YoloinOhio Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) Gotta go with the young guys if I'm starting a team: Luck Wilson Cam Stafford Kap But if it's just for the next 3-5 years? Rodgers Ben Luck Rivers Wilson Edited June 30, 2015 by YoloinOhio
The Wiz Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 Rodgers .. too easy Luck .. loaded with all the goodies Big Ben... 2 rings and still some time for another? Flacco .. Over achiever in the playoffs Matt Ryan ...Has all the tools, never had a great team around him I am in the camp that Wilson gets too much credit for QBing one of the best rosters in the NFL. If the Bills Oline turns the corner and can be "better than good" I think the QB at the helm of their playoff run will fall into the same category.
qwksilver Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 If the Bills Oline turns the corner and can be "better than good" I think the QB at the helm of their playoff run will fall into the same category. From your keyboard to Goodell's ears!
Alphadawg7 Posted June 30, 2015 Author Posted June 30, 2015 Rodgers .. too easy Luck .. loaded with all the goodies Big Ben... 2 rings and still some time for another? Flacco .. Over achiever in the playoffs Matt Ryan ...Has all the tools, never had a great team around him I am in the camp that Wilson gets too much credit for QBing one of the best rosters in the NFL. That roster was mostly in place BEFORE Wilson and that roster went consecutive seasons of 7-9. They already had a great D and Lynch. With Wilson for 3 years they have averaged 12 wins never winning less than 11, 2 Super Bowl appearances, 1 Super Bowl Win. And Wilson has had the best 3 year start or close in just about any passing category in NFL history. I dont understand why people keep saying its the "roster" that gave him success. He took a 7 win team to 11 wins as a rookie and to a 13 win and Super Bowl title in year 2 followed by coming within inches of a back to back title. And he has had marginal, at best, weapons to throw to his whole career. Its not like this kid has been just chucking the ball up like Stafford to some freak like Calvin. I don't want to turn this into another Wilson thread, but I just fail to see why people want to diminish what he has accomplished just because they have a good D and Run game. Oh, and I keep hearing about the Seattle run game as to why Wilson is also so good. Marshawn Lynch Career YPC prior to Wilsons first game = 3.99 YPC which includes Buffalo and his first 2 seasons in Seattle. In fact, in his first 28 games in Seattle before Wilson he averaged 3.95 YPC. Lynch YPC with Wilson for 3 years = 4.64 YPC. So why is it that everyone says its the D and Lynch which led the team to just 2 consecutive 7 win seasons, a sub 4 yard rushing average, is the reason for Wilson putting up the best 3 year start of just about any QB in NFL history? Honestly, examining the facts strongly suggests the opposite.
qwksilver Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) So why is it that everyone says its the D and Lynch For me it's 3 reasons: 1) He does have great defense and great running game. 2) He doesn't have all the measurables (IE not the tallest guy and maybe not the biggest arm) 3) His own front office (for whatever reason) was/is hesitant to give him his huge payday. If he was as great as everyone says he is one would think they'd lock him up for as long as they could. Especially with the cap increase that are coming. For the record I'd have him 6-8 on this list. jut not top five. Edited June 30, 2015 by qwksilver
The Wiz Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 That roster was mostly in place BEFORE Wilson and that roster went consecutive seasons of 7-9. They already had a great D and Lynch. With Wilson for 3 years they have averaged 12 wins never winning less than 11, 2 Super Bowl appearances, 1 Super Bowl Win. And Wilson has had the best 3 year start or close in just about any passing category in NFL history. I dont understand why people keep saying its the "roster" that gave him success. He took a 7 win team to 11 wins as a rookie and to a 13 win and Super Bowl title in year 2 followed by coming within inches of a back to back title. And he has had marginal, at best, weapons to throw to his whole career. Its not like this kid has been just chucking the ball up like Stafford to some freak like Calvin. I don't want to turn this into another Wilson thread, but I just fail to see why people want to diminish what he has accomplished just because they have a good D and Run game. Oh, and I keep hearing about the Seattle run game as to why Wilson is also so good. Marshawn Lynch Career YPC prior to Wilsons first game = 3.99 YPC which includes Buffalo and his first 2 seasons in Seattle. In fact, in his first 28 games in Seattle before Wilson he averaged 3.95 YPC. Lynch YPC with Wilson for 3 years = 4.64 YPC. So why is it that everyone says its the D and Lynch which led the team to just 2 consecutive 7 win seasons, a sub 4 yard rushing average, is the reason for Wilson putting up the best 3 year start of just about any QB in NFL history? Honestly, examining the facts strongly suggests the opposite. There are a few things but I'll try to highlight them in order. He's a QB that KNOWS when to run. He's not lighting the boards on fire with his passing yards (in fact I think he's only tossed for over 300 about 4 times). He makes more plays with his legs than his arm. Does he occasionally have an amazing pass, yes, but a lot of the routes he targets are what we all fear, underneath check offs. As for Lynch, is it really that surprising that a RB gets better when the QB is known for being able to run the ball? For the record, I do think Wilson is good but he really is a product of the system he is in. Can you say that Wilson would have lead the Bills last year to 9-7 or better?
