keggerz Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 who is it in your opinion? I know this isnt possible but if i were the eagles I would send TO a pick and cash to that team to take owens off their hands... seeing him dealt back to SF would be such sweet justice I KNOW IT WONT HAPPEN but i am allowed to DREAM!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Houston. If you're talking endemically, in other words always were crap, are crap and always will be crap, it's a tie between Arizona and Detroit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sideline Merc Posted February 1, 2006 Share Posted February 1, 2006 Detroit without a doubt. Poor drafting over the past few years. Head coach revolving door. A GM who just don't get it. The only thing Detroit doesn't have is off the field issues. A close second I think is the Raiders. Does Al Davis really want to "Just win Baby". Look at the coaches he has let go. His ego is killing the Raiders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxdx_2003 Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Either AZ of SF. I thought AZ would step up after D. Greene took over, Arrington was and is a total bust, at least SF has some young guys in place to build up from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 The worst team right now IMO is Houston - based on the combination of lack of talent (particularly on the offensive line and on defense) and the inability of the coaching staff there to effectively use the talent they had. Detroit is a close second IMO. Their O-line is also atrocious. But, from a skill-player position I think Detroit is in slightly better shape on offense (despite the fact that David Carr is lightyears better than Joey Harrington). Defensively, Detroit is in better shape. But the worst franchises right now (meaning taking into account more than just current talent and coaching situation) - the teams that are always going to suck until there is a major overhaul involving management and perhaps ownership of the team are: New Orleans, Detroit and Arizona in that order. Just one man's opinion, obviously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Talent-wise it has to be Houston or SF. That 49er roster is . Az, Det, NO are bad, but they have some decent young talent. IMO- SF Houston flip a coin, mine came up SF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
broncosn05 Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Houston. If you're talking endemically, in other words always were crap, are crap and always will be crap, it's a tie between Arizona and Detroit. 1300205[/snapback] I think over the offseason that opinion will change. If they get Vince or Reggie that is Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puddy Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 (despite the fact that David Carr is lightyears better than Joey Harrington). 1300395[/snapback] I've seen this sentiment time and time again and don't really get it. I've never heard a single rumor that David Carr is in jeopardy of even losing his starting job much less his roster spot. At the same time, Harrington has been much maligned for his performance since coming into the league. I'm no Harrington knob slobber but I am very curious why Carr has gotten a free pass for so long. Taking a look at their career stats should help explain my confusion. Joey Harrington: 58 games, 68.1 QB rating, 54.7 comp %, 60 TD's, 62 INT's David Carr: 60 games, 73.7 QB rating, 57.8 comp %, 48 TD's, 53 INT's Carr has him a little bit in rating and comp %, but Harrington has thrown 12 more touchdowns (and 9 more picks) in 2 less games. One person mentioned to me that Houston has given no protection for Carr, which is undeniably true. However, the Lions offensive line has been very pathetic over that time frame too. Carr was sacked 208 times to Joey's 77, which supports this argument, but Harrington is known to hate to take a sack and often dumps the ball to avoid it. Carr has had a much better running game with Dom Davis versus Kevin Jones and James Stewart before him. Carr's number one receiver (Johnson) has been better than what the Lions have on the field so far too. What I am saying is they are virtually the same sucky quarterback, but Harrington has been hammered by fans and media from day one, while Carr is still looked at as a much better QB. It's been 4 years and his stats suck too. What gives Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meat Face Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 All I know is that SF is definitely NOT the worst team. Take your pick between the Cards, Lions, Saints, and Texans. SF is on the way up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NinersIn2006! Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 All I know is that SF is definitely NOT the worst team. Take your pick between the Cards, Lions, Saints, and Texans. SF is on the way up. 1300600[/snapback] BOO YAH!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 All I know is that SF is definitely NOT the worst team. Take your pick between the Cards, Lions, Saints, and Texans. SF is on the way up. 1300600[/snapback] Totally Disagree- AZ, DET definitely have more talent- there isn't a GM in the league that would take SF roster over AZ or DET. NO is notch above SF Texans- you have an excellent point they are about even IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sunysteelfly76 Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 seeing him dealt back to SF would be such sweet justice 1300199[/snapback] I think sending him to Baltimore would be even better, just to remind TO who calls the shots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donutrun Jellies Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 (edited) Joey Harrington:58 games, 68.1 QB rating, 54.7 comp %, 60 TD's, 62 INT's David Carr: 60 games, 73.7 QB rating, 57.8 comp %, 48 TD's, 53 INT's What I am saying is they are virtually the same sucky quarterback, but Harrington has been hammered by fans and media from day one, while Carr is still looked at as a much better QB. It's been 4 years and his stats suck too. What gives 1300432[/snapback] Michael Vick: 58 games, 75.8 QB rating, 54.1 comp %, 51 TD's, 39 INT's (also ran for 19, but lost 20 fumbles) HEY!! Come to think of it, Michael Vick ranks right up there with these two hoseheads! Granted he's actually thrown fewer interceptions (1 fewer every 5 games), but maybe that's because he can't be relied on to hit a defender, let alone a receiver?? Edited February 2, 2006 by Donutrun Jellies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
URLACHERisGOD Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 San Fransico no doubt. You've got Julian Peterson (over rated), Tony Parish, and then ....... *chirp* *chirp* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 I've seen this sentiment time and time again and don't really get it. I've never heard a single rumor that David Carr is in jeopardy of even losing his starting job much less his roster spot. 1300432[/snapback] Very true. In fact many thought the Texans would let Carr test the open market thinking they could save millions signing him afterward. Isn't the roster bonus $7 Million? I think I would vote Arizona over SF. Even with talent they lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vet Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 What I am saying is they are virtually the same sucky quarterback, but Harrington has been hammered by fans and media from day one, while Carr is still looked at as a much better QB. It's been 4 years and his stats suck too. What gives 1300432[/snapback] Actually, you've convinced me that you are right. I should not have written that Carr is lightyears better than Harringon. I think the reason I perceive it to be that way is that whenever I watch a Lions game, Harrington seems to disintegrate at the most inappropriate times. he makes horrible decisions. I think you could surround him with a Pro Bowl caliber team and he'd still lose consistently. The Texans games that I've watched, Carr always seems to be running for his life. But he doesn't seem to make the same poor decisions that Harrington does (although as you point out, his stats are just as bad). Still, I get the feeling watching Carr that if you surrounded him with some talent, he'd be a servicable QB. I must admit, however, that I have not watched enough Lions or Texans games to have a statistically valid sample. My perception of these two QBs has been formed largely by the media and could therefore be entirely wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedroz13 Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 I think the reason I perceive it to be that way is that whenever I watch a Lions game, Harrington seems to disintegrate at the most inappropriate times. he makes horrible decisions. I think you could surround him with a Pro Bowl caliber team and he'd still lose consistently. I must admit, however, that I have not watched enough Lions or Texans games to have a statistically valid sample. My perception of these two QBs has been formed largely by the media and could therefore be entirely wrong. 1301470[/snapback] Hola Vet. I have to agree with Vet on this one....and I am also swayed by the media's perception. Everyone seems to give Carr a pass. Maybe he is just more confident in his skills and doesn't come off as such a pu**y like Harrington does. Its not like Harrington has a lot of time back there either...and his WRs haven't really progressed like they were expected to in relation to their draft spots (R. Williams possibly being the exception). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSULions Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 2002 Draft 1) David Carr: 60 games, 73.7 QB rating, 57.8 comp %, 48 TD's, 53 INT's 2) Julius Peppers 60 games, 193 tackles, 40.5 sacks, 3 INTs, 1 TD, 20 passes defensed 3) Joey Harrington: 58 games, 68.1 QB rating, 54.7 comp %, 60 TD's, 62 INT's 1300432[/snapback] The Texans were enamored with Carr from the beginning and several pundits thought we should have taken Harrington since Weinke looked like he couldn't do the job after our 1-15 season. I am sure glad that the Panthers picked the right guy that has an anchor of our DL over the past four years! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jumpin Johnies Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 The Texans were enamored with Carr from the beginning and several pundits thought we should have taken Harrington since Weinke looked like he couldn't do the job after our 1-15 season. I am sure glad that the Panthers picked the right guy that has an anchor of our DL over the past four years! 1301518[/snapback] How about the qb we picked up from the Saints? In three seasons at the helm Delhomme has only had one truely bad game. Not only did we get Peppers but we avoided Joey and settled on a much better qb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gonkis Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Houston beat Cleveland. Cleveland picks what 12th? Look for many years of classic Browns disasters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Harrington sucks. Carr might suck. That about sums it up for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedroz13 Posted February 2, 2006 Share Posted February 2, 2006 Harrington sucks. Carr might suck. That about sums it up for me. 1301650[/snapback] Ha....thats great, a very simplified version. I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 I have to disagree with those who think SF is the worst. SF might be the 2nd or 3rd worst but definately not the worst. First of all, lets look at their record of 4 -12. Houston at 2 -14 and New Orleans at 3 - 13 had worse records. Now lets look at the teams they played against - right in the middle of the season they played the following schedule IND, WAS, TB, NYG, CHI, SEA and not to mention SEA, and JAC later in the season...thats 8 playoff teams. I have not done any research beyond the 9ers schedule but I would love somebody to step up and share a worse schedule, especially with 6 playoff teams in a row and not too mention 4 of those 8 playoff team games were against 1st round BYE playoff teams. The 9ers lost a combined 3 games by 6 pts and 2 of those teams were playoff teams (SEA and JAC)....and lastly, the 9ers beat HOU! I feel dirty...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Like I said my coin happened to some up SF, but yeah, Houston is on par with em. NO?? think their season was obivously a wash out- hard to judeg em on it. I was just suprised at how overmatched SF seemed- they may have fought hard to be in some games- but they were seriously overmatched talent-wise on Offense & Defense. Did SF really beat Houston??? was that a REAL GAME? or were the Texans just better actors?? I know it is hard for ya 49er fans to accept it- but right no, they are at the bottom of the barrel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted February 3, 2006 Share Posted February 3, 2006 Sniffle, wimper, sniffle......(curled in a tight ball in the corner, rocking back and forth) Bay Area football sucks worse than I ever remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.