CosmicBills

Umm.... So who is in your avatar anyway? Moulds? It looks like Moulds. I think Moulds. Is it Moulds?

1. NE 27 - Philly 13 2. Brady 3. Philly, FG 4. Dillon 5. Brady The game will not be as close as the score either. God, I hope I'm wrong. I really hope I am.

Release your anger, luke...join the Dark Side. I have no idea what that's supposed to mean. Just seemed to fit.

I hear what you're saying, I just don't agree. But it's all good. That's what boards like this are for

Again, I was the idiot that called him second tier...I was wrong. Once I did my research I saw the light

No, you're right. That is the other thing that jumped out at me when I put the other stats together. I had no idea how good he has been.

Here's a better view of what I'm saying based on the names we've been throwing around: Career QB Rating 1) Culpepper: 93.2 2) Manning: 92.3 3) Pennington: 93.7 4) Brady: 87.5 5) Favre: 87.4 6) McNair: 86.2 7) McNabb: 83.9 8) Hasslebeck: 83.7 9) Vick: 76.7 10) *Drew: 76.7 *Just for fun Now, let's look at the average QB Ratings for the stretch you are talking about, 2000-2004. In parens I've included their highest and lowest QB ratings. Very illuminating stuff: 2000-2004 Rating Average: 1) Manning: 97.5 (84.1 / 121.1) 2) Culpepper: 92.8 (75.3 / 110.9) 3) *Pennington: 92.7 (82.9 / 104.2) -3 year stretch 4) Favre: 88.1 (78.0 / 94.1) 5) *Brady: 87.7 (85.7 / 92.6) - 4 year stretch 6) McNabb: 86.6 (77.8 / 104.7) 7) McNair: 86.2 (83.2 /100.4) 8) *Hasslebeck: 82.7 (70.9 / 88.8) -4 year stretch 9) *Drew: 78.2 (73.0 / 86.0) -4 year stretch 10) *Vick: 72.8 (62.7 / 81.6) -4year stretch This shows a couple of things. First, and I'm man enough to admit it, I was wrong about McNair. He does have better numbers than I thought. He is SOLID. Looking at his low and high QB rating you see he was never lower than an 83 (very respectable) and never higher than 100 (the year he split the MVP w/ Manning). He's a workhorse that's consistent (unlike the fluctuations w/ Vick, Culpepper or McNabb). But it also shows that he isn't the best...no matter what stretch you look at. Whether you are looking at career stats or over that magical five year stretch where he won the MVP, he doesn't match up very well with the others. The career numbers are misleading since half the list is still too young to honestly compair. But over the 5 year stretch he's only 7th (and this was a random sample of QBs, there may be more higher or lower than he). Take those numbers into consideration and factor in his frequent injuries (during that 5 year stretch he only started 16 games twice) and his inabilty to win a ring despite playing on playoff teams year in and year out, how could you possibly assert that the Bills should trade their future (JP) for him? Even if he decided to play one or two more years, it doesn't make sense. He certainly is good, but not great. And certainly his numbers don't merit the recognition as THE best QB in the league nor the HOF. That's all I was saying.

It's pointless to argue about who knows more about football. How imature and insane is that? What if my point of view comes from playing the game in HS and College and covering the sport for Radio and Print? Is my opinion worth any more than you because of my background? Of course not. Still, as I said McNair is good, but not great. Kelly was great. Farve is great. Brady is great. Manning is great. McNair has one MVP and one Super Bowl performance. That's it. I have watched him since college and he has never scared me. Not once. Here's how I define a great QB. It's simple. And it has nothing to do with stats or rings. It has to do with leadership and clutch. Here's the test: down by 4, 2 minutes left with no timeouts on your own 20 yardline...who do you want under center? Lots of names come to mind: Kelly, Farve, Elway, Montana, Brady, Manning, Unitus, Bradshaw, Namath...but not McNair. As for the comments that he has only been hurt this year. That's a gross understatment. The guy has hardly EVER had a season where he hasn't suffered an injury. This season was his most severe, but he is always on the injured list. BUT the guy has grit. He plays through it. That's swell. I'll still take Brady or Manning over him any day of the week.

One of my teammates snorted a truckload of ridalin before a game. On the openning kickoff he knocked the KICKER out of the game (and out for the rest of the season with a broken jaw). He was thrown out of the game and he sat on the bench rocking back and forth like a heroin junkie. (To be fair, his assignment was to block the kicker. The kicker for this team was their leading tackler on STs because he was so friggin fast. So it wasn't a total cheap shot, but the guy never saw it coming).

Because that statement is so assanie that it merits that sort of response. Brady, Manning, McNabb, Farve, (and I can't believe I'm saying this) even Vick are the class of the league. On the second tier of QBs (this year) you have Culpepper, Breese, and McNair. Of those 8 QBs you have 3 or 4 HOFs, but McNair isn't one of them. (For sure HOF: Brady, Manning, Farve). His career numbers don't merit consideration for the HOF, he has never gotten a ring DESPITE having been on playoff teams for the past half a decade. And he's more fragile than ICE's ego. (come on, that was a little funny). Is he a good QB? Sure. Is he better than Drew or JP? Absolutley. But is he the best in the league? No friggin way. Do you honestly expect McNair to end up in the HOF?

It's pretty common, even at the HS level. I've played with people in college that do it. No-Doze, cafeene (can't spell) pills, smelling salts, snorting ridalin...you name it and football players use it to get jacked up before the game even between series.

There is no argument. He is not even CLOSE to one of the best QBs in the league. And he never was nor will he ever be.

There's a separate forum for this sort of stuff....

I walked right into that one, didn't I

That was what we gave up to Dallas to get him. Last year's second and 5th rounder. This years 1st.

You're right. But it's a new problem facing the Catholic Church. With the average lifespan expanding and modern medicine able to prolong life, Popes are able to live (and thus serve) longer. Without an instrument in place to force a Pope to step down (once his mental capacity wanes), you could potentially end up with a mentally incapacitated Pope. The reason is the people surrounding the Pope don't want to relinquish the power. Pope John Paul is a great Pope, but his condition has worsened to such an extent that he is hardly capable of performing his duties. Rumor has it, the JP's successor will be an older Cardinal (I forget his name, VERY conservative) who will take power with only one mandate, to implement an age limit for Pope's, then step down once he reaches it (he is already close to it I guess). I dunno, I just hate seeing the Pope in this condition

How do you stop them?

I wish nothing but the best for him. But it's time for him to step aside.

You're right. I got a chance to be upclose and personal with Reed (in Jim Kelly Camp, so much fun) and know first hand how big he is. But I always thought Moulds was bigger and more ripped. But, I've never really been close to Moulds, so I don't really know for sure. I just know what I see in camp each year. Am I wrong? Isn't Moulds just as jacked, if not more so?

True, but cut doesn't necessarily equate to atheleticism. Moulds is faster, stronger, more agile, better verticle and just as (if not more)chisled than Reed was. But, I think Reed was hungrier, better hands and had more competitivness than Moulds.

So Moulds had good No. 2s for a mere 2 years of his career, that makes his cast equal to Reed's? Reed had a much longer stretch with great people around him. Moulds has never had that. Moulds has NEVER had a QB like Kelly (in his prime) with an HOF running back and another HOF WR. You cannot possibly compair their supporting cast because Reed's dominated anything Moulds has had. But is Moulds better? Who knows. There's no question Moulds is a better athlete, but like I said earlier, it depends what your definition of "better" is.