The Official 2005 NFL Thread - Page 20 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Lemonade Stand Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-19-2005, 09:45 AM   #286
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,477
Local Time: 12:09 PM
u2kitten... i'm trying to defend the colts, but you're killing me with your bashing of tom brady.

is all of what you said true? maybe, maybe not. maybe it really was all about charlie w's system and so forth.

but that hasn't been proven.

the only thing about tom brady that has been proven time and time again is that he's as cool under pressure as they come. he's not flashy, he's doesn't put up gaudy numbers... he simply wins. there's something to be said for that. he's already a hall of famer, no matter what else he does in his career.

is he joe montana? no... i think montana was better, but then again, montana also had better weapons. but when you think montana, you think 4th quarter last minute drives going 90+ yards for a touchdown... not 4th quarter last minute drives leading to a field goal. thus why brady's last minute drives are great, and montana's game winning drives are legendary. not to take anything away from brady... IMO he's the second most clutch player in the NFL today... #1 would be vinatieri.

peyton manning is very much in the marino role. marino is probably the most skilled QB of all time, but he could never get it done in the clutch... thus why people always put montana in front of him. the point of the game is to win... and montana won better. until manning wins a super bowl, the same must be said about brady. brady simply wins better. and not for nothing, peyton manning has better weapons than dan marino ever had.

tom brady has very good stats and 3 super bowl rings. he has already earned his place amongst the pantheon of NFL quarterbacks based soley on this.

peyton manning has unbelievable numbers... and no rings. he was even "un-clutch" in college. if he continues to put up these kind of numbers over his career, he will eventually join the pantheon, right next to marino. but you can't put him there now, because he doesn't have a ring.

to quite the worst coach in the NFL... "YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME."

in order to place peyton up with the greats of all time, he needs to win THE game. he needs to win the super bowl. the second he does that, he immediately shoots towards the top of that list, much the same way elway did. but until that point, brady is higher on the all time list than peyton manning.
__________________

__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 10-19-2005, 10:02 AM   #287
Blue Crack Addict
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 26,498
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Very reasonable points Headache. The one thing you have to remember with Brady is that he has been in the NFL for 5+ seasons, playing in 4 (he basically held the clipboard in 2000) and he's already won 3 titles. So he has the potential to exceed Montana in terms of titles, although that obviously remains to be seen.

Is Brady the sole reason the Pats have won 3 titles...of course not. But those who discount him as a replaceable part really don't pay attention to how he plays the game. I always liked Drew Bledsoe, but I know full well that if he had been the Pats' starting QB all along until present day, the Pats probably still have zero titles.
__________________

__________________
Hewson is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 10:35 AM   #288
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Headache in a Suitcase
u2kitten... i'm trying to defend the colts, but you're killing me with your bashing of tom brady.
Okay, I'll stop!



Quote:
peyton manning is very much in the marino role. marino is probably the most skilled QB of all time, but he could never get it done in the clutch... thus why people always put montana in front of him. the point of the game is to win... and montana won better. until manning wins a super bowl, the same must be said about brady. brady simply wins better. and not for nothing, peyton manning has better weapons than dan marino ever had.
Marino never had a defense. If Miami ever had a defense to match their offense, they'd have done more. It's like the old saying goes, offense sells tickets, defense wins titles.


Quote:
tom brady has very good stats and 3 super bowl rings. he has already earned his place amongst the pantheon of NFL quarterbacks based soley on this.
I know you are a Giants fan, what about Phil Simms? He has 2 Super Bowl rings but nobody considers him one of the greats of all time. Is it because the Giants are remembered more for their defense?

Quote:
peyton manning has unbelievable numbers... and no rings. he was even "un-clutch" in college. if he continues to put up these kind of numbers over his career, he will eventually join the pantheon, right next to marino. but you can't put him there now, because he doesn't have a ring.

to quite the worst coach in the NFL... "YOU PLAY TO WIN THE GAME."

in order to place peyton up with the greats of all time, he needs to win THE game. he needs to win the super bowl. the second he does that, he immediately shoots towards the top of that list, much the same way elway did. but until that point, brady is higher on the all time list than peyton manning.
I know, he knows it, and he's working on it!

