If you’re watching Ohio State tonight.

[Glad Cougar]

I never said, implied, suggested that a team should worry about the #1 pick of 1st round being a Bust.

If they pick a LT, DL, with the #1 pick of 1st round, they Should Not Worry about a LT, DL being a Bust, because LT's, DL's usually are not bust when taken as the #1 pick.

But QB's have about a 43% chance to be a BUST when they are taken as the #1 pick of 1st round. There is a higher chance of BUSTING with a QB at #1 pick, then with a LT, DL, and thats a FACT.

When you have the #1 pick, and can pick of Lawrence QB, that Lawrence QB, #1 pick is SO DESIRED, EXTREMELY VALUABLE, that you can or should be able to get a #7 pick to #10 pick, to #13 pick, with a #17 to #20 to #23 pick. So 2, 1st rounders, and 1,2 2nd rounders.

And that has happened in past.

In fact KC gave up a SHET ton for #10, let alone a #1 pick.

Also a #7 pick, #10 pick, #13 pick, is not that much worse, then a #1 pick. In fact its happened in many drafts that there are 2 players that SHOULD be picked with #1 pick, and 1 of them gets picked #1, and the other slips to #5 to #7 to #10 to #13.

So what does that mean?

That means that can trade that #1 pick to a team DESPERATE for Lawrence, get a #9 pick, and a #20 pick, and a extra 2nd Rounder.

You now have 4 1st round picks, and 3,4 2nd round picks.

You take a QB either as good, or almost as good at #8.

And you take a LT, DL, etc, at the 6, 7 other draft picks within 1st 2 rounds.

Good debate, Mik. That's the thing about this discussion....ahead of the draft, there are no wrong answers. Good arguments can be made for keeping the #1 pick and good arguments can be made for trading down for more picks. It may take a couple of years to know if what the Jags ultimately do was right. To me, it really boils down to how good you think Trevor Lawrence is. I happen to believe he's a gifted college QB destined to have a very good to great pro career. Physically, he can do all the things that NFL superstar QBs can do. The most important task for Jacksonville is to draft the best players this spring to go along with Lawrence with their other first round pick (#22), the two second round picks, their third round pick, and the two fourth round picks they receive. Draft smartly, and they can get at least 4 of those 6 other picks to be immediate contributors to a turnaround. We'll see.

Glad Cougar

 

[95coug]

Good debate, Mik. That's the thing about this discussion....ahead of the draft, there are no wrong answers. Good arguments can be made for keeping the #1 pick and good arguments can be made for trading down for more picks. It may take a couple of years to know if what the Jags ultimately do was right. To me, it really boils down to how good you think Trevor Lawrence is. I happen to believe he's a gifted college QB destined to have a very good to great pro career. Physically, he can do all the things that NFL superstar QBs can do. The most important task for Jacksonville is to draft the best players this spring to go along with Lawrence with their other first round pick (#22), the two second round picks, their third round pick, and the two fourth round picks they receive. Draft smartly, and they can get at least 4 of those 6 other picks to be immediate contributors to a turnaround. We'll see.

Glad Cougar

The risk I see is this: this gambles that Lawrence pans out. I think he’s obviously got physical skills, but we have no idea how he does when not surrounded by good talent. We know very little about how he does when playing from behind. Of his 34 wins, Clemson won 30 of them by more than 14. 3 of the 4 games they won by 14 or less were against top 12 teams...and 2 of those were (statistically) not especially good games for him. Both of his losses were by over 14. Point is, I have trouble anointing a prospect as a “can’t miss” when he’s spent his entire career playing from a position of advantage.
Bigger risk is assuming you can turn 4 of 6 additional picks into “immediate contributors.” Especially when you don’t have that history. I have a lot easier time seeing 4-5 contributors coming from 9-10 picks...which means turning that #1 pick into 3 picks. And if you want immediate contributors, free agency is a better bet. Just don’t get sucked into the trap of overspending for FA stars - find some solid players who meet needs and improve on what you have. If you can do that well enough, maybe it becomes more reasonable to draft the #1 QB.

 

[BiggsCoug]

The risk I see is this: this gambles that Lawrence pans out. I think he’s obviously got physical skills, but we have no idea how he does when not surrounded by good talent. We know very little about how he does when playing from behind. Of his 34 wins, Clemson won 30 of them by more than 14. 3 of the 4 games they won by 14 or less were against top 12 teams...and 2 of those were (statistically) not especially good games for him. Both of his losses were by over 14. Point is, I have trouble anointing a prospect as a “can’t miss” when he’s spent his entire career playing from a position of advantage.
Bigger risk is assuming you can turn 4 of 6 additional picks into “immediate contributors.” Especially when you don’t have that history. I have a lot easier time seeing 4-5 contributors coming from 9-10 picks...which means turning that #1 pick into 3 picks. And if you want immediate contributors, free agency is a better bet. Just don’t get sucked into the trap of overspending for FA stars - find some solid players who meet needs and improve on what you have. If you can do that well enough, maybe it becomes more reasonable to draft the #1 QB.

That’s an interesting thought. How does TL handle adversity? What does he do when he has no weapons, no back, no blocking, a brand new scheme, staring at a defense that hides its coverages if not changes them before his eyes???

He will go from having every advantage to having no advantage. In a league where everyone runs fast, jumps high and a WR being open is actually not open but you have to make it work.

The leagues history is full of first round QBs that land on terrible teams. They get shit coaching, zero protection, no weapons and are run out of the league labelled a failure when in reality they are scapegoated by a staff and organization that ruined their career.

I have always wondered what the Manning family knew about San Diego that the Leaf family didn’t.

 

[Coug90]

The risk I see is this: this gambles that Lawrence pans out. I think he’s obviously got physical skills, but we have no idea how he does when not surrounded by good talent. We know very little about how he does when playing from behind. Of his 34 wins, Clemson won 30 of them by more than 14. 3 of the 4 games they won by 14 or less were against top 12 teams...and 2 of those were (statistically) not especially good games for him. Both of his losses were by over 14. Point is, I have trouble anointing a prospect as a “can’t miss” when he’s spent his entire career playing from a position of advantage.
Bigger risk is assuming you can turn 4 of 6 additional picks into “immediate contributors.” Especially when you don’t have that history. I have a lot easier time seeing 4-5 contributors coming from 9-10 picks...which means turning that #1 pick into 3 picks. And if you want immediate contributors, free agency is a better bet. Just don’t get sucked into the trap of overspending for FA stars - find some solid players who meet needs and improve on what you have. If you can do that well enough, maybe it becomes more reasonable to draft the #1 QB.

Eh. Watch the kid play. They were playing from ahead a lot because he was lights out. Clemson lost to ND when he was out. They destroyed them when he was back.
there’s no guarantees but TL is damn close to it. Also, his durability...Dabo ran the shit out of that kid. He had 6-10 QB keepers a game! He proved he could take a lick and stay healthy. He’s going to be a second slow and get hit in the NFL, that’s just a given. And he’s proven he’s durable. That’s huge! TL is going to be a stud in the NFL, I love GM3 but Jax is not passing him up.

 

[CougSinceBirth]

That’s an interesting thought. How does TL handle adversity? What does he do when he has no weapons, no back, no blocking, a brand new scheme, staring at a defense that hides its coverages if not changes them before his eyes???

He will go from having every advantage to having no advantage. In a league where everyone runs fast, jumps high and a WR being open is actually not open but you have to make it work.

The leagues history is full of first round QBs that land on terrible teams. They get shit coaching, zero protection, no weapons and are run out of the league labelled a failure when in reality they are scapegoated by a staff and organization that ruined their career.

I have always wondered what the Manning family knew about San Diego that the Leaf family didn’t.

Didn't handle the tOSU defense very well under pressure...

 

[Glad Cougar]

Didn't handle the tOSU defense very well under pressure...

He didn't match the incredible performance of Justin Fields in that game, but Lawrence was still 33-48 and passed for 400 yards. He did have an interception and was sacked twice...but I would stop short from saying he didn't handle OSU very well. It was Clemson's defense that let them down, giving up more than 600 yards to the Buckeyes.

By the way, I was rooting for Ohio State and happy that Fields played so well. He certainly was the better QB in that game.

Glad Cougar

 

[Coug90]

He didn't match the incredible performance of Justin Fields in that game, but Lawrence was still 33-48 and passed for 400 yards. He did have an interception and was sacked twice...but I would stop short from saying he didn't handle OSU very well. It was Clemson's defense that let them down, giving up more than 600 yards to the Buckeyes.

By the way, I was rooting for Ohio State and happy that Fields played so well. He certainly was the better QB in that game.

Glad Cougar

It was apparent to me Clemson coaches were thoroughly outdone by Ryan Day and his staff. Not helpful to a QB when your coaches get taken to the woodshed with their game plan and the defense is so bad that you have to score on every possession. It wasn’t Lawrence’s best game but he was still pretty good against one of the best teams in the country.

 

[dgibbons]

It was apparent to me Clemson coaches were thoroughly outdone by Ryan Day and his staff. Not helpful to a QB when your coaches get taken to the woodshed with their game plan and the defense is so bad that you have to score on every possession. It wasn’t Lawrence’s best game but he was still pretty good against one of the best teams in the country.

Clemson's OC was out for a positive Covid test.

tOSU receivers running free all over was a huge surprise to me. Venables should have been embarrassed.

 

[Coug90]

Clemson's OC was out for a positive Covid test.

tOSU receivers running free all over was a huge surprise to me. Venables should have been embarrassed.

I didn’t realize that Clemsons OC was out, terrible timing. Yes same w Venables, he’s been a consistently great DC, I was shocked OSU torched them like that. I still think Fields is a high upside yet potentially risky pick, but that performance against a really good Clemson D made him some $$.

 

[fingerdisco]

I didn’t realize that Clemsons OC was out, terrible timing. Yes same w Venables, he’s been a consistently great DC, I was shocked OSU torched them like that. I still think Fields is a high upside yet potentially risky pick, but that performance against a really good Clemson D made him some $$.

Didn't help that their dumbass defense-leading LB (Skalski) got himself ejected YET AGAIN early in a playoff game.

 

[95coug]

Didn't help that their dumbass defense-leading LB (Skalski) got himself ejected YET AGAIN early in a playoff game.

I was surprised when commentators argued against that hit being targeting. Seemed pretty clear that he led with the crown of the helmet.

And, for anyone who's about to argue that Fields moved into the contact, there's truth to that. But Skalski still had his head down and next straight, in exactly the way you're taught not to tackle from the first time you put on pads. It's a good way to break your neck.

 

[fingerdisco]

I was surprised when commentators argued against that hit being targeting. Seemed pretty clear that he led with the crown of the helmet.

And, for anyone who's about to argue that Fields moved into the contact, there's truth to that. But Skalski still had his head down and next straight, in exactly the way you're taught not to tackle from the first time you put on pads. It's a good way to break your neck.

Classic spearing to use old school vernacular, no two ways about it

 

[Coug90]

I was surprised when commentators argued against that hit being targeting. Seemed pretty clear that he led with the crown of the helmet.

And, for anyone who's about to argue that Fields moved into the contact, there's truth to that. But Skalski still had his head down and next straight, in exactly the way you're taught not to tackle from the first time you put on pads. It's a good way to break your neck.

Yup the spearing/crown of helmet to any part of the body is just as much about protecting the tackler. Same kind of hit that paralyzed Shazier. Anytime you make that kind of impact with your head down you are lucky if you dont get hurt.

 

[couginphx]

Here is a question.... your team sucks.... you need help all over the field.... do you draft the qb and then fill in around him, knowing it will likely take longer to build than his rookie deal will last.... OR.... do you fill all your other needs and then get your qb on a rookie deal with talent all around him to help????

I don't think its that easy, if I'm JAX this year for instance, I've got wholes everywhere, and I mean gaping holes. All things equal I'd gather assets (draft capital) and do a slow rebuild. But If my scouting tells me Lawrence is a generational type talent (many in the league report to believe this) no way I'm passing on him. If its a year like when Mayfield went #1, I'd trade back and the capital, and build around O/D line and secondary prospects where I can.

 

[random soul]

They used 5 first round picks on 1 position in however many years and only got 1 guy that could play well enough to get them to the playoffs. That's awful.

1 OL doesn't help you. It might make things a little better but ultimately the Jags will be picking top 10 again in a year. They need at least 2 studs on the OL and 3 other solid players.

It isn't gonna get done in a year. It may take 3-5 years to pull it all together.

Like you I prefer to build a team first and worry about a quarterback second. Joe Gibbs won 3 Super Bowls in 10 years with 3 different quarterbacks by building the best offensive line in football and a highly disciplined, specialized, professional defense that had quality pass rushers and a super human garden gnome fueled on Tootsie Rolls at one cornerback spot.

But Cleveland was terrible at drafting period for a long time. Most of their other first round picks in that stretch of years were terrible too. I think Joe Thomas was the only one that really worked out. They weren't only bad because they thought Johnny Football was legit. They were bad because they were terrible at managing their entire roster.

 

[random soul]

Eh. Watch the kid play. They were playing from ahead a lot because he was lights out. Clemson lost to ND when he was out. They destroyed them when he was back.
there’s no guarantees but TL is damn close to it. Also, his durability...Dabo ran the shit out of that kid. He had 6-10 QB keepers a game! He proved he could take a lick and stay healthy. He’s going to be a second slow and get hit in the NFL, that’s just a given. And he’s proven he’s durable. That’s huge! TL is going to be a stud in the NFL, I love GM3 but Jax is not passing him up.

I think Lawrence is legit too. I have fewer questions about him coming out than I did about Tua, that's for sure.

 

[couginphx]

Like you I prefer to build a team first and worry about a quarterback second. Joe Gibbs won 3 Super Bowls in 10 years with 3 different quarterbacks by building the best offensive line in football and a highly disciplined, specialized, professional defense that had quality pass rushers and a super human garden gnome fueled on Tootsie Rolls at one cornerback spot.

But Cleveland was terrible at drafting period for a long time. Most of their other first round picks in that stretch of years were terrible too. I think Joe Thomas was the only one that really worked out. They weren't only bad because they thought Johnny Football was legit. They were bad because they were terrible at managing their entire roster.

I get your point, but I'm not sure comparing what Gibbs did in essentially pre-historic football to now is a fair comparison, during the pandemic I've been watching a lot of 80's era NFL on youtube and the game was WAY different, RB's were far more the focus and QB play was in a lot of cases god awful and offenses were much simpler. Marino and Elway were so different from the rest of the league, its crazy how big the gap was. Theismann was a top level QB, athletically I'm not sure he would make a roster today, and I don't think he would be anything above a bottom third starting QB in the league now, think Andy Dalton.

Again, in building a team a lot of it is what you are positioned to take, if you think TL is elite talent, when there is only 5-7 of these QB's in the league at a time, that as a GM is what you work for your entire career to be in position to get. That level of QB talent can hide other warts, KC had a good roster and did okay with Alex Smith, a pretty similar offense and put in Mahomes, they are other worldly--the defense is pretty average, don't matter when you can score 40 points at will when focused and on point. If you think TL is a solid QB who fits in with Mayfield, Carr, Goff type, who with a good roster around them can get you to the playoffs, then I'm trading back and acquiring assets.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

*********************************

To go along with your thoughts and the way I am leaning, how many of the following list of Super Bowl QB's do you all think will end up in the Hall of Fame? Not many, that's for sure, yet each of them was able to lead their team to the SB because the rest of the team was good enough to get there. I think this list is proof that a HOF QB is NOT required to be successful, to reach the Super Bowl. Remember, one of the best QB's of all time, Dan Fouts, never made it to the Super Bowl and there are probably a couple others that I don't recall right now. Dan Marino only made it to one also.

Here is the list:

• Len Dawson
• 
  
• Daryle Lamonica
• 
  
• Earl Morral
• 
  
• Joe Kapp
• 
  
• Craig Morton
• 
  
• Bob Griese
• 
  
• Billy Kilmer
• 
  
• Vince Ferragamo
• 
  
• Ron Jaworski
• 
  
• Ken Anderson
• 
  
• David Woodley
• 
  
• Joe Theismann
• 
  
• Tony Eason
• 
  
• Doug Williams
• 
  
• Boomer Esiason
• 
  
• Stan Humphries
• 
  
• Neil O’Donnell
• 
  
• Chris Chandler
• 
  
• Steve McNair
• 
  
• Trent Dilfer
• 
  
• Kerry Collins
• 
  
• Brad Johnson
• 
  
• Jake Delhomme
• 
  
• Donovan McNabb
• 
  
• Matt Hasselback
• 
  
• Res Grossman
• 
  
• Joe Flacco
• 
  
• Colin Kaepernick
• 
  
• Cam Newton
• 
  
• Nick Foles
• 
  
• Matt Ryan
• 
  
• Jared Goff
• 
  
• Jimmy Garoppolo

Not a Hall of Famer in the whole lot, IMO.

Good list and good point except that Dawson and Griese are both in the hall of fame. Taihtsat

 

[Stretch 74]

Good list and good point except that Dawson and Griese are both in the hall of fame. Taihtsat

*********************

You know, I wondered about both of them, especially Griese, but I didn't wonder hard enough to bother looking them up. And dummy here didn't even notice that the HOF members were highlighted by the gold background. Hello! lol

But still, that isn't many that were on the list, right? Which is what I was getting at.

Now, do you think that they were mostly the reason that their teams got to the Super Bowl or were the teammates and coaches around Dawson and Griese more the reason that they got to the HOF? Were they each among the very top few in the league at their position? I didn't follow the NFL enough back then to know for sure, but my thinking is that their coaches and teammates may have been the biggest factors in their success.

 

[FnuLnu]

*********************

You know, I wondered about both of them, especially Griese, but I didn't wonder hard enough to bother looking them up. And dummy here didn't even notice that the HOF members were highlighted by the gold background. Hello! lol

But still, that isn't many that were on the list, right? Which is what I was getting at.

Now, do you think that they were mostly the reason that their teams got to the Super Bowl or were the teammates and coaches around Dawson and Griese more the reason that they got to the HOF? Were they each among the very top few in the league at their position? I didn't follow the NFL enough back then to know for sure, but my thinking is that their coaches and teammates may have been the biggest factors in their success.

Bob Greise only played in 5 of the 17 games the 1972 Miami Dolphins played in when they went 17-0.

Extremely overrated football team, but historic.

Bob Greise benefits from the Steve Garvey effect, handsome dude whose stats don't come close to matching his reputation.

Len Dawson actually was good. Had good teammates on 1969 Chiefs. Also won with Dallas Texans in 1963 (who moved to Kansas City the next year).

Hank Stram, Dawson's coach was media darling and not that great of coach.

 

[Glad Cougar]

Bob Greise only played in 5 of the 17 games the 1972 Miami Dolphins played in when they went 17-0.

Extremely overrated football team, but historic.

Bob Greise benefits from the Steve Garvey effect, handsome dude whose stats don't come close to matching his reputation.

Len Dawson actually was good. Had good teammates on 1969 Chiefs. Also won with Dallas Texans in 1963 (who moved to Kansas City the next year).

Hank Stram, Dawson's coach was media darling and not that great of coach.

I think Stram was better than "not that great of a coach." His winning percentage with Chiefs/Dallas Texas was .620 and he won a Super Bowl and 3 AFL championships....more than any other AFL coach. In 15 years with KC/Dallas, he had 3 losing seasons. He was actually quite brilliant and successful. But yes, he had great players, too. Len Dawson and Hank Stram aren't the only ones from those great Chief teams in the HOF. Bobby Bell, Willie Lanier, Buck Buchanon, Curley Culp, Johnny Robinson, Emmitt Thomas, Jan Stenerud are also there. Boyhood idols of mine!

Glad Cougar

 

[95coug]

I get your point, but I'm not sure comparing what Gibbs did in essentially pre-historic football to now is a fair comparison, during the pandemic I've been watching a lot of 80's era NFL on youtube and the game was WAY different, RB's were far more the focus and QB play was in a lot of cases god awful and offenses were much simpler. Marino and Elway were so different from the rest of the league, its crazy how big the gap was. Theismann was a top level QB, athletically I'm not sure he would make a roster today, and I don't think he would be anything above a bottom third starting QB in the league now, think Andy Dalton.

Again, in building a team a lot of it is what you are positioned to take, if you think TL is elite talent, when there is only 5-7 of these QB's in the league at a time, that as a GM is what you work for your entire career to be in position to get. That level of QB talent can hide other warts, KC had a good roster and did okay with Alex Smith, a pretty similar offense and put in Mahomes, they are other worldly--the defense is pretty average, don't matter when you can score 40 points at will when focused and on point. If you think TL is a solid QB who fits in with Mayfield, Carr, Goff type, who with a good roster around them can get you to the playoffs, then I'm trading back and acquiring assets.

I understand the logic, but I still think trading down is the better play. It lets you address multiple needs and solidify the team. If you don't do that, even if the kid is a generational talent, he's got no weapons and no defense. Maybe he can win you a few games on his own, but that just means you're in the playoff conversation at midseason, and you pick at #12 next year. By the time you can plug holes around him, his rookie deal is over and you have to pay market rate...and then you can't afford to plug any remaining holes.

I think its better to upgrade your talent - not with the very best at every position, but with solid performers. Spend money at some key positions, get some weapons and protection. Then draft your QB. If you try to start with the QB, you're trying to load up for a run in 3-4 years. If you don't make it, you're starting over.

 

[kayak15]

*********************

You know, I wondered about both of them, especially Griese, but I didn't wonder hard enough to bother looking them up. And dummy here didn't even notice that the HOF members were highlighted by the gold background. Hello! lol

But still, that isn't many that were on the list, right? Which is what I was getting at.

Now, do you think that they were mostly the reason that their teams got to the Super Bowl or were the teammates and coaches around Dawson and Griese more the reason that they got to the HOF? Were they each among the very top few in the league at their position? I didn't follow the NFL enough back then to know for sure, but my thinking is that their coaches and teammates may have been the biggest factors in their success.

Agree completely with your last paragraph. Super Bowls are won by teams, not by individuals or even groups of individuals. Winning a Super Bowl is a curse descending upon the front office as other teams are tempted to- and do- overpay for that QB, RB, CB etc. with the ring during the ensuing free agent market only to find that the player may be good but not great and not worth what they are paying him. Super Bowl winning teams often find themselves gutted by foolish franchises overpaying for players with a ring. Individual players may be a positive factor in the success but I do not believe any were ever the single, or even primary reason, for the team's success.

 

[KRUSTYtheCOUG]

*********************

You know, I wondered about both of them, especially Griese, but I didn't wonder hard enough to bother looking them up. And dummy here didn't even notice that the HOF members were highlighted by the gold background. Hello! lol

But still, that isn't many that were on the list, right? Which is what I was getting at.

Now, do you think that they were mostly the reason that their teams got to the Super Bowl or were the teammates and coaches around Dawson and Griese more the reason that they got to the HOF? Were they each among the very top few in the league at their position? I didn't follow the NFL enough back then to know for sure, but my thinking is that their coaches and teammates may have been the biggest factors in their success.

I do not think they were mostly the reason for the sucxess of those teams. But I guess it's so relative. Grieve was 8 for 11 in SBVII and Dawson was only 12 for 17 in IV. different times for sure. I've watched SB III, V and X and it's remarkable just how different the game was then...boring really. Run, run, run...dive, dive, dive. I'm exaggerating a bit, but not much. Particularly that first game between Dallas and Pittsbugh. Not very exhilarating television. However, they were amongst the best at their position although short by today's standards (6' and 6'1) taihtsat

 

[Stretch 74]

Like you I prefer to build a team first and worry about a quarterback second. Joe Gibbs won 3 Super Bowls in 10 years with 3 different quarterbacks by building the best offensive line in football and a highly disciplined, specialized, professional defense that had quality pass rushers and a super human garden gnome fueled on Tootsie Rolls at one cornerback spot.

But Cleveland was terrible at drafting period for a long time. Most of their other first round picks in that stretch of years were terrible too. I think Joe Thomas was the only one that really worked out. They weren't only bad because they thought Johnny Football was legit. They were bad because they were terrible at managing their entire roster.

*********************

Another thought on this subject just occurred to me. Aren't there some to several to a lot (sorry for sounding like Mik, but I just don't know what the % of guys taking advantage of the extra year will be) of players that are not very top tier talents that will be returning to school? Assuming that is the case, the overall talent level in next years draft class should be stronger than in the 2021 draft, thus making comparable picks next year worth more than this year. Seems logical, but I have no idea how to evaluate that value. Guess that is why the NFL pays their coaches and GM's the big bucks.

 

[anon_1nb5kgc7kwlls]

Ohio State 34 Alabama 24

 

[kougkurt]

Forgot that was tonight