[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You’re making my head explode…[/quote]
Kinda what I’m going for, but I’ll stop because I like both you guys… PWI is slow these days and I needed to get my argue out of my system.
(It’s better than the dude that shit all over me last year for saying the Jets would finish 8-8 and didn’t have the fucking sack to come back when they did.)
Impossible Task: Agreeing on criteria to judge GOAT quarterback.
Even more impossible task: Making valid arguments about which QB is GOAT before agreeing on criteria to judge GOAT quarterback.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]Broncoandy wrote:
Bills are benching Manuel for Orton starting this week. Shame they didn’t pick up Vick when they had the chance, but Orton will still be a short term improvement. Should call up Jeff Tuel from the practice squad to be Orton’s understudy while they’re at it. And maybe call Tebow’s agent just in case.[/quote]
I really thought Manual would get more time and would at least end up middle of the road. This could set the franchise back a few years if he is a bust. [/quote]
Huge set back, but that’s the way it’s gone for the Bills the last few years. They’ve been playing QB roulette, and should have just stuck with Fitzpatrick (without giving him that huge contract in the middle of a hot streak like retards). EJ checks down none stop, and just doesn’t throw deep very well. He throws maybe 200 yards a game total, meanwhile the other team can flood the box because there’s more risk of Spiller running for 20+ than there is for EJ to throw that far. They should seriously pull Tuel up from practice squad. At this point, I think he has as much, if not more potential than EJ.
That said, it won’t surprise me if they only bench Manuel for the Lions game and put him right back out starting next week.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I am… Good teams outplay bad calls. [/quote]
You’re right in most cases.
[quote]
If I was to take your tact the Pats should have beaten the Panthers last year because Gronk was interfered with to the point of ass raping and it was a no call.
However, I don’t give a fuck. Good teams play good enough to over come bad calls. If you “lose” because of a “bad call” you weren’t that good of a team to begin with.
Period… End of story. [/quote]
Come on man. You can’t actually believe that.
I guess Green Bay just wasn’t good enough to win this game?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You’re making my head explode…[/quote]
Kinda what I’m going for, but I’ll stop because I like both you guys… PWI is slow these days and I needed to get my argue out of my system.
(It’s better than the dude that shit all over me last year for saying the Jets would finish 8-8 and didn’t have the fucking sack to come back when they did.)
[/quote]
Lol,
I honestly don’t really care either. 99% of these guys are ass hatz anyway…
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I am… Good teams outplay bad calls. [/quote]
You’re right in most cases.
Nope. They weren’t.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
Impossible Task: Agreeing on criteria to judge GOAT quarterback.
Even more impossible task: Making valid arguments about which QB is GOAT before agreeing on criteria to judge GOAT quarterback. [/quote]
Don’t ruin a perfectly good argument!
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
Nope. They weren’t.
[/quote]
Lol, can’t argue with that.
You cant judge great QB’s by SB wins, although you can take their performances in those games into account and in that regard you have the best case against Peyton. Belichick has always had Peyton’s number. They knew how to play his teams with Harrison and Law. Seattle played them very much the same way in the SB. But with that said, Brady on those same teams would have not even sniffed the Superbowl or the playoffs so Peyton still is the better QB. The win-loss argument is a lazy way of arguing a point that the numbers don’t really apply to that well. Football is the ultimate team game and as such wins-losses are on the team, not one single player.
How a QB is ranked in GOAT should be based off of his ability to extend the reach of the talent he has around him. Peyton has done this with the exception of last year in the Superbowl. Brady has simply rode the talent and some would argue underachieved several times, ala both losses to the Giants.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
I am… Good teams outplay bad calls. [/quote]
You’re right in most cases.
Nope. They weren’t.
[/quote]
I still don’t think that was as bad of a call (on the field initially) as everyone made it out to be. The replay booth should have caught some flak but the replacement refs that got bombarded really didn’t deserve all that shit because that was extremely close.
[quote]jjackkrash wrote:
Impossible Task: Agreeing on criteria to judge GOAT quarterback.
Even more impossible task: Making valid arguments about which QB is GOAT before agreeing on criteria to judge GOAT quarterback. [/quote]
Is kinda where I saw my opening… So I took it, lol.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
You’re making my head explode…[/quote]
Kinda what I’m going for, but I’ll stop because I like both you guys… PWI is slow these days and I needed to get my argue out of my system.
(It’s better than the dude that shit all over me last year for saying the Jets would finish 8-8 and didn’t have the fucking sack to come back when they did.)
[/quote]
Ha I figured. But I like having this argument. I will eventually convert all you “Rings are the be all end all QB measuring stick” heathens over to the true GOAT gospel one day.
And for the record, I don’t really have any one routing interest except the Saints and Peyton Manning. After that I just love football and am a fan of most teams. I even like the Patriots but I find Brady to be hugely overrated in the GOAT discussion because of the teams he played with and the media nuthugging you previously alluded to annoys severely. I feel like we are seeing what Brady truly can do without a loaded team this year. With that said, Brady’s most impressive season for me personally was his second SB lost to the Giants. That was the year he did the most with one of the lesser teams he had played with.
I think Superbowls should be part of the equation when talking about GOAT’s at the QB position. At the same time reaching or winning a superbowl does not automatically put you into the discussion.
Elway is the greatest QB of all time though.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
They beat the Rams. They won the game. The Rams were a superior group of players in almost all regards and positions (by most measures at that point.) That win wasn’t a “gift” nor was is not earned. Marshal Faulk still cries like a child about it too, lol. [/quote]
They videotaped the Rams SB practices all week long, that’s actually what they did.
Then HC-Mike Martz chose to “take the high road” when asked about it afterwards, but it’s perhaps understandable that HOF’ers like M Faulk don’t share that sentiment.
Just the facts: Rams had gone into NE and won just weeks earlier… then in the rematch, NE DEF somehow knows all of STL’s redzone packages… and then the league punishes em for it.
Crow about it here, by all means, but there’ll be no inaccurate/revisionist history going on…
I think that was the most complete Chiefs performance I’ve see in the 7 years I’ve been watching them. The team is better this year at 2-2 than last year at 9-0. Excited for the arrival of De’Anthony Thomas and the return of Eric Berry.
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
They beat the Rams. They won the game. The Rams were a superior group of players in almost all regards and positions (by most measures at that point.) That win wasn’t a “gift” nor was is not earned. Marshal Faulk still cries like a child about it too, lol. [/quote]
They videotaped the Rams SB practices all week long, that’s actually what they did.
Then HC-Mike Martz chose to “take the high road” when asked about it afterwards, but it’s perhaps understandable that HOF’ers like M Faulk don’t share that sentiment.
Just the facts: Rams had gone into NE and won just weeks earlier… then in the rematch, NE DEF somehow knows all of STL’s redzone packages… and then the league punishes em for it.
Crow about it here, by all means, but there’ll be no inaccurate/revisionist history going on…
[/quote]
EVERYONE was taping practices. You do realize that right? It was so common that the NFL had to make a league wide rule in 07 because everyone was doing it.
Also by your logic in 07 the Pats smoked the Gants in the last reg-season game. However the Giants came back in the superbowl and pretty much dominated the most prolific offense in league history…does that mean the Giants somehow cheated?
A: No
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
They beat the Rams. They won the game. The Rams were a superior group of players in almost all regards and positions (by most measures at that point.) That win wasn’t a “gift” nor was is not earned. Marshal Faulk still cries like a child about it too, lol. [/quote]
They videotaped the Rams SB practices all week long, that’s actually what they did.
Then HC-Mike Martz chose to “take the high road” when asked about it afterwards, but it’s perhaps understandable that HOF’ers like M Faulk don’t share that sentiment.
Just the facts: Rams had gone into NE and won just weeks earlier… then in the rematch, NE DEF somehow knows all of STL’s redzone packages… and then the league punishes em for it.
Crow about it here, by all means, but there’ll be no inaccurate/revisionist history going on…
[/quote]
lmao… Booo HOOOO
whatever, The Pats won. Get the fuck over it already.
I’m not trying to be a dick, but the crying about a game played 12-13 years ago is rather pathetic.
The Pats won, and that is that. Nothing in that season is even remotely close to the defining moment for the franchise. Bigger deals:
At that point, anything that happened in 2001 or “spygate” starts entering the conversation.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]chillain wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
They beat the Rams. They won the game. The Rams were a superior group of players in almost all regards and positions (by most measures at that point.) That win wasn’t a “gift” nor was is not earned. Marshal Faulk still cries like a child about it too, lol. [/quote]
They videotaped the Rams SB practices all week long, that’s actually what they did.
Then HC-Mike Martz chose to “take the high road” when asked about it afterwards, but it’s perhaps understandable that HOF’ers like M Faulk don’t share that sentiment.
Just the facts: Rams had gone into NE and won just weeks earlier… then in the rematch, NE DEF somehow knows all of STL’s redzone packages… and then the league punishes em for it.
Crow about it here, by all means, but there’ll be no inaccurate/revisionist history going on…
[/quote]
lmao… Booo HOOOO
whatever, The Pats won. Get the fuck over it already.
[/quote]
Ha you really are just cruising for an argument aren’t you?