The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology
By: Matt Harmon
5/30/2014
5/30/2014
The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology will change the way you look at the position (Image: ESPN [edited])
Quarterback, the holy grail of sports positions. If you’re an NFL organization and you have one, you feel great. The ones that don’t are always looking up at the proverbial glass ceiling. It’s been years since a team without an above average quarterback won a Super Bowl.
The quarterback position is a game changer. The current owners of the Lombardi Trophy, the Seattle Seahawks, were a middling 7-9 team before they unearthed a franchise quarterback in Russell Wilson. The perennial contending Indianapolis Colts sunk to a miserable 2-14 when Peyton Manning missed an entire season. The team returned to the postseason the very next year, almost solely thanks to Andrew Luck.
The importance of the position amplifies the necessity of evaluating it properly. For much of the pre-draft season, it felt like the NFL wasn’t doing a good job of that. The rumors of Tom Savage being a top-50 pick, Teddy Bridgewater’s tumble, and the over-scrutinizing of pro days raised a fair amount of questions. A lot of that talk ended up just being rumors.
Nevertheless, the process raised a lot of questions for me about the state of the position around the league.
It seems like some analysts and front office members are relying on a “this is how we’ve always done it” brand of quarterback evaluation. Defaulting on familiar successful traits such as size and arm strength. As we know, just because a tactic or practice has tenure, doesn’t make it the right method or rule. The NFL is changing, and I’d assert that the quarterback position is at the forefront of that evolution.
Through a bit of independent research I’ve developed a theoretical approach to view the quarterback position. I’ve concocted The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology in order to better categorize, understand and evaluate quarterbacks, and what does and does not work at the position.
If you’re unfamiliar with the term, a typology is a classification according to general types. It helps distinguish and break down a grander topic (in this case quarterbacks) into compartments and more specific ideas.
Now for few disclaimers before you rip this project to shreds. Typologies are not meant to serve as a “catch all”. Most concepts in life are not simple. Outliers always exist, and some entities will cross between two or more typological categories. This is especially true in a study with human subjects (something we always overlook when evaluating football). These quarterbacks can have different aspects of multiple branches of the typology.
Also—again because of the human subject issue—it is very possible for these quarterbacks to evolve and change types throughout their careers. This is especially pertinent for the prospects coming out of the NFL Draft. Just because they start out as one type, doesn’t mean they’ll retain that label their entire career.
I’ll explain these ideas with more concrete and specific examples later on. So, before you ask for the check before the main course comes, let’s get to The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology...
The Prototype
When it comes to quarterbacks, the prototype is the “carved from stone model”. When they draw up quarterbacks in heaven, they compose the prototype. These quarterbacks are aesthetically pleasing; they’re almost always 6’2 or taller, with a strong build.
The Prototype has the strong arm necessary to make all the throws at every level of the field. Not every one has a cannon, but if arm strength is a weakness you’re not a prototype. Almost as importantly, these players aren’t statues in the pocket. A guy like Ryan Mallett is not a prototype (we’ll get to his type later). The prototype quarterbacks have the necessary athleticism to evade the rush, or create some plays with their legs. Strong frames, throwing arms and athleticism are all key traits of The Prototype.
The Prototype quarterbacks are a bit of a mixed bag on the mental side of the game. While the high-end ones are masters of manipulating defenses and decision making, the rest can be inconsistent. The middle to low-end prototype quarterbacks aren’t complete liabilities in this facet, but have some lapses.
In the scouting world, every team wants a prototype quarterback. The trouble is, they’re hard to find.
Most prototypes are high first round picks. The NFL covets them, and when they get a chance, they’ll pounce on one. Because they are so sought after, some evaluators’ cravings often find the next type mistaken for prototypes.
Current NFL example: Andrew Luck
2014 NFL Draft example: Blake Bortles
The Dinosaur
The Dinosaur is another brand of aesthetically pleasing quarterbacks. These players are massive pocket passers. The Dinosaur stands tall (usually 6’4 or more), 225-plus pounds and posses a rocket arm. They can make all the throws.
NFL coaches and front office members understand The Dinosaur. This style of quarterbacking has worked in the NFL for years. They dominated the 90’s and early 2000’s. The idea is those big, strong pocket passers win Super Bowls, and non-traditional quarterbacks don’t.
The problem is, that ideal is quickly becoming a farce. With the way defenses are playing today, it’s hard for dinosaurs to succeed in the NFL. This is due to several key traits that distinguish them from The Prototype quarterbacks.
Dinosaurs struggle with pocket movement. Whereas prototypes have the athleticism and quickness to elude the pass rush, dinosaurs are significantly lacking in this area. Quarterbacks classified as dinosaurs are slow-footed, don’t make many plays outside of the pocket or the structure of the offense.
While its not always a glaring weakness, The dinosaurs typically are not known for their accuracy. Especially towards the middle and low-end of the type’s scale, ball placement tends to be an issue. While they have the arm strength to drill throws down the field, they don’t posses the skills to put it in the right spot.
The Dinosaur is the devolved form of The Prototype. At a glance, they look the same. A closer look reveals The Dinosaur quarterbacks to be very flawed players. Much like their namesake, they are fast becoming extinct. While dinosaurs ruled the NFL at one point, it’s hard to find many successful ones these days.
Current NFL example: Ryan Mallett
2014 NFL Draft example: Zach Mettenberger
The Vick
Named after perhaps the most unique quarterback of all time, The Vick type is comprised of the athletes at the position. They aren’t always well built like The Dinosaur or The Prototype, but they sure are exciting. Most have excellent arm strength and 4.6 or lower speed.
The Vicks are first and foremost athletes known for their ability to make plays with their legs. For the most part, these players are more threatening as runners than passers. The speed Vicks posses allows their team to infuse read option plays into the offense. It also dictates matchups. Defenses have to commit someone to watch or scheme around the quarterback in fear of him taking off. In this way, Vicks are massive tactical advantages.
Just like Michael Vick himself, this type has plenty of holes in their games. Often times Vick quarterbacks struggle with the mental side of football. Reading defense, blitz recognition and decision-making can all come and go with these players. Often times it’s these issues that end up holding The Vicks back from reaching their full potential or achieving evolution.
Many analysts and evaluators refuse to embrace The Vick type. In their minds, quarterbacks are passers first, not athletes. It’s a fair point, and this type of quarterback is far from consistent with throwing the football. Accuracy, touch and anticipation are not always where they need to be for NFL success. Of course, the sheer athletic ability and arm talent of the Vicks tends to overshadow this issue. I believe you can succeed with this type of quarterback.
The amount of flaws you notice with Vicks is a good indicator of where they are on the scale. High-end Vick quarterbacks’ positives often outweigh the negatives. They combine enough accuracy and mental acumen with their natural gifts to make a fine starting quarterback. However, middle to low-end Vick quarterbacks almost never truly overcome their issues. It’s these players that scare evaluators away from this type.
Current NFL example: Colin Kaepernick
2014 NFL Draft example: Logan Thomas
The Game Manager
The Game Manager is the preeminent pejorative term for quarterbacks. When someone calls a quarterback a game manager, it really means they aren’t good enough. While that’s a part of the story, The Backyard Banter Typology helps to qualify the term.
The Game Manager is a quarterback who needs a little help. They aren’t the most physically gifted bunch. Game managers don’t have the athleticism to be threats as solo playmakers. They lack the arm strength to threaten a defense at every level of the field. Most game managers are strong in the mental facet of the position. These players know the offense well, how to read defenses and make smart decisions. Game managers are usually accurate enough to make the short and intermediate throws regularly.
One of the key traits of the game manager type is their awareness of these attributes. Most game managers are fully cognoscente of, and have accepted their, limitations. They’re not going to force the ball downfield, or play outside of themselves. For this type, the assignment is more “don’t screw it up” then “go win us the game”.
This highlights another important factor in The Game Manager type: the role of coaches. Offensive coordinators, and coaches in general, love working with game managers. Since they are more about playing within the structure of the offense than winning off script, coaches receive the credit for their work. For a game manager to succeed they often have to be paired with a strong coaching staff. They become that extension of the coach on the field.
Another factor in their success is that game managers function best with strong running games and pass catchers. Given their limitations, its nearly impossible for a game manager to thrive with a weak supporting cast.
Ultimately, you can win games with a high-end or midrange game manger at quarterback. The upside is just limited. This type rarely carries a weak team, and needs a perfect situation to win multiple playoff games.
Current NFL example: Alex Smith
2014 NFL Draft example: AJ McCarron
The Facilitator/Distributor
In the last few years, this quarterback type has taken the league by storm. The current iterations of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, as well as Drew Brees and Philip Rivers all fall under The Facilitator/Distributor type.
The Facilitator/Distributor can be looked at as the evolution of The Game Manager. The biggest difference between the two is the willingness of The Facilitator/Distributor to “let loose” outside of structure. Players like Matt Schaub and Russell Wilson have been mislabeled as game managers, when they fit this type better. Facilitators/distributors are more physically gifted, and capable of carrying an offense, but fall short of The Prototype’s skill-set. The Facilitator/Distributor lacks the combination of size, athleticism and overwhelming arm strength to be considered prototypes.
However, they might belong to the most successful branch of the typology. The Facilitator/Distributors are best known for their anticipation and accuracy. They might not be able to throw 70 yards on a rope, but their dominance of the intermediate areas more than compensates. Peyton Manning demonstrated last season that The Facilitator/Distributor could thrive without arm strength or athleticism. While Manning is at the very top of this branch of the typology, he exemplifies the positives of this type.
Unless a quarterback is at the peak of The Facilitator/Distributor scale, their positives might not jump off the page. A player like Teddy Bridgewater fell victim to this phenomenon during the pre-draft process. Bridgewater was my top ranked quarterback, and the second best player in this class. Yet, he fell all the way to the 32nd pick of the first round. Bridgewater was unfairly scrutinized due to his lack of size and overwhelming arm strength. His college tape revealed an excellent passer, with pocket manipulation, pinpoint accuracy and ball placement. Bridgewater, as a draft prospect, epitomized all the strengths of this type, and how they don’t get their due. The failure to accept him shows the NFL hasn’t grasped the merits of The Facilitator/Distributor type just yet.
There’s a current pro player whose positives get overlooked by many casual observers. It’s an unpopular opinion, but I believe Sam Bradford showed plenty of good signs last season, and can still be a franchise quarterback. The positives noted in that article aren’t readily apparent unless you’re watching closely. That tends to be a theme with the low-end and midrange facilitator/distributors. At the moment, I slot Bradford in as low-end facilitator/distributor. If his support cast improves and he can spread the ball out to better route combinations more often, he can certainly rise up the pantheon.
Sean Payton in New Orleans has built a perfect offense to tailor to, and help a facilitator/distributor succeed. The Saints have always had a deep, and diverse stable of pass catchers. Drew Brees is able to serve as the point guard of the offense. He distributes the football accurately to all different areas of the field. His weapons are all able to do different things, but players like Marques Colston, Jimmy Graham and Darren Sproles excel after the catch. That’s an important factor with a facilitator/distributor behind center.
The Facilitator/Distributor type is gaining traction in today’s NFL. They don’t jump off the page like The Prototype, but offer much more than The Game Manager and The Dinosaur. Their positive attributes fit the current state of the league. Don’t be surprised if smart organizations come around to this fact, and adjust their quarterback evaluations accordingly.
Current NFL example: Drew Brees
2014 NFL Draft example: Teddy Bridgewater
The Gambler
Every group of friends needs a wildcard. The Gambler fills that role on The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology.
Quite simply, The Gambler is some sort of Frankenstein of the other quarterback types. A few quirks make them unique.
The Gambler does not share much in common with the physical profiles of The Dinosaur. Most gamblers vary in size, don’t have the best skill-sets or come with great pedigree. Their tools more so mirror The Game Manager—except perhaps those on the high-end of the scale. It’s a psychological and intangible difference that sets them apart.
Gamblers want to take risks. Their mindset is to be aggressive more often than not. The Gambler pushes the ball down the field, even when it might be ill advised. This can be a good, and bad quality for this type. Which is why the scale is important.
High-end gamblers such as Tony Romo or Johnny Manziel often end up on the winning end of the risks. Their aggressive, attacking mindset allows them to get the most out of their skill-set. They can put the team on their backs, and have the improvisational ability to put immense stress on the defense.
The midrange to low-end gamblers do not get away with as much. As the talent begins to lessen, so do the odds of these quarterback’s success. Midrange to low-end gamblers epitomize the phrase “he writes checks his arm can’t cash”.
Ryan Fitzpatrick comes in as a low-end gambler. He is no more physically gifted player than an Alex Smith, but plays with a reckless abandon of a prototype quarterback. This is why Fitzpatrick and other low-end gamblers are so maddening to watch. While they’re capable of a “wow” play here and there, a bone-headed decision isn’t far behind.
If The Gambler is to succeed, and reach the high-end of the scale, they must develop their mental acumen and arm strength. Romo is an example of a player who has done that. He’s developed into an excellent quarterback because of it, but still is far from a mistake-free player. I project Johnny Manziel to have a similar career. Andy Dalton finds himself on the other end of the spectrum. Thus far, he’s failed to develop in the areas necessary to compliment his sub-par physical tools. He’ll still launch the ball into coverage, and it usually hurts the Bengals.
The Gambler can be a fan favorite, and a coach’s nightmare all at the same time. It takes a certain type of system and supporting cast to carry this type. When it works, it can be something really fun to watch.
Current NFL example: Tony Romo
2014 NFL Draft example: Johnny Manziel
Applying the Typology to the Current Starting NFL and 2014 Rookie Quarterbacks
In order to better demonstrate The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology, here’s a visual demonstration of how each NFL starter and 2014 NFL Draft prospect fits into the typology:
The quarterback position is a game changer. The current owners of the Lombardi Trophy, the Seattle Seahawks, were a middling 7-9 team before they unearthed a franchise quarterback in Russell Wilson. The perennial contending Indianapolis Colts sunk to a miserable 2-14 when Peyton Manning missed an entire season. The team returned to the postseason the very next year, almost solely thanks to Andrew Luck.
The importance of the position amplifies the necessity of evaluating it properly. For much of the pre-draft season, it felt like the NFL wasn’t doing a good job of that. The rumors of Tom Savage being a top-50 pick, Teddy Bridgewater’s tumble, and the over-scrutinizing of pro days raised a fair amount of questions. A lot of that talk ended up just being rumors.
Nevertheless, the process raised a lot of questions for me about the state of the position around the league.
It seems like some analysts and front office members are relying on a “this is how we’ve always done it” brand of quarterback evaluation. Defaulting on familiar successful traits such as size and arm strength. As we know, just because a tactic or practice has tenure, doesn’t make it the right method or rule. The NFL is changing, and I’d assert that the quarterback position is at the forefront of that evolution.
Through a bit of independent research I’ve developed a theoretical approach to view the quarterback position. I’ve concocted The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology in order to better categorize, understand and evaluate quarterbacks, and what does and does not work at the position.
If you’re unfamiliar with the term, a typology is a classification according to general types. It helps distinguish and break down a grander topic (in this case quarterbacks) into compartments and more specific ideas.
Now for few disclaimers before you rip this project to shreds. Typologies are not meant to serve as a “catch all”. Most concepts in life are not simple. Outliers always exist, and some entities will cross between two or more typological categories. This is especially true in a study with human subjects (something we always overlook when evaluating football). These quarterbacks can have different aspects of multiple branches of the typology.
Also—again because of the human subject issue—it is very possible for these quarterbacks to evolve and change types throughout their careers. This is especially pertinent for the prospects coming out of the NFL Draft. Just because they start out as one type, doesn’t mean they’ll retain that label their entire career.
I’ll explain these ideas with more concrete and specific examples later on. So, before you ask for the check before the main course comes, let’s get to The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology...
The Prototype
When it comes to quarterbacks, the prototype is the “carved from stone model”. When they draw up quarterbacks in heaven, they compose the prototype. These quarterbacks are aesthetically pleasing; they’re almost always 6’2 or taller, with a strong build.
The Prototype has the strong arm necessary to make all the throws at every level of the field. Not every one has a cannon, but if arm strength is a weakness you’re not a prototype. Almost as importantly, these players aren’t statues in the pocket. A guy like Ryan Mallett is not a prototype (we’ll get to his type later). The prototype quarterbacks have the necessary athleticism to evade the rush, or create some plays with their legs. Strong frames, throwing arms and athleticism are all key traits of The Prototype.
The Prototype quarterbacks are a bit of a mixed bag on the mental side of the game. While the high-end ones are masters of manipulating defenses and decision making, the rest can be inconsistent. The middle to low-end prototype quarterbacks aren’t complete liabilities in this facet, but have some lapses.
In the scouting world, every team wants a prototype quarterback. The trouble is, they’re hard to find.
Most prototypes are high first round picks. The NFL covets them, and when they get a chance, they’ll pounce on one. Because they are so sought after, some evaluators’ cravings often find the next type mistaken for prototypes.
Current NFL example: Andrew Luck
2014 NFL Draft example: Blake Bortles
The Dinosaur
The Dinosaur is another brand of aesthetically pleasing quarterbacks. These players are massive pocket passers. The Dinosaur stands tall (usually 6’4 or more), 225-plus pounds and posses a rocket arm. They can make all the throws.
NFL coaches and front office members understand The Dinosaur. This style of quarterbacking has worked in the NFL for years. They dominated the 90’s and early 2000’s. The idea is those big, strong pocket passers win Super Bowls, and non-traditional quarterbacks don’t.
The problem is, that ideal is quickly becoming a farce. With the way defenses are playing today, it’s hard for dinosaurs to succeed in the NFL. This is due to several key traits that distinguish them from The Prototype quarterbacks.
Dinosaurs struggle with pocket movement. Whereas prototypes have the athleticism and quickness to elude the pass rush, dinosaurs are significantly lacking in this area. Quarterbacks classified as dinosaurs are slow-footed, don’t make many plays outside of the pocket or the structure of the offense.
While its not always a glaring weakness, The dinosaurs typically are not known for their accuracy. Especially towards the middle and low-end of the type’s scale, ball placement tends to be an issue. While they have the arm strength to drill throws down the field, they don’t posses the skills to put it in the right spot.
The Dinosaur is the devolved form of The Prototype. At a glance, they look the same. A closer look reveals The Dinosaur quarterbacks to be very flawed players. Much like their namesake, they are fast becoming extinct. While dinosaurs ruled the NFL at one point, it’s hard to find many successful ones these days.
Current NFL example: Ryan Mallett
2014 NFL Draft example: Zach Mettenberger
The Vick
Named after perhaps the most unique quarterback of all time, The Vick type is comprised of the athletes at the position. They aren’t always well built like The Dinosaur or The Prototype, but they sure are exciting. Most have excellent arm strength and 4.6 or lower speed.
The Vicks are first and foremost athletes known for their ability to make plays with their legs. For the most part, these players are more threatening as runners than passers. The speed Vicks posses allows their team to infuse read option plays into the offense. It also dictates matchups. Defenses have to commit someone to watch or scheme around the quarterback in fear of him taking off. In this way, Vicks are massive tactical advantages.
Just like Michael Vick himself, this type has plenty of holes in their games. Often times Vick quarterbacks struggle with the mental side of football. Reading defense, blitz recognition and decision-making can all come and go with these players. Often times it’s these issues that end up holding The Vicks back from reaching their full potential or achieving evolution.
Many analysts and evaluators refuse to embrace The Vick type. In their minds, quarterbacks are passers first, not athletes. It’s a fair point, and this type of quarterback is far from consistent with throwing the football. Accuracy, touch and anticipation are not always where they need to be for NFL success. Of course, the sheer athletic ability and arm talent of the Vicks tends to overshadow this issue. I believe you can succeed with this type of quarterback.
The amount of flaws you notice with Vicks is a good indicator of where they are on the scale. High-end Vick quarterbacks’ positives often outweigh the negatives. They combine enough accuracy and mental acumen with their natural gifts to make a fine starting quarterback. However, middle to low-end Vick quarterbacks almost never truly overcome their issues. It’s these players that scare evaluators away from this type.
Current NFL example: Colin Kaepernick
2014 NFL Draft example: Logan Thomas
The Game Manager
The Game Manager is the preeminent pejorative term for quarterbacks. When someone calls a quarterback a game manager, it really means they aren’t good enough. While that’s a part of the story, The Backyard Banter Typology helps to qualify the term.
The Game Manager is a quarterback who needs a little help. They aren’t the most physically gifted bunch. Game managers don’t have the athleticism to be threats as solo playmakers. They lack the arm strength to threaten a defense at every level of the field. Most game managers are strong in the mental facet of the position. These players know the offense well, how to read defenses and make smart decisions. Game managers are usually accurate enough to make the short and intermediate throws regularly.
One of the key traits of the game manager type is their awareness of these attributes. Most game managers are fully cognoscente of, and have accepted their, limitations. They’re not going to force the ball downfield, or play outside of themselves. For this type, the assignment is more “don’t screw it up” then “go win us the game”.
This highlights another important factor in The Game Manager type: the role of coaches. Offensive coordinators, and coaches in general, love working with game managers. Since they are more about playing within the structure of the offense than winning off script, coaches receive the credit for their work. For a game manager to succeed they often have to be paired with a strong coaching staff. They become that extension of the coach on the field.
Another factor in their success is that game managers function best with strong running games and pass catchers. Given their limitations, its nearly impossible for a game manager to thrive with a weak supporting cast.
Ultimately, you can win games with a high-end or midrange game manger at quarterback. The upside is just limited. This type rarely carries a weak team, and needs a perfect situation to win multiple playoff games.
Current NFL example: Alex Smith
2014 NFL Draft example: AJ McCarron
The Facilitator/Distributor
In the last few years, this quarterback type has taken the league by storm. The current iterations of Tom Brady and Peyton Manning, as well as Drew Brees and Philip Rivers all fall under The Facilitator/Distributor type.
The Facilitator/Distributor can be looked at as the evolution of The Game Manager. The biggest difference between the two is the willingness of The Facilitator/Distributor to “let loose” outside of structure. Players like Matt Schaub and Russell Wilson have been mislabeled as game managers, when they fit this type better. Facilitators/distributors are more physically gifted, and capable of carrying an offense, but fall short of The Prototype’s skill-set. The Facilitator/Distributor lacks the combination of size, athleticism and overwhelming arm strength to be considered prototypes.
However, they might belong to the most successful branch of the typology. The Facilitator/Distributors are best known for their anticipation and accuracy. They might not be able to throw 70 yards on a rope, but their dominance of the intermediate areas more than compensates. Peyton Manning demonstrated last season that The Facilitator/Distributor could thrive without arm strength or athleticism. While Manning is at the very top of this branch of the typology, he exemplifies the positives of this type.
Unless a quarterback is at the peak of The Facilitator/Distributor scale, their positives might not jump off the page. A player like Teddy Bridgewater fell victim to this phenomenon during the pre-draft process. Bridgewater was my top ranked quarterback, and the second best player in this class. Yet, he fell all the way to the 32nd pick of the first round. Bridgewater was unfairly scrutinized due to his lack of size and overwhelming arm strength. His college tape revealed an excellent passer, with pocket manipulation, pinpoint accuracy and ball placement. Bridgewater, as a draft prospect, epitomized all the strengths of this type, and how they don’t get their due. The failure to accept him shows the NFL hasn’t grasped the merits of The Facilitator/Distributor type just yet.
There’s a current pro player whose positives get overlooked by many casual observers. It’s an unpopular opinion, but I believe Sam Bradford showed plenty of good signs last season, and can still be a franchise quarterback. The positives noted in that article aren’t readily apparent unless you’re watching closely. That tends to be a theme with the low-end and midrange facilitator/distributors. At the moment, I slot Bradford in as low-end facilitator/distributor. If his support cast improves and he can spread the ball out to better route combinations more often, he can certainly rise up the pantheon.
Sean Payton in New Orleans has built a perfect offense to tailor to, and help a facilitator/distributor succeed. The Saints have always had a deep, and diverse stable of pass catchers. Drew Brees is able to serve as the point guard of the offense. He distributes the football accurately to all different areas of the field. His weapons are all able to do different things, but players like Marques Colston, Jimmy Graham and Darren Sproles excel after the catch. That’s an important factor with a facilitator/distributor behind center.
The Facilitator/Distributor type is gaining traction in today’s NFL. They don’t jump off the page like The Prototype, but offer much more than The Game Manager and The Dinosaur. Their positive attributes fit the current state of the league. Don’t be surprised if smart organizations come around to this fact, and adjust their quarterback evaluations accordingly.
Current NFL example: Drew Brees
2014 NFL Draft example: Teddy Bridgewater
The Gambler
Every group of friends needs a wildcard. The Gambler fills that role on The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology.
Quite simply, The Gambler is some sort of Frankenstein of the other quarterback types. A few quirks make them unique.
The Gambler does not share much in common with the physical profiles of The Dinosaur. Most gamblers vary in size, don’t have the best skill-sets or come with great pedigree. Their tools more so mirror The Game Manager—except perhaps those on the high-end of the scale. It’s a psychological and intangible difference that sets them apart.
Gamblers want to take risks. Their mindset is to be aggressive more often than not. The Gambler pushes the ball down the field, even when it might be ill advised. This can be a good, and bad quality for this type. Which is why the scale is important.
High-end gamblers such as Tony Romo or Johnny Manziel often end up on the winning end of the risks. Their aggressive, attacking mindset allows them to get the most out of their skill-set. They can put the team on their backs, and have the improvisational ability to put immense stress on the defense.
The midrange to low-end gamblers do not get away with as much. As the talent begins to lessen, so do the odds of these quarterback’s success. Midrange to low-end gamblers epitomize the phrase “he writes checks his arm can’t cash”.
Ryan Fitzpatrick comes in as a low-end gambler. He is no more physically gifted player than an Alex Smith, but plays with a reckless abandon of a prototype quarterback. This is why Fitzpatrick and other low-end gamblers are so maddening to watch. While they’re capable of a “wow” play here and there, a bone-headed decision isn’t far behind.
If The Gambler is to succeed, and reach the high-end of the scale, they must develop their mental acumen and arm strength. Romo is an example of a player who has done that. He’s developed into an excellent quarterback because of it, but still is far from a mistake-free player. I project Johnny Manziel to have a similar career. Andy Dalton finds himself on the other end of the spectrum. Thus far, he’s failed to develop in the areas necessary to compliment his sub-par physical tools. He’ll still launch the ball into coverage, and it usually hurts the Bengals.
The Gambler can be a fan favorite, and a coach’s nightmare all at the same time. It takes a certain type of system and supporting cast to carry this type. When it works, it can be something really fun to watch.
Current NFL example: Tony Romo
2014 NFL Draft example: Johnny Manziel
Applying the Typology to the Current Starting NFL and 2014 Rookie Quarterbacks
In order to better demonstrate The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology, here’s a visual demonstration of how each NFL starter and 2014 NFL Draft prospect fits into the typology:
A few takeaways from the chart:
The purpose of the scale
I didn’t include the scale to cause a stir over which quarterback is better than his peers. The scale helps discern to what degree a player fits the type, not his actual skill level. Peyton Manning comes in as a high-end facilitator/distributor, because he exemplifies all the successful traits of the type. Matt Schaub comes in on the low-end, though he’d have been higher previously in his career. He fits the type, but doesn’t execute all the attributes to the degree of success that Manning does.
In some ways, the scale does help show which players are further along in their development. Yet, one purpose of this typology is to help eliminate arbitrary number rankings. It makes little sense to compare Alex Smith to Joe Flacco, because their types are so different. Just because Smith is tagged as a high-end game manager and Flacco a low-end prototype, doesn’t speak to who is better.
Evolution across types
As mentioned early in the study, quarterbacks can evolve, or devolve, to different layers of the typology. NFL players develop through their careers. As they make strides or decline they change types.
Some examples of common evolutions:
Russell Wilson evolved from a high-end game manager into a midrange facilitator/distributor. The Seahawks kept the reigns tight around Wilson early in his rookie season. As they let him loose, Wilson responded. He displayed the ability to act as the point guard of the offense, and make plays off script.
Peyton Manning devolved from a high-end prototype into a high-end facilitator/distributor. Devolve makes it sound like a bad thing, but really this conveys how Manning adjusted to his age. He still looks the part of a 6’5 prototype, but plays much differently. Anyone can see his arm strength has rapidly eroded. Now it’s Manning’s mind, accuracy and anticipation that allow him to run a high-flying offense. He fits the mold of The Facilitator/Distributor now.
Cam Newton evolved from a high-end Vick into a midrange prototype. Newton made a ton of strides as a passer last season. He went through his progressions, was more careful with the ball and showed better placement. While his legs are still a massive advantage, he no longer must base his game around them. Newton excelled solely on pure physical talent early in his career. He’s evolved to the point where his game is more than that. He still has some work to do, and that’s why he falls below the high-end of The Prototype scale.
The rise of The Facilitator/Distributor
If I’m a general manager of an NFL team, I want this type leading my squad. The Facilitator/Distributor type has the most current NFL starters with 11. The 2014 NFL Draft class was also filled with a majority of facilitators/distributors (six of sixteen listed).
This is partly because The Facilitator/Distributor is the most successful branch of the typology. Their ability to spread the ball out at all areas of the field stresses defenses. In many ways, they combine the positives of several other branches of the typology. At a glance, it’s harder to poke holes in this branch than any of the others.
The other factor is that you can find these players anywhere. Brian Hoyer was an undrafted free agent, but has shown flashes of being an effective distributor. There are the first-rounders like Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan and Philip Rivers. However, third round picks Russell Wilson and Nick Foles run their offenses very well.
If you want a prototype, it’ll cost you
When you scan through the quarterbacks listed as prototypes one thing sticks out. All the prototypes that are current NFL starters were first round picks. From Andrew Luck to Joe Flacco, all were elevated because of their physical gifts that fit the mold.
As for the rookies, Blake Bortles was drafted third overall because he’s a prototype. Bortles’ tape was a bit underwhelming and he’s a flawed quarterback. But because of his potential and fit in The Prototype mold, he went higher than expected. If you believe Bortles will succeed, it’s because you think he can fix his mechanics to the point his prototypical traits will take over.
Derek Carr came in as a low-end prototype. I saw a lot of flaws in Carr’s game, but its clear his arm talent and abilities won over many evaluators. Admittedly, Carr was one of the players I had trouble sorting (more on that later). He is the only prototype quarterback to be drafted outside of the first round.
Challenging quarterbacks to assign types
Geno Smith. To say Geno Smith’s rookie year was up and down would be kind. There were some moments the Jets’ quarterback was an abject disaster. Some of it was on him, as his accuracy and decision-making were inconsistent. Yet, New York did not always set him up for success. Ultimately, I decided to sort Geno based off the player I saw coming out of West Virginia. Smith was a smart and accurate passer, who spread the ball around all over the field in college. Time will tell if he stays in The Facilitator/Distributor type, or rise from the low-end.
Derek Carr. The younger Carr brother is the only prototype quarterback to go outside of the first round. He’s a major outlier in that regard. He also lacks the frame and pocket ability most prototypes are known for. Matthew Stafford is a similar player to Derek Carr, though is a far superior talent. His issues are still holding him and the Lions back. The similarities between these two played a big role in Carr ending up as a prototype.
How to use the typology to value quarterbacks
I’m of the belief that an elite or great quarterback can change your franchise. But I just as strongly maintain that the players below that are more replaceable that we tend to believe.
The Bengals seem ready to hand Andy Dalton a massive contract extension, just because he’s a passable starting quarterback. The organization hasn’t come to terms with the reality that Dalton will always be an anchor tied around their success. He presents a tangible ceiling. If the Bengals commit to him, its only because they are too scared to do worse than Dalton. Which is just delaying the inevitable.
With The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology we can better value quarterbacks. Instead of saying Andy Dalton is the 18th or so best quarterback in the league, we call him a midrange gambler. He has not shown the development to be considered a mid or even low-end facilitator/distributor (his likely ceiling). Nor is he careful and reliable enough to be considered a game manager.
The purpose of the scale
I didn’t include the scale to cause a stir over which quarterback is better than his peers. The scale helps discern to what degree a player fits the type, not his actual skill level. Peyton Manning comes in as a high-end facilitator/distributor, because he exemplifies all the successful traits of the type. Matt Schaub comes in on the low-end, though he’d have been higher previously in his career. He fits the type, but doesn’t execute all the attributes to the degree of success that Manning does.
In some ways, the scale does help show which players are further along in their development. Yet, one purpose of this typology is to help eliminate arbitrary number rankings. It makes little sense to compare Alex Smith to Joe Flacco, because their types are so different. Just because Smith is tagged as a high-end game manager and Flacco a low-end prototype, doesn’t speak to who is better.
Evolution across types
As mentioned early in the study, quarterbacks can evolve, or devolve, to different layers of the typology. NFL players develop through their careers. As they make strides or decline they change types.
Some examples of common evolutions:
Russell Wilson evolved from a high-end game manager into a midrange facilitator/distributor. The Seahawks kept the reigns tight around Wilson early in his rookie season. As they let him loose, Wilson responded. He displayed the ability to act as the point guard of the offense, and make plays off script.
Peyton Manning devolved from a high-end prototype into a high-end facilitator/distributor. Devolve makes it sound like a bad thing, but really this conveys how Manning adjusted to his age. He still looks the part of a 6’5 prototype, but plays much differently. Anyone can see his arm strength has rapidly eroded. Now it’s Manning’s mind, accuracy and anticipation that allow him to run a high-flying offense. He fits the mold of The Facilitator/Distributor now.
Cam Newton evolved from a high-end Vick into a midrange prototype. Newton made a ton of strides as a passer last season. He went through his progressions, was more careful with the ball and showed better placement. While his legs are still a massive advantage, he no longer must base his game around them. Newton excelled solely on pure physical talent early in his career. He’s evolved to the point where his game is more than that. He still has some work to do, and that’s why he falls below the high-end of The Prototype scale.
The rise of The Facilitator/Distributor
If I’m a general manager of an NFL team, I want this type leading my squad. The Facilitator/Distributor type has the most current NFL starters with 11. The 2014 NFL Draft class was also filled with a majority of facilitators/distributors (six of sixteen listed).
This is partly because The Facilitator/Distributor is the most successful branch of the typology. Their ability to spread the ball out at all areas of the field stresses defenses. In many ways, they combine the positives of several other branches of the typology. At a glance, it’s harder to poke holes in this branch than any of the others.
The other factor is that you can find these players anywhere. Brian Hoyer was an undrafted free agent, but has shown flashes of being an effective distributor. There are the first-rounders like Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan and Philip Rivers. However, third round picks Russell Wilson and Nick Foles run their offenses very well.
If you want a prototype, it’ll cost you
When you scan through the quarterbacks listed as prototypes one thing sticks out. All the prototypes that are current NFL starters were first round picks. From Andrew Luck to Joe Flacco, all were elevated because of their physical gifts that fit the mold.
As for the rookies, Blake Bortles was drafted third overall because he’s a prototype. Bortles’ tape was a bit underwhelming and he’s a flawed quarterback. But because of his potential and fit in The Prototype mold, he went higher than expected. If you believe Bortles will succeed, it’s because you think he can fix his mechanics to the point his prototypical traits will take over.
Derek Carr came in as a low-end prototype. I saw a lot of flaws in Carr’s game, but its clear his arm talent and abilities won over many evaluators. Admittedly, Carr was one of the players I had trouble sorting (more on that later). He is the only prototype quarterback to be drafted outside of the first round.
Challenging quarterbacks to assign types
Geno Smith. To say Geno Smith’s rookie year was up and down would be kind. There were some moments the Jets’ quarterback was an abject disaster. Some of it was on him, as his accuracy and decision-making were inconsistent. Yet, New York did not always set him up for success. Ultimately, I decided to sort Geno based off the player I saw coming out of West Virginia. Smith was a smart and accurate passer, who spread the ball around all over the field in college. Time will tell if he stays in The Facilitator/Distributor type, or rise from the low-end.
Derek Carr. The younger Carr brother is the only prototype quarterback to go outside of the first round. He’s a major outlier in that regard. He also lacks the frame and pocket ability most prototypes are known for. Matthew Stafford is a similar player to Derek Carr, though is a far superior talent. His issues are still holding him and the Lions back. The similarities between these two played a big role in Carr ending up as a prototype.
How to use the typology to value quarterbacks
I’m of the belief that an elite or great quarterback can change your franchise. But I just as strongly maintain that the players below that are more replaceable that we tend to believe.
The Bengals seem ready to hand Andy Dalton a massive contract extension, just because he’s a passable starting quarterback. The organization hasn’t come to terms with the reality that Dalton will always be an anchor tied around their success. He presents a tangible ceiling. If the Bengals commit to him, its only because they are too scared to do worse than Dalton. Which is just delaying the inevitable.
With The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology we can better value quarterbacks. Instead of saying Andy Dalton is the 18th or so best quarterback in the league, we call him a midrange gambler. He has not shown the development to be considered a mid or even low-end facilitator/distributor (his likely ceiling). Nor is he careful and reliable enough to be considered a game manager.
The Andy Dalton dilemma is one problem The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology can help solve (Image: Steve Mitchell-USA Today)
When looking at Dalton through the lens of the typology, a clearer picture is presented. Only four current starting quarterbacks are listed under The Gambler type. Tony Romo is the only one who has sustained any sort of success as a starter. The likelihood that Dalton bucks the trend is low.
The Bengals, and those in similar situations, must realize that they can indeed do better. Finding at least a comparable performance shouldn’t be too hard considering the talent on their roster. A midrange gambler is not worth a starting quarterback investment and a greater than $10 million annual salary.
Here are the quarterback types and scale placement I consider very difficult to replace and worth the investment:
If your team’s starting quarterback does not fall under that umbrella, they likely aren’t a long-term answer. Front offices are making a mistake if they invest in a quarterback outside that range. Those quarterbacks shouldn’t be viewed as anything more than replaceable entities.
Conclusion
There’s no denying the importance of the quarterback position. The proof is in the results. Yet, it seems this position has definitely become over-scrutinized and analyzed so that mediocre players are elevated too highly.
The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology should present a nice tool in changing that failure. By classifying quarterbacks by these types we can scout college prospects with more efficiency. We are also privileged to garner just how to value current starters, and decide whether they’re worth a major investment.
Quarterbacking is an art form, but evaluating them is so crucial we must find a way to make it a science. This typology takes a step in that direction.
The Bengals, and those in similar situations, must realize that they can indeed do better. Finding at least a comparable performance shouldn’t be too hard considering the talent on their roster. A midrange gambler is not worth a starting quarterback investment and a greater than $10 million annual salary.
Here are the quarterback types and scale placement I consider very difficult to replace and worth the investment:
- High-end prototypes
- High-end facilitators/distributors
- High-end gamblers
- High-end dinosaurs
- Midrange prototypes
- Midrange facilitators/distributors
- Low-end prototypes
If your team’s starting quarterback does not fall under that umbrella, they likely aren’t a long-term answer. Front offices are making a mistake if they invest in a quarterback outside that range. Those quarterbacks shouldn’t be viewed as anything more than replaceable entities.
Conclusion
There’s no denying the importance of the quarterback position. The proof is in the results. Yet, it seems this position has definitely become over-scrutinized and analyzed so that mediocre players are elevated too highly.
The Backyard Banter Quarterback Typology should present a nice tool in changing that failure. By classifying quarterbacks by these types we can scout college prospects with more efficiency. We are also privileged to garner just how to value current starters, and decide whether they’re worth a major investment.
Quarterbacking is an art form, but evaluating them is so crucial we must find a way to make it a science. This typology takes a step in that direction.
Comment Form is loading comments...
