Franchise Quarterbacks: Results

by mgrex03 on May 25, 2008 11:16 PM EDT in Analysis

I gave some stats a couple days ago, and got some really good responses. It seems like the idea of picking a franchise quarterback, based on his college performance, is not as cut and dry as some may think. For the most part, everyone was in agreement that Quarterback D was the best choice. Here is the table again, with the quarterback's name included this time:

	Starts	Comp	Att	Comp. Pct	Yds	YPA	TD	INT	Rating
Quinn	46	929	1602	58.0%	11762	7.34	95	39	90.62
Cutler	45	710	1242	57.2%	8697	7.00	59	36	82.66
Manning	42	851	1354	62.9%	11201	8.27	90	33	100.93
Leinart	39	807	1245	64.8%	10693	8.59	99	23	110.69
Ryan	32	806	1346	59.9%	9310	6.92	56	37	83.22
Young	32	444	718	61.8%	6040	8.41	44	28	92.84
Russell	30	493	707	69.7%	6625	9.37	52	21	111.38

So everyone wants Matt Leinart, eh? He, no doubt, had a great college career, going 37-2 as a starter at USC. I painfully sat through two of those wins, one as a senior, and the "Bush Push" game. However, the jury is still out on Leinart as a pro. If I had to make a decision right now, I'd say he was not a franchise quarterback in the NFL. He has made some really dumb decisions outside of football, which means he'll probably make some really dumb decisions on the football field. He doesn't seem to have the work ethic needed to succeed in the NFL, but only time will tell.

As PB noted in the comments in the original article, Vince Young also had his rushing numbers from college, that really helped his stats. I'd have to say he was drafted in the Top 3 because of his ability to run the ball, as his passing stats are below the others. He also made a great point about Matt Ryan:

Anyway, Matt Ryan’s got a LOT of pressure on him.

I think Ryan is the worst of the bunch, yet he'll have the most money of any of them up front. Personally, his high number of interceptions will be very problematic. He made a lot of plays at the end of games, which made the highlights, but also made a lot of dumb decisions, like all the interceptions. It seems fishy when the best thing about him is "his intangibles are off the charts." It is screaming "his measurable stats aren't good, but he is the best quarterback, so we need something to be good about him. Immeasurable 'Intangibles'".

Peyton also did quite well for himself in his 4 years at Tennessee. He seems like a pretty good franchise quarterback.

0 recs | Comment 11 comments

Read Related

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I was surprized by Russel's numbers

I had thought he was more of a “scouts love his insane measurables” type guy, but he was really productive. Less starts than you would like, but amazing production. The rocket “I can throw the ball 70+ yards from my knees” arm shows up in the high YPA. A high completion percentage, a big arm, and high YPA is a rare combo.

my blog http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com

by shake n bake on May 26, 2008 12:23 AM EDT 0 recs

Matt Leinart

Really a good article, and I appreciate the stat compilation.

Projecting professional success based upon college performance - especially at QB - is difficult. In the case of Matt Leinart in college, he played behind an offensive line with several NFL draft picks, handed off to Reggie Bush and Lendale White (2 NFL draft picks), and passed to NFL receivers. Add in a list of suspect opposition, and that adds up to tremendous college success.

But there are many college QB’s who possess great talent, but don’t shine because of the lack of supporting cast.

What we’ve found about Leinart at the pro level is that his arm strength is suspect—he appears unable to fire the ball accurately into tight NFL coverages. And his commitment doesn’t appear to be there. He seems more interested in being a celebrity than in honing his game for the Pro’s.

In Leinart’s 2nd season in the NFL, he posted a 60.9 passer rating (worst in the NFL), threw for 129 yards per game (last in the NFL), completed only about 50% of his passes, threw twice as many interceptions as touchdowns, and only threw 0.4 touchdowns per game. And it’s not as if he lacks receiving talent - He has 2 Pro Bowlers in Larry Fitzgerald and Anquan Boldin. Last season, he threw zero TD’s to Fitzgerald and only 1 to Boldin. And then there’s the fragility issue -- Leinart has suffered 2 season-ending injuries in his last 5 sacks.

His college stats in the above chart put him ahead of Peyton Manning, but yet he was drafted as only a #10. The Pro Scouts obviously had their doubts.

Based upon his awful professional performance, lack of commitment, and fragility, I don’t think it’s too early to say that he is pretty far down the path to becoming the biggest 1st round QB draft bust since Ryan Leaf.

by HardHat on May 26, 2008 4:47 PM EDT 0 recs

Leinart might not be all that bad...

I hear you HardHat, but I think left out some important points.

First of all his O-line is very suspect, and that is an argument often used, whenever the subject is why Edge hasn’t produced as well in the desert as in Indy.

Then we have the training staff who haven’t decided if Leinart or Warner should be the starter. This could perhaps affect his confidence, but also takes TD’s away from Leinart, thus giving him such a lackluster statline.

All in all I guess Leinart haven’t been the most succesful so far, but I think it is fair to give him a chance to redeem himself this upcoming season.

by jocre on May 26, 2008 5:09 PM EDT up 0 recs

Adding context

Cetainly Leinart has not proven himself to be what the Cardinals were hoping for yet, and the criticisms that HardHat lists are fair. But I am also willing to give Leinart more of a chance to prove himself. QBs rarely excel in their first year or two in the NFL. And while numbers don’t tell the whole story, I found some interesting similarities when comparing Leinart’s early stats with Peyton’s early stats.

I’ve taken both QBs first 16 starts (Leinart’s stats actually reflect 17 games played, 16 of them starts—I think that’s still a fair comparison for these purposes). Here’s what I found in some significant categories:

Peyton: 56.7 completion percentage
Leinart: 56.0 completion percentage

Peyton: 6.5 yards per attempt
Leinart: 6.5 yards per attempt

Peyton: 71.2 rating
Leinart: 71.2 rating

Peyton: 26 TD, 28 INT
Leinart: 13 TD, 16 INT

Now again, numbers don’t tell the whole story. But aside from number of TDs and INTs, the numbers between the two are eerily comparable in several telling categories. And this with Leinart having the aforementioned sucky O-Line and not nearly the running game that Peyton had.

Ultimately, it’s all about maturing, learning, and getting it done on the field. Some QBs will do these things while others will not, and it’s often hard to predict from numbers alone who will advance and who won’t (one of the main reasons a contract like Ryan’s has been so criticized). But with a better line and running game (great receivers don’t matter if you can’t run the ball or have time to throw) Leinart could still develop. He’ll likely never be Peyton-esque, but who is? But at least his start is not terribly dissimilar from Peyton’s.

Where Leinart goes from here is up to him, but I believe he’s shown enough to not be considered a huge bust just yet.

by ctnyc on May 26, 2008 7:01 PM EDT up 0 recs

Hardly an even comparison

That’s hardly an even comparison. Leinart’s first 17 starts include 2nd year games, versus Peyton Manning who played his first 16 games in his rookie season.

by HardHat on May 26, 2008 11:17 PM EDT up 0 recs

This is not a scientific study

just a comparison. If anything, I’d think the starts in one season would be an advantage as the QB would have more opportunity to find a rhythm and get comfortable with the tendencies of teammates. These are things that you really can’t learn sitting on the sidelined with an injury.

by ctnyc on May 27, 2008 11:20 AM EDT up 0 recs

The same oline was fine for Warner...

Playing behind that same so-called “suspect” offensive line, Kurt Warner threw 27 touchdown passes, and finished in the top 10 in most QB categories, including passer rating (89.8).

Remember you read it here first. Matt Leinart is a bust.

If the Cardinals are smart (but they’re run by the Bidwills - the most inept owners in pro sports history - so they’re not smart), they’d stay with the hot hand at QB. Warner threw something like 21 touchdown passes in his final 8 games (while playing with his non-throwing arm in a giant brace).

If it were me, I’d go with Warner—the guy with the proven potential to lead his team to the Super Bowl and the proven potential to put up MVP/Pro-Bowl numbers. At the pro level, Leinart hasn’t proven anything yet.

by HardHat on May 26, 2008 11:23 PM EDT up 0 recs

Warner was benched in New York

for Eli Manning because he made his O-line look like crap, holding onto the ball forever and taking a massive number of sacks because of it. If Leinart is doing worse behind the same line, that’s bad.

my blog http://shakennbaken.blogspot.com

by shake n bake on May 26, 2008 11:56 PM EDT up 0 recs

Well..

..As before mentioned, whenever the Cards were entering the redzone Leinart was taken out of the game, and was replaced by Warner.

That should, and does, show up in the stats.

by jocre on May 27, 2008 4:00 AM EDT up 0 recs

Wow

A lot of Leinart-haters out there. I don’t particularly care about him one way or the other, I am simply making the point that the sample size is a little too small to tell definitively what is going to happen in his career. He has had basically a season’s worth of starts, and in that time has numbers very similar to Peyton’s first season’s worth of starts. Obviously I’m not saying that he will therefore be the next Peyton. I’m just pointing out that the numbers - while incomplete to be sure - don’t tell the story of a massive bust that some seem to think.

He’s made some mistakes and gotten hurt. It’s up to him to refocus and turn his career around. My point is that he still has time to do it. He may, he may not. But to decide that he’s an out and out bust at this point is a little premature. It reminds me of Terry telling us last year that Romo, after about 14 starts, was going to break all the records and be an all-time great, etc. It could happen. But at this point, we haven’t seen enough to make a definitive judgment either way.

On a side note, are people really trying to make the argument that the Cardinals’ OLine was good and that it was Leinart that made them look bad? I’d be curious to see the sources, everything I’ve read has been about how much it sucked and how the Cardinals were making upgrading the line a priority.

by ctnyc on May 27, 2008 11:31 AM EDT 0 recs

About that last part

Although to be fair, the line concerns were much more pronounced at the end of two seasons ago (i.e. after Leinart’s rookie year) than they have been since the end of this season.

by ctnyc on May 27, 2008 4:48 PM EDT up 0 recs