View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently August 1st, 2014, 8:33 pm



Reply to topic  [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top 5 D 
Author Message
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: October 20th, 2004, 4:16 pm
Posts: 9848
Location: Where ever I'm at now
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
mwill2 wrote:
There isn't one single "correct" way to build a team. If the formula were that simple, every team would build in the exact same way. You have a good chance to win with a great defense or with a great QB. However, you have an even better chance to win with BOTH. it's not like the two are mutually exclusive.


I don't know that anyone is saying there is only one "correct" way to build a team, but I would argue that some are better than others. When you have a lack of talent across the board, grabbing a high priced, franchise QB first and parading him out as the starter in his rookie year hasn't produced many successful NFL QBs from that scenario. While QB may be the most important position on the team, they are also dependent on surrounding talent. It's not like a future HOF QB is going to instantly take a team from the cellar and it's off to the SB. If you want to put your young franchise QB into a position to succeed, it's better to have set the team up ahead of time. Not every position, but at least some of the key positions on both sides of the ball should be equipped with some pretty good talent. When the Lions grabbed Matt, the only really quality talent they had on the entire roster was Calvin. Nothing on defense, nothing else on offense.
And while many may point to the Colts and say "they did it with Peyton", he is an exception. Look at how he struggled this season, with injuries on both sides of the ball and a pretty mediocre group of players on the offensive line. They made the playoffs, but by the skin of their teeth. He makes that team better, but he can't do it by himself.

All that said, the Lions are well on their way to getting the sufficient talent around Matt, and hopefully this year they can do another good job in the draft and in the front office making trades and FA signings.

_________________
Driver of the 'we need a coaching change' bandwagon. Climb aboard.


January 24th, 2011, 11:01 am
Profile
Walk On
User avatar

Joined: April 29th, 2010, 1:17 pm
Posts: 391
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
What you say holds true for any great player. If you get a stud MLB but don't put anyone around him, he won't be nearly as effective. As long as a QB has a competent OL (see- not great, or even good), yes he can single handedly take his team at the very least to the playoffs. A defense can too, but you're comparing 11+ players to one. The Lions were the worst team in NFL history when they drafted Stafford. Had they went with, say, Aaron Curry, we would not be nearly as promising. You're probably going to say "well that's why he got hurt." To that I say, he got hurt because he ran around for 10 seconds trying to make a play.

Of course it would be best from the QB's perspective to have a dominant team already around him when he comes in, but from the team perspective you want that QB asap because he easily makes the biggest impact regardless of the team around him. You used the colts as an example. Outside of Manning, they are easily a sub .500 team this year with the way their season went down. Their OL is weak and they had injuries all over the offense. Their defense had problems as well. Despite those facts, Manning was still able to single-handedly take them to the playoffs. That is a prime example of what a great QB can do for a team. You say a QB can't do it by themselves, to which I respond you're right to a degree. A QB cannot effect the defense directly, but they can run a great offense by themselves. An average offense with a HOF QB and a great defense is a SB contender.

IMO, the #1 best way to build a team is to build the defense and offensive line, and whenever you have the chance to obtain a franchise QB you take it (no matter if it's the first offseason or the 5th). When you obtain the franchise QB, you start adding skill positions, without ignoring defense of course. If a once in a lifetime skill position comes your way (Calvin) you don't pass up on him. This is mainly done by drafting BPA in the positions where it makes sense, and filling holes via FA and/or trades.

_________________
Image
2011 AAL: Jahvid Best
Rushing: 390 Yards : 4.6 YPC : 2 TD : 65 YPG
Receiving: 287 Yards : 10.6 YPR : 1 TD : 47.8 YPG
0 Fumbles, 0 Fumbles lost
2 concussions


January 25th, 2011, 12:59 am
Profile
Div 1 - Starter
User avatar

Joined: August 19th, 2010, 9:24 pm
Posts: 582
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
i get why they took the qb first. you need to get the qb experience before he gets real good. so by the time they put all the pieces in place matt would have been matured and ready to make the run.


January 25th, 2011, 11:27 am
Profile
Play by Play Announcer - Al Michaels

Joined: October 15th, 2005, 9:00 am
Posts: 1839
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
m2karateman wrote:
mwill2 wrote:
I don't know that anyone is saying there is only one "correct" way to build a team, but I would argue that some are better than others.


Yes, some have said that exact thing. Repeatedly. "You start with defense" or "you start with the OL," further arguing that building around a QB is "wrong." The point is that there are countless ways to build a team. There are plenty of examples of teams that started with the QB and successfully built around them. Bill Parcells built the Patriots around Drew Bledsoe, Cowboys built around Aikman, the Falcons built around Matt Ryan. Manning and the Colts, etc etc etc. This approach isn't always successful (Jamarcus Russell, Joey Harrington) but building around a defense or OL isn't always successful either. If any method was known to be "better" than another, then every team would do it the same way.

The other thing to keep in mind is that in today's NFL, fans and owners give coaches a very short leash. Building a new OL or defense can take years but a new QB can earn a few extra wins right away (Sam Bradford). Coaches need to earn those wins early because they may only get 2-3 years before they get fired. Unless you have a very patient GM or owner, a coach may not have time to build the team in the trenches. Ask Steve Spagnuolo why he wanted a QB last year--his seat was getting hot after only one season. They could have used Suh, no doubt, but they took Bradford. I'm sure we'll see the same thing happen this year and certainly next year with Andrew Luck.

_________________
Proud member of the Contract Extension for Schwartz Fan Club.


January 25th, 2011, 2:01 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
I really find it funny that anyone has this conversation for the very things stated in the post above. People have been just as successful doing both. What was the one common factor? They got talent ALL THE WAY AROUND in the end. Draft crappy players, you get bed results. in the end you NEED a solid QB and you NEED a solid oline. You also NEED a solid D. If you don't have those blocks it doesn't matter where you started.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


January 25th, 2011, 2:07 pm
Profile
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
m2karateman wrote:
I don't know that anyone is saying there is only one "correct" way to build a team, but I would argue that some are better than others. When you have a lack of talent across the board, grabbing a high priced, franchise QB first and parading him out as the starter in his rookie year hasn't produced many successful NFL QBs from that scenario. While QB may be the most important position on the team, they are also dependent on surrounding talent. It's not like a future HOF QB is going to instantly take a team from the cellar and it's off to the SB. If you want to put your young franchise QB into a position to succeed, it's better to have set the team up ahead of time. Not every position, but at least some of the key positions on both sides of the ball should be equipped with some pretty good talent. When the Lions grabbed Matt, the only really quality talent they had on the entire roster was Calvin. Nothing on defense, nothing else on offense.
And while many may point to the Colts and say "they did it with Peyton", he is an exception. Look at how he struggled this season, with injuries on both sides of the ball and a pretty mediocre group of players on the offensive line. They made the playoffs, but by the skin of their teeth. He makes that team better, but he can't do it by himself.

All that said, the Lions are well on their way to getting the sufficient talent around Matt, and hopefully this year they can do another good job in the draft and in the front office making trades and FA signings.


As everyone knows, I agree with this 100%.


steensn wrote:
I really find it funny that anyone has this conversation for the very things stated in the post above. People have been just as successful doing both. What was the one common factor? They got talent ALL THE WAY AROUND in the end. Draft crappy players, you get bed results. in the end you NEED a solid QB and you NEED a solid oline. You also NEED a solid D. If you don't have those blocks it doesn't matter where you started.


Steen, I think what is so maddening is that you can't get quality play out of a quality Qb if you don't have talent around him. Yes you need more than a great DT, or DE, or MLB, but that great player will still yield positive results if there is little talent around him. The same isn't true for Qb. Look at players like Steve Young that rotted on a bad team until he went somewhere that had a good OL (the same could be said for Brett Favre in Atlanta). They looked like garbage picks, and total busts until they went elsewhere. I don't think there are examples of players going from busts to hall of fame caliber at other positions. I really think that DOES matter where you start (if it doesn't matter, don't tell that to all of the people crying about Sanchez winning a boat load of playoff games, they sure think it matters).


Last edited by wjb21ndtown on January 25th, 2011, 4:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.



January 25th, 2011, 4:19 pm
Div 1 - Starter
User avatar

Joined: August 19th, 2010, 9:24 pm
Posts: 582
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
qbs sell tickets, if you dont have 1 you better get 1. plus they need time to mature and get a better understanding for the pro game. qb is the toughest transition in the game so if you start out drafting 1 you will have time figure out if he is gonna be the guy to get it done. if not, you still have time to look elsewhere. as far as defenses go, you have to be able to get the right players in order to become a top defense. we could go out and draft nothing but defense for 10 straight years and still not become a top defense. i would think if you didnt have a qb you should select 1 to start the build and go from there. by the time his 3 year evaluation comes out you should have a solid team built. if the qb works out then your ready for a serious run, if not, back to the drawing board.


January 25th, 2011, 4:52 pm
Profile
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
wjb21ndtown wrote:
m2karateman wrote:
I don't know that anyone is saying there is only one "correct" way to build a team, but I would argue that some are better than others. When you have a lack of talent across the board, grabbing a high priced, franchise QB first and parading him out as the starter in his rookie year hasn't produced many successful NFL QBs from that scenario. While QB may be the most important position on the team, they are also dependent on surrounding talent. It's not like a future HOF QB is going to instantly take a team from the cellar and it's off to the SB. If you want to put your young franchise QB into a position to succeed, it's better to have set the team up ahead of time. Not every position, but at least some of the key positions on both sides of the ball should be equipped with some pretty good talent. When the Lions grabbed Matt, the only really quality talent they had on the entire roster was Calvin. Nothing on defense, nothing else on offense.
And while many may point to the Colts and say "they did it with Peyton", he is an exception. Look at how he struggled this season, with injuries on both sides of the ball and a pretty mediocre group of players on the offensive line. They made the playoffs, but by the skin of their teeth. He makes that team better, but he can't do it by himself.

All that said, the Lions are well on their way to getting the sufficient talent around Matt, and hopefully this year they can do another good job in the draft and in the front office making trades and FA signings.


As everyone knows, I agree with this 100%.


steensn wrote:
I really find it funny that anyone has this conversation for the very things stated in the post above. People have been just as successful doing both. What was the one common factor? They got talent ALL THE WAY AROUND in the end. Draft crappy players, you get bed results. in the end you NEED a solid QB and you NEED a solid oline. You also NEED a solid D. If you don't have those blocks it doesn't matter where you started.


Steen, I think what is so maddening is that you can't get quality play out of a quality Qb if you don't have talent around him. Yes you need more than a great DT, or DE, or MLB, but that great player will still yield positive results if there is little talent around him. The same isn't true for Qb. Look at players like Steve Young that rotted on a bad team until he went somewhere that had a good OL (the same could be said for Brett Favre in Atlanta). They looked like garbage picks, and total busts until they went elsewhere. I don't think there are examples of players going from busts to hall of fame caliber at other positions. I really think that DOES matter where you start (if it doesn't matter, don't tell that to all of the people crying about Sanchez winning a boat load of playoff games, they sure think it matters).


Great QB on a crappy team get's you no where, best defense in the world that holds their opponent to 3 points a game can't win if the QB can't lead his team to a field goal. They are dynamically linked and require each other.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


January 25th, 2011, 5:20 pm
Profile
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
steensn wrote:
Great QB on a crappy team get's you no where, best defense in the world that holds their opponent to 3 points a game can't win if the QB can't lead his team to a field goal. They are dynamically linked and require each other.


Steen:
First example (Great Qb on a crappy team) is the Tampa Bay Buccaneers of the 80's, one of the worst teams in sports history.

Second example is more or less the Trent Dilfer Baltimore Ravens, a Super Bowl team. I realize that Dilfer could lead his team to score on occasion, but he was a less than average Qb that was told to just not make any mistakes. Jon Kitna, Shaun Hill, Joey Harrington, etc. could have all filled in for Dilfer and done just as well.


January 25th, 2011, 5:29 pm
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
mwill2 wrote:
There are plenty of examples of teams that started with the QB and successfully built around them. Bill Parcells built the Patriots around Drew Bledsoe, Cowboys built around Aikman, the Falcons built around Matt Ryan. Manning and the Colts, etc etc etc. This approach isn't always successful (Jamarcus Russell, Joey Harrington) but building around a defense or OL isn't always successful either. If any method was known to be "better" than another, then every team would do it the same way.


I'm sorry, but Atlanta did NOT build their franchise around Matt Ryan. They drafted Roddy White and Michael Jenkins 2 and 3 years respectively before drafting Matt Ryan, they had a pro-bowl TE, and they signed Michael Turner the same year that they drafted Matt Ryan. Michael Turner was as responsible if not more so resonsible for Atlanta's turn around as Matt Ryan was. They also had a first round LT and a second round LG in place for the arrival of their new talent. Atl is much more an example of a team building first and getting their Qb last, than it is a team taking their Qb and building around him.

You're prior two examples are pre-1994, pre-NFL salary cap teams. The ONLY true successful team that has done it in the modern era is the Indianapolis Colts with Payton Manning, and I contend that he is just that special of a player.


January 25th, 2011, 5:47 pm
RIP Killer
User avatar

Joined: June 26th, 2006, 1:03 pm
Posts: 13429
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
wjb21ndtown wrote:
steensn wrote:
Great QB on a crappy team get's you no where, best defense in the world that holds their opponent to 3 points a game can't win if the QB can't lead his team to a field goal. They are dynamically linked and require each other.


Steen:
First example (Great Qb on a crappy team) is the Tampa Bay Buccaneers of the 80's, one of the worst teams in sports history.

Second example is more or less the Trent Dilfer Baltimore Ravens, a Super Bowl team. I realize that Dilfer could lead his team to score on occasion, but he was a less than average Qb that was told to just not make any mistakes. Jon Kitna, Shaun Hill, Joey Harrington, etc. could have all filled in for Dilfer and done just as well.


I guess that is where I would disagree... Jon Kitna, Shaun Hill, Joey Harrington were never pro bowlers. He was never a big threat, but he did protect the ball unlike most QB can do. That being said, even if I concede the Dilfer situation, that is the exception not the rule. I could bring up Elway's 1998 superbowl season where it was very obvious he made the win, not the team. They went 6-10 the year after he left. Again, exception, not the rule.

_________________
regularjoe12 - "You are crackin me up! really! HILARIOUS um let me quote some intellgent people in this coneversation: Steensn:"


January 25th, 2011, 5:57 pm
Profile
Play by Play Announcer - Al Michaels

Joined: October 15th, 2005, 9:00 am
Posts: 1839
Location: Greensboro, NC
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
wjb21ndtown wrote:
mwill2 wrote:
There are plenty of examples of teams that started with the QB and successfully built around them. Bill Parcells built the Patriots around Drew Bledsoe, Cowboys built around Aikman, the Falcons built around Matt Ryan. Manning and the Colts, etc etc etc. This approach isn't always successful (Jamarcus Russell, Joey Harrington) but building around a defense or OL isn't always successful either. If any method was known to be "better" than another, then every team would do it the same way.


I'm sorry, but Atlanta did NOT build their franchise around Matt Ryan. They drafted Roddy White and Michael Jenkins 2 and 3 years respectively before drafting Matt Ryan, they had a pro-bowl TE, and they signed Michael Turner the same year that they drafted Matt Ryan. Michael Turner was as responsible if not more so resonsible for Atlanta's turn around as Matt Ryan was. They also had a first round LT and a second round LG in place for the arrival of their new talent. Atl is much more an example of a team building first and getting their Qb last, than it is a team taking their Qb and building around him.

You're prior two examples are pre-1994, pre-NFL salary cap teams. The ONLY true successful team that has done it in the modern era is the Indianapolis Colts with Payton Manning, and I contend that he is just that special of a player.


You've left out an important part of Atlanta's time line. In 2001, they drafted Michael Vick. Atlanta has built around the QB for the last decade. White, Jenkins, and Alge Crumpler (round 2 pick after Vick) etc were all added to help Vick. They built around him. They even hired a coaching staff that would implement an offense to suit his skills. As soon as Vick got suspended, they used their #1 pick on Matt Ryan. So yes, the Falcons were built around the QB position. They've done it twice in this decade.

Even if you (or anyone) disagrees with the Falcons example, there are still countless other examples that prove the same point. The Seahawks built around an unproven Matt Hasselbeck and went to a Super Bowl. The Bengals were built (and had a modicum of success) around Carson Palmer--might have been a Super Bowl team if it weren't for his knee injury vs. Steelers. Etc etc etc.

The examples can go back and forth either way. The fact remains that teams build in a countless number of ways and the success of their building depends on many factors, not simply which area they choose to address first.

_________________
Proud member of the Contract Extension for Schwartz Fan Club.


January 25th, 2011, 7:15 pm
Profile
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
mwill2 wrote:
wjb21ndtown wrote:
mwill2 wrote:
There are plenty of examples of teams that started with the QB and successfully built around them. Bill Parcells built the Patriots around Drew Bledsoe, Cowboys built around Aikman, the Falcons built around Matt Ryan. Manning and the Colts, etc etc etc. This approach isn't always successful (Jamarcus Russell, Joey Harrington) but building around a defense or OL isn't always successful either. If any method was known to be "better" than another, then every team would do it the same way.


I'm sorry, but Atlanta did NOT build their franchise around Matt Ryan. They drafted Roddy White and Michael Jenkins 2 and 3 years respectively before drafting Matt Ryan, they had a pro-bowl TE, and they signed Michael Turner the same year that they drafted Matt Ryan. Michael Turner was as responsible if not more so resonsible for Atlanta's turn around as Matt Ryan was. They also had a first round LT and a second round LG in place for the arrival of their new talent. Atl is much more an example of a team building first and getting their Qb last, than it is a team taking their Qb and building around him.

