Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Derek Anderson to start Saturday...

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

  • Originally posted by nepg View Post
    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.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Shiver View Post
      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.

      Thanks to BK for the sig

      Comment


      • Originally posted by umphrey View Post
        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.

        Comment


        • 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.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Paranoidmoonduck View Post

            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.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by BeerBaron View Post
              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.
              Last edited by Paranoidmoonduck; 08-30-2010, 07:36 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Paranoidmoonduck View Post
                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.

                Originally posted by PMD
                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.

                Comment

                Working...
                X

                Debug Information