List the "franchise" QBs in the NFL (1 Viewer)

[duaneok66]

It seems to me that

WOW . . .we are discussing elite NFL QBs . . . you can't take a set of people and claim that most of those people are elite - we are comparing NFL QBs to each other, NOT comparing them to the rest of the world . . .

 

[Jersey35]

It seems to me that

Well, as I implied in my post: 32 starting NFL QB's was my set. A person could use whichever subset they wished - or even better: use the OP's set. But since the OP didn't exactly specify, I'd personally assume we're talking about the elite QB's out of the 30 or so starters in the NFL. "Elite" being the subset. Otherwise why bother with a list at all?I get what you're saying about ALL NFL QB's being talented, but I really don't think that was the point of the thread, and I can't imagine that you actually do either.

As far as being comfortable knowing someone is my starter for the next 3-5 years? Well, that's a different list for me, and probably includes 10 or so additional players.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

Remove Bradford and Romo

Romo I believe is really underappreciated. He has been terrific when healthy.

I disagree, he shows flashes but he is incredibly inconsistent and he has won only one playoff game so far.

Inconsistent? Do you have stats to back that up? Put Romo on the Steelers, he has two rings, we are not having this conversation. His stats are elite.

I highly, highly disagree, and I think that's an extremely optimistic viewpoint about Romo you have. If I had to make a prediction about that scenario, I'm pretty confident if Romo were on the Steelers he would have won ZERO rings, and Roethlisberger on the Cowboys would probably have one.Stats aren't everything, it's a cliche of course, but they really aren't. Roethlisberger is simply a better QB and a better leader than Tony Romo... and let's not act like Big Ben is putting up bad stats either. Not elite stats, but damn good overall.

I can'y suggest Romo is better then Ben while Ben is sporting two rings.I can argue that Romo hasn't had the benefit of good coaching since Bill left. If Bill stuck around, I'm pretty sure he would have dialed back some of Romo's Favre-esk blunders.

 

[Concept Coop]

I can'y suggest Romo is better then Ben while Ben is sporting two rings.

I can argue that Romo hasn't had the benefit of good coaching since Bill left. If Bill stuck around, I'm pretty sure he would have dialed back some of Romo's Favre-esk blunders.

Romo has a better TD/INT ratio. There is no need for anything to change, including coaching or a decrease of bad plays, for him to be a comparable player.

 

[Chaz McNulty]

First interception wasn't his fault.

I have seen several people make this argument and I disagree. Who's faullt was it? The pressure on Roelisberger was happening right in front of him. It wasn't from the blind side, it wasn't in a location that he couldn't see a blitzer. It was right in front of him -- a bull rush in the center of the line. But in spite of the pressure he decided to try to throw a 50 yard bomb with no time and no space to fully step into the throw. That's why they make safety valves. I realize he couldn't just take a sack where he was standing as it likely would have been a safety. He could have made a slide step and thrown the ball away. If he slid to the left, he could have ducked and fell forward out of the end zone for a sack at the one yard line. If he slid to the right, he could have either scrambled up the middle or bought enough time to roll to the right and found someone else (the back out of the backfield would have been an option).

I think the argument would be that Raji just made a play. It's not like he had an unobstructed path to the QB - he was blocked and made a nice play getting his arm out just as Roethlisberger's arm was coming forward. IMO QBs would never make a throw if they held the ball every time someone was in the position Raji was.

The point was that Ben made the decision to try to force a throw while under duress. He also has shown that sometimes he is a bit more on the reckless side to try to force the action. Other QBs would have not have taken the risk in making that throw. That's part of the downside when you have a guy with a playmaking's mentality. So when people point to other plays that "no other QB could have made that play or won that game," you have to stop and consider plays like this one. IMO, it was a poor decision, but that seems to not even be considered and Ben somehow gets a free pass on that play.

Ben is also fairly slow at going through his progressions. He can sometimes make up for it with his escapability, but on this play most QB's would have had the ball out (even if it was just a throwaway). The rush was right in his face and he's resposible for the pick 6.

The only time I cut QB's a break on Interceptions is a blindside hit as he's throwing and when the reciever tips a perfect pass.

 

[FUBAR]

It seems to me that

that indicates we're looking for players we'd be "extremely confident and excited about our chances of success every year", My point was simply that I don't buy into the "we can only list 10% out of the top people in the profession". I can see why you would, just a difference of opinion. Then again, my team has a mental case and an elder currently, so maybe I'm just looking to have a guy I don't see as a weak link...

 

[habsfan]

Yeah, "franchise" is not interchangeable with "elite" which is not interchangeable with "extremely confident and excited about our chances of success every year".

As someone has said already, I view franchise as "we have a guy that we see under centre for the foreseeable future. We're content with him".

Elite to me is, "the very short list of the very best", guys who you effectively can't really even upgrade from.

The last statement almost brings the whole team personnel into the mix and considers gameplan. If you take a team with a strong defense and running game, you could make this statement about a "game manager" who would not otherwise be considered "franchise' or "elite".

 

[Doug B]

The last statement almost brings the whole team personnel into the mix and considers gameplan. If you take a team with a strong defense and running game, you could make this statement about a "game manager" who would not otherwise be considered "franchise' or "elite".

No one thought Jim McMahon was an elite QB in the 80s ... but the Bears were content to go with him as their franchise QB for a few years.Phil Simms is probably an even better example. Or even--dare I say it--Terry Bradshaw on the Steelers.

 

[Jersey35]

It seems to me that

Fair enough. I focused on the "elite" and "lead your team to glory" aspect of his post. For me, that's: Manning, Brady, Brees, & RodgersTaking a stab at "extremely confident and excited about our chances", I suppose I'd add: Rivers, Roethlisberger, Romo, and Eli

I'd be excited about having Ryan, Bradford, and Vick, but not yet confident.

 

[STEADYMOBBIN 22]

The last statement almost brings the whole team personnel into the mix and considers gameplan. If you take a team with a strong defense and running game, you could make this statement about a "game manager" who would not otherwise be considered "franchise' or "elite".

No one thought Jim McMahon was an elite QB in the 80s ... but the Bears were content to go with him as their franchise QB for a few years.Phil Simms is probably an even better example. Or even--dare I say it--Terry Bradshaw on the Steelers.

I think Sims could have put up Monster numbers if he had one good wide out and didn't play in (windy) New York.