NFL 2012 Week 4 Thread

I am not a Cary Williams fan. Can't wait for Jimmy Smith to supplant him.

*Legion* wrote:

Baltimore is probably my favorite team to watch of the teams that I don't actually care about.

At this point I don't really pull for any teams. But I certainly try and catch every Baltimore game I can.

The level of respect the players have for the real refs is palpable. No bickering, less shoving. The game feels like it's actually in control. This does not suck.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

Actually, looking at that full list of players, it's kind of a fun exercise to think of who on that long list is least deserving. I'll go with Stephen Davis.

That's a good pick.

I might have to say McCardell. Stephen Davis was, at least, one of the top 5 RBs in the game for a few of his seasons. McCardell was never even a WR1 on any of his teams.

I just looked at McCardell's career stats, and they're much better than I expected. Five 1000 yard seasons, which is a lot of balls considering he averaged less than 13 yards/catch. He's like a poor man's Art Monk.

Stats aren't everything, but I give you Steve McNair vs. Jon Kitna.

If McNair is a HOFer someone like Kurt Warner is first ballot, IMO.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:

I just looked at McCardell's career stats, and they're much better than I expected. Five 1000 yard seasons, which is a lot of balls considering he averaged less than 13 yards/catch. He's like a poor man's Art Monk.

That's about it. I'm firmly in the Dr. Z camp of, "I don't think you make the Hall of Fame on 800 8-yard hook passes".

Jimmy Smith is on that Hall list and he's got 9 1000 yard seasons out of 12 seasons played. (And those first two seasons where he didn't get 1000 yards, he was a kick returner and played receiver very sparingly. And the third, he was injured for 4 games and would have reached 1000 otherwise). Basically, he was a 1000 yard receiver all day, every day when on the field as a WR.

And he's considered borderline, not likely to make it deep in the cuts anytime soon.

Given those numbers as borderline, McCardell isn't even in the picture.

John Harbaugh always looks like a sad Jim Harbaugh.

That's cause he played for the Jags.

Seriously though, Brunell might've had decent rushing numbers but he wasn't a threat like McNair was. McNair was scary in the red zone.

DSGamer wrote:

Stats aren't everything, but I give you Steve McNair vs. Jon Kitna.

If McNair is a HOFer someone like Kurt Warner is first ballot, IMO.

McNair's numbers across the board are slightly worse versions of Mark Brunell's numbers.

Brunell has slightly more yardage, slightly better passer rating, slightly more TDs, slightly fewer INTs. The only number McNair has better is rushing, but even there, Brunell was a runner too and not far enough behind to make McNair's case better than Brunell's. They've even got the same 5-5 playoff W-L record.

These two are direct contemporaries, playing in the same division at the same time. It's hard to make a good case about Steve McNair that doesn't apply to Mark Brunell, and no one is claiming Mark Brunell a Hall of Famer.

EDIT: Same number of Pro Bowls too: 3.

garion333 wrote:

Seriously though, Brunell might've had decent rushing numbers but he wasn't a threat like McNair was. McNair was scary in the red zone.

Sure, but is 1,100 more career rushing yards enough to really differentiate Steve McNair from Mark Brunell as a Hall of Fame candidate? Especially when you factor in the fewer passing yards and TDs and more INTs?

Put it another way: if Steve McNair is so dangerous, where's the production?

This discussion is a bit of a trap because Mark Brunell is very underrated compared to his actual production. But it's a great way to frame the discussion about McNair, given how closely their total production matches up and having played at the same time in the same division. Where's the production?

One place where you might be able to argue it: 37 rushing TDs. That's a decent number.

Still, I don't think Brunell is even a borderline HOFer, and if McNair is a legitimate HOF candidate, he's got to have more production to separate himself from Brunell than he appears to.

Yeah, I was in large part talking about the tds. I'm not sure if I consider McNair a legit HOF candidate or not, but that MVP probably put him on the ballot. McNair was a starting QB his entire career (outside of his first two years). Only injuries kept him from playing longer. Brunell on the other hand wasn't always a starter and I think that tarnished his reputation. Plus, he played for the Jags and didn't get as much love as he probably should have. And he was white. There, I said it. I'm not sure how much I mean it, but I said it.

garion333 wrote:

I am not a Cary Williams fan. Can't wait for Jimmy Smith to supplant him.

But probably not right now, right?

*Legion* wrote:
garion333 wrote:

I am not a Cary Williams fan. Can't wait for Jimmy Smith to supplant him.

But probably not right now, right? :)

It's more of a Cortland Finnegan thing than anything. Williams annoys me and I don't make excuses for him when he gets beat like I do with Webb.

garion333 wrote:

I'm not sure how much I mean it, but I said it.

By that rationale Randall Cunningham should already be voted in. I think it matters to voters that...

A) He played in a Super Bowl
B) He won the MVP one year
C) He came into the league with a bit of fanfare after setting records in college
D) He was pretty well liked and died tragically

Somewhere down that list it probably matters that he came into the league at a time when coaches were still trying to convert most black quarterbacks into WRs.

garion333 wrote:

Yeah, I was in large part talking about the tds. I'm not sure if I consider McNair a legit HOF candidate or not, but that MVP probably put him on the ballot. McNair was a starting QB his entire career (outside of his first two years). Only injuries kept him from playing longer. Brunell on the other hand wasn't always a starter and I think that tarnished his reputation. Plus, he played for the Jags and didn't get as much love as he probably should have. And he was white. There, I said it. I'm not sure how much I mean it, but I said it.

I don't think it's out of line to suggest that McNair being black may have helped raise his profile. Not a deep racial thing per se, just being the exception rather than the norm, kind of like Wes Welker being a white receiver no doubt makes him stand out a little more. Particularly given that McNair started in the mid '90s and a lot more black quarterbacks came along after that. Less of an exception than Moon or Cunningham, sure, but still, black QBs were more of an exception in 1995 than they've become since.

I pretty much don't disagree with anything you're saying. Ultimately I think the bar for QBs has been too low already, and putting McNair in would be lowering it even still. Very good player, but we're approaching a place where any quarterback who starts for 10 years or more gets considered a candidate.

DSGamer wrote:
garion333 wrote:

I'm not sure how much I mean it, but I said it.

By that rationale Randall Cunningham should already be voted in.

Cunningham really makes things problematic for a McNair candidacy. Cunningham has even more rushing production in terms of yardage, and only 2 fewer TDs.

McNair has slightly more passing production, but only slightly.

Cunningham was also voted All-Pro once, something McNair never did. (Or Brunell, just to throw him back in there).

Let the wild-assed guesses continue.

Chargers at Chiefs
Seahawks at Rams
Redskins at Buccaneers
49ers at Jets
Titans at Texans

Legion you list Vegas Line.. what exactly does that mean? Are you looking at the point spreads for the given game?

TheGameguru wrote:

Legion you list Vegas Line.. what exactly does that mean? Are you looking at the point spreads for the given game?

I look at the point spreads and the teams favored for each of the 5 games are Vegas's "picks". The spreads themselves don't actually factor in beyond marking one team as the favorite.

Last year, I wondered how one would fare if they had just picked whomever was favored to win for every game. So this year, I'm including that in each week and we can see if anyone outperforms just blindly picking the team that the oddsmakers favor every game.

I'm not involved in sports betting, so I don't know if perhaps my use of the words "Vegas Line" is confusing.

Chargers at Chiefs
Seahawks at Rams
Redskins at Buccaneers
49ers at Jets
Titans at Texans

Antonio Cromartie says that, with Revis out, he's the best corner in the NFL now.

That is, of course, rather amusing. But it brings up the question of who is.

Last year, by PFF's grades, the next best corners were Brent Grimes, Cortland Finnegan, and Lardarius Webb.

In terms of game-for-game performance, Derek Cox was neck and neck with Revis, although Cox missed the second half of the year, bringing down his final grade. Grimes was not far behind those two.

This year, Grimes is actually grading out below average so far. Cox is in the positive range but only has one game to his name so far, having made his first post-injury start this past week.

Right now, the top rated PFF corner is Alterraun Verner, the Titan who stepped into Cortland Finnegan's vacated spot. (Finnegan is #3).

Cromartie ranks #19, well into the positive grades, but he isn't even the top rated Cromartie (Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie has the 8th best grade).

PFF grades are, of course, far from Gospel, but I find them to be reasonably informative, and refreshingly free of "name" bias. Breakout players no one has ever heard of tend to emerge at the top of these grades weeks before "experts" start actually talking about them.

Where's Jonathan Joseph fit? I was under the impression he's been shutting down one side of the field.

*Legion* wrote:

This year, Grimes is actually grading out below average so far. Cox is in the positive range but only has one game to his name so far, having made his first post-injury start this past week.

Well, Grimes' coverage responsibilities have changed pretty significantly since he was put on IR after the first game.

garion333 wrote:

Where's Jonathan Joseph fit? I was under the impression he's been shutting down one side of the field.

10th so far in 2012, 9th overall last year. So, pretty damn good.

One thing to note is that the ratings are so purely about performance that players who get hot for a streak of time will jump up on the lists for a while, and fade down again when they regress back to the mean. So staying in the top 10 like that is pretty significant. Also, Joseph rates a couple spots higher if graded purely on pass coverage performance. His red marks in run coverage bring his overall grade down a bit.

Also, though they follow a standard, grades will invariably vary from grader to grader, so they don't make for perfectly mathematical comparisons. But they're very good at putting players in the right ballpark.

MilkmanDanimal wrote:
*Legion* wrote:

This year, Grimes is actually grading out below average so far. Cox is in the positive range but only has one game to his name so far, having made his first post-injury start this past week.

Well, Grimes' coverage responsibilities have changed pretty significantly since he was put on IR after the first game.

Well fine then.

I'm not involved in sports betting, so I don't know if perhaps my use of the words "Vegas Line" is confusing.

Vegas line would imply that for instance the Packers giving NO 7.5pts next week that they then win by 8 points+.. Not just win. But you clarified what you are doing so I'm good. I vote next year we move to include spreads and not just pick ems.

I'll call it "Oddsmakers Picks" or something. It's just a string in my little output generator, makes no difference to me what it says.

garion333 wrote:

Where's Jonathan Joseph fit? I was under the impression he's been shutting down one side of the field.

From a strictly fan perspective, he's totally awesome. We have total confidence in him.

Fedaykin98 wrote:
garion333 wrote:

Where's Jonathan Joseph fit? I was under the impression he's been shutting down one side of the field.

From a strictly fan perspective, he's totally awesome. We have total confidence in him.

No way! Would have never guessed that.

Gumbie wrote:
Fedaykin98 wrote:
garion333 wrote:

Where's Jonathan Joseph fit? I was under the impression he's been shutting down one side of the field.

From a strictly fan perspective, he's totally awesome. We have total confidence in him.

No way! Would have never guessed that. :)

I don't see what you did there, gumbie, but since our teams are playing this weekend, it's a good time to once again show everybody this educational video about the group of folks Tennesee named their team after:

Hm. Do I e-mail that to my in-laws in Nashville?

Stele wrote:

Hm. Do I e-mail that to my in-laws in Nashville? :D

In-laws are the BEST, aren't they?