Jump to content

Trey Lance could sit for two years and start his first game at the same age Matt Ryan did.


Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, Run 'n' Shoot said:

How can you trust them to properly evaluate a developmental QB at 4 but not trust them to hit on other picks? Either their good or they are not.

I was just making a facetious, worst-case comparison ~ similar to how people want to label a top-5 QB an automatic bust.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'm not sure how you pass on a QB with that skillset who could sit behind the greatest QB this team has ever had for two years while learning the offense. Trey Lance should be the pick at 4. 

Matt Ryan didn't need two years to learn how to play. He came in & hit the ground running. That is the kind of QB you draft with a top 5 pick... not a freaking project.

A.S. and Ice would have that kid ready to ball out when his time arrives.

49 minutes ago, 1989Fan said:

You could argue by reading these boards that no player would put more butts in seats or sell more jerseys than Fields...not that I am advocating drafting him.

Taking Fields would definitely generate a lot of excitement, even if he didn't take a snap this season. I think it would be naive to believe A.S. and T.F. aren't going to take the Wow Factor into account along with the more nuts and bolts aspects of what to do with that #4 pick...not that I am advocating for the Wow Factor. :ninja:

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, FalconofShadows said:

You no prior to the 08 draft with Ryan and Flaccid all rookie QBs waited 2-3 years. I know these kids get ready faster but sitting isn't a terrible idea sometimes putting them in right away breaks them. Also I am in the don't draft QB train though

A lot has changed in 13 years. It's not a terrible idea generally but top 5 pick in the draft is a day 1 starter, period. Not a guy you draft so he can start right as his rookie contract is expiring. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Lornoth said:

A lot has changed in 13 years. It's not a terrible idea generally but top 5 pick in the draft is a day 1 starter, period. Not a guy you draft so he can start right as his rookie contract is expiring. 

 

Well not exactly.

 

Baker Mayfield wasn't ment to start his rookie year.

 

It took Tyrod Taylor getting injured for Mayfield to officially become the starter his rookie season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DonOfThemBirds said:

 

Well not exactly.

 

Baker Mayfield wasn't ment to start his rookie year.

 

It took Tyrod Taylor getting injured for Mayfield to officially become the starter his rookie season.

Are we saying Mayfield was the kind of player we're hoping to emulate in this draft? When I say 'is' a day one starter I mean 'If they're not they shouldn't be the pick.'

Also we're talking more than just sitting the rookie season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PokerSteve said:

I was just making a facetious, worst-case comparison ~ similar to how people want to label a top-5 QB an automatic bust.

Not automatic, but way too close to 50/50 odds for even a top 5 QB. For every P. Manning, there's a Ryan Leaf. Will say that top 5 or top 10 are your best odds for a franchise QB, still, it's about 60% success. People remember Mahomes, and forget about Winston and Marriota, Will also say that using one pick to get a top 5 QB is much better than using multiple first rounders.

 

Much rather, though, have them take a developmental guy in the mid rounds, trade out of the 4th pick for multiple picks, including, ideally, a future first rounder they can use to trade for a franchise guy if needed. Plug some holes with the extra draft picks, make one more run with Ryan and Julio. They have 4 picks in the top 100, if they could end up with 6-7 in the top hundred, they could really fill some holes.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Lornoth said:

Are we saying Mayfield was the kind of player we're hoping to emulate in this draft? When I say 'is' a day one starter I mean 'If they're not they shouldn't be the pick.'

Also we're talking more than just sitting the rookie season.

 

Personally, I'd rather the Falcons find a way to stack the defense.

 

I just used Mayfield as an example. Just used him because I think he would've done better in the long haul if he had sat his rookie season despite having a pretty impressive rookie year.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DonOfThemBirds said:

 

Personally, I'd rather the Falcons find a way to stack the defense.

 

I just used Mayfield as an example. Just used him because I think he would've done better in the long haul if he had sat his rookie season despite having a pretty impressive rookie year.

I think that's evidence that Mayfield shouldn't have been a top pick, rather than that top picks should be sat for years. But yes we're in agreement about the defense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, falconidae said:

Not automatic, but way too close to 50/50 odds for even a top 5 QB. For every P. Manning, there's a Ryan Leaf. Will say that top 5 or top 10 are your best odds for a franchise QB, still, it's about 60% success. People remember Mahomes, and forget about Winston and Marriota, Will also say that using one pick to get a top 5 QB is much better than using multiple first rounders.

 

Much rather, though, have them take a developmental guy in the mid rounds, trade out of the 4th pick for multiple picks, including, ideally, a future first rounder they can use to trade for a franchise guy if needed. Plug some holes with the extra draft picks, make one more run with Ryan and Julio. They have 4 picks in the top 100, if they could end up with 6-7 in the top hundred, they could really fill some holes.

 

If the odds of getting a bust in the top 5 are so great, what are the odds of getting a bust taking Joe Random late in the third round? If the QB was mediocre in college compared to the top QB's, what are the odds you  develop him into an all pro?

If the odds were so great against success, why do teams give up boatloads of picks to trade up for a top five QB?  Also I think which team a top-five QB goes to has a lot of impact on whether he succeeds or fails. If he goes to a bottom-feeder, his chances to succeed are often slim and none.

If we don't take a QB at #4, I'll tend to believe A.S. and T.F. just felt the roster was too depleted not to take the extra picks, not that they felt the top four QB's are probably busts or under-achievers and can therefore just be disregarded.

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, PokerSteve said:

If the odds of getting a bust in the top 5 are so great, what are the odds of getting a bust taking Joe Random late in the third round? If the QB was mediocre in college compared to the top QB's, what are the odds you  develop him into an all pro?

If the odds were so great against success, why do teams give up boatloads of picks to trade up for a top five QB?  Also I think which team a top-five QB goes to has a lot of impact on whether he succeeds or fails. If he goes to a bottom-feeder, his chances to succeed are often slim and none.

If we don't take a QB at #4, I'll tend to believe A.S. and T.F. just felt the roster was too depleted not to take the extra picks, not that they felt the top four QB's are probably busts or under-achievers and can therefore just be disregarded.

Odds go down with each round, although Foles and Wilson are 3rd rounders with rings. Drafting high in the first round is not the only way to get a good QB. Draft a physical talented but raw player in the 4th, let him learn behind Ryan for a couple of years, he could end being a really good QB. Used to be SOP for teams, no reason it can't work again. It allows you to put more resources into winning immediately, and , ideally, make for a better team when the new QB comes in.

Teams give up boatloads of picks to pick a QB early first because they're stupid or desperate.  You really want to give up multiple draft picks for Goff, or Grffin? Or Darnold? No you want to be the team that gets multiple picks for a desperate team wanting Fields, or Wilson, or Lance.

I didn't say that all the QBs would bust, but the odds are really good that if, 4 QBs go in the top ten this year, 2 of them will be busts. I think the idea that taking a QB @4 means the franchise is set a QB for a decade is just wildly optimistic and history argues against it.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2021 at 9:57 PM, Em_Jae20 said:

People feel that we are only few players from making a playoff run and drafting a QB that's not projected to play for one season let alone two is a waste.  Not how I feel what so ever but this is a lot of the opposition's view

I feel 2 years of rookie scale QB pay being wasted as a back-up is a waste.  You bring them in when you have an established roster and throw them to the wolves whether they are ready or not in order to gain the value of 5 years of reduced QB pay 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, falconidae said:

Odds go down with each round, although Foles and Wilson are 3rd rounders with rings. Drafting high in the first round is not the only way to get a good QB. Draft a physical talented but raw player in the 4th, let him learn behind Ryan for a couple of years, he could end being a really good QB. Used to be SOP for teams, no reason it can't work again. It allows you to put more resources into winning immediately, and , ideally, make for a better team when the new QB comes in.

Teams give up boatloads of picks to pick a QB early first because they're stupid or desperate.  You really want to give up multiple draft picks for Goff, or Grffin? Or Darnold? No you want to be the team that gets multiple picks for a desperate team wanting Fields, or Wilson, or Lance.

I didn't say that all the QBs would bust, but the odds are really good that if, 4 QBs go in the top ten this year, 2 of them will be busts. I think the idea that taking a QB @4 means the franchise is set a QB for a decade is just wildly optimistic and history argues against it.
 

No, teams don't give up boatloads of picks to pick a QB early in the first because they're desperate and/or stupid. They put maximum effort into getting one of the top QB's in the draft because QB is the most important position on the team, and it's not even close.

You're trying to blame team GM's and HC's for doing their dead-level best to get a franchise QB. Without a top QB in today's NFL, you don't have a play-off caliber team. If you don't have a team competing for the play-offs, you're team is going to suffer a number of ills as a direct result of that besides not making the play-offs. Attendance and concessions are important aspects of NFL revenue to name just a couple of obvious things.

You also have to take into consideration the relative strength of the QB class in each year's draft. It definitely looks stupid to have gone Full Moron for Goff, Griffin or Darnold. If the top of the QB draft class looks weak, maybe you don't jump off the top rope for those QB's.

The top of this year's QB class looks very strong compared to the likes of Goff, Griffin and Darnold, but nobody knows and you're taking a chance on any one of the four or five top guys. If the QB we chose panned out, then we would have our new franchise QB and would be set.

If we don't choose a QB and trade down, we have no chance of avoiding the QB merry-go-round where you keep trying to get something going with mediocre QB's and they can not carry your football team. With the QB position in flux, both the offensive and defensive units are under duress to be competitive.

I can agree there are always going to be QB busts in the top of the draft, but that doesn't mean you can't hit on the right QB if you choose wisely. I believe A.S. and T.F. could pick the right guy, whereas I feel like some of the perennial bottom-feeder teams aren't able to pick the right QB and their lack of scouting talent continually bites them in the as. I just don't want to see the Falcons end up with a crappy QB in the coming years. They have enough trouble winning even with a franchise QB leading them, as we all know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...