I agree, but considering we are talking Franchise QBs, good still does not equate franchise QB.
Nfl Qb Position: Absolute Or Relative?
- Thread starter BigNastyFish
- Start date
I agree, but considering we are talking Franchise QBs, good still does not equate franchise QB.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2016
- Messages
- 13,421
- Reaction score
- 16,306
I get your point, but I think "all-time" is a stretch. A number of teams have won SBs with top Ds for that year, but not close to all-time. The Giants D was a significant factor in beating the Pats but weren't top t ALL-TIME. The Rams D wasn't the reason the Rams lost the SB. I agree, top Ds are hard to build, but you hurt you'r argument with "all-time." And top Ds have beaten elite QBs.
Given that, elite QBs are hard to find, and if you want to be consistent, you'll have to argue a top 5 all-time QB is is hard to find. But, that's not your point. Your point, if I read you correctly, is whether it's harder to build a top D or find an elite QB. Personally, I think both are difficult. In fact, I'd say 'rare.' That's why I'm in favor of getting a top 10 QB. Much easier to get one of those.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2012
- Messages
- 13,249
- Reaction score
- 31,900
It's so beyond ridiculous IMO to base your entire success on finding a super hero QB
when you can WIN with a high-performance QB surrounded by solid talent playing
great team ball. If there is a "Pats way" that's been it because Brady is in no way
a dude that can literally carry a team. He's benefited consistently from superior OL
play, a well designed and balanced attack, and (see the SB) a D that can make things
happen. Expecting a singular "super hero" to save the day consistently is stupid IMO.
BNF
when you can WIN with a high-performance QB surrounded by solid talent playing
great team ball. If there is a "Pats way" that's been it because Brady is in no way
a dude that can literally carry a team. He's benefited consistently from superior OL
play, a well designed and balanced attack, and (see the SB) a D that can make things
happen. Expecting a singular "super hero" to save the day consistently is stupid IMO.
BNF
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2016
- Messages
- 13,421
- Reaction score
- 16,306
No one will argue Brady is a gifted athlete. He's not. Neither was Marino. Yet, some here seem obsessed with the most gifted QB.
It is also apparent some place no importance on the HC/OC/DC. That's why I'm not obsessed with an elite QB. Get a top 10 QB, a top HC - Flores may or may not be that guy , and rid the team of bottom quartile players
erralyn
Starter
I must absolutely disagree that Marino was not a gifted athlete. He had one of the most tremendous arms I have ever seen and one of the quickest releases. It is absolutely mindboggling to me that someone would say he was not a gifted athlete.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2012
- Messages
- 13,249
- Reaction score
- 31,900
100% agree. Before his body broke down Dan was an excellent athlete -- incredibly fast twitch in the pocket and
had mobility as well. Of course NOT an RPO dude but in his special way a freak athlete...
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2016
- Messages
- 13,421
- Reaction score
- 16,306
Well, it isn't possible to say anyone playing a professional sport isn't a good athlete, but follow my logic. Judging by the discussions here on current QB prospects, there are references to fit for RPO, scrambling, winning games 'with his feet.' Neither Brady nor Marino would be drafted by those people. They may not have prototypical size. Marino was questioned by some due to lack of intelligence. Some, like Farve and wilson, weren't tall enough to be a legit prospect. My point was, by the definition of some, they want a QB who is good at EVERYTHING and HAS to match the ideal specs. THOSE are the "gifted" athletes. Bad in one area - arm not quite live enough, not able to take a hit - and they're scratched. Brady, Marino, Farve, elway, Kelly need not apply.
Maybe I should have said 'not gifted in every aspect of the game.' Nonetheless, I think this obsession with an 'elite' QB is a waste of time. First, because there are constant predictions THIS year's top QB will be elite when, in fact, most are no more than average. Second, because there's a reason everyone wants one but only 2-3 teams have one, and, third, because some have the idea an elite QB and a high school team can win the SB (QBWINZ). I want a top 10 QB and a top 10 HC. SBs will come.
Eli was a franchise QB. The fact that he wasn't as good as or aged as well as his brother doesn't change that and he was most certainly better than any of the mostly garbage we've had playing the position since Marino (yes, even our dear dear Pennington, the only one who wasn't garbage).
Regardless, this team has been a huge pile of dogshit without even a good QB. Not sure why there are still people out there arguing that we can get by with a decent QB if we build some awesome team around them. Arguing to stay the course of the godawful strategy this team has employed for nearly 2 decades. It's so weird.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2016
- Messages
- 13,421
- Reaction score
- 16,306
I've seen no one say "stay the course' or anyone arguing the QB shouldn't be upgraded. The debate here seems to be who will be a top/elite QB and how much to give to get him. I want a top QB, but not by giving up the '19 and '20 R1 picks. That doesn't mean "stay the course."
Can't argue with the comparison to what we have had, but as far as Eli being a Franchise QB, I guess it depends who you ask.
Though I thought he was a good QB, most Giants fan I know (I Know a lot of them) thinks he is just below a franchise QB, if you compare how he looked in the regular season.
I thought (like Joe Flacco) he was an Ok to good QB in the regular season, but an elite QB in the post-season.
By arguing that we don't need a great QB and that we'd be fine if we just built up a top team around whatever QB we have, one is arguing to stay the course, whether they use that exact expression or not. The basis of this thread is exactly that.
And you wouldn't give 2 1st rounders only for a top QB? That's undervaluing the position. Kind of like the team has done for 20 years.
And there are Dolphins fans who thought Tannehill was good. Anecdotal Giants fans opinions don't mean all that much to me, tbh.
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2012
- Messages
- 13,249
- Reaction score
- 31,900
Are you having a bad day?
Forgive me but I think you've actually missed the basis just a tad.
:)
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2016
- Messages
- 13,421
- Reaction score
- 16,306
I'll concede some have argued (incorrectly) tannehill would be a great QB "if we just built up a top team around" him. I disagree with that. Which get us to semantics. Miami, in fact NO team needs a "great" QB, depending on the definition. It certainly helps, but isn't a requirement. Wilson and Flacco are examples of good QBs who were successful because a "top team" was built around them. But I remember no one saying build a team around "whatever QB we have."
Me? I've said too many times, Miami doesn't NEED a great QB. I want a top 10 QB. Doesn't have to be great/elite (although I'd love one), but a top 10 QB and top 10 HC. Those two can win multiple SBs.
Don't think you will find many fans of other teams that thought Eli was that Elite...Just like how they felt about Tannehill also.
For the record, don't think you will find many NFL Coaches that would put Eli in their top 15. He is good, not great, not a franchise QB...But that my opinion, just like he is a franchise QB IS yours