The Real Quarterback U

It's not BYU, not Miami, but ...



http://isportsweb.com/2010/05/06/the-real-quarterback-u/



When you isolate it and base it on one specific criteria like this, it is hard to argue the conclusion.



If Purple Reign is still handing around, you ought to like this.

The key to this discussion IMO is "U"... not where they got drafted, not what they did in the NFL but what they did in college. And no school has been the record-breaking QB factory that BYU has. Period. It's that simple.



But if you must bring the NFL into it, I don't care where you get drafted. Anybody can be drafted high and we've seen how inexact a science the NFL draft is over and over. But find me another school who has two former QBs with superbowl rings. There might be others but not many.



A lot of people use the "system" argument against BYU. I really hate that stupid argument. As if there are no "systems" in the NFL. And how many of former Cougar "system" players and coaches have gone on to sustained success coaching in the NFL and other universities? Of the top of my head... Holmgren, Reid, Belichek, Billick, Crowton, Chow, Sarkesian... the list goes on and one.

It is hard to argue with this guys logic at all. We refer to BYU as Tight end U because of all the tight ends that we have put in the NFL over the last 10-15 years, well he just outlined that every QB that has played at UW for the last 35 years has been drafted and stuck in the NFL for a few years. I think that is pretty impressive. BYU has had some good ones but there are other schools that put more guys in the NFL from that position. In fact we have only put 2 guys in the NFL over the last 20 years. Detmer and Beck.

Wrong, there have been others (Walsh, Doman) they just didn't have very successful careers. But for that matter, neither did Detmer or Beck.



But again, IMO, it's about the "U". Regardless of BYU's success putting TEs into the NFL, they should be called Tight End U because of our success in utilizing the TE in the college game and producing many All-Americans at the position.

gmj81 wrote:
Wrong, there have been others (Walsh, Doman) they just didn't have very successful careers. But for that matter, neither did Detmer or Beck.



But again, IMO, it's about the "U". Regardless of BYU's success putting TEs into the NFL, they should be called Tight End U because of our success in utilizing the TE in the college game and producing many All-Americans at the position.

Enngeman made a practice squad for couple years...

In 2008 they contested their 1984 national championship that BYU OWNS.



in 2010 they contest their the QB U.





Well, we were 1 Harvey away from scoring another TD against them in 08, statistically owned them.



In 2010 we'll be beating them UCLA style up and down the field. This is the real reason they cancelled the rest of the games, they ran out of things to attempt to steal from BYU.





Washington: The "real" classless U (another tradition the UoU stole) with more purple.

The only quality NFL QBs I saw on that list were Moon, Chandler and Brunell. Miami produced Jim Kelly, Bernie Kosar, and Vinny Testaverde. BYU had Jim McMahon and Steve Young. All three schools had some other decent QBs who stuck in the league for a while. But only the BYU guys had Super Bowl wins as the starter. I give the nod to BYU. Championships gotta count for something.

Next they're going to proclaim that they're the Lords University also. I don't know, I'm guessing they just want to get under our skin before the next game.

Sammich wrote:
Next they're going to proclaim that they're the Lords University also. I don't know, I'm guessing they just want to get under our skin before the next game.

Well...Purple IS the color of royalty...

gmj81 wrote:
The key to this discussion IMO is "U"... not where they got drafted, not what they did in the NFL but what they did in college. And no school has been the record-breaking QB factory that BYU has. Period. It's that simple.



But if you must bring the NFL into it, I don't care where you get drafted. Anybody can be drafted high and we've seen how inexact a science the NFL draft is over and over. But find me another school who has two former QBs with superbowl rings. There might be others but not many.



A lot of people use the "system" argument against BYU. I really hate that stupid argument. As if there are no "systems" in the NFL. And how many of former Cougar "system" players and coaches have gone on to sustained success coaching in the NFL and other universities? Of the top of my head... Holmgren, Reid, Belichek, Billick, Crowton, Chow, Sarkesian... the list goes on and one.

Yeah, this column is not a finished prodcut, the guy found something to start with, but it is still a rough draft. It is one thing to get to the NFL, it is another thing to do something once you get there. It's like saying Harvard (or any other school) is the best university based on its job placement rate. That is nice that you can get a job, but once you get there you better have some substance to you, otherwise you are in trouble. Same thing can be said about the "system" label you bring up, and I think BYU has proven that the "system" used in Provo has some substance and merit.

gmj81 wrote:
Wrong, there have been others (Walsh, Doman) they just didn't have very successful careers. But for that matter, neither did Detmer or Beck.

I wouldn't call Detmer's career unsuccessful. He took Philly to the playoffs a couple of years as the starter. His career turned bad when he made the decision to leave SF. That is when he became a journeyman. Had he stayed in SF he would have taken over for Steve (Detmer left in 1999, which was Youngs last year) and the SF "system" would have given him a good 3-4 year run.

kitic77 wrote:
The only quality NFL QBs I saw on that list were Moon, Chandler and Brunell. Miami produced Jim Kelly, Bernie Kosar, and Vinny Testaverde. BYU had Jim McMahon and Steve Young. All three schools had some other decent QBs who stuck in the league for a while. But only the BYU guys had Super Bowl wins as the starter. I give the nod to BYU. Championships gotta count for something.

Agree. The "formula" used is raw and needs to be refined to include more criteria. Super Bowls, HOF, playoff appearances, won-loss record, etc. and obviously college play should play a factor.

YBrit wrote:
In 2008 they contested their 1984 national championship that BYU OWNS.



in 2010 they contest their the QB U.





Well, we were 1 Harvey away from scoring another TD against them in 08, statistically owned them.



In 2010 we'll be beating them UCLA style up and down the field. This is the real reason they cancelled the rest of the games, they ran out of things to attempt to steal from BYU.





Washington: The "real" classless U (another tradition the UoU stole) with more purple.

You would think that it would be enough for them to know that they took a National Championship away from us in 1996 and that they took our former QB to get on the road to recovery.



Except, we keep 1 uping them. We took Heaps.



You are right, no matter what they do, they just can't get ahead of the Y.

Y12 wrote:

The only quality NFL QBs I saw on that list were Moon, Chandler and Brunell. Miami produced Jim Kelly, Bernie Kosar, and Vinny Testaverde. BYU had Jim McMahon and Steve Young. All three schools had some other decent QBs who stuck in the league for a while. But only the BYU guys had Super Bowl wins as the starter. I give the nod to BYU. Championships gotta count for something.

Agree. The "formula" used is raw and needs to be refined to include more criteria. Super Bowls, HOF, playoff appearances, won-loss record, etc. and obviously college play should play a factor.

Meh. The NFL game is so different from the college game that bragging about who puts more QBs in the league isn't really a good way to brag about who's got the better college program. I'll take Detmer over Flacco et al every day of the week and twice on Sunday when it comes to college QBs.

I don't know why there is all this negativity, some of you are taking this guys article as if it was some sort of personal insult to you and BYU. I really didn't get that sense at all from the article. Heck, I have made the same argument on other forums before, whenever the "QB U" debate comes up.



His argument was based on putting kids into the NFL, so I don't know why anyone feels a need to tear that down, as I think based on that criteria our Dawgs have done pretty well. It's an impressive run, and I don't think that has to mean it takes away from someone else.

It's not any more impressive than BYU's run or Miami's run. To claim otherwise is to pick and choose your data and criteria until you find a unique set that includes your guys and excludes others. Even then, UW hasn't done any better than BYU or Miami. And the runs they have made have been less successful if you want to acheive the highest level of quarterbacking. Based on past histroy you're much more likely to win a Super Bowl if you played at BYU. You certainly don't go to UW if you want to win a ring as the starter.



That said, as a Vikings fan, I'd love for us to find some way to get Jake Locker next year.