After this weekend's games, it seems as if columnists and ESPN talking heads are engaging in one quarterback debate after another. So, I thought I'd join the discussion.
1) With Kirk Cousins playing so well these past two weeks, should the Washington Redskins try to trade Robert Griffin III and continue starting Cousins?
I'd wait until after the season to make that decision. If Cousins continues to play well and the 'Skins win a few games, I'd be "cautious" with bringing back Griffin. It'd be a somewhat similar scenario that Philadelphia faced last year with Nick Foles and Michael Vick. When Vick went down with an injury, Foles put up video game like numbers, and with the Eagles winning games, it was difficult to make the argument that Vick should return as the starter. The same is true in this scenario. Also, if Cousins continues to play well and Washington wins a few games, sitting Griffin will allow him to avoid further injury and potentially make him more valuable trade-bait in the off-season. On the other side of the coin, however, like Foles, the sample-size on Cousins is quite small and I'd be careful not to get overly excited about him right away - to the point where the team trades Griffin before the season ends.
2) Should Michael Vick start over Geno Smith?
Oddly enough, I'm going to answer this question in the same manner I answered it before the season started. If the New York Jets coaches and management truly feel that Geno Smith is their quarterback of the future and can lead them to great things in the coming years, then barring injury, I'd stick with him as the starter. However, if they don't feel this way and simply want to improve their odds of winning and making the playoffs this season, then I'd start Vick in place of Smith. Smith is a young quarterback and will need reps to improve in this league. However, as some analysts have pointed out, his decision making, especially in critical situations, hasn't improved from year 1 to year 2 thus far, and his passing and mechanics just don't appear to be that of a potential long-term NFL starting quarterback. So, if the Jets are going to go after a new quarterback next year, then they might as well start Vick and try to make the playoffs this year. But, again, if they disagree with the Geno Smith skeptics and think he can do great things, then I'd go with him.
3) Should Ryan Tannehill be benched in favor of Matt Moore?
To put it simply, no... Unlike Michael Vick of the New York Jets, Matt Moore is not a 4-time Pro Bowl quarterback and has never led a team to a championship game. He also doesn't possess the speed of someone like Vick. In other words, even if the Miami Dolphins don't feel Ryan Tannehill is their quarterback of the future anymore, they'd still be better suited to go with him this season than Matt Moore. This is Moore's 8th year in the NFL. Over his career, he's completed 58.9% of his passes for 5,321 yards, 33 touchdowns, 28 interceptions, and a quarterback rating of 79.3. So, while Moore is a solid back-up quarterback, he's been in the league long enough to know he's not a guy a team wants to build around at quarterback. On the other hand, this is Ryan Tannehill's third year in the NFL. To this point, he's completed 59.1% of his passes, for 7,831 yards, 40 touchdowns, 32 interceptions, and a quarterback rating of 78.6. He's also run the ball 97 times for 467 yards, and 3 touchdowns. Tannehill is younger, more mobile, and has more potential than Moore. If the Dolphins want to go after another quarterback in the off-season, then so be it, but I think the team would just be doing themselves a disservice this season to bench the youthful Tannehill in favor of Matt Moore.
4) Should the Jacksonville Jaguars and Minnesota Vikings stick with rookie quarterbacks Blake Bortles and Teddy Bridgewater over Chad Henne and Matt Cassell?
While I could have understood the Vikings going with Cassell at the start of the season over Bridgewater, I've never understood the reasoning for the Jaguars to go with Henne over Bortles. Bringing defensive genius Don Zimmer over from Cincinnati to coach Minnesota, the Vikings had some hope for the season. However, with all that's transpired over the past couple of weeks with regard to Pro Bowl tailback Adrian Peterson, that hope the Vikings had at the start of the season is all but gone, and I don't think it'd hurt them any to give their rookie quarterback a solid number of reps this season in order to build for the future. When it comes to Bortles, what was the point in sitting him this year? The Jaguars were one of the worst teams in the league last year, lost do-everything tailback Maurice Jones-Drew in the off-season to Oakland, and had less of a chance to make the playoffs this year than I do of winning the lottery this week. Bortles was a top 5 draft pick, played very well in the pre-season, and is one of the only guys on the team, if not the only guy on the team, who can excite the Jaguar fan-base. It's about time Jaguars fans had something to be excited about, and while they may still lose their fair share of games this year, with Bortles at the helm, at least they'll be able to watch their young quarterback and feel some sense of optimism going forward.
5) Who's a better quarterback: Russell Wilson vs. Andrew Luck?
I'm going to just put it out there - I think this is a stupid question. These two quarterbacks are completely different quarterbacks, are in completely different systems, and are surrounded by completely different players and coaches. How are we really supposed to compare these two? Russell Wilson is in his third year in the league. He's 26-9 as a starter to this point in his career, has completed 64.1% of his passes, for 7,126 yards (8.0 p/att), 58 touchdowns, 20 interceptions, and a 101.4 quarterback rating. He's also run the ball for 1,115 yards (5.4 p/att), and 5 additional touchdowns. He also led his Seattle Seahawks to a Super Bowl victory last year.
Andrew Luck is also in his third year. He's 23-12 as a starter, has completed 58.0% of his passes, for 9,108 yards (6.9 p/att), 55 touchdowns, 30 interceptions, and a quarterback rating of 83.6. He's also rushed for 686 yards (5.0 p/att), and 10 touchdowns. Unlike Wilson, Luck has yet to earn a Super Bowl ring.
Numbers wise, Wilson has the edge to this point in his career, as well as a Super Bowl ring. However, he has also been surrounded by a better team, which has been one of the best (if not the best) on defense and one of the better rushing teams as well, while Luck and his Colts have lacked a rushing attack or a great defense while he's been there. This has placed a great deal more responsibility on Luck's shoulders.
So, I'm not going to answer this question. Both Russell Wilson and Andrew Luck are two of the best young quarterbacks in the game, hopefully have several good years left in them, and I think it's rather silly to try and compare the two after just two full years of starting for their respective teams.
http://www.nfl.com/player/mattmoore/2507282/careerstats
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TannRy00.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WilsRu00.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LuckAn00.htm
1) With Kirk Cousins playing so well these past two weeks, should the Washington Redskins try to trade Robert Griffin III and continue starting Cousins?
I'd wait until after the season to make that decision. If Cousins continues to play well and the 'Skins win a few games, I'd be "cautious" with bringing back Griffin. It'd be a somewhat similar scenario that Philadelphia faced last year with Nick Foles and Michael Vick. When Vick went down with an injury, Foles put up video game like numbers, and with the Eagles winning games, it was difficult to make the argument that Vick should return as the starter. The same is true in this scenario. Also, if Cousins continues to play well and Washington wins a few games, sitting Griffin will allow him to avoid further injury and potentially make him more valuable trade-bait in the off-season. On the other side of the coin, however, like Foles, the sample-size on Cousins is quite small and I'd be careful not to get overly excited about him right away - to the point where the team trades Griffin before the season ends.
2) Should Michael Vick start over Geno Smith?
Oddly enough, I'm going to answer this question in the same manner I answered it before the season started. If the New York Jets coaches and management truly feel that Geno Smith is their quarterback of the future and can lead them to great things in the coming years, then barring injury, I'd stick with him as the starter. However, if they don't feel this way and simply want to improve their odds of winning and making the playoffs this season, then I'd start Vick in place of Smith. Smith is a young quarterback and will need reps to improve in this league. However, as some analysts have pointed out, his decision making, especially in critical situations, hasn't improved from year 1 to year 2 thus far, and his passing and mechanics just don't appear to be that of a potential long-term NFL starting quarterback. So, if the Jets are going to go after a new quarterback next year, then they might as well start Vick and try to make the playoffs this year. But, again, if they disagree with the Geno Smith skeptics and think he can do great things, then I'd go with him.
3) Should Ryan Tannehill be benched in favor of Matt Moore?
To put it simply, no... Unlike Michael Vick of the New York Jets, Matt Moore is not a 4-time Pro Bowl quarterback and has never led a team to a championship game. He also doesn't possess the speed of someone like Vick. In other words, even if the Miami Dolphins don't feel Ryan Tannehill is their quarterback of the future anymore, they'd still be better suited to go with him this season than Matt Moore. This is Moore's 8th year in the NFL. Over his career, he's completed 58.9% of his passes for 5,321 yards, 33 touchdowns, 28 interceptions, and a quarterback rating of 79.3. So, while Moore is a solid back-up quarterback, he's been in the league long enough to know he's not a guy a team wants to build around at quarterback. On the other hand, this is Ryan Tannehill's third year in the NFL. To this point, he's completed 59.1% of his passes, for 7,831 yards, 40 touchdowns, 32 interceptions, and a quarterback rating of 78.6. He's also run the ball 97 times for 467 yards, and 3 touchdowns. Tannehill is younger, more mobile, and has more potential than Moore. If the Dolphins want to go after another quarterback in the off-season, then so be it, but I think the team would just be doing themselves a disservice this season to bench the youthful Tannehill in favor of Matt Moore.
4) Should the Jacksonville Jaguars and Minnesota Vikings stick with rookie quarterbacks Blake Bortles and Teddy Bridgewater over Chad Henne and Matt Cassell?
While I could have understood the Vikings going with Cassell at the start of the season over Bridgewater, I've never understood the reasoning for the Jaguars to go with Henne over Bortles. Bringing defensive genius Don Zimmer over from Cincinnati to coach Minnesota, the Vikings had some hope for the season. However, with all that's transpired over the past couple of weeks with regard to Pro Bowl tailback Adrian Peterson, that hope the Vikings had at the start of the season is all but gone, and I don't think it'd hurt them any to give their rookie quarterback a solid number of reps this season in order to build for the future. When it comes to Bortles, what was the point in sitting him this year? The Jaguars were one of the worst teams in the league last year, lost do-everything tailback Maurice Jones-Drew in the off-season to Oakland, and had less of a chance to make the playoffs this year than I do of winning the lottery this week. Bortles was a top 5 draft pick, played very well in the pre-season, and is one of the only guys on the team, if not the only guy on the team, who can excite the Jaguar fan-base. It's about time Jaguars fans had something to be excited about, and while they may still lose their fair share of games this year, with Bortles at the helm, at least they'll be able to watch their young quarterback and feel some sense of optimism going forward.
5) Who's a better quarterback: Russell Wilson vs. Andrew Luck?
I'm going to just put it out there - I think this is a stupid question. These two quarterbacks are completely different quarterbacks, are in completely different systems, and are surrounded by completely different players and coaches. How are we really supposed to compare these two? Russell Wilson is in his third year in the league. He's 26-9 as a starter to this point in his career, has completed 64.1% of his passes, for 7,126 yards (8.0 p/att), 58 touchdowns, 20 interceptions, and a 101.4 quarterback rating. He's also run the ball for 1,115 yards (5.4 p/att), and 5 additional touchdowns. He also led his Seattle Seahawks to a Super Bowl victory last year.
Andrew Luck is also in his third year. He's 23-12 as a starter, has completed 58.0% of his passes, for 9,108 yards (6.9 p/att), 55 touchdowns, 30 interceptions, and a quarterback rating of 83.6. He's also rushed for 686 yards (5.0 p/att), and 10 touchdowns. Unlike Wilson, Luck has yet to earn a Super Bowl ring.
Numbers wise, Wilson has the edge to this point in his career, as well as a Super Bowl ring. However, he has also been surrounded by a better team, which has been one of the best (if not the best) on defense and one of the better rushing teams as well, while Luck and his Colts have lacked a rushing attack or a great defense while he's been there. This has placed a great deal more responsibility on Luck's shoulders.
So, I'm not going to answer this question. Both Russell Wilson and Andrew Luck are two of the best young quarterbacks in the game, hopefully have several good years left in them, and I think it's rather silly to try and compare the two after just two full years of starting for their respective teams.
http://www.nfl.com/player/mattmoore/2507282/careerstats
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TannRy00.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/W/WilsRu00.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/L/LuckAn00.htm
Comments
Post a Comment