teams giving up on QBs

[CR91]

do you feel teams dont really give a QB an opportunity to grow now-a-days? you see guys like manuel and smith benched before they play 20 games. has luck wilson cam made too lofty expectations for QBs to come in day one and change the fortunes of a franchise? honestly I feel like if your team doesnt really believe in you, then youre not gonna put it all on the line to help your team succeed. 

[NewColtsFan]

Good post.  

 

While it's easier to play QB these days than it was when Peyton broke into the league,  the problem, as you noted,  is that if you don't produce soon,  the coach and GM who picked you and who will likely be fired if you don't work out,  will look for an alternative to help the franchise win.

 

An owner won't fire the HC and GM if the team is winning.    Even if the promising QB is on the bench.    Winning cures everything.

 

But if the back-up can't deliver,  then the HC and GM have a problem.

 

Manuel was benched because the word was out that the HC could get fired by the new team owner if the Bills didn't make the playoffs this year.     They went to Orton.

 

And we all know what's going on with Rex in New York.    Same boat.     Win or go home.

 

So, the leash is not only shorter for the new young QB,  it's also shorter for the HC's and the GM's.......

 

It's too bad because people will be judged way too quickly.

[BOTT]

Playing some guys right away is a mistake. A lot of these guys are coming from spread/air raid systems in college and I gotta think the transition to a pro style offense is quite difficult. But the nfl is often a monkey see monkey do kind of league so I don't expect that to change.

[21isSuperman]

The problem falls on the coaches/GM/scouts, in my opinion.  Manuel was taken too high, same with Ponder, same with Gabbert.  Sanchez and Geno had terrible coaches that didn't let them develop properly.  If you're going to take a guy high and develop him, then you have to have patience.  Your owner, GM, and coaches must all be on the same page and not worry if fans get restless and the media is grilling them.  That's not to say Manuel, Ponder, Sanchez, or Gabbert are great QBs or even good QBs (they might be, they might not be), but their teams didn't do much to help them develop.  A lot of it does fall on the players (reports were that Gabbert wouldn't be accountable for anything and would always blame others), but the coaches must do what they can to develop the most important position on the team.  There were reports that the Jets coaches would determine the reads and throws for their QBs before the play.  You can't dictate where to throw the ball before knowing what the defense does.  Watch what the coverage does and find your open read; that's the whole point of having a progression.  Throwing into one pre-determined spot and hoping for the best will result in picks and losses.

 

You take a guy too early in the draft, put unreal expectations on him because you've seen guys like Luck (who are the exception and not the norm), and don't develop him properly.  That's a recipe for disaster

[-JJ-]

do you feel teams dont really give a QB an opportunity to grow now-a-days? you see guys like manuel and smith benched before they play 20 games. has luck wilson cam made too lofty expectations for QBs to come in day one and change the fortunes of a franchise? honestly I feel like if your team doesnt really believe in you, then youre not gonna put it all on the line to help your team succeed. 

Pretty much like coaches. 3 years and produce or be gone. unfortunately sign of the times in the NFL pressure to win now.

[dgambill]

A ton of expectations come with QBs taken in the top 10. Coaches jobs are on the line, gm etc....they get thrown into the fire too soon imo. A lot have promise and talent but when you have a qb that can only run 30% of your playbook is it smart to start him? Just because he is better at that 30% than the guy that can run 100% but not quite as well at those few plays. Once the young guys get out there they have some good plays but its easy to game plan for them because they have a limited offense...then coverages adapt and throwing lanes get smaller and blitzes come from places they've never seen before. I think overall unless they are one of those elite qbs its best to bring them along slow. Let them master the offense....learn in meeting rooms...learn from gametape...learn to be a pro really and then introduce them. There are those elite few that baptism by fire is appropriate with....the Mannings, Lucks, Wilsons, Ryans but for the most part I think a slower approach is better if you can take the heat of the fan base and mgt support. Most of the time these guys are coming into bad teams with coaches on the hot seat and need to save peoples jobs...so sometimes its not in their best interest to start but it is for the staff. The guys that come into the league and succeed right away...I think a lot of that is they are the right fit in the right offense a lot of times. Why we some someone struggle then move to another organization and play great....fit plays a lot into that...having the right guys around you...I think teams give up to quick often times...but a lot of the time I think they are just as much to blame for the player not working out....minus a Jamarcus Russell/Ryan Leaf etc.

[Synthetic]

QB's are the most overrated position in football.

Stop the passing fetish and focus on running the ball.

That's the problem right there for most teams that can't stop throwing it. They hate running the ball cause that's not as sexy as seeing a man drop back and throw a stupid ball up and down the field all day. Look at Pittsburgh, they used to be a very good running team that pounded the ball every game. Now all they do is throw throw throw, and then everyone goes OMG at Ben's stats, right before they lose to teams like Tampa Bay and the Jets cause they hate running the ball.

 

 

If teams give up on anyone too early, it's coaches. Since in this religion, you can't win fast enough, you get fired. No way a guy like Bill Walsh or Chuck Noll would survive to build long standing great teams in the league today when coaches get fired after 1 or 2 seasons.

[supremecoltsfan300]

do you feel teams dont really give a QB an opportunity to grow now-a-days? you see guys like manuel and smith benched before they play 20 games. has luck wilson cam made too lofty expectations for QBs to come in day one and change the fortunes of a franchise? honestly I feel like if your team doesnt really believe in you, then youre not gonna put it all on the line to help your team succeed. 

 

I'm probably in the minority, but I think teams give QBs too much time.  I don't think it's that hard to evaluate whether a guy can play or not.  By the end of season two, you should have a clear idea of whether your QB can legitimately get it done for you.  If you think about it, in the last twenty years, has any QB ever come back to haunt their team after being released and joining a new team?  We all know who the really good QBs are, and these guys don't get let go in the first place.  The only time you see it happen is when the QB has an injury and the team believes they have a great young QB prospect (ex. Brees and Peyton). 

 

The biggest mistake teams make imo is that they don't move on when they should.  They give out huge contracts for QBs that aren't very good (recent examples are Jay Cutler and Andy Dalton getting huge money; I'd add Flacco too but he did win them a SB, however, the amount of money they gave him was insane).

[dw49]

do you feel teams dont really give a QB an opportunity to grow now-a-days? you see guys like manuel and smith benched before they play 20 games. has luck wilson cam made too lofty expectations for QBs to come in day one and change the fortunes of a franchise? honestly I feel like if your team doesnt really believe in you, then youre not gonna put it all on the line to help your team succeed. 

 

 

No , I don't think this is the case. First of all , what everyone is leaving out of the equation is teams see these guys at practice a whole lot. In the case of Smith , he dropped like a rock a few months before the draft and it looks like it was well warranted . Manual on the other hand was not even supported by his college coach. Here's something I found from a CBS sports writer.

 

"Buffalo certainly can't blame Florida St. coach Jimbo Fisher for overselling it on quarterback EJ Manuel," Schefter said on Sunday NFL Countdown. "He was adamant throughout the pre-draft evaluation process that he didn't believe Manuel had the tools to be an NFL starter and he shouldn't be any better than a third-round pick.

"Fisher was extremely positive about Manuel as a person and as a hard worker, but he was very open and honest with teams about how limited he felt Manuel was as a quarterback prospect. 

 

It's my opinion that maybe the opposite of what you have is true. The Jags lost years with Gabbert , as did the Raiders with J Russell.They probably stuck with him a year too long as it was. History also seems to say your mistaken also. How many of these highly rated QB's that are finally cut make it with another team ? I guess those that want to try to argue it will say it's the team's fault for playing the QB too soon. 

[BleedBlu8792]

do you feel teams dont really give a QB an opportunity to grow now-a-days? you see guys like manuel and smith benched before they play 20 games. has luck wilson cam made too lofty expectations for QBs to come in day one and change the fortunes of a franchise? honestly I feel like if your team doesnt really believe in you, then youre not gonna put it all on the line to help your team succeed. 

 

Said QB's, the ones people have already named here (Smith, Gabbert, Ponder, Manuel, Sanchez etc..) were drafted WAY too high when they really did absolutely nothing at the college level. Teams get desperate, and overdraft, which puts enormous amounts of pressure on the QB to perform when they aren't ready to yet. However, this is nothing new. It's been happening for years.

[ColtsBlueFL]

do you feel teams dont really give a QB an opportunity to grow now-a-days? you see guys like manuel and smith benched before they play 20 games. has luck wilson cam made too lofty expectations for QBs to come in day one and change the fortunes of a franchise? honestly I feel like if your team doesnt really believe in you, then youre not gonna put it all on the line to help your team succeed. 

 

Some teams / coaches / scouts feel they can evaluate their talent on their rosters after seeing them everyday for a period of time and determine if they have 'IT'.  Even if it is raw, there must be flashes of brilliance that appears to be something to grow. If not, move on.  And I haven't heard the term "5 year plan" in next to... well... forever.  Doesn't fly.  I'm not a Buc fan, but residing in SW FL I do hear things.    Lovie Smith at beginning of the year-

 

"We have on the roster, both our QB of the present and QB of the future."  McCown and Glennon.  It is now quite apparent both are on the outs (Glennon more than McCown) and will be Tampa Bay fishing for a franchise QB in the draft, or however else they can land one.  Glennon appears to be set upon a career of being a journeyman QB.  Sad but true.

[James Harden]

I feel like Cam is going to be bench soon and maybe to a new team perhaps 

[oldunclemark]

do you feel teams dont really give a QB an opportunity to grow now-a-days? you see guys like manuel and smith benched before they play 20 games. has luck wilson cam made too lofty expectations for QBs to come in day one and change the fortunes of a franchise? honestly I feel like if your team doesnt really believe in you, then youre not gonna put it all on the line to help your team succeed.

I couldn't disagree more..

Its foolish to start QBs in the first game of their rookie season...

But if you do that, there will probably be a time they have to be benched. Geno and EJ simply arent ready to play (and win) in the NFL. No shame.

If being benched breaks you..you weren't good enough anyway.

You owe it tot the team to try to make the playoffs...Orton gives Buffalo that chance..Geno should have been benched sooner

[Superman]

I only see teams giving up on bad QBs.

[BloodyChamp]

I'm a Seminole fan and I'm telling you right now - EJ MANUEL IS BETTER THAN JAMEIS WINSTON. * Jimbo Fisher abandoned the run after a single 3 and out every game in 2012. Fast forward to Florida and they were snubbing our plays. He's gotten a little better at sticking with the run now which is the real reason we've been better the last 2 years. Heck, 1 of our backs might even get 500 rushing yards this year!

They certainly bench quarterbacks to fast these days for reasons that others have mentioned. Another reason is the interceptions. Interceptions should be fewer in this era (and they are among the best quarterbacks compared to the previous eras best) but not nonexistent. You still have to take chances. That's why Rodgers sucks so bad in big games.

[CR91]

I only see teams giving up on bad QBs.

so if they dont produce right away, their bad?

[BloodyChamp]

Brett Favre's first 76,432 passes were intercepted (well not counting his completion to himself), Troy Aikman lined up under the guard, and I still haven't figured out what the heck Steve Young was doing lol! Shoulda all been benched!

[Superman]

so if they dont produce right away, their bad?

 

Not sure how you get that from what I posted.

[ColtsBlueFL]

Brett Favre's first 76,432 passes were intercepted (well not counting his completion to himself), Troy Aikman lined up under the guard, and I still haven't figured out what the heck Steve Young was doing lol! Shoulda all been benched!

 

I didn't research Favre or Aikman's early years.  But I remembered much of Young's and thought he was a curious inclusion here.  Young was a top pick in the USFL.  his team and league folded in year 2.  Young was top selection in the NFL supplemental draft by Tampa Bay Buccaneers.  They went 2-14 two years in a row and Young was 3 - 16 in games he started.  Deemed a bust, the Bucs drafted Vinny Testaverde in the 1987 draft, and then traded Young to the 49'ers for a 2nd and 4th pick to be Joe Montana's backup for several years. 

 

So Young should be a role model to those who have not shown early success that they might still make it in this league with the right organization if they continue to learn and grow. But there are few Steve Young stories and more Mark Sanchez and Carson Palmer type stories. Let alone Ryan Leaf. Matt Leinart,  and Jamarcus Russell stories.

[BpG]

Bad teams draft QB's high.....QB's forced to play because they are the best option.....Coaches forced to play them even if they aren't ready because bad teams fire coaches when the team doesn't win.....bad teams stay bad.....

 

 

 

With that said, the guys that teams are giving up on show no signs of being good. Even the guys who were bad that eventually were good, they showed signs. 

 

Smith is a scrub, so is EJ Manuel. I would never draft a black QB. 

[House]

Bad teams draft QB's high.....QB's forced to play because they are the best option.....Coaches forced to play them even if they aren't ready because bad teams fire coaches when the team doesn't win.....bad teams stay bad.....

With that said, the guys that teams are giving up on show no signs of being good. Even the guys who were bad that eventually were good, they showed signs.

Smith is a scrub, so is EJ Manuel. I would never draft a black QB.

At least that's not racist.

[sweetsurrender]

QB's are the most overrated position in football.

Stop the passing fetish and focus on running the ball.

That's the problem right there for most teams that can't stop throwing it. They hate running the ball cause that's not as sexy as seeing a man drop back and throw a stupid ball up and down the field all day. Look at Pittsburgh, they used to be a very good running team that pounded the ball every game. Now all they do is throw throw throw, and then everyone goes OMG at Ben's stats, right before they lose to teams like Tampa Bay and the Jets cause they hate running the ball.

 

 

If teams give up on anyone too early, it's coaches. Since in this religion, you can't win fast enough, you get fired. No way a guy like Bill Walsh or Chuck Noll would survive to build long standing great teams in the league today when coaches get fired after 1 or 2 seasons.

Seattle primarily runs and won the SB doing it.

[Valpo2004]

I only see teams giving up on bad QBs.

 

Yeah none of those guys ever gave much reason to say "Lets give him more time."

[BpG]

At least that's not racist.

 

 

Cool, because it's not. Being racist has nothing to do with the majority of black QB's not being good and never reaching elite level. 

[House]

Cool, because it's not. Being racist has nothing to do with the majority of black QB's not being good and never reaching elite level.

Well ya see that's what we call stereotyping. And then declining someone a job, in this case a fictitious QB position, because the color of their skin. That's racism.

Thus the statement you made, was stereotyping blacks as well as just being ignorant.

[Valpo2004]

I didn't research Favre or Aikman's early years.  But I remembered much of Young's and thought he was a curious inclusion here.  Young was a top pick in the USFL.  his team and league folded in year 2.  Young was top selection in the NFL supplemental draft by Tampa Bay Buccaneers.  They went 2-14 two years in a row and Young was 3 - 16 in games he started.  Deemed a bust, the Bucs drafted Vinny Testaverde in the 1987 draft, and then traded Young to the 49'ers for a 2nd and 4th pick to be Joe Montana's backup for several years. 

 

So Young should be a role model to those who have not shown early success that they might still make it in this league with the right organization if they continue to learn and grow. But there are few Steve Young stories and more Mark Sanchez and Carson Palmer type stories. Let alone Ryan Leaf. Matt Leinart,  and Jamarcus Russell stories.

 

If I remember right Farve was a bit of a party animal in Atlanta.  And I'm reading on wikipedia that his coach didn't like him and opposed drafting him.  So he only got in on a few snaps none of which looked very good.  The Packers really wanted Farve from the last draft and offered up a first rounder for him which Atlanta happily took.  (Given that they spend a 2nd rounder to draft him and he didn't show any promise, they probably saw it as a major blessing.)

 

It's worth noting however that it didn't take that many games for Farve to start showing promise.  In week 3 in his 2nd year in the league (1st in green bay) he starts off bad but eventually throws the game winner.  Then he's tearing it up in week 4.  Having started no games in Atlanta and only taking 4 snaps there it really did not take much playing time for Farve to get going.  Certainly not 20 games.

 

Young took a little longer to start showing it, and based on when it happened though one could conclude that it was in big part to the Bucs and possibly coaching.  Looking at his Wikipedia article it's like he gets to San Fran and under Walsh and he's doing well again.

[BpG]

Well ya see that's what we call stereotyping. And then declining someone a job, in this case a fictitious QB position, because the color of their skin. That's racism.

Thus the statement you made, was stereotyping blacks as well as just being ignorant.

 

 

No, what you're describing is affirmative action. I'm not giving someone a job when it's proven that people from similar cultures and backgrounds can't produce at the same level or even close as their white counterparts. Unless they possessed the same skills (by and large black QB's are and have been running QB's) and the same talent, it's just being smart. 

 

It's a business, not a charity or a government run institution. 

[Valpo2004]

Cool, because it's not. Being racist has nothing to do with the majority of black QB's not being good and never reaching elite level. 

 

Very few QB's reach the elite level so it's not really a fair standard.  Having a QB that can just be an above average starter makes him worth the #1 overall pick in most drafts.  

 

Cam Newton and Russel Wilson, both above average starters at the QB position and black.  

 

As far as bust rate I wouldn't know. . . Seems like the bust rate on QB's is high anyways.  

[House]

No, what you're describing is affirmative action. I'm not giving someone a job when it's proven that people from similar cultures and backgrounds can't produce at the same level or even close as their white counterparts. Unless they possessed the same skills (by and large black QB's are and have been running QB's) and the same talent, it's just being smart.

It's a business, not a charity or a government run institution.

Uhhh no. Affirmative action would be requiring you to hire someone, or give them an interview, based on their skin or culture.

What you are describing is declining to ever, EVER, hire someone of 1 particular color, based on the fact they are that color. Basically saying if they came to you with a resume for some imaginary QB slot, even if it was good ala Newton, you would never hire them. Based on their skin.

That the very definition of racial discrimination.

Are you really that obtuse?

[BpG]

Uhhh no. Affirmative action would be requiring you to hire someone, or give them an interview, based on their skin or culture.

What you are describing is declining to ever, EVER, hire someone of 1 particular color, based on the fact they are that color. Basically saying if they came to you with a resume for some imaginary QB slot, even if it was good ala Newton, you would never hire them. Based on their skin.

That the very definition of racial discrimination.

Are you really that obtuse?

 

 

No, that is not what I am saying, the color of their skin has nothing to do with it. Black QB's historically aren't good, they just aren't. If I had to choose between an American basketball player and a Chinese basketball player, I would never choose the Chinese for the simple fact that statistically speaking you are way more likely to find a good american than Chinese. 

 

It's not discrimination at all, it's making a very factual decision based on decades of historical data. 

[House]

No, that is not what I am saying, the color of their skin has nothing to do with it. Black QB's historically aren't good, they just aren't. If I had to choose between an American basketball player and a Chinese basketball player, I would never choose the Chinese for the simple fact that statistically speaking you are way more likely to find a good american than Chinese.

It's not discrimination at all, it's making a very factual decision based on decades of historical data.

So yes. You really are that obtuse. That's all I needed to know lol.

[Nadine]

Removed some posts that were racial/political and / or personal shot

 

Please no racial or political posts..........they tend to lead to thread devolving

 

Thank you

[Superman]

Yeah none of those guys ever gave much reason to say "Lets give him more time."

 

There have been some guys who got the hook a little early, like Vince Young, etc. But they usually prove down the line that they weren't very good anyways, like Vince Young.

 

To me, you need to give young QBs weapons to throw to, and you should try your hardest to give him some good line play (which is easier said than done). A lot of teams are throwing young QBs out there with no one to throw to, like the Jets. Sanchez earned his benching, and he got hurt, and he was overpaid, so he was released. But the Jets did a terrible job with receivers, and they hired bad coordinators, and the head coach is apparently clueless when it comes to developing a good offense. 

 

For the most part, though, bad QBing is a result of bad QBs. 

[BloodyChamp]

Come on guys I was clearly being sarcastic. Does nobody really remember how 2 of Favre's first 4 passes were intercepted? Then the "completion" against Tampa Bay? But Aikman really did line up under the guard. It's probably on YouTube.

[BOTT]

Come on guys I was clearly being sarcastic. Does nobody really remember how 2 of Favre's first 4 passes were intercepted? Then the "completion" against Tampa Bay? But Aikman really did line up under the guard. It's probably on YouTube.

So did Elway lol

[oldunclemark]

QB's are the most overrated position in football.

Stop the passing fetish and focus on running the ball.

That's the problem right there for most teams that can't stop throwing it. They hate running the ball cause that's not as sexy as seeing a man drop back and throw a stupid ball up and down the field all day.

But Bogie...They hate running the ball because you cant make a living at it.

Defenses are bigger and faster every year. Do you want your TE to block the 260 pound outside linebacker or do you want him to run by him and catch a pass..

You just cant line up and block 8 defenders with 7 blockers or 7 defenders with 6 blockers like you did 20 years ago.

Defenders are allowed to abuse running backs but they cant touch receivers....

