Hey Excalibur, My point is that you don't panic and reach and burn mortgage draft capital unless you're absolutely sure you have the next Mahomes or Rodgers. You can find good QBs in lower rounds. 

Just for fun, I looked up the 2019 QB starters not drafted in R1 and their draft number: Carolina: Kyle Allen (UDFA), Will Grier (100); Bengals: Dalton (35); Cowboys: Prescott (135); Denver: Drew Lock (42); Detroit: Blough (UDFA); Indy: Brissett (91); Jacksonville: Minshew (178); Miami: Fitzpatrick (250); Minnesota: Cousins (102); Patriots: Brady (199); Raiders: Carr (36); Pittsburgh: Rudolph (76); SF: Garropolo (62); Seattle: Wilson (75); Washington: Keenum (UDFA). Worthy mentions: Brees was #32, as was his replacement this year, Bridgewater.

No, not all of them are HOFers, but a) it's hard to find the next Rodgers, Brady or Brees in any round, and b) some of them were tossed into situations that didn't help their development. 

I think when GB drafted Hundley they saw him with some potential, and we all know how that worked out. I'm not sure if they saw potential in Boyle or just wanted a decent camp body. I'm thinking that this year Gutey will keep a closer watch for QBs. 

Just for fun, part 2: Of the starters in 2019 who were drafted in R1, only a few were worthy of the position: Mahomes, Jackson, Rodgers, Rivers, Ryan. (I'd put Stafford here if he had played more this year.) Some should have definitely gone in lower rounds: Mayfield, Goff, Tannehill, Watson (I just can't get behind him). Some are "jury's still out": Murray, J. Allen, Darnold, Jones, Haskins. At least two are close to bust: Winston, Trubisky. And I'm not sure where to put Wentz...

El-Nuke-the-Hurricanes-Bong posted:

Does anyone seriously see Hebert as a first round pick?  

I am not quite sure what people see in him that makes them think he is a sure thing high in the draft.  A decent college QB to me and I kind of think of Trubisky when I see him play.

I am ok with the thought of drafting ARs eventual replacement I just don't see a guy in this draft that the Packers could get that you could say damn that is the guy.  Burrow, Tua, and Herbert will be gone by the time the Packers pick so who is left to go late in the first?  Fromm ehh no.

I say go play makers early and often and you will see a fully rejuvenated #12 if he has real options.

I don't know why people are so upset about letting Taysom Hill go.  He has had some nice plays on gimmicks, but when Brees was out, the Saints sure didn't turn to him to run the offense, they went to Bridgewater.  So I don't know how that proves Taysom Hill could take over for Rodgers.

Fandame posted:

Watson (I just can't get behind him). 

Why?? He flat out won that playoff game vs. Bills. No way the Texans beat the Bills without that ridiculous play he made. 

Watson's biggest problem is that head coach. 

I'm just glad the Bears didn't draft him. 

ammo posted:

My kids got a high five from Vonnie Holliday at training camp his rookie year.   
None of us had a clue as to who he was. 

What we do know is that Vonnie Holiday wasn't the player Wolf traded up to get...it was DB Shaun Williams from UCLA.
But then Vonnie was still on the board and Wolf snatched him instead

https://www.drafthistory.com/index.php/years/1998

SATORI, you may be right, but that's not how I remember it.  Wolf went for need, wanting to replace Reggie White, so he reached for Holliday.  Wolf often did that.  He did t when he reached for Bubba Franks in reaction to the hot-tub incident with Chmura.  He did it when he reached for DB Antuan Edwards in reaction to Vikings drafting Moss the year before.  Truth be told, Wolf most often went for need and had a horrible record in the first round.  What distinguished him was signing Reggie White, trading for Brett Favre and finding some gems in mid-to-late rounds.  But if he had not reached so often in the first round, he likely would have surrounded Favre with just enough better talent for Favre to have won a few Super Bowls instead of just one.  

sschumer - Packer Fan HoF'r posted:

SATORI, you may be right....

of course I'm right, I took it straight from Wolf

1998, DE Vonnie Holliday (19th overall selection): Wolf traded up 10 spots, hoping to land safety Shaun Williams, but was delighted to find Holliday still on the board. Holliday has been a solid starter the last five years, but the unrestricted free agent recently signed with Kansas City.

"Really and truly, we made the deal to get Shaun Williams," Wolf said. "We figured Holliday would be gone. But fortunately, Vonnie was there. And that pick was easy."

Hungry5 posted:

I guess everyone is discounting Boyle's potential. 

Pretty much.  I definitely think competition is never bad (obviously).  Maybe he's the Kurt Warner who wasn't mercilessly teased by Bert and bagging groceries. 

To be honest, there definitely is some similarities in the style of play.  Kurt Boyle.

Henry posted:
Hungry5 posted:

I guess everyone is discounting Boyle's potential. 

Pretty much.  I definitely think competition is never bad (obviously).  Maybe he's the Kurt Warner who wasn't mercilessly teased by Bert and bagging groceries. 

To be honest, there definitely is some similarities in the style of play.  Kurt Boyle.

In his college career playing in low level D1, Boyle threw 12 TDs and 26 interceptions. 

http://stats.washingtonpost.co...layers.asp?id=227501

When Warner got the chance to play in college,  he was his conference's offensive player of the year. It was still obscure, but at least he showed he could perform in an actual games. 

He had to sit his first three years at Northern Iowa, patiently waiting for his chance. It finally arrived during his senior year, and the former third-stringer responded with a season that earned him Gateway Conference Offensive Player of the Year honors.

Difference was Boyle played in a different system every year.  The kid never had any consistency and judging by the news out of Connecticut the OC/HC were just plain shit on a revolving yearly basis.

I don't doubt his talent but I agree we better see a ton of Timmy time in the upcoming preseason to see if his decision making is worth two shits.

El-Nuke-the-Hurricanes-Bong posted:

Well, yeah

I mean, I watched him play one game and never thought, this guy belongs in the nfl

There's so many examples of 1st round guys that suck and later round guys that pan out.  Russell and Leaf.... Wilson and Brady.  Then you have guys like Tannehill that sucked until he didn't.  Who the hell knows.  I just know you need to draft one every now and again and hope you hit on a guy.  In a perfect world, we get a young gun that can learn behind AR for a few years.  Maybe that guy is Herbert or Fromm or some other dude... I haven't a clue.  

I'm not sure I'd even like to draft a QB in R1 unless another Rodgers falls to Gutey's lap. Everyone expects sooooo much so soon, and so few deliver. If the value is there later, sure you draft a QB. And if he's going to be your starter one day, you now have time to groom him for the position. 

Unfortunately today, it's all about "play now" for those R1 QBs because everyone sees them as a savior and so few can actually do it. If Mayfield, Watson, J. Allen, et al., had a full year or two of just learning, they would probably be a whole lot better for it. I doubt that even Rodgers could have carried the whole weight of a franchise as a starting QB his rookie year and been successful. 

So, if you find "your guy" in later rounds, go for it. You lock him in for five years, sit him for a minimum of one year, find out if he's really The Man.

Fandame posted:

Unfortunately today, it's all about "play now" for those R1 QBs because everyone sees them as a savior and so few can actually do it. If Mayfield, Watson, J. Allen, et al., had a full year or two of just learning, they would probably be a whole lot better for it. I doubt that even Rodgers could have carried the whole weight of a franchise as a starting QB his rookie year and been successful. 

I don't think so.  I saw him close up from the 50yd line in one of his first preseason games his 2005 rookie year.  Looked lost and almost meek.  First thought when seeing our newest RD1 QB was "that's the guy? crap."  

Fandame posted:

Unfortunately today, it's all about "play now" for those R1 QBs because everyone sees them as a savior and so few can actually do it.

It's also about money ball.  If you can strike it rich with a 1st round QB, he's cheap for the first 4-5 years.

DH13 posted:
Fandame posted:

Unfortunately today, it's all about "play now" for those R1 QBs because everyone sees them as a savior and so few can actually do it. If Mayfield, Watson, J. Allen, et al., had a full year or two of just learning, they would probably be a whole lot better for it. I doubt that even Rodgers could have carried the whole weight of a franchise as a starting QB his rookie year and been successful. 

I don't think so.  I saw him close up from the 50yd line in one of his first preseason games his rookie year.  Looked lost and almost meek.  First thought when seeing our newest RD1 QB was "that's the guy? crap."  

That's not what I saw from Rodgers. 

Then I saw him live take over for an "injured" Favre in Dallas & he almost brought them back in 2007. 

That's when I knew the Pack had a starting QB after Favre

Tdog posted:
Fandame posted:

Unfortunately today, it's all about "play now" for those R1 QBs because everyone sees them as a savior and so few can actually do it.

It's also about money ball.  If you can strike it rich with a 1st round QB, he's cheap for the first 4-5 years.

The other formula is load up the defense, have a solid running game and add some Fitzmagic/Foleiage.  That only seems to work one time at best.

Boris posted:
DH13 posted:
Fandame posted:

Unfortunately today, it's all about "play now" for those R1 QBs because everyone sees them as a savior and so few can actually do it. If Mayfield, Watson, J. Allen, et al., had a full year or two of just learning, they would probably be a whole lot better for it. I doubt that even Rodgers could have carried the whole weight of a franchise as a starting QB his rookie year and been successful. 

I don't think so.  I saw him close up from the 50yd line in one of his first preseason games his rookie year.  Looked lost and almost meek.  First thought when seeing our newest RD1 QB was "that's the guy? crap."  

That's not what I saw from Rodgers. 

Then I saw him live take over for an "injured" Favre in Dallas & he almost brought them back in 2007. 

That's when I knew the Pack had a starting QB after Favre

Yes, but remember that in 2007 Rodgers was already almost three years on the bench and learning after being drafted in 2005, and he didn't start until the next year. If anything, you helped make my point that a QB should sit on the bench for a couple of years before being expected to carry a team. My point was that I doubted Rodgers could have been a starter his rookie year and been able to carry the team.

(I saw that game v Dallas as well and thought GB was going to be in good hands after Favre.  

The choice of a QB is determined by which skills are most valued by the front office/ coaching staff. Al Davis put arm strength first because that fit with his ideal down field passing game.

There are a few guys who fill all the blanks in college but most are deficient in one or more areas.

My score card would rank abilities this way:

1 Accuracy\touch;

2 Character (Includes preparation, leadership, focus)

3 Field vision\ post snap recognition;

4 Arm strength\release;

5 intelligence\ pre-snap recognition;

6 toughness (physical, mental)

7 pocket awareness\escapability;

8 running ability;

9 size

 

3 and 5 are the only two that can be readily improved after you're drafted. That requires a craftsman's commitment to improvement ie 2- which is the hardest to project.

 A critical quality that is difficult to assess. Is the guy committed enough, smart enough to put in the daily hours beyond learning the playbook? How can you tell?

Add Reply

×
×
×
×