NFL Thread III - Page 8 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Lemonade Stand > Put 'Em Under Pressure
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-31-2021, 01:52 AM   #141
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,464
Local Time: 11:50 PM
Just did some research, 10 QBs have played in the super bowl aged 34 or older. Three of recent - Brady, Manning, Warner
__________________

LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 04:25 AM   #142
Blue Crack Distributor
 
bono_212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 83,680
Local Time: 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the tourist View Post
Does that mean I should be bummed to be a Seahawks fan since Stafford and Wilson are the same age?
Exactly, but I'll add to my thought on that in a moment below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post
kroenke intends to go all-in for a run when the new stadium properly opens with fans, and he thinks stafford is the guy to do it (after realizing the rams don't have enough to offer for watson).
Yeah, this is what I was getting at: The Rams want to win a super bowl in their new stadium. No way they had enough for Watson. This was a great second option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
With many great QBs proving that they can play until 38-40 you never really know... but also Stafford didn’t really accomplish anything up until this point, and I’m not sure how many QBs wait until they’re 33-35 to suddenly start being taken seriously as a QB capable of winning a super bowl.
Stafford hasn't accomplished anything besides being one of the best QBs in the league, despite playing for one of the worst teams. He still has time and likely several more playoff appearances in his future. The only shame for him is it took this long for him to escape Detroit.
__________________

__________________
bono_212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 04:32 AM   #143
Blue Crack Distributor
 
bono_212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 83,680
Local Time: 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Just did some research, 10 QBs have played in the super bowl aged 34 or older. Three of recent - Brady, Manning, Warner
...That would then represent 7 of the last 10 Super Bowls.
__________________
bono_212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 06:29 AM   #144
Blue Crack Addict
 
GirlsAloudFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Chicago
Posts: 26,343
Local Time: 09:50 PM
The Rams got better and the Lions got worse.
GirlsAloudFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 09:21 AM   #145
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,464
Local Time: 11:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bono_212 View Post
...That would then represent 7 of the last 10 Super Bowls.

Or an easier explanation is two of the greatest QBs ever dominated the decade? Heck, remove Brady from the bunch and you’re now talking 1/10. And let’s not forget how god awful Peyton Manning was winning a super bowl with Denver.

To simply pass off Brady’s greatness as anything less than an enigma is incredibly unfair.
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 11:34 AM   #146
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 32,080
Local Time: 10:50 PM
For everyone saying the Rams got hosed...they unloaded Goff.
Might be the single greatest move in league history.

Surprised the Lions were willing to take him and that contract, I assume just punting on the next 2 years then cut him after 2022 when there's no dead cap hit, have 2 first rounders to use in each of 22 and 23 which will likely be one high (their) and one in the mid to late 20s (Rams).

Rams just opened a 2 year window, saved a few bucks, but mortgaged the future big time, what's that 4 years without a 1st rounder now thanks to the Ramsey and Stafford deals?
Some FAs may be enticed to go there and play with Stafford and Donald and Co., but they'll have to do it on the cheap.
And you still have Stafford's back to be concerned about.
I see Rams being good (which they already were) for the next 2 seasons but not winning it all and then falling into the abyss.
Lions....well they're the Lions.
Hewson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 01:07 PM   #147
Blue Crack Distributor
 
bono_212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 83,680
Local Time: 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
Or an easier explanation is two of the greatest QBs ever dominated the decade? Heck, remove Brady from the bunch and you’re now talking 1/10. And let’s not forget how god awful Peyton Manning was winning a super bowl with Denver.

To simply pass off Brady’s greatness as anything less than an enigma is incredibly unfair.

I'm just saying, you introduced a fairly meaningless statistic into the conversation by saying only two QBs over 34 have made the super bowl recently and neglected to mention that that represented the AFC for the vast majority of that time period. Not to mention leaving out how many QBs over 34 have been to the championship game recently, made the playoffs recently, won their division recently, etc. It's been a common talking point of the last several seasons, that there's a huge divide in the ages of the most successful QBs in the league. They're either in their first three/four seasons, or they're getting pretty deep into their 30s/40s.

At the end of the day, only two QBs are making the Super Bowl. And for a decade, those appearances were pretty much dominated by players over the age of 34 on one side of the league. Even if it was a single player most of the time, he is certainly NOT the only successful +34 QB in the league, unless we're going back to this idea that the only successful QB is a Super Bowl winning QB, to which I return to my thoughts on that topic from last week.

I just absolutely can't get behind the idea that Stafford's not going to make an impact on the Rams when he's been pretty much exactly the same player, statistically speaking, his entire career, on one of the worst teams in the history of the NFL. The worst team?
__________________
bono_212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 01:40 PM   #148
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,464
Local Time: 11:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bono_212 View Post
I'm just saying, you introduced a fairly meaningless statistic into the conversation by saying only two QBs over 34 have made the super bowl recently and neglected to mention that that represented the AFC for the vast majority of that time period. Not to mention leaving out how many QBs over 34 have been to the championship game recently, made the playoffs recently, won their division recently, etc. It's been a common talking point of the last several seasons, that there's a huge divide in the ages of the most successful QBs in the league. They're either in their first three/four seasons, or they're getting pretty deep into their 30s/40s.

At the end of the day, only two QBs are making the Super Bowl. And for a decade, those appearances were pretty much dominated by players over the age of 34 on one side of the league. Even if it was a single player most of the time, he is certainly NOT the only successful +34 QB in the league, unless we're going back to this idea that the only successful QB is a Super Bowl winning QB, to which I return to my thoughts on that topic from last week.

I just absolutely can't get behind the idea that Stafford's not going to make an impact on the Rams when he's been pretty much exactly the same player, statistically speaking, his entire career, on one of the worst teams in the history of the NFL. The worst team?


Except my original message clearly caveated the points you’re making by saying age of QBs in recent times.

It’s not a meaningless statistic, it is a statement of fact that highlights that most QBs don’t play late into their career because of a list of reasons... health, talent decline, opportunity, etc. but also I don’t know what you’re saying with some trade between winning young or winning old. We aren’t seeing that at all. Since the year 2000, QBs over the age of 32 playing in the super bowl account for 11 of the 42 QBs. Of those 11, 5 have been Brady, 3 Manning, Kurt Warner... Brad Johnson and Rick Gannon (20 years ago against one another in one of the most atypical Super Bowls of the past two decades).

Though I could be misinterpreting your statement of “championship game” if you’re referring to AFC/NFC championships. But the point here is that yes you can see QBs winning at old ages, but history doesn’t support the idea of the super bowl being a place for older QBs if you’re not talking about otherwise the greatest players to ever play the position.
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 02:38 PM   #149
More 5G Than Man
 
LemonMelon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Hollywoo
Posts: 68,541
Local Time: 07:50 PM
The Rams definitely got better with that trade, but if they didn't improve to the point where they could keep up with the Chiefs/Bucs/Packers, I don't see the move as a worthwhile one. They have one goal and they came within a couple scores of reaching that goal with Goff once before, so how much higher is their ceiling now that they've mortgaged their future (again)?

But that's a glass half empty way of looking at things. They had no chance of winning it all with Goff and now they have a slightly better chance. Not much else you can realistically do if you're in the market to win now.
LemonMelon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 02:56 PM   #150
Blue Crack Addict
 
mikal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Black Lodge
Posts: 27,089
Local Time: 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LemonMelon View Post
The Rams definitely got better with that trade, but if they didn't improve to the point where they could keep up with the Chiefs/Bucs/Packers, I don't see the move as a worthwhile one. They have one goal and they came within a couple scores of reaching that goal with Goff once before, so how much higher is their ceiling now that they've mortgaged their future (again)?

But that's a glass half empty way of looking at things. They had no chance of winning it all with Goff and now they have a slightly better chance. Not much else you can realistically do if you're in the market to win now.
Agreed. If anything, I just feel really good for Stafford to be able to get out of Detroit and spend the last few years of his career in LA.

And as a Packers fan, even if we do move on from Rodgers, there's a good chance we'll do have the best QB in the division.
mikal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 09:45 PM   #151
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,218
Local Time: 10:50 PM
I am stunned that the Chiefs are still only favored by 3. I feel like I'm stealing money.
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 09:51 PM   #152
Blue Crack Addict
 
mikal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Black Lodge
Posts: 27,089
Local Time: 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
I am stunned that the Chiefs are still only favored by 3. I feel like I'm stealing money.
Same. I actually thought the Packers had a better chance to beat the Chiefs than the Bucs.
mikal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-31-2021, 11:37 PM   #153
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 32,080
Local Time: 10:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headache in a Suitcase View Post
I am stunned that the Chiefs are still only favored by 3. I feel like I'm stealing money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikal View Post
Same. I actually thought the Packers had a better chance to beat the Chiefs than the Bucs.
Hewson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2021, 01:27 AM   #154
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,464
Local Time: 11:50 PM
I wouldn’t bet against Tom Brady. Even though the Chiefs are clearly the favorite, I just wouldn’t do it. He’s a dream wrecker.
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2021, 03:34 AM   #155
Blue Crack Addict
 
DaveC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: nazi punks fuck off
Posts: 21,975
Local Time: 10:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
I wouldn’t bet against Tom Brady. Even though the Chiefs are clearly the favorite, I just wouldn’t do it. He’s a dream wrecker.








DaveC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2021, 07:38 AM   #156
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: DC
Posts: 68,218
Local Time: 10:50 PM
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2021, 08:02 AM   #157
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Hewson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Your own private Idaho
Posts: 32,080
Local Time: 10:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveC View Post








Counter point:









Hewson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2021, 08:04 AM   #158
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,464
Local Time: 11:50 PM
Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_1243.JPG
Views:	12
Size:	81.7 KB
ID:	12792

I hate that you made me do that
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2021, 10:30 PM   #159
Blue Crack Distributor
 
bono_212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 83,680
Local Time: 07:50 PM
No dream wrecked - LIII (Feb 3, 2019) New England 13, Los Angeles 3 NE -2.5 (55.5)

Patriots dreams wrecked -
LII (Feb 4, 2018) Philadelphia 41, New England 33 NE -4.5 (49)

Dreams wrecked in-game, I can happily admit that one, but not going INTO the game -
LI (Feb 5, 2017) New England 34, Atlanta 28 NE -3 (57.5)

Dreams wrecked - XLIX (Feb 1, 2015) New England 28, Seattle 24 SEA -1 (47.5)

Patriots Dreams wrecked -
XLVI (Feb 5, 2012) N.Y. Giants 21, New England 17 NE -2.5 (53)

Patriot's Dreams rickety wrecked -
XLII (Feb 3, 2008) N.Y. Giants 17, New England 14 NE -12 (55)

No dream wrecked -
XXIX (Feb 6, 2005) New England 24, Philadelphia 21 NE -7 (46.5)

No dream wrecked -
XXXVIII (Feb 1, 2004) New England 32, Carolina 29 NE -7 (37.5)

Dreams wrecked -
XXXVI (Feb 3, 2002) New England 20, St. Louis 17 STL -14 (53)

He's only had to overcome spread odds twice. Most of the time, he's the one getting his dreams wrecked, or they win as expected.

Still, none of this means much of anything. But I'm not going to allow unchecked Brady circlejerks to go uncontested.
__________________
bono_212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-01-2021, 10:36 PM   #160
Blue Crack Addict
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,464
Local Time: 11:50 PM
What’s your deal? A circle jerk, are you kidding me?
__________________

LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 10:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×