Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 129
  1. #101
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "ejmat" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:
    [quote author=V link=topic=49220.msg876912#msg876912 date=1228917207]
    [quote author=ejmat link=topic=49220.msg876901#msg876901 date=1228916256]
    This brings up a good question.
    How many people would be willing to trade AP for Tom Brady?

    Personally I would consider it.
    We need a QB.
    RBs are a dime a dozen in the NFL.
    Granted not as explosive as AP but Taylor has proven he can handle the load even when the box is stacked.
    With Brady the box wouldn't be stacked.
    I am sure through FA and draft we would be able to find a competent RB to fill in for Taylor.
    Again, not as good or explosive as AP but with a good solid QB I think we make out okay.
    The one downfall is AP is younger than Brady and this would all be contigent on how Brady recovers from the injury.

    I am ready for the bashing now
    :-\ ;D
    Trading for an elite QB is a horrible idea. No matter what, the cost would be much too great. Let's assume Brady for AD is the trade.

    Bad Call. Our offense is built on the run. Our OL are better run than pass blockers. Our TEs are in the blocking mold. Our WRs block well. We don't have elite receivers. Taking AD from this offense and putting Brady into it, balances out the good running and average passing. I think the offense would totally lose its identity.

    Brady of course would make all players in the passing game around him better, just like AD does, but talent has to be accumulated correctly.

    We can get a solid QB without trading AD away, and that is the biggest reason the trade is stupid.
    Good post.
    I am real interested in people's feedback on this one.
    I will say this.
    Brady was in a run first offense for many years at NE.
    It wasn't until last year he becasme a pass first offense.
    Something to consider. The Vikings WRs aren't bad.
    Berrian is as good as any WR Brady had up till last year.
    Rice can be good if he stays healthy.

    As far as the offense totally losing its identity I'm not sure that would be a good reason not to bring in Brady.
    I hear many people on and out of this site complaining about the "lame-ass" offense all the time.
    I also hear having a decent QB would make this team into a championship calibur team.
    We have a great running game.
    We had one before AP came here too with Taylor and Memo.
    It would keep teams from stacking the box which would make Taylor more explosive as well.
    Still not sold.

    We're just a grind it out team. I think we would look more like a team from the late 90s. Giant momentum swings instead of slow, steady ones. Remember, our passing D is somewhat of a weakness as well. We are better off running the ball, using the steady offense as another form of defense.

    I would rather keep AD and get a solid QB who can simply limit turnovers. We don't need Brady. We don't need an explosive offense. We just need one that can occasionally make plays. That is what we have right now. The only problem is turnovers and penalties, and getting Brady doesn't solve that.

    In all of our losses, we have had a chance to make a last minute drive to win it. Sure, Brady makes us more effective on those drives, but remember, our ST put us way down against GB and Chicago. Our offense made the mistakes that led to deficit against TB. I'll take a team that can play with the lead over one that has to come back all the time.

    A Game Manager QB please.
    Excellent debate V.
    I can agree a QB such as Pennington would have worked out great in this offense.
    The only thing I would touch on here is that it would be great to have a QB that comes from behind when we are losing.
    That is something this team has lacked for a very long time.
    That is one reason I would love to get Brady.
    Sure, but you are considering trading AD to get him. It's lunacy. It would just make our team different, not better. There are examples all over the league of good-to-great QBs who have shriveled up when their running game dropped off:

    Romo
    McNabb
    Rodgers
    Orton
    Hasselbeck
    Bulger
    Favre
    Edwards
    Anderson
    Palmer
    Garrard
    Rivers
    Schaub
    Rosenfels
    [/quote]

    Don't really think lunacy would be a correct term here.
    Again Taylor is good enough to carry the load.
    If he had a decent QB he would be better.
    RBs are a dime a dozen today.
    QBs are not.
    Can't really use a lot of the QBs you are stating here.

