1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

Dilfer? He got propped up by an all-time great defense. He had 12 TDs and 11 interceptions. He was a bum. 

Did I say Dilfer was good? Neither was Eli. Eli  was better than Dilfer and Johnson, but not by some huge margin. He could win games for both teams. Plus he's butt ugly.

32 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Trent Dilfer: QBR, 60.1, 64.8, 82.8, 74.0, 75.8, 76.0 injuries were his problem, and playing on bad TB teams, when he went to Balt he was 7-1 and 4-0 in the playoffs, the same level of play that he showed in TB, but a much better team.

Brad Johnson was before QBR, but career 82.5 rating, similar to Eli. 8-5 in Minn in 1997, took Wash to the playoffs in 1999, TB in 2002.

Both were limited QBs who won in the playoffs because they were smart veterans surrounded by good talent.

Problem for most limited QBs is they tend to end up on bad teams, like Fitzpatrick, where their flaws are exposed.

 

 

Trent dilfer one of the best defenses in the History of the NFL carried him to a 4-0 record in the playoffs. Like if you can tell me the eagles are building an all time defense then yes you can. However the eagles haven’t done that in about 3 decades. So that’s unlikely. 

And yet neither one of them lasted as long as Eli Manning. you pretend like Eli Manning did not have some really bad teams in his giants tenure. They were not always great either. You act like the Giants when he got there were good and from 2012 to 2015 they had crappy rosters besides Eli Manning not playing very well.

I don’t think Eli Manning is great. However I do know he is better than Trent Dilfer who was carried immensely by an all-time defense of the ravens and Brad Johnson who did not last nearly as long as Eli Manning. Johnson had 125 starts and Eli went 234 starts. 

Do I think Eli Manning is great? No however I see Eli Manning is going to be up for Pro football Hall of Fame induction voting. The other two are not even remotely close. Does Eli Manning deserve to get in? Hell no. However the fact that he’s even involved in that discussion tells you how much better over a longer period of time than Brad Johnson and trent dilfer were 

 

18 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Young would have been the first overall but he elected to go to the USFL instead.  He absolutely counts.

The "era you mentioned" was 20-30 years. But if you only want to do back 20 then Hostetler and Rypien fall off the list of "meh" QBs who have won it all.

Only want to go back 10 you lose Manning, Johnson and Dilfer as well.

Regardless of what timefrom you want to look at teams with elite QBs win much more frequently than those without.  

 

I never mentioned Rypien or Hostetler in my lists above cause I was keeping it in the modern cap era of 20 years. 

Also doesnt matter "IF" Fact is Young was not selected in that NFL draft because he took the USFL(drafted 11th). He was not a top 10 drafted QB. Lets also not forget he had to get traded and be a backup and finally get the spot on one of the all time great teams before he took over. 

My point is the elite QBs are mostly not coming from the top 10 draft spots. You have more fails then winning tickets. Also when you do get that winning ticket if you didnt build a nice team around them they didnt get a SB. Plenty of examples of them as well. Id rather build the solid team first with a avg/good QB then draft a top 10 QB, esp in this years draft with nothing but projects. That really is where this all started from. Lance, Fields, Wilson, all projects. 

1 minute ago, ManuManu said:

He sucks at QB sneaks. 

Definitely the one area Wentz has him beat. Wentz may routinely throw balls 10 feet over receivers heads, but no one is better than the guy at QB sneaks.

5 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Did I say Dilfer was good? Neither was Eli. Eli  was better than Dilfer and Johnson, but not by some huge margin. He could win games for both teams. Plus he's butt ugly.

Uh, yeah, Eli was better than Dilfer by a wide margin...

9 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

Uh, yeah, Eli was better than Dilfer by a wide margin...

Thank you. I don’t even think Eli Manning is elite or great. However he did it for 234 starts. That doesn’t happen in the NFL unless you’re somewhat good. Dilfer and Brad Johnson got nowhere close to that. Pretending like Eli Manning is in the same category as Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson is ridiculous. 

Mahomes not elite is by far the dumbest thing I’ve read in here and Dumblebear has been posting all day. 

48 minutes ago, Mike030270 said:

Peyton is a HOFer but played like crap in the playoffs. Broncos defense won the SB. Defenses have been screwed by the new rules though. I don't think you can win a SB without a top QB anymore

We won in 2017 with Nick Foles.  The Patriots won in 2018 putting up only 13 points by holding the Rams to only 3.

(Stolen from another poster...can't remember who)

Every time @DumbleBear posts:

Has anyone went on the bears boards or reddit. Seems like best writers and fans are way against the Wentz trade. 

Watch them back out. 

3 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

We won in 2017 with Nick Foles.  The Patriots won in 2018 putting up only 13 points by holding the Rams to only 3.

You knew going into that game belichick was going to make Goff’s look awful. That makes me happy cause the Saints got screwed on that PI call and likely would’ve been a better opponent but yet it was nice seeing Payton not get a chance to win another SB. I do feel a little bad for Drew Brees cause I don’t have anything against him. I just hate the rest of the Saints

4 minutes ago, AzBirdGang said:

Has anyone went on the bears boards or reddit. Seems like best writers and fans are way against the Wentz trade. 

Watch them back out. 

I’m sure the fans aren’t thrilled. Probably the same feeling we had when we found out we were trading for Sam Bradford. 

Its been pretty quite today with trade rumors. Thats when the real offers are getting tossed around. 

31 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

I never mentioned Rypien or Hostetler in my lists above cause I was keeping it in the modern cap era of 20 years. 

Also doesnt matter "IF" Fact is Young was not selected in that NFL draft because he took the USFL. He was not a top 10 drafted QB. Lets also not forget he had to get traded and be a backup and finally get the spot on one of the all time great teams before he took over. 

My point is the elite QBs are mostly not coming from the top 10 draft spots. You have more fails then winning tickets. Also when you do get that winning ticket if you didnt build a nice team around them they didnt get a SB. Plenty of examples of them as well. Id rather build the solid team first with a avg/good QB then draft a top 10 QB, esp in this years draft with nothing but projects. That really is where this all started from. Lance, Fields, Wilson, all projects. 

Of course it matters where Young would have been drafted come on now.

Why do you keep moving the goal-posts?  This started by you saying there are "plenty" of examples of teams winning without good QBs (a big stretch). Then somehow you decided to say there are more examples of meh QBs to win than early round picks (there aren't).  Now it's some vague "early round QBs fail more than they succeed" comment.  

Bottom line is pretty simple: teams with elite QBs win much more often than teams without them and your chances of getting an elite QB is higher the higher up the draft you go.  5 of the last 12 (going back 20 years) superbowl winning QBs were selected within the top 11 picks of their draft.  If you increase that to people taken in the top 32 picks that increases to 8/12.  There are exceptions sure but that's not a coincidence.  QB play is a huge factor in team success.

8 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

I’m sure the fans aren’t thrilled. Probably the same feeling we had when we found out we were trading for Sam Bradford. 

Frankly the Bears need a quarterback that’s obvious. However their skill position players outside of Allen Robinson and David Montgomery aren’t very good. And Allen Robinson is a free agent and I would bet he’s leaving after they went all season without signing him to an extension. the issues he was having with them trying to get one done. That was a big time story at the beginning of the season. So even if they get the quarterback your weapons are going to be Mooney (solid), Miller, Montgomery and cole kmet and likely no 1st rounder. Bears aren’t exactly a great place to go as a QB with Nagy about to be fired and pace as well. 

15 minutes ago, AzBirdGang said:

Has anyone went on the bears boards or reddit. Seems like best writers and fans are way against the Wentz trade. 

Watch them back out. 

Pace and Nagy aren't making decisions based on what idiots on the internet say.  They are acquiring Wentz as a last ditch effort to save their jobs.

11 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Of course it matters where Young would have been drafted come on now.

Why do you keep moving the goal-posts?  This started by you saying there are "plenty" of examples of teams winning without good QBs (a big stretch). Then somehow you decided to say there are more examples of meh QBs to win than early round picks (there aren't).  Now it's some vague "early round QBs fail more than they succeed" comment.  

Bottom line is pretty simple, teams with elite QBs win much more often than teams without them.  Your chances of getting an elite QB is higher the higher up the draft you go.  5 of the last 12 (going back 20 years) superbowl winning QBs were selected within the top 11 picks of their draft.  If you increase that to people taken in the top 32 picks that increases to 8/12.  There are exceptions sure but that's not a coincidence.  QB play is a huge factor in team success.

I think your going way over here with the topic and Im going way over there with it. You have to remember where this all started from, with project QBs with potential drafted in the top 10.You keep saying elite QBs, I keep saying Elite QBs are not always top 10 picks. Again this is where it began on if you take a shot on a project QB in the top 10 like Wilson, Fields or Lance. Why do you think I didnt name Lawrence in that group?

Plus the funny thing is most of the "top 10 drafted" QBs that have won SBs you mentioned, only 1 of them were thought to be projects like those 3 in this year draft. Mahomes. So Ill stick with my thought that the chances Wilson, Fields and Lance are worth that top 10 pick and getting to a SB are extremely low and not worth it. 

10 minutes ago, DEagle7 said:

Of course it matters where Young would have been drafted come on now.

Why do you keep moving the goal-posts?  This started by you saying there are "plenty" of examples of teams winning without good QBs (a big stretch). Then somehow you decided to say there are more examples of meh QBs to win than early round picks (there aren't).  Now it's some vague "early round QBs fail more than they succeed" comment.  

Bottom line is pretty simple: teams with elite QBs win much more often than teams without them and your chances of getting an elite QB is higher the higher up the draft you go.  5 of the last 12 (going back 20 years) superbowl winning QBs were selected within the top 11 picks of their draft.  If you increase that to people taken in the top 32 picks that increases to 8/12.  There are exceptions sure but that's not a coincidence.  QB play is a huge factor in team success.

Yeah but A LOT of these winning QB's were still on their cheap rookie deals.  It's much harder to win once you have to pay your QB $35M/yr.

It's not just about having a great QB, its about how much he is paid also.

17 minutes ago, AzBirdGang said:

Has anyone went on the bears boards or reddit. Seems like best writers and fans are way against the Wentz trade. 

Watch them back out. 

That would be great, cause the reported trade was ass. They're better off keeping wentz and having him sit out a year than giving up a very high second to take on foles and Cohen and move into the bottom of the first round. 

Mahomes is a lock for first ballot hall of famer unless he retires after the game today.

What the hell is that guy on?

7 minutes ago, DeathByEagle said:

I think your going way over here with the topic and Im going way over there with it. You have to remember where this all started from, with project QBs with potential drafted in the top 10.You keep saying elite QBs, I keep saying Elite QBs are not always top 10 picks. Again this is where it began on if you take a shot on a project QB in the top 10 like Wilson, Fields or Lance. Why do you think I didnt name Lawrence in that group?

Plus the funny thing is most of the "top 10 drafted" QBs that have won SBs you mentioned, only 1 of them were thought to be projects like those 3 in this year draft. Mahomes. So Ill stick with my thought that the chances Wilson, Fields and Lance are worth that top 10 pick and getting to a SB are extremely low. 

You're all over the place here and clearly we're not getting anywhere so I'll tap out just agree to disagree.

6 minutes ago, Arsenal79 said:

Yeah but A LOT of these winning QB's were still on their cheap rookie deals.  It's much harder to win once you have to pay your QB $35M/yr.

It's not just about having a great QB, its about how much he is paid also.

That certainly helps. Rough look without getting deep into the contracts it seems like about 50/50 over the past 20 years.

1 hour ago, austinfan said:

Trent Dilfer: QBR, 60.1, 64.8, 82.8, 74.0, 75.8, 76.0 injuries were his problem, and playing on bad TB teams, when he went to Balt he was 7-1 and 4-0 in the playoffs, the same level of play that he showed in TB, but a much better team.

Brad Johnson was before QBR, but career 82.5 rating, similar to Eli. 8-5 in Minn in 1997, took Wash to the playoffs in 1999, TB in 2002.

Both were limited QBs who won in the playoffs because they were smart veterans surrounded by good talent.

Problem for most limited QBs is they tend to end up on bad teams, like Fitzpatrick, where their flaws are exposed.

 

 

Mahommes is elite. Shut the hell up....

Anything new with Carson trade talks? Don't really feel like reading through 100 billion pages.

1 minute ago, greend said:

Anything new with Carson trade talks? Don't really feel like reading through 100 billion pages.

Nah super bowl Sunday, doubt anyone talks about it today.

15 minutes ago, devpool said:

That would be great, cause the reported trade was ass. They're better off keeping wentz and having him sit out a year than giving up a very high second to take on foles and Cohen and move into the bottom of the first round. 

Did anyone legit report us kicking them back a 2nd rounder?  I only saw this from that fraud Vin Fosh.