I remember when there were those around here used to get so upset if anyone dared to compare Jalen Hurts to Josh Allen. I guess they were right, because these two guys aren’t in the same league. Jalen’s way beyond that guy.

10 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

I remember when there were those around here used to get so upset if anyone dared to compare Jalen Hurts to Josh Allen. I guess they were right, because these two guys aren’t in the same league. Jalen’s way beyond that guy.

I was just thinking that, I think a few of those guys are no longer here.

10 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

I remember when there were those around here used to get so upset if anyone dared to compare Jalen Hurts to Josh Allen. I guess they were right, because these two guys aren’t in the same league. Jalen’s way beyond that guy.

I said this in the blog, but it's astounding to me that MVP candidates like Wentz and Allen can fall off. I don't remember anyone in the late 80s or 90s being a good young quarterbacks and then tanking the way we've seen. Moon, Kelly, Young, Aikman, Marino, Favre, and Elway all became good and stayed good until age hit them.

10 minutes ago, Boogyman said:

I was just thinking that, I think a few of those guys are no longer here.

Jalen working hard and proving his doubters wrong. It was crazy how adamant some people got refusing to accept that Jalen was improving. Some refused to give him any credit for the Eagles winning games. The doubters will always be there waiting and watching for their chance to trash Jalen. 

8 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

I said this in the blog, but it's astounding to me that MVP candidates like Wentz and Allen can fall off. I don't remember anyone in the late 80s or 90s being a good young quarterbacks and then tanking the way we've seen. Moon, Kelly, Young, Aikman, Marino, Favre, and Elway all became good and stayed good until age hit them.

In Allen's case, anyone who knows football should have seen that his turnover issues were gonna catch up to him.

29 minutes ago, Diehardfan said:

I said this in the blog, but it's astounding to me that MVP candidates like Wentz and Allen can fall off. I don't remember anyone in the late 80s or 90s being a good young quarterbacks and then tanking the way we've seen. Moon, Kelly, Young, Aikman, Marino, Favre, and Elway all became good and stayed good until age hit them.

Ironically some of those guys if their numbers were put against the numbers of guys today they  would be considered bad. Elway for his career isn’t even a 60% passer, and Aikman threw for less than 200 yards a game for his career, had only 165 touchdowns compared to 141 interceptions. We don’t consider McNabb a HOF player, but he has more career tds, more career pass yards, more touchdowns, less interceptions, a higher career passer rating, and a higher pass yards per game than Aikman. You could say McNabb did way more with less than Aikman who was basically surrounded by HOF players. 

1 hour ago, EazyEaglez said:

Ironically some of those guys if their numbers were put against the numbers of guys today they  would be considered bad. Elway for his career isn’t even a 60% passer, and Aikman threw for less than 200 yards a game for his career, had only 165 touchdowns compared to 141 interceptions. We don’t consider McNabb a HOF player, but he has more career tds, more career pass yards, more touchdowns, less interceptions, a higher career passer rating, and a higher pass yards per game than Aikman. You could say McNabb did way more with less than Aikman who was basically surrounded by HOF players. 

Perhaps their numbers were hurt because defenses were allowed to get away with a lot more back then then they are now? You could rough the passer or hold/grab/etc with WR that would get a ton of flags today.

1 minute ago, Diehardfan said:

Perhaps their numbers were hurt because defenses were allowed to get away with a lot more back then then they are now? You could rough the passer or hold/grab/etc with WR that would get a ton of flags today.

excellent point. i dont think qb's overall got more accurate, although I'm sure that's true in some cases, but the rule changes have benefitted the qbs enormously. 

2 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

Perhaps their numbers were hurt because defenses were allowed to get away with a lot more back then then they are now? You could rough the passer or hold/grab/etc with WR that would get a ton of flags today.

I think to an extent, but teams ran the ball way more back in the past than they did now too. Also don’t forget the offense used to be allowed to run pick plays as well. Also, also McNabb played in the same era as Dawkins. I’d say that was somewhere in the middle of the golden era and what he see today. 

5 hours ago, Diehardfan said:

Perhaps their numbers were hurt because defenses were allowed to get away with a lot more back then then they are now? You could rough the passer or hold/grab/etc with WR that would get a ton of flags today.

I believe it has more to do with offensive philosophy and how that has evolved. Most teams have completely replaced the FB position with a 3rd WR in their base offense. Today's elite TEs are pass catchers (glorified WRs) more than blockers. Most passes are pretty short now. Today's short passing game has replaced a lot of run plays of the past, has increased completion percentage and has increased the amount of safe passes QBs throw (where INTs aren't likely).  Virtually all those QBs you listed earlier had seasons where they threw around 20 INTs or more and nobody thought that was awful back then. Defenses only needed to have two decent CBs on the roster compared to 3 today. So the CB play quality was a little bit better. DBs used to be coached to look back for the ball. Today, a majority of DBs have their back to the QB and are taught to watch the receiver's eyes and hands instead of playing the ball. That's why 50/50 passes are so common now --- today's QBs have been feasting on these backwards DBs. 

I'm not sure if the statistics back this up, but I feel like this season, INTs have been up with most of the big name QBs. To me, that's a sign that some of the younger defensive coaches are teaching their players to get their heads turned around. Being in perfect position for an INT, but having no idea where the ball is, is a huge waste of a play-making opportunity.

Anyway, when comparing eras, people automatically feel the officiating is the big factor. IMO, if officiating is a factor at all, it's probably one of the least. Coaching (philosophy and technique) is the #1 factor by far.  

Here's an very interesting article (from 2021) where former QBs like Jaws and Gannon were asked about the difference:

https://www.the33rdteam.com/category/breakdowns/how-the-short-passing-game-has-changed-the-nfl/

19 hours ago, EazyEaglez said:

I remember when there were those around here used to get so upset if anyone dared to compare Jalen Hurts to Josh Allen. I guess they were right, because these two guys aren’t in the same league. Jalen’s way beyond that guy.

I thought it was crazy.  I'm here to say I'm glad to be wrong. 

2 hours ago, eaglestime34 said:

I thought it was crazy.  I'm here to say I'm glad to be wrong. 

Honestly both players are talented, but where I believe Hurts gets him is that he’s been playing in big games his whole life. He’s been playing against SEC elite. Alene has been more of a big fish in a small pond. 

On 11/14/2023 at 6:28 AM, EazyEaglez said:

I remember when there were those around here used to get so upset if anyone dared to compare Jalen Hurts to Josh Allen. I guess they were right, because these two guys aren’t in the same league. Jalen’s way beyond that guy.

I’m not sure I’d go as far to say way beyond but yeah I’m definitely glad Hurts is our QB. Allen is still really really good though.

3 hours ago, UK_EaglesFan89 said:

I’m not sure I’d go as far to say way beyond but yeah I’m definitely glad Hurts is our QB. Allen is still really really good though.

Allen is really good, but he doesn’t scare me. He’s really reminds me of Wentz/Favre where they make some unbelievable wow type moments, but also could inexplicably have one of the dumbest plays or make one of the worst interceptions at the worst possible moments. These big arm guys always get their mistakes excused away because of the wow factor of their arm. 

Allen is simply suffering from the Madden curse. He's a good QB, but that curse is real man.

On 11/14/2023 at 5:45 PM, Diehardfan said:

I said this in the blog, but it's astounding to me that MVP candidates like Wentz and Allen can fall off. I don't remember anyone in the late 80s or 90s being a good young quarterbacks and then tanking the way we've seen. Moon, Kelly, Young, Aikman, Marino, Favre, and Elway all became good and stayed good until age hit them.

Good point, but how many of those guys were thrown in as starters day one in their rookie year? I don´t have data for this, but it feels like QBs are getting far less time these days to make the transition. Last one I can think of who had proper time to learn his trade behind a good starter was Rodgers.

3 hours ago, MF POON said:

Allen is simply suffering from the Madden curse. He's a good QB, but that curse is real man.

Or maybe there’s enough tape on him these days that teams know how to play him. It’s funny when Jalen throws a bunch of interceptions the roaches appear (not talking about you here bud) and bring back old takes that he can’t read defenses, but Allen struggles people go out of their way to try and keep the persona that he’s elite. I hate Dak, but I can’t deny he’s actually been pretty dominant against the Eagles, yet he gets no credit. Meanwhile people are awestruck over Allen who has never even played us yet. This is what I don’t get. Why is this guy being treated like he’s an untouchable unicorn? 

Also, QB is a weird position. Give an average-level pro QB an excellent Oline, a good running game, and smart receivers, and he will look elite. Give an elite QB a dreadful line, poor receivers and no running game, he´ll look like dogshit. It´s really difficult to assess QB play in isolation

4 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Why is this guy being treated like he’s an untouchable unicorn? 

I snipped your quote, apols, but the answer is narrative. It drives clicks, shares and, ultimately, revenue. And when it comes to storytelling, where there is a rise, there is often a fall not far after. We´re wired to seek out stories. 

Edit: In some places, his fall is already in motion

so, if these 11 pages have proved anything at all, it's that the author of this thread has most likely licked one too many windows.  

9 minutes ago, kiwinavega said:

Good point, but how many of those guys were thrown in as starters day one in their rookie year? I don´t have data for this, but it feels like QBs are getting far less time these days to make the transition. Last one I can think of who had proper time to learn his trade behind a good starter was Rodgers.

I think it’s a mixed bag. Marino and Elway were day one starters.Young started in the USFL, and Moon played in other leagues before going to the NFL. Aikman got one year sort of, but the Cowboys drafted two quarterbacks that year. Peyton Manning didn’t sit, but Favre was drafted by the Falcons who immediately traded him to Green Bay. He sat until the Makowski got hurt and never let the position go. Honestly I don’t think quarterbacks sat as much as people made it out like it was. 
 

Edit. Peyton played, but Eli sat for like a half of year. McNabb sat for almost a whole year. 

1 minute ago, kiwinavega said:

I snipped your quote, apols, but the answer is narrative. It drives clicks, shares and, ultimately, revenue. And when it comes to storytelling, where there is a rise, there is often a fall not far after. We´re wired to seek out stories. 

Edit: In some places, his fall is already in motion

I don’t get why we need to make excuses for some players struggling at points. It happens occasionally. Doesn’t mean he’s a bad player, but some guys get trashed while others get excuses. 

On 11/14/2023 at 1:20 PM, Diehardfan said:

Perhaps their numbers were hurt because defenses were allowed to get away with a lot more back then then they are now? You could rough the passer or hold/grab/etc with WR that would get a ton of flags today.

No 'perhaps' about it.   The NFL changed the rules to encourage the passing game and make it easier.   Back in the day, defensive players could virtually mug WRs all the way down the field.   Players like Mel Blount used to be draped all over guys.   And, defensive players used to lay guys out going across the middle.  Dick "Night Train" Lane used to clothes line guys as a matter of routine.    Then they outlawed a lot of these things.    Deacon Jones used to slap the ear hole of the offensive tackle to get after the QB more quickly.   Outlawed today.   

The 5 yard chuck area came into the league... then it became something that became more closely monitored and called with greater frequency... and passing stats went nuts afterwards league wide.  Where 4000 yards passing used to be an anomaly, and Marino's 1984 season was just ridiculous by the standard of that day, 5000 yards passing has since became the new standard for excellence (whereas it had been 3000 yards in the past).    And you can see the jump in production in the passing game to match the changes in the way the game was officiated.     And now, we have 'defenseless' receiver calls... back in the day, that was the GOAL of defensive backs and linebackers, and if a WR was running across the middle at full speed and didn't know if he was running into a zone or not, he could end up in the hospital while the defenders would be celebrating the hit.  Not today.  

 

The rules have made touching the QB below the waist illegal, touching their heads (I mean, literally touching, as even a graze of the head gear can be called in some games), etc.   It just makes everything crazy.   Oh, and now QBs can 'ground' the ball whenever they wish as long as they are near to being outside the pocket and get the ball near to the LOS.

 

 

The rules are why the offensive stats of previous eras can't be compared to today's game.  Not to mention that once upon a time, they only played 12 games... then it went to 14, then to 16... but now its 17 games.  So, of course the aggregate passing stats are going to be way different.  And with the era of eliminating a lot of the cards that defensive players used to have access to, in order to shut down the passing game, the goal of a pass defense isn't to stop the opponent too much anymore, but rather just try to slow them down a little, and try to generate turnovers rather than stops.  Which explains a lot about the Eagles' defensive philosophy. It is frustrating to watch, but the league has almost forced this on teams.  The Eagles might take it to an extreme a little bit... but even the best pass defenses of today can't hold a candle to what defenses of previous generations were because of how the game is legislated/officiated.

On 11/14/2023 at 10:55 AM, Boogyman said:

In Allen's case, anyone who knows football should have seen that his turnover issues were gonna catch up to him.

I'm surprised he's not injured more with the way he's constantly taking hits

15 minutes ago, EazyEaglez said:

Or maybe there’s enough tape on him these days that teams know how to play him. It’s funny when Jalen throws a bunch of interceptions the roaches appear (not talking about you here bud) and bring back old takes that he can’t read defenses, but Allen struggles people go out of their way to try and keep the persona that he’s elite. I hate Dak, but I can’t deny he’s actually been pretty dominant against the Eagles, yet he gets no credit. Meanwhile people are awestruck over Allen who has never even played us yet. This is what I don’t get. Why is this guy being treated like he’s an untouchable unicorn? 

 

I still think Allen is, or can be elite, but I've seen numerous people point out that he only has Diggs.  I don't watch much Bills football, so I can't speak to how accurate that assessment is. My boss is a huge fan though, and he mostly points to injuries and poor play from Allen, plus the lack of weapons. 

Dak gets no credit because he consistently fails in big moments. Being dominant against a division rival is one thing, but he's also been awful against SF for how many games in a row now?