Jace, Extat Posted January 22, 2019 Author Share Posted January 22, 2019 You literally said "couldn't happen to a more deserving team." Indicating that they "deserved" it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 5 hours ago, Jace, Basilissa said: I understand that this is the typical thinking, 'they still had opportunities...' and literally every other time I've ever watched a football game I would agree. I don't think I've ever seriously blamed a single call for deciding a game, in fact I normally ridicule unmercifully anyone I see doing so. But this is different. The cut and dry nature of the play, the fact that the DB never once looked anywhere but at the head of the receiver, and the fact that the game is over if the rules are applied. There was absolutely nothing subjective about this situation. It is no different than if the Saints had completed the pass for that first down but the refs just spotted the ball back at the previous LOS and declared 4th down with no explanation. It wasn't 'bad calls happen' like the Chiefs 'roughing' Brady, it was a clear and obvious violation of the rules that 35 million people all saw and agreed upon. I've never said this before because I've never seen it happen before, but it's a little much to ask a team to go win the game after you take their win away. I also don't think you can really quantify how deflating it is to get gut-punched like that. It's tough to rebound and finish the game strong after you watched victory get ripped from you fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 57 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said: You literally said "couldn't happen to a more deserving team." Indicating that they "deserved" it. That game is a sore spot for Vikings fans. Everyone references the missed kick in 98, but honestly that loss to the Saints was more painful to experience. I know for myself it was the last time I was truly, fully emotionally invested in a sports game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted January 22, 2019 Share Posted January 22, 2019 I’ve got a few thoughts to get off of my chest before my vacation starts. First, there have been some hilarious Brady stats floating around. Tom Brady is about to appear in his ninth Owl. He’s only played eight road playoff games. That’s mind boggling. Also, now Mark Sanchez can no longer claim that he’s won more road playoff games than Brady. That’s just hilarious. And lastly, Brady completed three 3rd and 10 plays on the final drive of the AFC Championship. Ryan Tannehill completed three 3rd and 10 plays over the course of the entire 2018 season. Second, the QBs that lost. Brees-Mahomes was the matchup I wanted, but it’s not to be. I heard a comment today from an analysts I respect I can’t tell if his point is valid. He was basically questioning if Brees should be considered an all-time great. Brees does have several records and a title, but those records are a byproduct of a system that gets easy yards in a pass friendly era. Furthermore, Brees has never been considered the best QB of his time and has never won a MVP (Mahomes should get it this year). You can’t say that about the other guys we associate with being among the best to ever play. So, is his point valid, that Brees is great, but not an all-time great? With regards to Mahomes, people can’t help but compare his season to Marino’s 1984 season. Marino in his second year threw for 48 TDs and 5,000 yards while Mahomes in his second year threw for 50 TDs and 5,000 yards. Both won the MVP (Mahomes is a lock) and both made deep playoff runs. Sadly, Marino never had a season that matched or exceeded his sophomore performance, and many are speculating that the same thing will happen to Mahomes. It’s easy to brush such comments aside, but there could be some truth to them. Mahomes is as good an arm talent as I’ve ever seen, but you can’t forget that his supporting cast was amazing. His offensive line ranked first in efficiency. He is surrounded by great weapons, and specifically, he has the best game breaker I’ve seen since possibly Moss. Once it comes time to pay everyone, will this all fall apart? I hope not, but it is a real possibility. All that said, Mahomes is always going to be fun to watch. He’s easily the most fun revelation since the pre-Durant Warriors, when they were down by 20 with five minutes left to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nictarion Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Brees is absolutely an all time great. It’s silly to suggest otherwise. You can talk about the system all you want, but most of the greats had top notch coaches (Brady/Belichick, Montana/Walsh, etc). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 I think it's reasonable to consider Brees might not be as good as some of the most amazing QBs in recent times, but I think it's also ridiculous to think given his longevity, performance and playoff success that he'll not be in. QBs in general get a lot of leeway, and he's one of the most prolific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 41 minutes ago, Nictarion said: Brees is absolutely an all time great. It’s silly to suggest otherwise. You can talk about the system all you want, but most of the greats had top notch coaches (Brady/Belichick, Montana/Walsh, etc). 38 minutes ago, Kalbear said: I think it's reasonable to consider Brees might not be as good as some of the most amazing QBs in recent times, but I think it's also ridiculous to think given his longevity, performance and playoff success that he'll not be in. QBs in general get a lot of leeway, and he's one of the most prolific. He's definitely a Hall of Famer ( I mean fuck, they're gonna let bums like Eli and Rivers in), but he's not an All Time Great. Probably my biggest gripe with the wonderful Mike Florio is that some insanity causes him to contend Brees is top 5 all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMC Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 minute ago, Jace, Basilissa said: He's definitely a Hall of Famer ( I mean fuck, they're gonna let bums like Eli and Rivers in), but he's not an All Time Great. Probably my biggest gripe with the wonderful Mike Florio is that some insanity causes him to contend Brees is top 5 all time. This entirely depends on one's own definition of what "all-time great" means. But it's not really up for debate that Brees is a Hall of Famer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 At least for me, when I think of all-time great I think of one or two of the QBs in their time playing that you'd consider the best. So in the 80s, I'd say it's Marino and Montana, or maybe Elway if you're feeling charitable. The 90s is probably Favre, as much as I hate to say it, or Aikman or Young. The 2000s is Peyton and later Brady, the 2010s Brady, and maybe Rodgers or Wilson. In none of those years would I think of Brees as one of the two best QBs. He's more like Jim Kelly - someone who was very good in the time, but wasn't as good as the bests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, DMC said: This entirely depends on one's own definition of what "all-time great" means. But it's not really up for debate that Brees is a Hall of Famer. There is Jace's definition, and there are incorrect opinions. Guy is a first ballot HoF'er, no doubt. And unlike Brian Urlacher it won't be a goddamn joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unJon Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 48 minutes ago, Kalbear said: At least for me, when I think of all-time great I think of one or two of the QBs in their time playing that you'd consider the best. So in the 80s, I'd say it's Marino and Montana, or maybe Elway if you're feeling charitable. The 90s is probably Favre, as much as I hate to say it, or Aikman or Young. The 2000s is Peyton and later Brady, the 2010s Brady, and maybe Rodgers or Wilson. In none of those years would I think of Brees as one of the two best QBs. He's more like Jim Kelly - someone who was very good in the time, but wasn't as good as the bests. You had me until Wilson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Altherion Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 2 hours ago, Tywin et al. said: With regards to Mahomes, people can’t help but compare his season to Marino’s 1984 season. Marino in his second year threw for 48 TDs and 5,000 yards while Mahomes in his second year threw for 50 TDs and 5,000 yards. Both won the MVP (Mahomes is a lock) and both made deep playoff runs. Sadly, Marino never had a season that matched or exceeded his sophomore performance, and many are speculating that the same thing will happen to Mahomes. It’s easy to brush such comments aside, but there could be some truth to them. Mahomes is as good an arm talent as I’ve ever seen, but you can’t forget that his supporting cast was amazing. His offensive line ranked first in efficiency. He is surrounded by great weapons, and specifically, he has the best game breaker I’ve seen since possibly Moss. Once it comes time to pay everyone, will this all fall apart? I hope not, but it is a real possibility. It depends on how much money he asks for. One of the things that makes Brady great is that he was never paid as much as he would be worth on an open market. For example, in 2018, Brady made roughly three-quarters of the salary of, say, Kirk Cousins. Even given the fact that Brady has (arguably) declined somewhat due to age, this is patently absurd. If Mahomes asks for, say, 25% more money than Cousins currently gets, the Chiefs will struggle to pay everyone -- and note that this still significantly overvalues Cousins, but the latter makes for good a benchmark of what desperate teams are willing to pay. All of that said, the Chiefs have one more year to get things right and they have an obvious area that needs improvement: the entire defense. If their defense can be upgraded from terrible to mediocre, Mahomes won't need an MVP-level performance in nearly every game just to get to 12-4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 1 minute ago, unJon said: You had me until Wilson. Heh. I don't think he's the best of the 2010s, mind you. I'm not sure Rodgers is either though - while he looks amazing quite often, his longevity has been shit, and he's never had one of those years that seemed to just take over the league like Brady did in 2007 or Peyton did in his first year with the Broncos. Heck, even Brady has often not been dominant in the 2010s, but he's been good enough that it's hard to say you'd pick anyone else, especially over that time period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briantw Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Isn't a Hall of Famer pretty much by definition an all-time great? Like, isn't that what the fucking Hall of Fame exists for...to showcase the all-time greats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalbear Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Just now, briantw said: Isn't a Hall of Famer pretty much by definition an all-time great? Like, isn't that what the fucking Hall of Fame exists for...to showcase the all-time greats? Not really. By definition it's for the people who were all-time famous. Not necessarily great. This is one of the reasons why people like Bradshaw are a lock, but Art Monk wasn't. Warren Moon is in the HoF, but I don't think anyone would consider him one of the all-time greats. Nor was Terrell Davis. Most of the time these are pretty well synonymous, but there are some that are on the edge, like, well, Jim Kelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 Brees is 80% cooked, he'll look like Corpse Manning by the end of next year. Meanwhile, what if the Saints are on All or Nothing? After the wet fart follow ups to the debut season that would be appointment streaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 16 hours ago, Kalbear said: Not really. By definition it's for the people who were all-time famous. Not necessarily great. This is one of the reasons why people like Bradshaw are a lock, but Art Monk wasn't. Warren Moon is in the HoF, but I don't think anyone would consider him one of the all-time greats. Nor was Terrell Davis. Most of the time these are pretty well synonymous, but there are some that are on the edge, like, well, Jim Kelly. Joe Namath, he of the 50.1% career completion percentage, 65.5 career passer rating, 173-220 TD-INT ratio, and 27K career passing yards is in the Hall of Fame. Why? Because he guaranteed the Jets would upset the Colts in Super Bowl III and that's exactly what happened. That's really all that needs to be said about who gets into the Hall of Fame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jace, Extat Posted January 23, 2019 Author Share Posted January 23, 2019 4 minutes ago, Fez said: Joe Namath, he of the 50.1% career completion percentage, 65.5 career passer rating, 173-220 TD-INT ratio, and 27K career passing yards is in the Hall of Fame. Why? Because he guaranteed the Jets would upset the Colts in Super Bowl III and that's exactly what happened. That's really all that needs to be said about who gets into the Hall of Fame. You left out "sub .500 record as a starter". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cas Stark Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 Where does wearing a fur coat come in into the equation? Didn't he also play drunk, he should get some extra points for that, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez Posted January 23, 2019 Share Posted January 23, 2019 49 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said: You left out "sub .500 record as a starter". I didn't want to laud his achievements too much. 32 minutes ago, Cas Stark said: Where does wearing a fur coat come in into the equation? Didn't he also play drunk, he should get some extra points for that, no? It's all combined into the Swagger Index(R), which is a modifier added to the percentage score of how many members of the selection committee voted in favor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.