Idzequitch wrote:Bythyrona wrote:No, I wasn't. I was talking about an individual QB's skill, or Tebow's lack thereof.
wat
That statement makes no sense. At all. A QB who can COMPLETE A PASS is far more likely to win than one who can't. You're ignoring everything that article said, which blatantly refutes the ignorant and obsolete notion that QB wins matters.
QB wins is one of the meaningless statistics in all of sports, and it's utterly laughable that you assert anything to the contrary. "All he does is win" is a phrase only meaning that a bad QB lucked out on a good team.
Might I point out that Stafford's record was only that bad because he had no supporting cast? Though respectable now, the Lions were the laughingstock of the league when he joined the team. He's a good quarterback, but not even Peyton or Brady would have been able to win on that team. In much the same way, Tebow had the proper supporting cast to win in Denver, but not with the Jets, not that he was even given a chance there. Was he elite? Hell no. Was he good? Not statistically, no. Was he adequate? Yes, and you may remember that that was my original argument. Tebow is probably never going to be an everyday starter, especially with the idiotic media circus that follows him everywhere he goes. He is, however, good enough to be the backup somewhere. Easily.Maurepas wrote:I disagree, just due to the nature of what the game has become. I've seen Tom Brady take subpar teams deep in the playoffs consistently. I've seen Houston consistently fail to make the playoffs.
The difference is in QB play. A Franchise QB is the lynchpin of any decent team in the NFL. The past decade has really borne this out through the haves and the have-nots.
I see what you're saying, and I respect your opinion, but I stand by my earlier statement. There is no doubt that having a good quarterback significantly increases a team's chances of being successful, but at the same time, this isn't the NBA. LeBron isn't here to take a team of nobodies to the championship. Brady has been impressive in making due with the team he has, but I wouldn't describe any of those teams as subpar. It's a quarterback-heavy league, but with the right players in other positions, you can do without a great QB (See: Trent Dilfer and Joe Flacco in Baltimore, Brad Johnson in Tampa Bay, and Rex Grossman in Chicago,)
Do you really think Tebow is that good? What tangible skills does he have (note: winning doesn't count)? He can't throw and was held up by a spectacular defense and run game. He hasn't been in the league for a reason and if you have an argument against that that doesn't consist of nonsense like "media circus" then I'd love to hear it, because the NFL doesn't refuse jobs to people that can play.
Yeah you can win in this league without a QB, but only if your team is anchored by an all-time great defense and that's proven to be much harder to come by.
