Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

In This Thread I Talk Rationally About Drafting A QB #1 Overall.


SmootsDaddy89

Recommended Posts

In 2009, most analysts believed that Stafford wasn't the best player in the draft, but he WAS the best QB. The lions needed a franchise QB, so they took him #1. Now, outside of injuries, he has looked like he could be a franchise QB.

The Jets TRADED UP to pick Mark Sanchez, even though some people rated him as a second-round pick. I'd say that pick has worked out well for them also.

No other position in the draft is as heavily scouted as QB. There's a reason that none of the QBs that we drafted from schools like Bentdick Community College ever panned out. Tom Brady isn't the standard, he's the exception. Most franchise QBs go early in the first round. We have the advantage of having the first pick in the draft. Unless you believe none of the QBs with fairly high grades (Newton, Gabbert, Mallet) can be franchise-caliber players, why WOULDN'T you take the best prospect at that position when your current QB situation is just as bad as Detroit's or New York's in 2009?

Being conservative pussies, the way some people are still advocating for, in this situation is EXACTLY why we've been stuck with short bus QBs the past few years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2009, most analysts believed that Stafford wasn't the best player in the draft, but he WAS the best QB. The lions needed a franchise QB, so they took him #1. Now, outside of injuries, he has looked like he could be a franchise QB.

The Jets TRADED UP to pick Mark Sanchez, even though some people rated him as a second-round pick. I'd say that pick has worked out well for them also.

No other position in the draft is as heavily scouted as QB. There's a reason that none of the QBs that we drafted from schools like Bentdick Community College ever panned out. Tom Brady isn't the standard, he's the exception. Most franchise QBs go early in the first round. We have the advantage of having the first pick in the draft. Unless you believe none of the QBs with fairly high grades (Newton, Gabbert, Mallet) can be franchise-caliber players, why WOULDN'T you take the best prospect at that position when your current QB situation is just as bad as Detroit's or New York's in 2009?

Being conservative pussies, the way some people are still advocating for, in this situation is EXACTLY why we've been stuck with short bus QBs the past few years.

but BUT BUT basanez is gonna break out this year just you wait and see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do you think Clausen deserves it? What did he do to deserve it?

He doesn't deserve anything. He hasn't earned that right. If we feel there is a player that can come in and be better than him, that player will play. This staff has nothing invested in Clausen and his contract isn't anything crazy that demands we play him to get a return on our investment.

This mindset baffles me.

Look I want us to draft a QB so don't take that as a glowing endorsement for Clausen.

At the same time it isn't fair to judge him on one season with a crappy OC and Steve Smith plus whatever rookie would start opposite him that Sunday.

He deserves a chance to prove he can be a starter IMO. However, I doubt he will and it is time to get a franchise QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look I want us to draft a QB so don't take that as a glowing endorsement for Clausen.

At the same time it isn't fair to judge him on one season with a crappy OC and Steve Smith plus whatever rookie would start opposite him that Sunday.

He deserves a chance to prove he can be a starter IMO. However, I doubt he will and it is time to get a franchise QB.

He does deserve a chance to prove he can be a starter, he will get that chance by beating out competition. Earlier you said he deserves to just go into the season as the starter which he doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look I want us to draft a QB so don't take that as a glowing endorsement for Clausen.

At the same time it isn't fair to judge him on one season with a crappy OC and Steve Smith plus whatever rookie would start opposite him that Sunday.

He deserves a chance to prove he can be a starter IMO. However, I doubt he will and it is time to get a franchise QB.

You said you think we'll likely give him the season to prove if he's a starter then said he deserved that chance.

He'll have camp and OTAs to prove that. He should only get game time if he earns it legitimately

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm actually quite surprised KT thinks we'll take Cam Newton since he spent the regular season posting how racist our FO & fanbase were and how little interest they had in a quarterback that wasn't white. Heh.

In that past, every person who said things like that were among the laziest and biggest failures I ever knew...but liked to claim that the world was out to get them and everyone like them.

Surprisingly, none of those complaints ever had a positive impact on them, or anyone else for that matter. I'd pity them if I could stop laughing at them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Too late to edit above but the quote is from this Diane Russini article in the Athletic: https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/5941684/2024/11/23/russinis-what-im-hearing-the-day-the-jets-fell-apart-and-the-broncos-rallied-belichick-best-fits/ Okay.. there you have sorry I left that out the first post.  Also waivers keep the contract intact. That is the major difference in released and waived. It's all in that link from the other post.
    • Okay so I am reading something in The Athletic and it says that Jones had to pass through waivers. So I don't know. I looked this stuff up when we were number one there all offseason and I thought it said 4 years in the league got you vested, as they call it.  Vested gets you out of waivers as I understood it. I probably got something wrong, but when I think about the slack quality of journalism these days I wonder about that. So I went and looked, again. Well, well.  For everyone: "When a player has accrued at least four seasons in the NFL, they are considered a vested veteran. When these vested veterans get cut, they are released and their contract is terminated. When a vested veteran is released, they are an unrestricted free agent that can sign with any NFL team, and the team that released them doesn’t need to provide any additional compensation." It runs it all down here, where the quotes came from: https://www.profootballnetwork.com/waived-vs-released-nfl/ As far as Jones, the team turned down his 5th year option so I knew that meant he had 4 years in, because they re-signed him anyway, after turning down the much cheaper extra year.  The Athletic is owned by the New York Times so I shouldn't be surprised. That paper was an institution once upon a time but they let their standards go.
    • Well, we got our answer on Army today.
×
×
  • Create New...