regardless. The only exception (IMO) is if the OL is Houston Texans bad (David Carr) and the QB gets hit so often he loses his internal clock (or worse, gets a major injury).
And yes, I think the Giants OL this year is bad enough it could ruin a young QBs career.
and the program they came from. Some guys like Wentz and even Prescott came 'league ready'. A few years ago, it was expected a QB would sit for some time... now, there's more of a push to get guys game experience as early as possible.
Part of the push to play rookie QB's is contract driven... you need to evaluate them before they burn through their rookie contracts and some of it is driven by how NFL ready they are.
Most beneficial for a rookie QB to not be thrown in to a disaster. Â
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
RE: IMO, the quality of the offensive line is the key for a rookie QB Â
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
I think it is beneficial for most QB’s to sit for a year Â
They get an entire season to get accustomed to life as a professional. They get a full year of learning the offense while learning behind a veteran to see how to prepare day in and day out. They also get a year in a strength and conditioning program to build up their frame. I have no issue starting a rookie QB if the line is solid and he is mentally tough but I would prefer for them to sit for at least the first half of the season. The last thing you want is for the young kid to lose his confidence.
and the program they came from. Some guys like Wentz and even Prescott came 'league ready'. A few years ago, it was expected a QB would sit for some time... now, there's more of a push to get guys game experience as early as possible.
Part of the push to play rookie QB's is contract driven... you need to evaluate them before they burn through their rookie contracts and some of it is driven by how NFL ready they are.
^this. Some of them are more ready than others, some situations are more amenable to a rookie QB than others. It's not as cut and dry as 'get them out there'.
I don't think it's mandatory, though. Even if they're not ready, they're bound to learn more by being out there than being on a bench.
RE: RE: IMO, the quality of the offensive line is the key for a rookie QB Â
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
But he's not a valuable commodity, he's a 4th round pick. Throw him in there.
RE: RE: IMO, the quality of the offensive line is the key for a rookie QB Â
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
There is no data to confirm what you are saying is true. What we know is that rookie QBs have been in bad situations and turned out well and some have sat and turned out well. We don't know if the rookie QBs that had bad situations and didn't make it would have done well if they were brought along more slowly. It is impossible to say. Or if the number that would have made it otherwise would be so small as to be an insignificant factor. You are just guessing like the rest of us. Aikman was murdered his first season and became a Hall of Famer. David Carr was murdered his first season and became a journeyman. The anecdotal evidence tells us nothing of substance.
RE: RE: RE: IMO, the quality of the offensive line is the key for a rookie QB Â
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
There is no data to confirm what you are saying is true. What we know is that rookie QBs have been in bad situations and turned out well and some have sat and turned out well. We don't know if the rookie QBs that had bad situations and didn't make it would have done well if they were brought along more slowly. It is impossible to say. Or if the number that would have made it otherwise would be so small as to be an insignificant factor. You are just guessing like the rest of us. Aikman was murdered his first season and became a Hall of Famer. David Carr was murdered his first season and became a journeyman. The anecdotal evidence tells us nothing of substance.
Allow me to quote myself!!!
Quote:
SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
That sums up what we are both saying in a nutshell... The point is, WHY RISK IT, with such a valuable commodity?
Your Handle says it all as far as you are concerned... You have a singular narrative that has been evident in all your posts on various threads. That is that above and beyond all else, this team needs a new Franchise QB.
My opinion is that this team has needs all across the board. Especially the OL. And I have mounds of analytics that I have posted in the past that support the fact that quality OL play correlates highly with wins. That is not a guess, that is fact. It is also my opinion that you need only a good QB to win the SB, not necessarily a great one. If you can build a great OL, then the running game works better as does the passing game. Just look what Dak did 2 years ago, when Dallas' line was still intact. In the last 20 years, teams won despite having these QBs: Foles, B. Johnson, Dilfer, Flacco, Rothlisberger (his first one where he was awful). The chances of finding great QBs like Brady or Montana in the draft is extremely low. Chances of finding E. Manning, Rothlisberger, Wilson, Warner is better but still difficult (I would call these guys very good, not great). Finding Flacco, Dilfer, B. Johnson, Foles is not difficult. But the last group is only going to win behind a very, very good OL. It's still difficult to build that kind of OL, but easier than finding a great or even very very good QB. As you step down in the quality of the QB, I would guess (yes guess, but its an educated one) that they are more likely to have their career negatively impacted long term by a bad OL.
All this is talking about being shellshocked. We haven't even discussed injuries. There have been some talented guys that have gotten injured behind bad OLs, perhaps they could have had a different career arc behind better ones. Tim Couch, Sam Bradford, Andrew Luck come to mind. Even right now, Josh Allen and Josh Rosen are injured.
So once again I ask... Why risk putting a young stud behind an OL this bad. This OL is every bit bad enough to ruin a QB.
RE: RE: RE: IMO, the quality of the offensive line is the key for a rookie QB Â
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
But he's not a valuable commodity, he's a 4th round pick. Throw him in there.
I wasn't referring to Lauletta... I was referring to a potential 1st round (top 5) draft pick.
I have no expectations of Lauletta, I don't care if you throw him in or not. He is a good kid, easy to root for. I haven't seen anything from him that suggests he is the next coming of Montana, Brady or even Wilson (all picked 3rd round or later). I hope he is, but, I am under no illusion that he is the long term answer.
