Faith Focused Dating. Create your Free Profile and meet your Match! Sign Up for Free

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

info: Please Sign Up or Sign In to continue.

A place to learn, mingle, and share

This room is for discussion of sports, non-video games & hobbies! Football, baseball, basketball, hockey, or your own personal favorite. Brag about your team and explain why the refs blew the big game! Discuss your passion for Corn Hole, Horseshoes,Texas Hold'em or other games.

Saint Christopher is the patron saint of the playing field.
Learn More:Saint Christopher

Over the past decade, we've seen a move towards a NFL that is much more friendly to the passing attack. As such, teams have placed a premium on drafting franchise quarterbacks. But this begs an important question. Does a great QB make great WR's, or vice-versa? For years, I've always felt that receivers are what makes a QB good. For example, Andre Johnson of the Texans puts up great numbers year after year, yet you never hear of Schaub being an elite QB. Kurt Warner, when he was with the Rams, had Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt. When he was with the Cardinals, he had Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin. However, he wasn't consistent and didn't play much when he was with the Giants and only had one good season with the Cardinals. Yet the receivers I mentioned were good with and without him.

When you look at the good teams in the NFL, they all have an elite QB and an elite WR. Tom Brady has Wes Welker. Eli Manning has Victor Cruz. Aaron Rodgers has Greg Jennings (as well as Randall Cobb and Jordy Nelson). Can those QB's be just as good without those guys? Can a guy like Wes Welker be just as good with Big Ben or Jay Cutler or even Cam Newton throwing the ball?

12/11/2012 new

(Quote) Cory-789423 said: Over the past decade, we've seen a move towards a NFL that is much more friendly to the passin...
(Quote) Cory-789423 said:

Over the past decade, we've seen a move towards a NFL that is much more friendly to the passing attack. As such, teams have placed a premium on drafting franchise quarterbacks. But this begs an important question. Does a great QB make great WR's, or vice-versa? For years, I've always felt that receivers are what makes a QB good. For example, Andre Johnson of the Texans puts up great numbers year after year, yet you never hear of Schaub being an elite QB. Kurt Warner, when he was with the Rams, had Isaac Bruce and Torry Holt. When he was with the Cardinals, he had Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin. However, he wasn't consistent and didn't play much when he was with the Giants and only had one good season with the Cardinals. Yet the receivers I mentioned were good with and without him.

When you look at the good teams in the NFL, they all have an elite QB and an elite WR. Tom Brady has Wes Welker. Eli Manning has Victor Cruz. Aaron Rodgers has Greg Jennings (as well as Randall Cobb and Jordy Nelson). Can those QB's be just as good without those guys? Can a guy like Wes Welker be just as good with Big Ben or Jay Cutler or even Cam Newton throwing the ball?

--hide--
Cory you make a good case. Lots of quarterback/receivers come to mind. When Peyton Manning was with the Colts...even BEFORE he was throwing to Reggie Wayne so much it was....Marvin Harrison. However, there ARE still great quarterbacks. Would you or I put Tony Romo in the same room as say a Drew Brees, Peyton Manning or a Tom Brady? I would think not. They are guys who WILL be good....(and actually have been except for Brady) no matter WHERE they go.

Some receivers REALLY do understand their quarterbacks and will adjust and re-adjust their routes to accomodate the thrower. (let's face it...in the NFL the quarterback has maybe 2.3 seconds at most....

And this brings up another valid argument: The Offensive Line. In the case of the Dallas Cowboys....we have a decimated and therefore overmatched Offensive Line. Makes everyone look bad! Even Romo would be better if he had the blocking. That said, he HOLDS the ball too long. Most good QB's do their check downs faster than him.

But I believe that Troy Aikman was so good....not just because of Michael Irvin and Jay Novacek. He was stellar because Mark Tuinei, Larry Allen, Mark Stepnoski, John Gesek and Eric Williams were outstanding! Your thoughts?

12/11/2012 new

Brady has a LOT more than just Welker, he also has Gronkowski and Hernandez. Welker's success comes from the fact that Gronk and Hernandez draw safety coverage, leaving him with one-on-one coverage nearly every play. The Pats also have a credible running game.


Jennings has Cobb and Nelson drawing double-team coverage away from him. The Pack also have a credible running game.


