The Official 2005 NFL Thread
- Thread starter DaveC
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
speedracer
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2001
- Messages
- 7,604
U2Kitten said:
All I can see is you trying to equate Tom Brady to various one-season-wonder QBs without explanation.
What the hell is wrong with Tom Brady? If it's his numbers, then consider this: besides Peyton Manning, there are 7 other QBs who had higher passer ratings than Brady in 2004. Which of those QBs would you want over Brady?
Last edited:
phanan
Blue Crack Addict
U2Kitten said:
I'm not blowing you off, but when you try to compare Brady by bringing up quarterbacks such as Warner and Bledsoe, that's where you lose me.
u2kitten... i fully believe that it is possiable that tom brady's great success this early in his career has been a product of a great system.
but there isn't a number i can throw at you or a stat i can show that can prove that.
if he's simply mediocre for the next 5 years... barely scratching out playoff births and/or missing hte playoffs all together? well yea... then there will be proof.
but last i checked, the last clutch situation he was placed in... without charlie w... this season, at pittsburgh... he went 12 for 12 in the 4th quarter and brought his team back from behind to win the game.
so while i believe there is the possability that tom brady is a product of a great system... just like there is the possability that peyton manning is the product of having an all time offense surrounding him... i'll continue to simply believe that both of them are great in their own ways, until proven otherwise.
but there isn't a number i can throw at you or a stat i can show that can prove that.
if he's simply mediocre for the next 5 years... barely scratching out playoff births and/or missing hte playoffs all together? well yea... then there will be proof.
but last i checked, the last clutch situation he was placed in... without charlie w... this season, at pittsburgh... he went 12 for 12 in the 4th quarter and brought his team back from behind to win the game.
so while i believe there is the possability that tom brady is a product of a great system... just like there is the possability that peyton manning is the product of having an all time offense surrounding him... i'll continue to simply believe that both of them are great in their own ways, until proven otherwise.
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
That free "bogus" 51 seconds was "awarded" very early in the 4th quarter. Without it, the Steelers and Big Ben would have been under more pressure to try and tie the game in less time and things might have played out differently and the Pats wouldn't have even needed to drive to win the game. Its not a relevant argument to what Brady did in the game. He was still perfect in the 4th quarter regardless of what the Steelers' timekeeper (Fred Cowher by the way) did to try to give his team extra time to catch up.U2Kitten said:
Brady still performed at the highest possible level.
Oh and Headache, this wasn't his most recent clutch situation, he led the Pats on a game winning drive in Atlanta 2 weeks after Pittsburgh.
And he may have done the same in Denver last week if David Givens could catch a ball that hits him in the hands. If thats Marvin Harrison, Brady leads the Pats to a TD that gets them to 28-26, and probably then tosses the 2point conversion to harrison to tie, but Brady's receiving corps is not as solid as Peyton's. But he does the best with what he has to work with, obviously he doesn't do it as well as Peyton cause of all the times Peyton has won their head to head meetings and all Peyton's titles.
U2Kitten said:
if the extra 51 seconds were added late in the 4th quarter, then you have a point.
the clock screw up happened early in the 4th quarter, neither team noticed it, and both teams played out the end of the game accordingly. both teams benefited from the extra 51 seconds, and both teams would have played the game differently if that 51 seconds was not still on the clock.
phanan
Blue Crack Addict
The whole point is that because it occurred early in the 4th, if it had never happened, the entire situation for that quarter would have been different and not have played out exactly the same way, so to say the Patriots benefited more from the extra time than the Steelers did is ridiculous.
U2Kitten said:
holy jeez... you really need to get off this kick.
they weren't given an extra minute at the end of the game... it was added at the begining of the 4th quarter.
BOTH TEAMS BENEFITED FROM THE SCREW UP.
the game would have played out differently if those 51 seconds weren't added. BOTH teams would have had to change their play calling, and BOTH teams would have had added pressure on them down the stretch.
get over it.
U2Kitten said:
if you were a steelers fan, perhaps you might have a minor reason to bitch.
and i emphasize minor.
and frankly i probably would get over it... we had a clock problem at the end of the second half of a huge game last year (i coach high school basketball) that allowed the opposing team to hit a last second shot. we ended up losing the game by two.
in no way did that shot cost us the game. there was too much time left in the game after the clock screw up to actually make a logical connection.
Last edited:
randhail
Rock n' Roll Doggie
U2Kitten said:
Dan Rooney, owner of the Steelers, more or less said, shit happens and moved on. It wasn't the biggest issue in the world. If the owner of the team can let it go, you probably should too. Like Headache said, neither team noticed it. Maybe if the Steelers noticed it and nothing happened there would be more to gripe about.
Also, with your passion for this clock issue, the 1972 Soviet Union USA gold medal basketball game must really get you fired up.
Last edited:
randhail said:Also, with you passion for this clock issue, the 1972 Soviet Union USA gold medal basketball game must really get you fired up.
now THAT is a clock fuck up... but alas, even doug collins has moved on.
Headache in a Suitcase said:
As a Colts fan I didn't think it was very cool that the Steelers were awarded a touchdown in the 95-96 AFC Championship game even though the guy clearly had both feet totally on the white stripe in back of the end zone (this can clearly be seen on tape, no question) and a long bomb to the 2 which set up the winning score when the guy's entire body was out of bounds (there is irrefutable video evidence of this too) So maybe the Steelers were getting the short end of the stick this time.
I do think it was that game that had a hand in bringing back instant replay. And everyone I meet tells me as soon as I mention the Colts 'man you guys got so ROBBED in that game!' I mean these are fans of other teams and don't give a damn about the Colts but they could see it. Obviously a lot of people did.
And you guys have yet to address my question about the 3 Super Bowls with 3 different QB's won by the Redskins in the 80s. This is proof that if the system, coaching and defense and offensive line are good, you could put just about anybody back there at QB and win. Not just anybody, certainly not me or you or Bono, but I mean the QB doesn't have to be anything all that special. Can you even name the 3 different QB's without looking it up online?
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
Theisman, Williams, Rypien.U2Kitten said:
I addressed this, noting that the argument is flawed, because the Patriots won with only 1 QB, 2 time MVP Tom Brady.
The Redskins 3 wins were spread over significant time that they had to change not only QB (Theisman's leg was snapped like a braedstick by LT in 1985) but also a lot of other position players.
What impacy did Timmy Smith have on wins 1 and 3? He was MVP for the second of these wins. The constant offensively for Gibbs' teams was one of the greatest offensive lines ever assembled in the NFL (Also a big key to the 90's Cowboy's success, so you should then argue that anyone could have polayed QB for them an Troy Aikman was a replaceable part, but you don't cause you like Troy).
And if Gibbs's system is the sole reason for their success, explain last season to me and why Patrick Ramsey didn't hoist the Lombardi trophy. In the NFL, the coaching and system are important but every great coach from Don Shula to Jimmy Johnson to Bill Parcells to Joe Gibbs to Bill Belichick will tell you that you need great players to execute that sysem in order to succeed, and Tom Brady is a great QB, who executes a game plan as well as anyone in the NFL currently and is the coolest QB under pressure since the likes of Joe Montana, much cooler than Peyton Manning who shows visible signs of frustration on the field when things aren't going well for him (watch any film of him playing in New England, you'll see him gesturing frustratedly and confused to the sidelines, its a familiar pose for him in January).
U2Kitten said:
i would've named them for ya but alas, hewson beat me to it.
so by this theory, that it's baisicly just the "system" when multiple QB's win for the same team...
perhaps then you could explain Hall of Famers Joe Montana and Steve Young... both of whom played in the same system and san francisco and won super bowls.
are they over-rated?
Headache in a Suitcase said:
No, Montana and Young were truly great. I admit Aikman was too though I despise him. I don't think Brady, Theismann, Williams or Rypien suck, just that they are not great. Kind of like the great vs. mediocrity thing in "Amadeus." I don't believe they would have been as successful without the team and coaches surrounding them.
randhail
Rock n' Roll Doggie
U2Kitten said:
That can be said for nearly any athlete in a team sport, including Montana and Aikman. Would Jeter have four rings without his teammates? Jordan didn't win anything until he had a team around him and trusted them.
phanan
Blue Crack Addict
U2Kitten said:
This is where your argument is flawed. Someone like Aikman was truly in a specific system that worked, but he executed it perfectly (with the effective results of 3 Super Bowl rings) and that's why he is considered great. Brady is the same way, and he's probably been in more clutch situations than Aikman was. To say Brady is mediocre because of the great system he's in, while saying Aikman is great for the same reasons, doesn't work.
phanan said:
So I leave out Aikman. Never liked him anyway, I really just added him because I do dislike him and wanted to prove that my dislike for Brady is not the only reason I diss on him. But Joe and Steve were something special. Joe was truly the 'chosen one' with a destiny.
In a way Steve was made great by Joe, having to follow an act like that and feeling he let everyone down when he didn't make the big game. His best friend and sister used to say in the off season he'd drive a piece of shit and not cash his paychecks because he felt he didn't earn them. He had something to prove and he drove himself. So maybe Joe was the only true great one in this bunch (but there are others) Don't mean to take anything away from Steve, he did it, many others would not have been able to do what he did.
Last edited:
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
So basically what we are to infer is that any QB could thus have thrown 49 TD passes last season plaing in a dome for more than half his games with Marvin Harrison, Brandon Stokely and Reggie Wayne to throw to, and a system that emphasized the pass, including throwing the ball deep in the 4th quarter of games when leading by 20+ points.
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
OK so Steve Young was great for winning 1 Super Bowl, taking over a system (you wanted to discuss systems remember) that dominated the league for over a decade and having the greatest wide receiver to ever play the game (I don't think anyone will argue that point) among his arsenal of weapons.U2Kitten said:
Yet Tom Brady has won 3 titles (and still has probably 10 good years left to attempt more), and his weapons are vastly inferior to those that Young had around him, but Brady is mediocre to Young's great.
Hewson said:
Peyton may very well be great too, I think he is, but time will tell. He does need titles, and he knows it, he's working on it.
But I don't think a title alone makes a great QB or that not having one doesn't make you great. I think Marino and Tarkenton and Fouts are greater than Brady, Theismann, Williams and Rypien. I especially consider Rypien a mediocre player at best. I don't think Young would have been great on another team, he did ride the coattails of a great team and system, but still not just anyone could have accomplished what he did in his own right. Jeff Garcia sure stunk the place out. Steve was driven to not let people down after the act he had to follow, he led himself to greatness, but I don't think it was as natural as Joe's.
Speaking of the 49ers, it is a shame how Eddie D lost the team to his sister due to his 'conflict of interest' fiasco about the riverboat gambling, conspiring with La's crooked and now jailed governer. His sister won't let him have it back, and she and her husband have IMO ruined a great organization. The drop in their standings and status speaks for itself. They were able to sustain themselves for awhile on leftovers, but once TO was gone, it was over.
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
Well certainly Jeff Garcia isn't quite in the class of Young and/or Montana, but to be fair to him the Niners franchise was in decline when he took over.
But Young would not likely have been a champ had he stayed in Tampa for his entire career, so as in most cases, its a combination of QB, other players, coaching and system.
Rypien was not by any means an all time great QB, but he did some things well, including throwng the deep ball well which fit nicely into the Redskins offense at the time. He isn't headed for Canton, but I'll bet you Tom Brady is.
The QB's playing right now, here's my assessment on hall of fame potential:
Sure things: Favre, Peyton Manning, Brady.
Almost sure thing: Drew Bledsoe
Probably, but need a few years more to be sure: Donovan McNabb
Shows potential, but too early in career: Michael Vick, Daunte Culpepper
Has the promise but way way too early to tell: Carson Palmer, Eli Manning
Outside shot but not likely: Steve McNair
But Young would not likely have been a champ had he stayed in Tampa for his entire career, so as in most cases, its a combination of QB, other players, coaching and system.
Rypien was not by any means an all time great QB, but he did some things well, including throwng the deep ball well which fit nicely into the Redskins offense at the time. He isn't headed for Canton, but I'll bet you Tom Brady is.
The QB's playing right now, here's my assessment on hall of fame potential:
Sure things: Favre, Peyton Manning, Brady.
Almost sure thing: Drew Bledsoe
Probably, but need a few years more to be sure: Donovan McNabb
Shows potential, but too early in career: Michael Vick, Daunte Culpepper
Has the promise but way way too early to tell: Carson Palmer, Eli Manning
Outside shot but not likely: Steve McNair
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
Peyton's basically already written a ticket to Canton, his numbers will get him there regardless. But if he never wins, he'll be regarded like Marino, "Best QB to never win" or whatever label people like to use, whereas Montana is just regarded by many as the best because along with great regular season play he delivered championships. Now Peyton has several years left and may well win a title or 2, he's got a good team around him and his window of opportunity is clearly now, but until he does, its a stigma that could stick.U2Kitten said:
Its an eerily similar to Brady and Manning currently. Marino always put up bigger numbers than Montana, but Montana won 4 titles.
Peyton clearly has bigger numbers than Brady, but Brady is no slouch during the regular season, and delivers championships.
I know you like to think he is a just a small cog in the Pats' machine, but trust me, I watch them every week, he is the one player this team can not afford to lose. He did lead the team on 2 Super Bowl winning drives, thats gotta count for something.
The way he handled the clock in SB 36 was phenomenal for a 2nd year player who was in his first season as starter. Watch the replay of his spike of the ball just before Vinatieri's winning kick...calm, no panic, spikes the ball, it bounces staright back to his throwing hand, he twirls it non chaalantly before giving it to an official...the kid doesn't show any sign of feeling pressure in big situations...much like Montana.
Hewson said:
if you understood the pain it took hewson to make this statement, you would certainly not argue with him any longer.
Hewson
Blue Crack Supplier
My fingers cramped up as soon as I hit E-l, but I pressed on.Headache in a Suitcase said:
- Status
Similar threads
