Archer: Brandon Weeden has 'most improved' look to Cowboys

Weeden's age is of little concern to me. It's not like he's thought to be a future starter. The fact that he's just not very good is what matters. I'd like to at least have a little hope if we were to lose the starter for a game or two.

NoDak said:

Weeden's age is of little concern to me. It's not like he's thought to be a future starter. The fact that he's just not very good is what matters. I'd like to at least have a little hope if we were to lose the starter for a game or two.

Click to expand...

Makes me want to see a lot of Vaughn in pre season just to determine if there is any potential there.

NoDak said:

Weeden's age is of little concern to me. It's not like he's thought to be a future starter. The fact that he's just not very good is what matters. I'd like to at least have a little hope if we were to lose the starter for a game or two.

Click to expand...

You want one of 2 things from your backup QB: either he's good enough to win games if needed right now, or he can develop to take over in the future. The fact that he's not good enough right now means that his age matters.

Genghis Khan said:

You want one of 2 things from your backup QB: either he's good enough to win games if needed right now, or he can develop to take over in the future. The fact that he's not good enough right now means that his age matters.

Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel about it. If the dude was 25 I think the team would view him as a potential future starter.

Genghis Khan said:

You want one of 2 things from your backup QB: either he's good enough to win games if needed right now, or he can develop to take over in the future. The fact that he's not good enough right now means that his age matters.

Click to expand...

Not really. He's what, 30? 31? If he was good enough, he could easily stick around for another 4-5 years, which is a decent run for a backup QB. Like I said, he isn't being looked at to ever be a starter here. Which means his age is a moot point.

Cowboysrock55 said:

This is exactly how I feel about it. If the dude was 25 I think the team would view him as a potential future starter.

Click to expand...

I don't think they would view him as a future starter even if he was 25. He's just not good enough, and never will be. He's a warm body they hope could win a game or two if Romo goes down for a short period. Longer than that, the season would be lost anyway. I think they're trying to get by cheap on the position, until they deem it necessary to go after Romo's replacement.

I think with the advent of medical miracles we have a really hard time gauging QB longevity. In any other era I think Romo's gone after two spine surgeries, including one that apparently went poorly. Peyton led a team to a SB post career ending injury. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a QB to last till 40.

Does this mean he's learned to look to his right when he drops back to pass unlike that abysmal game against the Cards where about every pass he threw was to the left? After a game like that, it would be hard to not improve.

DLK150 said:

Does this mean he's learned to look to his right when he drops back to pass unlike that abysmal game against the Cards where about every pass he threw was to the left? After a game like that, it would be hard to not improve.

Click to expand...

He does throw a pretty deep ball but if you can't keep the defense guessing you're worthless as a QB. It's possible they have worked on some of those subtleties but I doubt you'd see that much in OTA's.