N.f.l. 2010 season (1 Viewer)

[Spitfrnd]

Don't get me wrong- I think he certainly can, just not sure he can against Pitt. The Packers don't have many runs over 20+ yards this season- so it would seem to me that perhaps it's Starkes, stokes??? whatever their RB's name is that could really be the X Factor for the Pack this SB. Sort of like that one RB- Timmy Smith who had some kind of breakout SB for some NFC team that represents the nations capital- about 30 years ago when they actually last had a winning season ......

My point- they don't have a running game that can stretch the field and keep Pitt honest- they blitz heavily and this one is over. I am still taking Pitt by no more than 4....

I don't think you need a running game with many runs over 20 yards to be effective. If it makes consistent yardage, which GB's does, it will keep the defense honest since five 20 yards runs make up for one 100 yard one and are a lot more probable. Actually, this year neither team is above the league rushing average and the Steelers at 4.1 are only slightly better than the Pack at 3.8. For total yardage, Pittsburgh has again only a slight edge at 120 versus 100 yards per game. Even that is deceiving since GB’s best back did not play for the first part of the season and their offensive line had several holes early with injuries. Anyway, both of these are passing teams and GB has the best numbers in virtually every one of those categories but again, it is rather close. The same is true on defense. Actually I stand by my statement that this is a great matchup.

As to the amusing little Redskin dig, yes the last few years and most of what we call the Snyder Years have been underwhelming but fortunately I have also lived through the classic years, including the fabulous “Diesel Run” and “No Doubt Blown Out” Superbowls. BTW, the last winning season for the Skins was 2007 under Gibbs and again in 2005 (Gibbs again) where they went 10-6, the same as the Packers this year.

Ben R as an elite QB- I can't see why anyone would argue otherwise. The guy is John Elway wrapped up in a moose's body. If there is ever a QB who has played well beyond his talent or expectation level- it's that meathead. Last night was the first night since Nov 2009 when he threw 2+ pics in a game.

Well I grant you he seems to play beyond expectations, not so sure about talent. No doubt he is quite good but whether he is truly elite can and will continue to be debated. There are 32 starting QBs in the NFL. To be elite, I think you have to rate in the top 3-5 for more than a year. All the great legends of the game, like Unitas, Marino, Montana, Young, Fouts, Staubach and yes, even Farve, have done that, Of the current players, that includes Brady, Brees, Rivers and Manning. Ben has been as high as #2 in a few categories for a year but not consistently in the top 5 for several yet. Interestingly Rogers, who is not yet elite either but definitely on the rise, has rated above Ben in most categories since he has been starting.

Yes, I know about the SB rings. That is impressive but it takes a whole team to get you those and some great QBs, Marino and Fouts come to mind and Rivers may be next, just don’t have that luck. As we all know, there have also been some great Superbowl QBs, remember Doug Williams, that clearly were not elite. So I have to say that while Ben can win games, boost his team and is great under pressure, I just don’t think he is in the rarified category of elite. Now that doesn’t make him dog meat either. My favorite Skins QB of all time, little Joe, was also great and I would take his next incarnation for my team in a heart beat but I must confess he was not truly elite. I do think he deserves a HoF spot however and interestingly for his years he probably has better relative numbers than Ben.

 

[Spitfrnd]

That ain't Lombardi and Starr in Green Bay. I like Pittsburgh, Big Ben, and their playoff experience. -- Al

No argument about Lombardi Al but it is notable that Starr had a career QB rating of 80 and Rogers currently has best ever for a QB with 98.4. Not surprisingly, that means he also has much better relative numbers for his first four years. So it may be true that, as they say, he throws like Marino and runs like Young. I can tell you I was beside myself when the Skins, like many teams, passed over him in the draft and thought he had the best potential of that QB crop. Let's see, the Skins drafted Jason Campbell instead that year. So he has not had Starr's brilliant career, yet, but .........

 

[Currahee Chris]

All the great legends of the game, like Unitas, Marino, Montana, Young, Fouts, Staubach and yes, even Farve,

...My favorite Skins QB of all time, little Joe, was also great and I would take his next incarnation for my team in a heart beat but I must confess he was not truly elite. I do think he deserves a HoF spot however and interestingly for his years he probably has better relative numbers than Ben.[/FONT]

regarding point 1- you forgot AIKMAN- Never make that mistake again- EVER!! I'd take Aikman any day and twice on Sunday over Favre- Favre could hold Troy's water bottle on the sidelines

regarding point 2- look- it's bad enough I married a woman who thinks Joe "I changed my name to sound like Heisman because I am so vain but then got snubbed" Theisman is the greatest thing since sliced bread- I don't need to hear about that chump on my TS Forum!!

 

[Currahee Chris]

No argument about Lombardi Al but it is notable that Starr had a career QB rating of 80 and Rogers currently has best ever for a QB with 98.4. Not surprisingly, that means he also has much better relative numbers for his first four years.

I hope you aren't EVEN trying to compare Rodger and Starr. Please confirm that isn't going on- if so, you must be hungover still from too much Bday festivities

 

[jazzeum]

One point about Ben. His QB rating for the game was terrible, offense was virtually non-existent in the second half, and the Jets could have had five or six picks against him.

However, when the Steelers realized they needed a couple of first downs when they had less than a TD lead, he got the job done. That's in a nutshell.

 

[Spitfrnd]

regarding point 1- you forgot AIKMAN- Never make that mistake again- EVER!! I'd take Aikman any day and twice on Sunday over Favre- Favre could hold Troy's water bottle on the sidelines

regarding point 2- look- it's bad enough I married a woman who thinks Joe "I changed my name to sound like Heisman because I am so vain but then got snubbed" Theisman is the greatest thing since sliced bread- I don't need to hear about that chump on my TS Forum!!

Well I said those were examples and you are lucky I gave you any Dallas QBs and the better one at that.

Vain or not, I sure wish we had him back in his prime; your wife is a very smart lady. So just for her:

You can keep Troy (what kind of a name is that anyway?) and we'll just see how those games go.

Yes I am comparing Rogers to Starr since frankly Rogers has had a better early career thus far and undoubtedly has better skills. Whether he will go on to be as great (he doesn't have Taylor or Hornung to help him for example) is yet to be determined.

 

[Spitfrnd]

One point about Ben. His QB rating for the game was terrible, offense was virtually non-existent in the second half, and the Jets could have had five or six picks against him.

However, when the Steelers realized they needed a couple of first downs when they had less than a TD lead, he got the job done. That's in a nutshell.

Oh I agree Brad. I never said he wasn't good or even great on occassion; I just think elite requires a bit more.

 

[lancer]

No argument about Lombardi Al but it is notable that Starr had a career QB rating of 80 and Rogers currently has best ever for a QB with 98.4. Not surprisingly, that means he also has much better relative numbers for his first four years. So it may be true that, as they say, he throws like Marino and runs like Young. I can tell you I was beside myself when the Skins, like many teams, passed over him in the draft and thought he had the best potential of that QB crop. Let's see, the Skins drafted Jason Campbell instead that year. So he has not had Starr's brilliant career, yet, but .........

Hi Bill. Agree about the draft as the Skins reputation for bad drafts proves true. As for Starr, I was referring to his winning the big games, consistently, and his cool as a leader. Those career numbers of the golden age QB's are not as "impressive" as the bloated numbers of the QB's since the passing game became the be-all and end-all. Starr, Unitas, Tittle, Graham, etc., wouldn't be a blip on the screen, number wise, compared to just about any of today's QB's, but that certainly doesn't mean the old timers weren't great. I'd take any of the guys I just named in a winner-take-all scenario against today's QB's (with a nod towards the primo guys like Manning, Brady and one or two others as equals). Those NFL QB ratings numbers just don't mean a great deal to me. -- Al

 

[Spitfrnd]

Hi Bill. Agree about the draft as the Skins reputation for bad drafts proves true. As for Starr, I was referring to his winning the big games, consistently, and his cool as a leader. Those career numbers of the golden age QB's are not as "impressive" as the bloated numbers of the QB's since the passing game became the be-all and end-all. Starr, Unitas, Tittle, Graham, etc., wouldn't be a blip on the screen, number wise, compared to just about any of today's QB's, but that certainly doesn't mean the old timers weren't great. I'd take any of the guys I just named in a winner-take-all scenario against today's QB's (with a nod towards the primo guys like Manning, Brady and one or two others as equals). Those NFL QB ratings numbers just don't mean a great deal to me. -- Al

I agree with you as well Al. I was just using the rating as a shorthand but at this point in has career, he is farther along than Starr was for the same period, that's all. Manning and Brady are more near the end of their careers and even Manning hasn't always delivered in the big games. For that matter, my all time favorite (and yours I think) didn't have the best game in SB3.

No doubt the rules changes elevated the passing game and reversed the 65/55% ratio of pass to run. Still I was only using numbers relative to each QBs years for comparison.

 

[jazzeum]

Oh I agree Brad. I never said he wasn't good or even great on occassion; I just think elite requires a bit more.

Bill, my comment wasn't directed at you specifically. In a way, he reminds me of Billy Kilmer; not pretty but effective.

