|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
I thought I'd do some research to see what changed the SF 49ers from the crummy football they played the previous 6 years. Here's where their most recent starting lineups came from:
OFFENSE:
LT J Staley 1st round pick 28th overall from C. Michigan
LG M Iupati 1st round pick 17th overall from Idaho
C J Goodwin 10.9 million $ free agent signing from New Orleans
RG C Rachal 2nd round pick 39th overall from USC
RT A Davis 1st round pick 11th overall from Rutgers
QB A Smith 1st round pick 1st overall from Utah
WR M Crabtree 1st round pick 10th overall from Texas Tech
WR T Ginn Jr acquired via trade former 1st round pick at #9 overall from OSU
TE V Davis 1st round pick 6th overall from Maryland
HB D Walker 6th round 175th overal from C. Missouri
RB F Gore 3rd round pick 65th overall from Miami
1 more guy for the 1st 14-15 weeks WR B Edwards FA - 1st round 3rd overall from Michigan by Cleveland.
DEFENSE:
LDE R McDonald 3rd round pick 97th overal from Florida
NT I Sopoaga - undrafted
RDE J Smith - 45 million $ FA - drafted 1st round 4th overall from Missouri by Cincy
LOLB A Smith - 1st round pick 7th overall from Missouri
LILB N Bowman - 3rd round pick 91st overall from Penn State
RILB P Willis - 1st round pick 11th overall from Mississippi
ROLB A Brooks - former supplemental pick acquired via waivers from Cincy
LCB C Rogers - FA - drafted 1st round 9th overall from Auburn by Washington
SS D Whitner - 11.75 million $ FA - drafted 1st round 8th overall from OSU
FS D Goldson - 4th round 126th overall from Washington
RCB C Culliver - 3rd round 80th overall from South Carolina
This was a 6-10 team as recently as 2010. After some growing pains, established chemistries and some additional smart picks/acquisitions - they improved to getting a bye week in the post season. Doesn't this look like a fun group to play gridiron chess with?
The ongoing debate is what to conclude from a QB with a forgettable first 25 starts? Can he get better (even after the first 6 OCs got fired) once the gridiron chess table changes his margin of error to extremely comfortable? Pretty nice when your defense keeps the opponent's score low, you start 1-2 drives inside the red zone and you have a ton of high round draft picks with some ideal FAs in the 22 man starting lineup on both sides of the ball. As you'll see below, the passing stats and rating improved with experience and as more pieces of the puzzle changed the number of favorable matchups the QB got to work with.
Here's Smith's first 6 years:
2005 9 games 50.9 cmp% 1 TD 11 INTs 5.3 y/a 11 Fumb 3 Fumb lost 29 sacks 40.8 rating
2006 16 games 58.1cmp% 16 TD 16 INTs 6.5 y/a 10 Fumb 5 Fumb lost 35 sacks 74.8 rating
2007 7 games 48.7 cmp% 2 TD 4 INTs 4.7 y/a 6 Fumb - 5 Fum lost 17 sacks 57.2 rating
2008 0 games Injured Reserve
2009 11 games 60.5 cmp% 18 TD 12 INTs 6.3 y/a 2 Fumb 1 Fumb lost 22 sacks 81.5 rating
2010 11 games 59.6 cmp% 14 TD 10 INTs 6.9 y/a 4 Fumb 2 Fumb lost 25 sacks 82.1 rating
Now here's the 7th year:
2011 16 games 61.3 cmp% 17 TDs 5 INTs 7.1 y/a 7 Fumb 2 Fumb lost 44 sacks 90.7 rating
I think this franchise epitomizes what an environment of chaos, endless transition and bad drafting can do to even a 1st overall QB talent. That might have been quicker if he had a Herschel Walker trade giving the necessary environmental overhaul some giddy up and get after it. We have a nice draft volume featuring 4 selections in the top 100 this year. I'm pretty pumped up about that!
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,831 |
I think the difference can be summed up in two words: Jim Harbaugh.
He took that team of underachievers (look at how many 1st round picks are listed) and put in an approach and philosophy tailored to bring out their strengths. They went from a bad team in a terrible division to Super Bowl contenders and the only difference was finding the right coach.
Just my .02
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,851 Likes: 159
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,851 Likes: 159 |
Quote:
I think the difference can be summed up in two words: Jim Harbaugh.
He took that team of underachievers (look at how many 1st round picks are listed) and put in an approach and philosophy tailored to bring out their strengths. They went from a bad team in a terrible division to Super Bowl contenders and the only difference was finding the right coach.
Just my .02
Seems like that's the biggest change that occured.. was it a one hit wonder ala RAC in cleveland for a 10 win season, or will he do it again.. I'm leaning towards him being the real deal as a HC.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,411 Likes: 463
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,411 Likes: 463 |
Let's not forget that the rest of that division sucked as well.
They went 5-1 in their division, and IIRC, had the division wrapped up with something like 4 or 5 weeks left in the season.
They got Philly on a down year, Tampa on a down year, they played us .... and Washington.
Their year looks a bit like our 10-6 several years ago ....... in that they took advantage of a down division and some weakness in their schedule to put together a great season.
It'll be interesting to see how they do is one or more of the other teams in their division takes a big step forward.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
Let's not forget that the rest of that division sucked as well.
They went 5-1 in their division, and IIRC, had the division wrapped up with something like 4 or 5 weeks left in the season.
They got Philly on a down year, Tampa on a down year, they played us .... and Washington.
Their year looks a bit like our 10-6 several years ago ....... in that they took advantage of a down division and some weakness in their schedule to put together a great season.
It'll be interesting to see how they do is one or more of the other teams in their division takes a big step forward.
That's a pretty good analogy to our 2007 team Ytown. They did beat some good teams like Detroit, New York and New Orleans though.
An addition like that rookie DE Aldon Smith (14 sacks) and the way Justin Smith played football upfront made it easy on the LBers. I definitely understood why it took 14 or 15 weeks of regular season before the first opponent could score a rushing TD on that defense.
FA acquisition like Carlos Rogers as a former 1st round pick plus 3rd round corner Chris Culliver were great additions in last year's off season. Donte Whitner was also great. He freight trained one New Orlean RB right out of the playoff game and dislodged the football right near the goal line at the same time. That became 7 points Alex Smith never had to worry about overcoming.
Meanwhile, they have 3 olinemen from round 1. They had a pick of the litter TE working alongside 1st round WR Crabtree. Braylon Edwards was previously a 3rd overall pick back when football interested him while Ted Ginn JR added first round play maker excitement at least to their STs. Somehow, some way, SF also got one of our best STs players Anthony Costanzo last off season. They have a talented RB like Frank Gore now being backed up by a talented RB named Kendall Hunter.
What's nice about that new and improved SF program setup was it didn't ask the QB to be any greater than 17 TD passes. If you look at the numbers I shared, a former NFL QB told his QB that he would rather take more sacks than play Santa Claus with the INTs. There's your improvement in the passer ratings. Good job by Joker pointing out how important Harbaugh is to that team.
Last edited by Ottomatic Flugel; 03/31/12 02:30 PM.
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
Seems like that's the biggest change that occured.. was it a one hit wonder ala RAC in cleveland for a 10 win season, or will he do it again.. I'm leaning towards him being the real deal as a HC.
I felt bad for RAC. He wanted 2 gap dlinemen up front here; and Savage kept adding and overpaying veterans better equipped at the 1 gap schemes they came from (ie: Corey Williams, Shaun Rogers and Shaun Smith). Robaire came from a 4 man scheme in TN as well but at least he played previously in Houston's 3 man front. Unfortunately, he was old enough to visit injured reserve in 2 of the 3 years he had a friendly free agent contract.
And then we see RAC as a Head Coach with Scot Pioli's chosen players and he's beating Aaron Rodgers and the Packers even with Kyle Orton at QB.
If our current offensive scheme counts on talented WRs - we better start prioritizing that position better than we have. I want to see some new faces that can run better routes, make more educated blitz adjustments and catch the ball. Heckert found some really good west coast offense WRs in Jackson and Maclin in Philly. He also found an ideal RB for a west coast offense in LeSean McCoy so history tells me he can do it.
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,851 Likes: 159
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,851 Likes: 159 |
All true.. Still, they went far. like I said,, was it real? if they do it again next year and the one after that, you gotta give them some serious props.. Harbaugh also.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,851 Likes: 159
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,851 Likes: 159 |
Quote:
And then we see RAC as a Head Coach with Scot Pioli's chosen players and he's beating Aaron Rodgers and the Packers even with Kyle Orton at QB.
I don't put all that much store in things like that until they happen on a consistent basis. Look at a Tim Couch led Browns team putting it to the steelers or Colt McCoy (a rook) putting it to the NE Pats. things like that happen and it could be just an anomoly..
do it on a consistent basis and we got something to talk about...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 15,979 Likes: 83 |
The San Fran did not play in the Super Bowl last year. There's no real reason to follow their personnel aquisiton model.
2nd. What? Not 4 first round picks at Cornerback? They must be the worst team in the league?
Can Deshaun Watson play better for the Browns, than Baker Mayfield would have? ... Now the Games count.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 Likes: 2
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 Likes: 2 |
I think it's a good comparison, I think it's the next step for us if we want to be good.
They played in a far weaker division than us. It's easier to beat the Steelers when m you have them only once and in your place. Playing in the AFCN, the Browns have probably looked worse than they really are. Every one of your weaknesses will be exposed when you play in a division with 3 teams that make the playoffs. A lot of other teams are fortunate that it doesn't happen to them like that. Every team has holes, even the Giants who won it all, looked like a pretty mediocre team earlier in the year.
The 49ers have hit well on their big picks, and Harbaugh is a pretty good coach.
The Browns, not by their own choice, are just going down a tougher road. If they hit on this draft, I think we're going to start to see results.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1 |
The worst part is, besides I think one of the Ravens games...
We were in every AFCN game this year, should of beat Cincy week 1, if not the second time...
And had our two best showings against Pitt in a while with one of them by Seneca Freakin Wallace...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 Likes: 2
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,027 Likes: 2 |
Quote:
The worst part is, besides I think one of the Ravens games...
We were in every AFCN game this year, should of beat Cincy week 1, if not the second time...
And had our two best showings against Pitt in a while with one of them by Seneca Freakin Wallace...
That's where Shurmur should get some credit. Considering the talent is not quite there, he put his guys in spots to win the game. I'm not giving him full credit, but I think the guy can coach despite what a lot of media think.
I think when you hit on guys like Taylor and Sheard, it can change a lot, they were big factors in how we played last year. I also think Dick Jauron is a pretty good coordinator. That group is not far off at all.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 106
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 106 |
Quote:
The San Fran did not play in the Super Bowl last year. There's no real reason to follow their personnel aquisiton model.
2nd. What? Not 4 first round picks at Cornerback? They must be the worst team in the league?
Not sure if this was sarcasm or not. If it wasn't, San Fran was as close to the Super Bowl as you can get. A special teams gaffe because of an injury to a starter wouldn't be enough to tarnish their season or the fact they have a very solid model to emulate.
Not to mention, the San Fran model is not convenient for those who think the league has transcended to the point where you have to have a QB setting league records weekly. Their model shows tough defense (especially up front), strong running game, great special teams, good game management at QB and very good situational play calling can win---and win big.
Not to derail the point of this thread, but the fact Alex Smith took seven years to develop even into a marginal QB is certainly not conducive for those who don't believe you can give 3rd round QB's a chance to develop. Smith and San Fran;s season blew a major hole in many of the overriding trends that wannabe draftniks everywhere have been propagating--the idea that you have to scrap everything until you hit on the next Hall of Famer at QB.
Good, solid, well coached football still wins in this league and always will. For my money, San Fran would have beaten the Brady Bunch had they played in the game like they should have.
______________________________________________
"Does Howdy Doody got Wooden balls, man?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,411 Likes: 463
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,411 Likes: 463 |
Quote:
What's nice about that new and improved SF program setup was it didn't ask the QB to be any greater than 17 TD passes. If you look at the numbers I shared, a former NFL QB told his QB that he would rather take more sacks than play Santa Claus with the INTs.
Umm ...... of course a QB would rather take a sack than throw an INT. I'm not sure what the point is? A QB would rather throw the ball away than take a sack, or would really rather throw a TD than throw an INT.
However, the best QBs aren't terrified of throwing an INT, because they know that they might throw one when they attack down the field. They also know that they will rarely throw TDs if the refuse to attack the entire field.
That's the difference between being a QB, and being a game manager. Now, if you play in a bad division, and happen to have all of the factors fall into place, you might win with a game manager type. However, you aren't winning long term. Smith has become this year's poster child for modestly effective QB play being the answer in the NFL ...... but he's not. How many games can the Cleveland Browns expect to win in the AFCN with that type of philosophy? Probably not many.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 745
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 745 |
hey Flugel I was at Opry Mills Mall on the brand new reopening since the floods ruined it. Saw Kenny Britt there...anyhow.
Good breakdown of the Niners. Heres my take.
The Niners are a team that wants it to be known as being a team that can run the ball on you at will. Control the LOS. Thats their idenity.
They realize Alex Smith does not have the same skill set as Mannings, Rodgers, or Rivers. But he's good enough to move the chains and play high % football.
whats the 1st rule of QB'ing....don't turn the ball over.
Look at the how they have built their team up on the both sides of the ball.
Invested 1st RD picks and a 2nd RD pick on the o-line. Got a center in FA.
Invested in free agency, other teams 1st RD draft picks. Not 3rd tier guys,but actual 1st RD picks.....Justin Smith,Carlos Rogers,Donte Whitner, Ted Ginn, Braylon Edwards....
Ahmed Brooks was a supplemental pick with 1st RD talent.
Ray McDonald came from a school that is known for producing solid NFL DE's.
Navarro Bowman came from a school that produces tremedous LB's.
They have drafted well at impact positions....OLB and TE.
They got draft value with Kendall Hunter and Delanie Walker.
The Niners have done a great job of drafting in the middle RDs and adding solid free agents and not over paying for them.
and this plan nothing resembles what the Browns are doing
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 106
Practice Squad
|
|
Practice Squad
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 106 |
Quote:
Quote:
What's nice about that new and improved SF program setup was it didn't ask the QB to be any greater than 17 TD passes. If you look at the numbers I shared, a former NFL QB told his QB that he would rather take more sacks than play Santa Claus with the INTs.
Umm ...... of course a QB would rather take a sack than throw an INT. I'm not sure what the point is? A QB would rather throw the ball away than take a sack, or would really rather throw a TD than throw an INT.
However, the best QBs aren't terrified of throwing an INT, because they know that they might throw one when they attack down the field. They also know that they will rarely throw TDs if the refuse to attack the entire field.
That's the difference between being a QB, and being a game manager. Now, if you play in a bad division, and happen to have all of the factors fall into place, you might win with a game manager type. However, you aren't winning long term. Smith has become this year's poster child for modestly effective QB play being the answer in the NFL ...... but he's not. How many games can the Cleveland Browns expect to win in the AFCN with that type of philosophy? Probably not many.
Hold on a minute here. The Niners went 13-3, including 3-1 against our division. They held Cincy and Pitt to no TD's and lost to Bmore 16-6. They got a bye in the playoffs, then beat Brees and company 36-32 before losing in OT against the eventual Super Bowl champ because a sub for Ted Ginn fumbled a punt. They beat TB 48-3, they beat Detroit when they were the two hottest teams in the league, they beat the Giants in the regular season and they also beat Philly in Philly. Nice try to tarnish this season of theirs with a simple "their division sucks" theory.
While we are at it, they held everybodies hero Dalton to the sterling stat line of 12 of 26 for 96 yards with two interceptions and a sack. Colt's numbers were 22-34 for 241 1 TD and 1 pick (plus fumbles).
You are way too conveniently tarnishing what this team accomplished this past season. Regardless of their division, they won the games they should have and threw a huge wrench into the new philosophy that "the QB has to be putting up stat lines weekly like Rodgers, Brees, Brady and the Mannings."
______________________________________________
"Does Howdy Doody got Wooden balls, man?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
Good, solid, well coached football still wins in this league and always will. For my money, San Fran would have beaten the Brady Bunch had they played in the game like they should have.
That maybe true, but there is no room for mistakes and falling behind early in a game, because they are not built for quick precision strikes on offense.
They must play it close to perfect, week end and week out.
I don't think that managing a QB is a bad thing, because the majority of QB's playing in the League need to be managed to fit their strengths, but a team with a run first mentality has no room for error at all and really need to rely on the other two phases of the game. (you mentioned the ST's blunder in the Championship game)
That's all well and good unless you are matched up with a team who puts up 40 points per game on any given Sunday.
The rule changes don't favor even the best defenses.
The League wanted more scoring and that comes by way of the passing game and at a cost to trying to defend the pass with one hand tied behind your back for all intensive proposes, so it is bucking the trend in the League today to have a run first mentality.
I think that Coaching is an intangible factor with any philosophy of offense.
Teams that turn the ball over and shoot themselves in the foot by way of stupid penalties are detrimental to all types of philosophies, but those run first teams can't overcome those mistakes. It's simply not in their makeup.
![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/FL_Dawg/Logo5_1.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 Likes: 1 |
I don't think we compare to them at all...
They were an under performing group that finally reached their potential...
We suck...
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
hey Flugel I was at Opry Mills Mall on the brand new reopening since the floods ruined it. Saw Kenny Britt there...anyhow.
Good breakdown of the Niners. Heres my take.
The Niners are a team that wants it to be known as being a team that can run the ball on you at will. Control the LOS. Thats their idenity.
They realize Alex Smith does not have the same skill set as Mannings, Rodgers, or Rivers. But he's good enough to move the chains and play high % football.
whats the 1st rule of QB'ing....don't turn the ball over.
Look at the how they have built their team up on the both sides of the ball.
Invested 1st RD picks and a 2nd RD pick on the o-line. Got a center in FA.
Invested in free agency, other teams 1st RD draft picks. Not 3rd tier guys,but actual 1st RD picks.....Justin Smith,Carlos Rogers,Donte Whitner, Ted Ginn, Braylon Edwards....
Ahmed Brooks was a supplemental pick with 1st RD talent.
Ray McDonald came from a school that is known for producing solid NFL DE's.
Navarro Bowman came from a school that produces tremedous LB's.
They have drafted well at impact positions....OLB and TE.
They got draft value with Kendall Hunter and Delanie Walker.
The Niners have done a great job of drafting in the middle RDs and adding solid free agents and not over paying for them.
and this plan nothing resembles what the Browns are doing
Thanks! Glad you got to see the new Opry Mills and spotted Kenny Britt in the process Kendall. We'll get there soon. Good points about SF!
A big reason I wanted to share this post was to show people what has gone into SF all around the QB. Alex Smith is now a game manager that can keep a Head Coach and OC employed. Others pointed out that Jim Harbaugh is a big reason for the success. Very true! That pretty much means, he's good enough to keep the once maligned QB employed. Let's not forget how important a play making acquisition is that gives Alex Smith the football at the opponent's 7 yard line. That's a really cool margin of error any generation of Trent Dilfer can win with.
Is any of this possible if they didn't massively overhaul the roster all that roster since Smith's rookie year? Savage traded away the day 1 of our 2008 draft netting only 1 keeper here from that entire draft. In addition, more of his trading had us only set for 4 draft picks that had to be orchestrated without an experienced NFL GM and a young Head Coach. We're still feeling the impact of a bad front office followed by a hollow front office prior to Holmgren and Heckert showing up. This wasn't promising instant success for a new Head Coach or young QB.
I have a very common theme behind most of my posting. I'm not in the hunt for a miracle worker at QB. I want us to build a team that justifies whatever new scheme we're turning to. Now that we changed to a 4-3 defense and a west coast offense - here's what I want to see this team changing to:
1.) WRs that are able to get open consistently and catch the football instead of lead the league in drops. Somebody that can turn a short reception into 70 yac and TDs like other teams have. Outside foot speed that will command the respect of prying a Safety or 2 loose from the crowded boxes we never stopped seeing. If Jeff Garcia's arm strength never had to contend with that - I'm guessing he had the outside perimeter help we continue to long for here.
2.) A Right Side of an offensive line that is reliable and consistent. When a QB is getting smothered in 3 step drops - I'm not sold we need to hand Lauvao tenure just yet. For that matter, Pinkston has to step up at LG as well.
3.) A RDE that can clamp everything back inside to the LBers while giving QBs heat to hurry passes. If we upgrade this spot significantly, I think our secondary cashes in on some new and improved opportunities.
4.) Age plus wear and tear is creeping up on guys like Ben Watson, Scott Fujita, and Sheldon Brown at some pretty important positions. This means TE, OLBer and corner are needs. Along the same lines without duplicating what I just said, injuries have impacted Safety, RB and FB positions here while we lost fill-in guy Mike Adams to free agency. I don't care as much about FB; but talent is thin in many areas.
Even if we can get the pre camp roster looking better on paper, this is the Cleveland Browns. We all know that every single year we lose somebody very important to injury; and it's usually more than 1 important guy to our plans.Teams that always draft well handle this stuff way better than teams that never can.
Believe it or not, I'm also open to improving the competition at QB here. I believe in McCoy; but healthy competition makes any position stronger. Having said that, I don't want to draft a QB at #4 overall while hearing he needs to sit a year and learn as a rookie. Why on earth would that be if we're allegedly getting a better QB with a higher ceiling and better talent? Something doesn't feel right about a QB who had 2 different 3 INT performances in the same conference Colt McCoy aced. Aside from that, I heard Texas A&M lost to almost all of their best opponents on the schedule. Who says you can't get the same talent or better later in this draft? Weeden was a better QB in the exact same conference that won consistently and beat Andrew Luck head to head while carrying the 107th ranked defense all the way to a BSC Game. If someone argues Weeden is 28 - so was Kurt Warner when the NFL gave him his first shot right? How old was Warren Moon after the CFL? Joe Theisman? Jeff Garcia? Jim Kelly after the USFL? These guys didn't just play 2 years in the NFL. In fact, take a look over history at how many good-great NFL Qbs didn't showcase their best stuff until after age 27 anyway. There's other promising QB choices especially in the "he isn't ready to play as a rookie" category that won't compromise our first 2 shots a legit play makers we so desperately need here.
Last edited by Ottomatic Flugel; 04/01/12 09:15 AM.
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
If someone argues Weeden is 28 - so was Kurt Warner when the NFL gave him his first shot right? How old was Warren Moon after the CFL? Joe Theisman? Jeff Garcia? Jim Kelly after the USFL? These guys didn't just play 2 years in the NFL. In fact, take a look over history at how many good-great NFL Qbs didn't showcase their best stuff until after age 27 anyway. There's other promising QB choices especially in the "he isn't ready to play as a rookie" category that won't compromise our first 2 shots a legit play makers we so desperately need here.
I'm glad you brought this up as I had forgotten about Kurt Warner getting a late start.
I also believe that competition at the QB position will bring out the best in both players and whomever the one is that you settle on as far as being the #1, then you have to put all of the support your team can muster behind him.
Everone talks about a franchise QB for obvious reasons, but as we all know that can change in a new york minute and now your #2 QB is now your #1 option and I would like to know that we have two QB's going into any season that we can depend on if not shoulder the load on.
Bottom line is that I don't think that we have seen the best from Colt McCoy and while he might have some holes in his game, he also has some pretty good attributes that he brings to the table.
With that said if we spend a 2nd or 3rd round pick on a QB to challenge McCoy at QB and he shows that his cream rises above Colts, then I don't see how that can be a bad thing.
If the opposite is true, then at least we know that we tried to hedge our bets, but if Colt proves to be the better and improved version of himself, then that too is not a bad thing.
Back to Weeden and his age. With that comes maturity and I think that he could be more prepared for the ups and downs that are sure to follow.
We sign him to a 3 year rookie contract and if he proves to have what it takes, then say for argument sake we sign him for an additional 5 years. That's 8 years total and after witch time he would be right about the age of Peyton Manning who just signed a new 5 year deal.
In this day of FA if you told me that I could keep a starter for us sowed up under contract for at least 8 years, then that would make me happy, because to expect much more might just be wishful thinking imo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,460 Likes: 820
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 13,460 Likes: 820 |
You raise a really interesting point. Hard to argue that they (SF) have proven you can still play that style of football and win.
But...
Look at their offseason. They had to rush to make good with Alex Smith, as they almost let him walk. Now, eventually he came back to them, but they were definitely looking to upgrade that position.
What I find interesting as that even though you are 100% correct about Alex Smith and their game being successful, they are still looking for that elite QB. The reason for that is because this is a passing league, and you have the most chance for success if you have an elite thrower.
There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.
-PrplPplEater
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,411 Likes: 463
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,411 Likes: 463 |
Yep.
You "can" win without an elite level QB ....... but the margins are so fine that it's ridiculous. You have to be almost perfect in every phase of the game. It "can" happen ..... but it's usually in a bad division, and even then it usually isn't a dynasty in the making.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,338 |
Quote:
The reason for that is because this is a passing league, and you have the most chance for success if you have an elite thrower.
I have found more than a few reports refuting that this is now a Passing league, some I can't post. The term is over used and actually has no basis..a simple search provides some in depth analysis.
Is the NFL a Passing League? Part I
January 10th, 2012 at 7:00 AM
By Chuck Chapman
Our articles that have challenged the conventional wisdom that the "new" NFL is a passing league and that an "elite" quarterback is necessary to win have drawn some controversy. To help sort out fact from fiction, we dug into some statistics from the 2000 season to the present to see if any statistical trends could be discerned. Sure enough, some numbers jumped out, just not the ones that the "passing league" proponents would think are so.
Colts 101's central thesis is that the key to winning football is to run the ball effectively, play solid defense, and secure the football. The statistics we unearthed show that these age-old principles are still the most important factors in winning NFL championships.
Before we get into the numbers, let's start with a couple of assumptions. First regarding the Colts draft choice (what started all this discussion), it's fairly obvious that drafting Andrew Luck would not be stupid at all. The only issue in question is whether or not he's a "sure thing" or whether taking an offer of several picks would be preferable to drafting Luck.
Second, we're operating from the assumption that getting to the playoffs and winning there is the ultimate goal. We're not at all concerned with regular season records or statistics, only inasmuch as they accomplish those two things: they get the team to the playoffs and, once there, the team wins.
So the question is, just how much does a prolific passing offense (presumably led by a prolific passer) impact a team's ability to win the Super Bowl?
When we looked at Super Bowl teams and regular season statistics, not too much stood out with regard to regular season numbers. Ten out of the last eleven Super Bowls have seen at least one team that finished the regular season in the top 10 in rushing defense. Of those 10 teams, six went on to defeat their Super Bowl opponent. Seven Super Bowls have featured at least one team in the top 10 in rushing offense, with the higher ranked team winning five of those seven. A team rated in the top 10 in passing offense has made the Super Bowl nine of the past 11 years, but strangely enough, the higher rated pass offense has only won in three of those cases.
The numbers really started to get interesting when we started looking at how teams perform in the post season. What we discovered was teams might travel through the air to get to the post season, but once the Super Bowl tournament started, it was the ability to gain on the ground that made the biggest difference.
Nine of the past 11 Super Bowls have been won by the team that rushed for more yards. The only exceptions were the past two seasons when the Steelers and the Colts won the rushing battle but lost the war. Not coincidentally though, both of those teams also lost the turnover battle, resulting in their losing the game.
ANDREW INNERARITY/Reuters/Fotoglif
Colts fans remember all too well the pick-six thrown by Peyton Manning as the Colts drove for the game-tying score as well as the onside kick that New Orleans converted for a touchdown on the opening possession of the second half. The Steelers, even with a 76 yard advantage on the ground, couldn't overcome a -3 differential in turnovers to the Packers last year. In the other nine games since 2000, the team that rushed more won the game. Conversely, the team that passed for more yards won only five of 11 times.
Thinking that the Super Bowl might be an outlier, we took our statistical analysis one step further, to the conference championship games. What we found confirmed what we saw in the Super Bowl.
In 17 or the 22 conference championship games held since 2000, the team that won the rushing battle won the war. And guess what happened the other five times? You got it, turnovers. The '09 Vikings, the '08 Ravens, the '04 Steelers, the '02 Titans and the '02 Eagles all outgained their opponents on the ground and missed the Super Bowl. In all five cases, they lost the turnover battle, in four of five times by two or more turnovers.
In Part II, we'll take a look at some of the individual teams that put together great rushing performances in the playoffs. Who they are just might surprise you.
Passing League
Tim Tebow won his fourth game in five starts at quarterback of the Denver Broncos last night. Predictably, the media this morning is dumbfounded how Tebow and the Broncos could be winning since the NFL is a "quarterback's league." A closer examination will show that this meme is merely another media-driven myth that has little or no basis in reality. More importantly for the Indianapolis Colts, it should have no bearing on how they draft this season.
First, let's state the obvious: having a good quarterback is preferable to having a bad one. Anyone who thinks the absence of a quarterback the caliber of a Peyton Manning is irrelevant is clearly not paying attention. That being said, the absence of a future Hall of Famer at any position on the field is going to have a profound impact on that team. Take Troy Polamalu out of the Steelers' secondary and they change dramatically. I doubt anyone would argue that the NFL is a "safety's league" though.
Second, Tebow isn't that bad of a quarterback. For all of his unorthodox throwing mechanics, his numbers aren't really that bad. Yes, he's missed some open receivers, but his QB rating this season is 78.4. For comparison, Jacksonville's Blaine Gabbert has a QB rating of 63.6. Curtis Painter's is 67.4. Joe Flacco is quarterbacking a playoff contender with a 75.6 rating. Let's not forget that Tebow just played in his 17th NFL game last night too while Flacco is starting his third NFL season. Most importantly, Tebow is 4-1 as a starter this season. He's accounted for 10 scores while turning the ball over only twice. I can think of a team in Central Indiana that would love to have that kind of productivity from their quarterback.
All that brings the myth of the NFL being a "quarterback's league" to the surface. The rejoinders to Tebow's record inevitably involve the play of the Denver defense (which had an interception return for a touchdown last night) as well as other aspects of the team. While many cite those facts in an attempt to discount Tebow, the truth is that it illustrates the nature of football as the ultimate team sport.
No other sport emphasizes the collective efforts of the team more and discounts the feats of the individual less. The truth about football is that one player rarely determines the overall success of the team. Even here in Indy, Manning's presence and absence isn't solely the reason for the Colts' fortunes over the past decade. While it's a convenient (and lazy) media narrative, the facts just don't bear that out.
The fact is that Indianapolis was 6-6 after 12 games last year WITH Peyton Manning and needed four straight wins just to make the playoffs. As great as Manning is, the handwriting was on the wall as to rest of the team, especially after getting bounced by the Jets at home in the first round.
On a larger scale, the history of the NFL belies the myth of the NFL being a "quarterback's league." While we all know about Joe Montana and John Elway, we forget that Super Bowl history is littered with quarterbacks who have guided their teams to the NFL's ultimate heights, despite not being anywhere near "Hall of Fame" caliber. Billy Kilmer, Vince Ferragamo, Ron Jaworski, Stan Humphries, Neil O'Donnell, Chris Chandler, Jake Delhomme, and Rex Grossman have all started Super Bowls. But wait, you interject, they didn't win a ring! No, but Jim McMahon, Jeff Hostetler, Trent Dilfer, and Brad Johnson all did. Those four have the same number of championship rings as Peyton Manning, and one more than Dan Marino. Why is that true? Those players had the good fortune of quarterbacking some great TEAMS, while Manning, and especially Marino, often have had to play with inferior supporting casts.
And what do Tom Brady, Mark Rypien, Kurt Warner, Brett Favre and Joe Montana have in common? Yes, they all have Super Bowl rings, but none was drafted in the first round. What do Ryan Leaf, Akili Smith, Tim Couch and Dan McGwire have in common? They were all first round selections.
What does that say? It say's that the NFL is a "team league." Having a great quarterback who can make plays is great, but no greater than having a great wide receiver, running back, or safety who can make plays. Truth be told, to be a dominant NFL team, you have to be a team, with greatness at several spots on both sides of the ball.
What does that mean for the Colts? Indianapolis should think long and hard about what to do with this upcoming draft. No one player, even the return of a healthy Peyton Manning, is going to truly fix what ails this team. Anyone who thinks the Colts are just one player away from a Super Bowl clearly isn't paying attention. And anyone who thinks that if the Colts decided to pass on Andrew Luck means that they're doomed to mediocrity or worse just simply doesn't know football.
So as Colts fans endure the end of 2011 and look forward to the NFL Draft and 2012, let's bury the myth of the QB-centric NFL. That means you can enjoy Tim Tebow, who excels in the most important statistical category, winning. It also means that for a Colts team to contend again, finding a future Hall of Fame outside linebacker will be just as important as finding their next quarterback.
NFL a “Quarterback’s League” is a Media-Driven Myth
"Going from 4-12 to 6-10 isn't good enough. I believe we are going to be better than that. We're going to be a lot better than that." - Mike Holmgren (3/15/12)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Thanks for those links, but blah, blah, blah.
Spin it however you chose.
What makes this a passing league today is the rules that are in place, that favors offensive passing and you have to look no farther then the record setting passing stats that where posted by the top QB's in this League this past season.
Some folks are still in denial over the whole thing and it took me a while to come to that realization too, because it went against everything I believed in, but the facts are the facts and we are not going back to the old set of rules, ever again!
This League has always had great QB's, the difference isn't in the players.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 Likes: 147
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 Likes: 147 |
Quote:
Thanks for those links, but blah, blah, blah.
Spin it however you chose.
What makes this a passing league today is the rules that are in place, that favors offensive passing and you have to look no farther then the record setting passing stats that where posted by the top QB's in this League this past season.
Some folks are still in denial over the whole thing and it took me a while to come to that realization too, because it went against everything I believed in, but the facts are the facts and we are not going back to the old set of rules, ever again!
This League has always had great QB's, the difference isn't in the players.
Well one could argue that the mild winter meant northern teams weren't forced into ground games late in the year, allowing for passing stats to rise beyond the norm. 
To truly say the QB records were the result of the rules, one would have to compare their opponents and other variables amongst the other teams in the league to discount the possibility of other forces at work.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 8,660 Likes: 87 |
Quote:
Quote:
Thanks for those links, but blah, blah, blah.
Spin it however you chose.
What makes this a passing league today is the rules that are in place, that favors offensive passing and you have to look no farther then the record setting passing stats that where posted by the top QB's in this League this past season.
Some folks are still in denial over the whole thing and it took me a while to come to that realization too, because it went against everything I believed in, but the facts are the facts and we are not going back to the old set of rules, ever again!
This League has always had great QB's, the difference isn't in the players.
Well one could argue that the mild winter meant northern teams weren't forced into ground games late in the year, allowing for passing stats to rise beyond the norm.
To truly say the QB records were the result of the rules, one would have to compare their opponents and other variables amongst the other teams in the league to discount the possibility of other forces at work.
Or one might say that one is over thinking the situation.  
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323
1st String
|
|
1st String
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 323 |
Quote:
This League has always had great QB's, the difference isn't in the players.
are you contending that players nowadays, who are basically born and bred for sport, with the latest medical and training technologies available, are not more physically gifted than 20, 40 years ago?
cuz your "spin" is the same, just for the opposite argument....its a passing league because of some broken records in one season? wanting it to be doesn't make it so.
rule changes play some part, but there's much more to it than that. complex situations should not be simplified for convenience. you cannot make the argument its not a team sport.....cause if winning in the playoffs and the superbowl is the goal, then you need more than a passing offense to accomplish it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
You raise a really interesting point. Hard to argue that they (SF) have proven you can still play that style of football and win.
But...
Look at their offseason. They had to rush to make good with Alex Smith, as they almost let him walk. Now, eventually he came back to them, but they were definitely looking to upgrade that position.
What I find interesting as that even though you are 100% correct about Alex Smith and their game being successful, they are still looking for that elite QB. The reason for that is because this is a passing league, and you have the most chance for success if you have an elite thrower.
Good point. A lot of teams are always looking to bring in someone to compete with what they have at QB. Denver hadn't won a playoff game since Jake Plummer until Tebow came along. They didn't bat an eye lash to wave good bye to him for Peyton Manning. SF also tried to entice Manning to come there so Alex Smith did the right thing to go to Miami. In the process of uprooting Tebow, now Mark Sanchez gets the subliminal messages that tenure is going to have to be earned. A contract might say one thing - but the Jets wouldn't have done what they did if they felt all set. When you think about it, they could probably add the Robinson kid in a late round from Michigan if all they want is the short yardage running QB thing.
Like someone said, if SF doesn't fumble a punt in the red zone during OT of the NFC Championship - Alex Smith was in the Superbowl. What helps many young QBs of all pedigrees from all draft slots is changing their margins of error around them while using the opportunities to bring in first round talents like Vernon Davis, Michael Crabtree, Ted Ginn Jr, and Braylon Edwards (just in case he finds football appealing again) work well with a RB like Frank Gore and 3 first round olinemen up front (2 OTs and the OG from Idaho). SF is an example of changing the gridiron chess table when you don't have a Herschel Walker trade speeding up the talent overhaul over night.
Around the time we landed Kosar in the supplemental but lost draft picks to get him - something else really cool was working in our favor. Our front office was striking gold landing the following players from the USFL: Mike Johnson, Frank Minnifield, Kevin Mack, Dan Fike, Sam Clancy, Ice Cube McNeil. Every single one of those guys started and a few of them made the Pro Bowl at their respective positions.
Last edited by Ottomatic Flugel; 04/03/12 12:55 PM.
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,465 |
Quote:
Around the time we landed Kosar in the supplemental but lost draft picks to get him - something else really cool was working in our favor. Our front office raided the USFL and brought in the following studs: Mike Johnson, Frank Minnifield, Kevin Mack, Dan Fike, Sam Clancy, Ice Cube McNeil. Every single one of those guys started or made the Pro Bowl at their position.
Yeah, it's often overlooked, but the USFL disbanding was a major part of the Browns success in the mid-to-late eighties.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,807 Likes: 173
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,807 Likes: 173 |
Quote:
Around the time we landed Kosar in the supplemental but lost draft picks to get him - something else really cool was working in our favor. Our front office was striking gold landing the following players from the USFL: Mike Johnson, Frank Minnifield, Kevin Mack, Dan Fike, Sam Clancy, Ice Cube McNeil. Every single one of those guys started and a few of them made the Pro Bowl at their respective positions.
Flugel...that is a very good and I'm sure OFTEN OVERLOOKED fact that contributed to the Browns success in 86-89 years.
The Browns front office was a strength of the organization during that period, evaluating talent in places other franchises might not consider. One of the issues the Browns have had since their return is the constant turnover within the front office because HCs wanting their guys running the personnel/scouting dept... i.e. Butch Davis.
As a result, the Browns front office became a weakness within the organization rather then the traditional strength. Holmgren came in to a front office that had to be one of the worst in the NFL and it was the first area he addressed, when taking on the rebuild project of the Browns.
Let's hope Heckert and the scouting department can come up with some of those unknown gems, hiding in an unusual places.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246 Likes: 17
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,246 Likes: 17 |
The difference here is that teams are passing to open up the run. And are running because they're winning.
The conventional wisdom of old was that you have to run to open up the pass. And that's no longer true.
If you take a look at the offenses that are "Pass First" offenses... their plays are built to attack a patch of the field. They're precision oriented to exploit spots on defense. Thus the inclusion of hot reads. You see a lot more 4 WR sets now than you've ever seen previously too.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
SF's OL is an elite run blocking OL but is even worse than our OL when it come to pass blocking...Davis and Iupati were bad value selections since their game is 1 dimensional or simply lacking....I really can't hear the BS about SF's supposed good OL...it's not a good OL...they invested high in it but it's still an AVG one We also have 2 1st rounders in our OL..goes to show that consistency throughout the OL is more important than investing some high picks into it...ask STL how they feel about Smith and Saffold Also, Tebow didn't win anything..the D won for DEN...I think the point per game output of the Broncos Offense was a bout the same it was with Orton but their D AVG dropped by 10p or so...did Tebow play Defense? They also tried to unload Tebow regardless of Manning... "according to the Florida Times Union, the Broncos began "quietly shopping" Tim Tebow at the Scouting Combine. It's a smoking gun that the Broncos were looking to unload Tebow regardless of whether they landed Peyton Manning, as the Combine began a full two weeks before Manning's release from the Colts. It's possible Tebow would have lost a camp competition even if he had remained in Denver and the Broncos whiffed on Manning. The Broncos never wanted Tebow as their quarterback." http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/...me-jacksonvilleAlso, if he was any good his trade value wouldn't have been in the Brady Quinn range
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
SF's OL is an elite run blocking OL but is even worse than our OL when it come to pass blocking...Davis and Iupati were bad value selections since their game is 1 dimensional or simply lacking....I really can't hear the BS about SF's supposed good OL...it's not a good OL..
Also, Tebow didn't win anything..the D won for DEN...I think the point per game output of the Broncos Offense was a bout the same it was with Orton but their D AVG dropped by 10p or so...did Tebow play Defense? They also tried to unload Tebow regardless of Manning...
"according to the Florida Times Union, the Broncos began "quietly shopping" Tim Tebow at the Scouting Combine.
It's a smoking gun that the Broncos were looking to unload Tebow regardless of whether they landed Peyton Manning, as the Combine began a full two weeks before Manning's release from the Colts. It's possible Tebow would have lost a camp competition even if he had remained in Denver and the Broncos whiffed on Manning. The Broncos never wanted Tebow as their quarterback."
http://jacksonville.com/sports/football/...me-jacksonville
Also, if he was any good his trade value wouldn't have been in the Brady Quinn range
Tim Tebow? Way to use cut and paste in lieu of re-contexting what was actually pointed out. Very impressive! The Jets are currently trying to upgrade their 8-8 level of football 3 years into Ryan's tenure by looking to Tebow and Heaven above. The beauty of you intercepting this thread with needing to focus on Tim Tebow is he becomes an even better example of the overall message of this post than Alex Smith. He won a playoff game in the very first year he started.
The irony of your Tebow rant is the Chargers were the AFC West team with the hotshot QB from a 1st overall pick (and trade down to #4) whom Denver replaced as the divisional champion. You got really excited to tell me Denver's defense won every game in spite of their young QB. That wouldn't be a reflection of good drafting/free agency giving a young QB enough margin of error to be in position to win games almost every week would it? Just out of curiosity though - why was that same Denver team 1-4 with another QB? Do your draft guru crib sheets have any information about credible leadership at crunch time and throughout 60 minutes? Supply and demand only puts Peyton Manning on your doorstep if you are drafting first. And even then, it didn't lead to winning a playoff game until Peyton's 6th season in 2003. Don't take my word for it go check it out.
As for the offensive line, SF was in an NFC Championship Game so 3 first round maulers up front coincided well with the turnovers/field position their defense and STs provided. Another example of what adding great players for all facets of the game can do to keep a QB in position to win a game per the purpose of this thread. If you want to tell me Alex Smith took the most sacks of his career - I won't argue. That's actually a good point by you. At the same time, Alex only threw 5 INTs while sporting the best passer rating of his career. As others suggested maybe the biggest difference was the calming influence of another former NFL QB. For example, like telling him to eat the ball instead of playing Santa Clause to the opponent. Live another down even if it's to flip field position hasn't ever been a bad philosophy. It's not as pretty as it is patient.
To me, it looks SF is 1 dangerous WR away from being the team to beat in the NFC regardless of who they have at QB. Having said that, wanna bet the QB ratings improve again if 1 more attack prong is added there?
Back to the main purpose of the thread - the whole is greater than the sum of its parts when a front office makes winning easier for a QB. A lot of young recently drafted QBs that went to bad teams are drafting in the top 9 this year inclusive of St Louis, Minnesota, Cleveland, Jacksonville, Tampa Bay and even Carolina. These teams all need to look to some version of what Dallas once did for Troy Aikman or what SF has done for Alex Smith. If they don't, they may be the next Tampa Bay sending the next Steve Young to the closest version of Jerry Rice today and happily ever after.
Last edited by Ottomatic Flugel; 04/07/12 09:45 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Are you really trying to argue that a rookie QB doesn't turn around a franchise in his rookie season? I think you might be onto something  Top 5 picked QBs from 2008-2010: Ryan, Sanchez, Stafford and Bradford I think the 1st 3 teams aren't going to draft in the top 5 or 10 anytime soon again and look like PO contenders now....Bradford isn't looking too promising...yeah, there's risk drafting a QB high...you can't win it if you aren't in it...not trying doesn't solve any problem Tebow: why DEN was 1-4 with Orton? You can hold up that leadership (4th round value apparently) I'll put my money on a much better D....maybe watching Tebow the D knew they have to step up? Now that's some leadership by sucking Mr.Tebow, lol...and I bet the hotshot QB from SD won't get traded for a 4th rounder..you think there's a reason for that? "Reason" you say? Yeah, strange word when you ride faith and can cite all the wonders/exceptions of this league It is what it is and people will believe whatever they think is right....Colt will be 1 of those 5% exceptions and Mangini was a misunderstood, good HC depsite all NYJ HC before and after him had better records, despite Romeo having a better record in Cleveland...despite even Romeo getting another HC gig and not him Your mind is your world...and thankfully not my problem 
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
Are you really trying to argue that a rookie QB doesn't turn around a franchise in his rookie season?)
Top 5 picked QBs from 2008-2010: Ryan, Sanchez, Stafford and Bradford
No, it's either a reading comprehension issue at your end or you're re-contexting what the other side of debate put in front of you 1 more time. My guess is the latter since it's all I see you doing. Why don't you ask yourself why you need to spin doctor something into what you wished they had said? It means you are unhappy with how well you have done so far so it's time for desperate tactics. Impressive!
Anyway, you might want to understand Stafford landed on IR in both of his first 2 seasons. Neither season showcased a winning record. The winning record didn't kickoff in Detroit before Stafford's 3rd season. Sanchez was drafted by a 9-7 football team that was 10-6 and in the playoffs just 2 years before that. Bradford's team was scheduled to draft 2nd overall in 2012 just 2 years after finishing with 7 wins in arguably the worst division in football in 2010. Do you think playing the AFC North teams would have improved that record?
Again, I've been saying everywhere as often as I can there aren't many examples of bad teams drafting rookie QBs that lead them to playoffs in the rookie year. The only example you really have here is Matt Ryan. Meanwhile, the following bad teams with young QBs are drafting in the top 9: St Louis, Minnesota, Cleveland, Jacksonville, Tampa and Carolina. Newton's Carolina team had the most wins in 2011 with 6. Your theory says none of those teams need to draft any help because they have the right QB that will make everyone around them better. My theory says I understand why their teams are drafting where they are drafting.
In order to make any kind of sense at all in this debate - you have to understand what has been drafted here since 99 and how many washed up and out of scheme free agents many of our Head Coaches and QBs have been sentenced to. I haven't seen you show me you get this at all in all these threads you have been acusing other posters of jibberish in. You always dance around what the front office has this team ready to do from the gridiron chess table. Do you really think all this team needs to get to the playoffs in 2012 is a rookie QB? If so, God bless ya!
Tell you what - go play someone with your equivalent smarts in a game of chess. Let him use all the chess pieces and you remove all the pieces on both sides of the king in your back row but go absolute sic em with your pawns up front. Let me know how you make out with that.
Believe it or not, I understand a Dan Marino going to a Dolphins franchise that dragged David Woodley to a Superbowl Sunday 2 years earlier can win in the rookie season. I also know why a Ben Roehtlisberger landing on a Pittsburgh franchise keeping him in game management mode can go 15-1 in the rookie campaign. They were already frequenting playoffs with QBs like Kordell Stewart, Tommy Maddox and Neil O'Donnell right? Those are franchises that had great front offices surrounding their young QB with talent, chemistry and continuity. Our disconnect in this discussion remains you think we have had the same front office that laid down the cumulative effects of what Marino and Roethlisberger walked into as rookie QBs. I think Holmgren and Heckert can change things enough to get excited about. I'm really excited about this draft.
Last edited by Ottomatic Flugel; 04/07/12 10:42 AM.
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,744 |
Quote:
Again, I've been saying everywhere as often as I can there aren't many examples of bad teams drafting rookie QBs that lead them to playoffs in the rookie year. The only example you really have here is Matt Ryan.
Big Ben
Go Browns!!![[Linked Image]](http://www.dawgtalkers.net/uploads/BrowniePoints/AndersonSnowPic.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,511 Likes: 166
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,511 Likes: 166 |
Quote:
Quote:
Again, I've been saying everywhere as often as I can there aren't many examples of bad teams drafting rookie QBs that lead them to playoffs in the rookie year. The only example you really have here is Matt Ryan.
Big Ben
Big Ben was not drafted by a bad team... he did not lead them to the playoffs as a rookie... he was a good QB but was asked to do very little his first couple of years because the Steelers had a great defense and good running game.
<><
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Lol, I couldn't believe you have under 100 posts...you already had more "arguments" I had to  than posts already, that alone s a feat in itself If you haven't noticed: I said that the chances of any rook QB to lead their team into the POs are next to 0...and who the hell is arguing that a rook QB will lead us into the POs in 2012? We won't sniff the POs in 2012 no matter how good and what positions Heckert will draft in 3 weeks...not with McCoy and not with any other QB...yeah our ROSTER talent isn't good enough for it...we get it, really...everybody does Gone there before: bad talent around Colt doesn't make Colt ANY better...and if it would, wouldn't it be fair to excuse the other bad talent because they have Colt playing QB for them? Blame should go both ways...but either way it's a pretty stupid argument to begin with as everyone with a brain and 2 eyes can evaluate the talent level of any player regardless of the players around him when he has seen said player play hundreds of snaps I also think you over-estimate the "timing" of drafting a QB...sure, there are better and worse timings but talent will show itself...and some here and many others around the league think that Colt has shown little talent, so why shouldn't we draft another QB? From a pure young talent base perspective this roster has never been more talented the past 12 years (and that's a sad thing to say since it's still below AVG) but the draft and FA is all about upgrading...and if you can upgrade, you should do it esp. at QB....wouldn't you draft a top WR because you have a crappy QB? So, why shouldn't you draft a talented QB even if you have little talent at receiver? Why treat the QB position as a holy cow and the others as interchangable?
#gmstrong
"Players come along at different points in time" - Ray Farmer
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,411 Likes: 463
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,411 Likes: 463 |
Roethlisberger took over a Steelers team that went 6-10 the year before he arrived. Tommy Maddox had slipped to the level of 18 TD passes and 17 INT in 2003.
Joe Flacco took over a Ravens team that went 6-10, 13-3, and 5-11 the 3 years prior to his arrival. The exception year of 13-3 was McNair's one decent year in Baltimore. They have not done worse than 9-7 since Flacco arrived, and have made the playoffs every year.
Maybe these teams were pretty good ..... and maybe these teams would have gone down a bumpy road if they had not settled their QB position. It's hard to say for sure, but the Ravens especially weren't an annual power despite a great defense and run game. They were a yo-yo recordwise.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100
Practice Squad
|
|
OP
Practice Squad
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 100 |
Quote:
If you haven't noticed: I said that the chances of any rook QB to lead their team into the POs are next to 0..
Really? That's quite a remarkable turnaround to what you were trying to prove to me in your previous post. Did you see the cut and paste of my last reply to you capturing your words? You were trying diligently to prove rookie QBs go to the playoffs right?
That's why I use the courtesy of cut and paste. It's adult enough to take what you actually said instead of resorting to the desperate measure of re-contexting what the difference of opinion is saying.
Now that you suddenly had this Thomas Edison light bulb moment with rookie QBs having 0 chance to make the playoffs, it's probably a good time to remind you the QB you want to throw out of Cleveland doesn't even have 16 starts in either playbook here yet. I guess if DA, Quinn, Delhomme or Wallace lit it up with Robiskie and MoMass - A) we wouldn't have needed to draft McCoy in the first place and B) we could have developed McCoy the way Holmgren originally envisioned it. Even Tom Brady got to wear blue jeans to his first 16 NFL games with New England.
There's always going to be fans that don't trust a young QB that doesn't win early. There were Tampa fans that wanted Steve Young gone and their media labelled him an epic bust. The ones that wanted better talent for him to work with had to see him move to SF to get that. And look at the difference. Why does Drew Brees struggle for 3 years before he emerges as a Pro Bowl QB in the 4th year? Why does Peyton Manning go 3-13 with 28 INTs even with Faulk and Harrison? Why does Aikman go 1-15 while tons of Cowboy fans want Steve Walsh to be their QB?
There's 2 variables working before we even get to what the young QB has physically. There's the inevitable growing pains of learning from the jump in levels and then there's the working under fire with the surrounding talent inherited. Experienced QBs on the 2nd side of their 20s seem ready to make everyone around them better when/if they have it. It seems like Holmgren was keenly aware of this when he announced he didn't want McCoy to see the field as a 3rd round rookie QB. Sounds sensible but our situation here never really has been sensible. So what shook out? We wasted 18 million $ on Delhomme and Wallace in hopes we wouldn't have to race an inexperienced 3rd round QB into action ahead of schedule. That always gave me the sense Holmgren wasn't really planning on keeping Mangini long term so he didn't want McCoy learning 1 playbook only to de-program it 1 year later for playbook #2. It's not like he could announce that but enough of us got the impression their philosophical incompatibilities were going to come to a point where Holmgren would want his success to be defined with a Head Coach he got to choose. Isn't that why smart owners usually hire the front office BEFORE the Head Coach? Lerner threw away 2 years when he put Holmgren in the position he did in my opinion. After what we've been through, he didn't have 2 years to throw away liek that. It's just 1 more reason I'm never one of those fans quick to blame just 1 coach or 1 QB for all our failures.
What is the biggest reason you don't think McCoy will ever be a good NFL QB? The reason I remain confident in him is the guy that chose him has extensive experience training QBs in a West Coast Offense. I hope I'm not overrating him when I say he knows what to look for in a prospect. he's also aware guys like Steve Bono, Jeff Garcia, Brad Johnson, Rich Gannon, Matt Hasselbeck, and Mark Brunnell could became efficient starters in this league on playoff teams when they emerged. I don't think any of them had skillsets that dwarf McCoy's. Best of all, on 2 different levels McCoy led his team to Championship Games so it gave me the sense he does well when he has legit players to work with.
David doesn't beat Goliath without an accurate slingshot...
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Personnel Comparisons to the SF
49ers
|
|
![[Linked Image from i190.photobucket.com]](http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z33/booger52/phpGGRdhwAM.jpg)
