Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Franchise QB
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 22, 23, 24 ... 28, 29, 30  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
OakRaiders3828


Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 10062
Location: Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
Team wins are much more rewarding, but it seems like most of you don't believe in that. It seems like most would rather be built like the Saints rather than the Texans, I'm the opposite.


I'd say that's because the Saints have a ring and the Texans don't but what do i know anyway.


I forgot that every team that has ever won a superbowl is built that way. It's called personal preference, and I guess this roster is the exact same as the Saints roster that won a super bowl. Sorry, I guess I should have said the Giants and not the Texans, is that better for you?


Not every team. Most of the last decade winners were. Sorry, i like to pay attention to trends.


True, I forgot that all of the Super Bowl winners had the last ranked defense and run game, my bad. Quick, go tell every head coach that the correct way to build a team, is to build a terrible defense and run game and just air it out all day, which is what you seem to be implying.

I guess the Steelers, Patriots, Giants and Colts all had terrible defenses, you can point to the Colts, but that defense was 100% different in the post season.


No, i was implying they had an elite QB and we don't.


That's fine, although I don't believe that you do need an elite QB, I was never against going and trying to find one.
_________________
O A K L A N D R A I D E R S
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 14166
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OakRaiders3828 wrote:
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2009-01-27-important-stat_N.htm

Just throwing this out there, it was a 2009 article about what the most vital stat to being victorious in the Super Bowl, and it was determined that it was a combination of Sacks, Total Defense, Time of Possession, Win Total, Rushing yards and Turnover differential......


Just something to think about


Seriously?

Quote:
LUCK

Quality: 42 of the 42 Super Bowl champions led the league in this stat.


A full article that comes to the conclusion that luck is the one, deciding factor. Are we supposed to rely on luck then? As a Raider fan i'd rather not.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OakRaiders3828


Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 10062
Location: Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey I'm pulling out all the stops, heart of a lion Laughing
_________________
O A K L A N D R A I D E R S
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OakRaiders3828


Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 10062
Location: Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

you seem to be going by the premise that all you need is an elite QB, when that's clearly not the case. Supporting cast is just as important.

I don't think Palmer needs elite talent all over the field, on both sides of the ball in order to win, you do, and honestly we will probably never find out.
_________________
O A K L A N D R A I D E R S


Last edited by OakRaiders3828 on Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:25 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 14166
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OakRaiders3828 wrote:
you seem to be going by the premise that all you need is an elite QB, when that's clearly not the case. Supporting cast is just as important, just ask Brady.


I'm not. It's just the common denominator. It's not enough in itself but it seems like a prerequisite in today's NFL.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OakRaiders3828


Joined: 18 Aug 2007
Posts: 10062
Location: Pennsylvania
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
you seem to be going by the premise that all you need is an elite QB, when that's clearly not the case. Supporting cast is just as important, just ask Brady.


I'm not. It's just the common denominator. It's not enough in itself but it seems like a prerequisite in today's NFL.


Do you think there is an elite QB in this draft?
_________________
O A K L A N D R A I D E R S
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 14166
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 10:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OakRaiders3828 wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
you seem to be going by the premise that all you need is an elite QB, when that's clearly not the case. Supporting cast is just as important, just ask Brady.


I'm not. It's just the common denominator. It's not enough in itself but it seems like a prerequisite in today's NFL.


Do you think there is an elite QB in this draft?


If there's one, it's Smith but i'm not quite sure about that. Either way, we won't be in position to draft him.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5729
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Sat Nov 17, 2012 11:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
oakdb36 wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:
you seem to be going by the premise that all you need is an elite QB, when that's clearly not the case. Supporting cast is just as important, just ask Brady.


I'm not. It's just the common denominator. It's not enough in itself but it seems like a prerequisite in today's NFL.


Do you think there is an elite QB in this draft?


If there's one, it's Smith but i'm not quite sure about that. Either way, we won't be in position to draft him.