What makes more sense..Try to run consecutive successful running plays or try to complete one of every 2 passes?..

Ti focus on running the ball is to lose to passing teams like Denver and the Colts

[crazycolt1]

I'm probably in the minority, but I think teams give QBs too much time.  I don't think it's that hard to evaluate whether a guy can play or not.  By the end of season two, you should have a clear idea of whether your QB can legitimately get it done for you.  If you think about it, in the last twenty years, has any QB ever come back to haunt their team after being released and joining a new team?  We all know who the really good QBs are, and these guys don't get let go in the first place.  The only time you see it happen is when the QB has an injury and the team believes they have a great young QB prospect (ex. Brees and Peyton). 

 

The biggest mistake teams make imo is that they don't move on when they should.  They give out huge contracts for QBs that aren't very good (recent examples are Jay Cutler and Andy Dalton getting huge money; I'd add Flacco too but he did win them a SB, however, the amount of money they gave him was insane).

I think you are in the minority. In the past QBs were brought along slowly compared to today. Just because a lot of todays collage QBs are playing in a pro set does not mean they are ready to play in the pros. Two of the greatest QBs in history sat a long time before becoming great. Young and Rogers. The NFL history is full of QBs who were passed aside but later become great QBs. There is a reason there are only 32 starting QBs in the NFL.

[braveheartcolt]

If you draft a QB with the aim of him becoming the starter, and your current QB is not getting it done, why wouldn't you start him? The season is probably going no where anyway,so where better to learn than under centre, rather than in the class room etc. And if you spend too long keeping him under wraps, and he eventually flops, you've wasted a year or so.

[dw49]

I think you are in the minority. In the past QBs were brought along slowly compared to today. Just because a lot of todays collage QBs are playing in a pro set does not mean they are ready to play in the pros. Two of the greatest QBs in history sat a long time before becoming great. Young and Rogers. The NFL history is full of QBs who were passed aside but later become great QBs. There is a reason there are only 32 starting QBs in the NFL.

 

 

No offense meant but what you have is just not true. The only two guys I can think of that sat more than a year are the two you have. And both those guys were sitting behind HOF QB's . So if I look at the list of great NFL QB's , all but the 2 you mention played in their first or 2nd years. Plus one could really argue that Young and Rodgers were not by any means sat because of any issues other than they couldn't beat out the guys in front of them. 

 

As far as the "full of great QB's passed aside and later became great QB's " , I'm interested in the list you have that would be the following. Am looking for guys that were highly touted and thrown into the mix too early and then were acquired by another team , seasoned a bit and became great QB's. Wouldn't that be the criteria we are looking at to match your statement up with the thread here ? I really can't think of one.

 

Yikes... just clicking on a few of the older time great QB's and I have yet to find one that didn't start at least a bunch of games in his rookie year. 

 

Fouts

Bradshaw

Starr (17th rounder besides)

Unitas

 

I was looking to find guys that were not 1st round picks (Bradshaw was kinda dumb) to just see how many sat and learned. I had thought Montana sat 2-3 years but even he started 7 games his 2nd season. 

[crazycolt1]

No offense meant but what you have is just not true. The only two guys I can think of that sat more than a year are the two you have. And both those guys were sitting behind HOF QB's . So if I look at the list of great NFL QB's , all but the 2 you mention played in their first or 2nd years. Plus one could really argue that Young and Rodgers were not by any means sat because of any issues other than they couldn't beat out the guys in front of them. 

 

As far as the "full of great QB's passed aside and later became great QB's " , I'm interested in the list you have that would be the following. Am looking for guys that were highly touted and thrown into the mix too early and then were acquired by another team , seasoned a bit and became great QB's. Wouldn't that be the criteria we are looking at to match your statement up with the thread here ? I really can't think of one.

 

Yikes... just clicking on a few of the older time great QB's and I have yet to find one that didn't start at least a bunch of games in his rookie year. 

 

Fouts

Bradshaw

Starr (17th rounder besides)

Unitas

 

I was looking to find guys that were not 1st round picks (Bradshaw was kinda dumb) to just see how many sat and learned. I had thought Montana sat 2-3 years but even he started 7 games his 2nd season.

Bradshaw was kinda dumb? You just threw your opinion out the window. Where did I say the older QBs that were recycled won super bowls? I said success.