Do we have the worst QB situation in the NFL ?

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
See thats what im saying. People can say the Colts have the worst "qb situation", but in reality, do they?

No they don't simply because of their no.1. Like I stated there isn't much behind him though. Peyton by himself is a better situation than Smith Kaep and McCown I guess

to me, measuring a QB situation, you have to ask these two questions: Can the team win with the QB they have now? and Does the team have a plan for the future?

(I guess a team like the Falcons, the second question might be different, in that they have a young QB they can with now and he should be there for the better part of the next decade. So maybe you would ask a team like that: Do they have a capable backup? But the problem with the "capable backup" is that they're a really rare breed, almost as rare as elite QB's, and they usually end up creating QB controversy and/or getting traded while they are at their most "capable.")

you could probably do some kind of flow chart or whatever if you were a huge geek to show which teams are really "set" at the position (meaning that they can answer "yes" to both of those questions) and which teams are hanging by a thread right now, praying their QB doesn't get hurt, and which teams are taking their lumps while they develop a young QB.

So a team like the Colts can say, Yes, we can win with our QB, but do they have a plan for the future? I mean, really, do they?

Originally posted by BETTERDAYZ9ERS:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:
See thats what im saying. People can say the Colts have the worst "qb situation", but in reality, do they?

No they don't simply because of their no.1. Like I stated there isn't much behind him though. Peyton by himself is a better situation than Smith Kaep and McCown I guess

Thats exactly my point.

Originally posted by HessianDud:
to me, measuring a QB situation, you have to ask these two questions: Can the team win with the QB they have now? and Does the team have a plan for the future?

(I guess a team like the Falcons, the second question might be different, in that they have a young QB they can with now and he should be there for the better part of the next decade. So maybe you would ask a team like that: Do they have a capable backup? But the problem with the "capable backup" is that they're a really rare breed, almost as rare as elite QB's, and they usually end up creating QB controversy and/or getting traded while they are at their most "capable.")

you could probably do some kind of flow chart or whatever if you were a huge geek to show which teams are really "set" at the position (meaning that they can answer "yes" to both of those questions) and which teams are hanging by a thread right now, praying their QB doesn't get hurt, and which teams are taking their lumps while they develop a young QB.

So a team like the Colts can say, Yes, we can win with our QB, but do they have a plan for the future? I mean, really, do they?

Man, this thread is really mind blowing lol.

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by HessianDud:
to me, measuring a QB situation, you have to ask these two questions: Can the team win with the QB they have now? and Does the team have a plan for the future?

(I guess a team like the Falcons, the second question might be different, in that they have a young QB they can with now and he should be there for the better part of the next decade. So maybe you would ask a team like that: Do they have a capable backup? But the problem with the "capable backup" is that they're a really rare breed, almost as rare as elite QB's, and they usually end up creating QB controversy and/or getting traded while they are at their most "capable.")

you could probably do some kind of flow chart or whatever if you were a huge geek to show which teams are really "set" at the position (meaning that they can answer "yes" to both of those questions) and which teams are hanging by a thread right now, praying their QB doesn't get hurt, and which teams are taking their lumps while they develop a young QB.

So a team like the Colts can say, Yes, we can win with our QB, but do they have a plan for the future? I mean, really, do they?

Man, this thread is really mind blowing lol.

lol. obviously you're exactly right that Peyton alone is a better situation than anything we've had for ten years. but for all the fans who complain about how awful our QB's are, I would just say that, hey, at least we can tell ourselves that their is hope (rational or not) that either Smith somehow becomes a decent QB this year or Kaep will in a few years. If I'm a Redskins or Dolphins fan today, I have zero hope about the QB position, today or years from now. And there's a lot of teams that are trotting out mediocre QB's and calling them the franchise (Sanchez, Cassel, etc) and other teams, like the Colts, who one day are going to be in our situation at the end of the 90's, when we had to watch Steve Stenstrom try to fill in for a jelly brained Steve Young.

Now that Josh McCLOWN is added to the list, Id say its one of the top 3 in question, but Damn this could have all been changed had we signed Brett Favre

Originally posted by unst4bl3:
Dalton's career is going to be as bad as alex's especially with the rough start. Maybe it would have been different if we had drafted him.

That and crazy ass Mike Brown, there is a reason why all of their superstars have asked for a trade over the past 10 years. Marvin Lewis is on the Hot Seat and when the Bengals don't perform again The Ginger will have turnover of Coaches, hurting him more.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Teams you could say are worse off than us:

Miami - Henne, Matt Moore, O'Connell
Washington - Grossman, Beck, Clemens
Cincinnati - Dalton, Gradkowski, Jordan Palmer
Seahawks - Jackson, Whitehurst, Portis

I think the Niners QB situation is not the worst, but is in the bottom 3. I'd say the Dolphins and Seahawks have it worse, but Redskins and Bengals are better at this point. Grossman throws picks.......but he also throws TD's. Gradkowski has more Jeff Garcia in him, than Alex does.

Dennis Dixon is available now for trade!! Go get him!!!

Originally posted by Vasco49er:
Nope. I like our QBs more than the Seahawks, Redskins, Dolphins, and Raiders.

yeah this

Might not be the worst, but it's definitely bottom 3-5...which is saying enough.

Originally posted by swim4speed:
I think the Niners QB situation is not the worst, but is in the bottom 3. I'd say the Dolphins and Seahawks have it worse, but Redskins and Bengals are better at this point. Grossman throws picks.......but he also throws TD's. Gradkowski has more Jeff Garcia in him, than Alex does.

Redskins I agree, grossman can throw more yardage and td's than alex can, in a much tougher division. He'd have less picks in the nfc west I think.

Bengals I disagree, gradkowski sucks and dalton will struggle and possibly be another alex smith because of how they'll rush him in. Gradkowski has had even more injury concerns than alex, and when he has played he's been below 200/yd a game and only has 1 season where he threw more TD's than ints.(while alex has had decent passer ratings and 2 seasons where he threw more TD's than ints).

Originally posted by HessianDud:

Originally posted by Bay2Bay9erAllday:

Originally posted by HessianDud:

to me, measuring a QB situation, you have to ask these two questions: Can the team win with the QB they have now? and Does the team have a plan for the future?

(I guess a team like the Falcons, the second question might be different, in that they have a young QB they can with now and he should be there for the better part of the next decade. So maybe you would ask a team like that: Do they have a capable backup? But the problem with the "capable backup" is that they're a really rare breed, almost as rare as elite QB's, and they usually end up creating QB controversy and/or getting traded while they are at their most "capable.")

you could probably do some kind of flow chart or whatever if you were a huge geek to show which teams are really "set" at the position (meaning that they can answer "yes" to both of those questions) and which teams are hanging by a thread right now, praying their QB doesn't get hurt, and which teams are taking their lumps while they develop a young QB.

So a team like the Colts can say, Yes, we can win with our QB, but do they have a plan for the future? I mean, really, do they?

Man, this thread is really mind blowing lol.

lol. obviously you're exactly right that Peyton alone is a better situation than anything we've had for ten years. but for all the fans who complain about how awful our QB's are, I would just say that, hey, at least we can tell ourselves that their is hope (rational or not) that either Smith somehow becomes a decent QB this year or Kaep will in a few years. If I'm a Redskins or Dolphins fan today, I have zero hope about the QB position, today or years from now. And there's a lot of teams that are trotting out mediocre QB's and calling them the franchise (Sanchez, Cassel, etc) and other teams, like the Colts, who one day are going to be in our situation at the end of the 90's, when we had to watch Steve Stenstrom try to fill in for a jelly brained Steve Young.

Idk, I think id take sanchize over any of our qbs right now

Originally posted by qwestlove94:
Idk, I think id take sanchize over any of our qbs right now

Only if the jets D comes with him. Pretty sure alex smith would make the playoffs on that team.

He's another one that does have the "potential" to be decent though, he is young still and seems to improve each year.

Their defense is so good that they can win without him even throwing a touchdown...

Originally posted by mike:
Redskins I agree, grossman can throw more yardage and td's than alex can, in a much tougher division. He'd have less picks in the nfc west I think.

Bengals I disagree, gradkowski sucks and dalton will struggle and possibly be another alex smith because of how they'll rush him in. Gradkowski has had even more injury concerns than alex, and when he has played he's been below 200/yd a game and only has 1 season where he threw more TD's than ints.(while alex has had decent passer ratings and 2 seasons where he threw more TD's than ints).

Grossman is horrible. Watch him play. He's had one year as a full-time starter and had more turnovers than touchdowns.

"His twenty-three touchdowns in one season rank Grossman among the best Bears quarterbacks in the franchise’s history. However, his twenty interceptions in one season are among the most thrown by any Bears’ quarterback in almost two decades. The unusual combination ranked Grossman as statistically the most inconsistent quarterback in almost a decade in 2006."

And that was his best year.