PDA

View Full Version : Scout's Views: The new QBs


BMarsh615
09-25-2009, 09:27 AM
An NFL scout ranks the new starting QBs according to how much of a positive impact they will have on their teams.

1. Brett Favre, Vikings. "He's still effective as long as he spreads the ball around and relies on the running game. Las year, Minnesota won 10 games with marginal quarterbacking. He can maybe get them two or three more victories."

2. Mark Sanchez, Jets. "Of these eight tteams, the Jets have the second-best defense. They're going to limit how many points opponents score and create a lot of turnovers, putting Sanchez in a lot of favorable positions."

3. Kyle Orton, Broncos. "Josh McDaniels knows how to design plays, and Orton will be successful. Denver will have a better record than people think."

4. Matt Cassel, Chiefs. "He's accurate, and they have some veteran WR's. Once healthy, he's going to be successful. He'll give them a chance to pull out some victories late in the 4th Quarter.

5. Jay Cutler, Bears. "He can make throws some of those other guys can't, but he has just marginal receivers. The Bears are going to be playing from behind, and they will ask a lot of him."

6. Brady Quinn, Browns. "He just needs more experience. I think the team will struggle all year, but he has a couple of guys who can make plays for him."

7. Matt Stafford, Lions. "He's very talented, but he's a rookie. He has a great receiver (Calving Johnson) and a talented TE ( Brandon Pettigrew). He'll take a lot of bumps this year, but it will be a good learning experience."

8. Byron Leftwich, Bucs. "He's a veteran with a good skill set, but he takes a ton of hits. I would have ranked him higher, but I don't think he'll hold up for 16 games."

I don't have a link it is from Sporting News magazine

Smiling Assassin27
09-25-2009, 09:30 AM
Favre at #1 makes me question the entire piece.

gyldenlove
09-25-2009, 09:35 AM
Anyone who puts Cassel as number 4 and Favre as number 1 just plain doesn't know what they are talking about.

WolfpackGuy
09-25-2009, 09:47 AM
Matt Cassel at 4?
He's probably the third best QB on his own team and is fighting off Brody Croyle which is a joke in itself.

Rabb
09-25-2009, 09:58 AM
He can make throws some of those other guys can't

sometimes to his own guys too!

tsiguy96
09-25-2009, 10:00 AM
are you sure he didnt just list the new QBs randomly

Chris
09-25-2009, 10:14 AM
I don't think the Vikings are that good this year because of their D, with or without favre.

colonelbeef
09-25-2009, 12:41 PM
Anyone who puts Cassel as number 4 and Favre as number 1 just plain doesn't know what they are talking about.

Seriously. That article isn't worth the bandwith it's taking up.

alkemical
09-25-2009, 12:51 PM
I don't think the Vikings are that good this year because of their D, with or without favre.

one of the top DL's in the league, some good LB's - the secondary is a little weak but average.

Baba Booey
09-25-2009, 12:53 PM
Orton above Cutler. Praise be to Allah.

Bronx33
09-25-2009, 01:43 PM
Favre at #1 makes me question the entire piece.


I think john madden may have written it.. ;D

Killericon
09-25-2009, 02:20 PM
I think john madden may have written it.. ;D

The article is written based on which QB will have the biggest positive impact. IMO, Favre's big gun forces defenses to keep defenders back, which allows AD to run all over their faces. He may not be the best, but his impact is certainly the biggest.

Smiling Assassin27
09-25-2009, 02:20 PM
I think john madden may have written it.. ;D

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/XBW7ysPcbT0&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/XBW7ysPcbT0&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Smiling Assassin27
09-25-2009, 02:27 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L3dHNAMFlUI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L3dHNAMFlUI&hl=en&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

colonelbeef
09-25-2009, 02:42 PM
The article is written based on which QB will have the biggest positive impact. IMO, Favre's big gun forces defenses to keep defenders back, which allows AD to run all over their faces. He may not be the best, but his impact is certainly the biggest.

please. If that is true, then why is Orton 3rd? His gun?

There are crappy scouts in the NFL too. This guy must work for the Raiders or Lions

Killericon
09-25-2009, 02:54 PM
please. If that is true, then why is Orton 3rd? His gun?

There are crappy scouts in the NFL too. This guy must work for the Raiders or Lions

Let me clarify.

I was not defending the article, nor the scout sourced. I was just saying Favre being on the Vikings is a lot bigger than just his play.

BMarsh615
09-25-2009, 03:15 PM
please. If that is true, then why is Orton 3rd? His gun?

There are crappy scouts in the NFL too. This guy must work for the Raiders or Lions

Maybe he thinks that Kyle Orton is a perfect fit for this system, can make every throw needed, and will not throw games away with costly INT's.

BroncoMan4ever
09-25-2009, 04:06 PM
please. If that is true, then why is Orton 3rd? His gun?

There are crappy scouts in the NFL too. This guy must work for the Raiders or Lions

his impact isn't in the stat sheets or in ability. it comes from teams having to play a balanced offense, and from the reduction of stupid plays that result in turnovers from last years QB.

rastaman
09-25-2009, 07:40 PM
his impact isn't in the stat sheets or in ability. it comes from teams having to play a balanced offense, and from the reduction of stupid plays that result in turnovers from last years QB.

So are you saying Orton is the guy that will master and Lead McD's offense well enough to get the Broncos to the Super Bowl in by year 3 of of the McD era? Better yet, is Orton the long term answer?

Will Kyle get the label of Franchise QB and sign the lucruative deal to make him the top 10 or 5 salaried QB in the NFL?

How far can or does Orton taking care of the ball, not forcing throws and interception get the Broncos?

baja
09-25-2009, 07:47 PM
So are you saying Orton is the guy that will master and Lead McD's offense well enough to get the Broncos to the Super Bowl in by year 3 of of the McD era? Better yet, is Orton the long term answer?

Will Kyle get the label of Franchise QB and sign the lucruative deal to make him the top 10 or 5 salaried QB in the NFL?

<b>How far can or does Orton taking care of the ball, not forcing throws and interception get the Broncos?

Further than Cutler would have.

BroncoMan4ever
09-26-2009, 12:26 AM
So are you saying Orton is the guy that will master and Lead McD's offense well enough to get the Broncos to the Super Bowl in by year 3 of of the McD era? Better yet, is Orton the long term answer?

Will Kyle get the label of Franchise QB and sign the lucruative deal to make him the top 10 or 5 salaried QB in the NFL?

How far can or does Orton taking care of the ball, not forcing throws and interception get the Broncos?

i truly would not be surprised to see Orton get an extension after the season, and if he does i am confident he can not only lead this offense but can excel in it. i have always felt he was a QB that if put into a better situation than what he had in Chicago he could be a successful QB.

if he gets a shot, which means McDaniels isn't looking for his new Brady(the way Mike was looking for his new Elway) he can be a franchise QB for the Broncos, and I am sure fans will begin to like him as our QB.

Ask Plummer how far you can get if you take care of the ball and play team football. he got us to 13-3 and to the AFCCG, and had he had a running game and a little more defensive help he would have won a super bowl.

you don't need a QB that can throw a ball through a brick wall to be successful, if you have an intelligent QB, someone who takes care of the ball, doesn't put the team into ****ty positions, and has the respect of his teammates he can be extremely successful even with less athletic talent.

baja
09-26-2009, 12:35 AM
i truly would not be surprised to see Orton get an extension after the season, and if he does i am confident he can not only lead this offense but can excel in it. i have always felt he was a QB that if put into a better situation than what he had in Chicago he could be a successful QB.

if he gets a shot, which means McDaniels isn't looking for his new Brady(the way Mike was looking for his new Elway) he can be a franchise QB for the Broncos, and I am sure fans will begin to like him as our QB.

Ask Plummer how far you can get if you take care of the ball and play team football. he got us to 13-3 and to the AFCCG, and had he had a running game and a little more defensive help he would have won a super bowl.

you don't need a QB that can throw a ball through a brick wall to be successful, if you have an intelligent QB, someone who takes care of the ball, doesn't put the team into ****ty positions, and has the respect of his teammates he can be extremely successful even with less athletic talent.

