Who is willing to accept 40 turnovers by the QB this year?

[YosemiteSam]

Actually, I'm willing to accept up to 52 turnovers, but by golly if there are 53 I will be pissed off!

 

[Stautner]

funny how saying JJ's on pace for 1600 yards is OK though.

Being on pace for 1600 yards only means JJ is playing well AT THE MOMENT, just as being on pace for 40 (or is it 32) turnovers only means that Bledsoe is playing poorly AT THE MOMENT.

Besides, it's much more realistic to think that JJ will continue having 100 yard rushing games than to think Bledsoe will continue to have 5 turnover games - comparing the two isn't apples to apples.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Being on pace for 1600 yards only means JJ is playing well AT THE MOMENT, just as being on pace for 40 (or is it 32) turnovers only means that Bledsoe is playing poorly AT THE MOMENT.

Besides, it's much more realistic to think that JJ will continue having 100 yard rushing games than to think Bledsoe will continue to have 5 turnover games - comparing the two isn't apples to apples.

I agree with your analysis of Jones but I don't know that I do with Bledsoe. Jones has a short shelf life, thus far, because of his limited time in the league and his injury issues. Not so with Bledsoe. We have 14 seasons on which to draw conclusion from. Bledsoe is what he is.

 

[superpunk]

I agree with your analysis of Jones but I don't know that I do with Bledsoe. Jones has a short shelf life, thus far, because of his limited time in the league and his injury issues. Not so with Bledsoe. We have 14 seasons on which to draw conclusion from. Bledsoe is what he is.

And he isn't a three to five TO a game QB.

Considering we nearly won the games he did that in - if he goes back to being "what he is" - I like our chances.

 

[Hostile]

funny how saying JJ's on pace for 1600 yards is OK though.

When did I say that? Please point out the post where I said that.

If you meant that someone else said it, and are implying I said nothing about it, would you then please prove to me that I at least read it.

Thank you in advance.

 

[Stautner]

I agree with your analysis of Jones but I don't know that I do with Bledsoe. Jones has a short shelf life, thus far, because of his limited time in the league and his injury issues. Not so with Bledsoe. We have 14 seasons on which to draw conclusion from. Bledsoe is what he is.

This makes no sense because you would particularly have to agree with in light of Bledsoe having a long career to draw from because over 14 years he hasn't often had 5 turnover games.

In fact, it's a safe bet that JJ has had more 100 yard games in his short, injury plagued career than Bledsoe has had 5 turnover games in 14 years.

I admit that he isn't the best at protecting the ball, but nothing in Bledsoe's 14 year history suggests we can expect a lot of 5 turnover games.

Over his career he has averaged barely over 1 INT per game (1.06), and while I'm not sure about fumbles, I think it's safe to say that he isn't losing anywhere near 4 of them per game. My guess would be that he averages something like 1.4 turnovers per game - a far cry from 5.

 

[AbeBeta]

7 ints, 3 fumbles over four games = 40 screw ups by our QB this year. Could Romo be any worse? Bledsoe usually has been strong early and faded late. What is the problem this year? Maybe our WR's are horrible no talent bums. Maybe our TE's do not understand the game. Maybe JJ and MBIII are clowns.

What do you think?

Who is willing to accept a projection as reality?

How's that 16 INT season for Roy looking now?

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

This makes no sense because you would particularly have to agree with in light of Bledsoe having a long career to draw from because over 14 years he hasn't often had 5 turnover games.

In fact, it's a safe bet that JJ has had more 100 yard games in his short, injury plagued career than Bledsoe has had 5 turnover games in 14 years.

I admit that he isn't the best at protecting the ball, but nothing in Bledsoe's 14 year history suggests we can expect a lot of 5 turnover games.

Over his career he has averaged barely over 1 INT per game (1.06), and while I'm not sure about fumbles, I think it's safe to say that he isn't losing anywhere near 4 of them per game. My guess would be that he averages something like 1.4 turnovers per game - a far cry from 5.

He is among the higest of any QB in the history of the game where TOs are concerned. What QB in the history of the sport has ever averaged 5 TOs per game? To me, that statement is irrelivant. I pointed out earlier in another thread that I expect him to be in the area of 20+ TOs this year. That is what he averages. There is no way you can look at that and find it positive. JJ has the opportunity to become a consistant producer in the future. Bledsoe will probably retire as the most sacked, highest TO ratio QB ever, assuming he plays a few more years. That's all I'm saying here.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

And he isn't a three to five TO a game QB.

Considering we nearly won the games he did that in - if he goes back to being "what he is" - I like our chances.

I don't know that I agree with this. I like our chances to make the playoffs but I don't like our chances to do well in them. The statement "what he is" is a good one IMO. Against average teams, he's pretty good. Against teams that are superior, he's a 3 to 5 turn over QB that will get sacked a lot. If you view it in this light, I don't like our chances nearly as well.

 

[Stautner]

He is among the higest of any QB in the history of the game where TOs are concerned. What QB in the history of the sport has ever averaged 5 TOs per game? To me, that statement is irrelivant. I pointed out earlier in another thread that I expect him to be in the area of 20+ TOs this year. That is what he averages. There is no way you can look at that and find it positive. JJ has the opportunity to become a consistant producer in the future. Bledsoe will probably retire as the most sacked, highest TO ratio QB ever, assuming he plays a few more years. That's all I'm saying here.

FIRST - this post ignores what we were discussing and focuses on things that are irrelevent (we were discussing this year's rate of turnovers compared to Bledsoe's career - NOT his turnover ratio compared to other QB's).

SECOND - your points aren't just irrelevant, they are made up nonsense.

Bledsoe averages 1.06 interception per game.

Here are the averages of other notable QB's.

Terry Bradshaw - 1.25 INT's per game
Brett Favre - 1.13 INT's per game
Dan Fouts - 1.33 INT's per game
Jim Kelly - 1.09 INT's per game
Joe Namath - 1.54 INT's per game
Peyton Manning - 0.99 INT's per game (only slightly less than Bledsoe)
Dan Marino - 1.04 INT's per game (only VERY slightly less)
Fran Tarkenton - 1.08 INT's per game
Johnny Unitas - 1.20 INT's per game

And these are ALL TIME GREATS - this doesn't even include the endless number of average, below average and piss poor QB's in history who are FAR worse than Bledsoe.

YET, you claim Bledsoe's turnover rate is among the highest in history?

QUIT SPOUTING BASELESS BS ........ and pull that foot out of your mouth!

 

[dfense]

7 ints, 3 fumbles over four games = 40 screw ups by our QB this year. Could Romo be any worse? Bledsoe usually has been strong early and faded late. What is the problem this year? Maybe our WR's are horrible no talent bums. Maybe our TE's do not understand the game. Maybe JJ and MBIII are clowns.

What do you think?

I think the TEAM needs to play better in hostile environments. Will Watkins give up 2 TDs a game? I think not.

At the end of the year, see what teams go into Philly and Jacksonville and win.:

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

FIRST - this post ignores what we were discussing and focuses on things that are irrelevent (we were discussing this year's rate of turnovers compared to Bledsoe's career - NOT his turnover ratio compared to other QB's).

SECOND - even your irrelevant points are basically just made up nonsense.

Bledsoe averages 1.06 interception per game.

Here are the averages of other notable QB's.

Terry Bradshaw - 1.25 INT's per game
Brett Favre - 1.13 INT's per game
Dan Fouts - 1.33 INT's per game
Jim Kelly - 1.09 INT's per game
Joe Namath - 1.54 INT's per game
Peyton Manning - 0.99 INT's per game (only slightly less than Bledsoe)
Dan Marino - 1.04 INT's per game (only VERY slightly less)
Fran Tarkenton - 1.08 INT's per game
Johnny Unitas - 1.20 INT's per game

And these are ALL TIME GREATS - this doesn't even include the endless number of average, below average and piss poor QB's in history who are FAR worse than Bledsoe.

Yet you claim Bledsoe's turnover rate is among the highest in history?

QUIT SPOUTING BASELESS BS ........ and pull that foot out of your mouth!

