Couldn't agree more. OB was as an accurate passer as the game ever saw. He also had a gun for an arm. No O line and poor feet skills (immobility) was his shortfall. He also never knew when to throw the ball away. In this league now, he would tear it up, as the QB is way more protected by the rules including the ability to throw it away outside of the tackles, which was around when he played. The rules regarding pass interference would also help him tremendously. Good guy and good QB who really never had anything negative to say and never did anything stupid to give the press ammo.
That kind of game worked well for Chad when he had Randy Moss at Marshall. the point is, Chad didn't have the "spectacular" youtube highlight film type plays, but still moved the chains, played smart / better football than O'Brien did and still won and won in the postseason. If he had receivers like Moss, Toon or Walker maybe he would have a youtube highlight video.
I agree completely. I'm just saying he didn't rely on the deep ball as a Jet like O'Brien did, largely because he had different WRs and was in a different offense. Also, I think it's a fallacy that he couldn't throw deep. Just when teams thought he couldn't do it was when he burned them deep. Right off the top of my head I can think of 2006 Christmas night at Miami in the rain, a game we needed for the playoffs--he hit Cotchery for a long TD right when the MNF guys were laughing that he couldn't throw. Also the 2004 playoff game where he hit Moss for a deep TD at San Diego and couldn't even lift his arm to celebrate the TD. He wasn't a mad bomber but he could hit that pass when it was there, that's why I said earlier in the thread that he did more with less.
Is there a stat for how many people turn down the pro-bowl? If so, then it would tell the story for Ken's 1991 appearance. I think 4+ qb turned down the pro-bowl from the AFC that year.
THe problem was that Chad could not throw deep or the out pattern. A receiver like Walker would have been wasted if he played with Chad. I always thought this was why the Jets moved Moss to get Coles back. All concerned indicated that Coles was the better match for Chad, because he was more of a possession type receiver. No way Chad would have had a similar highlight video to O'Brien's no matter who his receivers were. I do concede IS's point that when coupled with Shuler the Jets had in Walker and Toon their best starting receiver corps ever, though. But it was balanced by a lesser running game and an even bigger drop off in OL pass protection. WSW's point about the rules also needs to be reinserted here as a caveat on statistical comparisons between Chad and O'Brien insofar as Chad had the benefit of league efforts to protect the Qb. Ftr I do not say that O'Brien is so great he deserves to be in the Hall. I remember with sadness and frustration him pulling up on that play when he was going for the end zone and did not want to take the hit. He did get gunshy from all those sacks. And his last couple of years on the team were on a team that was not much fun to watch. Still to me he is on balance the better Qb than Chad by a big enough margin that imo it should not really be all that debatable.
And don't forget the one he threw to Moss in the '04 AFC Divisional that was just tipped away. That was a beautiful pass to Moss (probably the same exact play they connected on the week before against the Chargers)
Ok, you are right to say we should not be claiming that Chad could never throw the ball more than forty yards. He did a couple of times. But Kenny could throw it deep and with accuracy all day long. You wouldn't claim I expect that Chad could.
No, the arms aren't even an issue, but it's overall how they played the position and the game. I just think people overstate Chad's lack of arm strength because he could throw deep when it was there, it just wasn't his bread and butter. O'Brien was the perfect guy for the offense he had with Walker/Toon because of his arm. Both guys were flawed in different ways, Chad in my opinion got more out of his ability and weapons in terms of winning late in the year and in the playoffs. I don't think too many guys lead our 2006 team to 10-6 and the playoffs with a rookie coach (who didn't even turn out to be that good), no real #1 RB and rookies on the O-line. An arm alone doesn't get that done, it's brains, saavy, managing the game and also making throws when they need to be made. Probably the weakest of the three Jet playoff teams Chad was on and probably the most impressive job he did, considering he was off of two shoulder surgeries.
I mentioned that. let's look at some #s: 1991 ken's "pro bowl season" 287-489, 3300 yds, 6.7 YPA, 11 TDs, 10 INTs, led us to 8-8 wildcard year and loss in EC rd. 2002 Chad's NON PB year: 275-399, 3120 yds, 8.2 YPA(since some people love that stat, this was higher than ANY O'Brien year)22 TDs, 6 INTs, led us to 2nd AFC East title EVER, win in WC round and lss in div rd. Remember Chad only started 12 games that year and in 90 less attemtps he had only 180 less yds w/ double the amount of TDs and almost half the INTs.
All you have to do is look at the 1991 stats for Dan Marino, John Elway, Jim Kelly, Warren Moon and Boomer Esiason. I don't know what they were but I'll bet all were better than O'Brien's year, we were 8-8. That Pro Bowl appearance shouldn't really even factor in the discussion. You can use 1985 or 1986, if he got there those years it was legit, in 1991 they needed someone to go out there and play in the game. Al Toon didn't catch a TD that year until the playoff game at Houston.
Chad threw with no velocity. If he reared back and could step into it he could throw it forty yards, but he had to have all the fundamentals in place. We will just have to agree to disagree. I think it beyond question he had mediocre arm strength. Kenny could really sling it, and did. 2006 - The rookies on the OL happened to be Ferguson and Mangold, two first round picks who played rather well as I recall. Yes it was running by committee, but that was Leon's great year. I remember that loss to Chicago as one of the worst games I ever saw the Jets play. Chad did shit all day, and they went scoreless. Wins included over the self destructing Texans (7 penalties compared to one for the Jets), a 3 interception day from Tennessee qb's, a rare win over New England when Brady had the better game, two wins over Miami by three points each with Joey Harrington at fish qb starting the first game and Cleo Lemon (CLEO LEMON) the second, a total first half self destruction by the Pack, and wins over Detroit and Oakland (Aaron Brooks at qb?). Followed by a dismal wild card loss. Not my favorite season, but yeah, it was a relatively good one for Chad.
You can pick apart a lot of wins by O'Brien or anyone else the same way, wins are wins. Again, we had one winning season with O'Brien, 8-7-1 in 1988, after the meltdown in 1986 and we had to rally to get that one. To me it's kind of an apples to oranges comparison because both guys fit the offense they were in. I don't think Chad would have been as prolific in the vertical game as O'Brien was, but I'll bet he could have found ways to win with Walker and Toon like Pat Ryan did. O'Brien on the other hand, wasn't suited to the kind of offense Chad ran. Remember Coslet was a Walsh/West Coast guy like Hackett, and O'Brien was limited in that because it didn't suit his abilities. To me that was a bigger problem than him being old or gun shy. I think that's one reason he and Coslet never clicked. Remember how shackled Vinny looked in that same offense after Henning left and we got Hackett.
I will totally agree that Kenny was better suited to the vertical game, but by the time Coslet came into the picture, he'd gone well into his career never having played the WCO. It's a lot to expect of anyone to change one's whole approach like that. Old dog new tricks and all that. There's something to it. Earlier in his career, who knows if he'd have been able to do that? Same applies to Vinny, of course.
I don't post ridiculous stuff in football forums. I save nonsensical crap for the bullshit and baseball forums. Sometimes I write nonsense in those forums simply to entertain others. The stuff I wrote in my response to jonnyd's comment (aka the post that led you to jump all over me) did not contain any ridiculous theories. You are free to disagree and tell me that you think I am wrong, but what I wrote was not ridiculous. It is insulting to be told by someone that what I wrote there was ridiculous. Now, if I had written that Ken O'Brien was abducted by evil aliens on a Monday night in November of 1986 and they did stuff to his brain and that's why he struggled after that, then, hey, you can call me nuts. The game works like this. If someone insults me, I typically will fire back. It is unusual for me to start something. You fired the first salvo, but you believe I did. Are we going to have to agree to disagree on this topic so we can focus fully on the actual football discussion? When you fired the first shot, my next move was to agree with nyjunc's comment that you are misinformed. That was easy enough for me to get you annoyed just as you had annoyed me. It is that simple. He could have called you a dork, moron, nitwit, douchebag, or some other negative term and I would have agreed with him. If nyjunc had never made the "misinformed" comment, then I would have had no reason to quote him. Instead, you would have seen the same response from me sans the agreement with nyjunc's comment. I wrote something like, "I'll respond to that crap later." That's basically what I would have wrote. In other words, agreeing with nyjunc as I did was simply to annoy. Turns out I was successful. If you simply disagreed and/or asked me to explain my stance in further detail, then this whole debate would have been much more pleasant. I am on baby duty till 8:15 tonight. I'll be here for the next few hours, but won't be able to truly hunker down and respond to all the football stuff till later.
O'Brien was nothing after 1991. He couldn't stick in Green Bay in a backup role and he didn't last long in Philadelphia, either. I liked it when Coslet gave the job to Nagle. It just didn't work out. He was a 2nd round pick. It was not outrageous of Coslet to think Nagle could be good. If O'Brien went elsewhere and won a starting job and put up big numbers, then your mocking of Coslet would be on the money. Unfortunately for O'Brien and his backers, he did not make Coslet look foolish. O'Brien did see some action in 1992 and he did not play well. As for O'Brien's Pro Bowl appearance after the 1991 season, he made the roster after at least 3 other QBs asked out of the game. It was absurd that he made the Pro Bowl. We discussed Pro Bowls ealier this year. I told you it would be best if you paid them no mind. Judging players by PB appearances is dangerous. If I remember correctly, you may have even agreed with me. If so, then why did you bring Pro Bowl appearances to the table here?
You misunderstood or I didn't explain that comment well enough. Pennington missed huge chunks of seasons. He was frail. All NFL players are tough, but it is relative. My larger point was that Favre was physically tough and mentally tough because he stayed in games and was reliable in that sense. He was also fearless and had the courage to take chances in the passing game. He did not play the position scared. I believe that O'Brien was not fearless after 1986. He was physically tough, he was an NFL quarterback, he took a beating, blah blah blah. However, I felt that he did not have the mental toughness of a guy like Favre. He who hesitates is lost. I felt O'Brien often hesitated with the ball. He would get sacked quite a bit, as a result. Pennington was a physical wreck after '02 and got by on guile.
Again, I was responding to a post about O'Brien and only O'Brien. Your reading comprehension is a problem. You read shit that people never wrote. It's fuckin' amazing.
Yeah, but did Pennington really have better running games backing him up than did O'Brien? I don't think he did. Let's quickly examine the run games for these QBs- O'Brien 1984- Jets led AFC in rushing yardage (2189) and average per rush (4.3) 1985- Jets 3rd in AFC in rushing yardage (2312) 1986- Jets were subpar that year (1729 yards, 3.5 avg) 1987- subpar again (1671 yards, 3.6 avg) 1988- above league averages in yardage and yards per carry (2132, 4.1) 1989- right at the league average with 4.0 yards per rush, but this team did not run often due to trailing on a regular basis 1990- 2nd in AFC in rush yards and average (2127, 4.5) 1991- very good running attack (2160, 4.1) Pennington 2002- below league average (1618, 4.0) 2003- below league average (1635, 4.0) 2004- 2nd in AFC in yards and average (2388, 4.5) 2005- very poor running attack (1328, 3.5) 2006- below league average in yards, well below league average in yards per carry (1738, 3.5) 2007- below league average (1701, 3.8) O'Brien benefited from good running attacks in 1984, 1985, 1988, 1990, and 1991. Pennington benefited from a good running attack in only one season of his Jets career. Yards and yards per carry are as simplistic as it is going to get. If there is some other way you want to examine this, then let me know. I thought the Jets ran the ball well in the O'Brien years for the most part. McNeil, Hector, and Baxter were very good. Martin played hurt in 2002 and outside of his final season which was an abbreviated one, 2002 was his least effective campaign. Martin was better in 2003, but not spectacular. 2004 was the one season where Pennington had a big running attack helping out his cause. Martin led the league in rushing and Jordan added almost 500 yards. Yes, it counts for something. That is one of the reasons why I don't rate Pennington as being significantly better than O'Brien. Edit- I won't be able to get to the rest tonight. Will be back on Wednesday evening.
