Writers of Pro Football Prospectus 2008

26 Dec 2012

Open Pro Bowl Announcement (and Oversight Bitching) Thread

The NFL Pro Bowl rosters are officially announced on NFL Network tonight at 7pm EST, and we'll post a link at that point, but lots of news seems to be leaking out to various team reporters. So you can use this thread to start discussing the players who are in and out of the Pro Bowl. Have fun complaining about the snubs, and remember that most of those guys will end up getting invited anyway because players who are sick of going will beg out with meaningless injuries while other players will get pulled because they make the Super Bowl.

UPDATE: OK, the rosters are up at NFL.com. Some initial thoughts: I think people will be surprised that Matt Schaub made it over Andrew Luck. In the NFC, there was only room for one of the rookies, hard to argue with either Griffin or Wilson, but one of them had to stay home. I'm sure if neither one is in the Super Bowl, they'll both end up in Hawaii due to roster additions. Five defensive starters from San Francisco, six if they play a 3-4 because both ILB are from the 49ers. For all the awesomeness of JPP, that seems like an odd choice given the fade of the Giants' pass rush. Robert Mathis doesn't really belong at all, there have to be better OLB in the AFC. Paul Kruger? Or better yet, Jerod Mayo is really an OLB this year, not ILB, so they could have added Lawrence Timmons and listed Mayo at OLB. And over in the NFC, they structured the roster like a 4-3 team but all three OLB are pass rushers. Hard to take one off for Lance Briggs, but maybe it is a good idea to at least allow one 4-3 OLB on the team?

Finally, Justin Tucker got totally and royally screwed. I know the Pro Bowl is somewhat meaningless, and nobody cares about the kickers, but Justin Tucker is the best kicker in the NFL this year by an absurd margin, No. 2 in FG value behind Janikowski (and ahead of Phil Dawson because his kickers have come from farther away) and No. 1 in kickoff value. Dawson over Tucker is an embarassment.

So is the Annual Brandon Meriweather WTF Pro Bowl selection, which this year goes to Jeff Saturday, who has been benched.

Posted by: Aaron Schatz on 26 Dec 2012

156 comments, Last at 30 Dec 2012, 9:27pm by PatsFan


by theslothook :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 7:19pm

Choosing the Qbs in the NFC is going to be so tough and is bound to lead to plenty of Snubs(though phantom injuries will mean they all get to go)


Rodgers Ryan are obvious, then who gets in? Brees? RG3? What about how Romo has played?

Receiver is also a bit of a mish mash in the NFC:

CJ and dez are the obvious one, but what about people like Marshall, Vjax, Cobb, Crabtree, Colston, White, and Julio Jones?

by Aloysius Mephis... :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:17pm

Rodgers, Ryan + any one of Romo, Brees, Wilson and RG3 would be totally defensible. I'll wince if Cam Newton or Eli Manning sneaks in, but it's not like they've been horrible.

For WR, the two you said plus Marshall and White would be my picks. I think Marshall should start for the NFC, alongside CJ. I don't see the case for Crab being at the level of the other guys you mention. If he played in the AFC he'd deserve consideration for a slot, though.

by greybeard :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:45pm

Was Eli Manning not horrible for 3-4 games this year? To the degree that people had to find excuses for him (his arm is tired).

by Red (not verified) :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 7:29pm

You mean you're not going to do a story on the Ochocinco sex tape?

by hoegher :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:18pm

Blair Walsh made it, huzzah!

by kamiyu206 :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:21pm

I'd still take Brees over RG3 even though I think RG3 had a fantastic year.

by Zach (not verified) :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:23pm

Considering how good their defense has been, it's pretty surprising to me that the Seahawks only have one representative (and no starters). Richard Sherman is the most obvious snub, though I understand that his potential suspension probably has a lot to do with that. Still, it's kind of amazing to me that the Seahawks have more players on offense (three, including two starters) than on defense. I wouldn't have bet on that before the season.

by RickD :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:55pm

Maybe when the Seahawks can improve their defense to that exalted level that the Chiefs are at, they can get multiple players on the Pro Bowl roster.

(Seriously? Why are there so many Chiefs on this team??)

by tuluse :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:30pm

Both their offense and defense are top 5 by FO, so it's actually pretty reasonable.

by Insancipitory :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:24pm

I'm fine with RG3 over Wilson, particularly if they give Wilson Rookie of the year.

But leaving Sherman off, there are no words.

(deleted ranting)

No words.

by greybeard :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:48pm

RG3 has been good from the very beginning of the season. Wilson has been pro bowl good only in the second half of the season.

by Zach (not verified) :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:33pm

that's a bit disingenuous, Wilson arguably has been the best quarterback in the league over the last 12 or so weeks

by Sherman is a snub though (not verified) :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:40pm

Ahahaha what? I am a Seahawks fan and come on, that is ridiculous. Wilson has been playing very well, let's not look like idiots for overselling him. The best quarterback in the league could have finished the game-winning drive vs Miami.

by Insancipitory :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:26pm

So you're arguing for the guy who was on the sideline biting his nails to see if his defense would be able to hold on against a backup Eagles QB with a broken hand leading a team so inept that one of the best coaches of the past 15 years is toast. Got it.

I mean that is pretty much the same thing as turning the best defense in the NFL into a pumpkin on primetime television, right?

by RickD :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:58pm

Obviously it makes sense to hold the disparity between the Redskins' defense and the Seahawks defense against RGIII.

by Insancipitory :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 11:34pm

Ummm if you want to take it that way, I guess. But it was the 2012 Eagles, and not the 1991 Eagles, Griffen watched his defense squeek one out against.

Griffen didn't do enough to win in his skate over an Eagles team, that could fairly described as Sanchezian, instead he relied on his defense to do just barely enough to let the Eagles beat themselves in the waning seconds. Russell Wilson stomped a crater in the not-quite-as-excellent-as-we-thought-they-were defense in his done-before-the-half domination of the 49ers. It's totally reasonable to pretend those are remotely the same.

If that's too enfeebled an opponant, or too dominant a performance feel free to compare it Wilsons 2 90+ yard drives, and 80 yard OT game winning drive in a close win over the NFLs best defense.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:09am

Griffin was injured in Week 14, was out in Week 15, and played through an injured knee in Week 16.

If your argument is "Russell Wilson was better in Week 16 than RGIII," I would agree with that.

But Wilson also hasn't had any game as good as RGIII's best games this season.

As for the 49ers, let's not pretend that they are the same without Justin Smith as they were with him. That was far from their best effort on Sunday. The world-beating defense disappeared with Justin Smith in the middle of the Patriots game.

by Insancipitory :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:35am

Bwahahaha Russell Wilson and RG3 have missed similar amounts of playing time. RG3 because he couldn't play, Wilson because he didn't need to. And by the way, if RG3 wants to play a long time, he should watch how Russell runs the ball, take some notes.

