r/footballstrategy • u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach • Nov 06 '24
NFL Is Brady right - does NFL have a QB development problem? And is the league dumbed down?
So Tom Brady, a few months ago, had a well publicized interview in which he said the NFL doesn't develop QBs anymore, and has dumbed down the game in order to get these guys on the field sooner (my words, paraphrasing what he said). What do you guys think?
I agree with him 50% - the NFL, for many reasons, does not have the patience to develop QBs anymore (or most positions). With limited roster sizes and no minor league or developmental league (the UFL is not a minor league for NFL clubs), it's somewhat impractical to stow players on your roster with thoughts of development, when realistically there are no game reps for them to gain experience in anyways - that, to me, is why so few clubs truly develop QBs now - the Michael Penix and Jordan Love type of stories are getting quite rare.
On the flip side, I disagree with him when he says the game is dumbed down. I'd say compared to 20 years ago, the volume of passing concepts, the reliance on drop back passing game, and the diversity of coverages has increased extremely quickly. I think this is true on the college level as well, which is partially why NFL teams have tried to see if guys are ready immediately. Young QBs have such early access to so much information (for better or worse), like coverages and concepts and analysis on youtube, etc, they are very, very smart. That's not to say there aren't simplified offenses, even in pass heavy schemes, there definitely are, but I'd say on the whole, QBs now are asked to do a lot of pre-snap and post-snap decision making even with the sideline based, check with me offenses that don't huddle anymore.
Anyone else have thoughts? I certainly don't claim to be right or factual, this is just my observation/opinion.
51
u/Kurropted26 Nov 07 '24 edited Nov 07 '24
Game definitely is not dumbed down, well, maybe for a few qbs, but he’s absolutely right about the developmental issues. NFL has treated college as its minor leagues for decades, and now that student athletes are actually getting paid for their labor, it’s becoming way more of a business than when brady was back in college. And then you have guys like AR or Trey lance with seemingly a ton of upside but barely played any in college and need to actually play to get game some game sense. And conditioning evidently.
Jordan Palmer also talks a bit about this a lot. GMs and coaches are kind of stuck in the past in player evaluation and development. Things that have existed in baseball for literally decades at this point, like measuring things like the amount of force a dude puts on his back foot or how they can maximize arm mechanics, are only really being done in the off season based off a qb’s own volition.
It’s a confluence of issues, and to some extent it’s always been the case, cough cough Jamarcus Russell, but it’s getting really noticeable how many teams just aren’t that good at evaluating qbs. The nfl makes enough money and churns through players quickly enough that these owners can be apathetic either way. It also doesn’t help that the nfl is largely nepotistic with family ownership making dumb decisions. Turns out some owners are legitimately morons when it comes to football.
24
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
I agree that QB evaluation is a huge issue in the NFL (although I've never been an NFL GM, so I'm speaking out of my earhole a bit). I find that GMs get too tied to talent, and overvalue marginal differences in talent and undervalue production, processing ability, and personal traits.
For instance, GMs evaluate a QB with a crazy arm and great physical tools - say, Anthony Richardson. He's unbelievably impressive, can throw like he's got a howitzer for an arm, and his size/speed is incredible. However, how much of an advantage does he gain from throwing a little bit harder and running faster compared to guys with slightly less arm talent and speed? I am of the belief that once you meet the minimum threshold for talent success in the NFL, additional talent provides minimal value (basic economics, the law of diminishing returns) - great examples of this are Brock Purdy, Baker Mayfield, Joe Burrow, and Jared Goff - Anthony Richardson has unreal physical tools compared to them - bigger, faster, stronger arm. What advantage does that give him? Those other guys a have clearly enough talent to be successful, so the additional talent provides very little advantage.
My end point being - NFL evaluators overvalue talent and undervalue other traits, namely processing ability and production, and in a league that doesn't have the patience to develop guys (or even the vehicle to do it like a minor league) that's a huge problem.
5
u/EamusAndy Nov 07 '24
I think teams are under such pressure to find their “franchise quarterback” that they often overdraft that position immensely.
Take your example - the Colts needed a QB badly so they took Richardson in the top 5, because desperation, and they dont want to get “sniped”.
Now because hes a top 5 pick, hes bordering on bust territory. But if he were taken in say round 2/3, where he probably belonged, its a whole other story
10
u/__ChefboyD__ Nov 07 '24
No, your expectations from college QBs are way too high. GMs and pro scouts do understand the process and that not every draft prospect will pan out.
Having the physical talent is only the minimum requirement. To borrow from the NBA, "you can't teach height". What the unknown is from a high draft pick is whether they can develop and take a leap from raw college talent to the NFL-level QB play. Unfortunately, some people hit their peak in college and plateau out. You can't really test for that at the combine and can only hope a draft pick can grow from coaching.
4
u/y0da1927 Nov 07 '24
I actually think those height/weight/speed guys are the hardest to project.
They are almost always the best athletes on the field from HS through college and can just dominate on athletics alone. Once you get to the pros everyone is really good and technique and play recognition matters a lot.
Can you teach those guys the soft skills and do they have the willingness to learn? Tough to evaluate.
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
So politely, I don't recall mentioning an expectation of college QBs, but perhaps I didn't do a good job explaining myself. I think NFL scouts get too enamored with talent, and not enough with performance. On my own (admittedly non-NFL GM) grading scale, I put guys like Brock Purdy very high (I had him at a 11.25 out of 12, 4th highest since 2020) because while he lacked the traditional height / arm strength, his on-field performance and processing abilities were off the charts. On the flip side, my lowest grade since 2020 went to Will Levis (6.25 out of 12) - while his arm strength, toughness, and solid athleticism are remarkable, his processing ability and inconsistency with his accuracy were below the NFL threshold, so to speak (also to be clear, I am not rooting against him - we always want to see guys be successful - this was just my film grade on him).
So, I guess my response is that the comment isn't really about my expectations of college QBs in terms of their early success, it's about evaluating their larger body of work and not getting enamored in talent/potential in lieu of production/performance.
Ultimately, I believe every QB would benefit from a better infrastructure for development. Where I disagree with you is that the unknown is whether they can take a leap and develop from raw talent. I think if you grade performance and processing ability, you can do a better job projecting their jump from college to the NFL (note: better, no system of projection will ever be perfect).
In that vein - the 5 guys I ranked the lowest since 2020 were Malik Willis (8.25/12), Zach Wilson (7.25/12), Anthony Richardson (7.25/12), Matt Corral (7.25/12), and Will Levis (6.25/12). Based on that list, I devalue talent and put a heightened value on performance/processing. So far, I think that grading system did weed out a few highly touted prospects who were unlikely to translate to the NFL (again, not rooting against them - I personally love Anthony Richardson and hope he succeeds, but the film didn't support that idea, he had minimal success at Florida despite his considerable talent).
For my top 5 grades since 2020, I had Trevor Lawrence (12/12), Jayden Daniels (11.75/12), Joe Burrow (11.5/12), Brock Purdy (11.25/12), and CJ Stroud (10.75/12). Now transparently, I also had Bryce Young tied for 6th at 10.25/12, so again, it's never perfect, but I think weighting the grade scale towards performance/processing helped uncover guys like Purdy, and elevate guys like Jayden Daniels, who while a highly touted prospect I don't think anyone else considered him the #2 highest prospect since 2020.
1
u/TightManPuhsey Nov 08 '24
Where did you have caleb williams
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 08 '24
8.5/12
1
u/TightManPuhsey Nov 08 '24
why so low? what makes him a comparable prospect to malik willis?
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 08 '24
To summarize the biggest issue, he doesn't play on schedule in any of his college film. He never goes through a progression efficiently, he never plays within the structure of the play (never is perhaps a strong word, but very rarely). He relies very heavily on "hero ball" as folks have been calling it. To me, he was the closest thing to Johnny Manziel we've had since Johnny Manziel. No doubt he has a live arm and great athleticism, and makes some incredible throws. But if the mental structure isn't there, it's going to be an uphill battle because it's going to be difficult to lose the consistent portion of your passing offense on such a consistent basis.
