The Forgotten Man

[Fox007]

Good find.

And just to be clear, people shouldn't act like the Panthers are the only team that takes this approach to the QB position. There are others.

The Patriots under Bill don't

but

Even the Pats who probably wouldn't do it had Bledsoe ahead of Brady.

Bledsoe had been taking them to the playoffs even though they would lose in the SB and other playoff appearances.(he was still a good QB back then)

And had them in place for the SB run when Brady took over and eventually won.

We don't have that caliber of coaching.

This new QB coach may very well work wonders though, so who knows.

What other successful team(s) did you have in mind?

[monstercat]

I've said several times that I believe McCown could run this offense as well as any FA or rookie QB out there. He has a good arm, he can make plays with his feet, and he has enough starting experience that it wouldn't be too big for him.

With our running game, we don't need a superstar QB anyway. We just need somebody who can keep the defense honest, and maybe tuck it and run for a 1st down every once in a while.

[Fireball77]

The Patriots under Bill don't

but

Even the Pats who probably wouldn't do it had Bledsoe ahead of Brady.

Bledsoe had been taking them to the playoffs even though they would lose in the SB and other playoff appearances.(he was still a good QB back then)

And had them in place for the SB run when Brady took over and eventually won.

We don't have that caliber of coaching.

This new QB coach may very well work wonders though, so who knows.

What other successful team(s) did you have in mind?

Belichick never drafted a QB in the first in Cleveland either. The last playoff win the Browns had was under Belichick and the QB was actually Vinny Testeverde who was someone else's first round QB and a retread in Cle. The opposing QB? Bledsoe, who failed to move the chains in crunch time IIRC.

Bledsoe's HUGE GINORMOUS RIDICULOUS contract that was given to him under the prior regime was likely part of the reason Belichick had to dump a ton of vets and fill in the team with very midlevel players few other teams wanted. Bledsoe also pretty much sucked in the playoffs IIRC. They weren't winning anything in 2001 with Bledsoe under center. In fact, the team was 0-2 when he was the starter that year.

We saw what happened to the Pats when their defense got weaker and they had an very good to unbelievable passing offense, no? They stopped winning SBs.

As to successful, what are your criteria? Making the playoffs pretty much every year and having a first round exit with one to no wins more often than not? Because that would be the Colts.

I am not saying your scenario doesn't ever work out, meaning that it's true that not all 1st round QBs turn out to be busts and some turn out to be good decisions, just that it is not the primary reason a team wins SBs...ever IMO. The passing game being the primary reason a team wins regular season games? Sure. That would be the Colts, some of the Rams teams, the 2007 Pats, etc.

[Squirrel]

The way I look at it right now Mccown is insurance and Moore is the future. As far as all of them coming F/A this year I really dont see Jake being extended this is his "thanks for all you did year" in his contract and they will let it expire after this season. Doesnt mean he wont be back next season.

Now for McCown we will keep him this year and see how Moore progresses. If Moore looks like he can lead the team and win then McCown will be gone after this season. If not then they will resign McCown.

I dont think they will bring all 3 back after next season and this season will be the deciding season for Moore. If he can start at QB he will stay after next season if not they will let him go after this season.

Jake will start this year but I think he will on a short string. They will want to get Moore and McCown in the games so they see what they have.

[Murph]

The point that I tend to argue the most when it comes to this QB discussion is that the fact that people still CLAIM that Fox and Hurney have come out and stated that they wouldn't draft a QB in the first because it will take them too long to develop.. Yet, I haven't seen anyone directly quote Fox or Hurney on it. How about finding me proof and then I will believe you.

They said in the offseason of either 2004 or 2005. I forget but it was as plain as day that it was their philosophy about starting QB's for the franchise. Every local paper has referenced it numerous times over the past 4-5 years.

One thing is for certain – they won’t draft a quarterback in the first round. Fox and Hurney share a philosophy that it takes too long to develop a first-round quarterback and by the time he’s ready to play his contract is up.

http://www.carolinagrowl.com/Read.aspx?Story=459

Coach John Fox and general manager Marty Hurney have long believed it takes a young quarterback too long to develop and generally have stayed clear of drafting players at that position

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=yasinskas_pat&id=3339606

First of all, coach John Fox and general manager Marty Hurney never have believed in drafting a quarterback early. Their logic is that it takes too long to develop a rookie quarterback.

http://www.carolinahuddle.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=1974677

These articles are not written out of opinions of the writers but quoting what was said by Fox and Hurney (or at least by one and agreed by the other) several years ago.

[Murph]

It should also be noted that it appears that Hurney's love affair with Matt Ryan this time last year was probably not a smokescreen as most of us here assumed at the time. He had a good idea about the gem Ryan was and could become. However I still think they would not have grabbed him by moving up if he fell close to them because their draft plan was already in place to go with a power RB and OT.

[Montsta]

For clarity's sake, I define a "franchise QB" as one who is the centerpiece of the offense. Examples would be guys like Peyton Manning, Tom Brady or Carson Palmer.

The Panthers don't subscribe to the franchise QB model because they want to be a run-first, "grind it out" team, one in which the QB need only be good, not great.

And I'm perfectly comfortable with that philosophy.

I agree with you Mr. Scot, and it's funny that you give this definition because I look at the Steelers with Ben Roethlisberger. I guess you could say he was drafted as their "franchise" QB, but year in and year out he leads (or is in the top 5, IIRC) the league in turnovers, be it INT's or fumbles. But when it matters, he is a winner and does enough to win. We all know about his win percentage as a starter and his toughness for always getting sacked, and he has plenty of jewelry too. Some guys got "it", whatever "it" is, and some don't.

Look at Carr. People said he got permanently rattled by the shitty o-line in houston, which caused him to be a bust. But Big Ben gets hit plenty, be it by D-Linemen, LBers, or even cars, and still gets the damn job done. Is he great? By no means. Would I give up a ton to have him as our "franchise" QB? You bet your sweet ass I would.

[top dawg]

For clarity's sake, I define a "franchise QB" as one who is the centerpiece of the offense. Examples would be guys like Peyton Manning, Tom Brady or Carson Palmer.

The Panthers don't subscribe to the franchise QB model because they want to be a run-first, "grind it out" team, one in which the QB need only be good, not great.

And I'm perfectly comfortable with that philosophy.

With this type of belief, would you say that Big Ben is not a franchise QB? The Steelers' philosophy has ALWAYS been a "run-first, 'grind it out' team," but their most successful years (i.e., their championship seasons) have been where the QB has pretty much been the centerpiece of the offense. I realize that some may question the greatness of Ben and Terry, but their play and effectiveness speaks for itself.

You can win with so-called "good" QBs, and may even win the big one, but history pretty much proves that "great" QBs are going to be the ones that give you your best shot year after year, and Six-burgh pretty much proves this out. Even with a run first philosophy, you still need a QB that will knock on the door most years, make good decisions, and ultimately get it done. Like I said, there are exceptions to every rule but, half stepping at QB is going to get you half baked results. It's like a dish that tastes "good," but you still feel there's something missing---something just a little off---that would have made it extraordinarily delicious. The Steelers have figured this out (perhaps by luck), and they are not about to let the most important ingredient to their recent success get away. The Panthers FO is still bumbling around trying to figure this out with the Delhommes of the world. Trying to make a champion out of an arguably second string QB can be a lesson in frustration, especially when it appears that you're so close to being the top dawg in the league.