The W
Views: 99018407
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
18.9.07 2046
The 7 - Football - Panthers and Patriots - Houston we have a ballgame
This thread has 2 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 Next(805 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (66 total)
Stefonics
Bockwurst
Level: 51

Posts: 260/596
EXP: 983475
For next: 30470

Since: 17.3.02
From: Queidersbach

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 6 hours
#41 Posted on 20.1.04 0034.33
Reposted on: 20.1.11 0036.55
    Originally posted by redsoxnation
    He had a bad leg last year that hampered him? Then why did he play? They seemed to be rolling along well without him the last 6 weeks of the season. If he puts himself on the field, he either thinks he's healthy enough to help the team win, or he is to arrogant to sit and is hurting his team.
    As for Barry Sanders, remember, Walter Payton always had a blot on his career until '85. Historically, it will hurt Sanders legacy that he never won a ring or got to a Super Bowl.

Redsox, I agree with your opinions more often than not so it hurts to debate this point with you. You're questioning why McNabb played last year with his hurt leg and that's borderline obscene. There is no debate as to who the leader of that team is. McNabb makes things happen for the Eagles. If he would have sat out that game last year, people would have questioned his heart. To use a baseball analogy, it's like when Manny decided that he was too sick to pinch hit. He's a superstar and because of that, he has to rise to the occasion no matter how hurt his leg is. The man threw 5 touchdown passes on a broken leg. That should be enough to cement his legacy. Football is a game about toughness. McNabb has it. McNair has it. If neither of those two quarterbacks gets a ring, they still deserve to be considered "great" due to the fact that anything short of paralysis won't keep them out of a game. As far as yesterday's game goes, anyone who says McNabb is the only reason why the Eagles lost is either braindead or drunk. The Eagles receivers resembled Pop-Warner players more than those on a team who is playing to go to the Super Bowl.

As far as Sanders goes, it would be a shame to hurt his legacy because he never won a ring. He retired in a very odd way, but at least he had the class to leave in his prime (see Smith, Emmitt). There are some things that people, for whatever reason, hold in high regard. Sanders refused to break Payton's record. That's his prerogative and that's fine. I even understand it. As a teenager, I hoped that Ripken wouldn't break Gherig's record either. But I've been told that I'm crazy for feeling that way before. Despite odd circumstances and the lack of a ring, there is no reason to not mention Barry Sanders when speaking of the greatest running backs of all time. If you can, download the footage of him forcing Rod Woodson to have reconstructive knee surgery. Then come back and tell me that he wasn't the best.
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1611/2042
EXP: 6286448
For next: 106351

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2999 days
Last activity: 213 days
#42 Posted on 20.1.04 1022.26
Reposted on: 20.1.11 1022.56
    Originally posted by Jaguar
    2) On Donovan McNabb as a 'Great' Quarterback: Both sides are wrong on this one. His detractors don't give him enough credit, but he also hasn't managed to get to the next level. McNabb is a very good quarterback, and he has the potential to be one of the very greatest quarterbacks, but he's not there yet. Case in point: John Elway. As a long suffering fan of the Denver Donkeys, I know all about 'great' quarterbacks. It took Elway over a decade before he finally stopped getting blown out in the playoffs. And while everyone knew he was a very good quarterback, you couldn't really call him great after the beatings he took in three Superbowls and numerous playoff games.


Damn, you beat me to the Elway comparison.

Elway was an awesome QB who didn't have much to work with for many years. Sammy Winder and Ricky Nattiel have a lot in common with Duce Staley and Todd Pinkston, all things considered -- they're adequate players, certainly not outright stiffs, but nowhere near the level of game-breaking threats, either. Elway carried his teams to many big games, but couldn't win them all on his lonesome.

Then they got Terrell Davis and an offensive line that let him run wild. Result: back-to-back Super Bowl victories.

The Eagles had shitty wideouts who've rarely been able to get regular separation to begin with. They were missing one of their better LBs (and were lousy at stopping the run WITH Emmons). They were missing their best running back (Westbrook). Their best corner (Vincent) wasn't playing at 100%. As far as threats go, the Eagles were a one-man team, and that one man got hurt in the first quarter. GAME OVER, MAN.

"Great" QBs win Super Bowls when they have solid supporting casts. Give McNabb something to work with and we'll see how good he really is.
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 152

Posts: 3225/7534
EXP: 43571490
For next: 730272

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 444 days
Last activity: 444 days
#43 Posted on 20.1.04 1034.13
Reposted on: 20.1.11 1034.59
    Originally posted by Whitebacon
      Originally posted by dMr
      The way I see it is if you take away the receivers (Rice et al) that Montana worked with and replaced them with me and a few of my mates, then I absolutely guarantee Montana never makes a Superbowl.


    This happened, it's called his tenure with the Kansas City Chiefs. I want to say his receivers were J.J Birden, Willie Davis (Willie Green?) and his tight end was Tony Simien(?). He got the Chiefs close a couple of times, but they couldn't win it all.





To be fair to Montana, he had two rings in his pocket when Rice arrived.
On Manning vs. the Chiefs: Get 11 of us from the wienerboard, and we could have scored 21 against KC that day.
And, to further clarify my McNabb comments: Calling him a good QB is not an insult. Around 75% of the starting QB's in the NFL are average or below average QB's, let alone good. However, great QB is a term thrown around way to loosely in the media, and I don't think McNabb's a good enough passer to be put in that rank (probably bounces more throws to his receivers than any other QB in the league). Now, if you want to make an argument for Steve McNair being very good (which is borderline great, ala Dan Fouts), I'd be in full agreement.
dunkndollaz
Banger
Level: 96

Posts: 1066/2549
EXP: 8767514
For next: 221305

Since: 3.1.02
From: Northern NJ

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 13 hours
#44 Posted on 20.1.04 1155.40
Reposted on: 20.1.11 1155.53
    Originally posted by Whitebacon
      Originally posted by dMr
      The way I see it is if you take away the receivers (Rice et al) that Montana worked with and replaced them with me and a few of my mates, then I absolutely guarantee Montana never makes a Superbowl.


    This happened, it's called his tenure with the Kansas City Chiefs. I want to say his receivers were J.J Birden, Willie Davis (Willie Green?) and his tight end was Tony Simien(?). He got the Chiefs close a couple of times, but they couldn't win it all.


Take a look at John Elway's first 3 Super Bowl appearances - he went with RB's like Sammy Winder & Gerald Wilhite (a collective WHO? goes up from the audience) and WR's like the 3 Amigos (Vance Johnson, Mark Jackson & Ricky Nattiel)- it wasn't until he had Terrel Davis, Rod Smith and Shannon Sharpe playing around him that he finally won the big one
Big Bad
Scrapple
Level: 145

Posts: 2683/6725
EXP: 37569450
For next: 34722

Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 9 hours
Last activity: 9 hours
#45 Posted on 20.1.04 2050.56
Reposted on: 20.1.11 2051.54
We all seem to be conceding the Super Bowl to the Patriots, but what if the Carolina D comes out fired up to all hell and Brady gets picked off three times? Can you call him a great QB then?

My definition of 'great' falls under the line of 'would I mark the ballot with a second thought in voting this guy into the Hall of Fame'? Under that criteria, the only truly great QB in the NFL right now is Brett Favre.

McNabb isn't overrated since he's (at least) in the top five quarterbacks in the NFL. The others, btw, are Favre, McNair, Brady and Manning. Whatever order you want to slot them is up to you, but I don't think it's a stretch to all these five the class of the NFL's quarterbacks. Guys like Vick, Green and Hasselbeck are still a notch below.
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 446/518
EXP: 803178
For next: 20370

Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 526 days
Last activity: 5 hours
#46 Posted on 20.1.04 2121.42
Reposted on: 20.1.11 2122.55
Yes I would still call Brady a great QB. If you want to go down the getting picked off route, how can you call Farve a great QB after throwing one of if not the worst Playoff INT in the HISTORY of the NFL this year?

Right now I would say there are only two QB's that are playing at a Great level. Brady and McNair. Farve over is career is a great QB but right now is on the downside and how he played this year I would call good but not great. Manning is very close to becoming great and if he makes another run in the playoffs next year I will call him great. (I dont think he will thank to the Pats showing the league how to beat him but that is another thread)
Jaguar
Knackwurst
Level: 107

Posts: 2013/3273
EXP: 12729006
For next: 362347

Since: 23.1.02
From: Phoenix, AZ

Since last post: 164 days
Last activity: 164 days
#47 Posted on 20.1.04 2208.00
Reposted on: 20.1.11 2210.57
On the Pats beating the Colts:

1) That game only happens in the playoffs. Regular season? Pats get hit with about 300 yards of penalties. At least the Carolina Cornerbacks didn't make it that obvious they were holding and interfering.

2) The Pats got into Manning's head. He spent a week studying all the elaborate schemes and blitzes, and went out ready to make the plays against them. Manning kept looking for the quick routes that'd open up and the Pats threw blanket coverage and only blitzed five times. Manning was fidgeting in the pocket waiting for the blitzes that never came. Peyton got surprised and rattled, but I don't think he's going to let anybody pull that on him again.

-Jag
Stefonics
Bockwurst
Level: 51

Posts: 261/596
EXP: 983475
For next: 30470

Since: 17.3.02
From: Queidersbach

Since last post: 4 days
Last activity: 6 hours
#48 Posted on 20.1.04 2304.47
Reposted on: 20.1.11 2305.07
    Originally posted by calvinh0560
    Right now I would say there are only two QB's that are playing at a Great level. Brady and McNair. Farve over is career is a great QB but right now is on the downside and how he played this year I would call good but not great.

Even though, statistically speaking, Favre had a better year than both McNair and Brady? The guy's father died, he came out with one of the ballsiest performances by a QB, but you don't feel even a bit wrong when mentioning Brady in the same sentence as Favre when refering to QB greatness? I guess my standards are too high.
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 447/518
EXP: 803178
For next: 20370

Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 526 days
Last activity: 5 hours
#49 Posted on 21.1.04 0021.55
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0023.36
Great QB's right now in the NFL no, I have no problem mentioning Brady with Farve. I am not compairing careers right now. I am just saying right now if I would rank Qb's it would be 1. Brady 2. McNair 3.Farve

He has had a great year. Is only 39-12 in his career as a starter. Has never lost a playoff game. Only has lead his team to the second lostest winning streak in the history of the NFL. Lead the NFL in TD passes last year.

Favre with thougth alot this year with his dad's death. But he will not be the first NFL player to go though something difficult. Joe Jurevicius also went hell last year. But i would him the only great WR in the league. Hell is he only average.

Farve has lost a step. That is all I am saying. He is no longer the best in the leauge. That is nothing wrong with that.
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 140

Posts: 793/6291
EXP: 32978350
For next: 308137

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 12 hours
#50 Posted on 21.1.04 0600.25
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0601.41
AS far as teh Farve debate, look at it like this, if your team had no QB and Farve was available, would you take him? The answer is yes. Not only can he make throws that probably about 95% of the QBs in the league cant make, but he is also a great team leader.

As far as pimping Brady as great for his long winning streak, think of it this way, how many games in a row did Trent Dilfer win, when he was on his super bowl run? I think the two are very much alike, as they both played on teams with terrific Defenses and had just enough fire power to put up numbers to win games.

Would the outcome of the philly game be different had Brady been thier QB? Probably not. If McNabb was in New England the pats still would have won. THerein lies the difference.
BOSsportsfan34
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 231/1097
EXP: 2376308
For next: 85556

Since: 2.1.03
From: MA

Since last post: 14 days
Last activity: 7 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#51 Posted on 21.1.04 0757.32
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0757.45
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    As far as pimping Brady as great for his long winning streak, think of it this way, how many games in a row did Trent Dilfer win, when he was on his super bowl run? I think the two are very much alike, as they both played on teams with terrific Defenses and had just enough fire power to put up numbers to win games.


Their are a few major differences....

One is that Brady now is going to his 2nd Super Bowl in 3 years as a starter (with a pro bowl appearance). Dilfer in Baltimore's Super Bowl year was primary know as a career journeyman who at best was an average QB (who I don't remember ever making the pro bowl).

As much as the Pats defense is responsible for winning this year, I think Baltimore's D was even more responsible for them winning in 2000. I believe the Ravens went like 4 or 5 games in a row without the offense scoring a TD, yet they still won those games?

I won't argue about guys like Favre, Manning, McNair, and even McNabb being above him, but to compare Brady to Dilfer? Compare what Dilfer has done since his first Super Bowl win and compare it to what Brady has done since his first Super Bowl win.
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1614/2042
EXP: 6286448
For next: 106351

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2999 days
Last activity: 213 days
#52 Posted on 21.1.04 0806.00
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0807.26
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    Would the outcome of the philly game be different had Brady been thier QB? Probably not. If McNabb was in New England the pats still would have won. THerein lies the difference.


Let's rephrase this: the Eagles would have lost with either Brady or McNabb, and the Patriots would have won with either Brady or McNabb. So you're saying that Brady and McNabb are interchangable, and it's the supporting cast in both Philly and New England that made the difference?

I won't disagree with that notion, but that says more about the supporting casts than it does about either QB. A good QB in a system that supports him and plays to his strengths is better than a good QB in a system that expects him to perform miracles.

StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 140

Posts: 795/6291
EXP: 32978350
For next: 308137

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 12 hours
#53 Posted on 21.1.04 0833.44
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0834.34
    Originally posted by BOSsportsfan34
      Their are a few major differences....

      One is that Brady now is going to his 2nd Super Bowl in 3 years as a starter (with a pro bowl appearance). Dilfer in Baltimore's Super Bowl year was primary know as a career journeyman who at best was an average QB (who I don't remember ever making the pro bowl Compare what Dilfer has done since his first Super Bowl win and compare it to what Brady has done since his first Super Bowl win.


    Dilfer had a career threatening injury, and was out a year, and was replaced by hassleback. I didnt say thier CAREERS were on the same plane, just that this season, Brady is winning, and not looking TERRIFIC doing it, just like Dilfer when Jason Sehorn made him look like a world beater!
Gugs
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 879/1857
EXP: 5341152
For next: 91092

Since: 9.7.02
From: Sleep (That's where I'm a viking)

Since last post: 483 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#54 Posted on 21.1.04 0837.39
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0839.25
Everybody's saying "It's the defense! It's the defense!" Where was the defense in Super Bowl XXXVI, when Brady led the Pats to victory on the closing drive?

Tom Brady makes so much out of so little. He leads the offense of the Patriots (averaging over 20 points per game) with no quality running backs and no receivers to speak of except Troy Brown, who has been hurt. If he had Edgerrin James and Marvin Harrison instead of Kevin "Fumbles McCoughitup" Faulk and Bethel "The Fastest Man Alive" Johnson, he'd be breaking records.
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 140

Posts: 797/6291
EXP: 32978350
For next: 308137

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 12 hours
#55 Posted on 21.1.04 0856.43
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0857.00
If, If, If, If.


Fact of the matter is, he doesnt have them, and he doesnt put up HUGE numbers.
BOSsportsfan34
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 232/1097
EXP: 2376308
For next: 85556

Since: 2.1.03
From: MA

Since last post: 14 days
Last activity: 7 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#56 Posted on 21.1.04 0933.36
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0936.59
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by BOSsportsfan34
        Their are a few major differences....

        One is that Brady now is going to his 2nd Super Bowl in 3 years as a starter (with a pro bowl appearance). Dilfer in Baltimore's Super Bowl year was primary know as a career journeyman who at best was an average QB (who I don't remember ever making the pro bowl Compare what Dilfer has done since his first Super Bowl win and compare it to what Brady has done since his first Super Bowl win.


      Dilfer had a career threatening injury, and was out a year, and was replaced by hassleback. I didnt say thier CAREERS were on the same plane, just that this season, Brady is winning, and not looking TERRIFIC doing it, just like Dilfer when Jason Sehorn made him look like a world beater!



    My main point is that Brady is going to the Super Bowl again, which is why comparing him to Dilfer is unfair, IMO. And if the Pats should win, Brady can't be lumped in with guys like Dilfer, Rypien, Hostedler, and other so called "one hit wonder" QB's.

    And if your calling Dilfer's Super Bowl performance "Montanna like" then we should look at his numbers from that game:

    12-25, 153 yds, 1TD, 0 INT

    Contrast that to Brady's numbers from his last Super Bowl appearance:

    16-27, 145 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT.

    Pretty similar. As much as I like Brady, I think calling him the "next Montanna" is WAY too premature like some Pats fans are. And I would hardly call Dilfers performance in the Super Bowl he was in (or Brady's in SB XXXVI for that matter) "Montanna like".
vsp
Andouille
Level: 87

Posts: 1615/2042
EXP: 6286448
For next: 106351

Since: 3.1.02
From: Philly

Since last post: 2999 days
Last activity: 213 days
#57 Posted on 21.1.04 0941.06
Reposted on: 21.1.11 0942.43
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    If, If, If, If.


    Fact of the matter is, he doesnt have them, and he doesnt put up HUGE numbers.


Dan Marino put up HUGE numbers. How many Super Bowl rings does he have?

BOSsportsfan34
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 233/1097
EXP: 2376308
For next: 85556

Since: 2.1.03
From: MA

Since last post: 14 days
Last activity: 7 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#58 Posted on 21.1.04 1003.03
Reposted on: 21.1.11 1003.06
    Originally posted by Jaguar
    On the Pats beating the Colts:

    1) That game only happens in the playoffs. Regular season? Pats get hit with about 300 yards of penalties. At least the Carolina Cornerbacks didn't make it that obvious they were holding and interfering.




It looked to me that the Colts were getting away with holding too on many plays. Plus the colts had 4 penalties for 15 yds and the Pats 3 for 15 yds. The refs were at least calling it even for both teams, even though the colts got away with a delay of game penalty that wasn't called.

EDIT: If we're going to talk about teams getting away with penalties, what about the one where Carolina got away with a roughing the passer penalty? That one pretty much knocked McNabb out of the game.

    Originally posted by Jaguar
    2) The Pats got into Manning's head. He spent a week studying all the elaborate schemes and blitzes, and went out ready to make the plays against them. Manning kept looking for the quick routes that'd open up and the Pats threw blanket coverage and only blitzed five times. Manning was fidgeting in the pocket waiting for the blitzes that never came. Peyton got surprised and rattled, but I don't think he's going to let anybody pull that on him again.

    -Jag


Manning is now something like 2-8 vs. teams where Belichick is either a head coach or a defensive coordinator. To say "I don't think he's going to let anybody pull that on him again" is somewhat of an incorrect statement, as Belickick has seemed to design defenses to do just that to Manning over and over.



(edited by BOSsportsfan34 on 21.1.04 1108)
Gugs
Bierwurst
Level: 83

Posts: 880/1857
EXP: 5341152
For next: 91092

Since: 9.7.02
From: Sleep (That's where I'm a viking)

Since last post: 483 days
Last activity: 9 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#59 Posted on 21.1.04 1023.10
Reposted on: 21.1.11 1023.59
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
    If, If, If, If.


    Fact of the matter is, he doesnt have them, and he doesnt put up HUGE numbers.


No, but he WINS. And, as Mike & Tony will glady remind you, we play to win the game! All the other QBs you throw out there as being great have great numbers, but aside from Favre, who among them has won a Super Bowl with those great numbers? Did Donovan McNabb win a Super Bowl? Peyton Manning? Steve McNair? No, no and no.

Here's the bottom line: Tom Brady's going to go to Houston on February 1, go 20-35 for 270 with 2 TDs, and the Pats are going to win the Super Bowl. Again. It's as simple as that. And then Brady'll take his family to Disney Land, and then go home for the rest of the winter while Peyton Manning and Steve McNair can ruin their careers playing flag football on sand in Hawaii. Call it poetic justice for Robert Edwards.
calvinh0560
Boudin rouge
Level: 48

Posts: 448/518
EXP: 803178
For next: 20370

Since: 3.1.02
From: People's Republic of Massachusetts

Since last post: 526 days
Last activity: 5 hours
#60 Posted on 21.1.04 1023.37
Reposted on: 21.1.11 1025.12
    Originally posted by vsp
    Patriots would have won with either Brady or McNabb


See unless they change their game plain I am not sure of that. The 3 step quick drops is that Brady is best of doing. Their are not many Qb's in the leauge who can do the quick read as good as he does. Look at Drew Bledsoe. If you put him in Indy offence there would only be a small drop off in Off since besides Indy lack of a front line it is perfect Offence for him. But Bledsoe could never run a 3 step drop Offence.
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 NextThread ahead: PAGING TEE MARTIN!
Next thread: More fun in Oakland & Al Davis appears
Previous thread: Fitzgerald is Draft Eligible
(805 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Related threads: Oh God, MTV gets to do it again - More...
The 7 - Football - Panthers and Patriots - Houston we have a ballgameRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.237 seconds.