News: Ranked: All 32 NFL Starting Quarterbacks from Worst to Best

[Aerolithe_Lion]

Cam Newton, Luck, stafford, I would at this time say Dak is at least as good as they are if not better. I would put Dak at about #9.

I disagree with all 3. Dak essentially got drafted into the 2016 nfc pro bowl squad on offense. 3 or 4 olineman? Witten? Zeke? Bryant? How many of those guys WONT have their numbers retired?

Andrew Luck took a team who’s talent rivals the Cleveland Browns to the AFC Championship game. I can’t fathom how you can say a healthy Luck is inferior to Dak.

I’m no Dak hater, he’s a solid qb. But if Detroit ever got Matt Stafford real weapons, he would win mvp. Go look at his statline last year with nobodies around him and zero run game. It’s shocking. Maybe the most under appreciated player in the nfl. If he played in Washington or New York, no one would overlook that kind of dominance.

 

[gimmesix]

Well in Cousins defense......he's 29. I think you're trying to compare him to a 34 year old Romo. A bit unfair.

"It has been clear since he took over for Bledsoe that Romo was a franchise QBIt has been clear since he took over for Bledsoe that Romo was a franchise QB"

I Think you can say the same about Cousins. Cousins has played for one of the worst organizations in football. He's never had a solid running game. He's never had a great offensive line. But he's produced. He's not good enough to win on his own. I think you could say that's the same case for Romo or even most quarterbacks in this league.

Let's also take notice that in 2014 Romo played with a stacked team and a stacked offense. Cousins hasn't had that to date. However, that could change this year unless he signs with the Browns. Vikings or Bronco's could give him a much better supporting cast than he had in Washington.

No. It wasn't clear with Cousins after his first three seasons in the league. As I said, he looked like a backup at best his second and third seasons. Again, this is where he is more comparable to Dak than Romo.

Cousins has had three upper-level seasons since then, and that is where he compares with Romo. I agree that it isn't fair to compare him to a 34-year-old Romo, but it can't be fair because Cousins isn't there yet ... and might never be. That's why I'm hesitant to compare him to Romo at all and think he can equally be compared to Dak if we play that game. We have three years (his first three) where there's no comparison between him and Romo. Then, we've got three years where he compares similarly to Romo.

For some reason, you seem to want to ignore half of Cousins' career. He's been Romo level for the back half and wasn't really even Dak level for the first half. He seems to have settled into Romo level, though, so I don't expect him to suddenly fall off, and that's what I hope with Dak. Last year was a step back for him, just like Cousins' second year was for him. This year, it wouldn't surprise me if he plays better but still doesn't return to his rookie level, just like Cousins didn't. Then, I hope that he will find his stride, like Cousins did. ... Neither can truly be compared to Romo IMO because Romo spent three seasons entirely on the bench, but they can be compared to each other fairly easily.

 

[Aviano90]

I disagree with all 3. Dak essentially got drafted into the 2016 nfc pro bowl squad on offense. 3 or 4 olineman? Witten? Zeke? Bryant? How many of those guys WONT have their numbers retired?

Andrew Luck took a team who’s talent rivals the Cleveland Browns to the AFC Championship game. I can’t fathom how you can say a healthy Luck is inferior to Dak.

I’m no Dak hater, he’s a solid qb. But if Detroit ever got Matt Stafford real weapons, he would win mvp. Go look at his statline last year with nobodies around him and zero run game. It’s shocking. Maybe the most under appreciated player in the nfl. If he played in Washington or New York, no one would overlook that kind of dominance.

Zeke was drafted into a great situation too. It wasn't just Dak.

 

[crashintonickdm]

Those stats this year aren’t even bad really.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

No. It wasn't clear with Cousins after his first three seasons in the league. As I said, he looked like a backup at best his second and third seasons. Again, this is where he is more comparable to Dak than Romo.

Cousins has had three upper-level seasons since then, and that is where he compares with Romo. I agree that it isn't fair to compare him to a 34-year-old Romo, but it can't be fair because Cousins isn't there yet ... and might never be. That's why I'm hesitant to compare him to Romo at all and think he can equally be compared to Dak if we play that game. We have three years (his first three) where there's no comparison between him and Romo. Then, we've got three years where he compares similarly to Romo.

For some reason, you seem to want to ignore half of Cousins' career. He's been Romo level for the back half and wasn't really even Dak level for the first half. He seems to have settled into Romo level, though, so I don't expect him to suddenly fall off, and that's what I hope with Dak. Last year was a step back for him, just like Cousins' second year was for him. This year, it wouldn't surprise me if he plays better but still doesn't return to his rookie level, just like Cousins didn't. Then, I hope that he will find his stride, like Cousins did. ... Neither can truly be compared to Romo IMO because Romo spent three seasons entirely on the bench, but they can be compared to each other fairly easily.

Half of what career? Cousins was backing up for the most part in Washington. He didn't start his first full season until he was 26...the same age Romo started his first full career.

Those stats this year aren’t even bad really.

Which goes to show how well he was playing before Zeke got suspended. No one mentions that when they bring up their negative narrative but Dak stat-wise was playing at a top 6 level.

 

[gimmesix]

Half of what career? Cousins was backing up for the most part in Washington. He didn't start his first full season until he was 26...the same age Romo started his first full career.

He's played in six seasons. Half of his career is three. It's pretty easy math. If a player plays 10 years in the league, he doesn't get credited for only the years that he starts ... he would have had a 10-year career.

First three years, he was really good, really bad and average as a backup.

Second three years, he has been really good.

Again, I can't understand why you want to dismiss the first three years of data. Yes, he was a backup, but he went from looking like a backup who could be a future starter to one who looked like he should never be a starter. That made a lot of people question him becoming the starter in 2015.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

He's played in six seasons. Half of his career is three. It's pretty easy math. If a player plays 10 years in the league, he doesn't get credited for only the years that he starts ... he would have had a 10-year career.

First three years, he was really good, really bad and average as a backup.

Second three years, he has been really good.

Again, I can't understand why you want to dismiss the first three years of data. Yes, he was a backup, but he went from looking like a backup who could be a future starter to one who looked like he should never be a starter. That made a lot of people question him becoming the starter in 2015.

But you do know that he was a backup because of all the draft picks they traded for Robert right? If Shanahan had his way Cousins would've been starting.

Even if he started....he probably would've sucked. I don't think he was ready to start when he came into this league.

But I don't understand your point here....you're judging him based on years he wasn't ready.......but in that time span Romo wasn't ready either. He wasn't even starting his first few years.

 

[gimmesix]

But you do know that he was a backup because of all the draft picks they traded for Robert right? If Shanahan had his way Cousins would've been starting.

Even if he started....he probably would've sucked. I don't think he was ready to start when he came into this league.

But I don't understand your point here....you're judging him based on years he wasn't ready.......but in that time span Romo wasn't ready either. He wasn't even starting his first few years.

We don't know if Romo was ready. That's one of the points. Parcells preferred using his older vets. Who knows what Romo would have done in similar circumstances to Cousins'? You assume that he would have done similarly to Cousins, but we just don't know that because we have no comparative data.

The comparative data that we have for those two QBs is for years 4-6, which are similar as you've pointed out.

What we do have is a basis in those first years for comparing Cousins to Dak. Many expected Dak to be ready because he did so well his rookie year. That built up fans' expectations while Cousins' career trajectory is probably more reasonable. He shined when given the opportunity his rookie year, played poorly his second year and played average his third year. Dak shined his first year and was average his second year, so you could say he's ahead of Cousins' trajectory, but we don't know for sure how Cousins would have performed if he had been the starter then.

So what we have is:

Year 1: Cousins 101.6 rating (as a backup); Dak 104.9 rating; Romo no rating

Year 2: Cousins 58.4 (as backup); Dak 86.6; Romo no rating

Year 3: Cousins 86.4 (as backup); Romo no rating

Year 4: Cousins 101.6; Romo 95.1

Year 5: Cousins 97.2; Romo 97.4

Year 6: Cousins 93.6; Romo 91.4

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

We don't know if Romo was ready. That's one of the points. Parcells preferred using his older vets. Who knows what Romo would have done in similar circumstances to Cousins'? You assume that he would have done similarly to Cousins, but we just don't know that because we have no comparative data.

The comparative data that we have for those two QBs is for years 4-6, which are similar as you've pointed out.

What we do have is a basis in those first years for comparing Cousins to Dak. Many expected Dak to be ready because he did so well his rookie year. That built up fans' expectations while Cousins' career trajectory is probably more reasonable. He shined when given the opportunity his rookie year, played poorly his second year and played average his third year. Dak shined his first year and was average his second year, so you could say he's ahead of Cousins' trajectory, but we don't know for sure how Cousins would have performed if he had been the starter then.

So what we have is:

Year 1: Cousins 101.6 rating (as a backup); Dak 104.9 rating; Romo no rating

Year 2: Cousins 58.4 (as backup); Dak 86.6; Romo no rating

Year 3: Cousins 86.4 (as backup); Romo no rating

Year 4: Cousins 101.6; Romo 95.1

Year 5: Cousins 97.2; Romo 97.4

Year 6: Cousins 93.6; Romo 91.4

Who were the older vets? Chad Hutchinson and Quincy Carter? You think a undrafted free agent was ready to start?

And those ratings you posted are very similar lol.

 

[Captain-Crash]

you can almost see a tear coming out of the left eye..

 

[gimmesix]

Who were the older vets? Chad Hutchinson and Quincy Carter? You think a undrafted free agent was ready to start?

And those ratings you posted are very similar lol.

I don't know what Romo was ready for. It's impossible to say. Most likely, like most rookie QBs, he wasn't ready to start, but I can't compare someone I didn't see as an NFL starter to someone I did. I can compare someone who started to someone else who started, which is why it's easier to look at what Cousins and Dak each did when they played as rookies and second-year players.

For some reason, you keep ignoring those first years, especially if you think Cousins' 101.6, 58.4 and 86.4 his first three years look "very similar" to Romo's 0.0, 0.0 and 0.0.

I don't have a problem acknowledging that Cousins' first three years as a full-time starter look very similar to Romo's first three years as a full-time starter, but I'm not going to ignore his nine games of starting experience or the 14 total games he played in before that (it's equivalent to Romo's first season as a starter).

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

I don't know what Romo was ready for. It's impossible to say. Most likely, like most rookie QBs, he wasn't ready to start, but I can't compare someone I didn't see as an NFL starter to someone I did. I can compare someone who started to someone else who started, which is why it's easier to look at what Cousins and Dak each did when they played as rookies and second-year players.

For some reason, you keep ignoring those first years, especially if you think Cousins' 101.6, 58.4 and 86.4 his first three years look "very similar" to Romo's 0.0, 0.0 and 0.0.

I don't have a problem acknowledging that Cousins' first three years as a full-time starter look very similar to Romo's first three years as a full-time starter, but I'm not going to ignore his nine games of starting experience or the 14 total games he played in before that (it's equivalent to Romo's first season as a starter).

No you brought up Cousins first three years. I simply compared Cousins and Romo from 27-29 years of age. I can't compare what they did before that because Romo didn't start.

 

[gimmesix]

No you brought up Cousins first three years. I simply compared Cousins and Romo from 27-29 years of age. I can't compare what they did before that because Romo didn't start.

You can't just compare an age range, though, and leave out part of a player's career.

Cousins' situation differs from Romo's because he started nine games and played in 14 before becoming the full-time starter. Romo's only experience before he became the starting quarterback was holding on field goals.

It would be like saying that Miles Austin's 81 catches for 1,320 yards and 11 TDs in 2009 means he was a better first-year starter than Marvin Harrison, who had 64 for 836 and 8. You would be ignoring the fact that Austin had gotten game experience as a receiver the previous two seasons (when he had 5 catches for 76 yards and 13 for 278 and 3 TDs).

I brought up Cousins' first three years because they are relevant in discussing the player. In those years, there are similarities that can be drawn between him and Dak. Granted, it's not an ideal comparison because Cousins wasn't a full-time starter those first three years, just like the comparison between him and Romo is not ideal because Cousins had experience going into his first year as a full-time starter while Romo didn't.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

You can't just compare an age range, though, and leave out part of a player's career.

Cousins' situation differs from Romo's because he started nine games and played in 14 before becoming the full-time starter. Romo's only experience before he became the starting quarterback was holding on field goals.

It would be like saying that Miles Austin's 81 catches for 1,320 yards and 11 TDs in 2009 means he was a better first-year starter than Marvin Harrison, who had 64 for 836 and 8. You would be ignoring the fact that Austin had gotten game experience as a receiver the previous two seasons (when he had 5 catches for 76 yards and 13 for 278 and 3 TDs).

I brought up Cousins' first three years because they are relevant in discussing the player. In those years, there are similarities that can be drawn between him and Dak. Granted, it's not an ideal comparison because Cousins wasn't a full-time starter those first three years, just like the comparison between him and Romo is not ideal because Cousins had experience going into his first year as a full-time starter while Romo didn't.

LOL. Cousins started but he was a backup. Are you implying because he started before he was ready that it gave him some kind of edge lol? I guess that's where we differ. I believe sitting and grooming a quarterback like what was done with Rodgers and Romo is better suited for a late round QB than it is to just throw him out to the wolves. There's a reason why all of these top quarterbacks in the league are struggling coming out of the gate. They need time to develop and groom.

There's no comparison to Miles first year and Marvin's first year. Marvin came in as a 1st round draft pick expected to come in and contribute and he did. He was a starter his rookie year. Miles sat on the bench because he wasn't ready.

Cousins started a few games sporadically in his first 3 years but he was a backup to RGIII. He was always going to be because they invested so much in Robert and coming out Cousins was viewed a project with potential to start.

You believe he got some edge backing up Robert and starting for him a few games when he was hurt. I disagree. He didn't start his first full NFL season until he was 27 just like Romo.

 

[gimmesix]

LOL. Cousins started but he was a backup. Are you implying because he started before he was ready that it gave him some kind of edge lol? I guess that's where we differ. I believe sitting and grooming a quarterback like what was done with Rodgers and Romo is better suited for a late round QB than it is to just throw him out to the wolves. There's a reason why all of these top quarterbacks in the league are struggling coming out of the gate. They need time to develop and groom.

There's no comparison to Miles first year and Marvin's first year. Marvin came in as a 1st round draft pick expected to come in and contribute and he did. He was a starter his rookie year. Miles sat on the bench because he wasn't ready.

Cousins started a few games sporadically in his first 3 years but he was a backup to RGIII. He was always going to be because they invested so much in Robert and coming out Cousins was viewed a project with potential to start.

You believe he got some edge backing up Robert and starting for him a few games when he was hurt. I disagree. He didn't start his first full NFL season until he was 27 just like Romo.

So you believe nine games of starting experience and playing in 14 has no value over not taking a snap at quarterback in a regular-season game before becoming a starter? Then, yeah, we disagree.

Players have said there is a big difference in the speed of the game going from college to training camp/preseason, and the speed of the game goes up another notch in the regular season. Teams do not game plan you as a QB in the preseason. They use vanilla schemes that don't confuse young QBs like they do in the regular season.

So yeah, I think the starting experience Cousins got gives him an edge, because by the time he became the starter he had had the opportunity to experience what happens in regular-season games and begin to adjust to it.

I agree that quarterbacks need time to develop and groom, and I believe this would be the best course for any of them (not just the late-rounders), but if part of that grooming experience includes getting a few starts or some playing time here and there, then that gives them some experience they can build on when it's time for them to assume the full-time starting role.

Cousins' path to becoming a starter IMO was ideal. Get the young, developing QB experience during the regular season and continue to develop him. Romo's was better than those who just get thrown into the fire, but ultimately after being groomed only in practice and the preseason, he was still thrown into the regular-season fire, while Cousins got to play when little was expected of him because he was the backup.

