A few links to check out on this beautiful Friday morning.
Charles Davis and Jamie Dukes of the NFL Network debate whether Matt Hasselbeck still is an elite quarterback in this video link.
Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk.com discusses how the three new coaches in the league, including Seahawks head coach Pete Carroll, will be measured in their first season.
Clare Farnsworth of Seahawks.com continues his look at the team’s coaching staff with a profile on running backs coach Sherman Smith.
ESPN’s Mike Sando ranks Seattle tops among the NFC West at free safety because of the potential of Earl Thomas.
Brian McIntyre of Scout.com writes that the New York Jets signing second-round pick Vladimir Ducasse to a four-year, $3.25 million dollar contract on Wednesday, picked 61st overall, sets the floor for Seattle second-round selection Golden Tate, picked No. 60 overall.
John Lopez of Sports Illustrated explains his rule for predicting if a quarterback will have a successful NFL career. He explains that if a prospect scores at least a 26 on the Wonderlic test, starts at least 27 games in his college career and completes at least 60 percent of his passes, chances are that person will succeed at the NFL level
Sam Bradford, Peyton Manning, Philip Rivers pass the test. JaMarcus Russell, David Carr and rookies ookies Colt McCoy, Tim Tebow, Jimmy Clausen do not. Charlie Whitehurst meets the criteria if you round up is completion percentage (40 career starts, 59.7 completion percentage, 33 wonderlic).
Matt Bowen of the National Football Post discusses the evolution of the tight end position to create mismatches against the defense.
hmm… broken link to the florio article?
http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/article/2010-07-09/how-success-for-nfls-three-first-year-head-coaches-will-be-measured
× Flag comment
Airbags: Fixed it. Thanks.
× Flag comment
I wonder how a QB who has had just 1 good year out of the last 4 can even be considered as an elite QB.
× Flag comment
Then you’d still be scratching your head as to why Jim Plunkett spent almost a decade looking like crap and then, boom, he wins a few Super Bowls. It’s called surrounding talent, my friend.
× Flag comment
Because when he’s not lying on his back he makes passes like these.. (PeytonManning-esk) I wonder how good Manning, Brees, Rodgers, Rivers, etc. would be behind the Hawks line of the past few years?
× Flag comment
The DMX music makes this video kinda funny
× Flag comment
http://www.youtube.com/watchv=SU3B0ftp4kk&feature=PlayList&p=FDA46AFDDFD0C56E&playnext_from=PL&playnext=1&index=16
× Flag comment
Hass has proved that he’s very capable with surrounding talent. However, there are plenty of QBs like T-Jackson who can’t get it done at a high level even with elite surrounding talent. You need to be good, but most also need players around them to be good too. Take away both of Brees’ guards and Colston and he doesn’t have the same statistical season last year. It’d most likely still be good, but it wouldn’t be as good. Put those three players on the Seahawks instead and Matt’s numbers from ’09 would be much improved. That’s just the way it is.
× Flag comment
Finally some love for Hasselbeck.
× Flag comment
Even during the best of times, I’m not sure I would consider Hasselbeck elite. But he was certainly knocking on the door and was at worst the next step below. Keeping him upright and having the D get off the field will help turn the clock back, but I wouldn’t go so far as to say elite. He’s always been at his best when he’s not required to win you games, IMO. As opposed to Brady and Manning who can take a game over. Of course superior surrounding talent is a bonus, but they would be great regardless. I love Hass, but he’s not elite.
× Flag comment
Of course we adimire and belove Mr Hasslebeck. He proved himself a great player and took our team to it’s only Super Bowl. We love him in the PNW. But lets not get all “Griffey Jr” with him now. His time has past. Last year showed it. His time to be great in this league is over. Lets bid farewell to him now before he embarrasses himself (ala Jr) and he can still walk. The only thing that waits for Matt on the gridiron is a terrible injury. I can only hope Coach Carrol won’t let that happen.
× Flag comment
I couldn’t disagree with you more footballscaa. The only chance Seattle has of making a respectable showing in 2010 is if Matt is the QB.
Mind you, my idea of a respectable showing is anything with 7 or more wins. I’m not ready to jump on the Div championship or playoffs bandwagon yet, but I’m reserving my spot just incase the miracle happens.
× Flag comment
I remember when Favre was embarassing himself too. Surrounding talent has a way of making you look good. Granted, Matt is not in Favre’s league, but it’s the way it goes.
