Chiefs Haley versus McDaniels

Terribilis · 11-30-2011, 10:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

Haley believes that an offense has to be able to run effectively out of the pro set to win championships.

McDumbass uses more spread to effectively mask the QB's deficiencies as a pro style QB.

Every SB has been won by teams, and QBs, that can run effectively out of the pro set.

That is the primary reason that most pro personnel people are looking at QBs and trying to figure out of they have what takes to learn the mechanics of the QB position out of the pro set.

Do you believe an effective pro set QB/ offense is the only way to win a superbowl? just curious.

milkman · 11-30-2011, 10:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terribilis

Do you believe an effective pro set QB/ offense is the only way to win a superbowl? just curious.

5 years ago I would have answered with a definitive yes.

However, with the rules set the way they are now, I am no longer certain that is the case.

Terribilis · 11-30-2011, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkman

5 years ago I would have answered with a definitive yes.

However, with the rules set the way they are now, I am no longer certain that is the case.

That's kind of where I am at as well.

JCharles1981 · 11-30-2011, 10:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terribilis

Do you believe an effective pro set QB/ offense is the only way to win a superbowl? just curious.

Nope. The New England Patriots proved that an offense can do mediocre in the Superbowl, and still win with a game ending field goal, which they did twice. Remember the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' SB win against the Oakland Raiders? Their defense intercepted Rich Gannon 5 TIMES, with three of them being returned for touchdowns. Brad Johnson is not what led the Bucs to the Superbowl, it was their scorching hot defense that did.

A wise man once said that an offense wins seasonal games, but defenses win championships.

Hammock Parties · 11-30-2011, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCharles1981

Nope. The New England Patriots proved that an offense can do mediocre in the Superbowl, and still win with a game ending field goal, which they did twice. Remember the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' SB win against the Oakland Raiders? Their defense intercepted Rich Gannon 5 TIMES, with three of them being returned for touchdowns. Brad Johnson is not what led the Bucs to the Superbowl, it was their scorching hot defense that did.

A wise man once said that an offense wins seasonal games, but defenses win championships.

I hope you die horribly.

JCharles1981 · 11-30-2011, 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Omega

I hope you die horribly.

Why? Because I spoke an ounce of truth you disagreed with? By the way, eight of the last sixteen Superbowl MVP's have been non-QB's. What does that entail? It means that a QB can only be half as good as the rest of his offense, and still win a Superbowl title. Just over 50% of all the Superbowl MVP's have been quarterbacks, so a QB doesn't necessarily need to be a superstar to lead his team to the Superbowl.

One other thing worth noting is that out of the 6 Superbowls won by the Pittsburgh Steelers, the SB MVP had been awarded to a QB just twice (Terry Bradshaw). Plus, of the 7 Superbowls that the Dallas Cowboys have been to, only 2 of them ended in the QB getting the Superbowl MVP trophy.

Hammock Parties · 12-01-2011, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCharles1981

By the way, eight of the last sixteen Superbowl MVP's have been non-QB's. What does that entail? It means that a QB can only be half as good as the rest of his offense, and still win a Superbowl title. Just over 50% of all the Superbowl MVP's have been quarterbacks, so a QB doesn't necessarily need to be a superstar to lead his team to the Superbowl.
.

This is the dumbest ****ing post anyone on this forum has ever made in regards to the QB debate.

For ****'s sake, just because Jerry Rice won the MVP in a Super Bowl doesn't mean Montana isn't a great QB. Santonio Holmes and Deion Branch won MVPs in Super Bowls with Tom Brady and Ben Roethlisberger. You want to tell me they aren't "superstar" QBs?

What about: John Elway, Brett Favre and Troy Aikman? They didn't win MVPs in Super Bowl wins.

****ing idiot.

jd1020 · 12-01-2011, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCharles1981

Why? Because I spoke an ounce of truth you disagreed with? By the way, eight of the last sixteen Superbowl MVP's have been non-QB's. What does that entail? Just over 50% of all the Superbowl MVP's have been quarterbacks.

This tells me that although a player that's not a QB can have a tremendous impact on any given day, QB is still, by a wide margin, the MVP(osition).

**BigMeatballDave** · 11-30-2011, 11:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCharles1981

Nope. The New England Patriots proved that an offense can do mediocre in the Superbowl, and still win with a game ending field goal, which they did twice. Remember the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' SB win against the Oakland Raiders? Their defense intercepted Rich Gannon 5 TIMES, with three of them being returned for touchdowns. Brad Johnson is not what led the Bucs to the Superbowl, it was their scorching hot defense that did.

A wise man once said that an offense wins seasonal games, but defenses win championships.

In case you haven't noticed, that style of play just doesn't win SBs nowadays.

SenselessChiefsFan · 12-01-2011, 10:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCharles1981

Nope. The New England Patriots proved that an offense can do mediocre in the Superbowl, and still win with a game ending field goal, which they did twice. Remember the Tampa Bay Buccaneers' SB win against the Oakland Raiders? Their defense intercepted Rich Gannon 5 TIMES, with three of them being returned for touchdowns. Brad Johnson is not what led the Bucs to the Superbowl, it was their scorching hot defense that did.

A wise man once said that an offense wins seasonal games, but defenses win championships.

The part that you are leaving out is the wise man said this a long time ago.

Now, at one time, this was true. However, you really need to have a balanced team to win a Championship. Given the new rules, even a great defense will give up points to a great offense. You have to at least be able to keep up offensively.

Also, the Bucs defense was the same for a long time. It was great. Tony Dungy was the head coach. The offense stunk. Gruden came, and suddenly, they win a Super Bowl. The defense was actually not quite as good, but the offense..... the offense was much better.

Oh, and the Pats were mediocre on both sides of the ball. They were the first team in the history of the league not be rated in the top ten in either offense or defense and still win the Super Bowl. So, you could use that team to argue that you don't need an elite defense either.

WhiteWhale · 12-01-2011, 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

The part that you are leaving out is the wise man said this a long time ago.

Now, at one time, this was true. However, you really need to have a balanced team to win a Championship. Given the new rules, even a great defense will give up points to a great offense. You have to at least be able to keep up offensively.

Also, the Bucs defense was the same for a long time. It was great. Tony Dungy was the head coach. The offense stunk. Gruden came, and suddenly, they win a Super Bowl. The defense was actually not quite as good, but the offense..... the offense was much better.

Oh, and the Pats were mediocre on both sides of the ball. They were the first team in the history of the league not be rated in the top ten in either offense or defense and still win the Super Bowl. So, you could use that team to argue that you don't need an elite defense either.

The bucs had their best defenses in history in 2002. They were ranked #1 in nearly every category. The offensive production barely changed. They actually averaged fewer points than they did in 2001 under Dungy.

Monte Kiffin was the genius behind that D. Not Dungy.

Point being... get a quality QB or have a defense that ranks in the top 5 of all time.

One of these is easier to achieve than the other.

SenselessChiefsFan · 12-01-2011, 10:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiteWhale

The bucs had their best defenses in history in 2002. They were ranked #1 in nearly every category. The offensive production barely changed. They actually averaged fewer points than they did in 2001 under Dungy.

Monte Kiffin was the genius behind that D. Not Dungy.

Point being... get a quality QB or have a defense that ranks in the top 5 of all time.

One of these is easier to achieve than the other.

I stand corrected. I remember the offense being better than the year before. Maybe that was more towards the end of the year when the Bucs were coming together more.

The point still stands that they had a great defense for a long time, and it wasn't until Gruden was hired as the head coach (offensive minded Coach) that they were able to get to the Super Bowl.

I have not doubt that the opponent in the Super Bowl had much to do with their actual winning of the Championship.

WhiteWhale · 12-01-2011, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan

I stand corrected. I remember the offense being better than the year before. Maybe that was more towards the end of the year when the Bucs were coming together more.

The point still stands that they had a great defense for a long time, and it wasn't until Gruden was hired as the head coach (offensive minded Coach) that they were able to get to the Super Bowl.

I have not doubt that the opponent in the Super Bowl had much to do with their actual winning of the Championship.

Their opponent in that game was a gift from god.

What Gruden did to make that team better wasn't about X's and O's. It was one of those intangible things. They were a different team. More motivated... more emotional.