2013 NFL Super Bowl Prediction Challenge

[Nevermore]

Heh, thanks.  After an 0-4 start no less. 

[naum]

Russel Wilson is a very good QB -- he might not be elite level (yet), but he's most definitely an asset to his team and I place him in the top 8. He'll improve but I'm not sure if he'll ever be the level of Tom Brady. But smarts and speed, coupled with a solid supporting cast (I think Seattle receiver group not an outstanding outfit), he'll have much more post-season success and more SB appearances.

Peyton Manning is way overrated -- people dork out over the glittering stats (and I concede that 2013 was an epic year for him, setting records despite age and the handicap of the neck which did subtract from his arm strength and release -- but he more than compensated with wisdom and preparation and tactical wherewithal) but all his career, he's played all his games in a dome or warm climate (AFC South). Then he goes to Denver and the thin air masks the ill effects of his neck surgical work. I know I got some flak for this in another thread here (proclaiming Roethlisberger the better QB), but put Manning in Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Cleveland, and New England and he might post decent QB numbers, but not the epic stats he amassed in Indianapolis and Cleveland. Where the majority of games are played in swirling, windy, sub-temperature conditions. It makes a difference -- just listen to any pro QB talk about the experience of throwing in a dome v. cold & windy conditions.

That said, Manning not the reason the Broncos got shellacked -- I think the coaching and preparation was pitiful -- I don't believe I've ever seen a team so unprepared for a big game. Unless the NFC is just that much more superior to the AFC.

[Yegolev]

So uh, what was Kaepernick's big crime this year that's got everyone calling him a douche? I mean other than things like 'having tattoos' and 'wearing his hat at an angle I don't like'.

[Nebu]

Peyton Manning is way overrated -- people dork out over the glittering stats (and I concede that 2013 was an epic year for him, setting records despite age and the handicap of the neck which did subtract from his arm strength and release -- but he more than compensated with wisdom and preparation and tactical wherewithal) but all his career, he's played all his games in a dome or warm climate (AFC South).

Let me guess... Dan Marino is also overrated because he played in Miami.   How about Roger Staubach in Dallas?

[Paelos]

I wouldn't put Wilson in the top 8, and saying Peyton is overrated boggles my mind. Denver doesn't even sniff the playoffs without him. Reference the disaster that was the Tebow years.

My top ten current QBs in no order are:

Peyton
Brees
Rodgers
Brady
Stafford
Ryan
Rivers
Luck
Foles
Big Ben

[Phildo]

No Kaepernick, Newton, RG III or Wilson?  Why do you hate the mobile guys?

[Paelos]

With the exception of Wilson, I haven't seen reason to believe that helps the team more than it hurts. And in Wilson's specific case, he won a Super Bowl practically without running at all.

I believe they can win, but they need a dynamic defense and supporting cast. I also believe I could plug any of those guys on my list into Seattle and they would make that team better.

[Cyrrex]

Haha, no way with that list.  Of course, your lists are notoriously wanting.  Top four is fine (order could be discussed), but Ryan and Stafford over Rivers?  Foles is still too much of an unknown to put on any list.  I think he can still go either way.

I would take the current version of Russel Wilson over the current versions of Luck, Big Ben, Foles, Ryan and Stafford.  Of those five, the only one that I think I might take as more of a longer term solution would be Luck.

Also, while I think you are high on this, just wanted to say that I don't actually think you are an idiot, despite whatever rage might be boiling off my posts.  Just a Russel Wilson idiot.  

[shiznitz]

I hope Manning's poor performance in the SuperBowl means he slips a few picks in fantasy next year so I can get him again.  He is the best QB playing right now.  Hands down.

[Paelos]

I could be wrong about the kid, but I don't see it with the new generation of QBs. They look like injury risks who are at best managing the game, and at worst can't make plays to come back if they are put in a bad situation.

They are GREAT with a lead, but so are most good QBs (except Romo). Also, my list wasn't in order.

[Cyrrex]

Oh, and back on Kaepernick.  Douche might be the wrong word.  Annoying, posturing waste of talent who purportedly puts very little effort into his craft.  I don't actually think he is actually a very good quarterback.  I mean, he'll have a day here and there, but what he really brings to the table is that he is a freaking gazelle.  He is the best running QB right now, for sure.  But if he blows a knee, just what is he going to fall back on?  He is a worse pocket-passer and has a lower football IQ than RG3, and RG3 was nearly a disaster without his legs at 100%.  If that happens to Kaep, I think he has a big problem.  Which he might avoid if he would work harder.

Being a Seattle fan, I am kinda glad he isn't better, so there's also that.

[Cyrrex]

I could be wrong about the kid, but I don't see it with the new generation of QBs. They look like injury risks who are at best managing the game, and at worst can't make plays to come back if they are put in a bad situation.

They are GREAT with a lead, but so are most good QBs (except Romo). Also, my list wasn't in order.

IMO, the difference with Wilson is that running is not what he does first.  He is almost certainly the best out-of-pocket QB in the league, there is certainly nobody that can throw as well on the run.  Maybe you haven't seen it enough yet.  When he gets chased out of the pocket, it's a big play waiting to happen.  It's not just me who says this stuff.

[Nebu]

The great QB's remain great when they no longer rely on pure athletic ability.  The question is whether the new crop will be able to play at a high level when they reach 30.  I give Wilson the best chance of this among he, RGIII, and Kaep. 

[Paelos]

He's not better throwing than Rodgers on the move. Sorry, he's just not. I've seen the man flick his wrist moving away from that offensive line and make plays 40 yards down the field that are just ridiculous.

I'm not talking as a fan of any of these guys. I'm a Cowboys fan and my QB is mostly garbage when shit hits the fan. What I'm looking at is fans of a team wanting their QB to get more credibility than he deserves just yet, and the rest of the national media buying into the HE WON A SUPER BOWL SO HE'S GREAT NOW!

Well, that wears off fast. It wore off of Eli and he has two rings now. Time will tell, but when contracts come due, and that Seattle defense starts to have to shed pieces, I think they are toast. That's where all the Super Bowl level talent lies, with them and Lynch.

[Cyrrex]

I expected you would come back with Rodgers.  I think Wilson is better (not by a huge margin).  At least, right now he is.  Lots of experts say it as well. 

He does deserve more credibility.  This has always been true of good Seattle players, it's part of the price of being where they are.  I will stop far short of calling him GREAT.  Far too early to say that sort of thing, any quarterback needs to be judged over a longer period of time.  But that said, you are still wantonly ignoring what he has accomplished, and I am not talking about Super Bowl rings.  Having a good defense means you may not have to throw as much.  It doesn't automatically make you more accurate, make you run better, or somehow give you a higher Yards per Attempt (which is possibly the best single measurement) or throw a smaller percentage of interceptions.  Go ahead, look up Dilfer's numbers.  McMahon's.  They are abymsal in comparison.

[ghost]

Wilson is not better than Rodgers. 

[Paelos]

When you have the lead, and you can pick and choose when to pass? Of course your percentages and Y/A are going to be high. In 2012, Robert Griffin led the league in that category. Is he somehow a top 10 QB, or has the shine come off? Cam Newton was top 5 in 2012. When you throw less than 400 times while the rest of the league is cresting 500+? Something is off.

Could Russell continue to hold up those numbers without his running game safety valve? Could he do that when defenses know he's going to throw? We don't know because he's not asked to do that since he's not the guy that has to win them games.

[HaemishM]

I could be wrong about the kid, but I don't see it with the new generation of QBs. They look like injury risks who are at best managing the game, and at worst can't make plays to come back if they are put in a bad situation.

They are GREAT with a lead, but so are most good QBs (except Romo). Also, my list wasn't in order.

IMO, the difference with Wilson is that running is not what he does first.  He is almost certainly the best out-of-pocket QB in the league, there is certainly nobody that can throw as well on the run.  Maybe you haven't seen it enough yet.  When he gets chased out of the pocket, it's a big play waiting to happen.  It's not just me who says this stuff.

No. The best out of pocket QB is Aaron Rodgers. He won't put up running numbers like Wilson, but he will be a better PASSER when flushed out of the pocket.

It's very hard to say that Wilson would thrive in another system because the Seattle system is SO GODDAMN GOOD. Their defense is so stifling, their special teams is so stifling that the offense all too often DOESN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING to win. How many short fields did Seattle start possession with in the Super Bowl? Their punt and kickoff special teams close people down, which means their defense is often defending in the opponent's territory. A 3 and out that started with a kick at the 15? That means Seattle's offense is starting on the 35-40 yard line. Their average starting field position was the 31 yard line - which was 3rd in the league.  Their average lead at the beginning of an offensive drive was 5 points (so they often started from a position of strength where they didn't have to pass). They were second in the league behind KC in drives that started in opponent's territory. They had the second lowest percentage of drives starting in their own territory.

It's hard to tell how good a QB Wilson is because he's not often being asked to do a whole lot and his stats bear that out. They were 24th in third downs made per game. He was 12th in completion percentage of guys that had more than 75 pass attempts, but he was 5th in yards per attempt. His receivers made him 18th in yards after the catch (Manning was 1st). He was 9th in TD to INT ratio.

All the stats point to him being a GOOD QB - but I don't think anything points to him being a GREAT QB. He seems more like a Byron Leftwich with much better running skills (when Leftwich was good). He won't turn the ball over, he'll win you some games but most of the time, he won't have to.

[Paelos]

Cyrrex is really showing the bias by even considering that Wilson is a better QB than Rodgers. There isn't a single national analyst that would have been willing to tolerate that conversation before this Sunday, and they shouldn't have.

[HaemishM]

To be fair, most of the "analysts" are complete and utter tool bags.

[Cyrrex]

Better than Rodgers, fuck no, I never said that.  I was talking primarily about throwing on the run.  Saying he is the best out-of-pocket is probably going too far...what I am trying to say is that he has a singular ability to run out of the pocket so convincingly that the defense are sure that he is off and running.  And then he throws, with stupid good accuracy.  Or he might run it for a first down.  I guess it is the combination of this threat that I am talking about.  

And you all continue to harp on the fact that "he doesn't have to do as much", and it is so much bullshit.  The same can be said for the QBs on all the great defensive teams then.  If you have any point at all, then we will see comparable stats from those QBs.  Dilfer and McMahon, right?  San Fran has that nearly epic defense, let's look at their QB stats then.  How about the more recent Ravens teams?  What other great defensive teams can we come up with?  Phil Simms with the Giants?  My quick look at all those guys' numbers shows a rather large gulf.  

[HaemishM]

This year, the only "Great" defensive teams played in the NFC Championship Game and Seattle won by a tight margin.

Which means he's better than Kaep, but doesn't really say a lot about his ability against other great defensive teams. And to follow that, Andrew Luck beat Seattle's defense as did a few other teams.

EDIT: Actually, Carolina had a "Great" defense but after that, you had New Orleans at #4 overall and KC at #5 overall - and both those teams had issues late in the season. Also, Seattle beat the #4 defense and played the #2 defense (Carolina) in the first game of the season and only scored 12 points - their only TD was a Wilson pass though.

[naum]

I wouldn't put Wilson in the top 8, and saying Peyton is overrated boggles my mind. Denver doesn't even sniff the playoffs without him. Reference the disaster that was the Tebow years.

Denver, with Tebow, beat the reigning AFC champions in the playoffs 2011-2012.

Again, Manning is a *good* QB, but not great, and vastly overrated. Rodgers, Brady, Roethlisberger, even Wilson and brother Eli (despite his horrid 2013 season, but he still brandishes 2 SB rings!) ahead of Peyton.  

You pay too much attention to stats, which can be deceptive and more indicative of supporting cast, offensive philosophy, etc.

Drew Brees is overrated too…

2013 INDOORS: 9 YPA, 1% INT
2013 OUTDOORS: 7 YPA, 3% INT

Let's look at some QB playoff records:

Roethlisberger: 10-4 (2-1 SB)
Russell Wilson: 4-1 (1-0 SB)
Peyton Manning: 11-12 (1-2 SB)
Tom Brady: 18-8 (3-2 SB)
Colin Kaepernick: 4-2 (0-1 SB)
Drew Brees: 6-5 (1-0 SB)
Philip Rivers: 4-5
Andrew Luck: 1-2
Aaron Rodgers: 5-4 (1-0 SB)
Andy Dalton: 0-3
Cam Newton: 0-1
Joe Flacco: 9-4 (1-0 SB)
Matt Ryan: 1-4
Eli Manning: 8-3 (2-0 SB)
Mark Sanchez: 4-2
Jay Cutler: 1-1
Alex Smith: 1-2
Tony Romo: 1-3

Matt Hasselback: 5-6 (0-1 SB)
Donovan McNab: 9-7 (0-1 SB)
Kurt Warner 9-4 (1-2 SB)
Brett Favre 13-11 (1-1 SB)
Terry Bradshaw 14-5 (4-0 SB)
Joe Montana 16-7 (4-0 SB)
Steve Young 8-6 (1-0 SB)
Troy Aikman 11-4 (3-0 SB)
John Elway 14-7 (2-3 SB)
Dan Marino 8-10 (0-1 SB)
Bart Starr 9-1 (2-0 SB)
Fran Tarkenton 6-5 (0-3 SB)
Jim McMahon 3-3 (1-0 SB)
Joe Theismann 6-2 (1-1 SB)
Steve McNair 5-5 (0-1 SB)
Trent Dilfer 5-1 (1-0 SB)
Jim Kelly 9-8 (0-4 SB)

[Cyrrex]

Haemish - Not really what I meant - I am saying to look at the QB stats of the so-called greatest defenses in NFL history, or any really good defense.  What you keep telling me is that I should see all their QB stats up there around Russell's, on account of how that is how it magically works.  I am telling you right now that it is not the case, but go ahead and look.

