In football it's generally thought that if you have a 'Franchise QB' you are set for 10-15 years and will be able to contend if you put enough complementary pieces around that QB. Except for in the rare cases where the complementary pieces are stronger than the QB (85 Bears, 00 Ravens), it's basically a requirement that you need a good QB to be a Super Bowl contender.
In this thread, I will present to you a handful of players who are currently the undisputed starter for their team. These guys will not have won a Super Bowl before, since all of the QBs with a ring would likely be considered 'Franchise QBs'. This thread isn't for them. This is a thread for guys that may or may not have the talent to lead his team to a Super Bowl Championship. I will list the pros and cons of the player listed and then I'll open it up to you guys to decide if the said QB is capable of being labeled a 'Franchise QB'.
Please note: my definition of a 'Franchise QB' is a guy that is the center of your offense and won't ride the coattails of his defense to a title (Dilfer with the Ravens, Grossman on the Bears as examples of guys I WOULDN'T consider franchise QB's even though they won/made a Super Bowl as the Starting QB.
---
The first case presented was Mark Sanchez, and it was quite unanimous (13-1 vote) that Mark wasn't/won't be able to reach franchise QB status. Today we're going to go with a contemporary from that 09 Draft class, and the other QB to make the playoffs as the starter from that class - Detroit Lions QB Matthew Stafford. Once again, I'll present pros and cons to why he can be a Franchise QB.
Yes, he's a Franchise QB
-He's only 24 and has already thrown for 5,000 yards. Only Dan Marino was younger than him when he threw for 5,000 yards.
-He's progressively improved in his 2+ years as a starter in terms of completion %, QB Rating, lowering INT rate.
-He's lead a once dormant Franchise to their first playoff berth in over a decade.
-Has already set numerous Franchise records - although some of that can be said about the lack of good QBs the Lions have produced.
No, he's not a Franchise QB
-He's been injured in 19 of the possible 48 games he can play in, which isn't a good ratio.
-He's only 13-16 as a starter.
-He has Calvin Johnson at receiver, which always helps a QB out.
Compared to Sanchez, Stafford doesn't appear to have as many question marks. I'll come right out and say I think Stafford is the face of this franchise and will lead them to a Super Bowl sometime in his career. I'll take the rest of my time to debunk these perceived flaws against Matt.
He's been injured in 19 of the possible 48 games he can play in, which isn't a good ratio.
Both of those injuries would've hurt any player and I don't believe show he's injury prone. He didn't get hurt anytime in his career before that injury his rookie year. He's now had surgery on that shoulder and it'll have to break for him to get hurt, which will be damn near impossible. He's shown he can play through injury (had a broken finger for a 3 game stretch where he played with gloves and produced poorly) and the Lions are beginning to address the need for some OL help by taking Tackle Riley Reiff in the first round in this past draft. While we don't know how he'll perform, it's safe to say that the Lions have a plan for Reiff to take care of his blindside either this year or the year after when Backus is gone. I'd expect more picks to address the line in future years at Center and a Guard, with many of the linemen getting up there in age.
He's only 13-16 as a starter.
Considering the situation he was put in, it's a bit surprising he's only 3 games below .500 for his career. The Lions weren't good his first 2 years, and rookie QBs don't typically have great years, despite what some of our recent history shows. Now that they have more talent and depth on the team, Matt's shown the ability to make these guys winners. There's a certain HOF by the name of Troy Aikman that began his career 14-24 and ended up 23 games over .500 for his career and he came into a very similar situation (bad team, needed pieces around him). Give him another year or two and I wouldn't be surprised to see his record over .500.
He has Calvin Johnson at receiver, which always helps a QB out.
Some stats to chew on (I stole this from another forum I frequent):
That's still producing at a high level, and to knock Stafford down simply because he's going to the best receiver the most (which he should be) is ridiculous. You think he's not going to throw it to Calvin if he has a favorable matchup? Frankly, Calvin should be getting at least that many targets. I don't care if it looks like it's one dimensional, 150 targets is a fair number for a guy like him. And Stafford deserves some credit, because it's not like Hill was producing at a great level with Calvin as his #1.
So, yay or nay?
In this thread, I will present to you a handful of players who are currently the undisputed starter for their team. These guys will not have won a Super Bowl before, since all of the QBs with a ring would likely be considered 'Franchise QBs'. This thread isn't for them. This is a thread for guys that may or may not have the talent to lead his team to a Super Bowl Championship. I will list the pros and cons of the player listed and then I'll open it up to you guys to decide if the said QB is capable of being labeled a 'Franchise QB'.
Please note: my definition of a 'Franchise QB' is a guy that is the center of your offense and won't ride the coattails of his defense to a title (Dilfer with the Ravens, Grossman on the Bears as examples of guys I WOULDN'T consider franchise QB's even though they won/made a Super Bowl as the Starting QB.
---
The first case presented was Mark Sanchez, and it was quite unanimous (13-1 vote) that Mark wasn't/won't be able to reach franchise QB status. Today we're going to go with a contemporary from that 09 Draft class, and the other QB to make the playoffs as the starter from that class - Detroit Lions QB Matthew Stafford. Once again, I'll present pros and cons to why he can be a Franchise QB.
Yes, he's a Franchise QB
-He's only 24 and has already thrown for 5,000 yards. Only Dan Marino was younger than him when he threw for 5,000 yards.
-He's progressively improved in his 2+ years as a starter in terms of completion %, QB Rating, lowering INT rate.
-He's lead a once dormant Franchise to their first playoff berth in over a decade.
-Has already set numerous Franchise records - although some of that can be said about the lack of good QBs the Lions have produced.
No, he's not a Franchise QB
-He's been injured in 19 of the possible 48 games he can play in, which isn't a good ratio.
-He's only 13-16 as a starter.
-He has Calvin Johnson at receiver, which always helps a QB out.
Compared to Sanchez, Stafford doesn't appear to have as many question marks. I'll come right out and say I think Stafford is the face of this franchise and will lead them to a Super Bowl sometime in his career. I'll take the rest of my time to debunk these perceived flaws against Matt.
He's been injured in 19 of the possible 48 games he can play in, which isn't a good ratio.
Both of those injuries would've hurt any player and I don't believe show he's injury prone. He didn't get hurt anytime in his career before that injury his rookie year. He's now had surgery on that shoulder and it'll have to break for him to get hurt, which will be damn near impossible. He's shown he can play through injury (had a broken finger for a 3 game stretch where he played with gloves and produced poorly) and the Lions are beginning to address the need for some OL help by taking Tackle Riley Reiff in the first round in this past draft. While we don't know how he'll perform, it's safe to say that the Lions have a plan for Reiff to take care of his blindside either this year or the year after when Backus is gone. I'd expect more picks to address the line in future years at Center and a Guard, with many of the linemen getting up there in age.
He's only 13-16 as a starter.
Considering the situation he was put in, it's a bit surprising he's only 3 games below .500 for his career. The Lions weren't good his first 2 years, and rookie QBs don't typically have great years, despite what some of our recent history shows. Now that they have more talent and depth on the team, Matt's shown the ability to make these guys winners. There's a certain HOF by the name of Troy Aikman that began his career 14-24 and ended up 23 games over .500 for his career and he came into a very similar situation (bad team, needed pieces around him). Give him another year or two and I wouldn't be surprised to see his record over .500.
He has Calvin Johnson at receiver, which always helps a QB out.
Some stats to chew on (I stole this from another forum I frequent):
That's still producing at a high level, and to knock Stafford down simply because he's going to the best receiver the most (which he should be) is ridiculous. You think he's not going to throw it to Calvin if he has a favorable matchup? Frankly, Calvin should be getting at least that many targets. I don't care if it looks like it's one dimensional, 150 targets is a fair number for a guy like him. And Stafford deserves some credit, because it's not like Hill was producing at a great level with Calvin as his #1.
So, yay or nay?
