Chiefs Game manager. What is that exactly? - Page 11

Earthling · 01-30-2014, 12:17 PM

During the course of the season the term 'game manager' has been used frequently to describe certain QB's in the league; usually in a negative sense. I was curious if there is a consensus on just what the heck that means to people here.

To me a game manager isn't a bad thing. I see it as someone who tries to keep moving the chains, and if that takes three plays of 4 yard gains, be it running or passing, that's ok as long as the chains keep moving.

Of course if the team is down by several scores, or time becomes an issue, then longer chunks of yardage would be necessary. To me a game manager would recognize that fact and try to manage the game accordingly at that point.

What do you all think? And is the opposite of a game manager a game mis-manager?

O.city · 02-01-2014, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

It's add to win when from one year to the next you lose most of your quality starters to injury or free agency.

Weatherspoon
Abraham
Baker
Jones
White
Clabo
Grimes
Jackson

I know I'm missing a couple guys, but you get the point.

Every NFL quarterback needs talent around him to win.

Except Tom Brady, I guess.

His contract now makes it tougher for them to add the talent around him f or him to win at the highest level.

So, his contract says he's good enough to win with sub par talent around him, talent he can raise the level of.

I don't think he can do that, this past year outside of his yardage, agrees with thats

**Mav** · 02-01-2014, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Elway played in a different era.

There's an almost direct relationship between a QBs contract and the number of rings he has over the past 20 years.

Elway when he won the super bowl, was hardly the deciding factor in it as well.

Their defense, and their running game was the catalyst, oh, that and they got to play the mediocre Falcons, who miraculously broke Garrison Hearsts ankle in the first quarter, and had Gary Anderson, who hadn't missed a KICK ALL YEAR, miss an easy fg attempt or else those 98 Vikings probably would of stomped all over Denver.

**BossChief** · 02-01-2014, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace

Or Alex Smith.

10 probowl players on the roster.

How many games do we win if we didnt have

Berry
Charles
Bowe
Hali
DJ
Houston
Poe

?

GordonGekko · 02-01-2014, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace

Elway when he won the super bowl, was hardly the deciding factor in it as well.

Their defense, and their running game was the catalyst, oh, that and they got to play the mediocre Falcons, who miraculously broke Garrison Hearsts ankle in the first quarter, and had Gary Anderson, who hadn't missed a KICK ALL YEAR, miss an easy fg attempt or else those 98 Vikings probably would of stomped all over Denver.

Lol the Vikings. The NFC's Buffalo Bills.

**Mav** · 02-01-2014, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

His contract now makes it tougher for them to add the talent around him f or him to win at the highest level.

So, his contract says he's good enough to win with sub par talent around him, talent he can raise the level of.

I don't think he can do that, this past year outside of his yardage, agrees with thats

Nope. I agree completely. He is good enough to win to the level of talent around him.

I completely agree. That is a concept that people refuse to accept as reality.

When the truth is, without his 5 top receivers Tom Brady looked like the Tom Brady of old. A game manager which he kinda was his first few years in the league before they added moss, and welker, then Hernandez, and gronk.

Its amazing to me how the elite qbs, usually are surrounded by immense talent, and no one puts two of these things together.

htismaqe · 02-01-2014, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GordonGekko

Brady hasn't won a SB since Spygate, and if Manning loses to Wilson he is 1-2 in the big dance.

One, I said "get to" the Super Bowl. Most guys can't even get there (see Matt Ryan).

Not coincidentally, Brady hasn't won a Super Bowl since he got his first big contract. In fact, the Mannings are the only QBs that have to my knowledge...

**Mav** · 02-01-2014, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BossChief

10 probowl players on the roster.

How many games do we win if we didnt have

Berry
Charles
Bowe
Hali
DJ
Houston
Poe

?

How many more could you of won if you didn't have Fasano/ McBeard, Avery, and Mccluster as your supporting cast?

Lets not kid ourselves. Minus out the Bowe factor, and how many receivers could of replicated his numbers for the regular season?

Posing him, as a reason why the Chiefs won, is silly. Even in his best game of the season, two of his bad plays ultimately cost the Chiefs.

