Best quarterback in football

I considered Schaub, but I think he's a product of that system. I think Arian Foster is the most talented running back in the NFL, and Ben Tate is easily the best backup and probably one of the 10 or 15 most talented backs.

When Vick is close to healthy, he's still a monster.

 

Not saying you're wrong, but I'm surprised to see Romo where he is. I'd think he'd be higher.

Are you punishing him for lack of post-season appearances/success? If they had a magical playoff run in them one year during his years as a starter, would you move him up?

Because three years of 4,000 yards passing in his last 4 as a starter (not counting the injury-shortened 2010 season), a good TD-to-interception ratio and a 102 passer rating (or whatever they call it) this year are all pretty impressive stats. The guy has taken 70 sacks in his last two full seasons. By comparison, Brees has taken 69 sacks in three seasons.

Now, I know that sacks can be a QB's fault too. But it strikes me as punishing a guy for being on a bad team. He's a very good player on what would be a very bad team without him, I think. If he's playing for the Lions, that would make him a cult hero. In Dallas, where they expect to win big, he's a scapegoat. He'll play brilliantly to keep a bad Cowboys team in a game against an opponent they are "supposed" to beat (say, a 9-7 Eagles team) then he'll throw a pick at the end or fumble a snap and the loss will be his fault although he goes 25-for-30 for 390 yards and three touchdowns in a game where they lose 38-35, give up 500 yards and rush for 50.

And let's compare him to Eli. I know some hate the stat, but Eli's best passer rating was 93.1. Romo's only had one season lower than that. And Philip Rivers is coming off a season far worse than any season Romo has had.

 

Although the Saints fanboy in me would like to say Brees, in all honesty, the best QB playing right now is Rodgers.

What gives him the edge is his ability to beat you running the ball. Brees and Brady can run when they have to, but Rodgers is the only one who's a real threat with his legs. He's also got a size advantage over Brees.

Eli has put himself in the No. 4 spot with his play this year, and after that it's a fairly large gap (IMO) to the place where you have the likes of Roethlisberger, Rivers, Stafford and a few others.

 

You know, I had Romo eighth initially. And you make compelling reasons to move him back up there. I don't think I would put him ahead of Eli Manning because of Manning's consistently impressive performances late in games, particularly late in close games. Clutch ability may not exist in baseball, but it's pretty certifiably real in football.

I do think Romo has less natural ability than five of the top seven, and he has a significantly worse resume than the other two, Manning and Roethlisberger. So I wouldn't put him above eighth.

The more I think about it, the more I want to move Vick up. Although he's a pretty despicable person, Vick has as much natural ability as anyone in this league when he's fully healthy. The reason I put him so low is because he's perhaps the most injury-prone player in the NFL.

 

I'm sure you know this already, but the history of the NFL is littered with "natural ability" QBs who never accomplished jack shit for one reason or another.

Vick is an athletic freak. When healthy, his speed and agility and elusiveness are unlike anything the NFL has ever seen at his position. He's got a Howitzer attached to the left side of his body, too.

But I think his highlight-reel plays make people go all googly-eyed and forget that for most of his career, he's been pretty damn ordinary as a QUARTERBACK.

As to the original question of this thread, I'm gonna hold my nose and pick Brady. He's won Super Bowls with more mediocre WRs and RBs than any of the other guys in consideration. He's turned Wes Welker and Rob Gronkowski into two of the most valuable players in the league at their respective positions -- and he might just win another title by carrying a defense that is just so freaking average it's amazing.

 

In the 12 games he played from start to finish in 2010, he was one of the two best quarterbacks in the NFL. He was better than Rodgers, Brees, either Manning, Roethlisberger and others. The Eagles also went 8-4 in those games. When he got healthy at the end of this season, they started tearing off wins, too.

 

No argument with 2010, other than to point out that it was a fairly obvious outlier for Vick both statistically and in terms of team success.

I love watching the guy play. He does some absolutely stupefying shit. But he was never as good as he performed during that ungodly 2010 and he'll likely never be that good again.

 

You're right, which is why I listed him seventh. When he was healthy enough to run last season, he was excellent again.

 

I think Baseball Prospectus was the one to coin the term, but health, or the ability to avoid injury, is also a skill. I'd say it goes double for a sport like football, where contact is constant - you can't ever count on Vick being healthy for an entire year, especially as he slides further into his 30s. He's only played 16 games one year, 15 games three years, 12 or 13 two years. It would be hard for me to put him in the Top 10, since you know he's missing a couple games each year, but you don't know which ones, and he's probably going to be sidelined in the middle of at least one other for a couple series.

 

Vick is to football what Allen Iverson is to basketball. If you don't have a good offense, he's great to have because he can give you offense by him self with the way he can create plays with his legs and his legs combined with his arms.

But if you have good weapons, he can be detrimental because, in order to take advantage of his talent, he might neglect others. By that, I mean to fully utilize a great receiver, you need a QB that's going to consistently throw him accurate, on-time passes at the right times. Vick won't do that because his mindset is to "create" plays.

The other issue with Vick is staying healthy playing the way he does.

 

Let's see here...

ELITE
1. Rodgers
2. Brady
3. Brees
4. Peyton (if he played like he did in 2010)
5. Roethlisberger

DAMN CLOSE TO BEING ELITE
6. Eli
7. Rivers
8. Cutler
9. Vick
10. Stafford
11. Schaub
12. Ryan

THE REST... THE SOLID, THE IMPROVING, THE DECLINING, THE JOURNEYMEN, THE TEBOW...
13. Romo
14. Flacco
15. Smith
16. Sanchez
18. Kolb
19. Tebow
20. Palmer
21. Moore
22. Cassel
23. Hasselbeck
23. Fitzpatrick
24. Freeman
25. Grossman
26. McCoy
27. Jackson

TOO EARLY TO TELL
1. Newton
2. Bradford
3. Dalton
4. Ponder
5. Gabbert

I'm sure I'm forgetting someone...

 

The hellfire that will rain down on you for saying there are 13 worse starting quarterbacks than Tebow ... oh boy ...

Also I would put Newton in the 15-20 range already. His rookie season shocked the hell out of me, but if/when he gets the picks under control he's going to be a unique and sometimes unstoppable force.