I wouldn't be mad at all. I don't think most of people that are second guessing the Barkley pick were QB or bust last year. I think it's the people who were Darnold vs Barkley. I thought Darnold was going to be a great QB and nothing to this point has changed my mind. I didn't like any of the other guys. If Darnold went 1, I wanted Barkley at 2.
If Bosa gives us the best chance to win games in the future of all the players available when we pick, I hope we take him. Pass rushers win games.
That means we know there are no QBs worthy of a top 3 pick this year, unlike last year when there were 4 top-rated QBs worthy of the second overall pick.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
I wouldn't be mad at all. I don't think most of people that are second guessing the Barkley pick were QB or bust last year. I think it's the people who were Darnold vs Barkley. I thought Darnold was going to be a great QB and nothing to this point has changed my mind. I didn't like any of the other guys. If Darnold went 1, I wanted Barkley at 2.
If Bosa gives us the best chance to win games in the future of all the players available when we pick, I hope we take him. Pass rushers win games.
Picking #2 overall in one of the best QB classes in recent memory and with a QB that hadn't been good for 6+ seasons, I was 100% QB or bust last year.
I wouldn't be mad at all. I don't think most of people that are second guessing the Barkley pick were QB or bust last year. I think it's the people who were Darnold vs Barkley. I thought Darnold was going to be a great QB and nothing to this point has changed my mind. I didn't like any of the other guys. If Darnold went 1, I wanted Barkley at 2.
If Bosa gives us the best chance to win games in the future of all the players available when we pick, I hope we take him. Pass rushers win games.
Picking #2 overall in one of the best QB classes in recent memory and with a QB that hadn't been good for 6+ seasons, I was 100% QB or bust last year.
I think Danny's point was that "we" didn't want just any QB. If the talent was NOT there at the position we would have been calling to draft someone else.
As of now I don't see the QBs in the upcoming draft as as good as the QB's in this year's draft. So I wouldn't have a problem taking a Bosa or a Ferrell.
That means we know there are no QBs worthy of a top 3 pick this year, unlike last year when there were 4 top-rated QBs worthy of the second overall pick.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
Bingo, there were a handful of posters that understood the steep drop between 2018 and 2019.
No I will not be upset, because as Jim says, I didn’t want just any qb and 2018 is not featuring any worth a top pick.
That means we know there are no QBs worthy of a top 3 pick this year, unlike last year when there were 4 top-rated QBs worthy of the second overall pick.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
Well said. But I'm not ready to write off this year's class just yet. Mahomes didn't convince me until halfway through the 2016 season.
RE: BBIers Who Wanted A QB This Past Year Actually Follow The Draft Â
That means we know there are no QBs worthy of a top 3 pick this year, unlike last year when there were 4 top-rated QBs worthy of the second overall pick.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
I do follow the draft, though not as closely as I used to. Last year's QB class was variously described as historic and overrated, but then really all of the QBs who went in Round 1 had been on the radar all year - if not necessarily penciled into Round 1. But plenty of top draftees at QB have not come into their draft seasons as presumptive top picks. We will see whether any of the QBs in the conversation look like franchise talents come next May, or whether they're simply the best of what's on the board.
Giants oline? The Giants should at the very least draft the best olineman available, and hope he is not another Tony Mandrich, or trade down and draft multiple olinemen and hop for at least two starters!
If you tell me Lauletta plays the rest of this season Â
be too surprised to see 1 or 2 of the QB's that will be selected next year having better careers than 2-3 of the guys selected early in this past draft.
An impact DE or OT would be the best pick they could make Â
if that's not obvious by now I don't understand what people think they are watching.
They are watching a 37 year old QB who isn't performing and who will be 38 next year.
Get your OL or pass rusher in the 2nd round. Or trade down to someone who wants a pass rusher and get extra picks. I hope we are picking #1 in 2019 just so we can do this. This team needs A LOT.
If the Giants are in position to get Herbert they should jump on it. They would need to bring in a stopgap for a year (Foles,Fitzpatrick,Taylor) because he is a bit raw and I want to make sure the line is better but he has exciting tools.
but I saw enough of Darnold and Rosen last season to think they were being over scrutinized. I didn't want to touch Josh Allen and I was lukewarm on Mayfield, only because of his size.
The feeling I got leading up to the draft were that Rosen and Darnold were in the spotlight for so long that scouts were looking for things to ding them on.
I wouldn't be mad at all. I don't think most of people that are second guessing the Barkley pick were QB or bust last year. I think it's the people who were Darnold vs Barkley. I thought Darnold was going to be a great QB and nothing to this point has changed my mind. I didn't like any of the other guys. If Darnold went 1, I wanted Barkley at 2.
If Bosa gives us the best chance to win games in the future of all the players available when we pick, I hope we take him. Pass rushers win games.
Picking #2 overall in one of the best QB classes in recent memory and with a QB that hadn't been good for 6+ seasons, I was 100% QB or bust last year.
I think Danny's point was that "we" didn't want just any QB. If the talent was NOT there at the position we would have been calling to draft someone else.
be too surprised to see 1 or 2 of the QB's that will be selected next year having better careers than 2-3 of the guys selected early in this past draft.
Me neither, because of the historical success rate of 1st round QBs It is a crapshoot, that doesn't mean you shouldn't draft one high, when your QB is 37 and hasn't been playing well and you own the the number 2 pick. It looks like we will have a high pick and the other teams that look like they will be picking high again already drafted their QB of the future. I think we will have our pick of the QBs in 2019. I hope you are right.
"last year when there were 4 top-rated QBs worthy of the second" Â
If the Giants are in position to get Herbert they should jump on it. They would need to bring in a stopgap for a year (Foles,Fitzpatrick,Taylor) because he is a bit raw and I want to make sure the line is better but he has exciting tools.
Not sure why the excitement over Herbert. He's completed less than 50% against Bowling Green State and San Jose State, with 4 interceptions. That shouldn't happen. I haven't seen the games so perhaps it's not his fault, but you're playing at Oregon and the talent level should be much greater facing these opponents, in particular Bowling Green State. He was pretty good last year but he played in only 8 games and was inconsistent.
Perhaps he needs another year...he may not even enter the 2019 draft as he's only a true junior.
I am excited about watching more of Lock, Finley and Grier, however. To me, the first two are a tier above Grier right now.
that our fourth round pick this year will be a starting QB in the NFL, so the next logical move is to select a DE.
I don't know that that's true. For me, though, I don't know that he WON'T be. So with all the things I'm reading about there not being "that great quarterback" available in this draft, if the Giants go 2-8 or similar in the first 10 and are effectively out of it, I'd like to see Lauletta for 4, 5 or 6 games. And I love Eli Manning.
This assumption or opinion is where the perspective fails, it's purely subjective.
It's a "Narrative Gone Wild".
If Bosa is the BPA, which he very well might be, I'd be very happy with him. Someone else mentioned Greg Little as a possibility. While I probably wouldn't draft him that high, I'm more positive about Drew Lock than most. I liked him a lot last season.
That means we know there are no QBs worthy of a top 3 pick this year, unlike last year when there were 4 top-rated QBs worthy of the second overall pick.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
Agree. Although Drew Lock is starting to look pretty good early in the college season (we'll see how he fares against Georgia), as early as the day after the April 2017 draft, Mel Kiper was predicting that Josh Allen would be the #1 pick in the 2018 draft, and by August of 2017, Darnold and Rosen were touted as rare QB prospects -- Rosen had a pedigree going back to high school and Darnold was a star in his sophomore year --, Lamar Jackson was an intriguing wildcard, and even Mason Rudolph was getting looks as a strong first rounder. Of course no one thought Baker Mayfield would be a first round pick at the beginning of last year, but he was a surefire Heisman trophy contender and at least a mid-round pick. (He still wouldn't have been my choice for a QB in this class.)
No one in 2019 has that kind of longevity, which, to me, tends to be an important indicator of likely success for a QB in the NFL. It's not always the case (Cam Newton possibly falls in the exception category), but it is often the QBs who suddenly fly up the charts in one season or half a season, or during the combines (see Kyle Boller), who are the least likely to have success in the NFL. It's the guys who have had a degree of sustained top performance and a significant amount of college game tape who more often than not end up being great pros. 2020 looks to be a good year for QBs with Tua and Fromm, maybe Jacob Eason when he takes over in Washington, a few other potentials.
And if you need a QB but there is none available who is worthy of a top pick, your next best bet is a pass rushing DE/OLB, a LT or possibly a freak DT. Those positions impact the game the next most after a QB and their average career length range from average/above average to very long, allowing for stability at critical positions.
I would have been perfectly happy with taking a RB if we had a young QB in or near his prime and only a couple of pieces away from a contender. Then it makes a lot of sense to draft a top RB, just like Jacksonville did. They had top defensive talent when they drafted Fournette, their o-line was decent and, while people can disagree about Bortles, he was a high first round draft pick who is young and still had talent to grow, and the team was willing to build with him rather than hit the restart button on him--which so far looks to have been a pretty good decision.
One thing I have to admit is that I had my doubts about Barkley. I wasn't sure he'd be a chain mover and thought he might just be a big play threat once in a while. Although he hasn't really been a great chain mover yet and has a pretty poor YPC average apart from his TD run in game 1, I'm not sure that any RB would be a chain mover with this O-Line, and it has been very impressive to see him make the first would-be tackler miss on nearly every play. I still question whether he'll end up being a back who can be relied upon to grind out tough yards to secure a win, but he has been very impressive even if his numbers don't really bare that out.
Dak Prescott has had success in this league being a very average QB. Nick Foles just won a Super Bowl MVP after being a very average QB. Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino and Jim Kelly. Yes QB is the most highly valued position in the sport and yes if you have a great QB you will be competitive year in and out. But you don't need one to win in this league. The best way to win consistently in the NFL is to have a good Defense ( always keeps you in games). A good offensive line (Allows you to run the ball, control the clock and give your receivers time). You put any competent QB on a team with both of those things and you have a chance to win every week. Bottom Line
Dak Prescott has had success in this league being a very average QB. Nick Foles just won a Super Bowl MVP after being a very average QB. Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino and Jim Kelly. Yes QB is the most highly valued position in the sport and yes if you have a great QB you will be competitive year in and out. But you don't need one to win in this league. The best way to win consistently in the NFL is to have a good Defense ( always keeps you in games). A good offensive line (Allows you to run the ball, control the clock and give your receivers time). You put any competent QB on a team with both of those things and you have a chance to win every week. Bottom Line
The problem is that you can't keep a very good defense together for many years anymore like you used to be able to, because of free agency and salary caps. So you won't get many years of having your team as a real contender based upon having a very good defense, without a good quarterback.
You can, however, keep a franchise QB for 10-15 years, who can give you a cornerstone to build around and rebuild or reload around 2 or 3 separate times during their career.
How much success has Dak really had so far? The Cowboys had one very good year, where Dak had an excellent year in his rookie year--and i think it's no coincidence that it was in a year that other teams didn't have much or any NFL tape on him.
Trent Dilfer had one of the greatest defenses of all time. Brad Johnson had a great defense too. But did that Bucs team continue to be a contender year in and year out before and after their Super Bowl the way the Packers are or the Saints are or the Colts were with Peyton and are with Andrew Luck when healthy? As a fan, don't you want to have a team that you can look forward to having a winning, potential playoff season year in and year out? The Bills went to 4 straight Super Bowls. The Dolphins never had any running back around Dan Marino during a decade when running backs were bell cows, and Marino still had the Dolphins in the playoffs or playoff contention for many years.
Nick Foles came in for a few games and played very well. He didn't run the Eagles for an entire season. Let's see how much better the Eagles are with Carson Wentz back at the helm.
Dak Prescott has had success in this league being a very average QB. Nick Foles just won a Super Bowl MVP after being a very average QB. Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino and Jim Kelly. Yes QB is the most highly valued position in the sport and yes if you have a great QB you will be competitive year in and out. But you don't need one to win in this league. The best way to win consistently in the NFL is to have a good Defense ( always keeps you in games). A good offensive line (Allows you to run the ball, control the clock and give your receivers time). You put any competent QB on a team with both of those things and you have a chance to win every week. Bottom Line
The problem is that you can't keep a very good defense together for many years anymore like you used to be able to, because of free agency and salary caps. So you won't get many years of having your team as a real contender based upon having a very good defense, without a good quarterback.
You can, however, keep a franchise QB for 10-15 years, who can give you a cornerstone to build around and rebuild or reload around 2 or 3 separate times during their career.
How much success has Dak really had so far? The Cowboys had one very good year, where Dak had an excellent year in his rookie year--and i think it's no coincidence that it was in a year that other teams didn't have much or any NFL tape on him.
Trent Dilfer had one of the greatest defenses of all time. Brad Johnson had a great defense too. But did that Bucs team continue to be a contender year in and year out before and after their Super Bowl the way the Packers are or the Saints are or the Colts were with Peyton and are with Andrew Luck when healthy? As a fan, don't you want to have a team that you can look forward to having a winning, potential playoff season year in and year out? The Bills went to 4 straight Super Bowls. The Dolphins never had any running back around Dan Marino during a decade when running backs were bell cows, and Marino still had the Dolphins in the playoffs or playoff contention for many years.
Nick Foles came in for a few games and played very well. He didn't run the Eagles for an entire season. Let's see how much better the Eagles are with Carson Wentz back at the helm.
I don't disagree with you and we feel the same way. Would I want to have a young stud QB for the next 10-15 years, absolutely. My response would be do you want say a Matthew Stafford or Marcus Mariota for the next 10-15 years? a Top 2 QB pick doesn't always translate to a slam dunk QB prospect. Id rather use a #2 pick on a very good RB than a average-good QB. Just my thoughts
Just for discussion, one would consider trading down and garnering a giant pile to adjust those outcome %ages.
As last years 'imho ' . And, again; the lines of scrimmage, the run blocking, and the ability to block zone style, if that's helpful, in any given game.
If Bosa gives us the best chance to win games in the future of all the players available when we pick, I hope we take him. Pass rushers win games.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
If Bosa gives us the best chance to win games in the future of all the players available when we pick, I hope we take him. Pass rushers win games.
Picking #2 overall in one of the best QB classes in recent memory and with a QB that hadn't been good for 6+ seasons, I was 100% QB or bust last year.
Quote:
I wouldn't be mad at all. I don't think most of people that are second guessing the Barkley pick were QB or bust last year. I think it's the people who were Darnold vs Barkley. I thought Darnold was going to be a great QB and nothing to this point has changed my mind. I didn't like any of the other guys. If Darnold went 1, I wanted Barkley at 2.
If Bosa gives us the best chance to win games in the future of all the players available when we pick, I hope we take him. Pass rushers win games.
Picking #2 overall in one of the best QB classes in recent memory and with a QB that hadn't been good for 6+ seasons, I was 100% QB or bust last year.
I think Danny's point was that "we" didn't want just any QB. If the talent was NOT there at the position we would have been calling to draft someone else.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
Bingo, there were a handful of posters that understood the steep drop between 2018 and 2019.
No I will not be upset, because as Jim says, I didn’t want just any qb and 2018 is not featuring any worth a top pick.
;)
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
Well said. But I'm not ready to write off this year's class just yet. Mahomes didn't convince me until halfway through the 2016 season.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
I do follow the draft, though not as closely as I used to. Last year's QB class was variously described as historic and overrated, but then really all of the QBs who went in Round 1 had been on the radar all year - if not necessarily penciled into Round 1. But plenty of top draftees at QB have not come into their draft seasons as presumptive top picks. We will see whether any of the QBs in the conversation look like franchise talents come next May, or whether they're simply the best of what's on the board.
DE is a premier position. If we can’t get a great QB prospect than let’s at least get a player who can get to the QB.
DUMB.
They are watching a 37 year old QB who isn't performing and who will be 38 next year.
Get your OL or pass rusher in the 2nd round. Or trade down to someone who wants a pass rusher and get extra picks. I hope we are picking #1 in 2019 just so we can do this. This team needs A LOT.
