![]() Because TH was like a regulator to the offense. ![]() I do expect more wins with Wetnz than with TH. The problem with that is it's not sustainable. The team won, at times inspite of his play, and got massively lucky in the Tampa game where they were thoroughly out-played except they got 5 turnovers from Fitzy and won anyway. Yeah, "he's a winner" and all, but he was still not playing all that well. So, Alex Smith in 2018 was quarterbacking a team to a 6-3 (probably soon to be 6-4 record) but was, by just about all accounts, dreadful. The majority of non-morons would be saying that we won the SB despite Wentz, not because of him. I find it interesting that historically you seem to have been somewhat on the "QB needs a team around him to win" argument, yet now with Wentz here you seem to be suddenly bestowing godlike abilities on the QB position and essentially saying it's the only thing that matters and everything should basically be on him when it comes to winning and losing, no matter what.Īnd sure, if Wentz throws for 25 TDs and 20 INTs but we somehow win a SB anyway there might be some people who say "Wentz was the guy who led the team to the trophy" but they'd probably be very few and far between, and they'd also be morons. The other areas of the team that played poorly would be. ![]() If Wentz plays at a top 5 level and we come out no better than last year then no, QB position absolutely won't be the one under the microscope. QBs can absolutely play really well and still be on losing teams. So your statement of "if Wentz does throw for 36 TD that mean we are actually winning not losing" is factually and historically inaccurate. Was that on Watson for only throwing 33 TDs instead of 40? Or his fault for not going out and playing defense? In 2020 Deshaun Watson threw 33 TDs, 7 INTs, ran for 3, had a 70% completion and was regarded by most to easily be a top 5 QB, if not top 3. If the rest of the team plays like dog**** then there's only so much the QB can do by himself. Yes a top level QB is very likely to lead you to more wins, but it isn't always the case. That's why the argument focusing almost exclusively on wins is dumb. He can't play defense or catch balls or pass protect for himself. The QB is definitely the most important position but he isn't the only position. What a great QB he is.ĭo you agree or disagree that a QB is not the only person involved in winning a game? They will say despite all the INTs Wentz was the guy who lead the team to the trophy. For argument sake, let say, Wentz does have 20 INTs but we win the SB do you really think people would care about the INTs? Nope. You could have 20 INTs in 4 games but then win it all at the end. The whole purpose of a good QB is to win the game despite the INTs. If you score 216 points in a year and come out no better than last year then yes the QB position will be under the microscope again. But if Wentz does throw 36 TD that mean we are actually winning and not losing. Your logic is also flawed in that you are also judging a QB solely on TDs to INT ratio. So yes indirectly a QB is judged by the wins too and how they are able to lead the team to achieve such a goal. What was the purpose of an upgrade if we are not in it to win more games and be in the playoffs and try to get to the SB? Are we just in to see better stats from a QB like Kirk and keep on looking at that carrot? Every team wants their QB to get them wins no matter how. If Wentz is an upgrade over TH then yes we should win more games with Wentz leading the offense then we did with TH last year. If he tosses 36 TDs and 7 INTs and we have a losing record, we should jettison him. So if we go by your logic and judge Wentz purely based on record, then if he had 25 TDs and 20 INTs and we still win 12 games, we should keep him.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |