Nothing confirmed yet. http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/10/02/report-signs-pointing-to-bridgewater-not-playing/
And would you consider him a "franchise" QB?... or simply a very good QB who is good when he's on a team with some good coaching and good overall talent (sort of like Jay Cutler, Ben Rothlesberger, Eli Manning).
Exactly... and how many of "those" type of QB's have existed over the last 20 years? Manning.... and maybe Brady (who had some excellent teams and excellent coaching), and maybe Brees. Then you have guys like Eli, Flacco, Rivers, Cutler, Rothlesberger, Romo... and past top picks like Vick, Bradford, Palmer. The chances of having one, let alone TWO true franchise QB's in a given year is close to zero.
A guy like Rivers is more valuable than JJ watt. It is QB league if Teddy or Blake reach River's level than they will be more valuable than clowney.
People always say that... and there are just as many non-franchise QB's winning super bowls over the last 10 years as truly elite ones. An elite defensive unit anchored by Watt/Clowney would be more valuable than a gunslinging QB that needs good coaching, good line play, and good WR talent to be successful. My original point stands... Teddy and Blake still need good overall teams/coaching to turn into success stories.
JJ Watt was pretty good last year they won 2 games last year. People like say Russell Wilson won because of his defense. If Matt Flynn was their QB I bet they don't win the SB. You need to an above average QB to win in this league.
Franchise QB doesn't mean an elite QB, in my opinion. It means a guy you can look at and say "I expect this guy to my QB for 10 years". That could be a superstar like Aaron Rodgers that puts the team on his back, or it could be a steady and reliable guy like Big Ben or Russell Wilson that makes plays when needed. It's a guy that ends a franchise's endless efforts of always trying to look for someone that's good enough to win with. If you eliminate question marks and know what you're going to get with your QB, you can build the rest of the team around that - regardless of whether that QB is elite or just good. The franchises that flounder are the ones that can't find a QB that they can stick with and build around. That applies to Rivers, Big Ben and Eli. Cutler always seems to have question marks and people are always wondering whether you can ever win with him - there was a lot of debate whether Chicago should keep him, etc. So I don't think he fits the mold.
They're also the ones that fail the QB as well. Brees was just an OK QB for the Chargers.... they even moved on from him and drafted their next "franchise" QB and lost him for nothing. On the flip side, Carson Palmer led the Bengals to the playoffs and was somebody they invested a #1 pick in... and they were more than willing to move on from him when he made a "stink" because they had a foundation in place to foster success for a future young QB. And the Giants were ready to possibly give up on Eli if he didn't get the proper coaching to turn him around (still may be "done", last two games not withstanding). Cutler also has been better after better coaching... but yes, he may not have it. You're pretty much agreeing with my assessment that these guys all still need the proper coaching/talent/scheme/health to ultimately succeed. Its not as simple as just committing to a highly drafted QB and then letting him "develop." Guys like Locker and Ponder may have had a better/different development pattern on different teams... sort of like Alex Smith. Same goes for David Carr.
You need a great team to win in this league.... its not as simple as "fix the QB, you fix the team." Matt Schaub was pretty good the year the Texans won 6 games... then the following year, they fix the defense and are a super bowl contender (till Schaub goes down). Nowhere am I saying QB play is insignificant... its damn important. I do believe, however, that you still need viable pieces and quality coaching around the QB (and the younger the QB, the more important those other things are for their development).
Most likely not, he didn't really practice and it's a short week. Also, he couldn't manage to get through a game without injury when he went in at 100% against a terrible defense, you are just begging for another quick injury if you rush him back against the Packers.
When matt shaub was good and their defense was one of the worst ever they still won 6 games. If a few breaks went here or there they might have won 8. If we had a matt shaub that didn't completely suck we would have won more than 2 games.
I don't think anyone anywhere has ever suggested if you have a franchise QB, you don't need coaching/talent/etc around them. There are lots of franchise QBs, so one that doesn't have coaching/defense/etc isn't going to beat one that does. I think most people have argued that it either (1) makes life a hell of a lot easier if you start with the QB or (2) that, regardless of how good the rest of your team is, you still need the franchise QB to win anything. If you don't have a franchise QB, you're probably not winning a Superbowl even if you build a great defense/running game/coaching/etc. I think the only two non-Franchise QBs to win a Superbowl in the last 25+ years are Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer. That said, there have been several more to make a SB like Rex Grossman and Kerry Collins. (side note: I know a lot of people don't consider Flacco a franchise QB, but Baltimore loved him the moment they got him and looked at him as their long-term solution at QB vs their constant revolving door before there; he qualifies under my definition)
Part of that is because once a QB is on a SB winning team these days he's immediately labeled a "franchise QB", and has people start calling them "elite" no matter how well they actually play.
While I agree with you about not wanting to rush him back your bias against Bridgewater is so evident in everything you post about him. At least before, you would try to hide it.
It's merely a product of the over the top nature of the Teddy fans, they're almost identical to Lin fans so it probably makes me a bit more negative than I would otherwise be. That said, I'm not being unfair to him with anything I've said.
