RE: NFL News (Full Version)

All Forums >> [The Minnesota Vikings] >> General NFL Talk



Message

Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 9:55:47 AM)

Pennington has played somewhat better than he did last year, but not that much. He is "leading" that team to the 23rd ranked scoring offense. That works in Miami because they have a defense that doesn't give up points. The Jets were about 23rd in piont last year, and they sucked. The reason the Jets have many more wins this year is... whatever, who cares about the stats? It's all gut feeling anyway, and the feeling is Favre sucks, he made no difference, it's just a coincidence and any QB would have had those great skill players scoring the 3rd most points in the league.

I AM NOT trying to give Favre all the credit. The Jets made a couple nice pickups, positioned themselves to just need good QB play, and then after having Pennington his entire career and see their offense be in the lower half of scoring forever, decided to go in another direction. Favre was that guy, and with 2 games to go, it worked well for them. That is how much credit Favre should get, as the needed QB to go with the rest of the team.

Pennington has done very well in Miami leading his team to the lower half of scoring. That would not have worked in NY, based on history. That team need a QB that could put points on the board and that was not Pennington.



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:02:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Simple Jets history of the past few year, prior to this season...when Pennington was healthy...they were better.  The problem has been, he hasn't been healthy.


Yep.

And again, E, you're using a strawman argument.  It is NOT just about Faneca.

It's about Faneca, and 4 other ProBowlers being added to the team, in addition to Favre, plus expected improvement (and vast improvement) from Mangold and Ferguson, both high picks. 

Favre maybe has a LITTLE to do with the improvement, but just not that much IMO.


Who are these other Pro Bowlers added?



djskillz -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:03:13 AM)

Question; which team has more overall offensive talent around the QB?

Favre by a MILE.

So you can't just look at pure scoring.  Pete's stats are a great indicator of Favre vs. Rogers for example.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:05:49 AM)

Fine E.  Believe what you want to believe... you are not going to convince me that Favre was the big reason the Jets have improved, nor are you going to convince me that Favre is the biggest reason for the Packers regression.  I have never said that he hasn't had an effect on both teams...I just think it isn't as big an effect as you are Marty are giving him credit for.

This isn't unhealthy Favre hate...it's honest evaluation.

I have never hated Favre, I just hated all the manlove given to him in the media...the "do no wrong" mentality they had regarding him.  It really hit its peak when they were chiding Randy Moss for leaving the field early when Brett has done that numerous times...and they say NOTHING of Favre doing it. 



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:06:33 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Simple Jets history of the past few year, prior to this season...when Pennington was healthy...they were better.  The problem has been, he hasn't been healthy.


They were 1-8 with Pennington last year.



Jim Frenette -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:07:12 AM)

It used to be that after the college season was over, we could count on 2 NFL games on a couple of Saturdays. Now with the NFL Network, we no longer have that. Instead they are airing 1 on Saturday night. I think that is unfair to the people that can't get their Network because they both are being hard headed



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:07:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Simple Jets history of the past few year, prior to this season...when Pennington was healthy...they were better.  The problem has been, he hasn't been healthy.


They were 1-8 with Pennington last year.


And he wasn't healthy at all. 



djskillz -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:08:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Simple Jets history of the past few year, prior to this season...when Pennington was healthy...they were better.  The problem has been, he hasn't been healthy.


Yep.

And again, E, you're using a strawman argument.  It is NOT just about Faneca.

It's about Faneca, and 4 other ProBowlers being added to the team, in addition to Favre, plus expected improvement (and vast improvement) from Mangold and Ferguson, both high picks. 

Favre maybe has a LITTLE to do with the improvement, but just not that much IMO.


Who are these other Pro Bowlers added?


They have 7 probowlers this year, most in the AFC I believe.  And oddly enough, 2 of them are OL, and 2 are RB's.  2 others are on the defense.  That tells you what's the reason for their success.



djskillz -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:09:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Fine E.  Believe what you want to believe... you are not going to convince me that Favre was the big reason the Jets have improved, nor are you going to convince me that Favre is the biggest reason for the Packers regression.  I have never said that he hasn't had an effect on both teams...I just think it isn't as big an effect as you are Marty are giving him credit for.

This isn't unhealthy Favre hate...it's honest evaluation.

I have never hated Favre, I just hated all the manlove given to him in the media...the "do no wrong" mentality they had regarding him.  It really hit its peak when they were chiding Randy Moss for leaving the field early when Brett has done that numerous times...and they say NOTHING of Favre doing it. 


Ditto. 



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:09:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Fine E.  Believe what you want to believe... you are not going to convince me that Favre was the big reason the Jets have improved, nor are you going to convince me that Favre is the biggest reason for the Packers regression.  I have never said that he hasn't had an effect on both teams...I just think it isn't as big an effect as you are Marty are giving him credit for.


I'm not trying to. You will not convince me that Favre is an afterthought and should get very little credit, that him being there was just a coincidence. You believe what you want too. I give equal credit to pickups like Faneca, and equal to Favre. That seems more fair than giving him next to none.



djskillz -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:10:09 AM)

Considering they added 5 other great players, plus got great improvement from 2 highly regarded young OL, I'm willing to give Favre 12.5% of the credit.

And I think that's more than fair as well.



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:10:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

They have 7 probowlers this year, most in the AFC I believe.  And oddly enough, 2 of them are OL, and 2 are RB's.  2 others are on the defense.  That tells you what's the reason for their success.


Yes, I'm aware that adding Favre and Faneca has improved that offense from one of the worst in the league to one of the best.

I'm asking, who are these four probowlers they added? You've said that a few times.



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:12:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Simple Jets history of the past few year, prior to this season...when Pennington was healthy...they were better.  The problem has been, he hasn't been healthy.


They were 1-8 with Pennington last year.


And he wasn't healthy at all. 


Which is what you'd expect from Pennington.



djskillz -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:12:58 AM)

They added 6 in total, with Favre being one.  The others:

Faneca, G
Jenkins (these are the two biggest reasons for the change in success IMO, and the MVP's of the team), DT
Woody, OT
Richardson, FB
Pace, LB

So basically the Jets added 2 probowl OL, plus got big improvements from 2 others.  They essentially upgraded 4/5 of their OL! 



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:13:24 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim Frenette

It used to be that after the college season was over, we could count on 2 NFL games on a couple of Saturdays. Now with the NFL Network, we no longer have that. Instead they are airing 1 on Saturday night. I think that is unfair to the people that can't get their Network because they both are being hard headed


Get used to it. It will only get more and more like this, not less.

A time is coming where you might get one game on normal network/cable.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:15:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Fine E.  Believe what you want to believe... you are not going to convince me that Favre was the big reason the Jets have improved, nor are you going to convince me that Favre is the biggest reason for the Packers regression.  I have never said that he hasn't had an effect on both teams...I just think it isn't as big an effect as you are Marty are giving him credit for.


I'm not trying to. You will not convince me that Favre is an afterthought and should get very little credit, that him being there was just a coincidence. You believe what you want too. I give equal credit to pickups like Faneca, and equal to Favre. That seems more fair than giving him next to none.


I am not considering Favre's contribution an afterthought either.  I do think Faneca's contribution (which probably includes helping the younger guys Mangold and DBrick improve) is greater than Favre's...  you clearly aren't seeing how huge a contribution that is.  IMHO the entire game STARTS at the line of scrimmage...you can't deny the immense improvement on that line this year.  Very little of that improvement can be attributed to Brett Favre.  A lot of it...and not just in his play can be attributed to Alan Faneca, both through his own play and likely mentorship of  Mangold and D'Brick. 

Favre's contribution goes about the same rate as lucky bounces that went against them last year going for them this year.  around or about 10% of the reason for their overall improvement. 



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:17:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

They added 6 in total, with Favre being one.  The others:

Faneca, G
Jenkins (these are the two biggest reasons for the change in success IMO, and the MVP's of the team), DT
Woody, OT
Richardson, FB
Pace, LB

So basically the Jets added 2 probowl OL, plus got big improvements from 2 others.  They essentially upgraded 4/5 of their OL! 


Damien Woody? Pace? ok.

How much improved from last year is their defense, would you say?

I think it would be fair to say that between Faneca, Jenkins and Favre, those 3 guys have had about the same impact on the team's improvement.

But again, those that think Favre is bad and has nothing to do with it, can certainly have their opinion. I realize I won't change that.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:19:07 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

Simple Jets history of the past few year, prior to this season...when Pennington was healthy...they were better.  The problem has been, he hasn't been healthy.


They were 1-8 with Pennington last year.


And he wasn't healthy at all. 


Which is what you'd expect from Pennington.


I am not questioning their decison to bring Favre in...I understood it and agreed...as soon as Pennington was available a lot of people wanted the Vikes to go get him...I didn't...the injury risk bothered me...especially on the Metrodump turf...But Hindsight is 20/20 and Pennington has remained healthy this year...I am only saying that the Jets wouldn't be much worse with Pennington than they have been with Favre knowing now that he's remained healthy this year and because of the improved Oline...




Trekgeekscott -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:20:39 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E



But again, those that think Favre is bad and has nothing to do with it, can certainly have their opinion. I realize I won't change that.


And who, E, might that be?



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:20:46 AM)

I clearly do see the contributions of Alan Faneca. I do not ascribe him herculean and mythical abilities to turn a team from one of the worst offenses to one of the best. I give him a lot of credit in the normal range.



Easy E -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:22:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E



But again, those that think Favre is bad and has nothing to do with it, can certainly have their opinion. I realize I won't change that.


And who, E, might that be?


You. I'm not going to play semantic games, tell me the phrase you want me to use and I'll use it. You've said quite clearly that Favre has had the same impact as a lucky bounce of the ball, so whatever kind of credit you want to call that, tell me. To me that's next to none. We can call it the "luck" impact or whatever you want.



djskillz -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:22:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: djskillz

They added 6 in total, with Favre being one.  The others:

Faneca, G
Jenkins (these are the two biggest reasons for the change in success IMO, and the MVP's of the team), DT
Woody, OT
Richardson, FB
Pace, LB

So basically the Jets added 2 probowl OL, plus got big improvements from 2 others.  They essentially upgraded 4/5 of their OL! 


Damien Woody? Pace? ok.

How much improved from last year is their defense, would you say?

I think it would be fair to say that between Faneca, Jenkins and Favre, those 3 guys have had about the same impact on the team's improvement.

But again, those that think Favre is bad and has nothing to do with it, can certainly have their opinion. I realize I won't change that.


Woody has been a pretty big part of it himself.  It's HUGE to have basically 4/5 of your line upgraded in a big way.  I can't ever remember a team doing that actually. 

So yes, I put Favre WAY below that improvement.  I think they would be every bit as good with the other improvements, and a healthy Chad Pennington at QB, which he is this year, and would be with such a stud OL for the NYJ.

We just won't agree on this, and it's not because I "hate" Favre.  I just really, really believe in OL play, and I apparently am higher on all of Pennington/Clemens/Rogers than you.



djskillz -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:25:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

I clearly do see the contributions of Alan Faneca. I do not ascribe him herculean and mythical abilities to turn a team from one of the worst offenses to one of the best. I give him a lot of credit in the normal range.


Again, strawman.

It is NOT just Faneca.  He's helped a lot, as much as Jenkins IMO individually, but they've gotten THREE other huge OL upgrades. 

Again, I can't even remember a team ever doing that in one offseason.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:25:55 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

I clearly do see the contributions of Alan Faneca. I do not ascribe him herculean and mythical abilities to turn a team from one of the worst offenses to one of the best. I give him a lot of credit in the normal range.


But that one player can help younger guys improve with his experience and leadership. 

And I don't ascribe Favre herculean and mythical abilities to turn a team from one of the worst offenses to one of the best.  I give him some credit...but not as much as you do. 

Offense starts at the line of scrimmage.  Hutch improved our Oline quite a bit when he arrived if you recall.  Faneca has had a similar effect in New Yuck.  The Jets OLine has VASTLY improved this year.  Favre, though decent, hasn't been more than average for the most part, that shows up in the individual stats.  He's helped by giving the position something it HASN'T had in recent years...stability.  But stat wise, he really isn't that impressive.



Trekgeekscott -> RE: NFL News (12/19/2008 10:28:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E

quote:

ORIGINAL: Trekgeekscott

quote:

ORIGINAL: Easy E



But again, those that think Favre is bad and has nothing to do with it, can certainly have their opinion. I realize I won't change that.


And who, E, might that be?


You. I'm not going to play semantic games, tell me the phrase you want me to use and I'll use it. You've said quite clearly that Favre has had the same impact as a lucky bounce of the ball, so whatever kind of credit you want to call that, tell me. To me that's next to none. We can call it the "luck" impact or whatever you want.


E, I like you and respect your opinion most of the time...but quite frankly I want you go back, read all my posts and quote where I said "that Favre is bad and nothing to do with it...".  Otherwise...don't put words in my mouth.  I have given Favre credit.  Just not as much as you.  And I already said today that I don't think Favre is bad.  This kind of bs is beneath you...



Page: <<   < prev  126 127 [128] 129 130   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5.5 Unicode