Looks like we see how important QB play really is. The Ravens had the superior defense but it was the QB that decided the game.
And long term who do you think will go farther over the next 5+ years - The Ravens, or the Colts and Chiefs with their super QB's? The Ravens have the superior D. Why not them? I think if we're honest we know it's the Qb's of Mahomes and Luck.
The NFL has made it a point to favor the offense. The QB is the most important position on the football field. To blindly deny this is foolish. IF IF IF IF IF Haskins (or Jones) are expected to be good to very good QB;s by the 2020 season-- you take them and don't look back. The edge rusher can NOT influence the game like the QB unless the rusher is "Lawrence Taylor" especially nowadays with such "favorable offensive rules" unlike our days with guys like LT.
It's the QB's that are most important. The good ones influence the game. Not plug-in QB;s with limited potential unless you want to wait 4+ years before they mature enough to be effective in playoff football. You look to get that QB as soon as you can if the opportunity arises instead of blind hope that you might get one "someday" if you pray hard enough.
Quote:
In comment 14250677 Chris684 said:
Quote:
Who went from complete dogshit as a passer to at least adequate enough to win the playoffs.
Eli complete 48 and 52% of his passes his first two years...
The NFL was much different then. With all the rule changes it has made it harder for the defense. Roethlisberger was an anomaly back then as a rookie QB that actually won and played reasonably well. Now there is at least one rookie QB that plays well. Compare the league leaders that year with the stats this year. The league leaders in passing stats would finish in the 8-12 range this season.
I don’t care how much the rules have changed 48 and 52% aren’t good in the 2000s. Eli’s completion percentage in 2005 was 31st.
Quote:
Who went from complete dogshit as a passer to at least adequate enough to win the playoffs.
do you remember Eli’s first playoff appearance? Made Jackson look like a savvy vet in comparison
Completely different passer profiles and different reasons for struggling.
Silly comparison.
The odds of this being a long-term, working formula for Baltimore - or really anyone - are very slim. You're either dealing with passers too limited to give you anything but a one-dimensional offense or the QB being a major injury risk.
The strategy of cycling through QB's using replaceable, "disposable" mobile QB's is trash and will never work. The players will either not be proficient enough throwing the football, or defenses will figure out how to attack the limited offense before it matters and render it useless.
People fall in love with this stuff too quickly and too easily. Trying to navigate the playoffs without being able to throw the football in this league is basically suicide.
Once in a while a team will get this far doing it... we saw it happen with Tebow in Denver, RG3 in Washington....and it's all the rage.. but defenses either figure out the keys or the QB gets hurt.
Beyond that - you have to have a top flight defense to even compete this way. It never lasts.
Besides, I don't think it's any easier to construct the type of defense and offensive line/ground game necessary with a cheap system QB like this than it is to look for a true NFL passer who is good enough to cover up some minor deficiencies elsewhere.
Football history is full of those guys. Our own Eli is one of them. In fact, for guys who win in the playoffs, that's the normal progression.
To insinuate he was dogshit as a passer or bears any resemblance to the incompetence shown by Jackson is simply trolling.
Great. I'm being flippant here because you deilberately avoided playoff football so allow me to retort--
You want to ignore the point I made of the playoffs and only talk about the regular season. SO if we had the Chiefs offense as I mentioned -- because as we know the QB is most important they averaged 35 ppg. How would the Gmen have done? ANd wiht the COlts - their 27 pg would have gotten them 9-7.
OFC you must think Mahomes and Luck are not better than eli, right (sarcasm)? It appears though despite having a bad d KC has been very successful, right? ANd with the highly touted offense of the Gmen you seem to want to babble about they would be 5-9 with the chiefs defense wiht tow ties.
OFC none of this is real but if you want to be silly and ignore playoff football then I can be just as silly. For example, would Eli be a HOF QB and be known as a great QB if not for his playoff results? YOU CAN:T Have it both ways-- ignore playoff FOOTBALL in one breath and another count it.
One doesn’t exist.
Or not even in the playoffs.
