Monday, April 20, 2009

Why The Lions Should Not Take Matthew Stafford #1 Overall

We can thank George Costanza for inventing “It’s not you, it’s me.” It’s a simple and easy way to escape from a relationship you’re no longer, well, into. Or a great way to stop one before it gets started. For the Detroit Lions (or as I like to call them, the Detwah Leones), they need to pull the “It’s not you, it’s me” bit with Matthew Stafford because he is the wrong pick for them at #1 overall at this Saturday’s NFL Draft.

Telling Stafford “it’s not you, it’s me” would actually be true both ways because unless John Elway or Peyton Manning were available in this draft, I don’t think ANY quarterback is the right pick for Detwah at #1 overall- not Stafford, not Marc Sanchez, not Josh Freeman. And also because I don’t think Stafford is going to be a very good NFL quarterback.

I don’t care how strong his arm is or how much he looks or sounds or acts like an NFL quarterback, Stafford's resume at Georgia- you know, what he actually did in real live games in his three seasons as the starter in Athens instead of in pro-day drills against no defense- leaves a little something to be desired. As a Bulldog, Stafford was surrounded by future NFL talent on both sides of the ball, and he rarely, if ever, took the field against a less talented team (I know LSU and Florida won National Titles while Stafford was at Georgia, but can you honestly tell me the Bulldogs were outclassed by either the Tigers or Gators? Those teams were great, but I don’t think they were clearly more talented than Georgia was).

Just last season Georgia was the preseason #1 team in the country with a solid O-line, one of- if not the best- stable of running backs in the country (led by redshirt soph Knowshon Moreno who will be one of the first two backs taken in Saturday’s draft), and talent at wideout which included senior Mohamed Massquoi (who according to various reports could be taken as early as the 2nd round) and freshman 6’4 200 lb monster AJ Green (who, barring injury or a bad attitude, is a lock to be a first round pick whenever he decides to enter the draft). Georgia’s result for 2008? A disappointing 10-3. In his three years as a starter, the Bulldogs won zero National Titles, zero SEC Titles, and zero SEC East division titles (they tied for the division lead in 2007, but tie-breakers gave it to Florida. I don’t personally don’t count that one). Sure, they were 3-0 in bowl games (in 2007 beat Virginia Tech in the Chick-Fil-A Bowl, 2008 beat an awful Hawaii team in the Sugar Bowl and this past January knocked off Michigan State in the Capital One Bowl), but they weren’t National Championship games that they had the talent to be in, and only one, the joke of a matchup against Hawaii, was a BCS game. They did win 30 games in his three seasons there, but ask Bulldogs fans if that was enough.

If Stafford has so much talent and ability and that golden arm, why weren’t his Georgia teams better? Why weren’t they the best? If his teams disappoint in college with all of that talent around him, what makes you think he’s going to be so much better in the pros?

Which leads us back to the “It’s not you it’s me” phrase actually being true because, as I said, Detroit really isn’t good enough for Stafford, or Sanchez or Freeman to be successful anytime soon. I mentioned Elway and Manning earlier because those are the only two rookie quarterbacks I can think of who were high draft picks, started in their first year for awful teams, and went on to have successful careers. Elway orchestrated a trade from the Baltimore Colts (who had the #1 overall pick in 1983) to Denver, and he started 10 games in Orange and Blue (why won't they go back to those jerseys? They were infinitely better than the stupid Nike designs they wear now) that first year and went 4-6. The next year the Broncos went 12-2 in games he started and well, you know the rest. Manning started from day one in Indy and went 3-13 his rookie year. The next year? 13-3. Like Elway, the rest is history.

But that's it for highly drafted QB's going to awful teams, starting as rookies, and living to tell about it. In recent years we've seen guys like Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch, David Carr, Joey Harrington and Alex Smith go high, start early for awful teams, and get so beat up and knocked around they never develop. Sure, maybe one or none of these guys would have be a good QB no matter how much talent was there, but they are examples that show rookie QB's should not be starting unless EVERYTHING- and I mean everything- else is in place.

In the last decade there have been three and only three rookie QB's whose teams have been successful- Ben Roethlisberger in 2004 (Pittsburgh was 13-0 in games he started), and Matt Ryan (Atlanta was 11-5) and Joe Flacco (Ravens were also 11-5 ) this past season.

Roethlisberger has developed into one of the top 10 QB’s in the league, and Flacco and especially Ryan, could join him in that group soon. All three undeniably are talented QB’s, but they were also put into the perfect situation- their teams asked them to do as little as humanly possible to win. As I’ve mentioned on this site a few times before, the Steelers in 2004 are the blueprint for winning with a rookie QB, and it’s really simple: all you need is a great defense, Oline, running game, and solid-to-great receivers. Really you just need the entire package there except a QB and your rookie quarterback should develop just great! Isn’t that easy? Ok maybe not, but if you draft a rookie QB and insist on starting him, unless you can draft Elway or Manning, this is your only recipe that doesn’t leave to disaster.

The Steelers in 2004 had an awesome defense, a veteran and outstanding O-line, a bruising rushing attack led by Jerome Bettis, and an unreal receiving core of Hines Ward, Plax Burress, Antwan Randel-El and TE Heath Miller that could not only catch but block. The Steelers went 13-0 that year with Roethlisberger as the starter because he only threw 295 passes that season (completing196 of them for a 66.4 completion % and a total QB rating of 98.1), which is an average of only 23 pass attempts per game. They used this recipe successfully for Big Ben’s first two years, winning a Super Bowl the second. His third year when the running game broke down and he had to attempt over 400 passes (469 to be exact) the Steelers limped to a 7-8 record and Ben had a completion % of only 59.1 and a QB rating of 75.4. Ouch. In 2007 the team was healthy and productive, and Roethlisberger asserted himself by throwing a respectable 409 passes with a 65.3 comp. % and an other-worldly 104.1 QB rating.

You see the progression? Ask your rookie QB to do as little as humanly possible, let him learn in a safe environment where there’s little pressure and he can drop back to throw without fear of being killed, and you get Big Ben. Ask your rookie QB to be David Carr where your team stinks and he gets sacked 4,375 times in his first five years (I’m only slightly exaggerating those sack totals), and he doesn’t exactly pan out.

Last season Baltimore and Atlanta both had excellent defenses, offensive lines, running games, and surprisingly productive receivers, and their QB’s helped their teams to 11-5 seasons. Yes, both guys did throw over 400 passes, but their numbers were still in the bottom 10 for passes attempted in the league. When they both got to the playoffs and saw defenses who forced them to throw, their teams made a quick exit. It doesn’t mean Ryan and Flacco aren’t good, it’s just further proof that no matter how talented you think a rookie QB is, you do not throw him into the fire unless you have everything else around him taken care of.

Of course, this doesn’t just apply to high draft picks, but to any rookie. Go ahead, look at any of the successful QB’s today by whatever criteria you’d measure as “successful” and they all sat at least a season before starting: Tom Brady, Drew Brees, Carson Palmer, Kurt Warner, Matt Cassell, Philip Rivers, and Aaron Rodgers. I could go on and on, but you get the point- they all sat for at least a year, and I don’t see any way that Stafford will sit for much or all of 2009 if he goes to the Lions.

I think Daunte Culpepper is a fine quarterback, but let’s be honest here: while the Lions can’t get any worse in 2009, they were 0-16 in 2008. They’re not going to the playoffs or anything close this year, which means no matter how well Culpepper plays, the wheels WILL fall off the Lions season early, and the pressure will be on to throw Stafford into the mix. He’ll get thrown to the wolves and he’ll get eaten alive, and chances are, he won’t recover from it.

So if the Lions want to stop being the laughing stock of the league and be respectable sooner rather than later, the best thing they can do is pull a Costanza and tell Matt Stafford “It’s you, it’s me”, draft Baylor OT Jason Smith (like Miami drafted OT Jake Long instead of a QB last year and Cleveland passed on Brady Quinn and took OT Joe Thomas the year before that) and use the rest of their picks to help them get better now. They can take a QB in the later rounds or worry about that next year or the year after when they have more than my mancrush Calvin “Megatron” Johnson and Kevin Smith to help him succeed.

Don’t take it personally Matt, because it really is not you, it’s me.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

"In the last decade there have been three and only three rookie QB's whose teams have been successful"

You forget about the great Kyle Orton who's 2005 Bears team went 10-5 with him starting as a rookie. Or maybe you didn't count him because they were winning despite his play at QB and benched him week 16 for Rex who was injured in the preseason. This must be why you left him off because how could anyone forget that great Bears team.