Jump to content
BadLandsMeanie

History tells us the NFL is terrible at evaluating quarterbacks

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Looks to me like there's a pretty large correlation. 

 

Out of the franchise QBs in the league now, how many are 6' 1" or under? The percentage is low.

 

How many of the franchise QBs have weak arms? The percentage is non-existent. There's a minimum. And how many franchise guys who play outside, especially in the north, have stronger than average arms? The percentage is a bit higher because cutting through the wind is a factor. How come Pennington looked elite or near-elite until his surgery reduced the strength of his arm? There's a clear correlation.

 

And while having experience in pro-style offenses absolutely is NOT a requirement, does having a pro-style background increase your odds of success, same as being taller does, same as having a quick release, same as having had more progressions to go throgh in college? Probably, and it definitely increases your chances of fitting pro-style offenses in the pros, making it easier for a team to incorporate you in their offense without too many changes.

 

Certainly there's no exact correlation, on anything at all. But some things help and some things hurt. There are correlations. But if people were so obsessed with these three things, how come Mayfield seems likely to go in the top six or seven? 

 

IMHO if we are starting to get a larger number of guys succeeding, it is because teams are more willing to deeply change their offenses to coddle the new QBs. And I'm not sure how well that will work out down the road. But it's an interesting thing to watch.

 

Accuracy, accuracy, accuracy. That is what correlates. And I do mean accuracy and not completion %. There is a range of arm strengths playing Quarterback in the NFL. Clearly if you are end of career Peyton Manning you don't have enough arm but most college QBs are in the range that is good enough to succeed. Matt Ryan has never had a big arm. Tom Brady has never had a big arm. Peyton himself never had a big arm. They won with accuracy. Aaron Rodgers and Russell Wilson do have big arms... they are also accurate. 

 

Equally if you are 5'9 you chances if succeeding are slimmer but most people who play QB at the college level are within the height range of what can succeed in the NFL.

 

Accuracy wins. Always has, always will. Anticipatory throwing wins. Always has, always will. 

 

The size, arm and pro style offense obsession is slowly fading. But it still exists. 

 

EDIT: on arm the only guy in the now 5 years I have been evaluating QBs that I have thought "not enough arm" was Cody Kessler. 

Edited by GunnerBill
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Accuracy, accuracy, accuracy. That is what correlates. And I do mean accuracy and not completion %. There is a range of arm strengths playing Quarterback in the NFL. Clearly if you are end of career Peyton Manning you don't have enough arm but most college QBs are in the range that is good enough to succeed. Matt Ryan has never had a big arm. Tom Brady has never had a big arm. Peyton himself never had a big arm. They won with accuracy. Aaron Rodgers and Russell Wilson do have big arms... they are also accurate. 

 

Equally if you are 5'9 you chances if succeeding are slimmer but most people who play QB at the college level are within the height range of what can succeed in the NFL.

 

Accuracy wins. Always has, always will. Anticipatory throwing wins. Always has, always will. 

 

The size, arm and pro style offense obsession is slowly fading. But it still exists. 

 

 

Agreed, certainly that accuracy correlates. But accuracy when throwing to the wrong targets won't help you. The key skill, IMO, is going through progressions very fast and making the right throw. That's a really rare skill. Composed, informed information processing and decision-making at a high speed. There are some successful guys without Brees-like accuracy. Newton and Roethlisberger for two. There is absolutely a minimum necessary level, but you don't have to have a laser-sight. (Don't get me wrong, I"m an accuracy fan. I hope the Bills get somebody who's accurate, but sometimes it's not all that clear who's where on the scale. Has Allen's accuracy improved with Palmer's coaching and work on his mechanics? Yeah, it's improved throughout the whole offseason. Will that stick? Ah, there's the rub? Who knows. Will a year or more of time on the bench to make sure those mechanical changes become part of his muscle memory? IMO the odds improve and maybe quite a bit. I'd rather have any of the other top four guys than Allen, myself. But I'll understand whoever picks him and what they're thinking.

 

Tom Brady has lost something off his arm, this year in particular, but he has had a strong arm. He improved his arm strength a lot after college working with a QB coach.

 

And yeah, most people in college are within the range of what can succeed. But many are within that part of the range - below 6'1" or so - that succeeds a good deal less frequently. Being Mayfield's height makes the game more difficult. You've got to be much more cognizant of and dependent on throwing lanes and lanes of sight. It's still possible to succeed and even to have extreme success, as Wilson and Brees show. But it adds a layer of complexity, and that's never good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My view is not about Josh Allen. It might explain why I am not mad on Allen though. I just don't see those things and get excited and I think pro scouts overvalue them. They are nice to haves, they should the be the icing on the cake of an evaluation and too often they appear to be the basis of it. 

 

I also don't believe Brady ever had a great arm. Even those couple of years when he threw deep more with Randy Moss... it was his placement that was exceptional. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Logic said:

I agree with Bill Barnwell (which is a sentence that makes me ill to type).

There are some "anonymous NFL sources" who just INSIST that Josh Allen is worth a top 10 or top 5 pick. I'm not buying it. He SO CLEARLY demonstrates many of the traits of a colossal bust. And yet, a 6'5" frame and a cannon arm have a tendency to give NFL scouts complete amnesia and hypnotize them into thinking "we can make something of this kid!". I won't bite. Allen will bust.

Why can't these guys learn?
 

Because they are meathead jocks/glorified gym teachers?

Edited by Fadingpain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from good or bad fortune, which people still tend to ignore, and is of course uncontrollable. You should keep hedging the situation by planning to draft another QB high in the next year or two, not necessarily in the top 10. Perhaps in the top 2-3 rounds. And, stay after it with your strategy, the Bills have been awful at this. They seem to have always wanted to build the team first, and then get a QB.

