Rumor from Denver

[celts32]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Well, let's look at last year's playoff teams and see how those "non-average" QB's were acquired - Had those teams made drastic moves to get to the top of the draft in order to reach up and grab QB? hmmm.....

Philly: Vick (Not Drafted By Team)
Green Bay: A. Rodgers (1st Rnd/24th pick)
Chicago: Cutler (Not Drafted By Team)
Atlanta: Ryan (1st Rnd/3rd Pick)
New Orleans: Brees (2nd Rnd/1st pick)
Seattle - Hasselback (Not Drafted By Team)
New England - Brady (6th Round)
New York Jets - Sanchez (1st Rnd/5th pick)
Indianapolis - P. Manning (1st Rnd/1st pick)
Baltimore - Flacco (1st Round/18 pick)
Pittsburg - Roethlesburger (1st Rnd/11th pick)
Kansas City - Cassell (Not Drafted By Team)

In addition, I am going to throw out a couple other teams that have been solid winners recently or are otherwise relevant to this analysis:

New York Giants: E. Manning (1st Rnd/1st Pick)
San Diego: P. Rivers (1st Rnd/4th Pick)
Dallas (bear with me folks!): T. Romo (undrafted)

First, I want to look at the “Not Drafted By Team” and "Non-First Rounder" categories:

Brady: Let’s start with the guy who wrecks the curve. Look, guys like this happen once in a blue moon. At the same time, Brady had huge advantages by coming to the Patriots. Remember, his first year they were a playoff team with Bledsoe at QB. That said, you simply can’t base your team’s future by betting that lightning will strike. BUT, if you build a solid team, when lightning does strike, that's when you have the makings of a dynasty.

Brees: New Orleans spent how much on one of the most prolific passers of recent years? Oh, that’s right. He was a free agent. On top of that, when Brees was drafted, San Diego actually traded back from taking Vick and then Brees fell into their lap in the second round after they got Tomlinson in the 1st – let’s see, trade down from a drafting highly rated QB, draft amazing RB who will take heat off rookie QB and get more picks.

Vick: Pretty unique situation. Regardless of baggage, and realizing there is a lot of back and forth on his ability to “Win the Big One”, it is pretty clear that a “Franchise QB” fell into their lap who was able to take advantage of all the draft picks spent on “supporting cast” players.

Cutler: I think you have to say the jury is still out on this one. For this analysis, not sure Chicago’s acquisition of him is relevant as he was a known commodity going to a mediocre team for a high cost. Will he be worth what Chicago gave up for him? I doubt it.

Cassell: Much like Cutler, the jury is still out on this one. He didn’t come cheap and he didn’t do much. But he is younger than Cutler. Less of a known quantity and Chiefs were in a state of transition when he was acquired. At the same time, prior to obtaining Cassel, the Chiefs had some fairly good drafts, obtaining a lot of quality young players.

Romo: Look, I don’t particularly like the guy. I certainly don’t think he is an all time elite QB like Manning or Brady. I am not even convinced he is a “short-term” elite QB like Rivers or Brees is right now. BUT, he is a solid starting QB and, w/ a good team around him, he could probably (gagging as I say this) win a SB. Again, he cost them nothing. As with us, the ‘pukes big problem is their O-Line which they ignored (like us) for years. Unlike us, they found a (quasi) starting QB and didn’t trade the farm to get him. (McNabb, Campbell)

Hasselback: umm, okay, whatever … moving on.

Okay, let’s look at those first rounders and, yes, there are a lot. But wait --- did these playoff teams spend tons of picks to get those 1st Round QB's? The Magic 8 Ball says “Very Doubtful”.

Sanchez: The Jets traded their 17th place pick, their 2nd round pick and 3 back-ups to move to the 5th spot. When they did it, they had a team that had been to the play-offs three years earlier and was 9-7 the prior year. Additionally, as it turned out, in Sanchez's rookie year, the Jets had a punishing ground attack, a fantastic O-line and a killer defense. Even so, Sanchez has not exactly lit up the world. In recent years, he is your best case scenario for trading up. I would humbly suggest, we are not nearly as good as the 2009 Jets were when they drafted him and, further, he has yet to show he can take this team to the promised land rather than be the guy who simply drives the bus.

P. Manning: You say he is the best example of a QB transforming a team. Okay. I grant you he does so. BUT - very simply, did the Colts trade to get him? Nope. He landed in their laps and they built around him. On the other hand, the same year Indi drafted Manning, San Diego spent big time draft points to move up one slot (trading two first round picks, a second round pick, and four time Pro Bowler Eric Metcalf) to move from the 3rd to the 2nd pick to grab that all-time great bust (and absolute proof of my argument against trading up) Ryan Leaf. A move that crippled their team for the near future.

Flacco: Again, a solid team builds defense and offense line through smart drafting and, when a solid QB prospect falls to them, they take him. Does anyone doubt the Ravens could win it all with Flacco?

A. Rodgers: Green Bay drafts QB’s well. They take’em where they can get them and trade’em away for picks. Yes, he had time behind Farve. But you know what? They knew Farve time was coming to an end and waited for the right opportunity. No panic mode drafting - Just keep drafting solid supporting cast and, again, when a highly rated QB falls to you, grab him.

Ryan: Solid pick. A team two years from the Michael Vick trauma and one year from the Bobby Petrino debacle. In terms of picks, he was just the right guy in the right place and it worked for them. Given the flux in Atlanta at the time of his pick, I am not sure he really adds anything to either of our positions except that you just don't know when a quality QB’s will “happen” (they were a mediocre team that had a bad year, creating the lucky break of being in the right place at the right time). In light of that, you just don’t need to go reaching for QB's.

OKAY, THAT BRINGS US TO THE 2004 DRAFT. Three QB’s all solid. One team traded up and won a SB, one team traded down and got a truly franchise QB but no SB, and one team stuck to its guns waited for a QB and has since won two SB’s, been to a third and is easily posed to win more.

The Trade DOWN -- Rivers: Yes, he was a first rounder – BUT San Diego traded down, to get him and got S. Merriman and N. Kaeding out of the deal. He hasn’t won a SB, but is there any doubt that he is an elite QB? In getting Rivers, San Diego not only got a franchise QB by trading down, they passed up the highest rated QB in the draft. Which brings us to …

The Trade UP – E. Manning: [Yes, SD drafted Manning but it was clearly a “raft and trade scenario”] Hard to knock a team that grabs a SB winning QB (but don’t worry, I will). In 2004, Eli was the top rated QB coming out of college – easily. The Giants wanted him and sold the farm to get him. As you now argue, they believed he was “the guy” and went after him. Contrary to what we have in place, however, the Giants were a solid team before he showed up. It’s not like Eli transformed the team. Yes, he threw the miracle pass - But what got that team to the SB? The Giants amazing D-Line which featured multiple draft picks from recent years. And finally ....

The Non-Trade: Roethlesburger: In the years leading up to 2004, the Steelers had won 6 (03), 10 (02) and 13 (01) games. In addition, they had Bettis and Hines Ward. Unfortunately, they had a retread XFL player at QB (Tommy Maddox). So, with several highly rated QB’s did they go chasing anyone? Nope. They had a solid team and let the QB come to them.

I WOULD CONCEDE that Eli is a solid QB. The Giants gave up a lot to get him. They did exactly what you suggest we do now. BUT - Let me ask you something, if you had your choice today – Would you take Manning, Rivers or Roethlesburger? Or, better yet and more accurately, would you take (1) Manning; (2) Roethlesburger; or (3) Rivers and Kaeding & the past 4 years of Merriman? I suggest that, in any reasonable poll, Eli is the last choice. Further, and more importantly, which of these teams are built for longer term success? Again, I think the Giants rank 3rd.

IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS, only one team that was in the play-offs last year (the Jets) traded up to get a highly rated rookie QB and Sanchez has a long way to go (IMHO) before I would classify him as more than "the driver of the bus". The Jets often won despite Sanchez, rarely because of him.

MY POINT through all of this (yes, I get there eventually) is that the best teams in the league didn’t reach for QB’s or trade away lots of picks. They built solid teams and let the QB position come to them. The Patriots, the Steelers, Ravens, Green Bay, San Diego, New Orleans, Philadelphia all have franchise QB’s b/c they created a team where a good QB could thrive.

First off let me say that you did a real nice job on this post. I think you gave examples of teams finding diffferent ways to get a franchise QB. however, I dont think I ever said trading up was the only way to get. What I do know is that I am 39 years old and fan for about 34 years and I am still waiting to see a franchise QB fall into the Redskins lap. I think we will just agree to disagree.

One thing though...didnt Baltimore trade up to get Flacco?

[SmootSmack]

Yes they did...this after trading up for Boller failed on them

[Dirtbag59]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

Yes they did...this after trading up for Boller failed on them

Say what you want about Lockers accuracy but at least he was over 50% for 3 years. In 3 years at Cal Boller had 2 years throwing under 50%. Of course he still threw for 28 TD's against 10 Int's his last year but still. Plus Billick lost his QB mojo after leaving Minnesota.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Dirtbag59

Say what you want about Lockers accuracy but at least he was over 50% for 3 years. In 3 years at Cal Boller had 2 years throwing under 50%. Of course he still threw for 28 TD's against 10 Int's his last year but still. Plus Billick lost his QB mojo after leaving Minnesota.

Did you hear Billick the other day talking about Boller? It was pretty interesting, he basically said they kept making excuses for Boller leading up to the draft to convince themselves he was the guy to take because they wanted to take a QB.

Easy to say in hindsight, but I never-even in college-saw what the big deal about Boller was. I thought the Ravens were making a big mistake in drafting him, and an even bigger one in trading up for him.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

.... Easy to say in hindsight, but I never-even in college-saw what the big deal about Boller was. I thought the Ravens were making a big mistake in drafting him, and an even bigger one in trading up for him.

I just can't think of the last time trading up in the draft for a QB ever paid off in a really transformational way. Like I said, not sure Eli counts but will give you that it's debatable. Certainly not Sanchez.

Boller, Losman, Quinn, Campbell. All trade-ups that just didn't pan out and cost each team youth and talent at other positions.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

First off let me say that you did a real nice job on this post. I think you gave examples of teams finding diffferent ways to get a franchise QB. however, I dont think I ever said trading up was the only way to get.

First, Thanks. Second - To be clear, it seemed to me you were saying that, with our roster in its current condition, it was an acceptable and even advisable strategy to trade up in order to get a highly rated QB that Shanahan thought was perfect for his system. My point was to say that, historically, this is not something that the consistent winners do (i.e. Packers, Patriots, Eagles, Steelers, Saints, San Diego, Ravens (they actually traded down - see below)) and that chasing after potential "Franchise QB's" in the draft has not been a particularly successful strategy even for good teams (i.e Jets, Giants) and could be disasterous (i.e. Ryan Leaf).

Originally Posted by celts32

What I do know is that I am 39 years old and fan for about 34 years and I am still waiting to see a franchise QB fall into the Redskins lap. I think we will just agree to disagree.

Fair enough. I have been a fan for 39 years and would agree that, I too, am still waiting for that Franchise QB. BUT - Didn't we win 3 Super Bowls with a CFL reject, a USFL reject and a 4th round project - All of whom had solid supporting cast players? FURTHER, since 2000, when have we had a team or team culture in which a good QB would thrive?

Originally Posted by celts32

One thing though...didnt Baltimore trade up to get Flacco?

Oops! I did miss the Flacco trade scenario. Actually, however, they first traded down. The Ravens had the 8th spot in the draft and switched with Jacksonsville to the 26th spot, gaining two 3rd rounders in the process. THEN they traded up to the 18th spot giving up the 26th pick, one of the 3rd's, and a 6th rounder. So ultimately, they traded the 8th pick and a 6th rounder for the 18th pick and a 3rd rounder. If we could pull that off with the 10th pick and get someone like Locker in the process, I would be fine with that.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

First, Thanks. Second - To be clear, it seemed to me you were saying that, with our roster in its current condition, it was an acceptable and even advisable strategy to trade up in order to get a highly rated QB that Shanahan thought was perfect for his system. My point was to say that, historically, this is not something that the consistent winners do (i.e. Packers, Patriots, Eagles, Steelers, Saints, San Diego, Ravens (they actually traded down - see below)) and that chasing after potential "Franchise QB's" in the draft has not been a particularly successful strategy even for good teams (i.e Jets, Giants) and could be disasterous (i.e. Ryan Leaf).



Fair enough. I have been a fan for 39 years and would agree that, I too, am still waiting for that Franchise QB. BUT - Didn't we win 3 Super Bowls with a CFL reject, a USFL reject and a 4th round project - All of whom had solid supporting cast players? FURTHER, since 2000, when have we had a team or team culture in which a good QB would thrive?



Oops! I did miss the Flacco trade scenario. Actually, however, they first traded down. The Ravens had the 8th spot in the draft and switched with Jacksonsville to the 26th spot, gaining two 3rd rounders in the process. THEN they traded up to the 18th spot giving up the 26th pick, one of the 3rd's, and a 6th rounder. So ultimately, they traded the 8th pick and a 6th rounder for the 18th pick and a 3rd rounder. If we could pull that off with the 10th pick and get someone like Locker in the process, I would be fine with that.

A couple things...we did win without great QB's in the past but it was a different league then. There was no free agency and it was possible to build truely great teams and keep them together which we did. We also had the greatest coach in NFL history then. I believe in todays NFL more then ever the consistent winners are the teams that have great QB's. Just look at the recent Super Bowl winners...almost all of them have a franchise QB. Obviously there are many ways to get one and the scenario that most teams seem to have used is getting lucky, but regardess of how you go about it, all the consistent winners have one. So far in my life we have not been so lucky in this department. And since luck is not on our side that is why i said that if i knew Shanny loved a QB so much I would take luck out of the equation and just go get him. but lets be clear...I am not advertising that the only way to get a QB is to trade up and I am not even saying that i want them to do it regardless. The best scenario for me would be that Shanny loves Locker and we draft him at #10 and call it a day. That's what i want but what i want doesn't much matter down at Redskins park...

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

A couple things...we did win without great QB's in the past but it was a different league then. There was no free agency and it was possible to build truely great teams and keep them together which we did. We also had the greatest coach in NFL history then. I believe in todays NFL more then ever the consistent winners are the teams that have great QB's. Just look at the recent Super Bowl winners...almost all of them have a franchise QB. ...

I will have my analysis of all 45 Super Bowl winning QB's, how they were acquired, and the status of the various teams at the time of acquisition.

Cliff Notes Version: If a team traded up in the draft to acquire the QB, the QB ultimately performed below expectations.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I will have my analysis of all 45 Super Bowl winning QB's, how they were acquired, and the status of the various teams at the time of acquisition.

Cliff Notes Version: If a team traded up in the draft to acquire the QB, the QB ultimately performed below expectations.

haha...save the trouble all 45 are not needed! I said my theory is that the QB is more important recently...say since free agency started. Basically every super bowl winning QB since Aikman can be in the study. Since then with few exceptions you need a franchise QB to win a Super bowl.

Here's the data:
Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman (MVP), 4 TDs
Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman (Emmitt Smith), O TDs
Super Bowl 29. Steve Young (MVP), 6 TDs
Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman (Larry Brown), 1 TD
Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre (Desmond Howard), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 32. John Elway (Terrell Davis), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 33. John Elway (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer (Ray Lewis), 1 TD
Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson (Dexter Jackson), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady (MVP), 3 TDs
Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady (Deion Branch), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger (Hines Ward), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger (Santonio Holmes), 1 TD
Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees (MVP), 2 TDs

All but 2 SB winning QB's since free agency started were franchise QB's. And the 2 exceptions(Johnson & Dilfer) had ALL TIME great defenses. We can argue about how to get one whether it's waiting and hoping or being aggressive...but the main point to remember is that we are not winning a Super Bowl until we find one.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

haha...save the trouble all 45 are not needed! I said my theory is that the QB is more important recently...say since free agency started. Basically every super bowl winning QB since Aikman can be in the study. Since then with few exceptions you need a franchise QB to win a Super bowl.

Actually that wouldn't add to many to those already done:

Elway (Denver 1998, 99): The only modern era "trade-up" that worked to land a elite QB. The anti-Ryan Leaf.

Warner (Rams 2000): In the "lightning strikes" category with Brady.

Trent Dilfer (Ravens 2001): The exception to the rule that you need a franchise QB.

Brady (NE 2002, 04, 05).

Brad Johnson (T Bay 2003): UFA pick-up (from us of course) - Do you consider him a "franchise" QB?

Roethlesburger (Pitt 2006, 09).

P. Manning (Colts 2007).

E. Manning (NYG 2008).

Brees (NO 2010).

Rodgers (G. Bay 2011).

ON THE OTHER HAND, if you look at the teams that made it to the SB but lost, your QB's seem to become much more non-descript: Chris Chandler (Atl), Kerry Collins (NYG 01), Gannon (Oak 03), Delhomme (Carolina 04), Grossman (Chi 07). [At the same time, "franchise" QB's lost (Donovan, McNair, Hasselback) and some won and lost (Farve, P. Manning, Warner, Brady).]

ALL OF THIS SAYS TO ME:
(1) Getting a "Franchise" QB is simply is mostly a matter of luck - so, build a solid team & do things that increase the odds for "luck" to happen ; and
(2) Having a true "Franchise" QB is close to a prerequisite for winning the SB (though not necessarily for just appearing in one).

AND - Whatever you do, never ever ever trade up in the draft for a QB unless his name is John Elway.

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by celts32

Here's the data:

Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman (MVP), 4 TDs
Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman (Emmitt Smith), O TDs
Super Bowl 29. Steve Young (MVP), 6 TDs
Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman (Larry Brown), 1 TD
Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre (Desmond Howard), 2 TDs
...

All but 2 SB winning QB's since free agency started were franchise QB's. And the 2 exceptions(Johnson & Dilfer) had ALL TIME great defenses. We can argue about how to get one whether it's waiting and hoping or being aggressive...but the main point to remember is that we are not winning a Super Bowl until we find one.

Hadn't done Aikman, Young or Farve in previous post. Just as they lend credence to your "you need a Franchise QB to win the SB" position, I would argue that the nature of their acquisitions lends credence to my "Fine, but don't go chasing rookie QB's in the draft" argument.

Also, except for Kelly against Aikman in 1993, their opposing SB QB's support the idea that you can get to the SB with a more average QB - Humphries (SD 1994); Neil O'Donnell (Pitt. 95); Bledsoe (NE 96).

[celts32]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

Hadn't done Aikman, Young or Farve in previous post. Just as they lend credence to your "you need a Franchise QB to win the SB" position, I would argue that the nature of their acquisitions lends credence to my "Fine, but don't go chasing rookie QB's in the draft" argument.

Also, except for Kelly against Aikman in 1993, their opposing SB QB's support the idea that you can get to the SB with a more average QB - Humphries (SD 1994); Neil O'Donnell (Pitt. 95); Bledsoe (NE 96).

Favre was a trade in which they paid more then his original draft position...could be labled as chasing him.

In general i agree that in most instances you shouldn't trade up for QB's...but I still maintain that if Shanny had a QB in mind that he felt strongly was a franchise QB I would do it. I don't just mean the guy he likes the best in a particualr draft...I mean he absolutelty loves the guy...one of the best he's seen in years blah blah blah. Basically the way he admitted feeling about Bradford last year after the draft. If that situation happened again I would be aggressive and make it happen. Thats all I am saying...

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by celts32

haha...save the trouble all 45 are not needed! I said my theory is that the QB is more important recently...say since free agency started. Basically every super bowl winning QB since Aikman can be in the study. Since then with few exceptions you need a franchise QB to win a Super bowl.

Here's the data:
Super Bowl 27. Troy Aikman (MVP), 4 TDs
Super Bowl 28. Troy Aikman (Emmitt Smith), O TDs
Super Bowl 29. Steve Young (MVP), 6 TDs
Super Bowl 30. Troy Aikman (Larry Brown), 1 TD
Super Bowl 31. Brett Favre (Desmond Howard), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 32. John Elway (Terrell Davis), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 33. John Elway (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 34. Kurt Warner (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 35. Trent Dilfer (Ray Lewis), 1 TD
Super Bowl 36. Tom Brady (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 37. Brad Johnson (Dexter Jackson), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 38. Tom Brady (MVP), 3 TDs
Super Bowl 39. Tom Brady (Deion Branch), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 40. Ben Roethlisberger (Hines Ward), 0 TDs
Super Bowl 41. Peyton Manning (MVP), 1 TD
Super Bowl 42. Eli Manning (MVP), 2 TDs
Super Bowl 43: Ben Roethlisberger (Santonio Holmes), 1 TD
Super Bowl 44: Drew Brees (MVP), 2 TDs

