The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Without picking sides in the Bradford/Clausen vs. Okung at #4 pick, it bugs me when I see people say to 'just pick up a QB in the mid rounds' like that's a recipe for success in the league.. Doing a little research (very little) it's pretty clear that it's not.. Of the playoff teams the past 5 years, the QB breakdown is (non first round QB in parenthesis):

2009, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brees, Warner, Brady, Romo, Favre)
2008, 9-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Warner, T. Jackson, Delhomme)
2007, 5-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Favre, T. Collins, Brady, Garrard, Romo, Garcia, Hasselbeck)
2006, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Brees, Romo, Hasselbeck, T. Green)
2005, 6-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Plummer, Brunell, Hasselbeck, Garcia, Delhomme)

So nearly 60% of the playoff QB over the past 5 years have been 1st round picks. The exceptions have been the greatest 6th round pick in league history (Brady) 4 undrafted FA (Romo, Delhomme, Garcia, Warner)-including perhaps one of the most unlikely stories of all time in Warner. Three second round picks (Brees, Favre & Jackson) and 5 late round picks who eventually became something after playing behind established QB for years (Garrard, T. Green, Collins, Brunell, Hasselbeck).

So unless we're hoping for another miracle (Brady, Warner, Romo, Delhomme) or a slightly undervalued gem (Favre, Brees) or are hoping to find an undiscovered star (Hasselbeck, etc) then 'picking up a QB in the mid rounds' is likely not going to yield us anything beyond mediocre football in the future.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

If it were that easy to groom a mid-rounder everyone would do it, right?

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

I agree. While it's clearly not absolutely necessary to find a successful QB in the first round, that is statistically your best chance. And what is clear is that you ain't hoisting any Lombardi's in today's NFL without a Probowl to Hall of Fame level QB. With rule changes favoring QB's, the day's of Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson winning Superbowls are long gone.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

YES!!! Thank you for bringing this up. I don't know what it is, weather it be some sort of subconscious compromise on the part of Campbell/O-Line @4 supporters or something else entirely but drafting and developing a QB is nothing like drafting and developing a lineman. With lineman you usually know within a year or two that they're going to be good with many showing lots of promise within the first year.

On top of that when you draft a lineman in rounds 3-5 you have a decent chance of that player turning into a quality starter down the line where as the only QB I can think of right now that was selected in those rounds was Matt Schuab.

The Saints have the best pair of Guards in the NFL right now in Nicks and Evans (5th and 4th respectively) with Evans being considered the premier guard in the NFL.

Keep in mind this is possibly the deepest tackle draft in years and it takes a year or two to develop a QB. If the JC experiment fails, which going into it's 6th year is a highly likely possibility then we're going to loose out on a year of drafting a QB.

Not to mention that next year we will probably have to give up picks to move up to select the QB prospect of our choosing. This time around we'll have our pick of the liter, and it's a very good liter. Certainly better then last year where now we have three established starters at our disposal, two being prospects for the top of the first when we select at 4.

In the end it all depends on how well they interview and weather or not we can get a clean bill of health from the respective doctors of Clausen and Bradford but this is our chance to finally pair a quality QB prospect with an offensive mastermind. This is the difference between hoping to make the playoffs every year and trying to win championships.

Right now I just can't see why people are so risk averse to taking a QB this year, but it seems like something I hear every year. "Bad QB class, next year will be better." Next year rolls around "Yeah I don't like these QB's next year." Basically we wind up with an infinity loop.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Paintrain;663071]Without picking sides in the Bradford/Clausen vs. Okung at #4 pick, it bugs me when I see people say to 'just pick up a QB in the mid rounds' like that's a recipe for success in the league.. Doing a little research (very little) it's pretty clear that it's not.. Of the playoff teams the past 5 years, the QB breakdown is (non first round QB in parenthesis):

2009, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brees, Warner, Brady, Romo, Favre)
2008, 9-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Warner, T. Jackson, Delhomme)
2007, 5-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Favre, T. Collins, Brady, Garrard, Romo, Garcia, Hasselbeck)
2006, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Brees, Romo, Hasselbeck, T. Green)
2005, 6-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Plummer, Brunell, Hasselbeck, Garcia, Delhomme)

So nearly 60% of the playoff QB over the past 5 years have been 1st round picks. The exceptions have been the greatest 6th round pick in league history (Brady) 4 undrafted FA (Romo, Delhomme, Garcia, Warner)-including perhaps one of the most unlikely stories of all time in Warner. Three second round picks (Brees, Favre & Jackson) and 5 late round picks who eventually became something after playing behind established QB for years (Garrard, T. Green, Collins, Brunell, Hasselbeck).

So unless we're hoping for another miracle (Brady, Warner, Romo, Delhomme) or a slightly undervalued gem (Favre, Brees) or are hoping to find an undiscovered star (Hasselbeck, etc) then 'picking up a QB in the mid rounds' is likely not going to yield us anything beyond mediocre football in the future.[/quote]

Well it seems that you and whoever thinks we're going to find the next Tom Brady in the middle rounds are under the impression that we're going to turn this ship around in one season.

