I'd rather have Edwards than Cutler

[Rico]

Sometimes they give a quarterback a winning percentage....similar to a baseball pitcher. I didn't mean that this was a 2 man game. Edwards was the winning quarterback. It was a huge road victory in a very unfriendly stadium in a game that the Broncos really needed.

 

I guess I made the original post because I would rather have Edwards than Cutler. I think he's smarter, has talent, and seems to me to be a better teammate.

 

I think Edwards failure to throw the deep ball started with the sack against Arizona. I remember him putting one right on the hands of Lee Evans for a 40 yard td vs the Rams the week before. He could use better protection.

Not sometimes... go to Pro Football Reference and you will see QBRec (Team record in games started by QB). Regardless of what some of these assclowns around here will tell you, it is the only QB 'stat' that has any true significance. Remember, this is football, not baseball... and when it comes to football, stats are for losers.

[PushthePile]

Not sometimes... go to Pro Football Reference and you will see QBRec (Team record in games started by QB). Regardless of what some of these assclowns around here will tell you, it is the only QB 'stat' that has any true significance. Remember, this is football, not baseball... and when it comes to football, stats are for losers.

If you believe that a Qbs winning percentage is the only Qb stat that matters, then you my friend are the assclown. Drew Brees has a career record of 55-51. I guess by your ridiculous estimation he is mediocre. Carson Palmer is 32-33 as a starter. Another loser, huh? Kyle Orton slides in with an astounding 21-12 record. Wow. Their you have it Rico, the messiah of the Qb position.

[Rico]

If you believe that a Qbs winning percentage is the only Qb stat that matters, then you my friend are the assclown. Drew Brees has a career record of 55-51. I guess by your ridiculous estimation he is mediocre. Carson Palmer is 32-33 as a starter. Another loser, huh? Kyle Orton slides in with an astounding 21-12 record. Wow. Their you have it Rico, the messiah of the Qb position.

In your case Junior, stats are for losers and also chumps, chump.

[Magox]

If you believe that a Qbs winning percentage is the only Qb stat that matters, then you my friend are the assclown. Drew Brees has a career record of 55-51. I guess by your ridiculous estimation he is mediocre. Carson Palmer is 32-33 as a starter. Another loser, huh? Kyle Orton slides in with an astounding 21-12 record. Wow. Their you have it Rico, the messiah of the Qb position.

But what you didn't state PushPile was that even though that Drew Brees career record is 55-51. 20 of those losses for the chargers were in the 2002-2003 seasons, when his qb rating was in the low 70's. So since 2004, his 4th year btw, his record has been 46-34 and not coincidentally his qb rating has been in the mid 90's. Big difference. Now I know you and Alpha for the most part like to ignore qb ratings and win losses, but believe it or not, there is a correlation between the two, and a strong one at that. Hence the similar qb ratings and win losses that Edwards and Cutler had for 2008.

 

Win loss obviously isn't the only measure of success of a good qb, and I don't think there is one single gauge or indicator that can define a good qb, but undoubtedly winning has to be the most important indicator. Too many times, people fall in love with some of these gunslinger qb's, but what they don't see are the boneheaded mistakes that many of these style of qb's make.

 

When people remember QB's, the most important thing they will look at is if he was a winner. If he won many playoff games, and even more importantly the Superbowl. At the end of the day, it's about being a winner. That is what Cutler up to now has lacked. His career will be judged on whether or not he can win in Chicago, if they don't become a perennial playoff team, then I just can't see how anyone can make a strong argument for Cutler being an elite QB.

[Bill from NYC]

Oh, and here is the irony of your dumb ass post...you whine about people disecting Trent and our players, then boastly shout we have no impact players and didnt get any in last 3 drafts...well guess what Einstein, Edwards was drafted in last 3 drafts, you know the guy you defend to the death and if bash anyone who doesnt. And we also got Lynch, Poz and McKelvin...amongst others...

 

You really are a douche. Seriously, how can you live with yourself? Look at where the Bills pick and then, if you are up to it, check out where the Patsies pick. Even at that, it isn't clear that Dick Levy out drafted the patsies in the last 3 years. For one thing, it is early to say. Wouldn't you agree, you freaking nitwit?

 

In 06, we entered day 1 with the #8, and 2nd, and 2 early 3rds. We left with Whitner, McCargo and Youboty. Sounds great right? I want to hear about all the "impact" we get from them. As far as Edwards, we goy lucky with him. If they really wanted him they would have taken him earlier. Still, that was a great selection when one factors in that he has outplayed virtually all of the qbs picked in front of him.

Anyway, why only go back to 06? Why not 04? Any special reason? A certain bonehead move all but crippled this franchise, as did drafting a fat RT with the fourth selection of 02.

 

You, in addition to being a schmuck, are a whining little phoney. A host of people here are not pleased with Edwards, and for differing reasons. At least they have the balls to simply say so, instead of trying to "win" debates with passive aggressive nonsense, as well as flat out lies.

 

Now, why don't you go down to your local bar and talk loud and alienate people. Maybe you can even pit one customer against another, or just be an all around a-hole.

[Rico]

You really are a douche. Seriously, how can you live with yourself? Look at where the Bills pick and then, if you are up to it, check out where the Patsies pick. Even at that, it isn't clear that Dick Levy out drafted the patsies in the last 3 years. For one thing, it is early to say. Wouldn't you agree, you freaking nitwit?

 

In 06, we entered day 1 with the #8, and 2nd, and 2 early 3rds. We left with Whitner, McCargo and Youboty. Sounds great right? I want to hear about all the "impact" we get from them. As far as Edwards, we goy lucky with him. If they really wanted him they would have taken him earlier. Still, that was a great selection when one factors in that he has outplayed virtually all of the qbs picked in front of him.

Anyway, why only go back to 06? Why not 04? Any special reason? A certain bonehead move all but crippled this franchise, as did drafting a fat RT with the fourth selection of 02.

 

You, in addition to being a schmuck, are a whining little phoney. A host of people here are not pleased with Edwards, and for differing reasons. At least they have the balls to simply say so, instead of trying to "win" debates with passive aggressive nonsense, as well as flat out lies.

 

Now, why don't you go down to your local bar and talk loud and alienate people. Maybe you can even pit one customer against another, or just be an all around a-hole.

Nice post.

[PushthePile]

But what you didn't state PushPile was that even though that Drew Brees career record is 55-51. 21 of those losses for the chargers were 2001-2003. When his qb rating was in the low 70's. So since 2004, his 4th year btw, his record has been 46-34 and not coincidentally his qb rating has been in the mid 90's. Big difference. Now I know you and Alpha for the most part like to ignore qb ratings and win losses, but believe it or not, there is a correlation between the two, and a strong one at that. Hence the similar qb ratings and win losses that Edwards and Cutler have.

 

Win loss obviously isn't the only measure of success of a good qb, and I don't think there is one single gauge or indicator that can define a good qb, but undoubtedly winning has to be the most important indicator. Too many times, people fall in love with some of these gunslinger qb's, but what they don't see are the boneheaded mistakes that many of these style of qb's make.

 

When people remember QB's, the most important thing they will look at is if he was a winner. If he won many playoff games, and even more importantly the Superbowl. At the end of the day, it's about being a winner. That is what Cutler up to now has lacked. His career will be judged on whether or not he can win in Chicago, if they don't become a perennial playoff team, then I just can't see how anyone can make a strong argument for Cutler being an elite QB.

I agree with you Magox. I was just giving a foolish example of Rico's grading methods. Obviously their is alot more to every Qb evaluation then his wins and losses. Personally I only grade a player on what the team has accomplished when he is on the field. If your a Qb and your playing with a HOF defense, this is going to greatly effect your winning percentage. Trent Dilfer was good enough but not great, IMO. The Ravens won despite him and game planned around that defense and his ability.

 

It's case by case. A qbs winning percentage is not always a very good indicator of his abilities. No stat is a true indicator of a qbs ability. That is what makes evaluation of a player fun. No situation is the same and all situations change game to game. You can only use stats over a period of time, in support of a view. The only way to trully get an accurate opinion is to watch the games closely and determine how much the said player helped his team. Obviously this isn't cut and dry either. Sports wouldn't be half as much fun if it was.

[Guest dog14787]

I agree with you Magox. I was just giving a foolish example of Rico's grading methods. Obviously their is alot more to every Qb evaluation then his wins and losses. Personally I only grade a player on what the team has accomplished when he is on the field. If your a Qb and your playing with a HOF defense, this is going to greatly effect your winning percentage. Trent Dilfer was good enough but not great, IMO. The Ravens won despite him and game planned around that defense and his ability.

 

It's case by case. A qbs winning percentage is not always a very good indicator of his abilities. No stat is a true indicator of a qbs ability. That is what makes evaluation of a player fun. No situation is the same and all situations change game to game. You can only use stats over a period of time, in support of a view. The only way to trully get an accurate opinion is to watch the games closely and determine how much the said player helped his team. Obviously this isn't cut and dry either. Sports wouldn't be half as much fun if it was.

 

Good post

 

 

So you agree that when judging a QB, the Coaching staff he plays under, his WR's and the rest of the teammates around him including the defense all play a vital role in how productive the QB is correct?

 

So on a scale from 1-10 what how do you rate the supporting cast for Trent Edwards? because I'm thinking 5 is pushing it, but I'll say 5.

 

To me, that's just not going to get it done no matter how good you are as a QB.

[Alphadawg7]

You really are a douche. Seriously, how can you live with yourself? Look at where the Bills pick and then, if you are up to it, check out where the Patsies pick. Even at that, it isn't clear that Dick Levy out drafted the patsies in the last 3 years. For one thing, it is early to say. Wouldn't you agree, you freaking nitwit?

 

In 06, we entered day 1 with the #8, and 2nd, and 2 early 3rds. We left with Whitner, McCargo and Youboty. Sounds great right? I want to hear about all the "impact" we get from them. As far as Edwards, we goy lucky with him. If they really wanted him they would have taken him earlier. Still, that was a great selection when one factors in that he has outplayed virtually all of the qbs picked in front of him.

Anyway, why only go back to 06? Why not 04? Any special reason? A certain bonehead move all but crippled this franchise, as did drafting a fat RT with the fourth selection of 02.

 

You, in addition to being a schmuck, are a whining little phoney. A host of people here are not pleased with Edwards, and for differing reasons. At least they have the balls to simply say so, instead of trying to "win" debates with passive aggressive nonsense, as well as flat out lies.

 

Now, why don't you go down to your local bar and talk loud and alienate people. Maybe you can even pit one customer against another, or just be an all around a-hole.

 

You are the only douche I see...

 

I made the comment of we have had better players in the draft the last 3 years...I said 3 years combined you dipstick...that question was not about whether we had the best FO, it was whether our end result was better in a player by player basis...man, you are as retarted as they come, I swear...its fine if you would rather have the pats draft over the last 3 years, but I will take ours, but you seem to want to mock me because of that...its fine, doesnt change my stance...

 

I normally don't get into a "you are this" pissing match with someone, but your ignorance is colossal. I keep things analytical, while you stomp your feet and act like a whiny biatch who doesnt know what the hell he is talking about because your intellect doesnt allow you to comprehend what someone writes...

 

I 100% fault myself for allowing myself to slum down in depths of the gutters where you post from...I know better...

 

And you have astounded me with how ignorant you are with this statement:

 

A host of people here are not pleased with Edwards, and for differing reasons. At least they have the balls to simply say so, instead of trying to "win" debates with passive aggressive nonsense, as well as flat out lies.

 

Show me even ONE, just ONE freaking lie I have ever written! I have been one of the ones with BALLS to call out Edwards and his flaws...ask anyone. I have never resulted to name calling or bashing him, only discussed REAL LIFE ACTUAL PLAY on the field and stats. Man, the levels of pussification of your posts are astounding...

 

Here is the funniest part...judging by your post above, you clearly think Edwards hasnt played well...hmmmm, thats also my stance...so you are being an infant jackass about something you apparently feel the same way about as I do...

 

I am sure I have used a lot of big words in here to complicated for you to understand, so here is a link to something that may be able to help you figure it out...

 

Here is help for you Bill

[Alphadawg7]

Good post

 

 

So you agree that when judging a QB, the Coaching staff he plays under, his WR's and the rest of the teammates around him including the defense all play a vital role in how productive the QB is correct?

 

So on a scale from 1-10 what how do you rate the supporting cast for Trent Edwards? because I'm thinking 5 is pushing it, but I'll say 5.

 

To me, that's just not going to get it done no matter how good you are as a QB.

 

I agree too its a combo of things...heck, I played football and understand its a TEAM game...I would grade his supporting cast a 7.5...here is how I came up with that...

 

1. Evans is a top level WR IMO.

2. Reed is better than he is getting credit for, case in point, how bad our offense dropped off when he was out. He isnt going to be top 10, but he is a solid and reliable player who runs above average routes and has good hands. Not to mention, he is solid blocker in the run game.

3. Our O Line wasnt great, but it did often provide Trent with lots of time to throw in the second half of the season.

4. Tight End was very weak for us...

5. RB's were top notch...

6. Coaching staff made some mistakes, but the fact we were able to achieve 7 wins in 07 after all the injuries, bad luck, and a rookie QB was still an achievement. In 08, our inept Offense kept us from winning more games than our Coaching staff IMO. So, I dont hold them as low as many Bills fans...

 

WR = 8

TE = 5

RB = 9.5

OL = 7.5

Coach = 7.5

 

Average out to 7.5...

[keepthefaith]

You are the only douche I see...

 

I made the comment of we have had better players in the draft the last 3 years...I said 3 years combined you dipstick...that question was not about whether we had the best FO, it was whether our end result was better in a player by player basis...man, you are as retarted as they come, I swear...its fine if you would rather have the pats draft over the last 3 years, but I will take ours, but you seem to want to mock me because of that...its fine, doesnt change my stance...

 

I normally don't get into a "you are this" pissing match with someone, but your ignorance is colossal. I keep things analytical, while you stomp your feet and act like a whiny biatch who doesnt know what the hell he is talking about because your intellect doesnt allow you to comprehend what someone writes...

 

I 100% fault myself for allowing myself to slum down in depths of the gutters where you post from...I know better...

 

And you have astounded me with how ignorant you are with this statement:

 

 

 

Show me even ONE, just ONE freaking lie I have ever written! I have been one of the ones with BALLS to call out Edwards and his flaws...ask anyone. I have never resulted to name calling or bashing him, only discussed REAL LIFE ACTUAL PLAY on the field and stats. Man, the levels of pussification of your posts are astounding...

 

Here is the funniest part...judging by your post above, you clearly think Edwards hasnt played well...hmmmm, thats also my stance...so you are being an infant jackass about something you apparently feel the same way about as I do...

 

I am sure I have used a lot of big words in here to complicated for you to understand, so here is a link to something that may be able to help you figure it out...

 

Here is help for you Bill

 

This board is filled with grief for simple reasons.

 

The Bills don't make the personnel and coaching choices that it takes to win and this upcoming season has the look of "more of the same". Until that changes, we'll have more of the same on this board also.

 

Looks like another year of fun to me.

[Alphadawg7]

This board is filled with grief for simple reasons.

 

The Bills don't make the personnel and coaching choices that it takes to win and this upcoming season has the look of "more of the same". Until that changes, we'll have more of the same on this board also.

 

Looks like another year of fun to me.

 

lmao...true

[Magox]

I agree too its a combo of things...heck, I played football and understand its a TEAM game...I would grade his supporting cast a 7.5...here is how I came up with that...

 

1. Evans is a top level WR IMO.

2. Reed is better than he is getting credit for, case in point, how bad our offense dropped off when he was out. He isnt going to be top 10, but he is a solid and reliable player who runs above average routes and has good hands. Not to mention, he is solid blocker in the run game.

3. Our O Line wasnt great, but it did often provide Trent with lots of time to throw in the second half of the season.

4. Tight End was very weak for us...

5. RB's were top notch...

6. Coaching staff made some mistakes, but the fact we were able to achieve 7 wins in 07 after all the injuries, bad luck, and a rookie QB was still an achievement. In 08, our inept Offense kept us from winning more games than our Coaching staff IMO. So, I dont hold them as low as many Bills fans...

 

WR = 8

TE = 5

RB = 9.5

OL = 7.5

Coach = 7.5

 

Average out to 7.5...

Wow!!

 

WR 8???

 

OL 7.5???

 

Coach 7.5????????

 

and you say other people are delusional. On what relative scale are you going by?

 

From 1-10

 

5 being average

 

WR 6 at best....Josh Reed is an average 5 as a #2 WR. Lee Evans is an 8.5 at best. Roscoe is a 3-4. Hardy was a 2. Steve Johnson didn't get any playing time til the end of the season.

