10 reasons

[NAS]

1 hour ago, CPantherKing said:

The myth of the 1st round QB is strong. Nick Foles won a SB. Matt Ryan went to a SB. Carson Wentz led a team to a SB. The reality is 1st round QBs drafted by 1st year coaches have worked out 4 of 35 times to win a SB and 2 of 35 times to establish a dynasty.

In their 1st year:

3 HCs traded for QB. 1 QB won the SB. 2 Dynasty HCs (both waited 5 years to draft their SB QB).

5 HCs signed QB. 3 QBs won the SB. 0 Dynasty HCs.

6 HCs drafted QB in year 1. 6 QBs won SB. 4 Dynasty HCs (2 of the 4 had non-1st round SB QBs and more successful dynasties).

21 HCs inherited their starting QB. 15 QBs won the SB. 13 Dynasty HCs (11 did not draft a 1st round QB). Of the 6 HCs who inherited QBs that did not win SBs and were replaced, only 2 of them drafted 1st round QBs who would win the SB.

 

The lesson here as a first year HC with prior championship experience is DO NOT rely on a 1st round rookie QB to set you up for success. The expectations, ownership, and fan base will likely wreck you. Draft a day 3 QB you believe can win a championship. Build a team and ride that QB if he has success, team him with a 30 year old vet franchise QB to take over if he fails. Plan on targeting a QB from college over the next 5 seasons if your late round QB or vet QB can't win in the playoffs for the team you have built. During this process, the coach should have no more than 2 losing seasons in 5 years and be playoff competitive with one of the first 3 QBs they have selected in their tenure.

No myth.  I would just rather we succeed or fail with our own QB selection than take on any more discarded trash

[45catfan]

8 hours ago, MHS831 said:

Gotta be careful--60% of those were first rounders.

Amazing how people automatically assume drafting a first round QB is a shoo-in solution.  It's an easy solution, but not even close to a sure thing.

The recency bias of the QB success from the 2020 draft is skewing people's perception of YEARS of data showing extremely high bust rates among first round QBs.

In a typical year, ONE QB--at most, drafted in the first ends up not being a bust.  So either we have to be damn sure we get the correct one or hope this QB class is not a typical year.

[NAS]

5 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Amazing how people automatically assume drafting a first round QB is a shoo-in solution.  It's an easy solution, but not even close to a sure thing.

Stop it, nobody says it's a shoo-in, but doing the same thing over and over is definition of insanity.  We need to do our research and draft a quarterback in the first round and see where the chips may fall.  

The part that you wont' say is that we already KNOW that the free agents we signed or you want to sign are not franchise quarterbacks because they already FAILED somewhere else.  At least with our own draft choice, we have a chance to do something...

[45catfan]

3 minutes ago, NAS said:

Stop it, nobody says it's a shoo-in, but doing the same thing over and over is definition of insanity.  We need to do our research and draft a quarterback in the first round and see where the chips may fall.  

The part that you wont' say is that we already KNOW that the free agents we signed or you want to sign are not franchise quarterbacks because they already FAILED somewhere else.  At least with our own draft choice, we have a chance to do something...

The Colts got to the playoffs with Rivers.  So your list is a bit skewed.  It's all a risk, but saying drafting is less risky by listing FAs that have failed would be like me posting a page of first round QB busts to prove my point.  I think if the coaches feel more comfortable getting a FA QB that they think would fit their system more so than a rookie first round QB, then so be it.

[mccjeff]

Shouldn’t the thread be named “11 reasons” and Cam added to the list?

[MHS831]

7 minutes ago, mccjeff said:

Shouldn’t the thread be named “11 reasons” and Cam added to the list?

Probably did not want to open the flood gates for the Newton Nut Huggers to start their "third coming of Cam" posts. 

[NAS]

22 minutes ago, mccjeff said:

Shouldn’t the thread be named “11 reasons” and Cam added to the list?

Cam shouldn't be on the list because he already proved himself as a franchise QB and unfortunately injuries prematurely ended his career.  These same people will use the "did not win a superbowl" argument to not include Cam in a list of successful #1 overall picks.  They would consider Dan Marino a bust by the same logic .  

[NAS]

44 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

It's all a risk, but saying drafting is less risky by listing FAs that have failed would be like me posting a page of first round QB busts to prove my point.

Nobody says it's less risky, but it's a risk you have to take at some point instead of being a pussy and hoping you can reclaim someone else's garbage.

He also doesn't fit the category because he was a franchise QB who was available as a one year rental.  I don't think anyone is interested in having to find another QB next year.   

[Luciu5]

57 minutes ago, NAS said:

Cam shouldn't be on the list because he already proved himself as a franchise QB and unfortunately injuries prematurely ended his career.  These same people will use the "did not win a superbowl" argument to not include Cam in a list of successful #1 overall picks.  They would consider Dan Marino a bust by the same logic .  

I'd say the "I'm BACK" Cam could be on that list.

Some of these guys were great QB's, namely Rivers and Ryans. They were just past their time. Rivers wasn't even bad in Indy, he was just looking for one more shot at a title before retiring. But, that list is all retreads who were busts, middling, or past their time.

Which looks a lot like our options at FA QB's this year. Lamar Jackson is the ONLY possible QB and he will cost 2 firsts AND a giant contract. I'd rather we trade up for a rookie at that point.

Why pickup someone who you know is going to fail to win you a Super Bowl. I'd rather have a chance than no chance. Drafting a rookie is possible to get a franchise guy. What is available for FA or trade this year, you will be hard pressed to find a franchise QB that route.

[thefuzz]

3 hours ago, Luciu5 said:

I'd say the "I'm BACK" Cam could be on that list.

Some of these guys were great QB's, namely Rivers and Ryans. They were just past their time. Rivers wasn't even bad in Indy, he was just looking for one more shot at a title before retiring. But, that list is all retreads who were busts, middling, or past their time.

Which looks a lot like our options at FA QB's this year. Lamar Jackson is the ONLY possible QB and he will cost 2 firsts AND a giant contract. I'd rather we trade up for a rookie at that point.

Why pickup someone who you know is going to fail to win you a Super Bowl. I'd rather have a chance than no chance. Drafting a rookie is possible to get a franchise guy. What is available for FA or trade this year, you will be hard pressed to find a franchise QB that route.

Carr strikes me as Rivers, but 9 years younger.

Been successful despite the franchises that drafted them.  Tough, love football, never throw teammates under the bus, etc....just good guys who play football.

I'd love to get Carr and pair him with Corral and a rook.  Dreams.

[PantherKyle]

8 hours ago, CPantherKing said:

Draft a day 3 QB you believe can win a championship. Build a team and ride that QB if he has success, team him with a 30 year old vet franchise QB to take over if he fails. 

This just isn't feasible.

[Brooklyn 3.0]

Oh neat, one of THESE threads!

[Luciu5]

13 minutes ago, thefuzz said:

Carr strikes me as Rivers, but 9 years younger.

Been successful despite the franchises that drafted them.  Tough, love football, never throw teammates under the bus, etc....just good guys who play football.

I'd love to get Carr and pair him with Corral and a rook.  Dreams.

Carr is fine. Top half of the league guy currently. We will win games with Carr. That will be fun to watch winning football. He'll never get us to the super bowl. We will pick 18-28 every year. We won't have any hope of a franchise QB until after he moves on or retires. Panthers will continue to be a media afterthought.

[CPantherKing]

4 hours ago, PantherKyle said:

This just isn't feasible.

It's easier and a greater probability than a first year HC drafting a 1st round QB and expecting to win a SB or build a dynasty.

History/numbers prove this. Do you think 1st year HCs simply draft a 1st round QB and start winning with them? Might as well plan to fire your HC after 3 seasons.

Easier to find a Montana or a Brady than it is to grow a Manning or draft 2 similar 1st round QBs in the same year.

I'd like to know where all these 1st year HCs and 1st round rookie QB pairings are since they are more feasible. They don't exist like people dream they do. 1st round rookie QBs are overwhelmingly coach killers - especially for 1st year HCs.

Edited February 22, 2023 by CPantherKing