Just a rant about QBs in general.

[Jakology]

Warning: Incoming wall of text that may or may not make sense at times.

I don't understand why the QB is always blamed, or always praised. I just don't. There are 21 other players playing. Do you people only watch the QB and evaluate every little thing he does and overreact to it like,"HE CHOKED THERE. LMAO." "WOW SO CLUTCH." "CHOKE." "CLUTCH" Etc. All within 30 minutes of each other. There is so much more that goes into the game of football. The QB alone can only do so much. I just wish people would actually talk about the rest of the teams more. And realize who the real problems are instead of just blaming the QB.

Lets be real, we all know that Romo is not the problem in Dallas. We just like to laugh at him. I know I'm guilty. The team chemistry isn't there, Garret is a bad coach, injuries(I know every team has injuries and blah blah blah no excuse but whatever. Point still stands) and of course, Jerry Jones. But everyone just loves to say Romo is a bad QB when in reality, he is one of the few reasons why Dallas has been any good at all.

Manning vs Brady. I love it as much as the next person, but we need to stop acting like idiots and look at it logically. Without the rest of their teams, they wouldn't be what they are. And all of this,"Manning always chokes in big moments." is just a pure joke. The real reason is that he has for the most part played in warm weather, or controlled environments(dome) his entire career. The few times he has to play in the cold, he struggles to adjust to it and can't play up to his full potential. These games just happen to be late in the year or playoff games. Its unfair to hold that against him, because he doesn't play in those conditions often. Brady on the other hand is used to it playing in that kind of climate for his entire career.

The whole,"Brady is a system QB and would fail on any other team." Is laughable, and it makes me sick. First of all, what system are are talking about? Because it seems to change a lot. And he seems to have different teammates every season too. But all this talk aside, who is the better overall QB? Throw everything else out the window. Who is better at actually playing the position. Not "winning" Not "Carrying teams" Not whatever other bullshit you can come up. Its called the eye test. You can tell who is better just by watching. There's only one other QB you can argue could be a better pure QB than Peyton, and its Marino. This is all that matters, is who can play the position the best. Not who is lucky enough, not who plays for what organization, whatever.

I'm tired of hearing,"This mobile QB phase is going to end and none of them will ever win a SB." You people are just upset that the game you're used to seeing is changing before your eyes. You want your "real" QBs. Not someone that runs. But guess what? It doesn't matter. If they can play the position, they can. If they can't, they can't. It doesn't matter if they can run, what color they are, whatever. Just get over yourselves and deal with the fact that the Cam Newtons of the world are here to stay.

All of it just doesn't make sense to me. How everyone comes up with these insane angles on all the different QBs and how they are "chokers" "overrated garbage" "winners" "losers" etc. You can't label one player based on what happens to a team. That's just common sense. So please people, take a step back, and think about what you're saying and doing.

/RANT

 

[NinerSickness]

I'm tired of hearing,"This mobile QB phase is going to end and none of them will ever win a SB."

I'm not hearing people say that. I'm hearing people say that run-first QBs will not succeed in the NFL, and they're right. Mobile QBs have won Super Bowls: Steve Young, Aaron Rodgers. But they were also amazingly efficient passers. QBs who succeed in college, to a large extent, have not succeeded in the NFL yet.

NFL coaches are smart, and they know this. This is why they tell "running" QBs like RGIII, Newton, Kaepernick to slide & avoid running a lot. Their bodies just won't be able to take it in the long term. They might go on extremely hot streaks, but they'll always phase out unless they're also great passers (see Michael Vick).

There are plenty of QBs in the NFL who have great speed & elusiveness; that's not going away. But the Steve Young template for quarterbacking is not going to succeed very often. Look at two of the most immobile QBs in the NFL: Peyton & Tom.

 

[Jakology]

I'm not hearing people say that. I'm hearing people say that run-first QBs will not succeed in the NFL, and they're right. Mobile QBs have won Super Bowls: Steve Young, Aaron Rodgers. But they were also amazingly efficient passers. QBs who succeed in college, to a large extent, have not succeeded in the NFL yet.

NFL coaches are smart, and they know this. This is why they tell "running" QBs like RGIII, Newton, Kaepernick to slide & avoid running a lot. Their bodies just won't be able to take it in the long term. They might go on extremely hot streaks, but they'll always phase out unless they're also great passers (see Michael Vick).

There are plenty of QBs in the NFL who have great speed & elusiveness; that's not going away. But the Steve Young template for quarterbacking is not going to succeed very often. Look at two of the most immobile QBs in the NFL: Peyton & Tom.

I understand, but the game is changing. Tell me, how many true pocket passers are playing college football these days? Not many. And the ones that are aren't great pro prospects. Why? Because the game is evolving and teams want more mobile QBs.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

I understand, but the game is changing. Tell me, how many true pocket passers are playing college football these days? Not many. And the ones that are aren't great pro prospects. Why? Because the game is evolving and teams want more mobile QBs.

Tom Brady wasn't a great Pro prospect.
Point is to succeed in the NFL you need to be a good passer. if you are a mobile good passer is a bonus.
A lot of these running QBs coming out of college, people are hoping they can make into good passers. While possible, if you aren't a good passer by the time you reach the NFL, you probably wont win a superbowl. (see Mike Vick)
It will always be about how good of a passer you have on the team. If you can get both in a player, passer & mobility Awesome! But if you have to choose one. That is a good (intelligent) passer over a running QB.

 

[NinerSickness]

I understand, but the game is changing. Tell me, how many true pocket passers are playing college football these days? Not many.

That doesn't really have anything to do with NFL prospects though. How many college football QBs are even going to play at the next level? Not many. Maybe 2 or 3 even become starters at the next level per year. The majority of CBF QBs isn't the indicator for NFL offenses; the 2 or 3 guys out of that bunch are.

And the ones that are aren't great pro prospects. Why? Because the game is evolving and teams want more mobile QBs.

That simply isn't true. The leading rusher among QBs this season is Terrell Pryor. He's terrible. The NFL doesn't want him. Next down the line is Russell Wilson, Cam Newton & Colin Kaepernick, Alex Smith and Michael Vick. Wilson's the only one of those 5 who's having a really good season. Next is Andrew Luck, who is a pocket passer; and he's having a down year. After that is Geno Smith, and he's been a dumpster fire.

But immobile QBs Tom Brady, Peyton, Philip Rivers & Drew Brees are playing great. And even the mobile ones like Aaron Rodgers & Tony Romo are almost never running the ball; they're playing great.

And if what you said were true then Michael Vick would've been much more successful in the Eagles' college-style offense than Nick Foles, and he clearly isn't. And how's RGIII doing lately?

Saying the NFL is "evolving" sounds good to the ear, but for the most part it's been a myth. Running QBs are not a new phenomenon, and with VERY rare exceptions they have never been successful at the pro' level.

 

[MrMoJoRisin63]

So OP really just wanted to start another Manning vs Brady thread cause he got owned it last one he tinkered with.

 

[JDM]

It's absolutely Romo's fault. Saying otherwise is laughable.

 

[ATL96Steeler]

Warning: Incoming wall of text that may or may not make sense at times.

I don't understand why the QB is always blamed, or always praised.

Lets be real, we all know that Romo is not the problem in Dallas. We just like to laugh at him. I know I'm guilty. The team chemistry isn't there, Garret is a bad coach, injuries(I know every team has injuries and blah blah blah no excuse but whatever. Point still stands) and of course, Jerry Jones. But everyone just loves to say Romo is a bad QB when in reality, he is one of the few reasons why Dallas has been any good at all.

Manning vs Brady. I love it as much as the next person, but we need to stop acting like idiots and look at it logically. Without the rest of their teams, they wouldn't be what they are. And all of this,"Manning always chokes in big moments." is just a pure joke. The real reason is that he has for the most part played in warm weather, or controlled environments(dome) his entire career. The few times he has to play in the cold, he struggles to adjust to it and can't play up to his full potential. These games just happen to be late in the year or playoff games. Its unfair to hold that against him, because he doesn't play in those conditions often. Brady on the other hand is used to it playing in that kind of climate for his entire career.

The whole,"Brady is a system QB and would fail on any other team." Is laughable, and it makes me sick. First of all, what system are are talking about? Because it seems to change a lot. And he seems to have different teammates every season too. But all this talk aside, who is the better overall QB? Throw everything else out the window. Who is better at actually playing the position. Not "winning" Not "Carrying teams" Not whatever other bullshit you can come up. Its called the eye test. You can tell who is better just by watching. There's only one other QB you can argue could be a better pure QB than Peyton, and its Marino. This is all that matters, is who can play the position the best. Not who is lucky enough, not who plays for what organization, whatever.

I'm tired of hearing,"This mobile QB phase is going to end and none of them will ever win a SB." You people are just upset that the game you're used to seeing is changing before your eyes. You want your "real" QBs. Not someone that runs. But guess what? It doesn't matter. If they can play the position, they can. If they can't, they can't. It doesn't matter if they can run, what color they are, whatever. Just get over yourselves and deal with the fact that the Cam Newtons of the world are here to stay.

/RANT

lol...we've all been there!

I did want to comment on a few of your points highlighted.

QB glory or goat...NFL QB is often termed the hardest job in all of sport...the only player aside from the center that's handling the ball on most every OFC play...yes, you can win, and win big (Ravens & Bucs) if you have an outstanding TEAM behind your average QB.

But, in this era of FA, and the way the draft is structured, it's incredibly difficult to assemble and now impossible keep 22 studs out of 53. So....as a result every team has holes somewhere. With the new rules on hitting, the passing game is where the NFL is, and a high production player in that position can make up for some of the areas the team is deficient in. Bottomline...it's a QB league...if you have a good one you have a chance to win every week, if you don't, you're literally working on hope.

Romo...he's a fine QB. I call him a great stats QB, because he will but up solid #s every season. No, he's not the problem in DAL...but when toe meets leather in a big game (and I mean win or go home) Romo is often on the short side of the outcome, often times contributing to his own demise. That will continue to follow him until it's no longer the case.

