Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: For all the "Wentz should sit for a year because it could hurt him" crowd
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Reality Fan
Since 1970 only 1 QB has sat for his first year. 2 started only one game....a few started 4 games. The overwhelming majority started either out of the gate or for a large part of the season. That is out of 46 QBs.
Dreagon
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 12 2016, 07:00 PM) *
Since 1970 only 1 QB has sat for his first year. 2 started only one game....a few started 4 games. The overwhelming majority started either out of the gate or for a large part of the season. That is out of 46 QBs.


True. But Wentz was recognized as a developmental talent in the first place, so his situation is a bit different. And personally, I think many of those QBs who were thrown out there their first year had their careers ruined by the deed.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Dreagon @ May 12 2016, 08:04 PM) *
True. But Wentz was recognized as a developmental talent in the first place, so his situation is a bit different. And personally, I think many of those QBs who were thrown out there their first year had their careers ruined by the deed.


I would disagree. A large number were successful. Beyond your Troy Aikman even Mark Sanchez performed well. The QBs like Couch and Young and Russell are really exceptions. Griffin was very good until he blew his knee out. That changed him but the same thing happened to Culpepper later in his career.. I mean you are talking about guys like the Mannings, Elway, McNabb, Luck, Newton...the list of successful QBs is longer than the failures.

The real question is why do you draft a guy that high if you think he is a "developmental" QB. That is a title for a guy taken in the 4th round or later.
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 12 2016, 08:11 PM) *
The real question is why do you draft a guy that high if you think he is a "developmental" QB.

Well, which question are you talking about?

If Wentz were Acheman or Manning he'd start out of the gate. The three QB coaches apparently think he'll benefit more by redshirting a year. I'll guess these guys have studied him more than we have and know more about his preparedness and the risk of throwing him into the fire than we do.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 12 2016, 07:00 PM) *
Since 1970 only 1 QB has sat for his first year. 2 started only one game....a few started 4 games. The overwhelming majority started either out of the gate or for a large part of the season. That is out of 46 QBs.



What's the sample? 46 1st round picks, top ten picks, top five picks?
Phits
QUOTE (Dreagon @ May 12 2016, 08:04 PM) *
I think many of those QBs who were thrown out there their first year had their careers ruined by the deed.

I agree. Too often the team who drafts a first round QB is need of a facelift at that position and they rush the player into playing before they are ready. Give them time to mentally prepare for the game, by sitting on the sidelines, before letting them get physically assaulted. I believe the Eagles see the value in this strategy, even if there is no historical reference to validate it.
Joegrane
How many QBs who started in year 1 were from FCS schools?

How many had so few starts in college?

How successful were they in that first year?

How many were playing for bad teams that had little pressure to win?

The Eagles drafted Wentz so high because ...

He has high upside
They could be almost certain they would get him at #2.
Maybe because the deal with Cleveland @ #2was more attractive than the one offered by SD @4 and they couldn't be sure Dallas would not take him.
The Eagles have rarely been in a position where they were drafting high enough to reach such a talent, even though it is raw talent. They don't expect to be drafting at such a high spot in the near future. So they felt he was worth the lost year or so.
They have a new coach who is in love with the kid. It is a great time to start over at QB.
They don't quite trust Sam B to lead a team deep into the playoffs but he gives them the best shot at maximum Ws this year.

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 12 2016, 08:11 PM) *
.....the list of successful QBs is longer than the failures.

The real question is why do you draft a guy that high if you think he is a "developmental" QB. That is a title for a guy taken in the 4th round or later.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ May 12 2016, 09:35 PM) *
What's the sample? 46 1st round picks, top ten picks, top five picks?


top five picks.....46....
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Phits @ May 12 2016, 10:01 PM) *
I agree. Too often the team who drafts a first round QB is need of a facelift at that position and they rush the player into playing before they are ready. Give them time to mentally prepare for the game, by sitting on the sidelines, before letting them get physically assaulted. I believe the Eagles see the value in this strategy, even if there is no historical reference to validate it.


The facts just don't support that line of thought...you can debate it but the numbers are grossly against you.
nephillymike
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 12 2016, 10:07 PM) *
top five picks.....46....



I wonder how many of those top five played for teams who had 7 or more wins the previous year.

and how many of those had a significant QB investment in other QB's on the roster.

Not being difficult, but just saying that I think those two factors weigh in as heavily in draft spot.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Zero @ May 12 2016, 08:19 PM) *
Well, which question are you talking about?

If Wentz were Acheman or Manning he'd start out of the gate. The three QB coaches apparently think he'll benefit more by redshirting a year. I'll guess these guys have studied him more than we have and know more about his preparedness and the risk of throwing him into the fire than we do.


So you now have complete trust in Pederson? It is funny to see all of the "he was not even their first choice" and "he has no head coaching experience" guys suddenly anointing him the QB whisperer.

If I need an opinion on a QB and my choices are Hugh Jackson or Doug Pederson it is not even close.

What worries me is that he is not Aikman of Manning and yet we spent so much to get him. I know that does not worry some but when you spend to get to number 2 you better get a guy who is ready.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (Joegrane @ May 12 2016, 11:05 PM) *
How many QBs who started in year 1 were from FCS schools?

How many had so few starts in college?

How successful were they in that first year?

How many were playing for bad teams that had little pressure to win?

The Eagles drafted Wentz so high because ...

He has high upside
They could be almost certain they would get him at #2.
Maybe because the deal with Cleveland @ #2was more attractive than the one offered by SD @4 and they couldn't be sure Dallas would not take him.
The Eagles have rarely been in a position where they were drafting high enough to reach such a talent, even though it is raw talent. They don't expect to be drafting at such a high spot in the near future. So they felt he was worth the lost year or so.
They have a new coach who is in love with the kid. It is a great time to start over at QB.
They don't quite trust Sam B to lead a team deep into the playoffs.


None of that matters....they took him number 2 and spent to get there. The impact of those draft picks cannot be ignored. AT 2 he should be ready to play. History dictates that. It is funny how no one likes excuses for Bradford but heap as many as you can upon Wentz already.

I went down the list of teams and their records prior to drafting in the top 5 so that is not an excuse either. Green Bay found their guy late in the first. Other teams found their guy in the middle or later in the first round. The idea is you trade up (well actually history shows us that trading up almost never works) for a guy who is ready to go.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ May 12 2016, 09:35 PM) *
What's the sample? 46 1st round picks, top ten picks, top five picks?


actually 44, Wentz and Goff don't count.

27 of the 44 have been to Pro Bowls, 19 to multiple.

Only 10 have not been a primary starter for less than 4 years and 3 of those are in the league since 2014

I worry that Wentz could be another Heath Shuler....he was a can't miss smart guy with a great arm.
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ May 12 2016, 11:20 PM) *
So you now have complete trust in Pederson? It is funny to see all of the "he was not even their first choice" and "he has no head coaching experience" guys suddenly anointing him the QB whisperer.

If I need an opinion on a QB and my choices are Hugh Jackson or Doug Pederson it is not even close.

What worries me is that he is not Aikman of Manning and yet we spent so much to get him. I know that does not worry some but when you spend to get to number 2 you better get a guy who is ready.

I don't have complete trust in Pederson as a HC. I have some level of confidence that between his QB experience and that of Reich and DeFillipo that they know more than we do and, given the time, will be capable of coaching him to success. And I too put Jackson above them when it comes to QBs, and also when it comes to HC. Jackson has a disaster to rebuild, a very good chance to draft early again in 2017 and the potential to draft a QB that will fit his needs then. In the meantime, he has a talented QB to try to resurrect plus he adds a #1, a #2 and a #3 to help him rebuild his team. I don't think this is nuclear physics.

Anyone who doesn't have some level of trepidation entering risk is either arrogant or stupid ... IMO. But without risk the reward ceiling is limited. Agree or not, Howard looked at the QB landscape now and in the immediate future and determined the potential for reward to justify the risk. There was no Acheman, Manning or Luck to draft and he didn't see one coming out that the Eagles would have any realistic chance of acquiring. He believes a franchise QB is needed and that Wentz can be that player with time and coaching. Reading all of the opinions on Wentz it sounds like a reasonable risk, even with the expense, provided there is time and the teachers are competent.

The "risk" debate should focus on Pederson, IMO. Not so much in regards to developing a QB, but in leading a team. Here again is where Howard seems to be hedging his bets with Bradford and why he appears adamant that Sam will play in Philadelphia this year. He has a rookie coach and a rookie QB who both need experience. If the coach fails the QB is protected because he's not playing. How short of a leash is Pederson on? If he's really terrible is he out after one year?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.