Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Initial draft grades
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Eyrie
I know it's far too early to say how any of these guys will actually play, but based on their potential and matched to our requirements, where are we?

I'm going with A-. Don't like the Foles pick at all, and we could do with a better third TE than the undrafted Igwenagu.

But adding DT, DE, SAM and slot CB to our defence, two developmental OL, 2 RBs for depth (include Polk) and a big WR is all good news to me.

Only gaps on the roster are a third TE and a veteran S (Bell?) so we're looking good for this coming season.
_KAMELOT_
B+

I love our first five picks, but I would take Z. Brown over Kendricks. Late picks are questionable.
koolaidluke
I voted for A+ because I didn't want to not vote. Really I don't believe you can grade a draft until several years after the fact but I went with A+ because I really liked the first 4 picks and didn't have a problem with any of the others.

The guard we took really doesn't seem to fit Mudd's MO. Mudd likes quick undersized guys (inside atleast) but the guy we picked up is a big dude with zero athleticism.
Zero
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Apr 29 2012, 04:41 AM) *
I know it's far too early to say how any of these guys will actually play, but based on their potential and matched to our requirements, where are we?

I'm going with A-. Don't like the Foles pick at all, and we could do with a better third TE than the undrafted Igwenagu.

But adding DT, DE, SAM and slot CB to our defence, two developmental OL, 2 RBs for depth (include Polk) and a big WR is all good news to me.

Only gaps on the roster are a third TE and a veteran S (Bell?) so we're looking good for this coming season.

The Eagles needs following last season were: upgrade LB, improve run defense (notice the correct spelling of that word laugh.gif ) and improve turnovers. Turnovers can't be fixed in the draft.

Safety is truly unknown at this point despite the questionable play there last year. Will Allen be better after a full off season plus another year away from his injury? Will Jarret step up following a year plus an off season of tutoring? Will the Eagles grab Bell or some other vet safety?

This was supposed to be a very poor draft for both safety and TE. At TE the team isn't in trouble with Celek and Harbor. This isn't New England's offense, they have better WRs and a better running game and Harbor is improving.

Considering what Reid and Morninwheg have done with QBs in the past I think it's best not to downgrade the Foles selection. I'm not excited by it, but if they develop the kid into merely a good starter who has dynamic weapons to support him and a killer defense to stop the opposition the team will be fine.

They filled the holes with exlamation points!!! Cox will be a beast as could Curry with Washburn's rotation. Hendricks isn't Matt McCoy nor is he Carlos Emmons but this isn't JJ's defense any longer either. Hendricks is a fast, athletic, determined, hard-working LB with a high football IQ. Boykin was rated by many pundits to go in the 2nd round and should fill both a RS spot and the slot CB spot ... not a reach. Then they add Polk who can pound it up the middle, catch the ball and pass protect???

I gave the draft an A+!
nephillymike
I gave a grade of B-. Don't think I'm Debbie Downer, but I look at it another way.

Everyone gets draft picks.

Based on draft position, some teams will get better players than others.

My expectation is that a team who drafts 1st in every round could get the same grade as the team that drafts last in every round becuase I grade on what value did they get based on where they selected a guy. I know this is not how most grade the draft. It isn't the NYG fault they pick last.

C is average on my grading system.

So basically, if you draft seven players with a rating around the rating for players at that spot and you don't do something Redskin stupid like draft two QB's early, or something similar, you get a C.

FWIW, If I were to grade the draft on how much the team has improved it's talent compared to what it could have done, I'd give them a B.

I also look at some sites that grade the players based on expected success (not only the rank per se b/c in some years the 100th best guy may not be as strong a prospect as the 150th guy in other years)

Here goes:

Round 1 12th - DT Cox = A. We selected him 12th, he was 12th best in NFL.com and had a grade of Immediate starter from NFL.com and Occassional Pro Bowl from SI.Com. He had a grade of 89 from NFL.com and 95 from ESPN. However, the A may be overated in that we gave up the 15th 114th and 172nd to get him. Would you do Cox or keep the 15th pick and pick one from group A + one from group B + a sixth round pick? Those in A & B were available at 15 and 114.

Group A = DE Coples (88), CB, Kirkpatrick (87), DE Ingram (90), WR Wright (88), OT Riley (89), OG Decastro (93), Te Fleemer (87), OLB Upshaw (88)

Group B = DT J Crick (84), OLB R. Lewis (84)

6th rounder at 172 - could have gotten another guy of McNutt's talents or better.

On paper, there is always a good argument for staying put, but maybe Cox is that special and the others were not.

Round 2 #46 - ILB Kendricks = C-. Rated as futrue starter by SI.com and eventual starter by NFL.com, graded a 79 on NFL.com and 82 on ESPN. was rated the 101st best player on NFL.com and we selected him 46th. a reach.

Round 2 #59 - DE Curry = B+. Rated highly as a first year starter on SI and eventual starter on NFL. Was 58th best player on NFL.com and we got him 59th. Rated an 84 on NFL and 86 on ESPN. Solid pick

Round 3 #86 - QB Foles = C- . Rated as eventual starter and future starter on both sources. NFL had him as 154th best prospect and we reached at #86. Rated highly with an 84 on ESPN but only a 71 on NFL.com.

Round 4 #123 - CB Boykin = B+. Got real good value here. Rated eventual starter and future starter and was the 92nd best prospect according to NFL.com. Solid pick

Round 5 #153 - OT Kelly = F. Didn't even make NFL.com data base and was rated as a bottom practice squad talent on SI.com. No need to draft him here. Pick him in the 7th or as UDFA.

Round 6 #194 - WR McNutt = B-. Rated as highly as a future starter on SI and only as a draftable player on NFL where he was rated as the 185th best prospect where at 194 we used the comparable pick. If you get a future starter in the 6th, pretty good.

Round 6 #200 - OG Washington = C. Rated as a high end fence player (bottom roster/PS) and also as a draftable player. Ranked 201st best by NFL and we got him at 200.

Round 7 #229 - RB Brown = D. Rated as someone who wouldn't even get picked up as UDFA by SI and rated as an UDFA by NFL.

OVERALL GRADE = B-

Of the UDFA, RB Chris Polk is interesting and a definite A+. Rated as a future starter on SI and a very high end eventual starter by NFL.com, this is a great find. I often wonder if the SB he gets exceeds those of the 7th rounders. This could be a great find.

Harris, Thomas, Iggy and Adcock all got similar fence player or draftable player ratings. About right maybe we'll get lucky here.

FA wish list. WR Burress and S Bell and we're good to go.
Zero
Mikey, you're always so analytical and consequently probably closer to accurate than someone like me. Saying that, the grades you give are more mathematical and don't factor in the intangibles like need, fit for the team's system and potential via specific coaching. For instance, Kelly may not have showed up on any publications but I'd factor in the probably input from Howard Mudd and his track record.

Some rate a draft's success by value: were the players chosen at a point where they should have been? I'm not as analytical about it, but I like the potential here for at least the top three picks and the effect they should have on the Eagles. Boykin should fit into that group as should Polk. They selected talented football players at positions of need who should all contribute to the team's improvement.
bwc2112
Had to go with an A- . I am still trying to figure out the Foles pick.. Other than that one I believed we went after our needs well.
Birdwatcher
QUOTE (_KAMELOT_ @ Apr 29 2012, 05:46 AM) *
B+

I love our first five picks, but I would take Z. Brown over Kendricks. Late picks are questionable.



I think I heard Mayock say that Brown could be a bit allergic to 'contact'

and then I heard him say that Kendricks was 'bloodthirsty'

We had too many allergic LBs on the roster last year, I want bloodthirsty
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (bwc2112 @ Apr 29 2012, 09:31 AM) *
Had to go with an A- . I am still trying to figure out the Foles pick.. Other than that one I believed we went after our needs well.


The Foles pick didn't prohibit us from doing anything we wanted. Safety was garbage in this draft. We got everything else.
Taking a chance on a QB is never a bad idea.
D Rock
QUOTE (Eyrie @ Apr 29 2012, 10:41 AM) *
I know it's far too early to say how any of these guys will actually play, but based on their potential and matched to our requirements, where are we?

I'm going with A-. Don't like the Foles pick at all, and we could do with a better third TE than the undrafted Igwenagu.

But adding DT, DE, SAM and slot CB to our defence, two developmental OL, 2 RBs for depth (include Polk) and a big WR is all good news to me.

Only gaps on the roster are a third TE and a veteran S (Bell?) so we're looking good for this coming season.

We rarely carry a 3rd TE on the active roster so I'm not sure how much of a "gap" this is.
HOUSEoPAIN
A.

I was so thrilled with our defensive picks nothing can really ruin this for me. A big WR with potential as well.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Apr 29 2012, 09:16 AM) *
I gave a grade of B-. Don't think I'm Debbie Downer, but I look at it another way.



Thank you for the headache from reading that, you have way too much time on your hands............lol

I don't like the rating system on either site you used, I like watching them play. Kendricks is a great example. He rates so low because he is 5'11", plain and simple. The facts are that on the field he is a beast. I like Mike Mayock and his palyer reviews because he is no nonsense generally, and Ray Diddy loves to kill Reid but he was pretty pleased also.

I agree with the B to B+ range, I just didn't want to follow your "War and Peace" style of writing to get there.....lol

and Foles was a solid pick to rid the roster of Edwards..........who apparently keeps forgetting how to get to the Novacare.......and keeps asking why the bells won't stop ringing...
nephillymike
I was real busy for quite a while the last few months with taxes and work but had an hour or two to kill last night and this AM so I figured that Mikey Numbers would make an appearance just to blind a few people with science and piss them off while doing so. I see that I was successful in your case!

Good luck to your friend's kid. Hey practice squad ain't bad work. I think they make over 70K and can find some part-time employment during the offseason. In this economy, a young kid should take that in a second.
Dreagon
I gave you guys an A-.

I think your picks shoring up the middle of your defense were well chosen, and addresses a need.

The only headscratcher was Foles.

Late round picks are always a crapshoot so I generally don't grade on picks past the first four or five.
TGryn
Mike Lombardi: Eagles had worst draft in NFC East.

http://bloggingthebeast.com/2012/04/28/mik...t-draft-grades/


For what its worth, Kiper gave us an A and rated the draft the best in the NFL.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/s...-nfl-team-draft
nephillymike
FWIW, Tony Pauline had us with three gems, Cox, Curry and Boykin from SI.com and that was in a league wide pool of drafted players.
Dreagon
QUOTE (TGryn @ Apr 29 2012, 12:38 PM) *
Mike Lombardi: Eagles had worst draft in NFC East.

http://bloggingthebeast.com/2012/04/28/mik...t-draft-grades/


For what its worth, Kiper gave us an A and rated the draft the best in the NFL.
http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft2012/s...-nfl-team-draft


Well, there aren't really any BAD grades on that board. And honestly, he grades Dallas's draft higher than I do. While after a day or two to think about it (I honestly didn't see the trade-up coming) I think it's a decent move, I'm not sure I would give an A to a draft where you gave up a second round pick, and the third round pick is a project (admittedly with a lot of upside)

I think ya'll scored well in that yall not only addressed needs, but you got the players you wanted to address them, and you didn't break the bank.. And you had plenty of picks. So I think ya'll did fine. The only thing I can figure about the Foles pick is that Kafka kicked a coaches dog or something.
Reality Fan
I think all the draft grades are total BS. How do you know now where these guys will be in 3 years. Jeff George anyone? Looking at the Cowboys draft I would think that past Claiborne they sucked with their 2nd and 3rd picks probably having reached their limit in college but who knows? They may end up with the best or the worst, no one knows what the next step will do for these guys........
mcnabbulous
Lombardi is the biggest joke. Don't forget he also picked the Skins to win the East last year. The Rex Grossman led Redskins.
Dreagon
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 29 2012, 02:48 PM) *
Lombardi is the biggest joke. Don't forget he also picked the Skins to win the East last year. The Rex Grossman led Redskins.


How can anybody doubt the awesomness that is Rex Grossman?

_KAMELOT_
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 29 2012, 09:48 PM) *
Lombardi is the biggest joke. Don't forget he also picked the Skins to win the East last year. The Rex Grossman led Redskins.


Yeap, I was about to say that...he pickes the Redskins to win the NFC East in 2011. They went 3-1 in the first games and I was "no way Lombardi can be right"...then the 'Skins delivered laugh.gif
GQSmooth
I gave it a B+, I'm happy with all the picks except Foles. I don't believe in non-mobile QBs. This was a weak draft for TEs and safeties, which I felt the Eagles needed. Other than the Sanford Te there was not much to pick at TE.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (GQSmooth @ Apr 30 2012, 10:29 AM) *
I gave it a B+, I'm happy with all the picks except Foles. I don't believe in non-mobile QBs. This was a weak draft for TEs and safeties, which I felt the Eagles needed. Other than the Sanford Te there was not much to pick at TE.

What is non-mobile? Brady has great in pocket awareness, but is hardly mobile. Same with Brees.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (GQSmooth @ Apr 30 2012, 11:29 AM) *
I don't believe in non-mobile QBs


If you're simply referring to 'mobile' as 'ability to scramble' then nothing could be further from the truth. All of the best QBs in NFL history haven't been scramblers. Ben R. and Aaron Rodgers are pretty mobile, but they're still primarily pocket passers. I can't think of any other Super Bowl winning QBs that have been scramblers.....guys like McNabb McNair Culpepper and Vick were mobile but never won the big one (yet).
Phits
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Apr 30 2012, 01:37 PM) *
If you're simply referring to 'mobile' as 'ability to scramble' then nothing could be further from the truth. All of the best QBs in NFL history haven't been scramblers. Ben R. and Aaron Rodgers are pretty mobile, but they're still primarily pocket passers. I can't think of any other Super Bowl winning QBs that have been scramblers.....guys like McNabb McNair Culpepper and Vick were mobile but never won the big one (yet).

how about steve young or john elway?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Apr 30 2012, 02:47 PM) *
how about steve young or john elway?

Which has resulted in zero rings since '98. It's a passing league. Being mobile is a luxury, but throwing is king.


HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Phits @ Apr 30 2012, 03:47 PM) *
how about steve young or john elway?


Well they could put their heads down and run and were mobile, but they still primarily were known and respected as pocket passers, and both were surrounded by some of the best supporting cast members ever known to a football team, which helped the 'surprise' factor. They were a far cry from Michael Vick.

Also, when I think of Steve Young, I think of how God must hate the Tampa Bay Bucs. Fortunately for them, God hates us more.
Jerome Brown Experience
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Apr 30 2012, 03:52 PM) *
Which has resulted in zero rings since '98. It's a passing league. Being mobile is a luxury, but throwing is king.


I totally agree with your point and frankly any argument that can count against Vick (who, in my opinion, was the biggest reason for our crummy 2011 season.....but I digress) is to the good, but Roethlisberger is pretty mobile and he has two.





Jerome Brown Experience
QUOTE (HOUSEoPAIN @ Apr 30 2012, 04:21 PM) *
Well they could put their heads down and run and were mobile, but they still primarily were known and respected as pocket passers, and both were surrounded by some of the best supporting cast members ever known to a football team, which helped the 'surprise' factor. They were a far cry from Michael Vick.

Also, when I think of Steve Young, I think of how God must hate the Tampa Bay Bucs. Fortunately for them, God hates us more.


I don't really agree that both were primarily known as pocket passers. Both were known as having great arms, but were known more as being mobile QBs - in Elway's case there were lots of critics of his scrambling style before he won. Also, Elway didn't have a TON of talent around him but Young had a bunch of guys who ended up in yellow jackets that it for sure.
HOUSEoPAIN
QUOTE (Jerome Brown Experience @ Apr 30 2012, 04:44 PM) *
I don't really agree that both were primarily known as pocket passers. Both were known as having great arms, but were known more as being mobile QBs - in Elway's case there were lots of critics of his scrambling style before he won. Also, Elway didn't have a TON of talent around him but Young had a bunch of guys who ended up in yellow jackets that it for sure.


Terrell Davis, Rod Smith, Ed McCaffrey, Shannon Sharpe, a great O-line, Bill Romanowski, Neil Smith, Trevor Pryce, Ray Crockett, Jason Elam? They had 9 pro-bowlers in 1998. Certainly at bare minimum, there were enough people on offense to worry about where Elway could sneak it for 5 yards.....
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Jerome Brown Experience @ Apr 30 2012, 04:44 PM) *
I don't really agree that both were primarily known as pocket passers. Both were known as having great arms, but were known more as being mobile QBs - in Elway's case there were lots of critics of his scrambling style before he won. Also, Elway didn't have a TON of talent around him but Young had a bunch of guys who ended up in yellow jackets that it for sure.


besides the ridiculous idea that Elay had no talent around him you really should check your facts.....Elway started 28 games in the 2 SuperBowl years and rushed for a grand total of 312 yds combined......not exactly a mad scrambler....
Jerome Brown Experience
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 1 2012, 03:20 AM) *
besides the ridiculous idea that Elay had no talent around him you really should check your facts.....Elway started 28 games in the 2 SuperBowl years and rushed for a grand total of 312 yds combined......not exactly a mad scrambler....


Ummm....he owns the NFL record for QB rushing attempts and is in the top 5 for career QB rushing yards. I'm not sure how you could stand behind the statement "primarily known as a pocket passer," and to say that about Steve Young is just not reasonable. Both were great passers, neither was known as "primarily a pocket passer."

In 1997 and 98 he definitely stayed in the pocket more than he had in prior years. He was old and he had Davis as an outlet, plus he was hurt in '98 - his passing stats were down too at about 216 per game. Even still in '98 he averaged just under three rushing attempts per game (compared with league leader Kordell Stewart who did little else but scramble and averaged 5.5 per game) so it wasn't like he was Kent Graham out there. Similarly in '97 he was at 3.1.

As far as him having scads of talent, I think I would challenge that a bit. Ed McCaffrey was not a great wide receiver until his year 30 season, the second Broncos Super Bowl year!!! Look at his stats, they scream "Went on Bill Belichick's magical chemical rejuvenation program."

Rod Smith was definitely a great WR, no question, Terrell Davis was a tremendous back and Shannon Sharpe was a great TE, but I'm not seeing the stacked out team that you are seeing. The Denver RUN blocking was excellent but their pass protection was league average in 1997 (although they improved to 7th in 1998 per Football Outsiders). It's not like he was playing on the mid-70s Steelers here.

Having said all that, this is taking away from a more important point that bears repeating......I completely agree that scrambling QBs reduce your likelihood of winning big. I can't stand watching Vick and while I really enjoyed watching Randall scramble you can't deny that he was much, much better once he became a "more pure" pocket passer later in his career. In the mid-2000s I thought Donovan came as close as you can come to scrambling "just the right amount" for a mobile QB, but reasonable people can disagree on that.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Jerome Brown Experience @ May 1 2012, 12:58 PM) *
Ummm....he owns the NFL record for QB rushing attempts and is in the top 5 for career QB rushing yards. I'm not sure how you could stand behind the statement "primarily known as a pocket passer," and to say that about Steve Young is just not reasonable. Both were great passers, neither was known as "primarily a pocket passer."

In 1997 and 98 he definitely stayed in the pocket more than he had in prior years. He was old and he had Davis as an outlet, plus he was hurt in '98 - his passing stats were down too at about 216 per game. Even still in '98 he averaged just under three rushing attempts per game (compared with league leader Kordell Stewart who did little else but scramble and averaged 5.5 per game) so it wasn't like he was Kent Graham out there. Similarly in '97 he was at 3.1.

As far as him having scads of talent, I think I would challenge that a bit. Ed McCaffrey was not a great wide receiver until his year 30 season, the second Broncos Super Bowl year!!! Look at his stats, they scream "Went on Bill Belichick's magical chemical rejuvenation program."

Rod Smith was definitely a great WR, no question, Terrell Davis was a tremendous back and Shannon Sharpe was a great TE, but I'm not seeing the stacked out team that you are seeing. The Denver RUN blocking was excellent but their pass protection was league average in 1997 (although they improved to 7th in 1998 per Football Outsiders). It's not like he was playing on the mid-70s Steelers here.

Having said all that, this is taking away from a more important point that bears repeating......I completely agree that scrambling QBs reduce your likelihood of winning big. I can't stand watching Vick and while I really enjoyed watching Randall scramble you can't deny that he was much, much better once he became a "more pure" pocket passer later in his career. In the mid-2000s I thought Donovan came as close as you can come to scrambling "just the right amount" for a mobile QB, but reasonable people can disagree on that.


First, I never said he was "primarily a pocket passer" and I didn't say a word about Steve Young. You defeat your own argument when you admit that in the years he won a Super Bowl he was no longer a scrambling QB.

Now on to the stats.....I will even ignore the scoffing at 3 pro bowl players in Smith, Davis and Sharpe(a hall of famer by the way) Elway ran as much as that other swift footed QB Bret Favre and had a big 7 more yards in 97.....in 98 he ran even less, even considering missing 2.5 games., the bottom line is when he stopped running they were a much better team.

As far as McCaffery goes, I have known him since high school and he is simply a freakish athlete.......he was wasted in NY, he was always a great WR looking for a place to play and his pro bowl (yes, that is 4 pro bowlers Elway had) was inevitable and only injury stopped him from continuing down that road to multiples.
Jerome Brown Experience
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 1 2012, 10:50 PM) *
First, I never said he was "primarily a pocket passer" and I didn't say a word about Steve Young. You defeat your own argument when you admit that in the years he won a Super Bowl he was no longer a scrambling QB.

Now on to the stats.....I will even ignore the scoffing at 3 pro bowl players in Smith, Davis and Sharpe(a hall of famer by the way) Elway ran as much as that other swift footed QB Bret Favre and had a big 7 more yards in 97.....in 98 he ran even less, even considering missing 2.5 games., the bottom line is when he stopped running they were a much better team.

As far as McCaffery goes, I have known him since high school and he is simply a freakish athlete.......he was wasted in NY, he was always a great WR looking for a place to play and his pro bowl (yes, that is 4 pro bowlers Elway had) was inevitable and only injury stopped him from continuing down that road to multiples.


No, my argument was a response to House of Pain's comment regarding Young and Elway and I think you don't understand my argument at all. I agree that scrambling QBs are tougher to have success with, but I did shoot down the concept that either Young or Elway was known as primarily a pocket passer. Also, there is no absolute case that mobile QBs destroy a team's chances of winning a SB as Roethlisberger, Young et al have won them (although I do say that they seem to reduce your chances).

Injury stopped Ed McCaffery? Come on. All NFL skill position players are freakish athletes. He got good in his age 30 season playing on a team that had a bunch of chemically enhanced players when he was catching passes from John Elway. That doesn't make him a bad person, the league is filled with guys who put junk in their bodies to excel, but let's not put this guy into Canton.

Finally, on a SB team 3-4 Pro Bowlers and one HoFer on the same unit is not that uncommon. There are cases - like Bradshaw in the mid 70s, or Aikman on that Cowboy team - where the players around a QB clearly make him a MUCH better QB. I don't see that with Elway in this case. TD definitely put that team over the top, Sharpe was a wonderful player, Smith was a great receiver but as much as I don't like the guy I respect Elway enough to recognize that he was not carried by the talent around him, he was a very good QB.

canadianeagle
While it is true that you cannot grade a draft for several years, I give the Eagles an A. The Eagles appear to have drafted players who they coveted for particular positions without any forced picks. One could argue that the Foles pick was a reach but when you factor in that they drafted Boykin in the 4th round I am okay with it. One sports writer mentioned that there would not be much discussion had the Eagles picked Boykin in the 3rd and Foles in the 4th.

Overall this is my most optimistic draft in a very long time.


Reality Fan
QUOTE (Jerome Brown Experience @ May 2 2012, 10:17 AM) *
Injury stopped Ed McCaffery? Come on. All NFL skill position players are freakish athletes. He got good in his age 30 season playing on a team that had a bunch of chemically enhanced players when he was catching passes from John Elway. That doesn't make him a bad person, the league is filled with guys who put junk in their bodies to excel, but let's not put this guy into Canton.

Finally, on a SB team 3-4 Pro Bowlers and one HoFer on the same unit is not that uncommon. There are cases - like Bradshaw in the mid 70s, or Aikman on that Cowboy team - where the players around a QB clearly make him a MUCH better QB. I don't see that with Elway in this case. TD definitely put that team over the top, Sharpe was a wonderful player, Smith was a great receiver but as much as I don't like the guy I respect Elway enough to recognize that he was not carried by the talent around him, he was a very good QB.



Ok, first this debate has wasted way too much of my time, the facts show the more traditional pocket passing QBs have carried the day in the playoffs, that is difficult to debate. That may be from a small number of QBs being scrambling QBs but it is what it is.

How you debate Elway having a ton of talent around is beyond me.......just say "I fucked up" because the more you try to prove he didn't have talent around him the more clueless you look.

Now the one that really pisses me off. McCaffery had 49 grabs his 2nd year and was expected to be a stud but nagging injuries dulled his impact year 3 and then he went to SF which was a mistake because he was barely used but he did get another ring. When he went to Denver he became a reliable WR for Elway and worked up to being a 3rd or 4th option to being 1st or 2nd. His career died or began to die when he broke his leg against the Giants, a compound fracture. While he came back and played well it was the beginning of the end. Now I realize the easy path for the dim is to defend any argument with "well, they did steroids" but you should really have a clue before you come out with something completely based in your imagination.
Jerome Brown Experience
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 3 2012, 10:54 AM) *
Ok, first this debate has wasted way too much of my time, the facts show the more traditional pocket passing QBs have carried the day in the playoffs, that is difficult to debate. That may be from a small number of QBs being scrambling QBs but it is what it is.
.


A fact that I have not debated. I agree that scrambling QBs seem to struggle and I completely agree that Michael Vick and his scrambling has not helped us. Is it possible that you are mis-reading what I am writing?

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 3 2012, 10:54 AM) *
How you debate Elway having a ton of talent around is beyond me.......just say "I f*cked up" because the more you try to prove he didn't have talent around him the more clueless you look.


Sure, I mean....other than "the data" and "Having seen the games it is pretty easy to see that you aren't right about this" you have this one nailed. in 1997 Elway was still a very good QB; he was ranked 7th in the league in DYAR and in '98 he was elite, ranking 4th in DYAR and 3rd in DVOA. Your hypothesis that he was carried by the talent around him cannot be supported by evidence, whereas proving that Aikman and Bradshaw were carried by the talent around them is a very simple exercise. The guy was a great QB in his career and a very good one in the SB years who made the guys around him better, not the other way around.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 3 2012, 10:54 AM) *
Now the one that really pisses me off. McCaffery had 49 grabs his 2nd year and was expected to be a stud but nagging injuries dulled his impact year 3 and then he went to SF which was a mistake because he was barely used but he did get another ring.


OK, let's hold this statement up to the light for a moment. McCaffery had 49 grabs in his second year and was expected to be a stud.

Let's do some comps. Is DeSean Jackson a stud? He's close. He had 62 receptions in his year 1 and year 2 season for 912 and 1,156 yards. Last year - his "crappy" season - he had 58 for 961 in 15 games.

Is Nate Burleson a stud? Definitely not. He had 68 catches for 1,006 in his second year.

Is Mario Manningham a stud? Not really. He had 57 for 822 in his second year.

I didn't do any kind of analysis to come up with these guys. Pick any third tier receiver you want and you will see comparable year 2s.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 3 2012, 10:54 AM) *
When he went to Denver he became a reliable WR for Elway and worked up to being a 3rd or 4th option to being 1st or 2nd.


Mmm hmmm. Mmm hmmm.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 3 2012, 10:54 AM) *
His career died or began to die when he broke his leg against the Giants, a compound fracture. While he came back and played well it was the beginning of the end. Now I realize the easy path for the dim is to defend any argument with "well, they did steroids" but you should really have a clue before you come out with something completely based in your imagination.


Or you can look at the data and compare when he made "the leap" compared with other WRs. Here are his career stats:

<script type="text/javascript" src="http://widgets.sports-reference.com/wg.fcgi?css=1&site=pfr&url=/players/M/McCaEd00.htm&div=div_receiving_and_rushing"></script>

In 1998 he played on the same team as he had for the prior three seasons. The QB was the same. The offensive scheme was the same. The Offensive Coordinator was the same. As we continue to use Occam's Razor and add in:

1) The 1994 SF management did not see him as a stud
2) He played on a team that was prominent in the BALCO scandal

Suddenly his leap in year 30 looks more and more curious.

Listen, I don't know the guy from Adam and I guess you kind of knew him in high school so maybe you have some insight, but WRs simply don't make a 400 yard leap from their prior career high in their year 30 season unless the team and scheme radically change. I would give $100 to charity if you could find one other example of this happening. I know it would be a lot of work and that your time is of value, but you are burying your head in the sand if you think this guy didn't do what admittedly a lot of other athletes do.

Jerome Brown Experience
Damnit. I thought the site could support javascript.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.