xxxxxxxx Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 (edited) Muscle memory is real. And if a QB has mechanical flaws they need to be taken seriously. There are cases where flaws were corrected(Romo)and there are cases where they were not corrected (Tebow). I don't think there has been a single case where a rookie QB started immediately, fixed his mechanics, and had suceess. Brady is the closest, I think, but his throwing improved over multiple seasons due to offseason work. 6 hours ago, Albany,n.y. said: Kizer was never very good & never will be. He was starting because he was on a team that was horrible and didn't have a viable NFL starting QB on the roster, so they threw him in knowing if he was really bad they would be able to draft another QB in a QB rich draft and if by some miracle, he vastly exceeded expectations, they would be set at QB. He didn't and was bad enough that he was jettisoned for a low pick without even considering keeping him and developing him further as a backup. Nobody ruined Kizer because there was nothing to ruin. I hate to break it to you but Kizer and Allen are closer than you think. And alot of people who think Kizer is Garbage also think Allen is garbage. I get the he's our guy so I'm going to back him no matter what attitude, but as prospects Allen and Kizer are similar. Edited July 31, 2018 by MURPHD6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Brown Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 Matthew Stafford was abysmal his rookie year as he started out of the gate. He threw 13 TD's, 20 INT's for 2,267 yards passing (53.3 completion %) and a QB rating of 60.9% behind a poor offensive line. His mental toughness was in full display though against the Browns when he came back on the field to throw the game winning touchdown pass after he injured his shoulder. It's my opinion that if you're mentally ruined by being thrown into the fire....you don't have the right stuff to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tumaro02 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 SILLY SILLY SILLY SILLY topic. Please don't waste my time. Define "too soon". Define "ruining." Without those definitions completely silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 2 hours ago, MURPHD6 said: Muscle memory is real. And if a QB has mechanical flaws they need to be taken seriously. There are cases where flaws were corrected(Romo)and there are cases where they were not corrected (Tebow). I don't think there has been a single case where a rookie QB started immediately, fixed his mechanics, and had suceess. Brady is the closest, I think, but his throwing improved over multiple seasons due to offseason work. I hate to break it to you but Kizer and Allen are closer than you think. And alot of people who think Kizer is Garbage also think Allen is garbage and Allen didn't even play D1. I get the he's our guy so I'm going to back him no matter what attitude, but as prospects Allen and Kizer are similar. Wyoming is a D1 school. And you have no idea what his prospects are. Let the kid work on things and when he's the best option let him play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxxxxxxx Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 (edited) 26 minutes ago, oldmanfan said: Wyoming is a D1 school. And you have no idea what his prospects are. Let the kid work on things and when he's the best option let him play. Corrected. You are right. Wyoming is D1. My point is that there was alot of excitement surrounding Kizer 1 year ago after a couple of promising pre season performances. And now he's suddenly trash and was always trash. Or maybe he was just put in the wrong situation. People were calling Goff trash before Fisher was fired, as well. Too many fans are too impatient. Scheme and coaching still matter at the NFL level. Edited July 31, 2018 by MURPHD6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldmanfan Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 20 minutes ago, MURPHD6 said: Corrected. You are right. Wyoming is D1. My point is that there was alot of excitement surrounding Kizer 1 year ago after a couple of promising pre season performances. And now he's suddenly trash and was always trash. Or maybe he was just put in the wrong situation. People were calling Goff trash before Fisher was fired, as well. Too many fans are too impatient. Scheme and coaching still matter at the NFL level. I agree. We live in an era where people think there should be an immediate definitive answer for everything. Let the kid practice, work on his game, and when it's clear he gives the team the best shot put him in there. I'd say the same for Kizer; he was thrown into an impossible situation in Cleveland. Now he's behind rogers, and he'll get time to hone his game and be a capable backup. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjt328 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 10 hours ago, oldmanfan said: I could argue Carr, Manziel, Winston, Gabbert, Smith, Freeman, Ponder, maybe Tannehill. Just looking quickly through the list. OK. Go ahead and argue for those guys. Throwing random names out isn't actually saying anything. There is no way to prove that any of those players were "ruined" by playing too early, or if they would have just busted regardless. Everybody likes to talk about David Carr, but statistically his best seasons were his 3rd, 4th and 5th in the league. If he was ruined by playing too early, you wouldn't expect to see any progression after his first season. But like many NFL quarterbacks, he just peaked at a certain point and never got better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrbojanglezs Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 10 hours ago, WMDman said: For me its more about not killing Allens confidence behind this line the first couple of weeks You need to have a stronger mindset to play quarterback in the NFL if his confidence is ruined from a couple of bad starts because of bad o line play then we drafted the wrong guy simple as that 8 hours ago, mannc said: 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. he wasn't ruined the coaches praise him about how he already moved on. Who was ruined was the media and the fanbase Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 I think McD learned the hard way putting Peterman in at the wrong time. He will not make that mistake with a high draft pick as Allen, I hope. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill from NYC Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 10 hours ago, Augie said: 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. Absolutely 100% true. Carr was all but murdered week after week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drunken Pygmy Goat Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 (edited) 13 hours 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. Goff showed flashes as a rookie, but the numbers were rough. Jeff Fisher is pretty much the anti-QB guru, and the Rams moved on from him in favor of an offensive minded coach, added some talented WRs, and VIOLA! A QB either has it or he doesn't, but they are also products of their environment. I'm sure Goff would have made some strides in year 2 had it been under Jeff Fisher, but I highly doubt that he or his offense would have played anywhere close to as well as they did under McVay. Everyone was calling him a bust after his rookie season, but not me, because I saw the flashes and knew what it could become under the proper tutelage, and also because I knew that Fisher had a reputation of "not being good" for QBs. Circumstance and environment always play a role, but that doesn't mean the same thing as "ruined by starting too soon". The term "too soon" itself essentially means "ill advised", a mistake. IMO, "too soon" as far as QBs goes is more about situation. Taking a beating behind a poor offensive line is one thing, but stunting a player's growth due to sub-par coaching/development is another. And in a league where you're really not afforded to much time, that can alter a career. With Allen, he has some of the traits you want, but still needs some work. You can argue that it's best to work on those things off the field, but I think it's better to put them on tape in real games. Showing progress in practice is different than progress in live action. The Bills may not have a very talented offense overall, but so far in camp, Daboll seems to be installing an offense that creates open receivers based on concepts (mesh, tossers, etc.), rather than relying more on WRs getting open and creating space on their own. And with an inexperienced QB (all 3 are really, in a way), it should help them gain confidence while they learn, and not have to play too risky early on. IMO, this team as currently constructed isn't as ill equipped to do this as many might think. They brought in McCarron as insurance, just in case Allen does need a bit more time, and (time will tell) they have a defense and run game that can be leaned on a bit more to keep games close. IIRC, Brady had a good D to lean on early in his career. Same with Big Ben. That allowed their teams to not have to give the QB more than they could handle early on, based on their lack of experience, and kept them competitive. Edited July 31, 2018 by Drunken Pygmy Goat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cripple Creek Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 8 hours ago, Green Lightning said: Thoughtful and reasoned post. I agree. suck up 8 hours ago, Dadonkadonk said: Well said. I gasped after reading that no good QBs sat. Add Brett Favre, Steve Young, and Joe Montana to that list as well. Young sat, but not from the start. USFL and Tampa starter. He sat once he got to SF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuoteTheRaven83 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, Thurman#1 said: It's scientific fact that you can learn by sitting and watching. Not only learn, you can even become physically stronger. Have you heard the experiment where they had three groups of people, one that did no exercise, one that lifted weights and one that did imaginary repetitions of lifting weights? The weight lifters gained the most, but the ones who imagined it gained almost as much strength. It ain't an accident that when the armed forces train pilots they have them spend a ton of time in simulators. Of course you can learn by sitting. Again, it's a scientific fact, not to mention an extremely widely accepted and understood phenomenon. Does there come a point where you need to get in and give it a try? Yeah, absolutely. But the "has it or doesn't" argument simply doesn't make sense. For plenty of guys they don't simply can't show they have it ... till the light bulb goes on. Aaron Rodgers is a terrific example. He played very little his first three years. He was terrible in his first two training camps, but in his third camp he looked like a different guy. It had come together for him. And your McCarron argument ... come on! Nobody's trying to argue that with sitting, every QB can succeed. Or that every QB is good enough to succeed if they just sit. The argument is that everybody learns while sitting, unless they are truly spectacularly lazy and uninvolved. And that while some guys don't need to develop, they're ready to go immediately, others do need time and development to reach their potential. LOL. I just stopped reading after this...Scientific fact. This is football not weightlifting junior. A sport and position that involves a lot more brainpower and instinct than lifting weights. I just stopped reading after the first paragraph. Just pure nonsense. Edited July 31, 2018 by QuoteTheRaven83 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 10 hours ago, WMDman said: For me its more about not killing Allens confidence behind this line the first couple of weeks Because you KNOW this line's gonna be bad, amirite? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WMDman Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 10 minutes ago, joesixpack said: Because you KNOW this line's gonna be bad, amirite? I don’t buy we face some tough front fours the first couple of weeks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 6 minutes ago, WMDman said: I don’t buy we face some tough front fours the first couple of weeks Operating from a position of fear is no way to go through life Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cripple Creek Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 7 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said: Here are the ones that have sustained success... So 25% of NFL QBs who are still active. Given the overall success rate of NFL QBs I don't think you're making the point you hope to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 2 minutes ago, Cripple Creek said: So 25% of NFL QBs who are still active. Given the overall success rate of NFL QBs I don't think you're making the point you hope to. Do tell, what point is this I’m trying to make? it was an observation. I’m an advocate of playing guys when they’re ready. Some are game 1 wk 1 yr 1, some never are and never will be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soda Popinski Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 It's hard to say what is too soon. Was it too Soon for Russel Wilson? Guy started from day 1 and it never looked like he needed any kind of learning curve at all. It's the situation and the individual combined. My thoughts on why Allen should not start early on are based on his inexperience with such little starts in college, and our sketchy offense in general. New Oline, no safety net WRs, a TE with a bum knee, and a HOF running back that commands the respect of the defense every single down. They'll key on Shady, but they'll blitz Allen every play. I think letting McCarron/Peterman go to at least week 9 is the right thing to do. But I don't get paid to make those decision. If they play him I'll root for him to succeed. If you look at what Wentz did his rookie year, 79 QB rating, i believe 16 TDs to 14 ints, his numbers were not great. But you could see he was the real deal. At least I could when I saw him play. I mean he was comfortable on the field, he knew what he wanted to do, even if he was doing the wrong thing, he had an idea of what to do. EJ always looked lost, Wentz never looked lost, he just looked like he needed time. Goff looked lost a lot his rookie year, but give him a better HC, better situation and man o man. Kid took off like a shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mannc Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 1 hour ago, Mrbojanglezs said: he wasn't ruined the coaches praise him about how he already moved on. Who was ruined was the media and the fanbase Hope you’re right. Peterman actually looked pretty good in the Indy snow game before he got hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts