QB Controversy Thread...

mschmidt64 said:
:lol

Actually it wouldn't. QBs learn by sitting and watching much better than they do being thrown into the fire. It's just that these days teams claim they don't have the luxury of letting high picks sit.

We do have that luxury.
Click to expand...
Yep. A few years back the standard approach for development was to be the clipboard guy for 2 to 3 years before that did any serious playing time.
 
mschmidt64 said:
Nothing is dying down. Dak could be 5-1, Romo is getting his job back.
Click to expand...

I think this also. It's not a preference issue it's an organizational approach to go through to make further decions.
 
mschmidt64 said:
:lol

Actually it wouldn't. QBs learn by sitting and watching much better than they do being thrown into the fire. It's just that these days teams claim they don't have the luxury of letting high picks sit.

We do have that luxury.
Click to expand...

There's a highly debatable point delivered as fact. It all depends on the QB and the team. You can't generalize like that because there are many examples on both sides of the argument.
 
lostxn said:
There's a highly debatable point delivered as fact. It all depends on the QB and the team. You can't generalize like that because there are many examples on both sides of the argument.
Click to expand...

The salary cap changed all that but the prior system worked well.
 
L.T. Fan said:
Yep. A few years back the standard approach for development was to be the clipboard guy for 2 to 3 years before that did any serious playing time.
Click to expand...

But that's the outdated, old-school way of thinking.

Most of today's QBs have been in specialized QB camps and training regimes since the age of 12. And on top of that, many of those guys have been running semi-sophisticated passing schemes since high school.

So the QBs of today are better prepared to contribute and play immediately than the QBs that came along 15+ years ago.

That's an undeniable fact.
 
1bigfan13 said:
But that's the outdated, old-school way of thinking.

Most of today's QBs have been in specialized QB camps and training regimes since the age of 12. And on top of that, many of those guys have been running semi-sophisticated passing schemes since high school.

So the QBs of today are better prepared to contribute and play immediately than the QBs that came along 15+ years ago.

That's an undeniable fact.
Click to expand...

Yep.
 
1bigfan13 said:
But that's the outdated, old-school way of thinking.

Most of today's QBs have been in specialized QB camps and training regimes since the age of 12. And on top of that, many of those guys have been running semi-sophisticated passing schemes since high school.

So the QBs of today are better prepared to contribute and play immediately than the QBs that came along 15+ years ago.

That's an undeniable fact.
Click to expand...

No doubt about it.

And the way contracts are structured, you need QB's to play right away either as starter (rounds 1-3) or primary backup (rounds 4+).

No more burying a drafted QB as the 3rd QB on the roster, because that guy will be a FA before you know it and you'll have gotten nothing for all your developmental reps.
 
1bigfan13 said:
But that's the outdated, old-school way of thinking.

Most of today's QBs have been in specialized QB camps and training regimes since the age of 12. And on top of that, many of those guys have been running semi-sophisticated passing schemes since high school.

So the QBs of today are better prepared to contribute and play immediately than the QBs that came along 15+ years ago.
B
That's an undeniable fact.
Click to expand...
Maybe so but that isn't my point. I am saying that it does no harm to a QB back up to not play immediately. The original concern by some was there may harm to a candidate to not allow them to play immediately or interrupt their progress. I am saying that is not a big issue to the player. They may well be better prepared to start as rookies but not playing wont hurt them.
 
I just want to know what the excuses will be when Romo comes back and we go on a losing streak due to him "shaking off the rust".

That is if he even finishes his game back.
 
Joe Fan said:
I just want to know what the excuses will be when Romo comes back and we go on a losing streak due to him "shaking off the rust".

That is if he even finishes his game back.
Click to expand...

That's what everyone wants to know especially the organization. It's going to happen to get the answer the question of whether Romo is kaput or still has gas in the tank.
 
mschmidt64 said:
:lol

Actually it wouldn't. QBs learn by sitting and watching much better than they do being thrown into the fire. It's just that these days teams claim they don't have the luxury of letting high picks sit.

We do have that luxury.
Click to expand...

That's stupid, you get better by playing football. When you're in a good situation the best way to learn is by playing. Honestly I think anybody who has ever played football would tell you that. The only time it's not beneficial to play is when the offense sucks and you'll get your teeth kicked in.
 
Cowboysrock55 said:
That's stupid, you get better by playing football. When you're in a good situation the best way to learn is by playing. Honestly I think anybody who has ever played football would tell you that. The only time it's not beneficial to play is when the offense sucks and you'll get your teeth kicked in.
Click to expand...
It seems like it's good for a lot of young QBs to have a period to sit and watch while they get more comfortable with the playbook and get a feel for the speed of the NFL, I think a lot of young players get thrown to the wolves and can lose their confidence.

But Dak is so far past that, he's on par with Wentz performance wise. I gotta wonder how much of the willingness to bench Dak is coming from his draft pedigree.
 
townsend said:
It seems like it's good for a lot of young QBs to have a period to sit and watch while they get more comfortable with the playbook and get a feel for the speed of the NFL, I think a lot of young players get thrown to the wolves and can lose their confidence.

But Dak is so far past that, he's on par with Wentz performance wise. I gotta wonder how much of the willingness to bench Dak is coming from his draft pedigree.
Click to expand...

If Dak looked lost sitting would make sense. Now it will only slow him.
 
Joe Fan said:
I just want to know what the excuses will be when Romo comes back and we go on a losing streak due to him "shaking off the rust".

That is if he even finishes his game back.
Click to expand...

He just went 12-4 and 3-1 in back to back years... kind of consistent I'd say.

We've been fortunate thus far to have played some of the dregs of the NFL... and injured dregs at that.
 
Brady (who has played longer than Romo) came back and lit it up for 3TDs and 406 yds. Color me stunned. He should be washed up and stuff.
 
kidd said:
Brady (who has played longer than Romo) came back and lit it up for 3TDs and 406 yds. Color me stunned. He should be washed up and stuff.
Click to expand...

He is better than Romo and has a great staff around him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom