Colts
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NFL 2012 Week 1 |OT| A New Hope
- Thread starter Buckethead
- Start date
Colts
The_Darkest_Red
Member
I'm not arguing that a QB isn't the most important player on an NFL team. Let me put it this way: I think the Packers offense + Aaron Rodgers would be better than the Dolphins offense + Aaron Rodgers. It seems crazy to me to suggest that both would be completely equal.
I use Thompson b/c he is one of the best in the biz. Jerry Reese is pretty good and he has taken Nicks and Randle in the first round. Both of those guys have good QBs leading their teams but seem to think it's better to have them throw to top talents than 5th round picks
Harrison and Wayne were first round picks. Polian drafted high on the OL but lost his touch at the end. The line didn't really go to shit until the last few years. A QB can excel with a shaky line or shaky WRs, but not both
I can't root for San Francisco teams. Too much bad blood between the Dodgers and Giants.
It would take a year and maybe there wouldn't be records set but a lot of that is luck. The Packers receivers had a fairly middling drop rate, it's not like they were doing Rodgers a billion favors. Jones, Finley and even Driver were real hit and miss on catch rate. Nelson is a fucking velcro wonder, but I think a lot of that is because he was targeted when he was open and not asked to get contested balls like Finley and Driver who play over the middle more.
Does the surrounding talent matter? Yes, of course it does to an extent. Defenses collapse late game and cost great QB's wins all the time. A blown assignment will result in an overtime loss to the Cardinals. But that stuff is flukey and can't really be personnelled against.
You do everything in the world to get a great QB and the rest of the stuff will work itself out.
And fuck the running game.
And Reggie Wayne disappeared without Manning. That was my point. All WR's are shaky except Fitzgerald.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
I don't necessarily disagree with any of this. It's hard to argue against the importance of a top tier QB in the year 2012. I definitely agree that any great offense can go from great to absolute garbage if they lose their star QB.
This stuff is the reason why I'm glad the Dolphins finally picked another QB in the first round. I'm not thrilled that it was Tannehill since I don't really have much faith in him but at least they're trying.
Semi-related: Why do any teams think QBs who can run really well are more valuable than a pocket passer who just sits back and nails his throws? How many more SBs do those type of QBs have to win before people stop worrying so much about how "dynamic" a QB is? I just don't get it. Even with a guy like Michael Vick in his prime, I don't see him leading a team to a SB win.
yankeehater
Member
It doesnt seem curious to you at all that the Giants run last year coincided with their running game greatly improving?
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Packers D will be better than last year by default. Defense in general in the nfl was trash last year, save for a few shining examples (Texans and Niners).
That said, their D will still be garbage. What changed over last season? They lost more than they gained. Love reading shit like "Dom Capers won't allow a bad defense twice". Like he would have allowed it the first time if he had any way to stop it?
That said, their D will still be garbage. What changed over last season? They lost more than they gained. Love reading shit like "Dom Capers won't allow a bad defense twice". Like he would have allowed it the first time if he had any way to stop it?
cuevas. PhD.
Member
Football? Yay! Hi.
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Dont let NFL Pundits and Eznark fool you. You need running and defense in the playoffs. Not so much in the regular season.
Just admit you were wrong. Manning's last year they were already using Garcon and Collie more as Reggie had lost a step.
Also
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Then again, the Patriots.
yankeehater
Member
Then again, the Patriots.
What did they win last year?
The_Darkest_Red
Member
The AFC Championship?
DeaconKnowledge
Member
Then again, the Patriots.
...lost the Super Bowl. Not following you.
yankeehater
Member
I think the Pats are more of an outlier then a real example. The AFC as a whole was really down and they still needed a huge amount of luck to get to the SB.
sf2fanatic
Member
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Well I'm just saying, they did moderately okay in the playoffs for a team with no running game and a pretty terrible defense. Don't think I'm standing up for them or anything, I hate the Patriots.
Yeah, I'll agree with you there. I definitely think a solid defense is still important these days but I'm not as convinced about a running game. Plus, if a team is good enough at spreading the field thanks to a star QB they will usually have a running game just by the fact that the defense is always on their toes. The '07 Pats were always picking up massive yardage on draw plays but I think it was mostly due to the fact that their passing game was terrifyingly good.
Defense yes, but not so sure on the running game. We won in 2008 when our running game was so bad we literally could not get a yard on anyone.
I think playing outdoors hurts the Packers offense late in the year. They would really benefit from having a dome and home field the way the Rams and Colts did.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
The Dolphins were higher ranked in rushing yards, defensive passing yards, and defensive rushing yards. Why didn't they win the SB?
Poor counter argument. Not following you.
OriginofHysteria
Banned
The Dolphins were higher ranked in rushing yards, defensive passing yards, and defensive rushing yards. Why didn't they win the SB?
Cause Chad Henne was the quarterback. Followed by Matt Moore.
The Dolphins were higher ranked in rushing yards, defensive passing yards, and defensive rushing yards. Why didn't they win the SB?
I'm just responding to Deacon's (false) claim that you need a running game to win in the playoffs (as much as it pains me to say as a Panthers fan seeing as we've invested so much in the running game).
And before Deacon responds with "I said the postseason!", the Giants averaged 3.5 ypc in the postseason (102 carries, 358 yds), the exact same figure they averaged in the regular season.
yankeehater
Member
Their rushing attack was much better at the end of the year/playoffs then early on.
Edit: What was their yards per game for the playoffs compared to the regular season Bowser?
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Yeah, I know. I was just asking a rhetorical question that backs up what you were saying. The answer to the question, Chad Henne and Matt Moore, still stings though.
The Giants were ranked last in the league in rushing so would it really prove anything if they improved slightly in the playoffs?Bowser said:
OriginofHysteria
Banned
Yeah, I know. I was just asking a rhetorical question that backs up what you were saying. The answer to the question, Chad Henne and Matt Moore, still stings though.
The Giants were ranked last in the league in rushing so would it really prove anything if they improved slightly in the playoffs?
It could be worse, you could have Sanchez
Also the Giants were hot in the playoffs because their defense got healthy again.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Ain't that the truth. The only thing worse than a terrible QB is a terrible QB that tricks people into thinking he might eventually be decent.It could be worse, you could have Sanchez
DeaconKnowledge
Member
yankeehater
Member
Yards per game went from 89 to 116, I would say that is a big difference. I think they also controlled the ball better which helped keep their defense fresh.
The Giants rushing in the postseason wasn't good. It just wasn't as god awful as it was in the regular season so it seemed like this HUGE revelation, but it really wasn't.
I have them at 4.16 yards/attempt in the postseason, which would be have been tied for 19th in the regular season. Not even close to an elite rushing attack.
I have them at 4.16 yards/attempt in the postseason, which would be have been tied for 19th in the regular season. Not even close to an elite rushing attack.
Futurevoid
Member
Some stats to enlighten the difference between the Giants regular season and post season.
NY Giants 2011 defense
Regular season:
Ranked 27th
25 pts/gm allowed
376.4 yds/game allowed
Total Points allowed: 400
Post season:
Ranked 3rd
14 pts/gm allowed
328 yds/game allowed
Total Points allowed: 56
NY Giants 2011 Offense:
Regular Season:
Ranked 8th
24.6 pts/gm
385.1 yds/gm
Total Points scored: 394
Rushing avg yds/gm: 89.2
Rushing avg/carry: 3.5
Post Season Offense:
Ranked 3rd
25.5 pts/gm
402.5 yds/gm
Total Points scored: 102
Rushing avg yds/gm: 116.5
Rushing avg/carry: 4.2
Eli Manning Post Season stats:
Completion percentage: 65%
Attempts per game: 40.1
Yards: 1,219
Average per pass play: 7.5 yards
Yards per game average: 304.8
TD: 9
INT: 1
QB Rating: 103.3
-----------------------------------
Supporting the argument that some are stating that the run game improved - they would be right. It certainly did during the playoffs. The average per carry certainly showed a nice increase to help keep the team somewhat more balanced.
That having been said, in support of Eznark's claim - look at the attempts per game for Eli. Look at his statistics during the post season. I would say his play directly along with the much improved defense are bigger markers for why the Giants won the Super Bowl over a relatively small improvement to the running game.
Tieing into that is the point differential difference in the regular season and post season.
NY Giants 2011 defense
Regular season:
Ranked 27th
25 pts/gm allowed
376.4 yds/game allowed
Total Points allowed: 400
Post season:
Ranked 3rd
14 pts/gm allowed
328 yds/game allowed
Total Points allowed: 56
NY Giants 2011 Offense:
Regular Season:
Ranked 8th
24.6 pts/gm
385.1 yds/gm
Total Points scored: 394
Rushing avg yds/gm: 89.2
Rushing avg/carry: 3.5
Post Season Offense:
Ranked 3rd
25.5 pts/gm
402.5 yds/gm
Total Points scored: 102
Rushing avg yds/gm: 116.5
Rushing avg/carry: 4.2
Eli Manning Post Season stats:
Completion percentage: 65%
Attempts per game: 40.1
Yards: 1,219
Average per pass play: 7.5 yards
Yards per game average: 304.8
TD: 9
INT: 1
QB Rating: 103.3
-----------------------------------
Supporting the argument that some are stating that the run game improved - they would be right. It certainly did during the playoffs. The average per carry certainly showed a nice increase to help keep the team somewhat more balanced.
That having been said, in support of Eznark's claim - look at the attempts per game for Eli. Look at his statistics during the post season. I would say his play directly along with the much improved defense are bigger markers for why the Giants won the Super Bowl over a relatively small improvement to the running game.
Tieing into that is the point differential difference in the regular season and post season.
yankeehater
Member
No one ever said elite but improved. This whole discussion was about is a running game important and I just pointed out that the Giants did better once they started running better.
Just admit you were wrong. Manning's last year they were already using Garcon and Collie more as Reggie had lost a step.
Also
Wrong about what? Reggie Wayne was never terribly great. Sloppy routes and uneven effort marred his entire career.
Are you claiming Garcon and Collie are good?
The Colts went from 10-6 to 2-14 and really only lost one impact player. What position did he play?
DeaconKnowledge
Member
The point i'm trying to make is that you need to be a complete team. The Giants weren't amazing with the run in the postseason, but they were better than they were in the regular season and could go to it when needed. This was in addition to their defense stiffening and Eli going into 5th gear. All three thing combined for them to come out on top.
Having an Elite quarterback is necessary for prolonged postseason success, but you're not riding one all the way to a ring alone.
The Giants were the middle of the pack statistically in the postseaon. Nobody said anything about needing elite running.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
eznark, how do you think the Broncos will do this year? I'm curious if you're predicting huge things for them given how much you value the QB postion, although I don't know what your feelings are on Manning's abilities these days.
Dan Marino refuses to let me completely disagree, although I think the running game is much less important now than it was back in his heyday.DeaconKnowledge said:
You're correct, I accidentally took the Falcons rushing total rather than the Giants for that game. However, that game was an outlier (31 carries, 172 yards, 5.5 ypc). In the three subsequent games, they averaged 3.6 ypc (81 carries, 294 yards). I think the entirety of the regular season performance and the postseason performance excluding the ATL game is a bigger sample size than the one game where their rushing attack looked potent.
As I said, it's because of the Falcons game (outlier). Without that game, their postseason ypg was 98.
No, you need a great QB and to not turn the ball over. That's it. Turnovers are the great equalizer.
The_Darkest_Red
Member
Wilson is the man, I'm expecting big things from him this year.
TheLegendary
Member
The way our team is run a lot of what we've gained thus far is still just unknown as our defense is going to look pretty different this year with all of the rookies. We're banking a lot of our success on our draft picks, just like we usually do. But it's even moreso this year than in recent years past.
Lot of room for growth with all of the rookies, but also the potential to be a year of development.
I agree with defense, don't agree with rushing. Many teams have made deep runs and/or won it all post 2003-04 with subpar rushing attacks in the playoffs.
Similar threads
- Poll