What Traits Do You Look For Part 1: The Quarterback

[Tannenbombs]

I'm planning on an 8 part series (QB-RB-WR-TE-OL-DL-LB-DB) of what traits to look for in each position group. Help others increase their football acumen. I'll post my thoughts as well...


What is most important? To me, it's having "the magic" to perform when your team needs it the most. For example, Derek Carr's new born son was hospitalized just days before the season opener. How did Carr respond? He throws for 456 yards and 5 touchdowns, leading the Bulldogs to an overtime win over Rutgers. That told me everything I needed to now about his ability to perform under pressure. Another great example, is the game Brett Favre had in 2002 against the Raiders, after his father passed. He lit up the Raiders for 4 touchdowns, in the first half!


The ability to process information quickly (both pre and post snap) is extremely important. Belongs at the very top of any "critical factor" list for QB's. Decision making somewhat ties into this as well.


Next I want an accurate passer of the football. Throw out completion % with all the teams throwing screens. The best barometer is ball placement. Is he accurate to all three levels? Does he struggle with the deep ball? This will extremely limit the explosiveness of your teams' offense (see: Ryan Tannehill, Teddy Bridgewater). You can improve the consistency of your accuracy with proper lower body mechanics, but you cannot improve pure accuracy. You're born with it.


I also want a QB who can avoid a pass rush. I don't need you to be Mike Vick, but I think escape-ability is vital. An NFL Scout once said his team conducted a study, and found that only 48% of the time their QB took his prescribed drop. 52% of the time he had to adjust or escape pressure. And if you can pickup "step up's" that is a tremendous bonus. The biggest backbreaker for a defense is to have everyone covered on 3rd & 8 only to give up a 10 yard scramble. "Statue" quarterbacks such as Tom Brady and Peyton Manning are able to nullify their lack of pocket mobility by getting rid of the football in ~ 2.0-2.5 seconds upon receiving the snap.


If you have the aforementioned traits, how much arm strength do you need? Enough. You don't need to be the next Joe Kapp. The best gauge of arm strength is watching a QB throw the 20 yard out. The only dilemma is, good luck finding that on tape at the college level. You may have to see this live in a workout setting.


I don't think leadership at this position needs to be explained. It's paramount to the success of your club.


Please, pretty please DO NOT watch every game he's played in. That's called paralysis by analysis. Chip Kelly profoundly stated that he watched "every single throw Sam Bradford had made at the NFL level" before trading for him.

If you watch every throw a guy has made, you'll "get fooled" and start to see all sorts of stuff on film that aren't even there. You should never watch more than 10 tapes on any player. Instead, breakdown their throws in the redzone and on 3rd down. Watch the games on the road where it's close in the 4th quarter.


A tight compact release is important for a few reasons. One, it allows you to avoid the rush by getting the ball out of your hands faster. Two, a quick release gives the defender in coverage less time to make a break on the ball. And three, it sets you up to make an accurate throw.


When looking at footwork, you don't want to see a vertical bounce in his shoulders. You want him to be able to set up quickly, but more importantly, you need him to come to balance at the top of his drop.



I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel by any means, it still spins just fine. I'm just trying to share my thoughts on some traits to look for when analyzing quarterbacks, at any level. I hope that you may have learned something or at least given an aspect of quarterback play more thought. I encourage you to post your thoughts on the position, and the traits needed to be successful!

 

[Brazzi]

I look for good decision making. I look for presnap lineup to see where the numbers (advantages) are for the offense. Whether it is one on one or three on two, whether there is a back available in the flat or on the sit route. And then I look at what the qb does. Is he making the best decision. Is he escaping pressure.

It's a play by play evaluation for me. Then, the secondary consideration is accuracy, arm strength, mechanics, you can get a feel for that as you analyze plays. For me those are less important.

Another thing I pay some attention to is timing and pace, but most or all of the college qbs are just slow, they will need to adjust to nfl speed. Those qbs who play fast in college are generally hard to watch as far as good decision making. They are just slinging it wildly.

 

[Tannenbombs]

****. I mentioned Ryan Tannehill and deep accuracy in the same thread. Hopefully it won't get derailed..

 

[Brazzi]

[video=youtube;xUh7Tia8pWM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUh7Tia8pWM[/video]

 

[Sons Of Shula]

****. I mentioned Ryan Tannehill and deep accuracy in the same thread. Hopefully it won't get derailed..

Nah. We've discussed Tannehill before (agreed and butted heads) and he is a naturally accurate passer. And to boot he was one of the few, if not only college QB's during his time to consistently and accurately throw an 18 yd out breaking route and did so with ease from the far hash which is spaced further than the NFL's.

Anyways, the intangible and uncoachable traits are the most important IMO. Accuracy is number one, followed by leadership and natural intelligence with athleticism not too far behind.

X's * O's can be taught and decision making can be coached. Mechanics can be somewhat manufactured and fixed as well as footwork granted the player possesses the number one trait of being accurate to start with.

Nice write up and an agreeable summation of traits. Always enjoy your insight.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

I like quarterbacks who can vary pace and loft perfectly to fit the evolving requirement of the play. Essentially you steal YPA. Line drive happy quarterbacks can't make those throws, at least not consistently, and their YPA naturally suffers.

John Elway was one of the rare examples of a guy who lacked ideal touch but became a top notch quarterback. I was a USC student parallel to Elway at Stanford. Elway was already a whispered legend as a freshman. I liked him a lot but since he was line drive prone I didn't think he'd fulfill the promise of an NFL all timer. It is still debatable whether or not he did, despite the Hall of Fame. If you remember that 1983 hype the experts had him above Unitas and everyone else. Elway had a lifetime 7.1 YPA, which is not special at all. He had only two seasons above 7.3, including his final season. I give him utmost credit for taking full advantage of his career and partially offsetting the lack of touch. Not recommended for everybody.

Accuracy is a huge variable and even moreso if you basically tighten your own window by failing to have appropriate touch. Lots of hands get in the way of those line drives, no matter how accurate.

I also love smarts at the position. Playing smarts. Growing up with Bob Griese quarterbacking my favorite team was a great lesson. I'd be laughing in the stands when it was 3rd and 4. I knew what would follow....head bod for a cheap first down via an offside defensive lineman.

I never liked Marino partially because he cut too many corners along those lines. Field smarts and resourcefulness and annoyances like the running game never meant much to him as opposed to sheer winging it. I bet against the Marino Dolphins very often in those years and succeeded far more often than not. We were sitting ducks against legit foes.

I also want quarterbacks who have proven it long term, as opposed to fanciful projections. That's the sucker route, as I've emphasized lone before joining this forum. The projections should be accompanied by low initial expenditure, not a ridiculous pay-first method when you are dealing with low percentage likelihood.

Pocket feel and sufficient arm strength are important criteria. Griese is another example of a guy who has just enough whip arm strength, which generally improves slightly as these guys move nearer to age 25. In contrast, arm strength doesn't really change much in college. Once they are men and not boys the arm can improve somewhat as it becomes a career. But there are limits. I've wanted to like players like Leinart and Kellen Moore but grudgingly acknowledged they were 10% deficient.

Character and leadership is occasionally a concern. Obviously there are debates regarding Connor Cook this time. I distinctly remember reading internet reports from Washington State students in 1998 that Ryan Leaf was a notorious goof off on campus and that regular students couldn't believe it was being overlooked, that a pro franchise would place millions of dollars of faith in him.

I have fared both ways while trying to evaluate quarterback character. I probably had the best pre-draft scouting report of Robert Griffin anywhere when I posted at length here a couple of times that Griffin was a self-enthralled crybaby who had somehow avoided that scrutiny late in his senior season and toward the draft. I bet Baylor games often in those years and could still envision Griffin whining and making excuses when Connecticut defeated him twice early in his career, and likewise the embarrassing incidents after an interception against Illinois in his junior year bowl game and then after the first half goal line failure at Oklahoma State midway through his senior year. Griffin was emotional and immature and it showed on the field. I've never understand how all of that was overlooked. I was mocked here for those scouting reports, which included the emphasis that he had no clue how to scramble or protect his legs.

But then I had the worst evaluation of Johnny Manziel's character when I took his early college career word that he was determined to be a model citizen. That was one time in which everything did not drift back to the beginning. I still would take a risk on Manziel if his troubles are not legally disqualifying. He showed enough in midseason on a dreadful team last year, including ability to make plays going to his right. His YPA was very good in some games.

 

[Tannenbombs]

Hackenberg is terrible

 

[Blake the great]

Are their any QBs starting in the NFL who were just OK in college or didn't win a lot of games?

 

[Sons Of Shula]

I like quarterbacks who can vary pace and loft perfectly to fit the evolving requirement of the play. Essentially you steal YPA. Line drive happy quarterbacks can't make those throws, at least not consistently, and their YPA naturally suffers.

YPA is a team value, not an individual statistic and is also dependent on the coordinator's offensive system in which the QB plays in. YPA is not an indicator of positive QB traits. Like any statistical measure, it has flaws. The major flaws here are it's calculation of sack rate, spikes, balls batted at the LOS, etc. Cam Newton's '12 season is a prime example of a QB with high YPA, but an overall yield of inefficient production.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

YPA is not an indicator of positive QB traits

You reach all time levels of desperation and hilarity. If I were a mean guy I'd sticky that sentence for the duration of my time here. It would certainly be appropriate.

