Quote:
Originally Posted by Baby Lee
Meh, at this point I'm just tired of arguing the point.
For the longest, the narrative was that anything short of championships was utterly unacceptable and that having a franchise QB was imperative BECAUSE IT MADE THE REST EASIER.
And my counter was, when we got to competent level QBing, we still weren't good enough AS A FRANCHISE to assure championships.
Now we have the best QB in the history of the sport, and the rest of the franchise is still mediocre, a lot of key aspects of the franchise are presently agysmal, and it's costing us games, and the narrative now is 'hey pretty passes' and 'at least we have A CHANCE.'
It's still a team sport, and having the best QB in history hasn't made us bulletproof, and it hasn't made our deficiencies any easier to overcome.
But it's fun, so I guess just have fun . . .
|
Well, most of that just isn’t true, or at least has so much hyperbole that it just makes you look silly saying it.
And they've now been to 3 consecutive AFCCGs, 2 consecutive SBs, and won one... so, I have no idea how any of this is remotely relevant. Yeah, the NFL doesn't just hand the SB trophy to the best QB every year (insert Tom Brady), but CLEARLY if you don't have one of the top few, you're at a huge disadvantage.
And once those best QBs in the league are playing each other, other phases/players/coaching make more of a difference.
I seriously doubt any reasonable person has said to completely ignore everything else and only have a franchise QB, period, and you'll be guaranteed SBs out the ass..... that's just how it gets painted in people's heads when they argue too much about it.
Yeah, we're all aware that a franchise QB needs a little help... but, Mahomes went to the SB with an injured starting RB, injured receiver, and like 18 injured offensive line. That's how important HE is to the team.