Thread: First Round QBs Driving Playoff Teams

How about first round offensive linemen enabling first round QB's to drive playoff teams

Originally Posted by "marshallvike" #1086990

How about first round offensive linemen enabling first round QB's to drive playoff teams

Or one better, DT's that make the defense so good they either score more than the offense or give the ball back in positions that the offense can't help but score.....

Man I'd of loved a crack at Suh, Raji, Dorsey, Okoye, Ngata (sp), Castillo etc.

Guys in the trenches that get little mention, but are still damn fine players.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1086993

Originally Posted by "marshallvike" #1086990

How about first round offensive linemen enabling first round QB's to drive playoff teams

Or one better, DT's that make the defense so good they either score more than the offense or give the ball back in positions that the offense can't help but score.....

Man I'd of loved a crack at Suh, Raji, Dorsey, Okoye, Ngata (sp), Castillo etc.

Guys in the trenches that get little mention, but are still damn fine players.

If we got someone of Suh's caliber, it wouldn't upset me too much that we passed up on an OLman. As long as we do not draft a wide receiver in round one. We may go back and forth on the OL vs DT for quite some time until this draft.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1086950

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1086942

That's like saying if you're good enough to guess the lottery numbers you can get rich. Duh. Problem is, you seem to think finding the next Tom Brady is something you can do with a little effort. When in fact, that's not how it works.

No, thats your interpretation of what I'm saying. As usual, your missing my point.

Do you see how many late round players are sitting at home? A hell of alot more.

A hell of alot more? Did you see the numbers? Even if you go low on the guys that have bounced around, its about 10 teams are sitting at home with QB starting that are out of the first round.

All other teams have a 1rst rounder on thier team or have had one at some point.

No, what's important is the quality of player. However, that means the best players get picked early. So you're right, in the sense that picking the same guy in the first round instead of the second won't make him a better player. But we need to get a guy early.

So your good with the 7th best QB this year.......

By the way, thats my point in case you missed it (again). :P

You are out of your fricken mind if you think 6 QBs will go before our pick.

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087006

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1086950

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1086942

That's like saying if you're good enough to guess the lottery numbers you can get rich. Duh. Problem is, you seem to think finding the next Tom Brady is something you can do with a little effort. When in fact, that's not how it works.

No, thats your interpretation of what I'm saying. As usual, your missing my point.

Do you see how many late round players are sitting at home? A hell of alot more.

A hell of alot more? Did you see the numbers? Even if you go low on the guys that have bounced around, its about 10 teams are sitting at home with QB starting that are out of the first round.

All other teams have a 1rst rounder on thier team or have had one at some point.

No, what's important is the quality of player. However, that means the best players get picked early. So you're right, in the sense that picking the same guy in the first round instead of the second won't make him a better player. But we need to get a guy early.

So your good with the 7th best QB this year.......

By the way, thats my point in case you missed it (again). :P

You are out of your fricken mind if you think 6 QBs will go before our pick.

OK, I gave you the teams, who they had at QB right now. Which teams do you think I'm wrong on?

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087008

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087006

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1086950

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1086942

That's like saying if you're good enough to guess the lottery numbers you can get rich. Duh. Problem is, you seem to think finding the next Tom Brady is something you can do with a little effort. When in fact, that's not how it works.

No, thats your interpretation of what I'm saying. As usual, your missing my point.

Do you see how many late round players are sitting at home? A hell of alot more.

A hell of alot more? Did you see the numbers? Even if you go low on the guys that have bounced around, its about 10 teams are sitting at home with QB starting that are out of the first round.

All other teams have a 1rst rounder on thier team or have had one at some point.

No, what's important is the quality of player. However, that means the best players get picked early. So you're right, in the sense that picking the same guy in the first round instead of the second won't make him a better player. But we need to get a guy early.

So your good with the 7th best QB this year.......

By the way, thats my point in case you missed it (again). :P

You are out of your fricken mind if you think 6 QBs will go before our pick.

OK, I gave you the teams, who they had at QB right now. Which teams do you think I'm wrong on?

I will let you know after the off season. Until then, your point has no merit.

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087010

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087008

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087006

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1086950

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1086942

That's like saying if you're good enough to guess the lottery numbers you can get rich. Duh. Problem is, you seem to think finding the next Tom Brady is something you can do with a little effort. When in fact, that's not how it works.

No, thats your interpretation of what I'm saying. As usual, your missing my point.

Do you see how many late round players are sitting at home? A hell of alot more.

A hell of alot more? Did you see the numbers? Even if you go low on the guys that have bounced around, its about 10 teams are sitting at home with QB starting that are out of the first round.

All other teams have a 1rst rounder on thier team or have had one at some point.

No, what's important is the quality of player. However, that means the best players get picked early. So you're right, in the sense that picking the same guy in the first round instead of the second won't make him a better player. But we need to get a guy early.

So your good with the 7th best QB this year.......

By the way, thats my point in case you missed it (again). :P

You are out of your fricken mind if you think 6 QBs will go before our pick.

OK, I gave you the teams, who they had at QB right now. Which teams do you think I'm wrong on?

I will let you know after the off season. Until then, your point has no merit.

Its a discussion for cripes sake. Why do I need merrit to have a discussion?

Again, there are 6 teams ahead of us that "COULD" take QB's in the first round. Now that Luck is staying, there are only 5 QB's that the gurus are calling "First Round" talent.

IF (Big If) they all take QB's ahead of us, we won't get one of them in the first round.

To your point? Could a team elect to stick with a Clausen (Carolina) instead of a "Franchise Guy". Sure, but then we would get completely away from the discussion point all of you want to make about how a team is only successful with a first round guy, which Clausen isn't.

But something suprising might happen and someone, say the Bengals, could say, hey, Carson is getting old and starting to show accuracey issues. Lets draft his replacement (much like the PUKERS did with Rodgers).

In the end, its a discussion. To say I'm out of my mind for having a discussion about the possibilities kindof takes away from what the site is all about isn't it?


On a side note, I see from some of the the Panthers fans sites they are pissed that Luck stayed. A few even speculate that he still might declare.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087081

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087010

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087008

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087006

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1086950

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1086942

That's like saying if you're good enough to guess the lottery numbers you can get rich. Duh. Problem is, you seem to think finding the next Tom Brady is something you can do with a little effort. When in fact, that's not how it works.

No, thats your interpretation of what I'm saying. As usual, your missing my point.

Do you see how many late round players are sitting at home? A hell of alot more.

A hell of alot more? Did you see the numbers? Even if you go low on the guys that have bounced around, its about 10 teams are sitting at home with QB starting that are out of the first round.

All other teams have a 1rst rounder on thier team or have had one at some point.

No, what's important is the quality of player. However, that means the best players get picked early. So you're right, in the sense that picking the same guy in the first round instead of the second won't make him a better player. But we need to get a guy early.

So your good with the 7th best QB this year.......

By the way, thats my point in case you missed it (again). :P

You are out of your fricken mind if you think 6 QBs will go before our pick.

OK, I gave you the teams, who they had at QB right now. Which teams do you think I'm wrong on?

I will let you know after the off season. Until then, your point has no merit.

Its a discussion for cripes sake. Why do I need merrit to have a discussion?

Again, there are 6 teams ahead of us that "COULD" take QB's in the first round. Now that Luck is staying, there are only 5 QB's that the gurus are calling "First Round" talent.

IF (Big If) they all take QB's ahead of us, we won't get one of them in the first round.

To your point? Could a team elect to stick with a Clausen (Carolina) instead of a "Franchise Guy". Sure, but then we would get completely away from the discussion point all of you want to make about how a team is only successful with a first round guy, which Clausen isn't.

But something suprising might happen and someone, say the Bengals, could say, hey, Carson is getting old and starting to show accuracey issues. Lets draft his replacement (much like the PUKERS did with Rodgers).

In the end, its a discussion. To say I'm out of my mind for having a discussion about the possibilities kindof takes away from what the site is all about isn't it?


On a side note, I see from some of the the Panthers fans sites they are pissed that Luck stayed. A few even speculate that he still might declare.

With a disclaimer that I haven't read everything building up to this post.

I can see your point that there are a number of teams picking above us that need a QB. But I would be extremely surprised if there are more than 2 or 3 QB's picked above us, especially now that Luck has withdrawn.

Teams will continue to draft mostly on BPA and generally won't go chasing a need in the wrong draft position. At least not grossly which this would be.

My personal opinion is that now that Luck has withdrawn, this year's QB class will quickly move into an average lot of QB's that will steer this draft into more of a non-QB oriented focus. Might not be rationale, but Luck pulled a lot of average guys into looking better than they really are and now that he is gone they all got demoted.

Originally Posted by "tastywaves" #1087086

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087081

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087010

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087008

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087006

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1086950

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1086942

That's like saying if you're good enough to guess the lottery numbers you can get rich. Duh. Problem is, you seem to think finding the next Tom Brady is something you can do with a little effort. When in fact, that's not how it works.

No, thats your interpretation of what I'm saying. As usual, your missing my point.

Do you see how many late round players are sitting at home? A hell of alot more.

A hell of alot more? Did you see the numbers? Even if you go low on the guys that have bounced around, its about 10 teams are sitting at home with QB starting that are out of the first round.

All other teams have a 1rst rounder on thier team or have had one at some point.

No, what's important is the quality of player. However, that means the best players get picked early. So you're right, in the sense that picking the same guy in the first round instead of the second won't make him a better player. But we need to get a guy early.

So your good with the 7th best QB this year.......

By the way, thats my point in case you missed it (again). :P

You are out of your fricken mind if you think 6 QBs will go before our pick.

OK, I gave you the teams, who they had at QB right now. Which teams do you think I'm wrong on?

I will let you know after the off season. Until then, your point has no merit.

Its a discussion for cripes sake. Why do I need merrit to have a discussion?

Again, there are 6 teams ahead of us that "COULD" take QB's in the first round. Now that Luck is staying, there are only 5 QB's that the gurus are calling "First Round" talent.

IF (Big If) they all take QB's ahead of us, we won't get one of them in the first round.

To your point? Could a team elect to stick with a Clausen (Carolina) instead of a "Franchise Guy". Sure, but then we would get completely away from the discussion point all of you want to make about how a team is only successful with a first round guy, which Clausen isn't.

But something suprising might happen and someone, say the Bengals, could say, hey, Carson is getting old and starting to show accuracey issues. Lets draft his replacement (much like the PUKERS did with Rodgers).

In the end, its a discussion. To say I'm out of my mind for having a discussion about the possibilities kindof takes away from what the site is all about isn't it?


On a side note, I see from some of the the Panthers fans sites they are pissed that Luck stayed. A few even speculate that he still might declare.

With a disclaimer that I haven't read everything building up to this post.

I can see your point that there are a number of teams picking above us that need a QB. But I would be extremely surprised if there are more than 2 or 3 QB's picked above us, especially now that Luck has withdrawn.

Teams will continue to draft mostly on BPA and generally won't go chasing a need in the wrong draft position. At least not grossly which this would be.

My personal opinion is that now that Luck has withdrawn, this year's QB class will quickly move into an average lot of QB's that will steer this draft into more of a non-QB oriented focus. Might not be rationale, but Luck pulled a lot of average guys into looking better than they really are and now that he is gone they all got demoted.

I hear ya my friend on all counts. Problem is, this threads primary discussion point was that teams (The Vikes specifically) should take a first round QB to gaurantee they win.

Following that line of discussion, I listed the teams that need a QB if they want to follow that idea. If that happens, then the guys quickly run out.

On a side note, although I agree with you (and Mars) that there probably won't be that many taken, the follow-on discussion point that goes with that is why did they say that a OT or a CB or a WR etc etc was the BPA and pass on those guys?

Maybe, just maybe, they all aren't "Franchise Guys". If that is then the case, why would we (at 12) take one instead of a OT or a CB, or a WR if they are the BPA.

Anyway, regardless of were you (not specifically you but anyone) want to enter the discussion or what point you (not specifically you but anyone)want to discuss, they are both very interesting in my book even thought someone doesn't think they have merrit.....:laugh:

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087089

Originally Posted by "tastywaves" #1087086

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087081

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087010

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1087008

Originally Posted by "marstc09" #1087006

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1086950

Originally Posted by "i_bleed_purple" #1086942

That's like saying if you're good enough to guess the lottery numbers you can get rich. Duh. Problem is, you seem to think finding the next Tom Brady is something you can do with a little effort. When in fact, that's not how it works.

