Which QB would you rather have?

#1
B

bburger991

Vol Fanatic
Joined
May 8, 2008
Messages
5,192
Likes
0
#1
QB A
167-267 59.9% Completion 2091 Yards 15 TD 3 INT
173 Runs for 843 yards (4.9 yards per run) 13 TD

QB B
95-152 62.5% Completion 1245 Yards 12 TD 4 INT
124 Runs for 553 yards (4.5 yards per run) 6 TD


Which of these two would you like? For added bonus, guess the QBs
 
#10
#10
But why would you rather have Pryor? Based on pure numbers, A is almost as good or better. Slightly lower completion percentage, more total yards, more TD's, and less turnovers.
 
#11
#11
bburger991 said:
But why would you rather have Pryor? Based on pure numbers, A is almost as good or better. Slightly lower completion percentage, more total yards, more TD's, and less turnovers.
Click to expand...
Based on pure numbers, David Klingler was better than Troy Aikman, Ryan Leaf was better than Peyton Manning, and Josh Huepel was better than Bret Favre.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#13
#13
bburger991 said:
But why would you rather have Pryor? Based on pure numbers, A is almost as good or better. Slightly lower completion percentage, more total yards, more TD's, and less turnovers.
Click to expand...

Pryor had less time in the system as starter and did it against harder competition.

Also, if they had an equal number of throws (and maintained along a linear path) Pryor would have better stats.

But honestly, I think Pryor has much more upside.
 
#14
#14
hatvol96 said:
Based on pure numbers, David Klingler was better than Troy Aikman, Ryan Leaf was better than Peyton Manning, and Josh Huepel was better than Bret Favre.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Eh good point I guess. I'm just tired of people slobbering over Terrelle Pryor because he's #1 recruit and doing decent playing around a ton of talent, while QB A (I'll name him if you guys want), is playing with next to no talent, and is putting up just as good or better numbers in a better conference.
 
#16
#16
DC Vol said:
Pryor had less time in the system as starter and did it against harder competition.

Also, if they has
But honestly, I think Pryor has much more upside.
Click to expand...
Better competition? I don't know about that, but he did have less time as starter, so I'll give him that, but they had the same time to learn their respective systems.

But why does Pryor have more upside? Other guy is arguably more athletic and has decent mechanics he could improve, and seems to make better decisions.
 
#18
#18
bburger991 said:
Eh good point I guess. I'm just tired of people slobbering over Terrelle Pryor because he's #1 recruit and doing decent playing around a ton of talent, while QB A (I'll name him if you guys want), is playing with next to no talent, and is putting up just as good or better numbers in a better conference.
Click to expand...

His team won 3 games with him as starter, and he was merely average against conference opponents.
 
#19
#19
DC Vol said:
His team won 3 games with him as starter, and he was merely average against conference opponents.
Click to expand...

Well it's hard to do well against some of the top teams in the country when you have no one to help you. He still did decently against them though.
 
#21
#21
Griffin is a decent college QB that has some NFL potential at receiver. However, Pryor is bigger, stronger, not quite as fast (but the gap isn't wide), and the only people arguing that Griffin is more athletic are Baylor homers. I would take Pryor without giving it a second thought.

Hell, Pryor could easily make his way in to the starting lineup at most D-1 schools in basketball, too.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top