PDA

View Full Version : Best Rookie QB ever, Big Ben or Bradford?



SteelCrazy
12-31-2010, 08:15 PM
http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/40841653/ns/sports-nfl/

No matter who wins the NFC West on Sunday night, Sam Bradford already has won. He has enjoyed one of the greatest rookie seasons by a quarterback in NFL history, establishing himself as a franchise cornerstone for the up-and-coming Rams.

Just how good has Bradford been? So good that he might be the second-best rookie quarterback of the past 25 years.

Elite company
Bradford's raw numbers — 3,357 yards and counting, 18 touchdowns, 14 interceptions — are good enough to stand next to an established veteran’s. But how do they stack up against other great rookie seasons?

This table compares Bradford's raw stats to those of some of the decade's best rookies: Ben Roethlisberger, Vince Young, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and Mark Sanchez. For argument's sake, we threw in the best rookie quarterback ever: Dan Marino in 1983.

Player Year Yards TDs INTs Rating Wins
Dan Marino 1983 2,210 20 6 96.0 7
Ben Roethlisberger 2004 2,621 17 11 98.1 13
Vince Young 2006 2,199 12 13 66.7 8
Matt Ryan 2008 3,440 16 11 87.7 11
Joe Flacco 2008 2,971 14 12 80.3 11
Mark Sanchez 2009 2,444 12 20 63.0 8
Sam Bradford 2010 3,357 18 14 78.0 7

A look at the table shows that someone doesn’t belong. Sanchez is developing into a solid quarterback, but he wasn't in the same class as the others as a rookie. Young is also a notch below the others, though his running ability made up a little of the difference in value. Bradford is clearly superior to both Sanchez and Young as rookies.

Roethlisberger’s quarterback rating was 20 points higher than Bradford’s, but by Sunday night Bradford will have thrown for about 1,000 more yards. Roethlisberger and Flacco each got the opportunity to lead run-heavy offenses for defense-minded teams; the quality supporting casts and simplified game plans improved their percentage statistics and victory totals. The quarterback most similar to Bradford is Matt Ryan, who climbed into the saddle of a rebuilding team and led them to the playoffs in his rookie season of 2008. Ryan’s raw numbers are comparable to Bradford’s, and his percentages are better.

But Marino is in a class by himself. Six interceptions as a rookie? In 1983, when even great quarterbacks threw about 20 picks a season? Sheesh. Let’s take him out of the field.

Secondary stats
Let’s go beyond yards, touchdowns and wins. The second table shows three other important statistics for evaluating quarterbacks. Two are self explanatory. Sack percentage is the number of times a quarterback is sacked per 100 attempts. You may think of sacks as the offensive line’s fault, but a confused rookie quarterback can really kill an offense by getting dumped too often. Fumbles include fumbles lost and recovered, so the quarterback doesn’t get any breaks if a left tackle flops on the ball for him.

DYAR is a Football Outsiders statistic: Defense-Adjusted Yards Above Replacement. We take every pass a quarterback throws, account for every variable (down and distance, length of pass, quality of defense, and so on), then calculate how many yards would a "replacement" quarterback throw for if given the same attempts in the same situations. By replacement we mean a guy such as Derek Anderson: your basic journeyman spot starter, the kind most teams can acquire if they need one.

The intangibles
Player Sack % Fumbles DYAR
Ben Roethlisberger 9.2 2 930
Vince Young 6.5 12 99
Matt Ryan 3.8 6 1167
Joe Flacco 7.0 11 384
Mark Sanchez 6.7 10 -266
Sam Bradford 5.3 6 96

These intangibles again show that Sanchez and Young are a notch below the others. The sack numbers also close a little of the gap between Bradford, Roethlisberger and Flacco: In their don’t-lose-the-game offenses, Roethlisberger and Flacco took a lot of sacks. Bradford also has done a relatively good job holding onto the ball, though Roethlisberger was outstanding in this area. Once again, Ryan laps the field for recent rookies: his sack rates were low, he didn’t fumble often, and according to advanced Football Outsiders analysis, he was over 1,000 yards better than the typical journeyman.

According to DYAR, Bradford is nowhere near Roethlisberger or Ryan; in fact, he’s much closer to Young, who added extra value as a scrambler. If high-tech analysis says Bradford isn’t that special, who am I to disagree?

Well, there are a few things DYAR cannot account for, including one biggie: quality of receivers.

Skimpy targets
There’s no good way of statistically separating a quarterback’s performance from the efforts of his receivers. If Hines Ward makes a leaping, one-handed, 40-yard catch on a less-than-perfect throw by Roethlisberger, there’s no reliable way of penalizing the quarterback for the bad throw or rewarding the receiver for the great catch. If Danny Amendola drops the exact same pass, then Roethlisberger gets 40 yards and Bradford doesn’t, and all of the spreadsheets in the world can’t adjust for the difference.

To illustrate how amazingly weak are the Rams’ receivers, we compared them to the receiving corps of the other rookie quarterbacks. Receivers and tight ends were split into Great Targets and Good Targets. A Great Target had two 1,000-yard seasons before the rookie arrived, or was a tight end with two 60-catch seasons under his belt. A Good Target had either one 1,000-yard season, two 50-catch seasons or was a tight end with two 40-catch seasons. In addition, we put a strict five-year limit on the good-great seasons, so 38-year old receivers who had their best seasons when the quarterback was in junior high didn’t qualify. And to be clear, the good-great seasons had to occur before the rookie arrived.

Good or great
Player Great Target Good Target
Ben Roethlisberger 2 0
Vince Young 0 2
Matt Ryan 0 1
Joe Flacco 1 1
Mark Sanchez 0 2
Sam Bradford 0 0

As this table shows, every quarterback on our list — except Bradford — had at least one Good Target (or better). Roethlisberger had Ward and Plaxico Burress, plus Antwaan Randle-El, who nearly qualified. Vince Young had Earl Bennett and David Givens; Bennett is no Jerry Rice (and Givens quickly got hurt), but he would easily be the top receiver for the 2010 Rams. Ryan had Roddy White, who grew from Good to Great Target on his watch. Flacco had Derrick Mason and Todd Heap. Sanchez had Jerricho Cotchery and Braylon Edwards.

How bad are the Rams receivers? Michael Clayton was Flacco’s third-best receiver in 2008. The Ravens cut him at the end of camp this season, the Rams signed him, and Clayton immediately became Bradford’s No. 1 receiver before getting hurt. We could have made a third category called Decent Targets and filled it with 500-yard receivers and highly-drafted rookies. That list would have included Randle-El, Michael Jenkins, Dustin Keller, Bo Scaife, Mark Duper and others, but the only Rams receivers to make the cut would be Clayton and possibly Amendola (depending on how the list was defined).

There is no good way to adjust for the weakness of the Rams' receiving corps, but we can make some quick-and-dirty guesses. Hines Ward’s DYAR in 2004 was 325, meaning that he gained 325 yards that a journeyman receiver wouldn’t gain in the same situation. Replace Ward with Brandon Gibson, and Roethlisberger’s DYAR dips to 605. Replace Roddy White with Amendola in 2008, and Ryan’s DYAR falls to 768. Take away Derrick Mason, and Flacco’s DYAR falls to 134. Take away Bradford’s best receiver and nothing happens, because Bradford’s best receivers grade out as league-minimum starters.

Among the best
We could keep going with this line of reasoning, subtracting away Burress and others, but DYAR isn’t designed for that kind of analysis, and if after too much number-fiddling the argument becomes unconvincing. Here’s what is clear:

Ryan had the best rookie season of any quarterback in the last decade, probably the best since Marino.

