Twitter: Dan Orlovsky's Lists Of QBs You Win Games With And QBs You Win Games Because Of In The NFL

[gimmesix]

stop it with derek carr. not sure why people would put him in the top category.

i'm fine with dak in the second group although entering last year stafford and burrow were also in the second group. these things are fluid year to year.

Was thinking the same thing. I can agree with most of the names on the first list, but I don't think the Raiders win because of Carr.

 

[gimmesix]

I’m not sure I’d put Watson in that first group either .

I know many love Jackson but not sure I’d call him an Elite QB either. Is he a game changer. Sometimes but more because of his legs .

That top Elite list is a little smaller IMO.

Didn't see him on there. I do think he is a quarterback you win because of at times, but also one you lose because of at times. Frankly, I think the same can be said of Jackson. They are hit and miss players. When they hit, they can elevate, but when they miss, it can be ugly.

 

[Adreme]

Frankly I think he is overeating Tua, Baker, and Winston. I think all 3 are in spite of.

Carr is a tough one though as we simply don’t know because the Raiders are so bad at surrendering him with talent that we can’t tell where he belongs (the Stafford problem).

 

[Proof]

i do not know about allen and herbert they so far have not proven that they can win the big championship games yet. allen still needs to figure out if he can beat the chiefs in playoffs.

he just had one of the best performances you’ll ever see in a playoff game, just so happens so did mahomes and had the ball last

 

[RonnieT24]

Was thinking the same thing. I can agree with most of the names on the first list, but I don't think the Raiders win because of Carr.

The Carr love always puzzles me.. The dude threw 15 fewer TDs and 4 more INTs than Dak if I'm not mistaken.. He also won one less game and lost 2 more. Yet his season is hailed as some sort of revelation for his talent. Clearly I'm missing something.

 

[RonnieT24]

Didn't see him on there. I do think he is a quarterback you win because of at times, but also one you lose because of at times. Frankly, I think the same can be said of Jackson. They are hit and miss players. When they hit, they can elevate, but when they miss, it can be ugly.

No offense but this describes every player who ever played. Any of them can have a career day and look like a hall of famer and any of them can have an off day and look like warm dog doo.. Didn't Brady throw INTs on three consecutive possessions against the Packers two years ago in the NFC Championship game but got bailed out by his defense and also because Rodgers was one raising Brady's stench with a stench of his own..

 

[Kingofholland]

stop it with derek carr. not sure why people would put him in the top category.

i'm fine with dak in the second group although entering last year stafford and burrow were also in the second group. these things are fluid year to year.

Totally agree, I'm not sure Stafford is in that group either otherwise wouldn't the Lions have always been in contention?

 

[Doomsday101]

Exactly.. you would think these guys would get bored of these same old tired canards about "QBs winning and losing games." But I guess it's a fairly effective means of trolling the group so as long as it continues to work they'll continue to use them.

media pumps it up but you get right down to it as important as QB is he relies on others around him to do their jobs, if they fail he fails. The QB needs to be protected, the WR and TE need to run the routs and make the tough catches. Defense going out and making big stops and setting up field position for the offense, takes added pressure off the QB where he is not asked to score every time they have the ball. A QB can be a lot more aggressive when he knows his defense can go out and get the ball right back. It is a team game, it is not golf or tennis where it is all about the individual it is about team. I hear Dak must have talent around him to win? I don't know of a SB team who did not have talent around the QB which is why Rodgers last SB was back in 2010.

 

[Creeper]

Yeah, the Lions won tons of games because of Matthew Stafford.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Yeah, the Lions won tons of games because of Matthew Stafford.

To be fair the Lions won a lot more games with Stafford than they would've without him.

Stafford didn't all of a sudden become a Super Bowl winning caliber QB last year. He was the #1 pick for a reason. He always had the skills. He elevated the Rams just as much as the Rams elevated him.

I know it's easy to discount him because of his lack of success with the Lions, but he lead his team to a Super Bowl victory literally the first time he ever had a Super Bowl caliber roster around him. There's a lot of QBs that waste Super Bowl caliber rosters every year.

 

[Acceptablename]

Who

who is Dan

 

[Doomsday101]

To be fair the Lions won a lot more games with Stafford than they would've without him.

Stafford didn't all of a sudden become a Super Bowl winning caliber QB last year. He was the #1 pick for a reason. He always had the skills. He elevated the Rams just as much as the Rams elevated him.

I know it's easy to discount him because of his lack of success with the Lions, but he lead his team to a Super Bowl victory literally the first time he ever had a Super Bowl caliber roster around him. There's a lot of QBs that waste Super Bowl caliber rosters every year.

he had 4 season where he was and the Lions were over 500, the other season all below the 500 mark. I don't think Stafford is a bad QB, but he certainly is not elite and winning a SB with a team stacked with talent, a team that went out and got top players giving up draft picks along the way helped Stafford tremendously. Rams put together a top defense to go along with the talent that was already on offense

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

he had 4 season where he was and the Lions were over 500, the other season all below the 500 mark. I don't think Stafford is a bad QB, but he certainly is not elite and winning a SB with a team stacked with talent, a team that went out and got top players giving up draft picks along the way helped Stafford tremendously. Rams put together a top defense to go along with the talent that was already on offense

The Rams won nothing without Stafford. Stafford won nothing without the Rams.

Why do the players that were there winning nothing without Stafford get the credit all of a sudden? Shouldn't it be equal? The biggest change from the 2020 Rams and the 2021 Rams was Matt Stafford. He was the difference maker.

I could understand if Stafford was dragged through the season and playoffs. He threw 41 TDs in the regular season (would easily be the Cowboys season record) and 9 more in the playoffs. He more than played his part.

A talented team and a talented QB got together and won. That's what happens. That's how it works usually.

 

[Doomsday101]

The Rams won nothing without Stafford. Stafford won nothing without the Rams.

Why do the players that were there winning nothing without Stafford get the credit all of a sudden? Shouldn't it be equal? The biggest change from the 2020 Rams and the 2021 Rams was Matt Stafford. He was the difference maker.

I could understand if Stafford was dragged through the season and playoffs. He threw 41 TDs in the regular season (would easily be the Cowboys season record) and 9 more in the playoffs. He more than played his part.

A talented team and a talented QB got together and won. That's what happens. That's how it works usually.

Rams went to the SB with Goff. Stafford wins nothing without the talent that the rams put around him. That is fact

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Rams went to the SB with Goff. Stafford wins nothing without the talent that the rams put around him. That is fact

Did they win that Super Bowl?

 

[Cboyfan4ever]

He has a career 100.1 rating in playoffs
45 TD 13 ints and 64% comp pct

I don’t like him, but he’s 1 of the top 3 QB’s to ever lace em up.

 

[Doomsday101]

Did they win that Super Bowl?

They got to the SB with Goff, Stafford clearly helped them but Stafford needed the talent around him to win as do all QB. Is he elite? NO, he is a good QB and if you put the talent around him he can win. Thing with post season it is not a series it is 1 game winner move on loser goes home. Rodgers is head and shoulder above Stafford but it takes a team to win and if you can't figure that out then you really are clueless about this game.

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

Rams went to the SB with Goff. Stafford wins nothing without the talent that the rams put around him. That is fact

If Stafford would throw 41 TDs for the Cowboys and get sent packing in the Wild Card ya'll would brag sooooo much about those stats and try and tell anyone that would listen what a top QB he is.

But, because he doesn't have a star on his helmet he's not that great, just a guy carried by a good team.

Ya'll are hilarious lol

 

[MountaineerCowboy]

They got to the SB with Goff, Stafford clearly helped them but Stafford needed the talent around him to win as do all QB. Is he elite? NO, he is a good QB and if you put the talent around him he can win. Thing with post season it is not a series it is 1 game winner move on loser goes home. Rodgers is head and shoulder above Stafford but it takes a team to win and if you can't figure that out then you really are clueless about this game.

Do you believe Stafford is better than Dak?

 

[gimmesix]

No offense but this describes every player who ever played. Any of them can have a career day and look like a hall of famer and any of them can have an off day and look like warm dog doo.. Didn't Brady throw INTs on three consecutive possessions against the Packers two years ago in the NFC Championship game but got bailed out by his defense and also because Rodgers was one raising Brady's stench with a stench of his own..

Yeah, I thought of that. I guess the difference is that some of them have them far more rarely than others. In other words, when Rodgers plays poorly, it's a surprise. When Jackson or Watson plays poorly, not so much.