NFL - Discussion Thread

New England are a champion team but all season they have had players injured who as far as I can tell aren't any closer to coming back. They haven't been exposed in the regular season because they've played awful opposition and had a cakewalk schedule, but when they go to the Superbowl they will be exposed by whichever NFC powerhouse makes it. Whoever on the NFC side makes it will have had at least 2 tough matches against quality opposition, while NE will have faced Tennessee (lol) and either Pittsburgh (SO overrated) or Jacksonville (Bortles). They are a good chance but not the most likely imo. There have been signs of digression, like Brady's average patch and the team's disgusting output without Gronk. Last season they were fine without him, but in that Miami game they were 0% on 3rd down.

NE by far have the best chance of REACHING the SB (almost guaranteed) but like I say when they actually make it and play it's a whole different story, especially if they verse Minnesota.

And Warrior please, stop living in the past Alex Smith isn't a game manager anymore. Maybe he will be when he is traded away, but he was very effective for KC and was one of the best QBs this season. Some of the choke was his fault, but instead that putrid defense should be blamed for conceding 3TDs in the second half. All Case the game manager has to do is exactly what he's supposed to do, manage the game. Slowly but efficiently lead the team down the field occasionally and score points while throwing maximum 1INT, and let the defense do the rest. What's wrong with a game manager? Yes if they get behind by a lot there could be a problem, but they;'re a strong enough team so it shouldn't ever happen.

« Last edited by Matt77 on Jan 11th 2018 »

Warrior13,very rarely does a team make it all the way with a mediocre quarterback. If they did you can be sure they had an outstanding defense. As you probably know two recent teams that managed it were Trent Dilfer with the Baltimore Ravens in 2000 and Brad Johnson with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in 2002. Both of those teams though did have monster defenses led by the likes of Ray Lewis and Warren Sapp. Both teams were scoring lots of points on defense too.

I don't think the 2017 Vikings aren nowhere near as good defensively as the two teams mentioned above. There's no automatic first ballot hall of famer in it to start with. To be honest with you the 2017 Vikings are no where near as good as the Purple People Eaters of the 70's, if it hadn't been for the Pittsburgh Steelers and the steel curtain winning four Super Bowls during that time that unit would be be better remembered. Instead they lost four Super Bowls. Two of the front four (Carl Eller and Alan Page) are in the Hall of Fame so that there tells you how good they were.

Case Keenum isn't worth 20 million dollars, he looks better than what he is because of the players he has around him at Minnesota. He is definately not an elite quarterback at the moment, look at his stats from previous clubs and you see an average or just below average quarterback who was a star at college.

You don't need an automatic first-ballot hall of famer to be a superbowl winning defense. That's why it's a team. The Vikings don't have a "face of the franchise" player. They have lots of great players that work together to be great.

By the way, I'm dying my hair purple for the game on Sunday. I should probably find a hat to wear at Church though...

Matt: You dont see the games. Alex Smith is nothing but a Game Manager. He was just fortunate enough to have two speedy guys that can run the ball seventy yards after he throws it to them ten yards from where he is standing. This is why KC drafted Mahomes, and it is exactly why Smith will be traded this spring. The stats you see on paper dont always equate to good football play.

Dennis: I was referring to the likes of Terry Bradshaw and Troy Aikmen, two really good QBs that were no where near the best players on their teams. But Johnson and Dilfer work too, all the more so actually. lol

Geez, Dennis, you are almost making me reconsider picking the Vikes. lol

« Last edited by Warrior13 on Jan 11th 2018 »

My dad got a chance to go to see the Vikes/Saints game with his work because his boss couldn't go. He's trying to be (and is honestly) bummed that that he can't watch at home with me and my sports-y sister, but he's super excited to go really XD

That'll be an experience to remember, probably the most exciting match in the playoffs this year (excluding SB)

I think Case Keenum is far better than Alex Smith. There's no comparison as to who is more mobile and can pass better. I'd argue Case is worth close to 20 Mil, depends on if that's per year or for a 2-3 year contract.

Warrior I do get what you're saying, but for the past 3 seasons he's had those same WRs to do the dirty work, yet his stats were mediocre in seasons 1 and 2 and nearly elite in season 3. Surely that's due to some improvement in his game. You, like many others, rate him too harshly based on past seasons and performances (gotta love how the moment I need to defend Smith is a week after a KC playoff choke -_-). Forget about that 0-19 half, and it's a different story.

What you said about the post-catch yardage made me remember a thought I had. Why does a QB's passing stats include the WRs running? If someone passed to a WR 10 yards and the WR ran an extra 60 yards, why don't they actually record the passing length and then the post-catch yards only go to the WR? That way stats would be more accurate, and certain QBs wouldn't get inflated stats. If a guy throws a 0 yard pass and the WR runs 70 yards, it's basically just 70 rushing yards and 0 passing yards. A QB like Jared Goff would not be a fan since he often throws tiny passes to Gurley and they go 40+ yards due to Gurley rushing.

Freez, while I rate Keenum a lot now, if he leaves Minnesota he WILL return to a mediocre QB and slot back to a backup position after a few seasons. Sometimes players are mediocre but just find the right team with the right players and have a lot of chemistry. Josh McCown has at times played like a top 10 QB, and has had a career-best season, which makes no sense considering NY Jets were supposed to be 0-16. The only explanation is the chemistry between him and the WRs/team. McCown and Keenum will lose that if they change teams.

« Last edited by Matt77 on Jan 11th 2018 »

I do agree with that, Matt, I just meant that it's in Minnesota's best interests to keep Keenum, while Bradford is the most easily discarded.

There are QB's that make their receivers look good - (Aaron Rodgers and Jordy Nelson)

And there are WR's that make their QB's look good - (Randy Moss on Vikings and Raiders teams)

I largely agree with you, Matt, in terms of him simply being a mediocre QB on a different team, but he has shown lots of improvement. Yes, he's been helped a lot by star receivers, a great rushing game, and an elite defense. But he throws some fantastic passes that he can take credit for, and I would argue he's the most evasive quarterback in the league. He simply can't be sacked.

Keenum is going to need to be elusive Sunday because he is going to be under constant pressure from the Saints front four. I?m actually starting to feel sorry for the guy, a whole City is expecting him to win the game for the Vikings and if he doesn?t he will be the scapegoat who will be run out of town. If he does pull of the victory however and the Vikings win the Super Bowl he?ll get a nice new contract from the Minnesota front office.

Here?s a question for you. If Drew Brees had of played with the Patriots would he have done better than Brady?

I think Brees is the better quarterback, Brady has been fortunate to have been surrounded by good players and a coach in Belichick who will go down as the best ever. Brees has not had a lot to work with over the years but has still managed to put up some good numbers and win a Super Bowl.

« Last edited by Sanzano on Jan 11th 2018 »

I think simply because of Belichick and his coaching, Brady has become the better QB and the greatest of all time. Go back in time and have NE draft Brees, and we're likely having this debate saying 'If Tom Brady had of played with the Patriots would he have done better than Brees?'

If it had been switched, I'm not really sure how good Brees would have been in terms of the GOAT discussion. When Brady was drafted at pick 200+ he would've been out there to prove the doubters wrong, and wouldn't have had much pressure to perform as a top pick (I'm assuming Brees was drafted fairly high). As we've seen, some top picks crumble (Blaine Gabbert) while late picks do well (Brady).

I think no matter what though Brady is and will always be the better QB. You can give a guy a good system and good coaching to follow, but a lot of the time they can't handle it and become busts. Early in his career he lead the team to NE's first ever SB. After the 0-31 SB recovery last season it locked him in as the GOAT. That is nearly impossible to achieve and there were several 4th down and crucial 3rd down plays completed thanks to him. I'd argue that the Philly o-line and RBs/WRs this season are much better than NE's this season, yet Nick Foles crumbles under limited pressure and can't score a single point at home against Dallas. Brady's had to deal with a huge number of sacks early in the season, and several of his WRs have been out for the season or various points in the season, yet he's going to win this season's MVP easily.

Kurt Warner apparently reached out to Case Keenum and encouraged him to be safe with the ball and simply manage the game. Both came from out of nowhere and I'd argue Warner was an average QB at best who made it to the SB two or three times (I forget) like the others mentioned.

There's no debate that Brady would have been an elite quarterback regardless which team he went to and who coached him. He has a will to win I haven't seen in many players, he's the only player I know who went to management and told them to reduce his wages so the club had more money to spend on getting quality players for the team.

I think if Brees and Rogers played in the New England teams Brady played in they'd be just as successful. Two players who had nightmares when they first started playing in the NFL were Steve Young and Doug Wiliams yet when they got traded to San Francisco and Washington they suddenly became good quarterbacks who won the Super Bowl, Steve Young ending up in the Hall of Fame. Having the likes of Bill Walsh and Joe Gibbs coaching you and having a decent team around you will go a long way in making you go from a good quarterback to all pro.

If Cleveland pick the best quarterback in the 2018 draft they are still not going have a winning season because all the other pieces to the puzzle are not yet in place. Mind you Cleveland could be a team to watch in about four or five years time with all these number 1 and 2 picks they are getting in the drafts. They've already got what looks like a good team coming together on defense with Myles Garrett, Emmanuel Ogbah, Danny Shelton, and Nate Orchard. It's just a matter of time before they start winning. Could they be like the Dallas Cowboys of the early 90's who went from 1-15 to becoming the dynasty of that decade?


« Last edited by Sanzano on Jan 12th 2018 »

Cleveland as an organisation are a complete and utter nightmare. They destroy the careers of all QBs that end up on their roster and refuse to fire a coach that is 1-31 (a 3-point win over San Diego last season) in the last 2 seasons. In terms of pieces outside of QB, they're not that bad. But DeShone Kizer had a woeful season and was never going to be reliable. Not all of it is his fault, since Cleveland are the Quarterback Graveyard. When Josh Gordon returned from his suspension from the NFL (not from his own club) Kizer looked slightly better and even had a 300+ yard game.

Cleveland should definitely pick up another QB in the draft since they own the #1 and #4 picks. If this crop of QBs is as good as it is they simply cannot miss out. With the other top 4 pick, and their other picks, they should draft players that will help their new QB thrive (new WR & any necessary o-line players). They have a half decent RB in Isaiah Crowell and shouldn't waste a pick. While some QBs can succeed even in teams with little talent (Jimmy Garoppolo 5-0 at SF), generally the foundations need to be built for a young QB to succeed.

Honestly, Cleveland doesn?t necessarily need to draft a QB. Let?s not forget that Cousins, Smith, Taylor, Tannehill/Cutler, Keenum/Bradford/Bridgewater, McCarron, and Manning could all be available this free agency. Cleveland could draft the best available at #1 & #4 if they pick one of those guys up, especially if that were Cousins. Shoot, Cleveland could even trade out of #1 if they signed Cousins prior to the Draft, letting the highest bidder (most likely Broncos at #5 or the Jets at #6) give them a bounty for that one pick without falling too far down. ;)

I should be made the executive of Cleveland. XD

« Last edited by Warrior13 on Jan 12th 2018 »

They could. Cleveland needs to make some serious moves in free agency and the draft. They have a decent defense, but they desperately need a QB and some WRs.

I make you right Warrior13, sign Kirk Cousins, trade back your number one pick for another teams number one pick plus their number 2 pick. Then draft two wide recievers a running back and tight end with your two number one picks and two number twos. All of a sudden you've got the makings of a decent team. Then for the rest of the draft strenthen areas that are weak, probably focus on the offensive line to protect your franchise quarterback.

The thing is with Cleveland is that they make bonehead decisions that make no sense, pretty much like Washington.

« Last edited by Sanzano on Jan 12th 2018 »

Honestly, Cleveland could get even more for the #1 Pick, as desperate teams make desperate (and for the most part unwise) decisions. Assuming they get Cousins, I reckon they could get two 1st Round Picks (2018 & 2019) and two 2nd Round Picks (both 2018 or one in 2018 & 2019) for the #1 Pick. Shoot, they could possibly get more since you would have to assume teams will bid the price up. Unlike last year, assuming the Browns somehow get Cousins or their new QB in free agency, Browns should definitely trade out of #1.

Assuming all of this happens, I think they need to draft RB Shaquon Barkley at #4 if he is there. He is the next Adrian Peterson, trust me, with even more speed. At #5 or #6, assuming they do indeed trade with the Broncos or Jets, they need to draft a DB, as they are incredibly weak in their secondary. From there, wait to get a WR until the Second Round, as their is only one WR in this draft that should go in the First Round this year. They actually drafted a TE in the First Round last year, so they don?t need one of those. Probably should stick with second WR and then a LB or another DB in the Second Round, as they already have two Picks in the Second Round and would receive a third with the aforementioned trade of the #1 Pick.

If the Browns could get Cousins (and if they were smart), they could get increasingly better with this draft (not mentioning the 2019 draft as well as they would again have two First and two Second Round Selections).

« Last edited by Warrior13 on Jan 12th 2018 »

It's all very well having these high draft picks but Cleveland may have a problem getting the player to sign if they feel its not in their best interest going to a graveyard NFL team and ruining their NFL career before it has begun.

What have the following players all got in common:
John Elway, Bo Jackson, Eli Manning, Jim Kelly, Bruce Clark, and Rich Gannon.

Let?s be real... If Cleveland offered any QB, including Cousins, roughly 25-27 million per year, they?re gonna accept it. Cleveland might have to push that towards 30 million a year, but Cousins could make a world of difference with all the Draft Picks they would have.