But what about them pretty passes?

BroncoMan4ever
09-26-2009, 01:16 AM
But what about them pretty passes?

pretty passes are fun to watch, but with guys like Favre or Cutler, you get 1 or 2 incredible pretty passes and then 1 or 2 wtf was he thinking passes. it is fun to watch, but if winning games and having the team reach elite status and become a perennial conteder means we need a QB with less physical talent, then i am all for it.

this isn't the NFL of the past where gunslingers and elite QBs can take over games completely on their own based on the talent they possessed. in today's NFL at the QB position intelligence on the field is more important than athletic ability.

look at guys like Peyton, Brady, Ryan, Rodgers, Rivers, Warner. guys at the top of the league at their position. None of them have incredible athletic ability, none of them have cannons for arms(not saying they are not athletic and don't have decent arms, but they aren't athletic freaks with Elway-like arms), but they all are very intelligent, and don't put the team into bad situations and that leads to wins.

and as much as i liked Jay when he was here, mainly because i was awed by the athletic talent he possessed, Orton is the better QB for this offense. he is the more intelligent player. that may be because he has never had the athletic tools that made him think he could make any throw, but for whatever reason Orton is better for us right now in the current situation than Cutler would have been. not necessarily a better QB, but a better fit for this system.

baja
09-26-2009, 01:30 AM
pretty passes are fun to watch, but with guys like Favre or Cutler, you get 1 or 2 incredible pretty passes and then 1 or 2 wtf was he thinking passes. it is fun to watch, but if winning games and having the team reach elite status and become a perennial conteder means we need a QB with less physical talent, then i am all for it.

this isn't the NFL of the past where gunslingers and elite QBs can take over games completely on their own based on the talent they possessed. in today's NFL at the QB position intelligence on the field is more important than athletic ability.

look at guys like Peyton, Brady, Ryan, Rodgers, Rivers, Warner. guys at the top of the league at their position. None of them have incredible athletic ability, none of them have cannons for arms(not saying they are not athletic and don't have decent arms, but they aren't athletic freaks with Elway-like arms), but they all are very intelligent, and don't put the team into bad situations and that leads to wins.

and as much as i liked Jay when he was here, mainly because i was awed by the athletic talent he possessed, Orton is the better QB for this offense. he is the more intelligent player. that may be because he has never had the athletic tools that made him think he could make any throw, but for whatever reason Orton is better for us right now in the current situation than Cutler would have been. not necessarily a better QB, but a better fit for this system.

The part that is fun is that the fans are starting to see that.

Popps
09-26-2009, 01:31 AM
How far can or does Orton taking care of the ball, not forcing throws and interception get the Broncos?

Well, considering our last QB was one of the worst in the league at taking care of the ball (2nd worst) .... he'll probably be an improvement.

Then again, that's not saying much.

UberBroncoMan
09-26-2009, 04:25 AM
i truly would not be surprised to see Orton get an extension after the season, and if he does i am confident he can not only lead this offense but can excel in it. i have always felt he was a QB that if put into a better situation than what he had in Chicago he could be a successful QB.

if he gets a shot, which means McDaniels isn't looking for his new Brady(the way Mike was looking for his new Elway) he can be a franchise QB for the Broncos, and I am sure fans will begin to like him as our QB.

Ask Plummer how far you can get if you take care of the ball and play team football. he got us to 13-3 and to the AFCCG, and had he had a running game and a little more defensive help he would have won a super bowl.

you don't need a QB that can throw a ball through a brick wall to be successful, if you have an intelligent QB, someone who takes care of the ball, doesn't put the team into ****ty positions, and has the respect of his teammates he can be extremely successful even with less athletic talent.

Actually if Plummer had CONTINUED to TAKE CARE OF THE BALL he wold have won a Super Bowl.

errand
09-26-2009, 04:47 AM
So are you saying Orton is the guy that will master and Lead McD's offense well enough to get the Broncos to the Super Bowl in by year 3 of of the McD era? Better yet, is Orton the long term answer?

Will Kyle get the label of Franchise QB and sign the lucruative deal to make him the top 10 or 5 salaried QB in the NFL?

How far can or does Orton taking care of the ball, not forcing throws and interception get the Broncos?

Ya know, it's almost to the point where I hope Orton has a pro-bowl year and shuts you the **** up until next year, when you'll be spouting the same ****.

Nobody here is saying anything like your above quote...the vast majority of "pro-Orton" fans have a wait and see attitude about him and the team in general. which makes us "pro-Broncos" fans more than Orton fans.

What we believe is irrelevant, I'm not the guy deciding who stays in Denver...McDaniels thinks Orton can master his offense, which if he does master one of the NFL's most prolific and diverse offense designed and the D is real, why couldn't we be playing for the Lombardi?

And if he masters the O...and gets us into the playoffs and produces the desired results, then why wouldn't he be considered the potential long term answer?

And if he becomes the long term answer, then why wouldn't he deserve a top contract and franchise QB status?

And how far does Orton taking care of the ball, not forcing throws and not throwing INT's get the Broncos? Well, Paul Brown said it best...

"Football is a game of errors, whoever makes the fewest errors usually wins"

...and winning games is all that matters to me.

BroncoMan4ever
09-26-2009, 01:43 PM
Actually if Plummer had CONTINUED to TAKE CARE OF THE BALL he wold have won a Super Bowl.

actually had the running game been working we could have given him some help and that resulted in less TOs in that game, and had the defense not been allowing Rothlisberger all day to pick them apart and just let the Steelers offense steam roll us, Plummer wouldn't have been put into the position to have to do more than he should have. the team as a whole sucked that game and because of that, Plummer's stats suffered the most.

errand
09-26-2009, 01:55 PM
actually had the running game been working we could have given him some help and that resulted in less TOs in that game, and had the defense not been allowing Rothlisberger all day to pick them apart and just let the Steelers offense steam roll us, Plummer wouldn't have been put into the position to have to do more than he should have. the team as a whole sucked that game and because of that, Plummer's stats suffered the most.

Exactly...our pass rush sucked, and Ben did what he wanted. As for Jake's performance, well...it's alot easier to play defense when you know what the opposing QB is gonna do, which is pass on practically every down. I've said it numerous times...your QB has to throw because he wants to...not because he has to.

maher_tyler
09-26-2009, 05:12 PM
sometimes to his own guys too!

Hilarious!

BroncoMan4ever
09-27-2009, 02:49 AM
Exactly...our pass rush sucked, and Ben did what he wanted. As for Jake's performance, well...it's alot easier to play defense when you know what the opposing QB is gonna do, which is pass on practically every down. I've said it numerous times...your QB has to throw because he wants to...not because he has to.

true, but Orton and Plummer are very different in the way they operate. Orton has never been a big risk taker as a QB. he has something like a 2-1 TD-INT ratio, while Jake prior to coming to Denver had a higher INT number than TD number, it didn't even out until after 3 seasons in Denver. Jake was always a gambler and had tendencies to do stupid things with the ball. even if Orton is put into a situation where he is forced to win by passing, he is still going to play his style of game which means not a lot of risks and smart passing. Orton is smart and cautious with the ball.

Drek
09-27-2009, 04:50 AM
I don't see the problem with Favre at the top of the list. He takes the Vikings from playoff contender to championship contender. It isn't so much that Favre is still an elite QB (he's not in my opinion) but he's a significant upgrade over what they had, still has some big play capability in him, and has a ton of big game experience. I don't much care for the guy but with him the Vikings are a top 5 SB contender.

BroncoMan4ever
09-27-2009, 12:04 PM
I don't see the problem with Favre at the top of the list. He takes the Vikings from playoff contender to championship contender. It isn't so much that Favre is still an elite QB (he's not in my opinion) but he's a significant upgrade over what they had, still has some big play capability in him, and has a ton of big game experience. I don't much care for the guy but with him the Vikings are a top 5 SB contender.

true, just the presence of a guy with his arm and accomplishments means teams can no longer stack the LOS and try to stop Peterson. the pass needs to be respected even if it is only used sparingly. it opens up the offense and takes pressure off their franchise player.