But look more closely at the point you are making yourself.  They played San Fran three times this year.  Played New Orleans twice, Carolina once.  Arizona twice.  The Rams twice.  That is a pretty heavy list of strong defensive teams they went against.  I would imagine only other NFC west teams had to deal with so many difficult defenses.

Anyway, let's just stop here, this isn't going anywhere.  We can regroup again a year from now, after another year of a nearly 3 to 1 TD/Int ratio, another rating of around 100, another Y/A of around 8, and maybe we'll throw in another 500 yards or so of rushing.  I have a feeling we'll still have the same discussion about the magical forces causing it  

[Ingmar]

... who purportedly puts very little effort into his craft.

FWIW this doesn't fit what we read about him here at all. Local accounts all pretty much say he has the best work ethic on the team (along with Gore).

[Nevermore]

You pay too much attention to stats, which can be deceptive and more indicative of supporting cast, offensive philosophy, etc.

Wait, so stats are deceptive and more indicative of supporting cast but playoff wins are not? 

[HaemishM]

Anyway, let's just stop here, this isn't going anywhere.  We can regroup again a year from now, after another year of a nearly 3 to 1 TD/Int ratio, another rating of around 100, another Y/A of around 8, and maybe we'll throw in another 500 yards or so of rushing.  I have a feeling we'll still have the same discussion about the magical forces causing it  

Not sure WTF you are talking about with magical forces.

Remove Marshawn Lynch, Richard Sherman and Cliff Avril from that team, and his stats would drop. He's a good QB and he may be great one day - but he hasn't shown me enough yet to make me think he will be great. A Super Bowl ring does not prove his greatness - after all, Flacco, Dilfer and McMahon all have rings and I wouldn't build a franchise around them anymore than Seattle is building a franchise around Wilson. Their franchise is built around that defense and running game.

[Nebu]

Again, Manning is a *good* QB, but not great, and vastly overrated.

Nearly every living NFL QB (retired and active) would place Peyton in the top 10 QB's to ever play the game.  How on Earth can you think that he's overrated?  Have you not watched the way that he runs an offense in real time on the field?  How many QB's even have the football IQ to do that in the modern era?

[Ghambit]

Manning to me has always just been a modern Jim Kelly with a slightly weaker arm.  Nothing more, nothing less.  A tier 2 prospect among the epic QBs like Elway, Marino, Montana, etc.
Teams have always placed too much burden on his shoulders since he was at TN (costing him the NCAA championship no-less), and he's not ever quite had the physical talent to make up the difference.

Danny Wuerfel was smarter and better throwing to-the-spot then Manning ever was btw.  He just was too short and too weak in the arm.

[HaemishM]

 

[Nebu]

Manning to me has always just been a modern Jim Kelly with a slightly weaker arm.  Nothing more, nothing less. 

Ever heard of Fran Tarkenton or Joe Montana?  Both have weaker arms than Manning. 

[Phildo]

the epic QBs like Elway, Marino, Montana, etc.

Out of curiosity, did you grow up watching these guys?  I remember them in particular because they were the big names when I was in middle school.  I mean, the records are there, but I find it interesting that the names you went with were all guys from the late 80s and 90s.

[naum]

Manning to me has always just been a modern Jim Kelly with a slightly weaker arm.  Nothing more, nothing less. 

Ever heard of Fran Tarkenton or Joe Montana?  Both have weaker arms than Manning. 

Joe Montana arm > Peyton Manning arm. Montana didn't have an arm like Bradshaw or Elway but he could throw decent enough, and a better spiral than Manning.

The comparison to Tarkenton is apt though, even if Tarkenton was a scrambling QB and Manning a pocket passer -- both used their wit moreso than most QB to gain advantage, and just like Tarkenton, in big games, this attribute not as much a difference maker. Even heard Kurt Warner on the radio saying the same thing -- that all the pre-snap audible calls and overriding based on defensive read can be overkill in a SB/championship game scenario.

[naum]

Again, Manning is a *good* QB, but not great, and vastly overrated.

Nearly every living NFL QB (retired and active) would place Peyton in the top 10 QB's to ever play the game.  How on Earth can you think that he's overrated?  Have you not watched the way that he runs an offense in real time on the field?  How many QB's even have the football IQ to do that in the modern era?

One word. SCOREBOARD.

Outside of his friendly home field confines, he's consistently come up short in big games. He's been owned by Roethlisberger, Brady, etc. in the playoffs. If it weren't for the Bears, he'd be 0-3 in SB. The comparison to Jim Kelly or Dan Marion is an apt -- a very good QB, not in the league of Brady, Roethlisberger, Elway, Bradshaw, Montana, etc..

[Nebu]

-- a very good QB, not in the league of Brady, Roethlisberger, Elway, Bradshaw, Montana, etc..

...

You have to be from Pittsburgh.  That's the only explanation.