What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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!

Trent Dilfer (1 Viewer)

Sweetcan

Footballguy
Just curious to hear what people's thought's are on Trent Dilfer being an analyst. I was put over the edge today when listening to Dilfer talk about Vick. He talked about how Vick should sign on a team with a hall-of-fame QB and re-learn the game by sitting the bench and watching.... do the "Steve Young" by holding a clipboard and watching Joe Montana for 3 years with SF......As Trent referenced it...........

WHAT????

 
He continues his ability to be adequate in whatever role he takes. Maybe he can take over for New York aka Tiffany Pollard as well.

 
Just curious to hear what people's thought's are on Trent Dilfer being an analyst. I was put over the edge today when listening to Dilfer talk about Vick. He talked about how Vick should sign on a team with a hall-of-fame QB and re-learn the game by sitting the bench and watching.... do the "Steve Young" by holding a clipboard and watching Joe Montana for 3 years with SF......As Trent referenced it...........WHAT????
Not sure what the issue here is? Steve Young took over San Francisco in 1991 at age 30. Vick is 29.Vick was a barely adequate passing QB before he went to jail. He'll have been away from football for two years and is going to have to re-adjust to the speed of the game and get back into condition as it is already. Why not have him sit behind a veteran QB, maybe relearn some throwing mechanics, and then get onto the field as a QB who can still scramble but is a much more refined passer as a result? Don't forget that Vick has been fragile in the past because of his scrambling. Sooner or later, he won't be running as he once used to and if he can't learn to throw, his usefulness will have vanished.I doubt Dilfer was saying Vick should sit for 3 years but anybody who followed Steve Young knows that he dialed down the scrambling a lot around the mid 1990's when he realized he couldn't run that way forever.Even current QBs like Donovan McNabb and Steve McNair dialed down their running and became more of a pocket QB as their careers continued.
 
Just curious to hear what people's thought's are on Trent Dilfer being an analyst. I was put over the edge today when listening to Dilfer talk about Vick. He talked about how Vick should sign on a team with a hall-of-fame QB and re-learn the game by sitting the bench and watching.... do the "Steve Young" by holding a clipboard and watching Joe Montana for 3 years with SF......As Trent referenced it...........WHAT????
I think it would lengthen Vick's career.As others have already implied...as Vick stands now, he is absolutely done in the NFL as soon as his ability to run is diminished. His only hope of sustaining a long career is to develop into a heady pocket passer.If your point is that Vick simply lacks the intelligence to develop that aspect of his game and if you are correct in that assessment, then what Dilfer advocates would be career suicide since he'd be wasting some of his athletic years trying to become that which he can never attain.But if you think Vick can develop into a smart, precision pocket passer, what Dilfer advocates isn't a horrible idea. I think it's possible Vick was never forced to sit and learn the ropes. And if he was never held accountable for that, it would be really easy to just give that sort of thing half an ear and keep on relying on your athleticism, which you don't have to think about, during the games. Atlanta tried to tutor him during the offseasons, but I never really saw much development.
 
There has been talk (simply from the fans and sports writers; not from anyone relevant) that Vick would be a good fit in New England. Imagine an offense with Brady and Vick in the backfield together, with Moss screaming down the field and Welker underneath... I have no idea how any defense would be able to contain something like that, even if they knew it was coming.

 
There has been talk (simply from the fans and sports writers; not from anyone relevant) that Vick would be a good fit in New England. Imagine an offense with Brady and Vick in the backfield together, with Moss screaming down the field and Welker underneath... I have no idea how any defense would be able to contain something like that, even if they knew it was coming.
Put Vick in the backfield as a RB? You must not want to see Brady play 16 games this season either.
 
Just curious to hear what people's thought's are on Trent Dilfer being an analyst. I was put over the edge today when listening to Dilfer talk about Vick. He talked about how Vick should sign on a team with a hall-of-fame QB and re-learn the game by sitting the bench and watching.... do the "Steve Young" by holding a clipboard and watching Joe Montana for 3 years with SF......As Trent referenced it...........

WHAT????
Not sure what the issue here is? Steve Young took over San Francisco in 1991 at age 30. Vick is 29.Vick was a barely adequate passing QB before he went to jail. He'll have been away from football for two years and is going to have to re-adjust to the speed of the game and get back into condition as it is already. Why not have him sit behind a veteran QB, maybe relearn some throwing mechanics, and then get onto the field as a QB who can still scramble but is a much more refined passer as a result? Don't forget that Vick has been fragile in the past because of his scrambling. Sooner or later, he won't be running as he once used to and if he can't learn to throw, his usefulness will have vanished.

I doubt Dilfer was saying Vick should sit for 3 years but anybody who followed Steve Young knows that he dialed down the scrambling a lot around the mid 1990's when he realized he couldn't run that way forever.

Even current QBs like Donovan McNabb and Steve McNair dialed down their running and became more of a pocket QB as their careers continued.
Trent Dilfer, Worthy of being an analyst?

Easily.

Funny thing is, he crushes Young in the booth as an analyst.
:rolleyes: x2
 
As a 49er fan I enjoyed having him on the team... in the beginning. He brought with him a bunch of knowledge and appeared to be the great mentor and tudor. Then he had to play and lost all credibility in my opinion, I am tired of hearing him tell everyone how it is on ESPN, same goes for Schlerith, Schlerith is the most self righteous guy on the tube, can't stand him. NFLN owns!

 
With the "talent" of guys like Emmitt Smith, Deon Sanders, Shannon Sharpe and Michael Irvin polluting the airwaves with their nonsensical drivel, I'm surprised that their is enough vitriol towards Dilfer to warrant a thread.

 
:sigh: The best players are usually not the best analysts. In fact imo the best analysts are non top players or players who didn't even make the top level of the profession.

 
Dilfer is alright but I don't understand why Tim Hasselbeck is there. Actually the only football analysts on ESPN that are any good are:

Marcellus Wiley

Jaws (loves him)

That's pretty much it (I know I forgot someone though). I'm just glad Salisbury is gone.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
:sigh: The best players are usually not the best analysts. In fact imo the best analysts are non top players or players who didn't even make the top level of the profession.
I think Marshall Faulk and Rod Woodson are two guys who made the transiton from top player to reporter pretty well but there are a lot who stunk too. Eric Dickerson was pretty sad. :goodposting:
 
:sigh: The best players are usually not the best analysts. In fact imo the best analysts are non top players or players who didn't even make the top level of the profession.
I think Marshall Faulk and Rod Woodson are two guys who made the transiton from top player to reporter pretty well but there are a lot who stunk too. Eric Dickerson was pretty sad. :thumbdown:
I do like Woodson but not so much FaulkTo be fair I also like Aikman a lot and I hate cowboys liking Woodson is not a homer thing
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think dilfer is alright....

The real question is do we need to have 15-20 minutes of sportscenter devoted to Vick getting out of jail?

I remember when sportscenter used to be an hour of sports highlights instead of an hour of:

"Right now we've got our TacoBell-Legal analyst Roger Cossak in the Budweiser hotseat to answer a sixpack of questions about who should be on the LegalZoom! Mount Rushmore of Athletes with legal problems"

 
Multiple Scores said:
As a 49er fan I enjoyed having him on the team... in the beginning. He brought with him a bunch of knowledge and appeared to be the great mentor and tudor. Then he had to play and lost all credibility in my opinion, I am tired of hearing him tell everyone how it is on ESPN, same goes for Schlerith, Schlerith is the most self righteous guy on the tube, can't stand him. NFLN owns!
No disrespect, but I couldn't disagree with this post anymore.I think both Dilfer and Schlereth are some of the better announcers on ESPN. Might not be saying much, but still.
 
Being an analyst is a different occupation from being a player. Just because you were a great player doesn't mean you can translate your abilities to spoken word. Tom Brady is clutch, has a decent arm, and a great offensive line, but how does any of those things make you a better analyst. I think Dilfer is a better analyst than he was a player.

 
Normally I think Dilfer is an excellent analyst, but he's off the mark here. First, Vick doesn't have time to sit for 3 years.

And second, Vick is no Steve Young.

 
Just curious to hear what people's thought's are on Trent Dilfer being an analyst. I was put over the edge today when listening to Dilfer talk about Vick. He talked about how Vick should sign on a team with a hall-of-fame QB and re-learn the game by sitting the bench and watching.... do the "Steve Young" by holding a clipboard and watching Joe Montana for 3 years with SF......As Trent referenced it...........WHAT????
Dilfer in little over one year is already one of the best in the business. He will only get better.
 
I think Dilfer is solid on the tube. He is there for his opinion as a former player and appears to give honest answers. Doesn't shy away from giving negative opinions of any player he feels warrants it. I think we'll be seeing Dilfer around for a while.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top