Who'll be the better pro QB? Rank 'em in order (1 Viewer)

[ConstruxBoy]

SEC football is the most watched college football in the country

OK I'll bite; you know this because-?

I'm making an educated guess based on experience. You disagree?

 

[jurb26]

SEC football is the most watched college football in the country

OK I'll bite; you know this because-?

I'm making an educated guess based on experience. You disagree?

Attendance numbers from NCAA

2005 NCAA DIVISION I-A FOOTBALL CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE

Total 2005 Change

Rank Division I-A Teams Games Attendance Average In Avg.

1. Southeastern 12 75 5,593,429 74,579 297

2. Big Ten 11 69 5,007,067 72,566 2,994

3. Big 12 12 72 4,204,574 58,397 1,085

4. Pacific-10 10 60 3,448,759 57,479 1,795

5. Atlantic Coast # 12 72 3,761,402 52,242 -3,493

6. Independent # 4 22 899,121 40,869 -1,766

7. Big East # 8 46 1,812,406 39,400 1,595

8. Mountain West # 9 48 1,693,216 35,275 62

9. Conference USA # 12 66 1,685,809 25,543 -2,816

10. Western Athletic # 9 51 1,101,350 21,595 -2,934

11. Sun Belt # 6 31 523,315 16,881 -1,173

12. Mid-American # 12 58 840,377 14,489 -3,410

This certianly helps supprot your claim (which I think is universally know to be true outside a few rebels here and there that just like bucking everything). I haven't found the TV ratings yet, but IIRC they support the arguement in the same way the attendance numbers do.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

SEC football is the most watched college football in the country

OK I'll bite; you know this because-?

I'm making an educated guess based on experience. You disagree?

Attendance numbers from NCAA

2005 NCAA DIVISION I-A FOOTBALL CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE

Total 2005 Change

Rank Division I-A Teams Games Attendance Average In Avg.

1. Southeastern 12 75 5,593,429 74,579 297

2. Big Ten 11 69 5,007,067 72,566 2,994

3. Big 12 12 72 4,204,574 58,397 1,085

4. Pacific-10 10 60 3,448,759 57,479 1,795

5. Atlantic Coast # 12 72 3,761,402 52,242 -3,493

6. Independent # 4 22 899,121 40,869 -1,766

7. Big East # 8 46 1,812,406 39,400 1,595

8. Mountain West # 9 48 1,693,216 35,275 62

9. Conference USA # 12 66 1,685,809 25,543 -2,816

10. Western Athletic # 9 51 1,101,350 21,595 -2,934

11. Sun Belt # 6 31 523,315 16,881 -1,173

12. Mid-American # 12 58 840,377 14,489 -3,410

This certianly helps supprot your claim (which I think is universally know to be true outside a few rebels here and there that just like bucking everything). I haven't found the TV ratings yet, but IIRC they support the arguement in the same way the attendance numbers do.

Again, I'm a PSU fan and do love the big 10. But there is nothing like the "fanatics" that follow SEC football down here. There were ALOT of people I know who really thought that the indicted booster than died in Memphis had been killed by Bama fans. And it wasn't that big a deal. Crazy stuff down here.

 

[Bevo]

Same bunch of guys who said no way Vince Young could beat the all mighty USC Trojans, no way he could end the winning streak of the great USC Trojans.....what happened? He singlehandidly took over the game and sent the Trojans home with something no one could......a loss.

And to follow up on that let's remember all the people here and elsewhere that continually hammered us with the idea that with the mind boggling defensive genius of Pete Carroll and with him having having 6 weeks to prepare for VY and Texas that there was no way that the Horns would be able to score more than a piddling few points against the defensive prowess of Pete and the Trojans. Pete was (is?) apparently considered to be a defensive mastermind of such gigantic proportions, especially when compared to his college competition, that VY would be completely befuddled by the whiz bang defenses that Pete would unleash on him that he would be a quivering mass of jelly by the end of the game as USC easily walked off with a huge number of points to a scarce few from Texas. Hell, even at halftime we got reminded how Pete would make adjustements at half time and shut VY down. Remind again, how did all that work out?Now, I am kind of curious, was the mistake that Young was so dumb that he couldn't handle the defense of a certified defensive guru that had 6 weeks to prepare for him or is Pete just another good defensive coach that got exposed this time despite having six weeks to come up with the ultimate defensive master plan because, just maybe, VY was good enough to handle this ultimate defensive game plan?

 

[jurb26]

SEC football is the most watched college football in the country

OK I'll bite; you know this because-?

I'm making an educated guess based on experience. You disagree?

Attendance numbers from NCAA

2005 NCAA DIVISION I-A FOOTBALL CONFERENCE ATTENDANCE

Total 2005 Change

Rank Division I-A Teams Games Attendance Average In Avg.

1. Southeastern 12 75 5,593,429 74,579 297

2. Big Ten 11 69 5,007,067 72,566 2,994

3. Big 12 12 72 4,204,574 58,397 1,085

4. Pacific-10 10 60 3,448,759 57,479 1,795

5. Atlantic Coast # 12 72 3,761,402 52,242 -3,493

6. Independent # 4 22 899,121 40,869 -1,766

7. Big East # 8 46 1,812,406 39,400 1,595

8. Mountain West # 9 48 1,693,216 35,275 62

9. Conference USA # 12 66 1,685,809 25,543 -2,816

10. Western Athletic # 9 51 1,101,350 21,595 -2,934

11. Sun Belt # 6 31 523,315 16,881 -1,173

12. Mid-American # 12 58 840,377 14,489 -3,410

This certianly helps supprot your claim (which I think is universally know to be true outside a few rebels here and there that just like bucking everything). I haven't found the TV ratings yet, but IIRC they support the arguement in the same way the attendance numbers do.

Again, I'm a PSU fan and do love the big 10. But there is nothing like the "fanatics" that follow SEC football down here. There were ALOT of people I know who really thought that the indicted booster than died in Memphis had been killed by Bama fans. And it wasn't that big a deal. Crazy stuff down here.

What is probably most telling about the srats on that page is that the "Souther/SOuteaster" Conferance leads EACH AND EVERY CLASS OF FOOTBALL with ecception of D3. 1A, 1AA, D2 are all lead by the South team.

 

[Chase Stuart]

And that mobility and athleticism can be the difference between winning and losing the SB (check out this year's SB champs )

Hi Chase,If one wants to get Roethlisberger into the discussion, you start talking about totally different things.

I'd never put Roethlisberger in the "running QB" category.

Of course you want some athleticism. Guy needs to be able to avoid the rush and such. I just don't want a running QB or a guy that looks to take off and run too quickly at the expense of staying in and finding the receiver.

Leinart and Cutler both are plenty mobile enough. But I wouldn't call either running QBs. And I'd rather have a non running / pro passing QB if I'm trying to build my team.

J

Fair enough. I guess my main point is that pro passing QB and "excellent running skills" don't have to be mutually exclusive. It may be rare, but without knowing anything else I'd still prefer to have a fast QB. Just because he's fast and likes to run doesn't have to prevent him from staying in the pocket and throwing a 20 yard strike to his third read just before he gets hit. When I talk about a running QB, I talk about a guy who will gain 10 yards on a play with his legs that would likely be incomplete (or worse) if he was immobile.

If you think there's something about fast QBs that hinders their ability to develop as a good passer (and I'd strongly disagree with this at least along a career timeline -- look at how guys like McNair and McNabb developed as passers), then I can maybe see your point. You could argue that if Vick was a lot slower he'd be a better passer.

But let me phrase it this way: If you were a Falcons fan, would you be happy if Vick was slower? If you were Vince Young's agent, would you rather he run a 4.8 than a 4.5?

If the answers to those questions are no, then I'd think all other things being equal you'd prefer your QB to be faster.

I don't disagree with you that most of the great all time QBs were pocket passers. But I'd still rather have my QB be fast than slow.

It is kind of funny Chase, but if I were a Falcons fan, I honestly would rather have Vick have generated all the hype he did and have run a 4.9. Because that would mean he'd generated all that hype as a passer.Heath Shuler did it for me. He dominatd SEC defenses. His game was 85% physical skills and 15% mental. Of course he was a giant bust in the pros. (Nice guy though and super successful now in Knoxville with a real estate business)

Whereas a Peyton Manning brought a game weighted way more on the mental side of the game. He has good height and a strong arm, but by far his game is built on his mental ability and not his physical traits.

I'll take a guy like him or Carson Palmer over a Vick any day. I've just seen guys that are incredibly gifted with physical talent never develop the same way as the guy who has to work on the mental angle. Palmer or Leinart will never outrun a DB. Young might. So Palmer figured a long time ago that he'd better figure out how to throw it. Young doesn't have that same push. Because he's always been able to tuck it and run. And that works. Sometimes. For a while.

Just my .02 on it.

J

I agree with you J. I think most people would. If Vick generated as much hype as he did running a 4.9, he'd be Manning. And we all know Manning is a lot better than Vick.

 

[Wheelhouse]

Are you saying that knowing nothing else about a QB, mobility is a bad thing?

Young led the NCAA in Y/A and Y/C IIRC. He also completed 65% of his passes. Would he be better to you if he had the mobility of Dan Marino?

If so, I'm going to need a lot of explanation before I understand that one (explain it to me like I'm Vince Young).

Hi Chase,I would definitely prefer a pocket passer over a mobile QB at the NFL level. Injuries are the biggest issue. That and tha fact that the defenses are so much more physically talented. What a mobile QB got away with in college, he doesn't get away with in the pros. That gap doesn't seem to narrow as much for the pocket passers.

So bottom line is yes, I'd always take the pocket guy. Colin Cowherd has done a big thing on this all week.

J

This is exactly how I feel about this topic and it was what I was trying to convey in my above posts.

 

[Chase Stuart]

The guys on the ESPN set did a similiar breakdown on the NFL's best QB back in 2002. I know Bill Parcells went with Peyton Manning as his guy, based on many of the same points being made here. If I remember correctly Steve Young went with McNabb, as did Chris Berman...while Tom Jackson said his guy was McNair.

Expectedly Young went with a mobile QB like McNabb, as Young endured the unwanted Montana comparisons his entire career. While Jackson of course played with the legendary John Elway in Denver...another mobile QB who would not hesitate to run with the ball in given situations. Parcells always seemed to have both types of QB on his clubs, Simms-Hostetler, Testaverde-Lucas etc. So besides his coaching credibility, Parcells may have been the only completely unbiased contributor in that particular forum and discussion.

I'd take Manning too.All I was standing for was the (I thought) not-controversial position that I'd rather my QB be fast than slow.

I think Peyton Manning would be a better QB if he ran a 4.3 40. I think Mike Vick would be a worse QB if he run a 4.9 40.

Apparently, some people disagree, but it's mostly a moot point since all things aren't ever equal.

 

[BigRed]

This certianly helps supprot your claim (which I think is universally know to be true outside a few rebels here and there that just like bucking everything). I haven't found the TV ratings yet, but IIRC they support the arguement in the same way the attendance numbers do.

Believe it when I see it. This was my point though. Saying "based on my experience" (as I suspected) is shall we say not exactly concrete proof.

Pardon the sidetrack, moving along....

 

[BlueOnion]

If you want to talk mechanics, I can see Cutler being ranked higher than Lienart.  However, I got Lienart higher than Cutler for the following reasons:

Being a successful NFL quarterback requires a player to do the following two things and do them extremely well:

1) Manage the game

2) Take what is available from the defense

These two attributes far out weigh any arm-strength or accuracy attributes a college prospect brings to the game and I think Leinart has not only been practicing these attributes but is already pretty polished at them.

At USC, Matt played with a very talented USC team and much of his success at USC was not only embracing these two attributes but excelling at them.  He has room for improvement with these attributes, but he is already on his way.

At Vanderbilt, these two attributes were foriegn to Jay Cutler because his teams had far less talent than the teams they were playing against.  Much of Cutler's tutoring at Vanderbilt did not involve 'managing the game' or 'take what is given to you'.  It was, "Jay, were out-manned in this battle so go out there and try to make plays."  This should not be contrued to imply Cutler's potential is limited nor should it mean it will inhibit is maturation as an NFL quarterback.  It just brings to the forefront the obstacles Cutler will have to overcome to succeed in the NFL.  Cutler's biggest obstacle will be relearning everything he learned at the college level.

It is the gun-slinger \\ try to make plays mentality that Cutler has learned at Vanderbilt that concern me.  It is Lienart's manage the game \\ take what is given that has me high on Lienart.  I know Cutler is compared to Brett Favre, but Brett Favre has endeared more success on the field when he was under the contraints of Mike Holmgren and endeared more failure when he has been allowed to be a gun-slinger.

If I could build on this and make an anology (I am currently taking golf lessons), I would compare Linehart and Cutler's game approach mentality to that of a golf swing.When Lienart enters the NFL, he will have a foundation to build on (mentally) in regards to Managing the Game and Taking What is Given to Him. Cutler will have to unlearn what he learned at college (mentally) and then learn what Lienart already started learning at USC; Managing the Game and Taking What is Given to Him.

Like learning a golf swing; somebody who has no golf experience will have less of a learning curve than somebody who has lots of golf experience with the wrong mechanics. I am not saying Cutler cannot do it, but I think he will need significant more time to close the gap on Lienart in this regard. And with the current financial situation of the NFL (salary cap, produce now), I think Cutler will have a hard time turning the corner in two or three years.

Hi BO,I understand the analogy but I think Leinart is going to be the guy that is going to be unlearning more. He's going to go from having the best players in the country at every position to a situation where his team is woefully overmatched at most positions. And in the same way, that's where I'd say Cutler already is.

J

I think that's a great point JB. That's also one of the few -- if not only -- reasons to explain why Roethlisberger was an immediate success.Big Ben didn't even play QB in HS until his senior year he only QBed at Miami of Ohio for three years. One season of HS football and three years of MAC football is hardly the stuff to prepare you for the NFL. Most top prospects (like a Leinart) would get three or four years of HS football and then four years at a powerhouse conference.

Yet of all of them, Roethlisberger was the one who excelled immediately. And I think Joe's answer is the reason why -- going from Miami to Pittsburgh was such a huge step up that the transition just wasn't that difficult for him. I can't think of many other reasons why he's the exception.

I guess we disagree on this point. Historically speaking, I believe the number of college quarterbacks that do well in the NFL are those who don't 'make plays' and those who 'manage the game'. If I recall the scoop on Ryan Leaf coming out of Washington State was, he had much better physical attributes than Peyton Manning and a fiery personality. On the field, it was his amazing attributes and his willingness to make plays that enabled him to take a far inferior Washington State team to the Rose Bowl.

There are other examples such as Akili Smith and Tim Couch.

I am not saying Cutler will be a bust, I am saying there is significant risk trying to speculate if Cutler can make the transition from a gun-slinger to a game-manager.

I don't agree with the Roethlisberger comparison because Big Ben never had the gun-slinger mentality; he was able to make a smooth transition from a game manager in college to a game manager in the NFL.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

This certianly helps supprot your claim (which I think is universally know to be true outside a few rebels here and there that just like bucking everything). I haven't found the TV ratings yet, but IIRC they support the arguement in the same way the attendance numbers do.

Believe it when I see it. This was my point though. Saying "based on my experience" (as I suspected) is shall we say not exactly concrete proof.

Pardon the sidetrack, moving along....

Sigh. Sure, but do you have a different experience to dispute mine? Or are you just attacking my sematics?

 

[Chase Stuart]

If you want to talk mechanics, I can see Cutler being ranked higher than Lienart. However, I got Lienart higher than Cutler for the following reasons:

Being a successful NFL quarterback requires a player to do the following two things and do them extremely well:

1) Manage the game

2) Take what is available from the defense

These two attributes far out weigh any arm-strength or accuracy attributes a college prospect brings to the game and I think Leinart has not only been practicing these attributes but is already pretty polished at them.

At USC, Matt played with a very talented USC team and much of his success at USC was not only embracing these two attributes but excelling at them. He has room for improvement with these attributes, but he is already on his way.

At Vanderbilt, these two attributes were foriegn to Jay Cutler because his teams had far less talent than the teams they were playing against. Much of Cutler's tutoring at Vanderbilt did not involve 'managing the game' or 'take what is given to you'. It was, "Jay, were out-manned in this battle so go out there and try to make plays." This should not be contrued to imply Cutler's potential is limited nor should it mean it will inhibit is maturation as an NFL quarterback. It just brings to the forefront the obstacles Cutler will have to overcome to succeed in the NFL. Cutler's biggest obstacle will be relearning everything he learned at the college level.

It is the gun-slinger \\ try to make plays mentality that Cutler has learned at Vanderbilt that concern me. It is Lienart's manage the game \\ take what is given that has me high on Lienart. I know Cutler is compared to Brett Favre, but Brett Favre has endeared more success on the field when he was under the contraints of Mike Holmgren and endeared more failure when he has been allowed to be a gun-slinger.

If I could build on this and make an anology (I am currently taking golf lessons), I would compare Linehart and Cutler's game approach mentality to that of a golf swing.When Lienart enters the NFL, he will have a foundation to build on (mentally) in regards to Managing the Game and Taking What is Given to Him. Cutler will have to unlearn what he learned at college (mentally) and then learn what Lienart already started learning at USC; Managing the Game and Taking What is Given to Him.

Like learning a golf swing; somebody who has no golf experience will have less of a learning curve than somebody who has lots of golf experience with the wrong mechanics. I am not saying Cutler cannot do it, but I think he will need significant more time to close the gap on Lienart in this regard. And with the current financial situation of the NFL (salary cap, produce now), I think Cutler will have a hard time turning the corner in two or three years.

Hi BO,I understand the analogy but I think Leinart is going to be the guy that is going to be unlearning more. He's going to go from having the best players in the country at every position to a situation where his team is woefully overmatched at most positions. And in the same way, that's where I'd say Cutler already is.

J

I think that's a great point JB. That's also one of the few -- if not only -- reasons to explain why Roethlisberger was an immediate success.Big Ben didn't even play QB in HS until his senior year he only QBed at Miami of Ohio for three years. One season of HS football and three years of MAC football is hardly the stuff to prepare you for the NFL. Most top prospects (like a Leinart) would get three or four years of HS football and then four years at a powerhouse conference.

Yet of all of them, Roethlisberger was the one who excelled immediately. And I think Joe's answer is the reason why -- going from Miami to Pittsburgh was such a huge step up that the transition just wasn't that difficult for him. I can't think of many other reasons why he's the exception.

I guess we disagree on this point. Historically speaking, I believe the number of college quarterbacks that do well in the NFL are those who don't 'make plays' and those who 'manage the game'. If I recall the scoop on Ryan Leaf coming out of Washington State was, he had much better physical attributes than Peyton Manning and a fiery personality. On the field, it was his amazing attributes and his willingness to make plays that enabled him to take a far inferior Washington State team to the Rose Bowl.

There are other examples such as Akili Smith and Tim Couch.

I am not saying Cutler will be a bust, I am saying there is significant risk trying to speculate if Cutler can make the transition from a gun-slinger to a game-manager.

I don't agree with the Roethlisberger comparison because Big Ben never had the gun-slinger mentality; he was able to make a smooth transition from a game manager in college to a game manager in the NFL.

I'd agree with this a lot more if Roethlisberger was a game manager in college or the NFL.Junior year in college (he came out after this year): 4486 yards, 37 TDs.