Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldcolt
Its been four years and my goal isn't playoffs. You and I are on completely different pages. You believe only one Super Bowl in 19 years doesn't prove my point. For me that is the whole point, winning Super Bowls. I am over loving making the playoffs because one outstanding player pulls us there only to inevitably getting our asses handed to us by a more rounded team. I agree, however, that one Super Bowl is better than a lifetime of mediocre play. I don't believe those are the options. Multiple Super Bowls are possible without a super qb, just look at New England with the POS they have had a qb. Nice to argue over football with you.
|
I can speak for myself, you don’t need to tell me what I believe. Tom Brady is a franchise QB. Is he the goat? No. But he is a franchise QB.
We won only one Super Bowl, meanwhile the pats won 6 with a franchise QB. KC won one. Denver went to two, won one in a fraction of the time with the same QB. Seattle went to three and won one. Pittsburgh won two with a franchise QB.
Is a super bowl win possible without one? Sure. But don’t expect some dynasty. Has there been a dynasty in the last 30 years that did not have a franchise QB?
You seem to have concluded that since we only won one super bowl then having a franchise QB is not important. But it is those QBs that got us to the opportunities. The point is you have to build a team around those QBs and not to squander your opportunities. How many one and dones did they have? Came out flat? How many opportunities were lost with Luck?
A franchise QB can’t get it done by himself, but it is much easier to win one with one than it is without one.