What's the 2nd most important position in football after QB?

[KnightAndDay]

The 2nd biggest priority is the Oline IMO.

I picked the center, since he's basically the anchor of the Oline.

 

[Clayton]

If we are talking a single position, its a pass rushing DT that shoots the gap OR a big mammoth 3-4 Nose Tackle depending on scheme. Pass defense is the most important thing in winning a super bowl. The easiest way to get a pass defense is to force blocking issues up the middle and get the QB uncomfortable.

The correct answer is the 'multiple' pass rusher, though. A pass rusher that can play outside, inside or kick into coverage. A Superman player. Von Miller basically. Khalil Mack too.

Its really common for 4-3 DEs to get kicked in the middle and rush as DTs. A guy like Kony Ealy who can do all three is super valuable although maybe not as talented as some other pass rushers. Michael Bennett types. They really glue your dline together. William Hayes did it for the Rams. These guys are everywhere in the NFL but go a long way in making a defense better.

 

[PolarVortex]

The second most important guy would be the guy who deflates the footballs for Thommy 'Little Hands' Bwady.

 

[Thruthefog]

1 vote for TE. Martin Mayhew, is that you?

 

[Hank Kingsley]

Use to be LT, but I don't believe that to be the case anymore... Most great teams of the 90's early '00's use to have great LT's... Now that's not the case as much... Seems like the great teams have an elite pass rush or DE... Great DE's can take the game into their own hands... LT's can't... I think a stud DE is more important these days than a stud LT... A lot of it also has to do with the way the QB position is played these days...

I think it depends on the team.

Brady sure could have used his proper LT in Denver, combined with his proper RT in position.

It was much more important than their MLB play.

 

[Shanemansj13]

The head coach

 

[ducky]

After QB, there isn't a 2nd best anymore.

LT flat out isn't even close to the 2nd best anymore. The quick passing game as opposed to the vertical ones of the past has changed that. You only have to look at the fact that the best LT in all off football plays for Cleveland and the LT's of the two SB teams were two of the worst in the league. It's not the impact position it once was.

2nd place is a tie between pass rusher, CB and WR.

 

[Beaker]

@Beaker Why'd you vote TE?

Individual players on offense can take over a game more often than an individual on defense because the offense dictates where the ball goes.

With that in mind, a great TE can consistently move the chains through the passing game, and greatly aids the running game either through blocking, or by forcing the defence to bring in an extra DB.

If I had to pick one position outside of QB to have a hall of fame player at, it would be TE.

 

[LionsWhyMe]

If it's a pocket passer QB I would say the blind side OT. If the QB is mobile I would go with MLB.

 

[Jakology]

@ElTexan RB? Why? Have you been paying attention to the evolution of football?

 

[cdumler7]

We saw what happens when you don't have an elite LT. If New Engalnd or Carolina had one they would be superbowl champions. You could have the best QB of all time and he can be nuetralied by a shitty takle.

The Broncos had 3rd string guys starting at both LT and RT yet they won the Super Bowl. So you can win without one.

To me it all depends on the player and scheme that you are putting out there. The Broncos don't win the Super Bowl this year without Von Miller doing what he does. For the Panthers though I wouldn't say they had an elite pass rusher yet they made the Super Bowl with an incredible MLB and Corner on the defense.

 

[Jim Rome is Flaming]

If you have to pick one position, I'd say LT. As a unit, I am a firm believer that the OL is far more important than the QB.

 

[Clayton]

If you have to pick one position, I'd say LT. As a unit, I am a firm believer that the OL is far more important than the QB.

Occasionally 5 positions are indeed more important than the 1

 

[Rockinkuwait]

If you have to pick one position, I'd say LT. As a unit, I am a firm believer that the OL is far more important than the QB.

That one is a tough sell. Dallas O-line minus Romo was a mess of an offense. Browns have had one of the better O-lines of late. I'd take the NE mess of a line and Brady or Seattle's bottom 5 line and Wilson over that any day.

 

[Jim Rome is Flaming]

That one is a tough sell. Dallas O-line minus Romo was a mess of an offense. Browns have had one of the better O-lines of late. I'd take the NE mess of a line and Brady or Seattle's bottom 5 line and Wilson over that any day.

I think if you are playing lesser teams, a good-to-great QB can carry a lackluster offensive line. That's why you consistently see teams like the Pats & Packers (although their line isn't terrible) in the playoffs. But once you get there and you're playing against elite defenses, even a great QB isn't going to be able to make up for a bad o-line.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

I think if you are playing lesser teams, a good-to-great QB can carry a lackluster offensive line. That's why you consistently see teams like the Pats & Packers (although their line isn't terrible) in the playoffs. But once you get there and you're playing against elite defenses, even a great QB isn't going to be able to make up for a bad o-line.

Good points but at that time you've weeded out just about all the mediocre and bad QB's. So you are left with good QB +good line/defense vs. good QB with lesser line or D.

Past 3 years, 14 QB's have won games in the post-season

Brady, Wilson, Ben, Luck, Cam, Rodgers, Palmer, Flacco, Brees, Romo, Rivers, Flacco, Kaep, and Alex Smith.

Once Brady or Rodgers get there, there is no Geno or Foles with a good D, it's Cam or Peyton with a good D.

 

[Rockinkuwait]

I'd agree, Dallas with Romo playing healthy and well, that line makes that team scary. Rodgers goes to Cleveland, that line makes them a scary out. But you need the QB first. Otherwise, no Romo on those teams and they are a combined 4-25 no matter if they are arguably the top two O-lines or not.

 

[Jim Rome is Flaming]

Good points but at that time you've weeded out just about all the mediocre and bad QB's. So you are left with good QB +good line/defense vs. good QB with lesser line or D.

Past 3 years, 14 QB's have won games in the post-season

Brady, Wilson, Ben, Luck, Cam, Rodgers, Palmer, Flacco, Brees, Romo, Rivers, Flacco, Kaep, and Alex Smith.

Once Brady or Rodgers get there, there is no Geno or Foles with a good D, it's Cam or Peyton with a good D.

Sure, that's fair. I guess my point was I'd rather have an elite O-line & average QB than an average line & elite QB.

 

[Hank Kingsley]

If it's a pocket passer QB I would say the blind side OT. If the QB is mobile I would go with MLB.

I agree.

Like I said, it depends on the team.

 

[Hank Kingsley]

That one is a tough sell. Dallas O-line minus Romo was a mess of an offense. Browns have had one of the better O-lines of late. I'd take the NE mess of a line and Brady or Seattle's bottom 5 line and Wilson over that any day.

I find it hard to disagree with any of that.