× Flag comment
How in the world can someone compare Hass to Plunkett? Plunkett was a late-bloomer, as was Gannon, but Hass is a deteriorating player that is showing a decline. He is fragile and even at his best he was not elite. Very good for a short time? Yes. Elite? Never. But you know what, sport, if you keep posting every hour something good will pop out and you’ll get that ego boost you need.
× Flag comment
Zombie: “He is fragile and even at his best he was not elite.”
Every QB in the league is “fragile” when they get hit like Hass has. Elite has a lot to do with how little your QB is getting takin down. Just take a look at the ‘elite’ quarterbacks and see how little they’re getting sacked or pressured compared to the ones who aren’t elite. The elites have solid o-lines. period.
× Flag comment
Elite QB ?
yeah right
× Flag comment
zombie – you clearly don’t understand what I was trying to say (or the comparison). And then you throw insults. Please do the blog a favor and grow up. I have no problem with meaningful dialogue where someone doesn’t agree with something but bantering someone for no reason is rather sickening.
× Flag comment
agree bobby. as for hass, his stats do not say elite. sometimes they say very good, other times poor. i do think he would have been up there with the best of his era had he had good protection and really good receivers over an extended time. he did not. the 2010 season offensively depends on exactly that combo (well, as well as a decent running game). at this point, i don’t think they have that. better yes, but not that much –yet.
if hass had a great season in 2010, i still doubt many would call him elite. when he is on, i like him a lot. i think he’s good.
× Flag comment
BobbyK – your comparisons of Hasselbeck and Jackson are apples and oranges. Jackson was a first and second year starter with the Vikings and he improved markedly each year. He had a decent 2008 but all that is remembered is the playoff loss to the Eagles.
Hasselbeck’s great years were in years 3-5 and year 7 as a starter. That is prime time for a QB. I actually think Jackson will make a decent starting QB in the NFL once he gets enough games under his belt.
Hasselbeck had his chance to be elite but instead threw critical, game changing, 4th Qtr/OT ROAD PLAYOFF INTs in the 2003 Packers game, the 2005 Super Bowl and the 2006 Bears game. Road playoff games against great teams in big moments is where the great ones shine and he failed miserably. I’m sure Duke and BobbyK don’t need me to bring up his pitiful road record against teams that finished the year with winning records. Again, not elite.
He was a very good QB in his day, but definitely not elite. And if he can’t recapture that very good feeling this year, we are in for another 4-12 season because the 2 guys behind him are worse than the 2008-2009 Hasselbeck.
× Flag comment
If indeed the Hawks “took the ball and scored” in Green Bay, Matt Hasselbeck would be considered elite.
Which speaks to the nonsensical nature of sports talk in general.
Matt, just win football games and keep repping for bald men world wide.
× Flag comment
I want to see just one Seahawks road playoff victory and watch my team shut the fans up and deliver a shocking upset – will I ever see this again?
The Bears game was the perfect opportunity – playing a team that blew the Seahawks out without Alexander earlier that year, a team that was favored by double digits and a team the pretty much blew the entire NFC out that year. This would have been one of the GREAT playoff upsets of all time in the entire NFL.
And Hasselbeck just couldn’t find Engram wide open at the end for the winning FG. I replayed that play several times and can’t figure out why Hasselbeck just stared him down without throwing the ball – evidently Holmgren couldn’t forget it either.
× Flag comment
“I want to see just one Seahawks road playoff victory and watch my team shut the fans up and deliver a shocking upset – will I ever see this again?” – Yes. It will happen and when it does it will feel even sweeter after these past few seasons. That’s what makes a rebuilding situation so exciting on a level; the prospect of championships and watching the team build toward it.
× Flag comment
Hasselbeck was widely considered an elite QB in his prime. Just google “Hasselbeck” and “elite” and you’ll find many references, not all of them to Elizabeth.
In his prime, he was a Top Five QB, not in the class of Manning and Brady, but in the next tier, alongside Brees and Palmer. Since then, Brees has passed him, and so have a number of other QBs. He probably won’t be elite anymore, but could still be among the Top 15.
× Flag comment
Here was Hasselbeck’s 1st real chance to demonstrate that he was an elite QB and he failed to back it up:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-playoffs/09000d5d805c2cfe/NFL-Scoreboard-Hasselbeck-s-proclamation
He may or may not be elite, but he QB’ed the Seahawks to their first Super Bowl. To me that’s all that matters. I hope he rekindles some of that 2005 form under the new regime. I love the guy.
Enjoy.
× Flag comment
Again, I love the guy, he’s one of my al-time favorite Seahawks, but he was never “widely considered an elite QB in his prime”. In fact, by saying this – “…not in the class of Manning and Brady, but in the next tier” – automatically eliminates him from consideration and is a counter argument to the previous assertion. By definition, if he were elite, he would be considered with the very best. Not in the “next tier”.
