How is there not 32 guys capable of playing QB at a high level?

[LumberTubs]

My first thought when I read the thread title was that the college game is becoming less and less "pro style" but that hasn't always been the case and, when it wasn't, did every NFL team have very good/great QB? Probably not.

Then I thought, is it because coaching staffs are under so much pressure to succeed quickly (there are exceptions to this obviously *cough* *cough*) that QBs aren't given time to develop and are cast aside too soon? But then I thought that this hasn't always been the case either. Its a relatively new concept in the grand scheme of things. So, again, back in the day did every NFL team have a very good/great QB? Probably not.

On that basis, the conclusion I'm leaning towards is that playing QB is just very, very difficult and only a handful at any one time are actually going to reach that level.

The college game point I started off with will come into play from now on though because it means that we're less likely to see an era where you have QBs of the calibre of Brady/P Manning/Rodgers/Brees all playing at the same time again.

 

[Zaphod]

32, that's clever.

A lot of people have taken the route that it's the most important position on the team, and it's so tough and so important that it just takes demigods to get it done. Hence the justification of the media and fan hype around the position. But I'm going to give you a different number, and try to explain why there aren't 32 people excelling at this position.

53 is your number. You have a total of 53 teammates, only 46 of which can dress for actual game day. So if you figure those 7 people aren't important enough, we'll just go with 46.

Now, I know what you're thinking, is that there are only 11 players out there for your offense. But still, that makes your quarterback only 1/11th of the team out there for your offense.

So, I'll give you the reduction from 53 to 46, but I can't give you a reduction from 46 to even 11. I just can't, because you know what? The other team is going to put another 11 players out there on the defensive side of the ball. And they matter too. I know they're not the quarterback, but they are another 11 players on the field trying to make it hard on that position that the sun sets and rises around.

Ok, so that makes it just 22, right? So now in the simplest of terms he's been reduced a 1/22 fraction, unweighted of course. But that's not fair, right? Well, but that's the point of my post really. He's been weighted so highly that there are no other considerations for why there can't be 32 good quarterbacks.

Anyway, we all know it's not really 22 with players when you consider substitutions, but I'm just painting my numbers to further my illustration. So he really does get even smaller in that sea of people. But then finally, you have to consider the coaches.

There you have it. 32 of 1,696 all competing with each other in what I still consider to be the ultimate team sport.

 

[FrantikRam]

It is my opinion that most of the guys drafted could succeed in the NFL under the right circumstances - meaning I think most QBs could turn into franchise guys.

That's one reason I hate saying things like "we should have drafted Alshon Jeffery over Brian Quick" - maybe we should have, but Brandon Marshall is a phenomenal WR and if we reverse the situation, there's a good chance Quick turns out better faster because of the situation.

The college game is destroying QBs. It's a shame because while playing college football is probably fun for these kids, they all would want to go on to the NFL if they could. Shouldn't it then stand to reason that college coaches tailor their games to fit NFL systems?

The issue with that is the greed of the NCAA and the schools themselves. Coaches want to win so badly that they make a QB have almost zero responsibility, aside from deciding whether or not to hand off a read option.

The reason why I think college football should be more like the NFL vs the other way around is because at least in the NFL, the players are getting paid.

 

[jjab360]

32, that's clever.

A lot of people have taken the route that it's the most important position on the team, and it's so tough and so important that it just takes demigods to get it done. Hence the justification of the media and fan hype around the position. But I'm going to give you a different number, and try to explain why there aren't 32 people excelling at this position.

53 is your number. You have a total of 53 teammates, only 46 of which can dress for actual game day. So if you figure those 7 people aren't important enough, we'll just go with 46.

Now, I know what you're thinking, is that there are only 11 players out there for your offense. But still, that makes your quarterback only 1/11th of the team out there for your offense.

So, I'll give you the reduction from 53 to 46, but I can't give you a reduction from 46 to even 11. I just can't, because you know what? The other team is going to put another 11 players out there on the defensive side of the ball. And they matter too. I know they're not the quarterback, but they are another 11 players on the field trying to make it hard on that position that the sun sets and rises around.

Ok, so that makes it just 22, right? So now in the simplest of terms he's been reduced a 1/22 fraction, unweighted of course. But that's not fair, right? Well, but that's the point of my post really. He's been weighted so highly that there are no other considerations for why there can't be 32 good quarterbacks.

Anyway, we all know it's not really 22 with players when you consider substitutions, but I'm just painting my numbers to further my illustration. So he really does get even smaller in that sea of people. But then finally, you have to consider the coaches.

There you have it. 32 of 1,696 all competing with each other in what I still consider to be the ultimate team sport.

That's a lot of numbers, but I disagree with the gist of your post. I don't think there's any doubting anymore that QB is by far the most important position in all of pro sports.

It's a team game but the rest of your team has to be pretty much historically good to excel with a mediocre QB in the modern NFL.

 

[LesBaker]

I wonder how many Warners there are playing in small schools that never get visits from scouts that could do what needs to be done at the NFL level.

Northern Iowa isn't really unique, there are oodles of schools like it that have kids that weren't good enough in HS to get a scholarship to a big time football program. And just like star athletes that come out of HS and go to a college and never really get to play because they aren't up to the level of competition I'm willing to bet that there are guys playing in small schools who outgrow the level of competition or can grow into an NFL caliber player at all kinds of different positions. Including QB.

There are probably dozens of guys that can play QB, but most of them never get considered. Or even looked at/scouted.

Too many NFL guys must still think that being in a "small school" or playing lower level college ball means those guys can't play in the NFL. I've never bought into that. Just because a kid wasn't ready or good enough to play at Florida or USC when he was 17 or 18 doesn't mean that by the time he is 21-22 he isn't capable of picking up the pro game and being good.

So the short answer from me is there are enough of them, most just never get a chance.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

It is my opinion that most of the guys drafted could succeed in the NFL under the right circumstances - meaning I think most QBs could turn into franchise guys.

That's one reason I hate saying things like "we should have drafted Alshon Jeffery over Brian Quick" - maybe we should have, but Brandon Marshall is a phenomenal WR and if we reverse the situation, there's a good chance Quick turns out better faster because of the situation.

The college game is destroying QBs. It's a shame because while playing college football is probably fun for these kids, they all would want to go on to the NFL if they could. Shouldn't it then stand to reason that college coaches tailor their games to fit NFL systems?

The issue with that is the greed of the NCAA and the schools themselves. Coaches want to win so badly that they make a QB have almost zero responsibility, aside from deciding whether or not to hand off a read option.

The reason why I think college football should be more like the NFL vs the other way around is because at least in the NFL, the players are getting paid.

I prefer my college plays a pro style offense. It may take longer to build success but eventually they'd could get the reputation of developing pro teafy players that get drafted. That matters to elite level recruits. So them they would draw better players over time.

 

[Ballhawk]

Too many NFL guys must still think that being in a "small school" or playing lower level college ball means those guys can't play in the NFL. I've never bought into that. Just because a kid wasn't ready or good enough to play at Florida or USC when he was 17 or 18 doesn't mean that by the time he is 21-22 he isn't capable of picking up the pro game and being good.

Yeah, we heard that BS about Wentz and look at how that turned out. Goff was supposed to be so much more Pro ready. Yeah, right!:rant:

 

[LACHAMP46]

Talent, dedication, and the "right" circumstances...right place at the right time...and to add to that, there is something about the mental makeup of being a pro....

I've seen several QB's that had "it"...then lost "it"....sorta like Aaron Rodgers this year...Cam Newton...Eli Manning...are they losing it? Or, are the circumstances not in their favor? Same teams...a few player moves...yet, something is missing.

I see a bunch of guys that could/can play QB in the NFL....but for some reason...it just doesn't click...Look at Matt Stafford of this week...That guy can play...So can Dalton...So can Ryan...but they haven't really won anything...

 

[shaunpinney]

Because QBs get the girl, and sometimes, getting laid is more important...

But in all seriousness I believe it comes down to more than the physical or mental tools that the player has. It comes down to the situation and structure around that player.

I often think what would have happened to Tom Brady had he been drafted by the Rams (or any other team) and not the Pats, would he be as successful? I doubt it.

It's all about getting the right parts of the machine.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Because QBs get the girl, and sometimes, getting laid is more important...

But in all seriousness I believe it comes down to more than the physical or mental tools that the player has. It comes down to the situation and structure around that player.

I often think what would have happened to Tom Brady had he been drafted by the Rams (or any other team) and not the Pats, would he be as successful? I doubt it.

It's all about getting the right parts of the machine.

Then how do you explain Peyton Manning. The Colts were a good team with him then the year he leaves they are the worst in the league.

 

[shaunpinney]

Then how do you explain Peyton Manning. The Colts were a good team with him then the year he leaves they are the worst in the league.

As I mentioned I believe it's more than just the physical and mental tools the QB has. There was also a change in the coaching staff at Indianapolis from 2011 - 2012. Ron Turner left as Qb coach, a switch at OC, WR coach changed there was also a huge turnover at WR for the Colts when Peyton left. I do also think that Manning has a coach's mind, he sees the game unlike many other QBs and changes plays to the strengths of the team and his team mates - he's just a once in a generation kinda player.

 

[Mackeyser]

You ever wonder how there is not 32 people in the whole world that can be successful at playing QB in the NFL? Its truly mind boggling, There is more 7 footers in the NBA than there is capable QB's in the NFL. It just doesn't make sense, I know its hard and all of the coverage's have changed the game but come one now ! I think sometimes team over complicate the situation and don't let these guys just play the game! Let me know if you have any comments on this because its just the weirdest thing in sports for me.

One MAJOR issue is that there wasn't such a HUGE chasm between the college game and the pro game.

These days with the advent of advanced spread offenses that allow College coaches, specifically in the SEC and ACC to take advantage of their massive recruiting advantage allows these schools to simply outmatch their opponents.

Thus, you have college QBs who actually learn LESS than their counterparts in the past while focusing more and more on their physicality because they have to produce MORE and do that immediately.

Meanwhile, the Pro game continues to evolve and become ever more complex. Thus, the learning curve is ever more daunting... and it makes evaluating college QBs extraordinarily difficult. We've talked as have experts and talking heads alike about HOW to extrapolate College production from these various spread offenses and the various physical traits these QBs bring.

Also, in the Pro game, Head Coaches have less stability than ever before, and as such, they are not allowed the time develop young QBs like in decades past.

Thus we have this collision of college QBs that on the whole are LESS prepared for the Pro game than ever before AND a Pro game that REQUIRES production from Rookie QBs FASTER than ever before.

Such a scenario forces fail states in situations when success was certainly possible. David Carr comes to mind. There are others. Sam Bradford is another. Now that he's in a stable situation (although he was rushed into it), he is flourishing. But look at his journey. He's had a new OC ALMOST every year he's been in the league. That's just no way to develop as a QB.

The College game isn't going to change because you have hundreds of millions of dollars riding on wins at the college level and college athletes are still growing, physically, mentally, emotionally and into their maturity. Thus, offensive systems like the spread allow teams that simply recruit better to overwhelm other teams and teams that may be short on talent to maximize their talent. You have College HCs making Millions per year in salary and endorsements and Schools making hundreds of millions in TV, licensing and alumni donations (Johnny Manziel per an independent study during his senior year was worth conservatively more than $300M to his University in licensing and alumni contributions alone).

So, the college game, other than the few programs where the HC is dedicated to running a Pro or Pro-style Offense, has very little incentive or interest in training their players to succeed in the NFL. The money is winning at the college level, NOT sending players to the Pros.

This is also manifesting itself at other positions, but none so critically than at QB.

This is a huge dilemma for the NFL and as older pro QBs like Brady, Rodgers, Brees, Rivers, and Roethlisberger retire, the NFL will TRULY have a dilemma on its hands because there is not or at least hasn't been in the last few years nearly enough supply of new QBs to supplant the retiring QBs.

The NFL had a bevy of QBs. Now it faces a drought and it can't just blame it on the cyclical nature of things. This is structural and unless something changes, this drought will only continue.

 

[JerseyRam1]

I always say there are only 15 that do it really well and 5 or so that are "special". If you get one, your team can be a perennial contender, hence the reason the Rams and Eagles gave up so much to grab a player they believe can be one. In regard to the OP, there is a bunch of 7 footers, but maybe 10 "special" players, capable of lading their teams to a championship.

 

[ramsplaya16]

There absolutely is enough quarterbacks in the world to play for all 32 teams, it all comes down to scheme fit for the coach. Take Alex Smith for example he is absolutely perfect for Andy Reid's offense. If you take a quarterback Who strengths matches your coaches play calling perfectly, and your offense will be successful. It just comes down to drafting and FA signing for strengths of your coaches.

 

[Ballhawk]

We are back to the point where it was before the 1990s when college programs mostly ran the ball and a QB held a clipboard for years in the pros before he got a chance to start.
If you think that spread offense is bad for QBs you need to go back to the days of the power I and the wishbone offense in college.

 

[Mackeyser]

I'm not saying the spread is "bad" for QBs, per se. What I would say is that it doesn't prepare QBs for the complexities of the Pro game for a number of reasons. Moreover, as we've seen for decades now, it is increasingly difficult to parse how a QB from a Spread Variant will have their physical skills and mental acuities transfer to the Pro game than ever.

Couple that with the pressures on HCs to have Rookies produce NOW and HCs typical reluctance to change for Rookies (although, those that have...have had success. I won't bother listing them. We all know them) and you have a "what does 'getting painted into a corner' look like in real life" scenario.

The college game and pro game are at cross purposes. Heck, the needs of the HC and the requirements of rookie QBs are at cross purposes at the moment.