Peter King: GMs hesitant on mobile QBs

[Master Teacher]

So Carson Palmer did take the Bengals to the playoffs? So I was right? How does that make me retarded again?


Carson Palmer isn't some elite QB either, don't get it twisted. I'm just saying I'd take him in his prime over Kaepernick. And this year, well past his prime, he had the Cardinals at the best record in the league at like week 11. He's no Rodgers but he's no schlub either.

And I didn't say Kaep sucked, don't twist my words, I said he's just a guy without his running. And you can say "yeah but he has his running!" all you want, but like someone above said, he doesn't even do it that much anymore. Kaep's shining moment in the league, which was great no doubt, was when he lit the Packers up for like 180 yards rushing in a playoff game on his way to the NFC championship. Do you think that's ever going to happen again? Do you think he can build a career off doing that? Of course not. Why? Because it's not sustainable for long-term success in the NFL because linebackers and linemen are faster in the NFL and can bottle up a running QB when they are looking out for it. And yes, it also leads to injuries.

I don't see how the point is debatable. For mobile QBs, if you can't execute the functions of a pocket passing QB at an NFL level, it doesn't matter if you have the running skills of Adrian Peterson with the size of Megatron. It just makes you an athlete playing QB and would probably have been better off, at least for an NFL career, playing a different position all along. And a lot of the guys that get the hype are in this position, and that's why they fail. Not because of their situation, not because of their coach, not because they got screwed over somehow cosmically by the universe. Because they fukking suck at the skills required to play QB in the NFL.

McNabb, Cunningham, Tarkenton, Rodgers, Wilson, S. Young, Elway, etc are all the "polished QBs who just happened to be good athletes" category so they don't get the label even though they are very good runners in their own right.

Carson Palmer has been a failure most of his career and got chance after chance
Kaep has won more playoff games than him

Tannehill has had none of the success RGIII and Kaepernick Has had, NEITHER HAS SAM BRADFORD

This fakkits had the nerve to bring up Jake Locker has been complete ass and has accomplished nothing

Buzz words like pocket passers don't mean shyt, you don't even know what you are talking about

RGIII thew from the pocket his first year, the second year his numbers from the pocket were better than Tannehill

he's barely played this year

now he deserves to be out the league yet jake locker is a prospect, get the fukk outta here

These so called pocket QB's fail again and again, you don't hear shyt

what is Eli struggling all of sudden, don't he play for the pocket, is something wrong with his fundamentals

its all bullshyt, just to throw shade at young black QB's who out perform their peers by comparing them to hall of famers

 

[NYC Rebel]

Yeah it's true.

But that's because every "mobile QB" that has ever succeeded was a good pocket passer. Will you continue to post absent of acknowledging that NFL-level pocket passing, regardless of mobility, is required to succeed at QB in the NFL?

"Pocket passing" as a style has never been in question and never will be because it's a base requirement. Pocket passing is to playing QB as Microsoft Excel is to being a data analyst. Sure, a data analyst can be really good at building websites, and that makes him more versatile, but does that make him better at his core, every day function that he is paid to do? No.

When was this ever a question until you created that captain obvious question just now?

I get you want to box with the same type of questioning, but pull it off better. I don't feel like repeating what others in here have already said that no mobile qb makes it to the NFL as a runner being their primary strength . It's absurd for you to even ask such a dumb question as it hasn't been spelled out to you over and over again in this thread.

 

[MikelArteta]

but jake locker ran a 4.6
so did gabbert

the nfl is filled with crappy slow drop back passers who aren't anything special

 

[resurrection]

When have I ever uttered a positive word about Jake Locker or Sam Bradford? They both SUCK. You're making no sense. You're missing the point completely.

Eli is struggling because he has always been inconsistent and streaky. Just BEING a pocket passer doesn't make you good. When I play pickup football with my friends, I play QB and throw from the pocket. It doesn't make me an NFL QB just because I can accurately throw a football from the pocket.

I'm just saying that if you CAN'T do it, you're fukked. And a lot of the "running QBs" that light up college football don't have that skill at a high enough level to regularly play in the NFL. I'm not sold on Tannehill either, and he played at my school so I'm a fan. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. There are only like 7 guys in the league playing QB at a really really high level these days

 

[resurrection]

When was this ever a question until you created that captain obvious question just now?

I get you want to box with the same type of questioning, but pull it off better. I don't feel like repeating what others in here have already said that no mobile qb makes it to the NFL as a runner being their primary strength . It's absurd for you to even ask such a dumb question as it hasn't been spelled out to you over and over again in this thread.

Says the 12+ year running master of altering arguments to whatever point he is trying to make.

If what I'm saying is so obvious, then why are you arguing with me?

It seems to me like you're just mad that the mobile QBs who are good don't get the "mobile QB" label. Because they're actually good QBs. The only ones that get the label are the ones whose mobility is their primary strength, so they struggle. If the racial implications of that upset you, just remember Tebow and Manziel and you'll be okay.

 

[Momentum]

Aaron Rodgers

 

[resurrection]

And Eric Crouch and Scott Frost and Jordan Lynch

 

[calh45]

I'm really close to a complete personal boycott of NFL and college football...I haven't been to a live game in years and my viewership his decreased by almost 75% this year.. I didn't watch once second of the games this past Thanksgiving...The proud Black man in me can't continue feeding this system..

It's getting to that tipping point with me too. I gotta listen to games with the sound off now.

 

[Bboystyle]

I'm really close to a complete personal boycott of NFL and college football...I haven't been to a live game in years and my viewership his decreased by almost 75% this year.. I didn't watch once second of the games this past Thanksgiving...The proud Black man in me can't continue feeding this system..

in other words,your team(s) suck

 

[King Kreole]

There's obviously a racial element to the notion of "mobile qbs" vs "pocket passer qbs", but the argument @resurrection has made is fundamentally sound. Racists will use it to say "See, blacks can't play qb!" but as he has pointed out, this has nothing to do with race. The reason mobile qbs aren't extended the same courtesy as pocket qbs when it comes to failing is because although many pocket qbs have failed, many have succeeded. Most of the greatest qbs in the history of the game have done it from the pocket. Whereas mobile qbs are somewhat of a novelty. Yes, Tarkenton and Young are in the HOF and many of their greatest exploits have come from scrambling, but the reason they had success in this league is because they could consistently do it from the pocket. The nature of a mainly mobile qb means that they're more likely to not learn the skills needed to do it from the pocket because their athleticism has masked it until they get to the NFL. Even great mobile qbs like McNabb and Young have said as much.

 

[Joe Sixpack]

How about they coach up "mobile" QBs the same as classic drop back passers?

 

[resurrection]

How about they coach up "mobile" QBs the same as classic drop back passers?

Why does it have to be the coach's fault? We're not in those locker rooms. It could also be a case of the player preferring to rely on his feet or being content with it.

 

[Joe Sixpack]

Why does it have to be the coach's fault? We're not in those locker rooms. It could also be a case of the player preferring to rely on his feet or being content with it.

That very well could be the case in some instances. But I think in others they coach these "mobile" QBs different. Aaron Rodgers and Luck are both athletic but I dont see their coaches callin QB draw plays and naked boots on their own 20 yd line.

 

[NYC Rebel]

Says the 12+ year running master of altering arguments to whatever point he is trying to make.

If what I'm saying is so obvious, then why are you arguing with me?

It seems to me like you're just mad that the mobile QBs who are good don't get the "mobile QB" label. Because they're actually good QBs. The only ones that get the label are the ones whose mobility is their primary strength, so they struggle. If the racial implications of that upset you, just remember Tebow and Manziel and you'll be okay.

12 years? Oh...you're still hurt.

Your question was obvious. Who in here needs this spelled out with this dumb ass parentified question:

Will you continue to post absent of acknowledging that NFL-level pocket passing, regardless of mobility, is required to succeed at QB in the NFL?

I didn't alter shyt...just asked you who in here is dumb enough to not understand this that you need to address this?



Then you pose this "it seems to me" argument when I've been more than clear on my points. So rather than debating with yourself...let me copy/paste what I've already said so you can respond to.

This

Because at the end of the day, we see far less mobile qbs in the league because they're still relatively new as far as being taken in numbers compared to pocket passer. The problem is, where their failure meet the same rates at pocket passers is where your biases come in and only focus on the mobile qb, even when facts are blatantly in your face

+

Plenty of pure pocket qbs that aren't shyt yet their label "pocket passer" lacks a negative tone tied to it.

We see failed pocket passers come through the league and people like you don't even bat an eye it, only looking to box mobile qbs in.

Does NOT equal

seems to me like you're just mad that the mobile QBs who are good don't get the "mobile QB" label.Because they're actually good QBs. The only ones that get the label are the ones whose mobility is their primary strength, so they struggle. If the racial implications of that upset you, just remember Tebow andManziel and you'll be okay.

NOTHING like it. And the difference between Tebow criticism is that it was labeled to Tebow and Tebow ALONE. Tebow wasnt used as a springboard to smear the genre of mobile quartebackssssssssss.

Cam is.

RGIII is.

Russell Wilson is.

Which goes to show AGAIN that you lack the mental capacity to accept the conversation here directed by Peter King who lumped black qbs to the failure of "mobile QUARTERBACKSSSSSSSS".

Plural if you're short of thinking as you have proven over and over again in this thread

You simply don't WANT
TO GET IT

 

[resurrection]

That very well could be the case in some instances. But I think in others they coach these "mobile" QBs different. Aaron Rodgers and Luck are both athletic but I dont see their coaches callin QB draw plays and naked boots on their on 20 yd line.

Yeah, I think it boils down to the coach and his system most of the time, not who the QB is.

Maybe my memory is failing me, but I don't think Urban Meyer's offense was drastically different for Alex Smith, Tebow, Braxton Miller, and JT Barrett