ESPN's Clayton disses Freeman BIG TIME

[jerseybucsfan]

Great posts guys. I can't disagree with any of that. I have more trouble with Clayton's definition than where Freeman belongs. If you extend the parameters, then he is dissed. If you go by YOUR definition, be it top four or top five, then he does not belong yet.
That said, if Freeman never wins a playoff game, his career here would be considered a failure. Given his talent level, I expect at least five playoff wins during his time in Tampa. Let's see if he reaches that level.

[Garv]

Someone needs to look up the definition of the word "elite".....  "representing the most choice or select; best"

12 of 32 quarterbacks can't be the "best".  That doesn't make any sense and it actually dilutes the idea of any QB being "elite". 

There's only 4 QBs who are "elite" in my opinion... Brady, Manning, Brees, and Roethlisberger. 

You can't be elite without a Super Bowl ring in my opinion, either.  Much less a playoff win.

I've got a SERIOUS problem with Schaub, Rodgers and Ryan being in the elite list.   Win at least ONE playoff game first.  Then we'll talk.

Its ABSURD to put anyone in the same group as Brady, Manning and Brees.

Laughable.

I realize a lot of this is semantics but as this is a message board and the season is over
for our Buccaneers..........
IMO Manning, Brady and Brees are "elite." I would not put Ben in that category. Those three are simply far better
and can do more with less than he can IMO. Just my opinion.
As for not being "elite" without winning a Super Bowl? Two words........Dan Marino.
I find it hard to argue that. Dan Fouts as well. Look at the numbers and the wins. I think you have to.

But when you type later that "it's ABSURD to put anyone in the same group as Brady, Manning and Brees?"
I certainly agree with you, absolutely.

But I STILL would not trade Josh Freeman for any of them today. For any other QB in the NFL.
And you know what? THAT'S INCREDIBLE!!! I assure you as a fan since the beginning. There has NEVER been
another time when I could type that.

I figured someone would bring up the Marino argument.  And I understand that.  And kindly disagree. 

Marino was great.  But not ever winning a ring takes a lot away from his career, in my opinion.

Still can't figure out why Ryan is "elite".  Never passed for 4000 yards in career.  ZERO playoffs wins.   Can't figure out why so many people mark out to that guy.  He has no fire.  He's a robot.  I'd take Freeman over Ryan ALL DAY LONG. 

My definition of "elite" would include ALL of these checkmarks -- Playoff wins, Rings,  Consistent top 10 stats.

I have to put Big Ben in the "elite" status.  The guy has 2 rings in 5 season.  And he makes plays under pressure.  That TD pass to win the Super Bowl was SICK.

Well, I still think ANY QB who makes it into the NFL HOF is an "elite" QB.
Is Dan Marino a better QB than Ben? By far IMO, by as great a distance as can be imagined.
If Dan had a defense in those days........oh well.
Some argue than Dan Marino is the best to have ever played. I'm not sure about that. Johnny U,
Joe Montana others come to mind too. Heck, Johnny U was 0-1 in Super Bowls. Does that matter?
Not to me, not at all. Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl. Half as many as Ben, more than Dan. Does that matter. Not to me, not at all.

Hey, I think Josh Freeman will make it to the HOF one day. Only thing he needs to do is stay healthy IMO.
Ahead of myself? Probably, but it's what I believe today. Absolutely what I believe today.

[DanTurksGhost]

I don't have a huge problem with Clayton's assessment. I might move Freeman up a couple of spots to, perhaps, #11 overall -- but really when you look at Clayton's rankings there are no less-experienced QB's than Freeman above him. When talking about QB's you want to see these guys do it a few times before you start to consider them among the "elite".

Where I disagree with Clayton's assessment is on Bradford. Throwing for 3,000 yards as a rookie sounds impressive, but the kid threw it 37 times a game (a paltry 6.0 yards per) and he also had a 15-to-18 INT to TD ratio. If Josh had tossed the ball 37 times a game this year and kept the same 7.3 yards per, he'd have thrown for over 4,300 yards.

And no, I wouldn't trade Freeman for any of the guys above him on the list today.

[mattyd1521]

Like it has been mentioned in this thread already I wouldn't trade Freeman for any other QB. As for Sam Bradford, he is also going to be a very good QB can't knock that. As for Cutler he is a QB I wouldn't be comfortable with. He has shown throughout his career he will consistently make bad decisions by taking a sack or throwing a INT.

I love watching Freeman overpower a lineman and make a throw. To me it is not a matter of it but when will Freeman reach the elite status.

[jerseybucsfan]

6.0 is what, 31st in the NFL? That's my argument too. A ton of attempts but all high-percentage. The pro-Bradford argument is ''He didn't have any receivers.'' And that's why they played it that way. But you can't assume his TD passes would go up and INTs would NOT if he has a better group. IMHO they both go up. And let's not forget one other obvious fact. Bradford won seven games in the second-worst division in NFL history. Put him in any other division and he wins five or six games.

[AcuraT]

Why pay attention to John Clayton?  Does anyone even realize all the bad calls he made in 2010 alone?  He goes with the masses, and never goes out on  limb.  See below:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/18799/out-of-character-move-for-the-eagles - Starting Michael Vick is a bad decision
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5528592 - Picks the Colts over the Cowboys in the Super Bowl
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/22320/ranking-quarterbacks-in-the-nfc-west - His ranking of NFC West QBs at the start of the season.  Why Hasselback?  Because Bradford would be going out on a limb!

Clayton is a good reporter, but I never pay any attention to his analysis as it is useless.  He may think he is qualified as an expert, but his opinion is pretty terrible.  I listen to Mike Golic because he does go out on a limb, and more often than not, he gets it right.  Clayton, not so much.

[nubcake]

I wouldn't say he bashed Freeman, I just think he's still stuck in "well known name" mode. That's why he has guys like Bradford and Cutler as more likely to be elite, he already knows them and he's just now getting to know Freeman. Clayton is your stereotypical look at the surface guy. He isn't going to put in the effort to look at factors like what players surround these QBs. Also, using a stat like 4,000 yards to determine "elite" status is hilarious. Nearly any QB in the league can hit 4,000 yards if the team chooses to throw 35+ times per game. It's a horrible measurement, one you'd expect someone very new to the sport to come up with.

Personally though, I thought his most ridiculous placement was putting Clausen over Tebow. I mean seriously, how can you possibly be that idiotic? Clausen looked absolutely horrendous this year, never showing even glimpses of potential. That's not to say he can never do it, but he's going to need some serious help to even be decent in this league. Meanwhile, Tebow had a team who had completely given up on the season playing very competitively, mounting 2 large comebacks and even winning one of them. He also showed the ability to run the ball very well, much better than even most Tebow supporters thought he'd be able to do. I wouldn't put him too high since he only played 3 games, but I'd certainly place him and McCoy ahead of guys who have had numerous opportunities and have shown nothing but mediocrity or are just getting old such as Collins, Henne, Hasselbeck, Smith, etc. I mean, you pretty much have to if you're going to Bradford way up at 14th based on just one season with a very low QB rating.

Clayton can't seem to decide if he's factoring potential into the equation or not. With big names like Bradford and Cutler he does, with guys like Freeman, McCoy, and Tebow he doesn't. All in all, I wouldn't really worry about it because very few people take Clayton seriously anymore anyways.

[bucfan33]

I don't dissagree with Freeman not being named an Elite Quarterback on that list but what gets me is chances of being elite. Freeman is at 85% while you got Cutler at 95% and Bradford at 99%? Seriously get off Bradfords **CENSORED**!!!! But on that list I would have Cutler above Freeman right now.

Heres my ranking by tiers
 


Changed your list some. Rivers isn't top 4 until he wins something & Big Ben has 2 SB rings.                                                                                     

Brady                                                                                 
Manning
Brees
Rothlesberger

Rivers
Rodgers
Ryan
Vick

Freeman
Manning
Flacco
Cutler
Schaub
Romo

Mcnabb
Bradford
Cassell
Palmer

Anyhting else really don't matter at this point

[CyberDilemma]

ESPN's Clayton disses Freeman BIG TIME

Probably penis envy.

[TBayXXXVII]

TB37, by your definition, if Bradford goes 25-6 next year then we have to wait until 2012 to call him elite?
I'll bet that no one makes him wait and I wouldn't either. Remember that as bad as the Rams were last year, a lot of their improvement can be credited to their defense this year. Their defense was in fact ranked higher than their offense.

As for Bradford...whether the media does or not, I don't know... but I would.

As for Freeman... "Elite" is not a word you throw around lightly.  Your talking the top 3 QB's... that's it... not 7, 8 or 10... top 3.  The top 3 right now are Brady, Manning, Brees.  That's it.  The next group would be Rodgers, Rivers, and Big Ben... that's it.  Freeman is not better than any of those 6.  Anyone who says he is elite, is just a blind homer.  Sure, you may not want to trade Freeman for anyone, fine, he's only in his 2nd year and 10-15 more could be in the future, but I can tell you this... for 1 year/game... I'd trade Freeman for everyone of those 6... in a heart beat.  I'm not saying in the future he won't be, I'm just saying that right now he isn't.  He's already better now than I thought he'd ever be.  Kudos for him for proving me wrong, I was hoping he would... but let's not get too carried away.

[Watchman]

TB37, by your definition, if Bradford goes 25-6 next year then we have to wait until 2012 to call him elite?
I'll bet that no one makes him wait and I wouldn't either. Remember that as bad as the Rams were last year, a lot of their improvement can be credited to their defense this year. Their defense was in fact ranked higher than their offense.

As for Bradford...whether the media does or not, I don't know... but I would.

As for Freeman... "Elite" is not a word you throw around lightly.  Your talking the top 3 QB's... that's it... not 7, 8 or 10... top 3.  The top 3 right now are Brady, Manning, Brees.  That's it.  The next group would be Rodgers, Rivers, and Big Ben... that's it.  Freeman is not better than any of those 6.  Anyone who says he is elite, is just a blind homer.  Sure, you may not want to trade Freeman for anyone, fine, he's only in his 2nd year and 10-15 more could be in the future, but I can tell you this... for 1 year/game... I'd trade Freeman for everyone of those 6... in a heart beat.  I'm not saying in the future he won't be, I'm just saying that right now he isn't.  He's already better now than I thought he'd ever be.  Kudos for him for proving me wrong, I was hoping he would... but let's not get too carried away.

I agree with much of what you are saying.  "Elite" is thrown around way to casually, and I'm not really concerned right now if Freeman will someday be viewed as one of the top 2-3 QBs in the league.  It also doesn't have any relation to whether or not the Bucs can win a SB with Freeman at QB.  Brad Johnson was never elite.  I also agree that for one game or one season there are QBs that I would take over Freeman right now.  However, for a young team that is trying to build something I'd be hard pressed to say that I'd want Brady, Manning, or Brees, or any of the other more veteran QBs in the league based on their age.  Would I trade Freeman for Ryan?  Maybe, but Ryan is a Falcom and I'm a Bucs fan so homerism comes into play.

[Garv]

TB37, by your definition, if Bradford goes 25-6 next year then we have to wait until 2012 to call him elite?
I'll bet that no one makes him wait and I wouldn't either. Remember that as bad as the Rams were last year, a lot of their improvement can be credited to their defense this year. Their defense was in fact ranked higher than their offense.

As for Bradford...whether the media does or not, I don't know... but I would.

As for Freeman... "Elite" is not a word you throw around lightly.  Your talking the top 3 QB's... that's it... not 7, 8 or 10... top 3.  The top 3 right now are Brady, Manning, Brees.  That's it.  The next group would be Rodgers, Rivers, and Big Ben... that's it.  Freeman is not better than any of those 6.  Anyone who says he is elite, is just a blind homer.  Sure, you may not want to trade Freeman for anyone, fine, he's only in his 2nd year and 10-15 more could be in the future, but I can tell you this... for 1 year/game... I'd trade Freeman for everyone of those 6... in a heart beat.  I'm not saying in the future he won't be, I'm just saying that right now he isn't.  He's already better now than I thought he'd ever be.  Kudos for him for proving me wrong, I was hoping he would... but let's not get too carried away.

I agree with much of what you are saying.  "Elite" is thrown around way to casually, and I'm not really concerned right now if Freeman will someday be viewed as one of the top 2-3 QBs in the league.  It also doesn't have any relation to whether or not the Bucs can win a SB with Freeman at QB.  Brad Johnson was never elite.  I also agree that for one game or one season there are QBs that I would take over Freeman right now.  However, for a young team that is trying to build something I'd be hard pressed to say that I'd want Brady, Manning, or Brees, or any of the other more veteran QBs in the league based on their age.  Would I trade Freeman for Ryan?  Maybe, but Ryan is a Falcom and I'm a Bucs fan so homerism comes into play.

I'm not at all embarrassed or ashamed to claim to be a Buccaneer fan, or "homer" or whatever else some may type thinking
it's insulting to some. Doesn't bother me at all.
I've also followed the game, the NFL in particular, since 1966 and know what I see. I would not trade Freeman for ANY QB for ANY reason
PERIOD..........end of sentence.
For Matt Ryan? LOL Nobody. Do I think Manning, Brady or Brees are ahead of him today? DUH! They are the three best of this era.
Unquestioned "elite" QBs and all in their 30's. Josh Freeman will be the face of the Buccaneers for the next ten to fifteen maybe more years.

Being a fan of the team, or a "homer" as some of you phony jack wagon "experts" like to hurl at some of us, I can not only
live with it but revel in it. I trade Josh Freeman for nobody.

[jerseybucsfan]

I wouldn't trade Freeman for Ryan. IMHO Rodgers and Rivers are the only guys that enter that conversation for me. No to Rodgers because of the concussions, no to Rivers because he hasn't really been able to win yet. Too up and down.
But I'm angry with Freeman's placement on Clayton's list, not whether he actually IS elite yet. He is elite in the current season sense. But since even Rodgers hasn't QBd a playoff winner yet, the TRUE elite list should be: win a Super Bowl AND be consistently excellent with rare exceptions. So Freeman could have a few more big years, but before he gets at least one 11 or 12-win season AND wins a playoff game, he's not yet really elite. Even Eli has failed to prove he can be this consistently. In one sense, Ben, Brees, Brady and Peyton are all alone.