I'm not saying I agree with the QB or bust logic, but it makes the road tougher. To believe that a team can churn through QB's and be successful is basically saying the QB is no more important than a RB and we know that's not true.
This is just a bunch of nonsense, sorry.
You can 'churn' through any position.
you KNOW damn well I dont believe this qb is the most important bs
Look at all these teams out here who most in here feel can be really, really good... if they just had a better QB.
and your point is ? theres teams with a good position group that can be improved by getting a better other position group, and vice versa
but unlike QB's, you can find those positions outside of the first round and in free agency.
right, right. like youve said, hall of famer superbowl winner nick foles was a first round pick groomed to be in such a position.
.
.
.
oh wait no he wasnt; he was a 3rd round pick and he was about to quit football a year before because no one in the league besides andy reid wanted him as a backup.
Mike Maccagnan picked Sam Darnold who at the moment is still the guy Jets fans pin their hopes and dreams on, but got fired a year later because he fukked everything else up. Now look at that team without Darnold. To give a QB basically 4 years to win a superbowl is harsh as all hell, especially when teams are out here tearing shyt down to the roots.
would he get fired any later if he didnt select a quarterback ? would the jets front office even LET HIM select a non-qb ? this is what Im saying. for the rebuilding team, hope is always with that 'qb' who needs to be drafted
the concept of 'building around the qb' is...trash
the concept of 'qb is the most important piece' is...trash
I disagree with this vehemently and I don't know what team he pays attention to. Admittedly, where I live, we don't care how you win a Superbowl, but do it already. Eventually we turn on any and every QB who ultimately doesn't get it done.
get what done? winning a football game is a team's accomplishment. don't really get why you keep wanting to go down this rabbit hole. why are there specifically quarterbacks who 'get it done' or 'don't get it done'. Why arent you saying this about cornerbacks, wide receivers, running backs, linemen ? the situation isnt any difference, you shouldnt be special if you are a qb. you suck, next man up.
Eli still started because fans legitimately believed if they could fix the shyt around him, he could still win another one. He got benched one time and everyone wanted to riot. You weren't dealing with rational people in that instance. They didn't wanna start over. They were too busy tryna have ride off into the sunset a winner. (and in both Eli and Flacco's situations, they got replaced by QB's in the first round-- hell the Giants tried to do the draft a developmental QB route; the QB's just weren't any good. If they were, Eli woulda been replaced by Ryan Nassib years ago)
this isnt about which round qb they are replaced by, this is about starting mediocre options and paying them big money instead of getting their replacements in the first place. something that doesnt happen with any other position, YES, including the RB position.
the chiefs were lucky that they were stacked and had a luxury of grabbing mahomes in the mid first and then letting him sit. they easily couldve stayed with alex smith and be competitive and playoff contenders. they chose to do exactly what we're saying they should do- upgrade to a cheap young talent instead of keeping average talent and paying him tons of money because hes a qb. they also lucked out mahomes is an incredible talent, but I could think of a few situations where mahomes career starts rocky instead.