Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

RockThatBlue

Your top 5 QB list

Recommended Posts

20 minutes ago, NFLfan said:

 

Rivers is one of my favorite QBs all time. I have liked him since he was at NC State. Too bad he never won a Super Bowl; that could keep.him out of the Hall of Fame. I think Rivers is a better QB than Eli but Eli has the rings. Eli may win another one -- Giant are looking good for next year.

 

I've never liked Rivers, but I cannot deny that he is a talented QB.  If we are just going off of last season to determine who is the better QB right now, then there is no question that Rivers is better than Eli.  Eli wasn't just on a bad team last season.  His poor play at QB was a big part of why the Giants lost games last season.  He was a liability.  If we are talking about who was better over their career, then that is a more difficult argument to make.  I don't think there is a clear right answer to that one.  That is not to say that Eli cannot bounce back this season.  He has gone through stretches in the past where he was mediocre to slightly above average and then bounced back to play really well.  He wasn't even mediocre last season, though.  He was just flat out bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brady, Rodgers, Brees are the easies and absolute locks.. the last two spots are tougher. I guess I'd have Ryan and Luck there. Wilson has a good case too.

 

Big Ben dropped off last year. Got propped up by great supporting cast. Decision-making and accuracy has declined.

 

Don't think Carr is there yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Colts_Fan12 said:

The amount of people leaving Brees off is what's killing me 

Brees is definitely top 5 IMO even at his older age. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to see how good Wilson will do when he has years where his defense isn't elite. If he still does well, he can probably be put in my top 5. But hes not there yet for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, RockThatBlue said:

I want to see how good Wilson will do when he has years where his defense isn't elite. If he still does well, he can probably be put in my top 5. But hes not there yet for me.

Without Lynch that team doesn't look near the same either. Not to dis Wilson but Lynch was the best Offensive player on both their SB teams. Wilson now has to do more and has failed 2 years in a row in the Playoffs. I would honestly be surprised if they make it back to a SB with the current core they have. Their Defense is getting a tad worse each season now too. Wilson got drafted in the perfect situation, to a team that had a Defense ready to dominate and had a RB like Lynch waiting to unleash Beastmode. If you look at both seasons the Seahawks made the SB, Wilson had some terrible games in those Playoffs but they were able to win because of their Defense and Lynch. He stunk it up vs GB in 2014 with 5 INT's and that team still won + it took a lucky SPTeams play to pull that out for Seattle. Against the Broncos in the SB, he didn't even have to do anything as their Defense won that game single handedly bullying Peyton's Offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2017 at 1:54 PM, Shadow_Creek said:

oh my bad. well in that case...

 

1. Aron Rogers

2. Russell Wilson 

3. Drew Brees

4. Tom Brady

5. Andrew Luck

 

So you remove a guy from your list then insert another guy who was not on the list at #2?  LOL!

 

Here's the list...

 

1.) Tom Brady

2.) Matt Ryan

3.) Derek Carr

4.) Aaron Rodgers

5.) Big Ben

 

TB12 earned his pay in the third third of the SB.  Ryan got his team there, was the MVP, and played a pretty good first two thirds of the SB.  Derek Carr is the real deal.  Rodgers pooped his pants again in the big game.  He can throw the ball, but cannot lead a team.  Big Ben is on the list for sentimental reasons.  Time for Ben to retire, but I still love the guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2017 at 2:49 PM, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I do think Carr beats the Texans but he would've been blown out vs the Pats in Foxboro just like Andrew was and Big Ben was. Carr has the 2nd best O.line in Football only behind Dallas IMO too. That helps when you have all day to throw. Ryan is going to get huge praise now but so did Cam last season and look at the putrid season Cam had. Ryan is inconsistent from year to year, we beat them in Atlanta with Hass at QB in 2015. I would almost bet my house on the Falcons not winning the NFC again this upcoming season. I said the same thing about the Panthers last season and they didn't even come close.

 

My thoughts exactly.  And you can throw Wilson in that category too... he has had the benefit of a good line for at least the first three years of his career.

