Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

A good and fair article about 1st round QB's


  • Please log in to reply
108 replies to this topic

#1 teeray

teeray

    THE SWAGNIFICENT

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,394 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 09:16 AM

Good write up on drafting QB's in the first round. Doesn't really take a side just puts it out there. This was written leading up to last year's draft but it just as easily could be about this year.

http://fifthdown.blo...ack-draft-bust/

I will highlight only one part that I really agree with,

* Many teams claim that they will wait until the second or third round to get their quarterback of the future. However, that strategy rarely appears to work. Only five teams – the Bills (assuming Trent Edwards is their starter), Dolphins, Patriots, Jaguars, and Eagles – will enter the season with a quarterback they selected after the first round.


Again this was prior to last year's draft

#2 DaCityKats

DaCityKats

    feed KB 2014

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,549 posts
  • LocationDa City

Posted 24 February 2011 - 09:19 AM

i agree with that highlighted part as well. the panthers are in position to take the best qb on the board and i believe they should.

#3 Murph

Murph

    Joe Cool

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,896 posts
  • LocationRound about here

Posted 24 February 2011 - 09:51 AM

And there is good chance three of those teams (Miami, Bills & Philly) can be removed from that list for the next season and only 1 can be added (Cleveland).

#4 Cracka McNasty

Cracka McNasty

    WWNPHD?

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,690 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 09:52 AM

HA! my favorite quote from the article:

* Since 1995, six colleges – U.S.C. (3), California, Marshall, Oregon, Tulane and Virginia Tech – have had more than one quarterback selected in the first round.
Notre Dame will probably join that list on Thursday.



#5 Jackofalltrades

Jackofalltrades

    OWN the Line of Scrimmage

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,630 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 24 February 2011 - 10:08 AM

We went into last year with a 1st rd QB? News to me.

What about Romo, Hasselbeck, Brees?

#6 Murph

Murph

    Joe Cool

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,896 posts
  • LocationRound about here

Posted 24 February 2011 - 10:09 AM

We went into last year with a 1st rd QB? News to me.


Undrafted doesn't count in that article otherwise Romo would be mentioned in addition to Moore

#7 Jackofalltrades

Jackofalltrades

    OWN the Line of Scrimmage

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,630 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 24 February 2011 - 10:12 AM

Undrafted doesn't count in that article otherwise Romo would be mentioned in addition to Moore


They weren't taken in the first, which is the whole point of the article.

#8 thefuzz

thefuzz

    coppin a feel

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,091 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 10:22 AM

They weren't taken in the first, which is the whole point of the article.




It's about where the team selects their starting QB, not mentioning trades, nor FA pick ups.


Schaub and Brees were not counted since they are not with the teams that drafted them.

#9 DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

DeAngelo's #1 Fan(CRA)

    Senior Member

  • Moderators
  • 24,703 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 10:23 AM

We went into last year with a 1st rd QB? News to me.

What about Romo, Hasselbeck, Brees?


it is referring to QBs drafted by a team to be their QB. Those guys were picked up by teams or traded for.

#10 mmmbeans

mmmbeans

    FBI SURVEILLANCE VAN

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,000 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 10:44 AM

They weren't taken in the first, which is the whole point of the article.


yea, intentional skewing of numbers...


damn you skew.

#11 Tom

Tom

    Member

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 11:01 AM

They weren't taken in the first, which is the whole point of the article.


The point of that particular stat was to demonstrate that while there is a high degree of risk drafting a QB in the first round, teams haven't had much success drafting QBs in other rounds. Brees and Hasselbeck don't play for the teams that drafted them. Romo and Moore weren't drafted.
So if you include those Qbs in the discussion, teams have had success finding QBs in the first round and through trades or FA (including undrafted FA), but rarely find successful QBs in rounds 2-7 (with Brady being the obvious exception).

#12 Jackofalltrades

Jackofalltrades

    OWN the Line of Scrimmage

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,630 posts
  • LocationNC

Posted 24 February 2011 - 11:03 AM

I get that, but they're bending the criteria to make their point. If you're going to do this type of comparison then look at all 32 starting QB's, not just the ones that fit your argument.

#13 Tom

Tom

    Member

  • NEWB
  • PipPip
  • 95 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 11:21 AM

But if you look at all 32 starting QBs, there are only 5 or 6's QBs drafted past the first round that start for the team that drafted them. Of those guys, the only one with much success is Brady. So the point still stands, draft a QB in the first round or find one outside of the draft.

#14 Urrymonster

Urrymonster

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,264 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 11:27 AM

I get that, but they're bending the criteria to make their point. If you're going to do this type of comparison then look at all 32 starting QB's, not just the ones that fit your argument.


This.

All I take from this is that teams will give up on QBs who do not have the financial burden of the 1st round sooner than those that do. There are several teams who have had great success picking up FAs, UDFAs and trading for back ups.

Yes the 1st round is the obvious place to pick up a quality QB, however teams often stick by their under performing 1st round QB much longer than they should. Like-wise later round QBs who weren't progressing as quickly with their first team were ditched in favour of a 1st rounder.

People expect success straight away, it rarely happens, so the $$$ dictates what happens next.

#15 Urrymonster

Urrymonster

    Senior Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,264 posts

Posted 24 February 2011 - 11:31 AM

But if you look at all 32 starting QBs, there are only 5 or 6's QBs drafted past the first round that start for the team that drafted them. Of those guys, the only one with much success is Brady. So the point still stands, draft a QB in the first round or find one outside of the draft.


That is all well and good, but it also shows that teams can find decent alternatives outside the draft too. Or it also indicates that beyond the 1st round usually takes a season or two longer to develop the QB.

I think it really ends up being dictated by the QBs in the draft. In my opinion there isn't one QB who I would be comfortable taking with the 1st overall, FA is poor and trades can't occur until the CBA is sorted.

Result? Looks like our prior 2nd round pick will get another shot.

I think people are fooling themselves that the best QB in a draft class is always the best option, whereas this happens to be one of the weakest draft classes in recent memory.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Shop at Amazon Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com