Oriole81 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2024 12:34 pm
Beef Supreme wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2024 12:19 pm
Oriole81 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 06, 2024 11:14 am
How many guys do you think actually fit that threshold?
Lamar, Dak, Lawrence, Herbert, Watson, haven't taken their teams anywhere special.
If I wanted to be a real stickler I could say Josh Allen as well, though I am choosing to give him the benefit of the doubt and just say he is having a difficult time getting past Mahomes. But Buff hasn't been close to a SB.
The last two SB losing teams had a 2nd rd pick QB and a Mr Irrelevant QB.
Penix has special traits. So do the top-3. Arguably McCarthy too. They all have flaws in varying degrees too. It’s about maximizing and accentuating their strengths and mitigating and minimizing their flaws. The top guys have more strengths and/or fewer weaknesses. But I don’t think Nix does anything at a level that translates into elite performance in the NFL. That sets a lower ceiling for him than the rest.
The point I was trying to make is it seems that the quest for that may in fact be an illusion, and it may be causing us to all overrate the QB position.
That in turn may be driving up the QB salaries and the cost it takes to acquire a QB on draft day.
But if you take the position that there's only a few select special QBs, but that the teams that don't have them can still be just as successful by utilizing other strengths, than it truly levels the playing field.
Teams with good coaching/development and that know how to put their QB into a position to succeed still are successful, and that helps to keep the cost associated with the QB position more in line.
All of Maye, Daniels and McCarthy have serious flaws, so why should teams think that they'll magically rise to the level of Mahomes/Burrow, and justify spending up to three first round picks?
I'm obviously talking in a big picture sense, but the use of the "a guy that will take you anywhere special" caught my eye.
I think everyone would be better served if we stopped thinking of that as the expectation.
We’re getting into semantics a little here, but how about a guy who doesn’t require a superhuman effort by his organization to build a team without weaknesses around him to succeed at a high level.
I am pie in the sky about the importance of landing a top quarterback. I’m of the belief that it takes the right guy and coaching/organization to develop that. I have some optimism we may have a quality organization capable of taking a prospect with high upside and maximizing that. Bo Nix to me has talent limitations that I don’t think Penix, JJ, and the top-3 have.
Get that guy and we’re in business.
I think it’s important to take such a swing because Tom Brady and Patric Mahomes, two obviously elite QBs from elite organizations won 10 of the last 23 super bowls. Of the other 13, Eli manning won 2, Ben Roethlisberger won 2, Matthew Stafford won 1, Brad Johnson won 1, Nick Foles won 1, Russell Wilson won 1, Aaron Rodgers won 1, Joe Flacco won 1, Drew Brees won 1, and Peyton Manning won 2.
Of those, you can argue that Johnson, Stafford, Flacco, Foles, Eli, and maybe the 2nd Peyton title involved QBs were were playing at a less than HoF level. And all of those teams had absolutely fantastic rosters beyond the QB.
We’ve tried the “good QB” route and have been unable to build a roster around him good enough to even compete for a title, much less win one. That doesn’t mean we couldn’t in the future. But I’d just like to try it the other way. Go all in to get that guy, even if it costs a lot. And then you have the easier task of building a roster around a guy who can make up for flaws.
I think Nix could possibly win a title a-la some of the lesser names on that list, but I’d love to have one of the better names so we’re in the mix every year and not hoping the stars align. That’s what I’d like to see for a change.