 

A good line slows the game down and allows the QB to be able to read what is happening as it happens vs running for your life and trying to make something happen as AL has had to do.  It allows plays to develop as they were intended to so more receivers come open creating opportunity.

 

Plus there is something to be said for playing without fear, in other words with confidence that you will be protected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Tom Brady

2. Big Ben

3. Aaron Rodgers

4. Cam Newton

5. Matt Ryan

 

That no.5 spot in in top contention with Luck and Brees being narrowly edged out. Luck had a great bounce back year last year, so I'm feeling great about what he might do this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Luck is the bizzaro Brady. The team sucks so bad and he's clearly not the problem even though he sucks in the end with his team. Brady's team is immaculate and he's clearly not the reason even though he wins in the end with his team. I'd take Luck right now over anybody but I don't have the guts to put it on a list lol! The only guy I might put above Luck is this Aaron Rodgers lookalike who has been winning big games for the Packers for the last 2 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The amount of Big Ben I see is surprising.  I like the guy, he's a good QB most of the time, but him, Eli, Rivers will always share the same spot imo. 

 

1 Brady...duh

2 Rodgers...duh

3 Brees....total stat padder, but still a great qb

4 Ryan...won't stay here, but just won the MVP, he's kinda gotta be here.

5 Carr...been pretty darn good for the last 2yrs

 

HM: Ben(always hurt goes 500/5 1 game then 3weeks of 180/1/2), Cam gotta stay healthy, Luck gotta stay healthy, Wilson/Stafford but I'm still not sure what those 2 are

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • IMO this is the wrong way to look at it. IMO the reason they drop 7-8 is not because they don't fear the run game - it's because they fear the pass game much more than they fear the run game. This is especially true when you have a combination of 1. Exceptional QB with great receivers and 2. bad running game. In general the level of fear that teams should show is:   1. Fear of great passing attack 2. Fear of bad passing attack 3. Fear of great running attack 4. Fear of bad running attack.    And the distance between 1 and 4 should be light years! And when you get on your team both great passing attack and horrible running attack this forces opponents to send more help to cover.    It is not a coincidence that teams with great running backs like KC(before Hunt got banished) and the Saints(Kamara) and the Rams(Gurley) faced the least amount of stacked boxes ... this goes directly against what you would assume teams would do in a situation where they face elite running backs. The reason is - they just feared those teams passing games MUCH MORE! The passing game dictates how many people you send to cover much more than the running game.    And at the same time teams like Dallas, TEN, JAX had most stacked boxes - it's because the opponents didn't fear their passing game. I'm using just anecdotes here but the data overall supports that. The passing game strength overall dictates coverage vs run support much more than the quality of the run game. The weaker your pass game is the more stacked boxes you will see almost regardless of how good your RB/running game is.    I said 'almost' above because I can see a situation where you need to have some base level of a threat from the run. You need to at least be a threat to run it.   The short answer is ... weak passing game. Notice that this is all relative. No team will 100% leave 8 in the box and not team will 100% leave 8 in coverage. We are talking about percentages. The weaker the passing game, the more attention your run game will get from the defense pre-snap. This is alignment based... now once the snap is made the defenders have to read run and pass keys in order to know whether they should choose optimal strategy for run defense or pass-defense. In general the reason play-action(and RPO) works is because of the THREAT of the run, not the success of the run(it doesn't matter if you run it for 4.2yards a run(where we were last year) or 4.7yard a run(where Reich wants us to be). So ... my point is not that you have to completely ignore the run. You don't ignore it. You still have to keep the threat that you will run it(by running it often enough) in order to make the defenders still read the keys and give you the extra second or so that running the play action gives you while the defenders are reading the run key you are giving(faking to) them. You just don't generally care much if you run for 4.7 or 4.2 when it comes to your passing game or your play-action game. Teams react the same way to 4.7y teams as they do to 4.2y teams when it comes to play action as long as you keep the threat that you will run high enough to make defenders still read their run keys. (now this is another thing I have not seen yet, but expect at some point in the future- some defensive coordinator will say - just screw it - play the pass 100% and don't read the run keys... play the run on your way to the passer and I don't know what will happen then)      Well, that quote is a bit of an exaggeration to bring the point across. You won't really wait for the old timers to die out. Just... the more young blood comes in(Shanahan, McVey, etc.) and tries the new stuff and succeeds with it against the old strategies the more the old timers that are unable to adjust will lose their jobs to the new kids and so on. This pretty much already happened in the NBA. It's a new league now compared to just 5-10 years ago. It didn't happen because the old timers died out, it happened because the new strategies proved better and more efficient and even some of the old timers borrowed from them and incorporated them into their game plans. IMO similar things are happening and will continue to happen in the NFL. It probably will take longer because in general the NFL seems more conservative of a league but IMO it will happen sooner or later.    In 20-30 years I think we will be laughing at things like "establish the run" or "first we need to stop the run", just like we would be laughing at statements like "what this team really needs is more post ups for their center" or "this guy should have just taken one dribble into the 2p range and taken the shorter 20 feet jumper instead of the 24 feet open 3" in the NBA-context right now. 
    • Thats a bummer.  She is talented and her and Matt Taylor worked well together. 
    • "But really what is going to set the tone for us is going to be how we run the football. That is not going to change. We have to run the football. Our goal is going to be a top-five rushing football team. That will set up our play-action pass. That will set up all the big chunk plays. To me that will get us where we want to go.” https://www.colts.com/news/top-takeaways-frank-reich-on-otas-day-1     Just as Reich has stated above I do believe a good ground game opens up more favorable passing opportunities because teams have to committ more personnel than they would like to run defense. That in itself sets up more opportunities for you to get one on one coverage down the field.  I think you get less of those opportunities if you can't run.   If I want more one on one coverage down field I'd like to know how I'm supposed to do that if I don't need to run? I guess maybe you'd say screens or something?  I'm sure he's saying this based off what he's experienced during games and what he's seen on film.
    • One of my issues and I belive Princeton Tiger brought it up also was when your running game is not very effective.  For example in Peytons last years in Indy our run game was abysmal and teams literally ignored all of our play action fakes. Or you can even look at some of our seasons under Pagano.  They dropped 8 and rushed three a large majority of the time because they had little fear that we could do anything on the ground.  Do you think that happens to us with a successful rushing attack? I personally don't believe so.   I think when you are able to run it forces the defense to leave less defenders in coverage.   I don't want to turn this into a long drawn out debate but I believe your contention was it isnt the amount of times you run but more of the effect of the play action itself.  So when the defense is ignoring the play action then what is it that would cause them to honor it again? I believe you would have get some kind of success from your running game which enhances those play action fakes.  It's not just the play action fakes themselves.  I don't really think you need any type of data during a game to tell you that if the defense is committing 8 men or more in the box you've got a better chance of completing passes on the defense.  What causes the defense to committ 8 to 9 men in the box?  A successful running game gets them to do that more often than not.  I think it creates more opportunities for you to face lighter numbers of defenders when you want to pass the ball.   I got to be honest here and say I can't go toe to toe with you on all that stat crunching, but there's just a few things I will just never buy about that data.   And if you're waiting for bodies(us old school thinkers) to die it's going to be a long, long, long time before that happens in the game of football.........
    • He could "beast", and still be a bad addition to the locker room in the long run. 
  • Members

    • Legend

      Legend 3,586

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Dingus McGirt

      Dingus McGirt 806

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • stitches

      stitches 5,226

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • CamMo

      CamMo 769

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • John Hammonds

      John Hammonds 365

      Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • newb767

      newb767 27

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • NewEra

      NewEra 3,602

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • erock

      erock 25

      New Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • Buck Showalter

      Buck Showalter 3,770

      Moderators
      Joined:
      Last active:
    • jskinnz

      jskinnz 5,163

      Senior Member
      Joined:
      Last active:
×
×
  • Create New...