Green Lightning Posted January 17, 2011 Posted January 17, 2011 Good thread and the OP makes valid points. Sometimes you have to challenge your assumptions. Finding a FQ is more an art than a science. TSW would be well served to read this thread before blithely popping off about grabbing FQ when none seems at the ready.
JohnC Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 (edited) Good thread and the OP makes valid points. Sometimes you have to challenge your assumptions. Finding a FQ is more an art than a science. TSW would be well served to read this thread before blithely popping off about grabbing FQ when none seems at the ready. It is very rare that a qb such as Peyton Manning or Luck is available to be drafted by a team. Making a draft decision on those caliber of qbs are relatively easy. Where a front office and scouting department earns its money is evaluating the next level of prospects and making a decision as to whether that particular prospect is capable of developing into a franchise qb. Is Mallett, Newton, Locker or Blaine Gabbert capable of being a franchise qb and worth a high draft pick? I can't answer that question with confidence. Dealing with such an important issue is where a front office earns its money. After a thorough examination the decision has to be made as to whether a particular prospect (at any position) is worthy of being drafted and investing in. If the answer is no then the front office has to go in a different direction. I don't expect any qb in this year's draft to make an immediate impact. Green Bay's qb, Rodgers, sat behind Favre for three or four years before he got the starting job. He is now considered an elite qb. Drafting a qb in the first round is no guarantee of success. But the odds improve the higher you draft a qb. The qbs for the four remaining teams were all drafted in the first round. That is very telling. Edited January 18, 2011 by JohnC
San Jose Bills Fan Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 Current franchise quarterbacks: P. Manning, T. Brady, A. Rogers, B. Rothlisberger, D. Brees, P. Rivers Borderline: T. Romo, E. Manning, J. Flacco, M. Ryan Becoming and Fading: S. Bradford, J. Cutler, M. Sanchez, M. Stafford, D. McNabb, B. Farve It's too late at night for me to attempt a definition of franchise quarterback but I like this breakdown very much. The only player missing IMO is Josh Freeman who should be in the Becoming and Fading category. Arguably Matt Hasselbeck could be in the same category. I disagree. Rodgers is an excellent QB that any team should be proud to have. His racking up a QB rating over 100 a couple of years in a row are great indications of how phenomenal talent he is. I do not think we should grace a QB with the franchise stamp until they are a proven winner and leader several times in a row. Doing it once may be an event. Doing it twice may be a coincidence. You have to do it three times to make it a trend. Rodgers has had a great couple of seasons and he is clearly a go-to guy right here and right now in my book. However, it was merely a couple of seasons ago he led his team to a ginormous 6-10 record. In addition, he is about to play the team which beat them and cost them them a division title this year. I think you are being a bit too easy in your praise to designate Rodgers as an obvious franchise QB. I'll disagree with you on this one. Rodgers was brilliant in 2008 as a first year starter. The main reason the Pack was 6-10 is because they had one of the worst scoring defenses in the league. They gave up nearly 400 points that year.
