So really, what is a "franchise" QB ?

[Mace]

This isn't an argument thread for me, I might make comments but I won't try and criticize what your definition of franchise QB is.

To me, a "franchise" qb is an elite qb who elevates the team. He's a guy you fear every time he gets the ball, he's a guy that earned that fear from you if he's an opponent. Or you believe in him utterly if he's yours, the game is not lost unless he cannot get one more chance to win it and you believe he will because he does more often than not. He plays nearly every game, and he's pretty much capable of the same with any team he'd be on because of his arm, his will, and his leadership. He dictates a game more often than not. Surrounding cast changes, he doesn't.

In my opinion right now, there are 4. Brady, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Newton. Peyton Manning was in his prime, Drew Brees was also. Roethlisberger may be on the decline, Newton could go either way down the road, but when they're on the field still, they're tearing off chunks of yards and looking like they expect it.

Next category is reliable starter. He's still a threat, and can pull games out, if he gets on a streak, he can bury you. He's dangerous but someone you worry about if he's an opponent, you don't fear him. Crapshoot, maybe, maybe not. If he's yours, you're set at QB, might have great things ahead with the team around him, but are likely as not to flinch and dream about the elite ones, while being relatively sure next game could well be different if he's on his game. He's not interchangeable with any team, has strengths enhanced by your offensive style.

In my opinion those guys are Alex Smith, Flacco, Russell Wilson, Eli Manning, Andy Dalton, Carson Palmer, Rivers, Stafford, Luck, Matt Ryan, Brees at this point in his career, Cutler sometimes not always.

The rest are maybes, potential, and working their way up or down.

I think a guy has to be a reliable starter to work his way to franchise/elite status. Some reliable starters will go up or down, or have elite moments on a roll. I don't think anyone enters the league as franchise qb, ala Luck, who isn't yet imho but surely came in with the package of potential unquestioned.

I think they develop into franchise QB's or not, and you can't be too sad if you have some of the reliable starters I mentioned.

Taylor ? I don't know. Needs durability to be a reliable starter and maintain/improve his pace to stay in that category before advancing unless he suddenly clicks. No telling. He's essentially a 2nd year starter.

Besides being desperate for one (and sure, I am too), what do people think a franchise QB is, and if you believe in an instant winner this season who will be better than Luck out of the gate (he's still only .500 outside owning his division, unlikely for a QB here with the Pats around), why is he a must have you are so certain of this draft ? Did I leave any out in my opinion ?

[YardRat]

That's a fair analysis, IMO. 'Franchise' QB's are few and far between, the most any team can really hope for is a reliable starter that thrives when the supporting cast on the field with him is better. I think fans that are relatively new to the game (the last 15-20 years) won't realize how special players like Peyton Manning and Brady are, and even Brady will always have the cheating stigma to contend with.

[John Doe]

Well thought analysis, but I think that your top tier is a bit too limited. I think of the top tier as "face of the franchise" guys including Eli Manning and Wilson. They have the superbowl rings to show for it. Lumping them with Alex Smith and Stafford (who had one of the best receivers ever to lean on) doesn't seem right. I would put Rivers well above Smith and Stafford as well even though he does not have the skins on the wall to show for it. He seems to make his receivers play better than they are - like Rodgers.

[Mace]

Well thought analysis, but I think that your top tier is a bit too limited. I think of the top tier as "face of the franchise" guys including Eli Manning and Wilson. They have the superbowl rings to show for it. Lumping them with Alex Smith and Stafford (who had one of the best receivers ever to lean on) doesn't seem right. I would put Rivers well above Smith and Stafford as well even though he does not have the skins on the wall to show for it. He seems to make his receivers play better than they are - like Rodgers.

Might be limited, some of those guys have elite periods, but I'm not sure they are consistently so, "face of the franchise" makes sense though, guys you live and die with so you might be right, if you can live and die with them happily.

A word for Alex Smith though, he's consistently good if not spectacular, 61% over 10 years with 142 td's to 83 int's. That makes me think he's always on the edge because with a flawed team, but could also mean his teams are always on the edge with a flawed Smith.

I held back on elevating Rivers because for some reason I don't fear him getting the ball late in a game. Maybe it's just the times I've seen it, but Rivers is off and on in when he controls a game and dictates it. He can and sometimes will, but most often you see him walking off angry, shaking his head.

Rodgers, you can fear or believe in, just about every play. When the victory formation play happens, Rodgers is standing there staring with his helmet on, amazed that there is no fumble and one more play.

I like Eli Manning. I think he's the best big moment QB you can want, just (to me) doesn't get enough big moments season to season. If it's a Super Bowl, he'll laser right in, that might make him elite to me, but in an average season game he might bust a play into an int, or start throwing wild. I think in a Super Bowl, you want an Eli before you want a Peyton, but in a regular season game you might want an Alex Smith. On the other hand I don't think if you send Eli Manning to SF he changes whatever.

I also like Russell Wilson, in Seattle. Think he's headed to elite/franchise. But I'm not sure if you send him to San Francisco you get the same results at this point in his career, yet.

My top 4 refuse to accept a game has ended, they fiercely just want that one more play and intend to do something with it.

Not arguing, just explaining my reasoning. I can see tiers in "reliable starter" trending up or down. You can look at a guy like Bridgewater, or Osweiler and wonder. They are the relative face of the franchise now, same as Winston and Mariota but have they really earned their chops yet.....a couple years ago the faces of those franchises seemed to be Freeman and Locker, Ponder in Minny, a declining Peyton in Denver.

If you're in San Diego, do you wonder about having Luck ? But if you're in Green Bay or New England, are you happy you don't ?

[YardRat]

If it weren't for defense, the most amazing catch in Super Bowl history, and another catch that is probably in the Top 10, Eli would be a ringless QB with so-so career stats.

[stuckincincy]

If it weren't for defense, the most amazing catch in Super Bowl history, and another catch that is probably in the Top 10, Eli would be a ringless QB with so-so career stats.

Eh. Coughlin's "calls" all last season, GB's idiotic last-play call against SEA, SEA's same against NE in 2015. Farewell SB wins for Bettis and P. Manning...

Fixed.

[pmoon6]

That's a fair analysis, IMO. 'Franchise' QB's are few and far between, the most any team can really hope for is a reliable starter that thrives when the supporting cast on the field with him is better. I think fans that are relatively new to the game (the last 15-20 years) won't realize how special players like Peyton Manning and Brady are, and even Brady will always have the cheating stigma to contend with.

Yeah, According to that, being a franchise QB is synonymous with "over protected baby".

[sukie]

Joe Ferguson... Reliable. Kelly... Franchise.

[John Doe]

If it weren't for defense, the most amazing catch in Super Bowl history, and another catch that is probably in the Top 10, Eli would be a ringless QB with so-so career stats.

Brady has had the the benefit of having a great defensive-minded head coach - maybe the best. The catch in the super bowl was certainly amazing - made by a scrub receiver. A more talented receiver may have made the catch look much easier. We can play ifs and buts about it, but the pass was catchable.

[Mace]

If it weren't for defense, the most amazing catch in Super Bowl history, and another catch that is probably in the Top 10, Eli would be a ringless QB with so-so career stats.

I still think he's a money man in the clutch, just not necessarily in an average game. No explanation for it, but I'd want him on the field in the playoffs more than I would in a regular season game. In the playoffs his comp pct goes up 2 points, td pct goes up a tenth, int pct goes down a point, yds per attempt the same, total yards goes down (he's more efficient), and his QB rating goes up 6 points.

[mdcas22]

too me a franchise QB is a guy that holds the position for 1 team for years that they think is a winner. If you say Eli isn't a franchise guy then Kelly surly wasn't one and he was.

[Joe Fo Sho]

I must have a much simpler definition of a 'franchise' QB than most. If there's a QB on our roster that allows me (as a fan) not to care about the available QBs in free agency and the draft, then he's a franchise guy to me.

My current list would be (in no order) :

Russell Wilson
Drew Brees
Matt Ryan
Cam Newton
Aaron Rodgers
Eli Manning
Phillip Rivers
Andrew Luck
Joe Flacco
Ben Roethlisberger
Andy Dalton
Tom Brady

I can't just say 'we can win a Super Bowl with this guy,' because there aren't many QB's around like that. It just has to be a guy that I think my team can win with on any given Sunday. I'm sure there are other QBs that some feel belong on my list, or maybe that don't belong on my list, but this is just my opinion.

[Mr. Pink]

A true Franchise QB is a guy who can put his team on his back and will them to victory more times than not.

Guys like Brady, Rogers, Roethlisberger, Brees, Newton to name a few.

Now as Joe Fo Sho pointed out if you have a guy where you're set at the position for a while with no worries, you're in good shape but I wouldn't say a guy like Dalton, Flacco or Manning are truly franchise QBs. They're just guys who are good enough to hold down the fort for a decade and win you games when almost everything around them goes right.

[Victor7]

If it weren't for defense, the most amazing catch in Super Bowl history, and another catch that is probably in the Top 10, Eli would be a ringless QB with so-so career stats.

You can play that game for a lot of other guys too.

Brady never would've won his early SB's without the elite defense. Or how about Vinatieri making a ridiculous kick vs the Raiders in the Championship game in the snow in the 1st one. After a bad call mind you. In his 2nd Super Bowl John Kasay missed the ENTIRE field on a kickoff setting Marcia up on his own 35 to move into FG range for the win Easy money.

Even Peyton franchise and all had to be helped immensely in both of his SB runs by stellar defenses.

Roethlisberger also benefited from an insane catch by Santonio vs Zona, not to mention the game changing INT before the half by all World POS James Harrison. A 10 point swing at the very least.

I think Eli is franchise stuff in the playoffs. During the regular season he's a solid starter. Just a notch below franchise status.

[BuffaloRedleg]

My rule is pretty simple. A QB who is capable of winning a Superbowl without a top 3-5 defense, with decent tools around him on offense.

None of that is really scientific, but it's a philosophy that is easily demonstrable in practice.

Done it:
Brady
Rodgers
Brees
Roethlisburger
Eli

Could do it but haven't:
Newton
Ryan
Rivers
Wilson (Hasn't won without a top 3 defense)
Luck

Could possibly do it with a top 3 defense
Palmer (This one might be debatable, he might deserve to be higher)
Tyrod (We hope)
Cutler
Stafford
Alex Smith
Tannehill (Maybe?)
Dalton
Flacco (Has done it, and he was absolutely dynamite in the playoffs that year, but has really dropped off and I don't think will ever be back to that form)

Could have the '85 bears and it wouldn't matter:
Mallet
Fitzpatrick
Cousins
Bradford
Hoyer
Foles
McCown
Gabbert
Cassel
Kaepernick

Too soon to tell
Bridgewater
Mariota
Winston
Bortles
Carr

That's how I divide them up mentally. It's all based on whether or not they could win a superbowl and under what conditions. It's easy to forget that winning the Suberbowl is the objective as a bills fan, I feel like if Tyrod took us to the playoffs we'd anoint him the next jim kelly.

If I'm a team that has one of those middling QBs that could only win with a top 3-5 defense, I'm ACTIVELY looking for his replacement.

[John Doe]

My rule is pretty simple. A QB who is capable of winning a Superbowl without a top 3-5 defense, with decent tools around him on offense.

None of that is really scientific, but it's a philosophy that is easily demonstrable in practice.

Done it:
Brady
Rodgers
Brees
Roethlisburger
Eli

Could do it but haven't:
Newton
Ryan
Rivers
Wilson (Hasn't won without a top 3 defense)
Luck

Could possibly do it with a top 3 defense
Palmer (This one might be debatable, he might deserve to be higher)
Tyrod (We hope)
Cutler
Stafford
Alex Smith
Tannehill (Maybe?)
Dalton
Flacco (Has done it, and he was absolutely dynamite in the playoffs that year, but has really dropped off and I don't think will ever be back to that form)

Could have the '85 bears and it wouldn't matter:
Mallet
Fitzpatrick
Cousins
Bradford
Hoyer
Foles
McCown
Gabbert
Cassel
Kaepernick

Too soon to tell
Bridgewater
Mariota
Winston
Bortles
Carr

That's how I divide them up mentally. It's all based on whether or not they could win a superbowl and under what conditions. It's easy to forget that winning the Suberbowl is the objective as a bills fan, I feel like if Tyrod took us to the playoffs we'd anoint him the next jim kelly.

If I'm a team that has one of those middling QBs that could only win with a top 3-5 defense, I'm ACTIVELY looking for his replacement.

In my opinion, that's a good grouping, but there are potential flaws in everyone's scale, including my own.

A ball control offense such as that run by Seattle may result in great defensive stats. Wilson's running skills can keep drives alive and eat up the clock. I am not saying that I have done any extensive research on the subject, but it is something to consider.

I have to think that Wilson is a franchise QB. He should have another ring but we all know what happened.

[ghz in pittsburgh]

Listen to what Kelly said about Tyrod http://www.wgr550.com/Jim-Kelly-In-S...-was-/22698065

I know everyone has been saying Tyrod does not throw to the middle because he's short. But sounds like Kelly, not really into coaching, sees something different. More in the area of "can't read defense." We know EJ suffers from the same deficiency but Tyrod is smarter enough to take safe route of throwing outside to guys like Watkins. Also his unbelievable mobility provides another weapon that really disguised some of his problems. Maybe that's why Whaley and Co. are not so committed to Tyrod yet.

[Mace]

I'm pretty much believing at this point that there is a wee population of franchise qb's (who can carry a team on their back) and a variety of reliable starters trending up or down, with a substantial amount of maybes.

Nearly all the franchise guys are older (with nods to Newton and Wilson), Going back 5 years that's 2 in 68 picks unless you include Luck (I dunno) and Dalton (I dunno) which at best gets you to 4 looking good among 68 QBs with over 1,000 games started. among them.

A good number of the reliable starters who could lead their teams to the promised land are also aging, and/or have also led their teams to losing records, and the maybes are mostly young with not much track record yet, not so different from the previous amount of hopeful maybes in past years.

It all kind of confirms (to me), my thought that you're more likely to get a reliable starter who will maybe, than an elite, more so with the increased influence of the spread in college.

They just aren't all over the place every year where you can snatch them up like dandelions if you get to the grass first. Has to be a close to great match between player/system/OC/GM and timing. Looks rare.