A look at playoffs teams and their QB's

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Packers-Aaron Rodgers
Bengals- Carson Palmer
Ravens- Joe Flacco
Cardinals- Kurt Warner
Patriots-Tom Brady
Eagles- Donovan Mcnabb
Colts- Peyton Manning
Chargers- Philip Rivers
Saints- Drew Brees
Cowboys- Tony Romo
Vikings- Brett Favre
Jets- Mark Sanchez

All of these teams have good play at the QB position. Who are we kidding? Alex Smith does not belong in this category.

Wow. You do an excellent job of showing that a superstar QB is not the key to winning in the playoffs, or even in getting there.

First, you show, that even a rookie and 2nd year QB can make it in. With Flacco throwing for a mere 4/10 for 34 yards and a pick against the Patriots last week. And Sanchez? The guy completed 54% of his passes this year with 12 TD to 20 INTs while passing for a whopping 163 yards per game. If it weren't for their OL which contributes to their running game, along with their D, the Jets would be nothing. But hey, look where they are. It all starts with Defense and OL.

Secondly, you show that not only is it possible to win in the playoffs without a Pro Bowl QB, you show that even seasoned veterans can choke big-time and that EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still. Good QB's were going to lose. Warner, Rodgers, Palmer, Brady, McNabb, Romo all lost.

Again, these teams' OL's did not protect, and their defenses didn't step up. OL and Defense gives you a championship team.

Great failing work with your blatant implications that we did not go to the playoffs this year because of Alex. Please, give it a rest, folks.

I think it's obvious that there is a strong correlation between great QB play and successful teams. Just because you see Sanchez on that list (who has the #1 defense) and Flacco (who had a pretty good year) doesn't mean that it's not an obvious trend. You can't pick the one outlier out and use that to make a point that defends your position.

Of course good QBs are going to lose, LOL. They're playing OTHER GOOD QBs. Romo lost to Favre. Rodgers lost to Warner. Warner lost to Brees. McNabb lost to Romo.

You're so steadfast in defending our lack of production from the QB spot that you're being blinded by reality...you need a SUPERSTAR QB to win in the NFL.

I don't agree with the presentation by the OP, but his point cannot be argued by an unbiased observer.

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Packers-Aaron Rodgers
Bengals- Carson Palmer
Ravens- Joe Flacco
Cardinals- Kurt Warner
Patriots-Tom Brady
Eagles- Donovan Mcnabb
Colts- Peyton Manning
Chargers- Philip Rivers
Saints- Drew Brees
Cowboys- Tony Romo
Vikings- Brett Favre
Jets- Mark Sanchez

All of these teams have good play at the QB position. Who are we kidding? Alex Smith does not belong in this category.

Wow. You do an excellent job of showing that a superstar QB is not the key to winning in the playoffs, or even in getting there.

First, you show, that even a rookie and 2nd year QB can make it in. With Flacco throwing for a mere 4/10 for 34 yards and a pick against the Patriots last week. And Sanchez? The guy completed 54% of his passes this year with 12 TD to 20 INTs while passing for a whopping 163 yards per game. If it weren't for their OL which contributes to their running game, along with their D, the Jets would be nothing. But hey, look where they are. It all starts with Defense and OL.

Secondly, you show that not only is it possible to win in the playoffs without a Pro Bowl QB, you show that even seasoned veterans can choke big-time and that EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still. Good QB's were going to lose. Warner, Rodgers, Palmer, Brady, McNabb, Romo all lost.

Again, these teams' OL's did not protect, and their defenses didn't step up. OL and Defense gives you a championship team.

Great failing work with your blatant implications that we did not go to the playoffs this year because of Alex. Please, give it a rest, folks.

I think it's obvious that there is a strong correlation between great QB play and successful teams. Just because you see Sanchez on that list (who has the #1 defense) and Flacco (who had a pretty good year) doesn't mean that it's not an obvious trend. You can't pick the one outlier out and use that to make a point that defends your position.

Of course good QBs are going to lose, LOL. They're playing OTHER GOOD QBs. Romo lost to Favre. Rodgers lost to Warner. Warner lost to Brees. McNabb lost to Romo.

You're so steadfast in defending our lack of production from the QB spot that you're being blinded by reality...you need a SUPERSTAR QB to win in the NFL.

I don't agree with the presentation by the OP, but his point cannot be argued by an unbiased observer.

I think it is obvious that there is a strong correlation between good teams and their overall talent especially the offensive line. In addition, something is to be said about having a QB and his receivers play together for some time. The best QBs are the ones who have played awhile with their receivers.

Originally posted by taney71:

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Packers-Aaron Rodgers
Bengals- Carson Palmer
Ravens- Joe Flacco
Cardinals- Kurt Warner
Patriots-Tom Brady
Eagles- Donovan Mcnabb
Colts- Peyton Manning
Chargers- Philip Rivers
Saints- Drew Brees
Cowboys- Tony Romo
Vikings- Brett Favre
Jets- Mark Sanchez

All of these teams have good play at the QB position. Who are we kidding? Alex Smith does not belong in this category.

Wow. You do an excellent job of showing that a superstar QB is not the key to winning in the playoffs, or even in getting there.

First, you show, that even a rookie and 2nd year QB can make it in. With Flacco throwing for a mere 4/10 for 34 yards and a pick against the Patriots last week. And Sanchez? The guy completed 54% of his passes this year with 12 TD to 20 INTs while passing for a whopping 163 yards per game. If it weren't for their OL which contributes to their running game, along with their D, the Jets would be nothing. But hey, look where they are. It all starts with Defense and OL.

Secondly, you show that not only is it possible to win in the playoffs without a Pro Bowl QB, you show that even seasoned veterans can choke big-time and that EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still. Good QB's were going to lose. Warner, Rodgers, Palmer, Brady, McNabb, Romo all lost.

Again, these teams' OL's did not protect, and their defenses didn't step up. OL and Defense gives you a championship team.

Great failing work with your blatant implications that we did not go to the playoffs this year because of Alex. Please, give it a rest, folks.

I think it's obvious that there is a strong correlation between great QB play and successful teams. Just because you see Sanchez on that list (who has the #1 defense) and Flacco (who had a pretty good year) doesn't mean that it's not an obvious trend. You can't pick the one outlier out and use that to make a point that defends your position.

Of course good QBs are going to lose, LOL. They're playing OTHER GOOD QBs. Romo lost to Favre. Rodgers lost to Warner. Warner lost to Brees. McNabb lost to Romo.

You're so steadfast in defending our lack of production from the QB spot that you're being blinded by reality...you need a SUPERSTAR QB to win in the NFL.

I don't agree with the presentation by the OP, but his point cannot be argued by an unbiased observer.

I think it is obvious that there is a strong correlation between good teams and their overall talent especially the offensive line. In addition, something is to be said about having a QB and his receivers play together for some time. The best QBs are the ones who have played awhile with their receivers.

All QBs don't need the world to be rotating around them to be successful. Just because Alex Smith apologists believe he needs all these conditions to succeed doesn't mean every QB needs the same thing. Remember, he's unique...dysfunctional until proven otherwise. When has that ever been insinuated about ANYONE else?

I'm not trying to hate on Smith here...I actually think he's our best option moving forward. He SHOULD get better going into next season and hopefully get his rating to the high 80s.

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by taney71:

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Packers-Aaron Rodgers
Bengals- Carson Palmer
Ravens- Joe Flacco
Cardinals- Kurt Warner
Patriots-Tom Brady
Eagles- Donovan Mcnabb
Colts- Peyton Manning
Chargers- Philip Rivers
Saints- Drew Brees
Cowboys- Tony Romo
Vikings- Brett Favre
Jets- Mark Sanchez

All of these teams have good play at the QB position. Who are we kidding? Alex Smith does not belong in this category.

Wow. You do an excellent job of showing that a superstar QB is not the key to winning in the playoffs, or even in getting there.

First, you show, that even a rookie and 2nd year QB can make it in. With Flacco throwing for a mere 4/10 for 34 yards and a pick against the Patriots last week. And Sanchez? The guy completed 54% of his passes this year with 12 TD to 20 INTs while passing for a whopping 163 yards per game. If it weren't for their OL which contributes to their running game, along with their D, the Jets would be nothing. But hey, look where they are. It all starts with Defense and OL.

Secondly, you show that not only is it possible to win in the playoffs without a Pro Bowl QB, you show that even seasoned veterans can choke big-time and that EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still. Good QB's were going to lose. Warner, Rodgers, Palmer, Brady, McNabb, Romo all lost.

Again, these teams' OL's did not protect, and their defenses didn't step up. OL and Defense gives you a championship team.

Great failing work with your blatant implications that we did not go to the playoffs this year because of Alex. Please, give it a rest, folks.

I think it's obvious that there is a strong correlation between great QB play and successful teams. Just because you see Sanchez on that list (who has the #1 defense) and Flacco (who had a pretty good year) doesn't mean that it's not an obvious trend. You can't pick the one outlier out and use that to make a point that defends your position.

Of course good QBs are going to lose, LOL. They're playing OTHER GOOD QBs. Romo lost to Favre. Rodgers lost to Warner. Warner lost to Brees. McNabb lost to Romo.

You're so steadfast in defending our lack of production from the QB spot that you're being blinded by reality...you need a SUPERSTAR QB to win in the NFL.

I don't agree with the presentation by the OP, but his point cannot be argued by an unbiased observer.

I think it is obvious that there is a strong correlation between good teams and their overall talent especially the offensive line. In addition, something is to be said about having a QB and his receivers play together for some time. The best QBs are the ones who have played awhile with their receivers.

All QBs don't need the world to be rotating around them to be successful. Just because Alex Smith apologists believe he needs all these conditions to succeed doesn't mean every QB needs the same thing. Remember, he's unique...dysfunctional until proven otherwise. When has that ever been insinuated about ANYONE else?

I'm not trying to hate on Smith here...I actually think he's our best option moving forward. He SHOULD get better going into next season and hopefully get his rating to the high 80s.

Oh really, well i think the's Pro-bowl, and maybe HOF qb's disagree with you;

Quote from Favre;

“I just think that this year I’m playing on a very good football team,” Favre said. “Warner is playing on a very good football team, Brees. Now, it helps to play well at our position, but you’ve got to have a good cast around you. The stars have to kind of be aligned, too, and it seems like this year that’s the case.”


Quote from Warner;

“It’s not like 30 is a very old player; a lot of guys are just getting into it,” said Warner, who did not play in an NFL game until he was 27. “But I definitely think the experience helps, especially at this time of year, and I think it takes time to build things. Very seldom do you have a quarterback that comes in in their first year and the team around them’s good.”

Quote from Brees;

Brees also noted that the quarterback position puts a premium on preparation and experience. It takes time to learn how to read defenses, to recognize blitzes and coverages, and to understand when it’s worth making riskier throws into tight coverage, and when it’s not.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-quarterbacklongevity&prov=ap&type=lgns

Dont know if the link works, but it's funny how biased fans feel it's all about the QB, and how true Qb's feel the exact opposite. And there's no reading between the lines, if after reading you take away anything else than what they say, then your kidding yourself.

The best teams not only have good QBs, they also have the best OL & defensive fronts. Because the 49ers can't realistic do anything about QB focus on the trenches. Dominate.

Let me guess, All the QB`s who had bad days should be traded or cut right?

only the numbskulls on the zone.....

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Packers-Aaron Rodgers
Bengals- Carson Palmer
Ravens- Joe Flacco
Cardinals- Kurt Warner
Patriots-Tom Brady
Eagles- Donovan Mcnabb
Colts- Peyton Manning
Chargers- Philip Rivers
Saints- Drew Brees
Cowboys- Tony Romo
Vikings- Brett Favre
Jets- Mark Sanchez

All of these teams have good play at the QB position. Who are we kidding? Alex Smith does not belong in this category.

Wow. You do an excellent job of showing that a superstar QB is not the key to winning in the playoffs, or even in getting there.

First, you show, that even a rookie and 2nd year QB can make it in. With Flacco throwing for a mere 4/10 for 34 yards and a pick against the Patriots last week. And Sanchez? The guy completed 54% of his passes this year with 12 TD to 20 INTs while passing for a whopping 163 yards per game. If it weren't for their OL which contributes to their running game, along with their D, the Jets would be nothing. But hey, look where they are. It all starts with Defense and OL.

Secondly, you show that not only is it possible to win in the playoffs without a Pro Bowl QB, you show that even seasoned veterans can choke big-time and that EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still. Good QB's were going to lose. Warner, Rodgers, Palmer, Brady, McNabb, Romo all lost.

Again, these teams' OL's did not protect, and their defenses didn't step up. OL and Defense gives you a championship team.

Great failing work with your blatant implications that we did not go to the playoffs this year because of Alex. Please, give it a rest, folks.

I think it's obvious that there is a strong correlation between great QB play and successful teams. Just because you see Sanchez on that list (who has the #1 defense) and Flacco (who had a pretty good year) doesn't mean that it's not an obvious trend. You can't pick the one outlier out and use that to make a point that defends your position.

Of course good QBs are going to lose, LOL. They're playing OTHER GOOD QBs. Romo lost to Favre. Rodgers lost to Warner. Warner lost to Brees. McNabb lost to Romo.

You're so steadfast in defending our lack of production from the QB spot that you're being blinded by reality...you need a SUPERSTAR QB to win in the NFL.

I don't agree with the presentation by the OP, but his point cannot be argued by an unbiased observer.

You're right. Let's just draft a bunch of QB's. That'll fix this team. We'll HAVE to find our superstar eventually and then we'll be set. Who needs OL and defense anyways? We've clearly done a fantastic job for years and years of keeping our QB off his backside.

Leath, I'm not sure if you're being blind to the post itself, or trying to pull something out of it that simply isn't there. Despite not discussing Alex's play whatsoever, you say I'm defending our QB's play? Good heavens, my friend. Talk about putting words into my mouth. I'm sorry, but that's not right. I stated the simple facts as clearly as possible that if we expect to be a championship team, we MUST get ourselves a great offensive line and defense. Those things can make even an average QB into a Super Bowl QB.

You can't possibly disagree with what I said -- "EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still." -- The teams that have been able to successfully protect their QB and are the teams that are winning.

Give this team a great OL and a great defense, and we could go far.

Or.. Say, hypothetically, stick someone like McNabb on this team and then we'd do what? Just about the same?

The point I made is absolutely true. I'd love to have a Hall of Fame QB, but I have enough understanding in me to comprehend that regardless of who we have behind center, we won't go far in the playoffs without a line to protect him. I don't want just a playoff team, I want a Championship team.

If you want me to discuss QB play, well then I have to say I firmly believe our guy can play well enough to get us to the post-season. But I don't want us to stop there. Do you? We need far more pieces to complete that Championship puzzle.

Don't make this about something that it is not. Understand the simple point that a great OL -- which can actually make some QB's take on the appearance of greatness, and all in all make the entire offense look better -- as well as great defenses, propel you to championships.

I am not arguing that there is no correlation between QB's and playoff teams.

What I am arguing is that there is an even stronger correlation between great OL's and great QB's.

[ Edited by OnTheClock on Jan 17, 2010 at 15:36:05 ]

OMG what a brilliant thread, I should definitely visit niner talk more often...

Originally posted by Jersey9er:

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by taney71:

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Packers-Aaron Rodgers
Bengals- Carson Palmer
Ravens- Joe Flacco
Cardinals- Kurt Warner
Patriots-Tom Brady
Eagles- Donovan Mcnabb
Colts- Peyton Manning
Chargers- Philip Rivers
Saints- Drew Brees
Cowboys- Tony Romo
Vikings- Brett Favre
Jets- Mark Sanchez

All of these teams have good play at the QB position. Who are we kidding? Alex Smith does not belong in this category.

Wow. You do an excellent job of showing that a superstar QB is not the key to winning in the playoffs, or even in getting there.

First, you show, that even a rookie and 2nd year QB can make it in. With Flacco throwing for a mere 4/10 for 34 yards and a pick against the Patriots last week. And Sanchez? The guy completed 54% of his passes this year with 12 TD to 20 INTs while passing for a whopping 163 yards per game. If it weren't for their OL which contributes to their running game, along with their D, the Jets would be nothing. But hey, look where they are. It all starts with Defense and OL.

Secondly, you show that not only is it possible to win in the playoffs without a Pro Bowl QB, you show that even seasoned veterans can choke big-time and that EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still. Good QB's were going to lose. Warner, Rodgers, Palmer, Brady, McNabb, Romo all lost.

Again, these teams' OL's did not protect, and their defenses didn't step up. OL and Defense gives you a championship team.

Great failing work with your blatant implications that we did not go to the playoffs this year because of Alex. Please, give it a rest, folks.

I think it's obvious that there is a strong correlation between great QB play and successful teams. Just because you see Sanchez on that list (who has the #1 defense) and Flacco (who had a pretty good year) doesn't mean that it's not an obvious trend. You can't pick the one outlier out and use that to make a point that defends your position.

Of course good QBs are going to lose, LOL. They're playing OTHER GOOD QBs. Romo lost to Favre. Rodgers lost to Warner. Warner lost to Brees. McNabb lost to Romo.

You're so steadfast in defending our lack of production from the QB spot that you're being blinded by reality...you need a SUPERSTAR QB to win in the NFL.

I don't agree with the presentation by the OP, but his point cannot be argued by an unbiased observer.

I think it is obvious that there is a strong correlation between good teams and their overall talent especially the offensive line. In addition, something is to be said about having a QB and his receivers play together for some time. The best QBs are the ones who have played awhile with their receivers.

All QBs don't need the world to be rotating around them to be successful. Just because Alex Smith apologists believe he needs all these conditions to succeed doesn't mean every QB needs the same thing. Remember, he's unique...dysfunctional until proven otherwise. When has that ever been insinuated about ANYONE else?

I'm not trying to hate on Smith here...I actually think he's our best option moving forward. He SHOULD get better going into next season and hopefully get his rating to the high 80s.

Oh really, well i think the's Pro-bowl, and maybe HOF qb's disagree with you;

Quote from Favre;

“I just think that this year I’m playing on a very good football team,” Favre said. “Warner is playing on a very good football team, Brees. Now, it helps to play well at our position, but you’ve got to have a good cast around you. The stars have to kind of be aligned, too, and it seems like this year that’s the case.”


Quote from Warner;

“It’s not like 30 is a very old player; a lot of guys are just getting into it,” said Warner, who did not play in an NFL game until he was 27. “But I definitely think the experience helps, especially at this time of year, and I think it takes time to build things. Very seldom do you have a quarterback that comes in in their first year and the team around them’s good.”

Quote from Brees;

Brees also noted that the quarterback position puts a premium on preparation and experience. It takes time to learn how to read defenses, to recognize blitzes and coverages, and to understand when it’s worth making riskier throws into tight coverage, and when it’s not.
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-quarterbacklongevity&prov=ap&type=lgns

Dont know if the link works, but it's funny how biased fans feel it's all about the QB, and how true Qb's feel the exact opposite. And there's no reading between the lines, if after reading you take away anything else than what they say, then your kidding yourself.

You are totally misrepresenting the theme of that article. That article is talking about how old QBs are still playing well. All of the QBs you brought up have ALWAYS been good.

What exactly are you trying to say? That if a team builds around a sh!tty QB he will magically be good? LOL. Like I said, I have no bias. I want my team to win. Smith is the best option moving forward simply b/c there is nothing better for us out there.

Carson Palmer was atrocious this year.. if he can lead that team to the playoffs this year the way he played then Smith could probably do it too. The problem with Smith and with how Palmer played this year is you'll never win a Super Bowl much less a playoff game playing like that.. ever. That is why Smith isn't the future of this team. It's about Super Bowl and not about just making it to the playoffs.

When our O-Line improves next year you can eat your words without any hot sauce

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by Leathaface:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by PatrickWillisHOF:
Packers-Aaron Rodgers
Bengals- Carson Palmer
Ravens- Joe Flacco
Cardinals- Kurt Warner
Patriots-Tom Brady
Eagles- Donovan Mcnabb
Colts- Peyton Manning
Chargers- Philip Rivers
Saints- Drew Brees
Cowboys- Tony Romo
Vikings- Brett Favre
Jets- Mark Sanchez

All of these teams have good play at the QB position. Who are we kidding? Alex Smith does not belong in this category.

Wow. You do an excellent job of showing that a superstar QB is not the key to winning in the playoffs, or even in getting there.

First, you show, that even a rookie and 2nd year QB can make it in. With Flacco throwing for a mere 4/10 for 34 yards and a pick against the Patriots last week. And Sanchez? The guy completed 54% of his passes this year with 12 TD to 20 INTs while passing for a whopping 163 yards per game. If it weren't for their OL which contributes to their running game, along with their D, the Jets would be nothing. But hey, look where they are. It all starts with Defense and OL.

Secondly, you show that not only is it possible to win in the playoffs without a Pro Bowl QB, you show that even seasoned veterans can choke big-time and that EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still. Good QB's were going to lose. Warner, Rodgers, Palmer, Brady, McNabb, Romo all lost.

Again, these teams' OL's did not protect, and their defenses didn't step up. OL and Defense gives you a championship team.

Great failing work with your blatant implications that we did not go to the playoffs this year because of Alex. Please, give it a rest, folks.

I think it's obvious that there is a strong correlation between great QB play and successful teams. Just because you see Sanchez on that list (who has the #1 defense) and Flacco (who had a pretty good year) doesn't mean that it's not an obvious trend. You can't pick the one outlier out and use that to make a point that defends your position.

Of course good QBs are going to lose, LOL. They're playing OTHER GOOD QBs. Romo lost to Favre. Rodgers lost to Warner. Warner lost to Brees. McNabb lost to Romo.

You're so steadfast in defending our lack of production from the QB spot that you're being blinded by reality...you need a SUPERSTAR QB to win in the NFL.

I don't agree with the presentation by the OP, but his point cannot be argued by an unbiased observer.

You're right. Let's just draft a bunch of QB's. That'll fix this team. We'll HAVE to find our superstar eventually and then we'll be set. Who needs OL and defense anyways? We've clearly done a fantastic job for years and years of keeping our QB off his backside.

Leath, I'm not sure if you're being blind to the post itself, or trying to pull something out of it that simply isn't there. Despite not discussing Alex's play whatsoever, you say I'm defending our QB's play? Good heavens, my friend. Talk about putting words into my mouth. I'm sorry, but that's not right. I stated the simple facts as clearly as possible that if we expect to be a championship team, we MUST get ourselves a great offensive line and defense. Those things can make even an average QB into a Super Bowl QB.

You can't possibly disagree with what I said -- "EVEN IF we had a Pro Bowl QB, it would take more than that to win still." -- The teams that have been able to successfully protect their QB and are the teams that are winning.

Give this team a great OL and a great defense, and we could go far.

Or.. Say, hypothetically, stick someone like McNabb on this team and then we'd do what? Just about the same?

The point I made is absolutely true. I'd love to have a Hall of Fame QB, but I have enough understanding in me to comprehend that regardless of who we have behind center, we won't go far in the playoffs without a line to protect him. I don't want just a playoff team, I want a Championship team.

If you want me to discuss QB play, well then I have to say I firmly believe our guy can play well enough to get us to the post-season. But I don't want us to stop there. Do you? We need far more pieces to complete that Championship puzzle.

Don't make this about something that it is not. Understand the simple point that a great OL -- which can actually make some QB's take on the appearance of greatness, and all in all make the entire offense look better -- as well as great defenses, propel you to championships.

I am not arguing that there is no correlation between QB's and playoff teams.

What I am arguing is that there is an even stronger correlation between great OL's and great QB's.

I firmly believe in what I'm saying and I know enough of where your posts are coming from that I honestly believe that my assumption wasn't wild (regarding how the angle of your post was referring to Alex Smith and our QB situation's lack of production). In any case, that's really not that important.

When did I say A THING about drafting more QBs? Not sure if you read it, but I made it pretty clear in the other post that I believe Smith is the best option moving forward.

I'm arguing that a good QB will raise the level of play of the entire team INCLUDING the o-line. The offensive line doesn't make the QB look championship caliber...the QB makes the offensive line look championship caliber. There's tangible ways to see this...a QB who can get the ball out fast and accurately...a QB who can audible and see the blitz coming. A QB who can make teams pay FOR blitzing. These are HUGE parts of our game.

Look, it's a chicken and egg argument so there's no resolution. I personally just think a QB means more to the improvement of a team than any other position.

You say a good line and a good D make an average QB into a Super Bowl QB? That's crazy talk. When was the last time you saw that? Name me some SB winning QBs from recent years who have "managed" the game. You need a Pro-Bowl quality QB. A decent line and a decent defense will suffice. The league is about offense now. The Saints have holes on D all over the place but their O is so good that it doesn't really matter.

A good defense and a good offensive line WILL NOT mask your QB.

If you put Brett Favre on our team this year instead of the Vikings, we would probably have won 11 games and who knows how far we'd go in the playoffs.

Obviously if you have a team that wins the SB, that means you were really good. There's no Super Bowl winner that didn't have a good line...that's true. I just believe a "good line" is more a cause of having a good QB than the other way around.

Alright well I gotta watch this 4th quarter more intently. I'm done with this thread for now...I just think it's too much of a chicken and egg argument to continue further at the moment...

Originally posted by posayshoohaa:
Carson Palmer was atrocious this year.. if he can lead that team to the playoffs this year the way he played then Smith could probably do it too. The problem with Smith and with how Palmer played this year is you'll never win a Super Bowl much less a playoff game playing like that.. ever. That is why Smith isn't the future of this team. It's about Super Bowl and not about just making it to the playoffs.

Smith was coming off an injury that had him out two years. He didn't see all the snaps in training camp like a normal starter and was the backup until game 7 I believe. The 9ers have changed offensive systems, hired new OCs every year, and just now have the offensive weapons in place but without a good offensive line.

Can you Smith haters at least admit that the 9ers situation for any QB has been a cluster f-ck for the past 7 years or so?

And one more point. It is one thing if Smith failed under these horrible conidations but he hasn't. His numbers have improved in each of his three healthy seasons playing.

Ok look at all their offensive lines eery single on of those abs have at least 3 seconds to throw and sometimes get all day

Who are we kissing Alex only gets 2 seconds max before u compare abs first compare the offensive lines it's like saying robbery horrt is the better than lebron cause he has 9 more rings