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!

     

Safe Pick isn't all that Safe


Ricky Spanish

Recommended Posts

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/draft2011/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=6343941

John Clayton article. Talking about how parcells wishes he would have taken matt ryan first overall, and how taking a guy that isn't a QB is just as big of a risk as taking a guy that is.

interesting stuff to say the least, at least it's different than what's been going on around here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it just shows that you will be scrutinized for not picking a franchise QB even though the guy you picked is a Pro Bowler.

yup. like it or not, QB is THE most important player on the field. he touches the ball every snap and runs the offense. sure you can have a beast at LT guarding him, but if he can't do poo, your offense can't do poo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's funny because Parcells' comments seemed to me to be more directed at how taking Pat White, despite the huge question marks about the offense he came from, was a big mistake.

He does say that maybe they should have taken him but this just came out today that really kinda debunks part of Clayton's article:

"Parcells: Dolphins should have taken Ryan, not Long, in '08."

The NFL.com headline was 150 percent longer than the actual quote. The former Miami Dolphins personnel executive, a bit stunned, also insisted it was inaccurate.

Parcells said he doesn't lament drafting Michigan left tackle Jake Long first overall in 2008 and claimed if he had to do it all over again -- even knowing what we know three years later -- he would still select Long ahead of quarterback Matt Ryan.

"Absolutely," Parcells told me Wednesday morning. "I do not regret taking Jake Long."

http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/27893/parcells-does-not-regret-drafting-jake-long

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would really doubt that the Tuna would regret picking a three time pro-bowler with the first pick. But when you look at whether Long or Ryan make more of an impact on his team, it is very clear that Ryan wins hands down. And that is the point. Without a franchise quarterback, you can't win year in and out.

Just like we wouldn't ever say we regretted drafting Peppers where we did. But if we had not found Jake and been stuck with Peete and Weinke and Carr had gone on to star in the league, the same issue could have been said about us.

If we pass on Newton and Gabbert and instead pick Green or Peterson, the only way you regret that decision is when either of those quarterbacks go on to be a star in the league and Moore and Clausen continue to struggle. If Gabbert and Newton struggle then passing on them will look like genius instead of folly particularly if we find our Qb of the future in another venue.

Hindsight is always 20-20.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Would Morgan or Beason have been HOFers' if injuries hadn't derailed their careers?  I was not a close watcher of the game when Morgan was in his prime but I thought Beason had a few seasons at close to Lukes' level of play.
    • Franchise QBs feast when things are rolling and the tide that raises boats when things are going sideways.  Bryce isn't that. He's a complimentary player, that's it.  When the defense and STs are on point, he plays loose and it shows.  When we are in a dog fight and things haven't gone our way, he struggles.  It's that simple. He's not a horrible QB, but he's not top tier either.  So the question begs, is this worthy of a second contract?  The answer should be no.  It definitely is my answer. Bryce will never be a QB that can produce wins largely on his arm.  That's a FRANCHISE QB, any other QB is simply a placeholder at the starter's position until that guy can be found.   At some point the excuses of lack of weapons will be a straw man.  Heck, it's nearly there now.  I mean if he doesn't look even better than last year will we blame it on the TE position?  'Well if Bryce only had a player like Kelce, Kittle or Gronk on this team...'  Are we really going to do that?  
    • When I arrived at college, I was 18, not too much younger than some of these draft picks.  It was not a huge school, but there were guys on the team who were 21, 22, 23....playing ahead of me.  I was seventh on the depth chart.  Those guys have been through a few seasons, were stronger, more knowledgeable.  I was a better raw player than some of them, but those other factors matter.  As I grew stronger, more familiar with the playbook, and learned what it was like to play in college, I gradually improved and with that, I rose up the depth chart.  It took most of my freshman year for the light to come on.  Had the coach thrown me into the starting lineup day 1, I would have probably failed.    And that was college.  So I agree with you based on my experience on a much lower level.  Frankly, I think that is why so many kids drafted to fill huge gaps bust.  The teams are desperate.  Anyone who looks to fill vacancies in the starting lineup through the draft is desperate.  You draft depth to develop.  For this reason, I say, "Let Walker start for a while."  Maybe Brazzell can be our WR 4.  Throw Hunter into a rotation and ask him to do one or two things.  Freeling needs some strength and he needs to work on run blocking.
×
×
  • Create New...