Troy Smith

**TTRaven** · 12-12-2007, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

No offense TT, but name me a playoff QB right now that has had to deal with anything REMOTELY like McNair and Boller have had to deal with this year, or any of our last 10 QB's.

Matt Hasselbeck

Has had no running game, played the majority of his season without his 2 main threats(Alexander, Branch) and has been sacked the 8th most times in the NFL. He still seems to be able to make plays and keep his team in the playoff hunt.

Look I know sometimes certain areas of a team struggle. Let's not kid ourselves and act like Boller/Mcnair are the only ones that have to deal with this. Plenty of QB's are able to make plays when protection breaks down, or when one of their weapons are out for whatever reason. Everything is not going to be perfect. If a QB can't succeed unless everything around him is perfect, that probably means that the QB isn't any good.

**Ravenbird** · 12-12-2007, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by TTRaven

Matt Hasselbeck

Has had no running game, played the majority of his season without his 2 main threats(Alexander, Branch) and has been sacked the 8th most times in the NFL. He still seems to be able to make plays and keep his team in the playoff hunt.

Look I know sometimes certain areas of a team struggle. Let's not kid ourselves and act like Boller/Mcnair are the only ones that have to deal with this. Plenty of QB's are able to make plays when protection breaks down, or when one of their weapons are out for whatever reason. Everything is not going to be perfect. If a QB can't succeed unless everything around him is perfect, that probably means that the QB isn't any good.

it's more a question of being able to play well consistently when being pressured consistently and the defenses don't have to account for a guy like Heap( or Williams to a lesser extent). If Boller had looked bad in every game then there would be no excuses. But he has looked good, so good that most non haters said that he was not the same as in the past, so what changed against indy?

I was very disappointed with that game but after thinking about it I realized that all of his int's were after we were down by 14 points. If he wasn't getting time, or receivers were not getting open, he had to make something happen or there would be no chance at all to win. So what if he forced the issue, big deal. The worst thing that happened did, but what if they would be caught, maybe there is a chance of a great comeback. If he holds on to the ball or throws it away time after time there was no chance of a win, so what is the big deal for forcing it. Don't get me wrong that was no good game by any stretch of the imagination, it's just not as bad as it may seem.

**TTRaven** · 12-12-2007, 09:52 PM

it's more a question of being able to play well consistently when being pressured consistently and the defenses don't have to account for a guy like Heap( or Williams to a lesser extent). If Boller had looked bad in every game then there would be no excuses. But he has looked good, so good that most non haters said that he was not the same as in the past, so what changed against indy?

So you're saying that because Boller has looked good a few games we should look past his many bad games? What changed against Indy is the story of kyle Boller's career. He'll look good one game only to follow it up by playing absolutely horrible. I'm convinced that he will always be like that. Just an inconsistent, average QB who will look bad more times then he looks good.

**festivus** · 12-12-2007, 10:01 PM

Ravenbird, understand you are new here but you are going over thrice-plowed ground.

Don't put words in my mouth, or twist what I said. Most of the regulars here, myself included, have laid out their opinions in one way or another about the QB position over the last *loooong* time.

No offense, I really don't feel like another round of posts about the worthiness of Kyle Boller, when there's nothing new to add. If you *really* want to know how I feel, just read a couple of the threads in this subforum. You'll find me there.

**RustonRifle** · 12-12-2007, 11:33 PM

This has got to be the only city in America where crummy quarterback play is accepted by even 1% of the fans.

We could pull someone off the waiver wire that would give us what Kyle Boller can. Boller is nothing special. This league is about winning championships. If you have a guy suiting up that can't get the job done you look for someone who can.

Kyle Boller will never be at the helm of a playoff team much less a championship squad.

**purplepoe** · 12-12-2007, 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by Ravenbird

it's more a question of being able to play well consistently when being pressured consistently and the defenses don't have to account for a guy like Heap( or Williams to a lesser extent). If Boller had looked bad in every game then there would be no excuses. But he has looked good, so good that most non haters said that he was not the same as in the past, so what changed against indy?

I was very disappointed with that game but after thinking about it I realized that all of his int's were after we were down by 14 points. If he wasn't getting time, or receivers were not getting open, he had to make something happen or there would be no chance at all to win. So what if he forced the issue, big deal. The worst thing that happened did, but what if they would be caught, maybe there is a chance of a great comeback. If he holds on to the ball or throws it away time after time there was no chance of a win, so what is the big deal for forcing it. Don't get me wrong that was no good game by any stretch of the imagination, it's just not as bad as it may seem.

First of all, Boller's first INT on Sunday night had nothing to do with score or a WR getting open.

He made a rookie mistake by completely staring down the WR (which is still does much of the time) and letting the LB read him like a book.

It was a freakin 6 yd pass, not some bomb down the field.

The excuse making is over.

It's been 5 years.

It's not as bad as it seemed?

O, let me be clear.

It was absolutely as bad as it seemed.

Look, if you wanna buy into the excuse making and hold onto the dream of Boller being a #1 QB in this league, that's your right.

But most of us have seen enough.

Every excuse has been made.

And believe me, the Indy game certainly didn't make or break anyone's opinion on Boller.

Every QB looks good sometimes. What is with that argument? Just because a QB looks good once in awhile doesn't mean he can be the guy.

PP

**StingerNLG** · 12-13-2007, 12:21 AM

Originally Posted by TTRaven

Matt Hasselbeck

Has had no running game, played the majority of his season without his 2 main threats(Alexander, Branch) and has been sacked the 8th most times in the NFL. He still seems to be able to make plays and keep his team in the playoff hunt.

With all due respect, here are Seattle's wins and their opponent's current records:

SF x 2 (3-10)
St. Louis x 2 (3-10)
Cincinatti (5-8)
Chicago (5-8)
TB (8-5)
Philadelphia (5-8)
Arizona (6-7)

We've beaten every common opponent on that list except Cincy. We didn't play TB, Philly, or Chicago.

The Seahawks lost to Pittsburgh, New Orleans, Cleveland, and Arizona the first time around.

Matt Hassleback has at least HAD Alexander and Branch on the field 9 out of 13 games. Heap has been out about that long, and D-Will is closing in on that number fast. Not to mention Hasslebeck has had his OL intact, as in EVERY one of his starting OL has been on the field for 13 games, and his TE Pollard for 11 games.

I realize that we have sucked much worse than Seattle. But you can't compare McNair/Boller's situation to Hasslebeck's.

Look I know sometimes certain areas of a team struggle. Let's not kid ourselves and act like Boller/Mcnair are the only ones that have to deal with this. Plenty of QB's are able to make plays when protection breaks down, or when one of their weapons are out for whatever reason. Everything is not going to be perfect. If a QB can't succeed unless everything around him is perfect, that probably means that the QB isn't any good.

I look at everytime Manning's OL can't protect him, and they lose and he goes nuts and throws them under the bus and I remember that everytime I hear one of you say something like that.

Then I remember how many games Houston won with David Carr getting HIS ass kicked on the field game in and game out. Oh yeah, and Matt Schaub, the savior of the Texans? OL got him blown up too and he's out. And where are the Texans right now? 6-7 and not heading to the playoffs again.

And oh yeah, who dat gonna beat dem Bengals? Seemingly everyone else but us. Isn't a QB supposed to make the entire team around them better? Palmer's thrown 17 interceptions this year, and his team is 5-8. In fact, Palmer's really only led that team to one playoff. Hell, Kyle Boller and Anthony Wright did that in 2003. Other than that the Carson Palmer led Bengals struggle to make it to 8-8 every year.

Make no mistake. My confidence in Boller's ability has spiraled downward. And for me, while Brian Billick's offense has ruined him and every other QB to enter Baltimore, the lines between whether it's the system or the QB itself has begun to touch here and there. To a point that I don't know if Boller can be saved by changing the offensive system. And unfortunately I don't think Troy Smith will last that long in this system either. Sorry, I just have watched the Ravens for too long.

