Jump to content

Fans who think QB's are nothing more than a product of thier offense don't understand football.


halsey
 Share

Recommended Posts

It's annoying to see Falcon fans who think a team can just plug anyone in at QB as long as the offense around him is good. BS. There's a reason QB's are the highest paid position in football and the most often drafted first overall. Good teams either have a franchise QB or have a plan to get one. They don't just try to put an offense around backup quality QB's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

halsey (3/24/2008)
It's annoying to see Falcon fans who think a team can just plug anyone in at QB as long as the offense around him is good. BS. There's a reason QB's are the highest paid position in football and the most often drafted first overall. Good teams either have a franchise QB or have a plan to get one. They don't just try to put an offense around backup quality QB's.

Any fan...

But then again... the only way you can tell if a guy is a "backup quality QB" is if he's on a team that's got good players and doesn't succeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

halsey (3/24/2008)
It's annoying to see Falcon fans who think a team can just plug anyone in at QB as long as the offense around him is good. BS. There's a reason QB's are the highest paid position in football and the most often drafted first overall. Good teams either have a franchise QB or have a plan to get one. They don't just try to put an offense around backup quality QB's.
Well said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)
Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Great O-Line >>> Great qb
If that's the case then Kordell Stewart would of been an all-pro.

You don't win consistently w/o a franchise QB.

You have a better chance at winning with a Great O-line and an average QB then winning with an average O-line and Great qb because that Great qb won't look so great behind that average O-Line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)
Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Great O-Line >>> Great qb
If that's the case then Kordell Stewart would of been an all-pro.

You don't win consistently w/o a franchise QB.

You have a better chance at winning with a Great O-line and an average QB then winning with an average O-line and Great qb because that Great qb won't look so great behind that average O-Line.

Again, if that was the case, Kordell Stewart would of won a SB w/the Steelers behind that O-line he had.

And yes, I'm a Steeler fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)
Again, if that was the case, Kordell Stewart would of won a SB w/the Steelers behind that O-line he had.

And yes, I'm a Steeler fan.

That is one example, the key word was "better chance". What qb has turned out be a great qb behind an horrible O-line.

Give me a great o-line over a great qb anyday. There are plenty of qb's they could of been good or great qb's if they had an o-line to work with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)
Again, if that was the case, Kordell Stewart would of won a SB w/the Steelers behind that O-line he had.

And yes, I'm a Steeler fan.

That is one example, the key word was "better chance". What qb has turned out be a great qb behind an horrible O-line.

Give me a great o-line over a great qb anyday. There are plenty of qb's they could of been good or great qb's if they had an o-line to work with.

I agree w/your last point.

You don't win w/o a franchise QB, not a game-manager. Dilfer is the exception to the rule b/c he had one of the greatest defenses ever to make the plays for him. The great teams in this league have had a franchise QB behind center.

End of discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)

I agree w/your last point.

You don't win w/o a franchise QB, not a game-manager. Dilfer is the exception to the rule b/c he had one of the greatest defenses ever to make the plays for him. The great teams in this league have had a franchise QB behind center.

End of discussion.

Dilfer isn't the only game-managing qb that won a Super Bowl, but I agree you do need a Franchise QB to have a team that is consistent when it comes to winning. I was just saying I think it's more important to have a great O-line than a great qb.

**** give me both though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't many Franchise QBs become just that through developement and time? If you don't have a good O-line a good young QB can become a mediocore QB and struggle. I believe in the saying " The whole is( or can be) greater than the sum of it's parts".

Sucessful Franchise QBs usually have good teams surrounding them. John Elway is a good example. He struggled for years without winniing the big one because Denvers' owner wouldn't build a team for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Great O-Line >>> Great qb

An O-line is five starters plus the backups. A QB is one player. Pretty tough for one player to be more important than 5 starters and the backups too.

And there's no rule that says a team can't have both a good QB and O-line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)
Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)
Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Great O-Line >>> Great qb
You have a better chance at winning with a Great O-line and an average QB then winning with an average O-line and Great qb because that Great qb won't look so great behind that average O-Line.
Again, if that was the case, Kordell Stewart would of won a SB w/the Steelers behind that O-line he had.

And yes, I'm a Steeler fan.

What about Trent Dilfer with Baltimore? Dilfer has been an average QB...they had a great TEAM...it NOT just the QB position-it's NOT just the O-line, it's all the pieces working together. Look at Brady in the Super Bowl-a GREAT QB-but the line played average-they lost. Look at Neil O'Donnel...he got the Steelers into the Superbowl.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert L (3/24/2008)
Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)
Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Matthew Pritts (3/24/2008)
Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Great O-Line >>> Great qb
You have a better chance at winning with a Great O-line and an average QB then winning with an average O-line and Great qb because that Great qb won't look so great behind that average O-Line.
Again, if that was the case, Kordell Stewart would of won a SB w/the Steelers behind that O-line he had.

And yes, I'm a Steeler fan.

What about Trent Dilfer with Baltimore? Dilfer has been an average QB...they had a great TEAM...it NOT just the QB position-it's NOT just the O-line, it's all the pieces working together. Look at Brady in the Super Bowl-a GREAT QB-but the line played average-they lost. Look at Neil O'Donnel...he got the Steelers into the Superbowl.

You had to go back almost a decade to a team with arguably the greatest defense ever and players like Jonathan Ogden, Jamal Lewis, Priest Holmes and Shannon Sharpe on offense. I agree with you point that you can get by win a Super Bowl with an average QB as long as you have arguably the best defense ever and multiple HoFers around the QB on offense. Good luck putting that team together...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

halsey (3/24/2008)
Bloodhoundz (3/24/2008)
Great O-Line >>> Great qb

An O-line is five starters plus the backups. A QB is one player. Pretty tough for one player to be more important than 5 starters and the backups too.

And there's no rule that says a team can't have both a good QB and O-line.

Did I say it was a rule?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

halsey (3/24/2008)
It's annoying to see Falcon fans who think a team can just plug anyone in at QB as long as the offense around him is good. BS. There's a reason QB's are the highest paid position in football and the most often drafted first overall. Good teams either have a franchise QB or have a plan to get one. They don't just try to put an offense around backup quality QB's.

so your saying peyton manning would have had hall of fame stats behind the falcons 2007 o line?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Maltese Falcon (3/24/2008)
I'm not 100% positive, but if you go and look at every single winner of all the superbowls you will find one thing that is constant and true. The O-Line for that team played fantastic.

Who is satying the O-line isn't important. I never said that. I'm talking real football here, folks. Not some imaginary league where there's some rule against having a good O-line AND a franchise QB. You guys have confused yourself into believing building an O-line and finding a franchise QB are mutually exclusive. Not true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

monoxide (3/24/2008)
halsey (3/24/2008)
It's annoying to see Falcon fans who think a team can just plug anyone in at QB as long as the offense around him is good. BS. There's a reason QB's are the highest paid position in football and the most often drafted first overall. Good teams either have a franchise QB or have a plan to get one. They don't just try to put an offense around backup quality QB's.

Ravens did it when they won the Super Bowl, if you have a great defense, and a good run game, it doesn't matter if your quarterback is Tony Banks, Trent Dilfer, or Chris Redman :P

Once again, you had to go back almost a decade to find a team that had the best defense ever, Jamal Lewis, Priest Holmes, Shannon Sharpe, Jonathan Ogden.  Even the Ravens have been smart enough to realize you can't depend on having all that to make up for not having a franchise QB. That's why they've been trying to find a franchise QB for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Maltese Falcon (3/24/2008)
I'm not 100% positive, but if you go and look at every single winner of all the superbowls you will find one thing that is constant and true. The O-Line for that team played fantastic.

Nonsense. **** the Giants won last year with a shaky offensive line that didn't consistently protect Manning during the regular season and didn't protect him from Adalius Thomas in the Superbowl.

This talk about "what wins games" is also hard to put on some part of the offense being really good. History dictates that the Superbowl winner will always have either a great defense, or a defense that at least played very well in the postseason. In the last decade, we've seen the Rams win a Superbowl followed by the Ravens. There is no constant as far as the offense goes, it can be the high-flying Rams and Colts or an offense built on the running game with the Ravens and Steelers, the quality of the quarterbacks, running backs, receivers, and offensive line have varied just about every year. The defense is and always will be the only legitimate constant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

monoxide (3/24/2008)
halsey (3/24/2008)
It's annoying to see Falcon fans who think a team can just plug anyone in at QB as long as the offense around him is good. BS. There's a reason QB's are the highest paid position in football and the most often drafted first overall. Good teams either have a franchise QB or have a plan to get one. They don't just try to put an offense around backup quality QB's.

Ravens did it when they won the Super Bowl, if you have a great defense, and a good run game, it doesn't matter if your quarterback is Tony Banks, Trent Dilfer, or Chris Redman :P

Does the Bucs' Brad Johnson qualify as a non-franchise SuperBowl winner in SB37 2003-01-26?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't seem like some here are arguing about the same issue. Some contend that a highly talented QB is necessary to win a Super Bowl. Others don't seem to be disputing this contention as much asserting that the time at which such a QB is drafted is also important.

Another dispute in many other threads centers on whom qualifies as a franchise quarterback. The problem I have with these threads is that someone presumes to know. They cite history to show that "franchise" quarterbacks usually win Super Bowls. I would only say that it's easy in retrospect to pick out the franchise qb. They are the ones that win Super Bowls. At the start of this year, Eli Manning, was considered by many to be 'on the bubble' and unworthy of the franchise moniker.

Unfortunately, this label of 'franchise' is also used on a lot of QBs that never work out. It's just that no one will admit to ever using the label for those whom never met expectations.

In addition, there are examples of QBs which win Super Bowls that were not consensus 'franchise QBs' until they started playing and winning consistently. Kurt Warner and Tom Brady would both seem to fit in this category.

So look for that franchise QB. Argue the worthiness of a particular college QB with your AFMB colleages. Just make sure that he is protected by a decent offensive line. Otherwise that franchise QB might just get pounded into a pulp which resembles David Carr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...