phillyfan26
Blue Crack Supplier
- Joined
- May 7, 2006
- Messages
- 30,343
No spoken words said:I'm really surprised to see such a silly post from you.
I intend to contribute to this discussion, but this made me .
No spoken words said:I'm really surprised to see such a silly post from you.
Are the Pats 18-0 with Matt Cassel starting all 18 games?LemonMelon said:
I don't understand your post. Are you saying that they're more important or equally important than any other position? Because I simply can't agree that QB is the most important part of an offense by far like so many believe. There have been too many instances of terrible QBs running good offenses for me to buy that.
I don't care how brilliant a QB is; even Peyton Manning would have sucked on a team like the Rams this year that had no offensive line. Tom Brady has arguably the best offensive line in football.
Hewson said:Are the Pats 18-0 with Matt Cassel starting all 18 games?
[/end discussion]
LemonMelon said:
QB is a hugely important position and often separates the great offenses from the passable
Hewson said:Yes, but the Pats wouldn't necessarily even rate as passable with Cassel.
8-8 I venture to guessLemonMelon said:
With Moss, Stallworth, and Welker?
With that brick wall of an o-line?
You're crazy. They would still be good. Just not a machine.
Hewson said:8-8 I venture to guess
Lets just stick to your argument that QB is not the single most important position on an NFL team.LemonMelon said:
With Moss, Stallworth, and Welker?
With that brick wall of an o-line?
You're crazy. They would still be good. Just not a machine.
True, but that D will have to be on the field more and stop the opponent more if Brady is not under center as the Pats will score much less and possess the ball less.LemonMelon said:
9-7 or 10-6 for me. Your defense is still pretty good, remember?
phillyfan26 said:I tend to see Eli getting bashed more than I see him getting credit, so I'm not sure I agree with your point here.
Until 4 weeks ago maybe, but I've heard no Eli bashing during the playoffs. He's played well. Is he the main reason the G-men are in the Super Bowl, no. They have played well as an entire unit. But Eli has stepped up his game considerably. He has not turned the ball over in the playoffs. So he deserves praise and some credit, certainly not all the credit.phillyfan26 said:I tend to see Eli getting bashed more than I see him getting credit, so I'm not sure I agree with your point here.
Just as long as they don't get it again in 13 days.phillyfan26 said:
Congrats to the Giants, by the way. You'll rarely get that from me, but you get it now.
LemonMelon said:As much as I hate to say it, I think Eli may be turning the corner and is no longer in the (Alex Smith-esque) bust category. But another season of success wouldn't hurt. Or a season with a QB rating in the 80's.
LemonMelon said:BTW, forgot to point this out...
Dude. No. Is a QB's ability to withstand name-calling more important than their ability to get a higher QB rating than 75?
LemonMelon said:As much as I hate to say it, I think Eli may be turning the corner and is no longer in the (Alex Smith-esque) bust category. But another season of success wouldn't hurt. Or a season with a QB rating in the 80's.
No spoken words said:
No. Their ability to win is. You're picking out choice bits but ignoring the other things I said abouyt Palmer. Palmer's an overrated QB, with a million dollar arm and a 2 cent head, and he's a locker room cancer. Go watch some of their games, and, then come talk to me when he gets his team into the playoffs again, let alone wins a playoff game. And, if you are going to let QB rating guide your arguments, you're making less and less sense by the second, sorry.
No spoken words said:
Wow, again with the QB rating. Unreal.
Terry Bradshaw's career QB rating: 70.9
Phil Simms': 78.5
John Elway: 79.9
Carson Palmer: 90.1
Please.
LemonMelon said:
This is what Manning fans always do. The past QBs had lower career ratings because it was a combination of their crappy earlier seasons. You of all people would know that Bradshaw's last few seasons were incredible, but when you balance it by his first few, that's what you get. To use that to make light of the QB rating system is ridiculous.
Palmer is a beast, and his numbers prove it, while Manning has yet to have a truly great season. Hell, just 7 weeks ago he had the most incomplete passes in a game since 1967. Good on him for having some great games, but he's had some bad ones this year as well. Another season will be the litmus test.
No spoken words said:You use a phrase "basic stuff" as a pejorative, but you harp on QB rating, which erodes your credibility severely. Wake me up when you get past that, until then, we're going in circles.
No spoken words said:
I'm a Steeler fan, not an Eli fan....I'm objective here. I like when my team wins. I don't care how they do it.
The QB rating system is what is ridiculous. And, again, we're going in circles, we're not going to agree here, so, I will drop it and we'll agree to disagree.
One last thing....you probably do not know a lot about Bradshaw, and that's ok.....his highest QB rating for even a 1/2 season was less than 90. He was above 80 only 3 times. He liked to take risks and throw deep, so his completion %'s were never great, and he tossed picks. But, in the 4th Quarter, he was amazing, as well as the playoffs.