Originally posted by winelv1: How about those Giants...being a big Giants fan I have to say the much maligned Eli Manning stepped up and showed he can be a great quarterback last year. Yet with out the entire team which as a whole all stepped it up down the stretch, with the defense leading the charge. Eli would mot even had mattered. Quaterbacks may inspire a team, just don't think they can carry them. Retire with honor Brett you don't need the money or the pain!
I was at the NFC Championship game last year (still cold from it) and Eli played well, but if the Packers' coaches had taken their collective heads out of their rear ends and realized that Burress was owning Harris (which was plainly obvious after about 2 drives) I think that game would have gone very differently.
Show me a good loser, I'll show you a loser - Vince Lombardi
Posts: 307 | Location: Toronto | Registered: Jun 05, 2008
Originally posted by winelv1: How about those Giants...being a big Giants fan I have to say the much maligned Eli Manning stepped up and showed he can be a great quarterback last year. Yet with out the entire team which as a whole all stepped it up down the stretch, with the defense leading the charge. Eli would mot even had mattered. Quaterbacks may inspire a team, just don't think they can carry them. Retire with honor Brett you don't need the money or the pain!
I was at the NFC Championship game last year (still cold from it) and Eli played well, but if the Packers' coaches had taken their collective heads out of their rear ends and realized that Burress was owning Harris (which was plainly obvious after about 2 drives) I think that game would have gone very differently.
Wasn't Burress even taunting the Packers down the sidelines saying "this guy can't cover me". Total ownage, Plaxico is the man.
Posts: 1230 | Location: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 19, 2008
Yes, but I would submit to you that the Steelers won a championship, in large part, thanks to the play of Rothlisberger. The Ravens, on the other hand, won a championship in spite of Dilfer. He played one season with the team; his stats: 9 TDs, 17 Ints.
You say in large part, eh? Well, what % IS "a large part" exactly (or in your opinion)? I'm guessing that you won't even try to answer that cloudy statement. Ben never played defense, so we know the maximum contribution possible is 50%. Of that 50%, what factor did the 10 other guys contribute throughout the season? Do the math and tell us what "large" is.
You also thwart your own argument by admitting that teams CAN win championships with merely average QBs. The inverse then must also be true; teams can't win championships with merely great QBs. Want proof? Most players at Canton DON'T have a ring, including a host of great QBs. Not all great players are fortunate enough to play with other great players.
quote: I'm so glad you mentioned that! Did Elway suddenly become great his 12th and 13th year in the NFL?? Well, that's when he got his rings (thanx to T.D.). When people start realizing that one man, no matter how skilled, can carry a team to the Promise land, then, and only then will we stop hearing that moronic "ring" comment.
Elway made it to the Superbowl w/o Terrell Davis, and multiple talented receivers, he just couldn't close the deal.
Again, you proved my point. Maybe it was his DEFENSE who allowed almost 40pts. who couldn't close the deal. Maybe it was stellar WRs. like Steve Watson, Orson Mobley etc. who couldn't catch a free bus pass. Shall I continue?!
You say in large part, eh? Well, what % IS "a large part" exactly (or in your opinion)? I'm guessing that you won't even try to answer that cloudy statement.
Sure, I can define my statement. Large part = without his significant contributions they would not have succeeded (i.e. efficient, productive, intuitive, and confident).
quote:
Ben never played defense, so we know the maximum contribution possible is 50%.[/QUOTE} If you are going to use percentages you need to account for Special Teams. Therefore, 50% cannot be a maximum contribution - again, in mathematical terms.
You also thwart your own argument by admitting that teams CAN win championships with merely average QBs.
The rare exception, not the rule.
quote:
The inverse then must also be true; teams can't win championships with merely great QBs. Want proof? Most players at Canton DON'T have a ring, including a host of great QBs.
Great QBs, but not champions.
quote:
Again, you proved my point. Maybe it was his DEFENSE who allowed almost 40pts. who couldn't close the deal.
Actually, they gave up 42, 39, and 55 respectively. But who's counting?
quote:
Maybe it was stellar WRs. like Steve Watson, Orson Mobley etc. who couldn't catch a free bus pass. Shall I continue?!
You're right, I forgot that Phil Simms had such greats as Carthon, Robinson, and Manuel; Brady had Brown, Wiggins, and Redmond.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: gigabit,
Posts: 2531 | Location: Utah | Registered: Jan 15, 2008
Like I said quarterbacks need a team around them. Phil Simms was a very good quarterback, A Hall of Fame candidate? I don't think so yet maybe. I loved the guy and met him twice. In 1986 when the Giants won the Super Bowl think of his suporting cast arguably the best team the Giants ever fielded. On defence Taylor, Martin, Marshall, Banks, Benson, Johnson just to name a few. On offence he had some good guys also, Bavaro, McConkey, Landeta, Manuel, Morris. Most of the games I remeber in 1986 were very close and won with good defence.
Posts: 41 | Location: New Jersey | Registered: Apr 27, 2008
Sure, I can define my statement. Large part = without his significant contributions they would not have succeeded (i.e. efficient, productive, intuitive, and confident).
Lay out a number for us, not just objective adjectives. Know why you'll have a hard time doing it? It's a TEAM sport! What is it that makes it so hard for you to understand?
No quarterback is a "champion" unless he did it by himself. Rather, he is on a TEAM, and THEY are championS. Without looking it up, I'll bet more than 1/2 super bowl MVP's weren't even QB's. I won't go into Dan vs Ben, because there is no comparison.
Originally posted by MiamiAtty: Lay out a number for us, not just subjective adjectives. Know why you'll have a hard time doing it? It's a TEAM sport! What is it that makes it so hard for you to understand?
No quarterback is a "champion" unless he did it by himself. Rather, he is on a TEAM, and THEY are championS. Without looking it up, I'll bet more than 1/2 super bowl MVP's weren't even QB's. I won't go into Dan vs Ben, because there is no comparison.
Nothing you have stated is hard for me to understand. In fact, you make some valid points.
The basis for this discussion never was a comparison of QBs. PSF inserted that following comment into his post:
quote:
That leaves us with Big Ben, the most underrated QB in the NFL. Great arm, threw over 30 TD passes last year to set the Steelers TD pass record and all that behind a bad OL and injured WRs. Now just imagine if Ben has a better line and the WR corp improves. No other QB has the physical strength Ben does. No other QB can break tackles like he does or even overpower defensive linemen like Ben can.
His comment was in regard to a current QB, and suddenly Dan Marino found his way into the conversation?
I should have realized the level of sensitivity Dan Marino fans have with the word Superbowl.
Posts: 2531 | Location: Utah | Registered: Jan 15, 2008
Originally posted by Chilepepper: People thought Marino couldn't move in the pocket...and then they invented Ben....and no...he doesn't have Marino's arm or quick release. And yes, he has a Superbowl ring.
Ok Gigabit, let's get the story straight! Chilepepper made a passing comment (which everyone knows to be true) on Dan and Ben. YOU make a passing comment about the "ring" implying Ben has one, and Dan does not. I say the whole "ring" argument is "moronic".
Here's where it gets good. You THEN back track and edit/erase anything you said about "the ring". The problem is that you can't erase OTHER people quoting what YOU said about the ring. Hence, the quote above by Chilepepper has a "ring" comment made by you in bold letters, yet his original comment does NOT.
Finally, after you have edited and erased anything that will trace that moronic statement back to you (not the one about that a QB can carry a team either,) you pretend to have no idea why Dan was mentioned, and foist your own spin on why he WAS in the first place.
For those still following, the quote by Chilepepper did not come out in bold as stated, but his original comment didn't have the ring comment. Only when Chile quoted Gigabit did it turn up. Conclusion: you can rewrite your own history any way you want...but not when others have previously quoted you.
Originally posted by Chilepepper: People thought Marino couldn't move in the pocket...and then they invented Ben....and no...he doesn't have Marino's arm or quick release. And yes, he has a Superbowl ring.
Ok Gigabit, let's get the story straight! Chilepepper made a passing comment (which everyone knows to be true) on Dan and Ben. YOU make a passing comment about the "ring" implying Ben has one, and Dan does not. I say the whole "ring" argument is "moronic".
Here's where it gets good. You THEN back track and edit/erase anything you said about "the ring". The problem is that you can't erase OTHER people quoting what YOU said about the ring. Hence, the quote above by Chilepepper has a "ring" comment made by you in bold letters, yet his original comment does NOT.
Finally, after you have edited and erased anything that will trace that moronic statement back to you (not the one about that a QB can carry a team either,) you pretend to have no idea why Dan was mentioned, and foist your own spin on why he WAS in the first place.
Niiiiice!
Correct, I did insert the ring comment, and I had no intention of erasing anything.
Did I - at any point - suggest that football is not a team sport? No, I made a simple statement.
quote:
And yes, he has a ring.
You chose to become emotional and argumentative, using words like moronic in a very defensive manner.
For the record, I believe that Dan Marino is one of the greatest QBs ever. However, he and his TEAMS couldn't get the job done either.
Posts: 2531 | Location: Utah | Registered: Jan 15, 2008
Will be interesting to see how this plays out. I kind of understand when a great player is gone from the game for a year or more and gets the itch to come back, but he was only gone a couple of months??? Dudes got issues.
Posts: 2216 | Location: OC, CA (Currently in London) | Registered: Aug 01, 2007
I wish he would come back to a backup quarterback/assistant to the QB coach position where he helps groom the new Greenbay QB in a transition. Why does a 38 yr old want to face another year of potential concussions/torn ligaments, etc. (answer: ego )
Posts: 674 | Location: New home of the Dallas Cowboys | Registered: Oct 31, 2003
His sense of entitlement is appalling (and to be fair, it isn't just Favre, but many athletes). He wants to go out on his terms (being released, so that he can choose where he wants to go), but he is the employee, not the employer. Why shouldn't the Packers get something in return?
Romeo and Juliet are together in eternity....
Posts: 6183 | Location: Elk Grove, CA, USA | Registered: Dec 06, 2003
Correct, I did insert the ring comment, and I had no intention of erasing anything.
Yet, somehow, that's the case. So we should go by your INTENT instead of the facts (you erasing previous statements AFTER I called them out). Yah ok.
[/QUOTE] Did I - at any point - suggest that football is not a team sport? No, I made a simple statement.[/QUOTE]
You absolutely "suggested" it when you made a comment (then erased it) about Ben having a "ring" and not Dan. Why do you think we're even discussing it now?
Why is it "emotional" and "argumentative" to call someone out on an incorrect statement? Did I say anything about you thinking that a QB can carry an entire team?! No, I left it alone. If I was argumentative, I'd have jumped on that too.
Ok, as far as Brett goes, I think he's nuts to leave 12 million on the table. IMO he won't win a championship with another team, so either retire or stop stirring up the pot. This isn't all about him, and he's put the Packers in an awkward position.
Originally posted by Dom'n'Vin'sDad: His sense of entitlement is appalling (and to be fair, it isn't just Favre, but many athletes). He wants to go out on his terms (being released, so that he can choose where he wants to go), but he is the employee, not the employer. Why shouldn't the Packers get something in return?
I completely agree, what is really dissapointing for most people is I think they thought Favre was somehow different or better than that. Personally I'm not a Packers/Favre fan so I don't really care what happens to him, I just think he looks like a douche who's severely tarnished his reputation in the eyes of many sports fans.
Posts: 1230 | Location: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 19, 2008
Originally posted by Dom'n'Vin'sDad: His sense of entitlement is appalling (and to be fair, it isn't just Favre, but many athletes). He wants to go out on his terms (being released, so that he can choose where he wants to go), but he is the employee, not the employer. Why shouldn't the Packers get something in return?
I completely agree, what is really dissapointing for most people is I think they thought Favre was somehow different or better than that. Personally I'm not a Packers/Favre fan so I don't really care what happens to him, I just think he looks like a douche who's severely tarnished his reputation in the eyes of many sports fans.
Favre is different. Employee / Employer is not really applicable as the Packers are a community owned team. Tell me what player do you associate more with the Packers community than Favre?
The Packers should not just give him away of course but Favre is not your average NFL employed player. He has given the Packers PLENTY over the years. He made a mistake and handled this whole thing poorly, but lets not act like the Packers did not ride his health and performance for years.
Posts: 1859 | Location: Anaheim Hills, CA | Registered: Nov 18, 2007
The year before, he didn't make a decision for months after the season ended. I wish he would have taken his time last year as well. He looks bad. The Packers look bad. And the whole thing seems like it could have easily been avoided.
Let him play another year. Just another chance for the Bears to take his head off.
Posts: 782 | Location: Chicago Western Burb | Registered: Oct 05, 2006
Chilepepper made a passing comment (which everyone knows to be true) on Dan and Ben. YOU make a passing comment about the "ring" implying Ben has one, and Dan does not. I say the whole "ring" argument is "moronic". 