As for better games, you're clearly high.

Last 3TD running game prior to Wilson? Daunte Culpepper. (Wilson did it before halftime)

4 TD eviceration of a top defense? Check. I forgot, 9ers only sent 1 defensive player to the probowl, my bad. I hear their safeties suck.

Brady-esque comebacks versus top opponants? 3

Historic beatdowns? 3 - 0, Wilson.

Wilson versus the Jets was better than just about anything RG3 has done this year. And no one even remembers that game because of the season he's put together. Hell, they have the exact same number of 4 TD and 3 TD games (2), Wilson just had them against somewhat better defenses.

Stupid shit like this is why Pete Carroll, or whomever, should run up the score. Leave no doubt. Screw simple decency, no one appreciates, much less respects, it anyway. Holmgren did the same shit. If he didn't sit Shaun Alexander during the Houstan game, Shaun would probably have a 2000 yard season, single season td record, single season rushing td record, and single game rushing TD record.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 6:49pm

When did you dispense with the idea of civil discourse and decide to make this a pissing match?

Take it to ESPN.com

by Insancipitory :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:02pm

The easiest way to avoid ridicule is to avoid being ridiculous. And why should I go to ESPN when you'll come here to recycle the talking-points from their forums.

It's hilarious that you never even compared RG3's games to Wilson's, being caught unaware like that must have been very embarrassing for you. It just seems like something someone discussing the two would do. I guess I assumed too much, and that's all on me.

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:24pm

I agree with Mr. D, this is the kind of thing you expect to read on national sites where 100,000,000 potential commenters make posting and reading comments totally worthless. Not on smaller sites with an, ahem, narrower demographic of readers.

by Insancipitory :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:28pm

What observations from post #49 do you feel are in error?

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:31pm

That's not the point, it's your tone. There are facts that support Wilson, and facts that support RGIII. It sounds like you're saying "my facts are the only ones that matter!"

by Insancipitory :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:50pm

Okay, what "facts" from post #40 were unaddressed?

Or is the opinion that "a team that sent 9 players to the prowbowl, 6 from the defense, is only actually competitive when just one of them is present" not completely ridiculous. If the expectation of a at least a tenuous tether to reality is too much to ask, then this site IS espn when it comes to community commentary. If someone wants to make a case for RG3, make it well. "He has 2 3TD games and 2 4TD games, what's Russell Wilson ever done?" is low hanging fruit, it exists to get picked on.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:34pm

Why would I continue the discussion after you accused me of "being high"?

This isn't very important to me. If you want to play nice, I can discuss things. As I said below, I think there's a case to be made in favor of either QB. But at this point you're practically foaming at the mouth.

And you're still insulting me. Good for you.

by Insancipitory :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:53pm

I assumed too much. I regret any inconvienence the error may have caused you.

by IHeartAdderall (not verified) :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 12:23am

I look forward to watching the Seahawks get beaten in the playoffs if only due to 'fans' such as yourself. You're beloved franchise has been mostly dismal for a decade, congratulations, you lucked into drafting a 5-10 QB whose proven to be a bit better than originally thought. That's nice. I think the better luck is the fact that you've got a steroid abuser in the defensive backfield (2, actually, that we know of) who, amazingly, is getting away with it.

by Scott Crowder (not verified) :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 1:13am

Wow, tonight it really isn't much better than ESPN's boards. Mostly dismal for a decade? You do realize that goes back to 2003 right? Do you know how many division titles we have in that span? How many playoff appearances. I do recall getting jobbed by the refs out of a Super Bowl we otherwise dominated during that span.

by Glen (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:59pm

Pretty sure Wilson had the best game ever recorded for a rookie QB by FO earlier this season. I'm pretty sure that is better than RGIII's best game.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 6:54pm

Yes, and FO has a way of measuring individual statistics that is regularly subject to derision every week. If you think two RBs who gained less than 80 yards are each better than a 200 yard performance by Adrian Peterson, FO will back you up on that.

IMO, FO stats overrate TDs and take "success rate" too seriously. As always, it's hard to criticize their formulae rigorously since everything they do is propietary, i.e. secret.

Like I said before, there's a case to be made for RGIII and one to be made for Wilson. But any case made on DYAR or DVOA alone is not very interesting to me (and ditto for QBR). Passer rating is deeply flawed, but at least we know how one arrives at the final number.

by commissionerleaf :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 2:27pm

I think there's probably an argument for calling RGIII a better quarterback this year than Russell Wilson. I also think it's wrong. RGIII has been a very good quarterback within the bounds of the offense that Washington runs. However, citing his raw passing statistics doesn't really make the right point: Wilson has more interceptions because he throws downfield more often, while RG has been asked to throw innumerable WR screens in order to protect him from blitz looks.

Based on their performance this year, I would think both quarterbacks will be very successful (I'm less sure about Luck, but there's just no way to tell with his offensive line).

But Wilson has been the better passer this year.

by Arkaein :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 6:56pm

Considering that RGIII is leading the entire NFL in yards per attempt (8.27), I'd say your argument about Wilson (tied for 7th at 7.67) throwing deep more is bogus. You don't achieve those numbers based on WR screens unless your WRs are the best in the NFL, which is laughable in the case of Washington.

While both look to be very good young QBs, RGIII is better in every basic statistic except for total TDs (and TD%, since both players have nearly identical number of attempts). However RGIII's 5 INTs are half of Wilson's 10, and RGII has the better completion percentage. I just don't see how the argument is made that Wilson has had a better year passing than RGIII in light of these numbers.

by A. Simmons (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 3:44am

If you were a Seahawks fan, you would know that Russell didn't have a chance to win the Miami game. He was sitting on the sidelines when Miami kicked a game winning field goal with no time left. You sure are some kind of Sehawks fans aren't you? You really have a great memory for the games.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 6:55pm

Dear me, we mustn't accuse anybody of being cherry picking homers!

by Karl Cuba :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:30pm

I'll give you some words.

He's a drug cheat.

I agree that we don't need any more words.

(I would have taken Cancellir over Whitner, though Whitner has had a good year.)

by 3cardmonty :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 4:46pm

You were saying?

by Karl Cuba :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:42pm

Well to begin with Sherman was still due to be suspended when the voting was conducted, so even if he really is innocent everyone was voting on the basis that he had cheated.

Secondly, he got off because there was a mistake in his test, the seal was apparently broken, which is the NFL's screw up. It doesn't exactly explain how he got a positive test, it means that the NFL can't be certain enough to levy sanction on him because of their screw up. I'm not an expert in pharmacology but if exposing clean urine to oxygen creates the metabaloids of steroids or Adderall I'd be quite surprised. I think he probably took something and has escaped as a result of a technical slip up, which really isn't fair to him as it's really the system that has failed and I just haven't any faith in it.

