A Solution to the QB Dilemma

[kungfoodude]

8 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Allen actually got sacked 15 more times in 1 more game, but both got sacked a good amount. Tannehill is like Mariota, they are mobile so they can extend plays and get sacked more. Tannehill got sacked a lot in Miami as well.

I wasn’t impressed when we played them. He’s fine, but he’s a backup that came in. Allen was 6-2 before he got figured out and our D decided to stop playing. We’ll definitely see next year if they extend him. 

Tannehill and Mariota do have higher sack rates typically but Mariota's more than doubled since Mike Vrabel became their head coach, so I kind of attribute that to scheme. As many times as Kyle got sacked, his sack rate is actually much lower. That largely has to do with that fact that Tennessee rushes the ball 46.89% of the time(fourth highest in the NFL) versus Carolina's 35.84%(29th in the NFL). But, as quickly as we get behind in a lot of games, it's not hard to see how that happens. 

Tannehill also has years of tape on him, so I am not sure that any more needs to be done to figure him out.

[45catfan]

4 minutes ago, stbugs said:

Sure thing. I’m not letting my judgement get clouded. I assume you don’t like Clemson and are letting your judgement get clouded. Lawrence will be a stud and it would be unbelievable if we got him. Besides, anyone who thinks Dalton can be a solution isn’t rising to the top of my list of QB experts.

Clouded no, but I know Clemson players as a whole, blue chip recruits in an ideal college situation and once out of Tiger orange in the pros, have spotty NFL careers.  I assume you are a Clemson fan?  More so than a Panthers fan obviously.

[kungfoodude]

9 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Good yes, elite, no.  He's good enough to get his team to the cusp or just in the playoffs.  The AFC South has been the joke of the NFL.  To win that division is nothing special.  Colts, Titans and Jags...

Yeah, I am gonna disagree with you. Watson is an elite QB.

[OriginalPantherDan]

3 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

His INT percentages haven't been much different than other typical gun slinger QB's like Rivers or Favre. The big spike this year had a lot to do with being in that Bruce Arians kind of offense. It puts him in situations where he is making poorer decisions a lot more easily. He is absolutely the most talented QB in that group and it's not even close. He is as capable of marching offenses up and down the field as he is throwing crippling INT's. As I said, he's part of that young QB reclamation project group which warrant a look at the right price/right situation. 

Ask yourself this, would you rather have Winston step in to attempt to win a game for us, or Kyle Allen/Will Grier?

I wouldn’t want Allen, Grier or Winston as a starting QB in a must-win game. All three have shown me they’re just not good, regardless of how many passing yards they may put up (that’s especially true of Allen and Winston...lots of yards but terrible INTs).  

[kungfoodude]

4 minutes ago, stbugs said:

8.6% to 9.8% isn’t much lower to me. Allen threw the ball away a lot and almost started feeling the rush earlier than it was there after he got pummeled by SF and Atlanta. Case in point. In the first Atlanta game, Allen got sacked 5 times. Little by himself gave up 14 pressures. It’s probably amazing that Allen only got sacked 5 times. Anyway, they both got pressured a lot more than most other QBs.

I was referencing Mariota on the "much lower" comment. I wish I had access to more QB pressure data(not willing to pay for it). It would be an interesting thing to compare wish some of the other OL metrics I have been looking at. 

[45catfan]

Just now, stbugs said:

I am a Clemson fan now, not nearly as much as a Panthers fan. My son goes there now so I’ve actually watched Lawrence play and unlike guys like Hurts and Tua, he’s stepped up against all the top teams he’s played and people keep forgetting that he’s a true sophomore. He just turned 20 two months ago. He’ll be 21 come the 2021 NFL draft. Not many QBs come to the NFL with that much big time experience at that age. Burrow is 23 and Tua will be 22 before the draft and Tua was a freshman when he took over for Hurts to win the championship.

Tell me what Lawrence has done that makes you think he will fail. 

I never said fail.  What is did say is a Clemson by-product.  I have to hand it to Dabo, he's created something special there.  The problem is everything has been clicking for several years now and it's blue-chip replacing blue-chip, replacing blue-chip and the ACC has been so down over the past few years that they never really get challenged.  Why is that a problem?  Well it's like an all-star team and they look great playing together, but bust up that all-star team and well, some of them don't look so special after all.  Call the USC syndrom from the 1990's.  Remember Reggie Bush was the next Walter Payton?  Matt Leinert was a QB phenom?

I can tell you OSU had them beat, but couldn't get out of their own way.  I can also tell you Lawrence will not outrun an NFL secondary for 65 yards either.  Will he be a franchise NFL QB?  Absolutely, will he be the next Marino, Manning or Elway, most likely not and that's the expectations that's being thrown his way.

[kungfoodude]

3 minutes ago, OriginalPantherDan said:

I wouldn’t want Allen, Grier or Winston as a starting QB in a must-win game. All three have shown me they’re just not good, regardless of how many passing yards they may put up (that’s especially true of Allen and Winston...lots of yards but terrible INTs).  

IDK about "must win" games but I'd definitely want Winston over the other two in just about any pressure situation. Kyle Allen has generated zero 4th Quarter Comebacks(4QC) and 1 Game Winning Drive(GWD) in his 15 career games(13 starts). Winston has 7 4QC's and 11 GWD's in his 72 career games(70 starts). That's part of the thing about having a true gun slinging QB, you are never really out of it because they are capable of huge plays all the time. 

Brett Favre, as much as everyone remembers him fondly, always had high interception rates, his whole career. Let me give you some examples of what I am talking about.

Favre

Completion Percentage: 62.0

TD/Int Ratio: 1.51

TD%: 5.0

Int%: 3.3

4QC/GS Rate: 0.150

GWD/GS Rate: 0.231

Winston

Completion Percentage: 61.3

TD/Int Ratio: 1.38

TD%: 4.7

Int%: 3.5

4QC/GS Rate: 0.100

GWD/GS Rate: 0.157

 

Winston is a classic gunslinger, so he is always going to have a lot of INT's but that mentality will also keep you in a lot of games. It's something people loved Favre for but have heavily criticized other gunslinging QB's like Winston or Rivers. 

[Sgt Schultz]

A lot of good discussion and good points in this thread.

I was never as high on Favre as most of the rest of the world.  He made a lot of bad decisions, often at the worst possible times.  Probably the dumbest throw that I remember seeing in a playoff game belonged to him, as a Packer against the Giants, in OT when he literally dropped back and just threw it up for grabs.  If I remember right, the Giants turned that into the game-winning FG.  He was a great competitor, and I've heard, a great teammate.  But, if your season depended on him making a smart decision against a savvy defense, consider it over.

This all boils down to what the goal is next year.  If the goal is to win (and I mean win big), then signing somebody that is not going to kill the cap makes sense.  If the goal is to start a rebuild and see what Cam has left, then it doesn't.  Doing so will only impact the rebuild by consuming cap dollars and perhaps posting a couple of empty wins.

The real issue, if the rebuild is on, is not what to do if Cam goes down again.  The answer is play our hand and probably lose a lot.  On the other side of the coin, as KungFooDude said, is what do you do if he is health is fine and he has progressed as a passer from working with Turner?  He then has trade value, but he could also stay at the helm while you eventually draft the next franchise QB (with some luxury of time), but at a cost.  That cost will eat into the money for a rebuild.  It becomes a balancing act. 

Personally, I like having him back there if he can do it, and at the right price.  But, I think the team owes it to him to sit down and tell him what is going on: things are probably going to suck for a few years, and offer him the option.  If he wants to go somewhere that gives him a chance to win and we can work out a deal, no hard feelings and we try to move in that direction.  If not, we stop worrying about QB as a need and wait for an opportunity to grab the next franchise QB, should one fall in our laps on draft day.

But, if Hurney is looking at opportunities, there could be a few Clausens between us and the next legitimate starter.

[davos]

2 hours ago, 45catfan said:

If we get a WCO HC or at least an OC, he's got a shot at being successful.  Nobody will last behind this OL on long developing routes, not even Cam.

I'm kinda wishing we luck up in a Jake Delhomme type scenario. Could lightening strike twice?

That's a Sudfeld/Mullens IMO. 

Low risk signings that have shown potential in bursts.  If Cam goes down, they're a potential upgrade over Allen.  Other guys available are either non-roster worthy or these older vets.  The 2-5 year exp. guys that have been behind legit QBs is my preference. 

[kungfoodude]

17 minutes ago, Sgt Schultz said:

A lot of good discussion and good points in this thread.

I was never as high on Favre as most of the rest of the world.  He made a lot of bad decisions, often at the worst possible times.  Probably the dumbest throw that I remember seeing in a playoff game belonged to him, as a Packer against the Giants, in OT when he literally dropped back and just threw it up for grabs.  If I remember right, the Giants turned that into the game-winning FG.  He was a great competitor, and I've heard, a great teammate.  But, if your season depended on him making a smart decision against a savvy defense, consider it over.

This all boils down to what the goal is next year.  If the goal is to win (and I mean win big), then signing somebody that is not going to kill the cap makes sense.  If the goal is to start a rebuild and see what Cam has left, then it doesn't.  Doing so will only impact the rebuild by consuming cap dollars and perhaps posting a couple of empty wins.

The real issue, if the rebuild is on, is not what to do if Cam goes down again.  The answer is play our hand and probably lose a lot.  On the other side of the coin, as KungFooDude said, is what do you do if he is health is fine and he has progressed as a passer from working with Turner?  He then has trade value, but he could also stay at the helm while you eventually draft the next franchise QB (with some luxury of time), but at a cost.  That cost will eat into the money for a rebuild.  It becomes a balancing act. 

Personally, I like having him back there if he can do it, and at the right price.  But, I think the team owes it to him to sit down and tell him what is going on: things are probably going to suck for a few years, and offer him the option.  If he wants to go somewhere that gives him a chance to win and we can work out a deal, no hard feelings and we try to move in that direction.  If not, we stop worrying about QB as a need and wait for an opportunity to grab the next franchise QB, should one fall in our laps on draft day.

But, if Hurney is looking at opportunities, there could be a few Clausens between us and the next legitimate starter.

I think that is one thing that people are not considering. Look at the teams that are QB needy the past couple of seasons. They are largely going through multiple drafted QB's over the years to find "the guy." That's how it goes in the NFL, you strike out at QB way more often in the draft than vice versa, even in the first round. So, if we do decide to move on from Cam(out of necessity or choice) it is going to suck to have to jump immediately into a rebuild scenario trying to find a QB. It would be nice to keep Cam another 5-6 years while we get serious about the future at QB and start drafting guys regularly to evaluate for that role. I realize that is highly unlikely to happen and we are much more likely to be facing some of the QB desert years that we had after Beurlein and Delhomme.

[Sgt Schultz]

1 hour ago, davos said:

That's a Sudfeld/Mullens IMO. 

Low risk signings that have shown potential in bursts.  If Cam goes down, they're a potential upgrade over Allen.  Other guys available are either non-roster worthy or these older vets.  The 2-5 year exp. guys that have been behind legit QBs is my preference. 

There is something to be said for looking at the young QBs riding the pine behind an established starter.  The Pats have done quite well peddling their backups to QB needy teams over the years.  I think it works better for the "seller" than the "buyer" (Matt Cassel got worse the longer he was away from Hoodie, the jury is still out on Garappolo but the early returns look good), but when it works, it works.

Sometimes an heir apparent is ready before the established starter is ready to give up the reins.  Most teams have historically stuck with the established starter, which creates an opportunity. 

[45catfan]

1 minute ago, Sgt Schultz said:

There is something to be said for looking at the young QBs riding the pine behind an established starter.  The Pats have done quite well peddling their backups to QB needy teams over the years.  I think it works better for the "seller" than the "buyer" (Matt Cassel got worse the longer he was away from Hoodie, the jury is still out on Garappolo but the early returns look good), but when it works, it works.

Sometimes an heir apparent is ready before the established starter is ready to give up the reins.  Most teams have historically stuck with the established starter, which creates an opportunity. 

If the new coach (hopefully new GM) is smart, they aren't "tanking for Trevor" and have a solid plan for our QB depth chart in 2020.  Ask Freddie Kitchens if there's enough leash beyond one year.  I find it funny that a new regime is going to come in here and tank just to get a local kid in 2021.

[Sgt Schultz]

1 minute ago, 45catfan said:

If the new coach (hopefully new GM) is smart, they aren't "tanking for Trevor" and have a solid plan for our QB depth chart in 2020.  Ask Freddie Kitchens if there's enough leash beyond one year.  I find it funny that a new regime is going to come in here and tank just to get a local kid in 2021.

Yeah, I don't see anybody coming in and tanking.  If the rebuild is full-scale, they may tank for a year or two, but not purposely to get a draft pick.

The problem with trying to be the worst team and secure the #1 draft choice (or even top 3 or so) is the same as trying to idiot proof a product o software: just when you think you have achieved it, they design a better idiot.  There is always some other NFL team destined to be on the list of better idiots, and generally not purposely.

It was widely rumored throughout the early weeks of the season that the Dolphins were purposely tanking.  It certainly looked like it.  They wandered into five idiots, including two playoff teams! 

And in the end, they not only were not the worst, they were only the fifth worst.  Trying to be the worst may take as much effort and dedication as winning the Super Bowl.