I know it’s early

[Superman]

10 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

The Chargers had the ball with a chance to win at the end of each of the 1st 2 games and Herbert looked awful. How is that on the defense? For the money he makes and as great as everyone says he is, those 1st 2 games at the end didn't help his cause.

 

I didn't see the second game. I saw the end of the first game. He got called for a questionable (IMO) intentional grounding, and the OL fell apart. I don't think he looked awful.

 

And in that game, the offense put up 34 points and didn't turn the ball over. The defense gave up 466 passing yards. So yeah, I tend to lean toward blaming the defense for that loss, and I don't put the responsibility for a team loss on one player because he wasn't supremely heroic on the final drive.

 

Quote

you probably think I am Herbert hater.

 

It's not that you're a hater. (Even though I think you're stubbornly hanging onto your early judgment of Herbert, where you said he was the next Joey Harrington.) I'm not worried about whether anyone thinks Herbert is good or great, how you rank him, etc. I'm not comparing him to Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Jackson, etc. It's that you're doing the typical thing where you're evaluating the QB on the basis of whether the team wins big games or not, which is convenient, but wrong.

 

For example, you say 'Burrow has been to a SB.' Let's not forget that they had an amazingly hot kicker that year. Meanwhile, you hold Herbert responsible for the Chargers losing to the Jaguars by one point last year, but let's not forget that Cameron Dicker missed a 40 yard FG in the 4th quarter, which probably would have changed the outcome of that game. In my eyes, the Bengals went to a SB, because success, especially in the playoffs, is a team result.

 

I have always called this out, because I think it's an unfair way of judging QB play. I called it out when people criticized Peyton Manning for not winning a playoff game; I did it when people called Joe Flacco "elite" because the Ravens won a SB. It's not me being a Herbert apologist, or you being a Herbert hater. It's a fundamental difference in how QBs should be judged and evaluated.

 

And that's especially true when we can see that the HC isn't good, and the defense is below average. And even bigger picture, the Chargers are just one of those franchises where nothing goes right for them, even when they have a great roster. So, no, I don't hold Herbert responsible for franchise level failure, and I'll never evaluate QB play this way.

[RollerColt]

29 minutes ago, Superman said:

For example, you say 'Burrow has been to a SB.' Let's not forget that they had an amazingly hot kicker that year.

It was much more than just the kicker that led them to the Super Bowl that year. A lot of things went their way. Burrow clicked on converting long 3rd downs. Chase was running really advanced routes, getting open and catching anything near his radius. The defense was making key stops and even more key turnovers when it mattered. And yes, the kicking was on fire. 

 

My point is it was more than just a kicker getting hot. The whole team gelled at the right time as the season went on. And they darn near won it all had it not been for a couple of key injuries. 

[Superman]

1 minute ago, RollerColt said:

It was much more than just the kicker that led them to the Super Bowl that year. A lot of things went their way. Burrow clicked on converting long 3rd downs. Chase was running really advanced routes, getting open and catching anything near his radius. The defense was making key stops and even more key turnovers when it mattered. And yes, the kicking was on fire. 

 

My point is it was more than just a kicker getting hot. The whole team gelled at the right time as the season went on. And they darn near won it all had it not been for a couple of key injuries. 

 

I'm not saying it was all about the kicker. I'm saying one team had a kicker that was money, the other team had a kicker missing a 40 yarder in the 4th quarter, and they lost by one point.

 

But the convenient story line is about the QB.

[2006Coltsbestever]

36 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I didn't see the second game. I saw the end of the first game. He got called for a questionable (IMO) intentional grounding, and the OL fell apart. I don't think he looked awful.

 

And in that game, the offense put up 34 points and didn't turn the ball over. The defense gave up 466 passing yards. So yeah, I tend to lean toward blaming the defense for that loss, and I don't put the responsibility for a team loss on one player because he wasn't supremely heroic on the final drive.

 

 

It's not that you're a hater. (Even though I think you're stubbornly hanging onto your early judgment of Herbert, where you said he was the next Joey Harrington.) I'm not worried about whether anyone thinks Herbert is good or great, how you rank him, etc. I'm not comparing him to Mahomes, Burrow, Allen, Jackson, etc. It's that you're doing the typical thing where you're evaluating the QB on the basis of whether the team wins big games or not, which is convenient, but wrong.

 

For example, you say 'Burrow has been to a SB.' Let's not forget that they had an amazingly hot kicker that year. Meanwhile, you hold Herbert responsible for the Chargers losing to the Jaguars by one point last year, but let's not forget that Cameron Dicker missed a 40 yard FG in the 4th quarter, which probably would have changed the outcome of that game. In my eyes, the Bengals went to a SB, because success, especially in the playoffs, is a team result.

 

I have always called this out, because I think it's an unfair way of judging QB play. I called it out when people criticized Peyton Manning for not winning a playoff game; I did it when people called Joe Flacco "elite" because the Ravens won a SB. It's not me being a Herbert apologist, or you being a Herbert hater. It's a fundamental difference in how QBs should be judged and evaluated.

 

And that's especially true when we can see that the HC isn't good, and the defense is below average. And even bigger picture, the Chargers are just one of those franchises where nothing goes right for them, even when they have a great roster. So, no, I don't hold Herbert responsible for franchise level failure, and I'll never evaluate QB play this way.

Fair enough,

 

It is a team game but the QB has to be held somewhat accountable for a win or a loss - he touches the ball more than anyone. I use the word somewhat because of course he could play a great game but his defense or Kicker fails him. Would you consider Tom Brady better than Peyton Manning? I think they are pretty even but the majority of fans and the media will say Tom Brady because he won 7 SB's, Peyton won 2. Peyton had more talent and won 5 MVP's but most would say Brady because he won more. 

[RollerColt]

1 minute ago, Superman said:

 

I'm not saying it was all about the kicker. I'm saying one team had a kicker that was money, the other team had a kicker missing a 40 yarder in the 4th quarter, and they lost by one point.

 

But the convenient story line is about the QB.

That's why it's best to look at the macro level when it comes to QB play. Not sure if you know or not, but I'm a huge fan of Herbert. 

 

I can chalk up his shortcomings down to essentially: bad luck. The Chargers are a franchise where things just don't work out the way they should, despite a lot of immense talent. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

1 minute ago, RollerColt said:

That's why it's best to look at the macro level when it comes to QB play. Not sure if you know or not, but I'm a huge fan of Herbert. 

 

I can chalk up his shortcomings down to essentially: bad luck. The Chargers are a franchise where things just don't work out the way they should, despite a lot of immense talent. 

To me Joe Burrow has the 'IT' factor. He changed the culture of that team. I think he would be great regardless of the coach and by the way, I don't think Cincy's head coach is that good. He is ok but even in his own division he ranks 3rd in my book. He isn't better than Harbaugh or Tomlin, JMO.

[Superman]

2 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Fair enough,

 

It is a team game but the QB has to be held somewhat accountable for a win or a loss - he touches the ball more than anyone. I use the word somewhat because of course he could play a great game but his defense or Kicker fails him. Would you consider Tom Brady better than Peyton Manning? I think they are pretty even but the majority of fans and the media will Tom Brady because he won 7 SB's, Peyton won 2. Peyton had more talent and won 5 MVP's but most would say Brady because he won more. 

 

I disagree with the blue bolded as an absolute statement. I'd agree that most games, the QB has a significant impact on the outcome. Yet, we've seen teams win playoff games despite bad QB performances, and we've seen the opposite as well. The way to evaluate QBs is by watching the games, not judging them based on the outcome.

