8 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

Yeah went back and edit it. I forgot it was the 2009 playoffs. Either way the point still stands that 8 out of the 9 teams with the most wins and had the most consistent success in the league over the last decade had some sort of HOF/great QBs for at least a 3 year window besides the ravens.

I think QB is a factor but it's not like the teams that won didn't have more beyond just great QB play.  I mean Rodgers and Brees have been top 5 QBs from 2010 to 2020.  Neither of them appeared in more than one Super Bowl.  Wilson has appeared in 2 but the Seahawks haven't been back 2015 and haven't really progressed in the playoffs since 2016.  The last time the Seahawks had an elite defense was 2016.  The Packers have appeared 4 times going 0-4.  They lost every time to the team with the better defense and not the better QB.  

17 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Now compare passing stats league wide in 2000 and 2021. And wake me up when we win 11 games and make the playoffs in 2021.

FTR I agree with you, but devils advocate needs to point out Andy Reid, Jim Johnson vs Nick Sirianni, Johnny Gannon 

15 minutes ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

100% agree you need the coaching to go along with the great QB. I think that goes hand-in-hand because we don’t have one or the other you’re not gonna be as successful as you want to be. Although i question just how good of a coach lefleur is if he doesn’t have rodgers.  

it is really hard for me though to say Russell Wilson is not elite QB when he’s a top-five quarterback in the league when he’s healthy. And has been arguably for 4 years now. It’s also hard for me not to call big Ben elite when he’s about to be 5th all time in passing yards and won as much as he had. Yes he’s had good teams and coaching around him. I get it’s a different game now but to have the sustainability to even get into the top five and have the amount of success he’s had on the field he is an elite quarterback. He’s not anymore but he definitely was. 

Wilson I think is elite. He's had to single handedly carry that offense and team for a few years and has done so. 

Ben is interesting. I guess it all depends on how you define "elite". I think Ben is right on the border between great/elite (over his career, obviously not now). He was really bad at the start of his career, and in his 3 Super Bowls he was bad. Combined stat line of 55/91 for 642 yards, so 60% and 214 yards per game, with 3 TDs to 5 INTs. They were also gifted a win against Seattle IMO. But he's always had a good coach, and a great defense to support him. 

He's played 22 playoff games, is 13-9, with 63% completion, averaging 262 yards per game, with 34 TDs to 28 INTs. Those are actually bad numbers IMO. And definitely not elite. 

I think using a QB's won/loss record is misleading, considering how many other factors are at play. Overall, looking at his career numbers, he isn't really elite. He did have one stretch from 2013-2018 where he was lighting up. He has 205 INTs in 241 games, I think that's very poor. 

Edit - he's also never been All Pro. Now, I think he gets in the HOF due to being a Steeler and having 2 rings....but....Aikman is in as well, and quite frankly he wasn't that good either.

17 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Pisses me off.  Some of them are white claw drinking millennials who would argue Lebron over MJ as well.  

Back in my day we called them Zimas.  

26 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

So we're at the point now where idiots are trying to claim Hurts is better than McNabb. That seems right on schedule.

The absolute hatred some people have for McNabb really baffles me. 

He had a good half. Just wait till he wins back to back games for the first time in his career, we'll be sculpting his swagged out bust for Canton

2 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

Wilson I think is elite. He's had to single handedly carry that offense and team for a few years and has done so. 

Ben is interesting. I guess it all depends on how you define "elite". I think Ben is right on the border between great/elite (over his career, obviously not now). He was really bad at the start of his career, and in his 3 Super Bowls he was bad. Combined stat line of 55/91 for 642 yards, so 60% and 214 yards per game, with 3 TDs to 5 INTs. They were also gifted a win against Seattle IMO. But he's always had a good coach, and a great defense to support him. 

He's played 22 playoff games, is 13-9, with 63% completion, averaging 262 yards per game, with 34 TDs to 28 INTs. Those are actually bad numbers IMO. And definitely not elite. 

I think using a QB's won/loss record is misleading, considering how many other factors are at play. Overall, looking at his career numbers, he isn't really elite. He did have one stretch from 2013-2018 where he was lighting up. He has 205 INTs in 241 games, I think that's very poor. 

If you want to say he’s not elite I think there’s an argument. but i think we all can agree that he’s  been at least great and argument to be made for him being elite either. However pretendjng like big Ben is a reason that the term elite gets lessened is a bunch of crap. This isn’t like I said Flacco was elite when we all know there’s no case for it. 

21 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

Just to put and end to this stupidity -- McNabb's first year as a starter was 2000. What did he do? FINISH SECOND IN MVP VOTING.

Excuse me!  The votes this year haven't been tabulated yet ..... 

That'll teach you for thinking you can put an end to MY stupidity

17 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I think something being overlooked with this elite QB talk is the coaching that goes with it. I think coaches have more influence in the NFL than they do in the other 3 big sports.

Say what you will about the cheating, but Bellichek is a master coach. Especially defensively. But just overall, the guy is obsessed with football, going so far as to only use left footed punters because the ball spins different. He just looks for any possible advantage, no matter how obscure it seems. But he's also a great game day coach and generally pretty good situationally too.

In regards to Ben, I think Tomlin is a great regular season coach, and great motivator/leader, but his playoff record isn't that great at 8-8. At times I feel like he's a bit overrated, but at other times I think he's kinda underrated. It's hard to get a grasp on him.

Carrol cost his team a Super Bowl by stupidly throwing at the goal line. Just insanely dumb. 

Dan Quinn had that game in the bag, but completely blew it with terrible coaching.

Doug et al called a masterful game, which even then was just enough to beat Bellichek and Brady. 

Ron Rivera I think is not a good coach, and got exposed as a one and done. Same with Jon Fox, got there but got wrecked. 

The classic example of a bad coach destroying a team's chances is McCarthy. The guy completely failed Rodgers and the Packers, and I have no doubt in my mind he'll blow it with the Cowboys too. Terrible game manager, over reliant on analytics now, and I don't see him as a great leader/motivator. I think he is good at designing the first 15 plays, but after that he's a complete clown.

Andy Reid is a great coach, though not on gamedays. Unbelievable game planner, maybe nobody better at the first scripted plays of a game. And players absolutely love the guy. But it took a marriage with him and Mahomes to get it done. 

So to sum up, an elite QB is certainly a big part of the puzzle, it makes a lot of other things easier. But if you don't have a good to great coach to go with that QB, you aren't winning it all either. Jury is still out on Sirianni IMO, though so far I'm more encouraged than discouraged. 

 

 

  The Pat’s first 6 games this year he pulled out the early 2000’s offense for Mac Jones to learn just as he did with Brady. Each week he expands the playbook by putting longer passes into the game plan.  
  New England has a better O line than the Jets or Jags, but so far watching him play, Jones looks much better than Wilson and Lawrence,  most of that is Belichick. 
 

43 minutes ago, austinfan said:

Dimes to dollars the team with a top defense wins the Superbowl and the majority of playoff games.

I agree that a top defense is key but having an elite QB is as important.  A mediocre QB isn't enough to ever win unless they just have an incredible hot streak where they lead an offense at an elite level.  Foles, Flacco and Eli are probably the best examples.  

If you put an elite QB on the Eagles, they're not a contender because of the talent level and likely coaching on defense.  While we all may disagree on Hurts' potential to be an elite QB, I don't think we disagree that he is not currently a top 5 QB as a passer.  I think we could also say the defense is more than one player away from being a top unit.  To be a top unit, I think we would expect multiple above average starters at all 3 levels of the defense and 2 or more elite playmakers.  I think the talent gap at defense is more significant than the talent gap at QB at this point.  

1 minute ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

If you want to say he’s not elite I think there’s an argument. but i think we all can agree that he’s  been at least great and argument to be made for him being elite either. However pretendjng like big Ben is a reason that the term elite gets lessened is a bunch of crap. This isn’t like I said Flacco was elite when we all know there’s no case for it. 

I mean I think it's best to place in tiers. I think there's an upper tier, of "elite", and I'll group them based on their careers, but will only include active QBs:

Brady, Mahomes, Rodgers, Wilson...and Wilson is right at the edge of the cliff, IMO. 

Then you have the great tier:

Ben (not the last 2 years), Ryan (again falling further every year), Lamar (who actually looks much better passing this year, to my surprise, I'm a big time Lamar Hater).

Then I'd group the young/rising stars:

Allen, Herbert, Burrow, Murray

Then, good QBs, with flaws:

Stafford, Cousins, Dak, Carr, Wentz

Next up, QB's who need a good run game:

Mayfield, Tannehill, Garroppolo

Then you have your Not Enough Info guys:

Jones, T-Law, Wilson, Fields, Hurts

Then, you have your clear trash pile, would not want any of these guys on my team:

Bridgewater, Danny Dimes, Heineken, Goff, Tua, Scam, Darnold, Mills. 

 

I think that's how I would place them all. 

 

 

12 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

I mean I think it's best to place in tiers. I think there's an upper tier, of "elite", and I'll group them based on their careers, but will only include active QBs:

Brady, Mahomes, Rodgers, Wilson...and Wilson is right at the edge of the cliff, IMO. 

Then you have the great tier:

Ben (not the last 2 years), Ryan (again falling further every year), Lamar (who actually looks much better passing this year, to my surprise, I'm a big time Lamar Hater).

Then I'd group the young/rising stars:

Allen, Herbert, Burrow, Murray

Then, good QBs, with flaws:

Stafford, Cousins, Dak, Carr, Wentz

Next up, QB's who need a good run game:

Mayfield, Tannehill, Garroppolo

Then you have your Not Enough Info guys:

Jones, T-Law, Wilson, Fields, Hurts

Then, you have your clear trash pile, would not want any of these guys on my team:

Bridgewater, Danny Dimes, Heineken, Goff, Tua, Scam, Darnold, Mills. 

 

I think that's how I would place them all. 

 

 

I wouldn’t disagree with you if you wanted to say he’s just great. Personally I’d say he’s elite. I know there’s an argument to be had either way. The rest of it i would agree with though.  

Also saw the edit I don’t really like the argument while he was never an all pro. Well when you played in the era with Tom Brady and Peyton Manning arguably two of the best quarterback to ever play the game and in their primes of their careers, the odds are you are likely not gonna be an all pro. Then you add rodgers into the fold. From 2005-2014 only 4 QBs were all pro: manning (5), brady (2), rodgers (2) and Brees (1). all those quarterbacks are better than Big Ben. After that you had cam, Ryan and then Brady and mahomes. And cam and Ryan were mvps that year. 

8 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

5 of 6 years in the late 00's and early 2000s Ben was a top 2/top 3 QB and it wasnt close. 

He averaged like 4400 yards, 28 Touchdowns, 9 picks, 4 or 5 straight pro bowls and the Steelers went 45-19 with 3 or 4 divison wins. 

He blows now, and has for a couple years, but yes, Big ben was ELITE for a 5-6 stretch and will be a first ballot hall of famer

This post is hilarious.

Let's break it down.

5 of 6 years in the late 00's....so is that, 2005-2010? Cause....he only entered the league in 2004? 

And early 2000s....wait? What? Then it's "he blows now and has for a couple of years"....so are the late 00's like, 2007-2009? 

His first 3 years were not good. His rookie year was OK, but he won ROY due to a 13-0 record, again, carried by a great defense. He had 17 TDs to 11 INTs. Not great. Averaged 187 yards per game. 

2005 averaged 198.8 yards per game, and improved to 17/9 TD/Int. So improvement, which is good. Still not good numbers.

2006 was a disaster, as they asked him to do more. Sure he improved to 234 yards per game, but that came with 18 TDs and 23 INTs! He led the league in INTs that year. 

Now 2007 he finally breaks out and makes his first Pro Bowl. Great year. 32 TDs to only 11 INTs, but still only threw for 210 yards per game. That's not great.

2008 back to 17 TDs and 15 INTs, and averaged 206 yards per game. Terrible year.

2009 he's back to looking good, with 26 TDs, 12 INTs, and throwing for 288 yards per game. Now we're getting there.

2010 it's 17/5, 267 yards per game. Little regression, but at least he finally cut down on INTs. 

2011, his 2nd pro bowl, 21/14 ratio, 272 yards per game average. 

From 2014-2019, he was absolutely elite. Great numbers. Except the INTs, every year except 2014 he threw double digit INTs, (2014 he threw 9), and he led the league again in INTs in 2018 with 16. He made the PB in 2014,2015,2016,2017. Never an All Pro.

Yes, he will be a first ballot HOFer, but mostly because his defense won him 2 Super Bowls. He's been a great stabilizing presence for that franchise, but they mostly won with a great running attack and great defense, not elite QB play. 

1 minute ago, e-a-g-l-e-s eagles! said:

I wouldn’t disagree with you if you wanted to say he’s just great. Personally I’d say he’s elite. I know there’s an argument to be had either way. The rest of it i would agree with though.  

Also saw the edit I don’t really like the argument while he was never an all pro. Well when you played in the era with Tom Brady and Peyton Manning arguably two of the best quarterback to ever play the game the odds are you are likely not gonna be an all pro. Then you add rodgers into the fold. From 2005-2014 only 4 QBs were all pro: manning (5), brady (2), rodgers (2) and Brees (1). all those quarterbacks are better than Big Ben. After that you had cam, Ryan and then Brady and mahomes. And cam and Ryan were mvps that year. 

To me, I think the All Pro basically designates the elite players. It's the cream of the crop essentially. And sure, you could argue that Brady/Manning hogged the honors, but to not even get it once, not even a 2nd team nod, I think speaks to the fact that Ben was never the best QB when he played. That franchises success has been built off a great running game with a great defense as I noted above. 

13 minutes ago, TorontoEagle said:

To me, I think the All Pro basically designates the elite players. It's the cream of the crop essentially. And sure, you could argue that Brady/Manning hogged the honors, but to not even get it once, not even a 2nd team nod, I think speaks to the fact that Ben was never the best QB when he played. That franchises success has been built off a great running game with a great defense as I noted above. 

I mean cam Newton all pro would you consider him cream of the crop and same with Ryan? I wouldn’t. I think both had great elite seasons and was never really elite after that.

I am never going to argue with you that he was never the best quarterback during that era. However he’s also playing with 3 quarterbacks in a 10 year window that might go down as 3 of the top 10 quarterbacks in the history of the NFL. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are both top-five in the entire history of the NFL. You can make the case Aaron Rodgers by the time he’s done is gonna be a top 10. And then you throw in Brees. Realistically the two years that he probably has the best chance that it was 2015 2016 and both cam Newton and that Ryan had unbelievable years while Peyton Manning retired and Tom Brady still finished second in all pro in 2016. 

also not that I think this is a major reason but the all pro teams are picked by the media. I think his off the field issues doesn’t help him win any votes 

I think one of the biggest unfortunate things to happen to fans is that we didn’t get to see Andrew luck play longer. Cause the colts really started getting traction with the Nelson and Leonard and branden smith draft in 2018. 

45 minutes ago, Nivraga said:

FTR I agree with you, but devils advocate needs to point out Andy Reid, Jim Johnson vs Nick Sirianni, Johnny Gannon 

Go back and read about how fans thought about those 2 in their 1st year

54 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Are you seriously this stupid?  Because it's more of a passing league then it was then.   You know...because of rules and all.  Good God!  

 

You know what else Mcnabb didn't have in 2000?  Marvin Harrison.....since that is what everyone wants to compare D. Smith to.  

because I actually watched just about all of mcnabb era’s games.  I know exactly what he was.   Hurts has a long way to go to get there but it’s year one for him.   
 

how stupid (blinded by bias maybe) does someone have to be to not get that simple concept?   That is the real question 

5 hours ago, austinfan said:

Take out Brady, and elite QBs don't win that many SBs, most win one, and maybe get back once in a 15 year career. Peyton was carried to his second by a great defense.

That is, you find as many 2nd and 3rd tier QBs on the trophy, because winning a SB is a combination of a TEAM peaking and luck, as much as an elite QB.

Nor will QBs be as important this decade as last decades - football goes in cycles, as the passing game becomes more important, defenses get lighter and faster, more emphasis on DL who can pass rush and LBs that can cover. Now what kind of offense can exploit that kind of defense?

 

The new movement in the NFL is winning while the QB is on a rookie contract, because unless you are cheating the salary cap like the Patriots did... the QB position takes up a huge chuck of the salary cap, especially if you are overpaying a guy that @eagle45 had in Tier 2, but paid at Tier 1.

Ultimately, football is a team sport... you need a complete team to win a Super Bowl.  BUT... an elite QB can cover for a lot of weaknesses on a roster.  

No matter how the league changes, the QB will continue to be the most important position on the roster, as it has been since around 1985.

4 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

Ultimately, football is a team sport... you need a complete team to win a Super Bowl.  BUT... an elite QB can cover for a lot of weaknesses on a roster.  

And boy do we have a lot of them

 

5 hours ago, RLC said:

If we go by QBR, which includes rushing, here's Hurts' ranking the past 3 weeks.

Week 8: 1
Week 9: 4
Week 10: 7

Given all the struggles of other QBs (ex: Stafford), at what point do we just acknowledge that Hurts is a reasonable starter with a 1.4M cap hit.

Sure... for a QB with a $1.4M cap hit, he's a reasonable starter.     All QBs struggle at times, so I'm not sure what the point is with that.  Are you suggesting that this team wouldn't be better with Stafford than Hurts?  Or just when you factor in the salary, that changes things.  

 

And the QBR with the addition of rushing doesn't interest me.  Long term, no QB in the modern era has been successful for a significant number of years as a running threat more than a passing threat.   Until Hurts becomes more dangerous as a passer than he is as a runner, he's not a long term answer.  I am encouraged by the last few games, but he's still got a long way to go before I'd stop looking to upgrade that position.   (That said, I have zero interest in the Eagles doing a deal for a guy like Wilson like the Rams did for Stafford.  The Rams had all the other pieces in place to make a push this year.  The Eagles don't and need those picks to make the roster as a whole better.)

8 minutes ago, Iggles_Phan said:

The new movement in the NFL is winning while the QB is on a rookie contract, because unless you are cheating the salary cap like the Patriots did... the QB position takes up a huge chuck of the salary cap, especially if you are overpaying a guy that @eagle45 had in Tier 2, but paid at Tier 1.

Ultimately, football is a team sport... you need a complete team to win a Super Bowl.  BUT... an elite QB can cover for a lot of weaknesses on a roster.  

No matter how the league changes, the QB will continue to be the most important position on the roster, as it has been since around 1985.

This! I would also add if you don’t have one the margin of error is so much thinner in a lot of different areas. 

1 hour ago, vikas83 said:

Because the game has changed to make offense easier. Did you just start watching football? What's next -- going to tell me Jon Kitna has better stats than Dan Fouts?

See my last response to that other tool.  I actually watched just about every game mcnabb played.  I remember it all.  
 

You guys act like you know the future for hurts and that’s the most ridiculous, arrogant, bias (gee vika arrogant? No way) stance one could take. 
 

I was referring to we rating and that’s really it as far as mcnabb year one and hurts year one.    Which while means only so much, is a sum of efficiency 

lastly I wasn’t the one comparing the two.   That was someone else.  I simply stated that it’s year one for hurts. 

5 hours ago, RLC said:

We learned this in 2017: having a cheap QB makes it much easier to build a good roster. Once Wentz got extended, our roster got weaker.

As of today, I'm leaning towards keeping Hurts for 2022 if only to solve the cap issues moving forward. 

Wentz' extension didn't hit until this season.   The roster got weaker because the guy building it focused on aging, injured and expensive players rather than knowing how to draft.   I don't disagree with the principle, but in practice, the Wentz extension had virtually no impact on the strength of the roster... until this year.

4 hours ago, RLC said:

It's objectively harder to build a good roster once you pay your franchise QB 30M.

Sure is.  But, that didn't happen until this year and they packed him off to Indy... now he only counts against the cap for one year.  Prior to this year, he was never even close to that number against the cap.  Meanwhile, Fletcher Cox, Lane Johnson, Brandon Brooks, etc. cost about $20M+ each.  

3 hours ago, Parrot Head said:

So, y’all are trying to talk yourselves in to being ok with average QB play? 

Not y'all.  But som'all.  Afan seems to be beating that drum loudest.  So, maybe we know where Lurie's head is.