NFL 2013 Season Thread

[Ben Kenobi]

And Doug Williams is #10 between Terry Bradshaw in 1978 and Aaron Rodgers in 2010, ahead of even Steve Young 1994 and Joe Montana 1984.

And so is Jake Delhomme. Clearly Steve Young and Montana are inferior to the great Delhomme. I rest my case.

[Al B. Sure!]

And so is Jake Delhomme. Clearly Steve Young and Montana are inferior to the great Delhomme. I rest my case.

So why did you bring up that Plunkett is #2?

I'm also puzzled by this comment of yours:

Ahh, bull****. You're retracting your claim now because you got owned.

What claim am I retracting? Kindly show me my claim.

[Ben Kenobi]

So why did you bring up that Plunkett is #2?

Why did you? You brought up Plunkett expecting me to be unfamiliar with him. I went through the lists, and ran the numbers and saw that Williams, (and Hostetler is really the only other arguable one), is the worst QB by career record to win the superbowl.

We would expect to see similarities between Plunkett's run, and Williams run if both were truly as bad as they are said to be. We do.

What claim am I retracting? Kindly show me my claim.

That Williams isn't the worst Super bowl winning QB. You're arguing because Williams played well on that streak is significant. I'm showing you, that it's not. Plunkett whom you despise had a better run than Williams, so if anything you should be arguing about how great Plunkett really is.

[Al B. Sure!]

Plunkett whom you despise

Are you insane? Why do you think I 'despise' Plunkett?

You are a crazy man.

[Ben Kenobi]

Well, fine then. Williams happened to string together three games - that is why he's notable. So did Delhomme, and Delhomme had a better run. If you're willing to concede that Willams was a pretty terrible QB, and the worst to woin a superbowl then I've got nothing more to argue.

[Al B. Sure!]

I'm not even going to defend Doug Williams because I don't need you to misconstrue that I think he was good when I already said he was very mediocre... just as you somehow think that I 'despise' Jim Plunkett, I don't know what insanity your mind is capable of perceiving.

I'm just going to point out that Doug Williams led the hapless late-70's, early 80's Bucs to their only three winning seasons between 1976 and 1997, even taking them to the Conference championship in 1979 (where he suffered a tricep injury as the Bucs lost 9-0). He was the Bucs best QB for 20 years.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm just going to point out that Doug Williams led the hapless late-70's, early 80's Bucs to their only three winning seasons between 1976 and 1997, even taking them to the Conference championship in 1979 (where he suffered a tricep injury as the Bucs lost 9-0). He was the Bucs best QB for 30 years.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/?p=8627

This study shows that Doug Williams received .8 standard deviations of support in his overall playoff record of 4-3. Right about the same as Hostetler. Less than Dilfer and Brad Johnson received. Unfortunately, it doesn't separate out the superbowl run, although I should be able to run that analysis myself from the data provided. Williams had one impossible loss which greatly skews the stats.

In any case, Doug Williams only had 1 impossible game in his playoff career. He had one gimme, 2 easy games and 3 neutral games. Had he been league average, he would have been expected to go 5-2, instead of his 4-3.

[Ben Kenobi]

It's too easy I don't even know where to begin with him, but let's start with the fact that this 'worst QB ever' is actually a superbowl MVP...

Undeserved Superbowl MVP, who received .8 standard deviations of support in his overall playoff career. Which includes the blowout loss. Sure, he won the games, but he actually performed worse than league average would expect.

Doug Williams never won a single playoff game in which his team was at a disadvantage. Every single playoff game he won - his defense and the run game provided him with an advantage. Every single one.

Or the fact that Doug Williams had such a poor record

Doug Williams was 5-9 with the Super bowl champion Redskins.

The Bucs didn't have a winning season until after Williams arrived, and in the four years he was the team's established starter, they went to the playoffs in three!

He went 1-3 in those games.

He took them to the NFC Championship game in only their 4th year of existence FFS!

Yes, they went 10-6 that season.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1979/

See that point differential? They were not the best team that year in the division.

They were the 8th best NFC team in offense. Defensively they were 3rd.

They were rated 9-7 by expected wins, so they got into the playoffs through luck.

So let's look at ol' Dougie Williams how did he do?

10-6 2448 yards, 41.8 completion percentage 18 TDs, 24 INTs.

Wow, that's ****ing crap.

How did they go 10-6? Let's take a closer look at the games.

Going 5-0 to start the season, Rushing yards were 229, 98 (won in OT), 235, 148, 214.

The only game that Doug Williams threw more than they rushed was the OT win vs the Baltimore Colts.

He did better as the season went on, but in the 10 wins, Williams threw for more yards than they rushed in only 2 games. One of them he had a pretty good game against the Vikings, throwing for 250, and they rushed for 102, and another vs the Lions where he threw for 182 and they rushed for 102.

To put it in perspective, Doug Williams only threw once for 200+ yards in a win, and only once did they win with fewer than 100 yards, and that was in OT. Clearly the 79 Bucs were a run first, pass last team. Ricky Bell had an amazing 1263 yards and 7 TDs.

So, because of conference records and their 5-0 start in which Doug Williams contributed little to nothing, they get a home playoff game against the Eagles.

How did it go? Well. Ricky Bell scored 2 TDs, and they got a FG to go up 17-0.

Then he thought he should get a pay rise as he was by far the worst paid of any starting QBs at the time:

He was a ****ty QB.

[Ben Kenobi]

It's all there in Black and White (cos, let's face it, this is about racism!) and makes a total and utter mockery of Ben's lies... Christ, because of what Culverhouse did to Williams, Bo Jackson (Ben don't know football) refused to play for the Bucs when they picked him in the draft in '86...

They went to the conference championship when he had a passer rating of 55. Ricky Bell and the Bucs defense (which was excellent), got them there. His pass completion rate was a Kordell-Stewart like 42 percent that year.

He was a ****ing ****ty QB. Worst superbowl winner ever.

[Ben Kenobi]

Flutie only had 37 regular season wins - not 38 (like Williams)... Why do you lie like this when it is a mere formality to expose you?

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/F/FlutDo00.htm

Did you forget the Bears game, he started in 1984?

In fact Flutie didn't play in a single playoff game, unlike Williams' 7 (4-3)

Flutie started for the 1999 Bills, and went 10-5, in the 15 games he started. Threw for 200+ on 5 wins.

William's only playoff win in a season where he started for the Bucs was that first one. Flutie earned his shot in 1999, and we all know what happened with Wade Phillips in the Music City Miracle.

Face it, in all the metrics that count, Williams is an infinitely more successful QB than your beloved Flutie.

Yeah, Flutie will just have to be content with being a football legend like Warren Moon instead of the worst Superbowl winning QB of all time.

Williams had a better overall passer rating than Plunkett, which is supposed to mean he's the better QB isn't it...?

What are you using for that?

[Ben Kenobi]

Doug Williams' Superbowl XXII stats: 18 of 29 for 340 yards with 4 TDs and 1 INT

How is that an undeserved Superbowl MVP!!?

Well, let's see.

Ricky Sanders, 9-193-2

Nobody else had 4 catches.

2 plays combined for 130 yards that quarter.

Timmy Smith:

22-204-2 TDs.

So if we subtract Ricky Sanders, we end up with 9-18 140 2 TDs.

He wasn't even the second best offensive player that game.

Ricky Sanders was a decent WR - 2 1000 yard seasons. 6477 receiving yards.

Timmy Smith had that one fluke game, almost half his career total in that one game. It was a strange season. You have a collection of Also-rans who never did anything again after that one season. They all came together and broke 3 long plays in one quarter. Aside from that, they all did nothing notable.

Year after they decided to let Williams start and he stumbled and bumbled the Skins to 3rd place in the division. After that he was out of football.

[Ben Kenobi]

I'm not sure why you care so much here. There are underappreciated Bengals like Ken Anderson who are far more worthy of your time.

[Ben Kenobi]

Now you're claiming the Any Given Sunday defence

You have to admit that it's strange to have a Super bowl MVP who failed to win a game as a starter over the course of the season.

Half his output was the one WR, who broke two long plays, three plays accounted for a third of the total offensive output, and that includes the running game.

- Clearly that's what had the Chargers coming to within a TD of the Broncos after they took their foot off the gas that had you coming in your pants the other week

The same Chargers that had already won a game in Denver just a few weeks previous?

Fact of the matter is: Doug Williams stepped up and delivered on the biggest stage in American Football, whereas Flutie may well have done a Dalton.

How did Flutie pull a Dalton? He went 10-5 on the season in 1999 for the Bills. Please. Show me where you can find justification anywhere in 1999, for not letting Flutie start. The Flutie curse is in full bore too, they've not returned to the playoffs since.

You just can't handle the fact that a black QB you'd never heard of won a Superbowl.

As opposed to Warren Moon who never did? Life is funny that way. People who strive and work hard and accomplish things are denied the great honors, while some luck out and things play out in their favor. I'm amused that he's been forgotten, what he did has no meaning to anyone watching football since the 90s. Moon on the other hand - his accomplishments are legendary.

[Al B. Sure!]

This study shows that Doug Williams received .8 standard deviations of support in his overall playoff record of 4-3. Right about the same as Hostetler. Less than Dilfer and Brad Johnson received. Unfortunately, it doesn't separate out the superbowl run, although I should be able to run that analysis myself from the data provided. Williams had one impossible loss which greatly skews the stats.

In any case, Doug Williams only had 1 impossible game in his playoff career. He had one gimme, 2 easy games and 3 neutral games. Had he been league average, he would have been expected to go 5-2, instead of his 4-3.

Look at Jim Plunkett on that measure...

We can then come up with expected winning percentages for each quarterback based on the number of games he played in those situations. As it turns out, Jim Plunkett would have been expected to win about 80% of his 10 playoff games based on the support he received from his running game and defense. He played in one "Gimme" game, which based on league averages is an automatic win. He had six "Easy" games, and since quarterbacks win 92% of those games, we would have expected him to win 5.52 of those games. His other three games were neutral, so we credit him with 1.44 expected wins, for a total of 7.96 wins.

How do you use data to make one argument and ignore the parts of the same data that COMPLETELY demolish your other argument?!

Williams got .8 'unit of support' or whatever the **** esoteric measure you've found while Plunkett got 3.0!

[Ben Kenobi]

Williams still won 4 more NFL games than Flutie.

Oh now. So we get to count the backup games too?

As a starter, no. Flutie won as many games. As a backup, Flutie won more. Flutie's team won 57 games with him in as a backup. Quite a bit more than Williams.

Flutie started for the 1999 Bills, and went 10-5, in the 15 games he started. Threw for 200+ on 5 wins. And Williams averaged more than 200yds per game in five whole seasons, so?

Not in wins. The Bucs won because of the run O, and the D, not because of Williams. Stuff the run and you beat the Bucs at least in '79.

He threw for more yards in a season than Flutie; has the same TD% as Flutie; gets sacked an awful lot less than Flutie; intercepted only slightly more...

And Flutie has a difference of 7 percent in pass completion. It's not even close. And remember, Flutie's numbers cut out 10 years of his prime. Stack them up age wise, there's no comparison. Williams was done before Flutie even got his shot at starting.

Williams' big difference compared to Flutie was his completion percentage - however he made up for that with having exactly the same average yards per pass of 6.8 - Williams' completed passes simply went further than Flutie's...

Flutie's got slightly higher Adjusted Net Yards per attempt. TD percentage is better, Int percentage is better. Williams was done at 34, while Flutie didn't even get back until he was 36. Flutie's three starting years were also over 200 yards per game.

William's passer rating is just 69.4, Flutie's passer rating was 76.3.

!? Williams won four playoff games, during four separate playoff campaigns - end of story!

Williams didn't get there himself. That's the difference. Flutie did. Williams won one playoff game where he was the starter for the season. Just one.

Flutie never played a single playoff game and even if he had, it would have only been in one campaign...

If Williams had received the same treatment as Flutie, he would have had zero playoff wins.

I ask AGAIN, how can someone who throws for 18 of 29 for 340 yards with 4 TDs and 1 INT be the worst Superbowl winning QB of all time!?

Career wise? Absolutely he is. He won zero games starting that season during the regular season. He fluked out in the playoffs to even get chosen, had a ton of support from the D and the run game, and played one game where he broke through for the quarter. After that, he was done.

We saw what he was capable of the next year when they finished 3rd.

Surely they'd have given the MVP to someone else if that was the case? like Timmy Smith, the RB equivalent of Doug Williams - which blows open your pissant argument of Williams relying on the Redskins supreme rushing attack...

He ran for 200+ that game. They could have given it to him or to the WR who caught half the passes for nearly 200 yards. The RB was averaging close to 10 ypc!

You vomited up something about Plunkett being better than Williams, when he isn't...

Yeah, Flutie's passer rating is better. And Plunkett is far, far better based on the fact that he was able to get and keep a starting job.