Keep Texans Talk Google Ad Free!
Venmo Tip Jar | Paypal Tip Jar
Thanks for your support! 🍺😎👍

I have a question for you guys regarding "Game Managers"

Mangler

Mangler

Toro de España
I've seen quite a few posters predicting Osweiler to be nothing more than a game manager. Fair enough, I guess. I think (and hope) he'll be a little more than that.

Anyway, I was wondering what you guys considered Matt Schaub? Before his mental breakdown. In his prime, did you guys consider him a game manager? And, what exactly do you guys mean when you use that term? Did you consider Hoyer (pre wildcard) a game manager?

I just want to know what everyone's definition of game manager is, and examples of some, in your opinion.

Thank you for your time....
 
2009-11 Schaub was top 10 qb in the league no doubt in my mind. Alot of people will disagree with me but he was smart and made quick decisions (even with his noodle arm). In 2010, him and foster singlehandedly kept our team slightly competitive despite our historically crappy defense. In 2011, Texans finally figured everything out. Schaub was playing elite level and defense was monstrous. I still think to this day we would've won the super bowl in 2011 if it wasn't for Albert Haynesworth.

So if Osweiler is anything close to 09-11 Schaub, I will be thrilled. I do think that some of Schaub's success can be attributed to Gary Kubiak but who knows. If OB can use Osweiler like Kubes used Schaub, we'll be alright.
 
Schaub absolutely was a game manager. He wasn't winning the game on his athleticism, improvisation or rocket arm. He won because he was the smartest guy on the field, ran Kubiak's offense to perfection, and had the best play-action in the league. (Not to mention a running game and TE's to throw to) A game manager isn't always a Dilfer that is playing not to lose or confined to a very limited role.
 
To me all QB's are "game managers" to some extent and the term "game manager" is probably misused to some degree. But, I think when most people use that term they are probably referring to a QB, much like Schaub, that is unable, in most games, to take it over and dominate the game with his physical and mental abilities, and will his team to win. The "game manager" doesn't have Cam Newton physical abilities or Peyton Manning/Tom Brady mental abilities. "Game manager's" have to play within their limited abilities and manage the game around them. Schaub, for example, was the anti-Cam Newton. He had to learn to play within his physical limitations and manage the game accordingly. Kube's system, with a healthy Foster, helped him do this. It wasn't until his physical abilities left him and Foster was injured that he couldn't do it anymore. I disagree that it was a "mental breakdown." It was purely physical on Schaub's part. JMHO.
 
I consider guys like Alex Smith to be the stereotypical "game managers". Trent Dilfer was another one when in the right situation. These are the guys that will lose the game for you if you ask them to do too much. However they can be effective if they are in the right situation. Strong defense, running game, etc. Basically you ask them to "manage the game" and don't turn the ball over. However these are not the guys that will take a game over and win it for you.

Having a "game manager" is just a step above having bad QB IMO. "He's not very good, however he doesn't totally suck. He can manage the game OK".

I think the good Schaub was better than a "game manager" for those couple of seasons. Then he went to a bad QB which was worse than a "game manager".

The Texans aren't paying Osweiler like a "game manager", so they obviously see something in him that's much more than that. He's being paid like a super star Pro Bowler which I personally think is insane and reeks of desperation however I will reserve judgement until after the season.
 
Mangler said:
I've seen quite a few posters predicting Osweiler to be nothing more than a game manager. Fair enough, I guess. I think (and hope) he'll be a little more than that.

Anyway, I was wondering what you guys considered Matt Schaub? Before his mental breakdown. In his prime, did you guys consider him a game manager? And, what exactly do you guys mean when you use that term? Did you consider Hoyer (pre wildcard) a game manager?

I just want to know what everyone's definition of game manager is, and examples of some, in your opinion.

Thank you for your time....
Click to expand...
Thank you. Your questions are always pertinent.
To me, a game manager is a QB who doesn't have much physical ability but gets lucky some of the time. He gives himself a chance to get lucky by avoiding disasters, and thus leaving the field with his team in a position to win the game.
I thought Schaub could have been one if he'd been more willing to go against the coaches when needed. In Jacksonville, on the his penultimate play of the game, he showed a little of this by running for positive yardage and stepping out of bounds. I thought he had room to run for 7 or 8 yards and step out of bounds on the next play, which would have put us in range to kick a winning FG as time ran out. Instead, a hopeless short completion over the middle, fumble, and Jag hail Mary pass... Thinking about is still makes me cuss.
Let's hope Oz will be a game manager. He isn't likely to become a superstar.
 
Hookem Horns said:
I consider guys like Alex Smith to be the stereotypical "game managers". Trent Dilfer was another one when in the right situation. These are the guys that will lose the game for you if you ask them to do too much. However they can be effective if they are in the right situation. Strong defense, running game, etc. Basically you ask them to "manage the game" and don't turn the ball over. However these are not the guys that will take a game over and win it for you.

Having a "game manager" is just a step above having bad QB IMO. "He's not very good, however he doesn't totally suck. He can manage the game OK".

I think the good Schaub was better than a "game manager" for those couple of seasons. Then he went to a bad QB which was worse than a "game manager".

The Texans aren't paying Osweiler like a "game manager", so they obviously see something in him that's much more than that. He's being paid like a super star Pro Bowler which I personally think is insane and reeks of desperation however I will reserve judgement until after the season.
Click to expand...

Brock is #15 on the 2016 NFL QB pay scale and $500k per year from being #19. That includes rookie contracts of Bortles, Carr, Bridgewater, Winston and Luck. All of whom are going to score huge contracts once off the rookie scale. That's not super star Pro Bowler level. There are at least 8 guys making ~$3-4 million PER YEAR more than he does. The market overvalues QB's right now, but he is far from being paid anywhere close to the top of the league.
 
Is there just not a pocket of play to comfortably label a QB better than a game manager but not quite elite?
 
sandman said:
Schaub absolutely was a game manager. He wasn't winning the game on his athleticism, improvisation or rocket arm. He won because he was the smartest guy on the field, ran Kubiak's offense to perfection, and had the best play-action in the league. (Not to mention a running game and TE's to throw to) A game manager isn't always a Dilfer that is playing not to lose or confined to a very limited role.
Click to expand...

Depends on "game manager" definition of course, but IMO game managers don't lead the league in passing.
 
redwhiteANDblue said:
2009-11 Schaub was top 10 qb in the league no doubt in my mind. Alot of people will disagree with me but he was smart and made quick decisions (even with his noodle arm). In 2010, him and foster singlehandedly kept our team slightly competitive despite our historically crappy defense. In 2011, Texans finally figured everything out. Schaub was playing elite level and defense was monstrous. I still think to this day we would've won the super bowl in 2011 if it wasn't for Albert Haynesworth.

So if Osweiler is anything close to 09-11 Schaub, I will be thrilled. I do think that some of Schaub's success can be attributed to Gary Kubiak but who knows. If OB can use Osweiler like Kubes used Schaub, we'll be alright.
Click to expand...
Schaub had a brief window where he was a very good QB, then the wheels fell off quickly. For that brief period I think Shaub was more than a game manager. Hoyer is a game manager at best. He's been demoted to assistant to the regional manager.

If OB got that much out of Hoyer I can only hope that Brock being more athletic can be more than Schaub was and hopefully for a longer period. The sample size of Brock's work is too small to know or even to have any strong opinion at least for me.
 
For me, the definition of a game manager is a QB who just takes what the defense is giving him, minimizing mistakes, and staying within the gameplan. A game manager plays smart football. A game manager will not go off schedule and make big plays. A game manager will not throw into coverage and challenge the defense.

A game manager doesn't carry the team. A game manager needs lots of talent around him because he's not going to do it himself.

Schaub's strength was that game manager mentality. But without a defense to back him up, that sort of mentality won't win games. Schaub led the league in passing because he was surrounded by the right tools and he just distributed the ball to the guy who was going to make the most yards on that play. You can do a lot of damage that way if you have a good offense.

I hope Os is more than that, but in a pinch, I'd take it. It would be much better than what we've had the past few years. I'd prefer a guy who's going to challenge the defense, throw into coverage occasionally and trust his guys to make the play, a guy who can scramble and improvise when things go wrong.
 
Mangler said:
I've seen quite a few posters predicting Osweiler to be nothing more than a game manager. Fair enough, I guess. I think (and hope) he'll be a little more than that.

Anyway, I was wondering what you guys considered Matt Schaub? Before his mental breakdown. In his prime, did you guys consider him a game manager? And, what exactly do you guys mean when you use that term? Did you consider Hoyer (pre wildcard) a game manager?

I just want to know what everyone's definition of game manager is, and examples of some, in your opinion.

Thank you for your time....
Click to expand...
Schaub had a physical breakdown that led, imo, to a loss of confidence. I don't consider pre-lisfranc Schaub to be a game manager. He had the ability to win games with his arm.

To me, Alex Smith is the epitome of a game manager. He's asked to run a fairly simple offense, limit mistakes and turnovers, allowing the defense to keep the team in games.
 
redwhiteANDblue said:
2009-11 Schaub was top 10 qb in the league no doubt in my mind. Alot of people will disagree with me but he was smart and made quick decisions (even with his noodle arm). In 2010, him and foster singlehandedly kept our team slightly competitive despite our historically crappy defense. In 2011, Texans finally figured everything out. Schaub was playing elite level and defense was monstrous. I still think to this day we would've won the super bowl in 2011 if it wasn't for Albert Haynesworth.

So if Osweiler is anything close to 09-11 Schaub, I will be thrilled. I do think that some of Schaub's success can be attributed to Gary Kubiak but who knows. If OB can use Osweiler like Kubes used Schaub, we'll be alright.
Click to expand...
I agree 100% and if Schaub is an example of a game manager, according to some posters, then I don't see a reason to not be optimistic. Man, 2011 sure was something! Like I said before, I have a good feeling about Brock, but I'm not going to be mad if it takes him a couple of seasons to take us all the way! Hopefully this is our year, though!
 
Insideop said:
To me all QB's are "game managers" to some extent and the term "game manager" is probably misused to some degree. But, I think when most people use that term they are probably referring to a QB, much like Schaub, that is unable, in most games, to take it over and dominate the game with his physical and mental abilities, and will his team to win. The "game manager" doesn't have Cam Newton physical abilities or Peyton Manning/Tom Brady mental abilities. "Game manager's" have to play within their limited abilities and manage the game around them. Schaub, for example, was the anti-Cam Newton. He had to learn to play within his physical limitations and manage the game accordingly. Kube's system, with a healthy Foster, helped him do this. It wasn't until his physical abilities left him and Foster was injured that he couldn't do it anymore. I disagree that it was a "mental breakdown." It was purely physical on Schaub's part. JMHO.
Click to expand...
This is on the money. IMHO a guy is either a "game manager" who plays within the offense and uses the tools around him to the best of his particular ability/skill set or he's a gunslinger who will throw into the teeth of the defense as opposed to taking the "smart/safe" play.
I think Manning (in his prime) and Brady were/are uber-game managers. Because of their superior smarts they use the tools around them with the highest level of effectiveness.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Insideop in that all QBs are game managers. Some are that plus a bag of tricks (i.e. big arms, or good at play action, or mobile, or clutch at two minute drills, or able to read/trick defenses, etc).

Typically, though, the term is used for guys like Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson (two QBs that won championships by managing the offense, low turnover rates, and relied on a great defenses and above average running games).

I personally think Osweiler will be better than the typical game manager, but that's just a hunch on my part since we do not have enough on the guy to really know what he will be in the end. The key to success with Brock is protecting him, and if they do that, I think he's got the intelligence, leadership qualities, clutch factor, and has the arm to be a really good QB.
 
Mangler said:
I've seen quite a few posters predicting Osweiler to be nothing more than a game manager. Fair enough, I guess. I think (and hope) he'll be a little more than that.

Anyway, I was wondering what you guys considered Matt Schaub? Before his mental breakdown. In his prime, did you guys consider him a game manager? And, what exactly do you guys mean when you use that term? Did you consider Hoyer (pre wildcard) a game manager?

I just want to know what everyone's definition of game manager is, and examples of some, in your opinion.

Thank you for your time....
Click to expand...


It isn't rocket science.

It is a guy that basically is trusted to make safe plays where the team mainly allows them to hand the ball off and let the running game and the defense to most of the heavy lifting if they can help it. They'll let the game managers types try to sling it all over the field if they have to in order to win, but that is never the goal for those types of QB's. It is the type of QB that can't carry a team to a lot of wins by just being a great offensive QB. Guys like Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, and Manning this season were all game mangers. Fitzpatrick and Hoyer were as well for the Texans this year.
 
Sure, all QBs have to manage the game, but I think to be called a"game manager" you are a QB who you don't necessarily depend on to throw the team on his shoulders and go win a football game on a consistent basis, but consistently don't make stupid mistakes to lose them. Alex Smith has been mentioned and he's a perfect example. Andy Dalton, Ryan Fitzpatrick, I think Bridgewater is a "game manager"....so far.

They're not the elites, Manning, Brees, Brady, Rodgers, etc, and they're not the riverboat gamblers like Rivers or Cutler.
 
"game manager" is a label that fans/media are too quick to slap on a player (generally speaking). It tends to be used in an insulting or condescending manner to make a reader or listener think a specific way about a player. To me, what Texecutioner described, are just QB's that I would describe as just not good. I hear a lot of people call Andy Dalton and Alex Smith a game manager but those guys I would call "decent".

If I'm reading published media that uses that phrase repeatedly I tend to think the author is being lazy in their analysis. The label usually varies so much with the actual quality of player that it's almost impossible to really know what the person using the term actually means.
 
Speedy said:
Sure, all QBs have to manage the game, but I think to be called a"game manager" you are a QB who you don't necessarily depend on to throw the team on his shoulders and go win a football game on a consistent basis, but consistently don't make stupid mistakes to lose them. Alex Smith has been mentioned and he's a perfect example. Andy Dalton, Ryan Fitzpatrick, I think Bridgewater is a "game manager"....so far.

They're not the elites, Manning, Brees, Brady, Rodgers, etc, and they're not the riverboat gamblers like Rivers or Cutler.
Click to expand...
I generally agree, but Rodgers can be a gunslinger. He's just a lot better than Rivers or Cutler.
 
b0ng said:
"game manager" is a label that fans/media are too quick to slap on a player (generally speaking). It tends to be used in an insulting or condescending manner to make a reader or listener think a specific way about a player. To me, what Texecutioner described, are just QB's that I would describe as just not good. I hear a lot of people call Andy Dalton and Alex Smith a game manager but those guys I would call "decent".

If I'm reading published media that uses that phrase repeatedly I tend to think the author is being lazy in their analysis. The label usually varies so much with the actual quality of player that it's almost impossible to really know what the person using the term actually means.
Click to expand...

This is so true! By the way, this past season I wished we had a "game manager" like Dalton or Alex Smith in our team. I was also a little bit jealous of the Bengals (McCarron) and Broncos' (Osweiler) because their backups were better than our starting QB. Osweiler, specially! He won me over in those 7 starts, specially after he beat the Patriots in OT after being behind. I feel that he has shown flashes of being clutch...

Anyway, I too have noticed that the term "game manager" is used to somewhat discredit a QB for wins. Kinda like Osweiler is discredited of the Broncos even making it to the playoffs, which makes absolutely ZERO sense to me!
 
To me game manager refers to 2 things:

1- the qb doesn't have a superior qb trait that sets him apart.

Not a great arm. Not overly athletic. Not freakishly accurate. Not a superior command of the offense. Not profoundly astute at reading defenses. Can't make off schedule plays consistently. So and so forth.

2- it's a label based on expectations coaches or fans may have at the time. No one here would call cam Newton a game manager because of all his freakish athletic ability - but in his first handful of games what did the coaches expect?

Manage the game. Get us in the right offense. Avoid stupid mistakes like penalties. Avoid turnovers. So on and so forth. As he progressed expectations increased on par with his athletic ability and history of success with off schedule plays.

I'm gonna say a name and some of you may taste bile. David Carr was an athletic guy with a plus arm. Year one all i really wanted was a game manager. The rest should follow as he progressed. He never did. Why is up for debate. By his last year here id given up on his athletic ability or his ability to just be a game manager. I would've settled for game manager at that point.

Game manager would likely be an offensive label to most NFL quarterbacks but at the minimum it means you grasp fundamentals and are dependable.

Schaub at his best was a step or 2 ahead of game manager to me. Carr and Hoyer were/are not consistent enough to be game managers. They might have a couple of decent outings here and there but sooner then later they'd lay an egg.

Key terms/phrases

Superior ability
off schedule plays
expectations
consistent
can/cannot win based solely on his performance alone
 
Game Manager means to me, they don't put your team in a position to lose by making stupid mistakes.

They will keep the team in the right offense and on schedule, take what is there without giving anything away.

The anti-Favre qb.
 
The Pencil Neck said:
For me, the definition of a game manager is a QB who just takes what the defense is giving him, minimizing mistakes, and staying within the gameplan. A game manager plays smart football. A game manager will not go off schedule and make big plays. A game manager will not throw into coverage and challenge the defense.

A game manager doesn't carry the team. A game manager needs lots of talent around him because he's not going to do it himself.

Schaub's strength was that game manager mentality. But without a defense to back him up, that sort of mentality won't win games. Schaub led the league in passing because he was surrounded by the right tools and he just distributed the ball to the guy who was going to make the most yards on that play. You can do a lot of damage that way if you have a good offense.

I hope Os is more than that, but in a pinch, I'd take it. It would be much better than what we've had the past few years. I'd prefer a guy who's going to challenge the defense, throw into coverage occasionally and trust his guys to make the play, a guy who can scramble and improvise when things go wrong.
Click to expand...

For the most part, I agree. A game manager takes what the defense gives him. But he'll take shots & throw into coverage when he has to... Ala Alex Smith, Andy Dalton.

I also believe "game manager" is a stage. All QBs are working towards becoming a game manager, is a game manager, or has past that stage.

All defenses make mistakes. Game managers are good at exploiting those mistakes. The guys who are past that stage make defenses make mistakes.

So a game manager is going to win a lot of games, especially if he's on a good team. But once he plays against a good defense... not so much. Tom Brady against the Seahawks defense... Tom's going to win some, Tom's going to lose some. Matt Schaub against the Seahawks D. He might win a game, but most likely not.

Peyton Manning will have a team figured out by halftime. In his prime, he'd have them running in circles.
 
Mangler said:
I agree 100% and if Schaub is an example of a game manager, according to some posters, then I don't see a reason to not be optimistic. Man, 2011 sure was something! Like I said before, I have a good feeling about Brock, but I'm not going to be mad if it takes him a couple of seasons to take us all the way! Hopefully this is our year, though!
Click to expand...

When people are more worried about the WR or the RB, he's a game manager with tools. I know, "it's Andre Johnson" but defenses were more worried about Tom Brady than Randy Moss. They were more worried about Peyton Manning than Marvin Harrison.
 
thunderkyss said:
For the most part, I agree. A game manager takes what the defense gives him. But he'll take shots & throw into coverage when he has to... Ala Alex Smith, Andy Dalton.

I also believe "game manager" is a stage. All QBs are working towards becoming a game manager, is a game manager, or has past that stage.

All defenses make mistakes. Game managers are good at exploiting those mistakes. The guys who are past that stage make defenses make mistakes.

So a game manager is going to win a lot of games, especially if he's on a good team. But once he plays against a good defense... not so much. Tom Brady against the Seahawks defense... Tom's going to win some, Tom's going to lose some. Matt Schaub against the Seahawks D. He might win a game, but most likely not.

Peyton Manning will have a team figured out by halftime. In his prime, he'd have them running in circles.
Click to expand...
You must have missed Super Bowl XXXXVIII. Manning was in his "prime". Brady>Manning in big games. Other than that, I agree with you.
 
DocBar said:
You must have missed Super Bowl XXXXVIII. Manning was in his "prime". Brady>Manning in big games. Other than that, I agree with you.
Click to expand...

I believe the New York Giants did the same to Brady at one time or two.
 
DocBar said:
4-2>2-2...just sayin...Ha!!:D
Click to expand...

How'd this become a Brady vs Manning thing?

I think Bellichick would have won 29 Super Bowls by now if he had Peyton Manning.

But still, both Peyton & Brady have progressed well beyond game manager.
 
thunderkyss said:
How'd this become a Brady vs Manning thing?

I think Bellichick would have won 29 Super Bowls by now if he had Peyton Manning.

But still, both Peyton & Brady have progressed well beyond game manager.
Click to expand...
I'm just yanking your chain. I'm bored at work and this board has been pretty dead this week.
 
thunderkyss said:
I believe the New York Giants did the same to Brady at one time or two.
Click to expand...

Does Brady play defense? Rewatch the ends of both games. Brady had them in position to win. Patriots defense let them down.

The first game, Brady hit Moss wide open in the end zone a touchdown to give New England a 14–10 lead with 2:42 left in the game. Defense failed to get Eli and David Tyree made that amazing helmet catch (this, to me, is still one of the greatest overall plays in SB history for what both Eli and Tyree did on both ends).

The second game, the Pats were up 17-15 when they intentionally let the Giants score a TD. I guess Brady had worked so many miracle comebacks that it was just expected that he could go 80 yards in 0:57 seconds. Got to give the Giants defense some credit.

thunderkyss said:
How'd this become a Brady vs Manning thing?

I think Bellichick would have won 29 Super Bowls by now if he had Peyton Manning.

But still, both Peyton & Brady have progressed well beyond game manager.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. Manning was a choker. Only elite QB to throw two pick sixes in two Super Bowls. Belichick can't fix that.
 
Double Barrel said:
Does Brady play defense? Rewatch the ends of both games. Brady had them in position to win. Patriots defense let them down.

The first game, Brady hit Moss wide open in the end zone a touchdown to give New England a 14–10 lead with 2:42 left in the game. Defense failed to get Eli and David Tyree made that amazing helmet catch (this, to me, is still one of the greatest overall plays in SB history for what both Eli and Tyree did on both ends)..
Click to expand...
I was watching on TV. Pats had just scored to go ahead in the last 3 minutes. I screamed for them to use an onside kick because I knew what would happen otherwise. Second huge mistake was staying in the blitz on NY's subsequent TD. They had blitzed the play before and NY was ready for it. It was just an embarrassment to the coach.
 
Schaub for very much of his career was a game manager. Average QB (passing yards alone don't make him top 10) play without the ability to make game changing plays and lacking the ability to carry a team. Most QBs are game managers. Some are better game managers than others
 
Double Barrel said:
Does Brady play defense? Rewatch the ends of both games. Brady had them in position to win. Patriots defense let them down.
Click to expand...

