Pastor Dillon Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 6 hours ago, EliteTexan80 said: It's not about who is suited for what - we've seen athlete QBs thrown behind bad OLs several times, and each time, they got murdered and usually never recovered. Can you stop just looking at this season and see this as a 5-10 year investment? Today proved he's nowhere near ready. He made some bad decisions and looked every part the rookie back there. Why rush him in? Did we not learn the first time with Carr? Mind you - I am pro Watson, but you start him now, you're letting him walk in four years. This is crazy. Teams have been starting rookies from week 1 for years with a ton of success on a lot worse teams than we have, with guys that played a lot less big time college football. Kiser is starting at QB for the Browns. The guy couldn't hold down the job for Notre Dame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKTexans Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 6 minutes ago, Pastor Dillon said: Kiser is starting at QB for the Browns. The guy couldn't hold down the job for Notre Dame. Are you really using a Browns QB as an argument? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted August 27, 2017 Author Share Posted August 27, 2017 47 minutes ago, Pastor Dillon said: This is crazy. Teams have been starting rookies from week 1 for years with a ton of success on a lot worse teams than we have, with guys that played a lot less big time college football. Kiser is starting at QB for the Browns. The guy couldn't hold down the job for Notre Dame. Teams have also been starting rookies and watching them bust out. I'd argue the bust rate is higher than the success rate, and I'd also argue that the success rate is directly correlated to the quality of the OL (you REALLY think Dak does well behind a shoddy OL?) You bring up Kizer and the Browns, but fail to mention that the Browns OL is vastly superior to ours at every single spot, even with Duane Brown in the lineup. Our offensive line might be the worst in the NFL. You don't risk a QB worth keeping behind it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UKTexans Posted August 27, 2017 Share Posted August 27, 2017 11 minutes ago, EliteTexan80 said: I'd argue the bust rate is higher than the success rate, Isn't this an actual fact? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted August 27, 2017 Author Share Posted August 27, 2017 Just now, texans_uk said: Isn't this an actual fact? I don't have numbers to quantify it, but I think it's pretty well understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted August 28, 2017 Share Posted August 28, 2017 I argue this point. Look at the last 5 drafts, and while the jury is still obviously not out, there seems to be a connection between week 1 starter and success 2016 Goff and Lynch werent week 1 starters and look terrible Wentz week 1 starter looks like franchise QB 2015 Winston and Mariota week 1 starters, look like Franchise QBs 2014 Bortles and Manziel not week 1 starters, look terrible Bridgewater wasnt week 1 starter either but his career is kind of in a mess right now 2013 EJ Manuel wasn't week 1 starter, sucks 2012 Luck, Griffin, Tannehill were all week 1 starters and were going to be franchise guys but injuries have robbed them Weeden was a week 1 starter that busted, but the guy was a 28 year old rookie so back in the last 5 drafts the only round 1 complete busts have been guys that didnt start week 1. There is no evidence that starting a guy week 1 as a rookie will harm them in the long run, it seems that 1st round QBs who cant win the job as rookies have a higher likeliness of busting. If you go to 2011 draft you see it with Newton being a franchise guy starting week 1 and Locker sitting a year and busting out, Ponder and Gabbert werent week 1 starters and busted out 2010 Bradford week 1 starter, still starting in the league....Tebow wasnt a week 1 starter and busted out 2009 Stafford week 1 starter, still going strong...Josh Freeman wasnt and busted out....Mark Sanchez is an exception, as he started week 1 and actually lead the team to the AFC championship game as a rookie, but ultimately busted out 2008 Matt Ryan and Joe Flacco week 1 starters and both going strong 2007 Russel and Quinn and that Famous Pastor Dillon vs AP_Texans debate neither were week 1 starters and both busted out so bottom line is that History shows us that Watson is more likely to bust out of the league for not being week 1 starter than he would if he had won the job. and almost all the guys on this list were on terrible teams, we have a good team with a great D that would have set him up for success. Now maybe Tom Savage is going to be Tom Brady and we are going to be awesome, that would be great, but as for Watson, history is not on his side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 Wow. Your correlation vs causation guage is way off. 18 hours ago, Pastor Dillon said: so bottom line is that History shows us that Watson is more likely to bust out of the league for not being week 1 starter than he would if he had won the job That is not even remotely what you can take from the above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 6 hours ago, mse326 said: Wow. Your correlation vs causation guage is way off. That is not even remotely what you can take from the above. Feel free to point out the flaws in my point that QBs who aren't week 1 starters have a higher likelihood of busting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mse326 Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 You are assuming the cause of their busting is not starting week 1. You'd have to show that they wouldn't have busted if they started week 1. If you aren't arguing that it's the cause then you aren't actually making an even remotely relevant point. As for starting there is more than just the ability of the QB that makes that decision. Who are the other QBs on the team? How good is the rest of the team? Things like that. You also ignore that Rodgers didn't start week 1. Nor did Brady. Or Brees. Or Roethlisberger. Plenty of QBs have succeeded without starting week 1. Others have started week 1 and busted. EJ Manuel. RG III. Brandon Weeden. There's more there too. So aside from what you posted not proving what you wanted, you also cherry picked just to get that. I mean you give random excuses for why player X doesn't count. RGIII the funniest blaming it all on injuries. Manuel you just lied about. You also take bust to be only worst of the worst. Most people want more from a 1st round pick than what Flacco is. Or Bradford. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted August 29, 2017 Share Posted August 29, 2017 1 hour ago, mse326 said: You are assuming the cause of their busting is not starting week 1. You'd have to show that they wouldn't have busted if they started week 1. If you aren't arguing that it's the cause then you aren't actually making an even remotely relevant point. As for starting there is more than just the ability of the QB that makes that decision. Who are the other QBs on the team? How good is the rest of the team? Things like that. You also ignore that Rodgers didn't start week 1. Nor did Brady. Or Brees. Or Roethlisberger. Plenty of QBs have succeeded without starting week 1. Others have started week 1 and busted. EJ Manuel. RG III. Brandon Weeden. There's more there too. So aside from what you posted not proving what you wanted, you also cherry picked just to get that. I mean you give random excuses for why player X doesn't count. RGIII the funniest blaming it all on injuries. Manuel you just lied about. You also take bust to be only worst of the worst. Most people want more from a 1st round pick than what Flacco is. Or Bradford. You are right on Manuel, I had my facts wrong on that. As for RG3, he had a great rookie year and lead his team to the playoffs and was never the same after he suffered yet another knee injury. Beyond that hat I didn't cherry pick anything. I brought up every 1st round QB of the last 10 years. Looking at who busted out completely, who has been a solid NFL QB there is a statistical edge to those who start week 1 being a long term fit. There is also a higher rate of busts among those who weren't week 1 starters than those who were. The whole point of the post was to show that the statistics don't show 1st round picks are better off to sit week 1. If you go back more than a decade that trend changes but it's a different NFL now than the early 2000s when Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Palmer, Eli and those guys sat on the bench. As for Flacco, I think 32,000 yards by age 32 with a super bowl MVP is more than enough to say that he's exactly what you want in a 1st round QB. Bradford hasn't been great but he's not busted out of the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amazingandre Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Pastor Dillon said: You are right on Manuel, I had my facts wrong on that. As for RG3, he had a great rookie year and lead his team to the playoffs and was never the same after he suffered yet another knee injury. Beyond that hat I didn't cherry pick anything. I brought up every 1st round QB of the last 10 years. Looking at who busted out completely, who has been a solid NFL QB there is a statistical edge to those who start week 1 being a long term fit. There is also a higher rate of busts among those who weren't week 1 starters than those who were. The whole point of the post was to show that the statistics don't show 1st round picks are better off to sit week 1. If you go back more than a decade that trend changes but it's a different NFL now than the early 2000s when Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Palmer, Eli and those guys sat on the bench. As for Flacco, I think 32,000 yards by age 32 with a super bowl MVP is more than enough to say that he's exactly what you want in a 1st round QB. Bradford hasn't been great but he's not busted out of the league. And we would gladly take Bradford over anyone we've previously had lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted August 30, 2017 Author Share Posted August 30, 2017 26 minutes ago, amazingandre said: And we would gladly take Bradford over anyone we've previously had lol People say that until they actually HAVE Bradford. Ultimately, we want a Rodgers or a Ryan or a Stafford. Given the limited looks of Watson, he's not there - but could absolutely develop into that guy with some patience. I'll let Savage get romped on for a bit behind this OL and put Watson in only when Savage gets hurt (which is always on the table) or when the coaching staff determines Watson is ready. I'm not starting him for trivial purposes such as having a "more exciting" offense or worrying about his "rookie stats". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 9 minutes ago, EliteTexan80 said: People say that until they actually HAVE Bradford. Ultimately, we want a Rodgers or a Ryan or a Stafford. Given the limited looks of Watson, he's not there - but could absolutely develop into that guy with some patience. I'll let Savage get romped on for a bit behind this OL and put Watson in only when Savage gets hurt (which is always on the table) or when the coaching staff determines Watson is ready. I'm not starting him for trivial purposes such as having a "more exciting" offense or worrying about his "rookie stats". My point is that when you go with this plan it's puts more pressure on your young QB. Guys who are week 1 starters are told "you earned this, you are the guy, we know you are a rookie but we believe in you and are willing to take the good with the bad." guys who can't win the starting job are looked at by everyone in a different light. It's now "ok you weren't better than this guy but he's terrible so you better play better if we are going to make the switch." Its a totally different level of communication when a guy didnt didn't win the job and gets it's weeks later not because they earned it but because the other guy lost it. The long post I made clearly shows that trend over the last decade. Week 1 1st rounder starting QBs don't have the same pressure that guys who fail upward later in the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ET80 Posted August 30, 2017 Author Share Posted August 30, 2017 21 minutes ago, Pastor Dillon said: The long post I made clearly shows that trend over the last decade. Week 1 1st rounder starting QBs don't have the same pressure that guys who fail upward later in the season. Correlation does not equal causation. There's no way to assume the guys who failed WOULDN'T have failed as W1 starters. Conversely, can't assume the guys who succeeded wouldn't have succeeded if they were held back. 21 minutes ago, Pastor Dillon said: Guys who are week 1 starters are told "you earned this, you are the guy, we know you are a rookie but we believe in you and are willing to take the good with the bad." Here's the thing - he DIDN'T earn it. Even if this was an open competition, Savage was the better QB, going against 1st team defenses. Better completion rate, better YPA, more passing TDs. If this was a case where Watson was better, I'd be on your side. Truthfully, he wasn't close. 21 minutes ago, Pastor Dillon said: guys who can't win the starting job are looked at by everyone in a different light. It's now "ok you weren't better than this guy but he's terrible so you better play better if we are going to make the switch." Ultimately, these guys are professionals. If their mental game is so weak to where this impacts their preparation and work ethic, then they're destined to fail. 21 minutes ago, Pastor Dillon said: Its a totally different level of communication when a guy didnt didn't win the job and gets it's weeks later not because they earned it but because the other guy lost it. Nobody in NRG is a fool - Watson. Is. The. Future. Savage is the seat warmer while Watson gets better at the basics (because scheme or no scheme, he has GOT to get more consistent on his intermediate and deep ball accuracy). Once that is done, everyone in the building knows that it's DW4s job. McNair, Smith, O'Brien, Hopkins, Watt - the minute he's tightened up his accuracy, the team is his. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pastor Dillon Posted August 30, 2017 Share Posted August 30, 2017 Let's be honest, Watson wasn't given a chance to win the job. Our O-Line and WR are terrible, we all agree on that, and Watson was playing with the 2nd team most of the pre season. Really it all boils down to BOB sucking at everything he does. He's created a tough situation for Watson because he's made QB changes 3 years straight and so if he gives Watson a shot it's already gonna come with crazy pressure because of that. This whole pre season seems to point towards a 4-12 season in which Watson is thrown to the wolves to be a season savior instead of a rookie QB with room to make rookie mistakes then BOB can go coach where he belongs at southwest Missouri state northeastern and we can bring in a different coach with a different system to begin the process of further ruining Watsons development Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.