The regime stinks, I don't know if he's clean or not, neither do you and neither does the NFL(which is a travesty), all that can be said for sure is that the NFL doesn't have the evidence to suspend him. However, because of the shaky set up I can't be sure about him or pretty much any player. I'm pretty certain that there are quite alot of dirty players in the league right now and I'm also pretty certain that the NFL doesn't have the regime to find them or punish them.

Sherman had a great year, he really did. Was it clean? Dunno,for full disclosure it is possible that my response to the situation is partially dictated by me thinking he's a pr*ck (like how all non 49er fans see Jim Harbaugh).

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:29pm

"if exposing clean urine to oxygen creates the metabaloids of steroids or Adderall I'd be quite surprised"

Not quite. What if the seal was broken because somebody tried to empty it out and replace it with clean urine but failed. Or a nutcase 49er fan works at the lab and tried to mix dirty pee in with his clean sample. We don't know if either of those things happened, so the test cannot be assumed to be his.

by IHeartAdderall (not verified) :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 12:26am

Delusional creeps. Getting away with cheating on a technicality isn't much to brag about, is it?

by Roch Bear :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 1:13pm

Interesting money making opportunity. All a lab worker really has to do is break the seal, no need to replace the sample since the broken seal invalidates the test (of course, one would need to trust the 'system'). I'm sure getting caught would get you fired, but it doesn't violate any law does it?

by Karl Cuba :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:30pm

Double post

by jayhawkco :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:35pm

Has there ever been a team who got the #1 overall pick in the draft yet had five Pro Bowlers?

Charles, Berry, Colquitt, Hali, and D. Johnson.


by justanothersteve :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:44pm

Jeff Saturday made the Pro Bowl. He couldn't even hold his starting job on the Packers. Even if he hadn't lost his job to EDS, he still shouldn't have made the Pro Bowl. If there was any more proof needed to show the absurdity of Pro Bowl voting, this is it.

by The Ninjalectual :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:10pm

Why can't fans be content with saying "I don't watch line play so I'm not going to vote for this position?"

Though seeing Trent Williams make it is nice, he deserves it.

by Karl Cuba :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:32pm

Yeah, The Saturday pick is just a joke.

by RickD :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:36pm

This really brings o-line voting to new depths.

It's very hard for casual fans to vote on line play on anything other than name recognition and reputation. But somehow the NFL has to avoid this kind of embarrassment.

In the AFC, I had read (was this Muth?) that Maurkice Pouncey was not as good as his brother this season. But the Pro-Bowl roster is like the Golden Glove award in terms of how winners get quickly entrenched.

by Mr Shush :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 6:29pm

Wade Smith has played at a pro bowl level in the past. I would not have picked him this year.

by theslothook :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:51pm

Actually, I thought the probowl voting this year felt ok. The saturday pick was beyond ridiculous as was the Mathis pick, but other than those and victor Cruz somehow passing Dez Bryant, it was alright.

Some notables: I feel like Kam chancellor should have made it over Donte Whitner and I actually think Goldson is a very poor deep safety(but hes good at other things so its ok). Corner selection was tough because I think all three are good, so its hard to say Sherman was a huge snub, but again I understand it. Oh and Jarius Byrd should have made it this year. Other than that, no real complaints.

by coboney :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:01pm

Mathis feels like a reach but there's not much in the way of OLB in the AFC this year. Its a weak crop there.

Patrik Peterson should have been replaced by Richard Sherman in my mind.

And ya Cruz over Bryant is silly.

Saturday making it though just shows how much of the thing is based on name value instead of actual play.

In regards to Aaron's comment - Tucker is having a great year but at least Dawson is passable. Its sad that a great year isn't recognized there but at least it isn't with a joke player.

Could also argue for someone over Clay Mathews due to missed games but its arguable for someone like Briggs at best.

by RickD :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:37pm

Dez Bryant was utter crap for the first half of the season. He waited until I cut him from my FF team, and then he decided to show up.

by BlueStarDude :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 8:58am

It's true. I don't know why so many are surprised by the Bryant "snub" since the NFL starts the voting so ridiculously early. First half the season for Dez was mostly screwed up routes and more screwed up punt returns. He has come on in the second half of the season (coincidentally ever since the punt return duty was shifted to Harris) but too much of the voting is done too early to catch that.

by Scott Crowder (not verified) :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 1:17am

He waited until I cut him from my FF team, and then he decided to show up.

Of course. It all makes perfect sense.

by Canfan (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:44pm

As far as Chancellor goes, he has been dealing with nagging injuries and has not played as well as last eyar. Other safeties have had better seasons so I have no problem with it even though I'm a Seahawk fan. As far as Wilson vs RGIII, they have both had great years. I think Wilson makes a better story, coming from the 3rd round and being undersized, but RGIII has meant more to his team from day 1. Wilson is likely playing as well as RGIII right now, but for the whole body of work for the season, the edge goes to Robert in my books.

by Scott Crowder (not verified) :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 1:18am

What people forget to take into account is that there was a three way QB competition in Seattle this year. Wilson got a third of the snaps. RGIII was the starter from the get go. RW was up to speed by the New England game.

by Never Surrender :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:53pm

Tough to see Alfred Morris not make it. I was really hoping he'd pull the upset there.

But I'm relieved to see RGIII get his spot, since it could justifiably have gone to one or two others.

I've been worried that Wilson will snatch away the ROTY award from RGIII after Seattle's hot month. Wilson has certainly been the better player during that stretch of time, but I still don't think it's been quite so close if you look at each player's entire body of work this season. So having RGIII get a Pro Bowl selection is at least some insurance that he won't get a total snub on deserved honors this year.

by Zach (not verified) :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:36pm

Um, you'll note that Wilson has more DYAR (both passing and rushing) and a higher DVOA (again, both passing and rushing) than RG3.

by RickD :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:47pm

Few people outside of the FO loyalists care about DYAR.

When it comes to passing, Griffin is ahead of Wilson in terms of passing yards, completion %, interceptions, QBR, and passer rating. Wilson is ahead on TDs by 25-20 and since the FO stats (heart) TDs so much, he's ahead on DYAR and DVOA.

When it comes to rushing, Griffin has 762 yards to 441 yards for Wilson. That's not remotely close. Griffin has 6 rushing TDs to 3 for Wilson. The down side is the 6 fumbles, but I wonder how many of those have come on actual rushing plays.

So, really, there's a case to be made for either RGIII or Wilson. I don't see any case to be made for Luck.

by Never Surrender :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 11:40pm

Thanks, you said that better than I could have.

I agree of course that one can make a case for Wilson; I am not going to attempt to minimize the excellence of his play, which seems to be standard procedure for this kind of debate. In reality (i.e., in voting), I suspect Wilson has a slight advantage as he is surging at the right time, and RGIII is nursing a minor knee injury at the wrong time. I'd say it's 50/50 if we assume the contest is now only between those two. (Of course, in reality, Luck probably has as good a chance as either of the other two at winning.)

But if it were only up to me, it wouldn't be a particularly close call. The award goes to RGIII, with a respectful nod toward Wilson and Luck in a distant third. I wish I could bring either Martin or Morris into the discussion just for the fun of it, but that's rather an uphill battle at this point.

by theslothook :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:25am

I'll freely admit to being a colts fan, but Luck a distant third? on pure qb skills alone, I honesty believe he's the best of the three but the reasons why are more subtle. Firstly, Griffin's stats are padded by a few things, like the fact that hes thrown more passes and derived more yardage from throws behind the line of scrimmage than any other qb in the nfl. He also has derived most of his yardage off of play action- which is partly him sure, but also effective because of the skins success running the ball. Wilson also plays on a team with a good o line and an effective run game coupled with a defense and special teams that provides him turnovers and better field position.

luck on the other hand plays in an offense that averages more long yardage throws than any other in the nfl. His offensive line have all graded negatively(according to pff) and his defense is the worst in football. Furthermore, look across the skill positions and outside of wayne, they are entirely manned by rookies.

I don't want to sound like the other two haven't been great, they have been, but seriously, cross comparing qbs with stats assumes they all face the same circumstances when they obviously don't. In this case, I would say both Griffin and Wilson get to run their race on paved tracks while Luck has to run through a blizzard.

by dbostedo :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 2:34pm

"...on pure qb skills alone..."

The vote isn't about skills, which seems more like "potential". It's about who has produced the most on their team. I think that puts Luck third.

"...but also effective because of the skins success running the ball. Wilson also plays on a team with a good o line and an effective run game..."

It has been shown that good running QBs generally improve their teams running as a whole. So Wilson and Griffin should get some credit for creating those good running games, not just benefiting from them.

And I think you're likely over-estimating how good the Seahawks and Redskins offenses would be without their running QBs. It's not like they have a lot of established stars or were considered to have excellent offenses in prior years. Reggie Wayne might be the best skill position player on any of the three teams in fact. (EDIT : Forgot about Lynch.... I'd say he's the best skill position player on any of the teams.)

by Anonymousse (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:33pm

". He also has derived most of his yardage off of play action- which is partly him sure, but also effective because of the skins success running the ball"

Why should a quarterback be penalized for throwing to an open receiver who can get YAC?

Sounds like a sign that RG3 is making good reads to me.

by theslothook :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 2:51am

Its about trying to judge qb play in isolation. The fact that he derived most of his yardage off of play action and throws behind the LOS suggest more about playing on a much better overall team than luck. Luck also leads the nfl in 3rd and long percentage and is second in dvoa in 3rd and long.

Again, when we judge qbs, you have to look beyond conventional stats and even fo stats to form your opinion. Why? because qb situations are not created equal. If Brady were really as good as Manning, why then are the pats able to win 11 games while the colts were lucky to win 2? This is especially damning considering matt cassel fucking sucks. I heard so many pats fans proclaiming how bad curtis painter was and how that was the reason, but news flash, Cassell is beyond horrible so that argument is meaningless. Cassel with new England puts up probowl numbers and has the makings of an all pro. Cassel with KC? Terrible. Gee- wonder what the reason behind that is? The truth is, its just lazy to attribute all the credit for stats to the qb.

I will repeat this. As far as who is the best rookie, Imo, its luck. He has the least total talent offensively(his entire O LINE IS HORRIBLE!!!!!). His defense is equally HORRIBLE. His skill position players are manned by rookies across the board. Hes in a offense that features mostly medium and deep throws. To blindly cross compare misses so many details that its embarrassing.

by PatsFan :: Sun, 12/30/2012 - 9:27pm

Because NE wasn't tanking the season fort he #1 pick, for one thing...

by Aloysius Mephis... :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:32am

There is a case to be made for Luck. It consists of two main arguments:

The first argument is that Luck plays for the least talented team of the three by far, so he's had to do his job with the least assistance. This argument isn't appealing to me, because I think ultimately the performance has to speak for itself. I'd be willing to consider a player's poor supporting cast as a tiebreaker between two players with equivalent performances, but Luck's performance isn't equivalent to Griffin's or Wilson's. However, some voters might give Luck points for playing on a very untalented team.

The second argument is that Luck's made numerous "clutch" plays at the end of close games to pull out wins and get his team into the playoffs. This argument won't win over the readers of this site, who understand that "clutch" play is for the most part random, and that late-game heroics are inferior to solid play early on that renders last-second miracles superfluous. I do think the "clutch" argument is likely to hold some sway with the voters, but it's not as if Griffin and (especially) Wilson have lacked for exciting plays late in games.

Of course, when you said you don't see any case to be made for Luck you probably meant that you don't see any *good* case. On that I'd agree.

by Ender (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:46am

It is a personal preference I think. Do you want the player who means the most to their team or the one who has put up the best numbers. Luck means more to his team, RG3 has put up better stats. Rodgers means more to his team since his team has been injured all year and would probably have 5 wins without him considering they have no run game, mediocre defense and all of his targets have been hurt. Manning has put up better numbers though even though he had a ton more support. Just depends on how you personally perceive the award.

by theslothook :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:47am

If the argument is who deserves the ROY award based on the medias general weighting of criteria, then yes - it would be between wilson and Rg3 with luck a distant third.

However, I took their above statements to imply what the true value of each qb was. Maybe that was incorrect, but when gauging value, you absolutely must take that into account. I'm more surprised this hasn't been brought up more, but its a travesty that rg3 made the probowl over brees. Why? because brees had the terrible misfortune of having to carry a horribly pathetic offense while playing in a strong conference and a tough division.

I just feel like too many times, even Fo readers fail to appropriately take into account how much a good supporting cast improves you're play as a qb.

by Aloysius Mephis... :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:17am

I think there has to be a limit to how much consideration you give to circumstances/supporting cast in evaluating a player, though. Otherwise you can end up arguing that Larry Fitzgerald had a borderline all-pro year this season because, hey, look at how horrible the QBs throwing him the ball are. Obviously there's no comparing Luck's good season with the terrible year Fitzgerald's had, but it illustrates my point. Fair or not, at some point the performance has to stand on its own.

by Scott Crowder (not verified) :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 1:23am

Luck's weak supporting cast argument pales when one looks at Wilson's opponents. Wilson has gone up against the toughest defenses in the league. Luck has played against significantly weaker opposition.

by Zach (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:23pm

This may be true in general, but we're here ON the FO boards, so I just kind of figured that the sorts of people who are discussing Pro Bowl snubs on the FO board would be the kind of people who would put weight on DYAR/DVOA.

by Never Surrender :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 3:06pm

I "put weight" on DYAR/DVOA but it's not something I live and die by, either. One of several factors.