I am most likely misremembering, but I seem to recall you having a ow opinion of Warren Moon re: the 35-3 debacle. Am I?
 
eriadoc said:
I am most likely misremembering, but I seem to recall you having a ow opinion of Warren Moon re: the 35-3 debacle. Am I?
Click to expand...

I've got mixed emotions about Moon. He was never a big game QB. Never. He was a great regular season QB, but his 3-7 career playoff record speaks for itself.

In the 35-3 game, he had a brilliant first half. Second half, he was a part of the problem, but it was not solely his fault. The offense was not designed to play a ball control game. The refs blew some calls. The Oilers defense had a complete meltdown by blowing a 32 point lead (DC Jim Eddy is probably the person I blame the most for this monumental failure). Moon did throw 2 picks in the second half/OT, iirc. First was not his fault. I think it was Slaughter that should have caught it but let it bounce off his hands to a defender. The second one was just a bad pass. Moon overthrew Givens on the second INT.

Unfortunately, I remember too much about the game because NFLN keeps showing it every year around playoff time. I always get sucked into watching it again and again. Guess I'm a glutton for punishment...or I just miss those old Oilers, even when they let us down.
 
Mangler said:
This is so true! By the way, this past season I wished we had a "game manager" like Dalton or Alex Smith in our team. I was also a little bit jealous of the Bengals (McCarron) and Broncos' (Osweiler) because their backups were better than our starting QB. Osweiler, specially! He won me over in those 7 starts, specially after he beat the Patriots in OT after being behind. I feel that he has shown flashes of being clutch...

Anyway, I too have noticed that the term "game manager" is used to somewhat discredit a QB for wins. Kinda like Osweiler is discredited of the Broncos even making it to the playoffs, which makes absolutely ZERO sense to me!
Click to expand...

Him and Manning both were mainly game managers last season. Whether you want to believe that or not is up to you, but you're going to have to deal with people saying it about the heroics of that season by the team's defense until the end of time.
 
thunderkyss said:
I believe the New York Giants did the same to Brady at one time or two.
Click to expand...

Are you oblivious to history? Manning lost a SB with a pick 6 where he was in the position to win with the last possession of the game against the Saints. He also got demolished from the opening snap of the game against the Seahawks who Brady torched the next season having arguably what was one of the best SB performances of all time winning the MVP. He lost to the NY Giants with his team leading the score where the Patriots defense failed to stop the other team. Unless you think Brady is was a LB the entire time, then what is it that the defense did to him? You mean his "own team's defense?" In Brady's first two SB wins he had the luck of his team having the ball last in those games. You don't blame the QB of the other team when the defense gives up the final score unless that QB played horribly the entire game. That would be like saying Kurt Warner got shackled and shut down against the Steelers all because Big Ben's offense got the ball last and scored on the final drive even though Warner put his team in position to win in the end in their SB. It is a convenient circumstance to ignore.
 
Double Barrel said:
I've got mixed emotions about Moon. He was never a big game QB. Never. He was a great regular season QB, but his 3-7 career playoff record speaks for itself.

In the 35-3 game, he had a brilliant first half. Second half, he was a part of the problem, but it was not solely his fault. The offense was not designed to play a ball control game. The refs blew some calls. The Oilers defense had a complete meltdown by blowing a 32 point lead (DC Jim Eddy is probably the person I blame the most for this monumental failure). Moon did throw 2 picks in the second half/OT, iirc. First was not his fault. I think it was Slaughter that should have caught it but let it bounce off his hands to a defender. The second one was just a bad pass. Moon overthrew Givens on the second INT.

Unfortunately, I remember too much about the game because NFLN keeps showing it every year around playoff time. I always get sucked into watching it again and again. Guess I'm a glutton for punishment...or I just miss those old Oilers, even when they let us down.
Click to expand...

I just fount it funny that you'd defend Brady, saying the defense let him down, after knowing you do put some blame on Moon for that game. While I agree with you about Moon not being a big game QB, I lay the smallest amount of blame on him for that one. If your offense goes out and scores 28 points in the first half and another TD immediately into the 2nd half, the defense should damn well hold it even if the offense goes out for beer and pizza the rest of the game - ESPECIALLY a defense that talented.

I don't think Brady had a very good game that day. People credit the NYG defense, which is great, but it brings it back to topic - all QBs need to manage the game. Even the best QBs can't just go out and win it at will. Even Brady managed only 14 points in that SB.

Also, IMO the prototypical "game manager" QB was Tom Brady that first Super Bowl. He obviously grew into what he is, but people seem to overlook that he wasn't even the best QB on his own team that year.

Rambling thoughts. Carry on. :D
 
Texecutioner said:
He lost to the NY Giants with his team leading the score where the Patriots defense failed to stop the other team.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect more than 14 points when you have Tom Brady at QB for a team that went 18-0 to that point. Yeah, the Pats defense failed to stop the Giants on that particular drive, but they had done pretty well against them the rest of the game. Where was that vaunted offense?
 
eriadoc said:
While I agree with you about Moon not being a big game QB, I lay the smallest amount of blame on him for that one. If your offense goes out and scores 28 points in the first half and another TD immediately into the 2nd half, the defense should damn well hold it even if the offense goes out for beer and pizza the rest of the game - ESPECIALLY a defense that talented.
Click to expand...

Kinda like Brock vs The Steelers? I just love how the Denver defense wasn't held accountable for that loss.
 
eriadoc said:
I just fount it funny that you'd defend Brady, saying the defense let him down, after knowing you do put some blame on Moon for that game. While I agree with you about Moon not being a big game QB, I lay the smallest amount of blame on him for that one. If your offense goes out and scores 28 points in the first half and another TD immediately into the 2nd half, the defense should damn well hold it even if the offense goes out for beer and pizza the rest of the game - ESPECIALLY a defense that talented.

I don't think Brady had a very good game that day. People credit the NYG defense, which is great, but it brings it back to topic - all QBs need to manage the game. Even the best QBs can't just go out and win it at will. Even Brady managed only 14 points in that SB.

Also, IMO the prototypical "game manager" QB was Tom Brady that first Super Bowl. He obviously grew into what he is, but people seem to overlook that he wasn't even the best QB on his own team that year.

Rambling thoughts. Carry on. :D
Click to expand...

Well, Brady had already been proven to be a Captain Comeback by that point in his career. Moon, not so much. As far as I can tell, Moon never led a comeback in a postseason game (there's only three wins, so not much to research).

As far as Brady's first SB, he was riding the bench when the season started. I think he did pretty good for himself that year, all things considered. You also have to remember that Brady led his team with 1:30 left in the Super Bowl game to set up that game winning FG. He marched his team down the field when the experts were expecting them to play for OT. In his first year as a starter, he played more clutch football as a "game manager" than Moon did his entire career.

I like Moon, but he's just not up there with the top elite QBs in my book. Montana or Brady would never let their team lose a 32 point lead in the second half of a playoff game. There is one image of Moon from that Bills game that is etched in my mind. It's Moon, sitting on the bench by himself, sulking. He wasn't trying to really the troops. He wasn't screaming at people for dropping balls or telling the defense to pull its collective head out of its ass. It was him just sitting there, almost pouting. They show that shot in every replay of that game. I anticipate it.

That said, I don't blame Moon for the loss. It was Jim Eddy and that "prevent" defense that lost the game. The bastard went to Dallas after that and got two rings as LB coach. Typical Houston karma.

And I don't really feel like Brady needs defending. His career speaks for itself. He was partly to blame in those games for not putting more points on the board, but c'mon, that Tyree helmet catch? There were 4-5 Patriot defenders that should have sacked Manning before he even threw the ball. And Tyree was double covered and still made the catch! Sometimes you just have to give the other team credit, and also admit that a QB, even a great one, can only do so much.
 
Double Barrel said:
Well, Brady had already been proven to be a Captain Comeback by that point in his career. Moon, not so much. As far as I can tell, Moon never led a comeback in a postseason game (there's only three wins, so not much to research).

As far as Brady's first SB, he was riding the bench when the season started. I think he did pretty good for himself that year, all things considered. You also have to remember that Brady led his team with 1:30 left in the Super Bowl game to set up that game winning FG. He marched his team down the field when the experts were expecting them to play for OT. In his first year as a starter, he played more clutch football as a "game manager" than Moon did his entire career.

I like Moon, but he's just not up there with the top elite QBs in my book. Montana or Brady would never let their team lose a 32 point lead in the second half of a playoff game. There is one image of Moon from that Bills game that is etched in my mind. It's Moon, sitting on the bench by himself, sulking. He wasn't trying to really the troops. He wasn't screaming at people for dropping balls or telling the defense to pull its collective head out of its ass. It was him just sitting there, almost pouting. They show that shot in every replay of that game. I anticipate it.

That said, I don't blame Moon for the loss. It was Jim Eddy and that "prevent" defense that lost the game. The bastard went to Dallas after that and got two rings as LB coach. Typical Houston karma.