Hplarrm Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 The teams vying for their league championships all have qbs who were drafted in the first round. Sanchez, Cutler, Roethlisberger and Rodgers were taken in the first round by their respective playoff teams. Do you consider that a coincidence? Did you forget that the Bills most successful period in its history was during the Jim Kelly era? If you forgot let me remind you that he was drafted by Bill Polian in the first round. No one is mortgaging the farm by taking a qb with a first or second round pick. It is simply one pick. How many high picks have this lame franchise squandered over the past decade? There are a lot of reasons why the Bills haven't been in the playoffs. One of the main reasons they haven't qualified for the postseason for almost a generation is a lack of a franchise qb. You may think Fitz is an exceptional qb but I consider him to be nothing more than a pedestrian player. That doesn't mean that he isn't a nice guy. No I actually do agree with you that this is not a coincidence. What I think this points to is that reality indicates that scouting has vastly improved over the last decade, The evidence which I think indicates this is true is the real world results at winning the SB which has been achieved by QBs over the last 20 or so years. Dallas choosing Aikman in the late 80s marked a significant drought in QBs drafted by teams in the 1st round actually leading the teams which drafted them to SB victories (and often after the retirement of Jimbo even seeing many first round choices even lead the teams which drafted them to SB berths even to lose. If you do not believe me check the records. Until Peyton Manning broke a 2 decade drought no team had selected a QB in the first round who had led the team that drafted him to even an SB berth. Steve McNair losing the SB by a few yards on the final play of the SB even marked a several year streaks (I think broken by Donovan McNabb) of first round QB choices not even leading the teams which chose them to even a losing berth, The odd thing to me was that in the face of reality being what it was, we actually saw the conventional wisdom become that a team MUST draft a QB judged worthy of being a 1st rounder if their goal was to win the S. In this QB centric league, the Bills were a particular victim of this counter to the facts we must draft a savior at QB or by any means find a new rangy Jim Kelly. This fruitless quest led to several miscalculations which to me are at the heart of a painful last decade +. Scouting, selecting and training have improved a lot over the last decade. Finally Manning broke through (though as QBs are still overvalued we see a team which pretty clearly has had one of the best passers in the league not only need the best D HC, the best GM. the best kicker, the best safety (the way Sanders played and was used at S revolutionized the game making the Cover 2 the D of choice and making a lie of the conventional wisdom that you never draft a safty in the top 10) and a pretty continual failure to come even close to repeating their SB glory. NFL teams (the Bills being a notable exception) have gotten much better at choosing QBs to meet their teams needs (thus the success of RoboQB, trading for E. Manning, and even the quick success of the very flawed Samchez. I agree that drafting the QB you want has gotten much better and refined the past 5 years or so, but a big part of this is not drafting an idiot QB in the 1at just to say you got a franchise QB. I simply do not see the needs of this Bills teams with his significant limitations on the OL, LB. and DL producing a winner by drafting a rookie to get killed. Ironically, I do not think Newton has the right stuff to be a team leading QB as a rookie. However, he is the only choice I could see the Bills making of an offensive player in the 1st round but if Newton is the one I do not start him at QB but instead use him in the O like the Jets use Smith as a snap catcher in Wildcat offense who I have no fear of running and sometimes throwing the ball if the D puts to many players in the box.
JohnC Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 No I actually do agree with you that this is not a coincidence. What I think this points to is that reality indicates that scouting has vastly improved over the last decade, The evidence which I think indicates this is true is the real world results at winning the SB which has been achieved by QBs over the last 20 or so years. Dallas choosing Aikman in the late 80s marked a significant drought in QBs drafted by teams in the 1st round actually leading the teams which drafted them to SB victories (and often after the retirement of Jimbo even seeing many first round choices even lead the teams which drafted them to SB berths even to lose. If you do not believe me check the records. Until Peyton Manning broke a 2 decade drought no team had selected a QB in the first round who had led the team that drafted him to even an SB berth. Steve McNair losing the SB by a few yards on the final play of the SB even marked a several year streaks (I think broken by Donovan McNabb) of first round QB choices not even leading the teams which chose them to even a losing berth, The odd thing to me was that in the face of reality being what it was, we actually saw the conventional wisdom become that a team MUST draft a QB judged worthy of being a 1st rounder if their goal was to win the S. In this QB centric league, the Bills were a particular victim of this counter to the facts we must draft a savior at QB or by any means find a new rangy Jim Kelly. This fruitless quest led to several miscalculations which to me are at the heart of a painful last decade +. Scouting, selecting and training have improved a lot over the last decade. Finally Manning broke through (though as QBs are still overvalued we see a team which pretty clearly has had one of the best passers in the league not only need the best D HC, the best GM. the best kicker, the best safety (the way Sanders played and was used at S revolutionized the game making the Cover 2 the D of choice and making a lie of the conventional wisdom that you never draft a safty in the top 10) and a pretty continual failure to come even close to repeating their SB glory. NFL teams (the Bills being a notable exception) have gotten much better at choosing QBs to meet their teams needs (thus the success of RoboQB, trading for E. Manning, and even the quick success of the very flawed Samchez. I agree that drafting the QB you want has gotten much better and refined the past 5 years or so, but a big part of this is not drafting an idiot QB in the 1at just to say you got a franchise QB. I simply do not see the needs of this Bills teams with his significant limitations on the OL, LB. and DL producing a winner by drafting a rookie to get killed. Ironically, I do not think Newton has the right stuff to be a team leading QB as a rookie. However, he is the only choice I could see the Bills making of an offensive player in the 1st round but if Newton is the one I do not start him at QB but instead use him in the O like the Jets use Smith as a snap catcher in Wildcat offense who I have no fear of running and sometimes throwing the ball if the D puts to many players in the box. You may have misunderstood my central point. I have never claimed that drafting a franchise qb is a miracle solution to respectability. Far from it. The Bills have many needs. No one can argue that they are a complete team, because they simply are not. It is going take more than a few years (because of the lethargic way this franchise operates) to address their many needs. My position on this matter is if our scouting department determines that there is a franchise caliber of qb in this draft and we are in position to draft him, we should do so. If a defensive player is rated much higher than a qb, then take the more highly rated player. Or if you are in position to trade down (admittedly difficult to do) trade down, get additional picks and take the qb at the draft position he should be picked at. I have never advocated immediately starting any of the qb prospects in this draft, unless the player was Luck. That is a recipe for disaster. Aaron Rodgers didn't get much playing time until his fourth year. Do you think that the Packers regretted drafting him? With Fitz on our roster the Bills are in an advantageous position to have a qb who can continue to start and tutor the prospect qb. Again, I will make the observation that all the qbs entering this next playoff series (Sanchez, Cutler, Roethlisberger and Rodgers) were selected in the first round. And again, I will make the point that Kelly was a first round draft pick by Polian who went on to lead this franchise for its most successful stint in its history. Taking a qb with one high pick doesn't mean that you can't address some of the other critical needs with the remaining picks and with a judicious use of free agency.
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 The NFL is now a passing league, and a team needs a good QB in order to compete at all. Playing QB in the NFL is the most demanding job in sports and takes physical, mental, leadership, work ethic, emotional, dedication to perfection, and maturity skills that are extraordinarily rare in the first place. A franchise QB is the creme de la creme of this vocation. One doesn't simply draft a franchise QB because they have a top pick; it's obviously not that simple. One drafts a college kid who seems to have the right make-up and physical measurables and if everything goes right, he becomes your franchise QB. A franchise QB transcends the position of QB to become not just a QB but a driving force within the franchise over a sustained career, a leader within the organization, an extension of the coaching staff on the field, a leader of men that makes everyone on the team better, respected by teammates, feared by adversaries, and even the singular name associated with a team's overall success.
Hplarrm Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 The NFL is now a passing league, and a team needs a good QB in order to compete at all. Playing QB in the NFL is the most demanding job in sports and takes physical, mental, leadership, work ethic, emotional, dedication to perfection, and maturity skills that are extraordinarily rare in the first place. A franchise QB is the creme de la creme of this vocation. One doesn't simply draft a franchise QB because they have a top pick; it's obviously not that simple. One drafts a college kid who seems to have the right make-up and physical measurables and if everything goes right, he becomes your franchise QB. A franchise QB transcends the position of QB to become not just a QB but a driving force within the franchise over a sustained career, a leader within the organization, an extension of the coaching staff on the field, a leader of men that makes everyone on the team better, respected by teammates, feared by adversaries, and even the singular name associated with a team's overall success. No one would argue do not get a great QB (well duh) I only argue that there are other methods besides drafting one in the first to get a franchise QB. This year actually strikes me as unusual not in that all the QBs are first round choices but unusual in that they a full 3 of 4 were first rounders playing for the team which drafted them. It is far too often the case that a player gets taken in the first like a Cutlet, he gets run out of town by the team which chose him as a QB incapable of leading a team deep into the playoffs and lo and behold he actually develops at his second stop. In fact, this was the case with last year's SB winner in that Drew Brees was drafted early to great expectations and then was allowed to leave in FA. I merely have been repetitively arguing that unless the Bills see the QB who can put them over the top and trade for him like Eli Manning, the better strategy is to allow some other team to draft a 1st rounder and let him learn the game and then get your first rounder from some berg like TD who impatiently gave up on Young (and second rounder Favre) or the folks who gave up on first rounder Dilfer or the folks who gave up on Brees. 1st round QBs from proven SB appearers like McNabb or Favre are available for the right price IF you see them making the difference for your team. The problem for the Bills is that we are no where near the status of a team like Pitts which did in fact spend a 1st on RoboQB who got them to the promised land, but intelligent teams have built a solid TEAM to fit the appropriate QB into. This draft a franchise QB 1st model and build around him has no precedent of working as best as I can tell.
K Gun Special Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 No one would argue do not get a great QB (well duh) I only argue that there are other methods besides drafting one in the first to get a franchise QB. This year actually strikes me as unusual not in that all the QBs are first round choices but unusual in that they a full 3 of 4 were first rounders playing for the team which drafted them. It is far too often the case that a player gets taken in the first like a Cutlet, he gets run out of town by the team which chose him as a QB incapable of leading a team deep into the playoffs and lo and behold he actually develops at his second stop. In fact, this was the case with last year's SB winner in that Drew Brees was drafted early to great expectations and then was allowed to leave in FA. I merely have been repetitively arguing that unless the Bills see the QB who can put them over the top and trade for him like Eli Manning, the better strategy is to allow some other team to draft a 1st rounder and let him learn the game and then get your first rounder from some berg like TD who impatiently gave up on Young (and second rounder Favre) or the folks who gave up on first rounder Dilfer or the folks who gave up on Brees. 1st round QBs from proven SB appearers like McNabb or Favre are available for the right price IF you see them making the difference for your team. The problem for the Bills is that we are no where near the status of a team like Pitts which did in fact spend a 1st on RoboQB who got them to the promised land, but intelligent teams have built a solid TEAM to fit the appropriate QB into. This draft a franchise QB 1st model and build around him has no precedent of working as best as I can tell. Who are these guys you are talking about? Trent Dilfer ? cmon man he was signed as a backup Franchise QBs are hardly available. Brees was only available because he suffered a serious shoulder injury and the Chargers didnt want to take the risk. Cutler - yea he was available for two 1st round picks, a QB and a 3rd round pick. And he wasnt even an elite qb. So no, you really cant reasonably expect to get your franchise QB by waiting around for him to fail somewhere else. Since 1989 there have been only a few QBs to win the super bowl who didn't start with the team they won it with. Johnson, young (who was acquired as a backup to montana), and trent dilfer. so yea, its possible to win a super bowl with a castoff, but you wont sustain long term success. Take a look at the top QBs from the pst few years and tell me which one is a castoff thats had sustained success?
JPicc2114 Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 "I'll take a stab at it: A franchise quarterback is the face of your franchise. When someone thinks of the Colts, it is, first and foremost, Peyton Manning that comes to mind. He is a quarterback that your franchise would pay top dollar to keep if his contract were up. He is an elite player who can, through both leadership and talent, get your team the win. He is The Man. When someone says we need to draft our franchise quarterback, they are saying is that we need to draft a kid that will become that man. Current franchise quarterbacks: P. Manning, T. Brady, A. Rogers, B. Rothlisberger, D. Brees, P. Rivers Borderline: T. Romo, E. Manning, J. Flacco, M. Ryan Becoming and Fading: S. Bradford, J. Cutler, M. Sanchez, M. Stafford, D. McNabb, B. Farve" Josh Freeman is a good young QB with franchise QB potential.
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 No one would argue do not get a great QB (well duh) I only argue that there are other methods besides drafting one in the first to get a franchise QB. This year actually strikes me as unusual not in that all the QBs are first round choices but unusual in that they a full 3 of 4 were first rounders playing for the team which drafted them. It is far too often the case that a player gets taken in the first like a Cutlet, he gets run out of town by the team which chose him as a QB incapable of leading a team deep into the playoffs and lo and behold he actually develops at his second stop. In fact, this was the case with last year's SB winner in that Drew Brees was drafted early to great expectations and then was allowed to leave in FA. I merely have been repetitively arguing that unless the Bills see the QB who can put them over the top and trade for him like Eli Manning, the better strategy is to allow some other team to draft a 1st rounder and let him learn the game and then get your first rounder from some berg like TD who impatiently gave up on Young (and second rounder Favre) or the folks who gave up on first rounder Dilfer or the folks who gave up on Brees. 1st round QBs from proven SB appearers like McNabb or Favre are available for the right price IF you see them making the difference for your team. The problem for the Bills is that we are no where near the status of a team like Pitts which did in fact spend a 1st on RoboQB who got them to the promised land, but intelligent teams have built a solid TEAM to fit the appropriate QB into. This draft a franchise QB 1st model and build around him has no precedent of working as best as I can tell. It can be done in other ways, of course. Teams can win with a Rex Grossman at QB. But, isn't this thread asking "what is a franchise QB"? Having a franchise QB just makes everything else that much easier. When you have Peyton Manning, you can still win with rookies and role players and keep rolling when injuries happen. When you don't have the franchise QB, your margin for error becomes slimmer. Like they were saying last week, the Jets had to play the "perfect game" to beat the Patriots. The Patriots had Tom Brady, and though they lost and made big mistakes, they were in that game until the very end.
Green Lightning Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 Did love the thread, but the more I think about drafting a FQ, the more I remember our D on the field puking up 200 plus yards on the ground and opposing QB's having the time to tweet while looking for open receivers. We just have to get some playmakers on D. It looks like there's a few more of them to be had then a FQ this draft. Let's just get some front 7 help.
K Gun Special Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 Did love the thread, but the more I think about drafting a FQ, the more I remember our D on the field puking up 200 plus yards on the ground and opposing QB's having the time to tweet while looking for open receivers. We just have to get some playmakers on D. It looks like there's a few more of them to be had then a FQ this draft. Let's just get some front 7 help. wouldnt a FQ help the offense move the chains, score more points........and keep the defense off the field thereby preventing the other team from scoring as much?
Hplarrm Posted January 18, 2011 Posted January 18, 2011 It can be done in other ways, of course. Teams can win with a Rex Grossman at QB. But, isn't this thread asking "what is a franchise QB"? Having a franchise QB just makes everything else that much easier. When you have Peyton Manning, you can still win with rookies and role players and keep rolling when injuries happen. When you don't have the franchise QB, your margin for error becomes slimmer. Like they were saying last week, the Jets had to play the "perfect game" to beat the Patriots. The Patriots had Tom Brady, and though they lost and made big mistakes, they were in that game until the very end. Well, lets look at this thread itself. One of the early lists submitted was the following: Current franchise quarterbacks: P. Manning, T. Brady, A. Rogers, B. Rothlisberger, D. Brees, P. Rivers Borderline: T. Romo, E. Manning, J. Flacco, M. Ryan Becoming and Fading: S. Bradford, J. Cutler, M. Sanchez, M. Stafford, D. McNabb, B. Farve My guess is that one can disagree about specific individuals here and there in this list but it is not totally or grossly away from where many come down. Roughly half of this list are QBs held by the team which drafted them and roughly half from the field of other options from FA to a targeted trade on draft day. I am not saying good QBs are not drafted early (they are). I am simply saying that not only is the obvious you state true that there are other methods besides drafting a guy in the 1st but in aggregate the other options are not once in a while but happen quite often.
Sisyphean Bills Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Well, lets look at this thread itself. One of the early lists submitted was the following: Current franchise quarterbacks: P. Manning, T. Brady, A. Rogers, B. Rothlisberger, D. Brees, P. Rivers Borderline: T. Romo, E. Manning, J. Flacco, M. Ryan Becoming and Fading: S. Bradford, J. Cutler, M. Sanchez, M. Stafford, D. McNabb, B. Farve My guess is that one can disagree about specific individuals here and there in this list but it is not totally or grossly away from where many come down. Roughly half of this list are QBs held by the team which drafted them and roughly half from the field of other options from FA to a targeted trade on draft day. I am not saying good QBs are not drafted early (they are). I am simply saying that not only is the obvious you state true that there are other methods besides drafting a guy in the 1st but in aggregate the other options are not once in a while but happen quite often. You're formerly Dik Smub, correct? If so, I do recall your pet theory that the Bills destroyed themselves by trading for Rob Johnson and signing The Midget, etc. and your conclusion that they should go after a QB like Jake Delhomme so as to spread their cap resources around. Now that they are and have been well under the cap, maybe that theory isn't relevant, and the original premise that teams could make do with a generic brand QB seems suspect as well. Given the list, I'll cross out all the names that have played for 1 franchise. Current franchise quarterbacks: P. Manning, T. Brady, A. Rogers, B. Rothlisberger, D. Brees, P. Rivers Borderline: T. Romo, E. Manning, J. Flacco, M. Ryan Becoming and Fading: S. Bradford, J. Cutler, M. Sanchez, M. Stafford, D. McNabb, B. Farve That's clearly more than half. (I am aware of the Manning/Rivers trade and consider it a contrived technicality of a red herring as neither player spent even 1 second with the team that technically drafted them.) That leaves you with Brees, who changed teams after a bad shoulder injury; Cutler who forced his way out of Denver after his idiot young coach let word leak out that he was willing to consider trading him; Donovan McNabb at the twilight of his career (not unusual or remarkable at all); and, Favre, who was with a terrible organization, got traded to a master QB developer, spent almost his entire productive career in 1 organization, and then bounced around and struggled in the twilight of his career. On the other side, you have 12 QBs that are leading their original team. Like I said before, there is more than one way to do it. Saying I said otherwise is misrepresenting what I wrote. Yes, it is possible to find a franchise QB as a UDFA or in the 6th round instead of the 1st round, but it is a fact that the odds of doing so are much more against you if that's your approach. The Buffalo Bills are a historically losing franchise. They have expended their very top pick on a QB exactly ONE time in their entire history and that was in 1960 -- over 50 !@#$ing years ago. They've been dumpster diving for coaches and QBs forever.
JohnC Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Like I said before, there is more than one way to do it. Saying I said otherwise is misrepresenting what I wrote. Yes, it is possible to find a franchise QB as a UDFA or in the 6th round instead of the 1st round, but it is a fact that the odds of doing so are much more against you if that's your approach. It's remarkable that so many people consider playing the odds a radical notion. Success in the NFL, for the most part, is predicated on having a very talented qb. Just look at the teams participating in the playoffs this year. Caretaker and managing type qbs are satisfactory if you are pursuing mediocrity.
The Jokeman Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 I disagree. Rodgers is an excellent QB that any team should be proud to have. His racking up a QB rating over 100 a couple of years in a row are great indications of how phenomenal talent he is. However, though my view may not be the norm in the "right now" society that we have, I do not think we should grace a QB with the franchise stamp until they are a proven winner and leader several times in a row. Doing it once may be an event. Doing it twice may be a coincidence. You have to do it three times to make it a trend. This to me is why Jim Kelly is the real deal and actually a worthy HOF player though he never won it all (and it can be said credibly with his partying that his pregame lack of preparation was one of the big stories of ther Bills first SB loss( but he us someone I would grace with the tag franchise QB. Rodgers has had a great couple of seasons and he is clearly a go-to guy right here and right now in my book. However, it was merely a couple of seasons ago he led his team to a ginormous 6-10 record. In addition, he is about to play the team which beat them and cost them them a division title this year. I think you are being a bit too easy in your praise to designate him as an obvious franchise QB. In fact, Rodgers is leading his team into the friendly confines of Soldiers Field rather than getting the advantage of the Lambeau Leap specifically because he is not a franchise QB (YET). He may do it and he has a chance to prove it on Sunday. However, your designation of undoubtedly? If Rodgers gets folded, spindled, and mutilated on Sunday his play this year will not be franchise but not even a footnote. Did Rodgers play improve significantly over the last three seasons? Judging by http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/7200/career;_ylt=AnPAYQMRJ_1XveY_.aeZA_r.uLYF I'd say no but did the Packers D improve with the transition to the 3-4 with a great coach in Capers and great player like Clay Matthews? I'd say yes, I hate to beat a dead horse but the first word in the term Franchise QB is Franchise.
Orton's Arm Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 My goal was to find out the pace at which franchise QBs enter the league. To achieve that, I looked at previous drafts, starting in 1998. Let me know if I missed anyone. 1998 Franchise QBs added: 2. Peyton Manning, first overall, 7.6 yards per attempt. Kurt Warner, UDFA, 7.9 yards per attempt. Solid starters added: 1. Matt Hasselbeck, 6th round (6.9 yards per attempt). 1999 Franchise QBs added: none. Solid starters added: 1. Donovan McNabb, 2nd overall. (6.9 yards per attempt.) 2000 Franchise QBs added: 1. Tom Brady, sixth round. (7.4 yards per attempt.) Solid starters added: 2. Chad Pennington, first round. (7.2 yards per attempt.) Marc Bulger, sixth round (also 7.2 yards per attempt). 2001 Franchise QBs added: 1. Drew Brees, second round. (7.3 yards per attempt.) Solid starters added: 1. Michael Vick, first overall, 6.9 yards per attempt. (Though Vick had 8.1 yards per attempt this year, and looked like a franchise QB.) 2002 Franchise QBs added: none Solid starters added: none 2003 Franchise QBs added: none Solid starters added: 1. Carson Palmer, 1st overall, 7.1 yards per attempt. (Close to being a franchise QB.) 2004 Franchise QBs added: 3. Philip Rivers, 4th overall, 8.0 yards per attempt. Ben Roethlisberger, 11th overall, 8.0 yards per attempt. Matt Schaub, 3rd round, 7.8 yards per attempt. Solid starters added: 1. Eli Manning, 1st overall, 6.8 yards per attempt. (Though Manning has averaged 7.9 and 7.4 yards per attempt the last two years.) 2005 Franchise QBs added: 1. Aaron Rodgers, 1st round, 7.9 yards per attempt. Solid starters added: 4. Jason Campbell, 1st round, 6.7 yards per attempt. Kyle Orton, 4th round, 6.5 yards per attempt. Matt Cassell, 7th round, 6.7 yards per attempt. Ryan Fitzpatrick, 7th round, 6.0 yards per attempt. (This past season he averaged 6.8 yards per attempt.) 2006 Franchise QBs added: none. Solid starters added: 1. Jay Cutler, 11th overall, 7.2 yards per attempt. (This past season he averaged 7.6 yards per attempt.) 2007 Franchise QBs added: none. Solid starters added: none. 2008 Franchise QBs added: none Solid starters added: 2. Matt Ryan, 3rd overall, 6.9 yards per attempt. Joe Flacco, 1st round, 7.2 yards per attempt. That's eight franchise QBs added to the league over an eleven year period, or less than one a year. Assuming the above is typical, it means that each NFL team will, on average, add a franchise QB once every 44 years. Because such opportunities are so rare, and because franchise QBs are so instrumental in determining the outcomes of games, a team should never pass up the chance to get a franchise QB if it doesn't already have one.
PromoTheRobot Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 I might dispute Matt Schaub's designation as franchise. I also dispute your assertion that franchise QBs can be added by choice. One never knows who will rise to the franchise level, despite the punditry that purports to know. Any QB drafted is a gamble. To say you should never "pass up" the chance suggests there is some guarantee of success. There is no such thing. PTR
Dan Posted January 19, 2011 Posted January 19, 2011 Similar to PTR's comment, what's your definition of a franchise QB? How is Schaub a franchise guy, but Eli is just a solid starter? For that matter, how are most all of your "solid starters" not considered franchise QBs? Vick was the unquestioned starter and face of the Falcons, and the league for that matter. Yet he's not a franchise QB? Ryan and Flacco are the unquestioned starters from day 1 and aren't being benched any time soon. But, they're not franchise QBs? IMO, a franchise QB designation should be less about stats or wins (which your determination seems to be based) and more about his position with the team. Flacco, for example, is a franchise QB. Debate his stats all you want, but he's the Ravens starter and the team has zero interest in trying to replace him. Ryan, Cutler, Eli on your list all fit that bill. For that matter, I think you could add a few guys like Freeman in Tampa, Sanchez, Romo, and Bradford (off the top of my head) to the list. Not all franchise QBs pan out and win championships or even play for 10-15 years - lots of variables affect that. But, that's what separates the greats from the also rans. Romo, for example, is the face of Dallas and has been their QB for several years and by all accounts will be their QB next year. I doubt he'll ever take them to the SB, but that doesn't mean he isn't a franchise QB. He's just not a very good one.
Recommended Posts