SkippinTurtles Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Brady started as a game manager and got better. Franchise QB's are pie in the sky. A blue-collar approach might be more realistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Brady started as a game manager and got better. Franchise QB's are pie in the sky. A blue-collar approach might be more realistic. Can't tell if sarcastic or stupid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Brady started as a game manager and got better. Franchise QB's are pie in the sky. A blue-collar approach might be more realistic. Yes, it can be done......see 2000 Ravens....see 2002 Bucs....even this year with a former Superstar QB turned game manager. See any Joe Gibbs Super Bowl winning team. But, still, having the killer QB is still the more frequent road to success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Add the fact that so many QB's are not great until they are on a great team....then suddenly..... And, as soon as one wins a SB, he gets dubbed as a superstar and future HOFer.....except the couple that everyone mentions, who were obviously no where near that level..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Add the fact that so many QB's are not great until they are on a great team....then suddenly..... And, as soon as one wins a SB, he gets dubbed as a superstar and future HOFer.....except the couple that everyone mentions, who were obviously no where near that level..... What would be the criteria for a QB to be considered great? How about winning two Super Bowls? Perhaps not. Jim Plunkett won two and has gotten a sniff of the HOF. A lot of people think that Eli is not HOF (even though some of his basics stats actually exceed his brother's at this point in their respective careers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 What would be the criteria for a QB to be considered great? How about winning two Super Bowls? Perhaps not. Jim Plunkett won two and has gotten a sniff of the HOF. A lot of people think that Eli is not HOF (even though some of his basics stats actually exceed his brother's at this point in their respective careers. Simply being a great player makes you great.....and simply being on a great team can win you super bowls.....and make you appear to be a better QB......having great WR's, OL's and RB's add a lot too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Greatness is also not necessarily reflected in stats, it's a function of the team as much as anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Greatness is also not necessarily reflected in stats, it's a function of the team as much as anything else. But we know that average or below QBs can win for a great team. The above examples have shown that. And, certainly there ARE QBs in the past who have been considered great mainly based on stats: Fouts, Marino, Warren Moon. ...Tony Romo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 aaron Rodgers has one superbowl because the packers defense has been inconsistent throughout the years. So you can have a guy that will score 25+ pts but if his defense gives up more than it's "nothing". You can win a SB without a top 5 defense. The colts won a SB with manning and an ok defense because the defense specialized in pass rushing...that was ok because teams had no choice but to pass and pass early just to keep up with the boat race manning put on in his prime. But just think how many SB's manning would have won if he had better defenses around him. Everyone talks about Brady when it comes to the Pats SB"s but their defense's are always good. They allow the Patriots offense to groove. We saw this year what happens when a pass rush breaks the Patriots O line. Brady becomes avg. As it pertains to the Browns though you can't move forward with this defense. At all. There's maybe a handful of guys that need retained but everyone else has to go either this year or the following. There has to be a legimitate overhaul of this defense and it has to start now. You simply do not overlook top grade defensive talent in favor of QB's that have no shot of stepping on an NFL field next year and playing at any decent level. Both Goff and Wentz need more work than should be required out of #2 pick. A #2 pick is a guy you know with certainty can step on the field day one if required and be competent. Mariota was borderline and he was far ahead of these guys we're talking about. Bottom line is we could have the greatest show on turf reincarnated here in Cleveland and they wouldn't get us deep into the playoffs with this clownshow of a defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Pssshh... Tom Brady Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 But we know that average or below QBs can win for a great team. The above examples have shown that. And, certainly there ARE QBs in the past who have been considered great mainly based on stats: Fouts, Marino, Warren Moon. ...Tony Romo? I get that....but do you really think there are only 3 GREAT QB's that didnt win a SB?......and do you really think a lot of HOF QB's would have been "great" on bad teams?....or would they be more like Archie Manning?..... The 75 Stools had 9 HOFers and 17 All-Pros....dont you think they had something to do with Bradshaws success?.....cause even though he won SB's, he has lousy stats.....and I contend he would've had even lousier stats without all those greats....(and would never have made the hall or even a Pro-bowl on a lousy team) And, what team really has 9 HOFers???.....Id say none.....and many of those players would not even sniff the HOF if not for being on that team and surrounded by enough excellent players to elevate the play for everyone..