Stafford Tops Sporting News' Overrated QB List

[brewer229]

Stafford is borderline top 5 on that list.

Your hate is obvious with Kaep, Fitz, Sanchez, Cutler and Orton comments.

Is he clearly better than any of them? Overall I would take Stafford above any of them, but there isn't a huge difference in quality play. They just get you there in different ways. Thats what you get with those middle of the road type players.

The only difference between Cutler and Stafford is one is an unlikable douche and the other is a likable douche.

 

[tonyballs]

Hence why I said there maybe one or two odd balls. Tell me who on the list above him Stafford is clearly better than?

Romo - Nope
Rodgers - Nope
Roethlisberger - Nope
Peyton - Nope
Brady - Nope
Brees - Nope
Luck - Nope
Palmer - Nope
Fitzpatrick - maybe
Wilson - Nope
Ryan - Nope
Rivers - Nope
Smith - Nope
Tannehill - Nope
Eli - Nope
Flacco - Nope
Cutler - They are the same player
Sanchez - Maybe
Orton - Maybe
Kaepernick - Maybe

It's not like Stafford is clearly an elite players that somehow ended up with a horrible rating. You could easily argue all those players above him are as As good to significantly better than he is.

Lmfao!! You have clearly lost your damn mind. I'll take Stafford over at least 8-10 of those guys. Stick your head in the toilet and count to 100....you're done.

I'm taking Stafford over guys like, Kaepernick, Orton, Sanchez, Cutler, Tannehil, Smith, Fitzpatrick and Palmer in a heartbeat. Without even blinking an eye

 

[brewer229]

Lmfao!! You have clearly lost your damn mind. I'll take Stafford over at least 10 of those guys. Stick your head in the toilet and count to 100....you're done.

Which ones. Name them. So you're argument is he might be borderline top 11?

 

[LKP]

Is he clearly better than any of them? Overall I would take Stafford above any of them, but there isn't a huge difference in quality play. They just get you there in different ways. Thats what you get with those middle of the road type players.

The only difference between Cutler and Stafford is one is an unlikable douche and the other is a likable douche.

Yes he is clearly better than all of him you mentioned. He is arguably better than Romo, Ryan, Rivers, Wilson, Big Ben etc too.

TDs and ints are a big difference between Cutler and Stafford too. Leading a team with first downs is all Stafford too over Cutler.

 

[brewer229]

Yes he is clearly better than all of him you mentioned. He is arguably better than Romo, Ryan, Rivers, Wilson, Big Ben etc too.

TDs and ints are a big difference between Cutler and Stafford too. Leading a team with first downs is all Stafford too over Cutler.

In your expert opinion.

How many games do you think we would of won with Romo? Wilson? Fitzpatrick? in 2014?

 

[LKP]

Stafford 112 TDs 64 ints 18,912 yards and 947 first downs passing the last 4 years

Cutler 79 TDs 51 ints (962 less attempts but only 13 less ints) 11,785 yards and 725 first downs passing.

Stafford moves the chains, the Bears passing does not.
2.4 % int rate for Stafford
3.0 % int rate Cutler

Stafford is much much much better than Cutler. He moves the chains, he is relied on more, he scores more points, he stays healthier and despite almost 1,000 more throws the past four years, he has a much better int rate than Cutler.

Just imagine if Stafford only had 79 TD passes the last 4 years and 3 % int rate.

 

[LKP]

In your expert opinion.

How many games do you think we would of won with Romo? Wilson? Fitzpatrick? in 2014?

Romo 9
Wilson 9
Fitz 7

Romo and Wilson are 450 attempt guys this past year. Without a run game or protectoin, toast.

 

[brewer229]

Romo 9
Wilson 9
Fitz 7

Romo and Wilson are 450 attempt guys this past year. Without a run game or protectoin, toast.

That must mean the rest of the roster for the other teams are clearly superior to the Lions.
They all had better records with their teams then you think they would of had with the lions. Interesting.

 

[LKP]

That must mean the rest of the roster for the other teams are clearly superior to the Lions.
They all had better records with their teams then you think they would of had with the lions. Interesting.

Cowboys had a better run game so Romo didn't have to pass. Cowboys defense stinks. You take the Lions roster for sure. More than one way to get to 11 wins in the NFC East. Run game got Cowboys there.

Seahawks had an equal defense to Lions and run game. 12-4 and 11-5. Wilson is still good just not as good as Stafford. With the Lions upgrades to Oline and RB, I take the Lions roster right now.

Stafford is better than both.

 

[tomdalton22]

That must mean the rest of the roster for the other teams are clearly superior to the Lions.
They all had better records with their teams then you think they would of had with the lions. Interesting.

