NFL Football 2010/2011 Season

[Apple OC]

The Seattle win over New Orleans would still be a bigger upset than a win over the Bears IMO. NO was one missed kick from being the number one seed and 13-3. The Bears are a good team, but they are not the defending SB champs. And as pointed out above, the Seahawks have already beaten the Bears at Chicago this year in week 6.

I agree that GB has the potential to drop the Falcons and go to the SB
And they proved they could play with NE even without Rodgers
I believe the winner of the Falcon/Packer game goes to the SB

Good Luck MacDawg in the next game ... IMO Green Bay does not match up to Atlanta ... the Falcons seem very poised to also not look past them. Should be a sound home win for them.

Chicago is too strong for the Seahawks at this point in the season ... I just do not see the Seahawks putting together back to back games to beat the Bears.

Therefore a Chicago/Atlanta NFC Championship seems likely to me and should be an outstanding game. If Atlanta stays focused to the immediate task at hand ... They will get to the Superbowl.

As for the AFC ... IMO the Ravens will put the hurt on Big Ben and the Steelers ... I like Flacco ... he is so mature for a young QB (reminds me of Ryan in that sense)

I believe the Jets will pull out a win against NE as they have nothing to lose and will lay it all out there. However when they face the Ravens ... they will face the same fate as the Chiefs.

Ravens/Falcons meet in Texas.

 

[MacDawg]

Personally, I think the Falcons match up better with GB than with the Eagles
So in that sense, I am more optimistic, but only cautiously so
I think they both will be ready to play

 

[grapes911]

Personally, I think the Falcons match up better with GB than with the Eagles

That's because the Eagles are too unpredictable. When they are on their game there isn't a team they can't beat -- Falcons, Colts. When they don't have it, there isn't a team they can't lose to -- Vikings, Redskins.

The Packers are what they are. You know what you are going to get. It should be a great game, but I give Atlanta the nod because of home-field advantage and a week off.

 

[63dot]

I like how the picture changes with every game in the post season.

It still looks to be safest to call it Pats v. Falcons in the SB. And for the reasons Macdawg has given us during the regular season, it's probably the Falcons who will win it all. The Falcons could have the top receiver in the NFL, and QB Ryan falls just behind Vick, Rodgers, Brady, Manning, and Rivers (in that order), and the Falcons killed a lot of winning teams and had a very long streak of wins so they are no stranger to a consistent system. Atlanta also has the hunger in going for their first ring and that can't be underestimated.

However, GB gave NE hell with just their backup QB and three injured starters. If GB, with full healthy team including Rodgers, peaks and somehow beats the Falcons, then I think GB can go all the way. Same can be said for Chicago though.

The Ravens tore it up and now they don't look so bad making it all the way. If the Steelers beat the Ravens big, then there could be a case to call the Steelers the team to beat.

Injuries allow for second place teams to rise to the top, and because this isn't golf a whole team could be hamstrung with a QB or RB coming out in a bad way under a pile of players. Sometimes the guy who is a team's defensive star who made the successful hit and took out the opposing player for the game also finds himself injured and out. As long as there is a game standing between a team getting to the SB, nobody is immune to injury and possibly the end of the season for that team.

I don't know who the D player from the Ravens was who got pretty banged up while banging up a Chief or two, but something like that could make a difference when they travel to the Steelers. You have to be running on all cylinders to have a chance to go against your next opponent, especially if they are rested for a whole extra week.

 

[einmusiker]

keep in mind, for all 8 teams left it's win 3 games to championship. EVERY team in the NFL can have a bad game at any given moment. All this postulating really is pointless, albeit fun game on!

 

[MacDawg]

keep in mind, for all 8 teams left it's win 3 games to championship. EVERY team in the NFL can have a bad game at any given moment. All this postulating really is pointless, albeit fun game on!

It is hard to beat any team twice in one season
All 4 of these games are regular season rematches
The AFC games are all coming from splits

All possible games are rematches next week except for:
Seattle v Green Bay
Chicago v Atlanta


Jets
Split with NE
Lost to Baltimore and beat Pittsburgh

Pats
Split with Jets
Beat Pittsburgh and Baltimore

Ravens
Split with Pittsburgh
Lost to Pats and beat the Jets

Pittsburgh
Split with Ravens
Lost to Jets and Pats

Falcons
Beat the Seahawks and Packers
Did not play the Bears

Packers
Split with the Bears
Lost to the Falcons

Bears
Split with the Packers
Lost to Seattle

Seattle
Beat the Bears
Lost to the Falcons

 

[zioxide]

I believe the Jets will pull out a win against NE as they have nothing to lose and will lay it all out there.

uhh, every team has nothing to lose at this point. Brady and the pats lost at home in the first playoff game last year. he is determined not to have that happen again. like wilfork said, "there's something different about this team"

QB Ryan falls just behind Vick, Rodgers, Brady, Manning, and Rivers (in that order)

In that order? You are on crack if you put Vick in front of all 5 of those names. How did he do yesterday? Oh yeah, he pulled a Brett Favre.

It goes Brady 1st (cause he is god), Manning, Brees, Roethlisberger, and the Rodgers to round out the top 5.

John Clayton at ESPN did an article last week ranking all of the quarterbacks that started in the NFL this year. He is spot on with his analysis.


On a side note, does Rex Ryan ever shut the **** up? Apparently only when he's eating cheeseburgers...

 

[63dot]

It is hard to beat any team twice in one season
All 4 of these games are regular season rematches
The AFC games are all coming from splits

All possible games are rematches next week except for:
Seattle v Green Bay
Chicago v Atlanta

I like your chances, Dawg. You don't have to play Philly (which is the hottest team in the NFL when they are on), and one team on the NFC side appears not to be a big threat (Seattle).

Just like it's hard to beat the same team twice, it's also hard for a regular season losing team like Seattle to go and repeatedly beat big winners in the playoffs. For just the sake of betting odds, I put Seattle as a statistical outlier. The Bears are the scariest NFC team besides you, with GB not far behind the Bears.

And the team that has been your equal is the Pats, of course and game for game, they are just as consistent as you.

What you have over the Pats is that Brady may be a little less athletic with age and possible cumulative injuries in this very brutal sport (but smarter and more experienced leading him to throw only passes he knows he can complete) and some key Pats may be inexperienced (yet have their physical peak in strength and durability). They have a couple of young D players who are like human bulldozers and can put the hurt on Atlanta's QB.

But I like where Atlanta stands with the right mixture of experience and relative youth/toughness. It's still your SB to lose on every level. If this was the 2001-2004 Pats you were facing if the SB was between you and them, they would clean your clock (or anybody's in this postseason) having gone 3 for 4 years into the SB and winning all three they entered. They had the best QB (not the #3 behind Rodgers and Vick this season as posted on the NFL site yesterday of top five quarterbacks) and they had one of the scariest defenses of all time in that 2001-2004 dynasty. They were perhaps the most complete team in football history. Their D alone could have won all three Super Bowls in the early 2000s!

I think this is your best chance being you have no Philly to worry about and the only real threat to you on the AFC side is what amounts to the Pats second dynasty (which while a great squad, is in no way like the Brady led team of 2001-2004).

In that order? You are on crack if you put Vick in front of all 5 of those names. How did he do yesterday? Oh yeah, he pulled a Brett Favre.

I thought that too when I saw the heading Top Five QBs of the NFL website on the fantasy tab. Too weird.

I would put Brady first, but the NFL site put Vick first. I think part of it is that comeback thing. Like many things, at least Vick gets comeback story of the year but nothing more. Vick is too inconsistent, imho.

Of the five, I would put Vick at #5 and put Ryan in that top five somewhere and not at #6 or worse. It's not me, it's the NFL site. They put Rivers in the top five leaving Ryan out. Go figure.

I think they just pull certain stats and make these determinations.

Brady is a leader in times of stress, and Vick just doesn't have that maturity.

 

[grapes911]

I thought that too when I saw the heading Top Five QBs of the NFL website on the fantasy tab. Too weird.

Don't confuse fantasy with reality. Vick missed a bunch of games and was the top fantasy QB in most scoring systems. He was the points per game leader by a wide margin. As much as I love fantasy football, it is not a very good barometer on how good a player is.

 

[zioxide]

I thought that too when I saw the heading Top Five QBs of the NFL website on the fantasy tab. Too weird.

Ahh, didn't catch the fantasy point in your PM. I have no problem putting Rodgers #1 for Fantasy QBs. Vick is right up there too. But fantasy football is a completely different animal than the actual game. There are plenty of players (cough Rivers cough) who can put up phenomenal fantasy football numbers but are actually complete **** at winning games in the NFL.

I would put Brady first, but the NFL site put Vick first. I think part of it is that comeback thing. Like many things, at least Vick gets comeback story of the year but nothing more. Vick is too inconsistent, imho.

When you factor in the fantasy points Vick gets from rushing the ball, he probably averages more fantasy points than Brady. The key in that statement is fantasy points though.

I just went on to the ESPN Fantasy website and got the point totals for the 2010 season. Here are the QBs sorted by most points scored:

So that is why NFL.com had the rankings that way. Clayton's rankings (that I posted above) is based on their actual play and performance in the NFL instead of fantasy production.

Of the five, I would put Vick at #5 and put Ryan in that top five somewhere and not at #6 or worse. It's not me, it's the NFL site. They put Rivers in the top five leaving Ryan out. Go figure.

I think they just pull certain stats and make these determinations.

Brady is a leader in times of stress, and Vick just doesn't have that maturity.

Your bold statement says it all. Brady is as cool and confident as you can get.. he's just like Montana in that way.

 

[MacDawg]

One of the greatest runs at the greatest times I have ever seen
He was not going to be denied

Ground shook on Marshawn Lynch TD

SEATTLE -- Marshawn Lynch's 67-yard touchdown run that clinched Seattle's upset of New Orleans in the first round of the NFL playoffs may be remembered for more than the half-dozen or so broken tackles.

It shook Qwest Field and the ground around the stadium -- literally.

John Vidale, director of the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network, says that a seismic monitoring station about 100 yards west of the stadium registered seismic activity during Lynch's fourth-quarter run that clinched Seattle's 41-36 victory.

Vidale says he was inspired to look at the seismic graphs after watching a video posted on the Internet from the upper deck of the stadium and noticed the shaking as Lynch completed his TD run.

Vidale says the shaking lasted about 30 seconds and then faded off for another minute.

What do you think?
Does Vick return to the Eagles or not?

Reid on starting QB: 'We'll see'

PHILADELPHIA -- The Eagles head into an offseason filled with uncertainty, mainly because of the NFL labor contract. Michael Vick is set to become a free agent, and there are no guarantees he'll be back.

 

[63dot]

What do you think?
Does Vick return to the Eagles or not?

Reid on starting QB: 'We'll see'

Vick is a strange one. With Atlanta in the mid-2000s, he was one of the best running QBs ever and was consistent. Then he comes back in this decade and is one of the best passers but is inconsistent. When he's on, he is the best passer in the NFL by a mile. But without consistency, there's no way he can be like a Manning or Brady. Sure all three are Hall of Fame no doubt, but Manning and Brady are on a higher level of quarterback mainly because of their consistency. Manning has almost all of the past 10 seasons with 4,000 yard seasons and nearly 400 TDs in his career. Brady has 3 Super Bowl rings and 4 Super Bowl appearances.

I say give Vick another full season to prove it, otherwise go with the other guy. Vick posted a very good QB rating this year of a 108.7 and his team made the playoffs so it's not as if Philly failed by any measure.

 

[grapes911]

Sure all three are Hall of Fame no doubt

Vick isn't even close to the hall of fame. Could he eventually get there? Possibly, but not likely.

I say give Vick another full season to prove it, otherwise go with the other guy. Vick posted a very good QB rating this year of a 108.7 and his team made the playoffs so it's not as if Philly failed by any measure.

I say give Vick another full season as well. The only issue is that we were ready to turn the page on Donavon McNabb. We replaced him, but got the same result. A dynamic QB who can control the game and be one of the best in the league at times, but very inconsistent. Even the overall season was the same result -- an opportunity for a bye late in the season, which was missed, and then out in the first round. I'm not blaming this all on Vick (or McNabb), but inconsistency at the QB position as plagued the Eagles for years now. It would be nice to have a QB who you can count on. Although, I can't think of any that are available.

 

[MacDawg]

^^
A fair assessment of the situation comparing Vick and McNabb
And no, Vick is no where near sniffing the HoF

Still a lot of story lines left to play out...
Ryan v Belichick/Brady
Steelers v Ravens

A budding Matt Ryan v Aaron Rodgers rivalry (Brady/Manning?)
Not close yet, but could be the start of many playoff encounters

 

[mscriv]

I'm not blaming this all on Vick (or McNabb), but inconsistency at the QB position as plagued the Eagles for years now. It would be nice to have a QB who you can count on. Although, I can't think of any that are available.

I think you are being pretty short sighted here. Vick did a fabulous job this year if you want to compare him with the other QB's around the league. Not elite, but close. The Eagles problem this year was their defense. The announcers showed the stats during the Packers game. The Eagles D was one of the worst this year at stopping people in the red zone. But hey, don't lose heart, Philly has a talented young team. With some tweaks they will be much better next year.

 

[63dot]

I think you are being pretty short sighted here. Vick did a fabulous job this year if you want to compare him with the other QB's around the league. Not elite, but close. The Eagles problem this year was their defense. The announcers showed the stats during the Packers game. The Eagles D was one of the worst this year at stopping people in the red zone. But hey, don't lose heart, Philly has a talented young team. With some tweaks they will be much better next year.

I think Vick did his job better than most, too.

But when the nation sees Vick on fire, and sees a QB performing (in that game) better than Montana or Marino ever did, one may fall into a false hope he can always be that way. We saw some high highs with Vick and some low lows.

Taking his whole career overall, his rushing yards, passing yards, and duties at the QB position is heading him towards at least another year at Philly, and after that, probably finishing out his career elsewhere and giving him a good shot at the Hall of Fame and maybe a ring or two.

And about Philly's former QB at his position, don't forget that McNabb was in the Super Bowl, and then think about your favorite team and their QB*** (everyone here), and ask, "How many times has your team been there recently?". I think Philly, as much as I don't like them, are a pretty solid team.

I could only dream that my 49ers or Raiders could have a Vick, so you guys out in Philly who are disappointed, just shut up!

***SF 49ers - let's see, hmm, last Super Bowl appearance?? umm? Wiki? 1994 season with Steve Young and Jerry Rice (both long retired)

***Oakland/LA Raiders - 2002 Super Bowl appearance with heartbreaking loss with our sure fire QB Rich Gannon, and last Raiders SB win? hmm, wait, Wiki again, 1983 season when Ronald Reagan was president during his first term.

 

[einmusiker]

I think Vick did his job better than most, too.

But when the nation sees Vick on fire, and sees a QB performing (in that game) better than Montana or Marino ever did, one may fall into a false hope he can always be that way. We saw some high highs with Vick and some low lows.

Taking his whole career overall, his rushing yards, passing yards, and duties at the QB position is heading him towards at least another year at Philly, and after that, probably finishing out his career elsewhere and giving him a good shot at the Hall of Fame and maybe a ring or two.

And about Philly's former QB at his position, don't forget that McNabb was in the Super Bowl, and then think about your favorite team and their QB*** (everyone here), and ask, "How many times has your team been there recently?". I think Philly, as much as I don't like them, are a pretty solid team.

I could only dream that my 49ers or Raiders could have a Vick, so you guys out in Philly who are disappointed, just shut up!

***SF 49ers - let's see, hmm, last Super Bowl appearance?? umm? Wiki? 1994 season with Steve Young and Jerry Rice (both long retired)

***Oakland/LA Raiders - 2002 Super Bowl appearance with heartbreaking loss with our sure fire QB Rich Gannon, and last Raiders SB win? hmm, wait, Wiki again, 1983 season when Ronald Reagan was president during his first term.

there is NO WAY vick makes the hall. Sorry but he would need to win a ring and have at least 2 or 3 more high number seasons to be considered and he doesn't have that in him, he's not smart enough.

I see scam newton following the same fate. He'll make plenty of money and get some glory (which is all he cares about) but he doesn't have the brains to be elite in the NFL.

Jamarcus Russell anyone?

 

[63dot]

there is NO WAY vick makes the hall. Sorry but he would need to win a ring and have at least 2 or 3 more high number seasons to be considered and he doesn't have that in him, he's not smart enough.

I see scam newton following the same fate. He'll make plenty of money and get some glory (which is all he cares about) but he doesn't have the brains to be elite in the NFL.

Jamarcus Russell anyone?

I don't want Vick to make the HoF, heck, I don't even want him to be in football.

But look at who has gotten into the HoF and determine for yourself. He has played some good football. If anything keeps him out, it's his inconsistencies and some missed years due to jail time.

There are tons of non-ring players in the Hall of Fame. The SB ring denotes an entire team, which includes coaches, too. The Hall looks at an individual players numbers. It's the reason why Dan Marino, ringless and with only one SB appearance, is there and considered by many to be among the best who every played the QB position. I think Vick can go another three or four seasons, if he stays healthy, and put up some impressive rushing yards, passing yards, and TDs.

That being said, I don't expect another 108 rated season or big rushing yards (as that greatly increases his chance of injury). The best indicator of making it to the HoF from their site is pro bowl selections. Vick has four which isn't great, but isn't bad considering his break in his career. I think he has seven pro bowl picks before he retires. I don't ever see him being put in the same sentence, career wise, as Peyton Manning or Tom Brady. Actually, very few QBs who ever played the sport will be put in the same category as Manning or Brady as they are on a very short list with the Marinos, Montanas, Aikmans, and a few others.

 

[zioxide]

Vick is a strange one. With Atlanta in the mid-2000s, he was one of the best running QBs ever and was consistent. Then he comes back in this decade and is one of the best passers but is inconsistent. When he's on, he is the best passer in the NFL by a mile. But without consistency, there's no way he can be like a Manning or Brady. Sure all three are Hall of Fame no doubt, but Manning and Brady are on a higher level of quarterback mainly because of their consistency.

What? Ryan Leaf has a better chance of making the Hall of Fame than Michael Vick. He has NO CHANCE ever. He has never been a great quarterback. Running QBs are for college, not the NFL. If you look at his numbers, they aren't any better than a guy like Chad Pennington. He's never won anything, and the fact that he spent 2 years in a federal prison kills any chance of him getting in the HOF even if he wins a ring or two. It's NOT happening. Jon Kitna will win 6 rings before Vick makes the HOF.

I don't want Vick to make the HoF, heck, I don't even want him to be in football.

But look at who has gotten into the HoF and determine for yourself. He has played some good football. If anything keeps him out, it's his inconsistencies and some missed years due to jail time.

There are tons of non-ring players in the Hall of Fame. The SB ring denotes an entire team, which includes coaches, too. The Hall looks at an individual players numbers. It's the reason why Dan Marino, ringless and with only one SB appearance, is there and considered by many to be among the best who every played the QB position. I think Vick can go another three or four seasons, if he stays healthy, and put up some impressive rushing yards, passing yards, and TDs.

Those numbers aren't even close to being hall of fame worthy. If you believe in passer rating being a good stat (which is questionable), Vick ranks behind active players David Garrard, Matt Cassel, Jake Delhomme, Mark Brunell, and Jason Campbell. He is tied with Eli Manning (80.2). Among retired players, he is behind Rich Gannon, Brian Griese, Damon Huard, Brad Johnson, and Jeff George. Do you see any names in that group that have any chance at all of the hall of fame? I don't.

Now there are some Hall of Famers, notably John Elway, Johnny Unitas, and Bart Starr, who have career ratings within a point of Vick. But they have the championships to back it up. Vick doesn't have ****. The only Hall of Fame he will ever see is the Leavanworth Federal Penitentiary "guys who got out of here and made it back to the NFL" hall of fame.

The best indicator of making it to the HoF from their site is pro bowl selections. Vick has four which isn't great, but isn't bad considering his break in his career. I think he has seven pro bowl picks before he retires.

The pro bowl is the WORST indicator for a players performance on the football field. The absolute worst. It's just voted on by the fans, and is nothing more than a popularity contest. You could have the best player in the league, but if he's playing for a small market team, he could not make the pro bowl over someone way better in the big market.

For example: Brandon Meriweather is in his 3rd year and is going to his 2nd Pro Bowl this year. He isn't even very good.. he blows coverages all the time. Rodney Harrison was one of the best safeties in NFL history, and has a great shot at the Hall of Fame. He's one of just two players in NFL history with 30 career sacks and 30 career interceptions (the other is Ray Lewis, another sure HoFer). Rodney also has 2 Super Bowl rings, but he only went to the Pro Bowl twice. The Pro Bowl means nothing. The players from the two Super Bowl teams don't even play in it anymore.

I don't ever see him being put in the same sentence, career wise, as Peyton Manning or Tom Brady. Actually, very few QBs who ever played the sport will be put in the same category as Manning or Brady as they are on a very short list with the Marinos, Montanas, Aikmans, and a few others.

Vick doesn't even go on the list of the top 50 quarterbacks in NFL history. He would be lucky to crack the top 100. If Brady wins another ring, him and Montana are going to be 1 and 1a (not even sure what order) for best QBs in the Super Bowl era. Right now, I would put him at 2 (with a slight bias), but I put him ahead of Bradshaw because the Steel Curtain D won those 4 Super Bowls. Manning is definitely top 10, (probably 6 or 7) but I don't think he is top 5 unless he wins another ring.

 

[grapes911]

I think you are being pretty short sighted here. Vick did a fabulous job this year if you want to compare him with the other QB's around the league. Not elite, but close. The Eagles problem this year was their defense. The announcers showed the stats during the Packers game. The Eagles D was one of the worst this year at stopping people in the red zone. But hey, don't lose heart, Philly has a talented young team. With some tweaks they will be much better next year.

Even though they only gave up 21 points to the Packers, you are correct in that defense is a major weakness. But we expected the defense to be a weakness. We were sold that Kolb was the future. An 8-8 season would have been a success as Kolb learned to be a solid NFL QB. Then the Vick experiment started and we were sold here is the guy that can help us win now. He played well at times and did a very good job. The problem is that in the end he was no better than McNabb. Vick may have had a pretty good year, but the team overall made very little progress. In hindsight, we probably would have been better off having Kolb get a year under this belt than losing in the first round of the playoffs again. I'm not being short sighted, I'm looking to the future.

And about Philly's former QB at his position, don't forget that McNabb was in the Super Bowl, and then think about your favorite team and their QB*** (everyone here), and ask, "How many times has your team been there recently?". I think Philly, as much as I don't like them, are a pretty solid team.

I could only dream that my 49ers or Raiders could have a Vick, so you guys out in Philly who are disappointed, just shut up!

***SF 49ers - let's see, hmm, last Super Bowl appearance?? umm? Wiki? 1994 season with Steve Young and Jerry Rice (both long retired)

***Oakland/LA Raiders - 2002 Super Bowl appearance with heartbreaking loss with our sure fire QB Rich Gannon, and last Raiders SB win? hmm, wait, Wiki again, 1983 season when Ronald Reagan was president during his first term.

Philadelphia sports fans have a terrible reputation. Some of it is earned, some if it is blown out of proportion (due to the reputation), and some it is misunderstood or even false (again due to the reputation). Why did we throw batteries at DJ Drew? Boo an unconscious Michael Irvin? Throw snowballs at Santa? Because to us, sports (all of them not just football) are closer to religion than a pastime or hobby. I think some sports markets understand that better than others. We are not lovable loser like Chicago Cub fans. We are demanding and defensive and weathered by our sporting experiences. Add in the fact that PA residents are statically very unlikely to move far away compared to other states, and you have generations of people passing down both the the love for their teams, but all the disappointment thats been building for decades.

We expect greatness and redemption for our worship. We are extremely hard on our teams, but we put our winners up on pedestals forever. We have so few championships, especially lately (1 since 1983 and that counts all four major sports), that we can name them all and remember each play to the last and smallest detail. Something that most Yankee, Laker, or Stealer fans never understand could because their memories are so clouded with so many championships.

• We have zero Super Bowl wins and two appearances. We do have three championships (1948, 1949, and 1960) but they are from forever-ago.

• We have three NBA championships (1954–55, 1966–67, 1982–83).

• We have two Stanley Cups (1973–74, 1974–75).

• We have two World Series titles in 127 years. We waited over 100 years for the first one (1980) and 25 years for the next one. Our Phillies have more loses (over 10,000) than another other sports franchise ever!

Where am I going with this . . . oh yea. We Philadelphia Eagles fans (and Philedephia sports fan in general) understand the pain and suffering that goes along with sports, losing, and diapointment. I would never tell a fan of another city/sport to shut up and stop complaining due to disappointment and years of losing. It's like a brotherhood. Those of us that understand it, well, we just understand it. You do, or you don't. I would never tell a Chicago Cubs fan to shut up and get over losing. I would never tell a Cleveland Browns fan to get shut up and get over losing. I hate the Mets. Frankly, if there are any mets fans out there you probably already know my feeling for you. But they haven't won a World Series since 1986 and part of me feels bad for them because I know how much that hurts.

Getting to the big game and coming up short does not alleviate the pain. Heck, I'm pretty sure it makes it worse. If you saying that Eagle fans should be content because they were in the SB in '04 and have been to the playoffs a few times since then, then you haven't lost enough to understand. Trust me. It get's worse and I don't wish that pain on anyone.

I'm sure there are those out there that think I'm a nut-job. I'm sure there are even some that think I'm just a stupid Philly fan that should go throw up on little girls and get tased on the field. Either way, I'm positive that others from various cities supporting various teams and sports know exactly what I'm talking about. Unless you won last year, you have every right to be disappointed and scream it from the top of the roof.

 

[63dot]

Vick doesn't even go on the list of the top 50 quarterbacks in NFL history. He would be lucky to crack the top 100. If Brady wins another ring, him and Montana are going to be 1 and 1a (not even sure what order) for best QBs in the Super Bowl era. Right now, I would put him at 2 (with a slight bias), but I put him ahead of Bradshaw because the Steel Curtain D won those 4 Super Bowls. Manning is definitely top 10, (probably 6 or 7) but I don't think he is top 5 unless he wins another ring.

Vick may or may not be in the top 50 (right now), but it's hard to say with all those really great QBs who played before most of us were born. Let's judge Vick after he retires and see if he throws for 200 TDs or tosses 30,000 yards or more.

The only QBs active today who could safely be put into the top 50 of all time (without argument) would be Manning, Brady, and Favre and no matter what happens from now, they have secured the numbers to be called top 50 of all time.

The only number than can go down is the QB rating, which I think is a very important figure. Some people like pass attempts and completions as an indicator, but older style football ran it more and hogged the clock. It wasn't worse or better, just different. If anything, percentage of completions and low interceptions is a good thing.

If Brady wins another ring, and take this along with the fact he's been to five SBs, and in other seasons took his team to the playoffs and/or AFC championship, and he has thrown for the most TDs in one season, and he has a ridiculously high career QB rating with the best of them (Rodgers, Young, Manning) and threw for a crazy 111 this year, he deserves to be called the best, at least in the Super Bowl era.

That being said, if Brady never goes to another Super Bowl, the numbers he is approaching (300 TDs, postseason appearances, low interceptions, and other data) will historically put him in the same sentence as 4 ring winners Montana and Bradshaw. As for sheer greatness in a season, and as a pure QB machine, Marino has been compared to Montana and Bradshaw. Even in Marino's day, the NFL did not air it out as much yet he threw for a lot of touchdowns in 1984 and his competition wasn't even close. Some say the refs were easier on D players going after QBs in a dirty way, too, which made Marino's stats even more impressive in context, but one can argue that while unethical hits are down, they are much more direct and weapon like today. Today's Ds are like assassins and have crafted taking down players into an art form. What happened to just sacking the QB? What is this human missile thing going on which not only tears QBs apart but also does no good for the D man going in head first?

Some of the greats before the SB was around have some pretty impressive records as do some teams, like the Browns. Who? Yes, them.

 

[rdowns]

Michael Vick in the Hall of Fame. LOLz. I triple dog dare you to show me stats to back that up.

 

[zioxide]

Michael Vick in the Hall of Fame. LOLz. I triple dog dare you to show me stats to back that up.

HEY!! Keep the dogs out of this!

Vick may or may not be in the top 50 (right now), but it's hard to say with all those really great QBs who played before most of us were born. Let's judge Vick after he retires and see if he throws for 200 TDs or tosses 30,000 yards or more.

I really don't see that happening.

The only QBs active today who could safely be put into the top 50 of all time (without argument) would be Manning, Brady, and Favre and no matter what happens from now, they have secured the numbers to be called top 50 of all time.

Agreed. Kurt Warner retired last year, so he's no longer active (neither is Favre hopefully), but of recent quarterbacks he probably makes that list too.

If Brady wins another ring, and take this along with the fact he's been to five SBs, and in other seasons took his team to the playoffs and/or AFC championship, and he has thrown for the most TDs in one season, and he has a ridiculously high career QB rating with the best of them (Rodgers, Young, Manning) and threw for a crazy 111 this year, he deserves to be called the best, at least in the Super Bowl era.

Brady has a crazy resume of records. Most touchdown passes in a season (50). Two of the top 5 rated passing season in NFL history [2007,2010]. (Manning has #1 [2004], but no others in the top 20). Longest regular season win streak. Most wins in a 2 year period. Most consecutive wins at home. Most attempts without an interception. Most attempts to start a career without an interception. Most consecutive postseason wins. Fastest QB to 100 wins. Best winning percentage for any QB with 100 wins. Highest single game completion percentage. Most completions in a single super bowl. Most career super bowl completions. Most touchdowns in a season. Fewest interceptions in a season with at least 25 touchdowns. 78% career winning percentage. 32 career game winning drives in the 4th quarter. 8/9 AFC East division titles (not counting 2008 lost to acl reconstruction). 2 NFL MVP awards (its a forgone conclusion now). 6 time pro bowler. SI Sportsman of the Year. 6 AFC Championship game appearances, 5 wins. 4 Super bowl apperances, 3 wins, 2 super bowl MVP awards.

I could keep going...

Some of the greats before the SB was around have some pretty impressive records as do some teams, like the Browns. Who? Yes, them.

It's extremely hard to compare eras. You have guys like Otto Graham, Sid Luckman, YA Tittle, Sammy Baugh. They are all all-time greats, but you pretty much have to have the two separate categories: pre-Super Bowl and Super Bowl eras. It's impossible to compare the two.

I think Vick did his job better than most, too.

But when the nation sees Vick on fire, and sees a QB performing (in that game) better than Montana or Marino ever did, one may fall into a false hope he can always be that way. We saw some high highs with Vick and some low lows.

Taking his whole career overall, his rushing yards, passing yards, and duties at the QB position is heading him towards at least another year at Philly, and after that, probably finishing out his career elsewhere and giving him a good shot at the Hall of Fame and maybe a ring or two.

And about Philly's former QB at his position, don't forget that McNabb was in the Super Bowl, and then think about your favorite team and their QB*** (everyone here), and ask, "How many times has your team been there recently?". I think Philly, as much as I don't like them, are a pretty solid team.

Philly fans are awful. McNabb was the best QB they have had in the past 20 years. He took them to 4 NFC Championships. His team was crap so he couldn't win a super bowl. That's not his fault. He was the best QB they are going to have for a while, and its a shame the fans and media ran him out of town. (BTW, Shanahan is an even bigger moron, but thats for another day).

 

[63dot]

Michael Vick in the Hall of Fame. LOLz. I triple dog dare you to show me stats to back that up.

dog?

I think he stopped any naysayers who thought he would never get back to NFL form. The comeback in itself is pretty amazing. Some can argue this season was pretty great for him, but there won't be much debate on whether he deserves a ring or not if he takes the Eagles to the playoffs, and pulls off another 108 QB rating. He would also have to keep interceptions down and get a lot more passing TDs which I think he is capable of. He's proven his ability to run them in.

That being said, his running and getting hit is also what has made him unable to sustain a full season uninjured, causing either a benching or horrific performance. If an NFL QB is not healed yet and all he can do is give up the ball all the time and not hit their receivers, they should sit it out. Vick and Favre have shown that all the talent in the world won't cover for playing injured.

We don't know for sure if Vick has remade himself into a better QB than his up and down Atlanta days, or that if he just hit a pretty good streak this year. He will have to prove this season was not a fluke. He will also have to prove that his possibly unearned pro bowl appearance was not a fluke.

And even if he is able to put up numbers nobody can refute over the next few years, his criminal record make keep him out of the hall forever. He could become ASPCA spokesman extraordinairre, but that may not be enough. His crimes were truly heinous.

McNabb was the best QB they have had in the past 20 years. He took them to 4 NFC Championships. He was the best QB they are going to have for a while, and its a shame the fans and media ran him out of town. (BTW, Shanahan is an even bigger moron, but thats for another day).

McNabb did well with Philly. If Vick can't deliver, and Kolb can't deliver, people will be wishing they didn't let McNabb go.

 

[grapes911]

McNabb did well with Philly. If Vick can't deliver, and Kolb can't deliver, people will be wishing they didn't let McNabb go.

No. It was time to move on from McNabb. The debate is over. Andy Reid has been shielding him for years. It took hotheaded Shanahan to show the world what Philly fans have known for years. McNabb is a good QB, but nothing more. He can dominate games at times, but his lackadaisical work ethic, nonexistent leadership skills and low confidence get in the way of greatness. Vick and Kolb could both fail, but getting rid of McNabb was still the right move at the right time. He was not going to take us to the promise land.