Hey You, You Don't Know Quarterbacking

[fieryprophet]

2 hours ago, Cpt slay a ho said:

Respect the post but mid is mid, most that aren’t rage baiting etc can see the inconsistency in Bryce’s play, and it’s mostly due to watching bad qb play over numerous years in the nfl

We gotta stop the coddling of QBs, these guys are going to be taking up 1/3 of your overall cap space, to have shown what young has up to this point, there’s no way anyone should be comfortable getting ready to drop 40-50 mil per year on what we’ve seen on the field.

not his fault he got over drafted but no need to double down on a bad mistake(still has the remainder of this season to change the narrative)

It's absolutely on him to change his narrative, and fans deserve to be critical of perceived shortcomings when those shortcomings reflect actual performance failings. But those that just rage at any perception that he may be developing into the team's quarterback for the future (notice I said may, this is not a given at all) just need a reality check on their hyperbole, just like those who proclaim his proclivity for game-winning drives negates his failings that sometimes lead to those situations.

[kungfoodude]

23 minutes ago, fieryprophet said:

I'm going to be real, the reason that vote ended up so lop-sided by the end was directly due to my programming. So there's nothing tongue in cheek about it. Also I left PFF after the Collinsworth acquisition (didn't want to move to Cincy) but have stayed involved in analytics via backdoor channels, but I can absolutely say that the experience was eye-opening, not because those guys are unquestionable football savants and that I became one by proxy, but because the amount of information that becomes available outside of what the typical fan has access to is revelatory and also really drives home how much context is still being missed even with all of that information. You don't discover that you know everything, you discover how much you still can't know no matter how hard you try, hence my point about the NFL not being able to figure out what makes a QB good. There's a lot of AI work going into that now and even that only seems to further confuse things vs. actually enlighten the problem.

In the professional realm teams don't really talk about quarterbacks as A strictly being better than B, but how A can potentially perform better than B given a specific context of C. Of course those contexts may be wider for A than B, but there's also contexts where B can outshine A, even with lesser talent surrounding them. So what good teams strive to do is ultimately define a process of how they want their entire team to operate under schematically, find players that fit that scheme, and hopefully find a guy whose skillset will be maximized running that scheme with those players. Where bad teams fall of the wagon is constantly shifting those schemes and chasing bad fits or fads vs. sticking with a core identity and developing it.

Fair enough.

I don't think many would argue that situations can certainly make players(much like you are suggesting). However, when players keep changing situations and not being successful, what then?

This has always sort of been my point with the historical evaluation problem we have experienced as a franchise. 

Not saying it is 100% accurate but it's really, REALLY high. That's generally what my perception of Bryce is. He isn't a guy that is likely to be successful almost any place in the NFL.

 

[Cpt slay a ho]

21 minutes ago, fieryprophet said:

It's absolutely on him to change his narrative, and fans deserve to be critical of perceived shortcomings when those shortcomings reflect actual performance failings. But those that just rage at any perception that he may be developing into the team's quarterback for the future (notice I said may, this is not a given at all) just need a reality check on their hyperbole, just like those who proclaim his proclivity for game-winning drives negates his failings that sometimes lead to those situations.

Perfectly understandable 

[fieryprophet]

11 hours ago, Panthera onca said:

The post was incredibly condescending and the OP came off as a huge Richard.

That was fully intentional, because something people who engage in hyperbole can't stand is to be systematically told why and how they don't have a clue. It's the prevalence of this farcical idea that everyone's opinions are valid and the more impassioned they are about them, the more valid they are.

And the point of the post wasn't merely to cut the knees of the exaggerators, but to illustrate why it shouldn't seem miraculous that someone like Mayfield and Darnold could come through Charlotte and fail and then suddenly seem much more successful elsewhere, when the reality is that there's far more to being successful at that position than one's own talent. It's also why young quarterbacks like Caleb Williams and Cam Ward deserve much longer leashes to determine their long-term viability and not be written off immediately, because the circumstances surrounding them are hardly conducive to success.

[fieryprophet]

3 hours ago, kungfoodude said:

Fair enough.

I don't think many would argue that situations can certainly make players(much like you are suggesting). However, when players keep changing situations and not being successful, what then?

This has always sort of been my point with the historical evaluation problem we have experienced as a franchise. 

Not saying it is 100% accurate but it's really, REALLY high. That's generally what my perception of Bryce is. He isn't a guy that is likely to be successful almost any place in the NFL.

 

Even a player that bounces around repeatedly with no success might suddenly stumble into a situation perfectly tailored for them. Think Kurt Warner and how as long as he was on teams that thrived with his timing-based, quick throwing traits, he was able to play well, but outside of that context he was marginal. So even on the same team, once the schemes diverged from his strengths his performance fell off as well. The question then becomes is that a failing of his due to having only a specific skillset, or a failing of the teams for not properly utilizing his unique traits to allow him and by proxy the rest of the team to thrive?

Edited 11 hours ago by fieryprophet

[mav1234]

4 hours ago, fieryprophet said:

It's absolutely on him to change his narrative, and fans deserve to be critical of perceived shortcomings when those shortcomings reflect actual performance failings. But those that just rage at any perception that he may be developing into the team's quarterback for the future (notice I said may, this is not a given at all) just need a reality check on their hyperbole, just like those who proclaim his proclivity for game-winning drives negates his failings that sometimes lead to those situations.

This is a perspective I agree with.

[strato]

4 hours ago, fieryprophet said:

It's absolutely on him to change his narrative, and fans deserve to be critical of perceived shortcomings when those shortcomings reflect actual performance failings. But those that just rage at any perception that he may be developing into the team's quarterback for the future (notice I said may, this is not a given at all) just need a reality check on their hyperbole, just like those who proclaim his proclivity for game-winning drives negates his failings that sometimes lead to those situations.

You are characterizing skepticism or negative perception as rage and hate and vitriol and whatever else. Then you say they/we need to rein in the hyperbole. Ironic because I view your choice of words there as hyperbole.

 That said there is fear that he will do just enough to fool people into seeing him as the future and give him more time. Yet another year. 
I am there and feel like we need a very clear answer and want it this year. I don’t want to be in the same position again next year. Like, I really don’t want that.

He has to tear it up for me to believe it isn’t a temporary thing and he’ll just go back to the annual week one and week two complete suckage routine. Again. 

Edited 10 hours ago by strato

[fieryprophet]

13 minutes ago, strato said:

You are characterizing skepticism or negative perception as rage and hate and vitriol and whatever else. Then you say they/we need to rein in the hyperbole. Ironic because I view your choice of words there as hyperbole.

No, when I said rage, I meant rage, which only applies to certain fans on this board. Your timeline of trying to assess whether he is the future or not is really tied to the discussions surrounding his second contract. If this team is going to commit to some monster contract while he has shown nothing but glimpses of brilliance would be deservedly worrisome, so the clock is genuinely ticking for him to settle into something resembling his final form.

Perhaps a best case scenario is that he plays well, the team succeeds, but he does so with a more limited role that makes the rest of the league view him as a game manager, and his second contract value reflects that. Then he continues to improve and becomes a bargain comparatively while not handicapping the team around him, and we enter an era of consistent championship competitiveness that the fanbase has craved for decades and has never really experienced before. But that requires many, many things to go right and for Bryce himself to facilitate that if he ends up being the quarterback of the future.

[strato]

Yeah and I am doubtful he can offer that consistently. I don’t have many years left at my age and in my view we have wasted two and this whole exercise with him was always a three year minimum. 
I am out on that with a guy I don’t believe in, and never believed in, it has sucked. To me it is a costly detour off the right track. Years. 
 

But I am not so rigid that I can’t see excellence. He needs to display it though, consistently before I change my outlook.  

[Panthera onca]

7 hours ago, fieryprophet said:

That was fully intentional, because something people who engage in hyperbole can't stand is to be systematically told why and how they don't have a clue. It's the prevalence of this farcical idea that everyone's opinions are valid and the more impassioned they are about them, the more valid they are.

And the point of the post wasn't merely to cut the knees of the exaggerators, but to illustrate why it shouldn't seem miraculous that someone like Mayfield and Darnold could come through Charlotte and fail and then suddenly seem much more successful elsewhere, when the reality is that there's far more to being successful at that position than one's own talent. It's also why young quarterbacks like Caleb Williams and Cam Ward deserve much longer leashes to determine their long-term viability and not be written off immediately, because the circumstances surrounding them are hardly conducive to success.

Yes, in the absence of your big brain, those points have been discussed ad nauseum around here. Most stable individuals can see that the org sucks since Tepper took over. We can’t change that fact so we debate Bryce’s viability as a QB into oblivion. Bryce has shown the occasional flash but it is year 3 and decisions have to be made. I personally don’t think he’s cut out for this but as a fan of the Panthers I hope that somehow it works.

[kungfoodude]

7 hours ago, fieryprophet said:

Even a player that bounces around repeatedly with no success might suddenly stumble into a situation perfectly tailored for them. Think Kurt Warner and how as long as he was on teams that thrived with his timing-based, quick throwing traits, he was able to play well, but outside of that context he was marginal. So even on the same team, once the schemes diverged from his strengths his performance fell off as well. The question then becomes is that a failing of his due to having only a specific skillset, or a failing of the teams for not properly utilizing his unique traits to allow him and by proxy the rest of the team to thrive?

That's fine but for every Kurt Warner there are 10 Tony Banks that don't find their spot because....it never really existed. 

Jake Browning was on and off practice squad teams for years until he stuck in Cincy. In his limited action over the past two seasons, he has played well enough that the Bengals panic traded for 41 year old Joe Flacco.

It's easy to point to outliers like Warner or Purdy or Tom Brady as players who fell through the cracks because....well, they are outliers. The statistics over the long term have never really borne out the argument that every QB is just waiting for their perfect spot and situation. Most of these guys bounce around the league and it just never really clicks anywhere or they become marginal backup QB's. I don't think that exactly an accident. It's tough to be a starting NFL QB and it's why the hunt every offseason is so frantic. There are just so few that do it at a high level.

My guess is that a theoretical market for Bryce Young(today) is going to look a lot like that post Chicago Justin Fields market. Not a lot of interest and a late round pick value at the highest. And a lot of that IS going to be his average to below average physical traits. It's extremely tough to be in that range and excel in the NFL. And it's precisely because you DO have to be closer to perfection to make up for the fact that you can't do a lot of the things that the elite to above average starters in this league do. 

[WUnderhill]

17 hours ago, strato said:

Where does this completely new claim of people lying about his arm strength like this 5 yard claim, and another right now today that claims ‘people’ say he can’t throw 20 yards, where is this coming from? 

It’s not new. That particular claim has largely disappeared because it has become untenable, but a few games into his rookie year when the playbook/gameplan/personnel/everything was terrible there was endless claims, posts, even threads made that Bryce Young was physically incapable of throwing the ball 20 yards downfield in the NFL. It was also argued that physically throwing the ball 20 yards in the NFL was somehow different than college. Once he threw the ball 20 yards, the goal posts moved to 30 yards, etc. I’m not going to use the search function for you, the point wasn’t as much that one claim as it was that that was one claim out of many that has made it very difficult to have a reasonable discussion here.

[strato]

2 minutes ago, WUnderhill said:

It’s not new. That particular claim has largely disappeared because it has become untenable, but a few games into his rookie year when the playbook/gameplan/personnel/everything was terrible there was endless claims, posts, even threads made that Bryce Young was physically incapable of throwing the ball 20 yards downfield in the NFL. It was also argued that physically throwing the ball 20 yards in the NFL was somehow different than college. Once he threw the ball 20 yards, the goal posts moved to 30 yards, etc. I’m not going to use the search function for you, the point wasn’t as much that one claim as it was that that was one claim out of many that has made it very difficult to have a reasonable discussion here.

Maybe people need to have a reasonable filter to help them differentiate exaggeration for effect from serious claims. 

[strato]

14 hours ago, jb2288 said:

Yep. Just because they’re extreme hyperbole and obviously not factual, they’re still said. The dude saying “he can’t throw it more than 5 yards”, hopefully doesn’t actually believe that but it’s weird we have posters in here acting like that stuff isn’t said all the time around here.
 

I don’t know why we are doing this revisionist history now. 

It isn’t weird if you have read the board for years and haven’t seen it. What’s weird to me is people that take that to heart and cling to it for years when if was said it couldn’t have been meant literally. 5 yards… right.

That!s like someone claiming he can throw a pass 70 yards, well I know that’s just bullshit. And I am not bringing that up as some kind of ammo in an argument.

 

Edited 1 hour ago by strato