QBs, Texas football (breakout from Offseason moves?)

[Slateman]

Weedon perhaps   ... 

Right, higher completion percentage, same number of TDs, half as many interceptions, a third the number of fumbles, 25 fewer sacks, a division title, and RotY honors. Yep, totally not as good as Tannehill . . . 

Oh and statistically, RGIII comes out quite similar to Wilson. One has a great defense and a coach willing to build an offense around his skill set. The other does not.

[spidernat]

 

Oh and statistically, RGIII comes out quite similar to Wilson.

A lot of garbage time stats. When you bring up division title in favor of Griffin you are clearly saying you value the team winning games. But Griffin accumulated a lot of this year's stats in losses when teams were playing prevent.

[Terpfan76]

Right, higher completion percentage, same number of TDs, half as many interceptions, a third the number of fumbles, 25 fewer sacks, a division title, and RotY honors. Yep, totally not as good as Tannehill . . . 

Oh and statistically, RGIII comes out quite similar to Wilson. One has a great defense and a coach willing to build an offense around his skill set. The other does not.

Considering how they used so much read option I don't see how you can really say they didn't tailor the offense to Griffin's strengths. He was excellent last year, less so this year. Between the league adjusting, Griffin missing so much time and regressing, he was clearly less effective this year. Now we'll see how he prepares for next season and if he shows the improvements we expected this year.

[Slateman]

I was talking about this year. This year Wilson had the best defense in the NFL and a coach who played to his strengths. Griffin didn't.

I think it's absurd to think Griffin can't be every bit as good as Wilson or Foles. Talent is there. We'll see if the work ethic is there. Skins have to find a coach who can work to his strengths.

[spidernat]

Considering how they used so much read option I don't see how you can really say they didn't tailor the offense to Griffin's strengths. He was excellent last year, less so this year. Between the league adjusting, Griffin missing so much time and regressing, he was clearly less effective this year. Now we'll see how he prepares for next season and if he shows the improvements we expected this year.

I think it's absurd to think Griffin can't be every bit as good as Wilson or Foles. T

I'll tell you what's absurd, it's absurd to say Griffin comes out quite similar to Wilson because of garbage time stats (and even then the only stat that can be pointed out to make that claim is yards).

[Slateman]

I'll tell you what's absurd, it's absurd to say Griffin comes out quite similar to Wilson because of garbage time stats (and even then the only stat that can be pointed out to make that claim is yards).

And completion percentage, turnovers,  and sacks. And when you compare 2012 RGIII with 2013 RW, they're even more similar. Same number of TDs, RGIII had fewer turnovers.

[Minty Fresh]

  Wilson is leagues ahead of Griffin in playing the QB position.

I disagree wholeheartedly with this.  Wilson has been covered up by an outstanding defense and a coach dedicated to calling plays designed to Wilson's limited strengths.

[mitlen]

Right, higher completion percentage, same number of TDs, half as many interceptions, a third the number of fumbles, 25 fewer sacks, a division title, and RotY honors. Yep, totally not as good as Tannehill . . . 

Oh and statistically, RGIII comes out quite similar to Wilson. One has a great defense and a coach willing to build an offense around his skill set. The other does not.

...   but Weeden's team had 4 wins.   

[Terpfan76]

...   but Weeden's team had 4 wins.   

In spite of him. MDS is better than Weeden

[Slateman]

...   but Weeden's team had 4 wins.   

http://www.nfl.com/player/brandonweeden/2532970/gamelogs

Of which Weeden played in two.

[mitlen]

http://www.nfl.com/player/brandonweeden/2532970/gamelogs

Of which Weeden played in two.

There it is  ...  definitive proof RGIII is special.    My only point in all this is RGIII is not a special QB at this time.   As someone else wrote, 2014 is the big test.    His off season preparation will be vital (and knock on wood  ...  his health).      Hope he's more Cam Newton than Sam Bradford and Vince Young, who were all rookies of the year.

[spidernat]

And when you compare 2012 RGIII with 2013 RW, they're even more similar. Same number of TDs, RGIII had fewer turnovers.

That's freaking hilarious.     By that standard you can enshrine him into the HoF already. crap, Daunte Culpepper can cherry pick one or two seasons to say he was better or similar to Joe Montana.

RGIII's fanbois: "We'll always have 2012"

[Slateman]

That's freaking hilarious.     By that standard you can enshrine him into the HoF already. crap, Daunte Culpepper can cherry pick one or two seasons to say he was better or similar to Joe Montana.

