Chad Pennington or Eli Manning?

Actually, metrics like YPA will always favor the better quarterback. "game manager" is such a silly term. every QB is a game manager to some degree.

It's kind of interesting that I'm being called a homer here, because I've posted on football forums for years and I've never been called a homer by anyone, because anyone who reads what I write knows how ludicrous that is. And it's also not a matter of being "a homer on a certain issue." You're either a homer or you're not. And I'm clearly not.

Hey, I'd rather be called a homer than a moron, and anyone who seriously thinks Eli is better than Chad is a moron.

The proof is everywhere you look. You choose to ignore it. Your choice. But don't shove your ignorance upon us.

 

Must reply to everything...

I think I see a trend...

 

You seem to be unable to grasp simple concepts, such as the fewer attempts a player has, the greater the likelihood of his sustained success (see: backup RBs that have ridiculous YPC averages). Of course every QB is a game manager to an extent, that's like saying every QB throws the ball occasionally. The term game manager is used in reference to a QB who does little if any more than this for his team. The bottom line here is Eli has a great deal more potential than Chad, he's outperformed him in the last 2 years, and he had a nearly equal season last year, and considering all that, I still gave the nod to Chad for now. To say there's no comparison between the two is simply a homer statement, and if my opinion on the subject makes you see me as a moron through your green and white shades, I'm fine with that.

 

lol, you're alone here. I don't have "green and white shades"


eli hasn't outperformed chad.

use any objective measure.

As for your crap about his having a higher YPA because he had less attempts, the difference between their attempts this past season was insignificant. Once a QB has over 400 attempts in a season, you can't say his averages are high because he hardly played. That's idiotic. Chad started every game and was involved in over 500 pass plays.


But you're not interested in logic and objectivity, are you?

I don't care who has more potential. Eli is younger than Chad. In five years, I'd expect him to be better. The question was not who will be better. The question is who is better. That's clearly Chad, and EVERYONE HAS AGREED WITH THAT.

if you were actually interested in objective statistics, you could look here:

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/qb.php


DVOA adjusts for competition, and uses success on each play in a complicated measure.

DVOA factors out increased play. Playing more won't get you a high DVOA.

Chad= 10.2%
Eli= negative numbers, ranked 22nd in the league


It IS clear, and just about everyone will tell you that.

The reason why I keep responding to your silly, illogical, non-reality based posts is because I enjoy the fact that I'm being called a homer for the first time in my life.


since you can't back up your argument with ANYTHING, your posts have mostly consisted of "homer, homer, homer, green-and-white shades, homer, homer, homer." You can ask misfitz why someone would resort to continuous name-calling in an argument.

 

I agree with that but if I have to choose, I would choose Chad to be my QB. He's been in the playoffs and won a few games.

 

Really? I'm alone in thinking that it's a close comparison? You might want to read through this thread again. Most people said it was close, so, really, if anyone is alone here, it's those wearing the green and white shades, namely yourself and TDJets.

Translation: "Don't count the injury". You have to take that into account, because a mediocre player who can stay healthy is better for a team than an above average player that can't stay on the field, not that that comparison has any relevance here, since we're talking about two mediocre QBs here, one that hasn't missed a game due to injury in his career, and another who has missed 22 games in his starting career due to injury.

Why is that? Because you say so? 400 pass attempts in a season is 25 a game, or about what you'd expect (maybe a little more) from a game manager. He attempted 485 passes to Eli's 522, you don't think that has any relevance? You're kidding yourself. I never said Pennington's averages were high because he played less, that was just an easy example of what I'm talking about. The less oppurtunities for success and simultaneously failure there are, the greater the likelihood that a certain level of success will be maintained.

Yes, because I, a Colts fan, really have a stake in this argument.

Including myself, that's not what is being argued here. The argument is whether or not it's a close comparison, and thus far the only ones that think it isn't either have a bias against Eli Manning for varying reasons or are Jets fans. But you're right, you're not being a homer here.

I know what DVOA is, but if you look into it, you'll find that Aaron Schatz himself admits that it's not a perfect measurement of player success, and could be improved upon. Therefore, I'm not going to take it as the end-all be-all of QB performance. Again, DVOA favors the game manager, as it rewards yardage, YPA, and accuracy far more greatly than it rewards TDs. Read his explanation of it if you don't believe me.

Well, if you'd take the green and white shades off for a moment, you'd realize that the only people that agree with your side of the point up for debate are people who have a bias either against Eli Manning or favoring the Jets. But I'm the one who's being illogical with a thought process not based in reality.

I haven't backed up my argument with anything? Really? Again, I suggest you re-read the thread. Just because I'm calling you what you've been throughout this argument does not mean that's all I've said. If that's all you notice, that's your fault.

 

That just about says it all. Really.

 

hmmm, Dam seems to have a basic problem with the English language, and that's what's at the root of this argument.

I said "clearly"

You don't understand what "clearly" means.

If everyone agrees on something, then it is CLEAR.

The most objective statistics there are favor Chad. But that's not good enough for you. He's a "game manager", however you define that. I watch the Jets. Chad is integral to the offense and does a lot more than "manage" the game.

I'm not the biased one here. Does it make me feel better to say a Jets player is good? No. I give my honest opinion. I never will favor or bash a player based on the uniform he wears, because that flat out doesn't make sense. You're having difficulty with this, clearly.

 

Classic. Way to change your argument when it's torn to shreds. Oh, and just in case you decide to claim you didn't, here's the proof to the contrary:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Objective? Schatz basically admits that his formula favors the game manager in his explanation of DVOA as I already explained (selective reading will allow ignorace of such things though), which is, by the numbers as well as the game tape, what Chad is.

So you're saying I'm the biased one? Obviously if "[You're] not the biased one here", that must mean that someone is biased, and since only you and I are involved in this argument, you must be implying that I'm the biased one, which is laughable. Please show me exactly what reason I have to be biased in this argument. You, being a Jets fan, have plenty of reason to be biased in this argument. You've made an obviously biased argument throughout the thread (considering you just changed it, I can tell even you've realized that), so your claim of being unbiased in this is one borne of either ignorance or delusion. Which is it?