I noticed a comment on another thread which seemed to imply that the Cleveland Browns have taken a lot of QBs high in the first round and therefore maybe it’s not necessarily a good strategy. So I looked back through some drafts and found that the Browns have only taken ONE QB with a high 1st rd pick since 1999. That was Tim Couch #1 overall in '99.
I don’t recall details, but believe they threw Couch to the wolves with no competition and not much of a supporting cast. Would one of the other QBs taken after, e.g., Donovan McNabb, Culpepper, et al, have done better with that franchise? Doubtful, but possible.
While looking through drafts since 2004, I noticed some drafts didn't have ANY franchise QBs, which to me means, you better get one when you can and you shouldn’t just hand someone the job based on their draft status, i.e., you need competition to increase odds of finding the franchise QB.
Other years, like 2015, there were 2 franchise QBs and they went #1 and 2 (Winston and Mariota). Same as 2016, when Goff and Wentz went #1 and 2. Yes, there are guys like Russel Wilson who go later, but you shouldn’t count on finding a franchise QB after rd 2; it happens but odds aren’t good.
Since Couch, the Browns drafted 3 QBs in the 1st round, all later in the round around pick 22. They've had a lot of high picks other years, even some years when they've had multiple 1st rounders, like when they took RB Trent Richardson #3 overall.
Here are some QBs since 2004 that the Browns passed on in the 1st or early 2nd round so they could pick up a RB, TE, WR, DT, C, et al instead.
2004 – Ben Roethlisberger
2005 - Aaron Rodgers (to be fair, 23 teams passed on him (but no team needed a QB like the Browns) and 49ers took Alex Smith #1)
2011 - Andy Dalton (high 2nd)
2012 - They were in striking/trading distance of Andrew Luck and RGIII (who knows if he hadn't blown out knee). They had #3 overall and took RB Richardson. Ryan Tannehill was still on board.
2014 - Teddy Bridgewater (jury still out due to injury). Also Derek Carr - early 2nd.
2017 - Deshaun Watson, Trubinsky, Mahomes (jury still out)
The Browns are a good example of how to be in QB hell for almost 2 decades. But the reason isn’t because they keep picking bad QBs with high first rd picks. They’ve passed on a bunch so they could draft RBs, TEs, WRs and freaking Centers. These are all important positions, but if you don’t have a QB, you don’t have shit.
It still blows my mind that they used the 22nd overall pick on a 28 year old QB.
(2) Picking the wrong one and being committed to that player for 4-5 years.
Teams have found their way to QB Hell both ways. As a result, it is not a persuasive argument to pick a QB high just because you can. It's about picking the right guy. You do as much damage to your franchise by wishful thinking and picking the wrong guy.
If the Giants think there is a future great QB at 2, then they should pick them. But you have to be sure that they will be a great player. From my perspective (which pretty much means nothing), all of these QBs that are under consideration have warts. Chances are that 2 out of the top 5 will be quality players. History says that they might not be the first two picked.
Quote:
they were really bad at evaluating QBs.
It still blows my mind that they used the 22nd overall pick on a 28 year old QB.
Also a good example why a successful head coach doesn't guarantee successful GM. Holmgren should've known better but he gambled on Weeden and himself to win now.
This is a QB draft and i will be surprised if they don't draft one in first 2 rds and just hand the job to Webb in a year or 2.
The shape the Giants roster is in right now (where a 2 time SBMVP w/ years of experience can't have success), taking a QB with the #2 pick is closer to... being like The Browns.
Especially when it is obvious that the QB cares more about partying than he does about football. What a disaster those two drafts were. Trading up to 3 to take Trent Richardson and then taking Brandon Weeden at 22. Then the following year taking Justin Gilbert in the top 10 and Manziel at 22. That's four wasted first round picks in two years.
Loading up on picks works well when you pick good players. When you do it year after year and draft questionable characters and guys who don't seem like they have the NFL material, then it doesn't work. BTW- just drafting a QB because you pick high in the draft doesn't always work either. Archie Manning is a great example as is David Carr. DRaft a guy high but ignore filling your roster at other positions, especially Oline and watch your QB and his career get killed.
This is a QB draft and i will be surprised if they don't draft one in first 2 rds and just hand the job to Webb in a year or 2.
If we don't draft one this yeat that doesn't necessarily mean we just hand Webb the job in 2 years, maybe we draft one next year or hey even the year after that lol
But what's the one thing worse than QB hell? QB purgatory, where you're handcuffed to an average QB and you spend years and years sitting in the middle of the pack in the league.. I believe that is your fate with Josh Rosen or Sam Darnold.. Personally I'd prefer to pass and get a great player out of this #2 pick
If a prospect like Wentz or Derek Carr was there that'd be one thing, I don't believe there's anything close (and before anyone asks, yes I did have Derek Carr rated that high, I thought Houston should've taken him #1 overall still can't figure out how he fell to the 2nd after watching him at the time)
Give credit where credit is due 1-31 is not easy to pull off lol
They could give the Sixers tips on tanking
Quote:
that is 37 years old.
heading into the 2nd to last year of his contract
With no O-line, running game, defense or special teams.
With a new GM, new head coach with a new offense/defense/culture to install. Oh yeah, the screams recipe for success. Sure a rookie QB will absolutely thrive in that environment...like they do in Cleveland.
Quote:
In comment 13815279 Dr. D said:
Quote:
that is 37 years old.
heading into the 2nd to last year of his contract
With no O-line, running game, defense or special teams.
With a new GM, new head coach with a new offense/defense/culture to install. Oh yeah, the screams recipe for success. Sure a rookie QB will absolutely thrive in that environment...like they do in Cleveland.
Who the hell is talking about throwing a rookie QB into the starting role? No one.
I'm talking about Eli starting next year, maybe even the year after that. Webb and another drafted QB will COMPETE to be Eli's eventual successor. If they both look good, we eventually trade one.
All I'm asking is for a draft pick to sit 1 or 2 years (2-3 for Webb).
All I'm asking is for a draft pick to sit 1 or 2 years (2-3 for Webb).
+1...its not a unrealistic scenario.
The problem for me is if through the scouting process the Giants dont feel Rosen/Darnold are going to be premier long term franchise guys. In that case you dont force the QB pick because your eventually going to need one in a season or so.
What would be nice is if they have an absolute conviction on one of them as EA did with Eli and completely buy in...but a half hearted QB pick for the sake of needing one is a recipe for disaster IMO.
Quote:
In comment 13815286 Dr. D said:
Quote:
In comment 13815279 Dr. D said:
Quote:
that is 37 years old.
heading into the 2nd to last year of his contract
With no O-line, running game, defense or special teams.
With a new GM, new head coach with a new offense/defense/culture to install. Oh yeah, the screams recipe for success. Sure a rookie QB will absolutely thrive in that environment...like they do in Cleveland.
Who the hell is talking about throwing a rookie QB into the starting role? No one.
I'm talking about Eli starting next year, maybe even the year after that. Webb and another drafted QB will COMPETE to be Eli's eventual successor. If they both look good, we eventually trade one.
You draft a QB @ #2 and plenty of people will be talking about starting him. That's kinda the deal.
Quote:
Necessarily have to pick QB at #2. If they like a guy who will be there at #34, that's fine.
This is a QB draft and i will be surprised if they don't draft one in first 2 rds and just hand the job to Webb in a year or 2.
If we don't draft one this yeat that doesn't necessarily mean we just hand Webb the job in 2 years, maybe we draft one next year or hey even the year after that lol
But what's the one thing worse than QB hell? QB purgatory, where you're handcuffed to an average QB and you spend years and years sitting in the middle of the pack in the league.. I believe that is your fate with Josh Rosen or Sam Darnold.. Personally I'd prefer to pass and get a great player out of this #2 pick
If a prospect like Wentz or Derek Carr was there that'd be one thing, I don't believe there's anything close (and before anyone asks, yes I did have Derek Carr rated that high, I thought Houston should've taken him #1 overall still can't figure out how he fell to the 2nd after watching him at the time)
With the rookie wage scale, it is not nearly as punitive to miss on a QB at the top of the draft as it used to be.
The worst possible position you can be in is being stuck paying a middling QB insane money because of the "market value". Remember, Webb only has three years left on his contract. So lets say the Giants plan on starting Eli in 2018 and 2019, and Webb proves to be a decent QB in 2020. Do you give him $30M a year for that?
You may not like the top QBs coming out, but if the Giants do, they should absolutely take one.
Loading up on picks works well when you pick good players. When you do it year after year and draft questionable characters and guys who don't seem like they have the NFL material, then it doesn't work. BTW- just drafting a QB because you pick high in the draft doesn't always work either. Archie Manning is a great example as is David Carr. DRaft a guy high but ignore filling your roster at other positions, especially Oline and watch your QB and his career get killed.
That is exactly what I said above re: drafting the right players. I wasn't suggesting taking a QB just to take a QB. The Giants are in much better shape than the expansion Texans were and Archie's Saints. The draft pick also won't start year one due to Eli so we don't have to worry about him becoming the next Carr if the line doesn't improve.
All I'm asking is for a draft pick to sit 1 or 2 years (2-3 for Webb).
Outlier aside, 24th pick on a fairly solid roster is very different than #2 pick on a very shaky roster. A luxury.
Plenty of people talk about all kinds of stupid stuff, doesn't mean DG and Shurmur will care. There's no reason (at least at this point) for the Giants to start a rookie QB.
Quote:
Quote:You draft a QB @ #2 and plenty of people will be talking about starting him. That's kinda the deal.
Plenty of people talk about all kinds of stupid stuff, doesn't mean DG and Shurmur will care. There's no reason (at least at this point) for the Giants to start a rookie QB.
Exactly, The Giants aren't going to start a rookie over Eli due to fan pressure. Eli will play well and hopefully keep those fans silent.
Don't forget about Simms to Collins.
Outlier aside, 24th pick on a fairly solid roster is very different than #2 pick on a very shaky roster. A luxury.
A lot of smart people thought the Giants roster in '17 was good enough to challenge at least for a playoff spot, some even said SB.
Our biggest problem last year was a HC who was a horrible play caller and over his head. I am very optimistic that Shurmur will be a much better HC and DG will upgrade the OL significantly.
Before the injuries was our roster better than the Browns team that won 5 games under Shurmur? I would say by a lot.
Tarkenton was a good QB.
Quote:
In comment 13815270 Dr. D said:
Quote:
Necessarily have to pick QB at #2. If they like a guy who will be there at #34, that's fine.
This is a QB draft and i will be surprised if they don't draft one in first 2 rds and just hand the job to Webb in a year or 2.
If we don't draft one this yeat that doesn't necessarily mean we just hand Webb the job in 2 years, maybe we draft one next year or hey even the year after that lol
But what's the one thing worse than QB hell? QB purgatory, where you're handcuffed to an average QB and you spend years and years sitting in the middle of the pack in the league.. I believe that is your fate with Josh Rosen or Sam Darnold.. Personally I'd prefer to pass and get a great player out of this #2 pick
If a prospect like Wentz or Derek Carr was there that'd be one thing, I don't believe there's anything close (and before anyone asks, yes I did have Derek Carr rated that high, I thought Houston should've taken him #1 overall still can't figure out how he fell to the 2nd after watching him at the time)
With the rookie wage scale, it is not nearly as punitive to miss on a QB at the top of the draft as it used to be.
The worst possible position you can be in is being stuck paying a middling QB insane money because of the "market value". Remember, Webb only has three years left on his contract. So lets say the Giants plan on starting Eli in 2018 and 2019, and Webb proves to be a decent QB in 2020. Do you give him $30M a year for that?
You may not like the top QBs coming out, but if the Giants do, they should absolutely take one.
Not AS bad as it used to be with those crazy contracts they would get but still hurts pretty fuckin bad to burn a #2 pick and at least 3-4 years of wasted time, because let's be real you're not gonna give up on a QB you took #2 overall much before that
And yeah sure that I agree with that
Outlier aside, 24th pick on a fairly solid roster is very different than #2 pick on a very shaky roster. A luxury.
Drafting a potential franchise QB (and having him sit and learn from a HOFer for a year or 2) is a luxury? Allllrightythen.
Quote:
Outlier aside, 24th pick on a fairly solid roster is very different than #2 pick on a very shaky roster. A luxury.
A lot of smart people thought the Giants roster in '17 was good enough to challenge at least for a playoff spot, some even said SB.
Our biggest problem last year was a HC who was a horrible play caller and over his head. I am very optimistic that Shurmur will be a much better HC and DG will upgrade the OL significantly.
Before the injuries was our roster better than the Browns team that won 5 games under Shurmur? I would say by a lot.
Injuries turned us into a preseason team however even at full health this team did have some pretty huge flaws.. I mean looking at the roster right now it's kinda in complete shambles, it's a huge fucking mess
We have an absurdly overpaid Dline, a 100% complete tear down of an oline, literally need 5 new starters there, a secondary that was thought to be a stregnth is now completely in flux, we have precisely zero linebackers, we have 2 viable bodies at receiver, and the backfield is a cesspool of mediocrity, oh and to top it off even our kicker and punter are trash lol
Take away the QB and are we really much better than the browns? We were 3 lousey wins better than the browns with him
Everybody seems to forget the Giants Picked Dave Brown in the supplemental draft which ended up with them losing their first round pick the next year.
Great point. It's such a luxury to know the Giants will never need to draft a QB again and will never need another starting QB, because Eli is a 2x SB MVP.
It's not like he's 37 years old or anything. And there are no open questions about his declining performance over the past four seasons (including two years that looked good on the surface in 2014 and 2015) by looking at his advanced metrics.
You're 100% right. Nothing to see here, folks. Keep it moving.
And I was comparing this roster (pre-injuries) to the Browns roster that won 5 games ('12?) under Shurmur.
You're 100% right, Dr. D. I read the post that I replied to out of the context of what you had written throughout the thread. My apologies.
And I was comparing this roster (pre-injuries) to the Browns roster that won 5 games ('12?) under Shurmur.
You'll find no disagreement here on the playcalling, the importance of which can NOT be over stated
But looking at this roster going forward.. Well as is, does not excite me in the slightest but I expect big changes
You're 100% right, Dr. D. I read the post that I replied to out of the context of what you had written throughout the thread. My apologies.
No problem. Have a nice day.
1) One should not look at the Browns and conclude what things should be done because they are just an abhorrent franchise. Duplicating their shittiness takes ineptitude on many levels, and doing the opposite doesn't ensure success
2) One shouldn't look at the Pats and think it is simply easy to copy their model. The greatness of BB is the intangible that cannot be duplicated. You can try to emulate their system, but doing so doesn't ensure success
The Giants with Kerry Collins would be closer. Won't crash and burn with him, but also not good enough to win the big one. He'll keep you hovering around 8-8, sometimes better, sometimes worse. Those records keep you out of range from drafting a franchise qb, thus keeping you stuck in qb hell
But looking at this roster going forward.. Well as is, does not excite me in the slightest but I expect big changes
One of the great things about the NFL is how quickly a team can turn it around (unless you're the Browns).
The Vikings totally rebuilt their OL in one offseason. As Shurmur said, they didn't just change the oil. They changed the transmission. I look fwd to that for the Giants.
Quote:
But looking at this roster going forward.. Well as is, does not excite me in the slightest but I expect big changes
One of the great things about the NFL is how quickly a team can turn it around (unless you're the Browns).
The Vikings totally rebuilt their OL in one offseason. As Shurmur said, they didn't just change the oil. They changed the transmission. I look fwd to that for the Giants.
Starts with Quentin Nelson!
That ('04) is an example of getting a franchise QB when you have a chance and not kicking the can down the road..
Quote:
Outlier aside, 24th pick on a fairly solid roster is very different than #2 pick on a very shaky roster. A luxury.
Drafting a potential franchise QB (and having him sit and learn from a HOFer for a year or 2) is a luxury? Allllrightythen.
It was a luxury pick for a team that had Favre and had just gone to the play offs 4 years in a row...meaning their roster was probably pretty good. My entire point.
Look at the Dolphins QB's since Marino
Bills QB's since Kelly
Jets QB's since Namath (?) Pennington?
and there are more teams who have struggled with finding franchise besides these 4.
Look at the Dolphins QB's since Marino
Bills QB's since Kelly
Jets QB's since Namath (?) Pennington?
and there are more teams who have struggled with finding franchise besides these 4.
As you point out, passing on Wentz may be the most damning move that franchise makes for 20 years. If the next QB they pick does not deliver a championship during his career, this will look the Jets passing on Marino. Wentz is going to be very good for a very long time. Cleveland's new GM has to get this next pick right.
It was a luxury pick for a team that had Favre and had just gone to the play offs 4 years in a row...meaning their roster was probably pretty good. My entire point.
I didn't know which situation you were referring to as luxury. Ours or the Packers. I don't think either qualifies.
Favre was turning 36 in the '05 season and he had been talking about possibly retiring since around '02.
Drafting his successor at that point wasn't a luxury. It was smart.
Thanks Joe!
The term QB Hell as used by DG recently refers to the other situation. Investing highly in a QB can place you in QB hell if he doesn't work out. You spend a valuable resource (top pick(s)), give out a big contract, spend precious developmental resources (limited practice and play time), and wait for a few years to see if he can work out.
If it was a mistake, you don't always know it for several years, and in the meantime you are committed, so you forego future opportunities to select a true franchise QB.
The smart play is to recognize a franchise QB and make the necessary moves to get them, even if it means sacrificing several draft picks to make the move up. Both Eli and Wentz are examples of this.
Since someone brought up the Patriots, they were almost the perfect example of QB hell. They had a talented QB they spent high resources on (Bledsoe) who was very good, but not great. He would have likely continued to get all the starts were it not for injury. The Patriots may have been wise to the ability/promise of Brady, but they weren't starting him over Bledsoe until injury forced the situation.
In other words, who knows how things would have worked out had Bledsoe stayed healthy another 3-4 years. Very possible that the Patriots stay with him and let Brady leave either via FA or trade.
Quote:
It was a luxury pick for a team that had Favre and had just gone to the play offs 4 years in a row...meaning their roster was probably pretty good. My entire point.
I didn't know which situation you were referring to as luxury. Ours or the Packers. I don't think either qualifies.
Favre was turning 36 in the '05 season and he had been talking about possibly retiring since around '02.
Drafting his successor at that point wasn't a luxury. It was smart.
I agree. It was smart for them. Very smart. My point to all of this is to look at the team he joined. Look at the rest of the rosters for any of the 1st round QBs who most would consider a successful QB/good draft pick for any of those teams vs. the rosters all of the 1st round failures in that time. (What I meant earlier "being like the Browns")
Any college QBs being considered for the 1st round are very good prospects, but it stops there. You don't get to just pick a franchise QB. You have to have a team in place to allow them to become one. To capitalize on that potential.
I don't feel like the Giants do right now. They can still take a QB and I'll hope the people making the decision are 100% sold on the player & are correct in feeling that way, but to me Eli's age or what they have in Webb or when they think they're gonna need that QB would weigh very little on my decision to select them.
They traded the picks that were used for Carson Wentz and Deshaun Watson
Think anout thst one.
I still think, and I guess we'll never know, that if Manziel was a committed pro without the off-field bullshit... that he'd have been pretty good. We saw flashes of good play in his rookie year too.
But - that leaked Patriots scouting report said all you needed to know... shame on the Browns for pretending that his off-field red flags in college - not to mention the Manning passing camp stuff - wouldnt just magically go away once he arrived.
Exactly, The Giants aren't going to start a rookie over Eli due to fan pressure. Eli will play well and hopefully keep those fans silent.
LOL, didnt the Giants just cave to fan pressure not but 2 months ago?
Quote:
Necessarily have to pick QB at #2. If they like a guy who will be there at #34, that's fine.
This is a QB draft and i will be surprised if they don't draft one in first 2 rds and just hand the job to Webb in a year or 2.
If we don't draft one this yeat that doesn't necessarily mean we just hand Webb the job in 2 years, maybe we draft one next year or hey even the year after that lol
But what's the one thing worse than QB hell? QB purgatory, where you're handcuffed to an average QB and you spend years and years sitting in the middle of the pack in the league.. I believe that is your fate with Josh Rosen or Sam Darnold.. Personally I'd prefer to pass and get a great player out of this #2 pick
If a prospect like Wentz or Derek Carr was there that'd be one thing, I don't believe there's anything close (and before anyone asks, yes I did have Derek Carr rated that high, I thought Houston should've taken him #1 overall still can't figure out how he fell to the 2nd after watching him at the time)
It's easy to say that now, but I don't recall anyone saying Wentz or Derek Carr was a can't miss prospect. And realistically, Wentz is only in his second year, so we don't know that what he has shown so far will even last. And Carr has not played lights out.
Wentz wasn't a household name whatsoever.
1) One should not look at the Browns and conclude what things should be done because they are just an abhorrent franchise. Duplicating their shittiness takes ineptitude on many levels, and doing the opposite doesn't ensure success
2) One shouldn't look at the Pats and think it is simply easy to copy their model. The greatness of BB is the intangible that cannot be duplicated. You can try to emulate their system, but doing so doesn't ensure success
I don't see anyone in the league coming close to trying #2. Who else in the league is as ruthless? Shit, Gettleman got fired in Carolina for being just a fraction as ruthless as Belichick is. And I also don't see another team that bases their own identity on the strengths and weaknesses of the opponent like the Patriots do even on a weekly basis.
It's true that Belichick's excellence is unique, but that doesn't mean there can't be lessons derived and implemented elsewhere. Haven't we seen other greats like Paul Brown, Tom Landry, and Bill Walsh copied elsewhere?
The thing is, to implement what Belichick does takes time and total support from ownership. What's needed to "copy" the New England model is an inspired owner that isn't going to buy in to the right person's vision and give him the time to implement it.
I'm hoping it's Darnold.
I do think Fromm is going to be a big time NFL prospect in a couple years, but where will the Giants be drafting that year? You want to give up 3 first round picks to get him? That will be the price.
I know Rosen and Darnold did not have quite the years people were expecting, but they are still both very good prospects who are very young. The Giants will have at least one of them fall into their lap with no trade.