• Please visit and share your knowledge at our sister communities:
  • If you have not, please join our official Homebrewing Facebook Group!

    Homebrewing Facebook Group

Obnoxious Football Trash Talk Thread

Homebrew Talk

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
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
 
Why can't you realize that this means absolutely nothing? Stat nerds really don't get it...

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.
 
but the only way to determine that is through stats.

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.
 
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.

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? ^^^ :confused:

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.
 
HoppyDaze said:
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.

So we're back to "because I said so"
 
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.
 
HoppyDaze said:
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.

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."
 
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."

and I'm stupid... lol
 
HoppyDaze said:
It must really make you feel good to call me stupid...which is weird because I'm right and you know it.

Yeah, you got me good. It's unfair to judge players by stats because "good players have more of them", or something. Amirite?!?!?
 
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.

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?
 
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.
 
AZ_IPA said:
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?

I see what you did there :)
 
Why so mad moto? Are you broke? Found out your wife's a whore? Seems like you're really pissed. I hope you work it out.
 
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?

'07 won 2 and lost in the SB to the Giants by a field goal
'08 didn't play (torn ACL)
'09 & '10... the only two times in his career he went one and done
'11 won 2 and lost in the SB to the Giants by 4 points
'12 won 1 and lost in the AFC Championship

So... in the last five years... he's made two Super Bowls and one AFC Championship... WOW... whatta piece of sht.

So what is that 5-5??
 
Back
Top