Dorkington Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 I think part of it is impatience... great QBs, imo, aren't all that great in their first few seasons. Hell, even Luck is inconsistent, yet he's considered the new king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garranimal Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) my take, expectations are too high. if your not an instant franchise QB, you suck, next man up. if wilson or kap played for JAX, they would be viewed alot differently. teams are just so desperate for a Top 10 qb.....the line keeps moving in qb rankings and what is considered good enough. I agree along these lines. There are only 30 QB positions in the NFL (plus Jax and Cleveland). When you factor out the 10 or so spots held by very good QBs and the 6-8 or so spots held by overdrafted first rounders there aren't a lot of opportunities and the window each guy gets in those few spots are getting smaller and smaller. if you aren't the yearly media annointed next big thing QB, the minute a young QB shows a flaw or doesn't carry his team you have guys like Merrill Hodge and Chris Carter running a smear campaign against you. Very few prospects get a chance to develop because if they don't put up big numbers in one year, the draft comes along and it is time to play the lottery again. Beyond the coaches, i think there is very little talent out there at actually evaluating QBs. If McShay and the Hairpiece threw darts at a wall of pictures they would have the same QB picking success rate. Let's face it, how long would Joe Ferguson have lasted in today's NFL? Bert Jones? Bernie Kosar? I am not sure if we would even know their names. Edited February 10, 2015 by Garranimal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFunPolice Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 People forget that Rogers sat for a WHILE and when he did play in preseason he looked awful his first few seasons. Now he's league MVP. I agree with the idea that players don't get time to develop. Even Brady sat until Bledsoe got hurt. If he got thrown right in as a rookie he might have washed right out of the league. Also, he was lucky enough to be drafted by New England*. If he was drafted by a bottom feeder team and had to play right away we probably never hear of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnwalter Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Luck is elite. Wilson is already top-10. Kap still has a lot to prove. Cam still has a lot to prove, but I don't think it's unreasonable to put him in the top-10. Between Carr and Bridgewater, I think one of those guys will become a top-10 type dude. So I think we're looking at around 4 elite guys from the last few drafts when it's all said and done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 This is only an NFL issue. College and HS football are great to watch as is. IMO coaches do not get good players and then build a winning scheme around them The only guy who seems to do that is Belicheat. Chip Kelly's offenses seem to be doing just fine with average QBs in the NFL. I believe the issue is the coaches, not the QBs. Develop the players and get a scheme they can thrive in, that is the answer. Instead, you have them drafting players based on pure physical measurements (EJ Manual) who are not quarterbacks. Then you take the assets they do have (mobility, same issue with Losman here) and try to minimize that and turn them into Peyton Manning. WTF?? PS - Russel Wilson is great, idk if you watch him much, but he is unbelievable. And that is another example of a coach building a system for a player, rather than trying to build a player into the system the problem with that is spread style QBs can't thrive against NFL defenses. Now if a spread guy can learn to read a Defense then they can become good but most of them when under pressure revert back to hold habits and then they flounder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 An NFL-D league. Owners believed colleges filed that role but I'm more convinced than ever a development league is needed again. Ask Fred Jackson what NFL Europe did for him. exactly but how cool would it be to have a team for each team like baseball. For us they could be in Rochester, Syracuse, Hamilton etc and then we could watch future Bills grow up before our eyes. Luck is elite. Wilson is already top-10. Kap still has a lot to prove. Cam still has a lot to prove, but I don't think it's unreasonable to put him in the top-10. Between Carr and Bridgewater, I think one of those guys will become a top-10 type dude. So I think we're looking at around 4 elite guys from the last few drafts when it's all said and done. Bortles will be there as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark80 Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 People forget that Rogers sat for a WHILE and when he did play in preseason he looked awful his first few seasons. Now he's league MVP. I agree with the idea that players don't get time to develop. Even Brady sat until Bledsoe got hurt. If he got thrown right in as a rookie he might have washed right out of the league. Also, he was lucky enough to be drafted by New England*. If he was drafted by a bottom feeder team and had to play right away we probably never hear of him. By all accounts, though, Rodgers was absolutely shredding defenses in practice during that time. For what it's worth. Luck is elite. Wilson is already top-10. Kap still has a lot to prove. Cam still has a lot to prove, but I don't think it's unreasonable to put him in the top-10. Between Carr and Bridgewater, I think one of those guys will become a top-10 type dude. So I think we're looking at around 4 elite guys from the last few drafts when it's all said and done. I'm sick of this Carr talk crap. Can someone show me a shred of evidence that this clown is better than EJ because his stats and what I saw during the two or three games I watched of him sure as heck don't show that. Bridgewater had an impressive rookie season though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProcessAccepted Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 While this is true, the rules have also changed to significantly favor the offense and especially the passing game. Contact rules on WRs, defenseless receiver rules leading to no consequence of going over the middle, you can't fart on the QB without getting a roughing the passer call, etc. I think that aspect gets balanced out because of these rule changes. I agree with your whole post and especially this part on EJ. He even stated after his benching something like "next time I get the opportunity, I'm letting it rip." To me, that meant that they were clearly keeping him on a short leash when it came to making plays. I have a couple of comments. 1. It depends on which QB your farting on. Some guys get different treatment like that no call on intentional grounding that helped Brady in the SB. 2. A lot of these guys became the guys after having a chance to learn from a older guy. Brees, Rodgers, Brady would not be the players they are today if they started from day one. Parcells says the exact same thing about Romo ( http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/2014/11/bill-parcells-if-i-played-tony-romo-as-a-rookie-he-wouldve-been-out-of-football-in-less-than-2-years.html/ ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark80 Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) I have a couple of comments. 1. It depends on which QB your farting on. Some guys get different treatment like that no call on intentional grounding that helped Brady in the SB. 2. A lot of these guys became the guys after having a chance to learn from a older guy. Brees, Rodgers, Brady would not be the players they are today if they started from day one. Parcells says the exact same thing about Romo ( http://cowboysblog.dallasnews.com/2014/11/bill-parcells-if-i-played-tony-romo-as-a-rookie-he-wouldve-been-out-of-football-in-less-than-2-years.html/ ) What about Luck, Manning, Roethlisberger, Flacco, Wilson, Eli to name a few who all started at least 1/2 their rookie season games (and many from day 1)? There are just as many examples on each side of the fence which tells me that it doesn't really matter either way. Not to mention the long list of guys who failed after sitting (as well as a the list of guys who failed starting from day 1). Edited February 10, 2015 by Mark80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1billsfan Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 exactly but how cool would it be to have a team for each team like baseball. For us they could be in Rochester, Syracuse, Hamilton etc and then we could watch future Bills grow up before our eyes. Bortles will be there as well EJ Manuel has played better than Blake Bortles in their early NFL careers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prissythecat Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 exactly but how cool would it be to have a team for each team like baseball. For us they could be in Rochester, Syracuse, Hamilton etc and then we could watch future Bills grow up before our eyes. Bortles will be there as well What about your other recent draft fave Johnny Football? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 What about your other recent draft fave Johnny Football? he's not out of football yet but him and other spread QBs have made me sour on them EJ Manuel has played better than Blake Bortles in their early NFL careers. No, EJ has better stats, when it's crunch time Bortles steps up EJ falters, that's the difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark80 Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) he's not out of football yet but him and other spread QBs have made me sour on them No, EJ has better stats, when it's crunch time Bortles steps up EJ falters, that's the difference. Yeah, he really stepped up in those 3 wins. Give me a break. And FYI EJ has 3 game winning drives on his stat sheet, Blake Bortles...0. Nice try though. Edited February 10, 2015 by Mark80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 Yeah, he really stepped up in those 3 wins. Give me a break. And FYI EJ has 3 game winning drives on his stat sheet, Blake Bortles...0. Nice try though. fell for the stats, you guys never learn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark80 Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 So when exactly is "crunch time" if it's not on game winning drives? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Barbarian Posted February 10, 2015 Share Posted February 10, 2015 (edited) So when exactly is "crunch time" if it's not on game winning drives? extending plays under pressure may have been the better words it's clear when watching Bortles that he is more accurate and doesn't fold under pressure Edited February 10, 2015 by Buffalo Barbarian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy1 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 my take, expectations are too high.if your not an instant franchise QB, you suck, next man up.if wilson or kap played for JAX, they would be viewed alot differently.teams are just so desperate for a Top 10 qb.....the line keeps moving in qb rankings and what is considered good enough. We'll said... I think a lot of the success of a QB prospect just depends on what type of team they land on and how good the coaches are at developing them and adapting to their strengths. It's the coaches job to put them in situations where they can succeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardinalScotts Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 (edited) very few college coaches are really coaches... they are recruiters. They go out and collect the best talent they can they attempt to break it down of my best players who are NFL caliber against your guys who aren't. Works for 8-9 wins every year. This is why Saban bombed at the NFL level and Spurrier and others and why you will never seen Urban Meyer have any interest in "coaching" in the NFL. If I have the best players I win. Why bother with a sophisticated passing attack a lot easier to teach the ground game (go watch most high school games) Edited February 11, 2015 by CardinalScotts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l< j Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 very few college coaches are really coaches... they are recruiters. College coaches have little incentive to actually invest time in developing a pro-style QB either. And plenty of incentive not to. kj Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent 91 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I think that the OP has a point, but I argue that now isn't much different than the last 50 years - there never were a large number of great QBs. The aberration is when there are more than a handful of outstanding QBs. Hence why the 83 draft is still talked about. Only 1 of the big 3 won a superbowl but it still goes down as one of the best drafts qb wise all time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts