The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[Koolblue13]

52 minutes ago, DWinzit said:

Imagine if TH went down in game one and Allen was our only option for the reminder of the season, yuck.

Name one time that's ever happened.  😬

Edited December 8, 2021 by Koolblue13

[Thinking Skins]

Interesting @Skinsinparadise that you don't name Brunell there. In my opinion he's the best QB we've had under Dan. Well, Honestly it goes

1. Brad Johnson

2. Marc Brunell

3. RG3

4. Alex Smith

5. Kirk Cousins

 

6. Heinicke (and he's climbing). 

7. Jason Campbell

 

Right now I put those top 4 in their positions because they took us to the playoffs. In terms of excitement RG3 is probably number 1 but in terms of what was being built, he was limited behind the first two. If Brunell's arm doesn't go out thats a stretch we have there. Cousins never won me over because initially he had the interception gene. Then when got past that he seemed too timid about throwing pics that he wouldn't throw contested balls and it was frustrating. Then he couldn't beat the Giants and it was just so frustrating rooting for him. I will admit that the team let him down as well (Detroit and Cincy games come to mind) but he was anti clutch. 

 

I am honestly debating whether Heinicke is above Smith right now. He doesn't have more wins yet and thats why I have him lower but he is doing so much more than Smith did. He's running with the ball, he's getting first downs and he's leading game winning drives. But I have Heinicke above every other QB that has led this team in the Snyder era (George, Banks, Woefull, Matthews, Ramsey, Mcnabb, Grossman, Beck, McCoy, Keenum). I don't think he's any kind of a "poor man's" any of those. In my opinion he's a step above them and climbing. 

[Skinsinparadise]

22 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Interesting @Skinsinparadise that you don't name Brunell there. In my opinion he's the best QB we've had under Dan. Well, Honestly it goes

1. Brad Johnson

2. Marc Brunell

3. RG3

4. Alex Smith

5. Kirk Cousins

 

6. Heinicke (and he's climbing). 

7. Jason Campbell

 

Right now I put those top 4 in their positions because they took us to the playoffs. In terms of excitement RG3 is probably number 1 but in terms of what was being built, he was limited behind the first two. If Brunell's arm doesn't go out thats a stretch we have there. Cousins never won me over because initially he had the interception gene. Then when got past that he seemed too timid about throwing pics that he wouldn't throw contested balls and it was frustrating. Then he couldn't beat the Giants and it was just so frustrating rooting for him. I will admit that the team let him down as well (Detroit and Cincy games come to mind) but he was anti clutch. 

 

I am honestly debating whether Heinicke is above Smith right now. He doesn't have more wins yet and thats why I have him lower but he is doing so much more than Smith did. He's running with the ball, he's getting first downs and he's leading game winning drives. But I have Heinicke above every other QB that has led this team in the Snyder era (George, Banks, Woefull, Matthews, Ramsey, Mcnabb, Grossman, Beck, McCoy, Keenum). I don't think he's any kind of a "poor man's" any of those. In my opinion he's a step above them and climbing. 

 

I don't give Dan credit for Brad Johnson.  He inherited him and then moved to dump him.  RG3 would be #1 for me if its just 2012 but I can't just ignore 2013-2015.  Mark Brunell is next to last for me on the list you provide let alone first.  Yeah we are on different planets as for that rankings you got, we aren't even close to being on the same page on it, so I'll leave it alone because how we rank those guys don't matter.

 

As for where Heinicke ranks on that list.  To me its irrelevant.  I only brought up Kirk and Alex because both helped make the team relevant.  And I see Heinicke doing it too.  The mystery for me is can he go beyond that?  Will see.  Both QBs to me were a mile better than Brunell. Actually so is Heinicke IMO assuming he stays on this track.   I am not talking Jax version of Brunell but the WFT version.  Yes that Monday Night Football game was magical but otherwise?   Thankfully we had a really good defense, great running game, O line, etc for his peak season here, where his completion rate was a whopping 57%, and just over 3000 yards.    But I digress. 😀

 

Listing all the bad QB's we've had here and saying he's not a poor man's version of them.  I agree.   I am not sure who you are arguing on that with?  Even Heinicke's critics here I think agree with you on that one. 

 

To me the question is simple.  do we have a franchise QB.  Mission accomplished.  Where we don't have to keep looking? 

 

Your positions on QB sometimes confuse me because you can tout mediocre QBs like Nick Mullens.  Complement Bruce as recent as this past off season for the Case Keenum deal.  Still think that Campbell could have been a franchise QB if groomed properly.  But then if I recall on another post, you said you do want a SB caliber QB. 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Koolblue13]

I can see rating RG3 highly, if you put that much weight into 1 playoff loss, but if enter into it, the cost, he's a bottom 5 QB for us.

 

3 firsts, à second and 2 awful seasons we couldn't capitalize on top 5 picks and it's not even close to what QB has hurt this team the most.

[Thinking Skins]

2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I don't give Dan credit for Brad Johnson.  He inherited him and then moved to dump him.  RG3 would be #1 for me if its just 2012 but I can't just ignore 2013-2015.  Mark Brunell is next to last for me on the list you provide let alone first.  Yeah we are on different planets as for that rankings you got, we aren't even close to being on the same page on it, so I'll leave it alone because how we rank those guys don't matter.

 

As for where Heinicke ranks on that list.  To me its irrelevant.  I only brought up Kirk and Alex because both helped make the team relevant.   Both QBs to me were a mile better than Brunell. Actually so is Heinicke IMO.   I am not talking Jax version of Brunell but the WFT version.  Yes that Monday Night Football game was magical but otherwise?   Thankfully we had a really good defense, great running game, O line, etc for his peak season here, where his completion rate was a whopping 57%, and just over 3000 yards.    But I digress. 😀

 

Listing all the bad QB's we've had here and saying he's not a poor man's version of them.  I agree.   I am not sure who you are arguing on that with?  Even Heinicke's critics here I think agree with you on that one. 

 

To me the question is simple.  do we have a franchise QB.  Mission accomplished.  Where we don't have to keep looking? 

 

Your positions on QB sometimes confuse me because you can tout mediocre QBs like Nick Mullens.  Complement Bruce as recent as this past off season for the Case Keenum deal.  Still think that Campbell could have been a franchise QB if groomed properly.  But then if I recall on another post, you said you do want a SB caliber QB. 

 

We obviously have different opinions of Brunell but thats OK. I hated the trade for him and I wanted Ramsey as the starter but the fact that he was the QB who led us to the playoffs isn't lost to me, even if it wasn't on his back like 2000 was on Johnson's. That said I wasn't really calling you out by listing the other names, but for the sake of the thread I wanted to mention them because the argument for a long time was that he was a backup, then a high quality backup, then not a starter. You mentioned a metric that I like which is where he would rank in the list of Dan's QBs so I wanted to remind the readers (the forum) a lot of the names that he's passed on this list. Some were calling him Beck and Grossman earlier this year. Heck, last night I was in a twitter discussion and somebody compared his 75% completion percentage to Beck's game with Helu. 

 

But I do think we are in different stratospheres as far as what we want right now. I was talking to Mark Tyler (from Hogs Haven) last night (at least I think it was him about this and it was kinda similar discussion. Its like I tell my wife about my kids. I'm not going to put a ceiling on his dreams because I can't envision it. If he can then lets go. If Heinicke falls down like Mullins or Keenum did then we'll reevaluate. But I'm not going to advocate pulling Heinicke because he may fail in the future. And yes by that I mean that a first round QB is not a priority. If there were a guy coming out that we were in love with (and maybe there is) then maybe that'd be different but from all I read this draft class is not too great so I'm not going to do Heinicke like Flutie and have the equivalent of Rob Johnson come in here and stink it up for the sake of having a 6'3 guy with a cannon arm. 

5 minutes ago, Koolblue13 said:

I can see rating RG3 highly, if you put that much weight into 1 playoff loss, but if enter into it, the cost, he's a bottom 5 QB for us.

 

3 firsts, à second and 2 awful seasons we couldn't capitalize on top 5 picks and it's not even close to what QB has hurt this team the most.

That's the whole thing about first round QBs, you've got to pay to play. We could have stayed pat and taken Tannehill or Wilson (later) and that may have worked out better but we went all in that year. But it didn't hurt that badly because we still got a young QB that year to groom in Cousins.

[Koolblue13]

4 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

We obviously have different opinions of Brunell but thats OK. I hated the trade for him and I wanted Ramsey as the starter but the fact that he was the QB who led us to the playoffs isn't lost to me, even if it wasn't on his back like 2000 was on Johnson's. That said I wasn't really calling you out by listing the other names, but for the sake of the thread I wanted to mention them because the argument for a long time was that he was a backup, then a high quality backup, then not a starter. You mentioned a metric that I like which is where he would rank in the list of Dan's QBs so I wanted to remind the readers (the forum) a lot of the names that he's passed on this list. Some were calling him Beck and Grossman earlier this year. Heck, last night I was in a twitter discussion and somebody compared his 75% completion percentage to Beck's game with Helu. 

 

But I do think we are in different stratospheres as far as what we want right now. I was talking to Mark Tyler (from Hogs Haven) last night (at least I think it was him about this and it was kinda similar discussion. Its like I tell my wife about my kids. I'm not going to put a ceiling on his dreams because I can't envision it. If he can then lets go. If Heinicke falls down like Mullins or Keenum did then we'll reevaluate. But I'm not going to advocate pulling Heinicke because he may fail in the future. And yes by that I mean that a first round QB is not a priority. If there were a guy coming out that we were in love with (and maybe there is) then maybe that'd be different but from all I read this draft class is not too great so I'm not going to do Heinicke like Flutie and have the equivalent of Rob Johnson come in here and stink it up for the sake of having a 6'3 guy with a cannon arm. 

That's the whole thing about first round QBs, you've got to pay to play. We could have stayed pat and taken Tannehill or Wilson (later) and that may have worked out better but we went all in that year. But it didn't hurt that badly because we still got a young QB that year to groom in Cousins.

But we didn't just draft a 1rst round QB that year. We essentially drafted 4, excluding Cousins.

 

Would you rather the cost of RG3 to get one lost PO game and two dead years without picks to swing again.

 

Or pick 15 for a bad QB that just gets dumped?

 

I'd say Haskins was better for this team than RG3.

 

And including Cousins in RG3s value, would be like saying Fitz or Smith was good for us, because we signed Heinicke.

[Thinking Skins]

Just now, Koolblue13 said:

But we didn't just draft a 1rst round QB that year. We essentially drafted 4, excluding Cousins.

 

Would you rather the cost of RG3 to get one lost PO game and two dead years without picks to swing again.

 

Or pick 15 for a bad QB that just gets dumped?

 

I'd say Haskins was better for this team than RG3.

 

And including Cousins in RG3s value, would be like saying Fitz or Smith was good for us, because we signed Heinicke.

I'm never for drafting a QB in the first. These conversations I am having yearly with SIP has softened me up on that, but I constantly see QBs succeed in lower rounds and undrafted and that gives me hesitation. Its not nearly the same success rate but its way less of an investment. And the question is always who is a franchise QB? Is Heinicke? Is Cousins? Is Tua? Is Jackson? Was RG3? It seems like we attach these labels after early success or failure and based on draft position and are quicker to pull a later guy who struggles and let an early guy who struggles grow into the position. 

 

I get criticized for believing in Mullins, Beathard, Allen, Heinicke, Minshew, etc but these guys have had some success without being first rounders and I think they for the most part got the short end of the stick. But thats what happens with lower round picks. They're big boys and they're getting paid way more than me so I'm not going to cry about it. But I don't believe that we need to invest heavily in first round QBs, especially if they don't have multiple years of success. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

That @Thinking Skins Top 5 list is perhaps the wildest ranking I've laid on eyes around here.

 

When I think Mark Brunell, the only #2 I can think of is the one you leave in a toilet.  Sheesh.

[Warhead36]

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

I'm never for drafting a QB in the first. These conversations I am having yearly with SIP has softened me up on that, but I constantly see QBs succeed in lower rounds and undrafted and that gives me hesitation. Its not nearly the same success rate but its way less of an investment. And the question is always who is a franchise QB? Is Heinicke? Is Cousins? Is Tua? Is Jackson? Was RG3? It seems like we attach these labels after early success or failure and based on draft position and are quicker to pull a later guy who struggles and let an early guy who struggles grow into the position. 

 

I get criticized for believing in Mullins, Beathard, Allen, Heinicke, Minshew, etc but these guys have had some success without being first rounders and I think they for the most part got the short end of the stick. But thats what happens with lower round picks. They're big boys and they're getting paid way more than me so I'm not going to cry about it. But I don't believe that we need to invest heavily in first round QBs, especially if they don't have multiple years of success. 

The track record for mid to low rounders is god awful. Look around the league, the vast majority of QBs starting on playoff contenders were high draft picks.

