Post by brasilbear on Sept 29, 2016 9:14:16 GMT -6
Now I'm getting depressed, what about day 2? Rounds 2-3?
Well...
Christian Hackenberg Jacoby Brissett Cody Kessler Garrett Grayson Sean Mannion Derek Carr Jimmy Garoppolo Geno Smith Mike Glennon Brock Osweiler Russell Wilson Nick Foles Andy Dalton Colin Kaepernick Ryan Mallett Jimmy Clausen Colt McCoy
So...3? Carr, Wilson and Dalton?
What about first round?
Jared Goff Carson Wentz Paxton Lynch Jameis Winston Marcus Mariota Blake Bortles Johnny Manziel Teddy Bridgewater EJ Manuel Andrew Luck Robert Griffin Ryan Tannehill Brandon Weeden Cam Newton Jake Locker Blaine Gabbert Christian Ponder Sam Bradford Tim Tebow
So, basically, we aren't finding a QB ever. If you go back more than 10 years, the numbers get even worse by a magnitude because you are adding in all the late rounders that don't pan out.
IMO Day 1 and Day 2 give you the best bet of finding a long-term 'franchise' QB.
How is the success/failure rate comparing the drafted in Top5 to drafted Outside the Top5?
I'd take Rodgers over Watt and therefor I take the best QB prospect over the best D prospect. If we would have Mariotta, Wentz, Luck, Goff or even Lynch then yeah I'd take the D
LOL You're welcome to do that research if you'd like and give us a report on it but what Monsters posted will give you a rough idea and answer your question gbph.
Part of the problem is top 5 QBs are often drafted by crappy teams with bad coaching, end up playing before they're ready, end up playing in a bad offense, and fail to ever reach the potential some saw for them had it all worked out differently.
I've said this before. Supposing we had drafted Aaron Rodgers in 2005 and instead of him sitting for three years before he replaced Favre he started for us immediately instead of Grossman? How well do you think Rodgers would have fared playing with the Bears offenses behind the Bears OL with the Bears WRs since then?
Teams can draft on talent but at this level how that talent is developed and supported will have the most impact on their careers and the team. GB has ALWAYS done a far better job of developing and supporting their QBs than we have. If we could have done that we would never have traded for Cutler to begin with because Grossman and Orton would have been more than enough.
With the exception of Mac and Cutler we haven't had a true top QB since Sid Luckman and we've been terrible at drafting and developing them yet somehow Bears fans think this will all magically change if we draft one in the top five next year. I guess most of them haven't been around as long as I have. LOL
How is the success/failure rate comparing the drafted in Top5 to drafted Outside the Top5?
I'd take Rodgers over Watt and therefor I take the best QB prospect over the best D prospect. If we would have Mariotta, Wentz, Luck, Goff or even Lynch then yeah I'd take the D
LOL You're welcome to do that research if you'd like and give us a report on it but what Monsters posted will give you a rough idea and answer your question gbph.
Part of the problem is top 5 QBs are often drafted by crappy teams with bad coaching, end up playing before they're ready, end up playing in a bad offense, and fail to ever reach the potential some saw for them had it all worked out differently.
I've said this before. Supposing we had drafted Aaron Rodgers in 2005 and instead of him sitting for three years before he replaced Favre he started for us immediately instead of Grossman? How well do you think Rodgers would have fared playing with the Bears offenses behind the Bears OL with the Bears WRs since then?
Teams can draft on talent but at this level how that talent is developed and supported will have the most impact on their careers and the team. GB has ALWAYS done a far better job of developing and supporting their QBs than we have. If we could have done that we would never have traded for Cutler to begin with because Grossman and Orton would have been more than enough.
With the exception of Mac and Cutler we haven't had a true top QB since Sid Luckman and we've been terrible at drafting and developing them yet somehow Bears fans think this will all magically change if we draft one in the top five next year. I guess most of them haven't been around as long as I have. LOL
That is they most important thing right there. While I believe that you are wasting a pick by drafting a QB after day 2, it doesn't matter where you draft him if you can't protect him, have no one to teach him the subtlities of the position at an NFL level, and there is no talent around him to throw to. That last one IMO is the least important, but it is a factor most of the time. Simply taking a day 1 or day 2 QB doesn't suddenly solve our problem. Do you trust Fox/Loggains to take a young passer and turn him into...Brady? Manning? Dalton? Brees? Hell, I'll take a Smith or a young Cutler (when there was at least hope he could change).
How is the success/failure rate comparing the drafted in Top5 to drafted Outside the Top5?
LOL You're welcome to do that research if you'd like and give us a report on it but what Monsters posted will give you a rough idea and answer your question gbph.
I'll give it a shot. Using 2000-2016 as my basis.
By QB record (which is a stat I hate but others seem to value for some reason) here are the QBs over .500
21 players drafted in picks 1-5
Eli Manning (99-87) P.Rivers (93-70) Palmer (84-78) Ryan (76-53) Smith (70-53-1) Vick (61-51-1) Newton (46-34) Sanchez (37-35) Luck (36-22) V.Young (31-19)
So 9 out of 21 (I dropped Sanchez because....really?) 9/21=43%
Everyone else: 192 drafted with picks 6-end of draft
Here are the guys that I didn't put in that due to small numbers of games started I didn't include: Sieman, Garoppolo, Brissett, Drew Henson, Stephen McGee, Brock Osweiler, Dennis Dixon, AJ McMarron, Dak Prescott, Craig Krenzel, Drew Stanton, Tim Tebow, TJ Yates
If you want you include them thats 29/162=18%
and 138 of them never even got a start as an NFL QB.
I'm willing to use whatever stat to want to re-run the numbers.
Quoting bb; "Hell, I'll take a Smith or a young Cutler (when there was at least hope he could change)."
Even last year under Gase and with Loggains as his QB coach there was an appreciable change in Cutler for the better and we all saw that. Gase was the first OC to come in and determine what Cutler did well and what he felt most comfortable and had confidence in and that's how they schemed the offense, game planned, and play called. It worked well enough considering that was year one in an offense that take 3 years to fully develop.
It's somewhat difficult for me to believe that since he was deeply involved in all of that Loggains wasn't able to handle pushing those same concepts along in year two provided he was given the green light to proceed as before. Why interrupt that progress unless he either didn't agree with those concepts or he was asked to change things to align them more with Fox's? We can blame the OL for some of it, and we can also blame Cutler if we like but more than just that has changed. They've all regressed terribly as an offense.
Why? Someone's plan is not working. So find out whose plan it is and that's what needs fixing.
Quoting bb; "Hell, I'll take a Smith or a young Cutler (when there was at least hope he could change)."
Even last year under Gase and with Loggains as his QB coach there was an appreciable change in Cutler for the better and we all saw that. Gase was the first OC to come in and determine what Cutler did well and what he felt most comfortable and had confidence in and that's how they schemed the offense, game planned, and play called. It worked well enough considering that was year one in an offense that take 3 years to fully develop.
It's somewhat difficult for me to believe that since he was deeply involved in all of that Loggains wasn't able to handle pushing those same concepts along in year two provided he was given the green light to proceed as before. Why interrupt that progress unless he either didn't agree with those concepts or he was asked to change things to align them more with Fox's? We can blame the OL for some of it, and we can also blame Cutler if we like but more than just that has changed. They've all regressed terribly as an offense.
Why? Someone's plan is not working. So find out whose plan it is and that's what needs fixing.
Jay was saying in the off-season that he and Loggains got together and threw out what didn't work well, and kept what did... like they tweaked things. LOL, maybe they threw out the good stuff by mistake :-)
Quoting bb; "Hell, I'll take a Smith or a young Cutler (when there was at least hope he could change)."
Even last year under Gase and with Loggains as his QB coach there was an appreciable change in Cutler for the better and we all saw that. Gase was the first OC to come in and determine what Cutler did well and what he felt most comfortable and had confidence in and that's how they schemed the offense, game planned, and play called. It worked well enough considering that was year one in an offense that take 3 years to fully develop.
It's somewhat difficult for me to believe that since he was deeply involved in all of that Loggains wasn't able to handle pushing those same concepts along in year two provided he was given the green light to proceed as before. Why interrupt that progress unless he either didn't agree with those concepts or he was asked to change things to align them more with Fox's? We can blame the OL for some of it, and we can also blame Cutler if we like but more than just that has changed. They've all regressed terribly as an offense.
Why? Someone's plan is not working. So find out whose plan it is and that's what needs fixing.
Jay was saying in the off-season that he and Loggains got together and threw out what didn't work well, and kept what did... like they tweaked things. LOL, maybe they threw out the good stuff by mistake :-)
No once they throw out what didn't work there was nothing left.
Jay was saying in the off-season that he and Loggains got together and threw out what didn't work well, and kept what did... like they tweaked things. LOL, maybe they threw out the good stuff by mistake :-)
No once they throw out what didn't work there was nothing left.