Drew Bashing
KMTHALER
Living in New England is a lesson in humility. I have read tons of so
called fans say things like Drew bites, he sucks, he isn't tough, I would
take other QB's in a heartbeat, and other mindless drival not worth
discussing.
I may only be 30 but I remember that New England fans booed Ted Williams
for his shoddy play in the field, New England fans never embraced Bill
Russel even after he won us 13 championships (as a matter of fact his
treatment by the fans so disgusted him that he will not grant interviews
with the Boston press to discuss his days as a Celtic.) and New England
fans chased Wade Boggs out of town even though he is a hall of fame Third
Baseman.
My point is the fans here are never satisified. Drew Bledsoe is the best
quarterback this organization has ever had, period. DOes he make a
mistake, sure he is not perfect. Does he run like Grogan. No. But he
does not have to. He has a golden arm, great vision, wonderful touch and
numbers to prove that he is one of the best quarterbacks in the league.
What I find really amusing is that the last time a young quarterback took
this team to the Superbowl and lost we ran him out of town. Bledsoe is a
far better quarterback than Eason ever was and he should be revered and
appreciated for his talents.
Just the thoughts of a humble fan.
Kent Thaler
Section 321
Scott James O'Neil
KMTHALER (kmth...@aol.com) wrote:
: Living in New England is a lesson in humility. I have read tons of so
I agree with everything you said except "wonderful touch."
He must develop that to become the best QB in
the NFL. Until then he will merely be
one of the three best.
BTW, I attended Flutie's first game, and afterward,
I called a sports radio program to suggest that the
Pats trade Eason because the fans would never give
him a chance while Flutie remained on the team.
The hosts laughed me off the radio, and two
years later, we cut Eason free with no
compensation at all. There was just no
way for Eason to win over the fans of N.E.
: Kent Thaler
: Section 321
--
Take care...
__________________________________
\ "WE must play some time." \
\ "Certainly we must -- by POST!" \ ___________________________
\ \ Scott O'Neil \
\ Live from the Green Dome... \ \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Games" web page at... \
\ "www.combsnet.com/games" \
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sullman
I agree 100% Time to support the guy, he's not going anywhere anytime
soon. And give him some credit too--he's about as down-to-earth and
just-like-a-normal-guy as you'll see for a player of his magnitude.
Our former coach may have said it best--in four years he's made it to 2
Pro-Bowls and led his team to the Super Bowl. What more can we ask? Based
on this, you can't change much.
And I offer this. Despite the fact that I despise Mr. Marino (whom I think
is over-rated and a product of a system and not the greatest QB ever,
though we don't need to discuss that right now), I will say this. At the
same point in his career, Drew is in front of him in yards, comp att to
name a few. TD's? No. But then again, a 48 TD year and a comparison of
the two teams' running games explains part of that. When looking at his
age and passing yardage, Drew has been the youngest ever to reach certain
milestones. These are facts.
Sometimes I think fans of this town have been spoiled by the likes of Bird,
Orr, Yaz, or Bourque to name a few. We may not have the greatest QB of all
time, but how many Joe Montana's are out there? And how many teams out
there do you think if they had a choice would swap their QB for Mr.
Bledsoe?
Sullman
KMTHALER
Thank you for being a man of reason...
A few more things to remember. Marino made it to exactly one superbowl,
lost and has never been back.
Orr was villified for leaving Boston as a free agent. ALthough time has
healed that wound the fact is when he came back to Boston the first time
as a Blackhawk he was booed. Yaz was considered the enemy when he took
over for Ted Williams. He was treated harshly by the media and by the
Boston fans (No Polak could replace Williams was a popular slogan in 1965
according to my Grandfather). And even the immortal Larry Bird is getting
his comeuppance. The fact that he is considering taking the Indiana job
has half this town up in arms calling him a turn coat.
We need to stop villifing our heroes and looking to watch them fail. They
are human and will stumble on their own. I think that we need to start
protecting our guys and let them know we support them completely.
Espically Drew, afterall he is going to QB us to our first championship
ever.
Dave Godes
> BTW, I attended Flutie's first game, and afterward,
Was this the game against the Colts that he won on a QB sneak? What a game!
> I called a sports radio program to suggest that the
> Pats trade Eason because the fans would never give
> him a chance while Flutie remained on the team.
> The hosts laughed me off the radio, and two
> years later, we cut Eason free with no
> compensation at all. There was just no
> way for Eason to win over the fans of N.E.
When we finally cut him loose he had zero value of course due to his
(elbow?) injury. However, even at the time of this game I believe he was
also essentially worthless wasn't he? Wasn't this the year that four
different QB's started - Wilson, Flutie, Grogan and Ramsey - and Tony
spent on IR?
I was never a huge Eason fan, though his '86 season _was_ phenomenal. If
the Pats defense had only kept moving after Blackmon (Rembert?) jumped
offside, who knows what might have happened?
I love Pats trivia...always chock full of positive reminiscences! ;-)
--
Dave Godes
MIT Sloan School of Management
Doctoral Student
phone: (617) 253-0159
fax: (617) 258-7597
Scott James O'Neil
Dave Godes (dgo...@mit.edu) wrote:
: > BTW, I attended Flutie's first game, and afterward,
: Was this the game against the Colts that he won on a QB sneak? What a game!
It was indeed. If this game couldn't show Ray Berry
that Flutie was what the Patriots needed, I guess he
never would understand. And, of course, his misuse
of Eason in the playoff game (against Denver, think it
was 1988) showed that he truly didn't get it.
: > I called a sports radio program to suggest that the
: > Pats trade Eason because the fans would never give
: > him a chance while Flutie remained on the team.
: > The hosts laughed me off the radio, and two
: > years later, we cut Eason free with no
: > compensation at all. There was just no
: > way for Eason to win over the fans of N.E.
: When we finally cut him loose he had zero value of course due to his
: (elbow?) injury. However, even at the time of this game I believe he was
: also essentially worthless wasn't he? Wasn't this the year that four
: different QB's started - Wilson, Flutie, Grogan and Ramsey - and Tony
: spent on IR?
Two years after leading the Pats to the Super
Bowl, he was not exactly worthless. The trade
I suggested was that the Pats swap Eason for
the then-injured Leslie O'Neal. O'Neal's team
needed a QB, and I thought this would be about
the best we could do.
Naturally, the radio hosts said I was nuts to
trade a player of Eason's talent for an injured
(I believe it was a severe knee injury) defensive
lineman. However, my point was not that we
should get rid of Eason because he was a
no-talent bum, just that the fans of this
area would never give him another chance
now that they had Flutie to cheer for.
I don't believe all the Tony-Eason-wears-
a-skirt-back-there hyperbole, but if the
fans weren't behind him, there was little
chance of success.
: I was never a huge Eason fan, though his '86 season _was_ phenomenal. If
: the Pats defense had only kept moving after Blackmon (Rembert?) jumped
: offside, who knows what might have happened?
: I love Pats trivia...always chock full of positive reminiscences! ;-)
: --
: Dave Godes
: MIT Sloan School of Management
: Doctoral Student
: phone: (617) 253-0159
: fax: (617) 258-7597
--
Lord Jeff
A few notes:
* The sheer audacity of comparing Drew Bledsoe with guys like Ted Williams and
Bill Russell is appalling. Absolutely appalling. When he has been playing for
ten years and won 5 super bowls, then maybe you can mention him in the same
sentence as them.
* Concerning statistics: You can get a lot better idea of how good a QB is by
actually watching him play than you do from a bunch of numbers. For every
stat you want to quote to support the idea that Bledsoe is great, I could
show you a game film that shows the exact opposite.
* Concerning Doug Flutie: A number of you seem to think that Flutie was Gods
gift to quarterbacks. How many of you watched him play with the Bears after
he left the Patriots? How many of you saw him struggle to see over the heads
of oncoming pass rushers? How many of you think that going to the CFL was a
a step up in the caliber of football he was playing? If Flutie was so great
he would still be in the NFL and not in the Molson Golden League. Do not get
me wrong, I liked the kid, but lets try to have just a little realism in our
lives, shall we?
* Concerning New England Sports Fans: True, we are tough on the players. We
demand a high level of excellence and we are quick to point out when something
is lacking. However, we are also some of the most intelligent sports fans
around - have you seen what passes for discussion on some *other* football
newsgroups?
I have said on a number of occasions that I will be happy if Drew proves me
wrong and turns out to be a Hall of Famer. I root for him when he is on the
field - but I do not think it is disloyal to express my disappointment when
he screws up.
There is a difference between loyalty and being a sheep.
-Jeff
----
Jeffrey B. Conti, Amherst '96| "My brother Esau is an hairy man, while I am a
aka "Lord Jeff" | smooth man." - Jacob, Genesis
Opinions expressed are my |"So okay, I'm a conservative, what are you going
own, so tough noogies. | to do, shoot me?" *gunshot* *gunshot* *gunshot*
Scott James O'Neil
Lord Jeff (jbc...@unix.amherst.edu) wrote:
: A few notes:
: * The sheer audacity of comparing Drew Bledsoe with guys like Ted Williams and
: Bill Russell is appalling. Absolutely appalling. When he has been playing for
: ten years and won 5 super bowls, then maybe you can mention him in the same
: sentence as them.
Actually, Bledsoe is well on his way to becoming a Ted
Williams type player. All stats and no championships.
I do believe, however, that he has plenty of time to
turn it around, and I think he will do so in short order.
Russell, on the other hand, has no peer in this town.
In fact, he has few peers in sports in general; the
guy flat out know how to win, and that's the point
of the whole thing, isn't it?
: * Concerning statistics: You can get a lot better idea of how good a QB is by
: actually watching him play than you do from a bunch of numbers. For every
: stat you want to quote to support the idea that Bledsoe is great, I could
: show you a game film that shows the exact opposite.
And I can show you a game film that supports his greatness
if asked to do so. Let's face it, Drew hasn't received
unanimous praise, and he is at a cross-roads with some
fans -- needing to show some more leadership to satisfy
the rest of the electorate. He could go either way from
this point, but that's ALWAYS tru of athletes. We judge
their previous performances to predict their future
ones, but previous greatness or futility is never
a guarantee of anything in the present of future.
That's what makes discussions like this possible
and keeps them interesting.
: * Concerning Doug Flutie: A number of you seem to think that Flutie was Gods
: gift to quarterbacks. How many of you watched him play with the Bears after
: he left the Patriots? How many of you saw him struggle to see over the heads
: of oncoming pass rushers? How many of you think that going to the CFL was a
: a step up in the caliber of football he was playing? If Flutie was so great
: he would still be in the NFL and not in the Molson Golden League. Do not get
: me wrong, I liked the kid, but lets try to have just a little realism in our
: lives, shall we?
: * Concerning New England Sports Fans: True, we are tough on the players. We
: demand a high level of excellence and we are quick to point out when something
: is lacking. However, we are also some of the most intelligent sports fans
: around - have you seen what passes for discussion on some *other* football
: newsgroups?
: I have said on a number of occasions that I will be happy if Drew proves me
: wrong and turns out to be a Hall of Famer. I root for him when he is on the
: field - but I do not think it is disloyal to express my disappointment when
: he screws up.
: There is a difference between loyalty and being a sheep.
: -Jeff
: ----
: Jeffrey B. Conti, Amherst '96| "My brother Esau is an hairy man, while I am a
: aka "Lord Jeff" | smooth man." - Jacob, Genesis
: Opinions expressed are my |"So okay, I'm a conservative, what are you going
: own, so tough noogies. | to do, shoot me?" *gunshot* *gunshot* *gunshot*
--
Edward Teach
On 9 May 1997 16:50:27 GMT, jbc...@unix.amherst.edu (Lord Jeff)
wrote:
You have got to be kidding. You can tell more from game film
than statistics. Wow, what an eye. So who picks the films. Or do
you just pick the films that support your opinions.
Drew's biggest problem is people like yourself who search for
the negatives and are blind to the positives. He's only 24, has shown
improvement every year. He has a strong arm. He already has great
stats, but still hasn't reached his prime yet. The sky is the limit
for him.
Yes, he gets shaky under strong pressure. It showed up more
after he separated his shoulder and continued to play. This caused a
few problems for him, but he worked his way through some of them last
year. And will work thru the other problems this year.
He is right now one of the top 5 QB's in the NFL. Everyone
wants a runningback/passer QB that can heave the ball 90 yds or
scramble for a 30 yd gain. Hey a few ballet lessons, maybe a year of
kung-fu ... who knows.
Looking forward to the coming season.
GO PATS
>A few notes:
>
>* The sheer audacity of comparing Drew Bledsoe with guys like Ted Williams and
>Bill Russell is appalling. Absolutely appalling. When he has been playing for
>ten years and won 5 super bowls, then maybe you can mention him in the same
>sentence as them.
>
>* Concerning statistics: You can get a lot better idea of how good a QB is by
>actually watching him play than you do from a bunch of numbers. For every
>stat you want to quote to support the idea that Bledsoe is great, I could
>show you a game film that shows the exact opposite.
>
Steven A. Kelts
> Lord Jeff (jbc...@unix.amherst.edu) wrote:
> : * Concerning statistics: You can get a lot better idea of how good a QB is by
> : actually watching him play than you do from a bunch of numbers. For every
> : stat you want to quote to support the idea that Bledsoe is great, I could
> : show you a game film that shows the exact opposite.
>
Other "Drew-Bashing" comments snipped
For those of you now on the group who may not know "Lord Jeff" because of
his recent hiatus from the list, let me assure you that he is one of the
more inveterate "Drew-Bashers," who has, for at least the time since his
college made the mistake of giving him an email account, been coming here
to make a fool of himself with his irrational rants against Drew. But,
at least you stick to the topic of football, Jeff.
Jeff, you've never even given Drew a chance to impress you. You hold him
up to such a high standard and then knock him down because he doesn't
meet it. The truth about Drew up until this point is probably that he is a
very good NFL caliber quarterback, probably the best we've ever had. He
may someday be great, or he may someday be forgotten. But, he is hardly
as bad as you constantly, and loudly, insist.
> : * Concerning Doug Flutie: A number of you seem to think that Flutie was Gods
> : gift to quarterbacks. How many of you watched him play with the Bears after
> : he left the Patriots? How many of you saw him struggle to see over the heads
> : of oncoming pass rushers? How many of you think that going to the CFL was a
> : a step up in the caliber of football he was playing? If Flutie was so great
> : he would still be in the NFL and not in the Molson Golden League. Do not get
> : me wrong, I liked the kid, but lets try to have just a little realism in our
> : lives, shall we?
Jeff, are you even old enough to remember Flutie's season with the Pats?
Are you old enough to remember his season with the Bears? By my
calculation, you were twelve. And you say, "I liked the KID?" Twelve
should be old enough to have known a little about football at the time,
but it doesn't seem like it from what you say here.
