What exactly are you arguing? Is it that some players have been good as a rookie and have been good after being rookies? I mean, of course that is true. There are just as many who either didn't play as a rookie or weren't that good who became really good. There are many who were good and ended up having average or below average careers.

As I said, take a sampling of 5 random quarterbacks you consider to be good or great. You won't notice any pattern with rookie production.

In fact, as I did before, you can look at the rookie production of this group and see exactly what I mean.

Brady
Rodgers
Brees
Elway
Warner

Now, you name 5 quarterbacks who were even average as rookies, and we can see which list is better.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Rest of the offense is doing well. The receivers are open, the line is blocking, the running asks are making the most out of the stacked fronts they are seeing. Hell, Nagy does seem to be at least ok at calling plays.

The problem is very clearly Mitch.

Im pointing out that this theory of yours is flimsy and there is not nearly enough of a sample size to indicate it means anything.


I don't think you even know what you're saying here. Is it that the totality of a QB's career is not completely on display as a rookie? That's pretty obvious.

Those guys you name were decent enough to stick around and become great, the guys who are terrible fade away. You can absolutely start to judge a QB in his rookie year.

I agree Mitch is a problem, but I wouldn't call the pass blocking close to "good" or consider the receiving corp open. I say many pass plays that are anticipated and read quckly by opposing defenses which puts Mitch in a bad place. Add in the fact that Mitch isn't very good and you've got the Bears offense where the only bright spot is the ability to run the ball

_________________

Their pass protection was rated as the NFL's best going into this game and did nothing to my eye to lose that status. Maybe Philadelphia edged them, but Maniac Leonard and that crew were getting penetration all game so they just as easily could not have.

FF was right about the Colts.

The sample size is every quarterback in nfl history. What are you talking about?


I know exactly what I am saying. No matter how good or bad you were as a rookie is not predictive of any sort of success. This is why you refuse to come up with a list to counter my list I provided.

Well, (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky stuck around too after his rookie year. Why didn't he fade away?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

No, it's not. You haven't shown that at all. You list 5 or 10 guys at most. You havent researched this at all.




Again, I dont even know what the opposite of your clearly wrong take would be. What exactly are you looking for?

Quarterbacks who had good rookie years and also good careers? And then QBs who had bad rookie years and were bad? There are plenty of both.

The guys who stuck around did so for 10+ years. See, it's obvious you know you're wrong when you resort to this non sense.

If you would have given up on two of the league's four super bowl caliber QB's at the point in their careers (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky is at now you would be giving up on a surefire first ballot HOFers and at least one super bowl title.

Whoever wins DROY this year is definitely going to need to earn it.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

so, to paraphrase Hub, after 5 years or so, having spent a ton to get the third pick, we'll have...Alex Smith?

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.

This is getting a little annoying. How about this? Name as many quarterbacks as you want who were "good" during their rookie year and then went on to be really good to great(at least three pro bowls or in the HOF). I will name 2 quarterbacks for each one you name that either didn't play much in their rookie year if at all, or if they did were not very good. I've already named 5, so I'll add Philip Rivers to that list to make it an even 6. So, start with 3 of them, and then give me the rest of your list. I am offering to do double the research of you while providing basis for my opinion at a much higher level than you.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

But Bobby Football can SEE it with his EYES! Don't you get it?

_________________
"When people want their version of the truth, they go find it, no matter how baseless their beliefs." -- Ken Rosenthal

If the Bears had made the trade for Alex Smith and he was starting they would be 3-0 and the scariest team in the NFL by a serious margin.

I wont lie, the following hypothetical is a little upsetting.

-Instead of trading up for (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky they stay put and take Marshon Lattimore at 1.3
-The Bears keep their pick at 3.67, and just for the sake of raising our collective blood pressure, we say they take Alvin Kamara (who went at that exact draft slot)
-They tough it out one more year with Fox and Cutler in 2017, fans at near riot but Pace keeps his job. Glennon is the backup.
-They take the picks they save by not making the (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky trade to acquire Alex Smith this past off-season. Cutler and Glennon cut at season's end.

Basically keep everything else the same, even the silly Fuller extension.

Lattimore/Fuller/Callahan at CB--Lattimore is having a bit of a sophomore slump but after Garrett and Mahomes he's still the third best player taken in the first round of 2017. The defense would be legitimately without weakness.
They have have Alex Smith instead of Mitch (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky running Nagy's offense to perfection.
They have a third-headed RB terror squad of Alvin Kamara, Jordan Howard and Tarik Cohen

...but people really were done with Cutler and Mike Glennon gmafb the Bears were never serious about him doing anything more than taking some lumps for Mitch the first couple weeks.

This is REALLY stupid. Chase Daniel has 78 career pass attempts and 1 touchdown for a reason. He's not an average or good quarterback. The best thing that can happen for the Bears is for Mitch to consistently look like the QB they believe he can be or very close to it.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

There is no plan B to (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky. Him playing is a condition of Nagy's continued employment, and Nagy almost certainly agreed to that when he got the job. There really is a serious discussion to be had about who the Bears should play, but ultimately its Mitch because (partially with the help of some fortunate drops by opponents defenses) he's kept the Bears in a position to dominate the turnover battle. As long as he does that and he converts a couple third downs, even if he converts them by drawing flags, they will stick with him no matter how ugly it gets.

I don't think we are understanding each other. Part of my issue is even taking every great QB ever and looking at their rookie seasons, how many are there? 20? 25? Is that enough for a trend?

Good as rookies, good careers
Cam Newton
Russell Wilson
Dan Marino
Matt Ryan
Ben Roethlisberger

Bad as rookies, bad careers
Cade McNown
Ryan Leaf
Akili Smith
Tim Couch
JaMarcus Russell

I'm only using the greats for maximum effect. The whole point is that you can't draw any conclusions based on rookie production. That is the trend and it includes all quarterbacks that have ever played.


Ok, so you are at 5. I need to get to 10.
Brady
Rodgers
Brees
Elway
Warner
Rivers
Aikman
Young
Favre
Montana

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

What are you saying about those 10?

Also, using guys who SAT their rookie year doesn't make sense does it? First year as a starter wouldmake more sense.

And if you are saying half those guys were good and other half not, then that makes 10 for me and 5 for you.

Good enough for me. Good enough to beat Green Bay. Smith is a good quarterback. Just take a look at his stats.

_________________
An Ode to the Texas man who shot an Antifa terrorist:

Oh, he might have went on livin'
But he made one fatal slip
When he tried to match the Ranger
With the big iron on his hip

I think that there is an advantage to sitting and learning than there is getting thrown into the fire immediately. Having a great defense or supporting cast on offense helps too.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!

Those 10 either didn't play as rookies, didn't play much as rookies, or weren't good as rookies. They ended up being pretty good.

That wasn't my initial point though. It all came from the fact that (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky was playing during his rookie year when he wasn't supposed to because Glennon was horrible. Playing bad as a rookie and not playing at all as a rookie should be viewed similarly.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Rick Mirer
Gus Frerotte
Mark Rypien
Josh Freeman
Scott Mitchell

All impressed early when given a chance, and were later exposed as bums. And there's millions AND a SB ring mixed in there as well.

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.

That's a rough take.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul

I generally agree with it.

Most rookie quarterbacks play as a rookie because there isn't a better option and not because they are ready. Josh Rosen may end up being bad but I'm not going to think so because of what he did yesterday against the Bears.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Yep. And if we're counting non-starters as being bad in their rookie year, then we also have to include guys who didn't start as rookies and then didn't get significant playing time in their career either. Thus if a non-starter is seen as having a bad or unproductive rookie year and then continues to not start, their "bad" rookie year would be predictive of their "bad" career.

Other than Russell Wilson almost nobody comes in right away and is really good.

That's true. It's why rookie year production whether good or bad at the quarterback position is virtually meaningless.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

On the contrary, the sheer number of guys who don't produce as rookies due to not playing and then don't produce in their careers due to not playing would make rookie production predictive. That group so far outnumbers the number of guys who were bad and became good and who were good and became bad that I imagine those categories would be washed away entirely in the data.

Now if one wants to make the far more reasonable choice of treating guys who don't play as rookies as N/As for the purposes of this question, we might start getting somewhere. Unfortunately for your position, I think the number of guys who started bad and stayed bad also is far greater than those who got better or worse.

Why not extend it to all high school quarterbacks then if you are going to include players who never play or barely play?

You are changing my position, and you are free to add to the list posted above and I will match every quarterback that qualifies as good as a rookie with two who either didn't play or weren't good as a rookie.

Now, you seem to be trying to say that many quarterbacks fail regardless, which is true. The whole point was that last year if (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky was good or bad it didn't make it any more or less likely he will have a great career. Most quarterbacks fail to even meet the lofty standards of Kyle Orton in terms of a career so you can't really change the argument to that.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!