NFL 2020

Status
Not open for further replies.
Little Late to the discussion, but I think the gamepass is somewhat expensive, but if you can and want to afford it, it’s a good service. Most of all it’s very reliable, transparent and also easily cancelled. You get precisely what you pay for, which is fair.
 
ha_rooney said:
Thought this was a parody - she’s been losing sleep over it :lol:

edit - Brady’s left the poor Karen in a really bad place:

Click to expand...


Christ on a bike. Get a grip woman. Was she equally upset, when Gronk used one as a baseball bat a few years ago? That actually put a dent in it.
 
dinostar77 said:
Also a theoretical question for the thread. If Ridgers decided he had enough of the Packers and wanted to add to his SB ring tally. What team would be ideally setup for him to do that next season? Remember theoretical question.
Click to expand...
Someone like the Rams or Saints.
 
Vincent Jackson has been found dead. Legit No.1 wideout for a solid stretch.
 
Was listening to a podcast yesterday and the guys were arguing over which QB you'd pick as a starting GM, knowing that you had that QB as from the start of his career.

Semi consensus was Brady but also votes for Rodgers because he's more talented and also has the longevity, and there were also Mahomes votes, even though you don't know how long he's gonna last just because he's such a one of a kind and special QB.

Very hard to not pick Brady though given you know what he is/was capable of, that you'd get 20+ years out of him without almost any injuries and the mentality he brings to the table.
 
RobinLFC said:
Was listening to a podcast yesterday and the guys were arguing over which QB you'd pick as a starting GM, knowing that you had that QB as from the start of his career.

Semi consensus was Brady but also votes for Rodgers because he's more talented and also has the longevity, and there were also Mahomes votes, even though you don't know how long he's gonna last just because he's such a one of a kind and special QB.

Very hard to not pick Brady though given you know what he is/was capable of, that you'd get 20+ years out of him without almost any injuries and the mentality he brings to the table.
Click to expand...
You'd pick Rodgers. He's a monster.
 
RobinLFC said:
Was listening to a podcast yesterday and the guys were arguing over which QB you'd pick as a starting GM, knowing that you had that QB as from the start of his career.

Semi consensus was Brady but also votes for Rodgers because he's more talented and also has the longevity, and there were also Mahomes votes, even though you don't know how long he's gonna last just because he's such a one of a kind and special QB.

Very hard to not pick Brady though given you know what he is/was capable of, that you'd get 20+ years out of him without almost any injuries and the mentality he brings to the table.
Click to expand...
The point I would argue here is that picking QBs in a vacuum doesn't really make a lot of sense. A lot of QB success is dependent on other factors such as personnel and the coaching staff. If you have a coaching staff that prefers playing 11-on-11, you pick Wilson/Lamar etc. as your QB. If you prefer a field general, you pick Brady/Manning etc. If you prefer someone who can make plays outside of structure and make throws when off platform, you pick Mahomes/Rodgers etc. I'm not too sure there is a QB who is the best possible option in all cases, because coaches do have preferences as to how the game should be played and no QB in the history of the game has been a great scrambler, a classic dropback passer, and a great out-of-structure QB all at the same time. Also, the strengths/weaknesses of the roster generally mean some QBs are more suited to certain rosters.
 
I'd say Roger Staubach fit the three areas you cited, @Rawls; great scrambler, a classic dropback passer, and a great out-of-structure QB all at the same time. Rodgers is probably the modern era version of Staubach, for me he is. Elway and Young were probably quite close to that as well.
 
Rodgers is best quarterback ever. He get's injured slightly more than your average, which would be the only reason to consider anyone else. Young is up there but he missed games too.

Rodgers is the pick in that scenario though. Unless you knew you had a great O-Line, I would listen to a case for Peyton if that was known.
 
MrMarcello said:
I'd say Roger Staubach fit the three areas you cited, @Rawls; great scrambler, a classic dropback passer, and a great out-of-structure QB all at the same time. Rodgers is probably the modern era version of Staubach, for me he is. Elway and Young were probably quite close to that as well.
Click to expand...
I see where you're coming from although I do disagree somewhat. I think what I should have said that there is no QB who is an all-timer in all three aspects. The QBs you listed are all well-rounded QBs who were good in all three phases but I'm not too sure that they were necessarily great in all three phases. Take Rodgers for example: good in the pocket, good outside of the pocket, and good when throwing off platform. I'd argue that he's an all-timer when it comes to being an out-of-structure QB. But I'm not too sure that he's an all-timer in the other two phases. He's a genuinely good pocket QB but if you were picking a pocket QB, you'd definitely pick Brady/Manning before him. Similarly, he's a good scrambler but if I were picking a scrambling QB, I'd definitely put Wilson and Lamar out of the current QBs ahead of him.

I'm not as familiar with Staubach but Elway and Young are again good examples of QBs who were well-rounded. The thing is though that I'm not too sure the majority of people would take Elway and Young before Marino and Montana in a vacuum. Elway and Young may have been well-rounded but you could argue that compared to Marino and Montana, they were jacks-of-all-trade and masters-of-none. And I think that most people would prefer a QB who is an all-timer in one aspect as opposed to a QB who is good across the three phases but is not an all-timer at any of them. But that then brings you back to the original problem which is that no QB is an all-timer in all three phases and that what QB you theoretically pick to start your franchise is dependent on coaching preferences/team personnel.
 
