|
|
Post by sdm3 on Dec 11, 2020 18:47:29 GMT
Sorry, got their names wrong. Did Edelman or Gronk play in the two Super Bowls that Brady won with this Hogan fellow? Gronk didn't play in SB 51, where they came back to win from down 25 late in the 3rd quarter. Edelman played in SB 51 and 53. Brady threw for 505 yds and 3 TDs (128 yds and 1 TD to Hogan!) in Edelman's absence in SB 52. So I guess Edelman is actually the reason Brady was great? Where are we going here? Why is that relevant? You said "Brady won two Super Bowls with Chris Hogan as a starting WR." They didn't win that game, so throw it out of the discussion. And I agree that Brady definitely should have won that game with his performance, but those are the terms you set. Two Super Bowl wins with Chris Hogan. Got it. Edit: Just noticed that you actually said "Brady went to three Super Bowls and won two of them..." My bad on that one. The point is that Brady was hardly suffering, forced to use the likes of Hogan. He had Edelman and Amendola in 51; James White was targeted 16 times for 110 yards and a TD out of the backfield! It's not like the guy was making Hogan the focal point of the offense. He had both Gronk and Edelman in 53. Gronk had the biggest catch of the game and Edelman won Super Bowl MVP. Yeah, poor Brady winning Super Bowls while having to make do with Chris Hogan.  The whole idea is "who can win with no help?" You cite Brady's two Super Bowl wins with Hogan as if he was forced to throw to Hogan and a bunch of practice dummies!
|
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Dec 11, 2020 18:55:50 GMT
A lot of this depends on what era we are playing in. There was a time when the running back was the most important player on the team and now the running back is just about the least important of this grouping of 'skills players.
|
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on Dec 11, 2020 19:02:59 GMT
Tom Brady went to three Super Bowls and won two of them with Chris Hogan as a starting receiver. He also had some guys named Plonkowski and Endleman or something. And a coach named Belicheck. 
|
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Dec 11, 2020 19:10:17 GMT
A lot of this depends on what era we are playing in. There was a time when the running back was the most important player on the team and now the running back is just about the least important of this grouping of 'skills players. True, but Walter Payton and Barry Sanders become more important when your QBs are Tebow and JaMarcus Russell while Brady might not have to rely on Trent Richardson. A good coach plays to the team’s strengths. A bad coach has Carson Wentz drop back 50 times a game when his top targets are a washed up Alshon Jeffrey and some rookies and practice squad guys. |
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on Dec 11, 2020 19:17:16 GMT
A lot of this depends on what era we are playing in. There was a time when the running back was the most important player on the team and now the running back is just about the least important of this grouping of 'skills players. True, but Walter Payton and Barry Sanders become more important when your QBs are Tebow and JaMarcus Russell while Brady might not have to rely on Trent Richardson. A good coach plays to the team’s strengths. A bad coach has Carson Wentz drop back 50 times a game when his top targets are a washed up Alshon Jeffrey and some rookies and practice squad guys. All true, and I get that but I am also reminded of something that (I believe) Terry Bradshaw said which was that he wasn't sure that he'd be able to play in the current NFL era but that he also wasn't sure that the likes of Brady and Manning would have fared much better in his era. Now there's every chance that I attributed that to the wrong person, but in the era when you could beat up on receivers and hit the fuck out of a QB, I'd favor the best running back and nowadays I'd favor the best quarterback, and to broadly generalize; I don’t think the targets are as important as either in their respective heydays. |
|
|
|
Post by FrankSobotka1514 on Dec 11, 2020 19:30:22 GMT
True, but Walter Payton and Barry Sanders become more important when your QBs are Tebow and JaMarcus Russell while Brady might not have to rely on Trent Richardson. A good coach plays to the team’s strengths. A bad coach has Carson Wentz drop back 50 times a game when his top targets are a washed up Alshon Jeffrey and some rookies and practice squad guys. All true, and I get that but I am also reminded of something that (I believe) Terry Bradshaw said which was that he wasn't sure that he'd be able to play in the current NFL era but that he also wasn't sure that the likes of Brady and Manning would have fared much better in his era. Now there's every chance that I attributed that to the wrong person, but in the era when you could beat up on receivers and hit the fuck out of a QB, I'd favor the best running back and nowadays I'd favor the best quarterback, and to broadly generalize; I don’t think the targets are as important as either in their respective heydays. All good points, probably deeper than I intended. For the sake of this poll, assume everything not covered here is neutral. They have an average coach and average offensive lines. I wrote this thinking of the game from the 90s on, probably even more modern. I think Walter Payton is the oldest player I chose but being Walter Payton he’d be great in any era. Want a more specific time? Say from the Greatest Show on Turf Rams, beginning of the Patriots dynasty onwards. |
|
|
|
Post by sdm3 on Dec 11, 2020 19:33:57 GMT
All true, and I get that but I am also reminded of something that (I believe) Terry Bradshaw said which was that he wasn't sure that he'd be able to play in the current NFL era but that he also wasn't sure that the likes of Brady and Manning would have fared much better in his era. Now there's every chance that I attributed that to the wrong person, but in the era when you could beat up on receivers and hit the fuck out of a QB, I'd favor the best running back and nowadays I'd favor the best quarterback, and to broadly generalize; I don’t think the targets are as important as either in their respective heydays. All good points, probably deeper than I intended. For the sake of this poll, assume everything not covered here is neutral. They have an average coach and average offensive lines. I wrote this thinking of the game from the 90s on, probably even more modern. I think Walter Payton is the oldest player I chose but being Walter Payton he’d be great in any era. Want a more specific time? Say from the Greatest Show on Turf Rams, beginning of the Patriots dynasty onwards. Are they playing in a dome? Natural grass or turf? Who's announcing?
|
|
|
|
Post by ReyKahuka on Dec 11, 2020 19:49:57 GMT
Gronk didn't play in SB 51, where they came back to win from down 25 late in the 3rd quarter. Edelman played in SB 51 and 53. Brady threw for 505 yds and 3 TDs (128 yds and 1 TD to Hogan!) in Edelman's absence in SB 52. So I guess Edelman is actually the reason Brady was great? Where are we going here? Why is that relevant? You said "Brady won two Super Bowls with Chris Hogan as a starting WR." They didn't win that game, so throw it out of the discussion. And I agree that Brady definitely should have won that game with his performance, but those are the terms you set. Two Super Bowl wins with Chris Hogan. Got it. The point is that Brady was hardly suffering, forced to use the likes of Hogan. He had Edelman and Amendola in 51; James White was targeted 16 times for 110 yards and a TD out of the backfield! It's not like the guy was making Hogan the focal point of the offense. He had both Gronk and Edelman in 53. Gronk had the biggest catch of the game and Edelman won Super Bowl MVP. Yeah, poor Brady winning Super Bowls while having to make do with Chris Hogan. The whole idea is "who can win with no help?" You cite Brady's two Super Bowl wins with Hogan as if he was forced to throw to Hogan and a bunch of practice dummies! I said he made it to three Super bowls and won two of them with Chris Hogan as a starting receiver. How is that statement untrue? What has Chris Hogan done anywhere else? 128 yds and a TD in the Super Bowl isn't a solid performance out of Chris Hogan?! Edelman caught 141 yds and 0 TDs in Super Bowl 53 and he was the MVP! If the Patriots defense could've ever gotten a stop in SB 52, Hogan would've been in the MVP discussion. What has Amendola done anywhere else? What did Super Bowl 38 MVP Deion Branch do anywhere else? How effective would James White be on any other team? Let's ask Shane Vereen. You mention these guys as if they were the reason for Brady's success instead of the other way around. It's wild. Who was throwing to those guys? The 'whole idea' is Chris Hogan didn't even play major college football and Brady won anyway. I never said he was the only available receiver. You brought up other players who missed entire seasons or postseasons where the Patriots made the Super Bowl anyway, as if their presence was necessary to the Patriots success which clearly it was not. You bring up a bunch of random players which Brady has won multiple titles without them on the roster, as if it matters whether or not they were here. They were key contributors on championship squads, I have the jersey of everyone mentioned in this conversation (even Hogan!). Once again however, history has proven somebody else can fill those roles while Brady succeeds, while those players either of us have mentioned have done exactly nothing without Tom Brady. "Well Brady had Gronk." Except the many times he hasn't, including the time he only had him for eight games and the Pats came back from down 25 to win the Super Bowl. "Brady had Edelman." Except the time he missed the entire season and Brady went to the Super Bowl anyway and threw for 505 yds. And this is forgetting Brady had three rings before those guys got here. I'll ask you again, name the impact offensive weapon that left the Patriots and went on to success elsewhere. By the way, I didn't think the point was "who can win with no help", I though the point was, "who can win no matter what you give him?" I posted this earlier, but I'll post these stats again, from last night's broadcast. How did Brady get to and win Super Bowls and put up insane numbers with this supporting cast? Gronk and Edelman have missed huge chunks of seasons (or the entire season) and James White has only been here since 2014. Since 2010 (using that to stick with the theme established by the above quote) Brady has only thrown for under 4000 yds twice-- His MVP 2010 season, and 2016, where he only played in 12 games due to the bullshit Deflategate suspension-- oh yeah, and he won the Super Bowl-- without Gronk. Anyone else you'd rather give the credit to than Brady? Let me know what they've done elsewhere and also feel free to explain how the Patriots were winning before they got here and kept winning once they left. Maybe we can watch Danny Amendola's HOF induction together on zoom. There must be a reason other than Brady, right? It must be the coach that can't seem to make the playoffs without Brady either. In defense of the defense (that sounded funny), you pointed out the Patriots offense this year sucks and often puts the defense into difficult positions by turning it over or not being able to sustain drives. That goes both ways. Brady rarely turned the ball over and could sustain drives better than anyone in the business. Just another side effect of losing the GOAT. The truth is that Brady was and forever will be the most important cog of the Patriots dynasty. He didn't do it alone. But he got the most out of every single teammate and coach he ever had. The Patriots were not champions until Tom Brady came to town, and as many players and coaches have come and gone over the years, that championship train kept rolling-- until he missed an entire season with injury or straight up left, then they can't even make the playoffs. But it's Amendola and James White propping him up. Sure, why not.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdm3 on Dec 11, 2020 20:54:54 GMT
