2012 NFL Draft Prospects

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Originally Posted by 30gut

Not saying that we should draft Russell Wilson, because I think drafting 2 QBs in the same draft creates more trouble then benefit on a team without an established QB.

But with that being said Wilson has been one of my favorite college QB prospects and here's some high praise from his pro-day:


NFL.com Blogs » Blog Archive Wilson dazzles, Konz sits at Wisconsin pro day «

Do you mean in terms of a QB controversy? If so, I agree, but maaaaaaaaaan, he could be Schaub later on where he comes in for some mop-up duty and gets us a second rounder down the road.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Do you mean in terms of a QB controversy? If so, I agree, but maaaaaaaaaan, he could be Schaub later on where he comes in for some mop-up duty and gets us a second rounder down the road.

I agree with the thought, just don't like the plan for a team with a rookie QB.
I liked the idea for the Packers who drafted Flynn and Brohm in the same class, but they could pull it off because the already had an established incumbent QB.
New England has Hoyer, Eagles have Kafka, Ravens have Tyrod Taylor etc.

But on a team with no established QB its inviting the inevitable comparisons.
And the sports media, especially here in Washington, are predisposed to create a QB controversy even where one really doesn't exsist.

Griffin will undoubtedly have some rough days during training camp, all QBs have them.
All it takes is for a reporter or two (heck with social media any blogger/forum member attending training) to see Griff miss a couple throws that the other QB makes then the snowball begins god forbid the other QB has a better day then Griffin.

[ArtMonkDrillz]

Originally Posted by 30gut

I agree with the thought, just don't like the plan for a team with a rookie QB.
I liked the idea for the Packers who drafted Flynn and Brohm in the same class, but they could pull it off because the already had an established incumbent QB.
New England has Hoyer, Eagles have Kafka, Ravens have Tyrod Taylor etc.

But on a team with no established QB its inviting the inevitable comparisons.
And the sports media, especially here in Washington, are predisposed to create a QB controversy even where one really doesn't exsist.

Griffin will undoubtedly have some rough days during training camp, all QBs have them.
All it takes is for a reporter or two (heck with social media any blogger/forum member attending training) to see Griff miss a couple throws that the other QB makes then the snowball begins god forbid the other QB has a better day then Griffin.

I understand your point, but I think by trading what the front office did they've determined that Griffin (or Luck) is the established QB for the foreseeable future.
If we hadn't made the trade and either reached for Tannehill at 6 or took, say, Weeden in the 2nd then I agree it might not be a good idea to draft another QB in the later rounds.

[30gut]

Originally Posted by ArtMonkDrillz

I understand your point, but I think by trading what the front office did they've determined that Griffin (or Luck) is the established QB for the foreseeable future. If we hadn't made the trade and either reached for Tannehill at 6 or took, say, Weeden in the 2nd then I agree it might not be a good idea to draft another QB in the later rounds.

But, the front office determination doesn't and cannot substitute for experience.
Without being an established and successful incumbent QB nothing tangible separates the QBs.
And without that established separation when QB1 has a bad day and QB2 has a great day it will look like QB1 is better then QB2.

I'm not saying that's gonna happen, but why create that scenario?

Also, there are only so many reps in a given practice.
And a rookie QB of the future is gonna need as many reps as they can handle and imo the whole staff should be singularly focused on preparing them to start.
And catering the system to make him successful.
Anything that takes away from that aim is a needless burden in my eyes.