This was originally posted on March 17, 2017. It has been updated following the 2021 season.
Sports fans love to debate the greatness of players and rank them in order from most revered to most despised. And while despised probably doesn't fit any of these players, since they played for the University of Michigan, we all have our favorites. I have endeavored to achieve the un-possible: Rank all of Michigan's starting quarterbacks.
Okay, that's too tall of a task for me right now. I'm working up to it. So I'm only going back to 1995, which was the beginning of the Lloyd Carr era. That's the earliest full coaching tenure where I can count on my recollections of Michigan football. I was a big fan of Bo Schembechler, Gary Moeller, and the Michigan Wolverines before then, but I'll be damned if I say I was aware enough to understand what was happening on the field.
This ranking only takes into account what the quarterbacks achieved wearing the winged helmet. High school highlight tapes and NFL performance aren't taken into account. (After all, we can agree that Tom Brady is far and away the best quarterback who ever played the game of football, and that includes Uncle Rico.)
So if you were starting a season with your pick of any Michigan QB since 1995, which one would you take?
On with the show:
1. TOM BRADY
Record as starter: 20-5 from 1995-1999
Career statistics: 443/711 (62.3%), 5351 yards, 35 TDs, 19 INTs
Biggest win: In the Orange Bowl against Alabama in 1999, Brady led a second-half comeback win and finished 34/46 for 369 yards, 4 TDs, and 0 INTs.
Why the ranking? People might say that Michigan fans are only huge Brady fans in retrospect, but his senior year saw him throw 20 TDs and just 6 INTs while completing 62.8% of his throws. Sure, there were some growing pains along the way, but he ultimately went 20-5 and made Michigan fans proud. Michigan fans like me were anxious to see Drew Henson, but we also were confused when Henson was taking time away from a stellar Tom Brady in 1999.
2. DREW HENSON
Record as starter: 6-2 from 1998-2000
Career statistics: 214/374 (57.2%), 2946 yards, 24 TDs, 7 INTs; 67 carries for 46 yards, 4 TDs
Biggest win: Henson led the Wolverines to a 38-26 win over the Ohio State Buckeyes in November of 2000. He didn't complete a high percentage of his passes (14/25 or 56%), but he did throw for 303 yards, 3 TDs, and 1 INT, along with a 1-yard touchdown run.
Why the ranking? Henson's numbers and winning percentage aren't exemplary, but the trajectory of his career was headed in a positive direction when he decided to quit football in favor of a baseball career. His completion percentage improved from 45% as a freshman to 52% as a sophomore to 62% as a junior. He also threw for 18 TDs and just 4 INTs in his final season. During his junior year, he was outstanding.
3. JAKE RUDOCK
Record as starter: 10-3 in 2015
Career statistics: 249/389 (64.0%), 3017 yards, 20 TDs, 9 INTs; 58 carries for 166 yards, 4 TDs
Biggest win: Michigan had a ballyhooed matchup with the Florida Gators in the Gator Bowl, and that resulted in a 41-7 victory for the Wolverines. Rudock completed 20/31 passes for 278 yards and 3 TDs, and he ran 4 times for 29 yards.
Why the ranking? Rudock only spent one season in Ann Arbor after transferring from Iowa. He started off with mediocre performances since he didn't arrive on campus until August, but as his chemistry built with his receivers, he turned in one of the best passing seasons in Michigan history.
4. CADE MCNAMARA
Record as starter: 11-3 from 2019-2021
Career statistics: 253/398 (63.6%), 3001 yards, 20 TDs, 6 INTs; 42 carries for 33 yards, 2 TDs
Biggest win: Michigan's 42-27 win over Ohio State - the first victory over OSU in a decade - was the most important Michigan win in years, it not decades. Not only did it propel Michigan to its first Big Ten Championship game appearance, but it also set the stage for the Wolverines to make the College Football Playoff for the first time. McNamara completed 13/19 passes for 159 yards, 0 touchdowns, and 1 interception, and he ran 1 time for 9 yards. Those aren't stellar numbers, but he mostly kept the ball out of harm's way and managed the team to victory.
Why the ranking? McNamara and Rudock are neck-and-neck and their stats are extremely close, but I give the edge to Rudock for having to adjust on the fly in his one season at Michigan and for having less offensive talent around him. McNamara benefited from a superior run game and more receiving talent overall, but he's an accurate thrower who makes good decisions.
5. BRIAN GRIESE
Record as starter: 17-5 from 1993-1997
Career statistics: 355/606 (58.6%), 4383 yards, 33 TDs, 18 INTs
Biggest win: It's tough not to pick an Ohio State victory, but Griese wasn't the savior on that day in 1997. He did, however, play an excellent game in the "national championship game," the Rose Bowl victory over Washington State that sealed a share of the title. He threw a touchdown pass in each of the final quarters to lead Michigan to a 21-16 win, ending up 18/30 for 251 yards, the 3 TDs, and 1 INT.
Why the ranking? Griese deserves a lot of credit for managing the 1997 team to 13 victories and 0 losses. He didn't make backbreaking mistakes, and he got the ball to the right people. He also didn't have a great backfield or a truly elite wide receiver. What he did have was a great offensive line and a great defense. Michigan's 2016 defense was often compared to the 1997 version, but one huge difference between 13-0 and 10-3 is the offensive line. Regardless, Griese wasn't a great quarterback, but he was the right guy for the job at the time.
6. CHAD HENNE
Record as starter: 34-13 from 2004-2007
Career statistics: 828/1387 (59.7%), 9715 yards, 87 TDs, 37 INTs
Biggest win: Michigan State finished 5-7 in 2004, but there's never any love lost between MSU and Michigan. In Henne's freshman year, he helped Braylon Edwards put on an epic performance in a 45-37, triple-overtime win over the Spartans. Henne was 24/35 for 273 yards and 4 TDs, including the game-winning 24-yarder to Edwards.
Why the ranking? Much like John Navarre, Henne put up some very good numbers, but those were buoyed by the fact that he was a four-year starter. He was 0-4 against Ohio State, and he consistently struggled with his accuracy. Moreso than any other QB on this list except for Shane Morris (see below), Henne seemed unable to take any velocity off his throws, and those bullets often glanced off someone's hands or didn't give receivers enough time to adjust. He had some gutsy performances when dealing with injury, but ultimately, his performance was good but not great.
7. SHEA PATTERSON
Record as starter: 19-7 from 2018-2019
Career statistics: 424/706 (60.1%), 5661 yards, 45 TDs, 15 INTs; 163 carries for 323 yards (2.0 YPC), 7 TDs
Biggest win: The 45-14 win over Notre Dame in 2019 probably ranks as his biggest victory, even if the running game paved the way to victory. Patterson was just 6/12 for 100 yards and 2 touchdowns, and his 11 carries for 2 yards didn't move the needle much. But it was a huge win over a team that finished #12 in the country. Oh, and it was Notre Dame.
Why the ranking? Patterson was ranked #5 going into the 2019 season, but his performance as a senior was somewhat lackluster. A more wide open offense should have helped, but he got flustered under pressure, something that shouldn't happen so much to a seasoned veteran. He also did not run the ball as well as he should have, and while some of that falls on the coaches, Patterson also carries some of the blame. Still, he was a talented QB who could throw and run.
8. DEVIN GARDNER
Record as starter: 15-13 from 2010-2014
Career statistics: 475/787 (60.4%), 6336 yards, 44 TDs, 32 INTs; 342 carries for 916 yards, 24 TDs
Biggest win: The 2013 win over Indiana had eye-popping numbers (503 passing yards, for example), but Notre Dame was coming off of a national championship game appearance and got beaten down by Gardner and company in 2013. In the 41-30 victory, Gardner was 21/33 for 4 TDs and 1 INT while also running 13 times for 82 yards and 1 TD.
Why the ranking? I love Devin Gardner's physical abilities and leadership qualities, and I'm in agreement with many Michigan fans: What would Gardner have achieved under the coaching of Jim Harbaugh? We'll never know, and that makes it difficult to place Gardner on this list. I want to rank him higher, but ultimately, he made some really ugly turnovers and didn't win enough games. He was doomed by a coach whose career was going into a tailspin and the worst offensive line performance in decades. I know people will get upset with me for placing him above Robinson, and Gardner didn't have the same abilities to run; but Gardner was a superior passer and very effective with his legs.
9. DENARD ROBINSON
Record as starter: 23-11 from 2009-2012
Career statistics: 427/747 (57.2%), 6250 yards, 49 TDs, 39 INTs; 723 carries for 4495 yards, 42 TDs
Biggest win: Robinson's performances went up and down as a passer, even though he was always a dangerous runner. He didn't have a great night against Notre Dame in 2011, but the team ultimately came out with a win in the initial Under the Lights matchup. Robinson (and Jeremy Gallon) had some late-game heroics that led to a 35-31 win. Robinson was 11/24 for 338 yards, 4 TDs, and 3 INTs, and he also ran 16 times for 108 yards and 1 TD.
Why the ranking? Okay, I'm on the record as saying that Denard Robinson wasn't a great quarterback, though he was an excellent runner. With all the talk about how a running quarterback changes the game, Robinson's win-loss record wasn't great - despite Brady Hoke's inaugural 11-2 season. He also turned over the ball too much (39 INTs, plus too many fumbles) and had a career completion percentage of just over 57%. He did some great things while at Michigan, but his throwing abilities were lacking.
10. JOHN NAVARRE
Record as starter: 31-11 from 1999-2003
Career statistics: 765/1366 (56.0%), 9254 yards, 72 TDs, 31 INTs
Biggest win: Navarre's 2003 win against Ohio State was significant. It propelled Michigan to a Rose Bowl appearance, and it gave the Wolverines a victory over the previously 10-1 Buckeyes. But that's not the game I think of when it comes to Navarre. He led Michigan's all-time best comeback on the road at Minnesota. This is one of those games where I remember exactly where I was and who I was with when watching that game on TV. Michigan was down 28-7 against the Gophers before Navarre turned on the jets - (almost) literally. In addition to completing 33/47 passes for 353 yards, 2 TDs, and 1 INT, he also caught a 36-yard TD pass from Steve Breaston on a "Transcontinental" throwback to the QB. The Wolverines won, 38-35.
Why the ranking? Despite setting a bunch of records at Michigan - largely because he started for three full seasons and part of a fourth - Navarre had an uncanny knack for getting his passes batted down at the line of scrimmage, an impressive feat for a 6'6" quarterback. He was slow and rather inaccurate, and he even had a good supporting cast around him that included the likes of Chris Perry, Anthony Thomas, Braylon Edwards, Jason Avant, and Marquise Walker.
11. WILTON SPEIGHT
Record as starter: 13-3 from 2014-2017
Career statistics: 257/437 (58.8%), 3192 yards, 22 TDs, 10 INTs
Biggest win: Michigan State was terrible (3-9) in 2016, but that doesn't change the fact that they had dominated the series against Michigan in recent years. Speight was 16/25 for 244 yards, 0 TDs, and 1 INT, so it wasn't a great game, but he did well enough to end the losing streak against the Spartans.
Why the ranking? Speight had a chance to move up (or down) in 2017, but he struggled early in the year against mediocre teams (54.3% completions, 3 TD, 2 INT) before getting injured. That leaves him right where he was previously, though I strongly considered placing him below Dreisbach.
12. SCOTT DREISBACH
Record as starter: 12-3 from 1994-1998
Career statistics: 208/380 (54.7%), 2920 yards, 15 TDs, 12 INTs; 81 carries, 51 yards, 2 TDs
Biggest win: In Lloyd Carr's first game as head coach, Dreisbach brought the Wolverines back from a 17-0 deficit against the Virginia Cavaliers, culminating in a late, game-winning touchdown pass to Mercury Hayes. In that game he was 27/52 for 372 yards, 2 TDs, and 2 INTs; those passing attempts and passing yardage were records for Michigan at the time.
Why the ranking? Dreisbach didn't put up great numbers and played for a run-heavy team that didn't count on him a ton, but he had a solid record and made some big plays - including a memorable 72-yard run against Illinois. Injuries and other talented quarterbacks shortened his career, and he came off the bench for the final two years of his career. But some people forget that when he went 4-0 in 1995, he was just a redshirt freshman.
13. TATE FORCIER
Record as starter: 5-7 from 2009-2010
Career statistics: 219/365 (60.0%), 2647 yards, 17 TDs, 14 INTs; 140 carries for 291 yards, 4 TDs
Biggest win: The Notre Dame game was the biggest game in 2009. Michigan pulled off a 38-34 upset that included a 31-yard TD run by Forcier and then the game-winning touchdown pass to wideout Greg Mathews with just 11 seconds remaining in the game. On that day Forcier was 23/33 for 240 yards, 2 TDs, and 1 INT, and he ran the ball 13 times for 70 yards and the 1 TD. He looked like Rich Rodriguez's next big thing at the time, though his star faded after that point.
Why the ranking? There's no doubt that Forcier was a talented player, but he was a risk-taker and gunslinger without the necessary arm strength, judgment, and supporting cast to make that work. Attitude and off-the-field issues seemed to contribute to his demise, since he was academically ineligible after 2010.
14. BRANDON PETERS
Record as starter: 2-2 in 2017
Career statistics: 57/108 (52.8%), 672 yards, 4 TDs, 2 INTs
Biggest win: Choices are limited so far, but Peters took his team on the road at Maryland, averaged 8.1 yards per attempt, and threw 2 touchdowns with 0 turnovers. That's more impressive than the Minnesota win when Chris Evans and Karan Higdon ran roughshod over the Gophers on a rainy night.
Why the ranking? Peters showed flashes of great play, combined with some silly mistakes. If Michigan's offensive line play were on par with the 2007 group for Mallett below, then I think Peters would have played pretty well. Peters can put more touch on the ball, and he's more athletic than Mallett. Peters transferred to Illinois after the 2018 season.
15. RYAN MALLETT
Record as starter: 3-0 in 2007
Career statistics: 61/141 (43.3%), 892 yards, 7 TDs, 5 INTs
Biggest win: In his second career start, Mallett was 16/29 for 170 yards, 0 TDs, and 1 INT against Penn State. But he helped the Wolverines to a 14-9 win over the Nittany Lions, who finished the year with a 9-4 record, and that game included a seemingly unlikely touchdown scramble from the 6'7", 252-pounder. It wasn't as dominant of a win as the 38-0 victory over Notre Dame the previous week, but the Fighting Irish finished 3-9 that year.
Why the ranking? Mallett's numbers weren't great, and he had the advantage of handing off to Mike Hart and throwing to the likes of Mario Manningham. So he had a better supporting cast than many of the quarterbacks on this list, but quarterbacks are measured by wins, and he found a way to help the Wolverines to that 3-0 record during his time.
16. STEVE THREET
Record as starter: 2-6 from 2007-2008
Career statistics: 102/200 (51%), 1105 yards, 9 TDs, 7 INTs; 76 carries for 201 yards, 2 TDs
Biggest win: Michigan stunned Wisconsin with a 27-25 victory over the Badgers in 2008. Threet struggled throwing the ball (12/31 for 96 yards, 1 TD, and 2 INTs), but the 6'6" Threet stunned everyone with a 58-yard run and ended the game with 9 carries for 89 yards.
Why the ranking? Threet had some potential, but he was unlucky throughout his career. He enrolled early at Georgia Tech just before they moved to a triple-option offense, so he dodged a bullet in order fall into the arms of pro-style QB haven Michigan . . . and then Lloyd Carr retired to be replaced by a spread option coach in Rich Rodriguez. After one season of not working out, he transferred to Arizona State and then retired from football due to concussions. Maybe he could have carved out a more lasting legacy if he had graduated from high school 5-10 years earlier, but that's the way things go sometimes.
17. JOE MILTON
Record as starter: 2-3 from 2018-2020
Career statistics: 86/152 (56.6%), 1194 yards, 5 TDs, 6 INTs; 50 carries for 156 yards, 3 TDs
Biggest win: Michigan began Milton's first season as a starter with a good looking win over the Minnesota Gophers, a 49-24 victory that saw Milton get a lot of hype. He completed 15/22 passes for 225 yards and 1 touchdown; he also ran 8 times for 52 yards and 1 touchdown.
Why the ranking? Though technically 2-3 as a starter, that Minnesota victory was really the only one for Milton. He was yanked in Michigan's only other 2020 victory - the Rutgers game - after completing 5/12 passes and recording 2 rushing attempts for -16 yards. Backup Cade McNamara brought the Wolverines back in what turned out to be a shootout to win the game. Milton was inaccurate and frequently made poor decisions, which negated his size, considerable arm strength, and above average speed.
18. JOHN O'KORN
Record as starter: 3-3 from 2015-2017
Career statistics: 104/191 (54.4%), 1146 yards, 4 TDs, 6 INTs
Biggest win: In his only start for an injured Wilton Speight in 2016, O'Korn didn't play well but sparked a late surge with a 30-yard scramble. While he won two more games in 2017, neither was a significant performance. In a non-starting experience, O'Korn played very well against Purdue in 2017 coming in for Speight; O'Korn finished 18/26 for 270 yards, 1 TD, and 1 INT.
Why the ranking? O'Korn played fairly well when he was inserted as a backup late in games, but he didn't play so well in his starts. He struggled mightily against Michigan State and Penn State, and he made some very frustrating plays against Ohio State in 2017. Unlike the guys below him, you saw his potential.
19. NICK SHERIDAN
Record as starter: 1-3 from 2007-2010
Career statistics: 70/148 (47.3%), 701 yards, 2 TDs, 6 INTs; 45 carries for 103 yards, 1 TD
Biggest win: Naturally, it's his only win, but he also played a good game. He was 18/30 for 203 yards, 1 TD, and 0 INTs. He also ran 8 times or 33 yards in the 29-6 win over the Minnesota Gophers at the Metrodome.
Why the ranking? Sheridan did not have a good career, but as a walk-on from Saline, he wasn't expected to do much in college. He fell into a situation where Michigan was lacking quarterbacks and he happened to be somewhat mobile for Rich Rodriguez's offense, so Sheridan made the best of it.
20. SHANE MORRIS
Record as starter: 0-2 from 2013-2016
Career statistics: 47/92 (51.1%), 434 yards, 0 TD, 5 INT; 18 carries for 87 yards (4.8 YPC)
Biggest win: N/A
Why the ranking? Morris arrived at Michigan when Brady Hoke's regime was on a downward slide, but Morris did nothing to stem the tide. Even with two years of Jim Harbaugh's coaching, he rose no higher than third on the depth chart and never accounted for a touchdown during his four years on campus.
Let the arguments begin.
Watching Jake Rudock progress game by game in 2015 was something fun to watch.
ReplyDeleteIf Tate Forcier had his head on straight, then he may have been something really good. But sadly his head was not on straight.
Always a great convo. I think the "who had the best career at Michigan" calculus is very different from "who would I insert as my starter for one year".
ReplyDeleteI'm a Cade-convert but I wouldn't yet put McNamara in the top 5 regardless of criteria. He had a good year and fit well with what was needed but his limitations were very evident early and he struggled in the post season too. Griese is a similar player IMO but would have done better. Cade's got some years ahead of him still though...
I WOULD put Cade ahead of Rudock though because I just still don't think very highly of Rudock. Individual numbers are what they are but the offense was so much better against OSU in 2021. Obviously neither QB gets full credit or blame for that, but the contrast is too stark. Plus Cade never threw 3 INTs in a narrow loss. That sort of high profile failure dings Speight too.
I wouldn't put any of the above in the top 5 for Michigan careers. Though again, Cade has plenty of years left and could easily get there. I wouldn't include anyone who started one season or less near the top of the list for career accomplishments.
1. Henne
2. Robinson
3. Brady
4. Navarre
5. Gardner (edge over Patterson just based on the surrounding environment)
Stats won't tell you everything of course but I think YPA is a big omission. QBR also gives a better sense for overall passing efficiency than completion percentage. If INTs are a point of emphasis, then attempts are really relevant there too (e.g., Henne and Denard have similar INT totals but Denard was far more likely to throw a pick when dropping back)... If we're talking about overall production I'd combine the rushing and passing yards and TDs to get a better sense of the body of work. If we're just talking passing then it's a passing ranking not a QB ranking.
ReplyDelete"If we're just talking passing then it's a passing ranking not a QB ranking."
DeleteI know we've had this discussion before, but you can't separate the QB from the passing ability. This post ranks modern football - not the 1940s or option-heavy 1970s or whatever - and modern football quarterbacks have to be able to pass the ball against good defenses.
A running QB will make for some fun football. A running QB will not win you championships. Vince Young was the last run-oriented QB to win a championship, and his passing numbers alone are impressive (65.2% completions, 3036 yards, 9.3 YPA, 163.9 PER). He threw 26 TD and 10 INT. Against USC he completed 75% of his passes for 267 yards and 3 touchdowns to win the Rose Bowl and the national championship. That was 16 seasons ago.
Denard Robinson's best season saw him complete 62.5% of his passes for 2570 yards, 8.8 YPA, 149.6 PER, 18 TD, and 11 TD.
If I were writing this blog post in 1990, it might have a different slant. But it's 2022 (well, it was 2017 when I started it) and this era of football requires good passers if you want to reach the pinnacle.
Hard to believe that was 16 years ago. That was one of the greatest games I ever saw. All sports tv and radio said things like Texas would be lucky to lose by only 10.
Delete@Thunder
DeleteAll I'm saying is that running and passing are both relevant. A TD on the ground counts as much as a TD through the air. I don't disagree at all about the importance of passing in the modern game. But we just Lamar Jackson win a unanimous NFL MVP while barely passing the 3000 yard passing mark. Because he could run.
I also agree that "modern football quarterbacks have to be able to pass the ball against good defenses". Yet Cade McNamara really didn't. He broke 300 yards once the entire year, threw 4 of his 6 picks in the handful of games against top defenses, and generally couldn't do a thing against Georgia and Washington. The running game did the heavy lifting all year.
There's a narrative around Denard that he couldn't get it done when facing tough defenses. There's truth to that but it goes for other guys too. Rudock got shut down by OSU. So did Griese. Penn State snuffed out Henson. McNamara got shut down by Georgia.
Great defenses shut down good passers, good runners, and good all around QBs. Denard had some good games on the ground against good defenses and good games through the air on good defenses too. Notre Dame in 2010 - that was a top 10 defense.
Denard had one of the best seasons in terms of passer rating (the NFL official measure) in recent Michigan football history. That ignores running completely, though of course it's not irrelevant that the 2010 team was so good at running.
DeleteIf you stack up the passer rating by year for our starting QBs you get some pretty interesting results that very much pass the smell test (to me at least).
The most effective seasons were passer ratings above 145:
Patterson 18 (150) Denard 10 (150)
Solid seasons near the 130s or low 140s:
Cade 21 (142) Speight 16 (140) Rudock (142) Henne's whole whole career was in this range.
Bad seasons 125 or less:
Milton 20 (125) OKorn 17 (102) Gardner 14 (119) Threet 09 (105)
Denard had a 140 passer rating for his entire career at Michigan, including the freshman year where he wasn't ready yet and probably should have red-shirted. His passing was good in college.
He benefitted from a strong run game certainly. So did Cade and Griese. Unlike those guys he was the biggest reason FOR that strong run game. That's certainly not something to be ignored or counted against him.
I think the discussion of Denard Robinson, needing passing quarterbacks, etc. is missing a certain key point, and that point is that I'm not saying these quarterbacks are great. After the first couple guys, they're not supremely talented elite passers.
DeleteNo, McNamara didn't shred Georgia's defense. Who did shred Georgia's defense? Bryce Young, who threw for a ton of yards and 3 touchdowns.
Alabama was the cream of the crop in 2020. Who gave them issues? Matt Corral (Ole Miss) and Kyle Trask (Florida). Corral can run a little bit, but Trask is a statue. Both are/were considered upper echelon passing quarterbacks. Corral is a potential NFL first rounder, and Trask was a second round pick.
This discussion is somewhat like the Fantasy vs. Real Life Football world. I like having Lamar Jackson as my fantasy QB (he won me a championship in 2019 and 2020), because the baseline for good stats is solid. I would take Lamar Jackson over virtually any other QB.
But if I were picking a Real Life QB, there's no way I'm starting with Lamar Jackson. At this point I would pick Pat Mahomes, Tom Brady, Josh Allen, and perhaps others ahead of Lamar Jackson.
And let's be honest. If you have one year to be a GM and win a Super Bowl or else you're fired - this is your ONE shot - you're not picking Michael Vick or Lamar Jackson, the greatest running QBs in NFL history. You're picking the guys who can throw the ball.
(Yes, there are exceptions like John Elway and Steve Young and Brett Favre, who can run...but the key is that they could ALSO pass.)
In today's NFL I am taking Mahomes. but that's really not the point.
DeleteLike you said, Jackson is better than the vast majority of NFL QBs - and it's not because he's a better passer. He blends good (but not elite) passing with elite rushing ability. If we ignore that, we're missing the point.
Denard in college, like Jackson in the NFL, was a very good passer.* It's not just fantasy football - it translated to winning as soon as the defensive catastrophe got sorted out.
I think we also have to note that Mahomes and Allen were the leading rushers in yesterday's playoff game. That never happened before as far as I know but an indicator of where the modern game is at. It's a pass first game, no doubt about that. QBs dictate everything, but rushing ability is absolutely relevant to the game.
Mahomes runs it 4 or 5 times a game and Allen runs it 6 or 7 times a game. That's only a few times fewer per game than their top RBs who get 10 or 11 carries per game. Less when it counts most, it seems. So, I don't think we can just say that QB rushing ability is a fantasy thing when it's playing such a big part in the play on the field.
Either rushing the ball really doesn't matter, in which case how can RBs matter, or it does, in which QBs rushing ability must be considered in the modern game.
*Yes, even despite the INTs. PER and YPA counter those, and anyway, he had essentially the same amount as Henne with a lot less talent around him while playing behind often because of a crap defense around him.
Here's what you're missing in the Josh Allen and Patrick Mahomes discussion:
DeleteTheir ability to pass opens up the run. The same goes for Aaron Rodgers, John Elway, and other guys who are/were moderately good rushers but very good passers.
Again, this isn't really even an argument. The proof is in the pudding. Run-first quarterbacks don't win. Pass-first quarterbacks do. That's the case in both college and the NFL.
So we can go back and forth and you can make your case for Denard Robinson, but the point of the game is winning, and quarterbacks like Denard Robinson don't win.
"Either rushing the ball really doesn't matter, in which case how can RBs matter, or it does, in which QBs rushing ability must be considered in the modern game."
This is a false dichotomy. For obvious reasons.
Denard won. He was the guy for one of the 3 seasons where Michigan football got above 10 wins since 1997 (2006, 2011, and 2021). He beat OSU and won the Sugar Bowl.
DeleteAnyway, Denard had more passing attempts than rushing attempts, despite playing RB for the last part of his career due to an arm injury. He's "dual threat" not "run first".
Here are some other dual threat QBs:
https://247sports.com/Player/Josh-Allen-78109/junior-college-135887/
https://247sports.com/Player/Joe-Burrow-36575/high-school-60304/
https://247sports.com/Player/Kyler-Murray-24020/high-school-38512/
https://247sports.com/Player/Dak-Prescott-8327/high-school-10422/
Speaking of false dichotomy.
DeleteI agree that isn't an argument because no one is say "run first QBs are better than pass-first QBs". At the NFL level run first QBs don't even exist! There aren't even that many at the major college level now that Paul Johnson is retired and Rich Rod is off in purgatory.
The closest thing to a run first QB in the NFL is Lamar Jackson and he passes twice as often as he runs. Jackson is 37-12 in his career. He is an MVP. He wins.
As a passer, Jackson is solid. As a runner he is exceptional. That's what made him such a successful starter, an all-pro, and NFL MVP at 22 years old. Note that Burrow and Allen (other dual threats, but less reliant on rushing) are both one year younger and were still in college when they were 22.
The argument is if we can dismiss rushing ability as irrelevant to QB performance or ignore rushing production in the evaluation of QBs. They both count.
QB running matters!
Dual-threat QBs abound in modern the NFL. Of course they do. This is the way the game has evolved and the number of pure pocket passers (like Tom Brady) who can't/won't run is dwindling. Mahomes and Allen illustrate that running ability matters in the NFL. Lamar Jackson made is abundantly clear when he won MVP.
Denard (and multitudes of others) made it clear at the college level when they won big with rushing and throwing.
The modern game is about passing, but rushing still matters. Rushing comes from QBs and WRs. Not just RBs anymore.
I think you can make a pretty good argument that McNamara's success was at least, if not MORE dependent on running ability than Denard.
DeleteSetting aside the source of the rushing ability entirely, and just comparing passing stats in their successful junior seasons in 2011 vs 2021, Denard comes out slightly ahead in everything besides INTs (15 vs 6):
McNamara threw for 184 yards per game to Denard's 167.
McNamara threw for 15 TDs to Denard's 20.
McNamara threw for 7.9 ypa to Denard's 8.4.
McNamara had a passer rating of 142 to Denard's 150.
So to rank McNamara above Denard at those point strains credulity and credibility. Even setting aside the larger point about the ignoring rushing ability entirely and only looking at passing it's a pretty weak case.
What you are missing is that Denard's ability to pass opened up the run too. Just like Allen and Mahomes.
DeleteFitz Toussaints YPC dropped from 5.6 ypc in 2011 to to 4.0 ypc and 3.5 ypc in subsequent years when Denard wasn't at QB.
We haven't had a primary ball carrier come close to Denard's career ypc of 6.2. Why?
Because he was a good QB who could throw and run and being a dual threat matters.
All that running ability to open up the passing game, and he still wasn't a very good passer. That shows you something. That's probably why he didn't even get a chance to play QB in the NFL.
DeleteI always think it's funny how you bend things whenever you see fit. When we talk about De'Veon Smith, he was good at being a running back because he got an NFL opportunity. When we talk about Michael Cox, he wasn't good despite getting an NFL opportunity. When we talk about Denard Robinson, he was a good QB even though the NFL clearly didn't think so.
In those three cases, the NFL means something (De'Veon Smith!), knows nothing (Michael Cox), and knows nothing (Denard Robinson).
The highest level of football in the world is the NFL. I tend to believe they know a little something about the game of football. So I'm just going to go ahead and agree with them that Denard Robinson was not that great of a QB.
Denard was a highly EFFECTIVE college passer. More effective than most on this list. The passing production and efficiency was statistically excellent. And he won a lot of games, accolades, and broke records as a QB. That speaks for itself.
DeleteThe burden that he was asked to take on - the level of difficulty considering surrounding talent, coaching turnover, and the individual responsibility on him to score, and do it often - exceeds most others as well. I think ignoring that is a pretty big omission.
But if you take his running ability off the table (LOL), if you put him in individual passing drills against a guy like Rudock or Patterson, he wouldn't be nearly as good as a pure passer. We don't even disagree on this. But that's not football. That's drills.
Like I said if you take away Denard's legs he isn't nearly as good. If you take away Henne's shoulder he isn't nearly as good either. That's imaginary. We have real life.
As for the NFL argument...we're talking about college football here.
Deveon Smith was a good RB because he ran for 2,500 yards and 23 TDs at Michigan.
Dendard Robinson was a good QB because he had 10,000 yards and over 90 TDs at Michigan.
Michael Cox was not a good RB because he had 300 yards and 3 TDs at Michigan and tranferred to get playing time. Then did nothing of note at a lower level.
Jake Rudock was a solid but unexceptional college QB who also had to transfer for playing time but amassed almost 8000 yards and 54 TDs while playing at 2 very good college programs.
The NFL is not college. They are different. But they can inform this conversation if there's some room for doubt. Unfortunately, counter to your assertion, none of these guys did anything substantial at the NFL level to flip the narrative from what we saw in college.
Rudock played 3 games and had 24 yards.
Smith played 5 games and had 27 yards.
Cox played 2 years and had 97 yards.
Denard played 4 years, had 1500 yards and 5 TDs.
So, the NFL thinks Denard was better than all those guys too.
Even when you strain to dismiss Denard's college performance by filtering through an NFL lense you fall short.
Even though you bring it up for Denard, it is very obvious that even you don't believe that NFL production is that important in ranking college QBs.
DeleteLook at where you have Rudock and Henson ranked. Between them they have 130 yards and 1 TD total in their NFL careers. Henson has some circumstances to consider but Rudock does not.
Henne and Griese, most obviously, had vastly superior careers. This was in college too, so it's not really much of a case that needs to be made.
But it also goes for Navarre, Mallett and Denard, who each had more yards in college too but then also did more in the NFL than Henson or Rudock.
Driesbach is another one. He didn't have more yards - in either college or NFL - but he was far more impressive as an NFL QB considering preseason performances and how he was treated while injured.
Bottomline, I think you're reading a lot into opinions and projections (be it via recruiting stars or NFL draft) while dismissing results and production. Hype over substance, which ironically is what you think about QBs who can run...
--------------------
Ranking QBs like this is a subjective exercise to be sure. It's a matter of opinion, but we can ground truth opinions in some objective measures. These can be used to call out overtly bad takes. That's what's going on here.
Denard's college career as a QB was vastly superior to Rudocks. If you want to argue the NFL career undoes that well...
Rudock had 3 mores pass attempts and 24 more passing yards than Denard, so those plays are doing some pretty serious work (like Michael Cox's carries against Delaware State LOL) Meanwhile Denard had 1 less interception, 1000 more yards, and 5 more TDs than Rudock, in the NFL.
Think about that - the NFL gave Denard Robinson nearly as many chances to pass the ball WHILE PLAYING RB as they gave Jake Rudock as a QB.
Denard's the better football player
AND the better QB
AND the more effective passer.
The NFL thought LaDainian Tomlinson was a better QB prospect (12 career attempts) than Denard Robinson. Tomlinson never played QB in college or the NFL. Yikes.
DeleteIt cuts both ways.
Nice try but you're dodging the basic point that Rudock did nothing in the NFL.
DeleteYour argument that JR had a better college career than DR falls flat if you're trying to use the NFL as rationale. The production and performance, or lacktherof, speaks for itself.
You keep trying to parse things finer and finer but you're only giving me more ammo to demonstrate that Denard was a superior quarterback. Because the mountain of evidence is overwhelming against the hot take.
If Cade McNamara is 24-3 at the end of the season next season where will he be ranked?
ReplyDeletePasser rating by season for primary starters since '04:
ReplyDeletePatterson 18 150
Robinson 10 150
Gardner 13 146
Henne 06 143
McNamara 21 142
Rudock 15 142
Speight 16 140
Forcier 09 128
Milton 20 125
Threet 08 105
Okorn 17 102
I put in the best season for each guy. So multi-year starters like Patterson, Denard, Gardner, Henne don't have their less impressive seasons show up. Most were in the 130-140 range.
Setting aside career accomplishments and if given the choice to plug in any QB into the 2022 offense I'd go with Denard. The others lack running ability which we've seen be a challenge with McNamara and Patterson. It would be for better passers like Henne as well.
DeleteHenne would be my second choice (with Denard assuming the JJ role, though if limiting it to backups I'd pick JJ over McCaffrey due to passing ability tie breaker).
The upside choices for dual threat QBs are Henson and Gardner. My feelings say they would thrive but can't pick them because they each had too many clunkers as starters. TBF to Gardner he had waaay less talent around him while Henson had an NFL OL, NFL WRs, NFL RBs.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/players/drew-henson-1/gamelog/
Henson got a ton of attention and beat OSU but he also stunk up the joint against MSU and PSU.
Career PER for some of those same Michigan starters:
DeletePatterson 144.2
Rudock 141.5
McNamara 140.5
Robinson 138.6
Gardner 138.3
Henne 133.9
Speight 132.2
This is what you're not seeing. Denard Robinson didn't play just one season at Michigan in 2010. He played four years, three of them as the starter. He wasn't tied for #1. He was #4. And if we're just going by peak stretch of play, Rudock was far and away the best QB of the past 15 years or so once he got acclimated to Michigan's offense in the second half of 2015. Over the last five weeks, his PER was 211.6, 190.8, 134.5, 138.7, and 171.8.
Career PER. Rudock 134, Robinson 139
DeleteBeast Season PER: Rudock 142, Robinson 150.
PER doesn't count rushing at all but #4 is still way higher than you have him ranked above.
Denard's best season was as a sophomore. What you're missing is that tells you something. Rudock didn't play as a sophomore because he wasn't good enough to.
You've gone down to where you are comparing Rudock's 5th year to Robinson first 4 years. This is completely ignoring context in multiple ways including some pretty obvious ones - that Denard never had a 5th year, and that was because he didn't transfer which helped Michigan tremendously rather than doing what was best for him.
If you compare apples to apples Denard comes out ahead.
If you want to boil it down to a short stretch of peak performance,
the last 5 games of Rudocks 5th year were not as good as the first 5 games of Denard's 2nd year. Rudock had 1,600 yards, 14 TDs, and 2 INTs and got blown out by our rival. Denard had 2,000 yards, 15 TDs, and 1 INTs and blew out a rival.
So Denard was better for his career, Denard was better for his peak season, Denard was better for a peak 5 game stretch. And Denard was better in the NFL too.
a) Rudock played at Michigan for one year. This ranking does not have anything to do with what he did at Iowa, what O'Korn did at Houston, what Morris did at CMU, etc. So you're factually incorrect. Rudock had a higher PER than Denard Robinson at Michigan. This is made clear in the preface:
Delete"This ranking only takes into account what the quarterbacks achieved wearing the winged helmet."
b) Rudock was less experienced (fewer games played) as a fifth year senior than Denard Robinson was by his fourth year. Rudock had played in 25 career games before his year at Michigan, while Robinson had played in 38 career games before his senior year.
c) If we're blaming Rudock for getting blown out by Ohio State, then what about when Denard Robinson got blown out by Ohio State in 2010, Mississippi State in 2010, Wisconsin in 2010, Alabama in 2012, etc.? Is it just because Robinson lucked out and faced a 6-6 Ohio State team in 2011 and won by six points? How would he have done if he faced the 12-1 Buckeyes that Rudock had to face? That's a silly thing to hold against Rudock, and you know it.
You keep bringing up Rudock's final stretch but it includes the game against OSU. It's not fair to blame Rudock for the loss but it IS fair to blame him for managing only 1 TD as a 5th year senior surrounded by NFL talent.
DeleteThat OSU team lost to MSU the week before and Notre Dame scored 4 TDs in the next game against them. It was a good D, number 7 nationally, but not impossible to score on.
The context and production of Rudock's 5th year loss to OSU is very similar to Denard's 2nd year loss to OSU. Though that defense was even better (#1 overall). So if you want to dismiss the 2011 win and just look at 2010 you can, but the conclusion isn't very good for Rudock:
Denard was better as a sophomore than Rudock was a 5th year player.
Denard heading into 2012: 580 pass attempts in 3 years
DeleteRudock heading into 2015: 691 pass attempts in 4 years
It doesn't matter but B is a bad argument. Rudock was a more experienced passer in his 5th year than Denard was in his 4th.
The idea that Denard playing in 12 games as a freshman should count against him or diminish his later production in any way is entirely off.
Denard played on better team (2011).
Denard played on a better offense (2010).
Denard was a more effective passer (2010).
Denard was a better QB (entire career, 2010, 2011).
Denard was a better football player (HS, college, NFL).
Denard was a better Wolverine (4 years, through turmoil, no transfer)
LOL. Okay, if running counts...Rudock was a less experienced runner in his fifth year than Denard was in his fourth!
DeleteYou keep making excuses for Denard Robinson. It's not my fault he only spent four years in college. You act as if an imaginary fifth year would have done him any good as a passer. He played okay in 2010 when the Big Ten didn't know what to do with a Rich Rodriguez offense, and he got worse - in almost EVERY category - as he got older.
You're lucky Denard didn't have a fifth year, because he probably would have been moved to running back permanently as a college player before even hitting the NFL.
18 TD, 11 INT
20 TD, 15 INT,
9 TD, 9 INT...and he didn't even have to play QB against Nebraska (the whole game), #17 Northwestern, #3 Ohio State, or #8 South Carolina. He probably would have ended up with more INTs than TDs as a fourth year player and three year starter. Yikes.
"You act as if an imaginary fifth year would have done him any good as a passer"
DeleteAbsolutely I do. Jake Rudock is a great example why. He stunk until Harbaugh surrounded him with NFL talent and NFL coaching. If you're giving Rudock, a pocket passer for 4 years at Iowa, half a season to settle in to a 5th year at Michigan, Denard should get way more leeway for a philosophical 180 at Michigan.
"He played okay in 2010 when the Big Ten didn't know what to do with a Rich Rodriguez offens" LOL Rodriguez was in year 3. Denard was a heisman finalist. Denard was very good, certainly better than Rudock, in 2011 too.
I'll fix those QB stats for you:
32 TD, 11 INT
36 TD, 15 INT
15 TD, 9 INT
Rudock in those same years during his career:
0 TD, 0 INT
23 TD, 13 INT
19 TD, 5 INT
I can't dispute that Denard threw more INTs. It's the one thing you can hang your hat on. The "excuses" there are very legitimate reasons why but the larger point is that this is about as important as YPC for a QB.
If QBs were just evaluated based on INTs thrown then I guess Favre, Manning, and Marino are among the 10 worst to ever play.
"You act as if an imaginary fifth year would have done him any good as a passer"
DeleteAbsolutely I do. Jake Rudock is a great example why. He stunk until Harbaugh surrounded him with NFL talent and NFL coaching. If you're giving Rudock, a pocket passer for 4 years at Iowa, half a season to settle in to a 5th year at Michigan, Denard should get way more leeway for a philosophical 180 at Michigan.
"He played okay in 2010 when the Big Ten didn't know what to do with a Rich Rodriguez offens" LOL Rodriguez was in year 3. Denard was a heisman finalist. Denard was very good, certainly better than Rudock, in 2011 too.
I'll fix those QB stats for you:
32 TD, 11 INT
36 TD, 15 INT
15 TD, 9 INT
Rudock in those same years during his career:
0 TD, 0 INT
23 TD, 13 INT
19 TD, 5 INT
I can't dispute that Denard threw more INTs. It's the one thing you can hang your hat on. The "excuses" there are very legitimate reasons why but the larger point is that this is about as important as YPC for a QB.
If QBs were just evaluated based on INTs thrown then I guess Favre, Manning, and Marino are among the 10 worst to ever play.
-Lank
"If running counts" LOL
DeleteBrett Favre, the worst interception thrower in NFL history with 336, threw an interception on 3.3% of his pass attempts.
DeleteDenard Robinson threw interceptions on 5.2% of his attempts.
According to Pro Football Reference, the NFL player who played into the 2000s with the highest interception rate was Trent Dilfer at 4.1%. Dilfer is widely regarded as perhaps the worst QB to win a Super Bowl, and Robinson was even worse (better?) at throwing the ball to the opposition.
In order to get an equally bad percentage, you have to go back to days when people didn't know how to throw the ball, such as Frank Ryan, who also threw 5.2% of his passes to the opposing team...from 1958-1970.
So there you have it. Denard Robinson, despite playing in an era of QB gurus and analytics and spread offenses, had passing abilities on par with dudes who smoked cigarettes during games and cracked open a cold Budweiser for their pre-game shakes from the 1950s and 1960s.
https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/pass_int_perc_career.htm
The Favre/Marino/Manning comment is absolutely irrelevant. You're grasping at straws.
Denard had a higher career PER. Denard had a higher peak season PER. These are facts.
ReplyDeleteYou're actually arguing about Rudock's inexperience as a 5th year senior at the same time that you're holding Denard's freshman stats against him. That's nuts.
It's indicative of the larger pattern where you are bending over backwards to make every excuse for Rudock. Rudock had every advantage compared to Denard yet he was an inferior college QB. Even when you reframe the debate, take away Denard's rushing ability, ignore context, and otherwise impose some arbitrary limits to make Rudock look better, it doesn't work. Because Denard was comprehensively better.
In this backward world you are actually giving CREDIT to Rudock not being good enough to play when he was younger, losing his job at Iowa, and transferring for playing time. Meanwhile Denard was sacrificing for Michigan, playing before he was ready, staying through a coaching change most saw as bad for him individually, playing hurt for a program clearly going in the wrong direction. That's ignored.
I'll say it again. Rudock had EVERY ADVANTAGE. He played for Jim Harbaugh and Jedd Fisch. He was surrounded by NFL talent. He got a 5th year. He plugged into a really good situation with years of experience. He was healthy and dealt with none of the turmoil Denard faced... Yet he was not as good.
Career games with PER over 150
ReplyDeleteRobinson: 16
Rudock: 10 (3 at Michigan)
Career games with PER over 200
Robinson: 7
Rudock: 1
Career 300 yard passing games
Robinson: 3
Rudock: 5
Games with 3TD or more
Robinson: 18
Rudock: 8
Enjoyable debate as always. Look forward to doing it again next year.
ReplyDelete