The "Understudy" Idea

[bbsplitter]

Aside from Aaron Rodgers and Favre, no other successful starting qb was an "understudy" of another succesful qb. I think its overrated i mean what has it done for Jake Locker, either a guy has what it takes or doesn't

Tom Brady with Drew Bledsoe
Steve Young with Joe Montana
George Blanda with Daryle Lamonica
Marc Bulger with Kurt Warner
Jeff Hostetler for Phil Simms

.......and depending on your definition of "successful" there are a ton of other backups that have gone on to start for other teams, i.e. Cassell type of QB's.

There are however, a greater number of failures than successes. Sure they learn some things from the starting QB, but they aren't magically going to acquire the good qualities of the starting QB. Flynn was under Russell Wilson for a year, but does that mean in Oakland he is going to be in the weight and film rooms every second of his day like Wilson? I doubt it. There are hard workers, people in between, and then lazy people. If albert haynesworth was somehow a #2 QB to RW, I guarantee you he would be just as fat and just as lazy at the end.

And responding to the 'its good to have a person RW can shoot ideas with and tell him what they see during the game' - isn't that what they specifically pay offensive coordinators and QB coaches for? As for in-game communication, I'd say probably 95% of RW conversation is with his WR and Oline, people with immediate impact in the game. The backup QB can watch him and sure add a thing or two maybe, but i doubt russell wilson stops to give a tutorial or Q+A session to a backup that will likely have no impact on that game.

 

[drdiags]

The idea of a starter providing his backup with insights and coaching that leads to the backup being a starter could be more hype than fact. The idea of the environment being setup correctly to allow the "understudy" a chance to get his feet under him before getting a chance to take on his own team is one that bears fruit.

Schaub may not have been tutored by Vick, but the Falcons nurtured him enough for the Texans to see value in him. The Patriots with Mallett and how they have nurtured him seems to have experts thinking the Patriots have a market for his services. All teams should be stocking QBs with the idea that a few may hit and even if the starter is entrenched, invest time/coaching into those they know have a chance to start for someone in the future.

The Kubiak/Elway scenario was a nice comfort blanket for the Broncos, but they never got tangible benefit from the investment they made in Kubiak. He and John were both young QBs who grew together.

Delhomme was a functional QB who sat behind Saints starters. Kordell Stewart went from backup to a few years as the Steelers starting QB. Jacksonville backup Garrard got a few years as starter. On and on. Some were understudies who benefited from the starter providing guidance. Others due to the starter being a dude and most likely coached up.

Short answer. Sure, the concept of learning at the feet of the starter is overblown but it isn't a non-factor either.

 

[Killa Kam]

Aside from Aaron Rodgers and Favre, no other successful starting qb was an "understudy" of another succesful qb. I think its overrated i mean what has it done for Jake Locker, either a guy has what it takes or doesn't

Tom Brady with Drew Bledsoe
Steve Young with Joe Montana
George Blanda with Daryle Lamonica
Marc Bulger with Kurt Warner
Jeff Hostetler for Phil Simms

.......and depending on your definition of "successful" there are a ton of other backups that have gone on to start for other teams, i.e. Cassell type of QB's.

Yeah I meant to say from the past couple of years, I also forgot about Kaepernick. Im not saying it can't be effective if a player isnt ready to start like Kaepernick was it makes sense for him to sit on the bench while being coached up, but if you look at the recent success of young qbs not many of them sat behind a veteran. Only ones who have been shown flashes of being any good are Josh Freeman and Kaepernick

Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, RG3, Andrew Luck, and Russell Wilson
vs
Jake Locker, Josh Freeman, Kaepernick, Christian Ponder, Chad Henne

 

[Sgt. Largent]

Yeah I meant to say from the past couple of years, I also forgot about Kaepernick. Im not saying it can't be effective if a player isnt ready to start like Kaepernick was it makes sense for him to sit on the bench while being coached up, but if you look at the recent success of young qbs not many of them sat behind a veteran. Only ones who have been shown flashes of being any good are Josh Freeman and Kaepernick

Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Cam Newton, Andy Dalton, RG3, Andrew Luck, and Russell Wilson
vs
Jake Locker, Josh Freeman, Kaepernick, Christian Ponder, Chad Henne

Sure the success rate isn't high, but that doesn't mean you stop trying to develop your own guys. Green Bay has perfected the correct way to successfully transition to the next QB. You try and draft at least one QB per year, that way over a period of 5-10 years you'll have a nice stable of young QB's to not only develop for your QB position, but you have QB's to trade for draft picks.

IMO the NFL is now a three QB league. If you want to be successful, you have to have a very good to elite type QB, a dependable backup..........AND 1-2 QB's to develop. That way you're not in dire situations like some teams (Oakland, Arizona, etc) overpaying for marginal, unproven or over the hill QB's on the free agent market.

 

[hawk45]

To answer the OP, and agree with rainger, yeah it's overblown.

If you have a guy as talented as Steve Young, okay fine it doesn't hurt to play under Montana. Steve Young would have been pretty damned good anyhow. Backing up Russell Wilson contributes maybe a tiny percentage to a guy's chances of success.

Having a GM that can pluck a gem out of nowhere is a far, far bigger factor. Start with good materials and then okay fine it ain't bad to be behind RW. Start with Vince Young (as a rookie, not now) and he doesn't turn into RW even if he sits there for 10 years.