Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

[img width=307.992 height=500]https://i.imgur.com/ZD1kOx7.png[/img]

So Bama and Miami won the NC the year they first reached #1.

WHY?

yeah, but I REALLY didn't like THAT one 

all QBs

I think a running back "stands a chance", but it usually isn't high.  The days when a running back can carry an entire team to a lofty season is pretty much history.

A Qb handles the ball on almost every play and is THE most important position.  A team won't do well these days without a very competent QB.  And teams that do well get on TV a lot, and their feature QB gets "featured" a lot.  One of them usually will make some spectacular looking plays in some key games ...

An RB MIGHT be in the mix if no QB looks all that relevant.

a WR/returner should be in the mix

as should a DE or DT or LB

it's the most outstanding player

not the guy that handles the ball the best
not the most TDs
not the best leader
not the most valuable

QBs are usually not the best football player on their own team
they have arm talent - other than that not exceptional athletes 

I think the dual purpose QBs might be the best overall athlete at times, think Mike Vick, and a few others of his ilk.

I was watching the Braves game last night and the announcers talked about the pitcher who played SS in college, and at some point asked to have a shot at pitching.  They said he would not have been drafted as a SS.  

Marquis Grissom pitched in college and was moved to the outfield at some point, good move for him.  The pitchers I know pretty well are/were really good athletes, I suspect most college QBs are pretty good athletes overall, but the "best athlete" in a team might be a safety often as not.  Wide receiver, MLB, RB ...