Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Why drafting a QB is more likely than you think

59 posts in this topic

Posted

I'm almost positive we go QB first overall, HIV positive, even...

Only reason I think we will is because no other player will rise to the top. If there was a dominate CB or DT on the board I would not be so sure.

meh, we can't keep throwing our first pick at QB. If we take Newton, we better stick with him even if he blows next year...

Ideally he want even start till then. Every QB needs two years for the lights to fully come on. I still want to see what Clausen has but I want to have a back up plan because he seems ill fitted for the Coryell system. IMO he would be much better with a team that runs the WCO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

that's an indefinite amount of time. if he isn't ready sit him until he is, even though he may never be?

the ssoner we can get him in the game and find out what we have to work with and what to build on, the better. the sooner he can get in there and play the game, the better. the best way for him to learn is on the field in real game situations. we have to have the balls to let him in there, take his lumps, and help him really build and develop. you won't do him any favors by protecting him. everything is just theory until they start to see play time.

yeah that totally worked for guys like Aaron Rodgers, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselbeck, and Matt Cassel; you know, cause they all played substantially their first year...

wait...

oh you must be talking about Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Alex Smith, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, and Jason Campbell, cause they all started early and had great careers...

wait...

All I'm saying is that if we draft a QB, the kid needs to sit until he proves that he is ready to play. if he can't prove it, then no need to start him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

meh, we can't keep throwing our first pick at QB. If we take Newton, we better stick with him even if he blows next year...

As much as I want us to take him I hope he doesn't start next year. At least not until very late in the season if at all. No matter who we draft we will not be world beaters overnight. Progress WHOEVER we pick into the lineup at a proper pace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I would like our situation to be good enough that no matter what our quarterback situation is, we don't need to force a player into starting before they are ready. But recent history makes me worry we may not have that luxury. It may be that a rookie QB would end up starting at some point his rookie year, though hopefully not as early as Week 3.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yeah that totally worked for guys like Aaron Rodgers, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselbeck, and Matt Cassel; you know, cause they all played substantially their first year...

wait...

oh you must be talking about Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Alex Smith, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, and Jason Campbell, cause they all started early and had great careers...

wait...

All I'm saying is that if we draft a QB, the kid needs to sit until he proves that he is ready to play. if he can't prove it, then no need to start him.

This is exacetly why they will also be bringing in a Vet this offseason, somehow. Our staff will be a Vet, Clausen, and Cam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yeah that totally worked for guys like Aaron Rodgers, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselbeck, and Matt Cassel; you know, cause they all played substantially their first year...

wait...

oh you must be talking about Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Alex Smith, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, and Jason Campbell, cause they all started early and had great careers...

wait...

All I'm saying is that if we draft a QB, the kid needs to sit until he proves that he is ready to play. if he can't prove it, then no need to start him.

Well you could look at that two ways. In one way if your like the Bucs that have no vet presence and really nothing to lose by starting him then do so to see if he can produce. On the other hand if your like Pittsburgh or Cinci that had a Vet that is established you start them and let your QB learn. Either way I think the cream always rises to the top. None of our QBs including Moore ever developed with time and thats why we are in the situation we are.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

THe only way it sets you back is if you not only pick a QB but you pay him a ton of money and feel compelled to stick with him even when he plays poorly. With a rookie cap almost assured, it means that although the first pick will be expensive, it won't be the 70 million deal like Ryan got. It means that you don't end up with a guy you have to start right away or stick with no matter what. You can also bring him along which improves the chances you don't have a bust.

I would think that a bust number 1 pick hurts you anyway you go. Unless you are Detroit and get one the next year too. LOL

At some point your going to have to play him for the majority of the season regardless if he plays poorly, otherwise your stuck in limbo on knowing where you stand and what to do with him.

Also if you draft a number one Qb chances are you don't have another consistenly good QB on your roster. So even if you bench your drafted QB, your offence and team will still hampred by your number one pick's poor play.

And if because he was picked number one, its proable to assume that no other high calibur QB's were drafted or signed during that period So if the Qb ends up being a bust, you will proably be setback agian by devloping yet another QB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There may not be an elite QB in this draft, whereas there might be an elite DT.

I think by their second year Newton will be a better NFL player than Fairley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I would like our situation to be good enough that no matter what our quarterback situation is, we don't need to force a player into starting before they are ready. But recent history makes me worry we may not have that luxury. It may be that a rookie QB would end up starting at some point his rookie year, though hopefully not as early as Week 3.

One of the benefits with Newton in my opinion is even if he gets thrown in the fire too soon, his ability to run will get him out of some jams that traditional QB's don't have the luxury of being able to do.

I still hope he sits for the majority of the year.

That still doesn't mean I think he is a project. No QB is ready on day 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

At some point your going to have to play him for the majority of the season regardless if he plays poorly, otherwise your stuck in limbo on knowing where you stand and what to do with him.

Also if you draft a number one Qb chances are you don't have another consistenly good QB on your roster. So even if you bench your drafted QB, your offence and team will still hampred by your number one pick's poor play.

And if because he was picked number one, its proable to assume that no other high calibur QB's were drafted or signed during that period So if the Qb ends up being a bust, you will proably be setback agian by devloping yet another QB.

These are really good points. If a QB drafted number 1 busts it sets a franchise back 3-5 years.

But the flip side is if he booms it props up your franchise for 12-15 years.

There are always boom/bust scenarios with QB's, and the busts are a disaster but the booms can change the entire life and outside perspective of a franchise forever.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

These are really good points. If a QB drafted number 1 busts it sets a franchise back 3-5 years.

But the flip side is if he booms it props up your franchise for 12-15 years.

There are always boom/bust scenarios with QB's, and the busts are a disaster but the booms can change the entire life and outside perspective of a franchise forever.

Wow summed up brilliantly.

Newton also has a ton of intangibles as well that people always tend to overlook due to his overwhelming athleticism. He is a great leader and everything I have heard from coaches and especially his teammates says he has a tireless work ethic and is constantly trying to improve himself. And I don't think there has every been a college player that has handle so much adversity and still played lights out and for a whole season. And something I love about the kid is how he just does not give up. Not on a play (see the countless times he has shrugged off tacklers) and certainly not on a game or even in his career (see his transfer from Flordia to Blinn then to Auburn).

I find it odd that so many people are so against drafting him. I guess its true Haters goin' Hate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yeah that totally worked for guys like Aaron Rodgers, Phillip Rivers, Carson Palmer, Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Tony Romo, Matt Schaub, Matt Hasselbeck, and Matt Cassel; you know, cause they all played substantially their first year...

wait...

oh you must be talking about Joey Harrington, Matt Leinart, Alex Smith, Ryan Leaf, David Carr, and Jason Campbell, cause they all started early and had great careers...

wait...

All I'm saying is that if we draft a QB, the kid needs to sit until he proves that he is ready to play. if he can't prove it, then no need to start him.

I find it funny how you mention the failures and omit the success like Matt Ryan, Josh Freeman, Sancez, Big Ben, Flacco, Bradford (although that one is meh so far) and oh yeah Peyton Manning. I don't really think you can make the broad assumptions you are making because it depends on too many variables. From the individual player to the situation it just depends. I honestly don't think it really matters how long they have been in the league as long as they know the playbook its really down to the player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites