We’re Having the Wrong Conversation about Josh Rosen

What if I told you that there was a Quarterback in this year’s draft class that had just about every attribute that you look for in a QB, from size, to arm strength, to footwork, to intelligence and ability to read defenses? This Quarterback was asked to run an NFL style offense on a team with a poor defense and drop-prone receivers, and in doing so was one of the more prolific passers in College Football. What if I told you this Quarterback was arguably the best QB prospect since Carson Wentz, and maybe even since Andrew Luck?

You would think that this is someone who would be talked about and looked upon with incredibly high regard during the pre-draft process. Alas, for reasons I cannot understand, this has not been the case.

Josh Rosen and the Elusive “Personality Issues”

The consensus on this year’s draft QBs is all over the place right now–which is far from unusual considering the complexity of evaluating college QBs–but what people generally seem to be able to agree on is that there’s no sure thing, with each prospect having his own set of questions.

Don’t get me wrong, if you want to argue with my assertion that Rosen is the best QB Prospect on film, I would be happy to listen. But this isn’t the argument that people are making. Instead, what happens is something like this: Pundits make a list of their QB Rankings, put a few players ahead of Rosen, and when they get to Rosen, acknowledge that he’s the most pro-ready on film with the fewest weaknesses, but then cite some vague concern about “attitude” or “personality” as the apparent sole evidence that he’s not the best QB prospect. For example…

Todd McShay of ESPN put Rosen 3rd on his Draft QB Rankings, citing that, “There isn’t much [negative] you can point to on the field, other than some poor decision-making and his lack of mobility outside the pocket. Teams are doing their research to find out just how driven Rosen is and how he would fit in with their team culture.”

Kay Adams of NFL Network’s Good Morning Football said that she would be more comfortable taking Sam Darnold over Josh Rosen, because, “When there’s smoke, there’s fire”, referring to the perception that Rosen simply isn’t invested enough in Football to be the leader of a franchise.

The usually spectacular Andy Benoit of the MMQB posited questions about Rosen’s personality in his first look at this draft’s QBs–unusual for an analyst that almost always sticks to film study.

These are just a few examples of the overall trend (and they’re of the more reasonable variety), and it’s what the narrative about Rosen has come to: Vague, cliched, and generally unsubstantiated questions about his “personality” and “love of the game” seem to entirely offset the fact that he is by far the least flawed Quarterback prospect in the draft.

And people generally seem to acknowledge this fact. If the only criticism about Rosen you can come up with has to do with personality, then that implies that there’s nothing about his actual game to criticize. And if that’s the case, he should already be at the top of everyone’s draft rankings. Personality critiques, in this case, as opposed to the red flag people paint them to be, are actually a tacit acknowledgement of how flawless the player is in every other sense that matters. And at the end of the day, you’re not drafting a player to win a personality contest; you’re drafting them to win football games.

There is Very Little Substance to the Critique of Rosen

Don’t get me wrong: Personality does matter. I’ve criticized Cam Newton for his attitude in the past. As a Giants fan, I often can’t stand the way Odell Beckham behaves. I do want my guy to be a leader both on the field and off it. So in the case of Rosen, the issue isn’t that there are concerns about his personality per se; it’s that there is very little of merit within those actual “concerns” that people cite. What they are is gossip, stereotypes, and the snowballing of a narrative that had nothing to stand on in the first place.

With Cam Newton there were identifiable occurrences you could point to in College that would be reason for concern about his personality. While at the University of Florida, Newton, according to wikipedia, “was arrested on felony charges of burglary, larceny, and obstruction of justice on an accusation that he stole a laptop computer from another University of Florida student” and was “subsequently suspended from the team”. He transferred before allegedly facing “potential expulsion […] for three instances of academic dishonesty”. He was also embroiled in a scandal where his father allegedly orchestrated a “pay for play” situation to get Cam enrolled at Auburn. Despite all this, Newton was selected No 1 overall in the 2011 draft by the Carolina Panthers.

Similar things could be said about Johnny Manziel at Texas A&M. Although not enough was made about his actual on field flaws during the draft process, he too had a litany of identifiable personality red flags, including but not limited to being arrested. He also left the Manning Passing academy after oversleeping, an example of something that could actually justifiably be used to say that someone might not have the dedication level you would want in a Quarterback.

And what about Baker Mayfield? Like Rosen, he is also a QB prospect in this upcoming draft. But unlike Rosen, he was actually once arrested and “charged with public intoxication, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest and fleeing”. (He also caught fire for facing the opposing sideline and grabbing his crotch to taunt them during one of Oklahoma’s wins this year). And yet Rosen is the QB prospect with personality issues?

I’m not trying to pick on any of these players. I’m merely saying that when players actually have personality issues, there are usually things that happen to justify those concerns.

But what’s the problem with Rosen? He apparently doesn’t love the game, or he doesn’t have the personality of a leader.

I’ll tell you exactly what Rosen is that people don’t like: He’s a rich, smart, liberal California kid. And that doesn’t fit the image a lot of people have of the country kid southerners who tend to overwhelmingly play in the NFL. Many have said that because Rosen grew up wealthy, he might not love the game as much as someone who needs it to make a living. Frankly, this is total bullshit. You can both have money and still love football, and the fact that he’s great at football is proof of this. As for the personality thing, I’ve watched some interviews of Rosen, and he is a bit of a different type of personality. He’s definitely more aloof; he’s not an in your face, cliche, “put me in there coach, I’ll do it all for the team!” guy like Russell Wilson. But you know what, who cares? People have different leadership styles and personalities. If they get the job done without being a jerk, then who cares what they say or how they motivate their teammates. You know who else is a QB that’s kind of aloof? Eli Manning, and he currently has 2 Superbowl Rings. Aaron Rodgers is another guy that often rubbed people the wrong way and is often looked at as cocky. He’s also one of the greatest Quarterbacks to every throw a Football. At the end of the day, whether a guy fits an image of how someone wants a Quarterback to act shouldn’t affect their draft evaluation.

Compounding this whole, pointless conversation about Rosen’s personality is his former UCLA Coach Jim Mora, who had this to say publicly about Rosen earlier this week:

“He needs to be challenged intellectually so he doesn’t get bored. He’s a millennial. He wants to know why. Millennials, once they know why, they’re good. Josh has a lot of interests in life. If you can hold his concentration level and focus only on football for a few years, he will set the world on fire. He has so much ability, and he’s a really good kid.”

First of all, let’s remember that Mora was justifiably fired midseason from UCLA, and no one really had an issue with it. That alone should question whether we should take his opinion seriously. But putting that aside, since when is a Quarterback wanting to be challenged intellectually a bad thing? Shouldn’t you want that out of your players? Quarterback is by far the most intellectual position in the sport. It’s all about compiling and processing information. Peyton Manning was the best in the game for a long time because his mind was literally a computer. He knew everything he was seeing, and no one could read a defense like him. He literally turned football into a chess game. If you showed him the same coverage twice, you were getting burnt. At the end of the day, if a guy’s not asking why, why this coverage looks like this, why the ball should go here, what this player is doing in this coverage, how to best attack this coverage, etc etc etc, then there’s a problem. And then there’s the fact that Josh McDaniels, the Patriots current Offensive Coordinator, basically said the same thing about Tom Brady that Mora said about Rosen:

“[Brady’s] a challenging guy to coach because his aptitude is so significant. He’s a tremendous player as far as coming every day ready to work and ready and willing to learn. That pulls the best out of you as a coach because you can’t go into the meeting room and not challenge this guy to try and get better.

Here’s a guy, he’ll go down as what he’ll go down as, which is one of the greatest players ever to play in this game, but he still comes into every meeting looking for something that’s going to make him a better player that day. And as a coach, you have to respond accordingly, whether it’s making sure you provide him with that information or you find something to help him improve some aspect of his game.”

Focus on What Matters, and You’ll See a Can’t Miss Prospect

I might be able to give some credence to the “he doesn’t love the game” concept if there was literally any evidence from his game on the field to back it up. But if a guy is as great as Rosen is with all the fundamentals and subtle nuances of playing Quarterback, then that alone should be proof against the claim. You don’t get to where Rosen is playing QB if you don’t truly love the game. Shame on people for not realizing that.

What this is really about is the media taking narratives and running with them, regardless of if they’re true or not. We saw it when nearly every draft expert said that Johnny Manziel was the best QB Prospect of the 2014 Draft–even after they would acknowledge that Teddy Bridgewater was the most pro-ready on film. But Manziel had the “it” factor or a different “compete level” or something like that. We saw it when, during the 2015 season, the media nearly unanimously decided that Cam Newton was the MVP, even though Carson Palmer was superior in every meaningful statistical category. For Rosen, the narrative has become that he has personality issues that will affect his play, even though there’s nothing to suggest that this is the case.

None of this is to say Rosen will be a guaranteed superstar or that there are zero concerns with him at all. But these aren’t things you can say about any prospect at any position. They’re called prospects for a reason. And insofar as QB prospects go in this year’s draft, Rosen is the best there is and stands alone from the rest. Hopefully, people will be able to start cutting through the noise to realize that. But if not, I’m sure Rosen will use all this as even more fuel to motivate him once he is in fact drafted.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10 other followers

Click here for Archives

Advertisements

Do I really have to write about this game?

It’s Saturday, February 3rd. The Super Bowl is tomorrow. Being a fan of the game, and having a football blog, it would seem that I should write a post about this game. Preview what interests me about the matchup, what we should be looking for, what I think will happen, etc.

But here’s the thing: I can’t really seem to get excited about this game, to the point where I have very little interest in doing any sort of look at the X’s and O’s of the matchup. Sure, I could pretend to be interested and dig deep to find things to talk about. But what’s the point? At the end of the day, we all know what’s going to happen. The Patriots are going to win, Bill Belichick and Tom Brady are going to get their sixth Super Bowl ring, and the rest of us that don’t live in New England are going to be subject to nonstop talk about how great the Patriots are and how Brady is the greatest of all time–or GOAT, in football speak.

This Super Bowl matchup ended up being about as bad as it could be. It’s been an off year for the NFL, as the league is in somewhat of a transitional period. A lot of great players from my generation have retired, and the current crop of young players aren’t quite ready to carry the torch yet. There also seems to be a lack of quality head coaches currently. The result has been an absurdly weak AFC in particular. The Chiefs were one of the few teams that could have held water with New England, but they got upset at home in the Wild Card round by the 9-7 Titans, with the help of some fluky plays and some god awful calls by the refs. The Ravens have played the Patriots well in the past, but they’ve been stuck in mediocrity ever since Flacco signed his post Super Bowl megadeal, and they blew their playoff chances with a Week 17 loss to the 7-9 Bengals. The only other real AFC Powerhouse outside of the Chiefs is the Steelers, but they look like a varsity team whenever they go to Gillette, and their coaching staff is incredibly overrated. It was probably for the best that they lost to upstart Jacksonville before having to face New England, as Jacksonville, who had a tremendous turnaround under Tom Coughlin, played the Patriots pretty well in the Championship game. Bortles played about as well as he’s capable of, but winning in Gillette with a limited QB and an inexperienced Head Coach ended up being too tall a task. When the 4th Quarter rolled around, it was the same old story for the Patriots. Brady went into clutch mode, McDaniels dialed up some trick plays, the o-line protected Brady well, Amendola got going underneath, and a situational defense that is historically good at protecting 4th Quarter leads at home, did just that. Just like that, the Pats were off to the Super Bowl. Again. Yawn.

Well at least there was still hope for the NFC right? Well the Packers were out of the mix, as the injury bug hit Aaron Rodgers this year, and Hundley was unable to keep them alive until Rodgers came back. (Well, technically, they were still alive when Rodgers returned, but only barely, and a 3 INT performance in Carolina by him was the dagger, as they would shut Rodgers down for the year after that loss.) The Falcons, despite an improved defense, were only a shell of their Super Bowl offense from a year ago, and they could only muster a mere 10 points in their Wild Card loss to Philly. Carson Palmer got hurt again… and then retired. The Lions and Cowboys, as usual, were stuck in 9-7 purgatory. The young Rams had a nice first year under Sean McVay, but struggled in their playoff debut. But hey, at least the Saints were back right? It was nice to have a Drew Brees led team doing well again, but unfortunately for them, they’re just not a very good road team, and they were unable to secure home field advantage throughout the playoffs. A Brady/Brees Super Bowl would have been fantastic, but first they had to get through the Vikings (after an impressive win hosting Carolina in the Wild Card round). In what looked like a great matchup on paper, the Saints looked awful and fell to a 17-0 deficit at halftime. They rallied to make it 23-21 late, and looked like they had a win secured. But, seemingly wanting to compete with Atlanta for “biggest choke in NFL history” title, they gave up a touchdown with 10 seconds left. The Vikings threw a deep out, trying to get into FG range, and after it was caught, Marcus Williams, the Saints safety, made one of the worst tackle attempts you will ever see. He not only missed entirely, but he then collided with the corner, leaving no one to tackle Diggs, who then sprinted to the endzone. Whelp.

Ok, so things really weren’t looking good for a good Super Bowl matchup. But there was still some hope. The Championship Game was Minnesota at Philadelphia. Sure, Minnesota was playing with their backup QB, Case Keenum, who, despite having a phenomenal season, is still a pretty unexciting player to watch. But it was still a great story for them to make it this far. They were clicking on all cylinders both offensively and defensively. And, if they could make it past Philly, they would have been the first team ever to play the Super Bowl in their home stadium. That would have been awesome story, and that homefield advantage combined with their awesome defense would have definitely given them a shot vs New England.

You had to like their odds coming into the Championship game. However, just before Jake Elliott kicked off, the announcers offered a troublesome stat: Dome teams on the road in the Championship round have never won.

History, and stats, tend not to lie, and this one wasn’t either. The Vikings, after their awesome Cinderella run to make it this far, fell apart entirely. They lost 38-7. Nick Foles decided to have one of the best games of his career, and the Vikings were outcoached and outplayed on both sides of the ball.

About those Eagles: Earlier in the season, they were one of the few NFC powerhouses. They looked awesome behind second year star Carson Wentz at QB–along with great defense, coaching, and some nice free agent additions. A Pats Eagles SB with Wentz at QB would have been great, and despite being a Giants fan, I couldn’t help root for Philly. Wentz is a great QB and a really likeable young player.

However, it all changed when Wentz got hurt against the Rams and was lost for the season. That left the Eagles with Nick Foles for the remainder of the season. He struggled to close out the regular season before getting hot in the Playoffs, with the help of some nice playcalling and play design. Despite Foles’s struggles, the Eagles had been good enough under Wentz to secure the No 1 overall seed and home field advantage throughout the Playoffs.

So with that Viking loss in the Championship round, this is what we’re left with: A New England vs Philly Super Bowl. As I said earlier, I’m not too interested in doing a deep dive of the X’s and O’s, because I don’t think the Eagles have that much of a shot to win this. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think they’re going to get blown out. They’re a good team, and it’s not like it’s a fluke that they’re here. However, at the end of the day, what you’re looking at with this matchup is the best coached and most experienced team in Football in the Patriots against a team with a limited backup Quarterback.

Nick Foles is not going to do against New England what he did vs Minnesota. He’s just not. Period, end of story. That was an anomalous performance by him. On a neutral site, against the New England defense, it’s not going to happen.

Philly can run the ball. They can run the “run pass option” plays that Foles is comfortable with and that they’ve been so successful with. But at the end of the day, there are going to be situations where your Quarterback is going to have to make plays to win. Not proactive plays, where everything is schemed up well, but reactive plays, where the Quarterback himself makes the play. If your Quarterback can’t do that vs New England, you’re not going to beat them. And call me a skeptic, but I don’t see it happening with Foles consistently enough for them to win.

Where is the path to victory for the Eagles in this game? The Pats are great on special teams. They’re great on offense. Gronk is healthy. Amendola’s a threat. Brady is Brady. McDaniels is McDaniels. They’re going to get matchups they like. They’re going to run the hurry up and go pass heavy if they feel the game demands it. If the last few years are any indication, they’re going to have success with it.

Defensively, they started the season a mess, but they’ve gone a total 180 and are just what we expect from the Patriots. No surprise there. Butler will take Torrey Smith. No problem there. Gilmore will take Jeffery. Shouldn’t be a problem there either. Ertz is a threat, but expect Belichick to double him.

Again, the Eagles will have some success. They will have plays that work. But will they have enough success consistently to the point where they out-execute and keep up with one of the best Quarterbacks and coaches to ever play the game? I mean.. you tell me if I’m missing something here.

No, what we’re most likely looking at here, barring some miracle or collapse, is a sixth ring for Brady and Belichick, who now seemingly have a second dynasty in 2014-2017 to go along with their first in 2001-2004. What goes around comes around, I suppose.

If I seem down, it’s because I am. If it seems like I want the Patriots to lose, it’s because I do. And no, it’s not because I think they’re “cheaters”. I think they probably broke some rules at some point, but I don’t think anything they did should really tarnish their accomplishments. It’s not because I think Brady is a two faced pretty boy (he is), or because the Patriots support Trump, or anything superficial like that. It’s not because I think the refs helped the Patriots a lot this year (they did).

No, I’m just sick of the Patriots winning. I’ve written about this before. What’s the fun in it? The NFL I know, the NFL that is interesting and fun, is one where anyone can win it any year. Sure, there will be perennially good teams and perennially bad teams, but ideally, everyone should have a shot.

Of course the Patriots earned this outcome, but it was also utterly predictable from the very start of the season. The NFL is weak. The Patriots are strong. When you combine the best coaching and execution of the game with a weak NFL and a couple breaks here and there, of course they’re going to win.

I’m just sick of them. I’m sick of hearing about them. I’m sick of hearing from their fans, who are some of the most boastful, pompous, and obnoxious people in sports. I’m sick of the media who won’t shut up about how great they are. I’m sick of hearing about the Patriot way, about how Tom is the GOAT. I’m sick of hearing the numbers about how often they’ve won and how what they are doing is unprecedented. I’m sick of being called a hater or jealous because everytime I turn on the radio or TV all I hear is someone else telling me how amazing the Patriots are. I’m sick of people calling nuanced analysis that doesn’t fawn over the Patriots “hating”. I’m sick of Patriots fans assuming I want to talk about their team when there are 31 other teams in the NFL.

It’s not fun. It’s not interesting. It’s bothersome, it’s boring, it’s repetitive, and it’s getting awfully old.

Anyway, that’s about all I have to say on this one. The Pats will most likely win, Patriots nation will freak out and won’t shut up about it, and the rest of us will collectively, sigh, shrug, and move onto whatever next thing we have to grab our attention. Maybe I need a new hobby.

Prediction: Patriots 27, Eagles 17

what-dilly-dilly-means--and-how-bud-light-came-up-with-its-viral-campaign

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10 other followers

Click here for Archives

Josh Rosen is the Best QB in the NFL Draft

Josh Rosen has officially declared for the NFL draft,  and I believe that he is by far the best QB Prospect in the draft. To be fair, I have only seen about 3 or 4 games worth of tape, and I haven’t substantively studied all of the eligible QBs this year. My opinion, like anyones, is always subject to change after watching more tape. And of course, this is by no means an objective judgment. Evaluating QBs is all about what you value, and everyone is bound to see the prospects differently. That’s what makes the process so fun and interesting.

Having said all that, in my mind, I’ve already seen enough to determine that Josh Rosen is the best QB prospect in the NFL Draft, and quite frankly, it isn’t even close.

It’s tough to sum up what’s so great about Rosen because there’s so much to like about him. But I think the best place to start is with his tremendous mix of NFL acumen/IQ and physical attributes. Quite often, it’s one or the other with QBs. The guys that are good with the more nuanced parts of the game (footwork, accuracy, anticipation) don’t have as good arm strength/speed/size, and vice versa. When you have one, you don’t really have to rely on the other. If you have great physical attributes, it’s easy to hang your hat on those and not develop the nuanced parts of the game. If you don’t have a great arm, you’ve got to be really great at the little things. That’s why the Quarterbacks that have both, are or have a shot at being all time greats (Aaron Rodgers, early Peyton Manning, Andrew Luck).

Josh Rosen has the best combination of NFL attributes and physical talent out of the draft prospects at QB. He has enough arm talent to make every throw. That in and of itself would be enough to make him an intriguing prospect. But when it comes to the nuanced parts of the game that make the great Quarterbacks great (like Tom Brady), he too is a master at those, far ahead of peers, and especially considering the level he is playing at.

Before I go into more specifics about Rosen, let me just preface by saying that my evaluations come from years of watching NFL Quarterbacks as well as following the smartest people in the business. This is not to say that I’m right or that you have to agree with me. It’s just to say that many of the attributes I pick up while watching Quarterbacks such as Rosen are subtleties of the game that might not be evident to casual fans. And this is what makes projecting (and evaluating) Quarterbacks to/in the NFL so difficult. You can’t just judge based on results, wins, or stats. Because there are some things that those just won’t and can’t qualify. (This is also not to say that people don’t fall back on cliches like “I watch film” or “I know the game” to justify their lack of substantive opinion. They do. Rather, I’m just attempting to give you an insight into how I evaluate Quarterbacks and where my opinion is coming from when I talk about them. A lot of these statements I make are based on subtle things you pick up on in watching Quarterbacks that you only start to understand after years of following the NFL.)

So let’s get into it and take a look at Rosen as a prospect, and what makes him so great.

Arm Strength/Physical Attributes

As I already touched on, Rosen has an NFL quality arm. He has the arm strength to make every throw, and the ball comes out of his hand with snap and velocity. He can also make deep down the field throws with little effort. While it’s not an insane arm a la Favre/Rodgers/Stafford, it’s significantly above NFL average and will be very intriguing to scouts. I’d give his arm a 9/10, only slightly below that top tier class of Rodgers/Stafford.

What is also so great about Rosen is that he’s a natural thrower of the football. The ball comes out of his arm very easily and he throws with very little effort. Being a natural thrower is related to arm strength, but it’s not the same. The best example of someone with good arm strength that isn’t a natural thrower is Blake Bortles. For Josh, the ball never comes out wobbly or short, and he’s always in a position where he can reload and throw with ease. He doesn’t have to work hard to throw the football, so to speak. It’s mainly about mechanics, but it’s also just an innate thing. Some people just throw the ball more easily than others. And Josh is always ready to throw and can always throw and put the ball where he wants with ease. That’s important, because as a Quarterback, throwing the ball is your No 1 Job – so you should be able to throw it as well and as easily as possible. Now, he doesn’t have the quickest or shortest release. I would say Sam Darnold’s release is quicker. But I wouldn’t say this is a problem. People have slightly different throwing motions, and his arm speed is quick enough and delivery is compact enough that he will be fine. In fact, sometimes guys with a slight windup are able to get a little more pop on the ball. His motion is somewhat comparable to that of Carson Wentz, maybe a little more compact. His ball position, windup, and release all allow him to get maximal velocity on the ball with minimal wasted motion.

At the end of the day, you’re looking at a high level arm talent and natural thrower of the football in Josh Rosen, and that in and of itself is enough to make him an intriguing prospect.

Footwork

You can almost always tell how comfortable or high level a Quarterback is by looking at his feet first and foremost. There are a few things to look for: 1) Are his movements calm, relaxed, and calculated? Or are they frenetic? 2) How do his feet and steps sync up with the timing of his drop and routes? Is he moving in a way that the play demands? Or is his movement haphazard, uneven, and/or random? and 3) How functionally mobile is the Quarterback? Can he shift and make subtle movements in the pocket in response to pressure? Movement is key at the Quarterback position. If the Quarterback has a clear and calm head, the feet usually follow. Two of the best Quarterbacks in the NFL when it comes to functional mobility are Tom Brady and Drew Brees.

Now, it’s worth mentioning that the timing of plays is very different in the College game than in the NFL. Mainly, College Teams on the whole often use much more of a spread offense than NFL teams do. This means that the Quarterback is in the shotgun or pistol almost all the time. There are far fewer deeper drops. You rarely see the five step timing throws, either from under center or out of shotgun, that you see in the NFL. Instead, what you get is a much quicker game. Often the QB is catching the ball and throwing right away (1 step timing), or taking a 3 step drop, or running play action out of multiple option looks. There is less nuanced footwork required. A lot of this has to do with the scheming of offenses in College Football. In college, the hash marks are much further apart than they are in the NFL. This means that the field is much less condensed than it is in the pros. When the ball is set on either the right or left hash in college, you have a ton of field to the far side to work with. Because of that, the college game becomes a lot about utilizing that spacing. This is why you see the prevalence of spread offenses in college. Its much easier to throw quicker timing throws, like WR screens, because it’s advantageous to get the ball to your WR in space. It’s much more effective to run deception based offenses (like those that utilize the option and reverses) because the wide side of the field is a far greater threat. It’s too much field for players to defend, and that leaves the defense vulnerable. One misstep on a fake or an option run gives the offense tons of field to get to the outside. As a defender, there’s too much ground to recover. (The opposite is true as well; over committing to to an outside man on an option play leaves the middle of the field wide open.)

