Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

2011 Draft. QB's are a "sucker bet" but this year ???

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Michael

unread,
Mar 22, 2011, 9:50:57 AM3/22/11
to
How many well regarded first round QB's have washed out ??? It is
almost a sucker bet taking a QB early. This year, it looks even
worse. I cant remember when there was such a poor choice of QB.

Gabbert. Poor accuracy, wins the tip QB spot by default. In most
drafts, he'd probably be an early second round guy.

Cam Newton. So many red flags it looks like a parade in Moscow circa
October 1917

Jake Locker. Has looked like anything but top draft pick as of the
last 12 months.

Ponder. OK, So they need another name to get to a "top five"

Mallet. See above.

On one hand, it looks like any team that throws away a pick on any of
these guys is placing a huge sucker bet. May be half of the highly
regarded 1st round QB's turn into somthing and few if any 2'nd round
guys ever do. The NFL has a Brady once every ten years if that.

These QB's SUCK. Does any one here think any of them has any
chance ???

IMHO, the team that takes any of these guys before Von Miller, AJ
Green,Patric Peterson, Nick Fairley is taking too big of a chance.
The desire to want a good qb should not over ride good sense.

Harlan Lachman

unread,
Mar 22, 2011, 10:41:00 AM3/22/11
to
In article
<d87689d1-e9b9-48dd...@n2g2000prj.googlegroups.com>,
Michael <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote:

Three thoughts:

1) There are some red flags over Fairley, having to do with whether he
is the real deal or a one year wonder and if Von Miller is big enough.

2) Brady was a late round pick. Any of the QBs you list who get lucky
enough to sit behind the right starter and end up playing only after a
year or two while working with a superior OC and playing behind a good
OL with a good runner and stud WR might blossom.

3) Most of the so called busts never played with a good OC, behind a
good OL, with a good RB and stud WR. Who knows how many might have fared
differently. There is a reason teams that pick in the top 5 frequently
are picking there -- and it is not just that the team is a small market
team.

h

Michael

unread,
Mar 22, 2011, 11:22:43 AM3/22/11
to
On Mar 22, 10:41 am, Harlan Lachman <har...@eeivt.com> wrote:
> In article
> <d87689d1-e9b9-48dd-858d-d16ddf26c...@n2g2000prj.googlegroups.com>,
> h- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

all good points... i agree about Fairley... some chance comes with
that pick, but at least he has visable skills. The experts are all
rating gabbert as the best qb in the draft. at least some of the top
qb's qb prospects that went bust in the past came with plenty of film
showing their potential. even sanchez who only had a limited college
career came with very impressive film showing that he had tremendous
potential. gabbert, the top rated qb has no such selling points. i
cant imagine why any team would draft a qb in this draft unless it was
late first round, early second. 2011 is the opposite of the 1983
draft.

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

Harlan Lachman

unread,
Mar 24, 2011, 12:23:14 AM3/24/11
to
In article
<fe5b5386-eede-4be6...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
Michael <mjd...@verizon.net> wrote:

Michael, I guess I was not clear.

Anyone being talked about as a possible first rounder will do better if
they get picked by a team with a better OL, WR, OC and RB and get to sit
for a year or two.

Michael

unread,
Mar 29, 2011, 12:20:19 PM3/29/11
to
On Mar 24, 12:23 am, Harlan Lachman <har...@eeivt.com> wrote:
> In article
> <fe5b5386-eede-4be6-bb0d-90f1fa7b5...@d26g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
> for a year or two.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

understood... in the case of gabbert, who will probably go to the
panthers... gabbert is dead meat. no question that they throw him to
the dogs. probably, a lot of top qb prospects that went bust would
have had a chance for a quality career if the teams that drafted them
followed your advice above.

Grinch

unread,
Mar 31, 2011, 5:32:34 AM3/31/11
to
On Mar 22, 10:41 am, Harlan Lachman <har...@eeivt.com> wrote:
> In article
> <d87689d1-e9b9-48dd-858d-d16ddf26c...@n2g2000prj.googlegroups.com>,
>
> 3) Most of the so called busts never played with a good OC, behind a
> good OL, with a good RB and stud WR. Who knows how many might have fared
> differently. There is a reason teams that pick in the top 5 frequently
> are picking there -- and it is not just that the team is a small market
> team.

Very wise words.

A really *bad* QB who throws one bounce-pass after another when not
throwing picks can sink a team by himself.

But once a QB reaches the capable level his numbers very largely
reflect the quality of the team around him (instead of vice versa, as
so may imagine, up to the point of QBs having personal won-lost
records).

Switch Archie Manning to the Walsh 49ers and Joe Montana to the Aints
of that era, today Archie is in the HoF and nobody remembers who
Montana was.

If Tom Brady had been drafted in the fifth round by the Detroit Lions
he might have gotten a chance to start for a season, maybe, if so
would've gone like 4-12, then would've lost the job to "savior" #1
pick Joey Harrington, and nobody here would've heard of him.

0 new messages