Quarterback driven league
-
Well, all of the best QB's have won Super Bowls (minus Marino)
How do you define "best"? Of the Top 20 in career QB rating, over half of them have never won SB.
Of the Top 20 QBs in career TD passes, over half of them have never won a SB.
Of the Top 20 QBs in career completions, over half of them have never won a SB.
Of the Top 20 QBs in career passing yards, over half of them have never won a SB.
So, like I said, how do you define "best QBs" Or does you criteria sound like this:
Of all the QBs that have won Super Bowls, all of them have won Super Bowls.
Just curious.
-
Todays NFL, even more so then 10 years ago
Don't let the Mensa boys see that you don't know "than" from "then"
Don't let the Mensa boys see that you don't know "than" from "then"
You use "Than" when talking options, comparing one thing to another "Stockton is smarter THAN you"
You use "Then" when talking chronologically, a period of time like "Even more so THEN 10 years ago"
-
I think there's many people who know more about football that dont have a menstrual card.
-
I think there's many people who know more about football that dont have a menstrual card.
I think there's many people who know more about football that dont have a menstrual card.
Well if any of those people think Brian Hoyer is a Franchise QB, then they would never be up for a Menstrual Card.
-
Well if any of those people think Brian Hoyer is a Franchise QB, then they would never be up for a Menstrual Card.
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
-
Well if any of those people think Brian Hoyer is a Franchise QB, then they would never be up for a Menstrual Card.
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
When you say the truth and you are met with resistance then you repeat the truth. Over and Over.
-
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
When you say the truth and you are met with resistance then you repeat the truth. Over and Over.
When you say the truth and you are met with resistance then you repeat the truth. Over and Over.
And, on that note.....
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
-
Don't let the Mensa boys see that you don't know "than" from "then"
You use "Than" when talking options, comparing one thing to another "Stockton is smarter THAN you"
You use "Then" when talking chronologically, a period of time like "Even more so THEN 10 years ago"
You use "Than" when talking options, comparing one thing to another "Stockton is smarter THAN you"
You use "Then" when talking chronologically, a period of time like "Even more so THEN 10 years ago"
Those are both comparisons ya wingnut. You were comparing todays NFL to the NFL of 10 years ago.
And you're referring to yourself in the 3rd person now.
Tighten up there slick.
-
You use "Than" when talking options, comparing one thing to another "Stockton is smarter THAN you"
You use "Then" when talking chronologically, a period of time like "Even more so THEN 10 years ago"
Those are both comparisons ya wingnut. You were comparing todays NFL to the NFL of 10 years ago.
And you're referring to yourself in the 3rd person now.
Tighten up there slick.
Those are both comparisons ya wingnut. You were comparing todays NFL to the NFL of 10 years ago.
And you're referring to yourself in the 3rd person now.
Tighten up there slick.
Oh boy.
When talking chronologically you use THEN. Comparison of two eras is chronological. Now is better THEN the past.
-
Those are both comparisons ya wingnut. You were comparing todays NFL to the NFL of 10 years ago.
And you're referring to yourself in the 3rd person now.
Tighten up there slick.
Oh boy.
When talking chronologically you use THEN. Comparison of two eras is chronological. Now is better THEN the past.
Oh boy.
When talking chronologically you use THEN. Comparison of two eras is chronological. Now is better THEN the past.
That's not right. You don't use then just because you referring to time, if it is a comparison, you use "than"
"Now is better THAN the past"
"I took a shower THEN I pissed"
http://www.grammar-monster.com/easily_confused/than_then.htm
Not quite as tricky as Champagne/Champaine
Zombo
-
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
When you say the truth and you are met with resistance then you repeat the truth. Over and Over.
When you say the truth and you are met with resistance then you repeat the truth. Over and Over.
No, its more like a chick on the rag. You just are suffering from heavy flow.
-
Those are both comparisons ya wingnut. You were comparing todays NFL to the NFL of 10 years ago.
And you're referring to yourself in the 3rd person now.
Tighten up there slick.
Oh boy.
When talking chronologically you use THEN. Comparison of two eras is chronological. Now is better THEN the past.
Oh boy.
When talking chronologically you use THEN. Comparison of two eras is chronological. Now is better THEN the past.
You are wrong Mensa boy, most time references do use THEN, however since you are comparing one time to another, it is a comparison, hence you use THAN.
I'm telling Mensa
-
Oh boy.
When talking chronologically you use THEN. Comparison of two eras is chronological. Now is better THEN the past.
You are wrong Mensa boy, most time references do use THEN, however since you are comparing one time to another, it is a comparison, hence you use THAN.
I'm telling Mensa
You are wrong Mensa boy, most time references do use THEN, however since you are comparing one time to another, it is a comparison, hence you use THAN.
I'm telling Mensa
How about this: If you guys don't STFU about this THEN I am going to hammer you flatter THAN a pancake.
-
You are wrong Mensa boy, most time references do use THEN, however since you are comparing one time to another, it is a comparison, hence you use THAN.
I'm telling Mensa
How about this: If you guys don't STFU about this THEN I am going to hammer you flatter THAN a pancake.
How about this: If you guys don't STFU about this THEN I am going to hammer you flatter THAN a pancake.
That would be like a crepe then, right?
-
How about this: If you guys don't STFU about this THEN I am going to hammer you flatter THAN a pancake.
That would be like a crepe then, right?
That would be like a crepe then, right?
Or a tortilla.
-
That would be like a crepe then, right?
Or a tortilla.
Or a tortilla.
or my first girlfriend..
-
I'm saying Hoyer is smart enough to win in this league. He looks good out there. But don't ask the guy any guy to throw 50 times. It wasn't like they were behind 30 points. They should have stuck to the run and I do agree Crowell needs to protect the ball. I remember when Bryce Brown debuted for the Eagles and was a touchdown-fumbling machine. He's now with Buffalo and still has issues.
There have been several running backs that worked through fumbling issues and good coaching will correct Crowell's mechanics. I watched this kid the last pre season game when he exploded out of nowhere for over 100yards. He's the guy. We need a number one to bear the brunt especially when the snow starts flying. It's going to be fun to watch. Hoyer, Crowell, the Oline and the defense must step up and I believe they will.
The ace in the hole is Josh Gordon so there's good reason to be optimistic even with the injuries.
-
if you don't win the battle of the line of scrimmage on both sides of the ball, chances are you won't win.
you could have brady or manning playing QB but if the opposing team's pass rushers are in the backfield within 3 steps of the QB's 3 step drop then you're not going to win. if you can't open a hole for a RB to get through then you're not going to win. if you can't get to the QB and he has all day to sit back in the pocket and wait for a receiver to come back to him then you're not going to win. if you can't stop the opposing team's running game then you're not going to win. if your corners or safeties continually blow coverage then you're not going to win.
if you have a RB that fumbles the ball and you turn the ball over more THAN your opponent, THEN you're not going to win.
-
You harp on the same thing over and over and over so much I swear you are driven by estrogen.
When you say the truth and you are met with resistance then you repeat the truth. Over and Over.
When you say the truth and you are met with resistance then you repeat the truth. Over and Over.
Your truth... not the truth...
Another reason to repeat the SOS over and over... you're fresh out of thoughts.
if you have a RB that fumbles the ball and you turn the ball over more THAN your opponent, THEN you're not going to win.
To paraphrase Eddy Izzard, "Do you have a card?"
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