WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.000
We're gonna back to you. Ka
wait commaspar the hotline. Now, I'm

2
00:00:02.000 --> 00:00:05.599
bring on Ryan Michael. We had
Ryan on the last week. Week before.

3
00:00:05.839 --> 00:00:08.480
I think we had had a good
time talk with Ryan. Decided to

4
00:00:08.480 --> 00:00:13.839
bring him back on after he put
out his list of the top quarterbacks of

5
00:00:13.880 --> 00:00:16.399
all time, and there were some
I was like, yeah, I agree

6
00:00:16.440 --> 00:00:18.640
with that, there were some I
was like, I got to ask him

7
00:00:18.960 --> 00:00:21.800
how he had Joe Montana at number
eight. Ryan, How you doing this

8
00:00:21.879 --> 00:00:25.800
evening? I'm doing well? Then, how are you good? Doing pretty

9
00:00:25.800 --> 00:00:28.480
well? You put out this interesting
list the top all time quarterbacks, obviously

10
00:00:28.800 --> 00:00:31.600
a well resent methodology behind it.
We'll give you a chance to, you

11
00:00:31.600 --> 00:00:34.000
know, to kind of explain that
a little bit. But my you know,

12
00:00:34.280 --> 00:00:36.799
typically when you see these lists,
we always see Tom Radiot one,

13
00:00:36.920 --> 00:00:39.520
Joe Montana two, Peyton Manning at
three, and then it's you know,

14
00:00:39.560 --> 00:00:43.280
dealer's choice after that. Your list
is a little bit different. And you've

15
00:00:43.320 --> 00:00:46.359
got some guys on there in the
top fifty all time that I think it

16
00:00:46.479 --> 00:00:48.600
was a little early in their career, but you've got him on there.

17
00:00:48.640 --> 00:00:52.240
So I wanted you to first of
all explain the methodology and then then we

18
00:00:52.280 --> 00:00:55.240
can start to get into this a
little bit. Sure, you know,

19
00:00:55.320 --> 00:00:58.840
there's no real, one perfect measure. What I usually refer to is they

20
00:00:58.880 --> 00:01:02.679
say that when I'm working up my
list, my measure is totality of on

21
00:01:02.840 --> 00:01:07.560
field performance in relation to context of
playing situations. So you'll see a variety

22
00:01:07.599 --> 00:01:11.920
of different styles of quarterbacks and quarterbacks
who, in the case of a guy

23
00:01:11.959 --> 00:01:15.799
like Kurt Warner, had a very
very strong crime but didn't necessarily have a

24
00:01:15.840 --> 00:01:19.280
long career. Then you'll have other
guys on the list like fran Parkinson,

25
00:01:19.359 --> 00:01:22.400
who at his peak might not have
been as dominant as some of the other

26
00:01:22.439 --> 00:01:26.200
guys I have in my top seven, but he sustained success for a much

27
00:01:26.280 --> 00:01:29.480
longer period of time than most of
the guys on the list. So it's

28
00:01:29.480 --> 00:01:34.400
a combination of everything. Well,
looking at your list, obviously, the

29
00:01:34.519 --> 00:01:41.040
thing that jumped out to me right
away is where Patrick Mahomes is kind of

30
00:01:41.159 --> 00:01:45.799
listed in this particular group. And
I think I might have said this to

31
00:01:45.879 --> 00:01:52.719
you when you first put this list
out after Sunday's victory. Doesn't or shouldn't

32
00:01:52.799 --> 00:01:57.760
Patrick Mahomes move up further on this
list? Should he not? Well,

33
00:01:57.799 --> 00:02:00.959
I've had a lot of people are
you in golf direction. Some people feel

34
00:02:01.000 --> 00:02:04.560
I have him too high, others
feel that I have him too low.

35
00:02:04.840 --> 00:02:07.799
What I'll say is this, I
have him ranked at thirteenth full time,

36
00:02:07.080 --> 00:02:12.000
and if you look at every quarterback
in my top thirteen, there is nobody

37
00:02:12.039 --> 00:02:16.319
on that list who has a sample
size as small as Patrick's is, And

38
00:02:16.599 --> 00:02:21.479
from my view, that's a testament
to just how dominant he's been in his

39
00:02:21.599 --> 00:02:23.840
six years as a full time starter. If you look at my top fifty,

40
00:02:24.120 --> 00:02:28.800
really the only other quarterback to make
the top fifty who had a sample

41
00:02:28.840 --> 00:02:30.800
size as small as Mahomes as Andrew
Luck, who I put all the way

42
00:02:30.840 --> 00:02:36.280
down at thirty nine. So if
we're talking prime for prime, you could

43
00:02:36.319 --> 00:02:39.439
make a very strong argument that Patrick
Mahomes as a top five all time quarterback.

44
00:02:39.759 --> 00:02:43.840
But given the reality that he's only
played six seasons as a full time

45
00:02:43.879 --> 00:02:46.960
starter, I feel comfortable having him
at number thirteen. Well, go ahead,

46
00:02:47.199 --> 00:02:52.439
right, I just want to follow
up because I understand the way that

47
00:02:52.520 --> 00:02:58.000
you've kind of surmised this list.
Well, considering the fact that Patrick Mahomes

48
00:02:58.080 --> 00:03:01.400
is only twenty eight years old,
and you look at what he's done from

49
00:03:01.400 --> 00:03:07.680
a statistical standpoint, the impact owned
the game and the fact that he just

50
00:03:07.800 --> 00:03:14.000
won his third title shouldn't that count
for something. It certainly does, and

51
00:03:14.039 --> 00:03:16.960
again that's the reason why I have
him as high as thirteenth all time.

52
00:03:17.000 --> 00:03:21.120
I've had a lot of pushback from
folks who feel that it's way too high

53
00:03:21.360 --> 00:03:23.879
to pet a guy who's only played
six seasons in the league. So,

54
00:03:23.280 --> 00:03:27.039
you know, like I said,
if we're talking about who has been the

55
00:03:27.080 --> 00:03:30.240
best at the peak of their power, Patrick is absolutely part of that conversation.

56
00:03:30.560 --> 00:03:34.000
But if you look at the other
guys that I have in my top

57
00:03:34.039 --> 00:03:38.360
fifteen, in my top twenty,
we're comparing him with other Hall of famers

58
00:03:38.520 --> 00:03:42.680
who sustained success for a much longer
period of time. Well, you also

59
00:03:42.759 --> 00:03:45.319
you did have some other small sample
sized guys in here, did you mentioned?

60
00:03:45.319 --> 00:03:47.080
I mean, obviously you have.
You have Lamar Jackson's the forty seventh

61
00:03:47.080 --> 00:03:50.919
best quarterback of all time, right
behind Josh Allen at forty six. I

62
00:03:50.919 --> 00:03:53.639
mean, those are some pretty small
sample sizes as well. They sure are,

63
00:03:53.719 --> 00:04:00.360
but they're definitely distant from the homes
with a somewhat similar sample size of

64
00:04:00.520 --> 00:04:03.639
total games played. So it is
my view that Patrick Mahomes is not just

65
00:04:03.759 --> 00:04:08.000
the best quarterback in the NFL today. I believe he's the best quarterback in

66
00:04:08.039 --> 00:04:11.879
the NFL today, and I'm not
sold that there's anybody who's a close second.

67
00:04:12.199 --> 00:04:15.400
You can make arguments for Lamar and
Josh Allen at this point in time.

68
00:04:15.479 --> 00:04:18.879
So given the sample size of those
three guys, I think having Mahomes

69
00:04:18.920 --> 00:04:23.959
as high as thirteenth all time compared
to the other guys Josh and Lamar at

70
00:04:23.959 --> 00:04:26.839
forty six and forty seven, again, it's a testament to just how dominant

71
00:04:26.920 --> 00:04:30.079
Mahomes has been all right now,
this is one that really gets me.

72
00:04:30.720 --> 00:04:34.600
At fifteen, you have John Elway. And when I look at some of

73
00:04:34.639 --> 00:04:40.160
the other quarterbacks that are ahead of
John Elway, I can understand a Peyton

74
00:04:40.240 --> 00:04:45.600
Manning. I don't understand Drew Brees, a Dan Marino and even an Aaron

75
00:04:45.680 --> 00:04:49.199
Rodgers. Based on and maybe my
metrics are a little different from yours,

76
00:04:49.519 --> 00:04:54.519
based on, once again, always
impact on the game, the idea of

77
00:04:54.600 --> 00:04:59.040
gone to going to multiple Super Bowls, being a back to back Super Bowl

78
00:04:59.120 --> 00:05:03.879
champ. So what falls in line
with this criteria of your list? So

79
00:05:03.920 --> 00:05:06.879
if you look at the way that
John played from when he was a rookie

80
00:05:06.920 --> 00:05:11.560
in eighty three. All the way
through eighty nine, his statistics as far

81
00:05:11.600 --> 00:05:15.319
as efficiency were around league average.
He really picked up steam after Mike Shanahan

82
00:05:15.399 --> 00:05:18.959
joined in the nineteen nineties. And
if you look again at any of the

83
00:05:19.040 --> 00:05:25.199
quarterbacks in my top fifteen, nobody
had the efficiency issues that John had,

84
00:05:25.439 --> 00:05:28.120
And I feel that a lot of
that is a product of the limitations of

85
00:05:28.160 --> 00:05:31.120
coaching and roster support during the first
half of his career. But if you

86
00:05:31.160 --> 00:05:33.959
look at all of the guys that
I've listed ahead of oh way, most

87
00:05:34.000 --> 00:05:39.959
of them had higher peaks and certainly
much much higher overall level of efficiency.

88
00:05:40.920 --> 00:05:44.000
Interesting to me or maybe only to
me, I don't know. You have

89
00:05:44.079 --> 00:05:46.879
Russell Wilson twenty first on this list, the twenty first best quarterback of all

90
00:05:47.000 --> 00:05:54.439
time in the NFL. I'm very
comfortable putting Russell Wilson that high when you

91
00:05:54.480 --> 00:05:59.639
look at how statistically dominant really he's
been with the exception of the twenty twenty

92
00:05:59.680 --> 00:06:01.480
two, I mean, he just
put together again. If the floor for

93
00:06:01.560 --> 00:06:06.399
Russell Wilson is his time in Denver, certainly last year wasn't very pretty,

94
00:06:06.439 --> 00:06:09.839
but if you look at what he
did this year. He was arguably a

95
00:06:09.920 --> 00:06:14.079
top eight statistical quarterback, playing in
the system that was not tailored to his

96
00:06:14.120 --> 00:06:17.000
strength and also having to carry the
load of a defense that ranks towards the

97
00:06:17.000 --> 00:06:20.240
bottom of league. What he was
able to do in a year by year

98
00:06:20.279 --> 00:06:26.399
basis during his time in Seattle,
particularly from twenty fifteen to twenty twenty,

99
00:06:26.759 --> 00:06:30.879
was so dominant I feel comfortable putting
him as high as twenty first on the

100
00:06:30.879 --> 00:06:33.199
all time list. So, of
course, after that statement, Ryan,

101
00:06:33.240 --> 00:06:38.360
I can't help but ask this question, all the Broncos making a mistake by

102
00:06:38.480 --> 00:06:43.279
not keeping Russell Wilson as their quarterback? In my opinion, yes, but

103
00:06:43.639 --> 00:06:46.639
I feel that there's no way around
it. And as much as I'd like

104
00:06:46.680 --> 00:06:48.800
to say that there's hope that he's
going to restructure his contract and him and

105
00:06:48.839 --> 00:06:53.079
Sean will find a way to see
eye to eye, I don't see that

106
00:06:53.240 --> 00:06:56.600
happening. Given the cost of what
it's going to take to let him go,

107
00:06:57.079 --> 00:07:00.680
I'm not confident the Broncos are going
to find anybody in free agency or

108
00:07:00.720 --> 00:07:03.360
the draft who can play at a
level comparable to the way that Russell played

109
00:07:03.360 --> 00:07:08.360
in twenty twenty three. So personally, I absolutely feel they make a mistake.

110
00:07:08.839 --> 00:07:11.399
One of the names on this list
is a name that did. A

111
00:07:11.399 --> 00:07:16.639
lot of people may not be as
familiar with as perhaps they should be.

112
00:07:16.720 --> 00:07:21.480
But Roman Gabriel at forty nine,
what specifically puts him at that and what

113
00:07:21.759 --> 00:07:27.800
measurements and statist allow him to be
that high? Sure so, Roman was

114
00:07:27.879 --> 00:07:30.839
one of the more dominant quarterbacks in
the mid nineteen sixties, which is one

115
00:07:30.879 --> 00:07:35.560
of the toughest eras of defensive football
ever played. He held and I don't

116
00:07:35.600 --> 00:07:39.120
know the number off the top of
my head, but he held the record

117
00:07:39.399 --> 00:07:44.600
for the most consecutive starts during his
run in the mid to late nineteen sixties.

118
00:07:44.680 --> 00:07:47.439
He's also one of the few quarterbacks
in NFL history to lead the NFL

119
00:07:47.480 --> 00:07:50.720
in touchdown passes with two different teams. He did it with the Rams,

120
00:07:50.720 --> 00:07:54.680
he did it with the Eagles.
Peyton Manning did it with the Colts and

121
00:07:54.720 --> 00:07:58.519
with the Broncos. Tom Brady did
it with the Patriots and with the Buccaneers.

122
00:07:58.680 --> 00:08:03.439
That's putting him in rarefied Speaking of
rarefied era, we saw a young

123
00:08:03.519 --> 00:08:09.399
rookie quarterback take the league by storm
and C. J. Stroud. If

124
00:08:09.639 --> 00:08:13.519
Stroud continues on the same trajectory that
he's on right now after year one.

125
00:08:15.360 --> 00:08:18.480
Do you think there's a possibility,
based on your metrics and evaluation, that

126
00:08:18.519 --> 00:08:24.800
he someday makes this list? He
absolutely can. He already put together one

127
00:08:24.839 --> 00:08:28.480
of the most dominant rookie passing seasons
in the history of the NFL. And

128
00:08:28.519 --> 00:08:31.159
you can look back to what Charlie
Connery did with the New York Giants in

129
00:08:31.159 --> 00:08:35.320
the late nineteen forties. You can
look back to what Dan Marino did in

130
00:08:35.399 --> 00:08:39.320
nineteen eighty three with the Miami Dolphins. You can look back to what Andrew

131
00:08:39.600 --> 00:08:43.639
Russell Wilson RG three did in twenty
twelve. But what CJ put together as

132
00:08:43.679 --> 00:08:48.799
far as a rookie season and also
elevating a Houston Texans team that hasn't been

133
00:08:48.840 --> 00:08:52.039
competitive for a while and to be
that dominant over the course of the entire

134
00:08:52.120 --> 00:08:56.200
season when he was active, He
absolutely has a realistic shot at one day

135
00:08:56.200 --> 00:09:01.240
making this list. What specific statistic
do you think is an indicator of greatness?

136
00:09:01.320 --> 00:09:03.960
Is there one that can be boiled
down to is it a collective?

137
00:09:05.080 --> 00:09:09.559
Is a is it a value you
know, maybe above the replacement? How

138
00:09:09.559 --> 00:09:13.320
many standard deviations from the means someone
is? How far like, how do

139
00:09:13.399 --> 00:09:18.480
you what specific statistics because you have
multiple eras of football, what specific statistic

140
00:09:18.559 --> 00:09:22.200
can you can you I don't want
to say be super reductive and boil it

141
00:09:22.240 --> 00:09:26.159
down to but is there something that
jumps out right away that you look at

142
00:09:26.240 --> 00:09:30.960
right off the bat. I think
a great standard statistical measure is adjusted net

143
00:09:31.039 --> 00:09:33.200
yards per attempt, and that factors
in yards per path in the attempt,

144
00:09:33.519 --> 00:09:39.440
touchdown passes, interceptions, and sacks
taken. So one of the numbers that

145
00:09:39.480 --> 00:09:41.759
I put together before coming on the
shows, and I just to kind of

146
00:09:41.840 --> 00:09:46.360
rope it into the discussion that we
may have about who's the greatest quarterback of

147
00:09:46.399 --> 00:09:50.639
all time. If you look at
the number of times a quarterback has finished

148
00:09:50.679 --> 00:09:54.799
in the top three and adjusted net
yards per attempt, Peyton Manning did so

149
00:09:54.080 --> 00:09:58.919
eight times, Tom Brady did so
five times, Mahomes has already done so

150
00:09:58.039 --> 00:10:03.120
four times, Joe Montana did so
three times. That's a good standard statistical

151
00:10:03.159 --> 00:10:07.440
measure as you're looking to incorporate a
lot of the passes of what a quarterback

152
00:10:07.480 --> 00:10:11.440
does well. It's again talking with
Ryan Michael at the Ryan Michael on Twitter

153
00:10:11.519 --> 00:10:16.559
Pro Football Hall of Fame contributor and
we enjoy, you know, having you

154
00:10:16.600 --> 00:10:18.639
on the show. There were some
quarterbacks left off this list. What was

155
00:10:18.679 --> 00:10:22.600
the when you look at, you
know, your top fifty and you look

156
00:10:22.639 --> 00:10:24.440
at who didn't make it, who
jumps out at you? Who's a person

157
00:10:24.480 --> 00:10:28.080
You're like, wow? They just
when I put all this together, who

158
00:10:28.200 --> 00:10:31.720
didn't make this list? That you
felt like, maybe in your gut without

159
00:10:31.720 --> 00:10:35.039
the stats, should have you know. There were some very close calls,

160
00:10:35.039 --> 00:10:37.919
and I know a lot of people
are except that Eli Manning didn't make the

161
00:10:37.960 --> 00:10:43.639
top fifty. Given where he ranked
statistically in terms of volume, completions,

162
00:10:43.679 --> 00:10:46.919
passing yards, touchdown pass at the
time of his retirement, and having two

163
00:10:46.919 --> 00:10:50.200
Super Bowl wins over Bill Belichick Tom
Brady in the New England Patriots. His

164
00:10:50.320 --> 00:10:54.919
durability was amongst the best we've ever
seen at the position, but his level

165
00:10:54.960 --> 00:10:58.559
of efficiency over the sample size of
a very lengthy career, I just couldn't

166
00:10:58.559 --> 00:11:03.440
possibly put him in the top fifty
given what the guys who made the top

167
00:11:03.480 --> 00:11:07.720
fifty were able to do on the
football field from an efficiency standpoint. With

168
00:11:07.200 --> 00:11:15.080
the draft evaluations underway for the twenty
twenty four draft prospects, I can't help

169
00:11:15.120 --> 00:11:18.279
but ask the question as to up
to this point. If you were to,

170
00:11:18.720 --> 00:11:24.200
let's just say, brank quarterback prospects
from the past, how would you

171
00:11:24.480 --> 00:11:28.159
rank them? Or better? Better
yet, let me let me do this,

172
00:11:28.720 --> 00:11:33.639
what would be in your top five
as far as quarterback prospects. Well,

173
00:11:33.720 --> 00:11:39.039
Caleb Williams is definitely part of the
discussion amongst the greatest college football quarterback

174
00:11:39.080 --> 00:11:43.000
prospects of all time. So the
names that you will often hear said would

175
00:11:43.039 --> 00:11:46.639
be John l Way coming in in
nineteen eighty three, Peyton Manning coming in

176
00:11:46.639 --> 00:11:50.039
in ninety eight, Andrew Love coming
in in twenty twelve, and Trevor Lawrence,

177
00:11:50.039 --> 00:11:54.720
who is, in my opinion,
the greatest college prospect to ever play

178
00:11:54.759 --> 00:11:58.639
the quarterback position, coming in in
twenty twenty one. You can put Caleb

179
00:11:58.639 --> 00:12:01.879
Williams right in there after those guys, although I'm not sold that he's on

180
00:12:03.080 --> 00:12:07.360
quite the same level as the first
four names I mentioned. Well, Ryan,

181
00:12:07.399 --> 00:12:11.440
we really appreciate you taking some time
tonight. You guys want to check

182
00:12:11.480 --> 00:12:13.360
that out and uh and I know
there's some spirited discussion on Twitter. I'll

183
00:12:13.440 --> 00:12:18.480
let the trolls get you down,
but I always enjoy Ryan's opinions even if

184
00:12:18.559 --> 00:12:20.240
I if I don't agree with him. They're well reasoned, uh and and

185
00:12:20.320 --> 00:12:24.639
he has statistical basis for for having
them, so there's uh, there's always

186
00:12:24.639 --> 00:12:26.480
a legitimate debate to be had.
Ryan, We always enjoy having you and

187
00:12:26.519 --> 00:12:30.759
we'll have you on again soon.
Sounds good. Appreciate your time. That

188
00:12:30.879 --> 00:12:33.600
Nick have a great name. Absolutely
take care, Ryan Michael at the Ryan

189
00:12:33.639 --> 00:12:33.440
Michael on Twitter