Do you think teams can “ruin” Qb’s?

[CP3MVP]

This is a narrative you hear from a lot of sports fans and analysts. That a teams situation was so bad that it ruined a QB. The problem with this narrative is that the QB will often go to other teams and still stink. The people who support it will argue well he was just mentally shell shocked from the first bad team that he could never be successful anywhere else. 
 

I personally think it’s nonsense, to me it just confirms that the QB was always bad. Mark Sanchez was a classic example, jets fans blamed the coaching for him being bad, he goes to Philly is still bad, goes to Denver can’t even win the job there. Nope Mark is just a bad QB independent  of environment, this was confirmed when he was bad outside of New York. 
 

On the Flipside look at Steve Young, dude was drafted to an all time dumpster fire in TB, and he was BAD. But he went to SF and became an all time Great. TB didn’t “ruin” him, he was able to be successful somewhere else

[RamblinMan99]

No, it’s the opposite.  
 

QBs are ruining teams.

Just look at Aaron Rodgers and the Green Bay Packers.  

[JiffyJag]

I think it depends on the QB. I do believe that for many QBs, the first few years in the league are pivotal for developing their skillset and can set a tone for the rest of their career, and if those years are spent being thrown onto the ground or running for their life, sure, they can be ruined and can develop the bad habits of seeing ghosts and/or running out of clean pockets as a result.

That's not to say that some QBs can't overcome that, obviously guys like Steve Young did. But some QBs are projects that need some reeling in, and if they don't get that, I do think they can be ruined. If Josh Allen went to an Adam Gase coached Jets team, I doubt that he develops the skills that he has under more competent coaching, and it would be fair to say that he was ruined by the Jets if that did happen.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

It depends what you mean by "ruin", because coaches/systems absolutely do maximize the potential of QB's, while other coaches/systems do not.

For example, Colin Kaepernick. In Harbaugh's system, he was a very effective QB. Then Tomsula takes over and changes systems and wants Kaepernick to be a pocket passer and he wasn't effective any longer. Lamar Jackson is another guy. If he wasn't in this system with this team, would he be an MVP-level player? Probably not. Jared Goff - same thing. He gets Sean McVay and suddenly he's a decent QB.

Meanwhile, you have guys like Adam Gase who completely ruin the potential development of Sam Darnold with their systems. Would other QB's have failed in Gase's system? Probably.

So I think it's hard to say whether a coach "ruined" a player, but it's certainly easy to say that a coach maximized the potential of a player.

Edited May 20, 2021 by AFlaccoSeagulls

[TakeTheBallDeep]

Yes absolutely just like any business if you have poor management then it can cause employees with talent to fail or not react their potential. Now it can be used as an excuse too often, but bad coaching and front office decisions can ruin a players confidence, mechanics, and ability to reach their potential 

 

[CP3MVP]

20 minutes ago, AFlaccoSeagulls said:

It depends what you mean by "ruin", because coaches/systems absolutely do maximize the potential of QB's, while other coaches/systems do not.

For example, Colin Kaepernick. In Harbaugh's system, he was a very effective QB. Then Tomsula takes over and changes systems and wants Kaepernick to be a pocket passer and he wasn't effective any longer. Lamar Jackson is another guy. If he wasn't in this system with this team, would he be an MVP-level player? Probably not. Jared Goff - same thing. He gets Sean McVay and suddenly he's a decent QB.

Meanwhile, you have guys like Adam Gase who completely ruin the potential development of Sam Darnold with their systems. Would other QB's have failed in Gase's system? Probably.

So I think it's hard to say whether a coach "ruined" a player, but it's certainly easy to say that a coach maximized the potential of a player.

Lamar is interesting because no one thought of the Ravens as some great place for QB development. The offensive roster was seen as bad and many people cited Flacco being terrible the last few years there as the problem with the team around him 

Darnold was bad before Gase. People cite Tannehil but Tannehill was a mediocre Starting QB in Miami, not worst QB in the league had.

Edited May 20, 2021 by CP3MVP

[CP3MVP]

23 minutes ago, JiffyJag said:

I think it depends on the QB. I do believe that for many QBs, the first few years in the league are pivotal for developing their skillset and can set a tone for the rest of their career, and if those years are spent being thrown onto the ground or running for their life, sure, they can be ruined and can develop the bad habits of seeing ghosts and/or running out of clean pockets as a result.

That's not to say that some QBs can't overcome that, obviously guys like Steve Young did. But some QBs are projects that need some reeling in, and if they don't get that, I do think they can be ruined. If Josh Allen went to an Adam Gase coached Jets team, I doubt that he develops the skills that he has under more competent coaching, and it would be fair to say that he was ruined by the Jets if that did happen.

In regards to  “running for your life” is you’re not under pressure every single play or even the majority of plays, we can Evaluate  you on plays when you’re given a clean pocket and most of these guys still stink. 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

3 minutes ago, CP3MVP said:

Lamar is interesting because no one thought of the Ravens as some great place for QB development. The offensive roster was seen as bad and many people cited Flacco being terrible the last few years there as the problem with the team around him 

To be fair to Harbaugh, he changed everything to maximize Lamar's potential (which was probably the plan anyways in the long run, it just got accelerated when Flacco got injured), and yeah Flacco just being awful was a main contributor to us being a bad team.

3 minutes ago, CP3MVP said:

Darnold was bad before Gase. People cite Tannehil but Tannehill was a mediocre Starting QB in Miami, not worst QB in the league had.

Tannehill went from being maybe mediocre to being a VERY good QB once he left Gase, and it doesn't even really stop at QB's with Gase either. WR's who left did better. RB's did better. Everyone did better after leaving Gase.

Darnold's only season before Gase was his rookie season, in which you cannot realistically evaluate a QB. Then, he changes systems and has two years under Gase and only gets worse.

[BayRaider]

Absolutely…. most of the time I would say it has nothing to do with team and it’s used as an excuse for the player busting, BUT it does happen. 
 

I always thought the 49ers drafted the wrong QB in 2005 (which they did), I was a huge fan of Rodgers as a prospect going into that draft. However, Smith was not a bad prospect or QB if you look at his 2011 seasons until retirement. The 49ers from 2004 to 2010 had some of the worst management and coaches in their Franchise History, dark time for both Bay Area teams. 

Edited May 20, 2021 by BayRaider

[lavar703]

David Carr and Tim Couch immediately come to mind. The team surrounding them was awful which lead to them taking a beating and essentially ruining their careers. 

[Forge]

Yes

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

19 minutes ago, lavar703 said:

David Carr and Tim Couch immediately come to mind. The team surrounding them was awful which lead to them taking a beating and essentially ruining their careers. 

Andrew Luck, too.

[SkippyX]

14 minutes ago, lavar703 said:

David Carr and Tim Couch immediately come to mind. The team surrounding them was awful which lead to them taking a beating and essentially ruining their careers. 

I am not sold that Carr or Couch could not have been a backup for Andy Reid for a few years and then turned into at least mediocre QBs.

In Carr's case he never got a chance behind Alex Smith and Eli.

In Couch's case it was probably some combo of injury and already making 33 million so 3rd string clipboard guy was not his preference.

 

NE and SF spent 7 years with joint custody ruining Jim Plunkett. He got to a better fit with better players and coaches and the rest was history

[ClutchDJ]

I think an organization can limit a QB’s effectiveness, but flat out ruin? Nah. 
 

I think a QB will always show flashes no matter how the situation might be.

 

Example: I know A LOT of folks thought Josh Rosen was “ruined” by the Cardinals, when honestly, I think Rosen made the situation & team looked worse than they actually did. Same with Carr & Texans.

 

I believe the main reason people say a QB got “ruined” by an organization is because they loved that QB as a prospect, but are afraid to throw in the white flag & admit they were wrong.

[pwny]

Jeff Garcia is a pretty great example of this in motion.

He was a pretty good QB in SF in their west coast offense. Dennis Erickson comes in and changed the offense, and he’s terrible. He goes to Cleveland to start and play in a system that’s about as different from the West Coast offense as one can imagine and he’s complete garbage again. Goes to Detroit, again not playing West Coast offense and he’s awful in his few games there. Then he goes to Philly, and when he’s tasked with playing Andy Reid runs west coast concepts and suddenly he’s an effective player again. Then he goes to the Bucs and they run more west coast concepts and he’s again an efficient QB.

Three straight teams decided to not run concepts the guy was good at and instead asked him to do things that showed off his limitations. Meanwhile the three stops where he’s put into an offense that he can do the things that he’s good at and hides the things he’s not good at, he’s an effective player.

Throw any player into the start of their career with the string of coaches and misfit offense that Garcia had for three years, and a guy is going to look like a complete bust and never really be given a chance to prove otherwise.