The backup QB readiness should never be about the primary QB, it is all about the coaching

[chad72]

I was just watching the NFL Top 100 players and at No.4 was Tom Brady. In one of the player testimonies on there, Matt Cassel was talking and these were his words:

"I remember being a backup to Tom and I would always be asking coach, can I get a rep here and there. Tom would never let me have it." The context was w.r.t how much a perfectionist Tom wanted to be.

There you go. That is just how the top tier QBs are wired. It was never up to the No.1 QB to make sure his backup had reps. As much a hold as Belichick had over the team, for Matt Cassel to say that on camera, this puts to rest the theory "Peyton should have taken care of the fact that Painter should have gotten reps."

It flat out does not work that way, folks. It was all up to the coaches to enforce something different, or come up with something different once they had to resort to plan B. Matt Cassel had no greater preparation in terms of reps when compared to Painter but what made them win many more games was they had a TEAM and they had GREAT COACHING.

It might be dusting up old opinions but I have always believed it is up to the coaches entirely to make sure their backup is prepared, the onus should never fall on the primary QB. The same applies for Drew Stanton now as well, IMO. Along the same lines, I wouldnt dog on Favre for not taking Rodgers under his wing either. Rodgers showed what he could do with time, and Matt Flynn showed what he could do with good coaching as well.

[chad72]

Just to make sure everyone had the proof for what I was talking about :

http://www.nfl.com/videos/new-england-patriots/09000d5d82a2ab06/The-Top-100-Players-of-2012-Tom-Brady

Watch the 03:40 mark in the video

[The Peytonator]

A thousand props Chad.

I've been saying it all along, any good QB should take all the reps with the 1's. Peyton was not some rep Nazi like some people would have us believe. To be honest though, I have a hard time blaming Christenson for the fact that Curtis sucked the big one. I think he sucked because he's just not an NFL level QB.

[Superman]

A thousand props Chad.

I've been saying it all along, any good QB should take all the reps with the 1's. Peyton was not some rep Nazi like some people would have us believe. To be honest though, I have a hard time blaming Christenson for the fact that Curtis sucked the big one. I think he sucked because he's just not an NFL level QB.

I agree with that, but I can blame Clyde and the rest of the coaches for continuing to run an offense designed for an NFL level quarterback. At one point, Painter's pass attempts were on a Manning-like pace.

[The Peytonator]

I agree with that, but I can blame Clyde and the rest of the coaches for continuing to run an offense designed for an NFL level quarterback. At one point, Painter's pass attempts were on a Manning-like pace.

Can't argue with that. You gotta at least do some game-planning if you call yourself a coach. I just meant it's not their fault for his general suckitude.

[Gavin]

Nah Painter isnt an NFL caliber quarterback but the coaching staff could have made sure he got more reps with the first team in case something last year happened you want your backup to have some sort of time with the first team

[oldunclemark]

I was just watching the NFL Top 100 players and at No.4 was Tom Brady. In one of the player testimonies on there, Matt Cassel was talking and these were his words:

"I remember being a backup to Tom and I would always be asking coach, can I get a rep here and there. Tom would never let me have it." The context was w.r.t how much a perfectionist Tom wanted to be.

There you go. That is just how the top tier QBs are wired. It was never up to the No.1 QB to make sure his backup had reps. As much a hold as Belichick had over the team, for Matt Cassel to say that on camera, this puts to rest the theory "Peyton should have taken care of the fact that Painter should have gotten reps."

It flat out does not work that way, folks. It was all up to the coaches to enforce something different, or come up with something different once they had to resort to plan B. Matt Cassel had no greater preparation in terms of reps when compared to Painter but what made them win many more games was they had a TEAM and they had GREAT COACHING.

It might be dusting up old opinions but I have always believed it is up to the coaches entirely to make sure their backup is prepared, the onus should never fall on the primary QB. The same applies for Drew Stanton now as well, IMO. Along the same lines, I wouldnt dog on Favre for not taking Rodgers under his wing either. Rodgers showed what he could do with time, and Matt Flynn showed what he could do with good coaching as well.

God stuff .......Chad....

The idea that it was Manning's fault that his backups werent ready always was odd to me....

...and it probably blows my theory that Luck could have been schooled under Manning...

