Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Wentz is definitely elevating everyone's play
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Birdwatcher
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles...les__wings.html

The kid has already become leader, and the rest of the team is raising their game because he has the reigns firmly in his grip. As Celek said, "The kid has the juice."
Zero
QUOTE (Birdwatcher @ Sep 26 2016, 12:48 AM) *
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles...les__wings.html

The kid has already become leader, and the rest of the team is raising their game because he has the reigns firmly in his grip. As Celek said, "The kid has the juice."

Just thinking back to last year the energy on the team seems to be much higher. Murray was supposed to be a key acquisition but the way he pouted and played safe was light years different than what we're seeing now. Credit DP and HR for giving us this.
Dreagon
That's what franchise quarterbacks do. It's hard to explain what they are until you actually have one on your team.
BirdsWinBaby
QUOTE (Birdwatcher @ Sep 26 2016, 12:48 AM) *
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles...les__wings.html

The kid has already become leader, and the rest of the team is raising their game because he has the reigns firmly in his grip. As Celek said, "The kid has the juice."



yea I was thinking that while watching.....seems the players were not just giving lip service during the off-season. they believe they are good and Wentz gives them good reason
Joegrane
I think this larger quote from a veteran Celek is even more telling.

I told [head coach Doug Pederson] being 10 years in, this kid is inspiring me, tight end Brent Celek said. Hes adding youth to my game just by the way hes acting, being in the huddle, taking command, its beyond impressive. Its great. We have to keep it going. Im not going to sit here and say were the greatest team, but Im excited with how hes playing and hes elevating everybody elses play by the way hes handling it.

QUOTE (Birdwatcher @ Sep 26 2016, 12:48 AM) *
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles...les__wings.html

The kid has already become leader, and the rest of the team is raising their game because he has the reigns firmly in his grip. As Celek said, "The kid has the juice."

mcnabbulous
This is why I've been preaching the idea of going all in on QBs for years. If you hit, the positional ability to make the rest of the team better makes up for any potential misses you've made over the years.

Just imagine when he gains the experience. He'll continue to make our receivers look legit. He'll make up for weaknesses on the line. He'll open up the running game.

Dreagon
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 26 2016, 09:15 AM) *
Just imagine when he gains the experience. He'll continue to make our receivers look legit. He'll make up for weaknesses on the line. He'll open up the running game.


Yes, a franchise QB can make your receivers better, BUT...if you ever want him to take you to the promised land on a regular basis you have to give him the rest of the package.

Joe Montana had Rice and Craig
Terry Bradshaw had Swann and Franco Harris
Troy Aikman had Irving and Smith
Staubach had Pearson and Dorsett
Jim Kelly had Thurman Thomas and Andre Reed
John Elway had Sharp and Davis

All were matched with a stud running back and wide reciever.
Matthews may or may not be your running back, time will tell. But I'm not knocking your current wideouts when I say that I don't think you currently have that next level wide reciever on your roster yet.
Wentze is showing the potential to the best QB you guys have ever had...seriously...now you just need to build on and around him.
D Rock
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Sep 26 2016, 02:33 PM) *
That's what franchise quarterbacks do. It's hard to explain what they are until you actually have one on your team.

laugh.gif

You haven't had one since Aikman. Tony Romo is a fraud and a choke artist. What's his playoff record?

"Pick 6 on 3. BREAK!!!"
Dreagon
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 26 2016, 12:56 PM) *
laugh.gif

You haven't had one since Aikman. Tony Romo is a fraud and a choke artist. What's his playoff record?

"Pick 6 on 3. BREAK!!!"


Agreed. That's why I did not include him on the list I made in a different post. Romo is a very good QB that is flawed. And that flaw is what separates him from being listed at the next level. He has just about run out of time to overcome it, and truthfully I don't think his age and body will let him now.
Birdwatcher
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Sep 26 2016, 11:16 AM) *
Yes, a franchise QB can make your receivers better, BUT...if you ever want him to take you to the promised land on a regular basis you have to give him the rest of the package.

