Official NFL Discussion Thread

[BHK1978]

Top 10 QB

 

1) Montana

2) Tom Brady

3) Peyton Manning

4) Moon

5) Marino

6) Unitas

7) Elway

8) Favre

9) Brees

10) Dan Fouts

 

Top 10 Running backs all-time to me (not just stats, but overall skills)

 

 

1) Jim Brown

2) Barry Sanders

3) Walter Payton

4) Ricky Williams

5) Bill Sims

6) Bo Jackson

7) LT

8) Marshall Faulk

9) O.J Simpson

10) Marcus Allen

 

Top 10 WR

 

1) Rice

2) Moss

3) Harrison

4) Cris Carter

5) Larry Fitz

6) Tim Brown

7) James Lofton

8) Isaac Bruce

9) T.O

10) Andre Reed

 

Just some food for thought: Bart Starr, Fran Tarkenton, Jim Kelly, Randall Cunningham (If you are going by skills alone this guy would be near the top.), Terry Bradshaw (He did win 4 Super Bowls), Sammy Baugh, Otto Graham, Roger Staubach.

 

And not because I am a Giants fan but I think Phil Simms should be close on the list as well. Maybe not top ten but close. Heck Bill Walsh once said that he thought Simms would have played better than Montana if he was playing on the 49ers.

 

Running Backs wise, I can't believe you left off Thurman Thomas.

[GatorBait19]

Just some food for thought: Bart Starr, Fran Tarkenton, Jim Kelly, Randall Cunningham (If you are going by skills alone this guy would be near the top.), Terry Bradshaw (He did win 4 Super Bowls), Sammy Baugh, Otto Graham, Roger Staubach.

 

And not because I am a Giants fan but I think Phil Simms should be close on the list as well. Maybe not top ten but close. Heck Bill Walsh once said that he thought Simms would have played better than Montana if he was playing on the 49ers.

 

Running Backs wise, I can't believe you left off Thurman Thomas.

 

go look at his numbers, Bradshaw was one of those QB's who was lucky because of all the talent around him. I do like ur other choices, but I wonder how some of the QB's would do in today's age of football.

 

I never liked Thurman.

[PoisonedSuperman]

when Ricky is healthy and is mind is right, there was no one better. Go watch film of him seriously.

 

I wanted to put Lance up there and I almost didn't put Larry up there, but Larry is such a talent that I couldn't leave him off, and when it is all said and done he might be the 2nd best wideout ever.

 

When Ryan Leaf is healthy and his mind is right, he's a great QB as well.

 

LOL.. Just giving you a little business, only disagreements I would have is Ricky being on the list at all and Moon, and Lofton being too high but then again this is subjective.

[BHK1978]

go look at his numbers, Bradshaw was one of those QB's who was lucky because of all the talent around him. I do like ur other choices, but I wonder how some of the QB's would do in today's age of football.

 

I never liked Thurman.

 

The list is subjective much like PoisonedSuperman said and you are not saying your opinion is fact so I can't argue with you. I can see what you are saying about Terry, I personally was never a fan of his and you are right about his stats. However, winning four Super Bowls has to put him in the converstaion one way or the other.

 

I actually like you list and agree with most of it. The one QB that I am really not sure of is Drew. Yes maybe when it is all said and done he would belong on that list but I just can't rank him better than Bart Starr or Roger Staubach at this point.

 

Never liked Thurman Thomas! The Bills are my favorite AFC team so I have a soft spot for Thurman and I truly do believe he is one of the best RB's in the history of the NFL.

[juggaloninjalee]

Just since I am bored I will give my opinion of that list.

 

Top 10 QB

 

1) Montana

2) Tom Brady

3) Peyton Manning

4) Moon

5) Marino

6) Unitas

7) Elway

8) Favre

9) Brees

10) Dan Fouts

 

Top 10 Running backs all-time to me (not just stats, but overall skills)

 

 

1) Jim Brown

2) Barry Sanders

3) Walter Payton

4) Ricky Williams

5) Bill Sims

6) Bo Jackson

7) LT

8) Marshall Faulk

9) O.J Simpson

10) Marcus Allen

 

Top 10 WR

 

1) Rice

2) Moss

3) Harrison

4) Cris Carter

5) Larry Fitz

6) Tim Brown

7) James Lofton

8) Isaac Bruce

9) T.O

10) Andre Reed

 

Your QBs... I would put Marino as #1 personally. Then Manning, Montana, Brady and Elway. After that it gets a little more difficult for me.

 

Your RBs... I think Barry Sanders is hands down #1. Then Walter Payton. Jim Brown 3rd only because he didn't play long enough to be on my all time list. That is why Davis, and Jamal Anderson wouldn't make the list also. Ricky Williams would never touch my list and neither would Bo Jackson. Bo easily could have been on this list if he had a longer career though.

 

Your WRs... Jerry Rice #1, Tim Brown #2, Lynn Swann #3, Cris Carter #4, Michael Irvin #5, Rodney Harrison #6, Sterling Sharpe #7, Randy Moss #8, Andre Rison #9, and Art Monk #10

[GatorBait19]

The list is subjective much like PoisonedSuperman said and you are not saying your opinion is fact so I can't argue with you. I can see what you are saying about Terry, I personally was never a fan of his and you are right about his stats. However, winning four Super Bowls has to put him in the converstaion one way or the other.

 

I actually like you list and agree with most of it. The one QB that I am really not sure of is Drew. Yes maybe when it is all said and done he would belong on that list but I just can't rank him better than Bart Starr or Roger Staubach at this point.

 

Never liked Thurman Thomas! The Bills are my favorite AFC team so I have a soft spot for Thurman and I truly do believe he is one of the best RB's in the history of the NFL.

 

I think Brees does a lot of things right. He is considered easily a top 3 QB in the NFL right now. He helped turn around the aints and made them a team that each year expects to make it to the Superbowl.

 

I love Staubach and I probably did snub him, but to me what modern QB do is more advanced then what QB's of the past did, and with Terry again this also had a lot to do with skills as well as stats and wins. Terry to me was a horrible QB, 2 more TD's then INT, 51.9% throwing, and more years throwing 20 INT's then 20 TD's.

 

Again, I think Terry was one of those QB's who had some of the best talent around him that make people think he was better then he was, but when you can sit here (like I do) and say a Montana, Brady, Manning would have won 4 and a couple more with that talent, it makes u wonder. He was a guy who came in 1st overall I believe and was replaced because Nolan thought the backup was more motivated. Again I think Terry did a great job winning, but he wasn't a good QB, he was a good game manger.

 

Again I am sorry about Thomas, anyone can come in and do this. This is what I see and how I feel about these. some people are going to see other stuff like jugg thinking Barry is the number 1 running back. That is something I could greatly agree with, but Brown had speed and power. Brown had two years where he didn't hit a thousand and each of those years he had 230 rushes or less. Look at Brown's biggest rushing year at 305 rushes and Sanders at 343. Brown had one year of 300 plus rushes and Sanders had 7. Brown also played 14 games to Sanders 16. Brown overall was just the better player. I am not saying Barry isn't in the argument, I just truly think Brown was probably the best player ever to play in the NFL.

[GatorBait19]

When Ryan Leaf is healthy and his mind is right, he's a great QB as well.

 

LOL.. Just giving you a little business, only disagreements I would have is Ricky being on the list at all and Moon, and Lofton being too high but then again this is subjective.

 

yeah, this is just how I see it. Ryan Leaf was just horrible lmao, even when Ricky was messed up I would still take Williams over a right minded Leaf. I am not saying Ricky has the best stats, but when he is on I would rather try and stop a speeding bullet followed by a train.

[Stennick]

The problem with your list GB is that you precede it by saying that its your view of "overall talent", not stats, not championships, not team success. Thats a hard thing to calibrate. A guy like Derek Anderson had a monster year in Cleveland. In fact sports are littered with guys that get hot for a year, two or three. They have great seasons or lead their teams to championships.

 

Either A. These guys are very talented and deserve to be mentioned in any "top talent" list or B they were very fortunate to have the right circumstances in the right situation play out just right for them. How can you tell between the two? The only real way you can tell between the two is longevity. Can this guy put up these championships for several seasons, can he dominate the rest of his position for several years, etc.

 

The truth is anybody that gets to any of the major sports in the United States or for that matter the world. Anybody that gets to the very top is already VERY talented. A guy hitting .200 in the majors is still way more talented than anybody else.

 

Honestly sports isn't so much about talent for the most part. Of course you have your MJ's, your Russells, your Brady's, Elway's, Mannings, Pujols, Ruth's, etc. These guys are obviously head and shoulders above everyone else. The tricky part is figuring out the rest. In my opinion its things like drive, work ethic, hunger, in short its their personality. How bad do they want it?

 

Its too easy to say Ricky Williams was one of the ten most talented Running Backs in history. I disagree with it but its an argument that can be made. The question is what does talent matter if you can't stay healthy, if you can push beyond the rest of the playing field, if you're not hungry enough for a championship. The only true way to measure people are on statistics and championships and honestly championships trump all.

 

When you're talking about the greats you're talking about the guys that have won. Is Montana the greatest pure QB in the game, is Manning better, is Brady better? Does it matter? The guy has won four championships, any sport you play in thats the ultimate goal is to win. Its a sports team so your goal is to be the best TEAM. Phillip Rivers is one of the best QB's around in my opinion but what good does that do him? Manning is regarded as the best pure QB in a generation. He's got ONE championship to show for that. While guys like Big Ben, Brady, etc have several.

 

So I guess in long what I'm saying is although I respect Gator's list and the guy certainly knows his sports and I'm not knocking him or the list I guess what I'm saying is "whats the point"? When it comes to most talented. I'd rather have an argument about who's the greatest not hows the best most pure talented in history.

 

Just my two cents though. Or with the length of this thing my fifteen cents maybe.

[Remianen]

Come on, let's do a real list.

 

Corner

1) Deion

2) Blount

3) Lane

4) Haynes

5) Willie Brown

6) Green

7) Champ

8) Revis

9) C. Woodson

10) Asomougha

 

I'd probably push the old guys down and the more current guys up since the older guys didn't have to play in the powder puff era where DBs weren't allowed to have contact with receivers.

 

Safety

1) Assassin

2) Ronnie Lott

3) Ed Reed

4) Larry Wilson

5) Steve Atwater

6) Carnell Lake

7) Troy Polamalu

8) Willie Wood

9) LeRoy Butler

10) Brian Dawkins / Sean Taylor (tie)

 

Tatum couldn't play in today's game unless it was a Cover 7 or downhill in a Cover 4 where he could erase the TE or crossing receiver. Man, I would love to see an Atwater-Okoye type collision between Tatum and someone like Mark Bavaro. LeRon Landry could supplant Taylor with another Redskin if he'd stop biting on pump fakes and blowing coverages trying to play the ball.

 

 

Personally, there's no way I'd rate Billy Sims or Ricky Williams higher than Earl Campbell. But that's just me, I guess.

[GatorBait19]

The problem with your list GB is that you precede it by saying that its your view of "overall talent", not stats, not championships, not team success. Thats a hard thing to calibrate. A guy like Derek Anderson had a monster year in Cleveland. In fact sports are littered with guys that get hot for a year, two or three. They have great seasons or lead their teams to championships.

 

Either A. These guys are very talented and deserve to be mentioned in any "top talent" list or B they were very fortunate to have the right circumstances in the right situation play out just right for them. How can you tell between the two? The only real way you can tell between the two is longevity. Can this guy put up these championships for several seasons, can he dominate the rest of his position for several years, etc.

 

The truth is anybody that gets to any of the major sports in the United States or for that matter the world. Anybody that gets to the very top is already VERY talented. A guy hitting .200 in the majors is still way more talented than anybody else.

 

Honestly sports isn't so much about talent for the most part. Of course you have your MJ's, your Russells, your Brady's, Elway's, Mannings, Pujols, Ruth's, etc. These guys are obviously head and shoulders above everyone else. The tricky part is figuring out the rest. In my opinion its things like drive, work ethic, hunger, in short its their personality. How bad do they want it?

 

Its too easy to say Ricky Williams was one of the ten most talented Running Backs in history. I disagree with it but its an argument that can be made. The question is what does talent matter if you can't stay healthy, if you can push beyond the rest of the playing field, if you're not hungry enough for a championship. The only true way to measure people are on statistics and championships and honestly championships trump all.

 

When you're talking about the greats you're talking about the guys that have won. Is Montana the greatest pure QB in the game, is Manning better, is Brady better? Does it matter? The guy has won four championships, any sport you play in thats the ultimate goal is to win. Its a sports team so your goal is to be the best TEAM. Phillip Rivers is one of the best QB's around in my opinion but what good does that do him? Manning is regarded as the best pure QB in a generation. He's got ONE championship to show for that. While guys like Big Ben, Brady, etc have several.

 

So I guess in long what I'm saying is although I respect Gator's list and the guy certainly knows his sports and I'm not knocking him or the list I guess what I'm saying is "whats the point"? When it comes to most talented. I'd rather have an argument about who's the greatest not hows the best most pure talented in history.

 

Just my two cents though. Or with the length of this thing my fifteen cents maybe.

 

it wasn't just pure talent, stats, and other things did play factor. I said talent played a heavy factor as well because it does. I love watch Ricky run, I thought what he could do with a ball was wonderful

[GatorBait19]

hmm the Bucs decided to hold their team workouts the same week and at the same place as the the rookie meetings where media would be all around.......... Josh Freeman and Barber are marketing genius lol

 

Also ESPN has been doing the Gruden/Pryor videos and I love how Gruden pretty much tells him "Hey the NFL aint gonna baby you with hugs and gatorade after a first down". Maybe it was just me, but it truly seemed like Pryor was getting upset with how Gruden was acting. I think Pryor might be a bit of a problem in the NFL

[BloodyKnuckles]

If Troy Smith can't be a starter in the NFL, Terrelle Pryor can't even make it as a backup. My hatred of OSU (I'm loving their recent collapse ) makes me biased against both guys, but I can't understand why anyone would think of TP as a future starter in the NFL.

[GatorBait19]

If Troy Smith can't be a starter in the NFL, Terrelle Pryor can't even make it as a backup. My hatred of OSU (I'm loving their recent collapse ) makes me biased against both guys, but I can't understand why anyone would think of TP as a future starter in the NFL.

 

ehhh, big difference. Smith is a small QB at 6'0 where Pryor stands at around 6'6 with a much much better arm.

[BloodyKnuckles]

Oops, my bad. My hatred of OSU makes me forget most of the good things about their players.

 

Still though, I give TP a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding in the NFL. He was an overrated college player with a bad attitude. I consider him to be a poor man's Vince Young.

 

On a kind of unrelated note, am I the only one that hates when people call OSU "The Ohio State"?

[ShaunGBD]

Oops, my bad. My hatred of OSU makes me forget most of the good things about their players.

 

Still though, I give TP a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding in the NFL. He was an overrated college player with a bad attitude. I consider him to be a poor man's Vince Young.

 

On a kind of unrelated note, am I the only one that hates when people call OSU "The Ohio State"?

 

I agree with 3 things you said

 

1)I hate OSU too.

 

2) I don't think he will do well in the Pro at all, VY did well early but I don't think TP will do well at all, won't work hard enough, will fight with teammates.

 

3)I hate when people call it "The Ohio State" probable as much as you.

[Remianen]

I'm putting this here because it fits this thread.

 

Wouldn't that mean in your world Tim Tebow busted in the NFL

 

It's only a matter of time.

 

Yes, because he's already thrown three times as many picks as TDs. Oh wait, no he hasn't! I honestly don't get how people can make a determination on a player's career based on three starts, ignoring the fact that said player has a very respectable rating at his position (82.1) and possesses all the intangibles (you know, the things you can't teach?) that every coach (except Belichick, Caldwell, Payton, and Smith) with a brain would KILL to have in their quarterback.

 

McDufus made a lot of bad moves when he was in charge (Knowshon, trading Peyton Hillis for magic beans, Laurence Maroney) but this was one of the few GOOD moves he made. Besides, it's not like the 2nd rounder they gave to the Ravens is actually panning out for them (Sergio may never play in the NFL).

 

It's odd how people talk about how bright Colt McCoy's future is and then down Tebow when at least Tebow hasn't come close to getting his receivers killed. Yeah, I said it. Leading a receiver over the middle when you're playing a contact happy team like the Steelers (or Ravens) is freakin' STUPID. The only way it could've been worse is if the pass was high. Notice how Brady throws to Welker when they're playing the Steelers (low and close to the body). Look at how Matty Ice threw over the middle to Gonzo and Roddy when they played the Steelers. There's a reason for that.

 

Oh yeah, and James Harrison is right. Well, except about Clay Matthews (tape says the kid showed up all season long). I can't think of a single coach who wouldn't kill to have 11 (or 22) people like him. Freakin' Goodell trying to turn American football into European futbol ("You touched him? RED CARD!"). Figures they'd have former finesse players like Merton Hanks in their back pocket, trying to portray legitimacy. Injuries (concussions being among them) are the cost of doing business. Much like lawsuits for cigarette companies and gun manufacturers.

[TheEdgeOfReason]

McDufus made a lot of bad moves when he was in charge (Knowshon, trading Peyton Hillis for magic beans, Laurence Maroney) but this was one of the few GOOD moves he made. Besides, it's not like the 2nd rounder they gave to the Ravens is actually panning out for them (Sergio may never play in the NFL).

 

That is just terrible reasoning in justifying a trade.

[cappyboy]

 

3)I hate when people call it "The Ohio State" probable as much as you.

 

Well, the reason they do that is because it was actually contested when it was being decided who would be Ohio's state university. There was a two way battle between the school we now know as Ohio State and I believe the other candidate was a teacher's college. So the Buckeyes started calling themselves THE Ohio State pre-emptively to stick it to the teacher college's bid. And they just kept at it once the decision was rendered in their favor. Don't deny it's annoying but at least it makes sense when you have the history behind it.

[ShaunGBD]

Well, the reason they do that is because it was actually contested when it was being decided who would be Ohio's state university. There was a two way battle between the school we now know as Ohio State and I believe the other candidate was a teacher's college. So the Buckeyes started calling themselves THE Ohio State pre-emptively to stick it to the teacher college's bid. And they just kept at it once the decision was rendered in their favor. Don't deny it's annoying but at least it makes sense when you have the history behind it.

 

No, I know the history but OS fans love it, think its the greatest thing ever.

[Remianen]

That is just terrible reasoning in justifying a trade.

 

Terrible reasoning? To date, Tim Tebow has three starts and several series of experience under his belt. Sergio Kindle has ZERO and ZERO (though Ed Dickson and Dennis Pitta have played). If people are going to bash a trade for a possible franchise quarterback, at least consider what was "lost". This wasn't a Herschel Walker (or Eric Dickerson or Marshall Faulk or...) type trade. One team got a potential long term starter at the most valued position in the game. The other team got a pair of tight ends and a hybrid/elephant linebacker who hasn't played a single live down due to injury (and may not ever do so).

 

While Sergio's situation is unfortunate, that doesn't change the fact that, right now, the Broncos got better value from that trade than did the Ravens. Now if Sergio comes back 100% and becomes a beast on par with DeMarcus Ware and Tebow doesn't start fulltime until year 3, the reverse would be true. If that's terrible reasoning, then so be it. The truth isn't always nice.

[TheEdgeOfReason]

You seem to mistaking the outcome with the initial deal. Who is to say that Denver would have drafted Kindle? Just because Denver seemingly got the better end of this deal doesn't make it a good deal for them.

[Remianen]

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-username="TheEdgeOfReason" data-cite="TheEdgeOfReason" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="26529" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>You seem to mistaking the outcome with the initial deal. Who is to say that Denver would have drafted Kindle? Just because Denver seemingly got the better end of this deal doesn't make it a good deal for them.</div></blockquote><p> </p><p> They wouldn't have drafted Kindle. They would've drafted some obscure name that would have everyone scratching their heads (like they did with Alphonso Smith), if history can be trusted for anything. But they filled a position of need with a high character guy who happened to be among the winningest quarterbacks in college football history. A guy with traits you can't teach (unlike throwing mechanics), who is very coachable and excellent in the community. I dunno about you but I can't think of a single GM who would turn down a player like that for a 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round pick. A mature kid who's dealt with far more fame and the perils of the spotlight in college than he's likely to ever see in the pros. How much did the Giants pay for Eli? And before you say it, yes he has a ring but he has a bunch of defensive guys to thank for it (much like Trent Dilfer, come to think of it).</p><p> </p><p> I dunno how you can say getting a guy who is in the frame to be "the franchise" for 3 non-first round picks isn't a good trade (for ANY team). This isn't Blaine Gabbert we're talking about (a one season wonder in college).</p>

[Remianen]

<p>So <a href="http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82101f05/article/asomugha-island-jets-reportedly-talking-with-freeagent-cb?module=HP11_headline_stack" rel="external nofollow">Nnamdi to the Jets, eh</a>? I'm thinkin' that's an upgrade over Antonio "Help me pay my child support" Cromartie. Assuming the deal gets done, that's going to allow Rex to run kitchen sink blitzes on every series, just about.</p><p> </p><p>

And McNabb to the Vikes for a pair of 6th rounders is a damn good deal as well. That is, assuming the Falcons don't steal Sidney Rice.</p><p> </p><p>

Jeez, just thinking about that trio at wideout for the Falcons (Roddy, Rice, and Julio Jones), with Matty Ice slinging it to them is ridiculous. Just the thought of Roddy White in the slot running 6s and 7s, all up in the safety's face while Jones & Rice devour corners on deep routes, is unfathomable. And that doesn't even factor in Gonzo.</p><p> </p><p>

This is chaotic and awesome at the same time!</p>

[jwt13]

Mcnabb can go I just hope we start the young guy instead of Grossman. We also will most likely get holmes and with Moss staying longer and Hankerson at wideouts. Then if Ryan The Train Torrain runs like he did last year, and the Defense looking pretty good. I hope this is the year Skins get back on track. Although this is what we've been saying for 13+ years now so...

[Wallbanger]

If McNabb is willing to take the pay cut, it is indeed a good deal. I do think we'll end up losing Rice which will have us desperate to replace him, otherwise we'll just see Ds stack the box on us all game long again. Who makes sense to go after in a scenario like that?