NFL - Are You Ready For Some Football?! - Off Season

[Al B. Sure!]

Vikings are another possible relocation to Los Angeles (would be the second Minnesota sports team to move to LA). The situation with the Metrodome may expedite a move by either forcing Minnesota to build a new stadium or let them go.

[OzzyKP]

Hmm, I don't quite see that happening.

[OzzyKP]

I suppose if it were Jacksonville that moved, would it replace KC in the AFC West and perhaps have KC move to the south? Or would it remain in the south?

Or... replace rams in NFC West, Rams move to AFC South?

Both Rams and Chiefs seem poorly placed in the west.

[Ben Kenobi]

Move Minnesota to LA and the AFC West. Move KC to the AFC North. Move the Ravens to the AFC South, Houston to the NFC West and the Rams to the NFC North.

[Ben Kenobi]

Isn't that what you said? Huh? Where did you bring up durability?

Given the players I cited, it should be obvious that durability is a factor.

Now Testaverde and Krieg being franchise players?!

Testaverde is underrated. Krieg's 10 best years are very similar to Aikman's. The difference is that Aikman has the classic curve, while Krieg's are all over the place.

A franchise QB plays for 2-3 teams in his career

I don't see that anywhere in your definition. Testaverde had a decent career by peak (at 5 years with 3600+ average), and for longevity. (10 years at 3000+ average), neither mark which Cunningham achieved.

Let's look at Testaverde. He was 90-123-1 in his career... .420. That's unbelievably bad (and compare it to Cunningham's fantastic .607). He only had 3 playoff appearances in his 21 year career!

Wins are team achievements.

Testaverde had only one 4000 yard season

Which is one more than Cunningham.

And who the **** is Dave Krieg?

Educate thyself. A pretty decent QB.

Jake Delhomme

Had 5 years over 3000 yards, which makes Delhomme superior to Cunningham.

Delhomme is actually a really good comp for Cunnigham. Krieg is better than both as a QB.

Phil Simms is the best QB on that list.

Kerry Collins is the best QB on that list. Another underrated solid QB.

Testaverde and Krieg aren't in the same ballpark as Cunningham.

Which is why I'm educating you on some players that you've underrated. Sure they aren't flashy, but we aren't talking about flashy folks. You're talking about solid, consistant franchise quarterbacks.

Flutie didn't rush for 600+ yards a season.

Flutie isn't a RB.

You do realize that neither Testaverde nor Krieg fit your parameters for a franchise QB, right?

I'm looking for one of the three. 2 4000 yard seasons, or 5 seasons at 3600 yards or 10 seasons at 3000 yards.

You do realize that Cunningham had 3 4000 yard seasons if you include rushing yards? And why wouldn't you include rushing yards? Those yards still contribute to the game, do they not?

We are assessing Cunningham as a franchise Quarterback, not as a franchise Running back.

And besides, your Cunningham numbers aren't correct Al.

[Ben Kenobi]

Quarterbacks are not just passers.

As a player you assess the total package. For a position, you assess the focus. The focus of a QB is passing.

I'm not arguing Randall Cunningham the Running back or Randall Cunningham the player. I'm assessing Randall Cunningham the Quarterback. To do so, I assess his passing.

The ultimate job of a QB is to win games.

We've moved beyond assessing Pitchers by their wins. Same with QBs. Wins are a function of the quality of the team, and can obscure high quality players who play on low quality teams. Wins can also inflate an overrate mediocre quarterbacks.

A QB uses whatever he has to that end, whether it's his arm, his legs, or his leadership ability.

I disagree. A Quarterback who runs the ball better than he passes the ball will become a runningback. The ultimate focus for a QB, and all QBs is the pass. The rest is gravy.

In my mind, a QB who can pass effectively AND run is that much better of a QB because he has an entire extra facet to his game.

I disagree. A quarterback who excells at the passing game adds a dimension to the team that cannot be replaced by any other player. Any team with a halfway decent rush attack will use a runningback to rush the ball. The Eagles do not qualify.

Could a Cunningham or a Vick throw for 4000 yards? I don't see why they couldn't if they wanted to.

But they don't. Why didn't Cunningham do so? Because he didn't have the durability to last out the whole season. Why didn't he have the durability? Because he tried to be a runningback. Cause and effect, Albert. QBs who are used in the dual role do not last as long as pure passers.

In fact, look at the 98 Vikings season. Cunningham, at age 35, mind you, became a pure passer. He threw for 3704 yards in 14 starts that season.

He would have gotten over 4200 yards. But instead he got hurt and had to sit out. Something that would be a pattern for his whole career.

Buddy Ryan told Cunningham that he wanted him to be as much of a runner as possible.

Which is why his career was cut short.

[Al B. Sure!]

Move Minnesota to LA and the AFC West. Move KC to the AFC North. Move the Ravens to the AFC South, Houston to the NFC West and the Rams to the NFC North.

What the hell sense would any of that even make? Why the hell are the Chiefs going to the AFC North and the Ravens going to the AFC South? What sense is that? Then why Houston in the NFC West or the Rams in the NFC North?

Why would the Missouri teams go to the North? You do realize that Missouri is a Southern state, right?


Realistically, there wouldn't be a realignment. The NFL has historically only done realignments when expansion teams were added, not when teams moved. That's why the St. Louis Rams are in the NFC West because when they moved from LA, they weren't realigned.

Case in point, the Arizona Cardinals were playing in AZ for over a decade yet remained in the NFC East stemming from their St. Louis days. It wasn't until the addition of the Houston Texans that the league realigned and moved the Cardinals to the NFC West in 2001.

There wouldn't be a realignment due to a team relocation.

[Al B. Sure!]

a bunch of crap that's not worth responding to... Kerry Collins is better than Phil Simms... Testaverde was a good QB... Dave Krieg was a good QB... Jake Delhomme was better than Cunningham

What sport do you watch and assess? You must not be paying attention. I'll tell you as a Giants fan, Kerry Collins was okay and he had his best years with the Giants. Yet he was still no Phil Simms by a long-shot. Kerry Collins would single-handedly lose games for us.

Maybe it was just me being a fan but I couldn't believe how many times Collins would put the ball on the ground. Holy **** I think he was breaking records for fumbles by a QB for a while there.

And besides, your Cunningham numbers aren't correct Al.

How the hell are my Cunningham numbers not correct?

1988: 3808 passing; 624 rushing
1989: 3400 passing; 621 rushing
1990: 3466 passing; 942 rushing

Do those not all add up to over 4000 total yards?

3 4000 yard seasons right there for Randall Cunningham.

[Al B. Sure!]

Yup! I was right:

During the 2001 season, Collins set a single-season NFL record with 23 fumbles

Between him and Tiki, it was like they were conspiring to cost the Giants games. I couldn't tell you how many times the Giants would march down the field (Collins sure had the weapons what with Tiki, Amani Toomer, Ike Hilliard, Joe Jurevicius, and then Shockey), yet they got to the opposing goal line... and either Tiki fumbled or Collins screwed up the snap or had a sack fumble.

Kerry Collins had about two good years in NY including the possibly worst Super Bowl performance by a team ever and that was it. Collins aint ****.

[Al B. Sure!]

As for your second post, this is the crux of it:

The focus of a QB is passing.

That is just plain wrong. A QB directs and executes the offense. That is his job. He uses whatever he has to that end.

Here's a quick thought experiment for you...

Two QB's on two teams. The teams are otherwise identical. One QB throws for 4000 yards. The other throws for 3500 yards and rushes for another 600 yards. Who is the better QB?

The latter. Not only because his ability to run screws with defenses and defensive coordinators so that forces them to make adjustments that will be to the benefit of the offense that is led by the scrambler.

But also because literally, that team would have gained 100 more yards than the pure passer's team. That 100 more yards is an extra march down the field and a touchdown that would make the second team better.

Testaverde's lone 4000 yard campaign in a losing season versus 3 Cunningham 4000+ yard campaigns (and made the playoffs all three of those years). It's clear who was better just by those numbers.


As for this:

We've moved beyond assessing Pitchers by their wins. Same with QBs. Wins are a function of the quality of the team, and can obscure high quality players who play on low quality teams. Wins can also inflate an overrate mediocre quarterbacks.

Who the hell did Randall Cunningham have? Name one offensive play-maker on that late 80's, early 90's offense. A washed up Herschel Walker towards the end of Cunningham's Eagle career? Cris Carter when he was a druggie and alcoholic and "all he did was score touchdowns"? Remember, Ricky Watters didn't come to Philadelphia til 1995.

Randall didn't even have a single 1000 yard receiver to throw to til 1992 when Fred Barnett (exactly. Who the **** is Fred Barnett?) had 1000 yards.


These were the Eagles' #2 rushers (after Cunningham) during Cunningham's height:
1987: FB Anthony Toney 473 yards
1988: Keith Byars 517 yards
1989: FB Anthony Toney 582 yards
1990: FB Heath Sherman 685 yards

How the hell are those the numbers for the Eagles leading RB each of those seasons? That is terrible. And it was god damned fullbacks!

His leading receivers:
1987: Mike Quick 790 yards
1988: TE Keith Jackson 869 yards
1989: RB Keith Byars 721 yards
1990: RB Keith Byars 819 yards

Look! His leading receiver every year was either his RB or his TE! Only Mike Quick in '87 was a WR. And Quick was old and washed up by this time.

[Al B. Sure!]

How does this alone not settle it?

You're clearly wrong, Ben. Are you saying that the people that give the Bert Bell Award, the Pro Football Writers Association, and the Newspaper Enterprise Association were all wrong?

Some awards won by Randall Cunningham:

Awards
1988 NFL Bert Bell Award (Player of the Year)
1990 NFL PFWA MVP
1990 NFL Bert Bell Award (Player of the Year)
1992 NFL AP Comeback Player of the Year
1998 NFL Newspaper Ent. Assoc. MVP
1998 NFL Bert Bell Award (Player of the Year)

Cunningham won the Bert Bell Award 3 times! The only player to ever do so.


Awards won by Testaverde and Krieg:

*crickets*

Why did Krieg and Testaverde never win any awards?

Why was Cunningham a 4x Pro Bowler and 1x All Pro?

Cunningham played at least 14 games 6 seasons. In that stretch, he had 5 playoff appearances and made the Pro Bowl 4 times. To play close to a full season 6 times and make the playoffs 5/6 and the Pro Bowl 4/6... you must be doing something right.

[Al B. Sure!]

It's funny how Ben touts Doug Flutie because of 'what could have been' but denigrates Cunningham for the same reason.

[Lord Avalon]

You think Collins was a fumbler? Krieg edges him out. He may not have fumbled 23 times in one season (18 was his high), but he did fumble 153 times in his career, or about 7.2 for every 10 games. Collins had 135 career fumbles, about 7.0 per 10.

[Al B. Sure!]

I'm looking for one of the three. 2 4000 yard seasons, or 5 seasons at 3600 yards or 10 seasons at 3000 yards.

I don't know what stats you are looking at but Testaverde STILL doesn't fit your criteria:

He had 1 4000 yard season (96), 1 3600 yard season (2000), and 4 3000 yard seasons (88, 89, 98, 2004).


As for Dave Krieg:

0 4000 yard seasons, 2 3600 yard seasons (84, 85), and 4 3000 yard seasons (89, 90, 92, 95)


If 6 3000 yard seasons is what you're looking for in a franchise QB then maybe then Krieg and Testaverde would be considered such QB's.

Cunningham had 5 3000 yard PASSING seasons and had 7 if you include rushing yardage.


Wow. Even your changing definition doesn't apply to your QB's.

[Al B. Sure!]

You think Collins was a fumbler? Krieg edges him out. He may not have fumbled 23 times in one season (18 was his high), but he did fumble 153 times in his career, or about 7.2 for every 10 games. Collins had 135 career fumbles, about 7.0 per 10.

I stand corrected. Krieg was even worse than Collins over the long-haul. Only reinforces my entire argument.

Though 23 fumbles over 16 games is mind-bogglingly bad.

I can't focus too much on fumbles, though, because Cunningham had his share of them as well but you expect that from a running QB. You take those as the lumps to go along with him breaking off big runs and extending plays.


You're reading this, though? What is Ben smoking? I have never encountered anyone who had such wrong opinions about football before. I thought Doug Flutie was better than Elway was the pinnacle of bizarre opinions and while he's not reaching those levels now, still, this is not much better.