Top two NFL QBs in salary, did not make the playoffs

[KingRex]

14 hours ago, Call_Of_Ktulu said:

This team will never win a Super Bowl with Taylor, I will take any and all bets on that one. Once Shady starts to decline their is no way Taylor is going to pick up the slack. 

 

Taylor needs to be traded and if we get no takers he needs to be released. 

 

The blame will go on McD and he will be fired which means a new OC for Taylor. Jay Cutler syndrome is alive and well in Buffalo with OC #4 trying to squeeze blood from a stone.

1.  Are you saying the Bills should trade the likely price of moving to the very top of this draft (I think likely both if our 1sts and one or more our 2nd rounders and then expect this rookie to win w/o the DL/LB/another starter and as you suggest replace sooner rathr than later a declining Shady.  Like Rothensberger when the Steelers drafted a rookie cspable of winning an SB it is ESSENTIAL there be a team around him.

 

The Bills MUS use their multiple early picks to build a TEAM to be led by this franchise QB to lead.

 

2. It would be syupid to think Taylor can win an SB, however, the goal right now is simply make the playoffs and I think a team with a better OC calling plays and an HC who does not panic and make the stupid move of figuring starting  a 5th round pick Peterman can lead your flawed team to the playoffs (at least Bills fans hope so this final weekend)!

[Hapless Bills Fan]

On 12/27/2017 at 6:18 PM, jmc12290 said:

Alex Smith is a franchise QB.

 

A number of people would disagree with that assessment of Smith.

He has gotten the Chiefs into the playoffs 4 of the last 5 years - where they've never made it even to the conference championship.

 

On 12/27/2017 at 6:49 PM, Rigotz said:

This is a dumb argument.

Packers went from one of the best teams in the league to one of the worst when Rogers got hurt.

Colts went from best team in the league to first overall pick when Peyton Manning got hurt.

A great QB can win you Super Bowls and playoffs for DECADES. Are there exceptions? Sure. Carr had a bad year and Stanford has never been Elite.

Do I want to swing for the fences and hope to lock in the single most important position on the field for decades? Of course I do.

If you’re not thinking that way, you are dumb. Period.

 

I'm actually not sure what the original point was.  Pay doesn't always equate with skill, so "top paid" doesn't necessarily mean "best"

However as to your point "a great QB can win you Superbowls for DECADES" - I think that's false and the two QB you cite are evidence of that.
 

The Packers have been to the playoffs - a great QB will get you to the playoffs - Rodgers has carried the Pack to the playoffs 8 of the 10 years he's started (8 of the 9 years he's been uninjured).  But they've only been to ONE superbowl in that time, and that year they had the #2 D in the league.  They were 4-3 when Rodgers got hurt, not "one of the best teams".  Hopefully his exit has been a wakeup call to them that they need to put a defense on the field again so as not to waste Rodgers while they have him.

The Colts with Manning are a similar example.  Manning carried them to the playoffs 11 of his 13 active years with them.  In that time, they went to the SB only twice, won one, lost one.  Manning is probably the best example EVER of a team wasting one of the best QB ever, by not fielding enough of a team around him.

Teams which the QB is carrying usually don't win championships.  To win superbowls, takes a solid team all around, including coaching.

One of the reasons NE has been so perennially successful is that Brady has been willing to take less pay than he could command, to help the cap and help NE keep a solid team around him.  When they've won SB, they've had a stout defense as well.

 

 

22 hours ago, Dorkington said:

This. There are maybe 2 or 3 QBs in the league that can carry a mediocre team to the playoffs. The rest need to have a decent team around them to get anywhere. This idea that you can just draft a stud QB and be set for life is so stupid. 

 

Say rather, easily disprovable by examples.

 

A great QB with a meh team will go to the playoffs every year (and fold like a cheap lawn chair once there).

Likewise a competent QB with a good team around him (see: Chiefs, Bengals).

 

To win championships, need a good QB and a good team around him (including coaching)

 

[row_33]

On 2017-12-28 at 7:34 PM, matter2003 said:

That's because salaries are no longer based on who is better than you or where you rank.  They are based on "Are you being paid like 'X' type player". In this case 'X' type player is a franchise QB.  And the answer was yes, they are paying them like that so they basically look at the biggest contract signed and then say I should make more due to inflation and the salary cap going up, and that's the contract.

 

It has really nothing to do with how good they are in relation to their peers that are within the same category as them.

 

 

You are taking the exceptions and declaring them the rule.

 

 

[Big Turk]

6 minutes ago, row_33 said:

 

You are taking the exceptions and declaring them the rule.

 

 

No, thats pretty much how it works every offseason in the NFL...

[BringBackOrton]

29 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

A number of people would disagree with that assessment of Smith.

He has gotten the Chiefs into the playoffs 4 of the last 5 years - where they've never made it even to the conference championship.

 

 

I'm actually not sure what the original point was.  Pay doesn't always equate with skill, so "top paid" doesn't necessarily mean "best"

However as to your point "a great QB can win you Superbowls for DECADES" - I think that's false and the two QB you cite are evidence of that.
 

The Packers have been to the playoffs - a great QB will get you to the playoffs - Rodgers has carried the Pack to the playoffs 8 of the 10 years he's started (8 of the 9 years he's been uninjured).  But they've only been to ONE superbowl in that time, and that year they had the #2 D in the league.  They were 4-3 when Rodgers got hurt, not "one of the best teams".  Hopefully his exit has been a wakeup call to them that they need to put a defense on the field again so as not to waste Rodgers while they have him.

The Colts with Manning are a similar example.  Manning carried them to the playoffs 11 of his 13 active years with them.  In that time, they went to the SB only twice, won one, lost one.  Manning is probably the best example EVER of a team wasting one of the best QB ever, by not fielding enough of a team around him.

Teams which the QB is carrying usually don't win championships.  To win superbowls, takes a solid team all around, including coaching.

One of the reasons NE has been so perennially successful is that Brady has been willing to take less pay than he could command, to help the cap and help NE keep a solid team around him.  When they've won SB, they've had a stout defense as well.

 

 

 

Say rather, easily disprovable by examples.

 

A great QB with a meh team will go to the playoffs every year (and fold like a cheap lawn chair once there).

Likewise a competent QB with a good team around him (see: Chiefs, Bengals).

 

To win championships, need a good QB and a good team around him (including coaching)

 

Those people would be wrong.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

24 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

Those people would be wrong.

 

I assume you're speaking of the first sentence of the post you quoted - as a little suggestion it is easy and more clear to edit out the rest of the post when that's the case.

The sentence in question is:

"A number of people would disagree with that assessment of Smith (that he is a franchise QB)

He has gotten the Chiefs into the playoffs 4 of the last 5 years - where they've never made it even to the conference championship."

 

Perhaps you would care to put up some facts or evidence to bolster your assertion?  That would take this beyond the level of "IS"  "IS NOT!"

 

[BringBackOrton]

19 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I assume you're speaking of the first sentence of the post you quoted - as a little suggestion it is easy and more clear to edit out the rest of the post when that's the case.

The sentence in question is:

"A number of people would disagree with that assessment of Smith (that he is a franchise QB)

He has gotten the Chiefs into the playoffs 4 of the last 5 years - where they've never made it even to the conference championship."

 

Perhaps you would care to put up some facts or evidence to bolster your assertion?  That would take this beyond the level of "IS"  "IS NOT!"

 

I assumed you would know I was responding to what you said to my quoted post.

 

We can look at the QB's who have ALSO been to the playoffs the last 4 of 5 years or greater.

 

Alex Smith

Tom Brady

Aaron Rodgers

Ben Roethlisberger

Cam Newton

Russell Wilson

 

Looks like a list of franchise QB's to me.  Quite a storied group.

[Foreigner]

Sorry guys, but Offense puts points on the board, DEFENSE wins championships, so put that

in your pipe and smoke it.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

23 hours ago, jmc12290 said:

I assumed you would know I was responding to what you said to my quoted post.

 

We can look at the QB's who have ALSO been to the playoffs the last 4 of 5 years or greater.

 

Alex Smith

Tom Brady

Aaron Rodgers

Ben Roethlisberger

Cam Newton

Russell Wilson

 

Looks like a list of franchise QB's to me.  Quite a storied group.

 

Not wanting to be too precious here, but how do you know?  How do you define "franchise QB"?  Is it operational - your team makes it to the playoffs 4 of the last 5 years, you're franchise?  It doesn't, you're not?  How would you judge Andrew Luck?  Drew Brees?  Stafford?  Andy Dalton?

 

I ask because the "franchise" nature of Cam Newton and Russ Wilson has also been called into question.

[BringBackOrton]

19 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Not wanting to be too precious here, but how do you know?  How do you define "franchise QB"?  Is it operational - your team makes it to the playoffs 4 of the last 5 years, you're franchise?  It doesn't, you're not?  How would you judge Andrew Luck?  Drew Brees?  Stafford?  Andy Dalton?

 

I ask because the "franchise" nature of Cam Newton and Russ Wilson has also been called into question.

Making the playoffs 4 of 5 years, in which only 6 QB's have been able to do, 3 of them HoFers would certainly support Smith's candidacy.  He's a lower end franchise QB, but a franchise QB all the same.

 

IMO, a franchise QB is a QB, who, at their peak, open a championship window for their team.  They are guys who can beat you with their arm.  They can go head to head against the greats and win.

 

That's a franchise QB.  So Luck, Brees, Stafford, Newton and Wilson all qualify.  Dalton is borderline, as is Tannehill.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, jmc12290 said:

Making the playoffs 4 of 5 years, in which only 6 QB's have been able to do, 3 of them HoFers would certainly support Smith's candidacy.  He's a lower end franchise QB, but a franchise QB all the same.

 

IMO, a franchise QB is a QB, who, at their peak, open a championship window for their team.  They are guys who can beat you with their arm.  They can go head to head against the greats and win.

 

That's a franchise QB.  So Luck, Brees, Stafford, Newton and Wilson all qualify.  Dalton is borderline, as is Tannehill.

 

"open a championship window for their team" - what does that mean?  Does it mean you go to the playoffs and get blown out in the WC or div round every year?

"can beat you with their arm" - in his 1st 3 years as a starter, Wilson was like 27, 26, 27 in the league for passing.  Now 20, 10, 15 - mediocre by what I read here.

Cam Newton lit the league on fire his first couple years, but since the team became more successful he's like, 29, 19, 24, 27 in passing.

 

It's just all so confusing.  We know Taylor isn't a franchise QB because he's been at the bottom of the league for passing his first 3 years as a starter, but we know Russ Wilson is a franchise QB even though he was at the bottom of the league for passing his 1st 3 years as a starter.  We know Cam Newton is a franchise QB because he lit up the league passing his first couple years, but he was 29th in passing yards the 1st year the Pant hers went to the playoffs and 24th the year they won the superbowl. 

We know Alex Smith is a franchise QB because his 2nd team, the Chiefs, have been to the playoffs (but exited early) 4 of his 5 years there, but they were 24th in passing his 1st year with them and 29th his second, 19th last year (arguably their most successful of the last 5).  Additionally, Smith blew chunks his first 4-5 years in the league - made his way onto "top 5 QB busts of all time" lists.  Meanwhile the Chiefs are starting Mahomes.  Are they just resting Smith, or do they want a look at Mahomes because they're so impressed with Smith's franchise-ness that they're thinking of moving on?

Meanwhile, N'Orleans (with Brees) has been consistently mediocre three previous seasons (until this season).   After 3 good years, the Colts were mediocre the previous 2 seasons with Luck.    Lions have had a winning record 2 of the last 5 years with Stafford.

 

I kind of take the position that whether a QB is "good enough" or not (franchise seems to be used as an equivalent for "good enough" where "good enough" means team goes to playoffs repeatedly)  depends a lot on the players and scheme and coaching he has around him.   Moreover, there are some QB who look pretty good right out of the gate (Luck, Newton) but seem to regress, either as key pieces get lost from the team or as the league gets film on their tendencies, and others who look good now, but who took 4-5 years to really come into their own as QB.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2017 by Hapless Bills Fan

[unclepete]

On 12/27/2017 at 4:13 PM, Foreigner said:

The Bills most likely will go QB looking after the season, but we need to be reminded while offensive

Football is a 11 man game; just because a team has a expensive (which should mean successful) QB,

it does not necessarily mean success in the NFL.
Before this season, contracts were signed by Derek Caar for 5 years at $125,000,000 and Matthew

Stafford for 6 years and $151,000,000. The guaranteed money was for $70M and $80M respectfully.

And by the way, Tyrod Taylor's contract was for 2 years at $30,500,000 with $15,5M guaranteed.

So bringing in a so called top veteran QB at big bucks doesn't mean much if you ask the Raiders or Lions.

As for the draft, we all know it is a crap shoot., but even getting a franchise guy means nothing

unless the O and D is upgraded, and we all know where that needs to be done in Buffalo.

As for JG in SF, that is the exception in the draft. He sat and learned for 3 years from perhaps the

greatest QB ever to play the game. I doubt if he came right out of the draft and started immediately

that he would be as good as he is today.

 

.       

I’ve tried to express this many times. The QB is the most important position but the team around the QB is much more important 

[BringBackOrton]

4 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

"open a championship window for their team" - what does that mean?  Does it mean you go to the playoffs and get blown out in the WC or div round every year?

"can beat you with their arm" - in his 1st 3 years as a starter, Wilson was like 27, 26, 27 in the league for passing.  Now 20, 10, 15 - mediocre by what I read here.

Cam Newton lit the league on fire his first couple years, but since the team became more successful he's like, 29, 19, 24, 27 in passing.

 

It's just all so confusing.  We know Taylor isn't a franchise QB because he's been at the bottom of the league for passing his first 3 years as a starter, but we know Russ Wilson is a franchise QB even though he was at the bottom of the league for passing his 1st 3 years as a starter.  We know Cam Newton is a franchise QB because he lit up the league passing his first couple years, but he was 29th in passing yards the 1st year the Pant hers went to the playoffs and 24th the year they won the superbowl.  We know Alex Smith is a franchise QB because his 2nd team, the Chiefs, have been to the playoffs (but exited early) 4 of his 5 years there, but they were 24th in passing his 1st year with them and 29th his second, 19th last year (arguably their most successful of the last 5).  Additionally, Smith blew chunks his first 5 years in the league - made his way onto "top 5 QB busts of all time" lists.

 

I kind of take the position that whether a QB is "good enough" or not depends a lot on the players and scheme and coaching he has around him.

 

 

"open a championship window for their team" - what does that mean?  Does it mean you go to the playoffs and get blown out in the WC or div round every year?

 

It means that with some luck and bounces, you can take a team to the Super Bowl any given year.

 

"can beat you with their arm" - in his 1st 3 years as a starter, Wilson was like 27, 26, 27 in the league for passing.  Now 20, 10, 15 - mediocre by what I read here.

 

Passing yard totals are not great when used in isolation.  Wilson was 27th in passing yards in his rookie year, but 8th in passing TD's, all on 32nd in attempts.  That's purty good. His next year he was 26th in yards, 10th in TD's, on 31st in attempts.  Again, purty good.  In fact, in his first 4 seasons, he was top 10 in TD passes 3 times.  "Mediocre by what you read here?"  No.

 

You can subscribe others' arguments to me if it makes you feel better, but I can't defend opinions I've never held.  Taylor's low yardage has been a part of the story, but not the end all be all.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

2 minutes ago, unclepete said:

I’ve tried to express this many times. The QB is the most important position but the team around the QB is much more important 

 

I dunno.  The team around the QB is important, that's for sure.  I think Whaley took the view that the team around the QB is "much more important" and that they could win with a QB who doesn't turn the ball over and a strong run game - and it led him to the unemployment line.  Now would he have been proven right if we kept Schwartz-level D?  We'll never know.

3 minutes ago, jmc12290 said:

"open a championship window for their team" - what does that mean?  Does it mean you go to the playoffs and get blown out in the WC or div round every year?

 

It means that with some luck and bounces, you can take a team to the Super Bowl any given year.

 

"can beat you with their arm" - in his 1st 3 years as a starter, Wilson was like 27, 26, 27 in the league for passing.  Now 20, 10, 15 - mediocre by what I read here.

 

Passing yard totals are not great when used in isolation.  Wilson was 27th in passing yards in his rookie year, but 8th in passing TD's, all on 32nd in attempts.  That's purty good. His next year he was 26th in yards, 10th in TD's, on 31st in attempts.  Again, purty good.  In fact, in his first 4 seasons, he was top 10 in TD passes 3 times.  "Mediocre by what you read here?"  No.

 

You can subscribe others' arguments to me if it makes you feel better, but I can't defend opinions I've never held.  Taylor's low yardage has been a part of the story, but not the end all be all.

 

I'm not trying to subscribe other arguments to you.  I'm trying to ask you what your arguments are.  Do you think the Chiefs and Lions were a few lucky bounces from the Superbowl each year?

 

If "passing yards" aren't what "beats you with his arm" means, what does it mean to you?  TD passes?  What is the "end all be all"?

[BringBackOrton]

2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

I'm not trying to subscribe other arguments to you.  I'm trying to ask you what your arguments are.  Do you think the Chiefs and Lions were a few lucky bounces from the Superbowl each year?

 

If "passing yards" aren't what "beats you with his arm" means, what does it mean to you?  TD passes?  What is the "end all be all"?

I didn't say "each year."  I said "any given year."  There's a distinct difference.

 

And yes.  Chiefs lost to the Steelers last year by two points in the playoffs.  The year before, 7 point lost to NE.  2013, 1 point loss to Indy.  Do you think an average margin of loss ~3 points constitutes a few lucky bounces?  I do.

 

The Lions had a poor showing last year in the postseason, but had a 4 point loss in 2014 to the Cowboys.  Luck certainly could swing that.

 

Beat you with his arm is a combination of how you play week to week, consistency, ability, numbers, how you play at your best, etc.  It also takes into account how I believe teams gameplan for you.

[row_33]

On 2017-12-30 at 10:23 AM, matter2003 said:

No, thats pretty much how it works every offseason in the NFL...

 

Due to the violence of the game there is a ton of speculation riding on the health of big $$$

 

but to say the top paid QBs are almost all garbage is being silly...

 

there are several FAs signed in pro sports, most meet their expectations and some bring titles ( but they all cannot as only one title is won each year)

 

they are are never really worth their millions in reality, but to take the flops and say all FA signings are disasters is plain dumb

 

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2017 by row_33

[Big Turk]

2 hours ago, row_33 said:

 

Due to the violence of the game there is a ton of speculation riding on the health of big $$$

 

but to say the top paid QBs are almost all garbage is being silly...

 

there are several FAs signed in pro sports, most meet their expectations and some bring titles ( but they all cannot as only one title is won each year)

 

they are are never really worth their millions in reality, but to take the flops and say all FA signings are disasters is plain dumb

 

 

 

 

I never said they are all disasters I said they routinely get raises over the highest paid players at their positions simply because they are considered to be at a similar level as those players and are a FA

Edited December 31, 2017 by matter2003