Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Why is it still a bad thing to call a QB a “game manager “??


recceice
 Share

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Martin said:

I think of a game manager as someone that excels within the system but maybe doesn’t have a lot to offer when things break down, a complementary player is missing etc. e.g. when Debo Samuel was down, Purdy didn’t look as good, when Cam was missing someone he just stepped up his game. Game managers are also great at avoiding mistakes, they usually don’t cost their team a win. So it is not a bad thing.

I agree with this and think this is what Cam was trying to say.. 
Game Manager is great in his system and great in a good situation..

Game Changer is a player you can drop on any system on any team and he elevate what is around him..

  • Pie 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/18/2023 at 9:00 PM, recceice said:

Why is Cam getting so much hate from talking heads for calling certain QBS game managers??? 
Why is it still seen as a Scarlett letter when reality most of the league QBs are game managers??

If you're trying to say Bryce is a game manager, he's not even that.

People are trying to label guys like Purdy as a Game Manager and I have a feeling it's solely because they see certain characteristics of his appearance and how he plays the game, dishing the rock, and they say "manager". Looking at his stats, he has a good case for MVP.

Give me the Purdy mold of Game Manager all day.

  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/21/2023 at 8:11 AM, pantherclaw said:

Well, these QBs that Cam is labeling game managers have better stats than Cam had.  

See this is the nerd way out of this and not what the actual point is.. Also the stats conversation should be way more objective if that’s all you’re going to go by..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2023 at 3:54 PM, CPcavedweller said:

If you're trying to say Bryce is a game manager, he's not even that.

People are trying to label guys like Purdy as a Game Manager and I have a feeling it's solely because they see certain characteristics of his appearance and how he plays the game, dishing the rock, and they say "manager". Looking at his stats, he has a good case for MVP.

Give me the Purdy mold of Game Manager all day.

When did BY even get brought up in this topic?? 
Why did you feel the need to add him in this discussion?? 
He might not be anything but a CFL QB in 2 years who knows but no.. BY was not even a subject matter in this thread..

  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, recceice said:

See this is the nerd way out of this and not what the actual point is.. Also the stats conversation should be way more objective if that’s all you’re going to go by..

You calling me a nerd? That's cute.  

They consider Brady the GOAT, and he is the very definition of a game manager. 

Edited by pantherclaw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, pantherclaw said:

You calling me a nerd? That's cute.  

They consider Brady the GOAT, and he is the very definition of a game manager. 

Brady was a game manager for the 1st 2 superbowls the pats won .. and it took Brady having that Wes Welker, Randy Moss all time season to prove differently.. Hw had to go to another team and win to prove differently.. He showed that he could be a carrier of a team and not just a passenger… That’s the point we are giving guys these titles before they proved it… Brady had to prove Purdy, Tua, and Dak should have to as well.. 

 

And your they have better stats thing is funny and a nerd way to debate without using context… None of these guys with better stats were asked to carry a team every year.. None were asked to be the QB, FB, Short yardage RB, and running game coordinator..

None of your better stat guys are asked to cover up for our BAD Oline choices and our bad moves in FA and draft when it came to WR.. None of them are asked to please Cam make a play so we actually have a functioning offense.. Please Cam be our offense while we spend most our resources on defense… When those guys can be that then let me know..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, recceice said:

Brady was a game manager for the 1st 2 superbowls the pats won .. and it took Brady having that Wes Welker, Randy Moss all time season to prove differently.. Hw had to go to another team and win to prove differently.. He showed that he could be a carrier of a team and not just a passenger… That’s the point we are giving guys these titles before they proved it… Brady had to prove Purdy, Tua, and Dak should have to as well.. 

 

And your they have better stats thing is funny and a nerd way to debate without using context… None of these guys with better stats were asked to carry a team every year.. None were asked to be the QB, FB, Short yardage RB, and running game coordinator..

None of your better stat guys are asked to cover up for our BAD Oline choices and our bad moves in FA and draft when it came to WR.. None of them are asked to please Cam make a play so we actually have a functioning offense.. Please Cam be our offense while we spend most our resources on defense… When those guys can be that then let me know..

As long as your taking what I am saying out context, which is what you're accusing me of doing, you're not even worth listening too. 

Just because I made a true statement doesn't mean anything that your insinuating.   Perhaps you should get to know my true opinions on the best to play the position.   Instead, you're taking a true statement that I made with zero context, and you assuming I give a rates ass about whom thinks what of a game manager or not. 

I'm not going to sit here and debate Brady with anybody.  I know how people view him.  Good, bad, otherwise. 

 Bottom line is stats are for losers 

What makes a great QB isn't just his ability to play the position, but his ability to lead men. Getting them to play above their weight class, regardless of level of talent around him.  

Take you assuming ignorant ass and leave me the fug alone since you can't even understand a statement is just a statement. It's not what I believe or otherwise.   

Get to know the person before you you open up your mouth and remove all doubt of your ignorance. 

Edited by pantherclaw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Game manager is whatever anyone wants it to mean.

To me, it has become a nice way to say they’re a tier B QB. They have some sort of intelligence and physical attributes where they can be pretty good or maybe even play great for a few seasons, until they regress back to winning 40-60% of their games. they win, but they’re not necessarily gamers. They need top level talent, especially a DUDE, to be successful. Be it either RB, WR, or TE.  They’re 1 and done in the playoffs. They have ‘winability’ until the national audience tunes in. 

C league are career backups, usually because of the mental side, but sometimes physical.  They have some tools , but always a glaring weakness which is their demise in critical moments. They’ll beat a few bad teams on your schedule and crash message board servers. 

A players are always a threat regardless of who is around them. They make all pro even if their team sucks. They make borderline practice squad players look like 2nd rounders and get them PAID on contract #2. Nobody takes a play off due to this reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • LOL... Yet again proving you can't look below anything than what you see on the surface Mock drafts ARE NOT draft grades They are what people think will happen.  They are mocking teams taking QB's in the top 5 of the draft because that's just historically how drafts go regardless of the grades on the QBs.  Almost every draft expert, even those mocking QB's going high, have said time and time again that none of these QB's actually grade out as those type of picks. This is again, where I say you don't like to actually read what I have to say, because I already explained it. 2022 the exact same thing happened, mock drafts had guys like Pickett and Willis going in the Top 5 because that's just what teams usually do, but GM's listened to their prospect grades and knew they weren't worth taking that high, so they didn't. It's not to say QB's won't go that high this year, but it's to say that they aren't graded out as elite QB prospects.  Mock drafts 
    • Have you seen the mock drafts lately?   Most of them have us taking a QB. Just because you aren't high on these QBs doesn't mean the Panthers or other teams aren't.   If you want me to be real I just think you a Tmac homer and all you care about is us drafting him. It's why you get so defensive when people mention other prospects.   Be open to other people's ideas. Nobody in this thread is saying anything bad about your boy Tmac. 
    • Oh good lord Interest doesn't mean interest in making a bad trade to take the player, that's why I had such a long post, to accurately describe why those are two different things, but you don't like to listen to that stuff.  Being interested in a player doesn't live in a vacuum. It's very simple... there isn't a #1 draft pick type of grade on any of these QB's, if there was, we'd just take them.  You can't bluff a pick everyone knows you won't make, and trying to trade the pick is the CLEAR signal that you're not taking the QB. Just because the Raiders would have interest, doesn't mean they're going to bail us out of a situation we don't want to be in, they'd be smart about it and just sit put, let us take a non QB as we'd be telling the world we're not taking one just by trying to trade the pick, and then they'd take him at #2 (either with their own pick or by trading less to get that one). Oh, and your point of "if nobody is willing to make the trade, you obviously just take the best QB" is quite literally the dumbest thing I've ever read on here. If nobody is willing to trade up to take the QB, then it's OBVIOUS that the QB isn't worth taking with that pick, so OBVIOUSLY taking the best QB there is just OBVIOUSLY stupid and a bad pick. The moral of it is if there is a QB worth taking, we're taking them and not making the trade.  If there isn't a QB worth taking there, nobody is trading up to #1 to take one, we just showed the NFL how bad of an idea that is 2 years ago, it's really not hard to see. You keep making up this mythical situation where there is a QB who has shown to be worth trading up to #1 for and we'll be able to leverage that into a trade.  But we're the most QB needy team in the league, if we end up with the #1 pick, either we are taking a QB #1 or no QB is going #1 unless we get VERY lucky and two teams in the Top 5 fall in love with one prospect and we can play them off each other and fleece one of them. But again, I can't see that happening, as if there was a QB worthy of that, we're just taking him ourselves.
×
×
  • Create New...