DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Why the NFL Has a Quarterback Crisis

It's kinda early to tell. We've only had 4 games to watch him. Here are some early thoughts, but I will probably change my mind over time because as I said, we just don't have enough history on him.

--I think the qbs in Ohio State's offense do have to make reads. It's not like Baylor's offense. Jones has made some good reads thus far.

--I think he needs to improve his footwork a lot. He has a huge arm, but throwing off balance the way he does will lead to a lot of picks in the NFL. Can't float those balls into the intermediate zones.

--I worry about his maturity issues.

--I like [I hate adding this because it is so obvious] his physical skills.

--The moment is not too big for him. That's important.

--His accuracy looks to be above average.

--I saw two throws the other night that required anticipation.

That's all I have for now. Sorry.

I am not going to go back and forth w/you on the 100% false thing. That is counter-productive. I stand by what I said. We disagree.

I will address this comment:



No offense, but that is pretty dumb. Not calling you dumb. You are obviously very intelligent.

NFL teams cannot simply their offenses too much or they will get killed by opposing defenses. The Browns simplified their offense for Timid and later BQ. It doesn't work. Teams catch up and exploit you. It might work for a little bit, but it is not sustainable.

I predicted this problem years and years and years ago. Way back when the original board started. I have maintained that it was going be hard for NFL teams to properly evaluate collegiate qbs due to the offenses that have become prevalent in colleges.

I am not knocking college coaches. I don't think they should change a thing. I am just stating that it is a fact that it's harder for NFL people to properly evaluate these qbs. That is why when you get qbs that excel in more prototypical pro offenses, you better not pass on them for potential.

Nope. You are wrong. I provided evidence on why Kelly runs the spread. I would appreciate if you would do the same.



I might have used the wrong words when describing what I think should. When I said "simplify," what I meant was "make easier." The offense can still be complex, but make the pre-snap reads for the QB, make the offensive line calls for the QB, etc.

It doesn't make sense to throw a full NFL workload at a guy who is not ready (unless he is Andrew Luck). My guess is that most times it will just overwhelm the player and make growing pains longer and harder.

If it's not their job to teach their players what they will need in the pros, then it's time to re-examine the NCAA/NFL relationship. The only reason there is a 3 year rule to turn pro is the NFL figured 3 years of college ball would better prepare these guys for the NFL game. If that's no longer the case, perhaps it's time for the NFL to draft these guys out of highschool, put them in a development program(add 5 spots to a roster just for developmental QB's) and bring them along slowly until they're ready or prove they aren't ever going to be..... The NFL had the European league and they dumped it. Looks like that was a mistake. Maybe every pro team needs a semi-pto team like MLB.....

Sure. Dumb it down. Make sure you NEVER ask a new age QB to actually read a D. Heaven forbid. Make it as simple as possible. Throw out the playbook and just let them throw it around. Works in college so it must work in the Pros. Except that in the Pros, an NFL linebacker can destroy a QB in the blink of an eye. So while he's playing fast and loose, and running around, BLAM he's seeing stars. How has the read option worked for RG3? They dumbed down their O and it got their QB killed and their Coach fired. Now RG3 is having to actually learn the WCO and he's showing he has no clue how to run a REAL offense..... He should be having the time of his life in that O. Lighting up the league.... Nope. This is the NFL where QB's are expected to actually learn an offense. If they can't learn an O and they can't read a D, then they aren't NFL material.

If the college coaches don't change and help to make these kids more prepared, then the NFL will have to change. And No I don't mean dummy up the systems. They will have to get to these kids younger and prepare them themselves. Draft them out of highschool and put them at the end of the bench. Or stgart a farm league system to get the players ready. Either way, colleges will be hurting themselves if they force the NFL to reexamine their relationship. Colleges have it good. They get these kids for free and rake in millions. Imagine if half of their roster was on an NFL farm team......

You got this:



Out of this:



Where did I say a player should "never" ask a "new age" player to "actually read a D?"

Hyperbole much?

Seems like there's a real market for an NFL-QBU style training center for up and coming QB's much like they have the physical training centers for future draft picks in Arizona and other places. This stuff can be taught but it takes a while to gain that snap-judgement, the automatic reads.

That's what dumbing it down means man. These morons coming out of college can't read D's. Have no concept of a playbook. So if, as you suggest, the NFL makes it "easy" for this generation of unprepared QB's, that will entail eliminating reading D, playbooks, etc. Actually asking one of these guys to read is D is MUCH too difficult a task. They might have to work on their game. Heaven forbid. Much easier to just install the spread, throw the playbook away and wing it. Simple.... lmao

I didn't directly say it, but it would be insane to not ask a player to continually develop.

There are just things that can be done to make the transition easier.

Why do people think it simply this simple, "simplify?!" When you simplify you need the athletic talent to execute. Defenses aren't stupid! Dummy it down makes their game plan easier.

I know what your are trying to state. Making it easier has its consequences. This is the NFL made of the top 1% of people who play football for a living.

I will say OC's need to modify their game to make use of today's college quarterbacks. They are doing it with the read-option. I think read-option is a derivative of the spread. "Spread" incorporates expanding gaps between the offense lineman stretching the width. Expanding greatly favors the defensive front-seven. You leave your OL guys on an island. NFL offense inserts two TEs equaling the effect.

I do feel OCs need to change when bringing in a young QB. QBs must adapt to the normal NFL standard. I think more study and more sampling is needed before GMs and scouts can identify what transitions to the NFL.

For those who think colleges are slacking and need to step up, take a look at the NFL who draft kids who have only two maybe three years experience. College HCs must make kids productive early, so they use simple concepts. NFL can avoid these issues drafting kids with fours years experience.

Sorry if I missed the main crux of the debate. I read cfrs's post and chimed in to give my two cents!

Thanks for taking the time .. I have areal problem with Shotgun QB's , No footwork at all .. Wish OSU had a tougher schedule ..

JC..

I'm not sure it's necc for Colleges or the NFL to change what they are doing.. first off, the style of play in both is cyclical.. coaches are complete copycats.. they see another coach having success with their system and they think "Aha! so that's how you doing it!"

Whats old will become new again..

Another thing.. the biggest change will come from the kids themselves.. sooner or later the kids that have a pro-style skill set and body and that have decided they want to play the game for money after they are done with college will seek out colleges that do a pro style offense

Then there's gonna be the coach that says.. I'll be a contrarian, I'll be the guy that does a pro game and I'll get a DC that can defense a spread. And the recruits will come. And poof.. that coach will be the new flavor of the month... the new guru..

I don't think I am communicating my point clearly. I am not suggesting you make the offenses less complex. Chip Kelly's offenses are very complex, but things are simplified so that the QB knows where he's going with the ball before the play even happens based on coverages, personnel, etc.



Yes.



Ideally yes. But how many players play four years? Most players only play for three. In some cases only two (Manziel and Winston for example).

All the NFL needs to do is change the rule can't draft players with less than 4 years of college or equivalent age.

That is insane. Players already put their livelihoods at risk by playing in college for two or three years.

I hate this argument...not directed at you. In order for me to make my salary, I needed to complete four years. I may not had to risk injury, but I endured two additional years of tuition. My wallet was injured!!!!!

This is a conversation that I would like to have, but a message board is not the forum to have it.

*General comment...*

Cleveland’s Farmer has one idea: What if you could design an offense to minimize the passing deficiencies of modern quarterback prospects? Farmer used the example of Auburn’s Nick Marshall, who threw 20 touchdowns last season but was projected to transition to defensive back in the NFL. What if, Farmer said, you devoted resources to designing an offense where Marshall could thrive? He would cost you almost nothing—Marshall went undrafted—and “you might get your franchise quarterback in the later rounds, and that’s unheard of these days.”

“Whoever cracks this code the soonest is going to have a huge, huge advantage,” Farmer said, adding he and his coach, Pettine, have had broad discussions on the topic.

Indeed, Snead has similar thoughts. He recalled the brilliance behind the “Cover 2” or “Tampa 2” defenses, popularized first by the Pittsburgh Steelers of the 1970s then refined by multiple teams in the 1990s, which minimized the importance of “cover” cornerbacks, who could lock up wide receivers in man-to-man coverage and are expensive and hard to find. Snead said the race is on to find a similar strategy that minimizes the importance of the quarterback. “The person who makes the quarterback like they made the cornerback will be a name that will be remembered forever,” Snead said. “But it will take courage to do it.”


1) I don't see why Farmer's comments are considered out there, or indicative of not knowing what he's talking about? Seems to me it would be obvious to want to minimize your QB's deficiencies. IMO what he's really talking about is the NFL needing to change how it views the QB. Too often QB's not drafted in the 1st Rd are just considered "projects" or roster fillers. That kind of thinking severely limits your options, and with the way NCAA teams use their QB's, its plain as day that an NFL ready QB is becoming extinct. Some of you guys think he's stupid, but I think he's talking about a shift in the paradigm. Think about how many QB's there are after the 1st Rd. If we are only looking at an average of 1-3 QB's per draft that are predicted to be franchise guys.. why not spend more time looking at the guys who don't come in with all the hype?

For example: When people talk about Tom Brady and he being taken in the 6th Rd... he's the poster child of the 'exception to the rule'. But does Brady become the franchise guy in NE because he's just that awesome? Or does he become the franchise guy because he lucked in to a system that happened to develop him? How many other teams could Brady have gone to and become what he is today?

Granted, what they are doing may be on par with theoretical quantum physics, but I think they are looking to see if there is a way to re-create that 'accident'.

Maybe they can, maybe they can't. It remains to be seen.

2) Anyone else notice how Farmer and Pettine according to the article aren't the only ones who are talking about minimizing the QB position? I guess they aren't the only ones who don't have a clue huh? (/sarcasm font off>

Farmer will never say anything right in some people's eyes.



This statement is 100% correct. Whether it is achievable or not remains to be seen.

Russell Wilson ran a WCO style offense, with reads, progressions, and call at the LOS at Wisconsin. The mental part was never a question with him. It was the fact that he was a short QB .... and the NFL had has a desire for QBs who fit a certain physical standard above all else. Wilson was NFL ready as far as the mental side of things.

The NFL does just about all it can legally do to keep kids in school. The will not draft players until they reach a certain class, and they have an advisory board that advices underclassmen as to where they are seen as going in the draft.

this was my takeaway from his comments, as well.
glad you saved me a bunch of typing tonight!

Good point. The spread is the next evolution/permutation of the WCO. If you read up on the history of the WCO it was designed for Virgil Carter after a QB went down. Now, the difference is that the game can be played north/south or east/west. Short drops, quick passes, pre-determined reads, are common to both.

The speed of the NFL game is the difference. Speed will mitigate the spread. That is why it has not been widely adapted.

I remember seeing (live) the Raiders in Gruden/Gannons heyday. The team targeted the width of the field, not so much as the depth. From a spectator perspective, it was a different way to play the game.

It is about execution, and having the talent to execute.

It's amazing to think that his first three starts in his college career were the Big 10 Championship game, the Sugar Bowl against the greatest program of all time, and the National Championship game against an unstoppable team. Not expected to win any of them, but brought home a trophy each time.

I cannot imagine any bigger 3 game stretch than that.

You are right, the moment is not too big for him.

Besides the arm and his athleticism, the thing that impresses me the most about Jones is that he is so calm and quiet in the pocket. By "quiet", I mean no ball pats, no happy feet, no herky jerky head movement - he just stands there erect, peruses the field, and delivers the ball on time. If the pocket is collapsing, he recognizes it and reacts appropriately - not wildly - while still looking downfield.

Flacco and Rothlisberger had talent and were on teams with talent and stability, giving them leeway to learn, while still having success. Dalton well he's also has some talent around him to help, but I still don't think he is all that.

We have had very little to help a QB survive their rookie mistakes. Not to mention we really haven't gotten that franchise QB yet to truly see.

i say put some, not all, but some of this on the player. If you are being courted by college programs to be a QB and you believe you can be NFL material, then chose a school that runs a more pro style offense. That would in my estimation improve your chances of being drafted and succeed. If you go to a school that runs a spread offense, and you know that the NFL doesnt, and needs you to be able to have ability to actually read a defense then plan for that, be prepared. If you have enough people making that choice, then the college game would also have to evolve. Just saying

JC..

I don't think this is about the Browns QB situation, which naturally is the direction this thread is taking.

And it is not about QBs in college have no talent, but more so that they are not being taught some of the most basic things that an NFL QB will need, during their high school, and college careers.

So finding a QB in the draft that can come in and start day 1 is going to become harder to find, at least per the article.

My summation is that teams with good talent, stable team, and veteran presence, can better absorb a a rookie QB's inefficiencies, and still be successful. Which this has almost always been true.

Where I think it makes a big difference is in the idea that one can draft a QB to quickly save your team, but rather we will be going back to the days when a QB was drafted and expected to sit a year or 2.

I agree.

You ever notice when a new technique is born it sprouted from something unique that worked in the past? I still believe teams such as Cleveland, Buffalo, Philly, Seattle, and St. Louis resurrect the run game. I get the argument rules favor the passing game, but defenses have evolved around stopping the pass neglecting the run.

Now that QB talent has diminished teams will need to search elsewhere in order to be successful. I think the answer will derive around offensive lines. Teams reintroduce pulling guard and tackle schemes.

We see teams using backs by committee with multiple skill sets. Hmmm, you don't think we begin seeing return of two back schemes to better disguise. I am not expecting the return of the wing-t or power-I, but it will incorporate some formation using two backs. Pass catching full-backs keep creeping into packages too.

None of these concepts are new simply revisiting something that once was effective. Defenses, outside of the DL, have become smaller and faster. Someone will exploit.

You are referring to me because Devil addressed me and I was the one bashing Farmer's idiotic comments.

I had just posted a bunch of positive moves that Farmer has made thus far in the Farmer thread. Why do you guys continually resort to telling lies?

I stand by everything I said on this thread. His comments were ignorant. They are also proof as to how he doesn't understand the position, and his choices thus far at qb back that up. Johnny Manziel and Josh McCown. Pffttt......

That is an excellent post. It's even more incredible because it was your first post. Other than my own posts [LOL], this is by far away the best post on the thread.

Well done and welcome to the board!

He won't in mine. Look at his all his first round and later round Draft BUSTS!!!!!!!!!!

I gotta add this:

People are talking about unlocking magical formulas. That's BS. The best minds in coaching work in the NFL. You really believe that they don't explore every option? You really believe they don't follow new innovations? Seriously?

Farmer is in way over his head when it comes to drafting offensive skill players. His track record has indicated that and his ignorant comments about QBs and WRs only further cement how clueless he is about those positions.

Magical formula...........

Nick Saban, Urban Meyer, Kevin Sumlin, Gary Patterson, Jim Harbaugh, David Shaw, Gus Malzahn. . .

Also, remember this:



You were joking, right?

Instead of just calling the comments idiotic, explain why you think that. Some people might me interested in your "expertise."

I already explained it. You weren't listening.

These are your comments on the subject of Farmer's quote:





The only true spread offense in the NFL, the Eagles offense under Chip Kelly, has been successful. And I'm not even sure that Farmer is saying the spread offense is the answer.

I read your comments. You never fully explained anything.