The overall lack of QB talent is killing the NFL

[papazoid]

i'm going the other way

 

 

#1- the defenses are so much better.

 

#2- you cant have 32 All-Pro's at any postion, even QB.

 

#3- no matter the skill level, there will always be a Franchise Top 10, an acceptable middle 10 and a we need better bottom 10.

[QuoteTheRaven83]

Blame the colleges that are ruining the QBs in the NFL. All they care about is winning and putting up points to improve their chances of making the BCS bowls. They don't care about fundamentals or anything.

Edited March 14, 2016 by QuoteTheRaven83

[BuffaloBill]

You're right. Let's make some projections about top QBs in three years time:

 

-cam newton

-russell wilson

-rodgers (35)

-big ben (37)

-bridgewater?

-marcus mariota?

-Jameis?

-some rookie?...

 

god this list is depressing.

 

Amen ... Look at the draft classes after Newton including the upcoming one and there are significant holes.

 

That is exactly the point to this thread - the NFL can no longer rely on college playing time as the only feeder of talent into the QB pool.

i'm going the other way

 

 

#1- the defenses are so much better.

 

#2- you cant have 32 All-Pro's at any postion, even QB.

 

#3- no matter the skill level, there will always be a Franchise Top 10, an acceptable middle 10 and a we need better bottom 10.

So look at QB's in the 35 + age bracket assume they retire out by age 40. Who is replacing them?

[GunnerBill]

I think Bortles will be in the conversation with Luck, Wilson, Newton and a couple of the younger "old" boys... Rodgers etc in three years. Maybe Winston and Mariota too.

[sir andrew]

 

 

Ultimately, i think the major gap between college offenses and the NFL coupled with the reduced window for acceptable success has the appearance that the Pro game is churning through QBs, but I'd bet if you did the math, the numbers are relatively stagnant.

This. Teams used to have their drafted QB's sit behind veteran for a few years before giving them the reigns to the offense. Everyone expects most QB's to be great right away out of college. I think that if teams actually allowed a QB to develop, there would be more starting caliber QB's in the league today.

[26CornerBlitz]

Killing it because teams are perpetually cycling in mediocrity because of the lack of talent at the most critical position.

 

This is the problem though - what QB's have the time to sit as an understudy?

 

No one is going to argue that there is a dearth of NFL caliber starting QBs. There are two contributing factors with college programs eschewing pro style systems to implement simpler spread/shotgun offenses designed to win at the NCAA level and the second reason being a major lack of patience with regard to the development of incoming QBs by NFL franchises.

 

NFL teams will either have to become more patient to allow coaching staffs and QBs they draft more time or go the way of the NCAA by adopting more spread/shotgun offensive systems. Either way, I don't believe the issue is "killing" the game.

[Luxy312]

I'm not sure anything needs to be done with the NFL at this point. The NFL is growing faster than any other professional sport and it's not even close. Is the quarterback position important? Absolutely. If anyone really wants to look at the statistics though, quarterbacks on average are significantly better than what they were in the 80's and 90's. There's always exceptional players in any era when compare to their peers. I just don't see any realistic scenario playing out where every team in the NFL suddenly finds themselves with a pro-bowl caliber franchise quarterback.

[Mr. WEO]

 

No one is going to argue that there is a dearth of NFL caliber starting QBs. There are two contributing factors with college programs eschewing pro style systems to implement simpler spread/shotgun offenses designed to win at the NCAA level and the second reason being a major lack of patience with regard to the development of incoming QBs by NFL franchises.

 

NFL teams will either have to become more patient to allow coaching staffs and QBs they draft more time or go the way of the NCAA by adopting more spread/shotgun offensive systems. Either way, I don't believe the issue is "killing" the game.

 

 

Like....when? You play your best QB--this has always been the case. Guys who have "developed" played behind better QBs. Teams that draft a QB in the first start him because they don't have a better QB on the roster.

 

The math here hasn't changed in a generation.

[Greg F]

Curious how some would rate the QB's from the past. Here is a bunch of QB's from 1985:

 

David Archer ATL

Bruce Mathison BUF

Jim McMahon CHI

Boomer Esiason CIN

Bernie Kosar CLE

Danny White DAL

John Elway DEN

Eric Hipple DET

Lynn Dickey GB

Warren Moon HOU

Mike Pagel IND

Bill Kenney KC

Dan Marino MIA

Tommy Kramer MIN

Tony Eason NE

Dave Wilson NO

Phil Simms NYG

Ken O'Brien NYJ

Ron Jaworski PHI

Mark Malone PIT

Marc Wilson RAI

Dieter Brock RAM

Dan Fouts SD

Dave Krieg SEA

Joe Montana SF

Neil Lomax STL

Steve DeBerg TB

Joe Theismann WAS

[26CornerBlitz]

 

Like....when? You play your best QB--this has always been the case. Guys who have "developed" played behind better QBs. Teams that draft a QB in the first start him because they don't have a better QB on the roster.

 

The math here hasn't changed in a generation.

 

Who said that it has? Certainly doesn't mean it's the best approach and it very often doesn't work out as everyone knows.

[OldTimer1960]

I don't think this is much different than it has always been. There have never been enough good starting QBs for all teams to have one. There are a few more teams than there used to be (not many, I think Tampa and Seattle was the last expansion). Certainly, rules changes make the differences more glaring today, but look at the top rated passers from some other eras:

1980 Passer Rating1.Brian Sipe*+ · CLE91.42.Ron Jaworski* · PHI91.03.Vince Ferragamo · RAM89.74.Steve Bartkowski* · ATL88.25.Joe Montana · SFO87.86.Dan Fouts* · SDG84.77.Gary Danielson · DET82.48.Archie Manning · NOR81.89.Danny White · DAL80.710.Craig Morton · DEN77.8

 

1975cPasser Rating1.Ken Anderson* · CIN93.92.Fran Tarkenton*+ · MIN91.83.Len Dawson · KAN90.04.Bert Jones · BAL89.15.Terry Bradshaw* · PIT88.06.Bob Griese · MIA86.67.Joe Ferguson · BUF81.38.Roger Staubach* · DAL78.59.Billy Kilmer · WAS77.210.Mike Livingston · KAN74.2

 

1985 Passer Rating1.Ken O'Brien* · NYJ96.22.Boomer Esiason · CIN93.23.Joe Montana* · SFO91.34.Dan Fouts* · SDG88.15.Dan Marino*+ · MIA84.16.Bill Kenney · KAN83.67.Jim McMahon* · CHI82.68.Dieter Brock · RAM82.09.Danny White · DAL80.610.Neil Lomax · STL79.5

 

Those periods had some very good QBs, some "OK" QBs and some really bad ones - just like today. Just looking at 1980, the only 2 that fit the great QB category were Montana and Fouts, I don't think Steve Bartkowski or Archie Manning were all-time greats and neither was able to single handedly elevate their teams.

 

When names like Ron Jawarski, Vince Ferragamo, Gary Danielson, Mike Livingston, Bill Kenney, and Dieter Brock were among league-leaders in passer rating, you can see that there might be more great QBs today than in times past. Of course, some eras have more very good QBs and other eras fewer, but there has never been a time when a lot of teams were not looking to get much better at QB.

Curious how some would rate the QB's from the past. Here is a bunch of QB's from 1985:

David Archer ATL
Bruce Mathison BUF
Jim McMahon CHI
Boomer Esiason CIN
Bernie Kosar CLE
Danny White DAL
John Elway DEN
Eric Hipple DET
Lynn Dickey GB
Warren Moon HOU
Mike Pagel IND
Bill Kenney KC
Dan Marino MIA
Tommy Kramer MIN
Tony Eason NE
Dave Wilson NO
Phil Simms NYG
Ken O'Brien NYJ
Ron Jaworski PHI
Mark Malone PIT
Marc Wilson RAI
Dieter Brock RAM
Dan Fouts SD
Dave Krieg SEA
Joe Montana SF
Neil Lomax STL
Steve DeBerg TB
Joe Theismann WAS

Ah, you just beat me to a similar post.

 

Some of those guys were truly awful. I remember having the distinct displeasure of watching Bruce Mathison with the Bills.

 

On that list I might say:

Great: Elway, Moon, Marino, Fouts

 

Good-Very Good: McMahon, Esiason, Kosak (for a short time), Simms, Lomax

 

Middling: Dickey, O'Brien, Kramer, Krieg, Theismann

 

Teams Wishing They Had Better: Archer, Mathison, Hipple, Pagel, Kenney, Eason, Dave Wilson, Jaworski, Mark Malone, Marc Wilson, Brock

[Mr. WEO]

 

Who said that it has? Certainly doesn't mean it's the best approach and it very often doesn't work out as everyone knows.

 

 

The OP is bemoaning the lack of talent at QB as though it is a recent development---and that ii is killing the game....suddenly.

 

That's the topic being discussed.

 

Best approach? Worst approach? It's the only practical approach and always has been. Why would anyone claim it is now killing the game.

 

If the Bills had drafted Wilson instead of Graham, threads like this wouldn't be started here..

[KRT88]

NFL should pony up the money and start a developmental league!

 

Partner up an AFC team with an NFC team, each team must supply 23 players for the roster and start a 16 team league.

4 divisions of 4 teams, play own division 2x, and one other division each year = 10 game schedule.

 

Spring, early summer, whenever you want to run the league. Pick smaller cities in the USA and develop some players.

Edited March 14, 2016 by KRT88

[Mr. WEO]

NFL should pony up the money and start a developmental league!

 

Partner up an AFC team with an NFC team, each team must supply 23 players for the roster. Spring, early summer, whenever you want to run the league. Pick smaller cities in the USA and develop some players.

 

Right on cue....

[26CornerBlitz]

NFL should pony up the money and start a developmental league!

 

Partner up an AFC team with an NFC team, each team must supply 23 players for the roster and start a 16 team league.

4 divisions of 4 teams, play own division 2x, and one other division each year = 10 game schedule.

 

Spring, early summer, whenever you want to run the league. Pick smaller cities in the USA and develop some players.

 

 

Right on cue....

 

They tried that with NFL Europe and I think they deemed it too expensive. The newly formed Spring League hopes to be an NFL feeder.

[quinnearlysghost88]

also, deadspin already proposed your option B in November:

 

So if the NFL really cares about its on-the-field product (this is not necessarily a given), it needs to create one or two special bonus roster spots for each team that are strictly for quarterbacks under the age of 30. You have your three active gameday passers, but you also get two bonus quarterbacks to stash who are not eligible (but are paid handsomely so that the NFLPA is cool with it). Then, the NFL sets up and funds a special QB farm (not run by Trent Dilfer!) somewhere warm and awesome, and you send your little project QBs there for a couple of years to learn mechanics and memorize sample playbooks and all that ****. This can be done off-site. The Bills didn’t have to develop Taylor for the past four years. The Ravens did that job for them.

[iinii]

There are only a handful of people that are able to play the position. Combine that with schemes, coaches, and a myriad of other factors and it is what it is. Just like anything else there is only one winner and a bunch of also rans. You can only develop a guy so far. You can't make every sow's ear into a silk purse.

[BuffaloBill]

No one is going to argue that there is a dearth of NFL caliber starting QBs. There are two contributing factors with college programs eschewing pro style systems to implement simpler spread/shotgun offenses designed to win at the NCAA level and the second reason being a major lack of patience with regard to the development of incoming QBs by NFL franchises.

 

NFL teams will either have to become more patient to allow coaching staffs and QBs they draft more time or go the way of the NCAA by adopting more spread/shotgun offensive systems. Either way, I don't believe the issue is "killing" the game.

Ok so your issue is with the idea of "killing the game."

 

Maybe your issue is over the idea of a slow death which in my opinion is what the dearth of QB talent you acknowledged is creating.

The OP is bemoaning the lack of talent at QB as though it is a recent development---and that ii is killing the game....suddenly.

 

That's the topic being discussed.

 

Best approach? Worst approach? It's the only practical approach and always has been. Why would anyone claim it is now killing the game.

 

If the Bills had drafted Wilson instead of Graham, threads like this wouldn't be started here..

I am not bemoaning the lack of talent I am saying the NFL needs to do something different about it.

[Mr. WEO]

 

 

They tried that with NFL Europe and I think they deemed it too expensive. The newly formed Spring League hopes to be an NFL feeder.

 

There was also "XFL" and "UFL" and there is still "CFL".

 

also, deadspin already proposed your option B in November:

 

So if the NFL really cares about its on-the-field product (this is not necessarily a given), it needs to create one or two special bonus roster spots for each team that are strictly for quarterbacks under the age of 30. You have your three active gameday passers, but you also get two bonus quarterbacks to stash who are not eligible (but are paid handsomely so that the NFLPA is cool with it). Then, the NFL sets up and funds a special QB farm (not run by Trent Dilfer!) somewhere warm and awesome, and you send your little project QBs there for a couple of years to learn mechanics and memorize sample playbooks and all that ****. This can be done off-site. The Bills didn’t have to develop Taylor for the past four years. The Ravens did that job for them.

 

TT was the Ravens backup QB. So now teams will have a 4th and 5th QB to "develop" on some farm somewhere? For what are they being developed?? To be starters some day? Ridiculous concept.

 

How about........developing the #2 and #3 already on your roster? Like Rodgers, Brady and TT.

[Chuck Wagon]

Lack of good young QBs?

 

Jameis - polished passing prospect, would be the #1 pick in almost any non-Luck draft, the only real concern are some character flags, though a lot of it can be brushed off as immaturity and hearsay.

 

Mariota - Aces the character concerns of Jameis, but some questions about the scheme he played in during college. Still showed so flashes on a very bad team.

 

Bortles - Really started to come around at the end of the year, again was put into a situation without a lot of talent but there's plenty of reasons for optimism.

 

Derrick Carr - Might sound ridiculous to say, but I think he likely would have gotten drafted higher had his brother not been a flameout as a #1 pick. Oakland is certainly optimistic about his future.

 

Bridgewater - A pretty polished prospect in his own right, there were some concerns with his arm strength coming out, but he's put Minnesota into the playoffs and won their division last year.

 

Russell Wilson - Concerns about his size caused him to drop down the board, but he's certainly put those aside.

 

Luck - Is Luck.

 

That's 7 franchises that feel they've found their QB of the present and future in the last 3 drafts. It also doesn't count guys like Cousins, who was also in Luck's class. Even in the vaunted 1983 draft, half the QBs in the first round were complete busts. There were 3 HOF QBs and everyone talks about that draft like each team got a Pro Bowl QB out of it. Teams really like Wentz and Goff, that's why the knocks on them are things like "Played at a small school" and "has small hands", no one wants to come out and say "we really like this kid" over a month before the draft, especially when the 1st pick is readily available.