Sam Bradford has a reasonable case for second best.

Bradford is much better, as a rookie, than Sanchez or Young. Factor in sack totals, raw numbers, advanced analysis and strength of receivers, and he appears to be better than Flacco. That leaves him behind Roethlisberger. Big Ben had the wins and the percentages, but he stepped into a dream situation as a rookie. Bradford has the raw totals, the sack rates and the sympathy of anyone who tried to spell the names of his tight ends, let alone throw to them.

Even if Bradford ranks behind Roethlisberger, he is in great company. Ryan, Big Ben, and Flacco are all headed for the playoffs. Along with Sanchez, Ryan and Flacco (and Josh Freeman) form the advance guard of the next generation of great quarterbacks. Bradford is right there with them, no matter what happens against the Seahawks on Sunday night.

tiproast
12-31-2010, 08:32 PM
One thing the article doesn't go into is strength of schedule.

Bradford has played a very weak schedule this year. Not his fault, but it's still a factor that should be considered.

My guess is that Ben played a harder schedule his rookie year. I don't recall Big Ben's rookie campaign all that well, but seem to recall he was a factor is breaking some team's all-time NFL win streak. :D

papillon
12-31-2010, 09:25 PM
One thing the article doesn't go into is strength of schedule.

Bradford has played a very weak schedule this year. Not his fault, but it's still a factor that should be considered.

My guess is that Ben played a harder schedule his rookie year. I don't recall Big Ben's rookie campaign all that well, but seem to recall he was a factor is breaking some team's all-time NFL win streak. :D

Yea, I vaguely remember something about the win streak, then getting thumped in the playoffs by that same team. I can't remember which team it was, Raiders, no, no, it wasn't the Raiders, Ravens, no, no it wasn't the Ravens, man I can't remember.

Tip, can you help me out here? :moon :Beer

Pappy

SteelCrazy
12-31-2010, 10:20 PM
He won his 1st 13 games as a starter....

jj28west
12-31-2010, 11:06 PM
I have not seen much of Bradford but I thought he would get killed and even suffer Tim Couch syndrome. Looks like he is the real deal.

RuthlessBurgher
01-01-2011, 03:07 PM
If the Rams win tomorrow, they will be 8-8, which is an impressive 7 game improvement over the 1-15 record which allowed the Rams to be in position to take Bradford first overall in the first place.

In Ben's rookie year the Steelers went 15-1 (including, as was already mentioned earlier in this thread, a 13-0 record in the regular season when Ben started), which was an impressive 9 game improvement over the 6-10 record which allowed the Steelers to be in position to take Roethlisberger eleventh overall in the first place.

Plus, Ben was 20 points better in passer rating as a rookie than Bradford. Nothing against Bradford, though. I think the kid could be quite good.

Mister Pittsburgh
01-01-2011, 04:08 PM
Ben beat undefeated teams in Philthy and the Cheatriots. Beat them bad too.

RuthlessBurgher
01-01-2011, 04:36 PM
Ben beat undefeated teams in Philthy and the Cheatriots. Beat them bad too.

Yup...beat Brady and the undefeated Cheetahs 34-20 on Halloween 2004 (was 18-24 for 196 yards, 2 TD's and 0 INT's) and then beat the undefeated Eagles 27-3 the following week (was 11-18 for 183 yards, 2 TD's and 1 INT). Those were his 5th and 6th starts as a rookie, and cemented that we indeed had something special here.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
01-01-2011, 05:16 PM
Ben beat undefeated teams in Philthy and the Cheatriots. Beat them bad too.

Yup...beat Brady and the undefeated Cheetahs 34-20 on Halloween 2004 (was 18-24 for 196 yards, 2 TD's and 0 INT's) and then beat the undefeated Eagles 27-3 the following week (was 11-18 for 183 yards, 2 TD's and 1 INT). Those were his 5th and 6th starts as a rookie, and cemented that we indeed had something special here.

And cemented the otherwise glorious relationship between McNabb and T.O. :lol:

SteelCrazy
01-01-2011, 05:37 PM
Did I mention he was 13-0 as a rookie?

sentinel33
01-02-2011, 01:18 AM
not to mention the fact that he entered the draft as a Junior. i shake my head every time he gets passed over in a qb conversation. the guy has been ridiculous from the start. unlike any qb before or since. they cant take wins from you and they cant take championships from you. thats what defines a champion. not records. or personal bests. the dude is the youngest qb to win a superbowl and 2nd youngest to win 2. he has the 2nd best win percentage amongst active qb's with Marsha in his way. 2 superbowls and going for a 3rd at the ripe age of 28. just sick.

yeah. ben is the best rookie qb ever. dude made his first start in the tail wind of a hurricane for cryin out loud.

nuff said. i know im preachin to the choir in this forum but this isnt even close in my mind.

fezziwig
01-02-2011, 11:23 AM
Just think how well Ben would have done ihis rookie seasonif the patriots didn't cheat to win ?

Chachi
01-02-2011, 11:26 AM
Some more preaching......only 1 year of experience in high school yet, as a redshirt, started at Miami. Out in 3 years (4 with redshirt). And, one thing I never hear mentioned anywhere.....he was a "shotgun" QB. Rarely, if ever, did he line up under center at Miami. Go ask any NFL coach about college "shotgun QBs" being able to make it in the NFL and you are not going to like what they say. Besides starting in a lesser league (MAC) than Rivers and Manning, this attribute was the main reason he was considered the worst of the three.

So, you have a "shotgun" QB who had only 4 years, total, of starting at the position in his life, playing as a rookie and going undefeated?

Movie scripts aren't that unbelievable.

sentinel33
01-02-2011, 06:56 PM
right on chach

RuthlessBurgher
01-02-2011, 07:38 PM
right on chach

Sentinel Loves Chachi. :wink:

aggiebones
01-02-2011, 08:41 PM
Apples and oranges. Two different teams surrounding them. Its pretty incredible for QBs like Bradford and Ryan having to bring up bad teams and get them into the playoffs. Rookies like Sanchez and Ben hard to do less to get farther.

Crash
01-02-2011, 09:34 PM
Um, Ben was drafted by a 6-10 team, and a team that missed the playoffs 4 of the previous 6 years prior to his arrival.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 09:44 PM
Um, Ben was drafted by a 6-10 team, and a team that missed the playoffs 4 of the previous 6 years prior to his arrival.

and we both know that 6-10 team was not as bad as you want to make it seem.

I know you like to fluff Ben but let's not change or exaggerate reality to do so.

SteelAbility
01-02-2011, 09:49 PM
Ben was 14-0 as a rookie and led his team to the playoffs as the #1 seed. Is this even a debate?

Crash
01-02-2011, 09:52 PM
Um, Ben was drafted by a 6-10 team, and a team that missed the playoffs 4 of the previous 6 years prior to his arrival.

and we both know that 6-10 team was not as bad as you want to make it seem.

I know you like to fluff Ben but let's not change or exaggerate reality to do so.

Yeah they were awesome. Two 10 loss seasons in the previous five prior to Ben as well.

Dominant stuff.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 09:54 PM
Um, Ben was drafted by a 6-10 team, and a team that missed the playoffs 4 of the previous 6 years prior to his arrival.

and we both know that 6-10 team was not as bad as you want to make it seem.

I know you like to fluff Ben but let's not change or exaggerate reality to do so.

Yeah they were awesome. Two 10 loss seasons in the previous five prior to Ben as well.

Dominant stuff.
I don't recall anyone saying anything about awesome or dominant but what is your point?

Please clarify before I show facts to prove you wrong yet again.

SteelAbility
01-02-2011, 10:18 PM
Um, Ben was drafted by a 6-10 team, and a team that missed the playoffs 4 of the previous 6 years prior to his arrival.

and we both know that 6-10 team was not as bad as you want to make it seem.

I know you like to fluff Ben but let's not change or exaggerate reality to do so.

In the 03 season, the Steelers produced 300 points in 16 games (18.75 ppg). In the '04 season, in Ben's starts, the Steelers produced 336 points in 14 games (24 ppg). That 5.25 ppg REALLY makes that much difference. Remember the extra almost-TD per game also speaks of keeping the ball out the hands of the opposing O, giving the D that much more rest.

In '03 Tommy Maddox had 6.6 Y/A, 18TD/17INT, and 5 FUM
In '04 Ben had 8.9 Y/A (a ridiculous 2.3 better), 17TD/11INT, and 2 FUM

Since we finished 15-1 (Maddox lost the one game) and were 6-10 the previous season, it's not too much of a stretch to say that Ben made at least a 7-win difference from '03 to '04 (actual win difference was 9).

Irongut
01-02-2011, 10:20 PM
Um, Ben was drafted by a 6-10 team, and a team that missed the playoffs 4 of the previous 6 years prior to his arrival.

and we both know that 6-10 team was not as bad as you want to make it seem.

I know you like to fluff Ben but let's not change or exaggerate reality to do so.

In the 03 season, the Steelers produced 300 points in 16 games (18.75 ppg). In the '04 season, in Ben's starts, the Steelers produced 336 points in 14 games (24 ppg). That 5.25 ppg REALLY makes that much difference. Remember the extra almost-TD per game also speaks of keeping the ball out the hands of the opposing O, giving the D that much more rest.

In '03 Tommy Maddox had 6.6 Y/A, 18TD/17INT, and 5 FUM
In '04 Ben had 8.9 Y/A (a ridiculous 2.3 better), 17TD/11INT, and 2 FUM

Since we finished 15-1 (Maddox lost the one game) and were 6-10 the previous season, it's not too much of a stretch to say that Ben made at least a 7-win difference from '03 to '04 (actual win difference was 9).
as I said, we weren't as bad as our 6-10 record made it seem. All we needed was a competent QB.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 10:38 PM
I instantly thought Ben, given the record but after reviewing I didn't realize just how good Bradford has been and how much they relied on him.

Going into today, he had 554 pass attempts. Ben had 295.

Bradford's completion percentage 60.5. Ben was 66.4

Passing td's for Bradford 18, Ben 17. Int's Bradford 14, Ben 11.

Passing yards for Bradford 3,357 to Ben's 2,621.

I don't think there is any question who had the better team around them.

I'd still go with Ben but Bradford has essentially carried that team, possibly to the playoffs.

Crash
01-02-2011, 10:45 PM
So Bradford has one more TD despite over 250 more attempts, and you are PRAISING him as being "relied upon"?

If anything he hasn't produced enough given the chances he has been given.

SteelAbility
01-02-2011, 10:46 PM
Um, Ben was drafted by a 6-10 team, and a team that missed the playoffs 4 of the previous 6 years prior to his arrival.

and we both know that 6-10 team was not as bad as you want to make it seem.

I know you like to fluff Ben but let's not change or exaggerate reality to do so.

In the 03 season, the Steelers produced 300 points in 16 games (18.75 ppg). In the '04 season, in Ben's starts, the Steelers produced 336 points in 14 games (24 ppg). That 5.25 ppg REALLY makes that much difference. Remember the extra almost-TD per game also speaks of keeping the ball out the hands of the opposing O, giving the D that much more rest.

In '03 Tommy Maddox had 6.6 Y/A, 18TD/17INT, and 5 FUM
In '04 Ben had 8.9 Y/A (a ridiculous 2.3 better), 17TD/11INT, and 2 FUM

Since we finished 15-1 (Maddox lost the one game) and were 6-10 the previous season, it's not too much of a stretch to say that Ben made at least a 7-win difference from '03 to '04 (actual win difference was 9).
as I said, we weren't as bad as our 6-10 record made it seem. All we needed was a competent QB.

We may not have been as bad as 6-10, but to get from there to 15-1 required more than just a competent QB. That's the point. Ben got us to FREAKING 15 and 1 and a #1 seed, not just an improved season or a 50/50 chance of squeaking into the playoffs by virtue of being in a suck division.

By the way, Ben's 24 PPG, projected into a 16-game season would be 384 points for the season. In the '09 season, that would be the #6 or #7 scoring offense. The 300 points that Maddox produced in '03 would be #22.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 10:52 PM
So Bradford has one more TD despite over 250 more attempts, and you are PRAISING him as being "relied upon"?

If anything he hasn't produced enough given the chances he has been given.
He didn't have Hines.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 10:54 PM
We may not have been as bad as 6-10, but to get from there to 15-1 required more than just a competent QB. That's the point. Ben got us to FREAKING 15 and 1 and a #1 seed, not just an improved season or a 50/50 chance of squeaking into the playoffs by virtue of being in a suck division.

By the way, Ben's 24 PPG, projected into a 16-game season would be 384 points for the season. In the '09 season, that would be the #6 or #7 scoring offense. The 300 points that Maddox produced in '03 would be #22.
What's your point? Ben is better than Maddox? I'll agree with that.

Unlike some, I don't feel the need to bash others to praise yet another. Bradford has done an excellent job this year, given the team around him.

Crash
01-02-2011, 10:56 PM
So Bradford has one more TD despite over 250 more attempts, and you are PRAISING him as being "relied upon"?

If anything he hasn't produced enough given the chances he has been given.
He didn't have Hines.

Ben didn't have Stephen Jackson either who LEADS the league in touches on Bradford's team.

SteelAbility
01-02-2011, 11:02 PM
We may not have been as bad as 6-10, but to get from there to 15-1 required more than just a competent QB. That's the point. Ben got us to FREAKING 15 and 1 and a #1 seed, not just an improved season or a 50/50 chance of squeaking into the playoffs by virtue of being in a suck division.

By the way, Ben's 24 PPG, projected into a 16-game season would be 384 points for the season. In the '09 season, that would be the #6 or #7 scoring offense. The 300 points that Maddox produced in '03 would be #22.
What's your point? Ben is better than Maddox? I'll agree with that.

Unlike some, I don't feel the need to bash others to praise yet another. Bradford has done an excellent job this year, given the team around him.

My point is that, as of right now, Ben is the greatest rookie QB ever. The facts bear it out. If Bradford can get his team the SB, then I'll agree that he's supplanted Ben.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:02 PM
So Bradford has one more TD despite over 250 more attempts, and you are PRAISING him as being "relied upon"?

If anything he hasn't produced enough given the chances he has been given.
He didn't have Hines.

Ben didn't have Stephen Jackson either who LEADS the league in touches on Bradford's team.

Right, he had Bettis and Parker. He also had a better OL, a much better defense, Plaxico and Hines while Bradford has a bunch of nobodies at receiver, the 23rd best rushing attack and 19th defense.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:05 PM
We may not have been as bad as 6-10, but to get from there to 15-1 required more than just a competent QB. That's the point. Ben got us to FREAKING 15 and 1 and a #1 seed, not just an improved season or a 50/50 chance of squeaking into the playoffs by virtue of being in a suck division.

By the way, Ben's 24 PPG, projected into a 16-game season would be 384 points for the season. In the '09 season, that would be the #6 or #7 scoring offense. The 300 points that Maddox produced in '03 would be #22.
What's your point? Ben is better than Maddox? I'll agree with that.

Unlike some, I don't feel the need to bash others to praise yet another. Bradford has done an excellent job this year, given the team around him.

My point is that, as of right now, Ben is the greatest rookie QB ever. The facts bear it out. If Bradford can get his team the SB, then I'll agree that he's supplanted Ben.
Yeah, umm., I said the same above. I said I'd still have Ben given the record but that I hadn't realized just how good Bradford has been and he has been very good given the circumstances.

I'm sure if we had this Bradford in 2004, he'd have done quite well on our team.

Crash
01-02-2011, 11:06 PM
Right, he had Bettis and Parker.

No, he had over the hill Bettis and Staley who couldn't stay healthy. He also didn't have Plax for 5 games because he pulled a hamstring.

Watch games, not the stat sheet.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:10 PM
Right, he had Bettis and Parker.

No, he had over the hill Bettis and Staley who couldn't stay healthy. He also didn't have Plax for 5 games because he pulled a hamstring.

Watch games, not the stat sheet.
You're right. Forgot about Staley. Parker was on the team though.

Get a new line. It makes no sense, much like your posts.

I'm sorry but we all can't be single 40 year old virgins with no family, children or life. Actually, I'm not sorry. Enjoy it!

Crash
01-02-2011, 11:12 PM
I'm sorry but we all can be single 40 year old virgins with no family, children or life. Actually, I'm not sorry. Enjoy it!

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..............same old tired song.

Sorta like Cowher's offense that you love so much.

Sucks that Ben proved him and you wrong doesn't it?

SteelAbility
01-02-2011, 11:16 PM
We may not have been as bad as 6-10, but to get from there to 15-1 required more than just a competent QB. That's the point. Ben got us to FREAKING 15 and 1 and a #1 seed, not just an improved season or a 50/50 chance of squeaking into the playoffs by virtue of being in a suck division.

By the way, Ben's 24 PPG, projected into a 16-game season would be 384 points for the season. In the '09 season, that would be the #6 or #7 scoring offense. The 300 points that Maddox produced in '03 would be #22.
What's your point? Ben is better than Maddox? I'll agree with that.

Unlike some, I don't feel the need to bash others to praise yet another. Bradford has done an excellent job this year, given the team around him.

My point is that, as of right now, Ben is the greatest rookie QB ever. The facts bear it out. If Bradford can get his team the SB, then I'll agree that he's supplanted Ben.
Yeah, umm., I said the same above. I said I'd still have Ben given the record but that I hadn't realized just how good Bradford has been and he has been very good given the circumstances.

I'm sure if we had this Bradford in 2004, he'd have done quite well on our team.

Didn't follow the whole thread, so I didn't see that you said the same above. I did have one other point. You sling very arm-wavy subjective arguments ... such as your point about not being so bad at 6-10. I have news for you ... 6-10 is a bad team. Good teams find ways to win. Bad teams don't. Trying to whitewash 6-10 is nothing but an attempt to save face in an argument. Then I debunked your generic "all we needed was a competent QB" argument and you come back with an accusing "what's your point?" as a cheap means of sidestepping the fact that your argument didn't hold water.

I'm beginning to think your more about your "expert" football opinion than you are in making a cogent argument.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:17 PM
I'm sorry but we all can be single 40 year old virgins with no family, children or life. Actually, I'm not sorry. Enjoy it!

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..............same old tired song.

Sorta like Cowher's offense that you love so much.

Sucks that Ben proved him and you wrong doesn't it?
You seem to be mistaken yet again. I have always stated Bill needed a better QB and I also wanted a more complete back.

PS, You stated if Bill ever won a SB, you'd never criticize him again. How long did that last? 5 or 10 minutes? Talk about same old tired song.

You're the DJ of "same old tired song."

You hate Bill Cowher.

You hate Hines Ward.

You hate the playing field.

You hate etc. etc. about the Steelers but "claim" to be a fan of the team.

Let's face facts, you're a "Ben fan" not a Steelers fan.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:19 PM
Didn't follow the whole thread, so I didn't see that you said the same above. I did have one other point. You sling very arm-wavy subjective arguments ... such as your point about not being so bad at 6-10. I have news for you ... 6-10 is a bad team. Good teams find ways to win. Bad teams don't. Trying to whitewash 6-10 is nothing but an attempt to save face in an argument. Then I debunked your generic "all we needed was a competent QB" argument and you come back with an accusing "what's your point?" as a cheap means of sidestepping the fact that your argument didn't hold water.

I'm beginning to think your more about your "expert" football opinion than you are in making a cogent argument.
Not trying to whitewash anything. I said we weren't as bad of a team as the 6-10 record made it seem. All we needed was a relatively competent QB. That's not making any excuses. That's stating facts. Ben proved it.

Crash
01-02-2011, 11:21 PM
PS, You stated if Bill ever won a SB, you'd never criticize him again.

I stated that he could stay as long as he wants to coach.

In 2006 he proved he didn't want to be there when he moped all season. When Mike Vick was killing his defense, and Cowher was hamming it up with him on the sideline? He should have been fired that night.

If he didn't want to be there, why stay?

I don't like the turf at Heinz Field, and the Steelers own players agree with me.

Again, stick to the facts boy.

SteelAbility
01-02-2011, 11:24 PM
Didn't follow the whole thread, so I didn't see that you said the same above. I did have one other point. You sling very arm-wavy subjective arguments ... such as your point about not being so bad at 6-10. I have news for you ... 6-10 is a bad team. Good teams find ways to win. Bad teams don't. Trying to whitewash 6-10 is nothing but an attempt to save face in an argument. Then I debunked your generic "all we needed was a competent QB" argument and you come back with an accusing "what's your point?" as a cheap means of sidestepping the fact that your argument didn't hold water.

I'm beginning to think your more about your "expert" football opinion than you are in making a cogent argument.
Not trying to whitewash anything. I said we weren't as bad of a team as the 6-10 record made it seem. All we needed was a relatively competent QB. That's not making any excuses. That's stating facts. Ben proved it.

... to accomplish what?????????????? Back to the generic and unspecified, once again. Yes, to get 3 or 4 more wins takes a competent QB. BTW, am I sensing that you just implied Maddox wasn't competent. Sorry, I forgot, unlike others you don't do any bashing. :roll:

To get from 6-10 to 15-1 takes way more than just a competent QB.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:24 PM
PS, You stated if Bill ever won a SB, you'd never criticize him again.

I stated that he could stay as long as he wants to coach.

In 2006 he proved he didn't want to be there when he moped all season. When Mike Vick was killing his defense, and Cowher was hamming it up with him on the sideline? He should have been fired that night.

If he didn't want to be there, why stay?

I don't like the turf at Heinz Field, and the Steelers own players agree with me.

Again, stick to the facts boy.
I give you credit. At least you were smart enough not to deny being a "Ben" fan and not a "Steelers" fan. I'm not the first on this site alone to notice that fact.

Crash
01-02-2011, 11:27 PM
PS, You stated if Bill ever won a SB, you'd never criticize him again.

I stated that he could stay as long as he wants to coach.

In 2006 he proved he didn't want to be there when he moped all season. When Mike Vick was killing his defense, and Cowher was hamming it up with him on the sideline? He should have been fired that night.

If he didn't want to be there, why stay?

I don't like the turf at Heinz Field, and the Steelers own players agree with me.

Again, stick to the facts boy.
I give you credit. At least you were smart enough not to deny being a "Ben" fan and not a "Steelers" fan. I'm not the first on this site alone to notice that fact.

Spare me your drug induced gibberish. Haven't missed a game since game 16 of the 1992 season.

You?

I have forgotten, more about this team than you will ever know about it.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:27 PM
Didn't follow the whole thread, so I didn't see that you said the same above. I did have one other point. You sling very arm-wavy subjective arguments ... such as your point about not being so bad at 6-10. I have news for you ... 6-10 is a bad team. Good teams find ways to win. Bad teams don't. Trying to whitewash 6-10 is nothing but an attempt to save face in an argument. Then I debunked your generic "all we needed was a competent QB" argument and you come back with an accusing "what's your point?" as a cheap means of sidestepping the fact that your argument didn't hold water.

I'm beginning to think your more about your "expert" football opinion than you are in making a cogent argument.
Not trying to whitewash anything. I said we weren't as bad of a team as the 6-10 record made it seem. All we needed was a relatively competent QB. That's not making any excuses. That's stating facts. Ben proved it.

... to accomplish what?????????????? Back to the generic and unspecified, once again. Yes, to get 3 or 4 more wins takes a competent QB. BTW, am I sensing that you just implied Maddox wasn't competent. Sorry, I forgot, unlike others you don't do any bashing. :roll:

To get from 6-10 to 15-1 takes way more than just a competent QB.
To accomplish taking us over the top. Bill took teams with crappy QB's to how many AFCC and they didn't deserve to get there or that far. Once we got Ben, even when trying to protect him, the team proved to be very competetive. The following year we won it all. The year after that, evel knieval and other factors crashed the season.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:31 PM
Spare me your drug induced gibberish. Haven't missed a game since game 16 of the 1992 season.

You?
I don't keep track but definitely over a decade.


I have forgotten, more about this team than you will ever know about it.
Keep telling yourself that. Some of us don't take welfare checks and in your own words "choose not to work" as you do. Some of us have families, dependents, other interests and a life.

Be proud of that fact. I'm sure it keeps you warm at night.

Crash
01-02-2011, 11:32 PM
Cowher won a lot early with players from Noll's last few teams. When those players began leaving so did the constant participation in the playoffs.

Thank God Dan Rooney vetoed Cowher's wish to draft Shawn Andrews when the Texans were on the clock and forever changed the fortunes of this franchise.

If Cowher got his wish, we'd be the Cleveland Browns right now.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:37 PM
Cowher won a lot early with players from Noll's last few teams. When those players began leaving so did the constant participation in the playoffs.

Thank God Dan Rooney vetoed Cowher's wish to draft Shawn Andrews when the Texans were on the clock and forever changed the fortunes of this franchise.

If Cowher got his wish, we'd be the Cleveland Browns right now.

Cowher made the playoffs over a decade and a half 2/3rds of the time. Yep, it was all Noll's players.

PS, Noll was 7-9 the year before Cowher and .500 with Noll players the two years before Cowher took over, went 11-5 and to the playoffs but don't let facts get in your way.

Crash
01-02-2011, 11:42 PM
PS, Noll was 7-9 the year before Cowher and .500 with Noll players the two years before Cowher took over, went 11-5 and to the playoffs but don't let facts get in your way.

And Noll's last two seasons were hampered by Eric Green's holdout as a rookie, drug suspensions, injuries, and erratic QB play in 1991. They missed the playoffs by one game in each of those seasons.

Again, facts boy.

Any moron can look at a season record and THINK they know what went on. But you have to follow the team to actually KNOW what went on.

Irongut
01-02-2011, 11:44 PM
PS, Noll was 7-9 the year before Cowher and .500 with Noll players the two years before Cowher took over, went 11-5 and to the playoffs but don't let facts get in your way.

And Noll's last two seasons were hampered by Eric Green's holdout as a rookie, drug suspensions, injuries, and erratic QB play in 1991. They missed the playoffs by one game in each of those seasons.

Again, facts boy.

Any moron can look at a season record and THINK they know what went on. But you have to follow the team to actually KNOW what went on.
Facts are facts. Spin them with your Cowher hate if you wish but they are still just that, facts. Are you really suggesting I didn't see those seasons? Really?

Crash
01-03-2011, 12:28 AM
Yeah, Bradford 2010 is really in 2004 Ben's league.

He folded like a cheap chair in crunch time.

The Sodfather
01-03-2011, 09:00 AM
Um, Ben was drafted by a 6-10 team, and a team that missed the playoffs 4 of the previous 6 years prior to his arrival.


That's some serious selective stat picking there.


They went 9-7 in 2000. Missing the playoffs largely due to 3 blown calls the league later apologized for. Went 13-3 in 2001 and 10-5-1 in 2002.

The only reason that team went 6-10 was the OL was destroyed by injuries.

Talk about someone who needs to watch the games and not just look at the stat sheet.

Crash
01-03-2011, 12:15 PM
They went 9-7 in 2000. Missing the playoffs largely due to 3 blown calls the league later apologized for.

Blown call #1.

Cleveland:

Didn't get the FG off in time. If they would have A) Brown would have had to make it, and B) You still have to win in OT.

Blown call #2

Tennessee:

Didn't give Hines a TD earlier in a drive which cost them a time out after they scored anyway. A) The defense still choked a 4th quarter lead. B) Even with a time out left Brown would still have to make a game tying FG and then move to OT and have to win that.

Blown call #3

Philadelphia

That's the one game. On the onsides kick they blew the call. Not sure of the rule then but if they call the penalty, the Steelers I THINK would still have to recover an onsides kick.

Those calls were bad, but unlike the Tampa game 2 weeks ago, the calls if made correctly would not have "guaranteed" a Steelers win (Except maybe the Eagles game).

I didn't stat pick anywhere, I used the 6 years prior to Ben, in the same manner the Cowher-ites use his fist six seasons when the media compared him to Paul Brown because like Brown he made the playoffs his first six seasons.

You on the other hand, ignored BOTH 1998 and 1999.

Two 10 loss seasons in 5 years prior to Ben, is pretty hard to ignore.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 12:38 PM
Yeah, Bradford 2010 is really in 2004 Ben's league.

He folded like a cheap chair in crunch time.
As did Ben against NE to end the season in 2004.

costanza2k1
01-03-2011, 12:40 PM
Yeah, Bradford 2010 is really in 2004 Ben's league.

He folded like a cheap chair in crunch time.
As did Ben against NE to end the season in 2004.

Are you serious as Ben did? Ben ripped through the season undefeated and on to the championship game....

Irongut
01-03-2011, 12:58 PM
Yeah, Bradford 2010 is really in 2004 Ben's league.

He folded like a cheap chair in crunch time.
As did Ben against NE to end the season in 2004.

Are you serious as Ben did? Ben ripped through the season undefeated and on to the championship game....

and crapped out in said game. Threw into coverages he was told and coached no to.

Had IIRC 3 int's?

The Sodfather
01-03-2011, 01:09 PM
I didn't stat pick anywhere, I used the 6 years prior to Ben, in the same manner the Cowher-ites use his fist six seasons when the media compared him to Paul Brown because like Brown he made the playoffs his first six seasons.

You on the other hand, ignored BOTH 1998 and 1999.

Two 10 loss seasons in 5 years prior to Ben, is pretty hard to ignore.


It's a clear stat pick, period. 98 and 99 have as much to do with 03 as 05 and 06 have to do with this season. That is to say.............

nothing


Everyone knows that 03 team was crushed by OL injuries. That's the only reason they were not a playoff contender again. The 04 team was playoff caliber with or without Ben. Ben just made us even better.

Crash
01-03-2011, 01:13 PM
Yeah, Bradford 2010 is really in 2004 Ben's league.

He folded like a cheap chair in crunch time.
As did Ben against NE to end the season in 2004.

So the comeback wins in Dallas and Jacksonville don't count?

Ben wasn't allowed to fold against NE in the playoffs. Cowher was too worried about running the ball.

Then when Ben and the offense got into a groove in the 3rd quarter (By throwing) and with a chance to cut the lead to 7 with a quarter left? Run, pass, run, field goal.

Season over.

Crash
01-03-2011, 01:15 PM
Everyone knows that 03 team was crushed by OL injuries.

That's the excuse. As soon as Cowher told Maddox to be careful with the ball, and the 3 wide offense, and the no huddle offense was basically ignored until they HAD to use it. The 2003 Steelers were DONE.

That OL didn't look so bad when they'd use no huddle, the problem was they didn't use it enough.

That's coaching, not the OL.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 01:18 PM
Yeah, Bradford 2010 is really in 2004 Ben's league.

He folded like a cheap chair in crunch time.
As did Ben against NE to end the season in 2004.

So the comeback wins in Dallas and Jacksonville don't count?

Ben wasn't allowed to fold against NE in the playoffs. Cowher was too worried about running the ball.

Then when Ben and the offense got into a groove in the 3rd quarter (By throwing) and with a chance to cut the lead to 7 with a quarter left? Run, pass, run, field goal.

Season over.
You stated above that Bradford folded like a cheap chair in crunch time.

Well, Ben did the exact same thing against NE. 3 picks. Try and change the past all you want, spin if you desire but Ben crapped out in that game.

Bradford was relied on to carry his team and had a much worse team to help him. Not saying his rookie season is better but it is compareable. Ben was not asked to carry the team. He was asked to play solidly, make a few plays a game, protect the ball and let the defense do their job, dominate.

Crash
01-03-2011, 01:20 PM
Steven Jackson led the NFL in touches. I'd say he was asked to carry his team.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 01:21 PM
Everyone knows that 03 team was crushed by OL injuries.

That's the excuse. As soon as Cowher told Maddox to be careful with the ball, and the 3 wide offense, and the no huddle offense was basically ignored until they HAD to use it. The 2003 Steelers were DONE.

That OL didn't look so bad when they'd use no huddle, the problem was they didn't use it enough.

That's coaching, not the OL.
The no huddle simplifies reads and creates much more man coverage. There isn't a QB on the planet that doesn't look better running it. That's not the problem. Sustaining the pace and the wear on the defense it creates often burns your own team. That's the problem.

Crash
01-03-2011, 01:23 PM
Never said use it full time. But we hardly used it at all unless it was obvious situations.

That's coaching, not OL injuries.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 01:24 PM
Steven Jackson led the NFL in touches. I'd say he was asked to carry his team.
I'm sure you would. You would say the sky is made of iron to refute and deflect any Ben criticism.

Why you are so small of a mind that you can't see Bradford's year as anything but an attack of Ben is your issue. One you've been dealing with a long time. I don't think anyone feels that is going to change. You say anything, spin anything, stat pick anything, to say something positive about players you like and twist anything, spin anything, stat pick anything to bash players you hate, like Hines Ward.

feltdizz
01-03-2011, 01:25 PM
Yeah, Bradford 2010 is really in 2004 Ben's league.

He folded like a cheap chair in crunch time.
As did Ben against NE to end the season in 2004.

Are you serious as Ben did? Ben ripped through the season undefeated and on to the championship game....

Ben was bad in the Jets game as well. We needed 2 chip shot misses to win that game.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 01:26 PM
Never said use it full time. But we hardly used it at all unless it was obvious situations.

That's coaching, not OL injuries.

The pick play where Wallace came under the receivers and space was created, Ben didn't have to think and the design of the play dictated the throw, is more of what Ben needs. Cut the field on rollouts, let his athleticism work and let the reads be easier.

Those are things Ben needs. More options, more thinking, more anticipation, more reads, are not what Ben does well.

Simplify it, dictate it and let him execute it.

The Sodfather
01-03-2011, 01:35 PM
That's the excuse.



No, it's the truth.

Crash
01-03-2011, 01:39 PM
That's the excuse.



No, it's the truth.

So how did the same OL look when they ran no huddle? Or did they have a different OL that came in to replace them?

Crash
01-03-2011, 01:46 PM
Never said use it full time. But we hardly used it at all unless it was obvious situations.

That's coaching, not OL injuries.

The pick play where Wallace came under the receivers and space was created, Ben didn't have to think and the design of the play dictated the throw, is more of what Ben needs. Cut the field on rollouts, let his athleticism work and let the reads be easier.

Those are things Ben needs. More options, more thinking, more anticipation, more reads, are not what Ben does well.

Simplify it, dictate it and let him execute it.

But makes plenty of anticipation throws, always has.

Watch the games, and don't listen to bitter assclowns like Steve Young and Marshall Faulk.

RuthlessBurgher
01-03-2011, 01:53 PM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*

Thanks for making my point, fellas.

The question was whether Ben or Bradford was the best rookie QB ever.

You both agree that it was Ben.

But two guys turn a 1 page thread into a 5 page thread overnight, by arguing about every stupid little point possible FOR A TOPIC THE TWO OF YOU ACTUALLY AGREE UPON (in general) FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER!!! And yet even the slightest bit of agreement confuses the two of you to the point that you absolutely must continue to argue about every other little piece of minutia, because that it all you guys do...argue with each other.

The sexual tension between the two of you is maddening. Kiss already. Get it over with. :P

grotonsteel
01-03-2011, 01:57 PM
I didn't stat pick anywhere, I used the 6 years prior to Ben, in the same manner the Cowher-ites use his fist six seasons when the media compared him to Paul Brown because like Brown he made the playoffs his first six seasons.

You on the other hand, ignored BOTH 1998 and 1999.

Two 10 loss seasons in 5 years prior to Ben, is pretty hard to ignore.


The 04 team was playoff caliber with or without Ben. Ben just made us even better.

04 team was playoff caliber team on basis of what??

Loss to Baltimore and a FG win against all mighty OAK team in dying minutes???

The Sodfather
01-03-2011, 01:57 PM
That's the excuse.



No, it's the truth.

So how did the same OL look when they ran no huddle? Or did they have a different OL that came in to replace them?


That's already been answered by irongut.

The same reason the OL looks better now when we run it.

feltdizz
01-03-2011, 02:16 PM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*

Thanks for making my point, fellas.

The question was whether Ben or Bradford was the best rookie QB ever.

You both agree that it was Ben.

But two guys turn a 1 page thread into a 5 page thread overnight, by arguing about every stupid little point possible FOR A TOPIC THE TWO OF YOU ACTUALLY AGREE UPON (in general) FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER!!! And yet even the slightest bit of agreement confuses the two of you to the point that you absolutely must continue to argue about every other little piece of minutia, because that it all you guys do...argue with each other.

The sexual tension between the two of you is maddening. Kiss already. Get it over with. :P

these 2 are in love. :oops:

Crash
01-03-2011, 02:40 PM
That's already been answered by irongut.

The same reason the OL looks better now when we run it.

How much no huddle did we run yesterday?

