Are You Ready for Some FOOTBALL! - Week 14

[-Jrabbit]

The guy seems to get 30 (fantasy) points a week no matter who they play and no matter how many guys are keying on him.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So they are not winning because of the leadership of Johnson.

Well, actually I'd say the leadership of Johnson IS helping to lead them to victory. Johnson isn't throwing tons of INTs like Culpepper did. He's calm, cool, collected and not making many mistakes. That kind of veteran leadership is essential in this run. If they still had Culpepper, they may have won 1 of those last 5.

The team seems very different after Johnson took over. He's not making silly mistakes and thus is allowing the team to win.

[Sava]

that's known as "managing the game"

if you want to see a QB who "leads his team to victory", try maybe Peyton Manning or Carson Palmer

[Imran Siddiqui]

Most people consider 'managing the game' to be 'leadership'

[snoopy369]

If the two of you ever meet in the same room ... please let me know ahead of time, so I can bring a video camera.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Most people consider 'managing the game' to be 'leadership'

yes...

most people are also morons

these are the same people that call in Chicago sports radio and say Kyle Orton is a great quarterback


"managing the game" or not screwing up is fine if you have a good defense... or a dominating defense like the Bears... but that does not mean that a QB is leading the team to victory...

but the kind of QB that will lead a team to victory is a Peyton Manning or Carson Palmer...

Johnson did this today... 256 yards and 2 TD's

but the last 4 games before this he was just managing the game... he did not lead them to victory in those games... anyone who thinks that he did is a moron and doesn't know **** about football

[Sava]

it's just like saying "BOBBY WADE HAS LED THE BEARS TO 8 WINS IN A ROW AS PUNT RETURNER"


the teams in question were winning despite the performances of the respective players

[Imran Siddiqui]

Managing the game is leading the team. There was obviously a huge change when Culpepper got hurt and Johnson came in. It was the addition of veteran leadership. How can you assert with anywhere near a straight face that a QB that manages a game very well isn't leadiing a team?

the teams in question were winning despite the performances of the respective players

Because the Vikes were winning before Brad Johnson started?

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Managing the game is leading the team. There was obviously a huge change when Culpepper got hurt and Johnson came in. It was the addition of veteran leadership. How can you assert with anywhere near a straight face that a QB that manages a game very well isn't leadiing a team?

No it's not. It's just not screwing up so that you keep the team in a position to win the game. I already broke the games down individually. Why are you even bothering to argue. You have already been pwned. You don't have a leg to stand on.

Because the Vikes were winning before Brad Johnson started?

This is irrelevant. They are not winning because of Johnson (except for today's game). They are winning IN SPITE OF HIM.

Culpepper was completely awful. Like worst in the league bad.

Johnson is mediocre... and even with today's performance, he's only averaging 187 yards per game.

You call 187 yards per game leading a team to victory?

I've already broken the last 4 of 5 Vikings victories down. They did not win because of Johnson. He just didn't screw up.

That's not leadership. That's game management.

Maybe if Johnson was throwing for 250+ yards and 2 or more TD's a game, then you would have a case.

[Sava]

Did Trent Dilfer lead the Ravens to their Super Bowl victory in 2000?

[Imran Siddiqui]

That's not leadership. That's game management.

Same thing.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Same thing.

No. It's not.

"Not screwing up" is not leadership Imran.


Well, maybe for you it is. But I have higher standards.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Sava
Did Trent Dilfer lead the Ravens to their Super Bowl victory in 2000?

If the Ravens stuck with Tony Banks, they most likely would never have tasted the SuperBowl. Dilfer's managment of the team was very good and ensure them that title. So yes, I think it is safe to say that his leadership was integral to their championship... especially after the Ravens had lost 3 in a row before he took over for good.

[snoopy369]

In other news ... Tomlinson is injured :horror: Not serious, but still ...

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-chargers-tomlinson

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Sava
"Not screwing up" is not leadership Imran.

The NFL is a hard league. "Not screwing up" is not an easy thing to master. QBs that don't make mistakes are valuable commodities and, by their leadership, make teams better.

Another good example is Byron Leftwich. The Jags are like 21st in the league in passing yards, but Leftwich's management of the game is integral in their success.