Joe Montana had Rice and Craig
Terry Bradshaw had Swann and Franco Harris
Troy Aikman had Irving and Smith
Staubach had Pearson and Dorsett
Jim Kelly had Thurman Thomas and Andre Reed
John Elway had Sharp and Davis

All were matched with a stud running back and wide reciever.
Matthews may or may not be your running back, time will tell. But I'm not knocking your current wideouts when I say that I don't think you currently have that next level wide reciever on your roster yet.
Wentze is showing the potential to the best QB you guys have ever had...seriously...now you just need to build on and around him.


We may not have the RB or WR yet, but we might, Wentz has already made guys who were invisible last year look good. NA and JM, and now even DGB are making plays and as they get more comfortable with each other, who knows how good they could get? Smallwood and Barner got their chance to shine last night, and showed they have the chops to play, so IMHO, we see where this goes this year before saying we need to look for anything else yet.

As to QBs needing studs at RB and WR, where were all the studs up in NE? If you have a QB who can read Ds and spread the ball around, you can win without a certified stud at WR or RB. This kid is the kind of QB that I think will use every tool in his box to win.

I watched Dak last night, kid looks good, but he is locking onto his primary receiver too soon and I think that will haunt him in the near future.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Birdwatcher @ Sep 26 2016, 01:22 PM) *
We may not have the RB or WR yet, but we might, Wentz has already made guys who were invisible last year look good. NA and JM, and now even DGB are making plays and as they get more comfortable with each other, who knows how good they could get? Smallwood and Barner got their chance to shine last night, and showed they have the chops to play, so IMHO, we see where this goes this year before saying we need to look for anything else yet.

As to QBs needing studs at RB and WR, where were all the studs up in NE? If you have a QB who can read Ds and spread the ball around, you can win without a certified stud at WR or RB. This kid is the kind of QB that I think will use every tool in his box to win.

Agree with all of this.

QUOTE
I watched Dak last night, kid looks good, but he is locking onto his primary receiver too soon and I think that will haunt him in the near future.

Dak is impressive. He's taken to that offense much quicker that anyone could have anticipated. He's still playing the role of game manager, but doing a nice job. We could be in store for a hell of a decade.

I'd take Wentz in a heartbeat over Dak though. I can't believe some people are suggesting otherwise. Carson is next level good.
Dreagon
QUOTE (Birdwatcher @ Sep 26 2016, 01:22 PM) *
We may not have the RB or WR yet, but we might, Wentz has already made guys who were invisible last year look good. NA and JM, and now even DGB are making plays and as they get more comfortable with each other, who knows how good they could get? Smallwood and Barner got their chance to shine last night, and showed they have the chops to play, so IMHO, we see where this goes this year before saying we need to look for anything else yet.

As to QBs needing studs at RB and WR, where were all the studs up in NE? If you have a QB who can read Ds and spread the ball around, you can win without a certified stud at WR or RB. This kid is the kind of QB that I think will use every tool in his box to win.

I watched Dak last night, kid looks good, but he is locking onto his primary receiver too soon and I think that will haunt him in the near future.


I view New England as a unique situation. It seems like any QB that plays for New England wins, and that all comes back to Belichik. Bledsoe was winning for him before Brady took over. Then Cassell was winning when Brady was hurt. Then these last two QBs win decisively when Brady is out. It seems like Belichik looks for a particular type of QB that will work in his system, yet they don't seem to fare well anywhere else. To me that's what will always separate Brady from Montana. Montana was awesome both at San Francisco and Kansas City, while I would have to see Brady succeed under a different system before declaring him Montana's equal.

I have been heartened by what I've seen in Dak, but I'm not losing my head over it. Right now Garrett is using him smart and tailoring the offense to him. He's spreading the load and keeping it from getting too complex. At the same time, its an improvement simply having a backup QB who can actually win a game here and there. After last year, I will be satisfied with that...and any improvement and evolving on his part will be a bonus.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Sep 26 2016, 01:36 PM) *
I view New England as a unique situation. It seems like any QB that plays for New England wins, and that all comes back to Belichik.

His career has been very average without Brady.

QUOTE
Bledsoe was winning for him before Brady took over.

No he wasn't.

QUOTE
Then Cassell was winning when Brady was hurt. Then these last two QBs win decisively when Brady is out. It seems like Belichik looks for a particular type of QB that will work in his system, yet they don't seem to fare well anywhere else. To me that's what will always separate Brady from Montana. Montana was awesome both at San Francisco and Kansas City, while I would have to see Brady succeed under a different system before declaring him Montana's equal.

Brady would succeed anywhere. He's great.

The one consistent throughout their tenure has been the utter dogshit that has been the AFC East. The best opposing QB they've had to face was Pennington. And there isn't really a notable #2.

They are in an advantageous situation of both being excellent and facing a pathetic set of rivals.

D Rock
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Sep 26 2016, 06:03 PM) *
Agreed. That's why I did not include him on the list I made in a different post. Romo is a very good QB that is flawed. And that flaw is what separates him from being listed at the next level. He has just about run out of time to overcome it, and truthfully I don't think his age and body will let him now.

and what of Dak? I've not seen a great deal of his play.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 26 2016, 06:26 PM) *
I'd take Wentz in a heartbeat over Dak though. I can't believe some people are suggesting otherwise.

Who is suggesting otherwise? I've not seen that lunacy yet. Dak's numbers equate to average NFL back-up.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 26 2016, 06:50 PM) *
The one consistent throughout their tenure has been the utter dogshit that has been the AFC East. The best opposing QB they've had to face was Pennington. And there isn't really a notable #2.

They are in an advantageous situation of both being excellent and facing a pathetic set of rivals.

Yes to this. The same can be said of the 49er's dynasty years. They had a cake walk to division champ for a decade. Also Supa5 had a lousy NFC east to feat upon for the first half decade of his career.
Dreagon
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 26 2016, 01:53 PM) *
and what of Dak? I've not seen a great deal of his play.


Dak has a lot of potential. I know a lot of Cowboy fans are super excited about him, but in the words of Bill Parcells...I'm not breaking out the anointing oil yet.

He has played well, showed good ball control, and reacted well to pressure and blitzes. He keeps his poise under pressure, and despite the fact he is mobile, running is not the option he immediately goes to at the first sign of trouble. On the other hand if he sees a lane open when he has an empty backfield, it doesn't bother him at all to take if for five or ten yards and then slide. He seems to like Beasley as a target, which I actually like because I think Beasley has been underutilized. He hasn't been asked to go downfield a lot, but this last game they finally allowed him to show he could do it. Right now, he's being asked to game manage a ball control offense, and is doing a pretty good job of doing it.

For now I can say we have definitely found our backup QB, and there are signs he could be our QB of the future. I'm not going to jump straight to that latter conclusion on the basis of three games though. I'm just going to take reassurance in knowing that something is going right at the moment, and we finally have a future possibility at the position worth exploring.

Still, the thought of a decade of Prescott and Wentze dueling it out is pretty cool.
D Rock
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Sep 26 2016, 07:55 PM) *
... the thought of a decade of Prescott and Wentz dueling it out is pretty cool.

Especially for eagle's fans.

cool.gif tongue.gif
mcnabbulous
Dak is intriguing. He'll continue to do well as long as he has great OL play and a stud receiver. The problem is that keeping that line together isn't economically feasible (unless they want to allocate way too much money to it) and Dez just can't reliably stay on the field.

I do believe we will have a nice rivalry over the next decade, but Wentz is a game changer at the position. Dak is a nice game manager.
Reality Fan
Whoa horsey...I love Brady but he has had a slew of good to incredible WRs including Moss for Brady's best year....He had Branch and Givens who were very good but got dinged up easily and he had Welker. Beyond that the offense looks to be nearly idiot proof looking at it this year or in 2008. Bledsoe had one sub .500 season in the 5 preceding Brady...one .500 season and 3 over .500 under Carroll and Parcells so he was winning. Belichick has an uncanny ability to get guys into his system that excel for a year or 2 at least, look at Corey Dillon.

All that being said, Wentz seems like he has been playing for years.....he does not make that dumb mistake or desperate play....he is just so even through out all his play it is a little scary.
Rick
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 26 2016, 02:50 PM) *
His career has been very average without Brady.

I believe I saw his record without Brady at QB since Brady has been in the league is 13-5. Hardly average.

No, they haven't won SBs without him but they only had one time where Brady wasn't playing in the playoffs. So who knows.

I still look at Brady as one of the best but you've got to question just HOW good he is and how much is the Big B and his system. Let's not forget, he's always had talent around him. Maybe not superstars but above average talent because Big B and his staff are probably the best evaluators of talent in the NFL today.

I'd be very interested to see how well Brady would do on a different team although that probably won't happen.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Rick @ Sep 26 2016, 03:33 PM) *
I believe I saw his record without Brady at QB since Brady has been in the league is 13-5. Hardly average.

Well sure, if you want to include the caveat that no one else was talking about.

QUOTE
No, they haven't won SBs without him but they only had one time where Brady wasn't playing in the playoffs. So who knows.

They went 5-11 in Belichick's first season and were 0-2 before the fortuitous Bledsoe injury.
QUOTE
I still look at Brady as one of the best but you've got to question just HOW good he is and how much is the Big B and his system.

No you don't. Belichick is a defensive coach. They have had three OCs during Brady's career, three different styles and results each time.
QUOTE
Let's not forget, he's always had talent around him. Maybe not superstars but above average talent because Big B and his staff are probably the best evaluators of talent in the NFL today.

I'd be very interested to see how well Brady would do on a different team although that probably won't happen.

It's easy to look like great evaluators of talent when you have a QB as good as Brady. Which Patriot skill position guy is it that went on to excel elsewhere?
Rick
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 26 2016, 04:44 PM) *
Well sure, if you want to include the caveat that no one else was talking about.


They went 5-11 in Belichick's first season and were 0-2 before the fortuitous Bledsoe injury.

No you don't. Belichick is a defensive coach. They have had three OCs during Brady's career, three different styles and results each time.

It's easy to look like great evaluators of talent when you have a QB as good as Brady. Which Patriot skill position guy is it that went on to excel elsewhere?

Ugh...here we go again.

Right, Brady is the ONLY reason the Patriots are good. Because, well, football is such an individual sport afterall...

So, your arguments are:

-Belichick didn't have a good record in his first season and they were 0-2 before Beldsoe went down. I guess, anything less than perfection EVERY year means you're not good enough?

-Belichick is a defensive coach. Funny how they pretty much always rank near the top in offensive categories as well. I'd say he does a pretty good job on both sides of the ball.

-He's not a great evaluator of talent because their skilled players don't go on the excel elsewhere. I didn't say they are superstars. This is an argument for his system and being a good evaluator of talent. When someone says that, they also mean evaluating talent for their particular system. They (him and his staff) do this better than anyone out there. To argue otherwise is just plain stupid. When you can plug in any ole QB into that system and still win just helps prove that point. 13-5 is not a fluke. They went 11-5 WITHOUT Brady in 2008. Again, another argument for talent/system.

As I said, the question is, what would Brady do on another team? We'll never find out. Brady is a great QB but how great is the question.
mcnabbulous
Belichick has coached 13 seasons with Brady as his primary QB. He's made the playoffs in 12 times of those.

He's coached 7 seasons without Brady as his primary QB. And made the playoffs once.

You can explain that away any way you'd like. You can guess how I'd do so.

Belichick is an excellent HC and even better defensive coach. But he's been blessed with a top-3 QB of all time and a dogshit division for nearly his entire tenure in New England. If he's the top coach in the NFL, the gap between him and the rest is much smaller than people let on.
manningwasbradysbeotch
QUOTE (Birdwatcher @ Sep 25 2016, 11:48 PM) *
http://www.philly.com/philly/sports/eagles...les__wings.html

The kid has already become leader, and the rest of the team is raising their game because he has the reigns firmly in his grip. As Celek said, "The kid has the juice."


Pats fan here.....your team looks fun and I predict good things to come for DGB. Anyway I am here to talk QB. The kid has a coolness in the pocket that reminds me of someone. Just saying. When he is in pocket you get a sense (from me a non-Eagles fan) that good things are about to happen. Mariota, Winston, Cam, Bortles, Carr all lack his intangible.

He would look real nice in a few years in a Pats jersey!!!

You got a winner there.
Zero
QUOTE (manningwasbradysbeotch @ Sep 27 2016, 09:05 AM) *
Pats fan here.....your team looks fun and I predict good things to come for DGB. Anyway I am here to talk QB. The kid has a coolness in the pocket that reminds me of someone. Just saying. When he is in pocket you get a sense (from me a non-Eagles fan) that good things are about to happen. Mariota, Winston, Cam, Bortles, Carr all lack his intangible.

He would look real nice in a few years in a Pats jersey!!!

You got a winner there.

bowdown.gif

Pats jersey ain't happenin'!
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 27 2016, 12:31 PM) *
Belichick has coached 13 seasons with Brady as his primary QB. He's made the playoffs in 12 times of those.

He's coached 7 seasons without Brady as his primary QB. And made the playoffs once.

You can explain that away any way you'd like. You can guess how I'd do so.

Belichick is an excellent HC and even better defensive coach. But he's been blessed with a top-3 QB of all time and a dogshit division for nearly his entire tenure in New England. If he's the top coach in the NFL, the gap between him and the rest is much smaller than people let on.

Boom. Perfectly stated. I'd only add in that he's helped his cause by filming other teams practices, and other such "genius" tactics.

Fuck Bill Belicheat.
D Rock
QUOTE (manningwasbradysbeotch @ Sep 27 2016, 01:05 PM) *
He would look real nice in a few years in a Pats jersey!!!

You got a winner there.

He'd be the first. Ugliest uni in the game.

Phits
BB is every bit the great coach that he is made out to be. Every year there is another reason why the Pat's should begin their slide and every year he has his team competing this year they're . 3-0...with their 3rd string QB. Un fricking believable.

They make me sick.

Obviously having a QB of Brad's calibre helps a great deal, but the Pat's machine is a juggernaut and just keeps rolling. At some point things have to go south...but it doesn't look like any time soon.


QUOTE (Rick @ Sep 27 2016, 06:14 AM) *
Ugh...here we go again.

Right, Brady is the ONLY reason the Patriots are good. Because, well, football is such an individual sport afterall...

So, your arguments are:

-Belichick didn't have a good record in his first season and they were 0-2 before Beldsoe went down. I guess, anything less than perfection EVERY year means you're not good enough?

-Belichick is a defensive coach. Funny how they pretty much always rank near the top in offensive categories as well. I'd say he does a pretty good job on both sides of the ball.

-He's not a great evaluator of talent because their skilled players don't go on the excel elsewhere. I didn't say they are superstars. This is an argument for his system and being a good evaluator of talent. When someone says that, they also mean evaluating talent for their particular system. They (him and his staff) do this better than anyone out there. To argue otherwise is just plain stupid. When you can plug in any ole QB into that system and still win just helps prove that point. 13-5 is not a fluke. They went 11-5 WITHOUT Brady in 2008. Again, another argument for talent/system.

As I said, the question is, what would Brady do on another team? We'll never find out. Brady is a great QB but how great is the question.

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 27 2016, 01:43 PM) *
BB is every bit the great coach that he is made out to be. Every year there is another reason why the Pat's should begin their slide and every year he has his team competing this year they're . 3-0...with their 3rd string QB. Un fricking believable.

They make me sick.

Obviously having a QB of Brad's calibre helps a great deal, but the Pat's machine is a juggernaut and just keeps rolling. At some point things have to go south...but it doesn't look like any time soon.

You seem to forget average coach Andy Reid going 1-0 with his backup and 4-1 (with that one loss being a meaningless game) with his third stringer in 2002.

It's impressive. It's not earth shattering.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (D Rock @ Sep 26 2016, 02:58 PM) *
Yes to this. The same can be said of the 49er's dynasty years. They had a cake walk to division champ for a decade. Also Supa5 had a lousy NFC east to feat upon for the first half decade of his career.


There is one problem with your idea..

2000
Giants 12-4 Won the division
2002
Giants 10-6 Wildcard
2003
Cowboys 10-6 Wildcard
2005
Everyone was better
Giants 11-5
Skins 10-6
2006
Cowboys 9-7 Wildcard
2007
Cowboys 13-3
Giants 10-6
Skins 9-7
2008
Giants 12-4 Won the division

There was a down year here and there but the division was no cake walk with a wildcard team coming from the division or the Eagles not winning the division in nearly every season.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 27 2016, 02:44 PM) *
You seem to forget average coach Andy Reid going 1-0 with his backup and 4-1 (with that one loss being a meaningless game) with his third stringer in 2002.

It's impressive. It's not earth shattering.

In and of itself it may not be earth shattering. Combine it with the regular season wins (.734 win%) playoff appearances and wins (.710 win%), division titles, and conference championships....

Once AR has won 4 championships in 6 SB appearances you can mention him in the same breath as BB.

You don't have to like him, I certainly don't...can't stand the smug fukk'r, but he just may be the greatest HC in the history of the NFL.
mcnabbulous
Right. And like I said. The evidence from his career without Brady tells a pointedly different story. That's undeniable.

Seven years. One playoff appearance.

He's a very good coach. His greatness is overstated.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 27 2016, 06:26 PM) *
Right. And like I said. The evidence from his career without Brady tells a pointedly different story. That's undeniable.

Seven years. One playoff appearance.

He's a very good coach. His greatness is overstated.

There's nothing overstated about BB. Over 17 seasons in NE, with different moving parts; OC, DC, WR, QB, RB, OL, DL, CB etc., he wins a bunch of games year in and year out.

QUOTE
"Bill Belichick coaches the team. Bill Belichick runs the draft. Lots of guys have left the staff, and they've kept winning. Nobody coaches a team in every facet of the game in a more complete, better way than Bill Belichick. Tom has a lot to do with it, but at the end of the day, he's one player."
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 27 2016, 06:14 PM) *
There's nothing overstated about BB. Over 17 seasons in NE, with different moving parts; OC, DC, WR, QB, RB, OL, DL, CB etc., he wins a bunch of games year in and year out.

No. The sample size on him succeeding without Brady is incredibly small and unimpressive. You can disregard his stint in Cleveland if you want. I don't know why he gets that benefit.

He simply hasn't gotten it done without Brady. That's irrefutable. You can quote as many knob gobbling reporters as you want on the subject.
Phits
Brady is only one part of the equation. Yes, he's a very big part of it, but BB oversees every facet on the team. A team that has been very successful under his watch ( the longest dynasty stretch in the history of the game). I don't see how you dismiss that so easily.

His stint in Cleveland had its ups and downs. The Browns are in football purgatory. Since he left (in 94), they have had 2 winning seasons. His 11-5 season with the Browns is the best record they have had in almost 3 decades. The problems in Cleveland go well beyond coaching.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 27 2016, 10:13 PM) *
No. The sample size on him succeeding without Brady is incredibly small and unimpressive. You can disregard his stint in Cleveland if you want. I don't know why he gets that benefit.

He simply hasn't gotten it done without Brady. That's irrefutable. You can quote as many knob gobbling reporters as you want on the subject.

mcnabbulous
I acknowledge that BB is an excellent coach. I don't buy into the idea that he is exceptionally better than the other premium coaches. Especially because he's never proven he can win without Brady.

Brady + shitty division = dynasty

I think you could name several other coaches who would have had similar success during that stretch. And I doubt those guys would have been as sleazy in the process.
Reality Fan
2001
Dolphins wildcard at 11-5
2002
Jets win division at 9-7
2003
Dolphins 10-6
2004
Jets wildcard at 10-6
2005
Dolphins 9-7
2006
Jets wildcard at 10-6
2008
Dolphins win division at 11-5
Pats miss playoffs without Brady but go 11-5
2009
Jets wildcard at 9-7
2010
Jets wildcard at 11-5

As you can see, up until 2011 the division was anything but weak. In all but 1 year the 2nd place team was a wildcard team or a team other than the Pats won the division. Add to that the Pats went 11-5 with a mediocre QB in Cassel.

The last few years the division has been weak but for the majority of the Brady tenure it was no more weak than any other division in football.

Rick
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 27 2016, 10:13 PM) *
You can disregard his stint in Cleveland if you want. I don't know why he gets that benefit.

Name a coach who's been successful in Cleveland. That's why he gets the benefit...
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 28 2016, 01:51 AM) *
I acknowledge that BB is an excellent coach. I don't buy into the idea that he is exceptionally better than the other premium coaches. Especially because he's never proven he can win without Brady.

He has a winning record in NE without Brady in the lineup.

QUOTE
Brady + shitty division = dynasty

Hyperbole

QUOTE
I think you could name several other coaches who would have had similar success during that stretch.

I believe that you would be mistaken, but let's play your game...name several coaches who would have the similar success with the same level of personnel (player and coaches) changes while wearing both the HC and GM hat.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 28 2016, 11:52 AM) *
He has a winning record in NE without Brady in the lineup.

14-13. Zero playoff appearances.


QUOTE
Hyperbole

Says you. Consider me unimpressed by dominating the likes of Pennington, Sanchez, Fitzpatrick, Jay Fiedler, Ryan Tannehill and other trash on a yearly basis.

QUOTE
I believe that you would be mistaken, but let's play your game...name several coaches who would have the similar success with the same level of personnel (player and coaches) changes while wearing both the HC and GM hat.

Honestly, you give Brady to any coach and they would have tons of success. Wisenhunt went to a Super Bowl because he had Kurt Warner.
Rick
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 28 2016, 06:37 PM) *
14-13. Zero playoff appearances.


Yes, and the year they lost him for the season, they won 11 games and missed the playoffs. Hardly a scrub season.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Rick @ Sep 28 2016, 05:01 AM) *
Name a coach who's been successful in Cleveland. That's why he gets the benefit...

They were a different franchise when he was there. Literally.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Rick @ Sep 28 2016, 05:38 PM) *
Yes, and the year they lost him for the season, they won 11 games and missed the playoffs. Hardly a scrub season.

Yeah, with a team that had won 16 games the previous regular season. No drop off at all. No sir.

Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 28 2016, 06:37 PM) *
14-13. Zero playoff appearances.

You are mistaken. He not only made the post season with Cleveland but also won a game. That alone should be a qualifier for GOAT.

QUOTE
Says you. Consider me unimpressed by dominating the likes of Pennington, Sanchez, Fitzpatrick, Jay Fiedler, Ryan Tannehill and other trash on a yearly basis.

you may have a point if he only did it for a decade (like Reid), but this is 17 seasons of AFC East domination. That's unprecedented.

QUOTE
Honestly, you give Brady to any coach and they would have tons of success. Wisenhunt went to a Super Bowl because he had Kurt Warner.

Winning a multiple SB's isn't just "tons of success" it's rarified air. When you're the HC and GM and only have a single losing season after 17 years, it makes you the best.

I know, it hurts to admit it...but them's the facts jack.

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 28 2016, 06:46 PM) *
Yeah, with a team that had won 16 games the previous regular season. No drop off at all. No sir.

I guess when you set perfection as the standard all else pales in comparison? What was their regular season record the following season when Brady returned?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 28 2016, 06:05 PM) *
You are mistaken. He not only made the post season with Cleveland but also won a game. That alone should be a qualifier for GOAT.

You said with the Patriots. Which caveat do you want to use here? The "only with the Patriots"? Or the one playoff appearance in five attempts with the Browns?

QUOTE
you may have a point if he only did it for a decade (like Reid), but this is 17 seasons of AFC East domination. That's unprecedented.

Well, it's really been 15 years of AFC East domination. He missed the playoffs once to start (without Brady), once with Brady at the beginning, and another time without Brady.

So...and let me do the math here. That's 0-2 in the important stat without Brady.

I think if Reid (or several other coaches) had Brady, we could be having the same discussion about them.

QUOTE
Winning a multiple SB's isn't just "tons of success" it's rarified air. When you're the HC and GM and only have a single losing season after 17 years, it makes you the best.

And we disagree on what makes them so rare. That makes neither your or I right. But if Carson goes down the same path of greatness, I'm quite confident we will be talking about Doug's brilliance in a decade.

QUOTE
I know, it hurts to admit it...but them's the facts jack.

You've actually provided no facts to substantiate the idea that Belichick would succeed, let alone thrive, without Brady. I've got seven seasons of evidence to suggest otherwise. It's way more compelling data than your "facts."

It's funny that you think I'm pained by people overrating Belichick, when I've watched you do the same thing for the second half of McNabb's career for nearly a decade.

QUOTE
I guess when you set perfection as the standard all else pales in comparison? What was their regular season record the following season when Brady returned?

It was 10-6. They "dominated" their way to the division title over teams led by Mark Sanchez, Chad Henne and Ryan Fitzpatrick. Tough division there.
Phits
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 28 2016, 09:00 PM) *
You said with the Patriots. Which caveat do you want to use here? The "only with the Patriots"? Or the one playoff appearance in five attempts with the Browns?

Winning anything in CLE is a marker.


QUOTE
Well, it's really been 15 years of AFC East domination.

Which is unprecedented.

QUOTE
He missed the playoffs once to start (without Brady), once with Brady at the beginning, and another time without Brady.

So...and let me do the math here. That's 0-2 in the important stat without Brady.

Even Bill Walsh, Lombardi, Shula or "insert coach name" couldn't win every year.


QUOTE
I think if Reid (or several other coaches) had Brady, we could be having the same discussion about them.

There's the rub; your fan affection for Reid. It isn't likely that Reid would have the same success. The reasons are numerous.


QUOTE
And we disagree on what makes them so rare. That makes neither your or I right. But if Carson goes down the same path of greatness, I'm quite confident we will be talking about Doug's brilliance in a decade.

That's the difference. BB has final input on the entire team...in every facet. I am quite certain Schwartz and Roseman control the ball in their territory. Now if DP also becomes the defacto GM and develops a tremendous defensive mind and switches coordinators and players like socks....he would be a genius.


QUOTE
You've actually provided no facts to substantiate the idea that Belichick would succeed, let alone thrive, without Brady. I've got seven seasons of evidence to suggest otherwise. It's way more compelling data than your "facts."

FACT: BB has made the playoffs, as HC, without Brady
FACT: BB controls the entire team
FACT: Brady is the QB for the offense.

QUOTE
It's funny that you think I'm pained by people overrating Belichick, when I've watched you do the same thing for the second half of McNabb's career for nearly a decade.

The difference is that I am only offering an opinion. You actually think you're right.


QUOTE
It was 10-6. They "dominated" their way to the division title over teams led by Mark Sanchez, Chad Henne and Ryan Fitzpatrick. Tough division there.

The math suggests that 11-5 is a better record than 10-6.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Phits @ Sep 28 2016, 08:18 PM) *
Winning anything in CLE is a marker.

So that makes Marty Schottenheimer the best coach ever?

QUOTE
Which is unprecedented.

The Niners had similar success stretched across two coaches and QBs

QUOTE
Even Bill Walsh, Lombardi, Shula or "insert coach name" couldn't win every year.

Almost always when given elite QBs. And the eras were also very different. QB play and the passing game has never been as impactful and relevant.

QUOTE
There's the rub; your fan affection for Reid. It isn't likely that Reid would have the same success. The reasons are numerous.

I don't think this is specific to Reid.

QUOTE
That's the difference. BB has final input on the entire team...in every facet. I am quite certain Schwartz and Roseman control the ball in their territory. Now if DP also becomes the defacto GM and develops a tremendous defensive mind and switches coordinators and players like socks....he would be a genius.

You use that word too loosely. I suspect they'd actually be a better organization if he didn't require final input on all those things.

QUOTE
FACT: BB has made the playoffs, as HC, without Brady

14% of the time
QUOTE
FACT: BB controls the entire team

So
QUOTE
FACT: Brady is the QB for the offense.

By far the most important position in sports.

QUOTE
The difference is that I am only offering an opinion. You actually think you're right.

You literally said, "thems the facts, jack" in your last post.

QUOTE
The math suggests that 11-5 is a better record than 10-6.

Brady was coming off a serious knee injury. I think we've all seen how that impacts QBs, no?

He's basically been better every year since.
Rick
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 28 2016, 06:42 PM) *
They were a different franchise when he was there. Literally.

You're joking...literally...

The Browns have been a dogshit franchise forever...even back then. Not like they were actually good at any point and he came in a ruined it all....
Rick
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Sep 28 2016, 06:46 PM) *
Yeah, with a team that had won 16 games the previous regular season. No drop off at all. No sir.

Riiight...because there have been so many 16-0 teams in the past, right?

Is pot legal where you live? I mean, this is probably one of the most ridiculous arguments you've ever made around here..and that's saying something. The fact that there haven't been a whole lot of other coaches who've gone 16-0 makes him one of the best ever--especially when you throw in the rest of what he's done for an extended period of time.

I guess you don't think there's EVER been a coach in the NFL who was that good if you don't think he is...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.