PDA

View Full Version : Why Shouldn't We Draft a QB In The 1st Round?



kevoncox
12-02-2010, 04:46 PM
I have been reading the boards and I keep coming posters that believe that you should not address the QB position with an ELITE prospect in this years draft. Honestly, I am left baffled as to why so many of you believe that we have a greater area of need. Have we learned nothing?

I will like to disprove a few myths.

Myth number #1:
We have bigger area of need!

Wrong! The lack of a franchise Qb is the number one issues plaguing this team. We have amazing depth at the DL position. Many of you are not please with our interior DL linemen but honestly there has been no real drop off in production in the defense.

PPG(21.7- 19.5), YPG(308 - 306), RYPG(92.5 - 87.1), PYPG(218 - 215)

The only really change has been sacks and turnovers. I believe both of these areas are tied together as we are not a huge INT team. Our turnovers tend to come off of sack-fumbles or fumbles caused due to intense pressure. Last season our offense held up its end of the bargain and we were able to play from ahead in most games. This allowed our defense to put more pressure on the QB. More pressure = more sacks + turnovers. This season we are playing from behind. However, the stats show, we haven't lost much.

Don't get me wrong, an improvement at safety would be great. However, it is nowhere as important as having a Elite field general. That's like buying $10,000 rims and your car is dead.

Myth number #2:
We have a QB on the roster than can take us to the Superbowl.

We don't period. TJ may be a good QB. However, if Qbs like Brees, Manning, Brady and the likes are struggling to make it to the Superbowl, TJ is far from a lock to do so. We need to get an elite Qb and the best way to do so with an early 1st round draft pick. In the past few years they Qbs drafted early have looked poised, polished and everything they were billed to be.

Players like Bradford, Stafford, Freeman, Sanchez, Ryan, Flacco look like they will make their teams competitive for years to come.
Sure there has been some misses in Russell and Quinn, but that's still a pretty good percentage, I wager its about the same for all other positions.
However, there is no position more important on the football field.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 04:58 PM
I have been reading the boards and I keep coming posters that believe that you should not address the QB position with an ELITE prospect in this years draft. Honestly, I am left baffled as to why so many of you believe that we have a greater area of need. Have we learned nothing?

I will like to disprove a few myths.
Do you opinion instead of myth? Besides, I thought you were on the same bandwagon I am on.......That bandwagon being draft BPA and not to draft for need.

Anyway......Love the idea for the thread......


Myth number #1:
We have bigger area of need!

Wrong! The lack of a franchise Qb is the number one issues plaguing this team. We have amazing depth at the DL position. Many of you are not please with our interior DL linemen but honestly there has been no real drop off in production in the defense.

PPG(21.7- 19.5), YPG(308 - 306), RYPG(92.5 - 87.1), PYPG(218 - 215)

The only really change has been sacks and turnovers. I believe both of these areas are tied together as we are not a huge INT team. Our turnovers tend to come off of sack-fumbles or fumbles caused due to intense pressure. Last season our offense held up its end of the bargain and we were able to play from ahead in most games. This allowed our defense to put more pressure on the QB. More pressure = more sacks + turnovers. This season we are playing from behind. However, the stats show, we haven't lost much.

Don't get me wrong, an improvement at safety would be great. However, it is nowhere as important as having a Elite field general. That's like buying $10,000 rims and your car is dead.
We have two issues this year. QB play and DL play. Not sure how you went down S play as being more critical than those two.

I don't have the guys scouted yet, but if you have a QB that fits the scheme that can be considered a "Franchise" guy, surely you should take him.

However, if there is a dominant DLmen (or a guy who can anchor your LT spot for 10 years) that would help improve our pass rush/QB pressure/Run stopping ability, you could take him there as well.




Myth number #2:
We have a QB on the roster than can take us to the Superbowl.

We don't period. TJ may be a good QB. However, if Qbs like Brees, Manning, Brady and the likes are struggling to make it to the Superbowl, TJ is far from a lock to do so. We need to get an elite Qb and the best way to do so with an early 1st round draft pick. In the past few years they Qbs drafted early have looked poised, polished and everything they were billed to be.

Players like Bradford, Stafford, Freeman, Sanchez, Ryan, Flacco look like they will make their teams competitive for years to come.
Sure there has been some misses in Russell and Quinn, but that's still a pretty good percentage, I wager its about the same for all other positions.
However, there is no position more important on the football field.
How do you know that?

Are you trying to say that TJ got to a level that we saw in 2008 and has not progressed?

Freeman, Sanchez had issues thier first year. Ryan had a step back last year. Bradford hasn't done anything but show flashes and then get hurt but all of them showed progress the next year. I wonder why you don't think that TJ is capable of getting better.

Again, if the scouting staff does thier job, they will be best served to take the BPA with the first pick instead of the typicall thought process of "Draft a QB" mentality that fans like to hear/chat about.

Zeus
12-02-2010, 04:59 PM
Freeman, Sanchez had issues thier first year. Ryan had a step back last year. Bradford hasn't done anything but show flashes and then get hurt.

I think you meant "Stafford", not "Bradford".

=Z=

Zeus
12-02-2010, 05:01 PM
Myth number #2:
We have a QB on the roster than can take us to the Superbowl.


Who, Joe Webb?

Because - as I've said over and over and over again - he's the only QB under contract beyond 2010.

=Z=

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 05:21 PM
Freeman, Sanchez had issues thier first year. Ryan had a step back last year. Bradford hasn't done anything but show flashes and then get hurt.

I think you meant "Stafford", not "Bradford".

=Z=
I did. Multitasking at work today.

Infidel
12-02-2010, 06:01 PM
BPA is an ok strategy to a certain point.

That point being when he fills a spot that we don't need filled.

That's inefficient use of our pick.

There might be exceptions if the player is, for example, a huge talent that we know wants to stay in this area.

Otherwise, no.

We have plenty of spots to fill, so I don't see this as a big problem anyway.

As for the QB.....it could go either way. I don't think even the coaches crystal ball is clear enough to see an answer.

We've invested time, money and training in Webb.....and we hope for a payoff.

We will go with best guess as to the competency of TJ and the potential of Webb.

We need either a new superstar from the draft or to trade for a talented veteran to vie with TJ for the starting job while Webb learns his trade.

Either could work or be a disaster.

All bets are off if Favre finishes this year with play at a high level.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 06:09 PM
BPA is an ok strategy to a certain point.

That point being when he fills a spot that we don't need filled.

That's inefficient use of our pick.

There might be exceptions if the player is, for example, a huge talent that we know wants to stay in this area.

Otherwise, no.

We have plenty of spots to fill, so I don't see this as a big problem anyway.

As for the QB.....it could go either way. I don't think even the coaches crystal ball is clear enough to see an answer.

We've invested time, money and training in Webb.....and we hope for a payoff.

We will go with best guess as to the competency of TJ and the potential of Webb.

We need either a new superstar from the draft or to trade for a talented veteran to vie with TJ for the starting job while Webb learns his trade.

Either could work or be a disaster.

All bets are off if Favre finishes this year with play at a high level.
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

The bigger issue here is that if TJ isn't gonna work out, we are basically starting from scratch next year. Like it or not, the Noodle will not be an option, regardless of how well he plays going out the door.

Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

Randy Moss
12-02-2010, 06:22 PM
This is a deep quarterback class with two to four QB's who may have NFL quality talent (Luck, Mallet, maybe Locker, maybe Ponder). This year will likely result in a high pick. Therefore, the 2011 NFL draft is where we should get our QB. If we have a top 15 pick we might even be able to get one of the top 2 without trading.

CanucksAreVikingsToo
12-02-2010, 06:45 PM
Dude. I am totally with you. Can't believe how good Bradford has looked this year.

Infidel
12-02-2010, 06:55 PM
Marrdro said:


Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

To me, it's a clear indicator that Leslie is:

1. NOT stupid and...

2. Will run whatever he needs to run.

When you're ahead and your running game is working....it sure would be stupid to pass, wouldn't it?!

That's exactly what was going on last Sunday.

They called a smart game.

Didn't surprise me.

The smart people have taken over. Long live the smart people.

And yes, we do have a lot invested in Webb. He has taken a spot and received training that could have gone to someone else.

I predict that it will pay off. I sure hope it does.

Our most pressing need is a big, tough Offensive Tackle and if the best BPA is a Center or a Guard.....grab him....(or maybe THEM).

12purplepride28
12-02-2010, 08:20 PM
First of all, I am 500% on board for drafting a QB with our first pick. I'm fine with drafting BPA in the later rounds, but we can't keep ignoring the fact that we have been missing the most important part in all of sports for years. I'm sick of watching everyone else in the division getting new, young QBs and we get stuck with patch work veterans. You can't get a franchise QB if you don't take a chance.

I can't explain how ridiculous and frustrating it is to see Marrdro and others say we should draft BPA in the first round. The reward is much greater if you strike gold on a QB that can last for 15-16 years than a great DT that will "anchor" the line for 10 years.

We need to take a chance on a QB while we have these great weapons at our disposal, draft a DT, WR, OL, and S later, but address the biggest need in the first round.

There's a reason the first pick in almost all recent drafts has been a QB; it's because that's what you build a team around. Imagine if the Colts didn't draft Peyton, if the Falcons didn't have Ryan, if the Packers didn't have Rodgers, if the Ravens didn't have Flacco, if the Jets didn't have Sanchez. These are all extremely young QBs (except Manning) taken in the first round, and because of them the teams are going to be contenders for years to come.

Marrdro
12-02-2010, 08:26 PM
Marrdro said:


Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

To me, it's a clear indicator that Leslie is:

1. NOT stupid and...

2. Will run whatever he needs to run.

When you're ahead and your running game is working....it sure would be stupid to pass, wouldn't it?!

That's exactly what was going on last Sunday.

They called a smart game.

Didn't surprise me.

The smart people have taken over. Long live the smart people.

And yes, we do have a lot invested in Webb. He has taken a spot and received training that could have gone to someone else.

I predict that it will pay off. I sure hope it does.

Our most pressing need is a big, tough Offensive Tackle and if the best BPA is a Center or a Guard.....grab him....(or maybe THEM).
First, anyone who is coaching at this level, regardless of title, isn't stupid.

Second, we were far from "Ahead" (4 pts) in that game were one would think that "Eating the clock" by running was an option.

What Leslie did, that I liked, was to play to the teams strenght and to stay away from the teams weaknes........

Strenght - run

Weakness - pass/defense

By running you kept the ball out of the Noodles noodle and kept your DL off the field so the offense wasn't out there trying to score on it late.

Caine
12-02-2010, 08:56 PM
BPA is an ok strategy to a certain point.

That point being when he fills a spot that we don't need filled.

That's inefficient use of our pick.

There might be exceptions if the player is, for example, a huge talent that we know wants to stay in this area.

Otherwise, no.

We have plenty of spots to fill, so I don't see this as a big problem anyway.

As for the QB.....it could go either way. I don't think even the coaches crystal ball is clear enough to see an answer.

We've invested time, money and training in Webb.....and we hope for a payoff.

We will go with best guess as to the competency of TJ and the potential of Webb.

We need either a new superstar from the draft or to trade for a talented veteran to vie with TJ for the starting job while Webb learns his trade.

Either could work or be a disaster.

All bets are off if Favre finishes this year with play at a high level.
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

The bigger issue here is that if TJ isn't gonna work out, we are basically starting from scratch next year. Like it or not, the Noodle will not be an option, regardless of how well he plays going out the door.

Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

A few points to consider:

1: I doubt Frazier will be our next HC...and if he is, I worry about the future of the franchise because that indicates to me that Wilf hasn't learned anything. Frazier is the "trendy" pick (according to the media), but I have already stated my reasons for wanting an established coach... and it begins with getting the Wilf family OUT of the football decision making process and into the owners box where they can smile for the cameras.

2: QB has been our biggest area of need for about 6 years. Chiller virtually ignored it until begging Favre to unretire, and had he not been fired this year his ineptitude in that department which has resulted in Webb being the ONLY QB under contract next season would have gotten him canned. Say what you will about Jackson, but his "progression" wasn't all that impressive, and there was ZERO reason to believe he'd suddenly figured it all out...and his contract is up after this season.

3: Favre is done...period. He won;'t be back next season, nor do I believe that the new HC - whomever that may be - will be interested in rebuilding the team with Favre on the roster. Brett's last best shot at a Superbowl was last season, and they blew it. He will retire for real after this season, and that will be that.

4: Marrdro says:
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

I care. Because those are the only two QB's on our roster other than Favre. So if they're "Busts", that indicates to me that the people who were supposed to make us competitive failed to do so.

5: Drafting BPA is great...when you don't have a GLARING need. We do. We NEED a QB. We can no longer afford to hope that maybe someone will drop into our laps, or that maybe our cheap options will develop just enough to get us through. We need a legit guy at the position.

To me, that says first round guy. And forget about a guy who "fits the scheme"...we don't have a scheme anymore. The "KAO" is going to be gone after this season.

But, at the end of the day, I can think of very few reasons NOT to go after the best QB available this draft.

Caine

kevoncox
12-02-2010, 11:04 PM
BPA is an ok strategy to a certain point.

That point being when he fills a spot that we don't need filled.

That's inefficient use of our pick.

There might be exceptions if the player is, for example, a huge talent that we know wants to stay in this area.

Otherwise, no.

We have plenty of spots to fill, so I don't see this as a big problem anyway.

As for the QB.....it could go either way. I don't think even the coaches crystal ball is clear enough to see an answer.

We've invested time, money and training in Webb.....and we hope for a payoff.

We will go with best guess as to the competency of TJ and the potential of Webb.

We need either a new superstar from the draft or to trade for a talented veteran to vie with TJ for the starting job while Webb learns his trade.

Either could work or be a disaster.

All bets are off if Favre finishes this year with play at a high level.
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

The bigger issue here is that if TJ isn't gonna work out, we are basically starting from scratch next year. Like it or not, the Noodle will not be an option, regardless of how well he plays going out the door.

Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

A few points to consider:

1: I doubt Frazier will be our next HC...and if he is, I worry about the future of the franchise because that indicates to me that Wilf hasn't learned anything. Frazier is the "trendy" pick (according to the media), but I have already stated my reasons for wanting an established coach... and it begins with getting the Wilf family OUT of the football decision making process and into the owners box where they can smile for the cameras.

2: QB has been our biggest area of need for about 6 years. Chiller virtually ignored it until begging Favre to unretire, and had he not been fired this year his ineptitude in that department which has resulted in Webb being the ONLY QB under contract next season would have gotten him canned. Say what you will about Jackson, but his "progression" wasn't all that impressive, and there was ZERO reason to believe he'd suddenly figured it all out...and his contract is up after this season.

3: Favre is done...period. He won;'t be back next season, nor do I believe that the new HC - whomever that may be - will be interested in rebuilding the team with Favre on the roster. Brett's last best shot at a Superbowl was last season, and they blew it. He will retire for real after this season, and that will be that.

4: Marrdro says:
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

I care. Because those are the only two QB's on our roster other than Favre. So if they're "Busts", that indicates to me that the people who were supposed to make us competitive failed to do so.

5: Drafting BPA is great...when you don't have a GLARING need. We do. We NEED a QB. We can no longer afford to hope that maybe someone will drop into our laps, or that maybe our cheap options will develop just enough to get us through. We need a legit guy at the position.

To me, that says first round guy. And forget about a guy who "fits the scheme"...we don't have a scheme anymore. The "KAO" is going to be gone after this season.

But, at the end of the day, I can think of very few reasons NOT to go after the best QB available this draft.

Caine
Nicely said Caine, Nicely said.
B)

Freakout
12-02-2010, 11:21 PM
I am for a QB but at the same time, and as bad as I want a young franchise QB, the last thing I want to see us do is settle for one and pass on more solid prospects. I don't want a Brady Quinn at the cost of an Adrian Peterson.

What scares me is the front office has a very poor track record when it comes to the QB's they have brought in. Which makes me hope that the next coach we eventually sign has a clue.

kevoncox
12-02-2010, 11:34 PM
Marrdro said:


Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

To me, it's a clear indicator that Leslie is:

1. NOT stupid and...

2. Will run whatever he needs to run.

When you're ahead and your running game is working....it sure would be stupid to pass, wouldn't it?!

That's exactly what was going on last Sunday.

They called a smart game.

Didn't surprise me.

The smart people have taken over. Long live the smart people.

And yes, we do have a lot invested in Webb. He has taken a spot and received training that could have gone to someone else.

I predict that it will pay off. I sure hope it does.

Our most pressing need is a big, tough Offensive Tackle and if the best BPA is a Center or a Guard.....grab him....(or maybe THEM).
First, anyone who is coaching at this level, regardless of title, isn't stupid.

Second, we were far from "Ahead" (4 pts) in that game were one would think that "Eating the clock" by running was an option.

What Leslie did, that I liked, was to play to the teams strenght and to stay away from the teams weaknes........

Strenght - run

Weakness - pass/defense

By running you kept the ball out of the Noodles noodle and kept your DL off the field so the offense wasn't out there trying to score on it late.

I think that is more about what he is forced to work with.
1) We were facing a terrible rush defense
2) We were facing a decent pass offence
3) Our WRS are banged up...Rice, Harvin and BB were all nicked
4) Our Running game was healthy
5) The Noodle is a liability and needs to be lasso'ed

However, if it was Brady on this roster, I doubt "Fobama" would hesitate to sling it some. 22 TOs is a lot of TOs

kevoncox
12-02-2010, 11:36 PM
I am for a QB but at the same time, and as bad as I want a young franchise QB, the last thing I want to see us do is settle for one and pass on more solid prospects. I don't want a Brady Quinn at the cost of an Adrian Peterson.

What scares me is the front office has a very poor track record when it comes to the QB's they have brought in. Which makes me hope that the next coach we eventually sign has a clue.

AD was a once in a lifetime player in college. Not too many of those coming out this year. My point is what if you already have LT...do you still draft AD in 2007? Probably not. You have to draft what gives you the best chance to win. We need a QB...and we need one badly.

Traveling_Vike
12-03-2010, 12:04 AM
This was quite well articulated. I will see if I can do it justice.




BPA is an ok strategy to a certain point.

That point being when he fills a spot that we don't need filled.

That's inefficient use of our pick.

There might be exceptions if the player is, for example, a huge talent that we know wants to stay in this area.

Otherwise, no.

We have plenty of spots to fill, so I don't see this as a big problem anyway.

As for the QB.....it could go either way. I don't think even the coaches crystal ball is clear enough to see an answer.

We've invested time, money and training in Webb.....and we hope for a payoff.

We will go with best guess as to the competency of TJ and the potential of Webb.

We need either a new superstar from the draft or to trade for a talented veteran to vie with TJ for the starting job while Webb learns his trade.

Either could work or be a disaster.

All bets are off if Favre finishes this year with play at a high level.
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

The bigger issue here is that if TJ isn't gonna work out, we are basically starting from scratch next year. Like it or not, the Noodle will not be an option, regardless of how well he plays going out the door.

Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

A few points to consider:

1: I doubt Frazier will be our next HC...and if he is, I worry about the future of the franchise because that indicates to me that Wilf hasn't learned anything. Frazier is the "trendy" pick (according to the media), but I have already stated my reasons for wanting an established coach... and it begins with getting the Wilf family OUT of the football decision making process and into the owners box where they can smile for the cameras.

The decision on who will be the next Head Coach had better be made well before the draft comes around. Whoever it ends up being, HIS philosophy will dictate where we go in the draft.

I'm not usually one for "trendy" guys. I want someone who will come in and bring guys along with him whom he trusts to do their jobs. But that discussion is going on in another thread, so I will leave it for now. All I will add is that I'd like to see a true GM put in place.


2: QB has been our biggest area of need for about 6 years. Chiller virtually ignored it until begging Favre to unretire, and had he not been fired this year his ineptitude in that department which has resulted in Webb being the ONLY QB under contract next season would have gotten him canned. Say what you will about Jackson, but his "progression" wasn't all that impressive, and there was ZERO reason to believe he'd suddenly figured it all out...and his contract is up after this season.

Childress did not entirely ignore the QB position. He tried to bring in a guy he liked, and failed to manage/develop him properly. Whether that is all on him is debatable, but TJ was his guy from the start. As to whether he has "suddenly figured it all out," well, that's how most guys describe it when it finally does happen for them. There are plentiful examples of guys who appeared to turn it on suddenly.

I also still contend that you characterization of "begging" is way overblown. As you are so fond of saying about evidence, there is ZERO to support that view. All published accounts indicate that the guys went down there simply to get an answer, and not to beg. There is also nothing proving that they were "sent," rather than going on their own volition. Believe what you like, but there is nothing out there other than opinion that supports the "begging" theory.

All of that said, I am not so sure that TJ is the answer any more, either, simply because we would need to commit to him now and completely, or we will not be able to keep him anyway. There are several other teams out there who would likely give him a shot. And if there is to be a coaching change, the new guy might not want him anyway, even if Frazier gives him the nod now.


3: Favre is done...period. He won;'t be back next season, nor do I believe that the new HC - whomever that may be - will be interested in rebuilding the team with Favre on the roster. Brett's last best shot at a Superbowl was last season, and they blew it. He will retire for real after this season, and that will be that.

I completely agree with this. He is done.


4: Marrdro says:
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

I care. Because those are the only two QB's on our roster other than Favre. So if they're "Busts", that indicates to me that the people who were supposed to make us competitive failed to do so.

I also care, because I hate waste. Webb, being a low round pick, is not as much of an issue as TJ, who cost us two picks (iirc), one being a second-rounder. That's a significant investment. I still believe he will make it, but not so much with us any more.


5: Drafting BPA is great...when you don't have a GLARING need. We do. We NEED a QB. We can no longer afford to hope that maybe someone will drop into our laps, or that maybe our cheap options will develop just enough to get us through. We need a legit guy at the position.

To me, that says first round guy.

It says that to a lot of others, as well. My problem with it is not in the pick itself. I can and will accept that if that is where we go. It's with the seeming perceptions that said first-round QB will:

a) solve all of our problems, and

b) start and be effective immediately.


And forget about a guy who "fits the scheme"...we don't have a scheme anymore. The "KAO" is going to be gone after this season.

It's not "fits the scheme" that we have now... it's "fits the scheme" that we WILL have when he comes in. That will depend on who the new HC and OC turn out to be. As I said above, that problem had better damned well be solved first.


But, at the end of the day, I can think of very few reasons NOT to go after the best QB available this draft.

Caine

Drafting one of them at our own spot is fine. I would argue very hard against trading up, however. We can't afford to give up the extra picks it would take. We have too many other issues to address.

The thing is, we're probably not going to be serious contenders next year in any case. A rookie stud QB isn't going to change that much, if at all. If we take one, it will be to develop him for the future, not for him to be our savior right now. If you're counting on that, I am afraid that you will be sorely disappointed. It just isn't very likely to work out, at least not right away.

So... that still leaves us needing a starter for 2011. Webb almost certainly won't be ready, nor will the new guy. So we still need to bring in another veteran from somewhere else, if we're not keeping TJ.

There's some money, there. A stud rookie, especially a top ten guy, plus an established vet taking up lots of cash that we then won't have to hang on to the other veterans we don't want to lose. That is another reason not to try to move up. It'll cost too much money.

If the QB we draft is not going to start right away, then we don't need the top one or two of those available. Of course, if one happens to fall our way, than by all means, snap him up. In fact, if it looks like we can get away with it when our turn comes up, we should probably consider trading DOWN a few spots in order to gain an extra pick or two.

I don't need a shiny new toy that may get broken by mishandling. I've never felt the pressure to have the newest, hottest, biggest, best toys. But that's just me.

I won't complain (although I am willing to discuss and debate) no matter which way we end up going. I will wait and reserve judgment on whether our picks are successful until a few years have passed.

It just seems to me that most folks are so focused on this that they are neglecting our other needs, not just as of now, but after we lose some of our current vets, which we undoubtedly will.

kevoncox
12-03-2010, 01:12 AM
"If the QB we draft is not going to start right away, then we don't need the top one or two of those available."

Your logic is flawed. You want the best QB available for you. You shoudln't care how much time you have to groom them. Draft the one that you believe will be the best QB long term.

ILLvike
12-03-2010, 02:56 AM
"If the QB we draft is not going to start right away, then we don't need the top one or two of those available."

Your logic is flawed. You want the best QB available for you. You shoudln't care how much time you have to groom them. Draft the one that you believe will be the best QB long term.


Like Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers?

kevoncox
12-03-2010, 03:05 AM
"If the QB we draft is not going to start right away, then we don't need the top one or two of those available."

Your logic is flawed. You want the best QB available for you. You shoudln't care how much time you have to groom them. Draft the one that you believe will be the best QB long term.


Like Alex Smith over Aaron Rodgers?

You fail! Both were elite QB prospects. I believe there were rated 1 and 2 and the difference between them were negliable. Smith got the nod because he had better mobility. I would like to point out Smith has played under 7 OCs in 6 years. What QB can survive that?
I'm talking about draft a talent in the 3rd rounds and saying he's good enough. Drafting a 6th rounder and thinking he can sit on the bench for 5 years.

Traveling_Vike
12-03-2010, 05:05 AM
"If the QB we draft is not going to start right away, then we don't need the top one or two of those available."

Your logic is flawed. You want the best QB available for you. You shoudln't care how much time you have to groom them. Draft the one that you believe will be the best QB long term.

To really understand what I was getting at, you need to include this in context. It is there to reinforce my position that we do not want or need to move up in the draft to get a guy who won't be playing.

If a guy we do really like happens to be there for us to take, then again, by all means, take him.

marstc09
12-03-2010, 05:26 AM
BPA is an ok strategy to a certain point.

That point being when he fills a spot that we don't need filled.

That's inefficient use of our pick.

There might be exceptions if the player is, for example, a huge talent that we know wants to stay in this area.

Otherwise, no.

We have plenty of spots to fill, so I don't see this as a big problem anyway.

As for the QB.....it could go either way. I don't think even the coaches crystal ball is clear enough to see an answer.

We've invested time, money and training in Webb.....and we hope for a payoff.

We will go with best guess as to the competency of TJ and the potential of Webb.

We need either a new superstar from the draft or to trade for a talented veteran to vie with TJ for the starting job while Webb learns his trade.

Either could work or be a disaster.

All bets are off if Favre finishes this year with play at a high level.


Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.


Good thing you are not a betting man. You would be on the streets.

ndnorseman
12-03-2010, 08:05 AM
I'm with the group that thinks we should get a QB with the first pick. He shouldn't, however, be thrown to the wolves right out of the starting gate (lol @ the combined idioms). It wouldn't be that difficult, IMO, to get a capable veteran QB out of FA at a low price to help mentor the kid in his first year (and Webb in his 2nd).

Bear with me on this, just thinking out loud.....

What would the pros and cons be, if each of the 3 QBs got a rep % of:

50% for 1st rd pick
30% for veteran FA
20% for Webb

For the first 3 games, let the rookie start for a quarter, and have the vet take over the other 3 quarters

For the next 3 games let the rookie start the first half, let the vet finish it.

The next 3 games, the rookie starts 3 quarters, and vet has the rest.

The last 3 games, the rookie starts the whole game.

If, during any of the games, the vet gets hurt during his playing time, let Webb get some snaps. That way, for the following year, the rookie should have enough experience and mentoring to start for the year, and Webb, depending on how he's progressed, could be a serviceable back-up.


Just some random thoughts...be gentle. LOL

Marrdro
12-03-2010, 02:55 PM
This was quite well articulated. I will see if I can do it justice.
Psssshawwww, bite your tongue.......You always do a post justice my friend.







BPA is an ok strategy to a certain point.

That point being when he fills a spot that we don't need filled.

That's inefficient use of our pick.

There might be exceptions if the player is, for example, a huge talent that we know wants to stay in this area.

Otherwise, no.

We have plenty of spots to fill, so I don't see this as a big problem anyway.

As for the QB.....it could go either way. I don't think even the coaches crystal ball is clear enough to see an answer.

We've invested time, money and training in Webb.....and we hope for a payoff.

We will go with best guess as to the competency of TJ and the potential of Webb.

We need either a new superstar from the draft or to trade for a talented veteran to vie with TJ for the starting job while Webb learns his trade.

Either could work or be a disaster.

All bets are off if Favre finishes this year with play at a high level.
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

The bigger issue here is that if TJ isn't gonna work out, we are basically starting from scratch next year. Like it or not, the Noodle will not be an option, regardless of how well he plays going out the door.

Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

A few points to consider:

1: I doubt Frazier will be our next HC...and if he is, I worry about the future of the franchise because that indicates to me that Wilf hasn't learned anything. Frazier is the "trendy" pick (according to the media), but I have already stated my reasons for wanting an established coach... and it begins with getting the Wilf family OUT of the football decision making process and into the owners box where they can smile for the cameras.

The decision on who will be the next Head Coach had better be made well before the draft comes around. Whoever it ends up being, HIS philosophy will dictate where we go in the draft.

I'm not usually one for "trendy" guys. I want someone who will come in and bring guys along with him whom he trusts to do their jobs. But that discussion is going on in another thread, so I will leave it for now. All I will add is that I'd like to see a true GM put in place.
I am of a mind that Caine is correct in that the owner probably has already made up his mind on who the HC is gonna be. What still might drive the train is will he deviate from the Triad Thingamigib and bring in a real GM to run the show or will he let the HC retain the power to jettison players whenever he likes/sees fit.



2: QB has been our biggest area of need for about 6 years. Chiller virtually ignored it until begging Favre to unretire, and had he not been fired this year his ineptitude in that department which has resulted in Webb being the ONLY QB under contract next season would have gotten him canned. Say what you will about Jackson, but his "progression" wasn't all that impressive, and there was ZERO reason to believe he'd suddenly figured it all out...and his contract is up after this season.
The staff (not just the Chiller) has not ignored the QB position. Look around the league my friend. The Vikings have been one of the most active in player moves in that area.

The problem is, there hasn't been anything worth going after that was available, until recently.

You yourself said the best option to date was Carr. Carr for cripes sake. He is currently a backup to a kid that was on the streets a few weeks ago.


Childress did not entirely ignore the QB position. He tried to bring in a guy he liked, and failed to manage/develop him properly. Whether that is all on him is debatable, but TJ was his guy from the start. As to whether he has "suddenly figured it all out," well, that's how most guys describe it when it finally does happen for them. There are plentiful examples of guys who appeared to turn it on suddenly.
The staff, not just the Chiller, brought in several guys they liked. I for one still believe Sage was a Spielmen option. TJ was a last minute pick cause they goofed and missed on Cutler and Clemens (who didn't work out).


I also still contend that you characterization of "begging" is way overblown. As you are so fond of saying about evidence, there is ZERO to support that view. All published accounts indicate that the guys went down there simply to get an answer, and not to beg. There is also nothing proving that they were "sent," rather than going on their own volition. Believe what you like, but there is nothing out there other than opinion that supports the "begging" theory.
After last year I don't think the Chiller wanted him back this year.

I think the Chillers trip was to find out (for the owner) if the Noodle was coming back. If he said no, the Staff was willing to go with TJ, Sage and Webb (in that order by the way).

I think the players trip was again, an attempt by the owner to find out if his ticket sales were gonna be up or down. The Noodle would equate to up, TJ would have equated to down.

Sad day indeed that decisions are being made on ticket sales. Pains me to see teams like the PUKERs and the Deadskins not have to worry about that kindof crap.


All of that said, I am not so sure that TJ is the answer any more, either, simply because we would need to commit to him now and completely, or we will not be able to keep him anyway. There are several other teams out there who would likely give him a shot. And if there is to be a coaching change, the new guy might not want him anyway, even if Frazier gives him the nod now.
I believe we should have already committed to him. My guess, he will leave as soon as he can.



3: Favre is done...period. He won;'t be back next season, nor do I believe that the new HC - whomever that may be - will be interested in rebuilding the team with Favre on the roster. Brett's last best shot at a Superbowl was last season, and they blew it. He will retire for real after this season, and that will be that.

I completely agree with this. He is done.
I'll believe it when I see it. Again, I think the owner opted to go with the Noodle this year just to ensure he had ticket sales. I also believe he let the Chiller go because of ticket sales. Every decision being made up there now centers around ticket sales instead of winning.

IMHO, that will equate to more losses and less ticket sales anyway.



4: Marrdro says:
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

I care. Because those are the only two QB's on our roster other than Favre. So if they're "Busts", that indicates to me that the people who were supposed to make us competitive failed to do so.

I also care, because I hate waste. Webb, being a low round pick, is not as much of an issue as TJ, who cost us two picks (iirc), one being a second-rounder. That's a significant investment. I still believe he will make it, but not so much with us any more.
Just because TJ leaves doesn't mean he is a bust. It means our FO pukes failed in retaining talent they should'nt have let walk.

If you follow the logical process that goes into developing a raw QB into a NFL ready QB, TJ should have got his first look this year.

I for one still think TJ was ready last year and the only reason he wasn't allowed to finally have a shot was again, driven by ticket sales.

We got lucky last year. The Noodle stayed in the system for the most part and we had a great season. Unfortunately, there was a rift between the QB and the HC with the player having more say than the HC (because of ticket sales) which eventually spelled doom for us this year.

The decision by the Wilfs to have a double standard, especially one were the HC and the QB were vying for control of the team was the dumbest football move I have ever seen and IMHO will have ripple effects for us the fans for a long time.

By the way, we are still worrying about ticket sales this weekend Mr. Wilf.:P



5: Drafting BPA is great...when you don't have a GLARING need. We do. We NEED a QB. We can no longer afford to hope that maybe someone will drop into our laps, or that maybe our cheap options will develop just enough to get us through. We need a legit guy at the position.

To me, that says first round guy.

It says that to a lot of others, as well. My problem with it is not in the pick itself. I can and will accept that if that is where we go. It's with the seeming perceptions that said first-round QB will:

a) solve all of our problems, and

b) start and be effective immediately.

Was Cassel a first round guy? Was Lienart a first round guy? Was Vy a first round guy? Was Brady a first round guy?

Comeon, what it says to me is that the scouting staff needs to make sure they do thier due dillegence and get the guy that fits the scheme.




And forget about a guy who "fits the scheme"...we don't have a scheme anymore. The "KAO" is going to be gone after this season.

It's not "fits the scheme" that we have now... it's "fits the scheme" that we WILL have when he comes in. That will depend on who the new HC and OC turn out to be. As I said above, that problem had better damned well be solved first.
So who are the scouts looking at if we don't know what scheme we are trying to find players for.

To sit here and say the scheme doesn't matter is simply crazy talk. Prime example is Sharper. Bad player for us who wasn't playing or a good player in a scheme that he wasn't suited for.

The better fit the scheme for cripes sake or you don't draft them.


But, at the end of the day, I can think of very few reasons NOT to go after the best QB available this draft.

Caine
Yea, lets go get a kid who can throw it deep (ala Leftwich) who has a slow delivery and then try to fit him into a WCO scheme were the kid needs a quick release.

LOL. The madness of it all......

.......snipped the rest.......Gotta go to a meeting.

Caine
12-03-2010, 06:20 PM
This was quite well articulated. I will see if I can do it justice.
Psssshawwww, bite your tongue.......You always do a post justice my friend.







BPA is an ok strategy to a certain point.

That point being when he fills a spot that we don't need filled.

That's inefficient use of our pick.

There might be exceptions if the player is, for example, a huge talent that we know wants to stay in this area.

Otherwise, no.

We have plenty of spots to fill, so I don't see this as a big problem anyway.

As for the QB.....it could go either way. I don't think even the coaches crystal ball is clear enough to see an answer.

We've invested time, money and training in Webb.....and we hope for a payoff.

We will go with best guess as to the competency of TJ and the potential of Webb.

We need either a new superstar from the draft or to trade for a talented veteran to vie with TJ for the starting job while Webb learns his trade.

Either could work or be a disaster.

All bets are off if Favre finishes this year with play at a high level.
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

The bigger issue here is that if TJ isn't gonna work out, we are basically starting from scratch next year. Like it or not, the Noodle will not be an option, regardless of how well he plays going out the door.

Heck, just look back at last week. When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.

A few points to consider:

1: I doubt Frazier will be our next HC...and if he is, I worry about the future of the franchise because that indicates to me that Wilf hasn't learned anything. Frazier is the "trendy" pick (according to the media), but I have already stated my reasons for wanting an established coach... and it begins with getting the Wilf family OUT of the football decision making process and into the owners box where they can smile for the cameras.

The decision on who will be the next Head Coach had better be made well before the draft comes around. Whoever it ends up being, HIS philosophy will dictate where we go in the draft.

I'm not usually one for "trendy" guys. I want someone who will come in and bring guys along with him whom he trusts to do their jobs. But that discussion is going on in another thread, so I will leave it for now. All I will add is that I'd like to see a true GM put in place.
I am of a mind that Caine is correct in that the owner probably has already made up his mind on who the HC is gonna be. What still might drive the train is will he deviate from the Triad Thingamigib and bring in a real GM to run the show or will he let the HC retain the power to jettison players whenever he likes/sees fit.



2: QB has been our biggest area of need for about 6 years. Chiller virtually ignored it until begging Favre to unretire, and had he not been fired this year his ineptitude in that department which has resulted in Webb being the ONLY QB under contract next season would have gotten him canned. Say what you will about Jackson, but his "progression" wasn't all that impressive, and there was ZERO reason to believe he'd suddenly figured it all out...and his contract is up after this season.
The staff (not just the Chiller) has not ignored the QB position. Look around the league my friend. The Vikings have been one of the most active in player moves in that area.

The problem is, there hasn't been anything worth going after that was available, until recently.

You yourself said the best option to date was Carr. Carr for cripes sake. He is currently a backup to a kid that was on the streets a few weeks ago.


Childress did not entirely ignore the QB position. He tried to bring in a guy he liked, and failed to manage/develop him properly. Whether that is all on him is debatable, but TJ was his guy from the start. As to whether he has "suddenly figured it all out," well, that's how most guys describe it when it finally does happen for them. There are plentiful examples of guys who appeared to turn it on suddenly.
The staff, not just the Chiller, brought in several guys they liked. I for one still believe Sage was a Spielmen option. TJ was a last minute pick cause they goofed and missed on Cutler and Clemens (who didn't work out).


I also still contend that you characterization of "begging" is way overblown. As you are so fond of saying about evidence, there is ZERO to support that view. All published accounts indicate that the guys went down there simply to get an answer, and not to beg. There is also nothing proving that they were "sent," rather than going on their own volition. Believe what you like, but there is nothing out there other than opinion that supports the "begging" theory.
After last year I don't think the Chiller wanted him back this year.

I think the Chillers trip was to find out (for the owner) if the Noodle was coming back. If he said no, the Staff was willing to go with TJ, Sage and Webb (in that order by the way).

I think the players trip was again, an attempt by the owner to find out if his ticket sales were gonna be up or down. The Noodle would equate to up, TJ would have equated to down.

Sad day indeed that decisions are being made on ticket sales. Pains me to see teams like the PUKERs and the Deadskins not have to worry about that kindof crap.


All of that said, I am not so sure that TJ is the answer any more, either, simply because we would need to commit to him now and completely, or we will not be able to keep him anyway. There are several other teams out there who would likely give him a shot. And if there is to be a coaching change, the new guy might not want him anyway, even if Frazier gives him the nod now.
I believe we should have already committed to him. My guess, he will leave as soon as he can.



3: Favre is done...period. He won;'t be back next season, nor do I believe that the new HC - whomever that may be - will be interested in rebuilding the team with Favre on the roster. Brett's last best shot at a Superbowl was last season, and they blew it. He will retire for real after this season, and that will be that.

I completely agree with this. He is done.
I'll believe it when I see it. Again, I think the owner opted to go with the Noodle this year just to ensure he had ticket sales. I also believe he let the Chiller go because of ticket sales. Every decision being made up there now centers around ticket sales instead of winning.

IMHO, that will equate to more losses and less ticket sales anyway.



4: Marrdro says:
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

I care. Because those are the only two QB's on our roster other than Favre. So if they're "Busts", that indicates to me that the people who were supposed to make us competitive failed to do so.

I also care, because I hate waste. Webb, being a low round pick, is not as much of an issue as TJ, who cost us two picks (iirc), one being a second-rounder. That's a significant investment. I still believe he will make it, but not so much with us any more.
Just because TJ leaves doesn't mean he is a bust. It means our FO pukes failed in retaining talent they should'nt have let walk.

If you follow the logical process that goes into developing a raw QB into a NFL ready QB, TJ should have got his first look this year.

I for one still think TJ was ready last year and the only reason he wasn't allowed to finally have a shot was again, driven by ticket sales.

We got lucky last year. The Noodle stayed in the system for the most part and we had a great season. Unfortunately, there was a rift between the QB and the HC with the player having more say than the HC (because of ticket sales) which eventually spelled doom for us this year.

The decision by the Wilfs to have a double standard, especially one were the HC and the QB were vying for control of the team was the dumbest football move I have ever seen and IMHO will have ripple effects for us the fans for a long time.

By the way, we are still worrying about ticket sales this weekend Mr. Wilf.:P



5: Drafting BPA is great...when you don't have a GLARING need. We do. We NEED a QB. We can no longer afford to hope that maybe someone will drop into our laps, or that maybe our cheap options will develop just enough to get us through. We need a legit guy at the position.

To me, that says first round guy.

It says that to a lot of others, as well. My problem with it is not in the pick itself. I can and will accept that if that is where we go. It's with the seeming perceptions that said first-round QB will:

a) solve all of our problems, and

b) start and be effective immediately.

Was Cassel a first round guy? Was Lienart a first round guy? Was Vy a first round guy? Was Brady a first round guy?

Comeon, what it says to me is that the scouting staff needs to make sure they do thier due dillegence and get the guy that fits the scheme.




And forget about a guy who "fits the scheme"...we don't have a scheme anymore. The "KAO" is going to be gone after this season.

It's not "fits the scheme" that we have now... it's "fits the scheme" that we WILL have when he comes in. That will depend on who the new HC and OC turn out to be. As I said above, that problem had better damned well be solved first.
So who are the scouts looking at if we don't know what scheme we are trying to find players for.

To sit here and say the scheme doesn't matter is simply crazy talk. Prime example is Sharper. Bad player for us who wasn't playing or a good player in a scheme that he wasn't suited for.

The better fit the scheme for cripes sake or you don't draft them.


But, at the end of the day, I can think of very few reasons NOT to go after the best QB available this draft.

Caine
Yea, lets go get a kid who can throw it deep (ala Leftwich) who has a slow delivery and then try to fit him into a WCO scheme were the kid needs a quick release.

LOL. The madness of it all......

.......snipped the rest.......Gotta go to a meeting.

1: Head Coach Issue: Zygi has already shown us what a "Rich Fan" will do when selecting a HC... He'll be overawed by the impressive sounding terms that the candidate spews forth, then focus on the elements he DOES know...like family, morals, etc. Meanwhile, the element he DOESN'T know (Football) gets diminished.

Zygi needs to hire a Football guy and let HIM select the new HC. Anything else reeks of "compromise" which means the original flaw in the process (Decisions being made by a "Rich Fan") still exists.

2: Begging Brett Favre: Of course that's overstating...much like when someone ELSE tries to undestate it by blaming the owner's alleged ticket sales goal for Favre's acquisition. Favre was brought in for ONE reason, we were a QB away from an excellent team, and everyone knew it. Jackson had not developed into the guy they thought he would (And everyone but Marrdro and small handfull knows THAT), and they were left with Rosenfels - who was a back-up quality QB. Favre was a no-brainer add last season.

This season, despite reports that Chiller wanted Favre - and despite the fact that "the trip was authorized by Chiller", a certain individual keeps theorizing that Chiller had nothig to do with this, and that Jackson was ready to go (despite a HORRIBLE preseason showing). I find that to be laughable primarily because there is so much public evidence AGAINST that belief.

Say what you will, Chiller didn't want Favre, he NEEDED Favre...and he knew it.

3: QB selection: We can go back and forth all day about great QB's and draft position..but the fact is that 1st round QB's have a higher success rate than other round selections. This is not an opinion.

That said, depending upon where we fall in the draft, it MIGHT be worthwhile to move up to get a guy we really want. Yes, it will be expensive, but the failure to do so will be expensive too.

It's too early to decide right now...we first need to assess the QB depth in the draft, figure out what kind of QB our new HC will need, and see where we are in the depth chart.

But to close the door absolutely right now is premature.

4: QB Options: Yes, Chiller brought in a butt load of QB's...each one more shitty than teh next. The roster of undeachievers and ne'er beens is impressive only in it's length. At NO time did Chiller actually go after any of the VIABLE candidates. My personal favorite was Carr, that's true...but that was also 3, 4, and 5 years ago. When he was coming out of Houston and still had some fire left in his gut. I don;t know why he's not playing in San Fran...but Singletary has been an impressive HC hasn't he? Oh...wait....no. They're 4-7 like us...

That said, there were other options Chiller didn't look at. Many of them better than Holcomb or Bollinger...or Rosenfels for that matter. Bottom line,m Chiller sat with Jackson, but didn't develop him properly OR completely overestimated his ability level and didn't drop him...either way, we are left with poor QB options while better options signed elsewhere. So, despite your shart (Shitty-chart), Chiller did FAIL in this department...spectacularly.

Caine

dfosterf
12-03-2010, 06:28 PM
How far up? To Luck? He's projected to go #1. (Notwithstanding the [goofy, imo] projection shown earlier in this forum)

Then what?

MAJOR gambles---

This discussion seems to hinge on generalized philosophy versus the REAL discussion that should be taking place, and that is the risk/benefit of the individuals in front of you as QB prospects in the 2011 draft.

Marrdro
12-03-2010, 06:30 PM
[quote]
That said, there were other options Chiller didn't look at. Many of them better than Holcomb or Bollinger...or Rosenfels for that matter. Bottom line,m Chiller sat with Jackson, but didn't develop him properly OR completely overestimated his ability level and didn't drop him...either way, we are left with poor QB options while better options signed elsewhere. So, despite your shart (Shitty-chart), Chiller did FAIL in this department...spectacularly.

Caine
I made a thread that listed EVERY option out there that WAS available. Last time you looked at that list you came up with Carr and Schaub and readily admitted you wouldn't have given what was given for Schaube.

What/who are the "many other" QB's you alude to in this post?

Caine
12-03-2010, 06:44 PM
[quote]
That said, there were other options Chiller didn't look at. Many of them better than Holcomb or Bollinger...or Rosenfels for that matter. Bottom line,m Chiller sat with Jackson, but didn't develop him properly OR completely overestimated his ability level and didn't drop him...either way, we are left with poor QB options while better options signed elsewhere. So, despite your shart (Shitty-chart), Chiller did FAIL in this department...spectacularly.

Caine
I made a thread that listed EVERY option out there that WAS available. Last time you looked at that list you came up with Carr and Schaub and readily admitted you wouldn't have given what was given for Schaube.

What/who are the "many other" QB's you alude to in this post?

How about Garcia? Kitna? Both of those were OBVIOUS steps over who we had in '06.

Schaub, Carr, and Garcia were all available in '07...and maybe "I" wouldn't have paid for Schaub...but I'm just a fan. Chiller - the PROFESSIONAL - should have known better...but didn't. Bledsoe was there too - better than Holcomb or Bollinger....

The POINT - which you continuously miss - is that other options were there, and in many cases were - arguably - better options than Chiller brought in. Had we brought in Kitna or Garcia in '06, do you think Jackson would have been starting? I don't. Would Jackson stood a better chance of developing? Maybe.

So, again, the POINT is that Chiller failed to recognize what was available...and that's his JOB...while I, and many other FANS saw better options AT THAT TIME. And in hindsight, HIS decisions didn't get any better...and most of ours didn't get any worse.

Pretty sad when the fan base is smarter than the Head Coach.

Caine

dfosterf
12-03-2010, 06:52 PM
PICK one.

Stop complaining about your former coach, stop trying to one-up your fellow posters, and P I C K one and tell us why.

That requires research. What a beeyatch.

Marrdro
12-03-2010, 07:00 PM
[quote]
That said, there were other options Chiller didn't look at. Many of them better than Holcomb or Bollinger...or Rosenfels for that matter. Bottom line,m Chiller sat with Jackson, but didn't develop him properly OR completely overestimated his ability level and didn't drop him...either way, we are left with poor QB options while better options signed elsewhere. So, despite your shart (Shitty-chart), Chiller did FAIL in this department...spectacularly.

Caine
I made a thread that listed EVERY option out there that WAS available. Last time you looked at that list you came up with Carr and Schaub and readily admitted you wouldn't have given what was given for Schaube.

What/who are the "many other" QB's you alude to in this post?

How about Garcia? Kitna? Both of those were OBVIOUS steps over who we had in '06.

Schaub, Carr, and Garcia were all available in '07...and maybe "I" wouldn't have paid for Schaub...but I'm just a fan. Chiller - the PROFESSIONAL - should have known better...but didn't. Bledsoe was there too - better than Holcomb or Bollinger....

The POINT - which you continuously miss - is that other options were there, and in many cases were - arguably - better options than Chiller brought in. Had we brought in Kitna or Garcia in '06, do you think Jackson would have been starting? I don't. Would Jackson stood a better chance of developing? Maybe.

So, again, the POINT is that Chiller failed to recognize what was available...and that's his JOB...while I, and many other FANS saw better options AT THAT TIME. And in hindsight, HIS decisions didn't get any better...and most of ours didn't get any worse.

Pretty sad when the fan base is smarter than the Head Coach.

Caine
Not sure if I agree that the staff should have figured out that Schaub was a fit and gone after him.

Truth of the matter is we don't know that they didn't go after him, however, if you dig, he wasn't really "Available" other than in a trade. Maybe Atlanta only called one team. Maybe they called 5. Maybe the Vikes weren't one that was called before Houston jumped. Again, we don't know how that deal went down.

If you want to look at guys like Schaub you would almost then have to lump in players like Cassel then as well. I distinctly remember alot of discussions on that cat (as well as Derrick Anderson) and the feeling about him. "He's not a first round draft pick and isn't worth the picks......Hasn't proved anything"......

Kitna, now thats one that bares some scrutiny as does Warner.

Garcia on the other hand is a career 9-7 QB. Aren't you the one who keeps asking me if I'm happy with mediocrity? IMHO he is the most overated QB to hit the league.

Bledsoe? Seriously?

Still, I don't think you have really given me "Many Others" my friend. Mostly cause there haven't been many others.

Agree or not, I know you won't, this staff has been pretty limited in what it could "Really" do at the QB position not only in the draft but in FA as well.

As I said, I hold alot of things against the Chiller. The issue of finding a QB isn't one of them. Alot of teams are having the same issues we are having and if push comes to shove, one could say that we have weathered it a bit better than most.

Until this year of course.

dfosterf
12-03-2010, 07:10 PM
The sample size of NFL Front offices that can project college quarterbacks as starting NFL quarterbacks on a consistent basis is rather small.

I'd go with zero as a starting point.

Marrdro
12-03-2010, 07:15 PM
The sample size of NFL Front offices that can project college quarterbacks as starting NFL quarterbacks on a consistent basis is rather small.

I'd go with zero as a starting point.
I think that number can grow if you add some variables....

a. A Coaching staff with a clear scheme.
b. A coaching staff that can articulte to the FO pukes what player fits that scheme.
c. A scouting staff that can find the player to fit that scheme.
d. A pool of players that can be drafted or picked up as FA's that fit that scheme.
e. A coaching staff that has the latitude and talent to then develop that player once he is found and on the team.

I think the biggest issue you will see from a Vikings fan perspective is that our staff has failed in all areas listed above.

I for one disagree a bit as I really believe TJ is ready. Problem is, he hasn't been given a chance of late so that I can see what I believe.

dfosterf
12-03-2010, 07:54 PM
The "regulars" (as in, regularly on an ad homenin bent against you) think we are in lock-step agreement, especially in your absence, as I was defending your dumbass (endearment/sarcastic-mods) , in a thread that has escaped your examination.

You got hosed in the latitude department.

You don't have any. TJ is as much a casualty of the knee-jerk reactionary sentiment of the fanbase as is Chilly.

If anyone ever bothered to look, staying the course ---as long as smart folk are running the show--- is probably better than not.

Kid might have been good. (tj) I personnally saw a lot of evidence indicitiave of precisely that.

I thought his skill-set was hard to beat from a defensive standpoint...

Notice how no one here is picking one from the draft, QB-wise... I know the top ten QB prospects backwards and forwards, as always, yet obviously not even in the market for one.

Just another typical dumb-assed Puker fan.

:P

Marrdro
12-03-2010, 08:04 PM
The "regulars" (as in, regularly on an ad homenin bent against you) think we are in lock-step agreement, especially in your absence, as I was defending your dumbass (endearment/sarcastic-mods) , in a thread that has escaped your examination.

You got hosed in the latitude department.

You don't have any. TJ is as much a casualty of the knee-jerk reactionary sentiment of the fanbase as is Chilly.

If anyone ever bothered to look, staying the course ---as long as smart folk are running the show--- is probably better than not.

Kid might have been good. (tj) I personnaly saw a lot of evidence indicitiave of precisely that.

Notice how no one here is picking one from the draft, QB-wise... I know the top ten QB prospects backwards and forwards, as always, yet obviously not even in the market for one.

Just another typical dumb-assed Puker fan.

:P
Quit cracking me up.

You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 2005 draft?

The Vikes had two chances to get young Rodgers and opted for the likes of Erasmus James and Troy Williamson.

That in and of itself should be enough, but when it happened, most fans were happy and didn't even blink that we passed on him cause we had Pepp.

And even to add more insult to injury, the despised PUKERS had the Noodle and still took him all the while silly chucklehead Vikings fans laughed at them.

In the end, I don't care who you have on the roster. If there is one there that fits your scheme you better take him. Even the fricken PUKER organization knows that for cripes sake.

IMHO, the goof on Rodgers and then on Cutler sealed the doom for this orgainzation for the next 3-5 years unless TJ works out.

jargomcfargo
12-03-2010, 09:41 PM
The "regulars" (as in, regularly on an ad homenin bent against you) think we are in lock-step agreement, especially in your absence, as I was defending your dumbass (endearment/sarcastic-mods) , in a thread that has escaped your examination.

You got hosed in the latitude department.

You don't have any. TJ is as much a casualty of the knee-jerk reactionary sentiment of the fanbase as is Chilly.

If anyone ever bothered to look, staying the course ---as long as smart folk are running the show--- is probably better than not.

Kid might have been good. (tj) I personnally saw a lot of evidence indicitiave of precisely that.

I thought his skill-set was hard to beat from a defensive standpoint...

Notice how no one here is picking one from the draft, QB-wise... I know the top ten QB prospects backwards and forwards, as always, yet obviously not even in the market for one.

Just another typical dumb-assed Puker fan.

:P

I'm anxious to see what TJ could do out from under the thumb of Childress.
But I don't have enough confidence to think drafting a potential future 'franchise QB' would be a bad option, despite the enormity of the crapshoot.

dfosterf
12-03-2010, 09:50 PM
Now THAT is fair, Jargo.

Judas.


Finally.

ndnorseman
12-03-2010, 10:01 PM
I'll be very surprised if T-Jack is around after this season. That's why I didn't include him in my earlier "thinking out loud" post.

Bottom line...I still want us to draft a QB with our first pick. We haven't done it since Culpepper, who we had measurable success with until the combo of McCombs and Pep blowing his knee out pretty much unraveled everything. Since then, it's been nothing but spit, duct tape, and old, used-up parts at the most important position on the field.

If we're going to keep on with the shaky supposition that there's a FUTURE for this team after this season, then start at the QB position, and DRAFT for it.


JMO

AngloVike
12-03-2010, 10:09 PM
IMHO, the goof on Rodgers and then on Cutler sealed the doom for this orgainzation for the next 3-5 years unless TJ works out.

So we're screwed then :whistle:

Zeus
12-03-2010, 10:19 PM
You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 2005 draft?

The Vikes had two chances to get young Rodgers and opted for the likes of Erasmus James and Troy Williamson.

You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 2000 draft?

The Vikes had six chances to get young Brady and opted for the likes of Chris Hovan, Fred Robbins, Doug Chapman, Tyrone Carter and Troy Walters.

You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 1979 draft?

The Vikes had two chances to get young Montana and opted for the likes of Ted Brown and Dave Huffman.

You know what really pissed me off when it comes to the 1964 draft?

The Vikes had 10 chances to get young Staubach and opted for the likes of Carl Eller, Hal Bedsole, George Rose, Tom Keating, John Kirby, Bob Lacey and Bill McWatters.

Get my point, Marty?

=Z=

dfosterf
12-03-2010, 10:37 PM
You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 2005 draft?

The Vikes had two chances to get young Rodgers and opted for the likes of Erasmus James and Troy Williamson.

You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 2000 draft?

The Vikes had six chances to get young Brady and opted for the likes of Chris Hovan, Fred Robbins, Doug Chapman, Tyrone Carter and Troy Walters.

You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 1979 draft?

The Vikes had two chances to get young Montana and opted for the likes of Ted Brown and Dave Huffman.

You know what really pissed me off when it comes to the 1964 draft?

The Vikes had 10 chances to get young Staubach and opted for the likes of Carl Eller, Hal Bedsole, George Rose, Tom Keating, John Kirby, Bob Lacey and Bill McWatters.

Get my point, Marty?

=Z=

All you gotta do is get a little lucky, =Z= , and ultimately, that is what it is.

Scoot
12-05-2010, 02:06 PM
Draft Cam Newton..from Auburn

singersp
12-05-2010, 02:29 PM
When AD went down, I bet everyone was thinking.....Pass pass pass. Instead the current staff plodded along with the backup running back and ran ran ran.

To me, thats a clear indicator of what type of offense Leslie will run if he is the HC for the long term.[/color]

So what you are trying to say is that Frasier will try & run, run, run his way to wins, which is no different than Childress.

Quick question.

In the last decade, how many pass oriented teams wom a SB?
In the last decade, how many run oriented teams won a SB?

Purple Floyd
12-05-2010, 02:33 PM
The sample size of NFL Front offices that can project college quarterbacks as starting NFL quarterbacks on a consistent basis is rather small.

I'd go with zero as a starting point.
I think that number can grow if you add some variables....

a. A Coaching staff with a clear scheme.
b. A coaching staff that can articulte to the FO pukes what player fits that scheme.
c. A scouting staff that can find the player to fit that scheme.
d. A pool of players that can be drafted or picked up as FA's that fit that scheme.
e. A coaching staff that has the latitude and talent to then develop that player once he is found and on the team.

I think the biggest issue you will see from a Vikings fan perspective is that our staff has failed in all areas listed above.

I for one disagree a bit as I really believe TJ is ready. Problem is, he hasn't been given a chance of late so that I can see what I believe.

Yeah, that pretty much ruled out Chiller from the subject then.

singersp
12-05-2010, 02:40 PM
We don't have squat invested in Webb. Just like we have the bare minimum invested in TJ.

If both wind up as busts, who cares.

The bigger issue here is that if TJ isn't gonna work out, we are basically starting from scratch next year. Like it or not, the Noodle will not be an option, regardless of how well he plays going out the door.

We need to see how TJ can perform in the post Childress era. Some here claim that the coach was the reason Favre played poorly this year, so it stands to reason that he had the same effect, if not worse, on young QB's.

I know there are people here who'll cry, "He already had his chance", but many of those are the same ones who have thought that about Kyle Orton & labeled him a bust prematurely.

singersp
12-05-2010, 03:36 PM
The sample size of NFL Front offices that can project college quarterbacks as starting NFL quarterbacks on a consistent basis is rather small.

I'd go with zero as a starting point.
I think that number can grow if you add some variables....

a. A Coaching staff with a clear scheme.
b. A coaching staff that can articulte to the FO pukes what player fits that scheme.
c. A scouting staff that can find the player to fit that scheme.
d. A pool of players that can be drafted or picked up as FA's that fit that scheme.
e. A coaching staff that has the latitude and talent to then develop that player once he is found and on the team.

I think the biggest issue you will see from a Vikings fan perspective is that our staff has failed in all areas listed above.

I for one disagree a bit as I really believe TJ is ready. Problem is, he hasn't been given a chance of late so that I can see what I believe.

The staff didn't fail in all areas. There was a clear scheme. Some, but not all players fit that scheme. Unfortunately, IMO, it was a bad scheme to chose based on the talent we had, how complicated it was & the lack of qualified & knowledgable people we had to run it.

Childress failed in that he picked a complicated scheme on offense he could not teach & lacked enough qualified friends to teach it as well.

Childress also failed to use his players talents. just to fit his system, rather than tweak or alter the scheme to best suit their talents, he forced them from being something they were very good at to being something they weren't.

He did evaluate his talent after becoming HC, but then ignored it & went with his system anyways, much to the dislike of Birk & Winfield.

His first & foremost goal was to fix the OL issues & it was his complicated scheme & lack of his ability & his staffs ability to teach it.
4 years later, the improvement has been marginal.

If you have a crop of players you like, you damn well better adjust your scheme to fit their talents & chose an OC knowledgeable to do that. Afterall, that's why those players are great.

MaxVike
12-05-2010, 03:36 PM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I agree with Marrdro's assessment a few posts back that the number one needed thing with the Team is a coaching staff with a clear cut plan. Any successful Coach, General, Admiral, business owner, or CEO has a developed strategy. One that can be articulated clearly to his support staff, players, soldiers, sailors, pilots...you get the picture. Walsh, Grant, Noll, Ditka/Ryan, Landry, Bellicheck, Lombardi, all could develop and communicate a strategy to win games.

If Wilf is able to fill the HC spot with someone who can do the aforementioned, and, TJ's skill set fits, maybe he has a shot. I just personally don't believe he has enough of an edge to be the Leader and I question whether he can be "an on field extension of his coach. There are a lot of things that happen around Winter Park that none of us ever see. Same with any Team...how many people knew Michael Vick, when at Atlanta, was the last player in and the first player out everyday? This coaching staff traded up to draft TJ, gave him several shots, and, whereas his stats can be argued until the cows come home, we will never experience his leadership ability and credibility within the Team. Further, has anyone heard Cris Carter or Rich Gannon comment on TJ? I trust their assessment, which, is far from glowing.

I say, if the right guy is there...take him in the first, second, third; whatever. Just have a plan, somebody, and get the right guys to execute the Plan.

singersp
12-05-2010, 03:54 PM
To me, that says first round guy. And forget about a guy who "fits the scheme"...we don't have a scheme anymore. The "KAO" is going to be gone after this season.

But, at the end of the day, I can think of very few reasons NOT to go after the best QB available this draft.

Caine

Was their ever really a KAO? We won games, but how often did we KA?

The only problem with 1st round picks is the amount of money you end up paying for them. Will you get a Matt Ryan or will you get a Jamarcus Russell? A poor choice could financiallly set a team back years.

I agree with your "scheme" aspect. Those have been my sentiments. Regardless of which QB you chose, you better be damn well prepared to change your scheme to taylor to that QB or don't bother drafting him.

Coaches who take talented players & try to make them something they're not or draft players & then try to change them completely or play positions that they aren't comfortable playing in, are simply asking for failure.

singersp
12-05-2010, 03:59 PM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I recall people saying that about Kyle Orton after he was done in Chicago. ;)

MaxVike
12-05-2010, 04:07 PM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I recall people saying that about Kyle Orton after he was done in Chicago. ;)

Well, whereas that is true, I was not among those people. Actually, Orton is a great illustration of one of my points. His leadership was never questioned. His decision making and arm strength were, particularly his arm strength, the main reason he was moved out of Chicago.

singersp
12-05-2010, 04:18 PM
I agree with Marrdro's assessment a few posts back that the number one needed thing with the Team is a coaching staff with a clear cut plan. Any successful Coach, General, Admiral, business owner, or CEO has a developed strategy. One that can be articulated clearly to his support staff, players, soldiers, sailors, pilots...you get the picture. Walsh, Grant, Noll, Ditka/Ryan, Landry, Bellicheck, Lombardi, all could develop and communicate a strategy to win games.

Make no mistake about it, Childress & his staff did have a clear cut plan. Unfortunately the plan sucked & he never had the qualified coaches (offensively) who could teach it & all of it's complexity. The complexity at the player level had even the players perplexed as to what to do. Don't you recall Hutch & Birk speaking out about it a few years back?

The scheme/plan has got to be based around the players you have that you plan to keep or at least envisining you'll have after the draft. Then you need a staff that's capable of teaching that scheme.

Also, the blocking scheme cannot be like the last one which Marrdro & others claimed it took 5 years to master. Those days are all but gone.

The only way that works is if you have the 5 years to waste trying to perfect it & you have a comfort level that you can retain that same group intact for several years to come.

How many of the same starting OL do we have from Childress' first year?
How many of the same starting OL do we have from 2008?
I think we can end discussions about that scheme. With FA being what it is, along with players under contract demanding trades, teams rosters are quite different over the span of just a few years.

One of the biggest things that have to happen is as Caine & I have mentioned several times. Wilf needs to quit playing with his toys & mandating who we should draft or what FA's we should persue.

Let the HC, OC, DC & recruiting staff handle that kind of stuff. He doesn't need to become an Al Davis.

MaxVike
12-05-2010, 04:45 PM
I agree with Marrdro's assessment a few posts back that the number one needed thing with the Team is a coaching staff with a clear cut plan. Any successful Coach, General, Admiral, business owner, or CEO has a developed strategy. One that can be articulated clearly to his support staff, players, soldiers, sailors, pilots...you get the picture. Walsh, Grant, Noll, Ditka/Ryan, Landry, Bellicheck, Lombardi, all could develop and communicate a strategy to win games.

Make no mistake about it, Childress & his staff did have a clear cut plan. Unfortunately the plan sucked & he never had the qualified coaches (offensively) who could teach it & all of it's complexity. The complexity at the player level had even the players perplexed as to what to do. Don't you recall Hutch & Birk speaking out about it a few years back?

The scheme/plan has got to be based around the players you have that you plan to keep or at least envisining you'll have after the draft. Then you need a staff that's capable of teaching that scheme.

Also, the blocking scheme cannot be like the last one which Marrdro & others claimed it took 5 years to master. Those days are all but gone.

The only way that works is if you have the 5 years to waste trying to perfect it & you have a comfort level that you can retain that same group intact for several years to come.

How many of the same starting OL do we have from Childress' first year?
How many of the same starting OL do we have from 2008?
I think we can end discussions about that scheme. With FA being what it is, along with players under contract demanding trades, teams rosters are quite different over the span of just a few years.

One of the biggest things that have to happen is as Caine & I have mentioned several times. Wilf needs to quit playing with his toys & mandating who we should draft or what FA's we should persue.

Let the HC, OC, DC & recruiting staff handle that kind of stuff. He doesn't need to become an Al Davis.

Yes, I remember it all, and largely agree with your points...although, I'm not sure I've caught where Wilf mandated who we draft. However, an Al Davis in today's game will not work; certainly agree there.

Also, I didn't agree with all of Marr's points, and only commented on the first.

That said, I certainly implied that successful leaders 1) have a plan, and 2) have the ability to communicate it; implying that Childress was a shitty communicator. I am not among those who think Childress is a moron...just an awful communicator and an ineffective Leader of a Team.

I stand by my comment that TJ is not our answer, will not be here next year, and, I think he will be doing something else after next year (what's his degree in?). Whether we draft a QB, or bring someone that can lead a Team for several years, and, be an on-field extension of our new coach, it needs to happen. In fact, I would prefer to see a rookie QB drafted and a veteran QB signed or traded for.

Teams simply don't win the SB without top-flite QB play...now, here comes the Dilfer (Ravens) and/or Brad Johnson (Bucs) argument, so, I will address that before someone goes there. Their play was top-flite given the Team's they played on. They were expected to "manage the game" whilst a combination of their defenses, special teams, and running game outperformed their opponent week to week.

singersp
12-05-2010, 05:27 PM
Teams simply don't win the SB without top-flite QB play...now, here comes the Dilfer (Ravens) and/or Brad Johnson (Bucs) argument, so, I will address that before someone goes there. Their play was top-flite given the Team's they played on. They were expected to "manage the game" whilst a combination of their defenses, special teams, and running game outperformed their opponent week to week.

"Managing the game" is what is key to that. That is why players like Johnson & Dilfer have rings.

But don't kid yourself, top-flite QB's don't win games on their own. They still need receivers who can catch, RB's that can run & defenses & special teams that perform well against their opponent week to week.

This is why our high powered offense with Culpepper to Moss failed to win a SB. There were several times we put up 27 points or more & still lost games.

Peyton Manning, a top-flite QB has his team only 1 game above .500

Elite QB's who have trouble managing the game, don't win SB's either. Favre who was in his day an elite QB, is destined for the HOF & has broken many QB records (although in some cases it's taken more games than others) has only 1 SB ring to show for it. Gunslinging & throwing INT's, when he didn't have to throw, has cost his team several wins & cost our team wins also.

singersp
12-05-2010, 06:05 PM
The 2011 Vikings Starting QB is… (http://www.thesportsbank.net/nfl/the-2011-minnesota-vikings-quarterback-is/)

There isn’t really a sense in denying the fact that the 2010 NFL season has been an apocolypse for the Minnesota Vikings. After being mere seconds away from a game winning field goal attempt in the NFC Championship Game last January, the downward spiral of the team has been swift and painful.

MaxVike
12-05-2010, 06:39 PM
Teams simply don't win the SB without top-flite QB play...now, here comes the Dilfer (Ravens) and/or Brad Johnson (Bucs) argument, so, I will address that before someone goes there. Their play was top-flite given the Team's they played on. They were expected to "manage the game" whilst a combination of their defenses, special teams, and running game outperformed their opponent week to week.

"Managing the game" is what is key to that. That is why players like Johnson & Dilfer have rings.

But don't kid yourself, top-flite QB's don't win games on their own. They still need receivers who can catch, RB's that can run & defenses & special teams that perform well against their opponent week to week.

This is why our high powered offense with Culpepper to Moss failed to win a SB. There were several times we put up 27 points or more & still lost games.

Peyton Manning, a top-flite QB has his team only 1 game above .500

Elite QB's who have trouble managing the game, don't win SB's either. Favre who was in his day an elite QB, is destined for the HOF & has broken many QB records (although in some cases it's taken more games than others) has only 1 SB ring to show for it. Gunslinging & throwing INT's, when he didn't have to throw, has cost his team several wins & cost our team wins also.

Wow, dude, you have successfully worn me out. I reserve the right to continue this "discussion" in person. I'm gonna drink a couple of beers now and enjoy a Vikings victory. Cheers.

Dibbzz
12-06-2010, 07:14 AM
I posted in another thread that Christian Ponder would be a good fit for the Vikings since he likely could be available in the second round, leaving for us to take BPA in round one. I still wouldn't mind if the Vikings nabbed him, but I think if you're going to be serious about (finally) solving the one position that has plagued our team in recent memory, the Quarterback position, you trade up and get Andrew Luck, arguably the best QB prospect in recent memory. Even at the expense of giving away, say you're first round pick, a second round pick, and the first round pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, you should still make the move regardless of who is going to be your head coach and the offense that said head coach will run. He is simply all-that-and-a-bag-of-chips, if you don't mind my 90's terminology. In all seriousness, I think what the Vikings should do, instead of trading away picks for an un-proven commodity like Kevin Kolb, you trade picks for a QB of the future that's going to be in your organization for years to come. Of all the QB's available in this years draft, can anyone provide a solid argument for a QB that is better equipped to run an NFL squad like Andrew Luck?

Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if the Wilfs decided to select Jim Harbaugh as the Vikings head coach (you have to admit, he's done a DAMN good job at making that Stanford Cardinal football program reputable) next season and takes Luck since the two would have obviously had a working relationship in college. Regardless, I am not a fan of trading for Kevin Kolb, Michael Vick or a QB who isn't going to fit this system and quite frankly a little overrated (and unproven). No offense to Kolb supporters, but there's a reason he's sitting on the bench while Michael Vick runs the show. I say that the Vikings unfortunately are in rebuilding mode for a little while at least, and plugging in Kolb in the hopes of him having the same kind of magic Favre had last season is naive. We need to draft a young QB in the NFL draft to groom for our squad, plain and simple, so why not give up a little more pick-wise to get the best QB prospect in this year's draft?

i_bleed_purple
12-06-2010, 08:42 AM
I posted in another thread that Christian Ponder would be a good fit for the Vikings since he likely could be available in the second round, leaving for us to take BPA in round one.

Don't like it. Somebody posted the statistics about it last offseason when we were debating about McCoy and Clausen. The only QB drafted in the second round in the past 15 years or so who has turned out to be a star in the league was Drew Brees, who was taken 32nd overall (would be a first round pick in todays format)

The percentage of first round QB's who pan out is by far the highest, and obviously, it decreases as you move down the draft. 5th and later round picks rarely ever work out to be a reliable QB. I"m not talking start QB, just reliable. Like a Kyle Orton, or hell, even a Jason Campbell. It just doesn't happen.



I still wouldn't mind if the Vikings nabbed him, but I think if you're going to be serious about (finally) solving the one position that has plagued our team in recent memory, the Quarterback position, you trade up and get Andrew Luck, arguably the best QB prospect in recent memory. Even at the expense of giving away, say you're first round pick, a second round pick, and the first round pick in the 2012 NFL Draft, you should still make the move regardless of who is going to be your head coach and the offense that said head coach will run.
It's simply not worth it IMO to trade away our future for a rookie. Like they say, you might get a Matt Ryan, or you might get a Jamarcus Russel. This years QB class is considered very weak compared to recent ones. I especially wouldn't want to risk it all this year.



He is simply all-that-and-a-bag-of-chips, if you don't mind my 90's terminology. In all seriousness, I think what the Vikings should do, instead of trading away picks for an un-proven commodity like Kevin Kolb, you trade picks for a QB of the future that's going to be in your organization for years to come. Of all the QB's available in this years draft, can anyone provide a solid argument for a QB that is better equipped to run an NFL squad like Andrew Luck?Can you provide a solid argument why Andrew Luck is better equipped to run an NFL squad than maybe a player who's been in the NFL for a couple years?



Hell, it wouldn't surprise me if the Wilfs decided to select Jim Harbaugh as the Vikings head coach (you have to admit, he's done a DAMN good job at making that Stanford Cardinal football program reputable) next season and takes Luck since the two would have obviously had a working relationship in college. Regardless, I am not a fan of trading for Kevin Kolb, Michael Vick or a QB who isn't going to fit this system and quite frankly a little overrated (and unproven). No offense to Kolb supporters, but there's a reason he's sitting on the bench while Michael Vick runs the show.
Yeah, there is an answer. I bolded it for you. Reid would be an idiot to bench Vick for Kolb at this point. When he plays, Kolb plays pretty well. Not outstanding, but decently. He has alot of upside, and is a guy I'd like to see as a Viking perhaps. Do we trade the farm for him? No, but if its reasonable, we need to do it.



I say that the Vikings unfortunately are in rebuilding mode for a little while at least, and plugging in Kolb in the hopes of him having the same kind of magic Favre had last season is naive.
I don't think anybody expects that. Keep in mind, Favre had an MVP calibre season last year. Nobody expected HIM to repeat, nevermind a young guy like Koklb


We need to draft a young QB in the NFL draft to groom for our squad, plain and simple, so why not give up a little more pick-wise to get the best QB prospect in this year's draft?
If we can get Kolb for less, I say do it. We don't need a Peyton Manning, or Drew Brees. Just a guy who can control the offense, make some plays when we need it and not be a liability.

If we trade for Luck, we'd have to start him. I don't want to see that. I want to see him sit for a bit, learn and come in when he's ready, ala Aaron Rodgers. Unfortunately, our window to do something like that has closed, as we don't have a QB to learn under next season. Favre's not coming back.

I'd be a fan of getting Kolb, then maybe a mid-round QB to groom into a backup. If he can start later on down the road, great. If not, no harm done.

Dibbzz
12-06-2010, 11:15 AM
We need to draft a young QB in the NFL draft to groom for our squad, plain and simple, so why not give up a little more pick-wise to get the best QB prospect in this year's draft?
If we can get Kolb for less, I say do it. We don't need a Peyton Manning, or Drew Brees. Just a guy who can control the offense, make some plays when we need it and not be a liability.

If we trade for Luck, we'd have to start him. I don't want to see that. I want to see him sit for a bit, learn and come in when he's ready, ala Aaron Rodgers. Unfortunately, our window to do something like that has closed, as we don't have a QB to learn under next season. Favre's not coming back.

I'd be a fan of getting Kolb, then maybe a mid-round QB to groom into a backup. If he can start later on down the road, great. If not, no harm done.[/quote]

But quarterbacks such as Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco and Mark Sanchez were all starters during their rookie seasons. It's unrealistic to think that Andrew Luck or any quarterback we draft is going to be able to replicate their seasons, but from a fan standpoint I would be willing to accept some rookie growing pains of a rookie quarterback so long as the organization is willing to move in a new direction. In my humble opinion, signing Kevin Kolb is a short term solution to a long term problem. Furthermore, I think Viking fans as a whole would like a quarterback that they can (again, finally) call their own and a high-profile talent like Andrew Luck would be a good way to tell Vikings fans "Hey, we know we have messed up on the single, most important position in the NFL. Here's how we're going to fix it." Would Kevin Kolb be more productive right off the get-go? Quite possibly. But what if he tanks, everyone is going to get on Frazier's case about not drafting a quarterback in the draft (or whomever gets the starting head coaching job).

I guess what it boils down to is PR versus "football logic" I guess. I for one would like a more traditional QB like Luck versus a "project" QB like Tarvaris Jackson or Joe Webb or Cam Newton. I just think Luck fits the bill better for what in my opinion is the direction that this team needs to take. Drafting and trading up for Luck would increase sales and get the fans fired up, and again tell the fanbase that we know we've fucked up at QB, we acknowledge it (finally), and here's what we're going to do moving forward. As for Kolb, yeah he has run a similar scheme in Philly but I personally don't see anything spectacular about him I guess. Perhaps he could in theory work out but I'd rather see us draft a QB.

And for the love of god, please don't draft Jake Locker. During the game versus Nebraska he proved to the world that he's not ready to play in the NFL.

Marrdro
12-06-2010, 04:47 PM
The sample size of NFL Front offices that can project college quarterbacks as starting NFL quarterbacks on a consistent basis is rather small.

I'd go with zero as a starting point.
I think that number can grow if you add some variables....

a. A Coaching staff with a clear scheme.
b. A coaching staff that can articulte to the FO pukes what player fits that scheme.
c. A scouting staff that can find the player to fit that scheme.
d. A pool of players that can be drafted or picked up as FA's that fit that scheme.
e. A coaching staff that has the latitude and talent to then develop that player once he is found and on the team.

I think the biggest issue you will see from a Vikings fan perspective is that our staff has failed in all areas listed above.

I for one disagree a bit as I really believe TJ is ready. Problem is, he hasn't been given a chance of late so that I can see what I believe.

The staff didn't fail in all areas. There was a clear scheme. Some, but not all players fit that scheme. Unfortunately, IMO, it was a bad scheme to chose based on the talent we had, how complicated it was & the lack of qualified & knowledgable people we had to run it.

Childress failed in that he picked a complicated scheme on offense he could not teach & lacked enough qualified friends to teach it as well.

Childress also failed to use his players talents. just to fit his system, rather than tweak or alter the scheme to best suit their talents, he forced them from being something they were very good at to being something they weren't.

He did evaluate his talent after becoming HC, but then ignored it & went with his system anyways, much to the dislike of Birk & Winfield.

His first & foremost goal was to fix the OL issues & it was his complicated scheme & lack of his ability & his staffs ability to teach it.
4 years later, the improvement has been marginal.

If you have a crop of players you like, you damn well better adjust your scheme to fit their talents & chose an OC knowledgeable to do that. Afterall, that's why those players are great.
If you have a crop of players that don't fit your scheme you and the FO pukes that gave you those players need to be fired. Absolutely idiodic to think that a team will be successfull by running out and drafting kids or bringing in FA's that don't fit the scheme.

Case in point Sharper.

On a side note, you don't think that the blocking scheme adjustment to a "Tracking or Railroading" version of the Zone Blocking scheme isn't making a adjustment?

For me, they shifted (or adjusted to use your word) to that scheme to alleviate holding calls for the stuff they use with Harvin.

Long story short, your rhetoric sounds good but it just doesn't hold water when you look at it in the proper context.

Besides, to quote my good friend Singer.........The scheme worked last year didn't it?..........:ohmy:

Marrdro
12-06-2010, 04:51 PM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I agree with Marrdro's assessment a few posts back that the number one needed thing with the Team is a coaching staff with a clear cut plan. Any successful Coach, General, Admiral, business owner, or CEO has a developed strategy. One that can be articulated clearly to his support staff, players, soldiers, sailors, pilots...you get the picture. Walsh, Grant, Noll, Ditka/Ryan, Landry, Bellicheck, Lombardi, all could develop and communicate a strategy to win games.

If Wilf is able to fill the HC spot with someone who can do the aforementioned, and, TJ's skill set fits, maybe he has a shot. I just personally don't believe he has enough of an edge to be the Leader and I question whether he can be "an on field extension of his coach. There are a lot of things that happen around Winter Park that none of us ever see. Same with any Team...how many people knew Michael Vick, when at Atlanta, was the last player in and the first player out everyday? This coaching staff traded up to draft TJ, gave him several shots, and, whereas his stats can be argued until the cows come home, we will never experience his leadership ability and credibility within the Team. Further, has anyone heard Cris Carter or Rich Gannon comment on TJ? I trust their assessment, which, is far from glowing.

I say, if the right guy is there...take him in the first, second, third; whatever. Just have a plan, somebody, and get the right guys to execute the Plan.
Ole Maxxxie.......Bringing his "A" game. Excellent post my friend.

Couple of quick commments....

a. No one has ever said TJ doesn't work his ass off. Truth of the matter is, there was a article that came out last year that aluded to that little rumor that several players said wasn't accurate.

b. CC worked out with TJ and Fitz this offseason. I saw CC saw one time that he has changed his mind on TJ since that offseason program and the he (Fitz made the same comment) that TJ was ready to lead a team.

Marrdro
12-06-2010, 04:52 PM
To me, that says first round guy. And forget about a guy who "fits the scheme"...we don't have a scheme anymore. The "KAO" is going to be gone after this season.

But, at the end of the day, I can think of very few reasons NOT to go after the best QB available this draft.

Caine

Was their ever really a KAO? We won games, but how often did we KA?

The only problem with 1st round picks is the amount of money you end up paying for them. Will you get a Matt Ryan or will you get a Jamarcus Russell? A poor choice could financiallly set a team back years.

I agree with your "scheme" aspect. Those have been my sentiments. Regardless of which QB you chose, you better be damn well prepared to change your scheme to taylor to that QB or don't bother drafting him.

Coaches who take talented players & try to make them something they're not or draft players & then try to change them completely or play positions that they aren't comfortable playing in, are simply asking for failure.
Look around the league my friend. Very few games are decided by someone getting thier asses kicked (refering to the score).

purplepat
12-06-2010, 07:44 PM
I have been reading the boards and I keep coming posters that believe that you should not address the QB position with an ELITE prospect in this years draft. Honestly, I am left baffled as to why so many of you believe that we have a greater area of need. Have we learned nothing?


Players like Bradford, Stafford, Freeman, Sanchez, Ryan, Flacco look like they will make their teams competitive for years to come.
Sure there has been some misses in Russell and Quinn, but that's still a pretty good percentage, I wager its about the same for all other positions.


Haven't weighed in on this conversation/topic anywhere on the board yet.

First, you drop the "ELITE" prospect tag. Who is an "ELITE" prospect? OK, I'll give you Luck. Which of the following QBs are also elite...Mallett?...Newton?...Locker? Just last year, many were touting guys like Clausen and McCoy as "ELITE", yet one lasted well into the 2nd round, the other into the 3rd. Clausen sure isn't looking "ELITE" at the NFL level, and while McCoy shows promise, he's far from looking "ELITE" at this point.

At any rate, the Vikings won't (or shouldn't, barring an absolutely insane trade of multiple first and second round picks) have enough ammo to move up and draft Luck. If Newton comes out, I doubt they have the ammo for Newton or Mallett either. Locker (if we are lucky) might fall to us if Newton comes out and is drafted before the Vikings pick. I do believe the Vikings should heavily look at taking a QB with their #1 pick, the question will be whether they should/will need to trade up to get one of the top QBs or if they should wait and see who/what drops to them.

Secondly, yes, some of the young QBs (Ryan, Bradford, Flacco) look pretty darned good and are proving well worthy of their first round status (but keep in mind, many were top five to top ten picks). But the list of first round flubs is far greater than the couple you mentioned...

Jamarcus Russell
Brady Quinn
Matt Leinart
Vince Young
Alex Smith
Jason Campbell
J.P. Losman
Byron Leftwich
Kyle Boller
Rex Grossman
David Carr
Joey Harrington
Patrick Ramsey

That's 13 stiffs out of the 26 QBs drafted in the first round since 2002...and I didn't even mention Tim Tebow (rookie carrying clipboard) or Matt Stafford (can't stay healthy) in this list yet. For that matter, to this point Stafford has 19 TDs to 21 INTs, Sanchez 28 TDs to 28 INTs, Josh Freeman 25 TDs to 23 INTs...hardly numbers that make Tarvaris Jackson look like a stiff given the number of starts each QB has received.

Again, I'm not trying to say the Vikings shouldn't take a QB in round one...but I wouldn't give up the farm to take one, and no matter what draft slot they are selected at, there is no guarantee that they will be a success in the NFL.

Caine
12-06-2010, 07:57 PM
I have been reading the boards and I keep coming posters that believe that you should not address the QB position with an ELITE prospect in this years draft. Honestly, I am left baffled as to why so many of you believe that we have a greater area of need. Have we learned nothing?


Players like Bradford, Stafford, Freeman, Sanchez, Ryan, Flacco look like they will make their teams competitive for years to come.
Sure there has been some misses in Russell and Quinn, but that's still a pretty good percentage, I wager its about the same for all other positions.


Haven't weighed in on this conversation/topic anywhere on the board yet.

First, you drop the "ELITE" prospect tag. Who is an "ELITE" prospect? OK, I'll give you Luck. Which of the following QBs are also elite...Mallett?...Newton?...Locker? Just last year, many were touting guys like Clausen and McCoy as "ELITE", yet one lasted well into the 2nd round, the other into the 3rd. Clausen sure isn't looking "ELITE" at the NFL level, and while McCoy shows promise, he's far from looking "ELITE" at this point.

At any rate, the Vikings won't (or shouldn't, barring an absolutely insane trade of multiple first and second round picks) have enough ammo to move up and draft Luck. If Newton comes out, I doubt they have the ammo for Newton or Mallett either. Locker (if we are lucky) might fall to us if Newton comes out and is drafted before the Vikings pick. I do believe the Vikings should heavily look at taking a QB with their #1 pick, the question will be whether they should/will need to trade up to get one of the top QBs or if they should wait and see who/what drops to them.

Secondly, yes, some of the young QBs (Ryan, Bradford, Flacco) look pretty darned good and are proving well worthy of their first round status (but keep in mind, many were top five to top ten picks). But the list of first round flubs is far greater than the couple you mentioned...

Jamarcus Russell
Brady Quinn
Matt Leinart
Vince Young
Alex Smith
Jason Campbell
J.P. Losman
Byron Leftwich
Kyle Boller
Rex Grossman
David Carr
Joey Harrington
Patrick Ramsey

That's 13 stiffs out of the 26 QBs drafted in the first round since 2002...and I didn't even mention Tim Tebow (rookie carrying clipboard) or Matt Stafford (can't stay healthy) in this list yet. For that matter, to this point Stafford has 19 TDs to 21 INTs, Sanchez 28 TDs to 28 INTs, Josh Freeman 25 TDs to 23 INTs...hardly numbers that make Tarvaris Jackson look like a stiff given the number of starts each QB has received.

Again, I'm not trying to say the Vikings shouldn't take a QB in round one...but I wouldn't give up the farm to take one, and no matter what draft slot they are selected at, there is no guarantee that they will be a success in the NFL.

Couple of elements you didn't consider:

1: Several of your "Bust" QB's were QB's drafted by crap teams and thrown to the wolves. Carr and Smith come to mind immediately. Houston and San Fran were shit teams who drafted QB's then didn't support them.

Minnesota isn't a "crap team". We have some issues, but a QB coming in here has a lot more opportunity for success than a typical 1st or 2nd overall drat pick has.

2: Even keeping the numbers the same as you listed, the success rate of a legit 1st round QB is @ 50% (by your list). What is it for other rounds? I'll wager it's a lot lower, but you didn't offer that information for comparison.

3: We have already seen what happens to a franchise that does NOT gamble and grab a top seed QB....we wind up with 5+ season project QB's who may or may not be NFL caliber, but we don't know because we keep bringing in aged talent who plays better than they do. We need to break that cycle and grab a top guy we can work with. A guy who can LEAD our team.

4: teams that moved up for QB's in recent memory were the Giants with Manning. And they mortgaged the farm for him. How did that work out for them?

Well, they won a Superbowl, and are still in the hunt for the playoffs...

We did NOT wager for a QB, and we are for all intents and purposes eliminated (unless everyone else suddenly melts down)...and we have ZERO Superbowl wins...

IMHO, we would be well served to trade up and grab the best QB in the draft...especially if he's as good as everyone seems to think. Then we build a team around HIM and Peterson.

Bottom line, yeah it's a risk...but we haven't won anything the other way, have we?

Caine

Dibbzz
12-06-2010, 08:00 PM
I have been reading the boards and I keep coming posters that believe that you should not address the QB position with an ELITE prospect in this years draft. Honestly, I am left baffled as to why so many of you believe that we have a greater area of need. Have we learned nothing?


Players like Bradford, Stafford, Freeman, Sanchez, Ryan, Flacco look like they will make their teams competitive for years to come.
Sure there has been some misses in Russell and Quinn, but that's still a pretty good percentage, I wager its about the same for all other positions.


Haven't weighed in on this conversation/topic anywhere on the board yet.

First, you drop the "ELITE" prospect tag. Who is an "ELITE" prospect? OK, I'll give you Luck. Which of the following QBs are also elite...Mallett?...Newton?...Locker? Just last year, many were touting guys like Clausen and McCoy as "ELITE", yet one lasted well into the 2nd round, the other into the 3rd. Clausen sure isn't looking "ELITE" at the NFL level, and while McCoy shows promise, he's far from looking "ELITE" at this point.

At any rate, the Vikings won't (or shouldn't, barring an absolutely insane trade of multiple first and second round picks) have enough ammo to move up and draft Luck. If Newton comes out, I doubt they have the ammo for Newton or Mallett either. Locker (if we are lucky) might fall to us if Newton comes out and is drafted before the Vikings pick. I do believe the Vikings should heavily look at taking a QB with their #1 pick, the question will be whether they should/will need to trade up to get one of the top QBs or if they should wait and see who/what drops to them.

Secondly, yes, some of the young QBs (Ryan, Bradford, Flacco) look pretty darned good and are proving well worthy of their first round status (but keep in mind, many were top five to top ten picks). But the list of first round flubs is far greater than the couple you mentioned...

Jamarcus Russell
Brady Quinn
Matt Leinart
Vince Young
Alex Smith
Jason Campbell
J.P. Losman
Byron Leftwich
Kyle Boller
Rex Grossman
David Carr
Joey Harrington
Patrick Ramsey

That's 13 stiffs out of the 26 QBs drafted in the first round since 2002...and I didn't even mention Tim Tebow (rookie carrying clipboard) or Matt Stafford (can't stay healthy) in this list yet. For that matter, to this point Stafford has 19 TDs to 21 INTs, Sanchez 28 TDs to 28 INTs, Josh Freeman 25 TDs to 23 INTs...hardly numbers that make Tarvaris Jackson look like a stiff given the number of starts each QB has received.

Again, I'm not trying to say the Vikings shouldn't take a QB in round one...but I wouldn't give up the farm to take one, and no matter what draft slot they are selected at, there is no guarantee that they will be a success in the NFL.

I remember draftniks last year didn't like the QB position overall. As per McCoy and Clausen being labeled "elite" by the Todd McShay's of the interweb, I can't say I recall that either. In fact, St. Louis was trying to get out of the top spot in the draft because they realized that there wasn't any potential having the top pick and the top dollar that said pick would get paid. No team was willing to play ball and ultimately St. Louis had to take Bradford (who has played quite well considering he's a rookie and he's playing for the Rams).

As for Cam Newton, he plays in a gimmicky system. If the Vikings wanted him we could take him EASILY in rounds 3-4, although maybe someone gets giddy like Josh McDaniels and takes him in round two because of hype, but I honestly don't think he has the mentality to play QB effectively in the NFL. Ryan Mallett will still be there as well. If you think about it, the only quarterbacks that will (or rather should) be off the board by the time the Vikings draft are Luck and MAYBE Locker. Any team that takes Cam Newton in round one is an idiot, and their parents are probably idiots, too.

Marrdro
12-06-2010, 08:58 PM
[quote="purplepat" #1081794]
As for Cam Newton, he plays in a gimmicky system. If the Vikings wanted him we could take him EASILY in rounds 3-4, although maybe someone gets giddy like Josh McDaniels and takes him in round two because of hype, but I honestly don't think he has the mentality to play QB effectively in the NFL. Ryan Mallett will still be there as well. If you think about it, the only quarterbacks that will (or rather should) be off the board by the time the Vikings draft are Luck and MAYBE Locker. Any team that takes Cam Newton in round one is an idiot, and their parents are probably idiots, too.
I don't know the college players coming out yet but I've been watching a few of the games the last couple weeks in an effort to get to know them.

Of course it was the first time I've seen him play so I am not a official expert on him, howeever, I'm not sure about you but watching Newton throw the ball this weekend and his ability to beat a team with his feet, wouldn't get me to say that he is a "Gimmick" player and that a team that takes him as idiots.

As to Luck, Mallet and Locker. I've seen two of them play 2 games and 1, one game. Wasn't very impressed with any of them from what little I've seen.

soonerbornNbred
12-06-2010, 09:29 PM
To me the best chance to get a young QB with lots of miles left was Drew Brees,If I told you to give up a first or second round in order to get a NFL ready QB like Brees you would jump NOW hindsite and all... there might be a similar situation again this next year...Kolb not saying hes a brees but he had A.Reid ready to bet his career on him, so he might be worth throwing a draft pick at...plus your getting someone that was set to take on a NFL team like Brees wanting to prove themselves...and I think there would be less growing pains than with atrue rookie

Marrdro
12-06-2010, 10:01 PM
To me the best chance to get a young QB with lots of miles left was Drew Brees,If I told you to give up a first or second round in order to get a NFL ready QB like Brees you would jump NOW hindsite and all... there might be a similar situation again this next year...Kolb not saying hes a brees but he had A.Reid ready to bet his career on him, so he might be worth throwing a draft pick at...plus your getting someone that was set to take on a NFL team like Brees wanting to prove themselves...and I think there would be less growing pains than with atrue rookie
Although I agree with you on Brees, I'm still not sure (even after EJmat has tried) that we were really ever in the running for him based on how the Pepp thing was working out.

If memory serves, EJ came up with a 2 or 3 day window were we could have gone after him, but by then I think he was already in Saintsville and probably couldn't have come up for a visist/medical checkup.

As to Kold, I kindof lump him in with guys like Schaub, Cassell, Derrick Anderson etc. Showed some flashes but really haven't proved anything that would appease most fans regardless of what the staffs think of them/him.

Traveling_Vike
12-07-2010, 01:38 AM
It's way too far back in the thread now, but I had tried four times to respond to Marrdro and Caine for their replies to my last long post here. Computer issues destroyed the posts more than halfway through each time.

SO I gave up.

I have one last thing that I want to say here, though.

Whether or not we should draft a QB early depends entirely on whether we even have a season in 2011.

If, as seems more and more likely, there is to be a lockout, then drafting a QB, and especially moving up to do so, would be a fatal mistake. The kid would sit and we could not coach him or even have much interaction with him for a full year. That delays any real development.

I say wait and evaluate the QB class for 2012. If I understand the situation correctly,
draft order would remain the same if there is no season played in between. This year's class is relatively weak at QB. Maybe the pickings will be better a year further down the road.

The only good thing about a potential lockout is that the Free Agent QB market will widen up with another year gone by, as well.

12purplepride28
12-07-2010, 03:50 AM
Funny that people here are saying that this qb class is weak because they were saying the same thing last year and talking up next year's (now this year's) class as the strongest qb class in years.

Zeus
12-07-2010, 05:04 AM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I recall people saying that about Kyle Orton after he was done in Chicago. ;)

Not me. All Orton ever did in Chicago was win football games.

=Z=

marstc09
12-07-2010, 06:18 AM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I recall people saying that about Kyle Orton after he was done in Chicago. ;)

Not me. All Orton ever did in Chicago was win football games.

=Z=

Now he has won 5 out of the last 22.

Zeus
12-07-2010, 03:39 PM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I recall people saying that about Kyle Orton after he was done in Chicago. ;)

Not me. All Orton ever did in Chicago was win football games.

Now he has won 5 out of the last 22.

Based upon what I've seen, not because of him. But that is a legitimate point.

=Z=

marstc09
12-07-2010, 05:14 PM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I recall people saying that about Kyle Orton after he was done in Chicago. ;)

Not me. All Orton ever did in Chicago was win football games.

Now he has won 5 out of the last 22.

Based upon what I've seen, not because of him. But that is a legitimate point.

=Z=

I don't know dude. He just had a 32% completion game. That is pretty bad. He has also had a couple under 50%. Overall though he looks ok.

mountainviking
12-07-2010, 06:23 PM
The Vikes had two chances to get young Rodgers and opted for the likes of Erasmus James and Troy Williamson.



OUCH!! D'oh!!!! :sick:

My thoughts are that we need to see what TJack can do now, IF he's progressed, and how he looks with a better team around him. Part of our 2nd rate QBs failing has been the low amount of talent at WR and the continual underperforming of our OL. When TJack was last named starter (with 2 games experience) Bobby Freakin Wade was our best WR!! Drafting another young kid at QB to fix those problems will likely lead to another "broken" QB. A kid who may have all the talent in the world, but no confidence in his receivers to catch the durn ball, nor his OL to keep enemies off his back...which leads to more of the ole "deer in the headlights" look.

IF we don't like what we see out of Jackson the rest of this season, we then know that we need to sign a FA veteran QB AND draft another prospect in the first 2 or 3 rounds.

Reaching for a QB in a must-have first round situation is NOT how we want to enter the draft. There is no guarantee that a first round pick there is better than a 2nd or 3rd or 6th (Tom Brady.) What you want is a TEAM around them to set them up for success.

So, I'm guessing we're not going to win out, nor lose out, and thus will end up with a late top-ten, or more likely, 10-15 range pick. Looking at the past few years drafts...

Last year, that would give us a choice between Tebow and Clausen...NO Thanks! I'd rather have Earl Thomas or Maurkice Pouncey.

2009, Josh Freeman was still there (picked 17th overall) but Orakpo, Cushing, and Malcolm Jenkins look like good picks before him.

2008, Flacco would have been there (picked 18th overall) but Ryan Clady, Chris Williams, or Albert may make more sense. Please realize that Flacco's success has been helped by a great defense and running game...

So, long story short, DO NOT GO INTO THIS DRAFT THINKING QB IS OUR ONLY OPTION IN THE FIRST ROUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :kiss:

Marrdro
12-07-2010, 06:29 PM
It's way too far back in the thread now, but I had tried four times to respond to Marrdro and Caine for their replies to my last long post here. Computer issues destroyed the posts more than halfway through each time.

SO I gave up.

Don't want to speak for my good friend Caine, however, we are both at a loss for not getting that post.

Something I've done since the new look when I put a lot of work into a long post........I copy it before I hit "Submit". That way if it gets dumped (like it has been doing of late) I can just paste it back in there.

Again, sorry to have not got the discussion points.




I have one last thing that I want to say here, though.

Whether or not we should draft a QB early depends entirely on whether we even have a season in 2011.

If, as seems more and more likely, there is to be a lockout, then drafting a QB, and especially moving up to do so, would be a fatal mistake. The kid would sit and we could not coach him or even have much interaction with him for a full year. That delays any real development.

I say wait and evaluate the QB class for 2012. If I understand the situation correctly,
draft order would remain the same if there is no season played in between. This year's class is relatively weak at QB. Maybe the pickings will be better a year further down the road.

The only good thing about a potential lockout is that the Free Agent QB market will widen up with another year gone by, as well.
But wouldn't the 2010 draftable players still be available regardless of what happens with the CBA?

I think they should do thier due dilegence and scout like they will have to draft and then, when it does take place, use that info to get the best players from the player pool regardless of who/what comprises that pool.

Marrdro
12-07-2010, 06:34 PM
The Vikes had two chances to get young Rodgers and opted for the likes of Erasmus James and Troy Williamson.



OUCH!! D'oh!!!! :sick:

My thoughts are that we need to see what TJack can do now, IF he's progressed, and how he looks with a better team around him. Part of our 2nd rate QBs failing has been the low amount of talent at WR and the continual underperforming of our OL. When TJack was last named starter (with 2 games experience) Bobby Freakin Wade was our best WR!! Drafting another young kid at QB to fix those problems will likely lead to another "broken" QB. A kid who may have all the talent in the world, but no confidence in his receivers to catch the durn ball, nor his OL to keep enemies off his back...which leads to more of the ole "deer in the headlights" look.

IF we don't like what we see out of Jackson the rest of this season, we then know that we need to sign a FA veteran QB AND draft another prospect in the first 2 or 3 rounds.

Reaching for a QB in a must-have first round situation is NOT how we want to enter the draft. There is no guarantee that a first round pick there is better than a 2nd or 3rd or 6th (Tom Brady.) What you want is a TEAM around them to set them up for success.

So, I'm guessing we're not going to win out, nor lose out, and thus will end up with a late top-ten, or more likely, 10-15 range pick. Looking at the past few years drafts...

Last year, that would give us a choice between Tebow and Clausen...NO Thanks! I'd rather have Earl Thomas or Maurkice Pouncey.

2009, Josh Freeman was still there (picked 17th overall) but Orakpo, Cushing, and Malcolm Jenkins look like good picks before him.

2008, Flacco would have been there (picked 18th overall) but Ryan Clady, Chris Williams, or Albert may make more sense. Please realize that Flacco's success has been helped by a great defense and running game...

So, long story short, DO NOT GO INTO THIS DRAFT THINKING QB IS OUR ONLY OPTION IN THE FIRST ROUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :kiss:
I actually like Flacco when he was coming out and believe the he is a pretty decent QB right now that helps rather than hinders the running attack they have up there in Raven land......

On a side note, I need to go back and look but I think I had the Vikes taking Flacco in the 6th round. Sure missed on that one.....:laugh:

i_bleed_purple
12-07-2010, 08:01 PM
TJ will be gone after this year, and out of football after next IMO.

I recall people saying that about Kyle Orton after he was done in Chicago. ;)

Not me. All Orton ever did in Chicago was win football games.

Now he has won 5 out of the last 22.

Based upon what I've seen, not because of him. But that is a legitimate point.

=Z=

Does it matter though? I thought you didn't like guys like Marino over guys like Bradshaw because Marino never won?

purplepat
12-07-2010, 08:06 PM
2: Even keeping the numbers the same as you listed, the success rate of a legit 1st round QB is @ 50% (by your list). What is it for other rounds? I'll wager it's a lot lower, but you didn't offer that information for comparison.

3: We have already seen what happens to a franchise that does NOT gamble and grab a top seed QB....we wind up with 5+ season project QB's who may or may not be NFL caliber, but we don't know because we keep bringing in aged talent who plays better than they do. We need to break that cycle and grab a top guy we can work with. A guy who can LEAD our team.

4: teams that moved up for QB's in recent memory were the Giants with Manning. And they mortgaged the farm for him. How did that work out for them?

Well, they won a Superbowl, and are still in the hunt for the playoffs...

We did NOT wager for a QB, and we are for all intents and purposes eliminated (unless everyone else suddenly melts down)...and we have ZERO Superbowl wins...

IMHO, we would be well served to trade up and grab the best QB in the draft...especially if he's as good as everyone seems to think. Then we build a team around HIM and Peterson.

Bottom line, yeah it's a risk...but we haven't won anything the other way, have we?

Caine

All valid comments (for the most part), though let me throw a few things out there...

Yes, the Giants did "give up the farm" to get Eli Manning, in a manner of speaking. The Giants had the #4 pick that season, the Chargers drafted Manning #1, the Giants drafted Philip Rivers, then the Giants traded Rivers, their 3rd round pick, and their 1st round and 5th round picks for the following year to the Chargers for the rights to Manning. From that standpoint, the Giants had a lot more ammo to offer the Chargers given that they had the #4 pick overall. If the season ended today, the Vikings would draft somewhere between picks 8 and 13...and I'd bet it will be closer to 13 (or even 14 or more) by the time this season winds up. The Vikings already don't have a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft. If their draft spot is around #13, how much/what/who will they have to trade to move up high enough to take a Luck, or Newton, or Mallett? And yes, Eli has won a Super Bowl...and as a NFL starting QB, he has a lifetime mark of 50-37. That averages out over a 16 game season to 9.19 wins per year. Not all that impressive in my book.

Of those 13 first round "successes" since 2002, seven of those are somewhat questionable. Five are very young and inexperienced (Bradford, Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman, Tebow). One has led his team to the playoffs twice with zero wins (Carson Palmer, though he was knocked out early in his first playoff game). Another (Jay Cutler) has never taken his team to the playoffs, though it looks like he might finally do so in his 5th NFL season. That leaves six that you can really call successful NFL QBs...E. Manning (#1 overall), Ryan (#3 overall), Rivers (#4 overall), Roethlisberger (#11 overall), Flacco (#18 overall), Rodgers (#24 overall). While the jury is obviously still out on the guys drafted early in the past two seasons, I think the suggestion is still there that your success rate in the first round is closer to 25% than it is to 50%.

Regardless of whether the team drafting them was crap or not, the anointed "best QB in the draft", if they really were any good, would have surfaced as a good QB in the NFL somewhere after they left their crappy team. Yet Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, Jamarcus Russell, David Carr and Vince Young haven't proven to be good NFL QBs anywhere. All went in the top three of their draft classes.

And yes, there are more 1st round draft choices (and successful NFL QBs) coming out of the first round than the second and later rounds. But for every Aaron Rodgers or Philip Rivers you have, you have a Brady (6th), Brees (2nd), Romo (FA), Cassel (7th), Schaub (3rd), Orton (4th), Favre (2nd), or Hasselbeck (6th).

Again, not saying the Vikes shouldn't draft a QB...even in the first. But I'd be reluctant to start a rookie QB...any rookie QB...in 2011, or mortgage the future of the team by trading away Pro Bowlers and/or multiple 1st and 2nd round draft picks for a single unproven player.

i_bleed_purple
12-07-2010, 08:13 PM
But for every Aaron Rodgers or Philip Rivers you have, you have a Brady (6th), Brees (2nd), Romo (FA), Cassel (7th), Schaub (3rd), Orton (4th), Favre (2nd), or Hasselbeck (6th).

I couldn't disagree more.

You're not including guys like Cutler or palmer because of lack of postseason wins on crappy teams, but you include guys like Romo, cassel, Hasselbeck, and Orton?
Romo has 1 postseason win on a very talented team
Cassell hasn't played that great since he left NE
Hasselbeck has always been good, but never great
Orton is the same as Cassell. Without a top Defense and decent ground game, he's nothing special.

Also, you include Brees as a later round pick, but remembe,r he was drafted 32nd overall. He would have been a first round pick in todays format.

So no, for every great first round pick, there is NOT a great late round pick.

In the list you've made, it spans 20 years, yet your stars only span the past 5.

Marrdro
12-07-2010, 08:19 PM
2: Even keeping the numbers the same as you listed, the success rate of a legit 1st round QB is @ 50% (by your list). What is it for other rounds? I'll wager it's a lot lower, but you didn't offer that information for comparison.

3: We have already seen what happens to a franchise that does NOT gamble and grab a top seed QB....we wind up with 5+ season project QB's who may or may not be NFL caliber, but we don't know because we keep bringing in aged talent who plays better than they do. We need to break that cycle and grab a top guy we can work with. A guy who can LEAD our team.

4: teams that moved up for QB's in recent memory were the Giants with Manning. And they mortgaged the farm for him. How did that work out for them?

Well, they won a Superbowl, and are still in the hunt for the playoffs...

We did NOT wager for a QB, and we are for all intents and purposes eliminated (unless everyone else suddenly melts down)...and we have ZERO Superbowl wins...

IMHO, we would be well served to trade up and grab the best QB in the draft...especially if he's as good as everyone seems to think. Then we build a team around HIM and Peterson.

Bottom line, yeah it's a risk...but we haven't won anything the other way, have we?

Caine

All valid comments (for the most part), though let me throw a few things out there...

Yes, the Giants did "give up the farm" to get Eli Manning, in a manner of speaking. The Giants had the #4 pick that season, the Chargers drafted Manning #1, the Giants drafted Philip Rivers, then the Giants traded Rivers, their 3rd round pick, and their 1st round and 5th round picks for the following year to the Chargers for the rights to Manning. From that standpoint, the Giants had a lot more ammo to offer the Chargers given that they had the #4 pick overall. If the season ended today, the Vikings would draft somewhere between picks 8 and 13...and I'd bet it will be closer to 13 (or even 14 or more) by the time this season winds up. The Vikings already don't have a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft. If their draft spot is around #13, how much/what/who will they have to trade to move up high enough to take a Luck, or Newton, or Mallett? And yes, Eli has won a Super Bowl...and as a NFL starting QB, he has a lifetime mark of 50-37. That averages out over a 16 game season to 9.19 wins per year. Not all that impressive in my book.

Of those 13 first round "successes" since 2002, seven of those are somewhat questionable. Five are very young and inexperienced (Bradford, Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman, Tebow). One has led his team to the playoffs twice with zero wins (Carson Palmer, though he was knocked out early in his first playoff game). Another (Jay Cutler) has never taken his team to the playoffs, though it looks like he might finally do so in his 5th NFL season. That leaves six that you can really call successful NFL QBs...E. Manning (#1 overall), Ryan (#3 overall), Rivers (#4 overall), Roethlisberger (#11 overall), Flacco (#18 overall), Rodgers (#24 overall). While the jury is obviously still out on the guys drafted early in the past two seasons, I think the suggestion is still there that your success rate in the first round is closer to 25% than it is to 50%.

Regardless of whether the team drafting them was crap or not, the anointed "best QB in the draft", if they really were any good, would have surfaced as a good QB in the NFL somewhere after they left their crappy team. Yet Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, Jamarcus Russell, David Carr and Vince Young haven't proven to be good NFL QBs anywhere. All went in the top three of their draft classes.

And yes, there are more 1st round draft choices (and successful NFL QBs) coming out of the first round than the second and later rounds. But for every Aaron Rodgers or Philip Rivers you have, you have a Brady (6th), Brees (2nd), Romo (FA), Cassel (7th), Schaub (3rd), Orton (4th), Favre (2nd), or Hasselbeck (6th).

Again, not saying the Vikes shouldn't draft a QB...even in the first. But I'd be reluctant to start a rookie QB...any rookie QB...in 2011, or mortgage the future of the team by trading away Pro Bowlers and/or multiple 1st and 2nd round draft picks for a single unproven player.
Man I love this stuff...........A couple of sites have the first round going like this.........

Carolina (1-11)
Detroit (2-10)
Cincinnati (2-10)
Buffalo (2-10)
Arizona (3-9)
Denver (3-9)
San Francisco (4-8)
Dallas (4-8)
Tennessee (5-7)
Washington (5-7)
Houston (5-7)
Minnesota (5-7)

One could say that every team ahead of us, including Detroit (Stafford can't stay healthy) and Dallas (Does anyone think Romo is anything but a average QB) should take a QB before us if that QB is deemed a "Franchise QB".

Any QB that slips to the Vikes at 12 probably slipped for a reason and shouldn't even be considered a "Franchise QB" and a QB of that caliber can be taken, as we did with TJ at a lower round with very little risk to the organization with respect to gauranteed money that comes with one of those critters.

How many of you think that the money paid to Quinn, Leinart, Russell, Stafford, etc.

Heck you could almost make a case to not take one in the second when you look at the likes of Pat White, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Kellen Clemens.

Of course TJ, atleast for me, looks alot better than any of the cats listed above IMHO.

Marrdro
12-07-2010, 08:23 PM
Cassell hasn't played that great since he left NE
What? A rocky first year but obviously you haven't been watching this year. Ranked 5th with a 98.4 QB rating, 23 TD's/4 INT's........

QB Stats (http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/year/2010/seasontype/2)

i_bleed_purple
12-07-2010, 08:33 PM
Man I love this stuff...........A couple of sites have the first round going like this.........

Carolina (1-11)
Detroit (2-10)
Cincinnati (2-10)
Buffalo (2-10)
Arizona (3-9)
Denver (3-9)
San Francisco (4-8)
Dallas (4-8)
Tennessee (5-7)
Washington (5-7)
Houston (5-7)
Minnesota (5-7)

One could say that every team ahead of us, including Detroit (Stafford can't stay healthy) and Dallas (Does anyone think Romo is anything but a average QB) should take a QB before us if that QB is deemed a "Franchise QB".

Any QB that slips to the Vikes at 12 probably slipped for a reason and shouldn't even be considered a "Franchise QB" and a QB of that caliber can be taken, as we did with TJ at a lower round with very little risk to the organization with respect to gauranteed money that comes with one of those critters.
Yes, because teams never mis-judge a player. Remember, Rodgers dropped down to 24th I believe? I believe there are a few people out there who might consider him a franchise QB.

purplepat
12-07-2010, 08:41 PM
Man I love this stuff...........A couple of sites have the first round going like this.........

Carolina (1-11)
Detroit (2-10)
Cincinnati (2-10)
Buffalo (2-10)
Arizona (3-9)
Denver (3-9)
San Francisco (4-8)
Dallas (4-8)
Tennessee (5-7)
Washington (5-7)
Houston (5-7)
Minnesota (5-7)

One could say that every team ahead of us, including Detroit (Stafford can't stay healthy) and Dallas (Does anyone think Romo is anything but a average QB) should take a QB before us if that QB is deemed a "Franchise QB".



I think Romo is an above average QB. Don't see Houston taking a QB, and assuming Washington is committed to McNabb, I don't see another high $ QB going there. Detroit will stick with Stafford. Unless they see a new QB driving ticket sales, I think Buffalo sticks another year with Fitzpatrick. Cincinnati would have to trade or cut Palmer to go after a QB, and Mike Brown (owner/GM) is loyal to some guys to a fault.

Carolina, Arizona, Denver, SF, and Tennessee are all legitimate landing spots for a 1st round QB IMO. Cleveland could also be in that mix if they pick ahead of Minnesota.

Without doing something stupid, I don't see the Vikings being in a position to draft Luck (or Newton if he comes out). Mallett is a maybe, again probably depending on whether Newton comes out. I get the sense Locker's stock has dropped a bit, and he could fall into the Vikings laps.

Assuming the offensive system remains the same, and barring any unforeseen FA QBs hitting the market, I think Jackson gives this winning nucleus the best chance to return to the playoffs in 2011.

Marrdro
12-07-2010, 09:01 PM
Man I love this stuff...........A couple of sites have the first round going like this.........

Carolina (1-11)
Detroit (2-10)
Cincinnati (2-10)
Buffalo (2-10)
Arizona (3-9)
Denver (3-9)
San Francisco (4-8)
Dallas (4-8)
Tennessee (5-7)
Washington (5-7)
Houston (5-7)
Minnesota (5-7)

One could say that every team ahead of us, including Detroit (Stafford can't stay healthy) and Dallas (Does anyone think Romo is anything but a average QB) should take a QB before us if that QB is deemed a "Franchise QB".

Any QB that slips to the Vikes at 12 probably slipped for a reason and shouldn't even be considered a "Franchise QB" and a QB of that caliber can be taken, as we did with TJ at a lower round with very little risk to the organization with respect to gauranteed money that comes with one of those critters.
Yes, because teams never mis-judge a player. Remember, Rodgers dropped down to 24th I believe? I believe there are a few people out there who might consider him a franchise QB.
I hear ya on Rodgers but if you look back, especially recent history, its getting harder and harder to judge these "Spread" QB's coming out.

Again, not many 1rst round picks of late have been better than TJ and when you look at 2nd rounders you really start to see a big drop off.

Look, I'm not trying to justify TJ, I'm just saying that the state of the NFL QB can be directly tied to the "Spread Offense" and how it has spread from the collegiate all the way down to the lowest of levels.

Kids just aren't taught how to be QB's. Franchises don't know how to teach them and teams aren't patient enough anymore to give the ones that have a chance time to develop before they are shipped down the road to places like Canada, the Arena league and the UFL.

As I said, if there is one that a) Fits your scheme, b)Has the talent, and c) is Coachable in the first round, you'd better snatch him, but the likelyhood of one of them slipping to 12 IMHO is pretty slim.

Marrdro
12-07-2010, 09:07 PM
Man I love this stuff...........A couple of sites have the first round going like this.........

Carolina (1-11)
Detroit (2-10)
Cincinnati (2-10)
Buffalo (2-10)
Arizona (3-9)
Denver (3-9)
San Francisco (4-8)
Dallas (4-8)
Tennessee (5-7)
Washington (5-7)
Houston (5-7)
Minnesota (5-7)

One could say that every team ahead of us, including Detroit (Stafford can't stay healthy) and Dallas (Does anyone think Romo is anything but a average QB) should take a QB before us if that QB is deemed a "Franchise QB".



I think Romo is an above average QB. Don't see Houston taking a QB, and assuming Washington is committed to McNabb, I don't see another high $ QB going there. Detroit will stick with Stafford. Unless they see a new QB driving ticket sales, I think Buffalo sticks another year with Fitzpatrick. Cincinnati would have to trade or cut Palmer to go after a QB, and Mike Brown (owner/GM) is loyal to some guys to a fault.

Carolina, Arizona, Denver, SF, and Tennessee are all legitimate landing spots for a 1st round QB IMO. Cleveland could also be in that mix if they pick ahead of Minnesota.

Without doing something stupid, I don't see the Vikings being in a position to draft Luck (or Newton if he comes out). Mallett is a maybe, again probably depending on whether Newton comes out. I get the sense Locker's stock has dropped a bit, and he could fall into the Vikings laps.

Assuming the offensive system remains the same, and barring any unforeseen FA QBs hitting the market, I think Jackson gives this winning nucleus the best chance to return to the playoffs in 2011.
You make fair points on Romo and Stafford but if a Franchise guy is there I would think that the Lions would consider it, and Dallas would jump at it.

I don't think Dnabb is gonna be a option for the Deadskins for much longer than 2 years. They will snag the best one available as the replacement or as a backup if Dnabb gets hurt.

Fitz has shown some flash this year, what does he have 19 TD's and 12 INT's. Not what I would call a "Franchise Guy". If one is there they will take him, ride Fitz another year or two and move on to the kid if Fitz doesn't improve over that time.

Great point on Carson. You know I'm a closet Bengals fan. Most of that fanbase is over Carson and even if they weren't, they have absolutely nobody behind him.

Caine
12-08-2010, 01:18 AM
2: Even keeping the numbers the same as you listed, the success rate of a legit 1st round QB is @ 50% (by your list). What is it for other rounds? I'll wager it's a lot lower, but you didn't offer that information for comparison.

3: We have already seen what happens to a franchise that does NOT gamble and grab a top seed QB....we wind up with 5+ season project QB's who may or may not be NFL caliber, but we don't know because we keep bringing in aged talent who plays better than they do. We need to break that cycle and grab a top guy we can work with. A guy who can LEAD our team.

4: teams that moved up for QB's in recent memory were the Giants with Manning. And they mortgaged the farm for him. How did that work out for them?

Well, they won a Superbowl, and are still in the hunt for the playoffs...

We did NOT wager for a QB, and we are for all intents and purposes eliminated (unless everyone else suddenly melts down)...and we have ZERO Superbowl wins...

IMHO, we would be well served to trade up and grab the best QB in the draft...especially if he's as good as everyone seems to think. Then we build a team around HIM and Peterson.

Bottom line, yeah it's a risk...but we haven't won anything the other way, have we?

Caine

All valid comments (for the most part), though let me throw a few things out there...

Yes, the Giants did "give up the farm" to get Eli Manning, in a manner of speaking. The Giants had the #4 pick that season, the Chargers drafted Manning #1, the Giants drafted Philip Rivers, then the Giants traded Rivers, their 3rd round pick, and their 1st round and 5th round picks for the following year to the Chargers for the rights to Manning. From that standpoint, the Giants had a lot more ammo to offer the Chargers given that they had the #4 pick overall. If the season ended today, the Vikings would draft somewhere between picks 8 and 13...and I'd bet it will be closer to 13 (or even 14 or more) by the time this season winds up. The Vikings already don't have a 3rd round pick in the upcoming draft. If their draft spot is around #13, how much/what/who will they have to trade to move up high enough to take a Luck, or Newton, or Mallett? And yes, Eli has won a Super Bowl...and as a NFL starting QB, he has a lifetime mark of 50-37. That averages out over a 16 game season to 9.19 wins per year. Not all that impressive in my book.

Of those 13 first round "successes" since 2002, seven of those are somewhat questionable. Five are very young and inexperienced (Bradford, Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman, Tebow). One has led his team to the playoffs twice with zero wins (Carson Palmer, though he was knocked out early in his first playoff game). Another (Jay Cutler) has never taken his team to the playoffs, though it looks like he might finally do so in his 5th NFL season. That leaves six that you can really call successful NFL QBs...E. Manning (#1 overall), Ryan (#3 overall), Rivers (#4 overall), Roethlisberger (#11 overall), Flacco (#18 overall), Rodgers (#24 overall). While the jury is obviously still out on the guys drafted early in the past two seasons, I think the suggestion is still there that your success rate in the first round is closer to 25% than it is to 50%.

Regardless of whether the team drafting them was crap or not, the anointed "best QB in the draft", if they really were any good, would have surfaced as a good QB in the NFL somewhere after they left their crappy team. Yet Joey Harrington, Alex Smith, Jamarcus Russell, David Carr and Vince Young haven't proven to be good NFL QBs anywhere. All went in the top three of their draft classes.

And yes, there are more 1st round draft choices (and successful NFL QBs) coming out of the first round than the second and later rounds. But for every Aaron Rodgers or Philip Rivers you have, you have a Brady (6th), Brees (2nd), Romo (FA), Cassel (7th), Schaub (3rd), Orton (4th), Favre (2nd), or Hasselbeck (6th).

Again, not saying the Vikes shouldn't draft a QB...even in the first. But I'd be reluctant to start a rookie QB...any rookie QB...in 2011, or mortgage the future of the team by trading away Pro Bowlers and/or multiple 1st and 2nd round draft picks for a single unproven player.
Man I love this stuff...........A couple of sites have the first round going like this.........

Carolina (1-11)
Detroit (2-10)
Cincinnati (2-10)
Buffalo (2-10)
Arizona (3-9)
Denver (3-9)
San Francisco (4-8)
Dallas (4-8)
Tennessee (5-7)
Washington (5-7)
Houston (5-7)
Minnesota (5-7)

One could say that every team ahead of us, including Detroit (Stafford can't stay healthy) and Dallas (Does anyone think Romo is anything but a average QB) should take a QB before us if that QB is deemed a "Franchise QB".

Any QB that slips to the Vikes at 12 probably slipped for a reason and shouldn't even be considered a "Franchise QB" and a QB of that caliber can be taken, as we did with TJ at a lower round with very little risk to the organization with respect to gauranteed money that comes with one of those critters.

How many of you think that the money paid to Quinn, Leinart, Russell, Stafford, etc.

Heck you could almost make a case to not take one in the second when you look at the likes of Pat White, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Kellen Clemens.

Of course TJ, atleast for me, looks alot better than any of the cats listed above IMHO.

The fact is we can go round and round on this topic all day long. For every 1st round bust you point to, I can find one who shined. For every later round QB who is on a HOF career path you can find, I can find 10 guys who were drafted later that no one's ever heard of...or ever will.

And while we might have already sold our 3rd rounder out (Atta boy, Chiller!!), sometimes you HAVE to gamble.

The fact is, maybe we risk it all and get a Ryan Leaf...

Or maybe we risk it all and get the next Peyton Manning.

What we DO know is that we've tried repeatedly to find the Tom Brady in the later rounds, and come up empty...over and over.

And with our QB situation as dire as it is right now - we have only Joe Webb under contract after this season - we actually have very little to lose.

Fact is, none of our stars are getting younger. Even if we manage to sign them all back, they will all continue to age while we continue to search for a QB. And our roster is too talented to wind up with a top 3-5 pick...so we don't really have a lot of options. We can keep going after mid-pick caliber QB's and aging Free Agents...like we've been doing for years...



...or we can take a shot at getting a legit FRANCHISE guy. A guy we can seriously build around.

Caine

singersp
12-08-2010, 01:30 AM
...or we can take a shot at getting a legit FRANCHISE guy. A guy we can seriously build around.

Caine

So are you saying we should grab the best QB in the draft with our first pick & start him right off the bat in 2011 regardless of his performance at the pro level?

Or are you saying we should grab the best QB in the draft with our first pick & start him after preparing him for a year or 2?

Caine
12-08-2010, 01:48 AM
...or we can take a shot at getting a legit FRANCHISE guy. A guy we can seriously build around.

Caine

So are you saying we should grab the best QB in the draft with our first pick & start him right off the bat in 2011 regardless of his performance at the pro level?

Or are you saying we should grab the best QB in the draft with our first pick & start him after preparing him for a year or 2?

The latter...remember, I was NEVER in favor of pushing Jackson out there in his second season. IMO, they ruined him by doing that. Or, at the very least, they hurt his development.

But 1st round money makes that unlikely.

Caine

Purple Floyd
12-08-2010, 01:55 AM
As crazy as it sounds I would rather spend the 1st on a QB than to trade it away for a player that the coach cuts a month later.

midgensa
12-08-2010, 02:04 AM
But for every Aaron Rodgers or Philip Rivers you have, you have a Brady (6th), Brees (2nd), Romo (FA), Cassel (7th), Schaub (3rd), Orton (4th), Favre (2nd), or Hasselbeck (6th).

I couldn't disagree more.

You're not including guys like Cutler or palmer because of lack of postseason wins on crappy teams, but you include guys like Romo, cassel, Hasselbeck, and Orton?
Romo has 1 postseason win on a very talented team
Cassell hasn't played that great since he left NE
Hasselbeck has always been good, but never great
Orton is the same as Cassell. Without a top Defense and decent ground game, he's nothing special.

Also, you include Brees as a later round pick, but remembe,r he was drafted 32nd overall. He would have been a first round pick in todays format.

So no, for every great first round pick, there is NOT a great late round pick.

In the list you've made, it spans 20 years, yet your stars only span the past 5.
There is no question that the large majority of good QBs in the NFL come from the first or early second round.

I can't believe the people who do not realize this. It does not take a lot of research to see it.

Caine
12-08-2010, 02:52 AM
But for every Aaron Rodgers or Philip Rivers you have, you have a Brady (6th), Brees (2nd), Romo (FA), Cassel (7th), Schaub (3rd), Orton (4th), Favre (2nd), or Hasselbeck (6th).

I couldn't disagree more.

You're not including guys like Cutler or palmer because of lack of postseason wins on crappy teams, but you include guys like Romo, cassel, Hasselbeck, and Orton?
Romo has 1 postseason win on a very talented team
Cassell hasn't played that great since he left NE
Hasselbeck has always been good, but never great
Orton is the same as Cassell. Without a top Defense and decent ground game, he's nothing special.

Also, you include Brees as a later round pick, but remembe,r he was drafted 32nd overall. He would have been a first round pick in todays format.

So no, for every great first round pick, there is NOT a great late round pick.

In the list you've made, it spans 20 years, yet your stars only span the past 5.
There is no question that the large majority of good QBs in the NFL come from the first or early second round.

I can't believe the people who do not realize this. It does not take a lot of research to see it.

The trouble is that a good number of busts come from those ranks as well....and there are just enough HOF QB's from late rounds to make people hope we can hit the jackpot too.

It's the lottery mentality. The odds are 100,000,000 to 1 that you'll hit it, but you drop your money down just the same...

Caine

singersp
12-08-2010, 12:58 PM
...or we can take a shot at getting a legit FRANCHISE guy. A guy we can seriously build around.

Caine

So are you saying we should grab the best QB in the draft with our first pick & start him right off the bat in 2011 regardless of his performance at the pro level?

Or are you saying we should grab the best QB in the draft with our first pick & start him after preparing him for a year or 2?

The latter...remember, I was NEVER in favor of pushing Jackson out there in his second season. IMO, they ruined him by doing that. Or, at the very least, they hurt his development.

But 1st round money makes that unlikely.

Caine

I remember, that's why I asked the question.

Who then, should the Vikings sign in FA to start next year, that you feel is head & shoulders above Jackson?

Don't list names of QB's that will undoubtedly be re-signed by their respective teams. I.E. Brady & Manning.

If you're going to say Favre, just put his name at the beginning of your post, so I know not to continue reading.

Here's the complete list;

Peyton Manning, IND
Tom Brady, NE
Brett Favre, MIN
Donovan McNabb, WAS
Matt Moore, CAR
Kyle Orton, DEN
Matt Hasselbeck
Alex Smith, SF
Troy Smith, BAL
Trent Edwards, BUF
JT O'Sullivan, CIN
Seneca Wallace, CLE
Shaun Hill, DET
Brodie Croyle, KC
Chad Pennington, MIA
Tyler Thigpen, MIA
Tarvaris Jackson, MIN
Jim Sorgi, NYG
Kellen Clemens, NYJ
Bruce Gradkowski, OAK
Michael Vick, PHI
Dennis Dixon, PIT
Billy Volek, SD
Kerry Collins, TEN
Chris Simms, TEN
Rex Grossman, WAS


I get a chuckle out of the ones stating we should be drafting a QB in the draft to start next season. It works in a few cases, but it's far from the norm.

The problem you have with that is the high risk. First of all, will there be a 2011 draft.

Secondly, when it comes the Vikings turn to pick, will the QB they want be available?

If not, is there another QB worthy of a 1st round pick available or are the Vikings faced with the dilemma of having to choose a second round caliber QB in the first round just to have a QB on their roster other than Webb?

If they decide to wait, rather than use a 1st round pick on 2nd round material, will that same QB or another worthwhile QB even be available in the 2nd? One you'd start the 2011 season with?

What happens if an exceptional non-QB player falls to us in the first? Do we take him & hope to get a QB later or do you let him slip by & just select the best QB option available?

Now after the draft ends, you finally have a QB that you selected at some point in the first few rounds. You head into the offseason minicamps & then training camps only to discover that you're newly acquired QB isn't ready enough to start in the NFL & neither is Webb.

They still need a year or two to become NFL ready before given the job, like you & I would both feel.

At that point, they are simply royally fucked. Rather than start one of those two QB's too early, a mistake you & I both agree they made with TJ, they find themselves looking for a QB from the FA pool just weeks before the season.

Sorry folks, but that pool has just about dried up & you are left with toaster leavings to chose from at that point.

I have no problem taking a QB high in the draft. I'm all for it, but I don't want to go into the draft betting all my chips that whomever we select will be able to start next September.

That leaves us with signing a FA from the pool or staying with Jackson. Forget Favre, he's done. Orton, IMO, will be resigned by Denver.

I don't see anyone on that list leftover from those that will be re-signed by their respective teams, that screams SB. Do you?

Caine
12-08-2010, 02:25 PM
...or we can take a shot at getting a legit FRANCHISE guy. A guy we can seriously build around.

Caine

So are you saying we should grab the best QB in the draft with our first pick & start him right off the bat in 2011 regardless of his performance at the pro level?

Or are you saying we should grab the best QB in the draft with our first pick & start him after preparing him for a year or 2?

The latter...remember, I was NEVER in favor of pushing Jackson out there in his second season. IMO, they ruined him by doing that. Or, at the very least, they hurt his development.

But 1st round money makes that unlikely.

Caine

I remember, that's why I asked the question.

Who then, should the Vikings sign in FA to start next year, that you feel is head & shoulders above Jackson?

Don't list names of QB's that will undoubtedly be re-signed by their respective teams. I.E. Brady & Manning.

If you're going to say Favre, just put his name at the beginning of your post, so I know not to continue reading.

Here's the complete list;

Peyton Manning, IND
Tom Brady, NE
Brett Favre, MIN
Donovan McNabb, WAS
Matt Moore, CAR
Kyle Orton, DEN
Matt Hasselbeck
Alex Smith, SF
Troy Smith, BAL
Trent Edwards, BUF
JT O'Sullivan, CIN
Seneca Wallace, CLE
Shaun Hill, DET
Brodie Croyle, KC
Chad Pennington, MIA
Tyler Thigpen, MIA
Tarvaris Jackson, MIN
Jim Sorgi, NYG
Kellen Clemens, NYJ
Bruce Gradkowski, OAK
Michael Vick, PHI
Dennis Dixon, PIT
Billy Volek, SD
Kerry Collins, TEN
Chris Simms, TEN
Rex Grossman, WAS


I get a chuckle out of the ones stating we should be drafting a QB in the draft to start next season. It works in a few cases, but it's far from the norm.

The problem you have with that is the high risk. First of all, will there be a 2011 draft.

Secondly, when it comes the Vikings turn to pick, will the QB they want be available?

If not, is there another QB worthy of a 1st round pick available or are the Vikings faced with the dilemma of having to choose a second round caliber QB in the first round just to have a QB on their roster other than Webb?

If they decide to wait, rather than use a 1st round pick on 2nd round material, will that same QB or another worthwhile QB even be available in the 2nd? One you'd start the 2011 season with?

What happens if an exceptional non-QB player falls to us in the first? Do we take him & hope to get a QB later or do you let him slip by & just select the best QB option available?

Now after the draft ends, you finally have a QB that you selected at some point in the first few rounds. You head into the offseason minicamps & then training camps only to discover that you're newly acquired QB isn't ready enough to start in the NFL & neither is Webb.

They still need a year or two to become NFL ready before given the job, like you & I would both feel.

At that point, they are simply royally fucked. Rather than start one of those two QB's too early, a mistake you & I both agree they made with TJ, they find themselves looking for a QB from the FA pool just weeks before the season.

Sorry folks, but that pool has just about dried up & you are left with toaster leavings to chose from at that point.

I have no problem taking a QB high in the draft. I'm all for it, but I don't want to go into the draft betting all my chips that whomever we select will be able to start next September.

That leaves us with signing a FA from the pool or staying with Jackson. Forget Favre, he's done. Orton, IMO, will be resigned by Denver.

I don't see anyone on that list leftover from those that will be re-signed by their respective teams, that screams SB. Do you?

Here's the thing, we don't even know what kind of offense we'll be running next year. Jackson has spent 5 years in the *cough* "KAO", but we're hopefully dragging that thing out back and shooting it in the head.

So, until we know what system we're running, we don't know who will fit...either as a FA to carry us through while a prospect develops, or as a prospect to develop.

I think McNabb might be available...who knows if Washington will hang on to him since they can opt out after this season. If not, there are a number of widely travelled QB's on that list who can be cannon fodder for a season (Hill, O'Sullivan, Pennington). I don't expect Philly to let Vick go....he's too good right now.

Now, none of the three I listed are Dream QB's...they're just guys who have been around long enough to know how to run most offenses. Jackson knows the KAO...but can he adapt to another system? Further, after pissing in his corn flakes TWICE, will he even want to come back? And if we plan to draft a 1st round QB, and he knows that, will he be willing to be the interim guy? Again?

Fact is, I don't know. I have already concluded that next season - if we have one - is NOT a Superbowl run year for us. Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch. No matter which way we go, we're not likely to have an ideal QB situation to start the season.

But, again, that all depends on who the next HC is. If it's Frazier, and he keeps Bevell....well, we're screwed for sure.

So, from where I sit, we're in "wait-n-see" mode. But my HOPE is that our new HC (Not Frazier, no offense to Leslie, but we need a new start altogether) will address that glaring hole at the QB position and be SMART enough to use his 2-3 season grace period to develop him.

And if that means trading UP in the draft to get the #1 guy...do it.

Caine

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 03:01 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 03:33 PM
I kindof think you almost have to exclude all of the QB's drafted prior to the collegiate move towards the spread offense.

If one were to look back over the last several years, one would see that very few QB's drafted are worth anything right now today, including alot of the first rounders.

I like to go back to 2000 as that gives you a pretty good look at the QB's that can still be considered part of that player pool (both young and old) which includes pre-spread and post-spread talent levels.

Draft History QB (http://www.drafthistory.com/positions/qb.html)

This leaves the league in quite a predicament. The have a player pool of Vet QB's (Pre-spread) that are now getting so old that can't even scramble and stay out of harms way, a bunch of mid tier guys who will never amount to anything and a rookie pool of QB's that can't even get out from under center cause they've never taken snaps from that position let alone have the ability to read a defense cause they've never had to turn thier back on a defense during a drop back.

When you have first round picks like Russel, Young, Smith, Lienart, Campbell, Loseman, Leftwich, Boller, Carr, Ramsey, Harrington etc all considered "Franchise" guys as just a big of a bust as the rest of the 2nd through 7th round picks, the production and development we've seen out of TJ isn't as bad as our good friend Caine wants to make him out to be.

Of the 140 or so QB's taken since 2000, the following can be considered to be a cat who can play at the NFL level, 5 of which are first round picks, 15 of which weren't:
(Read in 3 columns, year, number picked, player)

2010 1 Sam Bradford
2009 1 Matthew Stafford
5 Mark Sanchez
17 Josh Freeman
2008 3 Matt Ryan
18 Joe Flacco
2007 36 Kevin Kolb
2006 11 Jay Cutler
2005 24 Aaron Rodgers
106 Kyle Orton
230 Matt Cassel
2004 1 Eli Manning
4 Philip Rivers
11 Ben Roethlisberger
90 Matt Schaub
2003 1 Carson Palmer
2002 108 David Garrard
2001 1 Michael Vick
32 Drew Brees
2000 199 Tom Brady

The odds that the Vikes picking at 12 will get one that will work out, atleast better than TJ is pretty slim when you look at reality. Again, reality is 5 vs 15. The bigger reality is 20 out of 144.

My guess, the guys everyone will be trying to convince us will be "Beasts" will be nothing more than guys like Brian Brohm.

On a side note, who was the PPO poster who was so adament that Brohm was gonna be the next coming?

Long story short, has TJ done enough to convince us that he should be our QB? Probalby not, but damn, who else has that is currently out there that will realistically available, and to make it worse, when you look at the reality of what we will be able to draft at about the middle of the draft, why would anyone think we would get someone better than TJ is now.

Sad thing is, thats not a vote of confidence for TJ from me, but rather a slam on the whole QB position cause it isn't very good when you look at it.

tarkenton10
12-08-2010, 03:57 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 04:13 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

purplepat
12-08-2010, 04:39 PM
Here's the complete list;

Peyton Manning, IND
Tom Brady, NE
Brett Favre, MIN
Donovan McNabb, WAS
Matt Moore, CAR
Kyle Orton, DEN
Matt Hasselbeck
Alex Smith, SF
Troy Smith, BAL
Trent Edwards, BUF
JT O'Sullivan, CIN
Seneca Wallace, CLE
Shaun Hill, DET
Brodie Croyle, KC
Chad Pennington, MIA
Tyler Thigpen, MIA
Tarvaris Jackson, MIN
Jim Sorgi, NYG
Kellen Clemens, NYJ
Bruce Gradkowski, OAK
Michael Vick, PHI
Dennis Dixon, PIT
Billy Volek, SD
Kerry Collins, TEN
Chris Simms, TEN
Rex Grossman, WAS




For the record, Brady, McNabb, Orton and Hill are all under contract with their current teams through the 2011 season (Brady and McNabb, much beyond 2011)

purplepat
12-08-2010, 04:56 PM
But for every Aaron Rodgers or Philip Rivers you have, you have a Brady (6th), Brees (2nd), Romo (FA), Cassel (7th), Schaub (3rd), Orton (4th), Favre (2nd), or Hasselbeck (6th).

I couldn't disagree more.

You're not including guys like Cutler or palmer because of lack of postseason wins on crappy teams, but you include guys like Romo, cassel, Hasselbeck, and Orton?
Romo has 1 postseason win on a very talented team
Cassell hasn't played that great since he left NE
Hasselbeck has always been good, but never great
Orton is the same as Cassell. Without a top Defense and decent ground game, he's nothing special.

Also, you include Brees as a later round pick, but remembe,r he was drafted 32nd overall. He would have been a first round pick in todays format.

So no, for every great first round pick, there is NOT a great late round pick.

In the list you've made, it spans 20 years, yet your stars only span the past 5.

Valid points, though going back 20 years for one guy (Favre) isn't that huge of a sin.

However, my point still is that drafting a QB in the first round...any QB...is still a crapshoot. You've had good to great guys picked in the top 5 (Peyton, Rivers, Ryan, Eli) and total bums (Russell, Smith, Young), and virtually everywhere in between. Yes, the odds of getting a winnner are better in round one than later rounds, but by no means are winners restricted to the top ten or twenty picks in the draft.

And, once again, given the talent level on this team, I'd probably be more comfortable with a "vet" like Jackson leading this team in 2011 than I would a raw rookie regardless of whether he is a first round pick or not.

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 05:00 PM
And, once again, given the talent level on this team, I'd probably be more comfortable with a "vet" like Jackson leading this team in 2011 than I would a raw rookie regardless of whether he is a first round pick or not.
Bringing the "A" game today I see........

20 out of 144 QB's drafted in the last 10 years can still be considered viable options at this point.

Based on that, I tend ot agree with you. Problem is, most fans don't want to acknowledge that. All they want to do is say.....We need to draft a kid in the first round. Currently, 5 of those 20 are first round picks. 15 are drafted later.

purplepat
12-08-2010, 05:08 PM
Of the 140 or so QB's taken since 2000, the following can be considered to be a cat who can play at the NFL level, 5 of which are first round picks, 15 of which weren't:(Read in 3 columns, year, number picked, player)

2010 1 Sam Bradford
2009 1 Matthew Stafford
5 Mark Sanchez
17 Josh Freeman
2008 3 Matt Ryan
18 Joe Flacco
2007 36 Kevin Kolb
2006 11 Jay Cutler
2005 24 Aaron Rodgers
106 Kyle Orton
230 Matt Cassel
2004 1 Eli Manning
4 Philip Rivers
11 Ben Roethlisberger
90 Matt Schaub
2003 1 Carson Palmer
2002 108 David Garrard
2001 1 Michael Vick
32 Drew Brees
2000 199 Tom Brady



I think you meant to say 5 #1 picks overall, not 5 first round picks. Looks to me like 13 of them were first rounders (Brees was actually the first pick in the second round).

I also think it's far too early to judge some of the more recent picks in terms of whether they can really "play at an NFL level". TJack's stats are similar to or better than that of Sanchez, Stafford, Kolb and Freeman. Jackson's development as a passer (IMO) has been hindered by Childress' harping on avoiding the mistake/turnover and the presence of a strong running game (something for instance that Detroit doesn't have, so they depend on Stafford to sling the ball a lot), and that some of those teams were already at the bottom and had nothing to lose by letting their young QB learn and develop while making plenty of mistakes.

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 05:13 PM
Of the 140 or so QB's taken since 2000, the following can be considered to be a cat who can play at the NFL level, 5 of which are first round picks, 15 of which weren't:(Read in 3 columns, year, number picked, player)

2010 1 Sam Bradford
2009 1 Matthew Stafford
5 Mark Sanchez
17 Josh Freeman
2008 3 Matt Ryan
18 Joe Flacco
2007 36 Kevin Kolb
2006 11 Jay Cutler
2005 24 Aaron Rodgers
106 Kyle Orton
230 Matt Cassel
2004 1 Eli Manning
4 Philip Rivers
11 Ben Roethlisberger
90 Matt Schaub
2003 1 Carson Palmer
2002 108 David Garrard
2001 1 Michael Vick
32 Drew Brees
2000 199 Tom Brady



I think you meant to say 5 #1 picks overall, not 5 first round picks. Looks to me like 13 of them were first rounders (Brees was actually the first pick in the second round).

I also think it's far too early to judge some of the more recent picks in terms of whether they can really "play at an NFL level". TJack's stats are similar to or better than that of Sanchez, Stafford, Kolb and Freeman. Jackson's development as a passer (IMO) has been hindered by Childress' harping on avoiding the mistake/turnover and the presence of a strong running game (something for instance that Detroit doesn't have, so they depend on Stafford to sling the ball a lot), and that some of those teams were already at the bottom and had nothing to lose by letting their young QB learn and develop while making plenty of mistakes.
You are correct. Thanks for saving me from my own self. I think I made the same good in the original post.

Thats what I get for doing math in public. B)

purplepat
12-08-2010, 05:17 PM
COMP % ATT TD INT SACK RATING YPA
McCoy CLE 63.8% 127 3 3 15 85.3 7.7
Cassel KC 59.3% 1402 62 33 110 84.3 6.7
Campbell OAK 60.6% 1843 63 44 133 81.8 6.7
Bradford STL 60.6% 442 17 10 24 81.0 6.0
Orton DEN 58.3% 1911 71 45 121 80.8 6.6
T. Smith SF 53.0% 215 7 4 21 80.0 7.4
Jackson MIN 59.2% 573 24 21 43 78.2 6.7
Kolb PHI 62.2% 283 10 11 15 77.8 6.8
Henne MIA 61.3% 830 24 29 43 76.2 6.7
V. Young TEN 57.9% 1190 42 42 75 75.7 6.8
Freeman TB 56.6% 655 26 24 39 74.6 6.6
Moore CAR 57.9% 392 16 17 28 73.9 6.7
Fitzpatrick BUF 57.9% 1089 41 38 85 73.2 6.0
Sanchez NYJ 54.4% 761 28 31 46 70.5 6.7
A. Smith SF 56.8% 1414 46 52 116 70.2 6.1
D. Anderson AZ 52.6% 1436 53 55 72 68.8 6.4
Stafford DET 54.5% 473 19 21 28 67.1 5.9
Gradkowski OAK 53.2% 680 20 23 52 65.9 5.7
Clausen CAR 50.5% 200 1 6 19 55.3 5.3

tastywaves
12-08-2010, 05:44 PM
Of the 140 or so QB's taken since 2000, the following can be considered to be a cat who can play at the NFL level, 5 of which are first round picks, 15 of which weren't:(Read in 3 columns, year, number picked, player)

2010 1 Sam Bradford
2009 1 Matthew Stafford
5 Mark Sanchez
17 Josh Freeman
2008 3 Matt Ryan
18 Joe Flacco
2007 36 Kevin Kolb
2006 11 Jay Cutler
2005 24 Aaron Rodgers
106 Kyle Orton
230 Matt Cassel
2004 1 Eli Manning
4 Philip Rivers
11 Ben Roethlisberger
90 Matt Schaub
2003 1 Carson Palmer
2002 108 David Garrard
2001 1 Michael Vick
32 Drew Brees
2000 199 Tom Brady



I think you meant to say 5 #1 picks overall, not 5 first round picks. Looks to me like 13 of them were first rounders (Brees was actually the first pick in the second round).

I also think it's far too early to judge some of the more recent picks in terms of whether they can really "play at an NFL level". TJack's stats are similar to or better than that of Sanchez, Stafford, Kolb and Freeman. Jackson's development as a passer (IMO) has been hindered by Childress' harping on avoiding the mistake/turnover and the presence of a strong running game (something for instance that Detroit doesn't have, so they depend on Stafford to sling the ball a lot), and that some of those teams were already at the bottom and had nothing to lose by letting their young QB learn and develop while making plenty of mistakes.
You are correct. Thanks for saving me from my own self. I think I made the same good in the original post.

Thats what I get for doing math in public. B)

So, you're saying that 65% of the viable QB's drafted in the last 10 years were first round picks. Sounds like a pretty good argument to take one in the first round.

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 06:02 PM
Of the 140 or so QB's taken since 2000, the following can be considered to be a cat who can play at the NFL level, 5 of which are first round picks, 15 of which weren't:(Read in 3 columns, year, number picked, player)

2010 1 Sam Bradford
2009 1 Matthew Stafford
5 Mark Sanchez
17 Josh Freeman
2008 3 Matt Ryan
18 Joe Flacco
2007 36 Kevin Kolb
2006 11 Jay Cutler
2005 24 Aaron Rodgers
106 Kyle Orton
230 Matt Cassel
2004 1 Eli Manning
4 Philip Rivers
11 Ben Roethlisberger
90 Matt Schaub
2003 1 Carson Palmer
2002 108 David Garrard
2001 1 Michael Vick
32 Drew Brees
2000 199 Tom Brady



I think you meant to say 5 #1 picks overall, not 5 first round picks. Looks to me like 13 of them were first rounders (Brees was actually the first pick in the second round).

I also think it's far too early to judge some of the more recent picks in terms of whether they can really "play at an NFL level". TJack's stats are similar to or better than that of Sanchez, Stafford, Kolb and Freeman. Jackson's development as a passer (IMO) has been hindered by Childress' harping on avoiding the mistake/turnover and the presence of a strong running game (something for instance that Detroit doesn't have, so they depend on Stafford to sling the ball a lot), and that some of those teams were already at the bottom and had nothing to lose by letting their young QB learn and develop while making plenty of mistakes.
You are correct. Thanks for saving me from my own self. I think I made the same good in the original post.

Thats what I get for doing math in public. B)

So, you're saying that 65% of the viable QB's drafted in the last 10 years were first round picks. Sounds like a pretty good argument to take one in the first round.
I think your math is as flawed as mind. 65% of the ones that worked out yes but what is the percentage of the ones that are viable vs the ones that were actually drafted and then, if you look at the number that have been successfull were we will draft (something below the middle of the draft) that number is alot lower.

i_bleed_purple
12-08-2010, 06:41 PM
But for every Aaron Rodgers or Philip Rivers you have, you have a Brady (6th), Brees (2nd), Romo (FA), Cassel (7th), Schaub (3rd), Orton (4th), Favre (2nd), or Hasselbeck (6th).

I couldn't disagree more.

You're not including guys like Cutler or palmer because of lack of postseason wins on crappy teams, but you include guys like Romo, cassel, Hasselbeck, and Orton?
Romo has 1 postseason win on a very talented team
Cassell hasn't played that great since he left NE
Hasselbeck has always been good, but never great
Orton is the same as Cassell. Without a top Defense and decent ground game, he's nothing special.

Also, you include Brees as a later round pick, but remembe,r he was drafted 32nd overall. He would have been a first round pick in todays format.

So no, for every great first round pick, there is NOT a great late round pick.

In the list you've made, it spans 20 years, yet your stars only span the past 5.

Valid points, though going back 20 years for one guy (Favre) isn't that huge of a sin.

However, my point still is that drafting a QB in the first round...any QB...is still a crapshoot. You've had good to great guys picked in the top 5 (Peyton, Rivers, Ryan, Eli) and total bums (Russell, Smith, Young), and virtually everywhere in between. Yes, the odds of getting a winnner are better in round one than later rounds, but by no means are winners restricted to the top ten or twenty picks in the draft.
Yes, its a crapshoot, but so is every pick in the draft.

Lets say you go to vegas, and don't have alot of money to burn, are you going to bet it all on a risky bet, or take the better percentage one?

That's what you get. I'd say roughly 50% of first round quarterbacks are at least decent. That's a step up from what we have.
After the first round, that number drops off considerably.

the numbers are posted here somewhere, I'm not going to look them up.



And, once again, given the talent level on this team, I'd probably be more comfortable with a "vet" like Jackson leading this team in 2011 than I would a raw rookie regardless of whether he is a first round pick or not.

Hows that rookie doing in St. Louis vs. the "Vet" they used to have?

kevoncox
12-08-2010, 07:24 PM
To be honest i still don't think that you guys get it.
I will try to say it again a bit more clearly.

1) Drafting any player is a crapshoot.
I hate when people point to the fact that X amount of Qbs have flamed out. Can't you say the same for WRs, DTs, DL, LBs, etc. In fact, you can!!!!! I wager the failure rate of first down Qbs are just as poor as most other positions in the draft.

Lets take a quick look at the 2006 draft.
1 Mario Williams Defensive End - Stud
2 Reggie Bush Running back - Unique back some might consider a bust
3 Vince Young Quarterback - Great win%
4 D'Brickashaw Ferguson Offensive Tackle - Bust for where he was drafted
5 Green Bay Packers A. J. Hawk Linebacker Bust
6 San Francisco 49ers Vernon Davis Tight End - Once a bust- Now a Stud
7 Oakland Raiders Michael Huff Safety - Bust
8 Buffalo Bills Donte Whitner Safety - Bust
9 Detroit Lions Ernie Sims Linebacker - Bust
10 Matt Leinart Quarterback - Bust
11 Jay Cutler Quarterback
12 Haloti Ngata Defensive Tackle
13 Kamerion Wimbley Defensive End - Bust
14 Brodrick Bunkley Defensive Tackle - Bust
15 Tye Hill Cornerback - Bust
16 Jason Allen Safety - Bust
17 Chad Greenway Linebacker
18 Bobby Carpenter Linebacker - Bust

Just an example but as you can see players that don't live up to the potential in all positions. However, QB is a need why not role the dice in the round with the most talent?

2) I don't understand why people think we have to draft a 1st round QB and start him right away. YOu need to prep for the future. Draft a guy and sit him for 3 years if need be and then play him. However, lets not draft a guy in the 6th and try to coach him up in 3 years. If the talent isn't there...the talent isn't there.

2) The argument is not so much about drafting a QB in the first round but more about the fact that QB is the most important position in sports but most of you all seem happy to continue to draft a 6th rounder in hopes of them being Tom Brady :laugh:.

ndnorseman
12-08-2010, 07:34 PM
To be honest i still don't think that you guys get it.
I will try to say it again a bit more clearly.

1) Drafting any player is a crapshoot.
I hate when people point to the fact that X amount of Qbs have flamed out. Can't you say the same for WRs, DTs, DL, LBs, etc. In fact, you can!!!!! I wager the failure rate of first down Qbs are just as poor as most other positions in the draft.

Lets take a quick look at the 2006 draft.
1 Mario Williams Defensive End - Stud
2 Reggie Bush Running back - Unique back some might consider a bust
3 Vince Young Quarterback - Great win%
4 D'Brickashaw Ferguson Offensive Tackle - Bust for where he was drafted
5 Green Bay Packers A. J. Hawk Linebacker Bust
6 San Francisco 49ers Vernon Davis Tight End - Once a bust- Now a Stud
7 Oakland Raiders Michael Huff Safety - Bust
8 Buffalo Bills Donte Whitner Safety - Bust
9 Detroit Lions Ernie Sims Linebacker - Bust
10 Matt Leinart Quarterback - Bust
11 Jay Cutler Quarterback
12 Haloti Ngata Defensive Tackle
13 Kamerion Wimbley Defensive End - Bust
14 Brodrick Bunkley Defensive Tackle - Bust
15 Tye Hill Cornerback - Bust
16 Jason Allen Safety - Bust
17 Chad Greenway Linebacker
18 Bobby Carpenter Linebacker - Bust

Just an example but as you can see players that don't live up to the potential in all positions. However, QB is a need why not role the dice in the round with the most talent?

2) I don't understand why people think we have to draft a 1st round QB and start him right away. YOu need to prep for the future. Draft a guy and sit him for 3 years if need be and then play him. However, lets not draft a guy in the 6th and try to coach him up in 3 years. If the talent isn't there...the talent isn't there.

2) The argument is not so much about drafting a QB in the first round but more about the fact that QB is the most important position in sports but most of you all seem happy to continue to draft a 6th rounder in hopes of them being Tom Brady :laugh:.


Could have been a bit clearer, kevon...but I get your point, and agree with you. :)

i_bleed_purple
12-08-2010, 07:42 PM
To be honest i still don't think that you guys get it.
I will try to say it again a bit more clearly.

1) Drafting any player is a crapshoot.
I hate when people point to the fact that X amount of Qbs have flamed out. Can't you say the same for WRs, DTs, DL, LBs, etc. In fact, you can!!!!! I wager the failure rate of first down Qbs are just as poor as most other positions in the draft.

Lets take a quick look at the 2006 draft.
1 Mario Williams Defensive End - Stud
2 Reggie Bush Running back - Unique back some might consider a bust
3 Vince Young Quarterback - Great win%
4 D'Brickashaw Ferguson Offensive Tackle - Bust for where he was drafted
5 Green Bay Packers A. J. Hawk Linebacker Bust
6 San Francisco 49ers Vernon Davis Tight End - Once a bust- Now a Stud
7 Oakland Raiders Michael Huff Safety - Bust
8 Buffalo Bills Donte Whitner Safety - Bust
9 Detroit Lions Ernie Sims Linebacker - Bust
10 Matt Leinart Quarterback - Bust
11 Jay Cutler Quarterback
12 Haloti Ngata Defensive Tackle
13 Kamerion Wimbley Defensive End - Bust
14 Brodrick Bunkley Defensive Tackle - Bust
15 Tye Hill Cornerback - Bust
16 Jason Allen Safety - Bust
17 Chad Greenway Linebacker
18 Bobby Carpenter Linebacker - Bust

I'm going to disagree with many of your assessments

A good number of those players are good players, just not superstars you seem to expect.
Guys like Ferguson, Whitner, Cutler, Ngata, Wimbley, Bunkley and Carpenter are all decent players, some, like Whitner and Carpenter play on messes of a team, so its hard to really stand out, but they are decent players.


Just an example but as you can see players that don't live up to the potential in all positions. However, QB is a need why not role the dice in the round with the most talent?
Agree 100%


2) I don't understand why people think we have to draft a 1st round QB and start him right away. YOu need to prep for the future. Draft a guy and sit him for 3 years if need be and then play him. However, lets not draft a guy in the 6th and try to coach him up in 3 years. If the talent isn't there...the talent isn't there. Agreed again!


3) The argument is not so much about drafting a QB in the first round but more about the fact that QB is the most important position in sports but most of you all seem happy to continue to draft a 6th rounder in hopes of them being Tom Brady :laugh:.

once more, well done. I've been harping this for the last few years. People here are content with drafting late round guys, because all of a sudden they're experts at recognizing talent and predicting where the sleepers are.

Lets go back a few years to the TJ draft shall we?
in 2006, popular QB choices outside the top few were: Brodie Croyle and Omar jacobs. Wow, those guys really panned out.
2007: Troy Smith, Jordan Palmer, Drew Stanton
2008: Brian Brohm, Dennis Dixon, Eric Ainge, Colt Brennan, Andre Woodson,
2009: Nate Davis, Curtis Painter,
2010: outside of Clausen and McCoy, there was: John Skelton, Dan LeFevor, Tony Pike

And people thought that drafting any of the above QB's would solve our QB woes. There were other late round QB's as well, but I didn't include them because I don't recall people claiming we should draft them. They also haven't done anything in the league.

I would say the most successful of that bunch is a tossup between Troy Smith and Dennis Dixon. MAYBE one of those QB's will go on to be a starter for a while. Possibly. i don't like htose odds.

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 07:51 PM
2) I don't understand why people think we have to draft a 1st round QB and start him right away. YOu need to prep for the future. Draft a guy and sit him for 3 years if need be and then play him.
Because its the norm.

Most teams don't want to pay a kid the money he is gonna get and then let him grow from the bench the right way.


However, lets not draft a guy in the 6th and try to coach him up in 3 years. If the talent isn't there...the talent isn't there.
But you can expect to take a kid with the 6th pick and groom him, but I surely expect it to take more than 3 years. If the kid is talented enough that he can get NFL ready in 3 years he should have gone in the first 2 rounds. Anyone after that, 4-6 years.

Quick question........

What, if any, impact do you think the spread offense has had on how staffs evaluate and groom QB's coming into the league?

I think you can almost add 1 year to the timeline (whatever you think it is) to get a kid ready for the next level.

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 07:54 PM
I'm going to disagree with many of your assessments
Even after he said it was just an example? ;)

i_bleed_purple
12-08-2010, 07:56 PM
I'm going to disagree with many of your assessments
Even after he said it was just an example? ;)

yes, as he picked an example year, and I think his examples were off.

tarkenton10
12-08-2010, 08:05 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.

tarkenton10
12-08-2010, 08:07 PM
To be honest i still don't think that you guys get it.
I will try to say it again a bit more clearly.

1) Drafting any player is a crapshoot.
I hate when people point to the fact that X amount of Qbs have flamed out. Can't you say the same for WRs, DTs, DL, LBs, etc. In fact, you can!!!!! I wager the failure rate of first down Qbs are just as poor as most other positions in the draft.

Lets take a quick look at the 2006 draft.
1 Mario Williams Defensive End - Stud
2 Reggie Bush Running back - Unique back some might consider a bust
3 Vince Young Quarterback - Great win%
4 D'Brickashaw Ferguson Offensive Tackle - Bust for where he was drafted
5 Green Bay Packers A. J. Hawk Linebacker Bust
6 San Francisco 49ers Vernon Davis Tight End - Once a bust- Now a Stud
7 Oakland Raiders Michael Huff Safety - Bust
8 Buffalo Bills Donte Whitner Safety - Bust
9 Detroit Lions Ernie Sims Linebacker - Bust
10 Matt Leinart Quarterback - Bust
11 Jay Cutler Quarterback
12 Haloti Ngata Defensive Tackle
13 Kamerion Wimbley Defensive End - Bust
14 Brodrick Bunkley Defensive Tackle - Bust
15 Tye Hill Cornerback - Bust
16 Jason Allen Safety - Bust
17 Chad Greenway Linebacker
18 Bobby Carpenter Linebacker - Bust

Just an example but as you can see players that don't live up to the potential in all positions. However, QB is a need why not role the dice in the round with the most talent?

2) I don't understand why people think we have to draft a 1st round QB and start him right away. YOu need to prep for the future. Draft a guy and sit him for 3 years if need be and then play him. However, lets not draft a guy in the 6th and try to coach him up in 3 years. If the talent isn't there...the talent isn't there.

2) The argument is not so much about drafting a QB in the first round but more about the fact that QB is the most important position in sports but most of you all seem happy to continue to draft a 6th rounder in hopes of them being Tom Brady :laugh:.

Great post!!

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 08:22 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

NodakPaul
12-08-2010, 08:22 PM
I will admit to NOT having ready this entire thread, but I am curious as to what QB in 2011 some people think would be worthy of a first round pick? I honestly don't see any QBs who are locks to be selected in the 2011 first round. Dalton from TCU or Locker out of Washington have potential I guess...

I haven't been following college as closely this year, so please let me know who I am missing.

Caine
12-08-2010, 08:43 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

So now you're going to blame Tice for Childress not drafting a QB....

How many QB's do we have undere contract from the time Tice was here?

None.

After this season, how many from Chiller's term will we have under contract?

One. Joe Webb. A PROJECT QB!!!

So, how EXACTLY is this Tice's fault again?

And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.

Fact is, Chiller brought in crappy FA's to try and develop Jackson, and still FAILED to develop Jackson. Now, with Jackson on the cusp of leaving, Chiller has left us with NO ONE in a position to take over from a guy who might not even be a viable NFL QB.

And this is somehow Tice's fault?

When you pile it on, you pile it on THICK...

Caine

Infidel
12-08-2010, 08:46 PM
Caine said:



And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.

It's a factor.....but a quickly diminishing one.

In fact....it's almost gone.

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 09:15 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

So now you're going to blame Tice for Childress not drafting a QB....

How many QB's do we have undere contract from the time Tice was here?

None.

No, I'm not blaming Tice for Childresses problems, I'm blaming Tice and Green for not drafting QB's after the got Pepp.

I guess you can believe otherwise but the likes of Pepp, May, Torretta and Johnson over a that span is a hell of alot worse that Webb, Booty, Thygpen and Jackson IMHO.


After this season, how many from Chiller's term will we have under contract?

One. Joe Webb. A PROJECT QB!!!

So, how EXACTLY is this Tice's fault again?

And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.
Well who's fault is it? Santa Claus? Do I have to go back and bump the thread each and every week that lays out the reality of how it actually all fell?

Again, your best option was Carr and to trade for a QB that we might not even have been offered a chance to trade for in Schaub.

Unless of course you can come up with another option, you still haven't shown me what the staff, or as you contend, the Chiller should have done any different than they/he did.

Still waiting but I am sure you will only come up with Carr again.


Fact is, Chiller brought in crappy FA's to try and develop Jackson, and still FAILED to develop Jackson. Now, with Jackson on the cusp of leaving, Chiller has left us with NO ONE in a position to take over from a guy who might not even be a viable NFL QB.

And this is somehow Tice's fault?
Nope, you jumped in with both feet with Tice. All I said is that under his regime they didn't develop one QB. Not one. If they would have we wouldn't have had to run TJ out there long before he was ready now would we.

What we would have done is taken that QB that Tice didn't develop and put him on the field while TJ learned from the bench like he should have been doing.

Again, I ask, what other crappy FA's would have you brought in? Ohhhhhh, wait, Carr......LOL. :sick:



When you pile it on, you pile it on THICK...

Caine
Nope, not piling anything on. Just lost you in the conversation thats all. My apologies for not making understandable for you. I will do try harder next time......;)

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 09:20 PM
Caine said:



And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.

It's a factor.....but a quickly diminishing one.

In fact....it's almost gone.
How is it diminishing? We are watching coach Frazier continually say that if the Noodle wants to play he is gonna play.

No coach in his right mind would run that cat out there, unless of course he had a mandate from the owner.......

Wilf: Leslie, I am gonna be up front with you. I need stars on the field to sell tickets. Those yutz fans don't care about wins and losses. They only want to see guys with names they recognize.

The Chiller messed things up by getting rid of Moss and trying to bench the Noodle on me. You won't do that right?

Leslie: No boss. He'll play, even if I have to I will carry the Noodle out there myself.

Infidel
12-08-2010, 09:20 PM
Mardro said:



Nope, not piling anything on. Just lost you in the conversation thats all. My apologies for not making understandable for you. I will do try harder next time......

Oh oh......you just went to the bottom of a lot of spread sheets with that silly little attempt at condescension, my friend!

:D

tarkenton10
12-08-2010, 09:21 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

totally agree with that assessment. But in the end you work with what you have and he did not help his cause in any way other than drafting TJ and hoping he works out. Not very good vision for a HC of the NFL IMO my friend!! :blink:

Infidel
12-08-2010, 09:24 PM
Mardro said:


How is it diminishing? We are watching coach Frazier continually say that if Favre wants to play he is gonna play.

Now that is simply and totally untrue.

What Frazier actually said was that he will let the doctors and Favre decide whether or not Favre is ready.

He said he trusts Favre to be honest about it and it should be an easy decision to make.

HIS decision, not Favre's.

You tend to paraphrase to make people say what you want them to say, my friend.

You're going down on the spreadsheet with that kind of manipulation of facts, so you should try to do better.

:D

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 09:34 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

totally agree with that assessment. But in the end you work with what you have and he did not help his cause in any way other than drafting TJ and hoping he works out. Not very good vision for a HC of the NFL IMO my friend!! :blink:
Kindof funny when you look back at who we drafted and who was still available:

2000 Brady went at 199. We took Hovan at 25, Robbins at 55, Boireau at 56, Chapman at 88.
2001 Brees went at 32. We took Bennett at 27, Howard at 57, Kelly at 69.
2002 Garrard was there until 108. We took McKinnie at 7, Smith at 38, Offord at 70.
2003 I don't think there were any QB's worth taking in that class.
2004 Schaub was there at 90. We took Keneche at 20, Thomas at 48, Scott at 88.
2005 Rodgers was there at 24. We took Troy Williams at 7, Erasmus James at 18.

I mean seriously, if we would have just rolled the dice on any one of those cats look what we would have been like over the Chiller regime after Pepp flew the coop on us.

Infidel
12-08-2010, 09:36 PM
Mardro said:



I mean seriously, if we would have just rolled the dice on any one of those cats look what we would have been like over the Chiller regime after Pepp flew the coop on us.

No, that would just mean Childress had another talented athlete to screw up.

Caine
12-08-2010, 09:37 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

So now you're going to blame Tice for Childress not drafting a QB....

How many QB's do we have undere contract from the time Tice was here?

None.

No, I'm not blaming Tice for Childresses problems, I'm blaming Tice and Green for not drafting QB's after the got Pepp.

I guess you can believe otherwise but the likes of Pepp, May, Torretta and Johnson over a that span is a hell of alot worse that Webb, Booty, Thygpen and Jackson IMHO.


After this season, how many from Chiller's term will we have under contract?

One. Joe Webb. A PROJECT QB!!!

So, how EXACTLY is this Tice's fault again?

And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.
Well who's fault is it? Santa Claus? Do I have to go back and bump the thread each and every week that lays out the reality of how it actually all fell?

Again, your best option was Carr and to trade for a QB that we might not even have been offered a chance to trade for in Schaub.

Unless of course you can come up with another option, you still haven't shown me what the staff, or as you contend, the Chiller should have done any different than they/he did.

Still waiting but I am sure you will only come up with Carr again.


Fact is, Chiller brought in crappy FA's to try and develop Jackson, and still FAILED to develop Jackson. Now, with Jackson on the cusp of leaving, Chiller has left us with NO ONE in a position to take over from a guy who might not even be a viable NFL QB.

And this is somehow Tice's fault?
Nope, you jumped in with both feet with Tice. All I said is that under his regime they didn't develop one QB. Not one. If they would have we wouldn't have had to run TJ out there long before he was ready now would we.

What we would have done is taken that QB that Tice didn't develop and put him on the field while TJ learned from the bench like he should have been doing.

Again, I ask, what other crappy FA's would have you brought in? Ohhhhhh, wait, Carr......LOL. :sick:



When you pile it on, you pile it on THICK...

Caine
Nope, not piling anything on. Just lost you in the conversation thats all. My apologies for not making understandable for you. I will do try harder next time......;)

Here's the thing, do you know how Carr would have done here?

No.

Do you know how Garcia would have done here?

No.

Do you know how ANY OTHER QB would have done here?

Nope...none of us do.

Based upon what I saw then, and what I've seen since, I STILL maintain that Carr could have been successful here.

And that's just ONE name.

How well did Testaverde play in Tampa? But what happened once he got out of there and got a CHANCE? A 21 year career says quit a bit about a guy.

My POINT is that you judge all these guys on what they've done in different locations, but fail to factor in what those situations were.

Nope, Chiller blew this one BIG. Nobody else.

Caine

ndnorseman
12-08-2010, 10:02 PM
It remains to be seen where our spot in the 2011 Draft will be, but looking at our 1st round Draft picks over the last 4 years, I'm pretty confident in the Vikings staff's ability to pick out a winner.

On the other hand, it also remains to be seen whether or not the kid is actually gonna get to put on a Vikings uniform and play, so there's no sense in getting too riled up over this just yet.

Just sayin'...

Marrdro
12-08-2010, 10:04 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

So now you're going to blame Tice for Childress not drafting a QB....

How many QB's do we have undere contract from the time Tice was here?

None.

No, I'm not blaming Tice for Childresses problems, I'm blaming Tice and Green for not drafting QB's after the got Pepp.

I guess you can believe otherwise but the likes of Pepp, May, Torretta and Johnson over a that span is a hell of alot worse that Webb, Booty, Thygpen and Jackson IMHO.


After this season, how many from Chiller's term will we have under contract?

One. Joe Webb. A PROJECT QB!!!

So, how EXACTLY is this Tice's fault again?

And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.
Well who's fault is it? Santa Claus? Do I have to go back and bump the thread each and every week that lays out the reality of how it actually all fell?

Again, your best option was Carr and to trade for a QB that we might not even have been offered a chance to trade for in Schaub.

Unless of course you can come up with another option, you still haven't shown me what the staff, or as you contend, the Chiller should have done any different than they/he did.

Still waiting but I am sure you will only come up with Carr again.


Fact is, Chiller brought in crappy FA's to try and develop Jackson, and still FAILED to develop Jackson. Now, with Jackson on the cusp of leaving, Chiller has left us with NO ONE in a position to take over from a guy who might not even be a viable NFL QB.

And this is somehow Tice's fault?
Nope, you jumped in with both feet with Tice. All I said is that under his regime they didn't develop one QB. Not one. If they would have we wouldn't have had to run TJ out there long before he was ready now would we.

What we would have done is taken that QB that Tice didn't develop and put him on the field while TJ learned from the bench like he should have been doing.

Again, I ask, what other crappy FA's would have you brought in? Ohhhhhh, wait, Carr......LOL. :sick:



When you pile it on, you pile it on THICK...

Caine
Nope, not piling anything on. Just lost you in the conversation thats all. My apologies for not making understandable for you. I will do try harder next time......;)

Here's the thing, do you know how Carr would have done here?

No.

Do you know how Garcia would have done here?

No.

Do you know how ANY OTHER QB would have done here?

Nope...none of us do.

Based upon what I saw then, and what I've seen since, I STILL maintain that Carr could have been successful here.

And that's just ONE name.

How well did Testaverde play in Tampa? But what happened once he got out of there and got a CHANCE? A 21 year career says quit a bit about a guy.

My POINT is that you judge all these guys on what they've done in different locations, but fail to factor in what those situations were.

Nope, Chiller blew this one BIG. Nobody else.

Caine
But in the end, isn't that all we have to go on. What they eventually did or have done in the place they landed at?

To think that they would have done something different as a Viking would then mean that you are making the assumption that the staff would have improved thier play to a certain extent.

That would then mean that you believe that coach Rogers can develop a QB. Ohhhhhhh the HYPOCRISY of it all.......:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Infidel
12-08-2010, 10:11 PM
No hypocrisy, just the truth before twisting by Marrdro.

So, Marrdro.....you just did it again.

You are dropping precipitously on the spreadsheets today, my friend!

:)

tastywaves
12-08-2010, 10:45 PM
Of the 140 or so QB's taken since 2000, the following can be considered to be a cat who can play at the NFL level, 5 of which are first round picks, 15 of which weren't:(Read in 3 columns, year, number picked, player)

2010 1 Sam Bradford
2009 1 Matthew Stafford
5 Mark Sanchez
17 Josh Freeman
2008 3 Matt Ryan
18 Joe Flacco
2007 36 Kevin Kolb
2006 11 Jay Cutler
2005 24 Aaron Rodgers
106 Kyle Orton
230 Matt Cassel
2004 1 Eli Manning
4 Philip Rivers
11 Ben Roethlisberger
90 Matt Schaub
2003 1 Carson Palmer
2002 108 David Garrard
2001 1 Michael Vick
32 Drew Brees
2000 199 Tom Brady



I think you meant to say 5 #1 picks overall, not 5 first round picks. Looks to me like 13 of them were first rounders (Brees was actually the first pick in the second round).

I also think it's far too early to judge some of the more recent picks in terms of whether they can really "play at an NFL level". TJack's stats are similar to or better than that of Sanchez, Stafford, Kolb and Freeman. Jackson's development as a passer (IMO) has been hindered by Childress' harping on avoiding the mistake/turnover and the presence of a strong running game (something for instance that Detroit doesn't have, so they depend on Stafford to sling the ball a lot), and that some of those teams were already at the bottom and had nothing to lose by letting their young QB learn and develop while making plenty of mistakes.
You are correct. Thanks for saving me from my own self. I think I made the same good in the original post.

Thats what I get for doing math in public. B)

So, you're saying that 65% of the viable QB's drafted in the last 10 years were first round picks. Sounds like a pretty good argument to take one in the first round.
I think your math is as flawed as mind. 65% of the ones that worked out yes but what is the percentage of the ones that are viable vs the ones that were actually drafted and then, if you look at the number that have been successfull were we will draft (something below the middle of the draft) that number is alot lower.

You lost me. I thought this list represented the 20 QB's drafted in the last 10 years that have "worked out" over 144 QB's that were drafted in that period. This says that picking a QB after round 1 has a 7/144* (*minus the first rounders that wasn't given) chance of being someone that "works out". 65% (13/20) of the QB's that have worked out in the last 10 years were selected in round 1, while ~10% of QB's drafted outside of the first round "worked out". That's an order of magnitude difference in the odds of them "working out". BTW: 5 of those 13 that have worked out were in the middle to end of the first round vs 8 of 13 that were top 10 picks.

If you're arguing that it still may not make sense to draft a QB period because it ends up being a 50/50 proposition at best even for the first rounders, then fine. But statistically speaking, if you really want to draft a qb with the potential of "working out" then you should pick him early.

To say it differently, if you want to pick a future NFL QB that "works out" from the draft, you're odds are ~10x higher of that person coming from the first round vs. later rounds.

Disclaimer: This is going by the the data and assumptions presented by Marrdro in this thread.

i_bleed_purple
12-08-2010, 10:48 PM
Of the 140 or so QB's taken since 2000, the following can be considered to be a cat who can play at the NFL level, 5 of which are first round picks, 15 of which weren't:(Read in 3 columns, year, number picked, player)

2010 1 Sam Bradford
2009 1 Matthew Stafford
5 Mark Sanchez
17 Josh Freeman
2008 3 Matt Ryan
18 Joe Flacco
2007 36 Kevin Kolb
2006 11 Jay Cutler
2005 24 Aaron Rodgers
106 Kyle Orton
230 Matt Cassel
2004 1 Eli Manning
4 Philip Rivers
11 Ben Roethlisberger
90 Matt Schaub
2003 1 Carson Palmer
2002 108 David Garrard
2001 1 Michael Vick
32 Drew Brees
2000 199 Tom Brady



I think you meant to say 5 #1 picks overall, not 5 first round picks. Looks to me like 13 of them were first rounders (Brees was actually the first pick in the second round).

I also think it's far too early to judge some of the more recent picks in terms of whether they can really "play at an NFL level". TJack's stats are similar to or better than that of Sanchez, Stafford, Kolb and Freeman. Jackson's development as a passer (IMO) has been hindered by Childress' harping on avoiding the mistake/turnover and the presence of a strong running game (something for instance that Detroit doesn't have, so they depend on Stafford to sling the ball a lot), and that some of those teams were already at the bottom and had nothing to lose by letting their young QB learn and develop while making plenty of mistakes.
You are correct. Thanks for saving me from my own self. I think I made the same good in the original post.

Thats what I get for doing math in public. B)

So, you're saying that 65% of the viable QB's drafted in the last 10 years were first round picks. Sounds like a pretty good argument to take one in the first round.
I think your math is as flawed as mind. 65% of the ones that worked out yes but what is the percentage of the ones that are viable vs the ones that were actually drafted and then, if you look at the number that have been successfull were we will draft (something below the middle of the draft) that number is alot lower.

You lost me. I thought this list represented the 20 QB's drafted in the last 10 years that have "worked out" over 144 QB's that were drafted in that period. This says that picking a QB after round 1 has a 7/144 chance of being someone that "works out". 65% (13/20) of first round qb's in the last 10 years have "worked out", while ~7% of QB's drafted outside of the first round "worked out". That's an order of magnitude difference in the odds of them "working out". BTW: 5 of those 13 that have worked out were in the middle to end of the first round vs 8 of 13 that were top 10 picks.

If you're arguing that it still may not make sense to draft a QB period because it ends up being a 50/50 proposition at best even for the first rounders, then fine. But statistically speaking, if you really want to draft a qb with the potential of "working out" then you should pick him early.

To say it differently, if you want to pick a future NFL QB that "works out" from the draft, you're odds are 10x higher of that person coming from the first round vs. later rounds.

Disclaimer: This is going by the the data and assumptions presented by Marrdro in this thread.

I'm really bored, so I'll post the exact numbers for you. Give me a bit.

tastywaves
12-08-2010, 10:53 PM
Of the 140 or so QB's taken since 2000, the following can be considered to be a cat who can play at the NFL level, 5 of which are first round picks, 15 of which weren't:(Read in 3 columns, year, number picked, player)

2010 1 Sam Bradford
2009 1 Matthew Stafford
5 Mark Sanchez
17 Josh Freeman
2008 3 Matt Ryan
18 Joe Flacco
2007 36 Kevin Kolb
2006 11 Jay Cutler
2005 24 Aaron Rodgers
106 Kyle Orton
230 Matt Cassel
2004 1 Eli Manning
4 Philip Rivers
11 Ben Roethlisberger
90 Matt Schaub
2003 1 Carson Palmer
2002 108 David Garrard
2001 1 Michael Vick
32 Drew Brees
2000 199 Tom Brady



I think you meant to say 5 #1 picks overall, not 5 first round picks. Looks to me like 13 of them were first rounders (Brees was actually the first pick in the second round).

I also think it's far too early to judge some of the more recent picks in terms of whether they can really "play at an NFL level". TJack's stats are similar to or better than that of Sanchez, Stafford, Kolb and Freeman. Jackson's development as a passer (IMO) has been hindered by Childress' harping on avoiding the mistake/turnover and the presence of a strong running game (something for instance that Detroit doesn't have, so they depend on Stafford to sling the ball a lot), and that some of those teams were already at the bottom and had nothing to lose by letting their young QB learn and develop while making plenty of mistakes.
You are correct. Thanks for saving me from my own self. I think I made the same good in the original post.

Thats what I get for doing math in public. B)

So, you're saying that 65% of the viable QB's drafted in the last 10 years were first round picks. Sounds like a pretty good argument to take one in the first round.
I think your math is as flawed as mind. 65% of the ones that worked out yes but what is the percentage of the ones that are viable vs the ones that were actually drafted and then, if you look at the number that have been successfull were we will draft (something below the middle of the draft) that number is alot lower.

You lost me. I thought this list represented the 20 QB's drafted in the last 10 years that have "worked out" over 144 QB's that were drafted in that period. This says that picking a QB after round 1 has a 7/144 chance of being someone that "works out". 65% (13/20) of first round qb's in the last 10 years have "worked out", while ~7% of QB's drafted outside of the first round "worked out". That's an order of magnitude difference in the odds of them "working out". BTW: 5 of those 13 that have worked out were in the middle to end of the first round vs 8 of 13 that were top 10 picks.

If you're arguing that it still may not make sense to draft a QB period because it ends up being a 50/50 proposition at best even for the first rounders, then fine. But statistically speaking, if you really want to draft a qb with the potential of "working out" then you should pick him early.

To say it differently, if you want to pick a future NFL QB that "works out" from the draft, you're odds are 10x higher of that person coming from the first round vs. later rounds.

Disclaimer: This is going by the the data and assumptions presented by Marrdro in this thread.

I'm really bored, so I'll post the exact numbers for you. Give me a bit.

I edited my post a bit, trying to reduce some confusion.

Dibbzz
12-08-2010, 11:09 PM
Alright, well I would like to get this thread back on topic. I was watching Cam Newton's so called "comeback drive" and, once again, did not see what these national media analysts see in the kid. The throws he made on the winning drive did not impress me much. Hell, Jackson can make those dump-off passes. Why does everyone seem to have a huge boner for Cam Newton? Seriously, if we're going to draft him solely based on his athleticism then what's the point? We already have Jackson and Webb with similar (if not better) skill sets. Long story short he's overrated.

Why not take a chance at a quarterback whose skill set has historically proved more successful in the NFL like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCuu6UyO3B0

Ponder has had a very good season statistically. I was disappointed he didn't play in the ACC Championship game, but hopefully his rest will be for the better and he has a good outing in the Chik-Fil-A Bowl. He doesn't have the rocket arm like Mallett but he makes good decisions. Like I posted before, if the Vikings wanted they could easily take the BPA in round one then nab Ponder in round two easily.


Other QB options would be Ryan Mallett and, of course, trading the Panthers' soon-to-be first overall pick to draft Andrew Luck. As for the argument of draft busts by quarterbacks: it's always going to be a crap shoot, but that doesn't mean you don't ever try and take those risks associated with drafting a quarterback to better your team. Hell, you could make that argument about any position (then why even have a draft at all?).

My point is drafting a quarterback is much more suitable for the Vikings since we are likely going to have a new head coach next season. Even if Frazier gets the starting job, the Vikings still should draft a quarterback because:
a) It will be more cost efficient than locking up a FA or trading for a so-called "established" QB ala Kevin Kolbb given the nature of the uncertainty of the CBA
b) It allows the fanbase to get rejuvenated and perception-wise is a fresh start to a new regime. New regimes (quoting Walterfootball here) mean new quarterbacks, plain and simple. Drafting a new QB for the future sounds a hell of a lot sexier than trading for Kolbb. It means we have a fresh start. Kolbb has already gotten a decent chance of showing the NFL what he can do, and I wasn't impressed. Apparently Andy Reid agrees.

So to answer the question of the title of this thread, I can't think of a reason why we shouldn't. Given our track record of quarterbacks recently it makes perfect since why we should draft a QB. I just hope we take one that more-or-less is able to go right away and not a "project" like Newton. Even if there will be growing pains with a rookie we should draft one with the intention of starting him right away so he can gain the confidence of his coaches, teammates and fans. If whomever we draft doesn't pan out, then he doesn't pan out and we can look at other options at that point, but I think with at least the upcoming season we should draft a quarterback with the intention of starting him in 2011.

Caine
12-08-2010, 11:21 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

So now you're going to blame Tice for Childress not drafting a QB....

How many QB's do we have undere contract from the time Tice was here?

None.

No, I'm not blaming Tice for Childresses problems, I'm blaming Tice and Green for not drafting QB's after the got Pepp.

I guess you can believe otherwise but the likes of Pepp, May, Torretta and Johnson over a that span is a hell of alot worse that Webb, Booty, Thygpen and Jackson IMHO.


After this season, how many from Chiller's term will we have under contract?

One. Joe Webb. A PROJECT QB!!!

So, how EXACTLY is this Tice's fault again?

And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.
Well who's fault is it? Santa Claus? Do I have to go back and bump the thread each and every week that lays out the reality of how it actually all fell?

Again, your best option was Carr and to trade for a QB that we might not even have been offered a chance to trade for in Schaub.

Unless of course you can come up with another option, you still haven't shown me what the staff, or as you contend, the Chiller should have done any different than they/he did.

Still waiting but I am sure you will only come up with Carr again.


Fact is, Chiller brought in crappy FA's to try and develop Jackson, and still FAILED to develop Jackson. Now, with Jackson on the cusp of leaving, Chiller has left us with NO ONE in a position to take over from a guy who might not even be a viable NFL QB.

And this is somehow Tice's fault?
Nope, you jumped in with both feet with Tice. All I said is that under his regime they didn't develop one QB. Not one. If they would have we wouldn't have had to run TJ out there long before he was ready now would we.

What we would have done is taken that QB that Tice didn't develop and put him on the field while TJ learned from the bench like he should have been doing.

Again, I ask, what other crappy FA's would have you brought in? Ohhhhhh, wait, Carr......LOL. :sick:



When you pile it on, you pile it on THICK...

Caine
Nope, not piling anything on. Just lost you in the conversation thats all. My apologies for not making understandable for you. I will do try harder next time......;)

Here's the thing, do you know how Carr would have done here?

No.

Do you know how Garcia would have done here?

No.

Do you know how ANY OTHER QB would have done here?

Nope...none of us do.

Based upon what I saw then, and what I've seen since, I STILL maintain that Carr could have been successful here.

And that's just ONE name.

How well did Testaverde play in Tampa? But what happened once he got out of there and got a CHANCE? A 21 year career says quit a bit about a guy.

My POINT is that you judge all these guys on what they've done in different locations, but fail to factor in what those situations were.

Nope, Chiller blew this one BIG. Nobody else.

Caine
But in the end, isn't that all we have to go on. What they eventually did or have done in the place they landed at?

To think that they would have done something different as a Viking would then mean that you are making the assumption that the staff would have improved thier play to a certain extent.

That would then mean that you believe that coach Rogers can develop a QB. Ohhhhhhh the HYPOCRISY of it all.......:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

From where I sit, Carr didn't need the development Jackson did. Neither did Garcia, Schaub, or any of the other potential FA acquisitions. Most of them had already weathered a few NFL seasons and had proven they could play...to some degree.

By comparison, Jackson had played 3 seasons...and we went out and begged Favre to unretire.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement of our strength of roster...


...and to make it worse, we have NO viable QB options after this season. NONE.

And this isn't Chiller's fault how? I don't care how thin the QB market has been, there are 20+ teams ion the NFL that managed to find one they like....Chiller couldn't.

Well, he couldn't find one he liked that could actually play...

Caine

purplepat
12-08-2010, 11:30 PM
OK, my final post in this thread, will try to be brief, expect this subject to be much discussed later.

IMO...

Vikings should re-sign Jackson to be the starting QB in 2011.

Vikings should not mortgage the next two drafts, or trade away quality pieces, for a single pick in this year's 1st round.

If one of the top QB choices falls to them in the 1st, Vikes should draft him. If Vikes must trade up, no more than the Vikes 2011 1st rounder and one other pick in the top 3 rounds of the 2011 or 2012 drafts (one or two extra picks thrown in beyond the 3rd round are chump change). Trading down and acquiring extra picks would be even better. No reaches!

Said rookie draftee should only start in 2011 if he clearly beats out Jackson in camp for the position. None of this "have to play the guy because we are paying him X".

Again, no reaches! Brady Quinn is a bust. Clausen is proving weekly he wasn't worthy of being a 1st round pick and is probably not going to be a quality starting QB. Tebow will probably be a bust. Rodgers and Flacco are the only two first round QBs drafted in the past ten years taken after #11 that are demonstratively better than Jackson.

i_bleed_purple
12-08-2010, 11:53 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.

Purple Floyd
12-09-2010, 02:31 AM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

So now you're going to blame Tice for Childress not drafting a QB....

How many QB's do we have undere contract from the time Tice was here?

None.

No, I'm not blaming Tice for Childresses problems, I'm blaming Tice and Green for not drafting QB's after the got Pepp.

I guess you can believe otherwise but the likes of Pepp, May, Torretta and Johnson over a that span is a hell of alot worse that Webb, Booty, Thygpen and Jackson IMHO.


After this season, how many from Chiller's term will we have under contract?

One. Joe Webb. A PROJECT QB!!!

So, how EXACTLY is this Tice's fault again?

And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.
Well who's fault is it? Santa Claus? Do I have to go back and bump the thread each and every week that lays out the reality of how it actually all fell?

Again, your best option was Carr and to trade for a QB that we might not even have been offered a chance to trade for in Schaub.

Unless of course you can come up with another option, you still haven't shown me what the staff, or as you contend, the Chiller should have done any different than they/he did.

Still waiting but I am sure you will only come up with Carr again.


Fact is, Chiller brought in crappy FA's to try and develop Jackson, and still FAILED to develop Jackson. Now, with Jackson on the cusp of leaving, Chiller has left us with NO ONE in a position to take over from a guy who might not even be a viable NFL QB.

And this is somehow Tice's fault?
Nope, you jumped in with both feet with Tice. All I said is that under his regime they didn't develop one QB. Not one. If they would have we wouldn't have had to run TJ out there long before he was ready now would we.

What we would have done is taken that QB that Tice didn't develop and put him on the field while TJ learned from the bench like he should have been doing.

Again, I ask, what other crappy FA's would have you brought in? Ohhhhhh, wait, Carr......LOL. :sick:



When you pile it on, you pile it on THICK...

Caine
Nope, not piling anything on. Just lost you in the conversation thats all. My apologies for not making understandable for you. I will do try harder next time......;)

Here's the thing, do you know how Carr would have done here?

No.

Do you know how Garcia would have done here?

No.

Do you know how ANY OTHER QB would have done here?

Nope...none of us do.

Based upon what I saw then, and what I've seen since, I STILL maintain that Carr could have been successful here.

And that's just ONE name.

How well did Testaverde play in Tampa? But what happened once he got out of there and got a CHANCE? A 21 year career says quit a bit about a guy.

My POINT is that you judge all these guys on what they've done in different locations, but fail to factor in what those situations were.

Nope, Chiller blew this one BIG. Nobody else.

Caine

Under the KAO and Chiller?

They would have flopped. Big Time.

kevoncox
12-09-2010, 04:17 AM
2) I don't understand why people think we have to draft a 1st round QB and start him right away. YOu need to prep for the future. Draft a guy and sit him for 3 years if need be and then play him.
Because its the norm.

Most teams don't want to pay a kid the money he is gonna get and then let him grow from the bench the right way.


However, lets not draft a guy in the 6th and try to coach him up in 3 years. If the talent isn't there...the talent isn't there.
But you can expect to take a kid with the 6th pick and groom him, but I surely expect it to take more than 3 years. If the kid is talented enough that he can get NFL ready in 3 years he should have gone in the first 2 rounds. Anyone after that, 4-6 years.

Quick question........

What, if any, impact do you think the spread offense has had on how staffs evaluate and groom QB's coming into the league?

I think you can almost add 1 year to the timeline (whatever you think it is) to get a kid ready for the next level.

Hope you see this Marr,
It's a Push. Why do you ask? I'm glad you did.

On one hand you have the fact that a lot of kids now have difficulty coming in to the league and taking drop backs. As you have pointed out, in the spread your eyes are on the defense constantly and its easier to know what the defense is doing. So you lose a good amount of coaching on drop backs. However, the NFL has changed some what into a spread offense league. You don't really think Brady is a Pro offense Qb do you? Hell, I'll wager that 65% of his snaps are from the gun. There are also others that fit this bill as well, Rodger being one of them. When you add this to the fact that players are a bit more polished in other aspect of the game than some of the other predecessors... i think you get a push. I will also like the add that the pro offense has never dominated college football. Do you remember the option? How did all of those option Qbs turn into pro Qbs? Coaching.

Caine
12-09-2010, 02:29 PM
[quote="singersp" #1082163][quote="Caine" #1082133] Mostly because Chiller's stupidity in NOT getting a QB this season has left us in the lurch.
Caine
Who should have he got?

By the way, if memory serves he had the Noodle under contract and a owner who wanted the Noodle to play and you with the exception of maybe Mars, was the most excited PPO'r that he was coming back.

I was excited that Favre was coming back but that doesn't change the fact that chilly never addressed the position long term. There were several QBs I liked last year. I think McCoy is going to be a good QB maybe not great but you find very few Mannings. The kid out of Central Michigan, his name escapes me but I think in a few years he could be realy good also.
I hear ya Tark, but if you go back and look a few posts back, I listed all the QB's.

Liking a guy like McCoy or Lefeavor (I think his name was) doesn't alleviate the fact that a team in need of a QB didn't get one of those two, they went out and got Richard Bartel last night to add depth.....

Will McCoy work out? Possibly and I could have added him to the list, but as of right now he isn't working out that great, but I will give him props that he is better than Clausen right now. B)

I know you listed them and they are not very good. But if Chilly did the right thing we would have potential in the wings. McCoy is pretty good for a rookie. Do you remember how Manning fared his rookie year? He was not good. We still should have drafted a QB last year (And you are right his name was Lefeavor).

Now even if we want TJ we will have to pay for him. And the odds of him staying are not good. So the only one under contract is Webb. Chilly ran this ship like a rich kid that just got his inheritance, now we have to pay for it.
Comeon Tark, you know it wasn't just the Chiller making those decisions. Truth of the matter is, we are in the QB mess we are in cause of the previous staffs lack of efforts to draft and grow QB's and the limited options that have been out there over this regimes tenure.

Once they had Pepp they thought all things were good when in fact they should have been drafting a kid each and every year in an effort to grow one just in case Pepp decided to pull, well, a Pepp.

We've been trying to catch up ever since and the talent pool just hasn't been there to make it very easy.

So now you're going to blame Tice for Childress not drafting a QB....

How many QB's do we have undere contract from the time Tice was here?

None.

No, I'm not blaming Tice for Childresses problems, I'm blaming Tice and Green for not drafting QB's after the got Pepp.

I guess you can believe otherwise but the likes of Pepp, May, Torretta and Johnson over a that span is a hell of alot worse that Webb, Booty, Thygpen and Jackson IMHO.


After this season, how many from Chiller's term will we have under contract?

One. Joe Webb. A PROJECT QB!!!

So, how EXACTLY is this Tice's fault again?

And PLEASE don't try and say it's Wilf's fault because HE is the one insisting on playing Favre...that's complete horse shit.
Well who's fault is it? Santa Claus? Do I have to go back and bump the thread each and every week that lays out the reality of how it actually all fell?

Again, your best option was Carr and to trade for a QB that we might not even have been offered a chance to trade for in Schaub.

Unless of course you can come up with another option, you still haven't shown me what the staff, or as you contend, the Chiller should have done any different than they/he did.

Still waiting but I am sure you will only come up with Carr again.


Fact is, Chiller brought in crappy FA's to try and develop Jackson, and still FAILED to develop Jackson. Now, with Jackson on the cusp of leaving, Chiller has left us with NO ONE in a position to take over from a guy who might not even be a viable NFL QB.

And this is somehow Tice's fault?
Nope, you jumped in with both feet with Tice. All I said is that under his regime they didn't develop one QB. Not one. If they would have we wouldn't have had to run TJ out there long before he was ready now would we.

What we would have done is taken that QB that Tice didn't develop and put him on the field while TJ learned from the bench like he should have been doing.

Again, I ask, what other crappy FA's would have you brought in? Ohhhhhh, wait, Carr......LOL. :sick:



When you pile it on, you pile it on THICK...

Caine
Nope, not piling anything on. Just lost you in the conversation thats all. My apologies for not making understandable for you. I will do try harder next time......;)

Here's the thing, do you know how Carr would have done here?

No.

Do you know how Garcia would have done here?

No.

Do you know how ANY OTHER QB would have done here?

Nope...none of us do.

Based upon what I saw then, and what I've seen since, I STILL maintain that Carr could have been successful here.

And that's just ONE name.

How well did Testaverde play in Tampa? But what happened once he got out of there and got a CHANCE? A 21 year career says quit a bit about a guy.

My POINT is that you judge all these guys on what they've done in different locations, but fail to factor in what those situations were.

Nope, Chiller blew this one BIG. Nobody else.

Caine

Under the KAO and Chiller?

They would have flopped. Big Time.

Great point.....




I got nothin....

Caine

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 02:31 PM
2) I don't understand why people think we have to draft a 1st round QB and start him right away. YOu need to prep for the future. Draft a guy and sit him for 3 years if need be and then play him.
Because its the norm.

Most teams don't want to pay a kid the money he is gonna get and then let him grow from the bench the right way.


However, lets not draft a guy in the 6th and try to coach him up in 3 years. If the talent isn't there...the talent isn't there.
But you can expect to take a kid with the 6th pick and groom him, but I surely expect it to take more than 3 years. If the kid is talented enough that he can get NFL ready in 3 years he should have gone in the first 2 rounds. Anyone after that, 4-6 years.

Quick question........

What, if any, impact do you think the spread offense has had on how staffs evaluate and groom QB's coming into the league?

I think you can almost add 1 year to the timeline (whatever you think it is) to get a kid ready for the next level.

Hope you see this Marr,
It's a Push. Why do you ask? I'm glad you did.


Ha, you know that if I ask a question I'm gonna go find your answer. Especially from someone who played at the next level my friend. Remember, I'm here to learn as well.....Thanks for answering......;)



On one hand you have the fact that a lot of kids now have difficulty coming in to the league and taking drop backs. As you have pointed out, in the spread your eyes are on the defense constantly and its easier to know what the defense is doing. So you lose a good amount of coaching on drop backs. However, the NFL has changed some what into a spread offense league. You don't really think Brady is a Pro offense Qb do you? Hell, I'll wager that 65% of his snaps are from the gun.
But those snaps are high, not cause they want to run the spread, but are driven by the running style they now employ.

For the most part, even guys like Brady and Peyton, who run the spread more than a traditional NFL offense, can get under center if the situation warrants/dictates.

Young guys coming out now can't. Again, it limits what the defense has to worry about wouldn't you agree?



There are also others that fit this bill as well, Rodger being one of them. When you add this to the fact that players are a bit more polished in other aspect of the game than some of the other predecessors... i think you get a push.
A push? I guess I can see that, however, using Rodgers as the example, it seems to me that it took 4 years for them to make sure that he could do both aspects because he wasn't polished in the one he needed the most.


I will also like the add that the pro offense has never dominated college football. Do you remember the option? How did all of those option Qbs turn into pro Qbs? Coaching.
I agree, it never has, but I have never seen it as bad as it is now. Even when they ran the option the QB got up under center, read the defense, made his call, (they did that back then) and ran the play, often times turning his back to the defense as he handed it off.

As to the coaching part. I am not contending that pro staffs can't train them. I think they can, I am asking if you think, that because they need to teach them that basic aspect of the game that it takes longer to groom/train one?

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 02:33 PM
Great point.....

I got nothin....

Caine
Yes you do, but your like me, when they get to long you'll just wait for me to say it again in a smaller post someplace were its easier to reply. ;)

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 02:35 PM
Under the KAO and Chiller?

They would have flopped. Big Time.
Just like they did with thier first and second teams. I suppose those staffs and schemes suck as well and it isn't the players.

kevoncox
12-09-2010, 03:47 PM
But those snaps are high, not cause they want to run the spread, but are driven by the running style they now employ.
For the most part, even guys like Brady and Peyton, who run the spread more than a traditional NFL offense, can get under center if the situation warrants/dictates.
Young guys coming out now can't. Again, it limits what the defense has to worry about wouldn't you agree?

Touche’,
I agree that Brady can get under center and toss the rock. However, my point is that the league is transitioning away from a run first, play action heavy offense. The advantages that the offense has gained over the years have made it possible for offense to simply line up and toss the rock. With Wrs on the big end of the spectrum at 6’4 & 6’5 and CBs still under 6’. The reliance of the run is disappearing and with it the traditional 3&5 step drop. Teams like the Pats are revolutionizing the game and the draw play will soon become the average running play. Look at the counter? Its cone from nearly every NFL playbook. The days of power, blast and counter trey are gone.


A push? I guess I can see that, however, using Rodgers as the example, it seems to me that it took 4 years for them to make sure that he could do both aspects because he wasn't polished in the one he needed the most.

We may never know. I mean the noodle could have been holding him back a year or two.


I agree, it never has, but I have never seen it as bad as it is now. Even when they ran the option the QB got up under center, read the defense, made his call, (they did that back then) and ran the play, often times turning his back to the defense as he handed it off.
As to the coaching part. I am not contending that pro staffs can't train them. I think they can, I am asking if you think, that because they need to teach them that basic aspect of the game that it takes longer to groom/train one?
I hear you but I am saying that you are shaving time off of the training in other aspects. Poise, touch and other aspects are being refined at other levels of the game. So instead of a rookie coming into the league needing coaching up in multiple areas of the NFL game, most are coming in with a few less deficiencies but a probably reading defenses from the drop back. That's why i said its a push! You aren't loosing or gaining time training. It's just that different aspects are in need of training.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 04:02 PM
Damn, don't ya just love a football discussion........

On a side note, you gonna get down here for a game this year?




But those snaps are high, not cause they want to run the spread, but are driven by the running style they now employ.
For the most part, even guys like Brady and Peyton, who run the spread more than a traditional NFL offense, can get under center if the situation warrants/dictates.
Young guys coming out now can't. Again, it limits what the defense has to worry about wouldn't you agree?

Touche’,
I agree that Brady can get under center and toss the rock. However, my point is that the league is transitioning away from a run first, play action heavy offense. The advantages that the offense has gained over the years have made it possible for offense to simply line up and toss the rock. With Wrs on the big end of the spectrum at 6’4 & 6’5 and CBs still under 6’. The reliance of the run is disappearing and with it the traditional 3&5 step drop. Teams like the Pats are revolutionizing the game and the draw play will soon become the average running play. Look at the counter? Its cone from nearly every NFL playbook. The days of power, blast and counter trey are gone.

I hear ya, but you could also say that the trend to go to bigger recievers is also contributing to the running game. No way cats like AD and Chris Johnson get yards like they do without alot of help from those bigger WR's blocking.

Additionally, if you look at the Pats this year, those cats just seem to get smaller and smaller each game, including thier RB's and the can still run "Power Ball" if they need to chew the clock.

I need to go back and re-watch the Jets/Pats game. I think I saw a few counters in there.....Might not be as dead as you contend. ;)

What I find interesting in what the Pats are doing is that they can put up 300 yards passing and still get over 100 yards on the ground. Again, that isn't completely a "Spread" attack.




A push? I guess I can see that, however, using Rodgers as the example, it seems to me that it took 4 years for them to make sure that he could do both aspects because he wasn't polished in the one he needed the most.

We may never know. I mean the noodle could have been holding him back a year or two.
I think they were so ready to move on from the Noodle that they would have done it sooner rather than later. In short, TT wasn't gonna hang it out there if he wasn't sure that the coaches had Rodgers ready.

In short, if he would have been ready the year before, I think they would have moved on. My guess, he wasn't ready.




I agree, it never has, but I have never seen it as bad as it is now. Even when they ran the option the QB got up under center, read the defense, made his call, (they did that back then) and ran the play, often times turning his back to the defense as he handed it off.
As to the coaching part. I am not contending that pro staffs can't train them. I think they can, I am asking if you think, that because they need to teach them that basic aspect of the game that it takes longer to groom/train one?
I hear you but I am saying that you are shaving time off of the training in other aspects. Poise, touch and other aspects are being refined at other levels of the game. So instead of a rookie coming into the league needing coaching up in multiple areas of the NFL game, most are coming in with a few less deficiencies but a probably reading defenses from the drop back. That's why i said its a push! You aren't loosing or gaining time training. It's just that different aspects are in need of training.
OK, I can track with that to a point. I guess you could almost say that the passing game is the hardest to teach and the fact that these kids are throwing more at the collegiate level might shorten that aspect a bit.

Problem still gets back to reading defenses though. I still see that as the biggest issue the young kids seem to be having, right next to getting under center. Heck, Tebow, last time I watched, was still having probs with it a bit.

Again, good stuff my friend. We need more of this on here. ;)

kevoncox
12-09-2010, 04:50 PM
Damn, don't ya just love a football discussion........
On a side note, you gonna get down here for a game this year?

Nope, no plans to. However, I was at the skins game. I was hoping we would run into each other and give those Deadskins fans a good tongue lashing. However, I didn’t see anyone.


I hear ya, but you could also say that the trend to go to bigger recievers is also contributing to the running game. No way cats like AD and Chris Johnson get yards like they do without alot of help from those bigger WR's blocking.

Never thought about that aspect but then you can say that we are also losing the TE. Now guys are coming out as just beefed up WRS. The run game in all seems to be dying. Big Wrs on the outside won’t help if your TE is a pass catcher like Hernandez. Hey there was some kid on her pleading for the Vikings to trade up and grab the kid in the 4th. Who was he?



Additionally, if you look at the Pats this year, those cats just seem to get smaller and smaller each game, including thier RB's and the can still run "Power Ball" if they need to chew the clock.
I need to go back and re-watch the Jets/Pats game. I think I saw a few counters in there.....Might not be as dead as you contend. ;)
What I find interesting in what the Pats are doing is that they can put up 300 yards passing and still get over 100 yards on the ground. Again, that isn't completely a "Spread" attack.

Its call elite QB play Marr. That’s why we need to take a shot at one in the earlier rounds. It’s not that hard when you get up early to pound the ball. I think if we had an elite QB we would jump out on teams early and get our running yards late in the game.


In short, if he would have been ready the year before, I think they would have moved on. My guess, he wasn't ready.
We can’t even get the Noodle to end the streak…Do you really think TT, a new coach, would have been able to bench Farve in Green bay? Not freaking likely. I think the organization wanted to move on bu the Noodle tied their hands. Luckily he retired and they were able to move on (not before he unretired and demanded his job back). If TT had said, AR is the starter, there would have been rioting in the streets.
[quote="Marrdro" #1082425]
OK, I can track with that to a point. I guess you could almost say that the passing game is the hardest to teach and the fact that these kids are throwing more at the collegiate level might shorten that aspect a bit.
Problem still gets back to reading defenses though. I still see that as the biggest issue the young kids seem to be having, right next to getting under center. Heck, Tebow, last time I watched, was still having probs with it a bit.
Again, good stuff my friend. We need more of this on here. ;)
For a while this board was very uninteresting to me. It just became a weekly shouting match between Pro Favre and Anti Farve Supporters. We really stop talking football after the draft.
Question, which Qbs are you looking forward to seeing just off of the Buzz. I can’t wait to see Newton throw the ball some more. People are already calling him the greatest NCAA player of all time. He’s rush for 150 yards 5+ times this season. 20+ rushing TDs 20 + passing Shows poise and simply looks like a man among boys out there.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 05:28 PM
Nope, no plans to. However, I was at the skins game. I was hoping we would run into each other and give those Deadskins fans a good tongue lashing. However, I didn’t see anyone.

Truth of the matter is I turned down tickets Cajun had, tickets my friend had, tickets a season ticket holder had and some sky box tickets for $275.

The wedding this summer and hunting season have put a crimp in my style this year.




I hear ya, but you could also say that the trend to go to bigger recievers is also contributing to the running game. No way cats like AD and Chris Johnson get yards like they do without alot of help from those bigger WR's blocking.

Never thought about that aspect but then you can say that we are also losing the TE. Now guys are coming out as just beefed up WRS. The run game in all seems to be dying. Big Wrs on the outside won’t help if your TE is a pass catcher like Hernandez. Hey there was some kid on her pleading for the Vikings to trade up and grab the kid in the 4th. Who was he?
You can say the same thing for the FB position that you can for the TE position I guess.

I still say that teams will always look to have a "Inline TE" that can block and catch rather than a bunch of the Hybrids as they really telegraph what your trying to do.

You above all people know that the game is predicated on matchups and disguising how you are going to get those matchups. When you run a TE out there that can only catch, you are basically telling the defense what the matchup is and aren't fooling anybody.




Additionally, if you look at the Pats this year, those cats just seem to get smaller and smaller each game, including thier RB's and the can still run "Power Ball" if they need to chew the clock.
I need to go back and re-watch the Jets/Pats game. I think I saw a few counters in there.....Might not be as dead as you contend. ;)
What I find interesting in what the Pats are doing is that they can put up 300 yards passing and still get over 100 yards on the ground. Again, that isn't completely a "Spread" attack.

Its call elite QB play Marr. That’s why we need to take a shot at one in the earlier rounds. It’s not that hard when you get up early to pound the ball. I think if we had an elite QB we would jump out on teams early and get our running yards late in the game.
Don't want to correct you, but for me, its really called a balance attack that supports you can dictating to the defense and making them react instead of them dictating to you.

By the way, that "Elite" cat on that side of the ball wasn't a first round pick, however, I do agree. We should take one if we can get one, but if we are picking someplace after 10, we aren't gonna have a very good chance of landing one.

Sure, we will get a guy with first round talent, but it will be someone you will have to groom over a period of time (ala Rodgers) because he has some flaw in his game that made him drop to you in the first place.

Again, picking your spots, as a wise man once said on here.....With the predominance of the teams ahead of us needing QB help, it probably won't be the right spot. ;)





In short, if he would have been ready the year before, I think they would have moved on. My guess, he wasn't ready.
We can’t even get the Noodle to end the streak…Do you really think TT, a new coach, would have been able to bench Farve in Green bay? Not freaking likely. I think the organization wanted to move on bu the Noodle tied their hands. Luckily he retired and they were able to move on (not before he unretired and demanded his job back). If TT had said, AR is the starter, there would have been rioting in the streets.
We can't get him to break the streak cause of our owner. Atleast thats my contention. TT really didn't have that issue to deal with.

His issue was gonna be with the "Owners" who are the fans up there. If he would have gaffed and done it before Rodgers was ready, life would have been heck for the short period before he was fired.




OK, I can track with that to a point. I guess you could almost say that the passing game is the hardest to teach and the fact that these kids are throwing more at the collegiate level might shorten that aspect a bit.
Problem still gets back to reading defenses though. I still see that as the biggest issue the young kids seem to be having, right next to getting under center. Heck, Tebow, last time I watched, was still having probs with it a bit.
Again, good stuff my friend. We need more of this on here. ;)
For a while this board was very uninteresting to me. It just became a weekly shouting match between Pro Favre and Anti Farve Supporters. We really stop talking football after the draft.
The answer is, you don't leave, you keep talking ball with the ones who really want to talk ball and irritate the yutz's who don't know any better.

In the end, its almost over. All those chuckleheads will leave shortly and PPO will go back the place we all joined and support it for.

The best place to talk footbal, especially Vikings football.


Question, which Qbs are you looking forward to seeing just off of the Buzz. I can’t wait to see Newton throw the ball some more. People are already calling him the greatest NCAA player of all time. He’s rush for 150 yards 5+ times this season. 20+ rushing TDs 20 + passing Shows poise and simply looks like a man among boys out there.
I've watched all of the top guys atleast twice except for Newton. Only saw him once (last weekend).

He is the only one I am really impressed with followed by Luck. Only reason I really like Luck second is because the HC and the system. Truth of the matter is he looked average at best both times I saw him.

Probably start looking harder at team needs in a couple of weeks and then I will start looking at the players trying to figure out what players best fit those needs.

I can't wait for "Ourlads" to send out thier scouting report. Thats when I really get into it.

kevoncox
12-09-2010, 06:00 PM
I think teams aren't concerned about tipping their hands anymore. With TEs being nothing more than glorified WRs but bigger. They are being matched up with safeties and not LBs. Teams are still able to run the ball due to the transition to these matachups. It does back to dictating to the defense what you're going to do. If the Jets placed a LB on Hernandez, the Pats ran a pass. If they placed a safety on him, they ran the ball.

I was having a conversation with my friend about the teams ahead of us and their needs. I believe that a lot of them are not going to look QB.

I expect us to win out or possible loose to the eagles.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 06:47 PM
I think teams aren't concerned about tipping their hands anymore. With TEs being nothing more than glorified WRs but bigger. They are being matched up with safeties and not LBs. Teams are still able to run the ball due to the transition to these matachups. It does back to dictating to the defense what you're going to do. If the Jets placed a LB on Hernandez, the Pats ran a pass. If they placed a safety on him, they ran the ball.

I was having a conversation with my friend about the teams ahead of us and their needs. I believe that a lot of them are not going to look QB.

I expect us to win out or possible loose to the eagles.

Depending on how you look at it. If everything goes well, we will probaby get the 5th best QB in this draft.

Carolina (1-11) - Will take a QB
Detroit (2-10) - If they are concerned about Stafford they will take one but probably won't.
Cincinnati (2-10) - Carson is done. They could take one.
Buffalo (2-10) - I don't think Fitz has shown enough to make them happy. The could take one and play Fitz a year or two as he develops.
Arizona (3-9) - They will take a QB.
Denver (3-9) - Unless Urban is going there (he isn't) they could take a QB. New coach might not be as in love with whats his name. (Tebow, couldn't remember it there for a sec)
San Francisco (4-8) - They will take a QB.
Dallas (4-8) - Although they have Romo they could take one. Doubt it though.
Tennessee (5-7) - This depends on the owner. He loves young. Coach doesn't. They won't take a QB.
Washington (5-7) - McNabb isn't a long term answer. The could take on but probably won't.
Houston (5-7) - They won't take a QB.
Minnesota (5-7)

If even one or two of them try it, we won't see squat and it will even be slimmer if none of the underclassmen come out. Currently "Ourlads" top 32 Seniors lists Locker at 4 and Ponder at 20.

Ourlads Top 32 Seniors (http://www.ourlads.com/top32/?id=235649)

tastywaves
12-09-2010, 06:56 PM
I think teams aren't concerned about tipping their hands anymore. With TEs being nothing more than glorified WRs but bigger. They are being matched up with safeties and not LBs. Teams are still able to run the ball due to the transition to these matachups. It does back to dictating to the defense what you're going to do. If the Jets placed a LB on Hernandez, the Pats ran a pass. If they placed a safety on him, they ran the ball.

I was having a conversation with my friend about the teams ahead of us and their needs. I believe that a lot of them are not going to look QB.

I expect us to win out or possible loose to the eagles.

Depending on how you look at it. If everything goes well, we will probaby get the 5th best QB in this draft.

Carolina (1-11) - Will take a QB
Detroit (2-10) - If they are concerned about Stafford they will take one but probably won't.
Cincinnati (2-10) - Carson is done. They could take one.
Buffalo (2-10) - I don't think Fitz has shown enough to make them happy. The could take one and play Fitz a year or two as he develops.
Arizona (3-9) - They will take a QB.
Denver (3-9) - Unless Urban is going there (he isn't) they could take a QB. New coach might not be as in love with whats his name. (Tebow, couldn't remember it there for a sec)
San Francisco (4-8) - They will take a QB.
Dallas (4-8) - Although they have Romo they could take one. Doubt it though.
Tennessee (5-7) - This depends on the owner. He loves young. Coach doesn't. They won't take a QB.
Washington (5-7) - McNabb isn't a long term answer. The could take on but probably won't.
Houston (5-7) - They won't take a QB.
Minnesota (5-7)

If even one or two of them try it, we won't see squat and it will even be slimmer if none of the underclassmen come out. Currently "Ourlads" top 32 Seniors lists Locker at 4 and Ponder at 20.

Ourlads Top 32 Seniors (http://www.ourlads.com/top32/?id=235649)

I predict there will not be 4 QB's chosen before we pick in the first round.

We might still get the 5th best one if we pick one, but don't think that is what you were going for.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 07:17 PM
I think teams aren't concerned about tipping their hands anymore. With TEs being nothing more than glorified WRs but bigger. They are being matched up with safeties and not LBs. Teams are still able to run the ball due to the transition to these matachups. It does back to dictating to the defense what you're going to do. If the Jets placed a LB on Hernandez, the Pats ran a pass. If they placed a safety on him, they ran the ball.

I was having a conversation with my friend about the teams ahead of us and their needs. I believe that a lot of them are not going to look QB.

I expect us to win out or possible loose to the eagles.

Depending on how you look at it. If everything goes well, we will probaby get the 5th best QB in this draft.

Carolina (1-11) - Will take a QB
Detroit (2-10) - If they are concerned about Stafford they will take one but probably won't.
Cincinnati (2-10) - Carson is done. They could take one.
Buffalo (2-10) - I don't think Fitz has shown enough to make them happy. The could take one and play Fitz a year or two as he develops.
Arizona (3-9) - They will take a QB.
Denver (3-9) - Unless Urban is going there (he isn't) they could take a QB. New coach might not be as in love with whats his name. (Tebow, couldn't remember it there for a sec)
San Francisco (4-8) - They will take a QB.
Dallas (4-8) - Although they have Romo they could take one. Doubt it though.
Tennessee (5-7) - This depends on the owner. He loves young. Coach doesn't. They won't take a QB.
Washington (5-7) - McNabb isn't a long term answer. The could take on but probably won't.
Houston (5-7) - They won't take a QB.
Minnesota (5-7)

If even one or two of them try it, we won't see squat and it will even be slimmer if none of the underclassmen come out. Currently "Ourlads" top 32 Seniors lists Locker at 4 and Ponder at 20.

Ourlads Top 32 Seniors (http://www.ourlads.com/top32/?id=235649)

I predict there will not be 4 QB's chosen before we pick in the first round.

We might still get the 5th best one if we pick one, but don't think that is what you were going for.
I don't think 4 will go either cause I don't think there are 4 in this class worth burning a top pick on which gets back to my earlier discussion point with my good friend Kevon.

Whatever falls to us (12 or lower) won't be worth picking there especially if you draft like most teams......BPA .

I haven't put much work into the draft yet, however, it appears there are 3 QB's worth taking in the first round........Cam Newton, Ryan Mallett and Jake Locker with Locker falling to us in most of the mocks I've seen so far were we are drafting 12th. Newton and Mallet, by most accounts are having good seasons and will be the two that are most coveted, wereas Locker has struggled this year, compared to last year which seems to be the reason he slips to 12.

Again, I haven't put much work into it so I am only going on what other draftnicks are saying. I usually wait until Ourlads start putting thier stuff together before I start trying to fit players into schemes.

tastywaves
12-09-2010, 07:37 PM
I think teams aren't concerned about tipping their hands anymore. With TEs being nothing more than glorified WRs but bigger. They are being matched up with safeties and not LBs. Teams are still able to run the ball due to the transition to these matachups. It does back to dictating to the defense what you're going to do. If the Jets placed a LB on Hernandez, the Pats ran a pass. If they placed a safety on him, they ran the ball.

I was having a conversation with my friend about the teams ahead of us and their needs. I believe that a lot of them are not going to look QB.

I expect us to win out or possible loose to the eagles.

Depending on how you look at it. If everything goes well, we will probaby get the 5th best QB in this draft.

Carolina (1-11) - Will take a QB
Detroit (2-10) - If they are concerned about Stafford they will take one but probably won't.
Cincinnati (2-10) - Carson is done. They could take one.
Buffalo (2-10) - I don't think Fitz has shown enough to make them happy. The could take one and play Fitz a year or two as he develops.
Arizona (3-9) - They will take a QB.
Denver (3-9) - Unless Urban is going there (he isn't) they could take a QB. New coach might not be as in love with whats his name. (Tebow, couldn't remember it there for a sec)
San Francisco (4-8) - They will take a QB.
Dallas (4-8) - Although they have Romo they could take one. Doubt it though.
Tennessee (5-7) - This depends on the owner. He loves young. Coach doesn't. They won't take a QB.
Washington (5-7) - McNabb isn't a long term answer. The could take on but probably won't.
Houston (5-7) - They won't take a QB.
Minnesota (5-7)

If even one or two of them try it, we won't see squat and it will even be slimmer if none of the underclassmen come out. Currently "Ourlads" top 32 Seniors lists Locker at 4 and Ponder at 20.

Ourlads Top 32 Seniors (http://www.ourlads.com/top32/?id=235649)

I predict there will not be 4 QB's chosen before we pick in the first round.

We might still get the 5th best one if we pick one, but don't think that is what you were going for.
I don't think 4 will go either cause I don't think there are 4 in this class worth burning a top pick on which gets back to my earlier discussion point with my good friend Kevon.

Whatever falls to us (12 or lower) won't be worth picking there especially if you draft like most teams......BPA .

I haven't put much work into the draft yet, however, it appears there are 3 QB's worth taking in the first round........Cam Newton, Ryan Mallett and Jake Locker with Locker falling to us in most of the mocks I've seen so far were we are drafting 12th. Newton and Mallet, by most accounts are having good seasons and will be the two that are most coveted, wereas Locker has struggled this year, compared to last year which seems to be the reason he slips to 12.

Again, I haven't put much work into it so I am only going on what other draftnicks are saying. I usually wait until Ourlads start putting thier stuff together before I start trying to fit players into schemes.

Wouldn't that be the 3rd best QB in the draft then? That I can follow.

No doubt many things will change between now and draft day. Whether Cam is a top 12 pick I don't know..I would put him more towards the latter half of the first round.

Another take on a guy like Cam:
I equate his skills closest to Vince Young...not his character, his skills. Because he has great running ability, if he is put into an offense that struggles to move the ball, he can make a more immediate impact. His arm may not equate to many of the others in the draft, but it is not completely useless either. He is also more likely to take advantage of his legs in his younger years and be at his peak in that regard. His need to run a complex offense and be a master at reading defenses can be minimized somewhat. Because of this, he may make sense for the right team to pick him high.

If you believe he needs to be put on a 3-4 year program to be a "typical" NFL style QB, then it makes less sense for me to take him high.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 07:49 PM
I think teams aren't concerned about tipping their hands anymore. With TEs being nothing more than glorified WRs but bigger. They are being matched up with safeties and not LBs. Teams are still able to run the ball due to the transition to these matachups. It does back to dictating to the defense what you're going to do. If the Jets placed a LB on Hernandez, the Pats ran a pass. If they placed a safety on him, they ran the ball.

I was having a conversation with my friend about the teams ahead of us and their needs. I believe that a lot of them are not going to look QB.

I expect us to win out or possible loose to the eagles.

Depending on how you look at it. If everything goes well, we will probaby get the 5th best QB in this draft.

Carolina (1-11) - Will take a QB
Detroit (2-10) - If they are concerned about Stafford they will take one but probably won't.
Cincinnati (2-10) - Carson is done. They could take one.
Buffalo (2-10) - I don't think Fitz has shown enough to make them happy. The could take one and play Fitz a year or two as he develops.
Arizona (3-9) - They will take a QB.
Denver (3-9) - Unless Urban is going there (he isn't) they could take a QB. New coach might not be as in love with whats his name. (Tebow, couldn't remember it there for a sec)
San Francisco (4-8) - They will take a QB.
Dallas (4-8) - Although they have Romo they could take one. Doubt it though.
Tennessee (5-7) - This depends on the owner. He loves young. Coach doesn't. They won't take a QB.
Washington (5-7) - McNabb isn't a long term answer. The could take on but probably won't.
Houston (5-7) - They won't take a QB.
Minnesota (5-7)

If even one or two of them try it, we won't see squat and it will even be slimmer if none of the underclassmen come out. Currently "Ourlads" top 32 Seniors lists Locker at 4 and Ponder at 20.

Ourlads Top 32 Seniors (http://www.ourlads.com/top32/?id=235649)

I predict there will not be 4 QB's chosen before we pick in the first round.

We might still get the 5th best one if we pick one, but don't think that is what you were going for.
I don't think 4 will go either cause I don't think there are 4 in this class worth burning a top pick on which gets back to my earlier discussion point with my good friend Kevon.

Whatever falls to us (12 or lower) won't be worth picking there especially if you draft like most teams......BPA .

I haven't put much work into the draft yet, however, it appears there are 3 QB's worth taking in the first round........Cam Newton, Ryan Mallett and Jake Locker with Locker falling to us in most of the mocks I've seen so far were we are drafting 12th. Newton and Mallet, by most accounts are having good seasons and will be the two that are most coveted, wereas Locker has struggled this year, compared to last year which seems to be the reason he slips to 12.

Again, I haven't put much work into it so I am only going on what other draftnicks are saying. I usually wait until Ourlads start putting thier stuff together before I start trying to fit players into schemes.

Wouldn't that be the 3rd best QB in the draft then? That I can follow.

It would if he got to us. Again, if every team that I think needs a QB takes one (even though they aren't worth taking) we would get the 5th best.

I don't think they are all worth taking in the first. Most agree and say that 3 will go with one of them falling to us.

Again, I don't think one of the top 3 will fall to us. I think they will be long gone by 12.



No doubt many things will change between now and draft day. Whether Cam is a top 12 pick I don't know..I would put him more towards the latter half of the first round.
Wow, most drafts that have the underclassmen in thier drafts have him going top 5, some even number 1.


Another take on a guy like Cam:
I equate his skills closest to Vince Young...not his character, his skills. Because he has great running ability, if he is put into an offense that struggles to move the ball, he can make a more immediate impact. His arm may not equate to many of the others in the draft, but it is not completely useless either. He is also more likely to take advantage of his legs in his younger years and be at his peak in that regard. His need to run a complex offense and be a master at reading defenses can be minimized somewhat. Because of this, he may make sense for the right team to pick him high.


I watched him in his conference championship game and he threw the ball pretty damn good if you ask me.

When he ran, he looked pretty good as well.


If you believe he needs to be put on a 3-4 year program to be a "typical" NFL style QB, then it makes less sense for me to take him high.
I saw a chat page were they were talking about were he might go. One of the chatters asked, is he a better thrower and runner than Tebow? All answers were yes.

The guy then asked, were did Tebow go last year.....and went down a path of discussion about that because the NFL is in dire need for quality QB's (like I've been saying) a team at the top will take him early, much much sooner than Tebow went cause he can throw the ball with better mechanics that Tebow had/has.

gregair13
12-09-2010, 07:55 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO

tastywaves
12-09-2010, 07:59 PM
I think teams aren't concerned about tipping their hands anymore. With TEs being nothing more than glorified WRs but bigger. They are being matched up with safeties and not LBs. Teams are still able to run the ball due to the transition to these matachups. It does back to dictating to the defense what you're going to do. If the Jets placed a LB on Hernandez, the Pats ran a pass. If they placed a safety on him, they ran the ball.

I was having a conversation with my friend about the teams ahead of us and their needs. I believe that a lot of them are not going to look QB.

I expect us to win out or possible loose to the eagles.

Depending on how you look at it. If everything goes well, we will probaby get the 5th best QB in this draft.

Carolina (1-11) - Will take a QB
Detroit (2-10) - If they are concerned about Stafford they will take one but probably won't.
Cincinnati (2-10) - Carson is done. They could take one.
Buffalo (2-10) - I don't think Fitz has shown enough to make them happy. The could take one and play Fitz a year or two as he develops.
Arizona (3-9) - They will take a QB.
Denver (3-9) - Unless Urban is going there (he isn't) they could take a QB. New coach might not be as in love with whats his name. (Tebow, couldn't remember it there for a sec)
San Francisco (4-8) - They will take a QB.
Dallas (4-8) - Although they have Romo they could take one. Doubt it though.
Tennessee (5-7) - This depends on the owner. He loves young. Coach doesn't. They won't take a QB.
Washington (5-7) - McNabb isn't a long term answer. The could take on but probably won't.
Houston (5-7) - They won't take a QB.
Minnesota (5-7)

If even one or two of them try it, we won't see squat and it will even be slimmer if none of the underclassmen come out. Currently "Ourlads" top 32 Seniors lists Locker at 4 and Ponder at 20.

Ourlads Top 32 Seniors (http://www.ourlads.com/top32/?id=235649)

I predict there will not be 4 QB's chosen before we pick in the first round.

We might still get the 5th best one if we pick one, but don't think that is what you were going for.
I don't think 4 will go either cause I don't think there are 4 in this class worth burning a top pick on which gets back to my earlier discussion point with my good friend Kevon.

Whatever falls to us (12 or lower) won't be worth picking there especially if you draft like most teams......BPA .

I haven't put much work into the draft yet, however, it appears there are 3 QB's worth taking in the first round........Cam Newton, Ryan Mallett and Jake Locker with Locker falling to us in most of the mocks I've seen so far were we are drafting 12th. Newton and Mallet, by most accounts are having good seasons and will be the two that are most coveted, wereas Locker has struggled this year, compared to last year which seems to be the reason he slips to 12.

Again, I haven't put much work into it so I am only going on what other draftnicks are saying. I usually wait until Ourlads start putting thier stuff together before I start trying to fit players into schemes.

Wouldn't that be the 3rd best QB in the draft then? That I can follow.

It would if he got to us. Again, if every team that I think needs a QB takes one (even though they aren't worth taking) we would get the 5th best.

I don't think they are all worth taking in the first. Most agree and say that 3 will go with one of them falling to us.

Again, I don't think one of the top 3 will fall to us. I think they will be long gone by 12.



No doubt many things will change between now and draft day. Whether Cam is a top 12 pick I don't know..I would put him more towards the latter half of the first round.
Wow, most drafts that have the underclassmen in thier drafts have him going top 5, some even number 1.


Another take on a guy like Cam:
I equate his skills closest to Vince Young...not his character, his skills. Because he has great running ability, if he is put into an offense that struggles to move the ball, he can make a more immediate impact. His arm may not equate to many of the others in the draft, but it is not completely useless either. He is also more likely to take advantage of his legs in his younger years and be at his peak in that regard. His need to run a complex offense and be a master at reading defenses can be minimized somewhat. Because of this, he may make sense for the right team to pick him high.


I watched him in his conference championship game and he threw the ball pretty damn good if you ask me.

When he ran, he looked pretty good as well.


If you believe he needs to be put on a 3-4 year program to be a "typical" NFL style QB, then it makes less sense for me to take him high.
I saw a chat page were they were talking about were he might go. One of the chatters asked, is he a better thrower and runner than Tebow? All answers were yes.

The guy then asked, were did Tebow go last year.....and went down a path of discussion about that because the NFL is in dire need for quality QB's (like I've been saying) a team at the top will take him early, much much sooner than Tebow went cause he can throw the ball with better mechanics that Tebow had/has.

Very well could be that he goes that high. Not sure he should, but he is a monster in college. The title game will probably showcase him even more. Personally, I would struggle to take him in the top half of the first unless I had the perfect situation for him.

On his passing ability, I am far from an expert. But what I do notice is that he does not have a complete throwing motion (using his hips and arm). He tends to use more wrist and rely on his strength. Again, I am no expert.. but what I see is that he struggles to throw passes that require tighter trajectories, speed and more precision.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 08:07 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 08:10 PM
Very well could be that he goes that high. Not sure he should, but he is a monster in college. The title game will probably showcase him even more. Personally, I would struggle to take him in the top half of the first unless I had the perfect situation for him.

On his passing ability, I am far from an expert. But what I do notice is that he does not have a complete throwing motion (using his hips and arm). He tends to use more wrist and rely on his strength. Again, I am no expert.. but what I see is that he struggles to throw passes that require tighter trajectories, speed and more precision.
I would have to watch more than one game to agree or disagree with that assesment of his throwing motion.

All I know was the recievers didn't have to break stride to catch the ball and he ran like a gazelle.

Any kid that has the arm to throw like that only using his wrist and can flat out get it down the field going 0 to 100 in 2 steps is gonna go high.

tarkenton10
12-09-2010, 08:18 PM
Alright, well I would like to get this thread back on topic. I was watching Cam Newton's so called "comeback drive" and, once again, did not see what these national media analysts see in the kid. The throws he made on the winning drive did not impress me much. Hell, Jackson can make those dump-off passes. Why does everyone seem to have a huge boner for Cam Newton? Seriously, if we're going to draft him solely based on his athleticism then what's the point? We already have Jackson and Webb with similar (if not better) skill sets. Long story short he's overrated.

Why not take a chance at a quarterback whose skill set has historically proved more successful in the NFL like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCuu6UyO3B0

Ponder has had a very good season statistically. I was disappointed he didn't play in the ACC Championship game, but hopefully his rest will be for the better and he has a good outing in the Chik-Fil-A Bowl. He doesn't have the rocket arm like Mallett but he makes good decisions. Like I posted before, if the Vikings wanted they could easily take the BPA in round one then nab Ponder in round two easily.


Other QB options would be Ryan Mallett and, of course, trading the Panthers' soon-to-be first overall pick to draft Andrew Luck. As for the argument of draft busts by quarterbacks: it's always going to be a crap shoot, but that doesn't mean you don't ever try and take those risks associated with drafting a quarterback to better your team. Hell, you could make that argument about any position (then why even have a draft at all?).

My point is drafting a quarterback is much more suitable for the Vikings since we are likely going to have a new head coach next season. Even if Frazier gets the starting job, the Vikings still should draft a quarterback because:
a) It will be more cost efficient than locking up a FA or trading for a so-called "established" QB ala Kevin Kolbb given the nature of the uncertainty of the CBA
b) It allows the fanbase to get rejuvenated and perception-wise is a fresh start to a new regime. New regimes (quoting Walterfootball here) mean new quarterbacks, plain and simple. Drafting a new QB for the future sounds a hell of a lot sexier than trading for Kolbb. It means we have a fresh start. Kolbb has already gotten a decent chance of showing the NFL what he can do, and I wasn't impressed. Apparently Andy Reid agrees.

So to answer the question of the title of this thread, I can't think of a reason why we shouldn't. Given our track record of quarterbacks recently it makes perfect since why we should draft a QB. I just hope we take one that more-or-less is able to go right away and not a "project" like Newton. Even if there will be growing pains with a rookie we should draft one with the intention of starting him right away so he can gain the confidence of his coaches, teammates and fans. If whomever we draft doesn't pan out, then he doesn't pan out and we can look at other options at that point, but I think with at least the upcoming season we should draft a quarterback with the intention of starting him in 2011.

Great pst and I defintely do want to draft newton!! :woohoo:

gregair13
12-09-2010, 08:24 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.

Ryan should win MVP this year when the Falcons finish first in the NFC.
Flacco does not have to do a lot, but he makes plays when asked of him, for the most part.
Sanchez is same as Flacco, but has fixed his turnover issues from his first season. Now he plays well and is exactly what the Jets need.
Stafford is incredible, but cannot stay healthy behind a porous line.
Freeman is a beast. Would love to have him honestly.
Bradford can make all the throws too and looks to have a first place team.
Kolb sucks.
Rodgers, people (not me), think he is the best in the game.

Colt McCoy is pretty good too. When on the field, he is helping a team that most people pegged as terrible to more wins then they should have. Yes he has not played a full season, but the kid can play.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 08:33 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.

Ryan should win MVP this year when the Falcons finish first in the NFC.
Flacco does not have to do a lot, but he makes plays when asked of him, for the most part.
Sanchez is same as Flacco, but has fixed his turnover issues from his first season. Now he plays well and is exactly what the Jets need.
Stafford is incredible, but cannot stay healthy behind a porous line.
Freeman is a beast. Would love to have him honestly.
Bradford can make all the throws too and looks to have a first place team.
Kolb sucks.
Rodgers, people (not me), think he is the best in the game.

Colt McCoy is pretty good too. When on the field, he is helping a team that most people pegged as terrible to more wins then they should have. Yes he has not played a full season, but the kid can play.
Who do you think is gonna be the next (Kid that slips to the latter part of the draft) Rodgers, Freeman, or Flacco that might be available for us?

By the way, did you see Sanchez melt down against the Patriots last week? As he gets closer to the playoffs and starts playing playoff caliber teams it appears he might resort back to last years iteration of a INT machine.

Doesn't mean I think he is crap, I just think its gonna take him 3 or 4 years to get over that stuff.

gregair13
12-09-2010, 08:37 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.

Ryan should win MVP this year when the Falcons finish first in the NFC.
Flacco does not have to do a lot, but he makes plays when asked of him, for the most part.
Sanchez is same as Flacco, but has fixed his turnover issues from his first season. Now he plays well and is exactly what the Jets need.
Stafford is incredible, but cannot stay healthy behind a porous line.
Freeman is a beast. Would love to have him honestly.
Bradford can make all the throws too and looks to have a first place team.
Kolb sucks.
Rodgers, people (not me), think he is the best in the game.

Colt McCoy is pretty good too. When on the field, he is helping a team that most people pegged as terrible to more wins then they should have. Yes he has not played a full season, but the kid can play.
Who do you think is gonna be the next (Kid that slips to the latter part of the draft) Rodgers, Freeman, or Flacco that might be available for us?

By the way, did you see Sanchez melt down against the Patriots last week? As he gets closer to the playoffs and starts playing playoff caliber teams it appears he might resort back to last years iteration of a INT machine.

Doesn't mean I think he is crap, I just think its gonna take him 3 or 4 years to get over that stuff.

I have no idea about the draft class yet, so I cannot give you a name on who might slip. Ask me again after the combine then I will tell you what I think about each and every QB in the draft.

Sanchez does seem to blow, and I do not really like him, but as of right now I would take him over Tjoke.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 08:42 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.

Ryan should win MVP this year when the Falcons finish first in the NFC.
Flacco does not have to do a lot, but he makes plays when asked of him, for the most part.
Sanchez is same as Flacco, but has fixed his turnover issues from his first season. Now he plays well and is exactly what the Jets need.
Stafford is incredible, but cannot stay healthy behind a porous line.
Freeman is a beast. Would love to have him honestly.
Bradford can make all the throws too and looks to have a first place team.
Kolb sucks.
Rodgers, people (not me), think he is the best in the game.

Colt McCoy is pretty good too. When on the field, he is helping a team that most people pegged as terrible to more wins then they should have. Yes he has not played a full season, but the kid can play.
Who do you think is gonna be the next (Kid that slips to the latter part of the draft) Rodgers, Freeman, or Flacco that might be available for us?

By the way, did you see Sanchez melt down against the Patriots last week? As he gets closer to the playoffs and starts playing playoff caliber teams it appears he might resort back to last years iteration of a INT machine.

Doesn't mean I think he is crap, I just think its gonna take him 3 or 4 years to get over that stuff.

I have no idea about the draft class yet, so I cannot give you a name on who might slip. Ask me again after the combine then I will tell you what I think about each and every QB in the draft.


Fair enough. I don't know that much about them yet either.


Sanchez does seem to blow, and I do not really like him, but as of right now I would take him over Tjoke.
I would rather swap defenses. They have carried him for his NFL career so far, I'm sure they can carry TJ.

gregair13
12-09-2010, 08:44 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.

Ryan should win MVP this year when the Falcons finish first in the NFC.
Flacco does not have to do a lot, but he makes plays when asked of him, for the most part.
Sanchez is same as Flacco, but has fixed his turnover issues from his first season. Now he plays well and is exactly what the Jets need.
Stafford is incredible, but cannot stay healthy behind a porous line.
Freeman is a beast. Would love to have him honestly.
Bradford can make all the throws too and looks to have a first place team.
Kolb sucks.
Rodgers, people (not me), think he is the best in the game.

Colt McCoy is pretty good too. When on the field, he is helping a team that most people pegged as terrible to more wins then they should have. Yes he has not played a full season, but the kid can play.
Who do you think is gonna be the next (Kid that slips to the latter part of the draft) Rodgers, Freeman, or Flacco that might be available for us?

By the way, did you see Sanchez melt down against the Patriots last week? As he gets closer to the playoffs and starts playing playoff caliber teams it appears he might resort back to last years iteration of a INT machine.

Doesn't mean I think he is crap, I just think its gonna take him 3 or 4 years to get over that stuff.

I have no idea about the draft class yet, so I cannot give you a name on who might slip. Ask me again after the combine then I will tell you what I think about each and every QB in the draft.


Fair enough. I don't know that much about them yet either.


Sanchez does seem to blow, and I do not really like him, but as of right now I would take him over Tjoke.
I would rather swap defenses. They have carried him for his NFL career so far, I'm sure they can carry TJ.

Don't wait their defence against the Patriots. What a gongshow that was. Suck on that Rex

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 08:48 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.

Ryan should win MVP this year when the Falcons finish first in the NFC.
Flacco does not have to do a lot, but he makes plays when asked of him, for the most part.
Sanchez is same as Flacco, but has fixed his turnover issues from his first season. Now he plays well and is exactly what the Jets need.
Stafford is incredible, but cannot stay healthy behind a porous line.
Freeman is a beast. Would love to have him honestly.
Bradford can make all the throws too and looks to have a first place team.
Kolb sucks.
Rodgers, people (not me), think he is the best in the game.

Colt McCoy is pretty good too. When on the field, he is helping a team that most people pegged as terrible to more wins then they should have. Yes he has not played a full season, but the kid can play.
Who do you think is gonna be the next (Kid that slips to the latter part of the draft) Rodgers, Freeman, or Flacco that might be available for us?

By the way, did you see Sanchez melt down against the Patriots last week? As he gets closer to the playoffs and starts playing playoff caliber teams it appears he might resort back to last years iteration of a INT machine.

Doesn't mean I think he is crap, I just think its gonna take him 3 or 4 years to get over that stuff.

I have no idea about the draft class yet, so I cannot give you a name on who might slip. Ask me again after the combine then I will tell you what I think about each and every QB in the draft.


Fair enough. I don't know that much about them yet either.


Sanchez does seem to blow, and I do not really like him, but as of right now I would take him over Tjoke.
I would rather swap defenses. They have carried him for his NFL career so far, I'm sure they can carry TJ.

Don't wait their defence against the Patriots. What a gongshow that was. Suck on that Rex
Well played. Well played indeed.

kevoncox
12-09-2010, 08:59 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.
I flat out disagree Marr,
Look at those teams and what they have become since then. Some of those guys have helped turn the culture in the team around.

Bradford looks great. He is playing with a bunch of no ones and is getting it done

Sanchez is up and down like a young Qb tends to be. However, is there a doubt in your mind that this guy won't be a good QB?

Stafford. Plays great when not hurt. Looks like he is as billed.

Freeman...better than advertised. he has the bucs in the playoffs. The bucs?

The last 4 years...the top Qbs in the draft have all lived up to their billing.

Marrdro
12-09-2010, 09:05 PM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.
I flat out disagree Marr,
Look at those teams and what they have become since then. Some of those guys have helped turn the culture in the team around.

Bradford looks great. He is playing with a bunch of no ones and is getting it done

Sanchez is up and down like a young Qb tends to be. However, is there a doubt in your mind that this guy won't be a good QB?

Stafford. Plays great when not hurt. Looks like he is as billed.

Freeman...better than advertised. he has the bucs in the playoffs. The bucs?

The last 4 years...the top Qbs in the draft have all lived up to their billing.
Don't get me wrong, I like all of them and thought I gave them pretty good reviews and would take any one of them in a minute.

Maybe just maybe you can say that for Matty Ice but the rest are still up and down, as expected.

My point is that only a couple of the ones drafted over that time period can actually be considered to be carrying thier team is all that I'm saying and if a kid drops to us at 12 or below, isn't gonna come in and lead us to the promised land next year.

They will come in and struggle just like all the rest have and for that very reason we should have another option for next year if we take one of them so that he can learn from the bench instead of infront of us like TJ has so that he isn't persecuted for making rooking and 2nd year mistakes. Heck, even 3rd year mistakes.

kevoncox
12-10-2010, 12:27 AM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.
I flat out disagree Marr,
Look at those teams and what they have become since then. Some of those guys have helped turn the culture in the team around.

Bradford looks great. He is playing with a bunch of no ones and is getting it done

Sanchez is up and down like a young Qb tends to be. However, is there a doubt in your mind that this guy won't be a good QB?

Stafford. Plays great when not hurt. Looks like he is as billed.

Freeman...better than advertised. he has the bucs in the playoffs. The bucs?

The last 4 years...the top Qbs in the draft have all lived up to their billing.
Don't get me wrong, I like all of them and thought I gave them pretty good reviews and would take any one of them in a minute.

Maybe just maybe you can say that for Matty Ice but the rest are still up and down, as expected.

My point is that only a couple of the ones drafted over that time period can actually be considered to be carrying thier team is all that I'm saying and if a kid drops to us at 12 or below, isn't gonna come in and lead us to the promised land next year.

They will come in and struggle just like all the rest have and for that very reason we should have another option for next year if we take one of them so that he can learn from the bench instead of infront of us like TJ has so that he isn't persecuted for making rooking and 2nd year mistakes. Heck, even 3rd year mistakes.

It goes back to my main point. Drafting a QB in the first round, doesn't mean he has to start before he is ready. Resign TJ. Draft a Rookie QB. Rodgers was secure enough after going 6-10 that drafting Flynn and Brhomm didn't break his confidence.

gregair13
12-10-2010, 12:31 AM
I hope we do draft our QB in the first round. The quality of players that have been coming out recently is pretty good. Lets hope whoever we take doesn't bust and can be a great player for us.

There is no reason for us not to take a QB IMO
How so my friend?

2010 is still out but Bradford looks like he will work out. No one else from that class.

2009 Sanchez sucked his first year, was doing good this year and then he fell apart when games got important. Freeman has been OK and Stafford could be something special if he could just stay healthy.

2008 Ryan and Flacco have had good careers so far with Ryan slipping a bit last year. Flacco isn't really asked to do much, but hey, that whole team evolves around the defense even though Flacco has done more this year with his extra weapons.

2007. Good thing Kolb got a contract before the second coming of Vick. This is one of those classes that just flat out sucked even though a couple of them were really hyped by the disney channel.

2006. Pretty bad when we can say that TJ is the second best QB out of a class and he went at the bottom of the second round. Looks like Whitehurst might get a shot this weekend though. Maybe he'll turn into a "Franchise Guy".

2005. Rodgers and Orton. Rodgers went at the bottom of the first round and were did Orton go?

Seems, if you look at what they have done, and were the success came from, it wasn't were we are going to be picking.
I flat out disagree Marr,
Look at those teams and what they have become since then. Some of those guys have helped turn the culture in the team around.

Bradford looks great. He is playing with a bunch of no ones and is getting it done

Sanchez is up and down like a young Qb tends to be. However, is there a doubt in your mind that this guy won't be a good QB?

Stafford. Plays great when not hurt. Looks like he is as billed.

Freeman...better than advertised. he has the bucs in the playoffs. The bucs?

The last 4 years...the top Qbs in the draft have all lived up to their billing.
Don't get me wrong, I like all of them and thought I gave them pretty good reviews and would take any one of them in a minute.

Maybe just maybe you can say that for Matty Ice but the rest are still up and down, as expected.

My point is that only a couple of the ones drafted over that time period can actually be considered to be carrying thier team is all that I'm saying and if a kid drops to us at 12 or below, isn't gonna come in and lead us to the promised land next year.

They will come in and struggle just like all the rest have and for that very reason we should have another option for next year if we take one of them so that he can learn from the bench instead of infront of us like TJ has so that he isn't persecuted for making rooking and 2nd year mistakes. Heck, even 3rd year mistakes.

It goes back to my main point. Drafting a QB in the first round, doesn't mean he has to start before he is ready. Resign TJ. Draft a Rookie QB. Rodgers was secure enough after going 6-10 that drafting Flynn and Brhomm didn't break his confidence.
Its rare for a Qb to come into the league and dominate right away. That's why we can go 6-10 with Tjoke for a year and then the new kid can come and play. The sooner we draft him, the better.

Purple Floyd
12-10-2010, 02:22 AM
Under the KAO and Chiller?

They would have flopped. Big Time.
Just like they did with thier first and second teams. I suppose those staffs and schemes suck as well and it isn't the players.

That wasn't my point. The notion was whether Childress could have done any better and to that I say no.

Infidel
12-10-2010, 02:57 AM
Under the KAO and Chiller?

They would have flopped. Big Time.
Just like they did with thier first and second teams. I suppose those staffs and schemes suck as well and it isn't the players.

That wasn't my point. The notion was whether Childress could have done any better and to that I say no.

Obviously.

He did his best and it was insufficient.

The man is irreparably incompetent. He will never find anybody stupid enough to hire him to another coaching job.....in football.

His next job is junior high girls soccer.

vike_mike
12-10-2010, 04:44 PM
Don't put any concrete credence into the mock drafts now, but a few of the "experts" have us taking Cam Newton. If we win the next 3 out of 4 games, we won't be in position to get him. Besides that, he won't be NFL ready for a couple of years.

Marrdro
12-10-2010, 04:59 PM
Its rare for a Qb to come into the league and dominate right away. That's why we can go 6-10 with Tjoke for a year and then the new kid can come and play. The sooner we draft him, the better.
The bigger question, however, is, will you be able to overlook the inconsistencies?

From what I've seen of this fanbase, you won't, unless of course he is a highly touted kid like Quin, Young, Russell etc. Then you will try to blame the OL, or the WR's. ;)

Marrdro
12-10-2010, 05:02 PM
Don't put any concrete credence into the mock drafts now, but a few of the "experts" have us taking Cam Newton. If we win the next 3 out of 4 games, we won't be in position to get him. Besides that, he won't be NFL ready for a couple of years.
I've seen more with him gone in the top 5 that have us with whomever slips out of the group of Mallet, Ponder, Locker, Luck.

dfosterf
12-10-2010, 05:04 PM
Cam does seem like a perfect fit for the Vikes. I'm especially impressed with the off-field apsects.

Just yesterday he told us all that he has not discussed the "controversy" with his father "at all".

Sure. :P

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/7115402-cam-newton-arrested-charged-with-burglary

I really hope you get him, he will enrich the long tradition that is so uniquely Minnesota Vikings, and it'll be fun to watch the fans defend him and whatever criminal / idiotic/ Viking-player-type behaviour he comes up with in the future, of course dependent entirely on his completion percentage, etc.

Maybe you could pass a Viking QB state pre-blanket-pardon law in anticipation of his arrival.
:laugh:

Marrdro
12-10-2010, 05:07 PM
Under the KAO and Chiller?

They would have flopped. Big Time.
Just like they did with thier first and second teams. I suppose those staffs and schemes suck as well and it isn't the players.

That wasn't my point. The notion was whether Childress could have done any better and to that I say no.
OK, I can track with that.

Again, I have no allegiance to the Chiller and had my issues with him. If push came to shove, I don't buy into the drivel that was spewed forth around these here parts that he was any kindof QB guru but was probably more inlines with a better RB guru. Most of the credit (if it is deserved) for the QB's play on this staff I give to coach Rogers, who, I think did a pretty good with what he had to work with.

I mean we improved each year and eventually made the playoffs with the likes of TJ and Gus. That, in and of itself was one hell of a coaching job by our QB's coach getting those guys ready each and every week.

Heck, we've seen teams loose with better options than that on a more consistent basis than the Vikes.

ILLvike
12-10-2010, 05:09 PM
Cam does seem like a perfect fit for the Vikes. I'm especially impressed with the off-field apsects.

Just yesterday he told us all that he has not discussed the "controversy" with his father "at all".

Sure. :P

http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/7115402-cam-newton-arrested-charged-with-burglary

I really hope you get him, he will enrich the long tradition that is so uniquely Minnesota Vikings, and it'll be fun to watch the fans defend him and whatever criminal / idiotic/ Viking-player-type behaviour he comes up with in the future, of course dependent entirely on his completion percentage, etc.

Maybe you could pass a Viking QB state pre-blanket-pardon law in anticipation of his arrival.
:laugh:

They would have to overturn the law against drafting a quarterback in the first round...

pack93z
12-10-2010, 05:35 PM
Why not to draft a QB in the first round? How about Why?

Lets look at performance via QB rating and their average draft position by round.

Active QB's with over a thousand yards on the season, put in 8 for any undrafted QB's to provide a weighted number for the averages.

Brady distorts the list a bit at the top.. but a case could be made if you want an elite QB and play the averages.. draft them early.

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj103/pack93z/QBDraftAverage.png

Here is the Detail.

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj103/pack93z/QBDetails.png

kevoncox
12-10-2010, 05:49 PM
I forgot the Green bay Packers are the picture of model behavior. Didn't one of your guys get convicted of something this season? Don't you have a sheep that you could be making feel attractive right about now?

edit:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/06/packers-players-frustrated-by-link-to-sexual-assault/

Remember, when removing your foot from your mouth, the trick is to do it slowly and silently.

kevoncox
12-10-2010, 05:52 PM
Under the KAO and Chiller?

They would have flopped. Big Time.
Just like they did with thier first and second teams. I suppose those staffs and schemes suck as well and it isn't the players.

That wasn't my point. The notion was whether Childress could have done any better and to that I say no.
OK, I can track with that.

Again, I have no allegiance to the Chiller and had my issues with him. If push came to shove, I don't buy into the drivel that was spewed forth around these here parts that he was any kindof QB guru but was probably more inlines with a better RB guru. Most of the credit (if it is deserved) for the QB's play on this staff I give to coach Rogers, who, I think did a pretty good with what he had to work with.

I mean we improved each year and eventually made the playoffs with the likes of TJ and Gus. That, in and of itself was one hell of a coaching job by our QB's coach getting those guys ready each and every week.

Heck, we've seen teams loose with better options than that on a more consistent basis than the Vikes.
Those teams didn't have a Defense behind them like our Qbs did. Pair a good QB with out defense and you should go deep in the playoffs each season. Our Qbs were below average and that is why we struggled to make the playoffs.

pack93z
12-10-2010, 06:07 PM
I forgot the Green bay Packers are the picture of model behavior. Didn't one of your guys get convicted of something this season? Don't you have a sheep that you could be making feel attractive right about now?

edit:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/06/packers-players-frustrated-by-link-to-sexual-assault/

Remember, when removing your foot from your mouth, the trick is to do it slowly and silently.

Continued off topic.. but just to fill in on this particular event.

Not trying to say that Packers are free from deviants or what not.. but this is a poor case to pick.

Underwood, picked up two chicks at a bar, was having relations with one while the other was cleaning his personal belongs out and pocketing them.. rumor has it they are call girls, anyway.. the two chicks got caught in the five finger discount attempt of his belongings then cried assault.. hence why the DA and what not have pressed charges because really what charges do you bring? LOL.

Underwood got played.. and was thinking with the wrong head.

Anyway.. since you had it off topic anyway.. thought I would note that allegations of assault in that case were a bit distorted behind the events.. but I agree.. we the Packers have just as many deviants on the roster as another team.

Jolly comes to mind..

So.. the Vikings picking say a Cam isn't any worse than the Packers picking a Raji whom was caught smoking some weed.. but that doesn't mean it is fun to razz the other about it. B)

pack93z
12-10-2010, 06:12 PM
Now if you want to play the FA game.. Vince Young's off season is going to be interesting to watch.

Bud Adams might say he wants to keep him, but at this point saying anything else is going to hurt his off season value in terms of trade value.

dfosterf
12-11-2010, 12:58 AM
I forgot the Green bay Packers are the picture of model behavior. Didn't one of your guys get convicted of something this season? Don't you have a sheep that you could be making feel attractive right about now?

edit:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/06/06/packers-players-frustrated-by-link-to-sexual-assault/

Remember, when removing your foot from your mouth, the trick is to do it slowly and silently.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDjrrYeKW58


Damn it feels good to be a Packer
A real Packer quarterback throws a touchdown
A real Packer quarterback converts on third and ten
Cause real Packer quarterback they know how
And other quarterbacks might have high stats
But they brag to their fans on how they slaughter
Real Packer quarterbacks don't flex nuts
Cause real Packer quarterbacks don't wanna
And everything's strong in the arm of a Packer
Real Packer quarterbacks throw deep
Average 270 yards throw to anyone they want
Like Jennings, Driver, or Donald Lee
And all I gotta say to you wanna be, gonna be
Ball hogging turf eating slackers
When the Lombardi comes home what the hell you gonna do
Damn it feels good to be a Packer

Damn it feels good to be a Packer
Wake up Sunday watch my team play
Although I go to school in Minnesota
My heart will always be in Green Bay
Damn it feels good to be a Packer
Watching Favre go loco
No matter how many times he plays for one last drive
We'll know he'll throw a pick fo sho
Now Brett Favre fans come in all shapes and colors
Most he hurt in the past
But this fan here is a smart one
Started living for A-Rod and the Pack
And all I gotta say to you wanna be, gonna be
Ball hogging turf eating slackers
When the Lombardi comes home what the hell you gonna do
Damn it feels good to be a Packer

Damn it feels good to be a Packer
A real Packer linebacker knows the play
A real Packer linebacker gets the flyest of the tackles
Ask that Packer linebacker lil Clay
The Packers D look at QB's like an open book
That Charles Woodson knows how to read
Catch the ball all alone, get the pick take it in
And finish with a Lambeau leap
Cause Packer defenders be the game players
We'll get one more defensive MVP
Lets give some credit to Dom Capers
For switching us from a 4-3
And all I gotta say to you wanna be, gonna be
Ball hogging turf eating slackers
When the Lombardi comes home what the hell you gonna do
Damn it feels good to be a Packer

Damn it feels bad to be a Viking
Going 0 for 4 in the Super Bowl
And now we can't even make the playoffs
Cause our quarterback is too damn old
Every now and then he throws a good touchdown
Keeping my hopes up high
But then he turns around and throws another interception
Makes me wanna curl up and cry
But the coach of the Vikes keeps supporting him
Lets him take the field each play
Leslie should really play Tavaris
I wish Brett would go back to Green Bay
To all you quarterbacks that keep texting Jenn
You are not to her liking
And now the whole world is laughing at your nuts
Damn it feels bad to be a Viking


This was a good spot for this. Kid that made it just joined our site.

Their first vid.


:P

kevoncox
12-11-2010, 02:00 AM
Never...ever..ever..post this video again and I promise to say I didn't watch it.

dfosterf
12-11-2010, 02:04 AM
:laugh: :laugh: sorry :P :P

12purplepride28
12-11-2010, 02:21 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVukuIhEJNM

I'd much rather watch this

Purple Floyd
12-11-2010, 02:34 AM
"Marrdro" #1082427]
OK, I can track with that.
B)



Again, I have no allegiance to the Chiller and had my issues with him. If push came to shove, I don't buy into the drivel that was spewed forth around these here parts that he was any kindof QB guru but was probably more inlines with a better RB guru.

If I am not mistaken you have been the biggest spewer of this drivel over the past 5 years. I , OTOH have been the voice of reason defining why he was not the right coach for the team. In the end i was proven right and now you are slowly trying to slip into the club:P



Most of the credit (if it is deserved) for the QB's play on this staff I give to coach Rogers, who, I think did a pretty good with what he had to work with.

The QB play? How about the QB selection? You know, the likes of Drew Henson, Bollinger, O'Sullivan, Jackson etc. All guys Childress brought in and had the responsibility to see production out of. You have caught the articles that have outlined where Childress had the final say on ALL roster moves correct? It was in his contract.


I mean we improved each year and eventually made the playoffs with the likes of TJ and Gus. That, in and of itself was one hell of a coaching job by our QB's coach getting those guys ready each and every week.

And we could have won a SB with a marginally better QB and better coaching from the HC. But I guess just making the playoffs is enough for some.


Heck, we've seen teams loose with better options than that on a more consistent basis than the Vikes.


And we have seen teams win with the likes of Brad Johnson (Your original noodle arm) and Trent Dilfer so I am not sure what point there is. I am looking for a SB, not just a team that doesn't loose as consistently as some other one does.:whistle:

MaxVike
12-11-2010, 05:39 PM
Why not to draft a QB in the first round? How about Why?

Lets look at performance via QB rating and their average draft position by round.

Active QB's with over a thousand yards on the season, put in 8 for any undrafted QB's to provide a weighted number for the averages.

Brady distorts the list a bit at the top.. but a case could be made if you want an elite QB and play the averages.. draft them early.

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj103/pack93z/QBDraftAverage.png

Here is the Detail.

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj103/pack93z/QBDetails.png

Good list, relevant for the discussion. Lot's can be read into this, let's break it down a little more.

36 QBs total...

18 1st Round, Rating 88.44, 9 of which, are above 90
5 2nd Round, Rating 76.46
1 3rd Round, Rating 93.2
2 4th Round, Rating 92.8
1 5th Round, Rating 80.2
4 6th Round, Rating 79.65 with Brady...69.7 without Brady
2 7th Round, Rating 91.45
3 UDFA, Rating 87.67


Obviously, lot's of factors here, tenure, injuries, shitty teams, blah, blah, blah. But, the numbers suggest as Pack93z has concluded. It is more likely that a franchise QB comes earlier in the draft than later. Let's take a look at some Hall of Famers and the Round they were drafted in:

Aikman Rd 1
Steve Young Rd 1
John Elway Rd 1
Jim Kelly Rd 1
Dan Marino Rd 1
Joe Montana Rd 3
Dan Fouts Rd 3
Terry Bradshaw Rd 1
Bob Griese Rd 1
Joe Namath Rd 1
Roger Staubach Rd 10
Fran Tarkenton Rd 3
Len Dawson Rd 1
Sonny Jurgenson Rd 4
Bart Starr Rd 17
Johnny Unitas Rd 9



Manning (Rd 1), Brady (Rd 6), and Favre (Rd 2) will all surely be 1st ballot HOFers. So, those are both compelling lists which certainly indicate a higher success rate drafting a QB early. I still say, if the right guy is there in Rd 1, take him.

Infidel
12-11-2010, 06:15 PM
Assuming a tall, tough, talented guy.....the most important factor you need is attitude.

A healthy self-confidence is essential......a step beyond, no.

If the guy is already a bit arrogant and in love with himself.....forget him and go on to the next.

Muhammad Ali's attitude worked because he worked alone....it just won't work for a team player.

mountainviking
12-11-2010, 06:43 PM
36 QBs total...

•18 1st Round, Rating 88.44, 9 of which, are above 90
•5 2nd Round, Rating 76.46
•1 3rd Round, Rating 93.2
•2 4th Round, Rating 92.8
•1 5th Round, Rating 80.2
•4 6th Round, Rating 79.65 with Brady...69.7 without Brady
•2 7th Round, Rating 91.45
•3 UDFA, Rating 87.67



ummmm, the 3rd, 4th, and 7th rounders are averaging in the 90s too...more than the 1st round average. Hell even the UDFAs are close to that 1st round average. I'm not sure that proves anything. Perhaps, that teams are more likely to draft a QB in the first round due to pressure from fans/media? ;)

To me, a QBs success depends much less on where the guy gets drafted, and more on the talent around him, what he's taught by the coaches, and how his experience is brought along. IMHO we don't want the guy starting in year 1...or 2 if we can help it. So, we're going to need a vet anyway...maybe, TJack is that vet? And we shouldn't be expecting some miracle first year wonderkid to come in and save us anyway. Its too much pressure on him, and unrealistic as he sees bigger, faster, stronger, more complex defenses coming at him.

I'm not saying don't draft a QB round 1. Just, don't feel forced to reach for one that isn't there. The last thing this team needs is a Ryan Leaf or Leinert or Jarmarcus "no-hustle" Russell type of anchor weighing it down and holding it back.

And, there are other needs. OL could sure use a boost, and DL seems to have taken a step back too...some fresh legs there could be tremendous. S/CB still has issues. We have a lot of FAs heading into this questionable CBA rules offseason...we could find ourselves short and/or upgrading elsewhere too.



On a side note. I am looking at QBs too...where's the discussion going on this year's crop? Newton's got issues, but he sure has led some comebacks this year. Sounds like Luck is going early? Guess one of my bosses went to school with his dad...sounds like a smart kid, good family.

Cheers!!

Infidel
12-11-2010, 07:09 PM
Will Newton put some meat on those bones?

He looks more like a greyhound than a pit bull.

Not sure he would hold up under the battering QBs get these days.

i_bleed_purple
12-11-2010, 07:31 PM
36 QBs total...

•18 1st Round, Rating 88.44, 9 of which, are above 90
•5 2nd Round, Rating 76.46
•1 3rd Round, Rating 93.2
•2 4th Round, Rating 92.8
•1 5th Round, Rating 80.2
•4 6th Round, Rating 79.65 with Brady...69.7 without Brady
•2 7th Round, Rating 91.45
•3 UDFA, Rating 87.67



ummmm, the 3rd, 4th, and 7th rounders are averaging in the 90s too...more than the 1st round average. Hell even the UDFAs are close to that 1st round average. I'm not sure that proves anything. Perhaps, that teams are more likely to draft a QB in the first round due to pressure from fans/media? ;)

You're ignoring the fact that this list includes only starters or players who have seen active start time.

How many first round picks don't cut it? About 40%.

How many 2nd? Over 60%

Once you get to the fifth round, almost 90% of QB's will never see the field.

I crunched the numbers, I posted it a few pages back, I'll bump that post so you can se eif you missed.

The gems that did start, are starting for a reason. Because they play well.

i_bleed_purple
12-11-2010, 07:32 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.

MaxVike
12-11-2010, 08:25 PM
36 QBs total...

•18 1st Round, Rating 88.44, 9 of which, are above 90
•5 2nd Round, Rating 76.46
•1 3rd Round, Rating 93.2
•2 4th Round, Rating 92.8
•1 5th Round, Rating 80.2
•4 6th Round, Rating 79.65 with Brady...69.7 without Brady
•2 7th Round, Rating 91.45
•3 UDFA, Rating 87.67



ummmm, the 3rd, 4th, and 7th rounders are averaging in the 90s too...more than the 1st round average. Hell even the UDFAs are close to that 1st round average. I'm not sure that proves anything. Perhaps, that teams are more likely to draft a QB in the first round due to pressure from fans/media? ;)

You're ignoring the fact that this list includes only starters or players who have seen active start time.

How many first round picks don't cut it? About 40%.

How many 2nd? Over 60%

Once you get to the fifth round, almost 90% of QB's will never see the field.

I crunched the numbers, I posted it a few pages back, I'll bump that post so you can se eif you missed.

The gems that did start, are starting for a reason. Because they play well.

Yeah, I started writing, then finished several hours later. It's kinda busy around here. I said from the beginning that the spreadsheet was a good start to a robust analysis.

At the end of the day, good fortune has something to do with it...so, I'll summarize. I want the Vikes to pick a QB that...#1, I like...#2, that, is a future perennial Pro-Bowler...#3, that delivers a Super Bowl WIN that we deserve, and...finally, #4, that is a potential HOFer, and...#5, in whatever Round you deem appropriate. There, that should cover it.

i_bleed_purple
12-11-2010, 08:37 PM
36 QBs total...

•18 1st Round, Rating 88.44, 9 of which, are above 90
•5 2nd Round, Rating 76.46
•1 3rd Round, Rating 93.2
•2 4th Round, Rating 92.8
•1 5th Round, Rating 80.2
•4 6th Round, Rating 79.65 with Brady...69.7 without Brady
•2 7th Round, Rating 91.45
•3 UDFA, Rating 87.67



ummmm, the 3rd, 4th, and 7th rounders are averaging in the 90s too...more than the 1st round average. Hell even the UDFAs are close to that 1st round average. I'm not sure that proves anything. Perhaps, that teams are more likely to draft a QB in the first round due to pressure from fans/media? ;)

You're ignoring the fact that this list includes only starters or players who have seen active start time.

How many first round picks don't cut it? About 40%.

How many 2nd? Over 60%

Once you get to the fifth round, almost 90% of QB's will never see the field.

I crunched the numbers, I posted it a few pages back, I'll bump that post so you can se eif you missed.

The gems that did start, are starting for a reason. Because they play well.

Yeah, I started writing, then finished several hours later. It's kinda busy around here. I said from the beginning that the spreadsheet was a good start to a robust analysis.

At the end of the day, good fortune has something to do with it...so, I'll summarize. I want the Vikes to pick a QB that...#1, I like...#2, that, is a future perennial Pro-Bowler...#3, that delivers a Super Bowl WIN that we deserve, and...finally, #4, that is a potential HOFer, and...#5, in whatever Round you deem appropriate. There, that should cover it.

If it were that easy, anybody would be an NFL GM.

unfortunately, that kind of player doesn't exist in every year's draft.

MaxVike
12-11-2010, 10:31 PM
36 QBs total...

•18 1st Round, Rating 88.44, 9 of which, are above 90
•5 2nd Round, Rating 76.46
•1 3rd Round, Rating 93.2
•2 4th Round, Rating 92.8
•1 5th Round, Rating 80.2
•4 6th Round, Rating 79.65 with Brady...69.7 without Brady
•2 7th Round, Rating 91.45
•3 UDFA, Rating 87.67



ummmm, the 3rd, 4th, and 7th rounders are averaging in the 90s too...more than the 1st round average. Hell even the UDFAs are close to that 1st round average. I'm not sure that proves anything. Perhaps, that teams are more likely to draft a QB in the first round due to pressure from fans/media? ;)

You're ignoring the fact that this list includes only starters or players who have seen active start time.

How many first round picks don't cut it? About 40%.

How many 2nd? Over 60%

Once you get to the fifth round, almost 90% of QB's will never see the field.

I crunched the numbers, I posted it a few pages back, I'll bump that post so you can se eif you missed.

The gems that did start, are starting for a reason. Because they play well.

Yeah, I started writing, then finished several hours later. It's kinda busy around here. I said from the beginning that the spreadsheet was a good start to a robust analysis.

At the end of the day, good fortune has something to do with it...so, I'll summarize. I want the Vikes to pick a QB that...#1, I like...#2, that, is a future perennial Pro-Bowler...#3, that delivers a Super Bowl WIN that we deserve, and...finally, #4, that is a potential HOFer, and...#5, in whatever Round you deem appropriate. There, that should cover it.

If it were that easy, anybody would be an NFL GM.

unfortunately, that kind of player doesn't exist in every year's draft.

Ah...no kidding, I forgot to cover that :dry:

Purple Floyd
12-12-2010, 01:42 AM
One way or the other the Vikings are not exactly known for taking QB's in the first round. I am not sure but Culpepper is the only one I remember in the past 30 years.

The Vikings org. seems genetically engineered to take an old washed up QB on their last leg and try to extract every last ounce of play from them rather than drafting and developing young talented prospects.

i_bleed_purple
12-12-2010, 02:17 AM
One way or the other the Vikings are not exactly known for taking QB's in the first round. I am not sure but Culpepper is the only one I remember in the past 30 years.

The Vikings org. seems genetically engineered to take an old washed up QB on their last leg and try to extract every last ounce of play from them rather than drafting and developing young talented prospects.

1977 - Tommy Kramer
1999 - Daunte Culpepper

The ONLY two first round QB's the Vikings have ever taken.

singersp
12-12-2010, 02:34 PM
Why not to draft a QB in the first round? How about Why?

Lets look at performance via QB rating and their average draft position by round.

Active QB's with over a thousand yards on the season, put in 8 for any undrafted QB's to provide a weighted number for the averages.

Brady distorts the list a bit at the top.. but a case could be made if you want an elite QB and play the averages.. draft them early.

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj103/pack93z/QBDraftAverage.png

Here is the Detail.

http://i270.photobucket.com/albums/jj103/pack93z/QBDetails.png

The other distortion factor in that chart is the QB rating. It appears to be from this year only, rather than career.

Favre's career QB rating can't be a mere 69.6, so the rating chart is skewed, unless they use the career avg. QB rating.

Marrdro
12-13-2010, 07:01 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.
I think your numbers are skewed a bit based on your "red is an average player" player catagory and who you included.

I wonder how many people like TJ's production as a backup compared to what we saw this weekend.

I know there were several teams floundering with thier backup under center. All the Vikings did was win with thiers under center.

i_bleed_purple
12-13-2010, 07:04 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.
I think your numbers are skewed a bit based on your "red is an average player" player catagory and who you included.

I wonder how many people like TJ's production as a backup compared to what we saw this weekend.

I know there were several teams floundering with thier backup under center. All the Vikings did was win with thiers under center.

TJ is exactly as I described, adaquate backup, or shaky starter.[

yes, some of those are up for interpretation, but if you change a couple names, in the end the numbers will still be similar to how they are now.

Marrdro
12-13-2010, 07:11 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.
I think your numbers are skewed a bit based on your "red is an average player" player catagory and who you included.

I wonder how many people like TJ's production as a backup compared to what we saw this weekend.

I know there were several teams floundering with thier backup under center. All the Vikings did was win with thiers under center.

TJ is exactly as I described, adaquate backup, or shaky starter.[

yes, some of those are up for interpretation, but if you change a couple names, in the end the numbers will still be similar to how they are now.
My apologies, I wasn't specifically talking about TJ. Guys I question as being "Red" are:

Ramswey, Leftwich, Walter, McCown, Simms, Rosie......

A case could be made for Leftwich, Rosie and Simms as they have actually done something that could be construed as productive, but what have the others done?

Then, to play devils advocate, you could also say that Leftwich was shitcanned and hasn't done anything since he was replace by Gerrard other than to land all over the place. Simms was OK at best, got hurt and hasn't done anything since. Rosie has come in as a backup, but had issues even doing that.

McCown. I can't even try to make a case for him or Ramsey.

i_bleed_purple
12-13-2010, 07:45 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.
I think your numbers are skewed a bit based on your "red is an average player" player catagory and who you included.

I wonder how many people like TJ's production as a backup compared to what we saw this weekend.

I know there were several teams floundering with thier backup under center. All the Vikings did was win with thiers under center.

TJ is exactly as I described, adaquate backup, or shaky starter.

yes, some of those are up for interpretation, but if you change a couple names, in the end the numbers will still be similar to how they are now.
My apologies, I wasn't specifically talking about TJ. Guys I question as being "Red" are:

Ramswey, Leftwich, Walter, McCown, Simms, Rosie......

A case could be made for Leftwich, Rosie and Simms as they have actually done something that could be construed as productive, but what have the others done?


Guys like Ramsey, Walter, McCown are still kicking around for a reason, they make a decent backup. They're not exceptional, they're not to be relied on as a starter, but when needed, they can step in and play a quarter.



Then, to play devils advocate, you could also say that Leftwich was shitcanned and hasn't done anything since he was replace by Gerrard other than to land all over the place. Simms was OK at best, got hurt and hasn't done anything since. Rosie has come in as a backup, but had issues even doing that. Yes, you could say that, but he's still a decent backup, which is part of what makes up Red. It's a broad range of players who aren't a waste of a roster spot necessarily, but there's room for better players.

Marrdro
12-13-2010, 07:48 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.
I think your numbers are skewed a bit based on your "red is an average player" player catagory and who you included.

I wonder how many people like TJ's production as a backup compared to what we saw this weekend.

I know there were several teams floundering with thier backup under center. All the Vikings did was win with thiers under center.

TJ is exactly as I described, adaquate backup, or shaky starter.

yes, some of those are up for interpretation, but if you change a couple names, in the end the numbers will still be similar to how they are now.
My apologies, I wasn't specifically talking about TJ. Guys I question as being "Red" are:

Ramswey, Leftwich, Walter, McCown, Simms, Rosie......

A case could be made for Leftwich, Rosie and Simms as they have actually done something that could be construed as productive, but what have the others done?


Guys like Ramsey, Walter, McCown are still kicking around for a reason, they make a decent backup. They're not exceptional, they're not to be relied on as a starter, but when needed, they can step in and play a quarter.



Then, to play devils advocate, you could also say that Leftwich was shitcanned and hasn't done anything since he was replace by Gerrard other than to land all over the place. Simms was OK at best, got hurt and hasn't done anything since. Rosie has come in as a backup, but had issues even doing that. Yes, you could say that, but he's still a decent backup, which is part of what makes up Red. It's a broad range of players who aren't a waste of a roster spot necessarily, but there's room for better players.
Several backups that came in this weekend aren't on your list. How come?

12purplepride28
12-13-2010, 08:05 PM
The broncos-cardinals game reminds me a lot of the bills vikings game. It was a blowout with a backup QB playing. Did the Cardinals explode the scoreboard because Skelton is so good??? DOUBT IT. Neil Rackers racked (pun... ahaha i'm hilarious) up 25 points and hightower had a career game, and the defense created key turnovers in broncos territory. Same with the Vikings. We didn't light it up BECAUSE of Tavaris, we just had excellent performances by the defense, Rice, and AP.

Marrdro
12-13-2010, 08:10 PM
The broncos-cardinals game reminds me a lot of the bills vikings game. It was a blowout with a backup QB playing. Did the Cardinals explode the scoreboard because Skelton is so good??? DOUBT IT. Neil Rackers racked (pun... ahaha i'm hilarious) up 25 points and hightower had a career game, and the defense created key turnovers in broncos territory. Same with the Vikings. We didn't light it up BECAUSE of Tavaris, we just had excellent performances by the defense, Rice, and AP.
So are you saying the whole PUKERS team didn't show up or they sucked just cause of thier backup QB?

Nope, like it or not, we atleast have one heck of a good backup in TJ and we are better off than alot of teams and this weekends performance by a few of them show this to be true.

i_bleed_purple
12-13-2010, 09:03 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.
I think your numbers are skewed a bit based on your "red is an average player" player catagory and who you included.

I wonder how many people like TJ's production as a backup compared to what we saw this weekend.

I know there were several teams floundering with thier backup under center. All the Vikings did was win with thiers under center.

TJ is exactly as I described, adaquate backup, or shaky starter.

yes, some of those are up for interpretation, but if you change a couple names, in the end the numbers will still be similar to how they are now.
My apologies, I wasn't specifically talking about TJ. Guys I question as being "Red" are:

Ramswey, Leftwich, Walter, McCown, Simms, Rosie......

A case could be made for Leftwich, Rosie and Simms as they have actually done something that could be construed as productive, but what have the others done?


Guys like Ramsey, Walter, McCown are still kicking around for a reason, they make a decent backup. They're not exceptional, they're not to be relied on as a starter, but when needed, they can step in and play a quarter.



Then, to play devils advocate, you could also say that Leftwich was shitcanned and hasn't done anything since he was replace by Gerrard other than to land all over the place. Simms was OK at best, got hurt and hasn't done anything since. Rosie has come in as a backup, but had issues even doing that. Yes, you could say that, but he's still a decent backup, which is part of what makes up Red. It's a broad range of players who aren't a waste of a roster spot necessarily, but there's room for better players.
Several backups that came in this weekend aren't on your list. How come?

Some aren't reliable backups, some will be gone in a year or two. Some were drafted out of my range.

For example, Curtis Painter on the Colts, he's a backup, and if he were a Colt in the past couple years, he would have played signicantly at the end of the season. HOwever, the guy plays like garbage and doesn't make the list. Just because they play doesn't mean they're worth being on there.

Alot of them, you just can't tell yet. They havne't had their shot to prove if they can be relied on or not.

i_bleed_purple
12-13-2010, 09:04 PM
The broncos-cardinals game reminds me a lot of the bills vikings game. It was a blowout with a backup QB playing. Did the Cardinals explode the scoreboard because Skelton is so good??? DOUBT IT. Neil Rackers racked (pun... ahaha i'm hilarious) up 25 points and hightower had a career game, and the defense created key turnovers in broncos territory. Same with the Vikings. We didn't light it up BECAUSE of Tavaris, we just had excellent performances by the defense, Rice, and AP.

fyi, rackers is a Texan now.

but yes, I'm not sure how it ended, but by the third quarter, the kicker had accounted for ALL of the Card's points.

Marrdro
12-13-2010, 09:15 PM
Here's the Quarterbacks by round, and who worked out well.

This covers the 2000 to 2008 drafts. Anything more recent is too difficult to judge at this point, Anything earlier, and I'll probably miss some names of mediocre players.

I'll format by colour. Yellow is probowler, Purple is Franchise player, or looks like he will be a franchise guy, red is an average player, ok starter or good backup. Unformatted is a guy that hasn't done crap in the league.

So, round by round:
First round:
Chad Pennington, Mike vick, David Carr, Joey Harrington, Patrick RamseyCarson palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller, Rex Grossman, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger, JP Losman, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Jason Campbell, Vince Young, Matt Lienart, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco

Evaluation: out of 23 QB's drafted in the first round:
8/23 seem to be Franchise QB's, a few others have potential. so 34%
9/23 have made the probowl, not including guys like Ryan or Flacco. 39%
3/23 have been ok players who make quality backups. 13%
9/23 are busts, or haven't done anything yet. 40%

11/23 are probowl caliber players: 48%
3/23 are decent backups: 12%
9/23 are busts: 40%

Round two:
Drew Brees Quincy Carter, Marques Tuiasosopo, Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, David Greene, Kellen Clemens, Tarvaris Jackson, Kevin Kolb, John Beck, Drew Stanton, Brian Brohm, Chad Henne.

So far,
1/13 are Probowl caliber players 8%
4/13 have made reliable backups or borderline starters: 31%
8/13 have done not much: 61%

Round three:
Giovanni Carmazzi, Chris Redman, Josh McCown, Dave Ragone, Chris Simms, Matt Schaub, Kyle Orton, Stafan Lefors, Charlie Whitehurst, Brodie Croyle, Trent Edwards, Brian Brohm, Kevin O'connell

out of 12
1/12 look to be a franchise QB: 8%
3/12 have made decent backups or ok starters: 25%
8/12 have sucked: 66%

Round four:

Chris Weinke, Sage Rosenfels, Jesse Palmer, David Garrard, Rohan Davey, Seneca Wallace, Luke McCown, Brad Smith, Isiah Stanback,
Out of 9
1/9 are probowl caliber 11%
2/9 make ok backups 22%
6/9 suck.66%

Rounds Five, six, seven and undrafted:
There's too many to list, but the only noteworth players are:
Tom Brady, Tony Romo, shaun Hill, Derek Anderson, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Matt Cassel, Troy Smith,

Out of 65 players drafted fifth round or later:
2/65 are franchise players(Romo, Brady), 3%
5/65 are ok backups, or starters that look ok, but are still improving: 8%
58/65 are useless.89%

A condensed version

1st round:
Franchise: 48%
Ok/Backup: 12%
Bust: 40%

2nd Round
Franchise: 8%
ok/backup: 31%
bust: 61%

3rd round
Franchise: 9%
Ok/Backup: 25%
Bust: 66%

4th round
Probowl: 11%
Ok/Backup: 22%
Bust: 66%

5th and beyond:
Franchise: 3%
OK/Backup: 8%
Bust: 89%

The numbers don't lie.
I think your numbers are skewed a bit based on your "red is an average player" player catagory and who you included.

I wonder how many people like TJ's production as a backup compared to what we saw this weekend.

I know there were several teams floundering with thier backup under center. All the Vikings did was win with thiers under center.

TJ is exactly as I described, adaquate backup, or shaky starter.

yes, some of those are up for interpretation, but if you change a couple names, in the end the numbers will still be similar to how they are now.
My apologies, I wasn't specifically talking about TJ. Guys I question as being "Red" are:

Ramswey, Leftwich, Walter, McCown, Simms, Rosie......

A case could be made for Leftwich, Rosie and Simms as they have actually done something that could be construed as productive, but what have the others done?


Guys like Ramsey, Walter, McCown are still kicking around for a reason, they make a decent backup. They're not exceptional, they're not to be relied on as a starter, but when needed, they can step in and play a quarter.



Then, to play devils advocate, you could also say that Leftwich was shitcanned and hasn't done anything since he was replace by Gerrard other than to land all over the place. Simms was OK at best, got hurt and hasn't done anything since. Rosie has come in as a backup, but had issues even doing that. Yes, you could say that, but he's still a decent backup, which is part of what makes up Red. It's a broad range of players who aren't a waste of a roster spot necessarily, but there's room for better players.
Several backups that came in this weekend aren't on your list. How come?

Some aren't reliable backups, some will be gone in a year or two. Some were drafted out of my range.

For example, Curtis Painter on the Colts, he's a backup, and if he were a Colt in the past couple years, he would have played signicantly at the end of the season. HOwever, the guy plays like garbage and doesn't make the list. Just because they play doesn't mean they're worth being on there.

Alot of them, you just can't tell yet. They havne't had their shot to prove if they can be relied on or not.
I hear ya and agree on all counts. My question and comment still stands.......(Comment)I think your data is skewed by the number of your "Reds" (who you have in there) and (Question) why don't you have the cats that came in as backups this weekend in your data?

Additionally, don't you think a number one pick is a bit high for a kid who will maybe workout to be a good backup?

We take one with the first round pick he better be of starter material not backup material.

i_bleed_purple
12-13-2010, 09:23 PM
(Question) why don't you have the cats that came in as backups this weekend in your data?
I compiled this list before this weekend


Additionally, don't you think a number one pick is a bit high for a kid who will maybe workout to be a good backup?
Yes, but that's not hte point of this list. I'm just saying that a first round pick gives you the best chance of having a franchise QB, and if not that, the best chance of having a guy who's good for a probowl or two, or a backup at least. The odds of a bust are smallest in the first round. The late round players people here seem so keen on picking, fail more often than any other round.


We take one with the first round pick he better be of starter material not backup material.
Yes, but if we don't take a risk every now and then, we get an organization who's two best QB's have been Fran Tarkenton and Daunte Culpepper.

Zeus
12-13-2010, 09:24 PM
Yes, but if we don't take a risk every now and then, we get an organization who's two best QB's have been Fran Tarkenton and Daunte Culpepper.

No love for Tommy Kramer?

=Z=

i_bleed_purple
12-13-2010, 09:31 PM
Yes, but if we don't take a risk every now and then, we get an organization who's two best QB's have been Fran Tarkenton and Daunte Culpepper.

No love for Tommy Kramer?

=Z=

Although good, he had a few very good seasons, and alot of seasons hurt, or as a backup.

He only played a full season once, and since 1979(when the league switched to 16 games) to 1990, he played an average of 9.9 games a season.

his TD/INT record stands at 159/158 with an overall rating of 72.8.

Yes, he's been good, but I think Culpepper was at the very least, comparable to what we got with KRamer.

Also, remember that Kramer was the only other first round QB we drafted.

Regardless, when our top three QB's are Tark, Kramer and Culpepper, perhaps we're doing something wrong.

Pick any other team with a history of winning superbowls, and they will have always had one or more really good QB's.

We haven't had a franchise QB since Tarkenton retired.

Tark was our great QB, and he got us by far the closest we'll ever be to potentially being a dynasty.

i_bleed_purple
12-13-2010, 09:35 PM
So, using the Vikings trend of drafting QB's,

we have 100% with having good to great QB's in the first round.

After that, well it drops off significantly.

12purplepride28
12-14-2010, 12:31 AM
The broncos-cardinals game reminds me a lot of the bills vikings game. It was a blowout with a backup QB playing. Did the Cardinals explode the scoreboard because Skelton is so good??? DOUBT IT. Neil Rackers racked (pun... ahaha i'm hilarious) up 25 points and hightower had a career game, and the defense created key turnovers in broncos territory. Same with the Vikings. We didn't light it up BECAUSE of Tavaris, we just had excellent performances by the defense, Rice, and AP.

fyi, rackers is a Texan now.

but yes, I'm not sure how it ended, but by the third quarter, the kicker had accounted for ALL of the Card's points.

Oh lol good catch. I meant Jay Feely

vikes2456
12-14-2010, 04:47 AM
We NEED to draft a Franchise QB. Not a game manager, not some project, a perspective Franchise QB. If you look at the most successful teams over the last ten years, they have that. We can draft another project afterwords, but for the time being this is not even an option anymore.

marstc09
12-14-2010, 04:59 AM
Marrdro will want a DT. LOL

Purple Floyd
12-14-2010, 05:01 AM
The broncos-cardinals game reminds me a lot of the bills vikings game. It was a blowout with a backup QB playing. Did the Cardinals explode the scoreboard because Skelton is so good??? DOUBT IT. Neil Rackers racked (pun... ahaha i'm hilarious) up 25 points and hightower had a career game, and the defense created key turnovers in broncos territory. Same with the Vikings. We didn't light it up BECAUSE of Tavaris, we just had excellent performances by the defense, Rice, and AP.
So are you saying the whole PUKERS team didn't show up or they sucked just cause of thier backup QB?

Nope, like it or not, we atleast have one heck of a good backup in TJ and we are better off than alot of teams and this weekends performance by a few of them show this to be true.

God yea,. I can't imagine where we would be without him.

LMAO.

Any chance they could swap him for Sage before both teams leave for home without anyone noticing?

Purple Floyd
12-14-2010, 05:02 AM
Marrdro will want a DT. LOL

+1.

mountainviking
12-14-2010, 06:50 PM
If we can't get a better performance out of our OL, then I don't think any QB is going to look much better for our Vikings. Hutch has been dinged up for two years, Mak is still "only playing when he wants to," and due to injury, experience, and perhaps, size, our C has been a big disappointment.

I would actually rather see an OG/C guy or yes, even a DT in the first round because the good QBs are very likely going to be gone at our pick, and I think that better value may be there for perhaps, a bigger need...and, the big dominant guys are even more rare than "franchise" QBs.

A boost at DT could help vs. the running game, and provide a better chance at pass rush to our DEs. But, for my 2-cents, I'm hoping for the very best C in the draft, a guy smart enough and versatile enough to play OG for awhile if next year's offensive coaches think Sully can really play C. Basically upgrade the center of our OL with a guy who can backup Hutch/set us up for the future there, and possibly upgrade C and/or RG.

Then, we sign the best FA QB available, and draft another project to compete with Webb for 2nd/future guy.

i_bleed_purple
12-14-2010, 07:01 PM
If we can't get a better performance out of our OL, then I don't think any QB is going to look much better for our Vikings. Hutch has been dinged up for two years, Mak is still "only playing when he wants to," and due to injury, experience, and perhaps, size, our C has been a big disappointment.

I would actually rather see an OG/C guy or yes, even a DT in the first round because the good QBs are very likely going to be gone at our pick, and I think that better value may be there for perhaps, a bigger need...and, the big dominant guys are even more rare than "franchise" QBs.

A boost at DT could help vs. the running game, and provide a better chance at pass rush to our DEs. But, for my 2-cents, I'm hoping for the very best C in the draft, a guy smart enough and versatile enough to play OG for awhile if next year's offensive coaches think Sully can really play C. Basically upgrade the center of our OL with a guy who can backup Hutch/set us up for the future there, and possibly upgrade C and/or RG.

Then, we sign the best FA QB available, and draft another project to compete with Webb for 2nd/future guy.
I'm not so sure DT is our problem.

If I recall, all the big gains on the ground came on the edge, Runs to the Left mainly I believe. That's Jared Allen and Chad Greenway. DT's actually played pretty well I though.

Marrdro
12-14-2010, 07:12 PM
Marrdro will want a DT. LOL
And you'll say CB.....LOL.

On a side note, did you watch what a good defense can do to help out a offense?

Eventually you give it back to them enough, even a QB like Eli can get it done.

I for one quake in my sleep thinking about or DL and its inability to stop the run. Only reason the stats have been there this year is cause we haven't faced any team with a RB.

Aints were injured. Dolphins were trying to pass. Lions have nothing. Jets, well LT looked good against us but hasn't the rest of the year unless he goes against a defense that can't stop the run. Cowgirls can't figure out how to use thier RB's, atleast with thier old HC they couldn't. Patriots were transitioning into thier new offense. Those little guys would embarrass us now. Pukers, Deadskins, Bills all had thier starters and a couple of backups out.

In short, anyone who doesn't see that we need help on the DL in this area is still living on past stats and hasn't been watching the last 2 years.

Marrdro
12-14-2010, 07:14 PM
If we can't get a better performance out of our OL, then I don't think any QB is going to look much better for our Vikings. Hutch has been dinged up for two years, Mak is still "only playing when he wants to," and due to injury, experience, and perhaps, size, our C has been a big disappointment.

I would actually rather see an OG/C guy or yes, even a DT in the first round because the good QBs are very likely going to be gone at our pick, and I think that better value may be there for perhaps, a bigger need...and, the big dominant guys are even more rare than "franchise" QBs.

A boost at DT could help vs. the running game, and provide a better chance at pass rush to our DEs. But, for my 2-cents, I'm hoping for the very best C in the draft, a guy smart enough and versatile enough to play OG for awhile if next year's offensive coaches think Sully can really play C. Basically upgrade the center of our OL with a guy who can backup Hutch/set us up for the future there, and possibly upgrade C and/or RG.

Then, we sign the best FA QB available, and draft another project to compete with Webb for 2nd/future guy.
Someone with a clue.

You gonna do atleast a two round mock this year?

Marrdro
12-14-2010, 07:17 PM
If we can't get a better performance out of our OL, then I don't think any QB is going to look much better for our Vikings. Hutch has been dinged up for two years, Mak is still "only playing when he wants to," and due to injury, experience, and perhaps, size, our C has been a big disappointment.

I would actually rather see an OG/C guy or yes, even a DT in the first round because the good QBs are very likely going to be gone at our pick, and I think that better value may be there for perhaps, a bigger need...and, the big dominant guys are even more rare than "franchise" QBs.

A boost at DT could help vs. the running game, and provide a better chance at pass rush to our DEs. But, for my 2-cents, I'm hoping for the very best C in the draft, a guy smart enough and versatile enough to play OG for awhile if next year's offensive coaches think Sully can really play C. Basically upgrade the center of our OL with a guy who can backup Hutch/set us up for the future there, and possibly upgrade C and/or RG.

Then, we sign the best FA QB available, and draft another project to compete with Webb for 2nd/future guy.
I'm not so sure DT is our problem.

If I recall, all the big gains on the ground came on the edge, Runs to the Left mainly I believe. That's Jared Allen and Chad Greenway. DT's actually played pretty well I though.
Although I agree with you to a point (that 73 yarder was on JA and EJ) but a dominant DT like Phat Pat used to be would have gotten in the middle and denied that lane.

That little change would have allowed EJ to re-adjust as well the the S's to change/get a better angle from were they were inside.

Look at how the Giants DL attacked AD. Up the middle first, making him bounch to the speedier outside guys who stretched him out instead of allowing him to go north and south off his cut/bounce.

i_bleed_purple
12-14-2010, 07:22 PM
Marrdro will want a DT. LOL
And you'll say CB.....LOL.

On a side note, did you watch what a good defense can do to help out a offense?

Eventually you give it back to them enough, even a QB like Eli can get it done.

I for one quake in my sleep thinking about or DL and its inability to stop the run. Only reason the stats have been there this year is cause we haven't faced any team with a RB.

Aints were injured. Dolphins were trying to pass. Lions have nothing. Jets, well LT looked good against us but hasn't the rest of the year unless he goes against a defense that can't stop the run. Cowgirls can't figure out how to use thier RB's, atleast with thier old HC they couldn't. Patriots were transitioning into thier new offense. Those little guys would embarrass us now. Pukers, Deadskins, Bills all had thier starters and a couple of backups out.

In short, anyone who doesn't see that we need help on the DL in this area is still living on past stats and hasn't been watching the last 2 years.

yes, our DL has sucked.

But correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't all those big runs come from the outside? Off-tackle runs for the most part? Allen got caught going one way, EJ misses a tackle and BOOM, 72 yards.

Last I checked DT's don't play on the outside of the DL.

seems what you want is to switch to a 3-4 scheme. Thats where those DT type builds will come in handy.

slavinator
12-14-2010, 07:48 PM
If we can't get a better performance out of our OL, then I don't think any QB is going to look much better for our Vikings. Hutch has been dinged up for two years, Mak is still "only playing when he wants to," and due to injury, experience, and perhaps, size, our C has been a big disappointment.

I would actually rather see an OG/C guy or yes, even a DT in the first round because the good QBs are very likely going to be gone at our pick, and I think that better value may be there for perhaps, a bigger need...and, the big dominant guys are even more rare than "franchise" QBs.

A boost at DT could help vs. the running game, and provide a better chance at pass rush to our DEs. But, for my 2-cents, I'm hoping for the very best C in the draft, a guy smart enough and versatile enough to play OG for awhile if next year's offensive coaches think Sully can really play C. Basically upgrade the center of our OL with a guy who can backup Hutch/set us up for the future there, and possibly upgrade C and/or RG.

Then, we sign the best FA QB available, and draft another project to compete with Webb for 2nd/future guy.
I'm not so sure DT is our problem.

If I recall, all the big gains on the ground came on the edge, Runs to the Left mainly I believe. That's Jared Allen and Chad Greenway. DT's actually played pretty well I though.
Although I agree with you to a point (that 73 yarder was on JA and EJ) but a dominant DT like Phat Pat used to be would have gotten in the middle and denied that lane.

That little change would have allowed EJ to re-adjust as well the the S's to change/get a better angle from were they were inside.

Look at how the Giants DL attacked AD. Up the middle first, making him bounch to the speedier outside guys who stretched him out instead of allowing him to go north and south off his cut/bounce.

Our problem on the 73yrd run and a couple others were that we undercut or took to poor an angle at the LB position, while not setting an effective edge with our DE, Corner, and OLB. While I agree that the DT couldve aided in redirecting him, they down-blocked with one of their 14 TE's on our DT. I hate to say it but, EJ took a bad angle and it was compounded by the fact that we had virtually everyone at or near the line of scrimmage. One small snafu in a set like that and it is 6pts.

Now to the task at hand. I think that we should look at ALL positions in round 1 and take the best player available. Certainly there are some more than others that are a glaring need but we also won this division with Gus, TJ, and Kelly Holcomb.

WE will also need to begin leveraging players who do not fit our core group and get maximum compensation or players in return that fit the ultimate plan. The window for the Vikes is so small it makes me think that this draft will be a need based draft and what they dont get they will seek in FA.

I think that we need to look at this draft class and identify the strongest spots and pick from there. I am not opposed to going OL, QB,or DT in the first but it depends on the other players there.

Marrdro
12-14-2010, 08:01 PM
Some good stuff in there Slav. Comments/questions follow:


Our problem on the 73yrd run and a couple others were that we undercut or took to poor an angle at the LB position, while not setting an effective edge with our DE, Corner, and OLB. While I agree that the DT couldve aided in redirecting him, they down-blocked with one of their 14 TE's on our DT. I hate to say it but, EJ took a bad angle and it was compounded by the fact that we had virtually everyone at or near the line of scrimmage. One small snafu in a set like that and it is 6pts.

Bigger question is why was the Mike over there instead of the Will? Or, why was he in so deep? If he would have been off in the normal Will spot, he wouldn't have got caugth up in that mess and would have made the play.

Anway, answer to the bigger question is, He and Chad were working on a delayed blitz (working pass) and got caught by a running play.


Now to the task at hand. I think that we should look at ALL positions in round 1 and take the best player available. Certainly there are some more than others that are a glaring need but we also won this division with Gus, TJ, and Kelly Holcomb.
Agree, but I hope they really look hard at DT, QB and OT before they look at any other spot.


WE will also need to begin leveraging players who do not fit our core group and get maximum compensation or players in return that fit the ultimate plan. The window for the Vikes is so small it makes me think that this draft will be a need based draft and what they dont get they will seek in FA.
I don't think we will be very active at all in FA if they can keep most of our own FA's. If we can't, we will probably will still have to pay alot more than normal to keep the ones we can.


I think that we need to look at this draft class and identify the strongest spots and pick from there. I am not opposed to going OL, QB,or DT in the first but it depends on the other players there.
Can't go wrong with BPA even if you don't need a guy at that position, but drafting as high as we are going to, we should have a crack at the 2nd best at almost all positions.

mountainviking
12-27-2010, 07:58 PM
Can't go wrong with BPA even if you don't need a guy at that position, but drafting as high as we are going to, we should have a crack at the 2nd best at almost all positions.


AND BEST AT SOME POSITIONS!!! ;)

Safety!? Gotta like what I've seen out of Earl Thomas and Eric Berry as rookies.

Center!? Not sure Sully is going to be the guy, but a very important spot to have continuity at, and worth reaching a bit for a guy we feel can dominate, or perhaps, trading back some in the first for an extra 2nd and/or 3rd depending on how far the move was! Especially if it adds depth to OG and/or OT too!

LB? Leber and Greenway have expiring contracts and EJ wasn't quite himself this year...

Where as at QB we may be looking at 3rd or 4th best. Don't get me wrong, I'll be very interested in looking at all the top QB prospects this off season, just saying, we may be best served by snagging BPA over biggest need. We could always do something crazy like give up next year's first to pounce on a later first round guy who drops, or move up a lil around early second to get the next best guy we might be thinking about dropping pick no.9 on! ;)

jargomcfargo
12-27-2010, 08:22 PM
If the right QB is accessable I would like to use the first pick.
Better work on the O-line with the second pick.

That's just a wish list for me. I'm still a BPA guy in reality.

I would like to see us get back to building through the draft more than paying high priced free agents. Paying our free agent stars, to keep them, being the obvious exception.

snowinapril
12-27-2010, 09:03 PM
Right now, we pick anywhere from 11 to 14 in the draft.

There is a chance we don't win another game this season. If so, that means that the Lions will finish above us with a minimum of 6 wins.

Az vs SF on team moves up to 6 wins
Mn vs Det on team moves up to 6 wins (assuming Mn loses to Philly)

Bills, Bengals, and Browns all have very difficult match ups.

6 Wins
Seattle Seahawks
Tennessee Titans
Washington Redskins
5 Wins
Minnesota Vikings
Arizona Cardinals
Cleveland Browns
Dallas Cowboys
Detroit Lions
Houston Texans
San Francisco 49ers
4 Wins
Buffalo Bills
Cincinnati Bengals
Denver Broncos
2 Wins
Carolina Panthers


Draft order prediction (very rough) 4 thru 9 could be slightly different because of division and conference records:

1 Car
2 Cin
3 Buf
4 SF (.494 strength of schedule)
5 Denver (.508)
6 Dallas (.521)
7 Houston (.527)
8 Minnesota (.542)
9 Cleveland (.576)
10 Az
11 Det
12 Was
13 Ten
14 Sea

Get a QB and still go after a project QB with our first pick. I hope we never pick this low again, EVER, so make good use of the pick. Maybe we can trade up and take Luck. If not stay where we are at and take what comes our way.

snowinapril
12-27-2010, 10:17 PM
QBs drafted since 2001 in the first round:
Green = Quality
Red = Bust
Orange = Possibility Yet

2010
1 Sam Bradford - OK
25 Timmy Tebow - Florida
Notables - Clausen, McCoy, Skelton, Joe Webb

2009
1 Matthew Stafford - Georgia (injury prone)
5 Mark Sanchez - USC
17 Josh Freeman - K-State
Notables - White, Painter, Null

2008
3 Matt Ryan - BC
18 Joe Flacco - Delaware
Notables - Brohm, Henne, BOOTY, Dixon, Brennan, FLYNN

2007
1 JaMarcus Russell - LSU (lacked work ethic)
22 Brady Quinn - Notre Dame (just not that good?)
Notables - Kolb, Stanton, Edwards, Troy Smith, Thigpen

2006
3 Vince Young - Texas (lacked maturity)
10 Matt Leinart - USC (lacked work ethic)
11 Jay Cutler - Vandy
Notables - Clemens, Jackson, Croyle, Whitehurst, Gradkowski, and DJ Shockley.

2005
1 Alex Smith - Utah (if only SF would have taken Rodger instead)
24 Aaron Rodgers - Cal
25 Jason Campbell - Auburn
Notables - Frye, Walter, Orton, Orlovsky, Anderson, Cassel, Fitzpatrick

2004
1 Eli Manning - Ole Miss
4 Phillip Rivers - NC State
11 Big Ben - Miami of Ohio
22 JP Losman - Tulane
Notables - Schaub, McCown, Sorgi

2003
1 Carson Palmer - USC
7 Byron Leftwich - Marshall (was ok for time)
19 Kyle Boller - Cal (was ok for time)
22 Rex Grossman - Florida
Notables - Simms Wallace, St Pierre, Henson

2002
1 Carr - Fresno (reach)
3 Harrington - Oregon (reach)
32 Ramsey - Tulane (reach)
Notables - McCown, Gerrard (didn't realize he was so old LOL)

2001
1 Vick - Va Tech
Notables - Brees (2nd round), Carter, Weinke, Rosenfels, Feeley

kevoncox
12-27-2010, 10:42 PM
QBs drafted since 2001 in the first round:
Green = Quality
Red = Bust
Orange = Possibility Yet

2010
1 Sam Bradford - OK
25 Timmy Tebow - Florida
Notables - Clausen, McCoy, Skelton, Joe Webb

2009
1 Matthew Stafford - Georgia (injury prone)
5 Mark Sanchez - USC
17 Josh Freeman - K-State
Notables - White, Painter, Null

2008
3 Matt Ryan - BC
18 Joe Flacco - Delaware
Notables - Brohm, Henne, BOOTY, Dixon, Brennan, FLYNN

2007
1 JaMarcus Russell - LSU (lacked work ethic)
22 Brady Quinn - Notre Dame (just not that good?)
Notables - Kolb, Stanton, Edwards, Troy Smith, Thigpen

2006
3 Vince Young - Texas (lacked maturity)
10 Matt Leinart - USC (lacked work ethic)
11 Jay Cutler - Vandy
Notables - Clemens, Jackson, Croyle, Whitehurst, Gradkowski, and DJ Shockley.

2005
1 Alex Smith - Utah (if only SF would have taken Rodger instead)
24 Aaron Rodgers - Cal
25 Jason Campbell - Auburn
Notables - Frye, Walter, Orton, Orlovsky, Anderson, Cassel, Fitzpatrick

2004
1 Eli Manning - Ole Miss
4 Phillip Rivers - NC State
11 Big Ben - Miami of Ohio
22 JP Losman - Tulane
Notables - Schaub, McCown, Sorgi

2003
1 Carson Palmer - USC
7 Byron Leftwich - Marshall (was ok for time)
19 Kyle Boller - Cal (was ok for time)
22 Rex Grossman - Florida
Notables - Simms Wallace, St Pierre, Henson

2002
1 Carr - Fresno (reach)
3 Harrington - Oregon (reach)
32 Ramsey - Tulane (reach)
Notables - McCown, Gerrard (didn't realize he was so old LOL)

2001
1 Vick - Va Tech
Notables - Brees (2nd round), Carter, Weinke, Rosenfels, Feeley

I disagree with some of your ratings.
I don't think VInce is a bust. All he does is win.
Smith is also a good Qb, however, his team ha shad 5 offensive schemes in the past 6 years. A lot of teams have ruined these guys. However, I would like to see the mark up for DTs drafted in the first round.

snowinapril
12-27-2010, 11:02 PM
QBs drafted since 2001 in the first round:
Green = Quality
Red = Bust
Orange = Possibility Yet

2010
1 Sam Bradford - OK
25 Timmy Tebow - Florida
Notables - Clausen, McCoy, Skelton, Joe Webb

2009
1 Matthew Stafford - Georgia (injury prone)
5 Mark Sanchez - USC
17 Josh Freeman - K-State
Notables - White, Painter, Null

2008
3 Matt Ryan - BC
18 Joe Flacco - Delaware
Notables - Brohm, Henne, BOOTY, Dixon, Brennan, FLYNN

2007
1 JaMarcus Russell - LSU (lacked work ethic)
22 Brady Quinn - Notre Dame (just not that good?)
Notables - Kolb, Stanton, Edwards, Troy Smith, Thigpen

2006
3 Vince Young - Texas (lacked maturity)
10 Matt Leinart - USC (lacked work ethic)
11 Jay Cutler - Vandy
Notables - Clemens, Jackson, Croyle, Whitehurst, Gradkowski, and DJ Shockley.

2005
1 Alex Smith - Utah (if only SF would have taken Rodger instead)
24 Aaron Rodgers - Cal
25 Jason Campbell - Auburn
Notables - Frye, Walter, Orton, Orlovsky, Anderson, Cassel, Fitzpatrick

2004
1 Eli Manning - Ole Miss
4 Phillip Rivers - NC State
11 Big Ben - Miami of Ohio
22 JP Losman - Tulane
Notables - Schaub, McCown, Sorgi

2003
1 Carson Palmer - USC
7 Byron Leftwich - Marshall (was ok for time)
19 Kyle Boller - Cal (was ok for time)
22 Rex Grossman - Florida
Notables - Simms Wallace, St Pierre, Henson

2002
1 Carr - Fresno (reach)
3 Harrington - Oregon (reach)
32 Ramsey - Tulane (reach)
Notables - McCown, Gerrard (didn't realize he was so old LOL)

2001
1 Vick - Va Tech
Notables - Brees (2nd round), Carter, Weinke, Rosenfels, Feeley

I disagree with some of your ratings.
I don't think VInce is a bust. All he does is win.
Smith is also a good Qb, however, his team ha shad 5 offensive schemes in the past 6 years. A lot of teams have ruined these guys. However, I would like to see the mark up for DTs drafted in the first round.

I thought about VY, just am not sure if he will get a chance to turn it around fully. Maybe he shouldn't have been a bust, maybe he just needs to be part of the orange category and not the red. I just don't think IMHO that VY turns it around. When someone is more trouble than they are worth, that is a red IMHO. With that said, Vick is Green, he was a red according to my standards until he turned it around. On the flip side of that, Bradford and Sanchez could still choke their green status. Stafford could become a green also.

snowinapril
12-27-2010, 11:05 PM
27 QBs taken
12 Quality (green) 44%
9 Absolute Busts (red) 33%
3 guys that are still possibly Quality picks. (orange) 11%
That leave 12% unimpressive.

Only 2 of the 1st rounders won a Superbowl Ring. Brees, a 2nd rounder has a Ring.

I didn't know how to classify Leftwich and Boller. Leftwich could have been a quality pick. He did well for years, just got replaced on leadership by Gerrard. Boller was adequate, not a bust and not great. At pick 19, Boller did enough, it is worth a debate. Leftwich and Boller were part of the 12%, maybe they shouldn't have been.

Just under 50% chance to get a QB that at the very least can play in the NFL and do well. 33% chance you will get a total bust at QB. I would say draft that QB. How deep is the QB position this year, that would increase the odds a bit.

2beersTommy
12-28-2010, 01:05 AM
You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 2005 draft?

The Vikes had two chances to get young Rodgers and opted for the likes of Erasmus James and Troy Williamson.

You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 2000 draft?

The Vikes had six chances to get young Brady and opted for the likes of Chris Hovan, Fred Robbins, Doug Chapman, Tyrone Carter and Troy Walters.

You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 1979 draft?

The Vikes had two chances to get young Montana and opted for the likes of Ted Brown and Dave Huffman.

You know what really pissed me off when it comes to the 1964 draft?

The Vikes had 10 chances to get young Staubach and opted for the likes of Carl Eller, Hal Bedsole, George Rose, Tom Keating, John Kirby, Bob Lacey and Bill McWatters.

Get my point, Marty?

=Z=

better pissed off, than pissed on!

kevoncox
12-28-2010, 01:06 AM
27 QBs taken
12 Quality (green) 44%
9 Absolute Busts (red) 33%
3 guys that are still possibly Quality picks. (orange) 11%
That leave 12% unimpressive.

Only 2 of the 1st rounders won a Superbowl Ring. Brees, a 2nd rounder has a Ring.

I didn't know how to classify Leftwich and Boller. Leftwich could have been a quality pick. He did well for years, just got replaced on leadership by Gerrard. Boller was adequate, not a bust and not great. At pick 19, Boller did enough, it is worth a debate. Leftwich and Boller were part of the 12%, maybe they shouldn't have been.

Just under 50% chance to get a QB that at the very least can play in the NFL and do well. 33% chance you will get a total bust at QB. I would say draft that QB. How deep is the QB position this year, that would increase the odds a bit.

Overall, nice job. I still think it's foolish that people would believe that addressing the QB situation in the first round is a bad idea. I mean we drafted a WR in Harvin in the first round and no one b*tched. The most important position on the field and we are too cheap to address it with a first round pick? Hell, if I was in charge I would draft Mallet and trade up for Ponder. One of them would have to be a stud right? :laugh:

In all seriousness. QB is important and we need to address it. It's our biggest need. We have no one of starter ability on roster next season. The oline can be address in the later rounds. We have talent on our oline. We have no one @ QB. Please, please draft a damn QB (Hopefully not Luck because he is due 90 million over 7 years...lol lol lol salary cap hell)

SharperImage
12-28-2010, 01:16 AM
Ryan mallett will be the future QB for the Minnesota Vikings.. he is like a better big Ben

Purple Floyd
12-28-2010, 01:21 AM
I am going to go the other way and say that the number one thing we need to do this year in the draft is to take the best CB or Safety that is on the board. Then we need to focus on the secondary and OL as they are both in desperate condition.

I really feel we are in such bad shape after the Chiller era that we will be at the bottom of the division for the next few years and will have a few shots at drafting a QB closer to the top next year.

This is my rationale:

We are in a QB driven division with the likes of Rodgers, Cutler and Stafford (If he can stay healthy) and in facing those 3 teams for 6 games a year we really need to have quality CB's and safeties to help neutralize them. The only way I would draft a QB is if by some chance we have one available that is so sure to be what we are looking for that we just can't pass them up. You have to remember that we don't even know at this point what type of offense we will be running next year and we really need to make sure we get one that not only is talented, but also that their skill set will match what we need them to do.

We can get by next year with a guy like Orton etc. if the right QB isn't available but for sure the OL and the secondary NEED to be bolstered if this team is going to go anywhere in the next 4-5 years.

Marrdro
12-28-2010, 02:35 PM
Get my point, Marty?

=Z=

No I don't........


You know what really pisses me off when it comes to the 2000 draft?

The Vikes had six chances to get young Brady and opted for the likes of Chris Hovan, Fred Robbins, Doug Chapman, Tyrone Carter and Troy Walters.
All this tells me is our scouting staff goofed on everyone but Hovan and let a HOF QB walk.

Nope, still don't get your point. The staff sucked at scouting.

Do I need to break it down for each draft for ya?

In the end, talking reality about who our QB could be right now, our scouting staff elected to take the likes of Troy Williamson and Erasmus James instead of Rodgers.

That meant they thought that Troy Williamson was the 7th best player in that draft. WOW.

Then, to add injury to insult, they thought that Erasmus James was the 18th best player in that draft. WOW.

Lets look, that draft class was pretty loaded with talent. Even I could have made better picks....

8 8 Antrel Rolle Cardinals DB Miami (FL)
9 9 Carlos Rogers Redskins DB Auburn
10 10 Mike Williams Lions WR USC
11 11 Demarcus Ware Cowboys DE Troy State
12 12 Shawne Merriman Chargers LB Maryland
13 13 Jammal Brown Saints T Oklahoma

18 18 Erasmus James Vikings DE Wisconsin
22 22 Mark Clayton Ravens WR Oklahoma
24 24 Aaron Rodgers Packers QB California
27 27 Roddy White Falcons WR Alabama-Birmingham
28 28 Luis Castillo Chargers DT Northwestern
30 30 Heath Miller Steelers TE Virginia
32 32 Logan Mankins Patriots G Fresno State

Get my point?

Marrdro
12-29-2010, 05:45 PM
It was one performance. It was solid, but far from the point where you abandon the quarterback position altogether in the 2011 draft.

If a quarterback is available when you select in the draft, you take the shot and move Webb to a position where he can do more damage with the ball in his hand. If one is not available, letting Joe Webb manage a season wouldn't be the worst idea.




Joe Webb: Does He Alter The Minnesota Vikings' Draft Plans?
(http://bleacherreport.com/articles/556262-minnesota-vikings-joe-webb-does-he-alter-the-vikings-draft-plans)

Sure wish we could see him play next week. That would give us 3 games. Again not enough to really make up ones mind but it would help me.

If he played well enough, you might be able to (at 14) skip the 4th best QB, take a topflight DT, LT, WR, and get a QB with your second like Ponder.

In the end, you don't ignore QB in next years draft, or the year after for that matter.

Purple Floyd
12-30-2010, 01:14 AM
No change in my mind. Fill the CB and OL needs first and take a QB in 2 years after the foundation is stabilized.