ESPN Insiders rank QB's

[Bigappleyinzer]

7. Ben Roethlisberger, Pittsburgh Steelers (1.85 average rating)

One of the offensive coaches placed Rivers and Roethlisberger in the top tier. He noted that Rivers wins with his mind while Roethlisberger wins with his physical abilities. Several GMs said they thought Roethlisberger had declined into the second tier over the past couple seasons. "If you were there in Pittsburgh, you saw him run the no-huddle, you saw the command, you saw him run and make plays," a coordinator said. "Other people will not think as much of him. He is a very good quarterback, able to get himself out of tough positions."

Said one GM: "Ben plays big-boy football -- and regardless of what you think, he knows how to win the game."

The top guys:
T-1. Tom Brady, New England Patriots (1.04 average rating)
T-1. Peyton Manning, Denver Broncos (1.04 average rating)
T-1. Aaron Rodgers, Green Bay Packers (1.04 average rating)
T-1. Drew Brees, New Orleans Saints (1.04 average rating)
5. Andrew Luck, Indianapolis Colts (1.50 average rating)
6. Philip Rivers, San Diego Chargers (1.77 average rating)
12. Joe Flacco, Baltimore Ravens (2.31 average rating)

Find it difficult placing Andrew luck in the top 5 over BB but who knows...

 

[Roy92040]

Philip Rivers No. 6. Give me a break

 

[FordFairLane]

Andrew Luck at 5 is just retarded. I like him but he hasn't even broke 90 on QB rating and Ben had 98+ his first two seasons. I know his college hype has followed him but he's not a top 10 QB yet. I believe he will be and when it is all said and done has an Elway type career but right now, no.

 

[Steelers1356]

Luck is progressing but isn't quite there yet statistically. I would put him a notch above Flacco but not #5.

 

[Steelerfan]

Agree with first two responses. The "insiders" are idiots.

 

[FordFairLane]

Luck is progressing but isn't quite there yet statistically. I would put him a notch above Flacco but not #5.

Yeah, but I would put Flacco around 15 or 16 and Luck in that 11-14 range.

 

[fedderone]

If you're able to read the whole article, it's an interesting read.
The case for Luck is valid. I personally don't agree with the 5 spot, but their arguments hold water and aren't out of left field.
Also, the "insiders" are people in the know :

Eight general managers, two former GMs, four pro personnel evaluators, seven coordinators, two head coaches, two position coaches and a top executive participated.

They collectively have forgotten more than all us know combined.
I also think Marcia is not #1 overall. He's top 5, but he couldn't hold Brees/Manning/Rodgers' jocks with all things the same.

 

[Hineswardkickedurpanzyass]

Brady is #1 when it comes to getting his way

 

[USDA#1]

"Rivers wins with his mind"


exactly wtf has he ever won?

 

[Bigappleyinzer]

"Rivers wins with his mind"


exactly wtf has he ever won?

The hearts of women across the nation

 

[AggieSteel]

Do not agree with Luck in top 5. We can debate Rivers v Ben right now, although I'd pick Ben.. but Luck? So far he's more hype than substance. He's been good no doubt, with potential for top 5 good, but not top 5 good yet.

 

[deljzc]

After Eli won his 2nd Super Bowl he was top-5.

After 2012 when Rivers had an 88 rating and threw 35 INT's and 24 fumbles and a 15-17 record over the previous two season, no "expert" mentioned him in this group.

Just goes to show how much opinions of even so-called "experts" and actual GM's blows with whatever way the wind is currently blowing that year.

It's actually one of the most damning characteristics of GM's we actually get to glimpse from time-to-time (see Michael Lombardi's old Red Chip/Blue Chip articles on NFL.com). That a player they so-called "evaluated" as top-5 or "blue chip" one year can completely fall out of favor the next based on a bad season is stupid. What exactly happens in that year? Do they not run as fast? Is age 27 different from age 26? Did they forget how to play?

No GM or ex-GM on TV/radio ever really addresses that point. Why are they evaluating pro players DIFFERENT from college players? It's still about what can a player do NEXT GAME, not last week or last year or three years ago. What can he do INDEPENDENT of the talent around him?

The fact these lists change so dramatically sometimes just shows how much their so-called "knowledge" and "expertise" is a joke. Fans give this good-old boy, white elitist, friends of friends group that runs the NFL WAY too much credit in their knowledge and identification of talent.

 

[Confluence]

After Eli won his 2nd Super Bowl he was top-5.

After 2012 when Rivers had an 88 rating and threw 35 INT's and 24 fumbles and a 15-17 record over the previous two season, no "expert" mentioned him in this group.

Just goes to show how much opinions of even so-called "experts" and actual GM's blows with whatever way the wind is currently blowing that year.

It's actually one of the most damning characteristics of GM's we actually get to glimpse from time-to-time (see Michael Lombardi's old Red Chip/Blue Chip articles on NFL.com). That a player they so-called "evaluated" as top-5 or "blue chip" one year can completely fall out of favor the next based on a bad season is stupid. What exactly happens in that year? Do they not run as fast? Is age 27 different from age 26? Did they forget how to play?

No GM or ex-GM on TV/radio ever really addresses that point. Why are they evaluating pro players DIFFERENT from college players? It's still about what can a player do NEXT GAME, not last week or last year or three years ago. What can he do INDEPENDENT of the talent around him?

The fact these lists change so dramatically sometimes just shows how much their so-called "knowledge" and "expertise" is a joke. Fans give this good-old boy, white elitist, friends of friends group that runs the NFL WAY too much credit in their knowledge and identification of talent.

That's racist!

 

[steelermania]

No way Luck is top 5. He got tons of love for the playoff comeback, but it was his poor play that put them in a big hole to begin with.

 

[fedderone]

After Eli won his 2nd Super Bowl he was top-5.

After 2012 when Rivers had an 88 rating and threw 35 INT's and 24 fumbles and a 15-17 record over the previous two season, no "expert" mentioned him in this group.

Just goes to show how much opinions of even so-called "experts" and actual GM's blows with whatever way the wind is currently blowing that year.

It's actually one of the most damning characteristics of GM's we actually get to glimpse from time-to-time (see Michael Lombardi's old Red Chip/Blue Chip articles on NFL.com). That a player they so-called "evaluated" as top-5 or "blue chip" one year can completely fall out of favor the next based on a bad season is stupid. What exactly happens in that year? Do they not run as fast? Is age 27 different from age 26? Did they forget how to play?

No GM or ex-GM on TV/radio ever really addresses that point. Why are they evaluating pro players DIFFERENT from college players? It's still about what can a player do NEXT GAME, not last week or last year or three years ago. What can he do INDEPENDENT of the talent around him?

The fact these lists change so dramatically sometimes just shows how much their so-called "knowledge" and "expertise" is a joke. Fans give this good-old boy, white elitist, friends of friends group that runs the NFL WAY too much credit in their knowledge and identification of talent.

That's my main gripe with the article. It says some of these peeps focused too much on just last season, while others looked at the entire body of work.
I wish they were all working from the same requirements/protocol.

 

[slashsteel]

I would debate Ben deserves the no. 5 spot................................... no lower..........

 

[deljzc]

There are three very different categories when it comes to "Top-10" lists.

1. Is the list a snap shot of "right this instant in time". Which means either a) Who is the best quarterback I could pick for this Sunday's game? or even more broadly b) Who is the best quarterback to run my team this season in an attempt to win the 2014 Super Bowl?

2. Who is going to end up with the best careers if we project forward until 2025 or 2040 or whatever date all these quarterbacks are retired?

3. Who is the best player if we had an imaginary "draft" and your pick represents a remaining career investment. Or if each player is a free agent right now, who would get the most money? Or who is the best long-term investment? Who would be best to build a franchise around? Stuff like that.


Each of those questions really has a different top-10 list. At least to me.

 

[Punxsutawney]

If one has watched more than a handful of Colts games over the past few two seasons, he will see how special Andrew Luck is.

He's Peyton with legs.

Once he totally mentally masters the pro game, as Peyton did in his 5th or 6th season, he'll be totally unstoppable.

 

[deljzc]

If the criteria is #3 above, in which we are talking "starting a franchise with" then Brady and Manning aren't even in the top-10.

It really comes down to Aaron Rogers (30 years old) vs. Andrew Luck (24 years old) with all the other young bucks a step behind them in my opinion.

 

[CoolieMan]

If one has watched more than a handful of Colts games over the past few two seasons, he will see how special Andrew Luck is.

He's Peyton with legs.

Once he totally mentally masters the pro game, as Peyton did in his 5th or 6th season, he'll be totally unstoppable.

if he ever totally mentally masters the pro game......

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

Eli may have two Super Bowls, but he is not an elite QB. He's far too inconsistent to be considered elite.

Big Ben was right behind him with Arians as OC. Haley has helped correct some of Ben's awful habits but Ben could and should have been higher with his talent.

 

[Vader]

Ben hasn't had a real OL in a long time. Then the Steelers let his WRs go and he has to start over every few years. I can even count how many WRs have left the past 5 years. This year he has ONE go to WR in Brown. He'll have an untested WR in Wheaton and a new WR in Moore. Then as backups he has a washed up DHB and a rookie. He also hasn't had a real RB since Bettis left. Now he finally has Bell and Blount. So that should help. He has ONE TE worth a **** and some half assed hybrid FB/ TE with Johnson.

****, not sure what else Ben can do with what he has.

 

[steelermania]

Ben hasn't had a real OL in a long time. Then the Steelers let his WRs go and he has to start over every few years. I can even count how many WRs have left the past 5 years. This year he has ONE go to WR in Brown. He'll have an untested WR in Wheaton and a new WR in Moore. Then as backups he has a washed up DHB and a rookie. He also hasn't had a real RB since Bettis left. Now he finally has Bell and Blount. So that should help. He has ONE TE worth a **** and some half assed hybrid FB/ TE with Johnson.

****, not sure what else Ben can do with what he has.

Ben never really had Bettis. Duce was the main back his rookie year, and Parker was the main back in 2005. That said, Parker was pretty good for 3 years. He wasn't Bettis, but how many elite backs are there? Aaron Rogers has never had a true stud.

 

[Wingman]

After Eli won his 2nd Super Bowl he was top-5.

After 2012 when Rivers had an 88 rating and threw 35 INT's and 24 fumbles and a 15-17 record over the previous two season, no "expert" mentioned him in this group.

Just goes to show how much opinions of even so-called "experts" and actual GM's blows with whatever way the wind is currently blowing that year.

It's actually one of the most damning characteristics of GM's we actually get to glimpse from time-to-time (see Michael Lombardi's old Red Chip/Blue Chip articles on NFL.com). That a player they so-called "evaluated" as top-5 or "blue chip" one year can completely fall out of favor the next based on a bad season is stupid. What exactly happens in that year? Do they not run as fast? Is age 27 different from age 26? Did they forget how to play?

No GM or ex-GM on TV/radio ever really addresses that point. Why are they evaluating pro players DIFFERENT from college players? It's still about what can a player do NEXT GAME, not last week or last year or three years ago. What can he do INDEPENDENT of the talent around him?

The fact these lists change so dramatically sometimes just shows how much their so-called "knowledge" and "expertise" is a joke. Fans give this good-old boy, white elitist, friends of friends group that runs the NFL WAY too much credit in their knowledge and identification of talent.

Would it help if they were Black elitist, or Gay elitist, or Hispanic elitist, or Female elitist?

 

[SteelerinMD]

Yeah, but I would put Flacco around 15 or 16.

But But But, he is a super bowl MVP and beat the Steelers a few times ALL BY HIMSELF