Opal312 Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 It's been said over and over that the NFL is a "Quarterback driven league". Yet the Super Bowl winning Seahawks averaged only 26 passes per game last year. Which brings me to my point. Brian Hoyer passed the ball 50 times against Houston completing 20 with one touchdown. The Browns lost at home to a rookie QB and let Alfred Blue run 36 times for 156 yards. The Browns got away from a winning formula by not pounding the ball. Why is Hoyer throwing 50 times? They weren't playing catch-up so why not use your best weapon? If the Browns want to make it to the playoffs they must establish their identity on offense by running first and passing second. It worked for Russell Wilson last year. They were almost unbeatable with a dominant defense and Marshawn Lynch. And Wilson spread the ball around enough to beat the elite teams and the elite quarterbacks. Now that Pettine has gotten rid of the malcontent in the locker room it's time to name a starting running back and stick to the plan. Now is not the time to start experimenting. Run the damn ball! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Good Quarterback play drives the league. Bad QB play drives it into the ground. Hoyer was passing so much because they were behind and the running game was giving us nothing. But as much as QB play drives the league.....I actually think that defense, as much as QB play, drives the league. Defense drove the Seahawks to their title last year, no ifs, ands or buts about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibleedbrown Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Last week was the first time l thought l saw the emergence of a "feature back," and that being Crowell. Seemed like he started and got the bulk if the carries the rest of the game. Dude needs to put a lid on the ball though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 It might be a QB driven league, but it's clearly evident that when a QB must shoulder the load of the team, more than not there's a significant failure eventually. Manning against the Hawks, Saints and Pats in his career. Brady against the Gmen. Brees against the regular season. So much that passing title was worth when the teams season was lost. Manning won a Super Bowl when the Colts defense raised their level of play and he could turn to Joseph Addai. Brady won rings by playing alongside an elite defense and a strong ground game. Brees won a ring with a balanced offense and an opportunistic defense. The mouth breather, Eli got it done with a running game, defense and a couple clutch throws. This idea that placing an elite QB on any given team will mask all of your flaws is beyond tired. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElkDawg Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 you have to be able to pound the rock to win in this league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibleedbrown Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 I dont know how many negative runs the Browns had, but there were too many. If your running game is losing yards, you have no choice but to pass the ball. Browns were very successful with the playaction, surprised they didnt do more of that. I'll ditto that. Even seemed later in the 2nd half the play action was still working for them, even when it was pretty evident the run wasn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterWhite Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Since the first Super Bowl in 1966 there have been 48 Super Bowls. 43 of them have been won by HALL OF FAME, MVP, OR PRO BOWL QB'S multiple times. Star, Namath, Dawson, Unitas, Staubach, Stabler, Greise, Bradshaw, Montana, Rypien, Simms, Aikman, Young, Favre, Warner, Brady, Big Ben, E. Manning, P. Manning, Rogers, Brees, Flacco, Wilson. Sweet. Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Jim Plunkett, and Doug Williams won with a running game. 4/48 Super Bowl were won without good QB's. Gotcha OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StocktonShorts Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Since the first Super Bowl in 1966 there have been 48 Super Bowls. 43 of them have been won by HALL OF FAME, MVP, OR PRO BOWL QB'S multiple times. Star, Namath, Dawson, Unitas, Staubach, Stabler, Greise, Bradshaw, Montana, Rypien, Simms, Aikman, Young, Favre, Warner, Brady, Big Ben, E. Manning, P. Manning, Rogers, Brees, Flacco, Wilson. Sweet. Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Jim Plunkett, and Doug Williams won with a running game. 4/48 Super Bowl were won without good QB's. Gotcha OP. With todays rule the QB position is even more important. Your QB has to be your main weapon if you want to win in todays NFL. If you have a running game to go along with it thats great, but you're not getting anywhere with just a running back and a QB that isn't a threat to exploit defenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggie Brown fan Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Blanket statements like "qb-driven leagie" and "defense wins championships" are bullshit. Great teams win championships. Sometimes those teams are better on defense (85 Bears, Bucs, Seahawks), sometimes they're better on offense (49'ers, 90's Cowboys). They almost always have really good to great qb's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterWhite Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Your QB has to be your main weapon if you want to win in todays NFL. I can't believe I'm agreeing with you. The Seahawks do not go to the playoffs without Russell Wilson's 100+ QB rating and ability to escape pressure. 3300 yards, 26 TD's, 9 int's, and a 65 % is damn good QB-ing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterWhite Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Blanket statements like "qb-driven leagie" and "defense wins championships" are bullshit. Great teams win championships. Sometimes those teams are better on defense (85 Bears, Bucs, Seahawks), sometimes they're better on offense (49'ers, 90's Cowboys). They almost always have really good to great qb's. Took the words from my mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Opal312 Posted November 19, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Blanket statements like "qb-driven leagie" and "defense wins championships" are bullshit. Great teams win championships. Sometimes those teams are better on defense (85 Bears, Bucs, Seahawks), sometimes they're better on offense (49'ers, 90's Cowboys). They almost always have really good to great qb's. That was my point! Wilson won win one scary good defense and passed on average 26 times per game. That's why We need to establish one running back to tote the rock. It's fine to spell him during the game like teams do but name a starter and stick with him already. I would never alternate Lance Dunbar with DiMarco Murry or Turbin instead of Lynch. The Steelers let Bell run all over Tennessee. So if it's Crowell, give him 90% of the snaps. Sure there will be plays for little or no gain but eventually he'll start clicking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Here's the way I've looked at it for a good while now. A Super Bowl caliber QB needs to be able to take over the game when it matters, simple. Eli Manning has never had eye-popping numbers, but the dude up until the past few years played huge when he had to. It's plainly obvious to see that a strong running game is critical as well. Being able to have guys who can get tough yards and dominant time of possession has consistently shown to be associated with winning football teams. Like said above, a franchise QB doesn't automatically equal success (see Steelers past few years). But a team has to have one to not be in the basement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thenew23 Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Crowell was running great in the first half until he fumbled in the red zone. That changed the game. After that play, we saw more of West and Tate neither of whom could get anything going with the football. That fumble, while early in the game, was the turning point in the game. Add in the Cundiff miss, and what could have easily been a 17-7 lead going into halftime, turned into a 14-7 deficit... Changed the feel of the entire game, and squashed all the confidence and momentum this team had going... Hopefully we can bounce back this week and pound the rock... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Since the first Super Bowl in 1966 there have been 48 Super Bowls. 43 of them have been won by HALL OF FAME, MVP, OR PRO BOWL QB'S multiple times. Star, Namath, Dawson, Unitas, Staubach, Stabler, Greise, Bradshaw, Montana, Rypien, Simms, Aikman, Young, Favre, Warner, Brady, Big Ben, E. Manning, P. Manning, Rogers, Brees, Flacco, Wilson. Sweet. Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Jim Plunkett, and Doug Williams won with a running game. 4/48 Super Bowl were won without good QB's. Gotcha OP. What about the years before that? I think you can find some pretty damn good QBs winning titles. Like Bart Starr, Johnny Unitas, Otto Graham, Sid Luckman, Sammy Baugh, Bob Waterfield, Bobby Layne....and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Blanket statements like "qb-driven leagie" and "defense wins championships" are bullshit. Great teams win championships. Sometimes those teams are better on defense (85 Bears, Bucs, Seahawks), sometimes they're better on offense (49'ers, 90's Cowboys). They almost always have really good to great qb's. Agree, "Great Balance" wins championships. Or should I say, a team has to be pretty great both offensively and defensively to win. (since a team can have great balance....by being bad on both sides of the ball) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 I can't believe I'm agreeing with you. The Seahawks do not go to the playoffs without Russell Wilson's 100+ QB rating and ability to escape pressure. 3300 yards, 26 TD's, 9 int's, and a 65 % is damn good QB-ing. Yup damn good... not dominant.. or elite... just damn good. Other apt descriptors? Efficient... complementary... game-managing... Divide the season yardage by 16 and you get 206 YPG. Dominant? Even add in the 30-ish YPG Wilson rushed for and you are shy of 250. Brady? Won three SB's as a complementary QB averaging under 240 ypg. Since then he has won zero, but his yards are up. No one wins simply because they have the "best" QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawg2fan Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Since the first Super Bowl in 1966 there have been 48 Super Bowls. 43 of them have been won by HALL OF FAME, MVP, OR PRO BOWL QB'S multiple times. Star, Namath, Dawson, Unitas, Staubach, Stabler, Greise, Bradshaw, Montana, Rypien, Simms, Aikman, Young, Favre, Warner, Brady, Big Ben, E. Manning, P. Manning, Rogers, Brees, Flacco, Wilson. Sweet. Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Jim Plunkett, and Doug Williams won with a running game. 4/48 Super Bowl were won without good QB's. Gotcha OP. Yes, but if you truly evaluate those winning QBs, you will find that they had complete teams (at least while they were winning). When you look at some of the big names today such as Rothlesburger, Eli Manning, Flacco, Wilson, why are they not winning? Football is the one sport where it is all about being a complete team. A great QB and no Oline, wont get it done. A great Oline and no QB wont get it done. A pathetic Dline and the best QB wont get it done unless you have Aaron Rodgers and even he can only do so much. Again, football is about having a complete team and all of those QBs mentioned above had complete teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterWhite Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 No one wins simply because they have the "best" QB. Well, all of the best QB's have won Super Bowls (minus Marino) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Since the first Super Bowl in 1966 there have been 48 Super Bowls. 43 of them have been won by HALL OF FAME, MVP, OR PRO BOWL QB'S multiple times. Star, Namath, Dawson, Unitas, Staubach, Stabler, Greise, Bradshaw, Montana, Rypien, Simms, Aikman, Young, Favre, Warner, Brady, Big Ben, E. Manning, P. Manning, Rogers, Brees, Flacco, Wilson. Sweet. Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Jim Plunkett, and Doug Williams won with a running game. 4/48 Super Bowl were won without good QB's. Gotcha OP. Doug WIlliams might not have been a "franchise" quarterback, but during that Superbowl he, and the Redskin receivers were superb and clearly outmatched Denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StocktonShorts Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 If you think the QB is just "1 of 22" and has no more importance than other players on the field, then nobody can help you. You're lost. No position is more important, and it's not even close.Todays NFL, even more so then 10 years ago, is all about the QB. The rules are designed for the QB to score points. Passing yards and points have never been higher. If your QB can't sling it then he better be able to hurt the other team with his feet. If he has neither of those abilities then you you're not going to win a Super Bowl with that guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dawg2fan Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Well, all of the best QB's have won Super Bowls (minus Marino) And Marino may have been the best QB ever. He never won a SB because he never had a really good D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 And Marino may have been the best QB ever. He never won a SB because he never had a really good D. What did someone say about "Balance"? Perfect example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 And Marino may have been the best QB ever. He never won a SB because he never had a really good D. All he ever wanted was the D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Well, all of the best QB's have won Super Bowls (minus Marino) Really? When did Dan Fouts win his? Fran Tarkenton? Jim Kelly? Bleacher says there are 50 of them... I did not bother to look. http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1025782-50-greatest-quarterbacks-never-to-win-a-super-bowl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manzier Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Lets be honest, players(qb's especially) get elevated to god status as soon as they win a SB. Some deserve it and some dont. A great quarterback certainly CANT win a Super Bowl with an average team, but an average quarterback could win one with a great TEAM.(and then he might be declared great)(or get paid like it). But a great QB definitely improves your odds. I see QB's who "statistically" were average to below average, but they won SuperBowls and are considered GREAT! And I see QB's who had long, successful careers and statistically were great, but they never won a SB and, therefore are considered "ok" So, if WINNING defines great. Then you gotta give Hoyer space, because he's winning. And if STATISTICS define great. Then you gotta say "average" qb's have won a lot of SB's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WinstonLegthigh Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Todays NFL, even more so then 10 years ago Don't let the Mensa boys see that you don't know "than" from "then" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Well, all of the best QB's have won Super Bowls (minus Marino) How do you define "best"? Of the Top 20 in career QB rating, over half of them have never won SB. Of the Top 20 QBs in career TD passes, over half of them have never won a SB. Of the Top 20 QBs in career completions, over half of them have never won a SB. Of the Top 20 QBs in career passing yards, over half of them have never won a SB. So, like I said, how do you define "best QBs" Or does you criteria sound like this: Of all the QBs that have won Super Bowls, all of them have won Super Bowls. Just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StocktonShorts Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 Don't let the Mensa boys see that you don't know "than" from "then" You use "Than" when talking options, comparing one thing to another "Stockton is smarter THAN you" You use "Then" when talking chronologically, a period of time like "Even more so THEN 10 years ago" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 I think there's many people who know more about football that dont have a menstrual card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.