Not drafting a QB a mistake?

[CRedskinsRule]

Scot M drafted exactly 1 qb in 4 years with Seattle. His 3rd year. Russell Wilson

Scot M drafted exactly 2 qb's in 5 years at SF. His 1st year, a #1 pick, which some might argue has to be a qb nowadays. Alex Smith. and his last year ( a 5th rounder with no stats next to his name)

A mistake or not (I say not), Scot M clearly doesn't play the revolving qb game through the draft. We have a qb taken #2 overall, and a qb that was a 4th round pick. In 9 drafts before this Scot M took 3 qb's, I think it's safe to say that he doesn't value yearly picks on QB's.

81 total selections by SM at SF and Sea, 3 qb's (4% of draft picks ).

In those 81 selections, you know what he took a lot of? DE/DT/OL 29 out of 81 picks(35%).

We could be so lucky to have that type of focus on the line.

In the same 9 years the Redskins took twice as many qb's, 6, in 14 less picks (67 total, 9%), and nearly half as many DE/DT/OL 15 (22%).

I also take exception with QB being a need as a blind statement of fact. When our line caves in half the time, the qb's (as has been discussed to the nth degree) tended to fall back on their bad tendencies (Griffin holding and running, KC throwing quick INT's). Let's let these guys have quality line play (and blocking TE/RBs) for 1 season then we can go into the qb pool if we have too.

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Scot M drafted exactly 1 qb in 4 years with Seattle. His 3rd year. Russell Wilson

Scot M drafted exactly 2 qb's in 5 years at SF. His 1st year, a #1 pick, which some might argue has to be a qb nowadays. Alex Smith. and his last year ( a 5th rounder with no stats next to his name)

A mistake or not (I say not), Scot M clearly doesn't play the revolving qb game through the draft. We have a qb taken #2 overall, and a qb that was a 4th round pick. In 9 drafts before this Scot M took 3 qb's, I think it's safe to say that he doesn't value yearly picks on QB's.

81 total selections by SM at SF and Sea, 3 qb's (4% of draft picks ).

In those 81 selections, you know what he took a lot of? DE/DT/OL 29 out of 81 picks(35%).

We could be so lucky to have that type of focus on the line.

In the same 9 years the Redskins took twice as many qb's, 6, in 14 less picks (67 total, 9%), and nearly half as many DE/DT/OL 15 (22%).

I also take exception with QB being a need as a blind statement of fact. When our line caves in half the time, the qb's (as has been discussed to the nth degree) tended to fall back on their bad tendencies (Griffin holding and running, KC throwing quick INT's). Let's let these guys have quality line play (and blocking TE/RBs) for 1 season then we can go into the qb pool if we have too.

Someone should start another thread called, "Drafting too may Qb's a mistake?"

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

Someone should start another thread called, "Drafting too may Qb's a mistake?"

Or "Not drafting a QB likely to start about 15 games and lose most of them a mistake?"

[Defensewins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Scot M drafted exactly 1 qb in 4 years with Seattle. His 3rd year. Russell Wilson

Scot M drafted exactly 2 qb's in 5 years at SF. His 1st year, a #1 pick, which some might argue has to be a qb nowadays. Alex Smith. and his last year ( a 5th rounder with no stats next to his name)

A mistake or not (I say not), Scot M clearly doesn't play the revolving qb game through the draft. We have a qb taken #2 overall, and a qb that was a 4th round pick. In 9 drafts before this Scot M took 3 qb's, I think it's safe to say that he doesn't value yearly picks on QB's.

81 total selections by SM at SF and Sea, 3 qb's (4% of draft picks ).

In those 81 selections, you know what he took a lot of? DE/DT/OL 29 out of 81 picks(35%).

We could be so lucky to have that type of focus on the line.

In the same 9 years the Redskins took twice as many qb's, 6, in 14 less picks (67 total, 9%), and nearly half as many DE/DT/OL 15 (22%).

I also take exception with QB being a need as a blind statement of fact. When our line caves in half the time, the qb's (as has been discussed to the nth degree) tended to fall back on their bad tendencies (Griffin holding and running, KC throwing quick INT's). Let's let these guys have quality line play (and blocking TE/RBs) for 1 season then we can go into the qb pool if we have too.

Someone should start another thread called, "Drafting too may Qb's a mistake?" Kidding....don't get upset 30Gut.

CRedskinsRule, I like your post about questioning QB need when the rest of the team sucks.
As has been discussed on this thread about how to rate a draft pick as mistake or not, it seems to me there is a gray area and brings to mind Doug Williams. Drafted high in the draft by a perennial loser of a franchise and ends up leaving that team. He could and should be considered by Tampa a mistake for Tampa. Years later he goes to Washington and wins a Superbowl. Not a mistake. So what is he?

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Defensewins

CRedskinsRule, I like your post about questioning QB need when the rest of the team sucks.

If you think the QB position is fine going forward then I can see why you think it was fine not to address the position.

As has been discussed on this thread about how to rate a draft pick as mistake or not, it seems to me there is a gray area and brings to mind Doug Williams. Drafted high in the draft by a perennial loser of a franchise and ends up leaving that team. He could and should be considered by Tampa a mistake for Tampa. Years later he goes to Washington and wins a Superbowl. Not a mistake. So what is he?

Neither here nor there but when Doug was in Tampa it was that franchises only successful seasons (playoffs, conference title game iirc) prior to Dungy.