Things that we were told are things, but are they really?

[Moab]

After the Seahawks win in 2013 many writers/experts/pundits were talking about how the best route to win the title was with a QB on a rookie contract as you could then fill your roster with talent on short term deals and just have the QB not mess it up. Has that really been the case? The 2017 Eagles had Wentz on his rookie deal, but in the end Foles played lights out to win the title. In 2019 Mahommes was on his rookie deal, but that was hardly a don't screw it up by Mahommes, he led that team to the title. I don't think there is too much question that good QB play is required to win it all, not a "don't screw it up" QB. The rookie deal does make it easier on teams to reset as they're not hamstrung by the cap of a vet QB like Watson or Wilson with the Broncos last year. Those big vet contracts can mess up 4 years for a team in a hurry, but so can holding onto hope that your early pick QB can develop and they don't. The feeling might be better with the rookie contract guy, but it's still a 3 or 4 year problem.

What ever happened to teams with established QBs drafting development QBs , grooming them into something and then trading them off for picks or players. It's been a while since a backup has been traded to a team that needed a QB and then he became the starter at least for a little while. I'll mention the guys the Packers had behind Favre that had some success in other places, Mark Brunell, Ty Detmer, Aaron Brooks and Matt Hasselback are those that come to mind. Warner doesn't count as he was only there for 1 camp and they didn't develop him at all, the others were later round picks that they traded off and got something back for.

It wasn't that long ago where if you didn't have a dominant RB, you couldn't win. Now the only guy I can think of that has been dominant for the last few years has been Henry. The run game seems to be back in style with teams using more play action and focusing on running the ball more often. With them running more often many teams are going to more of a a 2 or even 3 back rotating system. They very often use the specific skill set the players have, IE runner, pass catcher 3rd down type and then a backup that can do both but not as well as the others. I'm guessing that part of that is the RB position gets so beat up over the course of a season that 1 guy just won't cut it. Heck the last guy I remember that played all the time and didn't miss many games was Petersen of the Vikes. Henry, Taylor and some of these other guys are great players, but seem to miss time here and there. I'm not talking about seasons, more dinged up stuff that costs them a few games here and there.

Just kind of bringing up a few things that have evolved over the year. There are plenty others because of rules changes, free agency, changes to rookie contract slotting and others.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

After the Seahawks win in 2013 many writers/experts/pundits were talking about how the best route to win the title was with a QB on a rookie contract as you could then fill your roster with talent on short term deals and just have the QB not mess it up. Has that really been the case? The 2017 Eagles had Wentz on his rookie deal, but in the end Foles played lights out to win the title. In 2019 Mahommes was on his rookie deal, but that was hardly a don't screw it up by Mahommes, he led that team to the title. I don't think there is too much question that good QB play is required to win it all, not a "don't screw it up" QB. The rookie deal does make it easier on teams to reset as they're not hamstrung by the cap of a vet QB like Watson or Wilson with the Broncos last year. Those big vet contracts can mess up 4 years for a team in a hurry, but so can holding onto hope that your early pick QB can develop and they don't. The feeling might be better with the rookie contract guy, but it's still a 3 or 4 year problem.

What ever happened to teams with established QBs drafting development QBs , grooming them into something and then trading them off for picks or players. It's been a while since a backup has been traded to a team that needed a QB and then he became the starter at least for a little while. I'll mention the guys the Packers had behind Favre that had some success in other places, Mark Brunell, Ty Detmer, Aaron Brooks and Matt Hasselback are those that come to mind. Warner doesn't count as he was only there for 1 camp and they didn't develop him at all, the others were later round picks that they traded off and got something back for.

It wasn't that long ago where if you didn't have a dominant RB, you couldn't win. Now the only guy I can think of that has been dominant for the last few years has been Henry. The run game seems to be back in style with teams using more play action and focusing on running the ball more often. With them running more often many teams are going to more of a a 2 or even 3 back rotating system. They very often use the specific skill set the players have, IE runner, pass catcher 3rd down type and then a backup that can do both but not as well as the others. I'm guessing that part of that is the RB position gets so beat up over the course of a season that 1 guy just won't cut it. Heck the last guy I remember that played all the time and didn't miss many games was Petersen of the Vikes. Henry, Taylor and some of these other guys are great players, but seem to miss time here and there. I'm not talking about seasons, more dinged up stuff that costs them a few games here and there.

Just kind of bringing up a few things that have evolved over the year. There are plenty others because of rules changes, free agency, changes to rookie contract slotting and others.

well no matter what the rules are. If you want to win a superbowl. Win the trenches!
You can have the greatest shutdown Corner, WR, RB, or even QB. If you have that & lose the battle of the trenches you dont win a Championship. Dont matter of the era, the ruleset, or what is the flavor of the month. Must win the trenches.

Now with that said. Having a QB on a rookie deal can make signing the right players for the trenches easier. So there is that.

 

[Clayton]

Id guess the formula to winning a Super Bowl is 3 good draft classes in the span of 4 years. I think if you do that you should be ready to step up. The rookie QB contract is a massive advantage but so are rookie WR contracts, rookie OT contracts, and rookie pass rusher contracts.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

I think it’s catching lightning in a bottle. You need talent, so a rookie qb is good, but if your rookie qb is Spencer rattler, it’s not much of an advantage. This is why bears fans are so excited. Not only did they draft a quality rookie qb, they had a year or two to rebuild before hand. If they get some quality players with their three picks this next draft, we are going to be good for a while.

The key is having players on cheap contracts that still haven’t produced their best football yet.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

well no matter what the rules are. If you want to win a superbowl. Win the trenches!
You can have the greatest shutdown Corner, WR, RB, or even QB. If you have that & lose the battle of the trenches you dont win a Championship. Dont matter of the era, the ruleset, or what is the flavor of the month. Must win the trenches.

Now with that said. Having a QB on a rookie deal can make signing the right players for the trenches easier. So there is that.

Lot those drafted trench players don't work out, best not to reach because a team has need in the trenches.

 

[Clayton]

It is worth pointing out that the Niners had Brock Purdy on a rookie contract, Eagles had Jalen Hurts on a rookie contract, Bengals had Joe Burrow on a rookie contract. Mahomes first Super Bowl on a rookie contract. Its still the biggest cheat code in football.

That said, I think Houston might be the only team in the AFC this year that has a shot at this. At some point, having Patrick Mahomes, Lamar Jackson, Josh Allen and Joe Burrow in their prime probably matters more.

 

[Schmoopy1000]

Lot those drafted trench players don't work out, best not to reach because a team has need in the trenches.

teams that miss that also dont win Championships. Tons of high drafted Qbs dont work out either. Not sure what that has to do with what we are talking about though.

But.
Winning the trenches obviously has to do with talent on Oline & Dline, but another element is coaching. Whether it is technique or gameplanning blocking, or attacking the pocket or the run or whatever. Winning the trenches will always be the biggest thing to winning a championship. But it isnt just the player that allows that win in the trenches. Coaching is very important to it.

Example. Years ago, the Broncos could produce a 1500 yd type rusher by just plugging people in. Whether the RB or lineman. Coaching was huge to them winning trenches back then.

 

[fastforward]

Multiple ways to build a team but ultimately you need some difference-makers, and you need them in the playoffs.

 

[Moab]

I think it’s catching lightning in a bottle. You need talent, so a rookie qb is good, but if your rookie qb is Spencer rattler, it’s not much of an advantage. This is why bears fans are so excited. Not only did they draft a quality rookie qb, they had a year or two to rebuild before hand. If they get some quality players with their three picks this next draft, we are going to be good for a while.

The key is having players on cheap contracts that still haven’t produced their best football yet.

Ok, it might work out, but are you totally sure after 6 games Williams is the real deal? I will admit I haven't seen him play in the last few weeks, but we might want to take a look at who the Bears played. Also, Rattler has played 2 games, while I don't think much of him, sometimes guys do figure it out. Williams didn't look like the end all in his first 2 games either, did he?

Getting quality players with their 3 picks next year is no guarantee either. I don't know and am not bagging on you, but in the last 3 years have the Bears' had 3 picks in each of them them turn out to be dependable starters? It's asking a lot if all you're counting on is 3, and worse if all you have are 3.

It is worth pointing out that the Niners had Brock Purdy on a rookie contract, Eagles had Jalen Hurts on a rookie contract, Bengals had Joe Burrow on a rookie contract. Mahomes first Super Bowl on a rookie contract. Its still the biggest cheat code in football.

That said, I think Houston might be the only team in the AFC this year that has a shot at this. At some point, having Patrick Mahomes, Lamar Jackson, Josh Allen and Joe Burrow in their prime probably matters more.

While it may be a cheat code, only 1 of them won it all. Plus if they do win it all, they're pretty much guaranteed to get a big contract. Sometimes that big contract doesn't work out and you get lucky, IE the Wentz to Hurts deal in Philly. Looking at the Philly situation right now, it doesn't look like it's all sunshine and rainbows. That could change tomorrow, but looking at the end of last year and the start of this year, I don't see any rainbows.

teams that miss that also dont win Championships. Tons of high drafted Qbs dont work out either. Not sure what that has to do with what we are talking about though.

But.
Winning the trenches obviously has to do with talent on Oline & Dline, but another element is coaching. Whether it is technique or gameplanning blocking, or attacking the pocket or the run or whatever. Winning the trenches will always be the biggest thing to winning a championship. But it isnt just the player that allows that win in the trenches. Coaching is very important to it.

Example. Years ago, the Broncos could produce a 1500 yd type rusher by just plugging people in. Whether the RB or lineman. Coaching was huge to them winning trenches back then.

I agree with your thinking about the trenches. If you can't protect the QB and run the ball, it doesn't really matter as there are teams that will exploit that weakness no matter who the QB is. Also, if you can't rush the passer or stop the run, there aren't too many teams that won't exploit that either. So I'm of the same line of thinking, the game is won in the trenches and the rest of the game happens because of what happens in the front 6 or 7 on both sides of the ball.

I'm not picking on Dallas, just using them as an example. Last year the Bills kind of exposed them as being unable to stop the run if you actually game planned it. It cost them in the playoffs out of the gate. The Bills laid out the blueprint and the Packers copied it for the W when it mattered.

 

[PDay8810]

it's a ballgame, shit happens all the time and has for decades

 

[Iggloo]

I still think that scoring a rookie QB who can start is indeed a huge head start toward winning a ring. It's no guarantee, but it is indeed a huge advantage.

The Eagles didn't win with Wentz but they were able to build the team around him financially that allowed for a ring. Likewise the Niners didn't win, but Brock Purdy has allowed them to keep their nucleus together and make two straight title runs including one in which they barely lost the SB. Ditto with Philly and Hurts.

No one would say that the trenches don't matter, that other positions like corner don't matter, etc. But getting a good QB is paramount. Getting a good QB on a discount for a few years is a huge edge.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

teams that miss that also dont win Championships. Tons of high drafted Qbs dont work out either. Not sure what that has to do with what we are talking about though.

But.
Winning the trenches obviously has to do with talent on Oline & Dline, but another element is coaching. Whether it is technique or gameplanning blocking, or attacking the pocket or the run or whatever. Winning the trenches will always be the biggest thing to winning a championship. But it isnt just the player that allows that win in the trenches. Coaching is very important to it.

Example. Years ago, the Broncos could produce a 1500 yd type rusher by just plugging people in. Whether the RB or lineman. Coaching was huge to them winning trenches back then.

Yeah, coaching, the big bodies up front are a huge key. We talk about Mahomes a lot and rightfully so but we all saw what happened vs. Tampa Bay when the Oline was a mess. Depth in that group is a big key as well. A QB is only as good as his protection and that's when the other side of the ball comes into play. Mahomes or not, KC isn't thinking about a threepeat without Chris Jones and the Rams, despite Stafford and Kupp's heroics, might not have a championship without Aaron Donald closing the game. That takes nothing away from the great QBs either but the media loves to overstate the QB role. Imo, the QB winning the SB has as much to do with him just not losing the SB, if that makes any sense.
How often does a QB have a great game only to lose because at some point in the game, he totally fucked up and gave the other team a free score. Yeah, the last minute plays ended up deciding it but those other ones nullify the importance to a degree. Kurt Warner with the Cardinals at the end of the first half vs, the Steelers comes to mind. That was a 10-14 point swing in that game and Rothlesburger to Holmes would have been irrelevant.

 

[Clayton]

While it may be a cheat code, only 1 of them won it all.

Brady and Mahomes in general distort the whole 'win it all' thing. I'd guess you could probably make a great argument that Gronk and Kelce have been massively underpaid.

Probably an argument that Aaron Donald and Kupp were the 2 best players in football when they won.

 

[Clayton]

Imo, the QB winning the SB has as much to do with him just not losing the SB, if that makes any sense.

If that was the case then the Marty Schottenheimer era and the Alex Smith era for the Chiefs would've been closer to the Mahomes era.

Sometimes QB matchups are a Peter Principle issue where the QB actually gets the team further than it should have gone. QB isnt more important than an entire oline but its certainly the most important position.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Ok, it might work out, but are you totally sure after 6 games Williams is the real deal? I will admit I haven't seen him play in the last few weeks, but we might want to take a look at who the Bears played. Also, Rattler has played 2 games, while I don't think much of him, sometimes guys do figure it out. Williams didn't look like the end all in his first 2 games either, did he?

Getting quality players with their 3 picks next year is no guarantee either. I don't know and am not bagging on you, but in the last 3 years have the Bears' had 3 picks in each of them them turn out to be dependable starters? It's asking a lot if all you're counting on is 3, and worse if all you have are 3.



While it may be a cheat code, only 1 of them won it all. Plus if they do win it all, they're pretty much guaranteed to get a big contract. Sometimes that big contract doesn't work out and you get lucky, IE the Wentz to Hurts deal in Philly. Looking at the Philly situation right now, it doesn't look like it's all sunshine and rainbows. That could change tomorrow, but looking at the end of last year and the start of this year, I don't see any rainbows.



I agree with your thinking about the trenches. If you can't protect the QB and run the ball, it doesn't really matter as there are teams that will exploit that weakness no matter who the QB is. Also, if you can't rush the passer or stop the run, there aren't too many teams that won't exploit that either. So I'm of the same line of thinking, the game is won in the trenches and the rest of the game happens because of what happens in the front 6 or 7 on both sides of the ball.

I'm not picking on Dallas, just using them as an example. Last year the Bills kind of exposed them as being unable to stop the run if you actually game planned it. It cost them in the playoffs out of the gate. The Bills laid out the blueprint and the Packers copied it for the W when it mattered.

Poles drafted Brisker, Stevenson, and Gordon for our secondary and when healthy with jaylon Johnson and Kevin Byard they make up the best secondary in the nfl imo.

Poles drafted Gervon Dexter and Austin Booker who both looks to be beasts on the DLine. Dexter more do than Booker, but Booker could be a star in a few years. He’s already making plays in the run game.

Offensively, Poles got Caleb and Odunze who look like they will be playing together for a long time. We also got Darnell Wright who looks good at RT, but he’s been injured most of this year, which is concerning.

Poles also drafted Tory Taylor who looks to be a very good punter. He’s flipping the field from deep in bears territory and can pin the other team behind their 20 when close enough.

I think that’s a pretty good track record when looking at players they drafted over the last 3 years. They have three picks in the top two rounds next year as well. They are a quality iOL away from being a contender IMO.

Also, Caleb looked awful until the fourth quarter of the colts game. He’s been looking good against mediocre or worse defenses and hasn’t really played any defenses since turning it around, but that’s the type of growth you want from your young QB. Even when he was struggling he didn’t really throw picks until he had to force the ball downfield.

I say all of this, but I still expect the bears to lose a lot on the back half of their schedule. Washington might even be too much to handle next weekend.

 

[Southieinnc]

Lot those drafted trench players don't work out, best not to reach because a team has need in the trenches.

Just ask Miami.
The drafted their #1 draftpick franchise QB and then tried to load up on the O-line.
They dumped a bunch of # 1's on O-line and trades too and they still have no O-line.
Their existing O-line got their QB killed and now where are they?

Fastest Offense in NFL with great WR's and very good RB's and they still cannot beat a winning team.
Their young coach is now 22-19 and likely under 500 for career soon.
Time for a rebuild!