Compare contemporaries. That is the only credible way to do this sort of comparison. Unitas, Tarkenton, Namath, Fouts and Bradshaw can not be compared because they played in an era where the passing game was not the dominant form of offense. The rules that have changed between those years and now make those comparisons inaccurate. Secondly, don't compare INTs. Compare Turn Overs. That is the better way to look at this IMO. Lastly, look at TD to Turn Over ratios. Yeah, a guy like Payton Manning might average 18 Turn Overs a season but he also averages 542 Attempts per season as opposed to 504 for Bledsoe. Also, you have to balance the equation by looking at TD production. Yeah, he commits a comparable amount of Turn Overs in a season, but he also producing more TDs a season on average. Basically, while the career averages for Turn Overs are in the same ball park, so to speak, the attempts, actual production and TDs are superior for Manning. I suspect that if you do the same comparison for the other QBs you list here, you will find the same kind of superiority. Of course, it's all meaningless because it doesn't work for you right?

OK Ernie.

 

[Stautner]

Compare contemporaries. That is the only credible way to do this sort of comparison. Unitas, Tarkenton, Namath, Fouts and Bradshaw can not be compared because they played in an era where the passing game was not the dominant form of offense. The rules that have changed between those years and now make those comparisons inaccurate. Secondly, don't compare INTs. Compare Turn Overs. That is the better way to look at this IMO. Lastly, look at TD to Turn Over ratios. Yeah, a guy like Payton Manning might average 18 Turn Overs a season but he also averages 542 Attempts per season as opposed to 504 for Bledsoe. Also, you have to balance the equation by looking at TD production. Yeah, he commits a comparable amount of Turn Overs in a season, but he also producing more TDs a season on average. Basically, while the career averages for Turn Overs are in the same ball park, so to speak, the attempts, actual production and TDs are superior for Manning. I suspect that if you do the same comparison for the other QBs you list here, you will find the same kind of superiority. Of course, it's all meaningless because it doesn't work for you right?

OK Ernie.

Wow - how much deeper are you going to stick that foot in your mouth?

First of all - YOU were the one that claimed Bledsoe was among the worst of ALL TIME - now you're covering your butt by changing the criteria.

Second, Tarkenton retired as the all time leader in passing yardage. Fouts isn't far behind and I think both are still top 5 IN HISTORY. Are you really going to try and claim they didn't play on passing teams?

Third, I notice you only managed to discuss the handfull of All Time greats I mentioned - which is only a small minority of the hundreds and hundreds of present and former NFL QB's - REMEMBER, YOU CLAIMED BLEDSOE WAS AMONG THE WORST ALL TIME, NOT JUST AMONG THE ELITE QB'S IN HISTORY.

But, I will grant you that it is legitimate to weigh the number of interceptions against the number of passes thrown, so lets look at THOSE statistics:

Bledsoe has thrown 1 interception for every 32.5 attempts.

Bradshaw - 1 in every 18.7 attempts.
Elway - 1 in every 32.0 attempts
Favre - 1 in every 34.5 attempts
Fouts - 1 in every 23.1 attempts
Kelly - 1 in every 27.3 attempts
Manning - 1 in every 34.1 attempts
Unitas - 1 in every 20.5 attempts
Tarkenton - 1 in every 24.3 attempts
Moon - 1 in every 29.3 attempts
Simms (Phil, not Chris) - 1 in every 29.6 attempts
Staubach - 1 in every 27.1 attempts
Aikman - 1 in every 33.4 attempts
Namath - 1 in every 17.1 attempts

Not so bad after all, huh?

And I could name all the Leaf's, Harrington's and Carter's - and all the even worse QB's in history - after all, they are all part of ALL TIME.

I hope your foot is starting to taste better, because you are going to have it there much longer than you hoped.

 

[Cochese]

The Bledsoe apologists are out in full force today.

You do realize that your attempt argument is rubbish because no player in the history of the NFL has had more passing attempts in a season than deadslow?

 

[superpunk]

No worries. I could never figure out ratios, either.

 

[Stautner]

The Bledsoe apologists are out in full force today.

You do realize that your attempt argument is rubbish because no player in the history of the NFL has had more passing attempts in a season than deadslow?

Huh? You apparently flunked ratios in school. You should refrain from discussing my numbers until you learn about them.

Ratios are an equalizer - it doesn't matter whether you've had the most or fewest attempts, only what happens PER ATTEMPT.

And the bottom line is that I'm not even a Bledsoe apologist - frankly I would like to see Romo.

What I am is intolerant of people who spit out blatent fabrications to make a point, and whether I'm on your side of an issue or not I expect you to use logic and facts for your arguments - not falsehoods.

