Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Why drafting a QB is more likely than you think


  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#46 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,604 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 02:00 PM

At some point your going to have to play him for the majority of the season regardless if he plays poorly, otherwise your stuck in limbo on knowing where you stand and what to do with him.

Also if you draft a number one Qb chances are you don't have another consistenly good QB on your roster. So even if you bench your drafted QB, your offence and team will still hampred by your number one pick's poor play.

And if because he was picked number one, its proable to assume that no other high calibur QB's were drafted or signed during that period So if the Qb ends up being a bust, you will proably be setback agian by devloping yet another QB.


These are really good points. If a QB drafted number 1 busts it sets a franchise back 3-5 years.

But the flip side is if he booms it props up your franchise for 12-15 years.

There are always boom/bust scenarios with QB's, and the busts are a disaster but the booms can change the entire life and outside perspective of a franchise forever.

#47 jramsey4

jramsey4

    "Blisters on me Fingers"

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,479 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 04:59 PM

These are really good points. If a QB drafted number 1 busts it sets a franchise back 3-5 years.

But the flip side is if he booms it props up your franchise for 12-15 years.

There are always boom/bust scenarios with QB's, and the busts are a disaster but the booms can change the entire life and outside perspective of a franchise forever.


Wow summed up brilliantly.

Newton also has a ton of intangibles as well that people always tend to overlook due to his overwhelming athleticism. He is a great leader and everything I have heard from coaches and especially his teammates says he has a tireless work ethic and is constantly trying to improve himself. And I don't think there has every been a college player that has handle so much adversity and still played lights out and for a whole season. And something I love about the kid is how he just does not give up. Not on a play (see the countless times he has shrugged off tacklers) and certainly not on a game or even in his career (see his transfer from Flordia to Blinn then to Auburn).

I find it odd that so many people are so against drafting him. I guess its true Haters goin' Hate.

Edited by jramsey4, 19 February 2011 - 05:01 PM.


#48 jramsey4

jramsey4

    "Blisters on me Fingers"

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,479 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 05:08 PM

yeah that totally worked for guys like Aaron Rodgers, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselbeck, and Matt Cassel; you know, cause they all played substantially their first year...

wait...

oh you must be talking about Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Alex Smith, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, and Jason Campbell, cause they all started early and had great careers...

wait...

All I'm saying is that if we draft a QB, the kid needs to sit until he proves that he is ready to play. if he can't prove it, then no need to start him.


I find it funny how you mention the failures and omit the success like Matt Ryan, Josh Freeman, Sancez, Big Ben, Flacco, Bradford (although that one is meh so far) and oh yeah Peyton Manning. I don't really think you can make the broad assumptions you are making because it depends on too many variables. From the individual player to the situation it just depends. I honestly don't think it really matters how long they have been in the league as long as they know the playbook its really down to the player.

#49 Cracka McNasty

Cracka McNasty

    WWNPHD?

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,873 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 07:16 PM

I find it funny how you mention the failures and omit the success like Matt Ryan, Josh Freeman, Sancez, Big Ben, Flacco, Bradford (although that one is meh so far) and oh yeah Peyton Manning. I don't really think you can make the broad assumptions you are making because it depends on too many variables. From the individual player to the situation it just depends. I honestly don't think it really matters how long they have been in the league as long as they know the playbook its really down to the player.


I was waiting for someone to point out what i did there.

I was just being a lying sack of crap politician and omitting facts from the results.

I still think it's best for rookies to sit and learn. the ratio of successful QB's who sat to those that started their rookie seasons shows a strong favoring of letting the guy develop first before throwing them out into the fire.

#50 MaineManPanther

MaineManPanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,476 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 08:27 PM

These are really good points. If a QB drafted number 1 busts it sets a franchise back 3-5 years.

But the flip side is if he booms it props up your franchise for 12-15 years.

There are always boom/bust scenarios with QB's, and the busts are a disaster but the booms can change the entire life and outside perspective of a franchise forever.


I agree, it's a risk either way. Personally for me it comes down to how your scouts ,FO and coaches feel. If there really high on Newton and low on the incumbents, I don't have a problem with him being picked.

#51 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,963 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 19 February 2011 - 09:14 PM

At some point your going to have to play him for the majority of the season regardless if he plays poorly, otherwise your stuck in limbo on knowing where you stand and what to do with him.

Also if you draft a number one Qb chances are you don't have another consistenly good QB on your roster. So even if you bench your drafted QB, your offence and team will still hampred by your number one pick's poor play.

And if because he was picked number one, its proable to assume that no other high calibur QB's were drafted or signed during that period So if the Qb ends up being a bust, you will proably be setback agian by devloping yet another QB.


Unless you have 2 young quarterbacks both picked in the first 2 rounds who are both relatively cheap. With a vet to play until they are ready, you have 3 chances to succeed rather than 1. That is why it makes sense to bring in some competition to ensure we have good options.

It doesn't have to set you back unless all your eggs are in one basket.

#52 Snake

Snake

    Im on the Gus Bus

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,133 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 10:04 PM

Wow summed up brilliantly.

Newton also has a ton of intangibles as well that people always tend to overlook due to his overwhelming athleticism. He is a great leader and everything I have heard from coaches and especially his teammates says he has a tireless work ethic and is constantly trying to improve himself. And I don't think there has every been a college player that has handle so much adversity and still played lights out and for a whole season. And something I love about the kid is how he just does not give up. Not on a play (see the countless times he has shrugged off tacklers) and certainly not on a game or even in his career (see his transfer from Flordia to Blinn then to Auburn).

I find it odd that so many people are so against drafting him. I guess its true Haters goin' Hate.



Only concern I have with him is his Football IQ and maturity. Those two things set apart the good from the best.

#53 MaineManPanther

MaineManPanther

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,476 posts

Posted 20 February 2011 - 01:22 AM

Unless you have 2 young quarterbacks both picked in the first 2 rounds who are both relatively cheap. With a vet to play until they are ready, you have 3 chances to succeed rather than 1. That is why it makes sense to bring in some competition to ensure we have good options.

It doesn't have to set you back unless all your eggs are in one basket.


Eventually, unless Clausen plays lights out, Newton (assuming he's picked) will be given the majority of a season to prove himself. Even if he plays bad, youll have to stick with him otherwise youll never get a solid opinion on him. So at the very least if sets you back a season.

If he turns out to be a bust, your long term success now rests on the shoulders of Clausen, who based on previous play , very well could be a bust as well.

Which puts you back at square one. Having competition is certainley the right way to go, but unless the competion is a high calibur QB, if your pick busts you can very well be setback.
Granted, if you have a good enough overall team the setback could hurt you minimally.

#54 Uncle_tom's_cabin

Uncle_tom's_cabin

    Junior Member

  • NEWB
  • Pip
  • 13 posts

Posted 20 February 2011 - 01:34 AM

Drafting Newton would put butts in the seats right? After all its a business and a Newton jersey would be an instant seller. JMO

#55 DaveThePanther2008

DaveThePanther2008

    Gonna live and die as a faithful Panther Fan

  • ALL-PRO
  • 3,436 posts
  • LocationMelfa

Posted 20 February 2011 - 09:19 AM

blaine gabbert looks like a joey harrington type pick to me. the kind you pick because he's a safe (boring) kind of guy. he's no superstar, but what you try to get when your desperate and having to pick the least rotten apple.

it will take balls to go after newton, but it's the kind of balls that will make you serious contenders.

and for all that "it will set the franchise abck 2-3 years if he busts" crap...what is really going to set this franchise back 2-3 years and probably 6 years is if we go out and get some stop gap player while we wait and see if clausen or pike has what it takes and let them sit a year or two more, because if they don't have it and you wait on them (or any young QB) a couple years before you give them a shot and then give them a couple more years of PT before you form a decision on him and then he doesn't turn out then you have to do the whole thing all over again. that is how you find yoursleves on the bottom for 5-6 years. that is why we are in this situation to begin with because we were too scared of making a mistake with a QB or too blind to see how big a deal getting an actual franchise QB in here is.


I agree Rayzor. I would love to see us put the clamps on our balls and pick him. Let Clausen Start 2011 and see what he has. Let Cam learn and come in mid-season if Clausen fails (Like J. Freeman in TB)

The one wildcard with Newton is. If he fails at QB he could be convert to TE or even WR so we could get something servicable out of him if he failed at QB.

At 6'6" 250 agile and talented. He could transition to a different position.

#56 pantherfan81

pantherfan81

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,260 posts

Posted 20 February 2011 - 11:21 AM

These are really good points. If a QB drafted number 1 busts it sets a franchise back 3-5 years.

But the flip side is if he booms it props up your franchise for 12-15 years.

There are always boom/bust scenarios with QB's, and the busts are a disaster but the booms can change the entire life and outside perspective of a franchise forever.


This is a good point if this were last year, but I disagree. There won't be 50+ million with the first pick anymore. The new CBA will include a rookie wage scale. If a QB busts it won't set back a team nearly as much IMO.

#57 panthers55

panthers55

    Starting all over again

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,963 posts
  • LocationAt the lake

Posted 20 February 2011 - 02:59 PM

Eventually, unless Clausen plays lights out, Newton (assuming he's picked) will be given the majority of a season to prove himself. Even if he plays bad, youll have to stick with him otherwise youll never get a solid opinion on him. So at the very least if sets you back a season.

If he turns out to be a bust, your long term success now rests on the shoulders of Clausen, who based on previous play , very well could be a bust as well.

Which puts you back at square one. Having competition is certainley the right way to go, but unless the competion is a high calibur QB, if your pick busts you can very well be setback.
Granted, if you have a good enough overall team the setback could hurt you minimally.


If you have 2 bust quarterbacks in the first 2 rounds of course it sets you back. You better be looking for a new set of scouts also. If we pick a QB in the first and Newton or Gabbart are the choices, you better hope that they play well or the competition spurs Clausen to elevate his game as well.
You can bust at any position but the solution is to find the best guys you can through the draft and in free agency. Hopefully this year we do both. The risk of a bust and wasted pick is far outweighed by the potential gain by finding the QB of the future. Should keep Smith here as well.

#58 CarolinaCatBrigade

CarolinaCatBrigade

    She likes my Newton

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,408 posts

Posted 20 February 2011 - 06:40 PM

One of the benefits with Newton in my opinion is even if he gets thrown in the fire too soon, his ability to run will get him out of some jams that traditional QB's don't have the luxury of being able to do.

I still hope he sits for the majority of the year.

That still doesn't mean I think he is a project. No QB is ready on day 1.


Newton may be fast, but NFL Defenses are faster than the ones he faced in the ONE YEAR he started at Auburn University. His throwing motion is in question, scouts say it could cause him injuries down the road if he doesn't adjust it. His deep ball is excellent, but his short/intermediate passes need improvement. He has never taken a snap from under center and his only job in the spread at Auburn was 1 or 2 reads and then take off. Not a very complex offense, not much experience as a starter, questionable throwing motion.

No thanks. Hype him up and then trade down.

#59 Mr. Scot

Mr. Scot

    Football Historian

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 41,454 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 20 February 2011 - 11:54 PM

Also, just because we need a QB doesn't mean we need to take a QB at #1. We need other positions, too, and by draft time it may turn out that the dudes in charge actually think we have a bigger need than QB. For some time, the FO has been stressing that they need to find out what they have and, if it isn't going to get it done, search for better elsewhere. It is very possible they have decided that what they have, if backed up by a veteran in FA, is worth going into the season with. Either way, they are going to want a FA QB... I have a VERY hard time believing we go into the season with Clausen/Rookie QB/Pike.

If there is no FA, look at the DT's we are stuck with. Not entirely awe-inspiring, either.

Have said many times I think the free agent this season is the better way to go. Use that as a fallback and see what you have in Clausen. If Clausen isn't the franchise guy, then you try for that guy next year.

People will say they already know Clausen isn't that guy. And while I have my doubts, objectively speaking that isn't true. Last year was a unique situation under a lame duck coach with a staff that wasn't exactly brimming with expertise in pro quarterback development. Thinking that we know all there is to know about Clausen after a rookie year under those conditions is pretty silly.

Still, we've got folks bound and determined to use that #1 pick on a QB. I wonder if a fair amount of that isn't "bait and switch victim" thinking resulting from losing out on Andrew Luck. You have people go to the store with their heart set on say, a certain TV, only to find out it isn't there anymore. They can still get that TV but they have to wait, or they could just buy another model. That model may not be as good, but hey, at least we have something now.

I'm not a fan of that sort of thinking.

People will likely respond "maybe that TV is just as good". Maybe it is. Better chance that it's not. But even if it isn't as good, when you want something right now and you don't want to have to wait, it becomes pretty easy to convince yourself that it is (even if - objectively speaking - it really isn't).

Edited by Mr Scot, 20 February 2011 - 11:59 PM.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com