the ultimate hypothetical thread

[rayzor]

And yet we have a undrafted QB starting who couldn't beat out A. Brooks and a undrafted QB that most people think is the future that couldn't even make the Cowboys roster two years ago.

Point is you never know how a QB will preform until you give them a shot.

not crazy about risking that at the expense of fixing our defense.

simms isn't going to be getting many calls and with good reason.

[jramsey4]

understood. i'm just saying that it would be a mistake if it did happen. this scenario has too many problems that would accompany it.

you get us a top tier QB that commands, deserves, and receives the respect of the team and i'm all for it. there are none available (and cutler wouldn't fit that bill if he was available).

the 17/89 connection can get us through until we find that QB. it could be, though, that the answer is already on our roster. in lieu of chasing after hopes and dreams i'm going to be content with a "wait and see" approach

with our QBs and hope that our defense can be solidified.

once we have that suffocating defense in place, then we can turn our attention towards replacing jake.

This is the kind of thinking that resulted in 5 picks against the Cards. The strategy of just forcing it into double or triple coverage has not work for us come January (same thing killed us against the Seahawks in 05'). We need a QB who will go through all his reads and not focus on 1 receiver (this may be coaching but seeing as it has happened with 2 different OC's I doubt it).

[rayzor]

This is the kind of thinking that resulted in 5 picks against the Cards. The strategy of just forcing it into double or triple coverage has not work for us come January (same thing killed us against the Seahawks in 05'). We need a QB who will go through all his reads and not focus on 1 receiver (this may be coaching but seeing as it has happened with 2 different OC's I doubt it).

that is what our new QB coach is supposed to be doing.

and he will be doing this with all the QBs on the roster.

[jramsey4]

that is what our new QB coach is supposed to be doing.

and he will be doing this with all the QBs on the roster.

I hope your right, but I don't have much faith in it. Jake has been doing things one way since he started here sometimes it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks.

[rayzor]

I hope your right, but I don't have much faith in it. Jake has been doing things one way since he started here sometimes it's hard to teach an old dog new tricks.

hypothetically it can be done.

/thread (or at least my part in it, i have to work)

[Fireball77]

Are you seriously comparing a QB from 4 years ago (pre-surgery) to a player from last year? And as far as talent I was referring to Jake barely having to throw the ball at all because of our running game, to Cutler being on a team that had 6 RB on IR. Which offense would you rather be QB on?

No, I was comparing the situations which shook out pretty much the same.

I would rather be on the offense that has the great defense on the other side. The Steelers won the SB with a mediocre offense that made plays when they had to and a world beating defense that either kept them in and/or won a ton of games. If you can name me a single SB winner that had a high scoring offense (which Carolina's was over the last 7-8 games of the year) and a defense that played like Carolina's did the last half of the year and continued to play that way in the postseason (which rules out Indy from 2006), have at it.

[jramsey4]

No, I was comparing the situations which shook out pretty much the same.

I would rather be on the offense that has the great defense on the other side. The Steelers won the SB with a mediocre offense that made plays when they had to and a world beating defense that either kept them in and/or won a ton of games. If you can name me a single SB winner that had a high scoring offense (which Carolina's was over the last 7-8 games of the year) and a defense that played like Carolina's did the last half of the year and continued to play that way in the postseason (which rules out Indy from 2006), have at it.

I know you said rule them out but to prove the point, The Colt's in 06' looked to have one of the worst defenses every in the regular season but turned it around in the post-season. I agree that I would rather have a great D then a great O. But to ask you a ? how many teams that followed that formula of great D and only decent O had a QB that turned the ball over 6 times in one playoff game. TO on the Offensive side are the kryptonite of a smash mouth Defensive team.

[Fireball77]

Well shoot, if you are asking me if I think any defense in the world could have overcome Jake coughing it up 6 times, I agree wholeheartedly that none could have, no argument there at all.

But, the Colts in 2006 overcame a 3 td 7 INT postseason from their all world QB and they did it with mostly a good defense and good running game. Manning played a great half of football that postseason and that was all.

[jramsey4]

Well shoot, if you are asking me if I think any defense in the world could have overcome Jake coughing it up 6 times, I agree wholeheartedly that none could have, no argument there at all.

But, the Colts in 2006 overcame a 3 td 7 INT postseason from their all world QB and they did it with mostly a good defense and good running game. Manning played a great half of football that postseason and that was all.

I never said that a good QB is all you need to win in this league. That would be foolish it is a team game. But our QB is holding this team back. Maybe if we improve the D when can go all the way even with Jake but I know it would be easier with a QB that took care of the ball and would check down to receivers that are not Smith or Moose (our RB's should be utilized far more then they are).

[mountainpantherfan]

I'm still waiting to hear what has to be done on defense to improve it how to go about improving it. Sorry but I don't see how any improvements can be made without trading Peppers. Even then I don't see any FA or draft picks coming in at this point that would improve the defence for this upcoming season.

[Fireball77]

Jake had two regular season games that were high INT that kind of made it look bad...vs Oak and TB the first time. The rest of the year, the 14 other games, he had 5 ints total.

I watched the NYG game again yesterday and he threw several to the RBs for some nice gains. Now, are the RBs used that much in the passing game? No, not as much as I want them to be. They dropped their share too. I think Dwill in particular should be used more on screens, etc. Some is probably Jake's doing because he's in love with the longball, some the offense's scheme.

[jramsey4]

I'm still waiting to hear what has to be done on defense to improve it how to go about improving it. Sorry but I don't see how any improvements can be made without trading Peppers. Even then I don't see any FA or draft picks coming in at this point that would improve the defence for this upcoming season.

There is always some Draftee or FA that gets pick up that everyone either had counted him out or was unheard of, that comes in and helps his team. We got a pleasant surprise last year in Brayton (who played far better then I thought he would). I think our biggest pickup has already happened and that is the signing of Meeks. I think if nothing else he brings in a breath of fresh air (because the Turd was a stinkin'). But he has historically taken a D of average talent and gotten them to overachieve and I just hope he can do the same with us.

[jramsey4]

Jake had two regular season games that were high INT that kind of made it look bad...vs Oak and TB the first time. The rest of the year, the 14 other games, he had 5 ints total.

I watched the NYG game again yesterday and he threw several to the RBs for some nice gains. Now, are the RBs used that much in the passing game? No, not as much as I want them to be. They dropped their share too. I think Dwill in particular should be used more on screens, etc. Some is probably Jake's doing because he's in love with the longball, some the offense's scheme.

So are you comfortable with a QB that is going to lose you, on his own, two to three games a year? Because if it hadn't been against the lowly Raiders we would have lost that game. In this offense all the QB has to do is protect the Football. If that means he only has 150-200 yards and 1 TD, then so be it. I heard one announcer this year say that you could tell what kind of game Jake was going to have in the first 1 or 2 drives. If he started poorly he was going to probably have a bad game and vice versa.

[Fireball77]

And Jake pretty much was that guy most of the year...the 150-250 yards and no turnovers guy.

I don't buy into the one player wins or loses games thing anyway. Sure the D and the fact the Raiders O sucked bailed Jake out 100% that day....no argument from me. But if you are looking for a team where you have a QB that doesn't have a couple shitty games a year you ain't gonna find it.