Cowboyz Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 Kitna is 38 years old and is a statue in the pocket. Sure, he could start for a number of teams in the NFL, but that's because there is a dearth of good QB's in the NFL, not because Kitna is a great QB. Kitna falls into the David Garrard territory. Good enough to be good enough... but will never take a team to a championship. And your point about QB's is just stupid. Anyone who knows jack about football will tell you that QB is the most important position on the team. Is a great QB absolutely necessary to win a championship? No, but it's much harder to do it without a really good one. The defenses on the Ravens, Bucs, and Bears teams were all time great defenses. But if you look at Super Bowl history you're going to find that most Super Bowl champions have a great QB leading the team... 8 of the last 10 Super Bowl winners had a franchise QB in that game where without that QB playing the way they did, that team doesn't win the Super Bowl. You could go back even farther to the previous 10, and I could say with certainty that all 10 of those teams had a franchise QB that played great football to win the big one. Seriously, with Brees, Brady, Peyton, Montana, Young, Elway, hell, even Aikman. Even the '85 Bears... say what you want about McMahon, but he played terrific in that Super Bowl. They blew out the Patriots, but McMahon was a big part of that. i believe i just said basically the same thing about kitna. he could start half the teams, and he's no chump. no one said he's great. my point about the qb's stands. it's been proven over and over that a good defense, coaching, and ball protection will take you just as far as an elite qb. yes everyone goes on and on about how important the qb position is, but any fan worth his salt knows that qb's get too much credit for the wins, and too much blame for the losses. So you're saying McMahon was a 'championship caliber' qb? how did he do without that stout defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 i believe i just said basically the same thing about kitna. he could start half the teams, and he's no chump. no one said he's great. my point about the qb's stands. it's been proven over and over that a good defense, coaching, and ball protection will take you just as far as an elite qb. yes everyone goes on and on about how important the qb position is, but any fan worth his salt knows that qb's get too much credit for the wins, and too much blame for the losses. So you're saying McMahon was a 'championship caliber' qb? how did he do without that stout defense? the dog pretty much think this sums it up perfectly... and just for kicks to allstarjim, mcmahon did exactly what was described above...far from terrific, and it is not hard to be terrific when your defense held the oppossing team to 21 first half plays, when only 4 of those were for positive yardage. mcmahon, like many, managed the game well, only to have that morph into being "terrific" through hazy memories... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 i believe i just said basically the same thing about kitna. he could start half the teams, and he's no chump. no one said he's great. my point about the qb's stands. it's been proven over and over that a good defense, coaching, and ball protection will take you just as far as an elite qb. yes everyone goes on and on about how important the qb position is, but any fan worth his salt knows that qb's get too much credit for the wins, and too much blame for the losses. So you're saying McMahon was a 'championship caliber' qb? how did he do without that stout defense? Really? It's been proven over and over? By who? There's far, FAR more evidence you need a top QB. I didn't say McMahon was a championship caliber QB, either... I said he played very well in the Super Bowl. Please try and refute how 8 of the last 10 Super Bowl winners somehow had franchise QB's? Brees, Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, yes Eli... Here, I'll help you out. Here's the last 20 Super Bowl winning QB's: Aaron Rodgers Drew Brees Ben Roethlisberger Eli Manning Peyton Manning Ben Roethlisberger Tom Brady Tom Brady Brad Johnson Tom Brady Trent Dilfer Kurt Warner John Elway John Elway Brett Favre Troy Aikman Steve Young Troy Aikman Troy Aikman Mark Rypien Lots of big names there. One would even say there's a trend. There's SEVEN HOF QB's (or likely to be in the Hall) on that list, accounting for 13 of those 20 championships, and that's not counting Kurt Warner or Ben Roethlisberger, who I believe are borderline candidates, otherwise that number would swell to 16... not counting Eli in there, either, or Aaron Rodgers (who I believe will be in the Hall one day) you have no argument. We're talking about Super Bowls, here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz Posted June 23, 2011 Author Share Posted June 23, 2011 Really? It's been proven over and over? By who? There's far, FAR more evidence you need a top QB. I didn't say McMahon was a championship caliber QB, either... I said he played very well in the Super Bowl. Please try and refute how 8 of the last 10 Super Bowl winners somehow had franchise QB's? Brees, Brady, Peyton, Rodgers, yes Eli... Here, I'll help you out. Here's the last 20 Super Bowl winning QB's: Aaron Rodgers Drew Brees Ben Roethlisberger Eli Manning Peyton Manning Ben Roethlisberger Tom Brady Tom Brady Brad Johnson Tom Brady Trent Dilfer Kurt Warner John Elway John Elway Brett Favre Troy Aikman Steve Young Troy Aikman Troy Aikman Mark Rypien Lots of big names there. One would even say there's a trend. There's SEVEN HOF QB's (or likely to be in the Hall) on that list, accounting for 13 of those 20 championships, and that's not counting Kurt Warner or Ben Roethlisberger, who I believe are borderline candidates, otherwise that number would swell to 16... not counting Eli in there, either, or Aaron Rodgers (who I believe will be in the Hall one day) you have no argument. We're talking about Super Bowls, here. so is the argument 'championship caliber' qb or is it franchise qb? you started out saying champ caliber. alex smith was a franchise qb at one time, so was ryan leaf. my argument is not that the qb position is unimportant, it's that it's not a necessity to have a championship caliber qb to go far in this league. youre trying to exaggerate my point. take your list and figure who on that list had a 'good defense' vs a bad one. i think you'll see another trend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 We have a winner. I've been telling him that over and over again.....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 the dog pretty much think this sums it up perfectly... and just for kicks to allstarjim, mcmahon did exactly what was described above...far from terrific, and it is not hard to be terrific when your defense held the oppossing team to 21 first half plays, when only 4 of those were for positive yardage. mcmahon, like many, managed the game well, only to have that morph into being "terrific" through hazy memories... No way!! You're agreeing with him??? Im SO surprised!!!....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 so is the argument 'championship caliber' qb or is it franchise qb? you started out saying champ caliber. alex smith was a franchise qb at one time, so was ryan leaf. my argument is not that the qb position is unimportant, it's that it's not a necessity to have a championship caliber qb to go far in this league. youre trying to exaggerate my point. take your list and figure who on that list had a 'good defense' vs a bad one. i think you'll see another trend. LMAO... watch out, don't want to trip over something when you're doing all that back tracking. Look at that list again, apparently you believe in coincidences. Or you think that average QB's would've taken those teams just as far? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 LMAO... watch out, don't want to trip over something when you're doing all that back tracking. Look at that list again, apparently you believe in coincidences. Or you think that average QB's would've taken those teams just as far? the dog would say you would also have to look at the super bowl losing QBs. in a lot of cases, you had QBs that didn't benefit from great defensive play or strong running games which ultimately were a factor. yet these QBs were in the super bowl. Would you say stan humphries, tony eason, rich gannon, ron jaworski, grossman, matt hasselback...etc...etc...are franchise QBs? yet if their teams had won it all in that one game, they would be added to the list. john elway won his first super bowl as a side piece who was only expected to manage the game (his words). then take the inverse. jim kelly would have loved to have gotten a defensive performance and run game in any of those games from his team at the same level that simms, eli, mcmahon, dilfer, hostetler, williams...etc...all benefited from. without that, most of those QBs would not have a super bowl win to their credit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allstarjim Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Wow, the Dog is saying that football is a team sport, and there is no way one person can carry a team to a championship by himself in the NFL. Thank you, Dog. We are now enlightened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 23, 2011 Share Posted June 23, 2011 Wow, the Dog is saying that football is a team sport, and there is no way one person can carry a team to a championship by himself in the NFL. Thank you, Dog. We are now enlightened. LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Wow, the Dog is saying that football is a team sport, and there is no way one person can carry a team to a championship by himself in the NFL. Thank you, Dog. We are now enlightened. ha ha ha...you are as big a huckleberry as bigblue...missing the point entirely...the dog loves it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 ha ha ha...you are as big a huckleberry as bigblue...missing the point entirely...the dog loves it... Huckleberry? You mean like huckleberry hound?.......He was awesome!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz Posted June 24, 2011 Author Share Posted June 24, 2011 LMAO... watch out, don't want to trip over something when you're doing all that back tracking. Look at that list again, apparently you believe in coincidences. Or you think that average QB's would've taken those teams just as far? ah haha what's next jimmy? "i know you are but what am i?" what am i 'back tracking' on? hell i'm not even sure what that means. there's about 4 on your list who aren't 'championship caliber' qb's, who won with defense. go back another 20 years and there'll be even more. now, answer my question. which one's on your list did it without a good defense? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 ah haha what's next jimmy? "i know you are but what am i?" what am i 'back tracking' on? hell i'm not even sure what that means. there's about 4 on your list who aren't 'championship caliber' qb's, who won with defense. go back another 20 years and there'll be even more. now, answer my question. which one's on your list did it without a good defense? Kurt Warner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 Kurt Warner. except that the ram's defense was ranked 4 in the league in points allowed, 6th in yards allowed that year. that would be pretty good by most standards. this is the part of the dog's point that "allstar"jim keeps missing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 except that the ram's defense was ranked 4 in the league in points allowed, 6th in yards allowed that year. that would be pretty good by most standards. this is the part of the dog's point that "allstar"jim keeps missing... Wow, didnt realize they were ranked that high. I actually said Kurt off the top of my head because my memories of that Rams team was "The Greatest show on turf"........I coulda swore their D gave up a lot of points. I seem to remember them winning shootouts, but obviously I am mistaken. Gotta agree with you guys on the every SB winning team having a good D. Other than me thinkin that Rams had a bad D, I cant remember any of the others having a bad D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 ah haha what's next jimmy? "i know you are but what am i?" what am i 'back tracking' on? hell i'm not even sure what that means. there's about 4 on your list who aren't 'championship caliber' qb's, who won with defense. go back another 20 years and there'll be even more. now, answer my question. which one's on your list did it without a good defense? How about Peyton Manning? Just checked nfl.com stats, and they were the 21st ranked D that year. Dead last vs. the run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 How about Peyton Manning? Just checked nfl.com stats, and they were the 21st ranked D that year. Dead last vs. the run. the dog thinks this might be the one team that did it with a weak defense...although oddly enough, if you look at what the defense did in the playoffs, they certainly were dominant during the 3 playoff wins and the super bowl, and again were key to winning it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 the dog thinks this might be the one team that did it with a weak defense...although oddly enough, if you look at what the defense did in the playoffs, they certainly were dominant during the 3 playoff wins and the super bowl, and again were key to winning it all. Good point. When I switched stats to the postseason, big difference. Depends on what we're talking here. Reg. season or postseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboyz Posted June 24, 2011 Author Share Posted June 24, 2011 Good point. When I switched stats to the postseason, big difference. Depends on what we're talking here. Reg. season or postseason. i would agree with putting peyton on that list. ofcourse now it's a very, short list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BIGBLUE01 Posted June 24, 2011 Share Posted June 24, 2011 i would agree with putting peyton on that list. ofcourse now it's a very, short list. True. Of that 20, I cant think of one other QB that had a bad defense. But Im a little confused with that list. Trent Dilfer? When did he win a SB? Cause the 2000 yr ended when we beat Minny. There was no SB that yr...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boohyah Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 the dog would say you would also have to look at the super bowl losing QBs. in a lot of cases, you had QBs that didn't benefit from great defensive play or strong running games which ultimately were a factor. yet these QBs were in the super bowl. Would you say stan humphries, tony eason, rich gannon, ron jaworski, grossman, matt hasselback...etc...etc...are franchise QBs? yet if their teams had won it all in that one game, they would be added to the list. john elway won his first super bowl as a side piece who was only expected to manage the game (his words). then take the inverse. jim kelly would have loved to have gotten a defensive performance and run game in any of those games from his team at the same level that simms, eli, mcmahon, dilfer, hostetler, williams...etc...all benefited from. without that, most of those QBs would not have a super bowl win to their credit... What was wrong with the defensive performance the Bills defense and Thurman Thomas's 135 yards against us in Superbowl 25?. Their defense was on the field twice as long as ours and Thomas only had 20 mjnutes to get 135 yards. Seems to me that wasn't so much the issue as the fact that they got out coached. The year Rich Gannon got to the Superbowl with the Raiders, he was MVP of the league. And the Bucs - raiders Superbowl was the clearest case of a guy playing against his own playbook ever (Gruden). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 What was wrong with the defensive performance the Bills defense and Thurman Thomas's 135 yards against us in Superbowl 25?. Their defense was on the field twice as long as ours and Thomas only had 20 mjnutes to get 135 yards. Seems to me that wasn't so much the issue as the fact that they got out coached. The year Rich Gannon got to the Superbowl with the Raiders, he was MVP of the league. And the Bucs - raiders Superbowl was the clearest case of a guy playing against his own playbook ever (Gruden). exactly. the dog is saying kelly never had a dominating performance from a defense. look at the stats that game and tell me you are OK with the defense...nearly 400 yards of offense, nearly 200 on the ground, forcing no turnovers...pretty poor overall. and gannon being mvp and not winning speaks again to the dog's point. a lesser QB with a better defense won out. doesn't it matter how a defense prepares (i.e., having knowledge of the other team's approach...etc...) for the win, just that a better defense is key... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigblue25 Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 Good point. When I switched stats to the postseason, big difference. Depends on what we're talking here. Reg. season or postseason. In the AFC Championship that year, the Patriots put up 34 points against them, the Pats had 319 total yards. That was a typical Brady vs. Manning duel. That was the one case, where Peyton did everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ksm7 Posted June 25, 2011 Share Posted June 25, 2011 In the AFC Championship that year, the Patriots put up 34 points against them, the Pats had 319 total yards. That was a typical Brady vs. Manning duel. That was the one case, where Peyton did everything. it was. but there was an interception return for a td and another td set up by a turnover. if you look at holding the pats to 20 points, that is not terrible. the dog isn't saying that defense was anything special, but it was very effective in the playoffs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now