    Romo - You are looking at one game to use and Choice didn't do a bad job.
    This game was more on WRs not running their routes correctly.
    Correct me if it is something else you are talking about.
    McNabb -
    Has never been without a decent RB.
    Westbrook and Buckhalter are solid.
    His WR unit would be a better example.
    Rodgers - Has only started 12 games in his career and has had the same RB almost every game from what I know.
    Orton - Juat started establishing himself this year.
    Was younger previously and won games with Thomas Jones.
    Now he has Forte.
    He wasn't the main starter last year.
    Hasselbeck - Been hurt all season.
    Has played well even without a solid RB as he did last year when Alexander sucked.
    Bulger - This is his first bad year.
    Not due to the RB.
    Due to the terrible front line.
    Favre - Huh?
    I think he did pretty good without a good running back for many, many years.
    Edwards - Lynch has played almost every game.
    When he hasn't Freddie Jackson filled in nicely.
    Edwards has been pretty consistent since becoming a starter.
    Anderson - Jamaal Lewis is the RB.
    I can't say that team's problem is the running game.
    Palmer - He's been hurt most of the year.
    Prior he was a top 5 QB
    Garrard - Never a great QB.
    A solid QB but has had MJD and taylor.
    The reason they have sucked this year is because of a bad front line and heart of the team from what I've seen.
    If anything MJD keeps them in more games.
    Rivers - Rivers has had a great running attack his entire career.
    It's their defense that loses games this year. Even when LT was hurt, Sproles filled in nicely.
    Lasst year it was Turner.
    Schaub - How many games has he started to prove your point?
    Rosenfels - See Schaub!

    Overall I can't agree with your RB assessments with the above QBs.

    [/quote]

    EJ, you are usually on key, but this time you completely missed my point. I'm not talking about RB personnel, I'm talking about running attacks in specific games. In other words, how do those QBs fare when they have to win games solely with their arms?

    Look at games this year:

    Romo? He has struggled when the run game is quieted?
    McNabb? Westbrook gets injured and he struggled mightily this year.
    Rodgers? It's not that Grant has always been his RB, but Grant is less effective this year, and Rodgers has struggled in games where Grant gets shut down.
    Orton? He is usually INT-city when the Bears try/have to win on his arm.
    Hasselbeck? A major step down when Hutch left town.
    Bulger? His first bad year indeed, and the Rams have no running game to speak of.
    Favre? Has been straight up underperforming in games where the Jets have no running attack.
    Anderson? Average at best when the Browns don't run. Just because they have Jamal Lewis means they can run? Look again, the Browns run game is ineffective.
    Palmer? Definitely not a top 5 QB before he got injured this year. The Bengals have ZERO running game.
    Garrard? Last year MJD and Taylor tore up the league and he only threw 2 picks. This year the RBs have been shutdown and Garrard has 11.
    Rivers? Went from great to average as their running game wnet from great to average.
    Schaub? Has three bad games this year. In all of them the Texans had bad rushing days.
    Rosenfels? Has one bad game this year. In that game the Texans had a bad rushing day.

    My argument is not that a good QB is found with a good RB. It is that most QBs that we think of as good/great still struggle when they have to win games by themselves. Having AD means never putting a QB in that position. That is why trading a star RB for a star QB gets us nowhere.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  2. #102
    ultravikingfan's Avatar
    ultravikingfan is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    NE Ohio
    Posts
    24,514

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Kevon still wants to know when did everyone but Kevon start thinking a game manager is a good idea. Kevon thinks its a terrible idea. Kevon wants you to look around the leage at the elite teams and you will not find game managers. To become a perennial title contender you need superstars at the QB and running back position. To purposely go out an dseek a player that is "good enough" is a recipe for "8-8" cake and "Miss-the-playoffs" punch.

    Eagles - McNabb & Westbrook
    Pats - Brade & Maroney
    Pits - Ben & Parker
    Colts - Manning & Addai
    Broncos - Cutler and who ever they put to play Rb
    San Diego - Rivers and LT
    Boys - Romo and Barber
    Giants - Eli and Jacobs

    These are just to name a few. An elite Qb doesn't mean the offense has to change and we come out passing on every down. What an elite Qb does is allow you to beat a team several different ways. It keeps defenses off balanced and it makes your strengths stronger. Wth an elite Qb, Peterson will have Lbs further off the ball, which would open up his lanes for longer, game changing runs.

    Think of it on the defensive side of the ball. Do you want to be great at stopping the run and average at stopping the pass? No you want to be the most dominanting force you can. You aim to be # 1 against the run and # 1 against the pass. You go out and bring in the players that you think can help you do so. The goal of any offense is to be # 1 in all catergories( except TOs). Why are we constantly settign the bar so low?


    LMAO!

    You call all those QB's superstars?

    Ha haa!

  3. #103
    Schutz's Avatar
    Schutz is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,719

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Kevon still wants to know when did everyone but Kevon start thinking a game manager is a good idea. Kevon thinks its a terrible idea. Kevon wants you to look around the leage at the elite teams and you will not find game managers. To become a perennial title contender you need superstars at the QB and running back position. To purposely go out an dseek a player that is "good enough" is a recipe for "8-8" cake and "Miss-the-playoffs" punch.

    Eagles - McNabb & Westbrook
    Pats - Brade & Maroney
    Pits - Ben & Parker
    Colts - Manning & Addai
    Broncos - Cutler and who ever they put to play Rb
    San Diego - Rivers and LT
    Boys - Romo and Barber
    Giants - Eli and Jacobs

    These are just to name a few. An elite Qb doesn't mean the offense has to change and we come out passing on every down. What an elite Qb does is allow you to beat a team several different ways. It keeps defenses off balanced and it makes your strengths stronger. Wth an elite Qb, Peterson will have Lbs further off the ball, which would open up his lanes for longer, game changing runs.

    Think of it on the defensive side of the ball. Do you want to be great at stopping the run and average at stopping the pass? No you want to be the most dominanting force you can. You aim to be # 1 against the run and # 1 against the pass. You go out and bring in the players that you think can help you do so. The goal of any offense is to be # 1 in all catergories( except TOs). Why are we constantly settign the bar so low?


    LMAO!

    You call all those QB's superstars?

    Ha haa!
    #2,3,4 are, but the rest either aren't or need more time to show they are.

  4. #104
    ejmat is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    8,849

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "V" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:
    "V" wrote:
    [quote author=ejmat link=topic=49220.msg876921#msg876921 date=1228917879]
    [quote author=V link=topic=49220.msg876912#msg876912 date=1228917207]
    [quote author=ejmat link=topic=49220.msg876901#msg876901 date=1228916256]
    This brings up a good question.
    How many people would be willing to trade AP for Tom Brady?

    Personally I would consider it.
    We need a QB.
    RBs are a dime a dozen in the NFL.
    Granted not as explosive as AP but Taylor has proven he can handle the load even when the box is stacked.
    With Brady the box wouldn't be stacked.
    I am sure through FA and draft we would be able to find a competent RB to fill in for Taylor.
    Again, not as good or explosive as AP but with a good solid QB I think we make out okay.
    The one downfall is AP is younger than Brady and this would all be contigent on how Brady recovers from the injury.

    I am ready for the bashing now
    :-\ ;D
    Trading for an elite QB is a horrible idea. No matter what, the cost would be much too great. Let's assume Brady for AD is the trade.

    Bad Call. Our offense is built on the run. Our OL are better run than pass blockers. Our TEs are in the blocking mold. Our WRs block well. We don't have elite receivers. Taking AD from this offense and putting Brady into it, balances out the good running and average passing. I think the offense would totally lose its identity.

    Brady of course would make all players in the passing game around him better, just like AD does, but talent has to be accumulated correctly.

    We can get a solid QB without trading AD away, and that is the biggest reason the trade is stupid.
    Good post.
    I am real interested in people's feedback on this one.
    I will say this.
    Brady was in a run first offense for many years at NE.
    It wasn't until last year he becasme a pass first offense.
    Something to consider. The Vikings WRs aren't bad.
    Berrian is as good as any WR Brady had up till last year.
    Rice can be good if he stays healthy.

    As far as the offense totally losing its identity I'm not sure that would be a good reason not to bring in Brady.
    I hear many people on and out of this site complaining about the "lame-ass" offense all the time.
    I also hear having a decent QB would make this team into a championship calibur team.
    We have a great running game.
    We had one before AP came here too with Taylor and Memo.
    It would keep teams from stacking the box which would make Taylor more explosive as well.
    Still not sold.

    We're just a grind it out team. I think we would look more like a team from the late 90s. Giant momentum swings instead of slow, steady ones. Remember, our passing D is somewhat of a weakness as well. We are better off running the ball, using the steady offense as another form of defense.

    I would rather keep AD and get a solid QB who can simply limit turnovers. We don't need Brady. We don't need an explosive offense. We just need one that can occasionally make plays. That is what we have right now. The only problem is turnovers and penalties, and getting Brady doesn't solve that.

    In all of our losses, we have had a chance to make a last minute drive to win it. Sure, Brady makes us more effective on those drives, but remember, our ST put us way down against GB and Chicago. Our offense made the mistakes that led to deficit against TB. I'll take a team that can play with the lead over one that has to come back all the time.

    A Game Manager QB please.
    Excellent debate V.
    I can agree a QB such as Pennington would have worked out great in this offense.
    The only thing I would touch on here is that it would be great to have a QB that comes from behind when we are losing.
    That is something this team has lacked for a very long time.
    That is one reason I would love to get Brady.
    Sure, but you are considering trading AD to get him. It's lunacy. It would just make our team different, not better. There are examples all over the league of good-to-great QBs who have shriveled up when their running game dropped off:

    Romo
    McNabb
    Rodgers
    Orton
    Hasselbeck
    Bulger
    Favre
    Edwards
    Anderson
    Palmer
    Garrard
    Rivers
    Schaub
    Rosenfels
    [/quote]

    Don't really think lunacy would be a correct term here.
    Again Taylor is good enough to carry the load.
    If he had a decent QB he would be better.
    RBs are a dime a dozen today.
    QBs are not.
    Can't really use a lot of the QBs you are stating here.

    Romo - You are looking at one game to use and Choice didn't do a bad job.
    This game was more on WRs not running their routes correctly.
    Correct me if it is something else you are talking about.
    McNabb -
    Has never been without a decent RB.
    Westbrook and Buckhalter are solid.
    His WR unit would be a better example.
    Rodgers - Has only started 12 games in his career and has had the same RB almost every game from what I know.
    Orton - Juat started establishing himself this year.
    Was younger previously and won games with Thomas Jones.
    Now he has Forte.
    He wasn't the main starter last year.
    Hasselbeck - Been hurt all season.
    Has played well even without a solid RB as he did last year when Alexander sucked.
    Bulger - This is his first bad year.
    Not due to the RB.
    Due to the terrible front line.
    Favre - Huh?
    I think he did pretty good without a good running back for many, many years.
    Edwards - Lynch has played almost every game.
    When he hasn't Freddie Jackson filled in nicely.
    Edwards has been pretty consistent since becoming a starter.
    Anderson - Jamaal Lewis is the RB.
    I can't say that team's problem is the running game.
    Palmer - He's been hurt most of the year.
    Prior he was a top 5 QB
    Garrard - Never a great QB.
    A solid QB but has had MJD and taylor.
    The reason they have sucked this year is because of a bad front line and heart of the team from what I've seen.
    If anything MJD keeps them in more games.
    Rivers - Rivers has had a great running attack his entire career.
    It's their defense that loses games this year. Even when LT was hurt, Sproles filled in nicely.
    Lasst year it was Turner.
    Schaub - How many games has he started to prove your point?
    Rosenfels - See Schaub!

    Overall I can't agree with your RB assessments with the above QBs.

    [/quote]

    EJ, you are usually on key, but this time you completely missed my point. I'm not talking about RB personnel, I'm talking about running attacks in specific games. In other words, how do those QBs fare when they have to win games solely with their arms?

    Look at games this year:

    Romo? He has struggled when the run game is quieted?
    McNabb? Westbrook gets injured and he struggled mightily this year.
    Rodgers? It's not that Grant has always been his RB, but Grant is less effective this year, and Rodgers has struggled in games where Grant gets shut down.
    Orton? He is usually INT-city when the Bears try/have to win on his arm.
    Hasselbeck? A major step down when Hutch left town.
    Bulger? His first bad year indeed, and the Rams have no running game to speak of.
    Favre? Has been straight up underperforming in games where the Jets have no running attack.
    Anderson? Average at best when the Browns don't run. Just because they have Jamal Lewis means they can run? Look again, the Browns run game is ineffective.
    Palmer? Definitely not a top 5 QB before he got injured this year. The Bengals have ZERO running game.
    Garrard? Last year MJD and Taylor tore up the league and he only threw 2 picks. This year the RBs have been shutdown and Garrard has 11.
    Rivers? Went from great to average as their running game wnet from great to average.
    Schaub? Has three bad games this year. In all of them the Texans had bad rushing days.
    Rosenfels? Has one bad game this year. In that game the Texans had a bad rushing day.

