Every single quarterback in the NFL is overrated.
From the face of your franchise to the young guy who backs up your aging veteran—not a single one of them is worth the mountains of attention they receive.
Do not get it confused. This is not a shallow attempt to discredit the quality of the athletes who call themselves quarterbacks.
This is not an indictment of the records Peyton Manning holds, the rings Tom Brady wears, the interceptions Brett Favre has thrown, or the clipboard your newest rookie clutches on the sideline.
It's a dose of reality. Consider the former a disclaimer.
Your favorite primary signal-caller is nothing but an incredible athlete who found himself in an ideal professional situation.
He's a talented player with physical abilities the average man can only dream of—and he's in an offensive system that allows him to flourish.
Some are clearly more talented than others.
There's a reason why few become long-time starters, why some go to the Pro Bowl, why less ever smell the Hall of Fame, and why so many wash out before you ever remember the number they wore.
But the NFL does not belong to them alone.
But It's About Leadership!
They're leaders because their contracts made them so. They're leaders because when the ball is snapped, they become the focal point for three-to-seven seconds.
Unfortunately, fans have misinterpreted that observation as a form of leadership, and the concept has spiralled out of control.
The attention focused on one man is an insult to the 10 others starting on offense. It's an insult to the receivers who catch the passes and the backs who move the chains.
It's an insult to the men who block would-be tacklers and allow the quarterback to be that "leader."
It's an insult to men like Ray Lewis and Barry Sanders whose careers were (and have been) defined by being successful despite the absence of a legitimate quarterback.
To assume that no other man is capable of leading his team to victory simply because he doesn't receive the snap directly is absolutely asinine.
Quarterbacks are leaders because they're the first person most fans see when the ball is snapped—not because they naturally display a level of fortitude superior to their teammates.
The Pointless Measure of Statistics
"He has a 90.2 QB rating, and is 9-for-11 on third-down conversions with less than two minutes to go in away games played in bad weather."
And then someone counters the point with, "Yeah, but how many rings does he have?"
Right back to square one.
Yet the one thing that's consistently ignored is the quality of their teammates. And whenever it is considered, it becomes a chicken-egg debate.
Would Joe Montana have been as great without Jerry Rice? Or was Jerry Rice made better by Joe Montana's play?
In 1988—a Super Bowl winning season for the 49ers—Montana threw for 2,981 yards. Jerry Rice is responsible for 1,306 of those. The rest were divided up between Roger Craig, Mike Wilson, Tom Rathman, John Taylor, and more.
What should this tell you?
Neither one of them did it alone. It should tell you the absolute truth: Both players were immensely talented athletes who were placed in ideal situations for their skills.
Both were talented enough to flourish without one another, but both are defined by their time together.
That's a credit to the scouting department and coaching staff—not the chess pieces maneuvered on the field.
What happens to the quarterback who isn't graced with similar opportunities? Does he become Ryan Leaf?
We're going to send you the most entertaining San Francisco 49ers articles, videos, and podcasts from around the web.
54 Comments
Loading more comments...
This comment and all replies have been deleted This comment has been deleted Undo delete