PDA

View Full Version : Matt Schaub NFL's most underrated QB?


drs23
06-28-2011, 03:34 PM
Saw this article (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/747758-statistics-validate-texans-matt-schaub-as-the-nfls-most-underrated-quarterback) and thought it was interesting. Some of the stats I'd not read/heard before. Even if it is BR I enjoyed it. And NFL news is Slow!

b0ng
06-28-2011, 03:36 PM
Saw this article (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/747758-statistics-validate-texans-matt-schaub-as-the-nfls-most-underrated-quarterback) and thought it was interesting. Some of the stats I'd not read/heard before. Even if it is BR I enjoyed it. And NFL news is Slow!

I think that honor of "most underrated" belongs to probably. . . Ryan Fitzpatrick. I do think Schaub is a better player than Josh Freeman currently is, or even Joe Flacco or Matt Ryan and deserved to be a top 100 player.

HJam72
06-28-2011, 03:53 PM
Anyone voted "Most Underrated" anything is no longer underrated at all. He was underrated when we were all still worried about whether he could play a whole season without getting injured and missing significant time.

Just thought I'd be the master of the obvious here. :)

The Pencil Neck
06-28-2011, 04:04 PM
Anyone voted "Most Underrated" anything is no longer underrated at all. He was underrated when we were all still worried about whether he could play a whole season without getting injured and missing significant time.

Just thought I'd be the master of the obvious here. :)

No, he's still under-rated by most people who aren't Texans fans or relatively proficient fantasy footballers.

drs23
06-28-2011, 04:07 PM
Anyone voted "Most Underrated" anything is no longer underrated at all. He was underrated when we were all still worried about whether he could play a whole season without getting injured and missing significant time.

Just thought I'd be the master of the obvious here. :)

Job well done. :)

Ole Miss Texan
06-28-2011, 04:09 PM
Shoot I already believed it and knew all about his stats. But after reading that article, I want to go run through a brick wall for him. Amazing! lol

badboy
06-28-2011, 04:14 PM
I just wished we had a similarly under rated back up QB.

TEXANRED
06-28-2011, 04:14 PM
I think that honor of "most underrated" belongs to probably. . . Ryan Fitzpatrick. I do think Schaub is a better player than Josh Freeman currently is, or even Joe Flacco or Matt Ryan and deserved to be a top 100 player.

Schaub puts up big passing numbers but when it comes down to winning in tight situations or when the prime time lights come on, or even when he plays at home, he fails.

He is 8-16 against the division since 2007.

Look at last year, we pulled an Oh'fer in prime time last year (and has never won on Monday night. I don't know about Sunday night). And he is 8-8 at home over the last 2 years.

Top 100 players are difference makers and Schaub is not a difference maker. He is Chris Chandler 2.0.

Ole Miss Texan
06-28-2011, 04:32 PM
Schaub puts up big passing numbers but when it comes down to winning in tight situations or when the prime time lights come on, or even when he plays at home, he fails.

He is 8-16 against the division since 2007.

Look at last year, we pulled an Oh'fer in prime time last year (and has never won on Monday night. I don't know about Sunday night). And he is 8-8 at home over the last 2 years.

Top 100 players are difference makers and Schaub is not a difference maker. He is Chris Chandler 2.0.

I just don't see it as many times as people have said this. There's been a lot of times he's brought us back in games with limited time remaining. It's not fair to ask him to score with under 2 minutes left, let the other team score, and then say he sucks when he can't do it again.

eriadoc
06-28-2011, 04:48 PM
I just don't see it as many times as people have said this. There's been a lot of times he's brought us back in games with limited time remaining. It's not fair to ask him to score with under 2 minutes left, let the other team score, and then say he sucks when he can't do it again.

When he failed to score anything in the first 30 minutes of play at all, it is. Over half the games last year saw the offense put up less than a TD in the first half, IIRC. So while the defense might be a sieve, the offense sure wasn't helping their own cause.

TEXANRED
06-28-2011, 04:57 PM
I just don't see it as many times as people have said this. There's been a lot of times he's brought us back in games with limited time remaining. It's not fair to ask him to score with under 2 minutes left, let the other team score, and then say he sucks when he can't do it again.

I am looking at his 4 years of work. 8-16 in the division is a huge short fall IMO.

losing all your prime time games is a huge short fall IMO.

31-33 over the last 4 years. (of course he missed half seasons in 07 & 08) So if you just look at his two complete seasons he is 15-17 as a full time starter going 8-8 at home. (we were 12-4 in 07 and 08)

And for every "come back" of Schaub's I can point to a choke. Like in 2007 when he rein-acted the mistake by the lake and got trounced by Cleveland. In 2009 when he threw the game losing INT to the Cards. Sprinkle in all the division loses and you have a typical Matt Schaub season.

Hey, I wanna like the guy, I do, but IMO Schaub is a pretender.

El Tejano
06-28-2011, 05:20 PM
I am looking at his 4 years of work. 8-16 in the division is a huge short fall IMO.

losing all your prime time games is a huge short fall IMO.

31-33 over the last 4 years. (of course he missed half seasons in 07 & 08) So if you just look at his two complete seasons he is 15-17 as a full time starter going 8-8 at home. (we were 12-4 in 07 and 08)

And for every "come back" of Schaub's I can point to a choke. Like in 2007 when he rein-acted the mistake by the lake and got trounced by Cleveland. In 2009 when he threw the game losing INT to the Cards. Sprinkle in all the division loses and you have a typical Matt Schaub season.

Hey, I wanna like the guy, I do, but IMO Schaub is a pretender.

If it weren't for Matt Schaub we would've got trounced in that game.

TEXANRED
06-28-2011, 05:31 PM
If it weren't for Matt Schaub we would've got trounced in that game.

It was 21-0 going into the half.

dalemurphy
06-28-2011, 06:12 PM
Here's the reality: Individual players on the Texans will be late getting significant respect around the league and in the media until the team wins. Fair/ not fair... who cares. My only concern as a fan is whether I think Schaub and other players are capable of participating in a winning organization. I certainly think Schaub is capable. But, it will only be proven or unproven over the next couple years.

DocBar
06-28-2011, 07:17 PM
When he failed to score anything in the first 30 minutes of play at all, it is. Over half the games last year saw the offense put up less than a TD in the first half, IIRC. So while the defense might be a sieve, the offense sure wasn't helping their own cause.

IMHO, that has much more to do with play calling and coaching than any particular player. I'm pretty happy with Schaub but I understand his being under-rated. Until the Texans start winning, he will be. QB's get all of the glory and all of the blame. Remember those 10 or so games the last 2 seasons when the D couldn't hold a lead or KB couldn't hit the ocean from the beach?

EllisUnit
06-28-2011, 08:35 PM
Schaub puts up big passing numbers but when it comes down to winning in tight situations or when the prime time lights come on, or even when he plays at home, he fails.

He is 8-16 against the division since 2007.

Look at last year, we pulled an Oh'fer in prime time last year (and has never won on Monday night. I don't know about Sunday night). And he is 8-8 at home over the last 2 years.

Top 100 players are difference makers and Schaub is not a difference maker. He is Chris Chandler 2.0.

crunch time, like against the skins and chiefs ???? he did pretty well then.

EllisUnit
06-28-2011, 08:37 PM
I am looking at his 4 years of work. 8-16 in the division is a huge short fall IMO.

losing all your prime time games is a huge short fall IMO.

31-33 over the last 4 years. (of course he missed half seasons in 07 & 08) So if you just look at his two complete seasons he is 15-17 as a full time starter going 8-8 at home. (we were 12-4 in 07 and 08)

And for every "come back" of Schaub's I can point to a choke. Like in 2007 when he rein-acted the mistake by the lake and got trounced by Cleveland. In 2009 when he threw the game losing INT to the Cards. Sprinkle in all the division loses and you have a typical Matt Schaub season.

Hey, I wanna like the guy, I do, but IMO Schaub is a pretender.

Not like the defense has given him any kind of help. Our offense is GOOD so is Schaub, with a mediocra defense he wont be thrown into pressure situations every game.

eriadoc
06-28-2011, 08:46 PM
Not like the defense has given him any kind of help. Our offense is GOOD so is Schaub, with a mediocra defense he wont be thrown into pressure situations every game.

And with a little more consistent play from him, it would be a different kind of pressure -- a back-and-forth slugfest instead of a come-from-behind miracle attempt.

b0ng
06-28-2011, 08:47 PM
Schaub puts up big passing numbers but when it comes down to winning in tight situations or when the prime time lights come on, or even when he plays at home, he fails.

He is 8-16 against the division since 2007.

Look at last year, we pulled an Oh'fer in prime time last year (and has never won on Monday night. I don't know about Sunday night). And he is 8-8 at home over the last 2 years.

Top 100 players are difference makers and Schaub is not a difference maker. He is Chris Chandler 2.0.

Let me tell you about Jason Babin, the difference maker. . .

EllisUnit
06-28-2011, 08:55 PM
And with a little more consistent play from him, it would be a different kind of pressure -- a back-and-forth slugfest instead of a come-from-behind miracle attempt.

i saw some BAD play calling that gave other teams leads. Not all on Schaub

Grams
06-28-2011, 09:47 PM
Matt gets us down the field with an opportunity to score most of the time. If the defense can't hold the other team from soring or the kicker can't hit a FG - or if the RB fumbles it is not his fault.

eriadoc
06-28-2011, 10:52 PM
i saw some BAD play calling that gave other teams leads. Not all on Schaub

Nah, I agree with that. But I'm just countering the segment of fans that think he's all that and a bag of snacks while overlooking how bad the offense (that he heads) is at times. If you get the credit, you have to take the blame too. Life ain't fair, but it pays a lot when you're a starting QB in the NFL.

DocBar
06-28-2011, 11:12 PM
Just think if we had a CB and/or safety as underrated as Schaub. We'd be SB champs!!

TEXANRED
06-28-2011, 11:20 PM
Not like the defense has given him any kind of help. Our offense is GOOD so is Schaub, with a mediocra defense he wont be thrown into pressure situations every game.

The Patriots were 25th in defense and went 14-2

TheMatrix31
06-29-2011, 08:28 AM
It's a tough thing to expect Schaub to lead us to victory every damn time. Obviously our defense puts the offense in a terrible position where we score and they give it right back. How about starting field position though? Our return teams hardly (if EVER) gave Schaub ANYTHING to work with. There's gotta be a stat on how many TD scoring drives Schaub had to lead while starting at his own 25 or further back.

Ole Miss Texan
06-29-2011, 09:35 AM
The Patriots were 25th in defense and went 14-2

No they weren't. The Patriots were 8th in the league in defense. We need to start using PPG as the measure and not yards.