Again, that's comparable to Dak. Romo was supposed to be the starter in 2016, so Dak having to step in as a fourth-round rookie gave him a chance to experience starting with little expected of him. But like Cousins, the game caught up to him some his second season. I hope having more starting experience than Cousins, though, keeps Dak from experiencing a mediocre third season as well. Hopefully, his stats also will end up being comparable to Romo's numbers in Years 4-6, maybe a year earlier than Cousins was able to do it.

 

[TheMarathonContinues]

So you believe nine games of starting experience and playing in 14 has no value over not taking a snap at quarterback in a regular-season game before becoming a starter? Then, yeah, we disagree.

Players have said there is a big difference in the speed of the game going from college to training camp/preseason, and the speed of the game goes up another notch in the regular season. Teams do not game plan you as a QB in the preseason. They use vanilla schemes that don't confuse young QBs like they do in the regular season.

So yeah, I think the starting experience Cousins got gives him an edge, because by the time he became the starter he had had the opportunity to experience what happens in regular-season games and begin to adjust to it.

I agree that quarterbacks need time to develop and groom, and I believe this would be the best course for any of them (not just the late-rounders), but if part of that grooming experience includes getting a few starts or some playing time here and there, then that gives them some experience they can build on when it's time for them to assume the full-time starting role.

Cousins' path to becoming a starter IMO was ideal. Get the young, developing QB experience during the regular season and continue to develop him. Romo's was better than those who just get thrown into the fire, but ultimately after being groomed only in practice and the preseason, he was still thrown into the regular-season fire, while Cousins got to play when little was expected of him because he was the backup.

Again, that's comparable to Dak. Romo was supposed to be the starter in 2016, so Dak having to step in as a fourth-round rookie gave him a chance to experience starting with little expected of him. But like Cousins, the game caught up to him some his second season. I hope having more starting experience than Cousins, though, keeps Dak from experiencing a mediocre third season as well. Hopefully, his stats also will end up being comparable to Romo's numbers in Years 4-6, maybe a year earlier than Cousins was able to do it.

Ok well whether its comparable or not......Cousin's gained some in-game experience and it helped him start by 27. Romo got to sit and learn a system and it helped him start by 27. Both had different ways they were thrown in the fire....both benefited from it.

 

[Keithfansince5]

Is this encouraging or a sign of how mediocre QB play is after the elites?

Could anyone else make the argument that "today" Russell is the best all around QB in the game? Dude is a straight up assassin. If they don't get him some oline he gonna be a dead assassin though.

No, I think are the ONLY one suggesting Wilson is #1.

 

[Keithfansince5]

Cam Newton, Luck, stafford, I would at this time say Dak is at least as good as they are if not better. I would put Dak at about #9.

Stafford? Wow, i am glad you are not in charge of personnel. Stafford is twice the QB Dak is. Stafford can't help he plays on an average team. I would take Stafford over Dak anyday....

 

[Keithfansince5]

I still think Dak has a lot of upside. And I really don’t put a lot of stock in QB “rankings”.

Dak needs some good coaching that helps him maximize his strengths while minimizing his weaknesses. IMO, he is an excellent leader and decision maker. He’s tough, and he can pass very well on the move. Those are his major strengths, so the offense should highlight those strengths more.

IMO, Dak is never going to be the kind of QB that puts the team on his back and carries them for long stretches. There really aren’t many of those QBs in the NFL anyway. But Dak is an excellent QB is used properly within the right system. A strong running game, with effective play action and occasional rollouts are his wheelhouse.

I eexpect Dak to have a rebound 2018 if he has has better coaching and support from the team.

But he won't because he has the same idiotic coaches that matter in Linehan and Garrett.

 

[Keithfansince5]

Who was the QB for the Skins when Alfred Morris ran for over 1,600 yards? Seems like a heck of a running game to me. If it were Cousins he had a dominant running game and back. I just don't recall if Cousins was the starter or RG3?

Someone mentioned not having a solid running game. Morris was pretty good for them for a few years.