NoSaint Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 I'm not sure what that means. Good QB and great QB often take 3 years to develop. Peyton Manning is probably one of the best QB ever drafted, go look up his early stats. Steve Young, Brady, Rodgers, Kaepernick, all QB who sat and learned before playing. So if a team in today's NFL can't wait 3 years, what do you suggest they do? Trade or cut a developing QB after 1 year or 2 years and potentially, watch him grow up and work for someone else? Use the 1st round draft pick on a QB every other year until they get one who can play very well his first season (rare)? Make a habit of picking up 2nd or 3rd year QB other teams are too impatient to develop? It's a point that you can't give a QB (Bradford *cough* Stafford) forever, but if you want a good QB you gotta give a guy time. Draft someone high to sit behind him if you like. So you're going to change your opinion every game? The previous week, Geno didn't look too good. Next week if he looks bad again, you'll be all up for EJ? I know what shoes you wear with that suit....flip flops! And on the flipside, guys that look great early sometimes flame out quick. It's just not an easy position to project, especially this early. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 I'm not sure what that means. Good QB and great QB often take 3 years to develop. Peyton Manning is probably one of the best QB ever drafted, go look up his early stats. Steve Young, Brady, Rodgers, Kaepernick, all QB who sat and learned before playing. So if a team in today's NFL can't wait 3 years, what do you suggest they do? Trade or cut a developing QB after 1 year or 2 years and potentially, watch him grow up and work for someone else? Use the 1st round draft pick on a QB every other year until they get one who can play very well his first season (rare)? Make a habit of picking up 2nd or 3rd year QB other teams are too impatient to develop? It's a point that you can't give a QB (Bradford *cough* Stafford) forever, but if you want a good QB you gotta give a guy time. Draft someone high to sit behind him if you like. Guess you haven't been watching Luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 I think you are living in the past. In today's NFL, teams don't get three years to figure out whether their QB sucks or not. In many cases it is clear, one way or the other, in the first year. I am not denying that it's too early to tell with EJ (or Geno), but if EJ performs poorly after he returns to the lineup, you had better believe the Bills will be looking at drafting a QB in the first couple rounds of this QB-loaded draft. Or at least they should. I disagree. In "today's NFL" it's possible for rookie QB's to start right out of the gate, that much is apparent but teams are still giving QB's time to develop. Just look at Kaepernick in SF, he didn't even start his first year and half. He was allowed to develop. Teams are more willing to "find out what they got" sooner, rather than letting that QB sit for 2-3 years, then start for a couple years... then when thats not working dump them. That could be a waste of 5 years. Instead, they put their rookie QB in there right away, let him grow and develop and then see where they are after 3 years, instead of waiting 5. Guess you haven't been watching Luck. Luck is an exception, not the rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeHateMe Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Did anyone here clamoring for Geno actually watch the Tennessee game? I guarantee you did not. The Falcons are terrible this season... btw. Jeff Tuel would light them up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hapless Bills Fan Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Guess you haven't been watching Luck. I have. So the solution is every team should tank at the right time and draft Luck? That would make for a wonderful NFL season that year. "Fumble - you recovered" "No no, I insist, COP, the ball is yours!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K-9 Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 (edited) Guess you haven't been watching Luck. I hope Luck isn't the standard you've established for young QBs. If so, you'll be frustrated 99.9% of the time. GO BILLS!!! Edited October 9, 2013 by K-9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Did anyone mention Geno's 11 turnovers? He had one good game, the only thing he has over EJ right now is probably a better long ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.Biscuit97 Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 I hope Luck isn't the standard you've established for young QBs. If so, you'll be frustrated 99.9% of the time. GO BILLS!!! Agreed. He's a once in a generation QB. It's also funny when you considered that Luck actually had a worse td to INT ratio than Manuel through both of their first 5 games ( Luck - 7 td to 7 ints, Manuel 5 td to 3 ints). http://www.nfl.com/player/andrewluck/2533031/gamelogs?season=2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 True WVs defense was crap. That doesn't mean Geno played well in those games or that the Syracuse D was loaded with NFL prospects. He didn't and they weren't. If only we had Ryan Nassib; then the Bills' defense surely would have confused Geno more. PS - to the OP, is it beyond the realm of possibility that both teams got good QBs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simpleman Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 If we are comparing Apples to Apples then I guess we will have a better chance to judge the two on December 1st when we play Altlanta. According to the diagnosis, EJ should be back by then and we can compare the two based on Atlanta if you would like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucci Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Guessing this will be a weekly question? Depending on how well they play. ( I know EJ is out) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattsox Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 I think you are living in the past. In today's NFL, teams don't get three years to figure out whether their QB sucks or not. In many cases it is clear, one way or the other, in the first year. I am not denying that it's too early to tell with EJ (or Geno), but if EJ performs poorly after he returns to the lineup, you had better believe the Bills will be looking at drafting a QB in the first couple rounds of this QB-loaded draft. Or at least they should. I don't think so Tim... It Took Eric Moulds 3 Years before he was worth anything. I do agree with you in that it seems today QBs can come in and lead right away, but I will live and die by the 3 year rule... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 (edited) I disagree. In "today's NFL" it's possible for rookie QB's to start right out of the gate, that much is apparent but teams are still giving QB's time to develop. Just look at Kaepernick in SF, he didn't even start his first year and half. He was allowed to develop. Teams are more willing to "find out what they got" sooner, rather than letting that QB sit for 2-3 years, then start for a couple years... then when thats not working dump them. That could be a waste of 5 years. Instead, they put their rookie QB in there right away, let him grow and develop and then see where they are after 3 years, instead of waiting 5. Luck is an exception, not the rule. Kaepernick was a second round pick and the 49ers already had a competent QB. Nowadays, QBs drafted in the first round start right away. Period. I can't think of a single first round QB taken in the last five years who did not start from day one. Usually a team has a pretty good idea what they've got in that first year, sometimes even sooner. RG III, Wilson, and Luck proved in their first years that they are legitimate franchise QBs. That doesn't mean the QB is not going to continue to develop or that they will never take step backward (like Cam Newton); it just means that a rookie needs to show at least enough flashes of brilliance for the team to conclude that he is " the Guy". On the other hand, a number of first round QBs have demonstrated in their first year that they probably don't have what it takes, and the club begins to develop a plan B. A good example would be Brandon Weedon in Cleveland. Jacksonville should have reached that conclusion after one year of Blaine Gabbert, and now they have to start all over three years later. So yes, I think Geno and EJ both need to demonstrate this year that they have what it takes to be a franchise QB. Manuel may get a bit more of a pass, simply because he has been injured, but if he really stinks it up after he comes back, the Bills would be foolish not to consider bringing in another QB in the 2014 draft. You can bet the Jets will do the same if Smith goes in the tank, although the early signs for him are pretty good. It's not a three-year process, although these guys might need at least that long to reach their full potential. Edited October 9, 2013 by mannc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebandit27 Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Kaepernick was a second round pick and the 49ers already had a competent QB. Nowadays, QBs drafted in the first round start right away. Period. I can't think of a single first round QB taken in the last five years who did not start from day one. Usually a team has a pretty good idea what they've got in that first year, sometimes even sooner. RG III, Wilson, and Luck proved in their first years that they are legitimate franchise QBs. That doesn't mean the QB is not going to continue to develop or that they will never take step backward (like Cam Newton); it just means that a rookie needs to show at least enough flashes of brilliance for the team to conclude that he is " the Guy". On the other hand, a number of first round QBs have demonstrated in their first year that they probably don't have what it takes, and the club begins to develop a plan B. A good example would be Brandon Weedon in Cleveland. Jacksonville should have reached that conclusion after one year of Blaine Gabbert, and now they have to start all over three years later. So yes, I think Geno and EJ both need to demonstrate this year that they have what it takes to be a franchise QB. Manuel may get a bit more of a pass, simply because he has been injured, but if he really stinks it up after he comes back, the Bills would be foolish not to consider bringing in another QB in the 2014 draft. You can bet the Jets will do the same if Smith goes in the tank, although the early signs for him are pretty good. It's not a three-year process, although these guys might need at least that long to reach their full potential. This is a more agreeable statement than your original...I think that's probably the correct approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2o Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 And on the flipside, guys that look great early sometimes flame out quick. It's just not an easy position to project, especially this early. See Mark Sanchez who has taken a step backwards every season. I also believe that EJ will be a good QB, but I am not sold on Geno or EJ as Franchise QB's. I hope EJ evolves into one and could care less about Geno, but only time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ko12010 Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Game 2 of their careers: Manuel throws for nearly 300 yards and leads a comeback victory. Smith completes 43% of his passes and throws 3 INTs. This thread wasn't made. Honestly, a lot of fans have the mindset of a 13 year old girl. Everything that just happened is the worst/ best. Whatever happened to patience? Bottomline, EJ Manuel is a rookie and hasn't been here for 13 years. It's so sad that a negative thread like this gets more attention than a positive one about Kiko or Woods. This is kinda sums up current America as well. Folks love the negative. This is really all that needs to be said about this thread. Sums it up perfectly. Hopefully the mods will lock this soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 This is really all that needs to be said about this thread. Sums it up perfectly. Hopefully the mods will lock this soon. Could not disagree more. All I am seeing here is interesting, intelligent discussion regarding which rookie QB--so far--has shown the most potential. How is that not a legitimate topic of conversation on a board like this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Cubed Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 Kaepernick was a second round pick and the 49ers already had a competent QB. Nowadays, QBs drafted in the first round start right away. Period. I can't think of a single first round QB taken in the last five years who did not start from day one. Usually a team has a pretty good idea what they've got in that first year, sometimes even sooner. RG III, Wilson, and Luck proved in their first years that they are legitimate franchise QBs. That doesn't mean the QB is not going to continue to develop or that they will never take step backward (like Cam Newton); it just means that a rookie needs to show at least enough flashes of brilliance for the team to conclude that he is " the Guy". On the other hand, a number of first round QBs have demonstrated in their first year that they probably don't have what it takes, and the club begins to develop a plan B. A good example would be Brandon Weedon in Cleveland. Jacksonville should have reached that conclusion after one year of Blaine Gabbert, and now they have to start all over three years later. So yes, I think Geno and EJ both need to demonstrate this year that they have what it takes to be a franchise QB. Manuel may get a bit more of a pass, simply because he has been injured, but if he really stinks it up after he comes back, the Bills would be foolish not to consider bringing in another QB in the 2014 draft. You can bet the Jets will do the same if Smith goes in the tank, although the early signs for him are pretty good. It's not a three-year process, although these guys might need at least that long to reach their full potential. That's better than what you originally said. And just as an FYI, Locker and Ponder did not start from day 1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 If The Bills made a gaffe it's by going with a rookie OC. Marty Mornhinweg is no rookie OC. He knows how to get the best from his QB - even a rookie. He has over ten years of experience as the OC for the Niners and Iggles, coached extensively in college, and was HC of the Lions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fan in San Diego Posted October 9, 2013 Share Posted October 9, 2013 If The Bills made a gaffe it's by going with a rookie OC. Marty Mornhinweg is no rookie OC. He knows how to get the best from his QB - even a rookie. He has over ten years of experience as the OC for the Niners and Iggles, coached extensively in college, and was HC of the Lions. +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts