Matthew Stafford comes in as No. 9 QB in NFL

[Mitchrapp]

In 10 years.....he?ll have the numbers to get in.....no doubt about it. But, Matthew Stafford will have to win SOMETHING to get in. Multiple playoff games or an MVP........something. If he wins a Super Bowl he?s in.....no question.

I?ve thought about this quite a bit.....who is Stafford?s MLB/NBA equivalent??

I?d say.....right now....he?s 2014 Carmelo Anthony. Numbers are there....a lot based on volume of attempts. Everyone says he?s really good but the questions about winning are starting to get more prevalent. Never really been on any good teams, either.

Do yards mean that much? Unless you're the absolute best, Barry Sanders, you better win something. I get it their team as a whole hasn't been good but what will change? 1 playoff in 60+ yards is ridiculous.

What was the highest MVP vote for him.. As much as it's been better a career 88.3 passer rating. Active and career leader in pass attempts. He throws a lot, thus the yards.

I would love to have another Lion as a HOF. Just don't see it.

 

[tomdalton22]

stafford has some time to pad his stats some more. Hopefully for Lions fans...they aren't as empty as the stats he has accumulated so far in his career.

 

[kalinecountry]

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/nfl/lions/2018/08/15/jalen-ramsey-matthew-stafford/996153002/
Jalen Ramsey on Matthew Stafford: He's not best QB ... he's straight.
Freep

 

[mhughes0021]

In 10 years.....he?ll have the numbers to get in.....no doubt about it. But, Matthew Stafford will have to win SOMETHING to get in. Multiple playoff games or an MVP........something. If he wins a Super Bowl he?s in.....no question.

I?ve thought about this quite a bit.....who is Stafford?s MLB/NBA equivalent??

I?d say.....right now....he?s 2014 Carmelo Anthony. Numbers are there....a lot based on volume of attempts. Everyone says he?s really good but the questions about winning are starting to get more prevalent. Never really been on any good teams, either.

Hes jim thome. 8th on the home run all time list... but who cares cause everyone hits home runs now.

Stafford will be on all time list for yards when it's all said n done... but who cares.... everyone throws for a ton of yards now.

 

[Mitchrapp]

The thing is no one talks about Matt when they're talking about the greats of today.. It's all Brady, Rogers, Brees, Wilson etc. They even talk about Cam Newton, and Wentz more than Matt. All I hear is the strong arm, yards & "he can make every throw." No MVP conversation, no All Pro conversation.. He's just a guy with a strong arm.

 

[kmd47]

The thing is no one talks about Matt when they're talking about the greats of today.. It's all Brady, Rogers, Brees, Wilson etc. They even talk about Cam Newton, and Wentz more than Matt. All I hear is the strong arm, yards & "he can make every throw." No MVP conversation, no All Pro conversation.. He's just a guy with a strong arm.

Look at the teams the guys you named, for the most part, have around them and compare them to what Matt had early on in his career.... Those teams also had multiple (save Wentz) deep playoff runs... Granted lately he's gotten a bit more help and his numbers have improved as a result as well... He was top 6 in most passing stats that matter and hopefully will only get better, but only time will tell... Hopefully we can win some playoff games and eventually the "one of the greats" talks can start then....

 

[boogerlovejoy]

Hes jim thome. 8th on the home run all time list... but who cares cause everyone hits home runs now.

Stafford will be on all time list for yards when it's all said n done... but who cares.... everyone throws for a ton of yards now.

Good call. Yards are like smart phones......everyone?s got em. Didn?t Kellen Moore have a 400 yard game with Dallas a couple years ago??

Anyway.....right or wrong.....QB?s are judged by wins. Some guys get lucky and have really good teams around them and get too much credit (I?m lookin at you Scam Newton) and some guys, like Stafford, get a little unlucky and get put on the Lions. If there were a ?WAR? stat for QB?s.....I bet Matt would be up near the top every year.

 

[tomdalton22]

Good call. Yards are like smart phones......everyone?s got em. Didn?t Kellen Moore have a 400 yard game with Dallas a couple years ago??

Anyway.....right or wrong.....QB?s are judged by wins. Some guys get lucky and have really good teams around them and get too much credit (I?m lookin at you Scam Newton) and some guys, like Stafford, get a little unlucky and get put on the Lions. If there were a ?WAR? stat for QB?s.....I bet Matt would be up near the top every year.

I think passer rating and ESPN's total QBR are good ways to measure how well a QB is playing. Last year he was #7 in QBR and #6 in passer rating.

 

[everyoneneedsasmil]

I think passer rating and ESPN's total QBR are good ways to measure how well a QB is playing. Last year he was #7 in QBR and #6 in passer rating.

Let's just be generous and say he's the sixth best qb each year. Does that warrant HOF induction? Maybe my standards are too high, but I wouldn't induct someone who was never in the running for best at his position. Without some sort of extra heroics (Barry's 2000 yard season, his universal respect from fans and opponents), being better than most isn't really HOF criteria.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Look at the teams the guys you named, for the most part, have around them and compare them to what Matt had early on in his career.... Those teams also had multiple (save Wentz) deep playoff runs... Granted lately he's gotten a bit more help and his numbers have improved as a result as well... He was top 6 in most passing stats that matter and hopefully will only get better, but only time will tell... Hopefully we can win some playoff games and eventually the "one of the greats" talks can start then....

My point is no one else talks like he's a hall candidate. When we had Calvin and there was a national televised games it was like "Aaron Rogers and the GB packers taking on Calvin Johnson and the Detroit Lions." Or "..Suh ad the Detroit Lions." Maybe that means little but does he get introduced like Brady and Brees, Rogers "Future hall of famer Matt Stafford."

I admit I've never been a huge supporter of Matt people talk about top 6 in passing rating, he still has a career 88.3 passer rating - Nowadays, it's better than average but not hall worthy. We assume he'll keep on getting better but there is no guarantee..

I mentioned this earlier, couldn't find it - has he been a top 10 MVP candidacy? His last 4 years his passing yards in passing he finished 3rd, 6th, 8th & 9th. So he's not even getting the big yards anymore..

 

[mhughes0021]

I think passer rating and ESPN's total QBR are good ways to measure how well a QB is playing. Last year he was #7 in QBR and #6 in passer rating.

Which is by far his best year in quite some time. He's a typical 15-20 qbr/rating guy.

 

[Mitchrapp]

QBR makes no sense. Sacks count against you. Sure sometimes it's the QB fault but many times it isn't yet the QBR suffers each time.. I hate that rating. It's like baseball WAR, just too many inconsistencies.

 

[tomdalton22]

QBR makes no sense. Sacks count against you. Sure sometimes it's the QB fault but many times it isn't yet the QBR suffers each time.. I hate that rating. It's like baseball WAR, just too many inconsistencies.

read this article...it will make more sense after you read it. It's probably a better stat than the traditional QB rating that we have been using all of these years. Granted, neither is perfect, but they do help develop a picture of what kind of QB you have.


http://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/...-calculated-we-explain-our-quarterback-rating

 

[Mitchrapp]

read this article...it will make more sense after you read it. It's probably a better stat than the traditional QB rating that we have been using all of these years. Granted, neither is perfect, but they do help develop a picture of what kind of QB you have.


http://www.espn.com/blog/statsinfo/...-calculated-we-explain-our-quarterback-rating

It has it faults that's enough reason not to use it. If I see a QB 22-26 8.1YPA 3-0 TD/INT ratio - he had a good day. I see a 58 QBR he might have been 22-26 8.1YPA 3-0 TD/INT ratio. Or 71QBR that was 19-29 7.3YPA 2-0.

Plus we can see if a INT is the QB fault or WR fault but a QBR can't see that.. Or if an INT was late game in an attempt to catch up. Desperate attempt so to speak. I don't need that or passer rating to tell you if a QB was good or not.

 

[tomdalton22]

It has it faults that's enough reason not to use it. If I see a QB 22-26 8.1YPA 3-0 TD/INT ratio - he had a good day. I see a 58 QBR he might have been 22-26 8.1YPA 3-0 TD/INT ratio. Or 71QBR that was 19-29 7.3YPA 2-0.

Plus we can see if a INT is the QB fault or WR fault but a QBR can't see that.. Or if an INT was late game in an attempt to catch up. Desperate attempt so to speak. I don't need that or passer rating to tell you if a QB was good or not.

sure...if you watch the game you can definitely tell if he had a good day. But, we don't watch each game and definitely don't watch every game that every QB plays. If we are to compare QBs to each other you have to use some kind of stats. I think QBR is probably the best one because it takes more things into consideration than just yards, TDs, INTs, & completion %

 

[Mitchrapp]

sure...if you watch the game you can definitely tell if he had a good day. But, we don't watch each game and definitely don't watch every game that every QB plays. If we are to compare QBs to each other you have to use some kind of stats. I think QBR is probably the best one because it takes more things into consideration than just yards, TDs, INTs, & completion %

That's why I ignore it. Because its not true even if it does a better job than say passer rating. I love stats in sports but sometimes there's too much.

 

[mhughes0021]

That's why I ignore it. Because its not true even if it does a better job than say passer rating. I love stats in sports but sometimes there's too much.

its directional. At the same time you dont really see much aof a disparity between who is at the top for QBR and who is at the top for rating. i think if anything some of the running qbs get a bump if i remember correctly for qbr.

 

[tomdalton22]

its directional. At the same time you dont really see much aof a disparity between who is at the top for QBR and who is at the top for rating. i think if anything some of the running qbs get a bump if i remember correctly for qbr.

yes, they do...and they should.

 

[tonyballs]

See that's where you are wrong, I'm happy he finally is starting to play where he should have been for years. I've praised Stafford for his turn-around the last couple years. When he finally started playing well I said he started playing well. You are the one that can't admit he played like crap for many years. Or do you still think that he is playing exactly the same and his stats are only improved because of a better team around him?


Does 5 years of being a maybe a 15-20 ranked QB, 2-3 of being a maybe top 10 QB, and 1 year of being a fringe top 5 QB make the HOF?

The QB waiting list for the HOF is going to be huge by the time Stafford retires. Stafford plays in an era where QB play is at an all-time high. If he can string together 5+ years where he actually finishes as a top 5 QB then perhaps he will get in at some point. However right now, there is no way he deserves it.

Look at the classes that are getting in, all the players you could make an argument were the best at their position at some point in their career, for sure top 3 for multiple years.

I mean will you put Eli in the HOF? Matt Ryan? Romo? Palmer? Rivers?

Stafford gets better and better though. He's had one stud playmaker his whole career and when CJ left he still got better. I think he deserves it. By the time it's all said and done he will have a shit ton of records. I just hope he wins some playoff games and a Super Bowl to officially lock it in.
And all those other QBs you mentioned should get in too. All of them were and still are considered top notch QBs.

 

[boogerlovejoy]

Stafford gets better and better though. He's had one stud playmaker his whole career and when CJ left he still got better. I think he deserves it. By the time it's all said and done he will have a shit ton of records. I just hope he wins some playoff games and a Super Bowl to officially lock it in.
And all those other QBs you mentioned should get in too. All of them were and still are considered top notch QBs.

It's a tough argument with Stafford. Those of us who believe, myself included, simply don't have as much "concrete evidence" as the doubters do. And that's fine. I think #9 is a top 4 NFL QB right now. Behind Brady, Rodgers and Brees. Yes, that means I think he is CURRENTLY better than Ruthlessraper, Willson, Rivers, Luck, Carr and Wentz (though its damn close).

In the last 7 years, the Lions are 57-55. That is the 2nd best 7 year stretch in FRANCHISE history ('91-'97....60-52) i believe. Though it's not great, I think the Lions would be maybe 40-72 with an average qb in there. Think Jay Cutler or Josh McCown. I don't believe Stafford gets enough credit for winning here in Detroit because he's basically made some really bad teams look good. He makes guys better. He wins ball games. The only reason we MADE 3 playoff appearances in that time is because of him (and CJ).

So I'm with you Tony. He's better than given credit for. That said, fair or not, he's got to win SOMETHING to make it to the HOF. QB's simply can't get there without a few playoff wins.

Also, just for fun discussions......let's say we would have passed on Stafford in '09......assuming we wouldn't have gotten another top flight QB (because they NEVER hit the market)......here are the other options we would have had.

'09 - Other than Stafford, the only QB's drafted that year that were even decent were Josh Freeman and Butt Fumble. Would we have won MORE with them? No fuckin way. NEXT

'10 - Only QB that was worth ANYTHING is the mysterious case of Sam Bradford. Decent QB. Fragile. Likely to have missed many more games than Stafford did because of injury. And WHY do teams keep throwing money at this guy?? Never won anything....never made the playoffs. Would we have won MORE with him?? Nope. NEXT

'11 - First interesting debate. Newton, Dalton, Colin K and Tie Rod Taylor all in this class. I think we can all agree that only Newton should be in the discussion. Personally, I don't think we would have won as much with Newton. I don't think he makes ANYONE better. He wins when he has GREAT teams around him......he doesn't make them great. Dalton is a guy....thats it. Colin just wasn't a very good QB, IMO. Great athlete.....amazing arm....but would have been a terrible fit in Detroit. Do we win MORE with any of these guy. Unlikely.

'12 - Luck, RGIII, Tannehill, Russ Wilson and Kirk Cousins. Some very good debates here. Luck and Stafford have extremely similar numbers. Staffords are a tick better.....IMO. Those Colts teams werent great.....but he won some games. Russel Willson......well.....it's really hard to deny the results.....but he has been on some REALLY GOOD teams, too. It will be interesting to see what Russ does this year. The big question.....do we win MORE with any of them?? Luck - If healthy, maybe one or two more games. Wilson.....thats a hard one for me. Id say, like Luck, MAYBE we win a couple more games. Cousins? No.....he's simply not as good as Stafford.

'13 - What a shitty QB class! Geno Smith and Mike Glennon are the best here. SO........No discussion needed.

'14 - Bridgewater, Carr and Garrapollo.....No, No and we'll see.

'15 - Famous Jameis and Marriota. Nope

'16 - Goff and Wentz. Damn it, Wentz looks like the real deal. He's probably the 5th best QB in football right now.


Anyway......I was bored so I thought I'd go through the years. Not a lot of good QB's drafted in the last 10 years. I'd say its Stafford, Wentz, Wilson, Luck, Cam, Carr, Cousins, Tie Rod (underrated qb) and Bradford.....in that order (sorry Garrapollo, you've played 7 games.....lets see what a whole season looks like)