View Full Version : QB's in pro football

12-10-2007, 02:48 PM
This article got me thinking about the different types of QB's we see in college versus in the pros.
Meyer's magic - NCAA Football - Yahoo! Sports (http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt=AruI_5rgJ6BzjvxjrTwEQFccvrYF?slug=tb-heisman120907&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)

Unless pro football is changing, I don't see the dual threat QB being all that successful in the pros. There might be one or two exceptions to the rule, but I don't see the spread option work in the pros. So if a dual-QB can't read defenses, and isn't that accurate or have that strong of an arm, can he make it with his legs?

It seems there are three general styles: 1) Drop-back pocket passer, 2) Mobile passer, and 3) Dual threat. (By dual threat, I mean someone whose first thought is not to stay in the pocket and is just as good with his legs as he is with his arm.)

The only real dual threat I can think of is Michael Vick, who literally could beat you with his legs, probably more so than his arm. But even while he was successful, the Falcons did not become perrenial contenders. QB's like McNabb, McNair and Vince Young seem to fall into the second category, because they focus first on passing, but are a threat to run and can beat you with their legs if passing is not an option.

So, will a dual QB ever succeed in the NFL?

12-10-2007, 02:57 PM

12-10-2007, 03:00 PM
What was Steve Young or Roger Staubach? How about Fran Tarkenton? I know he didn't win any Superbowls but he still won some games. What would we define them?

12-10-2007, 03:47 PM
What was Steve Young or Roger Staubach? How about Fran Tarkenton? I know he didn't win any Superbowls but he still won some games. What would we define them?

Young would definitely fall into the category of a mobile QB. He used his legs to open up throwing lanes but also wasn't afraid to take off. I highly doubt though, that teams gameplanned for his running abilities, unlike someone like a Vick who has a spy on him.

I doubt we will ever see a "dual theat" QB in the NFL simply because NFL players are too athletic. The NFL teams are like all-star college teams. LBs run extremely very fast in the NFL and normally even the lower level teams have players good enough to stop a running QB. Now, Vick had success with his legs, but that is because he has exceptional speed and agility, however, you could never take him seriously as a QB because he could never put it together through the air. I think the same thing goes for Vince Young. Yea he has a lot of TDs with his legs, but he has thrown more Ints than TDs this year, thats not a winning combination.

The NFL is all about strategy and execution, therefore it is fairly mandatory for an NFL team who wants to win a Super Bowl to have a drop back passer who can read defenses and make the throws.

12-10-2007, 03:53 PM
Randall Cunningham was the best dual threat QB in the NFL back in the day. Probably the best athlete on the field in every game he played. He could certainly beat you with his legs or with his arm.

12-10-2007, 03:55 PM
I don't think the dual threat QB is much of a threat at all in the NFL. Maybe for a big play here or there or a touchdown here or there but not as far as winning championships.

12-10-2007, 04:07 PM
In Cunningham's career he threw for 29,979 yards and 207 TDs. He rushed for 4,928 yards and 35 TDs. He was a 3-time MVP. Only a handful of guys can make that claim. He took teams deep into the playoffs during several seasons. There are many QBs who never win the big game, most notably, I will say, Dan Marino. I don't think anyone would argue that he was unsuccessful because of that. I definately think there is a place for the dual threat QB in the NFL. IMO, Cunningham is the best example of that.

12-10-2007, 04:10 PM
Are we measuring this by playoff success or if they are effective? If we are going effective you have to go with Randall Cunningham in the early 90's.

When you say dual threat what do your consider a dual threat? I think some definitions would help in answering this question. There is clear definitions for a pocket passer. Do you mean that a dual threat runs the ball most of the times and have plays made for created for him to run? You won't see many offenses in the pro game geared to having a QB running like that. It was believed that Mike Vick would get better in his passing and he would be a Steve Young x2.

I'm struggling with the question because I don't know if there is a such thing as a dual threat quarterback in the NFL. All QB's that run are being taught how to pass better. Not neccessarily to stop running. If he can't pass then how can we say that he is a "dual threat". He's one dimensional. Is it a better way of saying option QB?

I know I may have confused some but I think the dual threat classification needs to be takenout. It should be pocket passer or mobile.

IDK. Just some clarification on definitions is needed for me. It's not just this thread it's the media that keeps doing this as well.

12-10-2007, 05:10 PM
Problem you will have with a dual threat QB in the pro's is the fact that teams have so much money invested in these guys, you don't want them to take a hit. How many people would hold their breath when Young or Elway would start running down the field in fear of them getting hurt? You're not going to have too many offensive coordinators draw up plays that have the QB intentionally taking hits from LB's and DB's. Tebow is a big guy and take 10-15 hits in a college game over a 12 week season. He is not going to be able to take those hits in a 16 week NFL season for too many years.

12-10-2007, 05:15 PM
If the Spread is introduced to the NFL, YES
If not, NO

12-10-2007, 09:03 PM
So it seems like they may come along every once in a while, but not be overly successful, except with one or two exceptions every ten years or so.

Then I wonder why a college guy would want to go to a system that is spread option focused if he intends to play in the NFL. I supose if he is ok with going to another position, but it seems like that rarely happens. Yes, he can get a free education, but it seems that if you go that route, probability says you won't play QB in the NFL.

12-10-2007, 10:05 PM

ha ha, total reps. I just posted "No." to a thread ackirl started. And you burned me with my own words.

12-11-2007, 09:24 AM
Just look at McNabb and how injuries have pretty much ruined him the past few years. A running QB will eventually get destroyed in the NFL, they can't take the type of beating that defenses will give out.