Thoughts on the NFL Season So Far
The AFC is very strong and very competitive. Here are seven solid AFC teams that I can see making the Superbowl: Baltimore, Cincinnati, Denver, Indianapolis, Jacksonville, New England, and San Diego. And I wouldn’t count Pittsburgh out. Baltimore (my local team) and Denver (my favorite team) both have a lot of room for improvement on the offensive side of the ball. I have more hope for Denver because they’ve shown that they can run the ball and Plummer will certainly get better (he’s had slumps before), while Baltimore hasn’t been able to run for two-and-a-half years now and McNair still doesn’t look like he ‘gets’ the new (to him) offense. Neither New England nor Indianapolis are playing as well as they did last year and they are 4-1 and 5-0, respectively, so watch out if they hit their stride.
The NFC isn’t as deep, but the three standout teams, Chicago (!), Philadelphia, and Seattle, are very strong. Can you believe how good Chicago looks? And we’re past the point where we can consider that it might be a fluke. One or two dominant performances we can chalk up to good luck or bad opponents, but not five in a row. Grossman is making phenomenal reads and throwing some amazing balls. Add that formidable defense and you have to consider them the early favorite to win the Superbowl.
If we ignore T.O., he’ll go away. The Dallas vs. Philly game this week was only a big deal because the media said it was. There was no circus beyond the silly media hyping of T.O./McNabb bad blood issues.
Everyone needs to cool their jets and stop calling for the benching of quality veteran QB’s in favor of rookies. You only start your rookie back-up if a) your starter goes down or b) it’s clear that the season is a bust. Rookie QB’s rarely help their teams win. And no rookie QB is going to put Dallas or Denver over the top. So shut it, knuckleheads. That includes you, ESPN and especially you, dumb ol’ Michael Irvin.
Why does nobody remember that the Broncos went 13-3 last year and were a win away from the Superbowl? That is a great year. And who was their QB? Jake Plummer, the same guy that everyone wants to bench. They guy has bad games, like all QB’s do, but he’s not a bad QB; he’s a quality second-tier guy.
Tier one: Peyton Manning, Donovan McNabb, Tom Brady, Carson Palmer, and, if we are to believe our eyes, Rex Grossman. Proven tier two guys: Drew Brees, Mike Vick, Trent Green, Matt Hasselbeck, Jake Plummer, Marc Bulger, and, if they get their acts together, Ben Roethlesberger and Steve McNair. Second tier guys are the ones that will rarely be the main reason that you lose a game and will often put very good performances together and will sometimes be the hero. I hate to say it, but I can’t put Brett Favre in the second tier anymore.
Tom, Jake Plummer is one of the most under-rated QBs in the game today. What a lot of people don’t know, and what the media is reluctant to say, is that Plummer has broke nearly all of Elway’s franchise records. I’m not sure why they don’t highlight this as much as they ought to. It makes me sick, really.
The Bears really are amazing, aren’t they? If they can keep it up on the other side of the ball, we’re looking at the NFC champions, hands down (assuming the Seahawks don’t pull it together, which is unlikely).
And Palmer looks great. He looks like he never even hurt himself. All Cincy’s got to do is get the defense up to par and we’re looking at a 4 way battle in the AFC — Indy, Cincy, Denver, and New England (or Pittsburgh).
Agreed on TO. He’ll go down in history as an a$$hole, nothing more.
Tom, who are your picks for SB XLI? I’m going to get bold and say Indy vs. Philly.
Comment by David J — October 10, 2006 @ 7:38 pm
Nice analysis. Yeah, the Bears are looking very good. But in my extremely unbiased opinion I think Seattle will pull it out and win the NFC. And they’ll play Indy in SB XLI.
Comment by Rusty — October 10, 2006 @ 8:00 pm
Yeah, it’s a toss-up between Seattle & Chicago for the NFC championship for me too. We’re only 1/3 of the way to the end, and I’d say if they keep up the way they’re going, Chicago takes it. But that’s just it, we’re only 1/3 of the way. If they keep hitting it this hard, they’ll be out of gas by the time the playoffs are over. I gotta hand it to the Seattle team for conserving the best for last, and taking it easy now and then. Saving Alexander (although a detriment to fantasy football players) for the end is wise. I hear you, man.
Comment by David J — October 10, 2006 @ 8:26 pm
Chicago vs. San Diego in the Super Bowl. Possibly Cincinnati. Indy and NE have been very lucky so far. Pittsburgh is going nowhere. Surprise playoff team will be New Orleans.
Comment by Bill — October 10, 2006 @ 10:01 pm
I’m a die-hard Denver fan and grew up in the mile-high city. I think they have a definite shot at the Super Bowl this year. Mainly because I believe in the defense, especially after last night.
Incidentally, I’m not a believer in Jake Plummer. I do think he’s under-rated, but until last year he was consistently inconsistent. He tries to make it happen in the big games and makes mistakes–particularly interceptions. Last year’s AFC championship where he threw two interceptions and fumbled twice is a perfect example.
I’d be interesting in hearing what franchise records that belong to Elway Plummer has broken. Seeing how he’s only been with the Broncos for just over four years, I’m a bit skeptical that Elway’s legacy is in much danger.
Regardless, I like him better as a personality than Elway, who I always felt was a crybaby, especially after he got Dan Reeves fired. Basically, Reeves was only trying to establish the running game, and the running game ultimately proved to be what got the Broncos and Elway those back-to-back Super Bowls.
Comment by Brian G — October 10, 2006 @ 11:57 pm
As far as the Super Bowl, I break it down this way:
NFC: I think we’ve already seen who’s the better team between Chicago and Seattle. Hasselbeck’s been inconsistent, to say the least. Alexander’s hurt, etc. I like Philadelphia to beat out Chicago in the end though, I just think they’ve got more playoff experience and McNabb will be on fire.
AFC: Tougher call here. But not Indy. Did you see the Titans run all over them with Travis Henry? How are they going to stop running teams like Denver and San Diego? Plus, they got no running game. Neither Addai or Rhodes can get much done rushing. I think against any one of the powerhouse AFC defenses, Baltimore, San Diego, Jacksonville, or Denver they’d fold. Perennial chokers. I don’t see Cincy cutting it for similar reasons. I think the AFC champs will be a strong defensive team.
Maybe it’s my bias, but I keep coming back to Denver. They’ll get rolling stronger and faster each game. Witness how Bell ran against the Ravens, one of the toughest teams against the run. This will keep defenses honest and Jake will get to work some magic. I hate the Bolts, but they’d be my second pick. There’s some liabilities there, though. One is Shotenheimer, I think, the other is falling apart in clutch time, like they did against the Ravens.
Super Bowl XLI Denver 31, Philadelphia 21
Comment by Brian G — October 11, 2006 @ 12:12 am
Brian G,
The one Elway mark that I am positive Plummer beat last year was passing TD’s in a season. He might’ve beat Elway’s best year in passing and/or rushing yards too and I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he has a better completion percentage at Denver than Elway did.
I’m not going to argue against a Broncos pick for the Superbowl and not just because I’m a lifelong fan. Like I said, people seem to forget that they almost got there last year, and this year their defense looks stronger and their offense should get better too, once Plummer gets into the swing of things. Walker for Lelie is a definite upgrade and Tatum Bell should be better this year too.
I agree that Plummer is frustrating. The one play that sort of represents Plummer’s downside in a nutshell for me was from last year or the year before when the Broncos were in their opponent’s red zone, Plummer is back to pass, the rush gets to him and as he’s being pulled down he throws a left-handed pass right to a defender. He tries to do too much and ends up costing the team. But, he has a lot of upside as well and, on balance, he’s a strong QB. Given the choice, I’d take Peyton, but 13-3 last year wasn’t all running and defense. Plummer wins games.
David J,
From the NFC I can’t pick between Chicago and Philly at this point. And from the AFC I don’t see a clear front runner. But if you’re holding a gun to my head and I have to pick I’ll say Philly vs. Denver. Philly wins because that’s my luck. Despite the two great late-90’s wins, I was conditioned at an early age to expect a Denver Superbowl loss.
Here’s another tough question: which AFC team misses the playoffs: Denver, San Diego, Indy, Jacksonville, Baltimore, or Cincy? One of those teams doesn’t make it (New England’s got their division all but wrapped up). I’ve gotta go with either Jacksonville or San Diego. I don’t believe in Phillip Rivers yet.
Comment by Tom — October 11, 2006 @ 1:12 am
Are we the only household that is laughing our fannies off at Oakland being 0-5?
Comment by tracy m — October 11, 2006 @ 2:12 am
Let me only add that considering the extent of his horrible injury (bloody Steelers!), Carson Palmer is an absolute hero.
Comment by Ronan — October 11, 2006 @ 2:22 am
I’ve been drifting ever since the retirement of Steve Young.
I need to pick and settle on a football team for good. I’m thinking maybe that team will be the Giants.
It will not be the Broncos or the Cowboys.
Comment by danithew — October 11, 2006 @ 7:22 am
tracy m,
I just love the thought of Al Davis suffering through a terrible season and knowing that he can’t blame anyone but himself. Although I do take more pleasure in the Broncos beating up on a good Raiders team than on a crappy one, so I have slightly mixed feelings. But mostly I’m happy about it.
Comment by Tom — October 11, 2006 @ 7:37 am
A lot of love for Cincy. And for…Jake Plummer?Ahhh…good ol’ Denver fans. Never cease to amaze.
Denver’s only shot at the Super Bowl is to get Homefield throughout the playoffs. Plummer isn’t going to win a playoff game on the road. I gues it is feasible they could get it, but not likely. It’s going to come down to the head to head matchups with SD.
AFC:
AFC EAST: NE will roll through a terrible division.
AFC North: I’m going with Baltimore. I’m not drinking the Cincy kool-aid–which undoubtedly is either spiked or has a roofie. I’d feel better about them if they hadn’t soiled themselves against NE. And the only reason they beat Pitt, was a muffed punt return and 13 fourth quarter interceptions by Rothliesberger.
AFC South: Indianapolis easily. I know they’ve struggled, but we’ll find out what they’re about in their next 3 games, vs Wash., @ Den, @ NE. Jacksonville has had several injuries and that offense is way too inconsistent. I think they get the wildcard.
AFC West: I’m taking SD. They’re the best team and they have an easier schedule than Denver. Denver gets the wildcard.
I’ll say the AFC championship is NE vs. SD. SD wins.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 7:52 am
NFC:
NFC East: Philly wins. It will be interesting to see if the second place team (probably Dallas) can come through and take the wild card.
NFC North: Chicago. They should only lose 2 games this year–@ NYG, and @ NE. That’s it. I don’t like Minnesota this year.
NFC South: Carolina is taking this division. And watch out for them in the playoffs. They are one of two NFC teams that would be able to beat Chicago on the road in the playoffs (they did it last year), the other being Philly. Atlanta gets the wildcard. New Orleans’ nice story is about to end.
NFC WEST: Seattle wins, but I think St. Louis (who beat Denver) gives them a good run for their money and gets the wildcard.
NFC championship Philly vs. Chicago–Chicago wins a close one.
Super Bowl: SD 21 Chicago 13.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 7:58 am
Tim,
It’s the fetchin’ Denver fans that are calling Plummer a bum and booing him off the field. They’re the knuckleheads this Denver fan is chastising. And you too. So there.
So if Jake Plummer’s no good, you have to somehow account for 13-3 and getting to the conference championship last year. What part of Denver’s game is so incredibly good that they were able to overcome having a sucky QB to rack up 13 regular season wins and a playoff win against New England? What other second-tier QB would have indubitably gotten better results from that team, keeping in mind that the running game was less than stellar and the receiving corps was mediocre?
I’ll have a better handle on the AFC North when Baltimore and Cincy meet head-to-head. I think Baltimore will probably win, but we’ll see.
In the AFC West are you a Rivers believer or do you just think the rest of the team is that good? Their defense so far is looking great, but I don’t have a lot of confidence that they’re for real. I don’t know that they’re significantly different from last year’s team. Certainly not on offense. I can’t consider Rivers for Brees an upgrade at this point.
I won’t argue with your NFC picks. Things are a little more cut-and-dried over there.
Comment by Tom — October 11, 2006 @ 9:03 am
Quarterback is becoming a highly overrated and overhyped postion in football. All we talk about is how so and so hasn’t won the big one and yet we’ve had Trent Dilfer win the Super Bowl (vs. Kerry Collins!), Jake DelHomme has been to the SB and an NFC Championship game, Ben Rothliesberger went to the AFC Championship game his 1st year and so on.
The QB position has gone from “Win the game” to “Don’t lose this game.” Shanahan has clamped down on Plummer and limited his mistakes, but every once in awhile he tries to pull off a left-handed hail mary, or some other stupid play. He just can’t be counted on.
Denver’s strength is in the running game (always has been) and in their defense. But if they have to go on the road and play someone with a strong rush defense and an above average offense, I don’t see them winning.
If Brady throws a TD instead of a pick-six last year, its 20-20.
Like I said, the key will be the two head-to-head games with San Diego. Am I sold on Rivers? I know he’s not going to lose the game because Schottenheimer won’t let him. But he played a helluva game against Pitt last week.
Rivers is #8 in passer rating. Plummer is…#28.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 9:17 am
I am going with Tim in this argument. Plummer is now and always has been overrated. He is prone to making critical errors at critical moments. He loses games for his team.
Denver is about the rushing and has been since Shanahan took over. So much so that it doesn’t really matter who is doing it, as Shanahan has repeatedly demonstrated. If anything else, Shanahan has proven that winning comes from having a great O-line and average or just-better-than-average runningbacks, wide receivers, and quarterbacks.
Comment by HP — October 11, 2006 @ 9:22 am
My humble picks:
NFC East: Philly. I think the Giants will be a wild card.
NFC South: New Orleans (a stretch, but I think the talent might actually gel this year). Atlanta will be a wild card team. I don’t believe that Carolina will pull it together this year, which is too bad as I really like Delhomme.
NFC Central: The Bears (a pick I would not have made prior to the season starting)
NFC West: Seattle
In the NFC, it is consistently a matter of choosing the best of the worst (this not as much the case in the NFC East). Saying that I see some of these teams as winning the division doesn’t necessarily translate into my thinking that they are all that good. It just means the divisions are way down.
AFCEast: New England
AFCSouth: Jacksonville (because I am a total homer and because I think Leftwich to Williams is for real). Indy as a wild card
AFCCentral: I’ll go with Baltimore, too. The Ravens finally have a QB and it looks like they are going to jettison Jamal Lewis (both are good things for the offense, I think). That said, I see Cincinatti in the second wild card here.
AFCWest: Crap, I dunno. Denver, I guess.
Once again, my choosing a team is not necessarily reflective of my liking a team. In fact, I think that NFC East is the only decent division in the NFC and that only the AFC South and North don’t already have their champion crowned. That there is tension in the AFC West and NFC South is only do to the fact that nobody there is really all that good. It is kind of a down year for parity.
I see Philly and Jacksonville in the Superbowl (see the above about being a homer). However, I think Philly will win it, say 24-14.
Comment by HP — October 11, 2006 @ 9:35 am
I’m not trying to say that Plummer is a great QB. Just good. I gotta know, is there a second-tier QB that you can confidently say would have gotten a better overall result in Denver last year? I’m pretty sure that putting Manning or Brady at QB on that team last year would have improved the results, but I don’t think that replacing Plummer with many others would have made the difference. Denver has as good a shot at the Superbowl with Plummer at the helm as they would with any other second-tier guy. And a much better shot than if they bench him in favor of the rookie.
And I have to disagree that Plummer was reigned in last year and is a game-manager QB. He’s no Dilfer. Last year’s Broncos were not just a run-and-play-defense team. He had more TD passes last year than Elway ever had. He won games. He had great performances. 13-3 was more thanks to Plummer than despite Plummer, though I do acknowledge that it was also thanks to good running, good defense, and good coaching.
Comment by Tom — October 11, 2006 @ 9:45 am
All right, here’s the deal on New Orleans’. They’re 4-1 because they’ve beaten Cleveland, Green Bay, Atlanta (no chance they lose that one), and TB (in miraculous fashion).
They have yet to play:
Philly
Balt
@Pitt
Cincy
@ Atlanta
@ Dallas
Wash
@ NYG
That’s a little rough–even for a great team. As much as I would love to see it happen, New Orleans just isn’t gonna make it.
In the NFL, the schedule almost has as much to do with a team’s success as their talent. SD may have been one of the best teams in the NFL last year, but also had the toughest schedule anyone has seen in recent memory. They finished 9-7 and out of the playoffs.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 9:45 am
The results would have been the same with ANY QB, Tom. That’s the point. It’s not about the QB anymore. There are only a few QB’s in the league that change the game–Brady, Manning, McNabb, and Palmer. After that, you can interchange any QB you want and you’d get pretty much the same results.
Brian Griese took them to 11-5 a few years ago–Brian Griese! And the only reason they didn’t win more was because of their terrible defense.
I have yet to see a Denver game where I thought to myself, Wow! Plummer really pulled that one out. I can remember countless games (even with Denver) where I thought, Wow! Plummer really lost that for them.
Tom, Plummer only had 18 TD passes last year and threw the ball 70 fewer times than the year before. He wasn’t asked to do as much.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 9:51 am
Elway had 27 TD’s in ‘97, same as Plummer’s best of 27 in…2004, when they exited in the first round.
Comparing Elway and Plummer only proves my point of the interchangeability of quarterbacks.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 10:06 am
Yes, I am thrilled that the Raiders suck butt and are 0-5. One of my favorite Super Bowls was watching Gruden and Tampa Bay pummel them into submisssion. Hate hate hate the Raiders, even more than I hate San Diego.
San Diego is not going to win out against Denver. Denver even has the tougher schedule this year, but still Denver will triumph. San Diego like Indy is one of these teams that has been in a holding pattern for the last three or four years. They’ve never been able to take full advantage of Tomlinson. And what is so different about this year’s team? Just Rivers. Let’s not forget what happened to that defense in the fourth quarter against Baltimore. Plus, no one can convince me Shotenheimer is a better coach than Shanahan.
I will agree that Denver is in trouble if they don’t get home field advantage in the playoffs, or at least can avoid playing in Indy where they have been blown out on multiple occasions. However, Indy is not Indy any more. No Edgerin James. Peyton alone can not close the deal. Just as Elway alone couldn’t close the deal. It’s always been thus. Plus, when it comes to smashing mouthes Indy evaporates. I don’t see it.
Comment by Brian G — October 11, 2006 @ 10:07 am
What’s different about SD? The schedule.
And it wasn’t the defense that struggled against Baltimore, it was the offense giving them great field position. Schottenheimer wasn’t trusting Rivers with that game–he trusted his defense and lost.
Schottenheimer and Shanahan are about the same coach. I don’t see much difference there at all.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 10:14 am
I think if you compared their records against each other you would probably see a difference.
Comment by Brian G — October 11, 2006 @ 10:18 am
Not really:
Shanahan 125-75 62.5% win pct.
Schottenheimer 189-125 60.2% win pct.
Though head to head Shanahan has the advantage 11-8.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 10:26 am
Plummer only had 18 TD passes last year and threw the ball 70 fewer times than the year before. He wasn’t asked to do as much.
A good year.
I disagree that any QB could have got the 13-3 result. Third-tier guys like Kerry Collins, Alex Smith, Joey Harrington, David Carr, Kyle Boller, Brad Johnson, etc. would’ve won fewer games, in my opinion. I was (miraculously) able to watch about eleven Broncos games last year and there were some times when Plummer did pull off the win. Last week against the great Ravens defense, Plummer had a very good fourth quarter. He didn’t win it by himself, but his mobility and playmaking ability were a big part of the win.
Again, I’m not arguing that Plummer is great. Just good.
On the importance of the QB in general, I agree that those top-tier guys are the only real difference makers at QB. But the rest are not entirely interchangeable. They’re interchangeable within tiers, so trading Plummer for Hasselbeck wouldn’t make much difference to either team, but trade Boller or Collins for Hasselbeck and the Seahawks don’t go to the Superbowl.
Comment by Tom — October 11, 2006 @ 10:30 am
Exactly. I think the stats establish my point.
Now, if you compared post-season games you might see an even bigger difference.
The Broncos have a long history of taking the Shottenheimer teams out of the play-offs. It goes way back to those back-to-back nailbiting AFC Championship games when he was at the helm in Cleveland.
Comment by Brian G — October 11, 2006 @ 10:31 am
I would say Plummer was an upper third-tier, lower second tier-guy before he go to Arizona.
Brad Johnson almost led Minnesota to the playoffs last year, and David Carr is leading the league in passing this year.
Things change when you give a QB a great O-Line and a soid running game.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 10:36 am
But Shanahan will always be remembered for his post-Elway years, fair or not.
And Shanahan hasn’t quite rebuilt teams like Schottenheimer has had to do.
I would say that Shanahan’s last 5-6 years in Denver are almost exactly like Schottenheimer’s years in KC.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 10:38 am
By the way, they actually played even when Schottenheimer was in KC, 5-5. It’s been in SD that Marty’s had his troubles with Denver–making this year even more critical.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 10:42 am
I’m laughing about the Raiders — and I live in Oakland. The loss to the Niners was hilarious.
The state of Bay Area pro sports has finally pushed me over the edge into what is my natural state anyway — bandwagonism and fair-weather-fanhood.
The owners make it impossible for me to support the Raiders and the Niners (and it doesn’t help that the teams suck, but even if they didn’t — Davis and York are not owners I would support, and I’m one of those who believe you have to factor that into the equation when it comes to pro sports.).
The Warriors are a joke.
I still follow the Giants, but I’m no longer a fan of Barry Bonds and I’m esp. not a fan of the creaky-old roster strategy of Brian Sabean et. al.
The Oakland A’s are a nice story with a decent owner. But I’ve always been lukewarm about them. Not sure why. Maybe because when I was a teenager I hated Canseco.
The Sharks? Pretty good organization and team, but I still have a hard time taking NHL teams seriously unless they play in cities where it, you know, actually snows.
So I’m back down to my core love — college football and the California Bears. Luckily, it’s a much better place to be than it was in the mid-to-late ’90s.
Comment by William Morris — October 11, 2006 @ 11:29 am
But back to the NFL…
I haven’t watched many games — and, of course, don’t get to see the good ones because I’m saddled with local broadcasts (and refuse to pay for cable).
So my totally uninformed opinion is:
Superbowl is Carolina vs. Baltimore.
I’m totally not sold on that, but I will make one sure prediction — San Diego chokes in the playoffs.
Comment by William Morris — October 11, 2006 @ 11:33 am
Detroit is another team that had a hilarious loss last week. Aside from their loss to Chicago, they have been close in every game, but have found a way to squander each one.
Denver fans, I lived in Colorado in the early 80s, and have fond memories of the futile efforts of Sammy Winder and Steve DeBerg. I used to listen to the games on my little transistor radio in the back of the van on the way home from church.
This was the same radio I had under my pillow when I should have been sleeping and heard the 3-OT Nuggets game when English, Vandeweghe, etc. combined with the Pistons to score the most points ever in an NBA game (370 – Det 186, Den 184).
Comment by Bill — October 11, 2006 @ 12:24 pm
Ah, yes, DeBerg and Sammy Winder, but don’t forget Rulon Jones. And Rich Karlis, the lovable bare-footed kicker. Back in those days there was this back-up QB for Elway that never played named Gary Kubiak. Now he’s coaching the Texans.
Growing up in Denver, I knew a lot of people who spent all of church with an transistor radio in their pocket and an earpiece in one ear.
DeBerg had his moments, for a while he held the record for most consecutive completions, but then I think he lost it to Montana. I think it was 17, then Montana strung it along to 21, or something.
Comment by Brian G — October 11, 2006 @ 2:56 pm
I have no memory of anything pre-Elway. I never listened on the radio during Church (obviously, since it wasn’t on the radio in Utah), but I would try to find any excuse to miss church so I could watch the games when they were early. I would hide my shoes and pretend to have lost them or pretend to be sick. Sometimes it actually worked.
Comment by Tom — October 11, 2006 @ 3:12 pm
I remember the outcry among Denver fans to play Tommy Maddox over Elway after they drafted him out of UCLA. Gotta love Denver fans.
Comment by Tim J. — October 11, 2006 @ 3:22 pm
Neither Addai or Rhodes can get much done rushing.
Brian (#6), have you looked to add Rhodes’ & Addai’s numbers together to get their total rushing effort? If you do that, you’ve got above average results (with minor exceptions, usually due to falling behind and having to air it out). Nothing stellar, mind you, but above average. (Same thing with the Dillon + Moroney combo). And don’t forget–Indy doesn’t have to beat Tennessee in order to keep the AFC South championship because TN sucks too bad, so naturally they “rested” when they played them (relatively speaking). TN just isn’t a threat in that conference. If it were playoff time, and TN was in the way, Indy would have killed them.
Tim J, to say the QB is irrelevant is a bit much. A lot of QBs are the ones making the play-calling, which in a sense is part coaching. The QBs are the ones reading the defense and calling out what they see to the O-line and others. They’re the ones kicking dudes into motion, changing things up, and using their brains AND their brawn. For most of the other positions, things are quite mechanical, with little or no analysis, other than execution of the playbook (once again, as called out by the QB). And yes, SD sucks without Brees, and NO is doing great from his presence. A QB matters. He matters a lot. You can’t just throw any ol’ Joe Shmoe into a game and expect the variance from the norm to be marginal. The QB is the big play-maker, bar none. Maybe I’m reading you wrong, and that you’re saying there’s interchangeability between Elway and Plummer, in which case I won’t argue on that.
Denver in the SB? I just don’t see it happening this year. The offense doesn’t do it for me (but then again, neither did Pittsburgh’s last year, so who knows).
Comment by David J — October 11, 2006 @ 9:13 pm
David,
Again, there are only four difference-making QB’s. Brady, Manning, McNabb, and Palmer. Other than that they’re pretty much all the same save for a few guys on the bottom, Brooks, Kerry Collins, Warner, any Rookie, and quite possibly Culpepper–who is doing worse then Gus Frerotte did a year ago.
Take Drew Bledsoe for example. He went to Dallas to give the offense a boost, but he himself has lost two games by himself. And if he manages to make the playoffs, well, he’ll do exactly what Quincy Carter(!) did a few years back. It makes no difference beyond the top four guys.
Look at the QB’s who have played in the Super Bowl the past few years:
Brad Johnson (won)
Kerry Collins
Trent Dilfer (won)
Jake Delhomme
Neil O’Donnell
Chris Chandler
Stan Harbaugh
And don’t forget Shaun King was a few yards from making it with the Bucs in 2000.
What do these guys have in common? They played behind a plus O-Line, with a great running game, and the teams had a great defense. Why more teams haven’t figured this out is beyond me.
Comment by Tim J. — October 12, 2006 @ 7:14 am
I don’t think it’s so much a matter of teams not figuring out that they need a great O-line and defense, it’s just that its damn difficult to put those things together. Though I think you’re right that too much emphasis is put on the QB. Bad teams are not going to get good by drafting the savior QB if they don’t have a line to protect them or a running game to take some pressure off. Still, it’s overstating it to say that all but the bottom few are interchangeable. QB’s help and hurt their teams to varying degrees. It’s a continuum [despite my grouping QB's into tiers. I do that because it's difficult to evaluate precisely how much each QB helps their team.] True, Baltimore would’ve won the superbowl in 2000 (?) with the majority of QBs playing at the time. But most teams don’t have that kind of defense and they need QB play that will help them, not just some guy that’s in there to not throw interceptions.
Comment by Tom — October 12, 2006 @ 8:17 am
Tom, while I agree with most of what you say, it is difficult to assemble a great O-Line and defense. Matt Millen should be banned for like for drafting a WR in the 1st round three consecutive years. Things might also be different had SD drafted Larry Fitzgerald instead of Philip Rivers.
But I would challenge anyone to find a team where a change was made a QB that drastically changed the outcome of their season–without also having upgraded their offensive line, running game, or defense.
The only ones I can think of are Tom Brady and Carson Palmer, and those guys are in the top tier.
Comment by Tim J. — October 12, 2006 @ 8:32 am
The flip side is, how many times have we seen a team try to change its fortunes by signing a big time QB, only to have it fail miserably (think Culpepper and the Dolphins).
Comment by Tim J. — October 12, 2006 @ 8:33 am
Heck, think of Carr in Houston now or all the top-pick QB’s of the past few years. Tim Couch looked like he was going to be a good QB, even early in his NFL career, but years of getting the crap beat out of you because you have no O-line to speak of will ruin anyone’s career.
Comment by HP — October 12, 2006 @ 9:07 am
Exactly. If I were a GM I would absolutely not draft a QB until I had a solid O-Line in place.
Overall, I think the media has incredibly overrated quarterbacks. Elways numbers aren’t great, and he didn’t win the SB until the running game got there–which is why Marino never won.
Aikman is terribly, terribly overrated. He had one of the best running backs, and possibly the best O-Line ever. Case in point, Emmitt Smith holds out at the beginning of the season (‘93 or ‘94), the Cowboys proceed to go 1-3 with their only victory coming against a horrific Arizona team. Later that year, Aikman is out with an injury against the up and coming Packers on Thanksgiving. None other than Jason Garrett, Jason Garrett!, leads them to a two touchdown victory.
We have given QB’s waaayyyy too much credit for winning, and waaayyy too much blame for losing.
Comment by Tim J. — October 12, 2006 @ 9:32 am
[...] In our conversation about football here Tom reminded me of a childhood phenomenon: playing sick to get out of going to church. For some strange reason the only times I ever got sick as a child was on the Sunday mornings when the Seahawks happened to be playing at the same time as our church. I attempted this at least four or five times a season. [...]
Pingback by Nine Moons » Blog Archive : *Cough* *Cough*, I’m Too Sick To Go To Church Today » *Cough* *Cough*, I’m Too Sick To Go To Church Today — October 12, 2006 @ 10:40 am
Tim, I see your point. Those top-tier QBs definitely make a difference, but as was commented earlier, it could quite possibly be because of a superior O-line. David Carr was brought up as an example of a good QB behind a terrible O-line (sacked probably 80 times last year), and P. Manning’s O-line is one of the best (the Indy O-line won the Ironman award for their Thanksgiving 2004 game vs. Detroit). So I see your point.
And yes, QBs get a lot of the credit, most of which is probably due to them, but certainly not all. For example, I believe McNabb’s success so far this year is due to the Westbrook threat. As a receiving back, he makes everybody nervous — linemen (“is he coming through this hole at my side?”), linebackers (“is this a PA fake, a run, or will he go out for a pass?”) and the secondary (“Gee, I need to cover my WR, but keep Westbrook within view in case he breaks through”). He shakes things up for McNabb, thereby allowing McNabb more options with the throw. That said, Westbrook probably doesn’t get much of the credit for McNabb’s success, even though the two probably thrive off of each other.
Comment by David J — October 12, 2006 @ 5:34 pm
Unbe-freakin’-lievable. The Bears were crap. I can’t believe they won. Lucky dogs. [Plus some good second half defense].
Grossman is officially no longer in consideration for being a top tier QB, not unless he is phenomenal over the next several weeks. That was one of the worst QB performances I’ve seen in a long time. And he has no excuse. Protection was good enough and the opposition defense was nothing special. He just made *terrible* reads and bad throws. He let the hype get to his head. Really, really bad stuff.
There were several really good games this week. The Seahawks showed what they’re made of. So did the Rams, for that matter. Both teams have to be concerned with late-game defense, though.
Go Broncos! [I'm not at all happy with the way they won, but it's a win.]
Comment by Tom — October 16, 2006 @ 11:45 pm
I think you could replace Grossman with Brees. He showed alot by coming back to beat Philly.
Comment by Tim J. — October 17, 2006 @ 7:26 am
The Broncos offense is really starting to worry me. They need to get to get it together in Cleveland. No way they should have beat Oakland by only 10 points. No way.
Comment by Brian G — October 18, 2006 @ 3:52 pm
I just have to say that the Broncos/Colts game was the most frustrating game I have watched in a very long time. It was the worst coached defensive game I can remember. The Broncos strategy was this: let’s give Manning all the time he wants and hope he screws up. When it was clear that that strategy had no hope of working, they didn’t change it, they didn’t try to blitz, they didn’t try to get Manning off balance, they didn’t play different coverages. They just played straight-up and got beat straight-up, just like any defense who plays the Colts straight-up will get beat. I wouldn’t care if they changed strategies and still got beat. That’s fine. But dammit, you don’t stick with a strategy that is not working and has no hope of working. I would fire the Defensive Coordinator right now if I could.
I knew the Broncos had lost when, on their last drive, Mike Bell ran for 50 yards and went out of bounds because I knew that meant that the Colts were going to get the ball back with more than a minute left and there was no way the Broncos D was going to keep them out of field goal range.
Comment by Tom — October 30, 2006 @ 10:09 am
I think you’re being harsh. This was the first game the Bronc’s offense showed any real life. I think they were trying to get to Manning, but just couldn’t. I think blitzing would have opened up more opportunites for Manning to burn us.
I think the only change in strategy they needed was to tell Mike Bell to slip and fall to the ground and wait until someone touched him after he gets the bare minimum needed for a first down, that would have ate up the clock more.
You don’t fire the Defensive Coordinator that’s been running a record setting defense. This is the Colts, and one of the best, if not the most boring, quarterbacks in the history of the game. If you fire anyone you fire Darrent Williams for lettine Wayne get 3 TDs.
Comment by Brian G — October 30, 2006 @ 12:24 pm
I’m still steaming, so I probably am being harsh. Losing one game is not a firing offense. But nobody bears more responsibility for this loss than the Defensive Coordinator (I don’t even know who it is these days). I’m pretty sure you could count the number of times they blitzed on one hand. And like I say, I don’t care if blitzing caused us to get burned. It’s better than not trying anything. It’s better than doing the same damn thing that didn’t work all game long. Anyways, the defense has athletes that can cover when they send some extra rushers. From what I could tell, Williams didn’t make all that many mistakes. Receivers always have an advantage because they know where they’re going. If you let Manning stand tall without any pressure, he’s going to time his passes perfectly and he’ll hit his receivers no matter who’s covering them. The only chance you have of beating Manning is pressuring him. The Broncos rushed four all game and they never even knocked him down. I’m tellin’ ya, the defensive play calling was tantamount to handing the Colts the game on a platter. I’m not going to fault Bell for running as far as he could. He should’ve gone down in bounds, but I’ve noticed that there are very few young players who have the presence of mind to know when going down in bounds is more important than gaining a few more yards.
All in all, it was encouraging to see the offense do something. And I’m still confident that the defense is elite personnel-wise. The coaching staff just needs to pull their heads out before they meet the Colts in the playoffs.
Comment by Tom — October 30, 2006 @ 12:41 pm
Is there anything more beautiful than seeing the Cowboys go down so emphatically? The best part was Drew Brees taking a knee with three minutes to go on 1st and goal.
Looks like my predictions in post 4 (seconded by Tim J.) are in good shape so far. (Although, Tim J.’s New Orleans skepticism must be slowly eroding).
Comment by Bill — December 11, 2006 @ 12:11 am
Yeah, Indy and NE really are losing their luster, like you kinda predicted, though I don’t think things are as dire for either team as the ESPN people keep saying. But at this point it doesn’t look like either would hold up against the Chargers in the playoffs.
I know Chicago has that gaudy 10-2 record, but I’m still not sold on them. The only reason I consider them a favorite for the Superbowl is that the NFC sucks. When a team as thoroughly mediocre as the Cowboys are touted as one of the best teams in the conference, you know it’s a down year. If Chicago was in the AFC, I don’t think I’d consider them a front runner. I’d probably give them about the same chance at getting to the Superbowl as Baltimore, Indy, and NE.
Comment by Tom — December 11, 2006 @ 8:32 am
Yeah, the Seahawks are the third best team in the NFC and they suck. They just lost to 3-win Arizona yesterday and they’re STILL 2.5 games ahead in their division. Sad. I keep waiting for them to turn the corner and play to their potential. This has been an incredibly mediocre season across the board.
Comment by Rusty — December 11, 2006 @ 11:04 am
At least the Seahawks are not the Broncos. Ugh.
Talk about letting a season slip out of your grasp. We would have had a better chance with Plummer, and that’s not saying much at all.
I just want to crawl in a hole and die.
Comment by Brian G — December 11, 2006 @ 11:21 am
I echo Rusty and Brian’s despair. The Jets could have made an incredibly improbably playoff run, if only we had a marginally better quarterback. Unfortunately, Pennington always plays just good enough not to get fired, when we should really be looking at the future.
I’m happy with a better than expected season, but we could have been so much better.
By the way, did anyone see the Eli Manning’s backup warming up yesterday during the Giants game? I have never seen a fatter quarterback.
Comment by NFlanders — December 11, 2006 @ 11:28 am
Is it that Kentucky guy? Lorenzen or something? I like him because he’s fat but he’s pretty athletic.
Brian G: see my original post for my thoughts on benching a veteran for a young, unproven QB. You do it when you’ve given up on the season. Parcells dodged a bullet with Romo. I thought that was a major blunder at the time, but it’s worked out fine. I wonder if the Romo-for-Bledsoe thing influenced Shanahan. Plummer was sucking it up but he wasn’t the only problem with the team and I’ve thought all along that he’s the better option for now.
Comment by Tom — December 11, 2006 @ 1:05 pm
Wow, I’m surprised at how well some of my predictions have held up.
Comment by HP — December 11, 2006 @ 1:24 pm
That’s right, Tom. Lorenzen. I had never heard of him.
I’m sure he’s very athletic, but he looked like Luke Petitgout tossing the ball around. His belly was peeking out under his uniform, just like an offensive lineman. I wish Eli had been knocked out for a play, just to see him play.
Comment by NFlanders — December 11, 2006 @ 2:01 pm
I didn’t realize how good Brees was. While Tomlinson will run away with the MVP, Brees deserves to be in the discussion.
New Orleans could make the Super Bowl if they don’t have to play in Chicago. I still like the Bears vs. San Diego right now, but Baltimore vs. Dallas could easily happen, too.
Comment by Tim J. — December 11, 2006 @ 2:19 pm
Tom, still believing that the QB is important and that Shanahan ruined the season I’m sure. Parcells wasn’t the only one to bench a veteran for a 1st year guy and see results. See: Rivers, Philip; Young, Vince (Wow!), Leinart, Matt.
Also look at the success Damon Huard(!) and David Garrard have had. Two of the top three teams in the NFC are QB’d by Rex Grossman and Tony Romo.
Shanahan wasn’t taking much of a gamble at all. He knew his team had no shot of even making the Super Bowl this year with this team. Especially not on the road and especially not in the AFC. No chance. Plummer was also #29 out 32 QB’s in passer rating. Seriously, what took him so long to yank him?
Comment by Tim J. — December 11, 2006 @ 2:36 pm
QB is important. Otherwise, why would you suggest that Plummer should have been yanked? If it doesn’t matter, it doesn’t matter. I agree with you that the QB position is not the be-all and end-all that it is made out to be, but it is important.
If Plummer played this year like he did last year the Broncos would be better than they are because QB play is important. Between Plummer and Cutler (or any untested rookie), I think Plummer has a better chance of playing like last year’s Plummer (good, not great) before the end of the season than Cutler.
I don’t think Shanahan’s decision ruined the season. I think a combination of things have made the season take a turn for the worse: bad QB play and defensive inconsistency along with bad defensive play calling being primary causes.
See: Rivers, Philip; Young, Vince (Wow!), Leinart, Matt.
I thought the Chargers made a mistake letting Brees go and I still think so. It turned out OK, but they were taking a bigger chance than I think is wise. Brees has been really good for the past couple years and even though Rivers is doing fine, he’s not an upgrade from Brees.
Coaches of the Titans and Cardinals have a completely different situation from the Broncos and Cowboys. Young and Leinart replaced QBs who haven’t been any good for several years and their teams were never contenders. Non-contenders can afford to gamble because it’s really no gamble at all—there’s no season at stake. Contenders shouldn’t gamble with unproven QBs.
Now, I don’t think that the Cutler decision was the dumbest move ever. Plummer was really sucking. Shanahan was in a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don’t situation. But, again, Plummer beginning to play like he’s shown he can seems more likely to me than any unproven rookie coming in and playing real well.
Comment by Tom — December 11, 2006 @ 3:10 pm
Had the Chargers resigned Brees, they would of had to let some other player(s) go, so they were between a rock and a hard place. We’ll have to see how it turns out.
Comment by Tim J. — December 11, 2006 @ 4:26 pm
For me the issue is the mistakes that Cutler has made, all the fumbles, the numerous false start calls, doing all he can to keep the team in horrendous field position. Even with all the other flaws in the team, for example, having no one but Walker to catch the ball (I love you, but please retire Rod Smith) I think the Broncos would have won the Seattle game with Plummer.
Comment by Brian G — December 12, 2006 @ 2:13 am