Rayzer32 Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Actually, Plato, in defining justice, separated a task's purpose from any wage-earning associated with it. Thus, the earning of money by playing in the NFL is classified under the task of wage-earning, while the act of playing in the NFL is an act in itself, and the sole purpose of that act is to win Super Bowls. 826416[/snapback] That is assinine. Why do players choose money over success then.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 SB's dont make a player better. You're correct. SBs don't make a player better, but better players make SB wins happen.
daquixers_is_back Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 That is assinine. Why do players choose money over success then. 826421[/snapback] Hollywood Donahoe must not have received the memo ... in the SB's the stadium announcer actually announcer "introducing TOM BRADY and his band of 52 average players that he makes win every game" ... it was just edited for TV. The Patriots team didnt win the SB. Tom did. Duh.
meazza Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 I dont understand how you guys dont get what Rayzer and I are saying. Maybe if I put it in bigger caps. WERE NOT ARGUING THE PLAYER WITH MORE SB WINS WERE ARGUING THE BETTER QB MORE SB WINS DOES NOT MEAN YOUR A BETTER PLAYER IT MEANS YOUR TEAM WAS BETTER THAT YEAR The example I used was Elway. Elway was not ANY better of a QB after he won his SB, than he was 10 minutes prior to kickoff of the SB. He was the same quality QB. Only difference being he and his TEAM had a SB win. Unbelievable some people arent getting this. 826414[/snapback] Nope, you're wrong lol I'm sorry man, you're just completely wrong. You know why? Ask any fan, who would you rather have as your starting QB, Manning or Brady. Whoever wouldn't take Brady in a heartbeat is crazy. Manning has had everything given to him on a silver platter and yet he hasn't won anything.
daquixers_is_back Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 You're correct. SBs don't make a player better, but better players make SB wins happen. 826422[/snapback] Then Marino should have above 4 Sb rings.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 That is assinine. Why do players choose money over success then. Because to Plato, both playing in the NFL and earning a wage are functions. Obviously, achieving excellence in both would be ideal, but if achieving excellence in only one of the two is all that is possible, it becomes more difficult. But in any case, the player is still seeking excellence of some function.
daquixers_is_back Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Nope, you're wrong lol I'm sorry man, you're just completely wrong. You know why? Ask any fan, who would you rather have as your starting QB, Manning or Brady. Whoever wouldn't take Brady in a heartbeat is crazy. Manning has had everything given to him on a silver platter and yet he hasn't won anything. 826425[/snapback] I love when people say that. Its just complete ignorance. Manning has had ONE SUPERSTAR. Marvin Harrison. Peyton was a great QB far before Edge entered the league. Edge enjoy his success because of how good Manning was. Defenses were afraid of the pass so they couldnt stack the box. Look at edge in Arizona now. Squat. Wayne has never had over 83 receptions and Stokely is a 3rd or 4th receiver best. Manning has had nothing "handed" to him. He has had ONE superstar (other than Faulk his ROOKIE season only). Not to mention Manning has NO DEFENSE. Brady's defense has bailed him out many times. Manning cant rely on that.
Rayzer32 Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 You're correct. SBs don't make a player better, but better players make SB wins happen. 826422[/snapback] This brings us right back to the whole Trent Dilfer, Ben Roesthlisberger thing. The better players that won SBs for NE were at positions other than QB. Brady is good, but he did not by any means shine in those wins. Brady managed those games, whereas Manning dominates games.
meazza Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 I love when people say that. Its just complete ignorance. Manning has had ONE SUPERSTAR. Marvin Harrison. Peyton was a great QB far before Edge entered the league. Edge enjoy his success because of how good Manning was. Defenses were afraid of the pass so they couldnt stack the box. Look at edge in Arizona now. Squat. Wayne has never had over 83 receptions and Stokely is a 3rd or 4th receiver best. Manning has had anything "handed" to him. He has had ONE superstar (other than Faulk his ROOKIE season only). Not to mention Manning has NO DEFENSE. Brady's defense has bailed him out many times. Manning cant rely on that. 826429[/snapback] Really, and Brady has had who? Troy Brown? Who else? Deion Branch FFS you lost this argument, get over it. And don't call me ignorant because I actually know more than you do about football.
daquixers_is_back Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 This brings us right back to the whole Trent Dilfer, Ben Roesthlisberger thing. The better players that won SBs for NE were at positions other than QB. Brady is good, but he did not by any means shine in those wins. Brady managed those games, whereas Manning dominates games. 826430[/snapback] And thats where it comes down to for me. Brady manages games better than any other QB I believe I have ever seen. But Manning. Manning DOMINATES them. Manning picks apart defenses. He makes his RB's and WR's better and takes pressure off of his defense (which is a must on that team). Brady > manages Manning > dominates dont forget ... brady has Belichick, Weiss, and Crenell on his team. Talk about the dream team of coaches.
Hollywood Donahoe Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Then Marino should have above 4 Sb rings. You're presupposing that Marino's stats make him greater than those who were able to win Super Bowls. presuppositions can be dangerous in debating origin (as we are debating origin of greatness). I am not, however, indicating that Marino wasn't great (for he was), or that stats play no role in determining who is great and who is not (they do). I am simply pointing out to you that greatness is determined by a wide range of factors, from statistics to postseason success to Super Bowl wins and beyond.
daquixers_is_back Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Really, and Brady has had who? Troy Brown? Who else? Deion Branch FFS you lost this argument, get over it. And don't call me ignorant because I actually know more than you do about football. 826431[/snapback] Oh i lost because you said so I never called you ignorant. I dont do that. I said the statement was ignorant. You know more about football than I do? Whether or not thats true, its a very childish thing to say. "my daddy can beat your daddy up"
meazza Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Oh i lost because you said so I never called you ignorant. I dont do that. I said the statement was ignorant. You know more about football than I do? Whether or not thats true, its a very childish thing to say. "my daddy can beat your daddy up" 826434[/snapback] I hate Brady, with a passion. When I look at him I see evil, but if there is ever a 3rd and 98, he'd find a way to convert even with me as his top WR. He has that killer instinct Manning doesn't have. It's obvious, and whether you want to believe it or not, the Colts will not be winning a SB this year either.
Rayzer32 Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Nope, you're wrong lol I'm sorry man, you're just completely wrong. You know why? Ask any fan, who would you rather have as your starting QB, Manning or Brady. Whoever wouldn't take Brady in a heartbeat is crazy. Manning has had everything given to him on a silver platter and yet he hasn't won anything. 826425[/snapback] Are you serious? I'll take Manning all day long. I didn't realize that Manning had a great defense handed to him on a silver platter to help the Colts. Brady had a great coach, offensive line, defense and the best kicker in the game handed to him. Get off the crack pipe dude.
daquixers_is_back Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Here is what it comes down to: Rayzer and DaQuix's player evalutation: reg season counts as much as playoffs/Sb Meazza and Hol/Don player evaluation: 1 SB wins is equivalant (=) to 100 regular season wins
Hollywood Donahoe Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Brady is good, but he did not by any means shine in those wins. SB 36: TD, zero turnovers, game-winning FG drive, 86.2 rating. SB 38: 3 TDs, Super Bowl record 32 completions, 354 yards, game-winning FG drive, 100.5 rating. SB 39: 2 TDs, 236 yards, 110.1 rating. He obviously shined in the last two, and it could certainly be argued he shined in the first, given the theatrics of game-winning drive.
daquixers_is_back Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 I hate Brady, with a passion. When I look at him I see evil, but if there is ever a 3rd and 98, he'd find a way to convert even with me as his top WR. He has that killer instinct Manning doesn't have. It's obvious, and whether you want to believe it or not, the Colts will not be winning a SB this year either. 826435[/snapback] NE is not in the top 10 of 3rd down conversions. Killer instinct? you mean him having to come down to 3 SB field goals? Manning has some fierce emotions ... he waves off punt teams to go for 4th and 10 or whatever it was to win the game instead of playing it safe ... you see his emotion in interviews and post game conferences .... give me a break.
Rayzer32 Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 You're presupposing that Marino's stats make him greater than those who were able to win Super Bowls. presuppositions can be dangerous in debating origin (as we are debating origin of greatness). I am not, however, indicating that Marino wasn't great (for he was), or that stats play no role in determining who is great and who is not (they do). I am simply pointing out to you that greatness is determined by a wide range of factors, from statistics to postseason success to Super Bowl wins and beyond. 826433[/snapback] If Marino was the Pats QB the past 5 years, you would have won all 5 SBs. Brady still makes stupid mistakes that cost him games like tonight.
meazza Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 Are you serious? I'll take Manning all day long. I didn't realize that Manning had a great defense handed to him on a silver platter to help the Colts. Brady had a great coach, offensive line, defense and the best kicker in the game handed to him. Get off the crack pipe dude. 826436[/snapback] Didn't Manning have a great defense last year? And crack is great why should i get off it
daquixers_is_back Posted November 6, 2006 Posted November 6, 2006 SB 36: TD, zero turnovers, game-winning FG drive, 86.2 rating.SB 38: 3 TDs, Super Bowl record 32 completions, 354 yards, game-winning FG drive, 100.5 rating. SB 39: 2 TDs, 236 yards, 110.1 rating. He obviously shined in the last two, and it could certainly be argued he shined in the first, given the theatrics of game-winning drive. 826439[/snapback] Again. ONE GAME out of a 19 game season. Not to mention game 3 wasnt anything spectacular. 236 yards for 2 TD's in average QB's game ... he was also playing a pass defense in the top half of the league but by no means spectacular. Certainly not in the top 10. His 2nd Super Bowl he had a great game .. no doubt.
Recommended Posts