It is clear that we need keep fixing the oline, but we are not going to go far or win a Super Bowl with out a pass rush.
It looked like Rivers was getting killed, didn't it? SO it seems then that Rivers reacted better than Jackson, correct? in the 1st half they gave examples of two plays he'd throw a quick pass in the flat only to get knocked on his ass, didn't they?
What about QB;s with a quick release? They don't need quite as much time, right? Thus the OL while very important not as important as a one-dimenisonal QB who is not a pocket passer, correct?
One doesn’t exist.
OK! I will give you that. Tell me why Dan Marino has never won a Super Bowl?
Quote:
Point me to an NFL team that is complete.
One doesn’t exist.
OK! I will give you that. Tell me why Dan Marino has never won a Super Bowl?
You are trying to change the narrative of the thread to fit your pov. I mentioned "contenders" now all of a sudden you want to speak SUprer Bowl Champions only? SO for you if Gmen dont win a super bowl every year it means that year they sucked?
Yep, he’s awful. In 7 games he proved nothing. 160 yards a game lol. And his Wonderlic score of 13 isn’t going to help him moving forward. So glad we didn’t think about drafting him.
Quote:
jackson is a dogshit passer. he isnt good lol. idc if he is a dynamic runner
Yep, he’s awful. In 7 games he proved nothing. 160 yards a game lol. And his Wonderlic score of 13 isn’t going to help him moving forward. So glad we didn’t think about drafting him.
Bradshaw got a 16. Marino and Jim Kelly got 15s. Not sure you're level of football knowledge, but those were HoF QBs.
LJax is the youngest player to ever start a playoff game as a QB. So there is plenty of time to grow as a QB...
It is amazing how the OP can make a determination based upon one playoff game. It was all looking pretty good up until today.
Quote:
In comment 14250840 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Point me to an NFL team that is complete.
One doesn’t exist.
OK! I will give you that. Tell me why Dan Marino has never won a Super Bowl?
You are trying to change the narrative of the thread to fit your pov. I mentioned "contenders" now all of a sudden you want to speak SUprer Bowl Champions only? SO for you if Gmen dont win a super bowl every year it means that year they sucked?
Nope. Not trying to change the narrative. For close to a year, you have been crying about a franchise quarterback. You win Super Bowl’s with different philosophies. But the most important aspect in building a team is building the trenches on both sides. You can focus on the quarterback all you want, but he has to be worth it where you select him. I will tell you this. No freaking quarterback would’ve done anything in changing the Giants significantly this year. That’s how bad the Giants are talent wise. Can’t force a pick, even if it is a quarterback. If Gettleman and Shurmur agree that there is a quarterback worth the six pick in the draft, they will take him. I don’t want any freaking Blake Bortles on this team. A part of me wants the Giants to get Haskins; however, I don’t think it’s going to happen. It’s all about getting the right quarterback. I don’t think a guy like Jackson is a good long term investment for a QB either.
It is amazing how the OP can make a determination based upon one playoff game. It was all looking pretty good up until today.
Jackson has absolutely no feel for the rush (understandable in game 8), and was throwing the ball short routinely, even on their scoring drives.
Jackson has the tools to be an NFL QB. He needs to develop his footwork, his presence, and his anticipation of his targets. AKA become an NFL QB.
Quote:
more than Jackson did. Jackson did have a bad first half. Despite all of that, they were right there in the end close enough to make it a game.
It is amazing how the OP can make a determination based upon one playoff game. It was all looking pretty good up until today.
Jackson has absolutely no feel for the rush (understandable in game 8), and was throwing the ball short routinely, even on their scoring drives.
Jackson has the tools to be an NFL QB. He needs to develop his footwork, his presence, and his anticipation of his targets. AKA become an NFL QB.
yeah and he is a rookie who did not even start until the second half of the season. Like I said... interesting how the OP makes a determination based upon the first half of the guy's first playoff game.
Feel for the rush? The guy has only seen a handful of NFL defenses so far. San Diego did a great job today with their blitz package.