To me, the first-round QB should be picked up in 2011, once we have built the offensive line with a stud first-round lineman (i.e. Okung), a quality free agent, and (crossing fingers) 1 or 2 of our young lineman that (hopefully) develops into a solid starter.

While all of us hope that we can have a significant winning season (beyond 9-7) right away, in reality it is going to take one of the following things to happen, either...

a.) We pick up a QB in the first round (i.e. Clausen or Bradford) and HOPE that Shanahan can build an offensive line out of mid-round lineman and what we have left.

b.) We build our offensive line starting with the top tackle in the draft (Okung) and hope that Shanahan can develop a mid-rounder QB.

Personally, I would rather us build the line, let JC play in 2010. Then in 2011, draft your QB of the future and give him the keys to an offense that has a strong offensive line and (hopefully) a strong running game and more experienced receivers (DT, MK, and Davis).

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Ruhskins;663082]
To me, the first-round QB should be picked up in 2011, once we have built the offensive line with a stud first-round lineman (i.e. Okung), a quality free agent, and (crossing fingers) 1 or 2 of our young lineman that (hopefully) develops into a solid starter.
[/quote]

In that case you're willing to sacrifice a year of development on a rookie QB and a future draft pick that could easily become another starter along the offensive line to trade up for a QB prospect next year. And thats all to select a tackle in a ridiculously deep tackle class. The chance to select quality tackles comes along every year, the chance to select a top QB prospect for a team like us comes once every......5 years.

And even then it's not guaranteed that we'll get said prospect, I mean we tried like hell to trade for Jay Cutler and Mark Sanchez yet came away with neither. So whos to say we could trade up in the future to draft a QB that you'll be comfortable with?

I can personally think of plently of quality tackles that have been available for us to select over the years yet I can't find many QB's that got past us that I would love to have as starters.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;663080]YES!!! Thank you for bringing this up. I don't know what it is, weather it be some sort of subconscious compromise on the part of Campbell/O-Line @4 supporters or something else entirely but drafting and developing a QB is nothing like drafting and developing a lineman. With lineman you usually know within a year or two that they're going to be good with many showing lots of promise within the first year.[/quote]

You make it sound like everyone wants to draft a lineman with #4. Even the pundits have us drafting a QB, and all this people have mancrushes on Bradford. Whether you like Campbell or not, I just don't know what else you need to see out of our offensive line for you or others to say, "Say, shouldn't we draft the top tackle?"

[quote=Dirtbag359;663080]On top of that when you draft a lineman in rounds 3-5 you have a decent chance of that player turning into a quality starter down the line where as the only QB I can think of right now that was selected in those rounds was Matt Schuab.
[/quote]

And if you draft a first round lineman you have the chance to get the next Ryan Clady, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Jake Long, Joe Thomas, Jeff Otah, Michael Oher etc., etc., etc.

[quote=Dirtbag359;663080]The Saints have the best pair of Guards in the NFL right now in Nicks and Evans (5th and 4th respectively) with Evans being considered the premier guard in the NFL.
[/quote]

We're not talking about picking up guards in the first round, we're talking about picking up a franchise tackle.

[quote=Dirtbag359;663080]Keep in mind this is possibly the deepest tackle draft in years and it takes a year or two to develop a QB. [B]If the JC experiment fails, which going into it's 6th year is a highly likely possibility then we're going to loose out on a year of drafting a QB. [/B]

[B]Not to mention that next year we will probably have to give up picks to move up to select the QB prospect of our choosing[/B]. This time around we'll have our pick of the liter, and it's a very good liter. Certainly better then last year where now we have three established starters at our disposal, two being prospects for the top of the first when we select at 4.[/quote]

If the JC experiment fails, then we have another top pick in the 2011 draft. If it doesn't, then we had a winning season...and unless we trade away our first rounder, we can still pick a first-round QB in 2011 for the future.

[quote=Dirtbag359;663080]In the end it all depends on how well they interview and weather or not we can get a clean bill of health from the respective doctors of Clausen and Bradford but this is our chance to finally pair a quality QB prospect with an offensive mastermind. This is the difference between hoping to make the playoffs every year and trying to win championships.[/quote]

You're still talking about a "quality prospect" that didn't play much his last season in college and has a shoulder injury. In the Elway aftermath, Shanahan had moderate success with Jake Plummer before getting Cutler in the mix.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;663083]In that case you're willing to sacrifice a year of development on a rookie QB and a future draft pick that could easily become another starter along the offensive line to trade up for a QB prospect next year. And thats all to select a tackle in a ridiculously deep tackle class. The chance to select quality tackles comes along every year, the chance to select a top QB prospect for a team like us comes once every......5 years.

And even then it's not guaranteed that we'll get said prospect, I mean we tried like hell to trade for Jay Cutler and Mark Sanchez yet came away with neither. So whos to say we could trade up in the future to draft a QB that you'll be comfortable with?[/quote]

If the draft class is that deep in tackles, then we should trade down and get more picks or if Okung is not available. Honestly I feel this is the best situation, but second best for me would be to take a franchise tackle.

You should also take into consideration that Vinny Cerrato is no longer in charge of our team, so I would hope that this better front office could do a better job in future drafts to get the QB of the future.

I just feel that when you look at our starters from last year in the offensive line:

Samuels = probably done and should retire
Dockery = the only consistent one
Rabach = I personally think he's been terrible
Randy Thomas = injury-ridden and should hang it up
Heyer = Ugh

How could you say let's draft a QB with our #4 and patch this line up? Like I said, to me a trade down is the best scenario, but if not let's take the top tackle to anchor this line.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Ruhskins;663084]
And if you draft a first round lineman you have the chance to get the next Ryan Clady, D'Brickashaw Ferguson, Jake Long, Joe Thomas, Jeff Otah, Michael Oher etc., etc., etc.
[/quote]

Don't forget Micahel Roos, Marcus McNeil, Jason Peters, Eric Winston, Jeremy Trueblood, Donald Penn, David Stewart, and Matt Light. All guys selected after the first round.

We're also in an era were 7 first round lineman have started for a Super Bowl champion. Yet 8 of the last 10 Super Bowls were won by franchise QB's.

[quote]There were only 7, out of a possible 50, drafted in round 1.

Of that, the highest was Jonathon Ogden at number 4 overall in 1996. In fact, he was the only top 10 olineman on a Superbowl winning team this decade.

Only one team, the 2005 Steelers, had mutliple first round o-lineman.

2 of the 7 are Kenyatta Walker (hardly a cornerstone) and Damien Woody[/quote]

Keep in mind you're also coming off a Super Bowl where the starting Left Tackles were a 5th round pick and an UDFA.

[quote=Ruhskins;663084]
We're not talking about picking up guards in the first round, we're talking about picking up a franchise tackle.
[/quote]

And yet there are a handful of quality tackles that were selected in the 2nd round in recent years. This past year for instance there wasn't a whole lot of difference in performance between the first round tackles and the second round guys, in fact I think the second round guys made a much stronger statement this past year then the guys selected in the first round.

Eben Britton, Phil Loadholt, and Sebastian Vollmer all became regular starters by season end and are now staples on their line for years to come. If it hadn't been for Michael Oher the second round tackles would have outperformed their first round counterparts.

Plus we had a franchise tackle for the last 10 years while struggling with an anemic offense that suffered from *surprise* QB problems.

[quote=Ruhskins;663084]
If the JC experiment fails, then we have another top pick in the 2011 draft. If it doesn't, then we had a winning season...and unless we trade away our first rounder, we can still pick a first-round QB in 2011 for the future.

[/quote]

Again a one year jump start on developing a blue chip QB prospect is extremely valuable especially when it means you'll probably save draft picks down the line. Trust me we will not be picking in the top 10 for a while, unfortunately I can't promise you that we'll be picking in the bottom 10 either.

[quote=Ruhskins;663084]
You're still talking about a "quality prospect" that didn't play much his last season in college and has a shoulder injury. In the Elway aftermath, Shanahan had moderate success with Jake Plummer before getting Cutler in the mix.[/quote]

The type of accuracy Bradford has is rare so of course I want us to draft him, especially after Shanahan says the number 1 quality he wants in a QB is accuracy. By the way I don't want moderate success, I want a freaking championship. I want Obama leaning into the mic with a football asking "whereeee's Chris Cooley?" I'm tired of hoping we limp into the playoffs. Of course over the next year or two that will be our goal but I want something to look forward to after that.

[quote=Mike Shanahan;663084]
"I'm looking forward to it." Shanahan explained what he wants in a quarterback, and Campbell would do well to listen up. "I need a quarterback,[B] No. 1, to be accurate[/B], and No. 2, to be passionate about the game, about the preparation, the study and the execution," said Shanahan. "I've been around a lot of leaders and they do it different ways -- Joe Montana, Steve Young and John Elway. But they all had a deep desire to be the best."[/quote]

[quote=Ruhskins;663084]
You're still talking about a "quality prospect" that didn't play much his last season in college and has a [B]shoulder injury.[/B] [/quote]

Third degree AC joint sprain that was fixed with a 35 minute operation. Compare that to Drew Brees who came off a 360 degree tear.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

shanaman's going to do what it takes...up to and including drinking virgin blood to decide this draft pick for us.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Take the QB next year if ya can't get him in 2nd round. Otherwise we gotta be dealing some shit soon!

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

pain, good read. and some great points. too me, it boils down to being easier to evaluate an offensive lineman as compared to a q-back. im not a huge Campbell supporter. but i do think he would be a decent starter with an NFL caliber line

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;663086]Don't forget Micahel Roos, Marcus McNeil, Jason Peters, Eric Winston, Jeremy Trueblood, Donald Penn, David Stewart, and Matt Light. All guys selected after the first round.

We're also in an era were 7 first round lineman have started for a Super Bowl champion. Yet 8 of the last 10 Super Bowls were won by franchise QB's.



Keep in mind you're also coming off a Super Bowl where the starting Left Tackles were a 5th round pick and an UDFA.



And yet there are a handful of quality tackles that were selected in the 2nd round in recent years. This past year for instance there wasn't a whole lot of difference in performance between the first round tackles and the second round guys, in fact I think the second round guys made a much stronger statement this past year then the guys selected in the first round.

Eben Britton, Phil Loadholt, and Sebastian Vollmer all became regular starters by season end and are now staples on their line for years to come. If it hadn't been for Michael Oher the second round tackles would have outperformed their first round counterparts.

Plus we had a franchise tackle for the last 10 years while struggling with an anemic offense that suffered from *surprise* QB problems.



Again a one year jump start on developing a blue chip QB prospect is extremely valuable especially when it means you'll probably save draft picks down the line. Trust me we will not be picking in the top 10 for a while, unfortunately I can't promise you that we'll be picking in the bottom 10 either.



The type of accuracy Bradford has is rare so of course I want us to draft him, especially after Shanahan says the number 1 quality he wants in a QB is accuracy. By the way I don't want moderate success, I want a freaking championship. I want Obama leaning into the mic with a football asking "whereeee's Chris Cooley?" I'm tired of hoping we limp into the playoffs. Of course over the next year or two that will be our goal but I want something to look forward to after that.





Third degree AC joint sprain that was fixed with a 35 minute operation. Compare that to Drew Brees who came off a 360 degree tear.[/quote]

Knock out analysis from Dirtbag, well done.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

You have a much better chance of getting a good player [B]at any position[/B] in the first round. I don't think that's a surprise. If you draft a QB in the first round you'd better hope he's a good one because it can set your franchise back for years if he isn't.

There are 32 starting QB's in the NFL. In the last 10 years 26 QB's have been drafted in the first round. That's 26 out of 32 positions available.

There are 160 starting o-line positions available and 42 o-linemen have been drafted in the first round in the last 10 years. That's 42 out of 160 available positions.

It's obvious that the percentage of QB's taken in the first round compared to the positions available is pretty high compared to o-linemen. In that case more starting QB's should come from the first round percentage-wise than o-linemen. There are simply more players from the o-line starting in the NFL who were taken in the later rounds because there are more positions to fill. Just because you start on the o-line doesn't mean you're one of the best. I think we're proof of that. So I agree with Paintrain that your chances of getting a quality QB are better in the first round. The same goes with any position.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

dang, some good back n forth analysis in here.

go skins!

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Also, counting Pennington, Jamarcus Russell and Brady Quinn, if you want to count them as starters, 15 of the 26 first round QB picks start. 11 first round picks don't, and if you take away Russell and Quinn who haven't proven much, 50% of the QB's taken in the first round in the last 10 years did not start last year. Take away Pennington, which I guess you could since Henne is starting for Miami, it becomes even more who are not starting.

This is just my opinion and in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really count for much, but there are 2 things I feel strongly about.

1- Considering the personell we have, the Redskins needs at o-line are far greater than our need at QB to become a winning team.

2- Russell Okung is [B]much less [/B]of a risk than Bradford or Clausen at #4.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

I'm of the opinion that if you have a chance to get a QB you think will be great, you absolutely can't pass up the opportunity. No other position impacts the game nearly as much, and the point was already made that nobody is going deep in the playoffs these days without an elite QB.

If you have a great QB prospect available when you pick, it's a mistake to fulfill any other need, including LT.

Could you miss on the QB? Sure. Schuler anyone? But imagine if you hit, and you end up with the next Drew Brees or Peyton Manning. If you hit on an LT, you end up with a Chris Samuels, which is great for 10 years. But without the QB you see where that got us.

Football's a team sport and you need it all, but first and foremost you need the QB. The question isn't whether we should go LT over QB, the question is whether Bradford or Clausen are tremendous prospects. If we think one of them is, we've got to pull the trigger. We'll find our LT later, despite what people think, there are Sam Baker's out there who can make an impact outside of the top 10.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Schneed10;663106]I'm of the opinion that if you have a chance to get a QB you think will be great, you absolutely can't pass up the opportunity. No other position impacts the game nearly as much, and the point was already made that nobody is going deep in the playoffs these days without an elite QB.

If you have a great QB prospect available when you pick, it's a mistake to fulfill any other need, including LT.

Could you miss on the QB? Sure. Schuler anyone? But imagine if you hit, and you end up with the next Drew Brees or Peyton Manning. If you hit on an LT, you end up with a Chris Samuels, which is great for 10 years. But without the QB you see where that got us.

Football's a team sport and you need it all, but first and foremost you need the QB. The question isn't whether we should go LT over QB, the question is whether Bradford or Clausen are tremendous prospects. If we think one of them is, we've got to pull the trigger. We'll find our LT later, despite what people think, there are Sam Baker's out there who can make an impact outside of the top 10.[/quote]

Great post. I still want McCoy in the 2nd though.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

would this change things?
[url=http://www.extremeskins.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=43173&stc=1&d=1266164265]EXTREMESKINS.com[/url]

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Just for the sake of argument, we've won 3 Super Bowls and gone to 5. In the SB era, besides Sonny Jurgenson who didn't win any, what Franchise QB's have we had?

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

thats going to be a quick discussion. Joe T.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Taking a QB in the 1st round is no guarantee for success either. It just boils down to doing your homework and taking the right guy, regardless of round.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=dmek25;663112]thats going to be a quick discussion. Joe T.[/quote]

He was picked in the 4th round by the Miami Dolphins and played in the CFL before we got him. Mark Rypien was picked in the 6th. Doug Williams was given up on by Tampa Bay when we got him. But we had a strong o-line.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

you guys old enough to remember Theismann returning punts when he first got here? can you imagine someone trying that now

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=dmek25;663119]you guys old enough to remember Theismann returning punts when he first got here? can you imagine someone trying that now[/quote]

:laughing- The coach would get fired.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Just remember people, we don't need to get a QB later in the draft just to say we got one. I really don't want McCoy just because he is the best name available, he can only throw the ball 40 yards. Pike played in a QB friendly system and threw lots of close/should have been picks. Robinson would show flashes of great QB and also flashes of don't draft me; threw lots of picks without his best WR. LeFevour played in a QB friendly system/shotgun offense. Didn't play against elite competition and makes his receivers adjust to the ball. Tebow doesn't know how to read defenses and delivers the ball very slow and wobbily. Kafka is a definite fighter, but would have games where he would throw 4 TD and 5Ints, doesn't really cut it in the NFL. Kafka's the only one of this bunch of later QB's that I would take a shot on....Lets just go ahead and get Bradford, whether people here like it or not, he'll be our QB in 2010 unless St. Louis takes him. So many people have us taking him in their mocks, I know you shouldn't trust mocks but when its almost unanimous as to who we're getting and the fact that last off season we were looking at QBs, as well as the fact that shanahan can get good OLineman for his system throughout the draft, but QB's really have come to him in the first round, that just supports more why I think he'll go the more safe route (ironically with a guy with a question mark shoulder; then did Brees too...) and get Sam Bradford.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Paintrain;663071]Without picking sides in the Bradford/Clausen vs. Okung at #4 pick, it bugs me when I see people say to 'just pick up a QB in the mid rounds' like that's a recipe for success in the league.. Doing a little research (very little) it's pretty clear that it's not.. Of the playoff teams the past 5 years, the QB breakdown is (non first round QB in parenthesis):

2009, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brees, Warner, Brady, Romo, Favre)
2008, 9-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Warner, T. Jackson, Delhomme)
2007, 5-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Favre, T. Collins, Brady, Garrard, Romo, Garcia, Hasselbeck)
2006, 7-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Brees, Romo, Hasselbeck, T. Green)
2005, 6-12 playoff QB were first round picks (Brady, Plummer, Brunell, Hasselbeck, Garcia, Delhomme)

So nearly 60% of the playoff QB over the past 5 years have been 1st round picks. The exceptions have been the greatest 6th round pick in league history (Brady) 4 undrafted FA (Romo, Delhomme, Garcia, Warner)-including perhaps one of the most unlikely stories of all time in Warner. Three second round picks (Brees, Favre & Jackson) and 5 late round picks who eventually became something after playing behind established QB for years (Garrard, T. Green, Collins, Brunell, Hasselbeck).

So unless we're hoping for another miracle (Brady, Warner, Romo, Delhomme) or a slightly undervalued gem (Favre, Brees) or are hoping to find an undiscovered star (Hasselbeck, etc) then 'picking up a QB in the mid rounds' is likely not going to yield us anything beyond mediocre football in the future.[/quote]


My thing is there is a lot of QB talent in this year's draft. The QB's that are being hailed as future superstars all come from big time college programs stacked with talent facing marked inferior opponents most Staurday afternoons(Clausen is the exception IMHO). These guys had huge ass lines, and had top of the line talent to work with. What happens when they hit NFL parity central? The guys going in the mid rounds might just prove more resilent in making this transition to the NFL since most of them come from second tier Div 1-A schools that face competition that was either on par or even superior. Also, your own stats you just gave us have shown that you can indeed get some gems in the mid rounds. Might be a long shot bud, but I would take a shot at a healthy Dan Lefevour than an Okie with a bum shoulder that played on a totally stacked team in Norman. Besides your line of thinking also can apply to offensive linemen. Think Bradford is going to last long with the bums we have now? You give JC or Lefevour a stellar line and either one will make the pro bowl!!!!!!!!!

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Mattyk;663113]Taking a QB in the 1st round is no guarantee for success either. It just boils down to doing your homework and taking the right guy, regardless of round.[/quote]


Exactly, comes down to great scouting and coordination between the FO and the HC, plus a bit of luck wouldn't hurt.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;663086]The type of accuracy Bradford has is rare so of course I want us to draft him, especially after Shanahan says the number 1 quality he wants in a QB is accuracy. By the way I don't want moderate success, I want a freaking championship. I want Obama leaning into the mic with a football asking "whereeee's Chris Cooley?" I'm tired of hoping we limp into the playoffs. Of course over the next year or two that will be our goal but I want something to look forward to after that.[/quote]

To me, making the QB position a priority over the offensive line is very similar to what Snyder and Cerrato have been trying to do over the past 10 years, get skill position players (in their case it was through the draft...sometimes, free agency, and trades) without building in the trenches. And drafting Okung is not necessarily by itself going to rebuild the line, but you have a player that can start at tackle right away. Meanwhile, drafting Bradford means putting him behind JC for at least year, and any chance for him to start would be for JC to fail (which would make a lot of ppl happy I'm sure).

As I said, if we do draft Bradford, we better hope that Shanahan can build our depleted offensive line with what he has left. And we better hope that all the money we pay Bradford is worth it at the end and that shoulder that has been twice injured is not as serious as everyone makes it out to be.

You mentioned that people say that this year's QB class is weak, and they'll probably say the same about next year's class. Well, this is the second year when some people are calling out for the Redskins to take a first-round tackle, and well something gets in the way and a tackle is not drafted (and may not be drafted). I know we drafted an pro bowler in Orakpo, and I was fine with that selection, but once again it seems that our drafting of a first-round tackle will be pushed to the next year. Well I wonder what will be the excuse in 2011 as to why we shouldn't take a first-round tackle.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Ruhskins;663131]To me, making the QB position a priority over the offensive line is very similar to what Snyder and Cerrato have been trying to do over the past 10 years, get skill position players (in their case it was through the draft...sometimes, free agency, and trades) without building in the trenches. And drafting Okung is not necessarily by itself going to rebuild the line, but you have a player that can start at tackle right away. Meanwhile, drafting Bradford means putting him behind JC for at least year, and any chance for him to start would be for JC to fail (which would make a lot of ppl happy I'm sure).

As I said, if we do draft Bradford, we better hope that Shanahan can build our depleted offensive line with what he has left. And we better hope that all the money we pay Bradford is worth it at the end and that shoulder that has been twice injured is not as serious as everyone makes it out to be.

You mentioned that people say that this year's QB class is weak, and they'll probably say the same about next year's class. Well, this is the second year when some people are calling out for the Redskins to take a first-round tackle, and well something gets in the way and a tackle is not drafted (and may not be drafted). I know we drafted an pro bowler in Orakpo, and I was fine with that selection, but once again it seems that our drafting of a first-round tackle will be pushed to the next year. Well I wonder what will be the excuse in 2011 as to why we shouldn't take a first-round tackle.[/quote]

Are you saying I'm like Cerrato. That is unforgivable RuhSkins :D

I will say this though Vinny's problem wasn't refusing to take lineman in the first round but rather taking every other position besides O-Lineman throughout the draft, which was unwise, especially given the track record of lineman in all rounds of the draft. As the jokes go Vinny would constantly scout TE, DB, LB, QB, WR, and maybe DL if he was feeling crazy. I'm calling for the team to draft 2 or 3 lineman a year for the next two years where as Vinny would have maybe considered drafting 2 guys this year.

Drafting Okung might be smart but it could also be the whole "one player away" mentality that we've doing all along and as you've seen it's taken Soup 5 years just to get to the point where he might be the guy, waiting a year to draft a QB that we might not be in position to draft isn't on par with long term planning. We'd be better served to think 2 or 3 years down the line rather then focusing soley on 2010 and filling the biggest need with the 4th pick despite the high probability of quality options in the second round isn't the best way to go about it in my opinion.

Besides Shanahans track record says he will find mid round lineman that will produce. Ryan Clady was the only successful first round tackle under Shanhan, the rest of the time he was using third, fourth, and fifth rounders. Keep in mind these lines were frequently considered among the best in the league.

In the end I believe drafting Bradford/Clausen in the first and a tackle in the 2nd will provide more value for us in the long run rather then Okung/McCoy/Pike.

-Dirtbag (because signing my name shows how damn important I am)

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Ruhskins;663131]To me, making the QB position a priority over the offensive line is very similar to what Snyder and Cerrato have been trying to do over the past 10 years, get skill position players (in their case it was through the draft...sometimes, free agency, and trades) without building in the trenches. And drafting Okung is not necessarily by itself going to rebuild the line, but you have a player that can start at tackle right away. Meanwhile, drafting Bradford means putting him behind JC for at least year, and any chance for him to start would be for JC to fail (which would make a lot of ppl happy I'm sure).

As I said, if we do draft Bradford, we better hope that Shanahan can build our depleted offensive line with what he has left. And we better hope that all the money we pay Bradford is worth it at the end and that shoulder that has been twice injured is not as serious as everyone makes it out to be.

You mentioned that people say that this year's QB class is weak, and they'll probably say the same about next year's class. Well, this is the second year when some people are calling out for the Redskins to take a first-round tackle, and well something gets in the way and a tackle is not drafted (and may not be drafted). I know we drafted an pro bowler in Orakpo, and I was fine with that selection, but once again it seems that our drafting of a first-round tackle will be pushed to the next year. [B] Well I wonder what will be the excuse in 2011 as to why we shouldn't take a first-round tackle[/B].[/quote]
CB Patrick Peterson, Safety DeAndre McDaniel, RB Mark Imgram may all be to good to pass up. There always seems to be a reason not to draft an OT in the first round. Jake Locker and Ryan Mallet will be available too.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=53Fan;663136]CB Patrick Peterson, Safety DeAndre McDaniel, RB Mark Imgram may all be to good to pass up. There always seems to be a reason not to draft an OT in the first round. [B]Jake Locker and Ryan Mallet will be available too.[/B][/quote]

Aside from the idea of weather or not they're worthy the question becomes will we be in position to select them, and if not initially what will it cost to get them. Will it be at the expense of a second round pick that could become a lineman? Or maybe we get the O-Line situated and need to find a LB to pair with Fletch on the inside.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

I wanna lean towards trading back and aquiring more picks. But the more i think about it and analyze the more i wanna lean on taking bradford. The NFL has become a pass happy league, not saying the run game and good defense cant win championships because the jets were only a step away, but more often than not, you need a franchise QB to lead you. And as been said, there are a quality amount of tackles in most any draft, but not a good quality amount of QB's in each draft. I think since we are in need @ both positions (campbell doesnt cut it) i think it would be more important to get a franchise QB then a franchise Tackle, cuz you can find quality starters on OLine in round 2-5, while if you take QB's in those rounds, now they are labeled as "projects." With all the OTHER needs we have (RB, MLB, FS, possibly CB) i dont think we can afford to use a pick that SHOULD go towards not a star, but a quality producer (offense/defense/special teams) on a QB project that prolly wont pan out. Everyone says well grab an LT here and keep campbell and draft a QB next year. Well Bradford AND Clausen are above the QB's that will be coming out next year. When you're picking this high you grab an impact player that wont involve us choosing this high again. Take this years Super bowl for example, Peyton Manning and Drew Brees. Draft insiders said Sam Bradford had the highest grade of any QB coming out since Peyton Manning. Thats higher than eli manning, phillip rivers, tom brady, ben rothlinsberger, etc. And Drew Brees was takin in the 2nd round, but this years QB's isnt as deep as the one brees was in. After Bradford/Clausen, they start getting tagged with the "project" label. Tebow (throwing motion, spread offense) McCoy (small stature, not alot of arm strength) Now lets look at the Super Bowl Olines

Super Bowl Runner up Colts:

LT Charlie Johnson - Round 6 pick
LG Ryan Lilja - Undrafted Free Agent
C Jeff Saturday - Undrafted Free Agent
RG Mike Pollack - Round 2 pick
RT Ryan Diem - Round 4 pick

So the highest pick on the Colts Oline was a 2nd round pick.

Super Bowl Champ Saints:

LT Jeremy Bushrod - Round 4 pick
(they have a 1st round pick in Jammal Brown but he was injured this season)
LG Carl Nicks - Round 5 pick
C Jonathan Goodwin - Undrafted Free Agent
RG Jahri Evans - Round 4 pick
RT Jon Stinchcomb - Round 2 pick

So the highest drafted player on the Saints starting Oline for the super bowl was ALSO a 2nd round pick.

Now granted with a rookie QB in order for him to have an easier time to succeed you need to have a run game. And with saints finishing #21 and the colts finishing #24 on the NFL's list this year that appears to be a chink in the armor of my case for a QB. But those #'s are misleading. Neither team ran enough to put up the #'s of some of the other teams. The colts averaged 4.3 yards per carry and the saints averaged 4.5 yards a carry. Thats BOTH more than the 4.0 the redskins put up this year. Now Mike Shanahan has a knack for finding smaller Olineman that other teams wont use cuz he is the master of the zone blocking scheme. Someone might have to correct me but i believe the only 1st round tackle Shanahan took was R. Clady. And the very next year he was fired. So even tho Clady is a great player, that pick didnt save his job. This also brings me back to the Washington Redskins 1994 draft........yes....you know what im talking about. With the 1st round selection, the Washington Redskins take, Heath Shuler, Quarterback, Tennessee Volunteers. But what did they do in the 7th round of that draft? took a chance on a project who otherwise prolly could have came in as an undrafted free agent. A man by the name of Gus Frerotte. Shuler was an EPIC FAIL and we put in that "project" and that "project" turned into a Pro Bowler for us. So if you really wanna take a QB as a project, then grab one that is undrafted, or use the current one on our roster Colt Brennan. Shanahan has proved he can do alot with a little.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=53Fan;663104]Also, counting Pennington, Jamarcus Russell and Brady Quinn, if you want to count them as starters, 15 of the 26 first round QB picks start. 11 first round picks don't, and if you take away Russell and Quinn who haven't proven much, 50% of the QB's taken in the first round in the last 10 years did not start last year. Take away Pennington, which I guess you could since Henne is starting for Miami, it becomes even more who are not starting.

This is just my opinion and in the grand scheme of things it doesn't really count for much, but there are 2 things I feel strongly about.

1- [B]Considering the personell we have, the Redskins needs at o-line are far greater than our need at QB to become a winning team[/B].

2- [B]Russell Okung is [B]much less [/B]of a risk than Bradford or Clausen at #4[/B].[/quote]

i agree

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=PHazard;663138] Someone might have to correct me but i believe the only 1st round tackle Shanahan took was R. Clady. And the very next year he was fired. So even tho Clady is a great player, that pick didnt save his job. [/quote]

George Foster would be the only other first round lineman selected by Shanhan. He ended up being a bust.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

Yeah.. Shanahan needs the right linemen for his system as well, which might not be the top guy or whatever.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Paintrain;663071]So unless we're hoping for another miracle (Brady, Warner, Romo, Delhomme)or a slightly undervalued gem (Favre, Brees) or are hoping to find an undiscovered star (Hasselbeck, etc) then 'picking up a QB in the mid rounds' is likely not going to yield us anything beyond mediocre football in the future.[/quote]

Everything is true until it isn't.
You don't have to draft top 5 to get a good QB.
And there is some room between top 5-15 and mid round.

I don't put a lot of faith in 'stats' like this because every situation is different and there are so many variables in the development and success of QB apart from where they're drafted.

I think the coach is an important factor.
I don't think Holmgren has ever taken a top 5 QB and he's developed a lot of QBs over that period.
Shanny has taken 1 top 15 QB.
Payton coached Romo then traded for Brees.
Reid drafted McNabb a special talent but groomed Kolb.
McCarthy groomed Rodgers.

On the flip side many top QBs have been drafted to bad teams with either no plan for their development or poor coaching from the QB coach or OC or HC only to fail.

I agree that you should spend a quality draft pick to aquire any good player.
But, it doesn't have to be top 5-15.
I just find the risk and cost prohibitive.

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Dirtbag359;663135]Are you saying I'm like Cerrato. That is unforgivable RuhSkins :D

I will say this though Vinny's problem wasn't refusing to take lineman in the first round but rather taking every other position besides O-Lineman throughout the draft, which was unwise, especially given the track record of lineman in all rounds of the draft. As the jokes go Vinny would constantly scout TE, DB, LB, QB, WR, and maybe DL if he was feeling crazy. I'm calling for the team to draft 2 or 3 lineman a year for the next two years where as Vinny would have maybe considered drafting 2 guys this year.

Drafting Okung might be smart but it could also be the whole "one player away" mentality that we've doing all along and as you've seen it's taken Soup 5 years just to get to the point where he might be the guy, waiting a year to draft a QB that we might not be in position to draft isn't on par with long term planning. We'd be better served to think 2 or 3 years down the line rather then focusing soley on 2010 and filling the biggest need with the 4th pick despite the high probability of quality options in the second round isn't the best way to go about it in my opinion.

Besides Shanahans track record says he will find mid round lineman that will produce. Ryan Clady was the only successful first round tackle under Shanhan, the rest of the time he was using third, fourth, and fifth rounders. Keep in mind these lines were frequently considered among the best in the league.

In the end I believe drafting Bradford/Clausen in the first and a tackle in the 2nd will provide more value for us in the long run rather then Okung/McCoy/Pike.

-Dirtbag (because signing my name shows how damn important I am)[/quote]

Well you are talking about the draft and not trading away picks, so no you are not like Cerrato. Besides it's not like you are talking about picking up Dez Bryant with the #4. LOL. :smashfrea

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

[quote=Ruhskins;663150]Well you are talking about the draft and not trading away picks, so no you are not like Cerrato. Besides it's not like you are talking about picking up Dez Bryant with the #4. LOL. :smashfrea[/quote]

Wait Dez Bryant is available this draft :eek: ????????!??!?! Forget everything I said, this is a game chnager!! We're taking him at #4 if we're lucky enough that he falls to us. And you know what on top of that I'm trading this years second next years 1st and 3rd to move up to select Jermaine Gresham!!!!

In the meantime I'll sign Peyton to the vet min plus incentives!!!!!!!

On a somewhat related note ESPN Insider is ticking me off. Look at what they have written in Dez Bryants scouting report keep in mind I didn't leave anything out in this section:
[quote]The NCAA suspended Bryant for the final 10 games of the 2009 season for lying to an NCAA investigator who was looking into Bryant's off-season meeting with former NFL player Deion Sanders. Multiple NFL scouts h[B]ave told us that Bryant comes from a difficul[/B][/quote]

"Difficul"? I assume they mean difficult but difficult what? What am I paying you for ESPN?

Re: The Mid Round QB fallacy
 

pay your bill in full. then you get the whole article:)