Why there is no question about Ryan Tannehill and his $17.5 million

[AZStryker]

Nope just take a quick glance of the ppl in the HOF and you will understand there are players that are clearly better than other players even in the HOF. There are levels even among the elite.

And you're judging this by what, statistics? If so I sure hope you have something better than that horse manure you posted from YouTube.

 

[Jerrysanders]

And you're judging this by what, statistics? If so I sure hope you have something better than that horse manure you posted from YouTube.

No need for statistic when anyone with any type of logic can easily understand not all players in the HOF are on the same level. Saying Marino and Griese are on the same level because they're both in the HOF is kindergarten logic; in matter of fact it's horse manure logic.

 

[<O>]

My guess is that you've never seen Griese play. If you did you'd know how great a qb he was, stats be damned. Anyway, Marino excelled at chucking the ball 50 times a game, which was necessary due to the defense and lack of a running game. Griese excelled at making the most of his chances to throw and being an important cog in a well oiled machine. To say either is individually better than another is a flawed argument. The circumstances were drastically different and each time as asked to do what the surrounding Talent dictated. Plus Bob has two rings, and according to many experts, that makes him the better qb.

So how do we know when one QB is better individually than another? Is that even possible, or is the variation among QBs' individual performance caused entirely by what's going on around them?

Is Aaron Rodgers better than Andy Dalton individually, or has Aaron Rodgers simply benefited from better surrounding talent his whole career?

If you agree that Aaron Rodgers is better than Andy Dalton individually, then on what basis do you make that assertion? In other words, what is it that tells you he's better and it isn't just his surrounding talent that's driving the bus?

 

[39wildman]

So how do we know when one QB is better individually than another? Is that even possible, or is the variation among QBs' individual performance caused entirely by what's going on around them?

Is Aaron Rodgers better than Andy Dalton individually, or has Aaron Rodgers simply benefited from better surrounding talent his whole career?

If you agree that Aaron Rodgers is better than Andy Dalton individually, then on what basis do you make that assertion? In other words, what is it that tells you he's better and it isn't just his surrounding talent that's driving the bus?

this is just me some qb need more talent player around them to win.. and I feel Andy D some time can carried team by his self. Dalton have made playoff 5 out 6 yr.Andy biggest problem is playoff losing. Roger and brady can play w less talent and still win all the time. I find it wild how some avg qb is being paid more than the best qb in nfl.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

So how do we know when one QB is better individually than another? Is that even possible, or is the variation among QBs' individual performance caused entirely by what's going on around them?

Is Aaron Rodgers better than Andy Dalton individually, or has Aaron Rodgers simply benefited from better surrounding talent his whole career?

If you agree that Aaron Rodgers is better than Andy Dalton individually, then on what basis do you make that assertion? In other words, what is it that tells you he's better and it isn't just his surrounding talent that's driving the bus?

How about "all of the above" as an answer? Differences in QB performance is a combination of their abilities, the abilities of their teammates, their coaching staff, the opponents they face, and natural variation.

If it were all QB, you wouldn't have Marino with no rings or a 6-10 season or 30 point swings in QB ratings. You wouldn't have the simple fact that only one NFL QB has ever won the league MVP and SB in the same season in the modern era.

If coaching weren't important, you wouldn't have Belichick or Shula or Walsh.

I think it comes down to needing two of the three (QB, coaching, supporting cast) to be very good (and none to be terrible) to be successful and in addition a little luck win the SB.

 

[<O>]

How about "all of the above" as an answer? Differences in QB performance is a combination of their abilities, the abilities of their teammates, their coaching staff, the opponents they face, and natural variation.

If it were all QB, you wouldn't have Marino with no rings or a 6-10 season or 30 point swings in QB ratings. You wouldn't have the simple fact that only one NFL QB has ever won the league MVP and SB in the same season in the modern era.

If coaching weren't important, you wouldn't have Belichick or Shula or Walsh.

I think it comes down to needing two of the three (QB, coaching, supporting cast) to be very good (and none to be terrible) to be successful and in addition a little luck win the SB.

The part of your post I boldfaced is the critical part when talking about QBs' individual performance. Again we're not talking about team performance here.

Yes there are swings (or variation) in QB ratings for an individual QB from year to year, presumably as a function of all the other factors you mentioned. Indeed those factors play a part.

But why do Aaron Rodgers's QB ratings vary from year to year within a much higher range than Andy Dalton's QB ratings?

When there is a big enough sample size, there is only one explanation for that -- Aaron Rodgers is simply a better player.

The other factors you mentioned account for the variation for both QBs from year to year, but the difference in their individual ability accounts for why Rodgers varies at a level much higher than Dalton.

 

[FinfanInBuffalo]

The part of your post I boldfaced is the critical part when talking about QBs' individual performance. Again we're not talking about team performance here.

Yes there are swings (or variation) in QB ratings for an individual QB from year to year, presumably as a function of all the other factors you mentioned. Indeed those factors play a part.

But why do Aaron Rodgers's QB ratings vary from year to year within a much higher range than Andy Dalton's QB ratings?

When there is a big enough sample size, there is only one explanation for that -- Aaron Rodgers is simply a better player.

The other factors you mentioned account for the variation for both QBs from year to year, but the difference in their individual ability accounts for why Rodgers varies at a level much higher than Dalton.

Clearly some QBs are better than others. I don't think anyone disputes that. There are also cases where equally talented QBs are in drastically different situations and their individual performances vary more than the variation in their talent. I don't think it always evens out over the course of a career. Miami had a string of coaches and GMs that held the franchise back for years. I don't think a QB pulls them out of that mess by themselves.

To put it another way, if Miami drafted Rodgers in 2005 or picked up Brees in 2006, I don't think either has the same individual success in Miami under Cameron, Sparano, and Philbin as they did under McCarthy and Payton. The other benefit to good coaching is stability.

 

[Sons Of Shula]

So how do we know when one QB is better individually than another? Is that even possible, or is the variation among QBs' individual performance caused entirely by what's going on around them?

Is Aaron Rodgers better than Andy Dalton individually, or has Aaron Rodgers simply benefited from better surrounding talent his whole career?

If you agree that Aaron Rodgers is better than Andy Dalton individually, then on what basis do you make that assertion? In other words, what is it that tells you he's better and it isn't just his surrounding talent that's driving the bus?

Watch the game. LOL

It's not that difficult to determine that Rodgers is a better QB than Dalton. I don't need a ****ing analytics booklet to tell me so.

 

[<O>]

Watch the game. LOL

It's not that difficult to determine that Rodgers is a better QB than Dalton. I don't need a ****ing analytics booklet to tell me so.

When you're watching the game, what tells you with any certainty that it isn't his surrounding talent or other external factors that are accounting for the difference between his individual performance and Dalton's?

 

[Sons Of Shula]

When you're watching the game, what tells you with any certainty that it isn't his surrounding talent or other external factors that are accounting for the difference between his individual performance and Dalton's?

I'm not sure I want to play Football 101 with you. This is ridiculous.

 

[Vaark]

Clearly some QBs are better than others. I don't think anyone disputes that. There are also cases where equally talented QBs are in drastically different situations and their individual performances vary more than the variation in their talent. I don't think it always evens out over the course of a career. Miami had a string of coaches and GMs that held the franchise back for years. I don't think a QB pulls them out of that mess by themselves.

To put it another way, if Miami drafted Rodgers in 2005 or picked up Brees in 2006, I don't think either has the same individual success in Miami under Cameron, Sparano, and Philbin as they did under McCarthy and Payton. The other benefit to good coaching is stability.

An argument can be made that Archie is the 2nd best Manning despite an abysmal losing record with no support from an abysmal team to whom he was shackled

.. and that he'd have been a regular playoff contender with better teams in his era such as Cowboys, Rams and Cardinals.

Likewise speculating that David Carr would have had a much better career behind a line that could protect him reasonably well instead of being porous swiss cheese, is reasonable. It was his misfortune to be drafted by such a lousy team. Given what raw recruit Tannehill had to work with and his nepotistic, inexperienced, unqualified QBC, it's much to his credit that he's risen above those heavy weight anchors!

 

[<O>]

I'm not sure I want to play Football 101 with you. This is ridiculous.

If the answer to that question is truly at the "Football 101" level, it shouldn't take much time or effort to provide a cogent response.

 

[russianbear]

When you're watching the game, what tells you with any certainty that it isn't his surrounding talent or other external factors that are accounting for the difference between his individual performance and Dalton's?

the amount of things your brain actually processes when watching a football game and analyzing a qb's play is so far beyond what you could spend time writing on a forum, i'm trying to describe it without using the word infinite but it is really the only way to do it justice. that's why people often just refer to the eye test...it encapsulates body language, timing, speed, accuracy, tempo, everything.....

stats are better used when going back and reviewing either someone's entire season of play or entire career of work....then you can find trends, correlations, etc....people throwing out stat lines every week as if they mean anything individually are typically trying to justify a stance they already believe. sometimes less is more with statistics, because we drastically underestimate what we can process with the supercomputers in our heads...

if you need someone to break down what makes aaron rodgers a better qb than andy dalton, then your super computer must be broken

 

[Sons Of Shula]

If the answer to that question is truly at the "Football 101" level, it shouldn't take much time or effort to provide a cogent response.

Sorry for wasting you time. Not interested.

 

[<O>]

the amount of things your brain actually processes when watching a football game and analyzing a qb's play is so far beyond what you could spend time writing on a forum, i'm trying to describe it without using the word infinite but it is really the only way to do it justice. that's why people often just refer to the eye test...it encapsulates body language, timing, speed, accuracy, tempo, everything.....

stats are better used when going back and reviewing either someone's entire season of play or entire career of work....then you can find trends, correlations, etc....people throwing out stat lines every week as if they mean anything individually are typically trying to justify a stance they already believe. sometimes less is more with statistics, because we drastically underestimate what we can process with the supercomputers in our heads...

if you need someone to break down what makes aaron rodgers a better qb than andy dalton, then your super computer must be broken

If the eye test were sufficient, then everyone with eyes would agree on what they're seeing. That isn't the case, however.

I'm sure you could venture to the Cincinnati Bengals' forum and find people who believe that with Green Bay's surroundings, Andy Dalton would play like Aaron Rodgers.

Are those people's eye tests faulty? How do we know?