If you're not quite sure then he's not elite as elite talent is self-evident. Genome will need to be in the right system. Luck is a once in a decade player that would excel in any of the currently deployed systems.
_________________
Raiders 2014 Draft (check out my draft review tell me what you think)
Mancrush 2014: DE Clowney, WR Watkins, OT Robinson, LB Shazier, FS Brooks, TE ASJ, OG Jackson, WR Janis, OT Lucas, OT Tiny
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Burgesskills


Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 1114
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dudes, Iím still waiting for a decent argument to why Carson Palmer is easily top ten or playing so great this year.

This is what Iíve heard so far; He is not turning the ball over as much. He has 12 turnovers through 9 games. Iíve hear he has kept us is games, while the defense and running game have been lacking. Iíve heard he has a lot of passing yards. Any QB playing from behind would. My personal favorite from TaggÖ.he is easily top ten, arguably top 7Öbecause I see it, by watching and looking at situations.

Realistically, I would rank Palmer somewhere between 10-15, in no particular order. Some QBís are doing things better than others. If I was going to rank them, it would like this:
1. Manning
2. Rogers
3. Brady
4. Brees
5. Rothlisberger
6. Ryan
7. Freeman
8. Dalton
9. Schaub
10. Luck
11. Smith
12. Palmer
13. Stafford
14. Wilson
15. RG3

I havenít waffled on Palmer and I never said itís his fault weíre losing games. I said other QBís with worse teams have won games. Look at Andrew Luck, the Colts were dreadful last season, they draft him and didnít improve much and they are winning games. Their running game sucks and their defense is old, Freeney and Mathis arenít as dominated and they have secondary, but Luck still has them winning games.
Palmer has had his moments this year and has surprised me, at times. All the praise he gets for keeping us in games is laughableÖ.you guys keep pointing to defenses being awful, maybe the defenses Palmer is playing slips during those games. You guys are so sure, itís Palmer. Tagg especially making comments about him easily being top ten is crap.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 14166
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 12:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OakRaiders3828 wrote:

I don't think Palmer needs elite talent all over the field, on both sides of the ball in order to win, you do, and honestly we will probably never find out.


I think Palmer is good enough to get a team to the playoffs, assuming we're talking about a better team than our current one. So if that's winning, you can win with him.
I hope the only goal of this rebuilding we're going thru is winning the Super Bowl and that's not something i see Carson Palmer being a part of.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NickButera


Moderator
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Posts: 6395
Location: Nevada
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Burgesskills wrote:
Dudes, Iím still waiting for a decent argument to why Carson Palmer is easily top ten or playing so great this year.


I don't know about top 10, but I would think he's borderline. Right near where you put him, 9-13 range. You're so adamant he's "not top 10", but you have him 12th. That's so close I don't see the big disagreement here. How can you be so extreme to say "ranking him top 10 is crap" and then rank him 12? The chasm of difference you portray in these 2 views of Palmer appears to be more like a tiny creek. I mean I tend to agree with you, but I don't think it's complete crap if someone wants to rank him in the lower top 10, I just think it's a harder argument.

If Palmer would have thrown for 3 more TD's, 1 less INT, and won 1 more game he'd be statistically, unquestionably a top 10 QB. We'd be sitting at 4-5 and none of us would be arguing about how crappy Palmer is and how he isn't the answer. The differences between you two is so very minute, yet this argument is epic lol.

Regardless, I think this whole idea is confusing for me. The main point is that Palmer isn't losing us games (as a pattern). And by many means he's actually kept us in a few games we had no right to be in. Fact is he is probably the last thing we need to look at changing right now. We have so many holes that go so deep, why are we arguing about the QB when our pass rush is pathetic, our running game non existent, our O-line play is MIA, etc etc. I'm not using these as an excuse for Palmer's play.... I'm using these as bigger reasons as to why we aren't winning games than Palmer's play. Is he 7th? Is he 12? Does it matter? That's still pretty decent. Although I do think there are a few that overrate him a bit, but not to the point of massive homerism.