Augie Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 Rodgers, then Luck... then it gets muddy for me. Wilson is certainly in the mix. I seem to have Winston higher on the list than most. But there's plenty of room to be terribly wrong on that one!
Matt in KC Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) I read this topic as: which QB would you most like to sign to a 5 year deal at say $8 Mil per year, and build a roster around like an expansion team.LuckRodgers [edited: you know, Rodgers with a D in the middle! ] BreesBrady - I hate the guy, but he'll yeah, I would hire him#5: on the fence between Wilson and Big BenJust missed: Ryan, Flacco, RomoClose, but I am not quite sold on them: Newton, EliToo old: Manning, Rivers For the record, I do think Wilson is good but he really is a product of the system he is in. Can you say that Wilson would have lead the Bills last year to 9-7 or better? I certainly think so! You think they would have had a worse record with Wilson at QB? Edited June 30, 2015 by Matt in KC
jr1 Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 I'll stick with guys under 30 presuming you'd want them for 10 years Luck Wilson Bridgewater Tannehill Carr
Alphadawg7 Posted June 30, 2015 Author Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) There are a few things but I'll try to highlight them in order. He's a QB that KNOWS when to run. He's not lighting the boards on fire with his passing yards (in fact I think he's only tossed for over 300 about 4 times). He makes more plays with his legs than his arm. Does he occasionally have an amazing pass, yes, but a lot of the routes he targets are what we all fear, underneath check offs. As for Lynch, is it really that surprising that a RB gets better when the QB is known for being able to run the ball? For the record, I do think Wilson is good but he really is a product of the system he is in. Can you say that Wilson would have lead the Bills last year to 9-7 or better? YES...the Bills are a definite playoff team last year and very dangerous in the playoffs with him. I absolutely believe that...the Bills were 9-7 with crappy Orton most the season leading our weak offensive charge. I have to imagine that you would agree that upgrading from Orton/EJ combo last year to Wilson means a min of at least one or 2 more wins right? That puts us in the playoffs. Poor QB play definitively lost us the bulk of our games last year. Wilson is light years better than Orton and EJ were last year, not even close. Personally I think we win 12 games looking at last years record...at least. I'll stick with guys under 30 presuming you'd want them for 10 years Luck Wilson Bridgewater Tannehill Carr Bridgewater was another guy I considered at 5...I couldn't take Mariota or Winston over any of the more proven guys, but Bridgewater really seemed to have an upward pointing arrow last year, and I can see a valid argument being made to put him on this list for this scenario. Edited June 30, 2015 by Alphadawg7
metzelaars_lives Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) Few things. First off, anyone who doesn't have Luck #1- I gotta seriously question their football acumen. Not that he'll necessarily be better than Rodgers but if you read the original post carefully, he is clearly the best answer to the question posed. Rodgers is obviously also in the top 5 because he's still young enough and he has relatively little wear and tear for a guy his age. Matt Ryan is 100% absolutely in the top 5 and it blows my mind that only one other person has mentioned him. Russell Wilson is also a shoe-in and anyone who spews the "he's overrated; he's not asked to do that much because their defense is so good" nonsense simply doesn't watch him play. So I think there is a clear cut top 4: 1. Luck 2. Rodgers 3. Ryan 4. Wilson After that, I think it's naïve to take Roethlisberger over Brady, Romo and certainly Rivers. He is entering his 12th year and he is beat up for an 11 year veteran. I wouldn't be surprised if Roethlisberger starts his inevitable decline before Brady does. After reading that SI article on Brady and how he takes care of his body last year and knowing just how much he loves to play the game, I am inclined to go Brady. It's hard to go against the best QB to ever play the game coming off one of his best seasons. I wouldn't be shocked if he is an elite QB at 40. Newton, Stafford, ehh. I'd probably take Flacco over either of them. 5. Brady Edited June 30, 2015 by metzelaars_lives
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 I used to love Stafford but he really hasn't progressed. Too many bad turnovers. He is like Cutler with a better attitude. He's still really young and has a ton of tools though. Honestly, there aren't a ton of young elite Qbs right now. Fair...I was stuck between he and Flacco. But gave him the age nod. Eli, Ben, rivers were just to far on the wrong side of 30 for me.
KingRex Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 What is your question actually? I you are simply asking who is the best QB in the NFL that's one thing (actually two things 1. Brady is the best QB who knows and fits his team well, but 2. Wilson is the best combo of age/talent/experience in the NFL and though I would take Brady and his knowledge of his team if you gave me one year, but if I am picking 1 QB for now and the future it is Wilson. If you are asking who fits the Bills best I go with Wilson then Rodgers as you would need escapability behind our OL.
Wayne Cubed Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 (edited) That roster was mostly in place BEFORE Wilson and that roster went consecutive seasons of 7-9. They already had a great D and Lynch. With Wilson for 3 years they have averaged 12 wins never winning less than 11, 2 Super Bowl appearances, 1 Super Bowl Win. And Wilson has had the best 3 year start or close in just about any passing category in NFL history. I dont understand why people keep saying its the "roster" that gave him success. He took a 7 win team to 11 wins as a rookie and to a 13 win and Super Bowl title in year 2 followed by coming within inches of a back to back title. And he has had marginal, at best, weapons to throw to his whole career. Its not like this kid has been just chucking the ball up like Stafford to some freak like Calvin. I don't want to turn this into another Wilson thread, but I just fail to see why people want to diminish what he has accomplished just because they have a good D and Run game. Oh, and I keep hearing about the Seattle run game as to why Wilson is also so good. Marshawn Lynch Career YPC prior to Wilsons first game = 3.99 YPC which includes Buffalo and his first 2 seasons in Seattle. In fact, in his first 28 games in Seattle before Wilson he averaged 3.95 YPC. Lynch YPC with Wilson for 3 years = 4.64 YPC. So why is it that everyone says its the D and Lynch which led the team to just 2 consecutive 7 win seasons, a sub 4 yard rushing average, is the reason for Wilson putting up the best 3 year start of just about any QB in NFL history? Honestly, examining the facts strongly suggests the opposite. I'm sorry but I'm going to have to disagree here, they didn't have a great defense before Wilson got there. The defense was on a steady climb towards being great the years before Wilson arrived. In 2010, 2 years before Wilson arrived and Pete Carroll's first year, the defense gave up 4.2 YPC in the running game. That was 21st in the NFL. They gave up 249 YPG in the air, good for 27th in the NFL and a total yards per game of 368, which was also 27th. They were ranked 29th against the pass and 17th against the run. They allowed 25.4 points per game, 25th in the NFL. It's important to note that both Kam Chancellor and Earl Thomas were drafted and Thomas, although a rookie, was the pest player on that defense. Far from a great defense. In 2011, Richard Sherman and KJ Wright were drafted. Thomas and Chancellor were no longer rookies. Alan Branch was a nice pick up along the DL. Again, building towards greatness. They improved their YPC against to 3.8, good for 4th in the NFL and their pass yards per game improved to 219 which was 11th. Their PPG allowed improved to 19.1, which was 7th. They were the 9th ranked defense. Again, this was good, not quite great yet. Would you call the San Diego Chargers defense from 2014 great? They were ranked 9th. By 2012, just about the entire defense had been rebuilt. They drafted another key defensive piece in Bruce Irvin. All of their statistical areas improved. They were ranked 6th against the pass and 10th against the run. Their overall defensive ranking was 4th. 2013 is the year it all came together. Cliff Avril and Michael Bennett were both picked up. This defense was truly great. 14.4 PPG. They only gave up 20 TD's all season, 16 pass and 4 rushing. That's crazy. They allowed 172 passing yards a game. Again, ridiculous, they only allowed one 300 yard passer. They had 39 turnovers including 28 interceptions. This defense was great. To say the defense was great before Russell Wilson arrived is completely inaccurate in my opinion. They were building towards greatness and a Super Bowl win culminated their rise to a truly great defense. If you don't think having a truly great defense, which was what 2013 was, had any bearing on their success and it was Russell Wilson joining the team that did it, I honestly don't know what to say. Edited June 30, 2015 by Wayne Cubed
GunnerBill Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 Okay so I have a settled top 2: 1. Rodgers 2. Luck Then it depends how I am looking at it. Rothlisberger and Rivers are both 33 but I think they are both great Quarterbacks. Big Ben is a probable HOFer and Rivers is a least a Hall of very good candidate (although his body has taken something of a battering over the years behind some terrible lines). But if I am looking at guys able to play at a high level for the next 3 or maybe 4 years I am going with those two at 3 and 4. Then 5..... Wilson, Flacco and Ryan all have merits and if I am discounting the 33 year olds would be my 3,4 and 5.
Recommended Posts