All time QB rating top 10 list

[Diehardblues]

we will never know. but I think Mahomes plays in the perfect offensive system and a great offensive mind in Reid. He is one of the most under rated coaches in the NFL. he adjusts his system to his QB and he did with McNabb, Smith and then he got Mahomes and just took his scheme and offense to a different level...Garrett was the type to fit a square peg in a round hole by pounding it harder.....

While I’d agree Mahomes could have taken this team further than Dak, much like I argued for years I though Rodgers could take us further than Romo, still not enough without a better defense , coaching staff and organization to win it all.

We are flawed from the top down. QB is not our core weakness preventing us from winning championships.

As a matter of fact Romo and Dak have propped up a poor culture , poorly run organization and putrid defense on the most part from further futility.

 

[Diehardblues]

Our lack of success this era has attracted opposing teams fans and trolls to Cowboy sites antagonizing our fans much like Stephen A and other personalities in the media.

As America’s Team we wear a target on our backs.

 

[RonnieT24]

Dak has played with one bad defense and it was only for 4 1/2 games (2020). Every other year starting with Daks rookie year in 2016 the Cowboys defense finished 5th, 13th, 6th, and 11th in points allowed.

I don't believe the Chiefs would have any rings with Dak.

Dak is just like Alex Smith, above average, but still getting replaced by Mahomes.

We all know that those defensive rankings were aided mightily by the style of offense the Cowboys played. The defense counted heavily on the offense to possess the ball and control the clock to help them out. The defense has also spend more than its share of time at the bottom of the league in terms of turnovers. So they aren't helping the offense by forcing turnovers or a bunch of 3 and outs. Remember in 2019 that it took until week 13 or something like that for the Cowboys to start a drive in opponents' territory? I'm sorry but those rankings fall well short of telling the story of how good or bad our defense was in those years. I'm not going to sit here and claim they NEVER had games when they were great... but they have rarely had games where they were able to make the difference making plays when the offense struggled. Offense is gonna have off days no getting around it. It would be nice if the defense could present a short field or two to help out.. Just sayin. But I don't think anyone is arguing that Dak is better than Mahomes.. My only contention is that asserting that Dak getting better is just an absolute impossibility is simply not accurate. We have seen QBs get better well into their careers and we have seen guys flame out after a great start.

 

[RonnieT24]

QBR turns out some weird stuff at times. Then again, so does regular QB rating, though not as much imo.

I was a HUGE David Garrard fan--mainly because he went to my undergrad school and he was a great guy--but top 11 in NFL history. Good lordy. I do think he was underrated, but good grief.
And Vince Young top 25....lmao
QBR can be so bizarre. It hyper-inflates rushing stats onto the QB position at times.

If a QB's rushing helps his team win games how is it being hyper-inflated? Winning is the name of the game not "putting up the prettiest passing statistics." I don't much care HOW a QB gets his team over the hump so long as he does so. There are no trophies for "throws the prettiest spirals" or "can heave it the farthest" or even "has the quickest release." It's about winning games.. QBR encompasses everything a QB does to help his team win.. throwing it, running it, managing the clock, 3rd down conversions, avoiding sacks, not turning the ball over, clutch throws, missed throws, all of it. That's why it favors guys who can do more than just stand in the pocket and throw pretty passes. There is just so much more to playing the position than that.

 

[gimmesix]

And Romo simply didn’t have the longevity to compile career stats without more team success. Due to injuries he only played 7 complete seasons. 2007, 08, 09,11,12,13 and 14.

That’s really not long enough to make a greater impact to be considered for HOF without some Rings.

That would be the other path, longevity. Warren Moon comes to mind.

 

[DFWJC]

If a QB's rushing helps his team win games how is it being hyper-inflated? Winning is the name of the game not "putting up the prettiest passing statistics." I don't much care HOW a QB gets his team over the hump so long as he does so. There are no trophies for "throws the prettiest spirals" or "can heave it the farthest" or even "has the quickest release." It's about winning games.. QBR encompasses everything a QB does to help his team win.. throwing it, running it, managing the clock, 3rd down conversions, avoiding sacks, not turning the ball over, clutch throws, missed throws, all of it. That's why it favors guys who can do more than just stand in the pocket and throw pretty passes. There is just so much more to playing the position than that.

Horray for HOFers Vince Young and Seneca Wallace!


...j/k

If you noticed I didn't say rushing was not important...OF COURSE it is!
Just said that QBR may exaggerate it ....which is why you can get some very strange anomalies.
Also didn't say anything about pretty passes.
Pretty basic stuff

Hey, maybe "hyper" inflates was too strong a term
Maybe just "inflates" was what I meant

 

[ScipioCowboy]

Romo had good lines in 06 and 07. It started deteriorating in 08 and was gone by 10. In 2014, he had a phenomenal line, but it was too little, too late.

 

[waving monkey]

The QB passer rankings should be presented per era instead of all time.

Staubach for example had one of the highest passer ratings in his era but it doesn’t measure up this era because they simply didn’t pass the ball as much.

The change of rules and emphasis on passing has skewed the rankings for this era.

I agree with you. I know however that Staubach that would have been rated top ten in this era.

 

[RonnieT24]

Horray for HOFers Vince Young and Seneca Wallace!


...j/k

If you noticed I didn't say rushing was not important...OF COURSE it is!
Just said that QBR may exaggerate it ....which is why you can get some very strange anomalies.
Also didn't say anything about pretty passes.
Pretty basic stuff

Hey, maybe "hyper" inflates was too strong a term
Maybe just "inflates" was what I meant

Okay this is a fair and reasoned assessment. Still guys who do more to help their teams win should be ranked higher than guys who do less. If you put it all into the equation through if a guy is only an average passer but a great runner the extent to which he can help his team win will be predicated on HOW great he is as a runner. The same goes for a great passer who is a statue.. In either instance if the guy is great ENOUGH at what he does that he can't be stopped then that cream rises.

Obviously the running component is difficult to sustain long term which is why the guys with the super long successful careers tend to be the passers. However Rodgers is super athletic and always has been. He has simply evolved to relying LESS on his athleticism to more on his arm as he has aged. The same will be true of Mahomes. Before them there were guys like Steve Young and Randall Cunningham who came into the league as mostly runner and average at best passers who evolved into great passers.. but never stopped being great athletes. Some guys never make that transition and thus they wash out. The kid Allen in Buffalo has made that turn.. Lamar Jackson has yet to do so and he will always hit playoff roadblocks until he does. Mahomes has always been a superior athlete but he has never relied on it very much to make plays. Playing for Kliff did that for him. Dak played for Dan Mullen who did the opposite to him. Mullen's offense is built around the QB's athleticism. He uses the QB as damn near a single wing tailback. So Dak came into the league horribly prepared for NFL football while Mahomes came in pretty much ready to go.. and he still got a year to sit and learn. Dak had to make the turn from athletic QB to NFL passer quicker than anyone had a right to expect based on where he was drafted and the fact that he was drafted to a team that had a multi time Pro Bowl QB already.

I take exception when people choose to grade Dak's progress the same way they judge someone like Mahomes. Mahomes threw more passes in 3 years of college than Dak threw in 4. Again, preparation. None of this should be taken to minimize Mahomes' greatness. He's one of the 4-5 most talented passers I've ever seen. No I don't think Dak will ever throw the ball as well as he does.. But again.. that's not the point.. Dak can do other things to help his team win. And there can be no denying that Dak is closer to being able to throw it at that level now than he was 4 years ago. I do not accept that he can't get any better and if we look at Mahomes' numbers he's kind of standing still. Which is fine because he's already great.. But Dak is still climbing. Yes Dak's best statistical season as a passer was his rookie year but anyone who watched him then and is watching him now can see that he is far better passer now than he was back then.. He thinks the game at a higher level now and is far more aggressive throwing it than he was as a rookie. He had his best QBR in 2020 and was on pace to not only set his own career bests in most passing categories he was on pace to challenge a lot of NFL records.

In the final analysis it doesn't matter if Dak ever catches Mahomes because as has already been stated many times Dak is already good enough to get it done if the front office and coaching staff can get out of its own way. Dak is not what is standing between this team and greatness. So all this hand wringing over "where he ranks" is misguided. But hey, it's the offseason..

 

[DFWJC]

Romo had good lines in 06 and 07. It started deteriorating in 08 and was gone by 10. In 2014, he had a phenomenal line, but it was too little, too late.

Good summary
I'd say his best line was 2014--which was similar (plus or minus a little) to our lines from 2015-2019

 

[DFWJC]

I agree with you. I know however that Staubach that would have been rated top ten in this era.

He would be near the very top.
Rules way easier and offenses way more sophisticated w/ more passing options and route trees. Just SO much easier to put up stats now.
Anyway, time adjusted, he actually is top 10 all-time in QB rating.

 

[RonnieT24]

He would be near the very top.
Rules way easier and offenses way more sophisticated w/ more passing options and route trees. Just SO much easier to put up stats now.
Anyway, time adjusted, he actually is top 10 all-time in QB rating.

Yeah Roger played the position about as well as it could have been played under the rules and conditions he played. And I have zero doubt that if he were playing under the modern rules he would do the same. Roger was gifted athletically, brilliant intellectually, possessed a high football IQ and an incredible competitive spirit. That combination succeeds at a high under pretty much any conditions against pretty much any challenge. It's why he's damn near a billionaire businessman. If Roger played right now he would be right there with Mahomes and Rodgers... maybe higher.. People who think different probably never saw him play.

 

[waving monkey]

Yeah Roger played the position about as well as it could have been played under the rules and conditions he played. And I have zero doubt that if he were playing under the modern rules he would do the same. Roger was gifted athletically, brilliant intellectually, possessed a high football IQ and an incredible competitive spirit. That combination succeeds at a high under pretty much any conditions against pretty much any challenge. It's why he's damn near a billionaire businessman. If Roger played right now he would be right there with Mahomes and Rodgers... maybe higher.. People who think different probably never saw him play.

People who think different probably never saw him play.

I know I sound and am an old geezer but I suspect

 

[RonnieT24]

I know I sound and am an old geezer but I suspect

This reminds me of a conversation I had with some of my classmates after we had all finished our most recent round of interviews of high school kids applying to our alma mater. The kids these days are truly impressive and accomplished and it seems as though they are all waaaay ahead of where we were at that age. We wondered allowed if we would even get in if we had to apply to the school today. My response was that we were the most driven and accomplished sum*****es we could be back when we applied to colleges.. so we would most likely have adapted to whatever the hell we needed to do to get admitted if we were 17 years old today. If it's IN you it's IN you.. And it absolutely was IN Roger..

 

[waving monkey]

This reminds me of a conversation I had with some of my classmates after we had all finished our most recent round of interviews of high school kids applying to our alma mater. The kids these days are truly impressive and accomplished and it seems as though they are all waaaay ahead of where we were at that age. We wondered allowed if we would even get in if we had to apply to the school today. My response was that we were the most driven and accomplished sum*****es we could be back when we applied to colleges.. so we would most likely have adapted to whatever the hell we needed to do to get admitted if we were 17 years old today. If it's IN you it's IN you.. And it absolutely was IN Roger..

I totally agree about kid's sharpness today. I live in a tourist area overseas and attended college were young tourist would come to sit in to observe class.It always amazed me the their snap on higher philosophical meaning. Glad your contributing Ronnie