 

[Combat]

My prediction is that this Super Bowl provides us with endless comparisons of the two historic franchises. Lots of silly graphics and snazzy video clips accompanied by watered down rap or heavy metal music. A sob story involving at least one player who has overcome an illness, injury or loss of friend/family member. Every possible surface space covered in beer advertisements. An overblown halftime show including a giant flag stretched over the field, a lip synced performances by some horrible rock band while a bunch of hired MTV kids are instructed to jump up and down on the field in feigned rapture. The field covered in smoke from the fireworks at the start of the second half.

 

[Currahee Chris]

....A sob story involving at least one player who has overcome an illness, injury or loss of friend/family member.

or felony rape

 

[jazzeum]

You forgot to mention a football game

 

[Spitfrnd]

Bill, my comment wasn't directed at you specifically. In a way, he reminds me of Billy Kilmer; not pretty but effective.

Oh I know, I was just using your comment to make it clear I wasn't dissing the guy. Actually I think your comparison is quite apt. I still prefer Theisman though.

 

[lancer]

I agree with you as well Al. I was just using the rating as a shorthand but at this point in has career, he is farther along than Starr was for the same period, that's all. Manning and Brady are more near the end of their careers and even Manning hasn't always delivered in the big games. For that matter, my all time favorite (and yours I think) didn't have the best game in SB3.

No doubt the rules changes elevated the passing game and reversed the 65/55% ratio of pass to run. Still I was only using numbers relative to each QBs years for comparison.

Oh that SBIII! I have to say, I believe that if Johnny U had been put in earlier, bad arm and all, the Colt's might have won. The whole team was just "off" that day and Johnny could have made a difference with more time. That said, Unitas' arm was shot after the '68 season. He could be and was an effective QB at times after '68 but his arm was never the same. Give me Unitas of '67 and the Colt's team of '69 and there isn't a team in football history that I wouldn't bet the farm against. With a healthy Unitas, the Colts could beat anyone and that '69 team was simply the best. Combined together, I'd take them anytime, anywhere, regardless of the competition. Too bad it never happened. Can you imagine what Unitas could do with today's rules? Staggering numbers would be the least of it. Good thing I'm impartial and fair minded. -- Al

 

[Combat]

You forgot to mention a football game

There may not be time for that with the pregame, halftime and post game festivities.

 

[Warrior]

My prediction is that this Super Bowl provides us with endless comparisons of the two historic franchises. Lots of silly graphics and snazzy video clips accompanied by watered down rap or heavy metal music. A sob story involving at least one player who has overcome an illness, injury or loss of friend/family member. Every possible surface space covered in beer advertisements. An overblown halftime show including a giant flag stretched over the field, a lip synced performances by some horrible rock band while a bunch of hired MTV kids are instructed to jump up and down on the field in feigned rapture. The field covered in smoke from the fireworks at the start of the second half.

That's a comical post, dead on accurate too.

However, they will not be trotting out some fossil of a band at halftime, it will be the Black Eyed Peas, specifically Fergie, she can perform at halftime anytime she wants.

I'll be tuning in for the halftime show only, as our friends from the Uk like to say, I could give a toss about the actual game, a 10-6 Packers team that was 8-6 and had to win out just to get to the playoffs and a Steelers team that was a dropped touchdown by the Bills and a strip sack that resulted in a TD vs the Ravens away from also being 10-6.

Thanks but no thanks.

The NFL now has what they wanted; a watered down product with no great teams anymore, parity to the extreme, more like a parody of actual football, getting to the point where you can't touch a guy without a yellow hankie being thrown.

Throw 32 team names in a hat for 2011 and aside from 3 or 4 really awful teams, pull any 2 names out of the hat and I wouldn't be shocked to see those two teams in the 2012 Super Bowl.

The NFL has become a joke.

A pathetically sad one at that.

 

[Peter Reuss]

Hmm...so was it better to watch the great teams of the past (49ers, Cowboys for example) steamroll the competition and provide blowout Super Bowls? Some of those 'great' teams provided major snoozefests.

 

[Warrior]

Hmm...so was it better to watch the great teams of the past (49ers, Cowboys for example) steamroll the competition and provide blowout Super Bowls? Some of those 'great' teams provided major snoozefests.

True, but the league has become way too watered down, great teams just do not exist anymore, how many players on these two rosters are HOF candidates down the road, three or four? Look at the Steeler/Cowboy match ups in the 70's, well north of a dozen HOF members played in those games.............................

 

[jazzeum]

An example of the league being watered down are each conference's number one seeds going out before the conference championship. That used to be practically unheard of. This year it happened to both the Pats and Falcons. I believe history remembers the strong teams not the watered down ones.