11-25-2019, 04:12 PM
(11-25-2019, 02:12 PM)Catmandude123 Wrote: I agree that the top pick is usually more successful but Burrows could also be the next coming of Jamarcus, Winston , Bradford, Carr, etc. Based on improving the total team talent trading back makes more sense. The main reason they won't is because of the wow factor that Burrows will bring and help to sell more tickets. Even though MB will shed Dalton(17mil) , Glenn (9mil) and possibly AJs(15 mil) contracts don't look for him to try to get a FA QB.
This is actually interesting if you look at it...
Jamarcus Russell's issue really came from the fact that he was lazy. He has the talent, but he simply was lazy.
Winston turned the ball over too much in college and they thought they could fix him. In reality a guy who turns the ball over too much will always turn the ball over too much, that is one of the biggest red flags when evaluating a QB.
Bradford was a good NFL QB he simply got hurt too often. The red flags were there with how injury prone he was in college, which is why I continue to comp Tua to Bradford. They both will go down as superb talents who can't stay on the field.
Carr was simply sacked into oblivion. He is the reason I don't want a QB 1 overall because you can "break" a young QB by getting them hit too often. After so many hits you start hearing footsteps and it messes you up, which we have seen with Dalton over the last year or two.
Now don't get me wrong, I have questions about Burrow too. The one year leap is a flag, but at the same time the coordinator is an NFL coach and the scheme will translate. He could obviously fail, but if we are simply talking about the safest way to ensure we get better it is taking Burrow or Young at 1. I made a whole thread about why we are better off not taking a QB this year, in reality this isn't a one year fix it is a 2-3 year plan to get back to relevancy but trading back from 1 doesn't necessarily ensure that speeds up in any significant way.