 

As for the age old Brady vs Manning, once you get into that kind of rarefied air of determining who was better between two legends, sure, playoff success and SBs can make sense as a tie breaker. But for most of their careers, I think Brady had the more favorable circumstances, especially in the playoffs. And while Manning is my favorite QB of all time and I don't think any QB (other than Mahomes at this point) impacts the game the way he did, it's pretty obvious that Brady had a better overall career, and I don't mind him being viewed as the better player, all things considered. I very much minded this viewpoint in 2010, though, before Brady won two more MVPs, and assaulted pretty much every passing record, while playing into his mid 40s. 

 

When they were four years into their careers, like Burrow and Herbert are, team success wasn't a deciding factor in my mind.

[RollerColt]

Just now, 2006Coltsbestever said:

To me Joe Burrow has the 'IT' factor. He changed the culture of that team. I think he would be great regardless of the coach and by the way, I don't think Cincy's head coach is that good. He is ok but even in his own division he ranks 3rd in my book. He isn't better than Harbaugh or Tomlin, JMO.

I don't know how I feel about Taylor. I wasn't really a fan of him to begin with, but gave him the benefit of doubt since he was so young and innovative. Fast forward to last year with the Damar situation... I may not like some of his coaching decisions, but I can say that Taylor is a real genuine dude. An absolute man of honor and a standup guy for the city of Cincinnati. 

 

Will that win him Super Bowls? No. 

 

 

[Superman]

9 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

To me Joe Burrow has the 'IT' factor.

 

I just wonder if anyone would be saying this about Burrow if Evan McPherson had missed the game winning FG to beat the Titans in the 2021 divisional game, or any of those second half FGs against the Chiefs in the conference championship.

[2006Coltsbestever]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

I disagree with the blue bolded as an absolute statement. I'd agree that most games, the QB has a significant impact on the outcome. Yet, we've seen teams win playoff games despite bad QB performances, and we've seen the opposite as well. The way to evaluate QBs is by watching the games, not judging them based on the outcome.

 

As for the age old Brady vs Manning, once you get into that kind of rarefied air of determining who was better between two legends, sure, playoff success and SBs can make sense as a tie breaker. But for most of their careers, I think Brady had the more favorable circumstances, especially in the playoffs. And while Manning is my favorite QB of all time and I don't think any QB (other than Mahomes at this point) impacts the game the way he did, it's pretty obvious that Brady had a better overall career, and I don't mind him being viewed as the better player, all things considered. I very much minded this viewpoint in 2010, though, before Brady won two more MVPs, and assaulted pretty much every passing record, while playing into his mid 40s. 

 

When they were four years into their careers, like Burrow and Herbert are, team success wasn't a deciding factor in my mind.

It will be interesting to see how much each has accomplished and how great Burrow and Herbert are after around 7 years which is a good sample size. 

 

As far as me holding on to saying Herbert would be the Piano Man (Harrington), I already I admitted I was wrong about that. Herbert is legit good, maybe one day he will be great and lead his team to some big wins. I wanted to see him prove me wrong, he has already because I thought he would be a bust lol.

[2006Coltsbestever]

Just now, Superman said:

 

I just wonder if anyone would be saying this about Burrow if Evan McPherson had missed the game winning FG to beat the Titans in the 2021 divisional game, or any of those second half FGs against the Chiefs in the conference championship.

I say that about Burrow because Cincy sucked for years, when he came in things changed. I think Jim Kelly had 'IT' factor and his Kicker missed a FG that cost him a Championship. Herbert just needs to give me what Allen has or Luck did, I just don't feel that vibe yet.

[azcolt]

On 9/19/2023 at 6:17 AM, Mitch Connors said:

Am I wrong in thinking AR is likely to miss this game? It seems like it's a two-week thing for most concussions or am I just wrong on that? 

In my defense, it’s been a long time since last season.

 Safety has really changed from  the bad old days of simply assuming a “rung bell” without loss of consciousness wasn’t a big deal to today. I wouldn’t be shocked if this lasted weeks to months. Obviously AR isn’t hesitant to be honest about his symptoms.