Manning/Brady...I look at those two guys this way...much in the same way I look at Tiger Woods...whether you like them, or hate them, we're seeing greatness in their prime and that only comes around a few times in ones lifetime, they would be great players in any system on any team (DEN is a prime example)....20 yrs from now those names will still mean something to the NFL. Embrace it, we're watching history in the making when those guys play, each other or in general.

Mobile QBs...the NFL, like any other professional sports league is by product of their feeder system...in this case CFB. The read option or whatever they want to call it...works in CFB...and when you take the cream (the best of the best) and put them in the pro game we've seen that it can work on some level in the pro game.

But....yes, you had to know there would be a but coming right? The NFL has seen gimmick or different OFC offenses before and nearly all of them were rendered ineffective at some point. I agree with you the Cam Newtons of the NFL are here to stay, but I don't get the sense that you will see nearly as many designed running plays for the QB because it's not a matter of if your QB will get hurt...it truly is a situation of when they will get hurt. And circling back to your original point...it's the most important position on the field...the guy that takes 90% of the snaps in practice, the leader of the team...you need that guy on the field.

 

[HammerDown]

 

[sonnyblack65]

JDM,MOJO and Jak all disagree with you Hammer. Oops they are all gone too!!

 

[moxie]

lol @Jakology , @MrMoJoRisin63 and @JDM all posting in this thread.

edit: Ninja'd by sonny!!

 

[Sharkonabicycle]

One position in NFL controls what the other 11 guys are doing and gets the ball on the first snap of any down, that's the QB.

Every other offensive play is a result of the QB making a decision and coaching the offense to the play considering only a limited # of players can wear the green dot.

QBs are asked to essentially take on the role of a QB and coach. So most plays that happen offensively outside of great runs are a result of the QB. The WR that breaks a tackle and takes it 80 yards to the house is less impressive than the QB 90% of the time realizing the mis-match/play advantage and pulling the trigger.

It's IMO comparable to MLB starting pitchers. Play 1/5 the season compared to a slugger but get paid basically 200-300% more per game played. It's because you're basically 100% responsible for the defense. Yah good defenses in the MLB can bail out a pitcher, but generally the pitcher is mostly responsible for it.

 

[boogiewithstu2007]

QB's do more than just throw the ball though, it's the leadership quality that rallies an offense ... It's also being able to mentally stay strong even when things turn into chaos... A good QB can make a big difference...

 

[WizardHawk]

Damn, good old JDM. Almost forgot about him. Solid necropost.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

I get how people equate team success to the QB position. You can have guys like Champ Bailey, Joe Thomas, Tony Gonzalez, Butkus, Mack, and others who are elite at their positions that don't win. Where's the great QB with the losing records out there though? Where's the Marino with the losing record for his career? Sure some have outlier seasons (a-la Brees, where they have an awful awful team), but that's some really bad drafting and Coach/FA decisions in there. You have the worst D in the NFL by a LONG ways, like arguably worst D ever, 7 wins is impressive.


They touch the ball on half a teams plays, and have a huge part in the majority of a teams yards, points, and turnovers. Someone compared it to a pitcher, and that is pretty similar, except a QB doesn't come out or skip starts. Look at the QB's that have won in the playoffs the past three years, it's basically the top QB's. Also look at teams that win consistently. If you have great pitching you can cover up a lot of meh with the rest of your roster, same if you have a great QB.

In the past 10 years you have the winningest teams as...

NE, GB, IND, PIT, BAL, DEN, NOR, SDG, DAL, SEA as your top 10. Brady, Favre/Rodgers, Peyton/Luck, Big Ben, Flacco, Peyton, Brees, Rivers, Romo, Wilson/Hasselbeck (good years). Go year by year and look at QBR and with few exceptions you can just about predict win/loss records.



The one issue I see with the mobile running QB's is the risk. Obviously not a deal-ender and some have stayed healthy, but in college, you have a guy who's 20 years old, in his physical prime, no wear on his body and your investment on him is 15-25 games usually (1-2 seasons). In the NFL that investment is now 10 years and you are getting him with that wear and tear building. Some do break the mold, but look right now, Russell Wilson is breaking that mold, 4 straight years of starting without missing a game due to injury. That's about the all time record for a mobile QB.

The other issue is a pocket QB tears an ACL, he can still be a great QB. The more you rely on the physical aspect of a running QB, the more that QB's skill-set will deteriorate with age/injury. I LOVE running QB's, but with that different skill-set they do bring a different set of risks.

And I haven't heard anyone call Brady a "system QB" since like 2005.. lol What system? Standard pro-form? Spread run and shoot? Heavy TE? West Coast? Heavy shotgun? Heavy under center? Throwing over the top to WR's? Throwing more underneath and middle stuff to slot/TE's? If someone's going to call him a system QB for his career, I'd like to know what system that is.

Just my thoughts...

 

[darken65]

Is this the 'where are they now?' thread of posters gone by?

 

[Rockinkuwait]

lol didn't even notice how old the original post was...