Another thing this does is it makes running and improvisational QBs much more effective in college than in the NFL. In the NFL, to extend a play past 3 or 4 seconds, you need to be able to both manipulate the pocket, and get deep into your progressions to find the weakness in the defense. However in college, if a 3 step timing play isn’t there, the QB often has plenty of field to run around and improvise (the inferiority of college defenders has a lot to do with this as well, both in terms of closing speed in coverage as well as pass rush). In the NFL, if you’re running a 3 step timing play (a quick throw), the ball better be out within 2 seconds, or else you’re going to get walloped.

The spread/option offenses can lead to a far more interesting, fast-paced, diverse, and exciting product for the college game when compared to the NFL. But they also lead to QBs being less prepared for the NFL. Because of the aforementioned factors, you simply don’t see the type of QB drops in college required in the NFL: 5 step from under center, play action from under center, 7 step from under center, 5 step from shotgun. This is not something you can learn over night. The timing of NFL offenses and routes, how those routes sync up with the QBs drops, take time to learn. If you’ve never dropped back from under center, that will be an adjustment. It requires balance and precision with your mechanics. People don’t think about stuff like balance in your footwork and drop when evaluating QBs, but it’s the absolute basics when it comes to the position; every QB that is successful does those things well, and if you can’t do those things well, forget about everything else.

A great example of this is Robert Griffin III. He wasn’t ready for the NFL coming out of Baylor, so Mike Shanahan taylored the Redskin offense in 2012 to look like that of a college offense. It was run primarily out of the pistol, and combined option runs with quick, 1 and 3 step passing. RG3 was rarely asked to drop back straight and read the full field, because he couldn’t. Once NFL defenses learned how to play the option, RG3’s game fell apart. He simply never was able to learn the fundamentals of the Quarterback position.

This is not to say that guys who run spread offenses are incapable of transitioning, but simply that it will be a transition, and if a guy can show that he did things at the college level that he will have to do at the NFL level, then that’s a plus in his evaluation. Two great examples of this were Andrew Luck coming out of Stanford and Carson Wentz coming out of North Dakota. They both had experience running pro style offenses with success, and reading full field NFL type route progressions. This made their transition to the NFL game far quicker than it was for other prospects.

Successful college QBs, because of how different the college game is, often look different than successful NFL QBs. They often have a quicker release, are quicker twitch athletes, maybe have a slightly smaller frame, and can run fast. Two guys that come to mind in the NFL are Marcus Mariota and Derek Carr, both of whom have had their ups and downs in the NFL. Both guys are very quick twitch, as they had to be to run those spread offenses (with all the 1 step timing and option players). But they had less experience with pro style drops and progressions, and as a result have struggled at times. A guy who fits that college QB profile perfectly playing in college right now is Baker Mayfield.

Josh Rosen, on the other hand, is what I imagine an NFL Quarterback to look like. Taller, bigger frame, slightly longer release but stronger arm to go with it, slightly less twitch but also more calm in the pocket.

Of course, there’s a balance here. There are guys that can be the opposite of the college QB, and too deliberate to play in the NFL. Zach Mettenberger is a guy that comes to mind, Tom Savage another, and Jameis Winston at times as well. There are also guys that run pro style offense but just aren’t good enough to be in the NFL, so none of this is a zero sum equation.

But the point with Rosen, even more important than his physical profile, is how effective and smooth he was with his footwork, timing, and execution when it came to running an offense that featured NFL style drops and timing. His five step drop from shotgun and his play action from under center are about as pristine as it gets. He comes off his drop, plants, transfers his weight, and hits the proper read immediately. Or, he’ll calmly step up in the pocket, go through his progressions, and find his outlet receiver at the exact time the play requires it. Everything is in sync. His footwork always matches up with the timing of his routes and his drops. And it all works so seamlessly. He also feels where the pressure is coming from and is able to manipulate the pocket and move away from it without losing his composure. There is simply an NFL style command and control to his game that you don’t see with the other prospects, and this brings us to our final point with Rosen.

IQ

Josh Rosen has all the physical tools, but he also understands the game. This is evident from his complete and total command of a UCLA offense that asked him to be the guy. This is not the case with many offenses in College. Often, once a play is over, QBs will turn to the sideline to get the play call (as will other position groups, looking at different coaches depending on their position). He will run up to the line once the formation is set, then he may turn back to the sideline to get the audible. Coaches signal all this with hand signals or cards, and do so based on what the defense is doing. The QB isn’t running or directing the offense prior to the snap. He’s just one cog in a well oiled machine. This is mainly the case for spread offenses.

The UCLA offense with Josh Rosen, stylistically, could be called a spread offense in the sense that it was run primarily out of the shotgun (although it mixed in under center formations as well). But it differed from the traditional spread in that Rosen ran the show. When they went no huddle, he got the full play call and would portray it to the rest of his team. He also would audible based on the defensive look. Post snap, the offense primarily featured NFL style routes. These are all things a QB will have to do at the next level, and the fact that Rosen not only did them, but did them with such efficacy is a testament to his NFL readiness.

And he was always in command of this offense. He understood where to go with the ball. He directed his receivers based on the play and the defense. He moved with an elegance and nuance as if it was second nature to him. And he threw the football with both velocity and accuracy, especially down the field. One thing I saw that really impressed me from Rosen was the back shoulder throw. That’s an incredibly advanced throw to make and not something you see a lot of in College. It requires a perfect sense of timing and ball placement, as well as a shrewd understanding of the defense and chemistry with your receivers. Rosen had all of that.

Not to mention, his defense was absolutely horrible. He constantly had to play from behind and throw the ball a ton to get back into the game (often over 50 times). This was no problem, as he stacked up 300 yard passing efforts as if they were nothing. Perhaps there’s no better indication of this than his comeback win vs Texas A&M. Down 44-10, Rosen’s Bruins came back and won the game 45-44 on the back of Rosen.

If you’re looking for a guy who can put an offense on his back and has a command and understanding of how to run an offense from an NFL level (and has all the physical attributes to do so), Rosen is your guy.

Conclusion

The Bruins were 6-6 under Rosen this year, but that doesn’t really bother me. When evaluating college QBs, you have to look at traits and attributes, not wins and losses and stats. There’s so much variance in college that those things are useless without context. Besides, that record can mostly be attributed to UCLA’s awful defense. Here was the final score in their losses:

@Memphis: 45-48
@Stanford: 34-58
@Arizona: 30-47
@Washington: 23-44
@Utah: 17-48
@USC: 23-28

You’re not going to see those kind of scores in the NFL. In the wins under Rosen, UCLA scored 45, 56, 27, 31, 44, and 30 points. Is it concerning that all the losses were on the road? Perhaps, but that still seems to me to be a product of poor defense, and perhaps coaching as well (Jim Mora was fired midseason after the USC loss).

Josh Rosen’s Stats in his 3 years at UCLA are as follows:

Freshman Year (2015): 13 games, 60% comp, 3669 Yards, 7.5 Y/A, 23 TD, 11 INT
Sophomore Year (2016): 6 games, 59.3% comp, 1915 Yards, 8.3 Y/A, 10 TD, 5 INT
Junior Year (2017): 11 games, 62.6% comp, 3756 Yards, 8.3 Y/A, 26 TD, 10 INT

I think the improvement in his final year is especially noteworthy. You want a guy on the upward path.

The biggest concern for me with Rosen is injuries. He suffered injuries the past two years. It’s something I haven’t looked at to be honest, and something that will have to be scouted carefully (and absolutely will be) for any team who’s interested.

There have also supposedly been questions about Rosen’s attitude, but most of this is speculative, and therefore not something I can put stock into. Unless you’re in the huddle with the guy, there’s really no way of knowing. That is, unless the guy has off the field issues, which Rosen hasn’t. NFL teams will look into all this stuff when they evaluate Rosen, but as an observer, based on some ESPN gossip, it’s not something I’m going to value.

As I said, the evaluation is limited. It’s not as if I’ve watched every snap or seen every full Bruin game since his first start. Having said that, I’m confident in my evaluation and feel as if I’ve absolutely seen enough to assertively say that Rosen is the best QB Prospect in the NFL Draft. It’s evident from watching him on film. It’s certainly a great QB class, but Rosen’s mix of physical attributes, mental acumen, command of his offense, nuanced understanding of the game, and pro readiness, make him a can’t miss guy for any team looking for their next franchise QB. If drafted, Rosen is the type of player that would come in and make an impact immediately.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10 other followers

Click here for Archives

Detroit Did the Right Thing in Paying Stafford

The Detroit Lions just made Matthew Stafford the highest paid QB in the NFL and in NFL history. And as is bound to happen just about every time another QB is given a massive contract, the “should they have done it, should they not have done it” debate starts once again, with your fair of share of pundits and fans blasting the deal. I wrote about the question of whether it’s worth it to give a Quarterback–often one that isn’t an “elite” (ie Brady, Rodgers, Brees) guy–a huge contract when Brock Osweiler went to Houston and when Adam Gase signed Jay Cutler. But every situation is different, and seeing as how this debate always seems to come up, it’s always worth revisiting, as I intend to do now with Stafford. People get very passionate and intense about this stuff, but as with most things, the answer is rarely as clear cut as people make it out to be, and as I often try to do, I’ll attempt to look at the situation from as many angles as I can.

People often get shocked by the raw numbers of these deals, and understandably so. Money is an emotional issue, and a lot of people who watch the NFL probably will never see that kind of money in their lives. That in and of itself is enough to cause a negative reaction. But I think there are always a few things we have to keep in mind when looking at these giant numbers in order to help keep things in perspective and evaluate these deals objectively:

    1. NFL Contracts are rarely fully guaranteed, and players hardly ever play out their entire deal. This fact makes NFL contracts look a lot bigger than they actually are. It’s important to not look at the total number, but instead look at the guaranteed money and how it’s spread out over the years.
    2. Even the respective salaries of the richest NFL Quarterbacks probably shouldn’t be viewed just back to back, as that paints somewhat of a skewed picture. They need to be viewed with respect to what the market and salary cap were like at the time they made the deal. For example, it may seem strange that Matt Stafford is being paid more than Aaron Rodgers, but Aaron Rodgers’s deal was likely the highest when he signed it. The market doesn’t exist in isolation, and all these deals are essentially being crafted in response to the others. (I don’t really speak economics, but this piece seemed to do a good job explaining how the raw numbers can be misleading.)
    3. Athletes get paid a lot of money. It might not seem fair, but it’s just the way things work in society.
    4. The money these players are making is chump change compared to what the NFL owners are making. If the owners are getting paid so much, why shouldn’t the players? They’re the ones that are doing the heavy lifting.
    5. The NFL’s attitude toward Quarterbacks is different than its attitude toward almost every other position. With most players, teams think strictly in terms of value and don’t hesitate to let good players go if they’re asking for what they view as too much money. With Quarterbacks, teams tend to be a lot more generous. That doesn’t mean it’s justified, but with the mostly hardball philosophy the NFL employs–I can’t speak for other sports, don’t know if they do it that way too–the Quarterback position tends to stand out because of how different it’s done compared to the other positions. If other positions were paid as much as QBs were, we wouldn’t notice it as much.

Anyway, none of this is to say these big contracts are (or aren’t) justified. I just think it’s important to keep this stuff in mind when thinking about these deals and all the money that’s being tossed around. Because a lot of the negative sentiment seems to stem from people just being upset at how much money these guys get paid. But there’s more to it than that.

Anyway, back to Stafford. He’s currently the highest paid QB and player in the NFL. Is he worth the money?

Again, it’s easy in theory to say that QBss should be paid relative to the value they provide a team–that is to say, the QB pay tree should look almost identical to a QB rankings list. But as I alluded to above (see bullet (2)), the market is reactive. These seemingly huge QB deals probably started when Joe Flacco–a slightly above average QB who was coming off a spectacular postseason hot streak (which he was unable to maintain into subsequent seasons)–signed his megadeal after winning Superbowl 47. That created somewhat of a domino effect, as it set a benchmark for what other players could point to when negotiating their deals.

I’ve talked about that before, so I won’t go into it too much again here. But the bottom line is that because of how the market is set up, QBs have a lot of leverage. So Stafford, just like Flacco and all those before him, was never going to sign a middle of the pack deal. So when we evaluate this deal, we have to understand that in reality, Detroit had two options: Either pay him, or let him go.

One of my favorite NFL analysts, Scott Kascmar of Football Outsiders, has never been one afraid to go against conventional wisdom, and he is often an outspoken critic of deals like the one Stafford signed. He’s an avid tweeter whom I follow a great deal, and his arguments are certainly compelling. He spoke out against the Stafford deal, and his argument is similar to the one I presented above, namely, that top money should be reserved for top QBs, and that if a QB is unwilling to accept a deal that is more in line with his relative value, then the team should move on from said QB. Paying a non-elite QB elite money means being stuck in 8-8 purgatory, as it does not allow a team enough money to build up the rest of the team sufficiently. And there only a few QBs who can consistently overcome roster deficiencies to reach the playoffs, and these are the elite guys for whom top dollar should be reserved for.

It’s an argument that I struggle with, both because I think that these guys deserve to get paid and make as much money as they can (no one should be knocked for trying to make money, especially in a profession that leaves you more often than not injured for life), and because it’s really hard for coaches and general managers whose jobs rely on winning games to move forward without anyone at QB. But pragmatically it makes a lot of sense.

I’ve explored this philosophical debate in depth in my previous articles, and I’m sympathetic to both sides. And we’re starting to see more scenarios in which teams are willing to pass up paying Quarterbacks who they view as replaceable. Denver passed up paying Osweiler to start Siemian. The Jets, last year, played hardball with Fitzpatrick after his anomalous 2015 season. And the Redskins continue to use the franchise tag on Kirk Cousins rather than give him a long term deal (although ironically, they seem to be costing themselves more money in doing so). We’ll see what happens there, but the previous two scenarios, in retrospect, were both the right moves. Siemian was not great, but his 2016 was much better than Osweiler’s, and his flaws are easier to work around than Osweiler’s. More importantly, the Broncos want to keep their top defense together, something they would struggle doing if they had paid Osweiler. The Jets were right in thinking that Fitzpatrick’s 2015 was an anomaly, and he’s off the team now. Then there were the Eagles with Nick Foles back when Chip Kelly was the head coach. Although their plan was to roll with Bradford (who only started one so-so season with them before Kelly was fired and Wentz was drafted), they didn’t hesitate to give up Foles. He’s no longer a starter, and the Eagles seem to have their QB of the future in Carson Wentz.

The counterargument is always, if you don’t pay this guy, then who’s the QB? Kacsmar on Twitter, when asked about the last example of a team moving on from a high level QB and being successful, gave the example of the Bengals moving on from Carson Palmer to Andy Dalton in 2011, and then proceeding to make the postseason for the next 5 years. It’s not strictly analogous because the Palmers dispute with the Bengals was not about money. Rather, Palmer just didn’t want to play for the Bengals anymore. Nonetheless, it’s still a good example of a team that was able to move on from a highly respected, high level Quarterback, and maintain success. QBs certainly are not a dime a dozen, but the thinking behind the “let him go” mindset seems to be that the difference between a slightly below average to average QB and an average to slightly above average QB is not worth the difference in money and wins that it will cost you, and if you don’t have an elite QB, focusing on team building is more important. The other part of that argument is that average QBs aren’t as hard to find as people may think:

rudock
smith:tannehill.jpg

What Kacsmar wisely articulates here is that lots of people pay QBs (or defend QBs being paid) because they are afraid of the alternative (with regard to that first tweet, Jake Rudock is Stafford’s current backup). But letting your current guy go doesn’t mean going into QB purgatory. Kacsmar gave the example of the Bengals landing on Dalton in 2011. I already mentioned Siemian and Bradford filling in well for, if not playing being better than, Osweiler and Foles did in Denver and Philly, respectably. Then you have Houston who made the playoffs back to back years with Ryan Fitzpatrick one year and then Brian Hoyer the next. They didn’t have the best QB in the division, but they had the best defense, and that turned out to be more important.

These are all excellent arguments about team building and value, and I’ll come back to them later, but for now I’d like to focus specifically on Stafford and his specific value to Detroit as a player.

The Case Against Stafford

The best argument against paying Stafford this kind of money is that the Lions simply haven’t been that good since he joined. To be fair, they’ve been better than they were before he got there, but it hasn’t resulted in playoff appearances or wins. Here’s a listing of how well the Lions have done each year with Stafford <wikipedia>:

2009 (Started 10 games): 2-14 (4th in NFC North, Missed Playoffs)
2010 (Started 3 games): 6-10 (3rd in NFC North, Missed Playoffs)
2011: 10-6 (2nd in NFC North, Lost in the WC Round at New Orleans, 28-45)
2012: 4-12 (4th in NFC North, Missed Playoffs)
2013: 7-9 (3rd in NFC North, Missed Playoffs)
2014: 11-5 (2nd in NFC North, Lost in the WC Round at Dallas, 20-24)
2015: 7-9 (3rd in NFC North, Missed Playoffs)
2016: 9-7 (2nd in NFC North, Lost in the WC Round at Seattle, 6-26)

Overall that’s 8 seasons, 0 first place finishes,  3 second place finishes, 3 third place finishes, 2 fourth place finishes, 3 playoff appearances, and 0 playoff wins.

Even more concerning, however, is Stafford’s 5-46 record against teams with a winning record. Wins and losses aren’t all on the Quarterback, but that’s an abysmal number, and I think is the best argument against Matthew Stafford being paid this much. (A few examples I dug up for comparison’s sake: Andrew Luck had 4 wins of the sort in 2013 alone, Carson Palmer had 4 in 2015 alone, and Matt Ryan had 4 in 2010 alone. (Those numbers could be wrong but I double checked and am pretty sure they’re correct.))

Despite Detroit’s relative lack of success with Stafford at the helm, I still think he’s worth the money for the following reasons:

Stafford is a Unique Talent

It’s important not to get swept away by and judge a Quarterback solely on his physical attributes. You can have a good arm and still not be a good Quarterback. Jay Cutler was a guy who was always given extra chances because of his immense arm talent yet was never really able to be anything more than average. Cam Newton is another guy who, outside of his 2015 season, has not been anything special compared to his peers, yet because of his immense physical gifts, people continue to mistakenly view him as a top 10 player at the position.

Having said that, arm strength does matter, as it allows you to make throws that others simply aren’t capable of making. It’s been evident that Stafford has had a big time arm ever since his college days. It’s the reason he was the No 1 overall pick in the draft, and it’s always evident on film. The ball just comes out of his hand differently than it does with other Quarterbacks. He also has relatively quick feet and a quick release and can throw from nearly any platform. This allows him to be a unique asset at the position with the throws he is able to make.

Stafford is Very Important to the Detroit Offense

The Lions under Stafford always have thrown the ball a lot more than most teams. Sometimes the result is good, sometimes not so much, but there are few Quarterbacks that would be able to handle the type of workload he’s often given. With Stafford at QB, you’re never out of a game.

Furthermore, with the offense they currently run under Jim Bob Cooter, Stafford is asked to do a lot before the snap. Jim Bob was an Offensive Assistant to the Indianapolis Colts from 2009-2011, and the offense he runs with Stafford is somewhat similar to the one Peyton Manning used to run. It uses a lot of static formations (no pre-snap motion) from the shotgun, and Stafford is asked to identify the defense, adjust the play accordingly, and isolate the correct matchup. The Lions don’t have a ton of athletes on offense, and as a result, they rely on lots of quick, short passes to move the ball. Stafford making the right read and throw is imperative to that working successfully. It’s an offensive identity that relies on him as the centerpiece (they had to change to this after Calvin Johnson retired), and it’s not clear who would pick up the slack without him. His value to this offense was apparent last year, as evidenced by his 8 fourth quarter comebacks <pfref>.

Stafford Has been an Ascendant Player the Last 2 Years

There’s always been somewhat of a gap between Stafford’s talent level and his production. He’s always flashed, but he’s never really been able to produce on a consistent week-to-week basis. I maintain that 2011 was his best season by far (5038 yards, 41 touchdowns, and 7.6 Y/A), and I was expecting big things after that year. It didn’t really happen. 2012 was a big step back with a lot of stats padded by garbage time and volume of pass attempts, and he’s been for the most part up and down ever since.

Early on in his career, Stafford started to show some problematic tendencies, mainly related to a lack of discipline. He would often get sloppy with his fundamentals. His footwork could be erratic, but most worrisome were his throwing mechanics and his tendency to sidearm throws that didn’t need to be sidearmed. I always got the sense that then head coach of the lions Jim Schwartz, as well as possibly offensive coordinator Scott Linehan, ended up exacerbating these issues by failing to address them early on when they should have, and even excusing them (if I’m correctly recalling comments made by Schwartz at the time).

The Lions hired Jim Schwartz in 2014, in part to help instill more discipline in Stafford. The Offensive Coordinator was Joe Lombardi, who had previously been on the offensive staff with the Saints. The Lions essentially ran the Saints offense, which I never saw as a great fit for Stafford considering the amount of nuance and precision it requires (think about how Drew Brees plays the position). But the hope was that it would help Stafford. The Lions made the playoffs that year and Stafford had some nice 4th quarter moments, but overall it was a step back for the offense, and it was the defense that help propelled the Lions to the playoffs (a defense that for every other year Stafford has been in Detroit, really hasn’t been anything more than average).

The next year, the 2015 season, the Lions started the season 1-7 with Stafford playing poorly. Joe Lombardi was fired and the Lions promoted Jim Bob Cooter, the Quarterbacks coach, to Offensive Coordinator. The results were excellent. Stafford finished the season on a hot streak, as did the Lions, who went 6-2 in their last 8 games mainly thanks to the improved play of Stafford. The following season (last), Stafford showed that his improved play was no anomaly. Stafford had his lowing interception percentage since 2010 (a year in which he played only three games).

Stafford was always similar to Jay Cutler in that he was a tremendous talent but had too little discipline in his game. People, like they did with Cutler, would always make a big deal about the interceptions. But with those two I would argue that the little things were even more problematic. Footwork. Mechanics. Playing within the timing of the offense. Dropping back and getting rid of the ball on time. They both would make the headscratching throws more than they should. But they also failed to keep the offense running the way it needed to in order to have consistent execution.

Stafford and Jim Bob Cooter were on the same page from the start, something Stafford has made abundantly clear. And that’s so important for a Quarterback. But even moreso, Jim Bob Cooter deserves credit for fundamentally transforming the way Stafford plays the game. He’s still a gunslinger at heart. But Jim Bob honed in those gunslinger tendencies. He did it mostly with a lot of quick throws. His offense demands that you get the ball out quickly within the timing of the play. He reined in Stafford just enough. Now Stafford does the little things right when he needs to, but is still capable of making tremendous throws when he has to. That skill doesn’t go away and never would. He’s just added to Stafford’s game so that he can be a more consistent player.

This, more than anything else, is why Stafford is deserving of his contract. Under Jim Bob Cooter, he’s been an incredibly efficient ball distributor, rather than an inconsistent, undisciplined gunslinger.

As I mentioned earlier, Stafford and the offense arguably had to change when Calvin Johnson retired. Stafford could always rely on Megatron to bail him out. He could force it to Megatron and toss it up into coverage, even if it was outside the timing of the play, and more often than not Megatron would come down with it. With Calvin Johnson, Stafford didn’t really have to play with timing.

Now, without one guy that causes matchup issues for the defense, the offense has to win through scheme, and the Quarterback has to be the centerpoint. He has to consistently execute with precision in order to create offense. This always would have helped Stafford and the offense, but without Calvin Johnson, it’s more urgent than ever that he plays this way.

Stafford’s improvement carried on through almost of his last season until a late season injury to his throwing hand seemed to diminish his play a little bit. But make no mistake, it’s evident watching the Lions that Stafford is a different player than he used to be, and in the context of that scheme, he’s incredibly valuable to that offense.

All Quarterbacks, Even Elite Ones, Play Better with a Good Team

Kacsmar makes the point that big time money should be reserved for the few elite Quarterbacks that can overcome a flawed roster and consistently carry poor defenses to the playoffs, often playing in shootouts to do so.

There is no doubt that there is a small class of elite Quarterbacks that can do this. But I’d like to counter Kacsmar’s point with the following: If the goal is to win a Superbowl, and devoting too much money to the Quarterback makes it harder to do that, then why even pay the elite guys big money?

Because as good as those elite Quarterbacks are, even they have trouble winning Superbowls on their own. No one can, really. Aaron Rodgers won his only ring when his defense didn’t suck. The same can be said for Drew Brees. Both of those guys have struggled to elevate their team’s play after signing huge contracts. Though they are still able to do so, it’s clear that they are both essentially running one man shows. Peyton Manning is arguably the greatest Quarterback of all time, and even he was only able to win his 2 Superbowl rings when his teams stepped up in the Postseason. And then you have Tom Brady. He won 3 rings with an all time great defense in his first 5 years. He then didn’t win another one for 10 years. He’s been able to play at a transcendent level for his last 2 Superbowl wins and deserves all the credit in the world for doing so. But we still can’t neglect to mention that the Patriots are the best organizations in the NFL with arguably the best coach of all time. They are able to outscheme teams to oblivion, and are tremendous at getting cheap but talented players that fit their system. In short, they’ve essentially been able to beat the salary cap era and keep really good teams around Brady even while they are paying him. Has his play been spectacular during those two postseason runs? Of course. Was he still afforded help other elite QBs simply don’t get? Yes, he was. Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, and Aaron Rodgers’ defenses wouldn’t hold during a 28-3 deficit. They wouldn’t pick off a pass at the 1 yard line with the game on the line. Even someone as transcendentally great as Brady, who will be the Greatest of All Time if he maintains this level of play deep into his 40s, would not be where he is without the help he gets from his team and organization.

Russell Wilson’s going to get paid, and it’s going to be much harder for his team to have the consistent postseason success it’s had with him living off of his cheap 3rd round pick deal. And what about Andrew Luck?? For everything that’s great about the Patriots, that’s how bad the Colts organization is. He’s the best QB in that division and arguably a top 6 QB in the NFL, and even that wasn’t enough to make the playoffs last year. They’re a 2 win team without him, but with all the money they’re paying him and the fact that the roster is barely any better than it was when he was a rookie, it’s hard to see them getting back into the playoffs, let alone winning a Superbowl.

I get that it’s hard to win a Superbowl. I get that for most teams, it starts with having a winning season and making the playoffs. And I get that the great QBs can do that consistently. All I’m saying is that if we’re talking about the ultimate goal–winning the Superbowl–Kacsmar’s argument that having too much money tied up into the QB makes it harder, if not impossible, to have success, even applies to the elite guys who Kacsmar believes are deserving of big money.

The Lions Were Always Going to Pay Stafford

These are fascinating conversations to have from our armchair, but at the end of the day, I guarantee you that no one in the Detroit Lions organization for a second even considered letting Stafford go. When you find a good QB, you take care of him. That isn’t to say that everything an organization does is always right, but it is to say that moving forward without a QB is a lot bigger bullet to bite when your job depends on it.

In Conclusion

There’s no right answer and every situation is different. When it comes to paying or not paying the Quarterback, both sides make excellent points and its a discussion I’m sure will come up again and again. I’ve done my best to present both sides of the argument here, and while I am sympathetic to the strictly business side of things, I can’t get myself to endorse the notion that letting a QB as good as Stafford go is a good move.

We can’t generalize here because as I said, every QB is different. I’m not a business guy, so I don’t always see it from that cold, calculating side. However, I’m beginning to understand that there are situations where not always paying the QB is a good move. And I think teams are too. When you look at guys Tannehill, Kaepernick, Dalton, Cutler, and Newton, that all got big deals, I totally understand all of them, but I also get why those might be questionable and why you might be paying for a little more than they’re worth.

But I also think the idea that “we have to just give up if we don’t have an elite guy” is a tough pill to swallow for NFL organizations. Because there simply aren’t that many of those guys that can win in any situation no matter what. And I think when you have a guy that’s above average, you think that guy gives you the best chance to win. For most of Stafford’s career, he’s been around the line of average. He still has a lot to prove with this deal, but I do believe that his ascendance under Jim Bob Cooter has pushed him up from the Tannehill/Cutler tier and closer to where a guy like Matt Ryan is (probably just below the elite tier). He’s not there yet, but with guys that good, you trust in your chance to win with them.

Just to go back to team building quickly here. Kacsmar’s argument is also that the Lions are already at a disadvantage playing in the same division as Aaron Rodgers, and that they aren’t equipped to win shootouts with him, so it would be better to rely on defense. He points to Mark Sanchez and the Jets, who did a great job against Bill Belichik’s Patriots from 09-10.

This is an example I often think of when it comes to team building. Mark Sanchez was a bottom 15 Quarterback, but his team was so good that they were still able to win. In those two years, Rex Ryan beat Philip Rivers at home, Peyton Manning at home, Tom Brady at home, and was a 4th and Goal stop away from beating Ben Roethlisberger at home. That’s pretty incredible, and it shows that defense truly does win championships… or at least get you hella close.

However, we can’t neglect to mention that after 2010, Ryan’s Jets fell apart. The defense and run game sunk a little bit from their perch of best in the league, and Sanchez simply wasn’t good enough to carry the team by himself. So I think this comes back to the point that I was making just now. As Kacsmar articulates so well, it’s hard to win a shootout without a truly elite quarterback. But the counter to that is, it’s hard to win defensive battles without a truly elite defense. If you have just an average or below average Quarterback, your defense has to be phenomenal. Which is to say, while Kacsmar accurately articulates the dilemma of paying a non-elite QB and trying to win shootouts with him, I think he somewhat underestimates how hard it is to win without a QB, and overestimates how replaceable these guys really are.

Stafford’s not elite, but he’s been a really good Quarterback, and I think he’s worth the money. Even though it’s a tough pill to swallow, I think the Lions did the right thing in signing him.

So Matt Stafford, if you’re reading this, you better go out there and have a great season and make the playoffs. Don’t prove me wrong!!!!

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10 other followers

Click here for Archives

Why are we still talking about Colin Kaepernick?

The offseason is a slow and painful time to be an NFL fan, and every year the league needs something to clog the airwaves to fill the time. This year, it seems that that thing has been Colin Kaepernick and his inability to find a team. And it shocks me that we’re still talking about it, because it simply shouldn’t be that big of a story.

Colin Kaepernick is the Most Overhyped Story of the Offseason.

Can you remember the last time a Quarterback of a 2-14 team (1-11 under Kaepernick) created this much press over not being signed? This shouldn’t be that surprising, yet it seems there’s a new headline every week about someone pondering why Kaepernick has yet to get a job. Kaepernick made a lot of headlines this past season over his decision to kneel during the national anthem–something that people are apparently very sensitive towards–in protest of police brutality. Many are speculating how this decision has, either fairly of unfairly, affected his prospects of getting signed in the future. But Kaepernick’s decision to kneel and the hoopla it has created has almost entirely overshadowed the fact that Kaepernick simply isn’t that good of a Quarterback, and hasn’t been for a long time.

If Aaron Rodgers were kneeling, this wouldn’t be an issue.

Everyone has an opinion on the kneeling, so I’ll give mine very quickly just to get it out of the way. Kaepernick has always had a bit of a hipster personality, so when he first announced his decision to kneel, I kind of rolled my eyes. It seemed like something he was doing to get attention, and given the fact that he was also likely to be cut at the beginning of last year (due to a mix of his poor play, his lack of interest in the team, and the new coaching staff in place), it seemed to me like something he could use once he was cut to claim that his firing was unjust.

But Kaepernick was never cut and actually went on to be the starter midway through the season after Blaine Gabbert was benched. What also proceeded to happen is that NFL fans decided to have a collective heart attack over Kaepernick’s supposed “disrespect” for our flag and our country, and many threatened to stop watching the NFL. The press also made it a much bigger issue than I felt it needed to be. Watching this utterly misguided reaction–which fit in very well with the general craziness of our politics over the past year–made me support Kaepernick more than I had initially. His protest was about police brutality, a very real issue, and the fact that people couldn’t even see or acknowledge that without freaking out and spewing faux-patriotism bullshit, to me was an indication that protests like his and the conversations they create were only more necessary in our society, not less so.

Still, the owner of the Giants, John Mara, gave a very illuminating explanation for the scope of this issue when explaining that, for fans, kneeling during the anthem is something that is a very emotional topic. Hearing this from an owner showed me that whether or not the reaction from fans is justified is besides the point. If owners feel that signing Kaepernick is going to stop fans from coming to games, they won’t do it, regardless of if Kaepernick was in the right or if the fans’ anger is justified.

However, I still believe that Kaepernick’s protest and whatever doubts it may give owners is truly secondary to his play on the field. Andy Benoit of the MMQB, when discussing Kaepernick on his podcast, explained that if someone like Aaron Rodgers were to do this, we wouldn’t be having this discussion, and I wholeheartedly believe that. Talent and ability trumps just about everything else in the NFL, and if Kaepernick were good enough to be a starter right now, his protest, even if it upset people, wouldn’t matter enough to put his job in jeopardy. Instead, we’re at the point where whatever upside Kaepernick may offer just isn’t enough to trump the attention and backlash that may come with signing him. Andy compared this idea to the Tebow situation after he was cut and couldn’t find a team, in that Tebow’s talent wasn’t enough to overcome the circus that he would bring, but I think this justification is even more applicable here than it was with Tebow. Obviously Kaepernick is a more talented thrower than Tebow, but Kaepernick also has given us enough of a sample size that we have a pretty good idea of who he is and what he offers. Additionally, whereas Tebow was coming off a playoff year with the Broncos after he was cut, Kaepernick is coming off of a 2-14 season. Tebow was going into his 3rd year; Kaepernick is going into his 7th. Obviously, Kaep at his prime was better than Tebow at his prime; I’m not saying he wasn’t. But the point is that we’ve seen enough of Kaepernick at this point to know who he is, and his play on the field and his play alone, is enough to explain his lack of interest from teams. We shouldn’t have to look elsewhere for explanations.

Politics aside, Kaepernick just isn’t that good.

As I have mentioned twice already, the 49ers were 2-14 last year. Wins aren’t everything, but they are something. Rarely do good Quarterbacks lead their team to that kind of record. Let’s also not forget that Kaepernick lost the QB battle to Blaine freakin Gabbert last offseason, this after being benched for Gabbert at around midseason of the prior year.

Kaepernick’s numbers from last year are, on the surface, respectable. He threw 16 TD to just 4 INT with a 90.7 passer rating, and also rushed for 468 yards and 2 TDs. But while TD/INT is the sexiest number to look at (and passer rating is largely influenced by TD/INT ratio), the rest of his numbers aren’t too great. He only completed 59.2% of his passes for 6.8 yards per attempt, and he also took 36 sacks in 12 games.

What’s also worth mentioning is that, even though his surrounding cast wasn’t too great, Kaepernick played in the Chip Kelly offense. Many people probably think Chip Kelly is a joke at this point, and while his overall coaching ability, game management, and player management are all questionable, his offense has been proven to put up numbers. Let’s not forget that Nick Foles and Mark Sanchez both put up their best numbers by a long shot playing under Kelly. The mix of his route concepts and the pressure that the offensive pace puts on a defense usually leaves the primary receiver open and simplifies things for the Quarterback. Kelly also does a very good job improving a team’s run game, as the niners ranked 4th in the league in rushing yards per game last year. This will always help a Quarterback. The main reason that Kelly’s scheme hasn’t translated to wins at this point is because the fast pace that the offense goes at does not allow the defense ample time to rest, which is why Kelly has never had good enough defenses in the NFL. This wasn’t a problem for him in college because you can rotate a lot more players in and out of the lineup on gameday in college than you can in the NFL. Shootouts are also generally a lot more common in college.

But the point is that Kaepernick’s numbers should at least be partially attributed to Chip Kelly, as we’ve seen what his offense does for Quarterbacks in the past. It’s naive to think Kaepernick will put up similar numbers to his 2016 season with Kelly gone. And it’s not inconsistent to say that Kelly’s overall coaching abilities are questionable, but that his offense has been proven to be effective in putting up numbers. Claiming the latter doesn’t undermine the former, and vice versa.

“But Kaepernick went to the Super Bowl in 2012!”

Yes he did, but this was five years ago. That’s an eternity in NFL time. Back then, Matt Schaub was coming off a 4000+ yard playoff bound season, and I certainly don’t see anyone suggesting he get signed.

Playoff wins do tend to buy a lot of time for guys and leave them immune to criticism, so perhaps that’s what this is all about. We see the same thing time and again with Mark Sanchez. Sanchez had some success in the playoffs early in his career, so people continue to think that he’s a capable player, even though he never was.

But in no way, shape or form, should Kaepernick’s 2012 season be used as justification for his signing currently, as he simply hasn’t developed the way a QB should since then. If anything, he’s regressed.

When Kaepernick was named the starter in 2012, he lit the league on fire with his dynamic passing and rushing abilities. He expanded the offense in ways that the limited Alex Smith could not, and he put together a fantastic run, ultimately culminating in a tight Super Bowl loss to the Baltimore Ravens.

2012 was a big year for option QBs (it was also RG3’s one good year, although I never thought it was as good as people made it out to be), and Kaepernick was the beneficiary of this without a doubt. But he also showed a ton of promise playing from the pocket. The ways the 49ers schemed the offense around his running certainly helped, and the expectation was that Kaepernick would continue to develop and strengthen his play from the pocket as the years went by.

This didn’t happen. What did happen was that defenses got better defending the option, but Kaepernick’s play from the pocket only got worse. In 2013 the team as a whole had a good year, but Kaepernick himself struggled and had some very bad games. He came on somewhat late in the season, but they weren’t really asking him to do a ton. But nonetheless the 49ers made the playoffs, and Kaepernick led a game winning drive against Green Bay and almost led one against the Seahawks. He had some bad turnovers in that game that ultimately doomed them, but also made some tremendous plays. The year overall didn’t show the type of progression you would expect, but with a playoff run, all was forgiven.

2014 was where things really started to unwind. The ownership started creating drama surrounding Harbaugh’s job security, ultimately firing him for no good reason at the end of the season, other than the fact that they seemed to feel threatened by him and his leadership style (take notes, this is what losing teams and bad ownerships do). Kaepernick himself really regressed and no matter how much they simplified things for him, he could not run their offense at all really. He would break down almost immediately in the pocket and would not pull the trigger on one-read, open throws. It was tough to watch. This continued into 2015 until he was benched for Gabbert.

2016 was a pleasant surprise for Kaepernick, but it was really only this because he had set the bar so low the prior two years, that any ability to efficiently run the offense at all was looked at as an improvement. Still, it was by no means a great year. And film gurus like Greg Cosell of NFL Films and Andy Benoit of the MMQB confirmed that Kaepernick still struggled with the same things he had in the past. He was still, for the most part, a one speed thrower and he still would leave plays on the field and break down in the pocket when his first read wasn’t open. When his first read was open, which Kelly is very good at making happen, he’s able to throw it well, as he’s always had an arm. But you’re never going to always have your first read open in the NFL. Never.

None of this is to say that Kaepernick is the worst QB in the league. He’s not. It’s just to say that because of what he’s shown us up to this point, the lack of interest among teams shouldn’t be surprising.

And I think that’s especially the case for a backup QB. Not only should they not be a distraction, but the backup QB is usually someone whose physical traits are limited but can step in and run the offense, just hold the ship down and not lose the game until the starter is better. Think Matt Hasselbeck (retired now), Matt Moore, Brian Hoyer, Matt Cassel, Shaun Hill, etc. People see these guys like these get signed and think there has got to be something wrong if they’re getting picked over Kaepernick. And they also get upset when people suggest Kaepernick is somehow worse than guys like those. But all those guys are predictable. They’re not going to run for 90 yard TD’s, but they will throw a quick slant on time on 1st and 10 to make it 2nd and 4. Those plays may not seem like much, but they’re what keep the offense on schedule. You have to make the plays that are there. Kaepernick’s playing style, on the other hand, is pretty random. He’s more likely to hold the ball and run around. In the previous example, that may mean 2nd and 10 instead of 2nd and 4. That’s not usually what a team wants in their backup. The backup needs to play it safe and not lose games. And Kaep really hasn’t shown why anyone should trust him as a starter because he hasn’t shown the necessary level of consistency or skill. There are guys that are good enough to play randomly and get away with it because a) they’re super talented, and b) they have enough pocket skills to be able to play that way when they need to. Think Russell Wilson, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Aaron Rodgers. But you have to be able to play from the pocket as well, and they all can do that. Kaep hasn’t shown us that he can consistently.

Then there’s also the fact that Kaepernick’s new vegan diet seems to have changed his body type and made him thinner, which will only make him less durable as a runner, one of his main appeals as a player. This just further lessens Kaep’s value.

To be clear, all of this is not to say we can’t find individual plays where Kaep goes through progressions or throws on time or any of that. Just that it’s not his overall style.

Time to take a knee and move on from Kaep.

I get that he’s unsigned. I get that he’s an exciting player and an eccentric personality. I get that he went to the Super Bowl. I get that he did a bold thing (although I really don’t see why it should be…) with the protest and that it’s polarizing. And I get that the offseason is boring.

But the NFL season is upon us (preseason started last week with the HOF game), and there’s really no need to milk this story any further. We don’t need to bring it up every day until he’s signed. We don’t need to bring it up every time another QB gets signed, like many did when the Dolphins signed Jay Cutler. And we don’t need to keep asking people what they think and keep speculating on why he’s unsigned.

He had a good run in 2012. It was exciting. He was a good player then. He’s not now. And his upside is not anywhere near large enough to overcome the potential drama that would come with signing him. That’s why he’s unsigned.

If he hadn’t taken a knee but had the same season he had last year, would he still be unsigned? Obviously there’s no way of knowing for sure. But it certainly wouldn’t surprise me. And it shouldn’t surprise anyone or be a controversy that he can’t find a team now.

Kaepernick is unsigned, and the main reason he’s unsigned is that he just isn’t that good. Certainly not good enough to risk any controversy–justified or not–that might come with signing him. Let’s accept that and move on. We don’t have to make this any more complicated than it needs to be.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10 other followers

Click here for Archives

Monday Football Primer: Your Guide to Week 2 NFL Action

The NFL is back and in full swing! Here are some of my thoughts and observations after two weeks of action.

Packers-Vikings: Bradford Shines, Rodgers Struggles

Sam Bradford has always been a bit of an enigma. He’s always had the skillset, and he looks like a prototypical strong-armed, rhythm, dropback, pocket passer. He’s just never really lived up to expectations. He’s played in a ton of different offenses, has struggled with injuries, and has often been surrounded by subpar supporting casts. Nonetheless, he just always leaves you wanting a little more. He’s never proven that he can really elevate his supporting cast, or that he can produce wins consistently (or that he can stay healthy).

History would tell you to be skeptical that Sam Bradford can be anything more than average. Nonetheless, I find myself wanting to be optimistic about Sam Bradford. That’s because, when you watch him, you see why he was a No 1 overall pick. He’s a really natural and easy thrower of the ball. His arm strength is significantly above average, and he has a quick, effortless release.

On the one hand, a Bradford skeptic could argue that last night’s win over the Packers really wasn’t anything too significant. It was only one game, and it was a 17-14 win that was mostly defensive driven. Still, two throws in particular stand out to me: The play action deep shot to Diggs, and the TD pass to Diggs running up the seam while Bradford was being hit. Those are two throws that Teddy Bridgewater doesn’t make.

I think Sam Bradford has the potential to be an upgrade over Teddy Bridgewater, at least as Bridgewater is at this point in this career. (That’s not to say that he will be, or that the Vikings should abandon Bridgewater.) I know a lot of people like Bridgewater. The folks at Football Outsiders are really high on him. But one reason why I thought the Bradford trade sort of made sense, and why I didn’t think the Vikings were necessarily doomed when Bridgewater went down, is because I don’t think Bridgewater played particularly well last year. That Vikings team went to the playoffs because of Peterson and the defense, for the most part. Bridgewater threw for 3231 yards, 14 TD, and 9 INT for a passer rating of 88.7. His 65.3% completion and 7.2 y/a are okay, but for the most part, those numbers aren’t very good.

One thing that concerns me about Bridgewater, which Greg Cosell of NFL Films brought up during the pre-draft process and which hasn’t really changed, is his arm strength and throwing process. Bridgewater throws a very slow ball, and he’s not a natural thrower of the football. He pushes it way more than he flicks it. It looks like he’s trying really hard to throw it, like I often do when I play in the backyard. One reason for this, I believe, is his small hands, which prevent him from spinning the football and really getting torque on it. People talk about his struggles with the deep ball and lack of aggressiveness, but this is all tied into arm strength. You’re not going to make throws into tight windows if you don’t think that you are physically capable of getting the ball there.

This isn’t to say that Bridgewater can’t become a serviceable quarterback. But it’s just one more thing he has to compensate for, and it limits how high his ceiling can be. Bradford, as I mentioned, has no such issue. Not only is he a better natural thrower of the ball, but he’s taller and he plays taller, with a more over the top delivery and less bend in his knees.

The Vikings are a good team built on a strong defensive foundation by head coach Mike Zimmer. Bradford in many ways has become an easy target for criticism because of some of his history– the multiple huge contracts he’s signed and inability to produce that kind of return, the demanding of a trade in Philadelphia, the fact that he’s incredibly injury prone… but as a player, there’s no doubt that he’s talented. And there’s no doubt that Minnesota can make the playoffs with him at the helm. Whether or not they will? That, only time will tell.

Now onto the Pack. Over the past few days, Scott Kacsmar of Football Outsiders has tweeted some interesting stats about Rodgers. He is now going on a 14 game streak without a 100+ passer rating. His yards per attempt was 6.7 in 2015 (career is 8.0) and through two games in 2016 is 5.9. He is 6-8 as a starter in his last 14 games, including the Playoffs. As Greg Rosenthal of NFL.com pointed out within the last few weeks, Brady and Manning never had streaks of futility like this in their primes.

Now, Rodgers is certainly not all to blame, and he certainly has not been horrible. But the TD/INT ratio (31/8 in 2015) does not tell the story of what a poor offense this has been recently and how poorly Rodgers has been playing.

Again, Rodgers hasn’t been awful, and he still has had a spectacular career, but you wonder how long this can go before he starts being criticized. There have been a lot of times where I’ve felt that Rodgers has been overrated and that he often gets a pass for poor play. Yes, I had him at No 1 for my QB Rankings coming into the 2015 season. Yes, he’s still probably the most talented Quarterback in the league in terms of arm strength, although that’s always a tough call to make. But people for years have taken it for granted that he’s been the best QB in the league, and many have gone on to claim that he’s on his way to being the greatest that’s ever played this game. That’s ridiculous. He’s only been playing since 2008, and he has one Superbowl ring and has been average in the playoffs since. In terms of the all time argument, he’s still in the shadows of Brady, Peyton, and arguably even Ben Roethlisberger, as well as several guys that are now retired.

But that’s beside the point. On a more micro level, what’s always bothered me most about Rodgers is the degree to which he just isn’t a rhythm player. He holds onto the ball way longer than he should at times, and he takes a lot of sacks, WAY more than the Brady/Mannings. That should play into the picture when talking about his phenomenal TD/INT ratio.

We’ve seen this lack of rhythm come to haunt Rodgers at times during losses and against high level defenses, but for the most part he’s had an effective career and done a fantastic jab of walking a fine line between structure and improvisation.

But that’s not how he’s been playing recently. Scott Kacsmar of Football Outsiders was talking about how the Green Bay Offense just looks broken. How it used to run so smoothly and efficiently, like a tightly oiled machine, like we used to see with those perfectly timed back shoulder fades. But recently, it’s just been so out of sync. It essentially relies entirely on broken plays. Last year, I bet if you took out of Rodgers’ numbers screens and plays where he got the defense to jump offsides to get a free play, they would be a lot worse.

This is how Rodgers is playing recently. There is no timing or play-to-play execution involved in the GB offense. He’s arguably the best in the league at making improvisational plays, but that can’t be your whole game. Every play can’t be backyard football. That’s not high level quarterbacking and that doesn’t lead to consistent execution. That’s why the GB offense has been inconsistent and struggling. It seems like almost every time Rodgers drops back, he’s running around or moving around in the pocket to try to buy time and “make a play”, or wait for something to happen.

Rodgers is consistently looked at as having great pocket movement, but it’s different than that of guys like Brady and Brees. When they move in the pocket, it is measured and methodical. And it’s fairly consistent. It’s drop back, step up, deliver. Slide left or slide right occasionally if needed. Rodgers is by no means frenetic in the pocket, and he certainly has a great feel for finding the empty space… but his movement seems more random than that of those guys. It’s a little more all over the place. It seems like he’s buying time/extending the play just for the sake of extending the play. When he moves in the pocket, it looks like he’s trying to complete a madden challenge where you’re asked to stay in the pocket without getting sacked as long as you can. It’s not very calculated movement.

In Week 1 against the Jaguars, Rodgers made an absolutely ridiculous touchdown pass. He threw it with precision down the field with a defender practically tackling him. But the talking heads were so caught up with talking about that play, that they ignored the bigger picture of how out of sync the GB offense has been. And that’s been the story for the past year it seems like with Rodgers. People just talk about the crazy broken plays, and ignore how inconsistent Rodgers has been when he’s not making those plays. Sometimes, you just have to drop back and get rid of it for a short gain. Those plays aren’t exciting and they don’t make the highlight reels. But the great ones are going to make those every time. Rodgers tries to improvise so much, that he leaves a lot of plays on the field.

And then there are the comeback woes, which reared their ugly head again on Sunday. As Scott Kacsmar of Football Outsiders (who keeps track of QB 4th Quarter Comeback records) has written about time and time again, Aaron Rodgers is essentially a frontrunner. This means if it’s the 4th Quarter and the Packers are behind, they aren’t likely to comeback with Rodgers at the helm. No one in the media talks about this, but if you look at his track record, it’s surprisingly accurate. Rodgers’ last pick in the Minnesota game was bad (although the receiver might share the blame), and so was the fumble before that, another example of Rodgers holding onto the ball too long (also poor RT play). 4th Quarter Comebacks have been a problem for Rodgers every year since his rookie year, so this aspect of his game is unlikely to change even if he does get back to MVP form. Some QBs just aren’t comeback QBs. This doesn’t mean you can’t be a great QB–Kurt Warner, one of my favorite QBs, is an all time great, and he too was a notorious frontrunner–but when guys like Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Tom Brady, and even guys like Eli Manning, are spectacular in this department, it’s worth at least mentioning

Now, the poor GB offense certainly isn’t all on Rodgers. The O-line has struggled at times. The run game has been hit and miss. And most importantly, the receivers have been below average and have often been unable to separate. The GB receiving core has lost pieces throughout the years (Jones got old, Driver retired, Jennings left/got old, Finley got hurt), and it just isn’t what it used to be. Cobb really struggled without Jordy Nelson in the lineup. And Davante Adams is not a good No. 3. Everyone thought he’d be so good in 2015, but people were fixated on what were essentially only two good games for him (DAL and NE) out of the whole 2014 season. Greg Cosell of NFL Films was talking about, a while back, how it seems Rodgers doesn’t trust Davante Adams when he’s running the slant (the slant-flat is a staple route combination in the GB offense), because often he didn’t pull the trigger on those throws. And I’ve seen a few times where a slant to Adams almost ended up getting picked from the defender cutting in front of him. That kind of stuff messes with a QB’s head. The QB needs to trust that the receiver is going to be where he needs him to be. Otherwise, he either doesn’t throw it at all, or throws it a clutch too late, which is the difference between a completion and an incompletion/INT in this league.

I think 2015 was a perfect storm of factors for Rodgers. Somewhat similar to 2013 for Eli Manning. That year on the Giants there was no run game, the o-line was awful, the receivers were inconsistent, and the pass game concepts weren’t helping the issue. When Rodgers is uncomfortable, he plays fast at times (goes through his reads too fast/moves around too soon), holds onto the ball too long, and leaves plays on the field. When Eli gets uncomfortable, he chucks up absurdly dumb interceptions. Yes, it’s good that Rodgers has managed to avoid throwing picks throughout this slump, but that doesn’t mean he’s been playing well. There’s more to good quarterbacking than not throwing picks. Now, Eli did not at all have a good supporting cast in 2013, but he was part of the problem. A big part. By no means has Rodgers been as bad as Eli was then, but the GB offense has been bad, and that includes him. He too has been part of the problem. The bottom line is, it can’t all be about Jordy.

And it may seem like I’m overstating the issue (and perhaps I am), but this is the part of it that gets me. If I had a penny every time I heard someone talk about Jordy Nelson coming back and him being gone last year and the impact of that on the offense, I’d be rich. I know it matters. I know he’s a great WR, and I know the comfort level with Rodgers is huge. But there has to be more to it than that. Rodgers is supposed to be one of the best in the game. Does the production of the best QB in the game entirely depend on the presence of one WR? Does that also mean that when Rodgers has been so good in the past, it’s just been because of his receivers? Of course not. When Rodgers has been great, it’s been because of him. Why can’t we acknowledge that when he’s been not so great, it’s also because of him? Again, that’s not saying there aren’t other factors. It’s simply saying that he is one of the factors.

A guy like Peyton Manning, no matter who he was throwing to, would always get rid of the football quickly. That’s simply the type of player he is. Rodgers doesn’t have to run around for ten minutes every time he drops back. He needs to be more disciplined in the pocket, and he needs to be mentally sharper. That’s on him, and not anyone else.

Rodgers is one of the best in the game and one of the best to ever do it. And there’s a very good chance he bounces back. I was thinking similar things about him at the beginning of the 2014 season, and he responded by deservedly winning his second MVP award after telling everybody to R-E-L-A-X. But right now, he’s in a slump, and he’s struggling a bit. Let’s not be afraid to admit that, instead of just talking about Jordy Nelson and fawning over every time a broken play just happens to work out positively for him.

The Giants are 2-0 Thanks to Improved Defense and the Return of Victor Cruz

As a passionate Giants fan, it’s hard not to get over-excited about this. Yes, it’s just two games. Both were close games that included some mistakes and that really could have gone either way. But the thing is, we won. And that’s what the Giants haven’t been doing recently. If my memory is correct, this is our first 2-0 start since the 2010 season. That’s six years! That’s big, especially for a young, rookie head coach. Even more exciting is why we’re winning. The defense is looking better than it did a year ago, and Victor Cruz is back and contributing big time. He caught the go-ahead TD in week 1 on a great play to get open after the initial look was covered, and he caught a huge 3rd down in the fourth quarter this past week. He was running straight down the sideline, and the cornerback was right with him as he fought for position. Eli threw it up softly, and Cruz aggressively went after the ball and wrestled it away from the defender, who was in perfect position. That first down allowed the Giants to run the clock down before kicking the go ahead FG, so that they didn’t have to give Drew Brees the ball back.

It cannot be understated how big Cruz was in helping us win the SB in the 2011 season. Not to mention, he was undrafted and wasn’t even starting at the beginning of the 2011 season. And if you’ve ever seen or heard him talk, he’s a really great kid. I’m really happy that he’s come back from injury to be productive. He was out for a long time. And I bet he’s playing with a chip on his shoulder. There were a lot of people saying he wouldn’t be the same guy coming back. But I didn’t have much doubt. Every time he’s been healthy since 2011, he’s contributed. Really cool to see him back and on the field. Not to mention, Sterling Shepard is looking good as well. What’s interesting is that Shepard was a slot guy coming out of college, with questions about whether he could play on the outside. But Cruz was looked at as being primarily a slot guy as well, and most assumed he would take the slot while Shepard would go to the outside opposite Beckham. But from what I can tell, it looks as if Cruz has been playing outside with Shepard in the slot. I’m sure Ben McAdoo will mix it up–he even put Odell in the slot at times the past few years, from which he’s been very productive, just like he is everywhere else on the field–but this is an interesting move. For all the talk of Cruz being a slot guy, he did play on the outside a fair bit in 2011 with all the WR injuries we had. And he was pretty good from there as well. If Shepard can be a productive slot WR (which it looks like he can), we have a pretty good 3 deep WR core. We thought this was the case back in 2013. But Nicks wasn’t the same after injury, Cruz started getting injured, and Randle just was always a bit of a mess. But this is exciting going forward if you’re a Giants fan, no doubt.

Texans Putting Osweiler in Position to Succeed

I’m rooting for Osweiler, if not just because like Bradford has been in the past, he’s another guy that’s going to be under the microscope after signing a big contract. The Texans are 2-0 so far. He played pretty well in week 1 and was eh in week 2. There’s certainly no guarantee he’ll succeed this season. It’s early in the year. QBs really make their money in December. Hoyer in 2014, Fitzpatrick in 2011, and Orton in 2009 were all QBs who started the season well only to implode in the second half. Having said that, I’m cautiously optimistic, and I like what the Texans are doing with Osweiler.

Osweiler, like most QBs, is a system QB. He likely needs to be in a good situation to succeed. When you look at other free agent QB deals that have gone poorly in the past, it’s because these QBs were system QBs that were in over their head and asked to do too much. Kevin Kolb succeeded as a backup in Andy Reid’s system (which has been proven to be QB friendly) throwing to Maclin and Jackson. He wasn’t going to dig the post Kurt Warner Cardinals out of nothingness. Matt Flynn excelled in the GB West Coast with talented pass catchers, but the Raiders were no good when he went there. The same can be said for Matt Cassel in New England. Outside of one very game manager-ish year in KC, he was mostly a bust there.

Yes, these QBs didn’t play well on their respective new teams. But they were brought in to make losing franchises winners again. Usually, those types of Quarterbacks need to come from the draft.

But with Osweiler it’s different. The Texans made the playoffs last year with Brian Hoyer at QB and came close the year before with Ryan Fitzpatrick. So they’re already a good team. If Osweiler can prove to be even a marginal upgrade over those guys, then the trade is justified. Furthermore, lots of people were worried about how Houston might remain a contender with Brock getting so much money. But he has lots of team around him. We all know about JJ Watt. There’s also Clowney on that line, who definitely has talent. Bill O Brien wants to rely on defense, and has proven that he’s capable of doing so in the past. (He’s also a good coach, which wasn’t always the case with the other free agent situations I mentioned.) But offensively, they drafted Braxton Miller, a pretty good prospect at the slot position, as well as the speedster Will Fuller, to go along with Deandre Hopkins, one of the best X-ISO receivers in football. They also traded for Lamar Miller, who definitely showed flashes in Miami. They can mix him along with Alfred Blue, who’s proven to be a capable backup. Lastly, Bill O Brien comes from New England, and his pass game is very well schemed. It’s multiple, and aims to get the ball out quickly. All of this puts Osweiler in a very good position to succeed. Yes, he got the big contract. Yes, he likely will have the spotlight on him. But the investments look to be paying off two weeks in. He doesn’t have to be Tom Brady at this point. He just has to be Andy Dalton: efficient and smart.

~

Quick Hits

-It’s unfortunate that Garoppolo got hurt. Because I thought he looked really, really good against Miami.

-I was glad to see Matt Ryan bounce back against the Raiders. They came away with a W, but more importantly, he was aggressive throwing the ball downfield and confident, two things that have been missing from his game recently.

-It certainly doesn’t look like Cam Newton and the Panthers are taking a step back this season. Cam looks just as good as he did last year, and the addition of Kelvin Benjamin makes this offense scary. He’s quickly becoming one of the best young wide receivers in the league. What’s so impressive is his big body and catch radius, which gives Cam Newton margin for error. Then you have Devin Funchess as well, who people didn’t mention last year. WR often take a few years to develop, but he was a big time draft prospect. If he can become something too, then watch out. You also have Greg Olsen, one of the top receiving tight ends in the league, Corey Brown and Ted Ginn for deep shots, and then you ALSO have J. Stewart and that dominant O-Line… AND Mike Shula’s multiple option scheme which is so hard to defend. I don’t like Carolina, but it looks like they could be here to stay. If they play at their peak, they’re tough to defend.

-The Bills firing of OC Greg Roman struck me as a little strange, especially only two games into the season. He fits what they want to do in terms of being run first and then using Tyrod’s athleticism. Also, their problems over the last year seem to be more about defense than offense.

-Josh McCown gave us the usual Josh McCown treatment. Some nice gunslinger throws while under pressure (see the TD pass), and some bad gunslinger INT’s while under pressure (see the game ender). He did okay for himself last year, and should have been the starter this year (which isn’t saying much when RG3 is your other QB). But now he’s hurt, and the Browns might have to draft another QB next year. What number is that, now? Not to mention, they could have taken Wentz this year (who looks like he has the makings to be a star, at least based on week 1), but they traded the pick to Philly. They even spoke negatively about Wentz in the process (because the Browns are sooo good at evaluating Quarterbacks). What an embarrassment of a franchise.

-Can Chip Kelly and his offense succeed in the NFL? The jury is still out. On Sunday, we saw both sides of the equation. On the one hand, SF allowed 46 points. Yes, CAR is a very good offense, but as we’ve seen time and time again with Chip, when your offense plays so fast, you a) get into holes quickly if your offense isn’t producing, and b) your defense tends to suck. On the other hand, the 49ers were within one score of tying it in the 4th quarter. Before the Blaine Gabbert pick that basically sealed it, there was a dropped past by the niners that could have gone for a TD and tied it. Blaine Gabbert hasn’t played well by any means, but the offense has produced, albeit inconsistently. It’s hard to see anywhere else where Blaine Gabbert could go and even come close to this kind of offensive production. But that’s the Chip offense. They play fast, they get the ball out, and they get completions. Gabbert plays fast (wayyyy too fast), but the Chip Kelly offense is a good fit for him, because Chip wants the ball out. And when you have Blaine Gabbert as your QB (and Torrey Smith as your No. 1), you have to scheme offense. There’s nowhere Gabbert could go where they could huddle up, line-up, and simply out execute the defense. But Chip’s offense is at least giving these guys a chance, with a guy that is essentially a backup QB and a below average WR corps. And we’ve seen that with Chip in the past, where guys like Foles and Sanchez have looked serviceable. It hasn’t translated to wins consistently, but it does have the potential to morph offensive production.

-Speaking of Gabbert, he’s another guy that, like Bradford, can be frustrating. Like I said, at this point, he’s ideally a backup. He plays way too fast, and is way too overreactive to pressure. Because of that, his lower body mechanics become compromised, which leads to inaccuracy and missing throws he needs to make. It’s always been a problem with him, and pocket presence isn’t really something you can teach. But he also is capable of making really impressive throws. His TD throw this past week to Torrey Smith was an example. You do see the arm talent and the type of throws that explain why he was a first round pick. It’s just the other stuff that keeps him from being good.

-It looks like Mike Tirico is replacing Bob Costas as the host of pre and post-game Sunday Night Football. It’s unfortunate; I think Costas is better. I was never a big Tirico fan. He’s definitely a professional; I just don’t really like his voice or his style. But after the NFL told NBC they couldn’t put Tirico on Thursday Night broadcasts, they probably wanted to find something for him to do.

-We’re in the golden age of passing in the NFL, and we might be in the golden age of Quarterbacking as well. From vets to young guns, there’s a lot of talent in the NFL. I saw it all over the highlights this past sunday. Like I said earlier, Matt Ryan made some really impressive throws. Derek Carr as well. Marcus Mariota’s game winning TD pass was phenomenal, and Flacco’s TD to Mike Wallace was nice as well. Then as I mentioned there was Jimmy Garoppolo who looked really good, but Tanehill, although he’s dabbled in mediocrity, has a big time arm and is capable of big time throws as well, which can be seen with his TD pass to Jordan Cameron in the endzone. And Carson Palmer is back to MVP form; he continues to be a tremendous asset for Arizona.

-If it’s the golden age for passing, it might be the golden age for receivers as well. The NFL is full of physical specimens that we didn’t use to see, and these guys attack the ball. Late in the game, Amari Cooper went up for a first down catch on a short hitch that was spectacular. The ball was high and his arm extension was crazy. I was wrong when I said Larry Fitzgerald was done a few years ago, he’s rejuvenated with Palmer and is an absolute dog, attacking the football and running after the catch. Then there’s Julio Jones. A lot of people have been mentioning Antonio Brown’s name as best WR in the NFL, but don’t forget about this guy. Hardly anyone draws as much defensive attention as he does on the Falcons, yet he continues to make plays. He has a lethal combination of size and explosiveness. On a lot of those in-breaking routes, he reminds me of Andre Johnson, because he’s practically impossible to stop. He’s such a big target and so strong to the ball. Then there was the deep ball he caught from Ryan on the second and one deep shot. The ball placement was perfect, but his closing speed to the ball was ridiculous. He was double covered and behind the ball when the camera closed in on him, but by the time the ball got there, he ran through the double coverage and right into the ball. Phenomenal stuff.

Hopefully there’s plenty more great football on its way! Continue to stay tuned in to the blog to keep getting updates and analysis.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10 other followers

Click here for Archives

What is the Value of a Quarterback?

It seems like everytime a Quarterback not named Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers is handed a new contract, criticism is rampant. For years on end now, it seems like Quarterbacks have been given massive contracts that tend to eat up most of the salary cap. Many people often think that these players are not worth this type of money, as it used to be reserved for top-notch starters like Peyton Manning, Quarterbacks who were good enough that they could compensate for other areas of the team that were weak. This supposed jump in Quarterback salary likely started with Joe Flacco’s Superbowl XLVII run in 2012. At the start of that season, the Ravens chose not to offer Joe Flacco a new deal but instead let him play out the season. This was an understandable move in some respects as Joe Flacco had been a decent, but inconsistent starter up to that point, and the Ravens were a team built on running the football and playing strong defense.

That season, Joe Flacco essentially  bet on himself and won. He got hot at the right time and led the Ravens to a Superbowl victory, earning Superbowl MVP in the process. He had a tremendous postseason, throwing for 1140 yards, 9 yards per attempt, 11 touchdowns and no interceptions, and a passer rating of 117.2. At the end of the season, he knew he had the Ravens in a bind. He asked for big time money, and of course, they paid up. It was likely either that or let Joe Flacco hit the market. Letting Joe Flacco go after a Superbowl win would be a PR nightmare. Plus, they wouldn’t have a Quarterback.

It could be argued that that point changed the market for Quarterbacks as Flacco’s salary essentially became the asking price/market price for your average starter. It gave Quarterbacks and agents leverage. So since that point, we’ve seen a lot of non-elite Quarterbacks been given big time contracts. (Assuming “elite guys” are the top 3-5 guys, ie Brady, Rodgers, and Brees, that can win no matter who you put around them.) Some of these “non-elite” starters that have been given big money–and often criticized in the process–include Jay Cutler, Andy Dalton, Ryan Tannehill, Colin Kaepernick, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Matthew Stafford, and I believe since then the Ravens even gave Joe Flacco a second big contract.

Now, it is worth saying that a lot of these contract numbers are misleading. NFL contracts are almost never guaranteed and players almost never play out the entire deal. A lot of people just look at the raw number and assume that’s what the player is getting paid, and this is rarely the case. And there are a lot of people that have a problem with athletes getting paid so much money, or asking for so much money. (There are even some people who think that even when only looking at the guaranteed money, that Quarterbacks are still getting paid too much.) I would disagree with this stance, A) because NFL players are at risk of suffering severe, debilitating lifelong injuries, and B) because what players get paid is negligible compared to the money the owners make.

But that’s a conversation for another day. Putting aside the question of whether Quarterbacks, or even players in general, deserve to be paid this kind of money from an ethical standpoint, the issue I’m focusing on for this article is whether it makes sense from an NFL/business standpoint for Quarterbacks to be making the kind of big money that they often do.

As I’ve said, it seems that everytime a big new QB deal comes out, there is criticism all over the place. “They overpaid!”, “he’s not worth it!”, etc etc etc. Now, it’s easy to offer this kind of critique from at home sitting on your couch. But at the end of the day, teams need a Quarterback. It’s the most important position on the team, outside of kicker. (Kidding, kidding. But seriously, I do love Kickers.) The search for a QB drives coaches and franchises crazy. Too often, letting a serviceable guy go is just too big a risk to take, because QBs aren’t a dime a dozen. No one wants to be the Browns, Redskins, Bills, Dolphins, etc.

At the end of the day, if the market demands a certain price for a QB, the team has two choices: either pay that guy, or let him walk and not have a Quarterback. It’s easy for us to sit on our couches and say it’s not worth it, but we’re not the ones who have to put a product on the field to start the season. Someone’s gotta play. If it’s not the guy you currently have, who is it gonna be?

In the same sense, a lot of people will make the argument that paying for an average QB is paying to go 7-9, 8-8, or 9-7 and miss the playoffs, and that if you’re going to pay that much money to do that, then you might as well go 5-11 and get a high draft pick and draft a Quarterback. Again, this makes sense in theory, but no coach thinks like that. Coaches are being paid to win games. As are players. Most coaches’ jobs are on the line every single year. We know how quickly coaches get fired in this league. Their job is to create a winning product. No coach is going to tank/purposely lose games for any reason.

Most Quarterbacks that are getting paid big-time money aren’t guys that are going to single-handedly be carrying their teams to the playoffs. There aren’t that many Tom Bradys in the world. In fact, there’s only one. Yet a lot of these Quarterbacks are held to Brady-esque standards when pundits are criticizing these contracts. Ideally, should a Quarterback be paid his value proportionally to where he stands among the QB hierarchy of the rest of the league? Sure, but the league, and the market, don’t work like that.

Coaches would love to have Tom Brady, but they have to work with what they have. And outside of that group of about 3-5 elite QBs who can be successful in almost every situation, most QBs are situation dependent. I was once listening to a podcast where someone said–I don’t remember who, might have been Chris Burke or Doug Farrar, but not sure–that when it comes to QBs, there are a group of guys at the top who are going to have success no matter what situation they’re in, there are a group of guys at the bottom who are going to be bad and bring the team down no matter what situation they’re in, and the rest of the guys are dependent on situation. That rings true to me. I think when teams pay a non-elite QB big time money, they think (or are hoping) that if they can get enough team around him, he can win them a Superbowl or at least get to the playoffs, a la Eli Manning, Joe Flacco, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton.

This brings us back to the initial problem though: If a QB is dependent on team to be successful, why would you pay him so much money that you don’t have enough to build up the rest of the team? This is a tough question and you could argue it even applies to the elite guys–Tom Brady, Drew Brees, and Aaron Rodgers have been good enough to keep their teams in the playoff mix, but they all had more success winning rings on their earlier contracts. It’s just the case that early QB contracts are more conducive to team success, which is why it’s crucial to win a ring (or multiple ones, if you can) when you have a big time QB on his first contract. It’s going to be hard for the Seahawks to keep this defensive core together now that Russell Wilson has been extended. If I remember correctly, his first contract was incredibly team friendly, seeing how he wasn’t even expected to be the starter when he was drafted.

None of this is meant to defend any particular QB contract, nor is it meant to defend the signing of supposed “non-elite” QBs to big time contracts either. It is simply meant to point out that the criticism we hear regarding such contracts is often naive and fails to recognize the reality of the situations many of these teams are in and the options that they actually face. It’s always easy to criticize “after-the-fact”. But how many of these teams would have been criticized just as much had they cutoff ties with their QB and went into the season without a QB?

For years, teams have paid the QB, because they see it as the only viable option. For years, teams have been criticized for paying the QB because people see it as the wrong option. Could we now be starting to see a change in things? There are some situations that seem to suggest that, yes, teams may not be as willing to pay the QB going forward.

The Washington Redskins with Kirk Cousins and the New York Jets with Ryan Fitzpatrick both opted to give their QBs one year, “prove-it” deals rather than long term contracts. Both QBs had good years, statistically at least, and their teams were successful–the Redskins made it to the playoffs and the Jets were one game away–but these are guys you might hold your breath signing to long term deals. At least, that’s what the Jets and Redskins thought. Neither has a long track record of success, and neither is exceptionally physically gifted. Both played in well designed offensive schemes with talent at the skill positions. The Jets, especially, took a surprisingly long amount of time to sign Ryan Fitzpatrick, much longer than people expected. They did eventually get him signed, but they played hardball, and for a while it looked like they were ready to go into the season with Geno Smith as their starter.

Then you have Sam Bradford, who, not wanting to be a placeholder for a younger QB, decided to test the market after the Eagles drafted Carson Wentz. It turns out no one wanted him, and he eventually reported to training camp with the Eagles. Teams may have been turned off by the fact that he likely wanted to be guaranteed a starting position, and wanted big time money to do so. And I know he doesn’t have a track record of success in this league, and is injury prone, but it’s still a little surprising that a former No 1 overall pick who is likely more talented throwing the football than maybe half the QBs in this league wouldn’t garner any attention, especially this day in age when so many teams are looking for Quarterbacks.

Lastly, you have the most glaring example: The Denver Broncos. Last year, Brock Osweiler stepped in midseason for an injured Peyton Manning and played pretty well, going 4-2 in his absence. I was actually surprised that they gave the job back to Peyton, to be honest. But they did, and Brock had to sit back on the bench and watch while Peyton went on to be part of the Superbowl winning team.

Osweiler was drafted by the Broncos in 2012, and everyone assumed he’d be Peyton Manning’s replacement once Manning retired. Outside of that brief period last year, Osweiler didn’t get to see the field as a starter in those four years. Yes, Osweiler was drafted under a different coaching staff than the one currently in place (although Elway had still been there, and he seems to be making the decisions with this club), but it was still surprising, to say the least, when the Broncos decided so casually to not pay Osweiler and let him seek out a trade. (Not sure if he was traded or just released and then signed, but basically Denver made a conscious decision to move on.)

What happened was Osweiler wanted a certain amount of money and Denver didn’t want to give it to him. Osweiler likely felt disrespect from a team that had him sit on the bench for four years, and then bench him again and make him watch the Superbowl from the sidelines after he thought the job was his. Elway likely watched his team win a Superbowl off the heels of a dominant defense–after a regular season during which his Quarterback, Peyton Manning, was borderline atrocious–and thought that he had a formula for success (play good defense) that he didn’t want to mess with by paying a Quarterback money that, in his eyes, he didn’t deserve based on the caliber of player he was. In theory, it makes sense for both sides, but at the end of the day, Elway is going into the season with either Mark Sanchez, Trevor Siemian, or Paxton Lynch as the starter (still to be determined). He essentially doesn’t have a Quarterback right now. That’s a bold move to make, but Elway’s never been afraid of doing things his way.

Then on the other end of the spectrum, you have the Houston Texans. They represent the opposite philosophy, the “pay the QB” philosophy. They gave Osweiler the money he wanted, despite going 9-7 the previous two years with Ryan Fitzpatrick and Brian Hoyer at QB, respectively. Those QBs played okay, and Houston even got into the playoffs last year, although Hoyer imploded in the playoff game. But they saw Osweiler as an upgrade at the most important position on the field, so they gave him the money he wanted.

Both moves make sense in some respects and are questionable in others. Ultimately, only time will tell who made the best move.

The point is, it’s always easy to say from an outside perspective, not to pay the QB. But the alternative means going into the season with an unknown at QB, which could be just as dangerous, if not more. It seems that now some teams are finally beginning to take this option. It will be interesting to see what this means moving forward, as pundits who have always criticized teams for paying the QB will now get to see what the alternative looks like, and will have the opportunity to put their money where their mouth is.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 10 other followers

Click here for Archives