    My argument is not that a good QB is found with a good RB. It is that most QBs that we think of as good/great still struggle when they have to win games by themselves. Having AD means never putting a QB in that position. That is why trading a star RB for a star QB gets us nowhere.
    [/quote]

    Got ya V.
    Sorry about the misunderstanding.
    Appreciate it kind Sir.
    ;D

  5. #105
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,909

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Kevon still wants to know when did everyone but Kevon start thinking a game manager is a good idea. Kevon thinks its a terrible idea. Kevon wants you to look around the leage at the elite teams and you will not find game managers. To become a perennial title contender you need superstars at the QB and running back position. To purposely go out an dseek a player that is "good enough" is a recipe for "8-8" cake and "Miss-the-playoffs" punch.

    Eagles - McNabb & Westbrook
    Pats - Brade & Maroney
    Pits - Ben & Parker
    Colts - Manning & Addai
    Broncos - Cutler and who ever they put to play Rb
    San Diego - Rivers and LT
    Boys - Romo and Barber
    Giants - Eli and Jacobs

    These are just to name a few. An elite Qb doesn't mean the offense has to change and we come out passing on every down. What an elite Qb does is allow you to beat a team several different ways. It keeps defenses off balanced and it makes your strengths stronger. Wth an elite Qb, Peterson will have Lbs further off the ball, which would open up his lanes for longer, game changing runs.

    Think of it on the defensive side of the ball. Do you want to be great at stopping the run and average at stopping the pass? No you want to be the most dominanting force you can. You aim to be # 1 against the run and # 1 against the pass. You go out and bring in the players that you think can help you do so. The goal of any offense is to be # 1 in all catergories( except TOs). Why are we constantly settign the bar so low?


    LMAO!

    You call all those QB's superstars?

    Ha haa!
    Someone get the purple juice out his hand. He clearly hasn't been watching the league this year. I stand by everyoen on that list.

    McNabb is Mcnabb. If you don' tthink he is an elite Qb then I am wasting my breathe on you.
    Brady - DOn' tlike the guy but he's top 3 in the league.
    Big Ben - Playing like an MVP with a O Line that cannot block anyone. Elite
    Manning - See Brady
    Cutler - No RB this year but still leading their division. 3rd in yards per game and total yards. 4th in TDs and has taken 7 sacks. 89.2 QB rating. However, Stats aren't everything. See the guy play and you know the guy is playing at an elite level.
    Rivers - I'll let you hang your sel fanf talk abotu Rivers with out seeign what he is doing this year. Leading the league is all I have to say. You figure it out.
    :
    Romo - He's hated cause he the boys Qb but he is one of the best in the league. I hate the boys but he has the talent.
    Eli - Men lie, women lie, numbers don't. 11 and 2 are the only numbers you need to know.

    Anything you wish to add besides, I'm sorry?

  6. #106
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,194

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "ejmat" wrote:
    "UffDaVikes" wrote:
    "kspurplepride" wrote:
    "ejmat" wrote:


    Excellent debate V.
    I can agree a QB such as Pennington would have worked out great in this offense.
    The only thing I would touch on here is that it would be great to have a QB that comes from behind when we are losing.
    That is something this team has lacked for a very long time.
    That is one reason I would love to get Brady.
    Brady won't be on the market

    Why is Pennington this teams supposed savior? The guy has no arm strength and reminds me of a younger Brad Johnson with an even smaller arm. There is no way he would be able to spread the defense. He throws check down balls all day, and we won't clear anyone out of the box.

    I think he is saying that Pennington is a good QB for the WCO, Which we have been trying to run and I agree. The throws neither of our QB's have been good at completing are the short and intermediate passes where you have to rely more on accuracy and timing than arm strength and that is where Pennington is good. He has a stronger arm than he is given credit for and he has done pretty well in Miami considering where the team began this year and all of the changes they have had.

