It is not my issue that you don't even know what a franchise QB is, that's on you
Not my fault your standards are low
I keep trying to return to this board with the team's rejuvination. But you just make it so hard. Nobody thinks a franchise QB must be elite other than you. Facts just don't seem to matter in your arguments.
Eli Manning is another example of a Franchise QB who wasn’t elite.
I honestly thought everyone understood what a franchise QB is. I stand corrected.
It’s called debating DGF . The definition of franchise qb is subjective. Your interpretation of it is an opinion not a fact . Non franchise qbs have been to superbowl and won them . That is a fact , we won consistently under Gibbs without a franchise qb . That is a fact . So you don’t NEED a franchise qb but it sure as hell makes it easier .
I have hardly ever used the ignore function but in this case I agree it would be best for the board. I reserve the right to take you off ignore in the future and comment if you say something stupid again.
(that was a joke).
DGF, this board is all about differing opinions and defending those opinions, I’m not sure why you get so upset if someone has a different opinion. There is no universal definition of a franchise QB. It’s subjective. I personally believe that a franchise QB needs to be able to carry a team on his back, at times, to a win. But there are clearly QBs that have won a SB who are not elite nor, imo, franchise QBs. They were game managers that played well in a system. Neither of you have been disrespectful to each other, why the consternation over a debate?
Calling plays went on to the early 80’s, not just the 30’s outliers in fact prove it can be done and that is the crux of the debate . Again the 1st Gibbs era clearly shows my position. And that is 1/5 of my football watching life . Successful is also subjective. I say KC is successful while you may differ . I am not the only person on earth with my definition of what a franchise qb is. Listen to talk radio around the country and at least 30% agree with me if not more . The other 70% have 2 to 3 different standards of what a franchise qb .I have hardly ever used the ignore function but in this case I agree it would be best for the board. I reserve the right to take you off ignore in the future and comment if you say something stupid again.
Final comment on this: You make fair points above. Yes franchise QB is subjective but you appear to be the only person on Earth who believes franchise QB is the same as elite. Most of us understand that there is a difference between Justin Herbert and Patrick Mahomes yet most everyone but you considers them both to be franchise QBs.
Again when I say facts are not on your side I was not referring to the definition of franchise QB. I was stating, with links, how the teams who made the playoffs the most times all had franchise QBs, many elite but not all. The vast number of championships were with teams with franchise QBs. Your Ryp or Flacco examples are outliers from a different era. I have no idea why you didn't understand the point that they PLAYED like franchise QBs for those seasons. They were in fact playing at a high level, the level of a franchise QB, for those seasons which only backs my position not yours. But for LASTING SUCCESS you can't rely on outliers, you need a true franchise QB who can maintain that high level of play as history clearly shows. This should not be difficult for you to uinderstand yet here we are. Again the facts are not on your side here.
It is kind of mind numbing that you can't understand how the QB of today, where far more passes and QB runs are the norm, are more important now than when Mark Rypien played. Are calling plays in the 30's while throwing 9 passes and "managing the game" really as demanding as reading the complex defenses of today, calling the correct audibles while running and throwing it 40-50 times a game? You have got to be kidding me with that argument.
Bingo!
Just wanted you to know I enjoy your posts on the board and hope you continue to do so
