I Was impressed!!!

[DBUCHANON101]

Originally Posted by roth74va

Are you saying his performance solidified his spot on the team? I dont think he played well at all, and I dont see the "growth" from last year, outside of his feet. His arm is average at best, and his mechanics are still horrible. He isnt making good reads, the INT wasnt even close, and for the second week in a row thats a redzone turnover. Ultimately, I think its gonna have alot to do with how Daniel plays next week.

Also.......did I mention I HATE "gunslingers"!!! You can have the Favre/Romo/Brennan types, give me a game manager that doesnt turn the ball over every single game. Combined with a good running game, and a solid defense....thats the combination for a great team IMO.

Yeah man damn those Kurt Warner,Tom Brady,Brett Favre and Peyton Manning types. Them and their stupid Super Bowl rings.
Not many Game managers win titles. Dilfer and Johnson are the exception but defenses like they had dont come along every season.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by DBUCHANON101

[/B]

Yeah man damn those Kurt Warner,Tom Brady,Brett Favre and Peyton Manning types. Them and their stupid Super Bowl rings.
Not many Game managers win titles. Dilfer and Johnson are the exception but defenses like they had dont come along every season.

I can't speak for roth74va but for me, Brady, Manning, and arguably Warner are definitely NOT gunslingers. If you watch them, they are careful with the ball and avoid taking stupid Favre-like chances with the ball.

The playing styles of Brady and Manning are very different from the playing styles of folks like Favre and Romo. It is only the latter folks that you can put in the category of "gunslinger," that is, folks who are reckless with the ball.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by DBUCHANON101

[/B]

Yeah man damn those Kurt Warner,Tom Brady,Brett Favre and Peyton Manning types. Them and their stupid Super Bowl rings.
Not many Game managers win titles. Dilfer and Johnson are the exception but defenses like they had dont come along every season.

Maybe I have a different definition of Gunslinger, but Manning is the penultimate game manager to me, he directs everything, can throw the long ball, but ultimately doesn't make dumb mistakes. Not sure I would qualify Tom Brady as a "gunslinger" either.

For me a gunslinger is personified in Favre, Romo has some of it too. A qb who thinks he can get the ball inbetween those 2-4 bad guys, and has the arm to back it up, most of the time. The problem is for every Favre, or even Romo who can back it up a dozen wannabees fail out because their INT/TD ratio is a killer.

I definitely don't want a gunslinger, but I would take Manning or Brady.

[irish]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Maybe I have a different definition of Gunslinger, but Manning is the penultimate game manager to me, he directs everything, can throw the long ball, but ultimately doesn't make dumb mistakes. Not sure I would qualify Tom Brady as a "gunslinger" either.

For me a gunslinger is personified in Favre, Romo has some of it too. A qb who thinks he can get the ball inbetween those 2-4 bad guys, and has the arm to back it up, most of the time. The problem is for every Favre, or even Romo who can back it up a dozen wannabees fail out because their INT/TD ratio is a killer.

I definitely don't want a gunslinger, but I would take Manning or Brady.

So who do you think is the ultimate game manager?

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by irish

So who do you think is the ultimate game manager?

Not sure really, i just like the word penultimate, sounds cool :cool-smil

[irish]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Not sure really, i just like the word penultimate, sounds cool :cool-smil

Ok, penultimate means the one before the ultimate (the penultimate lap is the next to last lap) and IMO Peyton Manning is the ultimate game manager not the penultimate.

[dgack]

Originally Posted by irish

So who do you think is the ultimate game manager?

Roethlisberger, Pennington, Delhomme are all guys who fit this bill, IMO. Solid QB's who put their team in positions to win, know when to make plays and when NOT to try to force plays, but are not going to "take over the game" like a Peyton Manning or Drew Brees.

I might even put McNabb in this category these days.

Being a gunslinger QB gets you on SportsCenter and to the top of fantasy football positional rankings, but doesn't guarantee Super Bowl rings. Favre is one of the undisputed all-time gunslingers, and owns how many NFL passing records, but owns just as many Super Bowl rings as Mark Rypien. Coincidence?

Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are not gunslingers. They are elite, well-rounded QBs whose physical gifts are exceeded only by their decision making skills.

It's pretty easy to look at a Brett Favre or Kurt Warner and find ample evidence of poor decision-making, though. High risk, high reward.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Maybe I have a different definition of Gunslinger, but Manning is the penultimate game manager to me, he directs everything, can throw the long ball, but ultimately doesn't make dumb mistakes. Not sure I would qualify Tom Brady as a "gunslinger" either.

For me a gunslinger is personified in Favre, Romo has some of it too. A qb who thinks he can get the ball inbetween those 2-4 bad guys, and has the arm to back it up, most of the time. The problem is for every Favre, or even Romo who can back it up a dozen wannabees fail out because their INT/TD ratio is a killer.

I definitely don't want a gunslinger, but I would take Manning or Brady.

Well put.

[roth74va]

Originally Posted by DBUCHANON101

[/B]

Yeah man damn those Kurt Warner,Tom Brady,Brett Favre and Peyton Manning types. Them and their stupid Super Bowl rings.
Not many Game managers win titles. Dilfer and Johnson are the exception but defenses like they had dont come along every season.

When I said "gunslinger" in reference to Colt, I mentioned Favre/Romo. Favre being the career interception leader, and notoriously risky with ball, he is the "gunslinger" I think of first and foremost. And for all the success he had statistically, he only has 1 ring, for now. Romo maybe not as much, but I still see a bit of "gunslinger" in him as well. Kurt Warner I might put in that group, even though Im aware he did have a nice run last year(Fitz and Anquan didnt help at all ). And even though he had an incredible game(31/43 377yds 3tds), he did have the one interception that Harrison returned for the TD. BTW, Steelers 27 Cardinals 23 so that one play had a huge outcome on the game, especially since it was returned from the Steeler 1yd line. He had a great run, but eventually taking risks will get you burned. Its the reason Im happy with Romo being the Cowgirls QB, I dont believe he can put 3-4 consistent games together back to back, especially against the elite teams in the playoffs.

And Id never put Manning/Brady in that group, because I have common sense. Brady two seasons ago 50tds/8ints, I dont think thats being risky. Early Manning was a bit risky(young & dumb), but these two have consistently had twice as many TD's than INT's.

I do love the throwing downfield to take defenders out of the box, this can only help. And maybe Im just an "old timer" like Gibbs...but if you run the ball well, play good defense and take care of the ball, you win games. Turnovers almost always make the little differences in games, and "gunslinger" isnt what I want.

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by roth74va

When I said "gunslinger" in reference to Colt, I mentioned Favre/Romo. Favre being the career interception leader, and notoriously risky with ball, he is the "gunslinger" I think of first and foremost. And for all the success he had statistically, he only has 1 ring, for now. Romo maybe not as much, but I still see a bit of "gunslinger" in him as well. Kurt Warner I might put in that group, even though Im aware he did have a nice run last year(Fitz and Anquan didnt help at all ). And even though he had an incredible game(31/43 377yds 3tds), he did have the one interception that Harrison returned for the TD. BTW, Steelers 27 Cardinals 23 so that one play had a huge outcome on the game, especially since it was returned from the Steeler 1yd line. He had a great run, but eventually taking risks will get you burned. Its the reason Im happy with Romo being the Cowgirls QB, I dont believe he can put 3-4 consistent games together back to back, especially against the elite teams in the playoffs.

And Id never put Manning/Brady in that group, because I have common sense. Brady two seasons ago 50tds/8ints, I dont think thats being risky. Early Manning was a bit risky(young & dumb), but these two have consistently had twice as many TD's than INT's.

I do love the throwing downfield to take defenders out of the box, this can only help. And maybe Im just an "old timer" like Gibbs...but if you run the ball well, play good defense and take care of the ball, you win games. Turnovers almost always make the little differences in games, and "gunslinger" isnt what I want.

One could argue that it was a "gunslinger's" turnover which cost us the game last night.

[roth74va]

Originally Posted by Lotus

One could argue that it was a "gunslinger's" turnover which cost us the game last night.

Agreed, for me it isnt just this one play, but a pattern that Ive seen over the last 3 games. Honestly, I think last season he was pretty aggressive with the ball as well, but they werent getting picked and taken back for 6. Its easy to fall in love with the "gunslinger" mentality(highrisk/highreward), I just dont think that adds up to a consistent winner.

Originally Posted by saden1

A Gun Slinger? Colt? Puh-lease. He can't throw the ball further 40 yards.

Its not the distance he is throwing, its the holes he is trying to hit. And throwing directly through a defender isnt ever gonna work out well.