Peter King makes Burrow / Carr comparison

[Tony]

https://bengalswire.usatoday.com/2020/10/13/peter-king-worries-joe-burrow-david-carr-comparison/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=NFLdraftmaverickMike

Gotta say, I totally agree. Nothing like drafting a QB #1OA and not make any attempt to protect them. ..

[jj22]

I think it's closer to a Luck situation if the hits add up as the years go.

[jfkbengals]

(10-14-2020, 10:29 PM)jj22 Wrote: I think it's closer to a Luck situation if the hits add up as the years go.

The number of sacks so far is much closer to Carr than Luck.  Joe is on pace for 75 sacks this season, one under Carr's record.  Luck maxed out at 41 (although he had it twice).

[jj22]

It was the hits that hurt Luck who was a tough QB who embraced them much like Burrow. Those do add up moreso then the sacks.

None are good for the longevity of a career.

[*Nately120*]

Burrow has a long way to go before he gets Carr-ed, but I'll admit the Steelers games could look awfully grim.

[Murdock2420]

(10-14-2020, 10:54 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Burrow has a long way to go before he gets Carr-ed, but I'll admit the Steelers games could look awfully grim.

Which one.. 

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

(10-14-2020, 10:29 PM)jj22 Wrote: I think it's closer to a Luck situation if the hits add up as the years go.

Luck was ~75% self inflicted. Dude loved to hang onto the ball and not slide or avoid big hits.

https://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/205950/colts-on-andrew-luck-finally-sliding-to-avoid-hits-hes-reluctantly-accepting-it

That's from his 5th year in the NFL. Just finally starting to slide a little. 

It's why Russell Wilson is going to last. The guy is smart because he learned in his first two years that if you want to hang around and be healthy in the NFL for a long time, you need to avoid taking big hits. Unless it's 4th and 1 with the game on the line or something, it's not worth taking a big hit for that extra yard. He gets sacked a lot, but it's rarely a big hit. I don't know how much of that is him being a baseball player so he knows how to slide, but it's the difference.

It's why you see Cam Newton built like a superhero and still breaking down because he didn't avoid hits.
It's why you see Ben Roethlisberger has only played 16 games in a season 4 times in the last 16 years because he didn't avoid hits.

Meanwhile Russell Wilson is 5'11 and hasn't missed a game going on his 9th career year despite averaging 90 rushes and 43 sacks a season. He avoids big hits.

Joe Burrow needs to watch Wilson tape and learn (and go to Reds Spring Training this offseason). The OL obviously needs improved, and the offensive scheme is garbage, but there's a lot Burrow can do to help himself. Of the 7 sacks last weekend, PFF had 3 of them as Burrow's own fault. We've all seen him take some meaningless stupid hits so far this season that had nothing to do with the OL but him trying to extend the play and losing track of time.

[Au165]

Randall Cunningham got sacked 277 times from 86-90, 38 times more than Carr did in his five year span, yet he went and had a long carreer. People always want to jump straight to Carr, but no one even knows what Carr was actually going to be. We like to say sacks ruined him but we know now QB's miss all the time so it's easy to say that's why but it's just as likely he wasn't any good. He came out of Fresno State with essentially one decent season under his belt and we act like he was the next Peyton Manning if not for getting hit.

I am not saying Burrow needs to be taking hits constantly, but let's relax on this idea it is some sort of predictor of a ruined career because it frankly isn't. We have simply faced some great pass rushes so far this year, and the one time we didn't (JAX) he was fine. I don't think he finishes anywhere close to 70 when it's all said and done as I see it being closer to the 58-62 mark, which will be great because then we can stop with the stupid Carr narrative.

[*SHRacerX*]

(10-14-2020, 10:54 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Burrow has a long way to go before he gets Carr-ed, but I'll admit the Steelers games could look awfully grim.

Agreed.  However, I think David Carr is getting a huge pass for his poor play.  

[CJD]

I understand the purpose of the comparison and I understand the risks of not protecting Burrow.

But the truth is Burrow is vastly more talented than Carr was. He can already read defenses and throw fantastic passes based on touch, timing and location better than many veterans.

I think Carr is a cautionary tale, but less about "ruining" a good QB by not protecting them and more about failing to allow a QB to develop by not protecting them.
Carr had some raw tools but was unable to develop them in time to be an effective starting QB and the main reason was his offensive line. But Burrow does not have that problem.

Carr was never a good player in the NFL. His best year was his third year, where he had a 61% completion percentage, 16 TDs, 14 INTs and 3531 yards for a RTG of 83.5.

Burrow will, in all likelihood, exceed those numbers in his rookie year.

So we aren't really at risk of Burrow not developing as a player like Carr did, because he's already light years ahead in terms of development. The only way Burrow goes the way of Carr is if his body is broken by the Oline, which is not something that will happen in one year. Sure, if we fail to address the Oline in the next 3 years then maybe we're looking at ruining Burrow, but we have time. We've identified the problem, so now it's time to fix it.

Houston was a tough place to play as well because it was an expansion team, so it had a lot of needs in a very short amount of time. I personally think they would have been better off sitting Carr and playing a really bad veteran QB for a season or two just because it was inevitable that they were going to be a bad team for at least 3 seasons as they built their roster. Instead, they started Carr from the very beginning and then, in their following 4 drafts, the length of time Carr was on the roster, they spent 0 first round picks, 0 second round picks and 3 third round picks on the offensive line.

I think a more appropriate comparison for Burrow is Andrew Luck. A developed, star QB who was forced into early retirement because his team similarly did not give him much offensive line support.

From 2012 to 2017, the Colts spent 0 first round picks, 1 second round pick and 2 third round picks on the offensive line, even with Luck getting pummeled that entire time.

Physical toll on Andrew Luck through 6 NFL seasons:
» Torn cartilage in 2 ribs
» partially torn abdomen
» a lacerated kidney that left him peeing blood
» at least 1 concussion
» a torn labrum in his throwing shoulder
» and this mysterious calf/ankle issue that led to this

— Zak Keefer (@zkeefer) August 25, 2019

The idea that the Colts did not fix his offensive line from 2012 to 2017 is simply insane, given how often he was injured.

They did finally draft Quentin Nelson in 2018, who has become one of the best guards in the NFL, but by then the damage had been done and Luck retired the following off season.

That is what we need to not do to Burrow. He'll take his lumps this year, but in 2021, we need to draft heavy on the offensive line AND bring in offensive line free agents. We can't let history repeat itself with Burrow. We need to protect this young man and he will be an all pro. It's just that simple.

[*PhilHos*]

(10-15-2020, 08:14 AM)Au165 Wrote: Randall Cunningham got sacked 277 times from 86-90, 38 times more than Carr did in his five year span, yet he went and had a long carreer. People always want to jump straight to Carr, but no one even knows what Carr was actually going to be. We like to say sacks ruined him but we know now QB's miss all the time so it's easy to say that's why but it's just as likely he wasn't any good. He came out of Fresno State with essentially one decent season under his belt and we act like he was the next Peyton Manning if not for getting hit.

I am not saying Burrow needs to be taking hits constantly, but let's relax on this idea it is some sort of predictor of a ruined career because it frankly isn't. We have simply faced some great pass rushes so far this year, and the one time we didn't (JAX) he was fine. I don't think he finishes anywhere close to 70 when it's all said and done as I see it being closer to the 58-62 mark, which will be great because then we can stop with the stupid Carr narrative.

(10-15-2020, 08:16 AM)SHRacerX Wrote: Agreed.  However, I think David Carr is getting a huge pass for his poor play.  

(10-15-2020, 09:12 AM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: I understand the purpose of the comparison and I understand the risks of not protecting Burrow.

But the truth is Burrow is vastly more talented than Carr was. He can already read defenses and throw fantastic passes based on touch, timing and location better than many veterans.

