First of all, we all root for the Giants and Eli, so in a sense we re all in the category of wanting to see them make another run with him as the guy.
But some of us are in the camp of wanting to best secure the future in this draft while trying to win with Eli.
For example I want a quarterback rather than a better weapon for Eli like a running back, with a shorter NFL life span.
My question: If you love Eli to the point that you want a total commitment to put the best players around him now, but you had a crystal ball and knew one of Allen, Darnold, Rosen, were the next Eli, what would you do.
I know, it s hypothetical. But I curious about the amount of commitment to Eli, and that s not a criticism.
Sorry if this post is viewed as just another rehash. But count me as one of the guys that has loved rehashing the same stuff ever day.
BBI has never been more interesting during this part of the year.
This. I mean who wouldn’t?
Your annoyance with fans of Eli blinds you to the reality of what people are saying.
So, both; they can help win both now with Manning ...or in the future with another QB , a qb who will be better off having a team around him that's already functioning by then and with young lines.
But, I guess i agree to the extent that I won't draft target WR until 2019 draft. At least not in early rounds.
Britt in VA : 11/26/2017 8:17 pm : link
Here's how it's going to go.
Eli's replacement is drafted in Round 1 this year IF, and this is a big IF, they are in position to draft somebody they covet.
Davis Webb and new Quarterback duel it out for #2 in camp.
Eli starts the season, and depending on how it goes, he continues to play if they're winning or contributing.
One of two things happen, the Giants have a successful season which results in Eli starting the following season in his final year in his deal and whatever happens happens? Or they struggle and the new coach decides mid season that it's time to make the transition and they do it, ala Warner to Eli.
I know it's hard for people to wrap their heads around, but here's what's NOT going to happen:
Davis Webb will not start any game this season. His best case scenario is to be elevated to number 2 and come in the 2nd half of games to get some time.
Eli will not be cut or traded in the offseason.
Eli will not be a pay cut. I could see him restructuring if he works out an agreement that he will be allowed to play out his contract and retire gracefully, but who knows....
And I've said it a trillion times all season. IF, If there is somebody they covet at QB at 2, they take him.
But people will tell you up and down that I'm an Eli apologist that wants him to play until he's 50. Despite me saying otherwise over and over.
Perception vs. reality.
Even though I know you said that's not what you're doing, why else ask the question?
That is where my concern over QB at 2 comes from.
My personal opinion is that I'd rather have a lesser touted pro style QB in round 2 or later, than a highly touted spread style QB at #2 overall. That is my personal philosophy on building the team, based on recent draft history and the proliferation of the spread offense in college.
Simple as that.
There is a strong correlation between those that think Eli is still a top tier QB and the people arguing that these QB's aren't good enough to be drafted at 2. Seems like a lot of the people suggesting Barkley as the pick are also those that have defended Eli endlessly on every single Eli thread and every possible chance they get. Why? IMO, they want to validate what they've been arguing non-stop since they cried like babies when he got benched. Also, they want to see Eli win, despite whats in the best long term interest of the NYG. Just my opinion and obviously not everyone falls into this group, but I think a large contingent do.
I love Eli also,but reality says, if you can Carnac the next Eli, and hes your guy and available, you take him...for the future.
You ride Eli until the flow of the season, Elis skills, and the new ANd development come to the point where you sit Eli and play the pick.
Eli is the QB for '18, publicly 'promised' by JM in the media.
Eli came in @5-4, IT, and went 1-6; he knows anything might happen with the new kid. He welcomes the competition, publicly, but reality says the way he came in might be the way he goes out, but for now he's the QB for 18.
For the future, if they need to replace hi., It's been a ride!!
I've loved watching eli and I've defended him when he takes shit, but to me this draft comes down to one thing - is there a franchise QB available? If there is, you pull the trigger. And if there isn't, you have a ton of options, whether it is to take Barkley or trade down to amass more weapons.
I think too many people are caught up in the idea that a QB has to be taken. The real key is making this draft a success - either from hitting on the #2 pick regardless of the player, or trading down and getting at least two impact players. If the player they pick busts or they trade down and get squadoosh - it is going to be a painful next few years.
Watched "film" have you?
The fallacy here is the notion that Webb as a prospect is equal to the QBs at the top of this draft. If he were he would have been selected in the first round.
Right now Rosen is more pro ready than Webb. Darnold has a much higher ceiling.
People are kidding themselves with this Webb stuff. He is a developmental prospect.
The hilarious part is that Webb selection was largely derided on BBI, now all of a sudden he's the future because you guys want a RB at 2.
I've loved watching eli and I've defended him when he takes shit, but to me this draft comes down to one thing - is there a franchise QB available? If there is, you pull the trigger. And if there isn't, you have a ton of options, whether it is to take Barkley or trade down to amass more weapons.
I think too many people are caught up in the idea that a QB has to be taken. The real key is making this draft a success - either from hitting on the #2 pick regardless of the player, or trading down and getting at least two impact players. If the player they pick busts or they trade down and get squadoosh - it is going to be a painful next few years.
Exactly! We all know that the end is coming for Eli. 2 years is realistic, perhaps optimistic, but based on his contract that's what it's looking like.
So we know there will be a new QB for the NYG in the next 2-3 years. We need to do what's best for NYG, and IMO, the shortsighted is that doing what's best for the NYG is taking the best player for their future. Shoehorning a QB because the timing lines up is not best, unless they have the conviction for that player.
Is the new QB, whenever he steps on the field, not going to benefit when he's taking his rookie lumps from one of the following:
1. A great running game (Barkley)
2. Awesome protection (Nelson)
3. A defense that gets off the field (Chubb)
?
There are multiple ways to build a core of a team for a run. A lot of teams are winning around a deficit at the QB position.
The QB or bust crowd thinks they are so intellectually superior to the rest of us, but it's them in reality that refuse to see the bigger picture.
Editing typo.
It really is that simple.
Because cutting Eli and then signing a bridge QB like Keenum is actually more expensive, and at least Eli keeps your options open. Otherwise, they'd have to have decided for sure who they were going to draft a month ago, before Eli's roster bonus was due. And since they don't possess the #1 overall pick, there's also a variable outside of their control.
Why did the Chiefs keep Alex Smith for a year even though they traded up for Mahomes? Why did the Bears sign Glennon and then draft Trubisky? Why did the Jets re-sign McCown and sign Bridgewater while also moving up to #3? Why did the Browns trade for Taylor?
If they moved on from Eli prematurely, they'd be in the same boat as the Bills, with their hand already forced a month before the draft. No matter how badly you want it to be true, the Giants actions thus far have not telegraphed anything related to their intentions with regard to the QB position.
Next year (and definitely 2020) the pain gets less in making that move.
Keeping him can't even be evidence of a "win now" move - it is simply a must make move.
If our plan is to hedge our bet with our dearest asset by selecting Eli's replacement, which will not help/support Eli but instantly create a massive quarterback debate every time we lose a game, rather than selecting a weapon that upgrades the 2018 team, we will be a mediocre non-playoff team for at least the next two years... Or what was best described by Jeff Fisher as the "treadmill of 8-8 hell"... This future version of the Giants genuinely gets me nauseous and leads me to thinking we are headed to that very dark place where the New York Knicks currently reside...
As I said yesterday, the big question we rehash every day is "can we win now with Eli?" - the answer is yes, but if and only if we are fully invested in and committed to this objective now. It is a certainty that we cannot win now or in the foreseeable future without him...
Yes, just the lowly Eli defenders....
It's conceivable that four quarterbacks will be selected in Round 1 this year for the first time since 2012
by Joel Corry
Apr 17, 2017 • 5 min read
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
NFL executives making decisions about first-round draft choices should heed this warning particularly when there isn't a strong group of quarterbacks available like this year.
The search for the ever elusive franchise quarterback drives NFL teams to select passers higher than they should. Sustaining success in the NFL is hard enough, but infinitely more difficult without good quarterback play.
MORE NFL DRAFT
Mock Draft Central
How to watch NFL Draft
Rang's mock draft
Brinson's mock draft
Prisco's mock draft 5.0
Webb is draft's most intriguing QB (bolded this just because)
The 2017 quarterback class doesn't have any players on par with those in the 2015 and 2016 drafts when passers were taken with the first- and second-overall picks. Despite this, it's conceivable that four quarterbacks will be selected in the first round for the first time since 2012.
North Carolina's Mitchell Trubisky, Clemson's Deshaun Watson, Texas Tech's Patrick Mahones, California's Davis Webb and Notre Dame's DeShone Kizer are considered as potential first-round picks by a majority of draft prognosticators. Trubisky is rumored to be a candidate to be taken first overall by the Browns even though he only started one season in college and Texas A&M defensive end Myles Garrett is a safer bet. Other first-round spots where quarterbacks could be a possibility are sixth (Jets), 10th (Bills) 12th (Browns-if Trubisky isn't first), 13th (Cardinals), 25th (Texans), 27th (Chiefs) and 32nd (Saints). Watson is generally considered as the next best prospect after Trubisky.
The first round of the 2004 NFL Draft is modern day gold standard for finding long term solutions at quarterback. Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Ben Roethlisberger and J.P. Losman were selected first, fourth, 11th and 22nd. The first three have spent their entire NFL careers with the same team. Manning, a four-time Pro Bowler, has won two Super Bowls with the Giants in six playoff appearances. He was named MVP of both Super Bowl victories. Rivers, who has earned six Pro Bowl berths, has gotten the Chargers to the playoffs five times in 13 seasons. The Steelers have won two Super Bowls in three appearances with Roethlisberger under center. The five-time Pro Bowler has been to playoffs nine times as a Steeler. Losman had an eight-year NFL career where he started 33 games with the Bills, who drafted him. His biggest professional football achievement was leading the Las Vegas Locomotives to a championship in the now defunct United Football League's inaugural season in 2009.
The 2004 quarterback draft class is an anomaly as the chart below listing the 26 quarterbacks taken in the first round in the last 10 drafts demonstrates.
Quarterbacks taken in the first round
2007
1: JaMarcus Russell, Raiders
22: Brady Quinn, Browns
2008
3: Matt Ryan, Falcons
18: Joe Flacco, Ravens
2009
1: Matthew Stafford, Lions
5: Mark Sanchez, Jets
17: Josh Freeman, Buccaneers
2010
1: Sam Bradford, Rams
25: Tim Tebow, Broncos
2011
1: Cam Newton, Panthers
8: Jake Locker, Titans
10: Blaine Gabbert, Jaguars
12: Christian Ponder, Vikings
2012
1: Andrew Luck, Colts
2: Robert Griffin III, Redskins
8: Ryan Tannehill, Dolphins
22: Brandon Weeden, Browns
2013
16: EJ Manuel, Bills
2014
3: Blake Bortles, Jaguars
22: Johnny Manziel, Browns
32: Teddy Bridgewater, Vikings
2015
1: Jameis Winston, Buccaneers
2: Marcus Mariota, Titans
2016
1: Jared Goff, Rams
2: Carson Wentz, Eagles
26: Paxton Lynch, Broncos
For every successful first-round quarterback pick in recent years, there are almost twice as many failures. A conclusion can be drawn with 19 of the first-round picks. Only seven, or 36.8 percent, arguably could be considered a success.
Sam Bradford and Ryan Tannehill get categorized as successes under a broad definition of quarterbacks that could consistently put a team in position to make the playoffs more often than not under favorable circumstances or surrounded by the right pieces rather than being the catalyst of a playoff berth.
Joe Flacco is the only first-round quarterback drafted in the last 10 years to win a Super Bowl. He had a stellar postseason run during the 2012 season in which he threw 11 touchdowns without an interception and had a 117.2 passer rating en route to being named Super Bowl XLVII MVP. This led to Flacco briefly becoming the NFL's highest-paid player with the six-year, $120.6 million contract containing $51 million in guarantees he signed in 2013.
Matt Ryan and Cam Newton have earned NFL MVP honors in each of the last two seasons while leading their respective teams to the Super Bowl.
Andrew Luck, arguably the biggest can't-miss quarterback prospect since John Elway in 1983, found instant success. The Colts went from a league-worst 2-14 record in 2011 before Luck's arrival to the playoffs in 2012 with 11 wins. Luck re-set the NFL pay scale with the five-year extension he received from the Colts last offseason. The contract averages $24.594 million per year and contains $87 million in guarantees, of which $47 million was fully guaranteed at signing.
Matthew Stafford is in line to become the NFL's first $25 million per year player at some point this offseason after demonstrating he could thrive without six-time Pro Bowl wide receiver Calvin Johnson, who prematurely retired after the 2015 season.
A common denominator with Luck, Newton, Ryan and Stafford is they were top-three picks. Ryan is the only one that wasn't the first pick of his draft.
JaMarcus Russell is at the other end of the spectrum. He is widely considered as one of the biggest draft mistakes in NFL history. Russell only produced seven victories in 25 starts. He was benched midway during the 2009 season, his final season with the Raiders. He became the poster boy for a flawed rookie compensation system, which has been changed, that rewarded unproven high draft picks like Pro Bowlers. Russell made $39.365 million during his three NFL years, all in Oakland.
The jury is still out on the eight quarterbacks taken in the first round of the last three drafts except Manziel, who imploded, because it's too soon to reach a conclusion about these players. Jameis Winston and Marcus Mariota could eventually be thought of as best quarterbacks to go one-two of a draft in league history. Blake Bortles is at an early career crossroads after a disappointing 2016 season. There's no guarantee that the Jaguars will pick up his fifth year option for 2018 worth $19.053 million by the May 2 deadline. Teddy Bridgewater is trying to rebound from the career threatening knee injury he sustained last preseason.
Teams may be better served exercising more restraint with quarterbacks in the first round instead of reaching for a player because it's the game's most important position. There have been too many first-round quarterbacks that haven't panned out for the drafting team in recent years.
First-round quarterbacks that aren't overdrafted can pay dividends. Seventy-three of the 120 playoff teams (60.8 percent) over the last 10 years have gotten to the postseason with quarterbacks taken in the first round. Forty-four times the quarterback was a top-five pick. Additionally, six of the last 10 Super Bowl winners have had quarterbacks that were first-round picks.
Link - ( New Window )
Even though most of the top QB's regressed, the hype remains which makes it that much more difficult to figure out who will be the "guy", especially from a fan's perspective.
I don't take teams jockeying to move up as evidence that these QB's are the real deal - it is evidence that there are several teams who need a QB and may be willing to take on that risk.
Because Gettleman is excellent at scouting personnel and Shurmur is a QB guy, I expect the decision they make to be the right one.
There is a strong correlation between those that think Eli is still a top tier QB and the people arguing that these QB's aren't good enough to be drafted at 2. Seems like a lot of the people suggesting Barkley as the pick are also those that have defended Eli endlessly on every single Eli thread and every possible chance they get. Why? IMO, they want to validate what they've been arguing non-stop since they cried like babies when he got benched. Also, they want to see Eli win, despite whats in the best long term interest of the NYG. Just my opinion and obviously not everyone falls into this group, but I think a large contingent do.
If our plan is to hedge our bet with our dearest asset by selecting Eli's replacement, which will not help/support Eli but instantly create a massive quarterback debate every time we lose a game, rather than selecting a weapon that upgrades the 2018 team, we will be a mediocre non-playoff team for at least the next two years... Or what was best described by Jeff Fisher as the "treadmill of 8-8 hell"... This future version of the Giants genuinely gets me nauseous and leads me to thinking we are headed to that very dark place where the New York Knicks currently reside...
As I said yesterday, the big question we rehash every day is "can we win now with Eli?" - the answer is yes, but if and only if we are fully invested in and committed to this objective now. It is a certainty that we cannot win now or in the foreseeable future without him...
But a run to failure strategy is definitely a way to avoid the Knicks' fortunes. Makes perfect sense.
Oh, and for Britt - this is the sort of post people are referring to, not yours.
Quote:
Talk about re-hashing: I think your post is missing something. It's not just Eli but Eli/Webb. While Davis has never played in an NFL game (gee, I didn't know that) his film is really no different than film on the other QBs coming out this year. Is he automatically worse because he was round three? If you think so, think about a current Patriot QB.
Watched "film" have you?
The fallacy here is the notion that Webb as a prospect is equal to the QBs at the top of this draft. If he were he would have been selected in the first round.
Right now Rosen is more pro ready than Webb. Darnold has a much higher ceiling.
