2018 NFL Offseason Thread -- Philadelphia Burning Edition

I know I'm late to this discussion but this one looked interesting to me so I did a touch of research...

Troy Aikman 1989-2000 29
George Blanda (Also PK) 1949-1958, 1960-1975 none
Terry Bradshaw 1970-1983 15/16
Len Dawson 1957-1975 none
John Elway 1983-1998 29
Brett Favre 1991-2010 22
Dan Fouts 1973-1987 none
Otto Graham 1946-1955 none
Bob Griese 1967-1980 none
Sonny Jurgensen 1957-1974 none
Jim Kelly 1986-1996 15
Bobby Layne 1948-1962 none
Dan Marino 1983-1999 15
Joe Montana 1979-1994 none
Warren Moon 1984-2000 none
Joe Namath 1965-1977 none
Ken Stabler 1970-1984 none
Bart Starr 1956-1971 none
Roger Staubach 1969-1979 none
Fran Tarkenton 1961-1978 none
Y.A. Tittle 1948-1964 none
Johnny Unitas 1956-1973 none
Norm Van Brocklin 1949-1960 none
Kurt Warner 1998-2009 none - wasn't drafted
Bob Waterfield 1945-1952 none
Steve Young 1985-1999 33

average score for QB's is 25.8. I'd think you'd want at least a 20 if not the average. The way QBs need to be smart to learn to read defenses seems like that takes some intellect.

Also:
Tom Brady: 33
Aaron Rodgers: 35
Ben Rapelisberger: 25
Eli Manning: 39
Peyton Manning: 28
Phillip Rivers: 30
Tony Romo: 37
Drew Brees: 28

The short list above I think are all HoF worthy, maybe not Romo/Eli and maybe not even Rivers but all of them have 25 or higher and are/were great QBs.

Contender thing is sort of a minor league/tryout sort of thing. Seems like the guy he's fighting is ranked pretty highly regionally but still isn't exactly a top tier guy or anything.

BrutulTM said:

But don't forget Terry Bradshaw, Jim Kelly, and Dan Marino are all in the HoF with a score of 15 and there are plenty of really high scores that didn't succeed in the NFL. Obviously higher is better, but there's more important factors in playing QB than IQ.

Click to expand...

I agree but I was interested in seeing how raw talent matches up with guys that are smart but might not have the greatest talent the league has ever seen. I mean Brady is smart and has an incredibly talented arm but he's slow as dogshit and not super athletic compared to guys like Mike Vick, Steve Young, etc. Peyton Manning wasn't super athletic either but his football brain and arm combo were ridiculous.

I DO think having a QB with a higher intelligence is more important today than it was when Terry Bradshaw played. Offenses and Defenses are much more complex to run and read.

Daezuel said:

Click to expand...

That's pretty damn good. Should have kept it going longer, though.

Jozu said:

Ha, well played.

Doesn't change the fact the Giants were a pretty good offense with OBJ and dogshit without him. Most systems are dependant on QB play but there are outliers where a skill position player is so effective the offense can't function without them.

Cowboys are another example with Zeke. Giants with Odel.

Click to expand...

What? Giants were a below average offense before Odell went down.

Ambiturner said:

What? Giants were a below average offense before Odell went down.

Click to expand...

Odell only played in 4 games last year. 12 games without OBJ Giants averaged 302 yards and 13.9 points a game, good for 30th in yards per game and 32nd (dead fucking last) in points per game. In the 4 games with OBJ, Giants averaged 350 yards and 19.75 points per game, which would have been good for 12th in yards per game and 21st in points per game. Their overall rankings ended up 21st and 31st.

So above average yards, below average points with Odell (though clearly better with, than without). Ironically the Giants 2 biggest offensive games of the year were both against the Super Bowl Champion Eagles. Only times all year they scored 24 or more points and topped 400 yards (over 500 in one). Of course, they still lost both of those games.

Sadre Spinegnawer said:

C-Land looking forward to Darnold and Chubb. Oh yeah.

Click to expand...

Source: Browns considering Mayfield at No. 1

Ambiturner said:

What? Giants were a below average offense before Odell went down.

Click to expand...

Hardly a sample size. He was literally our offense in 2016. He fundamentally changes the defense when he's on the field.

Chanur said:

I've been hearing Saquon Barkley at 1 (which would be retarded) and Allen at 4. Pretty retarded so probably what the Browns will do.

Click to expand...

All depends on how they view the QB's, and what their read on Giants/Jets is...or whether someone else might trade up to #2 to grab the guy they might want (if they want one over the others).

I been saying the Browns should take Barkley at 1 and then take a gamble and see who falls to them at 4 as far as their QB.

It just makes sense. Cathan came up in here said the Browns should take TWO QBs with their 2 top 4 picks and then promptly disappeared, LOL.

No one knows whether Darnold is the number 1 guy. Now there is fucking talk about Mayfield at number 1....Lol. no one can predict who will be the best of that bunch, and then you have Jackson who someone will take a chance on.

How can the Browns go wrong if they take Barkley at 1? They end up with Josh Allen or Josh Rosen at 4? How is taking a huge gamble on "your guy" at one a better business decision than taking a no doubt can't miss prospect sitting right there staring you in the face.

What if "your guy" turns out to be another Tim Couch and then they land Bradley Chubb at 4 or some shit, no one will care because they will still be horrible.

At least if they take Saquan they kno what they are getting with their most valuable pick, and then you see who's left at 4.