9 wins in his last 24 games. Call Canton. (You seriously think Stafford is right behind Manning for MVP!?! C'mon TPaul. Mike Thomas just called... He thinks you're going a little too far.). "When" is the important thing. Putting the cart before the horse so to speak here.That's all strictly your opinion.
I think there could be 7 or 8 playing at the same time given the crop we have right now. Brady, Manning and Brees are locks. Aaron Rodgers is probably in that group as well. This is as good of group of QBs as has ever played together.
As for Stafford he's the most statistically profound QB through his first 50 starts (or whatever milestone he just passed) and fastest to 15,000 yards. When the playoff wins and a Super Bowl come he'll be a slam dunk.
I don't see my statement as any more laughable than you trying you damnedest not to buy into the hype. Stafford is delivering wins man, stop being so resistant and enjoy it. We're entering November in the driver's seat for a playoff spot, and if it wasn't for Manning we'd be discussing Stafford as a front-runner for league MVP this season.
9 wins in his last 24 games. Call Canton. (You seriously think Stafford is right behind Manning for MVP!?! C'mon TPaul. Mike Thomas just called... He thinks you're going a little too far.). "When" is the important thing. Putting the cart before the horse so to speak here.
I Conveniently left off his 2 first years due to injury.
As well it fucking should be.Btw Boondocks Saints is one of my favorite movies ever.
Yeah.... I noticed. (We cut him a lot of slack around here)
Who would be behind Manning at MVP(at this point in the season) though? Brees? Yeah, he's delivering great stuff right now. Rodgers? Ehhh, no. Smith? No, that defense sure fucking helps. I can't see anyone on Seattle standing out, more of a team effort. Kaep? Nope. Luck? Possibly. Brady? As much as he's sucked this year, he has helped his team be 6-2 without any real established playmakers.9 wins in his last 24 games. Call Canton. (You seriously think Stafford is right behind Manning for MVP!?! C'mon TPaul. Mike Thomas just called... He thinks you're going a little too far.). "When" is the important thing. Putting the cart before the horse so to speak here.
I was stoked when I heard it was coming out. It was fuckin garbage though.
I know you like the kid too. At times though it would seem your his worst critic. Where we show understanding or cut him slack as you say, you fail to do so.
Maybe he falls somewhere In between?
Who would be behind Manning at MVP(at this point in the season) though? Brees? Yeah, he's delivering great stuff right now. Rodgers? Ehhh, no. Smith? No, that defense sure fucking helps. I can't see anyone on Seattle standing out, more of a team effort. Kaep? Nope. Luck? Possibly. Brady? As much as he's sucked this year, he has helped his team be 6-2 without any real established playmakers.
No running back is worthy of the MVP this year so behind Manning I'd put Brees, Brady, and Stafford/Luck.
The reason I tied Luck and Stafford is b/c both have been very good, but while everyone is starting to praise that Indy D, our D has actually happeend to play big in a few games. They actually kept us in that game Sunday before it became a shootout in the 4th.
So while he isn't immediately behind Manning, a case could be made for him right up there(at this point in the season). What if Manning gets hurt Sunday for the rest of the year? Stafford, with his continuing good play would sure as shit get some talks.
There's no way I can get behind Kitna and Brady being reminiscent. Especially with the Pats being 6-2 with total garbage on offense aside from TB and Gronk for a game. Kitna couldn't win with CJ. (Reached the 4,000 yard mark though, which is but one example of why I don't care about passing yardage as an indicator of much of anything). I like the effort in your rant though JDW.Smitty-
I think Luck will be a top 5 QB. I he was a no brainer and is a great heir apparent for P. Manning in Indy. I do not think he has the upside of P. Manning as he is in the conversation for best 5 ever. Although Manning has had the good fortune of alway having really good Wrs.
Today right now I am happy with Stafford and he has 4 year experience and is just a few years older than Luck, RG3, and any NFC West QB that one may add to the conversation.
IMO, If Stafford was on the Broncos this season they have the same record! The NFL is currently littered with good but very few great QBs.
Ryan without top wideouts looks like Jay Cutler without Brandon Marshall.
Brady without good WRs looks a lot like John Kitna.
Luck has had great WR but now without Wayne I am interested in seeing what he can do. He may exposed as a Stafford light.
Ginger boy in Cinncy lacks consistency. Last night he didn't look so great. That has been Bengal fans complaint many wanted him gone going into this season.
Jake Locker may be realizing his potential but again Stafford hands down over him.
RG3 will be only as good as his legs hold out and no way no how do I want a read option QB. You have to factor in injuries.
Wilson & Keprenick don't look so dominating this year and if with the 49ers or Seahawks have to throw to win I don't like their chances.
Pryor is a joke! Geno Smith floats balls all day long.
Wheedon = looking for new job in 2014!
Cutler is good but you can't ignore he has high probability to melt down or get injured. Big arm with bad decision making has been his issues.
Ponder? See Wheedon.
Romo? Great fantasy QB! But the next big game he single handily wins will be his first.
My rambling point is in the current NFL and going forward I would say Stafford is elite. But his status isn't set in stone like Manning. He probably leap frogs Matt Ryan.
I mentioned the convenient part due to the fact that it isn't really fair to say he has only played three years. He was injured his first two though, so I don't factor those seasons in when I am evaluating his career. Granted, he did get some valuable experience through those years.
With what I have seen of him over that period of time I think he is damn good and is proving that he can play at an elite level. One of the things that keep me from putting him up there with the greats of this era is sample size and W/L record. Winning has got to be factored in IMO when determining the difference between great and elite. I think/hope the winning will come. Until then, you wont hear me say he's elite.
I mentioned the convenient part due to the fact that it isn't really fair to say he has only played three years. He was injured his first two though, so I don't factor those seasons in when I am evaluating his career. Granted, he did get some valuable experience through those years.
With what I have seen of him over that period of time I think he is damn good and is proving that he can play at an elite level. One of the things that keep me from putting him up there with the greats of this era is sample size and W/L record. Winning has got to be factored in IMO when determining the difference between great and elite. I think/hope the winning will come. Until then, you wont hear me say he's elite.
Love your second paragraph. Wish I was capable of paragraphs. But Im not. (My boss hates my guys today btw. I told him I started playing Candy Crush, he didn't buy it)