Young was in a vacuum in the West Coast offense.

Had Elway or Marino played under Walsh in the 80s and carried on under Holmgren & Shanahan (the OCs; Seifert - HC) in the 90s they'd have racked up numerous championships and awards and likey regarded as the best ever. So, had Elway played in a vacuum versus a restrictive coach like Reeves, he'd probably have been the perfect QB you cited. He's still, for me, the only QB to literally carry above average sides to multiple SBs (the late 80s Broncos when the AFC was very weak overall).
 
MrMarcello said:
Young was in a vacuum in the West Coast offense.

Had Elway or Marino played under Walsh in the 80s and carried on under Holmgren & Shanahan (the OCs; Seifert - HC) in the 90s they'd have racked up numerous championships and awards and likey regarded as the best ever. So, had Elway played in a vacuum versus a restrictive coach like Reeves, he'd probably have been the perfect QB you cited. He's still, for me, the only QB to literally carry above average sides to multiple SBs (the late 80s Broncos when the AFC was very weak overall).
Click to expand...
No disagreement from me there, just goes to show that no matter how good your QB is, they're still going to need help in order to win SBs.
 
Brady all the way. Rodgers had very limited success considering his potential. Marino :-D can’t be serious
 
Too bad HoF can't be remade. Fame doesn't need to be greatness. You could have the elite hall or something for that. People like Eli and Mark Sanchez, Tebow. They are all iconic and deserve to be in.
 
MrMarcello said:
https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/...ach-team-who-deserves-enshrinement-in-canton/
Pro Football Hall of Fame: Best player on each team who deserves enshrinement in Canton
These guys deserve to have a bronze bust in Canton


Interesting list, some definite worthy names in there. The opening image of a certain #28 who should already be in.
Click to expand...
Herman Moore is oft forgotten when talking about offensive greats that were wasted in Detroit, as he was overshadowed by Barry. Those offenses were beastly on Madden, probably my go-to until Minny got “3-deep”.
 
ob·ses·sion
/əbˈseSHən/

noun
noun: obsession
  1. the state of being obsessed with someone or something.
    "she cared for him with a devotion bordering on obsession"
    • an idea or thought that continually preoccupies or intrudes on a person's mind.
      plural noun: obsessions
      "he was in the grip of an obsession he was powerless to resist"
 
That’s not a bad deal if Wentz plays like he did before his injury in the SB season. A change of team might do him good, similar to Goff.

I’m guessing Philly’s sold on Hurts as their starter then.
 
ha_rooney said:
That’s not a bad deal if Wentz plays like he did before his injury in the SB season. A change of team might do him good, similar to Goff.

I’m guessing Philly’s sold on Hurts as their starter then.
Click to expand...
Goff is a dud.
 
ha_rooney said:
That’s not a bad deal if Wentz plays like he did before his injury in the SB season. A change of team might do him good, similar to Goff.

I’m guessing Philly’s sold on Hurts as their starter then.
Click to expand...


Surely they will Draft a QB at 6?
 
Rado_N said:
Glad Denver wasn’t in for Wentz.

Dare we hope they might actually get Watson?
Click to expand...
I think we are the best dark horse candidate...at least that’s what I’m telling myself. I don’t think there’ll be any real update until April and the draft.
 
Organic Potatoes said:
I think we are the best dark horse candidate...at least that’s what I’m telling myself. I don’t think there’ll be any real update until April and the draft.
Click to expand...
The recent reports all seem to be saying they want to trade for a QB but only for a “clear upgrade” over Lock which is fair enough.

If Paton is willing to go big and bring in Watson and also sign free agent Pat Peterson to help the weak secondary then (depending what we have to give up for Watson in this hypothetical) we could be in decent shape.
 
Happy to have got rid off Wentz , he showed some glimpses after his one crazy season but there was so much negativity around him all the time . I don't think we should take a QB , I would much rather go with Hurts and if it doesn't work then draft one or trade for one in 2022
 
Ayush_reddevil said:
Happy to have got rid off Wentz , he showed some glimpses after his one crazy season but there was so much negativity around him all the time . I don't think we should take a QB , I would much rather go with Hurts and if it doesn't work then draft one or trade for one in 2022
Click to expand...


Justin Fields could drop to six would be hard to pass him up surely.

It's like the Cowboys need Patrick Surtain but if that tight end happens to be there at 10 then you got to take him.
 
lsd said:
Justin Fields could drop to six would be hard to pass him up surely.

It's like the Cowboys need Patrick Surtain but if that tight end happens to be there at 10 then you got to take him.
Click to expand...


I don't think there is much chance of that but I agree if Wilson or fields came down somehow then eagles might be tempted
 
lsd said:
If he is there i think they will take him
Click to expand...
It’s an interesting dilemma if it comes to pass between Hurts and Lance, as they share some similar traits. They’re both good on the run and extending the play, not as a speedster like Lamar or Kyler, but a power runner. Both with questions regarding their passing, though for different reasons.

Some have Lance picked 3-4 ahead of Fields or QBs going 1-4, so who the hell knows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.