 

[Cochese]

I mean, look at Farves 1 in 34.5 attempts but he is an odds on favorite to be the all time NFL interception king at the seasons end. That ratio doesnt mean he isnt a turnover waiting to happen.


I dont think those ratios mean anything or are relevant in any way.

 

[StanleySpadowski]

I think we can all agree that Bledsoe can put up some great numbers against crappy teams. Woohooo. You only have to play a couple of crappy teams to win the Super Bowl, right?


Let's look at his performance against playoff teams last year. Does 8 TDs - 11 INTS to go along with 10 fumbles sound like a quality QB to you?

Do you wanna look at the numbers comparing what Bledsoe did against the 2 teams that have winning records vs. the 2 teams that have losing records so far this season?


This ain't college ball and you don't get extra votes for running it up against Whatsamatta U.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Wow - how much deeper are you going to stick that foot in your mouth?

First of all - YOU were the one that claimed Bledsoe was among the worst of ALL TIME - now you're covering your butt by changing the criteria.

Second, Tarkenton retired as the all time leader in passing yardage. Fouts is right up there with him - not much behind. Both those guys are still top 5 IN HISTORY. Are you really going to try and claim that they didn't play on passing teams?

And I've notice how you have conveiniently onl managed to discuss the handfull of All Time greats I mentioned - which is only a small minority of the hundreds up hundreds of present and former NFL QB's - REMEMBER, YOU CLAIMED BLEDSOE WAS AMONG THE WORST OF ALL TIME, NOT JUST WORSE THAN THE GREATEST QB'S IN HISTORY.

But, I will grant you that it is legitimate to weigh the number of interceptions against the number of passes thrown, so lets look at THOSE statistics:

Bledsoe has thrown 1 interception for every 32.5 attempts.

Bradshaw - 1 in every 18.7 attempts.
Elway - 1 in every 32.0 attempts
Favre - 1 in every 34.5 attempts
Fouts - 1 in every 23.1 attempts
Kelly - 1 in every 27.3 attempts
Manning - 1 in every 34.1 attempts
Unitas - 1 in every 20.5 attempts
Tarkenton - 1 in every 24.3 attempts
Moon - 1 in every 29.3 attempts
Simms (Phil, not Chris) - 1 in every 29.6 attempts
Staubach - 1 in every 27.1 attempts
Aikman - 1 in every 33.4 attempts
Namath - 1 in every 17.1 attempts

Not so bad after all, huh?

I hope your foot is starting to taste better, because you are going to have it there much longer than you hoped.

Ernie, stop trying to be combative. If you want to discuss this, then lets discuss it. If you want to act foolish, I'm sure there are plenty of people on this board who will indulge you. I, however, am not one of them.

Bledsoe will end his career among the highest INT/Lost Fumbles Ration in history. Also sacked. He's already near the top. The fact that rules have been changed to favor the passing game and QBs in particular are the reason I'm saying you can't look at TD to INT ratios of past greats. It's unfair to compare Bledsoe and the era he's played in to Fouts or Tarkenton. The fact that those two were so great in an era where it was actually tougher to pass just says how much greater they were IMO. However, it doesn't make the comparison any more relivant. Don't turn this around and say that I was trying skew the comparison. I specifically compared Bledsoe to contemporaries because that is the only fair way to compare.

I specifically asked you to consider Interceptions and Fumbles against TDs produced. In stead, you try to continue with INT per pass or total INTs. You can't just ingonre the Fumbles. They are also Turn Overs.

If you don't want to discuss those points, then just say so. Stop with the foot in mouth stuff. It's juvenile. Compare all the numbers and do it with contemperaries so that you can actually see how he stacks up. Look at guys who have had 9 or 10 seasons in the league. Compare Brunell, Collins, Dilfer, Favre, Frerotte, Griese, Brad Johnson, Warner and Manning. Then we can actaully talk about how he compares.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Huh? You apparently flunked ratios in school. You should refrain from discussing my numbers until you learn about them.

Ratios are an equalizer - it doesn't matter whether you've had the most or fewest attempts, only what happens PER ATTEMPT.

And the bottom line is that I'm not even a Bledsoe apologist - frankly I would like to see Romo.

What I am is intolerant of people who spit out blatent fabrications to make a point, and whether I'm on your side of an issue or not I expect you to use logic and facts for your arguments - not falsehoods.

I tend to have problems with those who read only what they want as opposed to what is trying to be explained.