Bolts223 Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 QB's like Matt Stafford, Derek Carr, now Jimmy G and probably Kirk Cousins are all making around $25 million a year, more in the case of Jimmy G. As important as a QB is to a teams success, is it worth it to pay that much for a QB? (Assuming the ultimate goal is to win a SB) Do you think that you will see more teams give up a franchise QB like the Redskins if he demands that much money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 Can the QB take you to the Super Bowl with the right cast around them? If you think they can then the answer is yes. That's why in regards to Kirk Cousins many people are hesitant. Matthew Stafford certainly has the capability but a lot of the team around him is.... pretty bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmen Cygni Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 14 minutes ago, Bolts223 said: QB's like Matt Stafford, Derek Carr, now Jimmy G and probably Kirk Cousins are all making around $25 million a year, more in the case of Jimmy G. As important as a QB is to a teams success, is it worth it to pay that much for a QB? (Assuming the ultimate goal is to win a SB) Do you think that you will see more teams give up a franchise QB like the Redskins if he demands that much money? Pretty easy answers to that here: In every case, Super Bowl wins = 0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bolts223 Posted February 13, 2018 Author Share Posted February 13, 2018 9 minutes ago, Danger said: Can the QB take you to the Super Bowl with the right cast around them? If you think they can then the answer is yes. That's why in regards to Kirk Cousins many people are hesitant. Matthew Stafford certainly has the capability but a lot of the team around him is.... pretty bad. Obviously. The question here is that how much harder does it become to build a team around a QB when the QB is eating 25-30 million in cap space? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TecmoSuperJoe Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 Depends who the quarterback is, and what Plan B is if you don't want to pony up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dashing202 Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 Ask Kirk cousins Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmad Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 If you like winning consistently then yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmen Cygni Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 3 minutes ago, OleXmad said: If you like winning consistently then yes. What about winning Super Bowls? Evidence clearly points that it doesn't work to pay a QB an obscene amount of one's overall cap money. I mean, you're a Ravens fan and all, it should be obvious in how to properly allocate one's funds for a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 If you actually have an elite QB yes. Midtier franchise QB's, no. Stafford's the type of a guy a franchise gets stuck with when they realize he's way above what the rest of the options are but not a guy that can get it done for you. It's basically purgatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 46 minutes ago, Carmen Cygni said: Pretty easy answers to that here: In every case, Super Bowl wins = 0 Im sorry, but this is laughably misleading and a foolish misrepresentation of reality. Im not disputing the validity of the stats, but they lack meaningful context. You suggest that these stats prove that QBs arent worth paying, yet without the QBs most of these teams had, they wouldve never won the Superbowl, and the SB wins got alot of these players paid the big money. Some deservedly, some not so much. If anything, this proves that teams shouldnt be overpaying for guys who arent true proven franchise QBs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 30 minutes ago, Carmen Cygni said: What about winning Super Bowls? Evidence clearly points that it doesn't work to pay a QB an obscene amount of one's overall cap money. I'm going to push back on this data set you are using as clear evidence against paying a top QB his top QB-level money The time frame chosen was somewhat arbitrary, but not really. 7 years is a small sample, but its also important to cut it off at 7 years... Because if you look at the QBs who won the SB just before this magical 7 year cutoff....it paints a completely different picture They conveniently eliminated the SB wins by Rodgers, Payton Manning, Eli Manning, Drew Brees and Ben Rothlisberger- all top notch QBs earning top notch pay and winning Super Bowls. Over The Cap wrote a lengthy article on this topic and their conclusion was that there are (2) distinct and successful methods to building a Champion - one method if you have a Top QB and the other if you don't. But they did not conclude that paying a Top QB top cash was a bad strategy, just that it requires different tactics. I say "no sale" on this specifically sorted dataset and its biased conclusions. And we also need to remember that as an entertainment enterprise, the NFL owners want to win a Super Bowl, but they need to make money. And nothing earns money like having a star QB to sell tix, jerseys and hope. https://www.pro-football-reference.com/super-bowl/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tugboat Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 If you've got a truly elite franchise guy who can elevate those around them and truly get "more" out of mediocre-average supporting cast (which you can hire at a bargain rate), then yes. But a lot of these guys getting the cap destroying megadeals these days aren't that, or certainly haven't proven that they can be. Spending top QB money on a non-elite guy is a recipe for disappointment. It sucks, because it's becoming extremely hard to afford good QBs. You can afford to splurge on the absolutely elite, but anyone below that...you draft, develop, build around a guy out of the draft and you're rolling along toward something finally...and suddenly your franchise gets T-boned by a Brinks truck. You win some games, build something and wham, your QB eats up 15% of your cap space and you're bleeding talented players left right and center around them because you simply can't afford to keep them anymore. It just makes QB purgatory that much more unpleasant. Where you know that your guy is good enough to win with the right supporting cast around them...but outside rookie deals, you can't afford to keep that superb supporting cast around them anymore. So you're back to the QB hunt...or you just "settle" on the gal what brung ya, and sink into a quagmire of mediocrity. Win with an absolutely Elite QB. Win with a guy on a rookie deal. Win by getting a bit lucky and having an elite team that overperforms and a cruddy QB who gets hot at the right time in a sheltered role. Not sure what else you can really do these days, with the way QB deals are trending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
43M Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 33 minutes ago, Carmen Cygni said: What about winning Super Bowls? Evidence clearly points that it doesn't work to pay a QB an obscene amount of one's overall cap money. I mean, you're a Ravens fan and all, it should be obvious in how to properly allocate one's funds for a QB. Again, your argument grossly lacks context. Not winning SBs can be attributed to a ton of different variables. You cant just point towards that, especially when these QBs played huge roles in their teams winning their SBs....even if they werent highly paid yet. The problem is, you have a guy like Flacco, who had an elite postseason and led his team to a SB title....but was paid almost exclusively because of that postseason performance, as opposed to him proven he was a true franchise QB. Is it worth paying a QB top money? The real answer is....when they are actually worth it. However, alot of average QBs get $20m a year nowadays, and in that regard, no, teams should be paying top dollar. Do you really think the Saints would be better off without Drew Brees? Packers without Rodgers? Steelers without Ben? The reason those highly paid QBs havent won SBs recently isnt because they are highly paid, its because their teams have failed to build complete teams. And you can claim that the additional money would allow them to build more complete teams....but a) thats assuming the teams made the right moves and b) you would be asking those teams to perhaps do it without the QBs they currently have. Bottom line....the stats you provided really dont prove anything. Every team except the 2015 Broncos relied heavily on their QBs to get them to and win Superbowls. Doesnt matter that they werent paid some arbitrarily high amount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmad Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 59 minutes ago, Carmen Cygni said: What about winning Super Bowls? Evidence clearly points that it doesn't work to pay a QB an obscene amount of one's overall cap money. I mean, you're a Ravens fan and all, it should be obvious in how to properly allocate one's funds for a QB. People above me have better arguments than I could've done so I'll say read them. While I wish the ravens didn't pay Joe as much money as they did, we would've had no shot at a SB after we let him walk in FA/ Traded him away if we didn't pay him. We'd be in QB purgatory and while we haven't gotten back to the SB since then we've had 1 losing season with Joe since the SB win so eh I'll take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cddolphin Posted February 13, 2018 Share Posted February 13, 2018 8 hours ago, Carmen Cygni said: In every case, Super Bowl wins = 0 25 data points over 7 years.. they're viewing the high-extreme of the spectrum. On top of that, only taking cap hit % for that particular year into account, which will not always accurately reflect the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.