QB comparison (1 Viewer)

-OZ- · May 5, 2006

Looking at last year's QB class vs. this one, the top 2 QBs taken aren't close IMO. And I assume the opinion of most. Leinart and VY, despite the risk associated with VY would be taken long before Smith or Rodgers (at least in most drafts).

But, when you get down to #3, at least IMO it gets a lot closer.

I'd like to see what the consensus is here, I think I'd prefer Cutler by a little, but given their situations, and that Campbell is behind a much older QB, I don't know for sure.

I figure, both have strong OL's, both have great running games.

The receivers look about equal.

What do you think?

Phlash · May 5, 2006

Cutler is superior is sooo many ways. Only thing Campbell has going for him is that Joe freakin Gibbs and Al Saunders are coaching him up

-OZ- · May 5, 2006

Cutler is superior is sooo many ways. Only thing Campbell has going for him is that Joe freakin Gibbs and Al Saunders are coaching him up

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for the deep analysis.

dgreen · May 5, 2006

Cutler is superior is sooo many ways. Only thing Campbell has going for him is that Joe freakin Gibbs and Al Saunders are coaching him up

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Isn't that a pretty big thing to have going for you?

-OZ- · May 5, 2006

Cutler is superior is sooo many ways. Only thing Campbell has going for him is that Joe freakin Gibbs and Al Saunders are coaching him up

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

Isn't that a pretty big thing to have going for you?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I thought so.The thing I like about both of these guys is their coach traded up to ensure they get him, instead of just "taking him because he's there". I might be completely wrong here, but that speaks volumes to me.

carlosnphilly · May 5, 2006

I really like both. Campbell's going to begin in one hell of a situation. As is Cutler in all likelihood.

psycho lions fan · May 5, 2006

Cutler is superior is sooo many ways. Only thing Campbell has going for him is that Joe freakin Gibbs and Al Saunders are coaching him up

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

Isn't that a pretty big thing to have going for you?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

I thought so.The thing I like about both of these guys is their coach traded up to ensure they get him, instead of just "taking him because he's there". I might be completely wrong here, but that speaks volumes to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gibbs made Theismann look good, he can sure make Campbell successful.Think Green Bay wish they would have done something different with the Rodgers pick last year.. or did they really want him?

redman · May 5, 2006

I have no way to compare these two guys other than the general situation that they find themselves in. Both should benefit from good coaching and the fact, like OZ said, that both teams are invested in them. I really watched neither guy in college.

Here's some footage of Campbell in college:

1st half of SEC Championship vs. Tenn

2nd half of SEC Championship vs. Tenn

I do know that what Gibbs likes about Campbell is his ability to roll out and complete passes while on the move.

SSOG · May 6, 2006

Here's all the insight I can offer.

As a fan of the SEC (Florida, actually), I can honestly say that I never heard anyone who worried about facing Campbell. They worried about facing Brown, or Caddy, but never Campbell. Campbell always struck me as a Trent Dilfer type- a guy who guided a team with a great defense and an unbelievable running game to a great season. That's not a knock on him- he did everything he was asked to do... but he was never asked to do that much.

That said... I *have* been worried about facing Cutler. Yes, he had a losing career record... but he played at VANDERBUILT. Before Cutler, they had 22 consecutive losing seasons. They had a 25+ game losing streak against the SEC. And Cutler came in and pretty much single-handedly willed them to victory, ending both of those streaks. I was at the Florida/Vanderbilt game last year, and it was really Florida vs. Cutler. His team was outmatched, his offensive line bought him no time, there were a few questionable calls (and yes, I'm man enough to admit that my team got some hometown calls from the refs)... and he still took Florida to OT and almost beat them. It was one of the most remarkable individual performances I've ever seen. Cutler was a lot like Eli Manning in that he didn't have a ton of success, but he single-handedly carries his entire offense for entire seasons.

Again, yes, he never played in a bowl game. Neither did Elway. I'm not saying that Cutler is the next Elway, I'm just saying that you shouldn't let a poor surrounding cast negatively affect your opinion of a player.

