So much for the NEED to have a "franchise QB"...

[Hapless Bills Fan]

Can the mods please close this exercise in BS?

 

You do have the ability to ignore it not one, but two different ways.

[hondo in seattle]

 

Lol... this is "logical"? What if my Defense overpowers your Offense? Now where is your arguement?

 

 

 

Um... I was joking about the logic...

 

It's just silly to argue that Defense wins games and not see the game holistically. A good Offense makes a Defense look bad and vice-versa. If you have a bad Offense, every opposing Defense will be good (comparatively) and you'll lose a lot of games.

[BuffOrange]

Colts/Bears SB was a match of two teams that had Indy/Chi both scoring the same pts a game (however if you remember that season, Chi had a TON of D and ST TD's), and Chi allowed approx 7 pts less than Indy on D. In that game Indy had both the better D and the better O. Indy also returned an INT for a defensive score to put that game away.

 

Rams/Titans SB... lol... the Rams were ranked #4 defensively. They only gave up 15.1 pts a game.

 

That Colts defense was dead last against the run all year, and they were shredded the week before by Brady throwing to a bunch of scrubs.

Yes they played better than the Bears in that game (it helps when Rex Grossman is the opposing QB) - how exactly does that rationalize whatever point you're trying to make?

 

The Rams defense was good that year, but they also played an uber soft schedule and get shredded by Minnesota in their own building in the playoffs. Nobody on earth outside of some stubborn poster on a message board thinks the better offense & worse defense didn't win that Super Bowl.

 

We can all move the goalposts and flip back & forth between season-long stats and individual games to make our point, depending on what's convenient for us.

Edited January 25, 2011 by BuffOrange

[CosmicBills]

Depends on the formation they go with but you cant go wrong with the BPA at DE, DT or even LB if it o fits what they're trying to do.

 

The question with the QB is... how much better a QB are we going to get over Fitz?

Please, for the love of all that's holy, stop. It's not fun anymore. It's like picking on a blind kid.

[whodat]

Please, for the love of all that's holy, stop. It's not fun anymore. It's like picking on a blind kid.

 

First Take the plank out of your own eye.

 

I cannot believe all the venom that is coming out in many of these posts. Mcd makes an OP that has merit. But so many here are just bleeding with animosity.

 

What the hells is wrong with you people! I promised myself I wasn’t going there.

 

Perhaps what many of you are angry about is how well he defends his position. You are all coming after him like a bunch ninjas from every angle. Really. I have to admit though, a lot of the enjoyment I’m getting from this thread is the feeling I’m participating as a spectator in an old Steven Seagal movie with guys getting B word slapped, kicked in the mouth and tossed across the room and half expecting the need to duck away from a flying chair while reading each new post.

 

I think the Super Bowl would be a terrific culminating event for this developing novel. But then again, maybe the draft would be a more natural end landing.

Edited January 25, 2011 by whodat

[CosmicBills]

First Take the plank out of your own eye.

 

I cannot believe all the venom that is coming out in many of these posts. Mcd makes an OP that has merit. But so many here are just bleeding with animosity.

 

What the hells is wrong with you people! I promised myself I wasn’t going there.

 

Perhaps what many of you are angry about is how well he defends his position. You are all coming after him like a bunch ninjas from every angle. Really. I have to admit though, a lot of the enjoyment I’m getting from this thread is the feeling I’m participating as a spectator in an old Steven Seagal movie with guys getting B word slapped, kicked in the mouth and tossed across the room and half expecting the need to duck away from a flying chair while reading each new post.

 

I think the Super Bowl would be a terrific culminating event for this developing novel. But then again, maybe the draft would be a more natural end landing.

It's easy to defend a position when it keeps changing. Give me one example of how he successfully defended his original (not his multitude of variations found after he started back pedaling) position that all you need to win is a great defense.

 

I'll wait.

[BuffOrange]

The Super Bowl will definitely validate his position. If Pittsburgh wins it's because their defense ranked higher. If GB wins, well, their defense was better because they played better and at some key point in the game they will have made a play. Easy game this internet.

[CosmicBills]

The Super Bowl will definitely validate his position. If Pittsburgh wins it's because their defense ranked higher. If GB wins, well, their defense was better because they played better and at some key point in the game they will have made a play. Easy game this internet.

