Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffp12
Yeah you're right. It's a chicken or the egg kind of thing. Does the quarterback make the great team or does the great team make the quarterback? It can work both ways. My point is that Tyler Thigpen is an okay quarterback, maybe not for long, maybe it was just a fluke, but he did pretty well for a guy who rarely took snaps in practice and was thrust in as the 3rd qb and we should give him a shot. You draft sanchez and he might not beat thigpen as the starter. And even if he does and thigpen and croyle are sitting, we have some talent that is wasted. You pick a pass rusher and he doesnt become reggie white you can still use him some of the time, it's not a total bust.
Personally I want to see an NFL team try a quarterback by committee approach. Alternate series. When a QB goes down and you put in a backup who never plays in games you don't know what you have and there's a steep learning curve, if you alternate then both guys are experienced, both guys build confidence, and if one goes down then you just use the other full time. Plus it makes it that much harder to game plan against. It wasn't long ago that they said running back by committe can't work, but now it's the norm.
I'm probably going to catch hell for saying this but Imagine a quarterback duo of Thigpen and Tebow. The reason the running quarterback hasn't succeeded that well at the NFL level is because of injuries, but if you have two, then that risk is greatly reduced. Just saying, somebody oughta try it. Even if it fails it could be fun to watch.
I am a diehard chiefs fan, and I would much rather see them winning consistently behind a great defense than experiencing the ups and downs of the great offense. Those vermeil teams were fun to watch on offense, but boy was it frustrating on defense. Schottenheimer teams were fun to watch on defense, but boy was it frustrating on offense. But if i had a choice, I would pick the schottenheimer teams because with that defense all we needed was a decent offense to get us to 13-3, add a playmaker or two and we could have won super bowls. Under Vermeil that offense was great, but I don't think an extra player or two on defense would have gotten us a ring. That's all I'm saying.
|
I like alot of what you had to say, so I'll just point out that I don't like the Tebow idea in the least just to get that out of the way.
I'm also hopeful that, by watching the way the Patriots teams operated, that we can emulate them, by not juss being good at only one particular facet of the game. The Pats of recent years, are always well prepared and disciplined in all three phases of the game. It won't happen over night, but I can see Pioli improving the team fairly quickly and us being balanced in our approach.