Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

The Bridge Quarterback Debate


Mr. Scot
 Share

Recommended Posts

I can see the point:  if you're a prideful alpha male, who wants to sign on to giving up your job to a kid?  Very few pay well enough to do that!

If our rookie is ready to rock, let them start.  Cam had a LOT to learn, but still came out kicking butt his rookie year.  The bridge QB sounds like a nice luxury, but I think it's up to the coaching staff to earn their paychecks and prep that first player to come out and win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Doc Holiday said:

If Josh McCown wasn’t our QB coach I’d be a lot more concerned about this. Literally who could we have better than McCown for this job?

If anything, it gives us the liberty to look for a second promising guy as a backup. The idea is finding a guy who can win when #1 goes down.  We don't need a bridge, we need a capable backup.   

So, if we're not paying top backup prices like Miami and Atl just did, and if we're considering the Drew Locks of the world, might as well take a late shot at a Haener or Tune in the 5th-6th. Could only benefit at this point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A veteran back up QB who has field experience is also worth their weight in gold sitting on the bench beside the young starting QB. Second set of eyes, someone to keep them on an even keel when they game gets tough, someone who can tell the diva receiver to  back off or step up.

Honestly, this is where you need a Ryan Fitzpatrick or Derek Anderson. Hopefully McCown can handle it, but still...

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, chknwing said:

I'm not sure why the coaching staff wants to dump Matt Corral.  He could be the bridge qb.  the new staff hasnt even seen him yet.

The guy who has never taken a meaningful snap in the NFL and has spent the entirety of his career on IR is not the guy I want showing the new guy the ropes. 

Edited by travisura
  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we go with a Dalton I would argue it knocks out any shot we draft Richardson, which is fine with me. I think with Young/Stroud you just need a guy with a lot of experience, comfortable with the knowledge of what his role is, and could potentially start a game or two max.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • then why dont teams do that more if the 5th is so valuable?  If thats the case then the bills clearly value moving up 60 spots vs a 5th on a wr or whatever
    • guaranteed for injury only. I know I know he's always hurt. But if he sucks this year or misses more time this year but can pass a physical after the season we can cut him with zero $ on the books. 12.4 isn't much for a corner these days. easy decision in my view to pick up the option.
    • Historic Success Chart  (this chart is nine years old, but it shows the basic pattern of success) The numbers show us the following outline for finding consistent starters: 1st Round - OL (83%) LB (70%) TE (67%) DB (64%) QB (63%) WR (58%) RB (58%) DL (58%) 2nd Round - OL (70%) LB (55%) TE (50%) WR (49%) DB (46%) QB (27%) DL (26%) RB (25%) 3rd Round - OL (40%) TE (39%) LB (34%) DL (27%) WR (25%) DB (24%) QB (17%) RB (16%) 4th Round - DL (37%) TE (33%) OL (29%) LB (16%) WR(12%) DB (11%) RB (11%) QB (8%) 5th Round - TE (32%) DB (17%) WR (16%) OL (16%) DL (13%) RB (9%) LB (4%) QB (0%) 6th Round - TE (26%) OL (16%) DL (13%) WR (9%) DB (8%) RB (6%) LB (5%) QB (0%) 7th Round - DB (11%) OL (9%) QB (6%) WR (5%) DL (3%) LB (2%) RB (0%) TE (0%) https://www.arrowheadpride.com/2015/2/20/8072877/what-the-statistics-tell-us-about-the-draft-by-round Disclaimer:  I realize the first thing some of you will attempt to do is discredit the validity of this empirical study in an attempt to invalidate any conclusions that differ from those you have developed without any degree of exhaustive research or mild inquiry--comparative analysis, data collection, or coding, etc.  So I suppose I should apologize in advance for providing unsubstantiated and unapproved data for our casual consumption; if you'd like, I can get the address for those at Pro Football Reference who are responsible and allow you to contact them or seek compensatory damages.  If this information is still relatively accurate, the probable success rate for our WR selection yesterday should be in the 55-58% range, considering the depth of the position in this year's draft.  FUN FACTS:  For those of you wanting to double dip at WR:  The probability of starting drops in half each round from the second to fourth, and then (strangely) jumps from 12% to 16% in round 5, dropping back down to 9% in round 6...Notice the incredibly high (compared to the others) rate of success for TEs taken in rounds 5 and 6.  TEs drafted in the fifth round nearly double the chance for starting when compared to nearly every other position.  In the sixth round, the chance for TEs becoming a starter is 10% higher than the next highest position--5 times higher than a sixth round LB, for example. Statements that are related to the Panther situation based on this data: If we take a C in round 2 the chances of finding a starter are about three fourths (75%), the chances for drafting a LB in round 3 drops from more than half (55%) to a third (34%).  Finding a starting CB in the third round (opposed to the second) would drop from nearly half (46%) to a quarter (24%). If we take a LB in round 2, the chances of finding a starter are just over a half (55%).  Finding a starting CB in the third round (opposed to the second) would drop from nearly half (50%) to a quarter (24%).  Finding a starting C in the third would drop from 75% to 40%. If we take a CB in round 2, the chances of finding a starter are about 50%.  the chances of finding a starting C would drop from 75% to 40% in round 3.  The chances for drafting a LB in round 3 drops from more than half (55%) to a third (34%) So what scenario gives us the highest percentage of finding 2 players in rounds 2 and 3 that give us the highest likelihood for finding starters? Round 2: Center 75%, LB 55%, CB, 50% Round 3:  Center 40%, LB 34%, and CB 24% Other tips DAY 3:  This is when you draft the TE.  Between rounds 4-6, the percentage of finding a starter drops from 33% (rd 4) to 32% (rd. 5) to 26% (rd. 6). Recommendation: Draft your TE round 5. Round 4:  This is when you draft a Defensive Lineman.  37% chance of becoming a starter.  That is 10% higher than the third round and 24% higher than the fifth round. Round 5: The best round for drafting WR on day 3 (16% chance of starting). Round 7:  Draft a defensive back.  There is a one-in-nine chance of finding a starter--11%.  PROGNOSIS:  Based on this draft,  If we draft Center (rd 2) and ILB (rd 3) and have the best chance of producing two starters 54.5% If we draft LB (rd 2) and Center (rd. 3) the chance for producing 2 starters is 47.5%. If we draft a CB (rd 2) and LB (rd 3), the chance for producing 2 starters is 42%. If we draft a LB (rd 2) and CB (rd 3) the chance for producing 2 starters is 39.5%.* * in my opinion, based on the depth of this draft, this is probably what the Panthers will do-- At any rate, this is not law or current, but it does give you some ideas--hope you enjoy it.  
×
×
  • Create New...