If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The whole "teams win rings" argument is overrated. Teams put up stats too. Do you think Tom Brady would've won that Super Bowl without a defense or running game? Do you think Peyton Manning would put up record stats if his defense didn't keep him on the field more? Would he get all those TD if he had crappy receivers? What if he had no OL and a bad running game? Would he still put up amazing stats? The fact of the matter is that Brady was the biggest part of the Pats winning two of the three Super Bowl, and a very large part of the last one. Does Vinatieri get to attempt those FG if Brady doesn't lead the team down the field? Teams have just as much importance on the stats a QB puts up as they do the games they win. While Brady comes to play in the big games, Manning comes to throw INT.
I agree completely. The Patriots were 5-13 under Bill Belichick when Tom Brady became their starting quarterback. Since then, the Patriots are 68-21 (including postseason games) with three Super Bowl titles. Gee, do you think Brady might've been the difference?
Bledsoe and Eli are on here and Hasselbeck isn't... Hasselbeck is the NFCs best QB IMO.
Yeah and my names is Baby Jr. Sunuvabitch
So who's the best? Vick? Ha! Delhomme? No. Maybe McNabb.... Did you watch the playoffs? Hasselbeck took over the game when Alexander went down. He's the best in the NFC.
it doesnt matter about a QB's ability as such, its there ability too command a game, and i have never seen hasselbeck as a QB who does, whereas eli, ive noticed him do that, bare in mine my judgements are based on only seeing some teams play twice a year, ive only ever seen tennessee play twice so if my judgements are querstionable that is why