by SportsGirl365, Strike Zones and End Zones
With NFL training camps starting this weekend, there are a large number of teams with question marks at the quarterback position. Various media outlets are blaming higher pressure for lack of player performance. Is it possible that it’s not player performance, but simply lack of players?
Traditionally since the start of the game, the spotlight has been on the quarterback. Youth football players coveted that position and every football father dreamed that his son would be an All Star QB. Being a high school quarterback meant instant popularity, local celebrity, and lots of girls.
In the NFL in the late 80’s and early 90’s, however, there began a shift in power. Lawrence Taylor changed the passing game and brought more credibility to the pass rush defense. While the NFL had always featured great backs, this shift meant more action in the running games of stars such as Thurman Thomas, Emmitt Smith, and Marcus Allen. Youth players watching the NFL and learning the game on the playground no longer aspired to be the quarterback. They wanted to run and they wanted to tackle.
The new highlighted importance of QB protection also increased the salaries of both pass rushers and blind side linemen. As a pro player, you could now make as much money as a linebacker as you could a QB. It also meant that kids playing those positions well had a great chance of going pro.
The result 10 to 15 years later is that the shift in position popularity then means a decreased QB pool now. There are less quality QB’s for teams to choose from. Since 1997, 34 quarterbacks have been selected in the first two rounds of the NFL draft. Only 15 are either fighting for the start or are scheduled to start this season. Only two have won Super Bowls. This means that 80% of the Super Bowls won in the last 10 years either featured quarterbacks drafted prior to 1997, or quarterbacks who were underestimated at draft time (Tom Brady was drafted 199th in 2000).
What does this mean? It means that coaches don’t necessarily have the luxury of picking a quarterback to fit their offense. They need to adjust their offense to fit the quarterback. And if they want to bring back the passing game, they need to go back to the junior highs and the high schools and rebuild interest in the QB position.
Friday, July 20, 2007
The Question Mark Quarterback
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe to the Epic Carnival
2 comment(s):
I appreciate what your stats bear, but I disagree with your conclusion. To wit:
Many "great" quarterbacks in college are system qbs. Take Florida for instance. Since the Spurrier era began, they've had one Heisman winner and a couple of also-rans. How many of them have had an impact in the NFL? One. Grossman.
Some are just genetic freaks who ignored the college playbook, improvised and stood tall amongst his peers, like Heath Shuler. Heisman finalist, NFL bust.
The position has changed and so has the prototype. Many NFL cellar-dwellers have drafted qbs hoping they'll be their savior and TWEAKING, not wholesale changing their system. The Broncos and the Chargers will still feature the run.
When you don't have the support around you (Alex Smith, David Carr), and you can't adjust to the speed of the game, then you either wind up on the market or you're holding a clipboard.
At the end of the day, it's just money. And what's a few mil wasted on a bust (ala practically every Jeff Tedford qb) when there's another promising kid waiting in the wings?
Oh, it's definitely not as simple as what I've laid out. Size, athletic instincts, speed...they all play a part in what position a kid is coached in. And the college offense is so different from the NFL that you can't always depend on the college star to be the NFL star. Combine that with the evolving running offense and you've got a new ballgame.
It's just an angle I haven't seen explored and it got me thinking.
Post a Comment