And I don't really feel like Brady needs defending. His career speaks for itself. He was partly to blame in those games for not putting more points on the board, but c'mon, that Tyree helmet catch? There were 4-5 Patriot defenders that should have sacked Manning before he even threw the ball. And Tyree was double covered and still made the catch! Sometimes you just have to give the other team credit, and also admit that a QB, even a great one, can only do so much.
Click to expand...

Moon was a HOF choker, Gentleman's club patron.
 
eriadoc said:
I don't think it's unreasonable to expect more than 14 points when you have Tom Brady at QB for a team that went 18-0 to that point. Yeah, the Pats defense failed to stop the Giants on that particular drive, but they had done pretty well against them the rest of the game. Where was that vaunted offense?
Click to expand...

The Giants defense became one of the best defenses of all time once that playoffs started. That D line was unblockable. They were so good, that it literally didn't matter who was in the secondary at all. It was one of the most strange SB runs I've seen. Brady didn't light it up, but he didn't screw his team over in any way either. He had an average game for his standards, but he didn't get the luck of having the ball last in the first game. He had to sit on the sidelines hoping that his D would hold them and Asante Samuel dropped one of the easiest INT's he could have ever been given on that drive right before that big miracle play. Lets not forget what it took to beat that Patriots game in the final few minutes. He got them a score to take the lead, but his defense failed to stop them.

The next game the same thing basically happened and on Brady's last drive before the Giants got the ball Welker dropped that pass that should have been caught which likely would have gotten them a two score lead that the Giants couldn't have came back from. The throw could have been better placed, but it was definitely catchable. Once again, the Pats D couldn't make the key stop.

I don't see how anyone could put those SB losses on Brady or act as if they were some sort of black eye on his career unless they hate the guy and are looking for reasons to denigrate his achievements like Thunderkyss was. And when you actually try to compare that to Manning's pick 6 loss where he could have been the hero and his loss where he got raped by the Seahawks, well it is pretty laughable.
 
Texecutioner said:
I don't see how anyone could put those SB losses on Brady or act as if they were some sort of black eye on his career unless they hate the guy and are looking for reasons to denigrate his achievements like Thunderkyss was.
Click to expand...

Not trying to do that at all, and I guess my point in these posts was lost on everyone. Brady had a subpar game (not even average), especially for that particular season. My point in all that was that even the best QBs have to be game managers at times. I also was making the point that you can't defend Brady in that game for putting up 14 points and then blame Moon for the 35-3 debacle.

But I'm not detracting from Brady at all. I hate the guy (in a sports sense), but there's no dispute he's one of the best 5 QBs ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB
eriadoc said:
Not trying to do that at all, and I guess my point in these posts was lost on everyone. Brady had a subpar game (not even average), especially for that particular season. My point in all that was that even the best QBs have to be game managers at times. I also was making the point that you can't defend Brady in that game for putting up 14 points and then blame Moon for the 35-3 debacle.

But I'm not detracting from Brady at all. I hate the guy (in a sports sense), but there's no dispute he's one of the best 5 QBs ever.
Click to expand...

I disagree that you can't blame Moon in comparison to Brady for a lot of reasons. Moon was always choking in big moments. As a kid I loved him as a QB, but always hated it when we'd get so close and Moon would have big INT games that would hurt the Oilers. It just always seemed to happen. Brady usually shines in big moments and overcomes bad circumstances. He has all types of post season records for single game performances in the playoffs. Him having two sub par games statistically where they lose amongst so many other great post season games, does not all of a sudden make a pattern of Brady. He has the best post season win loss record of all times at 22-9 I think. Moon never could win squat in the playoffs, and had an entire half where he watched the other team's backup QB take away a 32 point lead against us. The worst meltdown in NFL history, and just having to talk about it and replay the events in my head literally makes me sick to my stomach.
 
Texecutioner said:
I disagree that you can't blame Moon in comparison to Brady for a lot of reasons. Moon was always choking in big moments. As a kid I loved him as a QB, but always hated it when we'd get so close and Moon would have big INT games that would hurt the Oilers. It just always seemed to happen. Brady usually shines in big moments and overcomes bad circumstances. He has all types of post season records for single game performances in the playoffs. Him having two sub par games statistically where they lose amongst so many other great post season games, does not all of a sudden make a pattern of Brady. He has the best post season win loss record of all times at 22-9 I think. Moon never could win squat in the playoffs, and had an entire half where he watched the other team's backup QB take away a 32 point lead against us. The worst meltdown in NFL history, and just having to talk about it and replay the events in my head literally makes me sick to my stomach.
Click to expand...

You're talking about body of work ("pattern"), and I'm talking one singular game for each. It's all good though. Unproductive conversation. Moving along.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top