Is the QB solely responsible for wins and loses? (1 Viewer)

[mr roboto]

In several threads lately I've noticed QB's get blasted because their teams aren't winning. Now these critics are not pointing out that the QB play is the problem - quite the contrary. But despite good or great QB play, the team has a losing record, so it must be the QB's fault.

Let me say this clearly, and slowly. The QB is the leader of the offense. He has nothing to do with defense or special teams. And no matter how many times you've seen Rudy or Rocky or Hoosiers or Remember the Titans or some other overly-emotional sports movie, one guy, one speech, one play does not automatically make a poor offensive line block better, or bad receivers run terrific routes. There are no points on the board for 'leadership.'

This is the NFL. Not Pop Warner. These guys get paid millions of dollars. They shouldn't need some Lombardi-like QB to make them play well.

The QB is the most important player on the team. Because of how often he touches the ball. Not because his gravitas should propel his crappy team to 10 wins.

That is all.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

A QB can take a lot of pressure off the defense every time he converts a 3rd down situation and keeps the drive going and letting his defense rest. A QB can take pressure off the punter by not forcing him to always punt the ball from deep inside his own territory every time. A QB can answer the call and cover up for times when the defense is having a bad day that week. A QB can often pick a team up on the sideline with his energy and enthusiasm and cheer the defense on to get him the ball back so he has one more chance to drive the team into the end zone to win the game.

That is all

 

[mr roboto]

A QB can take a lot of pressure off the defense every time he converts a 3rd down situation and keeps the drive going and letting his defense rest. A QB can take pressure off the punter by not forcing him to always punt the ball from deep inside his own territory every time. A QB can answer the call and cover up for times when the defense is having a bad day that week. A QB can often pick a team up on the sideline with his energy and enthusiasm and cheer the defense on to get him the ball back so he has one more chance to drive the team into the end zone to win the game.That is all

So you DON'T agree with me.What about when the QB is playing well? But the team isn't winning? I agree that he should try to motivate. I just think it's lazy analysis to point to a QB's record as proof he is not good. Now if he is the reason they are losing, sure.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

I just think it's lazy analysis to point to a QB's record as proof he is not good. Now if he is the reason they are losing, sure.

Similar to a winning pitcher in MLB, too many factors outside of their control.

 

[AngryPatriot]

Domo Arigato- you make some valid points, see the 2011 NE Patriots. The D has sucked it up bad but Brady hasn't always played well either. How your QB plays is a pretty good indicator of how your team is doing, if your QB is playing poorly that's a very good indicator of how your team will fare. It's a QB/celebrity driven league and media culture so no doubt too much focus is put on QB's at the expense of the D and special teams where a lot of "subtle" plays can have big outcomes- on a single play, a key drive, or a whole game. But eventually the ball ends back up in the QB's hands and the cycle starts again.....

I wouldn't underestimate leadership though, we're dealing with human beings!

That is not all.

 

[The Comedian]

It's not either or. The quarterback effects the success of his team more than any other person on the planet. But no, he's not out there trying to get the defense off the field on third down. Brady fans want to say that QB is everything - Brady haters try and makes it sound like QB is no more important than the RG. The truth, quite obviously, is somewhere in the middle, but probably more towards the QB heavy side.

 

[Cenobite]

On the field the biggest factor in wins and losses is the play of the offensive line. You can have the best qb, rb, and wrs but if the offensive line cannot pass protect or run block no team can win. You can even have a weak link on the offensive line and survive by double teaming and chip blocks but if your unit as a whole plays poorly your team is in for a long day. I would rather have a stellar offensive line than any skill position on offense.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

To the OP:

See: P. Rivers

end rant/

 

[Dizzy]

What about when the QB is playing well? But the team isn't winning?

Example?

 

[DollaDIllz]

Why do people say "that is all" when they're clearly not done talking?

 

[RUSF18]

Why do people say "that is all" when they're clearly not done talking?

Or when they post a thread to seek conversation.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

What about when the QB is playing well? But the team isn't winning?

Example?

Matt Shaub for most of his career w/ Houston

 

[DollaDIllz]

What about when the QB is playing well? But the team isn't winning?

Example?

This year:Cam Newton, Mike Vick, Matt Hasselbeck, Tony Romo2010:Carson Palmer, Matt Schaub, Phillip Rivers, Kyle Orton, Romo/Kitna2009:Matt Schaub, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Kyle Orton, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco2008rew Brees, Phillip Rivers, Kurt Warner, Jay Cutler, Donovan McNabb, Aaron Rodgers, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, David Garrard2007rew Brees, Carson Palmer, Jay Cutler, Kurt Warner2006:Carson Palmer, Marc Bulger, Tony Romo, Ben RoethlisbergerThere's five and a half years' worth, should I go on?

 

[lakerstan]

I see where you are going with this. I keep pointing out that Peyton Manning doesn't play defense and didn't give up 62 points to New Orleans.

 

[DiStefano]

Dan Marino was the example of suckitude because he never won the Superbowl.

Joe Montana was fantastic, because he won 4. Of course, in the other 11 years of his career, he was an example of suckitude.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

I see where you are going with this. I keep pointing out that Peyton Manning doesn't play defense and didn't give up 62 points to New Orleans.

Peyton Manning would also never had all those 3 and outs that led to all those Saints possessions. Seriously, why do people equate great fantasy stats to great QB's thar lead their teams to critical wins? In the NFL, you are what your record says you are, Stats are for FF nerds.

 

[DollaDIllz]

In the NFL, your team is what the record says they are...

fixed.

 

[Dizzy]

This year:Cam Newton, Mike Vick, Matt Hasselbeck, Tony Romo2010:Carson Palmer, Matt Schaub, Phillip Rivers, Kyle Orton, Romo/Kitna2009:Matt Schaub, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Kyle Orton, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco2008rew Brees, Phillip Rivers, Kurt Warner, Jay Cutler, Donovan McNabb, Aaron Rodgers, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, David Garrard2007rew Brees, Carson Palmer, Jay Cutler, Kurt Warner2006:Carson Palmer, Marc Bulger, Tony Romo, Ben RoethlisbergerThere's five and a half years' worth, should I go on?

Good list, and many of these QB's regularly make (made) mistakes that either contribute to - or directly lead to - their team losing.That's the position. That's why they get paid the big bucks. When they play well, truly play well... their teams usually win. I believe Cam Newton said it as much in his press conference this week. And Romo is a fine example of a QB that is quite capable of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

 

[DollaDIllz]

Good list, and many of these QB's regularly make (made) mistakes that either contribute to - or directly lead to - their team losing.

But, many of them didn't. Their teams lost for plenty of reasons other than the QB play. Mike Vick is definitely not the reason the Eagles have been losing; he's probably kept them from being winless. Same goes for Brees, Rivers, Bulger, etc. over the years.