QB Success

[BrianS]

I've seen a lot of talk in a number of threads about how "QB's from ________ college" never succeed in the NFL.  I thought the argument was misguided, but I didn't have any data to back it up.  Here we go.

I looked at NFL QB's who had AT LEAST 60 wins in the league as being "successful".  I put that list in the quote so the post wasn't super hard to read.  Some thoughts after the quote.  I apologize for the formatting, it's a little ugly at times, but the columns are . . . Name, Wins, Losses, Ties, Win % and College.

Quote

* Tom Brady[1]	230	69	0	77%	Michigan
^ Brett Favre[2]	186	112	0	62%	Southern Miss
Peyton Manning[3]	186	79	0	70%	Tennessee
Drew Brees[4]	172	114	0	60%	Purdue
* Ben Roethlisberger[5]	156	74	1	68%	Miami (OH)
^ John Elway[6]	148	82	1	64%	Stanford
^ Dan Marino[7]	147	93	0	61%	Pittsburgh
Philip Rivers[8]	134	106	0	56%	NC State
* Aaron Rodgers[9]	126	63	1	67%	California
^ Fran Tarkenton[10]	124	109	6	53%	Georgia
^ Johnny Unitas[11]	118	63	4	65%	Louisville
Eli Manning[12]	117	117	0	50%	Ole Miss
^ Joe Montana[13]	117	47	0	71%	Notre Dame
* Matt Ryan[14]	113	92	0	55%	Boston College
^ Terry Bradshaw[15]	107	51	0	68%	Louisianna Tech
^ Warren Moon[16]	102	101	0	50%	Washington
^ Jim Kelly[17]	101	59	0	63%	Miami (FL)
Alex Smith[18]	99	67	1	60%	Utah
Drew Bledsoe[19]	98	95	0	51%	Washington State
* Joe Flacco[20]	98	77	0	56%	Delaware
Dave Krieg[21]	98	77	0	56%	Milton
Donovan McNabb[22]	98	62	1	61%	Syracuse
* Russell Wilson[23]	98	45	1	68%	NC State
^ Ken Stabler[24]	96	49	1	66%	Alabama
Phil Simms[25]	95	64	0	60%	Morehead State
^ Troy Aikman[26]	94	71	0	57%	UCLA
^ Len Dawson[27]	94	57	8	62%	Purdue
^ Bart Starr[28]	94	57	6	62%	Alabama
^ Steve Young[29]	94	49	0	66%	BYU
* Bob Griese[30]	92	56	3	62%	Purdue
Carson Palmer[31]	92	88	1	51%	USC
Ken Anderson[32]	91	81	0	53%	Augustana College
Steve McNair[33]	91	62	0	60%	Alcorn State
Vinny Testaverde[34]	90	123	1	42%	Miami (FL)
Jim Hart[35]	87	88	5	50%	Southern Illinois
^ Dan Fouts[36]	86	84	1	51%	Oregon
Roman Gabriel[37]	86	64	7	57%	NC State
Matt Hasselbeck[38]	85	75	0	53%	Boston College
^ Roger Staubach[39]	85	29	0	75%	Navy
Randall Cunningham[40]	82	52	1	61%	UNLV
John Hadl[41]	82	75	9	52%	Kansas
Kerry Collins[42]	81	99	0	45%	Penn State
^ Bobby Layne[43]	81	61	5	57%	Texas
Craig Morton[44]	81	67	1	55%	California
Boomer Esiason[45]	80	93	0	46%	Maryland
Joe Ferguson[46]	79	92	0	46%	Arkansas
Mark Brunell[47]	78	73	0	52%	Washington
Tony Romo[48]	78	49	0	61%	Eastern Illinois
^ Y. A. Tittle[49]	78	50	5	61%	LSU
Joe Theismann[50]	77	47	0	62%	Notre Dame
Rich Gannon[51]	76	56	0	58%	Delaware
Steve Grogan[52]	75	60	0	56%	Kansas State
* Cam Newton[53]	75	63	1	54%	Auburn
John Brodie[54]	74	76	8	49%	Stanford
Jay Cutler[55]	74	79	0	48%	Vanderbilt
* Andy Dalton[56]	74	66	2	53%	TCU
* Matthew Stafford[57]	74	90	1	45%	Georgia
Ron Jaworski[58]	73	69	1	51%	Youngstown State
Brad Johnson[59]	72	53	0	58%	Florida State
Jim Plunkett[60]	72	72	0	50%	Stanford
^ Sonny Jurgensen[61]	69	73	7	49%	Duke
Jake Plummer[62]	69	67	0	51%	Arizona State
Chris Chandler[63]	67	77	0	47%	Washington
Jim McMahon[64]	67	30	0	69%	BYU
^ Kurt Warner[65]	67	49	0	58%	Northern Iowa
Jim Harbaugh[66]	66	74	0	47%	Michigan
Daryle Lamonica[67]	66	16	6	80%	Notre Dame
Charlie Conerly [68]d	65	39	1	63%	Ole Miss
Jack Kemp[69]	65	37	3	64%	Occidental
Jim Everett[70]	64	92	0	41%	Purdue
Earl Morrall[71]	63	36	3	64%	Michigan State
^ Joe Namath[72]	62	63	4	50%	Alabama
Danny White[73]	62	30	0	67%	Arizona State
Billy Kilmer[74]	61	52	1	54%	UCLA
Jay Schroeder[75]	61	38	0	62%	UCLA
^ Norm Van Brocklin[76]	61	36	4	63%	Oregon
Michael Vick[77]	61	51	1	54%	Virginia Tech
* Ryan Tannehill[78]	60	54	0	53%	Texas A&M

When talking about successful NFL QB's, only 18 schools have ever produced more than one.

Quote

Michigan	2
Purdue	4
Stanford	3
California	2
Georgia	2
Ole Miss	2
Notre Dame	3
Boston College	2
Washington	3
Miami (FL)	2
Delaware	2
NC State	3
Alabama	3
BYU	2
Oregon	2
UCLA	3
Delaware	2
Arizona State	2

What I've learned is that arguing that a college has never produced a successful NFL QB is a fools game.  They can come from anywhere.

Terry Bradshaw from Louisiana Tech won 68% of his games and four Super Bowls. 

Roger Staubach from Navy won 75% of his games and two Super Bowls.  As an aside, had he not been a Navy officer, Staubach might have been in the running as one of the greatest to ever play, but losing five years of his career was just brutal.

Peyton Manning from Tennessee won 70% of his games and has two rings . . . had he not been in the same generation as Brady, he would absolutely have won more rings.

Augustana College, Southern Illinois, Eastern Illinois, TCU and Youngstown State have produced more successful NFL QB's than "big" schools like UNC, Nebraska, Florida, Minnesota or Rutgers.

There is just no rhyme or reason to where a successful NFL QB comes from, or where one COULD come from.  This is why drafting a QB is such a crapshoot.  There is just no accounting for it.  There is something in the makeup of a successful QB that defies understanding.

Justin Fields or Trey Lance could easily succeed . . . or fail.  But it won't be due to where they went to school.  Likewise Davis Mills, Ian Book and Mac Jones can all easily fail . . . or succeed . . . despite the fact they are coming from schools with a history of producing multiple, successful NFL QB's.

College makes no difference at all.

[DaveThePanther2008]

3 minutes ago, BrianS said:

I've seen a lot of talk in a number of threads about how "QB's from ________ college" never succeed in the NFL.  I thought the argument was misguided, but I didn't have any data to back it up.  Here we go.

I looked at NFL QB's who had AT LEAST 60 wins in the league as being "successful".  I put that list in the quote so the post wasn't super hard to read.  Some thoughts after the quote.  I apologize for the formatting, it's a little ugly at times, but the columns are . . . Name, Wins, Losses, Ties, Win % and College.

When talking about successful NFL QB's, only 18 schools have ever produced more than one.

What I've learned is that arguing that a college has never produced a successful NFL QB is a fools game.  They can come from anywhere.

Terry Bradshaw from Louisiana Tech won 68% of his games and four Super Bowls. 

Roger Staubach from Navy won 75% of his games and two Super Bowls.  As an aside, had he not been a Navy officer, Staubach might have been in the running as one of the greatest to ever play, but losing five years of his career was just brutal.

Peyton Manning from Tennessee won 70% of his games and has two rings . . . had he not been in the same generation as Brady, he would absolutely have won more rings.

Augustana College, Southern Illinois, Eastern Illinois, TCU and Youngstown State have produced more successful NFL QB's than "big" schools like UNC, Nebraska, Florida, Minnesota or Rutgers.

There is just no rhyme or reason to where a successful NFL QB comes from, or where one COULD come from.  This is why drafting a QB is such a crapshoot.  There is just no accounting for it.  There is something in the makeup of a successful QB that defies understanding.

Justin Fields or Trey Lance could easily succeed . . . or fail.  But it won't be due to where they went to school.  Likewise Davis Mills, Ian Book and Mac Jones can all easily fail . . . or succeed . . . despite the fact they are coming from schools with a history of producing multiple, successful NFL QB's.

College makes no difference at all.

You know I was just thinking about this.  Unitas (My Hero when I was young) was from Louisville and one of the greatest.  Great point about Staubach. 

Schools make no difference.  There isn't a QB University.

Thanks for posting this.  

[MadHatter]

4 minutes ago, BrianS said:

I've seen a lot of talk in a number of threads about how "QB's from ________ college" never succeed in the NFL.  I thought the argument was misguided, but I didn't have any data to back it up.  Here we go.

I looked at NFL QB's who had AT LEAST 60 wins in the league as being "successful".  I put that list in the quote so the post wasn't super hard to read.  Some thoughts after the quote.  I apologize for the formatting, it's a little ugly at times, but the columns are . . . Name, Wins, Losses, Ties, Win % and College.

When talking about successful NFL QB's, only 18 schools have ever produced more than one.

What I've learned is that arguing that a college has never produced a successful NFL QB is a fools game.  They can come from anywhere.

Terry Bradshaw from Louisiana Tech won 68% of his games and four Super Bowls. 

Roger Staubach from Navy won 75% of his games and two Super Bowls.  As an aside, had he not been a Navy officer, Staubach might have been in the running as one of the greatest to ever play, but losing five years of his career was just brutal.

Peyton Manning from Tennessee won 70% of his games and has two rings . . . had he not been in the same generation as Brady, he would absolutely have won more rings.

Augustana College, Southern Illinois, Eastern Illinois, TCU and Youngstown State have produced more successful NFL QB's than "big" schools like UNC, Nebraska, Florida, Minnesota or Rutgers.

There is just no rhyme or reason to where a successful NFL QB comes from, or where one COULD come from.  This is why drafting a QB is such a crapshoot.  There is just no accounting for it.  There is something in the makeup of a successful QB that defies understanding.

Justin Fields or Trey Lance could easily succeed . . . or fail.  But it won't be due to where they went to school.  Likewise Davis Mills, Ian Book and Mac Jones can all easily fail . . . or succeed . . . despite the fact they are coming from schools with a history of producing multiple, successful NFL QB's.

College makes no difference at all.

Not entirely true.  The system that a QB plays in at college absolutely has an impact in whether they are likely to succeed.

i am nervous about Fields because of the QB friendly system that he played in at OSU..which limits the ability to evaluate on the things it didn’t ask him to do.  Jones, Pryor, and Haskins (the 3 qb’s right before him at OSU) all looked like heisman caliber qb’s in that system...and all have been complete and utter failures in the NFL.

Does that mean Fields will be a bust?  Absolutely not.  But, it dies make evaluating and projecting him in an nfl system more difficult...and causes teams to question it.

 

 

[ncstatekwi]

No doubt our Team would have taken Fields if they were 100% all in

[ForJimmy]

33 minutes ago, MadHatter said:

Not entirely true.  The system that a QB plays in at college absolutely has an impact in whether they are likely to succeed.

i am nervous about Fields because of the QB friendly system that he played in at OSU..which limits the ability to evaluate on the things it didn’t ask him to do.  Jones, Pryor, and Haskins (the 3 qb’s right before him at OSU) all looked like heisman caliber qb’s in that system...and all have been complete and utter failures in the NFL.

Does that mean Fields will be a bust?  Absolutely not.  But, it dies make evaluating and projecting him in an nfl system more difficult...and causes teams to question it.

 

 

Haskins was the only player with the same coach/system. Ryan Day just became the head coach in 2019 and uses his own system. Which again is why it’s silly to right off prospects from an entire university that has had several staff/coaching changes. 
Also Texas Tech ran a QB friendly spread offense and what did the Chiefs do? Draft Mahomes and cater their offense to his strengths. Worked out pretty well...

[Mr. Scot]

41 minutes ago, MadHatter said:

Not entirely true.  The system that a QB plays in at college absolutely has an impact in whether they are likely to succeed.

i am nervous about Fields because of the QB friendly system that he played in at OSU..which limits the ability to evaluate on the things it didn’t ask him to do.  Jones, Pryor, and Haskins (the 3 qb’s right before him at OSU) all looked like heisman caliber qb’s in that system...and all have been complete and utter failures in the NFL.

Does that mean Fields will be a bust?  Absolutely not.  But, it dies make evaluating and projecting him in an nfl system more difficult...and causes teams to question it.

Agree that system is way more important than school.

When Jeff Tedford was at Cal, he consistently produced highly drafted busts like Kyle Boller...up till that Rodgers guy, of course.

There are always exceptions. You just have to be really careful about picking a guy who you're counting on to be that exception.

[CRA]

15 minutes ago, ForJimmy said:

Haskins was the only player with the same coach/system. Ryan Day just became the head coach in 2019 and uses his own system. Which again is why it’s silly to right off prospects from an entire university that has had several staff/coaching changes. 
Also Texas Tech ran a QB friendly spread offense and what did the Chiefs do? Draft Mahomes and cater their offense to his strengths. Worked out pretty well...

Clemson runs a QB friendly system too.

Dabo is still a product of the Tommy Bowden tree.   But I've never heard anyone talk about Charlie Whitehurst, Taj Boyd, etc when Trevor's name gets brought up. 

 

[ForJimmy]

5 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

Agree that system is way more important than school.

When Jeff Tedford was at Cal, he consistently produced highly drafted busts like Kyle Boller...up till that Rodgers guy, of course.

There are always exceptions. You just have to be really careful about picking a guy who you're counting on to be that exception.

QBs busting is more common than not and OP as shown there really isn’t a QB university. The exception to the rule for ANY university is when a QB makes it. It’s such a hard position to find the right guy that’s why I was desperate enough to want the Panthers to draft another one as well as  have Darnold.

[ForJimmy]

Just now, CRA said:

Clemson runs a QB friendly system too.

Dabo is still a product of the Tommy Bowden tree.   But I've never heard anyone talk about Charlie Whitehurst, Taj Boyd, etc when Trevor's name gets brought up. 

 

They did have Watson, but before him a lot of nothing...

[Mr. Scot]

I'd have to look it up, but I remember a few years back reading an extensive article about how colleges moving away from pro style systems to super simplified offenses wasn't doing players any favors when it came to their pro transitions, especially quarterbacks and wide receivers.

Obviously though, the goal of a college program isn't to prepare players for the pros. It's to win games.

[kungfoodude]

2 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd have to look it up, but I remember a few years back reading an extensive article about how colleges moving away from pro style systems to super simplified offenses wasn't doing players any favors when it came to their pro transitions, especially quarterbacks and wide receivers.

Obviously though, the goal of a college program isn't to prepare players for the pros. It's to win games.

That is what happens when you use college as your minor league.

[Mr. Scot]

Just now, kungfoodude said:

That is what happens when you use college as your minor league.

People have been arguing for the NFL to fully embrace a minor league system for years and years.

No idea why they don't given how much of a benefit it would be to the game.

(outside of the fact that as a whole, they're a bunch of greedy sons of b-tches who don't like to spend any money they don't have to)

[CRA]

1 minute ago, ForJimmy said:

They did have Watson, but before him a lot of nothing...

and Kelly Bryant went 16-2 and had the job before Lawrence.  He went to the college playoffs his first year as the starter and would have gone back the second year too.   Clemson is a super friendly place to find success. 

But no one ever mentions any of that with Trevor. 

Eyeball test.  Trevor was a different.  I think Fields was similar in that respect...when you look at him vs others that played up there.   

 

[kungfoodude]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

People have been arguing for the NFL to fully embrace a minor league system for years and years.

No idea why they don't given how much of a benefit it would be to the game.

(outside of the fact that as a whole, they're a bunch of greedy sons of b-tches who don't like to spend any money they don't have to)

Yeah, all these leagues want to get that for free. The problem was that over time college athletics became massive, multibillion dollar industries in their own right. So, why care about developing for what the NFL is doing when you need to win at your level. That's why college has forced the NFL to change the way it does things. 

In the MLB and NHL, you weed out a lot of guys that wouldn't cut it by the minor league process. In the NBA and NFL, they go straight into the league. At least the NBA is starting to remedy that. I think eventually you will see the same in the NFL, although it may not be for 15-20 years.