@rams29jackson, thanx for answering my question and no you did not come off as mean or anything, I was just curious about your screen name is all. Most people wouldn't give rookies a chance to win in the playoffs, I'm sure that quite of few of us think that also. If Kaep brings us a SB trophy, great....but he's not winning anything by himself, it still is a team game...
That's nice, except their inexperience didn't really have any affect on the TEAMS loss. You could make that argument for Luck, maybe, but Griffins injury had more of an effect on the game than anything else, and that wasn't due to his inexperience. Russell had an absolutely great game, led them on a huge comeback and had them within a minute of the win but the defense quickly gave up two big plays and Carroll hecked up the TO to give them 2 tries. It's absolutely asinine to blame either of the NFC rooks' losses on "inexperience".
it doesnt matter whether its one decision, one second or one yard of difference. Its a team game but the QB is a nerve center and you dont have to see or know or understand the decision that he made. At some point a split second decision that you the spectator didnt even know was important/happening can alter the entire course of a game and a QB is in a key position for that to happen to him more than anyone else on the field. anD a rookie QB obviously never mentally grasps as many split second before and after play decisions as a veteran can or will. its simple, it doesnt matter what the team situation is or who the coach is or what decision were or werent made. Rookie QBs have never won a significant amount of playoff games and never will. It doesnt matter how close Seattle was in that game, they still didnt win. And a key factor of not winning was the fact that the QB was young and inexperienced along with all the other factors that part still counts. (even if Carroll still thinks he's in college :icon_cheesygrin:) RG3= he did not possess the wisdom to take himself out of the game knowing he already had messed up his leg before, which is a young mistake( no matter what the doctor or coach told him or thought). and furthermore that game cancels out because it was a head to head rookie game. Who ever won that game was losing the next one regardless in my opinion. you can hash all the variables you want.It doesnt matter whether it was a coach or a team or some other aspect. Rookie QBs dont lead to long playoff runs. They dont know as much, they havent seen as much. It all factors in to the performance.
I completely disagree. Wilson put his team ahead with 30 seconds left. He had nothing to do with his defense blowing it.
personally, i didn't see wilson do anything in the game yesterday that made me think he hurt his teams' chances of winning at all. he played a helluva game. their defense and o-line didn't play well for most of the game.
a rookie QB Still started the game and a rookie QB still lost the game. It doesnt matter what he did or didnt do or what you think he did or did not do. I am going by the simple stat that rookie QBs dont win playoff games because they dont and they havent by and large. Until that becomes a norm of some sort, The stat will still favor veterans and I will pick in that direction. and next year wont count because those guys will be in year 2 :icon_cheesygrin: if these guys are great and talented, thats wonderful ! but it isnt a normal occurance yet if ever ?
Im sure that the fact that rookie starters, especially the highest caliber ones, are usually on terrible teams has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that they havent won a Super Bowl. And no, neither Brady nor Warner were rookies, but they certainly didnt have any on-field experience previous to their Super Bowl campaigns that would have given them the "veteran" qualities you insist are neccesary to win a Lombardi.
[MENTION=1]SteveRobWhatever[/MENTION] can you clear this up for us? What do the footballs by the user names mean?
0-99 posts 100-299 posts 300-499 posts 500-999 posts 1,000-4,999 posts 5,000-9,999 posts 10,000+ posts
