+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (http://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-Cincinnati-Bengals-NFL)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (http://thebengalsboard.com/Forum-JUNGLE-NOISE)
+--- Thread: Does the backup QB really matter? (/Thread-Does-the-backup-QB-really-matter)
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - Gohards - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 12:35 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sanchez is a proven loser.
It has been SIX YEARS since he had a winning record as a starter.
Sanchez went to back to back AFC championships. Thats not a "proven loser"
What people seem to forget around here, is AJ McCarron didnt score a single point in the first 3 quarters of that playoff game! Didnt even sniff the red zone. He threw a horrid INT and im pretty sure he lost 2? Fumbles. Maybe only one but still. This is all, against the Steelers 31st ranked secondary...
You can say he got a great passer rating, or whatever, but stats dont always tell the full story. He completely SUCKED in that playoff game with the exception of the 4th quarter. And thats not good enough in this league. You have to play all 4 quarters.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - wolfkaosaun - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 12:41 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yeah, that was a brilliant idea to have our running game only produce 68 yards against the Forty Niners and 155 in two games against the Steelers when McCarron was under center. Maybe if we had went all the way down to zero rushing yards McCarron would have had a 120+ passer rating.
So why doesn't every other team in the league just "pare down" their offense and make their QBs produce 97+ passer ratings if it is that easy.
You mean the two Steelers games where McCarron had 3 interceptions and fumbled the ball 3 times as well
Or the 49ers game where the defense had 4 turnovers? Two, of which, put the Bengals in the 49ers red zone. But I guess we shouldn't talk about the Bengals field position, huh?
And also not every offense pares down their offense because they don't have a defense like the Bengals do. Plus, if you want to show stats you have to show them all.
Like how Dalton had the #2 YPA with 8.42. Then McCarron's goes down to 7.18. Which is worse than Blaine Gabbert and Josh McCown.
Even Luke McCown came in for the Saints and had a high YPA (8.59).
Or that McCarron averaged only 208 yards per game. Which would rank him 38th in the league. Behind Matt Hasselbeck and Brian Hoyer.\
Unless you want to do a "qualified" list, then McCarron ranks 32nd out of 35.
McCarron is a solid backup, but this team made him look much better than he actually is. He was put into a good spot with the #2 scoring defense and one of the best offensive lines along with weapons all around him.
Trading him does not create "a huge hole". I'm thankful for what he's done, but if trading him away gets the Bengals a better starter, you do that. There's going to be backup QBs out there.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - fredtoast - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 03:15 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: You mean the two Steelers games where McCarron had 3 interceptions and fumbled the ball 3 times as well
Or the 49ers game where the defense had 4 turnovers? Two, of which, put the Bengals in the 49ers red zone. But I guess we shouldn't talk about the Bengals field position, huh?
And also not every offense pares down their offense because they don't have a defense like the Bengals do. Plus, if you want to show stats you have to show them all.
Like how Dalton had the #2 YPA with 8.42. Then McCarron's goes down to 7.18. Which is worse than Blaine Gabbert and Josh McCown.
Even Luke McCown came in for the Saints and had a high YPA (8.59).
Or that McCarron averaged only 208 yards per game. Which would rank him 38th in the league. Behind Matt Hasselbeck and Brian Hoyer.\
Unless you want to do a "qualified" list, then McCarron ranks 32nd out of 35.
McCarron is a solid backup, but this team made him look much better than he actually is. He was put into a good spot with the #2 scoring defense and one of the best offensive lines along with weapons all around him.
Trading him does not create "a huge hole". I'm thankful for what he's done, but if trading him away gets the Bengals a better starter, you do that. There's going to be backup QBs out there.
So if McCarron sucks so bad why would any team offer anything for hiim?
Why does his name pop up everytime there is any team interested in trading for a QB?
Another example of message board fans thinking they know more than every other team in the NFL.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - McC - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 03:15 PM)wolfkaosaun Wrote: You mean the two Steelers games where McCarron had 3 interceptions and fumbled the ball 3 times as wellDuke Tobin said last night that AJ is part of the team, part of the family and they have no intention of trading him. Kinda puts this thing to bed.
Or the 49ers game where the defense had 4 turnovers? Two, of which, put the Bengals in the 49ers red zone. But I guess we shouldn't talk about the Bengals field position, huh?
And also not every offense pares down their offense because they don't have a defense like the Bengals do. Plus, if you want to show stats you have to show them all.
Like how Dalton had the #2 YPA with 8.42. Then McCarron's goes down to 7.18. Which is worse than Blaine Gabbert and Josh McCown.
Even Luke McCown came in for the Saints and had a high YPA (8.59).
Or that McCarron averaged only 208 yards per game. Which would rank him 38th in the league. Behind Matt Hasselbeck and Brian Hoyer.\
Unless you want to do a "qualified" list, then McCarron ranks 32nd out of 35.
McCarron is a solid backup, but this team made him look much better than he actually is. He was put into a good spot with the #2 scoring defense and one of the best offensive lines along with weapons all around him.
Trading him does not create "a huge hole". I'm thankful for what he's done, but if trading him away gets the Bengals a better starter, you do that. There's going to be backup QBs out there.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - fredtoast - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 09:17 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: Vick had a torn hamstring and was inactive for multiple weeks (6 I think). You don't know how healthy or ready to play Vick was at that point. They could have kept Jones out there to groom an upcoming backup rather than play Vick just to cut him at the end of the season. Jones didn't bench Vick. Vick benched Vick due to injury.
Wrong again
http://www.behindthesteelcurtain.com/nfl-pittsburgh-steelers-news/2015/10/27/9621076/steelers-qb-landry-jones-supplants-mike-vick-as-no-2-qb-on-depth-chart
"Landry Jones' performance the past two weeks has proven to be enough for the team to list him as the No. 2 quarterback on the team's depth chart, ahead of Mike Vick.
This shouldn't come as a shock to anyone with the ability to watch football.
Jones has outplayed Vick in every possible sense of the term, but more importantly, Jones has gained the trust of the coaching staff to the point where he would be the "next man up" if Roethlisberger were to be lost again for any amount of time."Vick sucks. Sanchez sucks. People who watch football know this. The only people who would take either of those guys over McCarron are the ones who just look at names they recognize from years ago.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - Shake n Blake - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 12:35 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Sanchez is a proven loser.
It has been SIX YEARS since he had a winning record as a starter.
Yet, he's had a .500 record twice since, which is the same as McCarron, who sits at 2-2. He also has an overall better record in way more starts. He's also won as many playoff games as the Bengals have in their entire 48 year history.
(09-02-2016, 12:41 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Yeah, that was a brilliant idea to have our running game only produce 68 yards against the Forty Niners and 155 in two games against the Steelers when McCarron was under center. Maybe if we had went all the way down to zero rushing yards McCarron would have had a 120+ passer rating.
So why doesn't every other team in the league just "pare down" their offense and make their QBs produce 97+ passer ratings if it is that easy.
Have you ever thought that maybe opposing defenses loaded up to stop the run because they weren't worried about Mac?
I'd also argue that McCarron averaging 191 yards in his starts contributed to the terrible yardage numbers, but maybe that's just me being a hater.
(09-02-2016, 12:51 AM)fredtoast Wrote: He sucked so bad as a back up that he got benched for Landry Jones. He got credit for a win over the Cardinals even though he threw for only 6 yards adn the Steelers were trailing when Jones came into the game.
Ok then. Vick went 1-1. Mac went 2-2. Is there supposed to be a huge difference there?
Btw Fred, it's called "multi quote".
(09-02-2016, 01:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Everybody but a select few on this MB realizes that AJ did a fine job for us last year when pressed into duty. Our backup matters quite a bit.
Nobody is saying the kid sucks. Just saying he's not the 2nd coming of Brady. Which many folks here sincerely seem to believe.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - Fresno B - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 03:20 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So if McCarron sucks so bad why would any team offer anything for hiim?
Why does his name pop up everytime there is any team interested in trading for a QB?
Another example of message board fans thinking they know more than every other team in the NFL.
Fred you kind of brought this upon yourself. You clamored about Dalton too long before you opened your eyes. You used to be the 1 dogging anyone you percieved was a threat to Dalton. Now that you came to the dark side you're witnessing karma. Mcarron is a threat and therefore he must be traded.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - fredtoast - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 04:19 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Ok then. Vick went 1-1. Mac went 2-2. Is there supposed to be a huge difference there?
Yep. AJ did not get credit for a win when he went 3 of 8 for 6 yards.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - fredtoast - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 04:19 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Nobody is saying the kid sucks. Just saying he's not the 2nd coming of Brady. Which many folks here sincerely seem to believe.
Yeah right, because saying he gives us a better chance at winning games than any other back up we could go into the season with is EXACTLY the same as claiming he is the second coming of Brady.
However, saying that he is no better then any other back up we could sign off the street is the same as saying he sucks.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - Shake n Blake - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 04:37 PM)Fresno B Wrote: Fred you kind of brought this upon yourself. You clamored about Dalton too long before you opened your eyes. You used to be the 1 dogging anyone you percieved was a threat to Dalton. Now that you came to the dark side you're witnessing karma. Mcarron is a threat and therefore he must be traded.
If you really believe McC is a threat to Dalton's job, you're living in a fantasy land. The organization is 100% behind Dalton as the franchise QB, gave him a lengthy contract and even promoted Zampese to OC thanks in no small part to his relationship and work with Dalton. Dalton is also coming off possibly the best season by a QB in franchise history.
Btw, I'm not saying McC must be traded at all costs. I wouldn't trade him for less than a 2nd rounder. He's a good backup. I just don't see a guy who is a future stud. That's the only difference between myself and people like yourself.
(09-02-2016, 04:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yep. AJ did not get credit for a win when he went 3 of 8 for 6 yards.
I already accounted for that game. His record minus that start would be 1-1.
(09-02-2016, 04:57 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yeah right, because saying he gives us a better chance at winning games than any other back up we could go into the season with is EXACTLY the same as claiming he is the second coming of Brady.
However, saying that he is no better then any other back up we could sign off the street is the same as saying he sucks.
I never said he was no better than anybody off the street. I believe that was brownshoe.
There really are people here who think he can supplant Dalton though, which is still ridiculous.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - 'E' - 09-02-2016
Yes it is ridiculous. AJ and Andy are similar players, there is no way Mike Brown will throw away all of the time invested in Dalton by benching him in favor of a guy out of the same mold.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - bfine32 - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 04:19 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Nobody is saying the kid sucks. Just saying he's not the 2nd coming of Brady. Which many folks here sincerely seem to believe.
I have no idea what thread you are reading because it is not this one.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - bfine32 - 09-02-2016
FWIW, anybody remember the draft day thread when AJ was taken in the 5th Rd and folks immediately lost their minds? Many were saying how much better Aaron Murray was and dang the Chiefs for taking him before us. That dude is on the street and we are talking about how high of a draft choice we could get for AJ.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - TheLeonardLeap - 09-02-2016
(09-01-2016, 01:51 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Good points. Sometimes I forget about the good ol' compensatory picks. I still think I'd prefer a 2nd round pick + Mark Sanchez over McCarron + possible 3rd or 4th rounder, but it is comforting to know that if he bolts for a bigger contract/better opportunity elsewhere, we could still get a pick out of it.
Gotta point out it wouldn't just be a 2nd rounder vs 3rd or 4th rounder. It'd be a 2017 2nd rounder vs a 2019 3rd or 4th rounder (he's under contract for 2017, he'd be a FA in 2018, and comp picks are calculated for the next year, so 2019).
Draft picks become less valuable the further into the future they are. By the time you get that comp draft pick for McCarron, Dalton would be turning 32, Green will be 31 (contract year), Atkins will be 31 (and a FA), Burfict will be 29 (and is a FA in '18)... etc.
A possible comp pick 3 seasons from now doesn't do much for a team who's trying not to waste their current window. A high draft pick in 2017 can.
Just throwing that out there.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - Shake n Blake - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 08:49 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I have no idea what thread you are reading because it is not this one.
Just in this thread:
#4 - Brady comparison
#36 - Brady comparison
#52 - Brady comparison
#64 - Steve Young comparison
I've also read threads like these:
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-This-is-the-moment-when-AJ-McCarron-becomes-a-star?highlight=mccarron
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-AJ-McCarron-is-Better-than-Andy-Dalton?highlight=mccarron
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-AJ-McCarron-is-a-future-star?highlight=mccarron
As well as multiple comments in the trade McCarron thread where some are suggesting Dalton and McCarron are on similar levels.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - bfine32 - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 09:37 PM)Shake n Blake Wrote: Just in this thread:
#4 - Brady comparison
#36 - Brady comparison
#52 - Brady comparison
#64 - Steve Young comparison
I've also read threads like these:
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-This-is-the-moment-when-AJ-McCarron-becomes-a-star?highlight=mccarron
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-AJ-McCarron-is-Better-than-Andy-Dalton?highlight=mccarron
http://thebengalsboard.com/Thread-AJ-McCarron-is-a-future-star?highlight=mccarron
As well as multiple comments in the trade McCarron thread where some are suggesting Dalton and McCarron are on similar levels.
This is just the tip of the iceberg.
4 posts in 5 pages; is this where I link the posts slamming him?
EDIT:
Post #4. Nobody compared AJ to Brady; simply replied to the OP that said a back up is not going to be Brady
Post#36 Nobody compared AJ to Brady; simply posted pictures of backups that have won the Super Bowl
Post #52 Nobody compared AJ to Brady; simply provided an example of a back up winning a Super Bowl
Post #64 Nobody compared AJ to Young; simply suggested someone should as Young if a back up can win a Super Bowl
To be honest, you should be ashamed for using them as examples and I hope folks read the posts quoted to see how hard folks try.
As I said: I don't know which thread you are reading but it is not this one.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - Nately120 - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 01:32 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Everybody but a select few on this MB realizes that AJ did a fine job for us last year when pressed into duty. Our backup matters quite a bit.
Pshaw...everyone realizes AJM is either garbage OR he should be traded for two 1st round picks!
(09-02-2016, 02:10 AM)Go Cards Wrote: Never have won this argument and have debated with many.
But think Steve Young was the best QB ever.
Hmm, I realize the Yuckaneers were the absolute nadir of football when they drafted him but I can't help but feel like the best QB ever should have won more than 2 games per year regardless.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - Utts - 09-02-2016
McCaron was playing well enough to get us into the Super Bowl.
Look how bad Manning was. Osswhateverhisnameis could have won that game.
So the backup matters.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - Nately120 - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 11:35 PM)Utts Wrote: McCaron was playing well enough to get us into the Super Bowl.
Look how bad Manning was. Osswhateverhisnameis could have won that game.
So the backup matters.
According to that logic any starting QB in the NFL played well enough in 2015 to get "us" into the Super Bowl.
RE: Does the backup QB really matter? - fredtoast - 09-02-2016
(09-02-2016, 09:19 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: A possible comp pick 3 seasons from now doesn't do much for a team who's trying not to waste their current window. A high draft pick in 2017 can.
And a '17 draft pick does not help us if we need to win some games with a back up QB this year.
Bengals are built to win this year. It would be a mistake to create a hole ion our roster for a future draft pick.