It is my position that the vast majority of quarterbacks in the NFL are either underrated or overrated. This is due to the fact that most of the performance of the quarterback is determined by the effectiveness of his supporting cast. This fact is acknowleged by many, but the significance is not fully appreciated. Due to the incredible complexity of the game of football, there is little real way to separate the performance of the quarterback alone, and thus little way to truly rate the effectiveness of his talent on it’s own.
I base this on the following:[list=A][li]Many “great” quarterbacks have understudies who perform just as well when put into the game due to injury (e.g. Frank Reich behind Jim Kelly, Mitchell behind Marino, all-sorts-of-guys in SF, Rodney Peete behind Aikman, etc.) These backups are commonly described as being “good enough to start on most other teams, but unfortunately not good enough to supplant the great so-and-so”. When these backups actually get starting jobs with other teams, they generally bomb.[/li]
[li]Many starting quarterbacks who are very succesful with good teams are signed with much hoopla by bad teams. Generally they have no impact and perform much like the “bad” quarterbacks that they replaced. (e.g. Boomer Esaison, Neal O’Donnell).[/li]
[li]Many “weak” quarterbacks suddenly become succesful simply by being given opportunities to start on good teams (e.g. the afformentioned Rodney Peete).[/list=A]I’ve seen many other examples of this over the years, where the team is the determinant of performance, but the one’s listed are the ones that come to mind offhand.[/li]
This is relevent to executives and coaches building teams, not to put too much of your eggs in the quarterback basket, but also to rotisserie football team owners drafting players. Base your expectations on the team’s performance, not the quarterback’s.