Just now, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

 

Well considering kaepernick threw a pick in the first half. I think Colin Kaepernick played pretty mediocre to below average for 35 minutes of that game. So he had a pick. And he and the offense failed to score touchdowns in the red zone (twice in the first half). He and the offense also had multiple three and outs that gave the ravens short fields of 49 and 56 yards. 

defense not play well either. Neither did the special team. However pretending like the only reason they were down 28 to 6 was because of the Niners defense and special team when karpernick couldn’t convert touchdowns in the red zone, he had an interception and his offense giving the niners short field position did play into that score is ridiculous. He was below average for the first 35 mins of that game just like the defense and offense.

So I don’t think he played well enough to win cause he was below average for 35 mins along with the niners defense and offense. This is like saying mcnabb played well enough to win the nfc title game vs the cardinals cause second half he was good meanwhile first half they scored 6 points and looked bad and got down 24-6. 

Ah I see. That's weird, I thought games were 60 min long and not 35. My apologies.

2 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Caesars bought a 20 year naming rights deal over the summer. It sounds horrible. 

So is that what the Superdome is called now?  If so I didn't realize that.

Now is that from Lil Ceasers or something else?

4 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I feel like you continue to miss the point. 

Refresh my memory, what exactly is the point.

3 minutes ago, 315Eagles said:

You talking about Barnett?  Wasn't he a Joe Douglas guy?

Gym shorts favorite player too

1 minute ago, 315Eagles said:

So is that what the Superdome is called now?  If so I didn't realize that.

Now is that from Lil Ceasers or something else?

Yup, that's the name. Caesars like the casino. 

Just now, Godfather said:

Gym shorts favorite player too

I thought his favorite player was Nate Gerry?

@LeanMeanGM

Eagles 28

Cowboys 20

Defense gets 2 ints

1 minute ago, LeanMeanGM said:

Yup, that's the name. Caesars like the casino. 

When I first saw the name I thought it was named after the pizza chain.

10 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Ah I see. That's weird, I thought games were 60 min long and not 35. My apologies.

Oh I thought games are 60 minutes long not 25 minutes after a delay where he played well but the first 35 minutes he played poorly.  I guess in your world we just dismissed the first 35 minutes for that Super Bowl because it wasn’t good for Colin Kaepernick. So if you play poorly for 60% of the game it’s ok because the last 25 mins of the game he played well…. Got it. 

so because he played well for 25 minutes of a 60 minute game it’s justified him not playing well for 35 minutes of a 60 minute game and a reason the niners also found themselves down 28-6. 

Just now, downundermike said:

Refresh my memory, what exactly is the point.

That the NFL is moving more toward mobile QBs and that their mobility and running ability is not a bonus — it’s all part of the evaluation. 

Mobility and running ability is not rushing production. I think where you got off track was when IP asked me about QBs who run better than they passed making deep playoff runs. My point was never about having QBs who run better than they throw. That branched way off from my initial point. I should have corrected it there instead of answering his question. 

Ar no point have I said you don’t need a QB who can win from the pocket. 

3 minutes ago, 315Eagles said:

I thought his favorite player was Nate Gerry?

Maybe Nate was number 2 💩

3 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

That the NFL is moving more toward mobile QBs and that their mobility and running ability is not a bonus — it’s all part of the evaluation. 

Already proven false.  There has always been mobile QB's.  Rich Gannon had 500 yards rushing his age 35 season.  Randall, Young, Elway, this is not new.

33 minutes ago, DawkinsOwnage03 said:

If Hurts ends up sucking, who cares no harm no foul, we move on after the season. With the last one who still can’t even walk yet again we were locked in to paying ridiculous money.

Big harm big foul

cost you your qb and coach and wasted a high pick

14 minutes ago, Saltpeter said:

Just the 14th overall pick DE getting pancaked by a TE, nothing to see here....

And also Eric Wilson, whose knocks coming in were he couldn't tackle or play the run. Not quite an encouraging start...

George Kittle, meet your match

 

12 minutes ago, LeanMeanGM said:

 

20 years ago, I'd have complained that this is striving for mediocrity.  In 2021, it works.  Limit the damage.  

 

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

Already proven false.  There has always been mobile QB's.  Rich Gannon had 500 yards rushing his age 35 season.  Randall, Young, Elway, this is not new.

I didn’t say it was new. Cripes.

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

I didn’t say it was new. Cripes.

You said the NFL is moving more towards it, when in fact, it is exactly the same.

7 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Oh I thought games are 60 minutes long not 25 minutes after a delay where he played well but the first 35 minutes he played poorly.  I guess in your world we just dismissed the first 35 minutes for that Super Bowl because it wasn’t good for Colin Kaepernick. So if you play poorly for 60% of the game it’s ok because the last 25 mins of the game he played well…. Got it. 

so because he played well for 25 minutes of a 60 minute game it’s justified him not playing well for 35 minutes of a 60 minute game and a reason the niners also found themselves down 28-6. 

I'm pretty sure I'm judging the totality of the performance, which I thought was all 60 min, not just the first 35 min.

3 minutes ago, ToastJenkins said:

Big harm big foul

cost you your qb and coach and wasted a high pick

DP is a good coach, but first gut feeling is that Siriani might be better.

Wentz was ok -with the exception of last year- but at this point I‘d take Hurts in a heartbeat over him.

2 minutes ago, downundermike said:

You said the NFL is moving more towards it, when in fact, it is exactly the same.

No, I think there are more running/mobile QBs than ever before, and certainly more play calls with QBs incorporated into the run game. 

Edit: And certainly a heavier emphasis on QBs who can make plays off script. 

Guys, I mean, come on. I’m aware there have been mobile and running QBs in the history of the NFL. Thanks for pointing it out to me. 

2 minutes ago, ManuManu said:

No, I think there are more running/mobile QBs than ever before, and certainly more play calls with QBs incorporated into the run game. 

Edit: And certainly a heavier emphasis on QBs who can make plays off script. 

No doubt about it... anyone who doubts it isn't paying attention to the rest of the league.

Just now, schuy7 said:

No doubt about it... anyone who doubts it isn't paying attention to the rest of the league.

Thank you.

10 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

I'm pretty sure I'm judging the totality of the performance, which I thought was all 60 min, not just the first 35 min.

And you think by not playing well for 2.5 quarters it justifies in saying he played well enough to win a Super Bowl? That’s 2.5 quarters (More than 50% of the game) he played poorly.the Niners found themselves down 28-6 because of defense and ST but also him/offense with stalled drives, interceptions and poor red zone efficiency.

Just point out the niners defense and ST also helped kaepernick in that second half.  They got a 3 and out deep in the niners territory. Ginn returned the punt to the 20 so kaepernick only had to go 20 yards for a td. 

Tom Brady I could argue played well enough to justify winning a Super Bowl in Super Bowl 52. From start to finish he was good (should’ve had more points if not for his kicker). When you only look good and ply well for 1.5 quarters of a 4 quarter game i can’t justify anyone played well enough to win a super bowl. Cause if you showed up for more than 1.5 quarters you would’ve won  and that’s on him for not playing very well for more than half the game along with his defense and ST 

1 minute ago, schuy7 said:

No doubt about it... anyone who doubts it isn't paying attention to the rest of the league.

There's also no doubt having a healthy starting QB is vital to a team's success.  The players on offense and defense are bigger, stronger, and faster every year -- yet the field remains the same size.  The QB holding the ball more and running with the ball more intuitively doesn't seem like a recipe for long term success.

In the end you want your franchise QB to be a constant for 10+ years.  Very skeptical a QB who holds the ball instead of distributing it can stay healthy.