1.26 - Jordan Love [QB; Utah State] - QB1

[incognito_man]

12 minutes ago, Smidgeon said:

Rodgers, Rivers, and Love are the only 1st Round QBs since a 9ers QB (in the early 90s?) to sit their first year. Everyone else started at least one and a vast majority several rookie games

It took me 10 seconds and google to determine this isn't remotely true, man.

[vegas492]

4 minutes ago, incognito_man said:

It took me 10 seconds and google to determine this isn't remotely true, man.

Jordan Love, Jake Locker, Brady Quinn, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Philip Rivers, J.P. Losman, Carson Palmer, Chad Pennington, and Daunte Culpepper comprise the list of quarterbacks that failed to start any games during their rookie seasons after being selected in the first round.Jul 10, 2022

[Smidgeon]

1 hour ago, vegas492 said:

Jordan Love, Jake Locker, Brady Quinn, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Philip Rivers, J.P. Losman, Carson Palmer, Chad Pennington, and Daunte Culpepper comprise the list of quarterbacks that failed to start any games during their rookie seasons after being selected in the first round.Jul 10, 2022

Okay. Found the post. I misremembered my original parameters: starting one game or less in the first two years. And I forgot about Chad Pennington. The 9ers QB was in 1997, so 25 years ago instead of 30.

 

https://forums.footballsfuture.com/topic/5962-random-packer-news-notes/?do=findComment&comment=4370824

Edited February 14, 2023 by Smidgeon

[Old Guy]

14 hours ago, vegas492 said:

Jordan Love, Jake Locker, Brady Quinn, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Philip Rivers, J.P. Losman, Carson Palmer, Chad Pennington, and Daunte Culpepper comprise the list of quarterbacks that failed to start any games during their rookie seasons after being selected in the first round.Jul 10, 2022

Five had a good career and 4 would be considered busts. Jordan Love will make it 6-4. 

[MacReady]

@Smidgeon, Mahomes sat his entire first year until he was given a start at the end… Once the Chiefs locked everything up.

It’s abundantly clear that quarterbacks benefit from sitting at least a year.

Now do the list of quarterbacks who didn’t sit and how hard they bust.

[Smidgeon]

1 hour ago, Outpost31 said:

@Smidgeon, Mahomes sat his entire first year until he was given a start at the end… Once the Chiefs locked everything up.

It’s abundantly clear that quarterbacks benefit from sitting at least a year.

Now do the list of quarterbacks who didn’t sit and how hard they bust.

Yeah. Once I went back to my original post (sorry for the misleading on just one year of sitting, Vegas and Incognito), I remembered why I chose two years. There's just so much noise in the data.  

I'll probably look at it later in a "immediate starter", "starter at least half games", "second year starter", and "sits for at least two years" [already done] breakdown, but that's going to take time.

I speculate the only reliable pattern is in the last group (6 of 9 drafted behind HOFers) anyway. 

[vegas492]

3 hours ago, Smidgeon said:

Yeah. Once I went back to my original post (sorry for the misleading on just one year of sitting, Vegas and Incognito), I remembered why I chose two years. There's just so much noise in the data.  

I'll probably look at it later in a "immediate starter", "starter at least half games", "second year starter", and "sits for at least two years" [already done] breakdown, but that's going to take time.

I speculate the only reliable pattern is in the last group (6 of 9 drafted behind HOFers) anyway. 

@Smidgeon Sorry, my post was not meant to contradict yours.  @incognito_man man made a reference to google, so I went there and just grabbed the first thing I saw.

I figured you were going a lot from memory, which is more fun than using google.  I thought you were pretty darned close with your statement.

[incognito_man]

19 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

@Smidgeon Sorry, my post was not meant to contradict yours.  @incognito_man man made a reference to google, so I went there and just grabbed the first thing I saw.

I figured you were going a lot from memory, which is more fun than using google.  I thought you were pretty darned close with your statement.

I'm a stickler about facts in our current societal climate. Intention is often difficult to assess, so I have a tendency to jump on factual errors when I noticed them.

I don't think @Smidgeondid anything intentionally, so I don't want to come off as a d!ck, but I do love me some verifiable facts.

[HokieHigh]

1 hour ago, incognito_man said:

I'm a stickler about facts in our current societal climate. Intention is often difficult to assess, so I have a tendency to jump on factual errors when I noticed them.

I don't think @Smidgeondid anything intentionally, so I don't want to come off as a d!ck, but I do love me some verifiable facts.

I would say being a d!ck is no way to get a 500 million dollar contract, but deshaun watson found a way. 

[MacReady]

17 minutes ago, HokieHigh said:

I would say being a d!ck is no way to get a 500 million dollar contract, but deshaun watson found a way. 

Not the **** reference you expect when referencing Watson.

[incognito_man]

2 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

Not the **** reference you expect when referencing Watson.

funny. that was literally the first thing that popped into my head as I read it. I even did a double take because I read it differently in the sentence the first time.

[Arthur Penske]

 

[packfanfb]

3 hours ago, Arthur Penske said:

 

I am ready to see it too; however, I am curious whether any of the other 31 teams feel this way? It is somewhat surprising that in the midst of all this chaos about whether we keep/trade Rodgers, there has not been any speculation, report or even discussion about teams maybe calling the Packers, not for Rodgers, but for Love. Unless it is being kept completely in the dark, it doesn't seem like there is much interest in Love outside of Green Bay. 

[ccecilnosebleed]

15 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I am ready to see it too; however, I am curious whether any of the other 31 teams feel this way? It is somewhat surprising that in the midst of all this chaos about whether we keep/trade Rodgers, there has not been any speculation, report or even discussion about teams maybe calling the Packers, not for Rodgers, but for Love. Unless it is being kept completely in the dark, it doesn't seem like there is much interest in Love outside of Green Bay. 

This is curious to me as well - but my guess is teams know the Packers wouldn't entertain the conversation about Love in any way until Gute and Co know what is happening with Rodgers - or they already do. God forbid if Rodgers returns, once that is announced I bet phones start ringing for Love pretty quick..

[Donzo]

35 minutes ago, packfanfb said:

I am ready to see it too; however, I am curious whether any of the other 31 teams feel this way? It is somewhat surprising that in the midst of all this chaos about whether we keep/trade Rodgers, there has not been any speculation, report or even discussion about teams maybe calling the Packers, not for Rodgers, but for Love. Unless it is being kept completely in the dark, it doesn't seem like there is much interest in Love outside of Green Bay. 

Yep, Love's improvement is a lot of hope without collaborating affirmation. The facts state he's been nothing but an awful QB every year since HS Sr. season in 2015, except for one season (2018). He's been a complete disaster in the NFL with one of the worst preseasons (2022) I remember a QB having. I don't remember another NFL QB unable to make the simplest throws outside the hash other than MR. Love in August 2022.

The good news is in 2022 we saw a good comp for a bad QB becoming useful. The ridiculous comps of how Love was gonna be the next Rodgers or Allen because they had to "develop' was funny, but painful. Just maybe if everything breaks his way, Love could have some type of Geno Smith renaissance. 

We'll see?!?