Running QB's on the decline | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Running QB's on the decline

P

phinfreak

☠️ Banned ☠️
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
963
Reaction score
22
Say what you want about the pressure imposed on defenses by a running QB.

The fact is the numbers do not support this style of QB being a consistent and persistent threat.

Joe Montana
Steve Young
Are both good examples of running QB's that didn't win until they developed pocket presence.

Dan Marino was no threat to tuck the ball and run but he had superior pocket presence and was mobile WITHIN the pocket.

John Elway, for all his arm strength and scrambling ability didn't win until they got him a RB and he altered his game from running with the ball to buying time for his recievers.

Look at Vick, stories are now surfacing that the Falcons won't go too far until he develops his skills as a pocket passer, his running is great entertainment but puts him at risk of injury, his style can't be transported very successfully outside the Dome in weather, and it gates the down the field threat his recievers pose. There are rumblings in Atlanta that he should have been benched vs Bears.

Donovan McNab, on injured reserve.

Jaguars and Vikings both without their running QB's. Of the two, Culpepper has gone further in his transition.

Who will be the QB's in this years SB?

A stiff by the name of Manning and some other pocket passer.
 
they are on the decline because Defensive players have got even bigger and faster than they used. But with that said, having the ability to scramble if need be is always a good thing to have. Thats why I've said several times, if we can get ahold of Culpepper... we better do it.
 
The running quarter back adds another dimension of offense to the field. If the play isn't there he can take off and run with it. The one thing however that does bother me about running quarterbacks early in their careers is that it takes them a little longer to learn not to run the ball to quickly.
 
phinfreak said:
Say what you want about the pressure imposed on defenses by a running QB.

The fact is the numbers do not support this style of QB being a consistent and persistent threat.

Joe Montana
Steve Young
Are both good examples of running QB's that didn't win until they developed pocket presence.

Dan Marino was no threat to tuck the ball and run but he had superior pocket presence and was mobile WITHIN the pocket.

John Elway, for all his arm strength and scrambling ability didn't win until they got him a RB and he altered his game from running with the ball to buying time for his recievers.

Look at Vick, stories are now surfacing that the Falcons won't go too far until he develops his skills as a pocket passer, his running is great entertainment but puts him at risk of injury, his style can't be transported very successfully outside the Dome in weather, and it gates the down the field threat his recievers pose. There are rumblings in Atlanta that he should have been benched vs Bears.

Donovan McNab, on injured reserve.

Jaguars and Vikings both without their running QB's. Of the two, Culpepper has gone further in his transition.

Who will be the QB's in this years SB?

A stiff by the name of Manning and some other pocket passer.
Click to expand...

I agree, I would much rather have a QB that can stand in the pocket and throw right on the button every time than a QB that can run 10 yards every now and then. I'll take the best ever pocket passer over the best running QB any day. Thats like Marino vs. Vick.
 
PhinFan0202 said:
The running quarter back adds another dimension of offense to the field. If the play isn't there he can take off and run with it. The one thing however that does bother me about running quarterbacks early in their careers is that it takes them a little longer to learn not to run the ball to quickly.
Click to expand...

vick wont ever learn that
 
Vick in trouble

I think both Vick and McNab are in decline.

Teams have learned how to defend against both.

Vick you contain with DE's protecting against boots, reverses and waggles + coverage vs deep ball.

McNab won't torch you for 50 yards like Vick can so you contain, add blitzes, and play man coverage forcing accurate throws which he can't make. Force him to throw the check down which in the West Coast offense may be the primary reciever.

They guys that scare you are the QB's that can throw deep, accurate, and also throw the deep outs.

I'll take Manning or the guy in NE anytime.
 
phinfreak said:
I think both Vick and McNab are in decline.

Teams have learned how to defend against both.

Vick you contain with DE's protecting against boots, reverses and waggles + coverage vs deep ball.

McNab won't torch you for 50 yards like Vick can so you contain, add blitzes, and play man coverage forcing accurate throws which he can't make. Force him to throw the check down which in the West Coast offense may be the primary reciever.

They guys that scare you are the QB's that can throw deep, accurate, and also throw the deep outs.

I'll take Manning or the guy in NE anytime.
Click to expand...

So you'd take two of the best Qb's ever, over two of the best Qb's in their era, shocking.
 
"...two of the best QB's in their era"....who the hell are you talking about?

McNab? Vick? get real. What era are you talking about? Manning and Brady are both in the same "era" as McNab and Vick!

Your wit astonishes us all..
 
It's nice to have one that can run for it when things break down, a la Fiedler, but the real "running qbs" either cut and run too soon, or aren't very effective pocket passers if they learn to stay put. Elway's probably the exception, but the modern running qbs aren't anything I want.
 
phinfreak said:
"...two of the best QB's in their era"....who the hell are you talking about?

McNab? Vick? get real. What era are you talking about? Manning and Brady are both in the same "era" as McNab and Vick!

Your wit astonishes us all..
Click to expand...

Yeah but Manning and Brady are two of the best of all time, and McNabb and Vick are two of the best in the game now. Obviously Manning and Brady are better, but that doesn't take anything away from McNabb or Vick.
 
djfresh47 said:
Yeah but Manning and Brady are two of the best of all time, and McNabb and Vick are two of the best in the game now. Obviously Manning and Brady are better, but that doesn't take anything away from McNabb or Vick.
Click to expand...

What year are you living in?? They are all still playing IN THE GAME NOW. Vick and McNabb are nothing compared to Peyton or Brady.
 
Hello...do you actually watch football?

McNab is on IR. He has not played in many weeks. Before that he/eagles were struggling.
Vick...do the research. They are calling for him to be benched. Atlanta may be out of the playoffs.

There's your "...best in their era" QB's. Done and Doner.
 
phinfreak said:
"...two of the best QB's in their era"....who the hell are you talking about?

McNab? Vick? get real. What era are you talking about? Manning and Brady are both in the same "era" as McNab and Vick!

Your wit astonishes us all..
Click to expand...

beat me to it ;)
 
Shamboubou said:
What year are you living in?? They are all still playing IN THE GAME NOW. Vick and McNabb are nothing compared to Peyton or Brady.
Click to expand...

I said they're not as good, but I guess you missed it.
 
phinfreak said:
Hello...do you actually watch football?

McNab is on IR. He has not played in many weeks. Before that he/eagles were struggling.
Vick...do the research. They are calling for him to be benched. Atlanta may be out of the playoffs.

There's your "...best in their era" QB's. Done and Doner.
Click to expand...

Obviously McNabb is on IR, but before that he is still one of the best Qb's in the game as is Vick. San Diego maybe out of the playoffs does that mean that Tomlinson is not a great player?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom