If Rex Grossman wins in two weeks

CanadianCowboysFan · Jan 22, 2007

will the theory that you need a franchise QB to win be thrown out the window?

smarta5150 · Jan 22, 2007

No.

It would be a rarity.

Grossman is still young anyway so who knows, he might just start being consistently good one day

nc1054 · Jan 22, 2007

I believe that theory has already been tossed out...see Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson.

iceberg · Jan 22, 2007

CanadianCowboysFan;1325997 said:
will the theory that you need a franchise QB to win be thrown out the window?

you don't really *NEED* much of anything but a lot of luck and a solid team.

HOWEVER, it's easier *with* a franchise qb than w/o one.

Eddie · Jan 22, 2007

... and when you have a suffocating D like the Bears do, it's much easier.

All the teams who have won Super Bowls without franchise QB's (rare ... Dilfer, et al) all had great Defenses.

That's the same theory BP has been preaching around here. Too bad he found his franchise QB before he found his Defense.

Bob Sacamano · Jan 22, 2007

iceberg;1326008 said:
you don't really *NEED* much of anything but a lot of luck and a solid team.

HOWEVER, it's easier *with* a franchise qb than w/o one.

the only thing that matters is coaching, you can have the best QB in modern NFL history, the all-time leading rusher, the '85 Bears D, but w/o coaching, you have nothing

Eddie · Jan 22, 2007

summerisfunner;1326118 said:
the only thing that matters is coaching, you can have the best QB in modern NFL history, the all-time leading rusher, the '85 Bears D, but w/o coaching, you have nothing

Then again, we won a Super Bowl with Barry Switzer ...

Hostile · Jan 22, 2007

CanadianCowboysFan;1325997 said:
will the theory that you need a franchise QB to win be thrown out the window?

No.

Just like if Peyton Manning wins it won't validate that theory.

CaptainAmerica · Jan 22, 2007

Well, 3 out of 4 teams left playing yesterday for a chance at the SB, had Franchise QBs, I would say that's further evidence that if you want to be an elite team it's best that you find an elite QB. The 4th guy, Grossman, was a fairly high first round pick who was supposed to be the Bears franchise guy.

joseephuss · Jan 22, 2007

There are always exceptions to the rule.

Teams can win without a franchise QB as long as they have a strong overall team. Teams with a franchise QB sometimes do not win ita ll and that is partly because they don't have a well rounded team.

A team that is well rounded and also has a franchise QB tend to not only win one Superbowl, but win a few and play deep into the playoffs for several years. They don't just win one and disappear for a few years. Not every team can have it all. You are always going to lack at certain positions. The QB position is one that you don't want to lack at for a long period of time.

Doomsday101 · Jan 22, 2007

Teams win championship not QB's alone.

Hostile · Jan 22, 2007

CaptainAmerica;1326244 said:
Well, 3 out of 4 teams left playing yesterday for a chance at the SB, had Franchise QBs, I would say that's further evidence that if you want to be an elite team it's best that you find an elite QB. The 4th guy, Grossman, was a fairly high first round pick who was supposed to be the Bears franchise guy.

I say this every year CA and some still ignore it. You can predict on a yearly basis which teams will have a decent shot based on QB. There's an occasional curve ball, but for the most part if you want to win, you need a good QB. It has always been that way and it will not change any time soon.

joseephuss · Jan 22, 2007

Hostile;1326251 said:
I say this every year CA and some still ignore it. You can predict on a yearly basis which teams will have a decent shot based on QB. There's an occasional curve ball, but for the most part if you want to win, you need a good QB. It has always been that way and it will not change any time soon.

No it won't. Some people think just try to oversimplify it. They think when you say that you want a "franchise" or "good" qb, that you are willing to sacrifice other areas of the team. Not true. You just want to build around the QB and make sure you develop the other areas.

The team of the 70s was the Steelers and they invested heavily in the QB postion with a #1 pick for Terry Bradshaw. The #2 team of the 70s also invested in the QB position. They got lucky in that Roger Staubach was actually able to come back from military service and play at the high level that everyone expected from him. Both the Steelers and Cowboys also made sure they had good running backs, good receivers and great defenses. All those things made both teams dominant for a long time.

The 90s Cowboys did the same thing. The Patriots have continued that with some luck in landing late rounder Tom Brady. Sometimes you don't need the number one overall pick to find the QB, but it helps greatly to find the QB.

Cliff · Jan 22, 2007

NO!.... i've seen just 'bout every bear game - the ball has bounced right for these guys 90% of the time.... the "d" and special teams have led to 'bout 60% of their points....

Hostile · Jan 22, 2007

CliffHarris;1326277 said:
NO!.... i've seen just 'bout every bear game - the ball has bounced right for these guys 90% of the time.... the "d" and special teams have led to 'bout 60% of their points....

That's called being aggressive and opportunistic.

dbair1967 · Jan 22, 2007

CanadianCowboysFan;1325997 said:
will the theory that you need a franchise QB to win be thrown out the window?

it had already been thrown out...years ago

David

CaptainAmerica · Jan 22, 2007

Hostile;1326251 said:
I say this every year CA and some still ignore it. You can predict on a yearly basis which teams will have a decent shot based on QB. There's an occasional curve ball, but for the most part if you want to win, you need a good QB. It has always been that way and it will not change any time soon.

No question! Good post. This is why Romo has to be the guy if we are going anywhere in the next few years.

FLCowboyFan · Jan 22, 2007

Grossman was a first round pick!! He was taken #22 in the draft........how can you say he is not a franchise QB? He hasn't played the best yet but they certainly took him that high to make him their franchise QB.

People on this board seem to think if you are not in the top 10 or the #1 or #2 in the position that you play in the entire NFL that you aren't any good :bang2:

dbair1967 · Jan 22, 2007

FLCowboyFan;1326355 said:
Grossman was a first round pick!! He was taken #22 in the draft........how can you say he is not a franchise QB? He hasn't played the best yet but they certainly took him that high to make him their franchise QB.

People on this board seem to think if you are not in the top 10 or the #1 or #2 in the position that you play in the entire NFL that you aren't any good :bang2:

there's a big difference between being what people believe is a "franchise QB" and a guy thats a "starting NFL QB"

right now, Grossman clearly is the latter

for example:

Troy Aikman= franchise QB
Quincy Carter= "starting NFL QB"

John Elway= franchise QB
Jake Plummer- "starting NFL QB"

Steve Young- franchise QB
Steve Bono= "starting NFL QB

etc etc etc

David

FLCowboyFan · Jan 22, 2007

Looking it up, here are the QB's taken in the first round in 2003 when Grossman was drafted:

1. Carson Palmer
7. Byron Leftwich
19. Kyle Boller
22. Rex Grossman

All first round picks and Palmer is probably the only one that everyone agrees is a great QB and he was the #1 pick in the draft!

If Rex Grossman wins in two weeks

Lightning Rod

Mr. Wright

Member

rock music matters

Well-Known Member

Benched

Well-Known Member

The Duke

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The Duke

Well-Known Member

Benched

The Duke

Arch Defender

Active Member

Hoping to be half the man Tom Landry was.

Arch Defender

Hoping to be half the man Tom Landry was.