OK, baseball is 50% scoring runs and 50% preventing runs. The preventing runs part is mostly pitching with some defense included. Let’s say pitching is 40-45% with the rest defense. Starters don’t usually go the whole game, so let’s say that the starting pitcher controls 35% of the outcome of a baseball game. Does that sound fair?

Football is offense, defense, and special teams. Offense and defense are equal, so how much credit do we give special teams? I’ll say 10% — some might say that’s low. But that gives the offense 40% control of a football game. I know the QB controls the offense, but there’s still 11 players on offense (not including all the backups who play regularly). Let’s be generous and give the QB control of half of the offense — I think that’s way to much, but I’m trying to be fair — that would make give him control of 20% of a football game (I think it should certainly be less).

So a QB has control of about 20% of the outcome of a football game while a starting pitcher has control of about 35% of a baseball game (by my unscientific method). Do you still want to argue that W-L record is more important for a QB than for a pitcher?

Yeah, pitchers don’t start every game. And their W-L record doesn’t include games they don’t start, so that point doesn’t matter. Would you count wins for Brady Quinn for the games which Anderson started? Of course not! So what’s your point?

You argued that W-L record for a QB matters more than W-L record for a pitcher because a QB has more control over a game he plays in than a starting pitcher does. I said that you were wrong, and you haven’t said anything that counters my reasoning.

I’m certainly not saying that you should judge pitchers by their W-L record because that’s dumb, I’m just arguing that judging QB’s by their W-L record is even dumber. There are more players around the QB that have an effect on the game than players around a starting pitcher have an effect on the game, so judging a QB only by team wins is absurd.

Yes, I’m saying Eli is not one of the best four qb’s in the league. He’s probably top ten. I love the attempts here to make 14-36 seem ok.

DA’s comp % is sub-50, and was a nose hair over 50 this week (17-33).

That’s you arguing against DA, I see no mention of mitigating factors when it isn’t the guy you like.

- sub-50% completion % from the guy who’s taken every snap

You again, in a bullet list. So, which is it? Does completion percentage matter or not

Your argument for W’s as a measure is actually good argument against them.

No system factor, for example, I guess that makes Trent Dilfer quite the quarterback. He did go 11-5 and win the Super Bowl. In 2004, Ben Roethlisberger was far better than Peyton Manning. After all, your boy Ben won 15 games and Peyton only won 12. Of course, Peyton threw 32 more touchdowns and one fewer interceptions, but wins are what matters for a qb. So there goes the system factor argument.

No decisions? What about games where the qb is terrible and wins? Trent Edwards was a bad kick from winning on Monday. He certainly earned it too.

Starting 100% of the games isn’t much of an argument either. The only way that matters is if you actually think team wins is a good measure of a quarterback. It’s a tremendous circular argument, to be sure.

How are older qb’s penalized? Just look at the numbers as compared to the era. Is anyone here making the argument that Derek Anderson is better than Otto Graham? No.

Completely agree on the drops and missed blocking assignments on blitzes. Also consider that any time Braylon encounters contact off the line on a slant route, he pretty much gives up on the route for all intents and purposes.

while Brady didn’t earn any All-Pro votes on Monday night, calling his night awful based on the completion percentage is not fair.

There were three clean rushes on Quinn in the game. One resulted in a incompletion, one was the lob that McKelvin (I think) dropped and one was a sack. The dropped passes are just a part of our team now, sadly. I only counted three of those as well. It wasn’t an above average game, it wasn’t even average. I want the guy to do well but sycophantically proclaiming that as “better than average” is just wrong.

Right, I did forget the 22 throw aways he made. Are you being serious? He threw for 185 yards and 4.9 yards per pass. He didn’t throw a touchdown. How are we measuring a “good” game for a quarterback here? No interceptions? Is every game without an interception a good game? You cannot turn 14-36 for 185 yards into a good game no matter how hard you try. We won because the Bills somehow contrived to be worse than we were. That’s all.

I did this a month or so ago. But I’ll do it again for the Buffalo game:

Browns passing plays (BQ’s attempts + sacks) = 37
Browns running plays = 27
Bills passing plays = 26
Bills running plays = 38
FG attempts = 8
Punts = 8
Kickoffs = 13
TOTAL = 157

BQ plays: 41 (26.1)
Trent Edwards plays: 29 (18.5)
Joe Thomas plays: 69 (44%)

Even when you consider the Browns put the ball in Brady’s hands an absurd amount, 41 times when you count his runs, that is still just slightly over a quarter of total plays in the game. In 3/4 of the game’s plays, BQ was either watching on the side-line or turning around and giving the ball to someone. Now, I will say, that the first time I did this (for a game that DA played) I didn’t even consider audibles, because I honestly forgot the potential of a QB reading the D and changing the play at the line until I saw BQ do it, or at least fake doing it, to a running play. But even if you count ALL the browns RUNNING PLAYS, all the times Brady turned around a gave it to Lewis for a 3 yard gain, you still only get 64 plays, or 40.8%. The rest of the time he was impacting the game as much as you or me.

You say you can’t support the argument that Hadnot is more impactful in a given game than Peyton Manning. I challenge you- why. Manning is an extreme example. He calls many, if not all, of his own plays. He is in a pass-oriented offense. He is a top 3 QB in the league. But the ONLY argument that I can see to support you is the difference between Manning and his backup, Sorgi, is much greater than the difference between Hadnot and his, McKinney. Even then, you have to say that the difference is so high that it makes up for the higher percentage of plays a RG is in than a QB. In Manning v. Hadnot, an extreme example, the difference in their “vob” (value over backup) might be enough. But if we are talking about an about league average QB (Quinn at this point in his career) with about league average backup (DA) and a all pro tackle (Thomas) and his backup (Sowells?) you have a tougher argument. I’d say that losing Thomas would be WAAAAAYYY worse than losing Quinn in considering our chances to win this week.

On Marino- to be honest, I was surprised how underwhelmed I was with Marino’s stats, the first time I’ve looked at them in a while. Still, the lack of talent on his offenses must be considered. The bottom line is that objective measures in football for individual players are tough to come by. What would Marino’s career look like if he was on the 80’s and 90’s 49ers? We’ll never know.

Part of this goes without saying. It certainly was very important that Brady has gone something like 60 passes in two starts without an INT. Besides the one that was reversed on the replay, its not like he is throwing a bunch into the hands of defenders either. Certianly no inexplicable throws right to the other team that became a hallmark of DA’s 2nd half meltdowns in the past.

I’m not necessarily saying that LT impacts a game more than a QB. I am saying the difference is not as vast as a casual football fan might think in passing. The LT has more to do physically than a QB. He certainly doesn’t have to make as many strategic and careful reads as a QB. However, he is active in more plays.

I also stressed the specifics of the situation. If you have 2 average QBs, the value of each is lowered. If you have 2 ok LTs, the value of each is lowered. But if you have one great LT and one terrible LT (the Browns) or one great QB and one terrible QB (the Colts) I think the scales begin to tip. I’ve never been a fan of VORP as a concept because the “replacement player” is a non-reality. It doesn’t matter what a theoretical replacement player can do. It does matter what the back-up on your specific team can do. And when there isn’t that big of a difference between your #1 and #2 at a given position, losing your #1 isn’t going to hurt as much.

I’m more stressing the overrating of the QB position and specifically the ridiculousness of considering W-L record when evaluating that position.

You should just act like you are pushing their joke further and that THEY are the ones who don’t get it.

I’d back you up.