Bottom line, you like to nitpick things I've posted that look bad at the point in time. I have absolutely no respect for the way you think. And there we sit. Nothing is going to change. Every time I've tried to give you the benefit of a doubt you up the absurdity ante with gems like the above. If Tannehill were excellent in YPA but deficient elsewhere you would be arguing completely the opposite of the current and recent slant.

I'm sure Shouright is enjoying a howl, if he still samples this site despite unfair inability to post. Denouncing YPA as indicative of QB traits is like denying golf driving distance as a function of clubhead speed. Well done. As always, more often than not. The Adjusters somehow believe that isolating a single example like Cam Newton 2012 is more valid or equally valid than league history as a whole. Adjusters are forever dependent on the exception as opposed to the rule. Classic correlation: Adjusters own a terrible way to think and exceptions as opposed to the rule is the best and ongoing example of a poor way to think.

It's merely further evidence that the offseason is intolerable around here. The draft forum is one of the few sanctuaries, some actual analysis minus runaway bias. Otherwise the main forum -- once again -- can be quickly summarized as, "Happy Adjusters Think They Know Something." No different than last year, which was fronted as the season minus excuses until naturally we found dozens more, as in the Christmas jingle of, "Eight New Adjustments."

I briefly sampled that main forum a couple of days ago. Comedic. Lazor is under attack and mockery, the current comfortable whipping boy, the guy who essentially jailed Tannehill and all that talent. Again, where is Shouright when needed? He would provide the perfect summary, "How do you know?"

The adjusting fools around here assert without restraint that Tannehill would have bloomed minus Lazor. Yeah, I guess it's 95% certainty, like the confidence level of a political poll. The scary aspect is that the Adjusters actually believe it. Notice Sons of Shula's specific reference to "coordinator's offensive system." Not a coincidence. That theme has to be peddled and swallowed throughout this offseason, so the followers again retain unrealistic Adjuster hope, until those naughty games begin again, the actual evidence that precedes the next wave of adjustment. It's always something.

Lazor ran the ball too infrequently. That was my major disappointment. But he made some astute changes like reeling in the failed deep ball attempts in the later stages of 2014, and then altering the offense to include shorter deep balls in 2015, ones that Tannehill can execute. Since Lazor specifically was noted by players to limit those deep shots late in 2014 I think it's reasonable to conclude he designed the shorter deep patterns in 2015. Otherwise there's no hint of that tendency in anything from Philbin or Tannehill's past. Once again, I rely on favoritism and not adjuster absolute. Lazor also dramatically increased the number of burst (long) plays in both the running (10+ yards) and passing game (25+ yards) from Sherman's tenure. We were 23rd in 2012 and 28th in 2013, compared to 15th in 2014 and 14th in 2015. Not great but a noticeable bump, especially when the quarterback got stuck with a relatively low YPA. If you look at quarterbacks with weak YPA their teams occupy the low end of that "Big Play" category. It was classic around here when some posters tried to denounce my claim of improved spacing under Lazor. The spacing created the huge plays out of nowhere, even when the offense in general was struggling. Lazor has many fine strengths. Frankly at this stage he needs a freak quarterback to operate with, a guy who isn't dependent on high volume rushing attempts.

Notice that when opposing quarterbacks who are thriving are denounced by the Adjusters, they seldom if ever mention that guy's coordinator. It's never Russell Wilson is being artificially propped by Darrell Bevell. In that case it's always the team strength at issue, that Wilson's YPA is purely a function of Seattle's defense and running game. Whatever fits. Coordinators are the anchor here. When Adjusters ridicule opposing quarterbacks from Tannehill's era they never identify those coordinators. When the laugh track here was Andy Dalton Sucks I never saw the coordinator mentioned one time. Beginning next season the Adjusters are in a bit of a pickle because if Dalton declines they'll gleefully assign it to Lazor even though he's quarterback coach and not coordinator. You have to understand the way Adjusters think. Often there's a convenient bypass system. Lazor will have no impact if Dalton continues to succeed, or if he hits new heights. If Dalton plummets then the coordinator is not in play. It's the quarterback coach, stupid.

Actually I think Cincinnati in general and Dalton probably will take a step back next season. Basic situational trend. The Bengals have extended so much energy throughout the regular season for 4 or 5 years now, with basically nothing to show for it except public skepticism and jokes. The way they lost that playoff game last season likely will have lingering mental residue. Letdowns are overrated after success but very real after failure.

Anyway, I secretly wish the Dolphins would trade Ryan Tannehill. I could breathe again. Otherwise I share roy miami's expressed concern that Tannehill will waste a decade of our football rooting lives, with one adjuster offseason after another, regardless of the details of the prior season or the coaching situation. Tannehill is just good enough for more adjustments to attach, like tentacles from the deep.

I'd love to peddle Tannehill to Cleveland for the number two pick. Take a shot at Carson Wentz. That guy is not going to waste a full decade. By all looks and logic he is a boom or bust type with high upside, and if not you'll probably know within 2 or 3 years, time to move on. That type of dynamic is very attractive to me at this age.

 

[Sons Of Shula]

:sidelol:

[video=youtube;f0TGP-KWNV4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0TGP-KWNV4[/video]

 

[xXwarXx]

Notice that when opposing quarterbacks who are thriving are denounced by the Adjusters, they seldom if ever mention that guy's coordinator. It's never Russell Wilson is being artificially propped by Darrell Bevell. In that case it's always the team strength at issue, that Wilson's YPA is purely a function of Seattle's defense and running game. Whatever fits. Coordinators are the anchor here. When Adjusters ridicule opposing quarterbacks from Tannehill's era they never identify those coordinators. When the laugh track here was Andy Dalton Sucks I never saw the coordinator mentioned one time. Beginning next season the Adjusters are in a bit of a pickle because if Dalton declines they'll gleefully assign it to Lazor even though he's quarterback coach and not coordinator. You have to understand the way Adjusters think. Often there's a convenient bypass system. Lazor will have no impact if Dalton continues to succeed, or if he hits new heights. If Dalton plummets then the coordinator is not in play. It's the quarterback coach, stupid.

.

I've tried debating with sons about tannehill but it's pointless.

He actually argued that the reason Russell Wilson was so good at avoiding pass rushers, was because his offensive line Coach created lanes for him.
He argued Stills wasn't incredibly efficient while with NO with brees as a qb.
He argued Brady/bellichek didnt run the most complicated offense in the NFL.
Oh, and QBs with small hands isn't a big deal either.

He gives no other QBs credit while propping up tannehill. Sons is a knowledgable dude, but ya, don't bother debating anything tannehill related with him.

And I love all the talk now about Audibles. "Tannehill wasn't good because Lazor wouldn't let him audible." Mike Sherman let him audible, did that make him any better? Hell no

The weirdest thing about the blind tannehill love is he's never shown to be anything special. I think a really good coach and run game will help him immensely. But will he be anything special? A top 5 qb as some people here believe? Definitely not, we have never seen anything close to that from him.

 

[Sons Of Shula]

I've tried debating with sons about tannehill but it's pointless.

He actually argued that the reason Russell Wilson was so good at avoiding pass rushers, was because his offensive line Coach created lanes for him.
He argued Stills wasn't incredibly efficient while with NO with brees as a qb.
He argued Brady/bellichek didnt run the most complicated offense in the NFL.

He gives no other QBs credit while propping up tannehill. Sons is a knowledgable dude, but ya, don't bother debating anything tannehill related with him.

And I love all the talk now about Audibles. "Tannehill wasn't good because Lazor wouldn't let him audible." Mike Sherman let him audible, did that make him any better? Hell no

The weirdest thing about the blind tannehill love is he's never shown to be anything special. I think a really good coach and run game will help him immensely. But will he be anything special? A top 5 qb as some people here believe? Definitely not, we have never seen anything close to that from him.

Oh man, this is good stuff. I'll address all this non-sense along with Awsi's banter later. Sorry for the de-rail Tannenbombs.

In the meantime . . . Shouwrong . . .

 

[xXwarXx]

Oh man, this is good stuff. I'll address all this non-sense along with Awsi's banter later. Sorry for the de-rail Tannenbombs.

I mean don't take it personal, but you adjust what's important and what's not according to what tannehill is and isn't good at. Aswi isn't wrong about that.

Who could forget how angry you got when people talked of Goffs small hands, and you immediately reacted by arguing small hands isn't a big deal for QBs?

I think you actually compared it to Shaquille O' Neil shooting free throws. Haha

 

[BobDole]

don't tell anyone but i don't have much hope for tannehill either. i do get why people 'adjust' with tannehill though - it's incredibly hard to accept that we might need to scrap him and start all over again in this post marino apocalyptic era that is dolphins football. and it's not like he's gotten much help from his staff or offensive line. plus he's hard not to root for - total underdog, tough as nails, says all the right things, team player, bangable wife ... he checks a lot of boxes. he's shown just enough to give fans a glimmer of hope ... just enough rope to hang ourselves with.

i never get into the tannehill thing because of the sheer volume of posts about it and how depressed i get when i think about it but i figured i'd derail this thread a little too. maybe gase can get through to him and maybe the offensive line won't get him killed but history is not on his side. i'll root for him until we decide to go another direction but i've already started looking at QBs closely again ... haven't quite figured out if i'm gonna go suck for watson like i did for luck but it might be the best thing long term.

again, sorry for the derail and potential depression of all this