Peter King: GMs hesitant on mobile QBs

[Lakers Offseason]

Who said "individual qbs don't get criticized"?

I thought this thread was about a genre of qbs criticized because one qb of that style fails and others are lumped together.

For example.... PETER KINGS ARTICLE

You're convincing yourself you're a part of the conversation when you aren't.

I'm responding to that one post, not the entire thread
In regards to King's article, he's got relationship with GMs so he has a better feel for what they're thinking more so than you and I. Who am I to say he's talking nonsense


My personal feeling on mobile QBs is that the more they run and scramble, the more likely they sustain injuries. Now this doesn't mean pocket QBs can't get fukked up just the same. Think about it breh, when a QB is in motion and someone hits them also going at a fast pace, then the impact is greater compared to when a QB is just standing still and then gets nailed. I don't have scientific data that there's a relationship between this theory and injuries to mobile QBs vs pocket QBs, I'm just using common sense.

 

[resurrection]

No matter how many ways you tell him, he'll remain stubbornly fixed to his beliefs, unable to see that only the mobile nature of a struggling qb diss that attribute get viewed negatively and placed onto others who fit that mold.

LOL @ me being the only one in this thread who is "stubbornly fixed to his beliefs"




There is nothing you've said that I "can't see" or don't understand. You're saying that "mobile guy" and "big arm guy" and all these other failed QBs are all equally flawed, which is true, but that "mobile guy" is the only one who gets the stigma attached to his style because he's usually black. You act like I don't get your point. There's a difference between "not seeing it" and "not agreeing with it". Believe it or not, your viewpoint is not so infallible that all one needs to do is finally understand then they will agree. Not that simple.

There is another difference between "big arm/gunslinger guy" and "mobile guy" (besides racial considerations), and that is "big arm guy" at least has a strength that is tangentially related to the skills required to play QB in the NFL. They are still "pocket passers". Marino and Favre were gunslingers with big arms. Lots of guys have come through and tried to emulate and failed. Nobody would say their STYLE doesn't work because clearly the style works when executed correctly. Their execution or overall skill level was wrong. Coaches think they can work with "big arm guy" a lot more than they can work with "mobile guy" because his strength is related to throwing the football. Is it right for them to think that? In some cases no because the guy is too dumb or stubborn to learn the position, but that's up to the individual.

Until more mobile QBs prove they can succeed and win games with regularity and longevity in the league, then their "style" will always be in question. It's really this simple:
-All successful QBs in the NFL are good pocket passers
-Not all successful QBs in the NFL have good mobility
-Those that do have good mobility don't get labeled "mobile QB" because their game doesn't rely on it

"Mobility" is a bonus, a plus. Therefore, if a guy is labeled a "mobile QB", he gets that label BECAUSE it is suspected that his success relies upon his mobility. If that suspicion wasn't there, he wouldn't be labeled.

Pointing to OTHER flawed QBs doesn't make "mobile guy" any less flawed. If you can be so quick to point out the flaws of "big arm guy" as a counterpoint because he is flawed in other ways, then why is it such a stretch for you to also accept the flaws "mobile guy"?

If your beef is with the style of play being picked on, then your beef is with the speed, size, and tackling ability of NFL defenses who are largely able to neutralize a guy's mobility and force him to beat you throwing the football. If a guy earned his draft position without ever having that threat neutralized, then how can you say he has proven himself as a pocket passer? RGIII and Tebow put up silly passing #s in college. Was it because they were excellent passing QBs in college, or was it because they were so multi-dimensional and defenses weren't fast enough to keep up with them, that the fear of the run and the superior offensive system opened things up for them? After seeing both those guys in the NFL, it's pretty obvious that it was the latter. They earned their draft position because their running skills opened up the offense that they ran allowing for easy pitch-and-catch to open receivers. Urban Meyer was doing it with Braxton Miller, who has little to no chance of ever being an NFL QB. He is an athlete playing QB and his athleticism and the system he is in allow him to be great. He wouldn't make a 53 in the NFL at that position. And yes, it is partly BECAUSE HE IS A MOBILE QB, he runs systems that work in college and don't work in the pros. Do you think Urban Meyer is coaching Braxton Miller to be a great NFL QB, or to win games for Ohio State? Do you think if Braxton Miller happened to be the exact same player except white instead of black, that Meyer would coach him differently?

But hey, keep patting yourselves on the back pretending like your points are too sophisticated for me to understand, when I simply just think you're full of shyt.

 

[iceberg_is_on_fire]

And the game got rid of it.

People don't understand the way the world works. The NFL will always be a league built for the traditional drop back QB. Guys like Kaep and Russ do not take a lot of big hits and are durable.

It's funny how the league works. You got Stafford, Eli, Alex freaking Smith flying under the radar while guys like Kaep, RG3 and Cam get destroyed.

Dalton got 13 TD 13 INT. Not a single person in the media questioning his intelligence or whether he can play the game. Kaep, Cam, RG3 are all of a sudden regressing and should be benched. These clowns and their agendas.

People talk about Dalton all the time. Colin regularly shyts on him on his show.

 

[resurrection]

People talk about Dalton all the time. Colin regularly shyts on him on his show.

Yeah I'm not sure where that came from either. Dalton is trash and I'm quite sure I've heard plenty of guys (Colin included) shytting on him.

I have inside jokes with my boys about "Dalton out there Dalton'ing again".. He sucks and it's not because he's a pocket passer LOL. It's because he fukking sucks

 

[Lakers Offseason]

People talk about Dalton all the time. Colin regularly shyts on him on his show.

Beige Water Pistol

 

[NYC Rebel]

LOL @ me being the only one in this thread who is "stubbornly fixed to his beliefs"




There is nothing you've said that I "can't see" or don't understand. You're saying that "mobile guy" and "big arm guy" and all these other failed QBs are all equally flawed, which is true, but that "mobile guy" is the only one who gets the stigma attached to his style because he's usually black.

I said the mobile guys failure is used to slight the next ones coming up to bat. This isn't a "his" argument. It's a "his being tied to them" argument that is purposely not equally applied

1. Other styles of qbs that OFTEN meet failure but remain to a "his" argument.

2. White qbs who are mobile who meet failure remain a "his" argument. Example being Tebow's failures being his and his alone. A white privilege I don't think you acknowledge unless pressed and then respond with "I don't give a fukk." So no

You act like I don't get your point.

You don't get the nuances of my point

There's a difference between "not seeing it" and "not agreeing with it". Believe it or not, your viewpoint is not so infallible that all one needs to do is finally understand then they will agree. Not that simple.

There's more than enough evidence where my case above can be made. I mean seriously....you dipped in the well bringing up Eric crouch, Scott Frost and other scrubs who never had a chance as fitting the mold of criticism at the position of mobile qbs as if they had NFL expectations tied to them. That's like me bringing up:

Why would I need to bring up mobile ONLY qbs into an argument about mobile qbs with promise as passers? Because you did? And what's worse is your constant parentified posts on a qbs need to know how to throw in the pocket. **gasp**

Who doesn't know that? This is clearly a discussion where we are talking about mobile qbs the NFL puts hope on havingn both qualities. Your need to push the throwing angle as if we need learning is redundant.

There is another difference between "big arm/gunslinger guy" and "mobile guy" (besides racial considerations),


and that is "big arm guy" at least has a strength that is tangentially related to the skills required to play QB in the NFL.

. Same as the mobile qbs WE are talking about.

They are still "pocket passers".

. Same as the mobile qbs WE are talking about and hope they're successful being....no different than pure pocket only passing qbs.

Marino and Favre were gunslingers with big arms. Lots of guys have come through and tried to emulate and failed. Nobody would say their STYLE doesn't work because clearly the style works when executed correctly.

I can name call too.
And Fran Tarkenton didn't work?
Steve Young didnt work?
John Elway didn't work?
SO??

Their execution was wrong. Coaches think they can work with "big arm guy" a lot more than they can work with "mobile guy" because his strength is related to throwing the football.

And here is the fallacy in your argument. Highly touted Mobile guys have the same "related to throwing he football" hopes tied to them too. Where do you get this idea that the brand if qbs...NOT named

YOUR problem is your inherent bias and measuring mobile qbs to the lowest common denominator. Do you think RGIII was drafted without the promise of being a polished passer any different than an Andrew Luck or any other pure pocket passer? Yes.....YOU do. But here you are displaying your bias in full regalia.

No need for me to respond to the rest. You can't even see where your bias starts then ferments.

No one thinks my points are sophisticated. But I know simple minded when I see it

 

[NYC Rebel]

I'm responding to that one post, not the entire thread
In regards to King's article, he's got relationship with GMs so he has a better feel for what they're thinking more so than you and I. Who am I to say he's talking nonsense


My personal feeling on mobile QBs is that the more they run and scramble, the more likely they sustain injuries. Now this doesn't mean pocket QBs can't get fukked up just the same. Think about it breh, when a QB is in motion and someone hits them also going at a fast pace, then the impact is greater compared to when a QB is just standing still and then gets nailed. I don't have scientific data that there's a relationship between this theory and injuries to mobile QBs vs pocket QBs, I'm just using common sense.

It's not true though.
Here is the data.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sport..._like_colin_kaepernick_more_injury_prone.html

 

[resurrection]

I said the mobile guys failure is used to slight the next ones coming up to bat. This isn't a "his" argument. It's a "his being tied to them" argument that is purposely not equally applied

1. Other styles of qbs that OFTEN meet failure but remain to a "his" argument.

2. White qbs who are mobile who meet failure remain a "his" argument. Example being Tebow's failures being his and his alone. A white privilege I don't think you acknowledge unless pressed and then respond with "I don't give a fukk." So no



You don't get the nuances of my point



There's more than enough evidence where my case above can be made. I mean seriously....you dipped in the well bringing up Eric crouch, Scott Frost and other scrubs who never had a chance as fitting the mold of criticism at the position of mobile qbs as if they had NFL expectations tied to them. That's like me bringing up:

Why would I need to bring up mobile ONLY qbs into an argument about mobile qbs with promise as passers? Because you did? And what's worse is your constant parentified posts on a qbs need to know how to throw in the pocket. **gasp**

Who doesn't know that? This is clearly a discussion where we are talking about mobile qbs the NFL puts hope on havingn both qualities. Your need to push the throwing angle as if we need learning is redundant.

. Same as the mobile qbs WE are talking about.

. Same as the mobile qbs WE are talking about and hope they're successful being....no different than pure pocket only passing qbs.


I can name call too.
And Fran Tarkenton didn't work?
Steve Young didnt work?
John Elway didn't work?
SO??




And here is the fallacy in your argument. Highly touted Mobile guys have the same "related to throwing he football" hopes tied to them too. Where do you get this idea that the brand if qbs...NOT named

YOUR problem is your inherent bias and measuring mobile qbs to the lowest common denominator. Do you think RGIII was drafted without the promise of being a polished passer any different than an Andrew Luck or any other pure pocket passer? Yes.....YOU do. But here you are displaying your bias in full regalia.

No need for me to respond to the rest. You can't even see where your bias starts then ferments.

No one thinks my points are sophisticated. But I know simple minded when I see it

LOL @ "no need for me to respond to the rest" when "the rest" points out exactly why RGIII and Tebow should have never been expected to be pocket passers. It's not racial bias or bias for the sake of being biased. It is bias based in fact and common sense - knowing that guys with those skills are asked to do different things in college, and probably high school too.

 

[JLova]

People talk about Dalton all the time. Colin regularly shyts on him on his show.

Not nearly as much as you hear them sh1t on Cam, Kaep, etc. Dalton's intelligence has never been questioned. It's a different kind of hate. If Dalton was a nikka....

 

[JLova]

All QBs get criticized. GTFOH with this shyt. Brady got criticized. Aaron got criticized early this year. Peyton gets shytted on constantly. My boy Flacco on a weekly basis here in Bmore gets shytted on. But Cam gets criticized and all of a sudden there's an agenda. Yeah, the agenda is that he sucks

Are you slow?

 

[JLova]

What does the disappearance of the read option have to do with the discussion of mobile qbs? Mobile qbs exited a before and after that offenses use, so it's a useless point

It has nothing to do with it. I was responding to the quote.

 

[Dolla$]

Andrew Luck is doing just fine

Runs the same exact 40 like Cam

Lets call it what it is Mr. King

 

[resurrection]

Andrew Luck is doing just fine

Runs the same exact 40 like Cam

Lets call it what it is Mr. King

Jim Harbaugh offense vs. Gus Malzahn offense

I rest my case

 

[NYC Rebel]

Andrew Luck is doing just fine

Runs the same exact 40 like Cam

Lets call it what it is Mr. King

When I saw that at the combine....the promise of his mobility had me excited. Problem is, when players come in with equal promise as a runner and passer while being black, their failures represent an entire genre

 

[resurrection]

When I saw that at the combine....the promise of his mobility had me excited. Problem is, when players come in with equal promise as a runner and passer while being black, their failures represent an entire genre

Cam played in Gus Malzahn's offense in college while Luck played for Jim Harbaugh

They were asked to do two different things, one resembling what they will do in the pros, one not. Cam started behind Luck. And everyone who plays in offenses like that will also start behind, so yes it does represent a genre. Alex Smith started behind, Johnny Manziel started behind, Tim Tebow started behind. So it's not a race genre, it's a style genre. Even Case Keenum, Timmy Chang, and Colt Brennan started behind as well, just in a different way.

At least my theory gives the players an excuse. In your opinion, whose fault is it that Cam and RGIII have underachieved in comparison to their physical attributes? The media's?