Can Flacco avoid the sophomore jinx?

[TL24x7]

Finally, after over a dozen years of retreads, busts and journeymen, the Baltimore Ravens have discovered and developed their first real homegrown franchise quarterback.

Now, the Ravens are confident that they've finally identified a true leader that makes them competitive in the NFL arms race and an annual Super Bowl contender.

"Joe is light years ahead of where he should be, just like last year as a rookie," All-Pro middle linebacker Ray Lewis said. "Now, he understands that he is the quarterback of our team. He's always trying to fix something, tweak something that the guy should be working on. Joe is going to be Joe. Joe is staying humble."

More here...

[evade6317]

I don't think we will have to worry about Joe at all. He's as focused and as calm as a QB should be in the NFL.

[Jeremiah W]

I had never even really heard of that since most Qbs either stink or sit as rookies. I think the sophomore jinx referrs to college players who blew up as true or redshirt freshmen.

In the NFL, the overwhelming trend is for a huge improvement in year 2 from Qbs.

The second year in a new offense is alos normally an improvement accross the board because the language barrier and classroom learning time cuts into the practice efficency and film study time.

[psuasskicker]

I had never even really heard of that since most Qbs either stink or sit as rookies. I think the sophomore jinx referrs to college players who blew up as true or redshirt freshmen.

It refers to anyone at the pro level too, it's not QB specific. You don't hear it much about QBs in the NFL because most of them don't succeed in their rookie years (like you said), and because those that do tend to be very good to great QBs. I expect Flacco and Ryan will continue that trend, though Flacco's year may look average if we don't have a WR break out and play well.

I actually think it's pretty telling that with how few one-year wonder QBs there are through the history of the NFL that the QB position is one of the least "lucky" positions out there. i.e. You have to have skill to succeed, not luck. Derrick Anderson and Tommy Maddux seem to be the exception to the rule. Most often, QBs are either really good and play well for years, or they suck and never play well.

That might be worth some more in depth study on my part...

- C -

[srobert96]

It is more specific to baseball. When a rookie hitter or batter comes up to the bigs they have an advantage as the opposing players do not know their strengths and weaknesses. Can a hitter hit a low inside pitch etc. After their rookie year everyone knows the best way to attack them. Thus they will slump in their sophomore year. They either make adjustments and go on to be productive or wash out.

In football something comparable would be the rookie wall that players usually hit in games 13-16. They are typically tired from the season and opposing coordinators have seen enough film to make adjustments. Similar to the way that Shittsburgh took away the outside passing routes knowing that Flacco and Cam were not comfortable working the middle of the field.

The real challenge in football is adjusting to the speed of the game. So players usually do not start off on fire and fade. They usually struggle initially and the begin to progress or wash out.

[Dave Lap]

Most rookie QB's make their biggest strides between their first year as a starter and second year as a starter. I don't think we'll see a sophomore slump although if Mason sits out that will affect him.

There is some truth that defenses know QB's tendencies better after the first year so they can adjust, but I don't think that's nearly as big a factor in the QB learning curve as gaining a years worth of NFL starting experience.