Calvert28 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 6 hours ago, Iamcanadian said: Your joking right! Top 5 drafted QB's were drafted by teams that completely stunk and took a mauling as rookies, yet the vast bulk of them went on to be great franchise QB's because they were mentally very tough human beings. Carr simply wasn't strong mentally and acting like he failed because his supporting cast around him was weak, just does not cut it. The Texans and the Browns simply have not done much of a job in drafting solid QB's, their QB picks have just been full of failures due to bad drafting and not much else. Football is a very tough sport and you have to have real courage to play it. Most of us would not return to the field of play after starting for a couple of plays, because we are not used to the pain every pro football players suffers every game day. Concussions, broken limbs, torn ligaments etc. etc. etc.. yet most of them come back from these injuries and play again and QB's are no different. They are hit on practically every passing play whether they have a good OL or not, a good OL may cut down on the sacks, but QB's get hit over and over. There are many, many NFL QB's who play on teams that are rather weak, but their QB's just do not let it bother them. That is called mental toughess. Carr, simply did not have the capacity to take it and never really ever showed he had the talent to be a NFL franchise QB. Vast majority? lol http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2015/04/success_for_quarterbacks_picke.html That was done back in 2015. Not exactly the bulk of them. Not gonna bother with the rest of the post. Even the first overall's have only had like a 50-50 record with their win-loss records. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdrawkcab321 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 I'm of the opinion that you only get better with actually playing time. Not watching. Most of the guys who sat had good QBs in front of them. You shouldn't sit someone for the sake of sitting them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iamcanadian Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 14 hours ago, Calvert28 said: Vast majority? lol http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2015/04/success_for_quarterbacks_picke.html That was done back in 2015. Not exactly the bulk of them. Not gonna bother with the rest of the post. Even the first overall's have only had like a 50-50 record with their win-loss records. Going back to 2015 is hardly an example for your argument. QB's like Peyton and Eli had terrible rookie years, but went on to be great franchise QB's. It takes about 3 years of learning before an OC will completely turn his QB free to attack with everything in the book, until then, offenses are limited by how far the QB has advanced in learning his position. Come back in 5 years and we will see how much top 5 drafted QB's have accomplished. As for non top 10 QB's, the success rate for this group is around 6%, so including them in these stats, really just warps the reality of the position. We all know that even top 10 drafted QB's have a high failure rate, but the success rate is far higher than 6% which is why teams try to solve the QB position with top 10 picks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 4 hours ago, Iamcanadian said: Going back to 2015 is hardly an example for your argument. QB's like Peyton and Eli had terrible rookie years, but went on to be great franchise QB's. It takes about 3 years of learning before an OC will completely turn his QB free to attack with everything in the book, until then, offenses are limited by how far the QB has advanced in learning his position. Come back in 5 years and we will see how much top 5 drafted QB's have accomplished. As for non top 10 QB's, the success rate for this group is around 6%, so including them in these stats, really just warps the reality of the position. We all know that even top 10 drafted QB's have a high failure rate, but the success rate is far higher than 6% which is why teams try to solve the QB position with top 10 picks. Did you even read the article? Seriously go effin read it then come back and have a discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louis Friend Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Calvert28 said: Did you even read the article? Seriously go effin read it then come back and have a discussion. I read it, they are basing their entire argument on team success or lack there of. No mention of actual talent the QB possesses. That article is trash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp6488 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 9 minutes ago, Louis Friend said: I read it, they are basing their entire argument on team success or lack there of. No mention of actual talent the QB possesses. That article is trash. Not to mention that while "the vast majority" of 1st round picks may not work out-just accepting the premise that it's a 50/50 proposition-that doesn't change the fact that the success rate is WAY higher at the top of the draft than later. I feel like that shouldn't be such a controversial statement to rational folks... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 15 minutes ago, Louis Friend said: I read it, they are basing their entire argument on team success or lack there of. No mention of actual talent the QB possesses. That article is trash. They are first round freaking picks. The talent should speak for itself for both the talent of the actual QB and the team that he is going to, if its a Top 5 pick, chances are the team isn't good. The argument he had is that the vast majority of 1st round QB's have sustained success. Read his comment, then the article. It debunked his argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calvert28 Posted September 17, 2017 Share Posted September 17, 2017 8 minutes ago, sp6488 said: Not to mention that while "the vast majority" of 1st round picks may not work out-just accepting the premise that it's a 50/50 proposition-that doesn't change the fact that the success rate is WAY higher at the top of the draft than later. I feel like that shouldn't be such a controversial statement to rational folks... But to say the vast majority? Everybody whos ever followed the draft shouldn't even have to look for an article to know that's not true. It wouldn't be such a huge decision come draft time if it was that easy to find a franchise QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 9 hours ago, Iamcanadian said: Going back to 2015 is hardly an example for your argument. QB's like Peyton and Eli had terrible rookie years, but went on to be great franchise QB's. It takes about 3 years of learning before an OC will completely turn his QB free to attack with everything in the book, until then, offenses are limited by how far the QB has advanced in learning his position. Come back in 5 years and we will see how much top 5 drafted QB's have accomplished. As for non top 10 QB's, the success rate for this group is around 6%, so including them in these stats, really just warps the reality of the position. We all know that even top 10 drafted QB's have a high failure rate, but the success rate is far higher than 6% which is why teams try to solve the QB position with top 10 picks. Yeah, it's really obvious you just didn't click the link here. The article was written in 2015. It isn't about QBs drafted since 2015. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emaw1979 Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 I think it helps but it's more than just sitting. I think the organization stability has a huge part of a QB success. From the owner down to the coaching staff to the team around him. So many rookie QB's have had terrible teams, bad coaching staffs and multiple coaching staffs. Multiple schemes. etc. They are rushed and expected not only to learn the position but succeed right away. They are set up for failure from the beginning. That's why I think Mahomes has by far the best chance of success. He is sitting, which I actually care the least about, but I do think it does help in the right situation. But this gives him a chance to learn the playbook, the NFL life, his teammates all without being rushed. He is running the scout team in practice so this gives him practice reps. He is on a very good team with an surprisingly explosive offense that has a good running game, good oline and weapons at receiver and TE. His coaching staff is in the upper team of coaches in the NFL with a history of developing QB's....and Reid and the scheme aren't going anywhere anytime soon. All this being said, I think you could put any of the QB's drafted early and they would find success in this situation. Trubisky and Watson may lose their coaching staff after this year and have to learn a new system. Watson has a bad line and after the first game, I was thinking that David Carr's season record of getting sacked was in jeopardy. He's looked pretty bad to be honest. Kizer shouldn't be starting but he probably has a better situation, with his team and coaching staff than Chicago and Houston have...shockingly. I like Hue Jackson...and Andy Dalton clearly misses him. It's Cleveland so who knows if they will fire their HC, even if he's probably the best coach they've had in awhile. It's still a dysfunctional organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AkronsWitness Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 Has sitting a rookie QB prospect outside since Aaron Rodgers actually turned out to work? Kirk Cousins maybe? Essentially, there are far more examples of just playing a good young QB prospect working out (Carr, Mariota, Wentz, Goff, Winston) than going with the bench him for his rookie year actually working. All those QBs I mentioned were thrown in there as rookies, took their lumps and came back a improved QB in year two. I think teams are so obsessed with finding the next Aaron Rodgers situation that it almost hurts them and wastes a year of on the job training development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpanosPayYourRent Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 On 9/12/2017 at 8:30 PM, patriotsheatyan said: I find it interesting that Brady, Brees, Rodgers, Rivers, and Romo were all backups for at least their first year. That is five of the top seven best QBs of the last decade. Yes it makes sure they don't jump in and get started. It makes them want to work for it and learn from mentors, they will want to push themselves to the limits so they will not blow that one shot and one opportunity. Also how do I post on this board I'm new and I can't make a thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBURGE Posted September 18, 2017 Share Posted September 18, 2017 I don't think it really depends on the team's situation at all. IMO it depends on the situation of the rookie. Mahomes should sit. He needs substantial work on his footwork and motion. Do I think it would be detrimental for him to play now? No. Either way he is going to get what he needs. He can learn to develop with Reid and their QB coach, or he learns with 1st team reps and game time. Alex Smith wouldn't develop for crap if he sat, because the offense he played in and the direction of the team changed how many times? Every year? That is not what success looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patriotsheatyan Posted September 18, 2017 Author Share Posted September 18, 2017 3 hours ago, AkronsWitness said: Essentially, there are far more examples of just playing a good young QB prospect working out (Carr, Mariota, Wentz, Goff, Winston) than going with the bench him for his rookie year actually working. What has this group accomplished? Carr has proven himself to be good but not elite yet, Mariota has shown he can play but little more, and other three have done nothing yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.