This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Pretty sure they would have with Brees and Fitz.
So you think Philip Rivers and the poor QB play is the reason the Chargers haven't won a Super Bowl? Think again...
AJ probably would of taken Gallery
Chargers beat the Colts in Week 9 of 1997. They lose that game and they get Manning.
Rivers already was the only choce they had. Brees was gone no matter if he got hurt or put up record numbers that last game. IIRC he was franchised for that year and maybe the year before. They couldn't afford to sign him and keep Rivers and no way AJ gets rid of his blockbuster trade/first overall pick. Brees might never have even been given the chance to shine if Rivetrs hadn't held out in camp his rookie year. Brees was shafted with the drafting of a QB before he had a chance to grow in the system and perform well. If they had kept Brees and taken Fitz with that first pick... But AJ Smith wanted to make his mark as GM so he "ended" Brees as a Charger with that pick, it just took two seasons for the death bell to ring. As a Charger fan, I am unhappy that they drafted Rivers over Fitz since an offense with Fitz, Brees, LT and Gates would be polishing two rings already, even without Merriman and Not Clutch Kaeding.
Agree. Rivers is a very good quarterback. Teams need a succession plan, although Chargers seemed to give up a bit too early on Brees. They could not keep both QBs. Biggest mistake was not figuring out a way to get a trade done with Brees.That being said, I think it's the Dolphins that made the bigger mistake on Brees when they went with Culpepper. They've wasted 3 2nd round picks and maybe did ok with Henne. They could have had some sweet WRs with those picks. Maybe Saban would still be there, etc. etc.In the end, there are probably many chances for many teams to 'get' or 'keep' certain players. Hindsight's 20/20.
They traded that pick, allowing them to draft L.Tomlinson AND D.Brees.
and the whole universe pivoted on that game.this HAS to change. fire up the flux capacitor!
Im pretty sure that one did and threw in a #1 pick to boot
And he's do it again, 11 times out of 10.
Really? The Giants and Chargers traded back last week? I didn't see any stories about it...Yes, 5 years ago, lots of GMs would have traded Philip Rivers for Eli Manning. Of course, 5 years ago, they probably would have traded a pair of first rounders for Reggie Bush, too. Despite that, I feel confident in saying that no GM would trade a pair of firsts for Reggie Bush anymore. Just like no GM on the planet would trade Philip Rivers for Eli Manning. While we're at it, no GM on the planet would trade his entire draft for Ricky Williams, either. Yeah, yeah, once upon a time someone would have been that stupid, but since then we've kind of sort of gained some additional information which is kind of sort of relevant and which wouldn't be ignored.
There's always the "Tag and Trade", which is definitely an option (see: Price, Peerless and Cassel, Matt). Also, if the Chargers really felt like they were going to let Brees walk at the end of the year, they could have traded him at the beginning of the year while he was still under contract rather than waiting for the contract to expire (see: Seymour, Richard), although that risks turning that season into a "rebuilding year".Either way, that's all revisionist history. I think the Chargers handled the Brees/Rivers situation very well. Could they have possibly wrested a bit more value out of the situation? Sure, but even as it stands, they wrested far more value than could have possibly been expected. If a basketball player shoots 12 of 15 on 3 pointers, you don't criticize him for not shooting 15 of 15.
Tagging him would have been extremely risky, because it effectively would have given Brees veto power over any trades. (No team would trade for the right to pay him $12 million* for one year. Brees would have had to agree to a long-term contract for a team to trade for him. And Brees could easily have decided to stay in San Diego for $12 million and then become a free agent a year later, rather than signing a long-term contract as part of a trade deal. After all, he said that he wanted to stay in San Diego [as long as he didn't have to take less guaranteed money to do so].)____*I don't remember what tagging him would have cost. Maybe not $12 million. But a lot in any event.
The winners have been the Steelers, Giants, Saints, and to a lesser extent the CArds. The two losers have been the Dolphins and the Chargers.
I'll agree to disagree with you that the Chargers have been losers in the Brees/Rivers situation. It is nothing but unfounded speculation to think that Brees would have helped the Chargers to the Super Bowl where Rivers has not... which is what I assume you are implying would have happened. (If that isn't what you are implying, then you're basically saying they couldn't have won no matter what.)
I agree that it would have been risky. Like I said, while it's possible the Chargers could have wrung a tiny little bit more value out of the Brees/Rivers situation, they had already wrung so much out of it that it is silly to second guess. You don't criticize a guy who just went 12 of 15 on 3 pointers, even if he COULD have technically gone 15 of 15.
Big difference between "could have had" and "scouted him extensively and intended to acquire him".Chargers didn't want Brady. They wanted Manning, Manning and Brees.
Don't know why you keep mentioning Peyton Manning. The Chargers probably also wanted John Elway, Terry Bradshaw, and Troy Aikman... but they didn't have the #1 overall draft pick in those drafts, either.
The Chargers were closer to getting Peyton than the other guys. Change the outcome of ONE GAME in 1997 and the Chargers are drafting 1st overall and taking Manning without question. Can the same be said about San Diego's chances of getting Elway, Bradshaw or Aikman? Were the Chargers drooling over Elway in 1982 when they already had Dan Fouts? No.They wanted Manning badly in 1997, and they came up just short.
I'm sure a Chargers fan would know best, but I could see Brees winning that:2006 Playoff game vs the Pats.2007 playoff vs the Pats.& this year's game vs the Jets.Of course Rivers has those 2007-08 playoff wins vs the Colts. Brees matches up with them pretty well too last time I checked.
Not to mention he was injured at the time. Tagging him could've backfired big-time.
He actually makes a very good point that I hadn't thought of with the compensatory draft pick. It's not like San Diego let Brees walk for nothing. The compensatory pick means they essentially traded him for a 3rd rounder.
From the article:Maurile Tremblay said:
I have to give myself a pat on the back for saying the same thing after the 2004 season:
Maurile Tremblay said:
So he says "let's be totally honest and rational" but then conveniently omits the fact that Flutie was almost as bad as Brees in 2003. Yeah, real honest there. Let's not talk about how terrible their O-line was, or how terrible their defense was. Let's place the blame on Brees.
You're off base here.1. QB rating: Flutie 82.8; Brees 67.5Maurile Tremblay said:So he says "let's be totally honest and rational" but then conveniently omits the fact that Flutie was almost as bad as Brees in 2003. Yeah, real honest there. Let's not talk about how terrible their O-line was, or how terrible their defense was. Let's place the blame on Brees.
Almost as bad as Brees? Flutie was nowhere NEAR as bad as Brees.Flutie threw 175% as many TDs per attempt than Brees. Flutie threw 60% as many INTs per attempt as Brees. Flutie beat Brees in YPA (6.6 to 5.9), AYPA (6.6 to 4.6), NYPA (6.1 to 5.1), and in Chase's favorite stat, ANYPA, Flutie beat Brees by more than TWO FULL YARDS (6.1 to 3.9). Flutie took less sacks (4.6% compared to Brees' 5.6%), had a substantially better QB rating (82.8 to 67.5), had 2 wins in 5 tries compared to Brees' 2 wins in 11 tries, and averaged more yards and more TDs per game passing. And I haven't even gotten to the rushing disparity, yet. Drew Brees had 21 carries for 84 yards and 0 TDs. Flutie had 33 carries for 168 yards and 2 scores. Both players had 4 games with 200+ passing yards, but Brees started 11 games and Flutie started 5.Maurile Tremblay said:So he says "let's be totally honest and rational" but then conveniently omits the fact that Flutie was almost as bad as Brees in 2003. Yeah, real honest there. Let's not talk about how terrible their O-line was, or how terrible their defense was. Let's place the blame on Brees.
Brees was a pure pocket passer on a team with one of the worst O-lines in the league. His game just didn't fit with that. Meanwhile, Flutie was a scrambling QB who was able to adjust to San Diego's flaws. San Diego wrongly assumed that Brees had "regressed", when in fact it was San Diego's O-line that had regressed.
Sour grapes article.Brees is the best quarterback in the NFL and a great GM would have known it.Maurile Tremblay said:
VeryMaurile Tremblay said:
and true"Light years" is an exaggeration. Flutie looked better because he could scramble to avoid the rush. It was a style of play that allowed an inferior team to be competitive with superior opponents, but it wasn't going to work in the long run and San Diego failed to see that.Brees is like Kurt Warner -- give him a good O-line and decent receivers, and he's the best in the league. But force him to scramble and he's mediocre at best.
Brees isn't a bad scrambler. And he did a good job even in 2003 of avoiding sacks. His sack percentage was higher than Flutie's, but still pretty good overall under the circumstances.The offense did fit Flutie better that season. The offensive line was horrible, and as a result, the Chargers generally kept extra guys in to block, often getting just two guys into the pattern. It was not a timing-based offense that spread the field and let the QB pick the open man (which is where Brees excels). It was waiting for David Boston to break open for an instant against a double team and having the QB rifle it in there before the window closed.Brees's arm strength has improved since his surgery. But when he was in San Diego, he was one of the weaker-armed QBs in the league. (Some people say that Philip Rivers has a weak arm. I watched the two of them side by side in practice quite a bit. Rivers had a much stronger arm than Brees in terms of zip.)So the offense at the time just did not fit Brees at all. It fit Flutie better. A lot of people thought Brees stunk back then. My view was, "How can we know? We haven't given him a chance yet." That's why I wanted to draft Robert Gallery.
But you also can't fault AJ Smith for taking a QB in 2004. For one thing, I think drafting for need is overrated, and Smith got the best player in the draft regardless of position. But even based on need, if I was right that it was impossible to know whether Brees was any good (since he hadn't really gotten a chance), then Smith was also right that the Chargers couldn't feel set at QB. Moreover, the competition from Rivers may have been a big factor in Brees's improvement.
Brees isn't a bad scrambler. And he did a good job even in 2003 of avoiding sacks. His sack percentage was higher than Flutie's, but still pretty good overall under the circumstances.The offense did fit Flutie better that season. The offensive line was horrible, and as a result, the Chargers generally kept extra guys in to block, often getting just two guys into the pattern. It was not a timing-based offense that spread the field and let the QB pick the open man (which is where Brees excels). It was waiting for David Boston to break open for an instant against a double team and having the QB rifle it in there before the window closed.Brees's arm strength has improved since his surgery. But when he was in San Diego, he was one of the weaker-armed QBs in the league. (Some people say that Philip Rivers has a weak arm. I watched the two of them side by side in practice quite a bit. Rivers had a much stronger arm than Brees in terms of zip.)So the offense at the time just did not fit Brees at all. It fit Flutie better. A lot of people thought Brees stunk back then. My view was, "How can we know? We haven't given him a chance yet." That's why I wanted to draft Robert Gallery.But you also can't fault AJ Smith for taking a QB in 2004. For one thing, I think drafting for need is overrated, and Smith got the best player in the draft regardless of position. But even based on need, if I was right that it was impossible to know whether Brees was any good (since he hadn't really gotten a chance), then Smith was also right that the Chargers couldn't feel set at QB. Moreover, the competition from Rivers may have been a big factor in Brees's improvement.