But in a way, to me it's sad to see somebody like Brady get more praise than Marino or Fouts or Tarkenton because he won the ring and they didn't. He's really not as good as they were (oops that's right I have to stop bashing!)
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 10:45 AM   #289
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 12:09 PM
While the spectre of the 80's Dolphins and 49ers has been raised, I have been wanting to bring this up to some football people who would understand.

I feel that Super Bowl XIX was the greatest matchup ever of reciever vs. DB. SF had the awesome backfield of Lott, Wright and Williamson, (which is another reason for their rise to power) and Miami had the infamous 'Marks Brothers' Duper and Clayton.

Duper and Clayton were very flashy, trash talkers and arrogant. The 49ers never were, Bill Walsh would not allow it, but the players themselves were just not that way. They were so humble they would even give after game interviews saying 'we' instead of "I" and you never heard any crap from them in the press.

So anyway, in the SB XIX hype, Duper and Clayton were shooting off their mouths, sitting around in 'fly' type shades with their feet up bragging how many catches and touchdowns they were going to get, and that they were going to put the tally in an envelope to be opened after the game to see if they weren't right.

All this time, Lott and co. were watching, and stewing, but never said a word. They let their actions speak on the field. It was total flats. The Marks brothers were mainly shut down. There is one famous shot in NFL films of Lott hitting one of them in midair, he turned on his side and spun like a windmill before falling to the ground. Then they show Lott with a look on his face like 'there you go buddy!'. Showing the fallen WR's the film quoted 'Fire and Rain', "sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground." After the game, Lott was still not loud or bragging, but said the SF defense got so tired of hearing about Miami's recievers, and they felt they had no respect and had something to prove. They dominated in perhaps the best matchup of WR vs. DB of any batch of excellent players in their prime in the SB.
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 11:02 AM   #290
Blue Crack Addict
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 26,498
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten

I know you are a Giants fan, what about Phil Simms? He has 2 Super Bowl rings but nobody considers him one of the greats of all time. Is it because the Giants are remembered more for their defense?
Jeff Hostetler QB'd the Giants to their 2nd SB win. Simms was out injured.
__________________
Hewson is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 11:03 AM   #291
Blue Crack Addict
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 26,498
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
While the spectre of the 80's Dolphins and 49ers has been raised, I have been wanting to bring this up to some football people who would understand.

I feel that Super Bowl XIX was the greatest matchup ever of reciever vs. DB. SF had the awesome backfield of Lott, Wright and Williamson, (which is another reason for their rise to power) and Miami had the infamous 'Marks Brothers' Duper and Clayton.

Duper and Clayton were very flashy, trash talkers and arrogant. The 49ers never were, Bill Walsh would not allow it, but the players themselves were just not that way. They were so humble they would even give after game interviews saying 'we' instead of "I" and you never heard any crap from them in the press.

So anyway, in the SB XIX hype, Duper and Clayton were shooting off their mouths, sitting around in 'fly' type shades with their feet up bragging how many catches and touchdowns they were going to get, and that they were going to put the tally in an envelope to be opened after the game to see if they weren't right.

All this time, Lott and co. were watching, and stewing, but never said a word. They let their actions speak on the field. It was total flats. The Marks brothers were mainly shut down. There is one famous shot in NFL films of Lott hitting one of them in midair, he turned on his side and spun like a windmill before falling to the ground. Then they show Lott with a look on his face like 'there you go buddy!'. Showing the fallen WR's the film quoted 'Fire and Rain', "sweet dreams and flying machines in pieces on the ground." After the game, Lott was still not loud or bragging, but said the SF defense got so tired of hearing about Miami's recievers, and they felt they had no respect and had something to prove. They dominated in perhaps the best matchup of WR vs. DB of any batch of excellent players in their prime in the SB.
Sounds eerily reminiscent of Freddie Mitchell and Rodney Harrison this past February doesn't it?
__________________
Hewson is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 11:13 AM   #292
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,477
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Hewson
Jeff Hostetler QB'd the Giants to their 2nd SB win. Simms was out injured.
you beat me to the punch. phil simms only lead the Giants to one super bowl. he had two rings, but he was injured midway through the second super bowl season. jeff hostetler and the porn-stach lead the giants the rest of the way. if simms had three super bowl rings, all of which he earned as the starter in the super bowl? yea... he would be considered one of the greatest to ever play.

bill russell's numbers pale in comparison to wilt chamberlain's... but bill russell was the leader and key player for 11 different NBA championship teams... thus many people consider russell to have been the better player, despite not even being close to chamberlain's numbers.

is this fair to wilt? maybe, maybe not... but the point is to win.

and marino also never had a quality running back... something peyton certainly has, and something tom brady has now, but didn't have for his first two rings.



and as for the offense sells tickets, defense wins championships thing... there is no more over-rated saying in all of sports than this one right here. the baltimore ravens are perfect examples of this.

truely great teams have a delicate balance. if you have a great defense, you don't need a great offense... you just need it to be effective. i.e. baltimore with trent dilfer. dilfer is by no means a great QB... but he's effective, and he makes minimal mistakes. he was "good enough." the ravens thought they could get away with just the great defense... but alas, without an effective offense, they suck... despite having 8 pro bowlers on D.


USC is proving in college that if you have a superiror offense, you can still win despite not having a stellar Defense. their defense is simply "good enough."
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 10-19-2005, 11:19 AM   #293
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 17,927
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Hewson
Jeff Hostetler QB'd the Giants to their 2nd SB win. Simms was out injured.
He still has the ring, still helped them get there. It's like Earl Morrall playing in SB V for the Colts because Unitas was hurt.
__________________
U2Kitten is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 11:24 AM   #294
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,477
Local Time: 12:09 PM
simms didn't take a single snap in the playoffs.

unitas was hurt in the actuall super bowl.

and i just looked it up... the only touchdown thrown by the colts in that super bowl? 75 yards... Unitas to Mackey.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 10-19-2005, 11:27 AM   #295
Blue Crack Addict
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: gone
Posts: 17,891
Local Time: 12:09 PM
people people, enough bickering. lets just all agree that Marc Bulger is better than both of them, combined
__________________
Chizip is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 11:31 AM   #296
Blue Crack Addict
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 26,498
Local Time: 12:09 PM
But he's no Jamie Martin.
__________________
Hewson is offline  
Old 10-19-2005, 11:43 AM   #297
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,477
Local Time: 12:09 PM
who is?
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 10-19-2005, 12:02 PM   #298
Blue Crack Addict
 
phanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in the darkness on the edge of town
Posts: 25,065
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Kitten
You could have had Brady, Bledsoe and some other guy and it would have been the same.
We're still talking about this, I see.

I like Bledsoe and hope he does well in Dallas, but there's no way he would've done what Brady has done if he was still in New England. He doesn't have the field vision that Brady has, he's not as accurate, and he certainly holds on to the ball too long. Again, there are a lot of little things that Brady excels at that make that offense work.

I'd take your arguments more seriously if they made sense.
__________________
phanan is online now  
Old 10-19-2005, 01:09 PM   #299
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,477
Local Time: 12:09 PM
but alas, without drew bledsoe jumping in to the pittsburgh game, the pats don't make it to that first super bowl victory over chizip's beloved rams, now do they?

don't sell bledsoe short... he did get the pats to the super bowl under parcells, as well.

would he have won all three of the super bowls that brady won? maybe... maybe not. we'll never know for sure.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is online now  
Old 10-19-2005, 02:23 PM   #300
Blue Crack Addict
 
phanan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: in the darkness on the edge of town
Posts: 25,065
Local Time: 12:09 PM
Oh, I don't sell Bledsoe that short. He did a lot of good things while in New England. And coming into that game in Pittsburgh was huge, no doubt.

But I also don't believe he would have worked as well as Brady has these past few years, for the reasons I previously stated. Brady is much better at reading defenses and handles the pressure very well, while time and again Bledsoe has shown that he falters in the same situations.
__________________

__________________
phanan is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com