No announcement yet.

Interesting observation about QBs from Steve Young

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Interesting observation about QBs from Steve Young

    During the pregame show for Monday night football Steve Young had some interesting things to say about Quarterbacks that I thought was relevant to us, seeing as how the Rams are in need of getting a QB. Whether you like Bulger or not, yes we need a new franchise QB. To start right away or learn behind a veteran.

    A lot of people get very excited about very mobile QB's ala Vick, Young during his day, McNabb and so on. Many folks here on the forum have been screaming for having a mobile QB to make up for issues with the o-line. But the one thing that brought it all around for me was Steve's comment when they were talking about Vince Young.

    His comment was that as mobile as scrambling QBs are, they only really become great QBs when they learn how to be a good pocket passer. The way the game works and is played you can be an athletic prodigy and make plays, keep plays alive, and create opportunities with your feet. But if you are unable to work from the pocket as well, you will not achieve your full potential. He makes the point that if you look at all the seriously successful QBs, including the scrambling types, they only really become outstanding once they also became good pocket passers. He said he went through it himself. One of the examples he mentions is McNabb, that early in his career he was a primarily mobile type of QB with poor pocket skills. As his pocket skills developed he became a much more efficient and winning QB. And that is his advice to Vince Young, yes it is great to be able to use your feet when things break down, and it does give you options, but you have to be good in the pocket to be ultimately successful.

    So when we start looking for a new QB, yes having someone who is very athletic and mobile, gives us some desirable options, but we need someone who is balanced and able to work from the pocket as well.

    I am not all that up on any of the prime candidates coming into the draft. I think we need to use the 1st pick on something other than QB, maybe even trading down a little and getting some talent for other positions, like DT and RB. I think that a number of the QBs are going to be available in later rounds.

  • #2
    Re: Interesting observation about QBs from Steve Young

    well you're certainly right, i don't think anyone was screaming to draft a mobile qb that can't play in the pocket, but getting a pocket guy without the ability to scramble or keep plays alive would probably be a mistake. people are going to be attacking our backfield as long as jackson is around, so both areas need to be considered.


    • #3
      Re: Interesting observation about QBs from Steve Young

      i watched the highlights of the Texans vs Titans game, and noticed a lot of instances where Vince Young scrambled for the first down after finding nothing open. Now he has also been doing a lot of designed option runs with Chris Johnson as the pitch man, but it also seems that Young has been told that if the pocket breaks down or if his first read is covered he should scramble for yardage instead of finding space in the backfield to make the pass.

      This is working at the moment, but teams are going to start putting a spy on him soon and its going to stop working. So he is going to have to learn how to be a proper pocket QB. At the moment the scrambling and short passes are working, getting the Titans some wins. But its not going to turn them into a Superbowl contender


      Related Topics


      • AvengerRam_old
        QBs run for chatter, stay in the pocket when it matters.
        by AvengerRam_old
        The media loves a running QB.

        So do the fans.

        Give them a Michael Vick, a Tim Tebow or... the most recent example, an RGIII, and they can't get enough.

        But, riddle me this, Batman... how many running QBs have won the Super Bowl?

        Let's define the term first.

        I'm not talking about "mobile QBs" who can scramble a bit or move their feet well in the face of a pass rush. I'm talking about QBs who, when pressured, will tuck the ball and run, or who have running plays frequently called for them.

        The QBs who have had the most success in the big game... Starr, Bradshaw, Montana, Aikman, Brady... none of them were or are running QBs.

        Others who you might find on "best QB" lists... Favre, P.Manning, Marino, Fouts, Brees, Warner... none of them were or are running QBs.

        And, yet... fans and the media always seem to want to declare the latest running QB as the "next wave" of the position.

        In the end, some things just don't change. The QB position is about standing in the pocket and making throws. That's what wins championships.

        Even if the running QBs get the most face time on SportsCenter, its the pocket QBs that bring home the ring.
        -09-15-2012, 11:44 AM
      • berg8309
        Quarterback Qualities
        by berg8309
        With the recent thread on Walterfootball's assessment of Bradford vs. Clausen, I thought it would be a good time to ask what everyone values in a QB. Obviously different people have different qualities they rate higher than others, for instance Walterfootball values arm strength, and I value accuracy. I have put together a list of what I deem important traits in a QB. Note that not all of these are things I believe you can measure from an armchair, and it is not exhaustive, just a top 8.

