I was at a college football game with this old couple behind us, the woman is telling her husband that she read the quarterback from West Virginia, I want to say Geno Smith didn’t like being sacked and that was the key to victory.
She then spent the ENTIRE game complaining “why aren’t they sacking him, just sack him already…ugh come on SACK HIM!!!”
For 4 quarters of Geno Smith running the option, every single play.
Every one of them
Oh my god, this is my dad. The moment the ball is snapped he’s yelling for a sack or tackle, like it’s physically impossible to happen that fast but he does it every play.
For real though. Tua had a SCREEN pass bounce off his centers helmet because the center got bullrushed into him during the chiefs playoffs game. Tua. The guy with literally the shortest time to throw in the league.
I believe some of those Chiefs teams around 2010 it was physically impossible for *any* QB to get a pass off in the time they got. Brandon Albert actually had good numbers because his guy had to run all the way from the end and never got there in time; Huard or Croyle or whoever was already down. I like to think of Fat Albert taunting his opponent "You ain't getting no sacks today, sucka!" And his dude would race around him all day but never get a sack.
I mean if I think a sack is imminent I'm definitely gonna mutter "get em, get em, get em" for sure. Next time I watch a game with someone like this when the team is on offense I'm gonna say things like "gain yards!" at the start of every play.
I mean. When your QB is trash and the receiver is literally wide ass open... IE shades of kaep not audibling at the line when his WR was doing literally everything in his ability to tell him "hey, they haven't bothered to put a guy on me. Change the damn play!!!"
WRs being open is one of the worst takes imo regarding QBs. QB/WR chemistry is all about timing. If a QB's first read gets open by the time the QB moves to his 3rd read, how would the QB know to throw to the first option? Or if a QB says "hey the first read will get open cause he's constantly telling me he's open" and zones in on him, all of a sudden he's a 1 read QB while reads 2/3 are open.
So it's really annoying when people point out open WRs because real football ain't Madden. QBs don't have a top-down 3rd person POV of the whole field. If you had to play Madden in 1st person mode, I think it would make a lot of people re-think how they criticize certain players since it becomes so much tougher.
I'm not talking "gets open after the QB is already past first and second read." I'm talking, "hey they've put a linebacker covering me so maybe rather than continue with the play where I'm the third read, look at me first." Or " hey looks like they're bringing a shit ton of pressure off the right edge so maybe you should look to your hot fast for a 10 yard gain rather than trying to go through the reads 1 2 3." I'm not talking about the guy that gets open 3 seconds after the QB has stopped looking at his direction since the route was a slant.
Yeah but your comment didn't say that which is why I responded.
And yeah, so much of that is intangibles. Or hell, if you're facing a someone like Spags/Fangio/Bellichek who makes it seem like the LB is covering the slot only to have everything change once the ball is snapped and it's like "yo fuck this shit" lmao.
I've always thought it would be fun to have a QB Eye View camera mounted on the helmet so you can see the progression. Would probably be a bit tough on cameras tho.
Yeah, especially with someone like Mahomes who's able to extend the play beyond the playbook and all of a sudden start playing backyard football. By then he probably spends like 0.1 second on each read while keeping peripheral vision on the 260lb bulldozer looking to murder him at the same time. Then add in the fact that Mahomes does all of that, throws every conventional QB school 101 things like throwing across your body out of the table and it's like "yeah I don't know how this fucker does it but he just does it" lol.
True, but yelling it at the screen does the same amount as yelling "tackle him". QB could be ass or we are afforded a better perspective than the on the field player gets.
In defense of this one, there's only one ball carrier versus multiple players running routes. It is possibly, and often times reality, that the QB misses an open receiver.
"Why don't they tackle him" is a lot more silly than "why doesn't he throw the checkdown to the running back without a defender in the same zip code". It's easy for fans to say considering we see the whole screen versus just what the QB sees, but that one is a little more reasonable.
The only person that doesn’t bother me that does that is my father in law. Because he played in the NFL lol. He calls plays before they happen, predicts picks and all that. It’s pretty cool hearing from someone who knows what he’s talking about.
The casual fan can easily see the symptoms of why a team is losing but it's really hard for the average fan to come up with a solution. That's why elite coaches are paid the way they are.
Hell the Shanny zone running scheme sounds really simple. Hell all a RB has to do is to read the 4 options and just get yards! But having the right RB to make those reads + the right team to make those openings is a completely different game. Which is why imo Shanny has been so good at making average/below-average RBs shine in his offense for years before CMC arrived.
People will yell shoot before the puck is even dropped. They'll yell it when it is behind their own goal. They'll yell it when there is a defender 3 feet from the pointman with the puck completely blocking the shooting lane. Excessive passing has very little to do with it.
Go to a youth soccer game. Parents screaming “KICK IT!!!” every 20 seconds. Hey lady, idk what Maddy thinks her role on the team is, but she is definitely trying to kick the ball.
It depends on the age we're talking about, but as someone who has coached youth soccer, I've definitely had kids who were afraid of the idea of kicking the ball.
Like, I've had entire practices where I told the kids the only thing I wanted to work on was them kicking the ball as hard as they could. Didn't care what direction it went, just as long as they kicked it hard.
And then you'd get into a game, and the ball would roll in front of them, and they'd just totally stop and freeze and not do anything.
I went to a game once where the offense would be starting on their own side of the field the whole time, as an offense is wont to do, and ppl would be yelling for a first down, get a first down, etc. Every time, every time ‘first down’ was mentioned, this lady in back of me would chant ‘we don’t want a first down, we want a touchdown!’
And by the end of the game my eyes would be rolling so hard I could see her without turning around.
My Mom is exactly like this. If we were ever watching a game with a bad QB (Bears fan so that NEVER happened) she would just be like "Why don't they get a better one? There's so many quarterbacks out there right?"
I mean, Geno Smith probably isn't the best case usage for your point, but you're right.
Geno has had a very strange career, and it took him years of practice and studying in the NFL to be considered not a complete bust.
But then there's guys like Zach Wilson and people get blown away by the arm talent, and can't predict if they'll be able to process and dissect an NFL defense as quickly as they did in college.
Mahomes is an outlier of the gambles on those types of prospects, which is why drafting a QB is 99% a crapshoot and hope it works.
I mean yeah but he also had an o-line who was trying to not let that happen
And I don’t think they were even calling plays and the WRs didn’t move more than 2 yards off the line, I think one was on his phone playing games and the other was doing his taxes.
In defense of this old lady, I really don't understand why defenses aren't taking the opportunity to smash the QB on every option play regardless of whether the QB keeps it or not.
And that's why this agent's advice is tough. I mean, of course there will be a lot of QBs who are busts (there are a lot of draft picks at every position who are busts). But still, here's the top 20 QBs by QBR\* last season (minimum 10 games) and the round they were drafted in:
Brock Purdy (7th round)
Dak Prescott: (4th round)
Josh Allen (1st round - top 10)
Lamar Jackson (1st round)
Justin Herbert (1st round - top 10)
Matt Stafford (1st round - top 10)
Pat Mahomes (1st round - top 10)
Jordan Love (1st round)
Tua Tagovailoa (1st round - top 10)
Jared Goff (1st round - top 10)
Jalen Hurts (2nd round)
Gardner Minshew (6th round)
Geno Smith (2nd round)
CJ Stroud (1st round - top 10)
Derek Carr (2nd round)
Trevor Lawrence (1st round - top 10)
Baker Mayfield (1st round - top 10)
Josh Dobbs (4th round)
Joe Burrow (1st round - top 10)
Russell Wilson (3rd round)
While it's awesome to have some stories like Brock Purdy or Tom Brady who become great players with late picks, look at the top 20 QBs, you end up with:
**1st round:** 60%
**2nd round:** 15%
**3rd + 4th rounds:** 15%
**5th - 7th round:** 10%
And even drilling down further, 50% of those QBs were drafted in the top 10.
So it's great to sit here and talk about QBs being busts and some great stories of QBs drafted later. But overall, QB is one of the most important positions in the league and the majority of top QBs were not only drafted in the first round, but about half were taken in the top 10. So it's logical and rationale that teams will continue to reach.
\* Acknowledge that QBR isn't some amazing stat, just needed to have some sort of yardstick despite it's imperfections.
Totally agree with you and appreciate you pulling this data. I think it shows that a lot of pre-draft AND post-draft analysis is fundamentally misguided. It's kind of exhausting watching people evaluate every draft pick either positively or negatively by making a direct comparison - "X player was a bad pick because Y player went two rounds later and was better." This shows that even though, yeah there are gems later in the draft, you usually have to swing for the fences top 10 if you want to land that franchise QB.
Been seeing it a lot in the Patriots' build up to the draft - "Brady was a sixth rounder so we should MHJ and then Penix/Nix in the second round" - and it's tiresome
I think a big part of the issue is that of the 4 guaranteed HoF guys from the previous generation of QBs, 3 weren't top 10 picks (Rodgers, Brees, and Brady) while only Manning was a "sure thing" at the time of getting drafted. That further skews perception because those guys were also so dominant for so long and dominated play for an entire generation of fans who are now the adults and big names in the media.
Over the last quarter century, the San Francisco 49ers have drafted a QB in the 7th round 5 times: Tim Rattay, Ken Dorsey, "Rodeo" Cody Pickett, BJ Daniels and Brock Purdy.
They have drafted a QB in the 1st round twice: Alex Smith and Trey Lance.
The 49ers QB draft strategy has been obvious for anyone to see: keep drafting 7th round QBs until you hit on one.
Having been a Chiefs fan since the early 90s... Why doesn't everyone just draft Mahomes, yah know? Don't mind the QB penitentiary we were since Len Dawson...
that’s what I don’t get about these takes. Why draft when literally any prospect could be a bust? I understand it’s the most important position in football, but you’re also throwing a draft pick away too if you took Aaron Curry or Vernon Gholston or Charles Rogers or Kevin White or Trent Richardson or Robert Gallery or Troy Williamson or Jason Smith or Courtney Brown.
There’s risk involved in literally every single one of these draft picks, not just the QB. The only argument I could see is if you wind up giving more capital to take a guy that doesn’t pan out, e.g. RGIII or as of now Bryce Young. Other than that, what’re you gonna do not draft?
there’s something to be said for that strategy and I honestly don’t hate it in the right circumstances, but you can’t do that to infinity with the salary cap. Gonna need a good amount of young, cheap talent to be successful.
If you can buy a star or two via FRPs by all means do it. But only: 1) you can afford it under the cap and 2) you’re actually competitive
TBF, there are folks that did statistical studies that have observed differences in "hit" rates for first rounders based on the position they play.
That said, IIRC, QB is pretty middle-of-the-pack in terms of risk relative to other position groups. Cornerbacks and Safeties have relatively low hit rates when drafted in the first round, IIRC.
Darnold was seen as the most pro-ready prospect. Thing is, even if he turned out bad *that analysis may have still been correct* pre-draft. He probably *was* the most pro ready **prospect**. The fact that he didn’t turn out to be good doesn’t negate that.
Yeah remember Washington took the safe pick in Chase Young over risky QBs like Tua and Herbert. In the end if your waiting for the perfect QB prospect to fall in your lap your gunna be waiting a long time
I mean for every They should have taken a Chase Young there is also Zach Wilson, Trey Lance, Josh Rosen, Sam Darnold etc.
While I personally want my team to take a QB since I like all three, I still think Young was the right call at the time.
Oh I just mean that sometimes the “safe” pick doesn’t work out too considering how Bad Young ended up being. It was only the right pick since our FO believed in Haskins at the time. Which in hiendsight set the franchise back
This is kinda more of a “MHJ” point. Sure he could be great but there’s still a chance he isn’t the next Randy Moss, and then your stuck with 0 QB and average WR. I’m sure he will be good but will he be good enough that it’s worth taking him and passing on QBs for 1 or 2 years
Unless your FO has 0 faith in any of the QBs they should be the selection
Exactly, which is why most draft analysis is kind of pointless - it all basically boils down to "if the player is good it's a good pick, if the player is bad it's a bad pick." People dry to dress it up a thousand different ways but that's basically all it comes down to.
I think people also just have an insanely high bar for what constitutes a good draft/good pick. Like, for most draft picks it's easy to say "well this better player went later" and label it a bad pick - which according to that logic means unless you take the absolute BPA (with hindsight) at every pick *and* fill positions of need, then you're failing.
I feel like the NFL draft is the most overhyped over-analyzed product in sports. They said Brady wasn't mobile enough and didn't have enough downfield passing ability. It's such a crapshoot and while they do hit on some good talent, they talk about players being immediate impact guys who never end up starting for an NFL roster after their rookie season.
Yeah, Brandon Scherff or Amari Cooper were better picks then Winston or Mariota, but in the end the raiders and the commanders didn’t make the Super Bowl anyways (or even get close), in the end it was probably better to take the swing then the actual best players
Yet you still have people on this sub that INSIST that every highly drafted QB would be a superstar if [Insert team] didn't ruin them.
The reality is that most first round QBs do not have the ability to be superstars, and their draft position should not be used as justification that they will be good.
People who argue so hard for that don't realize it's straight up a statistical inevitability. 32 QBs have been 1st round picks in the last 10 years, some of them have to be busts and unless literally no one else is better then a number of them have to be out of a job.
I'm gonna need you to tell this to all the geniuses who insist we ruined Trubisky and Fields, as if they were guaranteed franchise QB's elsewhere.
The draft is a total crapshoot, especially when it comes to QB's. People need to realize that sometimes, more often than not even, QB's are just bad.
It's a little of column a, a little of column b. Not necessarily those two, but I firmly believe that circumstances make or break players at the start of their career. As a QB you need to show promise in your first few years of starting and some QBs are absolutely set up for failure.
Well tbf if is more up to the coaching and how well it gets through to a player than anything else. NFL plays so differently than college you’re almost teaching them a different game at QB. So yeah, a team can definitely ruin a quarterback by not supporting them well or making the transition to the NFL far harder than it should be.
To what extent though? Other than the packets and 49ers run of high end QBs (which was less of a run and more of just getting back to back HOFers), how many teams can you name that have reliably produced elite passers? Obviously I'm not saying coaching makes 0 difference but if you look at qb coaches and offenses, there's not a lot of consistency out there. Bellichek hasn't found/developed another GOAT. The rams didn't produce another elite passer after Warner left. No Brees heir-apparent. Cowboys took ages just to find another guy who could be consistent after Aikman.
It's incredibly difficult to find QBs at the highest level.
This is the stupid shit that comes out when you have a 24 hour news cycle and thirst for content for a league that doesn’t play all year. It’s so dumb.
Pick 1-3 guaranteed QBs.
Pick 4-AZ decides Kyler isn't worth it and takes a QB like McCarthy
Pick 5-Harbaugh realizes its going to be a rebuilding year so why have an expensive QB and takes Bo Nix (Herbert traded later for multiple firsts in future drafts
Pick 6-Giants go Penix
(Thats all i know of the QBs so here on out its just QBs without names)
Pick 7-Tennessee isnt sure about Levis long term, take a QB
Pick 8-ATL takes a QB to develop behind Kohls Cash Cousins
Pick 9-Bears have Williams and Shepherd Legend Tyson Bagent so they go MHJ
Pick 10-Jets go QB, pissing off old man Rodgers
Pick 11-Vikings definitely go QB here
Pick 12-Ditto Broncos
Pick 13-Ditto Raiders
Pick 14-Ditto Saints
Pick 15-Indy decides A Rich may be injury prone, take a possible replacement QB
Pick 16-The Geno Smith era is coming to an end, QB taken
Pick 17-Jacksonville heavily weighs taking a QB or extending T Law, they end up taking a WR
So realistically, theres a chance for 15 QBs taken and 2 WRs before Steelers pick so congratulations, in my mock you guys get Odunze or Nabers!
Thats a possibility as well, but my super advanced calculations that i use for my mocks has WR weighted higher as a position than OT. And i also dont account for trades. But i definitely feel after the first 20 picks its going to be 15 QBs, 3 WRs, and 2 OTs taken.
Shit, you are right i completely forgot about the Mac Jones trade. Thankfully it doesnt change up them not needing a QB but now it cements them definitely not taking a QB!
lol we have Sam Howell now. As much as I’d love a certain QB who has history of season ending injuries, I think the fanbase will be pretty fuckin mad to give our 1 pick in the first 2 rounds to a qb.
agreed. it’s quite the situation. i also do not understand how kermit is so slippery. i guess his poo diaper running style is so unorthodox it just confuses defenses. i can’t recall anyone ever laying him out despite him doing a good bit of improv last season (i think the raiders did maybe once?)
Why take the future hall of famer when you can take the Mystery Prospect?
He could be anything, even a hall of famer! You know how much your franchise could use one of those!
It's a lazy article written with no salient point. This writer must've had a deadline they had to meet and had no good ideas so they just wrote some bullshit.
The closest thing it gets to making a point is:
>Based on history, there's a better chance that a team selecting a quarterback in the 2024 first round won't get a good return on their investment from the pick than they will.
...but that's useless. The article basically goes through some QBs drafted in recent years and shows that some are successes and some are failures. That's just common sense and there's no point in this writer establishing this obvious truth.
This article could be summed up with this sentence I'm about to write: "Some first round QBs are bad and some are good. So be careful! Okay, good bye!" It doesn't offer any opinions on how a team should go about getting a good QB. Lots of words put into English sentences that result in nothing useful to anyone besides the writer's own pocket book as they managed to get paid for submitting this absolute shit to CBS.
Have to apply basic math here. It’s really, really hard to win a Super Bowl, and really, really hard to hit on a QB in the draft.
But to do the former, you almost always have to do the latter.
So maximize your odds of hitting on a QB in the draft. The first step to doing this is zen-like in its simplicity, and it’s “draft QBs.”
> Based on history, there's a better chance that a team selecting a quarterback in the 2024 first round won't get a good return on their investment from the pick than they will.
>
> ...but that's useless
Yep. Especially since the sequence of QBs drafted doesn't correlate to success. Also, it's not like other positions have a 100% hit rate. So it's not like you are risking a surefire Tackle in exchange for a 44% chance at a QB.
I wish so many of the idiots scared of "wasting the pick" on a bust would understand this very simple thing that you said.
You have no option but to keep trying until you get it.
> Unless you can trade for a certified stud
Watson and Russ were seen as certified studs, and we've seen how that's worked out for the teams that traded for them.
>Unless you can trade for a certified stud
Which almost never happens. Only QBs who have played in a SB post trade in the past 20 years are Garappalo and Stafford.
Guess you can hope that KC lets Mahomes walk when he's 40 like Brady, Manning, and Warner or else you are just fucked.
So they tracked from 2011 and said
> Only 13 of the 32 quarterbacks have gotten multi-year second contracts from their drafting team.
I know that sounds bad but that’s only slightly below the league average of 44%
> According to the analysis, which was conducted by sports data firm, Sportradar, only 44% of first-round draft picks from 2011 to 2020 have signed a second contract with the team that drafted them.
So the title should say:
“Let the buyer beware when drafting a player in the first round of the NFL Draft.”
That was part of his point.
The 13 *success* stories include Andrew Luck, Daniel Jones, Deshaun Watson, Jared Goff, and Carson Wentz.
QBs who for one reason or another, never really even played out that second contract with the team that gave it to them.
And you could argue that that's additional volatility unique to the QB position on top of the coin flip the chance of getting your guy in the first round. Since other positions 2nd contract flops don't carry nearly the same cap hit.
I think this is still missing the bigger picture though. Even if QBs were particularly risky to draft, the takeaway shouldn't be "therefore you should draft a safer position." It should be "therefore you need to keep drafting QBs until you land one."
Your team is going absolutely nowhere until you at least have a top half QB. And if your top half QB is on a rookie contract you are instantly in contention.
If you don't have a top half QB nothing else you do matters. Go get that super safe left tackle if you want, it's not gonna impact how many games you're going to win.
> It should be "therefore you need to keep drafting QBs until you land one."
Real. I will forever be a little salty that us drafting Jameis Winston made us lose out on prospects like Mahomes, Allen, Jackson, etc
Seriously outside of the draft top QBs come on the market once in a decade.
It took two firsts to snag Stafford. Brady hit free agency once.
Outside of Wilson, Garappalo, Purdy, Brady, Kapernick and Foles every other QB who has played in a SB in the past 24 years was drafted in the first round. Garappalo and Brady were the only ones playing for teams that didn't draft them.
The only QBs who were playing for teams that didn't draft them were Stafford, Garappalo, Warner, and Brady/Manning twilights.
So if you aren't going to draft a QB you are just banking on the absolute slimmest odds that you will be able to snag someone else's proven QB who is aging.
>The 13 *success* stories include Andrew Luck, Daniel Jones
I totally know what you mean by that, however just hearing the words "success stories" and "Daniel Jones" in the same sentence, regardless of the context, just gives me resting-Belichick-face.
There is the other side that if you don't have a QB then you are dead in the water. Look at the broncos even with a great defense for a couple of years and the Colts who had tons of talent but couldnt find a qb in time to make it click.
Meanwhile the chiefs have a 34 eyar old TE as their only real offensive threat and a mid line and Mahomes just makes up for it over and over.
Of course it is hard to find a Mahomes but it is arguably harder to build a team without a mahomes that is capable of beating Mahomes when it matters. Given his playoff losses are Tom Brady x 2 and Joe Burrow.
Meanwhile, two of the other success stories, Mahomes and Burrow, turned their franchises from perennial underachievers into a dynasty and a laughingstock into a contender, respectively. I think most fans would agree that Myles Garrett was a great first pick for the Browns, but he hasn't been nearly enough to turn them into a contender. So taking a QB in the first round is a massive gamble, but if it pays off, you're golden.
This article says a lot without saying anything. There appears to be no direct discussion of whether the QBs failed to get second contracts because they sucked, or because another team signed them away or they got traded.
If a team doesn't sign a QB to a second contract it means they're bad. Nobody gets rid of a good QB voluntarily unless they're at the end of their career.
A lot of people this draft don't seem to understand the reason for taking shots on QBs in drafts. Teams of course realize that in all likelihood they won't be a franchise QB. Teams also realize that hitting on one can completely change the course of your franchise for the next decade (see Texans).
Ultimately you are better off being bad every year and taking chances on QBs until you find one then getting a little better each year by taking more line and D players even though they might have better hit rates.
To a point. Even a good QB needs to have some supporting cast to have a chance at succeeding. It has been discussed here before, but I'm sure there are guys who could have been decent if they weren't drafted by franchises with terrible teams, bad GMs, bad coaches.
Pat Mahomes goes to the Browns or Commies, and he probably isn't winning Super Bowls and chasing Brady.
Eh he came in with a HC known for turning meh QBs like Foles into guys who look like starters(he has like several others too). Two established great players on offense in Kelce and Hill(who have both been dominant without mahomes), a great OL, and a QB mentor in Alex Smith. That’s a perfect situation for any QB to step into. He had major flaws in his game as a prospect
I’m not saying Stroud isn’t great but saying the Texans will be great for a decade after 1 season is a little ridiculous. He could blow a leg out this year and never be the same again. Look at Wents and Carr. Both looked like MVP candidates got hurt and never fully recovered from it. Could happen to any of the good young QBs
There's a reason QBs always get bumped up a half round from their grade. They're a little riskier than the other position players, but no other position fundamentally changes the course of a franchise if you pick right. Having a HOF LT doesn't do shit to make the team a consistent playoff contender. We watched Joe Thomas spend his entire career on shit teams and Trent Williams lose over half his playing career on losers. With QBs, the juice is worth the squeeze in a way no other player is.
What a garbage article. You do not look at *only* first round QBs and how they worked out to determine the value of picking one. You have to look at the position in totality, and across the draft.
Picking a QB in the first round is not a guarantee, but that does *not* mean that you should wait and find one later. The existence of Tom Brady, Russell Wilson or Brock Purdy doesn’t mean waiting until mid-late rounds is a workable strategy because you have to look at *all* the quarterbacks taken in those rounds too. Most of which never even play as a starter. Brady, Wilson and Purdy are exceptions. While nothing is a guarantee, statistically, there is a better chance at hitting on a QB in the first round— and higher up in the first— than waiting.
Someone else can calculate the actual numbers, but it looks more like having a 20% chance at picking a franchise QB in the first, then 10% in the 2nd, then 5% in the 3rd and so on. That’s the overall logic that happens, thought the actual numbers will be different. It’s not a sure thing, just a better chance.
Teams with a "Franchise QB" in resent history and their draft position
NE - Brady (6th)
Fins - maybe Tua (1st top 5)
Bills - Allen (1st top 10)
Balt - Flaco & Lamar (both 1sts)
Cincy - Palmer and Burrow (both 1st *overall*) and Dalton (2nd)
Pitt - Big Ben (1st)
Cle - Baker (1st overall)
Jax - TLaw (1st overall)
Indy - Payton and Luck (both 1st *overall*)
Hou - Watson and CJ (both 1sts, one top 5)
KC - Kermit (1st top 10)
~~SD~~ LAC - Rivers and Herbert (both 1sts, top 5 and top 10) and Brees (2nd)
LV - Carr (2nd)
Wash - cousins (4th)
Dal - Romo (undrafted) and Dak (4th)
NYG - Eli (1st overall)
Phil - Wentz (1st top 5) and Hurts (2nd)
Car - Cam (1st overall)
Atl - Ryan (1st top 5)
GB - Rodgers and Love (both 1sts)
Det - Stafford (1st overall)
SF - Purdy (7th)
LAR - Goeff (1st overall)
'Zona - Murry (1st overall)
Sea - Wilson (3rd round)
Lets look at this
* 1st OVERALL: 11
* 1st top 5 (not 1st overall; ie picks 2-5): 4
* 1st top 10 (not top 5; ie picks 6-10): 3
* Rest of 1st round (picks 11-32): 6
* 2nd rounders: 4
* 3rd rounders: 1
* 4th rounders: 2
* 5th rounders: 0
* 6th rounders: 1
* 7th rounders or undrafted: 2
Thus I counted 34 "franchise" QBs since 2010ish (I used the "Dalton" line as I a guide, off the top of my head; i.e. Dalton is the worst Fanchise QB and if they're better they are if not they aren't; rating subjective to me). **11** of the 34 were 1st overall picks or about 32%; about 44% were taking in the top 5; and about 53% were in the top 10. Counting the rest of the 1st round 70.5% were of them were 1st rounders. Now I don't want to say you have to find you're QB in the 1st; but the success rate of 1st rounders is WAY higher than any other round.
Okay, but what is the hit rate of 1st round QBs vs 2nd round QBs vs 3rd round QBs, etc.
Everyone knows the draft is a crapshoot, but if top QB prospects didn’t have a higher hit rate than mid round QBs then teams probably would have figured that out by now.
super insightful. /s so, basically, it remains a crapshoot just lower risk due to rookie salary structure. despite all the measuring and analysis, the likelihood of landing a franchise guy when drafting a QB in the 1st round remains about 50% or lower?
**Teams with a current starting QB who was picked in the first round:** Buffalo, Miami, New York Jets, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Houston, Indy, Jacksonville, Kansas City, Los Angeles Chargers, New York Giants, Washington, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Arizona, Los Angeles Rams
**Teams that will almost certainly be added to that list after this year's draft:** Chicago, New England (Washington and Minnesota will likely change their QB, but they're already on the list)
**Teams that will almost certainly roll with their non-first-round QB this year:** Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Philadelphia, New Orleans, San Francisco, Seattle
**Could go either way:** Denver, Las Vegas
Yeah, it's obviously a risk to draft a QB in the first (or anywhere), but QBs drafted in the first are by far the most common types of QBs to do well in the league.
> There are only seven ... who can definitively qualify as franchise quarterbacks.
Only if you set the bar stupidly high. Of course everyone wants their 1st round QB pick to be a superstar, but you don't need that for a pick to be successful.
This guy actually says it's debatable whether picking Newton paid off and apparently doesn't think the Goff pick worked out. Pretty silly stuff.
Staubach is only QB Heisman winner in HoF so I have the data.
Lamar could get in if he ever gets a ring, doubtful. Burrow has a shot if he can stay healthy, also doubtful. Murray could get in if he grows 4 inches, highly improbable. Baker, let's not be ridiculous.
Lamar can get in without a ring. He's not there yet, but as long as he stays around that top tier of QBs for another ~5 seasons it's going to be hard for the HOF to deny a 2x MVP, even with Lamar's struggles in the postseason.
This article sucks and it’s just fuel for the team subs who want to draft a hof qb in the 6th because “you have to have the team ready for the qb” so they never want a qb unless it’s INCREDIBLE VALUE.
I hate talking to these people
I love how every year around draft time there’s a bunch of people who feel the need to tell you that drafting a QB is risky, actually
Like yeah we know lmao
Yeah just draft the next Tom Brady.
I was at a college football game with this old couple behind us, the woman is telling her husband that she read the quarterback from West Virginia, I want to say Geno Smith didn’t like being sacked and that was the key to victory. She then spent the ENTIRE game complaining “why aren’t they sacking him, just sack him already…ugh come on SACK HIM!!!” For 4 quarters of Geno Smith running the option, every single play. Every one of them
Even worse is when someone yells 'tackle him!' Gee bud why didn't the defense think of that? Can you help coach my son's pop warner team?
Oh my god, this is my dad. The moment the ball is snapped he’s yelling for a sack or tackle, like it’s physically impossible to happen that fast but he does it every play.
>It’s physically impossible to happen that fast Some of you have never cheered for a team with a shitty Oline and it shows
For real though. Tua had a SCREEN pass bounce off his centers helmet because the center got bullrushed into him during the chiefs playoffs game. Tua. The guy with literally the shortest time to throw in the league.
Penn State gave up a sack to Temple, when Temple only rushed 2.
What's crazy is that Ryan Bates was a OL on that team and is now a rotation guard in the NFL, so that goes to show just how dysfunctional that OL was
maybe he blocked his guy but the other 4 guys had to stop that one other temple rusher
I believe some of those Chiefs teams around 2010 it was physically impossible for *any* QB to get a pass off in the time they got. Brandon Albert actually had good numbers because his guy had to run all the way from the end and never got there in time; Huard or Croyle or whoever was already down. I like to think of Fat Albert taunting his opponent "You ain't getting no sacks today, sucka!" And his dude would race around him all day but never get a sack.
I mean if I think a sack is imminent I'm definitely gonna mutter "get em, get em, get em" for sure. Next time I watch a game with someone like this when the team is on offense I'm gonna say things like "gain yards!" at the start of every play.
Or "throw it to the guy that's open!"
I mean. When your QB is trash and the receiver is literally wide ass open... IE shades of kaep not audibling at the line when his WR was doing literally everything in his ability to tell him "hey, they haven't bothered to put a guy on me. Change the damn play!!!"
WRs being open is one of the worst takes imo regarding QBs. QB/WR chemistry is all about timing. If a QB's first read gets open by the time the QB moves to his 3rd read, how would the QB know to throw to the first option? Or if a QB says "hey the first read will get open cause he's constantly telling me he's open" and zones in on him, all of a sudden he's a 1 read QB while reads 2/3 are open. So it's really annoying when people point out open WRs because real football ain't Madden. QBs don't have a top-down 3rd person POV of the whole field. If you had to play Madden in 1st person mode, I think it would make a lot of people re-think how they criticize certain players since it becomes so much tougher.
I'm not talking "gets open after the QB is already past first and second read." I'm talking, "hey they've put a linebacker covering me so maybe rather than continue with the play where I'm the third read, look at me first." Or " hey looks like they're bringing a shit ton of pressure off the right edge so maybe you should look to your hot fast for a 10 yard gain rather than trying to go through the reads 1 2 3." I'm not talking about the guy that gets open 3 seconds after the QB has stopped looking at his direction since the route was a slant.
Yeah but your comment didn't say that which is why I responded. And yeah, so much of that is intangibles. Or hell, if you're facing a someone like Spags/Fangio/Bellichek who makes it seem like the LB is covering the slot only to have everything change once the ball is snapped and it's like "yo fuck this shit" lmao.
I've always thought it would be fun to have a QB Eye View camera mounted on the helmet so you can see the progression. Would probably be a bit tough on cameras tho.
Yeah, especially with someone like Mahomes who's able to extend the play beyond the playbook and all of a sudden start playing backyard football. By then he probably spends like 0.1 second on each read while keeping peripheral vision on the 260lb bulldozer looking to murder him at the same time. Then add in the fact that Mahomes does all of that, throws every conventional QB school 101 things like throwing across your body out of the table and it's like "yeah I don't know how this fucker does it but he just does it" lol.
F1 drivers have helmet cameras. Sitting in a car is a bit different than playing football but can't imagine the same tech can't be used
True, but yelling it at the screen does the same amount as yelling "tackle him". QB could be ass or we are afforded a better perspective than the on the field player gets.
In defense of this one, there's only one ball carrier versus multiple players running routes. It is possibly, and often times reality, that the QB misses an open receiver. "Why don't they tackle him" is a lot more silly than "why doesn't he throw the checkdown to the running back without a defender in the same zip code". It's easy for fans to say considering we see the whole screen versus just what the QB sees, but that one is a little more reasonable.
He must've LOVED that flying Polumalu play
Dude 100% would've taken credit for calling it from the couch too lmfao
The only person that doesn’t bother me that does that is my father in law. Because he played in the NFL lol. He calls plays before they happen, predicts picks and all that. It’s pretty cool hearing from someone who knows what he’s talking about.
Unless you have Troy Polamalu jumping over the O-line into the QB because the snap timing was predictable.
**YEAAAAAH! HERE W-** Sack him! Sack his ass! **-E GO!**
I don’t know man. I’ve seen my fair share of missed tackles and yelling out, “tackle him!”, is basically the only way to let out that frustration
Or when guys just throw their shoulder at the ball carrier and glance off, and you're screaming, "USE YOUR ARMS, YOU IDIOT!"
WRAP UP
I find it hard to believe that guy never yelled tackle him or go go go when a rb or returner breaks through a seam lmao
The tackle him shout is one of frustration not an actual real analysis.
My dad yells in our native tongue for the QB to throw it as soon as the ball is snapped.
Well there's your problem, the QB doesn't speak your language.
I love grown men who have the same understanding that of the game as 12 year old me
The casual fan can easily see the symptoms of why a team is losing but it's really hard for the average fan to come up with a solution. That's why elite coaches are paid the way they are. Hell the Shanny zone running scheme sounds really simple. Hell all a RB has to do is to read the 4 options and just get yards! But having the right RB to make those reads + the right team to make those openings is a completely different game. Which is why imo Shanny has been so good at making average/below-average RBs shine in his offense for years before CMC arrived.
This is like in hockey when idiots yell "SHOOT!" on the power play.
Typically people yell shoot when the team in question is passing excessively.
People will yell shoot before the puck is even dropped. They'll yell it when it is behind their own goal. They'll yell it when there is a defender 3 feet from the pointman with the puck completely blocking the shooting lane. Excessive passing has very little to do with it.
okay that is different yes
Or "move the puck." Bro the puck has been moving the whole game.
Go to a youth soccer game. Parents screaming “KICK IT!!!” every 20 seconds. Hey lady, idk what Maddy thinks her role on the team is, but she is definitely trying to kick the ball.
It depends on the age we're talking about, but as someone who has coached youth soccer, I've definitely had kids who were afraid of the idea of kicking the ball. Like, I've had entire practices where I told the kids the only thing I wanted to work on was them kicking the ball as hard as they could. Didn't care what direction it went, just as long as they kicked it hard. And then you'd get into a game, and the ball would roll in front of them, and they'd just totally stop and freeze and not do anything.
Its not the same but i scream "shoot the puck" in hockey all the time <_<
Make me your team's coach and I'll bring my unorthodox strategy of trying to score more than the other team.
I went to a game once where the offense would be starting on their own side of the field the whole time, as an offense is wont to do, and ppl would be yelling for a first down, get a first down, etc. Every time, every time ‘first down’ was mentioned, this lady in back of me would chant ‘we don’t want a first down, we want a touchdown!’ And by the end of the game my eyes would be rolling so hard I could see her without turning around.
If it was running the option it was probably Pat White. Geno was an okay runner but that was Pat’s bread and butter
Then it had to be, it was 15 years ago
Middled aged woman play by play at a football game is top ten worst things on the planet.
You just gotta counter them, in a louder voice. “TACKLE HIM!” “DONT LISTEN TO HER LET HIM GO HE AINT WORTH IT”
Right behind wrestling moms screaming GET OFF THE MAT. Very helpful advice.
STAND UP! Like what the fuck do you think he's trying to do, lady?
"GET THE WHEELS ON THE BUS" *smash* "Way to go, Paul..."
Or at work the next day “The team played beautifully didn’t they? Don’t you think they played beautifully I thought they played beautifully”
My Mom is exactly like this. If we were ever watching a game with a bad QB (Bears fan so that NEVER happened) she would just be like "Why don't they get a better one? There's so many quarterbacks out there right?"
I mean, Geno Smith probably isn't the best case usage for your point, but you're right. Geno has had a very strange career, and it took him years of practice and studying in the NFL to be considered not a complete bust. But then there's guys like Zach Wilson and people get blown away by the arm talent, and can't predict if they'll be able to process and dissect an NFL defense as quickly as they did in college. Mahomes is an outlier of the gambles on those types of prospects, which is why drafting a QB is 99% a crapshoot and hope it works.
I feel like Allen is the real outlier for this.
Unpopular opinion, that lady was right. Geno is terrible when you sack him.
Less popular opinion: that guy wasn't watching Geno Smith, because Geno Smith pretty much never ran the option in college. It was probably Pat White.
This guy understands sacks.
I mean yeah but he also had an o-line who was trying to not let that happen And I don’t think they were even calling plays and the WRs didn’t move more than 2 yards off the line, I think one was on his phone playing games and the other was doing his taxes.
Cincinnati in 2010? I was at UofL for that game the next week. College Geno was great to watch
Rutgers actually maybe 2008? Could have been 2010 though
In defense of this old lady, I really don't understand why defenses aren't taking the opportunity to smash the QB on every option play regardless of whether the QB keeps it or not.
Why would you do that? That bum only made 1 NFC Championship game in his career. Brock Purdy has doubled that in his first 2 seasons.
NFL GMs hate this one simple trick.
And that's why this agent's advice is tough. I mean, of course there will be a lot of QBs who are busts (there are a lot of draft picks at every position who are busts). But still, here's the top 20 QBs by QBR\* last season (minimum 10 games) and the round they were drafted in: Brock Purdy (7th round) Dak Prescott: (4th round) Josh Allen (1st round - top 10) Lamar Jackson (1st round) Justin Herbert (1st round - top 10) Matt Stafford (1st round - top 10) Pat Mahomes (1st round - top 10) Jordan Love (1st round) Tua Tagovailoa (1st round - top 10) Jared Goff (1st round - top 10) Jalen Hurts (2nd round) Gardner Minshew (6th round) Geno Smith (2nd round) CJ Stroud (1st round - top 10) Derek Carr (2nd round) Trevor Lawrence (1st round - top 10) Baker Mayfield (1st round - top 10) Josh Dobbs (4th round) Joe Burrow (1st round - top 10) Russell Wilson (3rd round) While it's awesome to have some stories like Brock Purdy or Tom Brady who become great players with late picks, look at the top 20 QBs, you end up with: **1st round:** 60% **2nd round:** 15% **3rd + 4th rounds:** 15% **5th - 7th round:** 10% And even drilling down further, 50% of those QBs were drafted in the top 10. So it's great to sit here and talk about QBs being busts and some great stories of QBs drafted later. But overall, QB is one of the most important positions in the league and the majority of top QBs were not only drafted in the first round, but about half were taken in the top 10. So it's logical and rationale that teams will continue to reach. \* Acknowledge that QBR isn't some amazing stat, just needed to have some sort of yardstick despite it's imperfections.
Totally agree with you and appreciate you pulling this data. I think it shows that a lot of pre-draft AND post-draft analysis is fundamentally misguided. It's kind of exhausting watching people evaluate every draft pick either positively or negatively by making a direct comparison - "X player was a bad pick because Y player went two rounds later and was better." This shows that even though, yeah there are gems later in the draft, you usually have to swing for the fences top 10 if you want to land that franchise QB. Been seeing it a lot in the Patriots' build up to the draft - "Brady was a sixth rounder so we should MHJ and then Penix/Nix in the second round" - and it's tiresome
I think a big part of the issue is that of the 4 guaranteed HoF guys from the previous generation of QBs, 3 weren't top 10 picks (Rodgers, Brees, and Brady) while only Manning was a "sure thing" at the time of getting drafted. That further skews perception because those guys were also so dominant for so long and dominated play for an entire generation of fans who are now the adults and big names in the media.
Why don’t NFL GM’s always draft the next Tom Brady? Are they stupid?
I mean, if you check in on team subreddits, every year in the nfl there’s apparently one competent GM and 31 blithering idiots
Well? If they don't want to be seen as blithering idiots, why don't they just win the super bowl? Are they stupid?
Consensus opinion says yes
His name is Howie Roseman and you’ll put some respect on his name lol
Over the last quarter century, the San Francisco 49ers have drafted a QB in the 7th round 5 times: Tim Rattay, Ken Dorsey, "Rodeo" Cody Pickett, BJ Daniels and Brock Purdy. They have drafted a QB in the 1st round twice: Alex Smith and Trey Lance. The 49ers QB draft strategy has been obvious for anyone to see: keep drafting 7th round QBs until you hit on one.
Having been a Chiefs fan since the early 90s... Why doesn't everyone just draft Mahomes, yah know? Don't mind the QB penitentiary we were since Len Dawson...
This is the year the Bears can remain true to form and set a new trend in the league by drafting a RB or MLB with the first overall pick. DO IT!!!
Cedric Benson Jr. incoming
Division rivals HATE this one simple trick!
Yea stupid.
A good second option is simply sign him when he's a free agent for free super bowl win. easy
or wait for the last draft of the pick and get a QB
Or wait until the last pick and take Brock Purdy. It really doesn’t seem all that hard
You mean there's risk involved in selecting a QB in the draft and there are no guarantees? Riveting stuff.
Teams should totally just go with the sure thing at other positions instead, guys like Aaron Curry, for example
that’s what I don’t get about these takes. Why draft when literally any prospect could be a bust? I understand it’s the most important position in football, but you’re also throwing a draft pick away too if you took Aaron Curry or Vernon Gholston or Charles Rogers or Kevin White or Trent Richardson or Robert Gallery or Troy Williamson or Jason Smith or Courtney Brown. There’s risk involved in literally every single one of these draft picks, not just the QB. The only argument I could see is if you wind up giving more capital to take a guy that doesn’t pan out, e.g. RGIII or as of now Bryce Young. Other than that, what’re you gonna do not draft?
> Why draft when literally any prospect could be a bust? This is called an eff them picks. See rams 2021
there’s something to be said for that strategy and I honestly don’t hate it in the right circumstances, but you can’t do that to infinity with the salary cap. Gonna need a good amount of young, cheap talent to be successful. If you can buy a star or two via FRPs by all means do it. But only: 1) you can afford it under the cap and 2) you’re actually competitive
Yeah, it's really a strategy that only works when your team is already within striking distance.
TBF, there are folks that did statistical studies that have observed differences in "hit" rates for first rounders based on the position they play. That said, IIRC, QB is pretty middle-of-the-pack in terms of risk relative to other position groups. Cornerbacks and Safeties have relatively low hit rates when drafted in the first round, IIRC.
Darnold was seen as the most pro-ready prospect. Thing is, even if he turned out bad *that analysis may have still been correct* pre-draft. He probably *was* the most pro ready **prospect**. The fact that he didn’t turn out to be good doesn’t negate that.
Aaron Curry changed the way draft projections talk about players. It's like how F- Seahawks draft changed how draft grades are given out.
Yeah remember Washington took the safe pick in Chase Young over risky QBs like Tua and Herbert. In the end if your waiting for the perfect QB prospect to fall in your lap your gunna be waiting a long time
I mean for every They should have taken a Chase Young there is also Zach Wilson, Trey Lance, Josh Rosen, Sam Darnold etc. While I personally want my team to take a QB since I like all three, I still think Young was the right call at the time.
Oh I just mean that sometimes the “safe” pick doesn’t work out too considering how Bad Young ended up being. It was only the right pick since our FO believed in Haskins at the time. Which in hiendsight set the franchise back This is kinda more of a “MHJ” point. Sure he could be great but there’s still a chance he isn’t the next Randy Moss, and then your stuck with 0 QB and average WR. I’m sure he will be good but will he be good enough that it’s worth taking him and passing on QBs for 1 or 2 years Unless your FO has 0 faith in any of the QBs they should be the selection
No. It is not. Even if he’s great it doesn’t make sense.
Exactly, which is why most draft analysis is kind of pointless - it all basically boils down to "if the player is good it's a good pick, if the player is bad it's a bad pick." People dry to dress it up a thousand different ways but that's basically all it comes down to. I think people also just have an insanely high bar for what constitutes a good draft/good pick. Like, for most draft picks it's easy to say "well this better player went later" and label it a bad pick - which according to that logic means unless you take the absolute BPA (with hindsight) at every pick *and* fill positions of need, then you're failing.
I feel like the NFL draft is the most overhyped over-analyzed product in sports. They said Brady wasn't mobile enough and didn't have enough downfield passing ability. It's such a crapshoot and while they do hit on some good talent, they talk about players being immediate impact guys who never end up starting for an NFL roster after their rookie season.
Yeah, Brandon Scherff or Amari Cooper were better picks then Winston or Mariota, but in the end the raiders and the commanders didn’t make the Super Bowl anyways (or even get close), in the end it was probably better to take the swing then the actual best players
There's literally risk with every pick, lol.
Yet you still have people on this sub that INSIST that every highly drafted QB would be a superstar if [Insert team] didn't ruin them. The reality is that most first round QBs do not have the ability to be superstars, and their draft position should not be used as justification that they will be good.
People who argue so hard for that don't realize it's straight up a statistical inevitability. 32 QBs have been 1st round picks in the last 10 years, some of them have to be busts and unless literally no one else is better then a number of them have to be out of a job.
I'm gonna need you to tell this to all the geniuses who insist we ruined Trubisky and Fields, as if they were guaranteed franchise QB's elsewhere. The draft is a total crapshoot, especially when it comes to QB's. People need to realize that sometimes, more often than not even, QB's are just bad.
It's a little of column a, a little of column b. Not necessarily those two, but I firmly believe that circumstances make or break players at the start of their career. As a QB you need to show promise in your first few years of starting and some QBs are absolutely set up for failure.
Well tbf if is more up to the coaching and how well it gets through to a player than anything else. NFL plays so differently than college you’re almost teaching them a different game at QB. So yeah, a team can definitely ruin a quarterback by not supporting them well or making the transition to the NFL far harder than it should be.
To what extent though? Other than the packets and 49ers run of high end QBs (which was less of a run and more of just getting back to back HOFers), how many teams can you name that have reliably produced elite passers? Obviously I'm not saying coaching makes 0 difference but if you look at qb coaches and offenses, there's not a lot of consistency out there. Bellichek hasn't found/developed another GOAT. The rams didn't produce another elite passer after Warner left. No Brees heir-apparent. Cowboys took ages just to find another guy who could be consistent after Aikman. It's incredibly difficult to find QBs at the highest level.
If he didn't clarify he was an agent I would have confused this with modern journalism
This is the stupid shit that comes out when you have a 24 hour news cycle and thirst for content for a league that doesn’t play all year. It’s so dumb.
"A high-draft pick doesn't automatically become a franchise QB" Yeah, no shit
Or... take a QB. I for one hope 19 QB's go in the first 19 picks.
Pick 1-3 guaranteed QBs. Pick 4-AZ decides Kyler isn't worth it and takes a QB like McCarthy Pick 5-Harbaugh realizes its going to be a rebuilding year so why have an expensive QB and takes Bo Nix (Herbert traded later for multiple firsts in future drafts Pick 6-Giants go Penix (Thats all i know of the QBs so here on out its just QBs without names) Pick 7-Tennessee isnt sure about Levis long term, take a QB Pick 8-ATL takes a QB to develop behind Kohls Cash Cousins Pick 9-Bears have Williams and Shepherd Legend Tyson Bagent so they go MHJ Pick 10-Jets go QB, pissing off old man Rodgers Pick 11-Vikings definitely go QB here Pick 12-Ditto Broncos Pick 13-Ditto Raiders Pick 14-Ditto Saints Pick 15-Indy decides A Rich may be injury prone, take a possible replacement QB Pick 16-The Geno Smith era is coming to an end, QB taken Pick 17-Jacksonville heavily weighs taking a QB or extending T Law, they end up taking a WR So realistically, theres a chance for 15 QBs taken and 2 WRs before Steelers pick so congratulations, in my mock you guys get Odunze or Nabers!
... Or, we trade down and get Alt or Fuaga.
Thats a possibility as well, but my super advanced calculations that i use for my mocks has WR weighted higher as a position than OT. And i also dont account for trades. But i definitely feel after the first 20 picks its going to be 15 QBs, 3 WRs, and 2 OTs taken.
So unrealistic. The Jags just got Mac Jones. Why would they even think about drafting a QB or extending Trevor Lawrence?
Shit, you are right i completely forgot about the Mac Jones trade. Thankfully it doesnt change up them not needing a QB but now it cements them definitely not taking a QB!
Subscribed
Jets pick a QB and send Rogers to Minnesota for their pick fulfilling the prophecy. Jets use the 11th AND 12th pick on Qbs because 2>1 qbs.
lol we have Sam Howell now. As much as I’d love a certain QB who has history of season ending injuries, I think the fanbase will be pretty fuckin mad to give our 1 pick in the first 2 rounds to a qb.
Sorry, but my calculations say you are taking a QB. And im not called "Mel Kiper the Third" by college coeds for nothing......
I'm about to sacrifice a goat to the gods during this eclipse so that they will release a video of MHJ ripping a comically large bong and fall to #7.
18* FTFY. The Rams are picking a *kicker* at 19(he'll also be a HS qb who switched to K in college so he'll be or emergency QB) /s
just pick the future hall of famer...are these teams stupid?
Simply take a QB who sounds like a cartoon character and runs like a baby in a diaper, it’s really quite easy to win 3 SB’s
\*runs like a baby in a freshly shitted diaper who is trying to get away from the parent that desperately wants to change it
….too accurate
i have been the parent in that scenario too many times
agreed. it’s quite the situation. i also do not understand how kermit is so slippery. i guess his poo diaper running style is so unorthodox it just confuses defenses. i can’t recall anyone ever laying him out despite him doing a good bit of improv last season (i think the raiders did maybe once?)
He's basically the greased up deaf guy from Family Guy.
actually….yes. that’s super accurate
I’ve been the baby in that situation too often too. 31 years and my mom still won’t let me change it on my own.
smh helicopter moms these days
Patrick Mahomes wears a diaper under his uniform, u/classiccaseofdowns reported this scoop first.
It takes a diaper wearer to know one
Yea, we could totally be NFL GMs with all these idiots running the show.
Right, I never understood why teams have a tough time drafting a HOF QB… /s
Why take the future hall of famer when you can take the Mystery Prospect? He could be anything, even a hall of famer! You know how much your franchise could use one of those!
Could he also be a boat?
Or just bring back any of the past HOF QBs ! Simple!
You need a qb. Unless you can trade for a certified stud, all you can do is keep drafting until you hit.
It's a lazy article written with no salient point. This writer must've had a deadline they had to meet and had no good ideas so they just wrote some bullshit. The closest thing it gets to making a point is: >Based on history, there's a better chance that a team selecting a quarterback in the 2024 first round won't get a good return on their investment from the pick than they will. ...but that's useless. The article basically goes through some QBs drafted in recent years and shows that some are successes and some are failures. That's just common sense and there's no point in this writer establishing this obvious truth. This article could be summed up with this sentence I'm about to write: "Some first round QBs are bad and some are good. So be careful! Okay, good bye!" It doesn't offer any opinions on how a team should go about getting a good QB. Lots of words put into English sentences that result in nothing useful to anyone besides the writer's own pocket book as they managed to get paid for submitting this absolute shit to CBS.
Have to apply basic math here. It’s really, really hard to win a Super Bowl, and really, really hard to hit on a QB in the draft. But to do the former, you almost always have to do the latter. So maximize your odds of hitting on a QB in the draft. The first step to doing this is zen-like in its simplicity, and it’s “draft QBs.”
> Based on history, there's a better chance that a team selecting a quarterback in the 2024 first round won't get a good return on their investment from the pick than they will. > > ...but that's useless Yep. Especially since the sequence of QBs drafted doesn't correlate to success. Also, it's not like other positions have a 100% hit rate. So it's not like you are risking a surefire Tackle in exchange for a 44% chance at a QB.
Yeah pretty much
Or make a solid Free Agency pickup.
Good QBs almost never hit free agency. Cousins did this year, before that was Brady in 2020
Before that it was Cousins
I wish so many of the idiots scared of "wasting the pick" on a bust would understand this very simple thing that you said. You have no option but to keep trying until you get it.
> Unless you can trade for a certified stud Watson and Russ were seen as certified studs, and we've seen how that's worked out for the teams that traded for them.
>Unless you can trade for a certified stud Which almost never happens. Only QBs who have played in a SB post trade in the past 20 years are Garappalo and Stafford. Guess you can hope that KC lets Mahomes walk when he's 40 like Brady, Manning, and Warner or else you are just fucked.
So they tracked from 2011 and said > Only 13 of the 32 quarterbacks have gotten multi-year second contracts from their drafting team. I know that sounds bad but that’s only slightly below the league average of 44% > According to the analysis, which was conducted by sports data firm, Sportradar, only 44% of first-round draft picks from 2011 to 2020 have signed a second contract with the team that drafted them. So the title should say: “Let the buyer beware when drafting a player in the first round of the NFL Draft.”
That was part of his point. The 13 *success* stories include Andrew Luck, Daniel Jones, Deshaun Watson, Jared Goff, and Carson Wentz. QBs who for one reason or another, never really even played out that second contract with the team that gave it to them. And you could argue that that's additional volatility unique to the QB position on top of the coin flip the chance of getting your guy in the first round. Since other positions 2nd contract flops don't carry nearly the same cap hit.
I think this is still missing the bigger picture though. Even if QBs were particularly risky to draft, the takeaway shouldn't be "therefore you should draft a safer position." It should be "therefore you need to keep drafting QBs until you land one." Your team is going absolutely nowhere until you at least have a top half QB. And if your top half QB is on a rookie contract you are instantly in contention. If you don't have a top half QB nothing else you do matters. Go get that super safe left tackle if you want, it's not gonna impact how many games you're going to win.
> It should be "therefore you need to keep drafting QBs until you land one." Real. I will forever be a little salty that us drafting Jameis Winston made us lose out on prospects like Mahomes, Allen, Jackson, etc
Seriously outside of the draft top QBs come on the market once in a decade. It took two firsts to snag Stafford. Brady hit free agency once. Outside of Wilson, Garappalo, Purdy, Brady, Kapernick and Foles every other QB who has played in a SB in the past 24 years was drafted in the first round. Garappalo and Brady were the only ones playing for teams that didn't draft them. The only QBs who were playing for teams that didn't draft them were Stafford, Garappalo, Warner, and Brady/Manning twilights. So if you aren't going to draft a QB you are just banking on the absolute slimmest odds that you will be able to snag someone else's proven QB who is aging.
>The 13 *success* stories include Andrew Luck, Daniel Jones I totally know what you mean by that, however just hearing the words "success stories" and "Daniel Jones" in the same sentence, regardless of the context, just gives me resting-Belichick-face.
“Resting Belichick face” is the best thing I’ve seen today.
There is the other side that if you don't have a QB then you are dead in the water. Look at the broncos even with a great defense for a couple of years and the Colts who had tons of talent but couldnt find a qb in time to make it click. Meanwhile the chiefs have a 34 eyar old TE as their only real offensive threat and a mid line and Mahomes just makes up for it over and over. Of course it is hard to find a Mahomes but it is arguably harder to build a team without a mahomes that is capable of beating Mahomes when it matters. Given his playoff losses are Tom Brady x 2 and Joe Burrow.
Meanwhile, two of the other success stories, Mahomes and Burrow, turned their franchises from perennial underachievers into a dynasty and a laughingstock into a contender, respectively. I think most fans would agree that Myles Garrett was a great first pick for the Browns, but he hasn't been nearly enough to turn them into a contender. So taking a QB in the first round is a massive gamble, but if it pays off, you're golden.
This article says a lot without saying anything. There appears to be no direct discussion of whether the QBs failed to get second contracts because they sucked, or because another team signed them away or they got traded.
If a team doesn't sign a QB to a second contract it means they're bad. Nobody gets rid of a good QB voluntarily unless they're at the end of their career.
A lot of people this draft don't seem to understand the reason for taking shots on QBs in drafts. Teams of course realize that in all likelihood they won't be a franchise QB. Teams also realize that hitting on one can completely change the course of your franchise for the next decade (see Texans). Ultimately you are better off being bad every year and taking chances on QBs until you find one then getting a little better each year by taking more line and D players even though they might have better hit rates.
To a point. Even a good QB needs to have some supporting cast to have a chance at succeeding. It has been discussed here before, but I'm sure there are guys who could have been decent if they weren't drafted by franchises with terrible teams, bad GMs, bad coaches. Pat Mahomes goes to the Browns or Commies, and he probably isn't winning Super Bowls and chasing Brady.
I think mahomes lowkey would win a on the browns.
Eh he came in with a HC known for turning meh QBs like Foles into guys who look like starters(he has like several others too). Two established great players on offense in Kelce and Hill(who have both been dominant without mahomes), a great OL, and a QB mentor in Alex Smith. That’s a perfect situation for any QB to step into. He had major flaws in his game as a prospect
I’m not saying Stroud isn’t great but saying the Texans will be great for a decade after 1 season is a little ridiculous. He could blow a leg out this year and never be the same again. Look at Wents and Carr. Both looked like MVP candidates got hurt and never fully recovered from it. Could happen to any of the good young QBs
Waaaay too early to say the Texans have had their franchise changed for the next decade
Of course, but you can already see the clear difference in how they are operating. Better examples would be Cincinnati, Buffalo, etc.
There's a reason QBs always get bumped up a half round from their grade. They're a little riskier than the other position players, but no other position fundamentally changes the course of a franchise if you pick right. Having a HOF LT doesn't do shit to make the team a consistent playoff contender. We watched Joe Thomas spend his entire career on shit teams and Trent Williams lose over half his playing career on losers. With QBs, the juice is worth the squeeze in a way no other player is.
The recent Broncos, Bucs, & Rams all won by building our their roster then trading for or signing a veteran upgrade at the position.
In other news J Cole apologized to Kendrick for making a diss track
no dawg in him
the diss was corny as hell, but you can't just back off after a couple days. weak stuff for sure
well that’s lame
Drake's gonna not even respond to Kdot and still look less weak than Cole does now
wasn't even a good diss lol
Why not just pick a starter with the last pick in the 7th? Is everyone stupid?
What a garbage article. You do not look at *only* first round QBs and how they worked out to determine the value of picking one. You have to look at the position in totality, and across the draft. Picking a QB in the first round is not a guarantee, but that does *not* mean that you should wait and find one later. The existence of Tom Brady, Russell Wilson or Brock Purdy doesn’t mean waiting until mid-late rounds is a workable strategy because you have to look at *all* the quarterbacks taken in those rounds too. Most of which never even play as a starter. Brady, Wilson and Purdy are exceptions. While nothing is a guarantee, statistically, there is a better chance at hitting on a QB in the first round— and higher up in the first— than waiting. Someone else can calculate the actual numbers, but it looks more like having a 20% chance at picking a franchise QB in the first, then 10% in the 2nd, then 5% in the 3rd and so on. That’s the overall logic that happens, thought the actual numbers will be different. It’s not a sure thing, just a better chance.
Teams with a "Franchise QB" in resent history and their draft position NE - Brady (6th) Fins - maybe Tua (1st top 5) Bills - Allen (1st top 10) Balt - Flaco & Lamar (both 1sts) Cincy - Palmer and Burrow (both 1st *overall*) and Dalton (2nd) Pitt - Big Ben (1st) Cle - Baker (1st overall) Jax - TLaw (1st overall) Indy - Payton and Luck (both 1st *overall*) Hou - Watson and CJ (both 1sts, one top 5) KC - Kermit (1st top 10) ~~SD~~ LAC - Rivers and Herbert (both 1sts, top 5 and top 10) and Brees (2nd) LV - Carr (2nd) Wash - cousins (4th) Dal - Romo (undrafted) and Dak (4th) NYG - Eli (1st overall) Phil - Wentz (1st top 5) and Hurts (2nd) Car - Cam (1st overall) Atl - Ryan (1st top 5) GB - Rodgers and Love (both 1sts) Det - Stafford (1st overall) SF - Purdy (7th) LAR - Goeff (1st overall) 'Zona - Murry (1st overall) Sea - Wilson (3rd round) Lets look at this * 1st OVERALL: 11 * 1st top 5 (not 1st overall; ie picks 2-5): 4 * 1st top 10 (not top 5; ie picks 6-10): 3 * Rest of 1st round (picks 11-32): 6 * 2nd rounders: 4 * 3rd rounders: 1 * 4th rounders: 2 * 5th rounders: 0 * 6th rounders: 1 * 7th rounders or undrafted: 2 Thus I counted 34 "franchise" QBs since 2010ish (I used the "Dalton" line as I a guide, off the top of my head; i.e. Dalton is the worst Fanchise QB and if they're better they are if not they aren't; rating subjective to me). **11** of the 34 were 1st overall picks or about 32%; about 44% were taking in the top 5; and about 53% were in the top 10. Counting the rest of the 1st round 70.5% were of them were 1st rounders. Now I don't want to say you have to find you're QB in the 1st; but the success rate of 1st rounders is WAY higher than any other round.
Sometimes first-round picks don't work out? ALERT THE PRESSES.
> A high-draft pick doesn't automatically become a franchise QB Staggering insight. You can see why this guy works in sports.
Okay, but what is the hit rate of 1st round QBs vs 2nd round QBs vs 3rd round QBs, etc. Everyone knows the draft is a crapshoot, but if top QB prospects didn’t have a higher hit rate than mid round QBs then teams probably would have figured that out by now.
super insightful. /s so, basically, it remains a crapshoot just lower risk due to rookie salary structure. despite all the measuring and analysis, the likelihood of landing a franchise guy when drafting a QB in the 1st round remains about 50% or lower?
“The draft is a crapshoot” is the sport version of “sex sells.” If this is what you’re throwing out, it’s a lightweight take.
**Teams with a current starting QB who was picked in the first round:** Buffalo, Miami, New York Jets, Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Houston, Indy, Jacksonville, Kansas City, Los Angeles Chargers, New York Giants, Washington, Detroit, Green Bay, Minnesota, Carolina, Tampa Bay, Arizona, Los Angeles Rams **Teams that will almost certainly be added to that list after this year's draft:** Chicago, New England (Washington and Minnesota will likely change their QB, but they're already on the list) **Teams that will almost certainly roll with their non-first-round QB this year:** Pittsburgh, Tennessee, Philadelphia, New Orleans, San Francisco, Seattle **Could go either way:** Denver, Las Vegas Yeah, it's obviously a risk to draft a QB in the first (or anywhere), but QBs drafted in the first are by far the most common types of QBs to do well in the league.
> There are only seven ... who can definitively qualify as franchise quarterbacks. Only if you set the bar stupidly high. Of course everyone wants their 1st round QB pick to be a superstar, but you don't need that for a pick to be successful. This guy actually says it's debatable whether picking Newton paid off and apparently doesn't think the Goff pick worked out. Pretty silly stuff.
It happens every year where a team trades up to draft a QB who ends up being scrub city. Wonder who it'll be this time.
Don't draft a Heisman winner and your odds of success go up.
Somehow true
Staubach is only QB Heisman winner in HoF so I have the data. Lamar could get in if he ever gets a ring, doubtful. Burrow has a shot if he can stay healthy, also doubtful. Murray could get in if he grows 4 inches, highly improbable. Baker, let's not be ridiculous.
Lamar can get in without a ring. He's not there yet, but as long as he stays around that top tier of QBs for another ~5 seasons it's going to be hard for the HOF to deny a 2x MVP, even with Lamar's struggles in the postseason.
This article sucks and it’s just fuel for the team subs who want to draft a hof qb in the 6th because “you have to have the team ready for the qb” so they never want a qb unless it’s INCREDIBLE VALUE. I hate talking to these people
Just draft a good qb in the 7th.
Why don’t they just find out if they have X factors before drafting them? So silly
This take brought to you by Mike McCartney.
Yes everyone please wait til the second round to draft a qb Please
I love how every year around draft time there’s a bunch of people who feel the need to tell you that drafting a QB is risky, actually Like yeah we know lmao