Discussion in 'NFL Football Forum' started by crew1954, May 7, 2012.
Ranking All 16 AFC Quarterbacks: From Worst to Best | Football Nation
Since when does "great offense" mean ranking in the bottom half of the league four times and never ranking higher than 9th in the past decade?
Fail. Cassel at 4 is probably worse than Flacco at 2.
I came in here just to copy and paste that same quote. That's a headscratcher.
I'd take any of the QB's 5-7 over the qb's 2-4. Is it supposed to be that way?
He got #1 right. After that, it went off the rails.
Yeah, it's interesting all right. Matt Cassell above Peyton Manning? LOL, even if he is with a new team, and I like Cassell. Joe Flacc(id-arm)o at No. 2? LOL again. C'Mon man!!
I know the AFC sucks for QB talent, but Flacco at #2?!? Roethlisberger and Rivers are clearly better than Flacco. Manning may be better if he returns remotely to his pre-injury form. Others are debatable, but I would put at least 1-2 more ahead of him.
Overall, the rankings suck.
Sancheeze at 12 with pretty much just 2 "haven't played a snap" rooks, a washed-up Carson Palmer (a little debatable) and Blaine Gabbart behind him is pretty accurate too. Beyond #1 and #12 up. Not much else I agree with.
Is that by any chance meant to be a fantasy ranking?
That would help explain his stress on the weapons a QB does or doesn't have available.
Until proven otherwise, it's Brady 1, Manning 2 > the rest.
Just 4-5 years ago most people would have had the top 4 or 5 QB's in the NFL as being in the AFC. Manning, Brady, Rivers, Ben at the least.
How is Flacco ranked higher than Manning, Rivers, and Roethlisberger?
What exactly does Flacco do to deserve anyone's respect? The guy throws for about a 55% completion rate and is horrendous against good defenses. He is the biggest jeckyll and hyde QB in the league, padding his stats against garbage teams and faltering against good ones.
2. Rivers (who was ahead of Manning even before 18s injury)
4. Manning (with all due respect, age and injuries raise questions.)
Dead Last (tie). Tebow and Sanchez.
appreciate the rivers love lol
This list is about dead on, I don't think I'd change any of it. As for the OP, I have no idea how anybody can put Flacco at 2 and Cassel at 4, that's just absurd IMO.
Here's me, ever the cynic once again. My take is he put out unconventional rankings to garner clicks/hits. If he ranks the following...
...who's gonna read it or care? But if he ranks Flacco #2, Cassel #4 all of us start blabbing how wrong he is on the message boards.
He's just a nice guy who likes to go to church. Nothing wrong with that. Just doesn't know a damn thing about football. His brain has been scrambled by watching too much Clemson football on Saturdays and then followed up by Bucball on Sundays! He should probably have his brain checked by Boston U when he passes for possible concussion maladies.
1.) Roethlisberger > Rivers > Flacco
2.) Manning shouldn't even be listed because he's coming off a missed year and is now at the age of 36.
3.) Palmer > Sanchez
Heading into this season, I'd list them (Best to worst) like this:
Cassel (Until he shows that 2011 was the fluke, and not 2010)
Hasselbeck (assuming Locker doesn't become the starter)
Sanchez (Unless/Until Tebow takes over)
INC: Manning, Luck, Tannehill, Weedon
I agree about Mannning. Way too much incertainty involved after what he's been through and given his age.
Palmer could be decent this year. Last year he was thrown into a new system and I beleive his WRs got hurt. Yes, he looked awful at times but that's what happens when you practice for two weeks before playing your first game.
These are not actual qb rankings, but rather 2013 qb rankings in the context of his team in 2013... either that or fantasy rankings, which might amount to about the same thing.
Still, I wd place Manning at 2 and Rivers at 3.
Separate names with a comma.