Thread: What is a "Franchise QB"?

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Don't get me wrong - it's important, but not the most important IMO.

If you look at Elway's stats, they're rather pedestrian. It was all the other stuff he brought to the table that made him elite.

Love Marino, but if Elway played for the Dolphins, they'd probably have a couple recent championships.

Were Elways stats pedestrian for that era? I feel like he retired towards the top of a lot of passing categories.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Were Elways stats pedestrian for that era? I feel like he retired towards the top of a lot of passing categories.

He definitely threw too many interceptions. His completion percentage was below 57. Career rating below 80.

I don't know how that compared to others in that era, but I know a lot of people would bash him on his stats.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Don't get me wrong - it's important, but not the most important IMO.

If you look at Elway's stats, they're rather pedestrian. It was all the other stuff he brought to the table that made him elite.

Love Marino, but if Elway played for the Dolphins, they'd probably have a couple recent championships.

I think the ability to put up elite stats speaks to a quarterback's ability to say "get on my back, we're doing this." Which is a phrase I should have put in my original post. The ability to put a team on his back and go win, both in any game, and any season, though not specifically every game and every season.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Were Elways stats pedestrian for that era? I feel like he retired towards the top of a lot of passing categories.

No. He was top 10 in yards in 11 seasons, led the league once, and top 10 in TDs in 8 seasons. His passer rating was top 10 in five seasons (speaks to his interceptions, i.e., gunslinging). He was not pedestrian statwise by any means.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

I think the ability to put up elite stats speaks to a quarterback's ability to say "get on my back, we're doing this." Which is a phrase I should have put in my original post. The ability to put a team on his back and go win, both in any game, and any season, though not specifically every game and every season.

I get ya. I just believe actual stats are further down the list.

Granted, you did have that at level D, so I'm guessing it's not the end-all-be-all in your eyes either.

Originally Posted by BroncoWave

Yeah, I'm always going to give a guy a chance to prove me wrong. I don't love the keenum signing personally, but if he plays well and we're winning the next 2 years, I'm not going to stay married to that opinion just to dig my heels in the sand. I'd love for him to prove me wrong.

That's kinda where I'm at currently. Granted if we draft MOfield or Rosen, I'll probably migrate over there rather quickly lol.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

No. He was top 10 in yards in 11 seasons, led the league once, and top 10 in TDs in 8 seasons. His passer rating was top 10 in five seasons (speaks to his interceptions, i.e., gunslinging). He was not pedestrian statwise by any means.

Remember in the 80's the top QB's' were Montana, Marino, Kelly, Moon and Young. Even Fouts and Cunningham put up huge numbers.

In the 90's, you add in Favre, Aikman and Warner who all put up pretty good stats.

I'm not dissing on Elway - just stating my point that stats aren't the primary qualifier. He was incredibly consistent and a winner.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

He definitely threw too many interceptions. His completion percentage was below 57. Career rating below 80.

I don't know how that compared to others in that era, but I know a lot of people would bash him on his stats.

Well, once again, we get down to the "why's." Time and again, Elway had to bail the team out
with a come-from-behind win in the fourth quarter. Looking back, as I watched the game
(often in frustration, wondering whether we were going to see a complete game from the
team), Elway was forced to play within Dan Reeves' offense: run, run, pass, punt. Then, when
it came desperation time in the waning minutes, Elway was turned loose, and he proceeded to
make defenses look silly.

If one would look at Elway's career stats, they went up significantly beginning in 1993. If he
had Shanahan as a HC all his career, his stats would have been far more sparkling, IMO. But
even at that, keep in mind that stats weren't near back then what they are today. For instance,
it's commonplace that the top QBs today will register passer ratings in the 90s and 100s. Back
then, a Unitas or Marino might register one year or so in the 90s, but most of the time in the
70s and 80s. But then, the league started to limit what defenses can do, so now Elway's stats
don't look as good as they likely did back then. (I didn't pay too much attention to such stats
back then, and I don't think anybody did, at least as much.)

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Remember in the 80's the top QB's' were Montana, Marino, Kelly, Moon and Young. Even Fouts and Cunningham put up huge numbers.

In the 90's, you add in Favre, Aikman and Warner who all put up pretty good stats.

I'm not dissing on Elway - just stating my point that stats aren't the primary qualifier. He was incredibly consistent and a winner.

Yea, but if the guys you mentioned were the Peyton Manning's of their era, Elway was the Aaron Rodgers of that era. He was still solid statistically when compared amongst his peers. It's only when you take him out of his own era that his numbers seem pedestrian.

Someone who can carry the load with a flawed team. Someone who is productive more than most, and isn't reliant upon great players around them to do well. Someone who can carry a team. Someone who can mask the deficiencies of others. Can you do more with less? Can you make others overachieve?

Someone who clearly passes the eye test. Someone who you know that because you have them, you always have a shot.

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

Someone who can carry the load with a flawed team. Someone who is productive more than most, and isn't reliant upon great players around them to do well. Someone who can carry a team. Someone who can mask the deficiencies of others. Can you do more with less? Can you make others overachieve?

Someone who clearly passes the eye test. Someone who you know that because you have them, you always have a shot.

So, Keenum?

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

So, Keenum?

It is possible that he is this guy and routinely had bad luck and variance against him.

Originally Posted by Freyaka

Yea, but if the guys you mentioned were the Peyton Manning's of their era, Elway was the Aaron Rodgers of that era. He was still solid statistically when compared amongst his peers. It's only when you take him out of his own era that his numbers seem pedestrian.

I just want to be 100% clear: I think Elway is the GOAT. Period.

His statistics prove the point that it takes a hell of a lot more than great stats to be a franchise QB.

Originally Posted by BroncoJoe

Remember in the 80's the top QB's' were Montana, Marino, Kelly, Moon and Young. Even Fouts and Cunningham put up huge numbers.

In the 90's, you add in Favre, Aikman and Warner who all put up pretty good stats.

I'm not dissing on Elway - just stating my point that stats aren't the primary qualifier. He was incredibly consistent and a winner.

I'm not sure what you're arguing. I get that stats aren't the be all, end all, but all of these quarterbacks are franchise quarterbacks. You're listing off Hall of Famers.

Originally Posted by Von Kinger

It is possible that he is this guy and routinely had bad luck and variance against him.

We can certainly all hope that is the Case. Keenum.