It's unfair to judge a program's success by the performance of their quarterbacks in the NFL. The pro game and college games are so very different that any comparison between the two is inherently unfair. The development for a QB in the NFL takes so long, and depends on so many factors, that ascribing any of the successful qualities of a 30 year old starting QB to anything that happened when they were what, twenty years old?
It's borderline asinine, really, to even consider it. So what if Alabama wins without NFL talent at quarterback? Most teams win without NFL-quality starters behind center. Oklahoma had Jason White, LSU had Matts Flynn and Mauck, Florida won two titles with Tim Tebow, a quarterback who could not even consistently hit down markers with his passes in the NFL. Texas won a title with Vince Young, who turned into a shambles in the pros.
It just can't be done, even if you do things like point out that Alabama quarterbacks haven't won an NFL game since November 15th, 1987, when Jeff Rutledge lead the Giants to victory over the Eagles. It's a cheap trend, and an unfair one.
Why, it'd be unfair to just list even a selection of those quarterbacks who, despite their mediocrity or lack of playing time, had one victory since November 15th, 1987, and thus out-won the University of Alabama by themselves. That'd be unfair, cruel, stupid, and arbitrary, all in service of an anti-Tide agenda, a subpar sense of humor, or both. It'd just be the dumbest list anyone had ever complied.
[waits five minutes, clears throat]
Here are just ten of the quarterbacks who by themselves have one win as a starter in the NFL, which is more than all the quarterbacks who played for Alabama have since November 15th, 1987.
Like we said, it'd be dumb to do this!