"Ruining" a QB by starting him too soon

[Buffalo86]

Below are the 40 39 37 QBs from 2004-2016 who were drafted in the first or second round & started during their rookie year.  Were any of them ruined by starting too soon?

 

1. Jared Goff
2. Carson Wentz
3. Paxton Lynch
4. Jameis Winston
5. Marcus Mariota
6. Blake Bortles
7. Johnny Manziel
8. Teddy Bridgewater
9. Derek Carr
10. EJ Manuel
11. Geno Smith
12. Andrew Luck
13. RGIII
14. Ryan Tannehill
15. Brandon Weeden
16. Cam Newton
17. Blaine Gabbert
18. Christian Ponder
19. Andy Dalton
20. Colin Kaepernick
21. Sam Bradford
22. Jimmy Clausen
23. Matthew Stafford
24. Mark Sanchez
25. Josh Freeman
26. Matt Ryan
27. Joe Flacco
28. JaMarcus Russell
29. John Beck
30. Vince Young
31. Matt Leinart
32. Jay Cutler
33. Tarvaris Jackson
34. Alex Smith
35. Jason Campbell
36. Eli Manning
37. Ben Roethlisberger

Edited July 31, 2018 by Buffalo86
Some of those guys didn't actually start as rookies

[jrober38]

If a QB can play, they usually show it very early on. 

[reddogblitz]

EJ and David Carr.

[Maynard]

I’m not a huge believer in ruining a QB. I mean we can show success\failure either way, but if you got IT you got IT. There’s a lot that goes into that IT though. 

[greeneblitz]

IMO there absolutely no such thing, the only danger about starting a QB early is with insecure coaches and GM pulling the trigger and yanking them out of the starting gig.

12 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

EJ and David Carr.

No, neither has ever shown a single sign that they would have been good only if...

[oldmanfan]

I could argue Carr, Manziel, Winston, Gabbert, Smith, Freeman, Ponder, maybe Tannehill.  Just looking quickly through the list.

[DallasMac]

There are a lot of guys on this list that weren't successful.  How do you know it wasn't because they were started too soon?  I don't think you can say definitively one way or the other.  I think it depends on the kid.  Some you can throw in and let them learn on the job.  Others can go in and get beat up and lose their confidence.  Just like when they throw a pick.  The good ones shake it off and others let it affect them the rest of the game.

[The_Dude]

I believe in assessing each QB by their own merits and abilities. I don’t believe there is one right way. 

[Augie]

35 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

EJ and David Carr.

 

David Carr may have just been beaten half to death, it’s hard to tell. Maybe a grizzled vet would have retired from that beating. But maybe in another setting he could have succeeded. I doubt EJ would have been a Franchise QB, but that whole situation was unfortunate. He could have benefitted from a chance to learn slowly and develop. 

[WMDman]

For me its more about not killing Allens confidence behind this line the first couple of weeks

[C.Biscuit97]

35 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

If a QB can play, they usually show it very early on. 

Jared Goff had worse numbers across the board than EJ.  He led the highest scoring offense last year.

 

its an interesting topic for sure.  I think guys like EJ and Allen would both be better waiting to play, especially on a questionable team.  I think there is a ton you learn by sitting behind a vet.  It could be something as simple as learning to command a huddle.

 

plus with how stupidly impatient fans and media are, they are so quick to give up on a young qb.  Confidence can make or break these guys.  We can go back and forth if EJ would have been a better qb if he waited to play.  But his development was trash and there was no plan to let him grow into the position.  I feel like if we do the same thing with Allen, there will be a similar result.

 

i don’t know if he will succeed or not, but the Chiefs have done a great job with Mahomes (I think he will be good).  Let him sit for a year behind a very smart qb, have one of the best offensive coaches to coach him, and surround him with a ton of talent.  I think putting Allen on the field with this poor offensive cast is setting him up to fail.

[Buffalo Boy]

David Carr came to Carolina with the understanding he wasn’t going to play.

Delhome went down and Carr was absolutely terrified to be in there. It was painful to watch. 

He is the only QB I’ve seen in close to 40 years that I truly believe was ruined by the beating he took. Shell shocked!

If JA continues to look like he isn’t completely overwhelmed and our O Line looks serviceable by the end of Preseason I would prefer he start. 

Having said that, I’m prepared for the inevitable lumps he’s going to take and take it as part of the learning process. McD has to have the cajones to keep him in.

 

[C.Biscuit97]

8 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

I believe in assessing each QB by their own merits and abilities. I don’t believe there is one right way. 

That’s really the right answer.  

 

I will I’ll say if you spend a 1st on a qb, you should be willing to give them a minimum of 2 years as a starter.

30 minutes ago, greeneblitz said:

IMO there absolutely no such thing, the only danger about starting a QB early is with insecure coaches and GM pulling the trigger and yanking them out of the starting gig.

No, neither has ever shown a single sign that they would have been good only if...

BS.  EJ threw 2 tds in his first start and left the field with a lead against the Pats.  He threw for nearly 300 yards against the number 2 defense Carolina and helped led a comeback win.  

[jrober38]

3 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Jared Goff had worse numbers across the board than EJ.  He led the highest scoring offense last year.

 

its an interesting topic for sure.  I think guys like EJ and Allen would both be better waiting to play, especially on a questionable team.  I think there is a ton you learn by sitting behind a vet.  It could be something as simple as learning to command a huddle.

 

plus with how stupidly impatient fans and media are, they are so quick to give up on a young qb.  Confidence can make or break these guys.  We can go back and forth if EJ would have been a better qb if he waited to play.  But his development was trash and there was no plan to let him grow into the position.  I feel like if we do the same thing with Allen, there will be a similar result.

 

i don’t know if he will succeed or not, but the Chiefs have done a great job with Mahomes (I think he will be good).  Let him sit for a year behind a very smart qb, have one of the best offensive coaches to coach him, and surround him with a ton of talent.  I think putting Allen on the field with this poor offensive cast is setting him up to fail.

 

Very few QBs who sit on the bench early in their career go on to become successful NFL QBs. 

 

I agree that playing Allen early with this supporting cast would be a bad idea, but I also don't think Allen is a very good prospect to begin with. 

 

Good QBs show they're good very early on. Goff might be an exception, but way more often than not if a guy is going to be good he shows it in the first year or two they're in the NFL. 

[Augie]

9 minutes ago, WMDman said:

For me its more about not killing Allens confidence behind this line the first couple of weeks

 

This crosses all sports: Confidence is essential. I don’t care if you’re swinging a driver, putting a four footer, hitting a second serve, shooting a free throw or hitting a guy on a seam pattern, you have to be comfortable between the ears. Every guy will be different. THAT is why you do so much work pre-draft. Your guy had better be pretty strong mentally, but don’t put him out there too soon. 

 

 

. 

Edited July 31, 2018 by Augie

[C.Biscuit97]

1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

Very few QBs who sit on the bench early in their career go on to become successful NFL QBs. 

 

I agree that playing Allen early with this supporting cast would be a bad idea, but I also don't think Allen is a very good prospect to begin with. 

 

Good QBs show they're good very early on. Goff might be an exception, but way more often than not if a guy is going to be good he shows it in the first year or two they're in the NFL. 

Aaron Rodgers

Tom Brady

Eli Manning

Big Ben (injury forced him to start) 

Drew Brees

Carson Palmer

Phil Rivers

Jared Goff

kirk Cousins

Matt Stafford

 

 

no offense but you couldn’t be more wrong on this. In fact, it seems like most of the really good QBs sat at first.  

 

[billsfan_34]

43 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I could argue Carr, Manziel, Winston, Gabbert, Smith, Freeman, Ponder, maybe Tannehill.  Just looking quickly through the list.

Good list minus Winston- not enough sample size yet but he has had some good work under his belt.

[Formerly Allan in MD]

1 hour ago, reddogblitz said:

EJ and David Carr.

Is that all you got:  Geno, Jimmy, Josh, JaMarcus, etc. etc. etc.

[Augie]

6 minutes ago, billsfan_34 said:

Good list minus Winston- not enough sample size yet but he has had some good work under his belt.

 

He might have learned more in terms of humility than football had he sat. That could have been very helpful. Each guy is different. We’ll never know what might have happened. That’s life! 

[C.Biscuit97]

5 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

He might have learned more in terms of humility than football had he sat. That could have been very helpful. Each guy is different. We’ll never know what might have happened. That’s life! 

Winston was a day 1 starter.  He has all the tools and is football smart.  But my god, he is a dumb human being.  It will be real interesting to see if TB pays him big money.  They probably have to but I won’t trust him at all as a fan. 

[BillsPride12]

But with Josh Allen I don't even think it's a matter of ruining him by starting him too soon...it's simply the matter that he's taking a MAJOR jump from the level of play and competition he saw at Wyoming v.s. what he's in store for in the NFL and he needs a little bit of time to get used to playing ball at this level.  In Allen's case it does make sense to sit back and absorb a little bit IMO.  

[jrober38]

39 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Aaron Rodgers

Tom Brady

Eli Manning

Big Ben (injury forced him to start) 

Drew Brees

Carson Palmer

Phil Rivers

Jared Goff

kirk Cousins

Matt Stafford

 

 

no offense but you couldn’t be more wrong on this. In fact, it seems like most of the really good QBs sat at first.  

 

 

Now put together a list of all the guys who sat and never amounted to anything.

 

* Hint: it's 10 times longer than your list. 

 

** Big Ben, Brees, Manning, Goff, Cousins and Stafford all played as rookies, learning on the field. 

 

Edited July 31, 2018 by jrober38

[JoeF]

Think about the difficult decisions Beane and McDermott made to get us in position to draft a potential franchise QB.  They traded Watkins, Darby, Ragland and eventually Dareus and got a partial year's contribution from EJ Gaines in return for all that.  By the way, they still made the playoffs.  They did this with a QB that the coach chose to bench and was likely convinced from about game 3 of the '17 season had no future in Buffalo.

 

They traded Tyrod, Glenn to stockpile enough to get into the top 10.

 

There is no question that Josh Allen has the most arm talent, mobility, athleticism of the three on the team right now.  These are factors in this decision, but not the only factors.  This Coach and this GM are not willing to throw away seasons.  They will play the QB who provides the best chance to win with the team we have this year.  The media will be clamoring for Allen and so will we...but I trust Beane and McDermott to play the QB who gives us the best chance to have the best 2018 possible.

 

In most cases starting a Rookie does not ruin a QB as the list shows.  Starting a QB who gives the team less of a chance to win than alternatives on the bench -- ruins and divides teams.  McBeane won't let this happen.   Guys like Lorax, Kyle, Shady, Hyde, TreDe, Dawkins, Benjamin, Clay won't stand for anything but a commitment to winning this year.

 

[billsfan_34]

26 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

He might have learned more in terms of humility than football had he sat. That could have been very helpful. Each guy is different. We’ll never know what might have happened. That’s life! 

So true! 

[C.Biscuit97]

13 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

Now put together a list of all the guys who sat and never amounted to anything.

 

* Hint: it's 10 times longer than your list. 

 

** Big Ben, Brees, Manning, Goff, Cousins and Stafford all played as rookies, learning on the field. 

 

I’m not sure what you are arguing.  I named some of the greatest qbs of this generation who benefited from sitting.  It’s not 100% but man, it seems like guys do benefit from learning at first.  My god, stupid people were calling Goff a bust after 7 games.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, jrober38 said:

If a QB can play, they usually show it very early on. 

 

I guess the devil is in the details of how you define “usually”, but there are a number of good or great QB who struggled in their first 2-3 years.

The list would include Steve Young, Drew Brees, Alex Smith, Sam Bradford (6 freakin’ TD his 2nd year), Matt Stafford etc

 

As far as the op, the thing is we don’t have a parallel universe where we can set up do-overs where they QB gets handled differently, so it’s pretty tough to tell.  When a QB seems to be mishandled his first few years and flames out, people will always argue he wouldn’t have been good anyway.

 

I think the clearest argument that a QB can be mishandled would be Case Keenum and Nick Foles.  Kind of unusual to have two QB who both played poorly for a team relatively early in their careers, lighting the league on fire and meeting in the NFL Championship this year.

[Lfod]

I have made the argument for waiting to start Allen until Daboll has his offense established. It wasn't about ruining Allen. It was more about if Allen could be successful in the current situation or not. 

 

After some training camp and getting a peak at Daboll at work I at least feel better. It's not the same offense as last season so I'm feeling more open minded. 

 

We all have opinions and the story is going to play out anyway. 

[reddogblitz]

1 hour ago, greeneblitz said:

No, neither has ever shown a single sign that they would have been good only if...

 

i disagree. In EJ's first game he left the field with a lead over the Patsies**. A Stevie drop on 3rd down late forcing us to punt. d Couldn't hold 'em. In the Cleveland game he was playing well and the popular TBD sentiment was we may have found our guy. Then injuries etc and rushing him back because we had no one else and he was out. I can't say a wait definitely would have helped him nor can you say it wouldn't.

 

How can you tell David Carr would have done better had they held no out ahead to build the line? As it went down he spent most of the time on his back.

[Augie]

3 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

 

i disagree. In EJ's first game he left the field with a lead over the Patsies**. A Stevie drop on 3rd down late forcing us to punt. d Couldn't hold 'em. In the Cleveland game he was playing well and the popular TBD sentiment was we may have found our guy. Then injuries etc and rushing him back because we had no one else and he was out. I can't say a wait definitely would have helped him nor can you say it wouldn't.

 

How can you tell David Carr would have done better had they held no out ahead to build the line? As it went down he spent most of the time on his back.

 

 

And possibly wondering what city he was in....

[xxxxxxxx]

If you believe in sports pyschology, yes.You can damage a QB by throwing him in too soon. 

And lets be honest here. This fanbase does not have a very good record of being patient when it comes to QB development.

Start Allen too early and people will be calling for his head too quickly. And in the age of social media that can really mess with a guy's head. It already happened to Kizer last year, and I hope that it doesn't happen again with Allen.

Edited July 31, 2018 by MURPHD6

[Jerome007]

With Woods and Incognito gone, no real threat as far as we can see at WR which means opposing defenses can crowd the box and focus on Shady, there's not that many QBs that would succeed here! I'm all for starting Allen but I feel the current situation might ruin his confidence. Good QBs make their teammates better... but it goes both ways. I've never been negative before a Bills season but I am now. I see a serious lack of talent on offense. I want to be proven wrong, way wrong LOL but that's what I see. 2019 sounds great though with the salary cap situation but you always have to win NOW. The Bills sure proved this last year! They squeaked by but they did it. And showed they could (and should) have beaten the Jags too. So if there is a surprise star on the OL and WR group, OC is a magician, and the QB is on a streak, anything can happen! But betting odds look bleak for this year.

 

 

 

 

[BillsFan130]

2 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

EJ and David Carr.

Do you really think EJ would have been good if he sat a year though?

 

I certainly don't

[mannc]

2 hours ago, reddogblitz said:

EJ and David Carr.

So EJ would be a starting QB somewhere if only he hadn’t started as a rookie?  Ridiculous take.

[NewEra]

After reading this thread I’ve come to the conclusion that no one has a clue if a QB can be ruined but starting him prematurely 

Edited July 31, 2018 by NewEra

[Green Lightning]

54 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I guess the devil is in the details of how you define “usually”, but there are a number of good or great QB who struggled in their first 2-3 years.

The list would include Steve Young, Drew Brees, Alex Smith, Sam Bradford (6 freakin’ TD his 2nd year), Matt Stafford etc

 

As far as the op, the thing is we don’t have a parallel universe where we can set up do-overs where they QB gets handled differently, so it’s pretty tough to tell.  When a QB seems to be mishandled his first few years and flames out, people will always argue he wouldn’t have been good anyway.

 

I think the clearest argument that a QB can be mishandled would be Case Keenum and Nick Foles.  Kind of unusual to have two QB who both played poorly for a team relatively early in their careers, lighting the league on fire and meeting in the NFL Championship this year.

Thoughtful and reasoned post. I agree.

[JoPar_v2]

Sometimes bad QBs are just bad.

[Freddie's Dead]

What damages the QB is when they get pulled if they have some struggles, like EJ.  Especially for a no talent gutless bum like Orton.

[mannc]

I think it’s possible that Peterman was ruined by being forced to start the SD game, but you could never convince me that he would have amounted to anything anyway.

[Orlando Tim]

In a different direction(trying to make the point that the individual matters)

Rich Gannon was on his 4th or 5th team before becoming MVP

David Carr started right away and become terrible as his line left him to be destroyed and never recovered. 

EJ played his "best" early in his first year and steadily got worse.(he almost beat NE week one and I believe Marrone told him" do not lose game" which is crippling to a guy who is learning)

Rodgers obviously has become good after sitting 3 or 4 years.

I would also argue Josh Freeman as a perfect example

Basically if you start a guy who starts to believe his limited arsenal is enough you will ruin him, and every qb starts with a limited arsenal.

 

[Elite Poster]

2 hours ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Aaron Rodgers

Tom Brady

Eli Manning

Big Ben (injury forced him to start) 

Drew Brees

Carson Palmer

Phil Rivers

Jared Goff

kirk Cousins

Matt Stafford

 

 

no offense but you couldn’t be more wrong on this. In fact, it seems like most of the really good QBs sat at first.  

 

 

The problem is the timeline. These guys all seem to have come long ago when the rules and offenses weren't built around elevating the passing game and protecting the QB.