PDA

View Full Version : P.Manning vs M.Vick vs J.Elway..Most talented Prospect


dregolll
09-03-2010, 09:44 PM
I know we had a discussion last week with Vick vs Palmer and Micheal Vick pretty much won in a landslide but now I'm looking to raise the bar. Now, you know the rules, careers cannot be taken into account because that would take oout all of the fun. This is from a pure prospect perspective. All three players were taken #1 in their respective drafts. Elway 1983, Manning in 1998 and Vick in 2001. If your are a GM which QB do you take #1 overall? Remember careers are not taken into account.

terribletowel39
09-03-2010, 09:47 PM
Elway. Mixture of the other two. Although 99% of this board was not following the draft in 83. Including me.

nepg
09-03-2010, 09:50 PM
Elway. Look at the QBs that went after him in that draft. Those were all highly touted guys (not guys that were OK prospects and just churned out good careers), and Elway dwarfed them all as a prospect. He had everything going for him.

Saints-Tigers
09-03-2010, 09:53 PM
Vick, then Elway, then Manning.

Vick was a dominant college player even at a young age, and had as much(or more?) throwing potential as either guy, but Elway really isn't that close in terms of running ability, contrary to what people seem to think right now.

wonderbredd24
09-03-2010, 09:55 PM
I hate that horse toothed mother ******, but John Elway is the gold standard as a prospect

nepg
09-03-2010, 09:56 PM
Vick, then Elway, then Manning.

Vick was a dominant college player even at a young age, and had as much(or more?) throwing potential as either guy, but Elway really isn't that close in terms of running ability, contrary to what people seem to think right now.

Elway was a functional runner as a throw-first QB.

But compared to Vick? Not even close.

Vick was a transcendant prospect, but Elway was the elite of the elite.

Manning trails here because there were and still are questions about his ability to play tough in big games.

terribletowel39
09-03-2010, 09:58 PM
Vick, then Elway, then Manning.

Vick was a dominant college player even at a young age, and had as much(or more?) throwing potential as either guy, but Elway really isn't that close in terms of running ability, contrary to what people seem to think right now.

Of course it isn't close in running ability, Cunningham wasn't close to Vicks running ability. Lots of RBs and WRs don't have Vicks running ability.

wonderbredd24
09-03-2010, 10:01 PM
Of course it isn't close in running ability, Cunningham wasn't close to Vicks running ability. Lots of RBs and WRs don't have Vicks running ability.

Evidently, you've never seen Cunningham play

terribletowel39
09-03-2010, 10:04 PM
Evidently, you've never seen Cunningham play

Yeah, I have but it still wasn't close. Have you forgotten what Vick could do with the football in his hands?? I think his Eagles yrs are blocking your memory.

nepg
09-03-2010, 10:04 PM
Evidently, you've never seen Cunningham play

I understand your sentiment, but his statement is correct. And that's not a slight towards Cunningham at all... Just exactly how good Vick was/is.

xRxxuI3JJkQ

Randall Cunningham's a black man!

wonderbredd24
09-03-2010, 10:12 PM
Yeah, I have but it still wasn't close. Have you forgotten what Vick could do with the football in his hands?? I think his Eagles yrs are blocking your memory.

Buddy Ryan's offense was predicated almost entirely on Cunningham's legs.

He had 942 yards in a season and almost 5,000 yards and 35 TDs in his career as a runner.

I don't see how it wasn't close.

Is Vick better in that department? Sure. But not close? I don't see it.

Complex
09-03-2010, 10:16 PM
Vick
Elway






Peyton

nepg
09-03-2010, 10:19 PM
Buddy Ryan's offense was predicated almost entirely on Cunningham's legs.

He had 942 yards in a season and almost 5,000 yards and 35 TDs in his career as a runner.

I don't see how it wasn't close.

Is Vick better in that department? Sure. But not close? I don't see it.

You kinda made the point for us. Randall Cunningham could throw for almost 5,000 yards... Teams couldn't gameplan for him to run the ball because he was so good in the passing department.

Cunningham was an amazing runner. There's no doubt about that.

But Vick was way better. Way better.

wonderbredd24
09-03-2010, 10:21 PM
You kinda made the point for us. Randall Cunningham could throw for almost 5,000 yards... Teams couldn't gameplan for him to run the ball because he was so good in the passing department.

Cunningham was an amazing runner. There's no doubt about that.

But Vick was way better. Way better.

The 5,000 yards and 35 TDs were his career... he rushed for 4,928 yards and 35 TDs in his career.

The year he ran for 942, he was 10th in the NFL.

terribletowel39
09-03-2010, 10:37 PM
The 5,000 yards and 35 TDs were his career... he rushed for 4,928 yards and 35 TDs in his career.

The year he ran for 942, he was 10th in the NFL.

And Vick almost has 4,000 in 6 seasons with the Falcons with his last season being 1,039 yards. And he missed 11 games one year.

I'm hearing you, but its not close to me. As my first post said, a good bit of RBs and WRs are not able to run like Vick.

hockey619
09-03-2010, 10:49 PM
Peyton isnt close to the other two really.

He was polished but had the big game struggles, some questioned his arm a little (only because it was compared to leafs), and mostly people thought he mightve been a finished product or that he was 'self made' still not sure what the hell that means but i remember hearing it.

KCJ58
09-03-2010, 10:52 PM
Sam Bradford





but for real I'd say Vick

yourfavestoner
09-03-2010, 11:39 PM
I say this is Elway in a landslide.

Shiver
09-04-2010, 12:14 AM
Elway for sure, then Vick, then Manning. Manning wasn't even the consensus in his draft, it was like 60/40 him and Leaf.

niel89
09-04-2010, 03:33 AM
most talented prospect? vick.

best prospect? elway.

This.

Vicks speed, arm, and agility package is unheard of, but Elway is the better prospect. Elway had an equal or better arm than Vick and was no slouch of a runner.

If I had the #1 pick I would always take Elway every time. He is as close to a perfect QB prospect as you can get.
.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-04-2010, 04:32 AM
I say this is Elway in a landslide.

Meh. Vick was way faster and could throw the ball just as well. If you're assuming talent means physical ability, there's no world in which Elway could be considered any significant margin ahead of Vick. I personally would say that Vick was clearly more talented.

If we start factoring intelligence in this, the discussion changes a bit.

FUNBUNCHER
09-04-2010, 08:34 AM
Elway. Mixture of the other two. Although 99% of this board was not following the draft in 83. Including me.

Yeah, all I know about Elway in college is that he played for Stanford, I never saw him play in college, just the pros.

From the scouting reports I've read about Elway since then, most scouts up until that time had never seen a prospect like him; the strongest arm many had ever scouted, 6'3, and elite speed at the time for a QB, running a 4.6 forty.

It's really hard to do this without a little bit of their pro careers coming into play.

Based purely on measurables, I think Vick's 4.2 - 4.3 speed would have intrigued me more than either Elway or Peyton.

FUNBUNCHER
09-04-2010, 08:40 AM
Yeah, I have but it still wasn't close. Have you forgotten what Vick could do with the football in his hands?? I think his Eagles yrs are blocking your memory.


And for the young bucks who missed out seeing Cunningham play in his athletic prime in Philly, I feel bad for you cause you really missed out on witnessing the greatest individual show on turf.

IMO Cunningham was overall a more effective dual threat QB than Vick ever was.

There's a reason why Cunningham's nickname was 'the ultimate weapon'.

The separation is mainly that Cunningham was a much more effective passer than Vick, not their running ability.

xxxxxxxx
09-04-2010, 08:43 AM
most talented prospect? vick.

best prospect? elway.

I second this.

Manning shouldn't even be in this discussion. Talent wise he can't even SMELL either of the other two's jock straps.

xxxxxxxx
09-04-2010, 08:47 AM
And Vick almost has 4,000 in 6 seasons with the Falcons with his last season being 1,039 yards. And he missed 11 games one year.

I'm hearing you, but its not close to me. As my first post said, a good bit of RBs and WRs are not able to run like Vick.

I think people will like this comparision... Cunningham is more of a Dennis Dixon runner. Quality, but not even close to Vick.

FUNBUNCHER
09-04-2010, 09:02 AM
Vick is the best runner at the QB position the NFL has ever seen, and probably will ever see, but he's a far cry from the best dual-threat QB to ever play in the NFL.

Staubach, Tarkenton, Elway, Cunningham, McNabb and Steve Young for my money were the best in the game at combining passing and running ability.

Vick had the tools, but for the most part was the NFL's greatest tease.

San Diego Chicken
09-04-2010, 09:03 AM
People can say Vick is more physically talented than Peyton all they want, but there's no way in hell he goes ahead of Peyton in an actual draft.

CameronCropper
09-04-2010, 09:30 AM
Michael Vick was the most physically talented out of the three, by far.

If we consider intangibles and intelligence in the equation? It's John Elway pretty easily, he has a better arm than Peyton Manning by quite a way and clearly had a better grasp on the QB position than Michael Vick ever had.

roscoesdad27
09-05-2010, 10:51 PM
I second this.

Manning shouldn't even be in this discussion. Talent wise he can't even SMELL either of the other two's jock straps.

it might not be a physical talent but peytons ability to read defenses, make the proper adjustments and his leading ability to get everyone focused and on the same page is a talent non the less and a clear edge for peyton over the other 2 esp. vick....remember the question isnt whos the more physically talented for if it was anyone not saying vick would be wrong.

Halsey
09-05-2010, 11:16 PM
The only people who would pick Vick in this debate are those who think running is the most important talent a QB can have. Elway and Manning clearly had better talents for playing the position of QB.

JHL6719
09-05-2010, 11:41 PM
For all the talk about Peyton not being able to win the big game prior to the 1998 draft (and I remember it well)... Keep in mind that John Elway never even led Stanford to a bowl appearance. Let me repeat that. John Elway never even led Stanford to a bowl APPEARANCE.

Vick almost won the national championship by himself for VT.

That said, run first QB's just aren't going to win you superbowls, and that's the whole point. Mobility is always nice, but I'll take the statue who can pick apart defenses being a pocket technician over some guy that runs 4.2 40 yard dash and a laser for an arm but can't play the quarterback position the way it's supposed to be played.

I'd like for my QB to be able to scramble and pick up an occassional 4 yards for a 1st down every now and then... but other than that...

Pocket passer >>> scrambler






BTW.. Randall Cunningham was the best dual threat QB I've ever seen.

niel89
09-06-2010, 01:16 AM
Elway almost made it to a bowl game and then all these laterals later... Wasted another late game comeback by Elway

elway=goat
09-07-2010, 02:35 AM
Elway, pretty easily imo. He was the perfect prospect, ability to throw,as well as run. But his legs still didnt define him as a player like they did with Vick.

Elway was a more complete prospect. He was the guy you would want to build around. He would be an easier player to build around as well, as opposed to building a team around Vick, which imo would be a very tough task. You would have to have specific players with specific skillsets with Vick. A player like Elway you could almost put anyone in there, and he would adjust. With Vick you have to adjust to him.

Im not including Peyton because I dont believe he was the prospect the other 2 were.

CC.SD
09-07-2010, 07:18 PM
as others have said Peyton isn't in this conversation.

Although Vick for years has been painted as the ultimate high ceiling pick, a few articles and notes have come out (what's coming to mind is an article from the San Diego Union Tribune that went into why the Chargers passed on Vick, for Ladainian) that show that Vick wasn't entirely untouchable.

There were always accuracy concerns. The fact that he was by definition a slash is IMO a slight concern as well, for injury related reasons.

I won't pretend I was around then but I've done enough reading and watching to understand that Elway was entirely without knocks as a prospect. He gets my vote.

wonderbredd24
09-07-2010, 08:00 PM
For all the talk about Peyton not being able to win the big game prior to the 1998 draft (and I remember it well)... Keep in mind that John Elway never even led Stanford to a bowl appearance. Let me repeat that. John Elway never even led Stanford to a bowl APPEARANCE.

Vick almost won the national championship by himself for VT.

That said, run first QB's just aren't going to win you superbowls, and that's the whole point. Mobility is always nice, but I'll take the statue who can pick apart defenses being a pocket technician over some guy that runs 4.2 40 yard dash and a laser for an arm but can't play the quarterback position the way it's supposed to be played.

I'd like for my QB to be able to scramble and pick up an occassional 4 yards for a 1st down every now and then... but other than that...

Pocket passer >>> scrambler






BTW.. Randall Cunningham was the best dual threat QB I've ever seen.
That Tennessee team was ******* loaded. And Tee Martin led them to the National Title the year after Manning left, which really doesn't help Manning's case.

Halsey
09-07-2010, 08:04 PM
How can Peyton not be in this conversation? Maybe if you take the mental aspect out of it, which is silly. We are talking QBs, right. Peyton has ideal height, good arm strength and is obviously very intelligent. I'll take great intelligence over great running ability or elite arm strength any day. Peyton's talents are near perfect for the modern NFL. And he's more mobile than he's often given credit for.

wonderbredd24
09-07-2010, 08:06 PM
How can Peyton not be in this conversation? Maybe if you take the mental aspect out of it, which is silly. We are talking QBs, right. Peyton has ideal height, good arm strength and is obviously very intelligent. I'll take great intelligence over great running ability or elite arm strength any day. Peyton's talents are near perfect for the modern NFL. And he's more mobile than he's often given credit for.

He has Bernie Kosar-like mobility.

Get the **** out of here with that ****

Halsey
09-07-2010, 08:07 PM
He has Bernie Kosar-like mobility.

Get the **** out of here with that ****

Uh oh, a snappy one liner and some e-tough talk. I better leave right now.

wonderbredd24
09-07-2010, 08:10 PM
xU_3encGVP4

I'll take Eisen over Manning in a foot race.

Halsey
09-07-2010, 08:20 PM
Peyton Manning has run for over 700 yards in his career. He averaged 4.1 ypc as a rookie. Many QBs don't even maintain positive rushing yards.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=1854366559

CC.SD
09-07-2010, 09:10 PM
Peyton Manning has run for over 700 yards in his career. He averaged 4.1 ypc as a rookie. Many QBs don't even maintain positive rushing yards.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=1854366559

yes Peyton is a dangerous option as a QB rusher

Timbathia
09-07-2010, 09:24 PM
Peyton Manning has run for over 700 yards in his career.

I cant tell if you are serious. He has started over 190 games and averages 3.7 yards rushing/game. 3.7 yards! Those kinda numbers dont qualify you as any hint of a rushing threat. It just means that a couple of times a year when plays have broken down there were no defenders on one side of the field and he could shuffle 5 yards before the defense got there.

Halsey
09-07-2010, 09:42 PM
I cant tell if you are serious. He has started over 190 games and averages 3.7 yards rushing/game. 3.7 yards! Those kinda numbers dont qualify you as any hint of a rushing threat.

There's always got to be guys who need things re-explained...

I simply said he's more mobile than many people give him credit for. People often act like he's a statue. Not true. He can move around well enough.

And who cares if he can't run for big yards. He does his damage in the passing game. Why try to run for yards when you can get the ball downfield to pass catchers.

JHL6719
09-07-2010, 09:55 PM
That Tennessee team was ******* loaded. And Tee Martin led them to the National Title the year after Manning left, which really doesn't help Manning's case.



I watched Peyton Manning slice up Alabama's defense EVERY year.... it's was extremely frustrating to watch.. but also extremely impressive at the same time. I remember Peyton's first pass against Bama as a sophomore... it was an 80 yard TD to Joey Kent....


The team was even better the year Tee Martin was the quarterback.... I watched Dwayne ****ing Goodrich shut down Peter Warrick in the national championship game...


Im actually friends with several Tennessee fans that I've known for 30 years, and you would THINK that they all love Peyton and appreciate him as one of the best players that have ever played for the Vols... and 90% of Vol fans do..

..but you'd be surprised at the one's that still look at Peyton as the guy that couldn't win the big game for Tennessee...

Timbathia
09-07-2010, 09:58 PM
There's always got to be guys who need things re-explained...

I simply said he's more mobile than many people give him credit for. People often act like he's a statue. Not true. He can move around well enough.

And who cares if he can't run for big yards. He does his damage in the passing game. Why try to run for yards when you can get the ball downfield to pass catchers.

You are right, no-one cares that he cant rush cause he is a great passer. We werent the ones that brought in his "better than credited mobility" when arguing that he should be in the conversation. You pulled out the 700 yards as if it should be factored in. It shouldnt - while he is more mobile than a statue, his mobility does not translate into a rushing threat.

Halsey
09-07-2010, 10:05 PM
I'll take a QB who's not a "rushing threat" over a QB who's not a passing threat. It's one-dimensional Vick who doesn't belong in the conversation with actual QBs.

Timbathia
09-07-2010, 10:24 PM
I'll take a QB who's not a "rushing threat" over a QB who's not a passing threat. It's one-dimensional, Vick who doesn't belong in the conversation with actual QBs.

The debate is simply who was touted as a better prospect. Vick had a great arm to go with his running ability. It just turned out that he never actually figured out how to use it. He was still an unbelievable prospect, and in many opinions better than Peyton.

No-one is debating who ended up as a better QB.

Halsey
09-07-2010, 11:17 PM
I consider intelligence to be part of a player's overall talent. An aspect of a QB's talent that's much much much much much more important than being able to run fast.

Timbathia
09-07-2010, 11:48 PM
I consider intelligence to be part of a player's overall talent. An aspect of a QB's talent that's much much much much much more important than being able to run fast.

Well that is not true. Ryan Fitzpatrick and Michael Vick are the two extremes in that argument, and I am pretty sure even dog-lovers would prefer Vick starting for their franchise (I am talking pre-prison Vick).

JHL6719
09-08-2010, 12:25 AM
I consider intelligence to be part of a player's overall talent. An aspect of a QB's talent that's much much much much much more important than being able to run fast.

Interestingly enough, there's a thread around here somewhere asking why QB scouting still sucks....

The answer is all over the place in this thread... on these boards, etc... "Omg he's fast"...

"Holy **** can you believe that guy's arm strength"...

"Billy McBill passed for 56,894 yards and 734 TD's in college"....



None of it means jack**** in the NFL... Nobody pays attention to the little things... the devil is in the details.

The blueprint for increasing your odds of hitting on a QB high in the draft has been there for years.... it's not guaranteed, nothing is.. but it certainly increases your chances of hitting and reduces the risk of busting out...


The hype for guys like Jerrod Johnson and Terrell Pryor as NFL QB prospects is ridiculous... neither of those guys are NFL QB prospects...

Nobody wants to talk about the Greg McElroy's or the Ben Chappell's or the Nathan Enderle's... unless it's as an after thought...

Fact is, it's most of the "athletes" that are "ranked" above them that are going to end up being the after thoughts in the NFL 5 years from now...

Bengalsrocket
09-08-2010, 01:18 AM
Honestly, Elway threw the ball when he was suppose to and ran with it when he got into trouble.

Michael Vick always seemed like the kind of QB who made one read and then took off running if it wasn't there, especially in college.

Like many have stated, no doubt Vick was physically gifted and if we're just going off measurements he beat out any one else at the QB position in the history of the league. But if we're counting skill & knowledge, then Manning wins this one for me (as a prospect even).

As far as him not being the unanimous best prospect of his draft, Leaf was a pretty good prospect himself and we shouldn't rewrite history just because we know he's a bust.

With all that being said, Vick was still an amazing prospect and right up there with Manning and Elway. I don't think it should be considered a land slide in any of these guys' favor, they all had promise that not many other prospects ever showed.

Xenos
09-08-2010, 01:22 AM
Elway was the best prospect IMO. What hurt Vick was really his overall size. He had everything else but he was what 6'1? That's really the only knock I can take at him from a purely physical side.

Saints-Tigers
09-08-2010, 06:27 AM
Halsey is just mad that Vick was better than Matt Ryan.

Saints-Tigers
09-08-2010, 08:07 AM
ah, yes. peyton's incredible knowledge. that's so amazing, no one else has EVER been smart in the history of the league. being able to stand at the line of scrimmage and point at dbs. so much more important than being able to avoid a sack.

it WAS cute though, how you tried to minimize running ability. i'd hate to hear how bad you think randy moss is.


Eh, I hear what you are saying, but even if you just look at Peyton this year, he was only sacked 10 times, so he's doing a good job of avoiding it. Elway's career low in sacks were 18 and 20, two years where he played 12 and 13 games(one where he was in his last year, and threw for only 356 attempts, as opposed to Peyton's 571.

The only season Elway threw nearly as many attempts as Peyton did this year(his highest two are 551 and 605) he was sacked 38 and 39 times.

Beyond that even, he was behind a mediocre line this year(that's being generous), and it wasn't like he was just throwing the ball away, or only throwing dink and dunk plays to get the ball out, his yards per attempt were high as Elway's career high, his completion % was 5.5 points higher than Elway's ever was, and he had 470 more yards total than Elway ever did.

Again, I see what you are saying, but Peyton is obviously special in terms of his audibles and line calls, and just flat out getting the ball out quickly.

Buying time is nice, but Peyton doesn't have to buy time, because he doesn't need it, and he's better at avoiding sacks for that reason.

I could hear the arguments some years about how great the Colts line is, but this year sent me a big message, Peyton isn't going to get sacked a lot no matter who is out there, and he's not going to sacrifice efficiency in his passing game even if he has to get rid of it quicker.

Halsey
09-08-2010, 09:03 AM
Look, Vick has a lot of fans to this day. I get that. Now that he's just a backup/special package QB, those fans can only talk about how great his physical talent is. That's why they need to talk about comparing his talents to actual great QBs, but don't want to include things like intelligence, leadership ability, communication skills, accuracy, decision making, etc. Things that matter is real QB scouting. They want to limit the conversation to aspects that skew the debate to Vick.

Maybe the next Vick thread should be: "Who was More Fun to Play with on Madden: Vick or Brady?"

Or maybe: "If the NFL never made the forward pass legal, who would have won more Super Bowls: Vick or Montana?"

FUNBUNCHER
09-08-2010, 09:36 AM
IMO the player John Elway resembles most in the modern game, is Ben Roethlisberger. Very similar in that they both scramble to buy time for WRs to get open downfield.

The real difference being that Big Ben has the advantage of size/strength that allows him to shed tacklers, while Elway used his wheels to stay a step ahead of defenders.

As for 'intelligence', there are a LOT of super-smart QBs in the league who can't translate that concrete understanding of the playbook into performance on the field.

Being a great QB is about more than a high Wonderlic.

J52
09-08-2010, 09:37 AM
People are saying Peyton because of his intelligence, but it's not like we knew he would be Peyton in 98. Alex Smith scored like a 49 on the Wonderlic and has sucked. Intelligence is just another attribute. It doesn't always work out; just like arm strength and running speed.

Dan Marino scored a 13 on the Wunderlic. A 13 is a couple points above dyslexic. Obviously players can perform without superior intelligence.

Saints-Tigers
09-08-2010, 09:40 AM
Anyone that watched Peyton and Smith knew that Peyton was amazing pre-snap and diagnosing plays, and Smith was only smart in the classroom.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-08-2010, 09:42 AM
That's not the point though. The point is how many of those things like quickness reading an NFL defense, or ability to command a large number of checkdown plays at the LOS, or capacity for leading full-grown men are known when these guys are prospects?

In retrospect, Manning is spectacularly intelligent and capable when it comes to your average NFL QB. No one had a strong hint of that before he was drafted, just whiffs. Hell, even Vick led a pretty average team to the a National Championship game. Someone could be forgiven for thinking he was similarly capable before we saw his lack of work ethic in the NFL.

As njx said earlier in this thread (sorry if I misstate this here): Elway was the best prospect, Vick was the most talented prospect. Manning wasn't really quite on par with either, but he turned out the best.

Halsey
09-08-2010, 09:50 AM
People keep trying to say that intelligence is not an aspect of talent because look at all the smart guys who didn't become great QB's. Does that also mean that arm strength and speed are not part of the talent picture because look at all the strong armed or fast QBs that didn't make it.

"Arm strength is not part of the talent picture because JaMarcus Russell!"

"Speed is not part of talent picture because Usain Bolt could never play QB in the NFL"

Sorry, but the mental side of a QB prospect is part of what scouts evaluate and is part of the overall talent a player has. Go read any QB scouting report and mental aspects are covered.

Halsey
09-08-2010, 10:14 AM
Yeah, people knew Peyton Was smart in 98. It's not like he suddenly became a smart dude after becoming an NFL player. The guy was Phi Beta Kappa in college.

FUNBUNCHER
09-08-2010, 10:19 AM
People keep trying to say that intelligence is not an aspect of talent because look at all the smart guys who didn't become great QB's. Does that also mean that arm strength and speed are not part of the talent picture because look at all the strong armed or fast QBs that didn't make it.

"Arm strength is not part of the talent picture because JaMarcus Russell!"

"Speed is not part of talent picture because Usain Bolt could never play QB in the NFL"

Sorry, but the mental side of a QB prospect is part of what scouts evaluate and is part of the overall talent a player has. Go read any QB scouting report and mental aspects are covered.

I think when people are evaluating pro prospects, 'football' intelligence is much harder to get an accurate read on, compared to more obvious physical attributes, which is why IMO QB is absolutely the hardest position to scout.

The 'knack' or innate skill to play QB, (knowing when to get rid of the ball, when to buy time, the ability to sense a pass rush closing in on you, when to throw the ball deep instead of dumping it off and vice versa, etc.,) is probably more important than any other trait for a QB.

You know the phrase come draft time that you hear so often, 'not a great athlete, just a really good football player'?

Of course intelligence is an invaluable characteristic for a QB, but scouts have a tendency to convince themselves that a QB is 'smart enough' if he's tall, mobile and has a cannon for an arm.

And then, how do you measure something like 'emotional intelligence', which one could argue was the downfall of Ryan Leaf because he lacked so much of it??

Personally I'd prefer to draft a prospect who had elite physical tools and average intelligence than a QB with a genius IQ and mediocre physical ability/basic skillset to play the position.

Halsey
09-08-2010, 10:30 AM
It's not like Manning has below average physical tools or that Vick was a physically perfect QB prospect. Other than great speed, what does Manning lack? Yeah, Vick has elite athletic ability and arm strength, but the guy is barely 6 feet tall.

FUNBUNCHER
09-08-2010, 10:37 AM
Weird how NFL scouts are slaves to certain numbers; if Vick had been measured at 5'11 instead of 6 feet, which IMO would have made negligible difference in his play as a QB, I doubt he would have been a #1 overall pick.

San Diego Chicken
09-08-2010, 03:21 PM
Here's an article about Manning/Leaf from 1998 and why Peyton was a better prospect despite not having elite physical tools.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1012545/1/index.htm

yourfavestoner
09-08-2010, 03:28 PM
Here's an article about Manning/Leaf from 1998 and why Peyton was a better prospect despite not having elite physical tools.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1012545/1/index.htm

From that article: "I don't see Favre or Elway," Walsh says. "I see those guys on the next level. But Manning seems to be more pro-ready than Leaf."

Great article overall, though. Leaf and Russell are so ******* similar it's scary. Big arms, slow-twitch movers, overweight, and having a liking for prescription medication.

CC.SD
09-08-2010, 03:39 PM
Dan Marino scored a 13 on the Wunderlic. A 13 is a couple points above dyslexic. Obviously players can perform without superior intelligence.

To be fair, he was probably high.

yourfavestoner
09-08-2010, 03:40 PM
To be fair, he was probably high.

Dan Marinojuanaaaaa

San Diego Chicken
09-08-2010, 03:58 PM
Definition of talent:


–noun
1.
a special natural ability or aptitude: a talent for drawing.
2.
a capacity for achievement or success; ability: young men of talent.
3.
a talented person: The cast includes many of the theater's major talents.
4.
a group of persons with special ability: an exhibition of watercolors by the local talent.
5.
Movies and Television . professional actors collectively, esp. star performers.
6.
a power of mind or body considered as given to a person for use and improvement: so called from the parable in Matt. 25:14–30.
7.
any of various ancient units of weight, as a unit of Palestine and Syria equal to 3000 shekels, or a unit of Greece equal to 6000 drachmas.
8.
any of various ancient Hebrew or Attic monetary units equal in value to that of a talent weight of gold, silver, or other metal.
9.
Obsolete . inclination or disposition.



According to the book definition of talent, intelligence, aptitude, and mental capacity for success all factor in as much if not moreso; thus Peyton Manning is as "talented" as any prospect I've ever seen.

Bear in mind, I didn't watch John Elway in college. But I would take Peyton Manning's talent ten times out of ten over Mike Vick.

umphrey
09-08-2010, 04:50 PM
Vick easily. Rocket arm and one of the best open field runners I've ever seen. Keep in mind I'm comparing to what I thought Elway was like as a prospect because I wasn't alive in 1983. Trying to imagine based on how he was in the nineties.

San Diego Chicken
09-08-2010, 04:55 PM
so you're saying that intelligence, in terms of talent, is so overwhelming that lacking every physical tool in comparison is irrelevant? or you're saying he's a better prospect because he was smarter?

I'm saying, of the myriad of factors judging quarterback "talent", Michael Vick was better than Peyton Manning at exactly two of them: arm strength, and outside the pocket mobility.

Every other factor you can think of for a QB, edge to Manning. Throwing a football with accuracy is a talent. Processing information quickly (progressions) is a talent. Having a very wide range of field vision is a talent. Throwing a route with timing just as a receiver comes out of his break takes talent. Anticipation takes talent. Having an in depth understanding of defensive coverages is a talent.

Michael Vick is a more talented athlete then Peyton Manning, but Manning is the far more talented football quarterback. He was then and he is now.

I realize it's just my opinion, but I would like to hear one thing Michael Vick was more "talented at" other than throwing the ball hard and far and running with speed to the outside.

FUNBUNCHER
09-08-2010, 06:04 PM
From that SI article, even though as a talent evaluator he's a little 'off the reservation', Bill Walsh would have creamed himself for the opportunity to draft Vick.

But I'm beginning to think after reading that SI article that if all three prospects came out in 1998, Elway would have gone first, ( the best combination of the combined skills of Vick/Manning), Manning second, and Vick third.

All of them probably would have been gone in the first 4 picks.

Bengalsrocket
09-08-2010, 08:28 PM
From that SI article, even though as a talent evaluator he's a little 'off the reservation', Bill Walsh would have creamed himself for the opportunity to draft Vick.

But I'm beginning to think after reading that SI article that if all three prospects came out in 1998, Elway would have gone first, ( the best combination of the combined skills of Vick/Manning), Manning second, and Vick third.

All of them probably would have been gone in the first 4 picks.

Yea, I respect Bill Walsh on many different levels, but he always did over think player evaluations. He seems to attempt to aim for a unique prospect when looking at QB's and often skipping over the 1st round projections and aiming for later round quarterbacks for the sake of having a different opinion (or trying to look like a mastermind). Michael Vick might be the first QB he would have agreed with drafting in the first round.

Halsey
09-09-2010, 12:23 AM
In fairness to Vick, he did not grow up with some of the advantages that I know Manning had, and imagine Elway had advantages too. Manning was the oldest son of an NFL QB, probably went to good schools, and was overall better equipped for the life of being a superstar QB. Having said that, I still think Manning is just smarter than the average dude. Just look at his egg head. Vick had to overcome poverty, a deadbeat dad, etc. However, if all those kind of variables were equal, I still believe Manning has more 'talent' for being a QB.

katnip
09-09-2010, 12:25 AM
Based on their careers. John Elway all the way. Went to 5 super bowls, won 2 of them, 1 he beat brett favre. who many vastly overrate. at least most of the espn guys.

Halsey
09-09-2010, 12:32 AM
Say what you want about Brett Favre, but he's been the starting QB for his team every game for two decades. Every game. The teams Favre has started for have been in the playoffs all but like 2 or 3 years. The teams he started for have only had a losing record one or two of those years, I believe. Don't let the media hype and diva qualities fool you, Favre is ridiculously good.

Werowance
09-09-2010, 01:26 AM
See, the way this question is phrased, the answer is Michael Vick. If the question was who was the best prospect instead of the most talented prospect the answer would be Elway. Between the ears Manning is better than both of them, Elway is a great combination of athleticism and intelligence but in terms of talent, no QB prospect ever can touch Vick.

We're not likely to ever see a prospect comparable to Vick ever again, sure we might get a Pat White, Tyrod Taylor or a Robert Griffin every once in a while but not even the best running QBs today can touch Vick in terms of athleticism. Michael Vick ran a 4.25 40 yard dash at Virginia Tech and he ran a 4.36 at a post-draft mini-camp, the conditions of which likely didn't contribute to a fantastic 40 yard dash. And the guy probably still has the strongest arm in the NFL, Vick is very inaccurate but one thing is for sure, the guy can flick the ball 60 yards with the flick of a wrist. And the guy in his prime was the most elusive player since Barry Sanders, the guy was a blur on the field.

I dare you to find me any other QB who could do this:
http://videobeta.net/gifs/945.gif
http://i151.photobucket.com/albums/s126/William_Nicholas/Football/michaelvick.gif

You can't. In terms of talent, Vick is the most talented QB prospect ever IMO simply because no prospect is ever likely to match that speed, arm strength, elusiveness and athletic ability ever again.

Now if you're asking who is the best QB prospect ever instead of the most talented, thats different and its likely Elway.