You're prior two examples are pre-1994, pre-NFL salary cap teams. The ONLY true successful team that has done it in the modern era is the Indianapolis Colts with Payton Manning, and I contend that he is just that special of a player.


You've left out an important part of Atlanta's time line. In 2001, they drafted Michael Vick. Atlanta has built around the QB for the last decade. White, Jenkins, and Alge Crumpler (round 2 pick after Vick) etc were all added to help Vick. They built around him. They even hired a coaching staff that would implement an offense to suit his skills. As soon as Vick got suspended, they used their #1 pick on Matt Ryan. So yes, the Falcons were built around the QB position. They've done it twice in this decade.

Even if you (or anyone) disagrees with the Falcons example, there are still countless other examples that prove the same point. The Seahawks built around an unproven Matt Hasselbeck and went to a Super Bowl. The Bengals were built (and had a modicum of success) around Carson Palmer--might have been a Super Bowl team if it weren't for his knee injury vs. Steelers. Etc etc etc.

The examples can go back and forth either way. The fact remains that teams build in a countless number of ways and the success of their building depends on many factors, not simply which area they choose to address first.



Wait wait wait... If the Falcons DID in fact build around Michael Vick, it was a FAILED build. It took TWO first round Qbs to make it happen, is that really what we're doing here??? If that's the case, should we hurry up and grab our 2nd first round Qb this year??? And, did Michael Vick ultimately help the team succeed? I would say the answer is a resounding "NO!" Vick has nothing to do with the Falcon's current success, and if anything the Falcons drafting Vick hurt the team as it sits today, more so than it helped.


LMAO! The Seahawks "built" around Matt H!?!?! That's freaking HILARIOUS!!!, especially given that the was drafted by the PACKERS in the 6th round, and didn't even get to the Seahawks until two years later... After they acquired Shaun Alexander, and a little know OG named Steve Hutchinson - who won numerous pro bowls and went on to be the highest paid OG in league history. Hutchinson was more a part of Seattle's success than anyone, check their record before and after he left. The Seahawks... I can't believe you even went there...


The Bengals did NOT draft and build around Carson Palmer. They already had a good OL, a pro bowl running back, and Ocho Cino AND TJ Housmanzada in place BEFORE they drafted Carson Palmer. Nice try though...


January 25th, 2011, 7:56 pm
Fired Head Coach (0-16 record)

Joined: October 13th, 2005, 9:03 am
Posts: 2297
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
The Colts also were not built around Manning they drafted Harrison two years prior and Glenn the year before.


January 25th, 2011, 8:19 pm
Profile
Player of the Year - Defense

Joined: September 13th, 2007, 12:43 pm
Posts: 2627
Post Re: Draft A QB or No? - Also QB Importance vs Building a Top
Yeah, and the Lions drafted CJ before Stafford, therefore they built around CJ not Stafford...

Come on, this line of reasoning is ridiculous.

Quote:
Wait wait wait... If the Falcons DID in fact build around Michael Vick, it was a FAILED build. It took TWO first round Qbs to make it happen, is that really what we're doing here??? If that's the case, should we hurry up and grab our 2nd first round Qb this year??? And, did Michael Vick ultimately help the team succeed? I would say the answer is a resounding "NO!" Vick has nothing to do with the Falcon's current success, and if anything the Falcons drafting Vick hurt the team as it sits today, more so than it helped.


There was no way to know that Vick was going to go to jail. It was basically a random event and you can't factor that in. Its almost the equivalent of Stafford dropping dead tomorrow and you going "see! shouldn't have taken him!" Vick took the Falcons to the playoffs twice, including basically winning that game against GB single handedly. He didn't win them any super bowls, but to say it was a bad draft pick for that franchise is crazy ignorant.

Quote:
The Bengals did NOT draft and build around Carson Palmer. They already had a good OL, a pro bowl running back, and Ocho Cino AND TJ Housmanzada in place BEFORE they drafted Carson Palmer. Nice try though...


We already had this argument before. I stopped responding when you called the Bengals, who had gone a combined 22-58 the five years before Palmer started, a "good" team. Palmer made the Bengals. Seriously, how is this even debatable? The team was garbage before he started playing, went on an awesome streak when he was in his prime, and returned to a garbage team when injuries caused his play to decline.


January 25th, 2011, 9:14 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 80 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.