for display only
Big Blue Interactive The Corner Forum  
Back to the Corner

Archived Thread

Does the NFL really evaluate QBs well?

LCtheINTMachine : 5/24/2017 12:52 pm
Everyone knows and says it is the most important position in all of sports. Along with that I find that one of the charms of the NFL is that so little is known about the position by the people running the game. I am not knocking them or saying I or some outsider knows better but it is fascinating.

It is almost like until you see these guys play in an actual NFL game you can't tell how good they are - exceptions are guys like the Mannings and Andrew Luck. Most other QBs only prove themselves over time. So many star players who nobody evaluated that highly - Brady, Rodgers, Russ Wilson. Now Dak Prescott is another one who slipped through the cracks. And look at the QB class from this draft. Nobody knows anything about them.

Meanwhile rookies can't beat out retreads like Brian Hoyer and McCown who have had nice careers despite not being top quality. The more you look at QBs, it's a mess in many places. And it will never change.






Rogers was a highly thought of guy - top 10  
ZogZerg : 5/24/2017 12:56 pm : link
draft pick going into the draft.
And Rodgers was still a first round pick  
Greg from LI : 5/24/2017 12:57 pm : link
He slid a whole lot more than anyone expected, but it's not like he tumbled down to the fifth round.
I actually think the teams do pretty well  
ZogZerg : 5/24/2017 12:59 pm : link
Most of the good QBs in the league are drafted in the first couple of rounds.
They did pretty well in 2004.

Quote:

1) 2004
Round 1: Eli Manning (No. 1), Philip Rivers (No. 4), Ben Roethlisberger (No. 11), J.P. Losman (No. 22)
Round 3: Matt Schaub (No. 90)
Round 4: Luke McCown (No. 106)
Round 5: Craig Krenzel (No. 148)
Round 6: Andy Hall (No. 185), Josh Harris (No. 187), Jim Sorgi (No. 193), Jeff Smoker (No. 201)
Round 7: John Navarre (No. 202), Cody Pickett (No. 217), Casey Bramlet (No. 218), Matt Mauck (No. 225), B.J. Symons (No. 248), Bradlee Van Pelt (No. 250)

RE: I actually think the teams do pretty well  
LCtheINTMachine : 5/24/2017 1:07 pm : link
In comment 13480736 ZogZerg said:
Quote:
Most of the good QBs in the league are drafted in the first couple of rounds.
They did pretty well in 2004.



Quote:



1) 2004
Round 1: Eli Manning (No. 1), Philip Rivers (No. 4), Ben Roethlisberger (No. 11), J.P. Losman (No. 22)
Round 3: Matt Schaub (No. 90)
Round 4: Luke McCown (No. 106)
Round 5: Craig Krenzel (No. 148)
Round 6: Andy Hall (No. 185), Josh Harris (No. 187), Jim Sorgi (No. 193), Jeff Smoker (No. 201)
Round 7: John Navarre (No. 202), Cody Pickett (No. 217), Casey Bramlet (No. 218), Matt Mauck (No. 225), B.J. Symons (No. 248), Bradlee Van Pelt (No. 250)





The '04 draft is well known and was 13 years ago. It's hardly indicative of the evaluations these years.

2014 - Bortles, Bridgewater, Manziel
2013 - EJ Manuel
2012 - Luck, RG3, Tannehill
2011 - Cam Newton, Jake Locker
2010 - Sam Bradford, Tebow
2009 - Stafford, Sanchez, Josh Freeman

I count three solid QBs - Luck, Cam and Stafford from these years. No one else is better than average.





They do a better job  
David B. : 5/24/2017 1:12 pm : link
than Gregg Rosenthral. But then, so does everyone.
I agree with part of the premise  
pjcas18 : 5/24/2017 1:20 pm : link
that there is significant unknown quantity of can a QB make the transition to the game speed of the NFL from NCAA, but in the examples shown of the failures, it's not like a lot of later round picks succeeded those years.

It's just hard to play QB in the NFL successfully period.

So I think QB's in the first round have a high "failure" rate especially if average is considered a failure, but 1st round is also the place where you're most likely to find a franchise QB if you understand what I'm saying.
I see bust potential with  
SHO'NUFF : 5/24/2017 2:12 pm : link
Trubisky and Mahomes.
I think it may be more of a case  
Beer Man : 5/24/2017 3:00 pm : link
of teams desperate for a QB reaching in draft when a high level of talent is not there. This past draft is a good example.
RE: I think it may be more of a case  
Beer Man : 5/24/2017 3:04 pm : link
In comment 13480941 Beer Man said:
Quote:
of teams desperate for a QB reaching in draft when a high level of talent is not there. This past draft is a good example.
reach = overreach
RE: I think it may be more of a case  
Jimmy Googs : 5/24/2017 3:18 pm : link
In comment 13480941 Beer Man said:
Quote:
of teams desperate for a QB reaching in draft when a high level of talent is not there. This past draft is a good example.


agree. BPA is basically thrown out the window when QBs are involved...and to a lesser degree guys that can sack a QB.
I will tell you why it's  
NINEster : 5/24/2017 4:50 pm : link
so complicated.

QBs all have unique strengths and weaknesses that have to be complimented by the strengths of a team's roster and coaching staff.

Are they spread QBs or pro style? Does the team have a defense and running game to carry him? Will he have to start right away?

In no particular order, GREAT QB situations that panned out:

1) Roethlisberger,
2) Russell Wilson
3) Prescott

Great QB situations that panned out initially but got derailed:

1) RG3
2) Kaepernick

Some less obvious great QB situations:

1) Rodgers
2) Brady

Rodgers might have the best all time setup. Backing up Favre, McCarthy playcalling.....good talent.

I'm not gonna sugarcoat it-- 49ers should have drafted Rodgers. Everyone knows this, BUT....

Is Rodgers an all time great going to the 49ers? It's a good question, and one that is worthy of discussion.

Whatever you think of the Niners now, they were ten times worse back then structurally. Harbaugh fixed up the team and even this transition IMO wasn't as bad as back then.

He would have had Frank Gore in his prime, Staley, Willis, Vernon Davis and not much else. Rodgers would have had to do it all on his own like Smith was forced to. Not sure about the character makeup to handle adversity. His biggest strength over Smith would have been being more forceful in personality......if such a thing would have brought results.

I wager Rodgers would have been a good QB, but not top 3. Probably top 10, because it's hard to imagine his abilities being denied that much when you see what he has done lately.

But even with all that he has done, he hasn't been perfect either, and he got to hang out on the bench for 3 years while his friend in SF was forced to start.

Comparing Alex Smith to Rodgers -- worst QB to pick for that team. Smith was a known slow starter (to be productive) per Urban Meyer, a spread QB in a pro system....then he had the worst luck where he got hurt in 2007 and played sooner than he should have.

The Smith you see today is not the one that went #1 overall from a physical standpoint. He lost some throwing ability from 2007 onwards.....a game manager he was not back then and never projected to be. Norv Turner once said Smith had a great deep ball.

Imagining Smith in Green Bay, he would have become a top 10 QB in this league for sure if his luck merely played out with health, and a 3 year internship. It's unbelievable his mental toughness. He picked up some cowardice along the way, but very very few QBs I think could have done what he did after such a rough start.

So gather up all the rest of the dudes people like to bash and whatever.........Romo, Cutler, Rivers.....these 3 easily could have been SB champs.

All about stabilizing the team situation. I wager that probably 80% of 1st round graded QBs could win Super Bowls in ideal situations.

And of course, guys like Derek Carr and Russell Wilson could easily have been mere footnotes in the NFL, remembered only by draft junkies.

I did an analysis one day and found that almost all of the big name QBs you can name from the early '80s all had time riding the bench learning.....that includes Montana and Young, Brady, Rodgers, etc..

Or they were put on pitch counts like Big Ben.

Wilson was put on a pitch count and had an RB and D that even Ben did not have.

Elway, Marino, and Peyton I guess you could say did it all by themselves.......but the rather low Lombardi counts for the stature indicate that it was about the team.

RE: I will tell you why it's  
Beer Man : 5/24/2017 5:26 pm : link
In comment 13481077 NINEster said:
Quote:
so complicated.

QBs all have unique strengths and weaknesses that have to be complimented by the strengths of a team's roster and coaching staff.

Are they spread QBs or pro style? Does the team have a defense and running game to carry him? Will he have to start right away?

In no particular order, GREAT QB situations that panned out:

1) Roethlisberger,
2) Russell Wilson
3) Prescott

Great QB situations that panned out initially but got derailed:

1) RG3
2) Kaepernick

Some less obvious great QB situations:

1) Rodgers
2) Brady

Rodgers might have the best all time setup. Backing up Favre, McCarthy playcalling.....good talent.

I'm not gonna sugarcoat it-- 49ers should have drafted Rodgers. Everyone knows this, BUT....

Is Rodgers an all time great going to the 49ers? It's a good question, and one that is worthy of discussion.

Whatever you think of the Niners now, they were ten times worse back then structurally. Harbaugh fixed up the team and even this transition IMO wasn't as bad as back then.

He would have had Frank Gore in his prime, Staley, Willis, Vernon Davis and not much else. Rodgers would have had to do it all on his own like Smith was forced to. Not sure about the character makeup to handle adversity. His biggest strength over Smith would have been being more forceful in personality......if such a thing would have brought results.

I wager Rodgers would have been a good QB, but not top 3. Probably top 10, because it's hard to imagine his abilities being denied that much when you see what he has done lately.

But even with all that he has done, he hasn't been perfect either, and he got to hang out on the bench for 3 years while his friend in SF was forced to start.

Comparing Alex Smith to Rodgers -- worst QB to pick for that team. Smith was a known slow starter (to be productive) per Urban Meyer, a spread QB in a pro system....then he had the worst luck where he got hurt in 2007 and played sooner than he should have.

The Smith you see today is not the one that went #1 overall from a physical standpoint. He lost some throwing ability from 2007 onwards.....a game manager he was not back then and never projected to be. Norv Turner once said Smith had a great deep ball.

Imagining Smith in Green Bay, he would have become a top 10 QB in this league for sure if his luck merely played out with health, and a 3 year internship. It's unbelievable his mental toughness. He picked up some cowardice along the way, but very very few QBs I think could have done what he did after such a rough start.

So gather up all the rest of the dudes people like to bash and whatever.........Romo, Cutler, Rivers.....these 3 easily could have been SB champs.

All about stabilizing the team situation. I wager that probably 80% of 1st round graded QBs could win Super Bowls in ideal situations.

And of course, guys like Derek Carr and Russell Wilson could easily have been mere footnotes in the NFL, remembered only by draft junkies.

I did an analysis one day and found that almost all of the big name QBs you can name from the early '80s all had time riding the bench learning.....that includes Montana and Young, Brady, Rodgers, etc..

Or they were put on pitch counts like Big Ben.

Wilson was put on a pitch count and had an RB and D that even Ben did not have.

Elway, Marino, and Peyton I guess you could say did it all by themselves.......but the rather low Lombardi counts for the stature indicate that it was about the team.
I'm not sold on Prescott just yet. The Dallas OL can make a lot of mediocre QBs look like world beaters.
Kudos to ninester...great lucid post.  
grizz299 : 5/25/2017 8:25 am : link
San Fran is the greatest example of the system making the QB (or , in fact, the WR).

Joe Montana is a "nice" albeit limited QB if he plays in the standard (for the day) five step drop, long ball game.
Proof is Steve Young, he's a failure with Tampa Bay, comes to the niners and is an all time, maybe top ten QB.
Dwayne Clark (?) is the WR before Rice and that team wins a superbowl BEFORE Rice. Wonderful player but not an all time best in another system.
Brees is an almost valueless commodity before he hooks up with the right system. Imagine giving away Drew Brees.
The writer mentions Elway and Marino - talent that was so great that it would have transcended any system and I think Rogers falls in that category.
Look at it from an available pool standpoint..  
FatMan in Charlotte : 5/25/2017 8:48 am : link
you have 32 teams. They all are looking for a franchise QB. If they get him, he can expect to be there a minimum of 7 years, but possibly 12-15 years. If you count Eli, Ben, Brady, Flacco, Rivers, Rodgers, Brees, Stafford, Dalton, Luck, Carr, Cam, Matty Ice, Mariota, Winston and Wilson as those guys teams are generally going to stick with, it leaves you with 16 teams in the market for a QB, and probably half of them don't have a QB as their top need.

It isn't so much that teams don't evaluate QB's well, it is that QB's who are going to become franchise players just don't come around all that often, either because of the scheme the team is using, flaws that are magnified at the next level, injuries, or just the lack of leadership and maturity needed to be the leader.

And each year, QB's are inflated in worth. Guys like Deshaun Watson get labeled the next superstar, even if their combine results look terrible. You never know how a QB is going to transition from a college spread offense to the NFL - add in all the other factors needed for leadership (that separate a Ryan Leaf and Jeff George from others with similar physical attributes), and you can see why teams miss on QB's. Basically, you aren't looking for just an adequate player - you are looking for a Superstar.
RE: I see bust potential with  
section125 : 5/25/2017 9:03 am : link
In comment 13480864 SHO'NUFF said:
Quote:
Trubisky and Mahomes.


I don't think either one will amount to anything beyond average and that might be a push.
RE: RE: I see bust potential with  
Beer Man : 5/25/2017 2:15 pm : link
In comment 13481790 section125 said:
Quote:
In comment 13480864 SHO'NUFF said:


Quote:


Trubisky and Mahomes.



I don't think either one will amount to anything beyond average and that might be a push.
I think Mahomes could be something very special. He has unbelievable physical tools, time will tell if he can master the mental part of playing QB in the NFL. A number of the talking heads did post that Mac was pushing to trade up to get him.
Back to the Corner