have heard from their analyst. I have said my entire life that there are somethings that stats just don't and can not show, and that robs many great and talented players from ever getting the respect and attention they deserve. This is really a great post to debate on.

There are many QB's as well as other players who didn't get that ring or name into the HOF because of the crew, coach, and system around them. And all of us Redskins fans love hearing that we not only have a franchise QB, but a very good one at that. I love the kid and hope he and the crew around him gets better each year. He already deserves a Lombardi, just for being that leader on and off the field, keeping his offense hopeful and wanting to win, as well as his play on the field.

[WhoRUSupposed2Be]

Tell me where I've misrepresented your opinion on anything I said. Where did I build some giant strawman?

The only thing I've done, is simply stated what you have said.







This is the crux of your argument. This is not a strawman.

You view some guys as overrated system quarterbacks. And guys like Cam, RG3 and Cutler as better than those quarterbacks because they have better physical attributes. That is not a strawman argument. That is the entire basis of your quarterback rating system.

NCL, while I admire you as a poster as well an intellectual dissecter of bull**** I am going to have to ask that you level with OldFan on this particular subject because this is a thread overstating about a QB's athleticism... not sure how it became an outcry about support systems.

Belichick benefits from Brady just as Brady benefits from Belichick, there is no one without the other.