Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

A comparison of QBs drafted #1 overall


Icege
 Share

Recommended Posts

If you draft a qb at number one, or anywhere in the top ten for that matter, fans expect him to be elite.  Since there are only 10-12 elite qb's in the NFL at any one time, it rarely works out that.  And 10-12 might be pushing it.  

But if Young fails, we get another shot next year.  

Edited by Davidson Deac II
  • Pie 3
  • Poo 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Davidson Deac II said:

If you draft a qb at number one, or anywhere in the top ten for that matter, fans expect him to be elite.  Since there are only 10-12 elite qb's in the NFL at any one time, it rarely works out that.  And 10-12 might be pushing it.  

But if Young fails, we get another shot next year.  

I think just by using probability and no analysis whatsoever one could say “based on what I see player X is not gonna work out. I hope I’m wrong but that’s the way I see it” and you would be right a lot more than being wrong. 

  • Pie 3
  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Jackie Lee said:

Here's some more of them stats. CJ/AR top left/right, Levis/BY bottom left/right

 

Pretty polarizing. However, I think the point of this thread was QBs drafted #1 overall. Just showing how they typical struggle and go into bad situations.

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NCBlu said:

The draft is and always will be a craps shoot so I just don't understand trading away so much on 1 player that may or may not workout. Just take the best guys at your spot and roll with it.

 

 

That sounds good in theory but in today's NFL you have to have a top-tier QB (along with other things) to have more than a snowball's shot at winning the Super Bowl. As such, the limited pool of guys that appear to have that kind of potential require a cost to get, either outright sucking or paying to get in that draft range. 

Some teams pay an external price, like Carolina did, for their guy, like the Chiefs and Mahomes. The problem arises when the pick is wrong, and in Carolina's case they picked a guy who is a physical outlier on the wrong end of the curve to not only reach that status, but to do so when damn near no one else at his size ever has. Just an extra-thick additional layer of risk in what is already a risky proposition.

  • Pie 2
  • Beer 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/13/2024 at 8:04 PM, CPF4LIFE said:

Well...if bryce doesnt make a pro bowl by next year and even if he does is everybody ready to give him damn near 300 million? Because thats what its gonna be.

If we gave Bryce an extension after 2 years of a 5 year deal, you can just shut the doors to the facility and move the team wherever you want. 

I mean, I would say that about just about any rookie we have. That's just plum retarded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • This is gonna be longest six weeks ever 
    • This 1000%.  Hey who wants to sign with the guy that couldn't even get his client the guaranteed contract of a 3rd round pick?  Lmao
    • I don't think it's any weird or unique clause, it's the offset language, same thing so many contract disputes are over. It just means that including it, if a player is cut and then signed by another team, the original team would be able to subtract how much they're getting paid by the new team from what they still owe him on their guaranteed money. For example, it's why Russell Wilson signed for the minimum last year with the Steelers as that was included in his Denver contract.  So if he signed with the Steelers for $1 million, he'd get $1 million less from the Broncos, if it was $2 million, he'd get $2 million less, basically he couldn't make any more money than he was already going to make, so you sign for the minimum to not take unnecessary cap room from your new team while giving extra cap room to your old one. The problem with trying to include it in rookie deals is that a team trying to include it, it says they think they don't really believe the player will make it 4 years with the team before they cut them.  And this usually comes up with one or two rookies in most seasons, the difference is it's usually handled much more quietly and not as public and ugly as this one. The other difference is that it's happening with the Bengals, which I believe I saw are one of the few (or only?) team that doesn't have protections for rookies in rookie and mini camps to be able to participate even if they haven't signed their contract yet.  The other teams have injury protections that allow them to still play, but the Bengals do not, which is also why this one is so public and ugly, as most the time this happens, the rookie is still participating in the rookie and subsequent mini camps, giving them more time to get the contract done before training camp when they'd then hold out.
×
×
  • Create New...