Should the Bucs sign QB Josh Freeman to long-term extension now?

[Feel Real Good]

Freeman: 54 games, 1,026-1,737, 59.1%, 12,090 yards, 7.0 YPA, 76 TD, 54 INT

Snachez: 60 games, 998-1,804, 55.3%, 11,756 yards, 6.5 YPA, 67 TD, 64 INT

Yet another stellar comparison.

Who was comparing Sanchez to Freeman, or saying that Sanchez was better?

The comment was regarding the TD record for this franchise. Sanchez overall has been below average, yet if he were on this team and performed the way he has at NY, he would soon be the franchise leader in TDs.

That puts the franchise record into perspective. It means nothing. Freeman overall, has been average. You can continue to be a stat-wh*re and continue to throw out random numbers, but the fact remains that Freeman is wildly inconsistent and the stats do not tell the whole story.

While you are correct about the cumulative nature of career statistics, the fact that Sanchez would need one and a half more seasons than Freeman to become the career leader completely invalidates him. Sanchez has never finished a season with a QB rating in the 80s. Freeman already holds the franchise record for QB rating for a full year starter and is currently sitting at #4 for highest QB rating this season. So Freeman has not only done it by longevity, he's done it by having peak performances, too.

[BucBalla85]

Freeman: 54 games, 1,026-1,737, 59.1%, 12,090 yards, 7.0 YPA, 76 TD, 54 INT

Snachez: 60 games, 998-1,804, 55.3%, 11,756 yards, 6.5 YPA, 67 TD, 64 INT

Yet another stellar comparison.

Who was comparing Sanchez to Freeman, or saying that Sanchez was better?

The comment was regarding the TD record for this franchise. Sanchez overall has been below average, yet if he were on this team and performed the way he has at NY, he would soon be the franchise leader in TDs.

That puts the franchise record into perspective. It means nothing. Freeman overall, has been average. You can continue to be a stat-wh*re and continue to throw out random numbers, but the fact remains that Freeman is wildly inconsistent and the stats do not tell the whole story.

While you are correct about the cumulative nature of career statistics, the fact that Sanchez would need one and a half more seasons than Freeman to become the career leader completely invalidates him. Sanchez has never finished a season with a QB rating in the 80s. Freeman already holds the franchise record for QB rating for a full year starter and is currently sitting at #4 for highest QB rating this season. So Freeman has not only done it by longevity, he's done it by having peak performances, too.

Thing is chace, while we know the stats dont tell the whole story, the stats are still the stats. They are gonna be looked at seriously by this organization. If hes putting up those numbers while hes still 24, you dont just ignore that. You dont ignore stats where your 24 year old QB just broke all of your previous QBs stats. This organization likely wont do that. As much as the fans want to. They wont. They wont let another Doug Williams type situation happen. They will look at those numbers seriously and will most likely bring Freeman back because they have never had a QB have those numbers. You dont let him leave because hes been inconsistent at 24. While hes still young and can learn much more. The organization will feel he can get better no matter if the fans feel he has peaked. While the stats may be meaningless to the fans. It wont be to the people writing the checks.

[TBayXXXVII]

Now that I think about it. Foedus brings up a great point. Do we really think they wont resign the franchise leader in TDs? Given this franchise history with QBs they would not let Freeman get away. Hes young and full of potential. They will resign him. Its just a question of when I believe.

If Mark Sanchez plays next season like he did this season, he will be the Bucs all-time leader in yards and TD's.  Being the fastest runner in 100M dash in high school, doesn't mean you're one of the fastest runners in the world.

Just being jamaicas 2nd fastest, still gets you gold at the olympics.

LOL... nice try, I'll give you that.

[TBayXXXVII]

Drew Bree's first 58 games:  79 TD  53 INT after 58 games he was 26 years old at the end of that season.  Chargers let him go after that year, I wonder if they would like to do that over?

Freeman has 76 TD passes in 54 games you don't let that walk out the door.  Does Free need to improve in some areas of course what 24 year old doesn't.  Good coaching, which I would argue he hasn't had till this year, could help him improve.

Irrelevant arguement.  The game back then was not as favorable to QB's and passing as today.  Compare the players of that era.

Passing TD's
In 2000 (for reference)...
#1 Culpepper - 33
#10 Brunell & Favre - 20
+ Note: Only 3 QB's had more than 30 - Culpepper, Manning, Garcia

In 2001 (for reference)...
#1 Warner - 36
#10 Fiedler - 20
+ Note: Only 3 QB's had more than 30 - Warner, Favre, Garcia

In 2002...
#1 Brady - 28
#10 Pennington, B. Johnson, McNair - 20
(Brees had 17)

In 2003...
#1 Favre - 32
#10 Brady - 20
(Brees had 11 in 11 games)
+ Note: Only 3 QB's had more than 30 - Warner, Favre, Garcia

In 2004...
#1 Manning - 49
#10 Hasselbeck - 20
(Brees had 27)
+ Note: Only 3 QB's had more than 30 - Manning, Culpepper, McNabb

So, from 2001 to 2004, the #1 passer had an average of 36 TD's per year.  The #10 passer had an average of 20 TD's per year.  With 79 TD's, that puts Brees just outside the top 10, while playing in 58 of 64 games.  On average, he would just squeak into the top 10 in passing TD's over that 4 year span, when pro-rated to play 64 games.

Compare that to the last 4 years (projecting to the end of the season), and the average of the #1 passer is 42 and 27 for the #10.  Freeman, projecting forward as well as projecting for 64 games is at 23.

So  while Freeman projects to about 23 TD's per 64 games played and Brees to about 22, in an era of easier passing... Freeman is appoximately 16th (mediocre), among his peers while Brees was 9th (tier below the elite),

Keep in mind as well, I'm all for giving Freeman all of next season.  I'm not saying to get rid of him now.  Also keep in mind that the Chargers took the route of replacing Brees after 42 games... where as we are talking about Freeman after playing 72.  Quite a bit larger of a sample size... don't ya think?

[BucBalla85]

Its not irrelevant. I guarantee you the organization is not thinking like you. They are thinking about what Freemans done and what he could be. Seeing that hes already broken the record for a lot of passing records at 24 will probably make this decision easy for the organization. Especially in one that has had a hard time finding QBs. They dont want to go back to doing that again. Not while there is a 24 year old breaking records. They will see Freeman through and will continue to build around him. I think fans gotta get used to hearing Josh Freemans name around here. No matter how much you like him.

[Foedus]

Drew Bree's first 58 games:  79 TD  53 INT after 58 games he was 26 years old at the end of that season.  Chargers let him go after that year, I wonder if they would like to do that over?

Freeman has 76 TD passes in 54 games you don't let that walk out the door.  Does Free need to improve in some areas of course what 24 year old doesn't.  Good coaching, which I would argue he hasn't had till this year, could help him improve.

Irrelevant arguement.  The game back then was not as favorable to QB's and passing as today.  Compare the players of that era.

Passing TD's
In 2000 (for reference)...
#1 Culpepper - 33
#10 Brunell & Favre - 20
+ Note: Only 3 QB's had more than 30 - Culpepper, Manning, Garcia

In 2001 (for reference)...
#1 Warner - 36
#10 Fiedler - 20
+ Note: Only 3 QB's had more than 30 - Warner, Favre, Garcia

In 2002...
#1 Brady - 28
#10 Pennington, B. Johnson, McNair - 20
(Brees had 17)

In 2003...
#1 Favre - 32
#10 Brady - 20
(Brees had 11 in 11 games)
+ Note: Only 3 QB's had more than 30 - Warner, Favre, Garcia

In 2004...
#1 Manning - 49
#10 Hasselbeck - 20
(Brees had 27)
+ Note: Only 3 QB's had more than 30 - Manning, Culpepper, McNabb

So, from 2001 to 2004, the #1 passer had an average of 36 TD's per year.  The #10 passer had an average of 20 TD's per year.  With 79 TD's, that puts Brees just outside the top 10, while playing in 58 of 64 games.  On average, he would just squeak into the top 10 in passing TD's over that 4 year span, when pro-rated to play 64 games.

Compare that to the last 4 years (projecting to the end of the season), and the average of the #1 passer is 42 and 27 for the #10.  Freeman, projecting forward as well as projecting for 64 games is at 23.

So  while Freeman projects to about 23 TD's per 64 games played and Brees to about 22, in an era of easier passing... Freeman is appoximately 16th (mediocre), among his peers while Brees was 9th (tier below the elite),

Keep in mind as well, I'm all for giving Freeman all of next season.  I'm not saying to get rid of him now.  Also keep in mind that the Chargers took the route of replacing Brees after 42 games... where as we are talking about Freeman after playing 72.  Quite a bit larger of a sample size... don't ya think?

No it's not a larger sample size. 
Bree's played all 58 games for the Chargers and was with them for 5 full seasons 80 games I only listed the games he started.  Bree's got to sit his whole first year.  This Freeman's 4th year 61 games 54 games started.

[chace1986]

Freeman: 54 games, 1,026-1,737, 59.1%, 12,090 yards, 7.0 YPA, 76 TD, 54 INT

Snachez: 60 games, 998-1,804, 55.3%, 11,756 yards, 6.5 YPA, 67 TD, 64 INT

Yet another stellar comparison.

Who was comparing Sanchez to Freeman, or saying that Sanchez was better?

The comment was regarding the TD record for this franchise. Sanchez overall has been below average, yet if he were on this team and performed the way he has at NY, he would soon be the franchise leader in TDs.

That puts the franchise record into perspective. It means nothing. Freeman overall, has been average. You can continue to be a stat-wh*re and continue to throw out random numbers, but the fact remains that Freeman is wildly inconsistent and the stats do not tell the whole story.

While you are correct about the cumulative nature of career statistics, the fact that Sanchez would need one and a half more seasons than Freeman to become the career leader completely invalidates him. Sanchez has never finished a season with a QB rating in the 80s. Freeman already holds the franchise record for QB rating for a full year starter and is currently sitting at #4 for highest QB rating this season. So Freeman has not only done it by longevity, he's done it by having peak performances, too.

Thing is chace, while we know the stats dont tell the whole story, the stats are still the stats. They are gonna be looked at seriously by this organization. If hes putting up those numbers while hes still 24, you dont just ignore that. You dont ignore stats where your 24 year old QB just broke all of your previous QBs stats. This organization likely wont do that. As much as the fans want to. They wont. They wont let another Doug Williams type situation happen. They will look at those numbers seriously and will most likely bring Freeman back because they have never had a QB have those numbers. You dont let him leave because hes been inconsistent at 24. While hes still young and can learn much more. The organization will feel he can get better no matter if the fans feel he has peaked. While the stats may be meaningless to the fans. It wont be to the people writing the checks.

That I don't disagree with, but it does disappoint me that it will probably be the case.

I think a fellow poster summed the situation up perfectly in another thread....

Actually the problem isn't that Freeman stinks. He is average. He puts up good numbers just often enough to make you think he is better than he is. Bad and great are convincing. But mediocre makes you live with the delusion for too many years. He is just good enough to waste our time and not good enough to get us where we want to go.

[Booker Reese]

The last two seasons passing TDs are easier to come by (though we probably should check on a per attempt basis), but it's basically 2 TDs per team more than early 2000s. In truth, the totals jump around quite a bit from 2001 - 2009.

[BucBalla85]

Freeman: 54 games, 1,026-1,737, 59.1%, 12,090 yards, 7.0 YPA, 76 TD, 54 INT

Snachez: 60 games, 998-1,804, 55.3%, 11,756 yards, 6.5 YPA, 67 TD, 64 INT

Yet another stellar comparison.

Who was comparing Sanchez to Freeman, or saying that Sanchez was better?

The comment was regarding the TD record for this franchise. Sanchez overall has been below average, yet if he were on this team and performed the way he has at NY, he would soon be the franchise leader in TDs.

That puts the franchise record into perspective. It means nothing. Freeman overall, has been average. You can continue to be a stat-wh*re and continue to throw out random numbers, but the fact remains that Freeman is wildly inconsistent and the stats do not tell the whole story.

While you are correct about the cumulative nature of career statistics, the fact that Sanchez would need one and a half more seasons than Freeman to become the career leader completely invalidates him. Sanchez has never finished a season with a QB rating in the 80s. Freeman already holds the franchise record for QB rating for a full year starter and is currently sitting at #4 for highest QB rating this season. So Freeman has not only done it by longevity, he's done it by having peak performances, too.

Thing is chace, while we know the stats dont tell the whole story, the stats are still the stats. They are gonna be looked at seriously by this organization. If hes putting up those numbers while hes still 24, you dont just ignore that. You dont ignore stats where your 24 year old QB just broke all of your previous QBs stats. This organization likely wont do that. As much as the fans want to. They wont. They wont let another Doug Williams type situation happen. They will look at those numbers seriously and will most likely bring Freeman back because they have never had a QB have those numbers. You dont let him leave because hes been inconsistent at 24. While hes still young and can learn much more. The organization will feel he can get better no matter if the fans feel he has peaked. While the stats may be meaningless to the fans. It wont be to the people writing the checks.

That I don't disagree with, but it does disappoint me that it will probably be the case.

I think a fellow poster summed the situation up perfectly in another thread....

Actually the problem isn't that Freeman stinks. He is average. He puts up good numbers just often enough to make you think he is better than he is. Bad and great are convincing. But mediocre makes you live with the delusion for too many years. He is just good enough to waste our time and not good enough to get us where we want to go.

While I may be wasting my time asking this question to you, is it possible that Freemans best years are ahead? Hes had crappy coaching, **CENSORED** for weapons, and is still only 24, which means he still has some maturing to do. This year he gets better weapons, coaching, and gets in better shape (maturing) and has the best year of his career. Its very very possible that he only gets better. While its also possible he stays average. Its smarter and wiser to see through that potential. Especially if your a franchise who has had a very very tough time finding QBs. They will take average with potential over pure uncertainty every time at a very important position in this sport. Maybe the most important position in this sport. They will take average with potential every time.

[TBayXXXVII]

No it's not a larger sample size. 
Bree's played all 58 games for the Chargers and was with them for 5 full seasons 80 games I only listed the games he started.  Bree's got to sit his whole first year.  This Freeman's 4th year 61 games 54 games started.

That's because you're seeing what you choose to see and not what's actually there.  If you're not playing games, you can't put up numbers.  The bottom line is, the Chargers made the choice to replace Brees after he played in only 42 games.  That offseason, they drafted Rivers, then Brees played the following season.  After next season, Freeman will have played in 72 games.

[TBayXXXVII]

While I may be wasting my time asking this question to you, is it possible that Freemans best years are ahead? Hes had crappy coaching, **CENSORED** for weapons, and is still only 24, which means he still has some maturing to do. This year he gets better weapons, coaching, and gets in better shape (maturing) and has the best year of his career. Its very very possible that he only gets better. While its also possible he stays average. Its smarter and wiser to see through that potential. Especially if your a franchise who has had a very very tough time finding QBs. They will take average with potential over pure uncertainty every time at a very important position in this sport. Maybe the most important position in this sport. They will take average with potential every time.

Absolutely.  That's why no decision should be made until after next season.

[BucBalla85]

While I may be wasting my time asking this question to you, is it possible that Freemans best years are ahead? Hes had crappy coaching, **CENSORED** for weapons, and is still only 24, which means he still has some maturing to do. This year he gets better weapons, coaching, and gets in better shape (maturing) and has the best year of his career. Its very very possible that he only gets better. While its also possible he stays average. Its smarter and wiser to see through that potential. Especially if your a franchise who has had a very very tough time finding QBs. They will take average with potential over pure uncertainty every time at a very important position in this sport. Maybe the most important position in this sport. They will take average with potential every time.

Absolutely.  That's why no decision should be made until after next season.

While Im not against that. I do think it would be smarter to lock him up earlier. He most likely will get better next year. If he does more money to spend on one position.

[Foedus]

No it's not a larger sample size. 
Bree's played all 58 games for the Chargers and was with them for 5 full seasons 80 games I only listed the games he started.  Bree's got to sit his whole first year.  This Freeman's 4th year 61 games 54 games started.

That's because you're seeing what you choose to see and not what's actually there.  If you're not playing games, you can't put up numbers.  The bottom line is, the Chargers made the choice to replace Brees after he played in only 42 games.  That offseason, they drafted Rivers, then Brees played the following season.  After next season, Freeman will have played in 72 games.

Drew Bree's started 58 games for the Chargers not 42 games you are missing a season.   http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BreeDr00.htm

[TBayXXXVII]

Its not irrelevant. I guarantee you the organization is not thinking like you. They are thinking about what Freemans done and what he could be. Seeing that hes already broken the record for a lot of passing records at 24 will probably make this decision easy for the organization. Especially in one that has had a hard time finding QBs. They dont want to go back to doing that again. Not while there is a 24 year old breaking records. They will see Freeman through and will continue to build around him. I think fans gotta get used to hearing Josh Freemans name around here. No matter how much you like him.

Well, since totals is only what matters and the era doesn't, why not just give Freeman a 12 year $350M guaranteed contract now?  After all, he only has 6 less touchdowns shy of Joe Montana.

[chace1986]

Freeman: 54 games, 1,026-1,737, 59.1%, 12,090 yards, 7.0 YPA, 76 TD, 54 INT

Snachez: 60 games, 998-1,804, 55.3%, 11,756 yards, 6.5 YPA, 67 TD, 64 INT

Yet another stellar comparison.

Who was comparing Sanchez to Freeman, or saying that Sanchez was better?

The comment was regarding the TD record for this franchise. Sanchez overall has been below average, yet if he were on this team and performed the way he has at NY, he would soon be the franchise leader in TDs.

That puts the franchise record into perspective. It means nothing. Freeman overall, has been average. You can continue to be a stat-wh*re and continue to throw out random numbers, but the fact remains that Freeman is wildly inconsistent and the stats do not tell the whole story.

While you are correct about the cumulative nature of career statistics, the fact that Sanchez would need one and a half more seasons than Freeman to become the career leader completely invalidates him. Sanchez has never finished a season with a QB rating in the 80s. Freeman already holds the franchise record for QB rating for a full year starter and is currently sitting at #4 for highest QB rating this season. So Freeman has not only done it by longevity, he's done it by having peak performances, too.

Thing is chace, while we know the stats dont tell the whole story, the stats are still the stats. They are gonna be looked at seriously by this organization. If hes putting up those numbers while hes still 24, you dont just ignore that. You dont ignore stats where your 24 year old QB just broke all of your previous QBs stats. This organization likely wont do that. As much as the fans want to. They wont. They wont let another Doug Williams type situation happen. They will look at those numbers seriously and will most likely bring Freeman back because they have never had a QB have those numbers. You dont let him leave because hes been inconsistent at 24. While hes still young and can learn much more. The organization will feel he can get better no matter if the fans feel he has peaked. While the stats may be meaningless to the fans. It wont be to the people writing the checks.

That I don't disagree with, but it does disappoint me that it will probably be the case.

I think a fellow poster summed the situation up perfectly in another thread....

Actually the problem isn't that Freeman stinks. He is average. He puts up good numbers just often enough to make you think he is better than he is. Bad and great are convincing. But mediocre makes you live with the delusion for too many years. He is just good enough to waste our time and not good enough to get us where we want to go.

While I may be wasting my time asking this question to you, is it possible that Freemans best years are ahead? Hes had crappy coaching, **CENSORED** for weapons, and is still only 24, which means he still has some maturing to do. This year he gets better weapons, coaching, and gets in better shape (maturing) and has the best year of his career. Its very very possible that he only gets better. While its also possible he stays average. Its smarter and wiser to see through that potential. Especially if your a franchise who has had a very very tough time finding QBs. They will take average with potential over pure uncertainty every time at a very important position in this sport. Maybe the most important position in this sport. They will take average with potential every time.

You aren't wasting your time by asking that. It's not like I am a Freeman hater, or want the guy to fail. I am just not as enamored by the stats or much of what he has done in a Bucs uniform. I absolutely don't want him cut before his contract is up, I just need to see a lot more before I am willing to say that I want him to be resigned and be the QB for 5-10 more years.

To answer your question, of course it's possible. First you would have to define what you mean by "best years". Are you speaking of better stats? Are you speaking of playoff appearances? Playoff wins? SB title(s)? There is a possibility that "yes" could be the answer to all 4 of those questions. Personally, from what I have seen, I don't think that any of those questions can be accurately answered at this point and time , because he is so wildly inconsistent.

To me, the Bucs history with QBs is irrelevant. To me, his experience in the league makes his age irrelevant. Looking at his issues with accuracy and touch, also his overall poor play against quality opponents, I don't see any of the last 3 questions asked in the above paragraph being answered with a "yes"

For me, next year is key to this thread question. If he is great and leads us to the playoffs and maybe even a playoff win, then lock him in. If he continues the streaky play, then you weigh your options. With the franchise tag, we can buy 2-3 more years. It would be foolish to give him a contract extension just because he has a great physique and because he surpassed very low franchise records.