CBS names All-Decade Team

[MUBuck]

You're joking right?

Two of them are Heisman winners and the other is one of the most clutch and best dual threat QB's ever. Between them they have a claim at 5 NC's. Leinart is 39-2 and Vince Young only has like 2-3 losses. They all have great stats.

I don't really see the reach with the three.

Do you realize how many QB's have won the Heisman?

 

[Jaxbuck]

You're joking right?

Two of them are Heisman winners and the other is one of the most clutch and best dual threat QB's ever. Between them they have a claim at 5 NC's. Leinart is 39-2 and Vince Young only has like 2-3 losses. They all have great stats.

I don't really see the reach with the three.

College football has been played for well over 100 years and your all time top 10 QB list contains 3 guys from the last 8 years or so and you ask me if I'm joking?

Educate yourself and give some respect to the people who played the game before ESPiN became the molder of public opinion that it is today.

 

[kinch]

College football has been played for well over 100 years and your all time top 10 QB list contains 3 guys from the last 8 years or so and you ask me if I'm joking?

Educate yourself and give some respect to the people who played the game before ESPiN became the molder of public opinion that it is today.

Take a deep breath Jax. You brought up stats to support your argument, then you got mad when people used stats and said it was due to supporting cast.

Now you hyperbole out to thrashing at anything in sight. What's up?

Have a beer. :)

(not to say I disagree with the focus on recent years. . . though some such focus is due because the quarterback position "over 100 years" has increased substantially in its importance and focus.)

 

[jlb1705]

I think this list is biased against anybody who played in 2009.

Oh, we haven't had that season yet? It's kinda hard to have a good All-Decade team when you haven't even seen all of the decade yet.

 

[Jaxbuck]

Take a deep breath Jax. You brought up stats to support your argument, then you got mad when people used stats and said it was due to supporting cast.

Now you hyperbole out to thrashing at anything in sight. What's up?

Have a beer. :)

(not to say I disagree with the focus on recent years. . . though some such focus is due because the quarterback position "over 100 years" has increased substantially in its importance and focus.)

I'm not upset at all. Sorry if it came across that way.

As far as the stats thing goes no one showed me anything that discounted my point at all. Just on raw stats many guys just in recent memory are comparable to Tebow. I didn't want to get into the Hawaii QB's or anyone like that who's stats dwarf TT's.

So take away the stats and it becomes a team award (Heismans and NC's) that people want to use to crown TT the greatest of all time. I understand that's how it works but the point is worth considering. If you take a Troy Smith off OSU and put him at IU all of a sudden he's more a Kellen Lewis than a Heisman winner. If people want to celebrate the awsomeness of Tebow they should at least appreciate it for what it really is; a once in a multidecade melding of the perfect player to run the perfect offensive system with a hype machine in the form of the Internet/ESPiN no one has ever seen before.

The bias some have for only the athletes who have played the last decade or so saddens me more than it makes me angry. It like a whole generation admitting they are too lazy to read, think and draw their own opinions but instead would rather have their opinions fed to them via sports center sound bytes form people like Herbstreit.

 

[kinch]

I'm not upset at all. Sorry if it came across that way.

As far as the stats thing goes no one showed me anything that discounted my point at all. Just on raw stats many guys just in recent memory are comparable to Tebow. I didn't want to get into the Hawaii QB's or anyone like that who's stats dwarf TT's.

So take away the stats and it becomes a team award (Heismans and NC's) that people want to use to crown TT the greatest of all time. I understand that's how it works but the point is worth considering. If you take a Troy Smith off OSU and put him at IU all of a sudden he's more a Kellen Lewis than a Heisman winner. If people want to celebrate the awsomeness of Tebow they should at least appreciate it for what it really is; a once in a multidecade melding of the perfect player to run the perfect offensive system with a hype machine in the form of the Internet/ESPiN no one has ever seen before.

The bias some have for only the athletes who have played the last decade or so saddens me more than it makes me angry. It like a whole generation admitting they are too lazy to read, think and draw their own opinions but instead would rather have their opinions fed to them via sports center sound bytes form people like Herbstreit.

I'm sorry, I didnt' mean to paint you as psycho. (And I only said that because I know you are psycho and I fear you.)

I agree with you completely, I think. But you did put forth stats to show Brad Smith was better, then said stats don't matter, then attacked a guy and gutted him. You are, in nerd terms, a beserker. We shall handle you with care.



Cheers man.

 

[MUBuck]

But you did put forth stats to show Brad Smith was better, then said stats don't matter...

To me, these are the same arguments, not contradictions. Jax was showing that a guy like Brad Smith, who will never be in the discussion for GOAT, had superior stats to Tebow. Therefore, stats don't matter.

 

[kinch]

To me, these are the same arguments, not contradictions. Jax was showing that a guy like Brad Smith, who will never be in the discussion for GOAT, had superior stats to Tebow. Therefore, stats don't matter.

That would make sense if stats had been brought up yet. You mean that it made sense as a preemptive strike argument, disguised as otherwise? Perhaps Jax is more diabolical than I realized.

 

[Jaxbuck]

To me, these are the same arguments, not contradictions. Jax was showing that a guy like Brad Smith, who will never be in the discussion for GOAT, had superior stats to Tebow. Therefore, stats don't matter.

Thank you. Someone gets it.

More specifically how easy it is to just go back a few years and find a "no name" guy who's stats at least compare to Tebow if people aren't comfortable saying they are better.

GOAT is difficult to argue when its that easy to find just one example of a less hyped peer that an argument could be made for.

 

[BB73]

To me, statwise, QBs should be measured by efficiency rating and W/L record. Using stats such as passing yardage and TDs can make guys that play for Mike Leach or June Jones look like all-timers. And it takes guys that played more than 20 or 30 years ago almost completely out of the comparison, since there was less passing and less games per year played back in the day.

But in fairness, using QB-efficiency and W-L records makes the guys that played on great teams stand out. Leinart and Tebow have been very efficient because they've had great weapons around them, and solid O-lines to play behind.

So how does one tell whether somebody like John Elway, on a mediocre Stanford team that never went to a bowl game, compares to guys like Leinart and Tebow? Eveybody has to use their own method. Mine is a combination of stats like QB-rating and W-L record and the old eye test.

 

[cincibuck]

I really like VY as a player, but as a QB? Only if you went back to single wing or made him a halfback.

I feel much the same about TP and Tebow.

You look at the talent and you have to think how can I get the ball into their hands more often? They win, not because of QB type skills (i.e. passing), but because they can move the ball. Defenses find it far easier to keep the ball away from a receiver (witness the first Texas - OSU) game, than to keep a VY, Tebow or TP from doing what they do best, get the defense out of position.

I would think that many writers would have to consider professional talent potential in voting QB. They see the scrambling QB as still a bit too outside the box for most pro coaches and thus of limited esteem for an all decade team.

 

[TheIronColonel]

FWIW, Elway is vasty, vastly overrated.

 

[Jaxbuck]

FWIW, Elway is vasty, vastly overrated.

Ok I'll bite.

3rd all time in the NFL for Completions and Yards because he was overrated?

 

[DaddyBigBucks]

A word about the importance of supporting cast...

My favorite anecdote about the importance of the supporting cast to the QB position involves Jerry Rice. I don't have numbers to back it up, but I remember vividly that his college QB got as much pub as he did. Anybody remember his name? Didn't think so.

My second favorite anecdote involves LaDainian Tomlinson. In 1999, LT gained 6.9 yards per carry and beat Ron Dayne for the rushing crown on 35 fewer carries. The next year, as defenses keyed on LT and his yards per carry dropped to 5.85; his QB's passing efficiency rocketed from 133.5 (1999) to 156.7 (2000). In 2001, after LT had moved on to the league he was born to play in, the QB's passing efficiency plummeted to 125.4.

I discovered this when I was asked (by BKB I think) to do a study on year-to-year improvement in skill position players. I can say unequivocally that this was the biggest year-to-year drop in passing efficiency by one player going back to 1999 (at least). And it was caused entirely by the departure of a running back.

For those who are wondering, the name of LT's quarterback was Casey Printers. Back in pre-season 2001 he was considered a candidate for All-American... seriously. Then people saw him in a different light when they saw him with a different supporting cast.

 

[BB73]

My favorite anecdote about the importance of the supporting cast to the QB position involves Jerry Rice. I don't have numbers to back it up, but I remember vividly that his college QB got as much pub as he did. Anybody remember his name? Didn't think so.

I remembered Willie Totten, DBB, but your point is valid. I didn't remember Casey Printers.