junebugz Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 Hook, the arguement is WITH THEIR ORIGINAL TEAM. Dilfer doesn't count, neither does Elway. Elway won at 38-39 years old because they had a great running game and defense, he wasn't the focus of the offense. I'd be happy to see Leftwich or Harrington win a SB with the Raiders or any other team after he's cut or a FA (like Dilfer or McNair.) BLEDSOE DOES NOT COUNT, he was on the bench. How many games did he play that year? 2. He started 2 and Brady finished the second one for him. Give me Brady, Montana, Gannon, Young, Favre, Warner over a 1st round pick any day. If Chicago wins, Grossman is like Roethlisberger- a caretaker QB who you hope doesn't make mistakes so the defense, running game and special teams can win it for you. I never said Roethlisberger can't be efficient, I'm saying he's not a 4000 yd, 40 TD guy. He's not asked to win the game by himself, like Manning usually is. It is a little hard to expect a high first round QB to take his team to the SB and win it within his first few years in most cases ... mainly because if he is a high first rounder, then that indicates the team he is playing for sucked the previous year. Most high first rounders end up going to teams with line problems, coaching problems, personnel problems, or a combination of those. So to say that Elway doesn't count because he was older doesn't hold water in my book. Plus you should probably remember that back when Elway was playing it was the opposite of what it has been the past few years .. the NFC was stronger and the AFC was weaker. There are many variables in the stats, but they are what they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd1 Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 That is not the point of that stat. Of course, every QB taken in the first round will not win a SB ... but it seems as though the chance is greater. How many QB's taken in the sixth round end up winning the SB since 82? Far less than those in the 1st round. But what is your cost for taking a guy in the 2nd-6th rounds? The salary cap hit when he goes "Leaf" on you is minimal. You can actually give him time to learn the system, get stronger and develop before the idiot fans are screaming to see him on the field too soon. Too much goes wrong when you take a guy in the 1st, give a QB more $$ than the average 1st rd pick, push him into the lineup on a bad team too soon (Leaf, Harrington, Carr, etc., etc., etc.) and then scrap him to start over again in 3-5 years because you "MUST" have a franchise QB. Do you realize how often the same bad teams are taking QB's high? Look at SD, Detroit, NYG, Cincy, Wash (THREE in 11 years!), Chi (remember McNown plus most Bears fans hate Rex), SF (drunkenmiller and Smith), Seattle (McGwire and Mirer). It's a downward spiral. THIS time it will be different, keep telling yourselves that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geeteebee Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 yes, but do you know which divisoin II qb was only 15-13-1 in college and was a high first round pick but never led their team to the super bowl? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 So I just did the research ... since 82' a QB was taken in 1st round 54 times ... beyond the first round 282 times. Only 16% of QB's are taken in 1st round. So if a first round QB wins the SB 36% of the time that is fairly impressive given the total amount of QB's drafted. Sure you can find a dud in the 1st round ... some teams are great at it, but few teams consistently find quality "stud" players in round 6 and beyond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 But what is your cost for taking a guy in the 2nd-6th rounds? The salary cap hit when he goes "Leaf" on you is minimal. You can actually give him time to learn the system, get stronger and develop before the idiot fans are screaming to see him on the field too soon. Too much goes wrong when you take a guy in the 1st, give a QB more $$ than the average 1st rd pick, push him into the lineup on a bad team too soon (Leaf, Harrington, Carr, etc., etc., etc.) and then scrap him to start over again in 3-5 years because you "MUST" have a franchise QB. Do you realize how often the same bad teams are taking QB's high? Look at SD, Detroit, NYG, Cincy, Wash (THREE in 11 years!), Chi (remember McNown plus most Bears fans hate Rex), SF (drunkenmiller and Smith), Seattle (McGwire and Mirer). It's a downward spiral. THIS time it will be different, keep telling yourselves that. So you would rather pay 1st pick money to a good defensive player that gets outplayed by someone picked after him? This is true with any position, but is blatantly more obvious with the QB position because so much more rests on his shoulders as far as blame and responsibility go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd1 Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 My prime football watching years have been watching Green Bay take Brooks, Hasselbeck, Brunell, etc in mid-late round, develop them and trade them off for a premium. Just seems like the right way to run an organization to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Hook, the arguement is WITH THEIR ORIGINAL TEAM. Dilfer doesn't count, neither does Elway. that is absolutely retarded. your entire argument rests on john elway's career as a baltimore colt. how many downs did he play for them again? stupid "theory". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGrunt Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 My prime football watching years have been watching Green Bay take Brooks, Hasselbeck, Brunell, etc in mid-late round, develop them and trade them off for a premium. Just seems like the right way to run an organization to me. This is a good point. The Broncos seem to enjoy using this similar tactic with running backs and it so far has worked out well for them. One of the biggest trades that I can remember in the last few years was Clinton Portis to the Redskins for Champ Bailey to the Broncos. This was obviously a huge trade for both teams, but more so to the Broncos because of their running style. If they have a full blown stud RB, but can still use the lesser qualified players and get similar production from them, why not trade away uneaded talent for another skill position that might help the team out more? Brilliant! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
junebugz Posted January 23, 2007 Author Share Posted January 23, 2007 My prime football watching years have been watching Green Bay take Brooks, Hasselbeck, Brunell, etc in mid-late round, develop them and trade them off for a premium. Just seems like the right way to run an organization to me. Anthony Dilweg, Jeff Graham, Kirk Baumgartner, Ty Detmer, Jay Barker, Kyle Wachholtz, Ronnie McAda they didn't all quite pan out ... Craig Nall maybe he is still developing, I don't know ... but you can afford to develop some when you have a stud QB that another team gave up on that keeps playing every game for 15 years. By the way, what did GB give up for Favre? A first round pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainHook Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 (edited) Elway doesn't count? He never wore a Colts jersey. Denver is his original team. I don't care how old he was when he won. Roethlisberger doesn't count? Grossman wouldn't count? Your theory has some major holes. But keep bailing water! Edited January 23, 2007 by CaptainHook Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.