Agree Gronk is a beast and should be considered a #1 when healthy. But he's not a receiver.I'm with you until you could only count 1 legit #1 WR. Guys like Gronk, Edelman, and Welker put up enormous numbers, even if the weren't what is typically considered a #1 WR.
And the good ones, ALWAYS make others around him better, such as Dan Marino did with quite a few WRs during his tenure.
Agreed....You could put Sammy on our 99 RAMS GSOT(instead of Warner) and we would have never seen the playoffs!
Agree Gronk is a beast and should be considered a #1 when healthy. But he's not a receiver.
Edelman a 7th rounder and Welker released by the Chargers, used primarily as a ST guy on Mia. Mia tried going the cheap route and got their pocket picked by NE. Bottom line the majority of WRs on NE have been made by a BB system and playing with the GOAT QB of all-time.
You mean the guy that had the same winning percentage with the Rams that Sammy did.Lol you guys are crazy. Even Smed's Austin Davis would have been an all pro with that talent around him.
This is about the stupidest comment I've ever read on tHoopla!Sorry guys I love Warner but put him on the 2010 Rams and it's 7 wins at best. No HOF's on that team.
This is about the stupidest comment I've ever read on tHoopla!
Warner, a HOFer QB, the guy with probably the three greatest QB 4th quarter performances in Super Bowl history (No doubt no other QB has had three 4th quarter performances that equal his three) would do no better than your favorite QB's rookie year?
Hell, Bradford himself nearly had more than 7 wins himself with a couple of close losses and you want to feed the Rams boards that
one of the best QB's to ever wear horns is 7 wins at best!
That is near blasphemy on these boards and should get you kicked off for even suggesting such rubbish. Luckily for you, that is only my opinion and not the standard on the SportsHoopla boards.
Warner likely takes that 2010 team to no worse than 12 wins & a Division Title, considering all the close losses, and the state of the NFC West in 2010.
This is about the stupidest comment I've ever read on tHoopla!
Warner, a HOFer QB, the guy with probably the three greatest QB 4th quarter performances in Super Bowl history (No doubt no other QB has had three 4th quarter performances that equal his three) would do no better than your favorite QB's rookie year?
Hell, Bradford himself nearly had more than 7 wins himself with a couple of close losses and you want to feed the Rams boards that one of the best QB's to ever wear horns is 7 wins at best!
That is near blasphemy on these boards and should get you kicked off for even suggesting such rubbish. Luckily for you, that is only my opinion and not the standard on the SportsHoopla boards.
Warner likely takes that 2010 team to no worse than 12 wins & a Division Title, considering all the close losses, and the state of the NFC West in 2010.
2010 could have been a magic year for the Rams if they had a tenured QB.Love it Vita!!!!
We were talking about 2010 anyway.12 wins huh Vita? He only had 13 in 99 with how many HOF's on offense? 4. I don't think it's as far fetched as you think.
We were talking about 2010 anyway.
Here is an example of Warner's play in 2010....
Kurt Warner threw five touchdowns and completed 29 of 33 passes for 379 yards in a 51–45 victory over the Green Bay Packers. The game had the highest combined total score in NFL playoff history. Warner became one of the very few quarterbacks in NFL history to throw more touchdowns (5) than incompletions (4) in a playoff game. Warner finished the game with the second highest quarterback rating in NFL playoff history with a rating of 154.1.
I won't ask the obvious playoff question, but has Sam ever won a game where his opponent put up 45 or more?
Umm, dude it was you who compared them in the first place and now you are saying I can't compare them realistically?I don't think you can compare realistically. Bradford's never had an all pro WR certainly not 4 HOF's on offense at the same time. I'm just saying I think a lot of QB's would have had great succces on those teams.
Umm, dude it was you who compared them in the first place and now you are saying I can't compare them realistically?
Warner took two different teams to the Superbowl, had three of the greatest QB performances in Super Bowl history will be inducted into the NFL HOF this year and he couldn't win 5 more games when 4 were lost by an average of less than 2 points?
Warner was a gamer QB and gamer QB's win close games like that. It's ROY QB's who lose those close games like that, so yes I think Warner wins those 4 games, wins the same 7 that Sam won, and he also wins the season finally vs SF if the playoff scenario called for Warner to even play in to get to 12 wins in 2010.
By the way, who are those 4 HOF offensive players who played with Warner?
My goodness just imaging Mark Clayton and Danny Amendola with Warner .... with Stephen Jackson in the backfield and that defense? A healthy Kurt might have had those three flirting with the HOF had he had a few years to play with those cats......
Now tell me about all the HOFers on the Cardinals...Bruce, Holt, Pace, Faulk. And don't say it they ALL will be in someday. Not to mention the entire OL were studs. They had a great slot WR and TE. Their was no weakness.
Now tell me about the HOF on the Cardinals...
BTW - They are in the convo just like Fitz is and like Clayton, and Jackson would be if they got to play with Warner.
It was said earlier in this thread that good QB's bring up the level of play of those around them...
And as good as you want to paint the Rams OL Kurt took many a hit as he threw for the completion, that was the 'Gamer' quality in him. Kurt made is offensive line look good.