Superstar QB/average team vs average QB/Complete team

[CR91]

Is the superstar QB overrated? Lets analyze it

 

Dan Marino - zero championships

 

Peyton Manning - one championship in indy

 

John Elway - zero championship before he had a run game.

 

Aaron Rodgers - one championship

 

Russel Wilson - zero championship after LOB and Lynch 

 

Andrew Luck - zero championship

 

Drew Brees - one championship

 

Now if we look at teams where the QB wasnt the main focus.

 

Big ben- Before Big ben started throwing 5000 yards every year, he was a game manager with an elite defense and/or very good running game and that led to two championships and three super bowls. Since then there has been zero championship

 

Eli manning - Again if you think of Eli's two championships, you dont think of Eli, you think of the defense that gave Brady fits and a very good running game.

 

Now im not saying the QB isnt important, but if you have a QB that can make enough plays and avoid mistakes, you can win and I think Ballard understood that and why the team is built to succeed even without a superstar QB

 

[Flash7]

Honest question: Where do Brady and the Pats fit in? Super QB and complete team? 

[CR91]

2 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

Honest question: Where do Brady and the Pats fit in? Super QB and complete team? 

 

Ive always admired what BB can do with what I think is average players because most of the times, players thst were stars in NE dont pan out ala trent Brown and trey flowers. Id say its more BB's system then anything else

[KB]

Even with Peyton's, he had a running game and defence for indys one, and an elite defence in Denver.

[Dogg63]

24 minutes ago, Flash7 said:

Honest question: Where do Brady and the Pats fit in? Super QB and complete team? 

I put them in the Good QB and complete team category. 

[Superman]

Good heavens...

[braveheartcolt]

4 minutes ago, Superman said:

Good heavens...

Exactly. Should be in the General section.....

[OffensivelyPC]

PSA:  Winning the Super Bowl is hard to do, no matter who's on your roster.

[CR91]

14 minutes ago, Superman said:

Good heavens...

 

Joe Flacco vs Colin Kaepernick was a super bowl matchup. Heck Nick foles won a super bowl. You really gonna tell me their superstar QBs.

 

10 minutes ago, braveheartcolt said:

Exactly. Should be in the General section.....

 

Its somewhat colts related

[The Old Crow]

See Dilfer and Flacco. Game managers who won Super Bowls. Usually, a one time SB win occurrence. 

[CR91]

12 minutes ago, The Old Crow said:

See Dilfer and Flacco. Game managers who won Super Bowls. Usually, a one time SB win occurrence. 

 

They also had dominate defenses with strong running game in Jamel Lewis and Ray Rice

[2006Coltsbestever]

The Redskins won 3 SB's with 3 different QB's from 1982-1991. They had a great coach in Joe Gibbs when doing so, a great O.Line when doing so, and great defenses when doing so. I don't know anyone in here that would say Joe Theismann, Doug Williams, and Mark Rypien were elite QB's the years they won those SB's. They we were above average, good at best. 

[Superman]

58 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

PSA:  Winning the Super Bowl is hard to do, no matter who's on your roster.

 

Exactly, so why not try to get the best players you can, across the board?

 

I don't do well with black/white, either/or propositions, especially when I don't think the two choices are mutually exclusive. 

[Fisticuffs111]

I feel like this thread is just gonna rehash the discussion that took place in that Elite HC, QB, or D thread from a week or two ago.

[jvan1973]

39 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

The Redskins won 3 SB's with 3 different QB's from 1982-1991. They had a great coach in Joe Gibbs when doing so, a great O.Line when doing so, and great defenses when doing so. I don't know anyone in here that would say Joe Theismann, Doug Williams, and Mark Rypien were elite QB's the years they won those SB's. They we were above average, good at best. 

Much different game back then.    QBs and receivers were mauled without flags.    Pounding the rock and playing defense was the way most teams won superbowls.  

[OffensivelyPC]

51 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Exactly, so why not try to get the best players you can, across the board?

 

I don't do well with black/white, either/or propositions, especially when I don't think the two choices are mutually exclusive. 

And if you're not trying to get the best players you can, you won't be making posts talking about where the Colts fit in that black/white scenario because you won't be playing in any super bowl. Maybe you could if everyone else put a blindfold on and/or took a knee. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

56 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Exactly, so why not try to get the best players you can, across the board?

 

I don't do well with black/white, either/or propositions, especially when I don't think the two choices are mutually exclusive. 

It is just an opinion but I think it is way too early to discuss drafting a QB in the 2020 draft to possibly replace JB. There is a thread here doing just that. I have never seen any other fanbase do that when their team has a winning record. If JB read that type of stuff he would probably laugh his butt off. There is a time and a place for that like if we were 7-8 and out of the playoffs.

 

We just won at KC and some people still can't enjoy it. Many in here before the season started said unless Luck beats the Pats or Chiefs than it would be a fail, JB wins at Arrowhead and some want a QB in college that I have never heard of. Yeah that makes complete sense.  

[2006Coltsbestever]

44 minutes ago, jvan1973 said:

Much different game back then.    QBs and receivers were mauled without flags.    Pounding the rock and playing defense was the way most teams won superbowls.  

Very true and I know Theismann won league MVP in 1983 but in 1982 when they won the SB he was above average. Riggins and their O.Line carried them. I guess my point is, the game at KC reminded me of a 80's/90's game. Old school isn't always bad school 

[Superman]

13 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

It is just an opinion but I think it is way too early to discuss drafting a QB in the 2020 draft to possibly replace JB. There is a thread here doing just that. I have never seen any other fanbase do that when their team has a winning record. If JB read that type of stuff he would probably laugh his butt off. There is a time and a place for that like if we were 7-8 and out of the playoffs.

 

We just won at KC and some people still can't enjoy it. Many in here before the season started said unless Luck beats the Pats or Chiefs than it would be a fail, JB wins at Arrowhead and some want a QB in college that I have never heard of. Yeah that makes complete sense.  

 

Why don’t we stop acting like “winning” and “QB play” are the same thing?

 

And why don’t we stop acting like there’s something wrong with having a great QB?

 

And why don’t we have a discussion about QBing and Jacoby Brissett without resorting to extremes?

[2006Coltsbestever]

36 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

Why don’t we stop acting like “winning” and “QB play” are the same thing?

 

And why don’t we stop acting like there’s something wrong with having a great QB?

 

And why don’t we have a discussion about QBing and Jacoby Brissett without resorting to extremes?

To your 1st comment: My answer is - it is not the same thing (I agree) but the QB is the most important position on the field. So as long as JB plays well enough and the team wins he deserves some credit. Very little, if anyone in here has given JB any credit for the KC win. He wasn't the main reason why we won but he did enough not to lose and he gave his other teammates a chance to win. We won so he did his job in reality.

 

To your 2nd comment: I would rather have Luck, who wouldn't? But JB is getting the job done. Everyone wants a great QB but I just do not believe there is anyone in college right now that can step in and do better than JB is doing right now as a rookie. Nor do I think Chad Kelly can either but that is my opinion.

 

To your 3rd comment: That is a question you have to ask to basically several others in this forum saying JB is just average or below average and will never lead us anywhere. I have never posted extremes with JB, I have said JB is above average and we are winning with him which are facts if someone goes by the numbers and our 3-2 record.

[coltsva]

Superstar QB/average team vs average QB/Complete team

 

I would argue if you have an average QB then you are not a complete team.

[PeterBowman]

Elite QBs get you to the playoffs usually but TEAMS win Super Bowls.

[HOZER]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

Exactly, so why not try to get the best players you can, across the board?

 

I don't do well with black/white, either/or propositions, especially when I don't think the two choices are mutually exclusive. 

 

I definitely think having a great QB is beneficial to the team, as both Manning and Luck made everyone else around them(at least the receivers) better players. One could argue, though, that those elite QBs come with a high price tag and can keep the team from being able to afford other great players?

[Superman]

33 minutes ago, HOZER said:

 

I definitely think having a great QB is beneficial to the team, as both Manning and Luck made everyone else around them(at least the receivers) better players. One could argue, though, that those elite QBs come with a high price tag and can keep the team from being able to afford other great players?

 

One could argue that, just like one could argue that you have to choose between having a great breakfast or a great dinner. But one would be wrong. 

 

Yes, you have to make decisions because of the cap, but the impact of having a highly paid QB is overstated.

[IinD]

Complete team. We always lost to them in the playoffs. I'm personally happy we have a GM who seems to be building a complete team.

 

A good Dline draft/free agency and we could be really dangerous. Assuming the Oline stays in tact and healthy if course. One more WR also.

 

Next couple years will be fun. Speaking for myself only.

 

[Superman]

1 hour ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

To your 1st comment: My answer is - it is not the same thing (I agree) but the QB is the most important position on the field. So as long as JB plays well enough and the team wins he deserves some credit. Very little, if anyone in here has given JB any credit for the KC win. He wasn't the main reason why we won but he did enough not to lose and he gave his other teammates a chance to win. We won so he did his job in reality.

 

No, you're conflating a team win with good QB play. Whether JB deserves or has received credit for the KC win or not isn't at issue. The point is that the team winning doesn't mean the QB played well.

 

Quote

To your 2nd comment: I would rather have Luck, who wouldn't? But JB is getting the job done. Everyone wants a great QB but I just do not believe there is anyone in college right now that can step in and do better than JB is doing right now as a rookie. Nor do I think Chad Kelly can either but that is my opinion.

 

I didn't say anything about Luck, JB or CK, and I didn't mean anything about them, either. I'm talking about people mistaking having a great QB as a reason for not having a complete roster.

 

Quote

To your 3rd comment: That is a question you have to ask to basically several others in this forum saying JB is just average or below average and will never lead us anywhere. I have never posted extremes with JB, I have said JB is above average and we are winning with him which are facts if someone goes by the numbers and our 3-2 record.

 

How about your insinuating that the idea that a college QB that you've never heard of could be better than JB is unreasonable?

[2006Coltsbestever]

23 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

No, you're conflating a team win with good QB play. Whether JB deserves or has received credit for the KC win or not isn't at issue. The point is that the team winning doesn't mean the QB played well.

 

 

I didn't say anything about Luck, JB or CK, and I didn't mean anything about them, either. I'm talking about people mistaking having a great QB as a reason for not having a complete roster.

 

 

How about your insinuating that the idea that a college QB that you've never heard of could be better than JB is unreasonable?

The thing is I never said JB played good against KC. He didn't play bad either though so he deserves some credit for that win. Many in here has given him no credit for the win. Some in here say JB is average at best and will lead us nowhere. Do you not think that is an extreme? Regarding me, I have never said JB is great or will lead us to a SB win so I am far from extreme. I think he may be able too and I am not going to give up on someone after 5 games, not when the team is 3-2 is all I am saying.

 

I really do not think it is unreasonable saying that the current college QB's playing right now aren't as good as JB. It's not like Andrew Luck is in this class of QB's. I have heard of most of the QB's in college people are talking about so I was being sarcastic but a couple I have not which is funny. After 5 games talking about replacing a QB like JB is extreme IMO. I just say give it a bigger sample size which is reasonable.

[HOZER]

49 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

One could argue that, just like one could argue that you have to choose between having a great breakfast or a great dinner. But one would be wrong. 

Can the person afford both? Will both be beneficial to the persons health? Not necessarily wrong IMO. 

[Fisticuffs111]

2 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

The thing is I never said JB played good against KC. He didn't play bad either though so he deserves some credit for that win.

I think that's subjective, or at least it could be delved into deeper. People love to push the on-field general/leadership and that's fine, I'll always agree with that. But when it came to actual, after the snap QB duties, I think he had a bad game.

 

[2006Coltsbestever]

13 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I think that's subjective, or at least it could be delved into deeper. People love to push the on-field general/leadership and that's fine, I'll always agree with that. But when it came to actual, after the snap QB duties, I think he had a bad game.

 

If that is bad I would hate to see what is your good is  . How did JB play against Atlanta? Average  . He played great in that game, I can answer that. JB was far from bad against KC. Bad would be throwing 3 INT's and losing the game. We just beat KC and you guys still can't enjoy it. Unreal! He was average that I will agree with. So if we beat Houston and JB goes for only 220 and 1 TD and no INT's and we win, is that bad?

[2006Coltsbestever]

In order for the JB haters to be happy, he needs to throw for 400 yards and 3 TD's. I am very disappointed in the way some of you think. All I care about is winning that is all it counts. JB could throw for 173 yards and only 1 TD and 1 INT but if we run for 150 yards and win who gives a crap. 

[Fisticuffs111]

25 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

If that is bad I would hate to see what is your good is  . How did JB play against Atlanta? Average  . He played great in that game, I can answer that. JB was far from bad against KC. Bad would be throwing 3 INT's and losing the game. We just beat KC and you guys still can't enjoy it. Unreal! He was average that I will agree with. So if we beat Houston and JB goes for only 220 and 1 TD and no INT's and we win, is that bad?

 

What? Your quote was specifically talking about the KC game....

 

And yes, JB did do well against the Falcons, who have possibly the worst defense so far this year. I actually said that could be JB’s best game this season and so far I don’t think that’s out of the question.

[2006Coltsbestever]

2 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

 

What? Your quote was specifically talking about the KC game....

 

And yes, JB did do well against the Falcons, who have possibly the worst defense so far this year. I actually said that could be JB’s best game this season and so far I don’t think that’s out of the question.

Explain how JB played "bad" at KC. That is the point and you said that.

[Fisticuffs111]

14 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

Explain how JB played "bad" at KC. That is the point and you said that.

I feel like you're getting reallllly defensive. I said JB didn't play well after the snap... I mean, 150 yds, 5.2 avg, 1 INT, no TDs, plus he was obviously struggling against the blitz all night.

I even said that he showed good poise/leadership (mostly before run plays), but in terms of passing the ball, which is what I was implying in my original post, I think he did poorly.

[OffensivelyPC]

18 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

In order for the JB haters to be happy, he needs to throw for 400 yards and 3 TD's. I am very disappointed in the way some of you think. All I care about is winning that is all it counts. JB could throw for 173 yards and only 1 TD and 1 INT but if we run for 150 yards and win who gives a crap. 

At the end of the day, winning is possible with an average - even below average- QB. Just because anyone questions the talent and ability of that QB has no bearing on the ability,  or even the right, to enjoy that win. It doesn't even make anyone a "Debby-Downer."

 

All it means is that people notice imperfection. You ever watch a movie that seemed great, then after the second view, you had critiques? Ever go to your favorite restaurant and had complaints? Doesn't make that movie or restaurant horrible. It just means it is not perfect. Which by definition means it can be improved.

 

Ive been walking on cloud nine since the KC win. Couldn't be more proud of the Colts if I made the 4th and 1 stop myself. I still want them to be 19-0 every year. Thus I wont stop discussing how that's possible. I always want them to be better than they are. If that means talking about how JB isnt the perfect QB, well, then I'm sorry. But I want him to be the best QB in the league, and if he's not, I want to talk about how we find the next guy who is. Doesnt mean I dont appreciate him, or I'm a JB hater or even dissapointed if we lose, it only means I want the Colts to win as much as possible.

[2006Coltsbestever]

17 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I feel like you're getting reallllly defensive. I said JB didn't play well after the snap...I mean, 150 yds, 5.2 avg, 1 INT, no TDs..

No It's cool, you know me, I just want to learn more on how people judge players based on bad - great. I like you as a poster so no biggy. I just love getting different opinions. Superman and I went at it earlier  because I respect his opinions. I learn everyday from different perspectives from solid posters. 

[2006Coltsbestever]

5 minutes ago, OffensivelyPC said:

At the end of the day, winning is possible with an average - even below average- QB. Just because anyone questions the talent and ability of that QB has no bearing on the ability,  or even the right, to enjoy that win. It doesn't even make anyone a "Debby-Downer."

 

All it means is that people notice imperfection. You ever watch a movie that seemed great, then after the second view, you had critiques? Ever go to your favorite restaurant and had complaints? Doesn't make that movie or restaurant horrible. It just means it is not perfect. Which by definition means it can be improved.

 

Ive been walking on cloud nine since the KC win. Couldn't be more proud of the Colts if I made the 4th and 1 stop myself. I still want them to be 19-0 every year. Thus I wont stop discussing how that's possible. I always want them to be better than they are. If that means talking about how JB isnt the perfect QB, well, then I'm sorry. But I want him to be the best QB in the league, and if he's not, I want to talk about how we find the next guy who is. Doesnt mean I dont appreciate him, or I'm a JB hater or even dissapointed if we lose, it only means I want the Colts to win as much as possible.

You are my friend from the ESPN days with that Harrison jersey . I know what you are saying. In a nutshell we all miss Luck, I do too but lets give JB a chance.

[Fisticuffs111]

4 minutes ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

No It's cool, you know me, I just want to learn more on how people judge players based on bad - great, I like you as a poster so no biggy. I just love getting different opinions. Superman and I went at it earlier  because I respect his opinions. I learn everyday from different perspectives from solid posters. 

I hear you, and yeah, you're one of the OG posters and I always respect your opinion.

I don't want to say matter of factly JB had a bad game because he shows poise and displays leadership like some of the best to do it right now. That play where he went to basically every single player pre-snap to keep everyone on the same page comes to mind...I just thought he really struggled when it came to the actual passing game, struggled against the blitz, couldn't get much going. That's not to say it's all on him though, we have a fairly inexperienced WR group for sure.

[2006Coltsbestever]

3 minutes ago, Fisticuffs111 said:

I hear you, and yeah, you're one of the OG posters and I always respect your opinion.

I don't want to say matter of factly JB had a bad game because he shows poise and displays leadership like some of the best to do it right now. That play where he went to basically every single player pre-snap to keep everyone on the same page comes to mind...I just thought he really struggled when it came to the actual passing game, struggled against the blitz, couldn't get much going. That's not to say it's all on him though, we have a fairly inexperienced WR group for sure.

Most of the posts you make are good IMO. You are one of the better posters here so I always love the info from guys like you. I want to see how JB does against Houston, that will show us a lot.  

[Goatface Killah]

There are basically 2 approaches you see when it come to addressing the QB position in the NFL Draft......

 

1. Do whatever necessary to aquire the best QB you can. This approach typically values the guy with the most physical talent and potential. These QBs are typically taken in the first round, the best of the best are taken in the top 5. There are a lot of blockbuster trades made for these types of guys, some involving boatloads of draft picks. Very few of those big moves ever work out. Some teams get lucky and suck bad enough they have the right pick at the right time, like the Colts. If the right guy is there he isnt usually available for a trade.

 

But to get that top tier talent, you basically have to pay the price in a trade or suck bad enough to get it. And even if you do, its still the toughest evaluation in all of sports because so much goes into playing the position. You have to have the physical talent and the mental makeup. I dont

know what the odds are at landing a SB level QB, even with the first pick, but I'm sure you'd have better odds playing blackjack. 

 

2. Build the best team you can and find a QB that fits your team really well. There are guys who fall thru the cracks and make it out if the top 10 of the draft, pretty consistently. 

 

This seems to be what the most successful teams do. Tom Brady was picked with that philosophy. Aaron Rodgers, Ben Roethlisberger, Russell Wilson, Brees.....none of these guys were looked at as the total package.

 

The Colts have the best young GM in the league. I really do believe that. He will find us a QB. Whether its Jacoby or not is irrelevent right now, because he is the guy, right now. 

 

But, I also think Brissett fits our team really well and is much better than he is getting credit for with Colts fans because they are a tad bit snobby about the QB position and are used to taking a QB #1 overall and have been watching two top notch QBs for the last 20 years. 

 

Jacoby has a lot of intangibles that dont show up on PFF. Even his detractors would admit that, I think. So I wont be surprised if he improves and winds up a success story. He has a lot of support on the field and is being put in a great position to succeed. He isn't some slouch, he has talent. And hes doing pretty well so far, as we have done much better than anyone could have expected with all we have been through. There is no reason to look for a replacement yet.