It really has not changed that much. QB's still reach their peak around 3-5 years in. I have not looked but plenty of rookies started in the 80 and 90's and several QBs in "Todays" era do not start right away. It has nothing to do with being ready and more to do with team philosophy. I would bet most rookie QB drafted in the top 10 in the 80's started as rookies.
Yes, it's always been based on necessity. If a team is in desperate need of a QB and they've finished with a bad record and high draft pick, often that drafted rookie starts. Sometimes good teams with decent or better QBs have the luxury of drafting a QB and grooming him for a year or two or three, and all that is the same now as it was then, so I think the comparisons are valid.
you would bet wrong. Elway & Aikman were the only 2 to be named Day 1 starters and even Elway, who was perhaps the greatest prospect ever, really only started out the gate because Steve Deberg got injured. **I guess you could make an argument Jim McMahon, who even though mixed like oil & water with Coach Ditka, and probably wouldnt have started did start for the Bears but it really deserves an asterisk because it was a lost season that basically started in November - strike year The rest of these guys all sat out of the gates. Some never started at all ever amazingly, some were career backups and some started a few garbage games at the end of their rookie seasons but I would not call them starters as rookies 1981 1 6 Rich Campbell Packers California 1982 1 4 Art Schlichter Colts Ohio State 1982 1 5 Jim McMahon Bears Brigham Young 1983 1 7 Todd Blackledge Chiefs Penn State 1986 1 3 Jim Everett Oilers Purdue 1987 1 1 Vinny Testaverde Buccaneers Miami 1987 1 6 Kelly Stouffer Cardinals Colorado State
If you read the first article - did you? - you would see that he wasn't just talking about #1 picks, and also his "set" included 42 QBs considered "great" or having won a SB. Again, necessity was usually the primary factor in whether guys started their first year.
Compare that to today Baker-Nope Mahomes- Nope Herbert- Nope Zach- Yes Fields-No Allen- Nope All about necessity- The thought pattern on Qbs has not changed. Zach probably should have sat the first half of the season in hindsight but then maybe he would not be as far along. Only time will tell
Korrektamundo. The "needs better help" argument falls flat because Mike White, who is not Joe Namath, threw for nearly twice as many yds/gm than Wilson with the same help. Let me emphasize that: It was not Tom Brady filling in for Wilson, it was Mike White. Ron
Stop with the Mike White BS. He had a good game no doubt but came back to reality very quickly. MW was not a rookie.
You can compare statistics but if the time gap is too much the comparisons aren't meaningful. The leage average completion percentage in 1989, Aikman's rookie season, was 55.8%, so Aikman's 52.9% was comparable. But the league average completion percentage in 2021 was 64.8%, so Wilson's 55.6% is significantly worse than Aikman's. Even Aikman's career avg of 61.5% is below the current modern average of 64.8% The problem with comparisons like the op's is that you can easily turn it on its head. Once upon a time a very highly touted QB was selected in the 2nd round. He came into the league with great fanfare in New York Jets land. He was expected to be a great success from day 1, at least in this Jets forum. He played all 16 games. His completion percentage was 55.8%, he only threw for 190 yds/gm and threw 21 int and 12 td's. Who was this QB? And will Wilson make it up to his level, a 10 year veteran backup QB? or Once upon a time a very highly touted QB was selected in the first round. He came into the league with great fanfare. He was expected to be a great success from day 1. He played in 13 games. His completion percentage was 57.7%. He threw for 220 yds/game, with 17 td's and 15 int. Will Wilson make it up to his level, a guy who got a second contract from a different team and then imploded there as well? You get the idea. Ron