I know they weren't consecutive. The way they talk about Montana, you'd think he won every single year.
Obnoxious Football Trash Talk Thread
- Thread starter Cape Brewing
- Start date
Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:
I know they weren't consecutive. The way they talk about Montana, you'd think he won every single year.
stratslinger
Well-Known Member
I will say this: everyone I was watching the game with remarked on just how warm the handshake and hug was between the coaches after the game. Especially considering the coaches were Harbaugh and Bellichick. Every last one of us stopped and had to check if there was a little something extra in our drinks, or if we were in fact seeing what we were seeing.
And then Suggs had to go and be Suggs. And all was right with the world.
And then Suggs had to go and be Suggs. And all was right with the world.
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
oooooo, hoppy finally says something relevant!
McBrewskie
Well-Known Member
That's cause he is the single greatest QB to ever play.
McBrewskie
Well-Known Member
John Harbaugh made mention how gracious Belicheck was. It was in Peter King's Monday morning column. I have tons of respect for Belicheck. Ultimate competitor and lover of the game. I couldn't care less if he does interviews. Plus his press conference was classic.
I'm not arguing against that. I'm arguing this crazy logic about Brady isn't Montana so he must suck. If anyone doesn't think Brady is top 3 or 4, they must be out of their mind.
McBrewskie
Well-Known Member
Agreed. Though I'm not as sure he is now the same guy after the last two years. I like Brady and I'm not trying to talk ****, but that game on Sunday was one of the softest team performances I have ever seen at that level.
I agree 100%. We got punched in the mouth and embarrassed. It looked like they just gave up. And to rub salt in my own wound, it was the second time that team embarrassed us in the playoffs at home.
OP
OP
Montana went one and done four times in his playoff career... and in those four losses he threw for 2 TDs (both in one game) and 5 picks.
so... in three of the four, zero TDs and 4 picks.
People tend to forget the man was human. They remember The Catch and assume that was every throw he made.
Hey... if people want to argue Montana is the best ever... sure... I don't really disagree but to claim Montana is some legend, well beyond the likes of this lowly Brady guy... That's ridiculous.
Elway???? Manning???? you're drunk.
Marino?? maybe... but top two in my book are Montana and Brady. Until someone can give an intelligent argument as to how those two aren't 1 & 2 other than, "I am going by my wicked smart gut and what I saw" bllsht... that's what I'm going with.
McBrewskie
Well-Known Member
I will say the first game I think you are referring too is the Ravens beat down of them in the divisional right? If so that game was over so quick I think it was just they had a bad day. The one Sunday was pathetic, they looked like they gave up, including Brady. That clock management at the end of the second half was anything but go for the throat. To make up a word they were unphysical.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2011
- Messages
- 3,834
- Reaction score
- 364
Trent Dilfer won every Superbowl he went to.
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
Duh you guys...this was just a rebuilding year. NEXT year, better watch out, or whatever....
Haaaahahahhahaha!
Haaaahahahhahaha!
OP
OP
So did Doug Williams
McBrewskie
Well-Known Member
Mark Rypien.
Good point. That first go round was over by half time.
It's still comforting to know the Pats are winning the Superbowl next year!!!
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2011
- Messages
- 3,834
- Reaction score
- 364
So... At best Brady is 5?
OP
OP
Sure
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
Why can't you realize that this means absolutely nothing? Stat nerds really don't get it...
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
LOL! ok, hoppy- "tell us how it is"
tell us how your magnificent "gut" is the only real decider on who is "great" and who sucks.
while you're at it, why don't you change your avatar to a pic of Montana State cheerleaders?
"but my uncle-in-law went to oregon!"
yeah, cool story bro.
tell us how your magnificent "gut" is the only real decider on who is "great" and who sucks.
while you're at it, why don't you change your avatar to a pic of Montana State cheerleaders?
"but my uncle-in-law went to oregon!"
yeah, cool story bro.
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
You're no where near smart enough to understand...
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
Listen folks there are too many things like tipped passes, dropped balls, O-Line injuries, no running game, poor/good coaching, quality of division, weather, your team's defense....etc to spout out raw stats to support this kind of argument. That's why it boils down to anyone's opinion based on what they think the relevant qualities of QB are and who possesses them. Yes, this may seem like an old school way of thinking but its not. It just the nature of the game. Waaaaaaaaaay to many factors to just say "Brady has won three rings and Manning only 1" That's just silly
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2011
- Messages
- 3,834
- Reaction score
- 364
Because I said so isn't really a valid arguement either, Hoppy. What criteria are you using? Do you have any relevent facts?
You could certainly say that you watched every game and Montana was the better QB based on the eye test, but I'm guessing you weren't old enough to watch most of his games and form an opinion as you have been with Brady. What it comes down to is consistency, Brady has had it with an ever changing supporting cast. There was barely a running game, other than Dillon, and the Defenses have been marginal at best in the past 6 years.
You can certainly say that Montana was the better QB, but the only way to determine that is through stats. It's a team game, I wonder how Joe would do with this team and vice versa.
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
no, no, NO!
Example: Brady has no running game so he has to pass a lot, right? Of course he's going to accumulate statistics; his team leans on him more. Therefore his stats are better. But that, in no way at all, makes him better. It just means he's used differently. I find it ridiculous that I have to explain this. It's common sense.
JonGrafto
Well-Known Member
So did Jim McMahon... ha ha
JonGrafto
Well-Known Member
So all of Brett Favre's interceptions are because he had no running game behind him, therefore he had to throw more offten and thus causing more interceptions?
And by the way, why isn't Favre involved in this conversation?
(Not a Favre lover but he did work wonders in GB. He is just a ****** off the field)
Wait, is John Madden hanging out here now? ^^^ 
Favre *might* have been mentioned in the conversation if he retired five years before he did.
In his latter years, though, Favre was a horrible, horrible, HORRIBLE big-game QB. How many BAD interceptions did he throw? I'm not talking tipped passes; I'm talking, rolling-out, pass-back-across-his-body, floating-a-lob-into-triple-coverage plays? Favre made a lot of big plays over his career but he also absolutely KILLED his teams at the end of his career.
I mean, just the sheer number of picks he threw. He averaged almost eighteen picks a season over his career - and a lot more that that near the end. The only QBs in the league who had that many INTs last year were Brees (19), Romo (19), Luck (18), and Sanchez (18). You simply cannot turn the ball over as much as Favre did. He won that one title for Green Bay, which was great for all of you Cheeseheads - but man, those Packer teams later on in his career underperformed.
Favre *might* have been mentioned in the conversation if he retired five years before he did.
In his latter years, though, Favre was a horrible, horrible, HORRIBLE big-game QB. How many BAD interceptions did he throw? I'm not talking tipped passes; I'm talking, rolling-out, pass-back-across-his-body, floating-a-lob-into-triple-coverage plays? Favre made a lot of big plays over his career but he also absolutely KILLED his teams at the end of his career.
I mean, just the sheer number of picks he threw. He averaged almost eighteen picks a season over his career - and a lot more that that near the end. The only QBs in the league who had that many INTs last year were Brees (19), Romo (19), Luck (18), and Sanchez (18). You simply cannot turn the ball over as much as Favre did. He won that one title for Green Bay, which was great for all of you Cheeseheads - but man, those Packer teams later on in his career underperformed.
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
HoppyDaze said:
I'm smart enough to understand "nowhere" is one word.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2011
- Messages
- 3,834
- Reaction score
- 364
HoppyDaze said:
So we're back to "because I said so"
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,517
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
doh! lol
So I take it you disagree that all those factors I listed influence W/L and statistics drastically? If so, then I guess to conversation is pointless.
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
Hoppy's stupidity is actually frightening
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
It must really make you feel good to call me stupid...which is weird because I'm right and you know it.
stratslinger
Well-Known Member
Thank you JonGrafto for making an excellent counterpoint: yes, the fact that Brady's teams haven't had a significant rushing attack, aside from a couple of notable years, has forced him to throw more often, which has forced him to _attempt_ more throws than quarterbacks in previous eras, or than some quarterbacks in other teams in the modern era.
But if the guy performed at his position at, just to throw out a name here, the level of a guy like Mark Sanchez, he would never have ammassed the stats he has ammassed. Yes, he may have ammassed the number of attempts, in his first couple of seasons, before his coaches ran him out of town on a rail and found a different approach. And thus, his stats would paint a VERY different picture.
But the fact is that he is indeed an exceptional quarterback, and despite the fact that he does have the occasional gut-wrenching, make-every-New-England-fan-want-to-cry-out-in-anguish, WAY sub par game (like guys like Montana did, thanks for pointing those ones out Cape - these guys are only human), there's no way you're ever going to argue with any sane individual that he doesn't belong in the top 5, and no way you're going to argue with most that he's not in the top 2 or 3.
But if the guy performed at his position at, just to throw out a name here, the level of a guy like Mark Sanchez, he would never have ammassed the stats he has ammassed. Yes, he may have ammassed the number of attempts, in his first couple of seasons, before his coaches ran him out of town on a rail and found a different approach. And thus, his stats would paint a VERY different picture.
But the fact is that he is indeed an exceptional quarterback, and despite the fact that he does have the occasional gut-wrenching, make-every-New-England-fan-want-to-cry-out-in-anguish, WAY sub par game (like guys like Montana did, thanks for pointing those ones out Cape - these guys are only human), there's no way you're ever going to argue with any sane individual that he doesn't belong in the top 5, and no way you're going to argue with most that he's not in the top 2 or 3.
OP
OP
I know, right?
haha... yeah... Brady sucks in big games so much he just broke Montana's playoff win total last week.
Man... he sucks in big games. WHEN will he WIN ONE?!?
Dude... you sound like Hoppy now.
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
HoppyDaze said:
You could certainly make that argument. I mean, if you were mentally handicapped. I would definitely not make fun of a mentally handicapped person who made that argument. Absolutely not.
A non-mentally handicapped person would probably make the argument that they "use" Brady more because he's, you know, pretty f--king good. I could see billy now, "yeah, we got Tom Brady, but, lets run it 75% of the time."
HoppyDaze
Well-Known Member
and I'm stupid... lol
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
HoppyDaze said:
Yeah, you got me good. It's unfair to judge players by stats because "good players have more of them", or something. Amirite?!?!?
stratslinger
Well-Known Member
Finally something everyone can agree on!
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2008
- Messages
- 64,951
- Reaction score
- 16,517
So wild card games and divisional playoffs are big games?
Huh, I would've thought Conference Championship and Super Bowl games are what really matters. What's his record in those in the last, say, five years?
motobrewer
I'm no atheist scientist, but...
Not to mention the fact that there are a ton of normalized stats in which to compare players. Ask your math teacher what that means,hoppy.
Similar threads
