Since we're on the subject, what are some reasonable rookie standards by which we can judge Brandon Weeden? I've gone back and forth about this with someone who is not, in my opinion, being very reasonable. He wants to execute a friendly wager, but he's giving me even odds for a bet that I personally think Las Vegas would prop at -400/+500.
I had originally suggested that Weeden would have higher than a 1.0 TD-INT ratio by the the end of his 29th birthday (he will turn 29 the day he plays his 6th game of the season against the Bengals). I thought this was a very fair measure. He plays the Eagles, Bengals, Bills, Ravens, Giants and Bengals again in those 6 games. Those will be his first 6 games of his first NFL season, and I think you can reasonably suspect that his stats in those games will not quite be as good as later in the season as he gets more comfortable. Rookie QBs commonly have low TD-INT ratios, the median is WELL under 1.0.
He comes back with the following proposal:
I win if Brandon Weeden accomplishes TWO of the following:
1. A passer rating above 80.0
2. A TD-INT ratio above 1.5
3. Six wins
The problem is, you look through NFL history and the list of rookie QBs that have satisfied even ONE of those is short. Peyton didn't. NFL.com has statistics on what they call "qualified" passers (I think over 150 attempts, something like that). Tabulate all the rookie qualified passers from the last 15 drafts and only 10 of the 30 even satisfied one of those requirements. Only I believe 5 of the 30 notched two of them. So to have a successful season, Weeden needs to have a top 20th percentile rookie showing? On a bad team in a division with the Ravens, Steelers and Bengals defenses? Really?
I look at those historical rookie performances, I see that MEDIAN passer rating was 68.4, and MEDIAN ratio was 0.920. Also, MEDIAN wins was 4. If you set the standards at those marks and demand satisfaction of 2 of the 3 in order to "win", then coincidentally 15 of the 30 passers made the grade where 15 failed.
That to me is a better standard of success for a rookie, no?
At th every least, I don't think you have to turn in top 20th percentile performance in order to not be dubbed a disappointment.
unless somethings been said publicly that i haven't seen yet i'd wait til he wins the job out of camp before i made any bets...
hoops scoops 2012 season ..."in 2014 ryan tannehill etches his name in stone amongst the games elite qbs"..."ryan tannehill and andrew luck will carry the afc for the next decade plus the way peyton manning and tom brady have this last decade plus"
What I think we have been finding out since he joined the NFL is that Colt McCoy's intangibles, which I too thought were very good, were far overrated, much like Mark Sanchez' intangibles. Sanchez I had plenty of reason to suspect before he came out. McCoy, I should have known by the way he handled himself in that championship game and the suspicious circumstances with his father and him heading to the locker room, some of the whispers I heard, etc.
Sometimes it's the guys that put up a really good front who are secretly insecure and crumble at the first sign of adversity. And it's not always the black preacher with a suspicious brand new church who proves to be the overbearing father. Cam Newton was accused to putting up false fronts, but he put up that mask in order to combat adversity, and he never had it easy, ever since he blew his chances at Florida. Colt McCoy was a coddled little lamb in Texas compared to what Newton had to face post-Florida.
For one thing, Colt McCoy has already shown the Cleveland Browns enough both on and off the field for them to conclude that they're not making a future with him at quarterback. They're allowing him to compete for show.
They want to be able to line up Colt McCoy and Brandon Weeden right next to each other for all of the players, fellow coaches and media to see, so that the differences between the two become glaring and apparent. That way, both players and media will feel optimistic about what the Browns are doing, because they can see for themselves in a very glaring way that they've just significantly upgraded the quarterback position. It's an old trick, if you want to make someone look good, stand him up next to someone that looks horrible. Of course, this could backfire if Brandon Weeden is a severe disappointment and does not look better than Colt McCoy. I don't think the Browns are concerned about that possibility, though. I think they have a lot of confidence in the guy that they targeted and were going to get on draft day no matter what occurred and no matter who was available.
Already, just in rookie camp and OTAs, what they've seen of Brandon Weeden has everyone involved convinced there isn't a shot in hell Colt McCoy wins this battle. There's already been "wow" factor. That competition was over before it started.