Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
So you don't even think that the Eagles will make the play-offs! I think that they will and the Niners will not.
Sports Talk 2018: Lebron to Brady and Everything in Between
- Thread starter Town Heretic
- Start date
So you don't even think that the Eagles will make the play-offs! I think that they will and the Niners will not.
It's a coin toss and with the same caveat, who will field a healthy qb for the entire year. Both signal callers look great when they're upright, but will/can they stay that way? I think at least a couple of very talented teams will miss the playoffs this year. But this early, it's mostly a dart throw.
Last year the Niners had the 7th best rushing attack in the NFC. Philly had the 13th. That's the edge to me. Of course you can just about flip those positions with defensive yards allowed...sheesh. It's a headache.
Just signed up for the next season of ESPN's Pigskin Pick'em. So that should be fun. You can have up to 5 accounts, but I only keep 2, one in straight up and one against the line. My best year I came in 15th out of a couple of hundred thousand playing against the line. But I don't have time to do the background and math I used then, so I go with gut and a shorthand system that works pretty well most years. One day the lazy will come back to bite me, but it hasn't so far. 
Here are the games and lines for week 1. I'll pick and prognosticate later. I include the line beside the favored team.
1. GB @ Chi (3.5)
2. Atl @ Min (4.5)
3. Buf @ Jets (3.5)
4. Ten @ Cle (5.5)
5. KC (3.5) @ Jac
6. Rams (2.5) @ Car
7. Bal (4.5) @ Mia
8. Was @ Phi (9.5)
9. Cin @ Sea (9.5)
10. Ind @ SD (2.5)
11. Gia @ Dal (7.5)
12. Det (2.3) @ Arz
13. SF @ TB (1.5)
14. Pit @ NE (6.5)
15. Hou @ NO (6.5)
16. Den @ Oak (2.5)
Here are the games and lines for week 1. I'll pick and prognosticate later. I include the line beside the favored team.
1. GB @ Chi (3.5)
2. Atl @ Min (4.5)
3. Buf @ Jets (3.5)
4. Ten @ Cle (5.5)
5. KC (3.5) @ Jac
6. Rams (2.5) @ Car
7. Bal (4.5) @ Mia
8. Was @ Phi (9.5)
9. Cin @ Sea (9.5)
10. Ind @ SD (2.5)
11. Gia @ Dal (7.5)
12. Det (2.3) @ Arz
13. SF @ TB (1.5)
14. Pit @ NE (6.5)
15. Hou @ NO (6.5)
16. Den @ Oak (2.5)
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
The line will change before the actual games so these points spreads mean nothing now.
Right?
Right?
I don't know if they lock those in early or not. I usually make my picks inside the week. I think it's interesting to see how the odds makers are feeling about teams this far out. I haven't done any math, even the limited sort.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
There can be no doubt that the line for the Cowboys/Giants game will change if Elliott is not signed by the time of the game. Injuries to key players between now and game time can also cause a change in the line. Therefore, I believe that it is better to wait to the last possible moment to make one's picks.
Oh, I wasn't offering the lines to promote picking teams, and didn't pick them myself. I thought it was interesting and said something about the confidence or concerns of the odds makers at this point.
People have been saying this since 1972....lol
Seriously though, the NFC North is wide open this year. Cleveland has the young talent, Baltimore has the hyped-young QB, and Pittsburgh has the veteran Roethlisberger. Cincy is most likely in rebuild mode.
Soooooo, who knows? I'm biased, but I'll take the seasoned QB and coach.
Also, I'll really miss Antonio Brown, but at the same time, I'm so glad all the current drama with him has nothing to do with the Steelers.
It's a solid team.
And an unproven coach, plus a lot of talented pieces that have to gel. It's not to sleep on, but I want to see something before I get too excited. I've seen talent wither on the vine before (I'm eyeballing you, Cincinnati).
Has to prove he can throw out of the pocket.
Solid coach, solid team. Proven track record.
Sounds familiar.
It's the safe bet.
He's a sensitive fellow.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Stick a fork in the Steelers!
Putting together a top 25 NFL qbs using an adjusted rating system. I take the career stats and the SB stats, factor appearances and wins in the SB in relation to position play.