Quote:
In comment 14250859 DonnieD89 said:
Quote:
In comment 14250840 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Point me to an NFL team that is complete.
One doesn’t exist.
OK! I will give you that. Tell me why Dan Marino has never won a Super Bowl?
You are trying to change the narrative of the thread to fit your pov. I mentioned "contenders" now all of a sudden you want to speak SUprer Bowl Champions only? SO for you if Gmen dont win a super bowl every year it means that year they sucked?
Nope. Not trying to change the narrative. For close to a year, you have been crying about a franchise quarterback. You win Super Bowl’s with different philosophies. But the most important aspect in building a team is building the trenches on both sides. You can focus on the quarterback all you want, but he has to be worth it where you select him. I will tell you this. No freaking quarterback would’ve done anything in changing the Giants significantly this year. That’s how bad the Giants are talent wise. Can’t force a pick, even if it is a quarterback. If Gettleman and Shurmur agree that there is a quarterback worth the six pick in the draft, they will take him. I don’t want any freaking Blake Bortles on this team. A part of me wants the Giants to get Haskins; however, I don’t think it’s going to happen. It’s all about getting the right quarterback. I don’t think a guy like Jackson is a good long term investment for a QB either.
How can you sit at home or wherever you are and try to tell me what I meant in my own thread? Im telling you when I created this thread I spoke of/my intent is about having a contending team. YOU can't tell me what i meant.
If I wasn't specific I apologize but you are making a huge error by just looking at ONE YEAR. I'm speaking of BEYOND 1 year so your point of THIS YEAR -- please explain why its relevant?
ANd again if you don't think the most important position on the football field is the Qb then you need to start watching another sport. Iagree with you no Blake Bortles which is why I said TO START THIS THREAD IF IF IF THE Gemn think the qb will be good to veyr good.
It's the QB that runs everything. **WHat you are ignoring is that the Ravens had the better defense so why didn;t they win? BECUASE THE QB MADE PLAYS. ITS THE QB THAT IS THE MOST IMPT PLAYER!!!
You cant tell me what I meant in my own thread and you can't try to twist this into just this year as you tried by mentioning the Giants.This thread was created for beyond the thinking of "just this year."
If you want to discuss just this year start another thread. It wasn;t the subject of this thread.
Quote:
In comment 14250939 EricJ said:
Quote:
more than Jackson did. Jackson did have a bad first half. Despite all of that, they were right there in the end close enough to make it a game.
It is amazing how the OP can make a determination based upon one playoff game. It was all looking pretty good up until today.
Jackson has absolutely no feel for the rush (understandable in game 8), and was throwing the ball short routinely, even on their scoring drives.
Jackson has the tools to be an NFL QB. He needs to develop his footwork, his presence, and his anticipation of his targets. AKA become an NFL QB.
yeah and he is a rookie who did not even start until the second half of the season. Like I said... interesting how the OP makes a determination based upon the first half of the guy's first playoff game.
Feel for the rush? The guy has only seen a handful of NFL defenses so far. San Diego did a great job today with their blitz package.
I thought it would be interesting but did you read what I said or just want to vent?
I specifically spoke of OTHER POSTERS who seem to think a plug-in QB will work. THIS is a plug-in QB, correct? Baltimore has this plug-in QB over the next 5 years, correct?
So I asked a simple question-- who do you think has the better long term outlook the team that was built according to many like dennyd seem to want - build through th OL and DL 1st and get a plug-in QB?
Or--- get the star QB? Some posters have suggested it's okay to get a 2nd rd guy or a cheap guy like Dak.
I say gte me the stud QB as son as you can. The Gmen can have a pretty good OL starting next year by signing TWo FRE aGent oL. That;s my point of contention. SOme posters want to build liek Baltimore. Its going to take 3 freaking years before the Gmen can get a defense near that. On the other hand, if if if if you find one QB in draft that you project can be good by 2020- you'll have a terrific offense and a good football team for 2020.
Quote:
In comment 14250902 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 14250859 DonnieD89 said:
Quote:
In comment 14250840 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Point me to an NFL team that is complete.
One doesn’t exist.
OK! I will give you that. Tell me why Dan Marino has never won a Super Bowl?
You are trying to change the narrative of the thread to fit your pov. I mentioned "contenders" now all of a sudden you want to speak SUprer Bowl Champions only? SO for you if Gmen dont win a super bowl every year it means that year they sucked?
Nope. Not trying to change the narrative. For close to a year, you have been crying about a franchise quarterback. You win Super Bowl’s with different philosophies. But the most important aspect in building a team is building the trenches on both sides. You can focus on the quarterback all you want, but he has to be worth it where you select him. I will tell you this. No freaking quarterback would’ve done anything in changing the Giants significantly this year. That’s how bad the Giants are talent wise. Can’t force a pick, even if it is a quarterback. If Gettleman and Shurmur agree that there is a quarterback worth the six pick in the draft, they will take him. I don’t want any freaking Blake Bortles on this team. A part of me wants the Giants to get Haskins; however, I don’t think it’s going to happen. It’s all about getting the right quarterback. I don’t think a guy like Jackson is a good long term investment for a QB either.
How can you sit at home or wherever you are and try to tell me what I meant in my own thread? Im telling you when I created this thread I spoke of/my intent is about having a contending team. YOU can't tell me what i meant.
If I wasn't specific I apologize but you are making a huge error by just looking at ONE YEAR. I'm speaking of BEYOND 1 year so your point of THIS YEAR -- please explain why its relevant?
ANd again if you don't think the most important position on the football field is the Qb then you need to start watching another sport. Iagree with you no Blake Bortles which is why I said TO START THIS THREAD IF IF IF THE Gemn think the qb will be good to veyr good.
It's the QB that runs everything. **WHat you are ignoring is that the Ravens had the better defense so why didn;t they win? BECUASE THE QB MADE PLAYS. ITS THE QB THAT IS THE MOST IMPT PLAYER!!!
You cant tell me what I meant in my own thread and you can't try to twist this into just this year as you tried by mentioning the Giants.This thread was created for beyond the thinking of "just this year."
If you want to discuss just this year start another thread. It wasn;t the subject of this thread.
I’m not trying to tell you what you meant in your own thread. I’m not even disagreeing with you that the quarterback is the most important position on the field. What I am saying is that when you were selecting a quarterback,you are making a heavy investment. That investment better be right, because quarterbacks have a very high bust rate. Can you tell me that Haskins can throw under pressure? Only the scouts have some sort of idea. Perhaps, they may not. I don’t think Dave Gettleman is going to be throwing darts blindfolded and hoping he gets the bull’s-eye knowing it is a high risk selection of a QB. I would not take a humongous chance on a quarterback when you have an elite pass rusher sitting on the board that aligns with your grade and is dripping with need. I am not going to criticize Dave Gettleman for not selecting a quarterback at #6. As for Jackson, I wouldn’t even had selected him anyways, because I don’t think he will last in the NFL. Not the way he plays, unless he changes his game. It just takes one injury to ruin his career.
Quote:
In comment 14250962 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 14250939 EricJ said:
Quote:
more than Jackson did. Jackson did have a bad first half. Despite all of that, they were right there in the end close enough to make it a game.
It is amazing how the OP can make a determination based upon one playoff game. It was all looking pretty good up until today.
Jackson has absolutely no feel for the rush (understandable in game 8), and was throwing the ball short routinely, even on their scoring drives.
Jackson has the tools to be an NFL QB. He needs to develop his footwork, his presence, and his anticipation of his targets. AKA become an NFL QB.
yeah and he is a rookie who did not even start until the second half of the season. Like I said... interesting how the OP makes a determination based upon the first half of the guy's first playoff game.
Feel for the rush? The guy has only seen a handful of NFL defenses so far. San Diego did a great job today with their blitz package.
I thought it would be interesting but did you read what I said or just want to vent?
