Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

I collected some single season stats from the post Rypien era from some of the QBs who played here. Comparing Brunell's stats from 2005 the rest of these guys, I see many similarities.


Rich Gannon 1993: 8 games, 59.2% comp, 704 yards, 3 TDs, 7 INT, 88 rush yards, 1 rush TD.

Gannon completed 59.2% in 93 which is considerable considering he was stepping into big shoes. Efficient, but that 7 INT spot in 8 games played (and about half the starts) shows an inexpierenced QB. Gannon's stats look better when compared to Rypien's stats from the same season.


Heath Schuler 1994: 11 games, 45.3% comp, 1658 yards, 10 TDs, 12 INT, 103 rush yards

Theres no way to justify a 45.3% completion stat, but the guy really never got another chance to play after this horrid season.


Gus Frerotte 1995: 16 games, 50.3% comp, 2751 yards, 13 TDs, 13 INTs, 16 rush yards, 1 rush TD

Frerotte was an improvement over Shuler in his first year here, but 50% and only 2700 yards are not very impressive, obviously. Average Int total, but a mere 1 to 1 ratio between TDs and Ints.


Gus Frerotte 1996: 16 games, 57.4% comp, 3453 yards, 12 TDs, 11 INTs, 16 rush yards

Int total down from a year before, but TDs were down also. Still, Frerotte was far more efficient in 96 then in 95.


Gus Frerotte 1997: 13 games, 50.7% comp, 2682 yards, 17 TDs, 12 INTs, 65 rush yards, 2 rush TDs

TD production up, but passing efficiency went way down, comprable to his first year here.


Trent Green 1998: 15 games, 54.6% comp, 3441 yards, 23 TDs, 11 INTs, 117 rush yards, 2 rush TDs

Comp % is a bit low, but Green was really impressive in 15 apperances. 23 TDs was great for the era and 11 Ints is equally impressive. Plus, Green was somewhat of a rushing threat.


Brad Johnson 1999: 16 games, 60.9% comp, 4005 yards, 24 TDs, 14 INTs, 31 rush yards, 2 TDs

Johnson led a playoff apperance with a very high completion percentage, something he always has, 4000+ yards, and a high TD total, although his Ints weren't as impressive as Green's from a year back.



For sake of comparison:

Mark Brunell 2005: 16 games, 57.7% comp, 3050 yards, 23 TDs, 10 INTs, 111 rush yards

Over the past 12 years, only Brad Johnson and Gannon were more efficient with the ball (comp %) then Brunell last year. 10 Ints is the stat that stands out. Thats a full season low for the selected time period.

All of these guys (except Shuler) went on to have considerable success other places. Gannon and Green have been pro bowlers many a time, and Johnson won a SB. Brunell, of course, had considerable success in Jacksonville, before coming over here.

Here's the big question: with all the journeymen who came through here with considerable success, why were none of them ever retained through long term contract. I guess thats something the Franchise has always stressed, is a lack of reliance on one guy. We probably would have made the playoffs more often if we had settled on a guy. But then again I was too young to understand the business side of football during the 90's. So if someone could explain this trend of finding productive guys and letting them walk to me, that would be great.

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

new coaching staffs = unstable roster = players leave when the contract is up. danny also wanted exciting players like jeff george over boring (but good) QBs like brad johnson.

so, jumpy owner, bad talent scouting of our current roster, and regeime changes gives way to missing the little details, like securing your quality QB long term..

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

its the redskins,there always has to be a qback controversy.remember we also had stan humphries here who qbacked san diego all the way to the super bowl

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

I NEVER understood why the hell we let Brad Johnson go in favor of Jeff "Headcase" George. I mean, I know that was Snyder's decision, but oh my God what a terrible call there. I really think it was one of the top 3 bonehead moves Snyder made in the early-going, and I think it set us back for years. The decision just flat-out made no sense.

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

Shuler had a terrible attitude and was physically never right once he left Washington (and to reference another thread, yet one more great example of why investing a 1st rounder on a QB is a bad idea).

The key QB stat is TD/INT. With the exception of the Trent Green year (letting him go was a bigger mistake than letting B. Johnson go), a strong TD/INT ratio has resulted in playoffs.

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

It's really unfortunate the franchise was in such an unstable situation right after Trent Green emerged.

We've had two potential long-term answers over the course of the last decade, Green and Brad Johnson, and the overall instability of the franchise both in the front office and in the coaching staffs allowed both guys to slip away.

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

[quote=RiggoRules]investing a 1st rounder on a QB is a bad idea).

.[/quote]Peyton Manning, Big Ben, Carson Palmer,Vick,Mcnabb,were all first rounders. and i know that for every one of those you have the Ryan Leafs or Heath Shulers of the qb classes but its not always a bad idea!

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

[quote=RiggoRules]Shuler had a terrible attitude and was physically never right once he left Washington (and to reference another thread, yet one more great example of why investing a 1st rounder on a QB is a bad idea).

The key QB stat is TD/INT. With the exception of the Trent Green year (letting him go was a bigger mistake than letting B. Johnson go), a strong TD/INT ratio has resulted in playoffs.[/quote]but in defense of Shuler, he gave alot of effort, he was just no damn good:benched: .

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

[quote=gibbsisgod]Peyton Manning, Big Ben, Carson Palmer,Vick,Mcnabb,were all first rounders. and i know that for every one of those you have the Ryan Leafs or Heath Shulers of the qb classes but its not always a bad idea![/quote]

Leaf, Shuler, Manning and Rothlesberger are all anomolies in one direction or the other (most are going to be something other than a pure boom or pure bust). What I am arguing is that if you take a look at all first round QBs, the probability is that you will not get value for that pick.

The Ramsey experience is actually pretty typical.

What I am suggesting is that the history tells us that it is more probable that the overall impact that D'Brick Ferguson, Vernon Davis, and Mario Williams have on their first teams during the life of their first contract is will be greater than the impact from Cutler, Young, and Leinart.

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

[quote=RiggoRules]What I am suggesting is that the history tells us that it is more probable that the overall impact that D'Brick Ferguson, Vernon Davis, and Mario Williams have on their first teams during the life of their first contract is will be greater than the impact from Cutler, Young, and Leinart.[/quote]

I agree there, but the thought of filling your most important need for 10-15years is pretty tempting, and top 5 picks don't come around that often... a lot of times top ten QB picks are purely need, whereas almost every other position involves a lot more "best talent" available.

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

[quote=RiggoRules]The key QB stat is TD/INT. With the exception of the Trent Green year (letting him go was a bigger mistake than letting B. Johnson go), a strong TD/INT ratio has resulted in playoffs.[/quote]

I think Ints should stand independant of TDs. Having TDs is nice and all, but does it really matter whether the QB throws for it, or if the team runs it in. What you should look at is total team TD. Ints aren't always the quarterback's fault, but a high number never represents a good thing, whereas a low TD total works if the team scores a lot.

Both Trent Green and Rich Gannon would have hit their primes much sooner if we had kept them around. BJ quarterbacked here in his prime, and replacing him with Tony Banks and Jeff George is just plain stupid. Seriously, what's exciting about those guys?

To say that Danny Wuerffel and Shane Matthews were an improvement is an embarrassment, but something I believe to be accurate.

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

I don't think anyone could have seen what Rich Gannon was going to do later in his career. I mean the year after he played for us no one wanted him. He sat out all of 1994.

Trent Green was just bad timing. He was a free agent when we had no owner. As for Brad Johnson, while I was never a big fan of his personally, it was a juvenile mistake for Snyder to let him go.

Anyone else remember John Friesz?

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

Thers still a dent in the wall from Gus. Does anyone have that clip?

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

[quote=That Guy]I agree there, but the thought of filling your most important need for 10-15years is pretty tempting, and top 5 picks don't come around that often... a lot of times top ten QB picks are purely need, whereas almost every other position involves a lot more "best talent" available.[/quote]

An interesting factoid I saw here:

[URL="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12389000/"]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12389000/[/URL]

[QUOTE]
Pittsburgh's Ben Roethlisberger is the only first-round quarterback to win a Super Bowl since Denver's John Elway in 1997-98.
[/QUOTE]

Re: Discuss: 90's QB Stats
 

Trent Dilfer did it, but not with the team that drafted him. He actually kept that team from winning a superbowl.