Are these incoming QBs better or worse?
When you get married they throw out that great line that says something about "for better or worse," and there's a similar credo when it comes to fans and high-profile recruits.
If you're a recruitnik and you've been drooling over a five-star prospect whom your team has been recruiting, once your coaching staff brings him on board you basically agree to be a fan of the blue-chipper "for better or worse."
But will your standout recruit be "better" or "worse" for your program than his predecessor?
I have the answer, and I'll begin with the top quarterbacks from the 2007 class.
Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame. As the nation's No. 1 player, this would be a no-brainer if it weren't for a guy named Brady Quinn. Brady Quinn put up some impressive numbers over his last two years at Notre Dame and has set the bar high for Jimmy Clausen. However, with a much more polished game coming out of high school and more years under Charlie Weis, Jimmy Clausen will be an upgrade. Better or worse? Better.
Ryan Mallett, Michigan. This is even tougher than the Jimmy Clausen-Brady Quinn situation. Ryan Mallett is expected to be the heir apparent to Chad Henne, who has been quite remarkable at Michigan in his career so far. Henne has thrown 45 touchdowns and 16 interceptions in the last two seasons with a 60 percent completion record. Henne will be gone after this season in Ann Arbor, which many feel will be his best under center. That's a lot to live up to. Better or worse? Worse.
Tyrod Taylor, Virginia Tech. This one is easy. Taylor will be a major upgrade over Sean Glennon or whoever wins the quarterback job for the Hokies this year. His ability to scramble and run the option if needed makes him much more dangerous than the current lot in Blacksburg. Better or worse? Better.
about that. Will he be better than last year's national championship quarterback? Doubtful. Can he be better than Tebow? Possible. So, final call, better or worse than Chris Leak? Worse.
Aaron Corp, Southern California. John David Booty's numbers are impressive -- 3,310 yards, 29 touchdowns against only nine interceptions and a 61.6 completion rate. But John David Booty lacks what Matt Leinart and Carson Palmer had in the past, the ability to see the whole field and make quick decisions. John David Booty locks in on his primary target too much and that's hard to correct. Aaron Corp is more athletic than John David Booty and can do more things in the Southern California offense, but he is very raw and needs to beat out Mark Sanchez, who is likely better than both. Better or worse? Worse.
See more at www.msnbc.msn.com
