Quarterbacking is in steep decline

[Asklesko]

Just because there are fewer resources don't mean you give up.

What are you suggesting, that we not even try, and just go into Romo's retirement with nobody at all? How does that help us?

 

[Passepartout]

Like going into Romo's retirement like nothing happened at all it seems? Or drafting his heir apparent?

 

[cowboyuptx]

1993 quarterbacks
Troy Aikman
Jim Kelly
Brett Farve
Warren Moon
Dan Marino
Steve Young
John Elway
Phil Simms
Drew Bledsoe
Boomer Esiason
Joe Montana
Vinny Testeverde
Jeff Hostetler
Steve Buerlein
Randall Cunningham
Steve DeBerg
Rodney Peete
Mark Rypien
Neil O'Donnell
Bobby Hebert

It doesn't look like that anymore.

I don't know, I think that what we're seeing today is actually the golden age of QB's, and I think the QB's today are collectively better than they were in 1993...
Also in 1993, those QB's you listed had combined to win a total of 8 Super Bowls at that point (although by the time that group had all retired they would account for 14 Super Bowls total)... Meanwhile the 2015 the group of 2015 starting QB's have already won 13 Super Bowls collectively...

Aaron Rodgers
Ben Roethlisberger
Andrew Luck
Tom Brady
Matt Ryan
Philip Rivers
Drew Brees
Tony Romo
Russell Wilson
Peyton Manning
Andy Dalton
Carson Palmer
Cam Newton
Joe Flacco
Nick Foles
Matthew Stafford
Ryan Tannehill
Eli Manning
Sam Bradford
Teddy Bridgewater
Colin Kaepernick
Alex Smith
Jay Cutler
Blake Bortles
The league was looking pretty bad at QB around 2001..... Aikman, Marino, Elway, Kelly, Moon, Young, etc, were all recently retired, and around that time the QB position was starting to look pretty bad, which probably had something to do with us seeing Super Bowls with Kerry Collins vs Trent Dilfer and Rich Gannon vs Brad Johnson... But Tom Brady came in 2001... Then the 2004 draft gave us three pretty good QB's in Roethlisberger, Rivers, and E. Manning... Then Brees really emerged... Then Romo bursted on the scene in 2006... Then came Rodgers... Then Ryan in 2008... Then Wilson and Luck in 2012... So my point is not to worry about the current state, nor the future of QB in the NFL, more stars are sure to emerge...

(Ps - You forgot to list Dan Marino... So I added him...)

 

[TwoDeep3]

I chuckle every time I hear it. Dallas needs to draft a quarterback. The Cowboys aren't grooming anybody to replace Romo. We need a good backup.

My question would be.......who? What teams have this strapping lad in waiting as a surefire "next" guy in their organization. Most starters in the NFL are lousy these days. The backups are even worse.

Fast forward five years when Peyton, Brees, Brady, and Romo are retired. Who will be the top five quarterbacks circa 2020?

Perhaps an aged Aaron Rodgers in his twilight, Andrew Luck, Andy Dalton, Russell Wilson, and Matt Ryan? Seriously? I realize others yet drafted could work their way into that fold, but are any of these young guys inspiring images as future all-time greats?

Factor in the complete lack of training colleges are providing quarterbacks for the NFL, and it boggles my mind why anybody would waste a first round pick on a quarterback these days. The most recent picks have been so gawd awful, that we ladle Andrew Luck with praise befitting of Johnny Unitas. The fact is, there is still much for Luck to learn, and he's an interception machine at times.

The nature of the QB position was already a crapshoot. Now, factor in this epidemic of one-read high school read-option offenses that have taken over college football, and the future doesn't look so bright.

Let's take a look at the last 10 years of quarterbacks taken in the first three rounds:

Jameis Winston ROOKIE
Marcus Marriotta ROOKIE
Garrett Grayson ROOKIE
Sean Mannion ROOKIE
Blake Bortles PENDING
Johnny Manziel BUST
Teddy Bridgewater PENDING
Derek Carr PENDING
Jimmy Garoppolo PENDING
EJ Manuel BUST
Geno Smith BUST
Mike Glennon BUST
Matt Barkley BUST
Andrew Luck
Robert Griffin BUST
Ryan Tannehill PENDING
Brandon Weeden BUST
Brock Osweiler PENDING
Russell Wilson (Overrated, but OK)
Nick Foles LIKELY BUST
Cam Newton PENDING
Jake Locker BUST
Blaine Gabbert BUST
Christian Ponder BUST
Andy Dalton
Colin Kaepernick VIRTUAL BUST
Ryan Mallett BUST
Sam Bradford BUST
Tim Tebow BUST
Jimmy Clausen BUST
Colt McCoy BUST
Matt Stafford
Mark Sanchez BUST
Josh Freeman BUST
Pat White BUST
Matt Ryan
Joe Flacco
Brian Brohm BUST
Chad Henne BUST
Kevin O'Connell BUST
JaMarcus Russell BUST
Brady Quinn BUST
Kevin Kolb BUST
John Beck BUST
Drew Stanton BUST
Trent Edwards BUST
Vince Young BUST
Matt Leinart BUST
Jay Cutler VIRTUAL BUST
Kellen Clemens BUST
Tavaris Jackson BUST
Charlie Whitehurst BUST

It isn't pretty. There are precious few quarterbacks on the planet capable of playing at an elite level in the NFL, and Dallas is lucky to have one. This notion that you just groom somebody up to be next sounds awesome, but it's comes with an incredibly high failure rate along with it.

These days, quarterbacks are going to take 4-5 years to prepare because of the simplistic college offensive schemes, so why spend a high draft pick on a guy that will become a free agent at the time he MIGHT be ready?

I believe the level of play at the quarterback position is going to take a steep decline in the coming years. The hope is, college recruits will start to demand pro style offenses to sign with schools because the money and draft position starts drying up in the NFL for quarterbacks.

Until then, it's best not to waste valuable draft picks on them unless unusually sure about a player. Rather, go get somebody in free agency when you need them. Let somebody else take the risk and spend the time developing them, and focus draft picks on more predictable commodities.

Is your position is there isn't anyone any good coming out of college, so Dallas shouldn't waste time finding the next guy?

Sound logic. Snap it directly to the RBBC. Can't go wrong there.

 

[65fastback2plus2]

I've taken your list and assigned contemporaries to each one based loosely on similar skillets, styles, and accomplishments. Each one is arguably as good or better than their counterparts on your list.

My list didn't include other upper half quarterbacks in league right now like Stafford, Foles, Eli, and Smith

Other rookies/unprovens/potentials playing well right now: Tannehill, Bortles, Carr, Mariota, Winston, Bridgewater

Joe Montana 92.3 - Tom Brady 96.5
Dan Marino 86.4 - Peyton Manning 96.9
Brett Favre 86.0 - Aaron Rodgers 106.5
Jim Kelly 84.4 - Philip Rivers 96.1
Steve McNair 82.8 - Ben Roethlisberger 94.2
Neil O'Donnell 81.8 - Matt Ryan 91.2
Troy Aikman 81.6 - Drew Brees 95.4
Randall Cunningham 81.5 - Russell Wilson N/A
Warren Moon 80.9 - Joe Flacco 84.5
Boomer Esiason 81.1 - Carson Palmer 87.1
Jeff George 80.4 - Jay Cutler 85.2
John Elway 79.9 - Tony Romo 97.6
Jim Harbaugh 77.6 - Andy Dalton 87.8
Drew Bledsoe 77.1 - Andrew Luck 85.6
Kordell Stewart 70.7 - Cam Newton 85.3

My list wasnt comprehensive, so matching them up was cute, but of no substance.

Old guys average QB rating: 81.6
Current guys average: 92.1

5 old QB's went to superbowls while posting UNDER average QB ratings.
1 current QB went to a superbowl while posting under average QB ratings.

Now to go back to my original statement....it was MUCH easier to find someone average than currently. This is because we are in a league more reliant on QB's. Because it is easier, average guys no longer go anywhere. Only 1 below average QB has been to/won a superbowl, whereas in the past 5 QB's went or won.

In other words, as I was saying, average no longer cuts it. Tons of QB's are average. Now, you have to hunt and hunt and hunt to find the 1 superstar that is way above average. Now if you trot someone out that is average, you can well expect to not sniff a superbowl. Whereas before, you could find and trot someone out that was average and had a 500% better chance of appearing or winning.

Guys that would be superstars back then are just average now and havent sniffed a superbowl.

Ala, my conclusion: much harder to find a QB today than back 20-30 years ago.

 

[erod]

QB ratings can't be compared. The 90s quarterbacks played when football was football, not a rules contortion to generate fantasy football numbers for housewives and websites.

 

[jterrell]

Quarterbacking is actually not in steep decline.
The opposite is true.

But it is very hard to find a QB who can do all the things required in the modern game where QBs are asked to do a tremendous amount more than they were in prior generations.

In the 1980s if you could deliver a decent run fake and then hit a 20 yard out you were a pro QB.
Well, Weeden can do that and we have seen how limited that makes you in today's game.

Now good QBs account for one defender with pre-snap reads, audibles at the line or the ability to make a rusher miss.
A guy like Romo or Rodgers or Brady that do that regularly allow you to win.

Oh and of course it's just a given that now you must complete 60+ % of your passes.
In earlier eras that was unheard of.

 

[erod]

Just because there are fewer resources don't mean you give up.

What are you suggesting, that we not even try, and just go into Romo's retirement with nobody at all? How does that help us?

Absolutely not, but don't invest a first round pick in a QB that won't be ready for 4 years and probably won't pan out. Just draft one in the 3rd-4th round every year until you find one worth a crap.

 

[erod]

Quarterbacking is actually not in steep decline.
The opposite is true.

But it is very hard to find a QB who can do all the things required in the modern game where QBs are asked to do a tremendous amount more than they were in prior generations.

In the 1980s if you could deliver a decent run fake and then hit a 20 yard out you were a pro QB.
Well, Weeden can do that and we have seen how limited that makes you in today's game.

Now good QBs account for one defender with pre-snap reads, audibles at the line or the ability to make a rusher miss.
A guy like Romo or Rodgers or Brady that do that regularly allow you to win.

Oh and of course it's just a given that now you must complete 60+ % of your passes.
In earlier eras that was unheard of.

Bubble screens and 5-yard pick plays are the reason for the completion percentages of today.

Quarterbacks were vastly superior in the 90s collectively, especially considering defensive backs could clutch and grab, and light up anybody coming over the middle with head to head shots.

And QBs got hit high and low all the time. You could go helmet to helmet on a QB, and they did.

Now, you graze their facemask and it's 15 yards. Drives are kept alive with cheap contact and holding calls.

It's ridiculous.

 

[MapleLeaf]

One of the pertinent trends we may need to see is how the game has changed over the years.

If we all agree that the rules have changed making the game become a passing showdown then there is going to be greater pressure on hitting it big in the QB lottery.

Players have changed dimensionally. Systems have changed. Rules have certainly changed.

What we have now is a pass oriented league. You need to throw at sometime in the game to win.

Let's call this the "Brandon Weeden" lesson. Tight windows exist in the game now with regards to throwing the ball to a WR,

The tools of the trade is to have measureables, sound arm mechanics, good footwork, football intelligence, awareness and anticipation, calmness and the ability to take leadership in the huddle.

The first four you can acquire. The last four is very dependent on personal characteristics you have developed within your environment or were born with.

The latter group of four attributes is why the selection of a QB in the NFL is such a crap shoot. Not every QB is going to come into the league with the first four, but I would much rather throw a few chips on the table with the last four and work on the first three later.

Focusing on the first grouping is going to probably land you in the first round. Focusing on the last four may force you to invest time and energy to develop a QB, but you won't see your team talent drained in a crap shoot game.

It all comes down to how you want to manage your team. I really like the GB method of developing and acquiring QBs. Eitehr by trade or draft you are always working actively on the QB question.

 

[jterrell]

QB ratings can't be compared. The 90s quarterbacks played when football was football, not a rules contortion to generate fantasy football numbers for housewives and websites.

You can lie to yourself but when you try to lie to an entire board it is going to get corrected and also mocked.

Good ole days syndrome may lead some non-thinkers to posit stuff like this but it is easily disproven.

The parity in today's game is exactly because there are MORE quality QBs.
In previous eras the very small handful of decent QBs created dynasties.
There were long term starters in the 80s that couldn't even play college QB today.

The QBR numbers have increased EVERY generation. The QBs of the 70s are greater than those of the 60s, the 80's better than those of the 70s and so on.
It isn't about JUST rules changes but focus on offensive innovation and scoring.
The game has become less akin to rugby and more akin to basketball or soccer where spacing and ball movement are king.

 

[jterrell]

Bubble screens and 5-yard pick plays are the reason for the completion percentages of today.

Quarterbacks were vastly superior in the 90s collectively, especially considering defensive backs could clutch and grab, and light up anybody coming over the middle with head to head shots.

And QBs got hit high and low all the time. You could go helmet to helmet on a QB, and they did.

Now, you graze their facemask and it's 15 yards. Drives are kept alive with cheap contact and holding calls.

It's ridiculous.

And those QBs were asked to score 25 points a game to win.
The 1992 Cowboys, arguably the greatest team of all-time averaged 25.6 points per game which was 2nd in the league.
OVER HALF the league averaged UNDER 20 points per game.

 

[jterrell]

BTW, look at 1992.

The best QBR was Steve Young by far.
That has been the model of the new gen QB.
In that type of fast break offense with quick passes and defense avoidance through quickness and athleticism.

But after Young, Aikman, Marino and a young Favre it gets pretty bleak.
Bobby Hebert, Niel O'Donnell, Chris Miller and Cody Carlson qualified as top 10 in QBR that year.

 

[jterrell]

QB improvement is far more tied to year round skill development and conditioning than it is rules.
Same as play has improved at every other position for the same reasons.
We have better technology and a huge industry focused on nothing but athletic development.
For every QB development guru that existed in 1990 there are 50 today. Many who were the QBs of the 1980s... See Kevin Murray.

 

[erod]

And those QBs were asked to score 25 points a game to win.
The 1992 Cowboys, arguably the greatest team of all-time averaged 25.6 points per game which was 2nd in the league.
OVER HALF the league averaged UNDER 20 points per game.

Because defense wasn't illegal back then.

Contact and holding calls keep tons of drives alive today.

 

[erod]

QB improvement is far more tied to year round skill development and conditioning than it is rules.
Same as play has improved at every other position for the same reasons.
We have better technology and a huge industry focused on nothing but athletic development.
For every QB development guru that existed in 1990 there are 50 today. Many who were the QBs of the 1980s... See Kevin Murray.

Then why are quarterbacks so God awful today outside of a handful?

 

[burmafrd]

You can lie to yourself but when you try to lie to an entire board it is going to get corrected and also mocked.

Good ole days syndrome may lead some non-thinkers to posit stuff like this but it is easily disproven.

The parity in today's game is exactly because there are MORE quality QBs.
In previous eras the very small handful of decent QBs created dynasties.
There were long term starters in the 80s that couldn't even play college QB today.

The QBR numbers have increased EVERY generation. The QBs of the 70s are greater than those of the 60s, the 80's better than those of the 70s and so on.
It isn't about JUST rules changes but focus on offensive innovation and scoring.
The game has become less akin to rugby and more akin to basketball or soccer where spacing and ball movement are king.

actually I think you are full of brown stuff.

You keep ignoring the rule changes that all but hamstring the defenses. And the emphasis the NFL has placed on scoring. Having been old enough to have watched and seen the differences over the last 40 years the game has changed immensely- and brutally speaking to me not all that much for the better.

And to be blunt I do think that the QBs in many ways had a tougher job years ago then they do now. The defenses are more complicated but also are tremendously restricted on what they can do. Watching pre 1978 games when you could basically mug the WR and all but obliterate the QB compared today- no comparison. The real changes as regards D's did not come until the 90's= QBs who have to play through large scale changes have a much harder time then those today where its pretty much all laid out for them. They know they can get away with pic plays and all sorts of things now because the NFL wants more scoring. They know that they are more protected and their receivers are more protected then any other players in the game at this time. Physically and as regards injuries they are better off then they have ever been before especially with the most modern of training and medical facilities.

QBs of today have it easier then in any time prior in NFL history. And we still do not have very many that are real good. Brady, Romo, Rodgers, Rapist, Rivers, Brees are clearly the best. All should one day be in the HOF. BUT you go below that and the quality quickly drops. Newton, Luck, Wilson, Ryan, are above average but that is all. Peyton is done and Eli frankly was shot with luck.

One could make a case about the elite tier we had the last 5 years as close to some of the golden years of the 70's and 80's. But the overall depth of NFL QB play is much lower. Now the coaching they get is better then it has ever been with so many QB coaches (which was not a common thing for a long time in the NFL). Years ago it was the Head Coach or one of his assistants that worked on the QB and most of the time they were really not good enough. Back in the past the QB was much more on his own to sink or swim then the spoon fed guys we have now.

 

[jjktkk]

Jut because it is difficult to find and develop qbs, does not men you shouldn't try at all. Dallas does a poor job of developing young quarterbacks. A good example right now would be Pittsburgh with Laundry Jones. Pittsburgh, like the Cowboys, have a older, established qb in Roethlisberger. yet they have managed to draft and develop Jones, who looks like he has the potential to be, at the very least, a solid backup. It almost seems like Dallas is afraid to even try. I don't count the Dustin Vaughns and Richard Bartels of the world, as attempts.

 

[burmafrd]

Jut because it is difficult to find and develop qbs, does not men you shouldn't try at all. Dallas does a poor job of developing young quarterbacks. A good example right now would be Pittsburgh with Laundry Jones. Pittsburgh, like the Cowboys, have a older, established qb in Roethlisberger. yet they have managed to draft and develop Jones, who looks like he has the potential to be, at the very least, a solid backup. It almost seems like Dallas is afraid to even try. I don't count the Dustin Vaughns and Richard Bartels of the world, as attempts.

developing backups is a lot different then trying to develop a franchise QB. One can be done the other virtually never is.

 

[TrailBlazer]

QB's are better now than they have ever been before. They are asked to do more things. Defenses are more complex. The nuances of playing the position are much more crucial now. QB'S start training much younger than ever before. Most start in middle school. 7 on 7 tournaments. QB camps. No doubt they are better at throwing and catching now than in any previous generation bc of the emphasis put on it by football coaches at lower levels.