Jim Caldwell out master-minded Chuck Pagano yesterday in the closing minutes of the Lions / Colts game ...
When this happens you should be banned from coaching in the NFL.
That is what I was thinking. I really think it would be beneficial for coaches with poor clock management skills to run 2 minute drills on Madden over and over.
0
Options
F Me In The Brain
this knows everybody from other commets Posts: 30,685
It appears the Panthers started a human pinata in the 2nd half ...
some of those guys paychecks are going to be a little lighter next week
I need to see it in slow mo but looks like he lead with a shoulder on that hit. I don't like seeing players get hurt but QB's now are such pussies as a whole. Brady and Manning were the worst in that regards and is why in my opinion neither can ever be considered the greatest of all time. Top 5 ever, sure. But they didn't endure the legal pounding Montana took.
Oh stop it with your homerism. Someday, even niner fans are going to have to accept the fact that Brady is better than montana. It is just a fact.
Jim Kelly couldn't carry Joe Montana's jock.
Dumb
Not Dumb. Using your logic, Brady deserves more credit than Montana for leading his team to 6 SBs. This thinking asserts that there is value is getting to SBs and losing. Jim Kelly got to 4 SBs, but was never good enough to win any of them. Jim Kelly, credit him as much as you like for getting to 4 SBs, could not carry Joe Montana's (he of the 4/4 SB winning appearances) jock. Brady gets 4? In my opinion he will then have surpassed Montana. Until then? He just fucks hotter/richer women and balls like a champ. Not better than Joe Cool.
It appears the Panthers started a human pinata in the 2nd half ...
some of those guys paychecks are going to be a little lighter next week
I need to see it in slow mo but looks like he lead with a shoulder on that hit. I don't like seeing players get hurt but QB's now are such pussies as a whole. Brady and Manning were the worst in that regards and is why in my opinion neither can ever be considered the greatest of all time. Top 5 ever, sure. But they didn't endure the legal pounding Montana took.
Oh stop it with your homerism. Someday, even niner fans are going to have to accept the fact that Brady is better than montana. It is just a fact.
Jim Kelly couldn't carry Joe Montana's jock.
Dumb
Not Dumb. Using your logic, Brady deserves more credit than Montana for leading his team to 6 SBs. This thinking asserts that there is value is getting to SBs and losing. Jim Kelly got to 4 SBs, but was never good enough to win any of them. Jim Kelly, credit him as much as you like for getting to 4 SBs, could not carry Joe Montana's (he of the 4/4 SB winning appearances) jock. Brady gets 4? In my opinion he will then have surpassed Montana. Until then? He just fucks hotter/richer women and balls like a champ. Not better than Joe Cool.
Montana's wife was hot back in the day.
judging QBs by Super Bowl appearances or Super Bowl wins is just too simplistic. Marino never won one and he was one of the best. Doug Williams, Mark Rypien and Brad Johnson won titles and they were average or worse. Jim Kelly didn't become a worse QB because Scott Norwood missed a field goal.
Personally I think Brady is better than Montana. and that hurts because i dislike the man and the fact that he and his team cheats.
I'm not claiming Kelly is better than montana. To say he couldn't hold his jock though, well, it's just silly.
Fair enough....I put Winners in a different category than those who do not win in the clutch. Getting outplayed by Jeff Hostetler is not a free pass to say that Wide Right was the reason they lost the game. (We know it was the last reason.)
It appears the Panthers started a human pinata in the 2nd half ...
some of those guys paychecks are going to be a little lighter next week
I need to see it in slow mo but looks like he lead with a shoulder on that hit. I don't like seeing players get hurt but QB's now are such pussies as a whole. Brady and Manning were the worst in that regards and is why in my opinion neither can ever be considered the greatest of all time. Top 5 ever, sure. But they didn't endure the legal pounding Montana took.
Oh stop it with your homerism. Someday, even niner fans are going to have to accept the fact that Brady is better than montana. It is just a fact.
Jim Kelly couldn't carry Joe Montana's jock.
Dumb
Not Dumb. Using your logic, Brady deserves more credit than Montana for leading his team to 6 SBs. This thinking asserts that there is value is getting to SBs and losing. Jim Kelly got to 4 SBs, but was never good enough to win any of them. Jim Kelly, credit him as much as you like for getting to 4 SBs, could not carry Joe Montana's (he of the 4/4 SB winning appearances) jock. Brady gets 4? In my opinion he will then have surpassed Montana. Until then? He just fucks hotter/richer women and balls like a champ. Not better than Joe Cool.
It appears the Panthers started a human pinata in the 2nd half ...
some of those guys paychecks are going to be a little lighter next week
I need to see it in slow mo but looks like he lead with a shoulder on that hit. I don't like seeing players get hurt but QB's now are such pussies as a whole. Brady and Manning were the worst in that regards and is why in my opinion neither can ever be considered the greatest of all time. Top 5 ever, sure. But they didn't endure the legal pounding Montana took.
Oh stop it with your homerism. Someday, even niner fans are going to have to accept the fact that Brady is better than montana. It is just a fact.
Jim Kelly couldn't carry Joe Montana's jock.
Dumb
Not Dumb. Using your logic, Brady deserves more credit than Montana for leading his team to 6 SBs. This thinking asserts that there is value is getting to SBs and losing. Jim Kelly got to 4 SBs, but was never good enough to win any of them. Jim Kelly, credit him as much as you like for getting to 4 SBs, could not carry Joe Montana's (he of the 4/4 SB winning appearances) jock. Brady gets 4? In my opinion he will then have surpassed Montana. Until then? He just fucks hotter/richer women and balls like a champ. Not better than Joe Cool.
I think his logic is that Super Bowl appearances could be used a good tie-breaker if two QBs have the same amount of victories. Like, I'd consider Brady at 4-2 to be more impressive than Montana at 4-0. Or John Elway at 2-3 is more impressive than Eli Manning at 2-0.
Given multiple appearances with equal number of victories, undefeated should always be more impressive.
So Eli is better than elway?
The whole world will be different soon... - EV
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
Given multiple appearances with equal number of victories, undefeated should always be more impressive.
I completely disagree. You don't just appear in the championship through a random drawing. You earn your way there and it's tough to do it.
I once saw an e-mail in Bill Simmons' mailbag that I found interesting. The e-mailer noted that, for legacy reasons, a player/team is almost better off not making the playoffs (or Super Bowl) than getting there and losing. The e-mailer, like myself, disagreed with this. But from the perspective of the media, and some fans (like yourself), I see what he means. Take Jim Plunkett for example. He's 8-2 in the playoffs. Well that means he only got his team to the playoffs 4 times. All his other seasons were a wash. So is he better than Peyton Manning who's 14-13 in the playoffs? That record means that Manning has led his team to the playoffs 15 times. But, like Simmons' e-mailer said, it seems that being consistently good enough to make the playoffs and great once in a while to win the Super Bowl isn't as good for your reputation as being great enough once or twice to win the Super Bowl and shitty all the other times. You lose in week 17 to miss the playoffs, nobody remembers. You lose in the conference championship, you're a choker. Weird.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
It appears the Panthers started a human pinata in the 2nd half ...
some of those guys paychecks are going to be a little lighter next week
I need to see it in slow mo but looks like he lead with a shoulder on that hit. I don't like seeing players get hurt but QB's now are such pussies as a whole. Brady and Manning were the worst in that regards and is why in my opinion neither can ever be considered the greatest of all time. Top 5 ever, sure. But they didn't endure the legal pounding Montana took.
Oh stop it with your homerism. Someday, even niner fans are going to have to accept the fact that Brady is better than montana. It is just a fact.
Jim Kelly couldn't carry Joe Montana's jock.
Dumb
Not Dumb. Using your logic, Brady deserves more credit than Montana for leading his team to 6 SBs. This thinking asserts that there is value is getting to SBs and losing. Jim Kelly got to 4 SBs, but was never good enough to win any of them. Jim Kelly, credit him as much as you like for getting to 4 SBs, could not carry Joe Montana's (he of the 4/4 SB winning appearances) jock. Brady gets 4? In my opinion he will then have surpassed Montana. Until then? He just fucks hotter/richer women and balls like a champ. Not better than Joe Cool.
Um, Brady has 4.
OK. Dumb. (My post) I meant when he wins number 5 he will have surpassed Montana.
The love he receives is the love that is saved
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,361
Usually when a team loses their starting qb they'd be lucky to be .500. But when you don't lose a step. Does that devalue Brady some?
It does but in all fairness Steve Bono went 5-1 the year both Montana and Young went down. Young was a HOF'er and his success shouldn't have any bearing on Montana but Bono was a journeyman that had 1 decent season beyond those 5 games.
Tom Brady & Donald Trump, BFF's Fuckus rules all Rob Seattle
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
I'd say Brady is better as evidenced by what he accomplished with not being surrounded by marquee players, except the moss years, but more markedly when starters on both sides of the ball were devastated by injuries. And that success is not just a reflection on Brady but the organization in general, coaching staff, chosen 2nd and 3rd stringers, scouting, etc.
Usually when a team loses their starting qb they'd be lucky to be .500. But when you don't lose a step. Does that devalue Brady some?
I don't really think so. It's definitely impressive for Belichick and the franchise to win without him. But winning games in September this year, or the 11 games they won in 2008 with Cassel (against an all-time weak-ass schedule...and trust me I know....my crappy Dolphins won the division that year) is one thing. But to win playoff games is another. They'd need Brady for that.
A good comparison for that argument could be the 1993 vs. 1994 Chicago Bulls. In 1993, with Jordan, they won 57 games and won the title. In 1994, without Jordan, they won 55 games (seemingly devaluing Jordan as the regular season was happening), but they lost in the second round of the playoffs when the going got tough.
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Usually when a team loses their starting qb they'd be lucky to be .500. But when you don't lose a step. Does that devalue Brady some?
I don't really think so. It's definitely impressive for Belichick and the franchise to win without him. But winning games in September this year, or the 11 games they won in 2008 with Cassel (against an all-time weak-ass schedule...and trust me I know....my crappy Dolphins won the division that year) is one thing. But to win playoff games is another. They'd need Brady for that.
A good comparison for that argument could be the 1993 vs. 1994 Chicago Bulls. In 1993, with Jordan, they won 57 games and won the title. In 1994, without Jordan, they won 55 games (seemingly devaluing Jordan as the regular season was happening), but they lost in the second round of the playoffs when the going got tough.
I was about to make the Jordan comparison. Maybe he's the final piece. But you look at Peyton when he was healthy. And the Colts were horrible without him. But great coaching definitely helps.
I miss igotid88
0
Options
The Juggler
Behind that bush over there. Posts: 47,361
I'd say organizational management. Not many weak links. Your starting QB can go down and you can still get a record that should get you in the playoffs. Unlike the Colts, where when Manning goes down the rest of the organization is exposed as incompetent. Brady doesn't have to pull all the team's weight, just a small fraction of it.
If Luck goes down, the Colts will be battling the Rams for the #1 pick
(oh wait, the Rams traded all their picks to the Colt's rivals for a practice team QB)
I'd say Brady is better as evidenced by what he accomplished with not being surrounded by marquee players, except the moss years, but more markedly when starters on both sides of the ball were devastated by injuries. And that success is not just a reflection on Brady but the organization in general, coaching staff, chosen 2nd and 3rd stringers, scouting, etc.
Overall it's pretty tough to compare QB's from different eras.
Alright, alright, alright!
Tom O. "I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer
Comments
Using your logic, Brady deserves more credit than Montana for leading his team to 6 SBs. This thinking asserts that there is value is getting to SBs and losing. Jim Kelly got to 4 SBs, but was never good enough to win any of them.
Jim Kelly, credit him as much as you like for getting to 4 SBs, could not carry Joe Montana's (he of the 4/4 SB winning appearances) jock.
Brady gets 4? In my opinion he will then have surpassed Montana. Until then? He just fucks hotter/richer women and balls like a champ. Not better than Joe Cool.
judging QBs by Super Bowl appearances or Super Bowl wins is just too simplistic. Marino never won one and he was one of the best. Doug Williams, Mark Rypien and Brad Johnson won titles and they were average or worse. Jim Kelly didn't become a worse QB because Scott Norwood missed a field goal.
Personally I think Brady is better than Montana. and that hurts because i dislike the man and the fact that he and his team cheats.
we will find a way, we will find our place
Getting outplayed by Jeff Hostetler is not a free pass to say that Wide Right was the reason they lost the game. (We know it was the last reason.)
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
RED ROCKS 6-19-95
AUGUSTA 9-26-96
MANSFIELD 9-15-98
BOSTON 9-29-04
BOSTON 5-25-06
MANSFIELD 6-30-08
EV SOLO BOSTON 8-01-08
BOSTON 5-17-10
EV SOLO BOSTON 6-16-11
PJ20 9-3-11
PJ20 9-4-11
WRIGLEY 7-19-13
WORCESTER 10-15-13
WORCESTER 10-16-13
HARTFORD 10-25-13
I once saw an e-mail in Bill Simmons' mailbag that I found interesting. The e-mailer noted that, for legacy reasons, a player/team is almost better off not making the playoffs (or Super Bowl) than getting there and losing. The e-mailer, like myself, disagreed with this. But from the perspective of the media, and some fans (like yourself), I see what he means. Take Jim Plunkett for example. He's 8-2 in the playoffs. Well that means he only got his team to the playoffs 4 times. All his other seasons were a wash. So is he better than Peyton Manning who's 14-13 in the playoffs? That record means that Manning has led his team to the playoffs 15 times. But, like Simmons' e-mailer said, it seems that being consistently good enough to make the playoffs and great once in a while to win the Super Bowl isn't as good for your reputation as being great enough once or twice to win the Super Bowl and shitty all the other times. You lose in week 17 to miss the playoffs, nobody remembers. You lose in the conference championship, you're a choker. Weird.
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
But yes, Eli has a more impressive Super Bowl record than Elway.
Eli 2-0 1.000
Elway 2-3 0.400
http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/17531162/cleveland-browns-qb-robert-griffin-iii-injured-reserve-shoulder-injury
8/28/98- Camden, NJ
10/31/09- Philly
5/21/10- NYC
9/2/12- Philly, PA
7/19/13- Wrigley
10/19/13- Brooklyn, NY
10/21/13- Philly, PA
10/22/13- Philly, PA
10/27/13- Baltimore, MD
Tres Mts.- 3/23/11- Philly
Eddie Vedder- 6/25/11- Philly
Fuckus rules all
Rob
Seattle
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
A good comparison for that argument could be the 1993 vs. 1994 Chicago Bulls. In 1993, with Jordan, they won 57 games and won the title. In 1994, without Jordan, they won 55 games (seemingly devaluing Jordan as the regular season was happening), but they lost in the second round of the playoffs when the going got tough.
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
I need :face_palm: guy. and
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Vegas 93, Vegas 98, Vegas 00 (10 year show), Vegas 03, Vegas 06
VIC 07
EV LA1 08
Seattle1 09, Seattle2 09, Salt Lake 09, LA4 09
Columbus 10
EV LA 11
Vancouver 11
Missoula 12
Portland 13, Spokane 13
St. Paul 14, Denver 14
Therein lies your answer, my friend.
If Luck goes down, the Colts will be battling the Rams for the #1 pick
(oh wait, the Rams traded all their picks to the Colt's rivals for a practice team QB)
Tom O.
"I never had any friends later on like the ones I had when I was twelve. Jesus, does anyone?"
-The Writer