John Elway Sucks

Prologue: Jokes, before This Gets Real and I Shit on Your Hero.

I recently got reminded that I still haven't lived up to my promise to write an article about how Elway sucks. I don't mean as an executive, either. In that capacity he's actually been fairly successful, and by that I am specifically and exclusively referring to his recruitment of the GOAT quarterback. (Which, of course, he probably doesn't deserve credit for, because Peyton strikes me as the kind of free spirit who made his decision entirely based on the odds that he could corner the pizza market in any given location. I'm not joking. Peyton went to Denver because Papa John's is his future.)

No. I'm saying that John Elway, the quarterback, who won two Super Bowls, made nine Pro Bowls, was named second-team All-Pro on three occasions, and somehow won the NFL MVP in 1987, despite not being a top five player at his position in that season (more on that later), THAT John Elway sucks. Or, fine, 'is overrated.' Whatever. Here are my claims about Elway, in descending order of severity: He's not the GOAT; he's not in the GOAT conversation; he was at no point in his career the best quarterback in the league; he doesn't deserve his MVP; and he is categorically worse than every quarterback he's commonly compared with. I don't actually know how the relative severities of those statements stack up. I just wanted to use the word severity. It lends such a gravitas to my writing. Severity. After you finish this post, your view of John Elway will be severely altered. In a negative direction. Severely.

Part I: Origins. Or, How Elway Came to Be Overrated as Fuck.

He was a #1 overall draft pick.

That about covers it. But I guess I can say more things. When you're a #1 draft pick, you're usually hyped up. When you're also a quarterback, you get massively hyped up until it's virtually impossible for you to fulfill your hype. When you're also considered the Greatest QB Prospect Since Yourself, because I don't know who people got compared to before Elway, then you get hyped to an unimaginable extent.

Let's take a walk through memory lane. Here are the #1 overall draft picks since Peyton Manning.

2014: Jadeveon Clowney. Massively hyped up; so far has failed to deliver.
2013: Eric Fisher. I know, who? This was the draft that no one good came out of. I'm serious. I'm going through the first round trying to find the best player, and there just isn't one. I guess Cordarrelle Patterson? Or Star or Reid? Seriously, this might be the worst draft in NFL history. That I remember.
2012: Andrew Luck. At some point I'll write a comprehensive explanation of why Luck sucks. That is, assuming that his last two games weren't heralding the dawn of a new day. Which they weren't. Suffice it (here) to say that Luck is massively overrated, and that he is in fact the most overrated quarterback since Elway. Just like how he was the most hyped quarterback prospect since Elway. Funny how that happens. Funny how when we expect a quarterback to be great we tend to believe that they're great even when they're not. FUNNY.
2011: Cam Newton. Somehow people still think he's elite. He's a competent quarterback who's good at running the ball. He hasn't been elite since Auburn. Or, more precisely, since week 2 of the 2011 season.
2010: Sam Bradford. I'm not going to say anything mean here because I feel bad for him and the Rams, but so far he's a bust.
2009: Matt Stafford. He's had some big yardage seasons, but he's not the kind of good you'd expect from a #1 overall pick. It helps when you're throwing to the most unfair physical talent to ever grace the WR position.
2008: Jake Long. Long was good, and then he got worse, and then he got worser, and now he's injured or not starting or something. Who cares.
2007: JaMarcus Russell. Fill in your own jokes here. Wait, no, I want to. PURPLE DRANK! BLANK DVD! HASHTAG THE COMEBACK! Okay, I'm done.
2006: Mario Williams. This is basically Clown's ceiling, even though Williams was kind of a letdown.
2005: Alex Smith. Yeah.
2004: Eli Manning. They should have sent a poet. Wait, you people don't already think Eli sucks? Okay. Two Super Bowls doesn't make a QB great. And Eli kinda sucks otherwise. I don't actually think this merits that much elaboration. He's just bad.
2003: Carson Palmer. C-Palm had a two year prime. That's all that needs to be said.
2002: David Carr. This is the guy who got replaced by Matt Schaub. (I'm playing on your recency bias here. Schaub used to be fucking good. You think I'm exaggerating? In '09, he threw for 4770 yards and 29 TDs on 67.9% cmp%, 5.0% TD%, 2.6% int%, 8.2 YPA, and 98.6 rating. That compares favorably to most of Tom Brady's career. Also, his wife compares favorably to Gisele. Oh wait, no she doesn't. God DAMN quarterbacks have hot wives.)
2001: Michael Vick. Vick was amazing. Then he fought dogs and went to jail. Then he was amazing. And then he fell off a cliff.
2000: Courtney Brown: Say it with me. WHO?
1999: Tim Couch. Couch is the definition of mediocrity at the quarterback position. Shortly to be replaced by John Elway. Just kidding. Or am I...? I mean, Elway played on better teams and Couch's career passer rating is only 4.8 points lower. That's substantially less than the difference between Rodgers's and Peyton's. Hmm...
1998: Peyton Manning. This is the one that panned out. Let me clarify: This is the FIRST one that panned out. On this list. The sixteen preceding #1 overall picks did not live up to expectations. Not a single one. Some (Couch, Brown, DRANK) were worse than others (Williams, Long, Vick), but all of them fell prey to hype.

To summarize, over the past seventeen years, the best QB in the draft wasn't the first QB taken more than half the time. And in only one-seventeenth of those seasons was a QB taken first overall who played at the level expected of a first overall pick (i.e. eliteness). When you dig into it, first overall doesn't count for much.

Elway, though, was another level of hype. He was widely considered the most physically gifted and all-around talented quarterback prospect of all time, and the expectation for him was immediate dominance. After he was drafted and promptly traded, he began his career for the Denver Broncos. Unfortunately for the Broncos, his apparently inevitable dominance would never come...

Part II: Passing Is Hard. Or, Why John Elway Sucks.

Efficiency in passing is important. No, really. Yards are virtually uncorrelated with wins, while the best efficiency stats available (Passer Rating (or rather Uncapped Passer Rating, wink wink) and ANY/A) correlate most strongly with wins. Basically, this means that an efficient quarterback tends to win games, while an inefficient quarterback, even one who throws the ball a lot and earns many yards, tends not to win as many games. Kind of. Statistics are weird.

("But wait, Anna!" you're saying. "Quarterbacks who throw for a lot of yards tend to do so because their teams have put them in a situation where they have to. It stands to reason that when you throw the ball a lot, you wind up throwing the ball less efficiently. So quarterbacks who are forced to throw the ball a lot can't be blamed for low efficiency!" Which would be a good point, except that there's no correlation between pass attempts and efficiency. Seriously. There's just not. This causal link is imaginary. While we're on the topic, there's also no correlation between team rushing performance and efficiency. Nor is there a correlation between team defense and efficiency. I ran all the numbers myself. So there go all your arguments for why Russell Wilson isn't that great.)

What does this mean? In general, it means that quarterbacks who pass efficiently but for relatively low volume (e.g. Russell Wilson) tend to do better than quarterbacks who pass inefficiently for relatively high volume (e.g. Andrew Luck). Doing both is better (e.g. Peyton Manning), and doing neither is the worst (e.g. Tim "All I Do Is Win" Tebow), but if you have to choose one it is better to be feared than loved. And it's better to be efficient than to throw a lot.

So what does this have to do with Elway? Let's look at what Elway was good at. Specifically, I'm looking at the passing categories in which he was most frequently among the league's best (top 10).

- Passes completed (top 10 x10, top 5 x5, top 1 x1. That's a beautiful thing).
- Pass attempts (top 10 x11, top 5 x5, top 1 x2).
- Passing yards (top 10 x11, top 5 x5, top 1 x1).
- Passer rating (top 10 x5, top 5 x4 -- more on this later).
- Yards per attempt (top 10 x9, top 5 x2).
- ANY/A (top 10 x7, top 5 x4).
- Completion % (top 10 x4, top 5 x2).
- Interception % (top 10 x6, top 5 x2).
- Pass TD % (top 10 x6, top 5 x4).
- Sack % (top 10 x7, top 5 x3).

Notice anything? Here's what you're supposed to notice: The categories where Elway was successful the most frequently, and the categories in which he tended to be most successful, are the categories that don't correlate with wins. (Attempts, yards, and almost certainly completions, even though its not listed in the article I linked. This one, in case you missed it.) Meanwhile the categories that matter the most -- ANY/A, Passer Rating, TD%, YPA -- tend to be his worst statistics. Let's get more into this. I want to focus on one important metric in particular: Passer Rating.

Part III: Elway and Passer Rating: An Unhappy Coupling.

This section will change you. No matter how much they try to tell you that Elway's a good quarterback, that he's elite no matter what the numbers say, you just won't believe it, because you'll remember that game where he completed 37% of his passes en route to 1 TD, 3 picks, 257 yards, and a 36.8 passer rating. And lost 42-10. In the Super Bowl. Of his MVP season.

When Elway came into the league, he had some growing pains. That's to be expected from a young quarterback. His first season, he put up a passer rating of 54.9. But hey, he was a rookie. The next year his PR was 76.8. Then it dipped back down to 70.2. In that, his third season, he had no fewer than NINE games in which he threw for a passer rating under 70. Now, I think Andrew Luck's a pretty bad quarterback, but he has fewer than nine sub-70 games (8) in his CAREER. Oh yeah, and so does Aaron Rodgers.

"But wait, he was just a youngster back then!" you say. And that's true. But here's the really damning thing: Throughout Elway's first ten seasons, he broke a 70 PR on 71 occasions. He fell below that mark 70 times. That's a 1:1 ratio. Elway AVERAGED a 73.8 passer rating for his first ten seasons in the NFL. He did not place in the top ten in passer rating during his first TEN seasons as a starter. He was 33 before he put up a passer rating over 85, and other than one season at 83.4, in his first 10 years he never even broke 80.

In fact, over his first ten seasons combined (1983-92), among quarterbacks who started at least three full seasons and threw at least 1000 total passes, Elway ranks 26th with a rating of 73.8. There are only 34 QBs on the list. He finishes 26th in cmp%, 25th in Y/A, and 24th in ANY/A. Again, these are the best available stats for quantifying a quarterback's contribution. And Elway, for his first decade in the NFL, ranked in the mid-20s for each of these stats. (For comparison, over his first three seasons, given atts>=500 and GS>=24, Russell Wilson ranks 3rd in passer rating, 7th in cmp%, and 4th in ANY/A. Meanwhile Andrew Luck comes in 18th, 24th (out of 24), and 17th, respectively. Just FYI.)

Around now you may be saying that passer rating has generally gone up since the '80s because passing has gotten easier. And that's true. But Elway was bad even by contemporary standards, at least for his first ten seasons in the league. For a comparison, last year, the top 10 included the likes of Ben Roethlisberger, Colin Kaepernick, Tony Romo, and Josh McCown, all of whom outperformed their contemporaries to a greater degree than Elway, and none of whom are HoF worthy. Looking over the past 10 years ('04-'13), Elway's closest analogue is probably Matt Hasselbeck, who ranks 22nd, 16th, and 23rd in PR, Cmp%, and ANY/A. Now, I'm a Seahawks fan and I love Matt (who, by the way, made the top 10 in PR in four of his first ten seasons), but I would never call him an all-time great. And yet, over the first (starting) decades of their respective careers, their performances were comparable. There are two possible conclusions to draw from this: One, Hasselbeck is a Hall-of-Fame level quarterback who deserves consideration in the GOAT conversation. Or two, Elway is massively overrated. I'm actually fine with either, but I think the correct one is obvious.

Part IV: The MVP. Or, What the Fuck Was AP Thinking?

1987 was a weird year. Reagan got surgery on his prostate. Vladimir Nikolayev was sentenced to death for cannibalism. Canada introduced the Loonie. Larry Wall wrote Perl. And John Elway somehow won NFL MVP, in a year where a strike shortened the season to 15 games, 12 of which included NFL starters.

Here's the case for why Elway deserved MVP: The Broncos went 10-4-1, which in 1987 was somehow good enough to win the AFC. In the games Elway played, the Broncos went 8-3-1, which is the equivalent of a little better than 11-5 in 16-game terms. Of course, four teams in the NFC did better (two were 11-4, one 13-2, and one 12-3), but hey. Elway completed 54.6% of his passes for 3198 yards, which is around 4264 yards exactly in a 16-game season, as well as 19 TDs (~25), 12 ints (~16), an 83.4 PR, and a 6.74 ANY/A. Those are... decent numbers.

Here's the case for why Elway didn't deserve MVP: Those numbers are BARELY decent. In 1987, Elway ranked 18th in cmp%, 13th in TD%, 7th in int%, 4th in YPA, 11th in PR, and 4th in ANY/A. Hell, even if you look at dumb stats, he's not that great: 4th in yds, 8th in TDs, 9th in completions. Other players performed substantially better. Let's take Joe Montana, whose team went 10-1 with him, for example. Montana ranked 1st in cmp% by a mile, 1st in TD%, 14th in int%, 7th in YPA, 1st in PR by a mile, and 2nd in ANY/A. Sure, Elway wins in int% (which is not an important stat) and YPA (which is secondary to ANY/A, which is built from it), but aside from that Montana crushes him. In fact, Montana was even named First-Team All-Pro that season over Elway, and deservedly so.

If you're willing to consider non-QB MVP picks, there's an even more deserving candidate than Montana in the mix. Jerry Rice finished the season second in yards (by less than 40, despite playing three games fewer than #1), 4th in receptions, and 1st in touchdowns. Let me elaborate: Rice had 22 touchdowns (#2 had 11). In 12 games. Rice had 22 touchdowns in 12 games. Rice had 22 touchdowns on 65 receptions. One of every THREE catches Rice made in 1987 was a touchdown. His record topped the previous mark by four, it lasted for 20 years, and HE DID IT IN TWELVE GAMES. This is one of the greatest individual feats in NFL history. But no, the MVP went to John "Mediocre as Fuck" Elway. What the hell.

Part V: But Comebacks!

Elway was known for his comebacks. In his 16-year career, he put together 35 fourth-quarter comebacks and 46 game-winning drives. Yes, one of those games (Den@GB in 1987, his MVP season) resulted in a 17-17 tie, which also happens to be a game in which he threw 0 TDs, 3 ints, a Passer Rating of 52.9, and an ANY/A of 3.13. But hey, shit happens. Surely a QB who's engineered so many comebacks must be great, right?

Wrong.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

See, as it happens, comebacks don't seem to be correlated with greatness. The CAREER leaders in GWDs (Game-Winning Drives) obviously include all-time greats (Manning, Marino, Brady), but that's not because they're great, it's because they're the guys who started for fifteen years. The keyword here is competence. Elway started for fifteen years because his team thought he was great, even though he wasn't; whether he was competent or not is a matter of debate, but for the sake of pity I'll say he was. Same deal for other career leaders like Vinny Testaverde, Drew Bledsoe, Kerry Collins, and Eli Manning. That's not exactly a celebrated crowd. Those guys aren't great; they just started forever.

Fortunately, there's a way to even things out and find the guys who really excelled at GWDs for a shorter span: seasonal leaders! The record for GWDs in a season is 8, held by Jake Delhomme and Eli Manning. Tied for third are some greats, like Peyton Manning (twice) and Tom Brady, but they share that status with the likes of Don Majkowski, Jake Plummer, and Brian Sipe (NOT in his decent year). The next group includes Mark Sanchez, Alex Smith, Tim Tebow, John Elway, and the single greatest comeback artist of the bunch, Vince Young. Now THAT'S a celebrated crowd.

Part VI: The Rest of His Career.

Elway played better toward the end of his career. His brief ten-year affair with mediocrity ended in 1993, and for five of the next six years (up until the end of his career) he ranged from 3rd to 7th in the league in passer rating. In other words, he still wasn't exactly great (Steve Young, who was contemporaneous and who actually was great, led the NFL in passer rating six times between '91 and '98, placing 5th and 3rd in the two years he didn't), but he was decent. So what happened? What boosted Elway from straight-up bad to halfway good?

The common explanation is that Elway didn't have help from '83 to '92, the ten-year window in which he was awful. When he got it in '93, he suddenly started performing at a high level, thus indicating that he'd always been that good, but had just never shown it because of the terrible team around him. At least, that's how the theory goes.

The theory, of course, is completely wrong. I'll dismiss it piece by piece.

First: "Elway didn't have a great team/Elway always had to carry his team." Right off the bat, let me note that this particular point has little to do with Elway's individual performance. This is more a reflection on his team's performance, and the credit due to Elway for that performance. (This comes from the popular but misguided idea that it's okay for a QB to perform badly individually as long as his team is successful. This is related to the equally false ideas that when a team wins, it's always because of the QB.)

Elway didn't have a bad team. He pretty much never had a bad team. Between 1983 and 1998 (his 16-year career), the Broncos won at least 10 games nine times, and won at least 8 games 14 times. In '83-'87, '89, '91, '93, and '96-'98, Elway had an above-average defense, including top-10 on nine occasions. That doesn't happen when your only good player is your quarterback, so get that out of your head. That especially doesn't happen when your best player is a quarterback who frankly isn't playing well. The disparity in team talent we're talking about here isn't between terrible and good, it's between good and great.

But the bigger question is how good Elway's receivers and offensive line were, since those are the two factors (pretty much the only two) that actually affect how well a quarterback plays. (The other two that people bring up a lot are running game and defense, but there's no evidence that these have a statistical effect on QB efficiency. Having a bad defense or running game basically just makes you need to throw more, which DOES have a negative correlation with wins (according that website I've been linking) because obviously it means you have a worse team. But it DOESN'T actually make you throw less efficiently. It just means that you'll be throwing on some more early downs, which isn't actually a disadvantage, because (unless you're down 40 with 2 minutes to play) the opponent still has to account for the run.)

I don't know how to possibly establish the quality of Elway's line. But I can look at a few individual players (years I list will be as they intersect with Elway; many of these players played for the Broncos before/after Elway's tenure).

Elway had a little talent on the line to start his career, including two-time Pro Bowler Keith Bishop at LG from '83-'89, and the decent Bill Bryan at center from '83 to '88 and Ken Lanier at RT from '83 to '92, but beyond that it was pretty slim pickings. But starting at the end of that first decade (c. 1993), his line began to improve in a big way.

From '93 to '97 he played with Gary Zimmerman, the All-Pro, Hall-of-Fame left tackle (the most important position on the line). In '98 he was replaced by the excellent Tony Jones, who had also played at right tackle the previous year. Tom Nalen held down the middle from '94 to '98, making two Pro Bowls in that span and a total of five Pro Bowls and two First-Team All-Pro selections in his career. Two-time Pro Bowler Mark Schlereth started at LG for the Broncos from '95 to '98. Dan Neil had a solid year at RG in '98. Harry Swayne also played well (surprise, surprise) at RT for the Broncos in '98, and Bryan Habib was solid at RG from '93-'97.

In other words, from about '95 (Zimmerman, Schlereth, Nalen, Habib, Broderick Thompson) to '98 (Jones, Schlereth, Nalen, Neil, Swayne), Elway was playing behind lines that weren't just good, they were fucking great. That '95 line had players who made a total of 14 Pro Bowls and five FTAPs in their careers, and the '98 line had a total of eight Pro Bowls and two FTAP selections in the squad, but three of them made the Pro Bowl that year.

Early in his career, Elway's best receivers were Vance Johnson ('85-'95 minus '94), Mark Jackson ('86-'92), and the solid Pro Bowler Steve Watson ('83-'87). These guys were decent, but they were nothing special. But as with his line, after his first decade in the league, Elway suddenly found himself playing with a star-studded receiving corps.

From '95 on Elway played with three-time Pro Bowler Rod Smith, who put up a total of 2402 yards and 18 TDs in '97 and '98. He threw to Pro Bowler (and, in '98, 1000-yd receiver) Ed McCaffrey for the last four years of his career as well. From 1990 on, Elway had the Hall-of-Famer, eight-time Pro Bowler, and four-time FTAP Shannon Sharpe at tight end. From '94-'97, he had five-time Pro Bowler Anthony Miller at WR. All this means that in the mid-to-late '90s (let's take '97 for instance), Elway was throwing the ball to Smith, Sharpe, Miller, and McCaffrey, four guys with 16 Pro Bowls and four FTAPs between them.

Finally, and I know I said this doesn't really matter (but it does at this level), but from '95 to '98 Elway played with the superb, HOF-worthy Terrell Davis, who rushed for an INSANE total of 5296 yards and 49 touchdowns between '96 and '98.

I'll spin this from the popular angle, and then I'll come back and tell you why that angle is wrong.

Popular opinion holds that Elway was playing with trash through '92, and then when he finally got a decent supporting cast, he showed his true colors. He threw for a passer rating of 73.8 and an ANY/A of 5.10 through his first ten years, but in his last six, he put up a PR of 88.9 and 6.36 ANY/A throwing to solid receivers and playing behind an okay line. He also won two Super Bowls after losing his first three, showing that finally his team was giving him support. Moreover, since these last six years came after he was already 33 years old, if he'd had that level of support around him from the beginning, he surely would have put up numbers that compare well with the other all-time QBs.

Here are all the things wrong with that argument.

1) Elway was not playing with trash through '92. His teams were less talented than they would later become, but they were by no means bad. Refer back to the paragraphs about how successful his team was even in the early years. The Broncos made three Super Bowls in four years. That's an exceptional feat, even in a weak AFC. And yes, they lost all three games by blowouts (by a combined margin of 136-40), but Elway was at least partly to blame for each of those three losses. In the first game, he was decent-but-not-good, throwing for an 83.6 rating. In the second game, he completed 37% of his passes for a 36.8 rating; in the third, he completed 38% for 108 yds, 0 TDs, 2 ints, and a stunning 19.4 rating.

2) Other great QBs have thrown to bad receivers, and they've universally done better than Elway did. For the first six years of his career Brady threw to receivers at least as bad as Elway's early targets. He put up a rating of 88.4 and an ANY/A of 6.12, basically equalling Elway's peak output. When Brady started getting talented receivers in 2007, he promptly put up one of the greatest passing seasons ever, and since then he's averaged a 101.5 rating and 7.61 ANY/A over the past 8 years. Admittedly, it's gotten easier to pass since '04, but if you look into the Advanced Passing stats on PFR (I won't get into these here; basically they're standard deviations relative to other contemporaneous passers) you can see that Brady's pretty much dominating Elway across the board. Yes, throwing to weak receivers probably hurts your numbers, but not to the extent that it excuses Elway's piss-poor performance.

3) Elway's supporting cast in the mid-to-late '90s wasn't just good, it was great. I've already talked about this to some extent in the preceding paragraphs, but I'll reiterate and summarize here. The 1997 Broncos, with Elway, Davis, McCaffrey, Smith, Sharpe, Miller, Zimmerman, Schlereth, Nalen, Habib, and Jones, are one of the most talented offenses of all time. Their weakest point--and I don't say this lightly, or in jest--is at quarterback.

4) Super Bowls are a really bad judge of a quarterback's abilities. Dan Marino made (and lost) one Super Bowl in his career, but he is a vastly better (although still slightly overrated) quarterback than Elway, who made five and won two. And those two Super Bowl victories really WERE just a product of worse opponents and better teammates on the Broncos. Elway still played like shit in the '97 championship (55% cmp%, 51.9 PR), although he was decent in the '98 win against the Falcons. (He and the Broncos would have and SHOULD have gotten shredded by the '98 Vikings.) You really shouldn't judge a quarterback based on five games, but if you're going to do that, DON'T use the five games in which he totalled a 59.3 Passer Rating for your argument.

5) There's no way to know for sure how good Elway would have been if he'd played with the sky-high level of talent on the ~'97 Broncos for his whole career. But it's reasonable to assume he still wouldn't have been that great. QBs don't decline that fast, so I'm willing to bet that Elway's performance in the '90s isn't all that much better than his performance as a prime player with the same talent would have been. After all, the great-but-overrated Brett Favre had his best season in 2009, despite winning three straight MVPs (HOW) in the '90s. The fact that even on his ultratalented later offenses Elway STILL didn't perform any better than, say, Tony Romo (who I'm firmly convinced is the better passer) indicates that his supposed "missed prime" wouldn't have been anything special.

Part VII: Conclusion.

John Elway is the ultimate case of hype overpowering reality. For decades, fans have used self-deceptive doublethink arguments to convince themselves and others that he truly was one of the greatest of his generation. But the facts are clear, and the analysis is solid: John Elway started off bad, and was never any better than decent. His career accomplishments are overblown and undeserved, and the excuses about team talent that his fans make are unconvincing and exaggerated. Elway sucks.

Week Four vs. My Power Rankings

Once again, I failed to make predictions last week. That's all about to change... FOREVER. But until it does I just have to compare the results with my power rankings. Here goes.

Giants (25) @ Redskins (10): Giants, 45-14. I don't understand how the Giants keep winning. The connection of Eli Manning to Larry Donnell, a player whom I'd never heard of prior to fifteen seconds ago, somehow produced three touchdowns against a defense I had ranked in the top ten. Kirk Cousins threw a lot of picks, which football god would say isn't a big deal, but which I say suggests that he's making a higher rate of bad decisions. Washington's so ridiculously up and down. I can't handle the heartbreak. Verdict: Wrong.

Packers (20) @ Bears (6): Packers, 38-17. That'll happen. Elite QBs do tend to win games, and the Packers have one and the Bears don't. There's not really a lot you can do when one of the five best QBs of all time decides to throw for a 151.2 passer rating against you. Unless you're the '13 Seahawks, in which case you tell him to shove it and blow his team out 43-8. Yeah. Verdict: Wrong.

Bills (11) @ Texans (16): Texans, 23-17. So Ryan Fitzpatrick officially isn't actually good. If you were still wondering. But JJ Watt is probably the best player I've ever seen. He might be one of the ten best players of all time*, and he's gunning for that #1 spot (currently held by Jerry Rice). He might be the right MVP choice, but since defensive players don't tend to win MVP, I'm sticking with my Wilson pick. Verdict: Wrong. You'll never stop hurting me, Texans.

* Best, not 'greatest,' whatever the fuck that means. I got a list. Here's the order of my list that it's in. It goes, Jerry, Peyton, Barry and Lawrence. Walt from the Seahawks, Reggie, Deion Sanders, and Alan. Page. And Jim Brown and JJ Watt. I lost the rhythm a little bit toward the end but you get the idea. Watt legitimately might be top five if he keeps improving, although that top five is incredibly hard to break into. Steve Young gets Honorable Mention. Don Hutson gets the 'you're too old so you probably weren't that good' award; Night Train Lane and Johnny Unitas are runners-up for the same. (But to be honest Unitas is a ways off this list even if he wasn't old AF.**)

** AF means As Fuck. And yes, Jim Brown makes it and Unitas doesn't, because... Do I really need to get into this? Okay, fine. First of all, the passing game has changed WAY more than the running game. If you account for factors like better gear, nutrition, training programs, steroids, etc., there's a good chance Brown dominates today's NFL, sort of like a bigger, stronger, less child abuse-y Adrian Peterson. Meanwhile I'm not at all convinced Unitas translates, especially given his relatively low efficiency and the massive complexity of, and demand for accuracy in, today's passing game. Second, even within their own eras, Brown was WAY more dominant than Unitas. Brown fucking crushed it every single year. He played nine years (8x FTAP). In that span he led the league in rushing eight times, in TDs five times, and in YPC twice. He rushed for 133.1 YPG and 127.3 YPG on separate occasions (he has the #2 and #10 all-time seasonal spots, as well as the #1 career spot by a margin of 4.5 yds/game, which is almost twice the margin between #2 (Sanders) and #4 (the perpetually underrated Terrell Davis). He also has the third-highest career YPC average among running backs. During his career (1957-65), Brown ranked #1 in rushing yards (with 12,312, 64% greater than #2's 7502 and 123% greater than #3's 5526); #1 in rushing touchdowns (with 106, 38% greater than #2's 77 and 121% greater than #t3's 48); #1 in yards per game (by a lot, obviously; I won't bother with the numbers); and #1 in Y/A (5.22, slightly greater than #2's 5.06). Meanwhile Unitas was only the clear-cut best quarterback in the league a handful of times (5x FTAP, tied for 4th among QBs (with Sid Luckman, behind Otto Graham, Manning, and Dutch Clark, but nowhere near Brown's dominance), and over his career he ranks 6th in PR, 11th in cmp%, 5th in YPA, and 32nd in ANY/A. Even if we JUST look at his prime (call it '57-'67, his first and last Pro Bowl years), he ranks 2nd in rating, 5th in cmp%, but 1st in YPA and volume stats. I'm never going to write a "Johnny Unitas Sucks" article (I may or may not be putting the finishing touches on one for another QB at the moment), because he didn't suck. But all this talk by wanna-be football historians about how Unitas is the GOAT and would dominate today's NFL lies somewhere between unfounded conjecture and bullshit.

Titans (29) @ Colts (23): Colts, 41-17. Oh look, I got one right. My rankings got one right, actually, because I should probably be trying to separate myself from these shit results. Andrew Luck has suddenly strung together two consecutive excellent games. In fact, two of his three best career performances (and two of his three career games above a 120 passer rating--RUSSELL WILSON HAS NINE--sorry, I get defensive) have come in the past two weeks. It's possible that he's actually ascending to the GOAT mantle that 95% of NFL viewers and 'analysts' have predicted for him since he was drafted. Good for him. My theory, personally, is that the Titans and Jags both have abysmal defenses that could make even a mediocre quarterback look good. In other news, Charlie Whitehurst continues to be bad. Verdict: Right. But concerned.

Panthers (8) @ Ravens (15): Ravens, 38-10. New theory: the Panthers suck. Alternate theory: Everything I know about sports is wrong and players like Steve Smith can choose to have outrageously good games whenever they get angry enough. God, I hate sports 'analysis'. Verdict: Wrong.

Lions (7) @ Jets (21): Lions, 24-17. Golden Tate is the new Calvin Johnson. Calvin Johnson is the new Dwayne Bowe. Three-year wonder. Pshh. Michael Jordan would have caught for at least 15 yards in that game. FACT: One time Calvin Johnson caught 78 balls for 1331 yards and 12 touchdowns and didn't make the Pro Bowl. And it was actually kind of reasonable. #fluke Verdict: Right.

Buccaneers (31) @ Steelers (17): Bucs, 27-24. TO BE FAIR, if I had actually made picks, I would have picked the Bucs to win because I hate the Steelers. Verdict: Wrong.

Dolphins (26) @ Raiders (30): Dolphins, 38-14. Carr crashed. I should do this for a living. Verdict: Right.

Jaguars (32) @ Chargers (5): Chargers, 33-14. Bortles, on the other hand, looked pretty splendid on Sundizzle. Rivers looked splendider, and now has the highest passer rating in the NFL, topping the inevitable MVP choice Russell Wilson. (Aaron "Clownin" Rodgers also passed Wilson.) Stunningly, Bortles's 29 completions went to ten different receivers. I have no idea what the record is in this category but it can't be much higher than that. That kid's got a future. I am Nostradamus after all. Verdict: Right.

Falcons (14) @ Vikings (27): Vikings, 41-28. Bridgewater! Asiata! Jarius Wright, somehow! All these players had amazing games. Christian Ponder also contributed with 1 carry for 1 yard. Good job, good effort. On the other side of the ball, Atlanta sucked. Verdict: Wrong.

Eagles (9) @ 49ers (18): 49ers, 26-21. I watched this game. Foles looked downright terrible. San Francisco's run defense dominated. This game wasn't as close as it looked. If you take out a blocked punt return for TD, a pick 6, and a punt return TD, the game is 26-0. Which is closer to how it looked. Philly's offense completely stalled and Santa Clara shit on them. I said I didn't trust the Eagles, but I couldn't reasonably put the Niners above them. This is the problem with not actually making predictions. Verdict: Wrong.

Saints (19) @ Cowboys (12): Cowboys, 38-17. Holy shit, I got this one right??? Romo looked godly. That dude is underrated. Verdict: Right.

Patriots (13) @ Chiefs (22): Chiefs, 41-14. Wait, what? Fuck. I got a prediction for y'all. Belichick is trading Brady, this year. And he'll do it for less than a second-round pick. It's happening. This year. The Brady Era is over. I feel sick.

Final Tally: 5-8. Fuck.


NEXT WEEK! Time to make some real goddamn predictions. Bold's gonna win.

Vikings @ Packers. I don't think either of these teams is actually that good. But the Vikings' win switch (Bridge) is injured or something. I don't follow football that closely.

Bengals @ Patriots. Expect a big game from some random non-quarterback on Cincy's offense. I'm sorry, Tom. I'm so sorry. (Watch the whole thing so it feels like I linked more than one thing.)

Bears @ Panthers. Still working with the theory that Carolina sucks.

Browns @ Titans. Expect the Titans to bounce back after a humiliating loss against some troll-faced little monster.

Rams @ Eagles. The Eagles aren't that bad.

Falcons @ Giants. This luck gotta run out sometime... right?

Bucs @ Saints. That gotta be a freak win... right?

Texans @ Cowboys. Watt gotta FSU... right?

Bills @ Lions. The Bills gotta be actually sucky... right?

Ravens @ Colts. Luck gotta slow down (run out?) when he finally hits a decent defense... right?

Steelers @ Jags. Bortles gotta go ham on the Steelers' D... right?

Cards @ Broncos. The Cards gotta shock the world... right?

Chiefs @ 49ers. The Niners gotta be back for real... right? And the Chiefs gotta be fake....... right?

Jets @ Chargers. The Chargers gotta be really elite... right?

Seahawks @ Skins. The Hawks gotta still be the best team in the league... right?

I feel like I don't know anything about the NFL this season.

Week Three Power Rankings

LET'S GO! (Movement in parentheses. So (+1) means they moved up one, (-31) means they moved down 31, and (-) means they didn't move. It's real complicated.)

1. Seattle Seahawks (-). The Seahawks looked great against the Broncos. The defense held up against Manning, and Wilson and the offense converted. PFF may hate Wilson, but he is also leading the league in passer rating. Mvp. MVP. MVP! MVP!! MVP!!! MVP!!!!!!! MVP!!!!! MVP!!!!! The Seahawks are now 2-1 and look to be in a good position to roll to an easy 15-1 and win the Super Bowl for the next three or four years. gg nfl

2. Denver Broncos (-). No, the Bengals aren't #2 yet. Most people who make power rankings moved the Broncos down because they lost. But that's stupid. The expectation in power rankings is that the #2 team should lose a close game to the #1 team, which is exactly what happened. The fact that the Broncos lost to the Seahawks has zero impact on the comparison between the Broncos and the Bengals. The argument would be that the performance of the Broncos this week was relatively worse than their prior performance, while the performance of the Bengals this week was relatively better. I have no idea whether other power-ranking-makers think this is the case (I don't), but I DO know that this isn't the reason most people are moving the Broncos down. (The reason is because they're stupid. Also, other people value wins more than me. That's why I have Philly way lower than everyone else does. Because wins don't matter. If I beat the worst team in the league by 1 point and you lose to the best team in the league by 1 point, odds are you're better. But I'm 1-0 and you're 0-1.) Moving on. The Broncos haven't looked quite up to their world-beating standards this year, winning against the MediOlts (mediocre Colts) and the Chiefs by one touchdown apiece and losing to Seattle by the same margin. But having an elite QB is incredibly valuable in this league, and the Broncos have the second-best QB in the NFL by passer rating. Haha.

3. Cincinnati Bengals (-). Yes, the Bengals are #3. Again. They have a talented team with studs everywhere. But they also have a lot to prove to me before they jump ahead of the Seahawks or the Broncos. If they do okay in their week 5-8 stretch (@NE, vs CAR, @Ind, vs Balt), we'll talk. Their defense looks INCREDIBLE though.

4. Arizona Cardinals (+10). Okay, so I was low on the Cardinals. I wasn't expecting this. But that defense is elite. It's tied for second in the NFL (for points allowed). With... wait for it...wait for iiiiiit...

5. San Diego Chargers (+4). No, not the Chargers. I said wait. I was already high on the Bolts, but they just leapfrogged both the "high because they used to be good"-tier teams (NE, SF, Car, who got three weeks' grace and now get ranked based on their performance), and the "they're better than everyone else thought, but I was still overrating them"-tier teams (Was, Hou, who now fall because they broke my heart). I believe in Filly Rivers. I believe in the team from the part of southern California that's neither Los Angeles nor Orange County. You know. Mexico.

6. Chicago Bears (+4). Same deal. Also, hahaha, San Francisco is totally in the toilet this year, huh. I love this. (I know the Bears didn't just beat San Francisco. Get off me.)

7. Detroit Lions (+8). FUCKING DETROIT! (This is what you were waiting for.) Like I mentioned earlier this week, they finally got their big win over a semi-legit opponent (although GB does NOT look good this year). But that DEFENSE. What??

8. Carolina Panthers (-4). I have NO idea how good Carolina is this year. I think they're worse than this. But this is where they are.

9. Philadelphia Eagles (+3). I don't trust the Eagles. I'm the one. They've won all three of their games, yes. But those games were a blowout win against Jacksonville (which I'm pretty sure my middle school team could do at this point. I mean, Jax just made ANDREW LUCK look elite), a close win against Indy (who--spoilers--are in the bottom ten of these rankings), and a close win against Washington (we'll get to them. Really soon). The weird part is that Philly doesn't HAVE a game against a Really Good team (top 6) until week 8 (@AZ), and after that week 14 (vs Sea). So we'll have to wait to see if they belong in the elite.

10. Washington Redskins (-4). Yep. I'm the guy who still has the Redskins top-10. But they're a GOOD team. They're top 10 on offense and defense, and they're one of the few teams I think can probably hold their own against just about any team in the league. I probably have Washington about 10 spots above anyone else. But that's because wins don't count. All that counts is future wins. The past is dead.

11. Buffalo Bills (+2). The Bills went up two spots when they lost to the Chargers by 12 points. That's how big the gap is between #5 and #11 here.

12. Dallas Cowboys (+8). Don't ask me how the Cowboys are this high. I don't know. They just are.

13. New England Patriots (-5). Pull it together, fuckers.

14. Atlanta Falcons (+3). I'm just gonna say it. A 56-14 win against Tampa Bay is not impressive. This is like when the Patriots were playing normal teams in '07 and blowing them out, except that the Bucs are way worse than most of the Patriots' opponents, and the Falcons are way worse than the Patriots. (In other words, the skill disparity between the '07 Patriots and an average team is comparable to the disparity between an average team like the Falcons and one of the worst teams in the league.) Any competent offense can just keep scoring on Tampa Bay at will until the numbers start looking like Madden. There's no sport in it.

15. Baltimore Ravens (+1). I'm not that impressed by a 23-21 win over Cleveland. I'm especially unimpressed by Flaccastrophe. Bro. Come on.

16. Houston Texans (-11). There was always going to be a team this week that would crash and burn and destroy me emotionally. I know it was you, Texans. You broke my heart. You broke my heart.

17. Pittsburgh Steelers (+6). I don't want to talk about it.

18. San Francisco 49ers (-11). HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

19. New Orleans Saints (-1). They won, but they went down one. Um. Let's go with: That's a testament to how accurate my rating of them last week was, even though they were 0-2. Yeah.

20. Green Bay Packers (-9). Say goodbye to the last of the "high because they used to be good"-tier teams. BYE-BYE PACKERS!

21. New York Jets (+1). This is how old I am.

22. Kansas City Chiefs (+7). No comment.

23. Indianapolis Colts (+2). First. The Jags are like the Bucs except worse (at least defensively), so it's not impressive to blow them out. Second, their secondary just made LUCK look like a god. The Colts aren't as good as everyone else thinks. At no point in the past two years and change have they been.

24. Cleveland Browns (-). Still don't believe in Cleveland.

25. New York Giants (+6). I still have no idea how this game even happened. I'm speechless. See:

26. Miami Dolphins (-7).

27. Minnesota Vikings (-1).

28. St. Louis Rams (-1).

29. Tennessee Titans (-8).

30. Oakland Raiders (-).

31. Tampa Bay Buccaneers (-3). Just kidding. I just didn't want to talk about those boring teams. They're just bad, but not bad enough to be funny. The Bucs, though... the Bucs are bad enough to be funny. Ha. Hahahaha. The Bucs are 0-3 overall. In 28th in points for, 31st in points against, and they have the second-worst point differential in the league (wait for it...). Josh McCown is preposterously bad. He's substantially worse than Tebow. And Vincent Jackson is fucking sinking my fantasy league. I'm done with this team.

32. Jacksonville Jaguars (-). Yep. 0-3, 30th in PF, 32nd in PA, and 32nd in PD. Let me elaborate. The third-worst point differential in the league is St. Louis, at -29 through three games. And that's pretty bad. Then you have the Bucs, who are at -50. That's just awful. And then--and THEN--you have the Jags. At -75. They've lost their three games by 25 points, ON AVERAGE. They've allowed 34, 41, an 44 points, and they've never broken 17. But I'm not actually here to criticize the Jags. If you scroll down to the bottom of this recent post, you can read all about how high I am on Blake Bortles. He legitimately has a chance to pull the Jags out of cellar and maybe as high as the ground floor.

