David Carr?

[pbmax]

Do we know anything about the 49ers front office, how can you say what level of input McCarthy had?

And why does the fact that McCarthy had Smith rated over Rodgers mean Rodgers is incapable? There can't be two starting QBs in a draft?

Last one, are you aware that there is an Urban Meyer - QB system curse in effect now? Does that mean McCarthy would be back in San Fran urging the team to dump Smith and sign Brad Johnson (Florida State QB curse)?

C'mon.

No way Sherman had anything to do with the Rodgers pick. Think about it, picking Rodgers goes against everything we know to be true about Sherman (e.g. he drafts for the now, good QB's projects can be taken in later rounds, etc). Ingle Martin in the 5th? Once you get down that far, the GM is going to have a lot less to say about the pick and look more to his coaches and scouts for guidance. As far as Smith in San Fransisco, McCarthy did play a large role in that decision because of his background with QB's.

[Merlin]

How is it that failure by the GM to cut someone we don't like is almost immediately converted into the pernicious character flaw "can't admit he was wrong"?

Aaron Rodgers has been a professional QB for two years and has not started. The fact that he is still on the roster is proof Thompson can't admit a mistake?

Where are Taco Wallace and Matt O'Dwyer?

They weren't number one overall picks and you of course must know that teams all to often stick to that number one pick come hell or high water. Unfortunately the Packers have as well, many times over the years. TT will never admit he made a mistake with Rodgers. Just because he is on the roster is not a sign that he is any good, just a sign he was a high draft pick. We got the run down on Taco Wallace and Matt O'Dwyer the second they stunk up the place. Yet, we don't hear much about Rodgers, good or bad. You hear the same old "he's got a lot of potential" garbage but they say that about most players. The fact that they aren't singing kudo's about him every second of every day like they did with Greg Jennings should be telling you that they don't really think that highly of him. You don't really expect them to come out and say "whoops" do you?

[vince]

Obviously the decision to pick up Rodgers wasn't Mike Sherman's when he was with Green Bay.In fact it was TT's first draft pick for the Packers. Carr was cut from Houston who's offensive coordinator happens to be Mike Sherman. Since Carr and Rodgers are cut from the same mold and play remarkably similar I would say that Sherman doesn't believe in that system (among many many other coaches in the NFL). The 49er's passed up on Rodgers in favor of Alex Smith by who? Then offensive coordinator Mike McCarthy who has a knack for bringing up QB's. Enter McCarthy in Green Bay. Nall is let go and Ingle Martin is drafted in the 5th round (148th Pick) overall. So it's easy to see who made this call, not TT, McCarthy. He liked what he saw although he agreed he was raw.

Because Aaron Rodgers was the #1 overall pick in 2005, McCarthy the new head coach has no choice but to see what he has in him (the fact that TT won't admit he screwed up plays into it as well). Martin does not get the opportunities that he needs to prove otherwise. McCarthy numerous times talks about the potential of Martin but only states a few niceties about Rodgers.

If you can't put two and two together to see it equals four then I guess it stands to reason that the only argument you can bring is to revert to some kind of childish name calling ritual. I guess when articles are published I must be the only one that reads them and actually thinks about it instead of saying "idiots"...

Merlin, I apologize for insinuating that you were spewing idiocy. However, please re-read your statement. You state these things as facts.

They're not. They're complete conjecture on your part.

Perhaps Sherman WAS high on Rodgers, but feels that Carr makes poor decisions. Neither you nor anyone but the people directly involved know this.

You don't know that McCarthy doesn't think Rodgers has the potential to lead the team. Every statement I've heard from him indicates just the opposite.

Your complete conjecture that McCarthy is higher on Martin than Rodgers based on your interpretation of how many accolades he's delivered on each of their behalf is not only pure speculation, but HIGHLY questionable speculation at that.

I'd love to see Martin beat out Rodgers for the back-up QB job, or see Rodgers traded away for Moss. That would be a clear indication of the truth of the speculation you position as fact.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about - since you believe your theories and speculation are truths. Bring the articles, if you can.

Then you can say two and two equals four. With your "facts" above, you're adding one and one and getting fifteen.

