Name your elite qbs

[Chinook]

Eli doesn't meet my personal definition of elite. You can't add Eli to any team. Lots of QBs could have won with those Giants teams. Best D-Line I've ever seen.

Eli with the Jets would approach 50 ints.

Ryan is a potential elite, but not there yet. Lets see what his 4th year brings.

I don't think there's a single quarterback you can add to any team to make them contenders. Brady on the Bucs is still a terrible team. Manning in Oakland probably doesn't make the playoffs. Brees and Rodgers wouldn't be favorites if they were on the Panthers or Jaguars. The quarterback position itself is getting overrated, in my opinion. I wouldn't be surprised if none of the big four elites win another ring.

[monosylab1k]

I don't think there's a single quarterback you can add to any team to make them contenders. Brady on the Bucs is still a terrible team. Manning in Oakland probably doesn't make the playoffs. Brees and Rodgers wouldn't be favorites if they were on the Panthers or Jaguars. The quarterback position itself is getting overrated, in my opinion. I wouldn't be surprised if none of the big four elites win another ring.

LOL this is idiotic. In the age of parity, with the talent so close, most of the time the only difference between a 6-10 team and a 10-6 team is quarterbacking and/or coaching. Replace Freeman with Brady/Manning/Rodgers and the Bucs win 10 games minimum. Very rarely do elite qb's play on bad teams because they're the one thing separating that team from being terrible. Meanwhile teams with average or weak qb's are the ones who lose every year or do the inconsistent 11-5 this year, 6-10 the next yoyo. 20-25 teams every year have playoff level talent, but only a few have the qb play to put them in the playoffs.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

LOL this is idiotic. In the age of parity, with the talent so close, most of the time the only difference between a 6-10 team and a 10-6 team is quarterbacking and/or coaching. Replace Freeman with Brady/Manning/Rodgers and the Bucs win 10 games minimum. Very rarely do elite qb's play on bad teams because they're the one thing separating that team from being terrible. Meanwhile teams with average or weak qb's are the ones who lose every year or do the inconsistent 11-5 this year, 6-10 the next yoyo. 20-25 teams every year have playoff level talent, but only a few have the qb play to put them in the playoffs.

I do agree with him in the sense that teams with elite QBs have gotten totally complacent, New England and Green Bay being the two notable cases.

[stretch]

LOL this is idiotic. In the age of parity, with the talent so close, most of the time the only difference between a 6-10 team and a 10-6 team is quarterbacking and/or coaching. Replace Freeman with Brady/Manning/Rodgers and the Bucs win 10 games minimum. Very rarely do elite qb's play on bad teams because they're the one thing separating that team from being terrible. Meanwhile teams with average or weak qb's are the ones who lose every year or do the inconsistent 11-5 this year, 6-10 the next yoyo. 20-25 teams every year have playoff level talent, but only a few have the qb play to put them in the playoffs.

This.

Perfect example is the Broncos.

They went from 8-8 to 13-3. A 5 game difference. That's huge.

[DUNCANownsKOBE]

Or the Lions, where they go 11-5 the one season they get decent QB play but immediately fall apart if their QB doesn't throw for 5,000 yards and carry the offense.

[Creepn]

If you have to convince people that someone is elite then he's most likely not elite. Nobody has to convince me that Brady is elite. Nobody has to convince me that Rodgers is elite.

[Chinook]

LOL this is idiotic. In the age of parity, with the talent so close, most of the time the only difference between a 6-10 team and a 10-6 team is quarterbacking and/or coaching. Replace Freeman with Brady/Manning/Rodgers and the Bucs win 10 games minimum. Very rarely do elite qb's play on bad teams because they're the one thing separating that team from being terrible. Meanwhile teams with average or weak qb's are the ones who lose every year or do the inconsistent 11-5 this year, 6-10 the next yoyo. 20-25 teams every year have playoff level talent, but only a few have the qb play to put them in the playoffs.

First off, you don't even need a decent quarterback to make the playoffs. There's at least one team a year that makes it despite their quarterback. Is a team inconsistent with a bad quarterback? Often, yes, but that has a lot to do with other factors like coaching and general personnel inconsistency, too.

Decent quarterback play (and better, obviously) is a plus, for sure, and having a good quarterback CAN be the difference for some teams. The Vikings in 2009 were a great example of this, as well as the ans of 2008. But I think that says more about the quality of the quarterbacks who were being replaced than it does about the need for elite talent. It's obvious that bad quarterback play can hold a team back, but a bad team is a bad team. The Broncos of 2011 were NOT a bad team, neither were the 2007 ans nor the 2008 Vikings. They were ALL playoff teams the year before they got better quarterback play. I've yet to see an elite quarterback come in a take a truly subpar team anywhere.

And you bring up winning games in the regular season like that determines who's a contender. I'm of the mind that many playoff teams don't fit that description. It doesn't matter if the Brady Bucs make the playoffs. They wouldn't be able to beat more-complete teams like the 49ers or Packers of a couple of years ago. The Ravens were 13-3 in 2006, but I don't think they were really a contending team.

My stance is not that quarterback play doesn't matter. It's not that good quarterback play can't put a team over the top. It's that elite quarterback play doesn't trump all else. A team needs units that feed off each other well. That’s why the Ravens won this season. The offense could get needed scores when the defense got burned, while the defense prevented scores, especially after turnovers and gave the offense good field position.

[Chinook]

I do agree with him in the sense that teams with elite QBs have gotten totally complacent, New England and Green Bay being the two notable cases.

That's funny, because from my argument, I'd think those would be the two teams which could most withstand this elite craze right now. It's going to be terrible for the Packers when Rodgers' cap number doubles in a couple of years. And the Patriots should have the system to remain effective with cheap talent.

What do you mean by them getting complacent?

[Chinook]

This.

Perfect example is the Broncos.

They went from 8-8 to 13-3. A 5 game difference. That's huge.

It seems pretty clear that the 2011 Broncos were better than their record (and had the second-hardest SOS) while the 2012 Broncos were worse than theirs (easiest SOS). They both lost in the same round as well, so I'm not so sure that the example is that perfect. There are better ones, like the 2009 Vikings.

[Rob Gronkowski]

Who the is this Chinook

Some chode with re ed ass takes who is lucky as that I broke my arm. If I ever see him I'll beat his ass at beer pong and then dominate him in shirtless wrestling for 9 hours.

[Chinook]

Some chode with re ed ass takes who is lucky as that I broke my arm. If I ever see him I'll beat his ass at beer pong and then dominate him in shirtless wrestling for 9 hours.

[2centsworth]

New Orleans was brutal before Brees. Omg Brady with Vjax, mwill and Dallas Clark.
elite QBs transform franchises.

[2centsworth]

If you have to convince people that someone is elite then he's most likely not elite. Nobody has to convince me that Brady is elite. Nobody has to convince me that Rodgers is elite.

This

[Chinook]

New Orleans was brutal before Brees. Omg Brady with Vjax, mwill and Dallas Clark.
elite QBs transform franchises.

Jackson was a nice addition. Him, Williams and Underwood/Benn have the potential to be a nice core ( no on Clark, though). Brady probably would make that offense a lot better. But the rest of that team sucks too much for the Brady Bucs to be a big threat. Imagine the Patriots defense without Wilfork and Talib. That's pretty much Tampa's defense. They have some nice young pieces in McCoy, Clayborn, David, Barron and Foster. But they need elite talent on that side the ball in the worst way. Give them Julius Peppers and Alex Smith, and I think they win more games than they would if you just give them Brady. , give them Pepper and Willis, and I think Freeman would be good enough.

[2centsworth]

Jackson was a nice addition. Him, Williams and Underwood/Benn have the potential to be a nice core ( no on Clark, though). Brady probably would make that offense a lot better. But the rest of that team sucks too much for the Brady Bucs to be a big threat. Imagine the Patriots defense without Wilfork and Talib. That's pretty much Tampa's defense. They have some nice young pieces in McCoy, Clayborn, David, Barron and Foster. But they need elite talent on that side the ball in the worst way. Give them Julius Peppers and Alex Smith, and I think they win more games than they would if you just give them Brady. , give them Pepper and Willis, and I think Freeman would be good enough.

wrong bro. Tampa had the #1 rush d in the league. It was there secondary that stunk. Brady took the Patriots to the super bowl last year with the worst secondary in the league. NE's D was ranked near if not at the bottom last year.

[Chinook]

wrong bro. Tampa had the #1 rush d in the league. It was there secondary that stunk. Brady took the Patriots to the super bowl last year with the worst secondary in the league. NE's D was ranked near if not at the bottom last year.

I understand the Bucs' ranking. I've watched every Tampa game this season (and pretty much every season for about a dozen years). They went from one of the worst to one of the best by changing their scheme to bring a safety up into the box (usually Barron). You're right that they are good front-seven talent (although they lack elite talent outside of maybe McCoy and David). I conceded as much. Their pass defense is truly horrid, and a lot of that had to do with having Barron and a 37-year-old, undersized Barber. They also have no corners of note after trading Talib. Wright was a bad signing.

The Patriots' offense has been something to behold for about six years now. It hasn't always been because of the players, though. Even Matt Cassel managed to keep New England #12 in 2008. You'll get no argument from me that "elite" offense can overcome bad defense (only to a point, though, as ring-winning defenses usually have SOMETHING to hang their hats on) or that great quarterbacks can make offenses great. I see quarterbacks the same way I see point-guards: They're great to have, and great point-guard play can make an offense look really great, but if that's all you have, you're not going to win anything. The 49ers barely lost to the same team last season as the Patriots did with Alex "decent, but in no way elite" Smith at the helm. I don't know how much of a difference the Patriots having a better quarterback made.

[Chinook]

I am mainly upset with this elite talk, because I don't think Flacco deserves to be paid a sixth of the cap.