Honestly given the perception of the QBs at the time they were drafted...

[frash.exe]

True, but the thread is about QBs.

if you're projected in the first round, chances are you have hype, no matter what position you play. There have been QBs to get hype that didn't deserve it, as well as defensive picks (Alan Branch anyone?)

[OneBadassCat]

i love how people are so quick to criticize QBs who've broken 100 ratings and played remarkably in postseason games when we can't even get a QB to break a 60 rating against the Bengals defense in week 3

Sanchez is Jake Delhomme with a mustache and maracas. He will never amount to best in the league. I will criticize him all day everyday because he hides behind his fugin team. Not even top 10.

[Mr. Scot]

Rex Grossman has broken 100 rating and played well in a postseason game.

[frash.exe]

Rex Grossman has broken 100 rating and played well in a postseason game.

no he hasn't

[mav1234]

The more profitable a franchise is the more guaranteed money they are willing to throw at a back up RB. Like $15 million.

That likely had a lot to do with the money they had made off Vick.

you're really reaching here. Vick cost that franchise a ton of net worth with what he did. Ryan is building it back up, and who knows what it would have been if they had gone after someone other than Vick.

Clearly, they were not afraid to make big moves *before* Vick considering how they *got* Vick. So I dont' really hold that they needed Vick in order to pay people money or make big moves.

Undoubtedly Vick helped them while he was there, but IMO that is not enough to have ended up being worth it to the organization. Hell even Vick himself says he cheated the Falcons organization with what happened. And he's right.

Doesn't mean he was a "bad choice" exactly it just means it didn't work out well.

[Mr. Scot]

no he hasn't

http://www.nfl.com/players/rexgrossman/gamelogs?id=GRO597298&season=2006

Broke 100 seven times that season. Played well in two postseason games, arguably three but picks in the Super Bowl hurt him.

[frash.exe]

in the postseason

[TheRealDeal]

Sad thing is all the QBs you named are game managing QBs and none are elite.

[TheRealDeal]

Trent Dilfer did what you say, even though you didn't originally say they had to have 100 rating in the postseason

And Dilfer had a way shittier cast than Sanchez did.

[TheRealDeal]

And QB rating is one of the worst stats in all of sports

[frash.exe]

http://www.nfl.com/players/rexgrossman/gamelogs?id=GRO597298&season=2006

Broke 100 seven times that season. Played well in two postseason games, arguably three but picks in the Super Bowl hurt him.

his best postseason rating was a 76, and the one game he didn't turn the ball over he couldn't break 50% in completion pctg so no I don't agree that he's had good performances in the postseason

[Mr. Scot]

his best postseason rating was a 76, and the one game he didn't turn the ball over he couldn't break 50% in completion pctg so no I don't agree that he's had good performances in the postseason

Your original post didn't say both in the same game. And if that's what you want, you may want to go back and check because that may disqualify some of the guys you're talking about.

And as much of a Grossman critic as I am, he wasn't bad in the 2006 postseason. Had Cedric Benson not wussed out after taking a nasty shot from Bob Sanders early, he might even have ended up with a ring.

[CarolinaPanthers8789]

Testaverde succeeded? Sort of. Worth the #1? No way.

Bledsoe got his Super Bowl ring as a backup. For a number one pick, he was an underachiever.

Bartowski was decent. Worth the number one though? Please :nonod:

Trent Dilfer has a Super Bowl ring as a starter. Was he worth the #1 overall pick?

Doesn't really matter though no does it, he won a SB and thats what every team wants to accomplish.

[teeray]

And QB rating is one of the worst stats in all of sports

You know you can make all your points in one post right?? ;)