clock menu more-arrow no yes

Filed under:

Peter King Can't Get Out Of His Own Way

New, comments

Generally I like Peter King.  I don't always agree with him, but Brady man crush and total 'yeah that was popular 5 years ago moments' aside, I enjoy reading his column.  Earlier this week he dropped his rankings of all 32 QBs in the league.  The rankings had Rex Grossman coming in at 27.  An fairly low number considering he did have 7 games of over a 100 passer rating and his team did go to the Super Bowl, but I have gotten used to the Grossman bashing and some of it is well deserved.  As I am sure he expected he got tons of hate mail and saw fit to print some.  

If this was it, I would just let it go, but his article is just loaded with statements that just run all over themselves.

For starter's he opens with this line

Readers, readers. Here's my question after seeing your e-mails on Monday night: Did you read my column? Or did you only look at my ratings of the starting NFL quarterbacks and say, "He's nuts! Kitna ahead of McNabb! Schaub ahead of Vick! Vince Young ahead of Roethlisberger! Loco!"

Remember what I said: These are my ratings for 2007.

So with a second full year under Grossman, a full training camp, an emphasis on mechanics and a fully loaded receiving squad and he is only going to be better than 5 QBs in the league?  Really?

Here is the email from a fan who has an issue with King's bashing of Grossman:

I HATE THE BEARS, EVIDENTLY. "The anti-Bears bias in your column is just so amazing. Is Grossman a top-10 QB? No way. Is he somewhere between 10 and 20? Yeah. You say wins matter. Last year the Bears won 15 games, beat your beloved Saints and Giants like drums and went to the Super Bowl. Yet you and many other writers constantly tripped over yourselves to bash the Bears. Your pet Romo choked when it counted. Give the Bears a break, take the blinders off and write something fair. Until then your whole rating system is bogus biased crap.''

And here is his response:

Grossman played so many poor games last year that, a la Dilfer in 2000, I couldn't justify putting him in the top 20. Maybe he'll be better this year. I don't know. But I'll remind you of an old Parcellsism: I go by what I see. And what I saw of Grossman last year was, basically, a below-average NFL starting quarterback.

So you go by what you see?  The whole article is about how he thinks they will do in 07, not much seeing there. Sounds like you are basing the entire thing on last year.  How about Matt Schaub coming in at #19?  How much seeing have you done with him considering he has started a whole what 4 games?  

He has Vince Young at #7, because he saw so much in half a season.  You think that now that the league's defensive coordinators have a full season to sit down and look at tape they aren't going to figure out how to slow him down?  How about Matt Leinart at number 16?  Another full one season to see things.  Question, how much does one factor in the fact that the Cardinals have one of the best receiving duos into how good a QB is?  Brady has succeeded with bums at that spot, Leinart has had top tier talent all the way back through college.

Jason Campbell at #26.  WHAT?  I think Campbell can be a fine QB in this league, but better than Grossman after one year I don't think so.

I guess in the end I am just fulfilling my bi yearly rant clause, but you want to talk about Grossman being inconsistent time to turn that mirror around my friend.