Go Back   New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints
Shop Horizontal

QUARTERBACKS

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; A certain member of this board said recently: Vick, McNabb, Culpepper ... All 3 made it deep in the playofss and 2 will battle it out this weekend for a Super Bowl trip. What do they have in common? They're ...

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-21-2005, 07:46 PM   #1
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,631
QUARTERBACKS

A certain member of this board said recently:

Vick, McNabb, Culpepper ... All 3 made it deep in the playofss and 2 will battle it out this weekend for a Super Bowl trip.

What do they have in common? They're all black and they all can RUN!!

There aren't but a handfull of black QBs in the NFL. Yet, they seem to be enjoying a lot of success percentage wise when compared to their white counterparts.
This is an old argument, but let's address it. It goes to a fundamental difference between two philosophies about QBs in the NFL. The athlete vs. the football player. Talent vs. smarts. Play-making vs. role playing...

Our misguided friend is right about one thing - an athletic QB will do something that none has done in a long time this season - make it to a Super Bowl. Vick or McNabb will go, and that's huge. Neither will win, but it's a shift.

See, whatever you feel, it's hard to argue with results. Many people believe that the QB position is evolving. I doubt it highly. The basic tenants of good QBing remain the same. And those who play the game smart, who know their role, and who are efficient remain more successful, in general, than the athletes. Vick is the only exception of an inefficient QB that can still win - and he's basically a freak of nature. Look at what McNabb and Culpepper did this year and you'll see their comp %, QB rating, TD:INT, etc. were better than ever.

But some will argue, so I demonstrate with results you simply can't ignore. Let's find the last "athletic" QB that played in a Super Bowl, shall we?

2003 - Brady v. Delhomme
2002 - Johnson v. Gannon
2001 - Brady v. Warner
2000 - Dilfer v. Collins
1999 - Elway v. Chandler
1998 - Elway v. Favre
1997 - Favre v. Bledsoe
1996 - Aikman v. O'Donnell
1995 - Humphries v. Young

Steve Young was the last guy who could be classified as athletic, IMO, who played in a Super Bowl. Nevermind the fact that he set a record for QB RATING also...

The bottom line is that raw athletic talent will VERY RARELY outperform efficiency at the QB position.

The QB position isn't evolving. Just like Young and Elway, McNabb and Culpepper are learning the position as they get older. They rely less heavily on their ability to outrun opponents, and more on their ability to out think them. To take what a defense gives them. To move the ball efficiently down the field.

Look at the top picks in last years QB class. This year's... The top performers and top picks are prototypical.

If you need more proof, try this: compare the top athletic QBs to the top efficient QBs this year.

Roethlisberger, Brady, Manning, Brees, Pennington, Favre

vs.

McNabb, Vick, Culpepper, Brooks, Leftwich, Garcia

Compare those guys by numbers, W/L... anything you want. I take ANY guy in the top list before any one in the bottom to play for me right now.

[Edited on 22/1/2005 by WhoDat]
WhoDat is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 08:38 AM   #2
Site Donor
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Gonzales, LA
Posts: 1,738
QUARTERBACKS

Just the stats / facts ...

32 NFL teams - 26 White QB\'s, 6 Black QB\'s (starters in 2004)

Top 5 passer rating (starters):
1. P. Manning 121.1
2. D. Culpepper 110.9
3. D. Brees 104.8
4. D. McNabb 104.7
5. B. Roethlisberger 98.1

Top 5 TD passes:
1. P. Manning 49
2. D. Culpepper 39
3. D. McNabb 31
4. B. Favre 30
5. J. Delhomme 29

Top 5 rushing yards:
1. M. Vick 902
2. D. Culpepper 406
3. D. Carr 299
4. D. McNabb 220
5. J. Plummer 202

Top 5 rushing TD\'s:
1. A. Brooks 4
2. M. Vick 3
3. D. McNabb 3
4. M. Bulger 3
5. D. Culpepper 2

Less than 25% of the starting QB\'s in the NFL are black, but at least 2 of the only 6 starting black QB\'s in the league are among the top 5 in the major statistical categories.

Culpepper and McNabb - statistically - are not simply great \"athletic\" QB\'s, they are undeniably great QB\'s ... PERIOD. You\'ll notice they are the only two - black or white - who appear on most EVERY top 5 list.

Interpret as you wish...

[Edited on 22/1/2005 by mutineer10]
mutineer10 is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 10:04 AM   #3
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,715
QUARTERBACKS

mutineer and what else stuck out from those stats to me was look at how carr outrushed mcnabb this year. thats interesting because il bet that each year mcnabb has been in the nfl his rushing has more then likely gone down. im not positive but i\'d bet it. also this is more then likely his lowest total and just so happens to come the year he gets a really good wideout. meaning he had better options. now im not sure if this year is lower then last year or not because last year he missed some games. but it wouldnt surprise me if thsi is his lowest rushing total to date

If it doesn't matter who wins or loses, then why do they keep score?
Lombardi
spkb25 is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 10:05 AM   #4
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,715
QUARTERBACKS

also his best year statistically throwing the ball. your right culpepper and mcnabb are just good qb\'s
spkb25 is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 10:09 AM   #5
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,631
QUARTERBACKS

Mutineer - I\'m not making this about race. Please check that at the door. I\'m making it about athletes vs. students of the game. Guys who can play sports vs. guys who can play football.

The bottom line is that nothing is changing about the QB position. Efficiency is still king - not talent. McNabb and Culpepper both improved in significant areas this season - QB rating. That\'s what matters. Just like Young or Elway or whomever you want to name before them, they learned to use their skills to take what defenses gave them and keep the chains moving - not to try to be explosive and do it all themselves.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\"
he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"
WhoDat is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 10:10 AM   #6
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,715
QUARTERBACKS

yeah this is by far his lowest run totals. i just checked. even lower then when he was hurt in 20002 for 6 games. just proves to me that even with athletic qb\'s their more effective throwing the ball then running.
spkb25 is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 12:24 PM   #7
The Professor
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Lithonia, GA
Posts: 1,423
QUARTERBACKS

2003 - Brady v. Delhomme
2002 - Johnson v. Gannon
2001 - Brady v. Warner
2000 - Dilfer v. Collins
1999 - Elway v. Chandler
1998 - Elway v. Favre
1997 - Favre v. Bledsoe
1996 - Aikman v. O\'Donnell
1995 - Humphries v. Young

Steve Young was the last guy who could be classified as athletic, IMO, who played in a Super Bowl. Nevermind the fact that he set a record for QB RATING also...
You missed a year. 1999 should be Warner vs. McNair. McNair was certainly classified as an athletic QB at the time.

SFIAH
SaintFanInATLHELL is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 12:52 PM   #8
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,616
QUARTERBACKS

Hey, we can bring up the past if you want. But it really proves nothing about how the QB position is evolving.

Why? Because hardly any team tried to but a great athlete at QB.

However, if you want to talk about results, let\'s do that. Let\'s look at those RARE cases, in the past, where a coach did put an athletic guy at the QB position.

John Elway
Steve Young
Fran Tarketon
Roger Staubach (he was a great athlete)

Putting a guy who could run at the QB postion wasn\'t tried much back in the day. But, more times than not, they enjoyed a tremendous amout of success.

I\'ll bet you that if you look on a percentage basis of every athletic QB thoughout history that you\'ll see they did very well.

Which brings us to the current NFL. Vick, McNabb, Culpepper, McNair make up a very smalll percentage of athletic QBs in todays game.

They also QB some of the best teams in the NFL today. Is that just a fluke? Hardly !! Those QBs abillity to make something happen with their legs when all else fails continues to win games.

No one is saying those athletic QBs don\'t need to be good passers and make good smart decisions. They indeed do!!

Guys, you CAN have an athletic QB who can be a good passer too.

You\'d be a damn fool not to want to have the TOTAL package at QB.

You don\'t think Peyton Manning wouldn\'t like to be able to scramble for 30 or 40 yards?

It isn\'t hard to see what\'s happening at the QB position. But, if you haven\'t noticed it, check out the Eagles vs. Falcons NFC championship game tomorrow.

Like I said, you\'re still going to have you pure pocket passers like Manning and Brady. And they\'ll win a lot of games and even win some super bowls.

But I believe you\'re going to see most teams move toward having the total package at QB.

Time will tell......

[Edited on 22/1/2005 by GumboBC]
GumboBC is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 03:22 PM   #9
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 5,715
QUARTERBACKS

gumhead mcnabb rushed for less then 300 yards this year. thats less then 20 per game
your opinion is your opinion. but the fact is that qb\'s who can throw the ball will always be taken over just pure athletes. who was that eric guy out of nebraska. great athlete not a qb though.
spkb25 is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 03:29 PM   #10
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,616
QUARTERBACKS

gumhead mcnabb rushed for less then 300 yards this year. thats less then 20 per game
your opinion is your opinion. but the fact is that qb\'s who can throw the ball will always be taken over just pure athletes. who was that eric guy out of nebraska. great athlete not a qb though.
Why is this so hard to understand for some?

Did you EVER see me say that RUNNING QBs don\'t need to be good passers? NO!! You did not!!

In fact, I said they need to be the TOTAL package. They need to be good runners and passers.

Do you believe that just because a guy can run a 4.5/40 that it means he can\'t pass too?

Get this. Good passers who can also run are ALWAYS better than a guy who is a good passer but can\'t run!!

Are they always more successful? Of course not!!

But all things equal, running QBs can make something happen at critical times to where a pure pocket passer cannot!!

Dan Marino, Troy Aikman, Joe Montana... They got the job done and they couldn\'t run.

No ones saying those guys are obsolete.

I\'m just saying I believe they are at a disadvantage in todays game.

GumboBC is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:33 PM.


Copyright 1997 - 2013 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts