Official NFL Discussion Thread

[GatorBait19]

By that logic, so are BOTH Guggenheim museums. The fact that you don't even SEE the arena from all four cardinal directions, before you actually get it to (no, not even from 33rd street - you see the Borders on the corner), makes me question that. An eyesore to me (coming from a big city perspective) is one that cannot be ignored and stands out like a sore thumb within the neighborhood it's located in. Given the variety of architecture (again, the Post Office, Macy's, the nasty dump called the Hotel Pennsylvania, several of the buildings that house fashion houses, etc) in that neighborhood, MSG doesn't fit that description for me. YMMV.

 

I guess it's one of those agree to disagree thing. Like with Ray Jay, I don't see it as an eyesore, but others might.

 

You don't see MSG as an eyesore because it doesn't stick out, but others do.

 

It's a no win for everyone

[GatorBait19]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=5197588

 

"We're victims of the situation," said Edwards, one of the game's top left ends who would have commanded a lot of action on the unrestricted market. "I'm not happy about it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one."

 

I guess my question is, didn't you know this would happen?

So how are you a victim? you didn't want to redo the labor agreement because you felt it was unfair, now everyone who was given a tender is complaining about not getting their money they would have gotten if the agreement was still in place.

 

This article just makes them sound like a bunch of grown cry babies, you cry because you aren't getting enough from league revenue sharing. Now you cry because you aren't getting paid a long term deal. NFL is a business first. 75% of the players never graduated, well welcome to business 101. First rule, make your money, how do you do this you ask, simple. If you can sign a guy to just 3 mill for one season instead of giving him a 6 year 50 million dollar contract then do it. Half the reason the GM's discuss contracts with these players during the season is to keep the player happy and show, hey we are trying.

[Trashbear]

So, Mr. Revis, he of the Jets, says he is looking for a contract in the vicinity of $20 million per year.

 

I'd put cornerback in the top five or six most important positions on a team, but that seems like a high price tag for a DB. Granted, that's what he publicly wants, not what he privately expects, but still. As has been said before, against a QB that has ample time to throw, a $20 million dollar corner isn't going to look spectacular.

[GatorBait19]

So, Mr. Revis, he of the Jets, says he is looking for a contract in the vicinity of $20 million per year.

 

I'd put cornerback in the top five or six most important positions on a team, but that seems like a high price tag for a DB. Granted, that's what he publicly wants, not what he privately expects, but still. As has been said before, against a QB that has ample time to throw, a $20 million dollar corner isn't going to look spectacular.

 

I agree with that, CB are great and a shut down corner is hard to fine but when a QB has time (hard against a pressure D) they can pick people apart

[Stennick]

With the draft over I thought I'd go through the league and post where I expect each team to end up. Again this is just one man's opinion.

 

 

AFC East

 

1. Patriots (another solid looking draft, all the main players are there pretty easy pick)

 

2. Jets (they've made some good to great offseason grabs but I'm not ready to annoint Mark Sanchez the franchise QB the media is. His stats last year were not Franchise QB worthy. In fact their passing game in general is suspect but I think their more than good enough to grab a playoff spot much like last year)

 

3. Dolphins - ( Pretty much the status quo here)

 

4. Bills - (I don't see the Bills improving and after their attempts to lure real footbally coaches to the city have failed I don't see them doing that much.)

 

AFC Central

 

1. Bengals - I'm not afraid to admit that I think Carson Palmer could become a top 3 QB in this league in a few years. The Steelers are considerably weaker leaving the Ravens as their only real competition.

 

2. Ravens - With the Steelers on and off field problems this is going to be the Raven's and Bengals shooting it out all season. The Ravens are going to be one of those playoff bubble teams but certainly not a lock.

 

3. Steelers - Big Ben gone for a fourth of the season, one of their top WR's is gone, not too mention the firestorm the media will ambush them with until atleast Ben's back for a few games and your looking at a team that could implode.

 

4. Browns - They got their front office figured out and a good guy at the top. I think they had a pretty good draft but their not climbing out of the cellar this year no matter how crazy things get in Pitts.

 

AFC South

 

1. Colts - These guys went to the Super Bowl last year and they haven't lost any important members of the team. Their a virtual lock for another South clinch.

 

2. Texans - The Texans continue to quietly improve ever year and I think their going to be locked in a fight with the Titans for that second playoff spot. The difference between Houston and Tenn this year is going to be who comes out on top of their two matchups.

 

3. Titans - They got the best RB in the game right now, on top of that Vince is back and 100 percent the starter of this team. That being said there is a bit of a stigma that the Titans are a cheap team. They need to put this to rest and get CJ his contract because if the players come into this year feeling like one of their own was done wrong it may effect morale just enough to cost them a playoff spots.

 

4. Jaguars - These guys aren't going anywhere with the talent stacked up on the other three teams. They might make some improvements on their record but they got no chance at climbing out of last.

 

AFC WEST

 

1. Chargers - Every year I think their going to break out and become a Super Bowl team and every year they fall short of the mark. I have no reason to think they can't do it again this year.

 

2. The Broncos - These guys are going to be in a dog fight with the Titans, Ravens, Texans and Jets for those two wild card playoff spots. With Marshall and Cutler now gone and nobody that has been on that level to replace them I don't see them toppling the Chargers and I think their going to find it an uphill climb to get into the playoffs. With four combined games against the Chiefs and Raiders it makes it easy to walk into the playoffs with an easier schedule than some other teams. That being said I just don't see them being better than the other competing wild card teams this year.

 

3. Raiders - I know its the in thing to giggle at the Raiders and their lack of well everything. They got rid of their lazy QB, they seem to be improving each year and there is a bucket load of young talent on this team. Their not going to win much but I don't expect them to come in last.

 

 

4. Chiefs - This is going to be Matt Cassel's chance to show he's not a system QB. His numbers dropped dramatically last year taking over the Chiefs as any QB who went from NE to KC would. The Chiefs have dedicated themselves to being New England west with a starting QB, and front office and coaching staff. The only guy to have ANY success away from Big Bill has been Josh McDaniels so it will be interesting to see Scott Pioli put up or shut up. Much like Vince Russo and Vince McMahon this is a chance for the guy who is credited with so much success behind the scenes to show it was him and not Bill that structured that winning environment in New England. I'm thinking this entire era in KC is going to be an embarrassing failure but stranger things have happened.

[GatorBait19]

I think Ravens win that divison to me

 

their first two picks were solid, Kindle will be the next A. Thomas for them and Cody is just a huge (HUGE) body for the 3-4 front

 

Boldin was a great pick up as well.

 

 

It will come down to QB's in the league, how will Ben do when he gets back, and how does his replacement do while he's gone. Can Carson stay healty? will Joe F. become a great QB this year, he had a good year last year, Cam Cameron has another year with him (guy who helped develop Brees and Rivers in SD) and they have two RB, two TE, and two WR plus a great O-Line and D

[Remianen]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=pasquarelli_len&id=5197588

 

"We're victims of the situation," said Edwards, one of the game's top left ends who would have commanded a lot of action on the unrestricted market. "I'm not happy about it, and I'm sure I'm not the only one."

 

I guess my question is, didn't you know this would happen?

So how are you a victim? you didn't want to redo the labor agreement because you felt it was unfair, now everyone who was given a tender is complaining about not getting their money they would have gotten if the agreement was still in place.

 

This article just makes them sound like a bunch of grown cry babies, you cry because you aren't getting enough from league revenue sharing. Now you cry because you aren't getting paid a long term deal. NFL is a business first. 75% of the players never graduated, well welcome to business 101. First rule, make your money, how do you do this you ask, simple. If you can sign a guy to just 3 mill for one season instead of giving him a 6 year 50 million dollar contract then do it. Half the reason the GM's discuss contracts with these players during the season is to keep the player happy and show, hey we are trying.

 

Uh, are you serious? Are you aware of WHY the players refused to redo the labor agreement or are you just spouting what the halfwit media is telling you?

 

Let's say someone owes you money and when you come to collect, they say they don't have your money (or won't have your money in the future)? This, despite the brand new Jaguar X-Type, custom Mercedes S-class, and Gallardo in their driveway and the new inground pool in their backyard. Seriously? You'd be PISSED and you'd have every reason to be.

 

When owners were pleading poverty and saying they needed revenue sharing redone despite the fact that they were shelling out BILLIONS to build new stadiums and refurbish existing ones. They were still going out and spending A HUNDRED MILLION on INDIVIDUAL players. AND, they have refused (TO DATE) to disclose their financials to the union. Why? What do they have to hide? I'll tell you what. The large market teams don't want the small market teams to know how much money they're making outside of the basic league structure (local sponsorship deals, brand licensing, and such. Remember Jerry Jones' deal with Nike years ago?). If they divulge their numbers to the union (you know, to prove they weren't lying about being in dire financial straits?), these revenue streams would become known to everyone, just about. This is very much like a rich man marrying a (not rich) woman and hiding his assets. Pre-nups can be impeached so reducing your net worth on paper reduces your exposure to Juanita Jordan payouts.

 

But the union is stupid to have agreed to this so-called 'poison pill' in the first place. They sold their younger stars down the river for some 'end of the rainbow' payout scenario that anyone with a brain knew was never going to happen. "No cap, now everyone will spend uncontrollably for marginal players!" BS! There's literally no one worth paying that for. Peppers didn't get an "OMG" type of deal and he was probably the single most valuable free agent on the market. A proper poison pill would've been to eliminate the free agency rules altogether (so no 'restricted' free agents, no 'franchise tag', none of that).

 

So, Mr. Revis, he of the Jets, says he is looking for a contract in the vicinity of $20 million per year.

 

I'd put cornerback in the top five or six most important positions on a team, but that seems like a high price tag for a DB. Granted, that's what he publicly wants, not what he privately expects, but still. As has been said before, against a QB that has ample time to throw, a $20 million dollar corner isn't going to look spectacular.

 

I agree with that, CB are great and a shut down corner is hard to fine but when a QB has time (hard against a pressure D) they can pick people apart

 

A shutdown corner in Rex Ryan's system doesn't have to worry about QBs having time to throw. That's the whole point and why a shutdown corner is so vital to his defense. Ray Lewis has a pick-6 that was produced by Rex Ryan's schemes. He blitzed everyone except Ray, the left corner (who I think was Samari Rolle), and Jim Leonhard (who was close to the line but just outside the box). The QB tried to make a hot read and threw to the receiver (who was supposedly open due to the right corner coming) and didn't even see Ray slide into the passing lane.

 

It's different from Nnamdi's deal because the situations are different. Asomougha is Oakland's ONLY good defensive player. Revis's skillset and ability makes him the best for Ryan's system.

 

2. Jets (they've made some good to great offseason grabs but I'm not ready to annoint Mark Sanchez the franchise QB the media is. His stats last year were not Franchise QB worthy. In fact their passing game in general is suspect but I think their more than good enough to grab a playoff spot much like last year)

 

Like Rex said last year after the divisional playoffs, "Two home teams advance...and the (f'in) Jets". I think the Jets overall offense will improve by leaps and bounds this year.

 

1. Bengals - I'm not afraid to admit that I think Carson Palmer could become a top 3 QB in this league in a few years. The Steelers are considerably weaker leaving the Ravens as their only real competition.

 

Are Peyton, Brady, and Brees retiring before then? Top-10, easy. Top 5, maybe? Top 3? Eh, I don't see that. Rivers is better right now and on the rise. You're basically saying 'in a few years, Palmer will be better than Rivers, Flacco, Ryan, Ben, and either Peyton, Brady, or Brees' and not even including people like Stafford, Henne, Schaub, Sanchez, Young, Bradford, Freeman, Cutler, or that other Manning kid. I think Carson Palmer will be more of what Cincinnati is used to: a Ken Anderson type. Steady, intelligent, but he'll never carry a team on his back. Gotta be able to do that to be top 3 IMO.

 

3. Titans - They got the best RB in the game right now, on top of that Vince is back and 100 percent the starter of this team. That being said there is a bit of a stigma that the Titans are a cheap team. They need to put this to rest and get CJ his contract because if the players come into this year feeling like one of their own was done wrong it may effect morale just enough to cost them a playoff spots.

 

The stigma is well deserved, I think. You don't even need to use CJ, how 'bout Keith Bulluck? The heart of your defense, great in the locker room and in the community, and you hang him out to dry like that?

 

2. The Broncos - These guys are going to be in a dog fight with the Titans, Ravens, Texans and Jets for those two wild card playoff spots. With Marshall and Cutler now gone and nobody that has been on that level to replace them I don't see them toppling the Chargers and I think their going to find it an uphill climb to get into the playoffs. With four combined games against the Chiefs and Raiders it makes it easy to walk into the playoffs with an easier schedule than some other teams. That being said I just don't see them being better than the other competing wild card teams this year.

 

As a Broncos fan, I don't see the team making the playoffs this year. I believe that there are too many holes on defense and even with the neat play I saw proposed (Tebow under center, Orton in the slot and Quinn in the backfield with Knowshon. "It's probably an option....but to who and from where?!?"), I think they'll be hard pressed getting the offense in sync quickly. I'm also hoping they find a tight end who can spread the field a bit. They also need a breakaway threat for special teams.

 

3. Raiders - I know its the in thing to giggle at the Raiders and their lack of well everything. They got rid of their lazy QB, they seem to be improving each year and there is a bucket load of young talent on this team. Their not going to win much but I don't expect them to come in last.

 

The Raiders are at least two years away from contending for anything but the #1 overall pick, in my view. Yes, they have some young talent. But that talent hasn't produced and until they do, it's just 'young talent'. Heyward-Bey was a mistake and one they'll regret for years to come (just like Gallery...and Russell). I think the Chiefs manage to eke out 6 wins this year (maybe even 7). The Raiders will struggle to get 4.

 

I think Ravens win that divison to me

 

their first two picks were solid, Kindle will be the next A. Thomas for them and Cody is just a huge (HUGE) body for the 3-4 front

 

Boldin was a great pick up as well.

 

I don't think people realize how big a pickup the Boldin trade was. They got a receiver who very much fits the personality of this team ("Somebody's gettin' hit in the mouth"). He's a banger and doesn't shy from contact, but he can do it all at all levels of the passing game. Just his presence on the field is going to guaran-damn-tee that teams can't stack the box. That'll make life easier for Ray Rice, LeRon, and Willis, as well as Todd Heap. If Dixon and/or Pitta pan out, that's going to give Cam a lot of room to come up with jumbled formations that could confuse defenses. David Reed is also a very good prospect who could apprentice in the slot. And you still have Derrick Mason along with the promising Demetrius Williams.

 

I don't, however, think Cody is going to be worth much this year. His playing weight at Alabama was 370. The Ravens want him at 350-360. He's over 400 right now. He might be good for two downs every other series his rookie year.

[Remianen]

Oh, and in case anyone's interested, Matt Bowen over at NFP is doing in-depth articles on formations and approaches called 'Inside the Playbook'. While I realize not everyone's into the X's and O's, I'm looking forward to when he breaks down Rex's base defense. So far, he's done:

 

Tampa 2 and Cover 3

[Stennick]

Right now QB wise Brady and Peyton are on a level nobody can touch.

 

The fight for the 3rd QB in the league I would say is Brees, Rivers or Rodgers.

 

The tier right under that right now from what I've seen is Palmer, Romo, Eli, and McNabb.

 

You got a lot of guys with tons of upside Ryan, Flacco, Stafford, Sanchez, Cutler and Vince Young maybe a few others.

 

I guess top three is tough to get in with both Brees and Rivers there but I'd say its a dogfite between the likes of Rodgers, Palmer and maybe Eli or Romo for that five spot. I'm a huge fan of Palmer but the guy is injury prone and each season his numbers dip a little. The kid has a ton of skill and potential I'm just not sure that will be enough sadly.

[lazorbeak]

Right now QB wise Brady and Peyton are on a level nobody can touch.

 

The fight for the 3rd QB in the league I would say is Brees, Rivers or Rodgers.

 

The tier right under that right now from what I've seen is Palmer, Romo, Eli, and McNabb.

 

You got a lot of guys with tons of upside Ryan, Flacco, Stafford, Sanchez, Cutler and Vince Young maybe a few others.

 

I guess top three is tough to get in with both Brees and Rivers there but I'd say its a dogfite between the likes of Rodgers, Palmer and maybe Eli or Romo for that five spot. I'm a huge fan of Palmer but the guy is injury prone and each season his numbers dip a little. The kid has a ton of skill and potential I'm just not sure that will be enough sadly.

 

Wait what? Drew Brees just led the league in QB Rating and TDs and led his team to a super bowl, and he's not at the same level as Tom Brady? I mean every statistic from last season including the super bowl indicates Drew Brees is your #1 QB coming into this year. Brady's not even top 5 based on last season.

[Stennick]

261

 

One season doesn't make somebody the top QB in the league. Brees is good, real good and I'm a big fan of the guys but Brady and Manning have done everything Drew has done and they both did it five or ten years ago. Drew's good but you can't look at one season you have to look at success through the decade or heck even the last five years and when you go back more than last season it become apparent that Drew is the third maybe even fourth if you consider Ben has more SB wins plus a game winning drive in the final seconds of his second win. In football guys like Bradshaw are talked about as some of the greatest ever because of their post season accomplishments more so than their stats so I could see an argument for Ben staking claim to the third slot of QB of the decade.

 

Brady QB Rating 93.3, TD's 225, 30,800+, 63.3 cmp pct, INT 99

 

Brees QB Rating 91.9, 202 TD's, 30,600+ passing yards, 64.4 cmp pct, INT 110

 

Manning QB Rating 95.2, 366 TD's, 50,000+, 181 IN, 64.8 cmp pct

 

Those are Manning, Brees and Brady's career numbers. Now keep in mind Mannings yards are nearly 20,000 more but his per game average is 30 yards more a game.

 

Brees is good he's real good but you got to lead the league for more than one year. You got to make it to more than one Super Bowl before I'm going to declare him on Brady and Mannings level. You're talking about two guys who have been winning for a decade now. Brees is easily the number 3 QB in the league but he's playing catch up to Brady and Manning. I like Drew a lot but you can't just jump him ahead of Manning and Brady because of one league leading year because of one Super Bowl. Brady has more TDs' in a season than anybody.

 

Manning is right there as well. Two SB's, a ton of MVP awards, playoffs every year, 13, 14 game wins every year.

 

You can't just say Drew is on that level because of one season. Drew's been putting up some great numbers but when its all said and done and we talk about the best QB's of the 2000's he's number three on the list and if you want to throw in Ben's two SB wins as being more important than individual stats and his super bowl winning game drive he might be argued into the number four spot.

 

Again I like Drew but he's in a hard spot. You argue stats well Brady and Manning have been putting up those same stats for a decade back when Drew was struggling to be a start on his team thus leading to another good SD QB being drafted. You can't argue single season accomplishments since Manning has a pile of MVP awards and Brady just three years ago crushed a ton of single season passing records himself. You can't argue post season success since Drew's only got on Super Bowl appearance while Brady has three SB wins, Ben has two, and Manning has one win with two appearances.

 

Drew is good but there is absolutely no category in which he beats out Brady or Manning except for who won the Super Bowl last year which Manning did five years ago. Drew is good but he's the clear number 3 or 4 QB in the league right now based on argument.

[lazorbeak]

Fine if you want to talk about hall of fame numbers that's one thing but as far as who is the top QB TODAY, I don't see how past accomplishments are particularly relevant. Yes, Brady has won multiple championships, but he missed all of last year and put up good but not great numbers last year on a Patriots team that wasn't great. And it's not as though Brees' stats last year were a fluke: he led most categories two years ago and has put up elite stats for the past 4 years.

 

And if we're going by legacy and hall of fame numbers, we might as well argue Brett Favre is one of the top 3 QBs in the league, since not only is he one of the most successful QBs of all time who holds nearly every longevity-based stat, he still put up better numbers than Tom Brady last season.

 

But what you're describing isn't the "top QB of the league," what you're describing is best all-time. I'd take Rivers, Big Ben, Eli, Rogers, Matt Schaub and Tony Romo over the Tom Brady I saw last season. So while Brady is definitely a hall of famer IMO, in no way, shape or form is he the best QB in the league right now.

[Stennick]

Thinking about it Warner is ahead of Brees as well three Super Bowl appearances, two MVP's, a SB win, the top three passing yard games in SB history.

 

Brady (3 SB wins, 50 TD's in a season, MVP award, perfect regular season)

 

Warner (2 MVP awards, 3 Super Bowls, 1 SB win, 3 highest passing games in SB history)

 

Manning (4 MVP Awards, 2 SB's, 1 SB win, more regular season wins than any QB this decade, 49 TD's in a season )

 

Ben (2 Super Bowl wins, a game winning SB drive, youngest QB ever to win two SB's)

 

There could be a strong argument for that being the current QB of the decade list. Honestly when you look at it like that all Brees did was get one SB win. He's go no MVP awards and only one SB appearance. If he comes out and wins another SB this year and can get an MVP award that would put him on the list but right now whats the difference between Brees and Eli Manning besides some passing yards. I'm not saying Brees isn't the better QB but they've accomplished the same amount. Heck Eli went into a game and beat an unbeaten team. He beat a team that had won 20+ games in a row going into that game. Not only did he do it but he drove down the field to do it at the end of the game. I like Drew but his accomplishments are minimal up until his SB win.

[lazorbeak]

Again, you're just talking all-time numbers which in no way reflect current ability.

 

Yes, Eli won a championship and played a great game, but he's never been particularly consistent in putting up numbers the way Brees has. You say Brees hasn't won any MVP awards but he has won what, 3 NFC offensive player of the year awards?

 

And again, Favre has just as many championships and championship appearances as Manning, plus 3 MVPs plus 5 NFC player of the year awards spanning over a decade between them. Clearly he is a top 3 QB based on your logic.

[Stennick]

I'm just talking the last five or ten years. I didn't say who was the best QB as of right now today thats still IMO Manning.

 

What I was saying is that you can't put Brees into that elite category after one championship and two or three excellent offensive seasons.

 

I hate it when the talking heads take one year and make an example out of it. Just like I hate it when they take twenty years ago and pretend like its still relevant today. I think five years is a fair amount of time in sports. That gives you five seasons, different players, different teams faced it gives you a wide view of who excels. Five years isn't too distant to not be relevant and five years isn't too short to say "well the guy had two good passing seasons so he's the best".

 

Brees is good and yeah Brady's stats were down last year but thats after just missing an entire season due to a knee shredding. Palmer has shown you that it takes a season or two for you to get back to full health. I think your under the assumption that being offensive player of the year means you're an elite QB. Drew has put up crazy stats but so has Manning, so did Brady three years ago and again who knows what his stats the last two years would have been if it weren't for a knee shredding. My point is that guys like Bradshaw were considered elite in their day and for good reason. They didn't put up great numbers all the time but they won.

 

In baseball your team can go 0-162 as long as you hit .370, 50HR, 160 RBI's you're going to be considered the best in the game. Brees has put up good offensive numbers and again the guy is top five easy but even with a Super Bowl win I wouldn't put him on Manning's level because Manning has been doing everything Brees has done (and better most of the time) for a decade. Brady again Brady wasn't himself last season this is the season thats going to matter with him those knee shreddings are tough business.

 

To me there is no such thing as an elite QB for one season. To attain something like being called elite you need to be the very best in you're game for an extended period of time. Drew Brees is not elite yet. I like Drew a lot, he's great with the ball and putting up numbers but I'd like to see him do that for a decade or win another SB this year and then he can be talked about on that level.

[lazorbeak]

I'm just talking the last five or ten years. I didn't say who was the best QB as of right now today thats still IMO Manning.

 

Then maybe you shouldn't have introduced the topic by saying Manning and Brady were the best "right now." Since, obviously, that isn't what you meant at all. Best QB today I'm still going with the guy that won the super bowl while leading the league in nearly every stat category. Call me crazy.

 

What I was saying is that you can't put Brees into that elite category after one championship and two or three excellent offensive seasons.

 

I hate it when the talking heads take one year and make an example out of it. Just like I hate it when they take twenty years ago and pretend like its still relevant today. I think five years is a fair amount of time in sports. That gives you five seasons, different players, different teams faced it gives you a wide view of who excels. Five years isn't too distant to not be relevant and five years isn't too short to say "well the guy had two good passing seasons so he's the best".

 

I guess I'd understand your complaints more if Brees' season last year was a fluke, but like I said earlier, it's not. He's averaged 4,300 yards and 29.2 touchdowns over the past 5 years. For comparison, over the same period Manning averaged 4,100 yards a season and 30 TDs. Where I come from, when two players produce at a virtually identical level over a period of several years, we don't arbitrarily declare one is vastly superior to the other. Would I be willing to say they're even? Sure. But to argue that one is "elite" and one isn't when both have the same amount of super bowl wins and have put up almost identical numbers is pretty confusing to me.

 

 

I think your under the assumption that being offensive player of the year means you're an elite QB. Drew has put up crazy stats but so has Manning, so did Brady three years ago and again who knows what his stats the last two years would have been if it weren't for a knee shredding. My point is that guys like Bradshaw were considered elite in their day and for good reason. They didn't put up great numbers all the time but they won.

 

But Brees has won, and put up better numbers than Brady over the past four years (Brady is a guy who just put up ridiculous numbers for a single season, yet you list him as elite based on his other accomplishments), so who cares about the analogy of putting up great stats on a bad team? And yes, I do assume that if you're OP of the year, you're an elite quarterback. The last QBs to do that, in order, were:

 

Drew Brees

Tom Brady

Peyton Manning

Brett Favre

Steve Young

 

Yes, that is elite company. It isn't really an assumption, it's just the way it is. Every QB on that list is or is going to be a hall of famer.

[Stennick]

104.4 4200

 

I didn't say Brees was crap and Manning and Brady were VASTLY better.

 

I said they were better and they are. Brees has put up fantastic numbers I've said that on numerous occasions but he doesn't have the single season, nor the post season success that Brady and Manning have.

 

Brady doesn't have to put up another other number than three Super Bowl wins. Like it or not Super Bowls talk. Bradshaw, Montana, Brady if you win the Super Bowl and you win it a lot then you're considered the best of your generation its the way it works. You play the game to be a champion not to be the best offensive player or defensive player.

 

I've said it time and time again Brees has been very very very good lately but he's been to one SB and won one SB. In those five years you've talked about where Brees and Manning were virtual locks in stats Manning went to two SB's and won one. Not too mention the MVP awards he's complied during that time.

 

Again just MY opinion but call me crazy when I talk about the best I'm going to talk about the guy that has led multiple Super Bowl game winning drives this decade, or I'm going to talk about the guy thats been to multiple SB's and won half the MVP awards for the last decade. Brees is good but he doesn't have the accomplishments aside from offensive stats to go along with what Brady and Manning bring to the table. If he comes out this year and goes to the Super Bowl or makes a deep playoff run and can ad an MVP award to his resume then sure I'd be willing to recognize him on their level.

 

Your under the assumption that all that matters is offensive stats when in reality what matters is what you do in the post season. Call me crazy but I'm taking the guys who have been to and won in the post season not one year but multiple years.

 

Brees is great but so is Phillip Rivers. Rivers was 66 percent cmp percent, Brees was 70, Rivers put up more passing yards in the season, had 2 less INT's and had a 104 rating to Brees' 109.

 

What I'm trying to say is Phillip Rivers put up amazing stats and has for the last several years. Heck his overall QB rating is 4 or 5 points higher than Brees' over their careers. In fact his stats are better than Brady's offensively but I'm not going to pick Phillip Rivers over Tom Brady as the better QB. I wouldn't even say Rivers is better than Brees but stats wise they look like dead locks as well.

 

So which is it do Super Bowls count towards you being elite or not? If they do count then I'm going to go with the guys who have been in and won more of them over Brees. If they DON'T count then you're saying that Phillip Rivers is a better QB than Tom Brady.

 

The truth is somewhere in the middle. Its great to have a QB that can put up those numbers but what about the QB's that have a great running game. Should they not get any credit for being good QB's just because the HB on the team is better than the WR corps? Stats count obviously they count but guys like Rivers and Romo have won nothing and put up good stats that doesn't mean their elite.

 

I've been saying the same thing I'd rank Brees third on the active QB's list when you look at everthing. Team accomplishment, Post season success, regular season success, and Passing Stats. When you take all of that into account over just the last four or five years Drew Brees is the number three QB.

 

Its great that he won a SB and thats a huge accomplishment but if winning the SB makes you the best QB in the league than guys like Ben, Dilfer, and Eli have all been the best QB in the league.

 

Brees is good hell he's been great but if your version of an elite QB is winning one SB in ten years, and being at the top of the league in passing stats then yes he's elite.

 

One Super Bowl win IMO does not make you an elite QB as evidenced by the other names. Being "really good and near the top" in the QB stats doesn't make you elite or Phillip Rivers would be elite. Brees is I'll say it again the third best QB in the league.

[Remianen]

Right now QB wise Brady and Peyton are on a level nobody can touch.

 

The fight for the 3rd QB in the league I would say is Brees, Rivers or Rodgers.

 

The tier right under that right now from what I've seen is Palmer, Romo, Eli, and McNabb.

 

You got a lot of guys with tons of upside Ryan, Flacco, Stafford, Sanchez, Cutler and Vince Young maybe a few others.

 

I guess top three is tough to get in with both Brees and Rivers there but I'd say its a dogfite between the likes of Rodgers, Palmer and maybe Eli or Romo for that five spot. I'm a huge fan of Palmer but the guy is injury prone and each season his numbers dip a little. The kid has a ton of skill and potential I'm just not sure that will be enough sadly.

 

Uh, no, sorry, I can't agree with that first statement.

 

The top two QBs in the league right now (in order) are Peyton and Drew Brees. Peyton only edges Brees because he calls his own plays a lot of the time. Brady is third and his grip on the position is tenuous because he hasn't performed up to the standard he set for himself. Yes, he had a pretty bad team overall last year but he put up his early career numbers with the likes of Deon Branch as #1 receiver. No one is going to put Deon Branch in the same category as even an unmotivated Randy Moss.

 

Palmer is indeed injury prone, but he's a solid starting quarterback. I wouldn't put him in the discussion for top-3 because he hasn't done what tends to exemplify a top-3 QB.

 

Wait what? Drew Brees just led the league in QB Rating and TDs and led his team to a super bowl, and he's not at the same level as Tom Brady? I mean every statistic from last season including the super bowl indicates Drew Brees is your #1 QB coming into this year. Brady's not even top 5 based on last season.

 

Doubt it. I don't tend to judge a quarterback by a single season of stats without qualification. To me, Peyton is still #1 because, as I mentioned, he calls his own plays. That is huge. People who get all dizzy on stats would be fooled into thinking Kyle Orton was an excellent quarterback. Ben has two rings and decent stats but is he a top 5 QB? I don't think so, because his leadership can easily be called into question. As I said, I wouldn't say Drew is 3rd (and especially not FOURTH) but #2 isn't a bad spot to be in.

 

To me, Drew Brees still has to prove that he's not simply a system QB. He wasn't this good in San Diego but once he hooked up with Sean Payton, look out! Peyton, on the other hand, has always been Peyton, since the day he was drafted, regardless of coach or OC. I always root for Drew though because he's the antithesis of the NFL's quarterback template. Just like Sam Mills, Jessie Tuggle, Doug Flutie, and all the others who didn't fit their position's little box, it's always good to see desire completely invalidate "conventional wisdom".

[lazorbeak]

Again just MY opinion but call me crazy when I talk about the best I'm going to talk about the guy that has led multiple Super Bowl game winning drives this decade, or I'm going to talk about the guy thats been to multiple SB's and won half the MVP awards for the last decade. Brees is good but he doesn't have the accomplishments aside from offensive stats to go along with what Brady and Manning bring to the table. If he comes out this year and goes to the Super Bowl or makes a deep playoff run and can ad an MVP award to his resume then sure I'd be willing to recognize him on their level.

 

So basically the fact that Manning won more hardware for identical performance makes him better? Zuh? And if we're going by multiple Super Bowl game winning drives there's this drunken idiot named Pittsburgh that you're ignoring who is a significantly better clutch performer than Manning. Fortunately for Brees, most people who cover the league already recognize him as a top QB, so he has very little to prove to you personally.

 

Brees is great but so is Phillip Rivers. Rivers was 66 percent cmp percent, Brees was 70, Rivers put up more passing yards in the season, had 2 less INT's and had a 104 rating to Brees' 109.

 

What I'm trying to say is Phillip Rivers put up amazing stats and has for the last several years. Heck his overall QB rating is 4 or 5 points higher than Brees' over their careers. In fact his stats are better than Brady's offensively but I'm not going to pick Phillip Rivers over Tom Brady as the better QB. I wouldn't even say Rivers is better than Brees but stats wise they look like dead locks as well.

 

Uh, what? Did you do the sort of data analysis I did when you came up with this? Over the past 4 seasons Rivers has averaged 3700 yards and 26 TDs a game. He's put up all-star stats two years in a row, but that's it. Oh, and he's won zero super bowls. So no, they don't look like "dead locks" under your own criteria!

 

So which is it do Super Bowls count towards you being elite or not? If they do count then I'm going to go with the guys who have been in and won more of them over Brees. If they DON'T count then you're saying that Phillip Rivers is a better QB than Tom Brady.

 

What a fatuous point. Yes, Super Bowls count. Now, why isn't Big Ben an "elite" QB since he's got more rings than Peyton? And yes, Philip Rivers out-performed Brady this past season, that's pretty clear, but it's the only time he's ever done that when Brady actually played. I'd take him over Brady in a mock draft today, but only because he's so much younger than every other top QB.

 

 

Its great that he won a SB and thats a huge accomplishment but if winning the SB makes you the best QB in the league than guys like Ben, Dilfer, and Eli have all been the best QB in the league.

 

The difference of course is that those guys were primarily game managers while Brees is responsible for the majority of his team's success. For more reference, check out the Super Bowls Elway lost (when everything was on him) vs. the two that he won.

 

Brees is good hell he's been great but if your version of an elite QB is winning one SB in ten years, and being at the top of the league in passing stats then yes he's elite.

 

One Super Bowl win IMO does not make you an elite QB as evidenced by the other names. Being "really good and near the top" in the QB stats doesn't make you elite or Phillip Rivers would be elite. Brees is I'll say it again the third best QB in the league.

 

Third best maybe in terms of hall of fame voting or what have you but again, that's not really an indicator of talent. Brees has put up monster stats for the past half-decade that are second only to Manning (Rivers has only produced similar stats for two seasons), and his championship accomplishments over the same period are second only to Ben Roethlisberger.

 

Again, if we're going all-time who's the best among active players, the conversation is different and is pretty much Manning, Brady, and Favre, in that order. Along with Warner, they have all the career stats and at least one championship. But I don't think I'd argue Brady, Favre and Warner are at another level of play "right now."

[lazorbeak]

Uh, no, sorry, I can't agree with that first statement.

 

The top two QBs in the league right now (in order) are Peyton and Drew Brees. Peyton only edges Brees because he calls his own plays a lot of the time. Brady is third and his grip on the position is tenuous because he hasn't performed up to the standard he set for himself. Yes, he had a pretty bad team overall last year but he put up his early career numbers with the likes of Deon Branch as #1 receiver. No one is going to put Deon Branch in the same category as even an unmotivated Randy Moss.

 

My big asterisk on Brady is that he hosted a playoff game and looked horrible. He never found his rhythm against good teams last season and generally looked gun-shy. Luckily for him and the Patriots they still get to play the Dolphins and Bills twice a year.

 

Palmer is indeed injury prone, but he's a solid starting quarterback. I wouldn't put him in the discussion for top-3 because he hasn't done what tends to exemplify a top-3 QB.

 

Yeah Palmer is never going to be the next Dan Marino but he plays for the freaking Bengals and is above average so that automatically makes him their top QB in over a decade.

 

Doubt it. I don't tend to judge a quarterback by a single season of stats without qualification. To me, Peyton is still #1 because, as I mentioned, he calls his own plays. That is huge. People who get all dizzy on stats would be fooled into thinking Kyle Orton was an excellent quarterback. Ben has two rings and decent stats but is he a top 5 QB? I don't think so, because his leadership can easily be called into question. As I said, I wouldn't say Drew is 3rd (and especially not FOURTH) but #2 isn't a bad spot to be in.

 

What stats would people have to look at to think Orton was a top QB??? Not QB Rating or TDs or the Broncos record last season. All of those stats tend to indicate he's above average at best.

 

Really my objection to Stennick's original comment was that Brady and Manning were on "another level." Is Manning better than Brees? Maybe, although he is not particularly clutch. Are they not on the same level? No. One is a 99 and one is a 98, to use the language of John Madden electronic football.

[GatorBait19]

Remi I am not taking anything the media is feeding me.

 

I could careless about what anyone has to say about any of this labor crap. My family has owned a business for years (45 to be exact) and I was alway taught one thing, earn your money. So I don't care that players are crying because they don't get all this league revenue sharing, why.... simple their contracts is the money they get for people coming to the games and watching them.

 

If they fail (Michael Clayton, J. Russell, R. Leaf) they still get paid, you don't see teams getting that money back. Owners take all the risk like with Ron Artest running into the stands, sure Artest got into trouble, but what do you think happened to the Pacers, you don't think they didn't have to pay money to those people? there once once a guy working for my family's company and he made an illegal U-turn and hit and killed a women on a bike. Now even though he made the U-turn and it was his choice, my family got sued for 3 million dollars.

 

Also, who cares if the owners don't show their records, they aren't owned in the stock market so honestly they don't have to show their records. Plus who cares, we know what they charge for all the stuff we buy, do you believe they are struggling? I don't.

 

The players aren't victims, real victims are retired players who are getting benefits. Funny thing about all this is, is why you defend these players, notice not a single old timer has come out and supported them? Bart Starr doesn't even talk about the new age of football

 

Players are just a bunch of cry babies, get over it. Go ahead and talk about how I sound like someone who never made it, I don't care. Personally I think I sound like a business man who understands Business. Because guess what, when the stirke happens Owners aren't going to care as much as you think. this ownership mode they are in, is just fun and games for them, they have real companies they still work with (not all but a good amount) so they will go back to working after this.

 

One last thing, I am shocked that anyone would support the players in this. We are talking about a bunch of millionaires (which 75% are bankrupt by their 4 year retired) crying because they want more money? really you work year round, but honestly you only work for maybe 8 months out of the year. others bust their butts for 300 days out of the year just to make enough to feed their family

 

So go ahead Remi, go off on your own rant, where you cut people down cuz they don't support your idea because it's what you always do

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P.S MSG is an eyesore and so far everyone has agreed

[lazorbeak]

Gator, labor unions don't exist to protect "stars." While it's true that a substantial number of players are millionaires, guess what percentage of owners are multi-millionaires? The league is set up in such a way that you can make no fiscal effort towards winning at all and still make millions of dollars. Is it so absurd that players want to be fairly represented for the massive profits that others are making off of their work?

[Remianen]

Also, who cares if the owners don't show their records, they aren't owned in the stock market so honestly they don't have to show their records. Plus who cares, we know what they charge for all the stuff we buy, do you believe they are struggling? I don't.

 

But the entire reason they wanted to redo the labor agreement was because they said they weren't making any money. If that's the assertion, prove it. The fact of the matter is, a handful of teams are still making money hand over fist but the majority of teams, aren't. THAT'S the issue. But no one wants to come out and say that because the last labor agreement was supposed to help provide the elusive 'parity'. So large market teams couldn't run roughshod over teams like Green Bay merely by outspending them.

 

The players aren't victims, real victims are retired players who are getting benefits. Funny thing about all this is, is why you defend these players, notice not a single old timer has come out and supported them? Bart Starr doesn't even talk about the new age of football

 

Bart Starr and many of the older players talked down about the modern game well before the retired players benefit issue(s) came up. Today's players are 'soft' and 'coddled' and 'overpaid' according to people like Mel Blount and the like. They're right in many cases but that just proves this isn't a 'today' thing revolving around this issue. I'm not defending either side (re-read my post. I castigated both sides for their idiocy), merely pointing out each's faux pas.

 

Players are just a bunch of cry babies, get over it. Go ahead and talk about how I sound like someone who never made it, I don't care. Personally I think I sound like a business man who understands Business. Because guess what, when the stirke happens Owners aren't going to care as much as you think. this ownership mode they are in, is just fun and games for them, they have real companies they still work with (not all but a good amount) so they will go back to working after this.

 

err, project much? A work stoppage would be disastrous for both sides. Don't kid yourself and think the owners don't care or are somehow relishing the prospect of a lockout. Just wait until the fallout from American Needle comes. If the owners don't get the same privilege as the league, they'll be much more willing to negotiate, I wager.

 

One last thing, I am shocked that anyone would support the players in this. We are talking about a bunch of millionaires (which 75% are bankrupt by their 4 year retired) crying because they want more money? really you work year round, but honestly you only work for maybe 8 months out of the year. others bust their butts for 300 days out of the year just to make enough to feed their family

 

Tell me something, how many of those people who 'bust their butts for 300 days out of the year just to make enough to feed their family' risk permanent disability every, oh, 8 seconds while on the job? How many of those people mortgage their future every single minute they're working? Maybe I'm odd but I don't judge a person by how they make their money. I know, crazy! Whether you're a trafficker or a CEO, somebody values your ability enough to pay you to do what you do. I know of strippers who work 4 months out of the year and make more than ENTIRE HOUSEHOLDS. I guess I should hate on them because I work 12 months out of the year (though I earn more)? If someone offered you 2 mil a year to jump rope for 8 hours once a week for 8 months, you'd take it (though I'm sure you're going to say you wouldn't).

 

'Earn your money' is correct, which would suggest to me a bonus system should be in place. However, bonus systems don't allow for static, predictable salary amounts so would work against a cap. Tell me, who pushed hard for a salary cap? The players? Who gave a rookie a record deal before he had ever stepped foot in a pro huddle? The players? Who signs the checks that the players cash? I guess that's the players too, huh? G'head and keep thinking the owners are pristine and angelic and are somehow being held at gunpoint. You also seem to have a faulty memory when it comes to players having to give money back (see: Sanders, Barry and Rogers, Charles) but this isn't about facts, now is it?

 

And I seriously don't see your beef about that lawsuit. Might wanna read up on corporate law (or not, and just stew over it forever). An employee driving recklessly ('illegal u-turn') while in the process of conducting business for the company can be considered an agent of the company in many jurisdictions, making the company liable for their poor judgment. But given the fact that many civil suit awards are tax deductible (or covered by insurance), I don't see the beef. Unless we're talking about a non-corporate entity (SP or similar). And yes, both the Pacers and the Pistons had to pay out for that incident, but it was handled in large part by the league (and several of the cases were outright dismissed, like this one). But again, don't let facts get in the way of your catharsis.

[CQI13]

In the bonus situation, couldn't teams just plan for the highest possible outcome, leaving them with money to spend elsewhere?

[GatorBait19]

But the entire reason they wanted to redo the labor agreement was because they said they weren't making any money. If that's the assertion, prove it. The fact of the matter is, a handful of teams are still making money hand over fist but the majority of teams, aren't. THAT'S the issue. But no one wants to come out and say that because the last labor agreement was supposed to help provide the elusive 'parity'. So large market teams couldn't run roughshod over teams like Green Bay merely by outspending them.

 

 

 

Bart Starr and many of the older players talked down about the modern game well before the retired players benefit issue(s) came up. Today's players are 'soft' and 'coddled' and 'overpaid' according to people like Mel Blount and the like. They're right in many cases but that just proves this isn't a 'today' thing revolving around this issue. I'm not defending either side (re-read my post. I castigated both sides for their idiocy), merely pointing out each's faux pas.

 

 

 

err, project much? A work stoppage would be disastrous for both sides. Don't kid yourself and think the owners don't care or are somehow relishing the prospect of a lockout. Just wait until the fallout from American Needle comes. If the owners don't get the same privilege as the league, they'll be much more willing to negotiate, I wager.

 

 

 

Tell me something, how many of those people who 'bust their butts for 300 days out of the year just to make enough to feed their family' risk permanent disability every, oh, 8 seconds while on the job? How many of those people mortgage their future every single minute they're working? Maybe I'm odd but I don't judge a person by how they make their money. I know, crazy! Whether you're a trafficker or a CEO, somebody values your ability enough to pay you to do what you do. I know of strippers who work 4 months out of the year and make more than ENTIRE HOUSEHOLDS. I guess I should hate on them because I work 12 months out of the year (though I earn more)? If someone offered you 2 mil a year to jump rope for 8 hours once a week for 8 months, you'd take it (though I'm sure you're going to say you wouldn't).

 

'Earn your money' is correct, which would suggest to me a bonus system should be in place. However, bonus systems don't allow for static, predictable salary amounts so would work against a cap. Tell me, who pushed hard for a salary cap? The players? Who gave a rookie a record deal before he had ever stepped foot in a pro huddle? The players? Who signs the checks that the players cash? I guess that's the players too, huh? G'head and keep thinking the owners are pristine and angelic and are somehow being held at gunpoint. You also seem to have a faulty memory when it comes to players having to give money back (see: Sanders, Barry and Rogers, Charles) but this isn't about facts, now is it?

 

And I seriously don't see your beef about that lawsuit. Might wanna read up on corporate law (or not, and just stew over it forever). An employee driving recklessly ('illegal u-turn') while in the process of conducting business for the company can be considered an agent of the company in many jurisdictions, making the company liable for their poor judgment. But given the fact that many civil suit awards are tax deductible (or covered by insurance), I don't see the beef. Unless we're talking about a non-corporate entity (SP or similar). And yes, both the Pacers and the Pistons had to pay out for that incident, but it was handled in large part by the league (and several of the cases were outright dismissed, like this one). But again, don't let facts get in the way of your catharsis.

 

it's funny you would use that word sense I didn't use any form of art

 

 

my memory isn't faulty, you seem to forget there was a reason those players had to give back money. Not because they played bad, but beacause they breached contract. Sanders retired early (remember Williams, Ricky did they same thing, Dolphins wanted their money back, so he came back) Players like Vick and Rogers did things to get them in trouble with the league, which got them suspended

 

coal workers, Fisherman, anyone doing manual labor

 

Lol and I don't have beef with the lawsuit, it was a point to why I side with the owners. This is their business and they take all the responsibility, not the players. Player truly don't have as much responsibility as you think they hold.

 

Case in point, Michael Clayton last year had a horrible season, and a memorable quote he made after a loss was "Nothing I can do, the check is in the bank" that's great

 

and also I don't see how the American Needle case would hurt the owners if they won? they at that point could make slotted wages for coaches and players, and pretty much make the union not matter.

 

And that's great you know strippers