No, thats your interpretation of what I'm saying. As usual, your missing my point.

Do you see how many late round players are sitting at home? A hell of alot more.

A hell of alot more? Did you see the numbers? Even if you go low on the guys that have bounced around, its about 10 teams are sitting at home with QB starting that are out of the first round.

All other teams have a 1rst rounder on thier team or have had one at some point.

No, what's important is the quality of player. However, that means the best players get picked early. So you're right, in the sense that picking the same guy in the first round instead of the second won't make him a better player. But we need to get a guy early.

So your good with the 7th best QB this year.......

By the way, thats my point in case you missed it (again). :P

You are out of your fricken mind if you think 6 QBs will go before our pick.

OK, I gave you the teams, who they had at QB right now. Which teams do you think I'm wrong on?

I will let you know after the off season. Until then, your point has no merit.

Its a discussion for cripes sake. Why do I need merrit to have a discussion?

Again, there are 6 teams ahead of us that "COULD" take QB's in the first round. Now that Luck is staying, there are only 5 QB's that the gurus are calling "First Round" talent.

IF (Big If) they all take QB's ahead of us, we won't get one of them in the first round.

To your point? Could a team elect to stick with a Clausen (Carolina) instead of a "Franchise Guy". Sure, but then we would get completely away from the discussion point all of you want to make about how a team is only successful with a first round guy, which Clausen isn't.

But something suprising might happen and someone, say the Bengals, could say, hey, Carson is getting old and starting to show accuracey issues. Lets draft his replacement (much like the PUKERS did with Rodgers).

In the end, its a discussion. To say I'm out of my mind for having a discussion about the possibilities kindof takes away from what the site is all about isn't it?


On a side note, I see from some of the the Panthers fans sites they are pissed that Luck stayed. A few even speculate that he still might declare.

With a disclaimer that I haven't read everything building up to this post.

I can see your point that there are a number of teams picking above us that need a QB. But I would be extremely surprised if there are more than 2 or 3 QB's picked above us, especially now that Luck has withdrawn.

Teams will continue to draft mostly on BPA and generally won't go chasing a need in the wrong draft position. At least not grossly which this would be.

My personal opinion is that now that Luck has withdrawn, this year's QB class will quickly move into an average lot of QB's that will steer this draft into more of a non-QB oriented focus. Might not be rationale, but Luck pulled a lot of average guys into looking better than they really are and now that he is gone they all got demoted.

I hear ya my friend on all counts. Problem is, this threads primary discussion point was that teams (The Vikes specifically) should take a first round QB to gaurantee they win.

Following that line of discussion, I listed the teams that need a QB if they want to follow that idea. If that happens, then the guys quickly run out.

On a side note, although I agree with you (and Mars) that there probably won't be that many taken, the follow-on discussion point that goes with that is why did they say that a OT or a CB or a WR etc etc was the BPA and pass on those guys?

Maybe, just maybe, they all aren't "Franchise Guys". If that is then the case, why would we (at 12) take one instead of a OT or a CB, or a WR if they are the BPA.

Anyway, regardless of were you (not specifically you but anyone) want to enter the discussion or what point you (not specifically you but anyone)want to discuss, they are both very interesting in my book even thought someone doesn't think they have merrit.....:laugh:

On that note, I'll jump in with my take on picking a QB.

I would love to see us pick a QB in the first round, but only if that QB is worth taking

It very well could be that by the time we pick the options at QB are not worth taking over another player that may be available, whether it be OL, DL, secondary,... In that case, I will not be disappointed in picking another position as long as it works out to be a perennial pro-bowler :P

I'm not of the mindset that we must pick a QB with our first pick, but I do hope we give it a lot of thought and don't just steer away from it. Again my personal take, but I feel part of the reason we haven't picked a QB early in the last few drafts is because of uncertainty from our talent department in identifying QB talent. Since it is maybe the hardest position to identify a winner, there is a fairly high amount of risk involved. If your talent department and coaching staff isn't completely convinced on a QB, then it's easy to see them steer away from the pick. I'm hoping that our team can identify the right candidate when they see it and they have enough confidence to make that pick.