The problem the 2010 OL has is 3rd and long and too much two TE sets that stink for this football team because the formation dictates what we will do.

You'll notice the first play yesterday was three wides and Spaeth was on the bench.

hawaiiansteel
01-03-2011, 02:53 PM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*


I'll do it for you, I obviously don't have your willpower. Crash and Irongut are just:

http://www.mymiraclebaby.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/two-peas-pod.jpg

The Sodfather
01-03-2011, 02:57 PM
How much no huddle did we run yesterday?

That has nothing to do with the fact that they look better running the no huddle.

Besides, why would we run no huddle in a game like that?



The problem the 2010 OL has is 3rd and long and too much two TE sets that stink for this football team because the formation dictates what we will do.

If you're saying Arians suck, I agree.


You'll notice the first play yesterday was three wides and Spaeth was on the bench.


I also noticed they kept 7 in to block.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 03:13 PM
Never said use it full time. But we hardly used it at all unless it was obvious situations.

That's coaching, not OL injuries.

The pick play where Wallace came under the receivers and space was created, Ben didn't have to think and the design of the play dictated the throw, is more of what Ben needs. Cut the field on rollouts, let his athleticism work and let the reads be easier.

Those are things Ben needs. More options, more thinking, more anticipation, more reads, are not what Ben does well.

Simplify it, dictate it and let him execute it.

But makes plenty of anticipation throws, always has.

Watch the games, and don't listen to bitter assclowns like Steve Young and Marshall Faulk.Never said he does none of it. I said it is not a strength of his game. Thinking fast and reading defenses are both Ben's weaknesses not strengths. Limiting the options, limiting the reads, designing openings and dictating throw, not allowing reads to be needed and allowing Ben to use his physical abilities would certainly make the offense better and allow Ben to take less hits/sacks.

As for Steve Young, I'm going to go out on a limb and say he has forgotten more about how to ot only play but watch and understand play than you will ever know.

You have never even played the game.

Crash
01-03-2011, 03:13 PM
Six blocked. Three wides and Mendy ran pass routes.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 03:15 PM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*

Thanks for making my point, fellas.

The question was whether Ben or Bradford was the best rookie QB ever.

You both agree that it was Ben.

But two guys turn a 1 page thread into a 5 page thread overnight, by arguing about every stupid little point possible FOR A TOPIC THE TWO OF YOU ACTUALLY AGREE UPON (in general) FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER!!! And yet even the slightest bit of agreement confuses the two of you to the point that you absolutely must continue to argue about every other little piece of minutia, because that it all you guys do...argue with each other.

The sexual tension between the two of you is maddening. Kiss already. Get it over with. :P

these 2 are in love. :oops:
Clearly this board prefers childish games, not football discussions, likely because most of you are kids who never stepped foot on a field or lockerroom at any level.

The Sodfather
01-03-2011, 03:15 PM
Six blocked. Three wides and Mendy ran pass routes.

Mendy initially set to block. No one came and he snuck out in the flat.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 03:18 PM
Six blocked. Three wides and Mendy ran pass routes.

Mendy initially set to block. No one came and he snuck out in the flat.

5 blitzed, at least 7 in the box and a throw almost in stide. If not misplayed by the FS, likely broken up or picked. Wallace had to slow up slightly and flatten the route just a bit. Regardless, Ben's deep ball is coming from a weakness to marginal yet certainly not a strength. Perhaps if he didn't take two false steps before throwing and threw timely on the final drop step, it would have been in stride but given the lack of deep ball accuracy and timely throws over the years, I'll take it.

Crash
01-03-2011, 03:26 PM
Yeah Ben's pass sucked.

One of the best deep throwers in the NFL and somehow he can't throw deep.

Irongut
01-03-2011, 03:30 PM
Yeah Ben's pass sucked.

One of the best deep throwers in the NFL and somehow he can't throw deep.
I didn't say it sucked. I said it was not in stride and Wallace had to flatten the route and slow up a step. If the FS doesn't misplay it is likely broken up or picked.

Crash
01-03-2011, 03:34 PM
Yeah Ben's pass sucked.

One of the best deep throwers in the NFL and somehow he can't throw deep.
I didn't say it sucked. I said it was not in stride and Wallace had to flatten the route and slow up a step. If the FS doesn't misplay it is likely broken up or picked.

Of course. Ben's no Matt Schaub either.

fordfixer
01-03-2011, 08:34 PM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*

Thanks for making my point, fellas.

The question was whether Ben or Bradford was the best rookie QB ever.

You both agree that it was Ben.

But two guys turn a 1 page thread into a 5 page thread overnight, by arguing about every stupid little point possible FOR A TOPIC THE TWO OF YOU ACTUALLY AGREE UPON (in general) FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER!!! And yet even the slightest bit of agreement confuses the two of you to the point that you absolutely must continue to argue about every other little piece of minutia, because that it all you guys do...argue with each other.

The sexual tension between the two of you is maddening. Kiss already. Get it over with. :P

these 2 are in love. :oops:
Clearly this board prefers childish games, not football discussions, likely because most of you are kids who never stepped foot on a field or lockerroom at any level.


But yet your still here :shock:

The Sodfather
01-04-2011, 07:05 AM
5 blitzed, at least 7 in the box and a throw almost in stide. If not misplayed by the FS, likely broken up or picked. Wallace had to slow up slightly and flatten the route just a bit. Regardless, Ben's deep ball is coming from a weakness to marginal yet certainly not a strength. Perhaps if he didn't take two false steps before throwing and threw timely on the final drop step, it would have been in stride but given the lack of deep ball accuracy and timely throws over the years, I'll take it.


I would agree the safety (Ward) did not play it well but Ben did do a nice job of looking him off.

And the pass was better than you are giving him credit for.

I also liked the aggressiveness of the play call after the turnover.

feltdizz
01-04-2011, 09:24 AM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*

Thanks for making my point, fellas.

The question was whether Ben or Bradford was the best rookie QB ever.

You both agree that it was Ben.

But two guys turn a 1 page thread into a 5 page thread overnight, by arguing about every stupid little point possible FOR A TOPIC THE TWO OF YOU ACTUALLY AGREE UPON (in general) FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER!!! And yet even the slightest bit of agreement confuses the two of you to the point that you absolutely must continue to argue about every other little piece of minutia, because that it all you guys do...argue with each other.

The sexual tension between the two of you is maddening. Kiss already. Get it over with. :P

these 2 are in love. :oops:
Clearly this board prefers childish games, not football discussions, likely because most of you are kids who never stepped foot on a field or lockerroom at any level.

You are one of those :roll:

I played HS football in Western PA but does that really matter on a discussion board?

Eich
01-04-2011, 09:27 AM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*

Thanks for making my point, fellas.

The question was whether Ben or Bradford was the best rookie QB ever.

You both agree that it was Ben.

But two guys turn a 1 page thread into a 5 page thread overnight, by arguing about every stupid little point possible FOR A TOPIC THE TWO OF YOU ACTUALLY AGREE UPON (in general) FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER!!! And yet even the slightest bit of agreement confuses the two of you to the point that you absolutely must continue to argue about every other little piece of minutia, because that it all you guys do...argue with each other.

The sexual tension between the two of you is maddening. Kiss already. Get it over with. :P

these 2 are in love. :oops:
Clearly this board prefers childish games, not football discussions, likely because most of you are kids who never stepped foot on a field or lockerroom at any level.


But yet your still here :shock:

And it seems for one reason only - to argue with Crash. Yeah, bashing this board and Crash on another board and then coming here to argue isn't childish.

aggiebones
01-04-2011, 01:34 PM
I'm not even going to read most of this jibberish.

