Jump to content

Around The League V.2


Totty

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, drfrey13 said:

Look I do not want to argue who is the better QB.  You can not deny Brady plays with a different mentality than Carr.  Brady does not let up.  Carr is conservative.  

You should also stop throwing out the Brady's last 2 years in NE are 26/10.  Carr's best 3 years were 32/13, 28/6, and 27/9.   Those were with far superior weapons to what Brady had those last two years with NE.  Brady's career average over 21 years is the same as the average of Carr's 3 best years.

Brady is one of the greatest QB's of all time, there is no denying that but to say that a 43 year old Brady is a superior player to Carr on a team with no proven weapons outside of Waller and a bottom 3 D is flat out ridiculous.  

If you give both Carr and Brady and all star supporting cast for a single season you go with Brady because he is a proven winner and one of the best to ever play but I also have no doubt that Carr takes Tampa very deep into the playoffs last year as well. 

Edited by Frankie2Gunz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

Brady is one of the greatest QB's of all time

I was just about to say Brady is the GOAT. To ever play and there is nobody close and it pains me to say that...He's the best QB to ever play the game. He's not the most talented, best a reading, best release but he's the best at understanding it's a team game and doing what it takes to WIN! Talent wise there are many better but as a competitor...NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Frankie2Gunz said:

Brady is one of the greatest QB's of all time, there is no denying that but to say that a 43 year old Brady is a superior player to Carr on a team with no proven weapons outside of Waller and a bottom 3 D is flat out ridiculous.  

If you give both Carr and Brady and all star supporting cast for a single season you go with Brady because he is a proven winner and one of the best to ever play but I also have no doubt that Carr takes Tampa very deep into the playoffs last year as well. 

The overall point of the discussion was the difference in how each QB plays with a lead.  Brady keeps pushing which would make him a good compliment to Gruden who is conservative by nature.  Carr on the other hand is risk averse and does not play with the same mentality when he has a lead which helps the other team stick around the same way having a poor defense play prevent.  Carr, Gruden, and Guenther is a bad combination for closing out games.  Thankfully Guenther is gone but Carr or Gruden need to develop a killer instinct for the offense to reach its peak.  Yes they can score 30 a game but I want to see 40 if they are capable.  If we have the ability I want to see the Raiders as the best in all aspects of the game.  I want to crush our opponents.  Not saying bad sportsmanship but play until they quit.  If you are up 20 with a minute left to go take a knee and run out the clock.  If you are up 7 with 4 minutes left to go you should not be happy to kick a FG.  If they stop you then take the points but you should go in with the only goal of trying to take time off the clock.  Put the team away and force them to have to score 2 TDs.  Now your defense knows what they have to do and can attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

The overall point of the discussion was the difference in how each QB plays with a lead.  Brady keeps pushing which would make him a good compliment to Gruden who is conservative by nature.  Carr on the other hand is risk averse and does not play with the same mentality when he has a lead which helps the other team stick around the same way having a poor defense play prevent.  Carr, Gruden, and Guenther is a bad combination for closing out games.  Thankfully Guenther is gone but Carr or Gruden need to develop a killer instinct for the offense to reach its peak.  Yes they can score 30 a game but I want to see 40 if they are capable.  If we have the ability I want to see the Raiders as the best in all aspects of the game.  I want to crush our opponents.  Not saying bad sportsmanship but play until they quit.  If you are up 20 with a minute left to go take a knee and run out the clock.  If you are up 7 with 4 minutes left to go you should not be happy to kick a FG.  If they stop you then take the points but you should go in with the only goal of trying to take time off the clock.  Put the team away and force them to have to score 2 TDs.  Now your defense knows what they have to do and can attack.

I gotta put that more on Gruden. 

He's known for a complex playbook. Last year, year 3 (usually the magic year), Carr looked much more in control of the offense. We saw some of that in games we could hear his audibles and communication with the O-line. Not quite "perfected" yet, but in control nonetheless.  

To me, our biggest problems came on 4th and shorts. Gruden would shrivel up and send out the FG unit even if doing so kept us in a clear disadvantage. 

Now, I would absolutely recommend that Carr be more vocal about wanting to go for it in key situations, but there's only so far he (or any player) can push in that regard. 

Carr "could" be better, that's undeniable in my opinion. But at the end of the day, outside of a couple big doozies that can happen to any QB, he had us in position plenty of times. 

Gruden, meanwhile, "should" be better. He failed this team more than once last year by caving for FGs in losing situations and put arrogant faith in a historically and tragically bad defense. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

I gotta put that more on Gruden. 

He's known for a complex playbook. Last year, year 3 (usually the magic year), Carr looked much more in control of the offense. We saw some of that in games we could hear his audibles and communication with the O-line. Not quite "perfected" yet, but in control nonetheless.  

To me, our biggest problems came on 4th and shorts. Gruden would shrivel up and send out the FG unit even if doing so kept us in a clear disadvantage. 

Now, I would absolutely recommend that Carr be more vocal about wanting to go for it in key situations, but there's only so far he (or any player) can push in that regard. 

Carr "could" be better, that's undeniable in my opinion. But at the end of the day, outside of a couple big doozies that can happen to any QB, he had us in position plenty of times. 

Gruden, meanwhile, "should" be better. He failed this team more than once last year by caving for FGs in losing situations and put arrogant faith in a historically and tragically bad defense. 

I think the biggest issue is not Carr or Gruden.  I think it is the combination of Carr and Gruden.  I have been saying this for a long time now that Gruden would be better with a more aggressive QB and Carr would be better with a more aggressive coach.  As far as Gruden's playbook that is another reason why I wanted Fitz as a backup a couple years ago.  He would have digested the playbook in one off-season and could have helped Carr's transition.  Also I think Fitz's personality could have a positive affect on Carr.  Overall I think lesser QBs would be better fits in Gruden's offense because no matter how well Carr understands the playbook his demeanor will stop him from taking the necessary risks at the right time for the offense to run correctly.  Carrr will run Gruden's offense exactly how it is drawn up.  With our offense you need to know when to brake the rules and make something happen.  That is just not Carr's strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, G said:

I was just about to say Brady is the GOAT. To ever play and there is nobody close and it pains me to say that...He's the best QB to ever play the game. He's not the most talented, best a reading, best release but he's the best at understanding it's a team game and doing what it takes to WIN! Talent wise there are many better but as a competitor...NO

Don't be all crazy cause Joe Montana was pretty nasty. He never lost a super bowl he never throw a INT in the super bowl and he didn't play in the QB friendly NFL. He broke his back during a game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bitty 2.0 said:

Don't be all crazy cause Joe Montana was pretty nasty. He never lost a super bowl he never throw a INT in the super bowl and he didn't play in the QB friendly NFL. He broke his back during a game

It all depends on what you want to use to justify the greatest title.  After last year I will definitely put Brady up there.  Montana is there also.  I saw him play in a Madden exhibition game and it was unreal what he did. You do not realize how incredible they are until you are on the field with them.  One of my top, I would rank #1, is Marino.  He was doing things that would take 15-20 years for other QBs to catch up.  He is the one QB that I am sure would succeed in todays NFL.  If I had to pick a young QB today that could end up as an all time great I would pick Josh Allen.  He has the ability to be one of the greats but he has a lot to prove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, drfrey13 said:

It all depends on what you want to use to justify the greatest title.  After last year I will definitely put Brady up there. 

Yeah, I don't think it's particularly debatable anymore that Brady is the greatest ever. He's never been statistically underwhelming, so it's not like a couple of his rings got Eli'd. He produced numbers AND results. 

Everyone else is fighting for 2nd place anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

Yeah, I don't think it's particularly debatable anymore that Brady is the greatest ever. He's never been statistically underwhelming, so it's not like a couple of his rings got Eli'd. He produced numbers AND results. 

Everyone else is fighting for 2nd place anymore.

I would say his first few years he was not the reason why they won but played well within the system.  BB and the defense carried him.  After that though he was the engine and proved it last year without BB.  I would say 1-2 of the Super Bowls is debatable but the first one he was not even close to being a reason why they won.  He just did not crap the bed but they could have easily lost all 3 games.  He may be #1 but I do not think it is as clear as you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, drfrey13 said:

I would say his first few years he was not the reason why they won but played well within the system.  BB and the defense carried him.  After that though he was the engine and proved it last year without BB.  I would say 1-2 of the Super Bowls is debatable but the first one he was not even close to being a reason why they won.  He just did not crap the bed but they could have easily lost all 3 games.  He may be #1 but I do not think it is as clear as you think.

Idk man....if the only real knock is a handful of games and 1 Superbowl 20 years ago, that's pretty unbeatable considering how long most guys play and how mamy Superbowls they win.

Even with 2, being slightly questionable, that's still well above and beyond. 

I truly couldn't find a single QB I'd rather have for a 10-15 year run (give or take, of course). 

Pure talent wise, no, he's not the best. He's never been particularly athletically gifted for sure. If we're talking talent wise, then yeah it's a different story. But if we're talking A-Z being a team's QB and winning when it matters.....I'd have to take him over everyone else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, agarcia34 said:

Should be better then next years. The show just hasn’t been good lately even the Raiders one was meh. 

ya, I was excited for the Raider one. I thought it was boring, haven't watched Hard Knocks since that season 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, drfrey13 said:

I would say his first few years he was not the reason why they won but played well within the system.  BB and the defense carried him.  After that though he was the engine and proved it last year without BB.  I would say 1-2 of the Super Bowls is debatable but the first one he was not even close to being a reason why they won.  He just did not crap the bed but they could have easily lost all 3 games.  He may be #1 but I do not think it is as clear as you think.

Montana was the one QB that gave me pause but as I wrote and remembered more just came out. Brady didn't win those first few but he did understand what it took to win and he did that. The come back against Atlanta was incredible. Not having a perfect season (Go GIANTS!) a blessing. Not winning every game is what makes him GREAT. He didn't stop and took less to get more cap for the team success. His 'weapons' are NOT Rice/Taylor/Craig/Rathman/Clark just off the top of my head and SF had some really good defenses too. It's a team game and Brady had Joe as his goal and surpassed it. Tuck Rule will always make me 'hate' but not really, I'm just jelly because it could have been us. Raiders name doesn't sound as good as Patriots after 9/11 and the CT side of me goes hummm...   LOL 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, agarcia34 said:

Should be better then next years. The show just hasn’t been good lately even the Raiders one was meh. 

The Raiders one sucked because of the AB situation clouding the team, they should've waited until we moved to Vegas. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...