All but 2 SB winning QB's since free agency started were franchise QB's. And the 2 exceptions(Johnson & Dilfer) had ALL TIME great defenses. We can argue about how to get one whether it's waiting and hoping or being aggressive...but the main point to remember is that we are not winning a Super Bowl until we find one.

How many "franchise QBs" actually won the super bowl while playing at an elite level? The first three on the list qualify, I believe, but something has changed starting with Elway. Elway was out of his prime, Dilfer was on his second team, Brady didn't hit his prime until the middle of the decade. Roethlisberger hasn't achieved the elite level of play until just recently. Johnson was nearing the end of a journeyman career. Eli won it in a season where he wasn't even playing well.

I think there is no clear instance of the cause of winning super bowls being an effect of having a franchise quarterback. I think the correlation exists, but in a couple of cases, the opportunity to develop and achieve "franchise quarterback" designation came, oftentimes, seemingly as the result of playoff success. This happened in the recent cases of Brady, Roethlisberger, and Eli Manning. It also happened with Aaron Rodgers to an extent: even though he was already a pro-bowl level performer, he won his first playoff game and his first super bowl in the same year. Clearly now, Rodgers is a franchise QB, but even in his case, the super bowl he won was part of the cause of achieving franchise status, and not entirely an effect of having him.

I think when we start to adjust for revisionist history, there are only a couple instances of elite quarterbacks winning a super bowl. Manning in 06, Brees in 09, and then perhaps Brady in 04, Warner in 99, and Rodgers in 10 should also qualify. So that's what, 5 times in the last 14 years that the super bowl winning QB was also a regular season MVP candidate? Seems almost like the frequency has gone down in the last 15 years. Because in the early to mid 90s, it may have been an every year thing.

[celts32]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

How many "franchise QBs" actually won the super bowl while playing at an elite level? The first three on the list qualify, I believe, but something has changed starting with Elway. Elway was out of his prime, Dilfer was on his second team, Brady didn't hit his prime until the middle of the decade. Roethlisberger hasn't achieved the elite level of play until just recently. Johnson was nearing the end of a journeyman career. Eli won it in a season where he wasn't even playing well.

I think there is no clear instance of the cause of winning super bowls being an effect of having a franchise quarterback. I think the correlation exists, but in a couple of cases, the opportunity to develop and achieve "franchise quarterback" designation came, oftentimes, seemingly as the result of playoff success. This happened in the recent cases of Brady, Roethlisberger, and Eli Manning. It also happened with Aaron Rodgers to an extent: even though he was already a pro-bowl level performer, he won his first playoff game and his first super bowl in the same year. Clearly now, Rodgers is a franchise QB, but even in his case, the super bowl he won was part of the cause of achieving franchise status, and not entirely an effect of having him.

I think when we start to adjust for revisionist history, there are only a couple instances of elite quarterbacks winning a super bowl. Manning in 06, Brees in 09, and then perhaps Brady in 04, Warner in 99, and Rodgers in 10 should also qualify. So that's what, 5 times in the last 14 years that the super bowl winning QB was also a regular season MVP candidate? Seems almost like the frequency has gone down in the last 15 years. Because in the early to mid 90s, it may have been an every year thing.

I don't realy understand what you are trying to say...maybe you are overanalyizing. everyone on that list other then johnson and Dilfer is clearly a franchise QB. Aikman, Elway, Brady, Ben, favre...that list is a textbook example of a franchise QB.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

I will have my analysis of all 45 Super Bowl winning QB's, how they were acquired, and the status of the various teams at the time of acquisition.

Cliff Notes Version: If a team traded up in the draft to acquire the QB, the QB ultimately performed below expectations.

I assume you are in between jobs...or you have GTripp held captive in the WP Tread Hell Cells??