PDA

View Full Version : Derek Anderson to start Saturday...


PoopSandwich
08-26-2010, 11:38 PM
I'm sorry, I had to do it.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp10/news/story?id=5500778

http://hphotos-snc3.fbcdn.net/hs079.snc3/14632_210195681183_632821183_3456569_8299453_n.jpg

Brown Leader
08-26-2010, 11:44 PM
Max Hall, John Skelton, get ready.

PoopSandwich
08-26-2010, 11:55 PM
Max Hall, John Skelton, get ready.

if derek anderson and jordy nelson were on the same team the world would implode

FUNBUNCHER
08-27-2010, 01:05 AM
What happened to Matty ICE??

iBoldin
08-27-2010, 01:09 AM
Consequences will never be the same.

TACKLE
08-27-2010, 01:18 AM
Both Leinart and DA suck.

The Future is Now!

http://www.c2cjersey.com/news-images/John-Skelton-jersey.jpg

Saints-Tigers
08-27-2010, 06:49 AM
Was Leinart really THAT bad?

He's 10-13 thus far, I haven't watched him at all, is he just captain checkdown now?

Miaoww
08-27-2010, 07:11 AM
I actually quite like the look of Hall. Obviously he's not ready to start now, but he looks like an interesting prospect.

BmoreBlackByrdz
08-27-2010, 07:56 AM
I wanna see some more of John Skelton, a few scouts compared him to Joe Flacco.

killxswitch
08-27-2010, 08:05 AM
Wow put Leinart on suicide watch.

Bucs_Rule
08-27-2010, 08:47 AM
He was horrenduous in their opening pre-season game. His throws were completely off the mark. And those were on intermediate routes, going 5 feet off target. In the Titans game he had a reciever open in the endzone on a slant, but threw it behind him and cost a touchdown.

I do understand the frustration with Leinart. The team can't score when he starts.

I expect Skelton to be starting by the end of the season. He looked great in the preseason, it was against thrid stringers but that has nothing to do with overthrowing a mid open reciever on an intermediate out.

OSUGiants17
08-27-2010, 09:02 AM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rW-OJ48AJBU/TFNrp_fd1FI/AAAAAAAAPEg/tvEx-LrIRKg/s1600/SkeltonJohn%2520copy.jpg

tjsunstein
08-27-2010, 09:37 AM
When a team drafts a quarterback in the first round and five years later doesn't know if they're ready to start, I think it's time to cut bait.

Nalej
08-27-2010, 10:05 AM
Wow, Matt, you suck!

Matty Ice is Matt Ryan... not Leinart!

Splat
08-27-2010, 12:07 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/27/matt-leinart-bristles-at-his-benching/

"I don't know how you judge performance when you have 13 pass attempts to the other guy's 40 (http://twitter.com/kentsomers/status/22280886163)," Leinart said, per Kent Somers of the Arizona Republic.

But at least Leinart hasn't become discouraged. "I believe that I'm going to be starting that opening game (http://twitter.com/kentsomers/status/22281215098)," he said. As to a possible trade if he doesn't win the job that he's now losing, Leinart said that "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it (http://twitter.com/kentsomers/status/22281059196)."

tjsunstein
08-27-2010, 12:18 PM
The talking heads have commented on his body language as being discouraging to coaches. The coaches have to be seeing something in practice, leadership, knowledge of the playbook, something.

Splat
08-27-2010, 12:24 PM
I don't think Whisenhunt has or ever will be high on Leinart, he is just not "his" guy.

bigbluedefense
08-27-2010, 01:33 PM
I don't want to make any excuses for Leinart, but I think the spread style that Whissy uses is a terrible fit for Leinart.

I'm disappointed in Leinart, I actually liked the guy coming out.

FlyingElvis
08-27-2010, 01:42 PM
I don't think Whisenhunt has or ever will be high on Leinart, he is just not "his" guy.

Tough to blame him, though. Nobody wants to call an inaccurate, noodle armed scrub "his" guy.

keylime_5
08-27-2010, 01:45 PM
well cardinals fans, get ready for season from hell if derek anderson is even competing to start.

Shiver
08-27-2010, 01:47 PM
Titans' DBs were placing bets on Matt Leinart checking down passes. Brady Quinn had the same problem. In the NFL you have to throw a pass with timing, accuracy and most importantly into tight windows 12-18 yards down the field. Neither had to do it in college, neither can do in the NFL. Lobbing it up to Dwayne Jarrett, Jeff Samardjiza, Mike Williams isn't a realistic option in the NFL.

Splat
08-27-2010, 01:48 PM
I feel bad for the Cards fans who really thought they would just replace a HOF QB and not miss a beat, I don't think they will be 2-14 or anything but I find it hard to believe they make the playoffs.

tjsunstein
08-27-2010, 01:48 PM
I don't want to make any excuses for Leinart, but I think the spread style that Whissy uses is a terrible fit for Leinart.

I'm disappointed in Leinart, I actually liked the guy coming out.
Without a doubt. He has the running game and WRs he needs to succeed, just the wrong set. As someone stated above, Whisenhunt doesn't trust him in the system for whatever reason. I don't like how coaches rarely inherit a QB and stick with him. They always need 'their' guy. It's a shame that Leinart has gone to waste. Never like to see a first rounder fail miserably.

Shiver
08-27-2010, 01:49 PM
As far as I am concerned Leinart didn't go to waste, he was waste.

bigbluedefense
08-27-2010, 01:54 PM
Yeah it is. Just get a bunch of tall WRs. The Chargers kind of do it.

But yeah, Leinart blows.

bigbluedefense
08-27-2010, 01:57 PM
As far as I am concerned Leinart didn't go to waste, he was waste.

There has to be some degree of truth to it though. Leinart looked pretty decent under Dennis Green.

I'm not saying he'd be a great qb in a different scheme, but i also feel that Whisenhunt's spread system is the worst possible scheme for him to be in.

FUNBUNCHER
08-27-2010, 02:10 PM
I don't think Whisenhunt has or ever will be high on Leinart, he is just not "his" guy.

Truth, may be best for him to move on.

OSUGiants17
08-27-2010, 02:13 PM
If they where smart, the would have packaged Lienart with Boldin and gotten a solid QB instead of trading him to the Ravens.

Vox Populi
08-27-2010, 02:20 PM
What happened to Matty ICE??

Thats Matt Ryan, but sure.

Hurricanes25
08-27-2010, 03:10 PM
If they where smart, the would have packaged Lienart with Boldin and gotten a solid QB instead of trading him to the Ravens.

That would have been smart but I guess at the time they still had confidence in Leinart to get it done.

Shiver
08-27-2010, 05:47 PM
Matt Leinart's reaction just shows me why he was such a bust. What a *****.

Splat
08-27-2010, 06:06 PM
What if he would have came out early from college? It could have been even worse on he field at least.

Shiver
08-27-2010, 06:18 PM
On those 49ers teams?! That would have been something.

A Perfect Score
08-27-2010, 06:21 PM
Yeah but he would of at least gotten the extra 15 million guaranteed that went to Alex Smith instead.

Complex
08-27-2010, 06:23 PM
Derek Anderson has looked 1000x worser than Matt Leinart, Whisenhunt hates Matt or is on drugs

kalbears13
08-27-2010, 06:50 PM
Derek Anderson has a chance when Larry Fitzgerald is healthy. Other than that it's gonna be hard for him to compete.

elway=goat
08-27-2010, 07:32 PM
Anderson has looked ALOT worse than Leinart. If I remember correctly, Whisenhunt had problems with Big Ben.. I think he just prefers vets to run his system.

One thing for sure is, Leinart needs a chance. This is the preseason, and he has 13 pass attemtps. You have to give this guy a season, just to see what he can do. Let the guy get into a groove. Untill now we have only seen him coming in sparingly and he never gets consistants action on the field.

The guy has talent, and I think can be a starter. The Bears game a few years ago sticks out as to what he is capabale of.

fenikz
08-27-2010, 07:34 PM
There has to be some degree of truth to it though. Leinart looked pretty decent under Dennis Green.

I'm not saying he'd be a great qb in a different scheme, but i also feel that Whisenhunt's spread system is the worst possible scheme for him to be in.

what spread system?

And Whis loves ******* with people's heads, Leinart will start the final game and the regular season unless Anderson somehow doesn't suck anymore

Saints-Tigers
08-27-2010, 08:27 PM
Whisenhunt can't even give a fake vote of confidence.

Damn dude, just go with Leinart and stand by it firmly until he uber fails. Jerking him around is bad for everyone. It's like he wants him to fail.

LonghornsLegend
08-27-2010, 10:55 PM
As far as I am concerned Leinart didn't go to waste, he was waste.

Exactly, there isn't one single excuse you can use for him. He's been in the league 5 years now, and he had a HOF QB to sit behind and learn the ropes. Funny to think how Norm Chow wanted Leinart so bad, and now look. VY may never be an elite QB, but he has consistently shown growth and constantly gotten better, Leinart hasn't shown an ounce of potential to be a good QB.

descendency
08-27-2010, 11:14 PM
Leinart can't throw more than 5 yards without screwing it up. While Anderson is terrible, at least he can get the ball past the sticks on occasions. You can't win with Leinart in that system.

steelersfan43
08-27-2010, 11:44 PM
Derek Anderson has looked 1000x worser than Matt Leinart, Whisenhunt hates Matt or is on drugs

Worser. yep thats a word hahahaa

soybean
08-28-2010, 03:16 AM
I dont think this is really anything. It'll probably be the last game but in reverse order.

Plus, if you're not going to win with other qbs, why not just go with leinart the whole season and let him suck without the leash. Derek Anderson aint getting you to the playoffs.

BRAVEHEART
08-28-2010, 03:27 AM
qVApW5PFFfo

Let's not act like Matt can't play in this league. He hasn't been good this pre-season, but i'd roll with him instead of DA...that's for true.

CameronCropper
08-28-2010, 06:47 AM
Derek Anderson is, and always has been, an absolute turnover machine.

He had one great half season in Cleveland, but once teams had a little film on him and started to figure him out he looked like a complete bum. He's been fortunate to have had two Captain Checkdown's in front of him on the depth chart in both Brayden and Leinart. Neither have been able to move their offenses up the field or make the big play but haven't turned the ball over either, whereas DA can make all of the throws.

I'd like to see Leinart get his shot, because when he wants to the guy can flat out ball.

FUNBUNCHER
08-28-2010, 07:19 AM
Leinart really should give Tom Brady or Drew Bress a call and figure out how they managed to up their arm strength by a few dozen rpms.

If Leinart had busted his ass in the offseason since his rookie year and really improved his upper body strength, he wouldn't be reluctant to let it rip 25 yards downfield.

Even Mike Vick attributes the huge jump in arm strength he had between his senior year of HS and his redshirt frosh year at Va Tech was total participation in the Hokies strength and conditioning program.

I hope the Cards cut him, Kyle Shanahan could do big things with Matt in D.C.

Saints-Tigers
08-28-2010, 07:28 AM
I think Matt's issues aren't physical to be honest. Matt just isn't that confident and smart player he was. He's timid and lethargic now. He was a leader, now he's a whiner.

His arm isn't a cannon, but it's definitely good enough.

descendency
08-28-2010, 07:36 AM
Leinart really should give Tom Brady or Drew Bress a call and figure out how they managed to up their arm strength by a few dozen rpms.
Tom stopped throwing off his back foot so much.

LonghornsLegend
08-28-2010, 10:10 AM
I'd like to see Leinart get his shot, because when he wants to the guy can flat out ball.

Lol wut?


When did this ever happen, maybe I just missed something.

PoopSandwich
08-28-2010, 07:51 PM
well cardinals fans, get ready for season from hell if derek anderson is even competing to start.

its not like leinart would be any better

keylime_5
08-28-2010, 09:31 PM
I know, what I mean is that the simple fact that a guy like Derek Anderson is legitimately in the starting QB competition means you're QB is gonna suck.

PoopSandwich
08-28-2010, 09:56 PM
I know, what I mean is that the simple fact that a guy like Derek Anderson is legitimately in the starting QB competition means you're QB is gonna suck.

idk I think he could pan out to be a decent starter with a team like Arizona.

keylime_5
08-28-2010, 10:46 PM
doubtful, but I think his chances of finding that 2007 season form again are much better than Leinart ever doing anything at this point.

San Diego Chicken
08-28-2010, 11:25 PM
Seems like both of the QB's played reasonably well tonight. FWIW, it also seems like the Bears looked terrible.

yourfavestoner
08-29-2010, 01:08 AM
Lol wut?


When did this ever happen, maybe I just missed something.

One good half against the Bears your rookie season + a college career of not getting touched and throwing up jump balls=balling out.

Duh.

M.O.T.H.
08-29-2010, 06:50 AM
Related...


According to ESPN's Chris Mortensen, the Cardinals see some "Kurt Warner qualities" in undrafted rookie QB Max Hall.

Hall has a been a "tremendous surprise" outplaying fellow rookie John Skelton throughout camp, and it wouldn't be surprising to see him with a couple of spot starts late in the season. Mort joins NFL Network's Mike Lombardi in speculating that Matt Leinart won't be on the final roster because the Cardinals don't want to lose one of the rookies on waivers.

Aug. 28 - 4:24 pm et
Source: ESPN.com (http://espn.go.com/espnradio/player?rd=1#/podcenter/?autoplay=1&callsign=WTEMAM&id=5504786)


Had my eye on Hall...but looks like they're not letting him get away. I still think they'll keep 4 QBs. But if one doesnt make the cut...it will be Leinart. They did say they wouldnt cut him, though.

Brent
08-29-2010, 11:14 AM
more doom and gloom from ESPN.

Bucs_Rule
08-29-2010, 01:10 PM
doubtful, but I think his chances of finding that 2007 season form again are much better than Leinart ever doing anything at this point.

I don't expect it either. Winslow and Edwards made a ton of very tough catches. Fitz could make those catches, but leaping high in the air gets you killed and you can't run after the catch.

Basileus777
08-29-2010, 01:24 PM
His arm isn't a cannon, but it's definitely good enough.

I don't agree with this. It's not just about the deep ball, he lacks the arm strength to zip the ball into smaller windows even on intermediate throws. He's very limited in the throws he is physically able to make, and because he isn't great at anticipating, he just ends up throwing to guys that are already wide open. That's why he's a checkdown guy.

PoopSandwich
08-29-2010, 08:05 PM
I don't expect it either. Winslow and Edwards made a ton of very tough catches. Fitz could make those catches, but leaping high in the air gets you killed and you can't run after the catch.

Alot of the passes that they had to leap for were in the endzone and great passes where no one but those guys could have caught it.

tjsunstein
08-30-2010, 12:03 PM
"It's not as much about stats as it is about chemistry with the team. In that position it's about how you handle everything that's thrown at you," Whisenhunt said

"I feel like I have a great relationship with my guys, my team for four, five years now," Leinart said. "Like I said, I can only control what I control, and that's playing good football and being a leader. I have a great relationship with all my teammates and I don't think it should be based on that because I feel like I am doing a good job in that department."

Leinart is all but out of Arizona, imo.

nepg
08-30-2010, 12:21 PM
If Pete Carrol can get Mike Williams turned back into BMW, maybe he can do the same with Matt Leinart... Let's face it, the Seahawks' QB situation looks like dog doo right now. And I'm a Whitehurst fan.

umphrey
08-30-2010, 02:02 PM
Leinart is on the Brady Quinn NFL plan right now IMO

Mr.Regular
08-30-2010, 02:40 PM
Leinart is on the Brady Quinn NFL plan right now IMO
That's an insult to Leinart, and Leinart sucks. Quinn is one of the worst NFL QB's I've ever seen.

tjsunstein
08-30-2010, 02:44 PM
That's an insult to Leinart, and Leinart sucks. Quinn is one of the worst NFL QB's I've ever seen.
The best was when he came in for an injured Orton and was immediately sacked for a loss of 5 on 3rd and 8. Looking good, Brady.

FlyingElvis
08-30-2010, 02:49 PM
Matt has had misses this preseason that have been so bad only Jamarcus could equal them. Maybe he's been hangin' with Grimmace.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 02:50 PM
The best was when he came in for an injured Orton and was immediately sacked for a loss of 5 on 3rd and 8. Looking good, Brady.

Nah, this'll top that. In the Bengals game, after the pick 6 that any idiot with a brain can tell you he shouldn't have even attempted, he went on to hit Bengals players on 3 straight (may have been 3 out of 4) red zone passes. If those were anyone but the Bengals scrubs, they all could easily have been picked off.

Brady Quinn ******* sucks and it's a joke that he's still in the NFL. McDaniels just wants a buffer between Orton and Tebow.

LonghornsLegend
08-30-2010, 03:47 PM
Related...



Had my eye on Hall...but looks like they're not letting him get away. I still think they'll keep 4 QBs. But if one doesnt make the cut...it will be Leinart. They did say they wouldnt cut him, though.

That's pretty interesting.


I think they were surprised by this too, because they probably wanted Skelton to win the job judging by where they took him and going before Hall. They might be thinking they have the franchise with one of these guys though, and you'd have to get 1 of them some meaningful reps this season.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 03:50 PM
Leinart believes he outplayed Anderson:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/08/30/matt-leinart-i-outplayed-the-competition/

I look for them to either keep 4 QBs, or let Leinart go. Have Anderson start the season while they develop Hall/Skelton.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 04:23 PM
Instead of talking to his coach, Leinart is talking to the media. While he's trying his best to say the right thing, Leinart is subtly complaining about his lack of opportunity, redirecting blame, and allowing divisive comments about Anderson slip out. It's not about Anderson.

Leinart's comments provide a small window into why Whisenhunt doubts Leinart in the first place, and why Leinart probably hasn't asked for an explanation about his demotion.

He doesn't want to hear the truth.

Hahahahahaha. Sounds like the same spoiled brat who said "Well, I still think we're the better team" after the USC-Texas game.

I ******* can't stand that guy.

AHungryWalrus
08-30-2010, 04:25 PM
The problem is, though, that we pretty much KNOW Anderson won't get anything done. He's done. At least with Leinart it's just pretty doubtful he'll be any good. There's the CHANCE of non suckage.

But yeah, Leinart is a douche. Go back to dance.

bigbluedefense
08-30-2010, 04:27 PM
Damn Leinart, if you're going to be a bust, you should have at least busted with the 49ers and got an extra 15 or so million out of it.

Still glad you took that extra dancing class to stay at USC for a year now you ****** moron?

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 04:30 PM
The problem is, though, that we pretty much KNOW Anderson won't get anything done. He's done. At least with Leinart it's just pretty doubtful he'll be any good. There's the CHANCE of non suckage.

But yeah, Leinart is a douche. Go back to dance.

See, I disagree. Leinart has looked like a future version of Captain Checkdown and hasn't really shown anything special.

With Anderson, they have someone willing to take shots down the field and stand in the pocket. He did that versus the Bears this week.....he got absolutely crushed a few times but still got the ball off. At least he wasn't looking to dump it to RBs all game long...

It's a mess. I have a feeling that if Whisenhunt got his way, something more significant would have gotten done at the position this year.

J-Mike88
08-30-2010, 04:31 PM
Damn Leinart, if you're going to be a bust, you should have at least busted with the 49ers and got an extra 15 or so million out of it.

Still glad you took that extra dancing class to stay at USC for a year now you ****** moron?
I lost $100 on that ***** idiot staying in school for that last year.
I said there was no way anyone with a half-brain would bypass a sure-fire chance to be the NFL's #1-overall pick, and play with a QB-tradition rich franchise like the 49ers. Fool chose to stay in school and lost a ton because of it.

I guess I under-estimated the power of the USC p**sy. Hard to walk away early from that I guess. Still, big mistake Matty.

