Yes, I know how it's "portrayed" in the sports media. It's one of those "lazy, bad, football analysis" assumptions.
However, If one has ever played the game, one knows that DC's stop repetitive, non-creative "O" schemes not the Qb.
Sure there are Qb tendencies, but DC's look at overall "O" tendencies i.e. bad, repetitive, play-calling, running on 1st down, passing on 3rd etc. How many times do we sit in front of a game
and know the next play? Is it the Qb's fault or has the play-calling been figured out?
Another example is the Panther / Denver SB. The Panther "D" came with a different scheme than in the reg. season. However,
the "O" came in with the same old tired reg. season "O" scheme. This was extremely noticeable and the Panther "O" scheme was pretty much shut down ( i think they fired the Panther OC in the off-season) But some might say....' oh they caught up with Cam Newton'. Fact is they "caught up with " a poorly prepared , repetitive "O" scheme .
Another myth/ bad term / bad Qb analysis is "the Qb isn't tall enough to throw over the OL". Again, if a person ever player Qb, they know it's physically impossible to "throw over the OL". Unless one is Yao Ming. Instead, a Qb looks for passing lanes. With all this said, nothing against you. It's just when I hear these 2 specific football comments, to me, it's like scratching a chalkboard.