sam bradford

[SBXVII]

Dan Marino was good also.

[mlmpetert]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

IMO, this is how the franchise QB landscape shapes up. (order doesn't matter)

Only the sure ones are included

NFC East
Vick, and that's it

NFC North
Cutler
Rodgers

NFC West
Bradford

NFC South
Brees
Freeman
Ryan

AFC East
Brady

AFC North
Rapistberger
Flacco

AFC West
Rivers

AFC South
Manning

12/32(or 37.5%), and I did not count guys like Eli, Romo, McNabb, Stafford, Sanchez, Cassel, or Schaub.

I dont get how you can include Vick, Cutler, Bradford (after not even 1 year), and Freeman (even though im personally as high on him as i am Ryan) and not include Cassel and Schaub. Although, like i think Matty72 said i think there needs to be a agreed upon defition of franchise qb....

[skinster]

Originally Posted by SBXVII

Dan Marino was good also.

yea i figured there was probably a rook that had a better year than bradford, that's why I said "that has been drafted in my lifetime (I'm 21)" to cover ignorant my ass. Marino's numbers are unreal. I really hate how superbowls define the great qb's because from what I understand, marino had no talent around him and had no defenses to work with. If I had to guess marino was probably the best qb ever by doing so much with so little, but I can't say that with conviction.

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by skinster

yea i figured there was probably a rook that had a better year than bradford, that's why I said "that has been drafted in my lifetime (I'm 21)" to cover ignorant my ass. Marino's numbers are unreal. I really hate how superbowls define the great qb's because from what I understand, marino had no talent around him and had no defenses to work with. If I had to guess marino was probably the best qb ever by doing so much with so little, but I can't say that with conviction.

Nice comment. My original comment was supposed to be somewhat sarcastic in nature meaning Bradford could be awsome but had we drafted him and gave him the "lack of talented OL" we have now .... we probably wouldn't be talking about him and in the end people would be talking about him like Marino.

I won't lie... I was one who thought we should move up and get him but I can imagine what the Rams wanted for their spot.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinster

"Top 10" is an estimated term. Its only used to indicate a high pick. 11 I'd consider a high pick while the next highest picked "franchise qb" was aaron rogers at 24. I'd say that's a pretty big gap that proves my point.

But just for the record, now that you have me thinking about it, I'd have to say the top third is high, the middle third is middle, and the last third is last. I'd say that close enough can count for either, so I'll say the cutoffs are roughly at 10-12 and at 20-22.

lol some of you guys should be attorneys, I swear

[skinster]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

lol some of you guys should be attorneys, I swear

all i was trying to say is that we use the number 10 because it is a nice round number, not because it is accurate. That is around where the top of the draft class is. Where the cutoff line of the top of the draft has a small amount of variance from draft to draft and person to person, and there is no true cutoff...which is why i gave the estimated range of top vs middle vs bottom that is subject to opinion.

P.s I'm still in college, but my family is made of lawyers.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinster

all i was trying to say is that we use the number 10 because it is a nice round number, not because it is accurate. That is around where the top of the draft class is. Where the cutoff line of the top of the draft has a small amount of variance from draft to draft and person to person, and there is no true cutoff...which is why i gave the estimated range of top vs middle vs bottom that is subject to opinion.

P.s I'm still in college, but my family is made of lawyers.

Shocker... do you tap dance too?

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by mlmpetert

I dont get how you can include Vick, Cutler, Bradford (after not even 1 year), and Freeman (even though im personally as high on him as i am Ryan) and not include Cassel and Schaub. Although, like i think Matty72 said i think there needs to be a agreed upon defition of franchise qb....

Don't ever use his full name in public!


Anywho; any one who thinks Flacco is a franchise QB has not really watched in the past two years. they don't lose becasue of him but they surely don't win becasue of him either. The guy is Switzerland.

IMO: A franchise QB is someone who can do this; "Joe Q is hurt and so is Ray Rice we need a TD in the last minute go out and get it for us." He can't do it and I believe he has only one winning drive in his career in his career when they have been down in the 4th.

Basically if Flacco goes down for the year the Ravens are still alive if Brady and/or Manning go down their teams are sunk; more so IND.

[MTK]

This article is obviously a little dated now, but it could be a good starting off point for this discussion

From Peyton Manning to Jake Delhomme, ESPN's John Clayton ranks the NFL's starting QBs - ESPN

[SBXVII]

[QUOTE=skinster;769174]"Top 10" is an estimated term. Its only used to indicate a high pick. 11 I'd consider a high pick while the next highest picked "franchise qb" was aaron rogers at 24. I'd say that's a pretty big gap that proves my point.

But just for the record, now that you have me thinking about it, I'd have to say the top third is high, the middle third is middle, and the last third is last. I'd say that close enough can count for either, so I'll say the cutoffs are roughly at 10-12 and at 20-22.[/QUOTE]

Great arguement, but I thougth there were 32 picks in the first round? you broke your thirds down leaving out the last 10 picks. Secondly what if I broke it down into fourth's instead of thirds? Clearly that would narrow down the area in which a good QB could be drafted right? But if you really didn't want to narrow it down and wanted to be more broad you could simply break it down in half. Lastly is there any way the middle third might be in the last third considering you left out almost another third? Which might be why breaking it down into fourths is better.

Also what if there is no need for a Franchise QB in the top third and the best QB is picked in the middle third? Does that mean he is not a franchise QB? What about Tom Brady?

[SBXVII]

Originally Posted by skinster

all i was trying to say is that we use the number 10 because it is a nice round number, not because it is accurate. That is around where the top of the draft class is. Where the cutoff line of the top of the draft has a small amount of variance from draft to draft and person to person, and there is no true cutoff...which is why i gave the estimated range of top vs middle vs bottom that is subject to opinion.

P.s I'm still in college, but my family is made of lawyers.

I was just having fun with you, but I'd pretty much think top talent extends through the 2nd round and maybe into the 3rd round depending on positions.

[mredskins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

This article is obviously a little dated now, but it could be a good starting off point for this discussion

From Peyton Manning to Jake Delhomme, ESPN's John Clayton ranks the NFL's starting QBs - ESPN

I know it is dated but they have McNabb at 9 and Bradford at 30 and Schaub at 14; even at the time of the printing Schaub is better then DM5.

DM5 in my book is done, I totally see him as a stop gap at this point and not the guy to get us to the playoffs anymore. He has just been plain awful and honestly at this point I wish we had kept JC and looked for someone in this draft. Seriously though if bringing in DM5 only gained us one more win over 2009 I rather have those draft picks back and had watched JC17/8 play like a bum this year.

But I know water under the bridge at this point.

[MTK]

I think McNabb can still get it done, he needs to get better in this offense but he can still play.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by skinster

Roger saffold is a rookie 2nd round pick

And he's a key member of a good OL.

Originally Posted by skinster

Stephen Jackson is having a terrible year...the rams rushing attack averages 3.8 yards per rush, and has 7 total tds.

Are you trying to say that Stephen Jackson isn't a good RB?

Who is pat shurmur? I googled him and on the first page there is a movement to get him fired.

You don't know who he is but you're ready to claim he's not good b/c its suits you're point? Wow that's good logic.

Lets not get carried away on colt mccoy...he had 3 tds in 5 starts, and averages under 200 yards per game.

By the same token lets not get carried away w/ Bradord when McCoy is also having success w/ a higher QB rating (against tougher competition).

[Defensewins]

Anything can happen and it usually does.
For those of you that claim to know everything and have called McNabb over and done have every right to say whatever you want. No matter how stupid or inflexible you sound.
Just a few years ago Mike Vick was sitting in a jail cell and even as late as last year people were saying he was done. The so called experts were saying Vick had missed too much time, was too old to come back and even approach his old (Falcon's days) level of play. Well look at how well Mike Vick is doing in 2010!

By contrast today's favorite bandwagon that every front runner is jumping on (Sam Bradford) is one play or injury or playing slump from being yesterdays news. The guy does have a history of missing a lot time due to injuries. He is talented and should do well, but lets not get ahead of our selves and label him a franchise qb just yet.
It is very premature for a guy that has not played an entire season to be mixed in with the elite QB's of all time.