Quarterbackery: Round 1, Heat 8

[Rain Man]

Today's matchup features a team we all know and love, the Jacksonville Jaguars, against the perennial 1960s-era powerhouse Kansas City Chiefs.

Since the Jaguars haven't been around for 50 years I'll include the proportion of their history as a means of comparing.

Jaguars


Mark Brunell - 8 seasons (38 percent of history)
David Garrard - 5 (24 percent of history)
Bryon Leftwich - 3 (15 percent of history)
Blake Bortles - 2 (and current starter) (10 percent of history)
Chad Henne - 2 (10 percent of history)
Blaine Gabbert - 1 (5 percent of history)

They produced 4 pro bowlers, led by Mark Brunell with 3. Their record would scale up to 10 in a 50-year period.

Chiefs


Len Dawson - 8 (led team for 12 seasons, but only 8 since 1966) (16% of 50-year history)
Bill Kenney - 7 (14% of 50-year history)
Trent Green - 5 (10% of 50-year history)
Mike Livingston - 5 (10% of 50-year history)
Matt Cassel - 4 (8% of 50-year history)
Steve Deberg - 4 (8% of 50-year history)
Alex Smith - 3 (and current starter) (6% of 50-year history)
Elvis Grbac - 3 (6% of 50-year history)
Damon Huard - 2 (4% of 50-year history)
Steve Bono - 2 (4% of 50-year history)
Joe Montana - 2 (4% of 50-year history)
Steve Fuller - 2 (4% of 50-year history)
Tyler Thigpen - 1 (2% of 50-year history)
Rich Gannon - 1 (2% of 50-year history)
Dave Krieg - 1 (2% of 50-year history)

The Chiefs produced 14 pro bowlers during this span, led by Len Dawson with 5.

[CoMoChief]

You bored? lmao

[Simply Red]

this is what Rainman loves to do. Always has been.

[Rasputin]

Just because Lynn Dawson won the Chiefs a Super Bowl the Chiefs have a better 50 year quarterbacking than at least 13 other teams that have not won a Super Bowl.

[Rain Man]

My thoughts:

Jaguars - They're pretty much the definition of average, in my opinion. They've been stable for the most part, and Brunell was pretty good in his prime, but not dominating. Garrard's term lasted longer than it should. They've worked hard to improve with investments in Bortles and Gabbert, though Gabbert struck out. Overall, average.

Chiefs - Now here's your big surprise. They've produced 14 pro bowlers in 50 years. That's pretty good. And they may have had more individual pro bowlers than any team we've looked at so far - Dawson, Livingston, Kenney, Montana, Bono, Grbac, Green, and Smith have all been named to at least one pro bowl. So despite our frustrations, they've been pretty good over the years at staffing the position at an above average level. Of course, the challenge is that most of those pro bowls have been the 3rd or 4th quarterback, and other than Dawson they haven't had a dominating quarterback. Even so, I'd have to objectively rate them somewhat strong. Their valleys have been deep on occasion (Huard and Thigpen), but never very long.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by CoMoChief

You bored? lmao

You mean today or in my life?

Originally Posted by Simply Red

this is what Rainman loves to do. Always has been.

And always will be.

[Coochie liquor]

KC stronger.
Jacksonville very weak
KC about average

[Sweet Daddy Hate]

I'm not seeing the much needed and very factual "pure shit"-option for this poll?

[Gadzooks]

With the first poll I knew your strategy to move KC to the next round.
By matching teams alphabetically KC gets a matchup vs. the weak Jags. Meanwhile we see Dallas vs. Denver and Pittsburgh vs. San Diego is coming up, knocking off 2 AFC West competitors in the first round.
The poll was going to be biased against AFC West rivals regardless, however by moving KC to the next boring round of 16 the thread concept will keep it's legs until advancing to the final 8 where things will get more interesting.
Very clever.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Gadzooks

With the first poll I knew your strategy to move KC to the next round.
By matching teams alphabetically KC gets a matchup vs. the weak Jags. Meanwhile we see Dallas vs. Denver and Pittsburgh vs. San Diego is coming up, knocking off 2 AFC West competitors in the first round.
The poll was going to be biased against AFC West rivals regardless, however by moving KC to the next boring round of 16 the thread concept will keep it's legs until advancing to the final 8 where things will get more interesting.
Very clever.

You caught me. This is a conspiracy 3,000 years in the making that the early Phoenicians are only now revealing.

I did chuckle at the Dallas-Denver matchup, though. Into the loser's bracket, Elway. Scat.

[Mile High Mania]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

You caught me. This is a conspiracy 3,000 years in the making that the early Phoenicians are only now revealing.

I did chuckle at the Dallas-Denver matchup, though. Into the loser's bracket, Elway. Scat.

Yeah, not sure alphabetical would have been the way to go. Maybe group them by playoff appearances? Hurts a team like Jax to pair up against a founding NFL team.

[Mile High Mania]

And, if teams like the Cowboys, Steelers, Packers, Colts don't make it in the final 4, it will seem odd to me (at least). I can see NE making it far ... but if on true "QB History", they wouldn't as teams like the Giants and Redskins should compete. Hell, Denver should topple them on the history over 50 years if just based on QB.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by Mile High Mania

And, if teams like the Cowboys, Steelers, Packers, Colts don't make it in the final 4, it will seem odd to me (at least). I can see NE making it far ... but if on true "QB History", they wouldn't as teams like the Giants and Redskins should compete. Hell, Denver should topple them on the history over 50 years if just based on QB.

Oh, I've got a plan. I've got a plan...