The Ultimate Franchise QB (1 Viewer)

[Ryan Hester]

Who is the QB you'd start a franchise with?

Conditions:

- The goal is to get the most titles in the QB's prime (a "prime" is 25-35 years old), but they can also be won 3 years on either side of the prime

- A QB's career is "over" at 38 (can't win SB at 38 or older)

- Pretend you can match your QB with ANY personnel with your choice. I.E. - take supporting cast out of it. Don't use a QBs defense, line, WRs, etc. to determine.

- Use age, experience, SKILLS, ATTRIBUTES as determining factors.

- QBs selected can include anyone in the NFL or college (so let's see just how hypothetically good Andrew Luck is).

List your guy, list your top 5, do what you want -- but EXPLAIN why you picked your top guy.

P.S. - this will be a future post on www.footballandbrackets.com -- a new blog discussing college, pro, and fantasy football (and college hoops post-football season).

 

[jonboltz]

Does it have to be a current QB? If current, does it have to be his age right now, or if we choose Manning are we considering his years from 25-35?

 

[Ryan Hester]

It must be a current QB at his current age. For the example of Peyton Manning, he may not even make the list due to his health and (maybe more importantly for the purposes of this exercise) his age. He doesn't have a lot of "eligibility" or winning years left.

 

[BroadwayG]

Curtis Panter.

I like his hair.

 

[Terpman22]

Isn't this answer easily Aaron R? I only plan on dynasties in 2-3 year increments, b/c so much can change. But this guy gets the occasional rushing TD, has a vast amount of young weapons and is still pretty young.

 

[jonboltz]

It must be a current QB at his current age. For the example of Peyton Manning, he may not even make the list due to his health and (maybe more importantly for the purposes of this exercise) his age. He doesn't have a lot of "eligibility" or winning years left.

By this criteria, I believe your poll is going to be rather boring. There are some guys that might be close to Aaron Rodgers, but none of them that give the nearly the amount of years available. He will easily run away with this poll.

 

[Disc Shark]

Rogers. Complete QB, relatively young, great skills (arm, feet, etc), great presence and football intellect.

 

[Shrugs]

1. Rodgers

2. Luck

3. Stafford

4. Newton

5. Brees

 

[Ryan Hester]

It must be a current QB at his current age. For the example of Peyton Manning, he may not even make the list due to his health and (maybe more importantly for the purposes of this exercise) his age. He doesn't have a lot of "eligibility" or winning years left.

By this criteria, I believe your poll is going to be rather boring. There are some guys that might be close to Aaron Rodgers, but none of them that give the nearly the amount of years available. He will easily run away with this poll.

Fair points. Rodgers is 28 I believe so he's into "the prime" already. Would you take his 7 years vs 10 from guys like Luck, Newton, etc? If the answer is a resounding "YES," then lets change the question to "which QB not named Aaron Rodgers would you take?"Also, this is not for fantasy but reality so please think of it from that perspective -- of a real NFL GM.

 

[Shirtless]

Easily Rodgers.

After Rodgers it's Brees, Luck, Brady, maybe in that order. Basically the only measure if how many Super Bowl championships they have from now until the end of their careers, right? And hypothetically they are each on a team perfectly suited for their own individual talents?

The X-Factor is Cam Newton, because of the super team condition. In theory if you could construct a team perfectly suited to Newton's talents, it would look wildly different from any other QB's super team, but might be better because Newton's skill set is more diverse.

In the realm of reality, however, it's much more likely that a coaching staff and team would be able to complement a Brees/Luck/Brady than Newton.

 

[Ryan Hester]

1. Rodgers2. Luck3. Stafford4. Newton5. Brees

Interesting that Brees snuck on there since he's a guy near that 35 age group. I would have thought no one above 30 would make the top 5. Those guys are true "all-in" guys since the goal of the exercise is a 10-year period. You're essentially throwing away 2-3 years and 5ish "prime" years.

 

[Ryan Hester]

Easily Rodgers.After Rodgers it's Brees, Luck, Brady, maybe in that order. Basically the only measure if how many Super Bowl championships they have from now until the end of their careers, right? And hypothetically they are each on a team perfectly suited for their own individual talents?The X-Factor is Cam Newton, because of the super team condition. In theory if you could construct a team perfectly suited to Newton's talents, it would look wildly different from any other QB's super team, but might be better because Newton's skill set is more diverse. In the realm of reality, however, it's much more likely that a coaching staff and team would be able to complement a Brees/Luck/Brady than Newton.

The true design was how many titles in the next 10+ years (so guys like Brees and Brady would be disadvantaged). Since any question of "best QB" always has those guys involved, I am trying to "stir the pot" a bit and go to a hypothetical place where you're starting the NFL over right now and building for 10+ years. I agree that those guys would be chosen but am wondering what people think of taking 10+ years of a Newton/Lick/Landry Jones/Stafford (etc) vs 5-7 years of our current studs like Brees, Brady, etc.

 

[Run It Up]

Toss up between Brady Rodgers Newton and Luck imo.

Brady is the best of the 4 - I think right now he gives them the best chance to win a Ring in the next 2 years, Rodgers is right behind him but has time to improve and could possibly pass him along with more time in this scenario, Newton is easily the best athlete out of all these players, pretty much a freak of nature and so far in his first year in the NFL he has performed better than anyone expected. Luck happens to be a wildcard here for me, could be the next best QB or he could be Ryan Leaf.

Also, seems like a troll topic to me.

 

[Instinctive]

Easily Rodgers.After Rodgers it's Brees, Luck, Brady, maybe in that order. Basically the only measure if how many Super Bowl championships they have from now until the end of their careers, right? And hypothetically they are each on a team perfectly suited for their own individual talents?The X-Factor is Cam Newton, because of the super team condition. In theory if you could construct a team perfectly suited to Newton's talents, it would look wildly different from any other QB's super team, but might be better because Newton's skill set is more diverse. In the realm of reality, however, it's much more likely that a coaching staff and team would be able to complement a Brees/Luck/Brady than Newton.

The true design was how many titles in the next 10+ years (so guys like Brees and Brady would be disadvantaged). Since any question of "best QB" always has those guys involved, I am trying to "stir the pot" a bit and go to a hypothetical place where you're starting the NFL over right now and building for 10+ years. I agree that those guys would be chosen but am wondering what people think of taking 10+ years of a Newton/Lick/Landry Jones/Stafford (etc) vs 5-7 years of our current studs like Brees, Brady, etc.

I'm not sure you can put Landry in the conversation.NewtonBradfordLuckObviously after Rodgers, but outside of those 4 I don't think there is anybody else I want. Stafford probably round out my top 5 if you include Rodgers, or he becomes #4 if you don't. I think I would put Roethlisberger next (as much as I dislike him), but I could go Rivers tomorrow. Actually, I probably prefer Rivers to Stafford, so Roethlisbeger vs Stafford becomes the #5 battle.Then again, so many more years with Stafford compared to Roeth and Rivers (aren't they closing in on 30?) probably keeps him at #4 there.Freeman is in the discussion for the 5th spot - but again, it's really more of a top 3 for me, then Stafford, then everyone else.Vick's too old. Tebow's too risky. Manning, Brees, Brady all too old for this exercise.

 

[Ryan Hester]

Easily Rodgers.After Rodgers it's Brees, Luck, Brady, maybe in that order. Basically the only measure if how many Super Bowl championships they have from now until the end of their careers, right? And hypothetically they are each on a team perfectly suited for their own individual talents?The X-Factor is Cam Newton, because of the super team condition. In theory if you could construct a team perfectly suited to Newton's talents, it would look wildly different from any other QB's super team, but might be better because Newton's skill set is more diverse. In the realm of reality, however, it's much more likely that a coaching staff and team would be able to complement a Brees/Luck/Brady than Newton.

The true design was how many titles in the next 10+ years (so guys like Brees and Brady would be disadvantaged). Since any question of "best QB" always has those guys involved, I am trying to "stir the pot" a bit and go to a hypothetical place where you're starting the NFL over right now and building for 10+ years. I agree that those guys would be chosen but am wondering what people think of taking 10+ years of a Newton/Lick/Landry Jones/Stafford (etc) vs 5-7 years of our current studs like Brees, Brady, etc.

I'm not sure you can put Landry in the conversation.NewtonBradfordLuckObviously after Rodgers, but outside of those 4 I don't think there is anybody else I want. Stafford probably round out my top 5 if you include Rodgers, or he becomes #4 if you don't. I think I would put Roethlisberger next (as much as I dislike him), but I could go Rivers tomorrow. Actually, I probably prefer Rivers to Stafford, so Roethlisbeger vs Stafford becomes the #5 battle.Then again, so many more years with Stafford compared to Roeth and Rivers (aren't they closing in on 30?) probably keeps him at #4 there.Freeman is in the discussion for the 5th spot - but again, it's really more of a top 3 for me, then Stafford, then everyone else.Vick's too old. Tebow's too risky. Manning, Brees, Brady all too old for this exercise.

Fantastic response. Big Ben will be 30 in March. Rivers will be 30 this December. That's the tough part of the question. Do we go with Stafford's ceiling and surplus of years over guys like these, or do you take the "bird in the hand" approach knowing you'll have fewer seasons to win?Interesting that you have the OU logo avatar/pic but aren't high on Landry Jones. He's ranked as the #2 QB prospect in this draft almost everywhere you look. Is it a spread-offense thing?You nailed it on the Vick, Tebow, Manning, Brees, Brady accounts as well.I am having trouble as to what I should do with high-potential backups like a Brian Hoyer in NE. Some exec-types like Mike Lombardi are super-high on him. Question is: are they higher on him than a guy in this draft class (other than Luck)? Always interesting questions around the game's most important and most discussed position.

 

[bonesman]

I'm a Packer fan but BigBen might be higher on my list for this than Rodgers due to durability.

Rodgers is amazing and I love him but you never know when he might get Steve Young'd.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Luck

 

[jim k]

Who is the QB you'd start a franchise with?Conditions:- The goal is to get the most titles in the QB's prime (a "prime" is 25-35 years old), but they can also be won 3 years on either side of the prime- A QB's career is "over" at 38 (can't win SB at 38 or older)- Pretend you can match your QB with ANY personnel with your choice. I.E. - take supporting cast out of it. Don't use a QBs defense, line, WRs, etc. to determine.- Use age, experience, SKILLS, ATTRIBUTES as determining factors.- QBs selected can include anyone in the NFL or college (so let's see just how hypothetically good Andrew Luck is).List your guy, list your top 5, do what you want -- but EXPLAIN why you picked your top guy.P.S. - this will be a future post on www.footballandbrackets.com -- a new blog discussing college, pro, and fantasy football (and college hoops post-football season).

Well, since I can match any personnel with my choice, I will take ADP at rb, Megatron, Andre Johnson, Wes Welker as my slot wr, cherry pick the best offensive line and rest of the defense also. Then give me any qb - let's go with Ponder.

 

[Instinctive]

Easily Rodgers.After Rodgers it's Brees, Luck, Brady, maybe in that order. Basically the only measure if how many Super Bowl championships they have from now until the end of their careers, right? And hypothetically they are each on a team perfectly suited for their own individual talents?The X-Factor is Cam Newton, because of the super team condition. In theory if you could construct a team perfectly suited to Newton's talents, it would look wildly different from any other QB's super team, but might be better because Newton's skill set is more diverse. In the realm of reality, however, it's much more likely that a coaching staff and team would be able to complement a Brees/Luck/Brady than Newton.

