NFL: Young quarterbacks

I don't get it,.. why does the NFL insist on starting all these young rookie quarterbacks over the last several years? Every once in awhile you luck out with a guy like Rothlesberger(sp) of teh Steelers,.. but for the most part, they are all just a bunch of inexperienced young punks. For example,.. Eli Manning vs Kurt Warner. Warner starts the season for the Giants at 5-2. They then replace Warner with Manning. Manning goes on to lose 6 straight games. Does this make any kind of sense at all? Shouldn't Manning be sitting on the sidelines for about 4 years, learning, taking notes, etc. before he goes out to start a game?

Or with Carr as you want him to see the worst, then improve into a man

It worked for us. :D

Honestly I thought Eli was way over rated to begin with, thought Roth was the better suited for Pro's and had proved himself against bigger teams and bigger games better the Eli. Plus also the way Eli acted at the draft, bah....

Hope him and the Simms boy have the same lackluster go nowhere careers.

You got that right. Even sticking with Kerry Collins would have been better. But its typical of the brainless management/drafting the Giants have exhibited the past few seasons. BTW, they're stuck now - Warner can now voidd the last year of his contract.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=1955151

Good. I hope Warner finds a better team to play for. After winning two superbowls only to become a backup to a rookie? That is just a slap in the face. Although at the same time, I hope Warner realizes that he's no spring chicken anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebHead

Good. I hope Warner finds a better team to play for. After winning two superbowls only to become a backup to a rookie? That is just a slap in the face. Although at the same time, I hope Warner realizes that he's no spring chicken anymore.

---

Actually Wrrby. He lost the second one. For some reason I remember that vividly. :D

Well, in all honesty, Roethlisberger is the rare exception to the rule. I didn't have high hopes for the Steelers this season to start with, and when Maddox went down in week 2, I figured it was only going to get worse. I was honestly expecting like a 2-14, 3-13 finish at best. But who knew a rookie could come in and go 13-0, and set a new record for rookie completion percentage and quarterback rating? It's never been done before, and it probably never will be done again.

All rookies generally need time to develop. Whether it's a year or 2 sitting on the bench behind a veteran and learning, or being thrown to the lions from day one and learning on the field, it doesn't matter. Take a look at the bengals - Carson Palmer sat all of last year, and he got off to a shaky start this season, but he ended up finishing pretty strong, and has developed into a decent QB. Then you take a look at a guy like David Carr who has started ever since he was drafted, and is just now starting to look like a franchise QB you keep around for the long haul. You just never know, some players develop faster than others. Every position has some bit of a learning curve to it, but the QB position is the steepest of those curves. Not only do you have to know what you're doing, but you're also responsible for what 10 other guys on the field are doing. It's not just throwing the ball to the open guy - you've got to know how to read a defense, change up your pass protection before the snap, and most importantly, know when to eat the ball instead of trying to force a throw. It's a much different game from college ball, where you'll only be playing maybe 2-3 good/great teams a year.

As for the Giants, the decision to throw Manning in was pushing the panic button. The fact is, they won a few games on a great defense, but when that defense started to fall apart due to injuries, their lackluster offense was exposed. I mean, they haven't had a TD pass to a WR all season. Coughlin thought they needed a spark, and he figured that maybe Manning could provide it. He didn't of course. But at the same time, you've got to know that Kurt Warner was nothing but a stopgap for them, and wasn't there to build around in the long term. He knew Manning was their guy of the future when he signed there, so I can't really say I feel sorry for him...

Or you could be the Cowboys playing the ancient Testeverde

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Or you could be the Cowboys playing the ancient Testeverde

---

Doesn't really matter in their case, their line totally sucks. You could have Joe Montana behind that line and it wouldn't matter. Honestly, I'd let old man Testeverde stay in and take the beating this year and try to rebuild the line in the offseason.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Or you could be the Cowboys playing the ancient Testeverde

---

lmao,.. Vinnie "The Ancient" Testaverde. That has a certain ring to it. :D

Ever once in a while you do get that outstanding fresh meat QB that is kwik to take the reins and is able to run with it. Big Ben this year, Dan Marino was able to do it. Peyton Manning came in his rookie year and was thrown to the meat grinder and put up very decent #'s, but his TD/Int ratio wasn't great.
Remember though for every jewel you get like Big Ben, Manning or Marino you get a Ryan Leaf or Rich Mirer! :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by meatwad

Actually Wrrby. He lost the second one. For some reason I remember that vividly. :D

---

Oh yeah! That's right. I do remember that one too. That was a great moment in sports history to see the St Louis retards get soundly beat by the mighty Patriots led by San Mateo, California's own Tom Brady. That was a great game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Major Kong

...Remember though for every jewel you get like Big Ben, Manning or Marino you get a Ryan Leaf or Rich Mirer! :eek:

---

Oh yeah,.. I totally agree.

Btw,.. I guess Elway was a youngster when he started out too. Same as Montana. Maybe I'm just getting older or something, but It just seems strange to see 22, 23, 24 year old starting quarterbacks in the NFL. Totally inexperienced rookies making all sorts of bad decisions left and right. Takes the fun out of the game to watch the inexperience imo.

Elway sucked *** and got benched his rookie year. In most cases, if a rook has a 1:1.5 TD:INT ratio, he's doing all right.

Yeah,.. this is true. It took Elway like 46 seasons before he finally won the big game. I guess every quarterback learns at his own pace though. Either that or the laws of probability finally went in his favor towards the end.

Damn it wrbby, some days I just feel like smacking you. What I was saying is, Elway was bad his rookie year, just like the majority of QBs are. He was great the majority of his career, but he didn't win the big one until he had a running game to help him. No QB, no matter how great they are can win a Super Bowl without a running game to help them out. See Dan Marino, Fran Tarkenton, etc.

Food for thought: Johnny Unitas wasted away for a good 3 years on the Steelers bench, until they released him. He then went to the Colts and had finally honed his craft, and went down as possibly the greatest QB ever to play the game.

Will Troy Aikman ever be considered a great or will he just remain a footnote that won a lot of Superbowls?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Will Troy Aikman ever be considered a great or will he just remain a footnote that won a lot of Superbowls?

---

I think he'd be considered great. Not one of the greatest of all time, but one of the greats of his era. The problem is, there were a lot of other good-great QBs of his time - Steve Young, Jim Kelly, Brett Favre, and then you had Elway still doing his thing and winning Super Bowls.

I think Aikman will go down a lot like Terry Bradshaw - a good QB who was on a VERY talented team that won a lot of Super Bowls. Most of the credit for the Steelers wins tends to go to their defense, and I think most of the credit for the Cowboys 3 Super Bowls will go to Emmitt Smith. Aikman was a big part of it, no doubt, but Emmitt was the big star of the team.

The problem with Aikman - and Steve Young for that matter - is a career shortened by injury. If Aikman played a few more seasons, and kept the Cowboys competitive in spit of the fact that the team as a whole sucks (like what Favre is doing with Green Bay now), then he'd be without question among the best of all time.

If I remember right, they threw him to the wolves his first year. I know they lost way more then they won.

Would love to see that repeated down here in Houston, Carr is developing(still has some issues), Davis is really coming into his own, Andre Johnson will be a major star, and the line is getting better.

The Texans are starting to come into their own. They've played pretty well this year, and I think they could be major contenders next season. The only thing they got against them is a tough division. The Colts might be overrated, but they are tough, and they'll still be around next year. And the Jags are on the rise, just needing a bit more consistency to be in the top. And the Titans are starting to slip, but they can surpise you and come out of nowhere. They haven't had back to back losing seasons in a loooooong time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cobra X

Damn it wrbby, some days I just feel like smacking you. What I was saying is, Elway was bad his rookie year, just like the majority of QBs are. He was great the majority of his career,...

---

Well I guess my memories of Elway are different than yours. My memories usually included celebrating a 49er victory over the Broncos in the Superbowl each year which to me translates to Montana being superior to Elway which then translates to Elway sucks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cleetus

Will Troy Aikman ever be considered a great or will he just remain a footnote that won a lot of Superbowls?

---

Ditto on this one as my above reply to Cobra X, except replace the words Superbowl with NFC championship, replace Elway with Aikman and replace Montana with Young and the saga continued.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebHead

Well I guess my memories of Elway are different than yours. My memories usually included celebrating a 49er victory over the Broncos in the Superbowl each year which to me translates to Montana being superior to Elway which then translates to Elway sucks.

---

So losing in a Super Bowl means you suck? Nevermind that maybe 2/3 of the QBs in the game never even get there in the first place?

Brett Favre's Packers lost to the Broncos in Super Bowl XXXII. Does that mean he sucks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WebHead

Ditto on this one as my above reply to Cobra X, except replace the words Superbowl with NFC championship, replace Elway with Aikman and replace Montana with Young and the saga continued.

---

And how many NFC championship games did Young lose to the Aikman led cowboys? And let's not forget the one that he actually did win, he only won cuz Aikman left the game with a concussion. :thumbs:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cobra X

So losing in a Super Bowl means you suck? Nevermind that maybe 2/3 of the QBs in the game never even get there in the first place?

Brett Favre's Packers lost to the Broncos in Super Bowl XXXII. Does that mean he sucks?

---

Fiorve is great. Elway was great. I just like gloating about how great Montana was. It's all I got,.. I mean, look at them now. :sad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cobra X

Well, in all honesty, Roethlisberger is the rare exception to the rule.
All rookies generally need time to develop. Whether it's a year or 2 sitting on the bench behind a veteran and learning, or being thrown to the lions from day one and learning on the field, it doesn't matter..

---

You have that right! It is rare indeed.
You take ANY sport, and great rookies are rare.
This isn't college, or Triple A anymore. This is the real deal.
Some can handle it, some can't. and many have been mentioned in this thread.
btw:
Did you see how Peyton managed his offense last weekend? Calling off the punting team! Well, I for one am impressed.
Great QB's are indeed rare, and should be appreciated. Even when they are great rookies.