What position would you rather be in?

[Trace Pyott]

This really has nothing to do with our current play or lack there of so don’t read into this question too much but I was thinking.... 

  Let’s say you are a general manager of a team and you have the opportunity to get Peyton Manning in his prime  or some other all pro in free agency but......it’s gonna cost you tons of money where you can’t re sign your good talent and actually have to release a lot of your better players to make cap space.  (Just play along with me here). if you had to pick would you rather have a well rounded team with a good defense and horrible and I mean horribke Qb....or would you rather have an all pro qb (someone like Peyton) ......and a horrible team around him?  Basically I’m wondering which is easiest to build a franchise with.....is it easier to find an amazing Qb or is it easier to build an all around team ?  This question also raises the question how important is a top of the line franchise Qb?  I’m just asking this because people always say finding a franchise Qb is super hard and super important and it had me thinking and wondering what you guys thought. 

[buccolts]

Gimme a good well rounded team.

I can find a much better than horrible QB.

[dodsworth]

Give me a well rounded team with a competent GM, good

scouting department, good coaching staff with an offense

in place for a system QB such as an RPO, West Coast or the 

Pat's offensive system.

 

You can catch lightning in a bottle by making one guy 

the highest paid player in the league but you can't 

build consistent title teams that way.

[Myles]

Give me Manning.  

Since you mentioned him, I assume he was an available choice.    I think he is the best QB of all time.  

Do I take a well rounded team, or the best QB of all time?    I'm going with Manning.  

 

 

So I assume those choosing "well rounded team"   would have traded the Luck pick to Cleveland for the butt-load of picks they were offering us. 

[shasta519]

I take the QB. Have to be able to score points to win in the NFL.

[B~Town]

Well rounded team you don't need a super star QB to win SB's 

[richard pallo]

I would take the QB,  like Luck, and with hopefully a good GM, like Ballard, you build a good team around him.  Keep retooling the team while keeping the QB. Hopefully we win multiple SB's.   All you have to do is look at Brady, Bellicheck and the Patriots.  It's a plan for success if your GM can be successful. 

[dodsworth]

Green Bay is going through the same thing with Rogers as we did with Manning. Great QB, sub par team.

[Myles]

22 minutes ago, richard pallo said:

I would take the QB,  like Luck, and with hopefully a good GM, like Ballard, you build a good team around him.  Keep retooling the team while keeping the QB. Hopefully we win multiple SB's.   All you have to do is look at Brady, Bellicheck and the Patriots.  It's a plan for success if your GM can be successful. 

Now if it was Luck, I would choose the well rounded team.   If Manning is available, I would choose the QB.

 

[The Fish]

1 hour ago, B~Town said:

Well rounded team you don't need a super star QB to win SB's 

Actually more often than not, you do. That's it's possible to win with a Nick Foles, doesn't mean it's the likeliest way to win a SB. There's lot's of teams that can run and stop the run who never have *the guy* and don't do squat. You want a Peyton, Brady, Ben, Brees kind of guy and then fill in the gaps. 

 

It's never that cut and dry anyway (simply picking between the two approaches), which is more reason to want the quality QB.

[The Fish]

1 hour ago, dodsworth said:

Green Bay is going through the same thing with Rogers as we did with Manning. Great QB, sub par team.

 

This Green Bay team that Rodgers is running around with isn't bad and Peyton never had bad teams either (after 02, 03). Top heavy, sure, but not sub par.

[coltsva]

 

 

19 of the last 26 Super Bowls have been won by HOF or eventual lock HOF QBs. 

None of them did it alone, but it can’t be a coincidence that the Dilfers, Foles, etc of the NFL are the exception to the rule.

 

Other SB winners are:

Eli Manning (2) - possible HOF?

Wilson-Still too many years left to know

Flacco 

Dilfer

Johnson

Foles 

 

 

[dodsworth]

3 hours ago, The Fish said:

 

This Green Bay team that Rodgers is running around with isn't bad and Peyton never had bad teams either (after 02, 03). Top heavy, sure, but not sub par.

2010 with Manning the record was 10 and 6 with an AFC South title.

In 2011 with Manning on the sideline with neck surgery the record

was 2 wins with 14 losses, yup......sub par roster.

[Myles]

6 hours ago, The Fish said:

Actually more often than not, you do. That's it's possible to win with a Nick Foles, doesn't mean it's the likeliest way to win a SB. There's lot's of teams that can run and stop the run who never have *the guy* and don't do squat. You want a Peyton, Brady, Ben, Brees kind of guy and then fill in the gaps. 

 

History shows different.    Not many QB's with 10% or more of the teams cap win the Superbowl.   That was part of the thread option, at least implied.

 

"Since Young’s championship in 1994, only three other quarterbacks have eaten up 10% of their teams salary cap- Eli Manning in 2011 (11.7%), Peyton Manning in 2006 (10.4%), and Brett Favre in 1996 (10.2%). The average spend on a Super Bowl QB has been just 6.4%. If Brady wins the Super Bowl his cap percentage will fit between the Manning brothers at 11.1%. Russell Wilson’s 0.49% would rank below all others except for Brady in 2001 who cost just 0.47% of the Patriots salary cap. If Brady wins he will become just the fourth QB to win a title after signing a large contract extension. The others to do so were the Manning’s and Ben Roethlisberger"

[The Fish]

17 minutes ago, Myles said:

History shows different.    Not many QB's with 10% or more of the teams cap win the Superbowl.   That was part of the thread option, at least implied.

 

"Since Young’s championship in 1994, only three other quarterbacks have eaten up 10% of their teams salary cap- Eli Manning in 2011 (11.7%), Peyton Manning in 2006 (10.4%), and Brett Favre in 1996 (10.2%). The average spend on a Super Bowl QB has been just 6.4%. If Brady wins the Super Bowl his cap percentage will fit between the Manning brothers at 11.1%. Russell Wilson’s 0.49% would rank below all others except for Brady in 2001 who cost just 0.47% of the Patriots salary cap. If Brady wins he will become just the fourth QB to win a title after signing a large contract extension. The others to do so were the Manning’s and Ben Roethlisberger"

There's a real obvious hole here that makes this point, not just kind of moot, but totally moot. Like it's not relevant.

Brady doesn't take max contracts. (or the more precisely, highest paid at the position- I know it's not the NBA, for those who will eagerly miss my point to pick at this)

And again, none of that really speaks to the quality of starter, because since 1994, very few run of the mill guys have played in Super Bowls at the QB position . It's pretty self evident when you're watching one of three guys out of one conference for 15 years. Wilson won on a rookie deal and now he's a max guy now. Flacco won and he's a max, rightly or wrongly. 

You need a good QB and if a team has one, they're getting paid, best hope it's not Stat Mattford or Andy Dalton. Andy Dalton tier QB's are never a safe bet to win a Super Bowl, though on occasion it's happened. 

 

 

[IinD]

You need a lot of luck as well (no pun intended). Guys get hurt and kill a teams SB chances every year. It ain't that easy to win a SB.

A LOT has to go right. We had a top 5 all time QB and only got one ring.

[OLD FAN MAN]

7 hours ago, Myles said:

Now if it was Luck, I would choose the well rounded team.   If Manning is available, I would choose the QB.

 

i concur

[Myles]

14 minutes ago, The Fish said:

There's a real obvious hole here that makes this point, not just kind of moot, but totally moot. Like it's not relevant.

Brady doesn't take max contracts. (or the more precisely, highest paid at the position- I know it's not the NBA, for those who will eagerly miss my point to pick at this)

And again, none of that really speaks to the quality of starter, because since 1994, very few run of the mill guys have played in Super Bowls at the QB position . It's pretty self evident when you're watching one of three guys out of one conference for 15 years. Wilson won on a rookie deal and now he's a max guy now. Flacco won and he's a max, rightly or wrongly. 

You need a good QB and if a team has one, they're getting paid, best hope it's not Stat Mattford or Andy Dalton. Andy Dalton tier QB's are never a safe bet to win a Super Bowl, though on occasion it's happened. 

 

 

You missed what the question was.

This was in the opening post:

..it’s gonna cost you tons of money where you can’t re sign your good talent and actually have to release a lot of your better players to make cap space.

 

That is implying a top 5 paid QB or higher.    Top paid QB's rarely win the Superbowl.    Both Mannings and Favre are the only ones since 1994, when they make up at least 10% of the cap.  

[NewEra]

Well rounded or elite defenses like the 85 bears, 00 ravens and dungys bucs. Me personally, I loved watching those defenses

[2006Coltsbestever]

I would take our 2003-2009 teams again easily. I can make a strong argument the reason why we didn't win more than 1 SB was because we came up against the greatest dynasty of all-time in NE in those years, especially in 2003 and 2004. We would've been the #1 Seed in 2007 as well if it wasn't for NE.

[SOMDColtsfan]

I'll take the current Colts, a healthy A. Luck,  and a top 5 draft seating NEXT year..+ $100mil surplus cap space..cant wait til next year. Perfect ingredients IMO 

[The Fish]

3 hours ago, Myles said:

You missed what the question was.

This was in the opening post:

..it’s gonna cost you tons of money where you can’t re sign your good talent and actually have to release a lot of your better players to make cap space.

 

That is implying a top 5 paid QB or higher.    Top paid QB's rarely win the Superbowl.    Both Mannings and Favre are the only ones since 1994, when they make up at least 10% of the cap.  

"It's never that cut and dry anyway (simply picking between the two approaches), which is more reason to want the quality QB."

or

Tom Brady.