![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
The Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,373
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIII
Joe Montana, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIV Jeff Hostetler, New York Giants - SB XXV Mark Rypien, Washington Redskins - SB XXVI Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVII Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXVIII Steve Young, San Francisco 49ers - SB XXIX Troy Aikman, Dallas Cowboys - SB XXX Brett Favre, Green Bay Packers - SB XXXI John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXII John Elway, Denver Broncos - SB XXXIII Kurt Warner, St. Louis Rams - SB XXXIV Trent Dilfer, Baltimore Ravens - SB XXXV Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVI Brad Johnson, Tampa Bay Buccaneers - SB XXXVII Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXVIII Tom Brady, New England Patriots - SB XXXIX Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XL Peyton Manning, Indianapolis Colts - SB XLI Eli Manning, New York Giants - SB XLII Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers - SB XLIII Past SB winning QB's, id say this is a pretty good list. Nothing avg about them. But once here and there you will find a name that had a GREAT Defense that carried the team to the title but like i said for the most part these guys led their team to the "W". And the ones who rode their defense to the title,how often do you see a defense of that caliber? not very often do you see a defense like that of the 85 Bears, 2000 Ravens, or the Bucs of 2002. In these rare cases i believe these defenses actually outscored the opposing team all by themselves in the SB. In the post you had earlier where you stated if JC had an avg offensive supporting cast around him he could be a SB contending QB with a great defense. Well i think you would be hard pressed to find a pro QB who wouldnt, and thats the point, that you are more likely to win a title with a top QB with a top 10 defense than you are to have the stars align just right and have a great defense that wins the games for you.
__________________
But there's booze in the blender. And soon it will render. That frozen concoction that helps me hang on. |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 | |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 5,006
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
__________________
Paintrain's Redskins Fandom 1981-2014 I'm not dead but this team is dead to me...but now that McCloughan is here they may have new life! Jay Gruden = Zorny McSpurrier Kirk Cousins = Next Grossman |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
The Starter
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 1,373
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Im sorry, i thought the goal was to win the SB. History has shown that the chances are pretty unlikely you will do that with a 50/50 QB.
__________________
But there's booze in the blender. And soon it will render. That frozen concoction that helps me hang on. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Age: 55
Posts: 5,006
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Of course that's the goal but by your scale 26 active QB must suck since only 6 active QB are Super Bowl winners. Teams win SB not individuals.
__________________
Paintrain's Redskins Fandom 1981-2014 I'm not dead but this team is dead to me...but now that McCloughan is here they may have new life! Jay Gruden = Zorny McSpurrier Kirk Cousins = Next Grossman |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: the glorious city of DC
Posts: 741
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
ah..but the question here is...can the right individual get the team over the hump to win the sb? I have no doubts all 55 men are needed...BUT when you have that one guy that is a true leader, that you truly truly believe can take you to the summit...it pushes you a little more.
This...is what jc lacks |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 | |
|
Living Legend
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 38
Posts: 15,994
|
Re: Campbell's numbers dont lie
Quote:
The NFL these days is an oligarchy of sorts. You have the teams that get it, and they are concentrated mostly in the AFC, which gives the illusion of parity. Since 2000, the Steelers, Patriots, Colts have pretty much represented the AFC every year, exceptions to where the Raiders broke through in a down year and the Ravens big defensive year. But in the NFC, you've gotten basically a different team every year. The stars align for someone in the NFC every year. It's been the Giants twice, the Bucs, the Rams, the Panthers, the Eagles, the Seahawks, the Bears, and now the Cardinals. In 1998, the Falcons went. That's half the conference. If there's been a dominant QB among the bunch, it's been Kurt Warner. Having Tony Romo has not helped the Cowboys get anywhere. McNabb's been one of the more successful playoff QBs of all time, and it hasn't mattered much. Jake Delhomme and Kerry Collins were neither great quarterbacks, nor did they have great defenses in those years. Rex Grossman?! You combine all of the super bowl appearences for the best QBs in the NFC over the last decade: Romo, Brees, McNabb, Favre, Culpepper, Marc Bulger, Warner, Hasselbeck...it's roughly half the time that the NFC is represented by a team with an above average QB, or at least a guy who was as good as 08 Campbell. Chris Chandler, Collins, Johnson, Delhomme, Grossman, and Eli have all been there in subpar years, mostly because they had quality individuals on both sides of the ball. It's not quarterback play that progresses in the playoffs. Considering that it's not the best quarterbacks that get to the playoffs against the best teams, the only reason the trend seems to hold is because the best teams in the AFC every year also have the best quarterbacks. If you took the QBs away, they would still be the best teams: Steelers, Ravens, Titans, Colts, Patriots. Every year. They'd just be closer to the pack.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|