[whodat]

It's easy to defend a position when it keeps changing. Give me one example of how he successfully defended his original (not his multitude of variations found after he started back pedaling) position that all you need to win is a great defense.

 

I'll wait.

 

Perhaps you should read his original post. He’s been backing it up the whole time. So here I’ll paste his OP below

 

 

Posted 16 January 2011 - 08:09 PM

So, down goes Manning, down goes Brees, down goes Flacco, down goes Vick, down goes Ryan, down goes Brady....

 

" To all of you that think we NEED a QB at #3 this year (none worthy at #3), once again... here is a CLASSIC example of the need for a solid defense. This years defenses prove once again, that a top D is the tonic this team needs. It will give this team the attitude this team and city needs. You want to grab a QB in the third? Ok... no issues, but that better be after a selection of a DE/DT and a LB. Buddy... SOLIDIFY the D through the draft AND through FA. Don't bank on Merriman being "the man"... he's an unknown at this time. Go draft help, go pay the $$ for FA help... The O can use an RT an TE and some depth too... BUT... I hope you're paying attention this post season... D, D, D, D, D, D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

 

 

 

Rather than relive his writings, what if I just give you an example without research compiled in support but my mere mortal memory

 

Giants get plowed in

Giants vs Ravens, 2000 Super Bowl

 

NYG had a balanced team. Solid on Off. with both a strong passing & running attack , Def , ST and a good QB who had taken expansion team Carolina to a NFC championship game in his second year.

 

Baltimore had a boring, methodical and unimaginative offense composed of a solid power running game (big time power back), a less than average Qb they felt the need to get rid of after the SB and little receiving talent. Their defense was more than solid or even exceptional. It is still compared as the best of all time in today’s NFL annals. In fact, their defense, if I remember correctly scored nearly as many points as their offense that year.

 

In the NFL, you just can’t have it all before you have to rebuild again but maybe you can be so dominate on one side of the ball you can hide your weaknesses on the other. The past is proof.

Edited January 25, 2011 by whodat

[whodat]

The Super Bowl will definitely validate his position. If Pittsburgh wins it's because their defense ranked higher. If GB wins, well, their defense was better because they played better and at some key point in the game they will have made a play. Easy game this internet.

Why don’t you ask why the jets didn’t win. They held Ben Roethlisberger to a 35.5 qb rating and their franchise qb had a qb rating of 102.5.

[Adam]

Why don’t you ask why the jets didn’t win. They held Ben Roethlisberger to a 35.5 qb rating and their franchise qb had a qb rating of 102.5.

When plays had to be made, Rothlisberger found a way to make them and the Bust-chise didn't. Didn't Kelly throw a bunch of interceptions in the first half of the Monday night game against Cincy, before torching them?

 

Give me a great defense and a franchise QB, and I will give you a team that wins a lot of football games.

[disco]

Either McD is an idiot and believes this nonsense, or a total genius stoking the fires to keep the thread going this long.

 

I so badly want to think it's the latter...because it would be an award worthy effort.

[CosmicBills]

Perhaps you should read his original post. He’s been backing it up the whole time. So here I’ll paste his OP below

 

 

Posted 16 January 2011 - 08:09 PM

So, down goes Manning, down goes Brees, down goes Flacco, down goes Vick, down goes Ryan, down goes Brady....

 

" To all of you that think we NEED a QB at #3 this year (none worthy at #3), once again... here is a CLASSIC example of the need for a solid defense. This years defenses prove once again, that a top D is the tonic this team needs. It will give this team the attitude this team and city needs. You want to grab a QB in the third? Ok... no issues, but that better be after a selection of a DE/DT and a LB. Buddy... SOLIDIFY the D through the draft AND through FA. Don't bank on Merriman being "the man"... he's an unknown at this time. Go draft help, go pay the $$ for FA help... The O can use an RT an TE and some depth too... BUT... I hope you're paying attention this post season... D, D, D, D, D, D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

 

 

 

Rather than relive his writings, what if I just give you an example without research compiled in support but my mere mortal memory

 

Giants get plowed in

Giants vs Ravens, 2000 Super Bowl

 

NYG had a balanced team. Solid on Off. with both a strong passing & running attack , Def , ST and a good QB who had taken expansion team Carolina to a NFC championship game in his second year.

 

Baltimore had a boring, methodical and unimaginative offense composed of a solid power running game (big time power back), a less than average Qb they felt the need to get rid of after the SB and little receiving talent. Their defense was more than solid or even exceptional. It is still compared as the best of all time in today’s NFL annals. In fact, their defense, if I remember correctly scored nearly as many points as their offense that year.

 

In the NFL, you just can’t have it all before you have to rebuild again but maybe you can be so dominate on one side of the ball you can hide your weaknesses on the other. The past is proof.

His stance is Defense wins. Period.

 

Why don’t you ask why the jets didn’t win. They held Ben Roethlisberger to a 35.5 qb rating and their franchise qb had a qb rating of 102.5.

That just shows you weren't paying attention to the game. Ben's rating was awful. But he was the best player on the field when it counted (on 3rd downs).

[whodat]

Either McD is an idiot and believes this nonsense, or a total genius stoking the fires to keep the thread going this long.

 

I so badly want to think it's the latter...because it would be an award worthy effort.

minus your little dog poo.

[Orton's Arm]

Perhaps you should read his original post. He’s been backing it up the whole time. So here I’ll paste his OP below

 

 

Posted 16 January 2011 - 08:09 PM

So, down goes Manning, down goes Brees, down goes Flacco, down goes Vick, down goes Ryan, down goes Brady....

 

" To all of you that think we NEED a QB at #3 this year (none worthy at #3), once again... here is a CLASSIC example of the need for a solid defense. This years defenses prove once again, that a top D is the tonic this team needs. It will give this team the attitude this team and city needs. You want to grab a QB in the third? Ok... no issues, but that better be after a selection of a DE/DT and a LB. Buddy... SOLIDIFY the D through the draft AND through FA. Don't bank on Merriman being "the man"... he's an unknown at this time. Go draft help, go pay the $$ for FA help... The O can use an RT an TE and some depth too... BUT... I hope you're paying attention this post season... D, D, D, D, D, D!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

 

 

 

Rather than relive his writings, what if I just give you an example without research compiled in support but my mere mortal memory

 

Giants get plowed in

Giants vs Ravens, 2000 Super Bowl

 

NYG had a balanced team. Solid on Off. with both a strong passing & running attack , Def , ST and a good QB who had taken expansion team Carolina to a NFC championship game in his second year.

 

Baltimore had a boring, methodical and unimaginative offense composed of a solid power running game (big time power back), a less than average Qb they felt the need to get rid of after the SB and little receiving talent. Their defense was more than solid or even exceptional. It is still compared as the best of all time in today’s NFL annals. In fact, their defense, if I remember correctly scored nearly as many points as their offense that year.

 

In the NFL, you just can’t have it all before you have to rebuild again but maybe you can be so dominate on one side of the ball you can hide your weaknesses on the other. The past is proof.

Over the course of his career, Kerry Collins averaged 6.6 yards per pass attempt. Trent Dilfer averaged 6.5 yards per attempt. While I'll grant that Collins was probably a slightly better QB than Dilfer, it's not like the difference between the two was Earth-shattering. I also feel that Baltimore had the better offensive line.

 

But let's take a step back and look at the bigger picture. The Ravens played a 4-3. Each of their defensive lineman was good enough to justify getting double-teamed every single play. Obviously offenses couldn't do that, which meant the Ravens would win the battle up front with a high degree of consistency. Behind those four very good DL there were three LBs, the worst of whom played at or near a Pro Bowl level. That LB corps was led by Ray Lewis. Then in the secondary you had a pair of shutdown corners to go along with safeties such as Ed Reed. There were no weaknesses on that defense, which was one of the three best in NFL history.

 

But most years aren't like that. As I'd indicated earlier in this thread, of the past 14 Super Bowl champions, 11 have had franchise QBs, and another two have had QBs which played at a Pro Bowl level during the postseason in which their teams won the championship. Only in one year out of 14--the year you've mentioned--did a team win a Super Bowl despite receiving less-than-Pro Bowl-level QB play in the postseason. The reason for that is simple: while finding a franchise QB is no easy task, building a Ravens-of-2000-like defense is even tougher still. The Bills would need to upgrade ten of their starting defensive positions if they wanted to equal that defense. But not any old upgrade will do: you basically need a guy at or near the Pro Bowl level at literally every starting position on defense if you're going to be like the Ravens of 2000! Even the Ravens found that difficult to maintain, as demonstrated by that team's failure to get more than just one Super Bowl ring. In contrast, Joe Montana owns four Super Bowl rings, Tom Brady owns three, John Elway owns two, etc. While a team without a franchise QB can still win a Super Bowl--as the Ravens of 2000 proved--the odds are a lot more in your favor if you have a franchise QB!

