Which of THESE 2 types of Quarterbacks would you rather have....

Quarterback 1.

An EXTREMELY ACCURATE Quarterback with an UNBELIEVABLY QUICK, DYNAMIC RELEASE of the ball....BUT, he only has "'Average Mobility''

Quarterback 2.

A VERY ATHLETIC, MOBILE Quarterback that is ELUSIVE and potentially EXPLOSIVE with his feet.....BUT, he only has "Average Accuracy with an Average Release time'' on the ball.

18 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Quarterback 1. Teams pay running backs to run the ball. How many superbowls has Vick won? What about McNair (who did make it to the superbowl only after he learned to be a drop back passer)? How about McNabb? Kordell Stewart (who made it to the superbowl backing up Neil O'Donnell)? Maybe Randall Cunningham? Elway didn't start winning until he stopped running and started throwing, and Young didn't start winning until he took over for Montana. Other than Vince Young and Tim Tebow (who wasn't the starter), how many athletic, mobile quarterbacks have NCAA championships? A quarterback's job is to put the ball into the hands of the play makers. His job is to be the "field general", to make decisions and move the team. Athletic, mobile quarterbacks look great on the highlight reels, but they don't win championships.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Depends on the team the QB has to work with. If the o-line is good and the recievers are good at getting open and have good hands, I'd take QB 1. If the o-line can't provide adequate protection and the recievers aren't good, then QB 2 would be better able to avoid the constant pass rush, run for 1st downs and keep plays alive downfield.

    For example, David Carr was a type 1 QB who went to an expansion team with little surrounding talent and ended up setting a records for getting sacked and not having any success. I don't blame David Carr, he was just in a situation not suited to his strengths. If Mike Vick, a definite type 2 QB, would've went pro a year earlier and been drafted by the Texans, I think they would've been better off.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    It really depends on the level of play. College- #2 is surberb. Michael Vick, Vince Young, Pat White, Tim Tebow (although he is more powerful than elusive), and Juice Williams make perfect cases. NFL- #1 will always be best. Like everyone has been saying: Peyton, Brady, and I will even add Brees, Romo, and Eli, make the reason why the NFL is better for pocket passers(even though I still believe Vince Young the perfect chioce for the Titans. Had Leinart gone to the Titans his career would have been worse than Chris Weinke because of lack of great recievers.Tennessee doesn't have Fitzgelard and Boldin-type wideouts. So it definately depends on the level of play and receivers the team has.(And the tight-end and O-Line).

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    An EXTREMELY ACCURATE Quarterback with an UNBELIEVABLY QUICK, DYNAMIC RELEASE of the ball....BUT, he only has "'Average Mobility''

    Decent O-Line / Decent WRs / Good Running Back

    Great Defense = SUPER BOWL

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    I would have to go with Quarterback 1 there. We see Tom Brady and Peyton Manning rarely move out of the pocket, yet they are the current top two QB's in the league. Players like Vince Young are good, but I can't see the Titans winning a Super Bowl any time soon.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Jesse
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    depends on at what level and what your team is

    if your talking about the ncaa level than option 2. athletic qbs have proven themselves at this level - mainly because the defenses arent as good as the pro level. also you can run the option with option 2.

    if your talking nfl then it depends on the team. if you have a solid o-line than go with option 1 and try and develop him. if your o line or defense is crap go with option 2. also option 2 would probably sell more tickets which is also a very important part of the game at the nfl level.

    more importantly i would focus on character, intelligence, determination, and the "it" factor that coaches talk about. what good is either option if they are a thug, dumb, don't care about the sport, and can't will their team to a victory in a close game. Just look at Brady he wasn't anything special in terms of ability but was a hard worker and now is one of the best.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Qb #1. I would take Dan Marino over Michael Vick any day of the week.

    Run n' Shoot QBs only prevail in college. NFL defensives are to quick, and hit to hard. Got to have a pocket passer.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Quarterback #1. As a Titans fan, I have watched enough games with VY. I cringe when he throws the ball.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Quarter Back 1. Mobile quaterbacks don't win much because the defense is just as fast these days. Today, you need a really smart qb that can stand back there and pick apart defenses.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • myfav1
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    I would rather have Quarterback 1. But sometimes you get lucky and get one that can do both run and throw. Like John Elway and Steve Young.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.