Mark Schofield: Precarious Handling of Young Quarterbacks

[K-9]

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

 

Are you personally offended that a poster DARES to view Allen with any kind of objectivity rather than subscribing to your "Josh Allen can do no wrong" hero worship mantra?

 

My “Josh Allen can do no wrong hero worship mantra?” What a load of crap statement. Total nonsense. 
 

Given Firechans’s take on things, I think he was being disingenuous. My question was legit. 
 

 

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

 

Are you personally offended that a poster DARES to view Allen with any kind of objectivity rather than subscribing to your "Josh Allen can do no wrong" hero worship mantra?

 

It really is past time to stop your chilidishness.  Have a reasonable conversation for a change.

[GunnerBill]

13 hours ago, H2o said:

He's not. I haven't seen a single report where that is the case. On the other hand, this fact has been widely known about McVay and Goff since he took over. 

 

It is still massively overblown though. The idea that Goff is only doing what McVay tells him is just not true. McVay likes to get them to the line early and then call in audibles but even last year the Rams didn't get to the line early on every play.

[Buffalo Junction]

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

The success or failure of any offensive (or defensive) system usually depends upon the pieces that the OC (or DC) has to work into that system.  I think that in Roman's case, neither Kaepernick nor Taylor were good enough to sustain it.  

For sure. It’s one of the reasons why Baltimore’s offense and Jackson’s development are intriguing to me. We likely won’t know for another 2-3 years. Of course, the inverse also applies... have defenses had the right type of talent to effectively scheme against Jackson and Roman yet? Lynn certainly figured the scheme out last year and ran that 3 safety nickel in the playoffs with a DB spy on Jackson. Gonna be fun to see what NE does. That offense gets to face the current top three defenses down the stretch... which is a pretty good barometer. 

[Mr. WEO]

On ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 7:39 AM, IgotBILLStopay said:

Aaron Rodgers and Mahomes are the poster boys for having a QB sit and learn. Brady, Josh Allen (when he was hurt last year), Kyle Allen (this year) all benefited from sitting for a bit. Yet the Mannings, Luck, Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott are examples of throwing a QB into the deep end right away.

 

Bottomline - every QB is different and no one method will work for everyone. That said, the article is very well written. I did not know the specifics of the Rams with Goff and it makes for an interesting read. Maybe Darnold had the same issue vs. the Pats, eh?

 

On ‎10‎/‎23‎/‎2019 at 7:41 AM, billsfan1959 said:

 

 

 most QBs that are successful in this league for awhile, need to get through that initial couple of years striking a balance between not making so many mistakes they get benched and showing just enough promise to keep their organization's faith in them.

 

 

 

Most high drafted QBs are going to start right away---they were drafted high because their team and their current QB, by extension,  were bad.  It's more the rule than the exception.  They were drafted to start.  GB is the outlier in that they used a 1st round pick to draft a QB with an entrenched starter in place.

 

Josh Allen didn't sit out long enough to "learn" much (Peterman, AJ McCarron?). 

[DuckyBoys]

Hard to let them sit when most of the teams drafting that early have a terrible qb situation to begin with  Bills now have the luxury to ease some of the burden off Allen with great defense and a run game 

[IgotBILLStopay]

48 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

 

Most high drafted QBs are going to start right away---they were drafted high because their team and their current QB, by extension,  were bad.  It's more the rule than the exception.  They were drafted to start.  GB is the outlier in that they used a 1st round pick to draft a QB with an entrenched starter in place.

 

Josh Allen didn't sit out long enough to "learn" much (Peterman, AJ McCarron?). 

Besides Aaron Rodgers, others who sat out at least 10 games despite being drafted in the first round are Rivers, Eli Manning, JaMarcus Russell, Jay Cutler, Goff, Mahomes, Haskins and Paxton Lynch. Even Brees (he was the first pick of the second round) waited until his 17th game to start. Mayfield and our JA would also have sat out per plan, but Peterman and Tyrod were so bad / hurt that the plans had to be changed. So it is not really a given that teams want to play most high drafted QBs early.

 

That being said, Winston, Mariota, Tannehill, Luck, RGIII, Darnold, Newton, Bradford, Stafford etc. did start in their very first game. I agree with you that the latter is more likely than the former - But it is not as overwhelming as you characterize it to be.

[SlimShady'sSpaceForce]

4 hours ago, SoTier said:

What I got from the ESPN article is that neither Winston nor Mariota developed enough since their rookie/sophomore seasons to be considered competent NFL QBs much less than excellent ones.   Neither seems to have improved/overcome some of their worse flaws, and the situations of their teams -- coaching changes, talent levels, etc -- only obscure their failures.  In Mariota's case, his frequent injuries have been used as an excuse for him, but at least some of those injuries occurred because he takes too many sacks because of flaws in his own game.

 

IIRC both were thrown feet first into the fire and may not have had the best of coaches to work with 

 

and I agree they may have been over drafted 

 

but you get what you can if that is all you had to choose from 

[Manther]

On 10/23/2019 at 7:12 AM, Hue5711 said:

I second that, perfect coffee read.

 

 

Very enjoyable read!

[Shaw66]

Thurm

 

I haven't had a chance to respond to this thread, but I wanted to thank you for posting the article. It's really interesting. 

[Doc Brown]

On 10/23/2019 at 6:08 AM, Thurman#1 said:

"So they ignored it.

"That would be a model for teams who faced the Rams later that season, such as the Chicago Bears, the Philadelphia Eagles and of course the New England Patriots to follow.

"Of course, Bill Belichick took things a step further. Since McVay insisted on feeding his quarterback information at the line of scrimmage, creating a situation where Goff had come to 'over-rely on constant and near-instant access to a higher authority,' Belichick severed the connection.

"How? By calling two defensive looks in the huddle. One to show during the early part of the play clock, when McVay could still communicate with his quarterback, and the second to shift into after the rules mandate that the headset radio is turned off.

"Forcing Goff to operate autonomously. 

"The Rams scored three points in that game. 

Meanwhile, the Bills under Rex Ryan. 

 

Rex Ryan unhappy Chiefs’ video board didn’t show some replays

[Thurman#1]

On 10/24/2019 at 2:44 AM, Ethan in Portland said:

You nailed it. 

None of these guys know anything more than the casual fan when evaluating a QB. Im serious about that statement. Every team passed on Brady including the Patriots. Kurt Warner, Jamarcus Russell. The list is endless of the hits and misses by supposed experts.  We as fans see the college games too. Many of us know the level of competition these guys face and the silly numbers they put up against inferior competition. 

Mark my words the next Oregon bust will be Herbert. This guy doesn't have a single signature win or play in his entire career. His yards come from dump offs and WR screens. He will be next in a long line of Oregon bust QBs with the notable exception of Fouts.

 

 

"None of these guys know anything more than the casual fan when evaluating a QB," you say?

 

That's nonsense. They know thousands of percent more. More in gigantic multiples.

 

But it's true that despite knowing a ton more that picking a QB is such an extremely difficult thing to do that they can't do it perfectly or even close. And it's also almost certainly true that far more than fans think, how a QB is developed can make a huge difference. As can things like how getting big money and massive fame changes some guys.

[Thurman#1]

8 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Thurm

 

I haven't had a chance to respond to this thread, but I wanted to thank you for posting the article. It's really interesting. 

 

 

Thanks.

 

I really liked it too.

[Thurman#1]

On 10/23/2019 at 9:53 PM, GunnerBill said:

Good read. Thanks for sharing. I am very much of the view that the Rams' offensive struggles are much more to do with the league working McVay out than the league working Goff out. I said a lot last season that I didn't think his offense was that innovative. Matt Patricia was right to simply ignore the jet motion as window dressing. The offense is a lot of smoke and a lot of mirrors but when you strip it all back he is basically running the Shanahan stretch zone out of 11 personnel. The key to stopping the stretch zone has always been to take the threat of the run away because most of the big passing plays generated in that style of offense are off play action. Take away the threat of the run, reduce the opportunities available deep in play action and make the offense rely on a more traditional drop back passing game and you can bottle teams running that scheme up somewhat.

 

That is why the Rams paid big $$s to a running back with a dodgy knee. They knew Gurley was critical to making the offense go. Unfortunately for them he got injured. Then their oline aged and started to look a bit pricey. They decided to move on from John Sullivan, Roger Saffold left in free agency and suddenly the offensive line isn't winning up front and their formerly world class back has become positively average. It should be no surprise whatsoever to anyone paying attention that the team that really exposed the offense was the San Francisco 49ers coached by Kyle Shanahan.... he knows the key to that scheme better than anyone... his dad was basically the architect of the NFL version of the stretch zone scheme as a branch off from the west coast offense.  When you don't have the all-pro back and you don't have much of an oline and people have started ignoring your eye candy your offense quite quickly looks dull, uninspired and a bit incoherent...... think more Rick Dennison version of the stretch zone than Gary Kubiak stretch zone.

 

 

Interesting reaction, Bill. Thanks.

 

 

On 10/23/2019 at 10:00 PM, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Great find!  And with Allen's struggles with the Patriots and the Patriot-coaching-tree offenses, it does give perspective.  I had wondered if the get-to-the-line-early, get-advice-from sideline was an approach the Bills were using and/or should use.

 

This would argue - "no", it's a crutch that can fail at the worst times.

I would like to note that while I don't believe Daboll is copying McVay's approach, Belicheck seems to be successfully utilizing something he did in that game against the rookie QBs.  He is shifting defensive looks just before the snap, and literally forcing them to "think twice".

 

I believe we did that to Sam in the first Jets game as well.

 

 

 

I'd argue it's not so much something to stay away from as it is something to use only sparingly.

 

And yeah, as Bill noted below, our safeties are confident and smart enough to delay much longer than usual, sometimes even a bit after the snap, before making the moves that QBs can use as tells on what the D is playing. It's driven Brady, among others, crazy for a couple of years now, and I'm loving it.

 

 

 

 

Thanks, all, for making this a great thread.

Edited October 25, 2019 by Thurman#1

[SoTier]

21 hours ago, K-9 said:

My “Josh Allen can do no wrong hero worship mantra?” What a load of crap statement. Total nonsense. 
 

Given Firechans’s take on things, I think he was being disingenuous. My question was legit. 
 

 

 

Well, Firechance's comment on Allen was fair, and it's also disingenuous for posters to tout Allen's fourth quarter comebacks without acknowledging Atllen's own responsibility in creating the need for those comebacks.    Moreover, just because a poster is skeptical about about a coach or player's ability/quality/future doesn't mean that he or she hates that player or coach and wants to see him fail.

[oldmanfan]

7 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Well, Firechance's comment on Allen was fair, and it's also disingenuous for posters to tout Allen's fourth quarter comebacks without acknowledging Atllen's own responsibility in creating the need for those comebacks.    Moreover, just because a poster is skeptical about about a coach or player's ability/quality/future doesn't mean that he or she hates that player or coach and wants to see him fail.

Your takes on Mariota and Winston were very good, as was your thoughts on Kaepernick and Taylor.  But do your really think anyone on this site thinks Allen can do no wrong?  Come on now.

 

I think Allen comes out a bit too psyched up in the beginning of games and I t affects his play early. Something he needs to work on; if I were Daboll I'd go back to the Bill Walsh playbook and script the first 15 plays or so.  If it was good enough for Montana it should be good enough for Allen.  But you also cannot take away the guts and moxie the kid has shown in some of these fourth quarter efforts.  That is a real positive.

[SoTier]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

"None of these guys know anything more than the casual fan when evaluating a QB," you say?

 

That's nonsense. They know thousands of percent more. More in gigantic multiples.

 

But it's true that despite knowing a ton more that picking a QB is such an extremely difficult thing to do that they can't do it perfectly or even close. And it's also almost certainly true that far more than fans think, how a QB is developed can make a huge difference. As can things like how getting big money and massive fame changes some guys.

 

I think that the real problem with picking QBs is that the evaluators seem to put way too much emphasis on arm strength and size to the neglect of other qualities that are much more important to NFL success.   I think the most glaring  -- and embarrassing -- example is the prejudice against shorter QBs.  Two of the very best NFL QBs in the NFL -- Drew Brees and Russell Wilson --  weren't drafted in the first round because they were considered "too short".  One of the biggest busts in NFL history was overall first draft pick in the 2007 draft, 6 foot, 6 inch JaMarcus Russell.

 

The real key to a QB's success is what's between his ears. There are lots of tall QBs.  There are lots of big throwers.  There are lots of athletic runners.  What there's not a lot of is guys who can almost instantly assess what they see on the football field, make the right decision of about how to react to that situation, and then execute whatever action they need to do to be successful.   NFL professionals don't seem to be able to identify collegiate QB with these abilities with any kind of consistency, which is why selecting QBs seems to be such a hit or miss proposition. 

 

[oldmanfan]

7 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

I think that the real problem with picking QBs is that the evaluators seem to put way too much emphasis on arm strength and size to the neglect of other qualities that are much more important to NFL success.   I think the most glaring  -- and embarrassing -- example is the prejudice against shorter QBs.  Two of the very best NFL QBs in the NFL -- Drew Brees and Russell Wilson --  weren't drafted in the first round because they were considered "too short".  One of the biggest busts in NFL history was overall first draft pick in the 2007 draft, 6 foot, 6 inch JaMarcus Russell.

 

The real key to a QB's success is what's between his ears. There are lots of tall QBs.  There are lots of big throwers.  There are lots of athletic runners.  What there's not a lot of is guys who can almost instantly assess what they see on the football field, make the right decision of about how to react to that situation, and then execute whatever action they need to do to be successful.   NFL professionals don't seem to be able to identify collegiate QB with these abilities with any kind of consistency, which is why selecting QBs seems to be such a hit or miss proposition. 

 

well stated

[Buffalo Junction]

12 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

I think that the real problem with picking QBs is that the evaluators seem to put way too much emphasis on arm strength and size to the neglect of other qualities that are much more important to NFL success.   I think the most glaring  -- and embarrassing -- example is the prejudice against shorter QBs.  Two of the very best NFL QBs in the NFL -- Drew Brees and Russell Wilson --  weren't drafted in the first round because they were considered "too short".  One of the biggest busts in NFL history was overall first draft pick in the 2007 draft, 6 foot, 6 inch JaMarcus Russell.

 

The real key to a QB's success is what's between his ears. There are lots of tall QBs.  There are lots of big throwers.  There are lots of athletic runners.  What there's not a lot of is guys who can almost instantly assess what they see on the football field, make the right decision of about how to react to that situation, and then execute whatever action they need to do to be successful.   NFL professionals don't seem to be able to identify collegiate QB with these abilities with any kind of consistency, which is why selecting QBs seems to be such a hit or miss proposition. 

 

I think part of the issue with identifying intangibles is that many of these QBs are in winning programs and surrounded by superior talent. It’s relatively easy to identify a target when you have 1-2 reads and each involves a future NFL WR facing a CB that isn’t getting into the league. Alabama aside, most teams only have a few players a year that will get a legit NFL shot. Couple that with schemes and it becomes difficult to judge. As much as we can say Tua is going to be the #1 QB, we cannot say with certainty that he will be the best NFL QB from his draft. 

[K-9]

2 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

Well, Firechance's comment on Allen was fair, and it's also disingenuous for posters to tout Allen's fourth quarter comebacks without acknowledging Atllen's own responsibility in creating the need for those comebacks.    Moreover, just because a poster is skeptical about about a coach or player's ability/quality/future doesn't mean that he or she hates that player or coach and wants to see him fail.

All comments are “fair”. The reason why Firechans is disingenuous and I’m not, is that I’ve often been critical of Allen’s play whereas Firechans never has a positive thing to say about Allen or anything Bills. Thus he was being disingenuous when he said he was “glad” Allen can overcome mistakes and help us win games later on. 
 

Your suggestion that I point only to Allen’s positives while ignoring all his negatives is as ill-informed as it gets. 

[Happy]

Very interesting article.  I knew McVay had a lot to do with Goff's success, but I didn't realize to this extent.  McVay, and possibly Matt Nagy, are essentially the QB without having to physically handle and deliver the ball.  Definitely explains the Rams difficulties on offense during the SB.  

[ganesh]

The way they did this in the old days was easy.  They just sat young QBs for a couple of years to learn and adjust to the speed of the NFL.  We have lost that ability today in the NFL.  We are throwing young QBs to the wolves and the results are not pretty...they are bruised and battered physically and emotionally.  they see ghosts walking....

 

fix the problem by being patient with your young QB...Don't boo him out of your stadium....

[SoTier]

6 hours ago, ganesh said:

The way they did this in the old days was easy.  They just sat young QBs for a couple of years to learn and adjust to the speed of the NFL.  We have lost that ability today in the NFL.  We are throwing young QBs to the wolves and the results are not pretty...they are bruised and battered physically and emotionally.  they see ghosts walking....

 

fix the problem by being patient with your young QB...Don't boo him out of your stadium....

 

The results weren't all that pretty in the past, either.  We all remember that Elway, Kelly, and Marino came out of the historic 1983 draft as well as Ken O'Brien.  But Todd Blackledge (#7) and Tony Eason (#15) were sandwiched between Elway (#1) and Marino (#27).  Three QBs were taken in first round of the 1987 draft, but only Vinnie Testaverde was a successful NFL QB.  The 1990 draft had 2 first rounders, Jeff George and Andre Ware, and 1991 also had 2 more first rounders: Dan McGwire and Todd Marinovich.  The #1 pick in 1997 draft was Jim Druckenmiller who was a major bust who lasted only 3 seasons in the NFL while 2nd rounder Jake Plummer  had a successful NFL career.

 

Selecting and developing successful NFL QBs doesn't seems to have improved much over the last 40 or so years.  It was as hit or miss 30 plus years as it is today.

[Don Otreply]

Nice read, coach letting Josh try and fail, is a good learning tool for a young QB, and I for one like the concept behind this approach. A percentage of the fan base as one can see when reading peoples thoughts on this forum, does not likely have the patience to watch the “process” unfold. Teaching maturation in a compressed time frame is anything but easy, I suspect many here have gone through this in many job circumstances, the “process” comes to fruition at different rates for different pupils. Again nice read.

 

Go Bills!!!

[ganesh]

1 hour ago, Don Otreply said:

Nice read, coach letting Josh try and fail, is a good learning tool for a young QB, and I for one like the concept behind this approach. A percentage of the fan base as one can see when reading peoples thoughts on this forum, does not likely have the patience to watch the “process” unfold. Teaching maturation in a compressed time frame is anything but easy, I suspect many here have gone through this in many job circumstances, the “process” comes to fruition at different rates for different pupils. Again nice read.

 

Go Bills!!!

But unfortunately, the NFL is  for  Not For Long League...So  different rates for different pupil doesn't cut it in today's NFL

[Don Otreply]

7 minutes ago, ganesh said:

But unfortunately, the NFL is  for  Not For Long League...So  different rates for different pupil doesn't cut it in today's NFL

Haste makes waste....

[Shaw66]

I think the article is very interesting, but I'd take a different tack in talking about QB development.   

 

First, I don't think that coaches have ruined the careers of many, if any QBs.   I think QBs may have been in better or worse circumstances, but I think that they succeed based on multiple characteristics of their own.  

 

I think it's helpful to start with the end in mind.  What does a quality NFL starter - a franchise QB - look like?   He has an arm that's good enough, mobility that's good enough, and a whole collection of mental skills - call it field generalship - that make him a winner.  He's a competitor and a leader.   Much of the field generalship comes from experience.   There are NO great QBs in the their first or second year.   Well, I'll give you, maybe Marino, but I know the details of his career well enough to talk intelligently.   And I know people will say what about Mahomes, but I'm not sold.  I think once the league figures him out, he will come back to earth. 

 

What makes a great QB is reading defenses and being able to make adjustments, and the only guys who can do that are guys who have accumulated years of experience.   Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers.  They do stuff consistently that none of the young guys do.

 

So how do you develop a QB?  First, he has to have the physical tools.   Then you have to get him a lot of experience.   He can get some of that experience on the bench, in practice, watching film, etc.   But some significant part of the experience he needs he has to get on the field.   There's no other way.  

 

The question becomes how and when do you get him the on-field experience?   I don't buy the notion that McVeigh may be limiting Goff by all his radio talk.   The object is to get Goff on-field experience.  If you get him a couple of seasons of experience by holding his hand on the radio, yes he's not making ALL the on-field judgments you might want, but he's doing something, he learning something, every play, every game.  He can'n learn it all at once anyway, so let get lots of playing experience now and work him into the pre-snap read process gradually.    Being on the radio a lot for a couple of years is not going to ruin Goff.   If Goff is going to make it, he's going to make regardless of whether he made pre-snap reads early in his career. 

 

Similarly, a QB who plays with a dumbed-down play book.  If he can't ever master the whole playbook, he's not going to make it.  But he can start with a dumbed-down playbook, learn to make the reads with those plays, and work his way up.  

 

In both cases, you're talking about getting the guy on the field and getting him opportunities to gain experience.  That's more important than waiting until some later time. 

 

Allen is doing it differently.  They've thrown the whole playbook at him, and they're approach is to prep him each week for what he can expect to see.   

 

In all three cases, the objective is to get the guy to have some success, somehow, on the field.  The objective is to get them experience without their having major failure to deal with.  

 

Is Rosen failiing because he's being mishandled?   I doubt it.   He's failing because he hasn't been able to translate enough of what he's been taught into successful play on the field.  If he has what it takes to succeed as a starter, he will show someone in practice in Miami and at his next team, and with added experience from the bench, he'll start to better and eventually emerge.  

 

Can I prove any of this?  No.  I just think that's how it works.  

[GunnerBill]

1 hour ago, Shaw66 said:

I think the article is very interesting, but I'd take a different tack in talking about QB development.   

 

First, I don't think that coaches have ruined the careers of many, if any QBs.   I think QBs may have been in better or worse circumstances, but I think that they succeed based on multiple characteristics of their own.  

 

I think it's helpful to start with the end in mind.  What does a quality NFL starter - a franchise QB - look like?   He has an arm that's good enough, mobility that's good enough, and a whole collection of mental skills - call it field generalship - that make him a winner.  He's a competitor and a leader.   Much of the field generalship comes from experience.   There are NO great QBs in the their first or second year.   Well, I'll give you, maybe Marino, but I know the details of his career well enough to talk intelligently.   And I know people will say what about Mahomes, but I'm not sold.  I think once the league figures him out, he will come back to earth. 

 

What makes a great QB is reading defenses and being able to make adjustments, and the only guys who can do that are guys who have accumulated years of experience.   Brady, Manning, Brees, Rodgers.  They do stuff consistently that none of the young guys do.

 

So how do you develop a QB?  First, he has to have the physical tools.   Then you have to get him a lot of experience.   He can get some of that experience on the bench, in practice, watching film, etc.   But some significant part of the experience he needs he has to get on the field.   There's no other way.  

 

The question becomes how and when do you get him the on-field experience?   I don't buy the notion that McVeigh may be limiting Goff by all his radio talk.   The object is to get Goff on-field experience.  If you get him a couple of seasons of experience by holding his hand on the radio, yes he's not making ALL the on-field judgments you might want, but he's doing something, he learning something, every play, every game.  He can'n learn it all at once anyway, so let get lots of playing experience now and work him into the pre-snap read process gradually.    Being on the radio a lot for a couple of years is not going to ruin Goff.   If Goff is going to make it, he's going to make regardless of whether he made pre-snap reads early in his career. 

 

Similarly, a QB who plays with a dumbed-down play book.  If he can't ever master the whole playbook, he's not going to make it.  But he can start with a dumbed-down playbook, learn to make the reads with those plays, and work his way up.  

 

In both cases, you're talking about getting the guy on the field and getting him opportunities to gain experience.  That's more important than waiting until some later time. 

 

Allen is doing it differently.  They've thrown the whole playbook at him, and they're approach is to prep him each week for what he can expect to see.   

 

In all three cases, the objective is to get the guy to have some success, somehow, on the field.  The objective is to get them experience without their having major failure to deal with.  

 

Is Rosen failiing because he's being mishandled?   I doubt it.   He's failing because he hasn't been able to translate enough of what he's been taught into successful play on the field.  If he has what it takes to succeed as a starter, he will show someone in practice in Miami and at his next team, and with added experience from the bench, he'll start to better and eventually emerge.  

 

Can I prove any of this?  No.  I just think that's how it works.  

 

I largely agree. Can coaching and situation matter? It can. But generally you are talking small percentages either way. Guys who can be great are great, guys who can be good are good and guys who don't have it fail. I have been watching the NFL since 2002. The only guy in that time who I looked at and though "damn he just never had a chance" was David Carr in Houston. He is the only guy I ever saw who I thought the situation he landed in really screwed. He got beat up so bad his first 2 years that by the chance they finally gave him a chance and it looked like it might come together in his third year there was too much mental scarring. 

 

EDIT: Rosen might become the 2nd but I think it is fair to ask at this point whether he has the fortitude to overcome. 

Edited October 26, 2019 by GunnerBill

[NoHuddleKelly12]

On 10/23/2019 at 7:17 AM, ProcessTruster said:

Wow, so McVay was changing the play in Goff's headset at the line?   Wow, didn't know Goff was a total robot.   So McVay maybe ruined him by not allowing him to learn from mistakes, not allowing him to checkdown, etc. based on what the defense did?   McVay simply changed the play at the line based on the defense McVay saw and Goff just obeyed?   That kind of control?   Wow...  Maybe that is why young QBs seem to be running around a little lost if the original read isn't there? 

 

did not know the headset is not on all the time.. never knew it cuts off at a certain time in the pre play.  Does anyone know what the headset turn off timing is??  That would be super good to know when watching the play clock wind down.  Interesting.    Thanks OP.    Does Daboll do this with Allen?   I hope not.   If he's just a puppet on a string, how much and by when will he really learn to do on this own? 

Makes one appreciate a bit more the fact that JK called all of his own plays at the line in a hurry up rhythm, and did so mostly competently at that! 

[NoHuddleKelly12]

16 hours ago, SoTier said:

 

Well, Firechance's comment on Allen was fair, and it's also disingenuous for posters to tout Allen's fourth quarter comebacks without acknowledging Atllen's own responsibility in creating the need for those comebacks.    Moreover, just because a poster is skeptical about about a coach or player's ability/quality/future doesn't mean that he or she hates that player or coach and wants to see him fail.

Well...I would say that depends on the posters and their respective history in terms of banging the same negativity drum to such an extent that if said player(s) do something positive, a negative must still be found to avoid the narrative blowing up?

[FireChans]

On 10/23/2019 at 2:13 PM, K-9 said:

 

Are you really glad about that? Really? Somehow it just doesn’t ring true when you say it. 

 

Better a QB who throws a pick and then leads a TD drive after than a QB who throws a pick and then pukes on his shoes.

 

Ideally, Allen would be Brady 2.0 but I think keeping it realistic is okay.

Edited October 27, 2019 by FireChans

[leonbus23]

On 10/23/2019 at 5:09 AM, D. L. Hot-Flamethrower said:

Enjoyed the article thank you!

 

One thing that always seem to strike me with regard to modernity, are the people who believe in a formula, algorithm or some precise way of beating complex situations. Adaptability and adjustment, while giving a nod of respect to bias and procedure, would seem to be the obvious. The competing forces of opposition would seem to dispel the notion of "cracking the code". We struggled for years in the Middle East until General Stanley McCrystal modernized the approach to an Army of adaptable strengths, communication, tactics etc. And, the approach is ever changing, because complex situations can't be viewed strictly in a vacuum.

 

Postmodern military strategy?

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

5 hours ago, leonbus23 said:

 

Postmodern military strategy?

https://www.mcchrystalgroup.com/insights-2/teamofteams/

 

[PlayoffsPlease]

On 10/25/2019 at 9:11 AM, SoTier said:

 

I think that the real problem with picking QBs is that the evaluators seem to put way too much emphasis on arm strength and size to the neglect of other qualities that are much more important to NFL success.   I think the most glaring  -- and embarrassing -- example is the prejudice against shorter QBs.  Two of the very best NFL QBs in the NFL -- Drew Brees and Russell Wilson --  weren't drafted in the first round because they were considered "too short".  One of the biggest busts in NFL history was overall first draft pick in the 2007 draft, 6 foot, 6 inch JaMarcus Russell.

 

The real key to a QB's success is what's between his ears. There are lots of tall QBs.  There are lots of big throwers.  There are lots of athletic runners.  What there's not a lot of is guys who can almost instantly assess what they see on the football field, make the right decision of about how to react to that situation, and then execute whatever action they need to do to be successful.   NFL professionals don't seem to be able to identify collegiate QB with these abilities with any kind of consistency, which is why selecting QBs seems to be such a hit or miss proposition. 

 

At any given time less than 10%-15% of the starting NFL QBs are shorter than 6' 2"  .  The challenge is finding players that have both of the items above.  Sean McVay seems to see the field better than anyone and  is a rainman like genius in recalling playbooks and situations.  He played wide receiver in college.  I suspect this is because he did not have the physical skills to be a QB.  Russell Wilson has major league baseball caliber arm strength. So did younger Drew Brees.  Older Drew Brees is no arm strength slouch either.    I think the physical skill that separate short Wilson and Brees and tall Tom Brady from other players with equally strong arms and pretty good brains is unbelievable accuracy with the football.  I suspect if the NFL held a  dart tournament for 100 million dollars, Brady or Wilson would win it.  I suspect 20 NFL QBs would see the same tight  windows that the Brady Brees and Wilson see.  They also know they don't have the ability to hit that window and don't throw it, or if they throw it have a higher miss percentage.  

College football defenses are so inferior to NFL defenses that college QBs don't really need to throw to tight windows.  Guys like Brees and Wilson in college used their excellent field vision to find the wide open guys.  Its a very hard skill to assess. 

Edited October 27, 2019 by PlayoffsPlease

[GunnerBill]

2 hours ago, PlayoffsPlease said:

At any given time less than 10%-15% of the starting NFL QBs are shorter than 6' 2"  .  The challenge is finding players that have both of the items above.  Sean McVay seems to see the field better than anyone and  is a rainman like genius in recalling playbooks and situations.  He played wide receiver in college.  I suspect this is because he did not have the physical skills to be a QB.  Russell Wilson has major league baseball caliber arm strength. So did younger Drew Brees.  Older Drew Brees is no arm strength slouch either.    I think the physical skill that separate short Wilson and Brees and tall Tom Brady from other players with equally strong arms and pretty good brains is unbelievable accuracy with the football.  I suspect if the NFL held a  dart tournament for 100 million dollars, Brady or Wilson would win it.  I suspect 20 NFL QBs would see the same tight  windows that the Brady Brees and Wilson see.  They also know they don't have the ability to hit that window and don't throw it, or if they throw it have a higher miss percentage.  

College football defenses are so inferior to NFL defenses that college QBs don't really need to throw to tight windows.  Guys like Brees and Wilson in college used their excellent field vision to find the wide open guys.  Its a very hard skill to assess. 

 

Hmm. Brees hasn't had more than an average arm for a couple of years now. What Brees has always had is phenomenal natural accuracy. He is the most precise thrower in the NFL in my opinion, even more so than Brady. Having a big arm certainly helped earlier in his career though. 

[FireChans]

On 10/23/2019 at 2:10 PM, FireChans said:

He probably wouldn’t have needed those comebacks if he didn’t turn it over multiple times vs the Jets, or that boneheaded TO vs the Bengals. Glad he has the ability to overcome his own mistakes though.

 

On 10/24/2019 at 10:04 AM, K-9 said:

My “Josh Allen can do no wrong hero worship mantra?” What a load of crap statement. Total nonsense. 
 

Given Firechans’s take on things, I think he was being disingenuous. My question was legit. 
 

 

Case in point. Allen lets the Eagles back in.

[Bing Bong]

I find this a bit dismissive of Jared Goff's pure arm talent which is nonetheless impressive for any NFL QB. Add in how Baker, Deshaun Watson, Lamar Jackson, Pat Mahomes, Dak, and Wentz too have all solidified their role as franchise QBs and this new generation has quickly taken over the league: you make playoffs and you prove a football team can win with you as QB.. you've bought yourself time and credibility. They have all earned starting spots for a very long time and that's what I'm evaluating. This hasn't happened in a decade. They're ultra confident , competitive, and athletic. Just luck of the draw.

 

Reminds me of the Brees, Brady, Rivers, Big Ben, Eli, Peyton, Rodgers generation succeeding Elway, Young, Marino, Kelly, Aikman. And there were few great quarterbacks in the interim like Favre, Cam, Matt Ryan. Sometimes they come in bunches but that confident mentality is the intangible that helps them break through in such a mentally draining position IMO. I think it's more nature than nurture. 

 

I also think it's tougher to break into a league where so many veterans can consistently outclass you which is why these classes build each other up with their success. Lamar Jackson feels more comfortable competing alongside DeShaun Watson and other contemporaries. They see each other winning. Early success is also important with or without actual good QB play. Lot of those greats were winning early as game managers, like Brady, Big Ben, or at least later given time and handed a better team like Eli.

Edited October 27, 2019 by BarkleyForGOATBackupPT5P