- Thread starter
- #41
I think the same can be said of any high pick regardless of position. The Browns are an excellent example. If Brown and "The Chosen One" would have panned out, they'd be challenging for the division.Starkiller said:Maybe, but then you also have to consider that when you blow the early draft pick on a franchise QB, it is a major cause of that franchise's struggles for a few years. Teams don't give up on that QB for at least 5 years, so their future is directly tied to his success.
All three had little talent around them early in their careers. All three were chosen by teams not known for having stellar front offices (Texans were in their first draft). All three were tossed out there with no time to develop and all the pressure of the world on them.Look at guys like Harrington, Carr, and Couch as examples of failed early QB picks. Couch stuck around Cleveland for 5 years and never was productive. Carr and Harrington have been around for 4 years already with nothing good to show. They have been weighing their teams down...
Let's look at some early picks at QB and see how different approaches/situations impacted them:
Eli Manning - he had a passer rating of 55.4 his rookie year starting seven games for one of the better franchises in the league. The Giants were not gangbusters in '04 but he had one of the better RBs in the game to take some pressure off. Add a healthy Shockey and bring in Burress in '05 and you have over 3,700 yards passing this season.
Carson Palmer - sat his first year and played 13 games in his second with a 77.3 passer rating. Ideally, this is how it should be done, IMO. I think the year he had certainly had a significant impact on his development. He took a passer rating of 77 in year two and turned it into one of 101 this year on his way to passing for over 3,800 yards. It doesn't hurt to have a couple of quality WRs and a RB on your side as well.
Joey Harrington - started 12 games his rookie season with little talent around him. Had 16 picks and a 59.9 passer rating. The next season he had 22 picks and a 63.9 passer rating. Most would say the Lions front office isn't close to the best in the league and have a string of under-performing early draft picks to prove it.
David Carr - thrown to the wolves and had a rookie season with 15 picks and 62.8 passer rating. He followed it with 13 ints and a 69.5 passer rating in 11 starts the following season. His sack numbers are well-known as are the questions surrounding the Texans ability to draft well.
Michael Vick - played in eight games his rookies season (started two). Had a 62.7 passer rating but did have a 9.3 ypc average running. Started 15 games the next year with an 81.6 passer rating and close to 3,000 yards passing with another 777 on the ground. He not developed as a passer in the last two seasons despite having decent skill around him though some question the talent of his WRs.
Bottom line:
1. Bad teams may reach for QBs in the draft to begin with.
2. QBs who start as rookies usually perform poorly unless they have a strong supporting cast (Rothlisberger).
3. QBs who sit most (or all) of their rookie season appear to have much better careers.
4. QBs drafted by the stronger franchises do better.
5. QBs with talent around them perform better.
I assume the above would hold true for most any postion you want to look at. If Harrington or Carr would have been drafted by the Steelers or Broncos and allowed to sit a year (or even forced to start with the better talent these teams have had) they'd be much better QBs today, IMO.
The key here is whether or not Reese feels Young/Leinart is a true talent. I think the worst thing which could happen is that he takes one or the other and throws him out there early with the supporting cast he'd have right now. I think Leinart might be able to step in at some point late in the season but I'd prefer both to hold a clip board for '06. It would allow either to develop while the team hopefully improves as well.