Rookie QB starting vs sitting. Does it matter?

[Zerovoltz]

A while back this was a major topic of discussion about Mahomes and when he would be "ready".  I decided to try and see if there was any data to support sitting or starting etc.  Here is what I found.

 

I used QB's who started in a super bowl in the last 20 years as a basis to check this.  The idea was to check a large sample of "successful NFL QBs".  Here was what I found.  

 

Of the QBs to have started in at least one SB the past 20 years, the QB rating was practically the same over their first 16 games starting.  So the group who sat, rated THE SAME as the group that started from day 1 as rookies over their first 16 games.  

 

In the case of TALENTED NFL QB's  who played in a superbowl, the TALENT is what mattered, not sitting and learning.  IF sitting was a factor, there should be a measurable advantage to those QB's in their first 16 games who sat, from having more film study, mentoring, etc.  THERE IS NOT.  Playing QB in the NFL is something you must actually get on a field and do in order to learn.  

 

The "Bridge QB" as a concept is dumb.  Having a veteran backup in case your rookie is INJURED so the rest of the team can develope and compete is great...having some guy be a "placeholder" who delays your rookie from taking the field is less than optimal.  You are wasting the most critical portion, the most painful portion of that developement and therefore also wasting:

 

1.  The time you have your QB on his cheap rookie deal.

2.  The useful year(s) of the other players on your roster.

 

Draft your man, get him on the field.  See if he improves over the course of 16 games.  That's it.  

[Mat68]

They should play when they are ready.  You dont want to force the rookie on the feild.  When they are the best Qb on the team they play.  Mccarron adds a bit of a competion element and also time to let the rookie adjust.  I expect whoever is drafted if Buffalo trades up will surpass Mccarron some point during the rookie season.  When?  Idk could be OTAs could be TC could be mid season. Heck maybe Mccarron comes out of nowhere and kills it like Jon Kitna when Palmer was a rookie.  

[MAJBobby]

Nope play the best player. If that is the rookie so be it 

[Mango]

Best man wins in camp. But it has to be consistently. So if the rook comes in and isn't better 80% of the time, he sits I think.  Just to avoid the huge clunkers, and digging the team/himself into a hole. I have faith that McCarron is a more than serviceable place holder, so the situation is different than at other points. 

[Zerovoltz]

 

10 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

They should play when they are ready.  You dont want to force the rookie on the feild.  When they are the best Qb on the team they play.  Mccarron adds a bit of a competion element and also time to let the rookie adjust.  I expect whoever is drafted if Buffalo trades up will surpass Mccarron some point during the rookie season.  When?  Idk could be OTAs could be TC could be mid season. Heck maybe Mccarron comes out of nowhere and kills it like Jon Kitna when Palmer was a rookie.  

 

If Mccarron is playing, your rookie isn't benefitting.  Data suggests he needs to get his first 16 games under his belt...data says sitting doesn't accelerate development.

 

9 minutes ago, Mango said:

Best man wins in camp. But it has to be consistently. So if the rook comes in and isn't better 80% of the time, he sits I think.  Just to avoid the huge clunkers, and digging the team/himself into a hole. I have faith that McCarron is a more than serviceable place holder, so the situation is different than at other points. 

 

Not many rookies will see the field if the "best man" is on the field.  Rookie needs to develope to become the best man....data suggests they dont' develope on the bench.

[Formerly Allan in MD]

Right, Aaron Rodgers learned nothing sitting behind Favre.

[Mat68]

Just now, Zerovotlz said:

 

 

If Mccarron is playing, your rookie isn't benefitting.  Data suggests he needs to get his first 16 games under his belt...data says sitting doesn't accelerate development.

 

 

Not many rookies will see the field if the "best man" is on the field.  Rookie needs to develope to become the best man....data suggests they dont' develope on the bench.

If Mahomes plays well whats the data say about that?  Who to say he wouldnt have looked like Kizer?  Granted Kizer didnt have the players around him KC does.  Some guys are better prepared to play learning the position and how its done at the NFL then winging it on the Fly.  The KC Chief would not have gone as far or been as successful with Mahomes playing qb.  

[Zerovoltz]

5 minutes ago, Formerly Allan in MD said:

Right, Aaron Rodgers learned nothing sitting behind Favre.

His QB rating during his first 16 games starting in the NFL suggest all that sitting didn't matter.  Among SB QBs the past 20 years, his first 16 games were the same as the ones who started right away.

3 minutes ago, Mat68 said:

If Mahomes plays well whats the data say about that?  Who to say he wouldnt have looked like Kizer?  Granted Kizer didnt have the players around him KC does.  Some guys are better prepared to play learning the position and how its done at the NFL then winging it on the Fly.  The KC Chief would not have gone as far or been as successful with Mahomes playing qb.  

 

If Mahomes plays well, what data can you point to, that shows it was BECAUSE he sat and not because he is talented?

[psuscott16]

The problem with the argument is there is no way to track, with data, the mental or physical impact on a talented QB that was thrown into the fire. Derrick Carr would be one that jumps to mind. 

[ColoradoBills]

IMHO it depends on the Rookie QB.

Also, I feel that even a rookie should sit out the first few games.

It's a big stage and a lot of pressure, more than most of us have ever experienced.

 

You don't shove a "newbie" out on point his first day in combat.

[Zerovoltz]

2 minutes ago, psuscott16 said:

The problem with the argument is there is no way to track, with data, the mental or physical impact on a talented QB that was thrown into the fire. Derrick Carr would be one that jumps to mind. 

 

This kind of thing is very difficult to extrapolate data out of.  Just using Mahomes as an example....he was 20 years old last year....maybe sitting helped him mature?  Maybe working on his footwork or taking snaps in practive helped?  Hard to say.  You would be inclined to believe it was beneficial to sit.  But, if you think sitting helps, someone like Rodgers or that grouping of SB starters who sat at first...that includes Brady fwiw.....you'd expect that their numbers over the first 16 games of their careers would be better than a rookie who was thrown right in...that first 16 games....the numbers say it simply isn't the case.  

[Starr Almighty]

53 minutes ago, Formerly Allan in MD said:

Right, Aaron Rodgers learned nothing sitting behind Favre.

I agree and Rivers learned nothing sitting behind Brees too

[Zerovoltz]

19 minutes ago, Starr Almighty said:

I agree and Rivers learned nothing sitting behind Brees too

Favre is on record saying he didn't like Aaron Rodgers and didn't teach him anything.  And again....WHAT is it they are learning?  If they are learning something, it isn't showing up when they get on the field...you'd expect to see a difference in the QB ratings for the guys who sat to be measurably higher in their first 16 games wouldn't you?  

[Boatdrinks]

Most coaches don't want to be forced to start a rookie QB on opening day. If the guy clearly is the better player  ( i.e. The best option to WIN) you play him. Russell Wilson comes to mind. Everything is going to be new for the rookie: practices,meetings  film study, etc. They will have a lot on their plate, and it's not surprising that a vet with even a few years under their belt will be ahead of a rookie. At some point, the rookie will surpass the veteran. Especially if the team isn't winning. If the veteran QB is winning consistently, you play him. End of story. No player should be handed a spot. Especially not a QB. Coaches like to have a veteran to bring stability, maintain a winning culture etc. It's good to have options that can win if a rookie needs a bit more time. A QB can pick up things like how to break down film , read the defenses etc. Sitting behind a Favre isn't going to make Rodgers a better, more talented QB though. You either have it or you don't. Sitting a rookie is more for the coaches and team than the QB.