Re: Question

This is a fascinating thread that sums what I love and hate about this board. DZ makes a good generalized observation and ZN challenges it. It's a compliment really, because he doesn't bother challenging inane posts. I wish he would acknowledge the merit of the original post along the way but that's not his method. To each his own. The result is a healthy debate that develops deeper thinking.

For my part, the example here could possibly be the curious cases of Dak Prescott and Russell Wilson. By most standards, they are arguably tier 1 QB's and yet paying them is no guarantee of consistent success. Dak put up amazing numbers when he had a top tier OLine but never sniffed a championship. Seattle has never fielded a great OLine but the defense was formidable enough and their running game was above average.

So, I challenge both DZ and ZN to apply your logic to Dak and Russell and tell us this, pay or not pay?

By doing so, I believe my point will be made. NFL decisions are too individualized based on team composition to rely on broad generalizations. A team can have a top QB and fail quite consistently if that QB lacks a top tier OLine and defense. A team with a good defense and top OLine (like the Titans) can be formidable with a tier 2 QB but not necessarily reach the promised land.

Which brings us to the Rams. The QB investment has already been made so for Rams fans, it's a moot issue. The Chiefs at the turn of the century had a #1 offense when Trent Green was the QB and their best WR was Ram castoff Eddie Kennison. What they DID have was the best OLine in football and Tony Gonzales.The Rams have enough pieces everywhere else to win. But if the OLine isn't markedly improved toot sweet, everything else won't matter much.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/23/2021 02:51AM by Leoram.