I never bought the whole "he still learning the position" storyline. People just thought he would just keep on getting better and better because he played so little at QB in college. But he has been a starter in the NFL for three years going into this season. Sure, he didn't play a lot in college, but three years starting in the NFL is a long time and few QBs improve significantly after that long. The amount of time he played QB in college is irrelevant at this time.
Sure Brady is a much better QB than he was in 2003 or 2004, but he is the exception to the rule. And that is because he is insanely disciplined to consistently try to work on his weaknesses.
You are preaching to the choir here because I am of the belief that VERY rarely do quarterbacks progress from their first season. That's not to say a guy whose first season yielded a QB rating of 95 isn't going to progress to 105 or that a guy with a QB rating of 65 isn't going to progress to 78.
What I do believe is that, in general, what you see is what you get, and there are very few examples of guys who struggled out of the gate and ultimately became masters of the position. You look at the elite quarterbacks right now. Brady, Manning, Rodgers, Wilson, Luck, Roethlisberger, Rivers. Did any one of these guys look bad when they started? Maybe Manning, but he was throwing for a lot of TDs even in his first year. He was able to cut down on INTs better. The others all pretty much looked great and you knew they would be successful in this league right away. I would say Brees is an exception to the rule, as he didn't look great out of the gate but did improve.
Then you have guys who had "issues" but weren't that bad. Eli Manning struggled with accuracy and interceptions but could put up points. 10 years later, he's still the same guy. Everyone marveled at guys like Cutler and Stafford and remarked that as soon as they could "learn the defense" they would cut down on mistakes and become elite. Didn't happen. I would put Tannehill here as well. He's not a terrible quarterback but to think he will just "improve" to become semi-elite is unlikely. Just because a guy gets more reps does not change his innate ability to process information faster and play smarter. You have guys who just get it right away, and then you have guys who don't get and therefore probably won't get it.
And finally, you have the train wrecks who appear to suck but fan bases believe they just need to get more experience. Typically they have a sub-.70 passer rating and appear to be overmatched, but you keep hearing the GM rave about the kid's attitude, work ethic, and college game, waiting for him to translate. Often it takes the team at least two years, and sometimes three years, to realize it isn't going to work out. It's usually again about decision making and the false belief that with more experience, this guy will become smarter, and it rarely turns around. The list is too long, but here's a few I can think of in the last decade or so: Mark Sanchez, Joey Harrington, David Carr, Kyle Boller, Matt Leinart, Jake Locker, Rex Grossman.
So, I believe the QB is not much different than any other position. Typically when a guy is going to be a star, you know right away. It isn't impossible for a career turnaround, just not likely at all. The fallacy is in believing that most of these quarterbacks are able to "get smarter" and "learn to read a defense" when doing that may be just as difficult as jumping higher or running faster. No one is crazy enough to believe that an athlete will vastly improve on innate physical abilities, yet many believe that intelligence and decision making, or the ability to read defenses within split seconds, is a learned trait that can be taught or improved through repetition and experience. I don't think that's true to the degree most people believe/hope.
