Here's where I disagree on the ever-popular Ravens example, Thaak: Prior to Flacco (and we don't have a big enough sample on him), they were NOT consistent winners like the Eagles, Pats, Colts, and so on. They would be a playoff team one year, out the next.
Up and down, up and down. As the article says, it's the curse of the team trying to win without a long-term franchise quarterback: Over time, they'll end up around .500, even with other pieces in place.
The Jets haven't been consistent winners either. They were a .500 team last year and got a couple laste season gifts from the schedule, the Colts, and the Bengals... both of whom sat starters. Hell, the coach thought they were eliminated, remember?
They packaged a bunch for the right to get Sanchez at #6 to change all that, to have one quarterback for 10-15 years. We'll see if it works out, but that was the effort. Same with the Ravens and Flacco. Both teams mentioned have first round quarterbacks.
It's tough to find a team at the top of the overal records for the last decade who don't meet that critiera: High level play and stability at the QB situation. Same guy for a long time.
I know you'll find this hard to believe, but it's SO stable as far as credibility, the article I read a couple years ago flat out blew my mind (similar detail). As that one guy said, "I thought it was complicated. It's not. It's about the quarterback."
 |