 

Of the current 14 playoff teams, 10 of them have starting QBs that were drafted in the 1st round(Rams and Titans acquired their guys by trade but the guys they got were 1st rounders). The four that didn't:

 

Bucs-Signed Brady as a FA who was a 6th rounder. The massive exception.

Cowboys-Drafted Dak in the 4th. Another exception.

WFT-Heinicke UDFA but most people agree he's not the future and his numbers are fairly average/pedestrian.

49ers-Garopolo a 2nd but the team just spent 3 #1s on another QB this past offseason who will be the future.

 

 

 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Warhead36

[Califan007 The Constipated]

1 hour ago, Koolblue13 said:

I can see rating RG3 highly, if you put that much weight into 1 playoff loss, but if enter into it, the cost, he's a bottom 5 QB for us.

 

3 firsts, à second and 2 awful seasons we couldn't capitalize on top 5 picks and it's not even close to what QB has hurt this team the most.

 

Can't really blame the player for what the FO did before they were even drafted, though...better to judge the QBs on their performance and production.

[Thinking Skins]

13 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

The track record for mid to low rounders is god awful. Look around the league, the vast majority of QBs starting on playoff contenders were high draft picks.

 

Of the current 14 playoff teams, 10 of them have starting QBs that were drafted in the 1st round(Rams and Titans acquired their guys by trade but the guys they got were 1st rounders). The four that didn't:

 

Bucs-Signed Brady as a FA who was a 6th rounder. The massive exception.

Cowboys-Drafted Dak in the 4th. Another exception.

WFT-Heinicke UDFA but most people agree he's not the future and his numbers are fairly average/pedestrian.

49ers-Garopolo a 2nd but the team just spent 3 #1s on another QB this past offseason who will be the future.

 

 

 

I know, but my counter is that the lower round picks don't get the opportunities. Minshew is not starting in Philly despite looking better, Colt McCoy is older and when he's gotten chances to start hes gotten hurt but he's been good. Cousins could be a playoff QB, Same with Wilson, Cooper Rush looked good this year, there's Keenum and his controversy in Denver (6-10 then traded here) and here (benched for Haskins/McCoy), Tyrod Taylor always getting benched or hurt. There's a long list of people with similar stories. Not saying they'd all be pro bowlers but they aren't given many second chances. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

That said I wasn't really calling you out by listing the other names, but for the sake of the thread I wanted to mention them because the argument for a long time was that he was a backup, then a high quality backup, then not a starter. 

 

That's cool, i didn't think you were.  I don't consider myself as someone down on Heinicke or way up on him either.  I am a Zorn stay medium with him. 😀

 

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

But I do think we are in different stratospheres as far as what we want right now. I was talking to Mark Tyler (from Hogs Haven) last night (at least I think it was him about this and it was kinda similar discussion. Its like I tell my wife about my kids. I'm not going to put a ceiling on his dreams because I can't envision it. If he can then lets go. If Heinicke falls down like Mullins or Keenum did then we'll reevaluate. But I'm not going to advocate pulling Heinicke because he may fail in the future.

 

I agree with that.  i am not advocating for pulling Heinicke either.  My hard position is to double up on this with a young guy this off season.  And I don't mean some 6th round flier young guy but a dude with seriously potential.  And let the cards fall where it may.

 

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

 If there were a guy coming out that we were in love with (and maybe there is) then maybe that'd be different 

 

 Not picking on you but I see variations of this point from time to time.   The premise of taking a QB early isn't to take a QB they are lukewarm on but of course a QB they love.   Rivera has already suggested there are some QBs they dig in this draft.    I don't think there is a debatable point about them taking a QB or for that matter ANY player in the draft they don't really dig a lot.  Can we picture lets say Rivera saying hey we took Desmond Ridder, we got some serious concerns.  Internally we thought "meh" but what the hell, we decided to draft him anyway.  😀

 

1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

If there were a guy coming out that we were in love with (and maybe there is) then maybe that'd be different but from all I read this draft class is not too great so I'm not going to do Heinicke like Flutie and have the equivalent of Rob Johnson come in here and stink it up for the sake of having a 6'3 guy with a cannon arm. 

 

 

Considering I was maybe one of the loudest critics here of Haskins, I am not hung up on size and a cannon arm.    My dream is once in my lifetime, aside from 2012, we can actually put real fear in the other team because they are playing our version of Russell Wilson, Aaron Rodgers, Josh Allen, etc.  It doesn't have to be a fantasy that's exclusive to just other teams.    Yes, its hard to do.  But the fact that we've been unable to do it, when at one point or another more than half the NFL has pulled this off, and the list grows much larger when you go 1-14 QB types, has been a key reason why we haven't been a consistent winner or sniffed a SB.  I'd like to break that chain versus stay on that chain.

 

Does Heinicke break that chain?  I suspect not.  But you never know.  At a minimum, I am not so confident that he does where I just throw away the key and chill on the QB front and think finally we got our top ten QB.  I want to double down and help increase the odds we pull it off. 

Edited December 8, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[mistertim]

22 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

I know, but my counter is that the lower round picks don't get the opportunities. Minshew is not starting in Philly despite looking better, Colt McCoy is older and when he's gotten chances to start hes gotten hurt but he's been good. Cousins could be a playoff QB, Same with Wilson, Cooper Rush looked good this year, there's Keenum and his controversy in Denver (6-10 then traded here) and here (benched for Haskins/McCoy), Tyrod Taylor always getting benched or hurt. There's a long list of people with similar stories. Not saying they'd all be pro bowlers but they aren't given many second chances. 

 

My issue with this take is that it's sort of a non-falsifiable hypothesis. Would an appreciable amount of the scads of mid and low round QBs throughout the years have balled out if they'd been given the chance? Well...it didn't happen so we can't know. IMO pointing out a few outliers that managed to do something doesn't say much about the entirety of that large pool of mid and low round QBs who didn't necessarily "get a chance".

[Warhead36]

32 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

I know, but my counter is that the lower round picks don't get the opportunities. Minshew is not starting in Philly despite looking better, Colt McCoy is older and when he's gotten chances to start hes gotten hurt but he's been good. Cousins could be a playoff QB, Same with Wilson, Cooper Rush looked good this year, there's Keenum and his controversy in Denver (6-10 then traded here) and here (benched for Haskins/McCoy), Tyrod Taylor always getting benched or hurt. There's a long list of people with similar stories. Not saying they'd all be pro bowlers but they aren't given many second chances. 

They typically don't get many chances because they aren't very good.

[Thinking Skins]

10 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

My issue with this take is that it's sort of a non-falsifiable hypothesis. Would an appreciable amount of the scads of mid and low round QBs throughout the years have balled out if they'd been given the chance? Well...it didn't happen so we can't know. IMO pointing out a few outliers that managed to do something doesn't say much about the entirety of that large pool of mid and low round QBs who didn't necessarily "get a chance".

True, there's no way to verify this position but we constantly see "non franchise" QBs who are these get replaced by the higher round picks. Thats why I like to root for the underdogs. Its nice to see them land somewhere and thrive. I have no joy in rooting for a Manning or Rivers or a Rothlesburger. I was pro Brady until that became the fun thing to do. I was pro Brees until that was cool. I'm for the underdog because I like their story. Sure it doesn't always work, but I'll celebrate when it does. 

[Koolblue13]

57 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

Can't really blame the player for what the FO did before they were even drafted, though...better to judge the QBs on their performance and production.

I'm not blaming him for the trade. I blame him for his second and third season and his cost definitely weighs into his cost to the team.

[Conn]

2 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

I'm never for drafting a QB in the first. These conversations I am having yearly with SIP has softened me up on that, but I constantly see QBs succeed in lower rounds and undrafted and that gives me hesitation.

That’s the thing—no, you really don’t. You just know the name of every single one that has because it’s so damn rare that it happens. The hit rates are abysmal. Half a dozen guys, at best, in the modern era defying that really changes nothing—especially since the circumstances that led to their falls likely wouldn’t happen to a lot of them today given the extreme value placed on QBs has only continued to rise.

 

Brady was the exception of all exceptions.

 

Romo was an exception and that was 20 years ago. Who knows. 

 

Dak had a DUI.

 

Russ wouldn’t fall to the 3rd today imo. That was over 10 years ago.

 

Kirk…I’ll give you that one, and he’s not most fans’ idea of the type of QB we’re aiming for regardless of his stats.

[Tedskins 21]

2 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

That @Thinking Skins Top 5 list is perhaps the wildest ranking I've laid on eyes around here.

 

When I think Mark Brunell, the only #2 I can think of is the one you leave in a toilet.  Sheesh.

 

My friend tried to equate Taylor to Scott Brunell yesterday.  Maybe Scott prior to his stint in Washington back in Jax, but by the time he got here his arm was even weaker than Taylors is.  Plus Mark was an actual scrambling QB, where Taylor is just straight up slippery (more like Romo.)

 

Kirk gets a lot of hate because he lacked what Heiny has loads of, and that's guts.  But Kirk was probably our best pure passer since Dan took over.  With QB traits and intangibles considered, I expect Taylor to take that #1 spot on Dan era QBs.  

 

Prior to Heiny, my favorite Dan QB had been Rex Grossman.  That man could take a hit, and get back up again.  

 

I fully expect Taylor to connect on a deep shot this weekend.  

Edited December 8, 2021 by Tedskins 21

[mistertim]

42 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

True, there's no way to verify this position but we constantly see "non franchise" QBs who are these get replaced by the higher round picks. Thats why I like to root for the underdogs. Its nice to see them land somewhere and thrive. I have no joy in rooting for a Manning or Rivers or a Rothlesburger. I was pro Brady until that became the fun thing to do. I was pro Brees until that was cool. I'm for the underdog because I like their story. Sure it doesn't always work, but I'll celebrate when it does. 

 

I can understand rooting for the underdog. I'm just saying that I think you're overstating the number of mid or late round QBs who could have made it if given a chance, despite there really not being any evidence for it outside of a tiny number of outliers.

 

Also, mid and low round QBs do "get a chance". They get training camp, preseason, etc, just like any other QB. Wilson was a 3rd round pick who Seattle brought in as a potential project they could develop after they grabbed Flynn in FA. I'm guessing they hoped he could at least be a decent backup. But then Wilson completely balled out in camp and won the starting job over the expensive new signing.

 

So they do get chances, but I think it's more likely that none of them are good enough to be more than backups at best than that they're actually gems who didn't get a fair shake. Do you really think if a coach sees a young mid or late round rookie QB absolutely killing it in camp he'd completely ignore how good he looks just because he's not a 1st round pick? Probably not, because it's in his interest as well as the team's to put the best players out there.

[gbear]

If all it takes to make a top 5 Wash QB list under Snyder, how does Todd Collins not make the list?  He may have only started 5 games with the last being a dud in the playoffs, but he did go 4-0 to get us there with a QB rating over 100.   

 

He was the first QB I saw in the Snyder era who seemed to just catch fire in a bottle.  He had a great stretch for us after we lost Taylor in a heart wrenching way (we have yet to replace him 15 years later) .

[mistertim]

33 minutes ago, gbear said:

If all it takes to make a top 5 Wash QB list under Snyder, how does Todd Collins not make the list?  He may have only started 5 games with the last being a dud in the playoffs, but he did go 4-0 to get us there with a QB rating over 100.   

 

He was the first QB I saw in the Snyder era who seemed to just catch fire in a bottle.  He had a great stretch for us after we lost Taylor in a heart wrenching way (we have yet to replace him 15 years later) .

 

We have one of these guys every so often it seems. And we're so starved for even mediocre QB play that many people immediately jump on the train. I've done it once or twice in the past, and it always ends in disappointment. That's one reason that I'm staying pretty even-keeled on the Heinicke hype.

[88Comrade2000]

Taylor could be our version of the Chiefs era Alex Smith.  He takes you to the playoffs but doesn’t do much in the playoffs.  The team wins and it gives them time to find their Mahoney in a future draft.

 

If Taylor finishes well, he will get an extension and raise. If there’s no one to Ron’s liking in 22; he could very well pass on qb and see what’s available in 23,24.

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

8 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

That’s the thing—no, you really don’t. You just know the name of every single one that has because it’s so damn rare that it happens. The hit rates are abysmal. Half a dozen guys, at best, in the modern era defying that really changes nothing—especially since the circumstances that led to their falls likely wouldn’t happen to a lot of them today given the extreme value placed on QBs has only continued to rise.

 

Brady was the exception of all exceptions.

 

Romo was an exception and that was 20 years ago. Who knows. 

 

Dak had a DUI.

 

Russ wouldn’t fall to the 3rd today imo. That was over 10 years ago.

 

Kirk…I’ll give you that one, and he’s not most fans’ idea of the type of QB we’re aiming for regardless of his stats.

 

Agree.  Yeah the whole lets get ourselves a QB in the later rounds or even for that matter outside the first because of the anamolies is a fun thought but it doesn't play the odds at all to say the least.  As if Russell Wilson and Kirk are just as common players as Will Grier, Ryan Finley, Brett Rypien, Easton Stick, Clayton Thorton, Mason Rudolph, Kyle Lauletta, Luke Falk, Tanner Lee, Tracey McSorley, Deshone Kizer, Davis Webb, CJ Beathard, Joshua Dobbs, Nathan Peterman, Brad Kaaya, Connor Cook, Christian Hackenberg, Cardale Jones, Kevin Hogan, Brandon Allen, Jeff Driskel, Garret Grayson, Sean Mannion, Cody Kessler and on and on and on and on. 

 

I am surprised that @Thinking Skins , the math guy here, in particular has pushed the outlier argument, though to his credit he says he's changing some on his take. And I get his logic is more or less that he thinks there is an inefficiency system that stacks the deck against these QBs.   I don't consider myself a math guy.   But in another lifetime I was good in stats in college and was a teacher's assistant in the subject, too.  My stats professsor loved to stress that gambiling outfits and other venues making a living by getting people to ignore the odds by pushing the idea that the outliers are more common than you'd think.

 

Granted finding a franchise QB isn't as hard as winning the Lotto but there is statistically speaking miles of a difference between fishing in the first round versus the later rounds.   Heck even the 2nd round -- your odds are insanely low.   The best argument in theory I see used against the QB in the first is if you combine ALL QBs taking in ALL rounds than you might be able to beat the first round QB.  Yeah I'd entertain that but that doesn't mean taking 1 QB in name that random round beats the first rounder.  To play out that point, it would mean taking a QB in every round except for the first.  I haven't seen that tried but that would be an interesting experiement that obviously will never happen.

 

Yes the odds are if you stack the 2nd through 7th round so in effect 6 players versus just 1 --  the odds that 1 of those 6 players will beat the 1 player.  And some say that proves their point.  The thing is it doesn't prove squat.  All it proves is if some odd duck team decides to take 6 QBs in the draft starting from the 2nd round through the 7th, that team might beat a team that just takes a QB in the first.    But who is going to do that?  Obviously, if you draft 6 QBs in one draft at least 3 of them have to be cut.  

Edited December 9, 2021 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

 

[Thinking Skins]

51 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Agree.  Yeah the whole lets get ourselves a QB in the later rounds or even for that matter outside the first because of the anamolies in a fun thought but it doesn't play the odds at all to say the least.  As if Russell Wilson and Kirk are just as common players as Will Grier, Ryan Finley, Brett Rypien, Easton Stick, Clayton Thorton, Mason Rudolph, Kyle Lauletta, Luke Falk, Tanner Lee, Tracey McSorley, Deshone Kizer, Davis Webb, CJ Beathard, Joshua Dobbs, Nathan Peterman, Brad Kaaya, Connor Cook, Christian Hackenberg, Cardale Jones, Kevin Hogan, Brandon Allen, Jeff Driskel, Garret Grayson, Sean Mannion, Cody Kessler and on and on and on and on. 

 

Thats the thing though. Maybe these guys suck. Thing is we see glimpses of them showing something and being just replaced. People love to talk about Wilson and Cousins and look at what it took for them to get a chance. These are all names that we've discussed before and some just didn't have it. But others like Rypien or Rudolph or Beathard or even Dobbs did show something. It may not have been the superstar potential, but be honest did Zach Wilson show superstar potential at first? Tua? Heck, Lawrence? That's my point. These guys are replaceable because they're drafted to be replacements. They're not seen as the saviors. It takes some dramatic feat like what happened to Keenum where not one but two guys ahead of him went down with season ending injuries, and they still got rid of him after he took them to the championship game. Rarely do you see something like what Gibbs did with Rypien or Parcells with Romo or N. Turner did with Green where the coach sees the special talent in the young undrafted QB so he keeps him around for years and then finally gives him an opportunity after years of teaching. 

 

But again, we're approaching this from different standpoints. I'm saying that these guys can develop into serviceable starters and be better than some of the guys who keep getting signed to rosters to be bums. I mean Jared Goff sucks. Sam Darnold sucks. Josh Rosen sucks. Mark Sanchez sucks. RG3 sucks. There's a list of these QBs who are making rounds in the NFL as backups for whatever reason and they're getting practice snaps and starts or backup reps instead of these younger guys. But I've diverged this thread too much. I'm tired of talking about my love for lower round QBs. I'm going to take a break from that to focus on Dallas.