RGIII's fanbois: "We'll always have 2012"

(Image removed from quote.)

What?  I tool RGIII's best year to date and compared it to Wilson's. And for their two seasons, they have similar stats and performance. You give RGIII a decent coach and a stellar defense, and he's just as good, if not better than Wilson.

[spidernat]

Nevermind that one of the two QB's was actually consistent in his output and that one regressed (sucked ass) in his second season.

You give RGIII a decent coach and a stellar defense, and he's just as good, if not better than Wilson.

Based on what? Why all the excuses for Griffin? Someone mentioned that Wilson has playcalling that helps him by catering to his strengths but that is precisely what went on with Griffin last season. When you watch Russell play it's evident that he's miles ahead of Griffin playing QB. Griffin may end up being better in the ling run. I hope that's the case. But there's no way I'm going to say Griffin is better at this point of their careers just because he plays for my team.

[HalfSmokes]

In the long run, I'm not banking on the guy with a twice reconstructed knee having any longevity

[madj55]

No one's making excuses. This all started with the statement that if you put RG3 on the Seahawks in Wilson's place that they wouldn't miss a beat. And how is it evident that Wilson is miles ahead? I haven't seen that. I've seen a guy whose offense sputters as much as the Redskins. Seattle is able to put up big points and win games mainly because their defense creates turnovers and has taken some of them back to the house. With Wilson they had a +20 turnover differential, with RG3 it would've been +17. Meanwhile, the Redskins had a -8 turnover differential. The Seahawks were 26th in the NFL in passing, the Redskins were 16th. And I know you're gonna bring up garbage time, but I don't buy into that bullcrap. Teams might play prevent, but they aren't just going to let you put up points on them. They get paid, after all.

[mitlen]

Reminds me of the "Dilbert" strip with the final panel wording, "Let's not over think this."

[spidernat]

Seattle is able to put up big points and win games mainly because their defense creates turnovers and has taken some of them back to the house.

  Seattle had 4 turnovers taken back for TD's. The Redskins had 5.

[spidernat]

The Seahawks were 26th in the NFL in passing, the Redskins were 16th. And I know you're gonna bring up garbage time, but I don't buy into that bullcrap. Teams might play prevent, but they aren't just going to let you put up points on them. They get paid, after all.

The Seahawks were ranked higher in scoring. As for the passing stat, crap Houston and Atlanta ranked in the top half (higher than Washington) in that stat. As for the part of not buying into garbage time stats, 

[madj55]

  Seattle had 4 turnovers taken back for TD's. The Redskins had 5.

They hauled in 28 interceptions, which was the main point of that sentence. 28 interceptions and taking some of them back to the house doesn't help put up more points?

[madj55]

The Seahawks were ranked higher in scoring. As for the passing stat, crap Houston and Atlanta ranked in the top half (higher than Washington) in that stat. As for the part of not buying into garbage time stats, 

Believing in garbage time stats     

[spidernat]

You said they put up big points because they take some of them to the house. I just pointed out that Washington took more to the house.

I keep forgetting that you're not even old enough to drink. When my nephew talks the same crap you do I usually just send him out of the room.

[madj55]

You said they put up big points because they take some of them to the house. I just pointed out that Washington took more to the house.

I keep forgetting that you're not even old enough to drink. When my nephew talks the same crap you do I usually just send him out of the room.

I keep forgetting that you must be so old that your reading comprehension has passed you, because this is what I said: "Seattle is able to put up big points and win games mainly because their defense creates turnovers and has taken some of them back to the house." MAINLY because their defense creates turnovers.

[madj55]

And I'm old enough to do whatever I want, whether it's legal or not is a different story.

[spidernat]

I keep forgetting that you must be so old that your reading comprehension has passed you, because this is what I said: "Seattle is able to put up big points and win games mainly because their defense creates turnovers and has taken some of them back to the house." MAINLY because their defense creates turnovers.

Schools just aren't what they used to be before the big war. If you were in the same room with me I would hit you over the head with my cane and it might knock some sense into you. 

You know what, I said I would go easier on you because of your age and I'm going to try to abide by it. The fact that you said you don't believe in the concept of garbage time stats and that

Teams might play prevent, but they aren't just going to let you put up points on them. They get paid, after all.

Illustrates how clueless you are. Carry on with your Griffin jerk-a-thon.