Broncos backup QB Brock Osweiler ready if Peyton Manning can't play

[Denver Native (Carol)]

Brock Osweiler remains the loyal understudy to Peyton Manning ... for now.

The memory of star quarterback Peyton Manning limping off the field in the closing minutes of Sunday's 28-20 victory against the Chargers in San Diego is still on the minds of many. A few minutes before Osweiler chatted in front of his locker Monday, interim coach Jack Del Rio announced that a magnetic resonance imaging exam revealed no structural damage to Manning's right ankle. Manning's practice time this week is yet to be determined, but he will play Sunday night against the Kansas City Chiefs. And Osweiler will continue to be his backup until further notice.

"My job as a backup quarterback is always to be prepared," Osweiler said. "I have to know the game plan inside and out. That's how I look at it every week. I'll always be ready."

rest - http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_24510912/broncos-backup-qb-brock-osweiler-ready-if-peyton

[Ravage!!!]

Good. Considering how well Back-up QBs have been performing around the NFL, I have no doubt that our back-up will come in and perform admirably. He's preparing and learnging behind the best. We have stron WRs, a very good TE that can all be a young QBs best friend. Considering his mobility, he won't be able to diagnose the defenses pre-snap like Manning, but his legs will be able to keep LBs honest much more than Manning can.

I wouldn't count on him taking us to the Super Bowl just yet, but if he needed to hold down the fort for a game or two, I think we will be just fine.

[Northman]

Yea, i have faith in Oz. He's had a great tutor, will be exciting to watch him take the reigns when Manning is ready to leave the game. Unless of course Elway decides he needs competition to prove himself. *fart*

[powderaddict]

We are stacked at WR/TE, and have an effective running game. The defense has improved drastically since Von's return.

Of course I want Manning to play, but if Brock needs to come in for a spell, I don't see the playoffs being unreachable. 8-1 with 7 games to go gives us a good shot.

[Joel]

I highly doubt Osweiler's ready to face either of the defenses on tap for our next three games. Hopefully we find a way to block well enough an offense ranked 20th in total rushing can jam it down the throats of a D ranked 24th against the run, keeping PFM safely out of harms way so he'll be ready for another road duel with Brady. In the unlikely event we win ALL THREE of those games, it would definitely be nice to rest Manning and get Osweiler some real life reps against the Faders if we have homefield locked up by week 17, and even better if we could afford that against Houston's punishing blitz in week 16.

Not sure how realistic any of that best case scenario is though; we need to block much better in both the running and passing game, else our rocket offense may explode on the launchpad. But the trading deadline's passed and Clady's gone for the year, so we go to war with the army we have, not the army we want. I'm sure Osweiler's doing his due diligence; hopefully we won't need him, or he's good enough if we do.

[Joel]

We are stacked at WR/TE, and have an effective running game. The defense has improved drastically since Von's return.

Of course I want Manning to play, but if Brock needs to come in for a spell, I don't see the playoffs being unreachable. 8-1 with 7 games to go gives us a good shot.
20th in total yards is not "an effective running game." Especially not considering it actually WAS effective the first month; since Clady went down it's actually been a bottom 10 rushing attack. The defense is much better, yes, but not so good we can make a SB run with Osweiler unless he's MUCH better right now than even his biggest fans believe. We won't lose 6 of our last 7, no; we'll make the playoffs. But I'm frankly a little sick of people acting like just getting to the postseason when we've had PFM for two years and REACHED the postseason even without him. "We're #12!" just doesn't have the same ring.

[Ziggy]

Yea, i have faith in Oz. He's had a great tutor, will be exciting to watch him take the reigns when Manning is ready to leave the game. Unless of course Elway decides he needs competition to prove himself. *fart*

Elway will always bring in competition at every position. That's what great GM's do. Brock is the heir apparent, but there are no free rides in Denver as long as Duke has the reigns.

[powderaddict]

20th in total yards is not "an effective running game." Especially not considering it actually WAS effective the first month; since Clady went down it's actually been a bottom 10 rushing attack. The defense is much better, yes, but not so good we can make a SB run with Osweiler unless he's MUCH better right now than even his biggest fans believe. We won't lose 6 of our last 7, no; we'll make the playoffs. But I'm frankly a little sick of people acting like just getting to the postseason when we've had PFM for two years and REACHED the postseason even without him. "We're #12!" just doesn't have the same ring.

I said "effective", not great, nor dominating. They pass much more than run, so I really don't care what the overall rush ranking is. Moreno is among the league leaders in TD's. The RB position has been productive. His YPC is decent as well. Ball had a nice run last week. I stand by my comments.

Isn't getting to the postseason the reason regular season games are played? If Manning is hurt and can't play in the postseason, I don't see us going very far. With Manning, we are a Superbowl caliber team.

There are no guarantees, you put the best product out there you can, hope you don't get the injury bug, and hope you catch a few lucky bounces along the way. This team has been put together very well, and has as much of a chance of winning a superbowl as any.

Frankly, I'm sick of entitled fans acting like it's their right to a superbowl trophy, and cant recognize what the team is accomplishing right in front of their faces, when we didn't have PFM and barely made the playoffs only once in the prior 6 years without him. "We're 4-12" just doesn't have a good ring to it.

[Broncolingus]

I think Denver should put in Norris Weese!!!! :D


http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5223/5668226191_ed089317ed_z.jpg

[Dzone]

I think if Oz plays and Manning sits, we still beat the Chiefs. I may revisit this thread if that happens. lol

[Joel]

I said "effective", not great, nor dominating. They pass much more than run, so I really don't care what the overall rush ranking is. Moreno is among the league leaders in TD's. The RB position has been productive. His YPC is decent as well. Ball had a nice run last week. I stand by my comments.
Moreno HAD a quite good rushing average (5.1) until Clady and Franklin got hurt. Since then? 3.3, about a yard below the NFL average. http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MoreKn00/gamelog/2013/ Not entirely by coincidence, that's Montee Balls SEASON average, and three of his four best games were before Franklins injury against Jax.

Just to be clear, none of that is a slam on any of our backs: Unless a team has Barry Sanders, it needs at least SOME run blocking (sorry, Beadles, blocking safeties 20 yards downfield on screens doesn't count.)


Isn't getting to the postseason the reason regular season games are played? If Manning is hurt and can't play in the postseason, I don't see us going very far. With Manning, we are a Superbowl caliber team.

There are no guarantees, you put the best product out there you can, hope you don't get the injury bug, and hope you catch a few lucky bounces along the way. This team has been put together very well, and has as much of a chance of winning a superbowl as any.

Frankly, I'm sick of entitled fans acting like it's their right to a superbowl trophy, and cant recognize what the team is accomplishing right in front of their faces, when we didn't have PFM and barely made the playoffs only once in the prior 6 years without him. "We're 4-12" just doesn't have a good ring to it.
The postseason's the primary reason for regular season games, but not the only one; seeding matters, too (except for teams who phone in games against teams they slaughtered 4 weeks earlier, of course.) And, as you say, if Manning's hurt we don't go far (if anywhere) in the playoffs despite being almost assured a berth at this point. The three most important parts of offense are blocking, blocking and blocking. Shannys teams got that, which is how they coaxed me on board the bandwagon after the Packers SB, just in time to ride it to the top twice.

Maybe that just after growing up with the 'Boys going from Staubach, TD and Pearson to Aikman, Emmitt and Irvin spoiled me. Imprinting on The Hidden Game of Footballs focus on previoussly-ignored offensive linemen, combined with Dallas' judo-trained dominant line, DEFINITELY affected me. But the smart money says watching my beloved hometown Oilers make the playoffs 7 straight years yet never get past the divisional round soured me on the notion getting there is half the fun. If we were in a long playoff drought, that would be enough; we're not, so it's not.

I'm not saying anything but a Lombardi is a failure—but anything short of a conference championship appearance (win or lose) is. This team isn't about continually losing to REAL contenders, or shouldn't be.

[artie_dale]

The question is, can the Broncos beat the Chiefs without Peyton Manning????

I still think it's possible. We have enough weapons on both offense and defense to matchup well against the Chiefs. Brock is also more mobile than Peyton and I believe he can stay poised enough to pull it off. Sure, it'll be similar to the Chief's game management type of approach, but I definitely believe it's possible.

[Joel]

The question is, can the Broncos beat the Chiefs without Peyton Manning????

I still think it's possible. We have enough weapons on both offense and defense to matchup well against the Chiefs. Brock is also more mobile than Peyton and I believe he can stay poised enough to pull it off. Sure, it'll be similar to the Chief's game management type of approach, but I definitely believe it's possible.
No, because we'd have to run the legs off Moreno and at least one other back, and if we block well enough to do that Manning will finish the game without incident.

[wayninja]

Good. Considering how well Back-up QBs have been performing around the NFL, I have no doubt that our back-up will come in and perform admirably. He's preparing and learnging behind the best. We have stron WRs, a very good TE that can all be a young QBs best friend. Considering his mobility, he won't be able to diagnose the defenses pre-snap like Manning, but his legs will be able to keep LBs honest much more than Manning can.

I wouldn't count on him taking us to the Super Bowl just yet, but if he needed to hold down the fort for a game or two, I think we will be just fine.

I would normally agree, but holding down the fort in the next game or two is basically the toughest assignment we can hand a backup.

[Simple Jaded]

I think the Broncos run an entirely different attack with Os, far more basic and conservative. Roll outs and waggles.

[Joel]

I think the Broncos run an entirely different attack with Os, far more basic and conservative. Roll outs and waggles.
That increasingly appears the NFLs future. Manning and Brady may be the last truly great pure pocket passers (at least until the game changes again,) even with the latter prompting a rule to extend their lifespan. Setting aside the extent that's ratings driven (not that I think it minor, I just don't want to get into that,) cap and FA make it really hard to get and maintain a truly SOLID offensive line, and LBs and safeties will just pour through ANY gap that exists. Part of it's the 3-4s resurgence allowing blitzers such a variety of angles, but part of it's just defenses getting faster.

At a certain point one must ask, "If the QB's getting hit every week anyway, does staying in the pocket and refusing to run really 'protect' him that much?" If the answer is "no," why sit there waiting to get clobbered when a 50 yd TD run is there for the taking? Does a helmet in the ribs somehow hurt less in the pocket than in the open field? All the passer-specific protections vanish, but a hit's a hit. Meanwhile, a legit dual threat is a great way to get those edge rushers to stay back in their lanes rather than just sprint toward a QB with no fear he'll slip around them and sprint the other way.

[Dzone]

I think they should announce that Oz is going to start, so the chiefs get slack on Payton, then start payton at the last minute..
But seriously. if a stiff like Flacco can get hot and win a super bowl. we should have no problem with Osweiler...Osweiller can throw some bombs that Peyton cant

[Joel]

I think they should announce that Oz is going to start, so the chiefs get slack on Payton, then start payton at the last minute..
But seriously. if a stiff like Flacco can get hot and win a super bowl. we should have no problem with Osweiler...Osweiller can throw some bombs that Peyton cant
That only works with a murderer who made 10 Pro Bowls and announces retirement before the playoffs (seriously, what captain announces retirement BEFORE his teams postseason? Great ratings; very suspicious.)

[topscribe]

I think Denver should put in Norris Weese!!!! :D


http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5223/5668226191_ed089317ed_z.jpg
We had a modern version of Weese.

Some guy named Tebow . . .
.

[Simple Jaded]

That increasingly appears the NFLs future. Manning and Brady may be the last truly great pure pocket passers (at least until the game changes again,) even with the latter prompting a rule to extend their lifespan. Setting aside the extent that's ratings driven (not that I think it minor, I just don't want to get into that,) cap and FA make it really hard to get and maintain a truly SOLID offensive line, and LBs and safeties will just pour through ANY gap that exists. Part of it's the 3-4s resurgence allowing blitzers such a variety of angles, but part of it's just defenses getting faster.

At a certain point one must ask, "If the QB's getting hit every week anyway, does staying in the pocket and refusing to run really 'protect' him that much?" If the answer is "no," why sit there waiting to get clobbered when a 50 yd TD run is there for the taking? Does a helmet in the ribs somehow hurt less in the pocket than in the open field? All the passer-specific protections vanish, but a hit's a hit. Meanwhile, a legit dual threat is a great way to get those edge rushers to stay back in their lanes rather than just sprint toward a QB with no fear he'll slip around them and sprint the other way.

I'm thinking more of a Jake Plummer kind of offense, I don't care to see a 6'8" read option QB. Those offenses are a steamy pile of shit.

[Joel]

I'm thinking more of a Jake Plummer kind of offense, I don't care to see a 6'8" read option QB. Those offenses are a steamy pile of shit.
It's more a matter of where one strikes the balance than anything, but accuracy and ball security remain critical regardless. I don't want the Broncos offenses TYPICAL of Plummer, crumpling under center, coughing up fumbles, heaving off target picks and leading Pro Bowl WRs into LBs until resulting injuries prematurely end their careers. 2 lost fumbles and 2 picks in a home Conference Championship? No, thanks.

[wayninja]

It's more a matter of where one strikes the balance than anything, but accuracy and ball security remain critical regardless. I don't want the Broncos offenses TYPICAL of Plummer, crumpling under center, coughing up fumbles, heaving off target picks and leading Pro Bowl WRs into LBs until resulting injuries prematurely end their careers. 2 lost fumbles and 2 picks in a home Conference Championship? No, thanks.

C'mon, seeing bootlegs 30% of the time was awesome!

[FanInAZ]

I think Denver should put in Norris Weese!!!! :D


http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5223/5668226191_ed089317ed_z.jpg

I wasn't old enough to understand why my dad disliked him, but I was old enough to understand how much my dad disliked him :nod:

[capt. Jack]

I say start BO this week, we can beat these guys with our "scrubs" in there. Save Peyton for the next two games!

[sneakers]

I think Denver should put in Norris Weese!!!! :D


http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5223/5668226191_ed089317ed_z.jpg

oh man, those pants

[Shazam!]

I'm not fooling myself. If Manning goes down this team is done.

[Dreadnought]

I wasn't old enough to understand why my dad disliked him, but I was old enough to understand how much my dad disliked him :nod:

I have a 1979 Broncos game on a CD, wherein Weese crapped the bed, got benched in the third quarter with the Broncos down 34 - 10, and Craig Morton leads the good guys to 27 unanswered points for a 37-34 comeback win over the Seahawks. Its wonderful. Morton wasn't our greatest QB, but he might have thrown the prettiest pass of any Denver QB. Norris Weese was not very good.

This game in fact

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/197909230den.htm

[Ravage!!!]

I'm not fooling myself. If Manning goes down this team is done.

No shit. But that's not what people are asking of Os. We know Os isn't a Manning, who is?

But, if you want, you can hand in your card if Manning goes down.

[Ravage!!!]

I highly doubt Osweiler's ready to face either of the defenses on tap for our next three games.

Explain to me how Osweiller is less "ready" to face the Chiefs defense than Gabbart, Pryor, Campbell, or some guys named Keenum and Tuel.

[BroncoNut]

I love Ravage's attitude. it's cute.

[Ravage!!!]

I love Ravage's attitude. it's cute.

ahhh.. thanks man. That's what I've been going for!!

[PeytonManning]

Don't worry. I'll be ready to play come Sunday night.

Hurry, Hurry.

[FanInAZ]

I have a 1979 Broncos game on a CD, wherein Weese crapped the bed, got benched in the third quarter with the Broncos down 34 - 10, and Craig Morton leads the good guys to 27 unanswered points for a 37-34 comeback win over the Seahawks. Its wonderful. Morton wasn't our greatest QB, but he might have thrown the prettiest pass of any Denver QB. Norris Weese was not very good.

This game in fact

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/197909230den.htm

While we were watching a game during Elway's 2nd season (1984), my dad said that Morton was "the best pure passer" Denver had ever had. I haven't talked to him in years, so I don't know if now believes Elway had overtook him at some point. I also don't know what he thinks about Manning, but I'm pretty certain that non of our post-Elway/pre-Manning QBs are even part of the discussion.

I was 13 when Morton retired, so my assessment of the Broncos of the late '70s at that time was similar to OR's assessment of the Raiders. Not only did I think Gradishar was a HoFer, but Morton, Upchurch and Watson as well. I also didn't Elway should be allowed to wear Morton's #7.

[Simple Jaded]

It's more a matter of where one strikes the balance than anything, but accuracy and ball security remain critical regardless. I don't want the Broncos offenses TYPICAL of Plummer, crumpling under center, coughing up fumbles, heaving off target picks and leading Pro Bowl WRs into LBs until resulting injuries prematurely end their careers. 2 lost fumbles and 2 picks in a home Conference Championship? No, thanks.
Did you seriously just use Plummer's AFCC game performance as a reason to choose the POS offense the Broncos don't even have the personnel for? The irony in this post is amusing.

[Dzone]

Hahahaa...Morton could zing a ball...but his knees were so knocked in he could hardly run,..Most knocked kneed qb in history....but led the broncos on a glorious season in 1977 and beat 2 of the most dominant teams of the 70s before being destroyed by doomsday..Harvey Martin and the Manster demolished Morton..I think they put in Norris Weese...at least thats what I have read LOL

[FanInAZ]

Hahahaa...Morton could zing a ball...but his knees were so knocked in he could hardly run,..Most knocked kneed qb in history....but led the broncos on a glorious season in 1977 and beat 2 of the most dominant teams of the 70s before being destroyed by doomsday..Harvey Martin and the Manster demolished Morton..I think they put in Norris Weese...at least thats what I have read LOL

That's why I laughed so hard when he did a naked bootleg against the Seahawks a couple of years before he retired. I don't recall who the RB that he faked the handoff to, but everybody and their mother went after the RB allowing Craig "Mobile as a Brick Wall" Morton walked into the end zone.

[BroncoJoe]

That's why I laughed so hard when he did a naked bootleg against the Seahawks a couple of years before he retired. I don't recall who the RB that he faked the handoff to, but everybody and their mother went after the RB allowing Craig "Mobile as a Brick Wall" Morton walked into the end zone.

Man, I remember that "run". It was painful to watch, but glorious at the same time. Was it the Seahawks or Raiders?

[Ravage!!!]

That's why I laughed so hard when he did a naked bootleg against the Seahawks a couple of years before he retired. I don't recall who the RB that he faked the handoff to, but everybody and their mother went after the RB allowing Craig "Mobile as a Brick Wall" Morton walked into the end zone.

Like Manning this year!

[Joel]

Did you seriously just use Plummer's AFCC game performance as a reason to choose the POS offense the Broncos don't even have the personnel for? The irony in this post is amusing.
I said true dual threat QBs increasingly look like the NFLs future, not necessarily Denvers. Although, ZBS is probably better suited to brokenfield QB runs than straight up run blocking at the line is. A lot probably depends on how much bringing back Gibbs as a consultant means we return to the ZBS, and what kind of starting QB we have after Manning retires. I used Plummers AFCCG performance to prove I don't want a Tarkenton without the pocket accuracy, because the offense that let a wildcard team produce Denvers ONLY AFCCG loss at home can't win us a title now either.

[FanInAZ]

Man, I remember that "run". It was painful to watch, but glorious at the same time. Was it the Seahawks or Raiders?

That was in the Kingdom.

[underrated29]

I love Ravage's attitude. it's cute.

Ravs a good guy. I always picture him as Denero in "Meet the parents"

[Simple Jaded]

I said true dual threat QBs increasingly look like the NFLs future, not necessarily Denvers. Although, ZBS is probably better suited to brokenfield QB runs than straight up run blocking at the line is. A lot probably depends on how much bringing back Gibbs as a consultant means we return to the ZBS, and what kind of starting QB we have after Manning retires. I used Plummers AFCCG performance to prove I don't want a Tarkenton without the pocket accuracy, because the offense that let a wildcard team produce Denvers ONLY AFCCG loss at home can't win us a title now either.

Tarkenton without the pocket accuracy? Can't win a title? Please, please PLEASE tell me you see the irony?

Btw, the starting QB that will take over for Manning is Brock Osweiler, for better/worse, but if your heart is set on garbage dual-threats you better hope this regime suffers a massive failure.

[FanInAZ]

Like Manning this year!

Actually, Morton made Manning look like Tebow, seriously. Manning does have some ability to move around, and occasionally make a run for it, when the pocket breaks down. Morton was a sitting duck. I think Dan Marino may have been the last NFL QB to match Morton's complete lack of mobility.

[BroncoJoe]

That was in the Kingdom.

Jehovah Witness?

[Joel]

Tarkenton without the pocket accuracy? Can't win a title? Please, please PLEASE tell me you see the irony?

Btw, the starting QB that will take over for Manning is Brock Osweiler, for better/worse, but if your heart is set on garbage dual-threats you better hope this regime suffers a massive failure.
Was Cunningham garbage? Steve Young? McNair? Is Rodgers? I'm actually not a fan of Young and McNairs accuracy, but look around the league at guys like Wilson, Kaepernick, RGIII, Vick, Roethlisbeger and all the rest who are far more typical of modern starters than pure pocket passers like Manning and Brady are. Precision pocket passers with decent arms are hard enough to find, but then it takes five solid linemen to protect them since they can't move; if Eli were as immobile as his brother the Pats would have a perfect season.

Now, dual threat QBs must be genuine DUAL threats, not scattershot RBs. No matter how well a QB runs, he can't succeed unless he also throws well, from the pocket—he just can't live there. Not anymore; even with all the rules to nerf blitzers, the 3-4s resurgence and the difficulty of maintaining a solid line across the board in the days of caps and free agency increasingly encourage dual threat QBs. All the same ratings and revenue based motives that led the NFL to handcuff blitzers and DBs conspire to promote dual threat QBs, too. This: http://nfl.si.com/2013/10/27/terrelle-pryor-93-yard-run-pittsburgh-steelers/ sells tickets.

[Ravage!!!]

Ravs a good guy. I always picture him as Denero in "Meet the parents"

:lol: :lol: Omg, this made me laugh out loud! Thanks man!

[Ravage!!!]

Was Cunningham garbage? Steve Young? McNair? Is Rodgers? I'm actually not a fan of Young and McNairs accuracy, but look around the league at guys like Wilson, Kaepernick, RGIII, Vick, Roethlisbeger and all the rest who are far more typical of modern starters than pure pocket passers like Manning and Brady are. Precision pocket passers with decent arms are hard enough to find, but then it takes five solid linemen to protect them since they can't move; if Eli were as immobile as his brother the Pats would have a perfect season.

Now, dual threat QBs must be genuine DUAL threats, not scattershot RBs. No matter how well a QB runs, he can't succeed unless he also throws well, from the pocket—he just can't live there. Not anymore; even with all the rules to nerf blitzers, the 3-4s resurgence and the difficulty of maintaining a solid line across the board in the days of caps and free agency increasingly encourage dual threat QBs. All the same ratings and revenue based motives that led the NFL to handcuff blitzers and DBs conspire to promote dual threat QBs, too. This: http://nfl.si.com/2013/10/27/terrelle-pryor-93-yard-run-pittsburgh-steelers/ sells tickets.

You aren't describing something that is "new" to today's NFL. This "modern duel threat" QB isn't something that hasn't been around for generations. Yet, in the end, its the PASSER that is crème de la crème. Tarkenton, Steve Young, John Elway are just a few of the BIG named, HoF, QBs that were known for their legs throughout the generations of the NFL. Yet, the NFL's top guys are STILL passers. Especially when you see guys like Vick, Vince Young, and Tebow fail in the NFL.

Vick is without a doubt one of the best athletes to every play the QB position. A runner that could not be matched at that position and a CANNON of an arm. His "duel threat" doesn't seem to make him the guy that NFL franchises are looking for. They will take an Andrew Luck over an RGIII, and we aer seeing that those that thought RGIII was in the same class (some thought better) because of his "mobility" were off their rocker.

Now if you can find a guy that can throw like Manning and move like Vick, then yes, you have yourself a "true" duel threat QB. But the NFL is designed around PASSING QBs. Moving from the pocket isn't new, and the rules actually are more positioned to KEEP the QB in the pocket and NOT running since that is where he is protected.

The Tebownites tried to tell me that the "NFL is changing" and he was the "new generation" of QBs. Nuh uh.

[Joel]

You aren't describing something that is "new" to today's NFL. This "modern duel threat" QB isn't something that hasn't been around for generations. Yet, in the end, its the PASSER that is crème de la crème. Tarkenton, Steve Young, John Elway are just a few of the BIG named, HoF, QBs that were known for their legs throughout the generations of the NFL. Yet, the NFL's top guys are STILL passers. Especially when you see guys like Vick, Vince Young, and Tebow fail in the NFL.

Vick is without a doubt one of the best athletes to every play the QB position. A runner that could not be matched at that position and a CANNON of an arm. His "duel threat" doesn't seem to make him the guy that NFL franchises are looking for. They will take an Andrew Luck over an RGIII, and we aer seeing that those that thought RGIII was in the same class (some thought better) because of his "mobility" were off their rocker.

Now if you can find a guy that can throw like Manning and move like Vick, then yes, you have yourself a "true" duel threat QB. But the NFL is designed around PASSING QBs. Moving from the pocket isn't new, and the rules actually are more positioned to KEEP the QB in the pocket and NOT running since that is where he is protected.

The Tebownites tried to tell me that the "NFL is changing" and he was the "new generation" of QBs. Nuh uh.
Guys who can't pass aren't dual threats any more than guys who can't run; a starting pro QB must be a passer first or he'll never have a chance to be a runner second. The difference now is that, rather than the QBs of the '40s who had strong bodies, legs and arms but little accuracy, or the prototypical '80s pocket passers who were statues and crumpled under a blitz, we're starting to see guys who can run AND pass well.

Luck's a good runner, not just a scrambler but a guy who can take a called QB run, though not on the same level as Aaron Rodgers. It's still too early to say with Newton and RGIII, but it's not like their throws are all over the map every week; they have more bad weeks than most starting QBs, but so do a lot of guys who've only made a living at it for 2-3 years. Tarkenton wasn't a true dual threat because, great scambler that he was, he played when the pocket passer was solidified as the preferred choice of the era; he COULD'VE been a dual threat, even though he retired with every PASSING record in the book.

Once upon a time, QBs who couldn't run couldn't play; later, QBs who couldn't pass couldn't play. Increasingly, QBs who can't do BOTH can't play; they'll always have to be passers first, but if that were still enough Bob Grieses kid wouldn't have been booed out of the league for playing just like him, and Kyle Orton would still be a Bronco. After all Orton, is VERY accurate; was that enough? Unless a team can hand him the rock solid lines with NO holes that Manning once had in Indy and Brady has with maddening consistency in NE, a guy like Marino can't survive today, let alone flourish.

[Simple Jaded]

Dan Marino would destroy today's NFL, let's leave him outta discussions of Kyle Orton and Bob Griese.

[Simple Jaded]

Was Cunningham garbage? Steve Young? McNair? Is Rodgers? I'm actually not a fan of Young and McNairs accuracy, but look around the league at guys like Wilson, Kaepernick, RGIII, Vick, Roethlisbeger and all the rest who are far more typical of modern starters than pure pocket passers like Manning and Brady are. Precision pocket passers with decent arms are hard enough to find, but then it takes five solid linemen to protect them since they can't move; if Eli were as immobile as his brother the Pats would have a perfect season.

Now, dual threat QBs must be genuine DUAL threats, not scattershot RBs. No matter how well a QB runs, he can't succeed unless he also throws well, from the pocket—he just can't live there. Not anymore; even with all the rules to nerf blitzers, the 3-4s resurgence and the difficulty of maintaining a solid line across the board in the days of caps and free agency increasingly encourage dual threat QBs. All the same ratings and revenue based motives that led the NFL to handcuff blitzers and DBs conspire to promote dual threat QBs, too. This: http://nfl.si.com/2013/10/27/terrelle-pryor-93-yard-run-pittsburgh-steelers/ sells tickets.

Same old narrative about how QB's that can run will take over (much less make Manning and Brady types obsolete), it's horseshit. A slowass pocket passer is making Chip ******* Kelly break his mold.

[Northman]

Same old narrative about how QB's that can run will take over (much less make Manning and Brady types obsolete), it's horseshit. A slowass pocket passer is making Chip ******* Kelly break his mold.

/thread.

And Joel, Young, McNair, and Rodgers are not hybrid QB's so bad bad examples there. I think you have a very hard time determining what a hybrid QB is.

[Joel]

Dan Marino would destroy today's NFL, let's leave him outta discussions of Kyle Orton and Bob Griese.
Without a line that was rock solid at EVERY point Marino would GET destroyed in todays NFL. His quick release would be a great benefit, but he'd leave the field in a cast by the end of his second season, because his "mobility" gave a whole new meaning to the phrase "Statue of Liberty play."


Same old narrative about how QB's that can run will take over (much less make Manning and Brady types obsolete), it's horseshit. A slowass pocket passer is making Chip ******* Kelly break his mold.
In 5 starts Foles has gained >100 rushing yds, with >4 yds/carry and 2 TDs. In fact, he's already run THREE TIMES as much as last year—in one less start—and has a higher average: Who's breaking whose mold...?


/thread.

And Joel, Young, McNair, and Rodgers are not hybrid QB's so bad bad examples there. I think you have a very hard time determining what a hybrid QB is.
McNair and Young didn't routinely run circles around defenses? McNairs rushing (and other) numbers went down as injuries took their toll behind an Oilers line that's always treated pass blocking like a lost art, but until an abrupt drop in 2002 McNair had consistently good rushing numbers: >70 attempts/year once he took over as the starter (including 101 his first full season,) with >400 yds and 5/attempt in all but one year. Youngs numbers weren't quite as good because he ran slightly less, but once he became the starter he still had >200 yds every year except his last (OK, technically he only had 199 in '97; close enough.)

Since 2008 Rodgers has had a better rushing average than most RBs, and 18 TDs (though he didn't get any this year.) I literally couldn't remember all the current examples starting for good teams (I completely forgot about Newton.) About the only bona fide great in the style of Brady and Manning is Brees. Should we go through the list of current NFL starters, or will we just continue with the pretense anyone who doesn't have >1000 rushing yards and complete <60% of their passes isn't a running QB?

Neither passing nor running is enough by itself anymore; it's too hard to keep five solid linemen on a roster and the NFL wants it's big 'splosions for ratings.

[Dreadnought]

Without a line that was rock solid at EVERY point Marino would GET destroyed in todays NFL. His quick release would be a great benefit, but he'd leave the field in a cast by the end of his second season, because his "mobility" gave a whole new meaning to the phrase "Statue of Liberty play."

I believe this is 100% inaccurate, Joel. Marino did fine then and he would do just as fine now. Marino was very elusive within the pocket - it wasn't just a matter of quick release, though he had that too.The game is not that different.

As for your earlier list, I would certainly rate McNair as a mediocrity. The only true exception is Young. Cunningham, Moon, and McNabb briefly flirted with elite status once they stopped running and became purer pocket QB's. Time will tell with RGIII and the new crop of "athletic" QB's. Some may yet be great, though I would wager the only ones who do will have evolved into pocket passers. I think this precludes Kaepernick, by the way.

[Northman]

McNair and Young didn't routinely run circles around defenses? McNairs rushing (and other) numbers went down as injuries took their toll behind an Oilers line that's always treated pass blocking like a lost art, but until an abrupt drop in 2002 McNair had consistently good rushing numbers: >70 attempts/year once he took over as the starter (including 101 his first full season,) with >400 yds and 5/attempt in all but one year. Youngs numbers weren't quite as good because he ran slightly less, but once he became the starter he still had >200 yds every year except his last (OK, technically he only had 199 in '97; close enough.)

Since 2008 Rodgers has had a better rushing average than most RBs, and 18 TDs (though he didn't get any this year.) I literally couldn't remember all the current examples starting for good teams (I completely forgot about Newton.) About the only bona fide great in the style of Brady and Manning is Brees. Should we go through the list of current NFL starters, or will we just continue with the pretense anyone who doesn't have >1000 rushing yards and complete <60% of their passes isn't a running QB?

Neither passing nor running is enough by itself anymore; it's too hard to keep five solid linemen on a roster and the NFL wants it's big 'splosions for ratings.


There's a massive difference between running out of necessity and running by design. Two COMPLETELY different things.

[BroncoNut]

Dan Marino= goat period

[BroncoNut]

Warren Moon is right up there too

[MOtorboat]

Without a line that was rock solid at EVERY point Marino would GET destroyed in todays NFL. His quick release would be a great benefit, but he'd leave the field in a cast by the end of his second season, because his "mobility" gave a whole new meaning to the phrase "Statue of Liberty play."

The greatest pure passer to ever live couldn't survive in today's game?

WTF? Really?

[Simple Jaded]

I hope I'm dead by the time Joel's vision of the NFL is reality.

Oh, btw, true story, Dan Marino made NFLN's Top 10 Most Mobile QB's of All Time.

[Simple Jaded]

Now Nick Foles is a dual-threat QB?

[Ravage!!!]

How can ANYONE possibly say that Marino couldn't survive in today's NFL when we are watching the closest thing to a Clone beat NFL records while behind center of our Broncos??? :confused: Makes absolutely ZERO sense.

[Simple Jaded]

There are some good QB prospects in college who aren't true dual-threats, the best prospect (Bridgewater) is a true pocket passer who can run.

And for the record, Ben R-Berger is not a dual-threat, he's a pocket passer who buys time. He can pick up 1st downs running but that's not a dual-threat QB. Much the same with Aaron Rodgers, Romo, Cutler, Ryan, they all fall into this category. Also for the record, Cunningham was a selfish MeFirstPlayer until he decided to actually learn how to play the position. If you wanted to roll the ball out and let your "QB" play sandlot football, he was pretty good, if you wanted to implement the offense you took years to cultivate.......he was garbage.

[Joel]

I believe this is 100% inaccurate, Joel. Marino did fine then and he would do just as fine now. Marino was very elusive within the pocket - it wasn't just a matter of quick release, though he had that too.The game is not that different.
Marino played most of his career pre-cap, and even then tackles (let alone guards) didn't command salaries normally reserved for QBs. Or, put another way, it didn't cost $25-30 million to field a Pro Bowler at every offensive line position, and even if it had owners willing to pay it could've. The cap and Madden breeding mutant turkeys for the last Dallas dynasties line changed things, and are two of the biggest reasons I think dual threat QBs the new reality (until something else changes things again.)


As for your earlier list, I would certainly rate McNair as a mediocrity. The only true exception is Young. Cunningham, Moon, and McNabb briefly flirted with elite status once they stopped running and became purer pocket QB's. Time will tell with RGIII and the new crop of "athletic" QB's. Some may yet be great, though I would wager the only ones who do will have evolved into pocket passers. I think this precludes Kaepernick, by the way.
I run hot and cold on McNair, but he was well above average, IMHO, if not elite. Age and injuries has converted many dual threat QBs into pocket passers (another reason those who can't pass at least as well as they run can't last.) I contend Cunningham was pretty good, if never great, and McNabb would've been if his work ethic had matched his running and passing. I grew up watching Moon play just up the street; whatever he was in college or Canada, he was never an NFL dual threat: Our crappy pass blocking just flushed him a lot (and taught me the pain of frequent blindside strip-sacks.)

Pocket passers ruled the roost from the '70s through the '90s, but it doesn't look like they still can. Newton just outdueled Brady (though being at home helped,) and his legs and arm were equally indispensable; looking around the NFC, the only top team WITHOUT a dual threat QB is New Orleans, who'll be sorely tested when they face Wilson and (twice) Newton. Brady and Manning remain all they've always been in the AFC, but Smith's started all year for a SB favorite after losing his SF job to a different dual threat, and Luck's perfectly happy to convert firstdowns afoot without prompting from the pass rush.

[MOtorboat]

That argument's all fine and dandy, except he didn't have 5 Pro Bowl offensive lineman, and I think he only played with 3 his entire career.

[MOtorboat]

And Joe Flacco outdueled Colin Kaepernick.

:whoknows:

And the Chiefs are a Super Bowl favorite? WTF are you smoking?

[Joel]

There's a massive difference between running out of necessity and running by design. Two COMPLETELY different things.
Agreed. There's also a huge difference between voluntarily running when no one's open and waiting till the pass rush FORCES it. For example, this is the first case: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpJaJM4Cy8o

Can't believe Broncos fans are actually insisting dual threat QBs suck, like Elway wasn't famously dangerous with his feet (though more in youth than as a 37 year old SB champ.)

[Ravage!!!]

So for some reason, Marino couldn't survive because of the cost of OL, yet Manning (a virtual clone to Marino) is setting NFL records with a 20 million dollar salary and his elite, high salary, LT out of the lineup. :confused: Makes NO sense.

Then there are the rules that allow a RUNNING QB to be hit like any ball carrier while the pocket passer is protected like tissue paper. Throw in the obvious fact that Wrs can't be touched and can't be hit, and the rules circle around a pocket passer that can throw the ball.

[Joel]

So for some reason, Marino couldn't survive because of the cost of OL, yet Manning (a virtual clone to Marino) is setting NFL records with a 20 million dollar salary and his elite, high salary, LT out of the lineup. :confused: Makes NO sense.

Then there are the rules that allow a RUNNING QB to be hit like any ball carrier while the pocket passer is protected like tissue paper. Throw in the obvious fact that Wrs can't be touched and can't be hit, and the rules circle around a pocket passer that can throw the ball.
The rules are certainly trying that (as I DID note early in this discussion,) but it's probably not enough. There's a reason losing just ONE offensive lineman (albeit at the most critical pass blocking spot) has BOTH Mannings ankles taped, even though he's one of the best ever at reading blitzes/coverages and getting the ball out fast. All the talk about Manning reaching SBs by overcoming Tarik Glenn, Jeff Saturday and Ryan Diems worthlessness is being revealed as the fantasy it always was.

We franchised Clady to avoid losing him last year, right? Then gave him a massive payday this year, at the cost of making Doom renegotiate HIS huge contract, then walk away to Baltimore? Given how he handled that and how well Phillips has played I don't miss Doom, but that ought to be enough to make my point. Especially since, even after all that, Clady's out for the year and suddenly our QB's playing hurt ANYWAY.

[powderaddict]

Dude, Marino would tear it up in today's NFL.

He was good moving around the pocket, and had one of the quickest releases ever.

I can't believe I'm reading that Marino couldn't play in today's NFL! It has changed, but not all so much that one of the better pure passers the league has seen couldn't hack it :laugh:

[Ravage!!!]

Dude, Marino would tear it up in today's NFL.

He was good moving around the pocket, and had one of the quickest releases ever.

I can't believe I'm reading that Marino couldn't play in today's NFL! It has changed, but not all so much that one of the better pure passers the league has seen couldn't hack it :laugh:

yeah.. has ZERO substance to it.

[Simple Jaded]

If football ever gets to the point where RG3 and Colin Keapernick are better suited to play QB than Dan Marino then it's time to flush it down the toilet.

[Ravage!!!]

The rules are certainly trying that (as I DID note early in this discussion,) but it's probably not enough. There's a reason losing just ONE offensive lineman (albeit at the most critical pass blocking spot) has BOTH Mannings ankles taped, even though he's one of the best ever at reading blitzes/coverages and getting the ball out fast. All the talk about Manning reaching SBs by overcoming Tarik Glenn, Jeff Saturday and Ryan Diems worthlessness is being revealed as the fantasy it always was.

We franchised Clady to avoid losing him last year, right? Then gave him a massive payday this year, at the cost of making Doom renegotiate HIS huge contract, then walk away to Baltimore? Given how he handled that and how well Phillips has played I don't miss Doom, but that ought to be enough to make my point. Especially since, even after all that, Clady's out for the year and suddenly our QB's playing hurt ANYWAY.

I realize this is one of the shortest posts you can possibly ever type, but this is a very confusing post by you.

Are you trying to say that its PROOF that Clady is needed because we gave him big money??? What is your point again? Sometimes you lose track yourself.

[Joel]

If football ever gets to the point where RG3 and Colin Keapernick are better suited to play QB than Dan Marino then it's time to flush it down the toilet.
Fortunately or not, that doesn't mean it won't happen. There's always rugby, and if a US team can get beat the All Blacks they can truly say they're the best in the world.... ;)


I realize this is one of the shortest posts you can possibly ever type, but this is a very confusing post by you.

Are you trying to say that its PROOF that Clady is needed because we gave him big money??? What is your point again? Sometimes you lose track yourself.
No, I'm saying it's proof we need Clady badly enough to pay that much. And, far more importantly, I'm saying a team with a HoF QB and two Pro Bowl WRs (not to mention a DRoY and HoFer) can have its whole season thrown in jeopardy by losing just ONE lineman. Just one of FIVE (albeit the most important one for a right-handed QB.) Again, at a certain point one must ask "If QBs get pounded whether they run or not, why stand there and take it instead of running for a first/touchdown?" All the Brady Rules in the world can't change the cap arithmetic (and remember: He went out for the year because a GUARD missed a block.)

The problem with past "dual threats" was they weren't, but that appears to be changing. The dual threats of the NFLs first decades got away with being weak passers because there were so few great ones, and recent ones got away with it because there were so few great runners, but now that we're finally seeing QBs who can rush for 100 yds a game AND complete 65% of passes it's a whole new ballgame. And the same NFL that bubblewraps passers for ratings LIKES that ballgame, because it offers similarly inflated ratings. This isn't hard to follow, so don't play dumb.

[Ravage!!!]

Fortunately or not, that doesn't mean it won't happen. There's always rugby, and if a US team can get beat the All Blacks they can truly say they're the best in the world.... ;)


No, I'm saying it's proof we need Clady badly enough to pay that much. And, far more importantly, I'm saying a team with a HoF QB and two Pro Bowl WRs (not to mention a DRoY and HoFer) can have its whole season thrown in jeopardy by losing just ONE lineman. Just one of FIVE (albeit the most important one for a right-handed QB.) Again, at a certain point one must ask "If QBs get pounded whether they run or not, why stand there and take it instead of running for a first/touchdown?" All the Brady Rules in the world can't change the cap arithmetic (and remember: He went out for the year because a GUARD missed a block.)

The problem with past "dual threats" was they weren't, but that appears to be changing. The dual threats of the NFLs first decades got away with being weak passers because there were so few great ones, and recent ones got away with it because there were so few great runners, but now that we're finally seeing QBs who can rush for 100 yds a game AND complete 65% of passes it's a whole new ballgame. And the same NFL that bubblewraps passers for ratings LIKES that ballgame, because it offers similarly inflated ratings. This isn't hard to follow, so don't play dumb.

You think I'm playing dumb when YOU are the one stating that guys like Marino would get killed in today's NFL???? Then you try to defend that reasoning by giving the example of paying for a top LT??? :confused: How is having a top LT proof that the pocket passer isn't as valuable in today's NFL??? Giving big money to the LT was raised by the likes of Lawrence Taylor, in the 80s. Your "duel threat QB is changing the NFL" is the same discussion that has been regurgitated time and time again every time a Tim Tebow type of player comes into the NFL. Yet, every time someone tries to give the "NFL is Changing" speech, we continue to see the pocket passers lead the NFL in not only passing, offense, and scoring....but their team are the best in the NFL and winning Super Bowls.

The likes of the RGIII and the kid in San Fran don't last long. They end up being mere flashes in the pan, ironically enough because they get injured.

[FanInAZ]

Elway was a true duel treat QB because everyone was as scared of his arm as they were his legs. Tebow isn't a duel threat QB because cause although everyone's scared of his legs, no one is scared of his arm.

No QB can be considered a duel threat, no matter how dangerous he is once he takes off and runs with the ball, unless he can hit his passes. The way to stop such a QB is to defend against the run and force him to throw the ball. That's the solution that the league figured out with Tebow, who inability to adjust to the league adjusting to him is the reason no one will sign him. All of the read option QBs, with the possible exception of Wilson, are starting to suffer the same fate.

[Ravage!!!]

Elway was a true duel treat QB because everyone was as scared of his arm as they were his legs. Tebow isn't a duel threat QB because cause although everyone's scared of his legs, no one is scared of his arm.

No QB can be considered a duel threat, no matter how dangerous he is once he takes off and runs with the ball, unless he can hit his passes. The way to stop such a QB is to defend against the run and force him to throw the ball. That's the solution that the league figured out with Tebow, who inability to adjust to the league adjusting to him is the reason no one will sign him. All of the read option QBs, with the possible exception of Wilson, are starting to suffer the same fate.

Even Wilson is being limited on his passes.

[Joel]

You think I'm playing dumb when YOU are the one stating that guys like Marino would get killed in today's NFL???? Then you try to defend that reasoning by giving the example of paying for a top LT??? :confused: How is having a top LT proof that the pocket passer isn't as valuable in today's NFL??? Giving big money to the LT was raised by the likes of Lawrence Taylor, in the 80s. Your "duel threat QB is changing the NFL" is the same discussion that has been regurgitated time and time again every time a Tim Tebow type of player comes into the NFL. Yet, every time someone tries to give the "NFL is Changing" speech, we continue to see the pocket passers lead the NFL in not only passing, offense, and scoring....but their team are the best in the NFL and winning Super Bowls.

The likes of the RGIII and the kid in San Fran don't last long. They end up being mere flashes in the pan, ironically enough because they get injured.
That's not ironic; most runs end in tackles, which increases injuries and discourages running, so QBs who start our running a lot eventually run less, either gradually or suddenly after an injury.

Having a top LT AND PAYING HIM $11 MILLION/YR is proof pure pocket passers need very strong pockets and the cap's made it impossible to put five Pro Bowlers in front of them to provide it. Take away one—just ONE—and all of a sudden the first ballot HoF QB who was shattering scoring records with multiple Pro Bowl WRs starts looking mortal again on taped twisted ankles. Even with the Brady Rule. Even after shelling out >$3 million/yr for a Pro Bowl FA guard, with a Pro Bowl alternate as the other starting guard. Then the HoF pocket passer gets $10-20 million; how many teams can sink a third of their cap into 6 starters?

They're gonna get hit; they and the team are better off doing it 10 yds in front of the LoS than 10 yds behind it, especially when the only way to avoid is paying a couple tackles as much as top QBs and three guards more than most running backs. When we reach the point of needing a starting quality sixth linemen just in case, and paying him accordingly, all of a sudden a guy who can make plays with his feet and reduce the need for a solid sideline-to-sideline wall, guys like Rodgers, Newton, Wilson, Kaepernick, Smith, Vick, Roethlisberger or even Vince Young, start to look appealing.

In case anyone missed it, pocket passers have been dropping as fast as the runners this year; ask Cutler how feasible pure pocket passing is without a solid blocker at EVERY position. That doesn't mean RBs and QBs are interchangeable; a QB will always need to be a passer first and foremost. But the 3-4s resurgence, with its extra faster LBs runnings multitudes of exotic blitzes from every angle imaginable, the cap and the NFL Properties insatiable lust for ever more profits via big 'splosions all explain why we're no longer seeing one or two real or attempted dual threat QBs, but half a dozen annually.

Ask yourself why the NFL made such a big deal of mediocre third year players run for more yds than any QB (or Raider) in history, on a garbage team.


Even Wilson is being limited on his passes.
Even Wilson's missing his injured tackles. Fortunately for him he can do more about it than just hope his GM finds some scrub diamond in the rough on the waiver wire after the trade deadline.

[MOtorboat]

That's not ironic; most runs end in tackles, which increases injuries and discourages running, so QBs who start our running a lot eventually run less, either gradually or suddenly after an injury.

Having a top LT AND PAYING HIM $11 MILLION/YR is proof pure pocket passers need very strong pockets and the cap's made it impossible to put five Pro Bowlers in front of them to provide it. Take away one—just ONE—and all of a sudden the first ballot HoF QB who was shattering scoring records with multiple Pro Bowl WRs starts looking mortal again on taped twisted ankles. Even with the Brady Rule. Even after shelling out >$3 million/yr for a Pro Bowl FA guard, with a Pro Bowl alternate as the other starting guard. Then the HoF pocket passer gets $10-20 million; how many teams can sink a third of their cap into 6 starters?

They're gonna get hit; they and the team are better off doing it 10 yds in front of the LoS than 10 yds behind it, especially when the only way to avoid is paying a couple tackles as much as top QBs and three guards more than most running backs. When we reach the point of needing a starting quality sixth linemen just in case, and paying him accordingly, all of a sudden a guy who can make plays with his feet and reduce the need for a solid sideline-to-sideline wall, guys like Rodgers, Newton, Wilson, Kaepernick, Smith, Vick, Roethlisberger or even Vince Young, start to look appealing.

In case anyone missed it, pocket passers have been dropping as fast as the runners this year; ask Cutler how feasible pure pocket passing is without a solid blocker at EVERY position. That doesn't mean RBs and QBs are interchangeable; a QB will always need to be a passer first and foremost. But the 3-4s resurgence, with its extra faster LBs runnings multitudes of exotic blitzes from every angle imaginable, the cap and the NFL Properties insatiable lust for ever more profits via big 'splosions all explain why we're no longer seeing one or two real or attempted dual threat QBs, but half a dozen annually.

Ask yourself why the NFL made such a big deal of mediocre third year players run for more yds than any QB (or Raider) in history, on a garbage team.


Even Wilson's missing his injured tackles. Fortunately for him he can do more about it than just hope his GM finds some scrub diamond in the rough on the waiver wire after the trade deadline.

Surely a dual threat quarterback would never be injured, yes?

Might want to talk to Michael Vick, who has never played a full 16 games in ANY season, or maybe RGIII, who at 23 has had three knee reconstructions to two knees.

[MOtorboat]

And Joel, since it was so common pre-cap to have lines with five pro bowlers, can you show me examples?

[Joel]

Elway was a true duel treat QB because everyone was as scared of his arm as they were his legs. Tebow isn't a duel threat QB because cause although everyone's scared of his legs, no one is scared of his arm.

No QB can be considered a duel threat, no matter how dangerous he is once he takes off and runs with the ball, unless he can hit his passes. The way to stop such a QB is to defend against the run and force him to throw the ball. That's the solution that the league figured out with Tebow, who inability to adjust to the league adjusting to him is the reason no one will sign him. All of the read option QBs, with the possible exception of Wilson, are starting to suffer the same fate.
Tebow hasn't taken a pro snap under center in two years, but not everything's about him (difficult as that often is for some around her to grasp. ;))


No QB can be considered a duel threat, no matter how dangerous he is once he takes off and runs with the ball, unless he can hit his passes.
That's absolutely correct but, again, the difference now, and the reason we're seeing more than just an occasional proclaimed dual threat on one or two teams, is that many of them are HITTING THEIR PASSES now. Running will never be a substitute for passing, but legitimate dual threats—not option QBs who can't hit the broadside of the barn, but QBs who can pass or throw for a 50 yd TD with essentially equal ease—are as difficult to beat as they are (or at least were) to find.

Rodgers was hitting 66.9% before he got hurt, which is slightly above his career average and 4th among starters; we can pretend he just scrambles, but only if we ignore his 50+ rushing attempts each of the last 5 years (averaging >4 yds each all but one of them.) Wilson's 8th at 64%. Newton's at 63.2%, which just misses the top ten. What IS ironic is most people consider Andrew Luck a future HoF pocket passer, but he's only hitting 59.4% (still above his career average so far!) but in just 10 games has already run 41 times for 231 yds and 4 TDs (averaging 5.6,) on pace to surpass his 62 for 255 and 5 TDs last year.

Quarterbacks must pass well, first and foremost, but those who pass and run well are obviously better than those who only do one or the other. Historically, they've been hard to find, but, for whatever reason, a lot more of them are now producing on the ground AND through the air in the pros. It's also fairly obvious the League Office likes that at least as much as it likes the Brady Rule, for similar reasons, and since it's cheaper to pay one phenomenal dual threat QB and a five decent linemen than to pay 6-7 Pro Bowlers when the QB might STILL miss a year with injury, owners are warming up to the notion as well.

[Joel]

And Joel, since it was so common pre-cap to have lines with five pro bowlers, can you show me examples?
Sure; try the last true dynasty (cheaters don't count: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/dal/1993_roster.htm Tuinei and Gogan didn't make the Pro Bowl until the following year, but did get there (Tuinei also went the subsequent year; Gogan had to wait till '97 and '98 for his last two trips.) FIVE PRO BOWL STARTERS on the line that made people who weren't coaches suddenly start noticing linemen. By a strange coincidence the salary cap was introduced the very next year, so Dallas was sadly only able to start FOUR Pro Bowlers on their line http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/dal/1994_roster.htm Again, Larry Allen didn't make the Pro Bowl that year, but since he's a HoFer I think we can count him. ;)

[MOtorboat]

Sure; try the last true dynasty (cheaters don't count: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/dal/1993_roster.htm Tuinei and Gogan didn't make the Pro Bowl until the following year, but did get there (Tuinei also went the subsequent year; Gogan had to wait till '97 and '98 for his last two trips.) FIVE PRO BOWL STARTERS on the line that made people who weren't coaches suddenly start noticing linemen. By a strange coincidence the salary cap was introduced the very next year, so Dallas was sadly only able to start FOUR Pro Bowlers on their line http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/dal/1994_roster.htm Again, Larry Allen didn't make the Pro Bowl that year, but since he's a HoFer I think we can count him. ;)

I didn't realize you meant five Pro Bowlers over the course of 10 years.

I can do that with a lot of teams who had a quarterback that long.

[Joel]

I didn't realize you meant five Pro Bowlers over the course of 10 years.

I can do that with a lot of teams who had a quarterback that long.
Um, no, five guys on the same offensive line at the same time who all made Pro Bowls in their career. I didn't realize a guys Pro Bowl accomplishments and credentials vanish any year he doesn't go back; it's a pity you weren't there when we were negotiating Mannings contract:

"$3 million/year?! The guy went to 9 straight Pro Bowls!"
"Not last year he didn't...."

You asked for a precap line with 5 Pro Bowlers; I gave you one from the last precap year, then one with four Pro Bowlers from the next year. But it doesn't count because Larry Allen was a scrub then; whatever.

[MOtorboat]

Um, no, five guys on the same offensive line at the same time who all made Pro Bowls in their career. I didn't realize a guys Pro Bowl accomplishments and credentials vanish any year he doesn't go back; it's a pity you weren't there when we were negotiating Mannings contract:

"$3 million/year?! The guy went to 9 straight Pro Bowls!"
"Not last year he didn't...."

Right, but you're counting players long before they actually make Pro Bowls to try to make a point that doesn't really exist.

I'm trying to be nice about how asinine it is to suggest pocket passers can't thrive in the NFL in today's game, but seeing as how the two best are Brady and Manning, it is a ridiculous argument, at best.

[Joel]

Right, but you're counting players long before they actually make Pro Bowls to try to make a point that doesn't really exist.

I'm trying to be nice about how asinine it is to suggest pocket passers can't thrive in the NFL in today's game, but seeing as how the two best are Brady and Manning, it is a ridiculous argument, at best.
ONE YEAR before they made the Pro Bowl, and not for the last time. Larry Allen may not have made the Pro Bowl as a rookie, but was darned good even then; there's a reason he's in Canton. You asked for a precap example; I gave one from the year before AND after the cap. If you don't want the answer don't ask the question.

[Simple Jaded]

If the only criteria used is playing in a ProBowl at some point in a given career you could actually field an entire 53-man team full of ProBowlers with the lowest payroll that would literally never win a single game.

[Joel]

If the only criteria used is playing in a ProBowl at some point in a given career you could actually field an entire 53-man team full of ProBowlers with the lowest payroll that would literally never win a single game.
ONE YEAR before, in each case. No, Larry Allen didn't make the Pro Bowl his rookie year; he DID make the next SEVEN, and, apart from a year he was hurt, every year EXCEPT his rookie and final year.

Seriously, if the rebuttal amounts to "Larry Allen wasn't very good," that's not much of a rebuttal; he's in Canton for a reason.

[MOtorboat]

ONE YEAR before, in each case. No, Larry Allen didn't make the Pro Bowl his rookie year; he DID make the next SEVEN, and, apart from a year he was hurt, every year EXCEPT his rookie and final year.

Seriously, if the rebuttal amounts to "Larry Allen wasn't very good," that's not much of a rebuttal; he's in Canton for a reason.

What does it matter anyway? The theory/argument is flawed as it is. Not every team had five Pro Bowl offensive lineman protecting their quarterback in the 80s and early 90s.

The original argument was that Marino was protected pre cap by a Pro Bowl line, and couldn't survive today because teams can't afford five Pro Bowl lineman. When it was pointed out that that simply wasn't true, you shifted the argument to Aikman, who even with this great offensive line still retired because of concussions.

This all goes back to your theory about Marino, and none of it is a very sound argument.

[Ravage!!!]

yeah.. EVEN if you actually wanted to count joel's example as a good one, he is able to list ONE team to make his point. That's not the "common" situation that he told us it was. It was "common" for teams to have ALLLLLl these pro-bowl OLman protecting their Upright QBs.

Again, this is just another Zam argument given by another name. It makes no sense and has been given way too much bandwidth.

[Simple Jaded]

ONE YEAR before, in each case. No, Larry Allen didn't make the Pro Bowl his rookie year; he DID make the next SEVEN, and, apart from a year he was hurt, every year EXCEPT his rookie and final year.

Seriously, if the rebuttal amounts to "Larry Allen wasn't very good," that's not much of a rebuttal; he's in Canton for a reason.

Your theory is Dan Marino couldn't survive in today's NFL unless he had 5 Larry Allen's, save the pretentious condescension.