Please stop bashing our starting QB

[peplaw06]

Hey football genius. Do you want to tell me which game he played well in?

Saying he played poorly and saying he played well are on two different sides of the spectrum. Yes some games he's played poorly, but if you think he played poorly in our 3 wins you're kidding yourself so it will fit into your argument.

There's a middle ground there between poorly and well. First of all I never said he "played well." I said he didn't play poorly in all 5 games, and it's ludicrous to think that's the case.

That being said, I do think he played well in 2 maybe 3 games. He probably could have played better against Washington, seeing as he only completed 50% of his passes. But he definitely played well in the Titans and Texans games. Rating over 100 in each, completed over 60% in each, 2 TDs each game and one pick in the Titans game.

 

[Cbz40]

For the first time in my life I'm going to say this.

Bledsoe sucks.

The most intelligent post in this thread.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

Some of you guys need to chill out with the personal insults.

Just let things go please.

Well it is pretty funny how the thread went from "please stop bashing our starting quarterback" to "please stop bashing each other".

 

[sonnyboy]

"FOR EVERYONE PARTICIPATING IN THIS THREAD: HERE IS THE TRUTH:"

sonnyboy, I think this is where you got off on the wrong foot with your thread...

People are not going to like someone saying, "Listen too me"!! "This is the truth"!

Maybe if you would have said;

FOR EVERYONE PARTICIPATING IN THIS THREAD: HERE IS MY OPINION:

I don't think you would have gotten the responses that you did...

Carry on...

Now that's some constructive criticism I can handle. Well said.

I'll follow your instruction and carry on...

Bledsoe has played poorly this season. His numbers suck and his actual play looks worse than those numbers.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

But see IMO no matter how you try to slice it...I think you are wrong.

I see no legit reason why you would think he is not on par with the others listed in your top category.

I just don't see it.

I really think you really reached in adding Elway to the list.

Not sure why that is so hard to understand.

Bledsoe yes, Bradshaw yes, Elway no.

If anything Elway deserves to be in the top list because not only would he see the field, he was even quicker in determining if anything was open and if not he would then run (unless it was a designed run play).

So once again I just see no legit reason one could use to make that thought you came up with.

IMO he had the physical and mental tools, along with football smarts and I see no reasonable explanation to say he was not on par, in any way, with those others you listed.

Brain, in my post I said that I believed there was a connection between "football smarts" as they applied to the QB position and completion percentage. And I do think that is the case.


I'll eliminate the older players because you can't compare completion % for guys playing in an era where the rules weren't as condusive for a passing offense as they are today:

Name Completion %
Aikman 61.5
Marino 59.4
Montana 63.2
Young 64.3
Bledsoe 57.2
Elway 56.9

Elway's 56.9% completion percentage keeps him from being "on par" with the others IMO.

 

[Stautner]

But see IMO no matter how you try to slice it...I think you are wrong.

I see no legit reason why you would think he is not on par with the others listed in your top category.

I just don't see it.

I really think you really reached in adding Elway to the list.

Not sure why that is so hard to understand.

Bledsoe yes, Bradshaw yes, Elway no.

If anything Elway deserves to be in the top list because not only would he see the field, he was even quicker in determining if anything was open and if not he would then run (unless it was a designed run play).

So once again I just see no legit reason one could use to make that thought you came up with.

IMO he had the physical and mental tools, along with football smarts and I see no reasonable explanation to say he was not on par, in any way, with those others you listed.

Here is a legitimate reason for Michael Winicki's comments and categorization of QB's.

Think back to what he originally said and what his major criteria was - completion percentage ......

% of guys he put in the category of having the most "football sense"

Aikman - 61.5%
Marino - 59.4%
Montana - 63.2%
Young - 64.3%

% of guys he put in the category of relying on athleticism more than "football sense"

Bledsoe - 57.2%
Bradshaw - 51.9%
Elway - 56.9%

Now, that said, completion % obviously doesn't tell the whole story, but it does at least provide a reasonable foundation for Micheal Winicki's comments, and it does follow the criteria he explained to everyone when this all started.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Brain, in my post I said that I believed there was a connection between "football smarts" as they applied to the QB position and completion percentage. And I do think that is the case.


I'll eliminate the older players because you can't compare completion % for guys playing in an era where the rules weren't as condusive for a passing offense as they are today:

Name Completion %
Aikman 61.5
Marino 59.4
Montana 63.2
Young 64.3
Bledsoe 57.2
Elway 56.9

Elway's 56.9% completion percentage keeps him from being "on par" with the others IMO.

And I said I think you are wrong.

He is only a few points different from the others you listed yet I think it is fair to say he had inferior WR and RBs on his team for the majority of his career. One could argue Marino had it worse as far as RBs go.

So still I think you are wrong.

Of that list bledsoe is the only one that does not fit IMO because he has had some pretty good WRs and RBs playing with him...plus a pretty good TE.

Same with Bradshaw, he had better talent around him.

Elway did not have the same level of talent around him until his later years.

 

[Stautner]

Damn, I took the time to look up the percentages and then found you posted the same thing just before I did.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Here is a legitimate reason for Michael Winicki's comments and categorization of QB's.

Think back to what he originally said and what his major criteria was - completion percentage ......

% of guys he put in the category of having the most "football sense"

Aikman - 61.5%
Marino - 59.4%
Montana - 63.2%
Young - 64.3%

% of guys he put in the category of relying on athleticism more than "football sense"

Bledsoe - 57.2%
Bradshaw - 51.9%
Elway - 56.9%

Now, that said, completion % obviously doesn't tell the whole story, but it does at least provide some foundation for Micheal Winicki's comments, and it does follow the criteria he explained to everyone when this all started.

Exactly.

Do I expect everyone to agree with me that completion % is a good indicator of football intelligence?

Absolutely not.

But I will say that a very smart player like say a Chad Pennington can do very well at the QB position even if they don't have the physical gifts of an Elway. Here's a guy with a 65.4% completion percentage and his arm as we all know is one of the weakest in the sport for a starting QB. That's football intelligence doing that for him. And I think I would take a Pennington over a Bledsoe every day of week.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Damn, I took the time to look up the percentages and then found you posted the same thing just before I did.

I applaud the effort.


Elway's 56.9% completion percentage doesn't knock my socks off.

 

[Stautner]

And I said I think you are wrong.

He is only a few points different from the others you listed yet I think it is fair to say he had inferior WR and RBs on his team for the majority of his career. One could argue Marino had it worse as far as RBs go.

So still I think you are wrong.

Of that list bledsoe is the only one that does not fit IMO because he has had some pretty good WRs and RBs playing with him...plus a pretty good TE.

Same with Bradshaw, he had better talent around him.

Elway did not have the same level of talent around him until his later years.

This is so loaded with crap that it should get you laughed off the thread.

Do you really think Elway got to 5 Super Bowls without any talent around him? Do you really expect anyone to believe Elway got to 5 Super Bowls by being the only quality player on the team?

 

[MichaelWinicki]

This is so loaded with crap that it should get you laughed off the thread.

Do you really think Elway got to 5 Super Bowls without any talent around him? Do you really expect anyone to believe Elway got to 5 Super Bowls by being the only quality player on the team?

You know of course what answer you're going to get.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Here is a legitimate reason for Michael Winicki's comments and categorization of QB's.

Think back to what he originally said and what his major criteria was - completion percentage ......

% of guys he put in the category of having the most "football sense"

Aikman - 61.5%
Marino - 59.4%
Montana - 63.2%
Young - 64.3%

% of guys he put in the category of relying on athleticism more than "football sense"

Bledsoe - 57.2%
Bradshaw - 51.9%
Elway - 56.9%

Now, that said, completion % obviously doesn't tell the whole story, but it does at least provide a reasonable foundation for Micheal Winicki's comments, and it does follow the criteria he explained to everyone when this all started.

As I stated in my previous post.

That COULD be a legit argument IF all things were equal.

I can name a RB, WR or two, More than one O-Lineman for all of those QBs off the top of my head...except for Elway until his late years.

Completion percentage between people that had talent around them that was unequal is not quite fair.

Futhermore just because someone uses their althletic ability it does not automatically mean they do so because they lack in football sense more than others. As I have also noted. If Elway had time to survey the field and realize he had no open targets and still have time to run that should be counted as football sense as well.

I just think you guys are wrong is all I am saying. I think it was a HUGE stretch to say that just because elway could run or had a strong arm he therefore did not have as much football sense or did not have to rely on his football sense like the other guys.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

This is so loaded with crap that it should get you laughed off the thread.

Do you really think Elway got to 5 Super Bowls without any talent around him? Do you really expect anyone to believe Elway got to 5 Super Bowls by being the only quality player on the team?

He had a good defense and he had some ok offensive players.

You never did answer my question earlier though and I wonder why you never did.

Off the top of your head, without looking it up.

Prior to the last years of Elway playing when he won those superbowls.