People are kidding themselves with this Webb stuff. He is a developmental prospect.
The hilarious part is that Webb selection was largely derided on BBI, now all of a sudden he's the future because you guys want a RB at 2.
Webb slipped partly because of the very public travails of Goff in his first year. Webb came from the same system and the muck stuck.
Webb was getting some late 1st/early 2nd hype following the senior bowl.
See https://www.si.com/mmqb/2017/04/26/nfl-draft-prospect-davis-webb-cal-quarterback for example.
Webb shouldn't factor into things if the Giants think there's a better option at 2 (or elsewhere in the draft), but lets not pretend he's some complete scrub. He beat out Mayfield and only lost his starting spot to Mahomes due to injury.
btw, personally I think if Darnolds there I'd take him (although I worry about the turnovers), neither Rosen nor Allen interest me that much the risk is too great for differing reasons.
Quote:
is if we take every ounce of energy and every possible asset to help/support him and the 2018 team in winning now. We are not a good enough team to "hedge our bets"...
If our plan is to hedge our bet with our dearest asset by selecting Eli's replacement, which will not help/support Eli but instantly create a massive quarterback debate every time we lose a game, rather than selecting a weapon that upgrades the 2018 team, we will be a mediocre non-playoff team for at least the next two years... Or what was best described by Jeff Fisher as the "treadmill of 8-8 hell"... This future version of the Giants genuinely gets me nauseous and leads me to thinking we are headed to that very dark place where the New York Knicks currently reside...
As I said yesterday, the big question we rehash every day is "can we win now with Eli?" - the answer is yes, but if and only if we are fully invested in and committed to this objective now. It is a certainty that we cannot win now or in the foreseeable future without him...
But a run to failure strategy is definitely a way to avoid the Knicks' fortunes. Makes perfect sense.
Oh, and for Britt - this is the sort of post people are referring to, not yours.
Honestly, and I've been saying this for some time, this doesn't have to be an either/or issue.
You have to do both, drafting for winning for the short term and the long term simultaneously. That's how the league is designed these days.
People refer to rebuilding the team for the future. This isn't the 80's when you can build a dynasty and ride it for 10 years. You have to try and catch lightening in a bottle and try to win every year. The league, by design, is built for teams to go from worst to first. That's parity.
You can take the BPA non QB now, with a plan for finding the future QB in the next draft, Free agency, or already on the roster, and the long term will be better for it because whenever that guy take the field, he will be taking the field with a better team.
Or you can take the QB now, if you have the conviction that he's the guy for the next 10 years, because he's just too damn good to pass up, and then you still have to build the team up anyways, because what good is the next franchise QB going to do with a sh-t roster like what we've had for five years on offense?
You're going to have to make the offensive roster better regardless. Whether it's for Eli or the next guy. And let's face it, probably due to the spread as I've mentioned ad nauseam, these guys coming out need time to sit. They don't adjust to the pro game as quickly as they used to.
The bottom line is having the conviction for the player, regardless of position. That's having the best long term interest of the team in mind.
When you have a Brett Favre, Drew Brees, or Eli Manning, it allows you the luxury of a transition that a lot of teams don't have.
And one has to wonder, maybe one of the reasons a lot of these young guys bust is that they are thrust into bad situations without the ability to become acclimated.
I'd feel much more comfortable throwing a rookie in than anytime in the recent past.
I'd feel much more comfortable throwing a rookie in than anytime in the recent past.
Fingers crossed on that. Case Keenum is a good sign.
btw, personally I think if Darnolds there I'd take him (although I worry about the turnovers), neither Rosen nor Allen interest me that much the risk is too great for differing reasons.
To be fair, Webb only beat out Mayfield in 2013 when Mayfield got injured, and then Webb had a chance to win back his job from Mahomes at the start of 2015 (when he was healthy) and did not - he became the Wally Pipp of the story.
I agree that Webb does have a pedigree that should be regarded somewhere above scrub status, but it's not quite as rosy as you made it out to be.
Quote:
is if we take every ounce of energy and every possible asset to help/support him and the 2018 team in winning now. We are not a good enough team to "hedge our bets"...
If our plan is to hedge our bet with our dearest asset by selecting Eli's replacement, which will not help/support Eli but instantly create a massive quarterback debate every time we lose a game, rather than selecting a weapon that upgrades the 2018 team, we will be a mediocre non-playoff team for at least the next two years... Or what was best described by Jeff Fisher as the "treadmill of 8-8 hell"... This future version of the Giants genuinely gets me nauseous and leads me to thinking we are headed to that very dark place where the New York Knicks currently reside...
As I said yesterday, the big question we rehash every day is "can we win now with Eli?" - the answer is yes, but if and only if we are fully invested in and committed to this objective now. It is a certainty that we cannot win now or in the foreseeable future without him...
But a run to failure strategy is definitely a way to avoid the Knicks' fortunes. Makes perfect sense.
Oh, and for Britt - this is the sort of post people are referring to, not yours.
Ha ha ha... Yes Britt, I hereby acknowledge that I am the premier homer for and defender of Eli... And Landon... And Odell if he plans to play this year... And Snacks... And Olivier... And Evan... And Janoris... And now Alec, Nate and Jonathan.... And yes, I will fully come clean that, "I - The Mike" am indeed the most strident defender of and believer in Davis in BBI history...
And couldn't be more proud of it!
What I am not is a believer in fairy tales and make believe... Carry on Gatorade - I await your cynical insult with breathtaking anticipation!
Quote:
In comment 13910830 the mike said:
Quote:
is if we take every ounce of energy and every possible asset to help/support him and the 2018 team in winning now. We are not a good enough team to "hedge our bets"...
If our plan is to hedge our bet with our dearest asset by selecting Eli's replacement, which will not help/support Eli but instantly create a massive quarterback debate every time we lose a game, rather than selecting a weapon that upgrades the 2018 team, we will be a mediocre non-playoff team for at least the next two years... Or what was best described by Jeff Fisher as the "treadmill of 8-8 hell"... This future version of the Giants genuinely gets me nauseous and leads me to thinking we are headed to that very dark place where the New York Knicks currently reside...
As I said yesterday, the big question we rehash every day is "can we win now with Eli?" - the answer is yes, but if and only if we are fully invested in and committed to this objective now. It is a certainty that we cannot win now or in the foreseeable future without him...
But a run to failure strategy is definitely a way to avoid the Knicks' fortunes. Makes perfect sense.
Oh, and for Britt - this is the sort of post people are referring to, not yours.
Ha ha ha... Yes Britt, I hereby acknowledge that I am the premier homer for and defender of Eli... And Landon... And Odell if he plans to play this year... And Snacks... And Olivier... And Evan... And Janoris... And now Alec, Nate and Jonathan.... And yes, I will fully come clean that, "I - The Mike" am indeed the most strident defender of and believer in Davis in BBI history...
And couldn't be more proud of it!
What I am not is a believer in fairy tales and make believe... Carry on Gatorade - I await your cynical insult with breathtaking anticipation!
You flat out said that you would avoid taking a potential franchise QB that could be the seamless successor to Eli simply out of fear of a QB controversy in the event that Eli struggles or the team loses.
I don't need to insult you - you're doing just fine all by yourself.
I think it's dumb, as well as counterproductive.
There is a difference between full speed ahead dam torpedos, let s Winn with Eli , and let s go with a weapon for Eli because Webb is as good as these other guys
QB bust setting franchises back 8 years factory USC product, Samuel L. Jackson from movie Unbreakable, a guy who can't hit a bull in the assignment with a handful of peas, or a munchkin playing school yard Nintendo football?
Sign Eli to a 10 year extension already DG.
I was just curious and starting a discussion. I don t come here for confrontation. But whatever.
I was just curious and starting a discussion. I don t come here for confrontation. But whatever.
My apologies. The board is littered with people wanting to have an argument about this, it's hard to discern.
I don't believe there is a single person on this board that would want the Giants to pass on what they believe is a HOF level QB prospect, if they had that conviction.
Problem is, history doesnt always repeat itself. And none of these QBs are the prospect Eli was coming out. It's like, hey we nailed it last time so we better do it again.
I'm in the camp of Barkley or trade down and lets see what we have in Webb.
I don't believe there is a single person on this board that would want the Giants to pass on what they believe is a HOF level QB prospect, if they had that conviction.
Again, at the risk of being ridiculed, I do not believe that anyone can predict whether someone is a HOF level prospect - whether that be a professional scout or a passionate amateur like myself. If they could, the record of 42 HOFers of 480 draft picks taken in the top ten since 1970 would be significantly higher.
Second, I don't believe that the goal ever should be that we find a HOF talent at quarterback. The goal must always be to draft the collection of players that give us the shortest route possible to winning a super bowl. If these goals coincide, great. But only two quarterbacks drafted in the top ten since 1995 have won a super bowl - and they are both named Manning. Yes, Andrew Luck has been the best quarterback prospect in the last decade, throws the tightest spirals with greater accuracy than anyone else and may someday win a super bowl and make it to the HOF. But his ability to single handedly carry a team to winning a super bowl has thus far been no different than what has been achieved by RGIII and JaMarcus Russell. And Mathew Stafford and Matt Ryan for that matter...
And before I am assaulted by the tsunami of insults for having this view, just think about how quickly the cynicism will build when the anointed savior doesn't deliver us a super bowl... we need only look at the jets and the agony of jets fans to know precisely what it will be like.
If Gettleman believes that one of these quarterback prospects will lead this team to winning a super bowl within three years, than he will draft a quarterback. If not, he won't. And he will be judged by Mara accordingly...
It helps when Brady has won roughly a quarter of the Super Bowls in your sample set, too. And do you think the Eagles would have lost with Wentz starting instead of Foles?
There's just a lot of spin in your post.
It helps when Brady has won roughly a quarter of the Super Bowls in your sample set, too. And do you think the Eagles would have lost with Wentz starting instead of Foles?
There's just a lot of spin in your post.
There is no spin here - just stubborn facts. And for the record, I was against the 2004 selection and trade for Eli. I thought Roethlisberger was fine under Collins as a patient developmental quarterback (much like Webb or Allen today - of course I was as wrong on Ben as anyone since he won the super bowl in his first year)...
I was actually furious with the Rivers selection and trade and believed for two years that the Giants had made a terrible mistake... It wasn't until Eli won the Super Bowl that I became convinced that I had been mistaken and Accorsi's strategy had worked - I could finally see what Accorsi saw in Eli and I have been sold ever since. But I still argue to this day that the Giants would have gotten to the super bowl a year earlier with Collins - or Kurt Warner for that matter when they miraculously signed him in June 2004. Both of them had a number of great years after they left the Giants...
So I am not some sort of Eli defender at all costs. I just believe that there is only one strategy that ever makes sense in the NFL...win now!
Actually, let me correct that - it's clearly not random. But they would otherwise appear to be arbitrary except for what they omit in your effort to make a specific point.
The reality is, you can't defend your position so you attack the facts I use rather than presenting facts to make your point. I am simply saying that it is virtually impossible to know in advance by professional scouts whether a quarterback is capable of winning a super bowl and that first round selections are no more likely to win super bowls than any other selections elsewhere in the draft...
How about this - of the 33 super bowl winning quarterbacks, 13 were taken in the top ten or 39%. Four others were taken in the first round outside of the top ten (Roethlisberger, Williams, Flacco and Rodgers)... So 17 first rounders - 16 non-first rounders. Quite random.
No spin. Just facts.
Quote:
1995 is a random choice that conveniently omits Dilfer (by one year). And top 10 is a random choice that conveniently omits Roethlisberger (by one pick).
The reality is, you can't defend your position so you attack the facts I use rather than presenting facts to make your point. I am simply saying that it is virtually impossible to know in advance by professional scouts whether a quarterback is capable of winning a super bowl and that first round selections are no more likely to win super bowls than any other selections elsewhere in the draft...
How about this - of the 33 super bowl winning quarterbacks, 13 were taken in the top ten or 39%. Four others were taken in the first round outside of the top ten (Roethlisberger, Williams, Flacco and Rodgers)... So 17 first rounders - 16 non-first rounders. Quite random.
No spin. Just facts.
There were 150 QBs taken in the first round during that time and over 700 drafted after the first or signed as UDFA. Not apples to apples. Work on improving your statistical skills.