JohnC Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 I agree that athletic ability and mental acuity are not mutually exclusive. Steve Young had great mobility, but he also had the accuracy and mental tools needed to be a great pocket passer. Even if injuries had robbed Young of his great mobility, his pocket passing along was good enough to make him one of the best QBs ever to have played. I agree. But there is another type of QB: a guy who uses great athleticism to mask his below-average information processing ability. Kaepernick and RGIII--the two guys you mentioned--are in that category. I strenuously disagree with you on your stereotyping of these two physically talented qbs. Both players are exceptionally smart people who are being tutored by a couple of the top tier HCs. Harbaugh is a superb HC who recognized Kaepernick's talents and potential and knows how to develop him as a qb. Mike Shanahan is a superb HC who specializes on the offensive side of the ball. He will tame the nature of RGIII's game and will make him a more well-rounded qb. > But a weakness is not always a weakness if a player is receptive to hard work and good coaching. That depends on the weakness. No amount of hard work and good coaching was going to give Rob Johnson good pocket awareness; or Losman good awareness, or make Trent Edwards aware of opportunities more than five yards away from the line of scrimmage. All three of those quarterbacks failed due to their mental shortcomings--shortcomings which could not be erased by any amount of hard work or coaching. It's possible that players like Kaepernick, RGIII, and Manuel have higher mental ceilings than Johnson, Losman, and Edwards. It's also possible that offensive coordinators can do a better job of masking Kaepernick's/RGIII's/Manuel's mental weaknesses than they did at masking those of Johnson/Losman/Edwards. Kaepernick and RGIII are not in the same category of Johnson/Losman/Edwards. In the early stages of their careers they have demonstrated a "feel" for the game that the stubborn qbs you referred to never had. For those two qbs the issue won't be so much as masking their limitations as it will be enhancing their now more physical approach to the game. As I noted in the prior posting you are making a mistake in pigeonholing players without the recognition that players evolve and get better. You are allowing the failures of the past recalcitrant qbs color your views on some of the more recent qbs. > You interestingly cited O'Donnell in your comparison to Stewart. O'Donnell was a heady qb with physical limitations. He is an earlier version of Fitz. I agree that there are strong similarities between O'Donnell and Fitz. But Joe Montana had physical limitations also: he lasted until the third round because he lacked a big time arm. The main difference between Joe Montana on the one hand and O'Donnell and Fitzpatrick on the other was that Montana didn't have an Irish last name. But the second-most important difference was that Montana was a ridiculously accurate passer who could hit receivers in perfect stride; and whose threw with perfect touch. The limitations of an O'Donnell or a Fitzpatrick don't signal the end of the pocket passer era. A team with a Fitzpatrick as its starter can obtain a huge QB upgrade by obtaining an Aaron Rodgers or a Peyton Manning. Joe Montana was to football what Larry Bird was to basketball. Seeing things develop before they fully develop. I have never made the claim that pocket passing qbs signal the end of an era. Far from it. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are still elite qbs. The point I want to stress is that there are different skill sets and different qb styles. Each approach can succeed. There is no one way to be successful. The issue comes down to understanding what your strengths and weaknesses are and adjusting your game to emphasize your strengths and mitigate your weaknesses. That is where good coaching comes in.
chris heff Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 (edited) I agree that athletic ability and mental acuity are not mutually exclusive. Steve Young had great mobility, but he also had the accuracy and mental tools needed to be a great pocket passer. Even if injuries had robbed Young of his great mobility, his pocket passing along was good enough to make him one of the best QBs ever to have played. But there is another type of QB: a guy who uses great athleticism to mask his below-average information processing ability. Kaepernick and RGIII--the two guys you mentioned--are in that category. > But a weakness is not always a weakness if a player is receptive to hard work and good coaching. That depends on the weakness. No amount of hard work and good coaching was going to give Rob Johnson good pocket awareness; or Losman good awareness, or make Trent Edwards aware of opportunities more than five yards away from the line of scrimmage. All three of those quarterbacks failed due to their mental shortcomings--shortcomings which could not be erased by any amount of hard work or coaching. It's possible that players like Kaepernick, RGIII, and Manuel have higher mental ceilings than Johnson, Losman, and Edwards. It's also possible that offensive coordinators can do a better job of masking Kaepernick's/RGIII's/Manuel's mental weaknesses than they did at masking those of Johnson/Losman/Edwards. > You interestingly cited O'Donnell in your comparison to Stewart. O'Donnell was a heady qb with physical limitations. He is an earlier version of Fitz. I agree that there are strong similarities between O'Donnell and Fitz. But Joe Montana had physical limitations also: he lasted until the third round because he lacked a big time arm. The main difference between Joe Montana on the one hand and O'Donnell and Fitzpatrick on the other was that Montana didn't have an Irish last name. But the second-most important difference was that Montana was a ridiculously accurate passer who could hit receivers in perfect stride; and whose threw with perfect touch. The limitations of an O'Donnell or a Fitzpatrick don't signal the end of the pocket passer era. A team with a Fitzpatrick as its starter can obtain a huge QB upgrade by obtaining an Aaron Rodgers or a Peyton Manning. So in the spirit of alacrity, it is your belief that the most important attributes of an NFL QB are quickly processing information and accuracy. With this I would have to agree. You believe that EJ Manuel does not possess these attributes. It seems, and you can correct me if I am wrong, that you have based your supposition on what you have read not what you have watched. Edited July 9, 2013 by chris heff
Orton's Arm Posted July 9, 2013 Posted July 9, 2013 I agree. I strenuously disagree with you on your stereotyping of these two physically talented qbs. Both players are exceptionally smart people who are being tutored by a couple of the top tier HCs. Harbaugh is a superb HC who recognized Kaepernick's talents and potential and knows how to develop him as a qb. Mike Shanahan is a superb HC who specializes on the offensive side of the ball. He will tame the nature of RGIII's game and will make him a more well-rounded qb. > But a weakness is not always a weakness if a player is receptive to hard work and good coaching. Kaepernick and RGIII are not in the same category of Johnson/Losman/Edwards. In the early stages of their careers they have demonstrated a "feel" for the game that the stubborn qbs you referred to never had. For those two qbs the issue won't be so much as masking their limitations as it will be enhancing their now more physical approach to the game. As I noted in the prior posting you are making a mistake in pigeonholing players without the recognition that players evolve and get better. You are allowing the failures of the past recalcitrant qbs color your views on some of the more recent qbs. > You interestingly cited O'Donnell in your comparison to Stewart. O'Donnell was a heady qb with physical limitations. He is an earlier version of Fitz. Joe Montana was to football what Larry Bird was to basketball. Seeing things develop before they fully develop. I have never made the claim that pocket passing qbs signal the end of an era. Far from it. Peyton Manning and Tom Brady are still elite qbs. The point I want to stress is that there are different skill sets and different qb styles. Each approach can succeed. There is no one way to be successful. The issue comes down to understanding what your strengths and weaknesses are and adjusting your game to emphasize your strengths and mitigate your weaknesses. That is where good coaching comes in. > I strenuously disagree with you on your stereotyping of these two physically talented qbs. Both players > are exceptionally smart people who are being tutored by a couple of the top tier HCs. Earlier, you mentioned Kaepernick and RGIII as examples of physically gifted QBs who play in simplified offenses. Maybe they can learn to play in more complex offenses: to quickly and accurately handle large amounts of information the way Aaron Rodgers does. I'm not discounting that possibility. On the other hand, a player should never be given credit for accomplishing or proving something, until he's actually accomplished or proved it. Thus far Kaepernick and RGIII have not yet proved they can process information at or near the Aaron Rodgers level. > As I noted in the prior posting you are making a mistake in pigeonholing players without the recognition that players evolve and get better. A player like Drew Brees had a high mental ceiling; but that was not necessarily obvious based on the early portion of his career. He evolved toward his high mental ceiling, but it took time. Losman had a much lower mental ceiling; and required several years to reach that low ceiling. In college, Drew Brees had displayed more evidence of being an accomplished pocket passer, with a high mental ceiling, than had Losman. > Kaepernick and RGIII are not in the same category of Johnson/Losman/Edwards. In the early stages > of their careers they have demonstrated a "feel" for the game that the stubborn qbs you referred to never had. I tend to agree with this. But it's also important to remember that with Johnson/Losman/Edwards, we're dealing with 20/20 hindsight. A number of people on this board would have said positive things about Losman's feel for the game after the 2006 season; or Edwards' feel for the game after the 2008 season.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 If I understand you correctly, you're saying that, in the right system, a sufficiently athletic QB can use his athleticism to compensate for mental limitations. This right system would ask the QB to do a lot of things that only an athletic quarterback could do--thus playing to his strengths. At the same time, the person designing the system needs to avoid asking the QB to do some of the things that are beyond the QB's mental limits. This time around, highly athletic, mobile QBs--guys who don't necessarily have Aaron Rodgers-level information processing ability--are experiencing considerable success early in their careers. Is that success an anomaly? Or has something changed--something which would allow today's athletic, mentally limited QBs to achieve more long-term success than that category of QBs had in the past? Let's say something has changed. If offensive coordinators have unleashed a new style of offense uniquely suited to maximizing athletic QBs' strengths, how long will it be before defensive coordinators unveil new defenses well-suited to exposing their mental weaknesses? The bolded are the two salient questions and neither question has yet been answered. As JohnC points out, another question is whether the QBs in question (basically we're talking about Cam Newton, RGIII, and Kaepernick and by suggestion, EJ) will be able to continue to develop the mental aspect to compensate for the inevitable decline in their physical skills. That is the 3rd question for which we have no clear answer. I will ask you this, within our own division the backups as of today are, Ryan Mallett, Matt Moore and Geno Smith. Would you make a straight up trade of Kolb for any of these guys? You've made some great points Chris but I think this question misses the mark because two of the players have yet to play a regular season down in the NFL. But yes, I'd rather have Matt Moore (80.5 career passer rating, career record of 13-12 on mostly bad teams) than Kevin Kolb. I'd also probably take a guy like Shaun Hill who has a lifetime passer rating of 85.9 and a career record of 13-13, mostly on bad teams. So to your point, there are backup QBs that I'd prefer to Kevin Kolb. In fairness to Kolb however, I don't profess to have a comprehensive grip on exactly how competent he is.
JohnC Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) > I strenuously disagree with you on your stereotyping of these two physically talented qbs. Both players > are exceptionally smart people who are being tutored by a couple of the top tier HCs. Earlier, you mentioned Kaepernick and RGIII as examples of physically gifted QBs who play in simplified offenses. Maybe they can learn to play in more complex offenses: to quickly and accurately handle large amounts of information the way Aaron Rodgers does. I'm not discounting that possibility. On the other hand, a player should never be given credit for accomplishing or proving something, until he's actually accomplished or proved it. Thus far Kaepernick and RGIII have not yet proved they can process information at or near the Aaron Rodgers level. What you haven't acknowledged so far is that both Kaepernick and RGIII demonstrated last year that they on the strength of their perfomrances elevated their respective teams to new heights. Kaepernick was instrumental in getting his team to the SB and bringing it to the edge of victory. Also, RGIII elevated a long term floundering team to the playoffs. If he didn't get hurt there is a good chance that the Redskins could have been playing in the NFC championship game. What I'm stressing is that these two qbs have very early in their careers exhibited abilities that make them impact players. Their ability to be key players and the centerpiece of their respective teams is not a fluke. That is not going to be done without some mental wherewithal to go along with their physical talents. > As I noted in the prior posting you are making a mistake in pigeonholing players without the recognition that players evolve and get better. A player like Drew Brees had a high mental ceiling; but that was not necessarily obvious based on the early portion of his career. He evolved toward his high mental ceiling, but it took time. Losman had a much lower mental ceiling; and required several years to reach that low ceiling. In college, Drew Brees had displayed more evidence of being an accomplished pocket passer, with a high mental ceiling, than had Losman. Drew Brees is one of my favorite qbs. He is going to be inducted in the HOF some day. Your citing of Drew Brees's developoment over time reinforces my point that it takes time for qbs to develop. There are qbs such as Losman and RJ Johnson who never outgrow their limitations. Just because they can't break out of their aggravating mental blockages that doesn't mean that other qbs can't make the leap towards being an accomplished qb. You seem to stress the point that you are who you first appear to be. I am rejecting that generalization and giving more credence to the process of growth and development. Yes you are right that some prospects simply don't have the requisite traits to be a success at such a challenging position. But I'm cautioning you on being too premature in your judgment until the process runs its course. With your quick draw approach you seem to have in assessing qbs you would have made a quick negative judgment on a qb such as Favre. He was a physical talent who lacked in maturity and an early grasp of the game. The Packers were the beneficiaries of not making the quick disqualifying judgment on a player who turned out to be a HOF qb for them. > Kaepernick and RGIII are not in the same category of Johnson/Losman/Edwards. In the early stages > of their careers they have demonstrated a "feel" for the game that the stubborn qbs you referred to never had. I tend to agree with this. But it's also important to remember that with Johnson/Losman/Edwards, we're dealing with 20/20 hindsight. A number of people on this board would have said positive things about Losman's feel for the game after the 2006 season; or Edwards' feel for the game after the 2008 season. Especially with the qb position it is better to be patient and make sure that your qb isn't up to the task than it is to too quickly go on to the next option. The Bills gave both Losman and Edwards a fair chance to prove that they were legitimate franchise qbs. It didn't work out. So what. They demonstrated they couldn't do the job or grow in to the job. They were then dispatched. That is how it works. The failing of Nix is that he didn't exhibit much urgency in finding the next legitimate franchise qb. That is why he is a dismal failure who set this franchise back by years. Edited July 10, 2013 by JohnC
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Again, one of the main questions is whether RGIII, Cam Newton, and Kaepernick will be able to build on their early success. Vince Young was Rookie of the Year and a Pro Bowler in his first season so he too had success early. It will be interesting to see if the 3 more recent QBs can do what Vince Young couldn't do and build on their early success.
Dragonborn10 Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Any list of active QB's that does not start with Brady followed by two empty spots and then the next QB is a waste of time reading. I hate him but he and Montana are the best QB's of all time. He is showing no signs of slowing down. I respect Rodgers but Brees plays at least 9 games a year in a dome. Let's see him put up 5000 yards in Boston or Green Bay weather. Well let me ask you this. Here's Jaws QB ranking from last year. Do you agree with it? BTW I think Cosell really knows what he's talking about. Jaws, I think he can see the trees (break down a play) really well. But he has trouble seeing the forest (the totality of how a player contributes to a team) Jaws' QB Countdown Series Rankings No. 30 Tim Tebow New York Jets No. 29 Blaine Gabbert Jacksonville Jaguars No. 28 Christian Ponder Minnesota Vikings No. 27 Matt Flynn Seattle Seahawks No. 26 Matt Moore Miami Dolphins No. 25 Kevin Kolb Arizona Cardinals No. 24 Ryan Fitzpatrick Buffalo Bills No. 23 Mark Sanchez New York Jets No. 22 Matt Cassel Kansas City Chiefs No. 21 Carson Palmer Oakland Raiders No. 20 Sam Bradford St. Louis Rams No. 19 Andy Dalton Cincinnati Bengals No. 18 Matt Hasselbeck Tennessee Titans No. 17 Josh Freeman Tampa Bay Buccaneers No. 16 Alex Smith San Francisco 49ers No. 15 Cam Newton Carolina Panthers No. 14 Matthew Stafford Detroit Lions No. 13 Matt Schaub Houston Texans No. 12 Michael Vick Philadelphia Eagles No. 11 Matt Ryan Atlanta Falcons No. 10 Tony Romo Dallas Cowboys No. 9 Joe Flacco Baltimore Ravens No. 8 Jay Cutler Chicago Bears No. 7 Philip Rivers San Diego Chargers No. 6 Ben Roethlisberger Pittsburgh Steelers No. 5 Eli Manning New York Giants No. 4 Peyton Manning Denver Broncos No. 3 Tom Brady New England Patriots No. 2 Drew Brees New Orleans Saints No. 1 Aaron Rodgers Green Bay Packers I think the bottom line is it's not too difficult to evaluate a guy's toolbox - what he can see, can he make all the throws, his technique. But his contribution to the team, his ability to actually play when the whistle blows, is harder to evaluate. That's what I meant by saying it's "horseradish and hossenpfeffer".
Orton's Arm Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 The bolded are the two salient questions and neither question has yet been answered. As JohnC points out, another question is whether the QBs in question (basically we're talking about Cam Newton, RGIII, and Kaepernick and by suggestion, EJ) will be able to continue to develop the mental aspect to compensate for the inevitable decline in their physical skills. That is the 3rd question for which we have no clear answer. You've made some great points Chris but I think this question misses the mark because two of the players have yet to play a regular season down in the NFL. But yes, I'd rather have Matt Moore (80.5 career passer rating, career record of 13-12 on mostly bad teams) than Kevin Kolb. I'd also probably take a guy like Shaun Hill who has a lifetime passer rating of 85.9 and a career record of 13-13, mostly on bad teams. So to your point, there are backup QBs that I'd prefer to Kevin Kolb. In fairness to Kolb however, I don't profess to have a comprehensive grip on exactly how competent he is. > As JohnC points out, another question is whether the QBs in question (basically we're > talking about Cam Newton, RGIII, and Kaepernick and by suggestion, EJ) will be able to > continue to develop the mental aspect to compensate for the inevitable decline in their physical skills. Even if their level of physical skills were to stay exactly the same over the next ten years, it's not a given that their level of performance would stay the same. Kordell Stewart was a physically gifted quarterback who had one good season before defenses caught up to him. The same thing may or may not happen to the three guys you mentioned, but it's worth watching. As an aside, I have a high respect for your opinion. The fact you are optimistic about Manuel makes me feel better about him than I otherwise would.
Orton's Arm Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 What you haven't acknowledged so far is that both Kaepernick and RGIII demonstrated last year that they on the strength of their perfomrances elevated their respective teams to new heights. Kaepernick was instrumental in getting his team to the SB and bringing it to the edge of victory. Also, RGIII elevated a long term floundering team to the playoffs. If he didn't get hurt there is a good chance that the Redskins could have been playing in the NFC championship game. What I'm stressing is that these two qbs have very early in their careers exhibited abilities that make them impact players. Their ability to be key players and the centerpiece of their respective teams is not a fluke. That is not going to be done without some mental wherewithal to go along with their physical talents. > As I noted in the prior posting you are making a mistake in pigeonholing players without the recognition that players evolve and get better. Drew Brees is one of my favorite qbs. He is going to be inducted in the HOF some day. Your citing of Drew Brees's developoment over time reinforces my point that it takes time for qbs to develop. There are qbs such as Losman and RJ Johnson who never outgrow their limitations. Just because they can't break out of their aggravating mental blockages that doesn't mean that other qbs can't make the leap towards being an accomplished qb. You seem to stress the point that you are who you first appear to be. I am rejecting that generalization and giving more credence to the process of growth and development. Yes you are right that some prospects simply don't have the requisite traits to be a success at such a challenging position. But I'm cautioning you on being too premature in your judgment until the process runs its course. With your quick draw approach you seem to have in assessing qbs you would have made a quick negative judgment on a qb such as Favre. He was a physical talent who lacked in maturity and an early grasp of the game. The Packers were the beneficiaries of not making the quick disqualifying judgment on a player who turned out to be a HOF qb for them. > Kaepernick and RGIII are not in the same category of Johnson/Losman/Edwards. In the early stages > of their careers they have demonstrated a "feel" for the game that the stubborn qbs you referred to never had. Especially with the qb position it is better to be patient and make sure that your qb isn't up to the task than it is to too quickly go on to the next option. The Bills gave both Losman and Edwards a fair chance to prove that they were legitimate franchise qbs. It didn't work out. So what. They demonstrated they couldn't do the job or grow in to the job. They were then dispatched. That is how it works. The failing of Nix is that he didn't exhibit much urgency in finding the next legitimate franchise qb. That is why he is a dismal failure who set this franchise back by years. > What you haven't acknowledged so far is that both Kaepernick and RGIII demonstrated last year that > they on the strength of their perfomrances elevated their respective teams to new heights. If I haven't acknowledged that before, then I'll do so now. Consider the above statement acknowledged. > Drew Brees is one of my favorite qbs. He is going to be inducted in the > HOF some day. Your citing of Drew Brees's developoment over time reinforces my > point that it takes time for qbs to develop. There are qbs such as Losman and RJ > Johnson who never outgrow their limitations. Just because they can't break out > of their aggravating mental blockages that doesn't mean that other qbs can't > make the leap towards being an accomplished qb. Let's say you have a baby tortoise and a baby parrot. At first, neither animal shows any real speech ability. Learning how to talk takes time. So you give each animal several years of training; at the end of which the parrot knows how to talk, and the tortoise does not. The tortoise was never going to learn how to talk, because its mental ceiling was lower than the parrot's. So how do you know if the quarterback you've drafted is a tortoise like Losman or a parrot like Brees? If a draft prospect is described as "raw," or "a project," odds are he's a tortoise. But if, as a draft prospect, he's described as "polished," "NFL-ready," and so forth, there's a pretty good chance he's a parrot. If at the college level a QB shows he's good at handling the mental aspects of the game, then I'm willing to give him time to grow into the demands of the NFL. But if a college QB didn't do much to show high bandwidth, then I don't want my team drafting him. I certainly don't want them eschewing other potential QB prospects to give him more time to develop. In 2004, TD chose not to trade up for Roethlisberger, in part because he felt Houston's asking price was too high, and because he was confident Losman could be the answer. Later in the 2004 draft, he passed up the opportunity to draft Matt Schaub--now a franchise QB--because he felt the answer to the QB position was already on the roster in the form of Losman. In 2005, TD didn't draft Aaron Rodgers late in the first round, partly because he felt he was all set with Losman, and partly because his first round pick of 2005 had been used to acquire Losman. When a team puts its faith in a quarterback who didn't demonstrate mental acuity in college football, it can pay a very high price.
chris heff Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 > What you haven't acknowledged so far is that both Kaepernick and RGIII demonstrated last year that > they on the strength of their perfomrances elevated their respective teams to new heights. If I haven't acknowledged that before, then I'll do so now. Consider the above statement acknowledged. > Drew Brees is one of my favorite qbs. He is going to be inducted in the > HOF some day. Your citing of Drew Brees's developoment over time reinforces my > point that it takes time for qbs to develop. There are qbs such as Losman and RJ > Johnson who never outgrow their limitations. Just because they can't break out > of their aggravating mental blockages that doesn't mean that other qbs can't > make the leap towards being an accomplished qb. Let's say you have a baby tortoise and a baby parrot. At first, neither animal shows any real speech ability. Learning how to talk takes time. So you give each animal several years of training; at the end of which the parrot knows how to talk, and the tortoise does not. The tortoise was never going to learn how to talk, because its mental ceiling was lower than the parrot's. So how do you know if the quarterback you've drafted is a tortoise like Losman or a parrot like Brees? If a draft prospect is described as "raw," or "a project," odds are he's a tortoise. But if, as a draft prospect, he's described as "polished," "NFL-ready," and so forth, there's a pretty good chance he's a parrot. If at the college level a QB shows he's good at handling the mental aspects of the game, then I'm willing to give him time to grow into the demands of the NFL. But if a college QB didn't do much to show high bandwidth, then I don't want my team drafting him. I certainly don't want them eschewing other potential QB prospects to give him more time to develop. In 2004, TD chose not to trade up for Roethlisberger, in part because he felt Houston's asking price was too high, and because he was confident Losman could be the answer. Later in the 2004 draft, he passed up the opportunity to draft Matt Schaub--now a franchise QB--because he felt the answer to the QB position was already on the roster in the form of Losman. In 2005, TD didn't draft Aaron Rodgers late in the first round, partly because he felt he was all set with Losman, and partly because his first round pick of 2005 had been used to acquire Losman. When a team puts its faith in a quarterback who didn't demonstrate mental acuity in college football, it can pay a very high price. Very philosophical, I could be wrong, but it seems to me that your opinion of EJ Manuel is based on what you have read, not on having watched him play football. Is this true or false?
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Thanks EA. As others have pointed out there's roughly a 50/50 chance he'll succeed. But I'm so tickled that the Bills took the player I wanted that it's actually hard for me to be objective about him now that he's actually a Bill. And I really like him as a person. I find that he has substance to him and I like his temperament. Also I don't sense any phoniness in him so all things considered, he's gonna be an easy person for us to root for.
JohnC Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) > What you haven't acknowledged so far is that both Kaepernick and RGIII demonstrated last year that > they on the strength of their perfomrances elevated their respective teams to new heights. If I haven't acknowledged that before, then I'll do so now. Consider the above statement acknowledged. > Drew Brees is one of my favorite qbs. He is going to be inducted in the > HOF some day. Your citing of Drew Brees's developoment over time reinforces my > point that it takes time for qbs to develop. There are qbs such as Losman and RJ > Johnson who never outgrow their limitations. Just because they can't break out > of their aggravating mental blockages that doesn't mean that other qbs can't > make the leap towards being an accomplished qb. Let's say you have a baby tortoise and a baby parrot. At first, neither animal shows any real speech ability. Learning how to talk takes time. So you give each animal several years of training; at the end of which the parrot knows how to talk, and the tortoise does not. The tortoise was never going to learn how to talk, because its mental ceiling was lower than the parrot's. So how do you know if the quarterback you've drafted is a tortoise like Losman or a parrot like Brees? If a draft prospect is described as "raw," or "a project," odds are he's a tortoise. But if, as a draft prospect, he's described as "polished," "NFL-ready," and so forth, there's a pretty good chance he's a parrot. If at the college level a QB shows he's good at handling the mental aspects of the game, then I'm willing to give him time to grow into the demands of the NFL. But if a college QB didn't do much to show high bandwidth, then I don't want my team drafting him. I certainly don't want them eschewing other potential QB prospects to give him more time to develop. In 2004, TD chose not to trade up for Roethlisberger, in part because he felt Houston's asking price was too high, and because he was confident Losman could be the answer. Later in the 2004 draft, he passed up the opportunity to draft Matt Schaub--now a franchise QB--because he felt the answer to the QB position was already on the roster in the form of Losman. In 2005, TD didn't draft Aaron Rodgers late in the first round, partly because he felt he was all set with Losman, and partly because his first round pick of 2005 had been used to acquire Losman. When a team puts its faith in a quarterback who didn't demonstrate mental acuity in college football, it can pay a very high price. Most often you simply don't know how a player is going to turn out. That is the conundrum. You noted that Steve Young is one of the all time great qbs in the NFL. How long did it take before he exhibited a mastery of the game? He played in the USFL, with Tampa and was traded to the 49ers and then sat behind Montana before taking over as the starting qb. It took a visionary coach (Walsh) who recognized the talent Young had and then it took years sitting on the bench before he attainted his lofty status. Another qb you cited was Drew Brees. He wasn't an instant success. In fact the Chargers drafted Rivers to replace him. Injuries were certainly a factor in his early struggles but it wasn't until he played for the Saints (years later after being drafted) before he became an elite qb. I agree with you that some qbs, if not most, simply don't have the capacity to be an impactful qb. How do you determine that abililty? It certainly isn't established in the made for TV Gruden camps. You find out by playing the prospect. Some special qbs, such as Luck, are a virtual lock to become what you think they will become before they even step on the pro field. But in most cases the prospect takes grueling baby steps learning how to play the game. Ask Tampa Bay how making a premature judgment on Steve Young affected their franchise? The theme of my posts is that you can't make categorical assumptions on qb prospects. You try them out; if they don't work out then you move on. You don't do what Nix did i.e. ignore the most important position on the field thus crippling your franchise. Finding out that a qb can't play in this challenging league is not the worst thing in the world for a franchise. Not aggressively addressing the most important position in the game is the major failure Edited July 10, 2013 by JohnC
Chandler#81 Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Excellent discussion, folks! At the risk of sounding like a dick, the short version is the 'IT' factor for QB. There are early signs of IT, but IT too takes time to mature. Stewart, Losman & Young are great examples of time proving out their limitations and time will tell with Kap, III & -possibly-EJ. For me, I'll try not to be overly critical OR praiseworthy of Manuel going into his 3rd season as a starter. Just in case, the Bills would be wise to draft good QB prospects along the way.
JohnC Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 (edited) Excellent discussion, folks! At the risk of sounding like a dick, the short version is the 'IT' factor for QB. There are early signs of IT, but IT too takes time to mature. Stewart, Losman & Young are great examples of time proving out their limitations and time will tell with Kap, III & -possibly-EJ. For me, I'll try not to be overly critical OR praiseworthy of Manuel going into his 3rd season as a starter. Just in case, the Bills would be wise to draft good QB prospects along the way. An interesting quality that Kaepernick, RGIII and Manuel have in common is that they were all very good students in school. Stanford very aggressively recruited Kaepernick. He could have gone to a number of IVY league schools.According to Peter King he aced his SATs. So don't let those hideous tatoos (my bias) fool you as to what type of person he is. RGIII was doing graduate work at the end of his college career. Manuel finished his degree work and was working on a graduate degree in International Relations while he was at FSU. All three of these individuals realize how much effort goes into studying and preparing for a task. Michael Vick was a very gifted player who spent little time and effort watching film and studying defenses. That is why he has to a great degree squandered his outstanding physical talents. Vincet Young certainly wasn't a student of the game. I'm confident that won't happen with the three discussed qbs. Edited July 10, 2013 by JohnC
eball Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 An interesting quality that Kaepernick, RGIII and Manuel have in common is that they were all very good students in school. Stanford very aggressively recruited Kaepernick. He could have gone to a number of IVY league schools.According to Peter King he aced his SATs. So don't let those hideous tatoos (my bias) fool you as to what type of person he is. RGIII was doing graduate work at the end of his college career. Manuel finished his degree work and was working on a graduate degree in International Relations while he was at FSU. All three of these individuals realize how much effort goes into studying and preparing for a task. Michael Vick was a very gifted player who spent little time and effort watching film and studying defenses. That is why he has to a great degree squandered his outstanding physical talents. Vincet Young certainly wasn't a student of the game. I'm confident that won't happen with the three discussed qbs. Great point about intelligence and study habits being a factor in QB play. One could argue Kaep has shown some error in judgment recently with the Fins' cap fiasco and his subsequent Twitter response, but that's another story. From what I've heard/read, Vick is by all accounts a dummy -- not a surprising revelation considering his past decisions. Manuel, on paper, appears to have all of the necessary qualifications -- physical tools, intelligence, work ethic, leadership -- and the big "if" is whether he can also master the art of reading NFL defenses and making quick, accurate decisions.
JohnC Posted July 10, 2013 Posted July 10, 2013 Great point about intelligence and study habits being a factor in QB play. One could argue Kaep has shown some error in judgment recently with the Fins' cap fiasco and his subsequent Twitter response, but that's another story. From what I've heard/read, Vick is by all accounts a dummy -- not a surprising revelation considering his past decisions. Manuel, on paper, appears to have all of the necessary qualifications -- physical tools, intelligence, work ethic, leadership -- and the big "if" is whether he can also master the art of reading NFL defenses and making quick, accurate decisions. Being a dummy is no excuse for not putting in the effort to do your job properly. From a number of accounts that I have read his lack of preparation when he was with the Falcons during the season and offseason was appalling. I'm sure he has increased his work ethic with the Eagles. You make an excellent point that having the required qualities to be a qb doesn't automatically mean that you have the ability to read and react to the pro defenses. As you noted it is as much an art that some people can't master, no matter the effort. That is the point that Edwards Arm has convincingly been making in his posts.
reddogblitz Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Again, one of the main questions is whether RGIII, Cam Newton, and Kaepernick will be able to build on their early success. If RGIII does not change his game he is in for a short injury riddled career. What "early successes" has Cam had? In the same amount of time as a starter ( 3years), Cam won less games than Fitz. Kaepernick however, the sky's the limit. We'll see, but I absolutely see him building on his early success.
San Jose Bills Fan Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 What "early successes" has Cam had? In the same amount of time as a starter ( 3years), Cam won less games than Fitz. Cam Newton was the consensus Rookie of the Year and he also made the Pro Bowl. In just 2 years he's thrown for 40 TDs and run for 22 more TDs against 29 interceptions. He has a career passer rating of 85.3. This on a team which has marginal talent and coaching. People are down on Cam because he didn't make a big jump in his 2nd year. And that was my point. The other three guys, Kaep, Wilson, and RGIII have all had one good season.
mattsox Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 "The situation in Arizona, unfortunately, highlighted his limitations. He played behind the worst offensive line in the NFL." That's all that should be said. Everything else is negative lip fodder and comes from being harassed more than ANY other QB. I am in the 'wait & see' category. I'm in the "EJ Manuel or Bust" category. Kolb is limited and belongs on a bench...
BuffaloFan32 Posted July 12, 2013 Posted July 12, 2013 Has anybody noticed how much Ron Jaworski looks like Mark Geragos?
Recommended Posts