The following are statements that you've probably heard before and agreed with, or maybe even said yourself. They are decidedly and overwhelmingly the national opinion on their respective subjects. Call me crazy, but I don't agree with them. So here are the NFL's myths, and my weak attempts to debunk them.
Rex Grossman really bites the big one. This is a common one. Grossman threw away the Super Bowl. Yes. He had a few bad (okay, godawful) games down the stretch. Fine. But look at it statistically. Grossman passed for 3193 yards last season. Not too shabby. He completed 55 % of his passes. Decent. He threw a respectable 23 TD's. But here's what gets everyone: 20 interceptions. That's a bad number. But ten of them came in his three biggest stinkers. If you take out his 4 INTs against Arizona, 3 against Miami, and 3 against Minnesota, his stats are nearly identical to Philip Rivers, widely considered one of the biggest surprise stories of the league. Winning is often called the only real measure for a quarterback's success (which we'll get to later). And by that measure, only one quarterback in the league is better than Grossman.
Vince Young is freakin' awesome. The Madden '08 cover boy, in my opinion, could be the most overrated player in the NFL. Warts are prettier than his passing stats (12 TDs, 13 INTs, 2199 yards, 51% completion, 66.7 rating). "But he makes plays with his feet," you say. He ran the ball 83 times this year, gaining 552 yards for an average of 6.7 yards per carry. Why is the mobile-quarterback act still cute with Young, but not with Michael Vick, who does it better? Vick carried the ball 123 times, and become the first quarterback ever to cross the 1,000 yard rushing mark. Young gets slapped on the cover of the most popular sports game ever, while Vick becomes the most hated football player without the initials T and O. "But his team won most of the time when he was playing," you point out. Well, so did Grossman's. Even more often in fact. Enough to get to the Super Bowl. "Oh," you say, "well, Grossman sucks."
In order to really be a great player, you've got to have a ring. Football is a team sport, is it not? The better team should win the game, right? Not many people would disagree with that. Most people, however, would agree with the bolded statement. It's contradictory. If it's a team game, then winning the Super Bowl should be considered the mark of a great team, not a great player. If the best player ever gets put on the worst team ever, he wouldn't win the Super Bowl. Doesn't change the fact that he's the best ever.
It's important, when drafting players, to look closely at their "character." This is a bunch of horse ****. I literally think I might be the only person on Earth who feels this way, but who are NFL executives to look up prospects' personal records, see that they've had a run-in or two with the law, and declare them "character problem guys?" There's more to a person's character (whatever that is) than their criminal records. Split decisions are made in different circumstances, and people make mistakes. Unless the prospect has been convicted of murder, or you can prove that he's a terrorist, you can't know how he'll turn out to be as a person unless you've known him for years. Draft good football players. Whether they'll be good teammates isn't something you can judge beforehand.
Alright, that's enough for now. If I can think of any more, and then work up the energy to type them all down, you might see a Part 2.