I specifically spoke of OTHER POSTERS who seem to think a plug-in QB will work. THIS is a plug-in QB, correct? Baltimore has this plug-in QB over the next 5 years, correct?
So I asked a simple question-- who do you think has the better long term outlook the team that was built according to many like dennyd seem to want - build through th OL and DL 1st and get a plug-in QB?
Or--- get the star QB? Some posters have suggested it's okay to get a 2nd rd guy or a cheap guy like Dak.
I say gte me the stud QB as son as you can. The Gmen can have a pretty good OL starting next year by signing TWo FRE aGent oL. That;s my point of contention. SOme posters want to build liek Baltimore. Its going to take 3 freaking years before the Gmen can get a defense near that. On the other hand, if if if if you find one QB in draft that you project can be good by 2020- you'll have a terrific offense and a good football team for 2020.
I disagree that you need a 'stud' quarterback. The Ravens beat us in 2000 with Trent Dilfer, and I think everyone here will agree that Dilfer was no great shakes. We won a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler. Mark Rypien was no stud. Neither was Brad Johnson. Yet they won, also. Your chances are better with above average quarterbacks, of course, but to say you need a stud is a little off the mark. JMHO.
Sad that people are so eager to try to jump to conclusion
At least someone remembers.
Quote:
In comment 14250979 EricJ said:
Quote:
In comment 14250962 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 14250939 EricJ said:
Quote:
more than Jackson did. Jackson did have a bad first half. Despite all of that, they were right there in the end close enough to make it a game.
It is amazing how the OP can make a determination based upon one playoff game. It was all looking pretty good up until today.
Jackson has absolutely no feel for the rush (understandable in game 8), and was throwing the ball short routinely, even on their scoring drives.
Jackson has the tools to be an NFL QB. He needs to develop his footwork, his presence, and his anticipation of his targets. AKA become an NFL QB.
yeah and he is a rookie who did not even start until the second half of the season. Like I said... interesting how the OP makes a determination based upon the first half of the guy's first playoff game.
Feel for the rush? The guy has only seen a handful of NFL defenses so far. San Diego did a great job today with their blitz package.
I thought it would be interesting but did you read what I said or just want to vent?
I specifically spoke of OTHER POSTERS who seem to think a plug-in QB will work. THIS is a plug-in QB, correct? Baltimore has this plug-in QB over the next 5 years, correct?
So I asked a simple question-- who do you think has the better long term outlook the team that was built according to many like dennyd seem to want - build through th OL and DL 1st and get a plug-in QB?
Or--- get the star QB? Some posters have suggested it's okay to get a 2nd rd guy or a cheap guy like Dak.
I say gte me the stud QB as son as you can. The Gmen can have a pretty good OL starting next year by signing TWo FRE aGent oL. That;s my point of contention. SOme posters want to build liek Baltimore. Its going to take 3 freaking years before the Gmen can get a defense near that. On the other hand, if if if if you find one QB in draft that you project can be good by 2020- you'll have a terrific offense and a good football team for 2020.
I disagree that you need a 'stud' quarterback. The Ravens beat us in 2000 with Trent Dilfer, and I think everyone here will agree that Dilfer was no great shakes. We won a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler. Mark Rypien was no stud. Neither was Brad Johnson. Yet they won, also. Your chances are better with above average quarterbacks, of course, but to say you need a stud is a little off the mark. JMHO.
I agree that you don’t need a stud quarterback to win the Super Bowl. You can get a quarterback in the late first, or later rounds. When it comes to drafting in the top 10, it becomes high risk. You got to ask yourself, is it worth it? I will say this. If Haskins is a top 10 player, I would take him at #6. If he is top 6, you consider trading up. If he is not close to that top 10, it is not worth the risk. The problem is that when you trade down to try to get him, somebody else will grab him. I have faith in DG and PS in appraising the QBs in the draft. I just don’t think that they have they have him that high on their board. I hope I am wrong.
The running/ mobile QB got sacked 7 times in the game and you think slow footed Eli would win that game 10/10. Ok sure.
It's early yet, but Trubisky predictably looks like garbage tonight
If you love a QB in this draft at 6... by all means take him. But taking the wrong guy... sets a franchise back 5 years
So how do you guarantee the right guy? You can't, it’s a crap shoot no matter when, who or where he’s drafted.
Quote:
In comment 14250961 DonnieD89 said:
Quote:
In comment 14250902 giantstock said:
Quote:
In comment 14250859 DonnieD89 said:
Quote:
In comment 14250840 ajr2456 said:
Quote:
Point me to an NFL team that is complete.
One doesn’t exist.
OK! I will give you that. Tell me why Dan Marino has never won a Super Bowl?
You are trying to change the narrative of the thread to fit your pov. I mentioned "contenders" now all of a sudden you want to speak SUprer Bowl Champions only? SO for you if Gmen dont win a super bowl every year it means that year they sucked?
Nope. Not trying to change the narrative. For close to a year, you have been crying about a franchise quarterback. You win Super Bowl’s with different philosophies. But the most important aspect in building a team is building the trenches on both sides. You can focus on the quarterback all you want, but he has to be worth it where you select him. I will tell you this. No freaking quarterback would’ve done anything in changing the Giants significantly this year. That’s how bad the Giants are talent wise. Can’t force a pick, even if it is a quarterback. If Gettleman and Shurmur agree that there is a quarterback worth the six pick in the draft, they will take him. I don’t want any freaking Blake Bortles on this team. A part of me wants the Giants to get Haskins; however, I don’t think it’s going to happen. It’s all about getting the right quarterback. I don’t think a guy like Jackson is a good long term investment for a QB either.
How can you sit at home or wherever you are and try to tell me what I meant in my own thread? Im telling you when I created this thread I spoke of/my intent is about having a contending team. YOU can't tell me what i meant.
If I wasn't specific I apologize but you are making a huge error by just looking at ONE YEAR. I'm speaking of BEYOND 1 year so your point of THIS YEAR -- please explain why its relevant?
ANd again if you don't think the most important position on the football field is the Qb then you need to start watching another sport. Iagree with you no Blake Bortles which is why I said TO START THIS THREAD IF IF IF THE Gemn think the qb will be good to veyr good.
It's the QB that runs everything. **WHat you are ignoring is that the Ravens had the better defense so why didn;t they win? BECUASE THE QB MADE PLAYS. ITS THE QB THAT IS THE MOST IMPT PLAYER!!!
You cant tell me what I meant in my own thread and you can't try to twist this into just this year as you tried by mentioning the Giants.This thread was created for beyond the thinking of "just this year."
If you want to discuss just this year start another thread. It wasn;t the subject of this thread.
I’m not trying to tell you what you meant in your own thread. I’m not even disagreeing with you that the quarterback is the most important position on the field. What I am saying is that when you were selecting a quarterback,you are making a heavy investment. That investment better be right, because quarterbacks have a very high bust rate. Can you tell me that Haskins can throw under pressure? Only the scouts have some sort of idea. Perhaps, they may not. I don’t think Dave Gettleman is going to be throwing darts blindfolded and hoping he gets the bull’s-eye knowing it is a high risk selection of a QB. I would not take a humongous chance on a quarterback when you have an elite pass rusher sitting on the board that aligns with your grade and is dripping with need. I am not going to criticize Dave Gettleman for not selecting a quarterback at #6. As for Jackson, I wouldn’t even had selected him anyways, because I don’t think he will last in the NFL. Not the way he plays, unless he changes his game. It just takes one injury to ruin his career.
Okay. SO we can agree to a certain point I have said IF IF IF -- but I'm saying IF IF IF IF the QB is projected to be from good to very good then you get him. The 6th pick isn't the 1st pick so I highly doubt the 6th pick will net us "Lawrece Taylor." OFCwe rely on dg but at the end of the season he gets evaluated by his boss how well he does. He blos the pick and in the future this team goes nowhere - he gets fired.
Quote:
In comment 14250979 EricJ said:
Quote:
In comment 14250962 christian said:
Quote:
In comment 14250939 EricJ said:
Quote:
more than Jackson did. Jackson did have a bad first half. Despite all of that, they were right there in the end close enough to make it a game.
It is amazing how the OP can make a determination based upon one playoff game. It was all looking pretty good up until today.
Jackson has absolutely no feel for the rush (understandable in game 8), and was throwing the ball short routinely, even on their scoring drives.
Jackson has the tools to be an NFL QB. He needs to develop his footwork, his presence, and his anticipation of his targets. AKA become an NFL QB.
yeah and he is a rookie who did not even start until the second half of the season. Like I said... interesting how the OP makes a determination based upon the first half of the guy's first playoff game.
Feel for the rush? The guy has only seen a handful of NFL defenses so far. San Diego did a great job today with their blitz package.
I thought it would be interesting but did you read what I said or just want to vent?
I specifically spoke of OTHER POSTERS who seem to think a plug-in QB will work. THIS is a plug-in QB, correct? Baltimore has this plug-in QB over the next 5 years, correct?
So I asked a simple question-- who do you think has the better long term outlook the team that was built according to many like dennyd seem to want - build through th OL and DL 1st and get a plug-in QB?
Or--- get the star QB? Some posters have suggested it's okay to get a 2nd rd guy or a cheap guy like Dak.
I say gte me the stud QB as son as you can. The Gmen can have a pretty good OL starting next year by signing TWo FRE aGent oL. That;s my point of contention. SOme posters want to build liek Baltimore. Its going to take 3 freaking years before the Gmen can get a defense near that. On the other hand, if if if if you find one QB in draft that you project can be good by 2020- you'll have a terrific offense and a good football team for 2020.
I disagree that you need a 'stud' quarterback. The Ravens beat us in 2000 with Trent Dilfer, and I think everyone here will agree that Dilfer was no great shakes. We won a Super Bowl with Jeff Hostetler. Mark Rypien was no stud. Neither was Brad Johnson. Yet they won, also. Your chances are better with above average quarterbacks, of course, but to say you need a stud is a little off the mark. JMHO.
Yes but that's nt the point of teh thread. In my 1st posts I'm speaking of "long-term.' Who do you think has the better long term outlook - the team like Baltimore or the teams like KC and Colts? KC and Colts have the super QB's. The Trent Dilfer will give us a one hit/one year wonder.
We want more than a one hit wonder, right? The best ways it how Baltimroe is built or how KC and COlts are built? I say get the QB as long as Gmen think he can be good - ot very good!!
Dep, not sure if you were responding to what I said about the slow footed Eli vs the running QB but if you were, the O-line play the past 2 years didn’t help the smarter/slow footed pocket passer make quick enough decisions to avoid being sacked 78 times?
Bill in UT : 6:01 pm : link : reply
Lauletta instead of Jackson, they'f be playing next week
if all of his completions are to the other team?
Jackson has to get better as a passer, but he has time to do it. This was only his 8th start.
Jackson doesn't have the arm to get to where he needs to be as a passer in the NFL. Terribly inaccurate when throwing outside from opposite hash, really can't threaten teams deep. He's not going to all of a sudden get that ability.
Quote:
In comment 14250867 BleedBlue said:
Quote:
jackson is a dogshit passer. he isnt good lol. idc if he is a dynamic runner
Yep, he’s awful. In 7 games he proved nothing. 160 yards a game lol. And his Wonderlic score of 13 isn’t going to help him moving forward. So glad we didn’t think about drafting him.
Bradshaw got a 16. Marino and Jim Kelly got 15s. Not sure you're level of football knowledge, but those were HoF QBs.
LJax is the youngest player to ever start a playoff game as a QB. So there is plenty of time to grow as a QB...
At the very least Jim Kelly purposefully scored low on the Wonderlic. A lot of the old school guys didn't taje the test seriously at all.
It is amazing how the OP can make a determination based upon one playoff game. It was all looking pretty good up until today.
This is my take too. The OL was putrid and that's another reason they didn't put Flacco out there, he was going to get crushed if they did.
Lamar is developing and a rookie. He could throw the ball well in college, and he was a look to throw Qb there as well.
Further, he completed 59.1% his best season, and most importantly, never demonstrated the ability to make all the throws. He can throw inside the hashmarks, but NFL defenses will be able to eliminate part of the field with him because he can't hurt them with his arm on the bigger throws.
There is a reason why many teams thought he needed to change positions at the NFL level. This is not something he is going to get better at. You typically don't improve accuracy and significant arm strength from college to NFL.
He'll keep his team in it because they will win games because of his physical talents, but they won't win a Super Bowl with him, at least not with him being the reason why they won.
Further, he completed 59.1% his best season, and most importantly, never demonstrated the ability to make all the throws. He can throw inside the hashmarks, but NFL defenses will be able to eliminate part of the field with him because he can't hurt them with his arm on the bigger throws.
There is a reason why many teams thought he needed to change positions at the NFL level. This is not something he is going to get better at. You typically don't improve accuracy and significant arm strength from college to NFL.
He'll keep his team in it because they will win games because of his physical talents, but they won't win a Super Bowl with him, at least not with him being the reason why they won.
Well, he improved his accuracy year over year in College, and on top of that he absolute garbage at WR his last season. He literally carried that team much like he did the Raven's this year.
If they improve the O-line in Baltimore, specifically the pass blocking then you can make an accurate assessment of his arm talent.
There was a reason the Raven's stunk before he got in there.
The Ravens were 4-5 when Jackson started and were the either the last wild Card team or a game out. It isn't like they were 1-7 and about to face a bunch of 3rd string QB's.....
The Ravens were 4-5 when Jackson started and were the either the last wild Card team or a game out. It isn't like they were 1-7 and about to face a bunch of 3rd string QB's.....
This season John Harbaugh went from the hot seat and surely out the door to someone that teams are going to trade draft picks to get as their head coach.
Even at 4-5 the Ravens weren't fine and dandy.
- Bengals
- Raiders
- Falcons
- Bucs
Bradshaw got a 16. Marino and Jim Kelly got 15s. Not sure you're level of football knowledge, but those were HoF QBs.
LJax is the youngest player to ever start a playoff game as a QB. So there is plenty of time to grow as a QB...
At the very least Jim Kelly purposefully scored low on the Wonderlic. A lot of the old school guys didn't taje the test seriously at all.
Thats interesting, I didnt know that at all. Do you know Kelly "purposefully" scored low? He went to the "U" during its hey-day right?
I do think QBs are required to be a lot more cerebral now than back then... to study more.. etc. Its obviously become a much more analytical game today.
Flacco probably wins that game, too.
Flacco probably wins that game, too.
Quote:
Bradshaw got a 16. Marino and Jim Kelly got 15s. Not sure you're level of football knowledge, but those were HoF QBs.
LJax is the youngest player to ever start a playoff game as a QB. So there is plenty of time to grow as a QB...
At the very least Jim Kelly purposefully scored low on the Wonderlic. A lot of the old school guys didn't taje the test seriously at all.
Thats interesting, I didnt know that at all. Do you know Kelly "purposefully" scored low? He went to the "U" during its hey-day right?
I do think QBs are required to be a lot more cerebral now than back then... to study more.. etc. Its obviously become a much more analytical game today.
Yeah, if you watch Jim Kelly's episode of A Football Life on NFL Network, he talks about it. A lot of guys from that era just didn't take the test seriously, considered it a joke. But Kelly was also trying to manipulate his draft position, too. Really REALLY didn't want to play for Buffalo, lol. Didn't like the cold. Which is why he was trying to get his stock to drop into that back of the first round. Didn't want to play for the Vikings or Packers, either. That's why he signed with the USFL and played in Houston initially.
Today, athletes are much more under the microscope in the draft process and the test is taken a little bit more seriously. The entire draft process is so much more comprehensive.