He’s the best QB in Seahawk history, a warrior and a great leader. I hope too, that he is able to show those traits again this year.
× Flag comment
Duke – I’ve always had my own debate on whether or not he was better than Krieg. Overall Krieg has the better numbers (his numbers are first)
W-L 70-49 63-54
QB Rating 82.3 83.3
Playoff Wins 3 4
W-L Road Win Team Records 6-28 2-25
Those are objective numbers. But subjectively, I think Hasselbeck played with the better supporting cast, had an offense tailored to the QB Rating formula and a far easier schedule. Could Krieg have gotten home field advantage if instead of the Chargers, Raiders and Broncos he had the Rams, 49ers and Cardinals? If he did, would they have made the SB also? I think yes to all.
× Flag comment
I remember when all the WRs were injured and Hass was throwing to practice squaders and guys off the street. What, that didn’t affect his stats?
He has decent receivers now. If the O line holds up I fully expect Hass to put up good numbers. Of course a good running game would help.
× Flag comment
pabuwal – I understand the Krieg argument, but I’m not sure I’d go so far as to say Hass had a better supporting cast. Those 80s Seahawks had great defenses, the running game was every bit as good and he had Largent.
And those 4 categories you list, Krieg doesn’t hold the advantage, it’s 2 and 2.
It is a subjective argument, however, I’ll grant. But for me, from a talent, skill, performance and achievement perspective, Hass is the best Seattle has had. It’s a classic and fun argument though.
× Flag comment
if we are considering the greatest seahawk qb, somewhere the name moon must appear. just imagine what we would be saying if we had had him during his prime?
× Flag comment
John Clayton has ‘elite’ criteria and names 7 QBs in the AFC that meet them: P.Manning, T.Brady, B.Rothlisberger, P.Rivers, C.Palmer, M.Schaub, & J.Flacco;
and 7 in the NFC: D.Brees, B.Favre, A.Rogers, D.McNabb, T.Romo, E.Manning, and A.Ryan.
K.Warner was an elite QB, but retired, and M.Hasselbeck was an elite QB up to ’07, but dropped to the top of the next tier below ‘elite’ because of injuries (Matt’s, OL & WRs), since. Clayton expects Hass to return to the ‘elite’ column if the OL can keep him upright and his receivers stay healthy and don’t eat lotsa heavily buttered popcorn while sitting on the bench.
× Flag comment
ruminator1 – I don’t know about that. When we discuss Seattle all time great RBs, we don’t mention Franco Harris. It’s my belief that when one discusses all time great players for a given team, the crux of that players career or his greatest achievements, need to be with that club.
But Moon was a passing machine, in his day. No question.
× Flag comment
Who tried to compare ‘ole Soapdish Krieg with Hasselbeck?
Numbers shnumbers…
× Flag comment
Kreig: Remember spectacular throws sandwiched between Dave running after the football on the ground like chasin a chicken in the barnyard.
× Flag comment
Thats a good point about Kreig – Hasselbeck up to the last few years was amazing in terms of how little he fumbled when he was sacked. But they both take/took way too many sacks.
× Flag comment
Duke – in the stats Kreig holds the advantage, its by a large margin and in the stats where Hasselbeck holds the advantage its minimal. And then considering Kreig played in a ground offense that was NOT tailored to the QB rating while Hasselbeck played for a coach who loved passing tailored to the QB rating formula makes the nearly identical QB rating even more curious.
× Flag comment
Taylored to the QB rating (whatever that means) does nothing to sway me. And the counter argument Kreig’s run first oriented offense is that actually opens up passing lanes rather than having defenses able to pin their ears back and blitz. But no matter, I think we’re going to have to disagree here because after having watched the entirety of each of their Seahawk careers, I would never take Krieg over Hass. But that is simply my opinion.
× Flag comment
The QB rating is tailored to passing games that stress moving the ball efficiently, consistently and with minimal risks rather than in big, random, risky chunks. The pass first principles of the WCO are pretty much geared right towards the QB rating formula.
Interestingly enough, the QB rating was created in the early 70s whereas the WCO didn’t enjoy league wide popularity until some time later.
× Flag comment
pabuwal, I think you had a really good argument going that Hass was never quite an elite QB, until you got sidetracked comparing him to Kreig. I just can’t go there. If Kreig hadn’t had Largent, I don’ think he would be in the conversation.
I define an elite QB as one of the few guys who can truly carry a team. I don’t think Hass was ever quite that player, but close before injuries, a bad OL and WRs limited him. Now, at 34, and rehabbing from two years of injuries, he is certainly no longer an elite QB, if he ever was. But he does have elite skills when healthy – pinpoint passing and decision making as sharp as any of the elite QBs in 2004-2007.
And, he can be the best QB in the NFC West, hands down, if the team supports him.
But at this stage of his career, Hass is likely to crumble if he does not have a very solid supporting cast around him. That’s not a knock on him, just reality at 34 with all the hits he’s taken the past couple of years.
× Flag comment
duke agreed though moon had one pretty good year here, made pro bowl, led the league in one category.
really, the large point i would make with regard to hass–he hasn’t had the protection a great qb needs for much of his time here. and under that condition, he has tried to compensate a la favre and when many of these gambles didn’t work, whatever claims he had on “elite” disappeared. but when he has protection, he throws a great ball and i am comfoprtable with him.
stevos, agree on all counts. i would add that with kreig you had that immeasureable–he was a gamer. not the greatest talent but pure fire.
× Flag comment
“the 2 guys behind [Hasselbeck] are worse than the 2008-2009 Hasselbeck.”
I don’t think that comparison makes sense. I think the 2008-09 Hasselbeck was so severely limited by injuries, along with a pathetic OL (for all of 08 and the beginning of 09) and weak WRs, that we cannot compare that injured and unsupported guy to anyone.
Anyone would have sucked given the circumstances Hass had. But to say that JP Losman was never as good as Hass in 09? That’s not right.
Hass QB rating:
2009: 75
2008: 57
2007: 91
Losman QB rating:
2008: 63
2007: 76
2006: 84
JP Losman played on teams in Buffalo that were every bit as bad as the Seahawks of 08-09. The 2008 Buffalo team had as many injuries as the 2008 Seahawks team – both set records for injured starters. Losman was running for his life just as Hass was last year. But he had moments where he shined. Jesus Whitehurst hasn’t proven anything yet, of course, but he’s never been given the start to prove himself. I feel better about our #2 and #3 QBs than I have since Dilfer retired.
× Flag comment
rookies (ookies?) Colt McCoy, Tim Tebow, Jimmy Clausen …
× Flag comment
Big 12 championship game from on 09′ is on espnu for anyone that wants to see our starting safety Earl Thomas in real game action!!!
× Flag comment
I love the QB rating stat, but it doesn’t measure how many sacks and fumbles a QB takes – which was a good point made against Kreig earlier. Give Losman and Whitehurst no pass rush and they will look great because they have lousy pocket presence. That’s not NFL football.
Are we saying Hasselbeck can’t look great unless he has a HoF caliber OL? Because thats the main argument his supporters make for him. How many HoF OL have Manning, Brady, Montana and Young had?
An elite QB can take an average cast and go in and win anytime and against anyone, anywhere. Hasselbeck has had an above average cast and withered on the road against good teams.
In the 2006 Divisional Playoff Round Brady pulled off a massive upset in SD by throwing the game winning bomb to Reche Caldwell while Hasselbeck squandered numerous chances of his own to pull off one of the great upsets in NFL history. I would argue that Hasselbeck had the better surrounding cast that day.
× Flag comment
“An elite QB can take an average cast and go in and win anytime and against anyone, anywhere.”
I believe I understand what you are trying to say, but let’s not get carried away. Every great QB has lost games they could have won. It happens to every QB several times a year, that’s why only one team has ever gone wire to wire.
× Flag comment
OK, just my .02 cents worth, and in this economy that means nothing.
Hass WAS a very solid QB from 2004-2007 last couple of years, not so much.
Can he get it back if the O-line plays better? Odds are better than 50/50 in his favor.
Is he now or was he ever an elite QB? Depends on the definition of elite and I don’t think any expert has the same criteria.
I’m a little tougher when it comes to throwing around terms like ‘elite’. In my scale an elite QB is one that is a sure fire HOF QB no questions asked.
So, that would give us Manning (the one in Indy not NY), Brady, Favre (have to give him his dues, he definitely qualifies). I’ll throw in Warner because he’s just one year removed from playing.
Other QB’s who have a chance at HOF so may make elite status:
Brees, Rivers, McNabb, and it pains me to type this but maybe Rothlisburger.
Everyone else falls into the Franchise, Solid, won’t hurt you, or just plain bad catagory.
× Flag comment
I think that’s a fair assessment. I’ve always felt that if there is a debate whether someone is elite or HOFer and the like, then they are probably not.
× Flag comment
“In the 2006 Divisional Playoff Round Brady pulled off a massive upset in SD by throwing the game winning bomb to Reche Caldwell while Hasselbeck squandered numerous chances of his own to pull off one of the great upsets in NFL history. I would argue that Hasselbeck had the better surrounding cast that day.”
pabuwal–what day are we referring to where brady pulled off the great upset and hass failed so miserably in the 2006 playoffs?
pats vs chargers:
i think while san diego had a favorite team, the pats were actually better defensively for that year, they also had brady (10-1 in playoffs previously), belichick (11-2 playoff history ) vs shottenheimer 5-12. pats were underdogs, but many “experts” picked them.
Seattle slid into the playoffs, they scored 20 fewer touchdowns and allowed 15 more that yr, both hass and alexander were injured for a spell mid-season. not many experts picked them. so i am not sure you can make the case that Seattle had a better team than NE.
× Flag comment
The fastest way to turn around the fortunes of a losing franchise is to get an elite QB. Every year in the draft there are only about two of the 14 or so QB prospects drafted that have the chance to become good QBs. Just to have success (26 Wonderlic, 27 starts, & 60 C% in college) does not equate to becoming an elite QB in the NFL. Nor is an elite QB the same as a future HoFer.
What makes an ‘elite’ QB? Per J.Carlson:
1) can complete over 60% of his passes,
2) has 4th qtr ‘comeback’ abiility,
3) can put 22 points/game on the board, and
4) has a good history: when they play a non-elite QB team they usually win.
Clayton names: P.Manning, T.Brady, B.Rothlisberger, P.Rivers, C.Palmer, M.Schaub, J.Flacco, D.Brees, B.Favre, A.Rogers, D.McNabb, T.Romo, E.Manning, and A.Ryan as the only current elite QBs in the NFL. When the teams with these QBs played teams with non-elite QBs, the teams with the elite QBs won 105 times and the teams with the non-elite QBs won 29 times.
Teams with mid-level QBs (e.g. A.Smith – and currently M.Hasselbeck) are at the mercy of the schedule: if the schedule is easy they can win 9-10 games, if the schedules tough they’ll lose 9-10 games. When A.Smith goes against an elite level QB he loses.
If, this season, M.Hasselbeck goes against elite QB teams (SD, NYG, NO, & ATL) and wins more than 22% (1 game), and meets Clayton’s other criteria, then M.Hasselbeck becomes an ‘elite’ QB again.
× Flag comment
The only problem with labeling someone as elite is that it’s totally subjective, from the criteria to the application of the definition. Personal stats may be a measure for one person, vs other less tangible qualities like leadership, work for another. Clayton may have come up with a definition that he finds acceptable, but that doesn’t make it so. (With due respect to The Professor.)
That said, I find this interesting; “Nor is an elite QB the same as a future HoFer.” Has there been a QB that anyone here feels was elite that is not in the HOF? I cannot think of one, for me. I can however point to QB(s) in the Hall I would not consider elite. Joe Namath comes to mind.
Good conversation to pass a summer night with camp on the horizon.
× Flag comment
dukeshire–you will probably get a few calls for kenny anderson, or jon hadl or maybe john brodie
× Flag comment
I thought about Anderson. I think I could make a case for his inclusion in the HOF far easier than him being elite, as peculiar as that may sound. He wins XVI and I think he’s in by now. But I’m not sure I would take him over any 3 or 4 of his peers at any point of his career.
Brodie and Hadl are a bit like Namath to me without Super Bowl III.
× Flag comment
To me, the word “elite” is not synonymous with “future HOFer.” To me, Shaun Alexander was an elite RB for about five years, but probably won’t make the HOF. He was the league MVP, so can you argue that he wasn’t “elite”? Priest Holmes (remember him?) was also elite for a few years.
Hass was “elite” for about three years, but won’t sniff the HOF. He will, however, be a cinch for the Ring of Honor.
You have to be “elite” for most of your career to make the HOF. If Hass played for 10 years like he did from 2003 to 2005, he’d probably be a HOFer.
× Flag comment
Kenny Easley is like that. He was as dominant and as good as any safety to play in the league for his 7 years. He was elite for the entirety of his career, but it simply wasn’t long enough. (Although he still may get in. He deserves it.)
× Flag comment
Canfan- Ditto
Duke- The Professor has virtually taken the words ‘elite QB’ over the last coupla years and has made them his own. ‘Elite QB’ integrates into an organized system of thought and has a meaning that’s slightly more than their meaning when used separately. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=4705986
I don’t believe Clayton radically changed the meaning of the words ‘elite QB’, but has given those words specific meanings that, once you ‘get’ their new meanings they become difficult to disassociate.
