Most Overrated Thing in NFL? - Page 2

skinzzfan25 · 02-26-2007, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smooth Criminal

It's absolutley the 40 yard dash.

Agreed.

A .5 difference in running can make you loose millions of dollars... Teams value the 40 too much, and should go by film and stats more.

niel89 · 02-26-2007, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smooth Criminal

its starting to be like that. But up till not to long ago most QBs being groomed starting in high school were white.

too true. i dont really give a damn about race. i think the best players should play regardless.

could this interest for young african americans wanting to play qb be linked to mike vicks popularity? he is an amazing playmaker and very exciting to watch. heck when kids play pick up football who do you think everyone wants to be?

Im_a_Romosexual · 02-26-2007, 10:11 PM

INT's definately. If you dont have tons it doesn't mean you suck, you could be tipping passes or blanketing WRs

02-26-2007, 10:26 PM

It's not just Vick, but he's a big part of it. Hell, in recent years Vick, Culpepper, McNabb, McNair, Vince Young and others have made it more feasible for young black kids who start playing football to be taken seriously when they decide they want to be a QB. At this point it's harder to be taken seriously as a white non-FB running back or corner that it is to do so as a black quarterback.

And that's not because black people or white people are better at certain positions, but because these kids are all groomed for positions very young, and when the white kid gets asked what he wants to be, it's unlikely he'll think he can be a HB, based on what he sees in the NFL and at the college level. It's even worse for, say, asian kids, who have only one role model in the NFL, or latino kids, who also don't have many.

So now the race-stacking is shifting. All the QBs mentioned above have, at some point, been pigeonholed into the role of "the running QB", implying that they aren't as polished in the throwing or game-management roles. Which for some of them, like Vick, is valid, but for most, like McNair and McNabb, is crap. But nonetheless, for now at least, the stereotype that black QBs run better while white QBs throw better persists.

niel89 · 02-26-2007, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JoshTheStampede

But nonetheless, for now at least, the stereotype that black QBs run better while white QBs throw better persists.

yeah honestly Jake Plummer has mad scrables. >.<

Dam8610 · 02-26-2007, 10:46 PM

Tom Brady.

PACKmanN · 02-26-2007, 10:48 PM

QB rating is because that means the qb wont risk his stats to try and win by throwing the deep ball.

sweetness34 · 02-26-2007, 10:50 PM

Sacks according to Greg Blache.

Scorch · 02-26-2007, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by remix 6

tackles. guys like Vilma got huge #s again but his real production didnt back it in 3-4

i rather have a guy with 60 tackles at LB who didnt give up much rather than a guy who gets 120 tackles and got run over or made tackles down the field

Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

sweetness34 · 02-26-2007, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

QB rating is because that means the qb wont risk his stats to try and win by throwing the deep ball.

Then according to you Rex is an awesome QB!!!! Whooot!!

niel89 · 02-26-2007, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sweetness34

Sacks according to Greg Blache.

i could see how sacks could be at sometimes. people tend to think that sacks=good DE.

some time sacks are coverage sacks. or some times people are just able to get a free pass to the qb because of a good defensive play call.

i do think however that sacks as a team is much more important than individuals sacks.

hurry ups are something that often get over looked sometimes also.

sweetness34 · 02-26-2007, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niel89

i could see how sacks could be at sometimes. people tend to think that sacks=good DE.

some time sacks are coverage sacks. or some times people are just able to get a free pass to the qb because of a good defensive play call.

i do think however that sacks as a team is much more important than individuals sacks.

hurry ups are something that often get over looked sometimes also.

I'm talking about team sacks, not individual sacks. So causing a team to lose yards is overrated? Wait...

BigDawg819 · 02-26-2007, 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niel89

clarence moore

He's not overrated, he's TALL! :D

BlindSite · 02-26-2007, 11:10 PM

Hall of Famers...

niel89 · 02-26-2007, 11:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigDawg819

He's not overrated, he's TALL! :D

shhh im trying to make people think he sucks. he is our hidden weapon and i dont want other team to throw huge amount of money at him.

if you look at his stats from this past year he catches a touch down every other catch so if you throw to him look out new TD record no problem

KCJ58 · 02-26-2007, 11:39 PM

Eli Manning

BigDawg819 · 02-26-2007, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niel89

shhh im trying to make people think he sucks. he is our hidden weapon and i dont want other team to throw huge amount of money at him.

if you look at his stats from this past year he catches a touch down every other catch so if you throw to him look out new TD record no problem

Of course someone should throw ton's of money at him, he's TALL!

someone447 · 02-26-2007, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EdReedUnstoppable

The thought that race determines anything. Everyone can do everything we're all created equal!! now everyone can shut up about race.

QFFT

Race has absolutely nothing to do with anything. There is no significant difference between the races, other than skin color. Early in the 20th century, Jews dominated basketball, and so everyone thought they were naturally better basketball players. Oh how the times have changed, or maybe not. Same theory, different race.

EVERYONE GET OVER IT, I AM SICK OF HEARING ABOUT ******* SKIN COLOR HAVING ANYTHING TO DO WITH ABILITY IN ANYTHING. THE ONLY THING IT AFFECTS IS GETTING A TAN.

someone447 · 02-26-2007, 11:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinzzfan25

Agreed.

A .5 difference in running can make you loose millions of dollars... Teams value the 40 too much, and should go by film and stats more.

A .5 sec difference IS HUGE. That is 2-3 steps. I think you are talking about a .05 difference, which is only 2-3 inches. But yes, it is overrated. It should only be used when all else is equal.