Do you think teams can “ruin” Qb’s?

[CP3MVP]

12 hours ago, AkronsWitness said:

My talking point with Brady has always been his defenses helped win him multiple rings. The dude has seemed to travel with a top 5 defense every year of his career.

Last year he changed teams, but the defense didn't change. 

That defense that won the Super Bowl without him the previous year 

[CP3MVP]

8 hours ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

Destroyed? By who?

Everyone for ten years. It’s over bro. It’s like you don’t know when to quit lol

[SteelKing728]

The Broncos ruined Jay Cutler and Chicago doubled down on ruining him.

I thought Derek Carr had the potential to be the next Aaron Rodgers but the Raiders haven't done enough for him.

Maybe Cleveland was the reason Tim Couch failed?

[Johnny Nix]

On 5/20/2021 at 7:03 PM, HolmesPriest said:

The Colts ruined Andrew Luck. Now the Bengals are trying their darndest to ruin Joe Burrow.

How?

[ronjon1990]

Depends on the team and QB.

Sometimes, a QB just doesn't have it.

Some guys get slapped with the premature "Pro ready" label and have expectations that are too high while fighting a bad overall team and short  leash. 

Some get shoehorned into a system that doesn't work for their skills. 

Some get saddled with a coach who is just clueless about QBs. 

 

If Peyton Manning was asked early on to play in a RPO system that expected a lot of designed QB runs, he almost certainly flops and maybe doesn't even get a second chance elsewhere. Maybe his growth as a QB gets so stunted that he hits a ceiling far below his raw capabilities as a QB. 

On another note, some guys have raw talent that allows them to play in a variety of offenses/systems. Alex Smith probably knows the playbook for like 75% of the league lol. Pre-injury he was deceptively mobile but could absolutely function as a drop back QB. But not everyone can do that. 

Take Lamar Jackson, for example. Does he find success in any other system? If for some reason he and Baltimore fell out, is he ruined because they tailored the offense to fit his limitations as a passer and maximize his mobility? What makes him successful in one place could technically ruin his chances elsewhere. 

So I would say it's absolutely possible that a team can ruin a QB. Not everyone is equally advanced as a QB coming out of college and need good coaching and teammates. If not, Arch Manning could walk onto an NFL field and dominate, because thst kid is a great QB....in high school. It's not the blanket excuse some make it out to be, but it absolutely happens. 

I actually like the Sanchez example. Pete Carroll even said he needed more seasoning at USC once he declared for the draft. He wasn't ready. So what happened? 

Well, he found success early on by leaning on a strong run game and stone wall of a defense. That inevitably caused him to not really progress (whether by default or by a lack of drive to get better is subjective). Thus, he was a QB with a few years under his belt still making dumb rookie mistakes. Did the Jets and Rex ruin him? I think so, because they didn't put him in a situation to aid his growth as a QB at the NFL level.

Some of the blame can always be put on the player, but at the end of the day, even a near HOF talent can only do so much with what they're given to work with. If it was all on the player, we wouldn't even have positional coaches or coordinators on a team's payroll. 

[pwny]

On 5/21/2021 at 9:05 AM, ClutchDJ said:

Not limited in a sense where they provide only adequate play in certain schemes. I believe the top 8 QBs(whoever that may be to you)as of right now can provide at least above-average play in any scheme you throw at them. You can also say how a player can enhance the situation around them & is it himself that is making the situation look bad.

 

An organization can put a cap on a players’ ceiling, sure, but there’s never been a time where an organization 100% prevented a player from being a competent player. I think that’s a full on cop-out. I believe it’s just that player’s potential was never that good to begin with.

Sure. The top 8 can play wherever you want. But there’s 8 of them. There’s 32 teams. And those 8 guys have been drafted over the course of 15+ years. That type of player isn’t common. Those guys after Brady, Mahomes, Watson, Rodgers, Russ and the handful of other guys are all limited in different ways and need support to succeed at a high level. They need coaches that can help with development, they need a scheme that fits their skill set, they need players that they can work well with, they need an OL that doesn’t leave them out to die. 

Nobody is saying that David Carr would have been Pat Mahomes if he hadn’t been in Houston. But he very likely could have been at the level his brother is at right now. 

[Mr Raider]

8 hours ago, SteelKing728 said:

The Broncos ruined Jay Cutler and Chicago doubled down on ruining him.

I thought Derek Carr had the potential to be the next Aaron Rodgers but the Raiders haven't done enough for him.

Maybe Cleveland was the reason Tim Couch failed?

I agree on Carr to an extent. I didn't really peg him as the next Aaron Rodgers, I'm not convinced even in a perfect situation he could reach that type of heights. Because that's saying the situation stopped a guy I have around 10-12th in terms of best QB in the game from being one of the top 10 guys to ever do it at the QB position. I wouldn't lay that extreme amount of blame on the Raiders and the situation they have put Carr in. 

With that said, do I think the way the Raiders have handled Carr and the support (or lack their off) they have given him has kept him from being a guy considered by the majority a top 5-6 type of QB capable of winning an MVP or something (like a Matt Ryan) and having success in the post season (the thing that goes the furthest in terms of perception)? I absolutely do. The fact that Carr has been as good and even his bad years still being at least ok type of numbers production wise IMO is a real testament to just how talented Carr is. 

When you consider he was drafted by a franchise that almost his entire life had been the biggest laughing stock in the NFL, has had constant turnover in coaches and leadership, had gone like 2 decades without even a single winning season. He was drafted into a team that has given him 4 head coaches in 6 seasons (and most, perhaps even all could be considered below average to just solid), he's had 3 different offensive coordinators (but 4 different changes as Olsen was his OC his rookie year and since Gruden came back), he saw a head coaching change during his rookie season, an interim HC, and then Del Rio took over in his second year, and went through a stretch through his first 5 seasons having only 2 seasons with the same OC. He's been the QB and basically only constant from the start of his career that has remained the same through multiple rebuilds. Outside of Amari Cooper he has never had a receiver that most would argue is even a top 20 or so talent. He's been responsible for leading an offense that consistently needs to produce top 5-10 type of offensive output just to have a shot at winning most seasons because his defense has never been better than the 20's, and the majority of the time in the bottom 4 or 5. You could argue that he has only had 3 legitimate franchise corner stone talents on the entire roster (offensive or defensive) in his entire career (Mack, Cooper, and Waller). Two of those guys were traded smack dab in the middle of their respective primes. 

The one area of real service Carr has consistently received is on the offensive line. And while that is arguably the biggest asset you can give to a QB, even that hasn't been flawless and has constantly shifted in terms of players and scheme. If Carr had been drafted into a stable situation with some semblance of consistency from ownership all the way through coaching and was able to keep some of the very few elite talents he has played with for more than a couple of years I think it's very likely that Carr would be viewed in an entirely different light and would be much more highly thought of. 

Had he been drafted into a franchise with stability like the Chiefs, Saints, Ravens, Steelers, Patriots, or even a team like the Colts or Broncos, teams that are united on what they are trying to accomplish, give stability and time for players to develop, and regularly identify guys that will come in and play at a high level as support, Carr wouldn't be viewed as someone that is constantly the center of questions about whether the team should move on, if he's a franchise QB, he wouldn't be viewed as a consistently loser and asked if his presence is the biggest factor in that. 

He is without a doubt not blameless or without any faults or short comings. He definitely does. But I do feel some were exaggerated by situation, in terms of inconsistency throughout ownership and coaching, familiarity with the system, and a laughable lack of regular supporting talent. 

[Thelonebillsfan]

On 5/20/2021 at 6:21 PM, CP3MVP said:

There’s a big difference between as you said “not reaching his full potential” and being flat out garbage though lol. Andrew luck was drafted to a dumpster fire with indy and never reached his full potential but managed to be a really good player despite all of this because of his talent. 
 

Also how many teams do these guys have to fail with before we acknowledge they stink. You said failing with the second team isn’t proof. 4,5? 

Stafford basically never played his first 3 years because he kept getting hurt and the Lions sucked *** so they acquired mountains of talent to finally surround him with offensive talent. Also, some guys can overcome dysfunction, most can't, that's why most guys aren't Tom Brady despite a bunch of guys having that physical profile or better. Not rocket science.

[Thelonebillsfan]

On 5/21/2021 at 12:53 PM, RamblinMan99 said:

Absolutely not.  
 

Indianapolis wasn’t the problem for Andrew Luck.  He himself was the problem.  

He forwent the draft to stay in college.  He was never fully serious about playing football.  
 

Not to say he was Johnny Manziel because he wasn’t.  Luck definitely had a good head on his shoulders but just wasn’t fully committed to playing pro football.  

 

He played football with a lacerated kidney

[Thelonebillsfan]

Some of y'all project way too god damn much onto these guys when the answer is very simple and obviously "yeah, no duh, just like everywhere else if you go somewhere that reinforces bad habits, has no professional help around you, and is incredibly unstable you're not very likely to be very good at your job even if you're gifted at it or could be incredible at it in better circumstances".

[KingOfNewYork]

Hell no. I hate the excuse for players. Talent will always show even if it doesn't produce wins.

[CP3MVP]

8 hours ago, Thelonebillsfan said:

Stafford basically never played his first 3 years because he kept getting hurt and the Lions sucked *** so they acquired mountains of talent to finally surround him with offensive talent. Also, some guys can overcome dysfunction, most can't, that's why most guys aren't Tom Brady despite a bunch of guys having that physical profile or better. Not rocket science.

No those players just sucked. 
 

And again, if Matt Stafford wasn’t “ruined” on the worst team ever, you have no excuse. 

[CP3MVP]

8 hours ago, Thelonebillsfan said:

Some of y'all project way too god damn much onto these guys when the answer is very simple and obviously "yeah, no duh, just like everywhere else if you go somewhere that reinforces bad habits, has no professional help around you, and is incredibly unstable you're not very likely to be very good at your job even if you're gifted at it or could be incredible at it in better circumstances".

So if he sucks for 5 different teams it’s the first organizations fault lol

[lancerman]

6 hours ago, CP3MVP said:

No those players just sucked. 
 

And again, if Matt Stafford wasn’t “ruined” on the worst team ever, you have no excuse. 

Matt Stafford even on the worst team ever had Calvin Johnson who always opened up easy opportunities and was the bulk of his production. Though I find Stafford extremely overrated. He puts up a ton of passing yards which are probably the most inflated and least predicative stats in the entire league. Otherwise he routinely has double digit interceptions, he has only broken 30 TD's twice in his career, only one passer rating above 100 for the year (even Goff and Wentz have more than that) and he has an abysmal record against winning teams and the one time he did have a stacked defense and CJ on offense he did nothing with it come playoff time. He's great for fantasy football though, but that kinda says it all. 

[lancerman]

6 hours ago, CP3MVP said:

So if he sucks for 5 different teams it’s the first organizations fault lol

It's extremely rare for a QB to completely turn their level of play around after the first 5 years of development. That foundation is critical. After that as an athlete you are in your mid to late 20's and you just kinda are what you are. Kurt Warner is the most notable exception in that he did it 6 years in. But he had a **** ton of support on offense and it lasted a whopping 3 years and then he had one more good year in Arizona after that.