Fitzpatrick is not good. That's the story. He can't be the QB for the year if this team wants to go to the playoffs. He can fill in 4 games until Geno comes back.
... prolific college passer... somewhat limited but great NFL passer... already arguably the best rushing/evasive QB ever... 1 SB win and 2 appearances in 3 years.. how could you not? That offense is tending towards the pass. We will find out.
Good point with the trend, but I think calling him the best running qb ever is extremely premature. Vick is, and it's not close. Could he get there? Yeah maybe. Also, Russell has not even had 3,500 yards, OR 27+ touchdowns in a season yet. He has a long, long way to go. My original point is judging a qb off of wins is like many stats, a very flawed one. It's only 1 player. Football is a team game.
I agree actually. I just think using Wilson as an example was really poor choice because he is a great QB. And it def is a team game but comon,.. QB is not just one position... It's the most important position.
You're right, but there is defense too where the qb isn't on the field even. The reason I chose Wilson is mainly because I saw that stat a few days ago that he has the most wins in first 3 years. It seemed like a good example. What about Alex Smith in the last 4 years? I'm sure he is quite a few games over .500. I don't know the official number, but it would imply he is a very good qb which he just isn't.
Well I know he is above average overall, but he is a game manager in the end. He is afraid to throw deep. He's got a sick defense, and Charles and they still always miss the playoffs. You said qb is the most important position, so if he is so good, and the guys around him are so good, why aren't they playing in January?
I totally disagree. Other posters have already posted the reasons why that's utter nonsense. You're much smarter than this. So is Columbo. QBs have zero control over how good or how bad their team's D is or how good or how bad the offensive talent is around them. Even Peyton Manning went 3-13 his rookie season on a bad team. It's a stat that one should consider, but by no means is it the be-all and end-all of how one should judge a veteran QB. Football is the ultimate team game. While a great QB can elevate the play of the offensive players around him and keep his team competitive, he cannot carry a team to a winning record every season on his own.
Alex Smith has been on KC for two years: 9-7 last year with the 7th ranked total D. 11-5 the year before with the 25th ranked total D. Zero WR TD's last yr, what does that tell you? 2013 they went to the playoffs, lost a high scoring game by one point to the Colts, Smith had something like 375 yds 4 TD's 0 INT. In SF he was 1-1 in the playoffs abt 500 yds 5 TD's 0 INT's. Also they happen to play a division that had the winningest team in the NFL the last two years. He's good and the teams overall good despite arguably the worst receiving corp in the league they've had a winning record, 20-12 with him. They got Maclin this yr, lookin forward to seeing how that plays out. If Alex Smith was the Jets QB, half this board would be making Super Bowl predictions.
Last thing you said is so sad but true lol.. So where would you personally rank him among the current starting qb?
Fitz hasn't thrown more INTs than TDs in the last 6 seasons. That is something Jets fans haven't come to be familiar with. On a Titans team that went 2-14 the year after he went 14-12. If fitz can pull off something like 22-12 or even 20-14 at worst that would be considered a successful season and we could be looking at a WC spot easy.
What about Drew Brees last year? They were bad, but is that because of him? How about Colin Kaepernick? He has a winning record, but the general consensus is that he is a very flawed qb.
That's a good example. I already agreed with your original point that w-l is not solely indicative of the quality of QB play.. Going to sleep... Dropped my phone on the gf's face while typing this... Ha.
Football is a team sport. You can't judge a coach or a player on a W/L record. A good example would be an average QB going from a horrible team to the best team in the NFL. Is he suddenly a great QB or is he still average and the guys around him are just better, which helps him play better? He doesn't magically become more accurate, he doesn't have a bigger arm, he's not smarter just because he plays in a different city. He's the same guy. Same with headcoaches. John Fox went from one of the worst teams in the decade (Panthers) to one of the top dogs in the NFL (Broncos). Suddenly instead of being dead last in the NFL he's coaching for the Superbowl, thanks to having somebody like Peyton. It makes no sense to judge a player or a HC on a W/L record, or even superbowls. I hate how whenever you bring up one of the best players of all time and then they go "yeah, but he doesn't have a ring". So what?! What does that have to do with anything? You're gonna pick a worse player over him to the HOF just because he happened to be on a better team?
