Originally posted by 49erRider:Originally posted by 9eridiot:Originally posted by 49erRider:Originally posted by 9eridiot:Originally posted by Pick6:Originally posted by English:Originally posted by 9eridiot:Originally posted by wwrivers:
Was thinking about the OP -- what is make or break for Alex Smith? Frankly, if he improves over last year, and is statistically in the top half or better of QB's in the league, I don't think we can dump him. We might all be frustrated and want better, but top 10-15 QBs don't grow on trees and are hard to come by. If Smith is a top 15, top 12, or better yet a top 10 QB statistically, finding someone better would be hard. And if he is improving, it is even harder to dump him. We want playoff victories, but the reality is if he has decent stats it will be hard to dump him.
I also think Singletary will be satisfied if Smith can move the chains, avoid turnovers, and manage games. I think he'd love a franchise QB (who wouldn't), but doesn't feel that is necessary to win a Superbowl.
Right. How many teams have won the Superbowl without a franchise QB?
2 out of 44?
Nice odds.
2? Who did you have in mind, and what's your definition?
Top of my head:
Jim McMahon
Doug Williams
Jeff Hostetler
Mark Rypien
Trent Dilfer
Terry Bradshaw
Phil Simms
Depending on what you mean by Franchise QB... there have been a lot of SB winners without (imo) Franchise QB's. In addition to the ones mentioned above...
Joe Namath - that dude should NOT be in the HOF. - Career QB rating 65.6 (never had a season over 75!)
Ken Stabler - Career QB rating 75.3
Jim Plunkett - - Career QB rating 67.5
Brad Johnson
Eli Manning
Theres about a dozen names...
OK, I'll give you Eli too. But Stabler and Plunkett? No. I'm not a Raider fan, but I can admit those two were warriors.
Namath? Are you kidding me? This should tell you how important QB ratings are. Give me a leader anyday.
Bradshaw, Simms, Stabler, Plunkett and Namath have no business being on that list. I wouldn't even include Eli Manning.
Now, how many of those guys have won more than one Super Bowl? I'm not talking about the guys that I just removed from the list, so don't bother saying Bradshaw.
All those non-"franchise" QBs never turned a team into a dynasty by winning multiple championships.
What were we talking about anyway?
Wasn't it the idea that we could build a dominant defense and have a functional offense and that would be enough?
So how does Simms, Stabler, Plunkett, and Bradshaw not make that list? Are you saying those teams weren't balanced? All defense and a smash-mouth offense?
I'm wondering if there's a better way to test for a 'franchise' QB. Instead of the Wonderlic (telling us how quickly somebody can figure out where the stamp goes on an envelope) and the passer rating, maybe we can develop a test to figure out how to measure how big Shawn Hill's heart is and use that instead.
I believe we were talking about QBs that weren't top-notch and won Super Bowls. My main argument is that it can be done, obviously, but it's a one-and-done scenario. Teams that win without a GOOD QB generally don't win the Super Bowl more than once. Look at the Bears that Singletary wants us to be. How many championships do they have again? Yeah..
I want a QB that can take us there more than once.
Right now once would be fine.
By the way, Steve Young was a qb who could take us there more than once. But didn't. Let's take this one SB at a time.