Jump to content

Which QB would you rather have?

Coach55

By Coach55
in The Stadium Wall Archives

 Share

Which QB would you rather have?  

65 members have voted

  1. 1. Which QB would you rather have?

    • A) QB1, Age 28, 59.5% completion percentage, 3380 yds, 15 TD, 17 Int, 78.2% rating
      1
    • B) QB2, Age 25, 62.5% completion percentage, 3051 yds, 19 TD, 14 Int, 84.9% rating
      25
    • C) QB3, Age 37, 55.2% completion percentage, 3382 yds, 20 TD, 17 Int, 75.1% rating
      0
    • D) QB4, Age 27, 57.2% completion percentage, 3090 yds, 17 TD, 10 Int, 82.2% rating
      12
    • E) QB5, Age 25, 66.9% completion percentage, 3280 yds, 12 TD, 12 Int, 86.9% rating
      17
    • F) QB6, Age 30, 57.2% completion percentage, 2805 yds, 20 TD, 18 Int, 74.5% rating
      1
    • G) QB7, Age 32, 67.4% completion percentage, 3018 yds, 20 TD, 16 Int, 85.6% rating
      9

Recommended Posts

Thoner7 Veteran

Thoner7

Posted
Posted

Note to Poster of this thread:

 

Noone here is interested in 1 years worth of stats. You should consider using players career stats.

Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate

510 858 59.4 5,847 6.8 32 30 93 667 77.9

 

(That is player B's Career stats) - Dont look as good does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coach55 RFA

Coach55

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Note to Poster of this thread:

 

Noone here is interested in 1 years worth of stats. You should consider using players career stats.

Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate

510 858 59.4 5,847 6.8 32 30 93 667 77.9

 

(That is player B's Career stats) - Dont look as good does it?

 

 

There is an interesting point to this post. Check back at 6, the results may surprise you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
destro32 Practice Squad

destro32

Posted
Posted

what about stats like 4th quater comebacks?

A monkey could have semi-decent numbers if they were down 30 all the time?

How good is the teams defense?

 

apples vs oranges?

 

there are too many factors left out to make a judgement?

 

who would you take right now Joe Flacco (yds1649 comp%62.1 TD7 INT7 Rat79.7)or Kurt Warner ( yds2760 comp%70.6 TD19 INT6 Rat106.4)

 

Obviously Warner - Right?

 

oh - both teams are 6-3!!

 

apples to oranges?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Flbillsfan#1 Veteran

Flbillsfan#1

Posted
Posted
what about stats like 4th quater comebacks?

A monkey could have semi-decent numbers if they were down 30 all the time?

How good is the teams defense?

 

apples vs oranges?

 

there are too many factors left out to make a judgement?

 

who would you take right now Joe Flacco (yds1649 comp%62.1 TD7 INT7 Rat79.7)or Kurt Warner ( yds2760 comp%70.6 TD19 INT6 Rat106.4)

 

Obviously Warner - Right?

 

oh - both teams are 6-3!!

 

apples to oranges?

I would take Flacco over Warner- MUCH younger, more upside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
R!P REVOLUTIONARIES UDFA

R!P REVOLUTIONARIES

Posted
Posted

Come on, people. It is has to be D. Even though the comp. % is lower, we know turnovers are key. Besides Trent comp.% is great right now and we are struggling. In the past three games we have lost Trent has turned the ball over more than in the games we won. The QB with the best TD to turnover ratio would be the best for us. D has 17 TDs to 10 Ints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Orton's Arm Veteran

Orton's Arm

Posted
Posted

Just based on the numbers you've posted, QB B looks like the best choice to me. But obviously, those numbers alone would be an extremely silly way to make a decision. I'd want to know how those numbers were attained. Is the QB a one trick pony? Is he running a simplified offense? Are those numbers something he'll be able to sustain after defenses have had the chance to figure out his strengths and weaknesses?

 

Kordell Stewart had a good year before defenses figured him out. Like Kordell Stewart, Losman was chosen by TD, and is a lot stronger WRT physical potential than with respect to mental abilities. Like Stewart, Losman also had a good year. If you take a player like that, simplify the offense for him, have him roll out and use his mobility, he can give you a season's worth of a flash in the pan. But after that, defenses will largely have him figured out. The feasts that he occasionally delivers with his big arm will become rarer, while the periods of famine will be longer and more common. You'll ultimately come to realize that this guy--despite his favorable physical attributes--is always going to hold your offense back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Coach55 RFA

Coach55

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The answers are as follows

 

A - Jim Kelly in 1988, Bills went 12-4, lost in AFC Championship

B - JP Losman in 2006, Bills went 7-9

C - Doug Flutie in 1999, Bills went 11-5 (Flutie was 10-5), Wade pulled Doug and the Bills lost the Wild Card (not Rob's fault, but I still believe if Flutie was in, it wouldn't have come down to the last play)

D - Rob Johnson in 2000, Bills went 8-8 (Johnson was 4-7)

E - Trent Edwards this year

F - Joe Ferguson in 1980, Bills went 11-5, lost in Division playoffs

G - Kelly Holcomb in 2005, Bills went 5-11 (Holcomb was 4-4)

 

The point of this email was to show that stats don't matter when it comes to QB's. There has been a lot of chatter on the wall lately pushing for Losman to be back at QB. Although statistically good, he DOES NOT have the intangibles to be a winning QB in the NFL (maybe 9-7 with a soft schedule). The QB position is all about leadership and intangibles and not about physical ability, otherwise people like Todd Marinavich and Ryan Leaf would be superstars and people such as Tony Romo and Tom Brady would not be playing (had it not been for Drew Bledsoe, neither of them may have gotten the chance)... Give Trent some more time, he brings the intangibles to the table. People forget that this is only his sophomore year, he'll be an all-pro in due time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MDH All Pro

MDH

Posted
Posted
The answers are as follows

 

A - Jim Kelly in 1988, Bills went 12-4, lost in AFC Championship

B - JP Losman in 2006, Bills went 7-9

C - Doug Flutie in 1999, Bills went 11-5 (Flutie was 10-5), Wade pulled Doug and the Bills lost the Wild Card (not Rob's fault, but I still believe if Flutie was in, it wouldn't have come down to the last play)

D - Rob Johnson in 2000, Bills went 8-8 (Johnson was 4-7)

E - Trent Edwards this year

F - Joe Ferguson in 1980, Bills went 11-5, lost in Division playoffs

G - Kelly Holcomb in 2005, Bills went 5-11 (Holcomb was 4-4)

 

The point of this email was to show that stats don't matter when it comes to QB's.

 

Or your point could be that the team around the QB has a HUGE impact on if the team wins and loses. The belief that a QB can simply put a crapy team on his back and win is ridiculous. If Kelly posted those numbers on a Bills team in the past few years the Bills still don't have a winning season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ed_Formerly_of_Roch All Pro

Ed_Formerly_of_Roch

Posted
Posted

Thats risky though after only seeing 8 games. Anderson looked great last year too, now look at him. Many people would make the same argument about TE right now too. Looking at one year of stats are OK if you know the person as sandwiched a couple other similar years around it, then they mean something.

 

I would take Flacco over Warner- MUCH younger, more upside.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...