RJ (not THAT RJ) Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 its probably been mentioned before but why did the bills after Lynch had a good first half only give him the ball ONCE in the 2nd half? Jackson was doing nothing, Lynch seemed to have the hot hand and they don't use him. Makes me scratch my head It is a good question... but the big problem was that most of the Bills series in the second half were 3-and-outs... or when they were down by 9 on the FG drive... which cuts way down on the opportunities for running plays. Not an excuse, but it is a partial explanation.
Orton's Arm Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Would you be satisfied with dominating lines and a qb around the level of Flacco? He aint Peytpn Manning but imo he's the type of player we need at qb. I know this question wasn't directed at me, but I'll answer it anyway. I'm interested in core groups of players which have made it to multiple Super Bowls. Below is that list: 1970s Steelers: Terry Bradshaw Vikings: Fran Tarkenton Dolphins: Bob Griese 1980s 49ers: Joe Montana Broncos: John Elway 1990s Buffalo Bills: Jim Kelly Dallas Cowboys: Troy Aikman Denver Broncos: John Elway :| 2000s New England Patriots: Tom Brady St. Louis Rams: Kurt Warner (late '90s - early 2000s) Steelers: Ben Roethlisberger Literally every quarterback on that list is a current or future Hall of Famer (assuming Kurt Warner makes it in). You could point out that you don't necessarily need your team to win multiple Super Bowls--you just need to come away with one Super Bowl win. But even just one Super Bowl appearance/win is a best-case scenario if you don't have an elite level quarterback. Everything has to go exactly right for you to even achieve that! Take the Ravens of 2000, for example. They had arguably the best defense in NFL history, a very good offensive line led by Jon Ogden, an excellent RB in Jamal Lewis. Yet that group of players only made it to one Super Bowl, because of their lack of a quarterback. And there's no guarantee that some future Ravens-like team would even manage that one Super Bowl appearance. The Ravens had to conceal their weakness at QB by being almost completely dominant at everything else. That doesn't leave much of a margin of error, for injuries, bad breaks, or other stuff going wrong. But take a team like the Steelers of the '70s, which won four Super Bowls. They had a dominant defense and a dominant running game. But sometimes even a dominant running game gets shut down, and a dominant defense allows more points than it should. When those things happened, the Steelers could count on guys like Terry Bradshaw and Lynn Swan to score the points they needed to win postseason games. The strength of the Steelers' passing attack gave them another way to win games--a way the Ravens of the 2000s didn't have. Both teams' plan A was to run the ball and win with defense. But unlike the Ravens, the Steelers had a very viable plan B--to win the game with passing. It's that difference which explains why the Steelers of the '70s won four times as many Super Bowls as did the Ravens of the 2000s.
Recommended Posts