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 I get that....but do you really think there are only 3 GREAT QB's that didnt win a SB? Not sure....name some other great ones in your opinion that did not win a SB. ......and do you really think a lot of HOF QB's would have been "great" on bad teams?....or would they be more like Archie Manning?..... Very possibly so....I always use the Bradshaw/Phipps scenario. What would it have been like if the picks were switched...and the Steelers got Phipps and the Browns Bradshaw. The 75 Stools had 9 HOFers and 17 All-Pros....dont you think they had something to do with Bradshaws success?.....cause even though he won SB's, he has lousy stats.....and I contend he would've had even lousier stats without all those greats....(and would never have made the hall or even a Pro-bowl on a lousy team) Yea, speculation...see above....would Phipps have been the HOFer instead? Oi! And, what team really has 9 HOFers??? Those Steelers, 60s Packers even have more....50s Browns. .....Id say none.....and many of those players would not even sniff the HOF if not for being on that team and surrounded by enough excellent players to elevate the play for everyone..... Symbiosis I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 The answer to the idea of being a great team without an elite QB in today's NFL is easily, easily resolved. Look at any team that has won a super bowl past Tampa Bay and think if those dudes weren't top 10 at their position at the time (or still are in many cases). You don't win without the big stakes without a true franchise QB. Of course, a great TEAM wins the Super Bowl and I understand that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 The answer to the idea of being a great team without an elite QB in today's NFL is easily, easily resolved. Look at any team that has won a super bowl past Tampa Bay and think if those dudes weren't top 10 at their position at the time (or still are in many cases). You don't win without the big stakes without a true franchise QB. Of course, a great TEAM wins the Super Bowl and I understand that. I guess you weren't pay close attention to the Denver QB problem all season long. The D won the season and the playoffs including the SB which is why Manning retired. He knew the truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 I guess you weren't pay close attention to the Denver QB problem all season long. The D won the season and the playoffs including the SB which is why Manning retired. He knew the truth. Yeah, because boy that Manning fella isn't an all-time great QB. No one says you don't need a great, even dominant defense to win. But you can't win with a mediocre QB either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Yeah, because boy that Manning fella isn't an all-time great QB. No one says you don't need a great, even dominant defense to win. But you can't win with a mediocre QB either Well no you can win, ur defense just has to be that much better. Last season manning was beyond awful. You do realize if that if he had been that way his whole career he would never have even played d1 ball. His knowledge of the game was the only thing that kept him in there. As per ur statement i would also offer you cant win with a bottom tier defense either. Our defense is preposterous. Yes i said preposterous. Means i cant beleive it even exists. We would have been in the playofs two years ago "easily" if we had only had an avg defense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Yeah, because boy that Manning fella isn't an all-time great QB. No one says you don't need a great, even dominant defense to win. But you can't win with a mediocre QB either But, a few....see above examples...have. Again, no, not the norm, but notable exceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 we've tried the 'old' build a great team thing without having a QB since '99 and has gotten us nowhere (and i'm one of those guys that was shouting that was the route to take). how can building a team work when the builders and planners are canned every 2 years? as i've said in another thread: let hue 'the QB guru' draft us a franchise QB and let that be this regime's legacy for the brown's history and hopefully future before he gets canned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 wr's. Browns never have good ones that love the game... except for Benjamin, and he isn't an A.J. Green. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 we've tried the 'old' build a great team thing without having a QB since '99 and has gotten us nowhere (and i'm one of those guys that was shouting that was the route to take). how can building a team work when the builders and planners are canned every 2 years? as i've said in another thread: let hue 'the QB guru' draft us a franchise QB and let that be this regime's legacy for the brown's history and hopefully future before he gets canned. We have drafted 4 QBs in round one......and I don't care that they were lower in round one...they were first rounders. A QB drafted in round one is expected to become a team's franchise QB. So it is bollux to say that we have only gone the "build the team first before getting a QB" routel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudfly Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- We have drafted 4 QBs in round one......and I don't care that they were lower in round one...they were first rounders. A QB drafted in round one is expected to become a team's franchise QB. So it is bollux to say that we have only gone the "build the team first before getting a QB" routel. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- well you do have to account for the fact that our last 3 first round QB's were all the second pick we made.....Thomas came ahead of Quinn.....Richardson came ahead of Weeds......Gilbert came ahead of Manziel... So, in reality, it was team ahead of QB in 3 outta 4 .......and by taking other players first, it's also pretty clear that the Browns weren't sold on any of these guys as a franchise QBs, otherwise they wouldnt have risked losing them by picking other positions first.... So, not really bullox, but actually fact.... I think we just had 2 picks and decided we could risk the second one by throwing caution to the wind on players that we hoped might be good.....(emphasis on the word hoped, as opposed to expected) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted March 14, 2016 Report Share Posted March 14, 2016 Yeah, because boy that Manning fella isn't an all-time great QB. No one says you don't need a great, even dominant defense to win. But you can't win with a mediocre QB either This is what you said, "Look at any team that has won a super bowl past Tampa Bay and think if those dudes weren't top 10 at their position at the time". I was giving you the answer that no, he was not very good compared to his prime and certainly not top 10 at his position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkippinTurtles Posted March 15, 2016 Author Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 You need a franchise QB to win multiple SB's. You can get one with D and a kicker. Getting one is awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickers Posted March 15, 2016 Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 Add the fact that so many QB's are not great until they are on a great team....then suddenly..... And, as soon as one wins a SB, he gets dubbed as a superstar and future HOFer.....except the couple that everyone mentions, who were obviously no where near that level..... I disagree.. teams go as the QB goes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted March 15, 2016 Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 This is what you said, "Look at any team that has won a super bowl past Tampa Bay and think if those dudes weren't top 10 at their position at the time". I was giving you the answer that no, he was not very good compared to his prime and certainly not top 10 at his position. Eh, we'll just disagree on that. I get where you're going, but I think even a 40 year old Peyton Manning was still top 10-11 in the league last year. I'd flip this around a little bit, but this is pretty much how I saw it last year: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000524987/article/qb-index-ranking-the-starters-132 You need a franchise QB to win multiple SB's. You can get one with D and a kicker. Getting one is awesome. Again, name one team who has won the SB since 2003 who didn't have a true franchise QB at the helm (and don't give me that Joe Flacco bullshit like he isn't a franchise dude). Manning this year is as close of an argument you can make. There's plenty of examples in the history of the game but none in almost 15 years running. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted March 15, 2016 Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 Manning this year is as close of an argument you can make. There's plenty of examples in the history of the game but none in almost 15 years running. So now we have Tampa Bay and the Broncos. Both superb defensive teams! LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted March 15, 2016 Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 Injured Peyton was bad, but healed Peyton closed the deal. Physically he can be an average QB, but his head on an average QB's shoulders makes the package well above average. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Couch Pulls Out Posted March 15, 2016 Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 Eh, we'll just disagree on that. I get where you're going, but I think even a 40 year old Peyton Manning was still top 10-11 in the league last year. I'd flip this around a little bit, but this is pretty much how I saw it last year: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000524987/article/qb-index-ranking-the-starters-132 Again, name one team who has won the SB since 2003 who didn't have a true franchise QB at the helm (and don't give me that Joe Flacco bullshit like he isn't a franchise dude). Manning this year is as close of an argument you can make. There's plenty of examples in the history of the game but none in almost 15 years running. Peyton was one of the worst in the league last year. He may have been the worst of all starters in terms of rating. The guy only had like four games with a rating above 80. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrb12711 Posted March 15, 2016 Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 So now we have Tampa Bay and the Broncos. Both superb defensive teams! LOL! That's why I said since 2003, aka after Tampa Bay won? Peyton was one of the worst in the league last year. He may have been the worst of all starters in terms of rating. The guy only had like four games with a rating above 80. Like I said, I'm willing to bend on the idea some with Manning this year. I understand, really I do, but a broken down Peyton Manning is still not on the same level as a Trent Dilfer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasAg1969 Posted March 15, 2016 Report Share Posted March 15, 2016 That's why I said since 2003, aka after Tampa Bay won? Like I said, I'm willing to bend on the idea some with Manning this year. I understand, really I do, but a broken down Peyton Manning is still not on the same level as a Trent Dilfer. Just tugging on your leg a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.