Something to think about--rookie QBs

[Kittymama]

On Writer's Roundtable (DC.com), they were naturally discussing whether Henson should start. Babe Laufenberg was saying that the number of games he plays this season (or not) really doesn't matter. If a player has it, he has it--if he doesn't, he doesn't, & playing time in their rookie season isn't going to affect that much. Even if he doesn't play at all, the growth they experience from year 1 to year 2 is huge. He had an interesting stat to think about:

1999 was a big year for QBs in the draft--5 went in the first 13 picks. For the top 5:
--Tim Couch, Akili Smith, & Cade McNall (sp?) all had extensive playing experience in year one. None are still in the league (maybe Couch in a very diminished role).
--Donovan McNabb didn't play until game 10 of his first season
--Daunte Culpepper DIDN'T PLAY AT ALL

[mute_city]

Wow, that is a great stat to think about. Everybody wants a Roethlisburger, though.

[joseephuss]

Culpepper was on a playoff team. He benefitted from watching an experienced bet from the sideline for the year. Any playing time he would have gotten would have lessened teams chances at the playoffs.

Cleveland was starting over as an expansion team. It made sense to start Couch just like it made sense for Aikman to start when Dallas was re-building.

Cincy was and always is rebuilding, so that is why Smith started. Babe brought up a good point, either a QB has it or not and both Smith and Mcknown did not. It wouldn't have mattered if they both sat for a year. Both did get to sit and watch eventually and still could not do anything.

It would be a good idea to get Henson playing time at Thanksgiving. The team is now officially re-building. He is not the savior for this season, but he can be the savior for the future. Unlike Aikman, Henson will have a good O-line to start his career. They have done a good job protecting Vinny, so he won't get killed.

[TruBlueCowboy]

On Writer's Roundtable (DC.com), they were naturally discussing whether Henson should start. Babe Laufenberg was saying that the number of games he plays this season (or not) really doesn't matter. If a player has it, he has it--if he doesn't, he doesn't, & playing time in their rookie season isn't going to affect that much. Even if he doesn't play at all, the growth they experience from year 1 to year 2 is huge. He had an interesting stat to think about:

1999 was a big year for QBs in the draft--5 went in the first 13 picks. For the top 5:
--Tim Couch, Akili Smith, & Cade McNall (sp?) all had extensive playing experience in year one. None are still in the league (maybe Couch in a very diminished role).
--Donovan McNabb didn't play until game 10 of his first season
--Daunte Culpepper DIDN'T PLAY AT ALL

I think those guys benefit in the same way Roethlisberger has. Culpepper may have set out his first year but when he did play, he had Randy Moss and Cris Carter to throw the ball to as well as Robert Smith running it. That was a pretty good veteran offensive line too. McNabb wasn't all that great until Reid and company built the Eagles to what they are now. He never had a lot of offensive weapons around him but he did have a pretty scary defense helping him for a few of his first years.

[Gah]

Sitting down rookie QBs is ALWAYS the better plan, IMO. But when your starter is playing like crap or is merely playing OK and is NOT leading the team to touchdowns, you gotta get someone else in there to try and turn things around. Im not a big fan of starting Henson just to see him play; I didnt want to see him hit the field now, but Vinny just isn't getting the job done. Mort made a good point on the ESPN run-up to the MNF game; Dallas is 9th or 10th in overall offense, but is 24th or 25th in scoring. We move it just fine in between the 20s; both running and passing. But we go no further, and I think the blame for that falls on the shoulders of the leader of the offense; the QB. Let's get Henson in there, not to see what he can do, but because we have to do SOMETHING. Vinny just isn't working.

[Kittymama]

I think those guys benefit in the same way Roethlisberger has. Culpepper may have set out his first year but when he did play, he had Randy Moss and Cris Carter to throw the ball to as well as Robert Smith running it. That was a pretty good veteran offensive line too. McNabb wasn't all that great until Reid and company built the Eagles to what they are now. He never had a lot of offensive weapons around him but he did have a pretty scary defense helping him for a few of his first years.

Which kind of speaks to Parcells' comments yesterday. Wouldn't it make more sense to hold Henson until he has more receivers to throw to? As well as a running game? Right now, he really only has Johnson, Morgan (I think is finally back), & Witten. If he waits until next year, Glenn would be back, along with some potential top-level draftees, plus a returned JuJo & maybe additional RBs. Heck, even by later this year, Clayton & Williams may actually be catching balls, & JuJo would be back.

[junk]

Which kind of speaks to Parcells' comments yesterday. Wouldn't it make more sense to hold Henson until he has more receivers to throw to? As well as a running game? Right now, he really only has Johnson, Morgan (I think is finally back), & Witten. If he waits until next year, Glenn would be back, along with some potential top-level draftees, plus a returned JuJo & maybe additional RBs. Heck, even by later this year, Clayton & Williams may actually be catching balls, & JuJo would be back.

I still think the Seattle game is a likely candidate for Henson to see some PT. It makes sense anyway. I would like him to have 2-3 games knowing he is the starter where the team can game plan an offense around his strengths, where he can prepare with the starters all week for the bulk of the snaps and where he has the benefit of Julius Jones and a healthy Morgan. I also think it would be terribly funny if the team could somehow keep it under wraps until game time when Henson trots out under center.