Why Miami Should Draft a First Day QB.....

[korl68]

But............you can make do with less than top quality at nearly every other position except the single most important...which is of course quarterback.

Yes its a team game, and yes a QB can't do it alone, but without one it is useless.

See the Dolphins a few years ago.....3rd ranked defense in the league, 8 pro bowlers, leagues leading rusher, obviously an O-line good enough to have the leading rusher.....and we couldn't even make the playoffs because of Jay Fiedler.

You are fooling yourself to think this game doesn't primarily revolve around the QB position.

And just because we spend an extra pick we received on a QB to fill out our roster and give us a full pot of potentials to develop, does not mean we are neglecting building the rest of the team.

Common sense!!!

 

[korl68]

Originally Posted by JamesBW43
The Bucs and Ravens had no problem winning a Superbowl without a top quality QB. In fact they both had bad QB's, yet the "team" won.


How many times have they been back to the Super Bowl since?


Have they been SERIOUS contenders every year since they won?


It takes a franchise QB to develop consistency to become year in and year out contenders not one year wonders.



Me I want to be like the Patriots and Dallas teams or the 49er's

 

[Padfoot]

Originally Posted by JamesBW43
The Bucs and Ravens had no problem winning a Superbowl without a top quality QB. In fact they both had bad QB's, yet the "team" won.


How many times have they been back to the Super Bowl since?


Have they been SERIOUS contenders every year since they won?


It takes a franchise QB to develop consistency to become year in and year out contenders not one year wonders.



Me I want to be like the Patriots and Dallas teams or the 49er's

The Colts, Steelers, and Packers all won 1 superbowl with a top of the line QB. How many times have they been back since?

The day a team wins the superbowl on the back of a QB's skills alone, then I'll agree that we should just draft a QB year after year until we find a the best there is. But don't hold your breath.

The Patriots, Cowboys and 49er's all had good overall teams. They ran the ball effectively, they played good defense, and yes had solid QB play. You need all the pieces of the puzzle to win, not just one.

 

[korl68]

[/quote]
but we have to really start building this franchise from the ground up.[/quote]

What is a ground up position to start building from?

 

[korl68]

The Colts, Steelers, and Packers all won 1 superbowl with a top of the line QB. How many times have they been back since?

The day a team wins the superbowl on the back of a QB's skills alone, then I'll agree that we should just draft a QB year after year until we find a the best there is. But don't hold your breath.

That is not my point those teams are serious contenders every year because of the QB's they have.

Let me ask you if those teams had Josh McCown would they have been to the Super Bowl and won?

Would they be contenders to win a Super Bowl every year? Would the Patriots, Colts, Dallas be contenders every year without their QB's?

No one says a QB wins by himself that would be an assinine statement.

It takes great team balance and a Franchise QB to build a dynasty or a contender every year. PERIOD

 

[korl68]

I think drafting Jake Long first is building from the ground up.

Going after a QB in the second round is completely responsible and the right thing to do even if John Beck turns out to be great.

It makes sense having someone learning in the wings as Beck will be 27 when the season starts.

 

[Padfoot]

That is not my point those teams are serious contenders every year because of the QB's they have.

Let me ask you if those teams had Josh McCown would they have been to the Super Bowl and won?

Would they be contenders to win a Super Bowl every year? Would the Patriots, Colts, Dallas be contenders every year without their QB's?

No one says a QB wins by himself that would be an assinine statement.

It takes great team balance and a Franchise QB to build a dynasty or a contender every year. PERIOD

I have never disputed that. My comment was that a QB cannot win alone but that a team can win without a good QB. I wouldn't dream of claiming a team can be a dynasty without consistent QB play.

Obviously a franchise QB is ideal for plans of winning in the NFL, but if your team can block well, run the ball effectively, and play great defense, then an average skilled QB can be that franchise QB and manage the game.

And I guess my main point in this is that we're never going to turn the Dolphins into a complete team if we keep spending picks, whether in the draft or by trading, on quarterback after quarterback while the rest of our team slowly degrades over lost picks that were thrown away at every QB that came along.

 

[korl68]

Obviously a franchise QB is ideal for plans of winning in the NFL, but if your team can block well, run the ball effectively, and play great defense, then an average skilled QB can be that franchise QB and manage the game.

This where we disagree! I believe the QB should be a difference maker not a game manager.

Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Roger Staubach, Brett Farve, Dan Marino, Jim Kelly, Steve Young and John Elway were difference makers.

Game managers are not franchise QB's they are caretakers.

To be great year in and year out in the NFL requires a difference maker at QB

 

[BlueFin]

I have never disputed that. My comment was that a QB cannot win alone but that a team can win without a good QB. I wouldn't dream of claiming a team can be a dynasty without consistent QB play.

Obviously a franchise QB is ideal for plans of winning in the NFL, but if your team can block well, run the ball effectively, and play great defense, then an average skilled QB can be that franchise QB and manage the game.

And I guess my main point in this is that we're never going to turn the Dolphins into a complete team if we keep spending picks, whether in the draft or by trading, on quarterback after quarterback while the rest of our team slowly degrades over lost picks that were thrown away at every QB that came along.

Actually, you avoided my response, where I pointed out again that your two examples, Tampa Bay and Baltimore, had two of best three defenses in history, we CAN NOT depend on having a defense that dominant.

However, those two teams got consistent QB play those two years from Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson as well, you certainly can't categorize Johnson's play as "BAD" that year.

And you speak of throwing away picks on QB's, thats because we had incompetents running the team, if we had selected Drew Brees instead of Jamar Fletcher, in the draft, in round 1, we wouldn't have had to waste all those picks.

And, have you forgotten all the picks we've wasted on other positions?

 

[Padfoot]

This where we disagree! I believe the QB should be a difference maker not a game manager.

Peyton Manning, Tom Brady, Terry Bradshaw, Joe Montana, Roger Staubach, Brett Farve, Dan Marino, Jim Kelly, Steve Young and John Elway were difference makers.

Game managers are not franchise QB's they are caretakers.

To be great year in and year out in the NFL requires a difference maker at QB

Plus a solid supporting cast.

I certianly don't disagree with you, a QB "should" be a difference maker, but not every QB is. You can spend many many years at the bottom of the NFL taking QB after QB before that difference making QB comes along just at the right time for you to draft him.

A good example of what I'm trying to say is the Bengals. They spent so many years at the bottom of the NFL trying out so many different QB's and remained a horrible team for a very long time. Then their savior came along, Carson Palmer, a difference making QB. But are they contenders? No, even with that difference making QB, they do not have a strong enough supporting cast to contend.

Even Peyton Manning couldn't get close to the Lombardi trophy until Tony Dungee came in and beefed up their defense.

A great QB is a wonderful thing but constantly trying to find one that isn't there, while neglecting the rest of your team is not smart.

It makes much more sense to keep your team strong year after year so that when that Qb does come along, he'll have the tools in place to succeed.

 

[Padfoot]

Actually, you avoided my response, where I pointed out again that your two examples, Tampa Bay and Baltimore, had two of best three defenses in history, we CAN NOT depend on having a defense that dominant.

However, those two teams got consistent QB play those two years from Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson as well, you certainly can't categorize Johnson's play as "BAD" that year.

And you speak of throwing away picks on QB's, thats because we had incompetents running the team, if we had selected Drew Brees instead of Jamar Fletcher, in the draft, in round 1, we wouldn't have had to waste all those picks.

And, have you forgotten all the picks we've wasted on other positions?

You said that a team is irrelevent without a good QB. I disagreed and pointed out that those teams won the superbowl without a good QB.

So they had one of the best defenses in history, defense is part of the team. My point is still valid. I never tried to argue that teams should concentrate solely on defense in order to win. I simply made a point that a team is not irrelevant without a good QB. It may have taken a phenominal defense to do it, but they did it.

And until a QB carries a team on his back and wins by himself, I'm going to continue to hold the view that the QB is more dependent on the team than the team is on the QB.

 

[SammySmif]

What do you guys think about JD Booty? I am wondering if that guy could come in and surprise some folks and be a good NFL QB. It's funny how he struggled once the USC Oline got depleted last year...weird how that works eh?

The poster who brought up our OC is exactly right. He utilizes a great Oline and a ball control offense. These 2 things go hand in hand. We trade JT for Mckinney and are close to having an elite line. Then we draft Gholston and now have our stud pass rusher. We could draft a guard early 2nd round and then maybe still have a shot at Booty in the late 2nd. Suddenly the team has 3Qbs, a solid Oline, and a Dline that is shaping up.

It's just a scenario, but more in line with the philosphy of the new coaches here.

 

[BlueFin]

You said that a team is irrelevent without a good QB. I disagreed and pointed out that those teams won the superbowl without a good QB.

So they had one of the best defenses in history, defense is part of the team. My point is still valid. I never tried to argue that teams should concentrate solely on defense in order to win. I simply made a point that a team is not irrelevant without a good QB. It may have taken a phenominal defense to do it, but they did it.

And until a QB carries a team on his back and wins by himself, I'm going to continue to hold the view that the QB is more dependent on the team than the team is on the QB.

Thats a ridiculous notion, obviously no quarterback can win it alone, but it is the single most important position in Pro Football, and the rules changes that promote the passing game amplify their importance.

By the way, Brad Johnson is in the top 20 in lifetime passer ratings, completed over 60 percent of his passes for 12 straight years, and threw for 3800 yards and 26 touchdowns in Tampa's Superbowl year, so I think he qualified as good, at the least.

 

[Padfoot]

Thats a ridiculous notion, obviously no quarterback can win it alone, but it is the single most important position in Pro Football, and the rules changes that promote the passing game amplify their importance.

By the way, Brad Johnson is in the top 20 in lifetime passer ratings, completed over 60 percent of his passes for 12 straight years, and threw for 3800 yards and 26 touchdowns in Tampa's Superbowl year, so I think he qualified as good, at the least.

Ok fine, Baltimore still remains. My point is, a team is not irrelevant without a good QB. Is it hard? Unlikely? Yes, but again, the team is not irrelevant.

 

[korl68]

It makes much more sense to keep your team strong year after year so that when that Qb does come along, he'll have the tools in place to succeed.

You can do what you are suggesting with a RB they can be plug and play but a QB is different they are the general on the field and the identity of the team. It takes years to fully develop a qb.

The dog wags the tale not the other way around.

I completely agree it takes a complete team to win year in and out. But the foundation has to start with a QB not the other way around.

Foundation pieces:

QB
LT
Pass Rushers
CB