2016-2017 NFL Season Thread [Archived] Football • Page 628

^^^^^^^^^^

 

NCAA Football 2006 is the best football video game ever created and I will play it until my PS2 dies.

I like Madden on the next gen systems but it gets old for me really fast.

 

2006 is the greatest. 2014 is second.

It's something I play for a little bit for half a week then put down for three weeks haha. There just needs to be NFL 2K.

 

They all get boring quick

 

Yeah I don't buy Madden anymore. Used to love it but I just can't support that game anymore lol. 2k keeps me busy as far as sports games go.

 

They don't get old when you get an online franchise going like the one we had for years but unfortunately that's most likely done RIP AP Madden.

 

NFL Quarterback Club 99 was my jam

 

For the Nintendo 64? Hell yeah

 

Yeah, but the revamped version of the online franchise over here through GroupMe was terrible though.

RIP

 

NFL live >

 

The Groupme thing lasted all of about two weeks....it was god awful. The league kinda started a slow death around that time with a few core dudes leaving....unfortunate.

?????????????????

 

well that was a waste of time then.

 

Don't go pullin on my heart strings KJ

 

AP Madden was the best thing going on the old site. It had a slow, painful death. Moving to this site was the nail in the coffin.

 

I'll be honest, I've been thinking a little bit about it. Just not sure there is enough interest there still.

 

<------------ AP Madden great, imo

 

Can't argue that. Definitely on the "Legend" wing of the AP Madden Hall of Fame.

 

I miss u guys

 

:(

 

Okay, so say you took a quarterback in the first round every single year, no matter where you were drafting, and you either trade or cut the other quarterbacks if they're not panning out, how long would it take before you luck into a top 5 QB? I feel like if you just continuously picked a quarterback a year, whoever the top available guy is, you would eventually find one of these guys after 5-7 years, right?.

A team would never do this because the moment you go 2-14 with your first shitty quarterback your head coach and GM would both be fired and you'd have to start over again. But it's an interesting thought. And then I suppose after that your team would still be really bad but at least you'd have a quarterback to build around. I guess you'd be in a similar spot to where the Colts are nowards.

I'm not saying the Browns should do this (I happen to think Garrett is 100% the right move at 1) but having a quarterback you never have to worry about for a decade+ is a nice position for teams like the Seahawks and Colts to be in.

 

I'm biased but I don't think Trubisky would be a bad move if they don't feel confident about getting him at 12 or in the ability to trade up from 12 to get him.

 

Trubisky's play style reminds me a lot of Tannehill

 

In my opinion:

Players are entirely circumstantial in some instances, and in this instance, you wouldn't find your QB. Development is essential for a QB and, even if you drafted a guy with the tools to succeed, development may fail when your QB coaches are having to divide time between the rest of the drafted QBs, the highly drafted QB is being underminded by the fact that the team is gonna draft a QB next year anyway, and the entire team is divided on who is "their QB". This is a recipe for many QBs, no matter how good, to fail.

 

With the Browns luck, no matter what happens, whoever they don't pick will be the real star