Link: MMQB Chris Cooley Edition Talks About Young QBs
Posted on July 13th, 2009 by Bassett
Chris Cooley steps in for Peter King this week. One of the ten things that he thinks, is that handling a rookie with kid gloves is overrated.
I think all the talk about making young quarterbacks wait their turn and learn before they play is B.S. The best way to get better at something is by doing it, so if they’re ready to play, let ‘em play. I know teams are very considerate about a player’s psyche, but if a quarterback can’t handle the scrutiny of throwing a pick in his first season, how is he going to handle it throughout his career? Might as well find out.
I hope he’s right, because I imagine the Jets will be starting theirs come September.
your a studd or not. its that simple. Name me on QB that was a bust that you think if he sat for a year he ‘d still be playing.
Situation and supporting casts are important, too. Steve Young was a bust with Tampa, but a HOFer with SF.
There really only one question:
Can your line protect him? If they can, let him play. And ours obviously can, so he does.
StvDoe is right, you have to be able to protect your rookie QB or he’ll get shell shocked from all the pass rushers. Think of David Carr. However, protecting your QB also means good coaching too. If Schotty is putting too much of the game on Sanchez’s back, then that is not protecting your QB either. That means no empty backfields, because Sanchez will need an extra blocker in case he didn’t properly recognize a blitz.
I think Cooley is mostly right. I think throwing a QB to the wolves is bad if the offensive line is bad, with David Carr being a perfect example; he seemed shell shocked for the rest of his career after years of getting beat down moments after the ball was snapped. If Sanchez starts right away, he should be fine since we actually have a good line (that of course assumes Sanchez doesn’t suck, and hopefully he’s everything we think he is)..
Some of the more senior guys are going to have to help me out on this one, but isn’t Ken O’Brien a pretty good example of a promising QB that was beaten into a basket case? He was great in ‘85 and ‘86 (after sitting out all of ‘83 and part of ‘84), but was sacked around 60 times each season. By ‘89, when I was old enough to watch objectively, he was the jittery guy that was drafted instead of Marino that we all remember him being. Is that the way others remember it or was it clear he wasn’t going to be real good even in his early career?
Go sign Brian Griese as insurance…now!
O’Brien was a very good QB when he had a very good OL. He was also under strict orders from Walton to “eat the ball” rather than force a throw – hence the high sack totals
Toon2388 is right. O’Brien wasn’t very mobile and Joe Walton wanted him to eat the ball (he also had a tendency to hold the ball too long, but he also had Wesley Walker going on deep patterns…that’s worth waiting in the pocket for). Plus, he only started 5 games as a rookie in 1984, his breakout, Pro Bowl and NFL-sack leading season was in 1985. Hard to say the sacks beat him down when he made the Pro Bowl in his second season.
I watched O’Brien’s whole career and I think the sacks definitely affected him. I also think that once things started going in the wrong direction he might not have been mentally tough enough to handle the NY scrutiny.
Here’s a question to ponder. Is it more important for a rookie QB to have a solid OL and running game or a good defense to complement the offense? The worst thing for any QB is for the opposing team’s defense to know you have to pass, which happens all the time when your defense gives up a ton of points. Sanchez has both a good defense AND OL/running game. Plus, the Jets special teams should be very good with the additions of Izzo and Leonhard. Normally, rookie QB’s don’t succeed, but Sanchez has a lot more to work with than most rookies, which is why he may succeed like Big Ben or Flacco.
Pete57,
That Meadowlands turf negatively affected a lot of Jets, like Lance Mehl, Al Toon, Gastineau and Klecko. But, it wasn’t the classic “rookie QB thrown to the wolves.” O’Brien had a great offense around him and a great defense, it was just Joe Walton’s offense and O’Brien’s tendency to hold the ball a little long that affected him. But, I agree, the pounding on that Meadowlands turf took its toll.
Sack, I agree. I didn’t mean to imply that O’Brien was a classic case of a rookie thrown to the wolves. Since Namath, we have had this scenario a couple of times: New QB steps in, looks good, and looks good for an extended period, but in the end they don’t get the job done (Todd, O’Brien, Pennington). I understand what happened with O’Brien and Pennington. But it always baffled how Todd looked so great one year, and looked so horrible the next. They year we made it to the AFC championship game against Miami, 82, Todd looked fantastic. He was hitting Wesley Walker for bombs left and right. The next season, he couldn’t reach him it seemed. I don’t know the reason but I could only conclude that he was injured or, as rumor had it, he was paid off by the mob to throw games.
As little surprise Griese was released from TB. I think the money is going to be spent else where, but if Sanchez is the guy wouldn’t Griese be a good fit to help bring him along and a decent back up to both push him and teach him…..
Sack, I think a good o-line is more important for young QB’s than a good defense. You’re right that a bad defense might force the QB to throw more into defenses geared for the pass, but a bad o-line will force the QB into bad habits, which are much more damaging long-term. Look at David Carr in HOU. In 2002, HOU’s defense was average (20th in Football Outsiders’ efficiency stats), while his o-line was dead last in the NFL. Sure enough, he got killed, hisstats were awful, *and* worst of all he learned to be overly gun-shy and hurry his passes, esp to the sidelines. And he apparently could never get over those bad habits.
Is Jay Cutler a good variable to throw into this conversation? As we know, he won nearly all of his games when the defense played well, but hardly ever won if they played badly. (13-1 if defense holds the other team to less than 21, but only 4-19 if the other team scores more than 21) And the Broncos do have a good offensive line.
Let’s assume that trend would have continued and is not just a statistical anomaly. If their defense had been really bad, he’d have lost nearly every game and maybe killed his confidence, whereas if they had a really good defense, he’d be an all-conquering hero even if his stats were only mediocre.
Not sure what that tells you though.