The QB Position

**Stevie Ray** · 01-30-2015, 01:27 AM

Preface:

Let's see if I can start up a discussion about the QB position in general, and the cause/effect aspect of QB vs. supporting cast.

Frankly, I've grown a little weary of being viewed as an antagonist (basher) when it comes to Alex Smith, so I wanted to see if I could somehow depart from that and start a conversation about the residual impact, or lack thereof, of the QB on his supporting cast and vice versa.

Of course this will tie back into the discussion about the Chiefs' QB scenario as it stands, but I think it's at this foundational level where our respective views on the situation lend to our disagreements.

While the QB and the supporting cast need each other to function properly, I'm going to try to make the point that the skill of the QB effects the success/failure of the supporting cast moreso than does the talent of the supporting cast effect the success/failure of the QB.

I know that might seem a little counter-intuitive, but I believe that it is indubitably the case. Indulge me.

**jap1** · 01-31-2015, 10:15 PM

I forgot to add that the qbs in the good category all have weaknesses. Good coaching and/or the right personnel can either hide those weaknesses, or expose them.

**Stevie Ray** · 01-31-2015, 11:06 PM

Originally Posted by Justin5772002

We will see which wins championships...do you agree Seattle has the better Defense? And do you also agree the Pats have a much better Offense?

It's a lot more nuanced than that, but for the sake of discussion, I agree.

That said, the Pats defense is solid, and the Seahawks are no slouch on offense. These are 2 very good TEAMS no matter how its sliced. The styles and philosophy differ from one another, but this one game isn't going to prove nor disprove your point.

Originally Posted by Justin5772002

all the anylists seem to think the Pats are going to win this game.

Funny, I've felt its been just the opposite. Personally, I don't give the analysts' predictions any more credence than I do yours or mine.

I agree with you about Wilson. I don't consider him to be an elite QB either. He's sacked a ton, and his WRs are relatively unproductive. Wilson is young, improving and he's able to put the team on his shoulders when called upon. For a young QB, that's big.

**AkChief49** · 02-01-2015, 12:35 AM

someone get me a tylenol- stat

**Stevie Ray** · 02-01-2015, 09:56 AM

Originally Posted by jap1

Here is my thoughts on this topic. There are three categories of QBs: elite, good, and then below average.

Good post. It's nice that you addressed the thread topic directly.

As for the different tiers for QB - I'd say that there is elite, good, average, below average, and those that are developing to fit into one of those categories.

**jap1** · 02-01-2015, 01:43 PM

Originally Posted by Stevie Ray

Good post. It's nice that you addressed the thread topic directly.

As for the different tiers for QB - I'd say that there is elite, good, average, below average, and those that are developing to fit into one of those categories.

I was going to divide it between good and average, but when I started to think about it, there is a lot of blur between those categories. Sure, the top guys in the good category most people will agree are better than those at the bottom, but in the middle there is a lot of grey areas. Also some of the guys in the good category are only good when they have a team around them, and the defense doesn't expose their weakness.

Take Philip rivers. Many people consider him to be towards the top of the good category, a few say he is elite. However, he has one huge weakness that in my opinion makes him just as vulnerable as anyone at the bottom of the category: he is immobile, and makes bad decisions (I.e. turnovers) when faced with consistent pressure. Otherwise he is great. So put a good ol in front of him and he will probably get you to the playoffs.

A number of the guys in the "good" category I could probably fund a few make falls in their game. Romo- same as rivers; Luck is a turnover machine; Roethlisberger causes a lot of turnovers, doesn't read defenses pre snap well (which is why he ad libs so much, because it takes him time to read the d); etc.

The point being that unless you have one of the top four our five qbs, you NEED a talented team around them. Given the rarity of those elite guys, you should not count on your qb to develop into one of those guys, or for one of them to fall into your lap. It's almost not even worth considering having one given how rare they are.

**brdempsey69** · 02-01-2015, 02:38 PM

Maybe the Chiefs own Aaron Murray will become another Russell Wilson for them. Time will tell.

**Stevie Ray** · 02-01-2015, 10:38 PM

Originally Posted by jap1

The point being that unless you have one of the top four our five qbs, you NEED a talented team around them. Given the rarity of those elite guys, you should not count on your qb to develop into one of those guys, or for one of them to fall into your lap. It's almost not even worth considering having one given how rare they are.

I contend that every QB in the NFL has a talented team around them. It's the QB that brings it all together.

The only real difference I see between the supporting casts around elite-good QBs and the supporting casts around the rest ...... is the skill that those elite-good QBs have in utilizing the talent.

If you're a QB that needs a ton of time to make decisions with the ball, or need WRs that consistently get clear separation, you're not going to be a very effective QB at the NFL level.

**Stevie Ray** · 02-02-2015, 09:52 AM

Originally Posted by brdempsey69

Maybe the Chiefs own Aaron Murray will become another Russell Wilson for them. Time will tell.

I heard an interesting take yesterday about Russell Wilson and the Seahawks future. The stance was that the Seahawks will inevitably pay Wilson a mega QB contract this off-season or soon thereafter, and once that happens, the future of the team is shot.

He was essentially saying that Wilson isn't the type of QB that can carry a team, and his huge cap number will prevent the Seahawks from having the necessary resources to build a good enough team around him to make up for his limitations.

**jap1** · 02-02-2015, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by Stevie Ray

I contend that every QB in the NFL has a talented team around them.

This is where we disagree entirely. Yes, all NFL players are WAYYYY more talented than the rest of the population. But to say the talent (and execution) on the Raiders or Jaguars offense is even comparable to those on the Donkeys offense this year to me is bilnd to the reality of what the players do and contribute. There is a reason that a lot of the players who were starters when our team was horrible arent in the league anymore, let alone backups on other teams.

**doobs_05** · 02-02-2015, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by Stevie Ray

I heard an interesting take yesterday about Russell Wilson and the Seahawks future. The stance was that the Seahawks will inevitably pay Wilson a mega QB contract this off-season or soon thereafter, and once that happens, the future of the team is shot.

He was essentially saying that Wilson isn't the type of QB that can carry a team, and his huge cap number will prevent the Seahawks from having the necessary resources to build a good enough team around him to make up for his limitations.

Read the stat that he is 2-9 when opposing teams score 24 or more points (wins are against Oakland and TB at home)