    One of the reasons our offense has not done well is that neither Jackson or Frerotte have been accurate enough and had the timing they need to complete the short passes in the right spot to get big gains from them. At least that is what I think EJ is saying.
    That is exactly what I am saying.
    You don't need a great arm to win football games.
    Look at Troy Aikman.
    Look at what Pennington is doing this year.
    Only 6 INTs.
    That is what the team needs.
    A smart, accurate QB that takes care of the ball.
    Chad is the reason why Miami is contending this year.
    If they had a decent QB last year they would have been allot better.
    They lost a llot of close games.
    I watched them last year since my entire family are Dolphin fans.
    Trust me.
    If they had Chad they would not have been 1-15.
    Most likely would have been around the .500 mark.
    the west coast offence involves alot of short passes. and by the current look of our offence. pennington would be a good quarterback for our system

  7. #107
    V-Unit's Avatar
    V-Unit is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    6,317

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Kevon still wants to know when did everyone but Kevon start thinking a game manager is a good idea. Kevon thinks its a terrible idea. Kevon wants you to look around the leage at the elite teams and you will not find game managers. To become a perennial title contender you need superstars at the QB and running back position. To purposely go out an dseek a player that is "good enough" is a recipe for "8-8" cake and "Miss-the-playoffs" punch.

    Eagles - McNabb & Westbrook
    Pats - Brade & Maroney
    Pits - Ben & Parker
    Colts - Manning & Addai
    Broncos - Cutler and who ever they put to play Rb
    San Diego - Rivers and LT
    Boys - Romo and Barber
    Giants - Eli and Jacobs

    These are just to name a few. An elite Qb doesn't mean the offense has to change and we come out passing on every down. What an elite Qb does is allow you to beat a team several different ways. It keeps defenses off balanced and it makes your strengths stronger. Wth an elite Qb, Peterson will have Lbs further off the ball, which would open up his lanes for longer, game changing runs.

    Think of it on the defensive side of the ball. Do you want to be great at stopping the run and average at stopping the pass? No you want to be the most dominanting force you can. You aim to be # 1 against the run and # 1 against the pass. You go out and bring in the players that you think can help you do so. The goal of any offense is to be # 1 in all catergories( except TOs). Why are we constantly settign the bar so low?


    LMAO!

    You call all those QB's superstars?

    Ha haa!
    Someone get the purple juic eout his hand. He clearly hasn't been watching the league this year.
    The Eagles, Broncos, and Cowboys are not perrennial title contenders.
    "I hate when threads are destroyed by facts and logic."
    - Prophet


    Thanks Josdin!

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,194

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "Vikeman" wrote:
    "SamOchoCinco" wrote:
    "Vikeman" wrote:
    "SamOchoCinco" wrote:
    plus brady has 3 super bowl rings.... need anymore proof that brady is not going anywhere?
    Farve had one, Montana had four, and I'm not certain, but Unitas has at least 2 NFL champoinships.
    but they also had steve young dont forget. so thats why montana left. favre left the packers then came back. and i dont know what happened with unitas.

    but what makes you feel safe about trading off a future hall of famer and going with a guy with one year's experience?

    then after that they got a guy who will be nothing more than a career 3rd stringer.

    so please dont mention tom brady and matt cassel in the same sentence. they are NOT BY FAR ON THE SAME LEVEL
    If you remember, Brady was too skinny, not mobile enough and too slight in the build when he came out.
    When Bledsoe got hurt, Brady didn't exactly "Tear it up."

    He just simply managed games and played just well enough to win games.
    Many of those Pats wins that first year could be attributed to Special Teams and Defense.
    Just looks like history has a cgood chance to repeat itself.
    We are talking about Bill Belichick here.
    so let me get this straight. you are willing to trade off a top 3 quarterback and replace him with a guy who isnt as good?

    so because bill is their head coach and because they got a steal in the 6th round with brady that they will try to get lucky again with cassel? sorry but lightning doesnt strike twice.

    and so if you want new england should trade tom brady. why not trade big ben? byron did great when he played for big ben

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,194

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "V" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Kevon still wants to know when did everyone but Kevon start thinking a game manager is a good idea. Kevon thinks its a terrible idea. Kevon wants you to look around the leage at the elite teams and you will not find game managers. To become a perennial title contender you need superstars at the QB and running back position. To purposely go out an dseek a player that is "good enough" is a recipe for "8-8" cake and "Miss-the-playoffs" punch.

    Eagles - McNabb & Westbrook
    Pats - Brade & Maroney
    Pits - Ben & Parker
    Colts - Manning & Addai
    Broncos - Cutler and who ever they put to play Rb
    San Diego - Rivers and LT
    Boys - Romo and Barber
    Giants - Eli and Jacobs

    These are just to name a few. An elite Qb doesn't mean the offense has to change and we come out passing on every down. What an elite Qb does is allow you to beat a team several different ways. It keeps defenses off balanced and it makes your strengths stronger. Wth an elite Qb, Peterson will have Lbs further off the ball, which would open up his lanes for longer, game changing runs.

    Think of it on the defensive side of the ball. Do you want to be great at stopping the run and average at stopping the pass? No you want to be the most dominanting force you can. You aim to be # 1 against the run and # 1 against the pass. You go out and bring in the players that you think can help you do so. The goal of any offense is to be # 1 in all catergories( except TOs). Why are we constantly settign the bar so low?


    LMAO!

    You call all those QB's superstars?

    Ha haa!
    Someone get the purple juic eout his hand. He clearly hasn't been watching the league this year.
    The Eagles, Broncos, and Cowboys are not perrennial title contenders.
    eagles can be. with their team finally healthy. expect a better eagles team

  10. #110
    kevoncox's Avatar
    kevoncox is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    5,909

    Re: Tom Brady trade bait?

    "V" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    "ultravikingfan" wrote:
    "kevoncox" wrote:
    Kevon still wants to know when did everyone but Kevon start thinking a game manager is a good idea. Kevon thinks its a terrible idea. Kevon wants you to look around the leage at the elite teams and you will not find game managers. To become a perennial title contender you need superstars at the QB and running back position. To purposely go out an dseek a player that is "good enough" is a recipe for "8-8" cake and "Miss-the-playoffs" punch.

    Eagles - McNabb & Westbrook
    Pats - Brade & Maroney
    Pits - Ben & Parker
    Colts - Manning & Addai
    Broncos - Cutler and who ever they put to play Rb
    San Diego - Rivers and LT
    Boys - Romo and Barber
    Giants - Eli and Jacobs

    These are just to name a few. An elite Qb doesn't mean the offense has to change and we come out passing on every down. What an elite Qb does is allow you to beat a team several different ways. It keeps defenses off balanced and it makes your strengths stronger. Wth an elite Qb, Peterson will have Lbs further off the ball, which would open up his lanes for longer, game changing runs.

    Think of it on the defensive side of the ball. Do you want to be great at stopping the run and average at stopping the pass? No you want to be the most dominanting force you can. You aim to be # 1 against the run and # 1 against the pass. You go out and bring in the players that you think can help you do so. The goal of any offense is to be # 1 in all catergories( except TOs). Why are we constantly settign the bar so low?


    LMAO!

    You call all those QB's superstars?

    Ha haa!
    Someone get the purple juic eout his hand. He clearly hasn't been watching the league this year.
    The Eagles, Broncos, and cowboys are not perrennial title contenders.
    ??? ??? ???
    The Broncos can be argued but how can you argue that the Eagles and Cowboys aren't expected to go deep into the playoffs each season??

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Handful of Lions considered trade bait
    By VikingMike in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 10-09-2008, 12:12 AM
  2. Trade for Brady Quinn anyone? (From a blog)
    By cajunvike in forum Vikings Offseason/Draft/FA Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-26-2008, 01:41 PM
  3. Trade Bait: Other Side of the NFL Market
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-25-2008, 06:28 AM
  4. Woman: Store used me as 'upskirt' bait
    By BadlandsVikings in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 06-08-2007, 08:17 PM
  5. Lee Suggs as trade bait?
    By singersp in forum General NFL Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-30-2005, 05:33 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •