Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How would you help your QB be successful?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    orrr you can just do the exact opposite of what the Texans did, and what the Lions have done since the beginning of mankind.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by bigbluedefense View Post
      The Giants while having probably the best run blocking unit in the league, have average pass protection and an OC that leaves a lot to be desired....

      I get what everyone is saying, and superficially its true, but its not really accurate on the Giants.

      As for the best way to develop a qb, give me a combination of the Andy Reid regime and how Aaron Rodgers was handled. Except run the ball instead of throwing it 40 times a game.

      Surround the qb with a strong and deep oline, a great defense and let him sit and learn. Who cares what perception is on the outside, if you have strong management who is willing to stick with its coaches and let its young qb develop slowly, thats truely the best way to make him successful. That and talent around him of course.

      Aaron Rodgers wouldve been a bust if he started from year 1. But he's one of the upcoming great qbs of this league. His development played a huge part in it.
      Yes, it's the best way to do it, but not every team has had the luxury of sitting their future QB on the bench for three years.

      Honestly, he was there more by circumstance than by the Packers actually wanting him to sit for that long. They stumbled into a successful Aaron Rodgers. Like you said, had he started day 1 he probably busts, and you bet your ass he would have started if Favre would have retired. No chance in hell that they wait that long with mediocre QB play.

      When you think about it, getting a QB should be one of the last things you do when building a team, that way when he comes in the team is ready to make up for the lack of experience the young and talented QB will have. But with the media and fans the way they are, there simply is no room for teams to put out a crap product out there for their fans, and coincidentally, that's what causes all these failures at the QB position. Mishandling by coaching staffs and FO's.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by MetSox17 View Post
        Yes, it's the best way to do it, but not every team has had the luxury of sitting their future QB on the bench for three years.

        Honestly, he was there more by circumstance than by the Packers actually wanting him to sit for that long. They stumbled into a successful Aaron Rodgers. Like you said, had he started day 1 he probably busts, and you bet your ass he would have started if Favre would have retired. No chance in hell that they wait that long with mediocre QB play.

        When you think about it, getting a QB should be one of the last things you do when building a team, that way when he comes in the team is ready to make up for the lack of experience the young and talented QB will have. But with the media and fans the way they are, there simply is no room for teams to put out a crap product out there for their fans, and coincidentally, that's what causes all these failures at the QB position. Mishandling by coaching staffs and FO's.
        you're right. that is the best way considering the circumstances in today's league.

        i just wish more franchises had the balls to do it the right way though. if you can develop the guy to be your franchise qb for the next 10+ years, its worth waiting 3 years for. If you think super long term, its actually the smart move, but everyone is just so impatient, and they just keep recycling the position every 5 years or so bc they screwed it up the first time.

        Comment


        • #34
          I don't think it's worth waiting 3 years for a QB. Besides, it's really hard to tell when you're going to get a chance to grab a QB again. A team has to grab the first guy they can potentially see their franchise' future with, regardless of the surrounding cast.

          Now after you have your QB, I can see waiting maybe a year (I know Aaron Rodgers waited longer, and that seemed to be good for him, but that was a really unusual circumstance). But the sooner you get him out on the field he'll become more experienced for future years of the franchise.

          If you can't get yourself a decent (note: I'm not saying all-pro, just a line you can trust) enough O-line in 2 years for your QB to stand behind, then you need to be fired as a GM or coach anyways.

          Comment


          • #35
            If you were going to help you QB, why would you want a great D-Line.? Maybe to get him the ball back, but to help him he needs to have good blindside protection, plus decent tackles and a reliable running game or a trustworthy receiver.


            Originally posted by bearsfan_51
            Show me your Wang, if you will.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Bengalsrocket View Post
              I don't think it's worth waiting 3 years for a QB. Besides, it's really hard to tell when you're going to get a chance to grab a QB again. A team has to grab the first guy they can potentially see their franchise' future with, regardless of the surrounding cast.

              Now after you have your QB, I can see waiting maybe a year (I know Aaron Rodgers waited longer, and that seemed to be good for him, but that was a really unusual circumstance). But the sooner you get him out on the field he'll become more experienced for future years of the franchise.

              If you can't get yourself a decent (note: I'm not saying all-pro, just a line you can trust) enough O-line in 2 years for your QB to stand behind, then you need to be fired as a GM or coach anyways.
              Look at Carson Palmer. When the offensive line was good in Cincinnati, and when Rudi Johnson still had legs, he was very, very good. He played like an MVP his second year.

              It's no coincidence that as the team and offensive line started deteriorating, so did his play. He started forcing balls, making pressured reads, getting into bad mechanics, all the bad habits that develop when there's shoddy offensive line play.

              Honestly, a team can win with a decent QB. Look at the Giants. Look at the Steelers. Neither of them have elite QBs, yet they're both able to put up those W's. They have surrounded the team with talent and ability, all that coupled with great coaching and you have the recipe for instant success.

              Comment


              • #37
                I'd build the line before anything. If my QB has 4-6 seconds to make his reads, things would go alot smoother.
                "If you have one finger pointing at somebody, you have three pointing towards yourself."
                ~Nigerian Proverb

                Da riddum is too much for you.
                http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nKx27QrgO0

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by MetSox17 View Post
                  Look at Carson Palmer. When the offensive line was good in Cincinnati, and when Rudi Johnson still had legs, he was very, very good. He played like an MVP his second year.

                  It's no coincidence that as the team and offensive line started deteriorating, so did his play. He started forcing balls, making pressured reads, getting into bad mechanics, all the bad habits that develop when there's shoddy offensive line play.

                  Honestly, a team can win with a decent QB. Look at the Giants. Look at the Steelers. Neither of them have elite QBs, yet they're both able to put up those W's. They have surrounded the team with talent and ability, all that coupled with great coaching and you have the recipe for instant success.
                  Yes, I don't disagree with anything you said. The point of my post was that you shouldn't wait 3 years. If you need 3 years to put a QB and an offensive line in play, then you're not doing your job right.

                  One of the thing that separates the good franchises from the bad is usually their ability to maintain an upkeep on their offensive lines(and defensive lines, though that's not the topic of discussion here), including depth. Bad franchises sometimes get good lines, but they don't hold onto them for long.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    If you're rebuilding a team you need to do the following:

                    Offensive Line
                    Running back
                    Defensive line / Linebackers
                    Quarterback - Vet receiver
                    Young receivers
                    secondary

                    imo, with a good front seven a lot of defensive deficiency in the secondary can be masked.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Rams have already spent a crap load of money on rebuilding their O-Line.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        To make Kyle Orton better I would replace him with Jake Locker.

                        Sig by the sigmaster BoneKrusher. Each one is a masterpiece
                        Originally posted by BaLLiN72
                        i wish NFLDC had something like "wall to wall" where we could see Brodeur and Job's conversations.
                        Originally posted by Job
                        NFLDC would be jizzing itself non-stop.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by the decider13 View Post
                          To make Kyle Orton better I would replace him with a walk on from a WAC college.
                          Fixed it for you


                          Originally posted by bearsfan_51
                          Show me your Wang, if you will.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Sniper View Post
                            I would draft Tate Forcier, thus eliminating the need for anyone else.
                            You spelled Jacory Harris wrong.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              The best way is to put good players around the QB. The more the better. There's no one formula that works. Obviously a QB needs an O-line that blocks, but playmakers are important too. If having quality pass catchers wasn't important then why does a team like the Steelers have a first round WR, a first round TE, a second round WR, a highly paid vet WR who was a third rounder, a rookie 3rd rounder and RB's who can catch. Many fans seem to think they're being so hardcore and on top of things when they echo cliches like "It's all about the trenches!". If the lines were the only thing that mattered teams wouldn't ever spend high picks or big money on other positions.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I like what Baltimore has done with Flacco. Great O-line, running game, and defense, not having to take too many risky throws as a rookie, but slowly looks like their opening things up for him.


                                They pretty much have everything in place for him to suceed, when they get him a legit #1 WR we could really see him take a leap as far as how good he really is, his deep ball and arm strength are really elite. Can you imagine him with a speed guy who can get behind the defense consistently?


                                I see the same scenario with Sanchez, weapons can come later. But you HAVE to block, run the ball, and play defense, probably in that order. Running the ball comes with your Line blocking well, but you need a good defense so your QB isn't asked to score 30 points a game.


                                Everyone wants to say Sanchez played so much better then Stafford last week, but look at their situations. Stafford was playing from behind all game by multiple scores, and he needed to force balls and play completely different while Sanchez had a huge lead the entire game and was able to rely on the ground game. Those things make a QB's job much easier. I like what Detroit has done with Stafford in the weapons alot, if they focus on the offensive line the next year or 2 I think he'll be just fine.





                                Originally posted by Scott Wright
                                I guarantee that if someone picks Cam Newton in the Top 5 they will regret it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X

                                Debug Information