2014 NFL off-season thread

That's much harder for Eli (or Ben) to do than it has been in the past.

Peyton, Brady and Brees (and Rodgers) have had a stranglehold at the top of the list for a long time.

 

True. So I would argue, those four are the locks.

Roethlisberger and Eli will probably get in. I would consider Roethlisberger the better of the two, but it's close. I sort of feel like we'll see more good seasons from Roethlisberger and I'm not so sure about that with Eli, but the new OC in New York could wind up being a big hire.

 

I understand your words just fine. I'm pointing out that the he also played in other offenses.

Of course, you are still ignoring the arguments regarding the time in the CFL and the years that Moon lost at the beginning of his career because you know you can't counter them. Those alone make your comparison to Romo a crappy one.

 

I didn't compare them directly, schmuck.
Moon spent 17 years in the NFL.
It's not like he lost all that much time.

 

Yes, you did compare them directly. You said Romo's numbers were better than Moon's. That was the first Hall of Famer you compared him to in order to try to support your statement that Romo will also end up there.

Of course, now you are backing away from that comparison because it is clear that it doesn't work. There is no good reason that Moon didn't get a shot in the NFL when he first came out of college and voters counted that in his favor. They also gave him some credit for being so dominant in the CFL regardless of the weakness of that league then and now. Anybody who has a clue about the process knows those were factors in Moon's favor and Romo will have no such advantage when his name comes up for consideration.

Pointing out that Moon played 17 seasons is just a failed attempt to mislead others on your part. He appeared in all of two games those final two seasons, attempting a total of 37 passes. More importantly, that he played so long after being robbed of the early part of his career is a positive for Moon, not a negative. It makes his durability even more impressive. Bottom line is Moon didn't get to play in the NFL until he was 28 years old. To say he didn't lose that much time is truly ridiculous.

If you want to argue that he shouldn't get credit for that lost time, that's fine. I don't think he should, either. You can also make a good case that his years in the CFL should be ignored. It doesn't matter. Right or wrong, the voters counted those in Moon's favor, so even if you were correct in saying Romo's stats are better (which ignores the huge difference in the counting stats), the comparison you made does not hold up.

 

This is your special talent.
Distorting the shit out of an argument so those following can no longer determine what's being argued.
It's a little shell game you play in your many disputes on this site.
Moon played behind four HoF offensive linemen in his career. Five when Will Shields makes it.
Whatever durability he had should be credited partly to them, as well.

 

I'm not the one distorting things. That would be you.

You lied and said that you didn't compare Romo to Moon when that is exactly what you did.

Including Shields as a potential fifth Hall of Fame lineman Moon played behind is another distortion. They were teammates during those two seasons at the end of Moon's career that I mentioned, the ones in which he only appeared in two games. Yet another attempt by you to mislead posters into buying into the bullcrap you are selling.

And yet again, you are running away from the key points. Hall of Fame voters clearly counted Moon's detour to the CFL as a significant factor in his favor in addition to his production in the NFL. That is the primary reason that using a statistical comparison to Moon as justification for Romo's Hall of Fame case is a joke and you know it. You just keep ducking that point because you can't beat it.

Your comparison does not hold up. There is no shell game. The only attempts at deception are coming from you and your name calling and personal attacks can't cover that up.

 

I'm done with you in this discussion. Go jump in the lake.

 

That there are at least four quarterbacks currently playing, and possibly as many as six, that are HOF locks doesn't help Romo's cause at all. Neither does the increased emphasis on passing that's going to force us to recalibrate what a HOF QB's career stats look like.
We're seeing this now with receivers. Guys like Tim Brown, Cris Carter and Art Monk, who were all touted as "headed for Canton" on nearly every broadcast of their games, have had to wait years or are still waiting because so many of their contemporaries passed them, or the evolution of the game made their work look weaker. There's still a glut of receivers whose stats would've made them no-brainers 20 years ago (Brown, Isaac Bruce, Hines Ward, Torry Holt, to name a few) who are sitting squarely on the fence now and might be for some time because of the election process.

All of this is to say, if Romo does get in he's going to be waiting a while. And it's not necessarily through any fault of his own. He's very good. There are a lot of guys who are better.

 

I don't think it's analogous. The qbs will be first ballot guys mostly, whereas the WRs were all borderline cases. That's how you get a backlog.

 

As close as fart boy will allow himself to get to admitting the other guy has a point.

Thanks for playing. Sorry you didn't do a better job. Have a nice night.

 

Again, Moon was a top 5 QB for a decent chunk of his career. You can't say the same thing about Romo.

If Romo was 30, I would think there would be a much better chance of him having a shot at Canton, but he's 34 and I think under the most optimistic scenarios, could play 4-5 more seasons. Romo needs three more really good seasons. I think he has to get pretty close to 300 touchdown passes to have a chance.