Originally Posted by thunderkyss
That's his point. Matt Schaub was the better QB over those years. Better than Flacco as well, but... those guys have Super Bowls & we don't.
Just because the teams you mentioned have better QBs than we do, don't mean a whole lot. For all the good they are, they sure don't win a lot of games. & when we're talking about them being on our schedule next season, the fact that they are on those teams mean nothing.
We don't know who our QB is going to be, but our team has demonstrated more recently than they have with their "established" QBs, that they know how to win.
I've already conceded that the mere presence of those QBs doesn't mean we'll automatically lose those games. In fact, if Schaub was still here and running the offense he knows, I'd say we'd have a damn good chance of kicking their a$$es. (Flame on, Schaub haters). But truth is they have better quality at QB than we do. At least right now.
And as somewhat of an aside, how is it when I say the best athlete/player in the draft ISN'T one of the "wunderkind" QBs but Robinson or Watkins or Clowney or Matthews and that's where we should spend our 1-1 pick, I get shouted down with cries of "Ya gotta go QB because he'll have the biggest impact!"
Okay...QB = biggest impact guy. got it.
Then when I say, "We're behind the power curve QB-wise against some of the teams that are in a similar 'rebuild' state as we are, therefore they have an edge." You say, "the fact that they are on those teams mean nothing
" Even though they've had more success (depending on how you measure it) than any of our current guys.
So which is it? Un-confuse me.