Michigan State Football: Please stop the Connor Cook vs. Denard Robinson debate

A debate has surfaced on Twitter over the past few days and it’s honestly one of the bigger head-scratchers. Michigan State football’s Connor Cook or Michigan’s Denard Robinson, who was the better quarterback?

The debate all started over a tweet about every school’s best quarterback since 2000 and how they stack up with one another.

There were some questionable decisions in the ranking, such as Patrick Mahomes and Aaron Rodgers being listed far too low and Denard being listed surprisingly high.

Cook was ranked No. 27 while Denard came in at No. 24 ahead of the likes of Eli Manning, Rodgers, Mahomes, and Dak Prescott. This caused an immediate stir.

It’s not the most egregious ranking ever, but to think that Denard was a better quarterback than Cook is slightly ridiculous.

But obviously Michigan fans disagreed and attempted to argue that Denard was the better quarterback when the two were in college. Why? Because Denard was an elite runner and was on the cover of EA Sports NCAA Football 14. That’s it.

This debate is ridiculous because the two quarterbacks were great at different things and one saw much more success and fared much better in big games.

Michigan State football’s success was driven by Cook

Michigan fans might use the argument of “well, Michigan State had the better team which is why Cook was good” but let’s not get it twisted. Michigan State’s offense was the best it’s been in decades with Cook at the helm because he was an elite passer. His accuracy wasn’t the best because he took too many chances, but he could make all the throws downfield.

The offense didn’t change much at all from Andrew Maxwell the year before to Cook and yet it was much more effective with Connor under center.

Plus, Denard got worse every season and finished his career as Michigan’s backup quarterback while Cook was better as a senior than he was as a first-year starter and the only time he struggled in his career was when he had a shoulder injury before the Big Ten title game in 2015.

Denard was an elite runner and an average to slightly below-average passer who had 39 career interceptions to just 49 touchdown passes. His running ability was the reason he held onto the starting job for so long and why his inability to make downfield throws wasn’t a deal-breaker. He could run the offense so well because Rich Rodriguez wanted a mobile quarterback.

Cook was an elite passer and wasn’t mobile at all. He had the exact opposite strengths of Denard and just because he was a great passer and didn’t run doesn’t mean he’s any less effective than Robinson. You will never find anyone call a quarterback “great” or “elite” if they can’t throw the ball well downfield and look to run if their first option is covered.

Plus, did I mention how good Cook was in big games?

Against ranked teams, Cook averaged 262 yards with 15 touchdowns, 10 interceptions, five 300-yard games, and a 7-4 record. As for Denard, he averaged 165 passing yards per game with 12 touchdowns, 15 interceptions, zero 300-yard games, and a 2-8 record. If we’re going to be fair, he also rushed for 73 yards per game against those ranked teams with seven rushing scores.

So who would you take, a quarterback who averaged 238 total yards per game against ranked teams with 19 total touchdowns and 15 interceptions — not counting fumbles — and no 300-yard games who wins just 20 percent of those games or one who averages over 260 passing yards with a 300-yard performance half the time with 15 touchdowns and 10 interceptions who wins around 65 percent of the big ones?

If you chose Denard, you may want to re-evaluate.