Worse Than Most Of These?
-
And check this out by the same producers:
-
How you gave Bradford the nod for being good, but not Freeman is mindblowing to me ... Freeman in yr 2 last yr threw 25 TDs to just 6 INT's that is a pretty amazing stat for a second yr QB who was the starter for his first full season. Can't ask for more then that. Also Cutler has had a solid career so far.
Also minus the superbowl ring Jeff George had a better career then Dilfer who you stated as having a good career. And you just left Sanchez off your list. I am personally not a Sanchez fan but through 2 yrs you can make an argument that he is off to a very nice start so far
-
How you gave Bradford the nod for being good, but not Freeman is mindblowing to me ... Freeman in yr 2 last yr threw 25 TDs to just 6 INT's that is a pretty amazing stat for a second yr QB who was the starter for his first full season. Can't ask for more then that. Also Cutler has had a solid career so far.
Also minus the superbowl ring Jeff George had a better career then Dilfer who you stated as having a good career. And you just left Sanchez off your list. I am personally not a Sanchez fan but through 2 yrs you can make an argument that he is off to a very nice start so far
How you gave Bradford the nod for being good, but not Freeman is mindblowing to me ... Freeman in yr 2 last yr threw 25 TDs to just 6 INT's that is a pretty amazing stat for a second yr QB who was the starter for his first full season. Can't ask for more then that. Also Cutler has had a solid career so far.
Also minus the superbowl ring Jeff George had a better career then Dilfer who you stated as having a good career. And you just left Sanchez off your list. I am personally not a Sanchez fan but through 2 yrs you can make an argument that he is off to a very nice start so far
The Jets win despite Mark Sanchez most weeks. He's just reaping the benefits of having arguably the most talented team in the NFL, short of Philadelphia. McCoy would tear things up in New York on the field, I just don't think he's got the right personality for that media market. Fortunately, Sanchez does have the right personality, and can xxxx up just enough to still win on most Sundays.
-
How you gave Bradford the nod for being good, but not Freeman is mindblowing to me ... Freeman in yr 2 last yr threw 25 TDs to just 6 INT's that is a pretty amazing stat for a second yr QB who was the starter for his first full season. Can't ask for more then that. Also Cutler has had a solid career so far.
Also minus the superbowl ring Jeff George had a better career then Dilfer who you stated as having a good career. And you just left Sanchez off your list. I am personally not a Sanchez fan but through 2 yrs you can make an argument that he is off to a very nice start so far
How you gave Bradford the nod for being good, but not Freeman is mindblowing to me ... Freeman in yr 2 last yr threw 25 TDs to just 6 INT's that is a pretty amazing stat for a second yr QB who was the starter for his first full season. Can't ask for more then that. Also Cutler has had a solid career so far.
Also minus the superbowl ring Jeff George had a better career then Dilfer who you stated as having a good career. And you just left Sanchez off your list. I am personally not a Sanchez fan but through 2 yrs you can make an argument that he is off to a very nice start so far
OK, I agree on this point: Let's just say that it is way to early to really evaluate the likes of Bradford, Sanchez, Freeman and the others who have only 2-3 years in the league.
On Dilfer vs. George I will simply say this: I think Dilfer performed as well as can be expected in his career, winning a SB, being a solid QB. With George, he clearly underperformed in my opinion based on his much greater innate talent. I don't recall that he ever came close to leading a team deep into the playoffs. And on that note, Trent Dilfer has the second best postseason winning percentage as a starting QB in NFL history behind only Bart Starr. In George's career he only appeared in 3 playoff game, winning only 1..
-
Zombo said:
Cutler is having a pretty good career.
Zombo
I still think we need to see a lot more out of him before we can give him a # sign.
And note this: I didn't give Rex Grossman a # sign, but did in fact QB his team into the SB. So for that should we give him a * if not a #?
-
Way off I see 26 Qbs on that list that are better than prior
-
How you gave Bradford the nod for being good, but not Freeman is mindblowing to me ... Freeman in yr 2 last yr threw 25 TDs to just 6 INT's that is a pretty amazing stat for a second yr QB who was the starter for his first full season. Can't ask for more then that. Also Cutler has had a solid career so far.
Also minus the superbowl ring Jeff George had a better career then Dilfer who you stated as having a good career. And you just left Sanchez off your list. I am personally not a Sanchez fan but through 2 yrs you can make an argument that he is off to a very nice start so far
OK, I agree on this point: Let's just say that it is way to early to really evaluate the likes of Bradford, Sanchez, Freeman and the others who have only 2-3 years in the league.
On Dilfer vs. George I will simply say this: I think Dilfer performed as well as can be expected in his career, winning a SB, being a solid QB. With George, he clearly underperformed in my opinion based on his much greater innate talent. I don't recall that he ever came close to leading a team deep into the playoffs. And on that note, Trent Dilfer has the second best postseason winning percentage as a starting QB in NFL history behind only Bart Starr. In George's career he only appeared in 3 playoff game, winning only 1..
OK, I agree on this point: Let's just say that it is way to early to really evaluate the likes of Bradford, Sanchez, Freeman and the others who have only 2-3 years in the league.
On Dilfer vs. George I will simply say this: I think Dilfer performed as well as can be expected in his career, winning a SB, being a solid QB. With George, he clearly underperformed in my opinion based on his much greater innate talent. I don't recall that he ever came close to leading a team deep into the playoffs. And on that note, Trent Dilfer has the second best postseason winning percentage as a starting QB in NFL history behind only Bart Starr. In George's career he only appeared in 3 playoff game, winning only 1..
1. Dilfer's winning percentage in the playoffs is high because he had arguably the best D of all time carry him to a 4-0 playoff record in 2000. That superbowl had little to nothing to due with Dilfer. Aside from that he was 1-1 in playoff games.
2. How can you say Dilfer performed as well as expected throughout his career? He was the 6th pick in the draft. Granted he wasn't the 1 overall like George ... but 6 is high and people expected him to be the face of the Bucs when he was drafted.
3. Statistically he (Dilfer) never even threw for 3000 yards. 3000! 3000 isn't even that much. While George never had an eyepopping year He has had some pretty decent 3800-4000 yard and more then 25 TDs seasons. 2 things Dilfer didn't do.
4.If you take away Dilfers superbowl ... this wouldn't even be a discussion. And 1 player doesn't win a superbowl ... especially when that one player is Trent Dilfer on the 2000 Ravens.
At the end of the day both these guys were average NFL QBs and nothing more. I just don;t understand how you can think one had a decent or good career (whatever the # represents) and the other didn't.
-
OK, I agree on this point: Let's just say that it is way to early to really evaluate the likes of Bradford, Sanchez, Freeman and the others who have only 2-3 years in the league.
On Dilfer vs. George I will simply say this: I think Dilfer performed as well as can be expected in his career, winning a SB, being a solid QB. With George, he clearly underperformed in my opinion based on his much greater innate talent. I don't recall that he ever came close to leading a team deep into the playoffs. And on that note, Trent Dilfer has the second best postseason winning percentage as a starting QB in NFL history behind only Bart Starr. In George's career he only appeared in 3 playoff game, winning only 1..
1. Dilfer's winning percentage in the playoffs is high because he had arguably the best D of all time carry him to a 4-0 playoff record in 2000. That superbowl had little to nothing to due with Dilfer. Aside from that he was 1-1 in playoff games.
2. How can you say Dilfer performed as well as expected throughout his career? He was the 6th pick in the draft. Granted he wasn't the 1 overall like George ... but 6 is high and people expected him to be the face of the Bucs when he was drafted.
3. Statistically he (Dilfer) never even threw for 3000 yards. 3000! 3000 isn't even that much. While George never had an eyepopping year He has had some pretty decent 3800-4000 yard and more then 25 TDs seasons. 2 things Dilfer didn't do.
4.If you take away Dilfers superbowl ... this wouldn't even be a discussion. And 1 player doesn't win a superbowl ... especially when that one player is Trent Dilfer on the 2000 Ravens.
At the end of the day both these guys were average NFL QBs and nothing more. I just don;t understand how you can think one had a decent or good career (whatever the # represents) and the other didn't.
1. Dilfer's winning percentage in the playoffs is high because he had arguably the best D of all time carry him to a 4-0 playoff record in 2000. That superbowl had little to nothing to due with Dilfer. Aside from that he was 1-1 in playoff games.
2. How can you say Dilfer performed as well as expected throughout his career? He was the 6th pick in the draft. Granted he wasn't the 1 overall like George ... but 6 is high and people expected him to be the face of the Bucs when he was drafted.
3. Statistically he (Dilfer) never even threw for 3000 yards. 3000! 3000 isn't even that much. While George never had an eyepopping year He has had some pretty decent 3800-4000 yard and more then 25 TDs seasons. 2 things Dilfer didn't do.
4.If you take away Dilfers superbowl ... this wouldn't even be a discussion. And 1 player doesn't win a superbowl ... especially when that one player is Trent Dilfer on the 2000 Ravens.
At the end of the day both these guys were average NFL QBs and nothing more. I just don;t understand how you can think one had a decent or good career (whatever the # represents) and the other didn't.
First off, I think you underestimate Dilfer's contribution to the Ravens in 2000. Before he took over as starter that team was averaging like 8 points a game but still winning. When he came in they starte averaging over 20 some points a game.
Anyone that saw their raw talent could tell you that George was far more talented than Dilfer.
But George was the Randy Moss of QBs except without the victories. Sublime talent, but ALWAYS a cancer on his team. He was always fighting with his coaches and teammates.
Dilfer was the opposite. He was always a solid citizen with his team.
Yes, George might have occasionally had some good numbers, but it was fool's gold.
-
1. Dilfer's winning percentage in the playoffs is high because he had arguably the best D of all time carry him to a 4-0 playoff record in 2000. That superbowl had little to nothing to due with Dilfer. Aside from that he was 1-1 in playoff games.
2. How can you say Dilfer performed as well as expected throughout his career? He was the 6th pick in the draft. Granted he wasn't the 1 overall like George ... but 6 is high and people expected him to be the face of the Bucs when he was drafted.
3. Statistically he (Dilfer) never even threw for 3000 yards. 3000! 3000 isn't even that much. While George never had an eyepopping year He has had some pretty decent 3800-4000 yard and more then 25 TDs seasons. 2 things Dilfer didn't do.
4.If you take away Dilfers superbowl ... this wouldn't even be a discussion. And 1 player doesn't win a superbowl ... especially when that one player is Trent Dilfer on the 2000 Ravens.
At the end of the day both these guys were average NFL QBs and nothing more. I just don;t understand how you can think one had a decent or good career (whatever the # represents) and the other didn't.
First off, I think you underestimate Dilfer's contribution to the Ravens in 2000. Before he took over as starter that team was averaging like 8 points a game but still winning. When he came in they starte averaging over 20 some points a game.
Anyone that saw their raw talent could tell you that George was far more talented than Dilfer.
But George was the Randy Moss of QBs except without the victories. Sublime talent, but ALWAYS a cancer on his team. He was always fighting with his coaches and teammates.
Dilfer was the opposite. He was always a solid citizen with his team.
Yes, George might have occasionally had some good numbers, but it was fool's gold.
First off, I think you underestimate Dilfer's contribution to the Ravens in 2000. Before he took over as starter that team was averaging like 8 points a game but still winning. When he came in they starte averaging over 20 some points a game.
Anyone that saw their raw talent could tell you that George was far more talented than Dilfer.
But George was the Randy Moss of QBs except without the victories. Sublime talent, but ALWAYS a cancer on his team. He was always fighting with his coaches and teammates.
Dilfer was the opposite. He was always a solid citizen with his team.
Yes, George might have occasionally had some good numbers, but it was fool's gold.
Sorry I disagree too. If Dilfer was so great then why did the raven let him go the year after their Super Bowl run? That tells you all you need to know about his importance to the Ravens. And Pryor is just a faster, skinnier Jamarcus Russell..
-
First off, I think you underestimate Dilfer's contribution to the Ravens in 2000. Before he took over as starter that team was averaging like 8 points a game but still winning. When he came in they starte averaging over 20 some points a game.
Anyone that saw their raw talent could tell you that George was far more talented than Dilfer.
But George was the Randy Moss of QBs except without the victories. Sublime talent, but ALWAYS a cancer on his team. He was always fighting with his coaches and teammates.
Dilfer was the opposite. He was always a solid citizen with his team.
Yes, George might have occasionally had some good numbers, but it was fool's gold.
Sorry I disagree too. If Dilfer was so great then why did the raven let him go the year after their Super Bowl run? That tells you all you need to know about his importance to the Ravens. And Pryor is just a faster, skinnier Jamarcus Russell..
Sorry I disagree too. If Dilfer was so great then why did the raven let him go the year after their Super Bowl run? That tells you all you need to know about his importance to the Ravens. And Pryor is just a faster, skinnier Jamarcus Russell..
I'll argue easily against this, ravens since dilfer left 0 superbowls enough said they had a perfect fit for someone who could manage their offense just enough to stay in each game even if it was the defense that put them over the top Dilfer still was the right man at the right time for the job just because he didn't fit a certain (Mold) of QB the baltimore ravens tried to appease thier fan base which hurt their franchise from most likely putting up a few good years in a row with that murderous defense let's look at hmm
"The Baltimore Ravens were defending Super Bowl champions when Grbac replaced quarterback Trent Dilfer, the only quarterback to ever be released by his team after winning the Super Bowl, at the start of the 2001 season. Upon signing, Grbac trashed his immediate predecessor in the press: "It's time that a quarterback comes in here and provides leadership, a go-to guy, a vertical passing game. This is a great team. I can make it better."
2002 Jeff Blake went to the ravens and started 11 games 13 tds 11 picks
2003 first round pick Kyle Boller 7 tds 9 picks
2004 Boller 13/11
2005 Boller 13/12
Don't need to go on until i get to Flacco but my argument is "Don't fix what isn't broken" wheel spins wins you a race you don't change your tire cuz it wasn't pretty enough feel me.
-
The whole thing here isn't so much who is better between these 2 rags as much as my argument was how can you say Dilfer had a solid career and not George. They are on par with each other. My opinion says George and yours says Dilfer and that is cool. I just cant see saying Dilfer had a solid career and George didn't. They were both average pro QB's.
While Dilfers career was highlighted by a SB win ... Georges highlights were some of those decent statistical years. At the end of the day though they had similar enough careers where you cant say one had a bad career and the other had a good career. There careers are to similar to say they were opposite sides of the spectrum.
-
Sorry I disagree too. If Dilfer was so great then why did the raven let him go the year after their Super Bowl run? That tells you all you need to know about his importance to the Ravens. And Pryor is just a faster, skinnier Jamarcus Russell..
I'll argue easily against this, ravens since dilfer left 0 superbowls enough said they had a perfect fit for someone who could manage their offense just enough to stay in each game even if it was the defense that put them over the top Dilfer still was the right man at the right time for the job just because he didn't fit a certain (Mold) of QB the baltimore ravens tried to appease thier fan base which hurt their franchise from most likely putting up a few good years in a row with that murderous defense let's look at hmm
"The Baltimore Ravens were defending Super Bowl champions when Grbac replaced quarterback Trent Dilfer, the only quarterback to ever be released by his team after winning the Super Bowl, at the start of the 2001 season. Upon signing, Grbac trashed his immediate predecessor in the press: "It's time that a quarterback comes in here and provides leadership, a go-to guy, a vertical passing game. This is a great team. I can make it better."
2002 Jeff Blake went to the ravens and started 11 games 13 tds 11 picks
2003 first round pick Kyle Boller 7 tds 9 picks
2004 Boller 13/11
2005 Boller 13/12
Don't need to go on until i get to Flacco but my argument is "Don't fix what isn't broken" wheel spins wins you a race you don't change your tire cuz it wasn't pretty enough feel me.
I'll argue easily against this, ravens since dilfer left 0 superbowls enough said they had a perfect fit for someone who could manage their offense just enough to stay in each game even if it was the defense that put them over the top Dilfer still was the right man at the right time for the job just because he didn't fit a certain (Mold) of QB the baltimore ravens tried to appease thier fan base which hurt their franchise from most likely putting up a few good years in a row with that murderous defense let's look at hmm
"The Baltimore Ravens were defending Super Bowl champions when Grbac replaced quarterback Trent Dilfer, the only quarterback to ever be released by his team after winning the Super Bowl, at the start of the 2001 season. Upon signing, Grbac trashed his immediate predecessor in the press: "It's time that a quarterback comes in here and provides leadership, a go-to guy, a vertical passing game. This is a great team. I can make it better."
