Unless he changes his name, that's pretty hard to argue against.
I know, right? Something I believe is true is the judging a starting caliber NFL QB is one of the hardest things to do well in professional sports.
When scouts added up the positive and negative traits of Blaine Gabbart, they drafted him #10 overall. But when he was put through the starting QB baptism of fire, he revealed that he has no business being a starting QB.
If he had sat for a year behind Tom Brady, he would still be that backup QB pretending to be good enough to start. His destiny would not have changed. It would have just taken a team an extra year or two to find out that he cannot play.
What's worse is when teams believe this nonsense about sitting a QB behind a veteran makes them good, and then sit him behind a known bad QB. How can signing Mike Glennon have helped Mitch Trubisky become good?
Post by brasilbear on Aug 18, 2024 11:17:25 GMT -6
But posters said over and over you just needed to sit a rookie QB for one or more seasons to get a HOF QB. According to them, doesn't matter if Mitch sat behind Glennon or not.
The revisionist posting is going to be wild on this.
But posters said over and over you just needed to sit a rookie QB for one or more seasons to get a HOF QB. According to them, doesn't matter if Mitch sat behind Glennon or not.
The revisionist posting is going to be wild on this.
I'm guilty as can be on this myself. Full disclosure, I admit that I was on the "keep Fields bandwagon" too. I blame it on the fact we've not drafted a great QB1 in so long that I'm half-nuts wanting the team to get it right with a rookie QB. The idea of sitting a guy seemed good to me back then. But now it makes sense to do what Eberflus is doing with Caleb. Especially with the rookie contract benefit. But, this is for 1st round guys who have the gears to actually do this. Nothing wrong with letting a promising project QB develop - a guy like Steve Young (played initially in the USFL) comes to mind. For that matter Joe Montana was a 3rd round draft pick who sat for a year and a half. And it's probably a long shot but Bagent comes to mind as a possible starter someday. Bagent's floor seems to be a solid backup guy. But there is a chance he could be a starter in the league someday too.
But posters said over and over you just needed to sit a rookie QB for one or more seasons to get a HOF QB. According to them, doesn't matter if Mitch sat behind Glennon or not.
The revisionist posting is going to be wild on this.
I'm guilty as can be on this myself. Full disclosure, I admit that I was on the "keep Fields bandwagon" too. I blame it on the fact we've not drafted a great QB1 in so long that I'm half-nuts wanting the team to get it right with a rookie QB. The idea of sitting a guy seemed good to me back then. But now it makes sense to do what Eberflus is doing with Caleb. Especially with the rookie contract benefit. But, this is for 1st round guys who have the gears to actually do this. Nothing wrong with letting a promising project QB develop - a guy like Steve Young (played initially in the USFL) comes to mind. For that matter Joe Montana was a 3rd round draft pick who sat for a year and a half. And it's probably a long shot but Bagent comes to mind as a possible starter someday. Bagent's floor seems to be a solid backup guy. But there is a chance he could be a starter in the league someday too.
I think there is a difference in the type of QB who benefits from sitting, 100% true. A later draft pick might need revamped mechanics, or have to adjust from a shotgun OFF to a PRO-OFF. I also think the league and the cap has changed how much time teams can give players to devleop, not just QB--but we see it more intensely with QBs. LT/RT in college are moved to G instantly when they stumble out the gate. Prospects at WR taken in the middle rounds are given two seasons before being dumped. (I'm guilty of this with Scott---I'm not sold of him flipping the switch to the NFL level.)
IMO it comes down to one thing and one thing only--Does the drafted QB have the physical ability AND the mental ability to thrive in the NFL. Everything else stacks on that: coaching, talent around him, etc.
But this place was wild with people claiming that all Mitch/Fields needed to do was sit one year behind any stiff, LIKE THE PACKERS DO, and they would be franchise QBs. There were posters who wanted Williams to sit!
I'm guilty as can be on this myself. Full disclosure, I admit that I was on the "keep Fields bandwagon" too. I blame it on the fact we've not drafted a great QB1 in so long that I'm half-nuts wanting the team to get it right with a rookie QB. The idea of sitting a guy seemed good to me back then. But now it makes sense to do what Eberflus is doing with Caleb. Especially with the rookie contract benefit. But, this is for 1st round guys who have the gears to actually do this. Nothing wrong with letting a promising project QB develop - a guy like Steve Young (played initially in the USFL) comes to mind. For that matter Joe Montana was a 3rd round draft pick who sat for a year and a half. And it's probably a long shot but Bagent comes to mind as a possible starter someday. Bagent's floor seems to be a solid backup guy. But there is a chance he could be a starter in the league someday too.
I think there is a difference in the type of QB who benefits from sitting, 100% true. A later draft pick might need revamped mechanics, or have to adjust from a shotgun OFF to a PRO-OFF. I also think the league and the cap has changed how much time teams can give players to devleop, not just QB--but we see it more intensely with QBs. LT/RT in college are moved to G instantly when they stumble out the gate. Prospects at WR taken in the middle rounds are given two seasons before being dumped. (I'm guilty of this with Scott---I'm not sold of him flipping the switch to the NFL level.)
IMO it comes down to one thing and one thing only--Does the drafted QB have the physical ability AND the mental ability to thrive in the NFL. Everything else stacks on that: coaching, talent around him, etc.
But this place was wild with people claiming that all Mitch/Fields needed to do was sit one year behind any stiff, LIKE THE PACKERS DO, and they would be franchise QBs. There were posters who wanted Williams to sit!
This is because many fans overthink things and think there is some super secret formula to producing a great QB. The reality is through luck or skill you have to pick the right one. The only real determiner to sit someone or not is who gives the best chance to win at that moment. Mahomes sat because Alex Smith was playing at a high level. Love sat because Rodgers was playing at a high level. And Rodgers sat because Favre was playing well. Had the rookie QBs had different lesser QBs in front of them they all would have likely played their rookie years. And I don't think there career trajectories would have been much different.
I think there is a difference in the type of QB who benefits from sitting, 100% true. A later draft pick might need revamped mechanics, or have to adjust from a shotgun OFF to a PRO-OFF. I also think the league and the cap has changed how much time teams can give players to devleop, not just QB--but we see it more intensely with QBs. LT/RT in college are moved to G instantly when they stumble out the gate. Prospects at WR taken in the middle rounds are given two seasons before being dumped. (I'm guilty of this with Scott---I'm not sold of him flipping the switch to the NFL level.)
IMO it comes down to one thing and one thing only--Does the drafted QB have the physical ability AND the mental ability to thrive in the NFL. Everything else stacks on that: coaching, talent around him, etc.
But this place was wild with people claiming that all Mitch/Fields needed to do was sit one year behind any stiff, LIKE THE PACKERS DO, and they would be franchise QBs. There were posters who wanted Williams to sit!
This is because many fans overthink things and think there is some super secret formula to producing a great QB. The reality is through luck or skill you have to pick the right one. The only real determiner to sit someone or not is who gives the best chance to win at that moment. Mahomes sat because Alex Smith was playing at a high level. Love sat because Rodgers was playing at a high level. And Rodgers sat because Favre was playing well. Had the rookie QBs had different lesser QBs in front of them they all would have likely played their rookie years. And I don't think there career trajectories would have been much different.
*nods head in agreement*
But posters will argue that Mahomes would be Mitch 2.0 if he had been drafted here. Mahomes is the GOAT QB of ALL TIME. Chicago would have a SB win by now if Pace had drafted Mahomes. I'll fight you over this.
This is because many fans overthink things and think there is some super secret formula to producing a great QB. The reality is through luck or skill you have to pick the right one. The only real determiner to sit someone or not is who gives the best chance to win at that moment. Mahomes sat because Alex Smith was playing at a high level. Love sat because Rodgers was playing at a high level. And Rodgers sat because Favre was playing well. Had the rookie QBs had different lesser QBs in front of them they all would have likely played their rookie years. And I don't think there career trajectories would have been much different.
*nods head in agreement*
But posters will argue that Mahomes would be Mitch 2.0 if he had been drafted here. Mahomes is the GOAT QB of ALL TIME. Chicago would have a SB win by now if Pace had drafted Mahomes. I'll fight you over this.
But posters will argue that Mahomes would be Mitch 2.0 if he had been drafted here. Mahomes is the GOAT QB of ALL TIME. Chicago would have a SB win by now if Pace had drafted Mahomes. I'll fight you over this.
Even after Nagy would have changed his mechanics?
You do know that Nagy is Mahomes OC right? And he was the OC Mahomes' rookie year. That seemed to work out pretty well. Maybe Fields actually needed to change his mechanics because they were poor.
You do know that Nagy is Mahomes OC right? And he was the OC Mahomes' rookie year. That seemed to work out pretty well. Maybe Fields actually needed to change his mechanics because they were poor.
Nagy had his faults no question. His scheme was overly complex and resulted in a lot of false starts, wasted TO, delays of game, and so on. He was also rigid an inflexible in his playcalling.
Fields also has a lot of flaws. His windup/delivery are SLOW. His progressions are SLOW. He doesn't throw with anticipation well enough. He gets happy feet way too easily. And so on.
Seems like both of these guys have "low ceilings" so to speak. I've noticed that Nagy hasn't exactly been a hot HC candidate since leaving here despite the fact he's technically the OC of the league's most successful team. No one seems interested in giving him another HC gig. Maybe he's just hanging on waiting for Andy Reid to keel over.
Likewise, Fields has a golden opportunity with Wilson hurt and/or sucking to get another #1 job and seems to be fumbling it away figuratively. In no small measure because he continues to fumble the ball away literally. Maybe he can become a high-end backup but he doesn't look like he's ever gonna be the franchise starter we all hoped he would be. I finally gave up on him last fall.
Re-watch some old Fields replays and watch some of those many WR screens Getsy called. Watch how slow JF's delivery is and watch how often the ball isn't even well-placed for YAC purposes. And the whole freakin' point of a screen pass is YAC.
You do know that Nagy is Mahomes OC right? And he was the OC Mahomes' rookie year. That seemed to work out pretty well. Maybe Fields actually needed to change his mechanics because they were poor.