I want to get rid of Blough and run with 3 QB’s only, Boyle being our #3. get a QB that can push Goff if not start behind Goff @# 2, then Goff Ball is our starter.
I’m in this boat too, he did okay accuracy-wise, his passes just have a bit of ‘sail’ on them being too tall at times. That’s correctable in my opinion. he has a strong arm and has some legs to him. he wont’ cost much so I’d say keep him and draft someone late.
1 Like
Me, as a weapons instructor and NRA?
Accuracy is the fruit of all the other applications brought together in the moment.
DC already said Tom plays mentally to fast…. That if he slows down the mental process that he will show better results aka accurate ball placement
I think Goff needs to go, and Boyle is worse than him.
1 Like
I completely disagree and this point has been proven year and after year in the NFL and college football.
Was Tom Brady accurate coming out of college. No he was not.
Accuracy is the combination of mechanics, footwork and timing. All of these are teachable. Some guys take longer to develop these traits. Some never do.
There are QB camps that are designed around building and improving accuracy. Those camps use drills to improve accuracy.
Muscle memory comes from practice and repetition. That’s why veteran QB’s talk about repetition so much. The more you practice the more accuracy improves.
2 Likes
Josh Allen wasn’t either.
If Brunnell can teach accuracy and decision making, we absolutely must take Malik Willis.
You can’t teach physical tools. You can teach repetition and drill based things. That’s why I was so high on Justin Fields. I don’t think Nagy can teach that stuff though.
Brunnel was never very accurate in his playing days. His career completion percentage was 59%. Doesn’t mean he can’t coach it, but it’s worth pointing out.
Let me try and refine a bit. Going back to the surgeon example:
surgeons’ movements need to be meticulous and controlled. Hand-eye coordination and manual dexterity often come down to natural ability; however, practice also helps improve those skills.
If a guy doesn’t have the natural ability and hasn’t shown it by college, it won’t ever show up. These guys have thrown thousands of footballs and had coaching for a decade plus by the end of college. Not to say there isn’t room for improvement with better coaching, mechanics, timing, and placement targeting.
My point is that if a guy doesn’t show the ability to have pin point placement, especially with a still target, by the time they reach college, they will likely never have elite accuracy in the NFL.
Should you want to read the quoted article, its a good read on what it takes to be a surgeon and not too unlike an NFL QB:
we should be drafting a 3rd-4th round qb every couple of years regardless of starter status. I’d rather have a young hungry kid as backup who might start to impress than a retread career backup who’s only positive is they don’t cost too much
1 Like
That’s why Orlovsky carried on about QB’s throwing with “bad feet” or you hear other pundits talking about “off platform throws”. It reveals an innate ability to throw a ball accurately. Yes, there is a mechanical nature to what they do that you want to see a QB develop, but still, some QBs are just more accurate.
When you have a locked in franchise level QB, it’s the right thing to do to have vet backups. The Stafford years for instance. We didn’t need to be shedding draft picks on QB’s ala Brad Kaya or trading for David Blough. A franchise QB with time on his contract doesn’t need to be training a young guy and having one less set of eyes to help him dissect what defense are doing to him.
Now that we have a QB that IMHO is not our locked in franchise QB of now and the future, the paradygm should totally shift. We are focused on building the rest of the roster and playoffs/SB is not in sight. THIS is the time you draft your QB and sit him behind the vet and you don’t care that the vet is missing a set of eyes. We are going to lose no matter what. You do have the vet train up the new guy.
So Boyle is NOT the right plan right now. Malik Willis should be.
I’d love to come back to Kate Upton. Sorry to compare KU to the lions, but the me to Boyle analogy has merit.
After the Pats had Brady they still drafted 10 QBs in those 20 years in the mid to late rounds. I know they were able to flip one of those 7th round picks into a high second round pick after he filled in for an injured Brady
1 Like
As someone who has taught a lot of young people my trade, I wholeheartedly disagree with this. Sometimes it’s in the process of teaching someone that you yourself learn the most
2 Likes
I ran this evaluation a few years ago and what I concluded was yes the Pats won SB’s, but it had nothing to do with their habit of wasting picks on QB’s who did nothing for them. The hit ratio on drafting all those QB’s proved out that it was completely stupid to do. They did not need any of those guys. All of those picks could and should have been position players. Having ONE pick out of all of them net them a way better pick than they invested does not offset all the completely wasted picks they threw at guys who never did shit for them on the field. The rule, not the exception showed that they got less in return, (mostly nothing at all) instead of swings at guys who could have been long term positional players for them, or picks they could have packaged to move up in the draft and get even more impactful players.
Taking swings at later round QB’s is flat stupid and winning SB’s because you have the best QB to ever strap it up has zip to do with wasting picks, which is what the Patriots did.
lol you ‘ran an evaluation’ and ‘concluded’ the greatest and most successful coach in history was being stupid.
guess I can’t argue with that…
never minding of course that their entrenched starter over those 20 years was a late round flier drafted to compete behind an….entrenched starter
You can be phenomenal and still engage in a practice that showed it was not a good
practice. If you want to do the math yourself from an investment vs output standpoint of the QB’s they took post-Brady then perhaps you’ll come to a different conclusion. I think saying Belichick/Brady/SBs so everything they did was right, is a bit lazy when we are talking about how to manage the QB position ourselves from an ideological and process standpoint
Conveniently omitting the fact that the drafting of Brady was exactly what you are dismissing as wasteful….
I’d prefer to see your ‘evaluation’ first. It sounds like you put time into it. It should consider not just the success of the 3rd-7th round QBs they parlayed into picks or had as backups but a baseline average of all other late round picks overall and how much they helped the team in comparison
I would contend that bringing in mid to late round young inexpensive QBs buffers against injury (2008) flipped for a high pick and had positioned themselves to have Jimmy G step in as a starter had Brady not decided to play well into his 40’s
The constant churn of young talent could also serve to keep the entrenched QB motivated to always prove his worth. How successful was the Lions model of never drafting competition for Stafford? Half of Staffords years he was criticized by some for being sloppy, lazy and wouldn’t even get an off-season mechanics coach for several years.