Ducks Attack Message Board Forum

If you could choose one area or position to be dominant in the next 8 years which one would you choose?

For me, it would be a defensive line. A dominant defensive line covers up weak defensive backfields and if the other team can't score much a not-so-good offense can win games.

Probably have to go with QB due to its relevance to W:L

If the next 8 years see Top 5 nationally QB play it will redound elsewhere with the program.

Duck07 wrote:Probably have to go with QB due to its relevance to W:L

If the next 8 years see Top 5 nationally QB play it will redound elsewhere with the program.

It is all connected. If you have dominant QB play, it means most everyone else on offense is doing their job well also. So yeah, QB is always the answer for these types of questions.

DL, OL, or QB.

Kinda depends on how weak every other position group is.

Overall: Head Coach

Only on the field: QB

Following Georgia’s lead and the Tampa Bay team that won the SB, DLine with an emphasis on pass rush. Dominant pass rushers really ruin an offense.

DL. A dominate DL wins titles, even with an average QB. See UGA

Defense wins championships. Pressure, pressure, pressure! DL!

QB for sure, but almost feel like that's a given. Otherwise I'd say DL.

I have to say that I believe and average QB with a great dominate defensive line wins more games than a great QB with a sub par defensive line. Since we are talking domination perhaps my love a a great defense is coming through but I do remember when a single dominate defensive lineman crippled a lot of Chips game plan with some high end QB talent.

buckmarkduck wrote:DL. A dominate DL wins titles, even with an average QB. See UGA

Stetson Bennnett was a Heisman finalist, which shows that your QB having great success is indicative of most everyone on offense doing their jobs well also. No other single position has this strong of a correlation.

Quietduck wrote:I have to say that I believe and average QB with a great dominate defensive line wins more games than a great QB with a sub par defensive line. Since we are talking domination perhaps my love a a great defense is coming through but I do remember when a single dominate defensive lineman crippled a lot of Chips game plan with some high end QB talent.

You mean having good QB play means you might not go undefeated? Sure, if that is the point, then you can always point to individual games.

gogreen55 wrote:

buckmarkduck wrote:DL. A dominate DL wins titles, even with an average QB. See UGA

Stetson Bennnett was a Heisman finalist, which shows that your QB having great success is indicative of most everyone on offense doing their jobs well also. No other single position has this strong of a correlation.

Yeah, behind a bunch of studs on the OL, a future all pro TE and great WRs. Lots of average QBs have looked great surrounded by super teams. Bama win for decades with QBs that wouldn’t start at UO. I remember thinking Dorsey was really good at Miami also, turned out he just looked good because of everyone else around him.

buckmarkduck wrote:
Yeah, behind a bunch of studs on the OL, a future all pro TE and great WRs. Lots of average QBs have looked great surrounded by super teams. Bama win for decades with QBs that wouldn’t start at UO. I remember thinking Dorsey was really good at Miami also, turned out he just looked good because of everyone else around him.

This is my issue with how people are answering this - you get 1 group to be elite and people branch that out elsewhere to other positions groups as if UGA and Bama ONLY won because of the DL and not because almost every unit was stacked.

If all I knew is that over the next 8 years we'd have Elite QB play, like multiple Heisman-candidates level Elite, I'm choosing that over having an Elite DL because of the likely W/L results from that alone. You rarely have those kind of QBs who have poor seasons even if they don't always win it all.

LSU strikes me as the team who fits this bill of having an elite DL and yet they only won their titles with two #1 NFL draft picks at QB. Same with that Newton guy.

Duck07 wrote:

buckmarkduck wrote:
Yeah, behind a bunch of studs on the OL, a future all pro TE and great WRs. Lots of average QBs have looked great surrounded by super teams. Bama win for decades with QBs that wouldn’t start at UO. I remember thinking Dorsey was really good at Miami also, turned out he just looked good because of everyone else around him.

This is my issue with how people are answering this - you get 1 group to be elite and people branch that out elsewhere to other positions groups as if UGA and Bama ONLY won because of the DL and not because almost every unit was stacked.

If all I knew is that over the next 8 years we'd have Elite QB play, like multiple Heisman-candidates level Elite, I'm choosing that over having an Elite DL because of the likely W/L results from that alone. You rarely have those kind of QBs who have poor seasons even if they don't always win it all.

LSU strikes me as the team who fits this bill of having an elite DL and yet they only won their titles with two #1 NFL draft picks at QB. Same with that Newton guy.

LSU was elite at WR also, and has multiple starting IL on the nfl

Elite QBs don’t automatically win in college though. Mahomes TT team was so good Harral got fired. Allen Wyoming team made an average at best Duck team look like a juggernaut. Not discounting qb, but lots of all pro QBs college teams weren’t great. But it’s much harder to find dominant DLs whose teams went 7-5