Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

07 Nov 2011

MMQB: A Familiar Giants-Patriots Game

In this week's Monday Morning Quarterback, Peter King draws some parallels between yesterday's Giants-Patriots game and some other Giants-Patriots game. He also writes about last week's podcast guest Ryan Leaf (really good interview, I thought), and mentions an AFC North quarterback could be on the hot seat going forward.

Posted by: Tom Gower on 07 Nov 2011

17 comments, Last at 08 Nov 2011, 2:27pm by Eddo

Comments

1
by dmstorm22 :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 2:05pm

I heard Leaf of the Boomer and Carton show on WFAN. He's seems to be almost the exact opposite of the arrogant, petulant child that we all remember from his early Chargers days. He was funny, engaging and really open and honest about his career and the reasons why it all went wrong.

I don't know if he would do this, because he said that he enjoys his relative isolation in Montana, but I think he would be great as a talking head. Of course, most people wouldn't take him seriously, but he definitely has the right attitude for it.

Good for him that he got help for his pain-killer addiction and hopefully his brain tumor has been taken care of.

3
by Anonymous(not that one) (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 2:13pm

No one should ever take talking heads seriously. They talk to fill up time, laugh at things that aren't funny to take up time, and rarely offer nuggets of intelligence.

If Matt Millen can get multiple jobs across multiple networks while being the worst GM in sports history, then Ryan Leaf could too.

4
by dmstorm22 :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 2:17pm

I used talking heads as just a term. I think Leaf could be really good at it. I take Trent Dilfer seriously. He offers good insight. He's well prepared. He's engaging. I think Leaf could be the same. I doubt he would ever do it though.

9
by Anonymous(not that one) (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 5:55pm

Trent Dilfer is currently great. I think ESPN will eventually crush that out of him, they tend to grind their "talent" into uninteresting bores.

10
by akn :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 8:45pm

I'm sorry, my sarcasm radar may be malfunctioning, but are you guys seriously calling Trent Dilfer a great analyst? The only thing that guy is good at is maintaining a shiny dome to improve the lighting in the studio.

Dilfer is ESPN's yes man--all he does is slurp on players currently doing well and dump on players currently doing poorly. Not once has he held a consistent view or defended a player/performance when it wasn't clearly good/bad. He never had the skills to be anything more than a game managing QB riding the tide of his historic defense, and that's exactly what he continues to do now as an analyst.

11
by tuluse :: Tue, 11/08/2011 - 2:34am

I too find Dilfer to be awful.

Though I have noticed one consistent opinion from him. Nothing is ever a QB's fault. The line should have always protected better and the receivers should have always ran better routes or adjusted to the throw better.

12
by akn :: Tue, 11/08/2011 - 2:49am

Unless it's Jay Cutler, then it's just bad mechanics.

2
by Anonymous(not that one) (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 2:10pm

My favorite part is where the writer acknowledges criticism of his podcast with Ryan Leaf, plugs it, and writes more things we don't care about.

5
by are-tee :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 2:57pm

Another similarity to Super Bowl XLII in yesterday's game - Eli threw a near pick to the sideline on the final drive that would have effectively ended the game had the interception been made. This time it was Chung instead of Samuel.

6
by Dave :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 3:07pm

You be quiet over there. We're not allowed to talk about his mistakes. It would distort the narrative. Better in the clutch than Peyton, he is!

7
by Alexander :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 3:36pm

Eli's team is clearly better than any team Peyton ever played with. Coincidence?

8
by GK (not verified) :: Mon, 11/07/2011 - 4:46pm

Yes, you be quiet sir, because we surely wouldn't want to interrupt the media's well-known, poorly hidden and eternally lasting love affair with Eli Manning as a quarterback.

For once, I wish the media would have the courage to criticize Eli Manning for his accuracy, his turnovers, his mechanics, his leadership, his on-field demeanor, his off-field demeanor, his draft soap opera, his haircut and his acting chops in the Oreo commercials.

Take off the kid gloves!

14
by Dave :: Tue, 11/08/2011 - 10:58am

I was referring specifically to King. He lists Eli #2 in his MVP top 5, for crying out loud, and makes no mention of the hideous pick or other mistakes, dismisses the fact that the overall game numbers weren't that good and the Pats' D is bad, and lionizes him for leading two drives.

But really, almost an MVP? That's what got me.

13
by MJK :: Tue, 11/08/2011 - 3:23am

It's worth noting that both the PI calls that turned the game happened because of bad throws by Eli. On the first one, the ball was badly underthrown and Arrington was actually in better position...if he turns his head around, it's probably not PI and possibly an INT (I hate seeing a deep pass play where the CB is in perfect position, but the ball is underthrown, so he ends up getting rewarded with a PI call because of his good position). On the second, the safety (not realizing where the receiver was) was angling for the ball, which was thrown into coverage that Eli should never have thrown into. If the defender had taken a slightly different angle and not collided with the WR, it could have been another INT. In either case, if Eli had thrown the ball well, there would have been a PI. It may have been an catch, but not a PI.

I just find it ironic that the game was won partially because of Eli's bad thows. Throws like that against a team with actually good corners and safeties (instead of the Pats, who have a slumpling McCourty, an undertallented Arrington, and a bunch of who-dat's at safety) won't work out so well.

15
by Aaron Brooks Go... :: Tue, 11/08/2011 - 11:22am

"(I hate seeing a deep pass play where the CB is in perfect position, but the ball is underthrown, so he ends up getting rewarded with a PI call because of his good position)"
-----

I hate seeing professional safeties who aren't smart enough or sufficiently aware of their surroundings to turn their head and play the ball when the receiver they are chasing slows down and puts his arms up.

16
by MJK :: Tue, 11/08/2011 - 1:29pm

I hate seeing professional safeties who aren't smart enough or sufficiently aware of their surroundings to turn their head and play the ball when the receiver they are chasing slows down and puts his arms up.

No argument there. But I still hate seeing an offense rewarded with a 50 yard completion essentially because the QB made a mistake and the defensive player was unable to capitalize. Hence my argument for making PI a 10 or 15 yard penalty, and not a spot foul.

17
by Eddo :: Tue, 11/08/2011 - 2:27pm

I think your point would be a little more persuasive if offenses never completed passes that were poorly-thrown. There are plenty of 50-yard completions that were "mistakes" by QBs, in that sense.

Personally, I think DPI should be grouped into two levels; one would be a ten-yard penalty and automatic first down, the other would be a spot-foul.