Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Tennessee Titans and NFL Talk' started by Fry, Sep 20, 2006.
Peyton Manning said it last year, the best thing for a rookie qb is to play as much as they can. You take the bad times, but it works out.
Reps. Reps. And, more Reps.
There are 2 schools of thought.
There is the be patient and learn while holding a clipboard, playing in mop up and getting a zillion reps in practice and pre-season for 2-3 years.
Pro - you don't lose confidence, don't take a pounding, don't really have to make much adjustment to the speed factor of the game and you should be a legit expert in your offensive system.
Con - you have spent a ton of money on a player that won't help you for 3 or 4 years and if they THEN turn out to not be able to play, the organization has wasted a ton of money and probably been set back several years.
The chuck them in there from day 1 school...
Pro - can learn to adjust to the speed of the game much faster (probably end of first year or near beginning of second year), learn to deal with it quicker, and be forced to operate within that pressure. Eventually...the pieces should come together, the game slows down, and the lightbulb goes on around year 2. Meanwhile, you get great experience from year 1 in the offense and build rapport with your teammates. Can start really playing OK by year 2 and could start being a GOOD/GREAT player in year 3 (when the other school might give you your first start).
Con - most teams that draft franchise QB's are only able to because they stink. Frequently that means a BAD OL or no running game (or both). This can put too much pressure on the QB and the QB can take an absolute pounding. This can wreck your $100million investment in a QB before he hits year 3. It's hard to learn anything when you're getting crunched because the team around you stinks.
The Titans are adding a new school of thought...some playing time. Vince shouldn't get pounded and can just stick to the specific packages he's practicing. He doesn't need to master every play or every protection against every D, he just needs to know his package. If they are smart, they will add more and more pieces to the offense per game as well as game plan each package differently so he gets used to those kinds of offensive adjustments.
I say you should play your top draft picks immeidately if you need help at that position. If you're worried about them losing confidence then they didn't have the mental make-up to succeed in the league anyway. Why spend a top pick and spend that money for a guy who stands and watches a year, then takes another season of actual play to get used to NFL game speed? Put him in, let him take his lumps like a man, and come back next year ready to go full speed. (this goes for Lendale too)
The idea that a rookie QB will lose confidence if he starts early and sucks is very flawed. If a QB loses confidence his rookie year because of struggles, does he have the head to play QB at the highest level on the planet? No he doesn't. And he probably would have lost his confidence even if he had sat a year. The fact that Carson Palmer is successful is not because he sat a year. If Carson had started his rookie season he would have sucked. And now he'd still be great.
People who believe this theory never mention Manning, Aikman or Bledsoe. Only the rookies who started early and flamed out. Maybe they flamed out because they suck. Look thru the league at the starting QB's. Granted there's not many QB's that started their rookie seasons. But that's more because there aren't many starting QB's that were top 5 picks coming out of college and even expected to start as a rookie. It's because picking a QB is very, very hard. It doesn't matter when you start them. If they're good they'll be good.
Apparently, Volek lost his confidence by not starting.
This is always an interesting topic for discussion. But I come down on the other side of it. I ran some numbers before the draft and am convinced how you handle a rookie QB is important.
There are exceptions on both sides and probably impossible to prove either way.
If I can find the post I made then, I'll post it here so you can see where I am coming from.
I still believe that a good QB will succeed either way. I'm not suggesting that it's best to throw in a QB like Young, who comes from a very unconventional college offense, in immediately. But I see no reason to keep him on the sidelines his entire rookie season.
Lots of rookie QBs took a beating and still became great QBs (Troy Aikman and John Elway, for example). And lots sat out for a year or more and never amounted to anything.
Why not start him from day one then?