The feeling I got leading up to the draft were that Rosen and Darnold were in the spotlight for so long that scouts were looking for things to ding them on.
Quote:
In comment 14083079 Danny Kanell said:
Quote:
I wouldn't be mad at all. I don't think most of people that are second guessing the Barkley pick were QB or bust last year. I think it's the people who were Darnold vs Barkley. I thought Darnold was going to be a great QB and nothing to this point has changed my mind. I didn't like any of the other guys. If Darnold went 1, I wanted Barkley at 2.
If Bosa gives us the best chance to win games in the future of all the players available when we pick, I hope we take him. Pass rushers win games.
Picking #2 overall in one of the best QB classes in recent memory and with a QB that hadn't been good for 6+ seasons, I was 100% QB or bust last year.
I think Danny's point was that "we" didn't want just any QB. If the talent was NOT there at the position we would have been calling to draft someone else.
My point is that the talent was clearly there.
Not sure why the excitement over Herbert. He's completed less than 50% against Bowling Green State and San Jose State, with 4 interceptions. That shouldn't happen. I haven't seen the games so perhaps it's not his fault, but you're playing at Oregon and the talent level should be much greater facing these opponents, in particular Bowling Green State. He was pretty good last year but he played in only 8 games and was inconsistent.
Perhaps he needs another year...he may not even enter the 2019 draft as he's only a true junior.
I am excited about watching more of Lock, Finley and Grier, however. To me, the first two are a tier above Grier right now.
I don't know that that's true. For me, though, I don't know that he WON'T be. So with all the things I'm reading about there not being "that great quarterback" available in this draft, if the Giants go 2-8 or similar in the first 10 and are effectively out of it, I'd like to see Lauletta for 4, 5 or 6 games. And I love Eli Manning.
It's a "Narrative Gone Wild".
If Bosa is the BPA, which he very well might be, I'd be very happy with him. Someone else mentioned Greg Little as a possibility. While I probably wouldn't draft him that high, I'm more positive about Drew Lock than most. I liked him a lot last season.
So no, there will not be a meltdown.
The fact that you even posed your question means that you either don't closely follow the draft-worthy prospects or you think the posters who wanted a QB simply want to draft ANY QB.
Agree. Although Drew Lock is starting to look pretty good early in the college season (we'll see how he fares against Georgia), as early as the day after the April 2017 draft, Mel Kiper was predicting that Josh Allen would be the #1 pick in the 2018 draft, and by August of 2017, Darnold and Rosen were touted as rare QB prospects -- Rosen had a pedigree going back to high school and Darnold was a star in his sophomore year --, Lamar Jackson was an intriguing wildcard, and even Mason Rudolph was getting looks as a strong first rounder. Of course no one thought Baker Mayfield would be a first round pick at the beginning of last year, but he was a surefire Heisman trophy contender and at least a mid-round pick. (He still wouldn't have been my choice for a QB in this class.)
No one in 2019 has that kind of longevity, which, to me, tends to be an important indicator of likely success for a QB in the NFL. It's not always the case (Cam Newton possibly falls in the exception category), but it is often the QBs who suddenly fly up the charts in one season or half a season, or during the combines (see Kyle Boller), who are the least likely to have success in the NFL. It's the guys who have had a degree of sustained top performance and a significant amount of college game tape who more often than not end up being great pros. 2020 looks to be a good year for QBs with Tua and Fromm, maybe Jacob Eason when he takes over in Washington, a few other potentials.
And if you need a QB but there is none available who is worthy of a top pick, your next best bet is a pass rushing DE/OLB, a LT or possibly a freak DT. Those positions impact the game the next most after a QB and their average career length range from average/above average to very long, allowing for stability at critical positions.
I would have been perfectly happy with taking a RB if we had a young QB in or near his prime and only a couple of pieces away from a contender. Then it makes a lot of sense to draft a top RB, just like Jacksonville did. They had top defensive talent when they drafted Fournette, their o-line was decent and, while people can disagree about Bortles, he was a high first round draft pick who is young and still had talent to grow, and the team was willing to build with him rather than hit the restart button on him--which so far looks to have been a pretty good decision.
One thing I have to admit is that I had my doubts about Barkley. I wasn't sure he'd be a chain mover and thought he might just be a big play threat once in a while. Although he hasn't really been a great chain mover yet and has a pretty poor YPC average apart from his TD run in game 1, I'm not sure that any RB would be a chain mover with this O-Line, and it has been very impressive to see him make the first would-be tackler miss on nearly every play. I still question whether he'll end up being a back who can be relied upon to grind out tough yards to secure a win, but he has been very impressive even if his numbers don't really bare that out.
The problem is that you can't keep a very good defense together for many years anymore like you used to be able to, because of free agency and salary caps. So you won't get many years of having your team as a real contender based upon having a very good defense, without a good quarterback.
You can, however, keep a franchise QB for 10-15 years, who can give you a cornerstone to build around and rebuild or reload around 2 or 3 separate times during their career.
How much success has Dak really had so far? The Cowboys had one very good year, where Dak had an excellent year in his rookie year--and i think it's no coincidence that it was in a year that other teams didn't have much or any NFL tape on him.
Trent Dilfer had one of the greatest defenses of all time. Brad Johnson had a great defense too. But did that Bucs team continue to be a contender year in and year out before and after their Super Bowl the way the Packers are or the Saints are or the Colts were with Peyton and are with Andrew Luck when healthy? As a fan, don't you want to have a team that you can look forward to having a winning, potential playoff season year in and year out? The Bills went to 4 straight Super Bowls. The Dolphins never had any running back around Dan Marino during a decade when running backs were bell cows, and Marino still had the Dolphins in the playoffs or playoff contention for many years.
Nick Foles came in for a few games and played very well. He didn't run the Eagles for an entire season. Let's see how much better the Eagles are with Carson Wentz back at the helm.
Quote:
Dak Prescott has had success in this league being a very average QB. Nick Foles just won a Super Bowl MVP after being a very average QB. Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson have more Super Bowl rings than Dan Marino and Jim Kelly. Yes QB is the most highly valued position in the sport and yes if you have a great QB you will be competitive year in and out. But you don't need one to win in this league. The best way to win consistently in the NFL is to have a good Defense ( always keeps you in games). A good offensive line (Allows you to run the ball, control the clock and give your receivers time). You put any competent QB on a team with both of those things and you have a chance to win every week. Bottom Line
The problem is that you can't keep a very good defense together for many years anymore like you used to be able to, because of free agency and salary caps. So you won't get many years of having your team as a real contender based upon having a very good defense, without a good quarterback.
You can, however, keep a franchise QB for 10-15 years, who can give you a cornerstone to build around and rebuild or reload around 2 or 3 separate times during their career.
How much success has Dak really had so far? The Cowboys had one very good year, where Dak had an excellent year in his rookie year--and i think it's no coincidence that it was in a year that other teams didn't have much or any NFL tape on him.
Trent Dilfer had one of the greatest defenses of all time. Brad Johnson had a great defense too. But did that Bucs team continue to be a contender year in and year out before and after their Super Bowl the way the Packers are or the Saints are or the Colts were with Peyton and are with Andrew Luck when healthy? As a fan, don't you want to have a team that you can look forward to having a winning, potential playoff season year in and year out? The Bills went to 4 straight Super Bowls. The Dolphins never had any running back around Dan Marino during a decade when running backs were bell cows, and Marino still had the Dolphins in the playoffs or playoff contention for many years.
Nick Foles came in for a few games and played very well. He didn't run the Eagles for an entire season. Let's see how much better the Eagles are with Carson Wentz back at the helm.
I don't disagree with you and we feel the same way. Would I want to have a young stud QB for the next 10-15 years, absolutely. My response would be do you want say a Matthew Stafford or Marcus Mariota for the next 10-15 years? a Top 2 QB pick doesn't always translate to a slam dunk QB prospect. Id rather use a #2 pick on a very good RB than a average-good QB. Just my thoughts
As last years 'imho ' . And, again; the lines of scrimmage, the run blocking, and the ability to block zone style, if that's helpful, in any given game.
That said, a QB isn't a crazy thought either .