reality
-
Posts
10 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Blogs
Posts posted by reality
-
-
I shortened your quote to much Blah blah blah IMO
Fact is only 1 running back had a better season than Morris which is what i said .
Fact 2 Morris's big game in Dallas put the Redskins in the playoffs . RG3 threw for a 100 yrds .
And I'm pretty RG3 in the game prior did a lil worse .
Alfred Morris did great with out him in Dallas your team loses period so yes IMO Alfred deserves the credit for that win who cares what round , Scheme blah blah blah , Shannahan's a clown if he was that good he would still be in denver , He like many coachs get there share of surprises .
Kinda like Tom Brady it does'nt matter the scheme or if there a late pick there either good or not .
I say spread the credit around its a team sport & Bob did'nt do it all .
Your complete lack of logical progression is quite troubling. I know it's the internet, but at least put forth some effort into making a coherent argument. How can one even respond to such a seemingly random hodgepodge of subjective analysis not at all grounded in reality? When presented with factual evidence, your reaction is literally to say "blah blah blah who cares" and spout more tired, old platitudes. You want to give Alfred credit for the week 17 game against Dallas? Great! I (and RG3, and Redskins fans) give him all the credit in the world for that day. But that in and of itself does not lend to reason then that RG3 is somehow the most overrated player in the NFL.
-
With all the talk of over rated I believe opinions are understood .
But it does make a curious person think . With all the hot air afew kernels of knowledge can be gained while looking beyond the hype I learned
Alfred Morris rushed for 1,613 yrds & 13 touchdowns only Adrian Peterson rushed for more 2,097 . In my mind this was the most under rated player of 2012 . He got his team into the playoffs as a rookie &he came up big when it counted which is why IMO he was Rookie of the Year .
Morris was a fantastic addition to the Redskins this year, but let's not pretend this guy is on the level of RBs like Adrian Peterson and was a larger contributor to the Redskins success than RG3. You're choosing to be ignorant of the fact that Shanahan's schemes have turned unheralded rushers into 1000 yard backs consistently throughout his career.
Terrell Davis, 6th round pick - 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998
Olandis Gary, 4th round pick - 1999
Mike Anderson, 6th round pick - 2000
Clinton Portis, 2nd round pick - 2002, 2003 (as a 2nd rounder, I will grant you that he was at least projected to be impactful from day 1)
Reuben Droughns, free agent acquisition from Detroit - 2004
Mike Anderson, 6th round pick - 2005 (with Tatum Bell also acquiring 921)
Tatum Bell, 2nd round pick - 2006
He did not have the same success in his first year with the Redskins, but in year 2, with a three-man rotation due to injuries did have 3 different players go over 100 yards in a game. And then this past season as we all know, a completely unknown rusher by the name of Alfred Morris taken in the 6th round comes in and rushes for over 1600 yards. Here's his scouting profile from one website:
"Highly competitive, smart, motivated, productive, college running back lacking the speed and agility to remain there in the pros. Physical, inside, north-south running style, willingness as a blocker and strong intangibles make him ripe for a conversion to fullback. Has played both positions and could get looks for a team that employs one-back power sets."
Does that sound like a first round RB to you? This guy was projected as a fullback in the pros, for gods sakes. Morris was excellent this year, but a lot of that success can be chalked up to 1) the Shanahan ZBS, and 2) RG3 and the read option. Instead of understanding these facts backed up by over a decade of statistics, you choose to instead throw caution to the wind and boldly state that RG3's success is due to Morris. This seems incredibly unlikely given the large body of evidence to support the exact opposite of your position.
And as for the Cowboys game in week 17, if the opposing defense is terrified of getting beat deep as they had a month prior and also freezing on the read option play and yielding >6 YPC on handoffs, what coach wouldn't continue to run it down their throat? As has been demonstrated in multiple posts over the past few months, you can pick your poison with the Redskins offense, but you can't account for everything as long as execution is solid.
RG3 and Alfred Morris are synergistic, and to make the assertion as you have that RG3 is the most overrated player in the league (because of Morris' success) is dubious at best; willfully ignorant at worst.
My vote for most overrated player in the league goes to Matt Stafford. He's a guy who accrues passing yards solely on volume (727 attempts, 6.83 YPA this year) while always playing from behind AND has the best receiver in the NFL to throw to. He makes very, very few clutch plays on his own, and always seems to be getting sacked out of FG range in critical situations or something equally boneheaded.
-
"not delving into QBR and statistical arguments because RG3 absolutely annihilates Luck in every single statistical category, but seriously, CAP ISSUES? Stop. Just stop". Except TD passes, yards passing, Luck only had 1 less rushing TD. Not sure how that is annihilation. Also each team will only get 1.6 million of that cap hit handed out to the Redskins and Cowboys so lets not act like all teams are getting a huge amount, You guys are taking a huge cap hit no doubt but at one point we had less then you guys . We also had to turn almost our entire roster upside down to get to our current cap situation
I hear you, but there's a difference between irresponsible spending and bad contracts by a front office (believe me, as a skins fan, we know ALL about that!), and collusion by other owners to strip the 'skins of 15% of the total expenditure limit. The former every team has to deal with; the latter, only the Redskins and Cowboys.
And as a poster so astutely pointed out previously, you keep quoting statistics that are indicative of volume. They're the product of the sheer amount of passes thrown, NOT how effective those passes are (which, coincidentally, is why I personally don't fault him for the raw total of 18 INTs, because he is chucking it up that much more). He has more yards than Aaron Rodgers - is he better than him, too? He has the same passing TDs as Eli - how about him? But those raw numbers do not tell the whole story, because by virtue of Luck having 17% more passes than either of the aforementioned QBs, he will by necessity have more of whatever passing stat you want to cherry pick. Let's take it to the extreme: if a coach decided to completely eschew the running game in favor of passing 60 times per game and the player finished the season with 5,000 yards and 25 TDs on 1,000 attempts with a 54% completion rate, it would not be impressive at all, as he accrued those numbers on such a high volume of passes, and would have an underwhelming 5 yards per attempt. A true overall measure of effectiveness comes from what you can accomplish per attempt, in other words, how much bang for your buck are you getting on a per pass basis? And that's where the picture becomes far, far clearer.
Please refer to Post 222 of this thread for more information. I will add these conclusions from the numbers:
RG3's yards per attempt is 18.4% higher than Luck's, meaning on a given Luck completion of 10 yards, RG3's will go 12.
RG3's TD pass per attempt is 52.1% higher than Luck's, meaning Luck will have to throw over 50% more passes to match RG3's production total (and he has), but will not come near his efficiency.
and most damning of all:
Luck's INT per attempt is 125% higher than RG3's, meaning he is 2.25 times more likely to throw an interception on a given pass attempt.
As I said before, I don't fault Luck for the actual number of pick's that he's thrown per se because he has thrown a lot more ("he is asked to do much more!" they say), but you can draw the conclusion that he is making poor decisions with the football when he is getting picked off at a rate more than twice as high as his contemporaries. It's not to say that he won't improve because he most assuredly will, however, at the moment it's not close. Not at all.
And just to keep this post on topic, let's apply the same comparison to Matt Schaub, who I would agree doesn't pass the eye test per se when you think of a Pro Bowl QB:
Schaub's yards per attempt is 5.3% higher than Luck's
Schaub's TD pass per attempt is 23.5% higher than Luck's
Luck's INT per attempt is 52.5% higher than Schaub's
Combine that with Schaub's superior completion percentage (10% higher), and you can see why voters felt the way that they did, and can perhaps feel a little better about this "snub".
As you can clearly see from this demonstration, Luck is doing less with the ball on any given attempt than his peers (including Matt Schaub), and that, my friend, is why he did not make the Pro Bowl, and why he shouldn't win Rookie of the Year, either (which has its own threads).
-
18 million.. That's cute. The colts have 38 million in dead money THIS SEASON.. For you that aren't good at math, thats 20 million more than the skins have.
What?
Seriously. This post is so absurd that I actually felt the need as a casual Redskins fan linked here by a friend to register and post. This is not an RG3 vs Luck for ROTY award thread so I'm not going to drop a ton of stats on you (rates of TDs or INTs relative to number of attempts, which everyone here seems to be missing), and I know that it's somewhat OT, however, you have decided "Colts had major cap issues here" similar to the Redskins, when that is just completely, utterly, irresponsibly false.
Now, let me say first and foremost, I don't particularly care for the Schaub pick for the Pro Bowl. That said, since this thread has already devolved into yet another RG3 vs Luck thread, I'm not going to delve into who was more deserving and who is a snub. However, I really must take issue with the proposition that the Colts have had "major cap issues" somehow similar to those of the Redskins. It's your own team's fault for handing out bad contracts to players, creating your so-called "dead money". However, EVERY team has those problems. It does enter the discussion when you're talking about who played better than who. Everyone has ~120 million in cap space per year so spend as they so choose on a rolling basis. Well, everyone except the Redskins and Cowboys, that is. Which brings me to the following:
When you are penalized 18 million per year for two years, arbitrarily, by the owner of a division rival, please come back and tell us about how your cap situation is a mess. Until then, recognize that the Redskins are operating at a budget that is 15% less than that of every other NFL team except the Cowboys, and that money has furthermore been used to bolster the rosters of every other team in the NFL.
That link provides you with the total amount of spending each team could do before the season. It takes into account the cap penalties imposed on the Redskins, who after that subtraction has a shade over 6 million in cap space remaining. That means that 75% of the Redskins available salary cap space to spend on free agency and signing our own players was arbitrarily snatched away by a scumbag owner of a division rival's team. When that happens to the Colts, we can talk about cap issues.
I'm not delving into QBR and statistical arguments because RG3 absolutely annihilates Luck in every single statistical category, but seriously, CAP ISSUES? Stop. Just stop.
the top 100
in NFL General
Posted
Hey, can we apply this statement to Andrew Luck, too?
You know, in terms of his yardage #s, TDs/attempt, etc.
Pretty sobering when you look at his yards per attempt, versus his raw yardage totals.