Palmer's numbers are lower than you would expect also in part because the Bengals are running the ball A LOT. I'll take Palmer throwing for 200-250 yards and a win over the old days of Palmer throwing for 300-350 and losing.
Palmer's numbers are lower than you would expect also in part because the Bengals are running the ball A LOT. I'll take Palmer throwing for 200-250 yards and a win over the old days of Palmer throwing for 300-350 and losing.
Last edited by The Operator; 11-11-2009 at 10:55 AM.
Yea and if he was playing better maybe we would be 8-0 ever think of that?
I have no problem saying Palmer isnt playing that great right now and I'm honestly surprised a couple of you are trying to say he is. Then again I dont know how I win a battle with someone that uses "wins" as proof that a QB is great.
Can we use wins for any other positions?
Well, I guess unless the team is undefeated, the QB sucks.
They'd be 7-1 if it weren't for the freak ending to the Denver game and the game against The Texans was a letdown, perhaps because they dealt with Mike Zimmer's wife dying that week. Ever think of that?
The guy was injured last year. His line is just recently gelling. They're running the ball more. He's still got a 90 passer rating and is on pace for around 3700 yards in the air. I'm gonna give him some slack.
I think it all comes down to the play of the offensive line. They surge, they protect; two things that they did not do last year. Benson and Palmer are extremely important players, obviously, but you cannot overlook the improvement and the better play of the line in creating the opportunity for both players to to excel.
Next Reds manager, second shooter. --Confirmed on Redszone.
I dont know how much clearer you could make it when you bring up something like this
Seems to be stating that Wins make the QB no matter the stats.Palmer is near the top of the pile in the category that Big Ben and Eli Manning (two QBs I would gladly take, regardless of stats yet are repeatedly called over rated) also excel in: wins.
Guess what Carson is closer to being Kyle Orton this year stat wise than any of the top QBs you want to list. Just because I say he isnt playing great doesnt mean he sucks. If he was playing better we would be really really good. Hes not but luckily for us hes got the ability to be the top guys.
Wins meaning more is how Tim Wakefield gets an all star selection.
This is not baseball. Baseball is not at all relevant to the discussion. I think my posts above make it pretty clear that--for QB, in the sport of football, which we are currently discussing--I value wins over stats. That doesn't mean I don't value stats, I simply view them as a tool. Palmer has slightly above average stats, and a big time penchant for the clutch this year. In the end QBs are judged on wins and losses, not stats. If he had terrible stats and the Bengals were still winning, the logical conclusion would be that they were winning in spite of him. If he had stellar stats and they were losing, they would be doing so because of weaknesses elsewhere. As it is, he is ranked in the top half of the league in virtually every category and is proving able to get it done at crunch time. Those factors together say he is a very good QB at the moment.
It isn't just a few of us on this thread praising Palmer. Journalists, analysts and talk show hosts around the country are going absolutely batty over him, and they have no built in bias for the Bengals. This year he has been a winner pure and simple.
Are you going to sit there and tell me that Kerry Collins was a great QB last year?
Why are the Bengals 6-2 the top 5 d or the QB who is 13th in QB rating. Hmmm its the QB because he has 6 wins in a team sport.
Since you ignored what I said the first time, I'll paste it and highlight the parts you obviously missed. I'm then going to step away because all you are doing is throwing sophomoric jabs at me and making actual discussion impossible.
"This is not baseball. Baseball is not at all relevant to the discussion. I think my posts above make it pretty clear that--for QB, in the sport of football, which we are currently discussing--I value wins over stats. That doesn't mean I don't value stats, I simply view them as a tool. Palmer has slightly above average stats, and a big time penchant for the clutch this year. In the end QBs are judged on wins and losses, not stats. If he had terrible stats and the Bengals were still winning, the logical conclusion would be that they were winning in spite of him. If he had stellar stats and they were losing, they would be doing so because of weaknesses elsewhere. As it is, he is ranked in the top half of the league in virtually every category and is proving able to get it done at crunch time. Those factors together say he is a very good QB at the moment."
Yes I understand what you are saying, but you really dont seem to understand. You are telling me wins matter but then they dont matter if the stats tell you something else. Which is it? Stats or Wins? or is it just open to your interpretation and biases? Being middle of the pack isnt "very good"
I wish when I got a C on a paper my parents would have told me I did very good.
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |