Jump to content

JN Draftniks: Which one of you has the best track record?


Jetsfan80
 Share

Recommended Posts

And today Im telling you that Chan Gailey can get more out of Geno if in fact Geno is the starter as it seems its going to be. A month ago I felt that there was an opportunity to get a QB that does well despite the incompetency of the Coaching staff, which was Glennon. Maybe my words (Cant remember the Quote) was a bit extra. The bottomline is that I do believe that Chan Gailey is a Coach that will get whatever is in a Player though development and playcalling/scheme. My Statement is a compliment to the Coach.

 

It doesnt seem like we're going to get Glennon, and I answered your question based on what you presented. If it seems contradictory, the best Thing that I can say is, sorry i've disappointed you.

 

No. There is no forgiveness for what you have done.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bad coaches cant develop anything.

Often true (or usually true, or whatever). But whether a coach is good or bad doesn't mean a player was otherwise developable. Not unless the argument is also that the best of the best coaches never had players that didn't develop (or even that this lack of development was a rarity).

Most of the time a player who doesn't develop wasn't an NFL talent (or not NFL starting talent), even if they look the part on paper and seemed to look the part in college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is an interesting question 

 

the draft itself is hugely unpredictable. if you can predict 10 of the top 32 picks correctly, you would win the huddle report mock draft contest. 

 

I usually get murdered in the mock but do fairly well with the top 100s 

 

http://www.thehuddlereport.com/scoring/mockdrafts.shtml

 

http://www.thehuddlereport.com/scoring/top100.shtml

 

usually draft predictions go into the ether, never to be seen again. 

 

but the funny thing about predicting the draft is if anyone does remember, it's rare than anyone remembers your successes. people love to remember your failures forever tho

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I don't care much if someone correctly predicts who picks which players. I care if someone accurately assesses a player. Especially if they make bold statements that turn out to be spot on.

I have a bold prediction! Tom Brady misses time this year due to an injury. Pats still make the playoffs.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But you must have that competent coach in order to know it. 

 

Absolutely, but it can be a bit of a chicken and Pennington situation. Being a competent coach (head coach) doesn't mean one is necessarily competent at QB development. Just like being competent (or allegedly competent) at QB development doesn't mean one necessarily is, or would be, a competent head coach.

 

A prime example is Sanchez, who many people still claim was ruined here. Pete Carroll is credited, directly or indirectly, as having done a great job developing Russell Wilson. He didn't develop anyone else, though. He also had Mark Sanchez at USC and failed to develop him there through 3 years of school starting with his freshman year. Then he went to the Jets where he learned under Schottenheimer who, despite obvious flaws as an OC, didn't seem to "ruin" Drew Brees or Philip Rivers or even Sam Bradford after coaching each for at least 2 years. Then Sanchez goes to Philadelphia to play for the league's newest QB Whisperer, and he sucks there as well. But the message repeated ad nauseum is he was ruined solely by the Jets.

 

Some prospects are going to be bad whether they receive good coaching or bad coaching.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely, but it can be a bit of a chicken and Pennington situation. Being a competent coach (head coach) doesn't mean one is necessarily competent at QB development. Just like being competent (or allegedly competent) at QB development doesn't mean one necessarily is, or would be, a competent head coach.

 

A prime example is Sanchez, who many people still claim was ruined here. Pete Carroll is credited, directly or indirectly, as having done a great job developing Russell Wilson. He didn't develop anyone else, though. He also had Mark Sanchez at USC and failed to develop him there through 3 years of school starting with his freshman year. Then he went to the Jets where he learned under Schottenheimer who, despite obvious flaws as an OC, didn't seem to "ruin" Drew Brees or Philip Rivers or even Sam Bradford after coaching each for at least 2 years. Then Sanchez goes to Philadelphia to play for the league's newest QB Whisperer, and he sucks there as well. But the message repeated ad nauseum is he was ruined solely by the Jets.

