Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

NFL's most irreplaceable players (ESPN Insider)

28 posts in this topic

Posted

Cam came in at #4 in the QB group:

4. Cam Newton, Carolina Panthers

How important was Newton to the 2011 Panthers? They went from one of the worst offenses ever measured by Football Outsiders stats to the fourth-best offense in the league. However, an injury to Newton wouldn't just mean a new quarterback; it would require a completely overhauled offense, because Derek Anderson is a statue.

Smitty got an honorable mention at WR:

Honorable mention:

Steve Smith is hugely talented, but second receiver Brandon LaFell did have a strong rookie year, ranking 11th in our DVOA ratings for value-per-play. There isn't much else on the depth chart after that, but the Panthers' offense really revolves around the run and Cam Newton's skills.

Ahead of Cam was AR, Brees and Brady.

WR's were CJ, Fitz, Green, Andre and Bowe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Honorable mention:

Steve Smith is hugely talented, but second receiver Brandon LaFell did have a strong rookie year,

To think these people make money when they put out this garbage.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think Anderson would be more serviceable than people realize. He's looked pretty sharp in preseason. I mean, no, he's no CAM, but I was surprised how good the offense looked under him during the dolphins game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I call bullshit on brady. he went down that one year and they plugged matt cassel's ass in and went 11-5. Peyton manning went down last year and the colts struggled to win even 2 games...

the system is godly in NE, not their QB. Don't get me wrong, brady is one hell of a QB, but he is not the only reason that team is good.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I call bullshit on brady. he went down that one year and they plugged matt cassel's ass in and went 11-5. Peyton manning went down last year and the colts struggled to win even 2 games...

the system is godly in NE, not their QB. Don't get me wrong, brady is one hell of a QB, but he is not the only reason that team is good.

Knucklehead Ryan Mallet can run that offense.. fug Brady. If you sack him one time he's poo.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I call bullshit on brady. he went down that one year and they plugged matt cassel's ass in and went 11-5. Peyton manning went down last year and the colts struggled to win even 2 games...

the system is godly in NE, not their QB. Don't get me wrong, brady is one hell of a QB, but he is not the only reason that team is good.

I wonder why more teams don't run this magical system that allows a QB to be a Hall of Famer.

Look at NE's schedule that season. They went 11-5 only because they beat up on bad teams (same reason Miami did that well that year). They got smacked around against good teams sans the Colts game, which their offense couldn't do anything. Not to mention they went from 18-1 and nearly winning the Super Bowl to not even making the playoffs and their offense was much, much worse. Besides, Cassel did great for KC in 2010 with 27 touchdowns to 7 interceptions.

And what is more ridiculous about this system talk is the fact that Brady changes OCs just about every year. The system ran in New England in 2011 is vastly different than the one from the 2007 season which is vastly different than the one they ran in 2005 or any of those years prior. Manning on the otherhand had the same OC for his entire career. But yes, clearly Brady here is the system quarterback. Not even saying Manning is because he isn't. But if between the two either of them were, it'd be Peyton, not Brady.

And using how Peyton's team did as an example is pathetic. The team was clearly on a decline beforehand as seen in 2010. It wasn't nearly the same team he had in his prime with Marvin Harrison (some of the best hands of all-time and a fabulous route runner), Reggie Wayne, and Edge James. Not to mention their defenses were a LOT better than people give credit for. They consistently ranked in the top ten in PPG.

It's just sickening seeing people who refuse to give players their due respect and anybody who is actually watching New England play without any bias headed in could tell that. This isn't Madden. The OC isn't controlling the quarterback with a controller and the one behind Brady making the absolutely pin point throws he makes.

On top of everything else, that 2007-2008 team was really good on defense. The 2012 team, not so much defensively. New England wins 10+ games with Brady at QB. They'd be lucky to win 6 games without him. Saying otherwise is blindly hating on Tom, nothing more.

And Ryan Mallet is a terrible quarterback. He wasn't a good prospect to begin with coming out of college (just wasn't mentioned as much due to all his other issues and was the main reason he fell, considering it isn't like he was the only player with a drug history).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Tom Brady is whom The Golden Calf of Bristol prays to when he gets down on one knee. You guys should be ashamed.

Do you guys even like football?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

One more thing about this "system" thing. A lot of people usually credit it with Belichick for which I only have two questions.

1) You know Bill Belichick is a defensive coach, correct?

2) Why wasn't Belichick doing anything before he got Brady? Even ignoring his lack of success in Cleveland outside of 1 year, he went 5-11 in 2000 with Bledsoe (who wasn't a bad QB in the least). I think Belichick is a great coach but there is a lot more reason to believe Brady is the bigger reason for NE's success than he is.

Sorry for derailing this thread. But I've never understood the "product of the system" argument. Brady's offensive systems have changed a hell of a lot more than they have for most Hall of Fame quarterbacks. Montana was in the West Coast for pretty much his entire career. Manning had the same OC his entire career. Brady has went from the conservative, run first offense to the offense where his starting receivers were Caldwell (trash) and another no name (trash) to an offense where they spread you out and struck downfield often to an offense where they utilized the double tight end set and mainly worked the short to intermediate passing game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

One more thing about this "system" thing. A lot of people usually credit it with Belichick for which I only have two questions.

1) You know Bill Belichick is a defensive coach, correct?

2) Why wasn't Belichick doing anything before he got Brady? Even ignoring his lack of success in Cleveland outside of 1 year, he went 5-11 in 2000 with Bledsoe (who wasn't a bad QB in the least). I think Belichick is a great coach but there is a lot more reason to believe Brady is the bigger reason for NE's success than he is.

Sorry for derailing this thread. But I've never understood the "product of the system" argument. Brady's offensive systems have changed a hell of a lot more than they have for most Hall of Fame quarterbacks. Montana was in the West Coast for pretty much his entire career. Manning had the same OC his entire career. Brady has went from the conservative, run first offense to the offense where his starting receivers were Caldwell (trash) and another no name (trash) to an offense where they spread you out and struck downfield often to an offense where they utilized the double tight end set and mainly worked the short to intermediate passing game.

lil tidbit on Aaron Rodgers... Flynn stepped in 2 times and Basically outperformed Rodgers over a 2 game span. This lends to system talk.. and the Matt Cassel thing in NEgood and now KCterribad kinda debunks your Brady theory... though I agree with you just putting that out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

After last years debacle you could make a case for Beason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Honestly think our D would have still been bad just not as bad with him. DL has to improve from last year.

Having said that, is it possible that losing our NT was more harmful than our MLB? You may say I'm crazy but I think so and Edwards never even played a down for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Anderson looked good because hes back in Chud's offense. He looked good there in Clevland but once they parted ways Anderson sucked. Thats why im worried about Cam once Chud leaves.

Hopefully it had to do more with the type of offense in Anderson's case rather than Chud himself. It seems like this type of Offense is what Rivera wants in Carolina, so im hopeful for Cam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites