Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
cmh6476

Chargers moving on from Rivers

Recommended Posts

2019 was his worst ff season in seven seasons.  

I think if they do indeed move on, it’s the right move.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think people realize how good Rivers actually was.

He put up many very solid seasons behind a terrible line and many of those seasons had subpar WR's to throw to as well and no support in the run game.

still he put up numbers.

Maybe his skills have slipped a bit to the point where he can no longer carry a team that is terrible.   but I wouldnt be surprised if he still has one or two good years left in the tank if you put him on a team with a decent line and some solid pass catchers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great late ff draft pick was Rivers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, weepaws said:

Great late ff draft pick was Rivers. 

or priority waiver wire gem.  I've picked him up off the trash heap/waiver wire to plug him in to cover bye weeks or QB injuries and he never actually disappointed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ray_T said:

or priority waiver wire gem.  I've picked him up off the trash heap/waiver wire to plug him in to cover bye weeks or QB injuries and he never actually disappointed.

Yeah that to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t know, but do I think rivers could get voted in, yes I think they might vote him in, HOF doesn’t mean greatest any more. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Super Cubs said:

is Rivers Hall of Fame material?

Rivers was always an above average QB statistically. 

I dont know that I'd throw him in the hall of fame.

if he had played on some better teams that didnt have perpetual O line problems, his stats would have been better for sure.

If he had better WR's his stats would have been better for sure.

but its not very often that they consider these things when they vote for the hall of fame.   He played on some really bad teams and put up good numbers.

I dont see him getting in unless he wins a superbowl or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Super Cubs said:

Is Rivers Hall of Fame material?

He hasn't missed a game since 2006, and since 2008 (the past 12 years) he has failed to throw for more than 4,000 yards only once (2012) and failed to throw more than 25 TDs only once (2019).  He's also 6th in career passing yardage, ahead of more HOF QBs than I care to list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HOF doesn't mean greatest anymore? When was it great to begin with? Joe Namath and Terry Bradshaw have been in for decades. Their numbers are dwarfed by Eli and Rivers. The idea that the HOF used to be something different than it is now is revisionist history...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jrokh said:

HOF doesn't mean greatest anymore? When was it great to begin with? Joe Namath and Terry Bradshaw have been in for decades. Their numbers are dwarfed by Eli and Rivers. The idea that the HOF used to be something different than it is now is revisionist history...

So you're saying that Bradshaw doesn't belong in, but Eli does... because of "numbers"?  Seriously?

Well, he has a much better case than Eli does.  You like to bring up Super Bowls and Super Bowl MVP's, so... Eli played 2 more seasons and in 68 more games than Bradshaw, but Bradshaw still won 4 Super Bowls not 2.  Bradshaw won a league MVP, not 0.  Bradshaw has 1 All-Pro, not 0.  Both won 2 Super Bowl MVP's.

Bradshaw finished in the top 10 in completion percentage 3 times... Eli?  Only once.  Bradshaw was top 10 in yards 5 times, Eli 7.  Bradshaw, top 10 in TD's 8 times, Eli 10.  Passer rating?  Bradshaw was top 10 6 times, Eli only once.  Yeah, Bradshaw's TD:INT ration was practically 1 to 1, but considering the time frame and the state of the game at the time, he's not that different from Eli.  How so?  Bradshaw was in the top 10 in Int% just twice... Eli, only once.

Simply, if you think Eli BELONGS in the H.O.F., then Bradshaw has a better argument.  If you don't think Bradshaw BELONGS in the H.O.F., then neither does Eli.

Funny thing, I don't thing Bradshaw belongs in either.

For the record, the same arguments vs Eli for Bradshaw can be made for Namath as well.  Namath won a Super Bowl, and SB MVP, and was an All-Pro.  He was top 10 in passing yards and TD's 8 times.  Was top 10 in comp% 5 times.  Top 10 in passer rating 5 times.  He was also top 10 in Int% 5 times.

Oh, I don't think he belongs in either... and he has just as good of a case as Bradshaw, if not better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

So you're saying that Bradshaw doesn't belong in, but Eli does... because of "numbers"?  Seriously?

Well, he has a much better case than Eli does.  You like to bring up Super Bowls and Super Bowl MVP's, so... Eli played 2 more seasons and in 68 more games than Bradshaw, but Bradshaw still won 4 Super Bowls not 2.  Bradshaw won a league MVP, not 0.  Bradshaw has 1 All-Pro, not 0.  Both won 2 Super Bowl MVP's.

Bradshaw finished in the top 10 in completion percentage 3 times... Eli?  Only once.  Bradshaw was top 10 in yards 5 times, Eli 7.  Bradshaw, top 10 in TD's 8 times, Eli 10.  Passer rating?  Bradshaw was top 10 6 times, Eli only once.  Yeah, Bradshaw's TD:INT ration was practically 1 to 1, but considering the time frame and the state of the game at the time, he's not that different from Eli.  How so?  Bradshaw was in the top 10 in Int% just twice... Eli, only once.

Simply, if you think Eli BELONGS in the H.O.F., then Bradshaw has a better argument.  If you don't think Bradshaw BELONGS in the H.O.F., then neither does Eli.

Funny thing, I don't thing Bradshaw belongs in either.

No, I'm not. If my point wasn't clear enough, I'll repeat it. The Idea that the Hall of Fame was once more selective and as mentioned previously as "Great", but now its watered down is revisionist history and pure fantasy. There are players that get in all the time for decades that may not meet the criteria of inarguable all-time great.  Your Anti-Eli Bias notwithstanding, that is all I said, It doesn't bother me that Namath and Bradshaw are in the HOF, and it won't bother me WHEN Eli is in. So sorry for you that it bothers you to this extent. Fear not, I'm sure one day the Buccaneers will have a QB that is worthy of discussion for the HOF. I just hope you are around to enjoy it... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, jrokh said:

No, I'm not. This isn't the Eli thread, didn't mention him here. If my point wasn't clear enough, I'll repeat it. The Idea that the Hall of Fame was once more selective and as mentioned previously as "Great", but now its watered down is revisionist history and pure fantasy. There are players that get in all the time for decades that may not meet the criteria of inarguable all-time great.  Your Anti-Eli Bias notwithstanding, that is all I said, It doesn't bother me that Namath and Bradshaw are in the HOF, and it won't bother me when Eli is in. So sorry for you that it bothers you to this extent. Fear not, I'm sure one day the Buccaneers will have a QB that is worthy of discussion for the HOF. I just hope you are around to enjoy it... 

I'm not so sure.  We have a terrible owner who continues to hire terrible GM's and coaches.  But, in the NFL, both the Buccaneers, Ravens, and Giants have proven that you don't need H.O.F. caliber QB's to win Super Bowls.

Also, I've mentioned many times, I don't have a bias against Eli.  I think he was a perfectly acceptable QB.  I just think that "perfectly acceptable" shouldn't be the baseline for the H.O.F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I'm not so sure.  We have a terrible owner who continues to hire terrible GM's and coaches.  But, in the NFL, both the Buccaneers, Ravens, and Giants have proven that you don't need H.O.F. caliber QB's to win Super Bowls.

True, Phil Simms was good enough to win a super bowl, but not Hall of Fame worthy. Great point! Anyway, if you insist on keeping up this charade, move it over to the Eli thread, this is supposed to be about Rivers, which is what I was originally responding to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jrokh said:

HOF doesn't mean greatest anymore? When was it great to begin with? Joe Namath and Terry Bradshaw have been in for decades. Their numbers are dwarfed by Eli and Rivers. The idea that the HOF used to be something different than it is now is revisionist history...

So since Rivers and Eli also have surpassed Montana and Unties in numbers when do we start to talk about removing them also? 

I find it silly to try to compare numbers from players that played so long apart from each other, it just doesn’t add up.  

And yes I think the HOF should be reserved for great players, that doesn’t mean the players with the best posted stats, oline players don’t have stats.  

And I agree with  D Sanders statement it’s watered down, and I don’t see why they need to elect someone into the HOF every season, only those deserving players, those that dominated during their own era should be in. 

I look at a player like Ray Guy, a well deserve domination based on he dominated his postion.  

So yes only greatness should make the HOF, any HOF.  

But based on it’s not based on greatness like you said, and I ageee with, players that have very good career we’ll make it.  

Anyway.  

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, weepaws said:

I find it silly to try to compare numbers from players that played so long apart from each other, it just doesn’t add up. 

This....:thumbsup:

you cannot compare players from different generations.

Joe Namath and Terry Bradshaw played in an era where all teams ran the ball.   They ran the ball so much that QB's who consistently got over 230 yards passing in a game were considered superstars.

Today the offenses and defenses are more sophisticated and teams dont run the ball like they once did.   The game has changed so much I would argue that you cannot compare the players of past generations to players of today's generation.

it is not a fair comparison.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ray_T said:

This....:thumbsup:

you cannot compare players from different generations.

Joe Namath and Terry Bradshaw played in an era where all teams ran the ball.   They ran the ball so much that QB's who consistently got over 230 yards passing in a game were considered superstars.

Today the offenses and defenses are more sophisticated and teams dont run the ball like they once did.   The game has changed so much I would argue that you cannot compare the players of past generations to players of today's generation.

it is not a fair comparison.

 

Of course I agree with you. Any football fan is aware that passing offenses have exploded in the last fifteen years or so. That is not the point I was making, however. I was referring to the idea that the Pro Football Hall of Fame is more watered down now than in the past. The two players I used to illustrate my point, Namath and Bradshaw, were picked as Quarterbacks who were elected into the HOF decades ago, and are not slam dunk no doubt all-time greats. In other words borderline cases with clear flaws, where arguments can be credibly made for and against entrance into the HOF. One of the issues with HOF's in any sport is the distinction between the tier 1 all-timers, and players in lower tiers who may still be good candidates who get in, but aren't on the same level as the tier 1 guys. Think Tom Brady vs Philip Rivers, or Joe Montana vs Dan Fouts. In the latter case both Quarterbacks are in the HOF, but I have never heard anyone suggest they are equal candidates. Perhaps the Pro Football HOF should be a super exclusive club where only the best of the best gain entrance, but that's NEVER been the way it has operated. If it was watered down in the past, and is watered down now, then its not watered down. Its just what it is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree the HOF is watered down, and it has been so a long long time. 

When you keep having players be inducted into the HOF everyseason, when a lot of those players I think don’t derseve it, makes it watered down. 

I think back in the time when Jom Brown and other made it, those where great players, and when you have this issue that we must have a HOF induction every single season it well equal watered down. 

Any way it’s just another off season topic to chat about. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/30/2020 at 8:12 AM, Super Cubs said:

is Rivers Hall of Fame material?

He definitely in the HOF of checking it down to his running backs and chucking it up for grabs to his wr’s. Can someone dig up some tape of him zipping it into his wr’s in stride for a big gain? I looked and couldn’t find any. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rbs and WRs , but don’t forget about Gates.  His number one target , silly that one wouldn’t mention Gates  

Now as noted on another thread his number do surpass Bradshaw and Namith, and Montana and Johnny U. 

I think Rivers and Eli based on that note from another poster, should have their own wing in the HOF.  

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/31/2020 at 8:53 AM, jrokh said:

Of course I agree with you. Any football fan is aware that passing offenses have exploded in the last fifteen years or so. That is not the point I was making, however. I was referring to the idea that the Pro Football Hall of Fame is more watered down now than in the past. The two players I used to illustrate my point, Namath and Bradshaw, were picked as Quarterbacks who were elected into the HOF decades ago, and are not slam dunk no doubt all-time greats. In other words borderline cases with clear flaws, where arguments can be credibly made for and against entrance into the HOF. One of the issues with HOF's in any sport is the distinction between the tier 1 all-timers, and players in lower tiers who may still be good candidates who get in, but aren't on the same level as the tier 1 guys. Think Tom Brady vs Philip Rivers, or Joe Montana vs Dan Fouts. In the latter case both Quarterbacks are in the HOF, but I have never heard anyone suggest they are equal candidates. Perhaps the Pro Football HOF should be a super exclusive club where only the best of the best gain entrance, but that's NEVER been the way it has operated. If it was watered down in the past, and is watered down now, then its not watered down. Its just what it is...

I agree.  but I dont know that I agree with your choice of example.  Namath was a champion twice.  once for the AFL and once he was a superbowl winner after the merger.

Terry  Bradshaw was a 4 time superbowl winner.   I  dont think you can not include him.

while I think the hall of fame is watered down, the standard is different for QB's.    with QB's  they are considered the leader of the offense (if not the whole team) so when a QB wins a chamionship, he automatically becomes a candidate for the Hall.    It does not mean he will get in, but he becomes a candidate.   If he does not win a championship, he had better be dominant at his position becauase he needs to do more to make up for the fact he hasnt been a superbowl winner.

That being said, there are superbowl winning QB's not in the Hall (hi Trent Dilfer) but he played on a team where the star of that team was the defense and all he had to do was manage the game on offense.   I suspect if that team had won multiple superbowls, he may have been inducted into the hall of fame anyways, but in this one off, he was not widely considered to be the reason for their championship season.

Id argue even Eli Manning(like it or not).... a good but not great QB  having won two superbowls, will likely be considered as a possible inductee.

My point is... this superbowl consideration typically only happens with QB's.  it rarely happens for players playing any other position.   And  honestly,  I think there is something to it.   if you can lead your team to more than one superbowl win, you are probably a great QB.   a lot of average to good QB's get exposed in the playoffs, so if you as a QB can get it done not once but two or three times.  I'm willing to forgive a lot with respect to stats because leadership means more than stats when the chips are down.

The goal of every team in the NFL is to win a championship.   not to win every statistical category.   The hall of fame is there to honor great players, but also winners.

it is also worth noting that sometimes an offensive scheme is put together as part of an overall game plan.   lots of these superbowl winning teams with great defenses also rely more on running the football and are more balanced.   they depend on the QB to lead the offense, but also to manage the game so their defense/run game can be all it was meant to be.

giving up on personal  stats to win a superbowl?   Thats leadership.

Why do you think so many teams dont like the Diva WR  who cries when he doesnt get the ball enough?   They set a bad example for the TEAM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bad example any time one is trying to compare players from completely different eras.  

It’s a weak attempt to try to sale a point.  

Just saw the list of the 2020 class of HOF players, and I see one that’s worthy of being in the Hall of football Greatness. 

Another watred down HOF list of players.  

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

He definitely in the HOF of checking it down to his running backs and chucking it up for grabs to his wr’s. Can someone dig up some tape of him zipping it into his wr’s in stride for a big gain? I looked and couldn’t find any. 

I looked for great WR's  he had to throw to.... couldnt find any.   

I saw a few average to adequate  WR's that he made look good, but as a QB, I'll say most of his career, he did not have a lot of help.

crappy WR's crappy line.   Thats the story for most of his career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy peasy. Rivers > Manning

That aside, the Chargers are only doing Rivers a service. They have no oline and have to focus on that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read that Rivers could be landing with the Bucs.  

Now that could be a good spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he goes to the Bucs Mike Evans gets a boost. He’s tall and Rivers likes chucking passes up for grabs when he’s not dumping it off to the wide open running back. Not great for winning, but good for stats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Howard could get a bigger boost.  

Rivers likes his te.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, weepaws said:

I think Howard could get a bigger boost.  

Rivers likes his te.  

Howard is a bust.  Can't even get on the field.  Brate is more likely to get the boost.  Though, I don't see Tampa signing him.  Too much money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Howard is a bust.  Can't even get on the field.  Brate is more likely to get the boost.  Though, I don't see Tampa signing him.  Too much money.

Actually you would be incorrect, Howard as avg more ff points per season since he’s been in the nfl then Brate.  

He needs to be able to stay healthy. 

He would be the te on the Bucs that would indeed get the boost.  

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, weepaws said:

Actually you would be incorrect, Howard as avg per ff points per season since he’s been in the nfl then Brate.  

He needs to be able to stay healthy. 

He would be the te on the Bucs that would indeed get the boost.  

Thanks. 

Howard is a bust as an NFL player.  Health isn't an issue.  Neither Koetter nor Arians/Leftwich use him as much in pass patterns as he should be based on his projected talent.  He should be getting about 7+ targets per game and he's getting half of that and that's even taking into account that his snap count almost doubled last year.

 

From 2018 to 2019 Howard went from a 39% to 69% snap count while watching his target share drop from 4.8 to 3.8 per game..

From 2018 to 2019 Brate went from a 48% to 38% snap count while watching his target share increase from 3 to 3.4 per game.

 

Brate is a better route runner, Howard is a better blocker.  Any good QB will target Brate more than Howard on passing downs... heck, Winston even did.  That should tell you something.  It should tell you that with a better QB, you can expect Howard's production to drop (because he'll be in more often to block), while Brates target share will go up because he's a better route runner and has a better grasp on the playbook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again your going to be incorrect, Howard is the better player, and with Rivers his number well indeed get the boost.  

Last season weeks 13-16; Brate had 17 Targets, Howard had 26 targets.  

Now why would they target the blocker more then the better rec?  

Mmmm. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever Rivers goes to play for will be worse off for it.  I also think a team that signs Brady will not be getting the perennial pro bowler we all became accustomed to.  Peyton seemed to still be near the top of his game when he went to the Broncos.  It just doesn't feel to me like you have this complete team out there waiting to find a qb to put them over the hump.  And neither Brady or rivers seem to be able to carry teams on their back like they would have in their prime.  It's time for the next generation of quarterbacks to take over.  And thank good my favorite team seems to have one of the best in place for what I hope to be a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also think good that KC has a good Qb.  

But I would disagree about the qbs   

Bucs have a sold core that needs a Qb, I think Rivers would be a step up a the Qb postion for them. 

Would agree that Brady and Rivers better days playing Qb are behind them, but there are teams out there that they would be an upgrade at the most important postion on a nfl team.  

Thanks appreciate your input.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, weepaws said:

Again your going to be incorrect, Howard is the better player, and with Rivers his number well indeed get the boost.  

Last season weeks 13-16; Brate had 17 Targets, Howard had 26 targets.  

Now why would they target the blocker more then the better rec?  

Mmmm. 

Because Godwin missed the last 3 and Evans the last 4.  That's why.  Before you say Godwin played in 14 games not 13 and Evans played in 13 not 12... note, both got hurt on the first drive of their games.  They essentially missed the entire game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, cmh6476 said:

Whoever Rivers goes to play for will be worse off for it.  I also think a team that signs Brady will not be getting the perennial pro bowler we all became accustomed to.  Peyton seemed to still be near the top of his game when he went to the Broncos.  It just doesn't feel to me like you have this complete team out there waiting to find a qb to put them over the hump.  And neither Brady or rivers seem to be able to carry teams on their back like they would have in their prime.  It's time for the next generation of quarterbacks to take over.  And thank good my favorite team seems to have one of the best in place for what I hope to be a long time.

I think both players, while pass their primes, will perform based on their talent around them.  For example, if either go to the Bengals, they won't do well... but if they go to San Francisco, they will.  Both would have success in Tampa, Dallas, Oakland, and Tennessee... neither will have success in Cincinnati, Miami, or Washington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, weepaws said:

I would also think good that KC has a good Qb.  

But I would disagree about the qbs   

Bucs have a sold core that needs a Qb, I think Rivers would be a step up a the Qb postion for them. 

I agree, this looks like a situation where Rivers and TB will put both parties in better situations than they were in last year.

Rivers will have better WR than he had in SD and if you believe PFF, they have a better line than the chargers did.  (rank 7 vs rank 29)

I could see Rivers having himself a really nice season with this group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ray_T said:

I agree, this looks like a situation where Rivers and TB will put both parties in better situations than they were in last year.

Rivers will have better WR than he had in SD and if you believe PFF, they have a better line than the chargers did.  (rank 7 vs rank 29)

I could see Rivers having himself a really nice season with this group.

https://www.pff.com/news/nfl-offensive-line-rankings-following-2019-regular-season

for the record this is where I got the O line rankings via PFF

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Because Godwin missed the last 3 and Evans the last 4.  That's why.  Before you say Godwin played in 14 games not 13 and Evans played in 13 not 12... note, both got hurt on the first drive of their games.  They essentially missed the entire game.

Wasn’t my point. 

What you say is true I agree with it, but why would the blocker get more targets then the better rec te?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×