Young is a good example and there are plenty of others that also illustrate how tricky it is to identify and develop a franchise QB. Tim Couch, Joey Harrington, JaMarcus Russell and David Carr all come to mind. 3 of those 4 QBs were the top pick in the draft when they selected. All of them had impressive college careers. None of them had good pro careers.Texas Vike wrote:In an attempt to get back to discussing football, and the QB position in particular, per the title of this thread...
I found this to be an interesting read about Vince Young: http://espn.go.com/blog/green-bay-packe ... ay-packers
VY is a pretty good illustration of just how difficult it is to find a franchise QB. Drafted highly after his very impressive National Championship victory over a USC team that was pretty widely hailed as one of the best teams ever, VY looked like a solid pick and a pretty sure bet for success in the NFL. Not the pocket passer mold, but a new type of QB that could run and pass well. Admittedly, he ran better than he passed. Leinart was viewed as a more traditional, pocket passer and also had shown a lot of the characteristics you want in your franchise QB.
Well said. I strongly agree that patience is important. It isn't always rewarded but it's necessary and how a franchise handles a QB's development, along with how they build a team around him, can have a huge impact on his success or failure. It's very easy to lose perspective, especially when several teams have been fortunate enough to find rookie phenoms at QB in recent years. Whether those players become great QBs in the long term remains to be seen. For all the hype Michael Vick once received as a #1 pick and a young star, I don't think he ever truly lived up to his promise as a QB. He certainly didn't become a great QB for the team that invested in drafting and developing him.A lot of whether a guy becomes a franchise QB is how the franchise handles his progression. Impatience is one of the major obstacles. It is a complex position that requires time to absorb all of the subtleties. Riding the bench and soaking it all in like Rodgers did is ideal. At the very least we have to give CP this season to see if things start to come together for him. If not, we run the risk of simply jumping ship from one prospect to the next, all of whom might very well turn out to be a VY or Matt Lienart.
There's been a lot of attention devoted to stats in the Ponder debate so I think it's interesting to note that Tom Brady's stats in his second year in the league (and first as a starter) are similar in several ways to Ponder's stats in his second year. They aren't identical. There are differences (one of which is Brady played in 15 games and started 14 that year) but there are similarities. I'm not suggesting Ponder will become another Tom Brady but it's interesting to note that Brady's stat line doesn't suggest he would go on to become on the of the most prolific passers in football. In other words, the point is that a mediocre stat line at this point in a QB's career doesn't necessarily indicate what lies ahead. The Vikes are being patient and avoiding one of the major obstacles you mentioned. We just don't know if Ponder will ultimately reward that patience and if so, to what degree.
I almost left that out but since they both threw for 18 TDs and 12 INTs in their second season and they had similar yardage totals, I find it an interesting comparison. As I said, there are clear differences as well. For example, Brady led the Pats to a Super Bowl win that year! However, that also underlines the point: stats aren't everything. A QB with stats similar to Ponder can win it all with sufficient support from his teammates IF he makes the right plays at the right time.
I wasn't really comparing the players anyway, just making a point about QB stats and their relevance to wins and team success. 
