Sentences with phrase «qb who»

Lo and behold (and as painful as it is for me to say as a Bills fan), the Pats rattled off a long string of consecutive wins on their way to their 4th Super Bowl title, and continued that winning streak until a surprising upset loss last night to the Denver Broncos (coincidentally led by a young QB who is temporarily replacing another legend that many are also writing off — perhaps prematurely).

He will never be able to claim his starting provision over a more talented QB who joined the team after he did.

The pressure increases on the front office, from both the fan base and the media, to 1) sign ANYONE to at least give the appearance of being «active», and 2) make a «name» signing... which explains why the signings of a practice - squad LB (Marcus Dowtin), rotational DT (Alan Branch), and a LB whose own team made no effort to resign despite his supposed versatility (Manny Lawson) were spun as «fantastic» — and why the signing of an oft - injured QB who flamed out on two teams (Kevin Kolb) was hailed.

That tells me they are taking the QB who might be the least NFL ready of the BIG 4, but who has the the most impressive physical attributes and the highest ceiling, and that guy is Josh Allen who looks like a John Elway clone; big, strong, mobile and an absolute cannon for an arm, but he needs time to work on his technique and accuracy.

As used by Kelly, the read - option provides an offense with a multitude of advantages: It's easier to read a defender than it is to block him, the reads become built - in misdirection as the defense doesn't know who has the ball, and, as Kelly pointed out, a QB who is a threat to run alters the fundamental arithmetic of football.

All those great stats from Romo (in an era when rule changes made all QB's stats rise in the league)... hey guys, look, if you have fun watching a QB who cant stay on the field, who literally chokes in the biggest games where the season is on the line... well, you must have had a frigging BLAST during the Romo era.

It's very, very difficult to have either 1) an all - world QB who could win games by himself (Romo was) with a good enough team not to blow it, or 2) a team that is so awesome around the QB that they can win it all.

You can't just plug and play any of the top QBs into their system and think the results will be the same regardless of whether you take a young, downfield risk - taking passer (Darnold, Allen), a smoother, less athletic passer who is more risk averse (Rosen), or a shorter, arrogant, rhythm QB who throws with anticipation better than any other QB in this class (Mayfield).

looking to waste your biggest asset (early round draft capital) on a bench warmer and QB who cant make throws from the pocket.

But none of those teams had a QB who was both mobile and dangerous in the passing game while mobile and none of them were willing to or able to change to a different offense to keep a lead and take the pressure off their defense.

Nobody is saying that Bortles is the QB who threw for 35 TDs just two seasons ago, but with Dak we all assume he's going to be above average because he had a good rookie year.

The lesson: So, you're going into the Super Bowl with your backup QB who only got the job in the first place after your established starter got injured?

i do think lamar is yet another super athletic, phenomenally athletic qb who possesses below average accuracy.

Also, once we get towards the back end of the 1st round there is still a SB MVP QB who might be available for a price if the other options you feel comfortable with are already gone (I know there aren't any trades in this mock draft) which means that you can go BPA (Denzel Ward) and if the board doesn't fall your way there may still be an option to go and get a proven NFL QB.

He can get away with snap - anticipating in college where not every QB had mastered the offense, but the NFL is an entirely different beast and he'll probably rack up plenty of encroachment / offsides penalties when up against a vet QB who can quickly change things up on the fly.

A QB who will take chances would be the best QB for Dez.

The eagles should have been adding players instead of gamble on a division 1AA QB who everybody says is a project and not ready to play.

That is why a freshman can take over for him last season and go 8 - 0 or that the QB who ran the team in 2013 before Wentz in 2014 Brock Jensen went: 218 att 239 comp 66.3 % 2793 yards.

If so he a top tier pocket QB and not a injury prone reckless mobile QB who has add to major injuries in his last 2 out of 3 football seasons (Wentz).

But you're totally fine if the team would've «thrown money» at a certain QB who had arguably 1 good season out of 4?

Instead of selling the house for a QB who only played 7 games in 2015 for North Dakota.

McKinley just avoided a shitty cut block attempt, came in basically unmolested, and tackled a QB who held the ball a mite too long.

A bad line and bad targets could easily make him a «flee and pray» QB who takes the safe shot (HEDGE: This would require the coaching staff to tell him to protect the ball, rather than fling it).

He traded Brett Favre away after having an MVP level year and replaced him with an unproven QB who had an injury prone label placed on him at the time.

A QB who has more potential than Flacco ever had and one that can push Flacco to improve his play.

They have had a lot of success with a QB who may be the least mobile QB ever.

I wanted to highlight something you said: a QB who can play here late in the year.

Player to always watch: Fredi Knighten, Arkansas State's do - everything QB who's got all his weapons back

Brandin Cooks also has a proven QB who throws an avg.

But I also don't want a QB at all, because if you take one that high you had better start him day one, a qb who needs to sit a year or two is a mid to late round pick not a top 5 or 2 as this article suggests.

Imagine having a Ray Lewis type player on defense for the next 12 yrs compared to a qb who you think will struggle to fight for the starting position now and for the next 8 yrs?

Fill other needs that make the whole team better, rather than a potentially dynamic QB who doesn't play at all for the next year or two or spends his Sundays wondering why he's on the ground again — because the OLine is more invisible than a WalMart greeter.

and got rid of it's best weapon, with a young QB who hasn't shown he can beat teams through the air, especially without Dez, most of Dak's best passing games Dez has scored, gone for solid yardage, or both...

And regardless of what Scott wants to do, does he have a QB who can do it?

You can go ahead and ask the Browns, quarterbacks don't grow on trees and a young QB who's proven that he can play at least a teeny bit is worth more than basically any other asset.

we need ol dl cb rb de and qb who does nt no matter who u have as qb not named brady or brees.

Run - loving Baltimore suddenly has a passing game and, perhaps, a QB who is ready to lead

Fuente's urges usually drifted toward tempo and spacing, but while Lynch was more mobile than his lanky frame suggested (not including sacks, he rushed 70 times for 358 yards last year), the QB who starts for Tech in 2016 will probably carry a heavier rushing load.

It's time to unify behind one QB who has proven to be solid already.

Oh, and they have a back - up QB who has enjoyed NFL success and just helped lead a fourth - quarter comeback against the red - hot Rams.

Passing on Barkley or Nelson or Chubb & taking a QB who never lives up to expectations would be a much more regretful decision in the long run.

It's an absolute JOKE people defend an overall # 1 QB who has never won his conference, while his backups continue to prove they were better QBs than he has ever been.

But the QB who can pass him the ball will be far more important than actual $ this year, because that will determine his future performance and long term contract worth.

He's already experienced a QB who can't pass him the ball correctly, and I doubt he chooses to go through that again.

He gets a great payout over a short term, setting him up for another big contract in three years, and they get an excellent QB who elevates their offense and gives them legitimate Super Bowl potential.

Cant help but think they would of been better off over the past 4 years if they had just stuck with Tebow - A QB who would never be sidelined with a injury to the bottom of his foot, because if theres one thing Tebow has its a intact sole.

No faith in our team with a QB who don't turn the ball over much

- He's a «sure thing» starter versus rookie QB who may take a while to develop (if ever)- He may not ever be «elite» but strong argument that he'd improve the team and likely has enough talent for a Super Bowl run.

You may as well discuss the limitations of a QB who is useless out of the pocket.

and until we get a QB who can see open receivers and deliver the ball accurately we will always be in danger of losing.