I like Ridder but….

[Nino11]

31 minutes ago, runshoot said:

But thats the point. Its not about Ridder or babying him or whether he is like Mahomes and sits a year or starts day 1 like MR#2.

Its about the team. AS said Mariota was his starter and he stuck to it. This did the opposite of what TAFT posters think. TAFT thinks it lost the locker room and made AS look bad. What it really did was tell the locker room that he has their back. If you are named a starter you get the benefit of the doubt. Players from other teams see that. They see a coach standing behind his players. Now that we are out of the Playoff race, AS is free to say "hey lets see what we have next year".

I

It can be interpreted either way without knowing what’s actually being said. You could also say some guys may look at it like he’s playing favorites despite what your producing on the field. Marcus wasn’t terrible overall but his passing was very much below average 

[autigerfan]

It never really appeared to be a true battle for the starting job to begin with.  Mariota was named starter before the first pre-season game I believe.  Most rookie QB's are not equipped to be day one starters particularly those drafted after the 1st round.  All draftpicks have holes in their game particularly those drafted later.   Russell Wilson is the lone exception I can remember in the last 10+ years that started week one.    My hope is that we get enough from Ridder's late season audition to know if he might be the answer.  We likely won't know for sure but we will know if he is worth building around as our QB for next year at the least.  We need to find more answers and develop a long-term plan rather than just keeping all of our options open.  Lack of vision and taking calculated risks can hold a franchise back.  I hope that doesn't end of being the case with this regime as I still have high hopes.   

[Mr.11]

1 hour ago, Nino11 said:

I’ve posted I bought into every phase of the plan Smith has laid out. My only question is why baby Ridder when we need to find out if he’s the guy or not. Westbrook was able to come in and take over as a non first round pick. So was Dak Presscott. To me doesn’t matter where you drafted, either your a guy or not 

Because there's a very real possibility that Ridder didn't fully grasp the nuances of the offense as AS wants to run it yet. It wouldn't be fair to just throw Ridder to the wolves having very limited knowledge of the offense. And then you just expect him to play well in a live game at NFL speed? *** offense isn't easy to pick up--especially for a college QB because most, if not all of them, have never ran a pass play from under center. Even Ryan struggled with mastering the footwork and timing required for that type of offense going from Koetter to Kyle.

Besides the culture changes and the state of the team, you don't drop Ridder in the ocean unless you're sure he can swim, and you do that by training him up in the right way. If he still sinks, at least they can have a clean conscience that they taught him the necessary skills to swim and gave him ample opportunity to learn. This is literally like almost any other job in existence. Of course you're expected to have at least a baseline knowledge of what the job entails, but you still have to get spun up on the environment you're in, and no two environments are exactly the same.

Now the training wheels are off and now Ridder is going to have to learn on the job. Hopefully he's learned enough in training that the curve isn't as steep as it was in July.

[Swayzee]

6 hours ago, Nino11 said:

I mean I get it. We have holes. But Arthur Smith’s job is to put the best team on the field. If he feels Mariota gives us the best chance of winning, that’s what has me worried. Mariota has to play with the same guys you’re saying aren’t good enough and still managed to win 5 games. He gets to watch Ridder practice week in and week out. He gets to watch Mariota do inexplicably bad things on Sundays and you mean to tell me he believes that gives us the best chance to win? 

This is exactly what makes no sense to me. 

Is Ridder a worse QB that Mariota? And if he is not, why has he not been on the field for some VERY winnable games?

Something just does not add up at all.

[Falcanuck]

Why are we making threads like this before he even takes a snap? If he balls out, it will be easy to cite the waiting period as overwhelmingly positive. 

[Bunchy Carter]

7 hours ago, PriMeTiiMe said:

Matt Ryan was a top 5 pick. Desmond Ridder was a 3rd round pick.

Not saying Ridder could not have started week 1 but it's just completely different expectations when you compare those 2 different places of being drafted.

To my mind, draft position is only important as it relates to financial investment. Once the hype is done and the picks are made, they've still gotta play.

There's so many examples of high level picks sucking, and no name draftees becoming household names until I no longer put a lot of stock into where a guy is drafted.

I'm also not a guy who cares a lot about contracts, salary cap etc. So I'm happy to let Fontenot worry about draft slotting, salary cap, contracts etc.

[Falconcheff]

7 hours ago, SwampyMux12 said:

I've always kind of been on the fence about whether or not sitting a rookie QB actually helps. It used to be common practice for teams to sit a QB to have them "learn". Heck, John Elway, Dan Marino, and Joe Montana all sat for at least part of their rookie season (Elway actually split time with Steve Deberg, but played in 11 games and Montana sat for the better part of 2 seasons).

Anyway, Elway was terrible his rookie year 47% passing, 7 td 14 int and he still had a HOF career. Akili Smith and David Klinger in the long line of Bengals QB failures, sat for most of their rookie year and were still awful and flamed out in a few seasons.

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that either a QB has it, or they don't. And I don't really believe that sitting, or not sitting effects that. I don't think sitting for a season always makes a QB better, I don't think starting them right away ruins them. Derek Carr started every game his rookie year, went 3-13, it didn't break him.

Everyone always points to David Carr getting sacked almost 80 times his rookie year and how that "broke" him. Maybe David Carr just wasn't that good of a QB? He was only sacked like 15 times his 2nd season and he was still bad. 

I think Mariota was starting no matter what, and I think he did a solid job up until the 2nd Carolina game. IMO, that should have been his last start. Heck, his body language on the field during the 2nd half of that game looked like a he expected it to be his last stand... Ridder should have started vs Chicago against a weaker defense after a mini bye - Mariota has been a dead man walking for a few weeks.

So long story short, we need to find out if Ridder has it or he doesn't. We should have had the opportunity to know that by now, but AS was too bullheaded on Mariota and fell into the "we're still in the playoff hunt" trap at the expense of finding that out. The fact that he sat most of his rookie year, IMO, has no bearing on whether or not he will become a good QB some day.

Playing the actual game is I think such a small part of being a rookie...

Dealing with millions of dollars as a kid...

Dealing with football as a JOB rather than a pasttime...

The rigorous demands of the media...

We have to remember that sudden fame, fortune, responsibility,etc can take a toll on some these kids...look at our own situation...Ridder is coming in with expectations BY SOME to be the savior of the season, of the franchise, etc...

Being a rookie starter is so much more than Sunday gametime...

 

THAT'S what CoachAS was giving Ridder time to develop...

[Nino11]

2 hours ago, Falcanuck said:

Why are we making threads like this before he even takes a snap? If he balls out, it will be easy to cite the waiting period as overwhelmingly positive. 

This thread was made before he was announced the starter 

[RunningThePiszOuttaTheBall]

8 hours ago, popeyez_biscuits said:

Yeah, and Smith wasn't all that much better than Mariota.

Mariota is not worthy to wipe Alex Smith's ***.

[archanaheim]

14 hours ago, RunningThePiszOuttaTheBall said:

Mariota is not worthy to wipe Alex Smith's ***.

Let me rephrase that. Mariota's PEAK is about Alex Smith.

If Mariota was consistent, he's basically be a mobile Alex Smith.