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:19pm

Exactly! This is what they tell you to do anyway, if you actually read the instructions.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:05pm

My comment regarding the relative lack of interest was in the context of the OP's comment that, come the time when post-season awards are distributed, RGIII will likely "get his due."

Your rebuttal, that RGIII was behind Russell Wilson with regard to FO stats is certainly interesting on its own merits, but doesn't impact at all (or very much - I don't want to be too dismissive of the importance of FO) the question of whether RGIII is the most likely candidate for Rookie of the Year. And the latter point is how I read the original comment.

Pro Bowl "snubs" for backup positions at the Pro Bowl are not very interesting to me, esp. at QB, where it is typically difficult to find three healthy bodies to go to the game. I think the AFC went down to the 7th choice last year.

by Glen (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 2:06pm

Umm, you do realize where you are, don't you. Try to be a bit smarter than OMGSTATS.

DYAR and DVOA both account for strength of competition, of which Wilson has gone against much tougher teams than either Luck or RGIII.

by Anonymousse (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:35pm

I love DVOA, but DYAR is about as sophisticated as measuring baseball hitters by looking only at the number of times they strike out. Its a pretty terrible stat.

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:37pm

Wow. That's a wild exaggeration and you know it.

In the past, DYAR was expressed as DPAR (defense-adjusted POINTS above replacement), as in "this player helped his team score THIS MANY points more than a replacement could be expected to." It helps me to think of it that way still, and it's valuable even if all it does is remind you that an average (0.0 DVOA) player who gets 300 carries is still providing something to his team. When you see an average player according to DVOA racking the DYAR, it might make you rethink your opinion of the guy.

I even think DPAR was something simple like DYAR/11.8 or something. Even if it's more complex, the exact numbers aren't what's important anyway, nobody really needs DVOA or DYAR accurate to a tenth of a point. DVOA can accurately say "Seattle, Denver, New England, San Francisco, and Green Bay are head and shoulders ahead of everybody else"; it doesn't say "Seattle is #1! They are clearly the best team in the NFL, woohoo, FO said so!" Well, no, it's not "clear." It could be any one of them, they're all pretty much equally good.

I don't understand why they changed to DYAR, I thought DPAR was way more interesting, but there isn't anything stopping me from thinking about it that way.

by Aloysius Mephis... :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 5:20am

I assume the change from DPAR to DYAR was intended to make FO's metrics more accessible by getting DPAR to look like a conventional yardage stat. I miss DPAR, but that's probably just my nostalgia for the days when "teams don't win because they run, they run because they're winning," "part of a kicker's value is kickoff distance," and "a one yard gain on third and one is a good play and a nine yard gain on third and fifteen is a bad play" were stunning insights that blew my mind.

by Roch Bear :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 1:34pm

SEA has a higher passer DVOA than WASH. *Team* stat. What fraction of the variance does the QB position account for?

by The Ninjalectual :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 8:54pm

Fans have no clue what good safety play looks like, beyond what the announcers tell us during an occasional nationally televised game. LaRon Landry? Really?

by Scott C :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 1:00am

Yeah, Byrd, Weddle, and Jones are clearly a lot better than the actual AFC picks. I guess Ed Reed gets a pass for being so good in the past (and still very solid). Berry is good, but this year has not been in the top tier. Landry? Uh, ok.

by theslothook :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:00pm

Jarius Byrd is the highest rated cover safety according to Pff. Playing in Buffalo will reduce your hall of fame chances I guess.

by mehlLageman56 (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 3:17pm

As a Jets fan, I agree with you about Landry. He has been good, but not as good as the top three safetys in the AFC. The only argument for him is the relative strength of the Jets pass defense without much of a pass rush. They would be better off using Ryan as the defensive coordinator, even if the Jets fire him.

by Scott C :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 1:04am

Weddle is rated the best overall safetly by pff, and I've seen him play man coverage in the slot as a corner, strong safety, blitz, very good (but not Byrd good) in coverage as a FS, and cope with continuous change at the other safety slot and 3rd/4th cornerback.

Jones has also been great.

The Bills, Chargers, and Dolphins all have more wins than the Chiefs -- so it can't be because the teams are not playoff bound.

by Aloysius Mephis... :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:20pm

Am I alone in thinking these picks are mostly OK? The Saturday pick's bad enough to bend time and space, the JPP and Cruz picks are terrible, but most of the guys picked had Pro Bowl type seasons, even if others may have been more deserving.

by jonnyblazin :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:21pm

I'd say Ed Reed and Haloti Ngata are usually good selections, but not this year. Reed has not been good at tackling and has been getting burned repeatedly whenever he gambles on a route. Ngata has been fighting injuries and therefore been pretty average all year long. When he's healthy he's a force, but he has had few impact plays this year and hasn't always demanded a double team either.

by Hurt Bones :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:04pm

Agree, and with Aaron's comments about Justin Tucker. I tried to vote for Paul Kruger, but he wasn't on the ballot, and you can no longer write in. I emailed the NFL with a complaint which probably went in the electronic circular file nanoseconds after it was received.

by fakeninjitsu :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 9:58pm

Jeff Saturday over John Sullivan?!? There are no words... He's gotten snubbed 2 years in a row.

by theslothook :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:08pm

The whole front seven definition is all out of whack for probowls. Attack outside linebackers are listed in the same group as cover linebackers despite playing completely different positions. Ditto for 3-4 De's and 4-3 Dts.

Its probably why you didn't see calais campbell, cris clemmons, bobby wagner, lance briggs, etc make the probowl squad.

Its been a long time since a defense as good as Seattle's has featured a lone probowler.

by The Hypno-Toad :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 10:41pm

I was hoping that Wesley Woodyard would at least net an alternate spot. Oh well.

by Danish Denver-Fan :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 10:37am

Agree. I'd take 2012 Woodyard over 2012 Derrick Johnson. We are obviously biased though.

by The Hypno-Toad :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:54pm

And I may be even more biased regarding Woodyard than I am about the rest of the roster. I've always been fascinated by his very impressive college stats coupled with his undrafted status and have watched him very closely.

by Willsy :: Wed, 12/26/2012 - 11:17pm

Having just watched the Houston/Vikes game twice all I can say is the O line voting is amazing. Kevin Williams pushed the Houston C around all day and now I see Myers is in the Pro Bowl! Kevin W is starting to taper as a player but he held the middle of the line easily.
And they have two other guys as well? Clearly they all had an off day. The other thing was that Jared Allen is still hurt and he didn't have a normal day so I dread to think what would have happened if he did.
Andre Johnson would be one of the first players picked but Arian Foster?
I also thought the D line for the NFC was a bit weak at JP-Paul has tailed off this year and Allen has been injured.
Without any real basis of comparison Jerome Felton has nearly put a few LB's in intensive care and also plays with some real smarts - regularly adjusts the line he runs for a block. Wondering what other FB candidates that should have been considered.


by Ender (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:44am

I definitely agree that the Vikings O-Line is underrated. While Peterson deserves loads and loads of credit every time you see him break a big run he has a huge gaping seam because their blocking has been some of the best in the league. Facing stacked boxes all year and still getting very clear holes/seams all year long.

by Mr Shush :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 6:34pm

You just happen to have seen the Texans O-line's worst game of the season by far (and indeed the Texans as a whole's worst game of the season). Over the year as a whole Brown has been absolutely outstanding, and Myers deserves his spot. Wade Smith is a sketchier selection, but not a horrendous one.

by Ender (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:01am

I'm a huge Packer fan and if you had me name the 15 most deserving Packer's for a pro bowl I wouldn't have even had Jeff Saturday in the list of possible selections. That one just makes no sense at all.

Wonder if Cobb can play Center.

by Paul M (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 2:15am

The other aspect of the Packers is that the one DB with a reputation hasn't played in two months. So no Pro Bowl representatives, which is fair. But I would argue that the fivesome of Williams and Shields on the corners; Burnett and Jennings st safeties, and Heyward in the slot is easily the most talented young group in the league. Williams is the only one with more than 3 years starting experience. One of the reasons Woodson hasn't played yet (and won't again this weekend) is that the Packers aren't really sure what to do with him and whether he would improve the secondary given the role-changing that might occur. With New Orleans out of the playoffs, and Dallas probably the same, and also the Giants, the fact is that while Griffin, Wilson and Kaepernick pose a different set of threats to a defense, I'm not sure (partic. with Manningham out) the deep ball is going to be one of them.

Which leaves Ryan, Jones, White and Gonzalez. Another Georgia Dome track meet would be fascinating-- I simply believe Rodgers and Co. can outgun Ryan and his group.

by ptp (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:48am

Seahawks fan chiming in to disagree with the "most talented young group in the league" comment ;)

by Paul M (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:10pm

fair enough. I didn't realize all of Seattles' DBs were 3 years or less in terms of experience as well. Let's call it "easily one of the two most talented young groups in the NFL". And I don't want to get on a high horse, but at least so far there are no PED accusations for any of the Packers DBs.

by ptp (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:36pm

Eh, Adderall enhances focus but it's not like they're bigger and stronger because of it, I don't care much one way or the other about the accusations, just sucks to have lost Browner and possibly Sherman for a 4-game stretch. I understand why other people would care, of course, but I'm pretty in the tank on this team and I won't deny it.

by nick c (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:35pm

I was under the impression that players admit to adderall use to avoid the stigma of steroids. Is the substance in question ever officially specified?

by Insancipitory :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:49pm

Who knows, irrelevant anyway since Sherman won his appeal. Which given how stacked the appeal process is against players, is a pretty forceful exoneration.

by Karl Cuba :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:13pm

It sounds he was cleared specifically because the hearing officer decided that the NFL should be as responsible for faults in the process as the player. This has to be a good thing but it should be paired with more severe punishments for those that fail, four damn weeks for being caught cheating is a joke.

I'm pretty sick of the entire process from the wrist slap punishments, the non-disclosure that allows players to claim 'it was just adderall/ginseng tea/cold medicine' and now we are finding that the NFL isn't even holding up its end of the regime. It all needs fixing.

And they don't even TEST for HGH.

by Insancipitory :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:03pm

The NFL establishes the proceedures of the process, and arranges for their excecution, who else should be responsible? There are many things which are cause for concern in the mutually accepted facts of the case. That the technical procedural errors didn't come to light immediately, and had to be restated after the fact high among them. The proper thing to do, is throw out all the testing done on that occasion, and redo it properly; with whatever additional resources that might require.

When one is performing a chemistry experiment and learns in the middle the measuring has been going on improperly, one does not simply make a note and carry on using suspect reagents. In this instance the note didn't get made until well after the event.

Given how notoriously difficult for HGH seems to be, I would like to see if the NFL can establish a track record of successfully toting pee in cups before we get ahead of ourselves.

I don't have a solution, or anything approaching one. I just have an innate, intense, opinion that a false negative is far and away preferable to a false positive.

by Anonymousse (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:38pm

Completely correct. The NFL never releases what they tested positive to. If a guy tests positive for Aderall, he was on steroids.

That being said, if you don't think Aderall is a performance enhancer, you're an idiot.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:09pm

The current attitude of "it's OK, it's only Adderall" baffles me.

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 10:46pm

The current attitude of "it's OK, it's only Adderall" baffles me.

Get over yourself. I'm betting you never went to college, or you went to BYU or someplace lame. It really isn't a big deal. Yes, you're burning the candle at both ends, but some people can use it safely, and actually improve their lives doing so. Overtaxing yourself in the weight room is a concern, but harm is not guaranteed or even likely most of the time.

If you can use a drug that makes your life better, wouldn't you take it? It's like the drug in the movie Limitless, it works best if you're already smart.

by Anonymous123 (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 11:31pm

If you take a drug that is banned by the rules, you are breaking the rules. This isn't college, this is the NFL, and if he's so smart, then he should know better.

by IHeartAdderall (not verified) :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 12:39am

Well, the actual point of all this is that these guys aren't failing tests due to Adderall, they are using it as a lie/crutch/excuse when they get caught using PEDs, and since the NFL doesn't release why players are suspended (because it would upset the applecart about their game being 'clean', when it clearly isn't), it's a convenient excuse. I'm sure if one of these several Seahawks players to get caught on steroids claimed it was due to using Crest toothpaste, you would see any number of delusional fanboys claiming they used Crest in college (unless they went someplace 'lame') to stay awake, and it's no big deal.
Of course, meth addicts also know how to use their product safely.

by tuluse :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 2:54pm

As Tainer wrote, if they want to claim a "harmless" drug, why not say weed?

by ptp (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:51am

Did Darnell Dockett fall off a cliff? He's been one of the best 3-techs in the NFC for a long time now. Kinda surprised he didn't get a mention anywhere.

by Insancipitory :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 6:44am

He looks to have worn down a little. He's getting less pressure, but he's still savvy and now deflecting more passes. Might also have something to do with the rise of Calais Campbell.

by Purds :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 9:47am

It's very hard to assess Luck vs. the others. I am a huge Colts fan, but Luck's very poor completion percentage (even with a large number of downfield throws) is disconcerting. Hard to think of him in terms of Pro Bowl with that stat (53%). On the other hand, he's clearly operating on a team devoid of skill players. They may get there, but not yet. Of course, while there isn't really a "clutch" factor for QB's, there certainly is the ability (or inability) to manage the clock and keep the team under control down the stretch, and Luck has been very good at that. Not good enough to be a Pro Bowl guy, but much better than your average bear.

I haven't seen enough of any of the rookie QB's to know which is best in terms of ROY. I have been wowed by Wilson of late, but ... In the end, should it just be a stat award?

by Johnny Socko (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 11:01am

Well stated. I'm also concerned about Luck's poor completion percentage. Some of this was caused by the propensity of Arians to throw deep all the time, but some was also due to Luck's inaccurate throws. It's possible this may be an issue for Luck going forward and may limit his long-term potential.

by Ben :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 11:17am

I don't think it will be a long term issue. His percentage was good at Stanford. I think it's more a factor of poor offensive line. He rarely has a clean pocket to throw from. He's thrown a lot of high passes because he hasn't been able to step into his throws due to having a center in his lap.

That being said, his completion percentage is what it is for this year, so I have no problem with him not making the Pro Bowl or winning RotY.

by Ben :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 11:19am

Double post.

by jdiko :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 11:24am

Peyton Manning's completion percentage his rookie year was 56.7%.

by Paul M (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:18pm

Stats, and team performance, and team performance vs. expectations/last year, and leadership, etc, etc...

I think just sitting back and marvelling at all 3 leading them to the playoffs (or at least the verge for RGIII) is good enough. The stats probably favor Griffin a bit, but for the missed game. The trend favors Wilson-- i.e, he's getting better and better. The "It" factor-- pulling out all those late games-- favors Luck.

I think an honest assessment of their teams would say that:

1) Wilson helped turn a fairly average to below average team into what is now, in terms of both metrics and common consensus, one of the 3-4 best teams in the league. And maybe on the verge of becoming a historically great, or at least NFL elite, team.

2) Luck took a team with a playoff pedigree that collapsed without their HOF QB last year and reestablished a semi-elite atatus in the middle of a roster shift to youth. But I also think it's fair to say he exploited the weakest schedule of them all.

3) Griffin took a fairly moribund franchise-- even in mid-season this year-- and gave it not only real hope for the playoffs this year but also pointed it toward a revival of solid contention for the first time in about 20 years.

SInce everything beyond this season is speculative, I think you have to judge them based on the accomplishment this year-- and I think Wilson gets the edge because Seattle has become so good so fast.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:18pm

Seattle has a much, much better defense than either Indy or Washington. I think that makes the job of the QB much easier. Also, I think that, coming into this season, if asked which of the three teams was most likely to be a playoff team, the clear favorite would have been Seattle. Indy was expected to go 6-10 and the Redskins play in the pumped up NFC East. A lot of people predicted the Redskins to finish 4th. So in terms of exceeding expectations, I wouldn't give Wilson the credit you would.

(Bill Simmons, notable Seahawk homer, even picked the Seahawks for the Super Bowl before the season started.)

by Zach (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:26pm

While I wouldn't want much of the Colts roster, Reggie Wayne is the best receiver on any of the three teams.

by Anonymousse (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:40pm

Yeah, this. I'd take Reggie Wayne over some sort of conglomerate of all the best parts of RG3 and Wilson's WRs.

by KAN (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 10:35am

Phil Dawson over Justin Tucker is not a snub. Dawson leads the league in field goal percentage (96.6) and Kickoff Average Start Position (19.8).

by Anonymous`124 (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 11:27pm

Field goal percentage is useless, because not all field goal attempts are created equal. Dawson missed one field goal on the year, it was a 28-yarder (that was blocked). Justin Tucker has 2 missed field goals, they were from 41 and 47 yards. I would want to see video of the block and try to decide whether it was Dawson's fault or not before I decide which had a better field goal kicking year.

And the best starting position is confusing to me. Does starting (a fraction of a yard) inside the 20 mean that Cleveland's kick coverage team is great (which doesn't having anything to do with Dawson)? Does it mean that kick returners have stupidly taken the ball out of the end zone more vs. Cleveland than against other teams (also nothing to do with him)? Or does Dawson kickoff in a manner to try to increase hang time at the sake of distance to induce people to run out?

TLDR: Your stats are flawed, and I don't have enough information to make an accurate decision.

by Raiderjoe :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 11:06am

Pro Blow.

Who cares who morons pick to thsi farcical exjibition.

by McLuvin1983 (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 1:46pm

Thanks for your contribution to this thread.

How have you not been banned?

by Raiderjoe :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 2:20pm

We are all still waiting your first legit ppost on tihs websitr . You are a pathetic thing

by Raiderjoe :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 2:21pm

Hey McLubin1983

Sale on lotion at Pathamrk tonight.

by dbostedo :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 2:35pm

Why would he be banned? He contributes quite a lot to the site and doesn't violate any rules.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:20pm

If there was a motion to ban raiderjoe, it would fail dismally.

And what would the offense be? Bad spelling? Being an excessive homer? Knowing more about the AFL than any other two contributors combined??

by Ben :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 11:12am

I know no one cares much about punters, but is Colquitt over Mcafee a reasonable choice?

by turbohappy :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:23pm

McAfee has been awesome. He makes more sense than Mathis (and Luck, since some people are saying he should have made it - awesome year for a rookie and shows promise, but not really Pro Bowl caliber yet).

by tuluse :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 12:31pm

How often do two cornerbacks from one team both make it? Kind of neat to see Tillman and Jennings both there. Both seem deserving too with all the picks and forced fumbles they've caused.

by Slaymont Harris (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 2:55pm

The 1988 Browns were the last team to achieve it. Before that, I don't know.

by Purds :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 3:01pm

Wow, Tim Jennings. Couldn't even crack the starting lineup for an abysmal Colts defense until they had injuries, and now he's playing at a Pro Bowl level with the Bears. Better coaching? Maturity? Better teammates allowing him to shine (the Asante Samuel way of playing DB)? What gives, Bears fans?

by Eddo :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 3:56pm

Another wrinkle is that he was benched by the Bears towards the end of last year!

The biggest part, I would guess, is coaching. The Smith/Marinelli Bears have a way of finding unwanted or late-round defensive players and turning them into useful parts. Idonijie, Melton, and Roach are three active examples. Amobi Okoye was much better on the Bears than he was on the Texans.

Jennings definitely does not play "Asante Samuel style", ballhawking for interceptions. He's actually been a good tackler and this year has been asked to play much more tight man coverage than in the past, based on my observation. He truly has had an excellent year.

by Steve in WI :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:49pm

Well, word is that part of the reason for his benching last year was a number of dropped balls that should have been interceptions, and he worked hard on catching the ball this past offseason. It certainly seems to have worked. I'm sure there's more to it than just that, though.

by Slaymont Harris (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 6:00pm

From what I was able to gather at the time, it was a combination of Jennings being in Lovie's doghouse for not getting turnovers and the Bears wanting to see what they had in Zack Bowman for a game once they were out of the playoffs.

Despite the one game benching last year, he has been pretty good the past two years but really upped his game this year and has been excellent. Part of it was that he really concentrated on improving his ball catching skills in the offseason, and he has also played with more confidence and aggressiveness. A couple of his picks were bait jobs, which is something I don't remember him attempting the past two years.

by tuluse :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:07pm

He has improved his play each year with the Bears, so I think part of it is better coaching and/or more drive on his part to improve.

I think better teammates might be part of it too. Especially this year where the Bears front 7 were playing gangbusters for the first half of the season.

There could also be an aspect of putting a player in a position to succeed. The Bears and Colts both played a pretty traditional Tampa 2 when he was on the teams, but perhaps the wrinkles the Bears use are just more suited to his skill set.

Also, I still think this years was sort of a mirage for Jennings and he won't be nearly as good next year.

It probably doesn't need to be said, but I'm no where near a good enough film evaluator to give real answers these are all just speculations on possibilities.

by Roch Bear :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 2:15pm

Like you, I expect his pick numbers to fall as some were a bit lucky. It will be interesting to hear (if we do) whether he puts in the long hours of work on his pass catching again. That reported work and his remarkable turnaround on ball catching during games are a correlation that I chose to think causal.

His run support should still be there next year. The courage, agility and quick thinking in outstanding run tackling from small corners like Jennings and Winfield is utterly remarkable, and a joy to behold.

by Roch Bear :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 2:20pm

The fact that no one seems to comment on Tillman's selection is itself approbation. He belongs, and is getting recognition after being ignored for too long.

Four FFs in one game! Manos de Piedra ... except on picks where they soften considerably.

by tuluse :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 2:57pm

It's hard to say he was being ignored. He was always a legit #1 corner, but one of the weaker ones. Personally, I thought his selection last year was a lifetime achievement award in a down year for NFC corners. You just can't ignore 10 forced fumbles though.

by Gus (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 2:25pm

Michael Oher didn't make it. There is a god.

by ClemsonMatt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 3:42pm


by ClemsonMatt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 3:41pm

I'll admit to some bias, but CJ Spiller being left off is absurd.

1st in DVOA at 36.5% (A Peterson 2nd at 20.8%)
1st in YPA for running backs beating A Peterson 6.5 to 6.0
1st in Success Rate (nominal tie with Knowshon Moreno and Willis McGahee)
1200ish yds rushing.

The people ahead of him?

A.Foster 19th DVOA
J. Charles 11th DVOA
R. Rice 6th DVOA

That's the order they're listed in, so even for the ones that made it they're working backwards.

Recieving it looks like him and D. Martin are the only RB in the top ten in rushing and receiving.

And the rest of Buffalo's offense is...lacking.

Since it appears that it's a combination of total yds, carries, and touchdowns I blame Chan Gailey.

by Walshmobile :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 3:57pm

Side note: Am I the only one frightened by the fact we're in a world where CJ Spiller is leading in success rate?

by ClemsonMatt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 4:13pm

"And yea the end will be near when CJ Spiller leads the NFL in success rate and the NFC West shall be a power conference again and Tony Romo will play well in December. If also 3 rookie quarterbacks lead their teams to the playoffs, the Zombie apocalypse will arrive"

Ok....looks like there's no need to worry as long as Minnesota wins?

by RebeccaMartin (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:40pm

Figures -- in a world without Twinkies, no less...

Woody Harrelson has already grabbed his shotguns and Bill Murray has gone into hiding...

by Eddo :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 6:53pm

The Vikings winning would have only a very minor effect on your apocalyptic scenario (the Redskins can't get the wild card if the Vikings or Bears win, but would still make the playoffs as long as they beat the Cowboys).

by Tino (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 4:58pm

Spiller's problem is that a) his profile was too low coming into this season, and b) the stats that tend to grab people's attention most for running backs (total rushing yards and rushing touchdowns) are good but not great. Plus he plays for a franchise that has been in the toilet for the past decade, so only fans from 13 different teams got to see him first-hand this year. When is the last time Buffalo played on national TV?

by Gus (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:25pm

Wasn't it the game versus Dallas a couple years back where they picked off Romo five times and still lost?

by Anonymousse (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:42pm

Being behind by 14+ points every week is great for RB success rates and ypc figures.

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 10:51pm

If this were true, lousy teams would have great running backs all the time. That isn't the case, therefore you're not correct. Spiller is genuinely a talented back.

by RickD :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:31pm

I suspect most Pro Bowl voters don't care a whit for success rate. They look at total yardage and/or rushing yardage.

Spiller mainly suffers from a lack of name recognition. The real question I thought would be who gets in along with Arian Foster and Ray Rice. And it's Jamaal Charles, who leads them all in rushing yards.

Looking at the FO stats, it's surprising at how low Charles and Foster rate. Both are also behind Stevan Ridley, who gets no consideration at all, it seems.

Spiller is an excellent talent. It's good for the rest of the NFL that Chan Gailey is such a horrid coach. As a Pats' fan, I cringe when I see Spiller in the open field with the ball. I'm pretty sure he's the fastest RB the Pats have faced this season.

by ClemsonMatt (not verified) :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:19pm

No sure...I've seen them once or twice this season in the Carolinas. But I've actively been looking for them.

Overall he's 4th in AFC rushing yds (3rd in yds from scrimmage) and 6th in TDs. Like you said, good, but not great. Those are more a function of use than quality though.

So...Chan Gailey. He needs to go back to coaching GT. I REALLY liked him as GTs coach.

And whether or not he makes the pro-bowl, I'm happy for CJs success. I'll admit to some creative language when the Bills drafted him.

by CoachDave :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 5:33pm

"Wow...the fan voting this year was dead on."

Said no one ever in the history of the world.

by The Ninjalectual :: Thu, 12/27/2012 - 7:34pm

My painstaking handcrafted pro-bowl roster: http://fuckitimgoingdeep.wordpress.com/2012/12/27/pro-bowl/

by justanothersteve :: Fri, 12/28/2012 - 3:06pm

How long before FO makes a RGIII-Wilson irrational argument page?

by MC2 :: Sat, 12/29/2012 - 12:53am

After reading this thread, it seems like they already have.