NFL Picks

This week's picks were too easy which is why there should be a lot of upsets. I picked all the favs but I'm keeping my money in my pockets.

THIS is why Michael Vick, or anyone who plays like him, cannot be a great quarterback. It's just impossible to stay on the field over time with those monsters banging away at you.

marbleheadmaui wrote:

THIS is why Michael Vick, or anyone who plays like him, cannot be a great quarterback. It's just impossible to stay on the field over time with those monsters banging away at you.

Me and Wolf said Vick would be hurt and on the sideline come week 7....but really that isn't a bold prediction by any means. It was just a matter of time.

Players who have been injured on the field playing football cannot play great? Okay.

GDPofDRC wrote:

Players who have been injured on the field playing football cannot play great? Okay.

They cant stay on the field, therefore cannot play at all!

Well I agree with yall then. Any football player ever injured in the game has no right to be called anything other than bad.

GDPofDRC wrote:

Well I agree with yall then. Any football player ever injured in the game has no right to be called anything other than bad.

I couldn't agree more.

Wow. Someone obviously put alot of thought into completely missing the point here. Think we'll ever see Jevon Kearse in the Hall of Fame? Bob Sanders maybe? These guys will be lucky to ever get to Canton simply because while they played great when healthy, that "when healthy" wasn't often enough. To call someone a great they have to have played consistantly.

To call someone a great player they have to have done only one thing, play great. I didn't try hard at all to determine that.

Rashaun Woods HOF.

GDPofDRC wrote:

To call someone a great player they have to have done only one thing, play great. I didn't try hard at all to determine that.

Durability is a key factor for determining great players. Reggie Bush might be the next Barry Sanders but we'll never know since his recurring injuries likely won't allow him to play that much longer.

Great careers take durability. Being able to play great requires the ability to play great.

GDPofDRC wrote:

Well I agree with yall then. Any football player ever injured in the game has no right to be called anything other than bad.

LOL, if only that was something anyone had actually said.

GDPofDRC wrote:

Great careers take durability. Being able to play great requires the ability to play great.

I don't think that's right. Being able to do something great REPEATEDLY is an essential element of greatness. Many players can make one or two great plays.

There are no players with one or two great plays being talked about today though.

LudoCain wrote:

Wow. Someone obviously put alot of thought into completely missing the point here. Think we'll ever see Jevon Kearse in the Hall of Fame? Bob Sanders maybe? These guys will be lucky to ever get to Canton simply because while they played great when healthy, that "when healthy" wasn't often enough. To call someone a great they have to have played consistantly.

Pretty basic concept right?

GDPofDRC wrote:

There are no players with one or two great plays being talked about today though.

I don't get your view. My intial claim specifically said great QB's gotta be able to stay on the field over time. Do you actually contest that?

To have a great career your correct. It's no requisite to playing great though.

GDPofDRC wrote:

To have a great career your correct. It's no requisite to playing great though.

Playing great you define as what exactly? Is there NO time or durablity accomplishment required? I mean tens of thousands of players have made great plays and thousands have had great games and hundreds, maybe thousands have had great seasons. You want to water the term down that much? Does ONE great play do it? ONE game? If not, how many and why?

I mean what is greatness if not making a single great play time after time, game after game, season after season? One cannot do that from the sideline.

There is no rule. You see someone play great, you decide, the choice is unique. I could see someone play exceptionally only to be injured and never play again. That wouldn't eliminate what they have done from being great. Does it make qualify them for HOF status or anything like it, no, but great in some instances is about what you do, not how long you do it.

GDPofDRC wrote:

There is no rule. You see someone play great, you decide, the choice is unique. I could see someone play exceptionally only to be injured and never play again. That wouldn't eliminate what they have done from being great. Does it make qualify them for HOF status or anything like it, no, but great in some instances is about what you do, not how long you do it.

Nah, doing something once or over a short period of time is merely demonstrating potential. ESPECIALLY in football and ESPECIALLY at QB to earn the title great you gotta stay on the field (it is of course a minimum condtion only). Otherwise you're gonna say Clint Longley was great.

Your construction means there are possibly thousands of great NFL football players playing this year alone. It robs the word great of any distinctive meaning.

I'm out.

I guess you could say Darrel Kyle wasn't a great pitcher, or Bo Jackson wasn't a great athlete, Steve Moore, Munson, Gale Sayers, Freddy Lane, Len Bias, etc... Time doesn't bind all great things.

Those guys you named are phenoms, and footnotes, of greatness. That is marbles point. It stands to reason that an argument has been created just now in this thread over a concept that really a compromise if your two positions. How many of those guys are household names? Bo Jackson and Gale Sayers?

You don't have to have a great career to be a great player and visa versa. The distinction between being a great athlete and having a great career as an athlete is where I'm going. What does a guy do when he plays . Great isn't limited to the culmination of how long or what you haven't done when. In many instances is what you have done. Getting injured or killed means you only cannot continue to accomplish great things but takes nothing away from what has been done.

Mike is a fucking idiot and a pos, an extremely lucky one at that given his knack for displaying the shortcomings of his attitude and lifestyle. I dislike him and feel he is getting opportunities others would not because of his abilities and not for any atonement on his part, but I do not dislike him for the way he plays ball. What he has done after taking a snap from center in his career has been great, not every single play, but well enough times for me to consider him a great football player already. Will he be a hall of famer, I don't know, I don't think so. You were right in predicting kevin would be back. Injury is greater than a good or bad player, no way around it most of the time. I could very well see this situation work out just like it did in week 3. If Kev puts out some great efforts like Mike did he can take his job right back, the move would be equally justifiable. They will trade vick if Kev sustains.