with a new GM I'm at peace with waiting on a franchise QB

[Blokestradamus]

Haha, love this post. Hmmmm Rogers is dreamy oh yeah, SB baby

 

"I love it when you force it in there like that. Tyrod never does that for me."

 

Hits a routine slant vs tight coverage.

[John from Riverside]

"I wish they would just take one"

 

"The Buffalo Bills select EJ Manuel"

[teef]

"I wish they would just take one"

 

"The Buffalo Bills select EJ Manuel"

this is my fear.

[John from Riverside]

this is my fear.

I think that might have been what they were trying to avoid in this past draft.

 

that is jmo

[yungmack]

I wouldn't trade up. I would develop Peterman and use those picks (maybe even trade down to get more) and build up the team around him.

I'm not singling you out here -- this "develop a QB" trope is a cliche with tons of fans -- but I don't believe QBs at this age and stage can be "developed." What you see is what you get. QBs today who are with a top collegiate program have been coached up since Pop Warner, with private coaching up the ying yang and almost unimaginable hours spent in the film room or the practice field. Yes, they can be somewhat refined, can be exposed to the speed of the NFL and its vastly more complicated defenses, can have weight put on or taken off, can learn how to work under center, etc. But they cannot be "developed." If there was some magic formula for doing that, you could take any number of 6'5" guys with reasonable arms and turn them into QBs.

I'd prefer we take a QB if this class proves to be as strong as expected. QB fortunes can change quickly. Remember, Matt Barkley would likely have been considered a top pick if he had come out a year earlier. Playing that extra year cost him millions and exposed him.

You're right about the money he left on the table which only proves how many teams don't have a clue about QBs. I followed Barkley since high school and loved what he did with SC. But at no time did I ever see him as an elite NFL candidate. His position right now is about where I thought he would land.

I think Bills fans get stuck on vetting out every QB on the roster.

 

Peterman is a 5th Rounder. I don't think he was drafted to become a Franchise QB.

 

Yes, one 6th Rounder worked out from the 2000 Draft and became the GOAT.

 

But we've heard this over and over and over again from Brian Brohm, to Travis Brown, to Levi Brown, to Jeff Tuel. Fans ask if these backup types can ever develop into starters. Personally, I don't need to see if every QB on the roster can play. I know they can't play if they can't beat out the QB's we have.

This.

[GunnerBill]

 

You can think velocity is not an indicator of success all you'd like, but the numbers indicate otherwise. Since 08, there hasnt been a successful NFL QB who threw less than 55 mph. You can say "what did those QBs do in college?" all you want, I don't care if they threw for 15,000 yards in college or never played. The number 55 is the indicator.

 

QBs who sucked in college suck in the pros - you will get no argument from me there. Surely you accept that 55 is not an indicator until a Quarterback who really didn't suck in college sucks in the pros? Otherwise it is just sucky Quarterbacks sucking. At the moment Connor Cook is probably the closest you have to a cast study to prove your hypothesis. If Watson fails and he fails through arm strength and lots of floated balls picked then I think it provides a much stronger evidentiary basis for your hypothesis.

 

 

 

McCarron and his weak 49 has not shown anything to indicate hes more than a backup.

 

[....]

 

"Passing" the Velocity test does not mean you WILL be a good NFL QB, but "failing" it so far has proved that you will NOT be a good NFL QB (I mean "good" as in, potential franchise guy, because who cares about anything else).

 

McCarron and Glennon have achieved more than many of those guys though.... and they threw a 49. Maybe they are career backups, maybe they can be more.

 

But here is an actual analysis of those numbers - to illustrate what they actually prove (not much). By my reckoning since 2008 there have 7 Quarterbacks drafted who I would say have earned true "Franchise" status. They are: Ryan, Flacco, Stafford, Newton, Luck, Wilson and Carr. Of those:

 

- 4 don't have a tracked velocity score;

- 2 scored 55; and

- 1 scored 56.

 

There are then 10 who have either proven themselves capable starting Quarterbacks or are on the way to possible franchise status or showed promise as rookies. They are: Bradford, Dalton, Tyrod, Tannehill, Cousins, Bridgewater, Mariota, Winston, Wentz and Prescott. Of those:

 

- 2 were not tracked;

- 4 were scored at above 55 (2x 56; 1x 57; 1x 58)

- 1 was scored 55;

- 3 scored below 55 (2x 54; 1x 50)

 

I looked as well at guys who scored above 56 in velocity.... here are the results - very interesting:

 

- 2 starters (as already identified - Cousins and Wentz)

- 3 backups (Savage, Foles and Daniel)

- 18 busts

- 2 too early to say but doesn't look too hot (Goff and Lynch)

- 1 Kaepernick (no idea where he fits)

 

 

Based on proper analysis of this data there is nothing to support the original hypothesis that ball velocity of 55 or above makes it more likely that a Quarterback becomes a franchise player.

 

I think based on a proper analysis a much more reasonable hypothesis might be that there is an optimum velocity which is somewhere between 54 and 56 mph and players outside of those parameter at either end have a lower percentage chance of being good starters or franchise Quarterbacks.

[teef]

I think that might have been what they were trying to avoid in this past draft.

 

that is jmo

oh i agree. this draft had that same vibe to it.

[Guest NeckBeard]

this is my fear.

 

That year. It was nuts. New coaching, new GM, and with Nix looming. Plus they hadn't taken a QB for the last few years, which they should have.

 

I am not afraid of lunacy at this point. I have seen lunacy and beyond with this organization. We all have. One has to hope that outside of the gaffe that lead to BB scouts and the HC setting the board (apparently) only to fire all of scouts afterwards, that the moves for McD and Bean were the most forward looking this organization has done since the early 1990s, or perhaps the abortive 2001 TD hiring, or the 2002 draft.

[JM2009]

oh i agree. this draft had that same vibe to it.

They may have found a gem with the QB they did pick.

[teef]

 

That year. It was nuts. New coaching, new GM, and with Nix looming. Plus they hadn't taken a QB for the last few years, which they should have.

 

I am not afraid of lunacy at this point. I have seen lunacy and beyond with this organization. We all have. One has to hope that outside of the gaffe that lead to BB scouts and the HC setting the board (apparently) only to fire all of scouts afterwards, that the moves for McD and Bean were the most forward looking this organization has done since the early 1990s, or perhaps the abortive 2001 TD hiring, or the 2002 draft.

you're good a posting neckbeard.

They may have found a gem with the QB they did pick.

that would be just fantastic, but it's hard not to be overly guarded about the success of a 5th round pick. i'm still very open minded about it though.

[Guest NeckBeard]

you're good a posting neckbeard.

that would be just fantastic, but it's hard not to be overly guarded about the success of a 5th round pick. i'm still very open minded about it though.

 

I aim to please, well, except yesterday when I somehow conjoined the tragic death of Chris Berman's wife to a CTE discussion here. :-(