Calichief 3,016 Posted May 7, 2017 Share Posted May 7, 2017 Another good one Looks good dropping back me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calichief 3,016 Posted May 7, 2017 Share Posted May 7, 2017 https://twitter.com/nflnetwork/status/861038249170653184 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted May 7, 2017 Author Share Posted May 7, 2017 Fans were in an uproar about it but in reality they wouldn't have repeated with Dilfer as the QB. His range downfield was limited. He had success when the playbook was limited- not because of his football IQ, but because of his physical limitations. Plus the formula was to run Jamal Lewis down the throat, pop a short route to Sharpe, let the defense go hunt for scalps. Grbac was horrible....dumbest fa signing ever...for both our teams! Shortly after the release of Trent Dilfer, the Ravens spent a first-round pick on Kyle Boller. 47 career starts. Should've stuck with Trent Dilfer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 Shortly after the release of Trent Dilfer, the Ravens spent a first-round pick on Kyle Boller. 47 career starts. Should've stuck with Trent Dilfer. Shortly? It was 2 years after the release of Dilfer... You don't look very good when you talk off the top of your head.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted May 9, 2017 Author Share Posted May 9, 2017 Shortly? It was 2 years after the release of Dilfer... You don't look very good when you talk off the top of your head.... It took twelve years for a team with one of the best defenses in the league to get back to the Super Bowl. After that, it took being matched up against Colin Kaepernick to win it. Had the Ravens stuck with Dilfer, they might have won another Super Bowl earlier, and in the context of a history that proved that a quarterback doesn't have to play extra spicy to win a Super Bowl, they wouldn't have gotten married to Joe Flacco to the tune of more than $20 million per year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted May 9, 2017 Author Share Posted May 9, 2017 Shortly? It was 2 years after the release of Dilfer... Yes. With Elvis Grbac and Jeff Blake quarterbacking, those were quick seasons indeed. Trent Dilfer was not easily replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 It took twelve years for a team with one of the best defenses in the league to get back to the Super Bowl. After that, it took being matched up against Colin Kaepernick to win it. Had the Ravens stuck with Dilfer, they might have won another Super Bowl earlier, and in the context of a history that proved that a quarterback doesn't have to play extra spicy to win a Super Bowl, they wouldn't have gotten married to Joe Flacco to the tune of more than $20 million per year. Good grief- you don't "Know football" Flacco has proven to be the only QB in the last 10 years worthy of trading up to get him. All you see is a Salary Cap #. I bet Chiefs fans would have given a testicle to win a SB with Flacco. You excepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vonschnitz 130 Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Good grief- you don't "Know football" Flacco has proven to be the only QB in the last 10 years worthy of trading up to get him. All you see is a Salary Cap #. I bet Chiefs fans would have given a testicle to win a SB with Flacco. You excepted. Why? Does he have only one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Why? Does he have only one? No, because he'd rather rub Smith's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted May 10, 2017 Author Share Posted May 10, 2017 Flacco has proven to be the only QB in the last 10 years worthy of trading up to get him. Only one problem: The Ravens actually traded back from their original pick, which was an eighth-overall pick. You criticized me for not knowing history, but you don't even know the story about how your Ravens got their quarterback. Don't bite me. I can bite harder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtimer 8,687 Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Only one problem: The Ravens actually traded back from their original pick, which was an eighth-overall pick. You criticized me for not knowing history, but you don't even know the story about how your Ravens got their quarterback. Don't bite me. I can bite harder. eeeew .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Only one problem: The Ravens actually traded back from their original pick, which was an eighth-overall pick. You criticized me for not knowing history, but you don't even know the story about how your Ravens got their quarterback. Don't bite me. I can bite harder. wow, the level with which you impress yourself is.....well.....impressive. Trading back, picking up other picks to use a "draft capital" (the term you love to use), then trading up to get a guy that you valued (who will be SB MVP 4 yrs later), then trading back again to pick up a Pro Bowl/All Pro RB (Ray Rice, makes a shit ton load of sense. This why your stats based analysis of every situation fails to take into account the intangibles that each player and pick carries with them. I actually did not criticize your knowledge of history in the last post, although of other teams that you speak of, it is really poor. I merely pointed out that you were fixated on a Salary Cap number that doesn't really represent the current situation in its entirety. Bite? Good grief..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xen 1,010,220 Posted May 10, 2017 Share Posted May 10, 2017 Yes yes, we're all impressed with the google-fu going on here. Everybody happy now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted May 10, 2017 Author Share Posted May 10, 2017 Yes yes, we're all impressed with the google-fu going on here. Everybody happy now? Meh, I remembered the detail from a larger project I did recently concerning the general success or failure occurring when teams trade up to take a quarterback. Since the common draft started, no team has traded up for a quarterback and won a Super Bowl with them. I've never attributed causation to the correlation, but it's a pretty significant track record. The Ravens fan tried to present Joe Flacco as an exception to that history, and I already knew it was wrong. The only thing I had to Google was from what draft position the Ravens traded back before they traded up again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xen 1,010,220 Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 uh huh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 Meh, I remembered the detail from a larger project I did recently concerning the general success or failure occurring when teams trade up to take a quarterback. Since the common draft started, no team has traded up for a quarterback and won a Super Bowl with them. I've never attributed causation to the correlation, but it's a pretty significant track record. The Ravens fan tried to present Joe Flacco as an exception to that history, and I already knew it was wrong. The only thing I had to Google was from what draft position the Ravens traded back before they traded up again. I never "presented" anything.... The FU going on is the "Dodge-Fu" Phatal keeps playing in order to remain, in his mind, "correct" about a post or opinion. You pull pieces from a post in order to justify your opinion. So because the Ravens traded Back, then UP, they really didn't TRADE UP? WTF man..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted May 17, 2017 Author Share Posted May 17, 2017 So because the Ravens traded Back, then UP, they really didn't TRADE UP? As a general rule, when comparing apples to apples, I make sure that there isn't an apple posing as an orange. Speaking of posing, why are you calling me out for this when you know full well what people are thinking when one uses the term, "Trading up"? Who is the one splitting hairs here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handswarmer 645 Posted May 18, 2017 Share Posted May 18, 2017 As a general rule, when comparing apples to apples, I make sure that there isn't an apple posing as an orange. Speaking of posing, why are you calling me out for this when you know full well what people are thinking when one uses the term, "Trading up"? Who is the one splitting hairs here? So all of a sudden, if you trade back, then trade up its not a Trade up....its not legit? Seriously GTFOver your inability to be wrong. Plenty of people who write about football for a living agree that the Ravens "Traded UP" to get Flacco and then he won a SB. You are wrong. You just can't handle the Truth, LT Caffey..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted September 17, 2017 Author Share Posted September 17, 2017 Dak Prescott had more yards and TD's than Alex Smith, Smith will be replaced this year. After six-and-a-half quarters, Dak Prescott is 40/63, 365 passing yards, 2 passing touchdowns, and 1 interception. His team is about to be 1-1 for the season. Who is Dak Prescott, anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DefensiveMan 758 Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 After six-and-a-half quarters, Dak Prescott is 40/63, 365 passing yards, 2 passing touchdowns, and 1 interception. His team is about to be 1-1 for the season. Who is Dak Prescott, anyway? Prescott, is overrated and Denver has opened up the blue print on how to stop them. Take Elliott out of the game and force Dak to beat you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetlord 10,209 Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 Prescott, is overrated and Denver has opened up the blue print on how to stop them. Take Elliott out of the game and force Dak to beat you. Umm..I don't think the Chiefs run defense is a capable of taking Elliott out of the game as the Donks' was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPPT1974 21 Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 So far Alex Smith is 2-0! And really playing his heart out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
liquidfriend 1,151 Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 Denver is a soft run blocking D. They benefit from arguably the NFL best secondary allowing them to commit more resources to defending the run. Miller did great making Collins his bitch. Having the best secondary, edge rusher and thinner air is not exactly a blue print easy to replicate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhitter 1,424 Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 So far Alex Smith is 2-0! And really playing his heart out. I agree Alex has been solid for the first two games...but I think most fans are beyond rising and falling with Alex during the season. It's all about the playoffs for me and I think most here would concur. Chiefs can go 11-5, 12-4, 13-3...but if they get bounced in the divisional round again (like the past 2 years) then it's another year of "what might have been." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted September 18, 2017 Author Share Posted September 18, 2017 I agree Alex has been solid for the first two games...but I think most fans are beyond rising and falling with Alex during the season. It's all about the playoffs for me and I think most here would concur. Chiefs can go 11-5, 12-4, 13-3...but if they get bounced in the divisional round again (like the past 2 years) then it's another year of "what might have been." But about that 13-3: Does that earn the Chiefs the One-Seed in the AFC this year? Once the Chiefs beat the Patriots, it made every other team in the league look mortal. The Chiefs have a tough home game against the Steelers, and the Broncos appear to be better than originally thought. Even so, it no longer seems homeristic to imagine the Chiefs as anything better than a 12-4 team this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.