PJ and Eason time

[Mr. Scot]

11 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Brady's high level of awareness in the pocket combined with his footwork makes him good at buying time and evading the rush (for a pure pocket passer type).

Combine that with his Gumby like physique and pliability, and he is heavily resistant to injuries as well.

Which do you think would be easier though?

To find an amazing physical specimen like a Cam Newton or a Josh Allen or find a guy with enough smarts that he could develop into another Tom Brady?

Edited October 13, 2022 by Mr. Scot

[Wundrbread33]

57 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

And I think Bledsoe would have a hard time in today's game.

There's a reason why the player comparison here is from 20 years ago.

well he’s the first player that always pops in my head when someone says “pocket passing statue.”

 

When he played was the last time I enjoyed Madden games too. So he is stuck in that role (for me) forever. 

[PNW_PantherMan]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

Which do you think would be easier though?

To find an amazing physical specimen like a Cam Newton or a Josh Allen or find a guy with enough smarts that he could develop into another Tom Brady?

I want to say the latter, but the more I think about it the more it seems like a wash.  Most QB prospects are unsuccessful, and athletes like Cam Newton or Josh Allen are incredibly rare to begin with.

I think you have the best chance of finding a franchise QB if you're taking chances on better prospects.  Whether that's a top level prospect on an athletic level or the other end of the spectrum.  If we're waiting for a 3rd-5th round pick or a guy like Eason to come along and be the guy, I think we're going to be waiting for a very long time.  That's one of the worrying things about Fitterer's philosophy for me.  He hasn't come out and said it, but it seems like he thinks we can find another Russell Wilson on a discount rack in the draft or FA/trade.

[trueblade]

2 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

He hasn't come out and said it, but it seems like he thinks we can find another Russell Wilson on a discount rack in the draft or FA/trade.

Especially since he admitted in an interview during the pre-season that he was initially against drafting Wilson. Schneider had to talk him into it.

[Mr. Scot]

8 minutes ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

I want to say the latter, but the more I think about it the more it seems like a wash.  Most QB prospects are unsuccessful, and athletes like Cam Newton or Josh Allen are incredibly rare to begin with.

I think you have the best chance of finding a franchise QB if you're taking chances on better prospects.  Whether that's a top level prospect on an athletic level or the other end of the spectrum.  If we're waiting for a 3rd-5th round pick or a guy like Eason to come along and be the guy, I think we're going to be waiting for a very long time.  That's one of the worrying things about Fitterer's philosophy for me.  He hasn't come out and said it, but it seems like he thinks we can find another Russell Wilson on a discount rack in the draft or FA/trade.

See there again though, you have to define what a top prospect is.

Our buddy John Ellis prefers the guys who are superior athletes because "you can't coach tall / strong" and things of that sort. I want the guys who are known for passing accuracy, intelligence, field vision and things of that sort first and if they also happen to be good physical specimens, that's gravy.

The argument is that you can coach the intangible stuff into the athletic guys. And that sounds great in theory, but the reality is that if they don't already have those other traits, it's pretty rare to be able to coach it into them.

People go "oh but Josh Allen" to which I'd say there are a lot more instances of coaches who tried to make a Josh Allen and failed than there are ones who succeeded.

[Mr. Scot]

7 minutes ago, trueblade said:

Especially since he admitted in an interview during the pre-season that he was initially against drafting Wilson. Schneider had to talk him into it.

It was actually Gantt who suggested they could find a Russell Wilson type, but I don't think he met it in the strict sense of finding that guy in a later round, just someone of that talent level.

[pdub0702]

At that point..We know what we have with PJ..I’ll be curious what (if anything) Eason can bring 

[PNW_PantherMan]

7 minutes ago, Mr. Scot said:

See there again though, you have to define what a top prospect is.

Our buddy John Ellis prefers the guys who are superior athletes because "you can't coach tall / strong" and things of that sort. I want the guys who are known for passing accuracy, intelligence, field vision and things of that sort first and if they also happen to be good physical specimens, that's gravy.

The argument is that you can coach the intangible stuff into the athletic guys. And that sounds great in theory, but the reality is that if they don't already have those other traits, it's pretty rare to be able to coach it into them.

People go "oh but Josh Allen" to which I'd say there are a lot more instances of coaches who tried to make a Josh Allen and failed than there are ones who succeeded.

Well I should qualify, I'm mostly talking about guys who are drafted in the 1st round when I say top prospects.  First round QBs have a higher hit rate than guys drafted in later rounds.  That's observable.

And on the intangible stuff, that's what really makes a QB.  If you have a guy that can deliver the ball to the right spot at the right time, it doesn't really matter what their athletic profile is.  It's more about making the right decisions in a very limited amount of time.  An endless refining of their game as far as how they feel the pocket, how they move, etc.  But finding someone with that potential and matching them with the right situation is incredibly rare.  Franchise QBs are just rare because it's the toughest position to play.  You can argue its difficult to teach a super freak athlete to be a great pocket QB.  I'd agree.  But I think it's hard to teach anyone that, because how many other Tom Brady's are there?  Nobody else is really on that level.  There are multiple freak athlete QBs starting in the NFL today.

I'm just saying you're going to have a much better hit rate on QB's in the first round whether they are freak athletes or Mac Jones.

Edited October 13, 2022 by PNW_PantherMan

[TheCasillas]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

find a guy with enough smarts that he could develop into another Tom Brady?

Has this happened? I feel like TB12 is never going to happen again.

[Mr. Scot]

1 minute ago, PNW_PantherMan said:

Well I should qualify, I'm mostly talking about guys who are drafted in the 1st round when I say top prospects.  First round QBs have a higher hit rate than guys drafted in later rounds.  That's observable.

And on the intangible stuff, that's what really makes a QB.  If you have a guy that can deliver the ball to the right spot at the right time, it doesn't really matter what their athletic profile is.  It's more about making hte right decisions in a very limited amount of time.  An endless refining of their game as far as how they feel the pocket, how they move, etc.  But finding someone with that potential and matching them with the right situation is incredibly rare.  Franchise QBs are just rare because it's the toughest position to play.  You can argue its difficult to teach a super freak athlete to be a great pocket QB.  I'd agree.  But I think it's hard to teach anyone that, because how many other Tom Brady's are there?  Nobody else is really on that level.  There are multiple freak athlete QBs starting in the NFL today.

I'm just saying you're going to have a much better hit rate on QB's in the first round whether they are freak athletes or Mac Jones.

Fair, although the teams who drafted quarterbacks in the first round of the 2018 draft might raise some objections

[PNW_PantherMan]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

Fair, although the teams who drafted quarterbacks in the first round of the 2018 draft might raise some objections

The best chance to hit doesn't mean its a good chance.

[Mr. Scot]

4 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Has this happened? I feel like TB12 is never going to happen again.

I doubt you'll see another guy who will do it for as long as he has.

What things like accuracy, field vision, quick processing, intelligence and the like aren't that rare.

It would be fair to say though that, at the college level right now, they are devalued over pure athleticism.

Edited October 13, 2022 by Mr. Scot

[TheCasillas]

1 minute ago, Mr. Scot said:

I doubt you'll see another guy who will do it for as long as he has.

What things like accuracy, field vision, quick processing, intelligence and the like aren't that rare.

It would be fair to say though that, at the college level right now, they are devalued over pure athleticism.

Do you have anyone in mind that you would say replicates what Brady does in the league today?

[Mr. Scot]

15 minutes ago, TheCasillas said:

Do you have anyone in mind that you would say replicates what Brady does in the league today?

Intangible wise? I'd argue Rodgers and Mahomes are equal on a mental level, superior on the physical.

I'd probably also have thrown Russell Wilson into that mix before this season. Herbert might be but I don't know that we've seen enough of him to say that yet. Ditto Joe Burrow.

Some of the other guys I'd most closely compare to Brady have retired in the past few years. Brees was arguably the closest, though others would likely put one or both Manning brothers above him (or even above Brady for that matter).

Andrew Luck arguably could have gotten to that level but probably didn't play long enough. Wentz had potential too but God only knows what happened there. Hell, Matt Ryan is the same style of quarterback, though definitely nowhere near as close to Brady's talent level as the other guys.

Bottom Line: There are plenty of quarterbacks out there with more to offer than just athleticism. Brady isn't the only guy with superior brains.