We were not 15-1 because of Ben. He was a part and did incredibly well holding his head above water though we CLEARLY were protecting him ALL season. Geez, Crash, you are blind by mad love or crazy if you can't remember that season.
He did really well considering, but that team was VERY good.

We had the top overall defense that year by a good margin if I remember.
The 6-10 season we were 15th or so in DEFENSIVE pts.


And please stop mentioning the other 6-10 team run by Tomzack. Seriously. That season is irrelevant like most of your arguments.

People watching football understand what Bradford is being asked to do and they remember what Ben was asked to do. Whenever Ben threw it was almost a trick play from the moment he started.


15-0 was the best start by any team with a starting rookie QB. Meaning that team did a helluva job winning despite his mistakes.
Ryan and Bradford made alot of mistakes as rookies too, but the team couldn't hide them as well. All are great QBs for their age. And any team without them would be drooling today at the chance at any of the 3.

RuthlessBurgher
01-04-2011, 01:40 PM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*

Thanks for making my point, fellas.

The question was whether Ben or Bradford was the best rookie QB ever.

You both agree that it was Ben.

But two guys turn a 1 page thread into a 5 page thread overnight, by arguing about every stupid little point possible FOR A TOPIC THE TWO OF YOU ACTUALLY AGREE UPON (in general) FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER!!! And yet even the slightest bit of agreement confuses the two of you to the point that you absolutely must continue to argue about every other little piece of minutia, because that it all you guys do...argue with each other.

The sexual tension between the two of you is maddening. Kiss already. Get it over with. :P

these 2 are in love. :oops:
Clearly this board prefers childish games, not football discussions, likely because most of you are kids who never stepped foot on a field or lockerroom at any level.

You are one of those :roll:

I played HS football in Western PA but does that really matter on a discussion board?

I played some tight end and defensive end for Riverside up here in NEPA back in the day. We sucked back then, but this year we were in the state championship against SWPA's defending state champ Clairton and we almost pulled it out (we went ahead 24-0, and had a chance to pull ahead again at the end, but didn't quite make it...good game, though).

Irongut
01-04-2011, 01:57 PM
I played HS football in Western PA but does that really matter on a discussion board?

I couldn't really care less if someone played or not. Just don't act like you do when you have no concept of coverages, blocking schemes, corner coverages, etc. You don't see me talking much about anything but running backs and secondary/defense. As I have said to him, he's a great fan but he should at least read a book on the game before making **** up.

Irongut
01-04-2011, 02:02 PM
I played some tight end and defensive end for Riverside up here in NEPA back in the day. We sucked back then, but this year we were in the state championship against SWPA's defending state champ Clairton and we almost pulled it out (we went ahead 24-0, and had a chance to pull ahead again at the end, but didn't quite make it...good game, though).
Riverside tore it up this year. I wanted to go to that game but it was just too cold.

ikestops85
01-04-2011, 02:45 PM
I stayed here. Does that count?

http://aff.bstatic.com/images/hotel/org/675/675461.jpg

feltdizz
01-04-2011, 04:27 PM
*Fighting the urge to post another silly picture*

Thanks for making my point, fellas.

The question was whether Ben or Bradford was the best rookie QB ever.

You both agree that it was Ben.

But two guys turn a 1 page thread into a 5 page thread overnight, by arguing about every stupid little point possible FOR A TOPIC THE TWO OF YOU ACTUALLY AGREE UPON (in general) FOR THE FIRST TIME EVER!!! And yet even the slightest bit of agreement confuses the two of you to the point that you absolutely must continue to argue about every other little piece of minutia, because that it all you guys do...argue with each other.

The sexual tension between the two of you is maddening. Kiss already. Get it over with. :P

these 2 are in love. :oops:
Clearly this board prefers childish games, not football discussions, likely because most of you are kids who never stepped foot on a field or lockerroom at any level.

You are one of those :roll:

I played HS football in Western PA but does that really matter on a discussion board?

I played some tight end and defensive end for Riverside up here in NEPA back in the day. We sucked back then, but this year we were in the state championship against SWPA's defending state champ Clairton and we almost pulled it out (we went ahead 24-0, and had a chance to pull ahead again at the end, but didn't quite make it...good game, though).

Riverside in Beaver County? Green and Black?

I played against Riverside back in pee wee football. I don't think we played you in HS though. Those kids were huge, all of them barely below weight limit.. but thankfully they were a little soft and didn't know how to use their size to their advantage.

I played for Quaker Valley.. WR/DB but our team was terrible as well! Aliquippa New Brighten, Beaver Falls and Beaver used to crush us.

Jim Haslett has 2 brothers... they were assistant coaches for us.. unfortunately they were a little childish and it was obvious why he never picked them up to coach along side him.

RuthlessBurgher
01-04-2011, 04:40 PM
these 2 are in love. :oops:
Clearly this board prefers childish games, not football discussions, likely because most of you are kids who never stepped foot on a field or lockerroom at any level.

You are one of those :roll:

I played HS football in Western PA but does that really matter on a discussion board?

I played some tight end and defensive end for Riverside up here in NEPA back in the day. We sucked back then, but this year we were in the state championship against SWPA's defending state champ Clairton and we almost pulled it out (we went ahead 24-0, and had a chance to pull ahead again at the end, but didn't quite make it...good game, though).

Riverside in Beaver County? Green and Black?

I played against Riverside back in pee wee football. I don't think we played you in HS though. Those kids were huge, all of them barely below weight limit.. but thankfully they were a little soft and didn't know how to use their size to their advantage.

I played for Quaker Valley.. WR/DB but our team was terrible as well! Aliquippa New Brighten, Beaver Falls and Beaver used to crush us.

Jim Haslett has 2 brothers... they were assistant coaches for us.. unfortunately they were a little childish and it was obvious why he never picked them up to coach along side him.

Nope. Riverside in NEPA. Moosic and Taylor (just outside Scranton). Red and Blue. Vikings.

RuthlessBurgher
01-04-2011, 04:47 PM
I played some tight end and defensive end for Riverside up here in NEPA back in the day. We sucked back then, but this year we were in the state championship against SWPA's defending state champ Clairton and we almost pulled it out (we went ahead 24-0, and had a chance to pull ahead again at the end, but didn't quite make it...good game, though).
Riverside tore it up this year. I wanted to go to that game but it was just too cold.

I was surprised to hear that they gave up 34 total points in their last 15 games combined (including 10 shutouts and no team scoring more than 8 points in a single game against them), and then we come in and score the first 24 points with just under 10 minutes to go until halftime. Gotta hand it to the Clairton kids, though...after never experiencing that type of adversity on the football field, they came back to take the game 36-30.

feltdizz
01-04-2011, 04:47 PM
Riverside in Beaver County? Green and Black?

I played against Riverside back in pee wee football. I don't think we played you in HS though. Those kids were huge, all of them barely below weight limit.. but thankfully they were a little soft and didn't know how to use their size to their advantage.

I played for Quaker Valley.. WR/DB but our team was terrible as well! Aliquippa New Brighten, Beaver Falls and Beaver used to crush us.

Jim Haslett has 2 brothers... they were assistant coaches for us.. unfortunately they were a little childish and it was obvious why he never picked them up to coach along side him.

Nope. Riverside in NEPA. Moosic and Taylor (just outside Scranton). Red and Blue. Vikings.
Ohhh... the other NEPA :D
I'm dyslexic :oops: