What university is the real quarterback U?

[oxcoug]

Miami was the Original QB U. Let's not be like another school we're too familiar with at this place in ripping off one of "The U's" traditions.

I think I was pretty clear in my post that I wasn't saying BYU was it. I was asking the question - who is?

Given that it's been over 20 years since Miami sent a QB to the NFL who would become a long term starter at that level, I think it's fair to wonder if another school - Michigan, for instance, which has put four starting QBs in the NFL in the past two decades, including He of the Golden Locks, might have caught them.

[Devildog]

Cal - Aaron Rogers, Steve Bratowski (SP), Joe Kapp

+ Craig Morton, Kyle Boller

[oxcoug]

Well, then per that logic, I guess Mississippi Valley State University should now be known as Wide Receiver U.

Totally, since MVSU has placed all of one receiver in the NFL. Exactly what that logic would point to.

[U-Ute]

When in doubt, Google knows best... or at least will find a way to drive discussion...

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quarterback_U"]Quarterback U - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
Scout - Purely based on college production
Sports Central - They rank by how many QB's from a school played in the NFL

NOTE: I'm not sure why it insists on double-linking the Wikipedia article.

[TripletDaddy]

Totally, since MVSU has placed all of one receiver in the NFL. Exactly what that logic would point to.

He is one of, if not the greatest receiver in NFL history. I'm just using your own logic. I thought you said you consider what the athletes accomplish in the NFL?

New Mexico should receive some acclaim for churning out Brian Urlacher.

[oxcoug]

He is one of, if not the greatest receiver in NFL history. I'm just using your own logic. I thought you said you consider what the athletes accomplish in the NFL?

New Mexico should receive some acclaim for churning out Brian Urlacher.

That's not my logic. That's my logic halved and reconstituted in a DDD rendering. My logic was that programs that consistently send players to the NFL who clear the bar and make teams show signs of being a program that breeds players at that position.

By way of comparison-

The number of BYU QBs in the past 40 years who have made NFL rosters: 11, or one every 3.9 years.

The number of MVSU WRs in the past 40 years who have made NFL rosters: 1, or one every 40.0 years.

[TripletDaddy]

That's not my logic. That's my logic halved and reconstituted in a DDD rendering. My logic was that programs that consistently send players to the NFL who clear the bar and make teams show signs of being a program that breeds players at that position.

By way of comparison-

The number of BYU QBs in the past 40 years who have made NFL rosters: 11, or one every 3.9 years.

The number of MVSU WRs in the past 40 years who have made NFL rosters: 1, or one every 40.0 years.

Then I'm not sure what you are asking. Simply put together a spreadsheet using this objective criteria and the you can inform us which college really is quarterback U. Apparently, your definition of quarterback U is contingent upon what the athletes do in their pro career. I don't agree with that, but if it works for you, fair enough.

[Paperback Writer]

As many know, there are differences between the college and NFL games. There are many highly successful college QBs that never played in the NFL at QB...several Heisman winners at QB that I can think of.

So I think it's important to define the criteria used. Best college QB or most successful in the NFL? They are not always the same.

It's even tough coming up with criteria in the college game to evaluate a QB. Is is QB rating, passing stats, win percentage? I guess what I'm getting at is that some very successful college QBs have been running quarterbacks that are not a good fit for the NFL and don't measure well in QB ratings that favor passing statistics.

[oxcoug]

As many know, there are differences between the college and NFL games. There are many highly successful college QBs that never played in the NFL at QB...several Heisman winners at QB that I can think of.

So I think it's important to define the criteria used. Best college QB or most successful in the NFL? They are not always the same.

It's even tough coming up with criteria in the college game to evaluate a QB. Is is QB rating, passing stats, win percentage? I guess what I'm getting at is that some very successful college QBs have been running quarterbacks that are not a good fit for the NFL and don't measure well in QB ratings that favor passing statistics.

All true - I inject the NFL as a threshold measurement/vindicator because I think college stats are too subjective. Ty Detmer is validated by the fact that NFL franchises kept him around for 13 years - the similarly gaudy numbers thrown up by the likes of Klingler, Brennan and Chang are, in my view, exposed as system numbers owing to the fact that the guys behind them either sucked or couldn't stick in the NFL.

But I understand if people want to keep the things separate.

[scr29]

Here is a link to something that I put together this summer stating BYU's case:

http://isportsweb.com/2010/07/26/b-y...quarterback-u/

In it I suggest the following formula

1. Quarterback Stats (30%). We all know what stats are important for quarterbacks: passing yards, touchdown passes, completion percentage, and passing efficiency. The stats will take into account season and career stats. (I wanted to include game stats, but game-by-game stats for the entire 35 year period were impossible to obtain.)

2. NCAA Records (35%). No school can lay claim on the title “Quarterback U” if they don’t have a sizable presence in the NCAA record books. Quarterback U infers that this school is not just a good passing school, but the best passing school. The best passers are the ones who set the records.

3. Awards and Accolades (15%). Just as with NCAA records, if you are Quarterback U, your quarterbacks better be bringing home some hardware, and that is on a national level. Conference player of the year and bowl MVP awards are nice, but they do nothing to settle a debate about being Quarterback U.

4. Win-Loss records (10%). While quarterbacks are not solely responsible for winning a game or losing a game, this position gets the most praise or the most criticism after a game. When the wins don’t pile up, the quarterback is the first one on the hot seat. It is widely accepted that it takes a good quarterback to win. The teams that end the year on top are the teams with good, if not great, quarterbacks.

5. Advancing to the NFL (10%). I agree with Dave that getting into the NFL should count for something, but I can’t put too much weight into it. As I look at the 2010 NFL draft, it is painfully obvious that the NFL places a lot of emphasis on uncontrollable measurables (height and weight) and not so much emphasis on controllable measurables (accuracy, decision making, reading defenses, efficiency). Injuries, new coaches, and roster depth are all factors to a player’s success in the NFL that are out of a university’s control. A school is very limited in even getting its players into the professional ranks. While I love to see former BYU players flourish in the NFL, it is very difficult to assess how much credit BYU can claim for that player’s success.


A few other notes:

1. As for the SEC, don't forget the Manning family.

2. I am surprised no body brought up Lee Grosscup yet. NFL first round draft pick and led the NCAA in passing yards one season.

3. What about Texas Tech and Hawaii?

4. Marc Wilson was "29-5 record in the NFL as a starter for the Raiders. Wilson’s downfall was playing on the same team as fumble prone but hall of famer Marcus Allen. Three of Wilsons 5 losses (two in the playoffs) were the result of Allen fumbles and yet Wilson is the guy who everyone remembers as the bust in Oakland." That is from Louis Deaux, a member of the FWAA, and can be found here in the comments section.

[oxcoug]

Here is a link to something that I put together this summer stating BYU's case:

http://isportsweb.com/2010/07/26/b-y...quarterback-u/

In it I suggest the following formula

1. Quarterback Stats (30%). We all know what stats are important for quarterbacks: passing yards, touchdown passes, completion percentage, and passing efficiency. The stats will take into account season and career stats. (I wanted to include game stats, but game-by-game stats for the entire 35 year period were impossible to obtain.)

2. NCAA Records (35%). No school can lay claim on the title “Quarterback U” if they don’t have a sizable presence in the NCAA record books. Quarterback U infers that this school is not just a good passing school, but the best passing school. The best passers are the ones who set the records.

3. Awards and Accolades (15%). Just as with NCAA records, if you are Quarterback U, your quarterbacks better be bringing home some hardware, and that is on a national level. Conference player of the year and bowl MVP awards are nice, but they do nothing to settle a debate about being Quarterback U.

4. Win-Loss records (10%). While quarterbacks are not solely responsible for winning a game or losing a game, this position gets the most praise or the most criticism after a game. When the wins don’t pile up, the quarterback is the first one on the hot seat. It is widely accepted that it takes a good quarterback to win. The teams that end the year on top are the teams with good, if not great, quarterbacks.

5. Advancing to the NFL (10%). I agree with Dave that getting into the NFL should count for something, but I can’t put too much weight into it. As I look at the 2010 NFL draft, it is painfully obvious that the NFL places a lot of emphasis on uncontrollable measurables (height and weight) and not so much emphasis on controllable measurables (accuracy, decision making, reading defenses, efficiency). Injuries, new coaches, and roster depth are all factors to a player’s success in the NFL that are out of a university’s control. A school is very limited in even getting its players into the professional ranks. While I love to see former BYU players flourish in the NFL, it is very difficult to assess how much credit BYU can claim for that player’s success.


A few other notes:

1. As for the SEC, don't forget the Manning family.

2. I am surprised no body brought up Lee Grosscup yet. NFL first round draft pick and led the NCAA in passing yards one season.

3. What about Texas Tech and Hawaii?

4. Marc Wilson was "29-5 record in the NFL as a starter for the Raiders. Wilson’s downfall was playing on the same team as fumble prone but hall of famer Marcus Allen. Three of Wilsons 5 losses (two in the playoffs) were the result of Allen fumbles and yet Wilson is the guy who everyone remembers as the bust in Oakland." That is from Louis Deaux, a member of the FWAA, and can be found here in the comments section.

Damn. That's some thinking there. Cool stuff SCR, and when I say "cool" I mean "if stat geekery is cool, you're Miles Freaking Davis."

Very interesting notes on Wilson - very interesting. I'd always felt he got a raw deal but had never seen it quantified like that.

As for T Tech and Hawaii - I discount them because all of their QBs, in my view, have been pure system guys. Have any of those guys gone on to success after college? They played in stat machine systems- which obviously can be said to some extent of BYU, but BYU's guys have routinely been validated by clearing the NFL bar. That's why I emphasize the NFL. As for uncontrollable variables like height etc.... Detmer is not even 6 ft tall and he made it in the NFL for 13 years. Max Hall might not last long but he's already made a roster and started a couple of NFL games.

[RC Vikings]

Ohio State: 2 (Is Troy Smith the most forgettable Heisman winner of the past decade?)

I would say Eric Crouch would be the winner of that award.

[Surfah]

Here is a link to something that I put together this summer stating BYU's case:

http://isportsweb.com/2010/07/26/b-y...quarterback-u/

In it I suggest the following formula

1. Quarterback Stats (30%). We all know what stats are important for quarterbacks: passing yards, touchdown passes, completion percentage, and passing efficiency. The stats will take into account season and career stats. (I wanted to include game stats, but game-by-game stats for the entire 35 year period were impossible to obtain.)

2. NCAA Records (35%). No school can lay claim on the title “Quarterback U” if they don’t have a sizable presence in the NCAA record books. Quarterback U infers that this school is not just a good passing school, but the best passing school. The best passers are the ones who set the records.

3. Awards and Accolades (15%). Just as with NCAA records, if you are Quarterback U, your quarterbacks better be bringing home some hardware, and that is on a national level. Conference player of the year and bowl MVP awards are nice, but they do nothing to settle a debate about being Quarterback U.

4. Win-Loss records (10%). While quarterbacks are not solely responsible for winning a game or losing a game, this position gets the most praise or the most criticism after a game. When the wins don’t pile up, the quarterback is the first one on the hot seat. It is widely accepted that it takes a good quarterback to win. The teams that end the year on top are the teams with good, if not great, quarterbacks.

5. Advancing to the NFL (10%). I agree with Dave that getting into the NFL should count for something, but I can’t put too much weight into it. As I look at the 2010 NFL draft, it is painfully obvious that the NFL places a lot of emphasis on uncontrollable measurables (height and weight) and not so much emphasis on controllable measurables (accuracy, decision making, reading defenses, efficiency). Injuries, new coaches, and roster depth are all factors to a player’s success in the NFL that are out of a university’s control. A school is very limited in even getting its players into the professional ranks. While I love to see former BYU players flourish in the NFL, it is very difficult to assess how much credit BYU can claim for that player’s success.


A few other notes:

1. As for the SEC, don't forget the Manning family.

2. I am surprised no body brought up Lee Grosscup yet. NFL first round draft pick and led the NCAA in passing yards one season.

3. What about Texas Tech and Hawaii?

4. Marc Wilson was "29-5 record in the NFL as a starter for the Raiders. Wilson’s downfall was playing on the same team as fumble prone but hall of famer Marcus Allen. Three of Wilsons 5 losses (two in the playoffs) were the result of Allen fumbles and yet Wilson is the guy who everyone remembers as the bust in Oakland." That is from Louis Deaux, a member of the FWAA, and can be found here in the comments section.

Convinced me. Damn.

[oxcoug]

Convinced me. Damn.

Yeah gotta say - more Sammy Baugh and Davey O'Brien trophies than any other school. That's a pretty solid measurement.

[scr29]

Damn. That's some thinking there. Cool stuff SCR, and when I say "cool" I mean "if stat geekery is cool, you're Miles Freaking Davis."

Thanks. Maybe one day I can be worthy enough of being mentioned in the same breath as Indy Coug.

One other quick point, for what it is worth.

Virgil Carter is credited by some to be the first west coast offense quarterback when he was coached by none other than Bill Walsh in Cincinnati.