NFL offseason thread 2009

[Derwood]

I'm telling you, Vick is EXACTLY the QB that the Raiders would want. Fast, athletic....um....fast....

[Vanilla Ice]

strong arm and no accuracy

[RedFlash]

Exactly.

 

 

Contrary to a previous report, The Philadelphia Daily News reports the Philadelphia Eagles are not scheduled to meet with unrestricted free-agent LB Pisa Tinoisamoa (Rams) next week, according to sources.

 

Either Pisa visiting Philadelphia was never the plan, or Pisa may not be leaving Chicago without a contract. Hmm...

[SpongeWorthy]

Exactly.

 

 

Contrary to a previous report, The Philadelphia Daily News reports the Philadelphia Eagles are not scheduled to meet with unrestricted free-agent LB Pisa Tinoisamoa (Rams) next week, according to sources.

 

Either Pisa visiting Philadelphia was never the plan, or Pisa may not be leaving Chicago without a contract. Hmm...

 

Sounds good to me. I never minded Hunter but he always was the weak link in the LB corps. An upgrade would definitely be in order whether it be Roach or Pisa.

[shnsajax]

This is cool, even if you hate the Cowboys. They said though it is 90 feet off the ground. For some reason that sounds really low to me when a punt is going to occur.

 

http://www.dallasnews.com/video/dallasnews/hp/index.html?nvid=364036&stry

[dew1679666265]

The Cowboys appear to be interested in trading Greg Ellis.

 

AOL Fanhouse's Calvin Watkins was the first to report that Ellis was being shopped. I've confirmed with a club source that Ellis was asked not to attend Thursday's organized team activities, which were closed to the media. The report indicates the Cowboys have reached out to the Patriots and Bengals as possible trade partners.

 

In reality, I don't think the Cowboys will be able to trade Ellis. He's on the books for a base salary of $4.15 million in '09, and that's a bit steep for a declining player who will soon turn 34.

The Cowboys will probably end up releasing Ellis

[dew1679666265]

Very interesting article by Matt Bowen of the NFP analyzing what a franchise QB is and which QBs currently are franchise guys.

 

The franchise QBs: Manning, Brady, Brees, Palmer and Rivers.

 

For the Bear fans who are interested, he has Jay Cutler on the fence.

 

6. Jay Cutler, Bears: Has all the physical tools you want in a franchise quarterback, but the verdict is still out on Cutler — until we see him play and produce with the Bears’ wide receivers. Some think he’s a product of the Broncos’ passing system, but he will have an opportunity to prove me wrong in Chicago if he succeeds in a run-first offense.

[rawaction]

What is a franchise QB? That's like a #1 WR to me. What's the standard? It's obviously not Superbowls because Roethlisberger is not on there. Is it great talent and production?

 

My definition of a franchise QB is a quarterback who plays for a franchise who's foreseeable future is going to be closely related to that team's success. Teams with franchise QBs will not look at bringing in a starting caliber QB within the next 3 or so years barring disaster (see Vick, Michael) or stupidity (see Broncos, Denver).

 

By my count, that's: P Manning, E Manning, Brady, Palmer, Rivers, Cutler, Brees, Schaub, and Roethlisberger. By the end of the 2009 season, that list could include: Cassel, Ryan, Flacco, Edwards, Sanchez, Stafford, Rodgers, and Quinn.

 

And that list doesn't include guys who have been franchise QBs who may be on their last legs at least with their current teams: McNabb, Warner, Delhomme, and Hasselbeck....or QBs that still are young enough to have a chance: Russell, Jackson (Min), Leinart, and Campbell.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

What is a franchise QB? That's like a #1 WR to me. What's the standard? It's obviously not Superbowls because Roethlisberger is not on there. Is it great talent and production?

 

My definition of a franchise QB is a quarterback who plays for a franchise who's foreseeable future is going to be closely related to that team's success. Teams with franchise QBs will not look at bringing in a starting caliber QB within the next 3 or so years barring disaster (see Vick, Michael) or stupidity (see Broncos, Denver).

 

By my count, that's: P Manning, E Manning, Brady, Palmer, Rivers, Cutler, Brees, Schaub, and Roethlisberger. By the end of the 2009 season, that list could include: Cassel, Ryan, Flacco, Edwards, Sanchez, Stafford, Rodgers, and Quinn.

 

And that list doesn't include guys who have been franchise QBs who may be on their last legs at least with their current teams: McNabb, Warner, Delhomme, and Hasselbeck....or QBs that still are young enough to have a chance: Russell, Jackson (Min), Leinart, and Campbell.

 

Romo doesn't make your list?

[dew1679666265]

What is a franchise QB? That's like a #1 WR to me. What's the standard? It's obviously not Superbowls because Roethlisberger is not on there. Is it great talent and production?

 

My definition of a franchise QB is a quarterback who plays for a franchise who's foreseeable future is going to be closely related to that team's success. Teams with franchise QBs will not look at bringing in a starting caliber QB within the next 3 or so years barring disaster (see Vick, Michael) or stupidity (see Broncos, Denver).

 

By my count, that's: P Manning, E Manning, Brady, Palmer, Rivers, Cutler, Brees, Schaub, and Roethlisberger. By the end of the 2009 season, that list could include: Cassel, Ryan, Flacco, Edwards, Sanchez, Stafford, Rodgers, and Quinn.

 

And that list doesn't include guys who have been franchise QBs who may be on their last legs at least with their current teams: McNabb, Warner, Delhomme, and Hasselbeck....or QBs that still are young enough to have a chance: Russell, Jackson (Min), Leinart, and Campbell.

 

His definition:

 

Well, that’s exactly what I’m talking about here today. What defines a franchise quarterback has nothing to do with stats or Super Bowl wins or Pro Bowl appearances — because those tend to be direct reflections of the system that quarterbacks play in, or the situations they fall into.

 

In my definition, a franchise quarterback can walk into any huddle in the NFL, pick up a football and have immediate success.

By saying that, these guys aren’t defined by the system they play in because you don’t have to build a system around them to make them effective. They do it because they can make any throw, run any offense and succeed with any coach and with any type of offensive personnel around them.

[dew1679666265]

The Dolphins are considering the option of cutting S/CB Jason Allen and WR Ernest Wilford, according to the Miami Sun-Sentinel.

[Warpticon]

The Dolphins are considering the option of cutting S/CB Jason Allen and WR Ernest Wilford, according to the Miami Sun-Sentinel.

 

The loss of Wilford and his 3 catches last year would be huge.

 

Allen's a former first rounder who's never been able to find a set position in a mediocre secondary thas has had injury issues. He's played okay in stretches, but it'd be even harder for him to fit in now, considering the dolphins just signed a safety and a corner, then drafted two corners (in the first two rounds) and a safety.

[dew1679666265]

The Dolphins are considering the option of cutting S/CB Jason Allen and WR Ernest Wilford, according to the Miami Sun-Sentinel.

 

The loss of Wilford and his 3 catches last year would be huge.

 

Allen's a former first rounder who's never been able to find a set position in a mediocre secondary thas has had injury issues. He's played okay in stretches, but it'd be even harder for him to fit in now, considering the dolphins just signed a safety and a corner, then drafted two corners (in the first two rounds) and a safety.

 

Yeah, I had high hopes for Allen when he was drafted. He was a very good player at Tennessee until he got hurt and before the injury he showed terrific athleticism. It was generally accepted (and I tended to agree) that he could be a top 10 pick if he hadn't gotten hurt.

 

I wonder what happened to him.

[Rusch33]

Palmer, Schaub, and Cutler make your list on franchise qbs, but Romo doesn't.

 

How in the hell does that happen?

[rawaction]

Palmer, Schaub, and Cutler make your list on franchise qbs, but Romo doesn't.

 

How in the hell does that happen?

 

My God people, I forgot Romo. Get over it.

[Magnetic Curses]

Palmer, Schaub, and Cutler make your list on franchise qbs, but Romo doesn't.

 

How in the hell does that happen?

 

My God people, I forgot Romo. Get over it.

 

haha, the cowboy fans are hunting you down as we speak.

[jersey cubs fan]

Very interesting article by Matt Bowen of the NFP analyzing what a franchise QB is and which QBs currently are franchise guys.

 

The franchise QBs: Manning, Brady, Brees, Palmer and Rivers.

 

For the Bear fans who are interested, he has Jay Cutler on the fence.

 

6. Jay Cutler, Bears: Has all the physical tools you want in a franchise quarterback, but the verdict is still out on Cutler — until we see him play and produce with the Bears’ wide receivers. Some think he’s a product of the Broncos’ passing system, but he will have an opportunity to prove me wrong in Chicago if he succeeds in a run-first offense.

 

What a ridiculously arbitrary disctinction. The only reason he doesn't list Cutler as a franchise QB is because he is now on the Bears. If Palmer or Rivers were just traded to Chicago, he'd have to ask the same thing, whether they can produce with the Bears wide receivers. He tries to say it doesn't have anything to do with the team but makes it very clear that he thinks it depends heavily on the team.

 

And the whole notion that any of these guys could step right into any huddle and have immediate success is laughable. Manning stepped right into the huddle of the team he ran for a decade to start last season and sure didn't have success. I like how he says, sure Manning had success with Wayne, but he also had success with Harrison, and somehow that is supposed to explain how Manning can work with any WR.

[dew1679666265]

Very interesting article by Matt Bowen of the NFP analyzing what a franchise QB is and which QBs currently are franchise guys.

 

The franchise QBs: Manning, Brady, Brees, Palmer and Rivers.

 

For the Bear fans who are interested, he has Jay Cutler on the fence.

 

6. Jay Cutler, Bears: Has all the physical tools you want in a franchise quarterback, but the verdict is still out on Cutler — until we see him play and produce with the Bears’ wide receivers. Some think he’s a product of the Broncos’ passing system, but he will have an opportunity to prove me wrong in Chicago if he succeeds in a run-first offense.

 

What a ridiculously arbitrary disctinction. The only reason he doesn't list Cutler as a franchise QB is because he is now on the Bears. If Palmer or Rivers were just traded to Chicago, he'd have to ask the same thing, whether they can produce with the Bears wide receivers. He tries to say it doesn't have anything to do with the team but makes it very clear that he thinks it depends heavily on the team.

 

And the whole notion that any of these guys could step right into any huddle and have immediate success is laughable. Manning stepped right into the huddle of the team he ran for a decade to start last season and sure didn't have success. I like how he says, sure Manning had success with Wayne, but he also had success with Harrison, and somehow that is supposed to explain how Manning can work with any WR.

 

Peyton had a knee injury entering last year. It affected his play early on.

[jersey cubs fan]

Peyton had a knee injury entering last year. It affected his play early on.

 

Yeah, because he couldn't practice with his team. Doesn't matter, none of these could walk into a huddle and have immediate success.

[dew1679666265]

Peyton had a knee injury entering last year. It affected his play early on.

 

Yeah, because he couldn't practice with his team. Doesn't matter, none of these could walk into a huddle and have immediate success.

 

I would think he intended that to mean that the QB isn't defined by his system. Of course if a QB doesn't know the plays, terminology, etc., he won't have success. Any of those QBs could have success in any type of system, as he explained.

 

I know the one sentence you're focusing on from his article and, if he meant it completely literally, then I disagree with him. It's going to take some time for any QB to learn plays and terminology, but there's not a system in the league that Peyton, Brees, etc. couldn't excel in.

[Banedon]

What a strange list. We clearly aren't going by actual accomplishment, or Eli Manning, Kurt Warner and Ben Rothlisberger, QB's that has actually won a Super Bowl, would be in the top 5. Like jersey said, the definition they use is awful. I love how the definition requires that they would actually be able to have success in any system, and yet 4 of the top 5 have only ever been on one team in their entire career.

[dew1679666265]

What a strange list. We clearly aren't going by actual accomplishment, or Eli Manning, Kurt Warner and Ben Rothlisberger, QB's that has actually won a Super Bowl, would be in the top 5. Like jersey said, the definition they use is awful. I love how the definition requires that they would actually be able to have success in any system, and yet 4 of the top 5 have only ever been on one team in their entire career.

 

A QB winning a Super Bowl doesn't necessarily mean anything about his talent level.

[Banedon]

What a strange list. We clearly aren't going by actual accomplishment, or Eli Manning, Kurt Warner and Ben Rothlisberger, QB's that has actually won a Super Bowl, would be in the top 5. Like jersey said, the definition they use is awful. I love how the definition requires that they would actually be able to have success in any system, and yet 4 of the top 5 have only ever been on one team in their entire career.

 

A QB winning a Super Bowl doesn't necessarily mean anything about his talent level.

 

Agreed...Rex made it to a Super Bowl, and I think we can agree he wasn't a franchise QB. But lets be honest, usually these kinds of lists do factor in those kinds of achievements. It's just unclear exactly what he's using as measurement other than complete subjectivity...that's all I meant by that comment.

 

The fact that his best QB's have only ever been in one system is more of a problem for this list I think.

[dew1679666265]

What a strange list. We clearly aren't going by actual accomplishment, or Eli Manning, Kurt Warner and Ben Rothlisberger, QB's that has actually won a Super Bowl, would be in the top 5. Like jersey said, the definition they use is awful. I love how the definition requires that they would actually be able to have success in any system, and yet 4 of the top 5 have only ever been on one team in their entire career.

 

A QB winning a Super Bowl doesn't necessarily mean anything about his talent level.

 

Agreed...Rex made it to a Super Bowl, and I think we can agree he wasn't a franchise QB. But lets be honest, usually these kinds of lists do factor in those kinds of achievements. It's just unclear exactly what he's using as measurement other than complete subjectivity...that's all I meant by that comment.

 

The fact that his best QB's have only ever been in one system is more of a problem for this list I think.

 

There's definitely a good bit of subjectivity to the list, I completely agree. I like quite a bit how he doesn't factor in SB titles or anything like that, though.

 

I would think factors like arm strength/decision making/accuracy/etc., went into his decision-making as well and he just didn't explain that deeply, but I don't know for sure - and since he didn't say, we can only assume they didn't.

 

I tend to agree with his final conclusion, but his method of getting there does seem a bit odd.

[CubColtPacer]

What a strange list. We clearly aren't going by actual accomplishment, or Eli Manning, Kurt Warner and Ben Rothlisberger, QB's that has actually won a Super Bowl, would be in the top 5. Like jersey said, the definition they use is awful. I love how the definition requires that they would actually be able to have success in any system, and yet 4 of the top 5 have only ever been on one team in their entire career.

 

A QB winning a Super Bowl doesn't necessarily mean anything about his talent level.

 

Agreed...Rex made it to a Super Bowl, and I think we can agree he wasn't a franchise QB. But lets be honest, usually these kinds of lists do factor in those kinds of achievements. It's just unclear exactly what he's using as measurement other than complete subjectivity...that's all I meant by that comment.

 

The fact that his best QB's have only ever been in one system is more of a problem for this list I think.

 

The problem is always going to come that the best QB's are always going to only play on one team (I would argue that the system is going to change over the years for these QB's as the people around them change, even if they're still wearing the same uniform). Why would you get rid of a top QB?

 

It simply becomes a measure of how well-rounded the QB is. And while I understand the need to put some subjectivity in it (different teams ask different things of QB's which skew stats) there was too much subjectivity in this article. But it's a really hard task to try to compare quarterbacks because of the vast differences in talent and the fact that most QB's who are any good at all stay with their original team for most of their career.

 

I actually also like his rankings for the most part. There's a thin line between the QB's ranked 4th through about 12th, and so a writer has a hard time going wrong putting those quarterbacks in just about any order.