All these QBs have something in common.
Stan Humphries, Niel ODonnell, Drew Bledsoe, Chris Chandler, Kerry Collins, Rich Gannon, Jake Delhomme, Matt Hasselbeck, Rex Grossman.

I'm sure you all know, they all led their team to the Super Bowl.

Now the question is, would you consider them "franchise" quarterbacks?

bledsoe doesnt get enough credit imo,, he was a franchise quaterback and would love to see henee resemable his career..will probabaly get bashed for saying this but as we should all know SB wins arent the sole criteria for a franchise qb

Leon In Denver Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> All these QBs have something in common.
> Stan Humphries, Niel ODonnell, Drew Bledsoe, Chris
> Chandler, Kerry Collins, Rich Gannon, Jake
> Delhomme, Matt Hasselbeck, Rex Grossman.
>
> I'm sure you all know, they all led their team to
> the Super Bowl.
>
> Now the question is, would you consider them
> "franchise" quarterbacks?

you are right, they all have one thing in common---except maybe for Bledsoe and Gannon that one season only, they all were "carried" to the SB by team's defense and RBs. That's not the benchmark, and not really how teams win anymore in this era. Also, they all lost, in most cases to a FRANCHISE QB
Aikman beat ODonnel
Farve beat Bledsoe
Brady beat Delhome
Rapistberger beat Hasselbeck
P Manning beat Grossman

I think it proves to go to the Superbowl, all you have to do is have one good year and one good year does not equate to being a franchise QB, as proved by this list. A good defense also doesnt hurt. The better your defense, the worse the offense can be... Also all of those guys listed, at one point or another put up HOF numbers in a single season, except for Grossman, Chandler and Collins, but they had some of the best defense's.

IMHO
Yes: Drew Bledsoe

Close but no cigar: Matt Hasselbeck; Rich Gannon

No way: Stan Humphries, Niel ODonnell, Chris Chandler, Kerry Collins, Jake Delhomme, Rex Grossman.

I think a Franchise QB is what I would call a "natural" QB. Someone that can do it from early in his career to late in his career.

Gannon was great from ages 33 to 37 (or thereabouts). Not many guys become stars after 10 years of mediocrity and bouncing around the league.

Bledsow, and Hasselbeck. Thats it Hasselbeck has a bad back, which really eclipsed his career.

The rest where just ok, Collins and Gannon came on strong late.

Delhomme would have it, but shoulder issues, and surgeries killed his arm the past couple years.
Delhomme is but again the injuries to him, and Hassbeck killed the remaining time in their careers.

Quote:

"Gannon was great from ages 33 to 37 (or thereabouts). Not many guys become stars after 10 years of mediocrity and bouncing around the league."



&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Sounds like Brett Boone, Brady Anderson, and Jason Giambi.....Oh wait....



Hmmmmm....

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Phinsfan, Glad to see you state this.
"You are right. Nearly any starting NFL QB is capable of having a Super Bowl type season. You have to have talent to start in the NFL, even if you are not great. Given the right circumstances, teammates and offense just about any QB has a chance to make it to the SB even if they can't win it."

This is the point I have been trying to make with you and others for quite some time.
A team has to be full of winners, including the QB, just to make it to the SB.
I started from 1995 with this list. Only the last 3 years did both team have that Elite QB IMO. Is the loser of the SB a loser? No, if he wasn't a winner he would not be there in the first place.

My real point is the fact that it takes a complete team to get to the SB whether they win or lose that game. Of coarse we only tend to remember the winners. Took me a few minutes to remember who the Saints beat last year.

As far as the game changing. Yup, it changes every year. That is one thing I hate about the NFL. But, it still takes a complete team. Just look at the teams over the years and we find that they all, both the winners of the SB and the losers, have a great defense and at least a very good running game, especially in the red zone.

We can win with Henne I believe. But we simply MUST get that great OL and continue to improve our D every year. Of coarse ST must continue to improve.

Where would we be right now if our OL was as good as last year and our Special teams did not let us down? We are closer than many may think.

Biggest disapointment this year? The play of our OL. I think we all figured that would imporve, but it hasn't. If you want the GM or Sparano fired, it should be done if they don't imporve that line next year.

It's why QB is the number 1 thing we need. Andrew Luck. We keep losing, we might have a chance. I hope buffalo wins a few and beats us. We need luck and luck lol

I'm afraid what you said and all your research just went right over dolfan 1's head, PhinFans2.

But then gopher sh_t would go over his head.

ChyrenB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm afraid what you said and all your research
> just went right over dolfan 1's head, PhinFans2.
>
> But then gopher sh_t would go over his head.


Whatever loser boy

I thought you were the one advocating losing. You even asked folks to join your losing bandwagon.

And I still am. I want to be 6-10. Gives us a chance in 2012-2013 to have a shot

Loser. Straight loser.....and pats fan.

---------------------

"When you suck long enough, you get a Hickey"

Gopher Sh_t? Pwahahahahahahahah!

GBOFinFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gopher Sh_t? Pwahahahahahahahah!


EXPLANATION: He sh_ts underground.

Aqua&Orange Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Loser. Straight loser.....and pats fan.

Nope, just want to get better, and the destruction of the phins the next 4 games will get us closer to a new regime. I truly dont understand you people, lets win, lets flex our ego, lets show that we can have a better than .500...dude who cares, you are not going to the playoffs, the superbowl, or any of that, so when you lose, you play for better draft prospects, honestly you are an idiot to want us to win when we are not winning for anything.

dolfan you calling anyone an idiot? You a troll.

Funny how you disapear when we win and appear out of the woodworks when we lose. Thats the definition of TROLL.

samsam3738 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dolfan you calling anyone an idiot? You a troll.
>
> Funny how you disapear when we win and appear out
> of the woodworks when we lose. Thats the
> definition of TROLL.


samsam3738, not a troll, just want this team to get better...time to clean house. I know others think im full of shit, but my "source" says people are worried about there jobs. So just to let you there is whispers of the demise of this regime..thank god ross is listening