PDA

View Full Version : Eli Manning: 74.8 rating in 60 starts, Tim Couch: 75.1 rating in 59 starts


Matthew Jones
10-14-2008, 07:59 PM
I was just looking up some players and thought this was very interesting. Does anyone else think Tim Couch got a raw deal playing under an awful regime with a miserable supporting cast? I mean, the guy had no receivers, line, or running game. I dunno. I mean, obviously Eli Manning has been more successful so far, but that's a very interesting statistical similarity, and I thought I'd bring it up.

Bruce Banner
10-14-2008, 08:01 PM
Eli sucks the fatty against good defenses. Couch > Manning

I keed

(Why do we continue to use an ancient statistic?)

SeanTaylorRIP
10-14-2008, 08:03 PM
Well up until the end of last season and the playoffs Eli was highly inconsistent as a QB, and still is. He can either kill the team he's playing, or kill the team he's playing for. Those INT's last night were painful to watch. If he hadn't played so well at the end of last season and won a super bowl, I can't say that he would be the QB of the Giants still today.

steelersfan43
10-14-2008, 08:07 PM
Eli isnt good, 21% of his completions go to plaxico. He just throws to the tall guy.

bored of education
10-14-2008, 08:17 PM
Eli sucks the fatty against good defenses. Couch > Manning

I keed

(Why do we continue to use an ancient statistic?)


You love changing your avatar!

Couch > Croyles > Elis!

Geo
10-14-2008, 08:46 PM
I think there's a number of quarterback prospects taken early in the first round who are, for lack of a better term, "ruined" because of the situations they are in.

Then again, one might make the point that them not thriving (and not thriving afterwards) indicates if they can truly make it. Eli for example, didn't buckle or crumble, and helped lead his team to success even if his overall numbers aren't pristine.

Rayray52
10-14-2008, 09:03 PM
It's gonna be hilarious if the giants sign eli to a 100+ mil contract then release him 3 years later....

scottyboy
10-14-2008, 09:29 PM
It's gonna be hilarious if the giants sign eli to a 100+ mil contract then release him 3 years later....

this may be the absolute dumbest thing I've ever read, ever. And I saw the bulk of GRF's time here, oh my ******* lord...

and you do know QB rating is possibly the WORST stat, ever. Find some other way to bash Eli, but please, good golly miss molly, do not use QB rating.

and wanna hear another stat? Rings: Eli 1, Couch 0

Bruce Banner
10-14-2008, 09:30 PM
and wanna hear another stat? Rings: Eli 1, Couch 0

Best defense (on a multi game roll)
Eli 1
Couch -30

LonghornsLegend
10-14-2008, 09:32 PM
this may be the absolute dumbest thing I've ever read, ever. And I saw the bulk of GRF's time here, oh my ******* lord...

and you do know QB rating is possibly the WORST stat, ever. Find some other way to bash Eli, but please, good golly miss molly, do not use QB rating.

and wanna hear another stat? Rings: Eli 1, Couch 0

Can you tell us which QB stats matter, or are they only the ones that favor Eli manning in an argument?

scottyboy
10-14-2008, 09:33 PM
Can you tell us which QB stats matter, or are they only the ones that favor Eli manning in an argument?

well considering I think INT's are a major factor, i don't think they all favor Eli... honestly, anything but QB rating. worst stat ever. I can't ******* stand it.

and rushing yards

Number 10
10-14-2008, 09:50 PM
Does anyone think Couch is better than Manning?

aNYtitan
10-14-2008, 09:50 PM
Ummm....if i were to start a franchise and had to choose between a Tim Couch circa 1999 clone and an Eli Manning clone circa 2004, its a pretty easy pick

neko4
10-14-2008, 09:51 PM
Couch Completion %: 59.8
Couch AVG per Att: 6.5
Couch TD-INT: 64-67
Couch YDS per Game: 179.5

Eli Comp %: 55.4
Eli AVG per Att: 6.4
Eli TD-INT: 84-68
Eli YDS per Game: 203.4


Who has had better surounding talent: Eli

RaiderNation
10-14-2008, 09:51 PM
Eli Manning-Super Bowl Ring

Tim Couch-Out of the league

Number 10
10-14-2008, 09:56 PM
Answer my question please.

I hope you realize the fact that you guys are throwing numbers around only makes your argument less valid. Stats are not the way to evaluate a QB but hey, what can I expect from a bunch of kids that dont watch enough football?

CT Bronco Fan
10-14-2008, 09:56 PM
I think that stat just shows how overrated of a stat QB rating is. =)

I am a narcissist
10-14-2008, 09:57 PM
Answer my question please.

I hope you realize the fact that you guys are throwing numbers around only makes your argument less valid. Stats are not the way to evaluate a QB but hey, what can I expect from a bunch of kids that dont watch enough football?

I'm 14, that makes me a teenager not a kid.

scottyboy
10-14-2008, 09:59 PM
I'm 14, that makes me a teenager not a kid.

i thought it made you a pathetic attention *****?

Bruce Banner
10-14-2008, 10:00 PM
Answer my question please.

I hope you realize the fact that you guys are throwing numbers around only makes your argument less valid. Stats are not the way to evaluate a QB but hey, what can I expect from a bunch of kids that dont watch enough football?

Eli, don't you have film to be watching or something?

Number 10
10-14-2008, 10:06 PM
No answers.

Point made.

I am a narcissist
10-14-2008, 10:07 PM
No answers.

Point made.

I would take Tim Couch over Eli Manning. Giants suck, Eli sucks, Osi is overrated.

Vox Populi
10-14-2008, 10:07 PM
Tim Couch > Eli Manning by 1.0040106951871657765010695187166 times.

Bruce Banner
10-14-2008, 10:07 PM
No answers.

Point made.

Why did you throw so many picks? A little pressure burst your pipes?

skinzzfan25
10-14-2008, 10:10 PM
http://imageknight.com/images/1224040209.jpg

I know I'm no superkevin :(

KCJ58
10-14-2008, 10:12 PM
Eli sucks the fatty against good defenses. Couch > Manning

I keed

(Why do we continue to use an ancient statistic?)

why do you continue to change your avatar?

Vox Populi
10-14-2008, 10:21 PM
http://img504.imageshack.us/img504/6990/rshaea7.jpg

Bruce Banner
10-14-2008, 10:23 PM
why do you continue to change your avatar?

Why does it matter?

Vox Populi
10-14-2008, 10:24 PM
Cause its as relevant as this thread...

BlindSite
10-14-2008, 11:23 PM
Who cares?

Matthew Jones
10-14-2008, 11:26 PM
Eli Manning-Super Bowl Ring

Tim Couch-Out of the league

Eli Manning- Super Bowl Ring

Dan Marino - Out of the league

Menardo75
10-14-2008, 11:34 PM
Couch was a very good player in a really bad situation and did what he could. Eli is maturing into a very solid QB. If Eli keeps improving he will be much better than Couch. It is really hard to compare the two though.

steelersfan43
10-14-2008, 11:45 PM
Trent dilfer- Super Bowl Ring

Dan Marino - Out of the league

Seriously, teams achievments dont mean anything when talking about individual players.

NIN1984
10-14-2008, 11:52 PM
http://ihavenet.com/images/Eli-Manning-Super-Bowl-XLII-MVP.jpg

Paranoidmoonduck
10-14-2008, 11:54 PM
Seriously, teams achievments dont mean anything when talking about individual players.

Not in and of themselves, but Manning came up huge for the Giants in the playoffs.

Bruce Banner
10-14-2008, 11:57 PM
http://imagecache2.allposters.com/images/pic/PHOTOFILE/AABT029~Trent-Dilfer-With-Super-Bowl-XXXV-Trophy-Photofile-Posters.jpg

Toneloc498
10-14-2008, 11:59 PM
Stats are EVERYTHING for a QB, I mean just ask Romo and his two playoff duds, if you dont have good regular season stats theres NO way you can win a superbowl. You win superbowls in the regular season not in the playoffs.

NIN1984
10-15-2008, 12:02 AM
http://www.metronetiq.com/archives/Eli/Eli%20Manning.jpg

Look at that, he can walk through the fire.

MarioPalmer
10-15-2008, 12:06 AM
Carson is in just as much of a bad situation as Tim Couch and he isn't buckling under the pressure. I mean look at what he deals with. It's downright horrid. At least the Browns were having high draft picks to get Couch some help. The Bengals have taken 2 CB's, 2 LB's and a busted RB in their last 4 first round draft picks. Not a single player to help Carson and the the one moron that should have his back no matter is a complete clown and is more worried about his changing of his name then making his chemstry with Carson the most important thing.

C'mon guys, you know Eli is good and is worthy of being picked in the top 5. I'm not saying he is on Carson, Peyton, Marino, Elway, Aikman and other #1 overall QB's, but considering what they have gotten out of him he is worth the pick and definitly worth being at least respected guys. Look at Sexy Rexy. He had a phenom defense and a 2 headed monster running for him along with solid WR's and a solid O-Line, and Rexy is just downright horrid. Eli is good, he is very good. I wouldn't put him in top 5 in the NFL but certainly a franchise QB.

Crickett
10-15-2008, 12:18 AM
Yes, clearly Couch's 75.1 QB rating proves he is a better QB than Eli Manning with his 74.8 QB rating. In much the same way it proves Chad Pennington (89.5), Trent Green (86.7) and Marc Bulger (87.4) are better quarterbacks than Dan Marino (86.38), Brett Favre (86.0) and Johnny Unitas (78.2).

Number 10
10-15-2008, 12:21 AM
Yes, clearly Couch's 75.1 QB rating proves he is a better QB than Eli Manning with his 74.8 QB rating. In much the same way it proves Chad Pennington (89.5), Trent Green (86.7) and Marc Bulger (87.4) are better quarterbacks than Dan Marino (86.38), Brett Favre (86.0) and Johnny Unitas (78.2).

Snap .

TitleTown088
10-15-2008, 12:25 AM
t
and wanna hear another stat? Rings: Giants 1, Couch 0
there you go. For the record, I am in no way advocating Couch is better, just that the whole " The QB won the ring" this is ********."

Rayray52
10-15-2008, 12:53 AM
Eli Manning=Trent Dilfer

DMWSackMachine
10-15-2008, 02:44 AM
This shows several things.

First of all, it shows that Couch isn't as bad as everyone generally remembers him to be. He was in a bad position, and won some games and made many plays. Couch is not out of the league because of his play, he is out of the league because he hurt his throwing arm and never really recovered.

Secondly, it shows just how bad Eli Manning has been, at times, in his career. Revisionist history is a beautiful thing, especially in New York circa 2008, but people will remember that around this same time last year (ok, starting in November, but close) there was a large contingent of people calling for Manning's job! Yes, the same guy who would be a Super Bowl winning QB just months later was beleaguered by his own media AND fanbase. Eli had moments of brilliance, but there were times (see CLE 35, NY 14) where he literally killed the team single-handedly.

Finally, it shows that few people understand the purpose or methodology of the QB rating system. The formula works based upon four components:

1) Comp%; this represents the efficiency portion of the components, and reflects how often a QB is successful when attempting a pass.
2) YPA, or yards per attempt.
3) TD%, or frequency of touchdowns per attempt. Along with #2, these represent the "explosiveness" or reward portion of the system.
4) Int%, or frequency of INTs per attempt. This constitutes the risk portion of the system.

Each component is assigned a scale, which produces a score ranging from 0-2.375. These four scores are added up and then multiplied by 100/6 or 16.66666 (repeating). That is why the maximum QB rating is 158.3, because 2.375+2.375+2.375+2.375=9.5, while 9.5 x 16.66666 (or 100/6) = 158.3. Voila!

I don't think anyone can argue with the basis of the system. You want to complete as many passes as you can, for as many yards as you can, while scoring as often as possible, all while not turning the ball over. Think that covers it? Absolutely it does.

One of the chinks in its armor, though, is the assigned gradient or scale that each component carries. For example, the calculation for comp% is the following:

(((Comp/Att) x 100) -30)/20

For example, Drew Brees posted a 67.5% score. This would be times by 100, producing 67.5. 30 is subtracted from that, producing 37.5, which is then divided by 20, giving you a season score of 1.875 (out of a possible 2.375) for that component.

Here is where it gets interesting. This system was developed in 1973, with the intent that 66.6 be the average score for an NFL QB. That would translate to a score of 1.00 on each scale. Not so fast. As NFL passing evolved, the gradients shifted independently of each other. An average performance by league standards in one component would yield a different score (on the 0-2.375 scale) than an average performance in another component.

For example: in 2007, the 33 QBs who had the attempts to qualify posted the following averages in each component for the season:

Comp%: 61.77%
YPA: 6.95
TD%: 4.176
INT%: 3.100

Each of those average component scores would yield the following scores:

61.77% completions ----> 1.589
6.95 YPA -------------> .9875
4.176 TD% -----------> .835
3.100%---------------> 1.600

As you can see (and this is only last season, for a more thorough analysis I would need to run the numbers for several seasons), the components for comp% and Int% have gotten wildly out of whack with what the original intent of the was, while TD percentages has actually fallen off from where it had originally been pegged.


Ultimately, in application to Eli Manning and his poor rating, it is worth noting that his weakest areas, comp%(at a deviation of 9.2% below the average, it doesn't seem that bad, but if computed it standard deviations it would look much worse) and Int%(his INT% was a whopping 22.6% worse than the average NFL QB) are the ones most heavily weighed in today's passer rating formula. While his strongest, TD% (at +3.0% of the average, it was the only component in which he was above par, finishing 13th overall) is the least weighted.



All of this, though, is beyond the real point. Statistics should not be used as an end-all be-all for evaluating a players ability or even his performance. They should be used as a reference, in combination with our observations and analysis. At this time last year, it was generally considered that Eli was a mediocre, if not below average, NFL QB, whose strongest quality was his ability to excel in clutch situations and rise to the moment--a quality which is impossible to capture with statistics--but still ultimately a mediocre QB.

What happened in the playoffs does not change what he was before. However, his excellent performance in those playoffs is also reflected in his passer rating, as it rose from a below average 73.9 to 95.7, a number that would place him among the elite passers if he could sustain it for an entire season.

Finally, the Eli we saw in the playoffs has returned for an encore performance (at least so far this year). Everyone says he looks like a "made man", and is playing so much better this season. The best way to quantify stats is to monitor how well they reflect the obvious. His passer rating this season? 91.4.

/discussion

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 03:48 AM
In short. The QB rating statistic is **** and Eli is better than it makes him out to be....but he still sucks. He shows up against ****** defenses and ***** up against good defenses. Once again the stats lie. Maybe they should weigh how good the defenses are when calculating the QB passer rating.

DMWSackMachine
10-15-2008, 04:18 AM
In short. The QB rating statistic is **** and Eli is better than it makes him out to be....but he still sucks. He shows up against ****** defenses and ***** up against good defenses. Once again the stats lie. Maybe they should weigh how good the defenses are when calculating the QB passer rating.

http://failblog.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/fail-owned-twatt-sign-fail.jpg

scottyboy
10-15-2008, 07:51 AM
DMW, are you ******* serious? Eli single handedly lost the Giants the Monday night game? god forbid the defense stop the run, or Braylon Edwards or get a pass rush.

and it's the ******* new york media, every big name players name has been mentioned in getting the axe, it's how it ******* goes.

why don't you go suck on the cowboys greatest secondary ever?

scottyboy
10-15-2008, 07:53 AM
Eli Manning- Super Bowl Ring

Dan Marino - Out of the league

wow, jealous hating pats fan much?

shane_man
10-15-2008, 08:48 AM
DMW, are you ******* serious? Eli single handedly lost the Giants the Monday night game? god forbid the defense stop the run, or Braylon Edwards or get a pass rush.

and it's the ******* new york media, every big name players name has been mentioned in getting the axe, it's how it ******* goes.

why don't you go suck on the cowboys greatest secondary ever?

Maybe I'm misreading his post. But didn't he actually argue that Eli has indeed translated his playoff(clutch) form into this season based on his average QB rating in the playoffs compared to his QB rating so far this year?

Just on the Couch issue. It doesn't hurt Eli that he has been given EVERY chance to succeed. He's been surrounded by talent. The Giants management has drafted EXTREMELY well. They have pushed out malcontents who might make his fragile ego show(Tiki and Shockey... Hell even Strahan)... He's had the confidence of his coach since being drafted and replacing Kurt Warner in his rookie season despite what is seen as piss poor play.

The Browns stuck with Couch but that was about as far as the support went.

Couch might have made a good impact at the Giants had he been in Eli's situation. Support and stability can make or break a QB. Check Alex Smith for that...

rockio42
10-15-2008, 09:14 AM
Yes, clearly Couch's 75.1 QB rating proves he is a better QB than Eli Manning with his 74.8 QB rating. In much the same way it proves Chad Pennington (89.5), Trent Green (86.7) and Marc Bulger (87.4) are better quarterbacks than Dan Marino (86.38), Brett Favre (86.0) and Johnny Unitas (78.2).

GAME

SET

MATCH!

NY+Giants=NYG
10-15-2008, 09:21 AM
It's gonna be hilarious if the giants sign eli to a 100+ mil contract then release him 3 years later....

If that happens then they should re name this MB after you. Until then you win the award for one of the dumbest comments ever.

The Unseen
10-15-2008, 09:37 AM
and wanna hear another stat? Rings: Eli 1, Couch 0

That stat is worse than passer rating.

DMW's analysis is pretty amazing and goes to show how the strange yet useful stat works. I don't think Eli Manning is elite. I'm not even sure if he's very good. I mean, how bad can you be with Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer, along with his O-line? I think it's a legitimate question.

NY+Giants=NYG
10-15-2008, 10:19 AM
That stat is worse than passer rating.

DMW's analysis is pretty amazing and goes to show how the strange yet useful stat works. I don't think Eli Manning is elite. I'm not even sure if he's very good. I mean, how bad can you be with Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer, along with his O-line? I think it's a legitimate question.


He had 1 bad game.. Not to mention he was in a horrible system with a piss poor OC which is a point NO ONE BRINGS UP! And people have assumed he won't get better. You see we tossed him in the fire the 2nd half of the season his rookie year under an idiot OC. We didn't sit him for 3 years and plug him in.

scottyboy
10-15-2008, 10:31 AM
That stat is worse than passer rating.

DMW's analysis is pretty amazing and goes to show how the strange yet useful stat works. I don't think Eli Manning is elite. I'm not even sure if he's very good. I mean, how bad can you be with Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer, along with his O-line? I think it's a legitimate question.

that was kinda my point, brining up a pointless stat to counter the OP's countless stat...

Dam8610
10-15-2008, 12:07 PM
Yes, clearly Couch's 75.1 QB rating proves he is a better QB than Eli Manning with his 74.8 QB rating. In much the same way it proves Chad Pennington (89.5), Trent Green (86.7) and Marc Bulger (87.4) are better quarterbacks than Dan Marino (86.38), Brett Favre (86.0) and Johnny Unitas (78.2).

You do realize that era adjustments are a useful tool to understand and interpret passer ratings, right? For example, when era adjusted, Johnny U's passer rating in a few years of his career would have been a mark that would still stand today.

Dam8610
10-15-2008, 12:16 PM
In short. The QB rating statistic is **** and Eli is better than it makes him out to be....but he still sucks. He shows up against ****** defenses and ***** up against good defenses. Once again the stats lie. Maybe they should weigh how good the defenses are when calculating the QB passer rating.

You probably already know about it, but:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

giantsfan
10-15-2008, 12:25 PM
Eli Manning sucks, Never mind he's the first giants QB to have consecutive winning seasons since Parcells was here, or that he's been incredibly clutch throughout his career, or even that he's yet to have a competent OC who calls plays for the players he has and not the players he wishes he had. Eli is garbage and will never amount to anything, he's not a leader, would a leader come into a veteran team as a rookie and let them corrupt the lockerroom against him, i'm looking at you tiki, or stand for having an atrocious defense his first two seasons. Heck would a leader let Shockey, Plax and our receiving corps lead the league in drops? HELL NO MANNING IS GARBAGE, almost as bad as his older brother Peyton...

awfullyquiet
10-15-2008, 12:30 PM
Finally, the Eli we saw in the playoffs has returned for an encore performance (at least so far this year). Everyone says he looks like a "made man", and is playing so much better this season. The best way to quantify stats is to monitor how well they reflect the obvious. His passer rating this season? 91.4.

/discussion




Game
1.) WAS 61.1 QB rating 19-35 passing 216 yards 0 TD 1 INT
2.) STL 131.4 QB rating 20-29 passing 260 yards 3 TD 0 INT
3.) CIN 88.2 QB rating 26-43 passing 289 yards 1 TD 0 INT
4.) BYE
5.) SEA 136.6 QB rating 19-25 passing 267 yards 2 TD 0 INT
6.) CLE 57.1 QB rating 18-28 passing 196 yards 1 TD 3 INT


Average. 91.4 Passer Rating... I wonder why.

http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/10/cupcake_timer.jpg

giantsfan
10-15-2008, 12:35 PM
Eli Manning deserves to be banned from the NFL

bantx
10-15-2008, 12:41 PM
Eli Manning deserves to be banned from the NFL

Is this an attempt for laughs?

giantsfan
10-15-2008, 01:02 PM
Is this an attempt for laughs?

No it's a fact, he throws so many INTs and doesn't have a good game face, how could any QB have success with those things, plus he should be banned for what he did tot he Chargers, he ruined that team by refusing to play there...

Dr. Gonzo
10-15-2008, 01:19 PM
No it's a fact, he throws so many INTs and doesn't have a good game face, how could any QB have success with those things, plus he should be banned for what he did tot he Chargers, he ruined that team by refusing to play there...

I didn't really want to enter into this argument but IMO Rivers is a better QB than Eli Manning. That is just my opinion though.

AlexDown
10-15-2008, 01:24 PM
Yes, clearly Couch's 75.1 QB rating proves he is a better QB than Eli Manning with his 74.8 QB rating. In much the same way it proves Chad Pennington (89.5), Trent Green (86.7) and Marc Bulger (87.4) are better quarterbacks than Dan Marino (86.38), Brett Favre (86.0) and Johnny Unitas (78.2).

Chad Pennington is the man though.

giantsfan
10-15-2008, 01:25 PM
I didn't really want to enter into this argument but IMO Rivers is a better QB than Eli Manning. That is just my opinion though.

I like Rivers a lot to, although I think Eli's a better fit for the situation he ended up in. Really any debate about any of the top three from 2004 just doesn't go anywhere.

People hate and under-rate eli because he doesn't put up big stats, pulled that ish with SD and is a mannig with a poor game face people love to rip on, or they see the clutch leadership and love him to the point of over-rating him, same with Big Ben except he's hated for being almost Tim Tebow stupid and not a lack of stats.

Rivers is the only one who's generally appreciated by all, although even with him some people believe he's elite while others argue he's below Big Ben and Eli in tier two. Personally if I had to I'd rank them Eli, Rivers, Ben, but only because eli's been so incredibly clutch for us and unfortunately hasn't had the caliber of play calling that Rivers and Big Ben have gotten.

Dr. Gonzo
10-15-2008, 01:29 PM
I like Rivers a lot to, although I think Eli's a better fit for the situation he ended up in. Really any debate about any of the top three from 2004 just doesn't go anywhere.

People hate and under-rate eli because he doesn't put up big stats, pulled that ish with SD and is a mannig with a poor game face people love to rip on, or they see the clutch leadership and love him to the point of over-rating him, same with Big Ben except he's hated for being almost Tim Tebow stupid and not a lack of stats.

Rivers is the only one who's generally appreciated by all, although even with him some people believe he's elite while others argue he's below Big Ben and Eli in tier two. Personally if I had to I'd rank them Eli, Rivers, Ben, but only because eli's been so incredibly clutch for us and unfortunately hasn't had the caliber of play calling that Rivers and Big Ben have gotten.

Fair enough. I think Eli refusing to play for the Chargers was great for SD. They got a bunch of extra picks and the QB who IMO is better. They just have to put it all together now. I have never been a huge fan of Eli but he came up huge when they needed him too and helped win a SB so he has that going for him.

giantsfan
10-15-2008, 01:44 PM
Fair enough. I think Eli refusing to play for the Chargers was great for SD. They got a bunch of extra picks and the QB who IMO is better. They just have to put it all together now. I have never been a huge fan of Eli but he came up huge when they needed him too and helped win a SB so he has that going for him.

See Eli has more going for him than just last years playoff run, sure it was the first stretch where you saw him consistently playing great against elite teams, but before then he had shown the ability to drive us for scores late in games when we needed them and that clutchness is why us giants faithful love him so much. Watching a giants game we're comfortable knowing that even if we're down in the 4th Eli will lead us down the field and give us a chance to win, which is important with such a hit or miss Defense.

I think Rivers was a better fit for SD and Eli a better fit of NY, I'm not going to say one's better than the other because really it depends on how your team is built and what scheme you're planning to run and what you expect the QB to do. If you've got major talent at the skill positions and you need someone who'll spread the ball around effectively and give his team a spark with his passion you've gotta go with Rivers. If you need someone who'll stand in the pocket and get rocked b/c of a poor oline but deliver rockets down the field you'll want Big Ben. If you want a guy who'll take lesser talent and faciliate an offense instead of being an offense while being able to take over and drive a team singlehandedly when needed you'd want Eli.

Menardo75
10-15-2008, 01:48 PM
What the Chargers did in that draft is why they have been successful. Amazing what they did.

giantsfan
10-15-2008, 01:52 PM
What the Chargers did in that draft is why they have been successful. Amazing what they did.

Meh, that draft certainly helped, but a big reason for their success is that the had great co-ordinators, Brees exploded, LDT has been god, Gates became the man and then the draft. But yeah that draft was a big reason for their success, not the only reason but a good part of it.

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 02:50 PM
You probably already know about it, but:

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb

Cool stuff.

The Unseen
10-15-2008, 03:16 PM
He had 1 bad game.. Not to mention he was in a horrible system with a piss poor OC which is a point NO ONE BRINGS UP! And people have assumed he won't get better. You see we tossed him in the fire the 2nd half of the season his rookie year under an idiot OC. We didn't sit him for 3 years and plug him in.

1 bad game his entire career? I'm not talking about Monday; I'm talking about his whole career. Thus the discussion of his career passer rating, not Monday's passer rating.

awfullyquiet
10-15-2008, 03:18 PM
1 bad game his entire career? I'm not talking about Monday; I'm talking about his whole career. Thus the discussion of his career passer rating, not Monday's passer rating.

Or in week 1 against a mediocre Washington team (at the time)...

The fact is, i believe, with the exception of the playoffs, the team manages to win despite him.

DMWSackMachine
10-15-2008, 03:26 PM
Game
1.) WAS 61.1 QB rating 19-35 passing 216 yards 0 TD 1 INT
2.) STL 131.4 QB rating 20-29 passing 260 yards 3 TD 0 INT
3.) CIN 88.2 QB rating 26-43 passing 289 yards 1 TD 0 INT
4.) BYE
5.) SEA 136.6 QB rating 19-25 passing 267 yards 2 TD 0 INT
6.) CLE 57.1 QB rating 18-28 passing 196 yards 1 TD 3 INT

Average. 91.4 Passer Rating... I wonder why.

http://cache.gizmodo.com/assets/resources/2007/10/cupcake_timer.jpg

Valid points, certainly. But if you have followed Eli, like I have being a NFC East fan and owning him in several key FF leagues, you know that he has been very well known for playing horribly against even bad teams. A cursory glance will show the following performances against awful defenses last season:

Opp......YPG rank....Pass Rating Rank......Eli pass rating
Chi........27th.............19th.................. .....63.0
SF.........22nd.............28th.................. .....78.2
Det........31st.............31st.................. .....33.8
Mia........4th...............29th................. ......44.9


Awful performances against horrible defenses.

Now, Eli has started well before, but I think he has cleared a hurdle this season, and we will see by far his best regular season ever. I would expect him to maintain a rating in the mid-high 80s, with an outside shot at topping 90. Considering that he has been pimping it in the 70s his entire career, you can't overstate the magnitude of his improvement.

Also, when you compare the obvious improvement that is evident by watching him play with the corresponding improvement in passer rating, you see that it is, in fact, a very useful tool for measuring QB play.

Anyone who says differently either a) doesn't understand it or b) has an axe to grind because it doesn't support their favorite player being the GOAT.

awfullyquiet
10-15-2008, 03:31 PM
Fair enough. But now instead of beating up on good teams and turning the corner and becoming more consistent...

He's now able to beat up on cupcakes to pad his stats.

Cute.

DMWSackMachine
10-15-2008, 03:39 PM
DMW, are you ******* serious? Eli single handedly lost the Giants the Monday night game? god forbid the defense stop the run, or Braylon Edwards or get a pass rush.

and it's the ******* new york media, every big name players name has been mentioned in getting the axe, it's how it ******* goes.

why don't you go suck on the cowboys greatest secondary ever?

Say what you want, Scotty, but the Giants had been able to move the ball basically at will against the Browns. They couldn't stop them running the ball, and they couldn't stop the passing game. Hell, even after the beating they were handing the G-Men, Eli had his team inside the 20 yard line driving in for a score to cut the lead back to 6 and threw a pick that literally ended the game. Horrible decision, horrible throw.

I'm not meaning to say that Eli was the only reason why they lost. When you get pounded like that, there's always plenty of reasons. I'm saying that he is, by far, the BIGGEST of all those reasons. So much so that, if he had simply not thrown those 3 picks, I believe they would have won the game.

Jughead10
10-15-2008, 03:56 PM
What the Chargers did in that draft is why they have been successful. Amazing what they did.

Yet the Giants and Steelers have both won Superbowls since then while San Diego already had the best player in the league before that draft.

Jughead10
10-15-2008, 04:01 PM
Say what you want, Scotty, but the Giants had been able to move the ball basically at will against the Browns. They couldn't stop them running the ball, and they couldn't stop the passing game. Hell, even after the beating they were handing the G-Men, Eli had his team inside the 20 yard line driving in for a score to cut the lead back to 6 and threw a pick that literally ended the game. Horrible decision, horrible throw.

I'm not meaning to say that Eli was the only reason why they lost. When you get pounded like that, there's always plenty of reasons. I'm saying that he is, by far, the BIGGEST of all those reasons. So much so that, if he had simply not thrown those 3 picks, I believe they would have won the game.

Two things. Are you sure about those stats in your previous posts. I remember Eli having very effecient game against Detroit last year. The 33 passer rating doesn't seem correct. I know you are actually kind of defending him, but that number doesn't seem right to me.

As for Monday. Eli was the second biggest reason we lost. Did we make the Browns punt once? Did we even lay a finger on Anderson? Even if we scored that last TD instead of Wright taking it to the house, I couldn't count on our D to make a stop that day. We slept walked through that game. Also out of all the picks, I think the third was least worst. Wright made some damn play on that ball.

Jughead10
10-15-2008, 04:07 PM
Or in week 1 against a mediocre Washington team (at the time)...

The fact is, i believe, with the exception of the playoffs, the team manages to win despite him.

Just for the record, in the 2007 regular season, his two best games were againt the Cowboys and Patriots.

bantx
10-15-2008, 04:23 PM
Yet the Giants and Steelers have both won Superbowls since then while San Diego already had the best player in the league before that draft.

Both teams had superbowl teams, even last year with all the injuries we had, we still got to the afc championship. And one player doesnt win a superbowl, so i dont know how you're going with what you;re saying.

Giantsfan1080
10-15-2008, 04:24 PM
Two things. Are you sure about those stats in your previous posts. I remember Eli having very effecient game against Detroit last year. The 33 passer rating doesn't seem correct. I know you are actually kind of defending him, but that number doesn't seem right to me.

As for Monday. Eli was the second biggest reason we lost. Did we make the Browns punt once? Did we even lay a finger on Anderson? Even if we scored that last TD instead of Wright taking it to the house, I couldn't count on our D to make a stop that day. We slept walked through that game. Also out of all the picks, I think the third was least worst. Wright made some damn play on that ball.

That 33.8 rating was against the Vikings when he threw all those INT's. He had a 100.7 rating against the Lions.

bantx
10-15-2008, 04:24 PM
See Eli has more going for him than just last years playoff run, sure it was the first stretch where you saw him consistently playing great against elite teams, but before then he had shown the ability to drive us for scores late in games when we needed them and that clutchness is why us giants faithful love him so much. Watching a giants game we're comfortable knowing that even if we're down in the 4th Eli will lead us down the field and give us a chance to win, which is important with such a hit or miss Defense.



i wouldnt call inconsistency clutch

awfullyquiet
10-15-2008, 04:30 PM
Just for the record, in the 2007 regular season, his two best games were againt the Cowboys and Patriots.

Statistically the game was the best in week 17 with 4 td's against a very generous patriots defense.

But, if you don't remember, he also manage to lose the game for them with that late inning interception.

I will concede the fact that yes, he has risen to the occasion on multiple times, but if you look against the last calender year, he's not much better than he was in the regular season.

Jughead10
10-15-2008, 05:07 PM
Statistically the game was the best in week 17 with 4 td's against a very generous patriots defense.

But, if you don't remember, he also manage to lose the game for them with that late inning interception.

I will concede the fact that yes, he has risen to the occasion on multiple times, but if you look against the last calender year, he's not much better than he was in the regular season.

He also managed to beat that same team 5 weeks later with a late TD when it mattered more.

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 05:11 PM
He also managed to beat that same team 5 weeks later with a late TD when it mattered more.

Plaxico was the reason for that TD. Any QB could hit a man wide open in the end zone. As for the drive leading to the TD, fluke of epic proportions.

scottyboy
10-15-2008, 05:12 PM
Plaxico was the reason for that TD. Any QB could hit a man wide open in the end zone. As for the drive leading to the TD, fluke of epic proportions.

now come on, if any other QB makes that drive it's ZOMGZ best QB eva, total clutchz0rg.

But Eli makes it and it's a fluke of epic proportions...

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 05:13 PM
now come on, if any other QB makes that drive it's ZOMGZ best QB eva, total clutchz0rg.

But Eli makes it and it's a fluke of epic proportions...

Anyone but Tom Brady and it's a fluke.

scottyboy
10-15-2008, 05:14 PM
Anyone but Tom Brady and it's a fluke.

right, Tom Brady is the ONLY QB who can drive his team down in the Super Bowl in the final 2 minutes to win it?

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 05:20 PM
right, Tom Brady is the ONLY QB who can drive his team down in the Super Bowl in the final 2 minutes to win it?

When anyone else does it consistently, I will give them some leeway. Until then, FLUKE.

awfullyquiet
10-15-2008, 05:37 PM
When anyone else does it consistently, I will give them some leeway. Until then, FLUKE.

I know. Eli Manning != Joe Montana.

Eli has a great crutch. And that is a stingy NY defense and a good running game.

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 05:38 PM
E-lie is gr8 in tha clinch.

MetSox17
10-15-2008, 05:38 PM
I know. Eli Manning != Joe Montana.

Eli has a great crutch. And that is a stingy NY defense and a good running game.

I brought that up the last time i argued about Eli and the Giants homers flocked together to say that Eli is the reason for the great running game. LOL

awfullyquiet
10-15-2008, 05:55 PM
I brought that up the last time i argued about Eli and the Giants homers flocked together to say that Eli is the reason for the great running game. LOL

Sweet god. If that was true, the total dynamics of the NFL will change.

Tavaris Jackson made All Day Sooooooo good!

MetSox17
10-15-2008, 05:57 PM
Sweet god. If that was true, the total dynamics of the NFL will change.

For sure. Who needs an offensive line?! Draft an Eli Manning and wave good-bye to all your running game woes!

neko4
10-15-2008, 06:21 PM
Carson is in just as much of a bad situation as Tim Couch and he isn't buckling under the pressure. I mean look at what he deals with. It's downright horrid. At least the Browns were having high draft picks to get Couch some help. The Bengals have taken 2 CB's, 2 LB's and a busted RB in their last 4 first round draft picks. Not a single player to help Carson and the the one moron that should have his back no matter is a complete clown and is more worried about his changing of his name then making his chemstry with Carson the most important thing.


Dont even compare Carson and Couch's situations. Carson has had a good O for most of his career (except this year) and unlike Couch wasnt rushed into a bad situation. His team has suffered more because of a bad defense

Couch just had a bad everything and those early draft picks didnt help Couch much (Courtney Brown, Gerrard Warren, William Green) and a coaching change wasnt too great either, although Butch did take them to the playoffs.

Back on topic, Eli Manning is like Joe Namath to me, except Namath is cooler. Poor stats, but does have a ring.

DMWSackMachine
10-15-2008, 06:28 PM
That 33.8 rating was against the Vikings when he threw all those INT's. He had a 100.7 rating against the Lions.

Good catch there. You are correct. It was the Vikings, who were 32nd against the pass in ypg, and 22nd in QB rating. Still a really bad pass defense.

DMWSackMachine
10-15-2008, 06:33 PM
Quit trying to rationalize that TD drive. Eli took his team down the field and scored a TD in the most pressure packed situation possible in pro sports. It wasn't a fluke...with the possible exception of the Helmet Catch (which was still an incredible play by Eli, btw). It is consistent with Eli's ability to produce in pressure situations all throughout his career. Doesn't anyone remember his game winning drive against the Broncos in 2005, the year they went 12-4 and went to the AFC championship game? Eli beat them in the last minute with a TD pass to win the game, even though the Broncos had an awesome defense and were by far the better team. You can't take that away from him.

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 06:35 PM
It wasn't a fluke...with the possible exception of the Helmet Catch

That was the flukiest part about it! and the fact that E-Lie made a good play also contributes to the flukiness!

Giantsfan1080
10-15-2008, 06:52 PM
Quit trying to rationalize that TD drive. Eli took his team down the field and scored a TD in the most pressure packed situation possible in pro sports. It wasn't a fluke...with the possible exception of the Helmet Catch (which was still an incredible play by Eli, btw). It is consistent with Eli's ability to produce in pressure situations all throughout his career. Doesn't anyone remember his game winning drive against the Broncos in 2005, the year they went 12-4 and went to the AFC championship game? Eli beat them in the last minute with a TD pass to win the game, even though the Broncos had an awesome defense and were by far the better team. You can't take that away from him.

There are numerous Eli comebacks that us as Giants fans can point too. No one wants to give him credit for them and then he proved in the most pressure packed situation of all. There are just haters and they are going to be that no matter what. Of course Eli has a very good team around him but what Super Bowl winner hasn't. They are in the Super Bowl for a reason because they were a good enough "team" to make the playoffs. Eli steps up when the Giants need it most and there are plenty of examples that we can point too for that.

Sniper
10-15-2008, 07:06 PM
DMW, are you ******* serious? Eli single handedly lost the Giants the Monday night game? god forbid the defense stop the run, or Braylon Edwards or get a pass rush.

and it's the ******* new york media, every big name players name has been mentioned in getting the axe, it's how it ******* goes.

why don't you go suck on the cowboys greatest secondary ever?

Get real, scotty. No one can stop Braylon Edwards besides Braylon Edwards and Derek Anderson.

scottyboy
10-15-2008, 07:08 PM
Get real, scotty. No one can stop Braylon Edwards besides Braylon Edwards and Derek Anderson.

this much is true, dude's a total freak.

scottyboy
10-15-2008, 07:08 PM
That was the flukiest part about it! and the fact that E-Lie made a good play also contributes to the flukiness!

I think the flukiest part was when he beat the Bucs.

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 07:12 PM
I think the flukiest part was when he beat the Bucs.

That wasn't a fluke at all.

First round exit, typical of a Gruden coached team.

Giantsfan1080
10-15-2008, 07:17 PM
That wasn't a fluke at all.

First round exit, typical of a Gruden coached team.

Except for of course the year he won the Super Bowl.

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 07:23 PM
Except for of course the year he won the Super Bowl.

Riding a Dungy built defense with 4 hall of famers (at least 3, Lynch probably not. Barber, no) and playing an offense (in the SB) he built himself.

Don't get into a pissing match with me about Jon Gruden.

bored of education
10-15-2008, 07:39 PM
Bruce Gradkowski > both


http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7715

proof!

Giantsfan1080
10-15-2008, 07:40 PM
Riding a Dungy built defense with 4 hall of famers (at least 3, Lynch probably not. Barber, no) and playing an offense (in the SB) he built himself.

Don't get into a pissing match with me about Jon Gruden.

Haha I wasn't trying too. Just pointing out the fact that regardless of who built the team up he did manage not to F it all up that year.

P-L
10-15-2008, 08:50 PM
No one in their right mind thinks Couch is better than Manning. With that said, Eli isn't as good as Giants fans think he is. I truly believe that if David Tyree doesn't make that catch, Eli doesn't get half the hype he is getting now. I give him all the credit for playing incredibly in the playoffs last year against Tampa, Dallas, and New England. However, he hasn't done very much outside those three games to warrant the hype or contract he's getting.

The Unseen
10-15-2008, 09:16 PM
No one in their right mind thinks Couch is better than Manning. With that said, Eli isn't as good as Giants fans think he is. I truly believe that if David Tyree doesn't make that catch, Eli doesn't get half the hype he is getting now. I give him all the credit for playing incredibly in the playoffs last year against Tampa, Dallas, and New England. However, he hasn't done very much outside those three games to warrant the hype or contract he's getting.

You said it better than when I tried.

DMWSackMachine
10-15-2008, 11:24 PM
No one in their right mind thinks Couch is better than Manning. With that said, Eli isn't as good as Giants fans think he is. I truly believe that if David Tyree doesn't make that catch, Eli doesn't get half the hype he is getting now. I give him all the credit for playing incredibly in the playoffs last year against Tampa, Dallas, and New England. However, he hasn't done very much outside those three games to warrant the hype or contract he's getting.

Well said. I would differ a little though in one respect: if you compare the first 3 seasons of each QB's career, and adjust for Eli's far superior cast, I think the two are fairly comparable, with Eli getting the slight nod for his higher ceiling and occasional transcendent performance. It wasn't until the last several games of 2007, and into the playoffs (and continuing into this year) that Eli ever showed definitively that he was much better than Couch. He simply won more games with a far better supporting cast. Six of one, half a dozen of the other to me.

johnstonolb
10-15-2008, 11:30 PM
Does anyone think Couch is better than Manning?

No, Couch has/had a lousy arm. Manning is much better. This does not pass the eyeball test IMHO.

Bruce Banner
10-15-2008, 11:37 PM
http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/for_the_record/posts/14622

Saints-Tigers
10-16-2008, 12:32 AM
As far as that David Tyree catch goes, it was a fluke, but the most impressive part was Eli escaping the multiple defenders and THEN throwing the ball.

MarioPalmer
10-16-2008, 12:35 AM
http://www.fannation.com/si_blogs/for_the_record/posts/14622

God FanNation has gone down the tubes. I hate the new format, thats why I left, it used to be run by the fan for the fan, now it's a corporate haven with SI writers posing as real deal sports fans. Totally ridiculous. It used to have an excellent reputation now it's a sold out site that turned it's back on their top bloggers and turned it into a pathetic cash cow for Sports Illustrated. What an absolute fruad of a "fan" site.

MarioPalmer
10-16-2008, 12:36 AM
As far as that David Tyree catch goes, it was a fluke, but the most impressive part was Eli escaping the multiple defenders and THEN throwing the ball.

You gotta admit, during his playoff run he played with great poise, leadership and confidence. I won't call him top 5, but top 10 absolutely, and at the end of the day, thats what should get from a #1 overall pick.

USCowboysHC
10-16-2008, 12:50 AM
Eli Manning is an alright QB, nothing more nothing less. Couch was a bust, end of story.

Saints-Tigers
10-16-2008, 01:09 AM
You gotta admit, during his playoff run he played with great poise, leadership and confidence. I won't call him top 5, but top 10 absolutely, and at the end of the day, thats what should get from a #1 overall pick.

I agree, I think he's taking a bad rap, up until this past game, Eli has looked like an entirely different quarterback over his last 14 or so games, he really took the next step IMO.

bigbluedefense
10-16-2008, 10:00 AM
I'll stay out of this one, mainly bc i don't have the patience to refute everything said in here.

What I do have an issue with is the ridiculous notion that Eli had a great supporting cast all his career here with the Giants.

When he came into the league we had one of the worst olines in the league, his first year we didn't have Plax, and our skill position players have been overrated for quite awhile now.

Toomer is no different from an Isaac Bruce, the only reason why he looks as good as he is, is bc of Eli Manning. He makes that entire WR core look better than it really is.

Plax is our only playmaker, before Steve Smith we had no credible 3rd WR that was worth even discussing. Shockey was great, but rarely used in our scheme.

So while I won't say he had a terrible cast, he certainly did not have a great cast either. Not his entire stay here. Our cast has improved since last year, when we had Smith, and now Hixon this year with our depth behind them.

Also our oline has flourished over the years as an elite unit. But make no mistake, it was not that way the entire time. This was a process that took a solid 3 to 4 years to get to. The offense you see now is NOT the same offense we had 4 years ago. Not by a long shot.

NY+Giants=NYG
10-16-2008, 10:09 AM
I'll stay out of this one, mainly bc i don't have the patience to refute everything said in here.

What I do have an issue with is the ridiculous notion that Eli had a great supporting cast all his career here with the Giants.

When he came into the league we had one of the worst olines in the league, his first year we didn't have Plax, and our skill position players have been overrated for quite awhile now.

Toomer is no different from an Isaac Bruce, the only reason why he looks as good as he is, is bc of Eli Manning. He makes that entire WR core look better than it really is.

Plax is our only playmaker, before Steve Smith we had no credible 3rd WR that was worth even discussing. Shockey was great, but rarely used in our scheme.

So while I won't say he had a terrible cast, he certainly did not have a great cast either. Not his entire stay here. Our cast has improved since last year, when we had Smith, and now Hixon this year with our depth behind them.

Also our oline has flourished over the years as an elite unit. But make no mistake, it was not that way the entire time. This was a process that took a solid 3 to 4 years to get to. The offense you see now is NOT the same offense we had 4 years ago. Not by a long shot.


Yup I still remember the 4-12 season where our offensive line was a huge JOKE! That's why everyone was saying draft a franchise QB or Gallery. I, for one wanted Taylor. But I agree our offensive line sucked! Credit Jerry Reese for coming into the system and getting promoted at the right time.

Coughlin, Reese, and Accorsi>>>> Fassel, Sutherland, Accorsi

And because Reese came up in the system he and the scouts got Accorsi to fix the team up quickly. But this cast we had now was built on the fly AFTER we drafted Eli. Snee was the only guy in Eli's draft, but we didn't know he would be this good. It's not like we set the table, and drafted Eli. Eli was supposed to sit for a year or 2, but due to Warner sucking for us, especially later on when he started, we had to put Eli in.

bigbluedefense
10-16-2008, 10:12 AM
Yup I still remember the 4-12 season where our offensive line was a huge JOKE! That's why everyone was saying draft a franchise QB or Gallery. I, for one wanted Taylor. But I agree our offensive line sucked! Credit Jerry Reese for coming into the system and getting promoted at the right time.

Coughlin, Reese, and Accorsi>>>> Fassel, Sutherland, Accorsi

And because Reese came up in the system he and the scouts got Accorsi to fix the team up quickly. But this cast we had now was built on the fly AFTER we drafted Eli. Snee was the only guy in Eli's draft, but we didn't know he would be this good. It's not like we set the table, and drafted Eli. Eli was supposed to sit for a year or 2, but due to Warner sucking for us, especially later on when he started, we had to put Eli in.

Even now, our oline's pass protection ability is overrated. Its a dominant run blocking unit, i think its the best run blocking unit in the entire league, but as far as pass protection goes, its not as good as the media makes it out to be.

Eli's pocket presence and pass protection adjustments make it look better than it really is as far as pass protection goes.

NY+Giants=NYG
10-16-2008, 10:23 AM
Even now, our oline's pass protection ability is overrated. Its a dominant run blocking unit, i think its the best run blocking unit in the entire league, but as far as pass protection goes, its not as good as the media makes it out to be.

Eli's pocket presence and pass protection adjustments make it look better than it really is as far as pass protection goes.

Well David D still gets pushed back into Eli alot of the times. You can see the left side start collapsing into Eli. Eli needs all his 6'4 frame to make some of his throws. Again people don't see those throws unforuntetly. The run blocking is good, but I think the way we draw up the plays is what makes us so effective. Some of our plays are drawn up amazingly well!

But in general we drafted Eli, had to play him early in his career, had a piss poor OC, who got fired, and build this offensive unit on the fly! That's pretty tough to do, and yet thanks to Coughlin and Reese we managed to get the right talent. Give Accorsi some credit too as well.

bigbluedefense
10-16-2008, 10:31 AM
Well David D still gets pushed back into Eli alot of the times. You can see the left side start collapsing into Eli. Eli needs all his 6'4 frame to make some of his throws. Again people don't see those throws unforuntetly. The run blocking is good, but I think the way we draw up the plays is what makes us so effective. Some of our plays are drawn up amazingly well!

But in general we drafted Eli, had to play him early in his career, had a piss poor OC, who got fired, and build this offensive unit on the fly! That's pretty tough to do, and yet thanks to Coughlin and Reese we managed to get the right talent. Give Accorsi some credit too as well.

I actually love Diehl. I think he's a PB caliber LT. The issue our oline has is speed rushers off the edge. Theyre a big strong run blocking unit, but will have trouble sealing the outside against speed at times.

Thats also why CB and Safety blitzes are so effective against our offense. Cleveland really did an excellent job game planning that game. They showed the league the blueprint on beating us.

Both offensively and defensively.

awfullyquiet
10-16-2008, 10:43 AM
You gotta admit, during his playoff run he played with great poise, leadership and confidence. I won't call him top 5, but top 10 absolutely, and at the end of the day, thats what should get from a #1 overall pick.

He was, but from everything i've seen (4 of the 6 games), he's not who he was in the playoffs (which i also saw all of)...

NY+Giants=NYG
10-16-2008, 10:58 AM
I actually love Diehl. I think he's a PB caliber LT. The issue our oline has is speed rushers off the edge. Theyre a big strong run blocking unit, but will have trouble sealing the outside against speed at times.

Thats also why CB and Safety blitzes are so effective against our offense. Cleveland really did an excellent job game planning that game. They showed the league the blueprint on beating us.

Both offensively and defensively.

Well they had 2 weeks to create the gameplan, but I disagree, I think the 2nd half of the Redskins opener, and Bengals game were games that I would guess the Browns looked at alot. Now teams have 3 films to break down to go about beating us.

Speed rushers are a problem but big DEs like Thomas played in the superbowl dominated David D. Watch that game over, and see almost every snap he would bull rush and push DD into Eli. He needs to stop giving up ground, if he feels like he can't stay strong, then roll through his crotch and cut the DE.

CC.SD
10-16-2008, 11:24 AM
In my book, stepping up your game in the playoffs is a POSITIVE.

bigbluedefense
10-16-2008, 11:27 AM
Well they had 2 weeks to create the gameplan, but I disagree, I think the 2nd half of the Redskins opener, and Bengals game were games that I would guess the Browns looked at alot. Now teams have 3 films to break down to go about beating us.

Speed rushers are a problem but big DEs like Thomas played in the superbowl dominated David D. Watch that game over, and see almost every snap he would bull rush and push DD into Eli. He needs to stop giving up ground, if he feels like he can't stay strong, then roll through his crotch and cut the DE.

He almost always does a great job against power rushers. The SB wasn't one of his finer moments, and is actually the first time I saw him dominated by a power rusher.

More importantly, the Browns took principles of those games you mentioned, but also shown a blue print on taking on our offense.

On both sides of the ball, the strategy was great. Cleveland is the first time to put it all together against us.

NY+Giants=NYG
10-16-2008, 11:30 AM
He almost always does a great job against power rushers. The SB wasn't one of his finer moments, and is actually the first time I saw him dominated by a power rusher.

More importantly, the Browns took principles of those games you mentioned, but also shown a blue print on taking on our offense.

On both sides of the ball, the strategy was great. Cleveland is the first time to put it all together against us.

Cleveland has quality defensive coaches. I remember posting an article from the gameplan on how WE beat the pats, and the coaching staff used the way the Browns played against the Pats, and from there we had other tapes as well. So it's not suprise that they could do this with 2 weeks to prepare.

DMWSackMachine
10-16-2008, 05:39 PM
I'll stay out of this one, mainly bc i don't have the patience to refute everything said in here.

What I do have an issue with is the ridiculous notion that Eli had a great supporting cast all his career here with the Giants.

When he came into the league we had one of the worst olines in the league, his first year we didn't have Plax, and our skill position players have been overrated for quite awhile now.

Toomer is no different from an Isaac Bruce, the only reason why he looks as good as he is, is bc of Eli Manning. He makes that entire WR core look better than it really is.

Plax is our only playmaker, before Steve Smith we had no credible 3rd WR that was worth even discussing. Shockey was great, but rarely used in our scheme.

So while I won't say he had a terrible cast, he certainly did not have a great cast either. Not his entire stay here. Our cast has improved since last year, when we had Smith, and now Hixon this year with our depth behind them.

Also our oline has flourished over the years as an elite unit. But make no mistake, it was not that way the entire time. This was a process that took a solid 3 to 4 years to get to. The offense you see now is NOT the same offense we had 4 years ago. Not by a long shot.

Don't know who you're referring to here, but in case its me, let me elaborate a little bit.

In Eli's rookie year, with Kurt Warner starting (who, contrary to what a poster said early, actually played pretty well) the Giants got off to a 5-2 start. After losing the next game to a Craig Krenzel led Bears team (yes, the Craig Krenzel) they inexplicably replaced Warner with Eli. They then proceeded to lose eight straight games, before winning the final game of the season against an equally hapless Cowboy team. Along the way Eli posted a rating of 16.9, and the rarely seen 0.0, something that has happened just 46 times in the history of the NFL, and only 16 times in the past 20 years. His passer rating of 55.4 is among the worst of any QB to have started half his team's games over the same period of time.

He was not just bad, he was historically bad. And on a team that was good enough to win 4 of its first 5, and 5 of its first 7, as well.

Couch, meanwhile, posted a QB rating of 73.2 in his first season, surrounded by an expansion team who was nearly devoid of talent at every position. He easily outstripped Eli in comp%, ypa, TD% and Int%. Eli was historically bad, Couch was actually pretty decent for a rookie QB without a single above-average player around him.

The next year, with a newly signed Plaxico on his team, as well as a suddenly unstoppable Tiki Barber running the ball and a upper echelon TE to throw to, Eli had, almost certainly, one of the top 10 sets of weapons around him. His performance rose to roughly the same level as Tim's, statistically.

My point is this: you can argue (and I would agree) that the Giants supporting cast may not have been great. But it was still MILES AND MILES better than an expansion team. We all know that circumstances have a lot to do with how every player develops. Eli happened into a team on the rise with a management staff that knew what it was doing. Couch was drafted to a team that was completely incompetent and who failed to field a single home-grown Pro Bowler until 2006!

Would Couch have been better in a better circumstance? No one knows for sure. Would Eli have floundered like he did if positions were reversed? Same deal. But if you compare their play, as constituted by both the numbers they put up and observation of their ability, there is a valid case to be made that Couch was as good or better than Eli through their first ~3 seasons worth of games when you adjust for the quality of teammates each played with. Not definitive, certainly, but not ridiculous either.

jth1331
10-16-2008, 06:43 PM
Its funny basing a player on stats.
John Elway, when looking at his stats, you would wonder how he stayed in the league so long. His career QB rating was 79.8 I believe, and his completion % was pretty poor for the most part and he never threw for a ton of touchdowns in a year.
Yet, he was one of the greatest QB's the NFL will ever see. The QB rating now a days is caring less meaning, it seems like every year there are 10 QB's with ratings in the 90's or higher and most QB's 80 or higher.

Gay Ork Wang
10-16-2008, 06:50 PM
Along the way Eli posted a rating of 16.9, and the rarely seen 0.0, something that has happened just 46 times in the history of the NFL, and only 16 times in the past 20 years.

yay and Grossman made it into the record books with an incredible performance of 6/19, 34 yards 0 Tds and 3 INTs!

in the Same game Brad Johnson had an 11/26, 73 yards, 0 TDs and 4 TD performance.

Two 0.0 ratings should be a record not?

awfullyquiet
10-16-2008, 07:11 PM
Its funny basing a player on stats.
John Elway, when looking at his stats, you would wonder how he stayed in the league so long. His career QB rating was 79.8 I believe, and his completion % was pretty poor for the most part and he never threw for a ton of touchdowns in a year.
Yet, he was one of the greatest QB's the NFL will ever see. The QB rating now a days is caring less meaning, it seems like every year there are 10 QB's with ratings in the 90's or higher and most QB's 80 or higher.

see, what you're not grasping is league averages.

in the 70's the league average for passing was different than in the 80's... or 90's... hell... look at brett favre's ratings when he started verses now... is he getting better as he gets older? omg!

DMWSackMachine
10-16-2008, 07:51 PM
Its funny basing a player on stats.
John Elway, when looking at his stats, you would wonder how he stayed in the league so long. His career QB rating was 79.8 I believe, and his completion % was pretty poor for the most part and he never threw for a ton of touchdowns in a year.
Yet, he was one of the greatest QB's the NFL will ever see. The QB rating now a days is caring less meaning, it seems like every year there are 10 QB's with ratings in the 90's or higher and most QB's 80 or higher.

see, what you're not grasping is league averages.

in the 70's the league average for passing was different than in the 80's... or 90's... hell... look at brett favre's ratings when he started verses now... is he getting better as he gets older? omg!

Thanks, AQ.

Passer rating is a beautiful stat because it illustrates just how much the passing game has evolved since its inception. While YPA has held strong through all these years, the rate of TDs per attempt has gone down, while passer's comp% and Interception rates have sky-rocketed.

Its a change in the league. A combination of better schemes, better preparation, rule changes and other factors that add up to more efficient offenses.

If you compare each of these "glaring exceptions" that you bring up to the standard of the day, each would place among the best of their period.

Not only that, but find me another measure that works better. Total yards? Total TDs? Total completions?

Or are we just to walk blindly along and buy into the conventional wisdom of the subject blindly and never challenge what we have heard and never seen. I never watched Unitas play live. I doubt anyone else on this forum has either. I believe he's a great QB, because there is a general acceptance of that fact among every "expert" I've heard comment on the subject. However, if someone was to come to me and provide a rational and objective case as to why he wasn't so great, I would have no ammo to say anything differently.

Stats don't tell the whole story. But they do tell a big part of it. If you want to argue with passer rating, then understand what its based upon, and attack that, while finding something that is a better measure at the same time. I'll be happy to listen.

Iamcanadian
10-16-2008, 10:38 PM
Was Couch as bad as people believe, no. Injuries ruined the latter part of his career so we will never know if he could have taken the next step.
As for Eli, the ceiling is very high. Eli only missed the playoff in his rookie year and unless your getting some help from your QB, that isn't going to happen. Last year he won a Super Bowl, not just because he had a great defense but Brady challenged him in the final few minutes as he usually does by putting NE ahead with little time left on the clock. Eli took them the length of the field and beat NE. That wasn't the defense nor the running game, that was Eli's arm winning a Super Bowl in a last second comeback with everything on the line.
The question isn't whether fans think he is a franchise QB, it is whether the HC's in the NFL think he is the real deal and guess what, they do.
Comparing rookie stats isn't even a serious question. Peyton started out 1-5, did that mean he would never be great, what ridiculousness.
Eli is going to leave Couch's records dead in the water and New York will probably see another Super Bowl or 2 sometime in his future.
I know this, there are about 26 teams in the NFL that would love to take Eli off the Giants' hands if they could. I don't think you could have found 1 or 2 team's in Couch's best season that would have wanted him as their QB.
I wonder how many people here realize that QB ratings were never even mentioned in the NFL until about 10 or 15 yeasrs ago. Nobody ever considered them serious stat until the current generation. it has to be one of the worst stats ever put out and it is strickly for fan consumption.

Jughead10
10-16-2008, 10:47 PM
Don't know who you're referring to here, but in case its me, let me elaborate a little bit.

In Eli's rookie year, with Kurt Warner starting (who, contrary to what a poster said early, actually played pretty well) the Giants got off to a 5-2 start. After losing the next game to a Craig Krenzel led Bears team (yes, the Craig Krenzel) they inexplicably replaced Warner with Eli. They then proceeded to lose eight straight games, before winning the final game of the season against an equally hapless Cowboy team. Along the way Eli posted a rating of 16.9, and the rarely seen 0.0, something that has happened just 46 times in the history of the NFL, and only 16 times in the past 20 years. His passer rating of 55.4 is among the worst of any QB to have started half his team's games over the same period of time.

We were not as good as that 5-2 record indicated and Coughlin knew that. Thus the change. I actually think the change happened after a game in Arizona. He then went on to start against the toughest defenses in the league that year in his next five games. We had no talent anywhere on that offensive line, and Warner held onto the ball way too long. Similar to how he still does yet is surrounded with so much more talent than that Giants team had 4-5 years ago.

Tiki carried that team to a 5-2 record at the time. I remember him having a huge game against Green Bay that season early on. I don't expect you to remember Giants games from 4-5 years ago but Warner's performances (like most QBs) didn't transfer to a stat sheet. He had a lot of David Carr in him that year. Took a ton of sacks that were on him, and never threw the ball downfield. He wouldn't allow himselves to make mistakes and at the same time didn't allow himself to make a ton of plays.

NY+Giants=NYG
10-16-2008, 11:18 PM
All I remember was 39 sacks in 9 games and 12 fumbles!!!!!! Warner was a mess with us, and even remembering reading how our offensive line lost faith in him because he held the ball forever and then got sacked, or fumbled it.

DMWSackMachine
10-17-2008, 01:04 AM
You're talking to someone who had Drew Bledsoe as his QB for a year and a half. I know all about it.

And, yes, I actually do remember those Giants games fairly well. I remember the game against Philly specifically where Warner got knocked out and Eli came in. Doesn't someone have that hit he took as their avy?

The Giants weren't a 5-2 quality team, but they were a hell of a lot better than an 0-9 team, too, which they turned into after Eli took the reins. As much as Warner held the ball, he did limit mistakes and move the team. Something Eli didn't do at all.

Giantsfan1080
10-17-2008, 01:58 AM
You're talking to someone who had Drew Bledsoe as his QB for a year and a half. I know all about it.

And, yes, I actually do remember those Giants games fairly well. I remember the game against Philly specifically where Warner got knocked out and Eli came in. Doesn't someone have that hit he took as their avy?

The Giants weren't a 5-2 quality team, but they were a hell of a lot better than an 0-9 team, too, which they turned into after Eli took the reins. As much as Warner held the ball, he did limit mistakes and move the team. Something Eli didn't do at all.

You have a couple of facts wrong in this statement.

A)Warner didn't get knocked out of that game. It was opening day and we were losing by so much Coughlin put Eli in to see what he could do. The hit your talking about is where McDougle crushed him and yet he got up immediately. That right there showed how tough he was right off the bat.

B) Eli didn't take over the team until Week 10 when we were 5-4. He did lose 6 in a row when he started but did manage to beat the Cowboys in the last game of the season. The 6 games he started off with were against 5 teams that had top 10 defenses that year. The problem was the coaching staff didn't change the playbook one iota to compensate for having a rookie QB starting. They expected him to come in and know the playbook from A to Z. He struggled mightily until he told thd staff before the Pittsburgh game(Week 16) to make things a little easier. They did and presto Eli had a 103.9 rating that game against a very tough defense.

EvilMonkey
10-17-2008, 02:24 AM
All I remember was 39 sacks in 9 games and 12 fumbles!!!!!! Warner was a mess with us, and even remembering reading how our offensive line lost faith in him because he held the ball forever and then got sacked, or fumbled it.

i started a lot of terrible fantasy defenses that year against the giants and it worked out well

NY+Giants=NYG
10-17-2008, 09:17 AM
i started a lot of terrible fantasy defenses that year against the giants and it worked out well

Warner in his career had 38 sacks in a span of 16 games, but 39 sacks in only 9 games!!! Holy cow! Not only that he had a career high 12 fumbles too. I still remember the loss at Arizona and the Bears came sealed Warner's fate. I am so happy he is doing well in Arizona, but honestly, I thought after he left our team he was basically done. I am very glad to see him back to form though. Classy guy. But with us, he started out good, and then as the season went on he was a mess.

DMWSackMachine
10-17-2008, 04:15 PM
You have a couple of facts wrong in this statement.

A)Warner didn't get knocked out of that game. It was opening day and we were losing by so much Coughlin put Eli in to see what he could do. The hit your talking about is where McDougle crushed him and yet he got up immediately. That right there showed how tough he was right off the bat.

B) Eli didn't take over the team until Week 10 when we were 5-4. He did lose 6 in a row when he started but did manage to beat the Cowboys in the last game of the season. The 6 games he started off with were against 5 teams that had top 10 defenses that year. The problem was the coaching staff didn't change the playbook one iota to compensate for having a rookie QB starting. They expected him to come in and know the playbook from A to Z. He struggled mightily until he told thd staff before the Pittsburgh game(Week 16) to make things a little easier. They did and presto Eli had a 103.9 rating that game against a very tough defense.

Sure enough, I was confused because Eli played in 8 games that year. But it is still true that Eli was awful and failed to win a game with a team that had been moderately successful until he started playing.

My only point in bringing this all up is that Couch played better than Eli in each of their respective rookie seasons, even though Eli's cast was FAR superior. After that, as Eli's cast improved dramatically, while Couch's only got marginally better, their performance levels were roughly the same statistically.

My only point is that, while it seems ridiculous at this point to say that Eli and Tim were comparable, there really wasn't that big of a difference. Couch was mediocre but played on a team that was absolutely horrible for most of his stay, while Elil was mediocre but played on a playoff quality team. As such, we as fan-nation, with our idiotic habit of equating the quality of a QB with the quality of his team, automatically assume that Eli must have been much better.

Eli, in his best moments, displayed an ability for the position that Couch never showed, and there were clearly times when he took control of the game (which, correct me if I'm wrong, I never remember Couch doing) and led his team to victory. But taking their complete body of work and comparing them to one another, its not near blasphemy to suggest they were roughly equal in terms of their play, and it certainly isn't a means of discrediting the validity of passer rating as a method of measuring a QB's play.


In many ways, Eli was holding his team back from performing to their potential. I don't think its any coincidence that, once Eli raised his level of play, that the team began to win like they did. Going forward, it means that Eli will likely be 1000x the QB that Couch could claim to be. HOWEVER, it doesn't change the past, in which they were both comparably mediocre.

BBIB
10-17-2008, 04:17 PM
Great thread!

Once and for all proving how overrated passer rating formula truly is.

I used to always say how overrated it was because Daunte Culpepper at once had the 2nd highest passer rating of all time, but this takes the cake.

Tim Couch who had more picks than TDs in his career, has a higher career passer rating than Eli Manning.

That's just gold.

Most overrated formula in sports period.

bantx
10-17-2008, 04:31 PM
Great thread!

Once and for all proving how overrated passer rating formula truly is.

I used to always say how overrated it was because Daunte Culpepper at once had the 2nd highest passer rating of all time, but this takes the cake.

Tim Couch who had more picks than TDs in his career, has a higher career passer rating than Eli Manning.

That's just gold.

Most overrated formula in sports period.

If you took the time to read the thread instead of just jumping in and saying whats already been said and someone who has explained pretty well.

BBIB
10-17-2008, 04:42 PM
If you took the time to read the thread instead of just jumping in and saying whats already been said and someone who has explained pretty well.

Well it bears repeating with as much as passer rating is thrown down people's throat.

They even make it deceptive by many referring to it as QB rating.

bethemooseman7
10-17-2008, 06:46 PM
I doubt Eli is worse than Tim Couch. The touchdowns do set him a little ways apart. Also, those of you who point to his Superbowl ring, you need to remember: Winning is not a skill.

Jughead10
10-17-2008, 06:55 PM
Well it bears repeating with as much as passer rating is thrown down people's throat.

They even make it deceptive by many referring to it as QB rating.

This is true. Like in the Kurt Warner reference earlier, holding on to the ball and taking sacks that turn into fumbles lost don't effect passer rating, but are equally as harmful as a interception which does effect passer rating.

Number 10
10-17-2008, 07:38 PM
This is true. Like in the Kurt Warner reference earlier, holding on to the ball and taking sacks that turn into fumbles lost don't effect passer rating, but are equally as harmful as a interception which does effect passer rating.

And...

When a QB avoids a sack by throwing it away, his rating decreases. But wouldn't you rather that happen than him being taken down for a 6 yard loss?

DMWSackMachine
10-17-2008, 09:10 PM
Sure, it certainly isn't a comprehensive single number that tells you exactly how good a player is. There isn't such a thing in all of sports, no matter how inclusive it might endeavor to be.

But taken for what it is--a measure of how good a player is at throwing the football--its pretty damn good. I'm still waiting for anyone to show me something that would work better.

Number 10
10-17-2008, 09:22 PM
Sure, it certainly isn't a comprehensive single number that tells you exactly how good a player is. There isn't such a thing in all of sports, no matter how inclusive it might endeavor to be.

But taken for what it is--a measure of how good a player is at throwing the football--its pretty damn good. I'm still waiting for anyone to show me something that would work better.

I know you won't like this....but something that would work better is easy. Watch the games. Consider circumstances....opponents, schemes, weather, injuries, situations...

I can keep Eli out of this discussion and talk about other QBs I have done reports on and graded, and I guarantee my rankings do not coincide with QB ratings.

Saints-Tigers
10-17-2008, 10:14 PM
QB Rating doesn't really mean much here, because it's different for both players.

Eli DID get better talent put around him as he matured, but he is clearly a different player than he was as a rookie. Tim Couch was always Tim Couch.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-17-2008, 11:05 PM
In many ways, Eli was holding his team back from performing to their potential. I don't think its any coincidence that, once Eli raised his level of play, that the team began to win like they did. Going forward, it means that Eli will likely be 1000x the QB that Couch could claim to be. HOWEVER, it doesn't change the past, in which they were both comparably mediocre.

Why does the past matter though. The best measure of a player has always been how that player was at his best. Already, Eli's best is considerably higher than the level Couch climbed to, and we're still seeing him improve.

Seeing that Eli was a bit of a slow study is one thing, but comparing him to Couch is at least one season too late.

DMWSackMachine
10-18-2008, 01:02 AM
Why does the past matter though. The best measure of a player has always been how that player was at his best. Already, Eli's best is considerably higher than the level Couch climbed to, and we're still seeing him improve.

Seeing that Eli was a bit of a slow study is one thing, but comparing him to Couch is at least one season too late.

That is sort of the point of this thread. Read the title. Manning through his first X number of games vs. Couch through the same period of time. A few people are trying to say that this is just proof that QB rating is ridiculous. I'm saying that it is a combination of a bunch of things, but mostly its just that Couch was a little better than people give him credit for, and that Eli has really been that mediocre for much of his career.

I disagree that the best measure of a player is how good he is at his best, and maybe you misspoke yourself here. The best measure of a player is how he plays when his team needs him the most. Maybe that's what you were saying. I also agree that Eli has often been at his best when his team was in need of him most. The Eagle game early on in 06 immediately comes to mind, of course. As well as the Bronco game the year before. And no one needs to be reminded of his performance in the Super Bowl, or in the last 53 seconds of the half against Dallas in the playoffs. He has shown a propensity to rise to the occasion when the stakes are the highest--at times. Let's not forget how badly he's choked in a few games as well. The Browns game just this week being a good example for that.

Still, I agree. That would give him a fairly clear edge in the debate against Couch, according to my own evaluation of things. My point, though, is that for the time period in question, as the OP brought up, its a comparison that is valid.

Now, whether it means a damn thing in the big picture is another matter. If that's your beef, I can't say that I disagree with you.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-18-2008, 01:56 AM
My point was more than if you just look at Couch's passer rating, you miss that it came from a lot of mediocre games, while Eli Manning has mostly compiled very poor games versus very good games, with the latter become much more of the norm as of late. Does Couch get treated too harshly in remembrance? Probably. Does a comparison in terms of career path or of the stats that make up the QB rating really hold up all that well? I don't think so.

I tend to think that if Tim Couch hadn't suddenly hadn't so many injury issues he might have eventually had a chance to succeed. He was putting up some pretty good performances even in his last year with the Browns.

Dam8610
10-18-2008, 10:37 AM
Back on topic, Eli Manning is like Joe Namath to me, except Namath is cooler. Poor stats, but does have a ring.

At least Eli has thrown more TDs than INTs in his career. Namath only threw more TDs than INTs in a season ONCE in his career, his rookie year. He is such an overrated player.

Dam8610
10-18-2008, 10:59 AM
Thanks, AQ.

Passer rating is a beautiful stat because it illustrates just how much the passing game has evolved since its inception. While YPA has held strong through all these years, the rate of TDs per attempt has gone down, while passer's comp% and Interception rates have sky-rocketed.

Its a change in the league. A combination of better schemes, better preparation, rule changes and other factors that add up to more efficient offenses.

If you compare each of these "glaring exceptions" that you bring up to the standard of the day, each would place among the best of their period.

Not only that, but find me another measure that works better. Total yards? Total TDs? Total completions?

Or are we just to walk blindly along and buy into the conventional wisdom of the subject blindly and never challenge what we have heard and never seen. I never watched Unitas play live. I doubt anyone else on this forum has either. I believe he's a great QB, because there is a general acceptance of that fact among every "expert" I've heard comment on the subject. However, if someone was to come to me and provide a rational and objective case as to why he wasn't so great, I would have no ammo to say anything differently.

Stats don't tell the whole story. But they do tell a big part of it. If you want to argue with passer rating, then understand what its based upon, and attack that, while finding something that is a better measure at the same time. I'll be happy to listen.

Personally, I think a skewed version of passer rating would work better. I don't know what that skew would be, but I really think the current system places far too much emphasis on completion % and TD%, considering how much teams throw now (even the team on pace to throw the fewest passes is on pace for ~430). Based on sheer volume of throws, TD% is naturally going to go down, the league as a whole used the passing game as more of a deep option to gain chunks of yardage when the formula was created, now it's used more as part of a balance, with short passes being much more common these days. Also, I wouldn't mind a system whose "perfect" QB was 100, not some off number like 158.3. Anyone would say a QB who went for something like:

20-30 ~250 yards ~2 TDs 0 INTs

had a great game, but in QB rating, it's a 114.6, which to me says the completion% and TD% qualifiers are too high for today's game. Give me a formula where that game is a ~90-95 of 100, and it's great for the current game.

DMWSackMachine
10-18-2008, 03:22 PM
My point was more than if you just look at Couch's passer rating, you miss that it came from a lot of mediocre games, while Eli Manning has mostly compiled very poor games versus very good games, with the latter become much more of the norm as of late. Does Couch get treated too harshly in remembrance? Probably. Does a comparison in terms of career path or of the stats that make up the QB rating really hold up all that well? I don't think so.

You're 100% right about that. Eli was much more up and down, with far high peaks, and much lower valleys. But one could make the argument that inconsistency of that sort is worse than consistent mediocrity. It kills a team to never be able to tell what its getting from its QB. You can't sustain any sort of consistency anywhere else on the team when that happens. Given the choice, I tend to think that most coaches would take the guy who is going to give them a solid 70ish rating nearly every game, than a guy who posts a 100+ game followed by a 45.

DMWSackMachine
10-18-2008, 03:30 PM
Personally, I think a skewed version of passer rating would work better. I don't know what that skew would be, but I really think the current system places far too much emphasis on completion % and TD%, considering how much teams throw now (even the team on pace to throw the fewest passes is on pace for ~430). Based on sheer volume of throws, TD% is naturally going to go down, the league as a whole used the passing game as more of a deep option to gain chunks of yardage when the formula was created, now it's used more as part of a balance, with short passes being much more common these days. Also, I wouldn't mind a system whose "perfect" QB was 100, not some off number like 158.3. Anyone would say a QB who went for something like:

20-30 ~250 yards ~2 TDs 0 INTs

had a great game, but in QB rating, it's a 114.6, which to me says the completion% and TD% qualifiers are too high for today's game. Give me a formula where that game is a ~90-95 of 100, and it's great for the current game.


Finally. You make a sound argument, and its based on the methodology behind passer rating rather than a vague displeasure with something you know nothing about.

What I think should happen is for each of the components be set at the league average for that season, based around an average rating of 85 (which was the average last season). So an average score for each component would be 1.275. So you would be forced to adjust each one every season based on the average of the league so that that season's average would yield a 1.275. That would modify the actual formula used to determine each, but would give a number that wouldn't change based upon the comings and goings of trends or the further evolution of the game. Not just that, it wouldn't make completion percentage nearly TWICE as valuable as TD%, but would level the playing field among each of the four components. If anyone wants to know how David freaking Garrard got the 3rd highest score last season, look no further than his puny INT%. That alone skewed him to the top of the league, and I don't think that's appropriate.

Number 10
10-18-2008, 03:31 PM
You're 100% right about that. Eli was much more up and down, with far high peaks, and much lower valleys. But one could make the argument that inconsistency of that sort is worse than consistent mediocrity. It kills a team to never be able to tell what its getting from its QB. You can't sustain any sort of consistency anywhere else on the team when that happens. Given the choice, I tend to think that most coaches would take the guy who is going to give them a solid 70ish rating nearly every game, than a guy who posts a 100+ game followed by a 45.

I'm not sure I catch the drift here. Nobody can dispute that Eli is a roller coaster ride, but that kills a team? I hate to point to last year, again...but his ups and downs proved that he certaintly doesn't kill a team. Playoff appearances each year he has been the starter cannot possibly qualify as "killing" a team.

Paranoidmoonduck
10-18-2008, 03:36 PM
You're 100% right about that. Eli was much more up and down, with far high peaks, and much lower valleys. But one could make the argument that inconsistency of that sort is worse than consistent mediocrity. It kills a team to never be able to tell what its getting from its QB. You can't sustain any sort of consistency anywhere else on the team when that happens. Given the choice, I tend to think that most coaches would take the guy who is going to give them a solid 70ish rating nearly every game, than a guy who posts a 100+ game followed by a 45.

I agree. If Eli plays like he did his in first couple full seasons for the rest of his career, he will be trouble for the Giants. But already I think that is becoming less and less the case. And if we're making a comparison between him and Couch right now, I think Eli is playing better than Couch ever did. That can't escape the discussion, no matter how much their career QB ratings mirror each other. Couch was never a guy who inspired the idea that he was pulling it all together, while Eli has already convince most people that is the case for him.

PoopSandwich
10-18-2008, 03:37 PM
Eli has one bad game this year against a team with their back against the walls on Monday Nigh and people are already saying hes the Old Eli again?

Unbelievable.

Dam8610
10-18-2008, 03:39 PM
Finally. You make a sound argument, and its based on the methodology behind passer rating rather than a vague displeasure with something you know nothing about.

What I think should happen is for each of the components be set at the league average for that season, based around an average rating of 85 (which was the average last season). So an average score for each component would be 1.275. So you would be forced to adjust each one every season based on the average of the league so that that season's average would yield a 1.275. That would modify the actual formula used to determine each, but would give a number that wouldn't change based upon the comings and goings of trends or the further evolution of the game. Not just that, it wouldn't make completion percentage nearly TWICE as valuable as TD%, but would level the playing field among each of the four components. If anyone wants to know how David freaking Garrard got the 3rd highest score last season, look no further than his puny INT%. That alone skewed him to the top of the league, and I don't think that's appropriate.

Actually what you say here makes a lot of sense, and to be honest, I started working on a formula for what I was talking about earlier, but found that under the current formula, INT % is far too important, as you say above, even for my skewed version of the formula. I think I may have a solution to my problem from these thoughts though. I'll post the final result when I've figured it out.

Iamcanadian
10-18-2008, 03:40 PM
Eli has one bad game this year against a team with their back against the walls on Monday Nigh and people are already saying hes the Old Eli again?

Unbelievable.

The haters never go away. They just wait in the shadows looking for an opportunity to prove to themselves that they were right about Eli all along.

DMWSackMachine
10-19-2008, 02:26 AM
I'm not sure I catch the drift here. Nobody can dispute that Eli is a roller coaster ride, but that kills a team? I hate to point to last year, again...but his ups and downs proved that he certaintly doesn't kill a team. Playoff appearances each year he has been the starter cannot possibly qualify as "killing" a team.

Simply making the playoffs isn't any real big deal, as someone who is so anti-Cowboys should know, having pointed it out to the nth degree. More than that, though, the Giants were dead man walking the second year they made it, and only limped in by virtue of the NFC's pathetic collection of upper tier teams. The first year they got bludgeoned and embarrassed on their own home field. In both losses, Eli was a disaster.

Now, I'm not saying that you can't win with an inconsistent QB, just simply that it sucks the life out of a team to have a guy who you just can't count on.

I don't know exactly what we're arguing about here, so I will just say that if you thought I meant "a team can't compete for the playoffs" then I apologize. My intent was to comment on the effect that an up and down signal caller has on the psyche of his team and his coaching staff, in that it sucks the life out everyone around him, and no one can ever take that team seriously, whereas a team that maybe isn't spectacular at the QB position can, if they have a reliable guy who gives them a chance by limiting mistakes, hold out hope of things falling into place for them.

It happened with Sexy Rexy and the Bears, who somehow made it all the way through the playoffs by virtue of an incredibly weak conference (maybe the worst its ever been) and a dominant D/run game/special teams mix. Still, most everyone around knew they were just a sacrificial lamb, going to the slaughter against whomever the AFC produced as a champ that year, which is exactly what happened.

More importantly, you'll remember that most everyone out there just didn't trust that Giants team in the playoffs because they were waiting for Eli to revert back to his old ways. I don't care how great that pass rush was, or how well you ran the ball or anything else. If Eli hadn't played like he did for those 4 straight games--moreso in relation to his limiting mistakes than making plays--than the Giants don't stand a chance to do what they did. His development was the key.

Number 10
10-19-2008, 07:23 AM
Alright we are closer than I thought. I was under the impression that you were sayinbg two things. One, Eli is very inconsistent. Two, teams can't win with inconsistent QBs calling the shots. Teams can win with that kind of QB and it has been proven over and over before, but it certainly makes things tougher, obviously.

However, you may need to go check on the 2006 playoff game again. You called Eli a disaster. He was the furthest thing from a disaster in that game, night and day different from what he put out in the 2005 debacle against Carolina. He playd well in Philly.

He has shown a steady incline in his level of play with each playoff game he has been involved with. That is something that can be depended upon. If you don't believe me, take a few minutes and look at his performances starting with Carolina, ending with New England. Nobody can dispute he is up and down, but to even begin to think he is unreliable is ludicrous. Throughout these Manning discussions people are bringing up names like Couch, Dilfer, and Grossman....now take the pre-draft crap that the Manning family did and takw away the NY on his helmet, bo way do you guys look down on him the way you do. It isn't logical.

Jughead10
10-19-2008, 11:02 AM
However, you may need to go check on the 2006 playoff game again. You called Eli a disaster. He was the furthest thing from a disaster in that game, night and day different from what he put out in the 2005 debacle against Carolina. He playd well in Philly.

This is true. Eli led a nice TD drive towards the end of the game. However our defense was terrible under Tim Lewis and the Eagles marched right down the field and hit a last second FG to win.

Number 10
10-19-2008, 11:11 AM
This is true. Eli led a nice TD drive towards the end of the game. However our defense was terrible under Tim Lewis and the Eagles marched right down the field and hit a last second FG to win.

Not a coincidence.

sweetness34
10-19-2008, 03:37 PM
Eli is a pretty good starting QB in this league, but he's nowhere near elite or even very good in my honest opinion.

He has all the tools, but just like with Grossman, he still doesn't have the mental aspect of the game. You don't make the bonehead plays he does time after time after time and be called an elite QB in this league.

Yes he won a Super Bowl, and he was a big part in why that happened. But that doesn't mean he's a top tier QB. I saw him play in the Opener, against Seattle, and against Cleveland. He should have had about 3 INT's against the Redskins if their DB's could catch and he was god awful against Cleveland.

Eli peaked in the playoffs and now he's come back to Earth.

NY+Giants=NYG
10-19-2008, 07:07 PM
The haters never go away. They just wait in the shadows looking for an opportunity to prove to themselves that they were right about Eli all along.


Eli will forever be haunted by not wanting to go to SD. Ironic because Elway did the same thing, but towards the later part of his career fans the media were on the their knees for him. Granted Elway was a sick, sick, QB. But my point is that their ALOT of ELi haters out there.

Peyton throws 6 ints, and Romo had a huge Int nite, but ah well, but when Eli does poorly the idiots truly come out of the woodwork. It is now to the point that it's amusing to read and hear the hate people have for him. And the best is when people don't talk about the idiot OC who got fired and is in Canada now. Just read the Ralph V. Making of a QB book. It explains alot about eli.

illmatic74
10-19-2008, 07:17 PM
Eli will forever be haunted by not wanting to go to SD. Ironic because Elway did the same thing, but towards the later part of his career fans the media were on the their knees for him. Granted Elway was a sick, sick, QB. But my point is that their ALOT of ELi haters out there.

Peyton throws 6 ints, and Romo had a huge Int nite, but ah well, but when Eli does poorly the idiots truly come out of the woodwork. It is now to the point that it's amusing to read and hear the hate people have for him. And the best is when people don't talk about the idiot OC who got fired and is in Canada now. Just read the Ralph V. Making of a QB book. It explains alot about eli. The reason for all the critiscms is the fact he threw 20 ints last year.

NY+Giants=NYG
10-19-2008, 09:13 PM
The reason for all the critiscms is the fact he threw 20 ints last year.

Yea.. in his first FULL year with Gilbride and a new QB coach in Palmer.

I swear I don't think people realize that Coughlin, Gilbride, and Spags weren't originally there when Coughlin was hired. Let's put it this way... We got to the playoffs twice with dumb and dumber, and yet we STILL fired both fools. John Hufangel got fired still with games to play in the season, and Lewis got axed after the season.

Like I said for the haters I suggest they read the chapter on Hufangel in Ralph V's book. That explains it all.