 

My biggest question about all of these guys  like Allen, which is unknown, is how they handle adversity. Right now he is filled with confidence, everyone telling him how great he is. What happens when he finds out it doesn't work out as advertised, he isn't improving his accuracy and the footwork didn't help? Or he has a trait like "slow" eyes at the NFL level? Just sayin'.....lots of uncertainty. All you can do is follow a procedure of looking for traits that correlate, and ignore the ones that seem to be overrated. Let someone else take the risk who hasn't figure it out, and yes they're still some out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Rob's House said:

I sometimes wonder how many would be QBs chose baseball instead. It's a better gig in a lot of ways. You get a longer leash, more job openings, more money, longer career, and you don't take the beating an NFL QB does.

 

Personally, I think the threat of having a baseball hummed at your melon at 90+ mph, or worse, having a line drive drilled up the middle while you're in an awkward position on the mound, is more terrifying than getting pounded by a DE, but other than that it's a pretty sweet gig.

I think his point was that 3 of the QBs that went in the 1st rd, one before Kelly and all 3 before Marino, sucked ass.

 

Yeah but 'the NFL" found all three.  Individual teams with totally different FO's evaluated them differently and selected based on that. 

 

But, as someone above said, there is no evidence that the NFL doesn't sign great QBs that go on to greatness elsewhere. 

 

Therefore the author should more properly conclude that some individuals/FO's/teams are better than others at identifying the better QBs.  But is so obvious it doesn't merit mention.

 

It's a poorly conceived article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2018 at 12:24 PM, Logic said:

I agree with Bill Barnwell (which is a sentence that makes me ill to type).

There are some "anonymous NFL sources" who just INSIST that Josh Allen is worth a top 10 or top 5 pick. I'm not buying it. He SO CLEARLY demonstrates many of the traits of a colossal bust. And yet, a 6'5" frame and a cannon arm have a tendency to give NFL scouts complete amnesia and hypnotize them into thinking "we can make something of this kid!". I won't bite. Allen will bust.

Why can't these guys learn?

 

To err is human......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/9/2018 at 1:08 PM, BadLandsMeanie said:

This is sobering in a way so don't read of you are over anxious already!


 

History tells us the NFL is terrible at evaluating quarterbacks

 

 


Bill Barnwell
ESPN Staff Writer 

 

We could come close to an NFL record this year before any players take a snap. There are five quarterbacks who could come off the board on Day 1 of the draft, which would tie the 1999 draft for the second most since the merger. The only draft to post six first-rounders is the legendary Class of 1983, which delivered a trio of Hall of Famers in John Elway, Jim Kelly and Dan Marino.

As much as the league seems to be struggling to pick between the prospects in this year's class, though, the coaches and executives of 1983 weren't able to separate the wheat from the chaff until well after the fact. Elway was the first overall pick, but the Chiefs still managed to draft Todd Blackledge seven picks before Kelly. Blackledge threw 29 career touchdowns. Kelly topped 29 in 1991 alone. Tony Eason was taken one pick after Kelly and 12 picks before Marino, who would post the greatest passing season in league history to that point during his second campaign.

A league full of coaches and personnel executives who had spent and would go on to spend the majority of their lives working in the game of football were not able to pick between a trio of future Hall of Famers and two guys who would fail to make a single Pro Bowl. (Ken O'Brien, drafted after Eason and before Marino, at least made two Pro Bowls over his 10-year career.)

 

Thirty-five years later, I'm not entirely convinced we've gotten much better at evaluating quarterbacks. The league has access to more information than ever before, but the job has become tougher. A wider range of passing offenses at the collegiate level have made it more difficult for obstinate coaches to translate amateur success into bland professional schemes. Passers come better prepared for the pre-draft process than ever before and are far more selective about throwing at the combine.

As a result, the range of opinions -- anonymous and otherwise -- we hear about these players before they enter the league is truly remarkable. The error bars are impossibly large. Ask around about Wyoming quarterback Josh Allen and you'll hear that he'll turn into budding MVP candidate Carson Wentz or Titans washout Jake Locker. You'll hear that Heisman Trophy winner Baker Mayfield will turn into either Johnny Manziel or Russell Wilson. This doesn't happen in other sports. Jaylen Brown didn't enter the NBA draft only to be compared to both Jimmy Butler and Bill Murray in "Space Jam."

 

More at http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/23039883/history-tells-us-nfl-terrible-evaluating-quarterbacks-means-2018-draft-prospects

 

As a student of history I disagree. Stupid people are bad at picking QBs. Yes, Buddy Nix was stupid. He literally drafted a QB just to draft a QB because he was as slow as he talked. 

 

Now thats not to say there have never been any unforeseen busts...what I’m saying is when you do the autopsy on Jamarcus Russell’s career, it’s pretty obvious it was a mistake from the get-go and there were all the signs. Seriously, look at the busts and ask yourself — wasn’t the bust potential or the overreach (Ponder) just overwhelming from the beginning?! When you do that you start to see the stupidity in drafting the busts was obvious when it they did it and they didn’t see the obvious signs or ignored them because they’re stupid. They buckled to stupidity caused by immense pressure and did something stupid. 

 

Then look at those busts and compare them to Rosen, Darnold, and Mayfield — those three kids are way cleaner than the busts. 

 

Im The_Dude, and I say trade up!

 

(I was calling nobody in general stupid other than Buddy Nix...he drafted EJ...that was stupid.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×