 

OL 5.5 at best.... Jason Peters last year performed at a 5 level. Butler who was hurt part of the year, maybe can be considered slightly above average 6. Preston/Fowler 3 , Langston Walker 7, Dockery 5

 

Coach 3 considerably below average.

 

Really Alpha, did you quote those numbers with a straight face? I hope not, I'm thinking you were trying to pull our leg.

 

 

 

Also regarding Edwards, It's one thing to call out Edwards on some of his bad games, but it's another to obsessively try to prove your point over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over etc. You are the first and last to chime in on your quest to show TBD that Edwards is not worthy of being a starting QB.

 

It would be ok if you commented on your opinion a few times, but you are obsessive. I mean truly obsessive. Now you can try to fool yourself and think that you are not, but the fact is that you are. Seems like every page on this thread, someone new is calling you out on it.

 

Just to put things into perspective. Why don't you take a look at your last 200 posts, and see how many of them are regarding Edwards or how another qb like Cutler would be better. Sometimes you just have to take a step back and reflect. I think by looking at your post history you can get an opportunity to do that.

 

If it wasn't for your obsessive crusade against Edwards, the majority of your posts wouldn't be so bad, but unfortunately your consistant obsessive behavior to degrade Edwards tarnishes you as a credible poster, that's just how I see it.

[Bill from NYC]

Wow!!

 

WR 8???

 

OL 7.5???

 

Coach 7.5????????

 

and you say other people are delusional. On what relative scale are you going by?

 

From 1-10

 

5 being average

 

WR 6 at best....Josh Reed is an average 5 as a #2 WR. Lee Evans is an 8.5 at best. Roscoe is a 3-4. Hardy was a 2. Steve Johnson didn't get any playing time til the end of the season.

 

OL 5.5 at best.... Jason Peters last year performed at a 5 level. Butler who was hurt part of the year, maybe can be considered slightly above average 6. Preston/Fowler 3 , Langston Walker 7, Dockery 5

 

Coach 3 considerably below average.

 

Really Alpha, did you quote those numbers with a straight face? I hope not, I'm thinking you were trying to pull our leg.

 

 

 

Also regarding Edwards, It's one thing to call out Edwards on some of his bad games, but it's another to obsessively try to prove your point over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over etc. You are the first and last to chime in on your quest to show TBD that Edwards is not worthy of being a starting QB.

 

It would be ok if you commented on your opinion a few times, but you are obsessive. I mean truly obsessive. Now you can try to fool yourself and think that you are not, but the fact is that you are. Seems like every page on this thread, someone new is calling you out on it.

 

Just to put things into perspective. Why don't you take a look at your last 200 posts, and see how many of them are regarding Edwards or how another qb like Cutler would be better. Sometimes you just have to take a step back and reflect. I think by looking at your post history you can get an opportunity to do that.

 

If it wasn't for your obsessive crusade against Edwards, the majority of your posts wouldn't be so bad, but unfortunately your consistant obsessive behavior to degrade Edwards tarnishes you as a credible poster, that's just how I see it.

 

In other words, he is a douche.

[Alphadawg7]

Wow!!

 

WR 8???

 

OL 7.5???

 

Coach 7.5????????

 

and you say other people are delusional. On what relative scale are you going by?

 

From 1-10

 

5 being average

 

WR 6 at best....Josh Reed is an average 5 as a #2 WR. Lee Evans is an 8.5 at best. Roscoe is a 3-4. Hardy was a 2. Steve Johnson didn't get any playing time til the end of the season.

 

OL 5.5 at best.... Jason Peters last year performed at a 5 level. Butler who was hurt part of the year, maybe can be considered slightly above average 6. Preston/Fowler 3 , Langston Walker 7, Dockery 5

 

Coach 3 considerably below average.

 

Really Alpha, did you quote those numbers with a straight face? I hope not, I'm thinking you were trying to pull our leg.

 

 

 

Also regarding Edwards, It's one thing to call out Edwards on some of his bad games, but it's another to obsessively try to prove your point over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over etc. You are the first and last to chime in on your quest to show TBD that Edwards is not worthy of being a starting QB.

 

It would be ok if you commented on your opinion a few times, but you are obsessive. I mean truly obsessive. Now you can try to fool yourself and think that you are not, but the fact is that you are. Seems like every page on this thread, someone new is calling you out on it.

