Boludo Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 2008: Matt Ryan (1st round) Joe Flacco (1st round) 2009: Matthew Stafford (1st overall) Mark Sanchez (1st round) 2010: Sam Bradford (1st overall) 2011: Cam Newton (1st overall) Andy Dalton (2nd round) 2012: Andrew Luck (1st overall) Robert Griffin III (1st round) Ryan Tannehill (1st round) Brandon Weeden (1st round) Russell Wilson (3rd round) 2013: EJ Manual (1st round) Geno Smith (2nd round) 2014: Derek Carr (2nd round) 2015: Jameis Winston (1st overall) Marcus Mariota (1st round) That's almost half of the starters in the league. There is no such thing as ruining a young QB. The bad ones sink, the good ones swim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 Yep. That entire concept of ruining a QB by playing him to early is Old School thinking. The reality is sitting a rookie QB automatically buys the coach a year, so why do you think so mNy coaches want to do it??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 Almost half? What about the rest? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAJBobby Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, LeGOATski said: Almost half? What about the rest? He obviously just went back to 2008 there are even more before that bottomline is they are good or they are not. And you cant “ruin” a QB (unless major career altering injury) but putting them in early. The Only way to prove that sitting and learning is better is to take a look at ALL the QBs that sat before starting and show how they have had more successful careers against ALL the QBs that didnt. I bet you will be finding out that it doesnt and the numbers go in line with the chances at finding that franchise QB anyway Edited September 13, 2018 by MAJBobby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott7975 Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 15 minutes ago, MAJBobby said: He obviously just went back to 2008 there are even more before that bottomline is they are good or they are not. And you cant “ruin” a QB (unless major career altering injury) but putting them in early. The Only way to prove that sitting and learning is better is to take a look at ALL the QBs that sat before starting and show how they have had more successful careers against ALL the QBs that didnt. I bet you will be finding out that it doesnt and the numbers go in line with the chances at finding that franchise QB anyway Not too mention that some of the examples that people will come up with will show they sat behind a franchise/hall of fame type QB towards the end of their career. IE Brett Farve/Aaron Rodgers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJS Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 I think their success or failure is also partly dependent on what team and which coaches they play for. I'd be willing to bet that some of the flame outs for the Browns, Bills, and other bad teams could have turned out to be quality starters if they had been drafted by a successful franchise. We'veseen it happen a couple times where a QB gets labeled a bust then moves around the league and then finally does well: Alex Smith, Drew Brees, Steve Young. There are many, many variables that go in to success of a QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Domdab99 Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 um, what about rookies starting their first game in the 2nd game of the season? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zerovoltz Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 (edited) I did some research on this a couple years ago after we drafted Mahomes.....I took every QB who had started in a superbowl going back 20 years (this was a couple years ago so didn't include Foles) ....The reason I chose only super bowl starters is simply that if you are a QB and were good enough to be starting in a SB, that is about as good a baseline as I could come up with for what constituted a "good" or "Successful" QB. What I found was that of all the QB's on my list, over the course of their first 16 STARTS, the guys who sat, had a QB rating in those first 16 starts that was nearly identical to the guys who started right away. IF there were a benefit to sitting, then you would think that there should be some tangible difference in QB rating over the first 16 games....the idea being, all these QB made it to a super bowl, so they were good...so the benefit of sitting should have shown up when they got on the field having had more time to practice, more time to study, more mentoring. The numbers DO NOT show that at all. .......and I have posted this other places on this board....but IN SPITE of my own thoughts and my own research to back up that starting is better than sitting..Josh Allen is the rare case where I think actual, tangible improvement might have come from practice to work on some things and bad habbits that come from scrambling behind a bad line, and having inferior talent to work with..... On the other hand...Josh Allen might be perfect for the Bills because, having played behind a bad line in college, and had inferior targets to throw to....he should actually be able to come right in feel comfortable with the situation around him.....and throw for 45% completion pct. Good luck. The kid isn't ready. Edited September 13, 2018 by Zerovotlz grammar 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forward Progress Posted September 13, 2018 Share Posted September 13, 2018 6 hours ago, Domdab99 said: um, what about rookies starting their first game in the 2nd game of the season? Probably not as good, as it means the QB wasn't expected to start and didn't get as many reps with the starters. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts