Take away his running and his passing stats would still be considered very good for a pocket passer.

I know...except there's one variable that can't be measured. If he wasn't as mobile as he is, could he still be as good a passer with a more pass defensed focus approach? Teams playing Baltimore always have to account for him the way teams playing Brady or Manning never did.

I think he's a very good passer, and I think he's good enough to go to a SB. But he has a path this year to prove it, and he better take advantage of it. Because KC knows what it needs to fix, Burrow will be back, and either the Jags or Texans are going to have a second place team schedule next year.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the jury.

I submit to you that a crime was committed on Monday night Football this evening. My eyes were wounded by the display of football that I witnessed.

Yeah, once again, the Vikings embarrass MN on national TV. We as a state do fine on our own with embarrassment without the Vikings helping us out.

at one point in last night's game there were 6 penalties in 8 plays, one of which had 2 penalties on the same play.

the referees are constantly on TV.

My least favorite penalty? The block in the back, every single game usually twice. They are being nit picky with penalties these days especially holding, holding all day long.

You could say that about every major QB today -- Patrick Mahomes, Josh Allen, Jalen Hurts, etc. Even the guys who are primarily pocket passers like Herbert, Burrow, Lawrence, Dak, etc. all have much better wheels than Brady or Peyton, and are still a threat to run for a first down against man coverage.

I don't know how Lamar would do strictly restricted to pocket passing, but the big issue with him in the past was that Baltimore had no consistent receiving threat outside of Mark Andrews. This year, they went out and spent some money to build a strong receiving corps and we're seeing his pocket passing numbers rise -- and honestly, they were already pretty good. Additionally, living in Baltimore (but not a Ravens fan), I've watched my share of his games -- he's got the arm strength to throw anywhere on the field, he can throw with touch, he can work the short game, he can work the deep ball, he can throw off-platform, he's solid in the red zone -- I don't see a lot of holes in his passing game as a casual spectator. I think this perception of him as a weaker pocket passer is from the old paradigm of the mobile QB who can't consistently throw like Mike Vick. But I think Lamar is part of that new breed of QB who are in the tradition of Steve Young and young Aaron Rodgers... only he's more of a unicorn with his rushing as he sometimes has that Barry Sanders elusiveness.

Again, I'm not a Ravens fan but I've seen enough Lamar games and honestly, most of his bad games in past couple years that I've seen are the result of his receivers having bad games (like the Ravens' loss to the Steelers earlier this year -- I think two TD passes were dropped.)






This statement is odd to me, because other than Kansas City, Lamar Jackson's Ravens have owned all of those match-ups.

Seriously, why should Lamar be worried about Joe Burrow? He's 4-1 against him and every time they've played, Lamar has more TDs, less interceptions, less sacks, etc. Other than completion percentage and a difference of 30 passing yards, Lamar has outplayed him in every facet of the passing game head-to-head -- and most of it with a receiving corps far weaker than what Burrow has in Chase and Higgins (though Lamar has a much better offensive line). And all that without factoring in Lamar's rushing production.






The Texans are on the rise, but the Ravens blew them out earlier this season 25-9. Lawrence will have his shot on December 17 against this Ravens team.

But honestly, I've never been a QB WINZ guy and Lamar has another advantage over these other teams -- the Ravens defense is lights out this year and are usually very solid every year. But this year especially --



Only 4 teams they've played this year have scored more than 20 points and I wouldn't be surprised if all of them got turnovers from Baltimore's offense to help them get there. They held the Lions to 6 points. They held the Seahawks to 3 points. They held the Texans to 9 points. They held the Chargers to 10 points.

Lamar is playing at an MVP level and the defense is lights out. And while it varies from year to year, I can see Lamar and the defense playing very well for many years to come.

Unfortunately, their back-up QB played like a back-up QB and didn't get help from his receivers, who deflected 1 or 2 of those passes into interceptions.

I think the bigger embarrassment was the Bears offense. Your defense gets you four extra possessions and you put up 12 points? Eberflus' lack of aggressiveness on fourth and short nearly cost them in the end. It was baffling to watch -- very early in the game he was willing to roll the dice at midfield on 4th and 10 when they didn't need to... but later in the game, deep in Vikings territory, he doesn't want to go for it on 4th and 2? Make it make sense, lol.

Boy, this guy sounds like a sweetheart.


https://www.theringer.com/nfl/2023/11/2 ... ryce-young

Woof.

Some of you might find this interesting. The writers at the Athletic did a NFL 100 list of the best 100 players in NFL history. Here's the QBs and where they fall on the list --

1) Brady
6) Montana
7) Manning
9) Unitas
11) Graham
15) Elway
18) Marino
21) Rodgers
22) Favre
23) Baugh
43) Brees
48) Luckman
49) Young
61) Starr
69) Bradshaw
78) Staubach
89) Layne
95) Tarkenton

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0063329093/?tag=imwan-20

I have never, ever, been embarrassed by the performance of a professional sports team.

I think this is a good relative sequence, although I could quibble (Rodgers versus Favre, Bradshaw versus Staubach), but generally it's pretty good.

No, my bigger issue is with the absolute placement. Without seeing the whole list, I can't comment, but at minimum, would have Brown and Rice ahead of every QB. Probably also Lawrence Taylor and Ray Lewis from the defensive side of the ball. After that, it gets fuzzy, and would take too much time to think about than I can take off the top of my head.

Why's that?

In terms of pure impact to the game, I think it's difficult to rank any position higher than a quarterback. If you could magically put one of the following players in his prime on the Raiders for the next decade, who would you pick --

Tom Brady, Lawrence Taylor, or Randy Moss?
Joe Montana, Aaron Donald, or Jerry Rice?
Peyton Manning, Ray Lewis, or Barry Sanders?

I mean, come on -- you've seen what Davante Adams is doing with no legit QB throwing to him. The QB is the most important position, no?

I think the biggest issue with these lists is recency bias and a general failure to put players in their historical context. I didn't realize this about passing rules back then --

I agree the QB is the most important position, and of the choices you gave me, I'm probably taking Montana.

But on offense, it's about greatness within the position for this kind of thing for me. and for me, Jim Brown at RB (versus Sanders / Payton / Smith) and Jerry Rice at WR (Moss / Johnson) are much farther ahead of their competition (as opposed to Brady / Montana / Manning). and while QB's are the most important position, I think the truly great defensive players can wreck games all by themselves in a way QB's can't. There's probably only 5-10 game wreckers like that in history, though, and most of them aren't better than the top 3 qbs listed

and those passing rules are nuts.

Bring back throwing it out of bounds is intentional grounding!

The Eagles are 10-1.

With the hardest schedule in the league by far.

This stretch is brutal:
at KC
home with Buffalo
at SF
at Dallas

What sadist made this????

Obviously they will lose one, maybe two, but Hurts who is playing in pain is unreal. FIVE touchdowns on Sunday???

And how about Jake Elliott, one of the best kickers in the NFL, hitting a game-tying 59 yard FG in pouring rain and wind?

This has been crazy.

I still hate the new offensive coordinator Brian Johnson, who ignores the run and tanks every first half.

The secondary is beaten up, missing key guys and getting torched and that’s gotta stop.

But man, is this team and Sirriani special.

That's the problem with finishing in first place -- you're always playing other first place teams!

Currently NFL quarterbacks, other offensive players, and offensive schemes are likely the worst in NFL history. In fact, the overall quality of the NFL got so poor a few years ago that I completely stopped watching their shit product.

Don't believe that NFL offenses are garbage?

I'd guess that I started watching the NFL in about 1975, when I would have been 6 years old. In 1975, the average team scored 20.6 points per game.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... /index.htm

So now let's jump to 2023, where the average team scores 21.6 points per game.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2023/

They have completely re-written the rulebook for more offense, and teams can only manage 1 extra point per game after all of that? I had to do a double-take on those links I posted above because I found it really hard to believe. It's completely pitiful.

Back in the old days if the QB threw the ball away it was an automatic penalty, ball marked at the spot of grounding and loss of down. Now with QBs being able to run out of the pocket and throw the ball out of bounds...makes it a lot easier for them.

Back in those days a defensive player would literally have to tackle a pass-catcher to get a pass interference penalty. Now a QB can make a complete crap underthrow where the receiver stops and the defensive player runs over him, in today's football that is a free 30 yards and a 1st down because of an inaccurate throw by the QB.

They put in that junk about a defender not being able to impede a receiver after 5 yards. No rule like that in the old days. Now a defensive player can bump a pass-catcher 8 yards down the field and it's a free first down, and I had seen that called many times when the play was on the opposite side of the field and had no impact on the play.

Pre-Bill Walsh there was very little run in terms of slant patterns because if the QB misread zone coverage, thinking it was man instead, that pass catcher was going to get KO'ed by a linebacker or safety that was sitting there just licking his chops to deck the guy. Now it's a "defenseless receiver" and slants are the only consistent throws that many QBs can make.

And then we can jump to the defensive side of the ball, where in the post-Deion Sanders era, most defensive backs have decided that tackling is a optional ability. And even so, offensive still can only score an extra point compared to 50 years ago.

I could go on and on and on but I think everyone gets the idea. There may be some truth that I'm an old guy who just reminisces about the old days an wishes things could go back to the way things were. But let me tell out something else about old guys, most of them instinctively know when someone is trying to sell them poop instead of a rose. And I can tell you that the NFL was one big stinking turd a few years back and I seriously doubt if it's any better now.

And don't get me started on MLB and especially Rob Manfred. Screw that guy.

the eagles are getting 3 points at home vs the 49'ers.......why?

Because half of the people betting think SF can cover that spread.