Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Is Stafford a top 5 QB?

brewer228 said:
Yea thats why i always take records with a grain of salt. I mean Calvin Johnson already has more catches, yards, with 4 less TDs then hall of famer Lynn Swann.

But it goes both ways. I never saw Babe Ruth play, but I highly doubt he would put up anywhere near the stats he did if he had to face pitchers with the ability of pitchers these days.

That's why I think its so hard to compare players across generations.

If you're going to use that scenario then Babe would also have access to machines and technology that is now available. So i have no doubt he would be just as feared.
 
brewer228 said:
Yea thats why i always take records with a grain of salt. I mean Calvin Johnson already has more catches, yards, with 4 less TDs then hall of famer Lynn Swann.

But it goes both ways. I never saw Babe Ruth play, but I highly doubt he would put up anywhere near the stats he did if he had to face pitchers with the ability of pitchers these days.

That's why I think its so hard to compare players across generations.

It's almost impossible to, brew. The games were completely different, advancements in training and conditioning give athletes today advantages that athletes then didn't have. Take Babe Ruths' natural ability, but have him born in 1988 instead...who knows what you're looking at...
 
elrod said:
brewer228 said:
Yea thats why i always take records with a grain of salt. I mean Calvin Johnson already has more catches, yards, with 4 less TDs then hall of famer Lynn Swann.

But it goes both ways. I never saw Babe Ruth play, but I highly doubt he would put up anywhere near the stats he did if he had to face pitchers with the ability of pitchers these days.

That's why I think its so hard to compare players across generations.

It's almost impossible to, brew. The games were completely different, advancements in training and conditioning give athletes today advantages that athletes then didn't have. Take Babe Ruths' natural ability, but have him born in 1988 instead...who knows what you're looking at...

I'm not saying he wouldn't be great still. He did have skill.

However based on pictures and little video i've seen, he was one of the bigger guys at 6'2". Now a days he wouldn't be the bigger strong guy, that helped him be so dominant.
 
Well people as a whole we shorter. 6'2 back then is probably like 6'4 or 6'5 lol. Its really impossible to tell lol
 
Maize&Cheese304 said:
Well people as a whole we shorter. 6'2 back then is probably like 6'4 or 6'5 lol. Its really impossible to tell lol

Exactly...if Babe was born now, he very well could have been 6'5". Maybe taller? We'll never know...
 
Maize&Cheese304 said:
Well people as a whole we shorter. 6'2 back then is probably like 6'4 or 6'5 lol. Its really impossible to tell lol

I know. That's why it's hard to debate across generations, and talk best of all time. Do you base it on how dominate they were in their sport at the time? If so no one will probably ever be as dominate as Babe was in his time.

But would he be as successful in todays game if he was the same height/weight? It's impossible to tell. My opinion is a 6'2" chubby, cigar smoking guy wouldn't be as dominate in today's game facing 98MPH with movement.

But with today's technology would he of trained more, understood pitchers better, would he of actually hit better? It's something that can't be proven.
 
I think Babe gets 1000 home runs today. You have to remember and I think its a good point, at the start Babe had more home runs than some teams did in a season. I think its a no brainer he uses the technology and learns the pitchers better and becomes stronger because the payers of today do. You also nave a lower pitchers mound, etc. But then fenses are shorter, the strike zone is smaller etc.
 
Babe played in an all white league lol. How many great white hitters are there anymore? Lol. I wouldn't be shocked if babe was a pitcher in todays game.
 
Maize&Cheese304 said:
Babe played in an all white league lol. How many great white hitters are there anymore? Lol. I wouldn't be shocked if babe was a pitcher in todays game.

Opening day rosters 2011: 61.5% , how many great no idea.
 
I don't follow baseball like I use too, but how many great hitters can you name that are white? Lol.

Hamilton for texas comes to my mind.
 
When you consider the 9 picks with the glove and such I say yes, and if he's not its looking inevitable he will be for a long time to come. having Calvin helps him quite a bit, but he's still young and developing. it's a safety blanket but when he's at the top of his game he won't even need that. you have to presume he's only going to get better.
 
bunglesnacks said:
When you consider the 9 picks with the glove and such I say yes, and if he's not its looking inevitable he will be for a long time to come. having Calvin helps him quite a bit, but he's still young and developing. it's a safety blanket but when he's at the top of his game he won't even need that. you have to presume he's only going to get better.


Well the teams he threw the 9ints were better than the raiders/vikings
 
Maize&Cheese304 said:
bunglesnacks said:
When you consider the 9 picks with the glove and such I say yes, and if he's not its looking inevitable he will be for a long time to come. having Calvin helps him quite a bit, but he's still young and developing. it's a safety blanket but when he's at the top of his game he won't even need that. you have to presume he's only going to get better.


Well the teams he threw the 9ints were better than the raiders/vikings

So having a fk'd up fingers doesn't count as an excuse?
 
his stats are skewed because of the broken finger for a few weeks. Without that I think his numbers would have been even better. I voted yes for him being top five but for me its all about his potential. He is only 23 and just begun tapping into his ability. This year he hasnt been 100 percent consistent but outside the very top guys he is top 5. If peyton manning played this year you could assume that Eli would be fifth and stafford would be 6th.
 
[color=#006400 said:
Mitch[/color]]
[quote="Maize&Cheese304":s4a52vku]


Well the teams he threw the 9ints were better than the raiders/vikings

So having a fk'd up fingers doesn't count as an excuse?[/quote:s4a52vku]


He kills the weak teams that's for sure. But look at his numbers vs the better teams. Take away calvin and stafford most likely won't have a big day.
 
Take away Calvin? Lmao. Take away Jerry Rice. Take away Steve Smith and Cam is Caleb Hanie :) .
 
In fact take away Matt and Calvin doesn't have a big day. Or even an okay day.
 
Back
Top