We can absolutely sit here and pound on Boller for the mistakes he should NOT be making at this point in his career. But let's stop pretending that the team around our Quarterbacks, including Boller, McNair, Redman, and on down, has been anything CLOSE to what the good teams in this league have.

Remind me at what point in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, or 2007 when the Ravens had a Chad Johnson or Braylon Edwards, Randy Moss or Terrell Owens, Marvin Harrison or even a Larry Fitzgerald.

EDIT: First person to mention Kevin Johnson gets his SPOTS poster ripped down and torn in half!! :D

**copenhaggard** · 12-13-2007, 01:48 AM

Our QBs have never been asked to shoulder the load of the team until this year.

All our offense had to do was not suck, and be average. It hasn't, due to a number of factors. There was never a ton of pressure on our offense. Boller, Billick, McNair and most of them still couldn't handle it though.

How come Pitt can score points, when Ward is their best receiver? He isn't a burner, just a great player. You don't need a franchise WR to be a respectable, pretty good offense.

Our offense isn't even close to respectable. It wouldn't matter if we had a legit #1 WR. QbA wouldn't be able to throw the ball to a #1 receiver, and QBb would overthrow, underthrow, or stare down the receiver. Not to mention if we had a #1 receiver, Billick might decide to throw the ball 60 times a game.

Get a great shot caller. Sometimes a good QB can help out receivers. And vica-versa. But the main thing is a great receiver doesn't throw the ball to himself. Our OLINE is developing, and in good shape. We have younger receivers.

Enough of the joke QBs here. Get a franchise QB. Enough of the joke offense, and coach genius.

**StingerNLG** · 12-13-2007, 09:16 AM

Originally Posted by copenhaggard

How come Pitt can score points, when Ward is their best receiver? He isn't a burner, just a great player. You don't need a franchise WR to be a respectable, pretty good offense.

Hines Ward the 4 time pro-bowler? The guy who caught 112 passes with Tommy Maddox? He makes catches that few other WR's in this league CAN make. He bails his QB's out a LOT.

Our offense isn't even close to respectable. It wouldn't matter if we had a legit #1 WR. QbA wouldn't be able to throw the ball to a #1 receiver, and QBb would overthrow, underthrow, or stare down the receiver. Not to mention if we had a #1 receiver, Billick might decide to throw the ball 60 times a game.

I guess when you really never have a legit #1 WR you stop understanding how important it is to have one. You're telling me having a receiver that could get open more, and not force the QB to throw into coverages all the time and get downfield more than twice a game opening up the other 2 receivers more often, that this would make no difference?

Wow is about all I can say to that.

Get a great shot caller. Sometimes a good QB can help out receivers. And vica-versa. But the main thing is a great receiver doesn't throw the ball to himself. Our OLINE is developing, and in good shape. We have younger receivers.

And none of them as good as ANY of the ones I listed.

I challenge you again, compare anyone we've had since 2002 to any receiver on the upper tier teams. You can't. You just can't.

**xmradiodave** · 12-13-2007, 09:25 AM

We have talent on the WR corps. It appears that many of the plays called do not allow them to be utilized to their fullest potential. OR... the QB is not able to see the open receiver because he gets tunnel vision.

**crazyraven** · 12-13-2007, 10:00 AM

This is a great thread. I still cant believe hardcore huggers are still siding with Boller. anyway, I'm really enjoying this.

**festivus** · 12-13-2007, 10:29 AM

Originally Posted by StingerNLG

EDIT: First person to mention Kevin Johnson gets his SPOTS poster ripped down and torn in half!! :D

:)

Stinger it's not about the OL and it's not about the wide receivers. It's not about the play calling, and certainly not about Trent Dilfer, Chris Redman, or clock management. It's not even about Kyle Boller. It's not about any of that, at least for me.

It's about wanting to watch Troy Smith under center, at the tail end of this lost season. That's it.

:hug: