| saintswhodi |
03-20-2006 03:28 PM |
Quote:
still wouldnt say he played great... his best year was in 1980 when he had 3700 yards 23 TDs and 20 INTs for an 81.8 QB rating
compare brooks best year stat wise... in 2003 brooks had 3500 yards 24 Tds an 8 INTs for an 88.8 QB rating.... but he also had 14 fumbles that year as well.... but either way i wouldnt say brooks was that great and archie really didnt have that great of a season either in his best year...
|
Why would you compare Archie to Brooks? First, Brooks played on the most talented offensive teams the Saints have ever known. Second, it was different eras. There are so many rules made just to open up the passing game these days it's not even funny. In Archie's days, a receiver coming across the middle got knocked on his ass. Today, if a LB sneezes on them, it's 5-15 yards and a first down. But Archie STILL has a league MVP, meaning on his crap team, he was the best player int he NFL for that season. Archie was a great QB. If he played for the Steelers, he would have made Bradshaw look ordinary.
Quote:
an i never said you need a great O line to win it all i said you need a good Oline to have a Great QB
|
Actually, I don't believe that's true either. Would you say Denver has one of the best o-lines in football consistently? Since Elway, how many great QBs have they had? And would you say Peyton is a great QB? The Colts do not have a good O-line, or better put, you can't tell if they do or don't cause of the offense they run. Cause of Manning's understnding of the game, and their offensive philosophy, they run no huddle, quick timing routes most times, that keeps a defense guessing and on its heels. The o-linemen do not have to block long at all. The only time you get to Peyton, is when you interrupt the timing of their plays, like the Steelers did in last year's playoffs, and the Pats did in the years prior. Not every team has the defense and players to play them like that though. But because of Peyton, you would think that the Colts' O-line is very good. Really it isn't. They generally can't grind out plays at the end of games, cause their offensive line isn't built like that. They are built for finesse. That's not a good O-line. BUT, even with that said, I agree 100% we need a better O-line. There is no doubt whatsoever about that. I don't think we have to try and assemble the best O-line in the league, but if we can get a solid group of guys who can play together and watch each other's backs, and who have the proper scheme for their talent level, I bet we will see a stark contrast in the play of our entire offense. |
