[Samari]

Originally Posted by wingdarkness

^Actually the bags were pre-90's before the Dome Patrol, lol OK maybe a couple of Ditka years, but those don't count...

Go watch a movie from your childhood that you thought was great, only to watch it in your adult mind to see WTF were you thinking...Understand the joy of winning a championship...You just don't understand yet...

Beating the snot out of the Chargers isn't that complicated to comprehend. LMFAO at you still riding the coat tails of the age card. You'd be sunk without it.

Again, do historians that studied the Civil War have no idea what they are talking about because they weren't alive to witness the event? By your logic I guess so.

Please, just go sit in the corner.

Originally Posted by wingdarkness

Oooooh $hit! You'd be a first round Cornerback with back-peddling like this...

You've been bested dude, it's easier to just concede every once in a while...You looking kinda bad out here...

So owners can't be idiot fans? Or just plain idiots for that matter?

Okay? And you'd be a bust with your tendency trip over your words, or rather not provide impact at all with them. #god awful wisecrack from wingdarkness

And I don't see how I'm looking bad here, so I guess that notion carries zero weight, except from your stance.

Originally Posted by wingdarkness

That is dumb...You've gone on like an endless conveyer belt about how much the rules have changed to help passing, and you're cool with an offense that says, WR's? Meh? I remember Andrew Luck throwing it to Wideouts too bro...

Where did I say I was cool with the offensive production from the 49ers? Me being cool with it or not has NOTHING to do with the rules that have been changed over the years. 49ers had their top two receivers injured for the majority of the season, and by the time the postseason came they were down to one starter and the next man up was a 5th string receiver.

As for the offensive set up, it's what happened at Stanford whether you like it or not. Andrew Luck threw to receivers. Sure he did. So did Alex Smith. What the heck is your point? That doesn't mean receivers are going to have monster stats in that offense necessarily. Especially when the offense is designed to set up the run. And who the hell was a phenom in the receiving department at Stanford? Doug Baldwin? Here is a nice blub from ESPN regarding Stanford's wide receiving corps this past season:

The regular season is over, which means grades are due. Here's part four of the ongoing regular-season report card for Stanford.

WIDE RECEIVERS

Grade: C+

Summary: A grade of "C" means average. Griff Whalen is the main reason they get the plus, but for the most part, Stanford's wide receivers were simply average.

With the tight ends Stanford has and the lack of double-coverage/safety help over the top and on the outside, the receivers should have been more productive this season.

Quarterback Andrew Luck completed 70 percent of his passes this season, but only 62.9 percent to his wide receivers. They were targeted 175 times, but had just 110 catches. Also, the receivers accounted for just eight of Luck's passing touchdowns -- the tight ends had 18 and the running backs/fullbacks accounted for nine. Even though 47 percent of Luck's passes went to wide receivers, they didn't deliver the bang for the buck -- accounting for just 23 percent of Luck's scores.

And chances are Luck's interception total would drop from nine to only four or five had his receivers not dropped passes or missed routes.

After a slow start through the first few games, Whalen emerged as the top wide receiver option. The former walk-on played his heart out, turning in a very respectable 49 catches for 664 yards and four touchdowns. He played beyond his scouting report and skill set. He wasn't the lone bright spot, but he was the most consistent player from about Week 4 on to make contributions -- be it on critical third downs or simply running clean routes.

Even before his injury, Chris Owusu was not having the season that he or David Shaw had hoped for. Give him credit for not being afraid to take the tough shots and go over the middle, but that ultimately led to his multiple concussions and putting him on the shelf for the remaining three and a half games (probably the bowl game as well).

In Owusu's absence, true freshman Ty Montgomery emerged and is bubbling with potential. He had some drops -- but I'm less critical of true freshmen than upper-classmen when it comes to drops. He was targeted 27 times by Luck and caught 17 balls for 230 yards and a touchdown. He really made an impact in the USC game -- catching five of six balls for 87 yards.

Backups: Not much from them this season. Montgomery -- when he was in a back-up role, had just two catches on four targets for 13 yards. Drew Terrell caught eight balls (12 targets) for 81 yards and a score. Jamal-Rashad Patterson had three catches for 38 yards -- but none thrown by Luck. Corey Gatewood had one catch before moving back over to defense.

http://espn.go.com/blog/stanford-foo...wide-receivers

But no, offensive design and injuries can't possibly effect a passing offense. Nah.

Originally Posted by wingdarkness

Jesus Lightswitch, what don't you get? the rules have changed, and in the context of those changed rules Brees has been killing it, yet other Dome QB's haven't put up his numbers in the same time span, especially and without question in-terms of accuracy...

He's throwing thread through needle-holes you HATER (in like 10 straight National Tv games or whatever he's going off)...It's a cyclical argument and you suck at it...Keep saying skewed this and skewed that, every era is skewed in some fashion because the game has evolved in every era...You're just griping about the ones that happened in your prime...

It's like when Joe Namath--you know what forget it, dichotomy based arguments are lost on you...Like talking to my Aunt Sylvia over here...

You know how many outside games I've seen Brees throw ridiculous pinpoint passes that other QBs in this league can only dream of? Remember that outside game he played in called the Superbowl where he went 32-39, most completions ever? He doesn't play in 8 windy/frozen weather games a year so you'll never know how consistent he would do, but guess what, that's not his or anyones' fault...You play for who you play for, and you either excel or you don't...Keep bringing that butterknife to a laser fight...


C'mon thread posters, somebody judge this debate and determine a winner...I know sifting through the sarcasm and pot-shots are tuff, but there's a clear winner here...It's the peanut gallery's turn, DECIDE!

Yes Brees has been killing with the rule changes. This was never about that. This was about your implication that no one has ever thrown the rock as well as Brees in a dome. I think your Alzheimer's is kicking up again.

As for outside conditions, it's not just limited to Brees like you are trying to make it. Before I was talking about dome teams struggling in the playoffs, dome TEAMS. Maybe back in your day they called it clubs? Anyways, I never even hinted that Brees didn't play well outside in January. I'm talking about dome teams outside in the cold. Brees has has two good games in the last two playoff matches outside. And the Saints have still lost. Dome TEAMS haven't fared well consistently outside. Don't get this one twisted too.

Oh and I didn't say that other eras weren't effected either. But to use reference to Brees and his performances and say "no one has ever had 70% this, or 400 yard this" and all of your other courtroom case documents full of numbers and claim the crown without question (compared to others of historical lore) is kind of absurd. It's not surprising Brees blew the doors off the record books. We just had three 5,000 yard passers this season. That should tell you the sign of the times. Was Montana a worse passer than Brees because he didn't have a single 4,000 yard passing season in a 16 game schedule? And Brees has been better than Peyton Manning head to toe since Brees has played in a dome because he threw the ball more times? I think most non-bias would say "no" to that. Or rather, there wouldn't be a consensus that Brees would take the crown.

This was never even about Brees in the first place. But if someone is going to push the "he's the best best to ever play in a dome card" then I gotzzzz to step in. Can't let the common bystander who reads that get played like that.

Yeah I'm a hater. Great counterargument/FAIL.