You can't say that Sam is dogshit now because he started '18. I do think Sam had it rough in '18 by having 3 games in 8 days so I guess you could make the argument that it was definitely a rough and unfair to ask him to light the league on fire, but the trend of having of these guys sit and learn for a year with a clipboard is done. QBs come in right now and are able to be successful. Go look around the league. These guys all came into the league and had instant success - Burrow, Herbert, Kyler, Watson (came in at halftime of their first game), Luck, Russell Wilson, Dak (Romo hurt is back). They all started or were in the lineup within 1 game of their rookie season. The best experience for these guys is to play and learn as they go. Hopefully we don't have Saleh on the sideline with green, yellow, and red flashcards saying how risky Wilson can be with the play/throw. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one I guess.
What are you talking about? I never said Darnold was "dogshit" at any time. If you have a point worth making, why not make it without the fiction? The point is that I don't believe any draftee should be expected to come out of college, run a few OTAs work through a now much abbreviated training camp and be put on the field simply because he was drafted. It did not work with Darnold, and that should be obvious to everyone here. I don't care in the slightest about what Romo or Wilson did or anyone else you mention. To be honest you'd mention just as many guys who rode the pine for a while and learned the game well enough to end up in the Hall of Fame. If the toughest competition a guy has seen in almost two years is the Chanticleers, I don't expect him to be ready for primetime any time soon, if ever.
Were you not saying one of the reasons Sam is shit is because he didn't sit rather than coming into play right away? If you weren't, my apologies.
No, I was not saying Darnold was shit for any reason, I already told you that. What I was doing was providing a counterpoint to your posting that cherry picked two anecdotes from other teams in the following two years as if they established some kind of rule to be followed. They certainly don't prove in any way that every drafted quarterback belongs on the field for their first game, or even their first season.
Sure, you can find examples that have worked/failed with either approach. But that doesn't alter the fact that letting a quarterback learn gives him the best chance to succeed. Of course a lot of QBs who sit a year or two still bust. That's because they were bad quarterbacks. And of course some succeed despite being thrown in the deep end, because they are either exceptional talents, or are lucky enough to survive long enough to learn how to do the job. But letting a young player learn the most complex and demanding position in team sports before asking him to play it at the highest level possible is obviously the best way to go. Any other approach is borne of impatience. You might get lucky and not have it explode in your face, but you are lengthening the odds of that player succeeding.
At some point we are going to have to give James Morgan a chance at backup. If we are ever going to recoup something on him. Yeah. it's highly unlikely. But still. I imagine finding value with chosing a QB in the fourth is that they get traded farther down the line
I get what you’re saying but I have never seen data that supports it. Some players probably learn better taking their lumps on the field, and some probably would be better off learning from the sideline. I don’t know the answer, and I’ve heard QBs and others around the league all over the place on this issue in interviews etc. It’s probably a case by case basis. If we knew for sure that a QB always has a better chance of succeeding by starting on the bench, they would never play week 1 of their rookie season. Teams would be criticized if this were the case. I think the best case scenario would be to have the backup or vet QB ready to play week 1 and if the rookie shows he’s ready to go and wins the job fairly then have at it. They should never be forced to go week 1 if they’re clearly not ready.
There can't be data to support it because it's a binary situation. You can never put the same quarterback through both experiences and see how he fares in each. But in the same way that throwing a kid into the deep end of a pool might not make them terrified of water for the rest of their lives, there is just no need to do it. The kid will have a much better chance of loving swimming if you give him some time to get used to it.
Well I guess someone could go look at bust and success rates of guys who sat initially vs guys who didn’t. But again like you said, no one will know if the same guy would have been successful in a different situation or visa versa. Playing QB and football is not a new thing to these guys...so I don’t agree with your swimming comparison. NFL defenses are better but some guys can handle it just fine. Regardless, I still believe that some QBs it will actually benefit to play and some the opposite. There are also some that will be more or less the same regardless. It’s up to the coaches to figure out what will benefit our guy this season.
I agree with this, but usually, the higher a quarterback is drafted, the quicker he starts. It comes down to the impatience thing, but also the fact that the whole set-up - coaching staff, general manager, scouting department - will be judged on how this guy plays, and they just can't wait. If he sits a whole year the whispers will start about him maybe not being up to the job. If he's still sitting in his second year the whispers become louder. If he's still sitting in his third year, like Chad Pennington, people start calling him a bust. I would love to see us take our time with whomever we draft. Give him a couple of drives at the end of a few games maybe. Saleh has time, JD still has time. They can be patient with this one.
Wish we had gotten a chance to go after Marcus Mariota. But the QB market this FA period didn't flush out and he ended up re-signing with the Raiders. But he's experienced and can move the chains. It wasn't worth a pick though.
You look at the guy in practice you see how your o-line is progressing and you make a decision. If the oline is playing well start the kid if not give the oline time to gel.
Anyone who thinks a franchise can draft a qb #2 and have him sit: LOL. Never gonna happen. Zack will be under C play 1. There's things an OC can do to protect his rookie. Game plans that protect him, vs win at all costs. 3rd and 15? Either call a long developing play with a chance of converting (and a chance of getting ur rook killed) -or- simple draw play. Short quick passes, screens, TEs, 200yd 1td 0int type game plans. Best thing we could do is lose 17 games all by 1 score or less. Develop Zack, huge 2022 draft.
Get that thought out of your head. The Jets are done with losing or being one of the worst teams in the league. I think they will have some growing pains, especially with a rookie QB and a rookie Head Coach, but they will compete week in and week out. I forgot about Hoyer. I have been wanting a back-up QB upgrade, but I was thinking Nick Mullens, or Alex Smith, or Blake Bortles. Hoyer actually wouldn't be a bad choice, but you would assume Wilson starts immediately then.
All tru, but Jets are 1/3 thru total rebuild. Nothing completes the process faster than another top 2 pick in 2022. Can you even imagine all the top players that would bring? My god. So, start zack, conservative game plans that allow zack to develop safely and the rite way. Lose a bunch of 3 point games. KILL IT in 2022!
