SouthNYfan

Please explain where I was being ignorant and not knowing stats? Thanks Where did I compare newton to Brady? As usual you ignore the point of the post to run your own tangential narrative. You stated that a franchise QB MUST PERENNIALLY HAVE 30TDS A SEASON, which is "marginally above average" I provided factual evidence that even the best QBs of all time and of the current generation are only doing it about 35-45% of the time with Ben doing it in only 3 of his 15 seasons. You also blatantly ignored the point that newton provides a significant bonus the others do not, short yardage running options and a significant # of rushing TDs. A rushing TD is still 6 points last I checked, so you have to count those for him towards his overall total. He has 182 passing and 58 rushing TDs in 8 seasons. Know that that averages out to?? Exactly 30 TDs a season. Math isn't your strong suit. There are plenty of reasons to argue why cam isn't on the same level as Brady, Rivers, Rodgers (because he isn't), but he's still a franchise QB, and if you're saying any guy who isn't Brees, Rodgers, Brady level isn't considered a franchise QB then that's fine, but maybe you should use something other than arbitrary TD totals that you came up with to separate them from the pack, since Cam actually bests Brady (27.77 combined TDs), ben (26.2 combined), Rivers (28.92 combined), and falls slightly behind Peyton (32 combined), Brees (31.8 combined) and Rodgers (32.8 combined) Pretty amazing right?

You talk about this 30 passing td magical threshold as if rushing TDS by a QB don't count for the same # of points Newton's year by year 2011: 21 passing 14 rushing TD (35 total) 2012: 19 passing 8 rushing (27 total) 2013: 24 passing 6 rushing (30 total) 2014: 18 passing 4 rushing (22 total) (missed 2 games) 2015: 35 passing 10 rushing (45 total) 2016: 19 passing 5 rushing (24 total) (missed 2 games) 2017: 22 passing 6 rushing (28 total) 2018: 24 passing 4 rushing (28 total) (missed 2 games) He hit 30 total TDS in 3 seasons, came close in 3 others, one of which he would have without messing 2 games. That's a pretty good number. Tom Brady for reference has only eclipsed 30 TDS in 7 of his 18 seasons. Aaron Rodgers 6 of 11. Peyton 9 of 17. Brees 10 of 18. Big Ben 3 of 15. Rivers 6 of 13. I can keep going. Your "30 touchdown" stipulation isn't even met year in year out by some of the best QBs of all time. I'm not sure where you think pitching "at least 30 TDS" is "marginally above average" You are crazy because you have no idea what you are talking about. Your stipulation as to why newton isn't a franchise QB doesn't even apply to the current elites. He is completely lost.

He's absurd

All good points. I think Sanders is a better back than brown, more versatile, more talented, but brown had a more consistent style. If I'm building a championship team I would take the guy who is more consistent from a coaching perspective.

Good stuff. I'll have to dig up that BB article. In regards to him liking brown though, let's also remember that he seems to prefer big, bruising running backs when he can get his hands on them. LEAD BACK 2000 JR Redmond 2001 Antowain Smith 2002 Antowain Smith 2003 Antowain Smith 2004 Corey Dillon 2005 Corey Dillon 2006 Corey Dillon/Laurence Maroney 2007 Laurence Maroney 2008 Sammy Morris 2009 Laurence Maroney 2010 BenJarvus Green-Ellis 2011 BenJarvus Green-Ellis/Stevan Ridley 2012 Stevan Ridley 2013 Stevan Ridley/LeGarrette Blount 2014 Stevan Ridley/LeGarrette Blount/Jonas Gray 2015 LeGarrette Blount/Steven Jackson 2016 LeGarrette Blount 2017 Dion Lewis/Mike gillislee 2018 Sony Michel Overall as the league shifts to spread offenses, he always makes sure to have a beast back there when he can. I think that could be why he leans towards brown. Even on poor plays he's probably going to get you 3 yards, whereas sanders, even with his 5.0 average, would get stuffed more often than a power back would, solely because of his cutback style.

Good points Shaw. Ironically I was the one talking about Jordan vs LeBron and what's cemented from being a kid vs going back and watching, and I was also the one talking about "old timers" watching haha. Maybe you did watch all browns games as a kid, like I did with Jordan in my comparison. Since the videos of brown don't exist, you can't go back and scrutinize him vs Sanders like I can with LeBron vs Jordan. So there's another wrinkle in our discussion. Then there's things like schemes, which comes into play with guys like Terrell Davis, who played for a Denver team that cranked out 1k yard rbs like Chevrolet cranked out crappy cars in the 90s. (Similar to Brady in the BB system in the eyes of many) It's a very deep and nuanced discussion in which I think we are splitting hairs at the end of the day. Good talks though, sorry if I was a bit aggressive and condescending to you old farts as well.

Which would mean you are watching him through rose colored glasses if the only video available if him are highlights, you're only seeing the best he's doing.

Yeah there's no video of brown. None. Very little. Thanks.

That I would love to see!! Tiger dominated until his injuries. He was a physical specimen. A true athlete in peak physical condition. He forced other golfers to follow suit. Let's also remember that they adjusted golf courses, so called "tiger proofing" to compensate for him. They didn't do that for the old timers. I'd love to see jack and Arnold and slamming Sammy play with today's training and equipment, I think they'd be right on par with tiger!! It's such a muddy swamp to trudge through with so many variables!!

You failed to grasp the point of what I said, so let me help: Video exists, which means younger generations can watch older players, you know, play. This is in response to how older fans always say something akin to "I saw him play, you didn't" You'd think that you would have learned reading comprehension in your old age.

Definitely appreciate history. When debating goats it's really splitting hairs. I didn't make a mistake. Brown would have access to those things today, and he would improve no doubt, but the point is there is only so much the human body can improve. Brown would see less improvement in his physical being than the people he was playing against would, that's my point. Brown, wilt, etc would improve some, but their competition would improve to a greater science since there is more room for them to improve. I think Jim brown would still be a great RB in today's game, just like Barry Sanders and sweetness would be great in browns era. That's kind of what I'm getting at. Everybody seems to favor guys they watched growing up vs guys they've watched as adults. I was a kid watching bird, magic, and Jordan in the NBA. I was a young teenager when Jordan retired (the first time haha) When I watched him play as a kid, it was magical. I watch LeBron as an adult and my initial thought is that Jordan was better, the goat, no way to change my mind, blasphemy, because LeBron didn't give be that same sense of wonder and awe. Why is that?? Because I didn't know Jack sh*t about basketball watching Jordan when I was younger. I was a spectator, not analyzing anything. I've learned a lot about basketball since my early teenage days of watching Jordan, expanding my knowledge of basketball through playing d3 in college, watching and studying film, and analyzing it as a hobby. I have watched LeBron play since he came in the league with that scrutinizing eye. When I go back and watch Jordan's film now?? I see things I didn't back then. Holes in his game I never saw, strengths that I didn't see as well. I'm able to objectively look at LeBron vs Jordan instead of subjectively going on my gut feeling. My heart still tells me Jordan by a mile, but by head tells me it's splitting hairs and is really a lot closer then at first glance. That's how I feel with many goat discussions in any sport. It's very fun to dig through it though.

It amazes me that all older fans claim that "I watched them play" while shaking a stick at the younger generation as if they watched every play if browns career live and in person. Nostalgia is a fickle thing. People love to act like Jim brown ran 50+ yards on every touch and was never stopped. They love to act like babe Ruth hit a home run in every at bat. That wilt and his dominance were only a product of his amazing ability and fail to include that he was significantly bigger and faster and stronger than 95% of the NBA at the time. It reminds me of the scene in braveheart where the man claims William Wallace is 7 feet tall. *** William: Sons of Scotland! I am William Wallace. Soldier 2: William Wallace is seven feet tall! William: Yes, I've heard. Kills men by the hundreds. And if HE were here, he'd consume the English with fireballs from his eyes, and bolts of lightning from his arse. *** Jim brown simply would not dominate the way he did in his time. Why?? The exact reason that was stated by many earlier. Jim brown was an athletic specimen, a good amongst boys in both size and speed. He was incredibly talented, don't get me wrong, and if he grew up today, training with today's tools he would still be great, but he will not dominate as he did vs the competition back in his day because, well, the competition just wasn't as strong. It's akin to old men groaning about "rice burners" and "no replacement for displacement" acting as if 1960s and 1970s American muscle was the epitome of automobile engineering. Today's vehicles decimate them. There are v6 family sedans putting out performance numbers of 1960s muscle cars. Comparing eras is just not feasible. I just find it funny that older generations always say that younger generations can't weigh in because they never saw the old timers play. Video exists. It's a thing.

I'm glad you noticed too. I had a nice chuckle. That's saying a lot considering our previous front office/coaching staff.

I'm gonna buy an Allen jersey because I figure we are at least going to play him until the end of his rookie deal, so I'll get a solid 3-4 seasons out of it. Plus he deserves a place in bills lore for the Barr hurdle and the Jalen Ramsay autographed photo ??

Lorax is a dinosaur who's lost a step (obviously he's ancient) and when he regresses more he's a liability, but even if he stays at the same level, he's not good in coverage. Milano looked awesome, but that injury sucked, and who knows if he'll be back to full effectiveness. The depth behind them is worrisome. Unfortunately it's a terrible lb draft.

No prob There was a couple of pages on that one with a little discussion I believe Just good to tie them together in one place

I wanted mahomes the year before. I wanted Allen or Rosen last year. waffled a lot between them. Really don't remember ever wanting Baker or darnold. I do remember saying I thought Lamar was going to be decent and being okay taking him later in the first. In the end I'm kind of excited to see Allen grow and hope he makes "the leap" this year like mahomes, wentz, and goff

https://www.twobillsdrive.com/community/topic/214622-unknown-patriots-fan-giving-his-opinion-on-our-qb/ This was already posted a couple of days ago. Loved it then love it now.

A franchise QB is somebody who gives their team the chance to win, week in and week out, year in and year out. He won a league mvp and went to the Superbowl He's got a winning record If Allen accomplishes in his first 8 years what cam has, he will absolutely be a success.

Wow. Just wow I can't even LoL at it... It's that absurd I'm just like... At a loss... Right!? Not sure what else he has to do.

I dunno cam is a pretty decent one man show Mvp and a Superbowl trip ?

Yeah I think you and I are on the same page, just slightly on different sides of it. We both agree that it's on Allen and on the weapons (or lack of) that he was given. Im more on the lack of weapons side, you're more on the Allen being more responsible for it. I think we are closer on the topic than it seems, and either way both his weapons and Allen himself need to be improved. They have improved the weapons, at least on paper, and the rest is on Allen now either way. I was watching a video on him last month, and one of the biggest things they wanted him to improve on, like we both said, is taking that 80% completion 5-7 yard underneath throw on second down, setting up a third and 3-5yrds, instead of trying to make that 50/50 bullet at 12-15+ yards. Clay is garbage by the way. Not gonna change my mind on that. ??

Are you saying that you can get a guy almost equivalent to hock in the second round? That's why you don't take him in the first? (Honest clarification on your post) I love hock. I haven't seen much on the other tight ends outside of Smith, fant, and Jace If there's some other guys who popsvalmost as much that the bills can get later then I'm cool with that too.

Yep.

Well I don't disagree that he needs to work on scanning underneath, let's also factor in that his underneath targets (slot, and te) were complete garbage last year. It's very hard to determine how much of it was him not reading underneath vs not trusting those who were underneath to receive, leading to him being reluctant to when throw to them. Let's also factor in that hock is a ridiculous blocker as well as receiver, so having a te who blocks that well also improves the oline.