The true design was how many titles in the next 10+ years (so guys like Brees and Brady would be disadvantaged). Since any question of "best QB" always has those guys involved, I am trying to "stir the pot" a bit and go to a hypothetical place where you're starting the NFL over right now and building for 10+ years. I agree that those guys would be chosen but am wondering what people think of taking 10+ years of a Newton/Lick/Landry Jones/Stafford (etc) vs 5-7 years of our current studs like Brees, Brady, etc.

I'm not sure you can put Landry in the conversation.NewtonBradfordLuckObviously after Rodgers, but outside of those 4 I don't think there is anybody else I want. Stafford probably round out my top 5 if you include Rodgers, or he becomes #4 if you don't. I think I would put Roethlisberger next (as much as I dislike him), but I could go Rivers tomorrow. Actually, I probably prefer Rivers to Stafford, so Roethlisbeger vs Stafford becomes the #5 battle.Then again, so many more years with Stafford compared to Roeth and Rivers (aren't they closing in on 30?) probably keeps him at #4 there.Freeman is in the discussion for the 5th spot - but again, it's really more of a top 3 for me, then Stafford, then everyone else.Vick's too old. Tebow's too risky. Manning, Brees, Brady all too old for this exercise.

Fantastic response. Big Ben will be 30 in March. Rivers will be 30 this December. That's the tough part of the question. Do we go with Stafford's ceiling and surplus of years over guys like these, or do you take the "bird in the hand" approach knowing you'll have fewer seasons to win?Interesting that you have the OU logo avatar/pic but aren't high on Landry Jones. He's ranked as the #2 QB prospect in this draft almost everywhere you look. Is it a spread-offense thing?You nailed it on the Vick, Tebow, Manning, Brees, Brady accounts as well.I am having trouble as to what I should do with high-potential backups like a Brian Hoyer in NE. Some exec-types like Mike Lombardi are super-high on him. Question is: are they higher on him than a guy in this draft class (other than Luck)? Always interesting questions around the game's most important and most discussed position.

I just don't always trust Landry's decision making. If I was pressed, I'd probably put him around 9th or 10th (certainly not bad) and he's definitely the #2 QB (after Luck) this year. Nothing to do with the spread really, but he holds the ball a bit now and then, and he isn't the best at leading receivers sometimes - there's a few behind a guy type throws that go for picks that should be big plays. Then sometimes he tries to make a play when he should throw it away. Not big things but enough that he's not in the top 5 conversation we're having here. Backups like Hoyer, Flynn - I don't think you can rank them. You're losing years with them too, most likely.

 

[Area51Inhabitant]

Jones looked very erratic to me when I watched him this past weekend. I don't know the order that the draft QB's will go after Luck but Jones is hardly a lock as the number 2 QB in this draft.

 

[Ryan Hester]

Backups like Hoyer, Flynn - I don't think you can rank them. You're losing years with them too, most likely.

In terms of backups, I'm assuming they'd be "drafted" to lead a team. In this exercise (and in real life), one team's backup can be better than another team's starter.Thanks for the input though.

 

[AngryPatriot]

Tomaron "Lucky" Montanitas

 

[49erFan77]

Aaron Rodgers- Just the complete package. can do everything you need done.

 

[yrforyg]

I'm a Packer fan but BigBen might be higher on my list for this than Rodgers due to durability. Rodgers is amazing and I love him but you never know when he might get Steve Young'd.

That's ridiculous.

 

[Fensalk]

I'm a Packer fan but BigBen might be higher on my list for this than Rodgers due to durability. Rodgers is amazing and I love him but you never know when he might get Steve Young'd.

Ben has only played 16 games once in his career. He's suffered from multiple concussions. Sometimes he's come back from injury too soon and put up horrible numbers which only hurt his team. He's an "old" 30 to me. I think he probably only has 1 or 2 years left IMO. The next concussion might be the one that forces him to retire a la Steve Young.