Breer on Tepper, Rhule and the Panthers quarterback options

[X-Clown]

27 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

I mean I'd be pissed if we traded for Garoppolo but the dude is in large part a winner.  33-14 as a starting QB in the regular season and 4-2 in the postseason.

 Jared Goff was 42-27 in the regular season and 3-3 in the playoffs before last year. Does that make him a winner?

[MasterAwesome]

9 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

 Jared Goff was 42-27 in the regular season and 3-3 in the playoffs before last year. Does that make him a winner?

Umm...yes? Although still 10% lower of a win rate than Garoppolo.  You can debate the threshold for win percentage that would make someone a "winner", but >70% win rate for a starting QB with roughly 50 starts is objectively very strong.  You can criticize him for many things but "not winning" is not one of them.

What is your definition of "winner"?  Seems like yours has nothing to do with win percentage...so kinda directly contradicting the literal definition. 

[TheSpecialJuan]

Good !

[top dawg]

1 hour ago, Carl Spackler said:

Only one thing will keep the Carolina Panthers from picking No. 1 overall in 2023:

Rhule trading the pick this year.

[firefox1234]

1 hour ago, Carl Spackler said:

Only one thing will keep the Carolina Panthers from picking No. 1 overall in 2023:

Rhule trading the pick this year.

You’ve jinxed it. Both you and Rhule will now have blood on your hands.

[Carl Spackler]

13 minutes ago, firefox1234 said:

You’ve jinxed it. Both you and Rhule will now have blood on your hands.

How do you jinx a team that’s so incompetent that they don’t need bad luck?

[X-Clown]

35 minutes ago, MasterAwesome said:

Umm...yes? Although still 10% lower of a win rate than Garoppolo.  You can debate the threshold for win percentage that would make someone a "winner", but >70% win rate for a starting QB with roughly 50 starts is objectively very strong.  You can criticize him for many things but "not winning" is not one of them.

What is your definition of "winner"?  Seems like yours has nothing to do with win percentage...so kinda directly contradicting the literal definition. 

Winning percentage is not a QB stat as much as the talking heads love to quote it. It’s pretty easy to win playoff games if you only need to complete 6 passes and can just hand off and let your defense crush teams into oblivion. My take is that garroppolo (like goff) is nothing special, he’s just played on good teams that take him along for the ride. 

If it meant anything, then why would the Rams trade “winning” quarterback Jared Goff to get “losing” quarterback Matt Stafford?

[MasterAwesome]

39 minutes ago, X-Clown said:

Winning percentage is not a QB stat as much as the talking heads love to quote it. It’s pretty easy to win playoff games if you only need to complete 6 passes and can just hand off and let your defense crush teams into oblivion. My take is that garroppolo (like goff) is nothing special, he’s just played on good teams that take him along for the ride. 

If it meant anything, then why would the Rams trade “winning” quarterback Jared Goff to get “losing” quarterback Matt Stafford?

Dawg...you're arguing against a strawman.  The person I quoted said that Garoppolo couldn't even win with a stacked team and great coaching staff.  I said he was winning...that's it.  Everything else is an argument you're attributing to me that I've never made.  I never stated that he contributed in any meaningful way to his team winning.  Why would I say I'd hate trading for Garoppolo if I thought he was this beast of a QB carrying his team to a 70% win rate?  Your bolded take is also my take, which is why I don't want to trade for him and why I just said "you can criticize him for many things but 'not winning' is not one of them". 

All I did was correct that guy on an incorrect statement.  This is like if someone said "Ryan Santoso does not have a Super Bowl ring" and I corrected him and said "yes actually he does have a Super Bowl ring" and then you came in here and argued "Wow you really think Ryan Santoso is the reason his team won the Super Bowl?!?! From the practice squad?!".

[X-Clown]

9 hours ago, MasterAwesome said:

Dawg...you're arguing against a strawman.  The person I quoted said that Garoppolo couldn't even win with a stacked team and great coaching staff.  I said he was winning...that's it.  Everything else is an argument you're attributing to me that I've never made.  I never stated that he contributed in any meaningful way to his team winning.  Why would I say I'd hate trading for Garoppolo if I thought he was this beast of a QB carrying his team to a 70% win rate?  Your bolded take is also my take, which is why I don't want to trade for him and why I just said "you can criticize him for many things but 'not winning' is not one of them". 

All I did was correct that guy on an incorrect statement.  This is like if someone said "Ryan Santoso does not have a Super Bowl ring" and I corrected him and said "yes actually he does have a Super Bowl ring" and then you came in here and argued "Wow you really think Ryan Santoso is the reason his team won the Super Bowl?!?! From the practice squad?!".

I skipped over his post, and just read yours. My bad.