- Joined
- Feb 4, 2018
- Messages
- 15,881
- Reaction score
- 20,291
I’d say no, but he caught the NFL off guard by the way he played boxing guys out like a power forward which paved the way for Antonio Gates.affirmative
Gronk for me.
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.I’d say no, but he caught the NFL off guard by the way he played boxing guys out like a power forward which paved the way for Antonio Gates.affirmative
I’d say no, but he caught the NFL off guard by the way he played boxing guys out like a power forward which paved the way for Antonio Gates.
Gronk for me.
Your main argument neglects the stickum and HOF quarterbacks for the majority of his career (not to mention having Bill Walsh as a coach helps too).
Imagine if Randy Moss had stickum, Joe Montana/Steve Young, and Bill Walsh. Or if he had stickum, Tom Brady, and Belichick for the majority of his career. Randy would easily have an extra 7,000 yards and 40 TDs.
Randy Moss came into the league in 1998. He set the single season rookie TD record with 17 and was the main reason the 98 Vikings broke the record for most points in a season. Your pre-2004 argument holds no weight.
Who hasn't seen Jerry play? I swear people only resort to comments like this when they don't actually have any points to back up their arguments.
lol..!! I destroy your thesis with the fact that Rice has 7,000 more yards and 40 more TD’s.
All you have is your lame “but... but... stickum! Stickum!” I swear people only resort to comments like this when they don't actually have any points to back up their arguments.
He did admit to using stick em, but you have no idea how many games he actually used it. One thing that Rice has over Moss is heart. Randy at times gave up and was the reason why he was traded in 2009.
As awesome as Moss was, I would take Rice in his prime. No reliance necessary on good pass protection to setup deep passes and very few bust games. Rice is a guy who gives you 10 receptions and runs every route, whereas Moss breaks a defense over the top. I think Rice's skill set would ultimately lead to more wins, as its more flexible, though he could certainly beat you deep as well.
Woah.
The 2007 OL is one of the best all around units of the free agency era. This is some serious disrespecting of that unit. The 2007 unit would win at LT LG and C by a lot. RT would be a push, and while RG would go to 2019, Stephen Neal was a great player in his own right.
As far as WR -- none of these guys are as good as 2007 Moss or Welker. Whether or not the offense matches up as a whole is another issue. The one edge I would give to 2019 here is that they don't need to be as one dimensional as the 2007 team -- Gordon and Brown both have way bigger route trees than Welker or Moss, but they're also just worse.
I think time has made us underrate that 2007 team. They were one more play from being considered probably the 2nd greatest team in sports history after the 92 Dream Team. 2019 might be amazing, but c'mon.
The RB is way way way better in 2019 though. Sammy Morris and Laurence Maroney wouldn't even make this roster.
This offense won't be as explosive as 2007. It can't be. But it might be more versatile/consistent.
Versus opponents with a combined 0-4 record, with three of those four losses amounting to blowouts of 30+ points.It's 2 freakin' games.
It's 2 freaking games, but... 2019 Pats 1.5 pts per game, 85 Bears, I think, 12 pts a game. 14 to go.It's 2 freakin' games.
To be generic and simple: Better defense, less explosive offense (thus far)
It's 2 freaking games, but... 2019 Pats 1.5 pts per game, 85 Bears, I think, 12 pts a game. 14 to go.
WAY too early for anything like this, but I get why the comparison is being made. Both teams have offenses that are wide receiver centric, defenses that have multiple players who have already won 3 Super Bowls, and came out of the gates blazing. It'll be a fun thing to look at once the season gets some legs under it, but for now it's a week one game (which regardless of opponent, is weird and random) and a game against Miami... a team that has a chance to be historically bad.
I love what we've done, because even against bad teams in bad situations you're not guaranteed 30+ point victories. But that 2007 team was special, first and foremost because of how they just kept doing it all season, AND I feel like they played a lot of playoff teams that year. This team needs to prove their longevity before they're even remotely in that category.