NFL Forum :: - Greatest Offenses of the last 15 years

Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

FAQ Register Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

FootballsFuture.com Home

Greatest Offenses of the last 15 years
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Comparisons

View previous topic :: View next topic

Pick your favorite offense

'06-Present Saints

[ 7 ]

'07-Present Pats

21%

[ 25 ]

'03-'10 Colts

10%

[ 12 ]

'96-'98 Broncos

[ 2 ]

'02-'05 Chiefs

[ 0 ]

'99-'01 Rams

32%

[ 37 ]

'98 Vikings

11%

[ 13 ]

'11 Packers

[ 11 ]

- Vermeil

[ 3 ]

Brett Favre

[ 5 ]

Total Votes : 115

Author

Message

jrry32

Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31554

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:33 pm Post subject:

NextBigThing wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

NextBigThing wrote:

Please elaborate. By my count, he lost 2 of the 3 super bowls he played in.

If this is legitimately your argument, your not worth discussing anything with ever again. /discussion

Well, he did.

But I am a Brady fan. I know there is more to super bowls - wins and losses- for Qbs than how the QB plays.

I am just generally curious as to why one would come to the following conclusion:

Quote:

arguably the greatest playoff QB of all time.

Warner:
307/462
66.5%
3952 yards
8.6 YPA
31 TDs
6.7% TD%
14 ints
3.0% Int%
102.8 QBR
2 Rushing TDs

Super Bowl(3 games):
83/132
62.9%
1156 yards(385 YPG)
8.8 YPA
6 TDs
3 ints
96.7 QBR
1 Rushing TD

'Nuff said.
_________________

NextBigThing

Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 15886
Location: Tuck Rule FTW

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:37 pm Post subject:

I think there is a lot more to it than pure stats as well. Fitzs godly play in 2008 for example Laughing

Warner was a great playoff QB though, I'll say that much. Probably deserves more mention alongside Brady, Big Ben, and Eli for clutch play in the new millennium.
_________________

The King Does As He Pleases

NFLfan511 wrote:

NBT, I made an account here just because of you.

jrry32

Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31554

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:38 pm Post subject:

NextBigThing wrote:

I think there is a lot more to it than pure stats as well. Fitzs godly play in 2008 for example Laughing

Warner was a great playoff QB though, I'll say that much. Probably deserves more mention alongside Brady, Big Ben, and Eli for clutch play in the new millennium.

Yep, there is more to it but who was the guy delivering the ball to Fitz?
_________________

NextBigThing

Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 15886
Location: Tuck Rule FTW

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2012 10:46 pm Post subject:

jrry32 wrote:

NextBigThing wrote:

I think there is a lot more to it than pure stats as well. Fitzs godly play in 2008 for example Laughing

Warner was a great playoff QB though, I'll say that much. Probably deserves more mention alongside Brady, Big Ben, and Eli for clutch play in the new millennium.

Yep, there is more to it but who was the guy delivering the ball to Fitz?

Whoever it was got a lot of help:

Of course it isnt easy, or else Matthew Linart might still have a career. But it doesnt exactly dispel the theory that Warner requires elite talent around him to succeed.
_________________

The King Does As He Pleases

NFLfan511 wrote:

NBT, I made an account here just because of you.

Pats#1

Joined: 19 Aug 2011
Posts: 1894
Location: Plymouth, MA

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 1:30 am Post subject:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

Don't forget...it's cause they were cheating too!!!!

Right jrry? Rolling Eyes

While you having your opinion that GSOT was the best O of the past 15 years is fine...you trying to say the 07 Pats were cheaters simply proves you're pure hatred for anything including Brady/Pats.

Every team was doing the exact same thing as them...so stop whining. Spygate is a non-story and everyone knows it didn't make a difference because the Patriots have continued to be successful.

I could be wrong but I think it would be pretty accurate to say the Patriots have the best overall record since 07 to now? and if not the best...definitely one of the best.

The sarcasm went over your head. Faulk, as usual, made an absolutely ridiculous point so I did the same thing to rub his nose in it.

But don't start the every team was doing the same thing excuse...it's played out...

Vikefan79 wrote:

What other reason would the Packers have to take 3 defensive backs with the first 3 picks? The Packers were still competing for the division. The 49ers weren't even close. 49ers were drafting probably what they felt was the BPA and just trying to rebuild that 49ers team.

Ron Wolf came out and said Moss was the reason they drafted those players.

Maybe they needed defensive backs? And I'd love for you to find that quote from Wolf.

Nah, nah, the 49ers were definitely drafting to stop Faulk.

Doesn't change the fact that it's true... Laughing

_________________

Richter wrote:

Tzimisce wrote:

...too bad she's dead...

Oh right, like we're now supposed to believe that's your barrier for entry...

jrry32

Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31554

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:14 am Post subject:

Pats#1 wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

Don't forget...it's cause they were cheating too!!!!

Right jrry? Rolling Eyes

Vikefan79 wrote:

Maybe they needed defensive backs? And I'd love for you to find that quote from Wolf.

Nah, nah, the 49ers were definitely drafting to stop Faulk.

Doesn't change the fact that it's true... Laughing

It's the type of reasoning that a punished child uses.
_________________

Pats#1

Joined: 19 Aug 2011
Posts: 1894
Location: Plymouth, MA

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:28 am Post subject:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

Don't forget...it's cause they were cheating too!!!!

Right jrry? Rolling Eyes

Vikefan79 wrote:

Maybe they needed defensive backs? And I'd love for you to find that quote from Wolf.

Nah, nah, the 49ers were definitely drafting to stop Faulk.

Doesn't change the fact that it's true... Laughing

It's the type of reasoning that a punished child uses.

You're right. Pointing and yelling...BUT YOU CHEATED!!! after being mad that a team is so successful is sooo mature Rolling Eyes

_________________

Richter wrote:

Tzimisce wrote:

...too bad she's dead...

Oh right, like we're now supposed to believe that's your barrier for entry...

jrry32

Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31554

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 4:37 am Post subject:

Pats#1 wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

Don't forget...it's cause they were cheating too!!!!

Right jrry? Rolling Eyes

Vikefan79 wrote:

Maybe they needed defensive backs? And I'd love for you to find that quote from Wolf.

Nah, nah, the 49ers were definitely drafting to stop Faulk.

Doesn't change the fact that it's true... Laughing

It's the type of reasoning that a punished child uses.

You're right. Pointing and yelling...BUT YOU CHEATED!!! after being mad that a team is so successful is sooo mature Rolling Eyes

Lol really? After it's already been explained that it wasn't a serious comment? Did you happen to read anything in that post other than the 1 sentence? Laughing

Oh man, I'm just so angry that the Patriots are successful. Couldn't happen to a classier bunch of fans. Laughing

_________________

Pats#1

Joined: 19 Aug 2011
Posts: 1894
Location: Plymouth, MA

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:15 am Post subject:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

Pats#1 wrote:

Don't forget...it's cause they were cheating too!!!!

Right jrry? Rolling Eyes

Vikefan79 wrote:

Maybe they needed defensive backs? And I'd love for you to find that quote from Wolf.

Nah, nah, the 49ers were definitely drafting to stop Faulk.

Doesn't change the fact that it's true... Laughing

It's the type of reasoning that a punished child uses.

You're right. Pointing and yelling...BUT YOU CHEATED!!! after being mad that a team is so successful is sooo mature Rolling Eyes

Lol really? After it's already been explained that it wasn't a serious comment? Did you happen to read anything in that post other than the 1 sentence? Laughing

Oh man, I'm just so angry that the Patriots are successful. Couldn't happen to a classier bunch of fans. Laughing

Yes I read your post...and you make plenty of good reasons as to why GSOT could be considered the best. I personally think it comes down to personal opinion with these types of debates because it was two different times and the two teams never played one another so it will always be a hypothetical, "what if" situation. Like the one you are talking about with the rule change in 2004.

You made a sarcastic remark...I made a sarcastic remark.

While you were being sarcastic at that point and time I'm sure I could go back and find a post from you discrediting Brady and the Patriots success pre spygate...so I quickly and simply backed up my sarcastic remark with a couple well known facts.

Now with you're whole, "it's been played out" remark for my "excuse"...I completely agree. But the only reason it has been played out so much is because there are still people gullible enough to believe in Spygate and still "play it out" way too much.

And thank you...you are completely right...Pats fans have definitely deserved the fantastic success that they have got to witness over the past decade...classy and deserving indeed Dancing

_________________

Richter wrote:

Tzimisce wrote:

...too bad she's dead...

Oh right, like we're now supposed to believe that's your barrier for entry...

Superman(DH23)

Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16423
Location: Abdi on the sick sig

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:28 pm Post subject:

NextBigThing wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

NextBigThing wrote:

I think there is a lot more to it than pure stats as well. Fitzs godly play in 2008 for example Laughing

Warner was a great playoff QB though, I'll say that much. Probably deserves more mention alongside Brady, Big Ben, and Eli for clutch play in the new millennium.

Yep, there is more to it but who was the guy delivering the ball to Fitz?

Whoever it was got a lot of help:

Of course it isnt easy, or else Matthew Linart might still have a career. But it doesnt exactly dispel the theory that Warner requires elite talent around him to succeed.

So you bring up Warner being benched in NY in favor of Eli...interesting what was the Giants record under Warner that year? How bout Eli's. What kind of year was Warner having? How happy were the players that Eli was being brought in?

I know the answers to these questions, if you go and research the answers, you will NEVER, EVER bring up Warner being benched for Eli ever again. The fact that the Giants did is laughable.

Why did Warner struggle for 2 years in STL? Quite easy answer, the thumb wasn't right, really the thumb was never the same, which is why he started wearing a glove b/c it allowed him to grip a football again something he couldn't really do w/o it.

Do people realize that Warner went to 2 teams that were considered laughing stock franchises and led both to SuperBowls? If Warner had won that SuperBowl in AZ he'd be talked about as the GOAT, and I'd have no argument against it. If you had walked into Vegas prior to the start of the 99 season and laid a bet on the Rams to win the SuperBowl, you would have got 260-1 odds. The Rams were a running joke. The 49ers referred to them as the same old sorry [inappropriate/removed] rams. Now Faulk was a new addition too, but essentially the same team that had won only 4 games the year before won 13 and did it in dominating fashion. Not only did Warner win the MVP in 1999, Faulk won OPOY. They were clearly the best team from start to finish. Looking back I still struggle to believe they lost any games at all, let alone 3.

Fast forward to AZ, another laughing stock franchise. If you took a poll in 2007 who the worst owner in all of sports was chances are at least 30% of pollees would have said Bill Bidwell. Warner forces the golden boy 1st round draft pick QB out of the game in game defining situations, prior to Leinart's injury, then replaces him as the starter, and takes a 3-6 team on a 4-3 run to end the year, and is talked about as a MVP candidate, and you would have been hard pressed to find a QB playing better to end the year than Warner who produced more TDs and Yards than any other QB in the NFL from week 10-17 (keep in mind this was Brady's record year). Then in 2008 to take the same team to the SuperBowl and come w/in a Santonio Holmes toe-tap from bringing the ship home to maybe the most inept franchise in NFL history, is unbelievable.
_________________

OneBadCat wrote:

Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season.

jrry32

Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31554

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:45 pm Post subject:

It's nice to have someone who knows what they're talking about, thank you, Superman.
_________________

Superman(DH23)

Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16423
Location: Abdi on the sick sig

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 5:55 pm Post subject:

jrry32 wrote:

It's nice to have someone who knows what they're talking about, thank you, Superman.

I honestly don't know how anyone can vote anyway other than the Rams. They come out and destroy defenses in 1999, then come back the next year and do it all over again until Warner's injury, then come back in 2001 and are the clear best team in the NFL all the way up until 1:45 left in the SuperBowl. Had they played under 2007 rules is there any doubt they would have been the first 3 peat SuperBowl Winner?
_________________

OneBadCat wrote:

Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season.

jrry32

Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 31554

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 6:34 pm Post subject:

Superman(DH23) wrote:

jrry32 wrote:

It's nice to have someone who knows what they're talking about, thank you, Superman.

I can see why people would disagree. Just can't understand some people's logic or why they continually flip flop when it's convenient.
_________________

NextBigThing

Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 15886
Location: Tuck Rule FTW

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 7:15 pm Post subject:

Superman(DH23) wrote:

So you bring up Warner being benched in NY in favor of Eli...interesting what was the Giants record under Warner that year? How bout Eli's. What kind of year was Warner having?

Well I can't speak for the players, but the stats of starts - only 6 touchdown passes in 277 attempts (that is 1 TD for 47 throws) or 4 picks - in 10 starts are not overly impressive. 205 yards per game is a serviceable at best number. The Giants record during them - 5 wins, 5 losses - don't paint the best picture.

Rookie Eli Manning actually the same # of touchdowns - 6 - on 90 fewer pass attempts. His problem was he threw 9 picks in comparison to Warners 4 on those 90 less attempts, and was throwing for 1/2 the yardage. The team went 1 and 6.

I dont think anybody disputes that Warner was playing at a higher level than Eli; what is noteworthy is the fact that he wasn't impressive enough to keep Manning on the bench.

That season, The Giants started off 4-1 under Warner, and Warner started the first 9 games, going 5-4. After the 4 and 1 start, they would lose 3 out of 4. The problem is that even when they were 4-1, Warner wasnt impressive by any means. He threw just 3 touchdowns in those first 5 games. Then, when the team when 1-3 over the next four games, he only threw 2 touchdown, in addition to 5 turn overs (2 interceptions and 3 lost fumbles).

Eli came in, and was worse. The team was worse. But it was clear by then that Warner was far from impressive enough to warrant starting over him over Eli.

I am sure the players disliked it; they play in "win now" mode because they might not be there in 3 or 5 years, when Manning is winning super bowls. But don't act like Warner was lighting it up like it was 1999 or whatever. He wasn't.

Quote:

I know the answers to these questions, if you go and research the answers, you will NEVER, EVER bring up Warner being benched for Eli ever again. The fact that the Giants did is laughable.

It made little sense for that season, but clearly in the long run, it was best to get Manning experience.

Quote:

Why did Warner struggle for 2 years in STL? Quite easy answer, the thumb wasn't right, really the thumb was never the same, which is why he started wearing a glove b/c it allowed him to grip a football again something he couldn't really do w/o it.

Well thats fine. Injuries are part of the game. Jerry talks about double standards - nobody wants t hear about Randy Moss's busted hamstring in 2005 and 2006, they just want to say he dogged it in Oakland. Fine. The same 'injuries are irrelevant to status' applies here.

Injuries might be a fine excuse, but facts are facts. Warner SUCKED his final few years in St. Louis.

Quote:

Do people realize that Warner went to 2 teams that were considered laughing stock franchises and led both to SuperBowls?

He had a lot of help with both. Don't act like he is Tom Brady, leading a team of scraps to a super bowl worthy offense (even if his defense did do most of the work).

I know Leinart sucked in AZ, but since you are the stats expert - why don't you look how Trent Green did filling for Warner in 2000. 7 starts, 16 touchdowns, 260 yards per game, 5 ints.

How important was Warner to that GSOT offense, REALLY? OR was Trent Green just really, really good as well? Which is it?

Quote:

If Warner had won that SuperBowl in AZ he'd be talked about as the GOAT

Quote:

If you had walked into Vegas prior to the start of the 99 season and laid a bet on the Rams to win the SuperBowl, you would have got 260-1 odds. The Rams were a running joke. The 49ers referred to them as the same old sorry [inappropriate/removed] rams. Now Faulk was a new addition too,

.....

Quote:

but essentially the same team that had won only 4 games the year before won 13 and did it in dominating fashion.

So I guess adding one of the most dangerous players of all time - as has clearly been established - AND using the first round pick a speedy rookie contributor named Torry Holt DO NOT count as any sort of noteworthy addition to their 4-12 team of 1998?

Quote:

Fast forward to AZ, another laughing stock franchise. If you took a poll in 2007 who the worst owner in all of sports was chances are at least 30% of pollees would have said Bill Bidwell. Warner forces the golden boy 1st round draft pick QB out of the game in game defining situations, prior to Leinart's injury, then replaces him as the starter, and takes a 3-6 team on a 4-3 run to end the year, and is talked about as a MVP candidate, and you would have been hard pressed to find a QB playing better to end the year than Warner who produced more TDs and Yards than any other QB in the NFL from week 10-17 (keep in mind this was Brady's record year). Then in 2008 to take the same team to the SuperBowl and come w/in a Santonio Holmes toe-tap from bringing the ship home to maybe the most inept franchise in NFL history, is unbelievable.

Leinart was bad beyond comprehension that year. The facts remain.

Kurt Warner never did a thing without elite talent around him. A serious look at his career strongly supports the theory that Warner required elite talent to play at anything resembling a high level. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise.
_________________

The King Does As He Pleases

NFLfan511 wrote:

NBT, I made an account here just because of you.

Superman(DH23)

Joined: 03 Jan 2008
Posts: 16423
Location: Abdi on the sick sig

Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2012 8:12 pm Post subject:

NextBigThing wrote:

He had a lot of help with both. Don't act like he is Tom Brady, leading a team of scraps to a super bowl worthy offense (even if his defense did do most of the work).

I know Leinart sucked in AZ, but since you are the stats expert - why don't you look how Trent Green did filling for Warner in 2000. 7 starts, 16 touchdowns, 260 yards per game, 5 ints.

Kurt Warner never did a thing without elite talent around him. A serious look at his career strongly supports the theory that Warner required elite talent to play at anything resembling a high level. There is no evidence to suggest otherwise.

Let's start here, name me 1 QB, just 1 (other than Dan Marino who had 1 sensational year w/o elite talent around him), that has ever been elite w/o elite level talent around him. Now before you try and say Brady let me remind you that Brady never had a season above 28 TDs before he had elite level talent around him. And in the year between Randy and Rob Gronkowski, only had 28 TDs again. That's not elite. That's very good.

So while you ponder that question and try to come up w/ an answer (good luck btw) I'll move on to this answer. Yes Trent Green was very good. The GSOT was designed for Trent Green. He was brought to STL from Wash to lead the Rams out of mediocrity. And when he left STL he had 4 consecutive very good seasons in KC w/ QBRs of 92, 92, 95, & 90. it still was a very noticeable dropoff from Warner to Green as anybody w/ eyes saw.

The fact is that Warner was benched for Manning b/c Warner was brought in to be the transitional QB to Manning. Warner was always going to be handing the reins to Manning at some point in the season. It had absolutely nothing to do w/ Warner's play. Warner was 4-3 when he was benched in favor of Manning, was completing 64% of his passes at 7.7 ypa, and all the while being sacked more than 30 times in 7 games. The Giants looked like a playoff team before they benched Warner, afterwards they looked like a team that was lucky to win those 4 games.
_________________

OneBadCat wrote:

Ahah Okay first of all Gamble was lost to IR this year but when healthy he proved to be 2nd only to Revis last season.

Display posts from previous:

       FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL Comparisons All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next

Page 8 of 10

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum