Ex-Bucs GM on How To Manage Rookie QB's

[Warfish]

Mark Dominik, who famously drafted Mike Glennon amongst others, said today on NFL radio that he thinks rookie QB's can play right away, and they "either have it or they don't".  he likes the idea of sitting QB's for "a few weeks" then playing them, and they'll either sink or swim, but not be "ruined' by being started sooner rather than later.  Made arguments related to the 4-5 year rookie contracts, and the "clock ticking" on these picks.  Said this worked with Glennon.

Thoughts?

[Sperm Edwards]

Depends on the QB, depends on how new everything is to him, depends on how good/easy the situation is around him (to help ease the transition).

I do generically like the idea of sitting a kid for the first month (give or take). It's an extra month of practice and if there are lingering mechanics/terminology things he has to get down, he doesn't have to also consume his time with week-to-week gameplans.

But while everyone's different, I agree wholeheartedly with the totally unprovable "ruined" myth. 

Then again, Dominik is an asshat. 

[C Mart]

NY isn't Tampa. 2 people cover Tampa. A lot more goes into being a NFL QB than the onfield stuff. 

[Snell41]

I'm going on record, I think Hackenberg is going to be our day 1 starter.  I think he'll pick up the playbook faster than Geno, even with Geno having a year headstart. 

[Jet Nut]

Can't imagine a spread, 1 read, shotgun, no huddle, no audible QB needs the same time, care & learning curve as a Pro Style QB. 

 

[Miss Lonelyhearts]

Of course this is self-evidently true. People act like 'let him sit for a year' is a Plan A and that starting right away or not is somehow a matter of philosophy with regard to development or such nonsense. The simple fact of the matter is that the guy holding the clipboard is way behind the guy who's playing and falling even farther back. It's like the ridiculous idea that Sanchez was somehow going to catch up after starting far fewer games in college than the quarterbacks who turned out to be successful did. 

[BowlesMovement]

20 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Depends on the QB, depends on how new everything is to him, depends on how good/easy the situation is around him (to help ease the transition).

I do generically like the idea of sitting a kid for the first month (give or take). It's an extra month of practice and if there are lingering mechanics/terminology things he has to get down, he doesn't have to also consume his time with week-to-week gameplans.

But while everyone's different, I agree wholeheartedly with the totally unprovable "ruined" myth. 

Then again, Dominik is an asshat. 

I mostly agree with this, but I do believe QB's can be ruined, at least temporarily. They can develop bad habits and lose their confidence, and that ruins them unless they can get their confidence back and get rid of the bad habits, but I agree with everything else, its very individual.

[carlito1171]

17 minutes ago, C Mart said:

NY isn't Tampa. 2 people cover Tampa. A lot more goes into being a NFL QB than the onfield stuff. 

/thread

[Sperm Edwards]

3 minutes ago, BowlesMovement said:

I mostly agree with this, but I do believe QB's can be ruined, at least temporarily. They can develop bad habits and lose their confidence, and that ruins them unless they can get their confidence back and get rid of the bad habits, but I agree with everything else, its very individual.

So Geno is going to do well then this year?

(Sorry I couldn't resist)

[BowlesMovement]

Just now, Sperm Edwards said:

So Geno is going to do well then this year?

(Sorry I couldn't resist)

Well, if a lot of Jets fans are right, he certainly is, I mean, he would have had 50 TD's last year instead of the measly 33 that Fitz put up according to most. For the record, I thought it was idiotic to start Geno in 14, absolutely idiotic and showed what a fool Idzik was.

[Sperm Edwards]

1 minute ago, BowlesMovement said:

Well, if a lot of Jets fans are right, he certainly is, I mean, he would have had 50 TD's last year instead of the measly 33 that Fitz put up according to most. For the record, I thought it was idiotic to start Geno in 14, absolutely idiotic and showed what a fool Idzik was.

Definitely 50 TDs. At least.

[dbatesman]

The primary benefit of sitting a QB is that it provides an evidentiary vacuum that the fanbase can fill with hope that the guy will be good someday. Every week Hackenberg holds a clipboard is another week Maccagnan is guaranteed to have a job.

[BowlesMovement]

15 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Definitely 50 TDs. At least.

According to many here, Fitzpatrick is about as bad of a QB as you can have, and he threw 33, so I see no reason why Geno won't throw at least 40 this year, with a much improved receiving running game, and anything at the TE position, the huge upgrade that is Geno over Fitz that we are going to get is going to translate to at least 40 TD's this year, with last years schedule and this team, might have been 60.

[Beerfish]

He's certainly right on one massively overrated comment that people make, that being  'oh no you will ruin his confidence!' bs.  I also agree that you can tell pretty wuick if a guy is going to be good or not, even if he has rocky games or periods of time.

[win4ever]

1 hour ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Depends on the QB, depends on how new everything is to him, depends on how good/easy the situation is around him (to help ease the transition).

I do generically like the idea of sitting a kid for the first month (give or take). It's an extra month of practice and if there are lingering mechanics/terminology things he has to get down, he doesn't have to also consume his time with week-to-week gameplans.

But while everyone's different, I agree wholeheartedly with the totally unprovable "ruined" myth. 

Then again, Dominik is an asshat. 

I think it's very dependent on mechanics and the system that is being run.  For example, the transition from the Air Raid to the West Coast to a drastic change because one system relies heavily on timing while the other relies on identifying mismatches at the line.  

I think it's also dependent on the level of comfort within the system for the player.  I'm not sure Geno picks up the system within a month, but someone like Winston would be better at it.  

I however disagree with the ruined aspect, because I think QBs can develop bad habits because they are too much behind on the fundamentals of a system to actually thrive.  And once the doubt creeps in, it's pretty much over for the QB, unless another system rebuilds the confidence.  

[Sperm Edwards]

10 minutes ago, win4ever said:

I think it's very dependent on mechanics and the system that is being run.  For example, the transition from the Air Raid to the West Coast to a drastic change because one system relies heavily on timing while the other relies on identifying mismatches at the line.  

I think it's also dependent on the level of comfort within the system for the player.  I'm not sure Geno picks up the system within a month, but someone like Winston would be better at it.  

I however disagree with the ruined aspect, because I think QBs can develop bad habits because they are too much behind on the fundamentals of a system to actually thrive.  And once the doubt creeps in, it's pretty much over for the QB, unless another system rebuilds the confidence.  

Anyone can play worse in a bad system and then fail to get better until entering one better suited for his success. It is not limited to rookies. 

Even if it could somewhat ruin someone, the rate of incidence is negligible. The only ones who get truly ruined are those who get the piss beat out of them so much that they hear footsteps that aren't there and it becomes psychological like any phobia.

Anyway I think it appears this way a lot just simply because most QB prospects were going to be bad anyway, and allegedly rushing them onto the field early provides a nice scapegoat reason.

[JoJoTownsell1]

1 hour ago, Snell41 said:

I'm going on record, I think Hackenberg is going to be our day 1 starter.  I think he'll pick up the playbook faster than Geno, even with Geno having a year headstart. 

I think there is a good shot you are right. 

[detectivekimble]

1 hour ago, Beerfish said:

He's certainly right on one massively overrated comment that people make, that being  'oh no you will ruin his confidence!' bs.  I also agree that you can tell pretty wuick if a guy is going to be good or not, even if he has rocky games or periods of time.

David Carr is the example of how you ruin a young QB.  You would ruin any young QB by putting him in that sort of situation.

[Adoni Beast]

The best way to learn is through experience, but this is so situational and depends on the player. If the rookie QB can absorb and run enough of the offense, then you open up the playbook a little week-by-week. In addition, he has to be able to read enough of defenses, because I don't care how well you have your playbook memorized, if you aren't able to grasp what is happening pre snap and throughout the game from the other team, then you need to sit and wait.

Until can show you in practice and meetings an understanding both your offense and opposing teams defenses, you need to sit and watch. Then you play, take your lumps and grow. 

[Integrity28]

Every player is different, and requires a different approach. It's stupid to suggest there's just one way, no matter which way you advocate for. Mark Dominik is stupid.

[Smashmouth]

2 hours ago, Warfish said:

Mark Dominik, who famously drafted Mike Glennon amongst others, said today on NFL radio that he thinks rookie QB's can play right away, and they "either have it or they don't".  he likes the idea of sitting QB's for "a few weeks" then playing them, and they'll either sink or swim, but not be "ruined' by being started sooner rather than later.  Made arguments related to the 4-5 year rookie contracts, and the "clock ticking" on these picks.  Said this worked with Glennon.

Thoughts?

Warfish if these young QB's have the right pieces in place there's no reason they can't step in if they have a good grasp of the play book and the smarts to learn NFL defenses on the fly. If they put in the work like say a Peyton Manning does in the video room yeah they can get it done. I actually think Hackenberg has the team to do this and the smarts if we don't sign Fitz. Sure it would be better for him if he sits a year under a guy like Fitz and learns from him in the film room but that's all up in the air right now.

[Smashmouth]

13 minutes ago, detectivekimble said:

David Carr is the example of how you ruin a young QB.  You would ruin any young QB by putting him in that sort of situation.

David Carr went to a team with a horrid O-Line and a crappy offense over all. In that case NO you don't bring him in but if you bring in a Rookie on an established offense that's well balanced I see no reason why you can't bring them in.

Look at the Denver Broncos they have a lot of talent on offense no reason a rookie cant come in and grow with that team if you ease them in. The Defense will keep them in games so its probably the perfect place to do it. Will be interesting to see if they Go with Sanchez or Lynch

[Smashmouth]

56 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

Anyone can play worse in a bad system and then fail to get better until entering one better suited for his success. It is not limited to rookies. 

 

Ahh you mean like Fitz

[Smashmouth]

1 hour ago, dbatesman said:

The primary benefit of sitting a QB is that it provides an evidentiary vacuum that the fanbase can fill with hope that the guy will be good someday. Every week Hackenberg holds a clipboard is another week Maccagnan is guaranteed to have a job.

I can see this being the case if Hackenberg was a top 5 pick but he wasnt

[Stonehands]

The idea that you can learn while sitting is kind of ridiculous.  I can see sitting and watching and learning the playbook, but that can be accomplished well before the first bye week.  There is no substitute for experience.  I agree with Mark Dominik.

[Stonehands]

25 minutes ago, detectivekimble said:

David Carr is the example of how you ruin a young QB.  You would ruin any young QB by putting him in that sort of situation.

David Carr is also an example of "you either got it or you don't" because he has spent more time in his career sitting than anyone in history and has gotten no better.   Or, is sitting only the magic elixir if you do it at the very beginning of your career?  Just silly.  You need to play.

[PatsFanTX]

David Carr is also an example of "you either got it or you don't" because he has spent more time in his career sitting than anyone in history and has gotten no better.   Or, is sitting only the magic elixir if you do it at the very beginning of your career?  Just silly.  You need to play.

David Carr is the perfect example of drafting a QB in the 1st round and then not building around him. Charley Casserly totally neglected the OLine for the next 3 years.

At the other end of the spectrum, look what the Raiders are doing with his brother. Solidifying the OLine and giving him weapons to throw to.

Raiders will be the surprise team in the AFC this year and then for years to come. They are building a very solid football team.

[rex-n-effect]

It's not an either/or situation. Every player is different and their needs to maximize their potential are different. Some people learn well being thrown right into the fire. Some people don't. Overloading some people with high stress situations makes many people develop bad habits to accommodate the stress. That is not what you want in a QB. 

Identifying what the team can support and what the player needs is a critical part of the front office's job. 

[ljr]

4 hours ago, Warfish said:

Mark Dominik, who famously drafted Mike Glennon amongst others, said today on NFL radio that he thinks rookie QB's can play right away, and they "either have it or they don't".  he likes the idea of sitting QB's for "a few weeks" then playing them, and they'll either sink or swim, but not be "ruined' by being started sooner rather than later.  Made arguments related to the 4-5 year rookie contracts, and the "clock ticking" on these picks.  Said this worked with Glennon.

Thoughts?

Not sure if you heard it or not ... But they had  an interview with Parcells on as well ... And for all practical purposes he argued counterpoint to this

[chirorob]

4 hours ago, BowlesMovement said:

I mostly agree with this, but I do believe QB's can be ruined, at least temporarily. They can develop bad habits and lose their confidence, and that ruins them unless they can get their confidence back and get rid of the bad habits, but I agree with everything else, its very individual.

I think it depends on what's around them.  If they have no talent around them, and they are going to take a beating, they can be ruined.

David Carr.  No O line, took a beating and was ruined.   Tim Couch possibly the same thing.

Put them in a situation like Big Ben, or even Sanchez.   Good running game, good D.  Peyton Manning had Marvin Harrison and Marshal Faulk.   They don't have to try to carry the load.

 

[Villain The Foe]

4 hours ago, Snell41 said:

I'm going on record, I think Hackenberg is going to be our day 1 starter.  I think he'll pick up the playbook faster than Geno, even with Geno having a year headstart. 

haha.

[Sperm Edwards]

2 hours ago, Smashmouth said:

Ahh you mean like Fitz

I was chiefly referring to QBs with talent, but yes he got better than the prior season when he was benched for Ryan Mallet.

[Charlie Brown]

2 hours ago, Integrity28 said:

Every player is different, and requires a different approach. It's stupid to suggest there's just one way, no matter which way you advocate for. Mark Dominik is stupid.

Ummmmmm this....

There is a reason why TB got Winston and it wasn't because they have such a cleaver GM.  

It's because Mark Dominik and the whole TB FO and coaching staff have sucked for years. 

IMO it is like posting a comment from the Captin Of the Titanic on how to avoid icebergs, it just doesn't make sense.  

As many said on this thread it depends who you have a Winston or Luck you can put them in, you have an immature unprepared Guy you sit him or don't draft him. 

The idea that you can't rush someone is preposterous on its face.  

For example, Baseball pitchers are groomed and developed all the time.  

No knowledgable baseball person would say "this guy has a terrific fastball that's all you need." Why?Because if that is all you have will fail,that's why  

Yes there are exceptions to the rule that proves the rule but the safer saner course is to develop a talent if at all possible.  

The idea that talent is just innate and not cultivated, is in the main, an ahistorical fallacy.  

Genius works hard.  It is amazing how lucky one becomes when they work work work and prepare prepare prepare.  

 

[Villain The Foe]

4 hours ago, BowlesMovement said:

I mostly agree with this, but I do believe QB's can be ruined, at least temporarily. They can develop bad habits and lose their confidence, and that ruins them unless they can get their confidence back and get rid of the bad habits, but I agree with everything else, its very individual.

Exactly. The very situation with Hackenberg would be a great example. Dude had terrible talent around him, bad coaching, pedophiles (sad but very true) and was sacked over 100 times. Some guys need to sit and kinda get their feet back under them. Regain that swag, that confidence. Sometimes knowing that you have talent around you that can bail you out is great to know. It can really settle you. Hackenberg, the talent, was ruined in Penn State....but I think Macc can pull this off

 

Good point. 

[Villain The Foe]

5 hours ago, Warfish said:

Mark Dominik, who famously drafted Mike Glennon amongst others, said today on NFL radio that he thinks rookie QB's can play right away, and they "either have it or they don't".  he likes the idea of sitting QB's for "a few weeks" then playing them, and they'll either sink or swim, but not be "ruined' by being started sooner rather than later.  Made arguments related to the 4-5 year rookie contracts, and the "clock ticking" on these picks.  Said this worked with Glennon.

Thoughts?

Mark Dominik, representing an organization that let Doug Williams walk,  traded Steve Young and is currently letting Glennon ride the bench.