Would you be ok with a Trent Dilfer, if you got the defense that came with him?

[Cyberjag]

Just curious about the mood around here. Say we don't take a QB (because none of them will help in 2011 anyway). Instead we go defense, and end up with an amazing unit that threatens the 2000 Ravens 10 points per game mark. Clausen or some washed up veteran starts, and does a decent job as a game manager.

Bottom line though--we still suck on offense. But because our defense is awesome we win more than we lose.

Would you be happy with that?

[TheRealDeal]

Winning is all that matters so yes but it better not be Clausen, he will negate our great defense.

[The NFL Shield At Midfield]

Yeah I think it'd be fun to watch the blue chip QBs in this division running for their lives.

[Mattiekrome]

Yes. Yes I would.

[Jackofalltrades]

Yes.

[Cyberjag]

Winning is all that matters so yes but it better not be Clausen, he will negate our great defense.

Well in your world Matt Moore beats him out anyway, so it will be a contest between his end-zone INTs and our defense's greatness, huh? :)

Winning SHOULD be all that matters, not who's the QB.

[YourMomsLover]

PP7 or Dareus

[Ricky Spanish]

no, because a trent dilfer at QB hasn't won a superbowl since trent dilfer did it...

ok, brad johnson did it too the next year, but after that, no scrubs have.

[teeray]

In order to win a Super Bowl with a QB like that the first thing you have to do is get to the playoffs.

Having Ryan, Freeman, and Brees in your conference all but guarantees we would never have that chance if we had a Dilfer like QB.

So no. The league has changed and more importantly, our conference has changed!!

[YourMomsLover]

In order to win a Super Bowl with a QB like that the first thing you have to do is get to the playoffs.

Having Ryan, Freeman, and Brees in your conference all but guarantees we would never have that chance if we had a Dilfer like QB.

So no. The league has changed and more importantly, our conference has changed!!

But what if we have an amazing quarterback (Luck), and a horrible defense? We still win right?

[pantherfan81]

Yes & no. Be great to have that kind of run on defense, but I want championshipS. Even that bitchin Ravens D didn't win multiple. Looking at the recent past multiple superbowl winners, they had franchise QBs. However, netting a superbowl victory either way would be sweet.

[TheRealDeal]

Well in your world Matt Moore beats him out anyway, so it will be a contest between his end-zone INTs and our defense's greatness, huh? :)

Winning SHOULD be all that matters, not who's the QB.

To be fair they were redzone INTs mostly ;)

3 straight passes after Moore got us down to the 3 yard line doesn't help him much either, let alone being in the shotgun all 3 plays leaving no threat of running the ball.

Either way, Moore put up 18 that game and with a great defense that would have been enough to win :D

[teeray]

What are you talking about Luck for?? Is he an amazing NFL QB already???

And if you have an amazing QB he can mask a lot of ills on the defensive side of the ball.

In this conference as it is instituted now... you would have a better chance of winning games with a great QB and sub par defense than a bad offense and good defense.

The QBs are too good now in the NFC South.

Go look at the playoffs last year and look at the minimum points scored by the winning teams and the points allowed by the winning teams. In a lot of cases teams won despite giving up 21+ points

[teeray]

In the divisional round last season the losing teams scored 21, 24, 24, 21 points in their games. Defense is great. You HAVE top be able to produce points.