Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who are the current "Franchise Quaterbacks"

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    A franchise QB doesn't have to put up 4000+ yards and 30+ TD's year in and year our. A franchise QB is someone who knows his offense and the team well. Someone who the team can rely on to win games and make smart throws and not turn the ball over. If he understands the offense and does a good job managing the game which in turn leads to more W's he's a franchise QB in my books. And yeah, I was probably wrong about Peyton Manning, I guess I put too much thought into this age and forgot how good he really is. I'll change that.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Somse View Post
      Kyle Orton had 18 TDs and 12 INTs on a much less talented Bears offense. I think you need to ask for more out of Eli Manning than 20/10 if you're going to call him a franchise quarterback. Then again, my list of franchise quarterbacks might be a lot shorter than yours.
      I think Eli's 2007 playoffs is enough, we don't have to ask him for anything else.


      ^^Best Real Estate Salesman Ever^^

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by BmoreBlackByrdz View Post
        A franchise QB doesn't have to put up 4000+ yards and 30+ TD's year in and year our. A franchise QB is someone who knows his offense and the team well. Someone who the team can rely on to win games and make smart throws and not turn the ball over. If he understands the offense and does a good job managing the game which in turn leads to more W's he's a franchise QB in my books. And yeah, I was probably wrong about Peyton Manning, I guess I put too much thought into this age and forgot how good he really is. I'll change that.
        By that definition, Kyle Orton is a franchise quarterback. So was Trent Dilfer back when he played for the Ravens.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Somse View Post
          Kyle Orton had 18 TDs and 12 INTs on a much less talented Bears offense. Sure, Eli Manning is technically a "franchise quarterback" but I think you expect your franchise quarterback to be elite, which he isn't.
          There are many ways to look at this Trent Dilfer does not > Dan Marino because of his ring, but at the same time if Big Ben is considered a franchise QB with a 15 TD 15 INT stat line his only great season was 07', with his 2 SB rings then I think Eli Manning has to make the list. Same goes to Terry Bradshaw he is still considered a great QB with his 4 SB rings, but he never had amazing stats.
          Last edited by Malaka; 04-09-2009, 02:52 PM.

          Bone Krusher, the best

          Comment


          • #35
            If the question was who could be a Franchise QB Trent Edwards would be on the list but the question was who are the current franchise QB's and he doesn't make that list.

            Comment


            • #36
              Look let's not argue about eli because unless you watch him and see how he takes over in the clutch for our team you won't appreciate him, not with stats, not with previous success, etc. What makes eli a great QB is that we're never out of it with him under center, we can always comeback. Now that our D is strength he doesn't have too play from behind as much so you don't see him taking over as often, but he moves the offense in crunch time like few QBs in this league can.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Malaka View Post
                There are many ways to look at this Trent Dilfer does not > Dan Marino because of his ring, but at the same time if Big Ben is considered a franchise QB with a 15 TD 15 INT stat line his only great season was 07', with his 2 SB rings then I think Eli Manning has to make the list. Same goes to Terry Bradshaw he is still considered a great QB with his 4 SB rings, but he never had amazing stats.
                Big Ben has been much more efficient and consistent than Eli Manning, which is what separates the two.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Somse View Post
                  Big Ben has been much more efficient and consistent than Eli Manning, which is what separates the two.
                  If you take away Ben's 2007 they're just as efficient. Both win games, both are clutch, both benefit from great running games and defenses. There is no way you can call Roethlisberger a franchise QB without calling Eli one.


                  ^^Best Real Estate Salesman Ever^^

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Somse View Post
                    Big Ben has been much more efficient and consistent than Eli Manning, which is what separates the two.
                    Where is the proof of that?

                    Big Ben has had only 1 amazing season 07' 32 TDs 11 INTs. He has 2 SB rings but you can argue that both could have been won without him. Big Ben has been just as inconsistent posting 17 TD 15 INT season this year and also an 18 TD 23 INT season before 07'

                    Eli has had similar production on a worse team, also more TDs every year except his rookie year, and with out him the Giants would not have won a SB. Also if the Giants were less of a run happy team, and had a competent receiver other than Plaxico Burress Eli would have had a much better statistical year last year.

                    You cannot say Big Ben has been more consistent and efficient because that is not true, that point is moot.

                    Bone Krusher, the best

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Fogartynyy2789 View Post
                      If you take away Ben's 2007 they're just as efficient. Both win games, both are clutch, both benefit from great running games and defenses. There is no way you can call Roethlisberger a franchise QB without calling Eli one.
                      In fact Eli's better command of his offense and overall higher football IQ makes him a fair bit higher IMO than Roethlisberger, although Big Ben shares my first name, is a fellow Motorcycling enthusiast and with his gunslingerness is pretty much the QB i'd be if I had the skills to make it to the NFL, so I do like him and root for him, but Eli's just better, smarter and more dependable.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Ben Roethlisberger:


                        Eli Manning:


                        Roethlisberger has:
                        • More passing yards on 379 less attempts
                        • 62.4% completion percentage versus 55.9%
                        • 7.9 yards per pass average versus 6.4
                        • 89.4 QB rating versus 76.1 QB rating

                        Other than 2008, Manning turned the ball over too much and was inefficient as you can tell from his low yards per pass average and completion percentage.

                        Clearly, Roethlisberger is a more efficient quarterback.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by Somse View Post
                          By that definition, Kyle Orton is a franchise quarterback. So was Trent Dilfer back when he played for the Ravens.
                          Dilfer is a different story. That 2000 Defense was just something amazing. Dan Orlovsky could have led that team to the Super Bowl. As for Orton, his defense was a dissapointment and he had very little weapons to work with. Olsen was the only legit option in the pass game and Hester still isn't polished. I do believe Orton can lead a team to the Super Bowl, but he'll need a good defense supporting him and some weapons to work with. Look at Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan, Flacco had a top 5 run game and the #2 overall defense and Matt Ryan had the #2 run game and a pro bowl WR. The fact is, alot of QB's possess the ability to lead teams to the playoffs, they just need a solid supporting cast, but there are QB's (Brady, Brees, Rivers) who can take a team with nothing, and make then contenders. That is what seperates most QB's.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            I wouldn't say Trent is a franchise QB yet but he definitely has the potential to be. The Bills organization is very high on him and think he is the future. During our 5-0 start, Trent had MVP talk going on.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by art vandelay View Post
                              I wouldn't say Trent is a franchise QB yet but he definitely has the potential to be. The Bills organization is very high on him and think he is the future. During our 5-0 start, Trent had MVP talk going on.
                              Huh?

                              First of all the Bills started 4-0. Second of all, Trent Edwards has never even been on the radar for MVP. He didn't throw for over 300 yards ONCE last season. He had ONE multiple TD game when he threw 2 TDs. The Bills offense is also about as stagnant as you can get.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by BmoreBlackByrdz View Post
                                Dilfer is a different story. That 2000 Defense was just something amazing. Dan Orlovsky could have led that team to the Super Bowl. As for Orton, his defense was a dissapointment and he had very little weapons to work with. Olsen was the only legit option in the pass game and Hester still isn't polished. I do believe Orton can lead a team to the Super Bowl, but he'll need a good defense supporting him and some weapons to work with. Look at Joe Flacco and Matt Ryan, Flacco had a top 5 run game and the #2 overall defense and Matt Ryan had the #2 run game and a pro bowl WR. The fact is, alot of QB's possess the ability to lead teams to the playoffs, they just need a solid supporting cast, but there are QB's (Brady, Brees, Rivers) who can take a team with nothing, and make then contenders. That is what seperates most QB's.
                                So why did you just go on a rant about how you don't need to put up good stats (like Brady, Brees, Rivers, etc.) to be a franchise quarterback? Your two posts seem to be arguing complete opposites.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information