I just now have two favorite teams

[Superman]

Nah Painter isnt an NFL caliber quarterback but the coaching staff could have made sure he got more reps with the first team in case something last year happened you want your backup to have some sort of time with the first team

I think Cassel's comment that chad72 quoted blows that theory out of the water. Not only did he not get first team reps, but he stepped in in 2008 and did a really good job. And Matt Cassel is a guy who hadn't been a starter in five or six years.

[Superman]

God stuff .......Chad....

The idea that it was Manning's fault that his backups werent ready always was odd to me....

...and it probably blows my theory that Luck could have been schooled under Manning...

I just now have two favorite teams

I think it's different. I never would have expected Manning to tutor Luck, but it can't hurt being around someone who is as meticulous and detail-oriented as Manning reportedly is. I do agree that Luck's development will be ramped up more by being QB1 from the start, but I think if we had been able to keep Manning and Luck, Luck would have been just fine once he got the nod.

I continue to point to the Favre-Rodgers situation. Favre didn't do anything to help Rodgers, said it wasn't his job. And he's right. But Rodgers benefited from being around a HOF quarterback.

[funktacious2]

Also, there is a difference between a back up and grooming a QB to be the future face of the franchise. In the case of the Colts I don't believe we ever intended to hand over the reigns to Curtis Painter. (Otherwise why did we nab Kerry Collins).

[Smonroe]

Chad, I hope your post wasn't in response to that inane, poorly written piece of dung that Wells put out on StampedeBlue. He obviously has no interest in writing informative articles, he just tries to stir up controversy to get page hits.

Your post was 100% spot on.

[Gavin]

I think it's different. I never would have expected Manning to tutor Luck, but it can't hurt being around someone who is as meticulous and detail-oriented as Manning reportedly is. I do agree that Luck's development will be ramped up more by being QB1 from the start, but I think if we had been able to keep Manning and Luck, Luck would have been just fine once he got the nod.

I continue to point to the Favre-Rodgers situation. Favre didn't do anything to help Rodgers, said it wasn't his job. And he's right. But Rodgers benefited from being around a HOF quarterback.

The problem with that is, it didnt help Painter and the guy had an arm and its not like he cant make the throws, he did make some nice throws while on the field but to many bad ones but also our guys had some drops which as you know lowers his percentage, he was I believe I figured out the numbers to be 13 completions away from 60 percent, thats not alot and 60 percent is very decent. I think every quarterback is different and there is no one way to treat the back up, I think the time he didnt get with the 1st team hurt his growth

[FireJimCaldwell]

The only time QB2 should receive snaps with the first offense is when there is a chance he will receive extensive playing time. For example late in the year when Dungy/Caldwell would sit Manning after a series or two, then Sorgi & Painter should have and likely did receive practice reps.

What most fail to realize that during a practice each QB throws to each receiver. Most teams have 2 or 3 stations going on when they are working on passing drills, with the QB's & receivers rotating from left, middle and right. It's not like Painter didn't throw to the starting receivers during his first couple of years. He did. They get a lot of work during training camp and in practices. Live action scrimmaging is limited to QB1 taking the snaps unless there is a potential switch about to be made. When that happens there isn't a true #1.

I doubt anyone other than Luck gets many if any snaps with the first unit in live scrimmages during the season.

[FireJimCaldwell]

The problem with that is, it didnt help Painter and the guy had an arm and its not like he cant make the throws, he did make some nice throws while on the field but to many bad ones but also our guys had some drops which as you know lowers his percentage, he was I believe I figured out the numbers to be 13 completions away from 60 percent, thats not alot and 60 percent is very decent. I think every quarterback is different and there is no one way to treat the back up, I think the time he didnt get with the 1st team hurt his growth

How do you know it didn't help Painter? He could have been exponentially worse than he was without being around Manning a couple of years. If anything Painter's weakness was mental and fundamentals. He had the pocket presence of Ray Charles and that is hard to teach. He didn't have anywhere near the grasp of the offense that Sorgi had. He had a far better arm than Sorgi but Sorgi was a far better quarterback than Painter.

[Qwiz]

I think it's different. I never would have expected Manning to tutor Luck, but it can't hurt being around someone who is as meticulous and detail-oriented as Manning reportedly is. I do agree that Luck's development will be ramped up more by being QB1 from the start, but I think if we had been able to keep Manning and Luck, Luck would have been just fine once he got the nod.

I continue to point to the Favre-Rodgers situation. Favre didn't do anything to help Rodgers, said it wasn't his job. And he's right. But Rodgers benefited from being around a HOF quarterback.

[FireJimCaldwell]

I agree with that, but I can blame Clyde and the rest of the coaches for continuing to run an offense designed for an NFL level quarterback. At one point, Painter's pass attempts were on a Manning-like pace.

[FireJimCaldwell]

What happened to Painter then?

He is equivalent to what the Texans their first couple of years in the league.

[Qwiz]

Also, there is a difference between a back up and grooming a QB to be the future face of the franchise. In the case of the Colts I don't believe we ever intended to hand over the reigns to Curtis Painter. (Otherwise why did we nab Kerry Collins).

Well, Collins was a season vet. Even though I'm sure the coaching staff began to have doubts after inserting Painter into that game against the Jets a few years ago. It may have been an open competition to see who could replace Manning better, and Collins just won the job.

[Qwiz]

He is equivalent to what the Texans their first couple of years in the league.

How so? We drafted a quarterback who could have had at least a decent career in the league and ruined him with horrible offensive line play. I don't see the connection with Painter there.

[FireJimCaldwell]

How so? We drafted a quarterback who could have had at least a decent career in the league and ruined him with horrible offensive line play. I don't see the connection with Painter there.

You missed the point.

They were the worst team in the league. I wasn't comparing him to Carr. At that point it was hard for them to compete. They were outmatched more times than not.

Compare it to you and Mario Andretti racing cars.

Put you both in a 2012 Ford Fusion, I'd say Mario would beat you. Put Mario in a 76 Pinto and you a 2012 Porsche, as long as you don't wreck it, you're going to beat him. He'd have no shot of being competitive in the Pinto. Painter is a 76 Pinto.

[The Peytonator]

What happened to Painter then?

Does it really need to be spelled out?

Aaron Rodgers > Curtis Painter

Even if Peyton sat down with Curtis after class, and gave him special instructions, he still would have sucked the big one.

[Superman]

What happened to Painter then?

He doesn't have the talent of Aaron Rodgers or Andrew Luck. He was a 6th round pick for a team that practically never used a backup quarterback.

[Qwiz]

You missed the point.

They were the worst team in the league. I wasn't comparing him to Carr. At that point it was hard for them to compete. They were outmatched more times than not.

Compare it to you and Mario Andretti racing cars.

Put you both in a 2012 Ford Fusion, I'd say Mario would beat you. Put Mario in a 76 Pinto and you a 2012 Porsche, as long as you don't wreck it, you're going to beat him. He'd have no shot of being competitive in the Pinto. Painter is a 76 Pinto.

So are the cars a metaphor for Painter and Manning? How do you explain the rest of the team though? It was not just quarterback play that brought the Colts down this year.

[Qwiz]

Does it really need to be spelled out?

Aaron Rodgers > Curtis Painter

Even if Peyton sat down with Curtis after class, and gave him special instructions, he still would have sucked the big one.

I think Rodgers just has that chip on his shoulder. He wanted to be better than Favre. That is one of the main reasons he excells...plus he is surrounded by offensive talent, even more than Tom Brady. If Manning had given Painter instructions, who's to say he wouldn't have actually known what he was doing once he went in? He has just as strong an arm as Rodgers...he is an NFL quarterback for a reason. I don't think he would have tanked had he gotten at least some reps in with the first team.

[FireJimCaldwell]

So are the cars a metaphor for Painter and Manning? How do you explain the rest of the team though? It was not just quarterback play that brought the Colts down this year.

The metaphor was good vs. bad, not that you are a bad driver, but I doubt you are on level of Mario Andretti.

There isn't anything to explain. With a healthy Peyton Manning in my opinion your signature wouldn't exist and the Colts keep the status quo 10+ wins and the Texans would be fighting for a wildcard.

Manning with the 2013 roster, the Texans are still playing for 2nd place at best in the South. Can't be proven, but just how I see it.

[Qwiz]

He doesn't have the talent of Aaron Rodgers or Andrew Luck. He was a 6th round pick for a team that practically never used a backup quarterback.

T.J. Yates was a fifth-round draft pick, and he did pretty darn good for us when Schaub went down. He isn't anywhere near as good as Rodgers or Luck either, yet he managed to help his team succeed. Not all late-rounders are bad.

[The Peytonator]

I think Rodgers just has that chip on his shoulder. He wanted to be better than Favre. That is one of the main reasons he excells...plus he is surrounded by offensive talent, even more than Tom Brady. If Manning had given Painter instructions, who's to say he wouldn't have actually known what he was doing once he went in? He has just as strong an arm as Rodgers...he is an NFL quarterback for a reason. I don't think he would have tanked had he gotten at least some reps in with the first team.

He got a lot of reps with the 1's during the offseason while Peyton was getting his neck cut open. The Front Office realized he sucked and brought Grandpa Collins out of retirement. When that didn't work, they had to try something different......enter The Painter.

I would think if anything would give him a chip on his shoulder it would be getting benched for a retiree.

Also, arm strength is not everything when it comes to QB play. I'd be willing to bet that Painter can throw further than Manning. You know who else had arm strength?

JaMarcus Russel.

[Qwiz]

The metaphor was good vs. bad, not that you are a bad driver, but I doubt you are on level of Mario Andretti.

There isn't anything to explain. With a healthy Peyton Manning in my opinion your signature wouldn't exist and the Colts keep the status quo 10+ wins and the Texans would be fighting for a wildcard.

Manning with the 2013 roster, the Texans are still playing for 2nd place at best in the South. Can't be proven, but just how I see it.

I think our 3-4 defense, excellent defensive line play, along with our monster rookies could have helped us out immensely. Let's not forget, many are saying that had Schaub not gone down, we would have gone to the Super Bowl. If both Manning and Schaub were healthy, I think we would have beat you guys both times, if not at least once, and it is possible that we could have had a much better win margin. We had one of the easiest schedules in the league, many critics are quick to point out. It may very well have been the Colts fighting for a wild card in 2011, but this is all just speculation.

[FireJimCaldwell]

T.J. Yates was a fifth-round draft pick, and he did pretty darn good for us when Schaub went down. He isn't anywhere near as good as Rodgers or Luck either, yet he managed to help his team succeed. Not all late-rounders are bad.

3 words

WEST COAST OFFENSE

It amplifies every QB in it and it takes a pretty horrible QB not to have success in it. It even made Vick look competent.

[FireJimCaldwell]

I think our 3-4 defense, excellent defensive line play, along with our monster rookies could have helped us out immensely. Let's not forget, many are saying that had Schaub not gone down, we would have gone to the Super Bowl. If both Manning and Schaub were healthy, I think we would have beat you guys both times, if not at least once, and it is possible that we could have had a much better win margin. We had one of the easiest schedules in the league, many critics are quick to point out. It may very well have been the Colts fighting for a wild card in 2011, but this is all just speculation.

Yeah it's all speculation, but at this point that is all there is. I don't see game 1 being anywhere near what it was. I don't see Manning giving the pig away like Collins did to set up easy drives. It would have been closer than previous years. You by far had the best Texans team of all time, but I'm not sure if they would have reached the Super Bowl or not.

[Qwiz]

He got a lot of reps with the 1's during the offseason while Peyton was getting his neck cut open. The Front Office realized he sucked and brought Grandpa Collins out of retirement. When that didn't work, they had to try something different......enter The Painter.

I would think if anything would give him a chip on his shoulder it would be getting benched for a retiree.

Also, arm strength is not everything when it comes to QB play. I'd be willing to bet that Painter can throw further than Manning. You know who else had arm strength?

JaMarcus Russel.

Not as much of a chip as having to wait for years behind a quarterback who clearly did not like you and who the fans really, really adored. No, arm strength is not everything, but Painter could make the throws required of him. Had he had decent wide receiver play aside from Reggie Wayne, and maybe a semblance of an offensive line, then he would probably have given the Colts a better chance to compete. And they chose him over Orlovsky, so the coaching staff saw something in him.

[Qwiz]

3 words

WEST COAST OFFENSE

It amplifies every QB in it and it takes a pretty horrible QB not to have success in it. It even made Vick look competent.

He was a third-string, rookie 5th-round draft pick. West Coast Offense or not, he should have had at least some trouble and made many more rookie mistakes than he actually did.

[Superman]

Well, Collins was a season vet. Even though I'm sure the coaching staff began to have doubts after inserting Painter into that game against the Jets a few years ago. It may have been an open competition to see who could replace Manning better, and Collins just won the job.

It wasn't an open competition. Collins didn't even play in the preseason.

[Qwiz]

Yeah it's all speculation, but at this point that is all there is. I don't see game 1 being anywhere near what it was. I don't see Manning giving the pig away like Collins did to set up easy drives. It would have been closer than previous years. You by far had the best Texans team of all time, but I'm not sure if they would have reached the Super Bowl or not.

If I remember correctly, the first game of 2011 was almost a replica of the first game of 2010. That first game was a sign of the things to come. No, it probably wouldn't have been that bad, but you were playing in our stadium, in our electrifying crowd, against the number one ranked defense. Many have said that the Bears would have gone to the Super Bowl as well, something which I could actually see happening. Both our teams were just unfortunate and got a bad case of the injury bug.

[Superman]

T.J. Yates was a fifth-round draft pick, and he did pretty darn good for us when Schaub went down. He isn't anywhere near as good as Rodgers or Luck either, yet he managed to help his team succeed. Not all late-rounders are bad.

You're being obtuse.

It's good that TJ Yates was able to play as well as he did. He's better than Painter also. Generally speaking, when you insert a late round quarterback in to the lineup due to injuries, he doesn't play very well. That's no surprise, especially as a rookie. The fact that Painter was in his third year, and still played poorly (overall; he had some nice moments here and there) is a testament to how bad he was.

[Vance]

Wasn't Painter "the most NFL ready QB in the draft"? Lol. In a draft that included Stafford, Sanchez, even Freeman.

[Superman]

Wasn't Painter "the most NFL ready QB in the draft"? Lol. In a draft that included Stafford, Sanchez, even Freeman.

According to whom?

http://walterfootball.com/pro2009cpainter.php

Has a lot of the endearing qualities that you want in a quarterback in arm strength and accuracy, but when you get down to it, it simply takes more than that to be a solid NFL quarterback.

...

he needs time to be developed in the NFL.

http://www.fftoolbox.com/nfl_draft/profile_display.cfm?prospect_id=1264

He continues to make poor reads more often than other experienced starters. He seams to make his biggest mistakes when his team needs a big play. Painter still locks onto receivers on occasion, and neglects to look off safeties to open up the field.

http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/pyrnotes.php?pyid=33534&draftyear=2009&genpos=QB&startspot=50

02/11/09 - PRO POTENTIAL: QB Curtis Painter finished his career behind only Drew Brees in most offensive categories. Whether or not he has the same type of success in the NFL remains to be seen. Painter has great numbers and can show a quick release, but he made some bad decisions this year and frustrated his coach with his reads. Painter carried the knock of having never won a big game, which could hurt his draft stock. He'll latch onto some team in an NFL camp. What he does after that is strictly up to him.

[FireJimCaldwell]

He was a third-string, rookie 5th-round draft pick. West Coast Offense or not, he should have had at least some trouble and made many more rookie mistakes than he actually did.

Well let's not pretend that he came out and lighting up the score board.

They protected him. He only exceeded 30 or more throws 3 times including the playoffs. He had his training wheels on and the WCO along with his experience in the WCO at UNC helped him perform as good as he did and better than expected.

[FireJimCaldwell]

If I remember correctly, the first game of 2011 was almost a replica of the first game of 2010. That first game was a sign of the things to come. No, it probably wouldn't have been that bad, but you were playing in our stadium, in our electrifying crowd, against the number one ranked defense. Many have said that the Bears would have gone to the Super Bowl as well, something which I could actually see happening. Both our teams were just unfortunate and got a bad case of the injury bug.

Like you said. It's all speculation on both sides of the coin.

[The Peytonator]

Not as much of a chip as having to wait for years behind a quarterback who clearly did not like you and who the fans really, really adored. No, arm strength is not everything, but Painter could make the throws required of him. Had he had decent wide receiver play aside from Reggie Wayne, and maybe a semblance of an offensive line, then he would probably have given the Colts a better chance to compete. And they chose him over Orlovsky, so the coaching staff saw something in him.

Well now we're getting into different territory, and I'm not quite sure what the arguement is about.

1. Our team has had pretty solid receivers since I can remember. The media always liked to talk them up when talking about all the weapons Peyton had. Reggie Wayne as you mentioned, is no slouch. But don't so calously disregard Austin Collie and Pierre Garcon. Garcon received a pretty hefty contract this offseason, and it wasn't because he sucked. In 2010, before all the concussions, Austin Collie was a numbers machine. I believe he led the league in yards and touchdowns for a while. Painter's receivers were not scrubs.

2. The offensive line, believe it or not, was actually improved from the previous year. We had a significantly better running game, and that was without the threat of a legit QB to stretch the defense.

3. The coaching staff was inept in all facets of the game. Not sure what you're getting at with that one.