Does the backup QB really matter?

[leonardfan40]

(09-01-2016, 09:17 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It amazes me that some people think thst the back up QB does not matter.

The only teams that McCarron lost to were playoff teams.  If we play nothing but playoff teams then we may not win many games with McCarron, but during the regular season we play a lot of good teams that don't make the playoffs.  And we need to win those games to make the playoffs.

The 2010 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QBs went 3-1

The '05 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-2.

The '04 Steelers made the playoffs because their back up QB went 13-0

The '02 Buccaneers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-1

The '00 Ravens made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 7-1.

Yes he only lost to playoff teams, but who were the 2 QB's mccarron beat? 

[Bengalbug]

(09-01-2016, 09:17 AM)fredtoast Wrote: It amazes me that some people think thst the back up QB does not matter.

The only teams that McCarron lost to were playoff teams.  If we play nothing but playoff teams then we may not win many games with McCarron, but during the regular season we play a lot of good teams that don't make the playoffs.  And we need to win those games to make the playoffs.

The 2010 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QBs went 3-1

The '05 Steelers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-2.

The '04 Steelers made the playoffs because their back up QB went 13-0

The '02 Buccaneers made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 2-1

The '00 Ravens made the Super Bowl because their back up QB went 7-1.

More recently... What about when Alex smith went down and Kaep led the 9ers to the big dance?  

[Bengalbug]

(09-01-2016, 09:31 AM)leonardfan40 Wrote: Yes he only lost to playoff teams, but who were the 2 QB's mccarron beat? 

One is a likely starter this season. 

[Shake n Blake]

Honestly, I wasn't overly impressed with what McCarron did last year. He beat teams led by Blaine Gabbert and Ryan Mallet. The rest is "he almost" or excuses. 

I think McC is a very solid backup, maybe the best we've had since Kitna. That said, people talk about McC like he's some treasure we absolutely have to hang on to. I don't get that mentality.


1. Dalton's injury was very flukey and he never missed a game in 4 previous seasons. Odds are he stays healthy this year. [/b]


2. We get this year and next year. Then McC is surely gone in search of a better opportunity to start. Why not get something?


3. Let's say we traded McC now. Guys like Sanchez and Mike Vick will be available. Does anyone think guys like that wouldn't be able to do a servicable job in this offense with these weapons? Honestly that's all McCarron was last year. Serviceable. Nothing spectacular. Any half decent QB could beat the teams McCarron did.

Heck, I'd prefer the Sanchize over McCarron. More experienced and a proven winner in the playoffs.

[leonardfan40]

(09-01-2016, 09:35 AM)Bengalbug Wrote: One is a likely starter this season. 

Ouch! You told me lmao

[leonardfan40]

(09-01-2016, 09:32 AM)Bengalbug Wrote: More recently... What about when Alex smith went down and Kaep led the 9ers to the big dance?  

Kaep and Ben were both supposed to be the next franchise QB for their teams and we're just learning while on the bench. Not the same position as AJ at all

[Sled21]

(09-01-2016, 09:08 AM)Brownshoe Wrote: McCarron was going against the Steelers 29th rated pass defense. Ben had to go up against the team that was a nut hair away from being the least scored upon team in the league. Ben had 5 drives that resulted in points. McCarron had 3 drives that resulted in points, one of which was because he was gifted the ball on the Steelers side of the field, and a penalty put them next to the goal line (a drive that he had 0 yards on). The other drive where the RBs had the majority of the  yards, and the final drive where he got the ball on Pittsburghs side of the field and got a TD. Yes, it was a LOT better than McCarron.

And once again, that's why I said football is a team sport. McCarron is not great, but he gives the team the chance to win, against anybody.

[Brownshoe]

(09-01-2016, 09:53 AM)Sled21 Wrote: And once again, that's why I said football is a team sport. McCarron is not great, but he gives the team the chance to win, against anybody.

Most backups in the league would give us about the same chance to win as what McCarron does.

[Sled21]

Good grief...

[Essex Johnson]

(09-01-2016, 08:13 AM)Bengals_Legendary Wrote: I've been thinking about this over the past few days, and I've come to realize... what does it matter who the backup QB is? I'm being totally serious.

It's always, "If _________ goes down, we will need ___________!"

Will we though? Does it really matter? For what reason?

If your primary QB goes down with injury, the season is likely screwed.

That's just the bottom line. It doesn't matter if it's McCarron...it's not Dalton.

This doesn't necessarily refer to just the Bengals...it's everybody, the entire NFL.

If you HAVE to rely on your backup, you will not win the Super Bowl.

Sure, McCarron (and others) will do enough to get you into the playoffs...but that's it.

I just don't understand the thinking:

1) Your great backup gets you to the playoffs where you lose first round (bad draft pick) or...

2) Your average backup gets you nowhere and you get a decent or great draft pick.


My point is...a McCarron isn't going to beat a Brady in a Super Bowl, so who cares who's #2?

Look up the greatest backup of all time  "Earl Morrall" and you have why backups can matter

[CINwillWIN]

I tried beating that 'trade McCarron' drum early before the season, saw good points from both sides. I would have to be in the major agreement(s) that it would have to be a block-buster-can-not-turn-down situation for this organization to allow his release before he gets a better contract. I would assume they would try (the organization) to put him in a Bengals-friendly contract before allowing him to test free-agent waters after the 2018 season.

[hollodero]

(09-01-2016, 09:39 AM)Shake n Blake Wrote: 2. We get this year and next year. Then McC is surely gone in search of a better opportunity to start. Why not get something?

It tends to get neglected but we do get something in any case. A beloved compensatory pick. If the contract's big enough, might be a 4th or 3rd, right.
Just trying to establish the baseline. It's not quite zero.

Now whenever someone says "trade him for a 2nd", I wonder. That's just up 1 or 2 rounds so it gives the Bengals a shot for finding the new Margus Hunt. OK, that might be unfair. But it's a lottery ticket with slightly better odds. Downside, we have no backup QB - or spend the pick we gained for acquiring some Sanchezesque guy. Why?

Well, if the offer is unbelievably better than a 2nd, then ok, you might want to think about it. But there are no offers like that, because as you said. He's not exactly the next Tom Brady and did at least not perform like one.

[yellowxdiscipline]

50 post rule...

[Shake n Blake]

(09-01-2016, 01:16 PM)hollodero Wrote: It tends to get neglected but we do get something in any case. A beloved compensatory pick. If the contract's big enough, might be a 4th or 3rd, right.
Just trying to establish the baseline. It's not quite zero.

Now whenever someone says "trade him for a 2nd", I wonder. That's just up 1 or 2 rounds so it gives the Bengals a shot for finding the new Margus Hunt. OK, that might be unfair. But it's a lottery ticket with slightly better odds. Downside, we have no backup QB - or spend the pick we gained for acquiring some Sanchezesque guy. Why?

Well, if the offer is unbelievably better than a 2nd, then ok, you might want to think about it. But there are no offers like that, because as you said. He's not exactly the next Tom Brady and did at least not perform like one.

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.

[XenoMorph]

(09-01-2016, 08:13 AM)Bengals_Legendary Wrote: I've been thinking about this over the past few days, and I've come to realize... what does it matter who the backup QB is? I'm being totally serious.

It's always, "If _________ goes down, we will need ___________!"

Will we though? Does it really matter? For what reason?

If your primary QB goes down with injury, the season is likely screwed.

That's just the bottom line. It doesn't matter if it's McCarron...it's not Dalton.

This doesn't necessarily refer to just the Bengals...it's everybody, the entire NFL.

If you HAVE to rely on your backup, you will not win the Super Bowl.

Sure, McCarron (and others) will do enough to get you into the playoffs...but that's it.

I just don't understand the thinking:

1) Your great backup gets you to the playoffs where you lose first round (bad draft pick) or...

2) Your average backup gets you nowhere and you get a decent or great draft pick.


My point is...a McCarron isn't going to beat a Brady in a Super Bowl, so who cares who's #2?

season is screwed if you don't have a guy that can step in and play well..

But lets say Dalton gets hurt but is only out for 2 games.   We want to at least be competitive and win 1 of those 2 while out  its easier with a competent backup qb.

[Atomic Orange]

and for the hell of it

[GodFather]

(09-01-2016, 08:36 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: You may not expect the #2 to win games for you, but he can certainly lose them if his skills are that sub par.

Great picture of Gene and Gilda you have there!

"Come with me
And you'll be
in a world of 
Pure Imagination..."

[McC]

(09-01-2016, 08:13 AM)Bengals_Legendary Wrote: I've been thinking about this over the past few days, and I've come to realize... what does it matter who the backup QB is? I'm being totally serious.

It's always, "If _________ goes down, we will need ___________!"

Will we though? Does it really matter? For what reason?

If your primary QB goes down with injury, the season is likely screwed.

That's just the bottom line. It doesn't matter if it's McCarron...it's not Dalton.

This doesn't necessarily refer to just the Bengals...it's everybody, the entire NFL.

If you HAVE to rely on your backup, you will not win the Super Bowl.

Sure, McCarron (and others) will do enough to get you into the playoffs...but that's it.

I just don't understand the thinking:

1) Your great backup gets you to the playoffs where you lose first round (bad draft pick) or...

2) Your average backup gets you nowhere and you get a decent or great draft pick.


My point is...a McCarron isn't going to beat a Brady in a Super Bowl, so who cares who's #2?

Apparently, you have forgotten Jason Campbell and Bruce Gradkowski.  If you stop and remember them, you will instantly have a greater appreciation of AJ.

[Derrick]

(09-01-2016, 08:58 AM)jason Wrote: Did you miss the Dallas Cowboys season last year?

That's why it matters.

The Bengals lake and WANT McCarran on the team. Can we please stop the "oh man we can trade McCarran for a 1st round CB next year" stuff.

Yeah, first round DBs have not worked out well so far for the Bengals. Who is responsible for picking these DBs?

[XenoMorph]

(09-01-2016, 03:51 PM)Derrick Wrote: Yeah, first round DBs have not worked out well so far for the Bengals. Who is responsible for picking these DBs?

Not sure what your talking about...
Hall
Joseph
Jones* not a bengals draftee
Kirkpatrick

have worked out fine for us..

Dennard and Jackson haven't been needed yet.