Steven Jackson to Atlanta

[EKnight]

Failure is always relative to expectations.

Yesm but no one other than you and Mike have the expectation that ATL will win the Superbowl. That's my point. It's why I listed the teams who have better odds right now than them. Either address this point or be done. If their generally accepted EXPECTATION is not to win the Superbowl- and that's what odds are, the expecation of a team's performance- agreed upon and published by oddsmakers who make expectations for a living- then their season is not a failure if they do what is expected of them, and not win it. No amount of circular logic on your behalf will circumvent that- you teo made an expectation yourselves and labeled ATL a failure if they do not meet it. No one else in the sports world agrees or ATL would have the greatest odds of winning. -EK

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Marino lost that SB against the 49ers most certainly is used to label him a "failure." 

Any argument that in order to be successful rests on labeling a player that has been inducted into the Hall of Fame a "failure", is a weak argument. 

While Marino's  lack of a ring keeps him out of any serious discussion of "top 5 QBs of all time", it doesn't keep him off the top 25 lists. His career was not a failure.  Not elite, but not a failure. 

[EKnight]

Any argument that in order to be successful rests on labeling a player that has been inducted into the Hall of Fame a "failure", is a weak argument. 

While Marino's  lack of a ring keeps him out of any serious discussion of "top 5 QBs of all time", it doesn't keep him off the top 25 lists. His career was not a failure.  Not elite, but not a failure. 

Don't forget that Spider also listed Jim Kelly, Fran Tarkenton, Charles Barkley, Karl Malone, and Patrick Ewing- all Hall of Famers- as failures in this thread as well.    -EK

[Spider-Dan]

Yesm but no one other than you and Mike have the expectation that ATL will win the Superbowl.

Neither of us said that ATL is expected to win.  Try reading.

You should also make up your mind as to whether you want to continue to lean on the oddsmakers or not, because every time you make that statement, you reinforce the idea of "SB or failure"... you're just saying it should be a different team.

I ask again: is your problem here with the idea of a team being expected to play in/win the Super Bowl, or just the idea that Atlanta is a team in that position?

[Spider-Dan]

While Marino's  lack of a ring keeps him out of any serious discussion of "top 5 QBs of all time", it doesn't keep him off the top 25 lists. His career was not a failure.  Not elite, but not a failure. 

Were Ryan Leaf and JaMarcus Russell failures?  They were almost certainly better football players than everyone you ever knew or will know.

FAILURE
IS
RELATIVE
TO
EXPECTATIONS

[EKnight]

Neither of us said that ATL is expected to win.  Try reading.

You should also make up your mind as to whether you want to continue to lean on the oddsmakers or not, because every time you make that statement, you reinforce the idea of "SB or failure"... you're just saying it should be a different team.

I ask again: is your problem here with the idea of a team being expected to play in/win the Super Bowl, or just the idea that Atlanta is a team in that position?

Mike said if they don't get a Superbowl, the season is a failure (or something to that effect, using the word "failure").  Given that they are 5th on the list of odds to make it, the oddsmakers disagree- whether the argument is getting there or winning. Asking me to repeat my position because you can't figure it out after the multiple times I've stated it, leads me to believe you have no ground to stand on and are simply looking to argue. I'll compile them here, so you won't be so unclear:

I happen to feel it's "idiot logic" to have the mentality that anything less than a Superbowl is failure.

Im saying it's bipolar assinine stupidity to label anything but a Superbowl a "failure." There are levels of success that go beyond a single game. As Hoodie pointed out, 2nd place and 32nd place are not the same.

You can keep pouting out your failures is relative to expectations" all day and night- it doesn't change the fact that your position on the expectations of the Falcons is wrong. I'm not going to further debate this with you. Go ahead and say whatever you want about Atlanta's expectations and failures and how your list of Hall of Fame players is full of failures as well. Not a further fuck will be given.



-EK

[Spider-Dan]

Is your argument that it is unreasonable to expect any specific team to get to the Super Bowl, or that is unreasonable to expect the 2013 Atlanta Falcons to get there?

Please make up your mind, so I know exactly what I'm rebutting.  Because your "oddsmakers" defense does nothing at all to refute the former, even though you appear to have said that the former is "idiot logic."

[MikeO]

Mike said if they don't get a Superbowl, the season is a failure (or something to that effect, using the word "failure").  Given that they are 5th on the list of odds to make it, the oddsmakers disagree- whether the argument is getting there or winning.

1) I said that and stand by it! If you are at HOME in the NFC Championship game one year, add top players (Steven  Jackson) and fail to go further, then you failed that season. Short of a rash of serious injuries, if they stay healthy ...yes its a FAILURE of a season if they don't surpass what they did in 2012!

2) who the F' cares what the "oddsmakers" say on March 15th. FA is a week old and the draft hasn't happened yet. The odds are WORTHLESS right now!!!

[Sunstroke]

Steven Jackson and Michael Turner are the same person.  Except Michael Turner doesn't get hurt as often.

Gotta scratch my head a little at this one. Steven Jackson and Michael Turner have never, at any point of their career, been even similar in RB style. Start with Jackson being 4+ inches taller (and, ahem, 10 lbs lighter) and a galloping RB, while Turner is more of a one cut RB who relies on his power to break through initial tackles. Steven Jackson is arguably one of the best receivers out of the backfield among tailbacks (no fewer than 38 receptions every year), while Turner couldn't catch a cold in a pediatrics ward (never more than 19 receptions in a season). To put it in perspective: Jackson had 24 more receptions in 2006 alone than Turner has had in his career (90-66).

If you saw Turner play this past season, you wouldn't compare them in production either, as Turner looked pretty horrible. No burst, no power...lower body warranty: expired.

Over the last 8 seasons, Jackson has been automatic for 240+ carries, 38-50 catches, 1,000+ yds rushing , 200-350 yds receiving. He's the model of RB consistency.  Jackson is also two years younger than Turner...

As far as the injury nonsense goes, Steven Jackson has missed 2 games, total, over the past 4 seasons. If you use "injury-prone" to describe Jackson, then you should really include "but he plays through them all" as an honesty-driven caveat.

Jacquizz Rodgers is going to have a breakout year this season. 

I'll make ya a small $5 side bet, payable at the "following" YJFF draft. This season, Rodgers stats (carries, receptions, offensive yards) will be no more than 10% above last season's modest numbers, when he was playing behind Turner, rather than Jackson.

The Falcons signed Jackson as an upgrade over Turner, which it definitely is, and I believe part of the reason for that is because they know that Rodgers, at 5'6" and less than 200 lbs, isn't a real workhorse feature back, and is most effective as the speedy change of pace RB and extra WR behind a larger feature back.

I think it is an excellent pick-up for the Falcons, and one that significantly upgrades their offense. Not like their offense really needed a lot of upgrading...

At this point, I think the NFL should consider revamping the NFC schedule and just have a 4-way season-long tournament between the 49ers, Seahawks, Falcons and Packers. That would be fucking awesome.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

Were Ryan Leaf and JaMarcus Russell failures?  They were almost certainly better football players than everyone you ever knew or will know.

As NFL players they were failures.  As college players they were not. 

[Spider-Dan]

As professional athletes, they reached an elite pinnacle (#2 and #1 overall) that placed them at the top of a football talent pool consisting of millions of players.  They earned more money than most of us will see in our lives.

Yet the very mention of their names invokes scorn and derisive laughter.  Professionally speaking, were they failures?  That depends on who you are comparing them to, doesn't it?

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

As professional athletes, they reached an elite pinnacle (#2 and #1 overall)

No they didn't.  Being drafted number one means you reached an elite pinnacle as a college player, not as a professional athlete. 

Ryan Leaf was an elite college football player, but a failure as a pro player.

Tom Brady is an elite professional football player, but only a so-so college player.

Tim Tebow is a so-so professional football player, but was an elite college player.

Peyton Manning is an elite professional football player and was also at the college level. 

Your draft level is a measure of your success or failure as a college player, it says nothing about your status at the professional level. 

[Spider-Dan]

How many players at the professional level had signed bigger contracts than Leaf or Russell?

Money talks.  Professionally speaking, they signed elite contracts and made elite money.  Maybe not for very long, but money is money.

[Landshark]

Your draft level is a measure of your success or failure as a college player, it says nothing about your status at the professional level. 

Same goes for the Heisman Trophy, although the draft level and the Heisman trophy don't always go hand in hand.

I'd say over the past 20 years, about 1/3 of all Heisman Trophy winners went on to be NFL Standouts, 1/3 were so-so players, and 1/3 were complete busts.

[MyGodWearsAHoodie]

How many players at the professional level had signed bigger contracts than Leaf or Russell?

Money talks.  Professionally speaking, they signed elite contracts and made elite money.  Maybe not for very long, but money is money.

I think you are arguing just to argue....

But going back to were the deviation came from. 

In that case, the ONLY expectations we should use is not ESPN pre-season poll but team payroll.

Last year the Texans and Lions spent the most money of any team.  So unless those two teams met in the super bowl they failed to meet expectations by your standard.  And Jacksonville spent the least so unless they had the worst record, they exceeded expectations.