 

The other advantage is that a franchise QB stays with your team for many, many years, giving you plenty of chances to get enough other stuff right to come away with a Super Bowl ring. The Colts took Peyton Manning in 1998, and he's still going strong today. Look at all the opportunities Indy has had over the years to win Super Bowls because of that one guy! While Indy hasn't done a great job of taking advantage of those opportunities--only two Super Bowl appearances and only one ring--at least they're a contender year after year. The 49ers of the '80s were similar to that, except that they were able to achieve four Super Bowl wins because they surrounded Montana with more talent than Manning has been surrounded with. How many defensive players taken in 1998 are still in the league, and are still playing at a high level? How many defensive players elevate the overall prospects of their teams the way Montana elevated the 49ers, Warner elevated the Rams and Cardinals, or Manning has elevated the Colts?

 

If you don't have a franchise QB and you have the chance to get one, you take advantage of that chance. Period. Anyone who would dispute that proposition is simply wrong.

Edited January 26, 2011 by Edwards' Arm

[whodat]

His stance is Defense wins. Period.

 

 

That just shows you weren't paying attention to the game. Ben's rating was awful. But he was the best player on the field when it counted (on 3rd downs).

 

1)Precisely my point. Didn't you read what you're responding to? The 2000 SB was won on intimidating defense.

 

2)Precisely

[whodat]

If you don't have a franchise QB and you have the chance to get one, you take advantage of that chance. Period. Anyone who would dispute that proposition is simply wrong.

 

Well done. Let me remind you of one interesting footnote following Baltimore's SB win and one reason they didn't repeat. Billick traded for a rising star, strong armed Qb with some prolific passing stats named Elvis Grbac. They promptly dumped Dilfer and struggled with Grbac until he quit out of frustration just 2 years later with the Ravens unable to make the playoffs and their offense reduced to a turnover machine. As it turns out, he was missing the intangibles required to play the position.

 

Finding a franchise QB can be a roll of the dice. Maybe what we should start looking for is a winning Qb instead. So with that in mind, how good would Manning have looked with this supporting cast. There is a lot of subjection and uncertainty. No one knows for sure until you have him in place with some semblance of a supporting cast.

 

I am one of those who hasn't given up on Ryan Fitzpatrick. I think he's a winner.

Edited January 26, 2011 by whodat

[McD]

Either McD is an idiot and believes this nonsense, or a total genius stoking the fires to keep the thread going this long.

 

I so badly want to think it's the latter...because it would be an award worthy effort.

 

Definately not an idiot, but the genious part has merit.

[McD]

Man this thread is like Rasputin!

 

I read a lot of posts... Let me tell you I NEVER backed down from my original statement. Not once. Defense DOES WIN... you guys clamoring about your "franchise QB's" are getting a LOT of leeway since you go from everything from Brady to Sanchez (ranked #27) is a franchise QB. And both Rodgers and Roethlisraper (who I think are both franchise QB's in my mind) won their games because of defensive scores! So... what IS a "franchise QB then? I dunno, but if Cutler and/or Sanchez would have won, you would have said they too were franchise

 

My point IS valid and it's awesome thet the top 2 defenses (avg score against) are still playing, but yet my point is NOT valid?? How is that possible?

[McD]

It's easy to defend a position when it keeps changing. Give me one example of how he successfully defended his original (not his multitude of variations found after he started back pedaling) position that all you need to win is a great defense.

 

I'll wait.

 

Wait no longer... how did you get "THAT'S ALL" you need to win is a great defense? I can't remember ever saying that. If I did, I WOULD be an idiot. Instead, I did say that good defenses WIN period. Again, tell me how in the hell that's wrong? Take a look at the tale of the tape in scoring per game on O and D: 9 of the top 12 top defenses were in the playoffs, while only 7 of the top 12 offenses amde the dance. Defense does win, and we need it terribly. Are you going to jump on here and dispute that? (please, oh please do!)