PlayoffsPlease Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 Fans seem to be hanging their hats on the concept that there somehow there is a requirement to have short term mediocrity or failure in order to build for a period of sustained excellence. Not sure 21st history really bears that out. I think sustained excellence is fancy word for having one of the leagues top 3 or 5 QBs for an extended period of time. Bills fans are skewed by their relation with the Patriots. I am going to go out on a limb and say their run of success is a fluke, that won't happen again in my lifetime. In truth only 4 teams have really had a period of sustained excellence in the this century. Indianapolis with Peyton Manning, Steelers with Ben Rothlisberger and the Patriots with Tom Brady and the Saints with Drew Brees. Other teams have had intermittent successes with a different model, notably the Ravens. But no team without a future HOF QB who truly gaps out from their peers has accomplished that. ( I am defining sustained excellence as appearing in divisional playoff games more than 50% of the time for an extended period of years. Anything less would be more like "sustained good".) One great QB Aaron Rodgers only had intermittent success. So HOF QB is not the only thing for "sustained excellence" just the minimum starting requirements. I don't think top 10 QB really gets you sustained success. Think Matt Ryan or Cam Newton or Russell Wilson. Their teams had their moments when everything came together. Fortunately Josh Allen is a future HOF QB, and he provides the minimum building block to lead the teams to playoff wins and championships for the next dozen years. Starting this year. 1
BuffaloBill Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 Nice theory but coaching and front office come into the equation. No team has had a better combination of the three than the Cheats*. I hate to say it but it remains true. The really good thing is the reign is about to come to an end. 2
klos63 Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 1 hour ago, BuffaloBill said: Nice theory but coaching and front office come into the equation. No team has had a better combination of the three than the Cheats*. I hate to say it but it remains true. The really good thing is the reign is about to come to an end. When? Brady could play a few more seasons at this rate and still be one of the best.
Rad Likes The Bills Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 I agree that Josh is a future Gold Jacket. Just hope he wears shorts when he gets inducted 1 2
Thurman#1 Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said: Fans seem to be hanging their hats on the concept that there somehow there is a requirement to have short term mediocrity or failure in order to build for a period of sustained excellence. Not sure 21st history really bears that out. I think sustained excellence is fancy word for having one of the leagues top 3 or 5 QBs for an extended period of time. Bills fans are skewed by their relation with the Patriots. I am going to go out on a limb and say their run of success is a fluke, that won't happen again in my lifetime. In truth only 4 teams have really had a period of sustained excellence in the this century. Indianapolis with Peyton Manning, Steelers with Ben Rothlisberger and the Patriots with Tom Brady and the Saints with Drew Brees. Other teams have had intermittent successes with a different model, notably the Ravens. But no team without a future HOF QB who truly gaps out from their peers has accomplished that. ( I am defining sustained excellence as appearing in divisional playoff games more than 50% of the time for an extended period of years. Anything less would be more like "sustained good".) One great QB Aaron Rodgers only had intermittent success. So HOF QB is not the only thing for "sustained excellence" just the minimum starting requirements. I don't think top 10 QB really gets you sustained success. Think Matt Ryan or Cam Newton or Russell Wilson. Their teams had their moments when everything came together. Fortunately Josh Allen is a future HOF QB, and he provides the minimum building block to lead the teams to playoff wins and championships for the next dozen years. Starting this year. While you're right that having a top QB is huge, I disagree that it needs to be a top 3 or top 5 guy. Roethlisberger, for one, isn't top three, or even top five. Top ten? You betcha. And Russell Wilson is another terrific example. They've been consistently competitive right since they got him, and no he's not top five either, though close. I'd further argue that Rivers has been a top five guy for a very long time now and it hasn't got that team consistency. Oh, and in your first paragraph you say that "Fans seem to be hanging their hats on the concept that there somehow there is a requirement to have short term mediocrity or failure in order to build for a period of sustained excellence. Not sure 21st history really bears that out." But then you hang your hat on the Steelers, Manning's Indy, the Pats and the Saints. But the reason they Colts got Manning was that they were so very very bad the year before they drafted Peyton that they got the first draft pick. The Steelers were also consistently good before getting Roethlisberger. Wasn't till they had a bad year and got the 9th pick in a year where Eli and Rivers were also coming out that they finally got their first Super Bowl titles since Noll. More, the year before the Saints got Brees and got good, they went 3-13. They were lucky enough to get Brees without having to draft him, but they were still bad to mediocre for a long time before that, and that had a lot to do with how they were able to put a pretty good team around Brees almost instantaneously. And the Pats sucked pretty good in Belichick's first year too, going 5-11. I don't think your best examples bear you out very well, even though the Pats and Saints managed to get a top five QB without having to draft him very high, a rare feat. Get a top ten or top twelve QB and you'll have a chance every year. Not that you'll be good every year, but you'll have a chance if you can put a solid team around him. Below the top ten or twelve and you have to have not a good team but a sensational team to have much success and it's likely not to be very consistent. If you can get a top three or five guy, you're even better off, but it's not necessary for consistent competitiveness, as your own example, the Ravens, show. Edited September 25, 2019 by Thurman#1
Thurman#1 Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 2 hours ago, klos63 said: When? Brady could play a few more seasons at this rate and still be one of the best. Brady really is showing amazing longevity. But at his age, injuries start becoming a factor, and they're not predictable. I doubt we see a few more, personally. My bet is this year and maybe next year. And I'm not one of those guys who has been predicting his downfall for a decade. Just the opposite, I have always said that you can't predict it with him, as he doesn't get hit much. But we've finally started to see his arm strength lose the top few percent, and I don't see him thriving at 44, I just think the odds against that will finally be too high. An opinion? Absolutely. But a reasonable one.
Nextmanup Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 (edited) 6 hours ago, BuffaloBill said: Nice theory but coaching and front office come into the equation. No team has had a better combination of the three than the Cheats*. I hate to say it but it remains true. The really good thing is the reign is about to come to an end. I would argue BB is more important than Brady to the New England equation. Too many names dump in and flush out of that system all the time, while maintaining the same level of quality, for that not to be the case. Sure, Brady is the motor that keeps the machine running, but if coaching wasn't so important, Green Bay would have had a lot more Super Bowl appearances that it actually has had during the Aaron Rodgers era. Same for New Orleans with Brees. It is the unbelievable one-two punch of BB and Brady that makes New England what it is. Edited September 25, 2019 by Nextmanup
downunderbill Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 41 minutes ago, Nextmanup said: I would argue BB is more important than Brady to the New England equation. Too many names dump in and flush out of that system all the time, while maintaining the same level of quality, for that not to be the case. Sure, Brady is the motor that keeps the machine running, but if coaching wasn't so important, Green Bay would have had a lot more Super Bowl appearances that it actually has had during the Aaron Rodgers era. Same for New Orleans with Brees. It is the unbelievable one-two punch of BB and Brady that makes New England what it is. They are definitely a symbiotic coupling. Belicheck is probably the best there has ever been, but without the best QB there has ever been, i doubt he has all 6 of those rings.
H2o Posted September 25, 2019 Posted September 25, 2019 The teams who have had sustained success have stability in the FO, a good if not great HC, that FO has drafted well, maneuvered FA as they should, and re-signed their own. Yes they have good QB's, but it is more than that as a whole. 1
PlayoffsPlease Posted September 25, 2019 Author Posted September 25, 2019 6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said: While you're right that having a top QB is huge, I disagree that it needs to be a top 3 or top 5 guy. Roethlisberger, for one, isn't top three, or even top five. Top ten? You betcha. And Russell Wilson is another terrific example. They've been consistently competitive right since they got him, and no he's not top five either, though close. I'd further argue that Rivers has been a top five guy for a very long time now and it hasn't got that team consistency. Oh, and in your first paragraph you say that "Fans seem to be hanging their hats on the concept that there somehow there is a requirement to have short term mediocrity or failure in order to build for a period of sustained excellence. Not sure 21st history really bears that out." But then you hang your hat on the Steelers, Manning's Indy, the Pats and the Saints. But the reason they Colts got Manning was that they were so very very bad the year before they drafted Peyton that they got the first draft pick. The Steelers were also consistently good before getting Roethlisberger. Wasn't till they had a bad year and got the 9th pick in a year where Eli and Rivers were also coming out that they finally got their first Super Bowl titles since Noll. More, the year before the Saints got Brees and got good, they went 3-13. They were lucky enough to get Brees without having to draft him, but they were still bad to mediocre for a long time before that, and that had a lot to do with how they were able to put a pretty good team around Brees almost instantaneously. And the Pats sucked pretty good in Belichick's first year too, going 5-11. I don't think your best examples bear you out very well, even though the Pats and Saints managed to get a top five QB without having to draft him very high, a rare feat. Get a top ten or top twelve QB and you'll have a chance every year. Not that you'll be good every year, but you'll have a chance if you can put a solid team around him. Below the top ten or twelve and you have to have not a good team but a sensational team to have much success and it's likely not to be very consistent. If you can get a top three or five guy, you're even better off, but it's not necessary for consistent competitiveness, as your own example, the Ravens, show. 1. Ben Rothlisberger may not have been a top 5 QB every single season, but over the course of the entire number of years he played, he definitely was. I can prove this by adding "you betcha" 2. "Have a chance every year" is not the same as sustained excellence, for the purposes of my post. Feel free to use my definition (in the OP) to demonstrate which teams accomplished sustained excellence the four I mentioned (each of whom were led by future HOF QBs). Having an excellent non-future HOF QB probably gives a chance every year (of course chance every year is not really measurable). Have Matt Stafford and the Lions had a chance every year? Did Carson Palmer and the Bengals? 1
Thurman#1 Posted September 26, 2019 Posted September 26, 2019 (edited) 22 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said: 1. Ben Rothlisberger may not have been a top 5 QB every single season, but over the course of the entire number of years he played, he definitely was. I can prove this by adding "you betcha" 2. "Have a chance every year" is not the same as sustained excellence, for the purposes of my post. Feel free to use my definition (in the OP) to demonstrate which teams accomplished sustained excellence the four I mentioned (each of whom were led by future HOF QBs). Having an excellent non-future HOF QB probably gives a chance every year (of course chance every year is not really measurable). Have Matt Stafford and the Lions had a chance every year? Did Carson Palmer and the Bengals? Most years Roethlisberger hasn't been ranked in the top five in contemporary rankings. Some years yes. Most years more like six and seven. Even further back lately. Very questionable. And by your definition of sustained excellence, the Chiefs have been consistently excellent in the six-year Andy Reid era and look to continue that and again, did not have a great QB till last year. The Seahawks very easily qualify over the Carroll regime, without a top five QB. And one of your top examples, the Saints in the Drew Brees era, do not qualify, having made 6 of 13 division championship games. Sorry, but with this definition, your contention still doesn't hold up. Having that "excellent non-future HOF QB" you talk about (that's so unclear I return to my definition of what you need) a top ten to top twelve guy gives you a chance every year. As I said above, " Not that you'll be good every year, but you'll have a chance if you can put a solid team around him." The Lions certainly have not put a solid team around Stafford in the large majority of the years he's been there. Same with those Bengal teams around Palmer. You saw in Arizona what happens when you put a decent team around Carson Palmer. Cincy improved a bit at scouting after that but they've been a team that has settled for mediocrity and saving money in player acquisition. The Ravens have made your benchmark for a long time without a top five QB. Ozzie simply put an excellent roster on the field for years. Even really good QBs can't rescue bad teams as Rodgers and Rivers among others have showed. Edited September 26, 2019 by Thurman#1 1
BigDingus Posted September 26, 2019 Posted September 26, 2019 On 9/24/2019 at 11:30 PM, Thurman#1 said: Roethlisberger, for one, isn't top three, or even top five. Top ten? You betcha. And Russell Wilson is another terrific example. They've been consistently competitive right since they got him, and no he's not top five either, though close. I'd further argue that Rivers has been a top five guy for a very long time now and it hasn't got that team consistency. On what planet is Russell Wilson not a top 5 QB?! And Big Ben has been a top 5 QB for years now, though his play has regressed as he nears the end of his career. Along with people saying they're fine with not drafting Mahomes even knowing what they know now, I'm convinced Bills fans forgot what a good QB looks like. http://businessinsider.com/nfl-qbs-ranked-tiers-2019-2019-9 *Russell Wilson at #3 https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/top-10-qbs-in-nfl-tom-brady-aaron-rodgers-battle-for-second-behind-unanimous-no-1/ *Russell Wilson at #4 http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001037947/article/2019-nfl-season-tom-brady-drew-brees-still-top-qb-rankings *Russell Wilson at #6 https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-quarterback-rankings-2019-best-worst-1-32/11p5evm1b6g0v1tbu8lvzo5rzq *Russell Wilson at #5 https://www.complex.com/sports/2019/08/nfl-starting-quarterbacks-ranked/russell-wilson *Russell Wilson at #5 https://thecomeback.com/nfl/ranking-all-32-projected-nfl-starting-quarterbacks-for-2019.html *Russell Wilson at #3 http://www.espn.com/nfl/qbr (Actual QBR) *Russell Wilson at #6 https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2835945-ranking-every-nfl-teams-quarterback-situation-heading-into-2019-season#slide30 *Russell Wilson #3 I mean, this is just people coming into this season, but prior to this he was considered one of the top QB' and now that the 2019 season has began, talk has pushed him into top 3 easy with Brees & Ben going down. He's playing phenomenal football this year, averaging over 300 yards passing a game, 71% completions, 7 TD's & 0 INT's. If Allen can even sniff Wilson's level of play, the Bills will be a fantastic team for the next decade. But Wilson is borderline elite, so that's expecting a lot. Not everyone can be a Patrick Mahomes caliber player and take over the league in their first 2 years as a starter. I'm just hoping Allen can become a reliable, solid starter. Nothing special, but above the mediocre, Tyrod-level QB's. 1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said: Most years Roethlisberger hasn't been ranked in the top five in contemporary rankings. Some years yes. Most years more like six and seven. Even further back lately. Very questionable. Most years? Roethlisberger has been considered a top 5, or just shy of top 5 every year he's been healthy. Without question. At his absolute WORST he's still in the top 10, but very few people would rank him that low ever.
Thurman#1 Posted September 27, 2019 Posted September 27, 2019 (edited) 19 hours ago, BigDingus said: On what planet is Russell Wilson not a top 5 QB?! And Big Ben has been a top 5 QB for years now, though his play has regressed as he nears the end of his career. Along with people saying they're fine with not drafting Mahomes even knowing what they know now, I'm convinced Bills fans forgot what a good QB looks like. http://businessinsider.com/nfl-qbs-ranked-tiers-2019-2019-9 *Russell Wilson at #3 https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/top-10-qbs-in-nfl-tom-brady-aaron-rodgers-battle-for-second-behind-unanimous-no-1/ *Russell Wilson at #4 http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000001037947/article/2019-nfl-season-tom-brady-drew-brees-still-top-qb-rankings *Russell Wilson at #6 https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-quarterback-rankings-2019-best-worst-1-32/11p5evm1b6g0v1tbu8lvzo5rzq *Russell Wilson at #5 https://www.complex.com/sports/2019/08/nfl-starting-quarterbacks-ranked/russell-wilson *Russell Wilson at #5 https://thecomeback.com/nfl/ranking-all-32-projected-nfl-starting-quarterbacks-for-2019.html *Russell Wilson at #3 http://www.espn.com/nfl/qbr (Actual QBR) *Russell Wilson at #6 https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2835945-ranking-every-nfl-teams-quarterback-situation-heading-into-2019-season#slide30 *Russell Wilson #3 I mean, this is just people coming into this season, but prior to this he was considered one of the top QB' and now that the 2019 season has began, talk has pushed him into top 3 easy with Brees & Ben going down. He's playing phenomenal football this year, averaging over 300 yards passing a game, 71% completions, 7 TD's & 0 INT's. If Allen can even sniff Wilson's level of play, the Bills will be a fantastic team for the next decade. But Wilson is borderline elite, so that's expecting a lot. Not everyone can be a Patrick Mahomes caliber player and take over the league in their first 2 years as a starter. I'm just hoping Allen can become a reliable, solid starter. Nothing special, but above the mediocre, Tyrod-level QB's. Most years? Roethlisberger has been considered a top 5, or just shy of top 5 every year he's been healthy. Without question. At his absolute WORST he's still in the top 10, but very few people would rank him that low ever. We have been talking about a long period of time. Since Wilson got his big contract, and even occassionally going back to last year, he has indeed started making top five rankings. Through the great majority of his career, he has not. Right up to around 2017 many weren't even putting him in the top ten (which I thought even at the time was crazy), but he has absolutely NOT been listed as a top five guy till very recently indeed. Again, my side of this argument is that you don't need a top three or five guy, you need a top ten or twelve guy and your team will have a chance every year they can put a solid team around him. And I think Wilson has been a top ten or twelve guy pretty much right from the beginning of his career. As for Roethlisberger, you say it's without question, but that's just not true. Plenty of people have listed him outside the top five plenty of years, saying (correctly) that he has benefitted from being in the Pittsburgh system. https://www.ranker.com/list/best-2000s-quarterbacks/ranker-nfl https://bleacherreport.com/articles/561038-nfl-best-of-the-2000s-quarterbacks#slide0 https://www.thesportster.com/football/the-8-best-and-7-worst-nfl-qbs-since-2000/ https://www.yardbarker.com/nfl/articles/the_25_best_quarterbacks_of_the_2010s/s1__29728982#slide_19 https://bleacherreport.com/articles/804479-2011-nfl-quaterback-rankings#slide27 https://athlonsports.com/nfl/ranking-nfls-starting-quarterbacks-2012 Through most of his career, the top five have generally been thought of as Brees, Brady, Rodgers, Peyton and various combinations of Andrew Luck, Carson Palmer, Phillip Rivers and Ryan Fitzpatrick. Kidding, about Fitzy anyway, but Roethlisberger has indeed very often not been considered a top five guy. Not that he hasn't had a terrific career and been an excellent QB. He has been very very good for a long time. EDIT: As I re-read your post, you say, "or just shy of top 5," about Roethlisberger. Hey, I have no argument with you there, none whatsoever. IMO he's been around 6th for most of his career. But the OP has talked specifically about the top three or five, not "just shy of the top 5." Edited September 27, 2019 by Thurman#1
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted September 27, 2019 Posted September 27, 2019 On 9/24/2019 at 10:35 PM, Rad Likes The Bills said: I agree that Josh is a future Gold Jacket. Just hope he wears shorts when he gets inducted After he shatters every last Brady and Manning record he can go commando for all I care
Chris66 Posted September 27, 2019 Posted September 27, 2019 On 9/24/2019 at 9:10 PM, PlayoffsPlease said: Fans seem to be hanging their hats on the concept that there somehow there is a requirement to have short term mediocrity or failure in order to build for a period of sustained excellence. Not sure 21st history really bears that out. I think sustained excellence is fancy word for having one of the leagues top 3 or 5 QBs for an extended period of time. Bills fans are skewed by their relation with the Patriots. I am going to go out on a limb and say their run of success is a fluke, that won't happen again in my lifetime. In truth only 4 teams have really had a period of sustained excellence in the this century. Indianapolis with Peyton Manning, Steelers with Ben Rothlisberger and the Patriots with Tom Brady and the Saints with Drew Brees. Other teams have had intermittent successes with a different model, notably the Ravens. But no team without a future HOF QB who truly gaps out from their peers has accomplished that. ( I am defining sustained excellence as appearing in divisional playoff games more than 50% of the time for an extended period of years. Anything less would be more like "sustained good".) One great QB Aaron Rodgers only had intermittent success. So HOF QB is not the only thing for "sustained excellence" just the minimum starting requirements. I don't think top 10 QB really gets you sustained success. Think Matt Ryan or Cam Newton or Russell Wilson. Their teams had their moments when everything came together. Fortunately Josh Allen is a future HOF QB, and he provides the minimum building block to lead the teams to playoff wins and championships for the next dozen years. Starting this year. Really? 15 games in an your already stating he is a hof'er. You guys really are homers. 1
GreggTX Posted September 27, 2019 Posted September 27, 2019 We all know these QB's are the top reason for their teams' success and just having a QB isn't enough. Josh is getting better, but that's a huge leap of faith to even mention the HOF. He has so much improving to do before anyone could even make such a suggestion without looking silly. Let's see him actually play much better before we assume that he will ever even reach that level.
Nextmanup Posted September 27, 2019 Posted September 27, 2019 On 9/25/2019 at 4:22 AM, downunderbill said: They are definitely a symbiotic coupling. Belicheck is probably the best there has ever been, but without the best QB there has ever been, i doubt he has all 6 of those rings. I agree. I think BB and Brady would have achieved probably multiple Super Bowl success apart from one another, but the way they have ruined football for this long could have only been possible with the partnership.
row_33 Posted September 27, 2019 Posted September 27, 2019 On 9/25/2019 at 6:53 AM, PlayoffsPlease said: 1. Ben Rothlisberger may not have been a top 5 QB every single season, but over the course of the entire number of years he played, he definitely was. I can prove this by adding "you betcha" 2. "Have a chance every year" is not the same as sustained excellence, for the purposes of my post. Feel free to use my definition (in the OP) to demonstrate which teams accomplished sustained excellence the four I mentioned (each of whom were led by future HOF QBs). Having an excellent non-future HOF QB probably gives a chance every year (of course chance every year is not really measurable). Have Matt Stafford and the Lions had a chance every year? Did Carson Palmer and the Bengals? Ben is a no-brainer first ballot HOFer, he might be kept out a year for being such a *******
Iron Maiden Posted September 27, 2019 Posted September 27, 2019 On 9/24/2019 at 6:10 PM, PlayoffsPlease said: Fortunately Josh Allen is a future HOF QB, and he provides the minimum building block to lead the teams to playoff wins and championships for the next dozen years. Starting this year. Ain't that a bit early to proclaim JA is a future HOF ? On 9/25/2019 at 1:22 AM, downunderbill said: They are definitely a symbiotic coupling. Belicheck is probably the best there has ever been, but without the best QB there has ever been, i doubt he has all 6 of those rings. Absolutely agree....I think BB was the driving force behind NEs 1st 3 SBs wins....Then Brady became Brady and did his thing for 10 years....now that he's getting older, the power shifts back to BB.......the fact that they have a top defense the year Belichick is the default DC is not coincidence...BB being hands on with their defense is not a good news for any NFL teams...
Recommended Posts