I know it's hard for people to analyze things to the extent that I do. That isn't a cut on you or anyone else, that's just how it is, I over analyze everything (ask my wife it drives her nuts). And you are right that it may be part speculation on my part but it doesn't take much to look at the parties involved, know how they work and come up with a viable analysis that contains mostly fact. Sherman would be scared shitless to draft a QB that high because he doesn't coach them well and he always drafts for need even if his analysis is way off on the pick at times. TT is not going to trust the number one overall pick to anyone but himself. By the 5th round, he is asking for ideas. McCarthy watched Martin in a combine and liked what he saw. Martin probably wouldn't have been taken at all in the draft had McCarthy not liked him. He is from Furman, who the hell ever even heard of the guy until McCarthy brought his name up back then? Contrary to popular belief, McCarthy did go to combo's and watch players. Nall didn't fit for whatever reason, I wish I knew that one because he was a viable backup if nothing else. You can call it speculative all you want and that's fine. In order to make heads or tales of anything the front office does you need to look deep, analyze everything and come to a conclusion. I call it fact because that's what I see, it isn't what someone else said.

Merlin, FWIW don't be too proud of yourself. This isn't part speculation on your part. It's ALL speculation, and it's highly questionable. To believe it's fact, and to state it as such is both arrogant and ignorant.

[HarveyWallbangers]

Ingle Martin played at Florida before transferring to Furman--because of Chris Leak. He was highly recruited out of high school. He was invited to the combine--where his measurables were well above average. I'm sure every NFL scout knew who he was.

[Packnut]

Do we know anything about the 49ers front office, how can you say what level of input McCarthy had?

And why does the fact that McCarthy had Smith rated over Rodgers mean Rodgers is incapable? There can't be two starting QBs in a draft?

Last one, are you aware that there is an Urban Meyer - QB system curse in effect now? Does that mean McCarthy would be back in San Fran urging the team to dump Smith and sign Brad Johnson (Florida State QB curse)?

C'mon.

No way Sherman had anything to do with the Rodgers pick. Think about it, picking Rodgers goes against everything we know to be true about Sherman (e.g. he drafts for the now, good QB's projects can be taken in later rounds, etc). Ingle Martin in the 5th? Once you get down that far, the GM is going to have a lot less to say about the pick and look more to his coaches and scouts for guidance. As far as Smith in San Fransisco, McCarthy did play a large role in that decision because of his background with QB's.

Is'nt it a tad pre-mature to claim there is an "Urban Meyer QB system curse"? I don't think anyone expected Harris to be an outstanding QB. As for Smith, it's foolish to say he won't make it at this point. I'd be willing to wager anyone that his stats and play improve this season. There also is a big difference with Smith and Leak. Go back and examine the talent level Smith had at Utah. It was not in the least bit impressive. Smith made that offense better. Leak has talent around him so the same cannot be said.

Rodgers on the other hand did have some talent around him. He had a big play WR who I believe ended up injured towards the end of his career. Cal also had a very good O line and run game. Being a degenerate college football gambler, I saw plenty of games involving both Smith and Rodgers and there really was no comparison.

[Partial]

i've never once heard TT compare two players and give one more praise than the other. That's foolish to say that they hype up Greg Jennings. That is the media, not the organization. It is in their best interest to downplay everyones talents.

[vince]

An old, but good, article on the subject of Tedford system QB's:

Rodgers joins the Tedford Five

Jeff Tedford's star QB pupils have hardly taken the NFL by storm By Trent Modglin (tmodglin@pfwmedia.com)

Between Janet’s supposed “wardrobe malfunction” at the Super Bowl two years ago and, more currently, Michael’s controversial court case, the Jackson Five has had nowhere to hide from its critics in the media.

Neither has the “Tedford Five,” but for far different reasons.

The head of the family for the Tedford Five is Jeff Tedford, head coach at the University of California and longtime offensive guru on the West Coast’s collegiate scene. Wherever he goes, gaudy offensive numbers seem to follow. It’s what he does best.

The Tedford Five is made up of Trent Dilfer, Akili Smith, David Carr, Joey Harrington and Kyle Boller, the five current quarterbacks in the NFL who were under the tutelage of Tedford while serving as big men on campus. Needless to say, the Tedford Five has not had any hit records. No Grammys, no blockbuster tours, not much of anything to stir the pages of Rolling Stone or get MTV abuzz.

For the most part, they’ve lacked the stage presence necessary to hit it big. You could say they’ve struggled thus far, and with Cal’s Aaron Rodgers, another Tedford protege, primed to be an early pick on Saturday, everyone wants to know why, reasonable concerns that they are.

Typically, the passers selected in the first round of the draft are destined to find themselves under a heap of pressure to try to resurrect flawed teams with surrounding casts that are, shall we say, less than desirable. Things can start off rocky, and often do. But if the talent and mind for the game are prevalent, things usually even out and careers begin an upswing.

Not so with the Tedford Five. Collectively, they have a 98-127 record as starting quarterbacks in the NFL. They’ve completed a paltry 54.6 percent of their passes and thrown 28 more interceptions than touchdowns. Numbers not worth writing home about to be sure.

Sure, Dilfer tasted Super Bowl success with Baltimore following the 2000 season, but with the Ravens’ dominating defense and workhorse RB Jamal Lewis, Dilfer hardly was asked to put an undaring offense on his shoulders. He served more as gatekeeper than anything else. He was cast aside after the victory parade, and since then has mainly served as a backup in Seattle before being traded to Cleveland this offseason.

Smith, a bust of epic proportions after being drafted third overall by the Bengals in 1999, has thrown five touchdowns in 17 career starts. By comparison, Peyton Manning threw for five scores on three different occasions last year. Once, he decided to toss a half-dozen. Smith, his career on its last legs, has been allocated to NFL Europe by the Buccaneers to try to scoop up the pieces of his shattered confidence.

It’s far too early to pull the plug on the other three, but patience is a virtue not always afforded to players in our modern version of the NFL. And Carr, the No. 1 overall pick in 2002, Harrington, the third that same year and Boller, the 19th pick in 2003, can’t exactly be accused of abusing defensive backs to this point despite plenty of starting experience. Lofty expectations have yet to be met, or for that matter, even approached.

All of these pupils of Tedford’s system have in the past been quick to circle the wagons in his defense. Rodgers, who threw for 43 TD passes and 13 interceptions in his two years at the helm in Berkeley and completed 23 consecutive passes against top-ranked USC in 2004, has said the criticisms of his former coach’s teachings are unfounded, mostly “manufactured.”

Tedford provides a solid foundation and trains quarterbacks to make quick reads in a complex West Coast offense, they say. Even involves them in game planning. Tedford himself says he has never been informed by NFL decision-makers that there is any particular element holding his guys back once they reach the next level. No lack of fundamentals, no shortage of seasoning, no problems picking up the intricacies of the position. Nothing glaring. No red flags to speak of.

That much seems somewhat evident, based on where his prodigies continue to get drafted. So why the disparity? Why doesn’t the eye-popping collegiate success in Tedford’s system translate over into smooth 80-yard drives and highlight-reel touchdowns in the NFL?

Are these guys too mechanical? Do they have trouble adjusting out of the comfort level of Tedford’s high-percentage lesson plans and into a new offense that requires taking more chances? Are they overrated as “system quarterbacks” only to be overwhelmed at the next level?

Listen to the opinion recently offered to PFW by a veteran league scout.

“I've evaulated four Tedford quarterbacks, and none of them have pissed a drop in the league,” he said. “That scares me. Kyle Boller was not even a 50 percent career passer when Tedford got ahold of him, and look what he is now in the pros.”

In case you’re keeping score at home, that’s not a compliment. Boller’s accuracy hasn’t earned rave reviews. But it gets better. Or worse, depending on how you look at it.

“They don't throw the ball downfield a lot in Tedford's offense. Look at Joey Harrington now. He doesn’t keep his eyes downfield. He looks to dump everything off. He gets impatient in the pocket. Akili Smith only had one good year of football, and it was with Tedford (then at Oregon State). Tedford simplifies the game and gets so much out of his quarterbacks. No one in the NFL has been able to get the same out of them as he has."

And that is scary. In the four games this scout watched Rodgers play as a collegian, he was sacked 16 times. He believes Rodgers will have a tough time escaping an NFL pass rush and isn’t overly athletic. While his arm strength is considered good, Rodgers threw the ball downfield twice in the four games the scout watched. We’ve heard from a few reliable NFL people that Rodgers is more of a late-first or possibly even early second-round talent who is being pushed way up the board because franchise-type quarterbacks in this draft are scarce.

But what about these NFL coaches who have had the “Tedford Five” under their supervision? They shouldn’t exactly be allowed to slip out the door when fingers start getting pointed in blame. Does the learning process suddenly come to a grinding halt? If they’re talented enough to be coached to rack up big numbers by Tedford, why can’t they be once they start getting the big bucks to play the same game?

“I know our staff wants guys who do not need a lot of seasoning,” one AFC coach said, suggesting that maybe Tedford’s guys do in fact need an extra dose. “We want guys who can step in and compete right away and don't need to be taught mechanics. Coaching schemes and assignments is a far cry from teaching technique. The good coaching staffs in this league — and the teams you see going to the Super Bowl — are the teams that do both. I think that's a big problem around here and on many staffs. Not enough attention is paid to coaching players. You can ask players. I think a lot of them will tell you they got more individual coaching in college. In my opinion, that's why there's a dropoff with ‘Tedford quarterbacks.’ "

So maybe it’s not just Tedford quarterbacks. Maybe he gets a bad rap because, after all, he’s trying to win college games. Maybe it’s Spurrier quarterbacks too. Plenty of others have had problems. Ever see David Klingler or Ryan Leaf? Maybe it’s these “Tedford passers” not getting the same individual attention from their pro coaches. Maybe successful quarterbacking is more about being in the right place at the right time, sticking it out until everything eventually comes together and kids suddenly go scrambling for your jerseys and posters and a table is suddenly reserved for you at the hottest restaurant in town.

Then again, maybe the Tedford Five will have to make room for another chair at the table. Let’s give Rodgers ample time before making a final decision on his worth, though. The NFL on its own doesn’t consent to much as it is, so we probably should.

[pbmax]

Packnut, I was exaggerating a complaint I saw a scout state about both Smith and Leak. I don't buy it, or the Tedford curse, I was just trying to tweak the argument that you would make a personnel decision, after acquiring the player, based on a "curse".

Do we know anything about the 49ers front office, how can you say what level of input McCarthy had?

And why does the fact that McCarthy had Smith rated over Rodgers mean Rodgers is incapable? There can't be two starting QBs in a draft?

Last one, are you aware that there is an Urban Meyer - QB system curse in effect now? Does that mean McCarthy would be back in San Fran urging the team to dump Smith and sign Brad Johnson (Florida State QB curse)?

C'mon.

No way Sherman had anything to do with the Rodgers pick. Think about it, picking Rodgers goes against everything we know to be true about Sherman (e.g. he drafts for the now, good QB's projects can be taken in later rounds, etc). Ingle Martin in the 5th? Once you get down that far, the GM is going to have a lot less to say about the pick and look more to his coaches and scouts for guidance. As far as Smith in San Fransisco, McCarthy did play a large role in that decision because of his background with QB's.

Is'nt it a tad pre-mature to claim there is an "Urban Meyer QB system curse"? I don't think anyone expected Harris to be an outstanding QB. As for Smith, it's foolish to say he won't make it at this point. I'd be willing to wager anyone that his stats and play improve this season. There also is a big difference with Smith and Leak. Go back and examine the talent level Smith had at Utah. It was not in the least bit impressive. Smith made that offense better. Leak has talent around him so the same cannot be said.

Rodgers on the other hand did have some talent around him. He had a big play WR who I believe ended up injured towards the end of his career. Cal also had a very good O line and run game. Being a degenerate college football gambler, I saw plenty of games involving both Smith and Rodgers and there really was no comparison.

[Merlin]

Obviously the decision to pick up Rodgers wasn't Mike Sherman's when he was with Green Bay.In fact it was TT's first draft pick for the Packers. Carr was cut from Houston who's offensive coordinator happens to be Mike Sherman. Since Carr and Rodgers are cut from the same mold and play remarkably similar I would say that Sherman doesn't believe in that system (among many many other coaches in the NFL). The 49er's passed up on Rodgers in favor of Alex Smith by who? Then offensive coordinator Mike McCarthy who has a knack for bringing up QB's. Enter McCarthy in Green Bay. Nall is let go and Ingle Martin is drafted in the 5th round (148th Pick) overall. So it's easy to see who made this call, not TT, McCarthy. He liked what he saw although he agreed he was raw.

Because Aaron Rodgers was the #1 overall pick in 2005, McCarthy the new head coach has no choice but to see what he has in him (the fact that TT won't admit he screwed up plays into it as well). Martin does not get the opportunities that he needs to prove otherwise. McCarthy numerous times talks about the potential of Martin but only states a few niceties about Rodgers.

If you can't put two and two together to see it equals four then I guess it stands to reason that the only argument you can bring is to revert to some kind of childish name calling ritual. I guess when articles are published I must be the only one that reads them and actually thinks about it instead of saying "idiots"...

Merlin, I apologize for insinuating that you were spewing idiocy. However, please re-read your statement. You state these things as facts.

They're not. They're complete conjecture on your part.

Perhaps Sherman WAS high on Rodgers, but feels that Carr makes poor decisions. Neither you nor anyone but the people directly involved know this.

You don't know that McCarthy doesn't think Rodgers has the potential to lead the team. Every statement I've heard from him indicates just the opposite.

Your complete conjecture that McCarthy is higher on Martin than Rodgers based on your interpretation of how many accolades he's delivered on each of their behalf is not only pure speculation, but HIGHLY questionable speculation at that.

I'd love to see Martin beat out Rodgers for the back-up QB job, or see Rodgers traded away for Moss. That would be a clear indication of the truth of the speculation you position as fact.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about - since you believe your theories and speculation are truths. Bring the articles, if you can.

Then you can say two and two equals four. With your "facts" above, you're adding one and one and getting fifteen.

I know it's hard for people to analyze things to the extent that I do. That isn't a cut on you or anyone else, that's just how it is, I over analyze everything (ask my wife it drives her nuts). And you are right that it may be part speculation on my part but it doesn't take much to look at the parties involved, know how they work and come up with a viable analysis that contains mostly fact. Sherman would be scared shitless to draft a QB that high because he doesn't coach them well and he always drafts for need even if his analysis is way off on the pick at times. TT is not going to trust the number one overall pick to anyone but himself. By the 5th round, he is asking for ideas. McCarthy watched Martin in a combine and liked what he saw. Martin probably wouldn't have been taken at all in the draft had McCarthy not liked him. He is from Furman, who the hell ever even heard of the guy until McCarthy brought his name up back then? Contrary to popular belief, McCarthy did go to combo's and watch players. Nall didn't fit for whatever reason, I wish I knew that one because he was a viable backup if nothing else. You can call it speculative all you want and that's fine. In order to make heads or tales of anything the front office does you need to look deep, analyze everything and come to a conclusion. I call it fact because that's what I see, it isn't what someone else said.

Merlin, FWIW don't be too proud of yourself. This isn't part speculation on your part. It's ALL speculation, and it's highly questionable. To believe it's fact, and to state it as such is both arrogant and ignorant.

Proud of myself? Ignorant and Arrogant? THAT has to be the most stereotypical and inaccurate thing I have ever read in reference to myself. Just because you don't like something (or reality for that matter) doesn't mean it's wrong and doesn't mean it isn't factual. When you learn how to argue in an appropriate way (that would be like an adult) without name calling (which evidently is your M.O. when you have nothing to offer) and stereotypical responses, let me know. Until then, you just aren't worth it.

[MadtownPacker]

All of you are ignorant for quoting mutiple post instead of just the one you are responding to.

All the damn scrolling is giving me carpal.

[Merlin]

Although I don't believe in a "curse", the statistics for Tedford QB's don't lie. He runs a very quarterback friendly offense, one that is designed to be easy on the quarterback both in complexity and terminology. He also teaches each of them the same mechanics. Remember that he is teaching college quarterbacks to play the college game to win. He isn't interested in winning NFL games because he doesn't coach at that level. It is a well known FACT that his quarterbacks don't translate into good NFL quarterbacks. I am sure that plays into the decision somewhat when teams are drafting them. Mad has an article that I wrote that has a quote from an article that says something like this: "There is always a GM who thinks he can do better with a Tedford QB than anyone prior". I also quoted the article that Vince used. Of course Vince only highlighted the portions of the article that support Tedford QB's and ignored the basis for the article which is that they aren't very good and haven't amounted to anything in the NFL. I think the title of the article alone would tell one what it's about but then again, reality never seems to sink in t some people.

What is open for speculation is whether or not NFL coaches can coach a Tedford QB. I would argue that with how many Tedford QB's that have gone into the NFL and how many different coaching staffs that have worked with those QB's that at least one of them would have had some luck.

[Merlin]

All of you are ignorant for quoting mutiple post instead of just the one you are responding to.

All the damn scrolling is giving me carpal.

I don't think the mouse is the source of your carpal tunnel Mad~!

[vince]

Merlin I am pulling a quote here from another thread.

Your "reality" is far from real. That's my whole point. You say McCarthy doesn't like Rodgers. He says the opposite. Who should we believe?

QUOTE FROM MIKE MCCARTHY ABOUT AARON RODGERS: He knows how we feel about him. We're not blind to the fact that you're always trying to improve through player acquisition. But Aaron Rodgers, I think he has a bright future here. He's going to take over one of the toughest situations ever (succeeding Favre). It's my job and Tom Clements' job and Joe Philbin's job to get him ready.

Not much fluff there. I'd say that's pretty direct and to the point. That's the most direct statement by Mike McCarthy he could possibly make.

People who believe Rodgers sucks dismiss these reports as fluff. Those who believe he has potential put credence in them. But regardless of which side of the fence you're personally on, you can't legitimately deny that McCarthy hasn't made his opinion clear.

It's an incredible stretch to say that McCarthy believes anything other than what comes out of his mouth - especially when it's as clear-cut as this.

I don't think anyone can mistake what is said there. Mike McCarthy believes Aaron Rodgers has a bright future, and that he is the heir-apparent to Brett Favre. What else could he possibly say that would be any more clear?

To speculate that he's lying to the media because TT is forcing his hand is a stretch to say the least, and if that were the case, I don't think he'd be as direct as he was with this reporter.

[Merlin]

Merlin I am pulling a quote here from another thread.

Your "reality" is far from real. That's my whole point. You say McCarthy doesn't like Rodgers. He says the opposite. Who should we believe?

QUOTE FROM MIKE MCCARTHY ABOUT AARON RODGERS: He knows how we feel about him. We're not blind to the fact that you're always trying to improve through player acquisition. But Aaron Rodgers, I think he has a bright future here. He's going to take over one of the toughest situations ever (succeeding Favre). It's my job and Tom Clements' job and Joe Philbin's job to get him ready.

Not much fluff there. I'd say that's pretty direct and to the point. That's the most direct statement by Mike McCarthy he could possibly make.

People who believe Rodgers sucks dismiss these reports as fluff. Those who believe he has potential put credence in them. But regardless of which side of the fence you're personally on, you can't legitimately deny that McCarthy hasn't made his opinion clear.

It's an incredible stretch to say that McCarthy believes anything other than what comes out of his mouth - especially when it's as clear-cut as this.

I don't think anyone can mistake what is said there. Mike McCarthy believes Aaron Rodgers has a bright future, and that he is the heir-apparent to Brett Favre. What else could he possibly say that would be any more clear?

To speculate that he's lying to the media because TT is forcing his hand is a stretch to say the least, and if that were the case, I don't think he'd be as direct as he was with this reporter.

No generic comment from McCarthy there, nope none at all. What do you expect him to say? He sucks and I want someone else? In fact, when was the last time you heard any coach from any organization tell the media, "yeah he sucks" about any player on the roster? Even Ryan Leaf got the benefit of the doubt.

[pbmax]

Most college QBs struggle in the pros. If you were to argue that Tedford's success in passing in college causes his QBs to be overrated, I could understand that argument.

But nothing you mention (coaching to WIN college games, less complicated, more QB friendly offense, different mechanics) is unique to Tedford. You could lay these accusations accurately at any college coordinator who emphasizes the pass.

Most college QBs fail. Many first round QBs fail. Blaming Tedford is mistaking correlation for cause.

I mentioned the Meyer QB complaint earlier. Spurrier QBs have also had similar trouble. Including where the ball was held.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a QB from one of these systems. If you evaluate the physical aspects correctly, its no different than selecting any other QB.

="Merlin"]Although I don't believe in a "curse", the statistics for Tedford QB's don't lie. He runs a very quarterback friendly offense, one that is designed to be easy on the quarterback both in complexity and terminology. He also teaches each of them the same mechanics. Remember that he is teaching college quarterbacks to play the college game to win. He isn't interested in winning NFL games because he doesn't coach at that level. It is a well known FACT that his quarterbacks don't translate into good NFL quarterbacks.