BlitzFritz

after watching Cassel progress, and correlating it with how BB handled Brady his first year, it appears that the NEP have a strong view on how to develop QBs that is different from many other clubs. why is this no surprise.

here's what i see

1. Try to build his confidence - put him in position to succeed. Keep the scheme simple initially until he has mastered it, then gradually expand. Avoid tremendous gaffes at all cost
(by the way this applies to kickers too. BB handled Gost w kid gloves that first yr)

2. Avoid picks. So throw short passes.

3. Avoid fumbles. IF you feel pressure, dont be afraid to take sack. Its better than Kurt Warner fumbling. Once you get used to the game speed, you will be more confident about how long you can look downfield.

4. Keep telling the kid he is getting better. Focus him on moving from first read, to the second. Extend the pass distance.

This explains the basic playbook, the sacks etc in Cassels early weeks, until he got a feel for the rush. They just told him to take the sack, take care of the ball.

This explains the "game manager" approach to Brady and Cassel in the earlier phases of their development

In contrast, I would observe that other teams have put the weight of the team on the new QBs shoulders. Vince Young of the Titans. Now a psychological melt down. Brady Quinn - asked to win games. Jamarcus Russell.
I dont see too many other teams taking the same approach, namely - start with a simpler set of plays until the QB can master those, then keep opening it up. Avoiding major confidence set backs.

What do you think? Has BB the mad scientist come up with a science to QB development too?

FRITZ

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"If you counted out the Patriots, you just don't get it." Adam Schein, September 2008

�We are building a big, strong, fast, smart, tough and disciplined football team that. consistently competes for championships.� Guess who.

tedylb

Good post, Fritz. All of your points seem textbook, but you're right, it's amazing how so many teams put too much responsibility on the shoulders of talented young Qb's, often screwing up their careers.

Of course it doesn't hurt to have an offensive line that gives you time to act and react, and receivers who make you look better than you are.

Leave No Doubt

I think a lot of offensive playcalling early on was designed to nurture Matt along and you can sort of see that when you look back at the games this season. BB and Co. are pretty good at recognizing players who have the tools necessary to evolve into becoming good or even excellent (see the Brady pick at #199).

Plus they've had 4 years to observe and work with Matt, but BB's done an amazing job at getting him NFL ready.

But none of that would be accomplished without Cassel's basic abilities and qualities, especially his devotion to hard work and willingness to learn and improve. Same with Brady early on.

I hope Spygate's tarnish wears off by the time history really examines everything BB's done for the league and those who coach and play for it.

Instead of crying about BB, some of these coaches and players should just (Please be quiet - edited) and learn something from him. Actually I hope they never do

__________________
edit...2012 BABY!

fester

I think the biggest problem with this theory is the surrounding talent. Cassel had a viable offensive line in front of him. He started off with elite level receivers on the outside and competent backs and tight ends for the dump offs. He was inserted into a competent or better unit. So most of his initial problems were his problems that since they are single source, they are easier to correct.

Now on the other hand, the Oakland Raiders DON'T have a viable offensive line, they don't have elite skill players, and they don't have viable safety valves/check downs available. So the number of mutli-facetted mistakes increase exponentially and being able to solve one part of the system of errors still will produce significant number of errors. This is weaker in Cleveland, but very similiar to Tennessee a couple of years ago.

I think most teams do try to introduce their young or rookie slowly to the game. Tom Brady said that if he had to start as a rookie he would have been lost. The first year on the sideline, in the meetings and running the scout team for familiarization purposes was extraordinarily valuable for Brady. And we are seeing the same thing with Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay --- the couple of years studying behind a master combined with insertion into a competent offensive group has produced positive results (most of the time).

I think most teams if they have a viable option to not insert a young QB with the full package will do so. However if a QB is drafted in the 1st round, most of the time, it is because the team has very few viable options. Highly touted and drafted QBs seldom go to good teams (Roethlesberger is an exception).

__________________
Come on over to the Newshoggers for blogging on economics, football, policy analysis,and beer:


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Deus Irae

It starts with drafting a quarterback with the right type of mind, along with the needed skills. As we've seen with Kingsbury, Davey, et al..., the quarterback needs to have a particular ability to succeed in this offense. If the QB doesn't have the ability to scan-n-pan, he's useless in a Belichick offense. Bledsoe is a perfect example of this.

Bledsoe struggled mightily in the Belichick system, to the point where he was traded despite an enormous contract, and traded within the division at that. Once he got to Buffalo, however, he played better, taking a 3 win team to an 8-8 record, while garnering his 4th Pro Bowl berth.

So, while I think the team does a great job working with the quarterback, I think their 'working' requires the right type of quarterback to be truly beneficial.

__________________
"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."
- Marcus Aurelius

emoney_33

This team has a great system, policies and principles that are consistent with their mission statement. It is no surprise that they have a good approach to developing youth into their system at QB as they do at all other positions. And as Deus said it starts with drafting the right type of person/player.

From top to bottom this is a well-oiled machine with a fantastic business model. There are no irreplaceable parts and this organization does a damn good job of making that statement as true as possible.

__________________
There are 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary and those who do not.

xmarkd400x

You sound like you're applying for a management position somewhere.

BlitzFritz

While we are at it, let me add another angle on this.
DRAFTING

Clearly, BB/SP dont think you can project QB in the NFL very well. So they look for some mid to late rounders, coach em up, and see if they can do it. (As opposed to DL which projects pretty well).

My view is that they are looking for:
-- QBs with a good arm and accuracy
-- smart
--astronaut type emotional quotient ie calm calm calm

and then try to find out if they can make decisions quickly in real time. maybe they can, maybe they cant.

at least thats what it looks like to me w Brady and Cassel.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"If you counted out the Patriots, you just don't get it." Adam Schein, September 2008

�We are building a big, strong, fast, smart, tough and disciplined football team that. consistently competes for championships.� Guess who.

midwestpatsfan

I think you hit it right on the head. Take for instance Kevin O'connel. In college he played on a horrible team with really bad wide recievers, but he was very calm and always kept the play going by keeping his eyes down field while scrambling for his life.