In reality... I thought the big argument like this, this year, was going to be about McFadden. He's the one that should be putting up elite numbers but instead is playing putrid and seems to have gotten a pass. He's also getting paid for a top 5-10 RB.
_________________
Bah-Weep-Granah-Weep-Nini-Bong

My short-term memory is not as sharp as it used to be.
Also, my short-term memory is not as sharp as it used to be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Burgesskills


Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 1114
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nick, I have said all along Palmer has been decent. My argument isn't that. Mine is those are saying he is easily, easily top ten. I said how?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11910
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

oakdb36 wrote:
OakRaiders3828 wrote:

I don't think Palmer needs elite talent all over the field, on both sides of the ball in order to win, you do, and honestly we will probably never find out.


I think Palmer is good enough to get a team to the playoffs, assuming we're talking about a better team than our current one. So if that's winning, you can win with him.
I hope the only goal of this rebuilding we're going thru is winning the Super Bowl and that's not something i see Carson Palmer being a part of.


I agree but I think it;s only due to age restrictions and not talent restrictions. I see Carson giving us 2-3 more years but I'm OK w/ that. I want to build up the trenches on both side and especially on the offensive side prior to getting our next QB. We don't need to get some young guy in there now and get killed behind the product we're putting in to block for him and ruin his confidence. A vet like Carson is the best option considering the situation..... plus this QB class is weak. I don't think any of them will be anything special.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11910
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NickButera wrote:
Burgesskills wrote:
Dudes, Iím still waiting for a decent argument to why Carson Palmer is easily top ten or playing so great this year.


I don't know about top 10, but I would think he's borderline. Right near where you put him, 9-13 range. You're so adamant he's "not top 10", but you have him 12th. That's so close I don't see the big disagreement here. How can you be so extreme to say "ranking him top 10 is crap" and then rank him 12? The chasm of difference you portray in these 2 views of Palmer appears to be more like a tiny creek. I mean I tend to agree with you, but I don't think it's complete crap if someone wants to rank him in the lower top 10, I just think it's a harder argument.

If Palmer would have thrown for 3 more TD's, 1 less INT, and won 1 more game he'd be statistically, unquestionably a top 10 QB. We'd be sitting at 4-5 and none of us would be arguing about how crappy Palmer is and how he isn't the answer. The differences between you two is so very minute, yet this argument is epic lol.

Regardless, I think this whole idea is confusing for me. The main point is that Palmer isn't losing us games (as a pattern). And by many means he's actually kept us in a few games we had no right to be in. Fact is he is probably the last thing we need to look at changing right now. We have so many holes that go so deep, why are we arguing about the QB when our pass rush is pathetic, our running game non existent, our O-line play is MIA, etc etc. I'm not using these as an excuse for Palmer's play.... I'm using these as bigger reasons as to why we aren't winning games than Palmer's play. Is he 7th? Is he 12? Does it matter? That's still pretty decent. Although I do think there are a few that overrate him a bit, but not to the point of massive homerism.

In reality... I thought the big argument like this, this year, was going to be about McFadden. He's the one that should be putting up elite numbers but instead is playing putrid and seems to have gotten a pass. He's also getting paid for a top 5-10 RB.


I've taken the high road w/ this dude. I think he just wants to argue for the sake of arguing. It's like trying to tear down a brick wall w/ a butter knife. Regardless, what you touched on about him being 12th on his list is really a good point. An even better point about McFadden. It goes back to what I was saying in another thread, people don't care as long as it's their guy. The same concept holds true here also. People here probably LOVED McFadden out of college and are afraid to admit they were wrong about him so they assume blame elsewhere and pick someone else as the root of the problem.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Burgesskills


Joined: 11 Apr 2006
Posts: 1114
PostPosted: Sun Nov 18, 2012 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Taken the high road? No it's because your argument has been proved faulty.

He is not easily top ten.

Fitzpatrick and Flacco both have higher ratings, better completion % and you say he is waaay better than them.

Don't lump me in the group of McFadden, I was never high on him and have grown tired of him and his constant injury problems. We pay him too much and build the offense around him, just to be let down year after year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 22, 23, 24 ... 28, 29, 30  Next
Page 23 of 30

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group