Who Drives NFL Passing Success? The QB or the WR?
Published by Jeff Given on April 22, 2009
Article Source: Bleacher Report - Chicago Bears
In the wake of the Chicago Bears’ landmark trade for QB Jay Cutler, many media pundits—including a number of members of the Chicago print media—have cried, “It doesn’t matter—he still has no wide receivers to throw to!” Many Denver Bronco enthusiasts have made statements in a similar vein, amounting to, “Cutler is a crybaby and he was made by his receivers, Marshall and Royal!”
It’s the re-packaged age-old debate about the chicken or the egg—which comes first? Do you need a strong QB to have passing success, and can that QB make the wide receivers better, or do you have to have good wide receivers regardless of the level of talent of the QB?
There’s no way to definitively answer that question—although the passing performance of the 2009 versions of the Chicago Bears and Denver Broncos will be as close to a perfect laboratory for answering this question as you will ever find.
For those impatient folks who want to get an idea of what will happen this year, looking at some history can be instructive. Specifically, when much of the personnel remains the same, but there is a significant quarterback change, what happens to the performance of the receivers? Do they perform the same, or are they affected? You would (of course) expect some changes, but are they significant or minor?
Let’s look at some evidence:
In 1979, Roger Staubach retired, leaving Danny White at the helm. Now, Danny White was no slouch—he threw for almost the same number of yards in his career as Staubach did (a bit over 20,000). Still, Roger Staubach is an immortal, and Danny White is a historical footnote.
Drew Pearson would probably agree—his performance deteriorated from 55 catches, 1,026 yards, and eight TDs in 1979 to 43-568-6. Not awful numbers, of course. Tony Hill had no drop-off from 1979-1980, but, while still in the prime of his career, he also did not put up the same types of seasons post-1980.
For a couple of clearer examples, let’s look at the Miami Dolphins—pre-Marino, during Marino, and post-Marino (Note to haters: I am not saying Cutler is Marino).
Prior to Dan Marino’s arrival, the Dolphin offense was on the decline. Perhaps no player exemplified this more than Nat Moore, who had been a strong receiver in the late 1970s for the Dolphins, but whose performance had been in steady decline since then. Specifically:
- 1979: 840 yards, six TDs
- 1980: 564 yards, seven TDs
- 1981: 452 yards, two TDs
- 1982: 82 yards, one TD (strike-shortened season + some injuries)
One would think that Nat was done—toast, it was over. However, look at Moore’s stats once Marino showed up—and yes, the Dolphins started throwing it all over the field once Marino arrived, so everyone benefited, but there’s a reason for that strategic change. After all, Shula had been run-first just about his entire career until then…but in any event, Nat was apparently happy to see Dan Marino come to town:
- 1983: 558 yards, six TDs
- 1984: 573 yards, six TDs
- 1985: 701 yards, seven TDs
- 1986: 431 yards, seven TDs
Nat then retired to home and hearth.
On the flipside, we have The Curious Case of Oronde Gadsden. There’s no need to go into his specific statistics during and post-Marino—he was a young, productive receiver when Marino played. Once Marino retired, he dropped off the face of the earth.
On a grander scale, you can look at the offensive rankings of a variety of teams and see the difference even more clearly. For example, when Dallas was stable at the QB position, they had offenses that were always in the top half of the league, usually in the top five, and No. 1 many times.
Dallas had the benefit of the Meredith-Staubach-White-Aikman progression and having 40 years of solid QB play—mostly under Tom Landry, yes, but other coaches as well. Only since Tony Romo began starting has the Cowboy offense returned to prominence (and you can look at the Quincy Carter era to see what happened to Cowboy passing and offense after Aikman’s departure, although with personnel changes, it’s not that instructive).
What if you have no chickens or eggs, a.k.a the History of the Chicago Bears’ Passing Game?
Beyond all of this, to get an idea of the Bear mindset behind this trade, remember that many other commentators said, “Cutler is their best quarterback since Sid Luckman.” Well, Sid Luckman has thrown for more yards than any QB in Bears history—and he hasn’t played for 60 years.
He threw for 14,686 yards in his career with the Bears. To give you an idea of the organizational frustration around passing, that is the lowest total for a yardage passing leader for any NFL team in history except for the Houston Texans, who have only been in existence since 2002—and whose career passing leader, David Carr, had just a bit less with the Texans than Luckman has with the Bears—and the Ravens, who have technically not existed for much longer, either, and even Kyle Boller came close to 10,000 yards with them.
In other words, the QB play of the Bears has, without question, been the most consistently bad of any franchise ever in the history of the NFL. What are two No. 1 draft picks in comparison to the goal of correcting that hideousness?
The Bears have had a QB throw for 3,000 yards only five times. Only once in the Bears’ 89 seasons has one QB thrown in excess of 3,200 yards for the year—Erik Kramer in 1995. That’s 200 yards a game, folks.
We know the Bears have not had good QBs on their teams for decades. We also know they have had some good receivers during that same period.
As one of those receivers, Muhsin Muhammad, has said, “Chicago is where receivers go to die.” Why would that be? Because they have not had any excellence at QB, that’s why.
In my opinion, looking at historical evidence indicates to me that it’s the chicken, not the egg, that is in charge. Without a good QB, WRs cannot succeed, and good ones become mediocre. This is not universal, but a fair interpretation of the data. So beware, Brandon Marshall and (especially) Eddie Royal—young receivers who rose quickly to NFL prominence—you may have a rude surprise in store.
Meanwhile, I believe that Jerry Angelo thinks the same way, and that is why he made the Cutler trade. If Cutler can make the Bears passing game just as good as other teams, the trade has to be viewed as a success. Even so, fellow Bear fans, let’s hope Cutler takes our eggs and makes one hell of an omelet.
I think he will.
