| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
thelawoffices
Joined: 08 Dec 2007
Posts: 12398
|
 Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:57 am Post subject: |
 |
|
|
We really should address other needs before going after a QB, although I wouldn't be devastated if we took Barkley. I'd really love Jones, though.
_________________
| StevePerry wrote: | How old are you? 18?
This guy was dropping hits when you were in diapers.
His voice was incredible. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Darbsk
Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 626
Location: Wales, UK
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 4:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| oakdb36 wrote: | | NCOUGHMAN wrote: |
-does a SB ring make a qb elite?
-imo its pretty much impossible to replicate a SB run despite having a elite qb or not. recent multiple SB winning qb's have great defenses to lead them on magical runs (pitt, giants)
-after brady's defensive all star team left he hasnt won another ring
|
No.
In recent history, the Rams went to 2 SBs, the Pats won 3 SBs, the Colts went to 2 SBs, The Steelers went to 3 SBs, the Giants won 2 SBs. The fact they all have an elite QB wasn't enough and they obviously needed help from the rest of their team but teams like the Bucs, the Ravens or even the 85 Bears couldn't sustain their success for long despite having some historically great defenses and they never returned to a SB. I see some kind of pattern there.
He still went to 2 more SBs and has been to the playoffs every single year. He's actually the perfect example for my point since he's giving his team a shot every single year.
No player is going to win the SB alone but with an elite QB, you're half way there. |
Good point, although in 2008 Matt Cassell went 11-5 with the same cast of support artists (even though by a freak they didn't make the playoffs)........seems to suggest that either an elite QB and O, an elite D or just a well rounded team will do well. No suprises there!
_________________
“It may take us a short while, but we'll get that nastiness of the Raiders back.”
Mr. Al Davis RIP |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bitty
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 2992
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ZoomWaffle wrote: | | bitty wrote: | | Teams that win a SB all have a running game. |
2011 Giants- 32nd ranked rush offense
2010 Packers- 24th ranked rush offense
2008 Steelers- 23rd ranked rush offense
2006 Colts- 18th ranked rush offense
2003 Patriots- 27th ranked rush offense
2002 Buccaneers- 27th ranked rush offense
Every one of those teams, aside from the Colts (4.0) had less than 4 YPC as well.
Even most of the losing teams since 2002 had rush offenses in the bottom half of the league: Raiders, Eagles, Bears, Cardinals, Colts (2009), Patriots. |
As the playoffs started the running starts going at full tilt.
2 Ahmad Bradshaw, RB NYG 63 272 4.3 30 4 1 68.0 1 11
3 Brandon Jacobs, RB NYG 37 164 4.4 34 1 1 41.0 0 9
2010 1 James Starks, RB GB 81 315 3.9 27 1 1 78.8 0 16 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
91jmay
Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 20651
Location: Wonderland
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
You have one team to prove that and he has the majority of the last decade.
Starks numbers are below average.
_________________
| baconrad3 wrote: | | You mean Matt Stafford aka Stat Padford? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bitty
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 2992
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 7:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| 91jmay wrote: | You have one team to prove that and he has the majority of the last decade.
Starks numbers are below average. |
He was number 1 rusher in the playoffs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NCOUGHMAN
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 12598
Location: Stockton via East Palo Alto
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
meeh. id still trade down in a heartbeat we have to many holes to fill and we are already missing our 2nd rounder.
_________________
| green24 wrote: | | NCOUGHMAN >>>>>> all of you |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZoomWaffle
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 4580
Location: AZ
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| bitty wrote: | | 91jmay wrote: | You have one team to prove that and he has the majority of the last decade.
Starks numbers are below average. |
He was number 1 rusher in the playoffs. |
3.9 yards per carry is not "full tilt." Thats below average. Teams are good at running the ball when they average well over 4 yards, not just run the ball a ton to get volume yards with a low per carry average.
And FYI, Giants did not run the ball well during their playoff run last year:
vs ATL- 172 yards, 5.5 YPC
vs GB- 95 yards, 3.5 YPC
vs SF- 85 yards, 3.3 YPC
vs NE- 114 yards, 4.1 YPC
There was only one game where they ran the ball really well, and it was the first round. The next two games were awful, and the Super Bowl was OK, but definitely not "full tilt". To put those totals in perspective, if you compare each game to the 2011 regular season team rushing ranks per game, they would have ranked 1st, 29th, 32nd, and 17th. Aside from the first round, I'm not sure how you can say the run game is what led them to the Super Bowl, especially when you consider they also ranked dead last during the regular season.
_________________
Silver&Black88 on the sig
| La_Vader wrote: | | I wouldn't trade Pryor for any prospect in this years draft. Quote me on that |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Totty
Joined: 05 Jan 2006
Posts: 9309
Location: Oswego NY
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
I made the thread about the QBOTF a few meeks ago becuase I had a feeling Reggie, and rightfully so, will be lookin to select his guy at QB with help from the staff. Carson is as good as gone imo. He costs too much, doesnt fit the system, and is simply not Reggies guy. The WC system requires a very specific QB to run it. I feel like Geno Smith would be a mistake becuase he comes from the Holgerson offense which is a product od Ok. St. That is a very QB friendly offense. That being said, Smith is running it perfectly right now, I just dont see him translating in the NFL.
_________________
First Steve Jobs, Now Al Davis.. God must be building something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
big_palooka
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 19067
Location: ATL
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 11:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| Totty wrote: | | I made the thread about the QBOTF a few meeks ago becuase I had a feeling Reggie, and rightfully so, will be lookin to select his guy at QB with help from the staff. Carson is as good as gone imo. He costs too much, doesnt fit the system, and is simply not Reggies guy. The WC system requires a very specific QB to run it. I feel like Geno Smith would be a mistake becuase he comes from the Holgerson offense which is a product od Ok. St. That is a very QB friendly offense. That being said, Smith is running it perfectly right now, I just dont see him translating in the NFL. |
I disagree. You can look at his arm and ability to make all the throws as positives for an NFL QB. He can fit the ball in a tight window with accuracy.
He's had count 'em, 28 incomplete passes through 4 games. That's damn impressive.
Again, we will see where that goes when he faces stouter defenses. Right now, he looks to have a pro ready arm. Athletic ability and above all else work ethic. The guy is a football junkie. That is invaluable.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
big_palooka
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 19067
Location: ATL
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZoomWaffle
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 4580
Location: AZ
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| big_palooka wrote: | | Totty wrote: | | I made the thread about the QBOTF a few meeks ago becuase I had a feeling Reggie, and rightfully so, will be lookin to select his guy at QB with help from the staff. Carson is as good as gone imo. He costs too much, doesnt fit the system, and is simply not Reggies guy. The WC system requires a very specific QB to run it. I feel like Geno Smith would be a mistake becuase he comes from the Holgerson offense which is a product od Ok. St. That is a very QB friendly offense. That being said, Smith is running it perfectly right now, I just dont see him translating in the NFL. |
I disagree. You can look at his arm and ability to make all the throws as positives for an NFL QB. He can fit the ball in a tight window with accuracy.
He's had count 'em, 28 incomplete passes through 4 games. That's damn impressive.
Again, we will see where that goes when he faces stouter defenses. Right now, he looks to have a pro ready arm. Athletic ability and above all else work ethic. The guy is a football junkie. That is invaluable. |
+1
Dedication is very important for a QB, you know he will always strive to be better and wont settle.
As for WV's offense, its actually a variation of the Texas tech offense, which is scary considering that Texas tech has produced some of the greatest single-season's by a QB in college football history, yet none of them ever made it in the NFL. However, most college spread offenses use a lot of shorter routes. For example, when Michael Crabtree was at Texas Tech, the biggest knock on him was the fact that he never ran a full route tree. The variation that they use at WV incorporates more of a vertical passing game than that of Texas Tech. It gives Smith a chance to make throws that a lot of spread QBs never make in college.
What I like best about Geno Smith, is that he is already good on accuracy, footwork, and mechanics. If we draft him we dont have to wait a year or two for an NFL coach to change his throwing motion or footwork- two things that usually take rookie QBs a while to learn. I dont want any type of developmental QB, I dont want a guy with accuracy concerns. Smith has the touch, accuracy and zip to make any throw he needs to. The more I hear and the more I see, the more I really like this guy.
_________________
Silver&Black88 on the sig
| La_Vader wrote: | | I wouldn't trade Pryor for any prospect in this years draft. Quote me on that |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bitty
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 2992
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ZoomWaffle wrote: | | bitty wrote: | | 91jmay wrote: | You have one team to prove that and he has the majority of the last decade.
Starks numbers are below average. |
He was number 1 rusher in the playoffs. |
3.9 yards per carry is not "full tilt." Thats below average. Teams are good at running the ball when they average well over 4 yards, not just run the ball a ton to get volume yards with a low per carry average.
And FYI, Giants did not run the ball well during their playoff run last year:
vs ATL- 172 yards, 5.5 YPC
vs GB- 95 yards, 3.5 YPC
vs SF- 85 yards, 3.3 YPC
vs NE- 114 yards, 4.1 YPC
There was only one game where they ran the ball really well, and it was the first round. The next two games were awful, and the Super Bowl was OK, but definitely not "full tilt". To put those totals in perspective, if you compare each game to the 2011 regular season team rushing ranks per game, they would have ranked 1st, 29th, 32nd, and 17th. Aside from the first round, I'm not sure how you can say the run game is what led them to the Super Bowl, especially when you consider they also ranked dead last during the regular season. |
In the playoffs the Giants rushed for 436 yards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZoomWaffle
Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 4580
Location: AZ
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| bitty wrote: | | ZoomWaffle wrote: | | bitty wrote: | | 91jmay wrote: | You have one team to prove that and he has the majority of the last decade.
Starks numbers are below average. |
He was number 1 rusher in the playoffs. |
3.9 yards per carry is not "full tilt." Thats below average. Teams are good at running the ball when they average well over 4 yards, not just run the ball a ton to get volume yards with a low per carry average.
And FYI, Giants did not run the ball well during their playoff run last year:
vs ATL- 172 yards, 5.5 YPC
vs GB- 95 yards, 3.5 YPC
vs SF- 85 yards, 3.3 YPC
vs NE- 114 yards, 4.1 YPC
There was only one game where they ran the ball really well, and it was the first round. The next two games were awful, and the Super Bowl was OK, but definitely not "full tilt". To put those totals in perspective, if you compare each game to the 2011 regular season team rushing ranks per game, they would have ranked 1st, 29th, 32nd, and 17th. Aside from the first round, I'm not sure how you can say the run game is what led them to the Super Bowl, especially when you consider they also ranked dead last during the regular season. |
In the playoffs the Giants rushed for 436 yards. |
436 yards in 4 games? 109 yards per game is not even close to impressive. Nearly as unimpressive impressive is that they got that on 112 carries, an average of 4.1 YPC. They also only scored 2 rushing TDs. If you think 109 yards a game is good, that would have ranked them 21st last year. Also, 40% of those yards came in one game, the one fursthest from the Super Bowl, in a game which the defense didnt give up a single point (only score came on a safety). The next two games they were poor-below average at running the ball. In the Super Bowl they were average at it.
During the regular season they were the worst in the league, so you cant say the run game carried them to the playoffs. Half the playoff games they were bad at running the ball, so you cant say their run game carried them through the playoffs. In the Super Bowl they were OK at it, so you cant even say their run game won them the Super Bowl.
The run game was on fire in the Wild Card, but Manning also threw for 277 yards and 3 TDs, and the defense shut ATL out- that game was won, in order, by defense. Look at the last 3 games of that post season: Eli threw for 942 yards (314/game) and 6 TDs. The defense also allowed an average of 14 points in the playoffs. Sorry bro, but the run game had little to do with their regular season, playoff or Super Bowl success last year.
_________________
Silver&Black88 on the sig
| La_Vader wrote: | | I wouldn't trade Pryor for any prospect in this years draft. Quote me on that |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bitty
Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 2992
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| ZoomWaffle wrote: | | bitty wrote: | | ZoomWaffle wrote: | | bitty wrote: | | 91jmay wrote: | You have one team to prove that and he has the majority of the last decade.
Starks numbers are below average. |
He was number 1 rusher in the playoffs. |
3.9 yards per carry is not "full tilt." Thats below average. Teams are good at running the ball when they average well over 4 yards, not just run the ball a ton to get volume yards with a low per carry average.
And FYI, Giants did not run the ball well during their playoff run last year:
vs ATL- 172 yards, 5.5 YPC
vs GB- 95 yards, 3.5 YPC
vs SF- 85 yards, 3.3 YPC
vs NE- 114 yards, 4.1 YPC
There was only one game where they ran the ball really well, and it was the first round. The next two games were awful, and the Super Bowl was OK, but definitely not "full tilt". To put those totals in perspective, if you compare each game to the 2011 regular season team rushing ranks per game, they would have ranked 1st, 29th, 32nd, and 17th. Aside from the first round, I'm not sure how you can say the run game is what led them to the Super Bowl, especially when you consider they also ranked dead last during the regular season. |
In the playoffs the Giants rushed for 436 yards. |
436 yards in 4 games? 109 yards per game is not even close to impressive. Nearly as unimpressive impressive is that they got that on 112 carries, an average of 4.1 YPC. They also only scored 2 rushing TDs. If you think 109 yards a game is good, that would have ranked them 21st last year. Also, 40% of those yards came in one game, the one fursthest from the Super Bowl, in a game which the defense didnt give up a single point (only score came on a safety). The next two games they were poor-below average at running the ball. In the Super Bowl they were average at it.
During the regular season they were the worst in the league, so you cant say the run game carried them to the playoffs. Half the playoff games they were bad at running the ball, so you cant say their run game carried them through the playoffs. In the Super Bowl they were OK at it, so you cant even say their run game won them the Super Bowl.
The run game was on fire in the Wild Card, but Manning also threw for 277 yards and 3 TDs, and the defense shut ATL out- that game was won, in order, by defense. Look at the last 3 games of that post season: Eli threw for 942 yards (314/game) and 6 TDs. The defense also allowed an average of 14 points in the playoffs. Sorry bro, but the run game had little to do with their regular season, playoff or Super Bowl success last year. |
The Giants where the #1rushing team in the playoffs . How is that not good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dante9876
Joined: 23 Dec 2008
Posts: 17542
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2012 2:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I feel like raiders talk about how hard players work more than any other fan base. I think is the Russell effect. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
