WINS are NOT a QB Stat & Are Basically MEANINGLESS when Evaluating Individual Players

[Jameis1of1]

Originally Posted by doniceage I will disagree with you. As the talent level of Elvis Grbac is not above Trent Dilfer so the team did not upgrade their qb situation as you mentioned.

Also, that was the first qb ever to be resigned after winning a super bowl. Any one knows it is a a team sport but why break up something that works? I assume better talent has been out there over other Super Bowl champs qb's hence teams would upgrade their qb situation. None have never done it so I truly doubt your logic or it would be done more often.
Don

Thanks for the reply Don, I appreciate it.

However, firstly, the Elvis Grbac and Trent Dilfer situation actually proves my point perfectly.

The Ravens had just went 10-1 and won the SuperBowl with Trent Dilfer ... however in those 11 games he had only thrown for a measly 2,092 yards (190 yards per game) and had a rating of 76.6 in the regular season.

Elvis Grbac was coming off a season in which his team had a losing record but one in which he himself threw for 4,169 yards (278 yards per game) in just 15 games and had an 89.9 rating.

The Ravens, despite winning the Super Bowl with Dilfer, who won 11 out of 12 games during a magical run DUMPED DILFER for the more prolific Elvis Grbac who was viewed as a much better passer and a guy who could have 300 yard games and not need to be carried by the Ravens amazing defense.

Of course the experiment failed and Grbac would go on to play just one more year of football and have a worse passer rating than even Dilfer had the year prior ... but this example proves my point perfectly as even the defending Super Bowl Champion Baltimore Ravens were willing to dump a QB that had just went 11-1 and brought them their first ever title for a guy that had just had a much better statistical year in a LOSING cause ...

Secondly, the NFL is not like the NBA ... players, especially franchise QBs rarely change teams. If a team has a franchise guy, odds are that guy will stay with the team for the length of his contract and maybe even the majority of his career, unlike in the NBA where guys are traded all the time and stars hit free agency regularly, as in the NBA the players have a great deal more power than in the NFL.

Secondly, if the Chiefs win the SuperBowl this year but Alex Smith is on an expiring contract and Aaron Rodgers just happens to hit free agency at the same time, you better believe the Chiefs would offer the house to A-Rod and not care one iota about retaining Alex Smith! In fact, Kansas City is another perfect current example ... Alex Smith has been a great leader and lockerroom guy in KC for years and I understand they have won the 2nd most games of any team in the NFL (next to the dynastic Patriots) since he's been there ... however last spring when they had the chance to draft a QB with more talent than Smith in Patrick Mahomes, they did just that!

Lazy media narratives just drive me crazy and I hate hearing "wins" talked about as if they are a QB stat like yards, TDs or completion percentage ... it's absurd. I hate hearing Steven A Smith saying such and such a QB couldn't even beat another QB ... as if those two QBs were playing a game of one-on-one football ... it's just such a lazy narrative and utterly idiotic.

There is zero difference between evaluating an NFL QB and an NCAA QB ... wins mean next to nothing!

No GM in their right mind would look at the NFL today and say, "I think if I can sign Joe Flacco or Derek Carr, I'll sign Flacco because he's won 4 games this year and Carr has only won 3 ... or ... if Jay Cutler and Jameis Winston are available, I'll sign Cutler because he's won 4 games and Winston has only won 2". Such a GM would be immediately branded as a literal moron, fired from his job and never re-hired by any team as long as he lived!

Yet the media, believing fans are incapable of logical thought, continues to peddle lazy and absurd narratives about "wins" being a QB stat ... I hate it.

And, of course ... everyone knows that while ALL-TIME great QBs like Marino, Moon, Fouts and Tarkenton NEVER won a ring, no-names that would need to buy a ticket to get into the Hall of Fame like Trent Dilfer, Brad Johnson and Jeff Hostettler all did win a ring which in and of itself proves that "rings" are organizational accomplishments and NOT individual player accomplishments.

Likewise, the fact that Tom Brady won THREE rings when he was a young, game-manager and just two rings when he was in his prime and playing the best ball of his career, and likewise how John Elway never won a single ring when he was in his prime and a dominant force on the football field, but did win TWO rings when he was well past his prime and little more than a game-manager with stacked Broncos teams ... also is proof positive that rings are organizational accomplishments rather than individual accomplishments.

And, honestly, it's the same in all T-E-A-M sports ... some of the greatest NBA players ever such as Barkley, Stockton & Malone, Ewing, Dominique, Iverson, Nash, etc., NEVER won a single ring while a role player like Robert Horry won SEVEN (more than Jordan!) ... yet, football is even more of a T-E-A-M sport than basketball is as there are 22 guys on the field at all times rather than a mere 10 and one individual player, even a QB isn't even close to 20% responsible for a team's success or failure, as an NBA starter potentially could be if all starters played a full 48 minutes. And yet .. people still think "wins" are an individual stat ... so silly.

YOUR THOUGHTS?

[Cowboys8]

I think you have to take a QB on a case by case basis. It depends on the team they are on and the kind of offense they run. I think a lot of the media goes by what they think people want to hear. As a Cowboys fan I find the QB argument funny, I know we are one of the more popular teams but we have so many people that hate us and want to criticize and hear criticism. About 20 years ago all I heard was how overrated Aikman was. Everyone said, yeah he won championships but look at his stats he's average. Then in the last couple years I hear criticism of Romo, the same people saying he was garbage because he didn't have much playoff success despite the amazing stats. So two of my favorite players of all time "suck" for the exact opposite reasons lol. Aikman couldn't have great stats because of the offense they ran, but he could have put up huge #'s in an offense like San Fran had. Romo didn't have a team capable of winning big most of his career, but those years we only won 8 games we would have been lucky to win 3 without him. The whole notion he was a choker is crazy, I have seen sure fire HOF's like Eli and Brees blow a lot more games than Romo ever did. They get a free pass though because they won Super Bowls. Sorry if my rant on the subject turned into my team's but I think it is a decent example of what you are trying to say, and let me get some things off my chest lol.

[Jameis1of1]

I think you have to take a QB on a case by case basis. It depends on the team they are on and the kind of offense they run. I think a lot of the media goes by what they think people want to hear. As a Cowboys fan I find the QB argument funny, I know we are one of the more popular teams but we have so many people that hate us and want to criticize and hear criticism. About 20 years ago all I heard was how overrated Aikman was. Everyone said, yeah he won championships but look at his stats he's average. Then in the last couple years I hear criticism of Romo, the same people saying he was garbage because he didn't have much playoff success despite the amazing stats. So two of my favorite players of all time "suck" for the exact opposite reasons lol. Aikman couldn't have great stats because of the offense they ran, but he could have put up huge #'s in an offense like San Fran had. Romo didn't have a team capable of winning big most of his career, but those years we only won 8 games we would have been lucky to win 3 without him. The whole notion he was a choker is crazy, I have seen sure fire HOF's like Eli and Brees blow a lot more games than Romo ever did. They get a free pass though because they won Super Bowls. Sorry if my rant on the subject turned into my team's but I think it is a decent example of what you are trying to say, and let me get some things off my chest lol.

GREAT REPLY and I couldn't agree with you more!

I am NOT a Cowboys fan but Aikman was elite ... and so was Romo ... and I don't care who disagrees with that. They were both infinitely better than Eli Manning, Ben Roethlisberger and a handful of other HOF QBs people fawn over ... and I'm a massive Big Ben fan by the way!

It also bugs me that people seem to understand this fact for every position other than QB ... you'll never hear someone say Barry Sanders wasn't great because he only won one playoff game or that JJ Watt wasn't great because he didn't win a ring, etc ... but for QBs everyone spits constant insanity ... it drives me nuts.

By the way .... where do you stand on current Cowboys QB Dak and on Captain America Staubach ... what are you opinons on them and how would you rank all the Cowboys QBs ... personally, I'd say Staubach/Aikman/Romo/Bledsoe/Dak ... hahaha, I'm just joking with Bledsoe ...

[Cowboys8]

Yeah, I agree QB's seem to be the only ones held to the playoff success. I do have a lot of respect for Big Ben and Phillip Rivers as long as we are talking about that class. I am with you on Eli, he will be a HOFer and you have to give him credit for those two playoff runs and his durability. However, I always felt like we had the much better QB in Romo.

Staubach was a little before my time but from everything I have heard and seen I think he has to be #1. Then Aikman 2nd with Romo an extremely close 3rd. I guess 4th would be Don Meredith, he put up some pretty impressive numbers in the 60's for as little as most teams passed but he retired early. Danny White in 5th which tells me just how lucky we have been he took us to 3 straight NFC Championship games which is pretty impressive for only the 5th best in Franchise history. We have been very spoiled and fortunate with our QB play.

I would put Dak 6th with the potential to move up to 4th pretty quick at the rate he is going. He will have to have some longevity to pass the top 3 in my eyes. I do love what I have seen so far though, he definitely plays like a veteran more often than not. I am not big on putting young guys over HOFer's or guys that had a nice long career. It will be at least 8 or 10 years before you hear me saying Zeke is better than Dorsett or Emmitt. Fyi, I would put Bledsoe behind Craig Morton and Vinny Testeverde in 9th place lol. Not making fun of him at all though I do respect what he did in New England, his stats would have been out of this world had he not been hurt and had Brady take his place. He was just past his prime when he got to us.

[Jameis1of1]

Yeah, I agree QB's seem to be the only ones held to the playoff success. I do have a lot of respect for Big Ben and Phillip Rivers as long as we are talking about that class. I am with you on Eli, he will be a HOFer and you have to give him credit for those two playoff runs and his durability. However, I always felt like we had the much better QB in Romo.

Staubach was a little before my time but from everything I have heard and seen I think he has to be #1. Then Aikman 2nd with Romo an extremely close 3rd. I guess 4th would be Don Meredith, he put up some pretty impressive numbers in the 60's for as little as most teams passed but he retired early. Danny White in 5th which tells me just how lucky we have been he took us to 3 straight NFC Championship games which is pretty impressive for only the 5th best in Franchise history. We have been very spoiled and fortunate with our QB play.

I would put Dak 6th with the potential to move up to 4th pretty quick at the rate he is going. He will have to have some longevity to pass the top 3 in my eyes. I do love what I have seen so far though, he definitely plays like a veteran more often than not. I am not big on putting young guys over HOFer's or guys that had a nice long career. It will be at least 8 or 10 years before you hear me saying Zeke is better than Dorsett or Emmitt. Fyi, I would put Bledsoe behind Craig Morton and Vinny Testeverde in 9th place lol. Not making fun of him at all though I do respect what he did in New England, his stats would have been out of this world had he not been hurt and had Brady take his place. He was just past his prime when he got to us.

Great post!

I agree with your Cowboys QB rankings and yes ya'll have been very blessed with the QBs you have considering a 23 year old puppy like Jameis is already the greatest QB in Buccaneers history ... and some teams like the Jets and Bears haven't had a decent QB in what seems like an eternity.

[blackhorseson]

Lol you guys are pretty lucky in the qb department. Being a Browns fan, last good qb we had was good old Bernie. The last decent qb we had that was good was Kelly Holcomb, but that was many years ago. I can see what you mean about too much fuss being made at qb. First things first, you have to have a good oline so the qb can have time for his read, make his decision, and pass or run it. Without a good oline, you will have a qb carousel, like the Browns for many years. The rest of the offense makes the qb, imo, not the other way around.

[pwaldo]

Because they are....to a degree. QBs and pitchers (and maybe goalies) are the most important players on a team. While it isn't solely a win by the QB he plays the largest role in the win. If you split up all the positions that contribute to a win in the form of a pie graph the QB position in football would represent the biggest piece. Fact.

[Jameis1of1]

Because they are....to a degree. QBs and pitchers (and maybe goalies) are the most important players on a team. While it isn't solely a win by the QB he plays the largest role in the win. If you split up all the positions that contribute to a win in the form of a pie graph the QB position in football would represent the biggest piece. Fact.

Yes the QB would represent the biggest piece, but it would still be far, far, far lower than a star in basketball or a pitcher in baseball or a goalie in hockey.

A star goalie can probably be around 25-35% responsible ... a star basketball player 20-30%, a star pitcher maybe 15-25% but a star NFL QB maybe only 5-10%.

I honestly feel it's idiotic to consider "wins" an individual stat and the fact that all-time great QBs like Tarkenton, Fouts, Marino, Kelly and Moon played a combined SEVENTY plus years of NFL football and combined to win a whopping total of ZERO rings while guys who will have to buy a ticket to get into Canton like Jeff Hostettler, Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, etc., all won a ring, proves that.

For goodness sake, Fouts and Moon never even made it to the SuperBowl while an absolute garbage QB like Rex Grossman has!

[CAD]

I agree 100%

Yes the QB would represent the biggest piece, but it would still be far, far, far lower than a star in basketball or a pitcher in baseball or a goalie in hockey.

A star goalie can probably be around 25-35% responsible ... a star basketball player 20-30%, a star pitcher maybe 15-25% but a star NFL QB maybe only 5-10%.

I honestly feel it's idiotic to consider "wins" an individual stat and the fact that all-time great QBs like Tarkenton, Fouts, Marino, Kelly and Moon played a combined SEVENTY plus years of NFL football and combined to win a whopping total of ZERO rings while guys who will have to buy a ticket to get into Canton like Jeff Hostettler, Brad Johnson, Trent Dilfer, Doug Williams, etc., all won a ring, proves that.

For goodness sake, Fouts and Moon never even made it to the SuperBowl while an absolute garbage QB like Rex Grossman has!

[rtsjr]

there are some team without certain qbs would be just plain bad.just like without the qb some wr te stats with be not as good either.

good topic if certain qbs were on diff teams would they have more or less rings then they have