Thread: Frazier sends mixed signals about QB interest

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/03/frazier-sends-mixed-signals-about-quarterback-interest-early-in-draft/

Last month, Vikings coach Leslie Frazier suggested that his team could use a first- or second-round pick in the 2011 draft on a quarterback. More recently, he has clarified his remarks.

“The only thing I was saying about that is that would be ideal,” Frazier said, per Judd Zulgad of the Minneapolis Star Tribune. “That’s the term I used. But you don’t want to get to the point where you’re reaching for a player just because you have what you perceive as a need at quarterback. We want to get the best player that’s available and if the quarterback we like is not there you can’t just say, ‘OK, we’re going to take that guy because he plays quarterback.’ We have other needs other than that position. We’ve got to be smart. . . . When we sit down and go through all the scenarios we’re going to try to take the best player that’s available for us at whatever spot we take him.”

honestly I think Da'Quan is going to fall to us... This clears up a lot

Thanks for the read my friend. Thought this one went along with it.....

As I've said on more than one occasion, I'm not an uber draft guru or anything like that, but I can see eight quarterbacks that could be taken in the first two rounds of the draft that really wouldn't be considered reaches.

The two guys that would probably be worth taking at number 12. . .Missouri's Blaine Gabbert and Auburn's Cam Newton. . .probably won't be there at 12. If they could trade down a bit in the first round, they would probably find themselves in the territory where Washington's Jake Locker, Florida State's Christian Ponder, and Arkansas' Ryan Mallett would be legitimate picks (although I still hope like heck we avoid Locker like the plague). As we get closer to the 43rd pick in the draft, you could start adding names like TCU's Andy Dalton, Iowa's Ricky Stanzi, and Nevada's Colin Kaepernick, although Kaepernick would definitely be more of a long-term project than either Stanzi or Dalton.

Vikings' Coach Leslie Frazier Clarifies Comments About Quarterbacks

Looks to me like someone told Leslie he was talking to much. Anyway, as the author (Dailynorseman) said, there should be someone at 43. Problem is, the pickings are going to be pretty slim.

I think the pickings will be slim even if you are Buffalo or Carolina this year. That is why I am willing to do nothing this year and see how things shake out for next year.

Besides Luck, how deep is the QB class slated to be next year?

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1092930

I think the pickings will be slim even if you are Buffalo or Carolina this year. That is why I am willing to do nothing this year and see how things shake out for next year.

Besides Luck, how deep is the QB class slated to be next year?

Only issue I have with that process is that I believe you need to address the QB position almost every year even if you have a reliable starter.

I kindof think the approach should be that you have atleast 4 QB's in the hopper...

a. Starter. Atleast under a long term contract.
b. Backup. Might not be proven, but should have been in the system for atleast 3 years. Could be coming up on his last year of his rookie contract.
c. Third String. Should have been in the system atleast 2 years.
d. PS - Rookie you just brought in that is considered a long term project.

Rationale for that way of thinking is you always have QB's that are familiar with the system and the coaches have been looking at them over a long period of time so they should have a good idea of they could eventually be you next starter.

Right now the Vikes (Been that way since they drafted Pepp) aren't anywhere close to that depth at the position.

In the end, they need to burn a high pick this year on one of these kids. Doesn't mean he needs to start. Just means they have another peice to the puzzle.

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1092933

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1092930

I think the pickings will be slim even if you are Buffalo or Carolina this year. That is why I am willing to do nothing this year and see how things shake out for next year.

Besides Luck, how deep is the QB class slated to be next year?

Only issue I have with that process is that I believe you need to address the QB position almost every year even if you have a reliable starter.

I kindof think the approach should be that you have atleast 4 QB's in the hopper...

a. Starter. Atleast under a long term contract.
b. Backup. Might not be proven, but should have been in the system for atleast 3 years. Could be coming up on his last year of his rookie contract.
c. Third String. Should have been in the system atleast 2 years.
d. PS - Rookie you just brought in that is considered a long term project.

Rationale for that way of thinking is you always have QB's that are familiar with the system and the coaches have been looking at them over a long period of time so they should have a good idea of they could eventually be you next starter.

Right now the Vikes (Been that way since they drafted Pepp) aren't anywhere close to that depth at the position.

In the end, they need to burn a high pick this year on one of these kids. Doesn't mean he needs to start. Just means they have another peice to the puzzle.

But we have been addressing the QB position pretty much every year.
We already have Bomar and Webb on the roster so if we pick up a vet in FA to compete for the starting spot with Webb IMHO we would be fine. I am less concerned than you about a #4 guy on the roster.

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1092935

Originally Posted by "Marrdro" #1092933

Originally Posted by "Purple Floyd" #1092930

I think the pickings will be slim even if you are Buffalo or Carolina this year. That is why I am willing to do nothing this year and see how things shake out for next year.

Besides Luck, how deep is the QB class slated to be next year?

Only issue I have with that process is that I believe you need to address the QB position almost every year even if you have a reliable starter.

I kindof think the approach should be that you have atleast 4 QB's in the hopper...

a. Starter. Atleast under a long term contract.
b. Backup. Might not be proven, but should have been in the system for atleast 3 years. Could be coming up on his last year of his rookie contract.
c. Third String. Should have been in the system atleast 2 years.
d. PS - Rookie you just brought in that is considered a long term project.

Rationale for that way of thinking is you always have QB's that are familiar with the system and the coaches have been looking at them over a long period of time so they should have a good idea of they could eventually be you next starter.

Right now the Vikes (Been that way since they drafted Pepp) aren't anywhere close to that depth at the position.

In the end, they need to burn a high pick this year on one of these kids. Doesn't mean he needs to start. Just means they have another peice to the puzzle.

But we have been addressing the QB position pretty much every year.
We already have Bomar and Webb on the roster so if we pick up a vet in FA to compete for the starting spot with Webb IMHO we would be fine. I am less concerned than you about a #4 guy on the roster.

Webb I will give you. Bomar, well, not so much. He actually has less time in the scheme that Webb does.

Nope, they are going to take a kid at 12 or 43 and I don't think they are wrong in that way of thinking. Just hope they get the right one.