Happy Saturday, friends. I’m back for Part 2 of Holding John Clayton Accountable for Sucking Fest 2012 (here's Part 1). Some of you complained and criticized me for undertaking such a project yesterday. Your concerns are noted, and are being taken under advisement.
Today, we continue our slog through the Chad Pennington Division, and then make our way into the Hit or Miss Division. If you can believe it, the reasoning gets worse the further we go. To wit:
Alex Smith hadn’t yet put together a complete effective season before last year, so Clayton rated him 28th. That was reasonable, though I’ve always liked Smith, and would have had him a bit higher. My issue with this paragraph is that Clayton treats the movement between last year’s ranking and this year’s ranking as an event. Look here, John - you made a statement based on some evidence, ultimately got proven wrong, and now you’re making a new statement based on additional evidence. Smith just played good football, stayed healthy, and showed himself to be a winning player.
Did I tell you Clayton personally hates Josh McDaniels? Sweet homie Jesus. Clayton obviously knows nothing about offense, because the McDaniels scheme is excellent and proven. The issue in St. Louis wasn’t the scheme, not by a longshot. The protection was awful, the receivers were awful, and Bradford was awful, when he was even healthy. The Rams sucked because of the performance of players. Bradford is another QB who has pretty average physical tools. I’m not sure what “potentially elite skills” JC sees.
Bengals fans yelled at me because I was wrong. I used faulty reasoning to get to that answer, because I’m a dumbass little wanker with a comb-over/mullet combo. What do these fans want from me? They can only expect me to say things that are completely obvious. Goshhhh.
More nonsense about weapons, in keeping with some of the higher-ranked average QBs. How does saying “they need to be healthy at tight end” support the thesis that Cassel is going to do well? Cassel and the Chiefs are thinking playoffs – as opposed to every other team, or what?
Whoa. Palmer was sick of the Bengals, threw a hissy-fit, and sat out until they traded him. Since he got traded, he has “a chance to show he still has his elite skills.” He didn’t have that chance when he was being a perpetually underachieving disappointment in Cincinnati? Get this – “Give Palmer man coverage, and he’ll gamble deep.” So will every QB ever, moron. It’s a smart gamble if there’s no safety help.
Chan Gailey’s offense is, in fact, perfect for Fitzpatrick. He is good at making quick decisions, and it’s true that he’s accurate short. You’re doing great, John. Oh, really? Another team that’s “thinking playoffs?” But only as long as Fitzpatrick cuts down on interceptions. He had 23 last season. Is 22 okay, or would the Bills have to stop thinking playoffs at 22?
If I looked like John Clayton, I’d probably go with it, and become a stat nerd. The problem is, real stat nerds are a lot smarter than JC. And yet, he tries. If Tebow takes red zone plays, Sanchez will throw fewer TD passes. That will mean he’s a lesser QB. “Plus, the Jets don’t have a lot of weapons on offense.” He just did that – he started a sentence with the word Plus. Plus, not one word in Clayton’s stupid paragraph discussed Sanchez’s personal ability to play QB effectively.
Let’s get statistical, people. We know that 4,000 yards or greater is elite. Luck is going to be on the high end of Penningtonian, but he’ll finish with 3,999 yards or less. If he stays healthy. Because they have weapons. Well, sort-of weapons. Since dude is Penningtonian, and all.
RGIII will probably be decidedly Penningtonian in his numbers, but he’ll be exciting outside the pocket, and he loves to throw deep. No telling how that love affair with deepitude will work out.
The Hit-or-Miss Division is guys who aren’t good enough to make the playoffs. Unless they do, like Alex Smith and Andy Dalton. Then, I’m wrong, but I can’t be blamed, because who could have foreseen something non-obvious happening?
This Ponder paragraph is wonderful. Clayton obviously fancies himself a news-driver who can push a team into doing something. The Vikings may be pushed into taking one of the top QBs? If they let a weenie reporter push them into anything, they deserve to lose in perpetuity.
OK, let me follow this. Flynn has good odds on being a Hit, so he fits as big #27. If Wilson beats him out by being better than Flynn (which he clearly is), he’d rank below 27th. Huh? And what’s this nonsense about time with the first-team offense causing success as a starter?
I love it when a reporter tells you what a player is “considered.” Considered by whom? I consider Kolb and Skelton to both be QBs who suck at playing football. Kolb is luckier, because he suckered the Cardinals into a big paycheck, though. Big up for the hustle, Kev.
Tough schedule. Yawn. Nothing about whether Locker can play QB. Of course he can’t – he’s in the Hit-or-Miss Division. (Personally, I like his physical skills, but I’m skeptical of his ability to play winning football consistently.)
Tannehill’s stats are going to suck because he has a bunch of bums for offensive teammates.
I tend to agree with that, actually, but who cares what his stats are? He’s playing for experience and learning. Tannehill’s physical skills are easily among the top ten or twelve QBs in the NFL, too, if anybody is wondering.
I’m getting tired, and I’m just going to say that this article was stupid for a combination of reasons that we’ve already covered. K? K.
More repeat stupidity. Gabbert sucked as a rookie, but he’s looked a lot better in the preseason this year. Pretty amazing how a rookie can look overwhelmed one year, and in his second year, the same player looks like a different player. When does that ever happen?
As IAOFM reader Chibronx noted yesterday, the arrow is decidedly pointed up. For the 32 QBs, Clayton has 23 arrows pointing up, four pointing down, and five as flat. That really doesn’t make any sense, but that’s in keeping with Clayton’s standard practice.
To close, I wanted to say something that I said in the comments yesterday. I mostly avoid beating on MSM guys nowadays, because it’s too easy. ESPN is special, though, because they claim to be the Worldwide Leader in sports.
What happens there is that a fool like Clayton will write this article, and then a bigger fool like Pork Chop Williamson will analyze that article, and then Clayton’s rankings will percolate throughout ESPN’s various platforms, and be treated as gospel.
ESPN must be held accountable for employing a clown like Clayton, and for allowing him to say stupid things to readers and viewers. If nobody calls them on it, they’ll never take any steps to get better.
What I’m doing here is dabbling in the sort of thing that a site like Awful Announcing does everyday. It’s well within my purview as a football generalist, and when you consider that I’m a loose cannon-type of guy who does what I want, there’s no question that I can tread on this soil if I feel like it. I can tread on any soil I want, you dig?