J-Mike88
08-30-2010, 04:32 PM
doubtful, but I think his chances of finding that 2007 season form again are much better than Leinart ever doing anything at this point.
Speaking of that, can ANYONE explain that 2007 season? I mean that was on the Browns for God's sake.

Has anyone had a year that good at QB on a team that bad?

He has to have something to do that, even for just one year.

bigbluedefense
08-30-2010, 04:33 PM
I lost $100 on that ***** idiot staying in school for that last year.
I said there was no way anyone with a half-brain would bypass a sure-fire chance to be the NFL's #1-overall pick, and play with a QB-tradition rich franchise like the 49ers. Fool chose to stay in school and lost a ton because of it.

I guess I under-estimated the power of the USC p**sy. Hard to walk away early from that I guess. Still, big mistake Matty.

Me and a buddy of mine were talking about this earlier. He still could have gotten it. He would be in Cali, and just get that USC nana as an alumni.

Plus, he'd have like 30 mill guaranteed to his name. He'd get even more probably bc of that.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 04:33 PM
Speaking of that, can ANYONE explain that 2007 season? I mean that was on the Browns for God's sake.

Has anyone had a year that good at QB on a team that bad?

He has to have something to do that, even for just one year.

I think there was a lot of luck involved. Iirc, his completion % was still pretty terrible (like 55 or maybe even worse.) He just got the right mix of protection and production from his receivers to succeed.

A Perfect Score
08-30-2010, 04:35 PM
The Browns weren't all that bad that season. They had a very solid oline anchored by Thomas and Steinbach, they had legitimate weapons in Edwards and Winslow, and they had a stout running game in Jamal Lewis, who went for 1300 yards that year.

The defense, however, was a mess and its the reason they lost so many damn games.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 04:36 PM
I lost $100 on that ***** idiot staying in school for that last year.
I said there was no way anyone with a half-brain would bypass a sure-fire chance to be the NFL's #1-overall pick, and play with a QB-tradition rich franchise like the 49ers. Fool chose to stay in school and lost a ton because of it.

I guess I under-estimated the power of the USC p**sy. Hard to walk away early from that I guess. Still, big mistake Matty.

Which makes him even more of an idiot, because he got one of the USC Women's bball players pregnant during that senior year. So half of his earnings are automatically going to her.

So that's $15 million in bonus money he lost from going 9 picks lower, plus half of whatever he did receive going to his baby-mama. That's an expensive senior year in college. Hope it was worth it hahahahahaha.

bigbluedefense
08-30-2010, 04:40 PM
hahaha, i forgot about that.

Hey Matt, how does it feel to know that while your kid is playing with his legos in the living room, that girl you knocked up is swallowing someone else's **** in the bedroom with the AC is on, which you're paying for btw.

Dl5yCSYufeg

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 04:56 PM
Which makes him even more of an idiot, because he got one of the USC Women's bball players pregnant during that senior year. So half of his earnings are automatically going to her.

So that's $15 million in bonus money he lost from going 9 picks lower, plus half of whatever he did receive going to his baby-mama. That's an expensive senior year in college. Hope it was worth it hahahahahaha.

They're married?

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 04:58 PM
They're married?

I think he meant child support, though half seems to be a lot for that. Unless it's different in Cali.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 04:58 PM
They're married?

No, they're not married, but I'm pretty sure child support payments for California are close to half of your salary.

Shiver
08-30-2010, 05:01 PM
If that's the case how did Antonio Cromartie stay afloat?!

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 05:04 PM
If that's the case how did Antonio Cromartie stay afloat?!

The Jets had to front him some of his money in order to make back-logged child support payments.

Also, Cromartie on Hard Knocks was one of the best unintentional comedy moments in the history of television.

robert pancake gallery
08-30-2010, 05:07 PM
The problem is, though, that we pretty much KNOW Anderson won't get anything done. He's done. At least with Leinart it's just pretty doubtful he'll be any good. There's the CHANCE of non suckage.

I agree completely; after all, Scott Wright ranked Matt Leinart number 1 QB in the 2006 draft (#4 player overall)... it isn't his fault that so many teams passed on him in the draft, he should have gone to the Titans as the first QB chosen that year; just like Jimmy Clausen should have gone higher in this years draft... why don't these stupid NFL GMs listen to Scott Wright?

But anyways, Matt Leinart is considered an 'A' potential guy, whereas Derek Anderson is maybe 'B' or 'C' potential so you'd really have to be stupid to go with a guy who you know is going to cap out at 70 or 80 something overall.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 05:12 PM
Where do people get this elite potential with Leinart? He's got an average at best arm, has never had to carry a team, and despite years in the Cardinals system, ended up benched. His best shot would to be a game manager in a WCO somewhere else.

If anything, I'd say Anderson has the better potential. Bigger arm, bigger body, and, despite it being very flukey, made a pro bowl.

PoopSandwich
08-30-2010, 05:13 PM
Speaking of that, can ANYONE explain that 2007 season? I mean that was on the Browns for God's sake.

Has anyone had a year that good at QB on a team that bad?

He has to have something to do that, even for just one year.

We had Winslow (career year) Edwards (career year) Jurevicius a nice back-up tight end in Heiden a great left side of the offensive line and Jamal Lewis played great that year.

Back on topic, Anderson had amazing receiving play in 2007 and absolutely ******* pathetic in 2008 and 2009.

I believe he could succeed in Arizona's offense with Fitz/Breaston/Doucet and was excited to see him go there.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:13 PM
No, they're not married, but I'm pretty sure child support payments for California are close to half of your salary.

Don't tell my ex that (or the judge). I pay $600 per month for my son. If you're a high earner, it's roughly 10-12% of your monthly net depending on how much of a deadbeat you are and how good your lawyer is.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 05:14 PM
Where do people get this elite potential with Leinart? He's got an average at best arm, has never had to carry a team, and despite years in the Cardinals system, ended up benched. His best shot would to be a game manager in a WCO somewhere else.

If anything, I'd say Anderson has the better potential. Bigger arm, bigger body, and, despite it being very flukey, made a pro bowl.

But Leinart played in a pro style offense in college. Didn't you know that's the end-all, be-all indicator for NFL success?

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 05:15 PM
We had Winslow (career year) Edwards (career year) Jurevicius a nice back-up tight end in Heiden a great left side of the offensive line and Jamal Lewis played great that year.

This goes to what I said earlier in that he got super, super, super lucky. If they had a defense that year...who knows how far they could have gone.

When everyone around him stopped performing/got hurt/got old in subsequent years, he crashed back down to Earth and then some.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 05:16 PM
Don't tell my ex that (or the judge). I pay $600 per month for my son. If you're a high earner, it's roughly 10-12% of your monthly net depending on how much of a deadbeat you are and how good your lawyer is.

Ah, gotcha. I don't know much about family law other than California has pretty much set up their system to **** the male over in as many ways as they possibly can, so I figured the percentage was much higher than that.

A Perfect Score
08-30-2010, 05:17 PM
God damned kids are expensive.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 05:18 PM
But Leinart played in a pro style offense in college. Didn't you know that's the end-all, be-all indicator for NFL success?

I'll be the first to tell you that I'd prefer my QB to come out of a pro-style rather than the spread, but it's far from fool-proof. Plenty of pro-style college QBs have failed too.

My theories conflict over Leinart though. He's out of a pro-style...but he had elite talent around him and played in a super weak conference. (Dose of reality Pac-10 fans....particularly defensively.) Those last 2 are things I definitely don't like to see out of a QB prospect.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:19 PM
Ah, gotcha. I don't know much about family law other than California has pretty much set up their system to **** the male over in as many ways as they possibly can, so I figured the percentage was much higher than that.

It does suck for the little guy because even if you're only making enough to stay afloat (lets say 3k a month) you're still going to be paying probably at least 600 a month, maybe more. That's a big chunk of your income. But for a millionaire like Leinart who can afford good lawyers, it's probably not too big of an issue for 1 child.

PoopSandwich
08-30-2010, 05:19 PM
This goes to what I said earlier in that he got super, super, super lucky. If they had a defense that year...who knows how far they could have gone.

When everyone around him stopped performing/got hurt/got old in subsequent years, he crashed back down to Earth and then some.

Yeah I also think a ton of frustration started to set in. Our offensive game plan/coordinater Chudzinski got figured out in 2008 and he looked to be way in over his head, we then switched to a new offense in 2009. Everyone here hated him pretty much and wanted Quinn.

Receivers, runningbacks etc. dropped passes at alarming rates and Anderson just wasn't nearly the form he was in 2007.

I'm probably the only person who feels like he can get back to being a decent starter in this league but I've always felt that he was a guy that needs a top tier play maker and he definitely has that and then some in Arizona.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:22 PM
I'll be the first to tell you that I'd prefer my QB to come out of a pro-style rather than the spread, but it's far from fool-proof. Plenty of pro-style college QBs have failed too.

My theories conflict over Leinart though. He's out of a pro-style...but he had elite talent around him and played in a super weak conference. (Dose of reality Pac-10 fans....particularly defensively.) Those last 2 are things I definitely don't like to see out of a QB prospect.

How do you explain Aaron Rodgers then? He sliced up the same "weak" defenses. In fact, how do you explain any QB that was successful that didn't come from the ACC, SEC or Big 10 (conferences known for their strength on defense). The elite talent part I can buy, but it's hard to argue the Pac 10 when they've historically produced the best/most NFL QB's, and I dont' think it's that close either.

robert pancake gallery
08-30-2010, 05:22 PM
I'll be the first to tell you that I'd prefer my QB to come out of a pro-style rather than the spread, but it's far from fool-proof. Plenty of pro-style college QBs have failed too.

My theories conflict over Leinart though. He's out of a pro-style...but he had elite talent around him and played in a super weak conference. (Dose of reality Pac-10 fans....particularly defensively.) Those last 2 are things I definitely don't like to see out of a QB prospect.

When I'm evaluating a quarterback (and by evaluating I mean reading the reports of what other scouts have said, and then subtly passing that information off as my own) I look for the type of offense they ran, their height, the talent around them, and what conference they played in first, then I look for the minor things like the fear in their eyes when all their checkdown targets are covered.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 05:26 PM
When I'm evaluating a quarterback (and by evaluating I mean reading the reports of what other scouts have said, and then subtly passing that information off as my own) I look for the type of offense they ran, their height, the talent around them, and what conference they played in first, then I look for the minor things like the fear in their eyes when all their checkdown targets are covered.

That's probably the most overrated aspect of scouting QBs.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 05:26 PM
Yeah I also think a ton of frustration started to set in. Our offensive game plan/coordinater Chudzinski got figured out in 2008 and he looked to be way in over his head, we then switched to a new offense in 2009. Everyone here hated him pretty much and wanted Quinn.

Receivers, runningbacks etc. dropped passes at alarming rates and Anderson just wasn't nearly the form he was in 2007.

I'm probably the only person who feels like he can get back to being a decent starter in this league but I've always felt that he was a guy that needs a top tier play maker and he definitely has that and then some in Arizona.

Something I remember people pointing to, even during that year, was how inaccurate he was. He only completed something like 55% of his passes and still threw 19 picks iirc. When the team around him broke down, he wasn't good enough to carry them.

I like his odds better as a starter in Arizona than I do Leinart for this year though. They have some excellent receivers and 2 running backs I like. I think he could fling the ball around and make something happen more than Leinart. The o-line isn't very good though.....

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 05:28 PM
How do you explain Aaron Rodgers then? He sliced up the same "weak" defenses. In fact, how do you explain any QB that was successful that didn't come from the ACC, SEC or Big 10 (conferences known for their strength on defense). The elite talent part I can buy, but it's hard to argue the Pac 10 when they've historically produced the best/most NFL QB's, and I dont' think it's that close either.

Rodgers wasn't throwing to multiple 5-star recruit targets and handing off to a Heisman winner while being protected behind a line that all (or almost all) went on to start in the NFL.

He fits in with all of the MAC or other smaller conference QBs who've had success in the pros. The talent level around them on offense matches more closely the defensive talent level (or lack thereof) they are playing against.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 05:29 PM
How do you explain Aaron Rodgers then? He sliced up the same "weak" defenses. In fact, how do you explain any QB that was successful that didn't come from the ACC, SEC or Big 10 (conferences known for their strength on defense). The elite talent part I can buy, but it's hard to argue the Pac 10 when they've historically produced the best/most NFL QB's, and I dont' think it's that close either.

The differences in talent between Aaron Rodgers' teammates and Matt Leinart's teammates is not even comparable.

619
08-30-2010, 05:30 PM
hahaha, i forgot about that.

Hey Matt, how does it feel to know that while your kid is playing with his legos in the living room, that girl you knocked up is swallowing someone else's **** in the bedroom with the AC is on, which you're paying for btw.

Please, Leinart was cheating on this ***** with one of Jessica Simpson's former assistants (whatever you wanna call it), Kristin Cavalleri, and Paris Hilton, all the while she was pregnant.

Nothing she does from here on out can make up for that.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:33 PM
Aaron Rodgers
Carson Palmer
Mark Sanchez
Matt Cassel
Matt Moore
Trent Edwards
Derek Anderson/Matt Leinart

When the season begins, you're going to have 7 Pac 10 starters.

