NFL 2011: Should Young Quarterbacks Start Right Away?

The common perception when a team drafts a young quarterback is not to throw him into the fire immediately. Let him hold a clipboard and learn the ropes from a veteran for a few years, then he'll be ready to handle the heat of the NFL.

We have seen some teams take the other approach and thrust their young signal-caller right into life as a starting quarterback in the NFL. There has been success with both approaches, as well as failures. So, which approach is best?

Looking at the recent success of young quarterbacks in the league, the common trend is to start your newly drafted young gunslinger as soon as possible.  

Take a look at two young NFC South QB's: Matt Ryan of the Atlanta Falcons and Cam Newton of the Carolina Panthers. Ryan and Newton were thrown in as starters for their team from the first game of their rookie seasons. The organizations were left with no other choice but to start them, as their previous quarterback situations were very dismal.  So far, Ryan and Newton have done well in their starting roles and have given their teams a franchise quarterback to trust in.

There's also the other side of the coin, which is to let your prized possession sit and learn for a few years. A clear example of this is Green Bay Packers' quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers learned from the sidelines as he watched Brett Favre play. After Favre retired, the first time, Rodgers was given the reigns to the Packers and has not looked back since.

Rodgers sitting behind Favre wasn't necessarily because he wasn't ready, but because there was no need to put in Rodgers while the Packers still had Favre playing at a high level.

Take a look at rookie Christian Ponder, who got his first start against the Packers this past Sunday. Being thrown into the fire against the defending Super Bowl champions is a pretty daunting task for a rookie in his first game, but Ponder looked good and played well overall. He was able to move the offense down the field and put points on the board.

Eli Manning did not start out as the New York Giants' quarterback from the first game of the 2004 season but, by the halfway point, he emerged as the team's starter.

For a young quarterback, it all depends on the situation they fall into. Some may be fortunate enough to hold the clipboard for a couple of years and watch a veteran play, as Rodgers did. Others may have no choice but to start right away, as with Newton.

Despite the situation, some young quarterbacks have all the intangibles to make them an effective quarterback in the league right away, while others do not.

So, which approach works best? It all depends on the situation the quarterback falls into. They could sit a few years and still not be good enough to be a starting quarterback in the NFL. Or they could start from the onset and just not have what it takes to lead an organization. On the other side of things, they could excel no matter how long they have to wait, if at all.

What do you think? Is it best for a young quarterback to gain first-hand experience and start immediately, or should they sit back and learn for a few years?