Can you ruin a rookie QB?

[Buffalo Barbarian]

Do you think Tom Brady would still be in the league if he played for the bills??

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

If he can be “ruined” then the reality is he was never going to he good and the reasons for “ruining” him are excuses made 

How did the Bills ruin him?  They didnt. He took a hit and got gun shy is that on the Bills or is that on the weak mental fortitude of the freaking player 

 

Here's what bothers me about this philosophy.  By definition, it makes the question of whether a young QB can be "ruined" or not, impossible to assess because the conclusion precludes the question. 

 

"Mental fortitude" is by definition a nebulous internal quality, unlike footwork or ball velocity.   So if a promising rookie QB never develops under bad coaching or poor team play, he is, by this philosophy, automatically defined as having this nebulous quality and lacking the traits to be good. 

 

The conclusion essentially defines the question out of existence.  I mean, think about it - if a QB *were* able to be ruined, with this philosphy, how could you tell?  You couldn't.  You'd say "ah, he's a kitty, he never had what it takes anyway"

 

Folks do that on a number of issues, it's not exactly a sound or open-minded approach.

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

8 hours ago, NewDayBills said:

Typically coaches get 3 years, if even the best QB gets stuck with a moron coach, yes they can get ruined, look at Andrew Luck, his career would be vastly different with say Sean McVay as his head coach. Luck's career was almost ruined and he is a generational prospect, most QBs aren't good enough to overcome what he has.. If McD and Daboll are morons, Allen will likely bust, only time will tell.

 

Actually this brings up an interesting point.

 

Alex Smith and Sam Bradford, two QB who played very badly their first years in the league but later made good, were both drafted before the current CBO with its rookie salary cap.  So their teams couldn't just throw them out and move on, it would have cost too much.  Therefore they both got to "hang in there" until they got with a coach who helped them improve, long past the point where the league had written them off as busts.  Alex Smith once made a list of "top 5 QB busts of all time". (I'm sure he's got that under plexi in a room somewhere and re-reads it for inspiration.)

 

It's entirely possible that a number of QB today who get written off as busts or crap, would succeed if given more time or placed from the start with better coaching and a better system.

 

7 hours ago, Boatdrinks said:

Jim Kelly was sacked a whopping 153 times in his first 3 pro seasons. 75 in his first USFL year. Adversity simply reveals the quality of the player, it doesn’t change it. You can’t ruin a QB.

 

Well, you know.  One viewpoint is that he choked in 4 Superbowls, and probably getting drunk out of his gourd and being pukey the next day contributed.  As I understand it, he had the tendency to get drunk the night before games and be found hugging the porcelain throne and puking pre-game.

 

Maybe if he didn't get sacked 3+ times per game for 4 years and pounded more, he would have developed different pre-game habits and been better yet?  We don't know.

[billsredneck1]

10 hours ago, gobillsatthebeach said:

You can ruin him by putting him behind an inferior offensive line that can't properly protect and risk serious  injury. Trading McCarron was a BIG mistake.

 

bolded= wtf were they thinking? they had to the end of october trade deadline and possibly could have gotten much more for him.  huge,huge,huge mcbrainfart....

[Golden*Wheels]

This situation is not ideal and we shouldn't be here. But, David Carr was always gonna be David Carr IMO.

 

I do worry about Josh's physical self. And obviously a team's make up and plans effect the Qb's career performance. But if a rough year "ruins" him mentally, like really turns him into a Carr-esque turtle who hides in his shell, he wasn't that mentally strong to begin with.

 

Adversity doesn't build character, it reveals it, and all that.

[MAJBobby]

25 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Here's what bothers me about this philosophy.  By definition, it makes the question of whether a young QB can be "ruined" or not, impossible to assess because the conclusion precludes the question. 

 

"Mental fortitude" is by definition a nebulous internal quality, unlike footwork or ball velocity.   So if a promising rookie QB never develops under bad coaching or poor team play, he is, by this philosophy, automatically defined as having this nebulous quality and lacking the traits to be good. 

 

The conclusion essentially defines the question out of existence.  I mean, think about it - if a QB *were* able to be ruined, with this philosphy, how could you tell?  You couldn't.  You'd say "ah, he's a kitty, he never had what it takes anyway"

 

Folks do that on a number of issues, it's not exactly a sound or open-minded approach.

 

 

 

I can understand that. However the other side of the argument is also just as nebulous right?  So people should look at what can be measured and known.  It is known you learn more with reps good and bad reps all ate reaching points. So there really is no such thing as a “bad” rep in terms of learning and development. So get those reps at real speed. 

 

Also best way to evaluate somone is under pressure. So does he revert to Wyoming mechanics and play or is what he is learning with Palmer and Bills sticking and becoming muscle memory?

[Bray Wyatt]

4 minutes ago, Golden*Wheels said:

This situation is not ideal and we shouldn't be here. But, David Carr was always gonna be David Carr IMO.

 

I do worry about Josh's physical self. And obviously a team's make up and plans effect the Qb's career performance. But if a rough year "ruins" him mentally, like really turns him into a Carr-esque turtle who hides in his shell, he wasn't that mentally strong to begin with.

 

Adversity doesn't build character, it reveals it, and all that.

 

This is what I believe as well. Even the examples of Alex Smith mentioned above. He obviously wasn't ruined.

 

Also Trent Edwards had one of his best games once he returned, after that Adrian Wilson hit, against the Chargers. It wasnt the hit that ruined him.

Edited September 13, 2018 by Bray Wyatt

[billsbackto81]

10 hours ago, Boca BIlls said:

If a QB gets ruined he was never meant to be a franchise QB in the first place.

Tend to agree with this. Some may come into a more friendly situation like Darnold, Mahomes and to an extent Jimmy G but all have to perform to make the grade regardless of talent around them. Iron sharpens iron! Elway, Kelly, Aikman, Manning all had to tough it out during an era when QBs weren't coddled.

 

Some like Alex Smith and Cousins can take years to develop before they become franchise type material.

Edited September 13, 2018 by billsbackto81

[Ayjent]

8 hours ago, MAJBobby said:

Was Goff ruined getting sacked 4 times a day his rookie year And looking all around like trash?

 

or Wentz? What about Watson ruined because of the knee inj, or what about to good Carr?

Goff may still very well look like trash and be on his way out had Fisher remained coach.  Good coaching and player develop matter a lot, as much as natural ability.  I think you need both to be successful in the NFL as a QB, and it's not a one or the other proposition.  Good coaching can make a marginal talent look passable, and good talent look great, but it can't really make a bad QB magically into a passable starter.  There are guys that just don't have what it takes and it is usually pretty clear off the bat.  It's not always the case, but look at Watson and Darnold the past two years (played well right away).  You can see guys like Wilson, Prescott, Newton and Ryan who also came into the league playing well.  Goff is a good demonstration of what bad coaching vs. good coaching can do to a QB.  Sometimes guys are so good they can overcome bad coaching and shine, but not all can (see Alex Smith and how his career turnaround once he was coached by Harbaugh/Roman, then another QB friendly coach in Reid, and now another one in Jay Gruden). 

 

Some guys do take a little time to develop, some guys come out and they are who they are with a little improvement along the way.  Andy Dalton is who he is - he's been about as good as he's been since he started as a rookie, not much improvement.  Matt Stafford improved a lot more, but he's still prone to making silly mistakes that have plagued him since he was a rookie.  Mariotta has improved some since starting, but not a ton.  Winston has improved a little but still does things that are maddening.

[zow2]

Well, we have an example of a ruined QB on our own team.  His name is Peterman.  Started too soon, had a couple bad days, now gun shy and can't overcome adversity and the speed of a real game. 

[HOUSE]

A smart QB no. You can ruin a QB unable to read a defense after 2 years. Shouldn't be on the field.

Josh will be fine

 

 

[MAJBobby]

5 minutes ago, Ayjent said:

Goff may still very well look like trash and be on his way out had Fisher remained coach.  Good coaching and player develop matter a lot, as much as natural ability.  I think you need both to be successful in the NFL as a QB, and it's not a one or the other proposition.  Good coaching can make a marginal talent look passable, and good talent look great, but it can't really make a bad QB magically into a passable starter.  There are guys that just don't have what it takes and it is usually pretty clear off the bat.  It's not always the case, but look at Watson and Darnold the past two years (played well right away).  You can see guys like Wilson, Prescott, Newton and Ryan who also came into the league playing well.  Goff is a good demonstration of what bad coaching vs. good coaching can do to a QB.  Sometimes guys are so good they can overcome bad coaching and shine, but not all can (see Alex Smith and how his career turnaround once he was coached by Harbaugh/Roman, then another QB friendly coach in Reid, and now another one in Jay Gruden). 

 

Some guys do take a little time to develop, some guys come out and they are who they are with a little improvement along the way.  Andy Dalton is who he is - he's been about as good as he's been since he started as a rookie, not much improvement.  Matt Stafford improved a lot more, but he's still prone to making silly mistakes that have plagued him since he was a rookie.  Mariotta has improved some since starting, but not a ton.  Winston has improved a little but still does things that are maddening.

 

Yes I agree with all of that. But a QB getting hit early in his career like Carr, the main talking point about ruining a Rookie QB is A pretty weak take. 

3 minutes ago, zow2 said:

Well, we have an example of a ruined QB on our own team.  His name is Peterman.  Started too soon, had a couple bad days, now gun shy and can't overcome adversity and the speed of a real game. 

 

Do we? Or do we have what this specific 5th round pick was going to be?

[Ayjent]

1 minute ago, zow2 said:

Well, we have an example of a ruined QB on our own team.  His name is Peterman.  Started too soon, had a couple bad days, now gun shy and can't overcome adversity and the speed of a real game. 

Doubtful he has what it takes even if everything was "properly" handled.  He doesn't have enough arm strength and he doesn't have enough tools to overcome that issue.  Couple that with the fact that he doesn't make great decisions under pressure and you have a guy that probably doesn't last in the league very long.  I'll give you that the Bills may have accelerated the time table for him to get out of the league, but Peterman doesn't have what it takes to be an NFL starter, and its doubtful he has what it takes to be a backup.

[zow2]

3 minutes ago, Ayjent said:

Doubtful he has what it takes even if everything was "properly" handled.  He doesn't have enough arm strength and he doesn't have enough tools to overcome that issue.  Couple that with the fact that he doesn't make great decisions under pressure and you have a guy that probably doesn't last in the league very long.  I'll give you that the Bills may have accelerated the time table for him to get out of the league, but Peterman doesn't have what it takes to be an NFL starter, and its doubtful he has what it takes to be a backup.

 

I don't disagree at all.  I also think McD totally botched it...not only by starting him vs LA but leaving him in for 5 Int's.  I recall sitting there after the 3rd one yelling at the screen to pull the kid and put TT in.  I mean who is stubborn enough to leave a QB in till their 5th Int?   That's like a hockey coach pulling the goalie only after he lets in a 10th goal.   McD made the kid the butt of national jokes,,, and Peterman himself etched his name in NFL-joke history with his performance in Baltimore.  His career is effectively over.   

[Ayjent]

3 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Yes I agree with all of that. But a QB getting hit early in his career like Carr, the main talking point about ruining a Rookie QB is A pretty weak take. 

 

Do we? Or do we have what this specific 5th round pick was going to be?

The question about Carr was how much did he have to do with getting hit so much.  I think he had a lot to do with it, because he had poor pocket presence and he really was never that good at making quick reads and getting rid of the ball - he was a skittish QB and it wasn't just the OL in front of him.  It's one of the things that worries me about Allen to be honest, he holds the ball too long and gets a little skittish back in the pocket as well.  It's not a consistent trait, because sometimes he moves well in the pocket and makes the right call when to tuck and run, but he needs to be more fluid in the pocket and be quicker getting the ball out even if he has to force some throws into tight coverage.

[MAJBobby]

2 minutes ago, Ayjent said:

The question about Carr was how much did he have to do with getting hit so much.  I think he had a lot to do with it, because he had poor pocket presence and he really was never that good at making quick reads and getting rid of the ball - he was a skittish QB and it wasn't just the OL in front of him.  It's one of the things that worries me about Allen to be honest, he holds the ball too long and gets a little skittish back in the pocket as well.  It's not a consistent trait, because sometimes he moves well in the pocket and makes the right call when to tuck and run, but he needs to be more fluid in the pocket and be quicker getting the ball out even if he has to force some throws into tight coverage.

 

Agree but how do you get thru that. REPS. Not sitting you have to see real bullets. 

[transient]

I think a young QB can be “ruined,” but I don’t think it’s from bad play or a lack of supporting talent on the field, I think it’s due to poor coaching off the field and lack of support through the growing pains.

 

Case use in point, I don’t think EJ would have succeeded long term, but starting him in his rookie season when his QB coach also happened to be an OC who was in his first year in the NFL under a surly head coach who didn’t want to develop a rookie QB seemed like doubling down on his failure to me. 

 

I don’t know if this is the right staff to develop Allen, but unless we’re going to have him ride the pine until the next regime change it’s the lot he was, and we as fans were, dealt. Let’s hope they can set the right expectations and guide him through the bumps. 

[Ayjent]

13 minutes ago, MAJBobby said:

 

Agree but how do you get thru that. REPS. Not sitting you have to see real bullets. 

No argument here, but he also needs real coaching and we're about to find out what we have in that department.  They obviously didn't think he was ready, but can you really trust the "process" when it comes to judging QB talent?  Early results are in and the answer is looking like a "no", but I hold out hope that they can get this turned around.  Maybe Allen has it start coming together for him over the next couple of games, but he needs a game plan and play calling that helps him succeed. 

[TheElectricCompany]

There is never a perfect time to play a young QB. 

You'll always have holes somewhere on the OL, not enough playmakers on the outside, an inconsistent running attack, questionable scheme, etc. 

 

[Luka]

The argument for sitting a rookie QB is only valid if you have another, viable option on the roster. The examples that people always bring up are guys that sat behind all pros and hall of famers. We don't have one of those. There's really no point in waiting, the kid is football smart, he needs the in game experience.