No logical way he can wiggle out of that one...but he doesn't use logic!

 

[tonyballs]

Which ones. Name them. So you're argument is he might be borderline top 11?

Borderline 11 QBs? No, i put Staff around 12th-15th QB in the league.

 

[tomdalton22]

Yes he is clearly better than all of him you mentioned. He is arguably better than Romo, Ryan, Rivers, Wilson, Big Ben etc too.

TDs and ints are a big difference between Cutler and Stafford too. Leading a team with first downs is all Stafford too over Cutler.

There is no argument for Stafford being better than Romo, Ryan, Rivers, Wilson or Ben. He is below all of them and it really isn't close with any of them.

 

[LKP]

There is no argument for Stafford being better than Romo, Ryan, Rivers, Wilson or Ben. He is below all of them and it really isn't close with any of them.

There is an argument. Stafford does a good amount with less. he's a very good QB. 600 attempt a year QB, first down machine despite weapon and Oline injuries and very little run support over the last 4 years.

 

[LKP]

No logical way he can wiggle out of that one...but he doesn't use logic!

Romo had run support but Lions have better roster.

Lions and Seahawks clearly about equal. Just because Stafford is better than Wilson doesn't mean Wilson is bad. He's still a good player that can win games with that defense.

I am the only one who uses logic around here.

 

[tomdalton22]

Romo had run support but Lions have better roster.

Lions and Seahawks clearly about equal. Just because Stafford is better than Wilson doesn't mean Wilson is bad. He's still a good player that can win games with that defense.

I am the only one who uses logic around here.

Here is where your "logic" fails. You say the Lions have a better roster than Seattle and Dallas. Then you say that Stafford is better than Romo and Wilson. Yet Romo and Wilson lead their inferior rosters to better or equal records than the Lions.

As Spock would say....that is illogical.

 

[LKP]

Here is where your "logic" fails. You say the Lions have a better roster than Seattle and Dallas. Then you say that Stafford is better than Romo and Wilson. Yet Romo and Wilson lead their inferior rosters to better or equal records than the Lions.

As Spock would say....that is illogical.

They played different teams. Your argument has no logic. Cowboys and Seahwaks have good rosters. Lions is just better.

There are many ways to win 11-12 games.

 

[tomdalton22]

They played different teams. Your argument has no logic. Cowboys and Seahwaks have good rosters. Lions is just better.

There are many ways to win 11-12 games.

Right...The Lions had one of the easiest schedules in the NFC.

 

[Mitchrapp]

Right...The Lions had one of the easiest schedules in the NFC.

He will never understand that.

 

[LKP]

Right...The Lions had one of the easiest schedules in the NFC.

Lions have a tough division and had a tough schedule. NFC South is better than NFC East despite what the record says. NFC South just had to deal with tough NFC North. And we traveled to Super Bowl champs home field and Buffalo had a top 5 defense. And at Zona which is the toughest NFC West opponent for Seattle, Seattle played them after Stanton got hurt in Arizona. Cowboys got Zona at home and lost.

And the main point is there are many ways to win. Cowboys and Seahawks run games and Seattle (defense) were enough to beat the teams they played. Wilson and Romo aren't bad either, they are just not as good as Stafford. Wilson and Romo helped their teams win, Stafford helped his team win more.

For the Lions it was all Stafford/WRs and defense winning games.

It's not mutually exclusive that the Seahawks roster is better because Stafford is better than Wilson. They just played different teams in different scenarios with different injuries. Seattle relied more on run game and defense. Lions relied on Stafford to win games. Lions are a good team that won 11. Seattle won 12 in their specific scenario (playing a wounded Arizona).

And we'll see how the Lions compete with Packers, Philly, NFC West and AFC West this year (basically Seattle's schedule last year). San Fran, Zona at home and St Louis is a prime schedule for 3 wins against them. At Seattle is tough place to play but Detroit matches up very well. Our Dline is better than their Oline to bring pressure, our back 7 can cover their WRS/TEs for sure even with Graham in the mix and we can stop their run game with Ngata and company. Lions are better than all four AFC West teams.

Our revamped Oline needs to and should protect Stafford and offer some run game. Calvin and Tate have big battles with Sherman and Cary Williams and Seattle's safeties.

 

[dubbsco]

NFC North is a very average conference.

The Lions, other than a few bright patches here and there have been a doormat/average team.

The Bears were good back in the day.

Vikings have sucked for a long time.

Throw the Lions in the AFC North, NFC West, AFC West. They'd never sniff the playoffs.