Which NFL team has the worst QB situation going into 2014?

[Wayne Cubed]

The reason why EJ didn't exhibit the "bandwith" traits that you believe are a necessity for success in the pro game is that his offense in college was, as most college offenses are, a more simplistic one or two read offense. Cam Newton was the first pick in his draft year. Based on your "bandwith" standard you would have disqualified him as a good prospect. No pro coach or scout is going to attribute a high level of bandwith to Newton. Yet, as a young qb he has been a resounding success. How do you square that with your ironclad standard?

 

There was a number of questions regarding Kaepernick's style of play in college. There were also questions about his mechanics (as you noted). Yet the 49ers moved up in the second round to take him at the expense of the Raiders who were going to take him in the second round. Keapernick had impressive tools and a strong work ethic. He was drafted on potential. The point I'm making is just because a qb prospect isn't a finished product coming out of college that doesn't mean that the prospect can't develop into a quality franchise qb. Kaepernick mostly sat on the bench in his rookie year.

 

The longstanding criticism I have in your evaluations of qb prospects is that you are uncompromisingly chasing a dream prospect that rarely exists. The Andrew Luck type of prospect who fullfills your "gold plated bandwith standard" come along once in a generation. On top of that when they do come along you have to be the first team drafting to acquire this dream boat prospect.

 

My advice to you (frequently given) is don't out of hand dismiss EJ or any other qb prospect because the player doesn't fit into your preferred mold. There are a variety of styles of qb play that can be successful. Roethlisberger/Brees/Brady/Newton/Favre etc play different styles.

 

There is nothing wrong or unusual with young qbs struggling on the field. That's simply the norm. Before you make any declarative statements on EJ I suggest that you wait and see how he plays this year. Then I will be more receptive to your clarion calls of failure before the fact.

 

Great post.

[Dorkington]

The reason why EJ didn't exhibit the "bandwith" traits that you believe are a necessity for success in the pro game is that his offense in college was, as most college offenses are, a more simplistic one or two read offense. Cam Newton was the first pick in his draft year. Based on your "bandwith" standard you would have disqualified him as a good prospect. No pro coach or scout is going to attribute a high level of bandwith to Newton. Yet, as a young qb he has been a resounding success. How do you square that with your ironclad standard?

 

There was a number of questions regarding Kaepernick's style of play in college. There were also questions about his mechanics (as you noted). Yet the 49ers moved up in the second round to take him at the expense of the Raiders who were going to take him in the second round. Keapernick had impressive tools and a strong work ethic. He was drafted on potential. The point I'm making is just because a qb prospect isn't a finished product coming out of college that doesn't mean that the prospect can't develop into a quality franchise qb. Kaepernick mostly sat on the bench in his rookie year.

 

The longstanding criticism I have in your evaluations of qb prospects is that you are uncompromisingly chasing a dream prospect that rarely exists. The Andrew Luck type of prospect who fullfills your "gold plated bandwith standard" come along once in a generation. On top of that when they do come along you have to be the first team drafting to acquire this dream boat prospect.

 

My advice to you (frequently given) is don't out of hand dismiss EJ or any other qb prospect because the player doesn't fit into your preferred mold. There are a variety of styles of qb play that can be successful. Roethlisberger/Brees/Brady/Newton/Favre etc play different styles.

 

There is nothing wrong or unusual with young qbs struggling on the field. That's simply the norm. Before you make any declarative statements on EJ I suggest that you wait and see how he plays this year. Then I will be more receptive to your clarion calls of failure before the fact.

Your logical posts are not welcome here.

 

Only people who think EJ is a bust, and we must replace him immediately are welcome here.

 

We should have drafted.. uh... that one guy, who is... uh, guaranteed for success, because.. bandwidth?

[Orton's Arm]

The reason why EJ didn't exhibit the "bandwith" traits that you believe are a necessity for success in the pro game is that his offense in college was, as most college offenses are, a more simplistic one or two read offense. Cam Newton was the first pick in his draft year. Based on your "bandwith" standard you would have disqualified him as a good prospect. No pro coach or scout is going to attribute a high level of bandwith to Newton. Yet, as a young qb he has been a resounding success. How do you square that with your ironclad standard?

 

There was a number of questions regarding Kaepernick's style of play in college. There were also questions about his mechanics (as you noted). Yet the 49ers moved up in the second round to take him at the expense of the Raiders who were going to take him in the second round. Keapernick had impressive tools and a strong work ethic. He was drafted on potential. The point I'm making is just because a qb prospect isn't a finished product coming out of college that doesn't mean that the prospect can't develop into a quality franchise qb. Kaepernick mostly sat on the bench in his rookie year.

 

The longstanding criticism I have in your evaluations of qb prospects is that you are uncompromisingly chasing a dream prospect that rarely exists. The Andrew Luck type of prospect who fullfills your "gold plated bandwith standard" come along once in a generation. On top of that when they do come along you have to be the first team drafting to acquire this dream boat prospect.

 

My advice to you (frequently given) is don't out of hand dismiss EJ or any other qb prospect because the player doesn't fit into your preferred mold. There are a variety of styles of qb play that can be successful. Roethlisberger/Brees/Brady/Newton/Favre etc play different styles.

 

There is nothing wrong or unusual with young qbs struggling on the field. That's simply the norm. Before you make any declarative statements on EJ I suggest that you wait and see how he plays this year. Then I will be more receptive to your clarion calls of failure before the fact.

 

In the 2013 season Cam Newton averaged a solid-but-not-franchise 7.1 yards per attempt. That puts him a step or two above Fitzpatrick, but a step or two below the franchise guys. However, his QBR for 2013 was 56.2--compared to 55.4 for Fitzpatrick; 82.9 for Peyton Manning; and 68.6 for Kaepernick. At least according to QBR, there is not a significant difference between Cam Newton and Ryan Fitzpatrick. Should I place more weight in yards per attempt (which shows a noticeable difference between the two QBs) or QBR?

 

I don't know the answer to that question. QBR is a relatively new statistical measure. On the surface it seems much more reliable than the older (and highly flawed) quarterback rating. Matt Schaub had a high yards per attempt but a mediocre QBR. Considering his recent release by the Texans, it's at least possible that when the two indicators contradict, QBR may be the more valid of the two. But I'd obviously need to see more than just one data point before concluding that with certainty.

 

I read some pre-draft scouting reports about Cam Newton and found the following:

• He ran a simplified college offense and did not make more than 1 - 2 reads
  
• Some sites praised his accuracy
  
• There were serious concerns about his character
  
• He was praised for how he handled adversity
  
• He had freakish physical gifts

 

One site described him as just as good a scrambler as Vince Young, but with better passing accuracy. Another site provided this text

 

************

Very disingenuous — has a fake smile, comes off as very scripted and has a selfish, me-first makeup. Always knows where the cameras are and plays to them. Has an enormous ego with a sense of entitlement. . . . Does not command respect from teammates and always will struggle to win a locker room.

***********

 

My sense of Cam Newton as a professional is that he may be using his freakish physical gifts and reasonably good throwing accuracy to partially compensate for his mental limitations. Just as he may be using his personality strengths (ability to push through adversity) to partially compensate for his personality shortcomings. The result is a guy who's playing at about the same level as Fitz (if you believe QBR) or a step up from Fitz (if you believe YPA).

 

> On top of that when they do come along you have to be the first team drafting to acquire this dream boat prospect.

 

This is not the case. Drew Brees was an accomplished pocket passer chosen with the 32nd overall pick. Aaron Rodgers was chosen in the 20s. Prior to the draft, a number of sites praised his ability to process information quickly.

[thewildrabbit]

I for one still don't trust in Cam Newton and his shady past, despite his freakish athletic ability. Whereas Erik James is so clean he squeaks when he walks.

 

Drew Brees sat behind Doug Flutie his first year, and then next season was tutored by the same guy who tutored Joe Flacco in Baltimore in OC Cam Cameron. Brees was benched by Marty S in his second season of starting, and told he needed to cut down on the turnovers or else the bench is where is would stay. Talk about growing pains, the Chargers went 8-8 in Brees first year, and 4-12 his second year. in 2003 Brees went 2-9, 11 TD's 15 INT's, and his yards avg was 5.9.

 

That was also the year that John Butler passed and AJ Smith took over as GM. Apparently AJ didn't think much of Brees because they drafted Eli Manning #1 overall, who then refused to play for the Chargers so they traded him to the NY Giants, and obtained Phillip Rivers.

 

That must have lit a fire under Brees because the next year he went 11-4 as the starter with a 65% completion, 3159 yards, 27 TD's, 7 INT's, and a 7.9 yard avg. The next year Brees, and the Chargers went 9-7, 3576 yards 24 TD's, 15 INT's. 7.2 y/a. Brees was injured and traded away to the Saints. To hear Brees tell it, it was his benching that caused him to be more careful with the ball.

 

 

Brees sat behind Flutie for a year. Phillip Rivers was allowed to sit two years behind Brees while learning under OC Cam Cameron. Aaron Rodgers was allowed to sit three years behind Brett Favre, and learn. Colin Kaepernick was allowed to sit behind Alex Smith an entire year and learn. Plus these young men learned from some of the best, and brightest offensive minds in the NFL today.

 

 

EJ was thrown into the fire his first year behind a crap line, with a banged up and limited receiver corps, and only had one person to learn the ropes from. That guy he was learning from was running the entire offense and learning the NFL ropes himself. Not a particularly good way to bring along any rookie QB. Plus, EJ still doesn't have the proper supporting cast either in terms of vet QB on the roster along with one senior offensive assistant who was a WR coach the last six years. Not a particularly good way to bring along any second year QB. JMHO

[JohnC]

In the 2013 season Cam Newton averaged a solid-but-not-franchise 7.1 yards per attempt. That puts him a step or two above Fitzpatrick, but a step or two below the franchise guys. However, his QBR for 2013 was 56.2--compared to 55.4 for Fitzpatrick; 82.9 for Peyton Manning; and 68.6 for Kaepernick. At least according to QBR, there is not a significant difference between Cam Newton and Ryan Fitzpatrick. Should I place more weight in yards per attempt (which shows a noticeable difference between the two QBs) or QBR?

 

I don't know the answer to that question. QBR is a relatively new statistical measure. On the surface it seems much more reliable than the older (and highly flawed) quarterback rating. Matt Schaub had a high yards per attempt but a mediocre QBR. Considering his recent release by the Texans, it's at least possible that when the two indicators contradict, QBR may be the more valid of the two. But I'd obviously need to see more than just one data point before concluding that with certainty.

 

There isn't a serious football person in the pro ranks who wouldn't conclude either with or without the support of exotic statistical measures that Newton isn't a legitimate franchise qb while Fitz coming out of college and with a decade's worth of NFL experience is nothing but a marginal qb. At best he is an adequate backup, regardless if he is starting. Fitz playing at his optimal level is not going to have a major impact on the team he plays for. If Fitz is your starter I guarantee you that the team he is playing for is going to be an inconsequential team.

 

On top of that when they do come along you have to be the first team drafting to acquire this dream boat prospect.[

 

This is not the case. Drew Brees was an accomplished pocket passer chosen with the 32nd overall pick. Aaron Rodgers was chosen in the 20s. Prior to the draft, a number of sites praised his ability to process information quickly.

 

Both Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers support my point that it is a mistake to make immediate judgments on qbs based on their early play.If I'm not mistaken Rodgers sat on the bench for three or four years before he took over the reins at qb. Also, Brees struggled with his play and with injuries in his first few years. Why do you think the Chargers drafted Eli/Rivers? My point is that you have to give allowances for development.

 

EJ Manuel was not a high first round pick. The team traded down to get him in the middle of the first round. He was drafted at that position because he was an unpolished pro prospect with great tools and intangibles. This staff had a clear understanding that there was a lot of work to be done in developing him. As I stated in the prior post this is going to be a telling year. Not because he is going to be a finished product this year because he won't be, but because we will have a better grasp as to whether he has the potential to be a legitimate franchise qb. My main point in this discourse (which I appreciate) is that one can make a big mistake when one makes a snap judgment on a qb prospect.

Edited June 18, 2014 by JohnC

[JohnC]

 

EJ was thrown into the fire his first year behind a crap line, with a banged up and limited receiver corps, and only had one person to learn the ropes from. That guy he was learning from was running the entire offense and learning the NFL ropes himself. Not a particularly good way to bring along any rookie QB. Plus, EJ still doesn't have the proper supporting cast either in terms of vet QB on the roster along with one senior offensive assistant who was a WR coach the last six years. Not a particularly good way to bring along any second year QB. JMHO

 

You make a great point. Hackett himself was learning on the job. And as you stated our OL was less than stellar. There shouldn't be any surprise that three draft picks were used on the OL and one of our main free agent acquisitions was a guard. As many others have pointed out the original plan was to bring in a veteran qb, Kolb, and have EJ learn from him. Kolb got hurt. So the rookie's timetable was accelerated. His situation certainly wasn't favorable for instant success.

 

My position on Manuel is that I simply don't know if he is going to be a good starting qb in this league. I think he will be. Although I'm not sure about him what I can say for sure is that people who are with conviction making a judgment on him are making a mistake, whether one is taking a positive or negative view.

[YoloinOhio]

There isn't a serious football person in the pro ranks who wouldn't conclude either with or without the support of exotic statistical measures that Newton isn't a legitimate franchise qb while Fitz coming out of college and with a decade's worth of NFL experience is nothing but a marginal qb. At best he is an adequate backup, regardless if he is starting. Fitz playing at his optimal level is not going to have a major impact on the team he plays for. If Fitz is your starter I guarantee you that the team he is playing for is going to be an inconsequential team.

 

 

 

 

 

Both Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers support my point that it is a mistake to make immediate judgments on qbs based on their early play.If I'm not mistaken Rodgers sat on the bench for three or four years before he took over the reins at qb. Also, Brees struggled with his play and with injuries in his first few years. Why do you think the Chargers drafted Eli/Rivers? My point is that you have to give allowances for development.

 

EJ Manuel was not a high first round pick. The team traded down to get him in the middle of the first round. He was drafted at that position because he was an unpolished pro prospect with great tools and intangibles. This staff had a clear understanding that there was a lot of work to be done in developing him. As I stated in the prior post this is going to be a telling year. Not because he is going to be a finished product this year because he won't be, but because we will have a better grasp as to whether he has the potential to be a legitimate franchise qb. My main point in this discourse (which I appreciate) is that one can make a big mistake when one makes a snap judgment on a qb prospect.

Seems so simple....

[JohnC]

 

Seems so simple....

 

Sometimes adhering to a preconceived position can get awkward. It is better to make a judgment on a book after it is read rather than make a judgment after the first chapter.

[Orton's Arm]

There isn't a serious football person in the pro ranks who wouldn't conclude either with or without the support of exotic statistical measures that Newton isn't a legitimate franchise qb while Fitz coming out of college and with a decade's worth of NFL experience is nothing but a marginal qb. At best he is an adequate backup, regardless if he is starting. Fitz playing at his optimal level is not going to have a major impact on the team he plays for. If Fitz is your starter I guarantee you that the team he is playing for is going to be an inconsequential team.

 

Both Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers support my point that it is a mistake to make immediate judgments on qbs based on their early play.If I'm not mistaken Rodgers sat on the bench for three or four years before he took over the reins at qb. Also, Brees struggled with his play and with injuries in his first few years. Why do you think the Chargers drafted Eli/Rivers? My point is that you have to give allowances for development.

 

EJ Manuel was not a high first round pick. The team traded down to get him in the middle of the first round. He was drafted at that position because he was an unpolished pro prospect with great tools and intangibles. This staff had a clear understanding that there was a lot of work to be done in developing him. As I stated in the prior post this is going to be a telling year. Not because he is going to be a finished product this year because he won't be, but because we will have a better grasp as to whether he has the potential to be a legitimate franchise qb. My main point in this discourse (which I appreciate) is that one can make a big mistake when one makes a snap judgment on a qb prospect.

 

> There isn't a serious football person in the pro ranks who wouldn't conclude . . .

 

You do not speak for the serious football people of the NFL. If you've seen a survey about how Newton is regarded by NFL front office people, please provide a link.

 

Neither Newton's YPA nor QBR from 2013 support the idea that he's a franchise QB. There are times when the talking heads label a guy "franchise" even though he doesn't have franchise-type stats. Sometimes the QB's stats improve until they catch up to his reputation. That's what happened with Donovan McNabb. Other times, the anointed QB's stats don't improve--witness Mark "Sanchise."

 

> Both Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers support my point that it is a mistake to make immediate judgments on qbs based on their early play.

 

I'd be willing to invest several years of development time on the right college prospect. But before I pull the trigger on that kind of investment, I'd need to see the college QB excel in three areas:

• accuracy
  
• decision-making
  
• passion for the game
  

As a college QB, Manuel didn't excel at accuracy--especially not when throwing to a moving target. Nothing about his college game remotely suggested better decision-making than an average college QB. So he's 1-for-3 as far as my list is concerned. Neither coaching nor development time are going to fix that.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Edwards' Arm

[C.Biscuit97]

> There isn't a serious football person in the pro ranks who wouldn't conclude . . .

 

You do not speak for the serious football people of the NFL. If you've seen a survey about how Newton is regarded by NFL front office people, please provide a link.

 

Neither Newton's YPA nor QBR from 2013 support the idea that he's a franchise QB. There are times when the talking heads label a guy "franchise" even though he doesn't have franchise-type stats. Sometimes the QB's stats improve until they catch up to his reputation. That's what happened with Donovan McNabb. Other times, the anointed QB's stats don't improve--witness Mark "Sanchise".

 

I don't claim to know which of these categories Cam Newton will fall into. If I had to guess, I'd say his career will be about halfway between Mark Sanchez's and Donovan McNabb's.

 

> Both Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers support my point that it is a mistake to make immediate judgments on qbs based on their early play.

 

I'd be willing to invest several years of development time on the right college prospect. But before I pull the trigger on that kind of investment, I'd need to see the college QB excel in three areas:

• accuracy
  
• decision-making
  
• passion for the game
  

As a college QB, Manuel didn't excel at accuracy--especially not when throwing to a moving target. Nothing about his college game remotely suggested better decision-making than an average college QB. So he's 1-for-3 as far as my list is concerned. Neither coaching nor development time are going to fix that.

 

EJ completed 66.9% of his passing at 8.6 ypa for his college career. His last 2 seasons in college saw him threw 41 tds to 18 ints. As a rookie, he completed 58.8% of his passes at 6.44 ypa. For a comparison, the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck, completed 54.1% of his passes at 6.98 ypa as a rookie. Also in his college career, Luck completed 67 % of his passes at 8.9 ypa. his td to int ratio was outstanding though.

 

Obviously, this is not to say Manuel will be as good as Luck. But Luck is considered a once in a generation QB. Manuel was a bit of project yet there are some similarities in numbers. Let's not write the book on EJ yet, one way or another.

[YoloinOhio]

> There isn't a serious football person in the pro ranks who wouldn't conclude . . .

 

You do not speak for the serious football people of the NFL. If you've seen a survey about how Newton is regarded by NFL front office people, please provide a link.

 

Neither Newton's YPA nor QBR from 2013 support the idea that he's a franchise QB. There are times when the talking heads label a guy "franchise" even though he doesn't have franchise-type stats. Sometimes the QB's stats improve until they catch up to his reputation. That's what happened with Donovan McNabb. Other times, the anointed QB's stats don't improve--witness Mark "Sanchise".

 

I don't claim to know which of these categories Cam Newton will fall into. If I had to guess, I'd say his career will be about halfway between Mark Sanchez's and Donovan McNabb's.

 

> Both Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers support my point that it is a mistake to make immediate judgments on qbs based on their early play.

 

I'd be willing to invest several years of development time on the right college prospect. But before I pull the trigger on that kind of investment, I'd need to see the college QB excel in three areas:

• accuracy
  
• decision-making
  
• passion for the game
  

As a college QB, Manuel didn't excel at accuracy--especially not when throwing to a moving target. Nothing about his college game remotely suggested better decision-making than an average college QB. So he's 1-for-3 as far as my list is concerned. Neither coaching nor development time are going to fix that.

Kaepernick is one of the least accurate QBs in the league, yet amazingly SF invested in his development. He was ranked 31st in completion % in 2013. Interestingly, Ponder was ranked 10th and no one gives a flip about investing in him.

[JohnC]

 

 

> There isn't a serious football person in the pro ranks who wouldn't conclude . . .

 

You do not speak for the serious football people of the NFL. If you've seen a survey about how Newton is regarded by NFL front office people, please provide a link.

 

Neither Newton's YPA nor QBR from 2013 support the idea that he's a franchise QB. There are times when the talking heads label a guy "franchise" even though he doesn't have franchise-type stats. Sometimes the QB's stats improve until they catch up to his reputation. That's what happened with Donovan McNabb. Other times, the anointed QB's stats don't improve--witness Mark "Sanchise".

 

I don't claim to know which of these categories Cam Newton will fall into. If I had to guess, I'd say his career will be about halfway between Mark Sanchez's and Donovan McNabb's.

 

Cam Newton was the first pick in his draft year. The Bills would have gladly taken him with their high first round pick if he were available. My point is that many evaluators had him at the top or near the top of their draft board even though he didn't fit your mold of being a conventional qb. I very much understand that he doesn't fit your cerebral qb profile. My response is so what? My criticism of your forcefully clinging to the necessity of possessing certain qb traits is not that you are wrong but that you are limiting yourself to a particular type of traits in predicting success.

 

If you want a statistical rebutal I'll give you the most meaningful statistic not only in the NFL but in all sports i.e. the record. The year before Newton was drafted Carolina had a 2-14 record, qualifying them for the first pick in the next draft. In his rookie year the team went 6-10. The next year they went 7-9. Last year Carolina went 12-4 and made the playoffs. Regardless of what metric you use you can't deny that CM was the most instrumental player for that turnaround. In his three years of play are you going to deny the fact that he has markedly improved?

 

> Both Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers support my point that it is a mistake to make immediate judgments on qbs based on their early play.

 

I'd be willing to invest several years of development time on the right college prospect. But before I pull the trigger on that kind of investment, I'd need to see the college QB excel in three areas:

• 
  
• accuracy
  
• decision-making
  
• passion for the game
  

As a college QB, Manuel didn't excel at accuracy--especially not when throwing to a moving target. Nothing about his college game remotely suggested better decision-making than an average college QB. So he's 1-for-3 as far as my list is concerned. Neither coaching nor development time are going to fix that.

 

The Bills' organization made a decision to invest in a raw prospect that they felt had the potential to be a franchise qb. I recognize that he isn't the type of qb you would invest in. I understand your stance. It is not an unreasonable position to take. Where I strenuously disagree (respectfully) with your take on this issue is that because you are rigidly adhering to your profile stance you are then declaring the qb a failure before allowing the prospect a reasonable period of time to develop.

 

I think that Manuel is going to be a legitimate franchise qb. Am I sure of it? No. My main concern has to do with his level of accuracy, an issue that you highlighted. As I said in other posts this is going to be a very telling year in determining whether EJ has what it takes to be a starter. What I'm not going to do is make a declaration based on a preconceived notion on what a qb should look like. In my view there are a lot of different types of qb that can be successful. On this issue you are unnecessarily limiting yourself. The toolbox that you are carrying needs to be enlarged.

Edited June 19, 2014 by JohnC

[thewildrabbit]

Sometimes adhering to a preconceived position can get awkward. It is better to make a judgment on a book after it is read rather than make a judgment after the first chapter.

If he doesn't get it after reading that post, then he never will.

 

 

On another note, I still don't think that EJ has enough of a supporting cast to help him fully succeed this upcoming year. I still question his two starting OG's and the coaching. Although It really doesn't matter either because should the team end with a poor record again, then new ownership will certainly make regime changes. Then considering the team has no first round pick next year I'd think EJ will be given another chance with new coaching in 2015.

[Orton's Arm]

Cam Newton was the first pick in his draft year. The Bills would have gladly taken him with their high first round pick if he were available. My point is that many evaluators had him at the top or near the top of their draft board even though he didn't fit your mold of being a conventional qb. I very much understand that he doesn't fit your cerebral qb profile. My response is so what? My criticism of your forcefully clinging to the necessity of possessing certain qb traits is not that you are wrong but that you are limiting yourself to a particular type of traits in predicting success.

 

If you want a statistical rebutal I'll give you the most meaningful statistic not only in the NFL but in all sports i.e. the record. The year before Newton was drafted Carolina had a 2-14 record, qualifying them for the first pick in the next draft. In his rookie year the team went 6-10. The next year they went 7-9. Last year Carolina went 12-4 and made the playoffs. Regardless of what metric you use you can't deny that CM was the most instrumental player for that turnaround. In his three years of play are you going to deny the fact that he has markedly improved?

 

 

 

The Bills' organization made a decision to invest in a raw prospect that they felt had the potential to be a franchise qb. I recognize that he isn't the type of qb you would invest in. I understand your stance. It is not an unreasonable position to take. Where I strenuously disagree (respectfully) with your take on this issue is that because you are rigidly adhering to your profile stance you are then declaring the qb a failure before allowing the prospect a reasonable period of time to develop.

 

I think that Manuel is going to be a legitimate franchise qb. Am I sure of it? No. My main concern has to do with his level of accuracy, an issue that you highlighted. As I said in other posts this is going to be a very telling year in determining whether EJ has what it takes to be a starter. What I'm not going to do is make a declaration based on a preconceived notion on what a qb should look like. In my view there are a lot of different types of qb that can be successful. On this issue you are unnecessarily limiting yourself. The toolbox that you are carrying needs to be enlarged.

 

> The Bills would have gladly taken him with their high first round pick if he were available.

 

The fact that the Bills thought so highly of Newton--and that they later selected Manuel--demonstrated they may value good physical tools more than good information processing ability. Nor are they the only NFL team to have that preference. If you perform a retrospective analysis on any given ten year period of NFL drafting, you will encounter multiple first round busts who demonstrated that combination of good physical traits + poor information-processing ability. I am not suggesting that every player in this category is destined to be a bust. But a first round pick with great physical traits + limited demonstrated information processing ability is much more likely to be a bust than a first round QB with good decision-making ability and merely decent physical tools.

 

Why do a number of NFL GMs continue to overvalue physical tools and undervalue information processing ability? Below are several possible reasons:

1) Physical tools are easy to measure.

2) GMs convince themselves that if the information processing issues could be fixed, the player could be truly elite.

3) Coaches are overconfident in their ability to fix information processing issues.

4) You can't take out a tape measure and measure information processing ability. It's less tangible than physical gifts; and to some GMs that might make it seem less real.

 

> In his three years of play are you going to deny the fact that he has markedly improved?

 

Yes.

 

During his first two years at QB, Newton's YPA was very good. Consistent with being a franchise QB. During his third year, it sharply declined to well below franchise QB level. His QBR remained steady for all three years, in the 54 - 56 range. To put that into perspective, here are some other QBs' QBR numbers

 

Ryan Fitzpatrick

2011: 50.5

2012: 44.9

2013: 55.4

 

Peyton Manning

2011: injured, did not play

2012: 82.4

2013: 92.9

 

When evaluating a QB's play, I pay more attention to a QB's individual stats than to the team's W/L record. The latter is driven by the team as a whole, not just one guy in particular.

 

> I think that Manuel is going to be a legitimate franchise qb.

 

This belief may be based more on hope than on dispassionate, rigorous analysis. In drafting Manuel, the Bills chose to bet that patterns which have typically held true in the past will not apply to him. It is typically safer to bet with the odds; then to bet against heavy odds hoping to get lucky.

Edited June 19, 2014 by Edwards' Arm

[Dorkington]

Unless you put up Peyton numbers, you aren't a NFL ready starting QB.

 

Good thread.

[Security]

http://wallstcheatsheet.com/sports/nfl-the-7-worst-quarterbacks-set-to-start-in-2014.html/5/

 

Fitz is the worst on this list! ANd a bad Fitzmagic song too.

[bowery4]

I had to vote Tenn. I would have put Bradford on the list if I made the poll. That is a close 2nd for me.TB would be third but maybe, just maybe they have QB gold there, I think if he stinks it up this year....They be screwed but it was an impressive year for him last year. Fitz will do okay but he is an average QB, if that team can play up to better than average, who knows, they might do average. Cleveland next but with a ? mark (Hoyer just looks like a JAG to me and Mr Football, well we can sprculate but who knows).

Geno then EJ next for me and all the rookies (who might actually start) after, in no particular order since we have no idea how they will look. I think the Black and Silver will actually be good this year. Schaub has some tools and could be a good game manager.KC with Smith might make this list as the season goes on too, you never know. And honestly who is Kap's back up in SF, I forget? But he can be a bit pedestrian at times too and they are in the toughest division.

[YoloinOhio]

I had to vote Tenn. I would have put Bradford on the list if I made the poll. That is a close 2nd for me.TB would be third but maybe, just maybe they have QB gold there, I think if he stinks it up this year....They be screwed but it was an impressive year for him last year. Fitz will do okay but he is an average QB, if that team can play up to better than average, who knows, they might do average. Cleveland next but with a ? mark (Hoyer just looks like a JAG to me and Mr Football, well we can sprculate but who knows).

Geno then EJ next for me and all the rookies (who might actually start) after, in no particular order since we have no idea how they will look. I think the Black and Silver will actually be good this year. Schaub has some tools and could be a good game manager.KC with Smith might make this list as the season goes on too, you never know. And honestly who is Kap's back up in SF, I forget? But he can be a bit pedestrian at times too and they are in the toughest division.

 

Blaine Gabbert

 

I remembered about Bradford too late to add him, maybe I'll put him on though. I don't like that situation in STL at all.

[JohnC]

 

 

> The Bills would have gladly taken him with their high first round pick if he were available.

 

The fact that the Bills thought so highly of Newton--and that they later selected Manuel--demonstrated they may value good physical tools more than good information processing ability. Nor are they the only NFL team to have that preference. If you perform a retrospective analysis on any given ten year period of NFL drafting, you will encounter multiple first round busts who demonstrated that combination of good physical traits + poor information-processing ability. I am not suggesting that every player in this category is destined to be a bust. But a first round pick with great physical traits + limited demonstrated information processing ability is much more likely to be a bust than a first round QB with good decision-making ability and merely decent physical tools.

 

Why do a number of NFL GMs continue to overvalue physical tools and undervalue information processing ability? Below are several possible reasons:

1) Physical tools are easy to measure.

2) GMs convince themselves that if the information processing issues could be fixed, the player could be truly elite.

3) Coaches are overconfident in their ability to fix information processing issues.

4) You can't take out a tape measure and measure information processing ability. It's less tangible than physical gifts; and to some GMs that might make it seem less real.

 

> In his three years of play are you going to deny the fact that he has markedly improved?

 

Yes.

 

During his first two years at QB, Newton's YPA was very good. Consistent with being a franchise QB. During his third year, it sharply declined to well below franchise QB level. His QBR remained steady for all three years, in the 54 - 56 range. To put that into perspective, here are some other QBs' QBR numbers

 

Ryan Fitzpatrick

2011: 50.5

2012: 44.9

2013: 55.4

 

Peyton Manning

2011: injured, did not play

2012: 82.4

2013: 92.9

 

When evaluating a QB's play, I pay more attention to a QB's individual stats than to the team's W/L record. The latter is driven by the team as a whole, not just one guy in particular.

 

> I think that Manuel is going to be a legitimate franchise qb.

 

This belief may be based more on hope than on dispassionate, rigorous analysis. In drafting Manuel, the Bills chose to bet that patterns which have typically held true in the past will not apply to him. It is typically safer to bet with the odds; then to bet against heavy odds hoping to get lucky.

 

Sometimes when one is pursuing a rigorous analysis of a player in a team sport the statistics don't necessarily reflect the caliber of a performance due to the talent level of the rest of the team. Very often the statistics for a qb are less meaningful when the qb is playing behind a very poor OL. Newton's receiver corps was below average. That certainly is a factor not reflected in passing statistics.

 

The Panthers were a 2-14 team prior to his acquistion. A few years later the team made the playoffs with a 12-4 record. If he wasn't the most instrumental player for the turn around then tell me who was?

 

From a bandwith approach to evaluating qb prospects Ponder should be coming into his own as a starter. The reality is that he is at best a pedestrian player. From a bandwith approach to evaluating qb prospects Newton should be a dismal failure. That has not been the case.

 

As many others have stated the Bills knew what they were getting when they drafted Manuel. He was a raw qb with physical tools and admirably character traits. Will he develop into a good franchise qb? Although I think so I'm not willing to make a declarative judgment on that issue at this early juncture. The success of this team is mostly based on how he performs. I'm willing to wait a little longer than you are before I go on to the next option.

Edited June 19, 2014 by JohnC

[JohnC]

If he doesn't get it after reading that post, then he never will.

 

 

On another note, I still don't think that EJ has enough of a supporting cast to help him fully succeed this upcoming year. I still question his two starting OG's and the coaching. Although It really doesn't matter either because should the team end with a poor record again, then new ownership will certainly make regime changes. Then considering the team has no first round pick next year I'd think EJ will be given another chance with new coaching in 2015.

 

What this franchise doesn't need is another change in regimes, regardless how the team performs. It is very apparent that the staff recognized the OL deficiency because they brought in a veteran free agent guard and they used three draft choices on O-linemen.

 

I thought it was a mistake for Marrone to select the inexperienced Hackett to be his OC. I would have preferred Marrone selecting a more experienced OC and hired Hackett as a qb coach. Also, not having a veteran qb on the roster who could have served as a mentor to EJ would have been a smart move.

 

It is still early to make fair judgments but I like Whaley a lot and I thought the Marrone hire was a good hire. Time will tell.