Why is that relevant? You said "Brady won two Super Bowls with Chris Hogan as a starting WR." They didn't win that game, so throw it out of the discussion. And I agree that Brady definitely should have won that game with his performance, but those are the terms you set. Two Super Bowl wins with Chris Hogan. Got it. The point is that Brady was hardly suffering, forced to use the likes of Hogan. He had Edelman and Amendola in 51; James White was targeted 16 times for 110 yards and a TD out of the backfield! It's not like the guy was making Hogan the focal point of the offense. He had both Gronk and Edelman in 53. Gronk had the biggest catch of the game and Edelman won Super Bowl MVP. Yeah, poor Brady winning Super Bowls while having to make do with Chris Hogan. The whole idea is "who can win with no help?" You cite Brady's two Super Bowl wins with Hogan as if he was forced to throw to Hogan and a bunch of practice dummies! I said he made it to three Super bowls and won two of them with Chris Hogan as a starting receiver. How is that statement untrue? Edited my post to address that; that was my bad. Come on, man. I brought up Gronk and Edelman in response to the "two Super Bowls Brady won with Chris Hogan." He had one or both of them for both of those victories. So how was my statement untrue (other than calling them Plonkowski and Endleman)? He also had Gronk for the one he didn't win (and he had a monster game). Those two players weren't necessary? If he won while throwing to Chris, Mark, and Hulk Hogan you might have a point. As it stands it's just "he won two Super Bowls with Chris Hogan. No need to mention the other pass catchers that were on the field." Was it you or someone else who said they'd take Edelman over Wes Welker? Chuckled at that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by ReyKahuka on Dec 11, 2020 21:29:52 GMT
I said he made it to three Super bowls and won two of them with Chris Hogan as a starting receiver. How is that statement untrue? Edited my post to address that; that was my bad. Come on, man. I brought up Gronk and Edelman in response to the "two Super Bowls Brady won with Chris Hogan." He had one or both of them for both of those victories. So how was my statement untrue (other than calling them Plonkowski and Endleman)? He also had Gronk for the one he didn't win (and he had a monster game). Those two players weren't necessary? If he won while throwing to Chris, Mark, and Hulk Hogan you might have a point. As it stands it's just "he won two Super Bowls with Chris Hogan. No need to mention the other pass catchers that were on the field." Was it you or someone else who said they'd take Edelman over Wes Welker? Chuckled at that one. The point was they aren't necessary to win because he's won Super Bowls without either guy. He won three Super Bowls before either of those guys was in the league. He won without Gronk in 2016, so Gronk isn't necessary to win. He made it to a Super Bowl and threw for 505 yds without Edelman, hard to say Edelman not being there is the reason they lost. Both of those guys were key components in a Super Bowl win, I'm not downplaying their importance when they're out there. I'm saying the team is still successful when they aren't. It's been proven. And winning is a relative term. OP didn't say 'this is your Super Bowl roster,' it gave you options as to who you'd take on your roster in general. I like Brady with those guys above the other options in any given scenario, because Brady has proven he can win games with any roster. They went to the AFC championship game in 2006 with one of the worst receiving corps I've ever seen. That's all I was saying, I'll take Brady with whoever you give him over the other options presented. Not saying that team wins the Super Bowl six out of nine times, but I like my chances of winning any given game with Brady compared to the other options listed.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdm3 on Dec 12, 2020 0:17:21 GMT
Edited my post to address that; that was my bad. Come on, man. I brought up Gronk and Edelman in response to the "two Super Bowls Brady won with Chris Hogan." He had one or both of them for both of those victories. So how was my statement untrue (other than calling them Plonkowski and Endleman)? He also had Gronk for the one he didn't win (and he had a monster game). Those two players weren't necessary? If he won while throwing to Chris, Mark, and Hulk Hogan you might have a point. As it stands it's just "he won two Super Bowls with Chris Hogan. No need to mention the other pass catchers that were on the field." Was it you or someone else who said they'd take Edelman over Wes Welker? Chuckled at that one. The point was they aren't necessary to win because he's won Super Bowls without either guy. He won three Super Bowls before either of those guys was in the league. He won without Gronk in 2016, so Gronk isn't necessary to win. He made it to a Super Bowl and threw for 505 yds without Edelman, hard to say Edelman not being there is the reason they lost. Both of those guys were key components in a Super Bowl win, I'm not downplaying their importance when they're out there. I'm saying the team is still successful when they aren't. It's been proven. And winning is a relative term. OP didn't say 'this is your Super Bowl roster,' it gave you options as to who you'd take on your roster in general. I like Brady with those guys above the other options in any given scenario, because Brady has proven he can win games with any roster. They went to the AFC championship game in 2006 with one of the worst receiving corps I've ever seen. That's all I was saying, I'll take Brady with whoever you give him over the other options presented. Not saying that team wins the Super Bowl six out of nine times, but I like my chances of winning any given game with Brady compared to the other options listed. Wait, so you’re one of the guys who voted for Brady? |
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Dec 12, 2020 6:35:32 GMT
Which one of these groups of players would you want the most? Assume all are in their primes at the same time, and you must play the full set of players. Players are listed as QB, RB, WR 1, WR 2 (or TE). Discuss. Would Ryan's leafs team be named murderers row?. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2020 21:48:08 GMT
I voted for the Tebow team. That team is beyond stacked and imo its not even close. Tebow wasn't awful he just wasn't as good as the hype machine wanted you to believe. Tebow could run a Ravens style offense but with those weapons I imagine they'd be better. The Peyton team is 2nd but imo its a distant 2nd.
|
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Dec 15, 2020 18:35:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ReyKahuka on Dec 15, 2020 19:01:17 GMT
I voted for the Tebow team. That team is beyond stacked and imo its not even close. Tebow wasn't awful he just wasn't as good as the hype machine wanted you to believe. Tebow could run a Ravens style offense but with those weapons I imagine they'd be better. The Peyton team is 2nd but imo its a distant 2nd. Why did Tebow only last a few years in the league if he was a serviceable starter?
|
|
|
|
Post by klawrencio79 on Dec 15, 2020 19:05:39 GMT
Definitely Ryan Leaf and the Murderers' Row. Lawrence Phillips and Billy Cole can be our alternates.
|
|
|
|
Post by ReyKahuka on Dec 15, 2020 19:20:32 GMT
Definitely Ryan Leaf and the Murderers' Row. Lawrence Phillips and Billy Cole can be our alternates. How about Donté Stallworth? He'll run a route no matter who's in his way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2020 22:30:41 GMT
I voted for the Tebow team. That team is beyond stacked and imo its not even close. Tebow wasn't awful he just wasn't as good as the hype machine wanted you to believe. Tebow could run a Ravens style offense but with those weapons I imagine they'd be better. The Peyton team is 2nd but imo its a distant 2nd. Why did Tebow only last a few years in the league if he was a serviceable starter? Teams didn't know how to properly use him. Take Lamar for instance. If he was drafted by 85% of the league he likely would have washed out but the Ravens built a team around his skill sets. Tebow could have been the same but the league hadn't gotten to this point yet. Add in the media obsession with him no team wanted to sign him viewing him as a distraction. |
|
|
|
Post by hehatesshe on Dec 16, 2020 0:26:12 GMT
Why did Tebow only last a few years in the league if he was a serviceable starter? Teams didn't know how to properly use him. Take Lamar for instance. If he was drafted by 85% of the league he likely would have washed out but the Ravens built a team around his skill sets. Tebow could have been the same but the league hadn't gotten to this point yet. Add in the media obsession with him no team wanted to sign him viewing him as a distraction. Was Tebow even faster than Mahomes? I don't think he could come close to what Lamar can do. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2020 1:16:13 GMT
Teams didn't know how to properly use him. Take Lamar for instance. If he was drafted by 85% of the league he likely would have washed out but the Ravens built a team around his skill sets. Tebow could have been the same but the league hadn't gotten to this point yet. Add in the media obsession with him no team wanted to sign him viewing him as a distraction. Was Tebow even faster than Mahomes? I don't think he could come close to what Lamar can do. No clue how fast he was. Im simply saying build around his skill sets of a read option type offense (like what Lamar has in Baltimore) with the weapons that Frank gave him and I think it would be the best team. |
|
