Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 61 to 76 of 76

Thread: The problem with this whole QB "thing"

  1. #61
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    the 80s
    Posts
    8,358
    Quote Originally Posted by SlickBri481 View Post
    History says that conclusion would be very faulty. Also consider they don't have anything remotely close to a "viable starter" at QB currently on the roster.
    no history says that's right. Exceptions to that rule give forum posters QB-drafting blue balls.

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    13,518
    Quote Originally Posted by JB1089 View Post
    Let me see if I can clarify Paradis' point for some of you guys.


    A team has a position of need. They do their due diligence on all of the draft prospects at that position for the upcoming draft. They come to the conclusion that none of the prospects will be viable starters in the NFL.


    That team should not draft one of those prospects because "they're the best of the bunch" or "one of these guys has to wind up being pretty good." Every team has holes, and that's just a whole that will have to be filled at a later date.
    Nobody is saying this. If our scouts tell Idzik that every QB in this draft is garbage, then he has to trust them. But if Terry Bradway tells him that he's in love with one of these guys, then he has at least consider drafting that player, not make fun of him while drafting a fullback for Rex or one of Sanchez's buddies.

  3. #63
    When it comes to QBs, I'm of the belief that you only draft blue chip prospects. The hit rate on non-1st round QBs is absurdly low. A couple months ago I posted a list of all the QBs taken after the 1st round, going back to the Drew Brees draft. There were 5 or 6 good ones, including the undrafted Romo, out of almost 100 QBs. It's throwing away a draft pick that could be spent on a position where you have a much better chance of finding a good player.


    When you want a QB, you do what we did in '09 (unsuccessfully) or what the Redskins did last year (successfully). You pay whatever it costs to move into the top 5 and take a top-rated QB. Even then, you've only got a 50:50 shot of it panning out, but that's way better than the 8% chance you'd have taking a shot at one of these mid-round prospects.




    And as far as this draft goes: The QBs are bad. Stop trying to find a way around this fact (and it is a fact, there's 1 QB with a 1st round grade). We've got a lot of people with QB hunger pains that will take any QB, just to make the hunger go away.

    The goal is not to acquire a QB that is better than Mark Sanchez, which a couple of these guys could be. The goal is to acquire a good QB, which none of these guys are right now, and probably never will be.

    This year's QB crop is almost exactly like the 2010 group, only Geno Smith isn't a Sam Bradford level prospect. Sure, Bradford hasn't panned out, but that doesn't change the fact that he was an elite prospect. People say there's got to be a good QB in this draft? Really? Who was the good QB in 2010?

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by Sourceworx View Post
    Nobody is saying this. If our scouts tell Idzik that every QB in this draft is garbage, then he has to trust them. But if Terry Bradway tells him that he's in love with one of these guys, then he has at least consider drafting that player, not make fun of him while drafting a fullback for Rex or one of Sanchez's buddies.
    +1

    idzik didn't select mayy, if any, scouts this year, i think, he's using the jets' scouts who didn't get enough say under tanny. bradway in particular should be real psyched, as he's got some picks and (hopefully) an 'i told you so' card by trumping for wilson last year.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by SlickBri481 View Post
    History says that conclusion would be very faulty. Also consider they don't have anything remotely close to a "viable starter" at QB currently on the roster.
    A "viable starter" at the QB position is worthless. You can have a viable starter at any other position on the field, but not at QB. You must have at least a good QB, or your team is not going anywhere.

  6. #66
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    the 80s
    Posts
    8,358
    Quote Originally Posted by JB1089 View Post
    When it comes to QBs, I'm of the belief that you only draft blue chip prospects. The hit rate on non-1st round QBs is absurdly low. A couple months ago I posted a list of all the QBs taken after the 1st round, going back to the Drew Brees draft. There were 5 or 6 good ones, including the undrafted Romo, out of almost 100 QBs. It's throwing away a draft pick that could be spent on a position where you have a much better chance of finding a good player.


    When you want a QB, you do what we did in '09 (unsuccessfully) or what the Redskins did last year (successfully). You pay whatever it costs to move into the top 5 and take a top-rated QB. Even then, you've only got a 50:50 shot of it panning out, but that's way better than the 8% chance you'd have taking a shot at one of these mid-round prospects.



    And as far as this draft goes: The QBs are bad. Stop trying to find a way around this fact (and it is a fact, there's 1 QB with a 1st round grade). We've got a lot of people with QB hunger pains that will take any QB, just to make the hunger go away.

    The goal is not to acquire a QB that is better than Mark Sanchez, which a couple of these guys could be. The goal is to acquire a good QB, which none of these guys are right now, and probably never will be.

    This year's QB crop is almost exactly like the 2010 group, only Geno Smith isn't a Sam Bradford level prospect. Sure, Bradford hasn't panned out, but that doesn't change the fact that he was an elite prospect. People say there's got to be a good QB in this draft? Really? Who was the good QB in 2010?
    SO MUCH TRUTH! Probably the best post on this topic in the last 2 months of JI surfing.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by JB1089 View Post
    When it comes to QBs, I'm of the belief that you only draft blue chip prospects. The hit rate on non-1st round QBs is absurdly low. A couple months ago I posted a list of all the QBs taken after the 1st round, going back to the Drew Brees draft. There were 5 or 6 good ones, including the undrafted Romo, out of almost 100 QBs. It's throwing away a draft pick that could be spent on a position where you have a much better chance of finding a good player.


    When you want a QB, you do what we did in '09 (unsuccessfully) or what the Redskins did last year (successfully). You pay whatever it costs to move into the top 5 and take a top-rated QB. Even then, you've only got a 50:50 shot of it panning out, but that's way better than the 8% chance you'd have taking a shot at one of these mid-round prospects.




    And as far as this draft goes: The QBs are bad. Stop trying to find a way around this fact (and it is a fact, there's 1 QB with a 1st round grade). We've got a lot of people with QB hunger pains that will take any QB, just to make the hunger go away.

    The goal is not to acquire a QB that is better than Mark Sanchez, which a couple of these guys could be. The goal is to acquire a good QB, which none of these guys are right now, and probably never will be.

    This year's QB crop is almost exactly like the 2010 group, only Geno Smith isn't a Sam Bradford level prospect. Sure, Bradford hasn't panned out, but that doesn't change the fact that he was an elite prospect. People say there's got to be a good QB in this draft? Really? Who was the good QB in 2010?
    maybe it's against the odds, but that doesn't mean you do not draft any qb outside of round 1. you'd never find joe montana or tom brady, to name a few absolute superstars.

    too much of the nfl is getting a good qb. given this reality, it's worth the risk for the bad teams without a qb to take a shot every draft and hope you get it right. once you do you vault into the playoff race for a decade and football becomes fun again.

    if the jets sat around every draft and didn't take a qb unless they thought he would be great, they'd have a far reduced shot of improving and gms would keep losing their jobs. look what happened to tanny. he tried, i give him that. drafted clemens, traded up for sanchez. all this after farve got hurt and left. the jets were good when sanchez had a nice, strong veteran team around him. once that team was disassembled, sanchez was fully exposed. if sanchez were matt ryan, the team could be rebuilt far more easily. but even nice, strong veteran teams with great offensive lines cannot be maintained indefinitely, and at some point either you have a good qb who can pick up the slack (aka, flacco) or you keep trying to get one. you don't sit on the sidelines and not pick qbs and keep making excuses.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by JB1089 View Post
    Let me see if I can clarify Paradis' point for some of you guys.


    A team has a position of need. They do their due diligence on all of the draft prospects at that position for the upcoming draft. They come to the conclusion that none of the prospects will be viable starters in the NFL.


    That team should not draft one of those prospects because "they're the best of the bunch" or "one of these guys has to wind up being pretty good." Every team has holes, and that's just a whole that will have to be filled at a later date.
    This is absolutely correct logic.

    Just disagree with the notion that they are all going to be bad. Certainly possible, but I think one of them will be a good NFL QB.

    Personally I believe it's going to be Manuel, with an outside shot at it being Glennon.

    Because I believe it's Manuel, I'd go out of my way to take him. We have garbage at the QB position and there is no chance at anything without a good QB in this league.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by JB1089 View Post
    When it comes to QBs, I'm of the belief that you only draft blue chip prospects. The hit rate on non-1st round QBs is absurdly low. A couple months ago I posted a list of all the QBs taken after the 1st round, going back to the Drew Brees draft. There were 5 or 6 good ones, including the undrafted Romo, out of almost 100 QBs. It's throwing away a draft pick that could be spent on a position where you have a much better chance of finding a good player.


    When you want a QB, you do what we did in '09 (unsuccessfully) or what the Redskins did last year (successfully). You pay whatever it costs to move into the top 5 and take a top-rated QB. Even then, you've only got a 50:50 shot of it panning out, but that's way better than the 8% chance you'd have taking a shot at one of these mid-round prospects.




    And as far as this draft goes: The QBs are bad. Stop trying to find a way around this fact (and it is a fact, there's 1 QB with a 1st round grade). We've got a lot of people with QB hunger pains that will take any QB, just to make the hunger go away.

    The goal is not to acquire a QB that is better than Mark Sanchez, which a couple of these guys could be. The goal is to acquire a good QB, which none of these guys are right now, and probably never will be.

    This year's QB crop is almost exactly like the 2010 group, only Geno Smith isn't a Sam Bradford level prospect. Sure, Bradford hasn't panned out, but that doesn't change the fact that he was an elite prospect. People say there's got to be a good QB in this draft? Really? Who was the good QB in 2010?
    Well a few rebuttal points to this post. First, we may actually be in a position to take the one QB with a first round grade. I'm not arguing "take anyone." I'm arguing take a guy that scouts think has a chance to be very good. And this isn't a guy who rose out of nowhere because of a good combine or pro day. Mock drafts had him going in the top 5 dating back to September.

    Second, as to your "only first round QB picks generally do well." I'd argue that the 3 QBs that played the best football down the stretch and in the playoffs last season really don't fit this criteria. Wilson and Kaepernick were not selected in the 1st round. Both were actually considered reaches even where they were taken outside of the first round. Flacco was taken in the second half of the first round (the best QB prospects are almost always taken in the top 10 or 15) and came from the small FCS school in Delaware.

    The goal should be to upgrade your talent, certainly when it comes to the most important position on the field. You don't need the best QB in football to win it all. Flacco and Eli won SBs in the last 5 years after regular seasons where they were very close to being run out of town and still thought of as semi-busts. I don't think either was considered a top 10 QB prior to their big playoff run, Flacco may have been on the verge, but Eli wasn't even close. So yes, you need someone better than Sanchez, but he doesn't have to be Peyton or Rodgers. Bring in as much talent as possible and hope someone pans out

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by augustiniak View Post
    maybe it's against the odds, but that doesn't mean you do not draft any qb outside of round 1. you'd never find joe montana or tom brady, to name a few absolute superstars.

    too much of the nfl is getting a good qb. given this reality, it's worth the risk for the bad teams without a qb to take a shot every draft and hope you get it right. once you do you vault into the playoff race for a decade and football becomes fun again.

    if the jets sat around every draft and didn't take a qb unless they thought he would be great, they'd have a far reduced shot of improving and gms would keep losing their jobs. look what happened to tanny. he tried, i give him that. drafted clemens, traded up for sanchez. all this after farve got hurt and left. the jets were good when sanchez had a nice, strong veteran team around him. once that team was disassembled, sanchez was fully exposed. if sanchez were matt ryan, the team could be rebuilt far more easily. but even nice, strong veteran teams with great offensive lines cannot be maintained indefinitely, and at some point either you have a good qb who can pick up the slack (aka, flacco) or you keep trying to get one. you don't sit on the sidelines and not pick qbs and keep making excuses.
    Bravo, good post.

  11. #71
    Since coming to the Jets from Seattle, Idzik has been spreading Pete Carroll's mantra of 'win forever' and 'always compete'. He has been quoted multiple times saying that there will be a competition at the QB position. The reason why they brought in David Garrard is to compete with Sanchez. If the Jets were to take a QB early in the draft, there would be no 'competition' for the QB position. This would contradict everything that Idzik has been saying during this offseason.

    I would think that they would rather draft a QB in the 3rd or 4th to compete. That way, they wouldn't be handing the starting job to the rookie QB, but there is still the possibility that the draft pick could become the starter. If the pick pans out to be another Wilson (unlikely), good. If the player doesn't pan out, they can still draft another next year. You could say this about every draft pick and try to draft a QB early every year until you find one, but you'd be passing up on other players at positions of need.

    If Idzik follow's the draft strategy of Seattle the past 3 years (Carroll era), I'd expect:
    1. A clear starter with every pick in the first 2 rounds. Guys that will fill a void, minimum competition for them to start (Jets this year: G, OLB, S, NT)
    2. Not afraid to "reach". Get the players that best fit the system and are at the top of the draft board, regardless of value. (Austin, Warmack, Cooper at 9? Hayden, Eifert, Vacarro at 13?)
    3. Doubling up on positions (Seattle: 2010: 2 TEs, 2011: 2 CBs, 2012: 3 DEs & 2 ILB)

    Expect a 3rd/4th round corner to compete with Kyle Wilson to start (if they don't draft one earlier to be the starter).
    Expect a 4th/5th round RB to compete for starting job (if they don't trade for Chris Ivory)
    Expect a 5th/6th round tackle to compete with Austin Howard for RT.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by NYJBuddy View Post
    Since coming to the Jets from Seattle, Idzik has been spreading Pete Carroll's mantra of 'win forever' and 'always compete'. He has been quoted multiple times saying that there will be a competition at the QB position. The reason why they brought in David Garrard is to compete with Sanchez. If the Jets were to take a QB early in the draft, there would be no 'competition' for the QB position. This would contradict everything that Idzik has been saying during this offseason.
    I'm sorry, but this makes little sense. How is bringing in a washed up veteran journeyman competition, but taking a rookie with promising upside early in the draft not? The only guy you could argue that would get handed the job because of the selection would be Smith if they took him at 9 or 13. And even then I sort of doubt that because of what they will be paying Sanchez next season, he would still get a chance to compete for it. If they take a guy in the 2nd round or lower, no way would he just be handed the job, he'd have to win it.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by wepnx View Post
    All these comments remind me of Parcells first draft. We needed a QB in the worst way and decided to go with a stop gap QB. Now he played well but we passed over a Manning. If we take one of these QBs in this draft wisdom says we cannot take one next year. One of these guys could be good. We are sure next years class would be better but look what happened to Barkley. He would have been on the Phins. The same thing happened to Marino. He went back for his senior year and played worse the last year causing him to drop. QB's are a crapshoot. You just cannot be sure. I do think Sanchez is done though and Tebow is not going to be a starting QB in this league anymore.





    Jets did not pass on Manning fyi. I want a Qab this year as well, these guys always have that next year mentality, the loser mentality, I've seen it down here in Miami for years and the Dolfans, it's pathetic.


    Teddy Bridgewater and Manziel both will be scrutinized and torn to shreds nect year by the evaluators just watch.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by SlickBri481 View Post
    I'm sorry, but this makes little sense. How is bringing in a washed up veteran journeyman competition, but taking a rookie with promising upside early in the draft not? The only guy you could argue that would get handed the job because of the selection would be Smith if they took him at 9 or 13. And even then I sort of doubt that because of what they will be paying Sanchez next season, he would still get a chance to compete for it. If they take a guy in the 2nd round or lower, no way would he just be handed the job, he'd have to win it.
    I would think that the Jets are looking for players early in the draft that they feel are a clear upgrade over what they have now. If they were to draft a QB in the 1st couple of rounds and still have them 'compete' for the job, essentially they are saying "we drafted a guy that is equal to or not much greater than what we have now, hence we need a competition to differentiate the players". Would think they could do the same thing later in the draft. If they draft a guy in the first couple of rounds and tell everyone he is the starter, the story changes to, "it is clear that this player is an upgrade on what we have now, no question about it".

  15. #75
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    7,078
    Quote Originally Posted by NYJBuddy View Post
    I would think that the Jets are looking for players early in the draft that they feel are a clear upgrade over what they have now. If they were to draft a QB in the 1st couple of rounds and still have them 'compete' for the job, essentially they are saying "we drafted a guy that is equal to or not much greater than what we have now, hence we need a competition to differentiate the players". Would think they could do the same thing later in the draft. If they draft a guy in the first couple of rounds and tell everyone he is the starter, the story changes to, "it is clear that this player is an upgrade on what we have now, no question about it".
    The whole reason for the competition is to find out for sure if your guy is a clear upgrade.

    I highly doubt if they take a QB, and they might, that they would just name him the starter right off the bat.

    And he doesn't have to be a clear upgrade RIGHT NOW. The plan is for him to become a clear upgrade in the near future. They took Coples last year and he wasn't a starter. Same with Kyle Wilson. Drafting for the future. This happens ALL THE TIME.

  16. #76
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Delaware
    Posts
    6,304
    The best QB in this draft is Tyler Bray because he has everything you look for in a franchise QB. He has the Size, the Arm and the moxie that make him believe he can do the impossible. The problem is he's a nuckle head who doesn't give a hoot about anything but Tyler Bray.

    The QB with the best tools is EJ Manuel because he has everything you would want in a QB. He has the size, the arm, the athletism and the love for the game.The problem is he has no clue where his passes will end up and the next time he reads a defense will be the 1st.

    The Most Pro Ready QB in this draft is Matt Barkley because he was developed and prepared to run the a pro style offense. He reads defenses well, he has a compact over the top release and moves well in the pocket. The problem is he doesn't have a big arm and for the most part is a system QB.


    The safetest QB in this draft is Geno Smith. He runs well, has an above average arm and is a student of the game. There's nothing over the top about Geno. He's just safe. This is why he's considered the top QB in this draft.


    If i am going to take a chance on a QB in this draft, I am going for the gold especially when i can get it without having to dig ( as in my wallet). You can get Tyler Bray probably in the late 3rd , early 4th.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us