Fantasy Update!!

This is my blog so I'm going to write about my fantasy team and you just have to sit there and listen.

We started off 0-2. It was bad. As you may remember, my team after Week One was

- QB: Philip Rivers
- RB: Matt Forte
- RB: Doug Martin
- RB: Ryan Mathews
- RB: Rashad Jennings
- RB: Donald Brown
- RB: James Starks
- WR: Julio Jones
- WR: Vincent Jackson
- WR: DeSean Jackson
- WR: Jeremy Maclin
- WR: Golden Tate
- WR: Anquan Boldin
- TE: Dennis Pitta
- D/ST: Redskins D/ST
- K: Steven Hauschka

I lost the second week as well, thanks to abysmal performances from Forte (3 pts), Martin (0), VJax (5), Pitta (0), and even Hauschka (3). THANKS GUYS. So for Week 3, I decided to try a daring new strategy: Sit my weak-ass draft picks on the bench until they get their shit together. This week I started Rivers (my 12th round pick), Jennings (7th), Ahmad Bradshaw (waiver wire pickup), Julio Jones (3rd), Jeremy Maclin (8th), Antonio Gates (WW), Matt Asiata (WW), Texans D/ST (WW), and Dan Carpenter (WW). For those keeping score at home, that means that the guys sitting on my bench include my picks from rounds 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, and 10. Plus I've had to cut my picks from rounds 11, 13, 14, 15, and 16. I have FOUR draft picks contributing, including ONE from the first six rounds. That's just terrible.

Fortunately, my (late-round) picks finally panned out a bit. Rivers had 19 points, Jennings had 23 (!), Jones had a beast of a day (9 catches, 161 yds, 2 TDs, and 28 fantasy points), and Maclin put up 21. Add in the 13 from Bradshaw and I easily beat my opponent, 114-82. VICTORY.

Here's my current team (although it'll change on Wednesday when waivers go through):

- QB: Philip Rivers
- RB: Rashad Jennings
- RB: Ahmad Bradshaw
- RB: Matt Asiata
- RB: Matt Forte (enjoy the bench, Mr. 10 Points in the Last Two Games Combined)
- RB: Doug Martin (and his brother, Mr. 0 Points in the Last Three Games Combined)
- RB: Ryan Mathews (the third triplet, Mr. 5 Points in the Last Two Games Combined)
- WR: Julio Jones (MVP! MVP! Of my team! Russell Wilson is still my NFL MVP choice)
- WR: Jeremy Maclin
- WR: Vincent Jackson (15 pts in three games. I know how to pick 'em.)
- WR: DeSean Jackson
- WR: Golden Tate
- WR: Anquan Boldin
- TE: Antonio Gates
- D/ST: Texans D/ST
- K: Dan Carpenter

Week Three vs. My Power Rankings

So last week I did a Power Rankings for all 32 teams in the NFL, because if I'm responsible about anything it's my fucking football blog. And not college or whatever. What I DIDN'T do (besides go to work or class on time ever) is make predictions for Week 2. So what I'm going to do instead is compare the results of each game to where each team stood in my Power Rankings, since presumably higher-ranked teams should beat lower-ranked ones, so I made my predictions by default. That's what I'm going with. So basically, teams with higher rankings (lower numbers) should be expected to beat teams with lower rankings (higher... yeah, you get it), and the bigger the disparity, the bigger the predicted score differential. If the ranking disparity is bigger than 10, expect at least a two-score win (9+ PD). Give a few points for home-field advantage. Roll with it. Okay.

Buccaneers (28) @ Falcons (17): Falcons, 56-14. Nailed it.

Chargers (9) @ Bills (13): Chargers, 22-10. N-n-n-nailed it.

Cowboys (20) @ Rams (27): Cowboys, 34-31. Three for three.

Redskins (6) @ Eagles (12): Eagles, 37-34. Chalk this up to HFA. They're pretty close in the rankings. But okay... I missed this one. Fucking divisional games.

Texans (5) @ Giants (31): Giants, 30-17. WHAT THE FUCK???

Vikings (26) @ Saints (18): Saints, 20-9. That's better.

Titans (21) @ Bengals (3): Bengals, 33-7. It's good to be good.

Ravens (16) @ Browns (24): Ravens, 23-21. Nailed it.

Packers (11) @ Lions (15): Lions, 19-7. Yeah, sure, NOW you get your big win against a solid NFC opponent. Hey, Detroit:

Colts (25) @ Jaguars (32): Colts, 44-17. Yeah...

Raiders (30) @ Patriots (8): Patriots, 16-9. Didn't quite hit the two-score differential, but still.

49ers (7) @ Cardinals (14): Cardinals, 23-14. I might be underrating Arizona.

Broncos (2) @ Seahawks (1): Seahawks, 26-20. YEAH BABYYYY!!!!!

Chiefs (29) @ Dolphins (19): Chiefs, 34-15. ...Fuckers.

Steelers (23) @ Panthers (4): Steelers, 37-19. Fucking randomness. Fucking parity. Fuck.

Bears (10) @ Jets (22): Bears, 27-19. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, but I was right.

FINAL TALLY: 10-6. Running Total: 18-13 (58.1%). Last week was pretty bad, but we're improving. And I didn't even have to make predictions this week! A few alterations to my Power Rankings (coming out later this week!) and I should do even better next week. Although I might make actual predictions this time.

NFL 2014 Season Predictions

I know the 2014 season is well underway. I know that. Which is why I'm going to (deep breath) link you to a Reddit comment I wrote in early May in which I made my predictions for the 2014 season. Here is the comment. I will copy it here word-for-word, plus some italicized responses to each prediction.

(N.B. that when a Reddit post/comment has been edited more than a few minutes after it was first written, an asterisk (*) appears next to the time of writing. Since there is no such asterisk to the right of where it currently says "4 months ago," that is proof I never edited this comment.)

"Predictions!

"- Clowney will underperform. I won't say 'bust', since there's a pretty good chance he'll be pretty good, but he's NOT the best DE prospect in a decade (or even in recent memory). He's gotten incredibly hyped-up, and he's simply not that good. He won't get 10 sacks in (any individual one of) his first three years."

Okay, so Clowney got injured. But so far he IS underperforming. He wasn't exactly great in the one game he's played so far, either.

"- Manziel will bust. Bust bust bust. Great college line + 'unconventional' style of play + emotional immaturity + poor decision making + INCREDIBLY douchey face (how does no one talk about this??) = bust. PLEASE quote me on this. Manziel is going to BUST."

Nailed this one. Just absolutely nailed it. Nothing more needs to be said.

"- Watkins isn't going to be anything special. Okay, so I'm low on everyone in this draft. Sue me."

So far, he's had one great game and two mediocre ones. I'll wait to determine how this prediction pans out, but I'm confident that I was right in my assessment.

"- Jake Matthews is the best LT prospect in the draft. He's going to be really damn good, and he'll outperform Robinson at the next level."

So far, neither of them has seen any playing time. We'll see what happens later this year.

"- Mack is pretty good. Not convinced he'll be elite, but he's my top defensive prospect. Look for him to outperform Clowney across the board."

He's been playing excellently so far this season. I'm happy with this prediction.

"- Bortles is actually pretty good. Top QB available. Money-where-my-mouth-is time: He will make a Pro Bowl in his first three seasons, or I will have sex with a beautiful woman."

This one's hard to assess right now. Bortles played in the second half of the Jax-at-Indy game, and he was good-but-not-great (i.e. Andrew Luck-ian). Now let me say a BUNCH of things in his defense. First of all, it was his first ever NFL game and he was thrown in at halftime into another guy's system. That's hard for any QB. Second, his team was already down 30-0 when he took over, and to his credit he put 17 points on the board--not enough for a comeback, especially when the Jags gave up another 14 in the second half, and yes, part of it is attributable to garbage time, but at least he did SOMETHING. Third, you may be critical of Bortles for his interceptions, but when your team is down by four scores, you SHOULD be taking risks and attempting hard throws, because that's the only way you're ever going to give your team a chance. I'll wait to see what Bortles does as the starter (which the Jags just declared him to be) before I make a judgement here, but I'm still optimistic.

Actual analysis of what little pro tape I've seen of Bortles: Love his arm. Love his running (which never looks panicked, but always looks intelligent and necessary). Love his mobility in the pocket and his ability to stay cool under pressure. (On one memorable play, at around 7:50 to play in the 3rd (watch any highlights and you'll see it), he rolls out to his left, runs into two Colts pass-rushers, successfully TURNS AROUND and runs back right (you NEVER see this), keeps his eyes downfield (this is an INCREDIBLY good thing), and makes a nice throw to his open man downfield. He looked positively Wilson-esque.) His first interception, deep down the left side, was EXACTLY the kind of play you want to see your QB attempt when your team's down four scores. It was high-risk, but high-reward; he gave his guy a shot; and even though it was a turnover, it happened on 2nd and 10, and it gave the Colts the ball at the 36 yard line. Essentially, it was a 38-yard-punt on second and long. That's NOT that bad a play. (If, say, Bortles had just thrown the ball out of bounds, odds are the Jags wouldn't have gotten much on 3rd and 10 and would have ended up punting it, giving the Colts the ball maybe a little further downfield, but giving the Jags no chance of a Big Play that could get them back into the game.) His second Int was just a bad decision, but when you're trying to come back from that big a deficit, you pretty much take whatever shots you can.

As for the other QBs he's competing with: he's obviously dominating Manziel, and with the possible exception of Garoppolo (who we won't be able to judge for a few years), that means Bortles is only competing with Bridgewater and Carr. Bridgewater looked solid when he played, and we'll see how he performs as a starter. Carr's been starting for a few games and has looked mostly mediocre, but we'll see what he can do as the season progresses. I'm not making a call about this prediction yet, but I think I'm right.

I want to point out, in case you've forgotten, that back in May, every single one of these predictions was incredibly controversial. Note the response to me (which has a higher vote total than my original comment, which--although you can't see it now--was heavily downvoted). Predicting things is fun.

Seahawks Broncos "Live-Tweets"

I'm basically live-tweeting this shit.

- Seahawks offense looked weak on the opening drive.
- Love the aggressiveness I saw from the Hawks' D on their one play.
- LOVE THE WILSON CATCH!! We should convert him to WR.
- HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE the three consecutive Lynch-run goal-line playcalls. It was as obvious to the Broncos' defense as it was to me. That play works zero out of ten times when you call it three times in a row. Fuck you, Darrell Bevell. I hope Pete Carroll fires you before halftime. You just single-handedly cost the Seahawks four points. There's a significant chance that that makes the difference in this game.
- Oh yeah, and kicking a field goal from the one-yard line is one of the worst decisions you can possibly make if you're an NFL coach. That decision also cost the Seahawks multiple points.
- I'm just gonna preemptively respond to the comments I'm already starting to hear from the announcers: When a cornerback allows a catch, that doesn't mean the cornerback got "beat". It usually means that the receiver ran a good route and the quarterback is the GOAT. Receivers get open incredibly often (probably at least one gets open on a given passing play 85%+ of the time), so it's unreasonable to have this expectation that Sherman will just never allow catches. That only happens against scrubs like Aaron Rodgers.
- Loving what I'm seeing from the Seahawks' run D. Our linebackers especially are swarming like crazy. Plus Brandon Mebane is a beast.
- Why the FUCK would iPhone (or Verizon or whoever) advertise their new deal by comparing getting a new iPhone to killing your dog? I was already never going to get an iPhone, but now I'm even LESS inclined.
- I grew up in Seattle and I've lived there for something like 20 years. I've never, ever seen fish-throwing in person. No one I know, or have ever met, has ever seen fish-throwing. That's like saying "you can't go to Canada without tapping a tree with a moose-antler that you harvested from the moose that you killed with an icicle" or "you can't go to Mexico without starting a cartel and murdering hundreds of civilians." (Okay, that one actually happened.) It's not something that normal people ever experience. It's a stereotype. The kind that isn't true.
- Wilson isn't great because he has "heart." You can't measure "heart" because it's not a thing. He's great because he's great. It's that simple.
- Darrell Bevell, stop running the fucking ball. Moron.
- God, I hate Bono. But God, I love Robert Downey Jr.
- Aww, I want to make out with a model in a rainy alley. I should obviously get a Lexus. Wait, I have a Lexus. Oh my god.
- Holy SHIT I love what I'm seeing from the Seahawks' run D. This is fantastic. The pass D is getting beat up a bit, but again, they're playing the GOAT. Against lesser QBs (aka every other QB ever), the pass D will look as good as ever, and hopefully the run D will be this stifling.
- Notice how it's Reggie Wayne who got denied, and not Andrew Luck. Because Andrew Luck is undeniable. Undeniably average, maybe.
- Has Wilson even attempted a throw this game? No, seriously. Has he?
- Answer: He's attempted three. His runs plus sacks equals his pass attempts. That is BAD.
- Update: His runs plus sacks is now greater than his pass attempts. That's badder.
- Punting is never a victory, announcers. Never.
- That Fit commercial is the lowest-budget commercial I have ever seen.
- TOUCHDOWN SEAHAWKS!!! You see what happens when you throw the fucking ball, Bevell??
- Incidentally, THAT is a cornerback getting beat. Lockette straight-up beat Talib to the ball there. they were both in position, and Lockette was just better.
- Wilson's passer rating currently sits at 158.3!!! Just kidding. It's actually 170.3. SEE HOW MUCH BETTER THAT IS???
- God, I love JJ Watt.
- That's a catch and a fumble. He turns upfield. Or downfield. Whatever. That's a football move.
- I refuse to believe that the rulebook includes the phrase "bang-bang".
- That's a fucking bullshit call. The refs are completely wrong here. The receiver has control, two feet down, possession, and makes a football move (turning downfield).
- If I was in the NFL, that's exactly what every play would look like. I'd try to throw a checkdown but it would get there too slow because I'm not an NFL quarterback.
- That was an incredibly convincing fake.
- Aaron Rodgers on steroids confirmed.
- Wilson's rating is now 151.6, not 151.4. I realize that's not as significant an improvement from uncapping his rating. But still.
- NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
- Hey, hey Darrell? Darrell Bevell? When you're driving with less than a minute to go in the half and you only have one timeout left, DON'T FUCKING RUN IT.
- TOUCHDOWN SEAHAWKS!!! Again. This is why you throw it.
- It's Halftime.
- Okay, here's a better example. Wilson's capped rating right now is 152.7. His uncapped rating is fucking 170.4.
- Nice play from Burley! That's an example of a perfect coverage play.
- So glad to see Okung back!
- Wow Denver looks mad. Lol.
- Dominant pass D from Seattle. That's what I'm talking about.
- JAMES CARPENTER is a special player?? Him?
- As if you needed another reason to hate field goals. That sucked.
- More flawless D from Byron Maxwell! Loving this.
- Peyton rolls out like Wilson! I feel like I just got a glimpse into the future.
- Nice job by Wilson to hang onto the ball. If the Broncos get the ball back there, that's a game-changer.
- SPEAKING OF GAME-CHANGERS, WHAT THE FUCK, DARRELL BEVELL???? YOU CALL A RUN RIGHT UP THE MIDDLE OUT OF THE ENDZONE??? ON THIRD AND 17, OUT OF THE ENDZONE??????? THAT'S LITERALLY THE WORST PLAYCALL I'VE EVER SEEN.
- Let's list the reasons why that was the worst playcall I've ever seen. 1) You're running up the middle, a play that hasn't worked at all today. That's just a bad decision. 2) You're running on third down, and it's not a third and short. 3) It's a third and long. 4) In fact, it's a third and VERY long. 5) What's more, it's a third and very long in your endzone. 6) It's third and long in your endzone. 7) It's third and long in your endzone. 8) It's THIRD and LONG in your ENDZONE. 9) IT'S THIRD AND LONG IN YOUR ENDZONE. 10) WHY THE FUCK WOULD YOU RUN IT THERE???
- That was a fluky play.
- That was almost the greatest turnaround I've ever seen.
- That sucked. I'm not surprised that the Broncos (who still have the best offense in the league) were able to convert on that turnover. Shit happens.
- NOT a great choice by Harvin to return that.
- That Wilson-Walters connection.
- Did the ref just help Nate Irving up? CORRUPTION! BIAS AND CORRUPTION!
- I think Manning just tried to hand the ball off to Lennay Kekua.
- Ha! Puny Manning. Your meager audibling skills are nothing next to Kevin Williams.
- BOOOOM BABY!!!! KAM CHANCELLOR THE FIRST-DOWN CANCELLER!!!
- You're damn right they played Seattle Defense. "Fuck 'em up."
- Hey announcer, don't you EVER talk about Kam Chancellor!
- I need Wilson to throw a touchdown on his next pass. Preferably a long one. His passer rating is way too low. (It's only 103.7. Both capped and uncapped.) BUT if he throws a 60-yd TD on his next play (I don't know where the Seahawks are on the field, but whatever) he'll be at a much more reasonable 123.2. LEGGO.
- LET WILSON THROW! LET WILSON THROW! LET WILSON THROW! LET WILSON THROW!
- Why the FUCK is this announcer talking about what DENVER proved today? What the fuck? "Yeah, let's talk about the team that's about to lose to a stifling performance from Seattle, the best team in the league. It's way less important that we address the home, winning, better team."
- "If you're the Denver defense... you play run all the way." EVEN THE ANNOUNCER HAS FIGURED OUT YOUR STRATEGY, BEVELL. AND HIS IQ IS IN THE SINGLE-DIGIT RANGE.
- OH MY GOD LOOK HOW WELL THAT WORKED!!! I'M SO GLAD WE FUCKING RAN IT FIVE TIMES IN A ROW INSTEAD OF PASSING IT ONCE AND GETTING A TOUCHDOWN.
- SIKE
- "I sure do hate it when my team gets easy touchdowns. Or touchdowns." - Darrell 'Fuck Russell Wilson' Bevell. It's like he's the one guy who still believes Wilson is too short to be a successful quarterback.
- Oh look! It's a one possession game! Still!
- Get better soon, Burley. You were kinda good out there today. Couple great plays.
- Fuck. Fuck you, Emmanuel Sanders. Fuck.
- This game is too close. I like 43-8 better. Hell, THAT game was too close.
- FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK
- Yeah, THAT'S the play we get zero pressure. Fuck.
- That's a catch, if you're wondering. And no, that's NOT an example of Sherman getting 'beat'.
- The numbers on the Broncos' uniforms are too fucking round.
- "We want the ball and we're going to shit all over you motherfuckers."
- SO PUMPED. GOAL TO GO. LET'S GO SEAHAWKS!!!!
- TOUCHDOWN SEAHAWKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- THAT'S THE GAME, BABY!! BEAST MODE!! Y'ALL JUST GOT LYNCHED!! Oh god I just realized why no one ever says that.
- "What a game." That's the first sensible thing the announcers have said all day. That was a game.
- Jim Nantz and Phil Simms. Those are the motherfuckers. But hey, we won!! GO HAWKS!!!!

Introducing: Uncapped Passer Rating!

Preamble:

Passer rating is bullshit.

If you didn't know, passer rating is equally comprised of four parts: completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown rate, and interception rate. Each of these stats makes up 1/4 of a player's total passer rating. The way a player's rating is calculated is that each of these numbers is toyed with (the actual math is available here) to give the player a value between 0 and 2.375 in each category. These numbers are totaled, and then the total is adjusted to give a maximum rating of 158.3 repeating, and a minimum rating of 0. Herein lies the reason why standard passer rating is bullshit.

I understand the draw of having the ability to throw for a "perfect game". It makes sense. It's a meaningful occurrence in most other sports, so why not football? I also understand why the creators of passer rating wanted to implement a floor. After all, how could anyone show their face after throwing for a negative passer rating? But by adding these arbitrary limitations, passer rating is deceiving its audience.

For reference, these caps are as follows: 77.5% completion rate, 12.5+ yards per attempt, an 11.875% touchdown rate, and a 0% interception rate. (The floors, for any interested parties, are 30% cmp%, 3 YPA, 0% TD%, and 9.5% int%.) Two obvious complaints arise: First, lots of players have outperformed the ceiling in any one of these stats. Some of them earned "perfect games," but some of them didn't, and had their PR punished by the arbitrary caps. (Indeed, there are a LOT of cases where players should have had a passer rating of 160+, but because of the caps on PR ended up well below 158.3.) And second, the 0% interception rate limitation means that a player who throws one interception, even if every other one of his throws is a 99 yard completion for a touchdown, even if he makes a thousand such throws, will never achieve a perfect passer rating. (For reference, with the limitations in place, said player (1000/1001, 99,000 yd, 1000 TD, 1 int) would have a passer rating of 157.9. Without them, his passer rating would be a much more reasonable 830.0. Hold your questions until the end.)

I didn't like the effect of the limitations. So obviously, I removed them.

(A few quick notes: All stats here have a minimum of 15 pass attempts. Some places use 10. These places are wrong. For instance, Wikipedia says that QBs have thrown "perfect games" on 61 occasions. Wikipedia is wrong. First of all, two of these players were playing prior to 1960, but since football didn't exist prior to 1960 (seriously, how many Super Bowls do the Browns have?), which I know because that's as far back as PFR's search function goes, those two are illegitimate. Second, four of the instances Wikipedia lists occurred in the playoffs, which everyone knows doesn't count. Would you count a perfect game in the preseason? By a third string QB? Against a fourth string defense? In garbage time down 31 with 4 minutes to play in the fourth? Didn't think so. It's BASICALLY the same principle, to the extent that neither the pre- nor the post-season is the regular season. Third, 18 of the games listed on Wikipedia had pass attempts under 15 (including two of the playoff games). That's some weak-ass shit. Who wants a perfect game on eleven attempts? That's like saying you're a lock-down pitcher because you threw two no-hit innings. That's like claiming to be a master chef because you successfully prepared bruschetta. That's like calling yourself 'Kobe' because you hit one fade-away jumper. Out of seven. With no one guarding you. From 11 feet. There have been 39 "perfect games" in NFL history, and that's final. Oh, and once I'm done with them, not a single one of them will have a passer rating of 158.3. Because they'll all be higher. Because passer rating is stupid.)


New Ceiling! New Floor! New Everything!

My process was simple: I just excised the part of the formula that involved min/maxing the numbers so they fit in the range of 0-2.375. Instead, I let them go as high or as low as they wanted. Here's what happened:

- A perfect game, and I mean a REALLY perfect game, consists of every pass being completed for 99 yards and a touchdown. It's literally impossible to do better than this in a standard NFL game. Such a performance could obviously never happen under any realistic circumstances, but if it did, it would reward its creator with a passer rating of 831.25. (Fun fact: Remember how the cap for the value of each individual statistic was set at 2.375? Well, in this perfect uncapped game, one of those numbers hits 20 (TD%) and one reaches 24 (Y/A), while the third tops out at 3.5 (cmp%). Int%, of course, stays at 2.375, since you can't get lower than 0%.)
- The trivial record for highest passer rating in a game belongs to Arthur Marshall and Josh Miller, both of whom went 1/1 for 81 yards and 1 TD, giving them each a rating of 756.25. The trivial record for pass attempts >=2 belongs to Gene Mingo, who went 2/2 for 2 TDs and 102 yards, giving him a rating of 631.25. (Don't worry, we'll get to nontrivial records in a bit.)
- The worst possible game comes from throwing an interception on every attempt. Such a performance would give a passer rating of -414.58333 (repeating). (FYI, a game in which every pass was a completion for -99 yards and (obviously) no TD would give a rating of -327.1.) And although no one has ever achieved a true perfect game of 831.25, hundreds upon hundreds of players have reached this floor, mostly going 0/1 for 1 int. A number of players have hit 0/2 for 2 ints.
- One time Brett Favre (on his 22nd-and-one-twelfth birthday, as a backup in Atlanta) went 0/4 for 0 yards (obvs) and 2 interceptions, giving him a passer rating of -206.25. He's going to be in the Hall of Fame really soon, and he holds most career passing records (not that that means much, or that he'll have them for long, and not that the HoF is necessarily indicative of greatness). This gets its own bullet point.
- If you're wondering, the minimum values that can be reached in each stat are -1.5 for cmp% (0%), -25.5 for YPA (-99), 0 for TD% (0%), and -22.625% for int% (100%). If a player could hit all these numbers at once his PR would be -827.1. But since it's impossible to have both a 0 cmp% and a negative YPA, and simultaneously it's impossible to have both a negative YPA and a minimized int% stat, the lowest you can get to is -414.6.
- A number of players who previously sat below 158.3 despite having exceeded the cap in one or more categories were bumped up above the 158.3 'threshold'. The most recent bumpee is Matt Ryan, whose 21/24, 3 TD, 0 int performance yesterday got him bumped from 155.9 capped to 166.3 uncapped. Gratz Matt.
- No player who had a "perfect game" (158.3) maintained that number. It's possible that some player who was lower was bumped up to precisely that point, but it's unlikely. In other words, the 158.3 threshold (which was already incredibly arbitrary) is entirely irrelevant to the new system. Just like it always should have been.


The Greatest Single-Game Performances in NFL History (since 1970, min 15 atts):

- Fran Tarkenton, 1970: 15/18, 280 yds, 5 TD, 0 int, 228.9 Uncapped PR.
- Ben Roethlisberger, 2007: 13/16, 209 yds, 5 TD, 0 int, 228.4 UPR.
- Steve Grogan, 1979: 13/18, 315 yds, 5 TD, 0 int, 227.7 UPR.
- Craig Morton, 1981: 17/18, 308 yds, 4 TD, 0 int, 226.2 UPR.
- Craig Morton, 1970: 13/17, 349 yds, 5 TD, 1 int, 224.9 UPR.
- Robert Griffin III, 2012: 14/15, 200 yds, 4 TD, 0 int, 224.3 UPR.
- Alex Smith, 2013: 17/20, 287 yds, 5 TD, 0 int, 216.0 UPR.
- James Harris, 1974: 12/15, 276 yds, 3 TD, 0 int, 212.1 UPR.
- Jay Schroeder, 1990: 10/15, 234 yds, 4 TD, 0 int, 211.5 UPR.
- Nick Foles, 2013: 22/28, 406 yds, 7 TD, 0 int, 211.3 UPR.

Weird list. Here are the best-ever performances by some of the NFL's all-time and current greats.

- Johnny Unitas*, 1967: 17/20, 370 yds, 4 TD, 0 int, 216.7 UPR.
- Tom Brady, 2007: 21/25, 354 yds, 6 TD, 0 int, 211.1 UPR.
- John Elway (!**), 1984: 16/19, 218 yds, 5 TD, 0 int, 207.8 UPR.
- Drew Brees, 2009: 18/23, 371 yds, 5 TD, 0 int, 207.0 UPR.
- Peyton Manning, 2007: 13/17, 249 yds, 4 TD, 0 int, 205.3 UPR.
- Steve Young, 1993: 17/23, 354 yds, 4 TD, 0 int, 185.8 UPR.
- Joe Montana, 1989: 16/19, 270 yds, 3 TD, 0 int, 184.1 UPR.
- Dan Marino, 1984: 21/28, 311 yds, 5 TD, 0 int, 170.4 UPR.
- Brett Favre, 1992: 15/19, 214 yds, 3 TD, 0 int, 167.4 UPR.
- Aaron Rodgers, 2009: 15/20, 246 yds, 3 TD, 0 int, 165.8 UPR.
- UPDATE! This just happened today! GRATZ AROD!!
- Aaron Rodgers, 2014: 19/22, 255 yds, 3 TD, 0 int, 167.8 UPR.

* Unitas technically shouldn't be on this list because I'm not using numbers pre-1970 (which is why he's not in the first list), but he gets an exception because he's Johnny Unitas. (I don't use numbers before 1970 because football didn't REALLY exist until 1970.)

** The reason I'm surprised here is because Elway sucked. No, really. He was a mediocre quarterback. (I'll write an article on this sometime. (Edit: I DID IT!)) And yet he has a game that's better than any game Peyton ever played. What?? (Then again, Craig "I Never Made The Pro Bowl" Morton also has two games better than every player on this second list, so maybe we shouldn't look too far into it.)


The Worst of the Worst:

Let me qualify this real quick by saying that it's harder to find really bad games than to find really good ones. I wouldn't be even remotely comfortable presenting a list and saying with any certainty that it is a comprehensive list of players below a certain UPR. (I can say that I am fairly confident about the above "best" UPR lists.) But in my research, this is the worst game I found with atts>=15:

Joe Namath, 1976: 4/15, 20 yds, 0 TD, 4 int, -81.25 UPR.

Now THAT is exceptional. A Hall-of-Fame quarterback, throwing pretty much the worst game you can possibly throw. Again, it's possible someone's lower, but I haven't found him. Here are the worst games from some more HoF passers, current greats, Mannings with girl names, and people named Mark:

- Warren Moon, 1986: 5/23, 68 yds, 0 TD, 4 int, -39.9 UPR.
- Terry Bradshaw, 1970: 3/20, 110 yds, 1 TD, 4 int, -29.2 UPR.
- Johnny Unitas, 1973: 6/17, 55 yds, 0 TD, 3 int, -28.6 UPR.
- Mark Sanchez, 2009***: 10/29, 119 yds, 0 TD, 5 int, -23.9 UPR.
- Dan Marino, 1999: 15/36, 178 yds, 0 TD, 5 int, -0.5 UPR.
- John Elway, 1983: 13/34, 143 yds, 0 TD, 4 int, 2.5 UPR.
- Tom Brady, 2003: 14/28, 123 yds, 0 TD, 4 int, 2.5 UPR.
- Elisha Manning, 2013: 18/31, 156 yds, 0 TD, 5 int, 4.2 UPR.
- SAD UPDATE: I don't want to talk about it:
- Peyton Manning, 2015: 5/20, 35 yds, 0 TD, 4 int, -53.1 UPR.

*** Sanchez is the odd one out. He's here because he's Sanchez. Also Elisha is the odd one out. He's here because I think it's funny that he once had a 4.2 UPR.

If I didn't include someone, it's because either he never had a game that bad (e.g. Peyton, Montana, Young), or because he did but I'm just not that interested in him (e.g. Griese, Aikman****, maybe some QBs from the '70s). If you want to request the best or worst game from a given QB, you can do that.

**** I can't resist. Aikman once threw for 7/21, 54 yds, 0 TD, 3 int, and a UPR of -18.9.

Power Rankings, Week 2

We're back, baby! Week Two of the En Eff El Power Rankings! Will I make it all the way through this time?? Will there be teams in my rankings besides the Seahawks, Texans, and Lions?? Are the Seahawks going to be first or--gasp--second?? Stay tuned to find out. Thrilling, I know. Your ticket pays for your whole seat, but you'll only need the EDGE. The EDGE. The EDGE. The EDGE. The EDGE. This is now a blog about people standing at the edge of things underwater.

1. Seattle Seahawks. YEAH BITCH!! SEAHAWKS! I mean, yes, I realize that the Seahawks lost in a pretty ugly fashion last week. I realize that. But they're still the best team in football. Here are a list of relevant facts and/or opinions I feel strongly enough to refer to them as facts:

- The Seahawks blew out the Packers, who are at least as good as the Chargers, in week 1.
- That first fact is wrong, and the Chargers are massively underrated. They have an elite offense.
- The temperature on the field was something like 120 degrees last Sunday. The Seahawks sent several players to the locker room to get on fluids. Because it was the temperature you'd cook a chicken at. If you wanted salmonella. Salmonelsa.
- The Chargers had the ball for like 42:15 out of the 60 minute game (approximately). That's an ABSURD time of possession disparity. They wore out our defense by taking advantage of their cheating-ass Southern California sun and running a slow-paced fast-paced offense.
- The Seahawks were actually amazing on offense. Wilson put up a 119.1 rating and 2 TDs, and the combined efforts of our running backs averaged 8.3 YPC. Even our running backs not named Percy (of which there were only four on Sunday) averaged 5.727272727272727272727272 yards per carry.
- The Seahawks' defense is still the best in the league. And one of the best ever.
- It's probably never going to be that hot again.
- Seahawks are #1.
- Deal with it.

2. Denver Broncos. Okay, so I don't actually think the Broncos as a team look that good this year. They've won by a touchdown against Indianapolis and Kansas City, who are easily the two most overrated teams of the season. Unless people still think Cleveland is remotely good. Is that a thing people think? BUT Peyton Manning looks like a fucking football god out there. He's thrown for a passer rating of 126.5 through two games. That's practically Wilson-esque. Wilson, esq. God, Russell Wilson is so great, isn't he? Mmm...

3. Cincinnati Bengals. The Bengals are legit GOOD this year. They might be the best team in the AFC. Andy Dalton... Wait, I have to be able to think of a good nickname here. Hang on. Dalt... Daltoid? No. Dalter... Hm. Ander--- no. Fuck. Fuck this.

4. Carolina Panthers. This is the last conventional pick. Prepare your fucking mind, because it's about to get blown. I haven't really been following Carolina. Apparently Derek Anderson started for them at some point? I missed that dude. He was pretty solid in '07. Too bad he got overshadowed by that dude with the hot girlfriend. You know... Ryan Tannehill. I mean, FUCK. Why couldn't I have been a quarterback? Look at this shit. Fuck.

5. Houston Texans. YOU HEARD ME. Watt is the greatest defensive player in the league, possibly ever. He gets crucial stops and pressures more often than Andrew Luck acts awkward around pretty girls. Like Lauren Tannehill. Oh, and Ryan Fitzpatrick looks incredible. What is this?? How are this many quarterbacks killing it this year??

6. Washington Redskins. Other people make power rankings by basically listing the teams in the order of how they did last year and then making tiny little adjustments (tiny like Luck's confidence with women) until it becomes glaringly obvious how great a team is. Like the Redskins, when they go into their bye at 7-2. Seriously, this team is good. Kirk Cousins looks great (WHAT IS HAPPENING) and their defense is good or whatever. More importantly, they lost to a 'bad' team in the Texans in week 1 (who I think are actually good, obviously), and then they shit on the Jaguars, who actually are pretty bad. That's what you'd expect from the #6 team in my rankings. Which the Redskins are. BOW DOWN TO WASHINGTON!

7. San Francisco 49ers. How can they not be good? They have Stevie "I PRAISE YOU 24/7!!!!!! AND THIS HOW YOU DO ME!!!!! YOU EXPECT ME TO LEARN FROM THIS??? HOW???!!! ILL NEVER FORGET THIS!! EVER!!! THX THO..." Johnson on their team!

8. New England Patriots. How can they not be good? They have a quarterback whose wife is moderately attractive. I mean, she's okay I guess. She's no Lauren Tannehill. I mean... fuck.

9. San Diego Chargers. Does Rivers have a hot wife? Um... no. He does not. Good for him, I guess... I mean, he's worth TENS of MILLIONS. That's tens of millions more than I'm ever going to be worth. If I had that kind of money, I'd be dating Lauren Tannehill. Who looks like a zombie in that pic. But hey... I'm into it. Football! Right. Rivers is playing well or whatever and the Chargers are a solid football squad. I don't know. These are power rankings. I make them up essentially at random. You're not here for analysis.

10. Chicago Bears. The other team with a dominant offense, but the Bears have a better defense! So why are they below the Chargers, you might ask? Because the Chargers beat the Seahawks, while the Bears beat the Niners. Seriously. I think the Bears are a better team. But the Chargers beat the SEAHAWKS. (This is why power rankings are arbitrary and stupid. Because I can do shit like this.)

11. Green Bay Packers. What even is the "green bay"? Some bay on Lake Michigan? Wait, that's exactly what it is. But why are they called the PACKERS? Some 1920s bullshit when "packers" was something besides a joke? Okay, yes. Remember when this happened?

12. Philadelphia Eagles. Nick Foles fell back to earth in a big way. His stats are practically Luck-like, except that 8.0 YPA, which eclipses anything Luck's ever accomplished. EVER. Plus, Foles can actually talk to girls apparently. Good for him.

13. Buffalo Bills. There's something in me that doesn't want to have the Bills this high. I know they're 2-0. I know both the offense and defense look solid (and EJ Manuel looks decent). I know they beat the Bears and crushed the Dolphins. But they're still the BILLS, you know? I don't trust it. I don't trust any of it. If I had to pick one 2-0 team with a chance to pull a Texans and go 2-14 (I'm so sorry Texans), it would be the Bills. Because they're the Bills. You know? It's just... they're the Bills. They're like the Browns except without the championships in the '50s. They lost the Super Bowl four years in a row. Their best players in history are OJ, who's probably the least desirable "best player in history" you can possibly have, and Bruce Smith, who I can't actually say anything bad about because he's kind of a beast. I just... I can't trust them.

14. Arizona Cardinals. Carson Palmer is kinda killing it again, joining the quarterbacks with passer ratings of 105+. Which is now a very extensive group. The Cardinals also still have an excellent defense, and they'll (have to) show it over the next three weeks as they face SF, Denver, and Washington in rapid succession. Should be interesting.

15. Detroit Lions. Yes, the Lions just got destroyed by Carolina. Yes, Matt Stafford has been good but not great. Yes, they don't have an effective running game. Yes, there are some questions about the defense. But.

16. Baltimore Ravens. Flaccastrophe, also known as "the average-income man's Andrew Luck" because he plays almost identically to Andrew Luck except he also had that playoff run where he was better than Luck has ever been, also known as Joe Flacco to those who don't read my blog, is mediocre. Like Andrew Luck. And while the Ravens have looked okay on defense, and Justin Forsett is filling in nicely for the awful (person) Ray Rice, I still don't think the Ravens are great this year. I don't really have nice things to say about any team below #12.

17. Atlanta Falcons. Matt Ryan is Andrew Luck's ceiling.

18. New Orleans Saints. Sure, the Saints have started off the season 0-2. But lots of great teams have started out the season 0-2! Probably. I don't know how to look this up. Does PFR have a search function for this?

19. Miami Dolphins. I don't know anything about this team. I don't know why they're here. How did you people get in my room?

20. Dallas Cowboys. God, I wish the Cowboys had beaten the 49ers. They'd be top ten in my list, straight-up. Never say that I'm not a generous god.

21. Tennessee Titans. I still love you, Jake. I really do. But I just don't foresee a lot of success for the Titans this year.

22. New York Jets. I don't know about you, but I have a strange feeling that the Jets might not be a bottom-ten team in the league this year. They're not exactly winning the AFCE with Geno Smith and the Ghost of Michael Vick at quarterback, but they won't go 2-14 either.

23. Pittsburgh Steelers. I hate the Steelers.

24. Cleveland Browns. WHERE IS YOUR MANZIEL HYPE NOW?

25. Indianapolis Colts. You know how every quarterback in the league is kinda killing it so far this year? How every half-decent QB seems to have a passer rating of 105 and up? Like how (of all QBs with 22 attempts or more) there are nine QBs with a PR of 100+ in the league this year and three at 114.7 or better? (A group which comprises what I think should be considered the First Great Triumvirate of Quarterbacking Excellency: Peyton Manning, Ryan Fitzpatrick, and Russell Wilson)? You know how 1984 was the Year of Marino, and '94 was the Year of Young, and '04 was the Year of Manning, and '14 is looking like the Year of Wilson? You know how one would expect every gifted young quarterback to be putting up a passer rating AT LEAST in the triple digits, if not quadruple? Guess what Andrew Luck's passer rating is? No, really, guess. I'll give you a hint: It's lower than Ryan Fitzpatrick's. It's lower than Derek Anderson's. It's lower than Jay Cutler's and EJ Manuel's and Austin Davis's and Brian Hoyer's. It is 85.5, which places Luck at 20th in the league. I'm so happy.

Oh yeah, and you know how I always joke about Luck not being able to talk to girls, and about how all other quarterbacks seem to have ridiculously hot wives? And you were probably thinking, "Naw, I bet Luck TOTALLY has mad bitches. After all, he went to Stanford, studied some bastard easy-mode version of Architecture, and is both a professional athlete and in fact the #1 overall pick in his draft." Right? Well guess fucking what: here she is. She looks like the awful girl from Freaks and Geeks. She looks like the kind of girl a pedophile might be attracted to so that he can pretend he's banging a much younger girl because she looks so fucking young. She looks like EXACTLY the kind of girl you'd expect to end up dating an NFL player who has no idea how to talk to girls. Like Andrew Luck.

26. Minnesota Vikings. Adrian Peterson is still a horrible person, but at least it looks like he won't be playing football anytime soon. The Vikings are probably screwed without him. It's a testament to how bad the rest of these teams are that Minnesota is still only #26.

27. St. Louis Rams. I think the Rams are better than the Vikings, but I can't bring myself to put them at #26 when they got blown out by Minny in week 1.

28. Tampa Bay Buccaneers. Before us now stretches the abyss. Behold it, but beware, for when you gaze long into an abyss, the abyss also gazes into you.

29. Kansas City Chiefs. Abandon hope all ye who enter here.

30. Oakland Raiders. There is no God and we are his prophets.

31. New York Giants. My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!

32. Jacksonville Jaguars. That is not dead which can eternal lie, and with strange aeons even death may die.

I'm finished.