Terry Bradshaw's first five years

[Dr. K]

I don't know whether Losman is going to pan out or not. I still have hopes he will. But the talk on the board has made me think about Terry Bradshaw's early career (another strong-armed QB who had a rep for running the ball when he came into the league). I seemed to remember his stinking up the place in his first few years. Granted, the times were different then (completion precentages were generally lower overall), but still, look at these numbers.

 

year games att comp pct. yds. ypa TD INT rushes yds ypc TD

 

1970 13 218 83 38.1 1,410 6.5 6 24 32 233 7.3 1

1971 14 373 203 54.4 2,259 6.1 13 22 53 247 4.7 5

1972 14 308 147 47.7 1,887 6.1 12 12 58 346 6.0 7

1973 10 180 89 49.4 1,183 6.6 10 15 34 145 4.3 3

1974 8 148 67 45.3 785 5.3 7 8 34 224 6.6 2

1975 14 286 165 57.7 2,055 7.2 18 9 35 210 6.0 3

 

 

In the first five years he completed more than half of his passes only once. It wasn't until his sixth year that he had more TD's than Interceptions. Can you imagine what this board would be like if Losman, over his first 13 games, had a 38% completion percentage with 6 TD's to 24 interceptions?

 

It wasn't until 1975 that he had a "good" season, and that was not coincidentally the first year the Steelers went to the Super Bowl. They made it on running and defense.

 

I don't want to draw too many conclusions from this, but thought you might like to consider it.

[Billsjunkie]

How many Doctors do we have on this board?

[apuszczalowski]

Its been brought up before, It doesn't matter who you compare JP to, someone here will always have a reason why JP will never be a winner and how you can't compare the 2. Every QB that comes into the league takes years to develop, except if he puts on a Bills uniform, then its make the Pro Bowl or your a loser Bust

[RuntheDamnBall]

Interesting post. I think there's something both good and bad to the notion that in the pre-free agency days, teams both stuck with, and were stuck with, the players they drafted. Free agency has led to a more impulsive approach to personnel in the league, and away from the kind of patience that teams had to exercise when their options were more limited. This post is an excellent illustration of that.

[Tortured Soul]

It wasn't until 1975 that he had a "good" season, and that was not coincidentally the first year the Steelers went to the Super Bowl.  They made it on running and defense.

 

I don't want to draw too many conclusions from this, but thought you might like to consider it.

816436[/snapback]

The first year they won the Superbowl was 1974, when he had more picks than touchdowns. I wouldn't go comparing this team to the Steelers. He also had a pair of Hall of Fame receivers.

 

I never saw Bradshaw, but I always got the impession that he made the Hall because he was the quarterback of four championships, and he won those championships because of the players around him.

 

There are always exceptions. Anything is possible. But do you want to bet on it?

[Dr. K]

The first year they won the Superbowl was 1974, when he had more picks than touchdowns. I wouldn't go comparing this team to the Steelers.  He also had a pair of Hall of Fame receivers.

 

I never saw Bradshaw, but I always got the impession that he made the Hall because he was the quarterback of four championships, and he won those championships because of the players around him.

 

There are always exceptions.  Anything is possible.  But do you want to bet on it?

816450[/snapback]

 

You're right about the first super bowl year. Sorry.

 

I wouldn't compare the current Bills to the Steelers either. But what's your point? That Bradshaw was a crappy QB who got into the Hall not on his own merits? I guess you could say that we should expect more from Losman than Bradshaw because the Bills don't have two hall-of-fame receivers or one of the best defenses in all time. Seems like a tough row to hoe for any new QB.

 

What do you want to bet on? Craig Nall?

[stuckincincy]

The first year they won the Superbowl was 1974, when he had more picks than touchdowns. I wouldn't go comparing this team to the Steelers.  He also had a pair of Hall of Fame receivers.

 

I never saw Bradshaw, but I always got the impession that he made the Hall because he was the quarterback of four championships, and he won those championships because of the players around him.

 

There are always exceptions.  Anything is possible.  But do you want to bet on it?

816450[/snapback]

 

Yes, the Steelers were loaded with good talent.

 

Bradshaw had a fine arm, and was an excellent leader. One tough guy.

 

You have to put passing stats in context of the times.

 

When Bradshaw played, bump 'n run pass defense meant receivers were constantly being mugged. None of today's no-touch-me after 5 yards. Defensive linemen were allowed to haul back and slap the bejesus out of offensive linemen. Receivers could and did execute crackback blocks. QB's were not protected species - you could pretty much smack 'em as hard as you like, anywhere, anytime.

[BillWalton]

Can you imagine what this board would be like if Losman, over his first 13 games, had a 38% completion percentage with 6 TD's to 24 interceptions? 

 

It wasn't until 1975 that he had a "good" season, and that was not coincidentally the first year the Steelers went to the Super Bowl.  They made it on running and defense.

 

I don't want to draw too many conclusions from this, but thought you might like to consider it.

816436[/snapback]

Plain and simple, Bills fans have waited for a quarterback to replace Jim Kelly since 1996. People are sick and tired of being told "just wait another year" or "give him more time" whether it's unfair to JP or not.

 

It just compounds the problem when Bills fans see so many other young QBs that look great and have success (e.g., Eli, Big Ben, Rivers, Brady, Brees, Palmer, Leftwich).

[ganesh]

Plain and simple, Bills fans have waited for a quarterback to replace Jim Kelly since 1996. People are sick and tired of being told "just wait another year" or "give him more time" whether it's unfair to JP or not.

 

It just compounds the problem when Bills fans see so many other young QBs that look great and have success (e.g., Eli, Big Ben, Rivers, Brady, Brees, Palmer, Leftwich).

816463[/snapback]

 

One difference I would like to point is that we have not waited on JP Losman for

ten years to come through....The guy has finally got a season to start and show he can lead this team and plays bad games against two of the best teams in the league in Chicago and NE . While Losman needs to definitely improve and avoid his mistakes, the rest of the team also need to improve their play...

 

How many years did it take for Brees to succeed.....The situations are different....Philip Rivers is starting on a team that is loaded on defense and offense...Big Ben had a similar setup where there was no pressure on him.....

Brady was the one who made a change to that team....That teamwas failing with

Bledsoe....Once brady was in they were able to pick it up and win those CLOSE games that they were losing previously with Bledsoe.....

[Tortured Soul]

I wouldn't compare the current Bills to the Steelers either.  But what's your point?  That Bradshaw was a crappy QB who got into the Hall not on his own merits?  I guess you could say that we should expect more from Losman than Bradshaw because the Bills don't have two hall-of-fame receivers or one of the best defenses in all time.  Seems like a tough row to hoe for any new QB.

 

What do you want to bet on?  Craig Nall?

816457[/snapback]

My point is that Bradshaw is an exception rather than the rule, and it doesn't make sense to compare Losman to anyone who played 30 years ago.

 

I don't like the comparisons to Brees and Bradshaw that pop up so often. Yes, these things happen, but not very often. They are by far the exception rather than the rule.

 

And I'd give Losman 3-5 more games. If he still looks like he's regressing, then I'd want to give Nall a look. Otherwise, we're back to square one.

 

Yes, the Steelers were loaded with good talent.

Bradshaw had a fine arm, and was an excellent leader. One tough guy.

You have to put passing stats in context of the times.

816461[/snapback]

I'll take your word on Bradshaw. ike I said, i never saw him play. Comparing him to his contempotraries, good in TD's, not in yards.

[Dr. K]

My point is that Bradshaw is an exception rather than the rule, and it doesn't make sense to compare Losman to anyone who played 30 years ago.

 

I don't like the comparisons to Brees and Bradshaw that pop up so often.  Yes, these things happen, but not very often.  They are by far the exception rather than the rule.

 

And I'd give Losman 3-5 more games.  If he still looks like he's regressing, then I'd want to give Nall a look.  Otherwise, we're back to square one.

 

816486[/snapback]

 

 

Fair enough. I think that's a reasonable position, though I think I'd give him the entire season, no matter how painful it is to watch.

 

As for "the exception not the rule," do you mean that almost all of the time you can tell accurately how a QB's career will play out after, say 10-15 starts? I do not think I would agree with that. Though I was convinced that Todd Collins was dead meat after less than one season. I did stay on board the Rob Johnson support train longer than most, and I was wrong about that.

[Wraith]

Yes, the Steelers were loaded with good talent.

 

Bradshaw had a fine arm, and was an excellent leader. One tough guy.

 

You have to put passing stats in context of the times.

 

When Bradshaw played, bump 'n run pass defense meant receivers were constantly being mugged. None of today's no-touch-me after 5 yards.  Defensive linemen were allowed to haul back and slap the bejesus out of offensive linemen. Receivers could and did execute crackback blocks. QB's were not protected species - you could pretty much smack 'em as hard as you like, anywhere, anytime.

816461[/snapback]

 

The differences in the league from then to now do not matter.

 

The actual statistics do not matter (because the league is different now than then).

 

The only thing that matters is the change in the statistics over time. It can be seen from Bradshaws career numbers (partially displayed in this thread), that Bradshaw was a markedly different QB his first five years than he was for the rest of his career.

 

That is the point people should be taking away from this thread. Don't let the specific numbers cloud your mind.

[JoeF]

Not trashing you Dr. K...but JP is JP -- there have been about 10 comparisons of the first few years stats to JP's, everyone from Aikman to Kelly to JP class peers to Bradshaw -- hell probably YA Tittle....

 

We can do all the stat comparison we want but if he:

 

1) Doesn't get time to throw

2) Doesn't learn how to avoid the sack and take the sack (safely without fumbling) at the proper time

3) Doesn't get more consistent with his reads

4) Isn't allowed to use his athleticism more (My only beef with Fairchild is that they are trying to make him a pocket passer but I understand they are trying to make him more disciplined)

 

He won't develop as an NFL starter unless these things are addressed...this all based on JP and its all correctable but comparing him to others without assessing JP's unique talents and development opportunities and without comparing the talent around JP to the talent around these other QBs has some shaky validity.

 

Again--not picking on you but the comparison threads are getting pretty funny...Jim Kelly's first 9 years in the league he went to 4 Super Bowls...

[Tortured Soul]

Fair enough.  I think that's a reasonable position, though I think I'd give him the entire season, no matter how painful it is to watch.

 

As for "the exception not the rule," do you mean that almost all of the time you can tell accurately how a QB's career will play out after, say 10-15 starts? I do not think I would agree with that.  Though I was convinced that Todd Collins was dead meat after less than one season. I did stay on board the Rob Johnson support train longer than most, and I was wrong about that.

816501[/snapback]

Depends if you view it as one season as a starter or 2 1/2 in the league. By the second measure, definitely. By the first, probably. I'll give him 20 starts. If he looks like he did Sunday, yank him.

 

The differences in the league from then to now do not matter.

 

The actual statistics do not matter (because the league is different now than then).

 

The only thing that matters is the change in the statistics over time. It can be seen from Bradshaws career numbers (partially displayed in this thread), that Bradshaw was a markedly different QB his first five years than he was for the rest of his career.

 

That is the point people should be taking away from this thread. Don't let the specific numbers cloud your mind.

816540[/snapback]

In 1974, the Steelers drafted two hall-of-fame wideouts and a hal-of-fame lineman.

[RkFast]

1) Doesn't get time to throw

2) Doesn't learn how to avoid the sack and take the sack (safely without fumbling) at the proper time

3) Doesn't get more consistent with his reads

4) Isn't allowed to use his athleticism more (My only beef with Fairchild is that they are trying to make him a pocket passer but I understand they are trying to make him more disciplined)

 

Where have I heard this before??!!??

[Dr. K]

Not trashing you Dr. K...but JP is JP -- there have been about 10 comparisons of the first few years stats to JP's, everyone from Aikman to Kelly to JP class peers to Bradshaw -- hell probably YA Tittle....

 

We can do all the stat comparison we want but if he:

 

1) Doesn't get time to throw

2) Doesn't learn how to avoid the sack and take the sack (safely without fumbling) at the proper time

3) Doesn't get more consistent with his reads

4) Isn't allowed to use his athleticism more (My only beef with Fairchild is that they are trying to make him a pocket passer but I understand they are trying to make him more disciplined)

 

He won't develop as an NFL starter unless these things are addressed...this all based on JP and its all correctable but comparing him to others without assessing JP's unique talents and development opportunities and without comparing the talent around JP to the talent around these other QBs has some shaky validity.

 

Again--not picking on you but the comparison threads are getting pretty funny...Jim Kelly's first 9 years in the league he went to 4 Super Bowls...

816544[/snapback]

 

 

I agree that JP is JP, not Bradshaw or Brees or anyone else. That's why I said I'd not push this comparison or draw too many conclusions. Like every Bills fan, I am very tired of losing. But in general my temperament is to prefer patience over "win now!"

[JoeF]

Where have I heard this before??!!??

816589[/snapback]

 

Every QB since Kelly except Flutie....its just rewind the tape...Maybe JP will meet the criteria better than the rest--he's probably the most gifted athlete of the bunch...it would be nice...

[Ozymandius]

Every QB that comes into the league takes years to develop, except if he puts on a Bills uniform, then its make the Pro Bowl or your a loser Bust

816441[/snapback]

I think people are impatient with JP because they didn't want to wait for him to develop after having gone through the RJ saga. It was stupid to even draft JP in the first place. Why didn't they just bring in a veteran QB instead -- why make the fans wait on another project? And just because Bledsoe sucked doesn't mean that savvy QBs like Brad Johnson weren't available that you could win with. If a young QB was needed that badly, the Bills should've at least built an offensive line and defense first so that he could be developed properly ala Roethlisberger and Rivers. The Bills did things so assbackwards that it just pi$$es people off. Why the hell do we have to wait on this mistake prone QB to develop? I hate waiting, especially since there's no guarantee he'll pan out anyway. Shouldn't they have put this strategy up to a vote with the fans before they went ahead and did it? Seriously, after RJ, would ANYONE have voted for the Bills to use a first round draft pick on a SoCal QB who played on a losing team in college, got sacked a lot, wasn't very accurate and bore a bit of a physical resemblance to RJ? I would have rather seen them build other parts of the team and bring in a vet to win instead.

 

And about JP himself. My honest feeling about him is that his ceiling is Jake Plummer. All my instincts while watching him play tell me this. What is the impact if I'm right? It means, provided Marv can hit on some draft picks or free agents that improve the lines (and Marv has yet to show this ability), the Bills will probably improve over the next few years and perhaps even make the playoffs with JP at the helm. If Marv does a good job drafting and signing free agents (again, huge if) several years in a row, they may even become perennial playoff contenders with JP. But the season will always end in a loss because JP will make mistakes in crucial moments just like Jake Plummer does. Denver has a great team this year (and last year as well), and they have NO SHOT at winning the Super Bowl because Plummer is their QB. That's who JP reminds me of. A guy who is a double threat with his arm and his legs but who never really has total command of what he's doing and will never inspire confidence in his teammates or fans watching him, a guy who the opposition can "wait out" on to make a crucial mistake to lose the game. Anyway, the Bills are so far away from where Denver is that I can't really complain if that's how things play out. Making the playoffs and losing is still far better than being a sh!tty team.

[Alaska Darin]

Yes, the Steelers were loaded with good talent.

 

Bradshaw had a fine arm, and was an excellent leader. One tough guy.

 

You have to put passing stats in context of the times.

 

When Bradshaw played, bump 'n run pass defense meant receivers were constantly being mugged. None of today's no-touch-me after 5 yards.  Defensive linemen were allowed to haul back and slap the bejesus out of offensive linemen. Receivers could and did execute crackback blocks. QB's were not protected species - you could pretty much smack 'em as hard as you like, anywhere, anytime.

816461[/snapback]

Which doesn't change the fact that defenses are far more intricate today and QB development takes longer than it did then.

 

The Steelers team changed with the '74 draft. The literally picked FOUR Hall of Fame players with their first 5 picks. Amazing stuff.

[stuckincincy]

Which doesn't change the fact that defenses are far more intricate today and QB development takes longer than it did then.

 

The Steelers team changed with the '74 draft.  The literally picked FOUR Hall of Fame players with their first 5 picks.  Amazing stuff.

816639[/snapback]

 

Yep...more sophisticated. I kinda miss the qb calling most of his plays, though.

 

Quite a draft. A criticsm leveled at Noll was that he kept his troops in regardless of the score...for years, and that when that talent aged, the bench was pretty thin. With all his success, Noll never garnered coach of the Year, IIRC.