 

Just to put things into perspective. Why don't you take a look at your last 200 posts, and see how many of them are regarding Edwards or how another qb like Cutler would be better. Sometimes you just have to take a step back and reflect. I think by looking at your post history you can get an opportunity to do that.

 

If it wasn't for your obsessive crusade against Edwards, the majority of your posts wouldn't be so bad, but unfortunately your consistant obsessive behavior to degrade Edwards tarnishes you as a credible poster, that's just how I see it.

 

First off, you severly understimate Reed...I rate him at a 7 and Evans at a 9...that averages out to 8 as I only rated starting players.

 

Like I said, I hold the staff slightly higher than others...no shock there...

 

And Peters is not our whole OL...it did provide solid protection through periods of the year...not great, but not a fail grade as you want to point out...7.5 is a C...

 

I keep emotional opinnion out of my ratings...you clearly hate the staff, so you go over the top in the rating, and that is fine, but I dont feel they were as bad as you say, just my opinnion.

[Magox]

First off, you severly understimate Reed...I rate him at a 7 and Evans at a 9...that averages out to 8 as I only rated starting players.

 

Like I said, I hold the staff slightly higher than others...no shock there...

 

And Peters is not our whole OL...it did provide solid protection through periods of the year...not great, but not a fail grade as you want to point out...7.5 is a C...

 

I keep emotional opinnion out of my ratings...you clearly hate the staff, so you go over the top in the rating, and that is fine, but I dont feel they were as bad as you say, just my opinnion.

Really?

 

I clearly hate the staff? hmmm

 

where do you base that opinion on?

 

I rarely show hate for anyone. So, I think you're confusing me with someone else.

 

Regarding WR, remember Josh Reed last year for the most part was a #2 WR. So by rating him a 7, and 5 being an average WR, you are saying that he is better than %70 of #2 WR's in this league?

 

Are you saying that the other WR's in Hardy, Johnson and Parrish also played at a 8 rating? because you did rate the WR's as an 8. So, if you are going to rate Evans a 9 (which I don't agree with, I do think he's good, but not better than %90 of #1 WR's) and Reed a 7 (which I have a hard time agreeing with you), the rest would have to grade out as an 8 level for you to be correct with your analysis.

 

Coaching???? 7.5!! Really???? You are saying that Jauron is better than %75 of the NFL head coaches in this league? WOW!!! Talk about delusional. Even if you want to give him more credit than he could possibly deserve, at best a 5. %50 better than the coaches, even that is a huge stretch.

 

OL 7.5! ???????????

 

I can't think of one lineman, last year, that played better than %75 of the players of their position. The best last year had to be Langston Walker or Butler, but at best you could say between the two, they were slightly better than average, grading at best a 6.5 between the two, that would be better than %65 of the players of that same position. Fowler/Preston played below average. I would say that they played as well or better than maybe %30 of average centers. Dockery at best could of been considered an average 5. Peters, by your standards and the previous posts that I have read you comment, last year played at 3, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt of a 5. Now at his best, he is a 9 or 9.5, but we are talking about last year, right?

 

Come on Alpha, we know that by giving these outlandish and proposterous ratings that you generously gave, was all in your attempt to prove your point that Edwards was the main culprit of why he was a .500 QB.

[Alphadawg7]

Really?

 

I clearly hate the staff? hmmm

 

where do you base that opinion on?

 

I rarely show hate for anyone. So, I think you're confusing me with someone else.

 

Regarding WR, remember Josh Reed last year for the most part was a #2 WR. So by rating him a 7, and 5 being an average WR, you are saying that he is better than %70 of #2 WR's in this league?

 

Are you saying that the other WR's in Hardy, Johnson and Parrish also played at a 8 rating? because you did rate the WR's as an 8. So, if you are going to rate Evans a 9 (which I don't agree with, I do think he's good, but not better than %90 of #1 WR's) and Reed a 7 (which I have a hard time agreeing with you), the rest would have to grade out as an 8 level for you to be correct with your analysis.

 

Coaching???? 7.5!! Really???? You are saying that Jauron is better than %75 of the NFL head coaches in this league? WOW!!! Talk about delusional. Even if you want to give him more credit than he could possibly deserve, at best a 5. %50 better than the coaches, even that is a huge stretch.

 

OL 7.5! ???????????

 

I can't think of one lineman, last year, that played better than %75 of the players of their position. The best last year had to be Langston Walker or Butler, but at best you could say between the two, they were slightly better than average, grading at best a 6.5 between the two, that would be better than %65 of the players of that same position. Fowler/Preston played below average. I would say that they played as well or better than maybe %30 of average centers. Dockery at best could of been considered an average 5. Peters, by your standards and the previous posts that I have read you comment, last year played at 3, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt of a 5. Now at his best, he is a 9 or 9.5, but we are talking about last year, right?

 

Come on Alpha, we know that by giving these outlandish and proposterous ratings that you generously gave, was all in your attempt to prove your point that Edwards was the main culprit of why he was a .500 QB.

 

Where are you getting your math? How does a 7 mean he is better than 70% of the #2 WR's in the league? 7 is average...5 is failing...his grade has no relevanve to other players at his position...the grade is solely his grade on a scale of 1 to 10 with 5 being a Fail...6 below average, 7 average, 8 above average, 9+ really good to great player.

 

I rated him as a 7 as a WR because he is solid but not great...that doesnt mean 70% of the WR's are below him...I made no such statements and how you come to math is beyond me.

 

So why do you keep associating 75% with the numbers I wrote...that makes no sense what so ever...their grades have zero to do with how players at their position grade out.

 

I said you hate the staff if you grade them at a 3 out of 10...about the only person in all the NFL I would give a grade that low is Al Davis...

 

Again, our scales are clearly different...

 

7.5 for the OL is average...I said they werent great, but they werent terrible. They were about average last year...hence the 7.5 grade...

[Magox]

Where are you getting your math? How does a 7 mean he is better than 70% of the #2 WR's in the league? 7 is average...5 is failing...his grade has no relevanve to other players at his position...the grade is solely his grade on a scale of 1 to 10 with 5 being a Fail...6 below average, 7 average, 8 above average, 9+ really good to great player.

 

I rated him as a 7 as a WR because he is solid but not great...that doesnt mean 70% of the WR's are below him...I made no such statements and how you come to math is beyond me.

 

So why do you keep associating 75% with the numbers I wrote...that makes no sense what so ever...their grades have zero to do with how players at their position grade out.

 

I said you hate the staff if you grade them at a 3 out of 10...about the only person in all the NFL I would give a grade that low is Al Davis...

 

Again, our scales are clearly different...

 

7.5 for the OL is average...I said they werent great, but they werent terrible. They were about average last year...hence the 7.5 grade...

 

It's only logical that a 5 would be average. Much easier to understand that way.

 

That's where I am getting my math.

 

I looked on line, and the only ratings table that I could find for players was this. Now there may be more, but this is what I found.

 

http://www.rateitall.com/t-118-nfl-players-current.aspx

 

Star Rating Scale: 1 = Terrible / 2 = Bad / 3 = Ok / 4 = Good / 5 = Great!

 

This is pretty much how I had it, except I was basing it on your 10 point scale. 5 being roughly being average would translate exactly 2.5 on this scale. According to your scale 7.5 is average that would translate into just about a 4 on this scale.

 

You must be talking about the Madden Philosophy of rating.

[Alphadawg7]

It's only logical that a 5 would be average. Much easier to understand that way.

 

That's where I am getting my math.

 

I looked on line, and the only ratings table that I could find for players was this. Now there may be more, but this is what I found.

 

http://www.rateitall.com/t-118-nfl-players-current.aspx

 

Star Rating Scale: 1 = Terrible / 2 = Bad / 3 = Ok / 4 = Good / 5 = Great!

 

This is pretty much how I had it, except I was basing it on your 10 point scale. 5 being roughly being average would translate exactly 2.5 on this scale. According to your scale 7.5 is average that would translate into just about a 4 on this scale.

 

You must be talking about the Madden Philosophy of rating.

 

 

dude, that is the same scale cut in half that I used...lmao...

 

Didnt you go to to school...

 

A = 90-100

B = 80-89

C = 70-79

D = 60-89

F = 0-59

 

Thats the scale I used...nothing high tech...simple standard scale to keep it as simple as I could for you...

 

If this scale is too complicated for then I apologize...

[Magox]

dude, that is the same scale cut in half that I used...lmao...

 

Didnt you go to to school...

 

A = 90-100

B = 80-89

C = 70-79

D = 60-89

F = 0-59

 

Thats the scale I used...nothing high tech...simple standard scale to keep it as simple as I could for you...