|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on May 16, 2007 17:28:50 GMT -5
If Peyton Manning didnt win this SB then no one would be saying hes a leader, but I'm glad he did, so now he can be #2. Anyways, when the careers are done Brady will be better than Favre, right now you really cant say that he is, but a lot of people are gonna think of Favre as a selfish little bitch and its not right...but he is right now.
|
|
|
Post by T R W on May 16, 2007 17:57:48 GMT -5
Jim McMahon gets a considerable part of the credit for the 85 Bears? Are you kidding me? Any mediocre Quarterback (which is what McMahon was) could have lead that team to the Super Bowl. See Trent Dilfer and the Ravens. Joe Namath makes a bold prediction, and suddenly he's a great leader? He was a primadonna who was a decent Quarterback, who had a few great moments. To put him over Favre, Brady, Unitas, or several great QB's will get you laughed out of just about any serious football discussion. You ask any one of those 85 Bears.....and they will all tell you how McMahon more than just helped them become one of the most dominant teams in the NFL. You obviously have no clue about the 85 Bears if you dare try and make a remark like that. It seems like most of you here are concerned about stats and stats only. Sorry......being a great QB is more than just stats. The QB position is the most important position on the field. It takes more than just great stats.....ala Tom Brady. And I would appreciate it if people would not just make up statements claiming I made. I NEVER said Namath was better than Brady or Unitas. I did say he was better than Favre. I no longer desire to continue a discussion concerning Favre vs. anyone. I have already stated my points and have heard the same argument from the same people over and over. Come up with something different and leave the beaten horse alone. I'm not gonna sit here and repost the same points I made earlier. Say what you will.....cuz I know someone will just say that I have no point and I am giving up. Its a typical response on a message board. But making the same argument back and forth is absurd and a waste of time. Were you even alive to see the '85 Bears? I talk to Richard Dent all the time, and he said the "funky QB" was average at best,.
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on May 16, 2007 18:18:05 GMT -5
You ask any one of those 85 Bears.....and they will all tell you how McMahon more than just helped them become one of the most dominant teams in the NFL. You obviously have no clue about the 85 Bears if you dare try and make a remark like that. It seems like most of you here are concerned about stats and stats only. Sorry......being a great QB is more than just stats. The QB position is the most important position on the field. It takes more than just great stats.....ala Tom Brady. And I would appreciate it if people would not just make up statements claiming I made. I NEVER said Namath was better than Brady or Unitas. I did say he was better than Favre. I no longer desire to continue a discussion concerning Favre vs. anyone. I have already stated my points and have heard the same argument from the same people over and over. Come up with something different and leave the beaten horse alone. I'm not gonna sit here and repost the same points I made earlier. Say what you will.....cuz I know someone will just say that I have no point and I am giving up. Its a typical response on a message board. But making the same argument back and forth is absurd and a waste of time. Were you even alive to see the '85 Bears? I talk to Richard Dent all the time, and he said the "funky QB" was average at best,. Was I even alive? Born is 78......I think that qualifies me for alive. You talk to Richard Dent all the time? Not that I believe you......but so what? I channel the drunken Mongo McMichael and he tells me different. Dent has been interviewed numerous times and has nothing but sweet praises for McMahon. Sorry......I dont buy it. Now I am dropping the Tom Brady discussion. I am tired of having my statements misconstrued and feel that this discussion is now going round and round. I have already explained why I feel Tom Brady "WILLED" his team ALL SEASON long. I'm not gonna waste time having a round and round discussion here. As far as Manning goes.......I think he is over rated based on the praise that every single NFL announcer seems to cover him with. He is not as good as Brady and isnt as good as guys like Montana, Unitas, or Elway. He's good.....real good. But people have put him on pedestal as the greatest QB of all time. And he just is not. Will he a first ballot hall of famer? Sure. Does he deserve it? Absolutely. Is the best of all time? No way! Thats why I think Manning is over rated. Great leader, best defensive coverage reader, hell of an arm and pretty damn accurate as well. But he is not as good as the hype has him. Thats my point.
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on May 16, 2007 18:59:47 GMT -5
Wow your over 30 and a mod of a board I have no idea what it is?
Congrats!
|
|
krush
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 20, 2001 18:53:41 GMT -5
Posts: 4,767
|
Post by krush on May 16, 2007 19:55:15 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Jean-Ralphio on May 16, 2007 19:56:50 GMT -5
Carson Palmer likes men, heard it here first
|
|
|
Post by tim on May 18, 2007 11:02:13 GMT -5
the funny thing about the entire Favre situation is that the faults and front office blunders that he allegedly complained about, are largely his own fault. he is a god in green bay, so he gets to slide on a lot of stuff that most others wouldn't. lets be honest: he drove javon walker out of town, lambasting him for contract demands when all the while Favre was pocketing 40% of the team's payroll every year. then he has the grapefruits to blame the front office for the hole at wide receiver, when he pushed walker out the door in the first place. the front office did the right thing in drafting defense, but Favre seems more concerned with surpassing Marino's offensive statistics than he does climbing back atop the nfc black n blue.
favre is a great player who plays with heart and has fun on the football field. but, at least for the last half-decade, he's been an extremely selfish player. holding the team hostage via threatened retirement every season, booting javon walker, clashing with sherman, etc etc. I think you could honestly say that, in the last 5 years or so, Favre has done more to hurt the Packers than he has done to help them.
|
|
|
Post by tim on May 18, 2007 11:18:14 GMT -5
and to weigh in a bit on the quarterback discussion, because thats always been a debate of intrigue to me...
as far as active QB's go, the picture was shaken up quite a bit with Manning winning the supe. ever since he entered the league Manning has played with smarts, heart, leadership, and clearly has been quite productive. he's one of the most intuitive QBs to put on a helmet in quite some time. the initial knock on him was that Harrison and James carried him... doesn't look that way now, eh? then there was the constant defeat at the hands of new england... not anymore. then the "can't win the big one" argument, which obviously has since been negated. what other denigrating trait could you pin on this guy? is there really a flaw in his game?
Brady has the rings, he's proven he doesn't need All Pro players around him, he's shed the "system" label, and he's a true rags-to-riches story. it is such a fine line between Brady and Manning now, that it pretty much boils down to the fact that Brady has a better winning track record and Manning is a bit more marketable(he essentially resurrected the Colts franchise).
discussing the greatest QBs of all time is a totally different beast, though. there's so many different factors to weigh when you're judging such a large pool of historic talent and such a large body of work. you want production? Marino. you want a winner? Montana. you want an innovator who changed the way the position is played? Unitas. and that's not even dipping your toe into the pool of guys who have a little bit of everything above; Elway, Favre, Kelly. or the true game-changers; Moon, Tarkenton, Cunningham, Tittle. i don't think this is an NHL/Gretzky or MLB/Ruth situation where you can just pinpoint a single "greatest QB ever." i know i cant.
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on May 18, 2007 11:21:50 GMT -5
and to weigh in a bit on the quarterback discussion, because thats always been a debate of intrigue to me... as far as active QB's go, the picture was shaken up quite a bit with Manning winning the supe. ever since he entered the league Manning has played with smarts, heart, leadership, and clearly has been quite productive. he's one of the most intuitive QBs to put on a helmet in quite some time. the initial knock on him was that Harrison and James carried him... doesn't look that way now, eh? then there was the constant defeat at the hands of new england... not anymore. then the "can't win the big one" argument, which obviously has since been negated. what other denigrating trait could you pin on this guy? is there really a flaw in his game? Brady has the rings, he's proven he doesn't need All Pro players around him, he's shed the "system" label, and he's a true rags-to-riches story. it is such a fine line between Brady and Manning now, that it pretty much boils down to the fact that Brady has a better winning track record and Manning is a bit more marketable(he essentially resurrected the Colts franchise). discussing the greatest QBs of all time is a totally different beast, though. there's so many different factors to weigh when you're judging such a large pool of historic talent and such a large body of work. you want production? Marino. you want a winner? Montana. you want an innovator who changed the way the position is played? Unitas. and that's not even dipping your toe into the pool of guys who have a little bit of everything above; Elway, Favre, Kelly. or the true game-changers; Moon, Tarkenton, Cunningham, Tittle. i don't think this is an NHL/Gretzky or MLB/Ruth situation where you can just pinpoint a single "greatest QB ever." i know i cant. Pinpoint single greatest.......thats tough to do. And its definitely a wide range of debate. You brought up some great points in how different QBs did different things that made each one great. I think the debate concerns more about who is the best in the league right now.
|
|
|
Post by taker1 on May 19, 2007 19:37:26 GMT -5
Wow your over 30 and a mod of a board I have no idea what it is? Congrats!
|
|
|
Post by tim on May 20, 2007 16:51:45 GMT -5
2,468 yards and 37 touchdowns CEDRIC BENSON WILL EAT YOU AS THOUGH YOU WERE AN APPETIZER AT CICI'S PIZZA ps orlando bobo died. who next, god? WHO NEXT? KEN-YON RAMBO?
