Pick your Poison: The Backup QB poll

[Langlier]

Who should be our primary backup next year?

[007]

I picked Harrington.

Smart, mobile, cheap, veteran. About what you need, IMO.

[massraider]

Quinn Gray and Walter sounds good to me. I hate to say it, but Frerotte might be the next best option. That's assuming CPepp is gone, which I think is a foregone conclusion.

[s.dot88]

i said Daunte, simply because of his knowledge of the playbook and his similar body and arm strength

i wouldnt be surprised to see us bring in Quinn Gray or Tui, tho.

they can move around and would fit into this scheme pretty well.

[Madturk]

Quinn Gray and Walter, although a veteran like Frerotte might be good for mentoring JaRuss. Not really keen on bringing Tui back

[Raider Nation]

I'd actually take Gus Frerotte as my first choice at backup for JaMarcus. He's a veteran presence, has had some success in the distant past, knows a variety of systems, and has seen just about every defensive look in the league.

I don't like Carr or Harrington because I don't want their imense bustitude to rub off on Russell. Frerotte's accepted his role in life as a backup QB. Those two jackholes still think they can start somewhere. I want a guy who has leadership ability and knows that barring injury, his job is to do his best Doug Pederson impersonation.

[Johnny Friendly]

Tui won't come back, and if he did, he'd likely be poison for J-Rock. Same for dumbass Culpepper.

I thought Harrington was back with the Falcons.

At any rate, I went with Brunell, though Frerotte comes with nearly as much experience and nearly as little ego. Quinn Gray is an unknown, but he seems like a fat Andrew Walter.

What about Testaverde? Or Jeff George? :D

[Raidermania12]

quinn gray and Andrew Walter.

[hawaiianboy]

This is like trying to find a sweat free guy at Arrowhead...


Trent Dilfer has a roster bonus due at the end of this week and the Niners already have three other QB's they are pretty committed to... If Dilfer doesn't retire, I'd grab him be the vet #3 QB behind JaMarcus and Walter (or Quinn Gray)...

Otherwise, give me Ferotte...

[SoCalRaider]

:D

Why isn't my boy Russell on that list?

:neener:

[Stanny]

I'd actually take Gus Frerotte as my first choice at backup for JaMarcus. He's a veteran presence, has had some success in the distant past, knows a variety of systems, and has seen just about every defensive look in the league.

I don't like Carr or Harrington because I don't want their imense bustitude to rub off on Russell. Frerotte's accepted his role in life as a backup QB. Those two jackholes still think they can start somewhere. I want a guy who has leadership ability and knows that barring injury, his job is to do his best Doug Pederson impersonation.


What Natty Said....

[_gg_]

If Russell is cemented starter, I'd like the following backups.

Walter-Holcomb
Walter-Brunell
Walter-Brennan

[YodasBeast]

Picking up Brennan in the 7th wouldn't be bad, but I want a vet backup to help Russell with some of the nuances of the game that the coaches may not be able to help with.

[s.dot88]

i dont like the idea of Walter being the primary backup

i know the guy never got his fair shot and everything, but he just doesnt fit the scheme and he doesnt really have much experience and knowledge that he can pass on

im starting to like Brunell as the backup as well since he had some success using his arm, legs and brain back in Jacksonville

either way, we need a vet badly

[Madturk]

either way, we need a vet badly


How about HB's boy Martin Lawrence?:p

[_gg_]

Ok, don't take this wrong, but just in case Russell fails, we need a franchise QB back-up.
All we have right now is Walter.
Walter never got a real shot before, and he's next in queue.
He's been there a few years now and is indoctrinated, adapted, and for all his knockers out there, he's still got a good work ethic -- knows the playbooks, knows the ins-and-outs in Alameda, has built up chemistry with the playing and coaching staff.
He may not end up the future franchise QB (plan b), but he's next in line.

Also, with Russell starter, Walter compliments him in that they're both similar QBs. Whenever you plan ahead for a QB you should have similar QBs that both compliment the system. No point having Vick-Schaub, McCown-Culpepper, E.Manning-Lorenzen, etc.

Russell-Walter.

So for vet back-up, looking thru the available FA's, there's NO ONE worth anything there except for three names.

1. K.Holcomb....underrated QB, has great NFL experience, is a good QB. If anyone can hold up the fort and do a commendable job, Holcomb can. He's also about 5 years younger than....

2. M.Brunell....he's 39, but he's still got the talent to step in and hold the fort, he's also got a tremendous NFL resume, QB rating, TD-INT ratio etc. If Russell-Walter fall over, he can step in.

3. R.Fitzpatrick....he's not a vet, and he's very young. But he'd only be worth looking at as a possible franchise QB. The other two would merely be vets. So, if the Raiders want to think ahead for a possible franchise QB, Fitzpatrick could be worth a look.

4. Otherwise....if we're looking for a future franchise QB (plan b) type of thing, then you draft a late round QB like Brennan, Booty, etc and have them learn from 3rd string (maybe even 4th), and if they progress well over 2 years, then they could even compete with the starter and back-up for claim to franchise QB....if....the others fall over for some reason.

The rest of the FA's are not worth it. Quinn Gray is OK, but he's not the answer as a franchise QB (plan b). It'd be like signing A.Brooks all over again.

Got to be...

Russell-Walter + Holcomb/Brunell/Gray/Fitzpatrick or drafted late rounder.

[Raider Nation]

Not sure I follow your logic here, gg? Perhaps I need a better definition of what a "franchise" QB is that's #3 on the depth chart. Those guys don't get enough reps in practice or preseason to be considered "franchise" QB's. Not only that, of the 3 guys you listed as a preference I doubt anybody has ever linked their names with the term "franchise QB" with the exception of Brunell about 10 years and many snake-skin sheddings ago.

[_gg_]

Not sure I follow your logic here, gg? Perhaps I need a better definition of what a "franchise" QB is that's #3 on the depth chart. Those guys don't get enough reps in practice or preseason to be considered "franchise" QB's. Not only that, of the 3 guys you listed as a preference I doubt anybody has ever linked their names with the term "franchise QB" with the exception of Brunell about 10 years and many snake-skin sheddings ago.

What I mean is Russell is the starter or franchise QB to be. If he fulfills that promise, then his back-up should be a QB that compliments him, both suit the system. Walter is that.

However, you've always got to have a plan B in case the drafted franchise QB to be busts for any reason. Plan B means your back-up is a franchise QB type of player. Again, Walter is that. He's still a rookie, has upside, and was drafted originally as a franchise QB.

If you traded Walter away, and had Russell-Gray-Brunell as your depth chart, then you're fucked if Russell busts/fails. Who's your franchise QB? Gray is 28 and is still unproven really. Brunell WAS a franchise QB, but at 39 now, is just a vet back-up type, a mentor or hold-the-fort guy.

So the Raiders have to consider this and have Russell-Walter for sure as 1-2. So that if Russell busts completely, they have a franchise-QB type ready to assume the position. Kinda like Brees-River situation. Or Anderson-Quinn.

Bledsoe-Brady was the same principle. When Bledsoe got injured/failed, Brady was there as a 'potential' franchise QB in the waiting. He ended up proving to be a long-term franchise QB and HOFer, so the patriots only had to find a suitable back-up who complimented him, seeing as Brady would be there for 10 years.

[jatfly]

Ok, don't take this wrong, but just in case Russell fails, we need a franchise QB back-up.
All we have right now is Walter.
Walter never got a real shot before, and he's next in queue.
He's been there a few years now and is indoctrinated, adapted, and for all his knockers out there, he's still got a good work ethic -- knows the playbooks, knows the ins-and-outs in Alameda, has built up chemistry with the playing and coaching staff.
He may not end up the future franchise QB (plan b), but he's next in line.

Also, with Russell starter, Walter compliments him in that they're both similar QBs. Whenever you plan ahead for a QB you should have similar QBs that both compliment the system. No point having Vick-Schaub, McCown-Culpepper, E.Manning-Lorenzen, etc.

Russell-Walter.

So for vet back-up, looking thru the available FA's, there's NO ONE worth anything there except for three names.

1. K.Holcomb....underrated QB, has great NFL experience, is a good QB. If anyone can hold up the fort and do a commendable job, Holcomb can. He's also about 5 years younger than....

2. M.Brunell....he's 39, but he's still got the talent to step in and hold the fort, he's also got a tremendous NFL resume, QB rating, TD-INT ratio etc. If Russell-Walter fall over, he can step in.

3. R.Fitzpatrick....he's not a vet, and he's very young. But he'd only be worth looking at as a possible franchise QB. The other two would merely be vets. So, if the Raiders want to think ahead for a possible franchise QB, Fitzpatrick could be worth a look.

4. Otherwise....if we're looking for a future franchise QB (plan b) type of thing, then you draft a late round QB like Brennan, Booty, etc and have them learn from 3rd string (maybe even 4th), and if they progress well over 2 years, then they could even compete with the starter and back-up for claim to franchise QB....if....the others fall over for some reason.

The rest of the FA's are not worth it. Quinn Gray is OK, but he's not the answer as a franchise QB (plan b). It'd be like signing A.Brooks all over again.

Got to be...

Russell-Walter + Holcomb/Brunell/Gray/Fitzpatrick or drafted late rounder.

_gg_ maybe I am way off base but there are not many if any that have two guys that would be "plan b" franchise QB's.

I would be fine with a player like Brunell and Walter just not sure of the order you put them in.

Then again as long as Russell remains healthy and puts up the numbers I could live with Walter back there.

Look at it this way, they (big Al) believed in Walter enough to draft him and see if he could start at one time maybe they figure he has what it takes to be that (plan b) VET back up.

[_gg_]

_gg_ maybe I am way off base but there are not many if any that have two guys that would be "plan b" franchise QB's.

I would be fine with a player like Brunell and Walter just not sure of the order you put them in.

Then again as long as Russell remains healthy and puts up the numbers I could live with Walter back there.

Look at it this way, they (big Al) believed in Walter enough to draft him and see if he could start at one time maybe they figure he has what it takes to be that (plan b) VET back up.

In essence your post is on the same page as the post you quoted.
Russell-Walter + a vet just to hold the fort should either bust, fail, get injured. Someone reliable, experienced, but due to his age isn't gonna be around for too long.

Plan B just means the #2 QB is young and there as a potential franchise QB should the starter bust.

Walter is the only franchise type available to us via FA (Fitzpatrick the only other). Otherwise it's the draft.

So i'm saying Russell-Walter 1-2 for sure. Gray or Brunell or Holcomb or Culpepper would just be a short-term cheap vet slotting in at #3 on the depth chart.

But if the Raiders traded Walter and went in with Russell-Gray-Brunell, they're leaving themselves at risk of being without a franchise QB type should Russell bust. That's only a consideration over the next 2-3 years as we all find out whether Russell booms or busts. If he booms, then we could trade Walter and even just have 2 QB depth chart like Russell-Gray then, because Gray would just be there to step in when Russell got injured for a couple of weeks.

Kinda like Roethlisberger-Batch.

[jatfly]

In essence your post is on the same page as the post you quoted............................................ .................................................. ...............................
Kinda like Roethlisberger-Batch.

Ok that is why I said I maybe way off base, We were on the same sorta page....thanks for clearing that up.

Yeah No way we trade Walter not this year, with nothing else behind JR.

[Raider Nation]

gg, I think you and I have very different definitions of what a "franchise" QB is. Aside from some of his physical characteristics, Andrew Walter is about as much of a franchise QB as Chris Simms is.

Plan B means your back-up is a franchise QB type of player. Again, Walter is that. He's still a rookie, has upside, and was drafted originally as a franchise QB.

I've got some issues with this argument. First, Walter is a 4-year veteran in the NFL, not a rookie. And at what point do we determine that Walter either has a.) upside or b.) never reached his potential? Whether or not he was truly given a fair opportunity at the job is certainly up for debate. However, by year 4 of your NFL career if you're not a starting QB then you need to come to grips with the fact that the odds are VERY LONG you ever will be. And finally, I completely disagree that Walter was drafted as a franchise QB. Sorry, but you don't hear the words "franchise QB" and "drafted in the 3rd round" in the same sentence. Did the Raiders feel as though they got a steal? Yes, absolutely. But anybody who said "Yeah! We got our franchise QB in round 3 so we can cross this off the list of needs for next 10 years" is delusional.

The differnece in expectations between Andrew Walter when he was drafted and JaMarcus Russell when he was drafted illustrates the difference between our definitions of what a franchise QB is. The Raiders "hoped" Walter was going to answer their QB questions long term, but with Russell "hope" is out the window. When you take a QB 1st overall, or in the top-10 for that matter, you expect him to be a franchise QB, you don't cross your fingers and hope for the best. And that, to me, is what a franchise QB is. The face of an organization, the principle building block for your team, and, more often than not, the guy bringing in the most money. Walter qualifies as none of those.

Bledsoe-Brady was the same principle. When Bledsoe got injured/failed, Brady was there as a 'potential' franchise QB in the waiting. He ended up proving to be a long-term franchise QB and HOFer, so the patriots only had to find a suitable back-up who complimented him, seeing as Brady would be there for 10 years.

Again, I think this is revisionist history at its finest. Nobody in New England, least of all Belichick, came out of the '00 draft saying "Yes! We got our franchise backup QB in round 6!". No, Belichick did the typical "We took a kid in the 6th round who we think has some skills and could develop into a nice player someday" schtick. By your definition in using Brady as an example, any QB drafted is a potential franchise QB. Or, in the case of Tony Romo, any QB undrafted could be a potential franchise QB.

Let me be clear, I'm not disagreeing with you in the sense of Oakland needing another veteran backup it's just your use of the term "franchise QB" that I don't understand. Which then brings me to my final question -- If Oakland drafts Anthony Morelli in the 7th round, does that make him a frachise QB as a backup?

[_gg_]

gg, I think you and I have very different definitions of what a "franchise" QB is. Aside from some of his physical characteristics, Andrew Walter is about as much of a franchise QB as Chris Simms is.

I've got some issues with this argument. First, Walter is a 4-year veteran in the NFL, not a rookie. And at what point do we determine that Walter either has a.) upside or b.) never reached his potential? Whether or not he was truly given a fair opportunity at the job is certainly up for debate. However, by year 4 of your NFL career if you're not a starting QB then you need to come to grips with the fact that the odds are VERY LONG you ever will be. And finally, I completely disagree that Walter was drafted as a franchise QB. Sorry, but you don't hear the words "franchise QB" and "drafted in the 3rd round" in the same sentence. Did the Raiders feel as though they got a steal? Yes, absolutely. But anybody who said "Yeah! We got our franchise QB in round 3 so we can cross this off the list of needs for next 10 years" is delusional.

The differnece in expectations between Andrew Walter when he was drafted and JaMarcus Russell when he was drafted illustrates the difference between our definitions of what a franchise QB is. The Raiders "hoped" Walter was going to answer their QB questions long term, but with Russell "hope" is out the window. When you take a QB 1st overall, or in the top-10 for that matter, you expect him to be a franchise QB, you don't cross your fingers and hope for the best. And that, to me, is what a franchise QB is. The face of an organization, the principle building block for your team, and, more often than not, the guy bringing in the most money. Walter qualifies as none of those.

Again, I think this is revisionist history at its finest. Nobody in New England, least of all Belichick, came out of the '00 draft saying "Yes! We got our franchise backup QB in round 6!". No, Belichick did the typical "We took a kid in the 6th round who we think has some skills and could develop into a nice player someday" schtick. By your definition in using Brady as an example, any QB drafted is a potential franchise QB. Or, in the case of Tony Romo, any QB undrafted could be a potential franchise QB.

Let me be clear, I'm not disagreeing with you in the sense of Oakland needing another veteran backup it's just your use of the term "franchise QB" that I don't understand. Which then brings me to my final question -- If Oakland drafts Anthony Morelli in the 7th round, does that make him a frachise QB as a backup?

1. Walter's rookie year '05 was completely lost to surgery from the shoulder injury he received in his senior year in ASU. He played 8 games in '06 so that was his rookie year really. In '07 he went thru camp and pre-season, but was benched all year at #4 PURELY because Kiffin didn't want him nor want to use him. He received ZERO reps in practice until he was back-up against Tennessee and Green Bay. He spent the rest of the year training with the practice squad and throwing INTs to the Raiders defenders to sharpen their skills. A.Rodgers spoke about this happening himself and Holmgren spoke about how that is a terrible position to put a young player. Ie, Walter has had 1 full year 06, and 07 was him not even getting a genuine look. He's still a rookie.

2. Walter was drafted 3rd round because his shoulder injury dropped him from the late 1st to 3rd. Like M.Bush's injury dropped him from the 1st to 4th. Yet he's spoken of as a potential franchise RB. Bit hypocritical. Because it's just that prejudiced anti-Walter stuff driving it.

3. I blame Al Davis for this situation. He threw Walter under a bus, behind that bed-breakfast offense. It was THE worst OL and team dysfunction in the history of the NFL pretty much. THEN, he immediately drafts a flash new toy (Russell) completely discarding Walter. AND brings in McCown and Culpepper BOTH to upfront start ahead of Walter. Walter was on a hiding to nothing. Especially when Kiffin was lobbying all year to cut Walter.

4. This is what the Raiders SHOULD have done.....when they drafted Walter, focus on drafting and signing FA OL. But they didnt do that. In 07, they should've shown faith in Walter. Drafted Joe Thomas and focused on improving the OL in order FOR Walter to prosper. Instead, they made the same mistake! They drafted Russell as new franchise QB and proceeded to draft 18 DBs and 23 WRs. There was only ONE offensive lineman drafted in the ELEVEN draft picks we had in 07!! They did bring in Cable, tho. However, there's still this reluctance to understand that OL > QB. What have they done this year for Russell? Signed Kwame Harris. That's it so far. And they may STILL overlook the OL in the draft. They'll go DE-WR-DB-OT-WR again largely ignoring the lines.

[raiderfreak7]

2. Walter was drafted 3rd round because his shoulder injury dropped him from the late 1st to 3rd. Like M.Bush's injury dropped him from the 1st to 4th. Yet he's spoken of as a potential franchise RB. Bit hypocritical. Because it's just that prejudiced anti-Walter stuff driving it.

3. I blame Al Davis for this situation. He threw Walter under a bus, behind that bed-breakfast offense. It was THE worst OL and team dysfunction in the history of the NFL pretty much. THEN, he immediately drafts a flash new toy (Russell) completely discarding Walter. AND brings in McCown and Culpepper BOTH to upfront start ahead of Walter. Walter was on a hiding to nothing. Especially when Kiffin was lobbying all year to cut Walter.


I really don't see anyone touting Bush as a potential franchise back. Surely not the Raiders after they just re-signed Fargas and restructured Rhodes contract instead of letting him go. And Bush has yet to show anything while Walter sucked it up in his first action (yes, bread and breakfast didn't help him). But I feel that if he couldn't beat out Aaron Brooks, Josh McCown, and Daunte Culpepper then maybe the coaches just don't view him very highly.

He's a backup plain and simple.

[Raider Nation]

1. Walter's rookie year '05 was completely lost to surgery from the shoulder injury he received in his senior year in ASU. He played 8 games in '06 so that was his rookie year really. In '07 he went thru camp and pre-season, but was benched all year at #4 PURELY because Kiffin didn't want him nor want to use him. He received ZERO reps in practice until he was back-up against Tennessee and Green Bay. He spent the rest of the year training with the practice squad and throwing INTs to the Raiders defenders to sharpen their skills. A.Rodgers spoke about this happening himself and Holmgren spoke about how that is a terrible position to put a young player. Ie, Walter has had 1 full year 06, and 07 was him not even getting a genuine look. He's still a rookie.

So which one is it?

Also, as it pertains to this last year, it was an open competition. It's not like he came in #4 on the depth chart entering the year. In fact, it was he and McCown that were #1 and #2 until Daunte was signed. And Daunte was brought in by Davis, not Kiffin. Now I'm not going to contend that Kiffin didn't like Walter, I'll openly concede that. However, I would argue that Walter's done nothing during his career in the NFL to warrant being given anything. You can say he didn't get a fair shake all you want, and some of that is true, but the fact is his career byline lists 3 years of NFL experience. Whether he played or not it still doesn't equate to him being a rookie. He's a 3-yr. NFL vet. Period.

2. Walter was drafted 3rd round because his shoulder injury dropped him from the late 1st to 3rd. Like M.Bush's injury dropped him from the 1st to 4th. Yet he's spoken of as a potential franchise RB. Bit hypocritical. Because it's just that prejudiced anti-Walter stuff driving it.

Again, the point here is Oakland isn't depending on Bush to be a franchise RB. They have Fargas, they have Rhodes, and they very well could draft McFadden. Just like the Raiders were never depending on Walter to be a franchise QB so they drafted a clearly superior prospect in Russell. If Walter was all that and a bag of chips then Russell never would've been on the radar. Just like if Bush was able to rehab in time to play last year and prove he's capable of being the #1 back there wouldn't be any talk of McFadden. But the franchise is covering their ass and, as a fan, I'm very grateful for that.

3. I blame Al Davis for this situation. He threw Walter under a bus, behind that bed-breakfast offense. It was THE worst OL and team dysfunction in the history of the NFL pretty much. THEN, he immediately drafts a flash new toy (Russell) completely discarding Walter. AND brings in McCown and Culpepper BOTH to upfront start ahead of Walter. Walter was on a hiding to nothing. Especially when Kiffin was lobbying all year to cut Walter.

No argument there. Davis, the coaches, and the overall talent level of the team did put Walter in a bad position. My problem is even though he hasn't gotten a fair shake and hasn't received any playing time to speak of you're still quick to use the term "franchise QB" attached to Andrew Walter. Based on all of those factors he exactly the same type of franchise QB as Spergeon Wynn.

[Raider Bill]

Walter blows.

[Stanny]

Brunell is a Saint...cross him off your list.

[Rupert]

Brunell is a Saint...cross him off your list.

Yeah, we need more sinners. :p

[_gg_]

Just something to reply to....because the other points mentioned by several of you is equally valid as what I posted. But this I have to reply to....

It's not that Walter didn't beat out Brooks, it's that he stood up against Shell, complaining about the offense, on behalf of the team, and got punished (like Porter) by being benched the rest of the year.

Walter had a record of 2-6 as starter. Brooks 0-8.

Ie, he was doing "well", better than Brooks. Walter would've chalked up another win or two had Moss wanted to catch TDs in the endzone in a couple of games.
Also, it's just horrendous to put in a situation where you drop back 7 steps but the OL can only hold for 1-2 secs, so that you're already being sacked. To have WRs quitting on plays (eg, moss not running his routes because he didnt want to run over the midfield dirt). You cannot even QB let alone try to grow as a rookie in that situation.

I'm quite happy to judge Walter....AFTER he's had 2 years of actual consistent starting. Like you'd do of A.Smith, or Harrington after he had a couple of years entrusted as starter.

[raiderfreak7]

In the games I saw it was Brooks who played better than Walter. In the Steelers game our defense single handedly won that game. Walter didn't do shit. Can't even remember the other win.

[massraider]

When I first started watching Walter, I remember thinking, "man, he stands in against the rush...."

After a few starts, I was like, "Does he not see those guys coming after him? Get rid of the ball."


That offense would have made anyone look bad, but it wasn't like we saw magic from Walter that made me think he could be a starter in this league. Not sure if I think he can't EVER be a starter, and I am fine with him as a backup, but discussing him ever getting a shot at a starting position here isn't really feasible.

[_gg_]

Look at the career killer that 06 offense has been.
Brooks is completely overlooked as a decent QB anymore and Walter (by many) is being completely written-off as having even any potential, like his career has already ended and been judged after 8 starts.


But Brooks actually, statistically, is one of the top 40 or so QBs of all-time for efficiency and TD-INT ratio.

It's an unfortunate thing that players like Brooks/Walter can be cast into damnation after being thrown under a bus, and no redemption allowed.

[hawaiianboy]

Didn't we all cut our palms and shake a blood agreement to never, ever mention that giggling, sorry ass fool Aaron Brooks ever again?...


::starts the war chant::

*VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS VINCE EVANS*

[007]

Look at the career killer that 06 offense has been.
Brooks is completely overlooked as a decent QB anymore

That's because he isnt a decent QB. He sucks. All 32 teams and GM's know it...

and Walter (by many) is being completely written-off as having even any potential, like his career has already ended and been judged after 8 starts.

Everyone saw what he had (or didnt have) to offer. Schaub played less games and got traded for multple picks. Garrard got a shot in less time. If a QB is good, usually he plays, or goes to a team who'll let him compete...


But Brooks actually, statistically, is one of the top 40 or so QBs of all-time for efficiency and TD-INT ratio.


1 Steve Young* 96.81
2 Peyton Manning 94.37
3 Kurt Warner 93.77
4 Joe Montana* 92.26
5 Marc Bulger 91.26
6 Daunte Culpepper 90.75
7 Chad Pennington 89.32
8 Tom Brady 88.36
9 Drew Brees 87.54
10 Trent Green 87.48
11 Jeff Garcia 86.43
12 Dan Marino* 86.38
13 Donovan McNabb 85.19
14 Matt Hasselbeck 85.10
15 Brett Favre 85.05
16 Rich Gannon 84.71
17 Brian Griese 84.54
18 Jim Kelly* 84.39
19 Mark Brunell 84.21
20 Jake Delhomme 84.05
21 Roger Staubach* 83.42
22 Steve McNair 83.18
23 Brad Johnson 83.08
24 Neil Lomax 82.68
25 Sonny Jurgensen* 82.62
26 Len Dawson* 82.56
27 Ken Anderson 81.86
28 Bernie Kosar 81.83
29 Neil O'Donnell 81.82
30 Danny White 81.71
31 Troy Aikman* 81.62
32 Dave Krieg 81.50
33 Randall Cunningham 81.47
34 Boomer Esiason 81.06
35 Warren Moon* 80.90
36 Jeff Hostetler 80.48
37 Bart Starr* 80.47
38 Ken O'Brien 80.44
39 Jeff George 80.42
40 Fran Tarkenton* 80.35
41 Steve Beuerlein 80.32
42 Dan Fouts* 80.23
43 John Elway* 79.86
44 Tony Eason 79.72
45 Elvis Grbac 79.65
46 Chris Chandler 79.12
47 Mark Rypien 78.93
48 Jim Everett

Actually, those are the 48 ahead of him. Guys like Unitas, Theismann, Bradshaw, Testeverde, and Harbaugh are right below him.

I don't get your point though? Are you trying to say Brooks is among the 'top forty or so' all time QB's and we made him look bad?

:confused:


It's an unfortunate thing that players like Brooks/Walter can be cast into damnation after being thrown under a bus, and no redemption allowed.

Don't act like they werent in the passenger seat as the plane went down. If they would have shown something, anything, they might actually be playing on Sundays.

[_gg_]

Everyone saw what he had (or didnt have) to offer. Schaub played less games and got traded for multple picks. Garrard got a shot in less time. If a QB is good, usually he plays, or goes to a team who'll let him compete...



The rest of your post brought all great points. But just this point I'd like to debate you.

Schaub showed something because Atlanta had a damned good OL, team. He was GONNA look good in limited opportunity, and the Falcons at the time were far more functional than the dysfunctional state the Raiders were in over the last 5 years, where they were throwing coaches out every year, never upgrading the OL, and couldn't interest good prospective coaches like Wissenhunt and Payton.

Schaub in OAK 06 would've sucked just as hard and would be talked about the same as Walter. While Walter in Atlanta at the time, would've looked good and traded for multiple picks.

[007]

The rest of your post brought all great points. But just this point I'd like to debate you.

Schaub showed something because Atlanta had a damned good OL, team. He was GONNA look good in limited opportunity, and the Falcons at the time were far more functional than the dysfunctional state the Raiders were in over the last 5 years, where they were throwing coaches out every year, never upgrading the OL, and couldn't interest good prospective coaches like Wissenhunt and Payton.

Schaub in OAK 06 would've sucked just as hard and would be talked about the same as Walter. While Walter in Atlanta at the time, would've looked good and traded for multiple picks.

I hear ya, and there's no doubt Schaub would have sucked in '06, but the FACT of the matter, is teams end up trading for players they deem with potential.

Ryan Fitzpatrick (Who I liked a ton) got traded for a mid-late pick, Charlie Frye was worth a late pick, Schaub got dealt for picks...Usually a GM will pull the trigger on a young QB buried behind someone else, if a guy is worth it.

Hell there were rumors all this year that guys like Shaun Hill in San Fran and Sage Rosenfels in Houston were getting trade inquiries, and I didnt hear anyone calling about Walter.

[Crow]

Dilfer is a free man now. Let's dial him up.

[_gg_]

Thats my point specifically about Walter here.....that everyone's judgment of him is premature and based only on that horrendous bed-breakfast situation. Rookie QBs always take about 1-3 years of starting to develop and mature to the point where you CAN judge them. Like A.Smith this year....it's his moment. Because he's been entrusted for 2-3 whole years now. Been given everything to show something. Every other QB like Harrington, McCown etc, has been given that same opportunity AND in more professionally run offenses than OAK 06 was.

Another point worth mentioning....

The Raiders and RaiderNation is always enamored with picking up other teams' trash and hoping/believing/thinking we can make them good. Like Gannon and Plunkett. When McCown came here, I hated the choice because while McCown is a great guy, he's a terrible QB. He's had 6 years of regular starting to prove it. Yet, everyone was like "he could be Gannon for us". Even Davis said that. And said Culpepper could be our next Plunkett.

We as fans were always willing to give him that oppportunity here. So imagine Walter had never been a Raider but had been on another team and had the SAME history. And we signed him. We'd all suddenly be going on about how he could be our next Plunkett and willing to give him a chance. But because he's a Raider already, suddenly it's like everyone can't give him that same opportunity, can't look at him the same. That we cant convert our own 'trash' to treasure. Only has to be us signing trash from other teams that makes it a good choice.

Worth mentioning the fickleness of RaiderNation too on McCown. He sucked all year and everyone savaged him. Yet he had that one good game against Denver in week 13 and suddenly everyone was like....let's re-sign him, he's a beast, he's a great QB. They're so quick to change all over one game.

Also, many Raider fans started calling Russell a bust after his Denver snaps!!! I never ever do that. Because I always believe a rookie has to be given 2-3 years of regular starts before you can judge his ON-FIELD play. Off-field stuff (like weight or mental attitude is different)....but ON-FIELD play....no, they ALL need 2-3 years of actual starting first.

[_gg_]

I didnt hear anyone calling about Walter.

We don't know if that's because the Raiders are not shopping him. I would agree with you that the Raiders themselves are probably thinking the same thing. That Walter wont be a good starter -- but that could be because they're wrong too.

Put it this way....Davis/Raiders wanted to avoid cutting Jordan because Denver or Kansas might pick him up and somehow that would strike fear in Oakland? Like Jordan could run for 1200 yards on us. They over-estimate talent sometimes. And underestimate it too. If they let Denver pick up Jordan that would be a GOOD thing.

Similarly, if the Raiders are so keen to cut Walter because they think he wont be good, the chances are he WILL turn out an excellent QB on some other team that knows how to draft/build an OL and run a more functional system.

I dont see the Raiders even wanting to trade/cut Walter tho. Imo they need him still as a plan b in case Russell falters. They have no one else.

[Crow]

Thats my point specifically about Walter here.....that everyone's judgment of him is premature and based only on that horrendous bed-breakfast situation.
This may not be the right group to try applying common sense to the Andrew Walter situation. Just an FYI.

[SoCalRaider]

Actually the Falcons wanted Walter.... but Al didn't trust the teacher's pet and kept Walter around. I also agree that Walter has never gotten a fair shake. Only problem is the perpetual coaching and QB carousel will prevent him from ever reaching his potential.

[_gg_]

This may not be the right group to try applying common sense to the Andrew Walter situation. Just an FYI.

Lol, there's almost NO group that is willing to see it my way. I'm like always having to say all the same things I did here on any other forum or discussion with friends about Walter. Most everyone is anti-Walter etc. So I'm used to it.

I just wont be surprised if for some reason Walter ends up a starter (here or elsewhere) and does a great job and suddenly there's 20 million people all suddenly Walter supporters and moaning at the Raiders for letting him go or whatever.

[_gg_]

Actually the Falcons wanted Walter.... but Al didn't trust the teacher's pet and kept Walter around. I also agree that Walter has never gotten a fair shake. Only problem is the perpetual coaching and QB carousel will prevent him from ever reaching his potential.

Thank-you! Weird we're like on the same page with a lot of topics. I'm not used to that.

[Stanny]

Look at the career killer that 06 offense has been.
Brooks is completely overlooked as a decent QB anymore and Walter (by many) is being completely written-off as having even any potential, like his career has already ended and been judged after 8 starts.


But Brooks actually, statistically, is one of the top 40 or so QBs of all-time for efficiency and TD-INT ratio.

It's an unfortunate thing that players like Brooks/Walter can be cast into damnation after being thrown under a bus, and no redemption allowed.

Actually Brooks was over looked because he "tore" his pectorial muscle in 06 and was never completely healed in 07, thus the Packers not signing him after he didn't pass the physical last year. I would look for the Pack to possibly sign him this year.

[_gg_]

Actually Brooks was over looked because he "tore" his pectorial muscle in 06 and was never completely healed in 07, thus the Packers not signing him after he didn't pass the physical last year. I would look for the Pack to possibly sign him this year.

I heard the Packers are after Quinn Gray. Btw the Raiders didn't offer Gray a contract. So he probably goes to Packers or somewhere else. Therefore, the whole topic is still moot.

Who's the undeniable back-up and who's the vet we're gonna try for??

[Madturk]

From Rotoworld

The Raiders have "stayed in touch" with free agent Daunte Culpepper this offseason, according to ESPN's John Clayton.

Culpepper hasn't drawn any interest elsewhere, so if the Raiders want him back, they can probably have him. They tried to upgrade with Quinn Gray and brought him in for a visit last week, but nothing has come of it yet.
Source: ESPN Insider

Surprised Gruden hasn't signed him. I'd be all for bringing him back at the right price. Then maybe deal AWAL

[Raider Nation]

Christ, I was hoping he'd at least hook up with the Arena League. The words "Daunte Culpepper", "3rd String", and "Dallas Desperados" would be music to my fucking ears right now.

Give me Trent Dilfer or Gus Frerotte 10 out of 10 times over Culpepper.

[S and B Executioner]

From Rotoworld

The Raiders have "stayed in touch" with free agent Daunte Culpepper this offseason, according to ESPN's John Clayton.

Culpepper hasn't drawn any interest elsewhere, so if the Raiders want him back, they can probably have him. They tried to upgrade with Quinn Gray and brought him in for a visit last week, but nothing has come of it yet.
Source: ESPN Insider

Surprised Gruden hasn't signed him. I'd be all for bringing him back at the right price. Then maybe deal AWAL

Really, what are we gonna get for AWAL?? Nothing, nobody is gonna give squat for him. If we go get Culpepper back, we still need a 3rd QB, why not go with the 3 who have a year under their belts in this system? I really do kiss Gruden and his 10 QB's in camp philosophy.

[Crow]

Christ, I was hoping he'd at least hook up with the Arena League. The words "Daunte Culpepper", "3rd String", and "Dallas Desperados" would be music to my fucking ears right now.

Give me Trent Dilfer or Gus Frerotte 10 out of 10 times over Culpepper.
What the chubby porn star said.

[RaiderIVlife]

I think Ferotte and/or Dilfer would be great as the 'veteran QB' on the roster. I'm inclinded to roll with Andrew Walter as the 2nd or 3rd QB. He sort of had a red-shirt year and he might be ready to contribute if called upon. The team is at least more stable than it was in 2006.

[TommyGirl]

I'm an unabashed Andrew Walter homer. I've given reasons in the past. It's easier just to say that I'm a homer.

[hawaiianboy]

I have no problems with Andrew Walter-Tuiasosopo as our #2 QB... I'd just like to have someone behind them capable of showing those two youngsters how to read a defense and how to maybe actually look off a safety or two (I'm looking at YOU Andrew)...

I wouldn't want Trent Dilfer to start anytime soon, but he knows how to be a pro's pro and he still has some fire in him as witnessed by our pre-season game with the Niners last year... Sign him up... Hell, in two or three years he'll probably be our head coach anyways, may as well get him Al acclimated now...

[Crow]

The man makes a point.

[CrossBones]

:D

Why isn't my boy Russell on that list?

:neener:Hahahahaha.

D'oh.

[Raidermania12]

I'm an unabashed Andrew Walter homer.

Is this like a Val Kilmer type thing?

[massraider]

Is this like a Val Kilmer type thing?

Well, now that Val is fat, there is a parallel.

[Raidermania12]

Well, now that Val is fat, there is a parallel.

I thought that was for his new role in the biographical Dom DeLuise movie?

[007]

Well, now that Val is fat, there is a parallel.

He probably sees a pass rush about as well as Walter too.

The dude's a scrub.

:D

[Jack's sore libido]

I'm with you, gg, on Walter.

People assume he sucks because he was a QB on a historically bad offense, but I don't think many, if any, QBs could have been successful in that situation-- let alone it being their first NFL playing time.

The only way we'll ever know if Walter is any good is if he's a backup and a starter gets hurt.

[_gg_]

I'm with you, gg, on Walter.

People assume he sucks because he was a QB on a historically bad offense, but I don't think many, if any, QBs could have been successful in that situation-- let alone it being their first NFL playing time.

The only way we'll ever know if Walter is any good is if he's a backup and a starter gets hurt.

I think that's right. On both counts. Any QB, even Manning would have looked as bad as Walter (he did against Atlanta in 07 in similar circumstances). And we'll only really know if/when Walter is a committed starter in a real offense.

I think Raider fans are so bereft of success that they're often worse than Davis in how quick they want to proclaim someone a bust (Walter) or a savior (Russell).

[Raidermania12]

I'm with you, gg, on Walter.

People assume he sucks because he was a QB on a historically bad offense, but I don't think many, if any, QBs could have been successful in that situation-- let alone it being their first NFL playing time.

The only way we'll ever know if Walter is any good is if he's a backup and a starter gets hurt.

Yea, I do think he's mentally smart enough to step in and do well. Dont think a vet qb would be any help to Walter or Russell. I like Dilfer's heart. But I never felt he did much in helping Alex Smith get better. I actually Thought Norv Turner had a bigger hand in that ironically(when you force him as an OC to get a young guy ready Norv is more useful it seems). Either way i dont care who we sign. Theres NOTHING available that i'm in a rush to see on our roster.

[Madturk]

Walter couldn't have stepped into a worse situation with the Shell/Walsh fiasco then to get buried on the depth chart behind Pep and McClown. I still think he has a shot to be a serviceable back-up somewhere, maybe even a starter.

[_gg_]

I have more faith in Walter than a 'maybe a starter'. If he goes to another franchise, which will commit to him as a starter for a full year or two, and focuses on DL, have good coaches like Andy Reid etc, then I think Walter will prove he can be a good starter. But I agree stepping into that situation was a killer.

[Crow]

Well, now that Val is fat, there is a parallel.

Now that's funny right there.

[Rupert]

I think that's right. On both counts. Any QB, even Manning would have looked as bad as Walter (he did against Atlanta in 07 in similar circumstances). And we'll only really know if/when Walter is a committed starter in a real offense.

I think Raider fans are so bereft of success that they're often worse than Davis in how quick they want to proclaim someone a bust (Walter) or a savior (Russell).

The question is: Are you willing for the Raiders to commit to Walter as the fulltime starter?

[TommyGirl]

Well, now that Val is fat, there is a parallel.Did you just call me fat?


:p

[_gg_]

The question is: Are you willing for the Raiders to commit to Walter as the fulltime starter?

Of course I would be. The thing is, like with Russell, or A.Smith, he'd have to be given all focus, and a consistent 1-2 yrs as starter (with all downs and highs, bumps and bruises) included. He's not going to just suddenly become Tom Brady overnight.

[TheReallyBest]

xrumer is the BEST!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/6b/XRumer_screenshot.gif/200px-XRumer_screenshot.gif

;)

EDIT: Welcome to the banned list scum bag! ;)

[Langlier]

xrumer is the BEST!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/6/6b/XRumer_screenshot.gif/200px-XRumer_screenshot.gif

;)
at least you arent russian...