What is more important, Team or QB?

[johneric8]

1. When it comes to winning it all what is more important? The QB or the team around the QB? The other parts of the team.

Lets either keep coaching out of it or assume we have a quality coach.

Well, according to this forum a great QB is all thats needed to win a superbowl and coaching and defense don't matter.. All we hear about is how great Drew Brees is even though he has been through many sub 500 seasons because of TEAM issues.. If you watch Drew Brees in many of his losing seasons he couldn't beat good teams so I guess they should of fired the bum right? LOL...

 

[MojaveJT]

In 2015, Manning did not play particularly well all year except for a few games here and there and still won the championship with a stellar defense.

We had the #1 ranked offense last year and went 8-8 and missed the playoffs. QBs are important but having a surrounding talented team is even more. If last years example of our own damn team doesn’t open people’s eyes, I don’t know what will.

 

[bewp7]

i say team.

football is not basketball where the best player can play the whole game and both side of the ball. but qb is super imortant too...a million time more important then any other position in team sports.

 

[Diehardblues]

How are we going to build a quality team around him if we are over invested on offense.

I’d argue if we pay Dak top money like we have Elliott and Cooper then they are going to need to carry this team across the threshold without as strong a defense and all of the TEAM factors you’d normally aspire to.

 

[rnr_honeybadger]

Well, according to this forum a great QB is all thats needed to win a superbowl and coaching and defense don't matter.. All we hear about is how great Drew Brees is even though he has been through many sub 500 seasons because of TEAM issues.. If you watch Drew Brees in many of his losing seasons he couldn't beat good teams so I guess they should of fired the bum right? LOL...

Unfortunately people view the QB position romantically. Everyone thinks that having a great QB is all you need and it won’t change.

 

[Diehardblues]

True. That's why if you have a competent, but not great, QB, you win with mostly defense. With a smothering defense, you can play it close to the vest with safe plays on offense and then as long as you score a decent amount, you can win. It's how the Ravens won it all with Dilfer.

Yes but in order to do so you can’t over invest in your offense who would then need to be your strength carrying the team.

Cap era has proved with few exceptions you need either an Elite QB or Defense. Be great on at least one side of the ball and average to above average on the other side.

If our #1 offense isn’t great enough to carry us to the playoffs and beyond then we have over invested or they aren’t as great as we think they are or the stats are presenting.

 

[Diehardblues]

Unfortunately people view the QB position romantically. Everyone thinks that having a great QB is all you need and it won’t change.

Because in Cap era with the exception of a couple generational type defenses that’s who is winning and playing in most of the Super Bowls.

 

[CowboyRoy]

QB but you can win either way.

I just think its harder to have a top team anymore. There are always holes but you can have a top QB and they can carry a team

How easy is it to find a top QB?

 

[CowboyRoy]

Yes but in order to do so you can’t over invest in your offense who would then need to be your strength carrying the team.

Cap era has proved with few exceptions you need either an Elite QB or Defense. Be great on at least one side of the ball and average to above average on the other side.

If our #1 offense isn’t great enough to carry us to the playoffs and beyond then we have over invested or they aren’t as great as we think they are or the stats are presenting.

That 2016 team had a good enough offense to carry us and they did. But we didn't have the coaching. Probably would have gotten beat eventually though as we needed a better defense.

 

[Established1971]

1. When it comes to winning it all what is more important? The QB or the team around the QB? The other parts of the team.

Lets either keep coaching out of it or assume we have a quality coach.

seriously? that needs to be asked?

 

[CowboyRoy]

Because in Cap era with the exception of a couple generational type defenses that’s who is winning and playing in most of the Super Bowls.

Nonsense. Plenty of well rounded football teams with quality on both sides of the ball. Those Brady teams had defense as well.

Mahomes is maybe a rare example of a team that didn't have a good defense.

 

[CowboyRoy]

seriously? that needs to be asked?

Apparently it did, sadly enough. Because we have people on this board talking like the QB is the only thing that matters.

 

[aikemirv]

Amazing how simple the answer is to this question. Yet there are some on here that dont get that.

So, was San Francisco a better TEAM than KC. I think they were!

 

[BigD_95]

How easy is it to find a top QB?

its not but original post said what is better to have. I think you always start with the QB.

 

[CowboysFaninHouston]

Its been proven that you don't need a good QB. You can win with an average one or a below average one. Plenty of GREAT QB's don't win anything EVERY year. QB is the most important position, but that's all they are.

So you focus on the TEAM and roll with the best QB you can find. Dumbest thing you can ever do is run your franchise based on how good your QB is.

Romo is your QB until someone comes along that is better. And you pay him until you have someone better. Same with Dak or anyone else.

I agree that you don't need an elite QB to win, although based on past 50+ years that's the easiest path....90% of superbowl winners have that QB, Ravens did it twice, Denver did it once, SF tried, but lost in the end. sometimes you catch that lighting in a bottle for one or two years, but that's a gamble, you miss way more than you hit. that's why teams tend to over draft QBs, always looking, reaching, taking risks etc......

 

[Diehardblues]

Nonsense. Plenty of well rounded football teams with quality on both sides of the ball. Those Brady teams had defense as well.

Mahomes is maybe a rare example of a team that didn't have a good defense.

Of course it’s still about teams. But the Brady ( who played for championships without a great defense) Rodgers, Rothleisburger, Wilson, Manning have represented most of the Super Bowls this era. There’s a clearer path and it starts with the most important position.

While those teams aren’t always in it they are consistently at or near the top.

In Cap era with rare exception you need either an Elite QB or defense . We’ve had neither.

 

[Diehardblues]

its not but original post said what is better to have. I think you always start with the QB.

Of course and why teams use so much capital on the position often over reaching in the draft or risking several picks or players to move up.

Cause if you don’t have you must build an all star cast around them. Basically you need to be great on at least one side of the ball.

 

[Diehardblues]

So, was San Francisco a better TEAM than KC. I think they were!

The best team doesn’t always win. Sometimes the best player does.

Upsets are part of sports. Sometimes the great ones choke. Sometimes the underdog out maneuvers or out plays them.

 

[doomsday9084]

I have said this in multiple threads so I apologize. IMO, positional scarcity at the QB position is not as bad as it has been in the past. A long time ago, most high school and college teams ran the ball most of the time. Actually finding a QB who was big enough, smart enough and could throw the ball well enough to be an NFL QB was freaking hard. A few of the starters in the late 80's would struggle to make a team nowadays.

There are now a lot of QB's who can throw the ball in a good situation, just like there are a lot of RB's that can run the ball in a good situation.

NFL teams haven't figured this out yet, which is why Carson Wentz types keep getting huge contracts and then get beat by QB's on their rookie deals.

Regardless, this isn't the NBA where an elite player like Lebron can dominate the sport. Countless fantastic QB's like Dan Marino never even win a single title whereas Nick Foles, Joe Flacco, Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer have rings in the past 20 years.

A great team with an average QB has a shot. A great QB with an average team doesn't. Obviously everyone wants a great team with a great QB but if I had the choice, its team first.

 

[Diehardblues]

The greatest talent still needs a supporting cast. Aikman needed it. Michael Jordan is always one of my best examples in this discussion.

But it’s what these great talents do with it when they have the supporting cast that separates them from the pack.