The Importance of the QB Position

[DCofNC]

If Love works out, it’s another “Brilliant” move.  If not it’s a shame to not give A Rodgers more weapons 

[BillsFan619]

10 hours ago, Albany,n.y. said:

I remember years ago there was a faction that said never draft a QB in the 1st round & never draft a QB until you've built other parts of your team 1st.  They would back up their ideas with stats showing only 50% of 1st round QBs failed and others were "ruined" by lack of weapons around the QB.  

 

I've always believed the QB is so important that if you scout a guy who you think is the answer you move heaven & earth to get the guy unless you have a QB in his prime.  It's better to prepare to replace your franchise QB if he's on the wrong side of 35, although nowadays guys like Brady & Brees are playing long past the expiration date of a franchise QB.  

 

I firmly believe if you take the same team and it's a 12-4 team with a franchise QB, if that team has a below average QB they'd be 4-12.  Just look at the 2010-2012 Colts.  With Manning in 2010 they were 10-6, in 2011 with no answer at QB they were 2-14, in 2012 with rookie Andrew Luck they went 11-5.  The QB may not be everything,  but he's pretty much the only thing.  As the old WGR parody song said "with no quarterbackin' get those bags a packin'" 

The part that I bolded, I was pretty much thinking something similar.

 

Obviously a QB needs a surrounding cast but put a below average starting QB on our current team and we’d be a below .500 team. Also, having a great QB can keep you competitive when a team doesn’t have the surrounding cast.

 

Not saying a team has never won it with an average QB (Trent Dilfer) but it doesn’t happen often and that was a different era.

 

Well said, bro!

Edited November 24, 2020 by BillsFan619

[GunnerBill]

12 hours ago, Shaw66 said:

Difference is that Bills had a lame duck GM and everyone knew the next year was loaded with QBs. So skipping on Mahomes and getting draft ammo in the trade made sense. Giants didn't see a stocked draft class in the following year and used their #2 pick, so they couldn't improve their draft position,  either.  

 

Both Giants and Broncos were looking at a hole at QB and did nothing to get in position to fill it. 

 

Agreed. I wanted the Bills to take a QB in 2017 but I understood why they waited. And they could afford to wait because everyone knew the 2018 class was loaded with prospects. The Giants with a really glaring obvious need waited and then left themselves dipping into a poor class. I described the 2019 draft as "the closest to the 2013 Quarterback wasteland we have seen" until Kyler Murray changed course late in the day and declared. He was the only first round Quarterback in that class IMO. Jones isn't awful..... he can start in the NFL. But that feels like it's kind of his ceiling. They came out of those two first round picks with a running back (albeit an elite one) and a QB who is starter calibre but not much more.

 

I will defend the Broncos a tad more. They also had a lame duck going into the 2018 draft in that they had a lame duck coach. I don't think Elway had any faith in Vance Joseph at all by that point (he should have fired him after his first season which he reportedly was ready to do before an 11th hour mind change) and I don't think he wanted to give him a rookie. He also then didn't reach for a non first round talent in the first round in 2019, trading back and picking up Fant and Risner before taking a shot with his third pick of the draft (in the 2nd round) at Drew Lock. Now at this moment in time Drew Lock is still a question mark. He had a nice little cameo at the end of 2019 but has played mostly poorly in 2020..... but equally of the guys who were there for him to pick at #5 Allen has hit and Rosen has missed so he had a 50/50 shot. They came out of those two first round picks with an elite pass rusher, an ascending young tight end and a really good starting guard as well as the QB who is a TBC.  

 

That isn't to say the Broncos don't deserve some criticism of missing on Josh Allen. But their approach to the 2018 and 2019 drafts is certainly more defensible than the approach the Giants took.

[Shaw66]

2 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agreed. I wanted the Bills to take a QB in 2017 but I understood why they waited. And they could afford to wait because everyone knew the 2018 class was loaded with prospects. The Giants with a really glaring obvious need waited and then left themselves dipping into a poor class. I described the 2019 draft as "the closest to the 2013 Quarterback wasteland we have seen" until Kyler Murray changed course late in the day and declared. He was the only first round Quarterback in that class IMO. Jones isn't awful..... he can start in the NFL. But that feels like it's kind of his ceiling. They came out of those two first round picks with a running back (albeit an elite one) and a QB who is starter calibre but not much more.

 

I will defend the Broncos a tad more. They also had a lame duck going into the 2018 draft in that they had a lame duck coach. I don't think Elway had any faith in Vance Joseph at all by that point (he should have fired him after his first season which he reportedly was ready to do before an 11th hour mind change) and I don't think he wanted to give him a rookie. He also then didn't reach for a non first round talent in the first round in 2019, trading back and picking up Fant and Risner before taking a shot with his third pick of the draft (in the 2nd round) at Drew Lock. Now at this moment in time Drew Lock is still a question mark. He had a nice little cameo at the end of 2019 but has played mostly poorly in 2020..... but equally of the guys who were there for him to pick at #5 Allen has hit and Rosen has missed so he had a 50/50 shot. They came out of those two first round picks with an elite pass rusher, an ascending young tight end and a really good starting guard as well as the QB who is a TBC.  

 

That isn't to say the Broncos don't deserve some criticism of missing on Josh Allen. But their approach to the 2018 and 2019 drafts is certainly more defensible than the approach the Giants took.

Thanks.  That's a fair explanation of what Elway may have been thinking.  Especially the Vance Joseph part - if you don't have confidence in your head coach, it's risky making a big bet on a top pick at QB.  Still, I like the aggressiveness the Cardinals showed - get Josh Rosen, pull the trigger pretty quickly when it's clear he isn't the guy, change your coach, go after Murray.  Granted, all the pieces fell in place for Arizona, but it still took courage at the top of the organization to be that bold. 

 

On the other hand, I was struck again last night by this point about the importance of the QB.  The announcers at ESPN, who talk too much but aren't horrible, were talking about how Aaron Donald may be the best player in the league, and then said that Jalen Ramsey maybe can make that claim.   For me, that's all so much nonsense.  There was no question at all last night that Jared Goff was more important to that team than Aaron Donald.  With Goff playing well, that team can compete, whether they have Donald or not.   Heck, the Bears maybe have two of the five best defensive linemen in the game, but it makes no difference because they don't have a QB.  

 

A theme I've been talking about lately is that an NFL team needs four things for long-term success:  Good owner, good GM, good head coach, good quarterback.  All the rest is just clay that the GM acquires and the head coach molds.    McVay is no doubt thrilled to have Aaron Donald playing on his defensive line, but if he and his GM are any good, without Donald they'd just have different solutions for their defensive problems.  Which is not to say that talent at the other positions is irrelevant - it sure looks like the Bills have a raw talent deficiency on their defensive line.  McDermott can coach 'em up all he wants, but it doesn't look like he can get the performance out of them that he needs.  But that just means that Beane, who's generally done a good job acquiring talent, didn't get quite enough on the d line this year.  He'll work on it in the off-season.  That's completely different from leaving your head coach with Daniel Jones who, I agree, looks like an NFL starter but not like a QB you want to build your future on.  

[C.Biscuit97]

It has never been easier to be an nfl qb. The league is begging you to pass. That said, as a result, it’s never been harder to determine who is a legit, franchise carrying qb.

 

take Goff. I think I like him better than most. He’s good but I don’t ever see him being great. If I was a Rams fan, I would be happy. But secretly might I rather have a rookie or a young guy with McVay and have $25 million more to work with? I think that’s a no brainer.

 

and I’m not jinxing anything but I thought Allen got way too much credit last year. He got carried by a good defense and a crap schedule.  This year, and fingers crossed, he has carried the team a bunch of the season and that’s what you look for. 

[Shaw66]

1 hour ago, C.Biscuit97 said:

It has never been easier to be an nfl qb. The league is begging you to pass. That said, as a result, it’s never been harder to determine who is a legit, franchise carrying qb.

 

take Goff. I think I like him better than most. He’s good but I don’t ever see him being great. If I was a Rams fan, I would be happy. But secretly might I rather have a rookie or a young guy with McVay and have $25 million more to work with? I think that’s a no brainer.

 

and I’m not jinxing anything but I thought Allen got way too much credit last year. He got carried by a good defense and a crap schedule.  This year, and fingers crossed, he has carried the team a bunch of the season and that’s what you look for. 

Some interesting stuff here.  I think you're right about Allen last year and this - the team carried him last year, and he's been doing a lot of the carrying this year. 

 

I know you're a "rookie contract" guy, and I get the logic - you can buy a lot short-term talent with that extra $25 million every year.   I don't like that approach, primarily because there just aren't that many guys who are likely to win you a Super Bowl.  Wilson, Mahomes, and Wentz (even though he was injured).  Watson might have done it.  Lamar maybe.  Murray maybe.  Allen maybe.  

 

As you say, it's easier to play QB as a rookie in the NFL than it used to be.   I'm sure that's a temporary condition.   The best, sustained QB play still comes from the veterans, because they understand what's happening on the field.   Right now the NFL is dumbed down for those rookie starters, but it's because the defenses haven't completely adjusted to the running QB.  As the adjustments continue, the running QBs will be less of a threat, and then they'll be stuck again, having to play from the pocket.  

 

On the other hand, if you sign a good QB to a long term contract, you have superior talent behind the line of scrimmage every year for the next 10-15 years.  Yes, you have $25 million less to spend, but here's where your own argument gets turned against you.  Yes, with $25 million I can sign a Clowney or Hopkins, or I can sign five stud position players.   But without the $25 million, I can sign a bunch of free agent role players, undrafted rookies, etc.  I have a much simpler position to teach them than the position you have to teach to your rookie QB.  I can keep throwing Milanos and Boettgers and Wallaces out there endlessly.   With your approach, every few years you're looking for someone to play the most difficult position in all of sports.  With my approach, I'm just looking for ordinary guys to be role players.