Sometimes words can be given radically different meanings through concerted effort (like for a social, political, religious, or economic purpose,) that some people will not ‘get’ because of the transparency of the attempt to change (or corrupt) the thinking of the masses (e.g. I don’t refer to homos as ‘gays’, nor do I call the Unpatriot Act the ‘Patriot Act’ – see Ron Paul, nor do I believe that NAFTA really promotes ‘free trade’). But Clayton’s ‘elite QB’ I buy.
× Flag comment
klm,
we can debate the word elite all we want but please leave your personal political views at the door.
I have several gay friends and I resent your name calling on their behalf. And just so you know gays are sports fans too.
Now back to football. I just had to get that off my chest. Aside from that one comment I find your posts bring alot to the table.
× Flag comment
dukeshire–i think anderson belongs and hadl maybe. very close for me. and i think charlie conerly, who wouldn’t even get to play as qb today, might deserve HOF
× Flag comment
kim008 – Is that an attempt to disagree with me? Because you have done nothing be reiterate my point. Here is what I said;
“The only problem with labeling someone as elite is that it’s totally subjective, from the criteria to the application of the definition. Personal stats may be a measure for one person, vs other less tangible qualities like leadership, work for another. Clayton may have come up with a definition that he finds acceptable, but that doesn’t make it so. (With due respect to The Professor.)”
So, when you say, “…words can be given radically different meanings through concerted effort…” it tells me either you didn’t read what I wrote thoroughly or didn’t understand it.
Moreover, Clayton hasn’t “virtually” made elite QB his own. He has “literally” made it his own. (Although I dispute that. He has however developed a definition that suits his needs. Nothing wrong with that, but again, it’s subjective.) His criteria is this;
“An elite quarterback nowadays is one who can run an offense that can score 21.5 or more points a game, throw for at least 220 yards a game, complete at least 60 percent of his passes and have the ability to bring a team back in the fourth quarter.”
A combination of statistics and ambiguity. It’s a tangible definition that he is comfortable with and allows him to frame opinions, arguments, etc… Which goes back to my original statements on attempts to label someone as elite; subjective.
I appreciate your effort to articulate you opinions, but with due respect, you appear to be disagreeing with me for the sake of it, rather than form a linear argument. And I have to agree with Chuck, your last paragraph was not only poorly written, but thoroughly unnecessary regarding this topic.
× Flag comment
ruminator1 – I can’t disagree. It’s always difficult to draw lines regarding HOF inclusion for players that have had success.
× Flag comment
Duke – Not trying to argue. Just got a problem with that “totally subjective” part. If words were totally subjective it would be as good to call an apple an orange. Word meanings usually remain stable back to their roots in Greek, or Latin, or whatever. The word ‘elite’ came from ‘elect’. Sorta like the ‘elite’ are those ‘elected’ by the masses. Some commonality of usage is important with that particular word.
As long as their original meaning is preserved, words can be used to create organized thought systems that, for one thing, help model a predictable world. When words get used in such a system they often acquire more specific meanings as long as the model they become a part of seems to work. If and when that model is shown be less useful than it is worth, those words meanings tend to revert to their prior, more general, use. No harm, no foul.
Didn’t mean to offend anyone with that last paragraph, only meant to point out that words that lose association with their original meanings can cause havoc in building and maintaining cognitive constructions (predictive models). That was the specific aim of the Frankfurt school, but I do apologize for straying into those waters in this blog. Clayton’s construct both in establishing the criteria for the parameters that determine an ‘elite QB’ as well as his use of ‘elite QB’ in predicting the performance of NFL teams with and without one, doesn’t lose the original meaning and seem to be very useful.
× Flag comment
kim008 – Okay, that helps. However, based on the definition of a word, the application of it can be subjective. Not random or interchangeable. An apple a very specific fruit. As is an orange. These are objective. They are based in fact. The word elite is subjective and does not cary such an absolute definition. Many words do not carry definitive criteria regarding their meaning. And when one expresses an opinion, or speculates or evaluates a subject, words like good, bad, awesome, great, awful, and so on are used in a subjective manner.
So, when someone like John Clayton defines what it is he means by elite, it is for the purpose of putting into context the conversation and a way to frame his opinions. We may agree or we may not. But it is not fact. Calling someone an “elite QB” is totally subjective. Even if we are in total agreement.
× Flag comment
Got it. You’re saying ‘elite’ QB, while I’m referring to what Clayton calls ‘elite QB’. No arguments, but sooner or later, Hawks are gonna need one.
Speaking of which, anybody notice KFFL report from Adam Caplan: “The Arizona Cardinals have placed QB Kurt Warner on the Reserve/Retired list… By placing Warner on the list, he will not count against the team’s roster limit and his salary is off the books unless he decides to come back. If Warner decides to play again, all he needs to do is notify the league in writing.”
Sounds like Favre?
× Flag comment
“No arguments, but sooner or later, Hawks are gonna need one.” LOL! Truer words were never spoken.
× Flag comment
beating the proverbial dead horse: it seems to me that establishing any new norm is to some extent subjective. even with supposed objectively measureable elements. i am not sure that the attempt to compare it with word use evolution works, but at least word usage is organic and has some logic. using clayton’s standards as an example, you could argue that by looking at the statistical record, one could determine “elite.” i would argue that not only are those bases subjective, the interpretation of them is partially so as well.
“one who can run an offense that can score 21.5 or more points a game, throw for at least 220 yards a game, complete at least 60 percent of his passes and have the ability to bring a team back in the fourth quarter.” what makes these the qualities of the elite? and what is missing? does elite relate at all to the quality of talent around the candidate, for example? the ability to bring a team back in the 4th quarter–hmmm. do you measure that by the number of times a team comes back? by the number of successful plays called by the coach? by the actual touchdown passes? by the difficulty of the pass completions? etc etc a slippery slope. i agree with those who say clayton’s scheme is a framework for discussion. but it IS subjective.
as for the reference to homo vs gay, the following is from the Dictionary of Slang:
gay: Noun. A homosexual male and occasionally used for such females. The word, once derogatory, has been reclaimed by the ‘gay’ community and is an accepted term for homosexuals. However the term is still heard used in a pejorative sense. ‘Gay’ is now considered standard English.
i would add that “homo” is an emotionally charged term these days. so to say you do “not call homos gays” is IMO pejorative and offensive. clearly, the language has evolved and in this case, rather than returning to former roots, it has taken on a new accepted definition.
× Flag comment
Hass was handicapped with dropped passes. Stevens 3 or 4 in the SB and Engram end zone playoff drop were the biggest. I’m not sure if the receiver was hot on the GB INT but that was ugly, costly. These other so called Elite have had outstanding receivers.
Warner – Tory Holt, Isaac Bruce, Marshall Faulk
… AR; Larry Fitzgerald, Anquan Boldin
Manning – Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, etc. etc
Hasselbeck has never had an Elite WR. None have been close to a Jerry Rice or Randy Moss. No excuse but as mentioned, 2008 saw the backups being replaced by street receivers. 2009 Hass had injury and the o’line would not hold up.
I can only name 2 QB’s that remain Elite behind poor offensive lines. Bret Favre at 40 nearly accomplished the feet again this past playoffs. He was getting pounded by NO. The other was the early John Elway. Maino always lacked a run game so he might be included.
That said we now have Housh, Carlson, add Tate and McCoy with possibly a revitalized Branch. Okung will protect Hass blind side and Locklear of old has the other edge. This isn’t the 05 o’line but capable enough to win games. The skill positions look tight, least wise to me. Would like to bring up Forsett but memory of the Vikings doesn’t allow. Still, he and Washington are exciting to watch. Another who has had little mention is TE Anthony McCoy. Some scouts considered him the top prospect entering the draft. He is a ferocious blocker, not extremely fast but excellent hands.
All in All, Hass may not be Elite but with or without this offense is going to crack the top 15. Should they come together quickly they’ll become explosive before seasons end.
× Flag comment
Klm I tried to be polite. Now I’m going to get more blunt. Take your views and go away. You’ve now crossed a line. If you your to replace your sentence with the n word or Jew you’d be banned. Show some respect here. It is very likely that there are a few gay people on this blog site. I am from Canada and we have openly gay people in the military and we have gay marriage. It hasn’t been the end of our society. You can believe anything you want but either keep those views to yourself or kindly go away
× Flag comment
What Chuck said.
KLM, if you want to discuss the Seahawks, be my guest.
If you want to use offensive slang terms to describe a fairly large group (I wouldn’t consider 10 percent plus a “minority”) which even has Congresscritters and rumor has it at least one Supreme Court Justice (hint, he wasn’t nominated by a Democratic president), feel free to head on over to Hayden Lake Idaho where they enjoy such banter.
× Flag comment
KLM, that’s one of the most disturbing things I’ve ever read on a blog. If you believe that you are part of everything that is wrong with this world. Intolerance is more of a bellweather for the health of a society IMO, and sadly yours is on full display.
× Flag comment
What the hell is happening to this blog….
× Flag comment
Interesting piece about Forsett on PFT.
× Flag comment
Kim008 – Typically I’ll refrain from piling on, but not this time. Whatever you political and societal views, you are entitled to them and you are entitled to express them as you see fit. However, if you are going to bring archaic, small and ignorant views into my “home” I will share my though about you. These views of yours have no business on a sports blog. There are plenty of Tea Party, Christian, neocon and various fringe societal hate group blogs for you to join and spout your infantile beliefs. In short, your presence here is unappreciated by me and I hope you will take this opportunity to crawl back under the rock from which you have come. Go away moron.
× Flag comment
oceanic – Nice heads up.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/07/12/justin-forsett-becomes-instant-pete-carroll-favorite/
× Flag comment
KLM008: This is a football blog, not a place to discuss your views on life.
× Flag comment
So are you reactionaries replying to klm posting “but I do apologize for straying into those waters in this blog” or him comparing Warner to Farve. Or did you read someone else and attribute it to him.
The guy apologized. Move on.
× Flag comment
Oh, and FWIW, if Claytons formula has 14 elite QBs in the league, I think it kind of dilutes what elite means.
Elite to me means sustained greatness over time. Farve, Brady and Peyton Manning are the only active QBs who fit that model. Brees is still on the fringes, although I think he ends up becoming elite.
× Flag comment
You have to love people who complain about a “violation of TOS” by doing the same. Stay on topic already.
We have a lot of new parts and pieces. PC is such a RARA guy that it is hard not to be excited for this team. But I digress, you have to face reality. These are parts and pieces that have never played together. There have been many comments about how we WOULD have looked if the O-line stayed together. How we WOULD have looked if MH didn’t get injured. Running at half speed during camp at guys that you didn’t last season is nice when trying to sync up, but come on. I truly do not see us competing for the division. I put zero stock in the preseaon. Three of our first six games are against division opponents. Luckily, the lone road game is against the Rams. Toss in Chicago, Denver, and San Diego for our other three, and we could be anywhere from 1-5 to 5-1 with my thinking that we will more than likely be 3-3 with losses to Chicago, San Diego, and possibly Arizona and/or San Fran.
As much as I’d like to see us get off to a good start, those first six games will be huge and could actually cost us the season if we misfire. After the last two seasons, 5 losses in our first six games would seem like the norm.
× Flag comment
JoSCH,
There was one further posting that followed that post that took things to a much higher level. That post has been deleted and we can now go back to football.
× Flag comment
This was supposed to be about elite QB’s. Not the possibility of the season. Man, can I blame anyone here for me being off topic?
MH is not an elite QB. The years we had a running game can’t really count since teams had to load the box to stop it. That’s kind of cheating when all you have is 1 on 1 coverage everywhere. But just as much, the QB has to find the single coverage guy and go for it.
The one time MH mite qualify for elite status was the year Alexander was falling down because his pants pockets were so full of money. We had no running game to speak of, but we had an intact O-line. Everybody knew MH was going to throw, and he still racked up 4000+ yards if memory serves correct. We didn’t have one burner of a receiver, but he found the open man because he had time.
Favre was great in GB no matter who he was throwing to. He didn’t have a running game half the time either, yet he was still successful. Not so much for the Jets and they actually had a running game. But then again, NY is not Favre’s kind of town. Minnesota had an established running game and some good receivers that looked like All-Pros when Favre showed up. Anyone remember the Niner game?
Peyton….what can you say. You can throw a group of school yard kids out there and one of them is going to have a 1000 yard season. That’s how good he is. I would say this makes him elite.
Brady had success before Moss showed up. He has had great numbers since, but no rings. He has more rings than Peyton, but that mite be because he has almost always had a defense. Peyton didn’t always have a defense yet he would still win games. The lack of defensive support is probably the reason why Peyton does not have as many SB’s as the others.
Warner had the three amigos in St. Louis, and 4 or 5 guys to throw to in Arizona, including the RB’s. He played for the Giants and did nothing. It’s hard to say if Warner is elite. Warner went to the SB with the Rams and Arizona (twice). Does this make him elite? The year he went with the Rams, they had zero defense, but somehow managed to stop the Titans a yard short.
Numbers aside, think about intangibles. Coachability. The environment the player is on. Colt McCoy and Tim Tebow are products of a system. If you go five wide 99% of the time and run up the score, your numbers will be gaudy. Does that make you an elite college QB? I mean it’s a discussion that will never end. The only true point is that I don’t think MH gets the elite tag.
× Flag comment