 

Some prospects are going to be bad whether they receive good coaching or bad coaching.

Yeah, but its not like Rivers and Brees did too bad for themselves after schotty either, also, Schotty wasnt around when Rivers took over that job in San Diego. Rivers played in 4 games over two years while Schotty was OC in San Diego and Brees had his best years WAY AFTER his time with Schotty. Schotty gets credit because he was the OC for a team that drafted two all-time great QB's, Schotty did sh_t when it came to developing talent or implementing a successful scheme. Just look at every team he's been hired by after his time at San Diego. Brees is an OC on the field and Rivers has been an MVP candidate the past 5 years. Trust me, when talking about those guys I in no way see a chicken and Pennington situation. 

 

I dont know much about Sanchez and his time at USC but if im correct he only started 16 games at USC then declared for the draft during a time when Pete Carroll basically said that he wasnt ready yet. Then a defensive minded coach decides to move up in the draft to get a raw QB from USC with no one with real QB development experience. 

 

So to make it seem like Sanchez was a failure because "the guy who developed Brees and Rivers" couldn't get anything out of him is just f'ing ridiculous. Schotty is no Chan Gailey my friend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this is an interesting question

the draft itself is hugely unpredictable. if you can predict 10 of the top 32 picks correctly, you would win the huddle report mock draft contest.

I usually get murdered in the mock but do fairly well with the top 100s

http://www.thehuddlereport.com/scoring/mockdrafts.shtml

http://www.thehuddlereport.com/scoring/top100.shtml

usually draft predictions go into the ether

Yeah, Ether pretty much sums this thread up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, but its not like Rivers and Brees did too bad for themselves after schotty either, also, Schotty wasnt around when Rivers took over that job in San Diego. Rivers played in 4 games over two years while Schotty was OC in San Diego and Brees had his best years WAY AFTER his time with Schotty. Schotty gets credit because he was the OC for a team that drafted two all-time great QB's, Schotty did sh_t when it came to developing talent or implementing a successful scheme. Just look at every team he's been hired by after his time at San Diego. Brees is an OC on the field and Rivers has been an MVP candidate the past 5 years. Trust me, when talking about those guys I in no way see a chicken and Pennington situation. 

 

I dont know much about Sanchez and his time at USC but if im correct he only started 16 games at USC then declared for the draft during a time when Pete Carroll basically said that he wasnt ready yet. Then a defensive minded coach decides to move up in the draft to get a raw QB from USC with no one with real QB development experience. 

 

So to make it seem like Sanchez was a failure because "the guy who developed Brees and Rivers" couldn't get anything out of him is just f'ing ridiculous. Schotty is no Chan Gailey my friend. 

 

Sanchez and Clemens are the only ones under Schottenheimer who really failed (and never got good or better later) is another way of looking at it. And I'm not such a fan of Schottenheimer's myself.

 

Brees was also a pro bowl QB with San Diego. They didn't have him throwing 600+ times because of the HC and OC playcalling (they did have Tomlinson in his prime there). That he got even better in New Orleans is beside the point. He was in no way "ruined" beyond repair by that coaching, as has been alleged with Sanchez.

 

Rivers' intiial years in SD - his first 2 seasons, no matter how many games he started - were with Schottenheimer. The next year (when BS came to NY) he was an instant-success. I don't believe for a moment that he learned all of the good things about QB'ing in the summer of 2006. If so much of BS's teachings had to be undone and relearned, his success as starter wouldn't have happened so instantly.

 

Bradford with McDaniels was crap. His unreliability in terms of health aside, Bradford's passing numbers got dramatically better right away with BS compared to BB's wonderboy McDaniels. Whatever credit one wants to assign to Schottenheimer, clearly it wasn't having a negative effect, and there wasn't one solid/reliable starting WR on either their 2012 or 2013 rosters.

 

Carroll's had another QB bust as well (Leinart being even worse than Sanchez). He never once said Leinart wasn't ready for the NFL, unless we all just missed it. So Sanchez wasn't ready but Leinart was ready. This is the judgment that is to be revered? It could be he only coached them to be college-level good. Or perhaps that's just how good each could be. Some guys just don't have it, or they only have warning track power (i.e. backup talent).

 

The brilliant NE QB coaching that saw such success with Brady (and even some with Cassel) couldn't get anything at all out of Kingsbury or O'Connell, who were both taken with higher picks.

 

I know you think of Dungy as having been a top-notch HC. Well Dungy's QB success without Peyton Manning was what exactly? It sucked. Do people go around saying he's responsible for ruining Trent Dilfer and Shaun King? I haven't heard anyone say a peep in this regard. 

 

And looked at in the inverse, there have been some very good/successful QB coaches that weren't such good head coaches (Turner is the first one that comes to mind, and perhaps Chip Kelly, though the jury's still out on his HCing).

 

While some are skilled at both, there isn't necessarily a relation is all I'm saying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanchez and Clemens are the only ones under Schottenheimer who really failed (and never got good or better later) is another way of looking at it. And I'm not such a fan of Schottenheimer's myself.

 

Brees was also a pro bowl QB with San Diego. They didn't have him throwing 600+ times because of the HC and OC playcalling (they did have Tomlinson in his prime there). That he got even better in New Orleans is beside the point. He was in no way "ruined" beyond repair by that coaching, as has been alleged with Sanchez.

 

Rivers' intiial years in SD - his first 2 seasons, no matter how many games he started - were with Schottenheimer. The next year (when BS came to NY) he was an instant-success. I don't believe for a moment that he learned all of the good things about QB'ing in the summer of 2006. If so much of BS's teachings had to be undone and relearned, his success as starter wouldn't have happened so instantly.

 

Bradford with McDaniels was crap. His unreliability in terms of health aside, Bradford's passing numbers got dramatically better right away with BS compared to BB's wonderboy McDaniels. Whatever credit one wants to assign to Schottenheimer, clearly it wasn't having a negative effect, and there wasn't one solid/reliable starting WR on either their 2012 or 2013 rosters.

 

Carroll's had another QB bust as well (Leinart being even worse than Sanchez). He never once said Leinart wasn't ready for the NFL, unless we all just missed it. So Sanchez wasn't ready but Leinart was ready. This is the judgment that is to be revered? It could be he only coached them to be college-level good. Or perhaps that's just how good each could be. Some guys just don't have it, or they only have warning track power (i.e. backup talent).

 

The brilliant NE QB coaching that saw such success with Brady (and even some with Cassel) couldn't get anything at all out of Kingsbury or O'Connell, who were both taken with higher picks.

 

I know you think of Dungy as having been a top-notch HC. Well Dungy's QB success without Peyton Manning was what exactly? It sucked. Do people go around saying he's responsible for ruining Trent Dilfer and Shaun King? I haven't heard anyone say a peep in this regard. 

 

And looked at in the inverse, there have been some very good/successful QB coaches that weren't such good head coaches (Turner is the first one that comes to mind, and perhaps Chip Kelly, though the jury's still out on his HCing).

 

While some are skilled at both, there isn't necessarily a relation is all I'm saying.

 

I guess this is the point where I say you're right. 

 

Honestly, all this stemming from my original comment? I really have to learn that sometimes I just need to leave things alone lol! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not follow college football closely like so many people over here. So i do not consider myself a draftnik by any stretch of imagination. But i like watching "tape" and that too mostly of WR's when i can and have a few opinions that strike me as i go along.

 

I hated the Sanchez pick and i did not think Stafford or Freeman were good enough to lead a team anywhere on their own. I tried to convince myself Kyle Wilson was a good pick but couldn't.

 

I thought Geno as 2nd rounder was a great value pick. I was really glad the JETS did not reach for a super glaring. need in the first round. I liked the MIlliner and Richardson picks. I wanted Keenan Allen in the 3rd round.

 

I have never hated a pick more that Jalen Sanders in the 4th round. Baffled we passed on Martvais Bryant. I was glad JETS passed on Kelvin Benjamin with the 18th pick because i thought at best he was higher 2nd round pick. I liked the Marcus Lee pick in the 2nd round made by the Jags. Packers 5th round pick Abbrederis was my sleeper WR pick. I don't think he saw the field in his rookie season.

 

These are a few things i remember from the top of my head.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sanchez and Clemens are the only ones under Schottenheimer who really failed (and never got good or better later) is another way of looking at it. And I'm not such a fan of Schottenheimer's myself.

 

Brees was also a pro bowl QB with San Diego. They didn't have him throwing 600+ times because of the HC and OC playcalling (they did have Tomlinson in his prime there). That he got even better in New Orleans is beside the point. He was in no way "ruined" beyond repair by that coaching, as has been alleged with Sanchez.

 

Rivers' intiial years in SD - his first 2 seasons, no matter how many games he started - were with Schottenheimer. The next year (when BS came to NY) he was an instant-success. I don't believe for a moment that he learned all of the good things about QB'ing in the summer of 2006. If so much of BS's teachings had to be undone and relearned, his success as starter wouldn't have happened so instantly.

 

Bradford with McDaniels was crap. His unreliability in terms of health aside, Bradford's passing numbers got dramatically better right away with BS compared to BB's wonderboy McDaniels. Whatever credit one wants to assign to Schottenheimer, clearly it wasn't having a negative effect, and there wasn't one solid/reliable starting WR on either their 2012 or 2013 rosters.

 

Carroll's had another QB bust as well (Leinart being even worse than Sanchez). He never once said Leinart wasn't ready for the NFL, unless we all just missed it. So Sanchez wasn't ready but Leinart was ready. This is the judgment that is to be revered? It could be he only coached them to be college-level good. Or perhaps that's just how good each could be. Some guys just don't have it, or they only have warning track power (i.e. backup talent).

 

The brilliant NE QB coaching that saw such success with Brady (and even some with Cassel) couldn't get anything at all out of Kingsbury or O'Connell, who were both taken with higher picks.

 

I know you think of Dungy as having been a top-notch HC. Well Dungy's QB success without Peyton Manning was what exactly? It sucked. Do people go around saying he's responsible for ruining Trent Dilfer and Shaun King? I haven't heard anyone say a peep in this regard. 

 

And looked at in the inverse, there have been some very good/successful QB coaches that weren't such good head coaches (Turner is the first one that comes to mind, and perhaps Chip Kelly, though the jury's still out on his HCing).

 

While some are skilled at both, there isn't necessarily a relation is all I'm saying.

Schitty was not the OC in SD for Brees or Rivers, so using their success as some barometer of how good he is, is about as relevant as the price of tea in China during those years.

 

Besides, Rex destroyed Sanchez, Schitty was just too incompetent to stop it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schitty was not the OC in SD for Brees or Rivers, so using their success as some barometer of how good he is, is about as relevant as the price of tea in China during those years.

 

Besides, Rex destroyed Sanchez, Schitty was just too incompetent to stop it.

Schottenheimer was the QBC for both of them in their early/formative years. If you feel the QBC is a title-only position who has no hand in working with each every day you may believe what you choose.

It is silliness to believe Ryan had any serious day-to-day/all day long hand in Sanchez's development (or lack thereof); particularly silly to believe more than Schottenheimer had. Think he was breaking down film with the QBs all summer long or between games every year and working with him on footwork, cadence, selling his playaction, etc.? Yeah right. Once, after his second 4-interception game in about a month he had Sanchez's play wristband printed in traffic light colors, another time he brought in Joe Girardi to teach him how to slide, and this was the limit and extent of his QB training.

He didn't have 1/10 the influence on training Sanchez that Schottenheimer had, nor should he have given either one's background. One was an experienced QBC (and incumbent OC), and the other was a DL coach turned DC.

In the end there was and is no solution to not having Sanchez turn the football over, or being a reliable QB in general. He's not the only one there's been like this, nor will he be the last. This was my point (Sanchez was merely one example, but one that is well known here). Some guys are just not going to be all that no matter who the coaches are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schottenheimer was the QBC for both of them in their early/formative years. If you feel the QBC is a title-only position who has no hand in working with each every day you may believe what you choose.

It is silliness to believe Ryan had any serious day-to-day/all day long hand in Sanchez's development (or lack thereof); particularly silly to believe more than Schottenheimer had. Think he was breaking down film with the QBs all summer long or between games every year and working with him on footwork, cadence, selling his playaction, etc.? Yeah right. Once, after his second 4-interception game in about a month he had Sanchez's play wristband printed in traffic light colors, another time he brought in Joe Girardi to teach him how to slide, and this was the limit and extent of his QB training.

He didn't have 1/10 the influence on training Sanchez that Schottenheimer had, nor should he have given either one's background. One was an experienced QBC (and incumbent OC), and the other was a DL coach turned DC.

In the end there was and is no solution to not having Sanchez turn the football over, or being a reliable QB in general. He's not the only one there's been like this, nor will he be the last. This was my point (Sanchez was merely one example, but one that is well known here). Some guys are just not going to be all that no matter who the coaches are.

 

You live in a world of black and white, and you are missing all of the beautiful colors and shades in between.

 

Schitty was not the OC in SD, and he was not the QB coach in NY, its not an apples to apples basis, no matter how much you want to use it for your agenda.

 

To say Rex had no hand in his day to day development, and then absolve him of the attrocious development that he got, is another case of you fitting your agenda, you love Rex, and hate Sanchez.

 

Rex provided the culture. Rex decided to start him on day 1 when he had no business starting him on day 1, Rex yucked it up while Sanchez was pantsing players and acting like a frat boy, instead of forcing him to mature and learn the game. Rex never once threatened his starting position, or forced him to cut down on the turnovers. Rex let the Oline decline, and the WR core decline around a QB that was not ready for it. Rex hired Sporano. Rex turned loose his defense and blitzing schemes on Sanchez in practice day after day and the list goes on and on.

 

Sanchez may very well have never been good no matter what the circumstance, and he may have been good. Its impossible to know at this point, because you cannot change what happened in his first 4 years, which are the most crucial for an NFL QB. People who have forgotten far more knowledge of the NFL and QB's in particular than you have ever had, believed he was going to be a good QB. You never liked him, and formed your opinion and your agenda before he even played an NFL game, and have spent 6 years beating your chest and using anything you can to prove yourself right on the interwebz.

 

You absolve the horrid job Rex and Schitty did because it fits your agenda.

 

You look for things like extra dropped interceptions over other QB's to fit your agenda.

 

Its pretty sad, move on man, its been a long time since Sanchez has been the QB of this team, he cant hurt you any longer, and enjoy the shades and colors you are ignoring. If you love Rex so much, you can always start rooting for the Bills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian Schottenheimer has practically nothing to do with Sanchez being terrible. Neither does Rex.

 

OK Rex, of course not. I mean, Sanchez was the poster child of how to develop a QB, everything was done exactly as you should.

 

I heard that the NFL is considering making it the book on how to develop QB's in the future as they realize how important the QB position is for its brand, and they want to make sure that all future QB's are developed in the same manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK Rex, of course not. I mean, Sanchez was the poster child of how to develop a QB, everything was done exactly as you should.

 

I heard that the NFL is considering making it the book on how to develop QB's in the future as they realize how important the QB position is for its brand, and they want to make sure that all future QB's are developed in the same manner.

With a forward by Steve Young

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...