Who was his starting WRs, TE, RB and just a couple of names from the O-Line???

I can think of people who played with Marino, I can think of people who played with Bradshaw, of course with aikman, Young, Montana.

Who was with the broncos on OFFENSE, not defense?

Why did you not answer that before...I think I know.

 

[5Stars]

You know what I find funny about this thread? All this talk about different QB's, yet, there is a certain "poster" that has not yet chimed in to throw his "dog" into this discussion!

Maybe he has finally realized the truth?

Naw, I doubt it...

:laugh2:

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

This is so loaded with crap that it should get you laughed off the thread.

Do you really think Elway got to 5 Super Bowls without any talent around him? Do you really expect anyone to believe Elway got to 5 Super Bowls by being the only quality player on the team?

Furthermore No not 5...the three he lost, he did win two with some pretty good household name players on offense.

 

[gbrittain]

This is so loaded with crap that it should get you laughed off the thread.

Do you really think Elway got to 5 Super Bowls without any talent around him? Do you really expect anyone to believe Elway got to 5 Super Bowls by being the only quality player on the team?

Calling them crap might be a stretch, but clearly in Elway's first three Super Bowls the offensive talent was not that great.

Below are the WRs and RBs during the Broncos three Super Bowl losses:

Mark Jackson WR
Ricky Nattiel WR
Vance Johnson WR
Gaston Green RB

Bobby Humphrey RB
Mark Jackson WR
Ricky Nattiel WR
Vance Johnson WR

Sammy Winder RB
Bobby Humphrey RB
Mark Jackson WR
Ricky Nattiel WR

I am sure some team that won a Super Bowl has had to have had worse offensive talent than that, but I will say off the top of my head I do not know who. The Ravens come to mind, but not a single person in the entire football universe gives any credit to the Ravens offense for that Super Bowl run. At least the Ravens did have a pretty awesome backfield in Priest Holmes and Jamal Lewis.

I would say the 2000 Patriots were not extremely gifted at offensive skill position spots either aside from Tom Brady. But I would still give them a edge over the crew that the Broncos had during their first three Super Bowl losses.

 

[LaTunaNostra]

You know what I find funny about this thread? All this talk about different QB's, yet, there is a certain "poster" that has not yet chimed in to throw his "dog" into this discussion!

Maybe he has finally realized the truth?

Naw, I doubt it...

:laugh2:

Quincy Carter is more mobile than Marino, can escape better than Bledsoe, and has a stronger arm than Montana. He may also have a higher IQ than Vinny T.

That's the HOF right there.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

This is so loaded with crap that it should get you laughed off the thread.

IMO anyone that ever, in almost any way, compares wants to put Bledsoe, Bradshaw and Elway in the same boat...should be laughed at.

 

[Stautner]

Calling them crap might be a stretch, but clearly in Elway's first three Super Bowls the offensive talent was not that great.

Below are the WRs and RBs during the Broncos three Super Bowl losses:

Mark Jackson WR
Ricky Nattiel WR
Vance Johnson WR
Gaston Green RB

Bobby Humphrey RB
Mark Jackson WR
Ricky Nattiel WR
Vance Johnson WR

Sammy Winder RB
Bobby Humphrey RB
Mark Jackson WR
Ricky Nattiel WR

I am sure some team that won a Super Bowl has had to have had worse offensive talent than that, but I will say off the top of my head I do not know who. The Ravens come to mind, but not a single person in the entire football universe gives any credit to the Ravens offense for that Super Bowl run. At least the Ravens did have a pretty awesome backfield in Priest Holmes and Jamal Lewis.

I would say the 2000 Patriots were not extremely gifted at offensive skill position spots either aside from Tom Brady. But I would still give them a edge over the crew that the Broncos had during their first three Super Bowl losses.

Not stars, but not weak links either. Kay was a decent TE too, and one of the strengths was always the Denver O-line.

It's a pretty weak argument to say that Elway got to 3 Super Bowls with no talent around him - as if he were Atlas and propping the entire world on his shoulders.

BTW, I was going to make the Patriots comparson too - and Brady has a career % of 61.4%.

But, the bottom line is whether you agree with Micheal Winicki or not, he has some foundation for what he is saying, and a lot (A HELL OF A LOT) of what he has said has been totally twisted and misconstrued.

I happen to think Elway spent much of his career always looking to make the big play, always trying to force the ball downfield even when the plays weren't there to be made. At the end of his career Shanahan came in and installed a West Coast style system and drilled into Elway the way it worked - the idea of smart passes and selective shots downfield rather than trying to do too much and force things.