As for your points earlier about Schaub's shortcomings... some really good insights (must spread rep). Our offense can be way too, bipolar, for lack of better words. Last year was just a bad year for our team so I can kind of see him not making that top 100 list based on last year alone. But then again McNabb was on there with only 5 wins and I'd take Schaub any day of the week over him. I don't think Schaub is the greatest QB ever but I really like him as the QB of our team and think he's got what it takes to get us where we need to go.

ATXtexanfan
06-29-2011, 11:28 AM
i'm with TEXANRED on this. there is nothing underrated about schaub and much to be desired. above average is what he is.

dalemurphy
06-29-2011, 12:30 PM
The Patriots were 25th in defense and went 14-2

Wait! Are you suggesting that Tom Brady is better than Matt Schaub? Really?

By the way, if the Texans finish 25th in total defense (yards allowed) but are in the top half of the league in turnovers and sacks, they'll definitely be in the playoffs!

WesmanTexanfan
06-29-2011, 01:43 PM
Schaub puts up big passing numbers but when it comes down to winning in tight situations or when the prime time lights come on, or even when he plays at home, he fails.

He is 8-16 against the division since 2007.

Look at last year, we pulled an Oh'fer in prime time last year (and has never won on Monday night. I don't know about Sunday night). And he is 8-8 at home over the last 2 years.

Top 100 players are difference makers and Schaub is not a difference maker. He is Chris Chandler 2.0.

come on now, you watch the games right? is it his fault a ball bounces of his reciever's knee, or our deffense cant swat a hail marry or hold a team scoreless with 1 minute left, is it his fault when the kicker misses game winning/tieing field goals or the running back fumbles on the goal line? Matt Schaub is clutch..... Everyone else...not so much

Rey
06-29-2011, 01:49 PM
Schaub is would not be easy to upgrade.

Ckw
06-29-2011, 01:59 PM
Sure, Schaub has choked in some games. But he also has been exceptional in crunch time in others. The Chiefs, Redskins, Packers, Dolphins, and almost the Ravens would all probably disagree that Schaub is a choker.

Double Barrel
06-29-2011, 03:59 PM
I don't think any QB who was a league leader in passing yards and has been to a ProBowl is underrated.

He plays for the Texans, and until the Texans actually win a playoff game, I don't expect much respect for them or their players* from anyone.

*AJ being the exception, of course

TEXANRED
06-29-2011, 04:27 PM
I don't think any QB who was a league leader in passing yards and has been to a ProBowl is underrated.

He plays for the Texans, and until the Texans actually win a playoff game, I don't expect much respect for them or their players* from anyone.

*AJ being the exception, of course

IMO I think Schaub benefits from having a receiver like AJ. In fact believe that AJ does for Schaub what Moss did for Culpepper.

Everyone thought Culpepper was an elite QB. Then he didn't have Moss to throw too and then Culpepper all of the sudden become trash?

Hell AJ is so good he had some of us fooled in thinking that Carr had potential.

HTown2ATX
06-29-2011, 04:37 PM
Here's my view. I think he is a fringe elite QB. He teeters between being elite and above average IMO.

I think he is a winner and I think we can win a SB with him now that he has proven to play a full season.

However, I pretty much expect him to throw 1 duck/INT per game. He just seems to give up gawd awful picks out of nowehere. So usually my hope is that the duck is thrown up early in the game rather than later so that when it is crunch time and the game is on the line, hopefully by my fandom brand of thinking, he won't throw a pick since he already had his requisit 1 INT that game....lol

He does lock onto to AJ way too much but I can't blame him for that when Walters doesn't shed coverage and JJ will drop stuff too much and OD was hurt.

So, there have been plenty of FAILs to go around the offense, but I think Schauby is a damn good QB at this point.

Double Barrel
06-29-2011, 04:43 PM
IMO I think Schaub benefits from having a receiver like AJ. In fact believe that AJ does for Schaub what Moss did for Culpepper.

Everyone thought Culpepper was an elite QB. Then he didn't have Moss to throw too and then Culpepper all of the sudden become trash?

Hell AJ is so good he had some of us fooled in thinking that Carr had potential.

Good points, man. It's hard to argue with the idea that AJ is going to elevate the game of whatever QB he's catching passes from, and like you said, he probably made more than one team think HWWNBN could be a solid NFL QB.

I'd rate Schaub in that Joe Flacco / Matt Ryan area. Solid QBs, but have not proven anything at this point beyond being good QBs.

Not top 10, but a case could be made for that 11-15 area, IMO.

TEXANRED
06-29-2011, 04:49 PM
Wait! Are you suggesting that Tom Brady is better than Matt Schaub? Really?

By the way, if the Texans finish 25th in total defense (yards allowed) but are in the top half of the league in turnovers and sacks, they'll definitely be in the playoffs!

Yes, Brady is better than Schaub. I have always felt that if you are talking winners and talking how to win championships then you should compare yourself to other champions and see how you stack up.

I hope Schaub is the man someday. I hope I hope I hope. I am definitely rooting for the guy. Buuut that being said he is a wanna be at the moment. He can't seem to play well when it's prime time. Big games he crumbles. A terrible division record.

Sure we could go on and on about the team around him but what about the Manning's who over come? The Brady's? The Brees'? Rodgers?

Even Josh Freeman, Matt Ryan, and Joe Flacco are better QB's.

Why do you think David Garrard just has his replacement drafted? Crumbles under the pressure down the stretch.

You could probably rattle off 15 starting QB's who are better than Schaub.

TEXANRED
06-29-2011, 04:57 PM
Good points, man. It's hard to argue with the idea that AJ is going to elevate the game of whatever QB he's catching passes from, and like you said, he probably made more than one team think HWWNBN could be a solid NFL QB.

I'd rate Schaub in that Joe Flacco / Matt Ryan area. Solid QBs, but have not proven anything at this point beyond being good QBs.

Not top 10, but a case could be made for that 11-15 area, IMO.

Last year really put a bad taste in my mouth when it comes to Schaub. We got ripped by the Cowboys, lost every prime time game, and went 4-4 at home.

Sure you could make a case for having a poor defense but the elite QB's can elevate their team. The Colts have always had a horrible defense and a poor run game but Manning has somehow had his team dominate for the last 12 years.

From a Fantasy Football aspect Schaub is a top 5 QB. But in real life I agree with you on the 11-15. Possibly 16-20.

dalemurphy
06-29-2011, 06:26 PM
Yes, Brady is better than Schaub. I have always felt that if you are talking winners and talking how to win championships then you should compare yourself to other champions and see how you stack up.

I hope Schaub is the man someday. I hope I hope I hope. I am definitely rooting for the guy. Buuut that being said he is a wanna be at the moment. He can't seem to play well when it's prime time. Big games he crumbles. A terrible division record.

Sure we could go on and on about the team around him but what about the Manning's who over come? The Brady's? The Brees'? Rodgers?

Even Josh Freeman, Matt Ryan, and Joe Flacco are better QB's.

Why do you think David Garrard just has his replacement drafted? Crumbles under the pressure down the stretch.

You could probably rattle off 15 starting QB's who are better than Schaub.

I can only rattle off 7 that are clearly better:

Rodgers
Manning
Brady
Rivers
Brees
Ben Roth
M.Ryan

Beyond that, it would depend on the system, health, and other factors as to which I might prefer of the next group:

Schaub
Vick
Romo
Bradford
Eli Manning
Freeman

Flacco? No Way!

beerlover
06-29-2011, 06:49 PM
I would like to see a season first. Then let his play speak for itself. He has a lot going for him if it does?

Second Honeymoon
06-29-2011, 06:51 PM
I can only rattle off 7 that are clearly better:

Rodgers
Manning
Brady
Rivers
Brees
Ben Roth
M.Ryan

Beyond that, it would depend on the system, health, and other factors as to which I might prefer of the next group:

Schaub
Vick
Romo
Bradford
Eli Manning
Freeman

Flacco? No Way!

totally agree, although I would probably go ahead and include Flacco in the 2nd tier. His play was not that sharp last year though so I can understand why you would be hesitant to do so.

BigBull17
06-29-2011, 06:57 PM
A's long as Gary and Rick smith are in charge, I expect to lose more than we win

BigBull17
06-29-2011, 09:45 PM
Oops. Please delete

Double Barrel
06-30-2011, 11:21 AM
I can only rattle off 7 that are clearly better:

Rodgers
Manning
Brady
Rivers
Brees
Ben Roth
M.Ryan

Beyond that, it would depend on the system, health, and other factors as to which I might prefer of the next group:

Schaub
Vick
Romo
Bradford
Eli Manning
Freeman

Flacco? No Way!

Flacco threw 25 TDs/10 INTs last year to Schaub's 24/12. I don't know how you can say "No Way!" when Flacco is 3-2 in the playoffs in his first three years in the league and Schaub has never played a postseason game. It's relative to the teams they play for, of course, but I'm not seeing the clear distinction that you appear to perceive. They are very similar QBs, IMO.

But, your list is definitely interesting, because I agree about your 'elite 7'. It could be argued that Schaub is on the cusp of that lower top 10, because who do you put ahead of him? Maybe Vick and E. Manning - arguable - but I'm not sure who else is obvious with who they are right now. (You can argue against Vick, but NFL players themselves voted him into the top 20 of 2011. That's a statement.)

gary
06-30-2011, 11:42 AM
Bradford and Freeman need receiver help and they have not reached their peak yet while Schaub pretty much has so keep that in mind.

HoustonFrog
06-30-2011, 12:48 PM
Flacco threw 25 TDs/10 INTs last year to Schaub's 24/12. I don't know how you can say "No Way!" when Flacco is 3-2 in the playoffs in his first three years in the league and Schaub has never played a postseason game. It's relative to the teams they play for, of course, but I'm not seeing the clear distinction that you appear to perceive. They are very similar QBs, IMO.

But, your list is definitely interesting, because I agree about your 'elite 7'. It could be argued that Schaub is on the cusp of that lower top 10, because who do you put ahead of him? Maybe Vick and E. Manning - arguable - but I'm not sure who else is obvious with who they are right now. (You can argue against Vick, but NFL players themselves voted him into the top 20 of 2011. That's a statement.)

All of This. I'd even maybe put Romo's stats above him when you actually look at his numbers..despite his playoff and late season failures they rank with tops in the league over the years.... and getting to the playoffs. I think Schaub is right in the mix if he cut the horrible mistakes.

gary
06-30-2011, 12:54 PM
All of This. I'd even maybe put Romo's stats above him when you actually look at his numbers..despite his playoff and late season failures they rank with tops in the league over the years.... and getting to the playoffs. I think Schaub is right in the mix if he cut the horrible mistakes.Romo still has a better chance to win a ring before Schaub does.

The Pencil Neck
06-30-2011, 01:22 PM
Romo still has a better chance to win a ring before Schaub does.

I disagree with that. I think their chances are pretty even and Schaub might even be slightly ahead.

gary
06-30-2011, 01:26 PM
I disagree with that. I think their chances are pretty even and Schaub might even be slightly ahead.This ought to be the year for Gary we'll see but it is one too many in my book.

HoustonFrog
06-30-2011, 01:37 PM
I disagree with that. I think their chances are pretty even and Schaub might even be slightly ahead.

Disagree. The Texans have still shown no ability to get over the hump under Gary. The Cowboys still have the talent that got them their first playoff win in awhile. They showed they were willing to play under Garrett. Texans also starting a new D. It isn't too far off but I'd put Dallas more as being slighly ahead. But neither here nor there I was just saying above that I think Romo has an edge on Schaub right now but all if it can change.

TEXANRED
06-30-2011, 01:53 PM
IMO and in no particular order:

Manning
Brady
Brees
Rodgers
Rothisrapist
Rivers
Cutler
Ryan
Freeman
Flacco
Other Manning
Bradford (As a rookie he stepped in and carried a really bad Rams team that went 1-15 to 7-9.)

The company Schaub keeps:

Schaub
Sanchez
Garrard
Castle
Romo
McNabb (out of his prime McNabb. McNabb in his prime was head and shoulders above Schaub.)
Hasselbeck

TEXANRED
06-30-2011, 02:00 PM
Disagree. The Texans have still shown no ability to get over the hump under Gary. The Cowboys still have the talent that got them their first playoff win in awhile. They showed they were willing to play under Garrett. Texans also starting a new D. It isn't too far off but I'd put Dallas more as being slighly ahead. But neither here nor there I was just saying above that I think Romo has an edge on Schaub right now but all if it can change.

I am certainly not trying to start a Houston -vs- Dallas thing here, however, Dallas is way over rated on the amount of talent they have. Also they went 4-4 under Garret so I wouldn't start banging that gong just yet.

And we may be starting a new defense but the guy we have has a consistent proven track record of turning teams around in year 1.

Rey
06-30-2011, 02:06 PM
Dallas is a better team overall than the Houston Texans.

If you need evidence of that, look at the head to head match-up from last year. We were outclassed in every phase of the game.

Now any team can win on any given Sunday, but you don't get beat like that and then claim you are the better team. Makes 0 sense.

gary
06-30-2011, 02:11 PM
I honestly think McNabb still has gas left but with who I don't know. The Chiefs maybe.

HoustonFrog
06-30-2011, 02:20 PM
I am certainly not trying to start a Houston -vs- Dallas thing here, however, Dallas is way over rated on the amount of talent they have. Also they went 4-4 under Garret so I wouldn't start banging that gong just yet.

And we may be starting a new defense but the guy we have has a consistent proven track record of turning teams around in year 1.

They were 5-3 under Garrett...after being 1-7 and having no edge. The one win was a pantsing of Houston. It is the same talent that won a playoff game the year before and had multiple Pro-Bowlers on both sides. Is it as good as people made them out to be?..no. But they still have talent overall. But as you said, I don't want this to be Dal v Hou...I was just putting Romo a little ahead of Schaub.

TEXANRED
06-30-2011, 02:34 PM
They were 5-3 under Garrett...after being 1-7 and having no edge. The one win was a pantsing of Houston. It is the same talent that won a playoff game the year before and had multiple Pro-Bowlers on both sides. Is it as good as people made them out to be?..no. But they still have talent overall. But as you said, I don't want this to be Dal v Hou...I was just putting Romo a little ahead of Schaub.

I would give the edge to Romo due to having led his team to the playoffs.

Other than that they both put up big numbers, get people to talk about them and leave their fans disappointed at the end of the year.

And Romo does date the hot blondes.

I would also say that Romo shines on the big stage and doesn't shrink from it like Schaub does.

gary
06-30-2011, 04:18 PM
I don't think there really is a bad QB in the NFL. Do you have the elite? Sure, but none of them would ever be a starting QB in this league if they were just plain bad.

DocBar
06-30-2011, 04:33 PM
I don't think there really is a bad QB in the NFL. Do you have the elite? Sure, but none of them would ever be a starting QB in this league if they were just plain bad.That becomes purely objective. Define good. Does Buffalo, Arizona, Carolina or Miami have a good QB that can make most of the throws with reasonable accuracy and does he make good decisions at the LOS and when attempting a pass?

DocBar
06-30-2011, 04:39 PM
I would give the edge to Romo due to having led his team to the playoffs.

Other than that they both put up big numbers, get people to talk about them and leave their fans disappointed at the end of the year.

And Romo does date the hot blondes.

I would also say that Romo shines on the big stage and doesn't shrink from it like Schaub does. Romo shining on the big stage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRn5b4BJyiI)? The last BIG stage he was on was when he fumbled the snap on a go ahead FG in the playoffs. He's been pretty well shrunk since then. He gets more press because he plays for the Cowboys and usually has a TON of supporting talent. I would put Schaub (http://www.nfl.com/player/mattschaub/2505982/profile) and Romo (http://www.nfl.com/player/tonyromo/2505354/profile) about even with maybe a slight edge to Schaub cuz I'm a homer.

gary
06-30-2011, 04:41 PM
That becomes purely objective. Define good. Does Buffalo, Arizona, Carolina or Miami have a good QB that can make most of the throws with reasonable accuracy and does he make good decisions at the LOS and when attempting a pass?I actually think Buffalo has a decent QB believe it or not. The other three need upgrades for sure. But, how many just flat out horrid QB are there?

DocBar
06-30-2011, 04:56 PM
I actually think Buffalo has a decent QB believe it or not. The other three need upgrades for sure. But, how many just flat out horrid QB are there?Fitzgerald might be a good QB. Hard to say with the turd of a team he's surrounded by. A case can be argued that Henne (http://www.nfl.com/player/chadhenne/252/profile) in Miami, Anderson in Arizona and Smith (http://www.nfl.com/player/alexsmith/2506340/profile) in SF are flat out horrid. I, personally think that Anderson (http://www.nfl.com/player/derekanderson/2506546/profile) IS horrid. There again, it becomes a matter of opinion and speculation.
These guys I mentioned are definitely NOT "average" NFL caliber QB's. Anderson puts up numbers almost as bad as JaMarcus Russell and AS bad as HWWWNM. Pretty horrid IMO.

gary
06-30-2011, 05:07 PM
Fitzgerald might be a good QB. Hard to say with the turd of a team he's surrounded by. A case can be argued that Henne (http://www.nfl.com/player/chadhenne/252/profile) in Miami, Anderson in Arizona and Smith (http://www.nfl.com/player/alexsmith/2506340/profile) in SF are flat out horrid. I, personally think that Anderson (http://www.nfl.com/player/derekanderson/2506546/profile) IS horrid. There again, it becomes a matter of opinion and speculation.
These guys I mentioned are definitely NOT "average" NFL caliber QB's. Anderson puts up numbers almost as bad as JaMarcus Russell and AS bad as HWWWNM. Pretty horrid IMO.So maybe two or three or thirty two still not very many though. Not arguing just saying. And, how much of this is all their fault? We don't know that either.

DocBar
06-30-2011, 05:17 PM
So maybe two or three or thirty two still not very many though. Not arguing just saying. And, how much of this is all their fault? We don't know that either.That's the million dollar question to me. Look at some of the so-so QB's that have won titles by having a great team around them, then look at the GREAT QB's that never won one. I guess that's why it's called a team sport. At least none of the current QB's are as bad as Russell was. Talk about the benchmark of flat out BAD!
EDIT: I didn't mention this guy (http://www.nfl.com/player/jimmyclausen/497108/profile) cuz it just isn't right to pick on rookies, especially when they are put in no-win situations. Carolina did him no favors at all.

gary
06-30-2011, 05:22 PM
That's the million dollar question to me. Look at some of the so-so QB's that have won titles by having a great team around them, then look at the GREAT QB's that never won one. I guess that's why it's called a team sport. At least none of the current QB's are as bad as Russell was. Talk about the benchmark of flat out BAD!I know that's right.

b0ng
07-01-2011, 01:53 AM
So maybe two or three or thirty two still not very many though. Not arguing just saying. And, how much of this is all their fault? We don't know that either.

There are going to be plenty of teams with terrible QB situations. Arizona, Miami, Tennessee, Minnesota, SF, Cincy (Palmer retirement pending), Seattle, Washington, and Carolina. Then there's teams with just bad situations but could get better like Jacksonville, Buffalo, some might put the Jets here, possibly the Browns if McCoy shrivels, Oakland more than likely will not have good QB play.

All in all there's about 10 - 15 guys who's talent level ranges from once in a generation to pretty good and after that there's a pretty steep drop off and some teams are talking about starting career back up guys like John Beck. And this is after a draft where like 6 or 7 QB's went in the first two rounds and at least a few of them might be starting for their respective teams. A few free agents like Hasselbeck and McNabb will most certainly land a starters job but there are some teams that are probably going to take a hard look at guys like Vince Young and Matt Leinart as potential starters.

At least none of the current QB's are as bad as Russell was. Talk about the benchmark of flat out BAD!EDIT: I didn't mention this guy cuz it just isn't right to pick on rookies, especially when they are put in no-win situations. Carolina did him no favors at all.


I don't know, Rusty Smith and Trent Edwards put up what was probably some of the worst QB performances by a team not named the Texans that I've ever seen and I know that Russell has played us a few times in his career. Russell did soak up quite a bit of money though while he sucked out loud for a solid 3 or so seasons.

As far as Newton goes, he's probably not going to be the only rookie starter from week 1 this year. I think pointing out that teams are starting rookies is fair when evaluating the overall talent at the QB position in the league.

DocBar
07-01-2011, 04:21 AM
There are going to be plenty of teams with terrible QB situations. Arizona, Miami, Tennessee, Minnesota, SF, Cincy (Palmer retirement pending), Seattle, Washington, and Carolina. Then there's teams with just bad situations but could get better like Jacksonville, Buffalo, some might put the Jets here, possibly the Browns if McCoy shrivels, Oakland more than likely will not have good QB play.

All in all there's about 10 - 15 guys who's talent level ranges from once in a generation to pretty good and after that there's a pretty steep drop off and some teams are talking about starting career back up guys like John Beck. And this is after a draft where like 6 or 7 QB's went in the first two rounds and at least a few of them might be starting for their respective teams. A few free agents like Hasselbeck and McNabb will most certainly land a starters job but there are some teams that are probably going to take a hard look at guys like Vince Young and Matt Leinart as potential starters.



I don't know, Rusty Smith and Trent Edwards put up what was probably some of the worst QB performances by a team not named the Texans that I've ever seen and I know that Russell has played us a few times in his career. Russell did soak up quite a bit of money though while he sucked out loud for a solid 3 or so seasons.

As far as Newton goes, he's probably not going to be the only rookie starter from week 1 this year. I think pointing out that teams are starting rookies is fair when evaluating the overall talent at the QB position in the league.

I didn't mention any of those guys because they aren't "starters" for any NFL team. If we're talking sucky back ups, Matt Leinart comes to mind....

gary
07-01-2011, 10:15 AM
Colt is not going to get any worse than he was last season he is either going to move forward or stay the same and Kerry should hold the water for the Titans until Jake Locker is ready to go. Again, is everything entirely their fault? How many of them have the skills to be better but don't have the team around and then they don't put in the effort because of that? There are bad and good ones for sure. How good or bad would Schaub be without AJ? All I am saying is there are many factors which tie into QB play. Which begs the question, do good receivers make the QB better or vice verse? Is it some factors of both running hand and hand? I think it is. Coaching is just as large a part of QB and receiver play as well. How good is the defense you face and also how good is your own defense in regards to stopping their opponent? All of that and more could make any QB better or worse than they really are but some great overall team might make an average QB look special or the bad QB could make his team worse than they really are.

b0ng
07-01-2011, 01:17 PM
Colt is not going to get any worse than he was last season he is either going to move forward or stay the same

How can you say that with such certainty? He doesn't even have to regress he could get injured.

and Kerry should hold the water for the Titans until Jake Locker is ready to go. Again, is everything entirely their fault?

Kerry Collins is not a good quarterback, or even an average one. How is them and what they did with Young as a QB not their fault?

How many of them have the skills to be better but don't have the team around and then they don't put in the effort because of that?

A good qb who doesn't put in the effort is a bad QB. Bradford, Stafford, and Ryan all walked into what were probably looked at as terrible situations and have at least been "not the problem" on their respective teams.

There are bad and good ones for sure. How good or bad would Schaub be without AJ? All I am saying is there are many factors which tie into QB play.

There is still a lot of really bad QB play in the NFL. Unless 2 or 3 of the rookies this year blow up you may have more than half the teams having a starting QB that they aren't actively looking to replace. And that's a gigantic maybe.


Which begs the question, do good receivers make the QB better or vice verse? Is it some factors of both running hand and hand? I think it is. Coaching is just as large a part of QB and receiver play as well. How good is the defense you face and also how good is your own defense in regards to stopping their opponent? All of that and more could make any QB better or worse than they really are but some great overall team might make an average QB look special or the bad QB could make his team worse than they really are.

In terms of QB play strictly a really good QB is going to make bad receivers look better than they are, and is going to make the run game probably have an easier time running against 6 and 7 in the box. I think Schaub would be okay if AJ weren't around anymore, he wouldn't put up as many yards, but I think his completion % would still be above 62 or 63 and I think that he can still throw for more than 12 TD's without AJ.

DocBar
07-01-2011, 01:33 PM
QB is the one position where the term intangible really comes into play. We've all seen the "prototypical" passer with all the physical tools in the world fall flat on his face while the "lesser" athlete with the intangibles has come in and dominated the game. Joe Montana, Bernie Kosar, Doug Flutie, Dan Marino, Dan Fouts etc. None were particularly good athletes but they were all great QB's(yes I think Flutie was a great QB. Never got a fair shot).

gary
07-01-2011, 03:26 PM
How can you say that with such certainty? He doesn't even have to regress he could get injured.



Kerry Collins is not a good quarterback, or even an average one. How is them and what they did with Young as a QB not their fault?



A good qb who doesn't put in the effort is a bad QB. Bradford, Stafford, and Ryan all walked into what were probably looked at as terrible situations and have at least been "not the problem" on their respective teams.



There is still a lot of really bad QB play in the NFL. Unless 2 or 3 of the rookies this year blow up you may have more than half the teams having a starting QB that they aren't actively looking to replace. And that's a gigantic maybe.




In terms of QB play strictly a really good QB is going to make bad receivers look better than they are, and is going to make the run game probably have an easier time running against 6 and 7 in the box. I think Schaub would be okay if AJ weren't around anymore, he wouldn't put up as many yards, but I think his completion % would still be above 62 or 63 and I think that he can still throw for more than 12 TD's without AJ.Kerry is average and as old as he is decent/good enough to hold the fort down for Locker. Mike Holmgren is going to give his boy Colt every chance in the world to succeed but he might get injured and so could Matt Schaub. You listed QB's who aren't the issues on their team but their teams have all gotten better over recent years both by adding free agents and drafting well but teams like the Raiders, Browns, and a few others have not really progressed over recent years and have pretty much stayed the course so those QB's might not be as motivated to go the extra mile like the ones you listed. If any QB is cut and he is known to have a bad attitude and does not try hard enough then he and he only runs the risk of maybe never ever getting another chance in the NFL again. That is why no matter who drafts a QB he should give his team his all because he does not know when he'll have to rely on his reputation around the NFL in order to just receive another chance. There have been many players who have gotten a chance with a brand new team and made the most of it and not just QB's either but all different players.

Ole Miss Texan
07-01-2011, 03:32 PM
QB is the one position where the term intangible really comes into play. We've all seen the "prototypical" passer with all the physical tools in the world fall flat on his face while the "lesser" athlete with the intangibles has come in and dominated the game. Joe Montana, Bernie Kosar, Doug Flutie, Dan Marino, Dan Fouts etc. None were particularly good athletes but they were all great QB's(yes I think Flutie was a great QB. Never got a fair shot).
You can put Peyton Manning and Tom Brady in that category, the two best QBs of the decade.

DocBar
07-01-2011, 06:15 PM
You can put Peyton Manning and Tom Brady in that category, the two best QBs of the decade.You're absolutely right. I can't believe I forgot those two. I must be reliving the 80's after looking at the names I posted.:choke:

Texanmike02
07-02-2011, 08:08 AM
Here's the problem with the "underrated" argument. It is probably bigger than that. The whole "statistics" vs "results" argument. If you are pointing to the times that Schaub has "choked", you are pointing to a few performances in history. The truth is he hasn't had the opportunity to "choke". He has played in some close games. All players make those plays some of the time and "choke" some of the time, but he hasn't played in a "big" game yet. You cannot discount his performance in either circumstance. I understand you can use statistics to say anything and people are wary of them, but you can also use them to tell the truth. Before you look at the statistics, you have to ignore the data and come up with a legitimate way to tell the story. You must come up with a set of criteria independent of the result. It is possible to use statistics to remove your personal bias, which is the important thing.

I saw an article that had 14 examples from playoff games in which Kobe had missed a game tying or winning shot int he final 20 seconds of the game. I don't think anyone would argue that Kobe is clutch. Statistically though, he has hit around 50% of those shots.

If you want to see if Schaub is "clutch", you might consider looking at his QB rating when he is tied or behind in the last five minutes of a game? I don't know what the parameter is but if someone argues "I know what I saw, he's a choke artist", is that really a point for discussion? Of course you can't get wrapped up in statistics and ignore the results on the field... but you have to account for the team factor. For years, "ERA" was the standard by which pitchers were measured. Moneyball taught us about WHIP and trying to factor in the team around the pitcher (and allowed a low-budget A's team to stay competitive). How many playoff wins did Ryan have again? I think in this case it is a bad idea to consider individual performances in a specific game (or 3) because you approach the game with some sort of bias.

There were some arguments about Carr too. He had great completion percentages but was throwing the ball 3 or 4 yards. Schaub doesn't have either of those problems. You cannot disregard his poor performances but you must evaluate that to how he plays in "non pressure situations". I'm not telling how you must approach the situation, I'm telling you how you must approach the situation if you want to do it with as little bias as possible. Personally, I don't really have a dog in this fight and have no ideas what the numbers would bare. I just know that I have seen him throw bad passes (just like Manning v Saints in SB) and great passes. If you don't evaluate the statistics somehow, there is not much I can approach it with.


Mike

Rey
07-02-2011, 12:58 PM
Whether Matt is clutch or not is not even relevant to me.

He's good enough to win games when people around him are doing their jobs.

However he isn't the elite level qb that is going to consistently win games despite the circumstances around him. He's probably never going to be able to escape pressure on a consistent basis and make plays. He doesn't have the strongest arm. But he's smart, knows what he's doing and he's confident in his abilities.

Is he underrated? That's not a good question because it is subjective. Some people might have him as overrated. It really just depends on what your view of him is.

He's a really good qb. Until he wins a ring that's probably what he'll always be.

HoustonFrog
07-05-2011, 08:48 AM
Romo shining on the big stage (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRn5b4BJyiI)? The last BIG stage he was on was when he fumbled the snap on a go ahead FG in the playoffs. He's been pretty well shrunk since then. He gets more press because he plays for the Cowboys and usually has a TON of supporting talent. I would put Schaub (http://www.nfl.com/player/mattschaub/2505982/profile) and Romo (http://www.nfl.com/player/tonyromo/2505354/profile) about even with maybe a slight edge to Schaub cuz I'm a homer.

This is why I have Romo above...this plus the playoffs. He did win a playoff game. From Rick Gosselin before last season

http://www.dallasnews.com/sports/dallas-cowboys/headlines/20100707-Gosselin-Cowboys-quarterback-Tony-Romo-938.ece

Romo went to the Pro Bowl as a first-year starter with the Cowboys in 2006. He set a franchise record for touchdown passes in 2008 with 36, then established the franchise mark for passing yards in 2009 with 4,483.

Romo finally has thrown the necessary 1,500 passes to qualify for the NFL career passing list and debuts in 2010 as the third most-efficient quarterback in history - ahead of Peyton Manning , Kurt Warner , Tom Brady , Joe Montana and Drew Brees.

The top 10 passers in NFL history entering the season. It's based on their efficiency rating (a formula that includes yards, touchdowns, interceptions and completion percentage). A quarterback needs to throw 1,500 career passes to qualify: Rank, quarterback, Rating 1. Steve Young 96.8 2. Philip Rivers 95.8 3. Tony Romo 95.6 4. Peyton Manning 95.2 5. Kurt Warner 93.7 6. Tom Brady 93.3 7. Joe Montana 92.3 8. Drew Brees 91.9 9. Ben Roethlisberger 91.7 10. Chad Pennington 90.1

leebigeztx
07-07-2011, 12:24 AM
Schaub is a good qb who needs a lot of help to succeed. What really bother me is he can't throw an out route and he plays better when there is no pressure. He's like a volume shooter in basketball. If foster is running well and schaub is limited to 20 passes, he's around 50% and will be inconsistent all day. When the game is kinda away and they have to pass, he will throw for 65% on 35 throws and look great. When you're an elite qb or want to be on, you have to be just as effecient on the same limited throws.