Official National Football League (NFL) 2006 Regular season kickoff!

Status
Not open for further replies.
[quote name='integralsmatic']then tell me how peyton is already called a hall of famer but he has only won what 2 playoff games in a 9 year career while brady has destroyed that. andthe colts were and are the best team. how cant you win a a playoff game with a stud offense like that? please tell me? Brady proved that with a mediocre team you can take a team to its limits. he wins championships without having steller stats. he carried those super bowl teams to victory and dont tell me the D did it because they got banged up and almost became a liability for them to win. who would you call a HOF in this league right now if its not Brady?no one in four years has accomplished what he has and peyton hasnt even tasted a lick of what Brady has. He is our times Joe Montana. Montana was great but he didnt kill the record books like marino or manning has. montana won with poise and skill to lead a team. thats how brady is doing it. he leads his team with poise and greatness and makes his team look great. and if you dont believe me about montana not killing the record books here is the link to the NFL Facts and Records section. its on passing and montana is a bareley on their but he won alot with his team. why cant brady gain that same recognition

http://www.nfl.com/history/randf/records/indiv/passing[/QUOTE]

Look, if Brady has a 10-12 year career and puts up the numbers he has been, then yeah, he's a HOF. What pisses me off is the homers at ESPN calling him a HOF if he retired right this very instant. Look, just because you win championships doesn't mean you are a God. Look at Marino. Peyton will be a HOF because he'll smash every single record out there. Is he one now? I dunno, I'd have to compare the list and his current statistics.

Everyone harps at how Manning has everything and Brady has nothing. That's bullshit again. Look at Marvin Harrison's career before Manning arrived. Average. Only the YPC stands out. Once Manning starts his second year, #88 starts his HOF candidacy campaign. People say Reggie Wayne was a #1 draft pick. Charles Rogers. Desmond Howard. David Verser. Just because you are a top-pick WR doesn't mean you'll do well. Hell, he didn't even have a TD his first year. Brandon Stokely's numbers before he got to Indy combined doesn't measure up to his 2004 campaign.

The man's been winning games for seven years with no defense. People say he was able to pass so well because of Edgerrin, but what is EJ doing this year?

Could we play the what if game? What if Peyton didn't have an idiot kicker? They probably would have beat the Steelers (and then the Broncos) last year and perhaps we wouldn't be talking about him not having a ring. I like Dungy (and found Mora to be hilarious), but let's face it: they're no Belichek. Or Charlie Weis. Or Romeo Crennel.

The Patriots had an all-star coaching staff when this run started. If they didn't have this generation's version of Bernie Kosar (the human weeble), they could have won the SB in 2001 without Brady. Other years? Yeah, I'll give him the credit he deserves. But he's not a better QB than Peyton.
 
Tom Brady if he retired today would be a hall of famer.

I'll do it this simple: Last night, when Brady got the football (minus that ridiculous drop by Faulk) tell me you didn't think Brady was going to tie that up, i've never thought about that in Manning.
 
He shouldn't be if he retired right now. HOF is about more than Superbowl wins. I think he needs more high quality regular seasons under his belt before he is HOF worthy.
 
[quote name='ph33r m3']Tom Brady if he retired today would be a hall of famer.

I'll do it this simple: Last night, when Brady got the football (minus that ridiculous drop by Faulk) tell me you didn't think Brady was going to tie that up, i've never thought about that in Manning.[/QUOTE]

Oh, I thought Brady would have tied it. And then, no matter how much time was left on the clock, Manning would have driven down the field for the winning score. That thought never left my mind until the fourth interception.

Tom Brady is not a HOf'er today. That's fucking ridiculous.
 
[quote name='ph33r m3']
I'll do it this simple: Last night, when Brady got the football (minus that ridiculous drop by Faulk) tell me you didn't think Brady was going to tie that up, i've never thought about that in Manning.[/quote]You must have missed the Jets game. Or the Titans game. Or the Broncos game.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']
Tom Brady is not a HOf'er today. That's fucking ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

As much as I despise Tom Brady (and Peyton Manning), Brady is worthy of the Hall. Right now. Anyone thinking otherwise is fucking ridiculous in my opinion.

Only two quarterbacks in the history of the game have more rings - two dudes by the names of Montana and Bradshaw. Maybe you've heard of them. Both are in the Hall. Only one other quarterback has as many rings as Brady - Troy Aikman (who played on much better teams and never led the league in any passing category - more on that in a bit). Guess what? He's in the Hall.

You can argue numbers all you want (although guess who led the league in passing yards last season - hint: he played for the Patriots), but the fact remains the same: only three other quarterbacks in the history of the game have enjoyed as much success as Tom Brady. And all of them are in the Hall.
 
[quote name='2Fast']Why are the Raiders on MNF?[/quote]some bullshit. this is their second mnf game plus they get a saturday night game too near the end. fuck the raiders.
 
They should have expected what everyone already knew: the Raiders have sucked the past few years, and will continue to suck into the foreseeable future.
 
[quote name='captainfrizo']As much as I despise Tom Brady (and Peyton Manning), Brady is worthy of the Hall. Right now. Anyone thinking otherwise is fucking ridiculous in my opinion.

Only two quarterbacks in the history of the game have more rings - two dudes by the names of Montana and Bradshaw. Maybe you've heard of them. Both are in the Hall. Only one other quarterback has as many rings as Brady - Troy Aikman (who played on much better teams and never led the league in any passing category - more on that in a bit). Guess what? He's in the Hall.

You can argue numbers all you want (although guess who led the league in passing yards last season - hint: he played for the Patriots), but the fact remains the same: only three other quarterbacks in the history of the game have enjoyed as much success as Tom Brady. And all of them are in the Hall.[/QUOTE]

And what do all of those other QBs have in common?

Bradshaw: 14 seasons, 25000+ pass yards, Top 25 passing TDs
Montana: 15 seasons, 40000+ pass yards, Top 10 passing TDs
Aikman: 12 seasons, 30000+ pass yards, Top 50 passing TDs

Brady: 6+ seasons, under 20000 pass yards, 70th? in passing TDs
(Tom Brady is in the Top 50 in any statistical category only once: Passer Rating, 7th)


Oh, BTW:
Manning: 8+ seasons, 35000+ pass yards, Top 10 passing TDs


t1_owens.rosenhaus.jpg


Next question.
 
Yeah, I don't think anyone expected the Raiders to be good this year. I'm surprised by the choice especially with the selection of games for MNF so far this year. I'm positive that when ESPN was looking at the games when the schedules were released that there were much more enticing matchups for this week: DEN@PIT, CIN@BAL, DAL@WAS, or even MIA@CHI

Oh well, I guess those monster ratings they have been hyping so much will dip for a week.
 
Yes, it's real fair to complete career statistics when Brady has been in the league half as long (but experienced the same success). The only comparisons you could feasibly make are season based. However, if Brady maintains his pace and health, his numbers will quite impressible indeed (and better than Aikman's).

However, that's looking into the future and not the case of the present. Keep this in mind:

If Dan Marino (who owns damn near every passing record known to man) would be willing to trade all his numbers for a Super Bowl Ring, it should be a reminder that titles are what (most) players covet. The ultimate measure of success in the mind of (most) players and (seemingly) everyone else outside of Peyton Manning fans are rings. You cannot rule him non-Hall worthy when he is already one of the best of all time in the most important category: titles.

Manning may be a better quarterback than Brady numbers wise, but he still hasn't achieved the ultimate goal: a title. Hell, he hasn't even been to a Super Bowl.

Next question?
 
[quote name='captainfrizo']Yes, it's real fair to complete career statistics when Brady has been in the league half as long (but experienced the same success). The only comparisons you could feasibly make are season based. However, if Brady maintains his pace and health, his numbers will quite impressible indeed (and better than Aikman's).

However, that's looking into the future and not the case of the present. Keep this in mind:

If Dan Marino (who owns damn near every passing record known to man) would be willing to trade all his numbers for a Super Bowl Ring, it should be a reminder that titles are what (most) players covet. The ultimate measure of success in the mind of (most) players and (seemingly) everyone else outside of Peyton Manning fans are rings. You cannot rule him non-Hall worthy when he is already one of the best of all time in the most important category: titles.

Manning may be a better quarterback than Brady numbers wise, but he still hasn't achieved the ultimate goal: a title. Hell, he hasn't even been to a Super Bowl.

Next question?[/QUOTE]
It doesn't matter if players covet rings, numbers get you into the hall. And Trent Dilfer has more rings than Peyton Manning, so what? Career numbers are what ultimately make you a HOFer or not. The rings are just added bonus. If Brady can play consistently for a few more years, then yeah he'll be HOF worthy because he'll likely have the numbers to back it up.
 
I think the sticking point with the Brady/Manning issue is that all the praise is thrown to Brady (in regards to winning his rings) and all the criticism to Manning for not getting to the Super Bowl, when there's a team around both guys.

Brady may not have the same weapons Manning has on offense, but he has to contend with a far more lackluster defense and special teams (Vanderjagt comes to mind) than Brady who's had help from exceptional defenses and a great special teams kicker in Vinatieri.
 
[quote name='SteveMcQ']I think the sticking point with the Brady/Manning issue is that all the praise is thrown to Brady (in regards to winning his rings) and all the criticism to Manning for not getting to the Super Bowl, when there's a team around both guys.

Brady may not have the same weapons Manning has on offense, but he has to contend with a far more lackluster defense and special teams (Vanderjagt comes to mind) than Brady who's had help from exceptional defenses and a great special teams kicker in Vinatieri.[/QUOTE]

Yeah cuz having the highest precentage kicker in the league was so terrible for them, let's not forget the 2003 season where he was a perfect 37-37... how god awful was that? Vanderjagt missed some kicks, but every kicker does. I don't really like Manning or Brady (they are both good at what they do though), but the thing about Manning lovers that I don't like (and it's no offense to you Steve, living in Indiana you see people that defend him to the death) is that they try to attribute his shortcomings to others (kind of like Manning himself does).
 
Well last year, it was on Vanderjagt. Maybe not before when Peyton played terribly in New England. Offensively, the Pats can't mess with the Colts, but it's their defense that made the difference in their Superbowl years. All Brady had to do was not turn the ball over, and they were good. Peyton, on the other hand, doesn't have that same reliability from his defense. But that doesn't matter here, Peyton is a better QB than Brady hands down.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']the thing about Manning lovers that I don't like (and it's no offense to you Steve, living in Indiana you see people that defend him to the death) is that they try to attribute his shortcomings to others (kind of like Manning himself does).[/QUOTE]

"I don't want to point fingers, but we had some trouble with protection."

[quote name='PapiChullo']It doesn't matter if players covet rings, numbers get you into the hall. . .Career numbers are what ultimately make you a HOFer or not.[/QUOTE]

Ever see Lynn Swann's career numbers?
 
^fuck manning.

raiders need to fucking pull out a miracle here. Niners still have a slight chance of winning the west.
 
I've followed Peyton's career since he was in college (I was a huge Gators' fan back then) and the one thing that remains constant is that Peyton can't win the big game. I see Brady as more mentally tough, with a killer instinct, while Manning is more of a "aww gee shucks" kinda guy; Peyton just doesn't have "it" like Bradshaw, Montana, Aikman, and even Brady.
 
Let's pose this question with a different position...

Was Barry Sanders that much further behind Emmitt Smith because Emmitt won three titles and Barry won none?
 
[quote name='captainfrizo']
Ever see Lynn Swann's career numbers?[/QUOTE]

Maybe that's why it took him until 2001 to get in. Personally, I don't think he should be in. I don't know how his numbers compared to the best when he retired, but from today's perspective, he's not even close.

Superbowls are team accomplishments, the Hall of Fame is for individual excellence, and it takes consistency over a long period of time, and being in the top tier statistically. Right now, I don't think Brady has that, Peyton does.

Anyway, I hope the Raiders score in this game, because I had their D starting this week, but at the last minute switched to the Broncos, and with a shutout and all these sacks, I probably would have won this week. :(
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']Let's pose this question with a different position...

Was Barry Sanders that much further behind Emmitt Smith because Emmitt won three titles and Barry won none?[/QUOTE]

Actually, I believe Barry Sanders was better than Emmitt Smith and had he not retired early he would be the all time leading rusher easily. The lack of a title is a shame, but then he's just the running back equivalent of Dan Marino.

I actually think Peyton is a better overall quarterback than Tom Brady in terms of talent and skill. When it's all said and done his numbers could be the greatest of all time. However, he has not been as successful in the important aspect of the game to this point (at least in my opinion) - winning.

I understand why people believe that stats should be the primary factor in Hall of Fame selection, and I truly have nothing against that. But when people are so eager to throw way the fact that a guy has three rings and two Super Bowl MVP's (we're not talking about Trent Dilfer here) I truly cannot comprehend their logic behind it. Is it easier to throw for 3,000 yards a season or win the Super Bowl?

Stats may be more individual than winning, but do you think Emmitt Smith would have so many yards without one of the (if not the) greatest offensive lines and the Aikman/Irvin threat? Would Joe Montana or Steve Young have been as successful without Jerry Rice? Even individual statistics rely on teammate performance.

I guess it's your own preference. If you're more numbers oriented you'd be against Brady in the Hall at this point. If you're more outcome oriented you'd put him in with little thought since he's won more titles than almost everyone.

Hall of Fame aside, I'm surprised Seattle hasn't been able to put Oakland away quite yet.
 
Titles don't get you into the HOF. Ask Terrell Davis. That's who Brady reminds me of right now. Top tier for the few years he's been in the league, but who's to say that career continues? If Brady breaks his neck tomorrow, sorry, he's the TD of QBs. I could name a list of about 100 QBs that have SB titles and Peyton doesn't, but it ultimately doesn't mean anything. When you are a QB, you can only control the offense. You can't do anything about what the defense or special teams do, and ultimately, that's what wins championships. Don't believe me? Ask Brady. He's been the first to tell you that. Elway was one of the greatest QBs of all time before he got a RB. The championships validated his career, but he didn't need them.

Vanderjagt may be the career leader in FG percentage, but the man cannot kick in the clutch. Dallas is finding that out right now. Every single big FG he missed. Not defending, but you mentioned it.

If you want to speak of team, go back to my question: Why is Marvin Harrison going to the HOF? Peyton. Why did Edge get a huge contract in Arizona? Peyton.

I don't know if anyone else has noticed it, but Peyton seems like he's hellbent to win this year. I've not seen that kind of 'fuck it, I'm winning the game' from him until now. It's kinda scary.

I don't know what Stevens did to warrant that, but I'll accept 'breathing.'
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Titles don't get you into the HOF. Ask Terrell Davis.[/quote]

Terrell Davis won't be eligible for entry into the Hall until the next vote if I remember correctly, so it's too early to make that statement (even though it may become true).

In other news, it's always nice to see Oakland playing with class.

Edit - found this: Players become eligible for the Hall of Fame after being retired five years, and Butler is one of 10 new nominees, along with: running back Terrell Davis. . .
 
[quote name='DT778']what a fucking punk. just when you thought the raiders couldn't further embarrass themselves.[/QUOTE]

When your post first said to ban him I was like, "Damn. I didn't think I would have pissed anyone off too much with that post." :lol:
 
[quote name='PapiChullo']It doesn't matter if players covet rings, numbers get you into the hall. And Trent Dilfer has more rings than Peyton Manning, so what? Career numbers are what ultimately make you a HOFer or not. The rings are just added bonus. If Brady can play consistently for a few more years, then yeah he'll be HOF worthy because he'll likely have the numbers to back it up.[/QUOTE]

There are a ton of average players in the Hall of Fame solely because they won championships.

Also Vanderjagt only missed the kick aganist the Redskins because no one blocked. No kicker would have been able to make that kick. Last year in the playoffs, he may have missed the kick, but with the way the refs handed Peyton the game they should not have even been in that position. Peyton is a choker through and through, and just like Colts fans are doing right now, they are pinning blame on everyone else but Peyton. He is the Dale Earnhardt Jr. of football. Both blame everyone else when they lose and end up choking down the stretch.


On Barry Sanders, I believe even Barry said Emmitt was better. Barry had to carry a lot of teams, and plus he was not a north and south runner. He may break a lot of big gains, but he took a lot of losses as well.
 
TD definitely gets in eventually, if not this year. That topic's already been done to death in one of the past topics, so it doesn't need to be dug up.
 
How anyone could ever doubt Peyton at this point, I have no idea. He fucked up in New England a few years back, yes, but if you watch him this year, there's an edge to him, like Cochese said.

If anyone still has the Denver/Indy game on their DVR, look at him on the sidelines. He's got a look whenever Denver scores as though, "fuck them, I'm winning this game. Do whatever the hell you want, but I'm winning this game." It was evident in the Jets game (with his spiking of the ball) and on the sidelines and after TDs, he's got a different air about him now.

As for Peyton not being able to win "the big game":

Take last year's playoff game as a scenario:
Indy gets the ball back and Peyton drives the team down the field for a chance at a game-winning field goal. What happens? Vanderjagt boots it wide right.

Let's look at Super Bowl XXXVIII Patriots vs. Panthers:
Patriots get the ball back and Brady brings the team down the field for a chance at a game-winnning field goal. What happens? Vinatieri kicks a game-winner.

So why is it that Peyton would be blamed and called a choker when he gives his team a chance and other people let him down? On the opposite side, why is it that Brady is heralded for a kick that Vinatieri makes. Going by some people's logic here, shouldn't have Brady scored the TD and not left it up to Vinatieri if he really is that good?

The defenses stepped up in both scenarios, but each QB brought his team to a point in the game where they had a chance to win. The difference between the two is that Brady had his teammates step up for him. Peyton did not.

Of all the years in which Peyton has had shit thrown his way for not doing this or that, this year thus far is not one in which he deserves any criticism. Instead of bitching so much about what he's failed to do in the past and what he has yet to do in the future, enjoy him in the now, 'cause there's none better.
 
[quote name='captainfrizo']When your post first said to ban him I was like, "Damn. I didn't think I would have pissed anyone off too much with that post." :lol:[/quote]hehe, i didnt even read your post since I could careless about a brady/payton hof debate... even though your post was about sanders/smith.
 
whoever compared brady to TD is a moron those teams won rings because of Elway. Brady just wins his winning percentage over his career is the best among active qbs. There is room for both qbs in the hall both montana and marino got in.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']
Vanderjagt may be the career leader in FG percentage, but the man cannot kick in the clutch. Dallas is finding that out right now. Every single big FG he missed. Not defending, but you mentioned it.[/quote]

As the Qb you do you rbest to not let it come down to a clutch kick. Alot of time those games were close because the offense couldn't put up enough points in the last quarter. Ask anyone involved with football on any level and they'll tell you anyone who uses the "blame the kicker" strategy has serious ego issues. Don't go on a tangent about being a team then shift blame. You win and lose and as team, if you wan to say that fine, but that includes the kicker and you can't call Vanderjagt that bad as he provided many solid years as a top notch kicker and the colts still failed to excel in the clutch, as a team. You can go back and sight plenty of games where Peyton choked too. Here's my final question how many of the missed clutch, game winning kicks came during the playoff games where they failed to put up more than 14 pts?

[quote name='CocheseUGA']
If you want to speak of team, go back to my question: Why is Marvin Harrison going to the HOF? Peyton. Why did Edge get a huge contract in Arizona? Peyton.[/quote]

Wrong, Harrison's going because he's Harrison. With his talent to spread the field and get open and his hands he would excel on any team who has a decent QB. Edge's contract wasn't thanks to Peyton (actually it was because if Peyton hadn't sucked up half the cap the year prior he may have been able to get the contract he wanted in Indy), it was thanks to Indy's line. He quickly found that out in AZ. Plus it's not like those guys don't help Peyton, how many great catches has Harrison made that help Manning's numbers?

[quote name='CocheseUGA']
I don't know if anyone else has noticed it, but Peyton seems like he's hellbent to win this year. I've not seen that kind of 'fuck it, I'm winning the game' from him until now. It's kinda scary.
[/QUOTE]

Maybe so, I don't claim to be an expert, but will that fire last is the question. I do remember another Colt's QB had that drive to win, his name was Jim Harbaugh, they deemed him "Captain Comeback".
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']
Wrong, Harrison's going because he's Harrison. With his talent to spread the field and get open and his hands he would excel on any team who has a decent QB. Edge's contract wasn't thanks to Peyton (actually it was because if Peyton hadn't sucked up half the cap the year prior he may have been able to get the contract he wanted in Indy), it was thanks to Indy's line. He quickly found that out in AZ. Plus it's not like those guys don't help Peyton, how many great catches has Harrison made that help Manning's numbers?
[/QUOTE]


Not even close. Harbaugh in 1996 had a 57% pass completion. 1997? 61%. Harrison did nothing special those two years. 1998, Marvin only played 12 games and put up similar numbers as he did the last two seasons in fewer games, and a rookie QB. The man hasn't had a sub-1000 yard or sun-10 TD season since. Harrison is a good receiver with another QB there, he's HOF with Peyton. Manning is a 62-67% passer over those years, which I grant you is very good. But the offensive ratio running/passing is about the same while Harrison was there (remember, Faulk was there first). About the same number of attempts (more during 2004-5).

As for TD, he's not making the HOF. Listen to the voters talking about it, he didn't have enough years of top-level performance to warrant it. I'll take the word of three HOF voters over what I hear here. Having every RB since then to get 1000 yards in the same system doesn't help his cause either.


I'm sorry, the only reason Elway won two rings is because of Elway? What happened the previous three times? Elway won two rings because he finally got a running back that could run his way through a wet paper bag. Listen, I should be the #1 TD fan here (went to UGA, got Elway his ring) but the man isn't going to the HOF. When they make a Hall of Very Good, I'll be the first to support his entry.


The week of upsets really hurt me. 7-7 (still no losing week!), making me 83-45 for my picks for the year. Damn, I should have put some money down.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Not even close. Harbaugh in 1996 had a 57% pass completion. 1997? 61%. Harrison did nothing special those two years. 1998, Marvin only played 12 games and put up similar numbers as he did the last two seasons in fewer games, and a rookie QB. The man hasn't had a sub-1000 yard or sun-10 TD season since. Harrison is a good receiver with another QB there, he's HOF with Peyton. Manning is a 62-67% passer over those years, which I grant you is very good. But the offensive ratio running/passing is about the same while Harrison was there (remember, Faulk was there first). About the same number of attempts (more during 2004-5).
[/QUOTE]

You act like 61% is an affront to man. Besdies I didn't call him a HoF Qb, I called him a great guy that would always put everything on the line to get the team a W, often rallying from behind to do so. As for Marv, he led the team in recpetions for wideouts those two years you critic him on. The offense was different come 1999, don't lie to yourself about that. Faulk was utilized totally differently than James was early on. Faulk led the team in recpetions in 1996 and the number of short routes and dump passes to the RB decreased dramatically statring in Manning's years. Now I wasn't trying to say Harrison's success has all been due to just him. Like any wideout he's a decent passer and now it helps to have other guys like wayne that can spread the field. But his talent as a WR can't be denied, he may not have the exact same inflated numbers as now, but do you honestly don't think HoF too if he spent all this time at some place like St Louis, Philly, KC or *gasp* New England? Is Torry Holt not going to HoF because Peyton isn't the one throwing the ball? A QB makes a wideout look good and vice versa, think what you like about whoever, but that's always a two way street.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']You act like 61% is an affront to man. Besdies I didn't call him a HoF Qb, I called him a great guy that would always put everything on the line to get the team a W, often rallying from behind to do so. As for Marv, he led the team in recpetions for wideouts those two years you critic him on. The offense was different come 1999, don't lie to yourself about that. Faulk was utilized totally differently than James was early on. Faulk led the team in recpetions in 1996 and the number of short routes and dump passes to the RB decreased dramatically statring in Manning's years. Now I wasn't trying to say Harrison's success has all been due to just him. Like any wideout he's a decent passer and now it helps to have other guys like wayne that can spread the field. But his talent as a WR can't be denied, he may not have the exact same inflated numbers as now, but do you honestly don't think HoF too if he spent all this time at some place like St Louis, Philly, KC or *gasp* New England? Is Torry Holt not going to HoF because Peyton isn't the one throwing the ball? A QB makes a wideout look good and vice versa, think what you like about whoever, but that's always a two way street.[/QUOTE]

Actually, I think 61% is a good number for a season. Harbaugh was a pretty good QB, something his numbers show.

So you're saying that Tom Moore is the reason for their success?
 
I attribute the Colts success to me. First time Peyton's jersey became available I bought it. Now look where he's at. Coincidence? I think not.
 
[quote name='CocheseUGA']Actually, I think 61% is a good number for a season. Harbaugh was a pretty good QB, something his numbers show.

So you're saying that Tom Moore is the reason for their success?[/QUOTE]

Not exactly, but I don't think it's a coincidence that he's been there since Manning's beginning and lasted 8 years even through big coaching changes (think he's the longest lasting assitant there besdes the RB coach). I think Moore isn't as neccessary now because of the play calling the Colts can do on the fly and so on (though he probably helped develop that systam as well), but during the "Jim Mora years" I think he helped alot to get that offense rolling at full speed. But my real point was just to illustrate that an offense, at least a passing offense, takes more than just one guy to excel and that a widoeut with Harrison's talent and hands can be a success in any offense that can pass relatively well, it doens't have to be Indy's or Manning's offense.
 
[quote name='H-Town Info']i would take peyton manning over tom brady as a QB. But, I'll take Brady over Manning as a player.[/quote]

What?
 
[quote name='GuilewasNK']The Raiders are the football equivalent of explosive diarrhea.[/quote]

Check that...

My Redskins are the football equivlent of explosive diarrhea.

Missed FG, crazy ass catch/fumble touchdown given up, and Clinton Portis out with a broken hand. Super.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
bread's done
Back
Top