How good would a mobile QB be in are current offense ? WHEN I MEAN MOBLIE I MEAN A VINCE YOUNG TYPE.
-
To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2013
- Messages
- 4,453
- Name
- Tom
Boffo97
Still legal in 17 states!
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2014
- Messages
- 5,278
- Name
- Dave
Mobile QBs are overrated IMO. Yeah, they'll make a great play here or there, but they'll tend to give up on the pass quicker, and are a much larger injury risk.
...and for some reason, seem to be primadonnas more than usual.
Now, if we could get what Madden 04 thought was pre dog torturing Michael Vick, he'd be great... but he'd also be the greatest pocket passer ever as well.
...and for some reason, seem to be primadonnas more than usual.
Now, if we could get what Madden 04 thought was pre dog torturing Michael Vick, he'd be great... but he'd also be the greatest pocket passer ever as well.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #4
lol thought so too.
mr.stlouis
Legend
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2011
- Messages
- 6,454
- Name
- Main Hook
Well, I kinda have this "thing" against mobile QB's. I think they're overrated. They always have flaws in their passing game or durability. I'll take a pocket passer who can still run boot legs well, anyway.
The best mobile QB I've ever seen in 15 years of observing football has been Michael Vick. I don't think anyone comes close. RG3 was really good before his injury, but the NFCE sucks. So there you go...
I don't see how a mobile QB would be an upgrade.
The best mobile QB I've ever seen in 15 years of observing football has been Michael Vick. I don't think anyone comes close. RG3 was really good before his injury, but the NFCE sucks. So there you go...
I don't see how a mobile QB would be an upgrade.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2010
- Messages
- 3,162
- Name
- Niall
The word is 'our'. How good would they be in 'OUR' offense.
How are we supposed to take this argument seriously?
CAPS LOCK FOR EXTRA EFFECT
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 5,327
- Name
- Dave
A running QB could add a spark, sure.
But the NFL is a brutal world.
Running QBs just don't last.
This entire trend kind of pisses me off. This is the National Football League, not the NBA. This fascination with running QBs reminds me too much of the NBAs obsession with its star players rather than the teams.
Too many kids playing madden with Mike Vick just 3 years ago, now its Colon Krapernick and RGMe.
GROSS!!!
Running QBs DONT LAST.
Period.
Its hard enough for a good pocket passer to stay healthy in this league, let alone some fool that takes off running as soon as his first read is covered.
Russell Wilson is the first "mobile" QB to win a SB in this modern (2000's) era.
And their SB victory had very little to do with the fact that he is mobile.
Give me a legit RUNNINGBACK and QUARTERBACK all F****NG day!!!! (and twice on Sundays!!!!)
That's the NFL that I like. Besides, I don't believe you can build a dynasty around a run first QB. This game is just too violent for that kind of constant contact.
Remember the Wildcat?
It was a nice gimmick, but it couldn't last long term. Now its a memory. Miami never even got a conference (let alone a Divisional) title out of it.
That said, it is true that the young QBs are getting more and more mobile these days.
But just think.... there are Robert Quinns and Alec Ogletrees developing right now... these are the kind of guys destined to make the "Explosive, Exciting, Extreme" style of QB just another page in the NFL history books... mentioned right in the same chapter as the "WildCat"...
But the NFL is a brutal world.
Running QBs just don't last.
This entire trend kind of pisses me off. This is the National Football League, not the NBA. This fascination with running QBs reminds me too much of the NBAs obsession with its star players rather than the teams.
Too many kids playing madden with Mike Vick just 3 years ago, now its Colon Krapernick and RGMe.
GROSS!!!
Running QBs DONT LAST.
Period.
Its hard enough for a good pocket passer to stay healthy in this league, let alone some fool that takes off running as soon as his first read is covered.
Russell Wilson is the first "mobile" QB to win a SB in this modern (2000's) era.
And their SB victory had very little to do with the fact that he is mobile.
Give me a legit RUNNINGBACK and QUARTERBACK all F****NG day!!!! (and twice on Sundays!!!!)
That's the NFL that I like. Besides, I don't believe you can build a dynasty around a run first QB. This game is just too violent for that kind of constant contact.
Remember the Wildcat?
It was a nice gimmick, but it couldn't last long term. Now its a memory. Miami never even got a conference (let alone a Divisional) title out of it.
That said, it is true that the young QBs are getting more and more mobile these days.
But just think.... there are Robert Quinns and Alec Ogletrees developing right now... these are the kind of guys destined to make the "Explosive, Exciting, Extreme" style of QB just another page in the NFL history books... mentioned right in the same chapter as the "WildCat"...
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #14
its not a argument but a question.
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2010
- Messages
- 3,162
- Name
- Niall
I apologise for the hostility, it's 1.30am here and I've had a lot of alcohol.
Vince Young would fucking tank on this team. The reason for this is that since Fisher cut him loose he has achieved literally nothing in the NFL. If the only boss you had ever worked for fired you, and then wouldn't take you back three years later, would you consider yourself a professional success? I wouldn't.
The only "mobile" QB to EVER win a SuperBowl was successful this year. THIS YEAR. There have been 40-something superbowls and one mobile QB winner. This is not rocket science, and it's not a fucking coincidence.
The QBs I would take over Sam Bradford are, in no particular order...
Peyton manning
Russell Wilson
Tom Brady
Aaron Rodgers
Mart Ryan
The common link here is that outside if Wilson, they are all pocket QBs.
There's a bunch of reasons for my opinion, pick your favourite.
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2010
- Messages
- 48,171
- Name
- Burger man
The NFL adjusted to the 46.
The NFL adjusted to the run and shoot.
The NFL adjusted to the GSOT.
The NFL adjusted to cover-2.
The NFL adjusted to the wild cat.
The NFL always... adjusts.
Mobile QBs bring a dynamic to the field, but they are hardly a new aspect. See Randall Cunningham and Mike Vick.
See no rings.
Not saying it can't work. Just saying it's not exactly a revolutionary and winning combo.
The NFL adjusted to the run and shoot.
The NFL adjusted to the GSOT.
The NFL adjusted to cover-2.
The NFL adjusted to the wild cat.
The NFL always... adjusts.
Mobile QBs bring a dynamic to the field, but they are hardly a new aspect. See Randall Cunningham and Mike Vick.
See no rings.
Not saying it can't work. Just saying it's not exactly a revolutionary and winning combo.