Barry Sanders vs. Charles Rogers

[True2tRA]

Tebow had a fine college career. He was a standout player on a standout team.
But there have been, literally, hundreds of players like Tebow through the years. Tebow benefits from the recency effect in much the same way that Ndamukong Suh benefits over Rich Glover.

I get that his stats are gaudy, and he played QB of a very good team. But he benefited from a system that featured him greatly - much like Eric Crouch circa 2001.

I see what your trying to get at, but what I'm not getting is how it has somehow now become a knock against someone's career because they executed their offense to perfection. It's like saying they almost don't deserve credit, the system does. Well then hell, why don't they just throw anyone back there. These guys were recruited to those teams for a reason. It was because their talents fit that system. It's like saying Adrian Peterson was just a beneficiary of Oklahoma handing him the ball, which is true, but how many guys could have done what he did with it?

Give credit where credit is due. Crouch won a Heisman in a successful system, but Crouch possibly executed that system as good as anyone we've ever seen. Florida's offense was not nearly as successful after Tebow left. It's funny, here at Huskerboard so many of the same people who will pull out all kinds of stats and numbers to support their argument, will then try to ignore those stats and numbers when they disprove their point. The numbers don't lie in Crouch or Tebows case. Both were top of the line college football players.

 

[True2tRA]

Geez sometimes you forget how many people on Huskerboard can walk onto a college stadium turf every Saturday, in front of 80-100 thousand fans, and play the game like its a cake walk. Apparently having one of the greatest careers in college football history is nothing but a walk in the park to an everyday Huskerboard member.

 

[ShawnWatson]

Tebow had a fine college career. He was a standout player on a standout team.
But there have been, literally, hundreds of players like Tebow through the years. Tebow benefits from the recency effect in much the same way that Ndamukong Suh benefits over Rich Glover.

I get that his stats are gaudy, and he played QB of a very good team. But he benefited from a system that featured him greatly - much like Eric Crouch circa 2001.

I see what your trying to get at, but what I'm not getting is how it has somehow now become a knock against someone's career because they executed their offense to perfection. It's like saying they almost don't deserve credit, the system does. Well then hell, why don't they just throw anyone back there. These guys were recruited to those teams for a reason. It was because their talents fit that system. It's like saying Adrian Peterson was just a beneficiary of Oklahoma handing him the ball, which is true, but how many guys could have done what he did with it?

Give credit where credit is due. Crouch won a Heisman in a successful system, but Crouch possibly executed that system as good as anyone we've ever seen. Florida's offense was not nearly as successful after Tebow left. It's funny, here at Huskerboard so many of the same people who will pull out all kinds of stats and numbers to support their argument, will then try to ignore those stats and numbers when they disprove their point. The numbers don't lie in Crouch or Tebows case. Both were top of the line college football players.

I have never seen someone state Adrian Petersen benefited from the Oklahoma system. The guy almost broke the single season professional rushing record. You either don't watch football or that was a mistype.

 

[True2tRA]

I don't watch football.

 

[NebraskaHarry]

Of course he deserves in the tourny. They guy won the Heisman and a NC as a starting QB.

 

[Landlord]

QB1 -

Passing - 661/995, 66.4%, 9,285 yards, 9.3 ypa, 88 TDs, 16 INTs, 170.8 rating

Rushing - 692 carries, 2,947 yards, 4.3 ypa, 57 TDs

2 National Titles, 3 BCS Bowl victories, MVP of two BCS bowls, Heisman winner, Also finished #3 and #5 in Heisman voting

QB2 -

Passing - 232/469, 49.5%, 3,521 yards, 7.5 ypa, 43 TDs, 11 INTs, 138.1 rating

Rushing - 342 carries, 1,955 yards, 5.7 ypa, 36 TDs

2 National Titles, MVP of three straight de facto national championship games, Heisman Runner-up

By what merits does QB2 deserve a lofty ranking on this list while QB1 barely deserves to be on it? I believe the same arguments about being a "system" QB that was only good in the college game are applied to both.

I'd like to see someone respond to this. Quarterback 2 is Tommie Frazier, by the way.

Tebow had a fine college career. He was a standout player on a standout team.

But there have been, literally, hundreds of players like Tebow through the years. Tebow benefits from the recency effect in much the same way that Ndamukong Suh benefits over Rich Glover.

I get that his stats are gaudy, and he played QB of a very good team. But he benefited from a system that featured him greatly - much like Eric Crouch circa 2001.

There have been hundreds of Heisman winners..?

 

[knapplc]

QB1 -

Passing - 661/995, 66.4%, 9,285 yards, 9.3 ypa, 88 TDs, 16 INTs, 170.8 rating

Rushing - 692 carries, 2,947 yards, 4.3 ypa, 57 TDs

2 National Titles, 3 BCS Bowl victories, MVP of two BCS bowls, Heisman winner, Also finished #3 and #5 in Heisman voting

QB2 -

Passing - 232/469, 49.5%, 3,521 yards, 7.5 ypa, 43 TDs, 11 INTs, 138.1 rating

Rushing - 342 carries, 1,955 yards, 5.7 ypa, 36 TDs

2 National Titles, MVP of three straight de facto national championship games, Heisman Runner-up

By what merits does QB2 deserve a lofty ranking on this list while QB1 barely deserves to be on it? I believe the same arguments about being a "system" QB that was only good in the college game are applied to both.

This player is not on this list:

Passing - 312/606, 51.5%, 4,481 yards, 7.4 ypa, 29 TDs, 25 INTs, 121.1 Rating

Rushing - 648 carries, 3,434 yards, 5.3 ypa, 59 TDs

0 National Titles, 1 BCS National Championship appearance, BCS bowl MVP, Heisman winner, Walter Camp winner, Davey O'Brien winner, National Offensive Player of the Year, National Player of the Year, conference Offensive Player of the Year (eight publications), Guy Chamberlain Award Winner, 16-time TV Player of the Game.

This player is not on this list:

Passing - 507/783, 64.8%, 6,049 yards, 7.7 ypa, 56 TDs, 23 INTs, 147.4 rating

Rushing - 684 carries, 4,480 yards, 6.5 upc, 47 TDs

This player is not on this list:

Passing - 740/1,271, 58.2%, 10,098 yards, 7.9 ypa, 82 TDs, 24 INTs, 142.5 rating

Rushing - 600 carries, 4,112 yards, 6.9 ypc, 59 TDs

This guy played for the wrong school, and never got the recognition he deserved. Had he played at Florida, we'd have watched him in New York at the Heisman ceremony.

This player is not on this list:

Passing - 477/783, 60.9%, 6,177 yards, 7.9 ypa, 57 TDs, 26 INTs, 144.6 rating

Rushing - 436 carries, 2,164 yards, 5 ypc, 17 TDs

This player is not on this list:

Passing - 660/1,047, 61.5%, 8,202 yards, 7.6ypa, 75 TDs, 28 INTs, 143.4 Rating

Rushing - 120 carries, -144 yards, -1.2 avg, 6 TDs

Heisman Trophy winner, Davey O'Brien award winner

Look up "system quarteback" on Wikipedia. Guess who's listed as an example. Your boy Tebow.

EDIT - two more questions, the answers to which should have been provided last week, not today:

1 - Where, specifically, should Tebow have been ranked in this list?

2 - Where was this debate last week?

 

[True2tRA]

All of that effort instead of just admitting you are wrong. Lol.

It's okay to be wrong people. It happens every single day of nearly every human beings life. You aren't perfect, your sh#t does stink, you are not holier than thou..........your just wrong. Get over it.

In this instance though, it doesn't matter. Barry Sanders owns this vote.

 

[Mavric]

I guess we need to define what we are after in this list. To me, "greatest" means most accomplished. This would be a combination of stats, record, awards and titles. I knew someone would argue stats aren't everything which is why I specifically included other accomplishments for the two players I referenced. The greatest players are basically always going to have other great players around them. Football is the ultimate team game and you need other great players to help show off your talents. Incidentally, that's why I have no argument with Sanders at #1 because he probably had about the least amount of help - other than someone playing the same position - as anyone on the list.

Am I missing something or is the first mystery player you listed not Eric Crouch? The last list I saw had him at #21.

Pat White played in a second-tier league and still didn't get his team to an elite level. His senior year he lost to Colorado and East Carolina.

Kaepernick definitely put up great stats. Knowing what we know now, he'd probably be on the list. But he only won one bowl game and didn't win a conference championship (I don't think).

I don't think the other two really even compare on stats, let alone other accomplishments.

Don't you think recency also puts Tebow on the System Quarterback page?

To answer your other questions, I don't know any reason why Tebow is below anyone up to Kosar and I wouldn't think you could make a great argument why he would be below anyone up to #40.

I honestly started to look through the list several times last week but didn't ever have the time to really start editing.

Are you going to answer my question? It's your list so you can set it up how you want but I'm just curious what criteria you're using if Frazier is #10 and you don't think Tebow is in the Top 64.

 

[The Dude]

All of that effort instead of just admitting you are wrong. Lol.

It's okay to be wrong people. It happens every single day of nearly every human beings life. You aren't perfect, your sh#t does stink, you are not holier than thou..........your just wrong. Get over it.

In this instance though, it doesn't matter. Barry Sanders owns this vote.

Except he's right.

 

[True2tRA]

Clearly.

 

[knapplc]

I guess we need to define what we are after in this list. To me, "greatest" means most accomplished. This would be a combination of stats, record, awards and titles. I knew someone would argue stats aren't everything which is why I specifically included other accomplishments for the two players I referenced. The greatest players are basically always going to have other great players around them. Football is the ultimate team game and you need other great players to help show off your talents. Incidentally, that's why I have no argument with Sanders at #1 because he probably had about the least amount of help - other than someone playing the same position - as anyone on the list.

Am I missing something or is the first mystery player you listed not Eric Crouch? The last list I saw had him at #21.

Pat White played in a second-tier league and still didn't get his team to an elite level. His senior year he lost to Colorado and East Carolina.

Kaepernick definitely put up great stats. Knowing what we know now, he'd probably be on the list. But he only won one bowl game and didn't win a conference championship (I don't think).

I don't think the other two really even compare on stats, let alone other accomplishments.

Don't you think recency also puts Tebow on the System Quarterback page?

To answer your other questions, I don't know any reason why Tebow is below anyone up to Kosar and I wouldn't think you could make a great argument why he would be below anyone up to #40.

I honestly started to look through the list several times last week but didn't ever have the time to really start editing.

Are you going to answer my question? It's your list so you can set it up how you want but I'm just curious what criteria you're using if Frazier is #10 and you don't think Tebow is in the Top 64.

It's not "my" list, which is why I solicited input for a week before setting this up. I received very little feedback and the rate of feedback had slowed dramatically, so I went with the last list I had (which was largely created in similar conversations in 2007).

I didn't answer your question because I didn't know it was directed at me. I think I've answered that question before, though - Tommie was a gifted athlete who clearly stood head and shoulders above the rest of the team on one of the greatest, if not THE greatest, team of all time. Tebow was a fine player, and I've included him in this list, but I feel that he's a product of the system he was in.

Again, look up "system quarterback." Tebow is listed as one of seven or eight examples. Recency has nothing to do with that list - there are guys from 30 years ago on it. Frazier is not on the list. And that's not my list.

Again, while this is a worthy conversation, the time for said conversation was last week, not today. Where was this last week? Can someone explain that to me?

EDIT - and while this whole vote thing is just to kill time, it'd be no fun if it just pissed people off. So if it makes the process more fun, I'm willing to hold a special emergency vote to replace any player in the list below with Tebow, and move Tebow up in the bracket somewhere else. It doesn't really matter who we put against Sanders from that list - they're going to lose their first-round matches regardless.

Would this make it more realistic/palatable for those of you who think Tebow should be higher?

Charles Woodsen

Bernie Kosar

Larry Czonka

Charles Rodgers

James Street

John Hannah

Charley Trippi

Alex Karras

Bob Brown

Keyshawn Johnson

Dat Nguyen

Carl Eller

Dan Hampton

Sterling Sharpe

 

[Mavric]

I guess I don't put a lot of stock into which players someone who created a Wikipedia page included or didn't include in their list of "system quarterbacks."

People either like or hate Tebow and most of the hate has basically nothing to do with what he's accomplished or failed to accomplish on a football field. I don't think it will matter where you put him on the list, he'll lose the first round becuase too many people don't like him. He'd probably lose to #63 just because. There is no remedy for this and I realize it's just for fun discussion. I would just like to hear someone give a reasonable argument for why he should be that low that only focuses on football-related quantities, "I think", "I believe", etc.

If Frazier was on the greatest team ever (i.e., had a the best group ever playing around him) and his stats and accomplishments pale in comparison to Tebow's, shouldn't that be MORE of an argument for Tebow?

Which QB or RB on the list is not somewhat of a product of the system they were in? Would Frazier or Crouch or Vince Young or Jamelle Holieway have had as much success in a West Coast Offense? Would John Elway or Dan Marino have been good in a triple option offense? To me, the only place that "system quarterback" has any significance is trying to figure out who will succeed in making the transition to a "traditional" NFL-style offense. As far as determining who the great college players are, don't they all go where they think they'll have the chance to best utilize their talents?

 

[StPaulHusker]

I have always been curious as to what Tebow has done or not done to make so many people hate him. He's not a jerk. He doesn't seek the spotlight. Seems like people despise him because ESPN has 24-7 coverage of him as if he has control over it.

I personally neither like nor dislike him. I think he was a great college player and fun to watch. His pro career so far is something to be desired but that isn't what this contest was supposed to be about.

 

[beanman]

I have always been curious as to what Tebow has done or not done to make so many people hate him. He's not a jerk. He doesn't seek the spotlight. Seems like people despise him because ESPN has 24-7 coverage of him as if he has control over it.

I personally neither like nor dislike him. I think he was a great college player and fun to watch. His pro career so far is something to be desired but that isn't what this contest was supposed to be about.

That's why I hated him in college. They showed that clip after their loss about a million times. Stuff like that was annoying. They acted like there was never a quarterback like him before. You could make the argument that Vince Young carried his team more than Tebow. I don't dislike the guy anymore because I don't have to hear about him constantly when I'm tuning into college football highlights. I think he was a great player. But compared to Barry, he's left in the dust no matter what his stats are. You can't deny the fact that Florida was a national title caliber team without him there. Did they get better with him? Sure, but not by that much. I could see putting Tebow up to about spot 40 or so. But higher than that is pushing it in my opinion.

It all depends on how you define 'greatest'. I'm not that big on stats. TMart's stats are way better than Frazier's, but I'd take Tommie as my QB. The guy was a winner. He was a guy who walked up to the line, audibled and you had confidence he was making the right call. I just don't get that from a lot of our QBs we've had. It's an eyeball test more than anything for me. You could argue the talent disparity that TMart has vs. what Tommie had all day long and I'm not going to get into it. If we're just going to look at stats, then let's declare Ron Dayne the greatest running back ever, etc. and just have a position vs. position debate.