Plant Your Flag

[Yoop]

I went by the data, which says it's less then 50% chance that Love is our starting QB in 5 years.

just look at all these bust out QB's taken top 10, and Love doesn't have any where near these guys resume pre draft.

https://football.pitcherlist.com/pessim ... nfl-draft/

[NCF]

I mean, sure I can flip coins too, but I would just have absolutely nothing I am basing my decision off of.

While true, you have already done this and your answer is undoubtedly no. May be based on nothing, but something is leaning you that way. Dig a little deeper and figure out why that is.

[YoHoChecko]

I went by the data, which says it's less then 50% chance that Love is our starting QB in 5 years.

just look at all these bust out QB's taken top 10, and Love doesn't have any where near these guys resume pre draft.

https://football.pitcherlist.com/pessim ... nfl-draft/

You’re absolutely right that QBs are long shots to become great and even good starters. My contention is that this is mostly due to the incentives the league has structurally in place that lead to impatience, rushing development, and not putting a proper and patient plan in place.

Teams who make a development plan, give a guy time and a consistent coaching regime, and during the player with good protection and a complementary running game CHANGE the odds. My contention is and always has been that there are right and wrong ways to bring up a QB in the league and that most teams do it wrong. If they did it right, the bust rate would change.

That players such as Ryan Tannehill, Rich Gannon, Kurt Warner, heck Alex smith counts too have shown that “washed out disappointments or backups” can emerge into high level starters given the right coaching and time proves that there are more successful QBs waiting to be developed and improved that we never get to see due to the total incompetence and incoherence of NFL front officers who change coaches and QBs more often than bike tires

[Pckfn23]

Do we get 2018 Love or 1019 Love? Not sure. The deciding factor there is not that chronologically 2019 is closer to today than 2018. That thinking is laughably trollish.

I think we can get 2018 Love, especially if he can sit this season.

[go pak go]

In my opinion, everything that comes from the team about Love is hardly encouraging. We have heard out loud that he still has a long way to go. Lafleur yesterday was doing a word salad dance trying find a way to be encouraged. We have heard he throwing into nets about 10 yards away and not hitting them 100%.

Im not saying all these things equal that he sucks..just that the vibe is MUCH different in my opinion to the vibe around Mahommes after his rookie year. And again, Mahommes played some his rookie year and won the #2 job. Love couldnt beat out Boyle who the team let walk for free at the end of the year.

The energy doesnt feel the same at all to me.

There is a difference between not being ready and not being good.

It does indeed sound like Love is not ready. But Rodgers wasn't ready either until August 2007 when we were like, "oh this guy looks different" And Rodgers had a rookie minicamp, OTAs, and training camp as the backup reps. He also had a 2006 MM QB school and more offseason and training camp and the regular season backup reps.

Love has like never thrown a ball to any of our top 5 WRs. Love has hardly any reps with 11 on 11 beyond the last 10 minutes of practice where the rookies just hang around. And last year's TC was condensed as it started later and the team had to switch to Week 1 mod like 2 weeks into TC.

Jordan Love is as green as you can be at this stage of his 2nd season. He is honestly a red shirt freshman.

I don't think he is likely going to be ready this year which is why I really hope Rodgers plays. But I won't correlate that to Love is not good.

Not being ready doesn't necessarily mean not being good.

[NCF]

I think the TEAM will be “successful” with Love at the helm albeit I highly doubt he will perform at a level commensurate to Favre or Rodgers. I mean, those guys are generational players.

The beauty of it, though, is that he doesn’t need to play at that level. All we need is competent play in a highly adaptive scheme - tailor-made for QBs, mind you - along with a running game and capable defense and this TEAM can compete with anybody.

So yeah, I translate that to expecting Love to be a successful QB.

I like your take. Further, even if he doesn't reach the level of Favre or Rodgers, if he achieves competent play for a decade +, it's obviously a really, really good thing to have.

[NCF]

I think we can get 2018 Love, especially if he can sit this season.

Just go no further than comparing Gary $%@# Andersen to Matt LaFleur.

[Drj820]

In my opinion, everything that comes from the team about Love is hardly encouraging. We have heard out loud that he still has a long way to go. Lafleur yesterday was doing a word salad dance trying find a way to be encouraged. We have heard he throwing into nets about 10 yards away and not hitting them 100%.

Im not saying all these things equal that he sucks..just that the vibe is MUCH different in my opinion to the vibe around Mahommes after his rookie year. And again, Mahommes played some his rookie year and won the #2 job. Love couldnt beat out Boyle who the team let walk for free at the end of the year.

The energy doesnt feel the same at all to me.

There is a difference between not being ready and not being good.

It does indeed sound like Love is not ready. But Rodgers wasn't ready either until August 2007 when we were like, "oh this guy looks different" And Rodgers had a rookie minicamp, OTAs, and training camp as the backup reps. He also had a 2006 MM QB school and more offseason and training camp and the regular season backup reps.

Love has like never thrown a ball to any of our top 5 WRs. Love has hardly any reps with 11 on 11 beyond the last 10 minutes of practice where the rookies just hang around. And last year's TC was condensed as it started later and the team had to switch to Week 1 mod like 2 weeks into TC.

Jordan Love is as green as you can be at this stage of his 2nd season. He is honestly a red shirt freshman.

I don't think he is likely going to be ready this year which is why I really hope Rodgers plays. But I won't correlate that to Love is not good.

Not being ready doesn't necessarily mean not being good.

I dont really buy that there was much debate inside the building on whether Rodgers was going to be the guy or not. He may have needed time, but I think everybody including Brett Favre knew pretty early on that Rodgers was going to be the next guy. I dont get the feeling that Love has convinced anyone that he will be ready eventually. Maybe he has, hard for us to know..just going off public reports.

I think of Love too as a red shirt freshman, and would hope he gets one more year. But if he doesnt, he is still a first round draft choice QB in his second year, apart of a good team, with a good coach. His situation is much better than most rookie QBs.

Im not an expert of course, but my eye can usually tell if a QB just needs more time, or if its not happening for the guy. In my above post, I wasnt saying either way whether I think Love just needs more time, or if he is trash...I was just saying agreeing with Bud that the vibe around Love is no where close to what it was with Mahommes. The building knew they hit a HR quickly with Mahommes, he just got some extra time to mature and get ready. I am not convinced at all that Lafluer knows the team has hit a HR with Love. That the difference.

[Yoop]

I went by the data, which says it's less then 50% chance that Love is our starting QB in 5 years.

just look at all these bust out QB's taken top 10, and Love doesn't have any where near these guys resume pre draft.

https://football.pitcherlist.com/pessim ... nfl-draft/

You’re absolutely right that QBs are long shots to become great and even good starters. My contention is that this is mostly due to the incentives the league has structurally in place that lead to impatience, rushing development, and not putting a proper and patient plan in place.

Teams who make a development plan, give a guy time and a consistent coaching regime, and during the player with good protection and a complementary running game CHANGE the odds. My contention is and always has been that there are right and wrong ways to bring up a QB in the league and that most teams do it wrong. If they did it right, the bust rate would change.

That players such as Ryan Tannehill, Rich Gannon, Kurt Warner, heck Alex smith counts too have shown that “washed out disappointments or backups” can emerge into high level starters given the right coaching and time proves that there are more successful QBs waiting to be developed and improved that we never get to see due to the total incompetence and incoherence of NFL front officers who change coaches and QBs more often than bike tires

and all FO people know exactly what your talking about, however this is now and always has been a win now league, it's very rare that a team has the oppertunity to groom a Love as we where able to with Rodgers, Favre got a clip board year, but needed to start shortly into his first season with us, and it looks as though we'll have to start Love whether he's ready or not.

yes, I agree, it's best to groom a young QB a couple season, the game slows down better for them if there not rushed into it, but obviously it rarely works out that way.

[Pckfn23]

I think we can get 2018 Love, especially if he can sit this season.

Just go no further than comparing Gary $%@# Andersen to Matt LaFleur.

Gary Andersen who was then FIRED after going 0-3 to start the 2020 season. The guy didn't even last 2 full seasons.

[Pckfn23]

I dont really buy that there was much debate inside the building on whether Rodgers was going to be the guy or not. He may have needed time, but I think everybody including Brett Favre knew pretty early on that Rodgers was going to be the next guy. I

We don't need to look any further than Brian Brohm to see that we were not TOTALLY convinced Aaron Rodgers could be the guy or be healthy.

In the summer of 2006 I doubt may were convinced that Aaron Rodgers would be the guy. By the summer of 2007 it was still up in the air, but by the summer of 2008 I would say the general consensus would be he was ready to go. That was 3 normal seasons worth of time. Right now Love has had 1 truncated offseason.

[Yoop]

I think the TEAM will be “successful” with Love at the helm albeit I highly doubt he will perform at a level commensurate to Favre or Rodgers. I mean, those guys are generational players.

The beauty of it, though, is that he doesn’t need to play at that level. All we need is competent play in a highly adaptive scheme - tailor-made for QBs, mind you - along with a running game and capable defense and this TEAM can compete with anybody.

So yeah, I translate that to expecting Love to be a successful QB.

I like your take. Further, even if he doesn't reach the level of Favre or Rodgers, if he achieves competent play for a decade +, it's obviously a really, really good thing to have.

how is that a good thing to have? seriously now, please name the SB winners that only had a competent QB? with a mediocre QB everything else about the team has to be top notch, top 5 defense and a excellent run game, which means excellent blocking, your down playing the ability of a excellent QB to make up for the likely hood of not being able to keep all that stuff great.

[YoHoChecko]

That players such as Ryan Tannehill, Rich Gannon, Kurt Warner, heck Alex smith counts too have shown that “washed out disappointments or backups” can emerge into high level starters given the right coaching and time proves that there are more successful QBs waiting to be developed and improved that we never get to see due to the total incompetence and incoherence of NFL front officers who change coaches and QBs more often than bike tires

I want to build off of this a little...

In 2006 I did a deep dive into three star QBs who were, to say the least, unexpected. It was Tom Brady, Kurt Warner, and Rich Gannon. All three were playing at elite levels after a) being drafted 199th, b) being an UDFA who didn't pan out in the GB preseason, went back to working odd jobs and bagging groceries before being thrust into a starting role when preferred starter Trent Green got injured during the preseason, and c) a long-term backup QB who bounced around the league playing spot duty until he and Gruden connected in Oakland and built an MVP caliber force of an offense.

I found some things in common with the emergence of each over a 3-year period as starters.

First, in each of their first years as starters, their success felt more of a game manager type than an elite QB operating at a high level. In all three stops, the average air yards per completion were lower than league average. This means they were throwing shorter passes more often and relying on the players around them to make YAC and move things.

Second, each player improved both statistically and in complexity as they advanced in LARGE PART because there was continuity around them. All of them had the same coaches/scheme for their first three years (Warner switched from Vermeil to Martz but Martz was an in-house promotion), most had continuity of at least a portion of their weapons (least true for the Patriots, most true for the Rams).

By the end of their third years, they had clearly broken out of the system mold. But would they have been those capable players WITHOUT first being played within boundaries and with lower risk? I think they would not.

So when you are planning on drafting a QB, I contend that unless you're SURE they're ready (in later looks I have found that the players who start from day one without a "competition" generally are the year-one starters who perform the best, meaning the team accurately evaluated them as NFL-ready from the jump, while players who get inserted into the starting lineup quickly due to the struggles of a veteran starter are most likely to wash out--so the "put ;em on the field and see what you got" crowd is actively harming QB development), you should:

• Make sure you have the offensive coaching staff in place that you plan to trust and give three years to run the team and develop your most important players

• Have key offensive pieces in place that can create continuity

• Sit the QB for at least one year, unlearning bad habits and re-learning good habits under stress to create the proper muscle memory to advance and grow

• Utilize a running game and play action to help protect your young QB in the pocket but also to ensure that teams can't gameplan to destroy your young QB's soul without also having to account for the running game

• Utilize a more horizontal than vertical passing game that relies on quicker, shorter passes to get the young QB in a rhythm and build confidence to stack success while reducing turnover risk

• Gradually increase the QB's responsibilities and degree of difficulty as the QB becomes more familiar with the offensive concepts and the defensive reads

It's relatively easy and straightforward and ONLY requires patience and a plan. It's very rare these days that a team has the leeway to enact such a plan. The Dolphins did it with Flores, though... gave him guarantees and a big runway to clear out what was left behind and bring in what was needed to move in a new direction; put most of the roster in place before the QB. Give the rookie QB time to sit behind a veteran. Insert the QB last. Hopefully, this season, they don't just ask Tua to DO EVERYTHING RIGHT AWAY but they protect him with the shorter passes he's comfortable with.



It may be hard to remember or conceptualize now how much Brady was thought to be a game manager, system QB during the Patriots' first run of Super Bowls. It may be difficult now to think of Rich Gannon as an elite player since his heyday was so brief. And it may be true that my 15-year old analysis would yield different results if I tried to replicate it now by looking at how other QBs emerged. But the idea that there were three elite QBs playing in the 2000s who had zero pedigree, zero reason to be optimistic about their careers a couple years earlier, and clearly had a lesser degree of pure talent than many drafted above them proved a very useful experiment into "how to build a top level QB from the ground up" and I have internalized and stuck to those lessons throughout.

[NCF]

seriously now, please name the SB winners that only had a competent QB?

In the last decade, Philly, Denver (yes, Denver), Baltimore, and NYG. Made it to the SB with competent QB play: 49ers, Rams, 49ers.

[Yoop]

I dont really buy that there was much debate inside the building on whether Rodgers was going to be the guy or not. He may have needed time, but I think everybody including Brett Favre knew pretty early on that Rodgers was going to be the next guy. I

We don't need to look any further than Brian Brohm to see that we were not TOTALLY convinced Aaron Rodgers could be the guy or be healthy.

In the summer of 2006 I doubt may were convinced that Aaron Rodgers would be the guy. By the summer of 2007 it was still up in the air, but by the summer of 2008 I would say the general consensus would be he was ready to go. That was 3 normal seasons worth of time. Right now Love has had 1 truncated offseason.

I disagree, I think most fans had seen enough good stuff from Rodgers in 07 that he could eventually take over from Favre and do well, but most fans still thought Favre was better, that doesn't mean fans lacked faith in Rodgers.

lis prior to Yoho, unless you have a Rodgers most QB's are not given more then two groom years, heck many never get one year.

[NCF]

with a mediocre QB

Mediocre and competent are not synonyms.

[NCF]

Favre was better, that doesn't mean fans lacked faith in Rodgers.

That doesn't. But the fans openly stating they expected Brohm to win the starting job does.

[Pckfn23]

please name the SB winners that only had a competent QB?

2020 Buccaneers
2017 Eagles
2015 Broncos
2012 Ravens
2011 Giants
2007 Giants
2002 Baccaneers
2000 Ravens

Competent QBs that became Super Bowl winners. An excellent QB is not required to win a Super Bowl. It's nice, but not required.

[YoHoChecko]

lis prior to Yoho, unless you have a Rodgers most QB's are not given more then two groom years, heck many never get one year.

I agree! And that's why so many talented players wash out!

Let's say it again.

Given a year+ on the bench:
Patrick Mahomes
Aaron Rodgers
Phillip Rivers
Tom Brady
Drew Brees

Like if you look at which QBs were active in 2020 and had the best chance of going to the Hall of Fame, that's the list plus Russell Wilson and Ben Roethlisberger.

The tactic that has produced almost ALL the modern day HoF quarterbacks despite being the tactic that is utilized the least seems like there is a fairly objective case to be made that, hey, waiting a year sure seems to help a player's long-term development.

[NCF]

lis prior to Yoho, unless you have a Rodgers most QB's are not given more then two groom years, heck many never get one year.

Most teams are run by idiots. In Rodgers case he was already being written off at the end of 2008 as a guy that couldn't close out games. I agree with you that patience runs out eventually, but as long as the player still seems to be trending up, stick with your guy.