How Would YOU Build A Team ?

[Smashmouth]

Making a case for running games. Teams have become obsessed with the Passing game due to guys like Brady, Brees and Manning Rodgers...... and I think that's a huge mistake. Those guys can be beat by solid defense and a great running game, and lets face it, the odds of getting a player like Brady, Brees or Manning comes around once every ten years. Brady's game is basically an extension of a running game because he throws a hell of a lot of short precise passes designed to gain in the 5 to 10 yard range  as does Peyton Manning.... Brees throws about 150 to 190 passes per year to his RB's. They also throw A LOT of very short TD passes rather than trying to ram the ball into the end zone the way  teams like Seattle do. (that's why that SB call was such a mystery to me and everyone else for that matter).

 

Throwing so many short passes really does not have the same effect on a defensive line as does ramming the ball down their throats. As a matter of fact, it probably puts more wear and tear on the O-line as they have to be in pass blocking mode to some extent rather than imposing themselves on the D-line wearing them down.

 

Teams can build in the Seattle / Jets of 09 and 10 / Ravens / Cardinals / Steelers mold and win championships they just all seem so caught up in the sexy passing games but if you look at all those Franchise QB's the only time they really win is when the team around them Is built to win they can do it all during the regular season beating inferior teams or middle of the road teams with pure QB dominance but all of that changes drastically in the playoffs. In other words if a guy Like Peyton Manning had a solid running game and ran the ball more you might just see more SB's to his credit. Sure a little less in the way of stats but a better winning formula IMHO. Maybe Brady Wins more SB's and fairs much better in the playoffs because he simply has a better football team so Peyton can have his 55 TD's Ill take the SB with 25 to 30 any day

 

What you also have is teams trying to build the passing dominant teams without the QB to do it and this is the single biggest mistake so many teams make. Are teams trying to force this philosophy rather than building around their QB's talents ? Do to many teams think they are going to get the Next Aaron Rodgers then when it does not pan out they just fold up and die ? Perfect example: Tim Tebow... sure he's a terrible QB but when he did have that big run with the Bronco's they didn't try to force him to be something he was not they played to his strengths and won football games. Reason Tebow is no longer in this league is because his type of game is simply not sustainable he would have eventually broke down and his effectiveness would have gone with it. But he does somewhat prove a point.

 

Ill take the balanced team with the reliable game manager who can play clutch and make all the throws over the big time gun slinger any day because in the clutch they choke just as much as the next guy in big games and we've all seen that over and over.

 

Lets get back to the team concept and stop trying to grab the next Dan Marino I would much rather have the next Russell Wilson

[JustInFudge]

Stopped reading at focusing on a the passing game and having a HOF QB is a huge mistake.

[#27TheDominator]

Ill take the balanced team with the reliable game manager who can play clutch and make all the throws over the big time gun slinger any day because in the clutch they choke just as much as the next guy in big games and we've all seen that over and over.

 

I think this is the problem.  It is like basketball.  It is much easier to get in a rhythm when you are passing a bunch, even if it is short.  Expecting or counting on a guy to turn it on when the time comes is not a good strategy.  IMO, there is no such thing as a "clutch" QB.   If the QB does well in the clutch, he will do even better the rest of the time and you are wasting him by running.  One thing that can be better is that because the running game has been devalued, players that excel in the run game are cheap.  RBs, blocking TEs, are dirt cheap.  Road grader OLineman are often talked up, but guys that are better at run blocking than pass blocking may be cheap too.

[Smashmouth]

Stopped reading at focusing on a the passing game and having a HOF QB is a huge mistake.

you really have zero reading comprehension skills. If you bother to read the post OR god for bid do like the post asked and give your own ideas on how to build a team  that might be helpful.

[JustInFudge]

you really have zero reading comprehension skills. If you bother to read the post OR god for bid do like the post asked and give your own ideas on how to build a team  that might be helpful.

 

I stopped reading after a very stupid comment.  Why continue?  

 

Want my opinion?  Find an elite QB because nothing else matters without one unless you're looking to be that team that sneaks in once every 10 years.

 

Once you find a QB.  Build inside out.  Strong OL.  Strong DL.  Then go to the passing game.  WR's and Corners. 

 

The hard part is finding the QB.  Guess why you havent seen the Jets in the SB since Joe Namath?  Game manager?  **** that....you had your boy Chad with everything he needed around him, how did he do?

 

All that matters is the QB hence why your post wasnt worth reading.  Sorry

[Smashmouth]

I think this is the problem.  It is like basketball.  It is much easier to get in a rhythm when you are passing a bunch, even if it is short.  Expecting or counting on a guy to turn it on when the time comes is not a good strategy.  IMO, there is no such thing as a "clutch" QB.   If the QB does well in the clutch, he will do even better the rest of the time and you are wasting him by running.  One thing that can be better is that because the running game has been devalued, players that excel in the run game are cheap.  RBs, blocking TEs, are dirt cheap.  Road grader OLineman are often talked up, but guys that are better at run blocking than pass blocking may be cheap too.

You make good points Dom but those high end QB's have the same issues in big games going up against the better competition. I mean whose a batter QB Peyton Manning or Big Ben ? Obviously Big Ben has been more clutch in the playoffs and has a much better playoff winning percentage. Its not because Ben is the Better QB its because Ben played with the better more well rounded team and could rely  a lot on his running game. In Peyton Manning's case it was (most of the time) Peyton or bust and a lot of the times they busted. So in essence Big Ben had the Horses to adapt could go run/pass at any given time we saw that in the 10 AFCCG when they ran it down our throats for the first half of the game. But in the previous 2 games when we beat down Manning and Brady they really had no other option.

 

Obviously a lot of this has to do with how a team is built ...But I guess my point is when you build a passing team and that's all you rely on, you them become one dimensional, When a guy Like Manning gets figured out, like we've seen so many times in the playoffs. he has no choice but to fold and take the loss. So that's why I say building in that mold or trying to is a bad choice. Obviously we all want the next Peyton Manning but once again how often does that come along ?

[Smashmouth]

I stopped reading after a very stupid comment.  Why continue?  

 

Want my opinion?  Find an elite QB because nothing else matters without one unless you're looking to be that team that sneaks in once every 10 years.

 

Once you find a QB.  Build inside out.  Strong OL.  Strong DL.  Then go to the passing game.  WR's and Corners. 

 

The hard part is finding the QB.  Guess why you havent seen the Jets in the SB since Joe Namath?  Game manager?  **** that....you had your boy Chad with everything he needed around him, how did he do?

 

All that matters is the QB hence why your post wasnt worth reading.  Sorry

How many times did Manning Sneak in ? once in ten years and got Hammered just about every other time ? Was that Mannings fault ?? No Way but it was a poorly thought out philosophy and a one dimensional team. Nothings changed in Denver

[JustInFudge]

How many times did Manning Sneak in ? once in ten years and got Hammered just about every other time ? Was that Mannings fault ?? No Way but it was a poorly thought out philosophy and a one dimensional team. Nothings changed in Denver

 

He went to 3 Super Bowls and averages 12 wins a year.  WTF are you talking about? 

 

lmfao 

[Smashmouth]

I stopped reading after a very stupid comment.  Why continue?  

 

 

Want my opinion?  Find an elite QB because nothing else matters without one unless you're looking to be that team that sneaks in once every 10 years.

 

Once you find a QB.  Build inside out.  Strong OL.  Strong DL.  Then go to the passing game.  WR's and Corners. 

 

The hard part is finding the QB.  Guess why you havent seen the Jets in the SB since Joe Namath?  Game manager?  **** that....you had your boy Chad with everything he needed around him, how did he do?

 

All that matters is the QB hence why your post wasnt worth reading.  Sorry

To help you a bit with your reading comprehension read the sentence AGAIN Ill quote it below

 

 "Teams have become obsessed with the Passing game due to guys like Brady, Brees and Manning Rodgers...... and I think that's a huge mistake"

 

Its the Obsession with the passing game NOT the QB himself that ruins teams . The nonsense you posted in your first post has nothing at all to do with what I said. NOTHING

[Smashmouth]

He went to 3 Super Bowls and averages 12 wins a year.  WTF are you talking about? 

 

lmfao 

Boy you are just dense ...seriously get some extra strength Ritlin

[JustInFudge]

To help you a bit with your reading comprehension read the sentence AGAIN Ill quote it below

 

 "Teams have become obsessed with the Passing game due to guys like Brady, Brees and Manning Rodgers...... and I think that's a huge mistake"

 

Its the Obsession with the passing game NOT the QB himself that ruins teams . The nonsense you posted in your first post has nothing at all to do with what I said. NOTHING

 

Maybe the rules have something to do with that?  I dunno.  Just a thought.  

 

Or maybe its just the position? You know, the most important position in sports?

[JustInFudge]

Boy you are just dense ...seriously get some extra strength Ritlin

 

 

You're arguing the passing game and finding a HOF QB is HUGE mistake for teams but I'm dense. 

 

okay

[Smashmouth]

You're arguing the passing game and finding a HOF QB is HUGE mistake for teams but I'm dense. 

 

okay

That's really what I said huh JIF "??? Sorry I can't break it down to a simpler form for you.

 

Its very hard to find a franchise QB in the mold of what you want. the percentages are very low. So building with a QB and trying to emulate what a guy like Manning or Brady do with out actually having those guys is the mistake Im talking about. Does that help you a bit ?

 

How hard is it to find a franchise QB in the mold of the top 10 guys we have out their now ?? Just ask 3/4 of the teams in the NFL who can never ever seem to land one including your Jets who have been looking for 40 + years.

[Smashmouth]

You're arguing the passing game and finding a HOF QB is HUGE mistake for teams but I'm dense. 

 

okay

So let me get this straight I said finding a franchise QB is a mistake ??

 

You are hilarious ...either go troll somewhere else or get help.

[#27TheDominator]

You make good points Dom but those high end QB's have the same issues in big games going up against the better competition. I mean whose a batter QB Peyton Manning or Big Ben ? Obviously Big Ben has been more clutch in the playoffs and has a much better playoff winning percentage. Its not because Ben is the Better QB its because Ben played with the better more well rounded team and could rely  a lot on his running game. In Peyton Manning's case it was (most of the time) Peyton or bust and a lot of the times they busted. So in essence Big Ben had the Horses to adapt could go run/pass at any given time we saw that in the 10 AFCCG when they ran it down our throats for the first half of the game. But in the previous 2 games when we beat down Manning and Brady they really had no other option.

 

Obviously a lot of this has to do with how a team is built ...But I guess my point is when you build a passing team and that's all you rely on, you them become one dimensional, When a guy Like Manning gets figured out, like we've seen so many times in the playoffs. he has no choice but to fold and take the loss. So that's why I say building in that mold or trying to is a bad choice. Obviously we all want the next Peyton Manning but once again how often does that come along ?

 

I think much more of that depends on the amount of money spent on the top QB.  Big Ben had a better cast when he was on his rookie deal.  Peyton has been getting paid forever.  Once you spend all that money on a QB other places have to suffer.  See the Ravens post Flacco deal.  Perfect world is Luck or Wilson on rookie deals under the wage scale.  Not likely, but maybe Mariotta can do it.

[prime21]

Making a case for running games. Teams have become obsessed with the Passing game due to guys like Brady, Brees and Manning Rodgers...... and I think that's a huge mistake. Those guys can be beat by solid defense and a great running game, and lets face it, the odds of getting a player like Brady, Brees or Manning comes around once every ten years. Brady's game is basically an extension of a running game because he throws a hell of a lot of short precise passes designed to gain in the 5 to 10 yard range  as does Peyton Manning.... Brees throws about 150 to 190 passes per year to his RB's. They also throw A LOT of very short TD passes rather than trying to ram the ball into the end zone the way  teams like Seattle do. (that's why that SB call was such a mystery to me and everyone else for that matter).

 

Throwing so many short passes really does not have the same effect on a defensive line as does ramming the ball down their throats. As a matter of fact, it probably puts more wear and tear on the O-line as they have to be in pass blocking mode to some extent rather than imposing themselves on the D-line wearing them down.

 

Teams can build in the Seattle / Jets of 09 and 10 / Ravens / Cardinals / Steelers mold and win championships they just all seem so caught up in the sexy passing games but if you look at all those Franchise QB's the only time they really win is when the team around them Is built to win they can do it all during the regular season beating inferior teams or middle of the road teams with pure QB dominance but all of that changes drastically in the playoffs. In other words if a guy Like Peyton Manning had a solid running game and ran the ball more you might just see more SB's to his credit. Sure a little less in the way of stats but a better winning formula IMHO. Maybe Brady Wins more SB's and fairs much better in the playoffs because he simply has a better football team so Peyton can have his 55 TD's Ill take the SB with 25 to 30 any day

 

What you also have is teams trying to build the passing dominant teams without the QB to do it and this is the single biggest mistake so many teams make. Are teams trying to force this philosophy rather than building around their QB's talents ? Do to many teams think they are going to get the Next Aaron Rodgers then when it does not pan out they just fold up and die ? Perfect example: Tim Tebow... sure he's a terrible QB but when he did have that big run with the Bronco's they didn't try to force him to be something he was not they played to his strengths and won football games. Reason Tebow is no longer in this league is because his type of game is simply not sustainable he would have eventually broke down and his effectiveness would have gone with it. But he does somewhat prove a point.

 

Ill take the balanced team with the reliable game manager who can play clutch and make all the throws over the big time gun slinger any day because in the clutch they choke just as much as the next guy in big games and we've all seen that over and over.

 

Lets get back to the team concept and stop trying to grab the next Dan Marino I would much rather have the next Russell Wilson

 

 

A balanced team is needed in any case whether the QB is elite or not.  

 

I would build a team to be balanced and hopefully get myself a better than average QB but that is easier said than done.  An elite QB comes around once every 10 years or so.  A Brady or Russell Wilson in the mid rounds is like winning the lotto.  You have to hope that  2-4th round QB turns out to be way better than then anyone knew they could be.  If not then you will have an average to less than average QB like most of the NFL teams do.

 

Can you win the Super Bowl with out an elite QB?  Yes you can but the chances of that happening are very difficult.  Pats lost twice to the Giants because the Giants played great defense and Eli didn't make many mistakes.  

[Sperm Edwards]

You make good points Dom but those high end QB's have the same issues in big games going up against the better competition. I mean whose a batter QB Peyton Manning or Big Ben ? Obviously Big Ben has been more clutch in the playoffs and has a much better playoff winning percentage. Its not because Ben is the Better QB its because Ben played with the better more well rounded team and could rely  a lot on his running game. In Peyton Manning's case it was (most of the time) Peyton or bust and a lot of the times they busted. So in essence Big Ben had the Horses to adapt could go run/pass at any given time we saw that in the 10 AFCCG when they ran it down our throats for the first half of the game. But in the previous 2 games when we beat down Manning and Brady they really had no other option.

 

Obviously a lot of this has to do with how a team is built ...But I guess my point is when you build a passing team and that's all you rely on, you them become one dimensional, When a guy Like Manning gets figured out, like we've seen so many times in the playoffs. he has no choice but to fold and take the loss. So that's why I say building in that mold or trying to is a bad choice. Obviously we all want the next Peyton Manning but once again how often does that come along ?

Peyton also had many years of substandard coaching and team-building GM/scouting that has been masqueraded as borderline HOF jobs.

They were built with the idea to pass pass pass and on D only to stop the pass. Then he faces a team with more than 1 corner, even with an awful QB, and we just run 170 yards & 2 TDs over their pass-only defense. Manning had what should have been a perfect game-manager game (including the "clutch" drive). And they started the game with 3 straight punts after getting to 2nd & 1 and/or 3rd & 1.

What a waste of his career to spend it with Mora - Dungy - Caldwell - Fox, and all of his Indy years with Bill Polian (whose greatest accomplishment on Manning's behalf was getting new passing rules implemented after Ty Law mugged their receivers out of another failed SB run).

[Smashmouth]

I think much more of that depends on the amount of money spent on the top QB.  Big Ben had a better cast when he was on his rookie deal.  Peyton has been getting paid forever.  Once you spend all that money on a QB other places have to suffer.  See the Ravens post Flacco deal.  Perfect world is Luck or Wilson on rookie deals under the wage scale.  Not likely, but maybe Mariotta can do it.

very good point paying that 20+ mil is a big hit . Mariota is no doubt a question mark and right now its hard to see what direction we may go because our organization has become a lot less transparent than in the past. I would have loved for us to be able to trade out gain picks and gain a QB in the process but it looks like that is becoming a long shot. if Mariota is there do YOU take him ? me personally I think I would take the shot

[Smashmouth]

Peyton also had many years of substandard coaching and team-building GM/scouting that has been masqueraded as borderline HOF jobs.

They were built with the idea to pass pass pass and on D only to stop the pass. Then he faces a team with more than 1 corner, even with an awful QB, and we just run 170 yards & 2 TDs over their pass-only defense. Manning had what should have been a perfect game-manager game (including the "clutch" drive). And they started the game with 3 straight punts after getting to 2nd & 1 and/or 3rd & 1.

What a waste of his career to spend it with Mora - Dungy - Caldwell - Fox, and all of his Indy years with Bill Polian (whose greatest accomplishment on Manning's behalf was getting new passing rules implemented after Ty Law mugged their receivers out of another failed SB run).

Oh theres no Doubt Sperm I think Peyton, as great a career as hes had, has been let down to some extent and should easily have multiple SB's to his credit. Its becomes so obvious over the years that he's been a one man band and its so damn difficult to win SB's in that way.

 

Keep in mind when I talk football I really focus primarily on playoffs and how you need to be built to win in the playoff's. Its not a knock on Peyton Its just the fact that in the playoffs this is a totally different league, your not playing the door matts anymore. So many people focus on regular season stats and consistent winning during the regular season but how many time have we seen those consistent regular season wonders just get torched in the playoffs ? The Chargers throughout the 80's  come to mind as do the Colts both with all time great QB's yet lacking in so many other areas

[JustInFudge]

Making a case for running games. Teams have become obsessed with the Passing game due to guys like Brady, Brees and Manning Rodgers...... and I think that's a huge mistake. 

 

[LIJetsFan]

There are 32 NFL teams and maybe 8 or so franchise QBs.  So what are the other 24 teams to do?  That is the real question here.  Not what would they wish for but what are they to do.  How the feck can anyone argue with them building a balanced team.  

 

Some of you posted just argue for the sake of arguing. 

[Sperm Edwards]

A balanced team is needed in any case whether the QB is elite or not.  

 

I would build a team to be balanced and hopefully get myself a better than average QB but that is easier said than done.  An elite QB comes around once every 10 years or so.  A Brady or Russell Wilson in the mid rounds is like winning the lotto.  You have to hope that  2-4th round QB turns out to be way better than then anyone knew they could be.  If not then you will have an average to less than average QB like most of the NFL teams do.

 

Can you win the Super Bowl with out an elite QB?  Yes you can but the chances of that happening are very difficult.  Pats lost twice to the Giants because the Giants played great defense and Eli didn't make many mistakes.

Well, also because Eli didn't pay for his mistakes: overthrowing a wide open Plaxico on a short pass that was too high even for Plaxico's 10-foot reach, with no one behind him in the 4th Q, then Samuel dropping an interception he generally makes 10 out of 10 times. Not that I was unhappy with the result, but even winners can require stupid-lucky get out of jail free cards.

And even those who win without an elite QB typically get either an elite extended spurt (Flacco) or elite game-management (Brady, Brad Johnson, Wilson). But winning despite sub-par, or mostly sub-par, QB play requires some major help (both of Roethlisberger's SB wins).

[Smashmouth]

I think you should change your avatar Yosemite Sam is way too intelligent to be your role model

[Smashmouth]

There are 32 NFL teams and maybe 8 or so franchise QBs.  So what are the other 24 teams to do?  That is the real question here.  Not what would they wish for but what are they to do.  How the feck can anyone argue with them building a balanced team.  

 

Some of you posted just argue for the sake of arguing. 

great post and this is exactly the point .

[prime21]

There are 32 NFL teams and maybe 8 or so franchise QBs.  So what are the other 24 teams to do?  That is the real question here.  Not what would they wish for but what are they to do.  How the feck can anyone argue with them building a balanced team.  

 

Some of you posted just argue for the sake of arguing. 

 

 

[BroadwayJoe12]

Draft Andrew Luck....profit. 

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

you really have zero reading comprehension skills. If you bother to read the post OR god for bid do like the post asked and give your own ideas on how to build a team that might be helpful.

Here's an idea. If you're trying to build a car, you don't start with a horse and a carriage.

[jgb]

i don't think it's sequential but assuming the team doesn't have a franchise QB, i'd focus my efforts on finding one and building the O and D lines. Lines are like fine wine, they get better after a few years playing together and have a long shelf life by NFL standards. and once you have what you want, replacing one guy every couple years with a rookie means he will be learning from a cohesive, high performing group and be integrated quickly. When you find the qb then go hard after skill positions. But you have to be flexible of course. If you do hit a couple draft or FA homeruns with the skill positions and still don't have the guy, you have to consider a favre or peyton manning mercenary type acqusition. but long story short, the lines are where i would start.

[Smashmouth]

Here's an idea. If you're trying to build a car, you don't start with a horse and a carriage.

Yeah but JIF needs to invent the wheel first

[JustInFudge]

There are 32 NFL teams and maybe 8 or so franchise QBs.  So what are the other 24 teams to do?  That is the real question here.  Not what would they wish for but what are they to do.  How the feck can anyone argue with them building a balanced team.  

 

Some of you posted just argue for the sake of arguing. 

 

The other 24 teams lose.  That's what they do. 

 

Of course the most balanced teams win.  Thats the biggest duh in the world.  Still need the QB.  

[Jetsfan80]

There are 32 NFL teams and maybe 8 or so franchise QBs.  So what are the other 24 teams to do?  That is the real question here.  Not what would they wish for but what are they to do.  How the feck can anyone argue with them building a balanced team.  

 

Some of you posted just argue for the sake of arguing. 

 

Draft new QB(s) every single season until you find a QB.  You don't have to be shooting for a Rodgers, Brady, Brees or Manning.  But you need to find that guy capable of elevating both his own performance and that of his teammates when it matters most.  You can still continue to bring in talent to surround that future QB simultaneously.  They're not mutually exclusive goals.

 

Easier said than done, but it's a better strategy than trying to emulate the Seahawks.  You can't hope to have Pro Bowlers at every position.  The Seahawks are going to find that out real soon when they have to pay Wilson. 

 

When you know you do not have that in the QB you're currently trotting out there (Geno), you cut ties before it gets your front office fired for hanging on too long (Sanchez).

[JustInFudge]

Yeah but JIF needs to invent the wheel first

 

QB = Wheel - it makes everything go.

[Sperm Edwards]

Oh theres no Doubt Sperm I think Peyton, as great a career as hes had, has been let down to some extent and should easily have multiple SB's to his credit. Its becomes so obvious over the years that he's been a one man band and its so damn difficult to win SB's in that way.

 

Keep in mind when I talk football I really focus primarily on playoffs and how you need to be built to win in the playoff's. Its not a knock on Peyton Its just the fact that in the playoffs this is a totally different league, your not playing the door matts anymore. So many people focus on regular season stats and consistent winning during the regular season but how many time have we seen those consistent regular season wonders just get torched in the playoffs ? The Chargers throughout the 80's  come to mind as do the Colts both with all time great QB's yet lacking in so many other areas

Well people focus on regular season stats because they're generally equalizers (every team plays 16 regular season games every year) compared to the more sporadic/isolated playoff appearances that everyone does not play in. Manning didn't only put up stats against doormats and fail against all adversity in the regular season. But as much as anyone I think he needed help no matter how unique of a player he was. Look at his one SB ring, where he was given the MVP award despite a crappy game by Manning standards. He wasn't winning dick without 190 rushing yards. It could be argued that Jeff Saturday was Indy's MVP that game (like they'd ever award it to center). Indy's other MVP was Rex Grossman (and the lack of a top-end NFC team in general that season).

[JustInFudge]

Draft Andrew Luck....profit. 

 

No dude...running game.  

[Jetsfan80]

Either way, arguing that it's stupid/pointless to TRY to get a real QB is a moronic point.  Just because it's hard to find QB's doesn't mean you quit at it.  You can't win with a "C" or worse QB in this league anymore.  You at least need a "B" who can demonstrate an ability to reach the "A" level on occasion. 

 

Flacco is the best example of this.  He mostly puts up B and C performances but also found a way to have an 11 TD, 0 INT postseason run.  Geno Smith is not that guy.