From an NFL standpoint... everyone, I think, will agree that Matt Leinart is a better QB than Alex Smith. That'll be the basis for our comparisons. If Matt Leinart is better than Alex Smith, he's much better than Campbell or Rodgers (who were selected 24 and 25 picks later than Smith, respectively).

Now, according to everything I read, scouts and analysts were pretty much split on who was the best out of Young, Leinart, and Cutler. It seemed to be pretty close to 33% for each of them (although Jaworski liked Cutler best, and Jaworski is my hero). Either way, I suspect that if this were last year's draft class, any of the three would have been the #1 overall draft pick. From that standpoint, again, it's Cutler in a landslide.

Now, if you're going to look at NFL situation, that's another matter entirely. I don't really know who is in a better situation. Campbell will likely get more playing time early, Cutler will have a much better supporting cast on offense. Both will have top-notch coaches with a history of stellar development of QBs.

-OZ- · May 6, 2006

Cutler will have a much better supporting cast on offense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Good stuff SSOG, but will Cutler have a much better supporting cast?Denver's OL is better for the running game, but is it better for pass protection, and if so, is it by much? Either way, you could say they both have top OLs.

RB - not even close talentwise, but Denver's RBs always succeed.

WR - Will Rod Smith even be around by the time Cutler takes over? Javon is probably the best of the group, but Moss isn't a pushover. LLoyd/ARE vs. Lelie, Marshall, Hixon? Seems pretty close to me.

TE - Scheffler might be great, Cooley's proven to be very good.

Seems pretty close.

redman · May 6, 2006

From an NFL standpoint... everyone, I think, will agree that Matt Leinart is a better QB than Alex Smith. That'll be the basis for our comparisons. If Matt Leinart is better than Alex Smith, he's much better than Campbell or Rodgers (who were selected 24 and 25 picks later than Smith, respectively).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I can buy everything you said but this. Draft position means nothing after the first kickoff of the first NFL game. Almost every year there are examples of superior QB's being drafted later than inferior QB's. Even last year there were people wondering aloud whether Alex Smith had what it took to succeed in the NFL coming from a wide-open, QB friendly college offense - a concept that you should be familiar with as a Florida fan given the QB's that came from Spurrier to the NFL. There were also people who wondered whether Rodgers was in fact better than Campbell and whether the Packers had placed too much emphasis on the need for a QB rather than good evaluation of Rodgers as a player.

Anyway, Leinart was the second QB chosen this year - shouldn't our basis of comparison be Vince Young?

As a 'Skins fan, I look at Campbell like I look at a guy like Mark Rypien, who spent 3 years on the IR before being activated and playing well from the start. Gibbs' offense is QB friendly anyway, and doesn't require an all-world talent to run it. If Campbell is tough, makes good decisions with the ball, and can make accurate throws, that's pretty much all they need.

Shanahan is one of the few coaches with a level of job security that's comparable to what Gibbs and his staff have, which means that they can take all the time they want to let Campbell or Cutler develop from the bench and not worry about fan pressure or pressure from the ownership.

Bri · May 6, 2006

I'd guess Campbell is similar to 4th thru 7th QBs taken this year. He didn't seem to be the draft day darling that guys like Leinart, Young, and Cutler were. There must've been 8000 articles on them.

I'd bet Campbell would have fallen a bunch if the Skins didn't take him. IMO they were too quick to fill a need and not patient like the Bills and their first S this year.

SSOG · May 6, 2006

Cutler will have a much better supporting cast on offense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

Good stuff SSOG, but will Cutler have a much better supporting cast?Denver's OL is better for the running game, but is it better for pass protection, and if so, is it by much? Either way, you could say they both have top OLs.

RB - not even close talentwise, but Denver's RBs always succeed.

WR - Will Rod Smith even be around by the time Cutler takes over? Javon is probably the best of the group, but Moss isn't a pushover. LLoyd/ARE vs. Lelie, Marshall, Hixon? Seems pretty close to me.

TE - Scheffler might be great, Cooley's proven to be very good.

Seems pretty close.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

First off, no, you're right, "much" better is a stretch. I suppose marginally better would be a better way to put it.At O-line, it's no contest. Denver in a landslide. According to Dr. Z, who charted every play by every major notable O-lineman before handing out his final grades, Tom Nalen was the best center in the entire NFL last year, and Matt Lepsis was (iirc) the best tackle as well (I know he was ahead of Walter Jones, but he might have been the 2nd best tackle, instead). And Ben Hamilton was the third best guard.

At the skill positions, though, you're right... it's clearly Washington. While Denver's running game is fantastic, Portis is better than any RBs they have on their roster. Santana Moss and Walker are both very close (although I'd rather have Moss), and Cooley is better than any TEs that Denver has at the moment (unless someone comes from nowhere this season).

I suppose the reason I was giving such a big edge to Denver is because... well, they just have a better offensive coaching staff than Washington, imo. I know that's considered sacriledge in some parts, given what Gibbs did during the 80s, but... well, even if you include Gibbs' work in the 80s, and even if you consider Shanahan's work in Oakland, Shanahan's offenses on average rank significantly higher in both points scored and yards gained. And that's based on the assumption that Gibbs hasn't lost ANYTHING since he's been away (which isn't a great assumption, because he has yet to have an offense rank in the top 10 in either category since he came back). And it's also ignoring the fact that there were more teams in the league during Shanahan's years than there were doing Gibbs' years in the 80s (more teams means a lower average ranking). And there's also the fact that, while Gibbs had a bit of turnover (most famously at RB and QB), he didn't have anything resembling the churn of free agency to compete with.

So to sum it up... Denver has a much better line, Washington has much better skill players, and Denver has a better coaching staff, which results in Cutler being in a marginally better offensive environment.

From an NFL standpoint... everyone, I think, will agree that Matt Leinart is a better QB than Alex Smith. That'll be the basis for our comparisons. If Matt Leinart is better than Alex Smith, he's much better than Campbell or Rodgers (who were selected 24 and 25 picks later than Smith, respectively).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

I can buy everything you said but this. Draft position means nothing after the first kickoff of the first NFL game. Almost every year there are examples of superior QB's being drafted later than inferior QB's. Even last year there were people wondering aloud whether Alex Smith had what it took to succeed in the NFL coming from a wide-open, QB friendly college offense - a concept that you should be familiar with as a Florida fan given the QB's that came from Spurrier to the NFL. There were also people who wondered whether Rodgers was in fact better than Campbell and whether the Packers had placed too much emphasis on the need for a QB rather than good evaluation of Rodgers as a player.

Anyway, Leinart was the second QB chosen this year - shouldn't our basis of comparison be Vince Young?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, the whole point of that excercise was to try and figure out what the professional scouts might think of the comparison. Based on the scouts rankings of the QBs, and a little bit of creative extrapolation, it's clear to me that the scouts saw Cutler as a better talent coming out. Again, this isn't the be-all, end-all, since the scouts are wrong a startling percent of the time... it was just another factor to consider.

FreeBaGeL · May 6, 2006

Here's all the insight I can offer.

As a fan of the SEC (Florida, actually), I can honestly say that I never heard anyone who worried about facing Campbell. They worried about facing Brown, or Caddy, but never Campbell. Campbell always struck me as a Trent Dilfer type- a guy who guided a team with a great defense and an unbelievable running game to a great season. That's not a knock on him- he did everything he was asked to do... but he was never asked to do that much.

That said... I *have* been worried about facing Cutler. Yes, he had a losing career record... but he played at VANDERBUILT. Before Cutler, they had 22 consecutive losing seasons. They had a 25+ game losing streak against the SEC. And Cutler came in and pretty much single-handedly willed them to victory, ending both of those streaks. I was at the Florida/Vanderbilt game last year, and it was really Florida vs. Cutler. His team was outmatched, his offensive line bought him no time, there were a few questionable calls (and yes, I'm man enough to admit that my team got some hometown calls from the refs)... and he still took Florida to OT and almost beat them. It was one of the most remarkable individual performances I've ever seen. Cutler was a lot like Eli Manning in that he didn't have a ton of success, but he single-handedly carries his entire offense for entire seasons.

Again, yes, he never played in a bowl game. Neither did Elway. I'm not saying that Cutler is the next Elway, I'm just saying that you shouldn't let a poor surrounding cast negatively affect your opinion of a player.

From an NFL standpoint... everyone, I think, will agree that Matt Leinart is a better QB than Alex Smith. That'll be the basis for our comparisons. If Matt Leinart is better than Alex Smith, he's much better than Campbell or Rodgers (who were selected 24 and 25 picks later than Smith, respectively).

Now, according to everything I read, scouts and analysts were pretty much split on who was the best out of Young, Leinart, and Cutler. It seemed to be pretty close to 33% for each of them (although Jaworski liked Cutler best, and Jaworski is my hero). Either way, I suspect that if this were last year's draft class, any of the three would have been the #1 overall draft pick. From that standpoint, again, it's Cutler in a landslide.

Now, if you're going to look at NFL situation, that's another matter entirely. I don't really know who is in a better situation. Campbell will likely get more playing time early, Cutler will have a much better supporting cast on offense. Both will have top-notch coaches with a history of stellar development of QBs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agree with everything in this post. Especially the part about being a Florida fan and being at the UF/Vandy game and being absolutely astounded at what I was watching from #6 out there. Also agree on the point about never being scared of Campbell. I remember the overtime game a few years ago Auburn had a 4th and 6 or so in OT and I was actually relieved to see Campbell drop back to pass rather than handing it to Brown (who had been shredding us)....even on 4th and 6.

Hawkeyeskin · May 6, 2006

Cutler will have a much better supporting cast on offense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

Good stuff SSOG, but will Cutler have a much better supporting cast?Denver's OL is better for the running game, but is it better for pass protection, and if so, is it by much? Either way, you could say they both have top OLs.

RB - not even close talentwise, but Denver's RBs always succeed.

WR - Will Rod Smith even be around by the time Cutler takes over? Javon is probably the best of the group, but Moss isn't a pushover. LLoyd/ARE vs. Lelie, Marshall, Hixon? Seems pretty close to me.

TE - Scheffler might be great, Cooley's proven to be very good.

Seems pretty close.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

First off, no, you're right, "much" better is a stretch. I suppose marginally better would be a better way to put it.At O-line, it's no contest. Denver in a landslide. According to Dr. Z, who charted every play by every major notable O-lineman before handing out his final grades, Tom Nalen was the best center in the entire NFL last year, and Matt Lepsis was (iirc) the best tackle as well (I know he was ahead of Walter Jones, but he might have been the 2nd best tackle, instead). And Ben Hamilton was the third best guard.

At the skill positions, though, you're right... it's clearly Washington. While Denver's running game is fantastic, Portis is better than any RBs they have on their roster. Santana Moss and Walker are both very close (although I'd rather have Moss), and Cooley is better than any TEs that Denver has at the moment (unless someone comes from nowhere this season).

I suppose the reason I was giving such a big edge to Denver is because... well, they just have a better offensive coaching staff than Washington, imo. I know that's considered sacriledge in some parts, given what Gibbs did during the 80s, but... well, even if you include Gibbs' work in the 80s, and even if you consider Shanahan's work in Oakland, Shanahan's offenses on average rank significantly higher in both points scored and yards gained. And that's based on the assumption that Gibbs hasn't lost ANYTHING since he's been away (which isn't a great assumption, because he has yet to have an offense rank in the top 10 in either category since he came back). And it's also ignoring the fact that there were more teams in the league during Shanahan's years than there were doing Gibbs' years in the 80s (more teams means a lower average ranking). And there's also the fact that, while Gibbs had a bit of turnover (most famously at RB and QB), he didn't have anything resembling the churn of free agency to compete with.

So to sum it up... Denver has a much better line, Washington has much better skill players, and Denver has a better coaching staff, which results in Cutler being in a marginally better offensive environment.

From an NFL standpoint... everyone, I think, will agree that Matt Leinart is a better QB than Alex Smith. That'll be the basis for our comparisons. If Matt Leinart is better than Alex Smith, he's much better than Campbell or Rodgers (who were selected 24 and 25 picks later than Smith, respectively).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

I can buy everything you said but this. Draft position means nothing after the first kickoff of the first NFL game. Almost every year there are examples of superior QB's being drafted later than inferior QB's. Even last year there were people wondering aloud whether Alex Smith had what it took to succeed in the NFL coming from a wide-open, QB friendly college offense - a concept that you should be familiar with as a Florida fan given the QB's that came from Spurrier to the NFL. There were also people who wondered whether Rodgers was in fact better than Campbell and whether the Packers had placed too much emphasis on the need for a QB rather than good evaluation of Rodgers as a player.

Anyway, Leinart was the second QB chosen this year - shouldn't our basis of comparison be Vince Young?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

Well, the whole point of that excercise was to try and figure out what the professional scouts might think of the comparison. Based on the scouts rankings of the QBs, and a little bit of creative extrapolation, it's clear to me that the scouts saw Cutler as a better talent coming out. Again, this isn't the be-all, end-all, since the scouts are wrong a startling percent of the time... it was just another factor to consider.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I liked everything you said except that Denver has a better coaching staff. Not sure I agree with you on that. But maybe I'm biased.

-OZ- · May 6, 2006

I suppose the reason I was giving such a big edge to Denver is because... well, they just have a better offensive coaching staff than Washington, imo. I know that's considered sacriledge in some parts, given what Gibbs did during the 80s, but... well, even if you include Gibbs' work in the 80s, and even if you consider Shanahan's work in Oakland, Shanahan's offenses on average rank significantly higher in both points scored and yards gained. And that's based on the assumption that Gibbs hasn't lost ANYTHING since he's been away (which isn't a great assumption, because he has yet to have an offense rank in the top 10 in either category since he came back). And it's also ignoring the fact that there were more teams in the league during Shanahan's years than there were doing Gibbs' years in the 80s (more teams means a lower average ranking). And there's also the fact that, while Gibbs had a bit of turnover (most famously at RB and QB), he didn't have anything resembling the churn of free agency to compete with.

So to sum it up... Denver has a much better line, Washington has much better skill players, and Denver has a better coaching staff, which results in Cutler being in a marginally better offensive environment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Click to expand...

I liked everything you said except that Denver has a better coaching staff. Not sure I agree with you on that. But maybe I'm biased.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I might overestimate the guy, but to totally omit Al Saunders in this discussion?Very few OCs are better.

I am making the leap of faith that Gibbs lets Saunders run the offense.

SSOG · May 7, 2006

I might overestimate the guy, but to totally omit Al Saunders in this discussion?

Very few OCs are better.

I am making the leap of faith that Gibbs lets Saunders run the offense.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Saunders is a huge wildcard for me. I don't know how much of KC's offense was a result of Saunders and how much was a result of Vermiel. He and Gary Kubiak are two guys who I'm almost ready to annoint as offensive geniuses... but I want to see how they do for a couple of years away from their former offensive-genius HCs, first.

Marvelous · May 7, 2006

I'd guess Campbell is similar to 4th thru 7th QBs taken this year. He didn't seem to be the draft day darling that guys like Leinart, Young, and Cutler were. There must've been 8000 articles on them.

I'd bet Campbell would have fallen a bunch if the Skins didn't take him. IMO they were too quick to fill a need and not patient like the Bills and their first S this year.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

There were rumors that Cleveland and another team were looking at Campbell at the end of the 1st round. If that is true, the Redskins needed to make the trade to get him.Also, once Gibbs locks onto a player, they are willing to pay a lot to get him. After the draft, it is clear that Gibbs locked onto Campbell and really wanted him.

QB comparison (1 Viewer)

Who do you prefer long term?

Campbell by a lot

Campbell by a little

equal

Cutler by a little

Cutler by a lot

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Moderator

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Moderator

Footballguy

Footballguy

Footballguy

Moderator

Footballguy

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread