Why a QB this year isn't the move

[Whatever]

(11-12-2019, 09:35 AM)Au165 Wrote: Browns 3 year record before that 7-8-1 seasons 3-13, 1-15, 0-16. They accumulated three years worth of high picks before they finally were able to pull out of the nose dive. Actually if you look back at the history of teams that went 0-16 or 1-15 almost all of them had a two year skid before bottoming out then they had a bounce off the bottom but many returned back to the bottom within a year. This to me actually says we are pretty much destined to have one more year at the bottom before a bounce.

A couple things here, Dalton didn't play in 2010 he was drafted in 2011 and played in the 2011 season. In 2011 Pro Football Outsiders graded our pass protection as 5th best in football. In 2011 our defense was 9th in yards allowed and 7th in points allowed.

As I explained tickets don't really mean anything to this team. They could sell 20k tickets a game less next year and it be less than a 10 million hit from this years revenue. For a team making 300 Million dollars a year it's really just a drop in the bucket. 

Nick Foles isn't listed because he busted out once in Philly and was sent to KC where he was a back up only to come back as a back up and have a nice few game stretch but never find his way back to being a starter. Maybe he does in JAX but I tend to think scheme carried him in Philly and he will be back to being the guy that got ran out of Philly. As to the other guys, the mystic of the rookie fill in is an interesting case but most people are already saying the Panthers will move on from Cam and Kyle Allen next year, the Jags already punted on Minshew back to Foles. That to me says the teams know they aren't anything special jsut replacement grade players that came in and did good enough.

This is all an analytics play. The value of the rookie QB contract is known by NFL teams as the golden ticket. That contract allows you to build a super roster around a young QB. The window usually shuts after the rookie contract sans a few outliers because then everyone on the team including the QB need paid and you have to start dismantling. The point isn't to not take a good rookie QB, the point is to take them deeper into the rebuild process to save his controllable cheap years to ensure you can build the team around them.

Look at the Rams, when Goff was cheap they brought in all sorts of high priced hired guns to make a run. Now they paid Goff and that team already had to jettison some line pieces to do so and they have regressed. Next year they are rumored to be shipping out Cooks because they can't afford him anymore. This isn't unique to them, the Legion of Boom in Seattle was broken up after Wilson's contract and the same thing happened in Baltimore after Flacco got paid.

By that logic, the Browns have been stockpiling talent with great draft position for 20+ years.  In fact, if you want a case study on why you take a QB you have a franchise grade on when you have the chance, look at Cleveland.  If you sit back and stockpile talent for 3 years and miss on your QB, all that talent you stockpile has their contracts expire and you start losing talent.  If Chase Young is as advertised, he will up in QB contract #'s for his second contract.

You're talking about not drafting a QB next year based on team performance from this year, specifically putting a rookie behind this OL.  Ergo, the situation Dalton was drafted into is very relevant to the discussion.

That's your opinion, but I guarantee Mikey doesn't see it as a drop in the bucket, especially when is going to have to build a new stadium out of his pocket in a few years.  I don't know many business owners that are going to shrug at a 3%drop in revenue no matter what dollar amounts we're talking.

You can make the "system QB" argument about a lot of 1st round QB's that I'm sure you're counting as hits,like Wentz, Goff, Jackson, Mahommes, etc.  At the end of the day, Foles has an 88.7 career QBR and a Super Bowl ring. 

The issue with your percentages is that a lot guys haven't played enough to establish themselves as a long term QB.  You can't include them in the overall, then dismiss them as stopgaps when they play well.  

The rookie QB argument is really irrelevant in this case.  Again, if Chase Young is as advertised, he will get a $20+ mil per year mega deal similar to a QB contract which puts you on the rebuild clock, anyways.  

The other side of the rookie QB contract issue is that it's so hard to find a quality QB that teams overpay for middle of the road starters like Goff, Flacco, etc.  That's why you have to pull the trigger on a guy that can carry the team.  The worst thing you can do is give a second contract to a middle of the road QB.

The other huge issue is you can't hire a QB guru as your HC and fire him without drafting him a QB.  If you don't take a QB this year, you're committing to Zac until at least halfway through 2021.  If you don't get him a QB, no HC with any reasonable prospects will come here.  

QB has to be addressed if Finley or Dolegala don't show they can handle it.  Maybe you package our 3rd and a 2nd you get from Dalton to move back up into 1 and get one.  Maybe someone offers you a king's ransom to slide a couple spots and you can still get Tua or Burrow.  But you have to address it.  

[Au165]

Bucky Brooks actually just made this argument (Chase Young over the QB's for us) on Collin Cowherd's show.

[*bfine32*]

Draft one until you get it right. That's what the Cards did and it's most likely what the Skins will do.

[Catmandude123]

(11-12-2019, 06:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Draft one until you get it right. That's what the Cards did and it's most likely what the Skins will do.

 They took two first rounders in successive seasons.  It is funny how you cite them as a way to improve when they have a3-6-1 record. That is what Cleveland did too. If you don't improve the total talent of the team a QB will not be able to turn this around by himself. Having the top pick gives the Bengals options that MB will ignore.

[Hammerstripes]

(11-11-2019, 11:24 AM)Au165 Wrote: For everyone saying go QB, who was the last QB drafted in the top 5 (by a team who didn't trade into the top 5) that succeeded long term? The reason this matters is teams in the top 5 have bad teams around these QB's. Teams have traded up and found success with QB's due to the teams being better than the draft slot they took their guy, but normally that happens in the back half of the top 10 because teams are coming from mid to late teens.

The answer is Luck, who was hit so often because of a bad O line for years his potential hall of fame career was cut short. If you go past Luck the list doesn't look all that great with a guy like Matt Ryan or Cam Newton maybe being your next best examples.

Well, there's a few that have had good careers and others that have made Super Bowls:

1.  Eli Manning
2.  Troy Aikman
3.  Carson Palmer
4.  Vick had a good run
5.  Jared Goff
6.  Andrew Luck
7.  Cam Newton
8.  Peyton Manning
9.  Drew Bledsoe
10. Jeff George 
11. John Elway
12. Jim Plunkett
13. Terry Bradshaw

Those are just the #1 overall picks that have had some success or Super Bowl appreasnces

[Hammerstripes]

(11-11-2019, 04:44 PM)Au165 Wrote: Okay, I can see we aren't getting anywhere so let's try this. If I tell you one guy is going to grade out as a 6.5-6.7 and another guy will grade out as a 8-8.5 which player would you take to build around since neither will win right away? Those are the ranges I am hearing in terms of Burrow/Tua versus Chase Young, it really seems like a no brainer but it goes against conventional group think.

I guess that's a few guy's opinions.  I've also seen places where Tua is the clear top ranked prospect in this draft.

The bottom line is positional value.  IF, and it's a big IF, you feel a guy is a franchise QB, you take him.  I don't share your view that Young is going to have this sky-high generational talent grade.  Sure, he's good, but in now way is he light years better than Garrett, both Bosas, Mack, etc.

The other reality is that if you start fixing the team with FA and picks on both lines, you will  end up picking 10-15.  The cost to move up to get a QB isn't worth it.  It will cost you 2 first rounders minimum (current year and next).  

Personally, I'm sold on Burrow,  I haven't seen a guy in a long time that has played as consistently as he has against very good competition.  You make that pick and start the rebuilding process.

[Au165]

(11-14-2019, 03:07 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: I guess that's a few guy's opinions.  I've also seen places where Tua is the clear top ranked prospect in this draft.

The bottom line is positional value.  IF, and it's a big IF, you feel a guy is a franchise QB, you take him.  I don't share your view that Young is going to have this sky-high generational talent grade.  Sure, he's good, but in now way is he light years better than Garrett, both Bosas, Mack, etc.

The other reality is that if you start fixing the team with FA and picks on both lines, you will  end up picking 10-15.  The cost to move up to get a QB isn't worth it.  It will cost you 2 first rounders minimum (current year and next).  

Personally, I'm sold on Burrow,  I haven't seen a guy in a long time that has played as consistently as he has against very good competition.  You make that pick and start the rebuilding process.

I'd like to see a credible place with Tua as the top prospect, not projected first pick but top graded prospect. 

[Au165]

(11-14-2019, 03:02 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: Well, there's a few that have had good careers and others that have made Super Bowls:

1.  Eli Manning
2.  Troy Aikman
3.  Carson Palmer
4.  Vick had a good run
5.  Jared Goff
6.  Andrew Luck
7.  Cam Newton
8.  Peyton Manning
9.  Drew Bledsoe
10. Jeff George 
11. John Elway
12. Jim Plunkett
13. Terry Bradshaw

Those are just the #1 overall picks that have had some success or Super Bowl appreasnces

Of those only 3 played under the new rookie wage scale that creates more value in winning with a rookie QB. Add in that Goff was horrible until McVay showed up and brought more weapons and has now regressed again and I'd give you Newton and Goff....or like I said since Luck. The value of a rookie QB contract can not be understated and wasting years of that on bad teams is the main point in all this.

[TKUHL]

Why do I get the feeling it doesn’t matter who we pick. I have a feeling we will miss out somehow yet Pitt will come away with their franchise QB for the next 10 years.

[Bilbo Saggins]

I don't think that any of the teams who have good or elite QBs have any regrets about taking them.  Could you imagine John Harbaugh saying something like: "Gee, this Lamaar Jackson guy is really good and all, but I really wish that the FO would have diddly-f*cked around and traded down to grab another first round guard and a second round linebacker instead."  NO.  **** NO!  You take the QB.  You don't trade 30 points of IQ for bigger biceps.  You don't trade a CEO of an SP500 company for a better janitor and a better cashier and a better salesperson.  It's so obvious that it's SICKENING to me.  You take the executive.  You take the leader.  You take the person who can electrify your franchise and make people believe that maybe you won't be laughingstock dogshit for the next decade.  You take the QB with the superior brains/willpower and you don't apologize to anyone for it.  You round out your roster with a bunch of veteran FA and kick out the putrids once you feel like you're getting close.  QB is the play.  

[SadFaceBengal15]

(11-11-2019, 11:19 AM)Au165 Wrote: This is a myth. In the last 10 years no QB drafted in the top 10 has sat a full season behind other QB's even when the coaches say they plan to. Reason being is that the rookie QB contract is the most valuable contract in football, you can't waste a year of development on the bench now. If we draft a QB he is playing, especially if he is 1st overall, which means he will be subject to 40+ sacks his rookie year.

He won’t be sacked 40+ times if we draft right. Go burrow round 1 then Jedrick Wills JR. In round 2 and then Solomon Kindley in round 3. You make sure to resign Hopkins and then your oline left to right is LT Jonah Williams, LG Billy Price, C Trey Hopkins, RG Solomon Kindley, RT Jedrick Wills JR. Problem solved.

[Au165]

(11-17-2019, 09:46 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: I don't think that any of the teams who have good or elite QBs have any regrets about taking them.  Could you imagine John Harbaugh saying something like: "Gee, this Lamaar Jackson guy is really good and all, but I really wish that the FO would have diddly-f*cked around and traded down to grab another first round guard and a second round linebacker instead."  NO.  **** NO!  You take the QB.  You don't trade 30 points of IQ for bigger biceps.  You don't trade a CEO of an SP500 company for a better janitor and a better cashier and a better salesperson.  It's so obvious that it's SICKENING to me.  You take the executive.  You take the leader.  You take the person who can electrify your franchise and make people believe that maybe you won't be laughingstock dogshit for the next decade.  You take the QB with the superior brains/willpower and you don't apologize to anyone for it.  You round out your roster with a bunch of veteran FA and kick out the putrids once you feel like you're getting close.  QB is the play.  

The Ravens were ready built to add a QB, this is literally my whole point. Good teams that add QB's, even unconventional ones, can win quickly because the talent around them is good enough to support them early. The Raven's had a really good defense and a really good O line when they drafted him. Bad teams that add QB's have not had much success in the last 10 years.

[Au165]

(11-17-2019, 11:54 PM)SadFaceBengal15 Wrote: He won’t be sacked 40+ times if we draft right.  Go burrow round 1 then Jedrick Wills JR. In round 2 and then Solomon Kindley in round 3.  You make sure to resign Hopkins and then your oline left to right is LT Jonah Williams, LG Billy Price, C Trey Hopkins, RG Solomon Kindley, RT Jedrick Wills JR.  Problem solved.

...no. The Falcons tried that, it doesn't work. There is value in experience and when you have a whole side of the line that has no NFL starting experience it doesn't work out well. That is also assuming each one of those guys work out, which if the last couple years of O line across the league tell us anything, a decent amount of them will be busts. You can get away with one or two rookie starters on a line, but any more than that and you are asking for trouble.