That is two former Chargers QB's with SB wins..

[julius]

even though Manning didn't play for them.

 

[maxiep]

Johnny Unitas won a Super Bowl.

 

[oldmangrouch]

You know what is sad? If you asked the Chargers' front office if they regret dumping Brees, I would lay 10-1 odds they would say "no".

How can you avoid repeating a mistake, if you refuse to admit it was a mistake? Sports teams and politicos both suffer from this problem.

 

[Minstrel]

You know what is sad? If you asked the Chargers' front office if they regret dumping Brees, I would lay 10-1 odds they would say "no".

How can you avoid repeating a mistake, if you refuse to admit it was a mistake? Sports teams and politicos both suffer from this problem.

What do you think they should have done, though? They felt Rivers was a high-level prospect and were absolutely right, as he's been one of the top quarterbacks in the game also.

IMO, it's akin to the Colts "dumping" Marshall Faulk. They had Edgerrin James and couldn't have kept and used both. That Faulk and Brees went on to have even more sterling careers I don't think makes it a mistake. Just a tough situation where you have to give up on one of two redundant, talented players.

 

[julius]

Doesn't Rivers have the 2nd best winning% among active QB's?

I'm not sure I'd say they made a mistake in the QB change, in as much as their game plan. They had no running game this year, and that hindered them.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Not to mention that Roethlisberger has won two, and he was drafted after Rivers that same year. So, the Chargers have had, or could have had, the QBs who won four of the past five Super Bowls.

 

[kwamebsucks]

What do you think they should have done, though? They felt Rivers was a high-level prospect and were absolutely right, as he's been one of the top quarterbacks in the game also.

IMO, it's akin to the Colts "dumping" Marshall Faulk. They had Edgerrin James and couldn't have kept and used both. That Faulk and Brees went on to have even more sterling careers I don't think makes it a mistake. Just a tough situation where you have to give up on one of two redundant, talented players.

Well, they could of drafted Fitzgerald instead of having the Giants pick Rivers. However Brees was coming off a bad year (in only his 2nd season as a starter) and they decided that was enough to give up on him. Brees only really started over Rivers because Rivers held out his rookie season.

 

[maxiep]

As a Redskins fan, I find the bitching from a Charger fan to be a bit unappreciative. Wanna trade teams? Yeah, I didn't think so.

Be grateful for what you have.

 

[Mamba]

Well, they could of drafted Fitzgerald instead of having the Giants pick Rivers. However Brees was coming off a bad year (in only his 2nd season as a starter) and they decided that was enough to give up on him. Brees only really started over Rivers because Rivers held out his rookie season.

Brees wasn't impressive @ all until Rivers became his competition.

The Chargers' didn't make the wrong move, their failure this year can't be put on Rivers. Rivers' has been an elite QB two years in a row and is only now entering his prime as are the Chargers (don't mix them up with LT, who is done as a Charger). Their window of opportunity is still wide open and with a few minimal adjustments (a respectable run game...they'll address that this off-season) will be in the Super Bowl running for awhile.

Hell, Brees had 11 shoulder surgeries the off-season they let him go. Only two teams were interested in him, Miami and New Orleans. I mean shit, not even the Lions (who needed a QB and had some money to spend I believe) were interested in him. Brees chances of coming back and being successful were very minimal. it is damn impressive what he's done.

I don't think you'll find one bitter Chargers' fan. All the ones I know are happy with the way our team is developing and extremely happy for Brees. A better guy could not have won the Super Bowl.

 

[kwamebsucks]

Brees wasn't impressive @ all until Rivers became his competition.

The Chargers' didn't make the wrong move, their failure this year can't be put on Rivers. Rivers' has been an elite QB two years in a row and is only now entering his prime as are the Chargers (don't mix them up with LT, who is done as a Charger). Their window of opportunity is still wide open and with a few minimal adjustments (a respectable run game...they'll address that this off-season) will be in the Super Bowl running for awhile.

Hell, Brees had 11 shoulder surgeries the off-season they let him go. Only two teams were interested in him, Miami and New Orleans. I mean shit, not even the Lions (who needed a QB and had some money to spend I believe) were interested in him. Brees chances of coming back and being successful were very minimal. it is damn impressive what he's done.

I don't think you'll find one bitter Chargers' fan. All the ones I know are happy with the way our team is developing and extremely happy for Brees. A better guy could not have won the Super Bowl.

I have a hard time attributing Brees success in San Diego to Rivers. You don't think Brees struggled a bit because he was a young player on a god-awful team just coming off his second season as a starter? Rivers was a modest quarterback his first three seasons as well.

I never said the Chargers made the wrong decision in letting Brees walk, the bad decision is when they decided they needed to replace him and (essentially) drafted Rivers when they had other wholes to fill and good players available at those wholes.

I'm glad you aren't bitter, but that doesn't change the fact that they made a bad decision.

I won't even get into Michael Turner, or are you going to tell me that you had no idea he would be this good as well?

 

[oldmangrouch]

What do you think they should have done, though? They felt Rivers was a high-level prospect and were absolutely right, as he's been one of the top quarterbacks in the game also.

IMO, it's akin to the Colts "dumping" Marshall Faulk. They had Edgerrin James and couldn't have kept and used both. That Faulk and Brees went on to have even more sterling careers I don't think makes it a mistake. Just a tough situation where you have to give up on one of two redundant, talented players.

Ah, but there is one part of the equation you are overlooking. The GM who drafted Brees was fired, and Rivers was the first big acquisition of the new guy.

This was reverse "John Nash" syndrome. Nash wouldn't draft Paul or Williams, because it would mean he might have been wrong about Telfair. The new Chargers' GM wasn't going to keep Brees, because it would mean admitting Beatherd might have been right.

Put it this way: can you imagine KP demanding that Outlaw/Webster shouldn't play (or trading them) solely because he didn't draft them?

 

[Mamba]

Ah, but there is one part of the equation you are overlooking. The GM who drafted Brees was fired, and Rivers was the first big acquisition of the new guy.

This was reverse "John Nash" syndrome. Nash wouldn't draft Paul or Williams, because it would mean he might have been wrong about Telfair. The new Chargers' GM wasn't going to keep Brees, because it would mean admitting Beatherd might have been right.

Put it this way: can you imagine KP demanding that Outlaw/Webster shouldn't play (or trading them) solely because he didn't draft them?

That is a fair point if Rivers would have turned out to be Ryan Leaf 2.0. Rivers isn't a bust. His career isn't even close to being over, so how can you judge the move already?

 

[oldmangrouch]

That is a fair point if Rivers would have turned out to be Ryan Leaf 2.0. Rivers isn't a bust. His career isn't even close to being over, so how can you judge the move already?

Obviously, the talent gap between Brees and Rivers isn't nearly as big as the gap in the Paul/Williams vs Telfair example. My point is simply that "office politics" played a big part in the decision. You must admit, there was a degree of scapegoating going on.

 

[Minstrel]

Ah, but there is one part of the equation you are overlooking. The GM who drafted Brees was fired, and Rivers was the first big acquisition of the new guy.

This was reverse "John Nash" syndrome. Nash wouldn't draft Paul or Williams, because it would mean he might have been wrong about Telfair. The new Chargers' GM wasn't going to keep Brees, because it would mean admitting Beatherd might have been right.

Put it this way: can you imagine KP demanding that Outlaw/Webster shouldn't play (or trading them) solely because he didn't draft them?

That might be true, but you're also overlooking the extensive damage to Brees' arm at the time. You can say it was a bad decision in hindsight, in the same way that you can say not hitting on a 20 was a bad move if the next card is revealed to be an ace...but was it really a bad move based on the information at the time?

They (correctly) evaluated Rivers as a top-tier talent. Brees' arm had been shredded and repaired...the Dolphins had him checked out by a number of specialists (since they were interested in signing him) and those specialists were unanimous that Brees was unlikely to recover fully.

That he beat the odds is great for him. But do you really think the Chargers made the wrong decision at the time by not investing heavily in a quarterback of questionable short-term and long-term health and going with their young, talented quarterback instead?

If you think so, are you then in favour of giving Oden a big contract this off-season? You seem to be very willing to abandon Oden's future, due to major health concerns, yet are criticizing San Diego for not having faith in a major health risk. That doesn't seem very consistent.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I see your point, but I think the state of Brees' arm was exagerated. I wouldn't compare Batum's injury to Oden's, and I wouldn't compare Brees' injury to Culpeppers bad knees.

The other factor to consider here is timing. NFL QBs frequently struggle mightily their first few seasons. NBA lotto picks usually establish themselves within 2 years. Brees' development curve was fairly typical for a QB, and didn't really raise any red flags.

If the choice of Rivers/Culpepper over Brees had been financial (like James over Faulk) or based on age disparity (like Rogers over Favre), that would be a different matter. If they had decided to keep Rivers and trade Brees to fill a hole elsewhere, that would have been perfectly reasonable. Losing Brees for nothing? It doesn't take hindsight to question that.

 

[DaRizzle]

As an unbiased outsider....

Mamba/Minstrel 1

oldmangrounch 0

 

[kwamebsucks]

That might be true, but you're also overlooking the extensive damage to Brees' arm at the time. You can say it was a bad decision in hindsight, in the same way that you can say not hitting on a 20 was a bad move if the next card is revealed to be an ace...but was it really a bad move based on the information at the time?

They (correctly) evaluated Rivers as a top-tier talent. Brees' arm had been shredded and repaired...the Dolphins had him checked out by a number of specialists (since they were interested in signing him) and those specialists were unanimous that Brees was unlikely to recover fully.

That he beat the odds is great for him. But do you really think the Chargers made the wrong decision at the time by not investing heavily in a quarterback of questionable short-term and long-term health and going with their young, talented quarterback instead?

If you think so, are you then in favour of giving Oden a big contract this off-season? You seem to be very willing to abandon Oden's future, due to major health concerns, yet are criticizing San Diego for not having faith in a major health risk. That doesn't seem very consistent.

Well would you admit that drafting Rivers in the first place was the mistake? Brees' shoulder injury happened after Rivers second season.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Well would you admit that drafting Rivers in the first place was the mistake? Brees' shoulder injury happened after Rivers second season.

I was just about to point that out. Rivers was drafted after Brees had a subpar season and was supplanted at starter by Doug Flutie. The Chargers essentially gave up on a 25-year-old first-round quarterback (Brees was the 32nd pick, 1st of the second round) after 1 1/2 years of starting. There was no question about his durability then, just his talent.

 

[Mamba]

Well would you admit that drafting Rivers in the first place was the mistake? Brees' shoulder injury happened after Rivers second season.

No.

Brees showed nothing spectacular before Rivers was drafted. He made horrible decision and there was a lot of question about his height and ability to see over offensive/defensive lines.

 

[kwamebsucks]

No.

Brees showed nothing spectacular before Rivers was drafted. He made horrible decision and there was a lot of question about his height and ability to see over offensive/defensive lines.

And Oden and Bowie were sure things.

 

[oldmangrouch]

As an unbiased outsider....

Mamba/Minstrel 1

oldmangrounch 0

I'm sorry, but this thread is classic. The Chargers kicked Brees to the curb, the Dolphins turned him away, all he has done since then is play brilliantly and win a Superbowl, and people are still claiming they made the right call.

Serious question: is this some new doctrine they preach in business school or something - that results are irrelevant to evaluating decision making? That it is all about the process and not about the outcome?

I'm not being sarcastic here....I really don't get this argument.

 

[Minstrel]

Well would you admit that drafting Rivers in the first place was the mistake? Brees' shoulder injury happened after Rivers second season.

Only if you think that GMs have a perfect understanding of who in the draft will become stars and who won't. If you feel very strongly that Rivers has star talent, but don't have a good sense of some of the other prospects available at that slot, do you avoid the guy you believe will pan out simply because he's not a big need? It's cliche, but that's what leads to Bowie-over-Jordan decisions.

Also, at the time that Rivers was drafted, Brees was merely a solid young quarterback...not a star. Quarterback wasn't a need, but it's not like they drafted a quarterback with a clear franchise quarterback in place.

 

[Minstrel]

Serious question: is this some new doctrine they preach in business school or something - that results are irrelevant to evaluating decision making? That it is all about the process and not about the outcome?

I've never been to business school, but to me, the logical position is this: when evaluating a lot of decisions over time, the actual results are the only bottom-line measurements that matter. When evaluating one single decision, the process based on the information at the time is what matters.

Again, going back to the blackjack analogy...if a player has a 20 and asks for a hit, do you wait to see what card he gets before deciding if he made a good decision? If he gets an ace, do you say, "Wow, what a great decision. You, sir, are a genius!"

In any single decision, luck plays a massive role. You can't control that. You can only stack the odds in your favour as much as possible by good process. Over the course of many decisions, luck evens out...decision-makers who tend to stack the odds in their favour tend to have better bottom-line results over time. But on any one decision, even the right call (based on what was known at the time) can backfire. That's because everything is probabilistic and not purely deterministic (as far as the limits of human understanding goes, anyway).

 

[hasoos]

It's no secret that San Diego's struggles to get far into the playoffs have been more associated with the decline of LT than anything else. When you have no running game, it puts a lot more pressure on your QB.

 

[Mamba]

And Oden and Bowie were sure things.

What do Oden/Bowie have anything to do with this?

I'm sorry, but this thread is classic. The Chargers kicked Brees to the curb, the Dolphins turned him away, all he has done since then is play brilliantly and win a Superbowl, and people are still claiming they made the right call.

Serious question: is this some new doctrine they preach in business school or something - that results are irrelevant to evaluating decision making? That it is all about the process and not about the outcome?

I'm not being sarcastic here....I really don't get this argument.

So Philip Rivers has been a huge failure? Yeah? Not even 1/2 into his career and you're already classifying him as a failure?

How is it making the wrong call? Brees wouldn't have won a ring here in SD either. We've got absolutely no running game because LT's career is over. Brees has had a miracle come back that nobody expected. New Orleans was willing to gamble on him and it paid off. Good for them, I still dont' see how you can fault them because they've still got an elite QB and need to make a few minor adjustments and they'll be right there in the mix of things to win it all. They don't need an all-pro RB, they just need one who can run between the tackles.

So if Oden tore his knee up again and had to have multiple, major knee surgeries, you would re-sign him long term when you know you've got a gem waiting in the wings to explode onto the scene? Maybe you're the one who doesn't know how to make smart business decisions.

It's no secret that San Diego's struggles to get far into the playoffs have been more associated with the decline of LT than anything else. When you have no running game, it puts a lot more pressure on your QB.

Thank you. You get it. Can you please try to get that through to OMG.

 

[kwamebsucks]

Only if you think that GMs have a perfect understanding of who in the draft will become stars and who won't. If you feel very strongly that Rivers has star talent, but don't have a good sense of some of the other prospects available at that slot, do you avoid the guy you believe will pan out simply because he's not a big need? It's cliche, but that's what leads to Bowie-over-Jordan decisions.

Also, at the time that Rivers was drafted, Brees was merely a solid young quarterback...not a star. Quarterback wasn't a need, but it's not like they drafted a quarterback with a clear franchise quarterback in place.

I know we are still speaking in hindsight, but the Chargers WR's prior to that draft were AWFUL. I'm not sure if they dealt David Boston yet, but he was a bust anyways. Who didn't think Larry Fitzgerald wasn't a sure thing?

 

[Mamba]

They were bad, but the team then was built around LT, not the receiving core. You have to remember that Schotty was the coach and ran a RB-oriented offense.

 

[Minstrel]

I know we are still speaking in hindsight, but the Chargers WR's prior to that draft were AWFUL. I'm not sure if they dealt David Boston yet, but he was a bust anyways. Who didn't think Larry Fitzgerald wasn't a sure thing?

He wasn't a sure thing, anymore than Braylon Edwards was a sure thing. Both were among the best wide receiving prospects of the decade (along with Calvin Johnson, Andre Johnson and Michael Crabtree).