I think Carr is a cautionary tale, but less about "ruining" a good QB by not protecting them and more about failing to allow a QB to develop by not protecting them.
Carr had some raw tools but was unable to develop them in time to be an effective starting QB and the main reason was his offensive line. But Burrow does not have that problem.

Carr was never a good player in the NFL. His best year was his third year, where he had a 61% completion percentage, 16 TDs, 14 INTs and 3531 yards for a RTG of 83.5.

Building off of that, here's David Carr's stats from his first 5 games:
Game 1 - 10 of 22 - 45.5% 145 yards 2 TD 1 INT 78.8 rating (6 sacks)
Game 2 -  6 of 25 - 24% 87 yards 0 TD 2 INT 8.2 rating (9 sacks)
Game 3 - 12 of 22 - 54.6% 99 yards 0 TD 1 INT 47.3 rating (4 sacks)
Game 4 - 16 of 29 - 55.2% 188 yards 2 TD 2 INT 69.3 rating (7 sacks)
Game 5 - 12 of 23 - 52.2% 218 yards 1 TD 0 INT 99.5 rating (5 sakcs)
Do I even need to post Burrow's stats to show he's nowhere NEAR as bad as Carr was as a rookie?
Fact of the matter is that we need to be concerned for Burrow and hoping he doesn't get injured, but it's clear he's in no way shape or form in danger of becoming the next David Carr.

[Essex Johnson]

(10-14-2020, 10:49 PM)jj22 Wrote: It was the hits that hurt Luck who was a tough QB who embraced them much like Burrow. Those do add up moreso then the sacks.

None are good for the longevity of a career.

Got to blame Luck for part of it.. he held on to the ball as long as any QB that did not have great mobility that I can remember..

[Essex Johnson]

(10-14-2020, 09:53 PM)Tony Wrote: https://bengalswire.usatoday.com/2020/10/13/peter-king-worries-joe-burrow-david-carr-comparison/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=NFLdraftmaverickMike

Gotta say, I totally agree. Nothing like drafting a QB #1OA and not make any attempt to protect them. ..

I see it less on making no attempt and picks not worked out or our FAs have not panned out  We have 2 1st round picks and a 4th round pick on the line. Williams doing ok.. Jordan not playing well and Price is a bust.  This past draft was not a strong draft for lineman and the need for LBS was great.. Maybe we pass on Higgins for a lineman in 2nd round.. but they choose Higgins.. 3rd and 4th Lbs.. made sense.. maybe 4th round we go lineman..

As for FA.. this was a weak FA and do we want to overpay a 1 or 2 year veteran, thank god we did not sign Peters, he is done for the year  We signed Filo but went on IR..  Hart is below average and has not improved enough 

So over the last 3 years we have drafted a tackle, guard and center and signed a FA tackle that has not worked out in Hart and signed a veteran guard in Filo that was hurt game 1... So that is a complete line overhaul in 3 years problem is the picks and FAs have not worked out...

[*ochocincos*]

My worry with this current OL is that Burrow will end up with a big injury, not that he'll start being inaccurate or having a lot of turnovers.
He's proven he can be accurate and drive a team downfield even with this OL, so one has to assume he'll do even better if he had better blocking.

[*ochocincos*]

(10-15-2020, 03:42 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: Got to blame Luck for part of it.. he held on to the ball as long as any QB that did not have great mobility that I can remember..

Luck was actually a rather mobile QB to an extent.
He had 163 rushes for 957 yards in 3 college seasons.
He ran a 4.67 40 time.
In NFL, he averaged about over 250 yards per season rushing.

[shanebo]

(10-15-2020, 08:14 AM)Au165 Wrote: Randall Cunningham got sacked 277 times from 86-90, 38 times more than Carr did in his five year span, yet he went and had a long carreer. 

Randall might not be the best comparison -- love the guy, but he was notoriously injury-prone ...  Played all 16 games just 3 times in his 16-year career, and only 63% of the games in all.  Plus, he had arguably his best statistical year with the Vikings behind a better offensive line (fewer sacks) when he was more of a pocket passer (fewer hits).  So as good as Randall was, just think of what he could've been if he hadn't been sacked so many times.

Regardless, I think we all agree that priority no 1 should be to get Burrow a better o-line.

[Tony]

(10-15-2020, 01:27 AM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Luck was ~75% self inflicted. Dude loved to hang onto the ball and not slide or avoid big hits.

https://www.espn.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/205950/colts-on-andrew-luck-finally-sliding-to-avoid-hits-hes-reluctantly-accepting-it

That's from his 5th year in the NFL. Just finally starting to slide a little. 

It's why Russell Wilson is going to last. The guy is smart because he learned in his first two years that if you want to hang around and be healthy in the NFL for a long time, you need to avoid taking big hits. Unless it's 4th and 1 with the game on the line or something, it's not worth taking a big hit for that extra yard. He gets sacked a lot, but it's rarely a big hit. I don't know how much of that is him being a baseball player so he knows how to slide, but it's the difference.

It's why you see Cam Newton built like a superhero and still breaking down because he didn't avoid hits.
It's why you see Ben Roethlisberger has only played 16 games in a season 4 times in the last 16 years because he didn't avoid hits.

Meanwhile Russell Wilson is 5'11 and hasn't missed a game going on his 9th career year despite averaging 90 rushes and 43 sacks a season. He avoids big hits.

Joe Burrow needs to watch Wilson tape and learn (and go to Reds Spring Training this offseason). The OL obviously needs improved, and the offensive scheme is garbage, but there's a lot Burrow can do to help himself. Of the 7 sacks last weekend, PFF had 3 of them as Burrow's own fault. We've all seen him take some meaningless stupid hits so far this season that had nothing to do with the OL but him trying to extend the play and losing track of time.

I agree with Joe watching Some RW film.. I can't think of a QB who does this better.. I know he's gonna take some hits but 75 is just way to much. They gotta get this O line fixed next year.. IDC how they have to do it..

[Au165]

(10-16-2020, 11:04 AM)shanebo Wrote: Randall might not be the best comparison -- love the guy, but he was notoriously injury-prone ...  Played all 16 games just 3 times in his 16-year career, and only 63% of the games in all.  Plus, he had arguably his best statistical year with the Vikings behind a better offensive line (fewer sacks) when he was more of a pocket passer (fewer hits).  So as good as Randall was, just think of what he could've been if he hadn't been sacked so many times.

Regardless, I think we all agree that priority no 1 should be to get Burrow a better o-line.

Sure, but he was injury prone before getting into the NFL and the injuries itself isn't what King and many other allude to. The point being he wasn't mentally broken by the hits and neither will Burrow, which is the argument about Burrow being "Carr'd". Carr was supposedly broken mentally by it which is what is being insinuated by the comparison, there is no denying getting hurt is always possible taking hits, but the idea you get mentally broken by it isn't this forgone conclusion as the comparison is often set up to insinuate.

[Tony]

(10-15-2020, 03:55 PM)Essex Johnson Wrote: I see it less on making no attempt and picks not worked out or our FAs have not panned out  We have 2 1st round picks and a 4th round pick on the line. Williams doing ok.. Jordan not playing well and Price is a bust.  This past draft was not a strong draft for lineman and the need for LBS was great.. Maybe we pass on Higgins for a lineman in 2nd round.. but they choose Higgins.. 3rd and 4th Lbs.. made sense.. maybe 4th round we go lineman..

As for FA.. this was a weak FA and do we want to overpay a 1 or 2 year veteran, thank god we did not sign Peters, he is done for the year  We signed Filo but went on IR..  Hart is below average and has not improved enough 

So over the last 3 years we have drafted a tackle, guard and center and signed a FA tackle that has not worked out in Hart and signed a veteran guard in Filo that was hurt game 1... So that is a complete line overhaul in 3 years problem is the picks and FAs have not worked out...

If it wasn't for those guys being complete trash,  we wouldn't have Burrow.. They needed to do something as soon as they knew they were taking him. Instead they sign a bunch of Defense who are all hurt and or also trash..