NFL - Are You Ready For Some Football?! - 2010 Offseason

[Imran Siddiqui]

@ "rookie starter" bull****!

[-Jrabbit]

Me too.

Apparently Matt Cassel, drafted in 2005, became a "rookie" again in 2008 when Brady got hurt.

Seriously Ben, that excuse is, as my drummer friends say, weak stick.

[Ben Kenobi]

But that's not the point. There was a time that some people considered Brees to be a flash in the pan, and so did the Chargers. If they had confidence in Brees, they wouldn't have drafted Manning.

Edit, my bad about the rookie QB. Was thinking rookie starter there. Yeah, I'm aware it was his third season, which is one of the reasons why he's been so successful, but I'm pretty sure you guys all understood what I meant.

Plus, I don't understand your "fantasy" line-up there. Is it based on the Chargers never drafting Manning/trading for Rivers?

It's based on the Chargers cutting Rivers in '06, signing Brees and spending the 8 million they were spending on Rivers' contract to sign Charles Woodson. Their weakest part in '06 was the secondary, particularly the safety position, McCree would be ditched and Kiel cut later on.

I don't see any good safeties who had their contracts up in '06, perhaps someone can suggest one that would have been a good fit with the Chargers?

Rivers has enviable numbers. In the last two years, he's completed 65+% of his passes w/ 4,000+ yds and 28+ TDs. Not even Brady put up such numbers in his Super Bowl years.

Indeed, and he's right up there with Young in passer rating, and Montana in winning percentage. He's a great QB, but at this point in time Brees is still regarded as the better QB, and with good reason.

But the balance that they had in 2006 is gone. There is no way they could have become better.

Well, you have to remember that they were very hesitant to expose Rivers. I would think if they had Brees, they would have had his veteran presence. The difference in '04 is a not insignificant 1200 yards.

Brees and the Saints performed well this year because they had a rushing attack that had to be respected.

Partially, but even as well as Rivers played, Brees still outperformed him. QB/QB Brees was more valuable to the Saints than Rivers was to the Chargers.

Rivers has done very well to carry the team while LT has been in decline, both rushing and receiving. Heck, he also hasn't even completed a pass in the last two seasons

I would surmise that LT's 'decline' has more to do with the difference in schemes between Shelmon and Cam Cameron, who's becoming renowned for his ability to produce a rushing attack. Shelmon is a considerable downgrade and I'd argue that Ron Rivera's version of the 3-4 is better then Wade Phillips, although both are extremely good. I haven't seen a pitch out in 2 years, which used to be LT's bread and butter under Cam. Norv doesn't seem to like the pitch out to LT in motion, which is a real shame.

The coaching staff in 06 was ridiculously deep, Schotty, with Cam + Wade as OC and DC respectively.

For you to think that LT and Brees would peak at the same time because they're the same age is ridiculous. Brees is starting to peak. LT has no more upside.

My point being simply that QB peaks later than RB, so to draft a RB and QB the same year, is better then drafting a QB two years after the RB.

[Ben Kenobi]

Seriously Ben, that excuse is, as my drummer friends say, weak stick.

WTF? Look, asshats, any excuse to bash is weak stick. You seriously mean to think that I thought Rivers started in his first year in the NFL?

Seriously? You guys are so full of crap that you attack me and not my points.

I've used the term 'rookie starter' for years and no one blinks till the carousel of crap starts up.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You are a moron.

[Ben Kenobi]

Hey, ya'll seem to have difficulty understanding the concept of 'rookie starter'.

Why are you branding me the idiot? Piss off Imran.

If you've got something constructive it would be great to read.

[Lord Avalon]

Ben, you're the ******** who isn't using "rookie" properly, so get a ****ing clue. Dumbass.

[Grandpa Troll]

You are a moron.

Signature material, Imran

[-Jrabbit]

A simple "I meant first-year starter" would have avoided the bashing.

But you came with:

2006 was the first season that Rivers started so he was a rookie starter.

Applying the term "rookie starter" to non-rookies is ridiculous. So if, as you claim, you have been using this phrase inaccurately for several years, I guess I should apologize for not giving you grief a lot sooner.

Sorry.

[Ben Kenobi]

I did apologise for mixing up the terms.

Which is why I'm rather hesitant to give Imran a pass here. C'mon. Don't turn a good thread and discussion into crap.

[SlowwHand]

I can hardly wait for the NFL draft. I get so excited every year. I've listened to it on the radio some years at the lake.

[Jaguar]

Here's a post I wrote about Brees on another forum. Yes, he actually is one of the best ever.

Brees's past four years are easily a contender to be the best four-year stretch by any QB in history. Even if you extend it to six years, it's probably still true. Here is a comparison of several HOF QBs' four-season averages at their peaks. For one player, Tom Brady, I took four non-consecutive years to get around his nonexistent 08 season. For another, Dan Marino, I averaged him over three and two-thirds seasons, because he only took about 2/3 of his team's attempts in his rookie year, but he was very impressive with them. Dan Fouts was averaged over 3.56 seasons, because of the strike year. I'm trying to cast all the competition in the best possible light - and note that I have made no concessions for Brees, who sat out two week 17 games after clinching the best possible playoff seeding.

Brees: 4575 yards, 31 TD, 14 INT, 66.8%, 7.77 yards per attempt, 17 sacks
QB B: 4015 yards, 36 TD, 14 INT, 62.4%, 7.27 yards per attempt, 32 sacks
QB C: 3705 yards, 23 TD, 12 INT, 63.2%, 7.22 yards per attempt, 33 sacks
QB D: 4408 yards, 39 TD, 18 INT, 58.5%, 7.89 yards per attempt, 16 sacks
QB E: 4629 yards, 29 TD, 21 INT, 62.6%, 8.01 yards per attempt, 26 sacks
QB F: 4211 yards, 32 TD, 13 INT, 64.6%, 7.66 yards per attempt, 22 sacks
QB G: 4242 yards, 34 TD, 10 INT, 66.7%, 8.14 yards per attempt, 16 sacks

I just went ahead and put Brees as QB A, since he's pretty easy to spot with his massive yardage production and high completion percentage.

How does he stack up to QB B and C? More or less strictly superior. Those are Favre and Elway, respectively. Sure, those guys are admired more for longevity than for peak, and Elway's rushing yardage isn't accounted for. However, their sack rates are pretty horrid (and this is after Elway had Zimmerman and Nalen, too.) Favre began to deliver the ball more quickly as he aged, but these are his MVP seasons, and it would do him a disservice to pick a later part of his career.

QB D is obviously Marino - the stats are very characteristic of him. The TD production is ridiculous, and he's one of only two QBs to take fewer sacks than Brees - but he does produce more incompletions and interceptions than most of the other QBs. QB E is another high-risk-high-reward guy, Dan Fouts. Again, your preference probably depends on how much risk you want to take. Brees is a "safe" QB, whereas Fouts is a "fun" one who produces more big plays for both offense and defense. These guys played in a different style and in a different era, but they are by no means clearly superior or clearly inferior.

F and G are Brees's contemporaries - Brady and Manning. Manning's 4-season average (actually from 2003-2006, but 2004-2007 would also look impressive, as would 2006-2009) is pretty clearly the best of all the quarterbacks. Brady's stats are the most similar to Brees's. But Brees is superior across the board, except by a fraction of an interception and a fraction of a TD per year.

You can say that I cherrypicked four years as my timeframe to make Brees look good, but Brees's 2004 and 2005 are impressive as well - and unless I keep giving other quarterbacks a lot of deference for injuries and other missed games, Brees probably still looks superior over six years. Brees has missed 2 games, both because he had clinched the best possible playoff seeding.

In short, if you put Brees up against a whole horde of "best-ever" type QBs, he can stack up reasonably well statistically against all of them, except for Manning.

[Lord Avalon]

You left out number of completions and attempts.

[Tuberski]

WTF? Look, asshats, any excuse to bash is weak stick. You seriously mean to think that I thought Rivers started in his first year in the NFL?

Seriously? You guys are so full of crap that you attack me and not my points.

I've used the term 'rookie starter' for years and no one blinks till the carousel of crap starts up.

You are the only person to refer to a non rookie, who finally starts, as a rookie starter.

You made up a definition for a term that doesn't exist. I've heard rookie starter, but only as it applies to a first year starter.

ACK!

[Tuberski]

I did apologise for mixing up the terms.

Which is why I'm rather hesitant to give Imran a pass here. C'mon. Don't turn a good thread and discussion into crap.

No, you didn't. You justified your use of the term.

ACK!