25. Theismann
24. Jurgenson
23. Griese
22. Aikman
21. Tarkenton
20. Kelly
19. Rivers
18. Romo
17. Dawson
16. Elway
15. Favre
14. Unitas
13. Starr
12. Warner
11. Roethlisberger
10. Staubach
9. Wilson
8. Brees
7. Graham
6. Marino
5. Rogers
4. Manning
3. Young
2. Brady
1. Montana
25. Theismann
24. Jurgenson
23. Griese
22. Aikman
21. Tarkenton
20. Kelly
19. Rivers
18. Romo
17. Dawson
16. Elway
15. Favre
14. Unitas
13. Starr
12. Warner
11. Roethlisberger
10. Staubach
9. Wilson
8. Brees
7. Graham
6. Marino
5. Rogers
4. Manning
3. Young
2. Brady
1. Montana
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Thirteen quarterbacks better than Unitas?
That's a joke just like twenty-one quarterbacks better than Aikman!
That's a joke just like twenty-one quarterbacks better than Aikman!
By production, yes, even adjusting for the inflation of the modern game. Some put him in the top five, some put him lower than I have him. I even came across a ranking that had Starr and Unitas exactly where I put them. The higher placements were largely subjective valuations without rubrics or much math involved. What I did was look at career rating, adjust that for modern rules changes, then factor hardware/playoff performance and SBs into it. Where the career included pre SB championships I gave some credit as well. Otto Graham was one of those.
Well, I'd understand that sentiment if you were talking about my including Romo or disputing Roger being that high, but that's how the math played out.
Like I said, Unitas you can see much higher and you could argue lower. I always thought of him as the king of the old guard, until I started wading into his production. Still great, but the only way to move him up my list would be to seriously fudge the math. I think he and Starr are about where they need to be, though the separation as I have it is so close at that point that I could understand someone moving him as high as 11. Who is he kicking off the top ten though?
To my mind, Aikman was a lot like Griese. Talented, but he rarely put up gaudy numbers. He was more of an elite game manager. People forget that at first that there was a quarterback question in Dallas. But with one of the best offensive lines in the NFL, a great wr and compliment, and a workhorse at running back, he did his part to put together a dynasty and earned a spot in the top quarter. You'd have to make the case for who he replaces on the list. And he also had a shortened career.
You could look at the position by rules generated eras. Have one for Star, Graham, Unitas and that crew, another for Marino, Young, Montana, Elway and that group, and a last for Brady and his generation forward. Probably fairer to the old guard, especially, though Graham made my top ten, so you can't say I was prejudiced about them. I never got to see them, so all I can do is compare them by the numbers and try to be as fair with adjusting those for the rules alterations.
Okay, take your own stab. Give me your top 25. Or, if that's too daunting, try your top 20, or even top 10.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
According to you the list was for the "top quarterbacks." And you think that there have been thirteen quarterbacks that top Johhy Unitas. He was named the most valuable player of the league three times. He was named to ten pro bowl teams and was named on the first team pro bowl team five times.
And according to you Fran Tarkenton topped Troy Aikman. I saw the two play many, many times and Tarkenton's skills were not even close to Aikman's. Aikman's passing stats suffer because his passing skills were so good that the Boys usually had a big lead at half time so they kept feeding Emmitt the ball for the rest of the game.
One day you might finally realize that stats don't tell the whole story.
I've noted that it's close quarters at the top. You could argue him into the top 10, but I don't see him above 11, personally.
And he was a great quarterback. By the numbers the 13th best out of everyone to ever play the position.
Not only me and according to the numbers he did.
NFL.com recently ranked qbs while restricting it to SB participating signal callers only. They had Tarkenton at 13 among that class and Aikman at 15.
Bleacher had Tarkenton a lot higher than I could go and put him 9th. They had Aikman at 22nd.
Athlon had Tarkenton at 11th and Aikman at 15th.
There is a lot of traction for Unitas being much higher, but I'd argue against it given the people I have in front of him. I'd like to know who to move to accommodate him, great as he was.
You could say he wasn't that great until Smith took pressure off of him too. He threw 31 tds against 46 ints through his first 3 seasons under center. It wasn't until the third year that he threw more tds than picks, by a grand total of one. But by year four defenses were having to sit on Smith, or try to, and he got a lot better. I think he did what he needed to do to win. If you go strictly by the old pass rating standard he'd be 16th. Of course, if you do that Staubach is 41st.
They can tell me, when I pay close attention, who will win what contest and by how much more often than not.
Stats don't tell a story. They reflect what actually happened. What we do with what we see is a story, a narrative we create from any number of places. Now that narrative can be interesting to consider, but it's colored by our preference. And that can blind us.
What would Staubach's record look like with those prime years he gave to the armed services put back on the field? What would Steve Young have done taking Montana's place with Bill for all these years and without a concussion shortened career? What would Peyton have accomplished in New England with those defenses behind him? What if Elway had learned the discipline he had to accept late in his career and had that coaching when he was in his prime?
What would Marino have done for Pittsburgh?
They're interesting things to consider, especially when you start talking about the GOAT and how many ways there are to slice that one.
So, you going to keep complaining about other people's ideas or are you going to put up your own list?
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
If Staubach didn't have to play the great Steelers team with the Steel Curtain in two of his Super Bowls and instead faced the teams which Joe Montana faced in his Super Bowls Staubach would have been 4-0 in his Super Bowls. If Montana had to face those same Steelers he would have been 2-2 and Staubach would have been hailed as the greatest quarterback in the history of the NFL--not Montana.
I just can't believe that you think that Fran Tarkenton was a better quarterback than Troy Aikman, despite the fact that he was the quarterback for the Boys when they won three Super Bowls.
I'll give you a "could be" on Staubach and a "Nah" on Montana. Because those Steelers teams would be facing a great and balanced team with, to my mind, the actual GOAT in terms of big game play.
I can't believe you won't man up and put up your own list for critique.
Aikman is a peculiar qb to consider because he doesn't put up great numbers, he had a shortened career, and he was only good for half the seasons he played. In the playoffs it's much the same. He's great in 92,93, and 96. He's pretty good but not great in 94. He's terrible in 91, 96, and 98. He's weak back up bad in 99. So half the time he's very good to great and half the time he's awful.
He played great in his first win against Buffalo. 273 yds, 4 tds, 0 ints
He played badly and still got a ring the second time around with Buffalo, throwing for 207 yds, 0 tds against 1 int
He played up and down in his third, ending with 209 yds, 1 td and 0 ints.
So he only really was the deciding factor in one of those, contributed in another (the Pittsburgh game) and won in spite of himself in the middle. Could he play? Absolutely. Sometimes great, sometimes not. But he largely rode that running game and contributed. He was, as I noted, an elite game manager. I think he was as good at that role as anyone has been.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
In your mind but not in reality. If Montana would have had to play the Steelers with their Steel Curtain and all their all pro players on offense the 49ers wouldn't have had a chance. Montana would have been 2-2 in his Super Bowls while Staubach would have been 4-0 and hailed as the greatest of all time. Here is my top 10 list:
1. Staubach
2. Brady
3. Unitas
4. Montana
5. Graham
6. Manning
7. Marino
8. Rogers
9. Brees
10.Starr
Whatever gives you hope.
Ten? Rookie.
He could have challenged for the top five, but as it sits, no. And there's just no argument for him as GOAT, which is why no one outside of a Cowboy homer would put him here.
A lesser Montana in an age where stats are so cheap ESPN had to come up with a new system. Did I mention that in 85, with Marino, Montana, and Elway in stride, no one was rated over 100. Last year it was half the league. :chuckle:
Peyton until Peyton came along. Overrated here, but great.
Nobody comes close to him in the SB. Put him on the NE squad and he'd have more hardware than Brady. Putting him here is just begging serious students of the game to mock you...well, for the second time.
The actual GOAT of the old timers.
Best of his generation and too low on the list. His production was better than Brady regular season AND post, until the last two years when he limped to the finish line. Best way to note the difference here is that when Peyton went down his team won two games. When Brady went down the Pats won 11.
Put him behind that Cowboy's line Aikman had and you'd have more rings and records than anyone. Supernatural at read and release.
Most all around physical talent to play the game. Young plus.
Made for the modern era. Found the perfect place and coach/scheme to maximize his talent.
Great leader, but he wasn't as good at the position as Young, who didn't make your list. I wouldn't fight seeing Unitas here, but Starr?
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Staubach had it all in spades. He retired with the highest passer rating of all time. He was a better scrambler than Tarkenton. He was a great leader, a man among boys.