Actually I do care a little, we should see what he has at some point. Lets not repeat the mistake made with Webb. Beyond that... Whatever.
And yes, I think the Giants OL this year is bad enough it could ruin a young QBs career.
That's why they didn't get rid of Alex Smith right away.
Part of the push to play rookie QB's is contract driven... you need to evaluate them before they burn through their rookie contracts and some of it is driven by how NFL ready they are.
Darnold and Mayfield both are in good spots too. All they needed to do is show some improvement over the previous year.
Right now, the Giants are not a good place for a rookie QB. If they had 5 or 6 wins with 2 games left, maybe yes!
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I don't see how getting experience can be a bad thing.
Not to mention getting real practice time.
Maybe there is no such thing as David Carr syndrome and he just was never that good of a QB?
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
Part of the push to play rookie QB's is contract driven... you need to evaluate them before they burn through their rookie contracts and some of it is driven by how NFL ready they are.
^this. Some of them are more ready than others, some situations are more amenable to a rookie QB than others. It's not as cut and dry as 'get them out there'.
I don't think it's mandatory, though. Even if they're not ready, they're bound to learn more by being out there than being on a bench.
Quote:
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
But he's not a valuable commodity, he's a 4th round pick. Throw him in there.
Quote:
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
There is no data to confirm what you are saying is true. What we know is that rookie QBs have been in bad situations and turned out well and some have sat and turned out well. We don't know if the rookie QBs that had bad situations and didn't make it would have done well if they were brought along more slowly. It is impossible to say. Or if the number that would have made it otherwise would be so small as to be an insignificant factor. You are just guessing like the rest of us. Aikman was murdered his first season and became a Hall of Famer. David Carr was murdered his first season and became a journeyman. The anecdotal evidence tells us nothing of substance.
Quote:
In comment 14138625 baadbill said:
Quote:
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
There is no data to confirm what you are saying is true. What we know is that rookie QBs have been in bad situations and turned out well and some have sat and turned out well. We don't know if the rookie QBs that had bad situations and didn't make it would have done well if they were brought along more slowly. It is impossible to say. Or if the number that would have made it otherwise would be so small as to be an insignificant factor. You are just guessing like the rest of us. Aikman was murdered his first season and became a Hall of Famer. David Carr was murdered his first season and became a journeyman. The anecdotal evidence tells us nothing of substance.
Allow me to quote myself!!!
SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
That sums up what we are both saying in a nutshell... The point is, WHY RISK IT, with such a valuable commodity?
Your Handle says it all as far as you are concerned... You have a singular narrative that has been evident in all your posts on various threads. That is that above and beyond all else, this team needs a new Franchise QB.
My opinion is that this team has needs all across the board. Especially the OL. And I have mounds of analytics that I have posted in the past that support the fact that quality OL play correlates highly with wins. That is not a guess, that is fact. It is also my opinion that you need only a good QB to win the SB, not necessarily a great one. If you can build a great OL, then the running game works better as does the passing game. Just look what Dak did 2 years ago, when Dallas' line was still intact. In the last 20 years, teams won despite having these QBs: Foles, B. Johnson, Dilfer, Flacco, Rothlisberger (his first one where he was awful). The chances of finding great QBs like Brady or Montana in the draft is extremely low. Chances of finding E. Manning, Rothlisberger, Wilson, Warner is better but still difficult (I would call these guys very good, not great). Finding Flacco, Dilfer, B. Johnson, Foles is not difficult. But the last group is only going to win behind a very, very good OL. It's still difficult to build that kind of OL, but easier than finding a great or even very very good QB. As you step down in the quality of the QB, I would guess (yes guess, but its an educated one) that they are more likely to have their career negatively impacted long term by a bad OL.
All this is talking about being shellshocked. We haven't even discussed injuries. There have been some talented guys that have gotten injured behind bad OLs, perhaps they could have had a different career arc behind better ones. Tim Couch, Sam Bradford, Andrew Luck come to mind. Even right now, Josh Allen and Josh Rosen are injured.
So once again I ask... Why risk putting a young stud behind an OL this bad. This OL is every bit bad enough to ruin a QB.
Quote:
In comment 14138625 baadbill said:
Quote:
If he's playing behind a good OL, then every snap he takes is a quality learning experience (positive or negative).
OTOH if he's playing behind a horrible OL, then I can't see how any snap ever provides a quality learning experience. If anything, it is a cesspool where there is nothing but bad habits to learn.
For the Giants right now, Lauletta would almost certainly provide Giants fans with some excitement using his legs - but I doubt Lauletta would learn anything positive running for his life.
I agree with this and have said so numerous times. Playing behind a shit line is a recipe for bad habits. Not a good learning experience. SOme guys may overcome it. Other's won't... Why risk it with such a valuable commodity.
But he's not a valuable commodity, he's a 4th round pick. Throw him in there.
I wasn't referring to Lauletta... I was referring to a potential 1st round (top 5) draft pick.
I have no expectations of Lauletta, I don't care if you throw him in or not. He is a good kid, easy to root for. I haven't seen anything from him that suggests he is the next coming of Montana, Brady or even Wilson (all picked 3rd round or later). I hope he is, but, I am under no illusion that he is the long term answer.
Actually I do care a little, we should see what he has at some point. Lets not repeat the mistake made with Webb. Beyond that... Whatever.