What people are saying here is that Flutie was the best quarterback that
we could put on the field at the time. Do you recall the "revenge game"
in which we beat the Bears at Foxboro to avenge our Super Bowl loss? It
was one of the most masterful quarterbacking jobs I have seen from any
Pats QB of any time, 5'9" or not. Flutie did well in the league,
exceptionally well for the assets he had. People here are merely trying
to say this -- that he did well.
But, once again you try to hold him up to some standard of perfection,
and then pretend we are all praising him as a "God," so that you can
knock him down.
Why don't you try to offer a realistic argument once in a while?
The Younger Kelts
Apologizing that this post only barely advances a discussion of football.
Ben Giordano
On 7 May 1997 19:26:48 GMT, son...@cs.umb.edu (Scott James O'Neil)
wrote:
I have to disagree with your statement that he is one of the three
best (active) quarterbacks in the league. Drew Bledsoe is certainly
one of the top quarterbacks but he's not one of the top three. Here
are the top 10 quarterbacks in my judgement (remember, it's just my
opinion, so don't be offended!):
1. Dan Marino
2. Troy Aikman
3. John Elway
4. Steve Young
5. Brett Favre
6. Mark Brunell
7. Drew Bledsoe
8. Jim Harbaugh
9. Kerry Collins
10. Vinny Testaverde
KMTHALER
Ben Giordano wrote:
<<I have to disagree with your statement that he is one of the three
best (active) quarterbacks in the league. Drew Bledsoe is certainly
one of the top quarterbacks but he's not one of the top three. Here
are the top 10 quarterbacks in my judgement (remember, it's just my
opinion, so don't be offended!):
1. Dan Marino
2. Troy Aikman
3. John Elway
4. Steve Young
5. Brett Favre
6. Mark Brunell
7. Drew Bledsoe
8. Jim Harbaugh
9. Kerry Collins
10. Vinny Testaverde>>
Ben,
I totally disagree with your list, it seems to me that you included
reputation as part of your criteria. The people in Miami would trade 37
year old Dan Marino for 24 year old Drew Bledsoe in a sec. Marino may
have been one of the 5 best of all time but in 1997 he is not in the top
5. Ditto on Elway accept he has New England's number.
My top ten and you can rip me for them if you want. I am a big boy and
can take it.
1. Farve
2. Bledsoe
3. Aikman - he is on the down side of his career been hit too much
4. Elway
5. Brunell
6. Marino
7. Young - he is also on the down side having been hit too much
8. Blake
9. Furrote
10 George
The question I ask is what team would not trade their quarterback for ours
straight up. The only two I can think of are Green Bay and Dallas and i
am not so sure that Dallas would not trade for Drew to get some youth.
Kent Thaler
Section 321
Priest
In article <mlerner-1005...@slip-49-11.ots.utexas.edu>,
mle...@mail.utexas.edu (Mitchell B. Lerner) wrote:
> In article <33754872...@nntp.netcruiser>, gior...@ix.netcom.com (Ben
> Giordano) wrote:
>
> > I have to disagree with your statement that he is one of the three
> > best (active) quarterbacks in the league. Drew Bledsoe is certainly
> > one of the top quarterbacks but he's not one of the top three. Here
> > are the top 10 quarterbacks in my judgement (remember, it's just my
> > opinion, so don't be offended!):
> >
> > 1. Dan Marino
> > 2. Troy Aikman
> > 3. John Elway
> > 4. Steve Young
> > 5. Brett Favre
> > 6. Mark Brunell
> > 7. Drew Bledsoe
> > 8. Jim Harbaugh
> > 9. Kerry Collins
> > 10. Vinny Testaverde
>
>
>
> Wel,l this is an interesting thread. But, Ben, no way can I agree with
> a few of these choices, for example, placing Marino at number 1. Maybe
> 5-10 years ago, but not any more. And Vinny makes it but not Jeff Blake?
> And you think Farve is only the 5th best QB in the league? I intend no
> flame here, just genuine curiosity when I ask why you hold Farve in such
> low regard; I think most football fans place him #1. Anyway, here is my
> top ten (IMHO):
>
>
> 1) Farve
> 2) Elway
> 3) Bledsoe
> 4) Young (only because he is hurt so often)
> 5) Brunell (will probably move up if he can do it for one more year)
> 6) Blake (a vastly underrated QB)
> 7) Marino
> 8) Aikman (a vastly overrated QB)
> 9) Harbaugh (Great attitude in spite of his arm)
> 10) George (Great arm in spite of his attitude)
>
This is a tough one. Favre has been very hot for two years, and has
matured into an exeptional QB. But Elway has carried that franchise on
his back for 13 years. He is also the comeback king. Of course he
wouldn't have had all those miracle comebacks if he had played in a decent
offense. the fact that Steve Young is the games all-time most efficient
passer should count for something in combination with his athletecism and
keen intellect. You are absolutely correct about Blake and George. None
of George's receivers ever complain about his "attitude." Eric Metcalf
wanted to follow him to Oakland.
I wouldn't put Aikman in the top ten. He has never played well under
adversity. And while I have seen him blow two minute drills, I can not
recall a single instance of him winning a game in the final minutes. He
is a very accurate passer. If I were choosing a QB for my team, my wish
list would go:
1)John Elway (shows no sign of decline)
2)Steve Young (a little fragile, but an all-time great)
3)Brett Favre
4)Jeff Blake (Uncanny Montanaesque ability to shake off mistakes and take
over a game. Best long ball in the game. Still just a tot.)
5)tie-Drew Bledsoe/Steve McNair (Bledsoe is a sure thing, but McNair looks
like the next Elway and already has a 90+ QB rating.)
6)Brunell (great athelete, great decision maker. Was a top drop back
passer in college. Loses points for religious obsession: I prefer a QB
whose god is an oblong spheroid.)
7)Marino (On the downside but still a supremely accurate passer. Jerk with
a really bad haircut.)
8)Jeff George (Most beautiful passer in the game. Also has great footwork)
9)Jeff Hostetler (Getting old, but still the least likely to throw the
game losing interception. His legs still move. Shares NFL's all time
lowest int. % with Joe Montana.)
10)Stan Humphries (Ever watch the Chargers offense without him?)
sleepers:
Craig Erickson (excellent play passer, has never really played poorly.
Victem of cap system)
John Friesz (Pure passer, good size. Has slow feet but decent release
makes up for it.)
Elvis Grbac (Is now the man in a familiar offense. A great prospect
developed by some top rate coaches.)
--
Priest
Ben Giordano
On 10 May 97 16:29:48 GMT, JWMI...@kidder.oit.umass.edu (Jacob W
Michaels) wrote:
>I disagree, so, here's mine.
>
>1. Farve -- the man is amazing, especially because I don't really consider
>his supporting staff to be THAT great. He means more to his team than
>Bledsoe does to us, I'd say.
Favre is amazing but he's too emotional (remember when he ran back to
the sideline in celebration after he completed his first pass in the
Super Bowl? It was only in the first few minutes and he acted as if
the Packers had won the SB) and hasn't completely matured yet. He
definitely means more to us than Bledsoe, not because the rest of his
team isn't good but that he is better overall than Bledsoe.
>2. Marino -- Yes, he's getting old and he hasn't had much surrounding him,
>but I think currently he's still right up there. If he keeps getting hurt
>as he has the last two years, he'll drop down (assuming he doesn't just
>retire).
I disagree; Marino is #1. Nobody can match his quick release and he
has one of the best throwing arms in history. In addition, he is great
at avoiding sacks (and defenders).
>3. Elway -- Same thing. Granted, Terrell Davis helped, but Elway was a big
>reason the Broncos were the best team in the regular season last year.
>
>4. Aikman -- Sure, he's been helped by a great supporting staff, but he's
>a good leader. Like Montana, he may not be quite as physically impressive
>as some of the other guys on the field, but his leadership makes up for it.
Aikman IS very impressive physically. He has one of the best throwing
arms; in fact, people often compare Bledsoe's arm to Aikman's.
>5. Young -- When he's on the field he does great stuff. His big problem
>of late is being on the field.
>
>6. Bledsoe -- When he's on the mark, he could be number two on the list.
>Unfortunately, sometimes he just doesn't play like he's even a top ten
>QB. As a whole, I think he falls about here. He should continue to improve
>with more experience and as his supporting staff becomes even better
>(with Brisby's return, a better OLine, and more experience together).
>
>7. Brunell -- He created stuff out of nowhere, without as good a supporting
>staff as Bledsoe. His leap over Otis Smith is one of the best running plays
>I've ever seen a QB make.
>
>8. Blake -- Like others have said, he's vastly underrated. With Coslet,
>the Bengals should finally get somewhere. (Which is cool, since I'm
>moving to Ohio possibly and Cinci can become my new second favorite team.)
What happened to Kerry Collins and Vinny Testaverde? Blake hasn't
reached their abilities and achievements yet.
>9. Harbaugh -- He just wins the games though he's not as pretty to watch
>as some other guys.
>
>10. There's a few possible choices here. Ferrotte is turning into one
>of those guys that just wins games. George has the physical ability but
>his problems drops him below this spot I think. Collins might be on
>here, but I haven't really seen him play, so I'm not sure.
>
>I don't think there's too many people arguing that Bledsoe isn't a top
>ten QB. (Then again, considering some of the guys out there, that's not
>hard to be -- Zolak could start over some of them in my opinion.) It's
>just his inconsistency that's annoying.
>
>Jacob Go Patriots
Ben Giordano
On Sat, 10 May 1997 10:29:11 -0600, mle...@mail.utexas.edu (Mitchell
B. Lerner) wrote:
Vinny Testaverde was ahead of Blake because his performance was much
better; believe it or not, his rating is the second highest in the AFC
(after Elway). Blake is rated 7th. In addition, Testaverde had over
4,000 yards while Blake only had slightly more than 3,600. The former
had a completion percentage of 59.2 and the latter had just a 56.1
percentage.
I don't hold Favre in low regard at all. Look at my list again; he was
behind great quarterbacks like Marino, Aikman, Elway, and Young. That
is very impressive company to be in. Just because he just won the
Super Bowl doesn't make him "better" than the ones I just mentioned.
If he wins two more Super Bowls, then I would place him above Young.
You have to understand that he only has a fraction of the experience
that Marino, Aikman, Elway, and Young have.
One more thing: Green Bay didn't win solely on his arm. It wasn't as
if Green Bay won a close game; Favre wasn't under intense pressure
(unlike Bledsoe). They still had a 6-point lead before Desmond
Howard's kickoff return for a touchdown. In the 1996 NFC Championship
game against Dallas, Favre was under great pressure and buckled.
Fortunately for him (and the Packers), Dallas didn't make it to the
championship game.
>1) Farve
>2) Elway
>3) Bledsoe
>4) Young (only because he is hurt so often)
Young is hurt because he is effectively the 49ers' running back. They
never had a true (or adequate) replacement for Ricky Watters. If you
discount his injuries (it's not his fault, so you shouldn't penalize
him for it), he is much better than Bledsoe, considering his skills,
mobility, and experience.
>5) Brunell (will probably move up if he can do it for one more year)
>6) Blake (a vastly underrated QB)
>7) Marino
>8) Aikman (a vastly overrated QB)
I disagree with this; how can you place Blake (of all people) above
Aikman? Aikman earned his place among the great quarterbacks. He is
often cited as Bledsoe's model if Bledsoe were to reach his full
potential. The two are very similar; both were #1 overall picks and
both have great arms. The main difference, at least for now, is that
Aikman delivered and Bledsoe hasn't. It's also true that his three
Super Bowl rings don't hurt his reputation; Montana's four Super Bowl
rings is the reason why people consider him the greatest quarterback
of all time. Even if you disagree with such a statement, you have to
consider him the most successful quarterback of all time.
>9) Harbaugh (Great attitude in spite of his arm)
>10) George (Great arm in spite of his attitude)
Harbaugh also has great leadership, something that Bledsoe lacks.
Jacob W Michaels
Ben Giordano (gior...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>On 10 May 97 16:29:48 GMT, JWMI...@kidder.oit.umass.edu (Jacob W
>Michaels) wrote:
>>I disagree, so, here's mine.
>>
>>1. Farve -- the man is amazing, especially because I don't really consider
>>his supporting staff to be THAT great. He means more to his team than
>>Bledsoe does to us, I'd say.
>Favre is amazing but he's too emotional (remember when he ran back to
>the sideline in celebration after he completed his first pass in the
>Super Bowl? It was only in the first few minutes and he acted as if
>the Packers had won the SB) and hasn't completely matured yet. He
I disagree with the idea emotion is bad. It's worked for Marino.
Isn't one of the criticisms of Bledsoe (though moreso earlier last
year) that he didn't show enough emotion?
>>8. Blake -- Like others have said, he's vastly underrated. With Coslet,
>>the Bengals should finally get somewhere. (Which is cool, since I'm
>>moving to Ohio possibly and Cinci can become my new second favorite team.)
>What happened to Kerry Collins and Vinny Testaverde? Blake hasn't
>reached their abilities and achievements yet.
I haven't seen Collins enough to judge, though I've heard good things
about him. I'm not a fan of Testaverde. I think his years in the NFL,
no offense to the guy, show he was never as good as expected. His
recent success is based on being in Marchibroda's system which could have
made Secules into a pro bowler. Vinny is a starting NFL QB, I'll give
him that, but I can't say he's one of the elites. I'd rank him somewhere
around 20 I think.
Jacob Go Patriots!
Mitchell B. Lerner
In article <337baec1...@nntp.netcruiser>, gior...@ix.netcom.com (Ben
Giordano) wrote:
>
> Vinny Testaverde was ahead of Blake because his performance was much
> better; believe it or not, his rating is the second highest in the AFC
> (after Elway). Blake is rated 7th. In addition, Testaverde had over
> 4,000 yards while Blake only had slightly more than 3,600. The former
> had a completion percentage of 59.2 and the latter had just a 56.1
> percentage.
True, Vinny had great numbers last year, and I believe went to the Pro
Bowl (deservedly). But, that was just one year. The rest of his career,
I think, speaks for itself. Bear in mind that last year he played for a
pass-happy team with an awful defense, so his stats are a bit inflated.
Still, I agree that if you rate QB's based only on last year, sure he
makes the list, but one season does not a career make, especially when the
other years were awful.
>
> I don't hold Favre in low regard at all. Look at my list again; he was
> behind great quarterbacks like Marino, Aikman, Elway, and Young. That
> is very impressive company to be in. Just because he just won the
> Super Bowl doesn't make him "better" than the ones I just mentioned.
> If he wins two more Super Bowls, then I would place him above Young.
> You have to understand that he only has a fraction of the experience
> that Marino, Aikman, Elway, and Young have.
Wait a second. A minute ago you were ranking Vinny highly because he was
good last year without considering his career stats, now you are ranking
others based on career performance without considering last season. For
example, no way can Young, who missed half of the season, be considered
great based on last years season; he only qualifies if you look at his
career. So, if you look at his, let's look at Vinny's also. My list
ranked them in order of who I would want coaching my team next season;
now, Young may be a first ballot hall-of-famer, but next season I woud
rather have someone with less talent (like Bledsoe) who will start 16
games.
>
> One more thing: Green Bay didn't win solely on his arm. It wasn't as
> if Green Bay won a close game; Favre wasn't under intense pressure
> (unlike Bledsoe). They still had a 6-point lead before Desmond
> Howard's kickoff return for a touchdown. In the 1996 NFC Championship
> game against Dallas, Favre was under great pressure and buckled.
> Fortunately for him (and the Packers), Dallas didn't make it to the
> championship game.
>
> >1) Farve
> >2) Elway
> >3) Bledsoe
> >4) Young (only because he is hurt so often)
>
> Young is hurt because he is effectively the 49ers' running back. They
> never had a true (or adequate) replacement for Ricky Watters. If you
> discount his injuries (it's not his fault, so you shouldn't penalize
> him for it), he is much better than Bledsoe, considering his skills,
> mobility, and experience.
Of course I should penalize him for it. The injuries may not be his
fault, but they still affect his performance and therefore need to be
considered when he is evaluated. Hell, I think Cam Neely would have been
one of the greatest ever if he had 2 knees, but he didn't, so he's not.
Would you rank Rod Woodson as one of the league's best corners,since his
ACL problems are not his fault? Should Bill Walton go the Hall of Fame?
Mark Fydrich? Bottom line for me: I would not trade Bledsoe for Young
because, much as I recognize Young's superior talent, I want a QB who I
can rely on to start 16 games for the next few seasons.
>
>
> >5) Brunell (will probably move up if he can do it for one more year)
> >6) Blake (a vastly underrated QB)
> >7) Marino
> >8) Aikman (a vastly overrated QB)
>
> I disagree with this; how can you place Blake (of all people) above
> Aikman? Aikman earned his place among the great quarterbacks. He is
> often cited as Bledsoe's model if Bledsoe were to reach his full
> potential. The two are very similar; both were #1 overall picks and
> both have great arms. The main difference, at least for now, is that
> Aikman delivered and Bledsoe hasn't. It's also true that his three
> Super Bowl rings don't hurt his reputation; Montana's four Super Bowl
> rings is the reason why people consider him the greatest quarterback
> of all time. Even if you disagree with such a statement, you have to
> consider him the most successful quarterback of all time.
I have never been very impressed with Aikman. He has played behind
arguably the greatest offensive line of all-time, and has one of the
greatest running backs ever, and some top WR's and TE's. I think he
deserves a lot of praise for recognizing his role on the team; unlike most
QB's who need to lead their team to victory, Aikman just needs not to lose
it for his. Thus, he makes safe throws, rarely is picked off, etc.,
giving Emmitt, Michael, Jay, and a very good defense, time to win the
game. But, when the game is on the line, I have almost never seen him win
one by himself. Can you recall him leading a last minute TD drive that
didn't involve Emmitt breaking a long run or Michael turning a short pass
into a long gain? I can't. Now that the Cowboys seem to have started to
decline, I think his weaknesses are starting to show. He doesn't have a
powerful arm, he's not very mobile, and he doesn't throw the deep ball
with much touch. Last year, without Michael, and with Emmitt not up to
par, he was not as effective; just look at the playoff interceptions he
threw against Carolina because he was forced to step up and win the game
himself. As for Blake, I think he is more mobile, and throws a better
deep ball; give him the same weapons AIkman had (or even a running back
who can tear himself away from the Nintendo), and he would be awesome.
Mitch Lerner
Ben Giordano
On 10 May 1997 10:05:25 GMT, kmth...@aol.com (KMTHALER) wrote:
>Ben Giordano wrote:
><<I have to disagree with your statement that he is one of the three
>best (active) quarterbacks in the league. Drew Bledsoe is certainly
>one of the top quarterbacks but he's not one of the top three. Here
>are the top 10 quarterbacks in my judgement (remember, it's just my
>opinion, so don't be offended!):
>
>1. Dan Marino
>2. Troy Aikman
>3. John Elway
>4. Steve Young
>5. Brett Favre
>6. Mark Brunell
>7. Drew Bledsoe
>8. Jim Harbaugh
>9. Kerry Collins
>10. Vinny Testaverde>>
>
>Ben,
>I totally disagree with your list, it seems to me that you included
>reputation as part of your criteria. The people in Miami would trade 37
>year old Dan Marino for 24 year old Drew Bledsoe in a sec. Marino may
>have been one of the 5 best of all time but in 1997 he is not in the top
>5. Ditto on Elway accept he has New England's number.
My ranking factors in everything: abilities, experience, leadership,
etc..
I doubt that Jimmy Johnson would trade Bledsoe for Marino; the latter
has fully matured while the former is still very immature. The bottom
line is that Miami (or Dallas) will only exchange quarterbacks IF
Bledsoe can improve. Nobody knows for sure if Bledsoe will improve;
people can only guess. It's an uncertainty. As a Patriots fan, I
certainly hope that he can go to the next level (Montana, Marino).
I still consider Marino to be the best quarterback of all time (from
70s to now). The main reason he hasn't won even a single Super Bowl is
simple: the team around him was never as good as Jimmy Johnson's
Cowboys or Bill Walsh' 49ers (or even Parcells' Giants). Last season
was the first one in two decades that the Dolphins had a 1000-yard +
running back. A quarterback can't do everything.
Elway suffers the same problem (it seems that all AFC quarterbacks
do). As for his success against the Patriots, the Broncos beat the
Patriots because they were simply better at the time. They decisively
defeated the Patriots last season because they were the better team at
the time.
>My top ten and you can rip me for them if you want. I am a big boy and
>can take it.
There's no reason for me to attack you; most of the things we say are
opinions and opinions aren't right or wrong.
>1. Farve
>2. Bledsoe
>3. Aikman - he is on the down side of his career been hit too much
>4. Elway
>5. Brunell
>6. Marino
>7. Young - he is also on the down side having been hit too much
>8. Blake
>9. Furrote
>10 George
I'm surprised that you place Bledsoe before Aikman, Elway, Marino, and
Young. Bledsoe shouldn't be above those quarterbacks until he earns
his spot. He hasn't won anything and he is easily rattled. That cannot
be said of the 4 quarterbacks I just mentioned.
>The question I ask is what team would not trade their quarterback for ours
>straight up. The only two I can think of are Green Bay and Dallas and i
>am not so sure that Dallas would not trade for Drew to get some youth.
True, Green Bay would not trade Favre for anything. I doubt that
Dallas would trade for the same reasons that the Dolphins wouldn't
(above). Aikman is still one of the best quarterbacks in the league
(in history, too) and is not that old (32 or 33).
Joe Marinelli
In article <mlerner-1005...@slip-49-11.ots.utexas.edu>,
mle...@mail.utexas.edu (Mitchell B. Lerner) wrote:
> In article <33754872...@nntp.netcruiser>, gior...@ix.netcom.com (Ben
> Giordano) wrote:
>
> > I have to disagree with your statement that he is one of the three
> > best (active) quarterbacks in the league. Drew Bledsoe is certainly
> > one of the top quarterbacks but he's not one of the top three. Here
> > are the top 10 quarterbacks in my judgement (remember, it's just my
> > opinion, so don't be offended!):
> >
> > 1. Dan Marino
> > 2. Troy Aikman
> > 3. John Elway
> > 4. Steve Young
> > 5. Brett Favre
> > 6. Mark Brunell
> > 7. Drew Bledsoe
> > 8. Jim Harbaugh
> > 9. Kerry Collins
> > 10. Vinny Testaverde
>
>
>
Re-watched SB 31 again last night. John Madden commented that Bledsoe was:
"...impressive, you can't blame him for lack of running game. At one
point Pats ran 14 consecutive passing plays. One of his 3 (4?)
interceptions was a desperation throw........"
Considering the pass rush he faced, he kept the game close, brought the
team back and was a quick strike threat that had Green Bay anxious until
the last minutes.
However, he did not compare to Favre, who played an error-free game.
IMHO, with time & coaching, he could equal or exceed Favre, given his
abilities.
Joe
Priest
> Vinny Testaverde was ahead of Blake because his performance was much
> better; believe it or not, his rating is the second highest in the AFC
> (after Elway). Blake is rated 7th. In addition, Testaverde had over
> 4,000 yards while Blake only had slightly more than 3,600. The former
> had a completion percentage of 59.2 and the latter had just a 56.1
> percentage.
How many games did Vinny save with last minute heroics? How many did
Blake? Vinny has developed into a mature accurate passer. He can even
improvise a little nowadays. But he does not have the tenacity, and
ablilty to take control of a game, that Blake has.
If you insist on comparing their statistics, maybe you should look at more
than one year. For his ten year career, Vinny has a comp. % of 54.7 and a
passer rating of 72.4. Over the past five season Jeff completed 55.9% and
was rated 79.8. And unlike Vinny, Who starte his rookie season, Jeff has
only seen three seasons significant playing time. Blake throws tons of
TD's and is fairly stingy with the picks (66/41-1431 attempts). For his
part, Vinny has thrown more scores than picks in only three seasons
(157/168-2027 attempts). This was acceptable in the seventies, but under
the current rules...
Vinny's 1996 avg. passer rating in the second half of games was more
than 12 points lower than in the first. Blakes rose about 4 points.
Blake's passer rating on 4rth down was 86.8, Vinny's was 32.9. Blake is a
clutch passer who can take the game over, even if he looked poor in the
first half. Vinny can be rattled. I like Vinny, but he is no Jeff Blake.
--
Priest
Sullman
Curious as to what points the mobility of a QB gets. One of the biggest
reasons I don't agree with Marino #1 in this or any QB debate is his lack
of mobility. Heck, this guy made Kosar look like the speed demon QB on the
Dolphins.
Looking at this particular Top Ten, we really only have two immobile
QB's--Marino and Bledsoe. Especially Favre, Elway (well at least in his
hey day), Young, Brunell, and Harbaugh are very mobile and can improvise on
busted plays, and that's part of what makes them so dangerous. Brunell
gave everybody fits in the playoffs.
Granted the primary job is passing, and Marino has an incredible ability to
feel a rush and throw the ball somewhere, but I think mobility is an
important part of the package that both Marino and Bledsoe lack, which is
one big reason reason I think people find ton place the likes of Favre,
Young or Elway at the top. After all, take away that graceful swandive
against Arizona last year, how many times have we all wondered why our 6'5"
QB can't scramble (a la Buffalo last year) or make a simple QB sneak.
What does everybody else feel aboyut the importance of mobility?
Sullman
> >1. Farve
> >2. Marino --
> I disagree; Marino is #1. Nobody can match his quick release and he
> has one of the best throwing arms in history. In addition, he is great
> at avoiding sacks (and defenders).
> >3. Elway
> >4. Aikman
> >5. Young
> >6. Bledsoe
> >7. Brunell
> >8. Blake
> >9. Harbaugh
Ben Giordano
>>
>> Vinny Testaverde was ahead of Blake because his performance was much
>> better; believe it or not, his rating is the second highest in the AFC
>> (after Elway). Blake is rated 7th. In addition, Testaverde had over
>> 4,000 yards while Blake only had slightly more than 3,600. The former
>> had a completion percentage of 59.2 and the latter had just a 56.1
>> percentage.
>
>True, Vinny had great numbers last year, and I believe went to the Pro
>Bowl (deservedly). But, that was just one year. The rest of his career,
>I think, speaks for itself. Bear in mind that last year he played for a
>pass-happy team with an awful defense, so his stats are a bit inflated.
>Still, I agree that if you rate QB's based only on last year, sure he
>makes the list, but one season does not a career make, especially when the
>other years were awful.
Yes, he did go to the Pro Bowl (along with Brunell and Bledsoe). The
other years were considered "awful" because of people's high
expectations for him. Everyone predicted that he would be one of the
great quarterbacks. Unfortunately for him, he hasn't turned out that
way. But if you look at his career stats, he wasn't a "bad"
quarterback but was a little above average. You can't really Blake to
him or place Blake above him because the former has been a starter for
only a couple of years. Bear in mind that he was backup when Caroll
was coaching the Jets. I can't really judge how good Blake is or will
be because he's so new. Once he goes to the Pro Bowl, then I'll be
willing to compare him favorably with Testaverde. If Testaverde can
consistently repeat his performance of last season, he will at last
fulfill some of people's expectations.
>> I don't hold Favre in low regard at all. Look at my list again; he was
>> behind great quarterbacks like Marino, Aikman, Elway, and Young. That
>> is very impressive company to be in. Just because he just won the
>> Super Bowl doesn't make him "better" than the ones I just mentioned.
>> If he wins two more Super Bowls, then I would place him above Young.
>> You have to understand that he only has a fraction of the experience
>> that Marino, Aikman, Elway, and Young have.
>
>Wait a second. A minute ago you were ranking Vinny highly because he was
>good last year without considering his career stats, now you are ranking
>others based on career performance without considering last season. For
>example, no way can Young, who missed half of the season, be considered
>great based on last years season; he only qualifies if you look at his
>career. So, if you look at his, let's look at Vinny's also. My list
>ranked them in order of who I would want coaching my team next season;
>now, Young may be a first ballot hall-of-famer, but next season I woud
>rather have someone with less talent (like Bledsoe) who will start 16
>games.
When I ranked the quarterbacks, I assumed that they would be able to
play all 16 games and be injury-free. Bledsoe or anyone could be
injured next season without anybody expecting it. It would be
pointless to rank anybody if one had to assume that a quarterback
would be injured the next season.
Like you, I also ranked them in the order of who I wanted to lead my
team next season and not long-term. If I wanted a long-term
quarterback (5 to 10 years), then Favre would obviously be the easy
winner.
Aikman didn't have a good season for a simple reason: the team
virtually collapsed around him. His go-to guy, Jay Novacek, was out of
action for the whole season. Imagine what kind of year Bledsoe would
have had if Coates (his go-to guy, and not Glenn) was sidelined? The
result would have been significantly worse than Curtis Martin losing
Sam Gash.
Not only did Aikman lose Novacek, he also lost Irvin for much of the
season. Furthermore, Emitt Smith was injured and had a sub-par season.
Imagine what how Bledsoe would have fared if he had lost Terry Glenn
and Curtis Martin.
Ben Giordano
On 11 May 97 14:30:20 GMT, JWMI...@frost.oit.umass.edu (Jacob W
Michaels) wrote:
>Ben Giordano (gior...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>
>>Favre is amazing but he's too emotional (remember when he ran back to
>>the sideline in celebration after he completed his first pass in the
>>Super Bowl? It was only in the first few minutes and he acted as if
>>the Packers had won the SB) and hasn't completely matured yet. He
>
>I disagree with the idea emotion is bad. It's worked for Marino.
>Isn't one of the criticisms of Bledsoe (though moreso earlier last
>year) that he didn't show enough emotion?
Too much emotion (or of anything) is not good. He was overly excited
in the NFC championship game against Carolina and he promptly threw an
interception in the first quarter. Everybody was saying how he needed
to just calm down.
Yes, Bledsoe was criticized (and still is being criticized) for
showing too little emotion. I never said that quarterbacks should not
have emotion; I simply said that Favre had too much. In Bledsoe's
case, it *seems* that he doesn't care if the Patriots win or lose a
game. I'm sure that he does care but I wonder if he cares as much as
Marino, Favre, or other great quarterbacks.
>>>8. Blake -- Like others have said, he's vastly underrated. With Coslet,
>>>the Bengals should finally get somewhere. (Which is cool, since I'm
>>>moving to Ohio possibly and Cinci can become my new second favorite team.)
>
>>What happened to Kerry Collins and Vinny Testaverde? Blake hasn't
>>reached their abilities and achievements yet.
>
>I haven't seen Collins enough to judge, though I've heard good things
>about him. I'm not a fan of Testaverde. I think his years in the NFL,
>no offense to the guy, show he was never as good as expected. His
>recent success is based on being in Marchibroda's system which could have
>made Secules into a pro bowler. Vinny is a starting NFL QB, I'll give
>him that, but I can't say he's one of the elites. I'd rank him somewhere
>around 20 I think.
I'm not exactly a fan of Testaverde, either. When he came into the
league a decade ago or so, everyone said that he would be one of the
great quarterbacks (much like Bledsoe). Unfortunately, he failed
miserably. He is not one of the elite quarterbacks but he's certainly
much better than most starters.
Ben Giordano
On 12 May 1997 03:11:58 GMT, "Sullman" <sullman.nospam.@ziplink.net>
wrote:
>Curious as to what points the mobility of a QB gets. One of the biggest
>reasons I don't agree with Marino #1 in this or any QB debate is his lack
>of mobility. Heck, this guy made Kosar look like the speed demon QB on the
>Dolphins.
Mobility is important but in Marino's case, it's not. He makes up for
his immobility (partly due to his injuries) by having the quickest
release of any quarterbacks, a great ability to sense any pass rush or
blitz, and the best throwing arm.
>Looking at this particular Top Ten, we really only have two immobile
>QB's--Marino and Bledsoe. Especially Favre, Elway (well at least in his
>hey day), Young, Brunell, and Harbaugh are very mobile and can improvise on
>busted plays, and that's part of what makes them so dangerous. Brunell
>gave everybody fits in the playoffs.
Elway is simply the best mobile quarterback out there. Not only can he
run but he can also throw on the run; that's why he is so effective.
Favre can throw on the run but he's not as good a runner as Elway.
Brunell is the opposite; he can run very well but he doesn't throw on
the run as well as Elway or Favre. That is why the Patriots were able
to contain Brunell. The Patriots were very good at stopping the run;
as a result, Natrone Means and Brunell were prevented from
accumulating significant yardage. Unfortunately, the Patriots weren't
as good at defending against the passing game; that is why Favre was
so effective against the Patriots.
KMTHALER
Rather than arguing over what ranking each QB should receive, I ask a more
simple question:
What coach would not trade his QB straight up for Bledsoe. I think that
Mike Holgram would keep Farve, and I think that Barry Switzer would keep
Aikman. I disagree with everyone who does not believe Jimmy Johnson would
not swap QBs in a heart beat. He would pick up 13 years of youth. Ditto
with Mike Shannahan and the new guy in S.F (I forgot his name but I know
he was the coach at Cal). Marino, Young, and Elway may have a year or
two left but they are no longer tops in the league.
Our QB is one of the top 3 respected QBs in the league, I think he is
number 2. I would trade him straight up for Farve but would not trade
him for Aikman. His record and statistics are amoung the best of anyone
who is going to play in the league next year. In the end this is what we
are discussing. Who would you rather have running your team in 1997?
One other note: Vinnie Testerverde did not deserve to go to the Pro Bowl,
he stinks and has never lived up to his potential!
Kent Thaler
Go Section 321
Chris Smith
>Apples and Oranges. Just ask John Hannah what he thought of Tony Eason.
>Even the players knew.
>
>Chuck
>mcgi...@ll.mit.edu
>
Now if Doug had been left as QB.........
Off the server, over the T3, down the T1,
across ISND, through the Bitsurfr Pro.
Nothing But Net!
Priest
In article <337d07da...@nntp.netcruiser>, gior...@ix.netcom.com (Ben
Giordano) wrote:
>
> Yes, he did go to the Pro Bowl (along with Brunell and Bledsoe). The
> other years were considered "awful" because of people's high
> expectations for him. Everyone predicted that he would be one of the
> great quarterbacks. Unfortunately for him, he hasn't turned out that
> way. But if you look at his career stats, he wasn't a "bad"
> quarterback but was a little above average. You can't really Blake to
> him or place Blake above him because the former has been a starter for
> only a couple of years. Bear in mind that he was backup when Caroll
> was coaching the Jets. I can't really judge how good Blake is or will
> be because he's so new. Once he goes to the Pro Bowl, then I'll be
> willing to compare him favorably with Testaverde. If Testaverde can
> consistently repeat his performance of last season, he will at last
> fulfill some of people's expectations.
Jeff Blake went to the Pro Bowl in 1995-96. The only thing I remember
about that game is him throwing a beautiful slant. I can't remember the
receiver but it actually got me excited about that otherwise tedious game.
Blake deserved to go back to the probowl last year. He carried that
offense on his shoulders. The OL play was horrific. The running game
nonexistant. Regardless of his stats, he played superbly.
After 2 1/2 seasons as a starter, I would say the jury is is in.
Jeff was third string on the Jests. I think the number two guys were, in
succession, Browning Nagle and Jack Trudeau, but I don't really remember.
The Jests cut him to make room for Foley. He only threw 9 regular season
passes in NY.
I agree that Vinny was underrated for a long time. He was shackled by the
curse of Culverhouse in TB. I was sure he would do well in Cleveland. But
he has never evidenced the intangibles Jeff Blake oozes. Even in college.
BTW, I work with a woman whose brother roomed with Vinny at Miami. He was an RB.
--
Priest
Kanj...@xensei.com
Jeff:
On 9 May 1997 16:50:27 GMT, jbc...@unix.amherst.edu (Lord Jeff)
wrote:
>A few notes:
>
>* The sheer audacity of comparing Drew Bledsoe with guys like Ted Williams and
>Bill Russell is appalling. Absolutely appalling. When he has been playing for
>ten years and won 5 super bowls, then maybe you can mention him in the same
>sentence as them.
Jeff, relax. After all, how many championships did Ted Williams win?
Zero, I thought. Zero championships; what, was the rest of the team
that bad? Was this guy not a clutch hitter? I'd like to know what the
hell was wrong there.
Now Bill Russel, there's a winner.
>* Concerning statistics: You can get a lot better idea of how good a QB is by
>actually watching him play than you do from a bunch of numbers. For every
>stat you want to quote to support the idea that Bledsoe is great, I could
>show you a game film that shows the exact opposite.
Jeff, as I recall, you said the Pats have a potent passing offense.
That kind of implies a potent quarterback. It takes 2 halves to make
a whole, right? The whole yin & yang thing. A chain is only as strong
as its weakest link.
>* Concerning Doug Flutie: A number of you seem to think that Flutie was Gods
>gift to quarterbacks. How many of you watched him play with the Bears after
>he left the Patriots?
I thought that was before? Anyway, everyone knows Ditka is a complete
idiot when it comes to handling quarterbacks.
Anyway, plenty of people saw him play when he was with B.C. and the
Pats, who cares what happend with the Bears, was he a rookie that
year?
> How many of you saw him struggle to see over the heads
>of oncoming pass rushers?
Flutie was/is a great scrambler with an outstanding arm and has
terrific winning instincts.
Besides, I thought you like mobile quartebacks and last minute
heroics; remember the Hail Mary pass?
>How many of you think that going to the CFL was a
>a step up in the caliber of football he was playing?
I'll answer that. Zero. Nobody thinks his going to the CFL was a step
up in the caliber of football he was playing.
Why did you ask that kind of a question?
Did anyone ever say or imply to you that his moving to the CFL was a
step up? I can't really imagine anyone saying that. It really casts
some doubt on your credibility, there.
> If Flutie was so great
>he would still be in the NFL
That's bullshit. He was 9 and 5 as the Pats quarteback. I call that
being able to play in this league - there are a lot of teams who would
be glad with a 9 and 5 record. Berry used to put him in when the team
was doing lousy. Flutie would get the Pats going, give them some
momentum. Then Berry would PULL him for some incredible, totally
inexplicible reason. Why? What was his rationale? Who can ever know?
We can just guess and conjecture. It is just one of those frustrating
sports mysteries that seem to plague the poor, beleaugered, tread-upon
New England Sports Fan.
>and not in the Molson Golden League. Do not get
>me wrong, I liked the kid, but lets try to have just a little realism in our
>lives, shall we?
That's what I am trying to do. You have got to stop buying the company
line, and observe the evidence of your own eyes and mind.
>* Concerning New England Sports Fans: True, we are tough on the players. We
>demand a high level of excellence and we are quick to point out when something
>is lacking.
That doesn't make any sense. What does that mean "we demand
excellence"? You know as well as I we have little to no control over
the bizzarreness that defines New England professional sports.
You could say we HOPE and PRAY for excellence, but that we are jinxed
and doomed to suffer at the hands of bizzarro management techniques;
but to DEMAND something implies that we have some sort of CONTROL over
the process; and as you well know, we have little to none of that. So,
you should change "DEMAND" to "WISH" or "HOPE" or "WOULD VERY MUCH
LIKE" or something like that.
> However, we are also some of the most intelligent sports fans
>around - have you seen what passes for discussion on some *other* football
>newsgroups?
Or some of the blatherings posted by Jets fans into this newsgroup?
But, on the other hand, I've seen some very intelligent
thoughts/comments posted by individuals in other newsgroups.
>I have said on a number of occasions that I will be happy if Drew proves me
>wrong and turns out to be a Hall of Famer. I root for him when he is on the
>field - but I do not think it is disloyal to express my disappointment when
>he screws up.
But, as we've discussed before, you have to try to understand that
much of what he is put through is due to bizzaro management
techniques, like making him play half a season with an injured
shoulder (wierd, or what? this guy is getting paid $42 mil, regardless
of your opinion of his playing ability); or sensless play calling, as
you yourself have agreed to in previous posts. You don't think
sensless play-calling HELPS out a qb, do you?
>There is a difference between loyalty and being a sheep.
No one advocates being a sheep. But what's wrong with saying something
is good if it's good?
- Mark D. -
=========================================================
Break through the Kanji Barrier!
see KanjiCan at:
http://www.xensei.com/users/kanjican
By KanjiSoft Systems
=========================================================
Rick Palmacci
FG wrote:
>
> Ben Giordano <gior...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
> <337aac98...@nntp.netcruiser>...
> >
> >
> > Favre is amazing but he's too emotional (remember when he ran back to
> > the sideline in celebration after he completed his first pass in the
> > Super Bowl? It was only in the first few minutes and he acted as if
> > the Packers had won the SB) and hasn't completely matured yet. He
> > team isn't good but that he is better overall than Bledsoe.
> >
> >
> emotional quarterback rate lower in your opinion? I would prefer to have a
> fiery, emotional leader at quarterback than a cold as a cucumber qb just
> calling signals. I believe an emotional qb is a winning qb. Take a look at
> Elway, Marino, Kelly, Young Aikman during a 2 minute drill and then let me
> know if emotion is part of the equation. Just my opinion
>
> FG in NH
And what is wrong with Drew's 2 minute drills. They have usually ended
in 3-7 points.
Priest
In article <dgodes-1505...@flomac.mit.edu>, dgo...@mit.edu (Dave
Godes) wrote:
> In article <33812f01...@nntp.netcruiser>, gior...@ix.netcom.com (Ben
> Giordano) wrote:
> >
> > In any case, Aikman did manage to complete 63.7% of his passes last
> > season. Bledsoe has NEVER completed as many passes. Last season was
> > his best year and he completed only 59.9% of his passes. That
> > completion rate is very good but it's not close to Aikman's, even when
> > the latter had a horrible year.
>
I can't imagine a more useless statistic than comp. %. It has no bearing
at all on winning. In fact, a good QB sould be throwing intentional
incompletions all the time. If he eats the ball and takes a sack, it is
not negatively reflected in his passing stats. But it sure as hell hurts
the team and their chances of winning the ball game.
That said, Aikman is a very accurate passer. The main reason he has high
comp. % is because he places the ball very well and it is easy for his
receivers to make catch. But not having as high a comp. % is not a good
basis for criticizing other QB's.
> >
> > Dan Marino and John Elway have never won a Super Bowl and they
> > couldn't pull it off when it mattered (especially Elway). In most of
> > their Super Bowl appearances, their teams fell behind. Did they rally
> > their teams and win? No, they didn't. Aikman has three Super Bowl
> > rings; need I say more?
>
> This is actually a nice example of why I don't believe in the "you're not
> nothin' til you win it all" theory. Both Marino and Elway are far
> superior QBs, IMO, to Troy Aikman. I've seen both of them literally carry
> teams back and win (yes, some very big) games. I honestly don't recall
> Aikman doing very much of that (this could also be because I watch a hell
> of a lot more AFC games and many of these comeback wins were against the
> Pats so they stand out! ;-).)
I am a Giant's fan and watch every NFC east game I possibly can. I can't
recall a single great Aikman two minute drill. I do remember one
important scoring drive, but he didn't look that good. The drive hinged
on a bad pass interference call against Thomas Randolph. Randolph
stripped the ball from Kevin Williams and Re Cashen called it
interference.
--
Priest
Vishal Misra
>>>>> "Priest" == Priest <apr...@erols.com> writes:
Priest> I can't imagine a more useless statistic than comp. %. It
Priest> has no bearing at all on winning. In fact, a good QB sould
Priest> be throwing intentional incompletions all the time. If he
Priest> eats the ball and takes a sack, it is not negatively
Priest> reflected in his passing stats. But it sure as hell hurts
Priest> the team and their chances of winning the ball game.
Yes, exactly. Harbaugh had a "phenomenal" completion percentage early
last year, but if you factored in the sacks that he took, it didn't look
"phenomenal" anymore.
-Vishal