Matt Stafford is the suckiest suck to ever suck

[Fraquar]

Stats speak for the individual.

Wins speak for the team.

Stafford does his part every year. The running game, the defense do not always show up. This year when the defense showed up, the Lions won. The problem is our defense never shows up against good offenses.

Stafford's stats are the same as Andy Dalton. Stafford just throws the ball a ton more.

[kreton]

Stafford's stats are the same as Andy Dalton. Stafford just throws the ball a ton more.

First - I don't think that Dalton is a bad QB.

Second - Doing something 40 times is a lot harder than doing it 20 times.

Third - Stafford had far more yards. Stafford had a better TD/INT Ratio. Stafford had a much better QBR. Stafford had a much better completion %. He did that with an undeniably far inferior running game to help take any pressure off.

My point that I started with is not that Stafford is the GOAT. My point is that Stafford is at a minimum an above average QB. I think he is top 10 in the league. The Detroit Lions have held Stafford back. If he had been surrounded by more guys that lived up to their potential he would probably have a ring. The Lions can win a Superbowl with him, but we cannot win with our defense and probably not with our running game. Stafford is not why we are watching other teams in the NFCC.

[Fraquar]

Dalton isn't a top QB.......

[kreton]

Dalton isn't a top QB.......

No he's not a top QB, but that doesn't make him a bad QB.

I am not going to try to rank all 40ish QB's but over the last 3 years or so I would put Dalton in the top 15-20 I think. Which makes him a decent QB.

[Fraquar]

No he's not a top QB, but that doesn't make him a bad QB.

I am not going to try to rank all 40ish QB's but over the last 3 years or so I would put Dalton in the top 15-20 I think. Which makes him a decent QB.

Dalton is an average QB who had the luxury of having a good defense for most of his career. The aggregate stats are nearly a mirror image of each other with Stafford and Dalton. Dalton has slightly higher TD ratio, Stafford a slightly less INT ratio. Other than that, if Dalton throws as many times as Stafford he has Stafford's stats.

[kreton]

Dalton is an average QB who had the luxury of having a good defense for most of his career. The aggregate stats are nearly a mirror image of each other with Stafford and Dalton. Dalton has slightly higher TD ratio, Stafford a slightly less INT ratio. Other than that, if Dalton throws as many times as Stafford he has Stafford's stats.

We can agree to disagree. But like I said before - Completing 14/20 1TD is not that same as 28/40 2TD. It's just not.

[Fraquar]

We can agree to disagree. But like I said before - Completing 14/20 1TD is not that same as 28/40 2TD. It's just not.

Aggregate, they are identical. Counting stats are a byproduct of repetitition, not skill. A difference between Dalton and Stafford on the aggregate stat level - that would mean something. Problem is that difference doesn't exist.

[kreton]

Aggregate, they are identical. Counting stats are a byproduct of repetitition, not skill. A difference between Dalton and Stafford on the aggregate stat level - that would mean something. Problem is that difference doesn't exist.

It doesn't work like that. Aggregate forecasting isn't realistic. For instance did Sam Bradford have one of the greatest seasons ever in the NFL this year? I would say no. However he did complete 73% of his passes and had a 3/0 TD/INT ratio. You may believe that if he had continued throwing this year he would have been the first QB to throw for 40 TDs and 0 INTS in a single season but I tend to think that the more he threw the more those numbers, his 73% completion percentage and his 124 QBR would have come down quite a bit. Because as I keep saying, the less you do something, the easier it is to make the stats look good.

[Fraquar]

It works like that in every sport.
Aggregate stats are what every player is compared against - provided their attempts are relatively close. Dalton doesn't have control on how many times he throws the ball - but when he does he's pretty much throwing it the same way Stafford does. Same YPA, YPC and very, very similar TD and INT ratios.

Now if you want to compare Stafford to Rodgers - you'd see the Gulf of Mexico.

[kreton]

It works like that in every sport.
Aggregate stats are what every player is compared against - provided their attempts are relatively close. Dalton doesn't have control on how many times he throws the ball - but when he does he's pretty much throwing it the same way Stafford does. Same YPA, YPC and very, very similar TD and INT ratios.

Now if you want to compare Stafford to Rodgers - you'd see the Gulf of Mexico.

No they aren't compared that way. Do you really think that Bradford would have gone 40/0? The larger a data set is the more defined the results. There is a chance maybe that if Dalton threw more he maintain the exact averages, but chances are that his stats would falter.

Comparing Stafford to Rodgers stat wise is not drastically different, especially for the last 3 years or so.

Rodgers is def better but its not huge. Rodgers at this point in his career is a sure fire 1st ballot HOFer who is quite possibly a top 5-10 QB of all time. Stafford is not.

[Fraquar]

Seriously? In the year Stafford threw for 5,000 had Rodgers thrown as many times as Stafford he'd have thrown for nearly 6,000.

[kreton]

Seriously? In the year Stafford threw for 5,000 had Rodgers thrown as many times as Stafford he'd have thrown for nearly 6,000.

Stafford

Comp % Yards TD INT RATING

2017

65.7 4,446 29 10 99.3

2016

65.3 4,327 24 10 93.3

2015

67.2 4,262 32 13 97.0

Rodgers

2017

64.7 1,675 16 6 97.2

2016

65.7 4,428 40 7 104.2

2015

60.7 3,821 31 8 92.7

[Fraquar]

You are comparing apples to kumquats.

Compare Stafford's age 29 season to Rodgers' age 29 season. What you will find is two things:

1) Rodgers got sacked MORE than Stafford did this year - his O-line was a mess.
2) Rodgers still threw for nearly 40 TD's and had less than 10 INT.

I used Dalton and Stafford because they are pretty much the same age - and their aggregate stats for their careers are about as identical as you can get.

When you compare players, you compare them at the same time periods of their careers. Through age 29, Stafford can't hold Rodgers' jock strap - even with Rodgers not even starting till he was age 25.......

What you should be concerned with is Rodgers' last 3 years - because Stafford isn't very far from starting those years in his career (ages 31-33). In other words, the Lions are getting ready to pay for his declining years. Rare is the player whose career gets better after age 30.

[wcfwtf]

Stafford lovers thing he'll turn into John Elway and win a superbowl his last year, so we only have to go through about 9 more years of arguing this shit whole other teams keep passing us by

[Topweasel]

Seriously? In the year Stafford threw for 5,000 had Rodgers thrown as many times as Stafford he'd have thrown for nearly 6,000.

You do know that you are talking about the first full season Stafford played right?