Quarterback - Brees? Is it time?

[navysaintsfan]

2 hours ago, Canadian Saint said:

Also just throwing this out there, how about trading for Kizer?

No.

[whodatworm23]

4 hours ago, Raves said:

I was actually thinking about this earlier and was going to post it, but been distracted with other stuff lately.  He's got a big arm, though can be inconsistent, and has great athleticism, though I would be hesitant to actually try to develop an offensive system with him as a runner due to his build, though some bootlegs wouldn't be a bad idea letting him freeze some defenders with his running ability to open up the pass.

Jackson is getting such a bad rap... Bill Polian is such a dummy! (Per SBNATION) PFF whom ive personally been critical of actually has a great grading system that takes into account a college QB's spikes, throw aways and dropped passes and Jackson was 10th overall with a +97% score while Darnold and Allen rank 52nd and 80th overall. These are two prospects many in the NFL have going 1st overall but Jackson is often overlooked. 

 

Just weird to me...

[tyler735]

8 hours ago, whodatworm23 said:

People are gonna hate on me for this but I am begining to love the idea of resigning Brees for 2 years and drafting Lamar Jackson at 27. Brees is solid until 2020 and Jackson will only be 23 by then. Hed benifit the most by sitting and learning, yes his accuarcy isnt on Brees level but it is much better than what most are saying. Jackson also has a cannon and makes up for his lack of accuarcy with eletric playmaking ability. Those who are expecting a carbon copy of Bees as the successor is kidding themselves, Brees is a once in a generation type player that wont be repeated, Jacskon on the other had has a chance to be a great player for the Saints in his own way.

Totally agree with this if Lamar Jackson is there at 27, I hope we pick him. Obviously his natural ability/athletic traits are the best in the class by a large margin. People seems to overstate his weaknesses. He has been inconsistent at times with accuracy, but has also shown the ability to make every NFL throw. I think a lot of his perceived accuracy problems stem from his O-Line, which has been documented by many as being pretty bad at pass blocking. Jackson would often face pressure immediately and throw without really getting a chance to set his feet and go through his reads. There are certainly areas he can, and hopefully will improve, but I do think these areas are overstated for various reasons. However, I won't be surprised to see him jump up the draft boards in the coming months with his workouts.

[jcvoodoo]

Brees will most likely be extended before the March 14 "payday". I think a 2-3 year deal would work. And, don't under estimate Brees' ability to guide someone, like a Lamar Jackson, past their 'pitfalls'. I think Brees is a great motivator and teacher. Jackson's measurables with cause his stock to rise though...I mean after the combine and pro days.

I do like the turn this discussion went though. Build/add to the trenches via the draft...and keep the youth movement alive. Sure, a bluechip LB would be nice but look at what we did this season w/o an 'elite' LB corps. The Saints, IMO, have options...and options are what you want.

[JMG5]

Lamar seems like a project. I want the Saints to get a player that can actually contribute now with their first round pick. If Lamar starts to fall and the Saints want to trade up for him then sure, go ahead. I would just rather us get a player who can make an impact immediately rather than a player that won't see the field for a few years and even then could still turn out to be a bust. 

[Dome]

1 hour ago, navysaintsfan said:

No.

Indeed.

19 minutes ago, jcvoodoo said:

And, don't under estimate Brees' ability to guide someone, like a Lamar Jackson, past their 'pitfalls'. I think Brees is a great motivator and teacher.

We have to keep in mind that Brees would be grooming Jackson to take his job. I'm not sure how motivated he'd be to put it all out there for him. I think the whole idea of vets grooming young guys to take over is often overblown and I don't think it's as beneficial as people think. People bring it up all the time, and I make this counterpoint all the time.

Where was Brees ability to guide guys like Daniel, Grayson, Canfield, Griffin or Flynn? IMO if Brees was some great teacher or instructor some of those guys would've turned into SOMETHING. Right? My personal opinion is that the QB behind you on the DC has a lot more bearing on your performance than the guy in front of you. 

Brees was never groomed by a HOF QB. Neither were guys like Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Big Ben, Wilson or Rivers. I just don't see it as being a huge factor in a QBs development...

[whodatworm23]

15 hours ago, domepatrol91 said:

Indeed.

We have to keep in mind that Brees would be grooming Jackson to take his job. I'm not sure how motivated he'd be to put it all out there for him. I think the whole idea of vets grooming young guys to take over is often overblown and I don't think it's as beneficial as people think. People bring it up all the time, and I make this counterpoint all the time.

Where was Brees ability to guide guys like Daniel, Grayson, Canfield, Griffin or Flynn? IMO if Brees was some great teacher or instructor some of those guys would've turned into SOMETHING. Right? My personal opinion is that the QB behind you on the DC has a lot more bearing on your performance than the guy in front of you. 

Brees was never groomed by a HOF QB. Neither were guys like Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Big Ben, Wilson or Rivers. I just don't see it as being a huge factor in a QBs development...

While i agree with you i also feel its the backups job to watch and study the incumbent to better prepare himself to one day take his job and not the job of thr incumbent to groom the future starter, thats what QB coaches and OC's are for. Yes the whole grooming thing is overblown but having a viable NFL starter that a rookie can watch and  pick up practice habits, film study, work ethic and leadership skills from isnt. 

[Raves]

On 2/23/2018 at 5:41 PM, domepatrol91 said:

Indeed.

We have to keep in mind that Brees would be grooming Jackson to take his job. I'm not sure how motivated he'd be to put it all out there for him. I think the whole idea of vets grooming young guys to take over is often overblown and I don't think it's as beneficial as people think. People bring it up all the time, and I make this counterpoint all the time.

Where was Brees ability to guide guys like Daniel, Grayson, Canfield, Griffin or Flynn? IMO if Brees was some great teacher or instructor some of those guys would've turned into SOMETHING. Right? My personal opinion is that the QB behind you on the DC has a lot more bearing on your performance than the guy in front of you. 

Brees was never groomed by a HOF QB. Neither were guys like Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Big Ben, Wilson or Rivers. I just don't see it as being a huge factor in a QBs development...

Brees also wasn't 1-3 years away from retirement with those guys coming in either.  I do agree that I think "grooming" isn't the best way of looking at it in regards to Brees helping a player with footwork/accuracy issues, but I think Brees can help instill the right type of ethic when it comes to watching film, maybe help whoever is brought in to see things a little differently, about when/why to make throws, things that would likely come up in QB/Film meetings on why things were done and what they were seeing.  I think having Brees there to help make sure whatever rookie QB we bring in understands that to be able to play at a level that Brees does, it requires a certain level of dedication to film study, something that I'm sure even a cerebral and highly experienced QB like Brees still does a lot of.  That's really the main thing you hear being a difference between great QBs and bad/poor QBs seems to be the way they approach film study more so than their own physical abilities/limitations.  You hear a lot about struggling QBs early on not doing well in film study, from the sounds of it Goff had the issue with learning the offense/study which held him back his first year, yet his second year those comments disappeared and he really improved, so having Brees there to help further along those habits will be a boost and it'll be up to Payton and Lombardi to make sure all the mechanics of the player are up to snuff.

[tyler735]

On 2/23/2018 at 4:41 PM, domepatrol91 said:

Indeed.

We have to keep in mind that Brees would be grooming Jackson to take his job. I'm not sure how motivated he'd be to put it all out there for him. I think the whole idea of vets grooming young guys to take over is often overblown and I don't think it's as beneficial as people think. People bring it up all the time, and I make this counterpoint all the time.

Where was Brees ability to guide guys like Daniel, Grayson, Canfield, Griffin or Flynn? IMO if Brees was some great teacher or instructor some of those guys would've turned into SOMETHING. Right? My personal opinion is that the QB behind you on the DC has a lot more bearing on your performance than the guy in front of you. 

Brees was never groomed by a HOF QB. Neither were guys like Manning, Brady, Rodgers, Big Ben, Wilson or Rivers. I just don't see it as being a huge factor in a QBs development...

I'm a bit confused by these 2 names. Rodgers sat and learned behind Favre for years. Rivers sat and learned behind Brees for years. Could also argue a guy like Steve Young sat and learned behind Joe Montana. There are plenty examples both ways. Ultimately though, it obviously boils down to whether you have the talent both physically and mentally to get the job done. I'd venture to say Lamar Jackson has more talent than guys like Daniel, Grayson, Canfield, etc. I think having a guy sit behind a vet is a bit overrated, but at the same time it sure can't hurt to have a young player sit back and watch an all time great and how they train/prepare for each game. 

[Dome]

10 minutes ago, tyler735 said:

Rodgers sat and learned behind Favre for years.

Sitting behind them and learning isn’t the same as being taught/groomed by them. Favre was apparently pretty disinterested in helping Rodgers at all. That was the narrative for years until Favre and the Packers made up.

and if We’re talking about just teaching a guy how to be a pro rather than on the field stuff (like how to study film, how to prepare each week, how to carry yourself and talk to the media and all that) then I think it’s pretty apparent Rodgers didn’t need Favres help there anyways.

10 minutes ago, tyler735 said:

Rivers sat and learned behind Brees for years

Brees was so young then and was in no way carving out a HOF career for himself at that point.

IMO it’s not really a comparable scenario to having a HOFer holding on to the last couple years of his career and being expected to groom his replacement.

Yes, Rivers sat behind Brees. But what was Brees at that point other than a promising young QB and what about Rivers success can we attribute to Brees? 

 

[tyler735]

17 minutes ago, domepatrol91 said:

Sitting behind them and learning isn’t the same as being taught/groomed by them. Favre was apparently pretty disinterested in helping Rodgers at all. That was the narrative for years until Favre and the Packers made up.

and if We’re talking about just teaching a guy how to be a pro rather than on the field stuff (like how to study film, how to prepare each week, how to carry yourself and talk to the media and all that) then I think it’s pretty apparent Rodgers didn’t need Favres help there anyways.

Brees was so young then and was in no way carving out a HOF career for himself at that point.

IMO it’s not really a comparable scenario to having a HOFer holding on to the last couple years of his career and being expected to groom his replacement.

Yes, Rivers sat behind Brees. But what was Brees at that point other than a promising young QB and what about Rivers success can we attribute to Brees? 

 

Agree to disagree. If a player is behind an all time great such as the examples I mentioned, they are teaching by example even if they are said to be disinterested by the media. There is no "wasn't carving out a HOF career back then" in my eyes with Brees. Brees has always had the mental capacity, and very likely training habits of a HOF QB even if he was only a mere Pro Bowl QB with the Chargers.

[Dome]

30 minutes ago, tyler735 said:

If a player is behind an all time great such as the examples I mentioned, they are teaching by example even if they are said to be disinterested by the media.

This is fair, but I think it gets away from the root of the discussion.

Are we talking about a young QBs ability to come in and mimic a successful QBs habits and routines and grow in that way? Or are we talking about a successful QB in the twilight of his career taking a young guy under his wing and showing him the ropes in a more active hands on sense?

When people (in the media, on the forum, or other websites) use terms like Brees can “guide” or “teach” someone I think they’re looking for a more active teacher than what usually happens in the NFL. Grooming and teaching are the coaches jobs and Brees has no obligation to do that, and if his job is in the balance I don’t think he will. I can’t think of any examples where any QB in his situation HAS done that, but I’m sure it’s happened at least once.

If people just expect Brees to keep doing what he’s doing and a young guy can come in and take notes and mimic how one of the all-time greats then I agree that’s whats most likely to happen. 

[whodatworm23]

1 hour ago, domepatrol91 said:

This is fair, but I think it gets away from the root of the discussion.

Are we talking about a young QBs ability to come in and mimic a successful QBs habits and routines and grow in that way? Or are we talking about a successful QB in the twilight of his career taking a young guy under his wing and showing him the ropes in a more active hands on sense?

When people (in the media, on the forum, or other websites) use terms like Brees can “guide” or “teach” someone I think they’re looking for a more active teacher than what usually happens in the NFL. Grooming and teaching are the coaches jobs and Brees has no obligation to do that, and if his job is in the balance I don’t think he will. I can’t think of any examples where any QB in his situation HAS done that, but I’m sure it’s happened at least once.

If people just expect Brees to keep doing what he’s doing and a young guy can come in and take notes and mimic how one of the all-time greats then I agree that’s whats most likely to happen. 

Agreed... Any QB we draft has to have thr inner drive and work ethic needed to be great, however if we are able to find that guy reguardless of round having a guy like Brees in place for a couple more years can only shorten the learning curve for the younger player. Will Brees be a tutor for the next guy? Not likley as he has a job to do but Brees isnt above allowing a young guy into his inner circle and showing the next guy a path to success by his preperation on and off the field. 

[jcvoodoo]

So I think I need to clarify my stance on this. My previous post used words like "teach". I wrote the hastily while at work. The term "teach" was an inaccurate term, but hindsight in 20-20 right?

Brees would be a fantastic "mentor" for a young QB that may need that the "final nudge". Mentoring does have a teaching aspect, however. So while, in my mind, my previous post made sense...it needs some clarification (based on comments). I DO appreciate reading the comments!

[Jlowe22]

As far as mentors go, I think Brees would be one of the better ones.  He doesn't seem like a Favre to me.  That's not saying he would go out of his way to teach a rookie, but I don't think he would be opposed to sharing some knowledge.

Either way I think it's a rather small variable in what it takes to be a franchise QB.  If they don't have the talent/mental capacity/physical tools/ work ethic, no amount of mentoring is gonna matter.  If they're teetering on the edge, then picking up a few things from a guy like Brees could certainly make a considerable difference.