However, the Giants trump (and have beaten) both these teams because they not only have a credible running game, but 5 credible threats to catch the ball on any given pass play.


"Elite" QB's with an "elite" receiver will win a lot of games during the regular season, but lose in the playoffs because they lack either a credible running game, OL, or both. A good defense can and will usually shut down a one-dimensional offense come playoff time. Look at last year's playoffs and what happened to Green Bay, New Orleans, and San Francisco.


Examples from years past:


John Elway went to 5 Super Bowls, but never had anything close to an "elite" receiving corps. He lost his first 3 Super Bowl appearances because the Broncos lacked a credible running game. Enter Terrell Davis... and the Broncos win 2 consecutive Bowls.


Dan Fouts is one of the greatest passers who ever played the game. He also had Charlie Joyner catching the ball. The Chargers had nothing of a running attack... and never won it all.


Dan Marino is the greatest passer in NFL history. He had Mark Clayton and Mark Duper catching the ball for him. But like Fouts, Miami had no running game. Marino went to the Super Bowl in his second year in the league and got blown out. He never made it back.

Football is the ultimate team sport. The players are too talented and the coaches are too good for any team with an exploitable weakness to win when the games count the most.


biggrin

12/11/2012 new

(Quote) Victor-544727 said: Brady has a LOT more than just Welker, he also has Gronkowski and Hernandez. Welker's succes...
(Quote) Victor-544727 said:

Brady has a LOT more than just Welker, he also has Gronkowski and Hernandez. Welker's success comes from the fact that Gronk and Hernandez draw safety coverage, leaving him with one-on-one coverage nearly every play. The Pats also have a credible running game.


Jennings has Cobb and Nelson drawing double-team coverage away from him. The Pack also have a credible running game.


However, the Giants trump (and have beaten) both these teams because they not only have a credible running game, but 5 credible threats to catch the ball on any given pass play.


"Elite" QB's with an "elite" receiver will win a lot of games during the regular season, but lose in the playoffs because they lack either a credible running game, OL, or both. A good defense can and will usually shut down a one-dimensional offense come playoff time. Look at last year's playoffs and what happened to Green Bay, New Orleans, and San Francisco.


Examples from years past:


John Elway went to 5 Super Bowls, but never had anything close to an "elite" receiving corps. He lost his first 3 Super Bowl appearances because the Broncos lacked a credible running game. Enter Terrell Davis... and the Broncos win 2 consecutive Bowls.


Dan Fouts is one of the greatest passers who ever played the game. He also had Charlie Joyner catching the ball. The Chargers had nothing of a running attack... and never won it all.


Dan Marino is the greatest passer in NFL history. He had Mark Clayton and Mark Duper catching the ball for him. But like Fouts, Miami had no running game. Marino went to the Super Bowl in his second year in the league and got blown out. He never made it back.

Football is the ultimate team sport. The players are too talented and the coaches are too good for any team with an exploitable weakness to win when the games count the most.

--hide--
Indeed Victor. When you talk about CHAMPIONS you need to put DEFENSE in the same sentence. Vince Lombardi even said...."OFFENSE might win you some games....but DEFENSE wins championships"

12/11/2012 new

(Quote) Victor-544727 said: Brady has a LOT more than just Welker, he also has Gronkowski and Hernandez. Welker's succes...
(Quote) Victor-544727 said:

Brady has a LOT more than just Welker, he also has Gronkowski and Hernandez. Welker's success comes from the fact that Gronk and Hernandez draw safety coverage, leaving him with one-on-one coverage nearly every play. The Pats also have a credible running game.


Jennings has Cobb and Nelson drawing double-team coverage away from him. The Pack also have a credible running game.


However, the Giants trump (and have beaten) both these teams because they not only have a credible running game, but 5 credible threats to catch the ball on any given pass play.


"Elite" QB's with an "elite" receiver will win a lot of games during the regular season, but lose in the playoffs because they lack either a credible running game, OL, or both. A good defense can and will usually shut down a one-dimensional offense come playoff time. Look at last year's playoffs and what happened to Green Bay, New Orleans, and San Francisco.


Examples from years past:


John Elway went to 5 Super Bowls, but never had anything close to an "elite" receiving corps. He lost his first 3 Super Bowl appearances because the Broncos lacked a credible running game. Enter Terrell Davis... and the Broncos win 2 consecutive Bowls.


Dan Fouts is one of the greatest passers who ever played the game. He also had Charlie Joyner catching the ball. The Chargers had nothing of a running attack... and never won it all.


Dan Marino is the greatest passer in NFL history. He had Mark Clayton and Mark Duper catching the ball for him. But like Fouts, Miami had no running game. Marino went to the Super Bowl in his second year in the league and got blown out. He never made it back.

Football is the ultimate team sport. The players are too talented and the coaches are too good for any team with an exploitable weakness to win when the games count the most.

--hide--


It's not so much about the defense and the running game that I'm concerned about in this topic (although I do think the O-line plays a part in QB success). What I am mainly looking at is how can a team's passing game be successful in this league. Figuring this question out will help teams in the draft. Take the Vikings, my team, as an example. We have a good O-line and the running game is unquestionable. Yet Ponder, for lack of a better word, sucks. This offseason, the front office and coaching staff will have to make some decisions. Some, like me, believe that Ponder isn't doing any good without a legit receiver to throw to. Look at his numbers when Percy Harvin is playing and compare that with his stats when he's not playing. Can a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning have the season they're having when you have Devin Aromashodu, Mike Jenkins, Harvin, Jarius Wright, and Kyle Rudolph to throw to? Could Ponder be just as good as Tom Brady if he was playing in Foxborough? I don't disagree that there are some QB's that can make any receiver corps good (think Favre), but I believe that for a majority of QB's out there, you need to have some good receivers or that QB won't last long in this league. Having said that, the Vikings will have to look at the draft and FA and pick which path they should take: get another QB or get better receivers.

To drive my point home, look at Matt Cassel. He was able to fill in for Tom Brady in 2008 and did a mighty fine job for the Pats, leading them to an 11-5 record. He was so highly-regarded that he was traded for the 34th overall pick in the 2009 draft. Yet now he's not doing so well in Kansas City. If he was actually as good as people thought he was after the 2008 season, then he should have no problem winning games in Kansas City. Yet that is not the case. And what about Matt Flynn. He's getting paid, what, 20mil a year to sit on the bench and watch a rookie? Flynn was good in GB because of the great receivers they have. Put him in Seattle and he loses his job to a rookie. Sidney Rice is a good receiver, but not a great one and he can't help a QB out, even if it is Matt Flynn. His only claim to fame was 2009, but like I said earlier, Favre is the exception to the rule and he made Rice great.

I can see merit on both sides of the argument, but if I'm Rick Spielman, I would keep Ponder and get him some legit receivers. If Ponder still struggles even though he has Adrian Peterson to keep defenders in the box and receivers to stretch the field, then you can make the case that great QB's don't necessarily need great receivers.

12/12/2012 new

(Quote) Cory-789423 said: I can see merit on both sides of the argument, but if I'm Rick Spielman, I would keep ...
(Quote) Cory-789423 said:



I can see merit on both sides of the argument, but if I'm Rick Spielman, I would keep Ponder and get him some legit receivers. If Ponder still struggles even though he has Adrian Peterson to keep defenders in the box and receivers to stretch the field, then you can make the case that great QB's don't necessarily need great receivers.

--hide--


Well said, Cory.

Dante Culpepper and Randy Moss....bring em back!!

12/12/2012 new

(Quote) Cory-789423 said: It's not so much about the defense and the running game that I'm concerned about i...
(Quote) Cory-789423 said:



It's not so much about the defense and the running game that I'm concerned about in this topic (although I do think the O-line plays a part in QB success). What I am mainly looking at is how can a team's passing game be successful in this league. Figuring this question out will help teams in the draft. Take the Vikings, my team, as an example. We have a good O-line and the running game is unquestionable. Yet Ponder, for lack of a better word, sucks. This offseason, the front office and coaching staff will have to make some decisions. Some, like me, believe that Ponder isn't doing any good without a legit receiver to throw to. Look at his numbers when Percy Harvin is playing and compare that with his stats when he's not playing. Can a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning have the season they're having when you have Devin Aromashodu, Mike Jenkins, Harvin, Jarius Wright, and Kyle Rudolph to throw to? Could Ponder be just as good as Tom Brady if he was playing in Foxborough? I don't disagree that there are some QB's that can make any receiver corps good (think Favre), but I believe that for a majority of QB's out there, you need to have some good receivers or that QB won't last long in this league. Having said that, the Vikings will have to look at the draft and FA and pick which path they should take: get another QB or get better receivers.

To drive my point home, look at Matt Cassel. He was able to fill in for Tom Brady in 2008 and did a mighty fine job for the Pats, leading them to an 11-5 record. He was so highly-regarded that he was traded for the 34th overall pick in the 2009 draft. Yet now he's not doing so well in Kansas City. If he was actually as good as people thought he was after the 2008 season, then he should have no problem winning games in Kansas City. Yet that is not the case. And what about Matt Flynn. He's getting paid, what, 20mil a year to sit on the bench and watch a rookie? Flynn was good in GB because of the great receivers they have. Put him in Seattle and he loses his job to a rookie. Sidney Rice is a good receiver, but not a great one and he can't help a QB out, even if it is Matt Flynn. His only claim to fame was 2009, but like I said earlier, Favre is the exception to the rule and he made Rice great.

I can see merit on both sides of the argument, but if I'm Rick Spielman, I would keep Ponder and get him some legit receivers. If Ponder still struggles even though he has Adrian Peterson to keep defenders in the box and receivers to stretch the field, then you can make the case that great QB's don't necessarily need great receivers.

--hide--
Cory well stated. However Manning and Brady would look good if I WERE CATCHING the ball! And I'm old and fat. They are just that caliber of player. And you mentioned one of my favorites...Bret Favre. Ponder is not in the same vicinity as Brady and Manning...or Brees for that matter. In fact, you have an ALL-EVERYTHING running back who would make most Quarterbacks look good! Yes, we are a "pass first" league...but it helps when you have an explosive running back behind you...because it opens it all up. Tony Romo even looks better when Demarco Murray is our starting back. Some quarterbacks never "get it" And others....like Andrew Luck of the Indianapolis Colts "got it" right away. Course he is a winner.
But going back to my original post....I think it generates up front. The front four have got to be good. You have a defensive end (Jared Allen) who would "mop up" against our front four....and actually has.
Okay off the box...now...sorry. Now I'm gonna go out and catch a few! LOL!

12/12/2012 new

(Quote) Jerry-730726 said: Cory well stated. However Manning and Brady would look good if I WERE CATCHING the ball! And I...
(Quote) Jerry-730726 said:

Cory well stated. However Manning and Brady would look good if I WERE CATCHING the ball! And I'm old and fat. They are just that caliber of player. And you mentioned one of my favorites...Bret Favre. Ponder is not in the same vicinity as Brady and Manning...or Brees for that matter. In fact, you have an ALL-EVERYTHING running back who would make most Quarterbacks look good! Yes, we are a "pass first" league...but it helps when you have an explosive running back behind you...because it opens it all up. Tony Romo even looks better when Demarco Murray is our starting back. Some quarterbacks never "get it" And others....like Andrew Luck of the Indianapolis Colts "got it" right away. Course he is a winner.
But going back to my original post....I think it generates up front. The front four have got to be good. You have a defensive end (Jared Allen) who would "mop up" against our front four....and actually has.
Okay off the box...now...sorry. Now I'm gonna go out and catch a few! LOL!

--hide--


It's ridiculous to have the best running back in the game and you still can't complete a pass more than 15 yards down the field. hissyfit. To add salt to the wound, lately it seems Ponder has given up.

Another thing to look at is the offensive scheme. Could Tom Brady be good in a West-Coast offense? Brett Favre played basically the same offense for so long he could call off plays in his sleep. Would he have been successful in Mike Martz's system? I think QB's fit a certain system. Brett had the Jets alter their system dramatically in order to for him to be able to run the offense. Tom Brady's on fire this season because he has Josh McDaniels back as OC. And we all know how he did with Charlie Weiss.

As a Vikings fan, I would love to see Norv Turner get fired and we replace Musgrave with him. He has experience with an elite running back in Tomlinson and he made Rivers a great QB. Maybe he can do the same in Minnesota....

Posts 1 - 8 of 8