As the league goes more and more toward passing, being stuck with matt cassell at qb might be a blessing in disguise. As everyone loses their heads overpaying for qb, wr, cb, and pass rushers, it could just be the perfect time to win super bowls with a dominant rushing offense.
Remember 2010? When JC averaged 6.4 YPC? I don't remember the exact league-wide average off the top of my head, but that's approaching the effectiveness of passing. He had us all thinking BRich was a good player! And now with the addition of winston, enough weapons to make defenses pretend we have a real quarterback, and (hopefully) drafting Decastro, he could actually do even better after his ACL tear, since teams are forced to keep one or two defenders out of the box, AND he will have a much better Oline in front of him. And I suspect Hillis+Dex will make much better use of the rest of the carries than Jones ever did.
With offenses being geared more and more toward the passing game, while in some cases more or less neglecting the running game (like the Packers) defenses are doing the same. Ever notice how we never pay up for the big NT everyone goes on about? I think it has a lot to do with the fact that virtually every other team in the league is trying to be pass first (and second, and third...) on offense, and such a player would not have nearly the impact he would have had in the past. We simply aren't going to play another team that has a rushing attack like we're going to have in 2012. It's much better to add, for instance Routt and chris carr (one more CB than we lost), than solai. It's getting to the point where it's better to have 5 good CBs than one good NT. Years ago CBs #4 and #5 were pretty much just special teamers.
Another result of the increasing dominance of passing in the league is that the free market value of great runningbacks and run blockers is going to keep going down and down, as will their positions on the draft boards of other teams. This makes it very feasible for us to keep the salary cap cost of hoarding great pieces for a dominant rushing offense relatively low, so that we can spend big on keeping a defense that can stop the league's elite passing offenses in KC. Carr's contract was ridiculous, so we added routt, and now we're talking to chris carr as well. So really we could be even deeper at CB than the team that shut down GB's offense last year. Oh, and Berry's coming back.
If we assume that Houston keeps showing what he showed near the end of last season, and that losing Carr wasn't a huge disaster, we could have a defense that can match up and win against GB, NO or NE or any of the elite passing offenses in the league. That's going to be expensive to maintain over the years, but with the money saved from the declining costs of good pieces for a good running offense, we could probably do it. And keep in mind, every other defense in the league is being built more and more to stop the pass, which leaves teams severely mismatched when dealing with a rushing offense like KC is going to field in 2012.
And all the while, if an opportunity arises to add a franchise qb without a $20 million dollar annual cap hit or giving up our first round picks for the next decade, there probably won't be a rule in place against us doing it.
Still think it's impossible to win a SB without a franchise QB?
Yes (78 votes)
No (33 votes)
I never thought that to begin with (48 votes)
159 total votes