The overall lack of QB talent is killing the NFL

[KollegeStudnet]

There was a topic on this years ago and I remember someone asking the age old question of how do you get an elite QB?

 

Everyone bashed the poster with their own opinions, because he was in for trading for Jay Cutler.

 

One poster proved his point with a simple answer, of which always stuck with me, "You start by finding one that wants to win and never lose."

 

Tom Brady is Tom Brady because he invests his time in planning, executing, learning how to evolve his game to be one step ahead of the rest.

Edited March 14, 2016 by KollegeStudnet

[nucci]

Allow defenses to hit receivers u til ball is in the air, start calling offense holding and quit protecting the kitty QBs and you solve the issues

what?

There was a topic on this years ago and I remember someone asking the age old question of how do you get an elite QB?

 

Everyone bashed the poster with their own opinions, because he was in for trading for Jay Cutler.

 

One poster proved his point with a simple answer, of which always stuck with me, "You start by finding one that wants to win and never lose."

 

Tom Brady is Tom Brady because he invests his time in planning, executing, learning how to evolve his game to be one step ahead of the rest.

Some will say he did this by illegal means

[OldTimer1960]

 

Disagree. With so many college offenses having QBs who don't drop back, read the entire field, or call audibles there are many come into the NFL ill prepared to do what will be asked of them at the NFL level.

And I disagree here, too. How many QBs that used to run the triple option in college had any significant experience dropping back to pass from center?

 

To me, the major competences required to be a great NFL QB are:

1. The ability to see the field and make good quick decisions on where to go with the ball

2. The accuracy required to deliver the ball to a spot where the receiver can catch it without getting killed and with the opportunity to gain yards after the catch. This is very closely tied to "throwing to a spot", "throwing a guy open" and "giving the receiver an opportunity to make a play".

3. Adequate arm strength and athletic ability

 

Not many of the above can be readily developed. 1 & 2 are very difficult to judge in college QBs, as the ones that are on good teams have the best receivers and are generally under not much pressure because they have great OLs. There are a TON of QBs who looked great in college waiting 5 minutes behind an impenetrable OL and selecting among 3 or more receivers that are wide-open - but lots of those guys failed in the NFL.

 

Thing is, it is hard/nearly impossible to tell which of those QBs will be able to make quicker decisions and have the accuracy under pressure to succeed in the NFL.

Edited March 14, 2016 by OldTimer1960

[26CornerBlitz]

And I disagree here, too. How many QBs that used to run the triple option in college had any significant experience dropping back to pass from center?

 

To me, the major competences required to be a great NFL QB are:

1. The ability to see the field and make good quick decisions on where to go with the ball

2. The accuracy required to deliver the ball to a spot where the receiver can catch it without getting killed and with the opportunity to gain yards after the catch. This is very closely tied to "throwing to a spot", "throwing a guy open" and "giving the receiver an opportunity to make a play".

3. Adequate arm strength and athletic ability

 

Not many of the above can be readily developed. 1 & 2 are very difficult to judge in college QBs, as the ones that are on good teams have the best receivers and are generally under not much pressure because they have great OLs. There are a TON of QBs who looked great in college waiting 5 minutes behind an impenetrable OL and selecting among 3 or more receivers that are wide-open - but lots of those guys failed in the NFL.

 

Thing is, it is hard/nearly impossible to tell which of those QBs will be able to make quicker decisions and have the accuracy under pressure to succeed in the NFL.

 

Triple option QBs in College offenses had nothing to do with the many who used to run pro style offenses that allowed for the demonstration of many of the required skill sets (including the subset that you listed) at the NFL level. Furthermore, those QBs did not always come from the best programs and were not always surrounded by the best talent. With more and more money involved at the Collegiate level, the pressure to win often supersedes getting QBs ready to play at the NFL level which is exactly why those coaches will implement whatever offense will bring them sustained success with the most expedience.

[OldTimer1960]

 

Triple option QBs in College offenses had nothing to do with the many who used to run pro style offenses that allowed for the demonstration of many of the required skill sets (including the subset that you listed) at the NFL level. Furthermore, those QBs did not always come from the best programs and were not always surrounded by the best talent. With more and more money involved at the Collegiate level, the pressure to win often supersedes getting QBs ready to play at the NFL level which is exactly why those coaches will implement whatever offense will bring them sustained success with the most expedience.

Well, I guess that we'll disagree on this. My recollection is that the option offense was the dominant college offense of the 70s. Colleges run gimmick offenses like the option and spread because there is a lack of pro-style QBs. If there were enough pro-style QBs to go around, then I think more college programs would run pro-style offenses.

[26CornerBlitz]

Well, I guess that we'll disagree on this. My recollection is that the option offense was the dominant college offense of the 70s. Colleges run gimmick offenses like the option and spread because there is a lack of pro-style QBs. If there were enough pro-style QBs to go around, then I think more college programs would run pro-style offenses.

 

I don't disagree with your recollection at all. What I'm saying is that most of the NFL QBs didn't come from those offenses irrespective of the level (1A, 1AA, Division II, Division III, or NAIA). My point with regard to NCAA offenses these days is that it's easier to implement a shotgun/spread scheme in the interest of winning in order for coaches to keep themselves and their staffs employed. You lose these days with so much money on the line and you are out quickly.

[Big Turk]

Part of the reason is the college game has gone away from the pro style systems in many cases and the QBs lack basic fundamentals they need to succeed at the pro level. So in effect they are starting from scratch, and in some cases I. a hole because of all the things they have to "unlearn"...

 

Colleges are killing the NFL QB supply but what are teams going to do? They can't control colleges that can exploit inherent weaknesses at that level that don't exist at the NFL level...

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

To me this is the big one. QB's aren't able to mentally process things fast enough due to the speed of the game.

 

On the other hand to your point of 10 good/ 10 middle and 10 bottom; maybe it's just simple math. Back in the days of Joe Willy, Sonny Jurgenson, Starr, Unitas, etc there were less teams. In the early 70's I think there were about 26 teams which is about 20% less. Plus seemed back then the bad teams with bad QB's were terrible all around and without FA stayed that way. In 1970, if you were a fan of say Philly, Pitt, Atlanta, NE, Cleveland, who cares about the QB as the rest of the team was pretty bad too. More of the good QB's came from the AFL side of things too if that has any underlying meaning??

 

i'm going the other way

 

 

#1- the defenses are so much better.

 

#2- you cant have 32 All-Pro's at any postion, even QB.

 

#3- no matter the skill level, there will always be a Franchise Top 10, an acceptable middle 10 and a we need better bottom 10.

[Steve Billieve]

Arguably, Andrew Luck was the last QB to come out of college as a consensus "NFL ready" QB. This overall dearth of talent is hurting the league. Should the NFL do anything different to try to address this situation?

I think the answer is yes. I have two ideas to do so. The first one is insane and not likely to be considered. The second is realistic.

Option one - have a special draft that I'd for QB's only. Every team has to select one. this action is then combined with the second option.

Option two - Every team should be required to carry a developmental QB in a designated additional roster spot that is paid at a fixed salary. Teams would be free in the offseason to treat all of these individuals as eligible Free Agents unless they are moved to the active roster by the team that has their rights and they are signed to a contract beyond the minimum.

The above would give more players at the position time to develop. Colleges are not preparing players at this position for the NFL.

The talent available at qb is the same as for everything. I think you're mad at the bell curve distribution.

[Boatdrinks]

Well, I guess that we'll disagree on this. My recollection is that the option offense was the dominant college offense of the 70s. Colleges run gimmick offenses like the option and spread because there is a lack of pro-style QBs. If there were enough pro-style QBs to go around, then I think more college programs would run pro-style offenses.

There are other factors as well. Colleges also run these offenses because there is a lack of NFL caliber talent on opposing defenses . That's why those offenses don't work in the NFL , high talent level and fairly even distribution of talent among the 32 teams. That's not true in college so it's easy to win games with a " gimmick" offense that most defenses will not have the elite speed / quickness to deal with. You don't need to run a pro style offense, so why do it? Even if there were more pro caliber QBs , I still think you would see these offenses remain popular at the college level. And most colleges cannot identify pro caliber QBs that soon anyway. NFL scouts have a hard enough time. The overall game is different, and the uneven talent distribution among teams makes the college style offense popular because they are effective at that level regardless of whether you have an eventual pro at QB.

[Big Turk]

Well, I guess that we'll disagree on this. My recollection is that the option offense was the dominant college offense of the 70s. Colleges run gimmick offenses like the option and spread because there is a lack of pro-style QBs. If there were enough pro-style QBs to go around, then I think more college programs would run pro-style offenses.

I think if you went back and looked up the stats in the 70s and early 80s you'd see a far different landscape than today...teams ran far more often and passed far less.

 

Even looking back at the super bowl Bill's K-Gun teams...his numbers would be middle of the NFL these days.

 

The game has evolved into a passing league as more and more rules are implemented giving the passing game big advantages over the defense...

There are other factors as well. Colleges also run these offenses because there is a lack of NFL caliber talent on opposing defenses . That's why those offenses don't work in the NFL , high talent level and fairly even distribution of talent among the 32 teams. That's not true in college so it's easy to win games with a " gimmick" offense that most defenses will not have the elite speed / quickness to deal with. You don't need to run a pro style offense, so why do it? Even if there were more pro caliber QBs , I still think you would see these offenses remain popular at the college level. And most colleges cannot identify pro caliber QBs that soon anyway. NFL scouts have a hard enough time. The overall game is different, and the uneven talent distribution among teams makes the college style offense popular because they are effective at that level regardless of whether you have an eventual pro at QB.

Exactly...even at the best college programs, you will only have a handful of NFL players...

[BuffaloBill]

The talent available at qb is the same as for everything. I think you're mad at the bell curve distribution.

Who declared that I am mad? Besides, there is hardly a bell curve at play here. My point is that the NFL can make its product better by working to expand the pool of available talent at its most critical position.

[billsfan89]

QB development could be much better. Top picks are being rushed into action because owners and coaches are impatient and trying to get results or save their jobs. Any QB should sit their rookie year and learn NFL defenses, offenses, polish up mechanics, and learn to prepare as a pro. To be honest most QB's should sit 2 years before taking the field. But QB's always get rushed into action.

[apuszczalowski]

Whats killing the game, like many other things in this world, is the internet, and fantasy Football.

 

Back in the Kelly days, I would bet there were just as many good/great QBs as there are in the league today, the difference is no one paid so much attention to stats and film outside of the NFL office then the fans do today because they are too busy playing armchair GM/Scout with whatever footage and info thrown out there on the web today while trying to fill their fantasy team.

 

and yes, back then teams took their time bringing up players, partly because they didn't have a huge chunk of their salary cap tied up in first rounders forcing them to have to start and make an impact right away, and also back then organisations gave coaches and GMs time to build and work with their rosters. Now your lucky as a coach or GM to get 2 years to turn a team around before being shown the door and the new guy with a whole new system comes in. (not that it isn't always terrible to cut your losses and ralise a mistake is a mistake early *cough* Rex Ryan *cough*)

[PlayoffsPlease]

Nothing is killing the game. It's been a passing game for years. P Manning proved the rare instance where crappy QB play doesn't prevent a SB winning season.

 

First round QBs are drafted to start as rookies--this has been true for decades--why pretend otherwise? Some have done well, some have busted out--this has always been the way.

 

Newton, Wilson came right out of college ready to go. MAriota looked pretty good on an awful team. Even Wisnton looked OK by season's end.

 

The game is fine..

yep

This. Teams used to have their drafted QB's sit behind veteran for a few years before giving them the reigns to the offense. Everyone expects most QB's to be great right away out of college. I think that if teams actually allowed a QB to develop, there would be more starting caliber QB's in the league today.

Myth. The vast majority of QBs that eventually made the playoffs started by year 2 in the last 25 years. Aaron Rodgers being the rare exception because he was on a team with a HOF QB.

Who declared that I am mad? Besides, there is hardly a bell curve at play here. My point is that the NFL can make its product better by working to expand the pool of available talent at its most critical position.

Team has the exact incentives to put a QB on the practice squad, as Idea # in the OP, with the exception they need have player they think is worthy.

[justnzane]

Part of the problem of talent development (not just at the QB position) is that the NFL relies on a separate unaffiliated league to develop the talent for them. The other professional sports leagues rely on either:

 

• signing kids as youths and developing their skills in a system to be eventually ready for the main squad where the parent club is not too worried about youth team's results as long as they are developing the talent the way they want them. If the players are ready for professional level action, but not at the level of team, they lend them out to lower level teams to get experience. Such sports to use a youth/reserve squad and loans set-up as such: soccer, motor racing (minus the loans) and hockey/basketball overseas
• or drafting kids post college to put them in a farm league set up, with similar goals as above. The pro teams subsidize the farm team by making sure it is financially not crumbling and provide for the salaries of the majority of the players on the team. Such sports to use this model: baseball, basketball, and hockey, all predominantly in North America.

This point is relevant as NFL Europe despite losing money was important for talent development and marketing the sport as a whole overseas. This was a win/win that has been replaced with few players making it through canada or arena league instead and our top teams having to play in Wembley or in a few years the new Tottenham stadium.

[YattaOkasan]

The talent available at qb is the same as for everything. I think you're mad at the bell curve distribution.

 

 

Who declared that I am mad? Besides, there is hardly a bell curve at play here. My point is that the NFL can make its product better by working to expand the pool of available talent at its most critical position.

Agreed its not a Gaussian distribution at all. I would think its closer to exponential decay.

[PromoTheRobot]

This is simply not true. Who's an average QB in the NFL? Like around the 15th best QB? Matt Stafford? You think the 15th best QB in 1986 was better than Matt Stafford? The 15th best QB in 1986 was lucky to throw for 3,000 yards and have more TD's than INT's. I realize the numbers are inflated now but this simply isn't true. In fact, the opposite is probably true. Jim Kelly hovered around the 5th-10th best QB in the league for much of his career. Do you have any idea how many flaws he had in his game? Half of Buffalo wanted Frank Reich to start at any given time. As time passes, we tend to glorify the careers and forget about the flaws of players from bygone eras. The QB play is better than ever- whether or not it is due to rule changes, that is another conversation. But it certainly isn't killing anything. I watched an hour's worth of red zone channel from week 1 of the past season on the NFL Network last night before I even realized I was watching it. The NFL is doing just fine.

I'll take that a step further. Madden football has given fans unreasonable expectations of what QB play should be. If you aren't throwing 80 yard bombs every play, you suck.

[Nitro]

I heard an old football coach in the 90s say the NFL will have problems with QBs in the future because the evolving and complex offenses. Keep it simple and tailor the offense to the talents of the QB. Too many coaches go the "square peg, round hole" route. Elite QBs are just that and there is only a few each generation. The pendulum has swung to a pass happy league but it might return to a balance with teams looking back at the running game to help the QB. Only time will tell. Good debate thus far.

[Dragonborn10]

Honestly the same can be said of almost every position except perhaps WR and CB. There aren't 32 quality starting LT's, MLB's, TE's, FS, or centers. You could probably name 30 or 40 WR/DB that are at least competent to start.