Official Jake Plummer Handball Thread

Russ Smith

The Original Whizzinator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 14, 2002
Posts
85,086
Reaction score
34,240
So we've regressed to Jake that Jake was merely a contributor. And that credit is attributable to magic rather than an actual ability to lead an offense to remarkable last minute comeback victories. The Defense, which was awesome, is responsible for any real success that year.

I don't have time to look it up, but my memory of that defense is they were slightly above average. And the real question is, how good was the defense that year. How many pro-bowlers did we have that year. Chavous who played safety for Minnesota, wasn't a world beating corner for us. Where did the defense rank in 98? Again my memory is, at best, they were above average and I still give Jake a ton of credit none of it attributable to magic.

Only 2 defenses in the NFL forced more turnovers than ours. We just saw a stat the other day about how turnovers are the key stat in the NFL. So how does a team with the weakest schedule in the entire NFL, and all those turnovers, only win 9 games? Because the offense turned it over nearly as much as the defense forced turnovers.

The one issue the defense had that year was key stops late in games they never seemed to get that done. and as was discussed all year, one of the reasons for that is the only way the offense played well was in the no huddle.
 

BigRedMO

Registered
Joined
Apr 16, 2004
Posts
1,250
Reaction score
12
I really worry for the future of the human race. I was a teenager during the 80s part of the cold war but have never been as pessimistic for the future of man than I am now. Why so pessimistic now you ask? Back then I was a naive teenager who believed that rational objective thought and analysis determined the most correct answer. With what I have seen in politics the last several years and in any discussion of Plummer is that subjective opinion of the person under discussion totally colors peoples analysis.

It seems to me it is riduculous to not think that Plummer was a key contributor to success of '98. Is it possible events after that season have colored some peoples perception? After '98 I recall alot of Plummer supporters.

Also since being a teen back in the 80s I realize that people pick only the stats that support their opinion. Turnovers are important but so is points allowed, yards allowed etc. I have not looked up the stats but memory (prone to subjection) leads me to think the Cards defense was not great in '98. Neither was the offense as I recall since they finished 9-7. But I would love to see the other stats for the year.

Anyway since the scientific method of developing a hypothesis and looking at enough data in an objective way to determine whether facts support the hypothesis appears to be a quaint relic from the past. I am busily building my nuclear bomb shelter and stocking it with food since some of the world's leaders see threats where none exist except in their own mind.
 
Last edited:

Cheesebeef

ASFN IDOL
Supporting Member
Banned from P+R
Joined
Jan 2, 2003
Posts
89,467
Reaction score
63,075
So we've regressed to Jake that Jake was merely a contributor. And that credit is attributable to magic rather than an actual ability to lead an offense to remarkable last minute comeback victories. The Defense, which was awesome, is responsible for any real success that year.

huh? We might have different defintions of "magic" because to me, that's a pretty good thing for a QB to have in the fourth quarter. And where did I say the defense was "awesome" and that it was responsible for "any real success that year." You're taking comments that were shaded in grey and for some reason projecting them to be black or white with words I never said.

And what's wrong with being a contributor? That team had three things going for it: A defense that produced a TON of turnovers, a QB who had a special knack for fourth quarter FG drives and the easiest schedule known to man. So yeah, they were all contributors, but NONE of them was "awesome" or even close to it considering we were 1 game over .500, against an awful schedule, in which most of our wins against that awful schedule were won at the gun.

Like Russ said, the D was great at getting turnovers and horrible at getting the big stop. Plummer was horrible giving away turnovers (21 (edit: with rushing):25 TD:Turnover ratio), but great at engineering the big drive. So yeah, he was just a contributor, much like everyone else. Look, I know that was our best team and they were a blast to watch, but there was a reason they were 9-7. Pretty much every unit had BIG drawbacks and that's why I don't think one singular player deserves a "ton" of credit.
 
Last edited:

Darth Llama

Rise Up Red Sea!
Joined
Dec 9, 2007
Posts
2,360
Reaction score
0
Location
Section 444 Row 4
I don't have any hate for Jake. I'll never argue that he was a great QB, but getting a playoff Win for the Cardinals is quite an accomplishment. Between that, and the Rose Bowl for ASU, I'm kinda surprised he's not more of a hero in AZ.

Oh well, on the bright side, since he isn't here anymore, I really don't care that much. :lol:
 

RedViper

Registered
Joined
Dec 26, 2003
Posts
1,738
Reaction score
8
Location
Flagstaff
huh? We might have different defintions of "magic" because to me, that's a pretty good thing for a QB to have in the fourth quarter. And where did I say the defense was "awesome" and that it was responsible for "any real success that year." You're taking comments that were shaded in grey and for some reason projecting them to be black or white with words I never said.

And what's wrong with being a contributor? That team had three things going for it: A defense that produced a TON of turnovers, a QB who had a special knack for fourth quarter FG drives and the easiest schedule known to man. So yeah, they were all contributors, but NONE of them was "awesome" or even close to it considering we were 1 game over .500, against an awful schedule, in which most of our wins against that awful schedule were won at the gun.

Like Russ said, the D was great at getting turnovers and horrible at getting the big stop. Plummer was horrible giving away turnovers (21 (edit: with rushing):25 TD:Turnover ratio), but great at engineering the big drive. So yeah, he was just a contributor, much like everyone else. Look, I know that was our best team and they were a blast to watch, but there was a reason they were 9-7. Pretty much every unit had BIG drawbacks and that's why I don't think one singular player deserves a "ton" of credit.

I still think he gets a ton of credit, but you are right insofar as football, as the last great team sport everyone contributes and gets it done together. I take back my earlier thesis that they rest of the team wasn't very good, which was idiotic. I blundered into that in response to any suggestion that the team would have been so much better if not dragged down by the anchor called Jake Plummer. I ended up doing the same thing I was mad at the Jake bashers for. I'll have to do better next time and get to the perspective BigRedMo has where he's proud of all these players. People can remember it, rewrite it, anyway that want. To me, those guys all got it done together, for one month of completely worthwhile football. Not the kind of football New England or Indy plays, where they dominate and win by 40 points, but the kind you can't take your eye of for a single play. It was our one great thing. People can say or believe that it wasn't really great, it was really just mediocrity combined with some incredible luck, whatever. To me it was heroic, spectacular, incredible. To me personal attacks on Jake (none of which were made by Cheese or Russ but were earlier in the thread), insult my memory of that, but I from now on I'm going to stay the hell away from these. They just bring me down and I'm not going to change anyone's mind that hates the guy anyway.
 
Last edited:

Crimson Warrior

Dangerous Murray Zealot
Joined
Oct 27, 2002
Posts
7,682
Reaction score
7,651
Location
Home of the Thunder
Jake the snake Plummer. mmm. mmm. MMM.

Led the team to the playoff win against the hated cowboys in 1998. That ended the longest playoff drought of any NFL team at the time (maybe in history, it was like 25 years or something crazy like that), and the concrete would soon flow in Glendale as a result. So I consider his tenure in ARZ a success based on that season alone.

But such a polarizing player. I'm sure it would have come to blows if the AFSN pro-Jake and anti-Jack factions had faced off in real life.
 
Top