News: Gil Brandt's 10 most talented teams in the NFL (Cowboys 2)

[QuincyCarterEra]

You make good points. You go ahead and root for the Eagles. I'll take the Cowboys, despite what you say.

Just trying to educate!

 

[Diehardblues]

Yeah, you try to spin your bull**** and think you bear no responsibility to support it. And you’re wrong. I understand it perfectly.

If my opinions are wrong in your opinion then you don’t need to waste any energy arguing them.

Opinions are often based on the belief someone has based on the information or rhetoric provided. Opinions are not always based on factual data.

Remember man once believed the earth was flat for thousands of years until proven wrong. We have millions of the public now with sufficient scientific evidence of Climate Change that believe it’s a hoax. We have billions of people who argue over who to worship.

Surely there’s going to be discrepancies over who we believe are more prolific QB’s on which I haven’t yet received your personal opinion on just some factual data you support.

 

[lk8701]

BTW, Gil is battling dementia if he truly believes this is the 2nd most talented roster in the league. That is laughable.

If you don't include the QB position then yes the Cowboys are for sure in the top 3.

 

[Stash]

If my opinions are wrong in your opinion then you don’t need to waste any energy arguing them.

That's why I haven't bothered. I don't care about things that have no value or weight behind them.

Opinions are often based on the belief someone has based on the information or rhetoric provided. Opinions are not always based on factual data.

Those that have merit or value are.

Remember man once believed the earth was flat for thousands of years until proven wrong. We have millions of the public now with sufficient scientific evidence of Climate Change that believe it’s a hoax. We have billions of people who argue over who to worship.

Surely there’s going to be discrepancies over who we believe are more prolific QB’s on which I haven’t yet received your personal opinion on just some factual data you support.

I'm not interested on your opinion of "prolific". It has no value.

 

[Diehardblues]

That's why I haven't bothered. I don't care about things that have no value or weight behind them.



Those that have merit or value are.



I'm not interested on your opinion of "prolific". It has no value.

But here you are? It weighs enough on you that you feel the need to dispute it.

 

[Stash]

But here you are? It weighs enough on you that you feel the need to dispute it.

I'm not "disputing" anything. You've brought nothing of substance or value to the topic. And that why I don't care about anything you consider "prolific". Your position has no support and therefore no value. Responding to your replies to me is just that, a reply. But you have brought nothing of value to "dispute".

 

[Whirlwin]

don't agree at all on philly....i would have gone with the rams before them

The problem is the Rams are older team. I might have gone with Kansas City or even Jacksonville

 

[Diehardblues]

I'm not "disputing" anything. You've brought nothing of substance or value to the topic. And that why I don't care about anything you consider "prolific". Your position has no support and therefore no value. Responding to your replies to me is just that, a reply. But you have brought nothing of value to "dispute".

Prolific Passing QB disputes your opinion so it has no value to you which is fine but it might have value to others. It certainly has value to me and why I’m intent on presenting it.

 

[Stash]

Prolific Passing QB disputes your opinion so it has no value to you which is fine but it might have value to others. It certainly has value to me and why I’m intent on presenting it.

It only has value to you. It's worthless to everyone else. If you're not sure? Ask.

 

[CouchCoach]

Since there's this disparity about talent and how it's ranked, how does this even matter? If they were to even try and do this, to what avail I don't know, they would have to have a consensus on ranking every player on a 1 best and 32 worst, tally that up and rank the teams by the lowest scores. But that gets tricky because it gives the same numeric value to every position and that's not the case.

I think there would be disagreement with most positions at who #1 is because I've seen rankings that have Rodgers at #1 at QB instead of the GOAT.

Don't know about you but I do not consider PHL as #1 or DAL at #2 and does that even matter. They will play the games and they will play it form their individual positions to form the best team and that is all that matters.

 

[QuincyCarterEra]

It only has value to you. It's worthless to everyone else. If you're not sure? Ask.

He thought our offense with Flacco would be more "prolific". So his definition of prolific means garbage

 

[Diehardblues]

It only has value to you. It's worthless to everyone else. If you're not sure? Ask.

I’m not interested in taking a poll. I’ll let everyone decipher for themselves . But Prolific is a term much like Elite which holds different meanings for different people. It’s a subjective description. Not a definitive one.

 

[Stash]

He thought our offense with Flacco would be more "prolific". So his definition of prolific means garbage

He's under the mistaken impression that his opinions hold value simply because they're his opinions, and does nothing to support them. Therefore, they're worthless words thrown together, "signifying nothing".

 

[Diehardblues]

He thought our offense with Flacco would be more "prolific". So his definition of prolific means garbage

If it doesn’t support your opinion or narrative it won’t hold much meaning to you.

I’m sure if everyone believed Dak was a more Prolific Passer than Goff and Wentz it would have more meaning to them.

 

[Stash]

I’m not interested in taking a poll.

Because it would pose a truth that you'd rather try to deny.

I’ll let everyone decipher for themselves .

And the voters have spoken!

But Prolific is a term much like Elite which holds different meanings for different people. It’s a subjective description. Not a definitive one.

And therefore worthless.

 

[Diehardblues]

Since there's this disparity about talent and how it's ranked, how does this even matter? If they were to even try and do this, to what avail I don't know, they would have to have a consensus on ranking every player on a 1 best and 32 worst, tally that up and rank the teams by the lowest scores. But that gets tricky because it gives the same numeric value to every position and that's not the case.

I think there would be disagreement with most positions at who #1 is because I've seen rankings that have Rodgers at #1 at QB instead of the GOAT.

Don't know about you but I do not consider PHL as #1 or DAL at #2 and does that even matter. They will play the games and they will play it form their individual positions to form the best team and that is all that matters.

Yep

It’s just bragging rights or topic to discuss .

 

[Diehardblues]

Because it would pose a truth that you'd rather try to deny.



And the voters have spoken!




And therefore worthless.

It’s obviously worthless to some. That’s the nature of opinions .

If you believe Dak is a more Prolific passer than Goff or Wentz then that’s something that will just be out there for all to consider .

I’d be curious where you rank Dak amongst the Elite prolific passers in the league?

 

[Stash]

It’s obviously worthless to some. That’s the nature of opinions .

If you believe Dak is a more Prolific passer than Goff or Wentz then that’s something that will just be out there for all to consider .

I’d be curious where you rank Dak amongst the Elite prolific passers in the league?

Keep being curious. It's a worthless debate of an entirely subjective term. I'm not wasting my time.

This will be my last time-wasting response on that matter.

 

[CouchCoach]

Prolific Passing QB disputes your opinion so it has no value to you which is fine but it might have value to others. It certainly has value to me and why I’m intent on presenting it.

There have been prolific passing QB's in the past that never won a championship. There have been bus driver QB's that have rings.

That position isn't about passing to me, although they have to be proficient at that, it is about the right QB for a team. Brady is the right QB for that team because they've been most aware of building a team. Rivers is the right QB for LAC but they've failed to build it right around him and he's had a coaching carousel. But talent wise, I'd put him up there with any I've ever seen.

What we do not know for certain yet is Prescott the right QB for this team? You, and quite a few others with opinions I respect, seem to feel he's not a good enough passer and I agree, there are more accurate passers, but that does not mean he is not the right QB for this team. There is just no ignoring the first three years of his career and there are only two people in the NFL that get the record attached to their name.

I would not rank Prescott in the top 16 from a "prolific" viewpoint when comparing him to the other QB's in passing. However, when I consider the team effect of each QB and all of the elements of playing that position, he breaks the top 10 for me. He has this elusive intangible quality that his former coach Mullen referred to that can't be learned, it is innate in some.

It's like when Bernie Kosar, Joe Kapp and Billy Kilmer played. I looked at them passing and wondered 'how in the hell did they get that job'? Because they won. They weren't pretty to watch but not one of their teammates would have wanted another QB. Prescott certainly doesn't look like them, but he has that same effect on his teammates. Many assume if we take Brady, Brees and Rodgers and insert them into his position they will be more successful but I am not so sure about that.

When they bring a new Clydesdale into the team, they try different combinations to see how they work together and it is not always the prettiest or one that performed the best in individual training that makes the team, it is the one that best understands how to fit into the team.

 

[Diehardblues]

He's under the mistaken impression that his opinions hold value simply because they're his opinions, and does nothing to support them. Therefore, they're worthless words thrown together, "signifying nothing".

Sports writers, analyst and fans often have opinions which don’t align with our own. They often have little meaning if they dispute our opinions and beliefs.