The Weird, Wacky and Awesome World of the NFL - General Banter thread V3

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Oat23 wrote: »

The irony of writing an article explaining why Trubisky is the worst starting QB in the league under a picture of him playing in the pro bowl.


https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/pro-what-the-advanced-analytics-say-about-mitchell-trubiksy

Do you think Trubisky is the long term solution for Chicago as a matter of interest?

I don't believe Trubisky is the worst QB in the league (far from it), but I also don't think he's your solution. Imo ye won't win a Superbowl with him with the way the league is now. I just don't believe he can do what other below average QBs like Eli, Flacco and Foles have done in recent times. And in a league where there is no relegation, it really has to be about winning, not staying competitive or winning x number of games every year.

That being said I do like Trubisky, he comes across as a good leader and teammate. I'd like to see him succeed but I just see him at Andy Dalton's level.

And just to weigh in on PFF, I do like what they do. They give their rankings on players based purely on stats. Stats alone absolutely will not determine the fate of a player, but they're generally a good indicator.

Onecoolcookie

Trent Williams wants out of the Redskins it would appear, has demanded a trade. Browns would be an interesting contender here would be a massive upgrade on Greg Robinson at LT

VonZan

Onecoolcookie wrote: »

Trent Williams wants out of the Redskins it would appear, has demanded a trade. Browns would be an interesting contender here would be a massive upgrade on Greg Robinson at LT

According to the Washington Post it's to do with the Skins medical team and how they handled his diagnosis. I'm not sure what went on but there are rumours that he told the staff he didn't feel good and then went and saw his own doctor who found growths but there is no other information on what went on.

My guess is that he's more looking for a new deal with 2 years left but he hasn't played a full season in 6 years. Do the Skins have money to extend him?

The_Honeybadger

Big Pussy Bonpensiero wrote: »

Do you think Trubisky is the long term solution for Chicago as a matter of interest?

I don't believe Trubisky is the worst QB in the league (far from it), but I also don't think he's your solution. Imo ye won't win a Superbowl with him with the way the league is now. I just don't believe he can do what other below average QBs like Eli, Flacco and Foles have done in recent times. And in a league where there is no relegation, it really has to be about winning, not staying competitive or winning x number of games every year.

That being said I do like Trubisky, he comes across as a good leader and teammate. I'd like to see him succeed but I just see him at Andy Dalton's level.

And just to weigh in on PFF, I do like what they do. They give their rankings on players based purely on stats. Stats alone absolutely will not determine the fate of a player, but they're generally a good indicator.

I’d agree, while he made the pro bowl that is a fair question. Trubisky is a good QB, no chance he is the worst in the league but is he a franchise QB that you would want with the ball in his hand in the dying moments of a game when you need a winning drive? At the moment definitely not for me, and at some point he needs to be if you want to win a Superbowl. The other first round QB’s from his class Mahomes and Watson are a good bit better imo (without looking at their in game stats admittedly).

He has time on his side I suppose. Bears have most of the other pieces in place, it would be great for them if he could break out while they have this team together.

jack presley

VonZan wrote: »

According to the Washington Post it's to do with the Skins medical team and how they handled his diagnosis. I'm not sure what went on but there are rumours that he told the staff he didn't feel good and then went and saw his own doctor who found growths but there is no other information on what went on.

My guess is that he's more looking for a new deal with 2 years left but he hasn't played a full season in 6 years. Do the Skins have money to extend him?

I think they’re about $8m under the cap at the moment but they need to give Scherff a deal too.

Oat23

Big Pussy Bonpensiero wrote: »

Do you think Trubisky is the long term solution for Chicago as a matter of interest?

I don't believe Trubisky is the worst QB in the league (far from it), but I also don't think he's your solution. Imo ye won't win a Superbowl with him with the way the league is now. I just don't believe he can do what other below average QBs like Eli, Flacco and Foles have done in recent times. And in a league where there is no relegation, it really has to be about winning, not staying competitive or winning x number of games every year.

That being said I do like Trubisky, he comes across as a good leader and teammate. I'd like to see him succeed but I just see him at Andy Dalton's level.

And just to weigh in on PFF, I do like what they do. They give their rankings on players based purely on stats. Stats alone absolutely will not determine the fate of a player, but they're generally a good indicator.

Too early to make a call on him yet. Year 1 shouldn't count at all as he was playing in a Dowell Loggains/John Fox run-run-pass offense which was dreadful.


Last year I would say he played above-average, certainly not below. If you go back and watch weeks 1-3 and then weeks 15-17 you will see the huge leap the offense took over the course of the season as they learned Nagy's offense. He certainly has areas to improve in, like his accuracy beyond 20 yards and his decision making. I've never seen a QB so lucky when it came to bad passes not being intercepted like they should be.


He is an excellent runner and has the ability to make any throw you want a QB to make. He just needs to clean up his game and be more consistent. It would be foolish of me to make a judgement on him after his first season in a new offense though. Next season will tell us a lot about Trubisky.



As for PFF, their rankings aren't based purely off of stats. They are highly subjective, based on grades given to players on each individual play watched back by one of their analysts. An analyst who doesn't know either team's playbook nor does he/she know what is going through the mind of any of the players. They call it a science but science isn't opinion based. There have been plenty of players and coaches within the league who have publicly stated what a joke their grades are - even players who have a positive grade with them (I believe it was one of the Lions' linemen).


Kyle Fuller of the Bears is a great example of just how opinion based their 'stats' are, and just how wrong they can get it.



He was drafted in 2014 and was considered a bust up until his 2017 season when he broke out and was one of the best corners in the league that year. However, PFF had him graded as one of the worst for most of 2017 even though it was clear to anyone who watched him play that he was playing at an unbelievable level.


Here is how PFF had him graded after the week 10 games that season. 48.4. The 87th best corner in the NFL apparently.



Fast forward another 7 weeks, and this is their end of season grades.
I'm not even getting into them having Amos ranked that high as that is a whole other sh*tshow, but Fuller is suddenly graded at 84.3 which is good enough for their top 10 CBs in the league.






Obviously at some point in the final 7 games of the season they realised how wrong they had been grading Kyle Fuller and adjusted his grade so it didn't look so ridiculous. How is that 'advanced-analytics' or 'scientific'? :pac:

Christy42

The_Honeybadger wrote: »

I’d agree, while he made the pro bowl that is a fair question. Trubisky is a good QB, no chance he is the worst in the league but is he a franchise QB that you would want with the ball in his hand in the dying moments of a game when you need a winning drive? At the moment definitely not for me, and at some point he needs to be if you want to win a Superbowl. The other first round QB’s from his class Mahomes and Watson are a good bit better imo (without looking at their in game stats admittedly).

He has time on his side I suppose. Bears have most of the other pieces in place, it would be great for them if he could break out while they have this team together.

Indeed. I think his pro bowl selection had more to do with the rest of the team than him. He is a solid player who won't cripple his offense but won't do it all himself either when the defense crumbles.

Maybe he will get better, he wouldn't be the first but right now he is a few tiers down.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

Oat23 wrote: »

Too early to make a call on him yet. Year 1 shouldn't count at all as he was playing in a Dowell Loggains/John Fox run-run-pass offense which was dreadful.


Last year I would say he played above-average, certainly not below. If you go back and watch weeks 1-3 and then weeks 15-17 you will see the huge leap the offense took over the course of the season as they learned Nagy's offense. He certainly has areas to improve in, like his accuracy beyond 20 yards and his decision making. I've never seen a QB so lucky when it came to bad passes not being intercepted like they should be.


He is an excellent runner and has the ability to make any throw you want a QB to make. He just needs to clean up his game and be more consistent. It would be foolish of me to make a judgement on him after his first season in a new offense though. Next season will tell us a lot about Trubisky.



As for PFF, their rankings aren't based purely off of stats. They are highly subjective, based on grades given to players on each individual play watched back by one of their analysts. An analyst who doesn't know either team's playbook nor does he/she know what is going through the mind of any of the players. They call it a science but science isn't opinion based. There have been plenty of players and coaches within the league who have publicly stated what a joke their grades are - even players who have a positive grade with them (I believe it was one of the Lions' linemen).


Kyle Fuller of the Bears is a great example of just how opinion based their 'stats' are, and just how wrong they can get it.



He was drafted in 2014 and was considered a bust up until his 2017 season when he broke out and was one of the best corners in the league that year. However, PFF had him graded as one of the worst for most of 2017 even though it was clear to anyone who watched him play that he was playing at an unbelievable level.


Here is how PFF had him graded after the week 10 games that season. 48.4. The 87th best corner in the NFL apparently.



Fast forward another 7 weeks, and this is their end of season grades.
I'm not even getting into them having Amos ranked that high as that is a whole other sh*tshow, but Fuller is suddenly graded at 84.3 which is good enough for their top 10 CBs in the league.






Obviously at some point in the final 7 games of the season they realised how wrong they had been grading Kyle Fuller and adjusted his grade so it didn't look so ridiculous. How is that 'advanced-analytics' or 'scientific'? :pac:

On Trubisky, too early to judge for sure alright but I don't see it. I think he has that pro-bowl potential to him, but in a few years he'll be one of those QBs that too good to get rid of but not good enough to be 'the guy'.
It was only his sophomore season but he had the squad to go all the way in 18/19, especially with the form they were in and the capitulation/end-of-season-decline of almost every other NFC team. Think it'll be a while before ye find yourselves in such a good position to challenge for a Superbowl again. Yerselves, the Eagles and perhaps Dallas were the only teams going into those playoffs in a bit of form (and I do know that Trubisky isn't solely to blame for that).
I would be absolutely delighted to be proven wrong however, don't think there would be too many people upset to see the Bears win another Lombardi.


On PFF - there seems to be 2 extremes of viewing it, and I don't think either are correct tbh. It has its place and most of the time its a decent source. It obviously has made some disastrous errors but that is to be expected when grading players based on stats alone.
The main problem with what PFF do is that they do grade players on stats alone, which in almost any sport (bar maybe baseball) is a thoroughly 1 dimensional way of looking at things. IMO doing what PFF do can help in grading players, but it absolutely should not be the be-all and end-all.
Basically, I think people that completely dismiss anything PFF-related are being short-sighted, likewise anyone that places blind faith in it.

Hococop

We signed wentz to a 4 year extension $128 million and 65 million in guarantee, such a Howie move imo puts pressure back on the cowboys and Dak for his contract now

thomond2006

Carson Wentz and the Eagles agreed to a four-year extension through 2024, the team announced Thursday. Wentz's deal is worth $128 million, and up to $144 million, with $66 million fully guaranteed at signing and $107.9 million in guarantees, a source told NFL Network Insider Ian Rapoport.

66m signing bonus and 108m guaranteed in total, I assume the difference between the two amounts is put in escrow to be paid at a later date. Do I have that correct?

Foxtrol

thomond2006 wrote: »

66m signing bonus and 108m guaranteed in total, I assume the difference between the two amounts is put in escrow to be paid at a later date. Do I have that correct?

Quite frequently it rolling guarantees.

66m he will end up getting no matter what, but the rest is on a year by year basis. For example, in 2022 his guarantees might only come into effect for injury or if he is on the roster for the first day of the NFL league year.

Foxtrol

Hococop wrote: »

We signed wentz to a 4 year extension $128 million and 65 million in guarantee, such a Howie move imo puts pressure back on the cowboys and Dak for his contract now

Can I ask how it is a 'Howie move'?

He has gotten in before the next jump in the QB market but at the same time taken a risk with a QB that could be deemed to be injury prone.

Also, not quite sure what the tie in to the Cowboys is, this hasn't really moved the QB market from where it was before.

Itssoeasy

Hococop wrote: »

We signed wentz to a 4 year extension $128 million and 65 million in guarantee, such a Howie move imo puts pressure back on the cowboys and Dak for his contract now

Yep. Over to you jerry. Wentz has this chip on his shoulder because yes the eagles won the super bowl but he wasn't leading the ship. That's good though as he has something to get to. He needs to have a full season injury free and playing to his ability which we've seen glimpses of and it was great.

Itssoeasy

Hococop wrote: »

We signed wentz to a 4 year extension $128 million and 65 million in guarantee, such a Howie move imo puts pressure back on the cowboys and Dak for his contract now

Yep. Over to you jerry. Wentz has this chip on his shoulder because yes the eagles won the super bowl but he wasn't leading the ship. That's good though as he has something to get to. He needs to have a full season injury free and playing to his ability which we've seen glimpses of and it was great.

nerd69

Foxtrol wrote: »

Can I ask how it is a 'Howie move'?

He has gotten in before the next jump in the QB market but at the same time taken a risk with a QB that could be deemed to be injury prone.

Also, not quite sure what the tie in to the Cowboys is, this hasn't really moved the QB market from where it was before.

Ya but we where going to pay him either way. Now we get him for less

OldMrBrennan83

Texans have hoofed their GM.

Foxtrol

nerd69 wrote: »

Ya but we where going to pay him either way. Now we get him for less

Well you'd likely get him for less if he ends up again going on IR for a significant part of a 3rd season in a row (on top of other injuries he had during recent seasons before that).

It is a calculated risk where both sides can claim some sort of victory, like most QB signings are.

My question was more of how this is a 'Howie move'? Seems at this point a term that is trotted out for everything he and has absolutely no meaning.

Hococop

Foxtrol wrote: »

Well you'd likely get him for less if he ends up again going on IR for a significant part of a 3rd season in a row (on top of other injuries he had during recent seasons before that).

It is a calculated risk where both sides can claim some sort of victory, like most QB signings are.

My question was more of how this is a 'Howie move'? Seems at this point a term that is trotted out for everything he and has absolutely no meaning.

We had taken on Wentz extra year option so we had no pressure to sign him to a proper contract till next year whereas Dak didn't have the extra year so he is in contract negotiations

Dak also said he wont be doing a Brady discount and wants to get paid, by getting Wentz deal done before them it means they will probably have to give a bigger contract which means can they afford to give Zeke and cooper their extension

eagle eye

Dak isn't that good though.

Hococop

eagle eye wrote: »

Dak isn't that good though.

Nope but according to Jerry he is brilliant so hopefully he gets a huge contract ha

Itssoeasy

Hococop wrote: »

eagle eye wrote: »

Dak isn't that good though.

Nope but according to Jerry he is brilliant so hopefully he gets a huge contract ha

Well jerry somehow believes he'll have success with Jason Garrett as head coach also so jerry says lots of stuff.

brinty

eagle eye wrote:

Dak isn't that good though.

You do know he's better in almost every main rating than Carson Wentz and has played 16 gamea in each of the last three years.

Foxtrol

Hococop wrote: »

We had taken on Wentz extra year option so we had no pressure to sign him to a proper contract till next year whereas Dak didn't have the extra year so he is in contract negotiations

Dak also said he wont be doing a Brady discount and wants to get paid, by getting Wentz deal done before them it means they will probably have to give a bigger contract which means can they afford to give Zeke and cooper their extension

You'd have an argument if you'd moved the QB market, but you really didn't. Wentz' money is pretty much in line with what recent franchise level QBs have received, so more just reaffirming the market than impacting Dak and the Cowboys.

The 4D chess angle to somehow show you’ve gotten one over on the Cowboys is a serious stretch (and I’d say the same the other way around if Jerry had made a similar deal with Dak). You’ve taken a gamble by getting some discount on a long term deal through giving a lot of money to a QB who hasn’t shown he can stay fit. I don’t even see how that is some sort of special ‘Howie move’, I’d contend a sizeable number of GMs would make the same decision.

el Fenomeno

brinty wrote: »

You do know he's better in almost every main rating than Carson Wentz .

Since they entered the league, sure. But if you look at the second half of their respective careers so far, one of them is trending upwards and the other downwards.

nerd69

brinty wrote: »

You do know he's better in almost every main rating than Carson Wentz and has played 16 gamea in each of the last three years.

He has better stats because he's played more games. I'd give Dak credit for health that's unquestionable but I think he is a good qb nothing more when he's not behind that line with thhat run game he's not been the same player (although the same could be said for wentz with his line I think he was genuinely elite when he had the run game)

No doubt we both have our own bias but health aside I take wentz 10 times out of 10

eagle eye

brinty wrote:

You do know he's better in almost every main rating than Carson Wentz and has played 16 gamea in each of the last three years.

I know that he wasn't near the pre-injury Carson Wentz. Wentz played injured last season but when healthy is really, really good. Dak doesn't have the talent to be as good as Wentz has been when healthy.

Foxtrol

nerd69 wrote: »

He has better stats because he's played more games. I'd give Dak credit for health that's unquestionable but I think he is a good qb nothing more when he's not behind that line with thhat run game he's not been the same player (although the same could be said for wentz with his line I think he was genuinely elite when he had the run game)

No doubt we both have our own bias but health aside I take wentz 10 times out of 10

You could as easily argue that Dak is held back and Wentz helped by their respective coaching.

I’m interested in seeing how Foles does this year. I don’t rate him at all, but in the last two years he was able to have relative success in the Eagles system, yet I rarely see Wentz getting tagged as being helped by his coaching as some other QBs are.

nerd69

Foxtrol wrote: »

You could as easily argue that Dak is held back and Wentz helped by their respective coaching.

I’m interested in seeing how Foles does this year. I don’t rate him at all, but in the last two years he was able to have relative success in the Eagles system, yet I rarely see Wentz getting tagged as being helped by his coaching as some other QBs are.

Same argument was made about Brady for years went when healthy has shown he can be elite. His health being an issue at this point is a legitimate argument but we will only know about that in time

Foxtrol

nerd69 wrote: »

Same argument was made about Brady for years went when healthy has shown he can be elite. His health being an issue at this point is a legitimate argument but we will only know about that in time

I know, I have made those same arguments when judging Brady…

It is just strange that I don’t think I’ve heard it at all about Wentz, nearly all the praise just went to Foles rather than the system/coaching.

Wentz’ health is the big issue, but he was always getting a deal. Even if this season again ended up with him only playing limited games, while showing glimpses of being elite, he’d end up getting similar money next off-season. The increase in cap and other QBs salaries would negate any additional injury discounts. Even though it is the right move it is still a big risk.

mikemac2

I guess it happens every team going by “there is always one”

Michael Pierce nose tackle 340lbs for the Ravens was removed from practice for poor conditioning

I’ve heard of players failing conditioning drills at the start of training camp sure. I don’t remember a player being taken off the field

John Harbaugh said it was “for his own safety”. No doubt the player will get a lashing in private

No danger of getting cut, is a undrafted gem from 2016. Super run blocker