I can't even stomach that name with how biased he is commentating for the Chargers on CBS.
Here's how the sports show would go. I'd talk about shit that matters, he'd talk about the box scores, then argue with me basing his argument from the box scores, while I go to the teleprompter and draw him arrows and circles showing him why those box scores are the way they are, and why his "conclusion" about the box score was wrong, having had to show him the actual plays of the game.
1. I'm not a "stat" guy. A "stat" guy is someone who looks at the box score statistics (you) and derives all arguments from arbitrary stat lines (you again) to make a foolish attempt at a point not validated in any way shape or form, from those statistics (you again). Like your argument that Baltimore abandoned the running game in their losses this year, and thus lost the game. In reality, as I've already pointed out half a dozen times, they didn't lose the game because they ran it 2 or 3 times less in the second half than in the first half for the same or better yards per carry. They ended up having to pass the ball more frequently because they were running into "passing downs" more frequently due to an ineffective running game and/or penalties.
2. You've brought up nothing relevant about the QB's we've talked about, in the way they play. You have, however, told us how Joe Montana had an "arm" and could hit receivers "in stride" a mile down the field, while ever single NFL analyst has and will disagree with you, and they already have decades prior to your comment, and a few of them might be rolling over in their grave having you said such a bogus comment, again.
3. You said Brady couldn't play in "joe's era" because he was a "dink and dunk" QB, but were completely ignorant of the fact that Joe was a "dink and dunk" QB in the ORIGINAL "Dink and dunk" offense, under the ORIGINAL "dink and dunk" coach, and then later played out his final years in...........you guessed it......A DINK AND DUNK OFFENSE.
Literally, this is my biggest issue with you here in the debate of QB's. Quite simply put, you're arguing with me while being either completely oblivious to the fact of how wrong you are about Brady and Montana, or you're trolling your heart out 24/7 to get a response. Do yourself a favor, understand the fact that Joe Montana was coached and played in the original dink and dunk offense by the original dink and dunk coach, in the original dink and dunk scheme, and then later Brady would play in essentially the same dink and dunk offense in the same dink and dunk scheme decades later. This doesn't separate them by "era" as they basically played under the same rule sets, in the same types of offenses, and put up, for the most part, the same "efficiency" lines as far as statistics go. Brady just won more in less time and produced more. That's it, that's the end of the argument there. Does that make Brady the best? Not necessarily, but having seen Brady and Montana play before my very eyes at one of the most Iconic and Stoic stadiums the NFL has ever seen, its safe to say that my opinion of the discussion can't be so easily tossed aside as "just a stat guy" commentary, from the stat KING himself.
Yes, and I wish he would retire. His biased announcing anytime the Chargers play on TV is literally the most annoying thing in the world. All he ever talks about are Phillip Rivers, the Chargers, and the Chargers when he used to play for them. Coupled with peroidic highlight reels of Fouts tossing the rock to his legendary tight end for a touchdown.
He is literally the most annoying announcer on TV aside from Joe Buck, and I wish they would both lose their voices or retire because I have to fight the urge to turn off the television or change the channel when either of them are announcing a game.
Bookmarks