Top 65 Quarterbacks

[IH EART DA RAVENS]

Come on guys, we like to have fun here, but a Bleacher Report article? Let's stick to more serious and analytical sources, like The Onion and ProFootballMock.

[BALTIMOREFLACCO]

This list is absurd.

 

Colt Mccoy should be #1

 

But actually I disagree with a ton of these rankings

[52520Andrew]

Rivers had a REALLY good season this year. I wouldn't say #2 but definitely in the top 10 if not top 5. As for Flacco at 27, it makes absolutely no sense to have those guys ahead of him. People say the talent around Flacco is why he won, yet Andy Dalton with all that talent around him can't even win a playoff game and Matt Ryan only won 1. I don't think Wilson is #3 but he did just win the Super Bowl so I will give him a pass. But then again, this is bleacherreport so it makes sense. 

[The Raven]

Hahahahahahaha. 

 

I stopped looking at the list when I saw Thaddeus and Hoyer in front of him.

 

I generally respect Matt Miller's opinion but this is a joke. 

[ravefan52]

So much wrong with this, but they clearly don't take into account what was around the QB's. From Flacco's inept oline and receivers who can't consistently get open to Russel Wilson having an amazing defense and running game to rely upon.

[codizzle]

List was done by Cian fahey.. Have followed him on twitter for a long time.. He seems to play favorites at times and has a weird outlook on certain players.

He got started somehow doing stuff for steelers I believe. I honestly never see anything positive about flacco from him.. Ever.. and that's with me trying my best to take the purple glasses off

[Cville-Raven]

This is the same guy who at one time ranked Darren Sproles as the #1 RB in the league. 

[SecretAgentMan]

This is the same guy who at one time ranked Darren Sproles as the #1 RB in the league. 

I just died lol

[Sami84]

The list is flawed but im no joe flacco fan. If he pulls of the same crap next year or doesnt perform ...

[T3hRaven]

Hahahahahahaha. 

 

I stopped looking at the list when I saw Thaddeus and Hoyer in front of him.

 

I generally respect Matt Miller's opinion but this is a joke. 

 

Ditto.  He's pretty good with players come out of college and scouting.  Guys in the NFL, not so much.

[The Raven]

Ditto.  He's pretty good with players come out of college and scouting.  Guys in the NFL, not so much.

 

Some of his NFL 1000 stuff is good but some of it is bad. Like you said, he's best at scouting and evaluating college players.

 

I think he plays favorites with NFL players. I've also noticed from following him that he rarely pays attention to the Ravens. Might be an anti-Raven bias there.

[Bruce_Almty]

I also agree with most of the comments on this thread-- it's an opinion piece and we, as Raven/Flacco fans, disagree with the author's opinion. First off, who'd a thought there were 65 QBs worth rating? Not me. Then there is the numerical ranking. Splitting hairs between 15th best vs 19th best is silly. Some QBs are winners and some never will be.

Personally, I would rate them A, B, C, D, or F. Take the QBs on the 32 teams, I'd rate 5 or so as an "A," 10 or so more are winners I'd give them a "B" and the remainder somewhere lower.

So I say let BR have their fun with their rating system, we'll agree to disagree with their opinion and lets get on with our lives.

I'd rate Joe a solid "B." He's not average by any means and certainly not below average or one of the top QBs in the NFL either. Here's hoping Joe returns next season to his winning ways.

Go Ravens

[Bruce_Almty]

 

 

This article just completely was bogus. 

Furthermore, what about the effects of a good running game and defense? ... 

 

You missed the first slide of the presentation... "Potential is not taken into consideration. Nor are career accomplishments.

Quarterbacks are judged on accuracy (35 points), arm strength (15), decision making (30), mechanics (15) and mobility (5)." End of story.

Many of the complaints people are talking about are not of consideration.

[Gordo52]

And I'm pissed about Tyrod being behind Painter!!!

[BmoreBird22]

 

You missed the first slide of the presentation... "Potential is not taken into consideration. Nor are career accomplishments.

Quarterbacks are judged on accuracy (35 points), arm strength (15), decision making (30), mechanics (15) and mobility (5)." End of story.

Many of the complaints people are talking about are not of consideration.

I'm saying it can make the job of the quarterback much easier and alleviate a lot of the pressure to go for the big play or throw that make result in a an incompletion or interception. When RGIII was a rookie and a true running threat with the read option, it was a real problem for defenses. They had to come up and respect it for fear of getting burned. That always meant he would have an open receiver to throw to and meant he didn't have to work through his progressions. Now that he didn't have that, we see that without an open man, his decision making is a real question mark.

Similarly, teams have to fear Lynch and that forces more into the box and makes the throws less contested or difficult to make for Russell. Plus, Lynch is almost always a good 3 or 4 yards per play, at the least, so he had easier distances to work with and easier throws could be made.

That's what I meant.

[Gordo52]

And Idc about completion %

They basically said Joe is one of the most inaccurate passers in the league. They have Tolzein, Seneca Wallace, Yates, Tavaris Jackson, Dominque Davis, Locker and plenty other undeserving QB's ahead of him in that catergory. I bet they don't even account for drops, or who has been pressured/sacked the most. They also disrespected his mobility.....

One could say...

*takes off glasses*

Their analysis is inaccurate.

[DefensiveMind]

I'll be the first to admit that Flacco isn't as good as many on this board claim he his or want him to be, but 27 is kinda ridiculous...

[HomeoftheBRAVENS]

Its too early in the offseason for me to pretend to be mad about something a random fan wrote on bleacher report to get article views....

[Bruce_Almty]

 

 

... teams have to fear Lynch and that forces more into the box and makes the throws less contested or difficult to make for Russell. ....

 

Lynch has nothing to do with Russell's accuracy, arm strength, decision making, mechanics, and mobility. Try to understand the author's parameters.

[BmoreBird22]

 

Lynch has nothing to do with Russell's accuracy, arm strength, decision making, mechanics, and mobility. Try to understand the author's parameters.

No, it doesn't have to do with mobility or arm strength, but decision making and accuracy, yes. 

Joe didn't have a running game to lean on. Teams just didn't fear it, so they sat back in coverage. They routinely doubled Torrey or put bracket coverage on. That makes the throw a lot harder to make. 

What's easier to hit: a wide open receiver or one in very tight coverage? I think we can agree any quarterback in the NFL can hit a wide open receiver on a consistent basis, and in turn that makes them "accurate". If a receiver is in tight coverage, the window is tiny and difficult to hit (did you see the sports science for that Marlon touchdown against the Vikings?). Contested throws like that aren't going to be made routinely and they'll often be off, so it'll look like inaccuracy. 

As for decision making, I encourage you to look at what he wrote about RGIII both year's. He praises RGIII's decision making from his rookie year. RGIII didn't throw many interceptions because he almost always had an open man (already discussed why). This year without being nearly as big a running threat and being asked to be a drop back passer, the author calls out the decision making of RGIII. 

[BOLDnPurPnBlacK]

.

No, it doesn't have to do with mobility or arm strength, but decision making and accuracy, yes.

Joe didn't have a running game to lean on. Teams just didn't fear it, so they sat back in coverage. They routinely doubled Torrey or put bracket coverage on. That makes the throw a lot harder to make.

What's easier to hit: a wide open receiver or one in very tight coverage? I think we can agree any quarterback in the NFL can hit a wide open receiver on a consistent basis, and in turn that makes them "accurate". If a receiver is in tight coverage, the window is tiny and difficult to hit (did you see the sports science for that Marlon touchdown against the Vikings?). Contested throws like that aren't going to be made routinely and they'll often be off, so it'll look like inaccuracy.

As for decision making, I encourage you to look at what he wrote about RGIII both year's. He praises RGIII's decision making from his rookie year. RGIII didn't throw many interceptions because he almost always had an open man (already discussed why). This year without being nearly as big a running threat and being asked to be a drop back passer, the author calls out the decision making of RGIII.

Again read the article and perimeters. While it's easier to complete a pass to an open receiver that's not how's he's rating accuracy.

For instance he knocks josh McCowns accuracy who had a relatively high completion percentage. Why? Bc even when his placement was poor his beast receivers would still make a play.

He's rating accuracy based on routinely putting the ball in the right spot whether necessary or not, like throwing the ball away from the pressure, throwing receivers open, putting the ball where the receivers adjustment will naturally shield the defender from the ball. Whether these throws result in catches, drops or whatever he's looking at placement.

Now whether or not he's actually qualified to determine where the ball was suppose to be is certainly questionable. But please keep in mind he rated the qbs on a set criteria - if you're going to knock the ranking either knock the criteria themselves, his ability to judge them, or the scores he gave in relation to other qbs on the list.

For example, my biggest issue with the article was the low differences between best and worst in any given category. Like arm strength, there are several 15's and the worst, only one, rated an 11. Even more head scratching were the comments for QBs rated 12 in this category - like cannot make deep throws, can zip the ball on short throws but lacks the strength to make even intermediate throws... But then heaps high praise on the arm strength of several qbs rated 13 in the category. Only 1 point overall is the difference between a terrible nfl arm and a great nfl arm.

Even more puzzling to me was the clear disconnect between the grades and comments given by the different evaluators he used. There was one in particular where a QB rated a 28 in accuracy had comments praising his accuracy as elite with great ball placement and able to throw receivers open, and later a QB rated higher at 29 had comments like far too inconsistent, missed easy throws at times.

Just very strange grading system. Far too little separating the best from the worst, inconsistent grading, and clear biases shown.

[BmoreBird22]

Again read the article and perimeters. While it's easier to complete a pass to an open receiver that's not how's he's rating accuracy.

For instance he knocks josh McCowns accuracy who had a relatively high completion percentage. Why? Bc even when his placement was poor his beast receivers would still make a play.

He's rating accuracy based on routinely putting the ball in the right spot whether necessary or not, like throwing the ball away from the pressure, throwing receivers open, putting the ball where the receivers adjustment will naturally shield the defender from the ball. Whether these throws result in catches, drops or whatever he's looking at placement.

Now whether or not he's actually qualified to determine where the ball was suppose to be is certainly questionable. But please keep in mind he rated the qbs on a set criteria - if you're going to knock the ranking either knock the criteria themselves, his ability to judge them, or the scores he gave in relation to other qbs on the list.

For example, my biggest issue with the article was the low differences between best and worst in any given category. Like arm strength, there are several 15's and the worst, only one, rated an 11. Even more head scratching were the comments for QBs rated 12 in this category - like cannot make deep throws, can zip the ball on short throws but lacks the strength to make even intermediate throws... But then heaps high praise on the arm strength of several qbs rated 13 in the category. Only 1 point overall is the difference between a terrible nfl arm and a great nfl arm.

Even more puzzling to me was the clear disconnect between the grades and comments given by the different evaluators he used. There was one in particular where a QB rated a 28 in accuracy had comments praising his accuracy as elite with great ball placement and able to throw receivers open, and later a QB rated higher at 29 had comments like far too inconsistent, missed easy throws at times.

Just very strange grading system. Far too little separating the best from the worst, inconsistent grading, and clear biases shown.

Well, if you look at the opening slide, I actually addressed Josh McCown (or similar situations). Look at the praise for Stafford and Roethlisberger. He praises them for putting the ball where the receiver can go get it (and even makes mention of the vast catch radius of the Lions receivers), but knocks McCown for doing the same thing.

What I was trying to say is it is very difficult to put the ball in the correct place when your margin of error is next to none.

I actually went back and looked at the opening slide (something I didn't do at first) because I thought maybe he defined exactly what he's looking for. I wish there was an exact definition because I am seeing tons of double standards in this article and it's hard to get an exact definition

[Guest I-70WestRaven]

Opinions are like....well, everybody has one. Who was Joe Montana back in the day? Let folks write what they want, rings speak volumes. Just play the game.

[Tru11]

overall ranking is ridiculous and his mobility might be a tad higher but overall it seems to me very legit points he is making .

he has been very generous with the decision making so the balances alot.

 

Overall flacco should be a higher ranked QB but imo the other points are pretty much  on the money.

however did not bother to look what he said about others QBs though so if he biasly make others seems better then a poor job on the writer.

 

well now its time to see another warning come up lol.

[HoldingCall]

The article loses respect points with nearly every ranking:

 

Chad Henne above Eli Manning

Jake Locker above Joe Flacco

Philip Rivers above Tom Brady

Tyrod Taylor last, below every QB and back-up at #67.

[PurpleSnowman]

According to Matt Miller of Bleacher report, Joe Flacco is the 27th best QB in the NFL. He is rated lower than Thad Lewis of the Bills, and Brian Hoyer of the Browns. He is rated way low on his accuracy, which is not all that great, but it is certainly better than the 23/35 that he was given. 

 

Why do you think the league has given up on Joe Flacco and what does he have to do to fix his reputation?

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1949452-br-nfl-1000-top-65-quarterbacks/page/65

[The Raven]

He probably needs to win freaking Superbowl MVP to fix his reputation.

[codizzle]

He probably needs to win freaking Superbowl MVP to fix his reputation.

Na.. In Baltimore the receivers throw to themselves and make their own plays

[Seseau]

The league as you put it has never really rated Flacco that highly to begin with.

 

Ravens in general never get praised. We've been one of the better teams in the last 5 years. Even this past seasons was bad by our standards yet we still managed to finish .500

 

I'm definitely bias but I would rate Flacco higher than those listed before him.

[NFLfan123]

Lmao at people looking at Matt Miller's rankings