When The Time Comes, A Mid Round QB Will Probably Not Cut It.

[manxman2601]

Startling fact.

In the last 20 years, only three QB's taken outside the top 33 have won a Superbowl: Tom Brady, Brett Favre and Kurt Warner.

Whenever we choose to find Brady's replacement, we should start to get comfortable with the fact that we'll probably need to spend a first rounder on one. AJ McCarron in the third is probably not going to cut it.

 

[stelfans]

We can wait for Hackenberg to come out...just saying.

 

[manxman2601]

We can wait for Hackenberg to come out...just saying.

And hope for pick #1 or #2

 

[Luxusdk]

This year i would pick Tom Savage, he have had all the ups and downs you need AND learned from it. Plus he originaly comes from Rudgers where Schiano couldn't use him, that's a plus in my book. Since that guy, as great as he is, ain't have a clue what so ever about QBs

 

[Snake Eyes]

Startling fact.

In the last 20 years, only three QB's taken outside the top 33 have won a Superbowl: Tom Brady, Brett Favre and Kurt Warner.

Whenever we choose to find Brady's replacement, we should start to get comfortable with the fact that we'll probably need to spend a first rounder on one. AJ McCarron in the third is probably not going to cut it.

That’s a bridge you can cross when you come to it. There’s no reason a mid-late round QB can’t get the job done, right now we have the luxury of a franchise QB, in the mean time you keep on grabbing mid-late round guys and throwing the spaghetti against the wall, if you hit gold, great, if not you keep going.

I’d like to get Alex Tanney off the Cowboys practice squad and develop him. He’s very raw but has a TON of skill that just can’t be taught, his ball placement is outstanding and he has fantastic toughness/poise. He was a bit too much of a gunslinger in the last Cowboys pre-season game but I suspect some of that was due to him trying too hard to make plays so he could make the team, which makes sense considering Jerry Jones would be making the decisions. With BB that sort of thing would be the quickest way to get cut.

Anyway, he can be had for the absolute minimum and he can actually hit receivers consistently, something Mallett can’t do. I don’t care that Mallet “knows the system”, what good does that do when you can’t put the ball where it’s supposed to go?

 

[Snake Eyes]

tanney throw - YouTube

See that? It's called "touch", Mallett hasn't made the introduction yet.

Yet another thing I like about Tanney, he's not a big-school recruit that had everything handed too him, he's a small school guy that has had to fight himself into the NFL, he knows what it means to struggle, fail, and then get back up again. That kind of struggle is what breeds mental/emotional toughness, all other things being equal I want that guy over the big-school recruit that has an all-star cast around him.

 

[manxman2601]

That’s a bridge you can cross when you come to it. There’s no reason a mid-late round QB can’t get the job done, right now we have the luxury of a franchise QB, in the mean time you keep on grabbing mid-late round guys and throwing the spaghetti against the wall, if you hit gold, great, if not you keep going.

I’d like to get Alex Tanney off the Cowboys practice squad and develop him. He’s very raw but has a TON of skill that just can’t be taught, his ball placement is outstanding and he has fantastic toughness/poise. He was a bit too much of a gunslinger in the last Cowboys pre-season game but I suspect some of that was due to him trying too hard to make plays so he could make the team, which makes sense considering Jerry Jones would be making the decisions. With BB that sort of thing would be the quickest way to get cut.

Anyway, he can be had for the absolute minimum and he can actually hit receivers consistently, something Mallett can’t do. I don’t care that Mallet “knows the system”, what good does that do when you can’t put the ball where it’s supposed to go?

The trouble I have with this theory is that it's suspiciously like how the Dolphins approached the post Marino era. I'd rather we had a post Favre Green Bay approach.

I'm not saying we should do it this year but in the next two to three years we should grab a top quality QB.

Edit: The only first round QB the Dolphins drafted since Marino was Tannehill.

 

[Snake Eyes]

The trouble I have with this theory is that it's suspiciously like how the Dolphins approached the post Marino era. I'd rather we had a post Favre Green Bay approach.

I'm not saying we should do it this year but in the next two to three years we should grab a top quality QB.

Edit: The only first round QB the Dolphins drafted since Marino was Tannehill.

How many teams draft 1st round QBs only for them to completely suck? The big problem with spending a 1st round pick on a QB is that it means we can't spend it elsewhere, lowering Brady’s chances of winning. Brady isn’t slowing down due to age, the issue is more with his supporting cast and the playcalling (IMO). With TFB on the roster I’d rather use that pick on someone to protect Brady or on a receiver for him to throw to.

Also, there is NO guarantee that a 1st round QB we draft will turn into Aaron Rodgers, they completely hit the lottery with him. IMO Rodgers is one of the best QBs to ever play, he’d be my pick as QB if I were to start a franchise.

All this really comes down to resource allocation, and while we risk bad results with the “Dolphins approach” there’s plenty of risk with the Green Bay approach, they were also in a situation where they really didn’t know if Farve would actually retire that off-season or talk about it for another 3-4yrs, thankfully we don’t have that problem with Brady, who has stated his intention to play “till his arm falls off”.

 

[manxman2601]

How many teams draft 1st round QBs only for them to completely suck? The big problem with spending a 1st round pick on a QB is that it means we can't spend it elsewhere, lowering Brady’s chances of winning. Brady isn’t slowing down due to age, the issue is more with his supporting cast and the playcalling (IMO). With TFB on the roster I’d rather use that pick on someone to protect Brady or on a receiver for him to throw to.

Also, there is NO guarantee that a 1st round QB we draft will turn into Aaron Rodgers, they completely hit the lottery with him. IMO Rodgers is one of the best QBs to ever play, he’d be my pick as QB if I were to start a franchise.

All this really comes down to resource allocation, and while we risk bad results with the “Dolphins approach” there’s plenty of risk with the Green Bay approach, they were also in a situation where they really didn’t know if Farve would actually retire that off-season or talk about it for another 3-4yrs, thankfully we don’t have that problem with Brady, who has stated his intention to play “till his arm falls off”.

Sure you miss out on 1 1st round pick but compared with the prospects of another franchise QB, that's almost meaningless. If you don't take a QB outside of the top 48 picks, you've got a less than 10% chance of him being a success. Those are horrible odds.



2014 NFL Draft: Evaluating QB success by draft pick - Bucs Nation


And this is why we see the likes of the RGIII trade, the Tannehill and Weeden picks and what happened in 2011. GM's understand this but it's something fans tend to resist.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Sure you miss out on 1 1st round pick but compared with the prospects of another franchise QB, that's almost meaningless. If you don't take a QB outside of the top 48 picks, you've got a less than 10% chance of him being a success. Those are horrible odds.



2014 NFL Draft: Evaluating QB success by draft pick - Bucs Nation


And this is why we see the likes of the RGIII trade, the Tannehill and Weeden picks and what happened in 2011. GM's understand this but it's something fans tend to resist.

The thing is that if I'm a GM I really don't care about stats, if I'm a smart GM anyway. I care about the specific players I'm looking at and how well they fit into what I'm trying to do with my offense. If it's necessary to go early first round to get that QB then do it but I wouldn't shy away from a QB because they weren't a first round prospect.

The risks being what they are, unless Brady is in clear decline I'd rather err on the side of using picks to support him rather than using those resources on a potential replacement.

 

[manxman2601]

The thing is that if I'm a GM I really don't care about stats, if I'm a smart GM anyway. I care about the specific players I'm looking at and how well they fit into what I'm trying to do with my offense. If it's necessary to go early first round to get that QB then do it but I wouldn't shy away from a QB because they weren't a first round prospect.

This isn't what I said. I'm fine taking mid level QBs for the next 2-3 years and hoping to catch lightning in a bottle for a second time but this approach shouldn't be used as a replace Brady strategy. When the time comes that BB decides to find his Brady replacement, my argument is that nothing else should get in the way of getting the right guy which almost certainly mean drafting one in the first round and may mean trading up. The QB position is just too important to prevaricate about. It needs decisive action.

 

[Snake Eyes]

This isn't what I said. I'm fine taking mid level QBs for the next 2-3 years and hoping to catch lightning in a bottle for a second time but this approach shouldn't be used as a replace Brady strategy. When the time comes that BB decides to find his Brady replacement, my argument is that nothing else should get in the way of getting the right guy which almost certainly mean drafting one in the first round and may mean trading up. The QB position is just too important to prevaricate about. It needs decisive action.

I'm fine with that assuming you're confident he's the guy. Although the Redskins paid a hefty premium for RG3 it looks like a bargain compared to what the Browns have spent on their franchise deadbeats. Suppose Brady was done and it too 3 first rounders to get Andrew Luck, I'd pay it, I'd prefer to completely tank the season and go 0-16 but you get the point.

 

[manxman2601]

]I'm fine with that assuming you're confident he's the guy. [/B] Although the Redskins paid a hefty premium for RG3 it looks like a bargain compared to what the Browns have spent on their franchise deadbeats. Suppose Brady was done and it too 3 first rounders to get Andrew Luck, I'd pay it, I'd prefer to completely tank the season and go 0-16 but you get the point.

Oh absolutely. I'm certainly not advocating spending first round picks on QBs you don't think will be franchise guys. Which is why I'd rather take the Redskins approach on RGIII than the Browns approach on Brandon Weeden.

Edit: I'd settle for what the 49ers did with Kaepernick or the Bengals with Dalton although neither is optimum.

 

[patchick]

Startling fact.

In the last 20 years, only three QB's taken outside the top 33 have won a Superbowl: Tom Brady, Brett Favre and Kurt Warner.

Let's take another angle on that startling fact. Would we all feel a little better if it said that 10 of the last 25 Superbowls were won by QBs drafted outside of round 1? Because that's also true, it's just a slightly different cherry-picking of stats.

Or how about the fact that 6 of the past 10 Superbowl-LOSING QBs were drafted after round 1? (And before you dismiss the losers, remember that their list is just as rich in hall of famers as the winning list.)

1st rounders have the highest rate of success across the board; I'm not sure it's any more true at QB than other positions. But if your argument is that QBs are so important that you have to throw all your draft ammo in that direction, I could see that.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Here's the problem: you're weighting two contradictory goals against one another.

(1) Maximizing the talent around Brady for the rest of his Patriots career.
(2) Minimizing the dropoff of talent at QB post-Brady while probably NOT having a top-10 pick to do it with.

I don't envy the Patriots here.

 

[manxman2601]

Let's take another angle on that startling fact. Would we all feel a little better if it said that 10 of the last 25 Superbowls were won by QBs drafted outside of round 1? Because that's also true, it's just a slightly different cherry-picking of stats.

Or how about the fact that 6 of the past 10 Superbowl-LOSING QBs were drafted after round 1? (And before you dismiss the losers, remember that their list is just as rich in hall of famers as the winning list.)

1st rounders have the highest rate of success across the board; I'm not sure it's any more true at QB than other positions. But if your argument is that QBs are so important that you have to throw all your draft ammo in that direction, I could see that.

So I can't be accused of cherry picking facts, let's lay things open.

going back to and including SBXX the following drafted QBs have appeared:

32 1st Rnd QB
4 2nd
5 3rd
1 4th
8 6th
1 9th
4 UDFA
1 Supplemental

If someone wants to argue that that is just a result of a standard bias of 1st round talent regardless of the position then that's fine. Regardless, 70% of SB appearing QBs were drafted in the first round. Would anyone want to throw their lot in on the 30%?

By the way, consider that Drew Brees doesn't count towards that 70% figure even though he was included in my initial thesis. Also take in to account that Jeff Hoestettler (non 1st round) is included ahead of Phil Simms (1st round) on one of those appearances despite the fact that Phil Simms did most of the work that season (11-2) record. add those two into the first round ledger and you're looking at 75%.

 

[manxman2601]

just one more piece of evidence.

currently active QBs picked in the first three rounds:

 

[everlong]

Startling fact.

In the last 20 years, only three QB's taken outside the top 33 have won a Superbowl: Tom Brady, Brett Favre and Kurt Warner.

Whenever we choose to find Brady's replacement, we should start to get comfortable with the fact that we'll probably need to spend a first rounder on one. AJ McCarron in the third is probably not going to cut it.

Drew Brees was taken 32nd but was a 2nd round pick.

 

[everlong]

I think the problem is most teams, rightfully so, live by Jimmy Johnson's quote, "It used to be a quarterback-driven league. Now that’s the only thing", so they reach and chase. The important thing is to identify the right QB.

You recently posted the Bill Walsh theory on finding a QB. Breaking down what Walsh said by category we have.

Instincts, mental and emotional make up, how they throw, arm strength, ability to throw any route, quick delivery, touch, ability to read a defense, ability to work through a progression, mobility, ability to play through injuries and ability to make plays under pressure in crunch time AKA clutch.

I would add to Walsh's list leadership qualities and accuracy.

How do you quantify these and how would you rank them?

I think the problem is many teams rank ability to throw every pass, arm strength and delivery mechanics too high and they don't look at the mental aspects of the game enough. Montana, Young and especially Brees don't have cannon arms. Phillip Rivers has a throwing motion that looks like he's short arming the ball at times. Chad Pennington had a noodle arm and if not for injuries and getting stuck with the Jets I think he might have been capable of being a HOFer.

You look at some of the picks in the first round and they were all about the arm and ability to make every throw. Carson Palmer, Bryon Leftwich, David Carr, JP Losman, Kyle Boller, Jason Campbell, Alex Smith, Vince Young, Jay Cutler, JaMarcus Russell, Josh Freeman, Sam Bradford, Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, Blaine Gabbert,

The outliers to that are Matt Leinart, Brady Quinn, Mark Sanchez, Tim Tebow and Bradon Weeden. With the exception of Weeden they were all overrated because of the successful program they came from. Weeden it the Browns effect of being clueless.

Some of the younger guys like Geno Smith, EJ Manual, Ryan Tannehill it's haviing the arm and mobility.

Looking at this year's potential first rounders of Bridgewater, Mariota, Manziel, Carr, Mettenberger and Hundley. I would only take Bridgewater and Carr in the first.

Maiota will be a first rounder because he has a big arm and is moble. I don't think his accuracy is good enough nor his decision making.

Manziel is exciting and has a big arm. He may be semi successful in a Jay Cutler way but will never lead a team to a championship and is not a leader.

Carr is very accurate, by all accounts a good leader and while not in the class of Manziel or Maiota athletically he is moble.

Mettenberger he has the size and arm teams want and couple that with the big school he'll get over drafted. He could turn out to be a decent QB if you can sit him for a year or two but teams don't do that these days.

Hundley has the arm and highlight film of down the field throws to excite teams. I don't see him being able to read the short to intermediate routes to move the chains.

 

[VrabelMayeWin]

I want McCarron but I think he'll be gone by our #2. I think Mettenberger will drop like Mallett did due to his past. Right now I would :

- Keep Mallett next year. Would love to get something for him but we have no backup with system knowledge without him unless Cassell comes back.

- Draft Mettenberger in the 3rd round.

- Let Mallett walk after 2014 when Mettenberger will have a year of experience.

- Revisit when Brady's contract expires or if age catches up with him before that.

REALLY want above scenario with McCarron but I think he'll go no later than early round 2 and we can't afford our #1 on him

Obviously I would look at other QBs from the 3rd round on if Mettenberger is gone. If whoever we draft doesn't look good enough for the long term we can use a #1 on THE guy in the 2015-2016 draft.