Top 10 NFL Elusive QBs

[KaseKlosed]

Can you guess who is on this list? :cool:

[KaseKlosed]

embed assist please

[Mr. Scot]

Pop Quiz: Out of those ten, how many have Super Bowl rings? :lol:

And for the record, having a mobile/elusive quarterback is a good thing only if he's also a good passer. If he's not so hot in the pass department, all the running ability in the world doesn't mean squat. It might get you some nice highlight reels on ESPN, but it won't get you championships.

[mav1234]

10) Steve McNair

9) Kordell Stewart

8) Doug Flutie

7) Donovan McNabb

6) John Elway

5) Bobby Douglas

4) Steve Young

3) Fran Tarkenton

2) Michael Vick

1) Randall Cunningham

Interesting list.

[mav1234]

embed assist please

type [yt ]5F6Xl5Eg67A[/yt ] while removing the space after the t's.

[KaseKlosed]

Pop Quiz: Out of those ten, how many have Super Bowl rings? :lol:

And for the record, having a mobile/elusive quarterback is a good thing only if he's also a good passer. If he's not so hot in the pass department, all the running ability in the world doesn't mean squat. It might get you some nice highlight reels on ESPN, but it won't get you championships.

Aaron Rodgers and Big Ben are scrambling QBs and both have rings

[Mr. Scot]

10) Steve McNair

9) Kordell Stewart

8) Doug Flutie

7) Donovan McNabb

6) John Elway

5) Bobby Douglas

4) Steve Young

3) Fran Tarkenton

2) Michael Vick

1) Randall Cunningham

Interesting list.

Some glaring issues, though. Bobby Douglass and Kordell Stewart but no Roger Staubach? Yeesh.

[Mr. Scot]

Aaron Rodgers and Big Ben are scrambling QBs and both have rings

Rodgers is "pocket mobile", not that great as a runner. Roethlisberger has three Super Bowl appearances but only one decent performance. He stunk in the other two. He got his first ring because the rest of the team did better. Seahawk fans would say the refs contributed, and may have a point (I believe the NFL did admit to an error there).

Here's what you're not getting though. A mobile quarterback isn't the same thing as a running quarterback. A mobile QB is a guy who can pass, but can also move around if needed. A running quarterback is a guy who, while he might be a great runner, is a lousy passer.

You can win it all with a mobile quarterback. A running quarterback? Not so much.

The ability to pass effectively is still the most important thing you have to have in a QB, arguably even more so these days with the rule changes.

[SorthNarolina]

Vick is as far as the scrambling QB has got in NFL history in terms of effectiveness and his reliance on running.

They will likely only come around once in a great while. The next one will have to defeat the methods DCs invent to stop Vick.

That would be amazing though seeing a running QB play in the NFL like they do in college.

[Mr. Scot]

Vick is as far as the scrambling QB has got in NFL history in terms of effectiveness and his reliance on running.

They will likely only come around once in a great while. The next one will have to defeat the methods DCs invent to stop Vick.

That would be amazing though seeing a running QB play in the NFL like they do in college.

Wouldn't hold my breath.

College level competition just isn't the same. Heck, Andrew Luck had runs of 50 and 60 yards in college games. Don't expect that in the NFL though.

Pro defenses are just too fast - and too well coached - for running quarterbacks to have the kind of impact they do in college.

That, plus with the rules the way they are now, an effective passer is worth his wight in gold. If he can move in the pocket, that's a big plus. If he's also a running threat, cool but not really necessary.

[Proudiddy]

It can also be argued that several should have won Superbowls but the circumstances were unique. Steve McNair had a Fox-like coach in Jeff Fisher, who liked to play it close to the vest usually, and they came within one yard of winning it anyway against The Greatest Show On Turf.

Randall Cunningham was a ridiculously gifted passer AND athlete. He should have won one... Had great teams in Philly multiple years but played for a defensive minded head coach as well. Then when he went to the Vikes and took over they had several outstanding offenses.

Fran Tarkenton, if I'm not mistaken, went to 4 Superbowls but never won one. Had a HOF coach in Bud Grant but yet again, was a victim of circumstance.

Steve Young one once. And who is going to argue his ability? You can't just pin it on the QBs. They make a huge difference in how successful their teams are, but just because there are so many other factors that play into whether they win it or not.

How bout this...

How many Superbowls have the guys on that list been to? If Cam can do that, and I'm going there because it's bound to happen anyway, then I'm good. Just get us in the dance, and I trust that we'll have the right formula and win it all. Who's not gonna respect us if we went to 4 Superbowls under him regardless of the outcomes and we're competing year in and year out. That's what I want from my QB.

[mav1234]

it's way too early to compare Cam Newton to those guys, but we've had this discussion before.

The difference is most of those guys were pass first quarterbacks. That is what Cam Newton will become if he's going to have success in the NFL. That was not what Cam Newton was at Auburn, and that's fine... but people need to understand there is a difference and there is a transition. If he's working as hard as he says he'll be able to do it, but it might not be immediate.

[Stumpy]

For those who want an "elusive" QB, here are some interesting stats from that top 10 list...

**

Now 6 of those 10 played, at least part of their careers, before fumbles were tracked. So if you exclude those QBs...

**

Still want an "elusive" QB?

**Fumbles denotes all fumbles, not just fumbles lost. My bad. :redface:

[Udogg]

yes