Sage Rosenfels a candidate for Starting QB Job in 2007

[bah007]

Originally Posted by thunderkyss

even if they aren't loss, they are still wasted plays, so they still need to be accounted for.

I think his point is that not all those fumbles are the QB's fault tho.

A bad snap by the Center counts as a fumble by the QB.

A botched handoff with the RB counts as a fumble by the QB, even if it is not his fault.

[old football fan]

Stats really have to be taken with a grain of salt. Example: QB passes the ball hitting the receiver perfectlybut the receiver dosen't make the catch and ball pops into the air and is intercepted. Who's at fault? QB throws or gets the INT. So QB gets bad stat when he actually made a perfact play. So don't go for the stats all the time because they are a grey area.

[Arky]

Originally Posted by thunderkyss

However, "That's really not that bad??"

Well, yes, an average of 4 Lost Fumbles/year from the QB position is not *that* bad. Zero would be better, of course.

And you're correct that the QB fumbles that aren't turnovers are really good for nothing - like usually some negative yardage (ball recovered in the backfield, QB falls on bad snap, etc.).... Too many of those....

Howevah, considering our team (QB + teammates) has probably set an NFL record for most sacks in a 5 year period, these QB fumble numbers seem to fit and are not that surprising....

old football fan: Yes, stats are kind of a gray area but they can help to see trends - a grain of salt is right....

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by Arky

Howevah, considering our team (QB + teammates) has probably set an NFL record for most sacks in a 5 year period, these QB fumble numbers seem to fit and are not that surprising....

I think we're like 3rd worst for sacks over a 5 year period. Cunningham and the Eagles were the worst.

I could be wrong about that but I thought I saw that during one of the games.

[TwinSisters]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

I think we're like 3rd worst for sacks over a 5 year period. Cunningham and the Eagles were the worst.

I could be wrong about that but I thought I saw that during one of the games.

The thing about Cunningham ( and the stat for sacks ) is that he would get charged with a sack when it is actually a tackle for a loss. It's subtle and nitpicking, but important I think.

On the fumble issue itself:
I agree with almost everything said, but I have to add that there is a fumble due to a hit and then there is a fumble due to nothing but the QB failing to secure the ball: See Jon Kitna.

[HJam72]

The thing about fumbles is that sometimes the other team gets the ball.

PS-Me doing a Madden impression.

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by HJam72

The thing about fumbles is that sometimes the other team gets the ball.

PS-Me doing a Madden impression.

Even worse, sometimes they pick the ball up and run it in for a TD. I can remember 2 times offhand where Carr fumbled and the opposing team picked it up and ran it in (1 time against the Titans and 1 time against the Raiders.)

[Arky]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

Even worse, sometimes they pick the ball up and run it in for a TD. I can remember 2 times offhand where Carr fumbled and the opposing team picked it up and ran it in (1 time against the Titans and 1 time against the Raiders.)

Yep, the quarterback had some tough games with and without the help of his teammates. He also had some good games...

You were right about Randall Cunningham and the Eagles sack totals being larger than the Texans over a 5-year period.

This is interesting. Ugly QB stats:

David Carr (2002-2006 Texans)
Games played - 76
Sacked - 249
Fumbles/Fumbles Lost - 66/21
Interceptions - 65

Randall Cunningham (1986-1990 Eagles)
Games played - 75
Sacked - 277
Fumbles/Fumbles Lost - 57/unknown
Interceptions - 63

Just for fun, I looked up Daunte Culpepper and Jake Plummer:

Daunte Culpepper (2000-2004 Vikings, limited action in 2005 & 2006)
Games played - 73
Sacked - 197
Fumbles/Fumbles Lost - 72/31
Interceptions - 74

Jake Plummer (1997-2001, Cardinals, start of career)
Games played - 68
Sacked - 179
Fumbles/Fumbles Lost - 40/18
Interceptions - 94

I can furnish links if necessary - most stats came from www.sports.yahoo.com and Cunningham's came from www.databasefootball.com
ESPN stats were different in the Fumbles category - they call them "rushing" fumbles and are different (and smaller) numbers...

(my apologies to the thread starter for getting off topic)

[SamuraiSword]

Originally Posted by QB75

Rich Lord rarely knows what he's talking about.

wow any radio person that is against Carr you call them something. Just maybe they might be right?

[old football fan]

Originally Posted by Arky

Yep, the quarterback had some tough games with and without the help of his teammates. He also had some good games...

You were right about Randall Cunningham and the Eagles sack totals being larger than the Texans over a 5-year period.

This is interesting. Ugly QB stats:

David Carr (2002-2006 Texans)
Games played - 76
Sacked - 249
Fumbles/Fumbles Lost - 66/21
Interceptions - 65

Randall Cunningham (1986-1990 Eagles)
Games played - 75
Sacked - 277
Fumbles/Fumbles Lost - 57/unknown
Interceptions - 63

Just for fun, I looked up Daunte Culpepper and Jake Plummer:

Daunte Culpepper (2000-2004 Vikings, limited action in 2005 & 2006)
Games played - 73
Sacked - 197
Fumbles/Fumbles Lost - 72/31
Interceptions - 74

Jake Plummer (1997-2001, Cardinals, start of career)
Games played - 68
Sacked - 179
Fumbles/Fumbles Lost - 40/18
Interceptions - 94

I can furnish links if necessary - most stats came from www.sports.yahoo.com and Cunningham's came from www.databasefootball.com
ESPN stats were different in the Fumbles category - they call them "rushing" fumbles and are different (and smaller) numbers...

(my apologies to the thread starter for getting off topic)

With these stats Carr doesn't look all that bad. Maybe middle of the pack???? But what about the wins?? Carr must be in last place.

[bah007]

Originally Posted by old football fan

With these stats Carr doesn't look all that bad. Maybe middle of the pack???? But what about the wins?? Carr must be in last place.

That's not a very good arguement.

He started his career on an expansion team.

[TwinSisters]

Originally Posted by old football fan

With these stats Carr doesn't look all that bad. Maybe middle of the pack???? But what about the wins?? Carr must be in last place.

Well let's see:

Randall Cunnigham opened up the NFL for mobile running QBs as oppossed to the pocket passer. Along with putting up 5 straight 10+ win seasons and led a top ten offense 5 to 6 times. 4 or 5 seasons with 20+ TDs and 4 or 5 seasons throwing around 3200 yards while rushing for 500+. 10 starts in the playoffs and Pro Bowl appearances.

( on top of the fact that he could throw a bullet pass 50+ yards )

Culpepper was a little worse. Only one killer season with 4700 Yards and about 400 yards rushing a season. QB on 4 top ten offenses. Started in the playoffs, sat on Pro Bowl teams.

Jake Plummer... well now we get closer to Carr. Was the starter for a franchise that hadn't won a post season game since 1947, and then did. Beating the Dallas Cowboys so bad that it took them 5 years to turn in another winning season.

[old football fan]

Originally Posted by bah007

That's not a very good arguement.

He started his career on an expansion team.

Wasn't making an arguement, just kind of thinking out loud.

[old football fan]

Originally Posted by TwinSisters

Well let's see:

Randall Cunnigham opened up the NFL for mobile running QBs as oppossed to the pocket passer. Along with putting up 5 straight 10+ win seasons and led a top ten offense 5 to 6 times. 4 or 5 seasons with 20+ TDs and 4 or 5 seasons throwing around 3200 yards while rushing for 500+. 10 starts in the playoffs and Pro Bowl appearances.

( on top of the fact that he could throw a bullet pass 50+ yards )

Culpepper was a little worse. Only one killer season with 4700 Yards and about 400 yards rushing a season. QB on 4 top ten offenses. Started in the playoffs, sat on Pro Bowl teams.

Jake Plummer... well now we get closer to Carr. Was the starter for a franchise that hadn't won a post season game since 1947, and then did. Beating the Dallas Cowboys so bad that it took them 5 years to turn in another winning season.

No Randle didn't. I suggest you go back and watch Fran Tarkington to find the first running back. Heck even Otto Graham did some running as a QB.

[TwinSisters]

Originally Posted by old football fan

No Randle didn't. I suggest you go back and watch Fran Tarkington to find the first running back. Heck even Otto Graham did some running as a QB.

Well, let's say brought the Steve Grogan model back into vogue. I think he was the last real running QB that started full-time. Steve Young followed Cunningham up with Super Bowl appearances. So the path looks like Grogan - Cunningham - Young - Vick.

Tarkenton wasn't a running QB, he was a scrambler.

Grogan, Cunnignham, Young had plays designed with a run as an option or the primary option in regular use. ( 70-100 rushes called )

Graham looked more like the era and didn't really stick out ( just going off of stats here, his attempts and yards are on par with Unitas )

[The Pencil Neck]

Originally Posted by TwinSisters

Graham looked more like the era and didn't really stick out ( just going off of stats here, his attempts and yards are on par with Unitas )

Bobby Douglass back with the Bears in the early 70's?

[TwinSisters]

Originally Posted by The Pencil Neck

Bobby Douglass back with the Bears in the early 70's?

yeah that's a good call. Kansas and Kansas State that would put Grogan into the NFL.

SI did a really good article on this subject awhile back.