John Ellis on Stroud v Young

[frankw]

26 minutes ago, Tr3ach said:

Statistically with quarterbacks, larger ones are injured more often. 

Many things are said about this from angles that make an argument look better. If you do a dive for injuries to larger QB's I would assume a great many of them are lower body injuries which just about any player is going to be susceptible to. IE the Joe Burrow argument for most recent. But if the correlation for this were that smaller QB's are less likely to be injured and therefore more likely to be successful why aren't there many many more of them to list and also in the NFL hall of fame? Just some things to consider.

[stan786]

15 minutes ago, frankw said:

Many things are said about this from angles that make an argument look better. If you do a dive for injuries to larger QB's I would assume a great many of them are lower body injuries which just about any player is going to be susceptible to. IE the Joe Burrow argument for most recent. But if the correlation for this were that smaller QB's are less likely to be injured and therefore more likely to be successful why aren't there many many more of them to list and also in the NFL hall of fame? Just some things to consider.

Id love to see a study on the spread of injuries more also more current data, we can make plenty of assumptions not sure you can really discount a study due to assumptions.

But as you said let’s just assume the study is true why would there not be more small QBs.

In terms of small QBs I’d say the NFL biases have been filtering out a number of types QBs for a long long time, for varying reasons. Generally short guys are filtered out of the position because a number of things that don’t fit the nfl prototype narrative. They’ll be recruited less the big programs, they’ll have to find homes in gimmick offenses that don’t develop their skillset, or their arms are lacking because they aren’t as naturally strong as prototypes.  Then you can get into the NFL and how important draft capital is generally and how much these prospects have been dinged in the past because of fit, the style of the nfl (more pro style till recently), and general bias.

Everyone seems to admit small QBs have been able to stay healthy in college but the nfl is a different game, so it doesn’t seem small QBs have had a massive health problem from preventing them getting to the draft, it comes more to a bias (must be that much better to actually get a look), nfl fit, and probably honestly physical ability thing. 

I also have to mention, in that study we keep bringing up the graph dies out at like 210 (assuming Brees listed weight), it would be an assumption on my end that it continues flat, maybe it ticks up, i would love seeming more data and wish someone else did a study on it.

All I argue is we don’t know enough to make any for sure assumptions on Bryce’s health, but there are plenty of reasons for short QBs to not have a bigger sample in the NFL other than specifically injuries.

[frankw]

Just now, stan786 said:

Id love to see a study on the spread of injuries more also more current data, we can make plenty of assumptions not sure you can really discount a study due to assumptions.

But as you said let’s just assume the study is true why would there not be more small QBs.

In terms of small QBs I’d say the NFL biases have been filtering out a number of types QBs for a long long time, for varying reasons. Generally short guys are filtered out of the position because a number of things that don’t fit the nfl prototype narrative. They’ll be recruited less the big programs, they’ll have to find homes in gimmick offenses that don’t develop their skillset, or their arms are lacking because they aren’t as naturally strong as prototypes.  Then you can get into the NFL and how important draft capital is generally and how much these prospects have been dinged in the past because of fit, the style of the nfl (more pro style till recently), and general bias.

Everyone seems to admit small QBs have been able to stay healthy in college but the nfl is a different game, so it doesn’t seem small QBs have had a massive health problem from preventing them getting to the draft, it comes more to a bias (must be that much better to actually get a look), nfl fit, and probably honestly physical ability thing. 

I also have to mention, in that study we keep bringing up the graph dies out at like 210 (assuming Brees listed weight), it would be an assumption on my end that it continues flat, maybe it ticks up, i would love seeming more data and wish someone else did a study on it.

All I argue is we don’t know enough to make any for sure assumptions on Bryce’s health, but there are plenty of reasons for short QBs to not have a bigger sample in the NFL other than specifically injuries.

You are correct there isn't enough data. Specifically for Bryce's height and weight. We have examples of QB's 6 foot 210 range. But not 5'10 185-190 it just isn't there. Well Doug Flutie but I mean cmon lol. For me this really boils down to weighing risk vs reward. That is what the staff and Fitterer will have to decide on. If they think he's worth the risk based on his other intangibles then make the pick. He could go on to become a star. Of course there's also the possibility on the other end of the spectrum. And that one ends with folks losing their jobs.

[stan786]

Just now, frankw said:

You are correct there isn't enough data. Specifically for Bryce's height and weight. We have examples of QB's 6 foot 210 range. But not 5'10 185-190 it just isn't there. Well Doug Flutie but I mean cmon lol. For me this really boils down to weighing risk vs reward. That is what the staff and Fitterer will have to decide on. If they think he's worth the risk based on his other intangibles then make the pick. He could go on to become a star. Of course there's also the possibility on the other end of the spectrum. And that one ends with folks losing their jobs.

I 100% agree with this, and generally my nature is to lean risk so that explains my Bryce lean here, but I'm in the camp they both end up pretty good and I'll immediately be team Stroud the second we take him. I think if we take Stroud and he busts which isnt impossible folks are going to lose their job as well. They both have some elite traits and downside that makes this one not necessarily a slam dunk, but thats why we are able to discuss this so much.

[Tr3ach]

27 minutes ago, frankw said:

Many things are said about this from angles that make an argument look better. If you do a dive for injuries to larger QB's I would assume a great many of them are lower body injuries which just about any player is going to be susceptible to. IE the Joe Burrow argument for most recent. But if the correlation for this were that smaller QB's are less likely to be injured and therefore more likely to be successful why aren't there many many more of them to list and also in the NFL hall of fame? Just some things to consider.

I agree to an extent.  I definitely think smaller qbs have some disadvantages, such as seeing over the line and stuff like that.  Im not saying smaller qbs are better, im saying statistically the injury thing may be overblown by fans who are set on Stroud anyways.

[Moorgan]

2 hours ago, jfra78 said:

Yeah if we were A CFL team

Guys stop comparing him to Flutie, he started 3 years in the NFL

So? He started many years in the CFL and the rules allowed them to commit Assault and Battery. And he was a scrambling QB at 5’9” 180lbs. Why, when talking about injury and size, would we not compare the two? Is Bryce better than Flutie? Of course. At everything. But we’re not comparing the two for who you take number one overall. We’re comparing to injury and career longevity. Flutie managed to have success and avoid major injury. That’s a datapoint worth consideration.

[mrcompletely11]

7 minutes ago, Moorgan said:

So? He started many years in the CFL and the rules allowed them to commit Assault and Battery. And he was a scrambling QB at 5’9” 180lbs. Why, when talking about injury and size, would we not compare the two? Is Bryce better than Flutie? Of course. At everything. But we’re not comparing the two for who you take number one overall. We’re comparing to injury and career longevity. Flutie managed to have success and avoid major injury. That’s a datapoint worth consideration.

So?

 

Is this a real question?

 

And flutie had several major injuries

Edited March 29, 2023 by mrcompletely11

[Moorgan]

19 minutes ago, mrcompletely11 said:

So?

 

Is this a real question?

 

And flutie had several major injuries

He did? All I could find was a groin injury in training camp. 

[stan786]

6 minutes ago, Moorgan said:

He did? All I could find was a groin injury in training camp. 

I think he broke his collarbone in the USFL as well. Reading up on Flutie's career is wild, the amount of times NFL teams benched him before big games and lost is kind of hilarious.

[Moorgan]

10 minutes ago, stan786 said:

I think he broke his collarbone in the USFL as well. Reading up on Flutie's career is wild, the amount of times NFL teams benched him before big games and lost is kind of hilarious.

It for sure is crazy and I barely remember him. It’s wild how every time it’s like big game? Yeah you’re benched. Lol

 He doesn’t compare to Young at all, except they’re almost exactly the same size.

[stan786]

7 minutes ago, Moorgan said:

It for sure is crazy and I barely remember him. It’s wild how every time it’s like big game? Yeah you’re benched. Lol

 He doesn’t compare to Young at all, except they’re almost exactly the same size.

I became a bit of a Bills fan that Music City Miracle year because they had my favorite player from my college team on there. I was like 9-10 and remember being absolutely furious Flutie was benched. He was never very good but he was a lot of fun for some reason.

[Martin]

Here are some additional comments from John:

It is a real thing, like it or not. Will it make or break (pun intended) the decision? Not sure, but it is a factor to include.

[Martin]

[CPF4LIFE]

37 minutes ago, Martin said:

Here are some additional comments from John:

It is a real thing, like it or not. Will it make or break (pun intended) the decision? Not sure, but it is a factor to include.

I said last week there were still low rumbling concerns about Youngs injury not being talked about in media. The injury specifically could have longer implications with him playing in the league. Its definitely concerning, ignoring it is just foolish.