In order to reach the NFL's promised land, your team needs either an elite quarterback, or a good quarterback having an elite season. SB Nation ranks the NFL's 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that idea, rather than sheer talent.
Jun 15, 2010 - Quick: name the best quarterback matchup from any Super Bowl within the past 20 years. Maybe you're thinking of Aikman v. Kelly; perhaps your mind wandered to Elway v. Favre; Brady v. Warner, like a fine wine, has aged well with time; even Brees v. Manning from this past February might rate.
If we're talking solely about quarterback rating - that complex formula that maxes out at 158.3 and is used to gauge quarterback play - there have actually been two equally compelling quarterback matchups over the past two decades that rate above all of those previously mentioned duels. In 1991, Washington's Mark Rypien, the second-rated passer in the league, beat Buffalo and third-rated signal-caller Jim Kelly in Super Bowl XXVI. 11 years later, Tampa Bay, led by third-rated QB Brad Johnson, defeated second-rated Rich Gannon's Oakland squad.
Believe it or not, based purely on combined quarterback rating, those were the two best quarterback duels we've seen in the past two decades' worth of Super Bowls.
In that same time frame, a few more facts present themselves:
What does all of that mean?
The simple adage behind NFL successes - "If you have a quarterback, you can do anything; if you don't have a quarterback, you can do nothing" (paraphrased) - isn't wholly accurate. It's not completely necessary for a team to have a league-renowned, perennially elite quarterback to have a special season, particularly in a modern, highly impatient era of professional football. Your chances skyrocket, however, if your average-to-good quarterback has an elite season. Brad Johnson and Mark Rypien won't be remembered as among the all-time greats, but elite seasons from both, combined with a little luck and a little more help, yielded serious hardware.
That brings us to the upcoming 2010 NFL season, and the 32 quarterbacks that are projected to suit up for their respective teams. There are plenty of outstanding signal-callers in this league, but are there any that, given specific circumstances, can one-year-wonder their team to the promised land? Rather than pump out a run-of-the-mill ranking of the NFL's current signal-callers, we're tailoring this ranking specifically to the 2010 season and its various circumstances.
1. Philip Rivers, Chargers. Yes, the potential holdouts of star receiver Vincent Jackson and stud left tackle Marcus McNeilll could seriously hinder his status as the No. 1 QB on this list. Rivers, however, is already a dominant player, and he'll face a cupcake schedule in 2010. Expect big numbers regardless of the Jackson and McNeill situations; Rivers is that good.
2. Aaron Rodgers, Packers. He's had two consecutive outstanding seasons since taking over for that other guy Green Bay used to employ. He's grown organically alongside homegrown skill position talent, and shouldn't have any trouble exploiting a pretty average schedule.
3. Peyton Manning, Colts. He's Peyton Manning. He'll be awesome, as usual. Indianapolis has a pretty brutal schedule, which could slightly hinder his annual world dominance.
4. Brett Favre, Vikings. Assuming he plays - does anyone really doubt that at this point? - Favre will still be in a cushy situation with outstanding talent, plenty of offensive freedom, and a relatively easy schedule.
5. Drew Brees, Saints. The defending Super Bowl MVP will put up big numbers, as usual, but is competing in an improved NFC South, and gets Baltimore and Pittsburgh as well. Tough schedule, but he'll persevere.
6. Tom Brady, Patriots. New England always has a relatively difficult schedule, and Brady's coming off a pedestrian (for him) season. Expecting huge 2007-level numbers is probably ill advised, but Brady's still one of the league's best, regardless of circumstance.
7. Ben Roethlisberger, Steelers. Yes, he's suspended. When he returns, he'll re-assume his place as one of the league's truly elite signal-callers. The guy just makes plays, and he makes more of them the bigger the game gets.
8. Matt Ryan, Falcons. Entering his third season, Ryan's reached that "break-out-year" point. He's got talent around him; now's the time to produce. Has a very up-and-down schedule to look forward to.
9. Tony Romo, Cowboys. Dallas had the league's second-best offense in 2009, rating just behind Brees and the Saints. The Cowboys will be better in 2010, but their schedule is fairly treacherous. Of anyone outside the Top 5, Romo has the best shot of cracking that illustrious group.
10. Matt Schaub, Texans. Coming off an excellent 2009 season, the Texans might finally be ready to cash in on the "next big thing" status they've carried for the past three offseasons. Schaub has plenty of weapons in an offense perfectly suited for his skill set.
11. Donovan McNabb, Redskins. He'll need to adjust to a new coach behind a still-terrible line, but McNabb is still a good player. Aside from six brutal divisional games, McNabb won't have too much trouble with the rest of the schedule.
12. Matt Hasselbeck, Seahawks. He's a veteran quarterback that will be playing a very, very soft schedule. He was once one of the league's most underrated players; he should have a very solid 2010 season.
13. Joe Flacco, Ravens. That division he plays in is tough, and he'll have tough matchups all year long. Like Ryan, he's reached the "break-out year" point, and he's never had as many offensive weapons as he'll have in 2010.
14. Eli Manning, Giants. One of the toughest quarterbacks to read in the league, Peyton's bro will flash brilliance one week, and resemble a punter-turned-signal-caller the next. With a full year alongside his young receivers under his belt, Manning should rebound nicely.
15. Alex Smith, 49ers. Came out of nowhere in 2009 to put up some surprise performances in leading San Francisco to a 5-3 record over the second half of the season. His 18-TD season showed promise, and he's certainly got a lot of talent around him. Will also benefit from a breezy schedule.
16. Chad Henne, Dolphins. He'll face some of the league's toughest defenses, but also draws some of the league's worst. Miami has a strong running game, a solid line and one of the game's elite receivers for Henne to grow with.
17. Jason Campbell, Raiders. He's always rated efficiently, might actually be in a better situation than he was in a year ago, and will benefit from, again, an easy schedule. You heard it here first: the Raiders could be very serious contenders for an AFC Wild Card slot.
18. Carson Palmer, Bengals. Once regarded as one of the league's absolute best, Palmer was incredibly pedestrian in 2009 while quarterbacking a surprise division champion. It's imperative that Cincinnati improves its passing attack; if they do, they'll be serious AFC contenders once again.
19. Mark Sanchez, Jets. The hotshot rookie was direct hit or laughable miss during the regular season, but had a dynamite post-season run as he finally found his rhythm. He won't have to do much for the Jets to be playoff contenders; if he continues to play the way he did last January, New York is a legitimate Super Bowl favorite.
20. Vince Young, Titans. Sorry, Titans fans, but Vince Young - though he brings unique talents and a winning mentality to the field - won't rate amongst the league's best passers any time soon. That's just not his game.
21. Kevin Kolb, Eagles. Replaces McNabb; showed serious potential, but will play a brutal schedule.
22. Jay Cutler, Bears. Has a chance to rate much higher, but can't be so charitable with the ball.
23. Matt Leinart, Cardinals. Weapons galore and an easy schedule, but has a lot to learn.
24. Matt Cassel, Chiefs. Should be better than he was in 2009, but doesn't have a lot around him.
25. Matt Moore, Panthers. Strong finish to the '09 season could kick-start a promising career.
26. Kyle Orton, Broncos. Easy schedule, but who is he distributing the ball to?
27. David Garrard, Jaguars. Has never possessed the ability to make game-changing throws.
28. Sam Bradford, Rams. Could be a pleasant surprise in an unusually weak division.
29. Matthew Stafford, Lions. Tough schedule, lots to learn. Must cut down on turnovers.
30. Josh Freeman, Buccaneers. Plenty of upside, but he and his team are very green.
31. Trent Edwards, Bills. Lacks confidence, a supporting cast, durability and coaching endorsement.
32. Jake Delhomme, Browns. Gets another shot to start, but it's clear he's past his peak.
77 comments
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
Scoreboard data copyright © 2012 by STATS LLC. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of STATS LLC is strictly prohibited.
OpenCalais - Powered by Thomson Reuters
•
Odds Shark 
Comments
Matt Ryan at 8?! and above Romo and Schabb…… come on.
Hassellback at 12? He’s made of glass and who’s he thowing to?
Kolb is way too low. With Andy Reid callnig the plays, he’s guarenteed to have 25 TDs and 4000 yds.
by BmoreBlitz on Jun 15, 2010 9:32 AM EDT reply actions
Umm… Golden Tate and T.J. Whoseyourmama. Deion Branch…
While you’re at it could you tell me tomorrow’s lotto numbers?
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Jun 15, 2010 10:29 AM EDT up reply actions
Thanks for proving my point about Seatle.
About Kolb, this whole list about predictions, so I’m gonna make mine.
So you’re here to agrue things and not actually put any of your predictions out there…. awesome.
by BmoreBlitz on Jun 15, 2010 11:18 AM EDT up reply actions
its hard to argue kolb is
“way to low” when he has started what? like 2-3 games? that might even be a generous number. what has kolb done in his career for you to think he will pro bowl caliber in his first starting year? im not saying hes bad, but no one steps into the nfl and puts up those kind of number without taking his share of the lumps too. his qb rating will most likely be around what brian predicted seeing as its his first year as the everyday starter, thats the whole point of this post.
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
To us winning is a tradition. We are victors and need not explain. You may hate us, but your girlfriends love us. - BC
by silverstreak3k on Jun 15, 2010 1:11 PM EDT up reply actions
Kolb has started only a few games, but you can see he’s got talent. He’s also got the fastest WR in the game. Not to mention a great #2(Maclin) and #3(Avant). Oh yea an up and coming star TE (Celek). The Iggles pass more than any other team. They also got rid of McNabb when they didn’t have too. Reid must be confident in Kolb to make that move(especially because it was in the divsion). Kolb’s situation reminds me of Aaron Rodgers coming in for Brett Favre.
by BmoreBlitz on Jun 15, 2010 3:01 PM EDT up reply actions
i get it
but thinking that kolb is gonna come in and smell only roses is a bit much i think. sure he has the talent and he will be a good qb someday, but history says most times, new qbs will have pedestrian years their first year. and i think thats why kolb is where he is. he could certainly surprise, but logic puts him where he is.
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
To us winning is a tradition. We are victors and need not explain. You may hate us, but your girlfriends love us. - BC
by silverstreak3k on Jun 15, 2010 7:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Yeah that TJ guy was awful in Cincinnati. Hasselbeck was hurt last year, granted, but that doesn’t diminish TJ’s ability. Conversely… you support the Ravens. How has your WR corps been recently? Yet Joe Flacco has been pretty successful.
That’s fine. Base it on something.
What predictions should I make? I think Kolb is going to have some growing pains and have a mediocre season with an even TD to INT ratio. Ditto Matt Moore, and Sam Bradford (if he makes it past 8 games). I actually would rank Matthew Stafford higher than he is on here, mainly because I really like Brandon Pettigrew.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Jun 15, 2010 5:12 PM EDT up reply actions
I think you are wrong MRW,
I think Moore and Kolb, will outperform Stafford. They don’t have huge contracts like Stafford, so they have more motivation to perform. Sam Bradford will do even worse.
There's not a wide receiver who is fast enough, that J.P. Losman can't overthrow him on a fly pattern.
by The Buffalo Kid on Jun 16, 2010 2:54 AM EDT up reply actions
Of your entire list, the only guy who has passed for more than 1100 yards is Stafford. It’s not exactly going out on a limb with what I’m saying.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Jun 16, 2010 8:44 AM EDT up reply actions
TJ had a real #1 WR in Cinci to help his stats. Seattle doesn’t have a #1 WR. He’s way overrated anyway.
I based my Kolb prediction on the games I saw him play last year.
Stafford is a gunslinger and too young to have a good int / td ratio yet. He hasn’t got the speed of the game down yet.
Matt Moore is more of a game manager and should have a good QB rating. He just wont through as many TDs.
Sam Bradford I have no clue about. He never got hit in his historic season. I didn’t see enough of him last year to predict anything in the future about him.
by BmoreBlitz on Jun 16, 2010 10:47 AM EDT up reply actions
This list is a joke.
Okay, first of all, Aaron Rodgers absolutley sucks. How could he be ahead of tom brady, drew brees, and peyton manning, all super bowl mvps? Tell me, if you were down 4 points with 2 minutes left with 80 yards to the goal line, would you rather have Peyton Manning, or Aaron Rodgers as your QB? Aaron Rodgers has never even done anything past the wild-card round…? He puts average numbers up, and will never be anything more than an average quarterback. Second of all, Phillip Rivers has never been to a super bowl, will probably never, and is the number 3 or 4 QB in this league at best. Third, Mark Sanchez has the best team in the AFC, besides possibly the colts or ravens, around him. How could he be that low in the list… The Jets have the best Defense in the NFL, plus new recievers, LT, and other great weapons. Finally, Garrard should be WAY higher than 27. Hes about 16 or 17. He has made it to the divisional round of the playoffs, which at the time, he had a bad defense, and had to play the patriots of 2007.
This list makes much more sense:
1. Peyton Manning
2. Drew Brees
3. Phillip Rivers
4. Brett Favre
5. Tom Brady
6. Ben Roethlisberger
7. Donovan McNabb
8. Eli Manning
9. Matt Schaub
10. Matt Ryan
11. Vince Young
12. Tony Romo
13. Joe Flacco
14. Aaron Rodgers
15. Carson Palmer
16. Mark Sanchez
17. David Garrard
18. Chad Henne
19. Jay Cutler
20. Matt Hasselback
21. Alex Smith
22. Kevin Kolb
23. Jason Campbell
24. Matthew Stafford
25. Sam Bradford
26. Matt Cassel
27. Kyle Orton
28. Matt Leinart
29. Matt Moore
30. Josh Freeman
31. Jake Delhomme
32. Trent Edwards
by Alex Wilson on Jul 7, 2010 10:05 AM EDT up reply actions
Is this a fantasy ranking?
b/c your top ten is a joke. I swear, ladies, Aaron Rodgers is the Tony Romo of 2005 or whenever it was he first came on the scene. You rated him and Phillip Rivers above Superbowl winners and future Hall of Famers?!! lmfao, man. You’ve rated Schabb, Hasselbeck, Ryan, Flacco and McChoke (who’s team threw him away to the Redskins, btw) ahead of Eli? I can do nothing but chuckle. You did state in the first two sentences that this list is organized according to quarterbacks who can lead their team to the promised land right? Fantasy league man-crushes ruin football. Until these guys can win big, they’re just stuffing their bras in my eyes.
by takeoutburger on Jun 15, 2010 9:38 AM EDT reply actions
I suppose you could call it a fantasy ranking, because it includes factors that fantasy football incorporates.
This wasn’t an attempt to rank the quarterbacks based on sheer talent or accomplishments; as you say, otherwise, things would look very different, particularly in the arrangement of the Top 10.
Instead, this was an attempt to rank the QBs based on QB rating, which ties back into the original thesis of “if you have an elite-rated QB, you’ve got a good shot at glory” that we spent so much time on before getting to the rankings. And as much as I believe Peyton Manning is the absolute best there is, he was still only the sixth-rated QB in the league a year ago. It’s just a little twist for conversation, and clearly, it’s a twist you picked up on pretty quickly. :)
@BloRumblings
@BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 15, 2010 9:55 AM EDT up reply actions
So? Terrell Owens is a future Hall of Famer but he wouldn’t be ahead of a whole slew of wide receivers in a similar post. It’s about 2010.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Jun 15, 2010 10:30 AM EDT up reply actions
Bingo was its name-o.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Cold War Kids - Audience
by TheAfghanTwilight on Jun 15, 2010 11:00 AM EDT up reply actions
BUT...
T.O. isn’t playing at the same level as Manning and Brees. They just played in a Super Bowl. Owens can’t even find a job.
That’s a poor comparison.
2/3 of the Earth is covered by water. The rest is covered by Eric Berry.
I guess now we KNOW how Pioli feels about safeties that high... hahahaha
by Red N Gold Beast on Jun 15, 2010 12:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I’ll give you the comparison is off in that regard. But seriously, Rodgers did more with less in 2009 than Brees or Manning. He had the best interception percentage in the league despite taking 50 sacks. He had more yards per pass attempt than both Brees and Manning and that’s the stat that puts the most pressure on defenses.
That and he kicked butt on my fantasy team last year.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Jun 15, 2010 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions
Ummm
Donald Driver, Greg Jennings, and Jordy Nelson, is less than Marques Colston. Deverey Henderson and Robert Meacham? I don’t think so.
There's not a wide receiver who is fast enough, that J.P. Losman can't overthrow him on a fly pattern.
by The Buffalo Kid on Jun 16, 2010 3:09 AM EDT up reply actions
Right. WR is the only other position worth mentioning.
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Jun 16, 2010 8:45 AM EDT up reply actions
Well who won the super bowl?? Who lost in the wild card playoffs??
Aaron Rodgers has NO leadership skills.
by Alex Wilson on Jul 7, 2010 10:08 AM EDT up reply actions
And yeah,
Superbowl rings do not measure a quarterback’s career. I get it. But these flash boys have not WON BIG and I’ve watched them choke away huge moments. Some of these guys are rated way too high on potential alone. Potential never won any championships.
by takeoutburger on Jun 15, 2010 9:42 AM EDT reply actions
ive been saying that forever, but people seem to forget that. i’m so tired of guys that have “great upside.” give me someone who is already good instead.
by quantumuprising on Jun 15, 2010 9:43 AM EDT up reply actions
Matt Cassel’s rating is mostly right, but the reasoning is wrong. He has plenty of talent around him (Dwayne Bowe, Jamaal Charles, Thomas Jones, Chris Chambers if he’s still with them idk) and a young OL that should improve. His problem is mostly that he sucks.
Also wtf David Garrard just got thrown under several buses there. He should be at #20 at the very least.
by Exystence on Jun 15, 2010 9:54 AM EDT reply actions
I disagree
I think Cassel should of been ranked a little higher and some guys above him do not deserve to be above him
by tomahawk44 on Jun 15, 2010 10:31 AM EDT up reply actions
The QBs that should be below Cassel are
Leinart,Hasselbeck,Alex Smith and even Kolb who had a big game against Cassels Chiefs..I just dont see how one good game puts him up there
by tomahawk44 on Jun 15, 2010 10:44 AM EDT up reply actions
I don’t dislike Garrard as a QB, but what (as written above) was inaccurate?
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Cold War Kids - Audience
by TheAfghanTwilight on Jun 15, 2010 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Obviously I’m not going to change where Garrard is listed, but perhaps Exystence has a point – that analysis for Garrard, in retrospect, was a little harsh. He’s typically efficient; he’s just not a game-changer, and I think he’s about ready to bottom out.
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 15, 2010 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
I can agree with that entirely. And as TheAfghanTwilight was getting at, yeah there was nothing wrong with what you said at all, it’s perfectly true. But yeah… 27th is a bit low. If anything, he’s Kyle Orton with more mobility and better receiving options—assuming (reasonably so imo) that Demaryius Thomas will take some time to develop—so he should at least be above him.
And for the record I personally couldn’t care less for David Garrard or Kyle Orton or whoever (I’m a Jets fan lol), I’m just find these rankings interesting.
Oh yeah wtf Henne over Sanchez how dare you :P
by Exystence on Jun 15, 2010 11:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Heh. Sanchez had a lucky season> This is a big season for him. I wouldn’t be surprised if the stress to produce gets to him for a good portion of games, or even seasons.
I don’t get what ANYONE is seeing in Chad Henne. I haven’t seen one reason to think he’s going to be the next big thing for the Dolphins, but I don’t spend much time watching his game. It might be his college pedigree.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Cold War Kids - Audience
by TheAfghanTwilight on Jun 15, 2010 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions
What???
You rate Matt Ryan right below Roethlisberger???
Who's laughing now, O Line??? Ben Roethlisberger (from the Podium) to his O-Line and the world in Superbowl XLIII
by SteeladyinVA on Jun 15, 2010 10:00 AM EDT reply actions
This list is ridiculous
How is Kyle Orton 26th ? How do you have Henne ?Smith? Campbell?Palmer ?ranked above him ?
Who is Orton gonna throw to? Well who is Mcnabb going to throw to ? You have him at 11th and the Broncos receiving corps is better than the Skins
3800 yards 21 tds 12 picks and somehow he is the 26th rated Qb in the league coming into his second year in a complicated offense ?
by Hoopforia on Jun 15, 2010 11:08 AM EDT reply actions
LOL REALLY!?
Dude…denvers WR corps is not better then the skins’. Wash. has Moss, (flashes skill but is inconsistant) and at the very worst…a slew of recieving Rbs and a pro bowl elite te…backed up by what looks like after last yr could be ANOTHER pro bowl calibur te…who does denver have?…moreno and bucky? Oh wait i forgot they got jabar gaffney…yea..that seems elite! hahaha you all kill me i see one person talk about dont give me “people with potential” give me someone good already and then another guy calls a wr corps thats nothing but rooks better then another vet corp. wowzers
by Jamie Walker on Jun 15, 2010 11:20 AM EDT up reply actions
Not to mention you are quoting stats for Orten that he got last yr…with Bmarsh. Use your head…
by Jamie Walker on Jun 15, 2010 11:21 AM EDT up reply actions
Orton still has better WRs though, he has a pretty decent point. I think the bigger factor however will be Ryan Clady’s absence. That one’s gonna hurt a lot.
by Exystence on Jun 15, 2010 11:47 AM EDT up reply actions
The Broncos have Royal,Gaffney,Lloyd,Stokley all coming in to there second year in the offense about to get the opportunities presented by Marshall departing. We have Decker and Thomas two good rookie prospects who will have a chance to get some reps and Buckhalter and Moreno so we will have quite a nice rotation and nevermind that in the game without Marshall last season Orton threw for over 400+ yards .
Replacing Marshall is not the same as say replacing Randy Moss’s downfield speed as Marshall was primarily a possession receiver in our offense we have several guys who can fill that role .
by Hoopforia on Jun 22, 2010 12:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Washington’s receivers are similar to what McNabb had in Philly. Kyle Orton lost a TON of support in the WR department. Couple that with Tebowmania and Quinn sniffing his cold bench, I can see Orton struggling.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Cold War Kids - Audience
by TheAfghanTwilight on Jun 15, 2010 11:51 AM EDT up reply actions
orton wont last the year
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
To us winning is a tradition. We are victors and need not explain. You may hate us, but your girlfriends love us. - BC
by silverstreak3k on Jun 15, 2010 1:07 PM EDT up reply actions
Jake Delhomme
2010 version: most expensive: least reliable.
Buffalo Rumblings Premiere League 2009 Champion
Song recommendation of the week: Cold War Kids - Audience
by TheAfghanTwilight on Jun 15, 2010 11:57 AM EDT reply actions
How does Matt Cassel not have a lot around him?
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with your ranking of Cassel, but you should have left it at HE has a lot to prove. Jamaal Charles, Thomas Jones, Dexter McCluster, Dwayne Bowe, Chris Chambers and an upgraded interior OL.
Cassel has more than enough tools to make the jump into the upper echelon of QBs. That will be up to him though.
And, BTW… you should be beaten with an extension cord for putting Phillip Rivers and Aaron Rodgers ahead of Peyton Manning and Drew Brees. What the hell man?
2/3 of the Earth is covered by water. The rest is covered by Eric Berry.
I guess now we KNOW how Pioli feels about safeties that high... hahahaha
by Red N Gold Beast on Jun 15, 2010 12:35 PM EDT reply actions
If he's
queuing them according to how he thinks they will rank regarding their passer rating, it’s not unreasonable to think that Rivers and Rodgers will rank higher, considering they both had higher ratings. That doesn’t make them better QB’s, and they’re not in most people’s opinions, including his(Galliford) own.
by Ewdtrey on Jun 16, 2010 4:49 PM EDT up reply actions
This list is making some big time assumptions
"When I played pro football, I never set out to hurt anyone deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." ~ Dick Butkus
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Jun 15, 2010 12:54 PM EDT reply actions
I love this list. Anybody can fart out a carbon copy BREES MANNING BRADY list and call it a day.
Best thing about this list: the entire thing sailed over the heads of every commenter so far.
It’s not about who’s better. It’s about who’s going to have a better year. Did you guys read the note about Brad Johnson being the third-ranked QB in 2001, or did you just look for your guy so you could set your keyboard on fire?
Longest Atlanta Falcons winning-seasons streak: 2008 - current
The Falcoholic · Blog · Twitter
by Jason Kirk on Jun 15, 2010 1:10 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
hey
not every commenter. those of us that read got it….
Buffalo, that's where it's at baby. - Adam 'Pacman' Jones
To us winning is a tradition. We are victors and need not explain. You may hate us, but your girlfriends love us. - BC
by silverstreak3k on Jun 15, 2010 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions
this is exactly about NOT farting out lists-
unfortunately, you have comments about who is good or not good based on fantasy numbers alone. People type in names and get back a bunch of numbers and make assessments without watching the games. Without witnessing which players have BALLS. You really love this list? It’s about who’s going to have a better year? I thought it was about championships, leaders, and winners.
by takeoutburger on Jun 15, 2010 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions
Then you obviously missed the point of all of that reading material before the rankings started. But that’s OK.
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 15, 2010 7:24 PM EDT up reply actions
what numbers are you going by?
what reason do you have for brees dropping from #1 passer rating to #5? is his super bowl mvp going to make him lazy or something? you mention that the afc north is tougher… is the combination of afc north and nfc west easier or harder than the nfc east and afc east we played last year?
I love it when a plan comes together! -Hannibal
by DrewBreesManCrush on Jun 15, 2010 1:43 PM EDT reply actions
I’m expecting closer to ‘08-’09 numbers from Brees – not in terms of sheer quantity (I doubt he puts it up anywhere near 635 times, obviously), but in terms of quality of production. Clearly, he’s elite, and I don’t think not placing him No. 1 on this list is indicative of a lack of respect. Other QBs just have it easier in ’10.
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 15, 2010 2:15 PM EDT up reply actions
What About...
Flip Ryan and Schaub:
I don’t know what Hasselbeck is doing at 12, did anyone watch him play last season, his game has finally caught up with his hair line.
Campbell at 17, that’s a stretch
Sleeper: Matt Moore, I like his poise
by mmarshall on Jun 15, 2010 1:46 PM EDT reply actions
I stopped reading when #1 wasn’t Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, or Tom Brady.
We rise. They fall.
Proud to have my own tag on KSK
http://monkeybiziu.deviantart.com
by MonkeyBusiness on Jun 15, 2010 4:39 PM EDT reply actions
Matt Schaub had the most attempts, completions, and passing yards in 2009. Guess you hate those lists too. Phillip Rivers had the most yards per attempt, too, and yards per completion. THOSE MEAN NOTHING!
You can't have CHANGE without CHAN.
Tweet
Buffalo Rumblings
by MattRichWarren on Jun 15, 2010 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions
Leinarts rating is fair IMO.
But I am certain that he will be moving up on these lists next season. Very optimistic about him.
Lifelong Arizona Cardinals/Chicago Bears fan [I have always lived in Arizona, dad is from Chicago].
I can't stand fair-weather/bandwagon fans, stick with your team, throughout the good and the bad. And don't switch to whichever team wins the Super Bowl each year.
by JoeCB1991 on Jun 15, 2010 6:45 PM EDT reply actions
It's possible.
Equally possible that he falls flat on his face, I can’t wait to see what goes down in that regard.
Top Tip for England's next game: If you're watching on Sky+ press pause and wait a second before pressing play. Being a second or two behind the live play will give you that authentic Emile Heskey viewpoint.
Stalk me on Twitter!
by James Brady on Jun 16, 2010 8:32 AM EDT up reply actions
Brian Galliford is a moron.
Garrard maybe no Manning, but even last year with an offensive live bookended by rookies and NOT 1 SINGLE WR from the year before starting.. he was in the top 15 in most stats.
The year before with NO offensive line (Much less decent rookies), a WR Corp that the follow year was cut and only one (Matt Jones) ever signed with another team (and that was only during this offseason). He was again between 5-15 in most all stats.
So to rank him like this is nuts.. I won’t even go into where you have others ranked.. Peyton 3rd? Dont get me wrong I hate Peyton Manning as any good Jaguar fan would… but hes the best there is. Brees 5th?
Come on be honest.. you posted a list of QBs to a dart board and just threw darts at it.. I sure hope they didn’t pay you for this joke of an article.
" In Gene We Trust "
by Charles Goin on Jun 15, 2010 7:11 PM EDT reply actions
In the only statistical category around which I based this entire article – QB Rating – Garrard was No. 17 in the NFL in 2009, and No. 20 in 2008.
This was not a listing of who the best QB in the league is, because as I mentioned near the top of this here comments section, CLEARLY it would look pretty different. The entire point was to base the list on QB Rating. I’m sorry you missed that point.
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 15, 2010 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Here are some stats for you..
NO WHERE is Garrard close to being at the bottom of the list.
QB Rating
1 Drew Brees 109.6
2 Brett Favre 107.2
3 Philip Rivers 104.4
4 Aaron Rodgers 103.2
5 Ben Roethlisberger 100.5
6 Peyton Manning 99.9
7 Matt Schaub 98.6
8 Tony Romo 97.6
9 Tom Brady 96.2
10 Kurt Warner 93.2
17 David Garrard 83.5
TTL YARDS Player Yds
1 Matt Schaub 4,770
2 Peyton Manning 4,500
3 Tony Romo 4,483
4 Aaron Rodgers 4,434
5 Tom Brady 4,398
6 Drew Brees 4,388
7 Ben Roethlisberger 4,328
8 Philip Rivers 4,254
9 Brett Favre 4,202
10 Eli Manning 4,021
16 David Garrard 3,597
Comp %
1 Drew Brees 70.6
2 Peyton Manning 68.8
3 Brett Favre 68.4
4 Matt Schaub 67.9
5 Ben Roethlisberger 66.6
6 Kurt Warner 66.1
7 Tom Brady 65.7
8 Philip Rivers 65.2
9 Aaron Rodgers 64.7
10 Jason Campbell 64.5
15 David Garrard 60.9
20+ YD
1 Philip Rivers 64
2 Matt Schaub 62
3 Ben Roethlisberger 61
3 Tony Romo 61
5 Eli Manning 60
6 Peyton Manning 59
7 Drew Brees 58
8 Jay Cutler 56
9 Donovan McNabb 55
9 Aaron Rodgers 55
11 Brett Favre 52
12 Joe Flacco 44
12 David Garrard 44
YD AVG
1 Philip Rivers 8.8
2 Ben Roethlisberger 8.6
3 Drew Brees 8.5
4 Aaron Rodgers 8.2
4 Tony Romo 8.2
4 Matt Schaub 8.2
7 Donovan McNabb 8
8 Brett Favre 7.9
8 Peyton Manning 7.9
8 Eli Manning 7.9
11 Tom Brady 7.8
12 Kurt Warner 7.3
12 Vince Young 7.3
14 Joe Flacco 7.2
15 Jason Campbell 7.1
16 David Garrard 7
David Garrard 77 323 20.2 4.2 3
So lets see ALL new WR Corps, Rookie bookends on OL, A Defense that had 14 whole sacks.. so the Offsense was on the field a LOT more.
YET he was in the middle of the pack.
Give him the Colts, New Orleans or OL and WR Corps and I am willing to bet he is in the top 10 stats or better.
Remember the TWO Games against the Colts? Where Garrard went toe-to-toe with Manning and we lost both games last minute by less than 5 points combined in TWO games. Let me remind you Garrard – Wk 15 – 23/40, 223 YDS, 3 TD
So again.. Garrard is a good reliable QB. Is he a GREAT QB? NO.. but a LOT of GREAT QBs.. were mediocre and surrounded by GREAT Talent. Garrard the last two years has been surrounded by either really young or really bad WR COrps and Oline..
So a ranking of 26 is plain Fn’ stupid.. As is most your useless list.
" In Gene We Trust "
by Charles Goin on Jun 17, 2010 7:41 PM EDT up reply actions
too many words
by Mattyice318 on Jun 19, 2010 1:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Jaguar fans are the ultimate homers
Garrard just isn’t that great… he works with nothing (you have one tryuly hopeful WR) and MJD keeps the team afloat
by vitzeng on Jun 20, 2010 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions
I agree with everything Charles Goin says….Brian Galliford try baseball because you obviously don’t know football at all
by StylezMcKoolaid on Jun 15, 2010 7:19 PM EDT reply actions
For real, people. Giant text before the article even starts:
In order to reach the NFL’s promised land, your team needs either an elite quarterback, or a good quarterback having an elite season. SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that idea, rather than sheer talent.
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 15, 2010 7:29 PM EDT up reply actions
To break it down.. why Brian Galiford is a moron..
Apparently a lack of NFL knowledge and a lack of seeing the BIG picture.
In order to reach the NFL’s promised land, your team needs either an elite quarterback, or a good quarterback having an elite season.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that idea
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talent
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talentSee previous post.. I think Garrards talent speaks for itself. Again not saying he is a GREAT QB.. but he is most definately a GOOD QB.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talentSee previous post.. I think Garrards talent speaks for itself. Again not saying he is a GREAT QB.. but he is most definately a GOOD QB.As for your comment
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talentSee previous post.. I think Garrards talent speaks for itself. Again not saying he is a GREAT QB.. but he is most definately a GOOD QB.As for your commentHe’s typically efficient; he’s just not a game-changer, and I think he’s about ready to bottom out.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talentSee previous post.. I think Garrards talent speaks for itself. Again not saying he is a GREAT QB.. but he is most definately a GOOD QB.As for your commentHe’s typically efficient; he’s just not a game-changer, and I think he’s about ready to bottom out.He has been a game changer on a number of occasions.. (PIttsburgh playoff game anyone) But being a TEAM sport he can’t carry a weak rebuilding team on his shoulders and win every game.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talentSee previous post.. I think Garrards talent speaks for itself. Again not saying he is a GREAT QB.. but he is most definately a GOOD QB.As for your commentHe’s typically efficient; he’s just not a game-changer, and I think he’s about ready to bottom out.He has been a game changer on a number of occasions.. (PIttsburgh playoff game anyone) But being a TEAM sport he can’t carry a weak rebuilding team on his shoulders and win every game.As for bottoming out.. He is agile, fast, strong and not prone to injury. This year the WR Corps will be primarily the same one from last year and with a few patches the OL will be the same as last year. BIG difference is that they won’t be rookies. They will be more veteran.. and if you paid any attention to the team you would have realized the OL Started to gel towards the end of the year as did the WR Corps.. right aobu thte time our Defense decided to call it a year. Which if you noticed was completely rebuild from the ground up like our Offense was last year.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talentSee previous post.. I think Garrards talent speaks for itself. Again not saying he is a GREAT QB.. but he is most definately a GOOD QB.As for your commentHe’s typically efficient; he’s just not a game-changer, and I think he’s about ready to bottom out.He has been a game changer on a number of occasions.. (PIttsburgh playoff game anyone) But being a TEAM sport he can’t carry a weak rebuilding team on his shoulders and win every game.As for bottoming out.. He is agile, fast, strong and not prone to injury. This year the WR Corps will be primarily the same one from last year and with a few patches the OL will be the same as last year. BIG difference is that they won’t be rookies. They will be more veteran.. and if you paid any attention to the team you would have realized the OL Started to gel towards the end of the year as did the WR Corps.. right aobu thte time our Defense decided to call it a year. Which if you noticed was completely rebuild from the ground up like our Offense was last year.So not only do I expect Garrard to have decent fantasy numbers. I expect him to be in the top 10.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talentSee previous post.. I think Garrards talent speaks for itself. Again not saying he is a GREAT QB.. but he is most definately a GOOD QB.As for your commentHe’s typically efficient; he’s just not a game-changer, and I think he’s about ready to bottom out.He has been a game changer on a number of occasions.. (PIttsburgh playoff game anyone) But being a TEAM sport he can’t carry a weak rebuilding team on his shoulders and win every game.As for bottoming out.. He is agile, fast, strong and not prone to injury. This year the WR Corps will be primarily the same one from last year and with a few patches the OL will be the same as last year. BIG difference is that they won’t be rookies. They will be more veteran.. and if you paid any attention to the team you would have realized the OL Started to gel towards the end of the year as did the WR Corps.. right aobu thte time our Defense decided to call it a year. Which if you noticed was completely rebuild from the ground up like our Offense was last year.So not only do I expect Garrard to have decent fantasy numbers. I expect him to be in the top 10.My whole point is that.. if you are THIS wrong on Garrard.. and obviously equally wrong on other QBs in this list (I.E. Manning, Brees.. etc.. etc..) you were either VERY Biased and don’t actaully follow ALL the teams (and thus shouldn’t aren’t properly informed) OR you obviously made up this list by throwing darts at a wall.
Agreed.. and Garrard is a GOOD QB. YOU seem to forget this is a TEAM sport. Since his first full year as starter he has either dealt with Mediocre to horrible starting WRs and OL. It wasnt until last year (With the firing of Shack Harris and putting Gene Smith in charge) did Jacksonville start drafting anyone worth a da*mn.SB Nation ranks the NFL’s 32 projected starting quarterbacks based on that ideaReally? then how the hell is Garrard in 27th? Seriously… answer the agruments I gave here and above to why the hell you would have him rated so low.rather than sheer talentSee previous post.. I think Garrards talent speaks for itself. Again not saying he is a GREAT QB.. but he is most definately a GOOD QB.As for your commentHe’s typically efficient; he’s just not a game-changer, and I think he’s about ready to bottom out.He has been a game changer on a number of occasions.. (PIttsburgh playoff game anyone) But being a TEAM sport he can’t carry a weak rebuilding team on his shoulders and win every game.As for bottoming out.. He is agile, fast, strong and not prone to injury. This year the WR Corps will be primarily the same one from last year and with a few patches the OL will be the same as last year. BIG difference is that they won’t be rookies. They will be more veteran.. and if you paid any attention to the team you would have realized the OL Started to gel towards the end of the year as did the WR Corps.. right aobu thte time our Defense decided to call it a year. Which if you noticed was completely rebuild from the ground up like our Offense was last year.So not only do I expect Garrard to have decent fantasy numbers. I expect him to be in the top 10.My whole point is that.. if you are THIS wrong on Garrard.. and obviously equally wrong on other QBs in this list (I.E. Manning, Brees.. etc.. etc..) you were either VERY Biased and don’t actaully follow ALL the teams (and thus shouldn’t aren’t properly informed) OR you obviously made up this list by throwing darts at a wall.If your going to act like a journalist.. act like one and actually read the team reports, and do some research. Because you apparently didn’t and don’t understand a NFL TEAM is a TEAM.. so if your going to rate QBs for Fantasy reasons.. you may just want to actually see what the TEAM brings to the table to help the QBs overall stats. Like what is his Oline, WR corps, TE, RB and such on the team are like and take that into account before you open your mouth.
" In Gene We Trust "
by Charles Goin on Jun 18, 2010 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
???
Not sure what the heck happened there.. Thats not what it looked like in the Preview.
" In Gene We Trust "
by Charles Goin on Jun 18, 2010 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
You’re operating under the assumption that my ranking Garrard where I did means I think he’s a bad quarterback. I don’t. I think he’s been, as you say, a good player. My gut tells me he’s close to that point in his career where he goes from middling quarterback to a guy that needs to be replaced; if that makes me a moron, then so be it.
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 18, 2010 12:13 PM EDT up reply actions
You didn't say it outright
but you’re suggesting Garrard’s arrow is pointing down in terms of talent or production, but if you look at the clues, suggestions, facts, etc you will see that he should only get better next year.
1. He is still learning is craft.
2. His offensive line wont have 2 rookies, and a player coming off of a recent ACL.
3. His receivers wont include an old Torry Holt. A young WR coming off of knee injuries in Mike Sims-Walker. And a bunch of rookies like Mike Thomas and Jarett Dillard. Going into last season, he only had regular practice with Holt who was limited by his knee. This season, everyone is healthy and Holt isn’t slowing down the chemistry of the other receivers.
4. Garrard’s physical gifts are not dwindling by any means, which means he shouldn’t be getting worse for any reason.
5. His offensive coordinator is going to be less restricted by former coaches that liked to run the ball a lot.
6. He should have a break out receiver in Zach Miller as a receiver.
7. The defense should improve immensly with the addition of 7 defensive linemen that will be better than 2 of our starters last year.
8. Garrard is working harder than he ever has before now that he can work with his receivers. And he’s also on the hot seat and he knows it.
by Ewdtrey on Jun 19, 2010 11:39 PM EDT up reply actions
Sometimes simple is best
Ewdtrey you hit it on the head with a lot less text ;)
NO way is he 27th and NO way is his performance on the downturn..
Brian.. Its not JUST about the fact you have Garrard 27th, its the fact the entire lists looks like you grabbed names out of a hat. The list is a joke.
Brian.. Its not JUST about the fact you have Garrard 27th, its the fact the entire lists looks like you grabbed names out of a hat. The list is a joke.Rivers and Rodgers over Manning? If this is about fantasy numbers.. than that “could” make a “little” sense.. But even then its a stretch.
Brian.. Its not JUST about the fact you have Garrard 27th, its the fact the entire lists looks like you grabbed names out of a hat. The list is a joke.Rivers and Rodgers over Manning? If this is about fantasy numbers.. than that “could” make a “little” sense.. But even then its a stretch.Brady 6th? Fantasy wise he was on average OK, and he is definately getting worse..
Brian.. Its not JUST about the fact you have Garrard 27th, its the fact the entire lists looks like you grabbed names out of a hat. The list is a joke.Rivers and Rodgers over Manning? If this is about fantasy numbers.. than that “could” make a “little” sense.. But even then its a stretch.Brady 6th? Fantasy wise he was on average OK, and he is definately getting worse..Rothlisberger 7th? If this IS truly all about FF.. then being suspended 4 games should drop him 10 points alone. He will be rusty.. even when he gets off suspension.
Brian.. Its not JUST about the fact you have Garrard 27th, its the fact the entire lists looks like you grabbed names out of a hat. The list is a joke.Rivers and Rodgers over Manning? If this is about fantasy numbers.. than that “could” make a “little” sense.. But even then its a stretch.Brady 6th? Fantasy wise he was on average OK, and he is definately getting worse..Rothlisberger 7th? If this IS truly all about FF.. then being suspended 4 games should drop him 10 points alone. He will be rusty.. even when he gets off suspension.Schaub at 10th? Really? Top 5 in stats last year, hes young and improving..
Brian.. Its not JUST about the fact you have Garrard 27th, its the fact the entire lists looks like you grabbed names out of a hat. The list is a joke.Rivers and Rodgers over Manning? If this is about fantasy numbers.. than that “could” make a “little” sense.. But even then its a stretch.Brady 6th? Fantasy wise he was on average OK, and he is definately getting worse..Rothlisberger 7th? If this IS truly all about FF.. then being suspended 4 games should drop him 10 points alone. He will be rusty.. even when he gets off suspension.Schaub at 10th? Really? Top 5 in stats last year, hes young and improving..Campbell 17th? Hes wasn’t that good in DC and now he is going to be with the RAIDERS ! Nuf said on that one..
Brian.. Its not JUST about the fact you have Garrard 27th, its the fact the entire lists looks like you grabbed names out of a hat. The list is a joke.Rivers and Rodgers over Manning? If this is about fantasy numbers.. than that “could” make a “little” sense.. But even then its a stretch.Brady 6th? Fantasy wise he was on average OK, and he is definately getting worse..Rothlisberger 7th? If this IS truly all about FF.. then being suspended 4 games should drop him 10 points alone. He will be rusty.. even when he gets off suspension.Schaub at 10th? Really? Top 5 in stats last year, hes young and improving..Campbell 17th? Hes wasn’t that good in DC and now he is going to be with the RAIDERS ! Nuf said on that one..Sanchez at 19? Don’t disagree with what you wrote about him.. but if you believed that.. Why 19th? Below Campbell, Hasselbeck, and Henne. Really?
So.. in final.. I would go over all the other QBs you have listed in questionable places, but in the end your credibility as a sports writer is pretty much flushed down the toilet with this list.
" In Gene We Trust "
by Charles Goin on Jun 21, 2010 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions
WTF
Whats causing this wierdness. Seems every return causes a repeat of the text before.. It also didn’t look like this in Preview.
" In Gene We Trust "
by Charles Goin on Jun 21, 2010 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions
I beg to differ...
Having read a great deal of Brian Galliford’s commentary over the past two years, I contend that he does know a great deal about the NFL. As he CLEARLY indicated, his list was based on potential to lead his team to the championship, and that includes variables in addition to the ability of the QB alone, many of which are not within the QB’s control. Factors such as surrounding talent, quality of the opposition, balance within the divisions etc. come into play in his analysis. Brian’s list certainly would have looked much different had it been limited to an overall rating of the starting QBs. If you truly wish to debate his knowledge, why not preserve the list and review his evaluations once the 2010 season is completed. Then, if you feel justified, call him on it or congratulate him for his insight. For now, I’ll take his opinions as reasonable and informed.
by dukedoc76 on Jun 15, 2010 8:29 PM EDT up reply actions
Yes – the good ol’ “hey, in retrospect, you’re definitely a moron” argument is far more convincing. :)
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 15, 2010 8:37 PM EDT up reply actions
Dang it
Thats the keystone of my over arching posting policy. rap.
The player I would like least at #9 would be my sister’s cat, Captain Creamsicle. She does have a great work ethic and agility, but I’m really concerned that at 9 lbs., she’s too small to play safety in the NFL. She also bites way too often on play action and is easily distracted by someone waving string in the crowd. Lastly, her wonderlic score was pretty awful, answering "meow meow meow" for most of the questions- Dr. Brackish Okun
by mob16151 on Jun 16, 2010 5:14 AM EDT up reply actions
Good rankings.
There’s a serious amount of butthurt here, but for the most part I think these are solid, and before anyone assumes he was overly nice to my QB—he wasn’t.
I think Palmer is a bit underrated, Eli maybe as well. Hasselbeck a bit overrated (but noy by much), and beyond that, I’d say swap Romo and Ryan and you’ve got a very solid list (in my opinion).
Top Tip for England's next game: If you're watching on Sky+ press pause and wait a second before pressing play. Being a second or two behind the live play will give you that authentic Emile Heskey viewpoint.
Stalk me on Twitter!
by James Brady on Jun 16, 2010 8:31 AM EDT reply actions
Nice Job
Brian…You do a really nice job on the Buffalo site, nice job here as well. I don’t really know exactly how to do these rankings, I guess the way I think about it is who would I want to be quarterback of my team for this one year. Honestly, if off the field stuff doesn’t count, which of course it does, but on the field only I’d have Big Ben number one. I don’t like what he did off the field, but on the field he plays big in big games and he extends plays better than anyone in the league. He’s big and strong and tough and in the prime of his career…and he’s done it in Pittsburgh with an average at best line and only decent talent around him.
by P_Deuce on Jun 16, 2010 1:47 PM EDT reply actions
You are shortchanging Orton
He was ranked 14th last year and there’s no way he drops that much even losing Marshall. The recieving corps is still solid and two talented receivers were added in the draft. It might even be a benefit by allowing a more even distribution. He may not be top ten, but another year of comfort in the offense should allow him to make an incremental improvement.
by admill on Jun 17, 2010 8:34 AM EDT reply actions
i think you've put too much faith in Denver's WR corp
how many people would feel confident with Jabar Gaffney as their #1
frankly, demaryius thomas should be placed as #1… I think he’s offensive ROY
by vitzeng on Jun 20, 2010 2:58 PM EDT up reply actions
Matt Moore at 25?
He’s below Alex Smith, Chad Henne, Vince Young, and Matt Cassel for goodness sakes. Really? Matt Moore should be in the top 15 easily. Give me a break. You obviously haven’t seen him play. Also Jake Delhomme is not 32nd, nor is Phillip Rivers 1st. There are plenty of worse QBs than Delhomme. He just had one bad year. He’s been pretty good the rest of his career, and there’s nothing to suggest that he can’t get back to his old self. It’s not like he had some major injury to his throwing arm or something. He did great the year after his surgery, so that isn’t affecting him. It’s all psychological, and he’ll work past it.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Jun 20, 2010 8:25 PM EDT reply actions
Oye vey. The list is based on QB rating. It’s not your traditional ranking of QBs from best to worst.
And yes, I’ve seen Matt Moore play. Nice assumption, though. Yes, he’s at 25. He’s got the potential to be very good.
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 21, 2010 6:32 PM EDT up reply actions
I know what the article was about.
I read it. Did you look up what Matt Moore’s QB rating was last year? I’m sure it will go down some since he’ll be playing a whole season instead of just 5 games, but 25th worst? C’mon now. If he’s 25th, you obviously think he stinks. The 25th worst passer rating last year was around 70. That’s what you think his rating will be? That’s an epic plummet from almost 100 to 70. I don’t think so. Top 15 easily, like I said.
stuff 'bout stuff.
by silver82blade on Jun 23, 2010 1:56 AM EDT up reply actions
Are you crazy!
There’s Peyton Manning, then there’s everyone else. And I’m not even a Colt’s fan
by Indy Mike on Jun 21, 2010 11:01 AM EDT reply actions
I acknowledged as much earlier in this very comments section, but, again (I’ve said this a few times), this list was based on QB Rating.
@BloRumblings, @BrianGalliford
by Brian Galliford on Jun 21, 2010 6:33 PM EDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed