Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Leinart vs Pryor: Who should be the backup?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  

Who should be the Raiders backup QB?
Leinart
33%
 33%  [ 10 ]
Pryor
66%
 66%  [ 20 ]
Total Votes : 30

Author Message
CrashMan510


Joined: 14 Aug 2012
Posts: 4594
Location: Bay Area
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darkness wrote:
Silver&Black88 wrote:
Darkness wrote:
Trent Edwards had a great preseason with the Eagles and played solid for us last year. I wouldn't mind dumping Leinart for him.


That's a lateral movement at best. Edwards couldn't beat out Kyle Boller. At least Leinart knows the system.


That's highly debatable. Plus I think Edwards is pretty much better then Matt Leinart at everything.


yep, the only reason Boller stayed over Edwards was because Boller knew the system.
_________________


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-eSN8Cwit_s
fuarge
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
cellomac1212


Joined: 09 Sep 2007
Posts: 2041
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

dante9876 wrote:
cellomac1212 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
Darkness wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
Who cares? If either start a game the season is over.


I do?


IMO, neither has a future in Oakland. Neither are strong enough passers for the NFL. It's Palmer or bust for the foreseeable future unfortunately.


They were saying the same thing in Carolina with Cam, Washington with RG3, and Atlanta with Vick. Athleticism at the QB position allows for something most don't ever take into account. The ability to run makes the field so much more open that it allows them to actually not be great passers (ala Manning). This is not to say Pryor is ready, but he could be good one day. Even if it is just his running ability that makes him good.


I just don't understand how the NFL catches these freak athletes at QB, then tries to force them to be pocket passers. I don't know how anyone can be mad at a qb that can rush for over 1000 yards. That is just nuts...


Until a QB gets to a superbowl doing that, why would anyone try to do that.


I don't think I have ever seen a NFL team try to build around the athleticism of the QB. Not to say it would actually work, but I find it peculiar to see NFL coaches shy the Vick's of the league away from running (their strengths) and into passing (their weaknesses). It would be nice to see a coach develop a game plan around his QB that runs a 4.2 or 4.3 forty. But most devise the game plan for Peyton Manning even when they have Vick. Again, I know it might not work, but has it ever even been tried?

Also, Dan Marino, arguably the best pocket passer ever has never won a Super Bowl whereas Trent Dilfer has. QB style can be the reason Super Bowls are won, but there are numerous exceptions to that rule...
_________________

I hoped for a playoff appearance, but the passing of Al met terms for my sig removal after 3+ years.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
luvmyraiderz


Joined: 28 Jun 2012
Posts: 335
Location: The Black Hole
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Pryor! He's THE ANSWER!
_________________

Raiders-Athletics-Warriors-Golden Bears-Fighting Irish
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Bo_Spice


Joined: 17 May 2009
Posts: 9687
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

If Carson Palmer goes down our offense is going to be terrible regardless, but at this point I think Leinart should be the back-up. While I love how Pryor has progressed over the course of the pre-season I don't think he's ready to play with against first team NFL defenses. Plus Leinart knows Knapp's system and is a veteran guy which gives him the leg up. If Palmer goes down we'll play grind-it-out football and all Leinart will have to do is manage the game, something he's better prepared for than Pryor. I would hate to throw Pryor into the fire and kill his confidence if he struggles big time.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RaisinBran


Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 10145
Location: 925/805
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:35 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd like Pryor to be the #2, but I still want Leinart on the team because he can help the other guys out with Knapp's system.
_________________

(NFL)=Raiders, (MLB)=A's, (NBA)= Warriors
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Professor Oak


Joined: 12 Apr 2011
Posts: 3901
Location: Pallet Town
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darkness wrote:
Trent Edwards had a great preseason with the Eagles and played solid for us last year. I wouldn't mind dumping Leinart for him.

I was a huge advocate of Edwards last season. He was sharp, accurate, and smart - all qualities you like to see from a backup QB. Hue didn't like him at all though, and kept Boller because he knew the system longer.

With that said, there's no way we're going to bring in another QB at this point. It's WAY too late. Leinart is the backup & Pryor is the project.

The only positive I can see from making Pryor the #2 is him getting more reps in practice. Other than that, he's not quite ready to control the offense just yet. I've never been a Leinart fan, but at least he brings experience & can advise Palmer on things he sees from the field.
_________________
(o◕ ‿‿◕o)//
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darkness


Joined: 24 Jun 2012
Posts: 8253
Location: CA
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Professor Oak wrote:
Darkness wrote:
Trent Edwards had a great preseason with the Eagles and played solid for us last year. I wouldn't mind dumping Leinart for him.

I was a huge advocate of Edwards last season. He was sharp, accurate, and smart - all qualities you like to see from a backup QB. Hue didn't like him at all though, and kept Boller because he knew the system longer.

With that said, there's no way we're going to bring in another QB at this point. It's WAY too late. Leinart is the backup & Pryor is the project.

The only positive I can see from making Pryor the #2 is him getting more reps in practice. Other than that, he's not quite ready to control the offense just yet. I've never been a Leinart fan, but at least he brings experience & can advise Palmer on things he sees from the field.


Leinart can still advise Palmer on things he sees from the field. Just as the #3 QB. Smile
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Chali21


Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 3291
Location: Cali
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is a legitimate post, I mean when was Palmer's last full season? We need to have a competent back up.

I hate to say it but if Palmer goes down I hope we do bad enough to draft Landry, or Barkley.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S&B Bleeder


Joined: 02 Mar 2008
Posts: 1558
Location: SoCal
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If CP goes down, which likely will happen during the season ML will be the next victim. I felt that he could be a competent backup as he has shown some positive signs. The key is how long he is asked to perform. If for an extended period I suspect he will not do well and there will be a clamor for Pryor in the form of a QB controversy.
All signs indicate he is not ready at this time. I think TP's problem is he's thinking too much when he tries to pass. This happens with young players who have to think about what they're doing as it is not second nature. He has to think about the play, about defenses, how close the defender is to his receiver, leading him. This will at some point become second nature. We'll see the light come on. Naysayers need to take a break. It will happen. The question is when. Probably sometime after the 3rd year.
He obviously doesn't need to think when he's running.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bitty


Joined: 19 Jan 2005
Posts: 3755
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
Darkness wrote:
Trent Edwards had a great preseason with the Eagles and played solid for us last year. I wouldn't mind dumping Leinart for him.


That's a lateral movement at best. Edwards couldn't beat out Kyle Boller. At least Leinart knows the system.


How the hell did Boller ever make the team?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5388
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Silver&Black88 wrote:
Darkness wrote:
Trent Edwards had a great preseason with the Eagles and played solid for us last year. I wouldn't mind dumping Leinart for him.


That's a lateral movement at best. Edwards couldn't beat out Kyle Boller. At least Leinart knows the system.


So... what you are saying is we should talk Boller out of retirement? Laughing
_________________


Silver&Black88 on the sig

La_Vader wrote:
I wouldn't trade Pryor for any prospect in this years draft. Quote me on that
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
holyghost


Joined: 18 Jan 2007
Posts: 5774
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In my mind, while it's a good discussion, it's a moot issue.

If Pryor can't beat out Leinart for the #2 job then he should stay at #3 until he can take #2 away. If the guy has any skill and can run the offense, he'll beat out Leinart on the depth chart soon enough. Because Leinart, beyond 8 yards, is atrocious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ZoomWaffle


Joined: 25 Apr 2010
Posts: 5388
Location: United Kingdom
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cellomac1212 wrote:
dante9876 wrote:
cellomac1212 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
Darkness wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
Who cares? If either start a game the season is over.


I do?


IMO, neither has a future in Oakland. Neither are strong enough passers for the NFL. It's Palmer or bust for the foreseeable future unfortunately.


They were saying the same thing in Carolina with Cam, Washington with RG3, and Atlanta with Vick. Athleticism at the QB position allows for something most don't ever take into account. The ability to run makes the field so much more open that it allows them to actually not be great passers (ala Manning). This is not to say Pryor is ready, but he could be good one day. Even if it is just his running ability that makes him good.


I just don't understand how the NFL catches these freak athletes at QB, then tries to force them to be pocket passers. I don't know how anyone can be mad at a qb that can rush for over 1000 yards. That is just nuts...


Until a QB gets to a superbowl doing that, why would anyone try to do that.


I don't think I have ever seen a NFL team try to build around the athleticism of the QB. Not to say it would actually work, but I find it peculiar to see NFL coaches shy the Vick's of the league away from running (their strengths) and into passing (their weaknesses). It would be nice to see a coach develop a game plan around his QB that runs a 4.2 or 4.3 forty. But most devise the game plan for Peyton Manning even when they have Vick. Again, I know it might not work, but has it ever even been tried?

Also, Dan Marino, arguably the best pocket passer ever has never won a Super Bowl whereas Trent Dilfer has. QB style can be the reason Super Bowls are won, but there are numerous exceptions to that rule...


I agree with cell, here.

Yes, no primarily running QB has made it to a Super Bowl, but you have to take 2 things into account: 1) How many good running QBs (who werent stellar passers) have there even been in the league? and 2) While QB is the most important position, it takes a hell of a lot more to win a Super Bowl. The Chargers havent won a Super Bowl... thats not Rivers' fault, he plays lights out nearly every game and is one of the most effecient and biggest playmaking QBs around. It takes a lot to win a Super Bowl: Every facet of the team must play at a high level, or at least high enough in the right circumstances. Coaching, playcalling, and straight up luck also factor in. Any given Sunday, right? Look at the Pats during their undefeated season. They DOMINATED all year long, yet lost in the Super Bowl. Why? Because it happens, this is the NFL. Just because a "running" QB hasnt made it to the Super Bowl doesnt mean they cant, especially since there have not been many running QBs starting in the league.

I am not even going to get into predicting how Pryor will or will not develop, but cellomac does have a point. If a coach actually built an offense for a QB of that type, then they would be more successful than if they tried to make them into a traditional QB. Look at tebow, good runner, bad passer. Fox completely altered that offense to suit his strengths and it worked. Now, they werent a great team, but it was also an in-season adjustment so with more time to prepare and maybe a better roster they would have better results. Yes, I know that was just one guy and people here love throwing around the old phrase "exception, not the rule", but it just shows that it is possible. On top of that, I can only name a few real running QBs from the last decade: Vick, Tebow, and Young, so the sample size is small. Even still, Vick led a dangerous offense in ATL and has been good in Philly, Young took his team to the playoffs as a rookie, and Tebow managed to squeek into the post season last year.
_________________


Silver&Black88 on the sig

La_Vader wrote:
I wouldn't trade Pryor for any prospect in this years draft. Quote me on that
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Silver&Black88


Joined: 24 Feb 2009
Posts: 34092
Location: Boston, MA
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

holyghost wrote:
In my mind, while it's a good discussion, it's a moot issue.

If Pryor can't beat out Leinart for the #2 job then he should stay at #3 until he can take #2 away. If the guy has any skill and can run the offense, he'll beat out Leinart on the depth chart soon enough. Because Leinart, beyond 8 yards, is atrocious.


+1. Although, I'm probably the only guy in these parts who believes in Leinart. If Pryor outplays him, he should be the primary backup. Until then, I'm cool with the way things are.

I don't see the need for replacing Leinart after a game where he had no help from the OL, OC or running game. I understand that it leaves us with a bad taste in the mouth and how recent it is and how much Pryor has progressed. I also understand that in Leinart's other 2 appearances he was 11/16 for 98 yards and 5/8 for 66 yards with QBR's of about 85 and 89.

If he comes in and sucks, I'm open to replacing him. But until then, as I said already, I'm cool with our situation.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RaisinBran


Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 10145
Location: 925/805
PostPosted: Fri Aug 31, 2012 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Professor Oak wrote:
Darkness wrote:
Trent Edwards had a great preseason with the Eagles and played solid for us last year. I wouldn't mind dumping Leinart for him.

I was a huge advocate of Edwards last season. He was sharp, accurate, and smart - all qualities you like to see from a backup QB. Hue didn't like him at all though, and kept Boller because he knew the system longer.

With that said, there's no way we're going to bring in another QB at this point. It's WAY too late. Leinart is the backup & Pryor is the project.

The only positive I can see from making Pryor the #2 is him getting more reps in practice. Other than that, he's not quite ready to control the offense just yet. I've never been a Leinart fan, but at least he brings experience & can advise Palmer on things he sees from the field.

That's precisely the reason I want him to be the #2. I really want to see him develop into something special.
_________________

(NFL)=Raiders, (MLB)=A's, (NBA)= Warriors
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group