RuntheDamnBall Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 2-3 years IS the going rate, most GMs are scared of drafting two QBs #1 in a row because of their own and their QBs fragile egos. In retrospect, however, it may not be a bad idea. Most GMs can't draft. It's an incredibly difficult job and there are only 3-4 in the entire league that consistently do it pretty well. I'd also imagine there is fear out there that once you do that, you've basically given up on the next Favre, Warner, Brees, Young -- and the list of guys who have gone on to flourish with other teams is longer than the list of QBs who have eclipsed a young starter, I think.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 If you can come up with even one single plausible/acceptable/good answer EJ could have given to that question, I will agree with you. I don't feel there is one. There are all kinds of reasonable answers to give. If I were him, I would say, for example, "There's no reason for the Bills to draft a QB #1 this year, but if they did, I'll beat him out. But let me ask you, you were scared away from an awesome Bills message board and took your ball and went home, should the Buffalo News offer your job to Craig James?
BADOLBILZ Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Still, this happened once in the past 25 years, with a team that at that time was more terrible than the current Bills, and a team that executed one of the great draft-pick pillagings of all time in the Herschel Walker trade. Given all this, could we fairly call the situation a bit of an outlier? Context, context, context. You're a smarter man than I am, so I know that you know this. Fortune favors the bold. And in retrospect how many teams thought they had a good enough QB, found out they didn't and after-the-fact wished they had taken that other quarterback? The Bills passed on Drew Brees when they thought Rob Johnson might be their man. The Bills passed on Flacco and Cutler in round 1 and then obviously a flurry of quality QB's in recent years. Getting the quarterback is all that matters. The protocol is irrelevant. As has been the case with all of the poorly managed Bills teams of the past 14 years, those who favor the "patch mode" of drafting are more likely to be right because the staffs in charge of the Bills have an equally shortsighted approach to franchise building, as their primary motivation is to compete for a playoff spot and prolong their employment beyond 3 years. It's EASY to not draft a QB. EJ was the first QB the Bills have selected with their very first pick in any draft since 1960.........and even then they initially traded out of the pick and took EJ later. The Bills are the ANTITHESIS of bold as an organization traditionally and not suprisingly they have not only never won a SB but have never even had a HC or starting QB who had won a SB elsewhere. The Bills specialize in playing it safe and it's funny to me that so many fans don't see the folly in their conservative approach. Bottom line: no quarterback, no sustained winning. It is by far the most important aspect of team building and putting all the eggs in the basket of a project like EJ is an ultraconservative play.
billsfan1959 Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 So it is a rare occasion then ? can we agree on that ? And the second 1st round pick was not the 1st first round picks superior judged by the Cowboys. Hence trading him away to the Saints. Are we agreed upon that ? Can anyone here in this room see that there is no prior evidence that this is or ever was a successful stragedy in the NFL based upon the evidence brought forth by the prosecution ? so drafting a # one QB next year at nine when the most needy teams will have already scooped the most desirable ones ( and thats debatable if i may inject sirs) is reasonable ? thats my loud voice I think not , kind jurors all. I'll go further...I think it would be a bad idea to draft a quarterback in the first round even if they were all there to choose from at #9.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Fortune favors the bold. And in retrospect how many teams thought they had a good enough QB, found out they didn't and after-the-fact wished they had taken that other quarterback? The Bills passed on Drew Brees when they thought Rob Johnson might be their man. The Bills passed on Flacco and Cutler in round 1 and then obviously a flurry of quality QB's in recent years. Getting the quarterback is all that matters. The protocol is irrelevant. As has been the case with all of the poorly managed Bills teams of the past 14 years, those who favor the "patch mode" of drafting are more likely to be right because the staffs in charge of the Bills have an equally shortsighted approach to franchise building, as their primary motivation is to compete for a playoff spot and prolong their employment beyond 3 years. It's EASY to not draft a QB. EJ was the first QB the Bills have selected with their very first pick in any draft since 1960.........and even then they initially traded out of the pick and took EJ later. The Bills are the ANTITHESIS of bold as an organization traditionally and not suprisingly they have not only never won a SB but have never even had a HC or starting QB who had won a SB elsewhere. The Bills specialize in playing it safe and it's funny to me that so many fans don't see the folly in their conservative approach. Bottom line: no quarterback, no sustained winning. It is by far the most important aspect of team building and putting all the eggs in the basket of a project like EJ is an ultraconservative play. New England hasn't drafted a QB with a first pick since Drew Bledsoe. Fortune favors the bold indeed. The past Super Bowl winners include Flacco - a mid-first rounder a la EJ - Robo - the third QB taken in 2004, Eli Manning, a late first rounder (Rodgers), a second-rounder on his second team (Brees), Peyton, and sixth rounder Brady. Kurt Warner is also in the mix with two appearances over that time, and McNabb, Delhomme, Grossman, Kaepernick and Dilfer have appeared in SBs. Wilson is the latest addition - a third rounder who was undervalued. I think a goodly number of these guys had question marks hanging over their heads as to whether they were "the guy" at some point during their careers. Eli looked like a lost child for a good duration of his early years. This all gives me hope for EJ, who has as good an attitude as anybody.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 and we dont know that yet ! I'm of the opinion that: 1] back-up QB is a very important position on the team. I'm not convinced we have one. it's possible that EJ is a great back-up QB but not a star QB. 2] I'm not convinced that EJ is going to be a star. If I HAD to bet, it's less than 33% or so. Any QB even high in the first round is less than 50%. 3] I'm also of the opinion that it's extremely hard to find a star QB outside of drafting one #1. It's the only position of 22 that is true of. 4] I'm lastly of the opinion that it doesn't matter what round you draft good players in, if they're good players they're good players, and a great number of #1 draft picks are busts at all positions. Given those four opinions, and looking at them all together in relationship with the draft, it may not be a bad idea to draft a QB #1 in two consecutive years.
Doc Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 Fortune favors the bold. And in retrospect how many teams thought they had a good enough QB, found out they didn't and after-the-fact wished they had taken that other quarterback? The problem is identifying that "other quarterback."
K-9 Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 I love when people state opinions as absolute facts. Unfortunately it makes real actual discussion impossible. I can state as absolute fact that Trent Richardson would never fetch a 1st round draft choice in a trade. GO BILLS!!!
BADOLBILZ Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 I guess the GM's of the following teams aren't privy to your level of football player depreciation acumen: Misc Games Rk Year Rnd Pick Player Pos Tm From To AP1 PB St CarAV G GS Int Sk College/Univ 1 2011 1 2 Von Miller LB DEN 2011 2013 1 2 3 33 40 40 1 35.0 Texas A&M 2 2010 1 8 Rolando McClain LB OAK 2010 2012 0 0 3 16 41 38 1 6.5 Alabama 3 2009 1 4 Aaron Curry LB SEA 2009 2012 0 0 3 24 48 39 5.5 Wake Forest 4 2008 1 9 Keith Rivers LB CIN 2008 2013 0 0 3 22 62 48 2 3.0 USC 5 2008 1 10 Jerod Mayo LB NWE 2008 2013 1 2 6 44 81 79 3 9.0 Tennessee 6 2006 1 5 A.J. Hawk LB GNB 2006 2013 0 0 8 53 126 123 9 18.5 Ohio St. 7 2006 1 9 Ernie Sims LB DET 2006 2013 0 0 4 30 109 87 1 5.5 Florida St. 8 2003 1 10 Terrell Suggs LB BAL 2003 2013 1 6 9 89 165 149 7 94.5 Arizona St. 9 2000 1 2 LaVar Arrington LB WAS 2000 2006 0 3 5 46 84 72 3 23.5 Penn St. 10 2000 1 9 Brian Urlacher LB CHI 2000 2012 4 8 Some fairly impactful players on that list. The fact is many draft picks at any position don't pan out to have the impact the organization that drafted them hopes for One might even make a cogent argument for the word "most" That also impacts the QB position. Just curious, according to your depreciation schedule how many draft picks in what round are former first-10 draft picks Ryan Tannehill, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert, Sam Bradford, or Mark Sanchez are worth today? There is one player on that list who played on a SB winner......Suggs........who missed most of that season with a torn achilles. Von Miller's team is in the SB but he is on IR and made a modest impact this year after a long suspension prior to tearing up his knee. LB's rarely change the fortunes of a franchise. QB's do it all the time. Not really a list of greats, btw.
RuntheDamnBall Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 I'm of the opinion that: 1] back-up QB is a very important position on the team. I'm not convinced we have one. it's possible that EJ is a great back-up QB but not a star QB. 2] I'm not convinced that EJ is going to be a star. If I HAD to bet, it's less than 33% or so. Any QB even high in the first round is less than 50%. The second statement in particular could have been applied to Flacco or Eli until they got hardware.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 The problem is identifying that "other quarterback." His argument though, and it's a reasonable one, is that you cannot win without a great QB, and as you said, it's difficult identifying them, so you keep choosing one until you do. While no one is going to draft one first every year, in his scenario, he'd have a chance every year, you'd have a chance every 3-4 years. The second statement in particular could have been applied to Flacco or Eli until they got hardware. While that is true, without looking up names, I would guess there were at least ten #1 QB picks for every Eli and Joe that played as bad as Eli and Joe did in the first three years who never became good and only got hardware from the hardware store they were working in after flaming out 4-5 years into their career.
BADOLBILZ Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 I can state as absolute fact that Trent Richardson would never fetch a 1st round draft choice in a trade. GO BILLS!!! The common thread in the case of the Colts and Seahawks trading first round picks for Richardson and Harvin was that they felt that those first round picks would be very late first round picks IF they had those players. There was some mystery with regard to what Richardson was capable of.......unlike with CJ Spiller today......... and he was on a cheap contract. Turned out to be an awful deal. The Harvin trade was a head scratcher....... but the Seahawks are a very bold organization. They have drafted so well that they are playing with house money on draft day and felt they could take a chance. Is there an outside chance that the Bills could trade one of their players for a first round pick that projects in the late 20's. Yes. But it is a very slim chance though because of the reasons I have detailed. Of that slim chance the majority of that would be a trade AFTER the draft, which would allow the acquiring team to essentially double down, while the Bills would be forced to play shorthanded for a season to get that first round pick.
4merper4mer Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 There are all kinds of reasonable answers to give. If I were him, I would say, for example, "There's no reason for the Bills to draft a QB #1 this year, but if they did, I'll beat him out. But let me ask you, you were scared away from an awesome Bills message board and took your ball and went home, should the Buffalo News offer your job to Craig James? That's funny no doubt, but can also easily help portray EJ as arrogant, condescending and maybe even a stalker. I like the answer but Graham would have spun that 100 ways to Sunday.
Doc Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 His argument though, and it's a reasonable one, is that you cannot win without a great QB, and as you said, it's difficult identifying them, so you keep choosing one until you do. While no one is going to draft one first every year, in his scenario, he'd have a chance every year, you'd have a chance every 3-4 years. I can see your point. But teams still don't do this.
Mr. WEO Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 His argument though, and it's a reasonable one, is that you cannot win without a great QB, and as you said, it's difficult identifying them, so you keep choosing one until you do. While no one is going to draft one first every year, in his scenario, he'd have a chance every year, you'd have a chance every 3-4 years. While that is true, without looking up names, I would guess there were at least ten #1 QB picks for every Eli and Joe that played as bad as Eli and Joe did in the first three years who never became good and only got hardware from the hardware store they were working in after flaming out 4-5 years into their career. Flacco won at least 1 playoff game in each of his first 4 seasons before his SB winning season. I can see your point. But teams still don't do this. GMs aren't known generally for their long term success GM'ing
Doc Posted February 2, 2014 Posted February 2, 2014 GMs aren't known generally for their long term success GM'ing They would last even less time if they drafted a QB every year, much less in the 1st 2 rounds.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 They would last even less time if they drafted a QB every year, much less in the 1st 2 rounds. And you know this how? Which has more chance of hitting on a star QB with a #1 pick, when the long history of the draft is that it is significantly less than 50%, hitting on it one year's guess or three years in a row?
Doc Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 And you know this how? Which has more chance of hitting on a star QB with a #1 pick, when the long history of the draft is that it is significantly less than 50%, hitting on it one year's guess or three years in a row? Probably about an equal chance. Otherwise GMs would do it.
Kelly the Dog Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 (edited) Probably about an equal chance. Otherwise GMs would do it. Well, no coaches would start a 3rd round runt of a QB over a 25 mil prize free agent QB until one did, and that team is winning the Super Bowl 22-0 right now. The reason they don't IMO is because it would appear (although wouldn't be true) that they would be admitting they were wrong the year before and that the guy they picked they are giving up on, even though, again, neither of those are likely to be true. Edited February 3, 2014 by Kelly the Dog
Doc Posted February 3, 2014 Posted February 3, 2014 Well, no coaches would start a 3rd round runt of a QB over a 25 mil prize free agent QB until one did, and that team is winning the Super Bowl 22-0 right now. The reason they don't IMO is because it would appear (although wouldn't be true) that they would be admitting they were wrong the year before and that the guy they picked they are giving up on, even though, again, neither of those are likely to be true. Wilson outplayed Flynn in pre-season and showed that his height, which was the only negative about him, wasn't a factor. But he's a lone exception and you won't find too many teams going all-in on a 5'11" QB just because Wilson succeeded. And he was what, the 5th QB taken?
Recommended Posts