Rivals Article (not $): Quarterback U - USC over Michigan
I just thought this article could spark some good debate on which schools produce the best quarterbacks (or most NFL talent - however you want to word it), and specifically where Michigan should fall in that debate.
Steve Megargee, the writer of this article, makes the claim that USC is currently the top producer of NFL quarterbacks (Mark Sanchez, Carson Palmer, Matt Cassel, and Matt Leinart). Michigan, Purdue, Boston College among others are also briefly discussed as candidates.
Personally, it's hard to argue against Megargee. However, I wouldn't be shocked to see Michigan coined as "Quarterback U" in another 8 years. We have some talented quarterbacks on the roster currently, and the future obviously looks bright (Hello: Shane Morris).
Just as a side note, Rivals is putting out an article every day for the next week or two for each position, and this is the first in the series.
Link: http://footballrecruiting.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1354352
Too bad all four of those USC quarterbacks combined are still 3 rings behind Tom Brady
April 13th, 2012 at 10:37 PM ^
5 if you also count AFC / NFC Championships.
April 13th, 2012 at 10:59 PM ^
Wouldn't it be 8 rings if you also count AFC/NFC Championships?
April 14th, 2012 at 12:37 AM ^
technically he would be +7(8-1), because Matt Cassel has an AFC Championship ring as well... thanks to Tom Brady!
Edit: +6(8-2) Leinart also has a NFC Championship ring with the Cardinals... as a backup. So if you want to be relevant and count only rings as a starter(which makes the most sense) then he is up 8-0. But if you are basing it on rings they won, then its 8-2
I agree with his opinion. Though the string of Michigan QB's going to the NFL is impressive, the Rich Rod fiasco disrupted it. I expect that Michigan will re-earn the title of QB U under Hoke
April 13th, 2012 at 10:26 PM ^
Exactly this. Maybe four years ago this would be a "WTF HOW?" article, but right now that's not the case. I do think that we will be back on top in the near future though.
April 13th, 2012 at 11:13 PM ^
While I agree, I don't think this as strong of a statement as you make it. Ryan Mallett left, but after him there really is no other argument. Denard and Tate were there in year two. Tate canned, but Denard stayed and has now blossomed into one of the best quarterbacks in the country (although not your traditional NFL guy). He may not be a future star quarterback in the NFL, but he will get his shot, especially in today's move towards more mobile quarterbacks. And really, Denard was the first shot after Mallett to reach the NFL anyway. Sheridan and Threet were never going to be those guys.
The knock is that we have essentially had two three/four year starters in the last 8 years. It's not ideal to have a guy start for three or four years. And honestly, Tate possibly could have had his shot if it wasn't for all of the off-the-field issues. I don't really blame Rich Rod for that.
April 13th, 2012 at 11:32 PM ^
Sorry to interfere with your RR-bashing, but Brady is the only really successful Carr QB in the NFL, and he was gone in 2000. Neither Navarre, Henne, nor Griese has been more than a career backup or miscast starter in the NFL. So, there really wasn't much of a pattern interrupt here.
Besides, California QB's have the benefits of all of the "guru" schools in the offseason, and USC pretty much buys whoever they want. Then, they spend more money and surround them with NFL-caliber talent at every position.
But it's really cute that someone was so motivated to gratuitously slag RR that he was able to find an excuse to do so in an otherwise positive thread.
I am guessing that you hold a lot of grudges.
April 13th, 2012 at 11:46 PM ^
Regardless of whether you want to turn this into a Carr vs. Rodriguez thing, you're missing the point. The point is that if you played quarterback under Carr, you were essentially guaranteed a cup of coffee - at the least - in the NFL. Collins, Dreisbach, Griese, Brady, Navarre, Henson, Henne, even Mallett.
The quarterbacks under Rodriguez were Sheridan (now coaching at WKU), Threet (out of football), Forcier (seemingly out of football), and Denard Robinson (current Michigan quarterback, might get a chance to play QB in the NFL, might have to switch positions).
The Rodriguez fiasco DID stall the Michigan-QB-to-NFL streak. Fact.
April 14th, 2012 at 12:22 AM ^
You forgot David Cone. He was a solid 3/3 54yrds against Deleware St(2009), and 1/1 21yrds against Minnesota(2007). Played in 2 other career games as well.
April 14th, 2012 at 12:25 AM ^
I was only counting guys who started games...but yeah, Cone was excellent.
April 14th, 2012 at 12:41 AM ^
Right, but Cassel was included in USC's list even though he was a career backup, so I figured I'd throw in Cone since he had some college experience :P
April 14th, 2012 at 12:29 AM ^
was not a back-up. He started for 4 years for Denver and was an All-Pro in 2000. Then started for Miami, Tampa, Chicago, and Tampa again. He started and or played in 92 games. Granted, he was never a stud stand-out except for 2000 and 2004 in Tampa Bay, but out of all those before him that we're talking about, he'd be ranked #3 in starts behind Brady and Harbaugh. I think Grbac could have had better totals but he quit too soon. Collins lost his job after what 2-3 seasons, and the others, although started a few games, don't compare.
I don't think he's given enough credit. He was a pretty good quarterback for the skills he was blessed with.
You can't make a case for Michigan as QB U right now. Brady is awesome, and a few ohter Michigan QB's have been starters recently, but they're not franchise guys. Henne still has a chance, I think.
Sadly, right now i'm not sure Michigan is anything U when it comes to NFL talent. Could be LT U when Taylor Lewan joins Jake Long as a fellow #1 pick.
Jake Long, David Baas, Steve Hutchinson, Jonathon Goodwin, Jeff Backus, and Steve Schilling off the top of my head.
April 13th, 2012 at 11:55 PM ^
Agreed. Nobody else has the top-level talent (Long, Hutchinson, Baas) and the depth that Michigan has in the NFL right now.
A dry spell (QB) was mentioned above, but many people overlook the O-line dry spell of the last several years. Basically, you have Baas and Long. (Waiting to see on Molk, obviously ...) Compare that to the years around the turn of the century. Oddly, two of RichRod's recruits (Lewan, maybe Schofield) could herald an upturn.
Details (yes, just draft positions, first three rounds), courtesy of CBS Sportsline:
2011: none
2010: none
2009: none
2008: Jake Long (1)
2007: none
2006: none
2005: David Baas (2)
2004: none
2003: none
2002: none
2001: Steve Hutchinson (1), Jeff Backus (1), Maurice Williams (2)
2000: none
1999: Jon Jansen (2)
1998: none
1997: Rod Payne (3)
1996: none
1995: Trezelle Jenkins (1)
1994: none
1993: Steve Everitt (1), Joe Cocozzo (3)
1992: Greg Skrepanak (2)
tl;dr version: Just two high NFL picks from that area since 2001, compared to nine in the prior ten-year period. Michigan's O-line reputation is based more on history than recent production.
IMO of o-line recruiting in the final Carr years for sure. Thanks for positing. Combine poor Carr o-line recruiting with poor RR o-line recruiting (#'s) and it's obvious why we were in such bad shape on '08, and this year with depth.
April 14th, 2012 at 10:30 AM ^
I don't know if it's a complete indictment of Carr's recruiting. He was recruiting a different type of player than Rodriguez wanted. For example, that list doesn't include Schilling, who might have developed differently under Carr. It also doesn't include Justin Boren, who transferred. It also doesn't include David Molk, who won the Rimington Award. You also don't know how guys like Ortmann, Moosman, etc. would have developed if they weren't in a spread system and asked to shed weight in exchange for speed.
While I won't argue that early round draft picks diminished in the 2000's, there's more to it than "Carr recruited poorly."
April 14th, 2012 at 11:37 AM ^
This a question for no one in particular, but I'd appreciate your thoughts on it if you have any.
Looking over Rivals/Scout rankings for the '02 to '08 classes, it's not easy to see any obvious dry spots. Lots of those guys were 4-star types.
Andy Moeller got a lot of heat as a position coach. I've no idea whether that was fair, but I wonder if mediocre player development in those years (as well as the RichRod years, at least as far as the pro-style offense was concerned) had anything to do with the low number of high draft picks.
April 14th, 2012 at 12:26 PM ^
Well, I don't think Carr forgot how to evaluate and recruit offensive linemen. So I feel like the OL coach might have had a big part of any lack of development.
April 13th, 2012 at 10:00 PM ^
April 13th, 2012 at 10:36 PM ^
Very very valid question. Who the hell does he play for these days?
April 13th, 2012 at 11:07 PM ^
I think he's currently a free agent, but he was the backup in Houston. He got a start after Schaub got went down and ended up breaking his collabone during his 1st start. That's why TJ Yates was the Texan's starter late in the season and in the playoffs.
I hear he may be getting traded to the Jets to help Mark Sanchez block for Tim Tebow.
April 14th, 2012 at 12:29 AM ^
Braylon, Manningham, Breaston, Avant, Arrington and Hemmingway next year are a pretty solid group to contend for WR U.
April 13th, 2012 at 10:05 PM ^
The best USC quarterback in NFL history is probably... Matt Cassel?! lolz
April 13th, 2012 at 10:52 PM ^
April 13th, 2012 at 11:27 PM ^
Peete: 76-92 TD-INT, 1,021 Yards/Year, 73.3 QBR
Cassel: 76-45 TD-INT, 1,671 Yards/year, 82.5 QBR
Cassel is better, sorry
April 13th, 2012 at 10:11 PM ^
April 13th, 2012 at 10:15 PM ^
WAIT A MINUTE....
April 13th, 2012 at 10:23 PM ^
still irritates me whenever this topic comes up.
With that said, U of M is not QB U. We used to be RB U, but no more.
April 13th, 2012 at 10:31 PM ^
I would say WR U more than RB U. We sent a lot of RBs to the NFL but none of them were really stars at the next level the way they were in college. I guess it depends on what your criteria are for being called __U, big time success or just getting there and being somewhat productive. The WRs haven't really been stars either for the most part but I'd say they've been more productive as a group than the RBs.
April 13th, 2012 at 11:01 PM ^
that I may be a little older than you. In the 1980s, save Anthony Carter, U of M didn't really produce send much in terms of WRs to the NFL. Except for Harbaugh, not much for QBs either.
I always thought of QB U as a Carr thing, with people sometimes throwing Harbaugh out there in addition, because he was so easy to tack on.
I'd be interested to see a breakdown of some different positions under Bo, Moeller and Carr and how they fared in the NFL.
Michigan running backs haven't fared well in the NFL.
Hell, Big Ten running backs in general haven't fared well in the NFL. They have largely been busts or flash in the pan types.
April 13th, 2012 at 10:27 PM ^
Maybe we aren't QB-U but up until the RRod era, every QB that started a game for Michigan, since Grbac, has started at least one game in the NFL. That's impressive to me.
April 13th, 2012 at 11:04 PM ^
April 13th, 2012 at 11:14 PM ^
April 13th, 2012 at 11:26 PM ^
Don't recall "blaming" Rodriguez or anybody else. I was just stating a fact.
April 13th, 2012 at 10:28 PM ^
Cassel is the only one I have much respect for in that group. The other three have all underachieved big time, Leinert and Sanchez care more about the lifestyle than winning, and Palmer is pretty whiny (though I give him a little leeway since he played for the Bengals with Ochocinco). Not really that surprising given the way Pete Carroll was all about having the Hollywood team.
April 14th, 2012 at 12:16 AM ^
amusing (July, 2008):
I cannot stand the Buckeyes. It's amazing to hear what those guys think about that university and what they think about that football program and Tressel and all the crap I gotta put up with being back there.
I just can't wait for two years from now when SC comes to the 'Shoe and hopefully we'll have a home game that weekend, and I can go up there and watch us pound on them in their own turf.
I'm really getting sick of it, and I just can't wait for this game to get here so they can come out to the Coliseum and experience LA and get an old-fashioned Pac-10 butt-whoopin' and go back to the Big Ten.
35-3, 18-15...Still hate USC, though...
April 13th, 2012 at 10:29 PM ^
April 13th, 2012 at 10:42 PM ^
...yet! (?)
April 13th, 2012 at 10:42 PM ^
USC is not producing any stars either. Sanchez, Cassell, Leinert and Palmer aren't exactly dominating the league.
April 13th, 2012 at 10:43 PM ^
April 13th, 2012 at 10:43 PM ^
As a long time Michigan fan, I still am amazed that we are in a position to be part of this discussion.
I remember a Monday Night Football game in the '80's where for whataver reason this statement was made by one of the announcers . . . "There have been over 10,000 touchdown passes thrown in the NFL, and not one of them has ever been thrown by a Quarterback from Michigan."
We've come a long way, USC hype be damned.
April 13th, 2012 at 11:17 PM ^