You're the GM of an expansion team! . . .

[NoSaint]

given the premise set forth in the OP with regards to KNOWING these players will be successful...

 

I take the QB, without question.

 

 

Kind of by definition a successful qb means a successful team..... is there a hall of fame qb with a losing record, no sb rings, but a ton of probowls?

 

I think that fact makes it hard to really put those positions head to head.

 

if you are saying the qb will have a hof resume i take that because of what it means for the team. if you are saying hof talent, i trade back and build the team with 1 of three elite talents, and 2 extra picks. If you are locked at 1 i think you go qb, but i think a DE or LT or QB along with 2 extra high end players will do more for building a franchise from scratch then any one of those players alone.

[Orton's Arm]

So far this poll has helped restore some of my faith in the collective football IQ around here.

 

According to Polian (at least when he said so in the mid-nineties) the first position you want to secure is the most important one of all, QB. Then he said you should get your HOF DE to pressure the other teams' most important position and then you get your HOF LT to protect yours. I'm not sure if he hasn't shifted his line of thinking about the DE or LT since then as the league has evolved into much more of a passing league (let's not make the mistake of confusing a passer with a QB).

 

It's all a crapshoot though. Manning wasn't Manning before he was Manning. Bruce wasn't Bruce before he was Bruce, etc. But if you as a GM feel there is a QB with that kind of potential then you take him every time. You have to secure the most important position first and foremost if you have the opportunity. Great QBs are a scarce commodity to say the least.

 

GO BILLS!!!

 

Disclaimer: Any similarities between this post and others that have upset PDaDdy's sense of real-world relevance as to what the Bills will do in this year's draft if purely coincidental.

I agree with this, and with Polian's approach. The quarterback is the most difficult to find player, so you take him first (if there's one there waiting to be taken). The next hardest-to-find player is the DE, so if it's a choice between Bruce and Orlando, I'd choose Bruce. Though I admit it would be a tough call, and that it's of paramount importance to give your shiny new QB the protection he needs. Look what Kurt Warner and Orlando Pace were able to achieve when working together! That was a really nice combination while it lasted.

 

To address your point about the Manning/Leaf debate--I remember it quite clearly. Manning was described as the more "polished" and "NFL-ready" quarterback--the one who offered the most near-term potential, and that would be best for a short-sighted team that wanted to get good right away. But for a team that was willing to adopt a more patient approach, Ryan Leaf supposedly offered the greater level of long-term "potential" due to his physical gifts. I remember reading those descriptions and thinking that a team should definitely choose Manning over Leaf. You always want the "polished passer," and never the "project" QB with a ton of physical potential.

[thewildrabbit]

I agree with this, and with Polian's approach. The quarterback is the most difficult to find player, so you take him first (if there's one there waiting to be taken). The next hardest-to-find player is the DE, so if it's a choice between Bruce and Orlando, I'd choose Bruce. Though I admit it would be a tough call, and that it's of paramount importance to give your shiny new QB the protection he needs. Look what Kurt Warner and Orlando Pace were able to achieve when working together! That was a really nice combination while it lasted.

 

To address your point about the Manning/Leaf debate--I remember it quite clearly. Manning was described as the more "polished" and "NFL-ready" quarterback--the one who offered the most near-term potential, and that would be best for a short-sighted team that wanted to get good right away. But for a team that was willing to adopt a more patient approach, Ryan Leaf supposedly offered the greater level of long-term "potential" due to his physical gifts. I remember reading those descriptions and thinking that a team should definitely choose Manning over Leaf. You always want the "polished passer," and never the "project" QB with a ton of physical potential.

I would agree QB, but you know what...

 

In all the years I've been around football and watching it, Ive seen only one sure thing at QB and that was John Elway, and even then Marino made him look like a bad pick the first few years. Marino was drafted 27 out of 28 by the Dolphins, almost last.

 

Take that 1983 draft, the Bills took Tony Hunter with their first #1 at 12 and Jim Kelly with the second #1 at 14. Tony Hunter... who ?

 

Come to think of it the KC Chiefs had their choice of Jim Kelly-Dan Marino-Ken O'Brian-Tony Eason and took Tod Blackledge at no. 7 in the first round

 

My point is that finding that "save your franchise" QB is a lot tougher then then any of you think. The Bills already wasted a #1 pick on JP Losman.

 

To waste a #1 on Sam Bradford who "might" never recover from his injury, and "if" he is able to regain his accuracy and arm strength. I suppose the world will see at his pro day. Clausen is recovering from foot surgery, Colt McCoy is also recovering from an Injury.