Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Below are the 40 39 37 QBs from 2004-2016 who were drafted in the first or second round & started during their rookie year.  Were any of them ruined by starting too soon?

 

  1. Jared Goff
  2. Carson Wentz
  3. Paxton Lynch
  4. Jameis Winston
  5. Marcus Mariota
  6. Blake Bortles
  7. Johnny Manziel
  8. Teddy Bridgewater
  9. Derek Carr
  10. EJ Manuel
  11. Geno Smith
  12. Andrew Luck
  13. RGIII
  14. Ryan Tannehill
  15. Brandon Weeden
  16. Cam Newton
  17. Blaine Gabbert
  18. Christian Ponder
  19. Andy Dalton
  20. Colin Kaepernick
  21. Sam Bradford
  22. Jimmy Clausen
  23. Matthew Stafford
  24. Mark Sanchez
  25. Josh Freeman
  26. Matt Ryan
  27. Joe Flacco
  28. JaMarcus Russell
  29. John Beck
  30. Vince Young
  31. Matt Leinart
  32. Jay Cutler
  33. Tarvaris Jackson
  34. Alex Smith
  35. Jason Campbell
  36. Eli Manning
  37. Ben Roethlisberger
Edited by Buffalo86
Some of those guys didn't actually start as rookies
  • Like (+1) 3
  • Thank you (+1) 5
Posted

I’m not a huge believer in ruining a QB. I mean we can show success\failure either way, but if you got IT you got IT. There’s a lot that goes into that IT though. 

Posted

IMO there absolutely no such thing, the only danger about starting a QB early is with insecure coaches and GM pulling the trigger and yanking them out of the starting gig.

12 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

EJ and David Carr.

No, neither has ever shown a single sign that they would have been good only if...

Posted

There are a lot of guys on this list that weren't successful.  How do you know it wasn't because they were started too soon?  I don't think you can say definitively one way or the other.  I think it depends on the kid.  Some you can throw in and let them learn on the job.  Others can go in and get beat up and lose their confidence.  Just like when they throw a pick.  The good ones shake it off and others let it affect them the rest of the game.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
35 minutes ago, reddogblitz said:

EJ and David Carr.

 

David Carr may have just been beaten half to death, it’s hard to tell. Maybe a grizzled vet would have retired from that beating. But maybe in another setting he could have succeeded. I doubt EJ would have been a Franchise QB, but that whole situation was unfortunate. He could have benefitted from a chance to learn slowly and develop. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
35 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

If a QB can play, they usually show it very early on. 

Jared Goff had worse numbers across the board than EJ.  He led the highest scoring offense last year.

 

its an interesting topic for sure.  I think guys like EJ and Allen would both be better waiting to play, especially on a questionable team.  I think there is a ton you learn by sitting behind a vet.  It could be something as simple as learning to command a huddle.

 

plus with how stupidly impatient fans and media are, they are so quick to give up on a young qb.  Confidence can make or break these guys.  We can go back and forth if EJ would have been a better qb if he waited to play.  But his development was trash and there was no plan to let him grow into the position.  I feel like if we do the same thing with Allen, there will be a similar result.

 

i don’t know if he will succeed or not, but the Chiefs have done a great job with Mahomes (I think he will be good).  Let him sit for a year behind a very smart qb, have one of the best offensive coaches to coach him, and surround him with a ton of talent.  I think putting Allen on the field with this poor offensive cast is setting him up to fail.

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted

David Carr came to Carolina with the understanding he wasn’t going to play.

Delhome went down and Carr was absolutely terrified to be in there. It was painful to watch. 

He is the only QB I’ve seen in close to 40 years that I truly believe was ruined by the beating he took. Shell shocked!

If JA continues to look like he isn’t completely overwhelmed and our O Line looks serviceable by the end of Preseason I would prefer he start. 

Having said that, I’m prepared for the inevitable lumps he’s going to take and take it as part of the learning process. McD has to have the cajones to keep him in.

 

Posted
8 minutes ago, The_Dude said:

I believe in assessing each QB by their own merits and abilities. I don’t believe there is one right way. 

That’s really the right answer.  

 

I will I’ll say if you spend a 1st on a qb, you should be willing to give them a minimum of 2 years as a starter.

30 minutes ago, greeneblitz said:

IMO there absolutely no such thing, the only danger about starting a QB early is with insecure coaches and GM pulling the trigger and yanking them out of the starting gig.

No, neither has ever shown a single sign that they would have been good only if...

BS.  EJ threw 2 tds in his first start and left the field with a lead against the Pats.  He threw for nearly 300 yards against the number 2 defense Carolina and helped led a comeback win.  

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

Jared Goff had worse numbers across the board than EJ.  He led the highest scoring offense last year.

 

its an interesting topic for sure.  I think guys like EJ and Allen would both be better waiting to play, especially on a questionable team.  I think there is a ton you learn by sitting behind a vet.  It could be something as simple as learning to command a huddle.

 

plus with how stupidly impatient fans and media are, they are so quick to give up on a young qb.  Confidence can make or break these guys.  We can go back and forth if EJ would have been a better qb if he waited to play.  But his development was trash and there was no plan to let him grow into the position.  I feel like if we do the same thing with Allen, there will be a similar result.

 

i don’t know if he will succeed or not, but the Chiefs have done a great job with Mahomes (I think he will be good).  Let him sit for a year behind a very smart qb, have one of the best offensive coaches to coach him, and surround him with a ton of talent.  I think putting Allen on the field with this poor offensive cast is setting him up to fail.

 

Very few QBs who sit on the bench early in their career go on to become successful NFL QBs. 

 

I agree that playing Allen early with this supporting cast would be a bad idea, but I also don't think Allen is a very good prospect to begin with. 

 

Good QBs show they're good very early on. Goff might be an exception, but way more often than not if a guy is going to be good he shows it in the first year or two they're in the NFL. 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, WMDman said:

For me its more about not killing Allens confidence behind this line the first couple of weeks

 

This crosses all sports: Confidence is essential. I don’t care if you’re swinging a driver, putting a four footer, hitting a second serve, shooting a free throw or hitting a guy on a seam pattern, you have to be comfortable between the ears. Every guy will be different. THAT is why you do so much work pre-draft. Your guy had better be pretty strong mentally, but don’t put him out there too soon. 

 

 

Edited by Augie
  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
1 minute ago, jrober38 said:

 

Very few QBs who sit on the bench early in their career go on to become successful NFL QBs. 

 

I agree that playing Allen early with this supporting cast would be a bad idea, but I also don't think Allen is a very good prospect to begin with. 

 

Good QBs show they're good very early on. Goff might be an exception, but way more often than not if a guy is going to be good he shows it in the first year or two they're in the NFL. 

Aaron Rodgers

Tom Brady

Eli Manning

Big Ben (injury forced him to start) 

Drew Brees

Carson Palmer

Phil Rivers

Jared Goff

kirk Cousins

Matt Stafford

 

 

no offense but you couldn’t be more wrong on this. In fact, it seems like most of the really good QBs sat at first.  

 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Posted
43 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I could argue Carr, Manziel, Winston, Gabbert, Smith, Freeman, Ponder, maybe Tannehill.  Just looking quickly through the list.

Good list minus Winston- not enough sample size yet but he has had some good work under his belt.

Posted
6 minutes ago, billsfan_34 said:

Good list minus Winston- not enough sample size yet but he has had some good work under his belt.

 

He might have learned more in terms of humility than football had he sat. That could have been very helpful. Each guy is different. We’ll never know what might have happened. That’s life! 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Augie said:

 

He might have learned more in terms of humility than football had he sat. That could have been very helpful. Each guy is different. We’ll never know what might have happened. That’s life! 

Winston was a day 1 starter.  He has all the tools and is football smart.  But my god, he is a dumb human being.  It will be real interesting to see if TB pays him big money.  They probably have to but I won’t trust him at all as a fan. 

×
×
  • Create New...