fansince62
Guest
Why is it not possible to grade a player on his performance, regardless of what's going on around him ?
It's just not that hard to zero in on a player's performance, and analyze it for what it is, without respect to what other players are doing.
NFL scouts do that all the time with college players. How do you think they determine whether a college player has NFL potential, since obviously the potential draftee's whole resume is against college-level players, and not NFL. And in many cases, they're not playing in an NFL-style offense. Scouts don't use that as an excuse, and throw up their arms, and say, "Well we can't judge this player's NFL potential, because he wasn't playing in an NFL environment".
Just once, can we forget about what the rest of the team is doing, and just put each QB under the microscope ?
With RG3, when he fails, it's always about what other players are doing wrong.
When McCoy does well, it's always about outside circumstances giving him good luck.
People bring up McCoy's past when talking about his potential, but they don't give him the same excuses they give RG, about having a bad supporting cast performance, at the time.
When he loses, it's his fault.
When he wins, it's only because some other factors outside of him
You have to be able to judge a QB for what he himself is doing.
If you're waiting for the perfect environment for him to be surrounded with all the right factors, you're going to be waiting your whole life for that environment.
This is not a science experiment, where we can control the environment and factors, for a perfect study. You work with what you have, to come to a conclusion.
As a matter of fact, it's actually MORE relevant to see how a QB performs when all the circumstances around him are not right - because he has to be able to handle pressure situations. I don't want a guy who only plays well under perfect circumstances. How a guy performs in constantly changing environments, is the truest test of his abilities.
Instead of using the surrounding environment as an excuse to call it a flawed study, the question should rather be - how did HE respond to the surrounding environment ? THAT'S the focus and the issue
then at least establish the correct framework. you haven't even done that.
what you have structured is the fol: we will ignore everything RGIII accomplished his first year. buuuuuuuuut........those last 8 games of Robert's? and the fantastic, absolutely mind-blowing, unimaginably, super cali fragilistic two games Colt played? why they're simply irrefutable proof that the wrong guy is at the helm!!!
make the case. I'm sorry and I really don't want to be nasty...but do you really think stating "Robert has thrown 200 more passes" is an argument? do you really think highlighying some flaws while ignoring ALL the strengths is an argument? it's not. it's exactly what I called it - a straw man argument. and, if you like, trying to reroute the discussion into one about the franchise QB (i.e., the future) distracts from the core issue of performance. what's the standard? how do you measure it so there is at least something more than someone voicing frustration/anger with one player's performance in a system/on a team that is crashing and burning in toto - the only thing this team does as a unified goal apparently!!!!