|
|
|
Post by I am CANADIAN on May 20, 2007 23:24:12 GMT -5
he was only 33, that's horrible. r.ip. Orlando Bobo.
|
|
|
Post by katphishjake on May 21, 2007 0:36:41 GMT -5
2,468 yards and 37 touchdowns CEDRIC BENSON WILL EAT YOU AS THOUGH YOU WERE AN APPETIZER AT CICI'S PIZZA not if he injures his leg making his trip back to the buffet line to refill his coca cola
|
|
|
Post by K.J.V. on May 21, 2007 20:49:37 GMT -5
What up nigs. Been a bit huh huh. Found this news and figured sir TIMOTHY would find it interesting. Super shuffle? McNabb, Briggs swap makes sense
Monday, May 21, 2007 2:06 pm EDT
Was the recent drafting of quarterback Kevin Kolb a sign that the Philadelphia Eagles might trade Donovan McNabb before the 2007 season?
That's one theory, anyway. As for a possible destination, the Chicago Bears are ready to win the Super Bowl. They might have won it last year except for a glaring weakness at quarterback.
The key to this scenario is Bears linebacker Lance Briggs, who has said publicly that he will never play for Chicago again and who refused to report to minicamp on Friday.
Briggs is, arguably, the best weakside linebacker in the game and is only 26. He could help Philly rebuild its defense while Kolb gets ready to take control of the offense.Source: Philadelphia Inquirer Though Briggs is good, I don't really the Eagles getting rid of Mcnabb. Kevin Kolb is the future?! OKAY THAT'S JUST THE PACKER FAN IN ME TALKING
|
|
|
Post by K.J.V. on May 21, 2007 20:51:50 GMT -5
Oh let me also add, I'm still pissed at Favre for driving Javon out of town. He 100% deserved the contract he was asking for. If Favre wanted to WIN then he would take a cut out of his salary to give the front office even more room to work with.
Driver, Jennings, Walker.
That would have been sexy.
|
|
|
Post by King Bálor (CM)™ on May 22, 2007 20:51:54 GMT -5
What up nigs. Been a bit huh huh. Found this news and figured sir TIMOTHY would find it interesting. Super shuffle? McNabb, Briggs swap makes sense
Monday, May 21, 2007 2:06 pm EDT
Was the recent drafting of quarterback Kevin Kolb a sign that the Philadelphia Eagles might trade Donovan McNabb before the 2007 season?
That's one theory, anyway. As for a possible destination, the Chicago Bears are ready to win the Super Bowl. They might have won it last year except for a glaring weakness at quarterback.
The key to this scenario is Bears linebacker Lance Briggs, who has said publicly that he will never play for Chicago again and who refused to report to minicamp on Friday.
Briggs is, arguably, the best weakside linebacker in the game and is only 26. He could help Philly rebuild its defense while Kolb gets ready to take control of the offense.Source: Philadelphia Inquirer Though Briggs is good, I don't really the Eagles getting rid of Mcnabb. Kevin Kolb is the future?! OKAY THAT'S JUST THE PACKER FAN IN ME TALKING This isnt the first time I heard this rumor. I live about 2 hours from Philly and a couple of the local papers have been talking about Chicago being interested in Donovan and Donovan wouldnt mind heading home. Didnt know Donovan was from the Chicago area.
|
|
|
Post by Stuffs "Thunder" Liger on May 22, 2007 20:57:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Happy Pizza on May 23, 2007 1:58:45 GMT -5
Southeast Jerome does not encourage animal cruelty and thinks Michael Vick should burn in hell....
|
|
|
Post by tim on May 23, 2007 12:22:47 GMT -5
there are a couple of reasons that the proposed mcnabb/briggs deal would never happen
1) briggs is in the last year of his deal, and even if he's traded, he's going to sit out unless his team gives him a contract worth about $85 million with a $20 million dollar signing bonus.
2) mcnabb has 4 years left on his deal, and a 5th option year. and he's not even one of the highest paid players in the league, so its a relative bargain.
3) andy reid and jeffrey lurie are so far up mcnabb's ass--rightfully so, probably--that they'd never, ever, ever consider trading their franchise QB for a weakside linebacker who only produces in the Tampa2
|
|
|
Post by T R W on May 24, 2007 10:34:29 GMT -5
Yeah, I gotta agree with my main man tim. QB Eagles will never be traded.
|
|