Saints QB Drew Brees retiring

[MacReady]

Just now, tyler735 said:

You're entitled to that opinion. That said, I just don't agree with it and don't care that much to get into a long discussion about it. If you think a QB from the 50's would be successful in today's NFL then I suppose we won't see eye to eye here.

 

 

What good is "all-time" if all-time isn't considered? 

Okay, sure.  Drew Brees is a top 10 QB all-two decades. 

But not better than Manning, Rodgers, Brady, Mahomes, Wilson and probably two more. 

[tyler735]

Just now, Outpost31 said:

What good is "all-time" if all-time isn't considered? 

You can consider it, I just don't put much stock in the older era's in these discussions.

Just now, Outpost31 said:

Okay, sure.  Drew Brees is a top 10 QB all-two decades. 

And for many top 10 all time

Just now, Outpost31 said:

But not better than Manning, Rodgers, Brady, Mahomes, Wilson and probably two more. 

You're entitled to that opinion.

[ramssuperbowl99]

9 minutes ago, Deadpulse said:

I disagree with you about Brees's place in history but damn this was a fun post to read. 

There's a difference between Brees' place in history and his ability as a QB. 

I think he deserves special mention for being a sub-6' guy who continued to erode that barrier, he overcame a serious shoulder injury (that was a far bigger deal at the time), and of course his response to hurricane Katrina goes without saying. 

[MacReady]

I’m actually not even a rankings guy because eras make it impossible to rank.  So I actually agree with that. I’m a range guy.

The only real ranges you can put a QB or really any position:

Top 5.  6-10.  11-20.  21-50.

Brees is in 11-20 range.

Anyone who wants to put him on top 5 range is a Saints fan.  Remember, when Favre retired (the first time), people tried putting him in top 5 range.

He clearly belonged in 11-20, maybe even 21-50 range.

[Broncofan]

20 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Remember, when Favre retired (the first time), people tried putting him in top 5 range.

He clearly belonged in 11-20, maybe even 21-50 range.

At the risk of being part of the problem, are you deliberately trying to change this into a Favre thread?     I mean, half the FF active posting population are GB fans.    

[lavar703]

Came in to see people celebrate a great career. See someone actually arguing Russell Wilson is better and a top 10 all-time QB. Sigh, great career Brees. Enjoy retirement. 

[MacReady]

Just now, Broncofan said:

At the risk of being part of the problem, are you deliberately trying to change this into a Favre thread?     I mean, half the FF active posting population are GB fans.    

God no.  Just using him as a point.  I was a diehard Favre fan and defended him WAY too long.  I'm a Packer fan myself and I don't think many Packer fans left would argue Favre was a top 10 QB all-time, and a good chunk of them would admit he probably wasn't top 20 either. 

But that's the problem with quarterbacks.  They're such a huge part of a fan's life and they're the head of their franchise, so they get overrated.  They get overrated in comparison with their peers, with other quarterbacks of other eras, with how much they're paid and with how important they are to a team's chances of winning the Super Bowl.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Congratulations to Drew Brees on a great career.  He is, and always has been a total class act.  Nothing but respect for him!

[incognito_man]

Brees said he's going to take some time to think about it

This seems premature

[Uncle Buck]

22 hours ago, ronjon1990 said:

Great player. Great career.

Never cared for him. He and Payton are so insufferable together they singlehandedly kept me from adopting the Saints as my secondary team while I lived in New Orleans. I'm glad his last NFL pass was intercepted.

Enjoy retirement, Drew. Now go fix your Jimmy John's franchises. The one on Maple always consistently screws up entire orders. K thnx. 

🙋🏼‍♂️

 

Wow, this is surprising.  What makes you say he is "insufferable?"

[Awsi Dooger]

9 hours ago, tyler735 said:

Yep. I always laugh when people add players like that when they clearly have no idea how good they really were not being able to watch them, and playing in era's that are a joke compared to today's NFL

Today's NFL is a joke compared to the era I grew up with. I feel sorry for any young fan who doesn't comprehend how pathetic the sport is now, forced to evolve into nothing but a pantyhose passing league. You can't blame coaches for taking advantage of these rules. But let's not ignore how laughable it is that a team with as many blatant flaws as the Chiefs can win 24 of 25, or whatever it is. In the era I grew up with that could never happen because Mahomes and all of his toys would have been ruthlessly battered game after game. The league wouldn't tolerate a cupcake team like that. Blue collar teams understood that contrast destroyed cupcake. The tinkerbell receivers would have been roughed up every play. Mahomes would have taken high hits, low hits and late hits. That's why it is so preposterous to compare stats of yesteryear to today. Geniuses somehow want to believe it was the same game, that the running percentage was so high via idiocy and it only teams in that era had merely thrown the ball to today's reliance it would have equated to 70% completions and all the prancing touchdowns.

As a Dolphins fan in the early '70s, my absolute favorite plays in the Orange Bowl were when the opposing quarterback dropped back and had nobody to throw to. It happened regularly. Feisty cornerbacks Curtis Johnson and Tim Foley immediately submarined the receiver and took him out of the play. There weren't 4 man routes or 5 man routes. It was two principals and both of them sprawled on the Poly Turf. That tactic accounted for the first rules change in the secondary, the so-called Isaac Curtis Rule in 1974. There were supplemental changes in that era like elimination of the head slab, liberalizing pass blocking rules, and reducing offensive holding from 15 yards to 10. That latter change is seldom mentioned but just imagine how a quarterback is forced to throw into deep coverage when it's 2nd and 25 several times per game. That type of thing equates to the markedly higher interception rate in that era.

By far the most dramatic rules changes favoring the passing game were after the 1978 season. Passer rating and everything else slanted upward after those changes. I wasn't in favor of the switch but I gradually came to accept it opened up the game just enough that any style was available. That quarter century was excellent football, IMO. But then Bill Polian indeed whined after that Patriots/Colts playoff game in 2004 and everything subsequent has been insulting football. I watch but don't have nearly the same interest level. It's like the league catered to the lowest denominator type of fan. the one who wants unencumbered offense. 

Brees proposed as a top 3-5 quarterback is so ludicrous it wasn't even worth getting upset. There's another 6 yarder. Was that Top 3 or Top 5? 

 

[Uncle Buck]

10 minutes ago, Awsi Dooger said:

Today's NFL is a joke compared to the era I grew up with. I feel sorry for any young fan who doesn't comprehend how pathetic the sport is now, forced to evolve into nothing but a pantyhose passing league. You can't blame coaches for taking advantage of these rules. But let's not ignore how laughable it is that a team with as many blatant flaws as the Chiefs can win 24 of 25, or whatever it is. In the era I grew up with that could never happen because Mahomes and all of his toys would have been ruthlessly battered game after game. The league wouldn't tolerate a cupcake team like that. Blue collar teams understood that contrast destroyed cupcake. The tinkerbell receivers would have been roughed up every play. Mahomes would have taken high hits, low hits and late hits. That's why it is so preposterous to compare stats of yesteryear to today. Geniuses somehow want to believe it was the same game, that the running percentage was so high via idiocy and it only teams in that era had merely thrown the ball to today's reliance it would have equated to 70% completions and all the prancing touchdowns.

As a Dolphins fan in the early '70s, my absolute favorite plays in the Orange Bowl were when the opposing quarterback dropped back and had nobody to throw to. It happened regularly. Feisty cornerbacks Curtis Johnson and Tim Foley immediately submarined the receiver and took him out of the play. There weren't 4 man routes or 5 man routes. It was two principals and both of them sprawled on the Poly Turf. That tactic accounted for the first rules change in the secondary, the so-called Isaac Curtis Rule in 1974. There were supplemental changes in that era like elimination of the head slab, liberalizing pass blocking rules, and reducing offensive holding from 15 yards to 10. That latter change is seldom mentioned but just imagine how a quarterback is forced to throw into deep coverage when it's 2nd and 25 several times per game. That type of thing equates to the markedly higher interception rate in that era.

By far the most dramatic rules changes favoring the passing game were after the 1978 season. Passer rating and everything else slanted upward after those changes. I wasn't in favor of the switch but I gradually came to accept it opened up the game just enough that any style was available. That quarter century was excellent football, IMO. But then Bill Polian indeed whined after that Patriots/Colts playoff game in 2004 and everything subsequent has been insulting football. I watch but don't have nearly the same interest level. It's like the league catered to the lowest denominator type of fan. the one who wants unencumbered offense. 

Brees proposed as a top 3-5 quarterback is so ludicrous it wasn't even worth getting upset. There's another 6 yarder. Was that Top 3 or Top 5? 

 

The game is different today.  They protect the players A LOT today compared to the old days, but I don't blame the league for that.  One thing I will say is that the game is a lot more fun to watch than it used to be.  Try watching a game from back in the 70's and I think you will find it to be pretty boring compared today's game. 

[Ty21]

Incredible player, incredible person outside of the awkward BLM snafu in the offseason. Wild to think only two teams were interested in him after he left SD lol. 

[ronjon1990]

56 minutes ago, Uncle Buck said:

Wow, this is surprising.  What makes you say he is "insufferable?"

Won't bother with going into specifics on a forum where opinions are far and wide reaching and often clouded by adulation of a particular athlete, but there's plenty of things about Drew Brees that makes his "all American clean cut Clark Kent good guy" persona something of a farce to me. 

Some people are more forgiving, some people might not think this or that is a big deal while others might, etc. For me, personally, my perception of him off of the football field isn't particularly rosy for a few reasons. This isn't the proper forum to discuss it though. 

Edited January 19, 2021 by ronjon1990

[SteelKing728]

15 hours ago, biggie. said:

Why do people dislike Brees outside of division rivalry?

I don't really care for the Saints, and he played for them. I have nothing against Brees himself. 

Here's to fantastic career!!