Moderator: Moderators
Exactly Jim. I would take Wilson and I am sure any GM in the NFL would too, that was in need of a very good, young, accomplished (SB winning) QB.Mothman wrote:
Wilson and the Seahawks just won a Super Bowl. You can't "get the job done" much better than that (except by doing it again).
I don't think half a season's worth of games is much time to show improvement so I believe Bridgewater deserves more time to show what he can do. However, I'd love to have a QB like Wilson. He's not an elite passer but he's playing his position well overall and he's already helped his team win a championship.Purple bruise wrote: Exactly Jim. I would take Wilson and I am sure any GM in the NFL would too, that was in need of a very good, young, accomplished (SB winning) QB.
And how do you not want a dual threat QB like Wilson? Beats the hell of a one threat, average to below average QB that has shown little or no signs of improvement so far.
I'm talking about Wilson himself. Not the entire Seahawks team. Like I said, Seattle's defense saves Wilson. They have a legitimate running game and a pretty good offensive line as well. Wilson is a game manager. He hasn't thrown for more than 2 TDs in a game all year. Trust me I know, I have him in 2 fantasy leagues and he is a nightmare. By no means am I saying Wilson is bad or anything but he is very very average. 6 times this year he didnt even break 200 yards passing. If you have a defense as good as Seattle's, all you have to do as a QB is manage the game so maybe I worded my above post wrong. However, for some reason I feel PB still wouldnt like Teddy if he was just a game manager and right now, that's very close to what he is. Not saying he will be one his whole career but thats pretty close to what he is now.Mothman wrote:
Wilson and the Seahawks just won a Super Bowl. You can't "get the job done" much better than that (except by doing it again).
I understood what you meant about Wilson and I probably should have elaborated on my comment a little more. I didn't intend it to seem like nit-picking and it may have come across that way. My point was that Wilson is getting the job done since his job is to play within the overall context of that team as structured. You refer to 6 times this year where he didn't break 200 yards passing but in this age of fantasy football, I think there's far too much focus on yardage totals and numbers when the real object is for the team to win. Yardage totals don't matter, It's overall effectiveness in the role that really counts. It's a point I tried to make about Ponder a few times in 2012. There were games where he just played poorly but there were also games in which he simply did what he was asked to do efficiently and really, that's all they needed him to do, just play his role. On the opposite (and far less controversial) end of the spectrum, that's basically what Tom Brady did against the Vikings earlier this year, which is why I didn't see it as a big deal that the Vikes held him to a relatively low passing yardage total. His role that day was to manage the game because the Patriots were winning in all phases of the game. He didn't need to do more but by no means did he have a bad day.Pondering Her Percy wrote:I'm talking about Wilson himself. Not the entire Seahawks team. Like I said, Seattle's defense saves Wilson. They have a legitimate running game and a pretty good offensive line as well. Wilson is a game manager. He hasn't thrown for more than 2 TDs in a game all year. Trust me I know, I have him in 2 fantasy leagues and he is a nightmare. By no means am I saying Wilson is bad or anything but he is very very average. 6 times this year he didnt even break 200 yards passing. If you have a defense as good as Seattle's, all you have to do as a QB is manage the game so maybe I worded my above post wrong. However, for some reason I feel PB still wouldnt like Teddy if he was just a game manager and right now, that's very close to what he is. Not saying he will be one his whole career but thats pretty close to what he is now.
I think, at an absolute minimum, it makes sense to be patient with him until the mid-point of next season. It's always nice to see rapid, steady improvement but things don't always work so neatly. If he plays out this season and looks much the same as he has thus far, he could still come back and look considerably improved in 2015 after an offseason of film study, further work with his coaches, etc.Also, I agree with what Jim said about giving TB more time. I'm not sure why PB is so hard on him so early in his career. Just to point out:
Andrew Luck (Rookie season):
-Didnt throw more than 2 TD passes in one game until week 12 vs Det (the only time he did it all season) (Teddy has 0 as of right now)
-Had a Completion Percentage of 54.1 (Teddy's is 60.3)
-Threw for under 200 yards in 4 games (Teddy has done that 3 times)
-In Luck's first 7 starts he threw 8 TDs (Teddy has 6)
-In Luck's first 7 starts he threw 8 INTs (Teddy has 7)
-In Luck's first 7 starts he averaged 6.8 yards per completion (Teddy averages 6.5)
....Not saying Teddy is the next Luck but Teddy does have him beat in a few of these categories and the ones he doesn't have him beat in, he isn't far off. Indy had no problem giving Luck more time though right?
I find it odd that you get so upset about any posts that compare Teddy to Ponder, but it's just fine if you compare Teddy to Luck. Just saying you can't have it both ways.Pondering Her Percy wrote: Also, I agree with what Jim said about giving TB more time. I'm not sure why PB is so hard on him so early in his career. Just to point out:
Andrew Luck (Rookie season):
-Didnt throw more than 2 TD passes in one game until week 12 vs Det (the only time he did it all season) (Teddy has 0 as of right now)
-Had a Completion Percentage of 54.1 (Teddy's is 60.3)
-Threw for under 200 yards in 4 games (Teddy has done that 3 times)
-In Luck's first 7 starts he threw 8 TDs (Teddy has 6)
-In Luck's first 7 starts he threw 8 INTs (Teddy has 7)
-In Luck's first 7 starts he averaged 6.8 yards per completion (Teddy averages 6.5)
....Not saying Teddy is the next Luck but Teddy does have him beat in a few of these categories and the ones he doesn't have him beat in, he isn't far off. Indy had no problem giving Luck more time though right?
I am not sure that he needs to be compared to anyone. Luck has much more talent, size, strength, and leadership (you do not see him sitting by himself on the bench for the whole game with a disinterested look on his face). Like I said before, I do not see any improvement from his game at all. I want to see what he does for the rest of this year. I would love to be proven wrong...but just not seeing it.Purple Reign wrote:
I find it odd that you get so upset about any posts that compare Teddy to Ponder, but it's just fine if you compare Teddy to Luck. Just saying you can't have it both ways.
Sure he can. He's even using "first 7 games" when it fits his side of the discussion, and the whole season when that fits it.I find it odd that you get so upset about any posts that compare Teddy to Ponder, but it's just fine if you compare Teddy to Luck. Just saying you can't have it both ways.
I'm not getting upset at all. I'm just stating the facts of the discussion. I compared Ponders stats to Teddy in their first year and they weren't really comparable at all. It's easy to say Luck this and Luck that NOW but what about after his rookie season?? All my argument is pointing out is that even the best of the best struggle in their first 7 games or first season for that matter. Ponders rookie year was worse than Teddys. Lucks was actually pretty close to comparable in many categories. The numbers don't lie. If he "compares" to Ponder so much then the numbers would be a lot more similar and they aren't. Add Teddy's intangibles into it, and Teddy runs away with it. Period.Purple Reign wrote: I find it odd that you get so upset about any posts that compare Teddy to Ponder, but it's just fine if you compare Teddy to Luck. Just saying you can't have it both ways.
Which numbers are you talking about? As rookies, their TD/INT ratios are similar. Their YPA is identical at this point. Ponder had a better TD % but also a higher INT%. Of course, he played on a weaker team and numbers are influenced by circumstances so that's not surprising. Teddy has a better QB rating but not by a significant margin. His completion percentage is definitely superior and I agree that some of his intangibles are better.Pondering Her Percy wrote:I'm not getting upset at all. I'm just stating the facts of the discussion. I compared Ponders stats to Teddy in their first year and they weren't really comparable at all. It's easy to say Luck this and Luck that NOW but what about after his rookie season?? All my argument is pointing out is that even the best of the best struggle in their first 7 games or first season for that matter. Ponders rookie year was worse than Teddys. Lucks was actually pretty close to comparable in many categories. The numbers don't lie. If he "compares" to Ponder so much then the numbers would be a lot more similar and they aren't. Add Teddy's intangibles into it, and Teddy runs away with it. Period.
The areas that Teddy's struggling in are accuracy and his deep ball. However I believe he has more arm strength than Ponder does. Ponder floated his ball badly. Teddy is overthrowing more than anything which shows the strength but obviously not the accuracy. Ponder had neither accuracy nor arm strength. He couldn't step into a pocket if his life depended on it which is the complete opposite of Teddy. He crapped his pants in the face of pressure. Also the complete opposite of Teddy. If Ponder was playing terrible, there was no overcoming it, the opposite of Teddy. Ponder had a terrible habit of not going through his progressions. Something the announcers praised Teddy for last week.Mothman wrote: Which numbers are you talking about? As rookies, their TD/INT ratios are similar. Their YPA is identical at this point. Ponder had a better TD % but also a higher INT%. Of course, he played on a weaker team and numbers are influenced by circumstances so that's not surprising. Teddy has a better QB rating but not by a significant margin. His completion percentage is definitely superior and I agree that some of his intangibles are better.
That said, as I said earlier, he's struggling in a number of the same areas Ponder did. That doesn't make them the same guy or mean they'll have the same fate but it's reason enough to compare them and to some extent, perhaps even cause for concern.
Time will tell if Teddy is the future NFL backup Hasselbeck believes he will be or if he's the long term starter Zimmer believes he can become... and giving him time is the only way to find out.
Here is a quote from you a couple pages back.Pondering Her Percy wrote: I'm not getting upset at all. I'm just stating the facts of the discussion. I compared Ponders stats to Teddy in their first year and they weren't really comparable at all. It's easy to say Luck this and Luck that NOW but what about after his rookie season?? All my argument is pointing out is that even the best of the best struggle in their first 7 games or first season for that matter. Ponders rookie year was worse than Teddys. Lucks was actually pretty close to comparable in many categories. The numbers don't lie. If he "compares" to Ponder so much then the numbers would be a lot more similar and they aren't. Add Teddy's intangibles into it, and Teddy runs away with it. Period.
I've been posting plenty of statistics and observations throughout the last few pages of this thread and you have to go back two pages to find something I said that wasn't a fact??? If that's not trolling then I don't know what is. So far you've questioned my above post and putting Lucks rookie stats next to Teddy's. Nothing but nitpicking rather than bringing something to the discussion.Purple Reign wrote:
Here is a quote from you a couple pages back.
"It still drives me crazy to even see Teddy's name in the same sentence as Ponders. They are literally nothing alike. ZERO. ZILCH. NADA."
What kind of fact is that?
The only reason I quoted that was because you said you were not upset at all with Ponder comparisons. As I pointed out earlier, I just find it odd that you 'get crazy' (which to me means the same as being upset) when you see posts comparing Teddy to Ponder but then turn around and make comparisons to Luck. Not trolling at all - just making an observation.Pondering Her Percy wrote: I've been posting plenty of statistics and observations throughout the last few pages of this thread and you have to go back two pages to find something I said that wasn't a fact??? If that's not trolling then I don't know what is. So far you've questioned my above post and putting Lucks rookie stats next to Teddy's. Nothing but nitpicking rather than bringing something to the discussion.
