If A QB sucks after 2 years, he sucks.
-
This is an interesting article. Part of me wanted to just sit on this info and then use it in future discussions, but I think it can spark enough discussion on its own.
For as much shit as the Browns have gotten for ditching their QB's early, maybe they've been maximizing their efforts at finding a quality franchise quarterback. After all, it's not like an quarterbacks went on to have successful careers elsewhere (I'm pulling for you in Miami, BQ).
via Deadspin:
If a quarterback has a chance to be a star, chances are it will become apparent within two seasons. Chase Stuart of Football Perspective looked at how long it took star quarterbacks to become great, examining the top 42 quarterbacks since the merger and compared how each quarterback performed (measured by adjusted net yards per attempt) relative to the league average during their career. He then broke down their early careers into segments of 16 stars to reflect the current NFL season duration.
Of the 42 quarterbacks studied, only four had below-average passing stats after two years of starting. Those four players were Terry Bradshaw, Troy Aikman, Vinny Testaverde, and Drew Brees.
As Stuart puts it:
If a quarterback is below-average through two years worth of starts — say,— then it seems highly unlikely that such a player will turn into a franchise quarterback absent extenuating circumstances.The "extenuating circumstances" gives for Bradshaw, Aikman, Testaverde, and Brees were that each landed with terrible teams.
Note that this isn't telling us who will be a great quarterback, as Stuart didn't track down all the QBs who are at least above average through their first two years. This is sussing out a negative indicator, showing which QBs have virtually no chance of getting to the highest level of quarterback.
This raises further questions—how does his manifest at different cutoffs, both in starts and for caliber of quarterback?—but it's a compelling case that there's a set timer on a quarterback to get himself and his offense to an above average level if he's going to be great.
-
Interesting, yes, and some of the linked prior articles were interesting reads as well. That said...
The utility of an evaluation tool that relies on so much subjective rationalization of so many outliers has to be questioned.
How many former Browns QBs can be considered to have been on "bad teams"?
How many of the QBs that rose to meeting the tool's criterion only did so because either their "betters" were eliminated form the data base or their teams "got better"?
-
The simple way I'd say it is this: there's a good reason all the dud Browns QB's have never done anything else in their career. If they truly were in a bad situation here someone would have seen enough to give them a second chance. Hell, Anderson did get that chance and sucked again.
-
This was certainly not always the case. Oftentimes it took a QB at least 2-3 years to even see the field. Take Jim Plunkett....considered a bust.....but made a comeback and won 2 SBs.
Look at Brian Sipe. On the taxi squad for at least 2 years.
Elway was actually pretty bad his first two years.
Len Dawson....cut by both the Browns and Steelers before becoming a HOF QB.
And recently, Aaron Rodgers sat for what? Three years?
I am sure there are a few more examples.
-
This was certainly not always the case. Oftentimes it took a QB at least 2-3 years to even see the field. Take Jim Plunkett....considered a bust.....but made a comeback and won 2 SBs.
Look at Brian Sipe. On the taxi squad for at least 2 years.
Elway was actually pretty bad his first two years.
Len Dawson....cut by both the Browns and Steelers before becoming a HOF QB.
And recently, Aaron Rodgers sat for what? Three years?
I am sure there are a few more examples.
This was certainly not always the case. Oftentimes it took a QB at least 2-3 years to even see the field. Take Jim Plunkett....considered a bust.....but made a comeback and won 2 SBs.
Look at Brian Sipe. On the taxi squad for at least 2 years.
Elway was actually pretty bad his first two years.
Len Dawson....cut by both the Browns and Steelers before becoming a HOF QB.
And recently, Aaron Rodgers sat for what? Three years?
I am sure there are a few more examples.
Because the game is much more QB friendly now than it used to be.
Even still, some of your stats that you listed don't really fit the argument. The study involved the statistics from star quarterbacks in their first two years of starting, not just their first two years in the league.
Rodgers sat behind a HOF QB for three years. He didn't sit because he was inept. He sat because Brett Favre was, and still is, one of the greatest NFL QB's to play the game. Rodgers threw for 58 TD's and 20 INT's in his first two years actually starting.
Elway's first year of starting, he only won 4 games. However, that was double what the Broncos won the year before. Elway's second year, he won 12 games and made it to the playoffs. His stats weren't absolutely atrocious, either. He still had about 55% completion percentage and 2,500+ yards his sophomore year.
Len Dawson started two games in his first five years in the league, mostly out of necessity (similar to Hoyer, actually). When he actually became a full fledged starter in Dallas, he turned it on.
However, Plunkett and Sipe were just garbage their first four or so years. On that case, you're absolutely spot on.
-
This was certainly not always the case. Oftentimes it took a QB at least 2-3 years to even see the field. Take Jim Plunkett....considered a bust.....but made a comeback and won 2 SBs.
Look at Brian Sipe. On the taxi squad for at least 2 years.
Elway was actually pretty bad his first two years.
Len Dawson....cut by both the Browns and Steelers before becoming a HOF QB.
And recently, Aaron Rodgers sat for what? Three years?
I am sure there are a few more examples.
Because the game is much more QB friendly now than it used to be.
Even still, some of your stats that you listed don't really fit the argument. The study involved the statistics from star quarterbacks in their first two years of starting, not just their first two years in the league.
Rodgers sat behind a HOF QB for three years. He didn't sit because he was inept. He sat because Brett Favre was, and still is, one of the greatest NFL QB's to play the game. Rodgers threw for 58 TD's and 20 INT's in his first two years actually starting.
Elway's first year of starting, he only won 4 games. However, that was double what the Broncos won the year before. Elway's second year, he won 12 games and made it to the playoffs. His stats weren't absolutely atrocious, either. He still had about 55% completion percentage and 2,500+ yards his sophomore year.
Len Dawson started two games in his first five years in the league, mostly out of necessity (similar to Hoyer, actually). When he actually became a full fledged starter in Dallas, he turned it on.
However, Plunkett and Sipe were just garbage their first four or so years. On that case, you're absolutely spot on.
Because the game is much more QB friendly now than it used to be.
Even still, some of your stats that you listed don't really fit the argument. The study involved the statistics from star quarterbacks in their first two years of starting, not just their first two years in the league.
OK, sure, I agree that you can certainly tell a lot more about a guy that has started say a full 25-32 games than one that has been sitting on the bench or on the practice squad. Point noted.
Rodgers sat behind a HOF QB for three years. He didn't sit because he was inept. He sat because Brett Favre was, and still is, one of the greatest NFL QB's to play the game. Rodgers threw for 58 TD's and 20 INT's in his first two years actually starting.
Elway's first year of starting, he only won 4 games. However, that was double what the Broncos won the year before. Elway's second year, he won 12 games and made it to the playoffs. His stats weren't absolutely atrocious, either. He still had about 55% completion percentage and 2,500+ yards his sophomore year.
Len Dawson started two games in his first five years in the league, mostly out of necessity (similar to Hoyer, actually). When he actually became a full fledged starter in Dallas, he turned it on.
However, Plunkett and Sipe were just garbage their first four or so years. On that case, you're absolutely spot on.
Like I said, I conceded your point that there is a difference between two years of starting and X number of years in the league riding the pine.
And to that extent, I disagree with your point here about Sipe. He rode the pine on the Taxi Squad for a couple of years, then was a backup for a while. He certainly wasn't "garbage" his first 4 years as a starter......he didn't play. When Sipe began to start he began to do well.
-
Because the game is much more QB friendly now than it used to be.
Even still, some of your stats that you listed don't really fit the argument. The study involved the statistics from star quarterbacks in their first two years of starting, not just their first two years in the league.
OK, sure, I agree that you can certainly tell a lot more about a guy that has started say a full 25-32 games than one that has been sitting on the bench or on the practice squad. Point noted.
Rodgers sat behind a HOF QB for three years. He didn't sit because he was inept. He sat because Brett Favre was, and still is, one of the greatest NFL QB's to play the game. Rodgers threw for 58 TD's and 20 INT's in his first two years actually starting.
Elway's first year of starting, he only won 4 games. However, that was double what the Broncos won the year before. Elway's second year, he won 12 games and made it to the playoffs. His stats weren't absolutely atrocious, either. He still had about 55% completion percentage and 2,500+ yards his sophomore year.
Len Dawson started two games in his first five years in the league, mostly out of necessity (similar to Hoyer, actually). When he actually became a full fledged starter in Dallas, he turned it on.
However, Plunkett and Sipe were just garbage their first four or so years. On that case, you're absolutely spot on.
Like I said, I conceded your point that there is a difference between two years of starting and X number of years in the league riding the pine.
And to that extent, I disagree with your point here about Sipe. He rode the pine on the Taxi Squad for a couple of years, then was a backup for a while. He certainly wasn't "garbage" his first 4 years as a starter......he didn't play. When Sipe began to start he began to do well.
And to that extent, I disagree with your point here about Sipe. He rode the pine on the Taxi Squad for a couple of years, then was a backup for a while. He certainly wasn't "garbage" his first 4 years as a starter......he didn't play. When Sipe began to start he began to do well.
I loved Sipe, but we (yes, me included) romanticize him way beyond his actual performance. He really only had one, great, Kardiac-filled year... 1980.
"Garbage" may seem a harsh assessment of his first, four-years, but objectively, it's close to true.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SipeBr00.htm
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
i'm glad we got rid of the QBs we did when we did. you can't hold onto guys for years thinking they'll develop into something they're not as other franchise QBs are drafted by other teams year in and year out.
-
And to that extent, I disagree with your point here about Sipe. He rode the pine on the Taxi Squad for a couple of years, then was a backup for a while. He certainly wasn't "garbage" his first 4 years as a starter......he didn't play. When Sipe began to start he began to do well.
I loved Sipe, but we (yes, me included) romanticize him way beyond his actual performance. He really only had one, great, Kardiac-filled year... 1980.
"Garbage" may seem a harsh assessment of his first, four-years, but objectively, it's close to true.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SipeBr00.htm
I loved Sipe, but we (yes, me included) romanticize him way beyond his actual performance. He really only had one, great, Kardiac-filled year... 1980.
"Garbage" may seem a harsh assessment of his first, four-years, but objectively, it's close to true.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SipeBr00.htm
Well, he was drafted in 1972. He didn't play a game for 2 years. And for two years he was a backup, playing in only 2 and 5 games. So, that was his first 4 years. For the next 4 years he was a starter he was just a little above .500: 7-5, 5-4, 8-8, 9-7.
Then certainly he had a massive year in 1980.
No, I would say he was "good" and only great for one year. And honestly, yes, he followed up his great year with kind of a bad year.
And note, for his career as a starter he was only 57-55......and never won a postseason game. I love the guy but truth be told, he never took us anywhere we wanted to go....playoff wise.
And let's note this about those teams: Sipe was not the worry about those teams. They played fairly poor defense that entire era.
-
I loved Sipe, but we (yes, me included) romanticize him way beyond his actual performance. He really only had one, great, Kardiac-filled year... 1980.
"Garbage" may seem a harsh assessment of his first, four-years, but objectively, it's close to true.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/S/SipeBr00.htm
Well, he was drafted in 1972. He didn't play a game for 2 years. And for two years he was a backup, playing in only 2 and 5 games. So, that was his first 4 years. For the next 4 years he was a starter he was just a little above .500: 7-5, 5-4, 8-8, 9-7.
Then certainly he had a massive year in 1980.
No, I would say he was "good" and only great for one year. And honestly, yes, he followed up his great year with kind of a bad year.
And note, for his career as a starter he was only 57-55......and never won a postseason game. I love the guy but truth be told, he never took us anywhere we wanted to go....playoff wise.
And let's note this about those teams: Sipe was not the worry about those teams. They played fairly poor defense that entire era.
Well, he was drafted in 1972. He didn't play a game for 2 years. And for two years he was a backup, playing in only 2 and 5 games. So, that was his first 4 years. For the next 4 years he was a starter he was just a little above .500: 7-5, 5-4, 8-8, 9-7.
My bad... By "his" I meant years when he started all, or nearly all, games and those were '76 thru '79. But regardless win/loss is not the way to judge him.
-
-
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
Yea, the comparison of Hoyer to Sipe had been made long ago. As noted, each barely played there first 4 years.....but then Sipe went on to become the MVP of the NFL and became and still is the Browns all time leader in passing yards.
What would you think of that? If Hoyer became NFL MVP?
-
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
Your avatar screams "trashbasket douchebag", yet we don't judge.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
Your avatar screams "trashbasket douchebag", yet we don't judge.
Your avatar screams "trashbasket douchebag", yet we don't judge.
Is that him....or is it Ricky Fowler?
-
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
Your avatar screams "trashbasket douchebag", yet we don't judge.
Your avatar screams "trashbasket douchebag", yet we don't judge.
I do!
-
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
Yea, the comparison of Hoyer to Sipe had been made long ago. As noted, each barely played there first 4 years.....but then Sipe went on to become the MVP of the NFL and became and still is the Browns all time leader in passing yards.
What would you think of that? If Hoyer became NFL MVP?
Yea, the comparison of Hoyer to Sipe had been made long ago. As noted, each barely played there first 4 years.....but then Sipe went on to become the MVP of the NFL and became and still is the Browns all time leader in passing yards.
What would you think of that? If Hoyer became NFL MVP?
I can't even fathom that. It would be so damn exciting.
-
Yea, the comparison of Hoyer to Sipe had been made long ago. As noted, each barely played there first 4 years.....but then Sipe went on to become the MVP of the NFL and became and still is the Browns all time leader in passing yards.
What would you think of that? If Hoyer became NFL MVP?
I can't even fathom that. It would be so damn exciting.
-
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
... and back to hit and run...
-
This entire thread screams Brian Hoyer
Yea, the comparison of Hoyer to Sipe had been made long ago. As noted, each barely played there first 4 years.....but then Sipe went on to become the MVP of the NFL and became and still is the Browns all time leader in passing yards.
What would you think of that? If Hoyer became NFL MVP?
Yea, the comparison of Hoyer to Sipe had been made long ago. As noted, each barely played there first 4 years.....but then Sipe went on to become the MVP of the NFL and became and still is the Browns all time leader in passing yards.
What would you think of that? If Hoyer became NFL MVP?
What if Brian Hoyer breaks Peyton Mannings TD record this year
What if Brian Hoyer decides to be a running QB and leads the league in rushing?
What if Brian Hoyer never throws an incomplete pass this year?
We can talk about all these what ifs, along with yours. All equally nonsensical.
You're going to have to comes to terms with the reality that Brian Hoyer isn't a great QB. I'm fully aware that you're not coming to terms with that idea right now, but eventually you're going to have to deal with it. There's mountains of evidence that Hoyer isn't a great QB. It's all over. There's a reason why he's on his 4th team and currently in the middle of a battle with a Rookie QB. NFL people agree with me on this one. They love his personality, they love his quick release, they don't like his arm and they don't like his accuracy. NFL.com just had an article ranking backup QBs and Hoyer came in 10th. He's three spots behind Shaun Hill for crying out loud.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000377086/article/ranking-all-32-backup-quarterbacks
That's how people in the NFL view Brian Hoyer. The Browns themselves drafted a QB in the first round because they believe the same things about Brian Hoyer. Not the answer. Not going to be NFL MVP. Not Brian Sipe or Kurt Warner. Has a NFL team been wrong about a player before? Yup. But they're right 99.9% of the time. Don't point out the .1% and tell me they're equal.
Brian Hoyer isn't going to be NFL MVP. I'd love to be pimps from Oakland or cowboys from Arizona, but it's not Halloween. Grow up Peter Pan, Count Chocula.
-
Yea, the comparison of Hoyer to Sipe had been made long ago. As noted, each barely played there first 4 years.....but then Sipe went on to become the MVP of the NFL and became and still is the Browns all time leader in passing yards.
What would you think of that? If Hoyer became NFL MVP?
What if Brian Hoyer breaks Peyton Mannings TD record this year
What if Brian Hoyer decides to be a running QB and leads the league in rushing?
What if Brian Hoyer never throws an incomplete pass this year?
We can talk about all these what ifs, along with yours. All equally nonsensical.
You're going to have to comes to terms with the reality that Brian Hoyer isn't a great QB. I'm fully aware that you're not coming to terms with that idea right now, but eventually you're going to have to deal with it. There's mountains of evidence that Hoyer isn't a great QB. It's all over. There's a reason why he's on his 4th team and currently in the middle of a battle with a Rookie QB. NFL people agree with me on this one. They love his personality, they love his quick release, they don't like his arm and they don't like his accuracy. NFL.com just had an article ranking backup QBs and Hoyer came in 10th. He's three spots behind Shaun Hill for crying out loud.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000377086/article/ranking-all-32-backup-quarterbacks
That's how people in the NFL view Brian Hoyer. The Browns themselves drafted a QB in the first round because they believe the same things about Brian Hoyer. Not the answer. Not going to be NFL MVP. Not Brian Sipe or Kurt Warner. Has a NFL team been wrong about a player before? Yup. But they're right 99.9% of the time. Don't point out the .1% and tell me they're equal.
Brian Hoyer isn't going to be NFL MVP. I'd love to be pimps from Oakland or cowboys from Arizona, but it's not Halloween. Grow up Peter Pan, Count Chocula.
What if Brian Hoyer breaks Peyton Mannings TD record this year
What if Brian Hoyer decides to be a running QB and leads the league in rushing?
What if Brian Hoyer never throws an incomplete pass this year?
We can talk about all these what ifs, along with yours. All equally nonsensical.
You're going to have to comes to terms with the reality that Brian Hoyer isn't a great QB. I'm fully aware that you're not coming to terms with that idea right now, but eventually you're going to have to deal with it. There's mountains of evidence that Hoyer isn't a great QB. It's all over. There's a reason why he's on his 4th team and currently in the middle of a battle with a Rookie QB. NFL people agree with me on this one. They love his personality, they love his quick release, they don't like his arm and they don't like his accuracy. NFL.com just had an article ranking backup QBs and Hoyer came in 10th. He's three spots behind Shaun Hill for crying out loud.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000377086/article/ranking-all-32-backup-quarterbacks
That's how people in the NFL view Brian Hoyer. The Browns themselves drafted a QB in the first round because they believe the same things about Brian Hoyer. Not the answer. Not going to be NFL MVP. Not Brian Sipe or Kurt Warner. Has a NFL team been wrong about a player before? Yup. But they're right 99.9% of the time. Don't point out the .1% and tell me they're equal.
Brian Hoyer isn't going to be NFL MVP. I'd love to be pimps from Oakland or cowboys from Arizona, but it's not Halloween. Grow up Peter Pan, Count Chocula.
So it's nonsensical to talk about Hoyer performing well, but it's not nonsensical to talk about JF performing well?
I would love to know the reasoning behind that.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login