Now, im not mentioning alex smith, we aren't talking about him, obviously, he is to blame for some of that. But you SPECIFICALLY included BOWE.

mcaj22 · 02-01-2014, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

0-4 in the playoffs.

he's 1-4, and every time hes lost in the playoffs, i believe hes lost to the team that represented the NFC in the Super Bowl that year.

it's not like hes losing games and blowing 28 point leads to marginal teams with no talent, no defense that get squashed the very next week in the divisional round, like the Chiefs do.

htismaqe · 02-01-2014, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by O.city

His contract now makes it tougher for them to add the talent around him f or him to win at the highest level.

So, his contract says he's good enough to win with sub par talent around him, talent he can raise the level of.

I don't think he can do that, this past year outside of his yardage, agrees with thats

Exactly this.

Same for Joe Flacco.

htismaqe · 02-01-2014, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcaj22

he's 1-4, and every time hes lost in the playoffs, i believe hes lost to the team that represented the NFC in the Super Bowl that year.

Well that's SOOOO much better.

mcaj22 · 02-01-2014, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by htismaqe

Well that's SOOOO much better.

it's better than the Chiefs and their 10 pro bowlers and 0 wins

**BossChief** · 02-01-2014, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcaj22

he's 1-4, and every time hes lost in the playoffs, i believe hes lost to the team that represented the NFC in the Super Bowl that year.

Beat me to it

I'm waiting on the response "quit looking at stat sheets"

**Mav** · 02-01-2014, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GordonGekko

Lol the Vikings. The NFC's Buffalo Bills.

Not that year they weren't. That year they were 15-1. Moss's rookie year.

Jake Reed, Robert Smith, Cris Carter, Randy Moss, Cunningham, John Randle and the terror squad. That team was LOADED.

**Mav** · 02-01-2014, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mcaj22

he's 1-4, and every time hes lost in the playoffs, i believe hes lost to the team that represented the NFC in the Super Bowl that year.

it's not like hes losing games and blowing 28 point leads to marginal teams with no talent, no defense that get squashed the very next week in the divisional round, like the Chiefs do.

Ouch.

But yet, when he lost Julio Jones, their entire team went to shit. Despite having All Pros Roddy White, Tony Gonzalez, and Stephen Jackson.

Meanwhile, Alex Smith loses Jamaal Charles 6 plays in, and puts up over 400 yards of total offense, and 3 TDS.

not to mention that the Chiefs then lost Flowers, Houston, Charles back up in Kniles Davis, and oh, the Chiefs had Kendrick Lewis. Every opposing teams 12th man.

Oh, and yes, HE DID BLOW A HUGE LEAD. They were up huge on the Seahawks two years ago. But, they ended up winning the game anyways. But, of course his wr made the clutch play, the Chiefs all world wide receiver, couldn't stay in bounds.

**BossChief** · 02-01-2014, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mavericks Ace

How many more could you of won if you didn't have Fasano/ McBeard, Avery, and Mccluster as your supporting cast?

Lets not kid ourselves. Minus out the Bowe factor, and how many receivers could of replicated his numbers for the regular season?

Posing him, as a reason why the Chiefs won, is silly. Even in his best game of the season, two of his bad plays ultimately cost the Chiefs.

Now, im not mentioning alex smith, we aren't talking about him, obviously, he is to blame for some of that. But you SPECIFICALLY included BOWE.

So, Alex needs more talent around him than 10 probowlers....but Matt Ryan is garbage because e couldn't win with NOTHING but an 80 year old Tony Gonzalez on offense, a terrible defense and the worst running game I can remember.

People make all these claims about "Matt Ryan needs elite talent around him to win" and "Alex Smith is the better player"

While failing to acknowledge that we had 10 probowlers and couldn't hold a 28 point lead in the playoffs.

01-30-2014, 12:17 PM
Earthling MVP Join Date: Apr 2001 Casino cash: $10008447	Game manager. What is that exactly? During the course of the season the term 'game manager' has been used frequently to describe certain QB's in the league; usually in a negative sense. I was curious if there is a consensus on just what the heck that means to people here. To me a game manager isn't a bad thing. I see it as someone who tries to keep moving the chains, and if that takes three plays of 4 yard gains, be it running or passing, that's ok as long as the chains keep moving. Of course if the team is down by several scores, or time becomes an issue, then longer chunks of yardage would be necessary. To me a game manager would recognize that fact and try to manage the game accordingly at that point. What do you all think? And is the opposite of a game manager a game mis-manager?
Posts: 5,995