Jump to content


Veteran Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,858 All-Pro

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yeah it wasn't surprising that Tampa Bay did what they did. The QB was new and in a new offense so there was an adjustment period and finding the right balance, they had to integrate Gronk and Brown. But once you saw what they did to the Packers, you knew they had the potential to go off. They just got it together late and once they did that was all she wrote. Hell look at who they lost to in the regular season. The Saints twice, the Chiefs, and the Rams. All teams that were consistently championship contenders over the last 3-4 years and were relatively well oiled machines. The only wei
  2. Exactly. Two things can be true. Calvin can be better the player and Edelman can have had the more fulfilling career based on the stage and moments he's been able to contribute in. Edelman is the type of guy who would have been forgotten to history if you only looked at regular season. Now he's a guy who will have his highlights and biggest catches (and that pass in the Ravens game) played over and over again and when historians talk about post season receiving it's going to be him and Rice at the top of those leader boards. People who think you could plug any random guy into Edelman's s
  3. No it’s what the other guy said, most posters here either took the poll as “better player” or got offended by the question and when you broke their reasoning down it came down to them being unable to separate it from who is the better player. The question of what is better between an all time great on a stagnant losing franchise and an above average player who had championship heroics isn’t uncommon in sports. It’s pretty much the microcosm of Dan Marino’s career where if he had remotely any post season success he’d be talked of as the GOAT but now there’s an air of a disappointment
  4. Steve Young, Jerry Rice, Randy Moss, Barry Sanders, Marshall Faulk and Rob Gronkowski. Unless the line was made of paper, nobody would ever neutralize that offense.
  5. I think Orlovsky/Rivers isn’t the same comparison because one is about their football careers and one is about whether one career field is tangibly better than a different career field. Like as a football player I think Dan would have preferred his career end up like Rivers and I really see no reason why Rivers couldn’t easily get an Orlovsky television role. To your first point though there’s a lot of guys that wouldn’t want to be the amazing talent stuck on the bad franchise who wasted away there and then retired to little fanfare always on the outside looking in on post season gre
  6. No it’s just some people are being sensitive as to what the point of the thread is because the idea that an inferior player might have made our better is something beyond what they considered. Nobody would ever say Eli Manning is better as a QB than Dan Marino.... but Dan Marino for the rest of his life has been saddled with the “yeah he’s great... but he’s the guy that never got it done” while Eli is the SB hero of NYC and will be lionized for ever and be remembered for his post heroics as long as the sport is relevant. That’s despite Dan Marino being one of the greatest players at
  7. Need game suggestions. I got a PS5 a 4 months ago. I beat Miles Morales and the precursor Spidey game for PS4, Demon Souls, and Bloodbourne. I got a discounted AC Vahalla that I can play but after DS and BB I don't know if I want to jump right into another single player dude with a sword game (even though I am going to play Ghosts of Tsushima and Sekiro at some point).
  8. Eli is only fringe HOF because of his SB's. He wouldn't even be considered if he didn't have them. Edelman and Eli not being close on the HOF has more to do with positoonal value than how good they were relative to their peers. Eli was average for his era. Edelman was average for his era. Both from a pure player perspective. And yeah Edelman was definitly considered one of the top 10 on his team during his SB runs. If WR's were treated the same way QB's were for the HOF, then Edelman would 100% be a HOF'er. They just aren't because of positional value. But Eli was not a better QB than Ed
  9. Well when you load it like that you can make the premise look ridiculous but you can frame it multiple ways. Would you rather be an all time great who retired early on bad terms with your team that prevented you from having any success on the biggest stages in your sport.. or would you rather be an above average guy who overachieved and had some of the most important moments in the sports history that guarantees you will be a Super Bowl hero of sorts for the rest of your life and got to retire on good terms with your franchise and region where you be celebrated as if you were one of the
  10. It's more would you rather be Dan Marino or Eli Manning. Like obviously Dan is the better more legendary QB, but Eli is the post season hero that retires with some of the greatest moments in thehistory of the sport on the biggest stage and will be celebrated as a SB hero forvever for his team.
  11. Calvin had a better career, but I would never trade him for Edelman. Edelman was the man in the playoffs and the Lions really didn't change drastically when Calvin left and he would eat up a **** ton of cap space which I don't think a wide receiver is worth.
  12. Bledsoe would be interesting because he'd have the Eli case. Where he finished top 10 in yards and TD's mostly due to era and he'd have a ring against the guy who had 3 consecutive MVP's. He'd have a very big debate imo.
  13. Ind vs Chi. It's probably the least memorable of the last 20 years to the point where people talk more about the AFCCG than the actual SB from that year.
  14. 2004 2014 2016 2020 2003 2001 2018 2007 2017 2011 Putting the non winners last
  15. Pretty much. Welker was a monster in the regular season but Edelman is the best post season wide receiver not named Jerry Rice
  • Create New...