Quote
max
So all we need is the greatest QB of all time and we can pay him top dollar.
A very doable plan, indeed.
Anyways, Brady will be done pretty soon. Then we
You misunderstood. I was pointing out that the question, how many teams paying the top qb cap percentage to qbs have won superbowls, doesn't tell us anything because one team has been hogging all the superbowls. So as long as Brady Bellichick are a good working combo the question "who has won superbowls" doesn't tell you anything.
If you asked "how many teams who DON'T pay their qb top qb cap percentage have won the superbowl" you would get the exact same answer.
So it's just not a good question IMO.
A better question would be, how many teams that pay their qb the top qb cap percentage have been in championship games---we might get a better answer.
In 2018, it was 2 young qbs who have yet to get a 2nd contract, and 2 veteran qbs who have contracts in the normal range for top qb cap hits (Brees and Brady).
So if someone told me that a team paying their qb in the top contract range in terms of cap percentage had a LESSER chance of doing well, I would say that the evidence of the conference championship games tells you otherwise. QBs with those top percentage contracts regularly appear in those games. Go back years and there is always someone who meets that description in those games. In 2016 for example it was 4 of them--Brady, Roethlisberger, Rodgers, Ryan.
I think the evidence keeps showing that YES you can win if your qb is getting a top cap percentage contract. So yes I think it's a myth to say you CAN'T win with that.
Is it harder to win that way? Well---not necessarily at all, no.
The counter idea is, a team has an advantage if they have a young qb who has still not cashed in yet. But I think that's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other. If you have a young qb he can carry less of the load, so you NEED 10 top contract guys taking up 60% of the cap for your team to be in it. (10 top contracts taking up 60% of the cap is a norm.) On the other hand, once the qb is better established he can carry more (assuming he's good which is a different question), and in that case you DON'T need 10 other top contract guys, you can do it with 8 others instead. Because that's all having a top qb contract on the books is going to do. It takes you from having 10 top contract guys taking up 60% of the cap, not including the qb, to having 8 or 9 other top contract guys, including the qb. That's the only real difference. So it gets down to this---are you better off with a young rookie contract qb and 10 top contract guys, or with a veteran qb (who can carry more of the load) and 8 or 9 other top contract guys? I suppose it depends and goes case by case, but I would never say that yes one is ALWAYS absolutely better as a situation than the other.
A team that is well managed can pay their qb and if he's a good one, be in it and win. We see that every year.
...
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 03/19/2019 03:27PM by zn.