        1. Decision Making - No matter what your physical tool set is, accurate, gun for an arm, speed demon, all of the above, if you make poor decisions, you will be a poor QB, end of story. This includes everything from not throwing into too much coverage, to knowing when to cut losses and throw the ball away.

        2. Accuracy - The most important physical attribute to me. Not to take away from others which are still important, but if you can't get the ball on target, then what good is everything else? This does not mean you need elite accuracy, but enough to hit your targets. If your throws are always high or wide by too much, you'll never be a success.

        3. Intangibles - Successful QBs don't roll in at noon and leave at 2. First in, first out, or close to. You need a guy who not only loves the game and cares about being the best (Or trying to be) but who has his head on straight outside the game as well. You will crash and burn at QB with no work ethic. I initially had this lower, but then I thought about QBs like LeaF and Russell who just don't care. They had the skill sets, but their loafer attitude made them bad QBs.

        4. Release - I value this higher than arm strength because a quick release can make up for a certain amount of lack of arm strength on short and intermediate routes. A quick release gives D-linemen less time to put their hands up, and coverage backs less time to read and react. Angle of release is also important in terms of how well the ball travels, and how likely it is to get batted down at the line.

        5. Arm strength - Although I believe you can get away with just adequate arm strength, I will readily admit that if you have to float balls because you can't throw hard enough, you are going to have a bad time. Floating balls are easy to pick off, or at least get a hand on. You want to be accurate, but you don't want to give too much time for the defense to get in front of it. Also helpful for stretching the field when you need a desperation play, or have a speed receiver who finds himself with a mismatch.

        6. Footwork - I am not good at identifying good footwork, I admit that. However I will also admit that it is important. Bad footwork can lead to falling down, missed handoffs, failed play action, and an assortment of other problems with throwing a good ball and hiding it from the defense as long as possible.

        7. Football I.Q. - Good QBs can...
        -04-19-2010, 04:24 PM
      • EvilXenu
        QBs should be measured by "Situation Handling."
        by EvilXenu
        There are so many stats for QBs floating out there.

        You have the raw numbers (attempts, completions, yards, TDs, etc.).

        You have ratings (QB rating, total QBR, etc.).

        You can go by wins and losses.

        You can go by playoff performances.

        But, to me, it comes down to how a QB plays in key situations. The situations handling factor (which, I believe, is the best objective description of the "it factor") is what really sets apart the average from the good, and the good from the elite.

        So how do you measure the Situation Handling (SH) It factor?

        Well, when you're talking SH It factors, you really should just go on your observations. I think most of us know a QB with a good SH It factor when we see one. While you can certainly argue about the SH It factor of a particular player, even casual fans can point out a QB who has that SH It factor.

        So, forget the complicated stats.

        Its all about the SH It factor.
        -11-07-2012, 12:03 PM
      • AvengerRam_old
        To be great, a QB needs...
        by AvengerRam_old
        Let's see where the overall opinions fall...
        An above-average set of receivers.
        An above-average offensive line.
        Both an above-average receiving corps and O line.
        Either an above-average receiving corps and O line, but not necessarily both.
        None of the above. A great QB will succeed even with average (or worse) players around him.
        -09-15-2012, 08:18 AM
      • GolfnRAMFAN
        Future QB
        by GolfnRAMFAN
        This idea crossed my head earlier today, and to some it may be a terrible idea, but something for discussion. We ALL know how this offensive line is just garbage, and keep saying that no QB could be successful behind it. We are more than just 1 year away from being an good. But what about in the near future for a QB, while maybe a young drafted QB sits on the bench waiting for a line to perform, we go after a mobile QB. The one I have in mind is Michael Vick. I know, bad character, don't want to take a chance. But my thought is that nobody wants him, so it wouldn't take much. And we need all the help we can get. At least until we get competitive, maybe he could scramble around and give us a few thrills. So, he wouldn't be a long term solution by any stretch of the imagination, but maybe he could make things exciting for a year or two. I can honestly say that if he started for us, I would be more excited to watch a game that I am right now.
        -11-11-2008, 12:06 PM