Historically you've got #1 overall picks, Super Bowl MVP's, and Hall of Fame players that came out of the Pac 10. I don't get this sentiment at all. At all.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:35 PM
The differences in talent between Aaron Rodgers' teammates and Matt Leinart's teammates is not even comparable.

Okay. Leinart had talent. I can see why that would be a concern. But for that matter, so did Sam Bradford, and he carved up defenses that were far worse that what has been offered from the Pac 10 the last 10 years.

I'm not saying Bradford isn't good. Just that these arguments don't make any sense. Leinart isn't good enough, plain and simple. Has nothing to do with where he went to school for anyone other than people who don't like USC.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 05:37 PM
Aaron Rodgers
Carson Palmer
Mark Sanchez
Matt Cassel
Matt Moore
Trent Edwards
Derek Anderson/Matt Leinart

When the season begins, you're going to have 7 Pac 10 starters.

Historically you've got #1 overall picks, Super Bowl MVP's, and Hall of Fame players that came out of the Pac 10. I don't get this sentiment at all. At all.

Palmer was pre-Pete Carroll before USC became a monster....so I don't count him.

Sanchez isn't very good, at least not yet.

Cassel didn't play in college and hasn't been very good for KC anyway.

Moore was undrafted and has been average at best. Need to see more from him.

Edwards hasn't been very good.

Anderson had one fluke year and otherwise hasn't been very good.

And Leinart.

Plus, none of the non-USC guys had the elite offensive talent around them that Leinart, and to a lesser degree Sanchez, had at USC.

Beating through Pac-10 defenses with those weapons is like going through tall grass with a machete. None of those offensive skill players had to learn to actually play their position better to be good....they got by wit their superior athleticism dominating a defensively weak conference.

robert pancake gallery
08-30-2010, 05:40 PM
a defensively weak conference.

except for TJ Trauma Ward

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:41 PM
Palmer was pre-Pete Carroll before USC became a monster....so I don't count him.

Sanchez isn't very good, at least not yet.

Cassel didn't play in college and hasn't been very good for KC anyway.

Moore was undrafted and has been average at best. Need to see more from him.

Edwards hasn't been very good.

Anderson had one fluke year and otherwise hasn't been very good.

And Leinart.

Plus, none of the non-USC guys had the elite offensive talent around them that Leinart, and to a lesser degree Sanchez, had at USC.

Beating through Pac-10 defenses with those weapons is like going through tall grass with a machete. None of those offensive skill players had to learn to actually play their position better to be good....they got by wit their superior athleticism dominating a defensively weak conference.

I know this was coming, the "well, they're not that good". They're still on NFL rosters. They're still starting ahead of QB's from other conferences. You're speaking as if they're out of the NFL in 2 years flameouts like JaMarcus Russell (who shredded tough defenses in college I might add).

You just have to face facts that your opinion is influenced by bias and nothing concrete or factual.

Shiver
08-30-2010, 05:45 PM
How I would explain how Aaron Rodgers has been so good, breaking the Tedford streak, is that he was allowed to sit on the bench and learn from a living legend. He then inherited a great offense. Had he been thrown into the fire, like SF was, he would have had the success he has had.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:45 PM
Also interesting - The Pac 10 has produced an NFL draft pick at QB every year since 1977. That's amazing, IMO. And it's only going to continue with Locker, Luck, Foles and Barkley in the pipeline.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 05:47 PM
I know this was coming, the "well, they're not that good". They're still on NFL rosters. They're still starting ahead of QB's from other conferences. You're speaking as if they're out of the NFL in 2 years flameouts like JaMarcus Russell (who shredded tough defenses in college I might add).

You just have to face facts that your opinion is influenced by bias and nothing concrete or factual.

I don't think we're arguing the same point anymore since you brought up the other QBs....if anything, the fact that none but Rodgers has done much as a pro only backs up my point that overall, the Pac-10 is a defensively weak conference.

If it makes you feel any better, I feel the same way about the Big-12. Tons of spread offenses and no real defensive powerhouses before Nebraska last year. And look what they did with studs like Suh and Crick. Those teams that normally just threw all day long on the other weak teams in the conference struggled when they ran into Nebraska....Texas almost lost their bid for the title game to Nebraska if it wasn't for a last second FG.

And I didn't (don't) like Bradford all that much as a pro prospect for some of those reasons. Elite talent around him in a spread offense going against mostly weak defenses......could easily be Leinart 2.0. His one saving grace is that he legitimately seems to care about football while Leinart doesn't.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:48 PM
How I would explain how Aaron Rodgers has been so good, breaking the Tedford streak, is that he was allowed to sit on the bench and learn from a living legend. He then inherited a great offense. Had he been thrown into the fire, like SF was, he would have had the success he has had.

Rodgers would have still out-performed Alex Smith. Maybe he wouldn't have developed into a top 5 starter like he is today, but I'm pretty confident he could have still been pretty good. He doesn't have the scheme issues Alex Smith does, and his arm talent is way better.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 05:53 PM
I don't think we're arguing the same point anymore since you brought up the other QBs....if anything, the fact that none but Rodgers has done much as a pro only backs up my point that overall, the Pac-10 is a defensively weak conference.

If it makes you feel any better, I feel the same way about the Big-12. Tons of spread offenses and no real defensive powerhouses before Nebraska last year. And look what they did with studs like Suh and Crick. Those teams that normally just threw all day long on the other weak teams in the conference struggled when they ran into Nebraska....Texas almost lost their bid for the title game to Nebraska if it wasn't for a last second FG.

And I didn't (don't) like Bradford all that much as a pro prospect for some of those reasons. Elite talent around him in a spread offense going against mostly weak defenses......could easily be Leinart 2.0. His one saving grace is that he legitimately seems to care about football while Leinart doesn't.

Even if the Pac 10 was a weak defensive conference (which in the grand scheme of things it isn't, not even close) that has little to no relevance to a players draft projectability to the NFL. Even Pac 10 QB's who DIDN'T succeed against the same weak defenses find themselves in the NFL. Cassel never even played. Anderson was awful in college, and had a completion percentage below 50%. In college. Against so called weak defenses.

No, it's about projectability to the NFL and it really matters not whether you faced USC's defense week in week out or UC-Davis's defense.

Sorry, you just can't argue these points when the Pac 10 has the most QB's in the NFL by a good margin, you just can't.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 06:00 PM
This isn't a Pac-10 issue as much as it is a USC issue. And the issue with USC is that their skill position talent sucks in the NFL. I've written multiple posts on this subject, going all the way back to when the were rolling everybody back in 2005. The talent of their skill position players simply did not translate to the NFL-style game, but it was overlooked by everyone because of TEH PRO STILE OFFENCE!!!1 that the Trojans ran.

San Diego Chicken
08-30-2010, 06:07 PM
This isn't a Pac-10 issue as much as it is a USC issue. And the issue with USC is that their skill position talent sucks in the NFL. I've written multiple posts on this subject, going all the way back to when the were rolling everybody back in 2005. The talent of their skill position players simply did not translate to the NFL-style game, but it was overlooked by everyone because of TEH PRO STILE OFFENCE!!!1 that the Trojans ran.

Maybe so. They could be the product of a dominant offensive line. Baker, Justice, Kalil and Lutuii, that would be one of the NFL's better OL's. I can't remember if Chilo Rachal was the starter on that 2005 team but he's a pretty good starting guard for the 49ers too.

In general, I think skill players from big name programs are overrated, not necessarily just USC , but skill players from big schools just garner so much media attention that makes it difficult to live up to expectations.

MidwayMonster31
08-30-2010, 06:17 PM
I never bought the idea of conferences to figure out quarterbacks. By comparison, the Big Ten only has three starting quarterbacks, and two of them are from Purdue, which plays a shotgun-spread offense. As far as stacked teams go, the quarterback is just along for the ride, more often than not. You can win with Matt Flynn, Chris Leak or Ken Dorsey if you have the team around them.
Personally, I would go with how hard he works, if he can make the guys around him better, and how well he handles adversity. A lot of the things you can't measure are what makes a quarterback. Physical tools somewhat matter too.
On a complete side note, if Colt McCoy projected remotely well physically then I would have been much higher on him.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 06:22 PM
Maybe so. They could be the product of a dominant offensive line. Baker, Justice, Kalil and Lutuii, that would be one of the NFL's better OL's. I can't remember if Chilo Rachal was the starter on that 2005 team but he's a pretty good starting guard for the 49ers too.

In general, I think skill players from big name programs are overrated, not necessarily just USC , but skill players from big schools just garner so much media attention that makes it difficult to live up to expectations.

That's exactly the reason why.The offensive success of those teams lies with that dominant offensive line, most of whom were starting by the time they were sophomores.

And I'm not necessarily trying to say SC's skill position talent didn't have talent. They did. Their talent just did not translate well to the pro game whatsoever.

Bush was Harvin before Harvin. He would have been much better had he been groomed as a receiver who occasionally lines up in the backfield as opposed to a runningback who occasionally lines up in the slot. Dude just blew through huge cutback lanes opened up by that offensive line.

Lendale was the second coming of Ron Dayne. He was bigger AND faster than everyone in college. His problem is that he thinks he's a scatback. That flew in college, but not in the NFL, where everyone is bigger and faster than him, not the other way around. He doesn't use his biggest asset - his size - to his advantage. He's got great feet for a big guy, but he relies on them too much instead of just putting his head down and running people over.

I think it's fairly obvious that Mike Williams and Dwayne Jarrett were going to face huge separation issues in the NFL. I don't think it's any coincidence that Steve Smith has ended up as their best receiver. He's undersized, doesn't have great measurable, and was forced to survive by developing his route running skills.

And then there's Leinart, who was pretty much Ken Dorsey all over again. I remember going to the OC Sportsman of the Year Roast for Leinart, where Carroll (tongue in cheek at the time, but still) saying how he thought USC was completely screwed in spring and fall practices because they couldn't figure out who sucked less between Leinart and Cassell. They would have been fine with either one, because they had a rock solid wall of offensive lineman, had two elite college backs to hand the ball off to, and a huge WR who could just post up on small Pac-10 DBs.

Like I said, I'm not saying that SC doesn't have skill position talent. It's just that the talent they had didn't translate to the NFL game. At all. And the offensive line made everyone look waaaaaayyyy better than they actually were.

nepg
08-30-2010, 06:42 PM
Is it crazy that the best USC QB right now is the one that never started a game?

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 06:43 PM
Is it crazy that the best USC QB right now is the one that never started a game?

Yeah, that's pretty much accurate. I'm not sure if my faith in Sanchez is misplaced or not, but I still think he can be decent.

nepg
08-30-2010, 06:45 PM
Sanchez will be fine. Hell, Palmer might even get closer to what he was... Just, right now, Cassel is the better QB of the group.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 06:48 PM
Sanchez will be fine. Hell, Palmer might even get closer to what he was... Just, right now, Cassel is the better QB of the group.

I actually hadn't even thought about Palmer. I was thinking between Leinart, Cassel and Sanchez.

I'd still take Palmer right now over Cassel.

umphrey
08-30-2010, 06:49 PM
How I would explain how Aaron Rodgers has been so good, breaking the Tedford streak, is that he was allowed to sit on the bench and learn from a living legend. He then inherited a great offense. Had he been thrown into the fire, like SF was, he would have had the success he has had.

Rodgers is good because he had the talent, he was a hard worker, McCarthy is maybe the best quarterback coach in the league, and he has run an above average to very good offense. He would have been good anywhere, but the Packers allowed him to be great.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 07:04 PM
Rodgers is good because he had the talent, he was a hard worker, McCarthy is maybe the best quarterback coach in the league, and he has run an above average to very good offense. He would have been good anywhere, but the Packers allowed him to be great.

Maybe...we'll never really know though. If he was in San Fran where they've gone through 3 Head Coaches and something absurd like 4 offensive coordinators in 5 years like Alex Smith.....he may not have looked great either. But, we'll never know and he is in a place to succeed now.

Paranoidmoonduck
08-30-2010, 07:07 PM
I think it's perfectly fine to say that circumstances and degrees of pressure are big factors in how much a quarterback succeeds are fails.

What I've never been willing to do is say that a quarterback who found success somewhere would have been an utter failure elsewhere. That's putting way too much importance on the environment and not enough on the player himself. It's an easy trap to fall into, because we, as outsiders, can evaluate the strength or weakness of an environment much better than we can evaluate the personality, work ethic, and general aptitude of a quarterback in the day-to-day.

If you want to use the Alex Smith/Aaron Rodgers example, this is about as far as I'm willing to go. The thoughtfulness and intelligence of Smith that impressed NFL teams is exactly the reason he's struggled. He was never willing to grab control of his offense and was just another player during all that turmoil. No one deserved to be publicly berated by their own coach like he was by Nolan, but someone better suited would have handled that better. I'm not trying to say that since Smith has this history that he can never be a successful NFL quarterback, but during his early years it was his tendency to over-think and to not be a confident leader that sunk him.

Conversely, it was the very "big man on campus" attitude that many teams cited as a concern that has helped out Rodgers. It helped him when he was forced to sit about as long as any modern era quarterback, it helped him when Favre basically refused to tutor him, and it helped him when he was put in an incredibly awkward situation as Favre un-retired (the first time).

I think Rodgers' immediate success can be laid at the feet of his ability to sit on the bench for all those seasons, but I can't possibility accept the world in which the only difference between those two players was the teams they were drafted to. Rodgers was better suited to be an NFL quarterback.

PS: The Tedford thing was ******** from the start.

BeerBaron
08-30-2010, 07:11 PM
PS: The Tedford thing was ******** from the start.

Really? I can't remember who all was on it, but I saw a list of former Tedford coached QBs about 6 or 7 names long of which Rodgers is the only one remotely successful. Joey Harrington was definitely one of the bigger failures on it.

Paranoidmoonduck
08-30-2010, 07:33 PM
Really? I can't remember who all was on it, but I saw a list of former Tedford coached QBs about 6 or 7 names long of which Rodgers is the only one remotely successful. Joey Harrington was definitely one of the bigger failures on it.

There's 6 1st round quarterbacks, I believe.

Trent Dilfer (drafted 1994) - Tedford was there for three years of Dilfer's college career
I'm going to refrain from saying much here, because I never saw him in college and my biggest impression of seeing him is leading that Baltimore offense. He wasn't great, wasn't terrible, but it wasn't like he was a supremely talented player who underachieved.

Akili Smith (drafted 1999) - Tedford was there for his senior year
I really don't think you can lay this at the feet of Tedford. The Bengals didn't do their due diligence with Smith. There's tons of evidence out there that if they had simply asked the majority of the Oregon staff what they thought of Smith, they would have figured out he was a terrible pick that high.

Joey Harrington (drafted 2002) - Tedford was there for three years of his career
Maybe it was just a mental thing with Harrington. In his defense, he actually was pretty far from terrible for a terrible team. I just don't think he had the mentality to stick in the league for a long career.

David Carr (drafted 2002) - Tedford was there for his freshman year
This one shouldn't even get mentioned. Tedford was gone before Carr was a sophomore and none of Carr's problems (low release, not getting rid of the ball, etc.) are even slightly what Tedford preaches.

Kyle Boller (drafted 2003) - Tedford was there for his senior year
Let's be honest, Boller was a product of draft hype. He had never even completed over 50% of his passes in a season before Tedford came along, and while Tedford reformed his throwing motion enough to get him be mildly productive, Boller was picked high because he was an athlete, not because he deserved to.

Aaron Rodgers (drafted 2005) - Tedford hand-picked him and was there for his entire college career
This is the one guy who where it's clear he was Tedford's guy all along. At the time, everyone was referencing Tedford as a concern without actually saying what specifically the issue was. Tedford runs a simple offense compared to the NFL, but so does every single other coach. He asks that his quarterbacks carry the ball high and get rid of it quickly, but that's hardly a negative. Obviously, Rodgers carries the ball lower now, but you can still see the signs of Tedford's mechanical teaching in the way he plays. Rodgers was obviously smart, confident, and crazy accurate. Anyone remember him completing 26 straight passes in LA against USC the year after beating them in triple overtime (as a sophomore)? To say that Rodgers and Tedford were unfairly tagged is an understatement.

If we limit the list to guys that Tedford coached for more than a single season, we're left with Trent Dilfer (an average starter who won a Superbowl), Joey Harrington (who struggled for the worst team in football), and Aaron Rodgers (who's been a huge success). There's not even close to enough there to constitute a trend, either positive or negative.

yourfavestoner
08-30-2010, 09:27 PM
There's 6 1st round quarterbacks, I believe.

Trent Dilfer (drafted 1994) - Tedford was there for three years of Dilfer's college career
I'm going to refrain from saying much here, because I never saw him in college and my biggest impression of seeing him is leading that Baltimore offense. He wasn't great, wasn't terrible, but it wasn't like he was a supremely talented player who underachieved.

Akili Smith (drafted 1999) - Tedford was there for his senior year
I really don't think you can lay this at the feet of Tedford. The Bengals didn't do their due diligence with Smith. There's tons of evidence out there that if they had simply asked the majority of the Oregon staff what they thought of Smith, they would have figured out he was a terrible pick that high.

Joey Harrington (drafted 2002) - Tedford was there for three years of his career
Maybe it was just a mental thing with Harrington. In his defense, he actually was pretty far from terrible for a terrible team. I just don't think he had the mentality to stick in the league for a long career.

David Carr (drafted 2002) - Tedford was there for his freshman year
This one shouldn't even get mentioned. Tedford was gone before Carr was a sophomore and none of Carr's problems (low release, not getting rid of the ball, etc.) are even slightly what Tedford preaches.

Kyle Boller (drafted 2003) - Tedford was there for his senior year
Let's be honest, Boller was a product of draft hype. He had never even completed over 50% of his passes in a season before Tedford came along, and while Tedford reformed his throwing motion enough to get him be mildly productive, Boller was picked high because he was an athlete, not because he deserved to.

Aaron Rodgers (drafted 2005) - Tedford hand-picked him and was there for his entire college career
This is the one guy who where it's clear he was Tedford's guy all along. At the time, everyone was referencing Tedford as a concern without actually saying what specifically the issue was. Tedford runs a simple offense compared to the NFL, but so does every single other coach. He asks that his quarterbacks carry the ball high and get rid of it quickly, but that's hardly a negative. Obviously, Rodgers carries the ball lower now, but you can still see the signs of Tedford's mechanical teaching in the way he plays. Rodgers was obviously smart, confident, and crazy accurate. Anyone remember him completing 26 straight passes in LA against USC the year after beating them in triple overtime (as a sophomore)? To say that Rodgers and Tedford were unfairly tagged is an understatement.

If we limit the list to guys that Tedford coached for more than a single season, we're left with Trent Dilfer (an average starter who won a Superbowl), Joey Harrington (who struggled for the worst team in football), and Aaron Rodgers (who's been a huge success). There's not even close to enough there to constitute a trend, either positive or negative.

As is the case with most guys who get lumped into a "system" argument. There's such a small sample size of guys picked that high from a gimmick offense/system/whatever you want to call it that it's completely unfair to say whether the system was the cause of their failure. Usually, it just comes down to teams not doing their due diligence while scouting. I'm sure if somebody crunched the numbers, players from "traditional/pro style" offenses bust at a similar rate as "system" guys. There's just so many more of them to judge from which leads to the perception that they've got a better rate of success.

Tedford runs a simple offense compared to the NFL, but so does every single other coach.

I completely agree with this, 100%. College offenses (and defenses) are so much more simple than NFL ones that guys who come from pro style offenses generally only beat the learning curve in terms of their footwork in the running game and in their drops. The passing game is so different on so many levels that the advantage of a being in a traditional offense is negligible at best.

Truth be told, I think we need to eliminate the term "pro style offense" from scouting jargon. There is no pro style offense in college. There are traditional offenses, sure, but nobody is running pro offenses in college with a six hour practice limit every week.