Originally Posted by infantrycak
I can't discern any pattern at all to the names you are throwing around. Your examples almost seem random rather than proving anything. Brady fell due to looking like a banker more than a QB and Bortles does not look like a more athletic version of the Brady who has actually been successful.
These two sentences in particular make no sense to me:
Are you trying to throw Staubach into a group of lesser athletes than Flacco, Kaep and Wilson?
I see absolutely zero similarity between Flacco and Kaep other than they are under 30. If you are trying to say people of Manning & Brady skill are dinosaurs in the league and will be beat out by Kaeps and Wilsons well, I'd say join 50 years of people making that prediction and being proven wrong.
bigger faster stronger, its not rocket science. I do not mean to defer player from yesteryear to today's player only in the sense QB position is constantly evolving just like other positions in the NFL. emphasis on a QB skill set must include better athletic ability or dude must have a howitzer for an arm & mind of Einstein reading defenses to compensate for any athletic deficiency. Chip Kelly likes to put it this way, I'm paraphrasing, a bigger stronger faster guy beats up a smaller, weaker slower guy every day in the NFL.