Sunshinepacker
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2013
- Messages
- 5,815
- Reaction score
- 936
I chose the only example I need. SF is a team that functions in similar capacity to GB (actually technically vice versa) and has had recent success. More success than GB with a lesser QB.
SF smothered KC in the regular season 2019. They then went 13-3 and beat us down like a dog if you recall? That was Aaron Rodgers who took a meltdown. The score never fully represented how outmatched we were. SF didn’t even throw the ball was it like 8-10 times? That’s embarrassing and yes I watched that game and it was awful.
SF then went on to the SB and led 20-10 until well into quarter 4! It wasn’t the SF QB to blame for allowing 2 TD’s inside 6 minutes. They came very close to SB champions with a far lesser QB than Rodgers.
I never said QB wasn't important. I’ve argued the importance of the QB position many times. But there’s more ways to skin a cat. Having a balanced team (leaning Defense if anything) is more important than a lopsided Team
You sidestepped the question. A simple yes or no is fine
Is Garoppolo a great QB?
Nope. I'll note that you too avoided my question about the recent Super Bowl winners but I understand, it undermines your point.
Edit: The above is a little harsh. I'll just point out that building an elite defense is very difficult. Finding an elite QB is also very difficult. However, once a team has an elite QB it's much easier to build a great team with a mediocre defense and elite QB. Again, for an elite defense you need about 3-4 elite players between the dline and secondary as well as another 3-5 very good players. That's difficult to put together whereas you can field an elite offense with one elite QB and 1-2 other elite guys on offense.
Last edited: