If you're talking about Jared Lorenzen, sure. Are you serious? By what criteria? Russell's level of play in the second half of the season last year (QB rating over 90 and completion percentage over 60% over his last 7 starts) far exceeds anything Clemens did as a starter, and Mr. 16 Collegiate Starts has done nothing. In talent Russell ranks first (by a wide margin), and in actual on-field results he ranks first too if you're being honest with yourself. I'll give you this; I bet Russell ranks third in posing shirtless but this is football, not modeling. Oh, and let's not forget, the Raiders' BACKUP QB is also superior to anyone the Jets will trot out there under center this year too.
Ya, Faneca was such a horrible signing. For all that money, we should have at least had a top 10 running game and Thomas Jones should have led the AFC in rushing. Oh wait.
Oh...I see...so 11 pass attempts against Denver is why he was drafted number one? (the Broncos were so afraid of Russell that the running game was wide open?) The guy had 6 games with a QB rating of under 70. Including 2 down the stretch, and his rating is more indicative of not being allowed to throw the ball (low YPA in 10 games) than of good QB play...yet he finished at 77... Oh..and BTW? What was the W/L record for Russell vs. Clemens over their last 7 starts.... (3-4..both guys....) As I said...either W/L..or QB rating this year...ours against yours? Care to hazard a guess?
OK, Raiderjoe has blown his load. Early this afternoon in this thread, I saw Ra%ders. Not possible even by a misskey. I saw it in the blink of an eye. He changed it before the edit showed. I call fraud. The jig is up, but it was a good ride.
I was at the right place at the right time. How many folks are going to be sad now? He also shed his persona occasionally and peppered it with semi-coherent typing along the way. I've been suspicious on many levels for ages. Bye-bye, Joe Joe.
Yah, credit for that, but he gave himself away in a millisecond. He finally blew it. % % % % % % % % Shift key and stuff.
I love your "glass is half empty" approach, "2 games rated under 70 down the stretch." As for the last 7 games of the season, the other 5 that you don't mention were 88.4 (@ Miami), 149.1 (@ Denver), 85.7 (New England), 128.1 (Houston), and 98.9 (@ Tampa Bay). Five solid/good/great games vs. 2 bad ones. 4 bad games in the first half of the year vs. 2 down the stretch. Looks like a 23 year old QB making progress to me. And it's laughable that you're mocking 11 passes in Denver. They won 31-10! What would you have done differently? They're a run first team, and they're built that way because it's the best way to break in a young QB, which is why the Steelers did that same thing with Big Ben. It took quite a while for the Steelers to be able to win a game throwing the ball more than 30 times. Prepare to see the same thing in NY this year, no matter who your QB is. By contrast, Clemens had one game with a rating over 90. His second highest rating in any game was 78.1. Russell had five games with a better rating than Clemens' best, and nine games with a better rating than Clemens' second best. I'm not making any W/L claims, you have me confused with Joe. The Raiders' schedule is too tough and the Jets certainly should have a better D. But I am certain Russell will have a better rating than either of the guys you throw out there, and I'll take the Raiders to beat the Jets again too. Hell, they beat them with a HOFer at QB last year, what am I supposed to worry about now? Final point; if both guys were on the waiver wire, 32 teams would take Russell without a second thought. You know that.
You guys look into passer rating way too much. Let me ask you this....is this considered a good day? 9-19 156yds 1TD This equates a rating of 93.3. Really? Is that good? Sorry NJRaider, but his overall body of work last year was suspect. I give him the benefit of subpar receivers. But like RaiderJoe likes to tout how great the Raiders running game is, you would think that would open something up in the secondary. Regarding the high rating in the Denver game....he only threw 11 passes. That's it. Anytime he starts going over 20, it looks like in most cases his rating drops alot. After the Denver game, he played KC, a TERRIBLE team. Rating 51.5. He finished the year better than he started, but it seems once he tries to carry the offense, his completion percentage and mistakes start to creep up. This year he will have to show something.
Well then Clemens must have been really unimpressive to top out at 91, then do no better than 78. Your final point is something I can agree with, but all of this JaMarcus bashing around here is really just done in a ball busting sense anyway, because Joe drives everyone crazy. Two years ago a lot of people on this site were saying Russell wouldn't make it because he "only" had 29 starts in college. Now people are all hyped up about a guy who had 16 starts in college. All I'm trying to say is: He did get better last year. He had more good games than he gets credit for, especially in the second half of the year. His career arc is similar to other overall #1 picks such as Elway, Aikman, and Eli, and in fact his stats are marginally better than those guys at the same point in their careers. So yeah, he needs to get better. So did Aikman after his first two years. So did Eli. Why is this news? The Matt Ryans and Big Bens are rare, rare cases. And Big Ben leaned heavily on the Steeler D and running game while he learned the pro game. I bet the Giants are glad they didn't give up on Eli after two years. I have friends who thought he was a bust in December of 2007, then he won a Super Bowl 2 months later. If you're not willing to be a little patient, you shouldn't go the route of drafting a QB with a high pick because the payoff is usually down the road, even for Hall of Famers.
Again you can throw out all the numbers you want to try and show how bad jamarcus russell is. The facts are not any QB , NOT Peyton manning , NOT tom Brady and Not matt Ryan would have done any better than Jamarcus Russell did under the same circumstances. . Facts. HE had a severly depleted WR corps last year 22 receptions was leading reciever . ( look how many Wrs ended up on IR) , He had two of the worst Offensive tackles protecting him, TWo head coaches, three diffrent play callers and he didn't have the running game due to injuries that he was expected to have.. SO you look at Russell. HE was getting pressure quick, Wr couldn't get seperation fast enough, so you either throw it up in double coverage or throw it away. He threw it away( Your completions percentage going to be in the 50%) under those circumstances. You can only do so much. Yet Russell still under those circumstances did improve tremendously in all facets of his game in the second half. The oline plays up to its potential Russell will show everyone how good he is. Has alot more weapons to work with in 2009.
You're like A TGG jehovah's witness.....going door-to-door with plenty of bullshit to say.....but all you're getting is a bunch of doors slamming in your face. It's the same retarded spiel everyday with you. Maybe it's time to pack up your Raider pamphlets and your Dodge Caravan....and move on to FinHeaven.com.
And by dynasty Joe..do you mean the palindrome dynasty? Well then I agree considering your on your way there...just post another 4-12 record...then the poster will come
I already responded to that post in detail. Look it up. Listen you know I will attempt to answer all your questions. As the leading Football authority on this board, I don't shun away from my responsibilty. You and everyone else should know that by now.
