Quote:
Originally Posted by patteeu
You're talking about the QB's window. Dan Marino was great for well over a decade, but his team didn't have a legitimate window of Super Bowl contention for that entire period. For example, from 1986 through 1989, they didn't have a winning season mainly because their defenses were window closers. The Chiefs defenses of the Vermeil era kept the Chiefs from realizing the potential of Trent Green's offenses, but even with those defenses, the Chiefs were winning.
No one would confuse Trent Green with Dan Marino in terms of value to his team, and if Flacco or Sanchez end up being top notch QBs over the course of a long career, their teams will have put themselves well ahead of the game. But neither of those guys can be considered Dan Marinos yet either and IMO, they still have to prove that they can even become Trent Greens.
|
I am talking about making long term investment at the most improtant position on the filed.
QBs don't win championships by themselves, but having a top notch young QB in place gives you the opportunity to find and open the window for a much longer stretch than trading for or signing a backup that is already approaching 30.
If the Chiefs had drafted Brees, rather than trading for Green, they would not only have had the QB for that window, but also have that QB for the next window.
Had they built the team the right way to start with, using the draft rather than trading for and signing players that were on the downside of thoer careers, they could have opened a window for 10-12 years, rather than simply have that 4 year window.
That was why I still consider the trade for Montana a mistake.
They had the talent in place to compete for the better part of a decade, but by trading for Montana, and not having a better contingency plan in place in case of injury and for his retirement, they essentially opeend a two year window.
That, to me, was sheer stupidity and piss poor planning.