Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012
Look, to put it politely, you don't know what you are talking about.
There's a reason the best quarterbacks win a lot of games and populate the playoff field. It has nothing to do with why you think it does. When two quarterbacks play in the super bowl and the second best quarterback wins, it makes your argument bunk. The second best quarterback in this super bowl won it. The second best quarterback two years ago won it. The second best quarterback three years ago won it. The second best quarterback four years ago won it.
Obviously, there's something there as to why Tom Brady has lost two super bowls to Eli Manning, but beat Kurt Warner in one. Some would even suggest that just maybe, other players on the field matter.
|
Obviously that's very important. For instance, some would argue without the Giants d-line, there's no way they win the SB because their defense is largely predicated on getting pressure, which they were able to do most of the game despite minimal blitzing. I definitely agree with you in that aspect that the rest of the team around the qb is just as important as the qb itself. My whole point re: franchise qb's is that the better the qb, the better your odds of winning the SB, at least in the last 7 years. I think that's a trend that's going to continue in the NFL for a while.
Which is why I don't want a guy who
might be able to get the job done. I want the guy that gives us the best chance of it happening. Whether that's a healthy P. Manning, Luck, RG3, Tannehill, whomever, it doesn't matter. But I honestly don't think Shanny will last here that long if he has to sit Tannehill for a couple of seasons while he learns. We're going into year 3 of the regime. If it looks like we're not improving by the end of year 4, there's no telling what Snyder might do.