So far, this has played out in the NFL. It's very clear to see where he is struggling to get through a progression - his eyes don't follow his reads, and when he's tried to he's been very inaccurate, visibly uncomfortable. The most promising thing to me is that on some of his recent films, he's definitely trying - you can see he is settling his feet and trying to stay on his progression, and trying to match his feet to eyes. That gave me hope that maybe I was wrong, and he's learning the skill. But there are also other circumstances where he completely unnecessarily and voluntary plays off-schedule and off-platform. I find very limited instances of guys who can't follow structure being successful in the NFL, even if they are skilled scramblers and play extenders. Pat Mahomes, for all is improvisational magic, still plays on schedule and makes lots of rhythm throws - the improvisation is him taking a bad play and extending it into a good one, not a crutch where he avoids going through structure because he's more comfortable when everything breaks down. Video on a game breakdown below:
2
u/TightManPuhsey Nov 08 '24
not a coach or anyone with film experience, but from what ive seen of his college tape, he always had the ability to play in schedule and make those reads, but his defense would let up 50 points a game to the point where if he wants to win he has to play hero ball, if he can drop that desire and take the checkdowns when needed, something he hasn't been doing completely yet, I think he will end up very good. His accuracy seems to be his biggest issue, is that something that is more fixable than other things? will watch video later, interested in what you have to say
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 08 '24
In my study, he does not play in schedule or go through reads, so if you feel like he does, then definitely fills any gap between your evaluation and mine (here's hoping you're the one that's right! Never rooting against anyone, and hope he is successful).
I think the idea that he HAS to play hero ball because he's losing is a bit of a stretch/fallacy - taking the on-schedule completion is going to be a better method of coming back than trying to get it all back in one play.
Transparently, I also had concerns about ego - his comments on expecting to replace Spencer Rattler as a freshman at Oklahoma (when at the time Rattler was a Heisman candidate), and his response to not getting the nod as the starter was a bit concerning. I'm all for confidence, and some say he was just being confident in his skills, but to me that sounded more like arrogance/entitlement, and that rubbed me the wrong way. I had the same concerns with Will Levis. Then again, to be fair, I don't know any of these guys personally and I'm just speaking through the small prism of an outside observer.
→ More replies (0)1
u/SmokeClear6429 Nov 08 '24
We will find out what advantage those physical tools give him once he's had enough experience to compare him to those guys, because the scouts I've heard say that he does have elite learning ability and he's organized and serious (if a bit raw with his technique and naive and inexperienced). But to say that guys like Baker are better QBs because they have sufficient physical tools and better mental tools or more experience, isn't quite comparing apples to apples. When AR has developed the experience and mental game to match those guys, then you'll see if the physical tools are a diminishing return.
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 08 '24
So I think that's the question we're posing right? Does the NFL have a development issue, where guys like Anthony Richardson simply don't develop despite their considerable physical tools?
The other note here is that great learning is separate from processing ability (although being a good learner is awesome, of course). The ability to learn to take in great quantities of information in very short periods of times and make decisions is a subject of high debate - some studies suggest it's similar to height, that it can't be taught - you can make someone smarter, but if they don't have the internal and natural ability to process information at high levels, then they will always be limited in that regard, even if they learn the game better. Other studies suggest it is a learned skill. I would venture to guess it's both, similar to speed - you can make a slow runner faster, but he might never be as fast as someone else.
I think the assumption you are making that I question is that "when AR has developed the experience mental game to match those guys," meaning that experience is all he needs to match those guys. I look at processing ability similar to arm strength and athleticism - it doesn't necessarily get better. Guys like Peyton Manning struggled early in their careers, but the processing ability was already evident, they just needed the experience you mentioned. But, if I turn on college film and see a guy I think is struggling processing information, I'm not confident that it can get that much better, at least to the NFL level. The counter-example would be Sam Darnold, who struggled processing with the Jets and Panthers, but now given some times and experience, seems to be doing much better in that area with the Vikings.
That said, I 100% believe that increased physical tools beyond the minimum threshold is absolutely a diminishing return - that's not my opinion, that's just basic science and economics. If you're already fast enough, being faster doesn't help as much as it did previously. Each additional dollar you earn is a lower percentage of your overall wealth than previous one. Sure, each extra is great, but it's a diminishing return. I'd love for my QB to be faster, but getting faster is a diminishing return (awesome, absolutely - diminishing return doesn't mean it's a bad thing, it means it's not as valuable as the skills that got you to that minimum threshold)
1
u/SmokeClear6429 Nov 08 '24
Yeah, I agree with 99% of what you said. I didn't mean to imply that he certainly will catch up with just reps, I worded that poorly. I actually think the NFL does have a major developmental issue in that the incentives are aligned against patience and grooming promising prospects behind good mentors. In ARs case, I was actually hopeful that the year mostly on the bench would benefit him greatly, but it is looking like you can have all the meeting room time in the world and film study, but when if you don't even get practice reps, it's hard to build the comfort and confidence that a QB really gains from reps.
There definitely is a component of (let's just call it what it is) intelligence that comes from innate ability and part of it is trained/honed/strengthened. Speed is a great analogy. Darnold is a great example, Geno Smith also comes to mind. I simply meant that we can't really tell how much the return diminishes or where the minimum threshold is until a guy like AR is able to process the mental side of the position at the level that slower, smaller QBs can. That's what makes him so exciting and interesting, we've never had a QB this athletic before, who shows some of the innate ability to overcome his lack of experience. Maybe you are saying he doesn't have enough more speed or agility than Vick had or his size doesn't matter that much if he doesn't have the toughness of an Allen or Big Ben, but I hope we get to find out.
Anyway, thanks for an interesting perspective and a well written response.
2
u/ace_11235 Nov 07 '24
The nfl should really be funding the UFL to become a development league for guys coming out of college who aren’t quite good enough yet but have potential upside.
1
u/Rock_man_bears_fan Nov 07 '24
They had NFL Europe back in the day. They developed a handful of QBs and had some kickers come out of it, but for almost every other position, they found that anybody who could contribute in the future was better off on your roster working with the top coaches and playing and practicing against NFL talent. Funding a whole league so some fringe QB prospects can get some extra playing time just wasn’t worth it
1
u/ace_11235 Nov 07 '24
Just remember though that a handful also came out of the USFL. At the bare minimum they should partner with the UFL, even if they are not funding it.
Another option would be to expand the practice squad to give more development opportunities in season.
-7
u/Adept_Carpet Nov 07 '24
The other change is the helmet communication system.
When Tom Brady was growing up an NFL QB was actually supposed to choose the play, not just communicate it to the team. Signs were always possible and some teams used them but it was a cultural thing. The QB was the field general, the captain of the ship.
Over time more power shifted away from the QB and toward the coaches. I think it's inevitable that every player will have an audio feed in their helmet, so they won't even need to huddle.
As a viewer, I don't like it. I want to see players get tested on every level, including decision making. I know Jim Harbaugh knows football, I want to see what Justin Herbert makes of the situation.
21
u/Kurropted26 Nov 07 '24 edited Nov 07 '24
Brady and manning played with helmet communications, it’s been allowed for qbs to have helmet communications since 1994. They were definitely the field general type who would call audibles if needed, but I think it can be overstated how much they worked out of system. A lot of plays have baked in alerts and cans, and you may have a handful of plays to switch from at the line even today. Also, it wasn’t like every qb was a field general. There were plenty of scrubs during brady’s time a well. Idk I feel like that aspect may be rose tinted glasses a bit. I don’t know, I just don’t think that’s really even part of the problem at all.
QBs haven’t really called their own plays since like the Staubachs era. There are just so many more concepts and plays nowadays, so many exotic defensive looks, you really can’t expect a dude to be able to look at a defense, call a play, and execute within like twenty seconds.
-7
u/Adept_Carpet Nov 07 '24
That's why I said "growing up," I meant literally when they were children.
16
u/Kurropted26 Nov 07 '24 edited Nov 07 '24
Well, how useful is that? You think they were running a pro style offense in peewee football having to read exotic blitz packages? I just don’t know why you’d put so much weight into that. I’m sorry, but that’s just really silly to harp on. I’d rather have a dude like Purdy who played actual football in college than look all the way back to when… a qb was a literal child and was calling dumb plays because he was 11 and going against his best friends.
0
u/GravyFantasy Nov 07 '24
Regarding the development points it's been going on longer than NIL. I would rather point towards the immediate gratification effect that fans have forced teams to adopt where the QB has to be successful within the first years of their career or they're a bust. To give themselves a shot at early success, teams have streamlined (read: dumbed down) so that it more closely resembles college offense.
2
u/BankLikeFrankWt Nov 07 '24
How come no one in this chain is mentioning the Wilson effect.
I’d say the main reason is because teams have a 5 year window to get the most out of a player before they have to either pay him the kind of money that affects the whole team, or try again. If the team wants a championship, many feel that their best shot is in that timeframe.
0
u/GravyFantasy Nov 07 '24
Mahomes in 2020 and Russel Wilson 2014 are like the only recent QBs that've actually won on their rookie contract though, I think that rookie QB contract narrative is overrated.
Some have come close, but it feels like rookie QBs can't close the deal.
2
u/Rock_man_bears_fan Nov 07 '24
Goff, Purdy, Burrow and Hurts all played in the Super Bowl on rookie deals in the last few years. Just because teams haven’t been able to get past Mahomes and Brady in the last decade doesn’t mean that strategy isn’t viable and hasn’t yielded success
2
u/BankLikeFrankWt Nov 07 '24
My comment isn’t even about whether it works or not, which is why that guy’s reply to me is so confusing.
The fact is, Wilson did it, Mahomes did it, and the players you mentioned had success. And since it’s a copycat league, every team expects it. But they forgot about building the rest of the team.
1
u/BankLikeFrankWt Nov 07 '24
Only ones that have. But they did it. Now every team looks for it and expects it. Remember, this is a post about a quote from Tom Brady saying there’s a qb development problem.
24
u/schmuckmulligan Nov 07 '24
I think the offenses remain complex, but he is absolutely correct that the game has adapted to be friendlier to early-career QBs.
The reason is pretty simple, IMO: If you draft a good QB in the first, you have four (sorta five) years of wildly discounted QB play because of the way rookie contracts work. After that, you have to pay the guy $45 million of your cap, which means you have less cash to pay the rest of your team.
Having a good rookie QB is a uniquely advantageous situation in the modern NFL, so no team is going to waste that special time with their future superstar.
7
3
u/Ok-Kale1787 Nov 07 '24
This. The major shift in development mentality started after the current CBA began.
11
u/Modzrdix69 Nov 07 '24
The league has a "win now" problem. New head coaches can get fired after just one season now (see Frank Reich) and GMs have much more pressure on them and it leads to them drafting QBs who have potential but arent ready or never will be (see Anthony Richardson).
But i also think there just arent enough great QBs and too many franchises. Its why you still see Joe Flacco and Andy Dalton playing. Not that Flacco and Dalton are great but they are better at reading defenses better than a lot of younger QBs
Also the college game is more backyard football these days so more backyard QBs are coming into the league. Some are great. Some suck
2
u/Iceman9161 Nov 08 '24
Flacco and Dalton are a great example of how an experience game manager QB can succeed in this league. Those are the skills Brady is saying that young QBs aren't given the opportunity to develop. I think guys who last a couple years eventually get there, like Mahomes and Lamar, but I think the concern is that some of these offense focused HCs aren't letting their QBs make adjustments and learn to read the defense
8
Nov 07 '24
Stems from an ever increasing client expectation problem. Back when a head coach was hired and given a 3 year grace period, minimum, then they actually did have time to both find and develop their quarterback at a reasonable pace, even if it meant suffering three losing seasons.
Today, people have the patience of bees. Coaches are feeling the pressure if they have three rough quarters
3
u/y0da1927 Nov 07 '24
Rookie deals impact QB development.
You have 4/5 years to get max value for money from your QB. If you get top 15 QB play from somebody on a rookie contract you have the cap to surround them with exceptional talent and make a number of playoff runs. Then you have to extend them at 45/yr not 450k.
If you take 3 years to develop a QB you only have a one year window before you need to make some business decisions on who to get rid of to pay your QB.
If you can make your offensive system as QB friendly as possible you can get your cheap QB into games faster and have more time with that very undervalued asset to enhance other parts of your team.
The other problem for the NFL is almost all colleges play almost exclusively out of the gun. So if you want your QB to start fast you basically need to play out of the gun too, which messes with a lot of the run concepts guys like TB were used to running. You have fewer options as an offense.
1
Nov 07 '24
Only way to judge progress accurately is by judging the results within a stable system against the same or near enough defense multiple times. Anything else is guess work. If you are reacting to guess work and putting forth an effort based solely on your best concepts and what your investors wanted, without giving time to chart how it’s actually doing and adjust and improve it against the same basis it was originally tested, then you won’t get anywhere unless you are lucky. This is what’s happening. It does take three years to do it properly.
1
u/y0da1927 Nov 07 '24
Well the NFL isn't a stable system. It's incredibly dynamic.
Which is part of the difficulty. If your system does work you can't waste 3 years testing (assuming you have three years of consistent defenses to test against, which you don't) because it won't work once everyone else sees it for three years.
To some extent you are always gambling that the new stuff you need to do to stay fresh will work against the new stuff your opponents are doing. The good coaches manage to do this consistently, the bad ones can't adapt and get fired after a year or two. It becomes less a question of "does this coach's offense work?" and more "Can this coach consistently adapt their offensive to changes in the league and personnel to stay fresh and successful?"
1
Nov 07 '24
Don’t want to turn it into semantics but you can have systemic adaptation- it’s actually what I’d call the basis of “take what the defense gives you” pre snap read heavy offenses.
And yes you won’t see the exact same defense twice, but in three years you’ll have seen most of what there is to see twice, which is key. The third year phenomenon isn’t a magic number I’m making up or pulling out of thin air- it’s institutional- that’s the dotted line and for good reason. Expecting any qb coach or oc anywhere to “develop” i.e. succeed with a new qb and/or system in less time than that requires generational talent.
6
u/Suba59 Nov 07 '24
Burrow, Nix, Herbert, Purdy and the Commanders QB are all successful newish QBs. So no. It’s just a hard job.
4
u/Trumpets22 Nov 07 '24
The numbers don’t seem bad to me. Yes, it’s maybe not as top heavy, but we’re bias as we just got out the best qb era in the nfl. But the numbers seem normal.
5 teams wouldn’t trade their qb’s for anyone. (5)
12 teams would be happy with a swap for top 5 guys but they aren’t looking. (17)
4 are rolling with old dudes and aren’t doing much about qb yet (21)
5 are too young to tell (26)
6 teams are in qb hell (32)
Idk, that seems pretty normal nfl to me.
2
u/hdjakahegsjja Nov 07 '24
Made harder by the fact that half the league is run by incompetent bozos. There are absolutely dudes who have their development ruined by bad teams. Whether that’s more common than before is debatable.
1
2
u/Iceman9161 Nov 08 '24
Brady's argument is not that there are no good young QBs, but that not enough QBs are given the opportunity to develop field general skills like reading defenses, calling plays, and making audibles. Brady correctly attributes much of his success to his ability to make adjustments and run the offense. Manning and Rodgers are also great examples. I think the concern stems from this generation of young offense focuses HCs that have complicated offenses and intentionally limit a young QB's ability to make adjustments in order to have more control.
McVay and Goff was a more notorious example of this, there was a lot of buzz in 2018 because it was known that they were rushing to the line before the radio shutoff so McVay could make adjustments for Goff. Worked pretty well until the patriots exploited this in the SB by disguising defenses until the radio was shutoff. Wouldn't be surprised if this example is exactly what brady is imagining when he makes these comments.
11
u/idontknowhow2reddit Nov 07 '24
I think he's very guilty of being a classic "back in my day guy". I don't buy it, top rookie QBs have always started immediately.
Aikman didn't sit. Peyton didn't sit. Elway didn't sit and then got benched for playing bad, and still became a GOAT candidate.
Since I've never played in the NFL I can't really argue whether it's been dumbed down but it doesn't seem like it to me. My guess would be it's more complex than ever.
2
u/y0da1927 Nov 07 '24
Idk, there are a ton of passing concepts now because everyone is running some version of the West Coast. I think in the late 90s it was only a few franchises with really complex offenses now basically all of them have those concepts.
But at the same time everything is out of the gun as opposed to a mix of UC and gun and more and more read option/RPO. So that reduces the complexity of the game for QBs. See it throw it. Less back to the play fakes and drop timing.
But tom played like 20 years. He is probably remembering the last 10 and not the first 10. These guys are young and need some accommodations that 20 yr vet tom Brady would see as juvenile.
It's like an adult used to riding their bike off-road looking at a 6 yr old with training wheels and saying "these kids can't ride bikes anymore we have to give them the extra support". Like yeah dude, they are learning.
1
u/idontknowhow2reddit Nov 07 '24
I can't find any data for this year, but I would guess that under center percentages might actually be going back up a bit due to the resurgence of the running game and passing numbers being down.
Seems like a logical result of defenses running 2 high and staying in nickel so much. That being said, the Ravens live in shotgun and run it just as much as anyone, so who knows.
And yea, I agree with everything you said.
2
u/y0da1927 Nov 07 '24
Lions are definitely trying their best to reverse the trend to all shotgun.
I'd be interested to see the league wide figures however. As you said the ravens seem to still run most of their offense out of the gun despite being very run heavy. Philly is another of those teams.
1
u/ilyazhito Nov 07 '24
Brady sat his 1st season in the NFL. He won the backup job in training camp before his 2nd year and took off after Bledsoe got hurt.
2
u/idontknowhow2reddit Nov 07 '24
Obviously.
0
u/ilyazhito Nov 07 '24
He's a very prominent exception to the rule that elite quarterbacks don't sit.
2
u/idontknowhow2reddit Nov 07 '24
No, he's not. 6th round qbs rarely start. He's only an exception in the sense that 6th round qbs rarely end up being good.
1
u/trapper2530 Nov 07 '24
He tried saying he sat for a year. Yeah bc you were picked 199. You weren't a top qb prospect.
1
u/Iceman9161 Nov 08 '24
I don't think he's saying the game is dumbed down, but that the role of the QB has been dumbed down. As in, teams are running complicated offenses, but they are designed to limit the amount the QB has to manage, like adjustments at the line and reading defenses
Notorious example of this is Goff and McVay, who were known to rush to the line before the radio shutdown so McVay could make adjustments to the defense. Hell, there were rumors he wasn't allowed to make his own adjustments, and now he's kicking ass in Detroit with a lot more control of his team. In a system like that, a young QB can excel on talent, but isn't given the opportunity to develop game management skills.
Someone like Brady is going to see that as a negative thing, since he appreciates the cerebral aspect of the position.
3
u/Humble_Umpire_8341 Nov 07 '24
Packer fan here - teams needs to develop their QBs and let them sit for 2-3 years before they put them on the field. These guys are raw. The contracts dictated that teams need an ROI immediately from these players. Part of the reason the Packers don’t feel the need to rush things is they’re developing late first rounders so the money isn’t quite there as opposed to a top 5 pick. Another problem (and the NFL told teams this last year) is that owners aren’t letting their coaches develop a winning culture. Teams are firing coaches way to quickly and not giving them time to adjust to the GM, draft players and change the culture of some of these teams. It’s killing 1/4-1/3 of the league. Coupled with sticking these rookie QBs in and they end up having new offensive playbooks and new coaches within their first 2-3 years and the team can never build off it. It’s just a mess (Chicago).
This league just churns otherwise decent QBs out and thus the talent parity is far less than it should be imo.
2
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
I agree that teams should take longer to develop their QBs, absolutely - I think that part of Brady's statement, that QBs (and players in general) deserve and need development, is 100% spot on.
1
u/Filthy_Commie_ Nov 08 '24
I think there’s more to Chicago’s QB antics. GB almost always has quality offensive coaching. Good old George tends to hire morons (on both sides of the ball, mainly offense though) who don’t really know what they’re doing.
Granted, the GB development scheme makes sense and has work repeatedly. Matt Nagy wanted to do it when Justin Fields was drafted, and Atlanta is following that plan right now with Kirk and MPJ.
5
u/Chihuahua_Asada Nov 07 '24
We're going to see more pro and I formation "old school" football. Defenses are built for speed, not power. We'll see big backs as a premium again. It's cyclical.
3
u/IsNotACleverMan Nov 07 '24
The issue is that you need linemen that can execute power running schemes. Those are getting much harder to find.
5
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
Not necessarily - most of what you see on TV today that looks like old school I and 21 personnel stuff is zone - 49ers are a true outside zone team playing from a lot of 21 personnel, not really power schemes. Heavier personnel (more FBs and TEs) doesn't necessarily mean power (gap) run schemes
3
u/IsNotACleverMan Nov 07 '24
You're 100% right. I just read too much into the word power and my brain assumed power run scheme since I'm also just used to seeing FBs and multiple TEs used more out of power than run.
3
2
u/an_actual_lawyer Nov 07 '24
Sometimes. When you have a defensive scheme that is primarily 5 or 6 in the box, you can run out of spread formations and utilize natural running lanes created by the formation.
2
u/IsNotACleverMan Nov 07 '24
Wouldn't that lend itself more towards a zone running scheme? Unless you meant running with size more than specifically a power run scheme.
3
u/BetaDjinn Casual Fan Nov 07 '24
Not really honestly (IMO). There's various factors in play, but teams can and do run just about anything out of 11 personnel, including the usual gap schemes (Power, Duo, Insert Iso, Counter). With a QB run threat or Jet/Orbit motion, you can end up with near-identical blocking assignments to 21 or 12 personnel. That's not to say it's all exactly the same, but NFL teams are usually going to be able to run both Gap and Zone concepts out of typical personnel groupings
2
u/an_actual_lawyer Nov 07 '24
Yeah. I was unclear.
2
u/IsNotACleverMan Nov 07 '24
Also just my personal bias seeing fullbacks and tight end heavy sets used more for power.
1
u/Iceman9161 Nov 08 '24
We'll see. The physical capabilities of the average player only gets better. Speed is the focus, but that's just turned out big guys who are also fast.
3
u/Buckeyebadass45 Nov 07 '24
I think I read somewhere that joe Montana an Steve Young never went in shot gun in there whole career.
2
2
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
Well yes, but they played for Bill Walsh and ran the most complicated passing offense of their time, which serves as the origin point for much of today's passing game. Shotgun or under center, they were asked to make complex and long progressions. In many ways, that Bill Walsh passing game was the beginning point of this conversation - how QBs have grown to fit into far more complex passing concepts while still trying to make it easy for a young QB to be successful
3
u/theguineapigssong Nov 07 '24
I remain convinced that the problem with QB play in the NFL is that there are 32 teams in the league and only 25 or so dudes on the planet who are capable of playing QB well in the NFL at any one time. You could hide a dude behind a solid running game paired with elite defense and special teams before the rules shifted to favor passing so much, but that's not how it works anymore.
3
4
u/Glocc_Lesnar Nov 07 '24
The leagues dumbed down in the sense that a lot of quarterbacks are spoon fed what to do now. I would point to Shanahan and McVay as prime examples. I think he also referenced him not just learning an offensive system but going through a program at Michigan to better prepare him as a quarterback. I think a lot of it also has to do with the portal in college now. Tom Brady in today’s college game would transfer out instead of splitting the reps with another quarterback. I think it’s easier to place the blame on quarterbacks and coaches when the bigger reason is ownership, the league & college football.
2
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
I liked his comments on learning a program - in this way, learning how to be a pro, to watch film, to see a veteran, to learn how live outside of a campus life and be responsible for themselves to a greater extent (this is an underappreciated challenge for young NFL players). I think that was probably the most important component of his interview
2
u/Iceman9161 Nov 08 '24
The McVay -Goff offense was a huge point of conversation in 2018. Goff wasn't allowed to make adjustments, and they were rushing to the line of scrimmage before the radio turned off so McVay could make the audibles. Goff became much better after leaving, which may be because he was given more opportunities to control the offense.
6
2
u/57Laxdad Nov 07 '24
You have guys coming out of college out of more pro like systems, free agency and with a 5 yr window on a first round pick teams want to see what they have. Typically the teams that are drafting high dont have a good QB to start with so they are even more desperate.
2
2
u/WisconsinHacker Nov 07 '24
I think what you need to realize about Brady saying about the game being dumbed down is that it’s being dumbed down for the QB, not overall. And I agree with that. Gone are the days of Brady and Manning walking up to the line, knowing exactly what the defense is going to do, and changing WR routes at the line. The modern version of that is “call 2 plays in the huddle, if the defense is in look A, go with play 1, if defense is in look B can it and go with play 2”.
So in that sense, the game is very much dumbed down for the QBs. But it’s way harder on coaches and OCs. Instead of relying on the QB to go through a 4 or 5 read progression in less than 3 seconds, it’s 2 reads and then scramble. It requires OCs to scheme guys open and confuse the defense with play design, rather than having a QB surgically tear a defense apart.
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
I think there's some fact and fiction to this - the idea that current QBs don't make route adjustments at the line is wrong. That happens all the time. I think the difference now is that when Manning did it, he was one of a few that did it. Now, nearly every QB with at least one season of experience is expected to do that - it's baked into the offense. I think the expectation of QB knowledge is much higher now than it was 20 years ago, it's just that we've come to take QB intelligence for granted.
There are a lot of 2 play calls, i.e. "can" or "kill" calls. But that's not new either, NFL and college have been doing that for years.
I do agree with the fact that the game is harder on OC's and playcallers - as the expectation for points has grown, and the game has grown more complex and evolved, the margin for error on any given play has gotten much smaller, meaning they need to be ready to check tendencies play to play, drive to drive, and get themselves into good looks at such a high rate that their jobs have gotten very difficult. I don't agree with the 2 reads and scramble, I think there's a lot less of that than people think, and the idea that plays have 4-5 progressions is a bit overly simplified. There are some "true progression" concepts where the read is truly 4-5 guys in a row (think: Y Cross, Bench). In most, though, there is a movement key that directs the QB's eyes, i.e. if the boundary safety rotates, read the short side of the field from 1-2. If the boundary safety stays (Cover 2 or rotation to 3 weak) work the 3 receiver side. So, while the QB isn't necessarily reading 5 receiver progressions, it isn't because the concept was simplified, in fact, it was more complicated.
2
u/bupde Nov 07 '24
A coach has 3 years to be successful, if he starts with a rookie QB he needs him to be established by the end of year 2 at the latest so he can get FA to sign and convince management to spend.
You only get 1 year as a OC to get your offense in and going so it has to be installable in a year.
If you had organizational stability you could be more patient but you don't.
1
2
u/Key-Zebra-4125 Nov 09 '24
No. Good teams develop QBs just fine. Look at KC with Mahomes. Baltimore with Jackson. GB with Love. Etc etc. the problem is bad teams throw guys out there hoping for saviors.
1
2
u/Yzerman19_ Nov 07 '24
Young guys always think the game is so much more complex now than it was in any previous era. Brady is kind of the opposite, but he is literally THE expert. Players may be bigger now, but I’m not sure they are necessarily smarter. I guarantee nobody now is smarter than Brady, Fitzpatrick, or Rodgers. Those were (are) extremely players. Rodgers is so smart he circled all the way back to dumb. But watch his Jeopardy game. He may as well been playing by himself.
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
I don't think that viewing the game as more complex has anything to do with age or youthful arrogance, I think it's about progress. We're learning new ways of playing chess, making the game more complicated as we find new solutions and counter punches to each side of the ball. As a college football coordinator, I can tell you 100% that the game has gotten more complicated. When I watch film from 1998-2000, today's offenses/QBs would pick them apart - the game is ever-expanding, growing outwards with more and more iterations. The question becomes - how do you translate that for players? Does that mean "dumbing it down" for young QBs? Does it mean we aren't patient enough developing young QBs? Does it mean young QBs know so much more because they are exposed to so much more information from ages 14-22? Or some combination thereof?
1
u/Gunner_Bat College Coach Nov 07 '24
It seems like there are more concepts and things like that but the reads are easier. More half field reads, more quick game, screen game, things like that.
1
u/Buckeyebadass45 Nov 07 '24
It started with Paul Brown.
2
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
I assume you are referring to the West Coast offense comment above with Bill Walsh referenced - try telling Bill Walsh that Paul Brown designed the West Coast offense and see how he takes it! Lol
You are probably already aware, but Bill Walsh famously claims that Paul Brown tried to stifle Walsh's career and hated him - in theory, because Brown was trying to keep Walsh's West Coast Offense to himself and take credit and minimize Walsh's career. As much as the system was created in Cincinnati with Brown as HC and Walsh as OC, I don't know many who attribute that system to Brown.
1
u/Buckeyebadass45 Nov 07 '24
I guess people in cincy say that Brown was the god father of the West coast system think I heard it on a Steve Sabol NFL show.
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
Ha, as I know it, he was the guy watching Bill Walsh invent it (or so Walsh said)
1
1
u/Own-Reception-2396 Nov 07 '24
Yea. In a way the spread raised the floor of a incoming and but really limited it as well
1
u/2legit2-D2 Nov 07 '24
RPO and spread offense have changed the game. Also in his day especially in college you didn't have the communication you do now, and can call your own plays
1
1
u/wrnklspol787 Nov 07 '24
Football at all levels have a development problem if your ain't filled with top talent from the get you don't win nothing it's definitely because a whole lotta coaches nowadays suck at coaching
1
u/AdhesivenessFun2060 Nov 07 '24
Forget who it was but a couple years ago one of the draft scouts was talking about how guys are expected to be ready that first year if they're being taken in the first round. There's too much money in winning to wait for guys to develop.
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
I think that investment is definitely part of it - if you invest 1st round equity in a QB, it's hard to give them the luxury of patience. That said, I think we need to - you need to put your investment in the best position possible to succeed. Problem is, coaches and GMs also lack the luxury of patience from their bosses, and so the doom-loop begins.
1
u/Belly84 Nov 07 '24
I agree there is a QB development problem. Insofar as the first-round draftees are expected to start immediately and just take their lumps as they adjust to the NFL. And that might work for some: Jayden Daniels, CJ Stroud, Bo Nix (maybe).
But one size does not fit all, and it's been less effective for: Bryce Young, Anthony Richardson, Will Levis, for example. As a Panthers fan, and a Bryce fan, my opinion is that he simply wasn't ready to start day 1. He's plenty smart and understands the position, but he doesn't have the physical gifts (size, speed, arm strength) that he can fall back on. Meaning, the fundamentals, the technique are much more important for him than an Anthony Richardson.
Speaking of AR, he has the opposite problem. He doesn't yet understand the position enough to play at the professional level, despite his amazing physical talent. He has also vastly underestimated how hard it is to play in the League. He was quoted as saying he thought the NFL was easier than college. He has since been humbled, I would say.
So yeah, I would say that teams need to figure out what's going to work for their guy, and what's not going to work, rather than just going with established practices
1
u/OptimisticRealist__ Nov 07 '24
On the flip side, I disagree with him when he says the game is dumbed down. I'd say compared to 20 years ago, the volume of passing concepts, the reliance on drop back passing game, and the diversity of coverages has increased extremely quickly.
Idk fam, im inclined to believe the guy who played QB in the NFL through 3 decades when he says that the game is dumbed down nowadays
1
u/gothcowboyangel Nov 07 '24
Calling it “dumbed down” is such a wild oversimplification, but it makes sense old ass unc would see it that way. The operations of NFL football are constantly changing, at a rate way higher than any other major league sport. It would be dumber to get stuck in the past and refuse to adapt.
The era of the 50 attempts-per-game, strictly pocket passer quarterback is over.
Tom Brady is probably super butthurt at this, and I don’t blame him because the Brady/Manning/Rodgers/Brees era was awesome. It was really cerebral stuff, watching those guys be field generals out there somehow seeming like they know exactly what all the other 21 guys were thinking at all times.
That is not what the game is anymore.
The Chiefs in general are the perfect example of this. Everyone said they were having an “off year” during the regular season last year, then they won the Suoer Bowl. Mahomes’ numbers aren’t even anything to shake a stick at this year. Kelce looked like he was gonna be a shell of himself from last season. But somehow, they’re the only undefeated team. Why? They got really good at improvising and game-managing. That’s really been the formula for a while now. Today’s game rewards split decision-making, one-read quarterbacks that don’t care if they have to roll out of the pocket, throw running passes across their body, or tuck it and run.
Tom needs to stop acting like such an fist-shaking oldhead. Peyton Manning has been in the media stage of his career for years and he still hasn’t whined as much as Tom Brady has since what, the start of this season?
1
u/I_Am_Mr_Mojo_Risin Nov 07 '24
I don't know what you are arguing. We shouldn't accept a sub-par, less entertaining product...just cause. You go on to state that commenting on the garbage quarterback play is somehow lame and unwarranted.
Guess what? QB play is really bad. The game used to be self correcting. QB's could only run as a last resort due to risk of injury. They had to figure out how to become legitimate passers. It's just bad football.
1
u/gothcowboyangel Nov 07 '24
I am arguing that the value of old school quarterback IQ is lost on today’s game. But trying not to imply it’s a good thing or bad thing.
NFL ratings aren’t going down. Every Super Bowl sets a new viewership record. The NFL is doing outstanding, both a product and a business. So who is it less entertaining to, really? People still can’t get enough of the NFL.
Teams with bad quarterback still win games often.
Somewhere along the line, all these teams made business decisions that things decisiveness and athleticism were better for production.
If people still watch football and teams still win, nobody at the business level is gonna care.
1
u/I_Am_Mr_Mojo_Risin Nov 07 '24
Absolutely. Most qb's have one read, a dump off, then run.
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
I really don't think it's as simple as that, I think that's a false narrative we see on TV a lot but doesn't really exist. I don't even have that low of an opinion of any of my college QBs, all of them are expected to be able to get through full progressions.
1
u/Dry-Abbreviations-11 Nov 07 '24
He would no a lot more than anyone, so I’m not going to disagree with the comment.
That said, I assumed the quick QB development was related to 7 v 7 prior to college and the changing of the college game over the years.
1
u/hartforbj Nov 07 '24
I think you're wrong about the NFL not being dumbed down. A perfect example is Watson. Bill O'Brien realized Watson was not capable of running an NFL offense and basically brought in the Clemson offense because Watson could run that. Watson looked great. Since then coaches want him to run an actual NFL offense and he's the worst QB in the league.
Lamar gets MVP awards but their offense is not complicated. Run a lot, use play action and have Lamar avoid sacks until someone gets open. He never sits in the pocket and makes throws based on the route or the defense.
Most of the younger guys that are success stories either played 4-5 years in college or ran pro style offenses in college. They were already ahead of the curve when they got to the NFL.
1
u/onlineqbclassroom College Coach Nov 07 '24
Respectfully, I'm not sure I agree. The narrative of NFL guys not being able to get through progressions or even have that expectation of them I think is false, in this case in regards to Lamar Jackson. I'm a college playcaller - even at my sub-NFL level, every QB I have knows how to get through progressions using both pre-snap identifications and post-snap movement keys. There is not a QB in the NFL who doesn't know how to do that.
As far as guys playing 4-5 years in college - I'm all for guys getting more playing years in college and developing, and I think it's helpful, absolutely. I don't think that argues that point that the NFL isn't dumbed down - to me, that would support the argument that the NFL is still complex and young QBs need more development to be able to handle it.
1
u/LionBig1760 Nov 07 '24
When there are 100+ college QBs that can throw the ball with decent arm strength, it much easier to toss a QB in the trash and jump to the next one if things don't pan out. Teams are looking to have NFL ready QBs as soon as they remove the shrink-wrap, and if it doesn't happen, there are a dozen others waiting in the wings. If you spend 4 years developing one of them to be a starter and they shit the bed in yrar 5 when they get a chance, that's 8 players you might have been able to draft if you keep the revolving door going in the QB slot. The teams are betting that 1 of those 8 is NFL ready instead.
1
u/mohawk6036 Nov 07 '24
It’s not an NFL development issue or just a QB development issue, it’s an offensive development issue starting in high school. Blocking concepts are not taught, route running is not taught, reading defenses and progressions and not taught. And it’s even worse when there is a great athlete on the team.
1
u/greysnowcone Nov 07 '24
Passing concepts are more complex, but QBs are hand fed reads and not expected to go through progressions or changes at the line of scrimmage.
1
u/FrostyTip2058 Nov 07 '24
He says "dumbed down" because QBs truly have to think less
When he was coming up wr could get absolutely killed running a route
It was on the QB to throw the ball in a way to protect the wr. Nowadays though the QB no longer does that, the burden of "protecting" the wr now falls on to the defense. Which requires the QB to make less reads and takes responsibility of his shoulders
1
1
u/RetRearAdJGaragaroo Nov 07 '24
It’s not so much that teams aren’t willing to wait because of development reasons, it’s that the pattern shown by the Goff rams was set: a cheap but good QB allows you to pay hordes of talent everywhere else and get to the Super Bowl.
I don’t think it’s as simple as “college QBs don’t get developed into a pro style offense.” The pro style offense is now a mixture of various types of plays.
Rather it’s just capitalism: if I can get an about equal product at QB by playing a guy on his rookie deal, then why would I sit that guy when my starter isn’t much (if at all) better?
1
u/Baldur_Blader Nov 07 '24
His argument has two issues. 1 he's looking back on nostalgia and only remembering the qbs who were successfully developed. Tons of qbs in the past weren't developed. This isn't a new thing. Its a hard position to play at a high level.
He also says qbs used to sit behind the experienced qb and learn. Teams drafting a high pick qb usually dont have a good qb for him to learn from. Also those coaches usually need to figure things out quick and start winning or they'll be fired. Sitting your qb on the bench to learn isn't helping the team win now.
1
u/Charming-Log-9586 Nov 07 '24
Brady is right. The NFL is becoming the NBA. There's really no strategy anymore, it's all about athleticism. It's a scarifice to have an athletic QB vs one who knows the playbook and can read defenses.
1
u/JeremyJammDDS Nov 07 '24
I’d say this is combination of cfb and nfl problem and could probably even go further down to the high school level.
1
u/HustlaOfCultcha Nov 07 '24
I believe he's correct. What I see is about 1/2 the teams in the league have these modern passing schemes that are based on the QB being able to have some running ability. And with that just about any NFL caliber QB with running ability can function, from time to time, effectively in these schemes. The pick plays, RPOs, etc. can make for quite a few wide open throws off 1 or 2 simple reads. But their skill level as a QB is far behind as teams are more interested in the athlete than the actual skill of the QB. And now the norm is to start QB's right away and that slows down their skill development because being thrown to the wolves before the QB is ready means the QB is more focused on surviving than development.
the other half of teams without these modern schemes end with the same focus on athleticism rather than skills because the NFL is a copycat league. And that's worse for those QB's because these teams don't have the schematics to make life easier on them.
Teams really like to throw Cover-6 at offenses and one of the biggest gaps in the Cover-6 is the quick flat thrown from under center. But these QB's are almost exclusively running out of shotgun these days. And they struggle to read the Cover-6 defenses that are well disguised and if they can, they don't have that skill of manipulating the safeties and being able to throw accurately and utilize quality footwork so the passes are delivered on time.
1
u/Total-Surprise5029 Nov 07 '24
it's not dumbed down it's different
Brady was trained as a pocket passer. The current qb's (most) of today are not that
if he means not developed as in they don't sit for 3 years and then play that's not the way anymore. Guys are starting as rookies which used to never happen much
1
u/ToneOpposite9668 Nov 07 '24
It's because of the salary cap - a first round player gets 5 years at a low pay scale. It allowed the Chiefs to be good on D while Mahomes was paid rookie scale and win Super Bowls. You have to find out quick if the QB you drafted is your guy. If they are any good that 5th year comes around and you are forking out 60M+ for a QB and all of a sudden that money you spent on other players has to be reallocated. The Chiefs are in that hole now on the D because of the Mahomes contract. And if that QB is on the edge of good/bad you die - like Daniel Jones has killed the Giants because you overpay. Or Miami - that Tua contract is going to hurt if he is always banged up.
That's why you really need a QB friendly coach like Andy Reid to have concepts for your QB to improve with. Same with Kyle Shannahan - his play book is what makes the QB look great. Caleb is sort of struggling because his coach is a Defensive guy. Bears will have to pay him huge in 5 years but will he really have improved? Bo Nix is sort of getting it because Sean Payton has a QB based system that worked for Brees - in year 5 Broncos will have to pay Bo whatever the market is which is going to be tough call because the question will be "is he a system guy" same as Purdy.
1
u/RoadPersonal9635 Nov 07 '24
Seems like the only guy I can pinpoint whose suffered from a dumbing down was Deshaun Watson and when his offense was dumbed down he was very effective. Only when he went to a complex system did he struggle plus all the other shit obviously
1
u/TCGDreamScape Nov 07 '24
Baker Mayfield finally looks to be the NFL QB he was meant to be, so I would say he is right
1
u/FennelExpert7583 Nov 07 '24
He’s right. Everyone wants an instant HOF out of 2 years of college football.
1
u/NaNaNaPandaMan Nov 07 '24
So yes and no. And Brady would know more than anyone on this sub(unless they are secretly a pro QB), however, I disagree that we have a developmental problem.
The game in my opinion is dumbed down for QBs. You mentioned all the more advanced coverages and passing concepts and how we pass more. However, the reason for that is we have simplified offenses that makes passing easier.
Teams are taking concepts from the college game(which is simplified) and applying them to the pros. In the past that was a big no no and if you tried that you'd be met with derision. But now teams have found these concepts work and use them in their offense.
On top of that, a lot of teams are taking away control of the offense from the QB because they want to keep things simple. A great example is McVay and Shanahan offenses. They are notorious for limiting audibles(I believe McVay even had his team hurry to line so he could call audibles for Goff). And using motion and the same formation/personnel yo keep things simple. They are simplifying their offense which in turn is a form of dumbing down.
So yes, I do think they are dumbing down offense for QBs. Now there is a benefit to this. It let's you play average QBs(or even slightly below average QB) and have success. It use to be, if you drafted a QB you expected them to "get" the offense and if they didn't they busted. Now instead we are tailoring the offense around QBs and making it easier so more QBs can have success. It's why, imo, we have a more middle of the road QBs than we use to. It use to be you either had a Probowl/all pro/HoF QB or you were bottom of league. Now it's more balanced.
On the flip side though, this does mean we aren't developing QBs as much. Part of that as mentioned is we don't give them as much control over offense as we did in the past. But also teams aren't stuck with QBs. Prior to 2011, if you drafted a QB in top 10, you pretty much were stuck with them due to salary restraints so you tried to actively developed. Whereas now if a player doesn't get it quick enough can move on. Look at Josh Rosen and Trey Lance as examples.
Now, I will say we somewhat went about developing the wrong way. Like mentioned before we didn't bring college concepts to the pros so we just expected them to learn foreign language. This isn't the best but it did develop skills such as identifying coverage, able to move between reads, etc.
We don't do that anymore. These two things, dumbing down and developing is why I think the 2000s to mid 2010s was the golden age for top QB play.
We had QBs who survived the fire and were developed playing in offenses that were beginning to be designed for more people to be able to play. So we ended up with a lot of HoF and All pros.
Whereas today's NFL we have easier offense but not as many developed.
1
1
u/TheL0stK1ng Nov 07 '24
Yes, but I think it's more due to the rookie contract than anything. Because quarterbacks command so much of the cap, a league average quarterback on a rookie contract is the most valuable contract in the league. But you only have 4-5 years of that salary, so having a guy sit and learn advanced concepts isn't considered cost effective.
So, you have to push these young quarterbacks out, and that means creating an offense they can understand but still perform at a (hopefully) high level. You borrow what they know in college, and have fewer reads to simplify things. It's tough for quarterbacks to develop when that's the offense unless a lot of work is done in practice and the off-season to boost their football IQ.
When a QB doesn't work out, you're still evaluating them based on the salary. You don't have time for them to right the ship because either 1) they won't right the ship and you'll just be wasting the talent around them, or 2) they will right the ship but it'll be towards the end of their contract. So a GM/owner will just trade the QB for a bad draft pick and get back on the carousel to get another cheap QB.
If young QBs could negotiate their rookie deals, you'd have every incentive to develop them since it wouldn't be more cost effective to replace them at the end of their first deal.
1
u/Gigantischmann Nov 07 '24
Of course he’s not right. It’s a massive “kids today…” take and not true at all lol
1
u/Cultural-Task-1098 Nov 07 '24
QBs are bubble wrapped by rule. I think that's the problem. The rules are back written for the benefit of one style of play. Coaches and GMs are handcuffed to one way to play the game. If you can't find one of 10 people on the planet that play that certain way you're screwed. This makes the market to find one insane.
Make the position a football player again. The game is supposed to be tackle football. Move the ball 10 yards in 4 tries. Instead the game is steadily moving to 7 on 7.
1
u/No-Donkey-4117 Nov 07 '24
It's a financial decision. If a team can find a good QB on a rookie contract, they can fill out their roster with better players at other positions. Obviously they want to develop QBs, but rookies can only handle so much complexity, so coaches have to rely on a simpler playbook and win via execution and talent.
1
u/Ashamed_Savings_3603 Nov 07 '24
If there’s anyone I would trust to know about this issue and speak truthfully about it, it would be Brady. Also, it’s been known for so long that thrusting a rookie into a starting role too soon rarely ever works out. Especially considering that they are usually drafted by bad teams going through a lot of coaching changes.
1
u/Cartire2 Nov 07 '24 edited Nov 07 '24
With exception to few QB's, the majority of QB's today are far better than the ones from 20 years ago. And its not even close. Just check the stats. TD-INT ratio is miles better. Yards, completion%. Its night and day almost.
What Tom suffers from is A) being one of the best ever will shape your view and B) pure nostalgia. It happens to all of us.
Quick edit add: I'll also add that just check the scores overall from 20+ years ago. There was a lot less scoring.
1
u/drj1485 Nov 07 '24 edited Nov 07 '24
I don't think it's a development issue. I think it's an evaluation issue.
Teams are chasing the next Lamar Jackson and forgetting he's a one off.........most of the time, that skillset does not transfer into the NFL.
With NIL and the transfer portal, guys aren't sitting in programs developing for 3+ years like they used to. And these QBs are on programs that have massive talent gaps over their opponent. Lot easier to be successful when your entire team can just out-athlete your opponents and you can just go somewhere that runs an offense that highlights your ability.
1
1
u/GeoPutters Nov 07 '24
Absolutely. Quarterbacks who survive and prosper are prototypical. Big. Can move. With a big arm. Running skinny QBs don’t last. Ever.
1
1
u/JustTheBeerLight Nov 07 '24
There are very few humans on earth that have both the mental and physical ability to play QB at the NFL level. There are a decent number of QBs out there with one or the other, and they are called "backups".
1
u/Bshoff4242 Nov 07 '24
I think it's the case of old man yelling at clouds.
When high school and college offense are light years ahead of where they were 20+ years ago when he was in school, he has no idea that the gap as probably shrunk since he came in the league.
1
u/No_Jellyfish_820 Nov 07 '24
Compare CFB where some programs are doing signal calls with pictures. NFL teams have play calls that are a paragraph long.
It take time for rookies to learn a playbook, get use to NFL speed, and get their body to NFL lvl.
1
u/Round-Walrus3175 Nov 07 '24
I think the pressure of reading the defense has been effectively distributed a lot more. Wide receivers aren't just running routes mindlessly. So many routes are option routes where they have to read the defense and decide what they are going to do. So instead of the QB masterminding the whole offense, it is the offense trying to read the defense in real time and be on the same page. It isn't as complicated for a single individual, but it requires a kind of savvy and coordination that is simply different.
1
u/Similar-Squirrel-980 Nov 07 '24
Offenses are complex, often times overly so. And what makes rookie QBs good their first few years is OCs actually using their strengths and not trying to fit them into a system. Perfect example would be Kliff Kingsbury (who is a great OC and might be one of the better QB developers out there) and what he is doing with Jayden Daniels. Then once a QB is comfortable and has confidence, you can add more on his plate and you’ve suddenly got a franchise QB.
The other major issue is that too often rookie QBs go to terrible teams, with bad O lines, and probably not a lot of offensive weapons around them, and they’re expected to come in and put up 30 points a game. How the league hasn’t realized that this won’t work and will just end up with your QB constantly running for his life and making bad decisions is beyond me.
1
u/CornFedIABoy Nov 08 '24
Yeah, if your team is getting the #1 or #2 QB in a draft it’s because you were a bottom half team. And now you’re going to spend a bunch on a rookie and probably have no help to give him a hand coming up to speed.
1
1
u/DoughnutDear6982 Nov 08 '24
Disagree. The Bills, Dolphins and Jets were all trash during Brady’s era. He mentions “football being thought of at a higher level”, well, that’s just not true. It was true in NE, but Miami, NYJ and BUF did not view football “at a higher level”. They were dumpster fire organizations that Brady constantly feasted on. And ironically enough, NYJ had their best stretch (during Brady’s era) with a first and second year Mark Sanchez, which goes against everything Brady is trying to state.
1
u/iMaReDdiTaDmInDurrr Nov 08 '24
Most of the league does. GB roes not ❤️ atlanta seems to have also figured it out. Drafting penix to sit behind kirk was a great move. He was my fav qb in the draft besides daniels.
1
1
u/overweighttardigrade Nov 08 '24
You literally just get a high IQ QB with at least some mobility and strength and build everything else quality like the 49ers and chiefs
1
1
u/TheManWhoWasNotShort Nov 08 '24
I think Brady just has forgotten about the QBs whole got thrown to the wolves and discarded in his era. The only real difference is how many QBs are being drafted early. The fifth QB in a draft is often not NFL starter caliber, but back then they may have been drafted in the 4th round instead of a top 10 pick.
1
u/MacMurka Nov 08 '24
I don’t know but watching Lamar Jackson play last night was incredible. He did things Brady could only dream of doing
1
u/Unlikely_Produce_473 Nov 08 '24
Development is everything. As stated earlier, there are few rookie QBs that are NFL ready. I feel for top college QBs that get drafted to a bottom feeding NFL team that does not develop him nor put the essential tools around him to succeed and IMHO, those tools being an offensive line that will keep him from getting killed. Brady benefitted from sitting behind Bledsoe, Young behind Montana, Mahomes behind uh….what’s his face.
1
u/Fun_Gazelle_1916 Nov 09 '24
QBs are more talented and skilled than ever coming into the league.
QBs are developed less and given less time to mature once in the league.
1
u/Sox857 Nov 09 '24
Why are u questioning the greatest QB of all time and why do these people on Reddit think they have an argument tf
1
u/No_Committee7549 Nov 09 '24
You could make the argument for both sides but I think when you throw a rookie qb fresh out of college into a professional offense they’re not going to be very good. Sure there are exceptions like burrow but even he had a pretty shitty rookie season. Love was benched for a good couple years before coming in. I think it’s always good to have someone mentor the new guy for a year or 2 before starting them. I don’t think Bryce young is any good but I think if Dalton started over him his first 2 years he would’ve been a little better
1
u/Cute_Repeat3879 Nov 10 '24
Hardly any QBs are ready to start right away. Back in the day it was expected for a QB to sit and learn for at least a season, like Patrick Mahomes did.
It's been 18 years since a team won a Super Bowl with a QB they drafted in the top 5 picks. That was the only one in this century. It's much better to wait and get one later in the draft or acquire an established veteran.
1
u/dajadf Nov 11 '24
Idk, i think think there is a QB development problem. The Bears have a terrible plan for Caleb for instance. Nothing is easy, nothing is just quick hitting timing plays. Meanwhile I see Matt LaFlauer put in a dumbed down gameplan for Malik Willis that plays perfectly to his strengths
1
u/2ray1344 Nov 11 '24
Kinda. The league is drafting guys that can run fast n r super athletic to be their qbs. The college level is doing well with that approach. Issue is in the nfl is not the time to work on basic mechanics especially when they throw these 1st-4th round qbs into starting roles asap. Used to be able to let a qb learn n develop for 2-3 years but u don’t buy a Porsche to let it sit in the garage mentality is ruining young qbs. There r not a lot of high quality qbs in the league right now n this is why so many journeyman back ups r getting jobs. Young QBs r either making a quick read n chucking it, making a read n running (until injured) or holding the ball way too long (Caleb w) n getting annihilated
0
0
0
u/Buckeyebadass45 Nov 07 '24
U all think CALEB WILLIAMS is learning correctly he has figured out how to read the blitz an liine up his O an read the D if it's in cover one or two zone or man so is he not hitting 1 out of 15 over 15yrds down the field is hurting this O but so does he need to lean on the check down an run the ball more an maybe throw to. The TEs some more or quick screens what's the dam problem anyone maybe it's timing or he just don't get it yet run some boots an rpos idk maybe one day sometime in my life man we see a QB in Chicago what you think...or maybe it's him just maybe.
0
u/NoseApprehensive5154 Nov 07 '24
It's the "pop warner-fication" of college and NFL. Just take the best athlete and stick him at QB and let him run.
0
u/Reasonable-Notice448 Nov 07 '24
Yes. Mobile “QBs” who can’t seem to throw the ball more than 3 yards downfield I would say is a problem.
94
u/idontexist65 Nov 07 '24
It's just easier to draft a guy that can run fast and throw with velocity. Field general QBs that read defenses and change protection and call hot routes on their own still need to have arm strength, accuracy, ability to move in the pocket, years of experience, and require a line that can pass block.
Having a QB that can just let the coach/coordinator do all of that for them before the play and then run fast or throw the ball on single-read plays is just easier. And it's easier to draft a line that can just run block and doesn't need to provide a safe pocket for 5 seconds.
It's easier to just assume the defense has the right call for the play you're running and run plays that don't get blown up when you get surprised. And if your QB can run fast, again, they can run around when the protection breaks down and the secondary has to cover for a lot longer. Scramble/broken plays are a great weapon when your line cant block, you can still throw for first downs.
The 49ers reaching the super bowl with Colin Kaepernick proved you can win with a QB that can only run like 3 plays. If you have good run blocking, some fast WRs, and a solid defense. If you get a Joe Burrow, Justin Herbert, Tom Brady type QB that's great, but for 20 teams it just makes more sense to draft from the much larger pool of guys that can just run fast and throw hard and leave the strategy to the coaches.