Football Sim/Reality: Player Development

SunDancer · 09-06-2003, 11:46 PM

Reading the GT thread over Ball and watching Leak, two true freshman who are learning the ropes, I wanted to see how you guys would develop a pro quarterback you just drafted or signed in a football sim, using reality....How does that affect him? Can a sophmoore or a third-year passer with no game experience, can they contribute more then a freshman or a rookie right away, with a more aggressive gameplan, can they adapt right away? Let me hear it for every position?

TroyF · 09-07-2003, 12:01 AM

I think if you have a guy with a strong mentality, nothing can replace "live" snaps. It can backfire when you get a Ryan Leaf. I just think you have to let a guy play and see what he can do. Are Chad Pennington, Bret Favre, and Steve McNair great QB's simply because they sat on the bench a year or two and watched? What about Donovan McNabb, Drew Bledsoe or Peyton Manning who were thrown into the fire right away?

I think that in MOST cases, you throw the guy into the fire and see what he's made of. It's up to the coaching staff to understand the psychology of an individual player. (this rookie CB's losing his confidence, maybe I need to pull back a little on the throtte. . . )

There are times you can't play a rookie and just live with their mistakes. A team like the Bucs can't just thrust Simms into the starting role for example. It'd cause a locker room revolt. The losses the young QB would cause would damage their hopes to repeat. In most cases though, I would take the same approach Brian Billick did with Boller, throw him out there.

As for positions besides the QB, you can rotate a rookie in for live bullets without a major disruption to the team. You can get him a few carries on third down. You can put him in multiple WR sets. You can rest your starting lineman or DB for a series a game.

TroyF

General Mike · 09-07-2003, 01:11 AM

I don't know which way is better, since I've seen both ways fail, and I've seen both ways succeed. It all depends on what kind of personel you have around you. If you put a rookie QB on the Raiders, with Brown, Rice, Porter and Garner, I think he'd be ok. I don't want to make excuses for Ryan Leaf, but San Diego had nobody on offense. It's not about throwing players into the fire that will make them successful, it's about putting them in a position to succeed.

SunDancer · 09-07-2003, 01:33 AM

But Ryan Leaf didn't have the mentality to handle the pressure, and seem not willing to commit.

NYFAN · 09-07-2003, 01:34 AM

I'm not sure about Brad Pennington, but Chad Pennington probably learned a lot by watching a guy like Vinny T. for a year. Not only the x's and o's but the life a professional QB has to live.

General Mike · 09-07-2003, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by SunDancer
But Ryan Leaf didn't have the mentality to handle the pressure, and seem not willing to commit.

That's why I said I didn't want to make excuses for Ryan Leaf. I'll put it this way tho, Peyton Manning, as a rookie had the best RB in football, 2 quality TEs, and a good young WR. Ryan Leaf had Natrone Means, Freddie Jones, and a bunch of no name, never was WRs. I'm not gonna say Leaf would have succeeded in Indianapolis, but I think he would have had a much better chance of succeeding.

TroyF · 09-07-2003, 01:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NYFAN
I'm not sure about Brad Pennington, but Chad Pennington probably learned a lot by watching a guy like Vinny T. for a year. Not only the x's and o's but the life a professional QB has to live.

DOH!!!!

I'll edit that to change it.

He may have learned a lot, but would he have been a failure had he played earlier? What if he had just watched Vinny for 8 weeks and then started? We'll never know. The only thing we can say is the Jets must have done something right because Chad (I'll get it right this time) succeeded.

My preference is still to let the kids play provided they can handle it upstairs.

TroyF

GrantDawg · 09-07-2003, 04:04 AM

I would say most, if not all, QB's would benefit with a year on the bench before being thrown to the hounds. The game is much faster and more complex than the college system. A true frehman can come in and succeed because, though the game is faster and there is more to remember, the jump between college and pro's is not nearly as steep as the jump between pro's and college.

That's not to say some would not succeed without it, but I think there have been more that harmed by being thrown in early (either picking up bad habits, or worse being injured and never returning the same) than have succeeded. TroyF will now probably throw out a billion stats and say they prove me wrong, but there is no way a stat can say what a guy would have done had he had the extra year (or not if the case may be).

Taur · 09-07-2003, 07:15 AM

Why is it always one way or the other? Either starter or backup. Why can't a team split series with 2 QBs. It works extremely well in college so why can't it work in the pros?

Case in point the Cincinnati Bengals. They have named their starter as Jon Kitna and their backup as Carson Palmer to start the season. Most think Palmer will finish the season as the starter and Kitna the backup. But, why not gradually ease Palmer into the lineup. Say let him start every 4th series to begin the season. Gradually increase or decrease his playing time throughout the season as his play dictates. Why does the NFL always have to throw their QBs in the deep in rather than let them wade in from the shallow end?

Poli · 09-07-2003, 08:13 AM

I think from my own perspective, I'd be worried to start a rookie immediately. Be it pro, college (freshman), or high school (freshman). I think the setup of each level dictates how you play this person.

In high school, most schools have a freshman of JV team where a freshman can learn the ropes of an offense, possibly taking some snaps against players with more experience in the game. This provides you with some experience before stepping out into the "Friday Night Lights". Still, there are times where a coach may bypass this idea and try a "phenom", a Leak or Croyle, for example. In my opinion, it's best that a freshman play on the freshman and JV levels first, and possibly promote him to the varsity later in the year if it is needed.

In college, you have five years to play four. That's a blessing, really. I think I'd try my hardest to red shirt every player I could, to the point of lettine exceptional walk ons play where I felt a true freshman might be a little better.

Still, true freshmen have shown that they can contribute (though I'm not sold on Ball) to a team. Despite this, I think it's best for the player and the program that a player sit a year. Get involved in the program and be ready to contribute the next year. He could take snaps with the practice squad and during the spring.

In the pros, I'm not necessarily sold on the "throw them in the fire" concept. I think it's more of a "we've got a ton of money on this guy". It's a sad state, really, but the NFL has done this to itself.

I think off hand that most QBs thrust into starting early struggle and it hurts them. Rick Mirer, Heath Shuler, Ryan Leaf, and Akili Smith all come to mind. David Klingler, Browning Nagle, Bobby Hoying, Tony Banks, and Charlie Batch were also thrust into the starting spots and struggled.

I think it's essential to have someone out there that knows your offense very well. I don't think as a rookie that's completely possible. I think almost any team would much rather have a player sit a year and learn rather than start and get "thrown in the fire". However, it again boils down to money.

What Cincy fan wants to see Kitna instead of Palmer, especially if the ticket price, parking, and concessions all rose because of the addition of Palmer (I'm guessing, I don't know this for sure)?

Really, the same applies for any team that adds a QB in the first round (despite the fact the term "first round" is getting watered down with the addition of more teams in the NFL). Who'll bring in the fans, Horton Scrubbottom or Carson Palmer?

I think I'm getting away from my point. Best move for QBs in the NFL: Sit and learn for a year or two. But it's not going to happen for a struggling team.

JasonC23 · 09-07-2003, 08:32 AM

Horton Scrubbottom! Horton Scrubbottom!

SunDancer · 09-07-2003, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ardent enthusiast
I think from my own perspective, I'd be worried to start a rookie immediately. Be it pro, college (freshman), or high school (freshman). I think the setup of each level dictates how you play this person.

In high school, most schools have a freshman of JV team where a freshman can learn the ropes of an offense, possibly taking some snaps against players with more experience in the game. This provides you with some experience before stepping out into the "Friday Night Lights". Still, there are times where a coach may bypass this idea and try a "phenom", a Leak or Croyle, for example. In my opinion, it's best that a freshman play on the freshman and JV levels first, and possibly promote him to the varsity later in the year if it is needed.

In college, you have five years to play four. That's a blessing, really. I think I'd try my hardest to red shirt every player I could, to the point of lettine exceptional walk ons play where I felt a true freshman might be a little better.

Still, true freshmen have shown that they can contribute (though I'm not sold on Ball) to a team. Despite this, I think it's best for the player and the program that a player sit a year. Get involved in the program and be ready to contribute the next year. He could take snaps with the practice squad and during the spring.

In the pros, I'm not necessarily sold on the "throw them in the fire" concept. I think it's more of a "we've got a ton of money on this guy". It's a sad state, really, but the NFL has done this to itself.

I think off hand that most QBs thrust into starting early struggle and it hurts them. Rick Mirer, Heath Shuler, Ryan Leaf, and Akili Smith all come to mind. David Klingler, Browning Nagle, Bobby Hoying, Tony Banks, and Charlie Batch were also thrust into the starting spots and struggled.

I think it's essential to have someone out there that knows your offense very well. I don't think as a rookie that's completely possible. I think almost any team would much rather have a player sit a year and learn rather than start and get "thrown in the fire". However, it again boils down to money.

What Cincy fan wants to see Kitna instead of Palmer, especially if the ticket price, parking, and concessions all rose because of the addition of Palmer (I'm guessing, I don't know this for sure)?

Really, the same applies for any team that adds a QB in the first round (despite the fact the term "first round" is getting watered down with the addition of more teams in the NFL). Who'll bring in the fans, Horton Scrubbottom or Carson Palmer?

I think I'm getting away from my point. Best move for QBs in the NFL: Sit and learn for a year or two. But it's not going to happen for a struggling team.

Excellent post....It also depends on who you have for the veteran as well. Personally, I rather bring in a guy, and sit him for the first year. Teach him the x's and o's, give him some reps in practice, plenty of pre-season action, work on his techinque and skills...He is a leader, I want him to develop some relationships with his teammates and coaches. He'll also have a year of adjusting to life of the pros, , ect...and build up his body to pro form....

Curious, how big are playbooks, and how long does it take to learn the playbook?

Taur · 09-07-2003, 02:24 PM

The 3rd quarter has just ended of the DEN vs CIN game. the score is 27 to 3 Denver. Kitna has thrown 2 ints and the only 3 points that Cinci. has scored came off a Jake Plummer int.

So, with Denver moving into the prevent Defense with a 3 man rush why not bring in the kid and let him get some reps?

GrantDawg · 09-07-2003, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Taur
The 3rd quarter has just ended of the DEN vs CIN game. the score is 27 to 3 Denver. Kitna has thrown 2 ints and the only 3 points that Cinci. has scored came off a Jake Plummer int.

So, with Denver moving into the prevent Defense with a 3 man rush why not bring in the kid and let him get some reps?

Now that I don't have a problem with. Mop-up duty is like a live practice. That you should do.

SunDancer · 09-07-2003, 04:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by SunDancer

Curious, how big are playbooks, and how long does it take to learn the playbook?

In addition to that, how do you teach one, and how many times does it take?

How do you go in with teaching a rookie a playbook, in what ways do you keep it simple, and when and how what direction do you expand that?

09-07-2003, 12:01 AM	#2
TroyF Coordinator Join Date: Oct 2000	I think if you have a guy with a strong mentality, nothing can replace "live" snaps. It can backfire when you get a Ryan Leaf. I just think you have to let a guy play and see what he can do. Are Chad Pennington, Bret Favre, and Steve McNair great QB's simply because they sat on the bench a year or two and watched? What about Donovan McNabb, Drew Bledsoe or Peyton Manning who were thrown into the fire right away? I think that in MOST cases, you throw the guy into the fire and see what he's made of. It's up to the coaching staff to understand the psychology of an individual player. (this rookie CB's losing his confidence, maybe I need to pull back a little on the throtte. . . ) There are times you can't play a rookie and just live with their mistakes. A team like the Bucs can't just thrust Simms into the starting role for example. It'd cause a locker room revolt. The losses the young QB would cause would damage their hopes to repeat. In most cases though, I would take the same approach Brian Billick did with Boller, throw him out there. As for positions besides the QB, you can rotate a rookie in for live bullets without a major disruption to the team. You can get him a few carries on third down. You can put him in multiple WR sets. You can rest your starting lineman or DB for a series a game. TroyF Last edited by TroyF : 09-07-2003 at 01:52 AM.

09-07-2003, 01:11 AM	#3
General Mike Pro Starter Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: The State of Rutgers	I don't know which way is better, since I've seen both ways fail, and I've seen both ways succeed. It all depends on what kind of personel you have around you. If you put a rookie QB on the Raiders, with Brown, Rice, Porter and Garner, I think he'd be ok. I don't want to make excuses for Ryan Leaf, but San Diego had nobody on offense. It's not about throwing players into the fire that will make them successful, it's about putting them in a position to succeed. __________________ Boise Stampede Continental Football League Jacksonville Jaguars GM North American Football League Nebraska Coach FOFC-BBCF Rutgers & Washington coach Bowl Bound-BBCF

09-07-2003, 01:34 AM	#5
NYFAN High School JV Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Marietta, OH	I'm not sure about Brad Pennington, but Chad Pennington probably learned a lot by watching a guy like Vinny T. for a year. Not only the x's and o's but the life a professional QB has to live. __________________ "Adversity never improves your character, it only reveals it." - Jeff Van Gundy "It was me against the world, but it made me strong" -Sprewell

09-07-2003, 07:15 AM	#9
Taur High School Varsity Join Date: Jan 2002	Why is it always one way or the other? Either starter or backup. Why can't a team split series with 2 QBs. It works extremely well in college so why can't it work in the pros? Case in point the Cincinnati Bengals. They have named their starter as Jon Kitna and their backup as Carson Palmer to start the season. Most think Palmer will finish the season as the starter and Kitna the backup. But, why not gradually ease Palmer into the lineup. Say let him start every 4th series to begin the season. Gradually increase or decrease his playing time throughout the season as his play dictates. Why does the NFL always have to throw their QBs in the deep in rather than let them wade in from the shallow end? __________________ END OF LINE.....

09-07-2003, 08:13 AM	#10
Poli FOFC Survivor Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Wentzville, MO	I think from my own perspective, I'd be worried to start a rookie immediately. Be it pro, college (freshman), or high school (freshman). I think the setup of each level dictates how you play this person. In high school, most schools have a freshman of JV team where a freshman can learn the ropes of an offense, possibly taking some snaps against players with more experience in the game. This provides you with some experience before stepping out into the "Friday Night Lights". Still, there are times where a coach may bypass this idea and try a "phenom", a Leak or Croyle, for example. In my opinion, it's best that a freshman play on the freshman and JV levels first, and possibly promote him to the varsity later in the year if it is needed. In college, you have five years to play four. That's a blessing, really. I think I'd try my hardest to red shirt every player I could, to the point of lettine exceptional walk ons play where I felt a true freshman might be a little better. Still, true freshmen have shown that they can contribute (though I'm not sold on Ball) to a team. Despite this, I think it's best for the player and the program that a player sit a year. Get involved in the program and be ready to contribute the next year. He could take snaps with the practice squad and during the spring. In the pros, I'm not necessarily sold on the "throw them in the fire" concept. I think it's more of a "we've got a ton of money on this guy". It's a sad state, really, but the NFL has done this to itself. I think off hand that most QBs thrust into starting early struggle and it hurts them. Rick Mirer, Heath Shuler, Ryan Leaf, and Akili Smith all come to mind. David Klingler, Browning Nagle, Bobby Hoying, Tony Banks, and Charlie Batch were also thrust into the starting spots and struggled. I think it's essential to have someone out there that knows your offense very well. I don't think as a rookie that's completely possible. I think almost any team would much rather have a player sit a year and learn rather than start and get "thrown in the fire". However, it again boils down to money. What Cincy fan wants to see Kitna instead of Palmer, especially if the ticket price, parking, and concessions all rose because of the addition of Palmer (I'm guessing, I don't know this for sure)? Really, the same applies for any team that adds a QB in the first round (despite the fact the term "first round" is getting watered down with the addition of more teams in the NFL). Who'll bring in the fans, Horton Scrubbottom or Carson Palmer? I think I'm getting away from my point. Best move for QBs in the NFL: Sit and learn for a year or two. But it's not going to happen for a struggling team. __________________ Cheer for a walk on quarterback! Ardent leads the Vols in the dynasty forum.

09-07-2003, 01:33 AM	#4
SunDancer College Benchwarmer Join Date: Sep 2002	But Ryan Leaf didn't have the mentality to handle the pressure, and seem not willing to commit.

09-07-2003, 04:04 AM	#8
GrantDawg World Champion Mis-speller Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Covington, Ga.	I would say most, if not all, QB's would benefit with a year on the bench before being thrown to the hounds. The game is much faster and more complex than the college system. A true frehman can come in and succeed because, though the game is faster and there is more to remember, the jump between college and pro's is not nearly as steep as the jump between pro's and college. That's not to say some would not succeed without it, but I think there have been more that harmed by being thrown in early (either picking up bad habits, or worse being injured and never returning the same) than have succeeded. TroyF will now probably throw out a billion stats and say they prove me wrong, but there is no way a stat can say what a guy would have done had he had the extra year (or not if the case may be).

09-07-2003, 08:32 AM	#11
JasonC23 High School Varsity Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Huntley, IL, USA	Horton Scrubbottom! Horton Scrubbottom! __________________ "I'm A god. I'm not THE God...I don't think." Bill Murray, Groundhog Day

09-07-2003, 02:24 PM	#13
Taur High School Varsity Join Date: Jan 2002	The 3rd quarter has just ended of the DEN vs CIN game. the score is 27 to 3 Denver. Kitna has thrown 2 ints and the only 3 points that Cinci. has scored came off a Jake Plummer int. So, with Denver moving into the prevent Defense with a 3 man rush why not bring in the kid and let him get some reps? __________________ END OF LINE.....

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)