Just Say “No” to the Franchise QB

I think you’ll find the article interesting. It’s a 5 minute read.

 

Awful funny We have seen some pretty good teams with not so great Qbs also. How about the Browns this year. That team is stacked yet the Qb is so bad. No team is stacked more except maybe the Rams.

 

Everyone and his brother knows the NFL is QB-centric league. To somehow try to argue that a franchise QB is a myth is a stretch. To say bolster that argument by saying that Kirk Cousins' stats are just as good as Brady's and that it reflects a good team vs a good QB is a ridiculous interpretation of the data.

I guess one could buy that argument if a QB, say Archie Maning, played on nothing but bad teams, but when one, TB, has won SB's with two different franchises and multiple different NE teams over two decades and won 7 SBs total, and the other, Cousins, has played on two different franchises over multiple teams and never come close to sniffing a conference championship that's a tough argument to swallow.

 

Wasn't Cousins in a NFC championship, or I'm I remembering that wrong???

 

I don’t remember that, to be honest. Maybe that was Bridgewater?

Edit: not Teddy. Cousins did lead the Vikes to a playoff win against the Saints. Wildcard match-up.

 

Fun fact: Franchise QB Aaron Rodgers = 1 SB win / Trent Dilfer = 1 SB win

 

Good post.

TB won multiple Championships at NE, but if I’m not mistaken, he was known for taking heavy discounts on his contracts. That enabled the NE front office to still field a decent team around him.

Contrast that with the Vikings, who isn’t as whole a team as others, looking for the franchise guy and willing to pay huge sums for him.

I was shocked to see Cousins name in a chart that named the most highly paid athletes ever. He was surrounded by names like Mayweather, Tiger Woods, etc…Tom Brady’s name never appeared on the list.

If I’m not mistaken, Tampa Bay, led by an AP Coach of the Year in BA, had most pieces in place before bringing in veteran free agents (TB, Gronk, Suh, AB, Barrett) on win-now deals. That strategy paid off big time for Tampa Bay and earned TB12 another ring.

The author compared QB ratings over the past 5 years and correlated Ws and Ls when the rating dipped below 90 and surmised that instead of QBs carrying the team, the opposite can be argued, as Thigpen pointed out.

 

Im afraid you’re misinterpreting what the article is saying, so none of this really addresses it’s argument.

I mean, it’s not a watertight argument at all, as I’ve suggested. But an interesting.

 

Tiny sample size though and no history to compare to. QB's salaries haven't been 30+ million for very long, so there's no historical data.

10 years from now pretty much every QB that wins the SB will be making north of $30 million.

 

Stats never tell the whole picture. If it was that simple, every franchise would be built using the moneyball strategy. GM's wouldn't be football people, instead they would be accountants who just add numbers and buy stats at various positions. That's just not how sports work though.

There's a reason almost every single Superbowl is won by a "franchise" QB. It's not a coincidence

 

I understand the article, I just disagree with it.

One argument for where this yahoo's analysis fails is that he uses raw passer rating numbers without normalization. As we all know, passer rating numbers have been increasing. What was average in 2018 was well above average in 2005. I'm not sure how much that would change the final numbers, but clearly Brady's early numbers are lower due to that. I randomly picked 2007 where his rating was 87.9 which was good for 9th in the league. In 2021 that would make him 23rd. Without normalizing the passer rating data for both players, comparing passer rating doesn't mean much.

Also, in Kirk Cousins 10 year career, Brady has had a higher QB rating in 9 of them. Once again, call me crazy, but maybe, just maybe, that's somewhat responsible for NE/TB greater success during the comparable time period.

Let me put this counter argument. Let's look instead at the number of games started or years played as a starter as a proxy for how good a QB is. That's independent of won-loss, passer rating, etc. At some point every player reaches replacement level. If your team is carrying you and you're not doing your part, you're going to get replaced.

The top QB's in games started are:

Brady
Favre
Brees
Manning
Ben
Marino
Rivers
Tarkenton
Eli Manning
Elway

That's a ton of SB titles and appearances. Only Rivers failed to make a SB.

Compare to the next ten that played primarily in the SB era and it's not even close in terms of SB appearances. If it's really the team and not the QB, than you would not see much of a correlation, but clearly one is there.

 

Let me add that the author's use of game-winning drives and 4Q comebacks is a total canard. Those stats crack me up. Yeah, Brady doesn't have a lot of those, cause he doesn't have a lot of opportunities relative to the rest of the league. They're not behind as much in the fourth quarter.

 

I've always hated that 4th quarter comeback stat. On one hand it can indicate a level of clutch play from a QB. On the other hand, perhaps the QB is the reason a 4th quarter comeback is even needed. Perhaps if the QB played better in the first 3 quarters, then a comeback wouldn't even be needed. Or maybe that teams defence is bad and they have to score a lot, including regular comebacks. Or maybe both. Or maybe neither.

That stat literally tells us nothing.

The one stat that speaks volumes is wins. Franchise QB's tend to win a lot of games. They rarely have losing seasons. They rarely miss the playoffs. There's a reason for that.

When Minnesota was beating us, Kirk Cousins gave us several opportunities to get back in the game by making bad throws. Does anyone really believe Brady or Rodgers would have made bad throws like that when up by a lot? Not a chance. NE or GB would have put us away, because good QB's help their defences by making plays.

 

Defense still wins championships. The average seasonal defensive rank of the first fifty SB champions is 8.35. The QB is obviously the most important and demanding position on the team. However quality defenses can affect TOP and provide good FP.

To me, Bill Belicheck's true genius is in his simple yet effective strategy of taking away his opponent's most productive assets. If you have Derek Henry, he will game plan to stop him. If you have a Lamar Jackson, he makes him throw and limits his running opportunities. His defenses place his offenses in good scoring position.

So, even if you have a dynamic passer like Mahomes, if his defense is fair to middling, then he has to make nearly every possession count, even if some possessions end in a FG attempt. I remember watching the old Chargers' teams with Dan Fouts and a whole gun rack of fancy offensive weapons. They routinely won or lost shoot out games because their defenses where always average at best. So, a "franchise style" QB only tells half of the story. History proves a team most likely needs a quality QB AND a top ranked defense. The Steelers defense won their first SB. The Ravens defense won their first SB, too. Same with Chicago, the Bucs and Seahawks. And I'm sure others. Ask Dan Marino how much he would have appreciated having a good defensive squad for a few seasons.

 

Of course, one needs some semblance of balance to win it all, but the relative importance of defense vs QB play is tilting continually toward the QB as the league's rules change to favor passing. For example, the average defense ranking, using yards/play, of SB champs over the last ten years is 11.1

 

Oh...That's right.
Thanks

 

Agree and it is a trend I lament. I know why the league is fudging the rules both in the name of player safety and to accent scoring. I could concede the safety aspect IF those plays resulting in unsportsmanlike conduct penalties were reviewable. For example, the great hit Minkah delivered in the end zone that resulted in a dropped TD pass. The play was flagged for targeting, when in fact it was a text book tackle. A referee tapping his chest to Minkah implying "my bad" doesn't cut it.

The other rules need work because too much is left for interpretation by the refs. Individual bias. The two biggest offenses are pass interference and what exactly constitutes a good catch. I can't immediately recall the exact play, but I think Minnesota challenged a catch by McCloud that was ruled complete. It was overturned because the nose of the ball contacted the ground as he rolled over. Holding is likely the most misunderstood and abused rule there is. It probably needs its own thread for discussion purposes.

Anyway, I'm guilty of leading this thread astray. Sorry, OP.

 

It's not the money of the contract that should be looked at...IMO...., but the Cap space % it takes up each, and every year .

 

But that's not what his post said, which is why I addressed it the way I did.
What percentage of the cap is $30 million?
Has a team ever won with a player making that percent of the cap, or more?

If someone wants to look that up, by all means.

 

I don't know Why Rogers keeps getting lumped with Brady....A. Rodgers has been in 5 NFC Championship with 9 td, and 8 ints. 1 win , and 4 losses. Hell he had a game He didn't even score in ,but threw 2 ints. Yet You people act like he's a football god. LoL

 

I wasn't disagreeing with You, but with the article. How much You're getting paid will fluctuate with the Money made...So it's How much Cap space % the Qb is taking up that counts. IMO.

 

Just to add to the Kirk Cousins vs Brady comparison, see this link. https://www.profootballnetwork.com/kirk-cousins-minnesota-vikings-and-the-kings-of-garbage-time/

Seems that Cousins is a great garbage time QB which may explain why his passer rating doesn't line up with his won-loss record.

 

So which one do you want as your QB1?

HACK