2002 Jeff Blake went to the ravens and started 11 games 13 tds 11 picks
2003 first round pick Kyle Boller 7 tds 9 picks
2004 Boller 13/11
2005 Boller 13/12
Don't need to go on until i get to Flacco but my argument is "Don't fix what isn't broken" wheel spins wins you a race you don't change your tire cuz it wasn't pretty enough feel me.
You are seriously implying that had Dilfer stayed with the Ravens, they would have more Super Bowl victories?! Its not like the Ravens have sucked ever since 2000. The Ravens 2000 defense was just that good.
-
I'll argue easily against this, ravens since dilfer left 0 superbowls enough said they had a perfect fit for someone who could manage their offense just enough to stay in each game even if it was the defense that put them over the top Dilfer still was the right man at the right time for the job just because he didn't fit a certain (Mold) of QB the baltimore ravens tried to appease thier fan base which hurt their franchise from most likely putting up a few good years in a row with that murderous defense let's look at hmm
"The Baltimore Ravens were defending Super Bowl champions when Grbac replaced quarterback Trent Dilfer, the only quarterback to ever be released by his team after winning the Super Bowl, at the start of the 2001 season. Upon signing, Grbac trashed his immediate predecessor in the press: "It's time that a quarterback comes in here and provides leadership, a go-to guy, a vertical passing game. This is a great team. I can make it better."
2002 Jeff Blake went to the ravens and started 11 games 13 tds 11 picks
2003 first round pick Kyle Boller 7 tds 9 picks
2004 Boller 13/11
2005 Boller 13/12
Don't need to go on until i get to Flacco but my argument is "Don't fix what isn't broken" wheel spins wins you a race you don't change your tire cuz it wasn't pretty enough feel me.
You are seriously implying that had Dilfer stayed with the Ravens, they would have more Super Bowl victories?! Its not like the Ravens have sucked ever since 2000. The Ravens 2000 defense was just that good.
You are seriously implying that had Dilfer stayed with the Ravens, they would have more Super Bowl victories?! Its not like the Ravens have sucked ever since 2000. The Ravens 2000 defense was just that good.
Yes i am implying that they could've competed-(KEYWORD)-competed for more championships if you don't know Dilfer only lost 1 game in their system as the Ravens starter it's when they had no game general to manage the team that they (Tried Hard) and failed for it.
-
The whole thing here isn't so much who is better between these 2 rags as much as my argument was how can you say Dilfer had a solid career and not George. They are on par with each other. My opinion says George and yours says Dilfer and that is cool. I just cant see saying Dilfer had a solid career and George didn't. They were both average pro QB's.
While Dilfers career was highlighted by a SB win ... Georges highlights were some of those decent statistical years. At the end of the day though they had similar enough careers where you cant say one had a bad career and the other had a good career. There careers are to similar to say they were opposite sides of the spectrum.
The whole thing here isn't so much who is better between these 2 rags as much as my argument was how can you say Dilfer had a solid career and not George. They are on par with each other. My opinion says George and yours says Dilfer and that is cool. I just cant see saying Dilfer had a solid career and George didn't. They were both average pro QB's.
While Dilfers career was highlighted by a SB win ... Georges highlights were some of those decent statistical years. At the end of the day though they had similar enough careers where you cant say one had a bad career and the other had a good career. There careers are to similar to say they were opposite sides of the spectrum.
The key is that despite perhaps statistical parity, George was a cancer no matter where he went. He alienated his teammates, coaches and fans. For all his decent stats, he was never a leader.
The opposite is true for Dilfer. He was well liked by players, coaches, fans. And he led his teams. And the fact is, despite his high draft status, he clearly did not have the physical talents that Jeff George did. He was let go by the Ravens precisely because they thought they could do better on the measurables with a different QB. And maybe Elvis Grbac did have better measurables, but what they lost were the immeasurables with Dilfer.
I mean, it was like Mike Phipps vs. Brian Sipe, or Bernie Kosar vs. Vinny Testaverde. There is absolutely no doubt that Mike Phipps and Vinny had far superior physical gifts over Brian or Bernie, yet is there any doubt in anyone's mind here that Brian Sipe and Bernie Kosar were the better quarterbacks?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login