2020 Our Year For Sure

I don't care if it didn't matter.

I'd go with Avery and Floyd, myself. Definitely Avery, after that there isn't much difference between them.

We are making slightly different arguments, so I can see why. Thanks for your kind words.

I rather like this line of reasoning, and I think that most quarterbacks would pretty clearly fall into one category or another. My only critique is that perhaps The Game Manager and The Backup are actually one and the same. When you have a guy like Trent Dilfer who doesn't excel at enough different areas to be a good all-around quarterback (and therefore falls into The Backup category), you'll sometimes ask him to just take care of the ball and not mistakes, and let the rest of your team lead the way (and therefore he becomes The Game Manager). I have trouble thinking of a quarterback who clearly falls into the Game Manager category, who I don't think of as simply being inferior to the other types, and therefore can also fit into the Backup category. Perhaps the Ravens simply found a way to win with a "backup" quarterback. Great post, very interesting concept.

As things have proven out, cornerback was not a need going into the '08 Draft. If we had not added anyone, we would be left with the same top three corners on the depth chart we have now, all three of which are relatively young and able to fill those spots for a good while (with Greer needing a new contract). There wouldn't have been much of a downgrade. You may say I'm saying that with the benefit of hindsight after seeing Youboty emerge, but I don't feel that way. At the time, we still had Will James, a third rock-solid veteran cornerback. James is now playing the nickel for a pretty good defense in Jacksonville. He's been a starter in this league before, and even without Youboty coming through, there would have been nothing wrong with James playing the nickel here. That would have been three steady players at the position, plus a 4th with plenty of upside. The only thing really saving them from serious criticism regarding the McKelvin pick is the lack of another clear option on the board at the time...but what in the world were they thinking drafting Corner also? Maybe Corner will be like Terrence McGee, the last time we drafted a corner in the 4th round...but how many Terrence McGees do we need? Assuming they'll at least get a 'solid starter' status from McKelvin (and if they're going to use value to justify the pick, they better!), that means they already had 4 solid starters at the position before making that pick, PLUS Youboty with upside. No wonder a quality player in James was cut...they drafted so many players at the position that it was either he or Youboty, and James became the odd man out. Of course competition is a good thing, but the point is that the Bills aren't devoid of needs, and the Corner pick could have been better spent elsewhere. We absolutely desperately needed 0 cornerbacks in the draft. We came out with 3 of them, when Cox was added later. This is the kind of thing that makes me think Jauron/Modrak have an affinity with drafting DBs that goes overboard, to the point that it hinders their ability to use resources to efficiently help the entire roster. I'm a big Jauron fan- maybe as adamant a supporter for him as you'll find around here- but this is one of the few things I feel he's given us to worry about. We are STACKED with talent in the defensive backfield, and there is little reason why we should see a single pick in the secondary come draft day. Here's to hoping we don't.

You'll never see crayonz get the people who have seen his threads before...

The poll is more or less a joke, Dean. Some of us got a chuckle out of it, especially seeing how many posters he managed to hook.

When he said "the free and strong safety designations don't mean much," I take it he meant there isn't a huge difference between the two of them (which was widely reported when Jauron and Fewell first implemented the system here), as opposed to the two positions not being important. But to my untrained eye, it seems like we're using the base Tampa 2 much less nowadays than we did back then, and now mix man-to-man and other coverages in there often enough that there is a significant difference between FS and SS. Maybe someone else could elaborate on that for us.

Well done, HA. I think you've out-crayonzed crayonz. I think DJ proves you wrong this year. We'll see.

Consider Josh Morgan of the 49ers, if he's available. He's a big, late-round rookie who generated some buzz as a fantasy sleeper in the preseason, to no early returns. But just last week he took over the starting job from Bryant Johnson (who subsequently was used quite sparingly), and responded with 5 catches for 86 yards and a TD. You know Martz loves to sling the pigskin. This week, San Francisco hosts a Seahawks defense that ranks 29th in passing yards per game (242.2), 28th in yards per pass attempt (8.2), and 24th(t) in passing touchdowns (10).

Just click it

*raises hand* You'll notice I always try to put these things into newer terms that I can understand. And the Dehlomme/Bulger/Green/Hasselbeck comparisons were strictly on skill/performance level, not on style. Should have made that clearer.

I don't believe comparing Trent Edwards to Joe Montana necessarily equates to expecting Trent to BECOME Joe Montana. Your point is well-taken, but look at it this way. As far as actual performance level TODAY, at this point in his career, who would you compare Trent to? Maybe a Jake Delhomme, a Trent Green, a Marc Bulger or a Matt Hasselbeck? Honestly, if I had to compare Edwards' play right now to one quarterback, it would probably be Delhomme. Neither guy is asked to win games by themselves, yet neither one is in the Joe Flacco 'just don't lose it for us' mold. Both guys need to make contributions if their team is going to get anywhere, and they've both proven worthy of that responsibility. Trent differs because he has more upside, but upside is irrelevant to where he is right now. And yet if you go through this thread, you'll find very few comparisions to these types of quarterbacks. Is that because most of the replies are from people so drunk on Kool-Aid they can't see straight? I think, rather, that "Trent Green in his best days" simply isn't the kind of response this question tends to invoke. We tend to take the question "Who does Trent Edwards remind you of?" and translate it into something like "When he's playing winning football, what other quarterback's style of winning football does Trent come closest to?" Maybe thats why you get more Joe Montana than Bob Griese. Again, someone comparing Edwards to Tom Brady, I don't believe necessarily means they think Edwards is as good as Tom Brady. The next Donovan McNabb or Drew Brees would do just fine.

Yep Lets add Marisol Nichols (2, 3) who plays Nadia Yassir on 24.

I had this conversation with my bro a few days ago, and Aikman was the name I threw out there. He just finds a way to win. I didn't see much of Montana, but from what I understand, Trent plays along those lines. A cerebral quarterback who will take what you give him, and always seems to know where to go with the football. Montana is well-known for playing under pressure, and Edwards has already at this early stage shown the moxy needed to shine (and sometimes lead a comeback) in the late stages in the game. Pressure, whether from the defense or the game situation, just doesn't seem to get to him. The Brady comparisons are obvious...clearly not calibre (yet?), but style. Both guys find ways to lead their teams to wins* without being flashy, neither have cannon arms but can make all the throws, both throw the ball accurately to maximaze YAC, both guys (again) seem to have a way of just always knowing where to go with the ball, and both guys are masters at not seeing, but sensing the rush, and just taking the small step or two that will make all the difference. It will sure be something if Trent becomes the next Brady the 100% legal way.

Your avatar...I'm so tempted... What does it do? Will my computer explode?

troll

By telling Carl Peterson, "nah, dog."

No it doesn't.

Roscoe's return is SO huge for us. Having him back there changes everything. Action Jackson is passable, but he's no Roscoe.

The best thing about crayonz is that he's actually one of the most clever posters around here.

Losing McCargo and having a need to get to the quarterback are seemingly unrelated to each other.

So I'm assuming you're not a fan of the Marcus Stroud trade. There's a difference between the Redskins approach, cramming a bunch of random, overpaid veterans onto a roster, tossing them into a blender and hoping against hope something tasty is the result...and already having a core group of young talent that will have a large window, and adding a couple of strong veteran pieces here and there to fill in the gaps. Tony Gonzalez is a gamer, having appeared in 156 of the Chiefs 158 games since being drafted. He's a great locker room, high-character guy, and perhaps best of all, the number one thing on his mind right now is WINNING. He's still close to his prime, as evidenced by his 99 catch, 1172 yard season just last year. He is everything you look for in a guy to fill that veteran-amongst-a-bunch-of-youngsters type of roll. Three years of his services seem well worth an anonymous 2nd round rookie to me. We've already set ourselves up beautifully for the future. This was a chance to improve our standing for the right now.