This Is Rival Talk v1.0

[Mazrimiv]

8 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

I guess you are going to have to push the boundary from very good to great, but Kirk was very, very good, and they had a few really good seasons from Daunte Culpepper.  His 2004 season would have won him an MVP in just about any other year, but that was a monster Peyton Manning season.  

Williams will probably be good.  But I trust the coaches in Minnesota more than the ones in Chicago.  Plus the Bears have drafted like 3 of the players you have even heard of on their roster.  

For the Vikings, it should be a year like 2023 was for the Packers.  Evaluation of the team, if you win it is just icing on the cake.  

Definitely.  Cousins is fun to joke about, but is definitely a good QB.  Culpepper at his peak in 2004 was awesome.

[ThatJerkDave]

1 minute ago, Mazrimiv said:

Definitely.  Cousins is fun to joke about, but is definitely a good QB.  Culpepper at his peak in 2004 was awesome.

You know I have been Cousins' waterboy for like 5 years.  I never understood how the guy was the 7th best QB every single year, but anyone that was better for one year was placed above him, and anyone that had previously been better still got the benefit of the doubt and was also ranked higher.  Like Cousins is just sitting there with 4200 yards, 30 TDs, 10 INTs, and people would still rank Cam Newton above him because he won an MVP 5 years ago.  

[vegas492]

12 hours ago, joeybrowner47 said:

You youngsters will have to explain to me what gaslighting is.. actually don’t bother I’m really not interested. I understand that the lord Jesus Christ has chosen the great Green Bay Packers as his chosen team. The mere possibility of another team having a great quarterback especially in the NFC North is absolutely an impossibility. Maybe it’s someone else’s time? I’d say the odds are against you 

With nothing but respect, I must say this to you.

It has been a shame seeing what happens to young QB to your team.  I thought that Culpepper was really good and if he wasn't already elite, he'd be so soon and be a force for a decade.  Then the knee shreds and he is done.

Bridgewater and his freakish practice accident when he almost died on the field.

It was hard to watch.  I wish you the best this season and please take care of Aaron Jones for me.  He's very good at being a football player on Sundays, but he is an even better person.  

[Old Guy]

12 hours ago, joeybrowner47 said:

You youngsters will have to explain to me what gaslighting is.. actually don’t bother I’m really not interested. I understand that the lord Jesus Christ has chosen the great Green Bay Packers as his chosen team. The mere possibility of another team having a great quarterback especially in the NFC North is absolutely an impossibility. Maybe it’s someone else’s time? I’d say the odds are against you 

fwiw, I remember Joe Kapp and Fran Tarkenton. 

I saw where Joe Kapp got into a fist fight a few years ago at, I believe at a banquet session with another guy who he had a long-standing beef with. 

Joe Kapp 'glad' fight with CFL foe caught on camera - Bring Me The News

[Mr Bad Example]

13 hours ago, Mazrimiv said:

It's possible for another team in the NFC-N to have a great QB.  After all, the Vikings did get a great year out of Favre.

I was going to dispute this, but Rodgers/Stafford/Cousins for a few years isn't too bad of a lineup - an all timer, a HOVG guy, and a consistently productive and durable starter? 

 

That's not bad.

[Eternal]

11 hours ago, Mr Bad Example said:

I was going to dispute this, but Rodgers/Stafford/Cousins for a few years isn't too bad of a lineup - an all timer, a HOVG guy, and a consistently productive and durable starter? 

 

That's not bad.

Stafford probably could be considered closer to Rodgers level if the Lions were run better during his time there.

[AlexGreen#20]

22 hours ago, ChaRisMa said:

Say it with me. 18 game seasons. No player allowed to play more than 16.

Backup QBs now get two live games a year. That goes quite far for developing young QBs. Teams that had injured QBs prior to week 16 now probably get to face a backup with their QB1. Teams that need an excuse to play a young player are now given one.

Ever watch the NBA with their rest days? 

Teams wouldn't rest their starting QB against bad teams. They would rest them against elite teams. 

The Chiefs wouldn't see a starting QB all year (maybe a division game).)

This would devastate primetime matchups. 

[Mazrimiv]

Let's mandate that the backup QB's must play the final 2 weeks of the season so that multiple playoff races are decided by how well the backup QB's play.  That sounds fair.

[ThatJerkDave]

1 hour ago, Mazrimiv said:

Let's mandate that the backup QB's must play the final 2 weeks of the season so that multiple playoff races are decided by how well the backup QB's play.  That sounds fair.

Devastatingly hilarious.  There were a couple of seasons that would have seen us fielding Graham Harrell while we were fighting for the playoffs.  

[Tperk]

2 hours ago, Mazrimiv said:

Let's mandate that the backup QB's must play the final 2 weeks of the season so that multiple playoff races are decided by how well the backup QB's play.  That sounds fair.

Don't remember if we were in the playoff hunt, but Matt Flynn accepts that challenge!

[spilltray]

That would be such garbage to watch.

[ChaRisMa]

8 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Ever watch the NBA with their rest days? 

Teams wouldn't rest their starting QB against bad teams. They would rest them against elite teams. 

The Chiefs wouldn't see a starting QB all year (maybe a division game).)

This would devastate primetime matchups. 

NBA and NFL are completely different. Playoff position matters. Each game is what? 4 times as crucial to a final record roughly? Everyone is going to play their starters until they’re hurt enough to honestly rest a week. By the time you make it to week 17, the majority of the players will have missed a game and would be eligible. By week 18, it turns into a bit of a bye week prior to the playoffs for starters. Now we remove the bye week for the 1 seed, and we add an eighth team in for each conference—we win big there getting another game too.

Chiefs would be playing against a starting QB 16/18 games just like everyone else. And in two of those games, Mahomes isn’t playing.

Intentionally sitting players just wouldn’t make sense unless you had a cupcake team coming in, and then you’ve opened the door to defeat. The likelihood of them being forced to miss time to injury is too large in the NFL to sit any game you’re healthy for.

[Refugee]

13 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said:

NBA and NFL are completely different. Playoff position matters. Each game is what? 4 times as crucial to a final record roughly? Everyone is going to play their starters until they’re hurt enough to honestly rest a week. By the time you make it to week 17, the majority of the players will have missed a game and would be eligible. By week 18, it turns into a bit of a bye week prior to the playoffs for starters. Now we remove the bye week for the 1 seed, and we add an eighth team in for each conference—we win big there getting another game too.

Chiefs would be playing against a starting QB 16/18 games just like everyone else. And in two of those games, Mahomes isn’t playing.

Intentionally sitting players just wouldn’t make sense unless you had a cupcake team coming in, and then you’ve opened the door to defeat. The likelihood of them being forced to miss time to injury is too large in the NFL to sit any game you’re healthy for.

The games are weighted even more importantly that 4 to one. 82 game vs. 17 game season but also the added importance of winning the division giving you an automatic home playoff birth means those division games become huge. 

[AlexGreen#20]

16 minutes ago, ChaRisMa said:

NBA and NFL are completely different. Playoff position matters. Each game is what? 4 times as crucial to a final record roughly? Everyone is going to play their starters until they’re hurt enough to honestly rest a week. By the time you make it to week 17, the majority of the players will have missed a game and would be eligible. By week 18, it turns into a bit of a bye week prior to the playoffs for starters. Now we remove the bye week for the 1 seed, and we add an eighth team in for each conference—we win big there getting another game too.

Chiefs would be playing against a starting QB 16/18 games just like everyone else. And in two of those games, Mahomes isn’t playing.

Intentionally sitting players just wouldn’t make sense unless you had a cupcake team coming in, and then you’ve opened the door to defeat. The likelihood of them being forced to miss time to injury is too large in the NFL to sit any game you’re healthy for.

Come on dude. This isn't Madden with endurance bars. QBs play fully healthy seasons all the damn time. 

[Mr Bad Example]

10 hours ago, Eternal said:

Stafford probably could be considered closer to Rodgers level if the Lions were run better during his time there.

Some disagree. 

Personally, I thought Stafford was a QB who could carry a team to victory on his arm for any given game. Some point to his lack of MVPs and All Pros, but Staubach never had those either (one 2nd place MVP finish...and TBF Staubach did make 6 Pro Bowls) and he is a top ten all time for me. 

 

Back to Stafford - he was top 5 in yds 5 times, top 5 in tds 4 times, and threw a few too many ints. If you put any stock in game-winning drives, he was led the league 3 times and was top 5 8 times. 

I am on board with you that he was similar to Bum Phillips assessment of Archie Manning - "a franchise QB without a franchise."* The running games he had in Det were at best "functional" (and usually worse than that) and while it's fair to point out that he had Megatron, the WR depth rarely had a decent #2 or TE. To say nothing of the coaches he was under - 5 years of Jim Schwartz (fine, maybe even great, DC, shaky as a HC) and 3 years of Matt Patricia? Ugh. 

 

* I haven't really dug into Manning's career to see if this is an accurate assessment of his ability or not