Latest:

Thinkable or Not

Original thoughts, offbeat observations, lasting information

Sports 

How NOT to Judge a Quarterback

Peter Mucha 0 Comments

Here are some colossal blunders to avoid if you’re trying to figure how good an NFL quarterback might become.

  1. Make no allowances for time needed to (a) recover from injury, (b) shake off rust from a year-plus of being sidelined, (c) learn a new system or (d) adjust to new teammates.
  2. Harp on salary, as if that’s relevant.
  3. Treat wins as a reliable quarterback stat.
  4. Mistakenly assume a guy in his late 20s can’t or won’t improve.
  5. Claim you can judge character by expressions you imagine.
  6.  Blame the guy if his backup comes in and blows a game.
  7. Forget that sports constantly proves the best predictions wrong.

Now examine a test case.

Let’s play ‘Guess the Quarterback’!

If you live in Philadelphia and listen to sports-talk radio, you’d never recognize this guy. Name is Sam Bradford, the Eagles’ designated starter for the 2016 NFL season. Here in Philly, most fans and media members regard Bradford as mediocre or worse, likely to get seriously injured by Thanksgiving, and sure to get traded or cut after the season.

It’s true he’s not the most athletic or mobile guy, and he’s had trouble staying healthy. No disagreement here that Bradford’s downside is worrisome.

But his upside has been seriously underestimated. Not only has Bradford at times performed like a Top 10 quarterback, but many quarterbacks keep improving into their early 30s. Furthermore, Bradford’s value should keep rising as some of the league’s best decline from age. Brady, Brees, Eli, Tony Romo and Carson Palmer are fighting Father Time, with Philip Rivers pushing 35 and Ben Roethlisberger hobbling right behind.

What, the above stats are skewed, you say? Exactly the point! Some of the stats used to ridicule Bradford are irrelevant, rigged or even wrong, and nobody knows what the future holds. Before last season Carson Palmer had never won a playoff game and at age 36 wound up among the Top 4 QBs for yards, passer rating, and touchdowns.

No recovery or readjustment time for you!

The Sixers have a center, Joel Embiid, who has missed two seasons because of a broken navicular bone in his foot. Now ask yourself, what’s fair? Do we expect him to play like Hakeem Olajuwon his first game back? Second or third? 10th or 12th?

Obviously, ripping Embiid after a handful of games would be ridiculous. And yet, that’s exactly what happened last year in Philadelphia to Sam Bradford, who’d missed a season and a half because he blew out an ACL twice. After 6 games, experts began complaining about the lack of a deep passing game, while harping on a couple of end-zone interceptions (even though they sure beat pick 6s). CSNPhilly’s highly-respected Ray Didinger declared Bradford’s job should be on the line — even though the Eagles had just won two straight.

Good grief. Here’s a guy with a reconstructed knee, playing behind a reconstructed offensive line, being relentlessly chased by 300-pound brutes, and it’s a good idea to have him linger in the pocket? Way to risk the season and his career.

Planning to rip the Sixers if they don’t let Embiid play full games at full throttle this fall?

As the season went on, Bradford clearly played better. In his first 7 games, he had 9 TDs and 9 interceptions, 10 and 5 in his last 7 games (he missed two due to injury). Obvious conclusion: He was still recovering at the beginning of the season.

Yet stats for the entire season have been repeatedly trotted out by likes of ESPN’s Trey Wingo and Philly Voice’s Jimmy Kempski.

The difference is remarkable. For the whole season,  Bradford’s 86.4 quarterback rating ranked him 25th. But, notes one of Bradford’s few defenders, Paul Domowitch of the Philadelphia Daily News, “He had the eighth-best overall passer rating (97.4) in the league over the last nine weeks of the season and the sixth-best third-down passer rating (100.7).”

Not a large enough sample? Instead of counting the first 7 games of 2015, substitute the previous 7 games, before Bradford blew out his knee. In 7 games in 2013, Bradford threw 14 TDs and 4 interceptions.  So one could argue that in his last 14 “healthy” games (7 in 2016, 7 in 2013), he had 24 TDs and 9 interceptions.

Not a bad place for a quarterback-desperate franchise to start.

Even despite the bad start in 2016, Bradford set a club record for completion percentage, while surpassing the career yards-per-attempt averages of predecessors Donovan McNabb, Randall Cunningham and Ron Jaworski.

Jaworski, who works for ESPN,  said he re-watched every one of Bradford’s plays after the season, and thought he was “impressive.”

No ‘excuses’ for you!

Apparently, the more obstacles you face, the more blame you deserve.

Aaron Rodgers loses receiver Jordy Nelson, and everybody cuts Rodgers slack for a down year. Eli Manning blamed his down year in 2014 on having to learn a new offensive system. Drew Brees fails to produce a winning season in 2015, but the lousy defense is to blame. Philip Rivers couldn’t win because of a porous offensive line and a terrible running game.

All valid points. But why aren’t they also valid for Bradford, who suffered from all these factors and was recovering from a major injury and had a head coach whose predictable play-calling contributed to his getting fired?

Seen in that context, Bradford had a remarkable season in 2015.

For some irrational reason, the take in Philly is that these are all “excuses,” not legitimate factors.

“My goldfish died and I was upset” is an excuse. “My team set an NFL record for passing yards allowed” and “my receivers led the league in dropped passes” seem legit to me.

ACTUALLY, USING THAT ‘EXCUSE’ LINE IS AN EXCUSE. As in: Oh, sorry, my brain can’t objectively handle more than two factors at time,  so I’ll just do this waving motion with my hand, hoping you’ll mistake contempt for cogitation.

Surrounding cast alone is critical. When Nick Foles set records as Eagles QB in 2013, he had a top deep threat in DeSean Jackson, a top rusher in LeSean McCoy, and one of the league’s best offensive lines. Wideout Randy Moss helped both Randall Cunningham and Tom Brady to their best passing seasons ever. How good is Ryan Fitzpatrick without Brandon Marshall, Eli Manning without Odell Beckham Jr., Carson Palmer without Larry Fitzgerald, Tony Romo without Dez Bryant and Jason Whitten, or Matthew Stafford without Calvin Johnson and Golden Tate? The Eagles’ best receivers,  Jackson and Jeremy Maclin, were shipped out of town, along with McCoy and two starting offensive lineman, before Bradford arrived.

Quarterbacks Can Improve With Age

We’ve all heard stats about how short NFL careers can be, and we’re always impressed when a quarterback makes a playoff run early in his career. Nobody’s saying Sam Bradford’s first five years compare favorably with those of Russell Wilson, Roethlisberger or Newton. The first two won Super Bowls, the third got there.

But, as with Palmer, it’s not unusual for a quarterback to keep improving in his 30s.

  • About half of all Super Bowl starters were 30 or older at the time of the game.
  • Sam Bradford, 28, has yet to win a playoff game, but some Super Bowl winners took longer. Phil Sims finally made it at age 29, and went on to win two NFL titles. Roger Staubach started his first playoff game at age 29, and snagged two titles. One-time winner Joe Theismann didn’t throw a pass in a playoff game till age 33. Two-time champ Jim Plunkett first made the playoffs at age 33. That’s 7 Super Bowl wins for a bunch of “losers.”
  • A lot of very good quarterbacks were older than Bradford when they had their highest single-season ratings ever. Here’s a partial list: Sonny Jurgensen (age 40);  Brett Favre (39); John Elway (38); Y.A. Tittle and Gannon (36); Randall Cunningham and Palmer (35); Romo, Vinny Testaverde, Theismann , Eli Manning and Simms (34); Fran Tarkenton, Joe Montana and Warren Moon (33); Steve Young, Brees, Bart Starr, Johnny Unitas and Jay Cutler (32); Ryan Fitzpatrick, Alex Smith, Rivers and Dan Fouts (31); Brady and Michael Vick (30).

Guaranteeing Greatness?

No way is any of this to claim Bradford will become an elite, franchise quarterback. He could get hurt. He could suddenly take his money and retire. Not taking or making any bets. Just saying greatness is not unthinkable. Bradford could have an outstanding season, prove his critics wrong, and wind up welcomed back next year by fans and front office alike.

Philly’s love affair with Carson Wentz could turn out like the town’s crush on Chip Kelly. Genius! Love him! Idiot! Hate him! About half of all quarterbacks chosen in the first round turn out to be busts, despite stellar resumes and physical tools. Think about Tim Couch, Akili Smith, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Vince Young and JaMarcus Russell, with the book still out on Robert Griffin III, Blake Bortles and … Sam Bradford. And that’s just since 1999. All of them were among the top three picks in their drafts.

Wentz, who missed eight games his senior year by simply falling on his throwing hand, could turn out to be the one who’s most injury-prone. McNabb took a dozen sacks in a single game, Troy Aiken and Randall Cunningham 11. Will Wentz will be just as tough? Or will he be another Kevin Kolb? Kolb set an NFL record by throwing for 300 yards in his first two starts, but kept missing games due to injuries and wound up retiring at age 30 because of concussion syndrome.

Eagles fans should be glad the club has two hopes for a franchise quarterback. Embrace the optionality, as ex-Sixers “process” guru Sam Hinkie might have said.

— Peter Mucha

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That doesn’t make Bradford “elite,” especially

 

The whole point of Thinkable or Not is to discover the overlooked truth.

Here’s one:

Sam Bradford is more likely to become a franchise quarterback than rookie Carson Wentz.

No way you’d come to such a conclusion listening to sports-talk radio in Philadelphia, or by hearing some respected guys on ESPN. Here in Philly, Bradford is an average (CSNPhilly’s Ray Didinger) or below-average quarterback (Philly Voice’s Jimmy Kemski), who has about zero chance of being the Eagles starter next year (97.5 The Fanatic’s Mike Missanelli) while Wentz is “amazingly smart” (Eagles GM Howie Roseman) and has an some kind of charisma or “it” factor (97.5’s Anthony Gargano). These are not cherry-picked opinions. For every media member named, you could substitute another. WIP’s Glen Macnow dismissed all the obstacles Bradford faced last year, calling them “excuses,” and concluded Bradford has a “zero point zero” chance of being a franchise quarterback. WIP’s Rhea Hughes often scoffs derisively at stats that show Bradford performed very well at the end of the season. ESPN’s Trey Wingo has an arsenal of anti-Bradford stats with glee.

The favorite lines goes something like, guy’s made a fortune and won nothing. You can find stats online about Bradford being an all-timer at dollars per win, dollars per touchdown, and so on.

Flaws in that reasoning,  such as money’s irrelevance to ability, mostly go unnoticed.

Bradford does have a few defenders. ESPN’s Ron Jaworski called Bradford “impressive” after re-watching every single pass Bradford threw in 2015, including pre-season.

 

Paul Domowitch wrote of Bradford in the Philadelphia Daily News, adding that he had “a 3.95 GPA in finance at the University of Oklahoma.”

What follows are all sorts of stats and arguments that present the case for Bradford. Understand no one is guaranteeing future greatness. They try to injure quarterbacks in the NFL, and a couple of bad games could get him booed and benched by a rookie head coach. The contention is: It’s way too soon to give up on the guy.

 

Who’s the quarterback? Sam Bradford, of course.

Of course, these stats can be picked apart. That’s the point! The question is: Why don’t Bradford’s critics ever pick their own stats apart? They’re just as biased and one-sided.

The 3 Most Unfair Anti-Bradford Stats

  1. “Bradford has never had a winning season.” He had one last year! He was 7-6 in games he started and completed. You disagree? Seriously? You’re going to blame the loss against Miami on Bradford? When he left the game with an injury, the Eagles were winning. And they would have won if not for these mistakes after he left: Miles Austin failing to drag a foot on a Mark Sanchez potential TD pass,  illegal formation penalty wiping out a Zack Ertz touchdown, and Chip Kelly letting Sanchez pass and being intercepted when they were in range for a winning field goal. You must still blame Curt Shilling for Joe Carter’s home run off Mitch Williams in the 1994 World Series.
  2. Every stat based on money. Yes, Bradford has been overpaid. Not a news flash. He was the last No. 1 draft pick before the NFL instituted a rookie wage scale. But what quarterback rating system includes take-home pay? It’s irrelevant to yards, completions or scoring points. In addition, any dollars-per game/TD stats are skewed even more if the 25 games he missed due to ACL tears are counted. He was playing badly then, he wasn’t playing! Besides, in 2015, Bradford ranked only 19th in the league for average salary under current contracts, and he’ll be 19th again in 2016.
  3. Any stat that includes the start of 2015. Let’s be fair. Really, are you being honest if you give a quarterback no grace period after returning from a devastating injury? I’ve heard experts say it can take an entire year for a player to recover from an ACL tear, and Bradford suffered one twice, causing him to miss a year and a half. He wasn’t even ready to fully work out during the 2015 off-season. Think he might have been a little rusty? Think he wasn’t terrified of a third blown-out knee? On top of that, he was learning a different offense and different receivers, behind a reconstructed o-line, under a different coaching staff.  In New York, they made allowances for Eli Manning having an off year in 2014 just because of a new offensive system. In Green Bay, they understood Aaron Rodgers might have a down year just because of the loss of favorite target Jordy Nelson? But in Philadelphia, with no DeSean Jackson or Jeremy Maclin to throw to, and Zack Ertz out to start the season, Sam Bradford is held accountable — no “excuses”! — from Game One? C’mon, who’s the real Sam Bradford? Toss out his first seven games (including a 3 TD, zero interception game against Washington), and instead include the seven games he played in 2013. In those 14 games, Bradford threw 24 touchdowns with only 8 interceptions. Imagine the Eagles getting that Sam Bradford this season.
  4.  ESPN’s QBR. The sports network’s Total Quarterback Rating has a major bias in favor of well-protected running quarterbacks who wind up in back-and-forth games. Win a blowout? You’re not as good as the guy who barely won. Get sacked a bunch? Cancel out some touchdowns. Scamper for some yards? Woo-hoo! Bonus points! (Even though almost every quarterback’s average rush is less than his average pass.) No

 

  1. Got  It’s unfair enough that the regular rating system makes no allowances for tips, drops or sacks, ESPN’s QBR blames quarterbacks for being sacked and even building up a big lead! score, pass protection.
  3. The whole point of Thinkable or Not is to discover the overlooked truth.Here’s one:Sam Bradford is more likely to become a franchise quarterback than rookie Carson Wentz.No way you’d come to such a conclusion listening to sports-talk radio in Philadelphia, or by hearing some respected guys on ESPN. Here in Philly, Bradford is an average (CSNPhilly’s Ray Didinger) or below-average quarterback (Philly Voice’s Jimmy Kemski), who has about zero chance of being the Eagles starter next year (97.5 The Fanatic’s Mike Missanelli) while Wentz is “amazingly smart” (Eagles GM Howie Roseman) and has an some kind of charisma or “it” factor (97.5’s Anthony Gargano). These are not cherry-picked opinions. For every media member named, you could substitute another. WIP’s Glen Macnow dismissed all the obstacles Bradford faced last year, calling them “excuses,” and concluded Bradford has a “zero point zero” chance of being a franchise quarterback. WIP’s Rhea Hughes often scoffs derisively at stats that show Bradford performed very well at the end of the season. ESPN’s Trey Wingo has an arsenal of anti-Bradford stats with glee.The favorite lines goes something like, guy’s made a fortune and won nothing. You can find stats online about Bradford being an all-timer at dollars per win, dollars per touchdown, and so on.Flaws in that reasoning,  such as money’s irrelevance to ability, mostly go unnoticed.Bradford does have a few defenders. ESPN’s Ron Jaworski called Bradford “impressive” after re-watching every single pass Bradford threw in 2015, including pre-season.Here’s Paul Domowitch of the Philadelphia Daily News on Bradford: “He had the eighth-best overall passer rating (97.4) in the league over the last nine weeks of the season and the sixth-best third-down passer rating (100.7),” Paul Domowitch wrote of Bradford in the Philadelphia Daily News, adding that he had “a 3.95 GPA in finance at the University of Oklahoma.”What follows are all sorts of stats and arguments that present the case for Bradford. Understand no one is guaranteeing future greatness. They try to injure quarterbacks in the NFL, and a couple of bad games could get him booed and benched by a rookie head coach. The contention is: It’s way too soon to give up on the guy.Let’s play ‘Guess the Quarterback’
    • In 2015, he was the 15th highest paid quarterback, and will be No. 18 in 2016.
    • In 2015, he won 7 of his last 12 games, and left the field leading in one more.
    • In 2015, he was the NFL’s most accurate quarterback under pressure, according to Pro Football Focus.
    • Four of his wins came against Super Bowl winners Tom Brady, Drew Brees and Eli Manning.
    • He had more passing yards per game in 2015 than Russell Wilson, Cam Newton, Aaron Rodgers or Peyton Manning.
    • In the last seven games of 2015, this guy’s quarterback rating topped 100 three times, Aaron Rodgers zero.

    Who’s the quarterback? Sam Bradford, of course.

    Of course, these stats can be picked apart. That’s the point! The question is: Why don’t Bradford’s critics ever pick their own stats apart?

    The 3 Most Unfair Anti-Bradford Stats

    1. “Bradford has never had a winning season.” He had one last year! He was 7-6 in games he started and completed. You disagree? Seriously? You’re going to blame the loss against Miami on Bradford? When he left the game with an injury, the Eagles were winning. And they would have won if not for these mistakes after he left: Miles Austin failing to drag a foot on a Mark Sanchez potential TD pass,  illegal formation penalty wiping out a Zack Ertz touchdown, and Chip Kelly letting Sanchez pass and being intercepted when they were in range for a winning field goal. You must still blame Curt Shilling for Joe Carter’s home run off Mitch Williams in the 1994 World Series.
    2. Every stat based on money. Yes, Bradford has been overpaid. Not a news flash. He was the last No. 1 draft pick before the NFL instituted a rookie wage scale. But what quarterback rating system includes take-home pay? It’s irrelevant to yards, completions or scoring points. In addition, any dollars-per game/TD stats are skewed even more if the 25 games he missed due to ACL tears are counted. He was playing badly then, he wasn’t playing! Besides, in 2015, Bradford ranked only 19th in the league for average salary under current contracts, and he’ll be 19th again in 2016.
    3. Any stat that includes the start of 2015. Let’s be fair. Really, are you being honest if you give a quarterback no grace period after returning from a devastating injury? I’ve heard experts say it can take an entire year for a player to recover from an ACL tear, and Bradford suffered one twice, causing him to miss a year and a half. He wasn’t even ready to fully work out during the 2015 off-season. Think he might have been a little rusty? Think he wasn’t terrified of a third blown-out knee? On top of that, he was learning a different offense and different receivers, behind a reconstructed o-line, under a different coaching staff.  In New York, they made allowances for Eli Manning having an off year in 2014 just because of a new offensive system. In Green Bay, they understood Aaron Rodgers might have a down year just because of the loss of favorite target Jordy Nelson? But in Philadelphia, with no DeSean Jackson or Jeremy Maclin to throw to, and Zack Ertz out to start the season, Sam Bradford is held accountable — no “excuses”! — from Game One? C’mon, who’s the real Sam Bradford? Toss out his first seven games (including a 3 TD, zero interception game against Washington), and instead include the seven games he played in 2013. In those 14 games, Bradford threw 24 touchdowns with only 8 interceptions. Imagine the Eagles getting that Sam Bradford this season.
    7. In one game last year, why? Because

    Many QBs keep improving into their 30s

    Many in Philly seem to believe Bradford already had his chance and fell short, so there’s little hope. On the contrary, it’s typical for NFL quarterbacks to keep improving.

 

Many QBs keep improving into their 30s

Many in Philly seem to believe Bradford already had his chance and fell short, so there’s little hope. On the contrary, it’s typical for NFL quarterbacks to keep improving.

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *