Drafts with Multiple QBs Taken in the 1st Round . . . is 2021 Class All That? (1 Viewer)

I was thinking the other day about the likelihood that this draft class could have 5 QBs taken in the Top 8-12 picks (or at a minimum in the first round). That got me wondering how many drafts have had 3 or more QBs selected in the first round and how did they turn out. There have been 20 such drafts in the Super Bowl era. Here is the list of years and players selected . . .

2020 Joe Burrow (1) Tua Tagovailoa (5) Justin Herbert (6) Jordan Love (26)
2019 Kyler Murray (1) Daniel Jones (6) Dwayne Haskins (15)
2018 Baker Mayfield (1) Sam Darnold (3) Josh Allen (7) Josh Rosen (10) Lamar Jackson (32)
2007 Mitchell Trubisky (2) Patrick Mahomes (10) Deshaun Watson (12)
2016 Jared Goff (1) Carson Wentz (2) Paxton Lynch (26)
2014 Blake Bortles (3) Johnny Manziel (22) Teddy Bridgewater (32)
2012 Andrew Luck (1) Robert Griffin III (2) Ryan Tannehill (8) Brandon Wheedon (22)
2011 Cam Newton (1) Jake Locker (8) Blaine Gabbert (10) Christian Ponder (12)
2009 Matthew Stafford (1) Mark Snachez (5) Josh Freeman (17)
2006 Vince Young (3) Matt Leinart (10) Jay Cutler (11)
2005 Alex Smith (1) Aaron Rodgers (24) Jason Campbell (25)
2004 Eli Manning (1) Philip Rivers (4) Ben Roethlisberger (12) JP Losman (22)
2003 Carson Palmer (1) Byron Leftwich (7) Kyle Boller (19) Rex Grossman (22)
2002 David Carr (1) Joey Harrington (3) Patrick Ramsey (32)
1999 Tim Couch (1) Donovan McNabb (2) Akili Smith (3) Daunte Culpepper (11) Case McNown (12)
1987 Vinny Testaverde (1) Kelly Stoufer (7) Chris Miller (13) Jim Harbaugh (26)
1983 John Elway (1) Todd Blackledge (7) Jim Kelly (14) Tony Eason (15) Ken O'Brien (24) Dan Marino (27)
1979 Jack Thompson (3) Phil Simms (7) Steve Fuller (23)
1971 Jim Plunkett (1) Archie Manning (2) Dan Pastorini (3)
1967 Steve Spurrier (3) Bob Griese (4) Don Horn (25)


I will have to ponder how things turned out and what we might be able to learn from this info. For starters, the last few years have seen a lot more QBs going in the first round than ever before. Certainly the list is cluttered with a fair share of busts. Part of me wants to say that getting the 5th drafted player at any position with your first draft pick seems like a bad bet, but that is hard to conclude without more research.

As discussed in other threads, is it any wonder that a lot of the early QB picks didn't work out because they went to poor teams with poor coaches? It stands to reason that stronger teams with a winning culture and good coaching would be a better landing spot than a team that has been a train wreck for years.

My bigger question is whether teams this year should be looking to snag one of the Big 4-5 QBs very early. I tend to think probably not as there is still a high percentage of QBs that won't work out (maybe even bust). I also am curious why there are so many guys projected to go so early. Is the Class of 2022 considered lackluster without many good options? I get that team's need a stalwart franchise QB now more than ever, but does that automatically mean grab one at all cost (or even over pay to move up to draft one)?

One thing I forgot to mention is even in years with an early run on QBs, on occasion there are other guys drafted later that turned out to be worthy and productive picks. For example, in recent drafts . . .

2016 - Dak Prescott (Pick 135 - QB8)
2014 - Derek Carr (Pick 36 - QB4)
2012 - Russell Wilson (Pick 75 - QB6), Kirk Cousins (Pick 102 - QB8)
2011 - Andy Dalton (Pick 35 - QB5)
 

I think we're seeing an increase in QBs taken earlier because the passing game has become that much more important as the NFL strives to make the rules more pass friendly.  If you don't have a good QB you're automatically at a disadvantage.  And yeah there are guys that end up being successful after the first round,  but that list is very small. So IMO,  yes I think teams have to do what they can to get that QB. Maybe not "at all cost" but pretty close.  

Jail said:

I think we're seeing an increase in QBs taken earlier because the passing game has become that much more important as the NFL strives to make the rules more pass friendly.  If you don't have a good QB you're automatically at a disadvantage.  And yeah there are guys that end up being successful after the first round,  but that list is very small. So IMO,  yes I think teams have to do what they can to get that QB. Maybe not "at all cost" but pretty close.  

Click to expand...

This is the way I see it.  Yes there are a lot of QB busts taken in the first round, even high in the first but when they hit the payoff is so huge that it's worth it to take the chance when you have it.   A Mahomes or Watson can change the fortunes of a franchise for a decade.  Yeah, it's possible that you could get a Brady or Dak or Wilson in later rounds but that is so rare and the hit percentage after round 2 is so miniscule that it's almost not worth talking about.

Marauder said:

This is the way I see it.  Yes there are a lot of QB busts taken in the first round, even high in the first but when they hit the payoff is so huge that it's worth it to take the chance when you have it.   A Mahomes or Watson can change the fortunes of a franchise for a decade.  Yeah, it's possible that you could get a Brady or Dak or Wilson in later rounds but that is so rare and the hit percentage after round 2 is so miniscule that it's almost not worth talking about.

Click to expand...

Certainly things could change by opening day (and will), but 10 of the 32 teams have starting QBs that weren’t first round draft picks. Plenty of others have first round picks they DIDN’T draft. So sure, having a productive QB is more important than ever. As I posted last week, none of the first round drafted QBs from 2009-2016 are still with their original teams. How to find one that is productive is the big question. 

Anarchy99 said:

Certainly things could change by opening day (and will), but 10 of the 32 teams have starting QBs that weren’t first round draft picks. Plenty of others have first round picks they DIDN’T draft. So sure, having a productive QB is more important than ever. As I posted last week, none of the first round drafted QBs from 2009-2016 are still with their original teams. How to find one that is productive is the big question. 

Click to expand...

It's not just a binary Productive/Non-Productive thing.   There's a difference between finding a productive QB and a game changer.  There was a bad stretch during your cherry picked time period where there were no game changing QB's except Andrew Luck who retired early and possibly Cam Newton but I don't read much into that.

The biggest issue is the landing spot...if the QB goes to a subpar organization/Coach it usually does not end well...that is the most important common denominator.

Jail said:

I think we're seeing an increase in QBs taken earlier because the passing game has become that much more important as the NFL strives to make the rules more pass friendly.  If you don't have a good QB you're automatically at a disadvantage.  And yeah there are guys that end up being successful after the first round,  but that list is very small. So IMO,  yes I think teams have to do what they can to get that QB. Maybe not "at all cost" but pretty close.  

Click to expand...

This, and I also don't ever remember as much talk about the pressure to get a team to a SB while the QB is on his rookie contract like you hear now so often. Overall I just don't think QB's are given time to develop before they are expected to be quality starters. If you can't lead us deep into the playoffs on your rookie deal... we'll just spin the wheel again.

So much depends on where these rookies land. After watching Mohomes in the SB crumble behind a bad OL.... BUT having all-world weapons and one of the best offensive coaches in the game it kind of snaps into perspective how difficult it must be for a guy like Darnold that has to overcome and OL, overcome all his offensive "weapons", overcome sub-par coaching, and lastly a culture inside the building that has been headed in the wrong direction since he was in elementary school. 

Boston said:

The biggest issue is the landing spot...if the QB goes to a subpar organization/Coach it usually does not end well...that is the most important common denominator.

Click to expand...

And so many guys just get trapped in a regime change, since so many teams drafting QB so early are caught in a cycle of firing/hiring coaches. If the people in charge didn't make the decision to bring you in than they certainly aren't going to give you much time to sink or swim.

The #1 pick is virtually never a bust at qb. There are plenty of other first round busts. Any qb needy team should go for it. I feel like we’ve had this same conversation several times. 

Marauder said:

This is the way I see it.  Yes there are a lot of QB busts taken in the first round, even high in the first but when they hit the payoff is so huge that it's worth it to take the chance when you have it.   A Mahomes or Watson can change the fortunes of a franchise for a decade. 

Click to expand...

Agree with this, but I think the cost of missing on an early pick is overlooked. A team can go into a tank for 2-3 seasons before it calls it quits on a bad QB draft and then they're back to square one, so the real cost could easily be 3-6 seasons to get to the right QB and that's assuming they ever get there. But like you said, when you have the opportunity, what owner could ever pass on the opportunity right?

Side note and interesting stats:

Since 2000 there have been 60 QB's taken in the first round and 29 of them, just about half, were by 9 teams-Redskins, Browns, Bills, Jags, Titans, Jets, Broncos, Ravens, and Cards. The notable QB's in this group of 29 are Baker Mayfield, Josh Allen, Lamar Jackson, and Kyler Murray. Joe Flacco gets a honorable mention, but outside of these five it's a who's who of one hit wonders.

On the other extreme, only 7 teams took one QB in the first round and 4 of them have been to or won the Superbowl-Eagles (Wentz), Colts (Luck), Panthers (Cam), Raiders (Russell), Niners (Smith), Steelers (Big Ben), Chiefs (Mahomes). 2 of these QB's took their teams to the Superbowl (Wentz/Foles, Smith/Kaepernick), Cam lost in one, Big Ben won twice.

Seems to be NFL scouts are just really bad at this.

The biggest problem is that the worst run teams keep getting the earliest picks. Of course most of them won't work out.

IHEARTFF said:

The #1 pick is virtually never a bust at qb.

Click to expand...

JaMarcus Russell, Tim Couch, David Carr, Jameis Winston, Sam Bradford, Jeff George, Baker Mayfield, Vinny Testeverde, Jared Goff, there's actually several pretty bad ones. 

I dont know if this QB class is all that or not. Only time will tell. I do know there are many QB being talked about as 1st round picks, and I am not talking about recently but going back to last year this QB class was being talked about as comparable to the historic 1983 draft.

I have no idea about the 2022 QB prospects. There is no foreshadowing I am aware of about them like there has been for this group.

I think its a good point about how the NFL is changing to more of a passing game pushing the value of QBs up even more and similarly the decline in investment at the RB position (the offensive alternative that does not require a QB as much). You can see this in the player salaries how the league prioritizes and values the players.

So even if there are as many QBs selected in the 1st round as in 1983 I think the market has some influence on that and its not solely on the merit of the quality of QB prospects.

I was listening to Arif Hasan the other day (he is from North Dakota) and he jokes that Trey Lance is a safety playing QB but he might be a 1st round pick. FWIW he hated Carson Wentz too.

When they restructured rookie deals so that guys like Sam Bradford no longer got mega lucrative contracts coming right out of college and it was all slated, just makes it all the easier for teams with top 5-10 picks to grab a QB, they don't hit financial ruin the same way as in decades past. 

I think the trend of late is grab a QB early or often since they can be had at relatively good deals vs established QBs and you can use the difference to build up other positions and make a Super Bowl run going back to Russel Wilson in the early 2010s. 

Ministry of Pain said:

JaMarcus Russell, Tim Couch, David Carr, Jameis Winston, Sam Bradford, Jeff George, Baker Mayfield, Vinny Testeverde, Jared Goff, there's actually several pretty bad ones. 

Click to expand...

I would not count Jameis or Baker or Goff as busts, so hasn’t really been total busts in the last 30 years besides Jamarcus Russell and Tim Couch. 2007 class was absolute dog crap at qb and 1999 was an lol browns for not picking Mcnabb or Culpepper. 

Anarchy99 said:

Certainly things could change by opening day (and will), but 10 of the 32 teams have starting QBs that weren’t first round draft picks. Plenty of others have first round picks they DIDN’T draft. So sure, having a productive QB is more important than ever. As I posted last week, none of the first round drafted QBs from 2009-2016 are still with their original teams. How to find one that is productive is the big question. 

Click to expand...

Ministry of Pain said:

When they restructured rookie deals so that guys like Sam Bradford no longer got mega lucrative contracts coming right out of college and it was all slated, just makes it all the easier for teams with top 5-10 picks to grab a QB, they don't hit financial ruin the same way as in decades past. 

I think the trend of late is grab a QB early or often since they can be had at relatively good deals vs established QBs and you can use the difference to build up other positions and make a Super Bowl run going back to Russel Wilson in the early 2010s. 

Click to expand...

Boston said:

The biggest issue is the landing spot...if the QB goes to a subpar organization/Coach it usually does not end well...that is the most important common denominator.

Click to expand...

The Ring NFL show went through all of the 1st round QBs since 2011 a week or 2 ago.  That was when the CBA last had a major change (including the rookie scale reduction).  A few of the key takeaways of the overall landscape echo these points:

-Getting a QB to be successful requires a lot more than just the player himself.  The system, scheme, flexibility of coaches, supports, etc. are all super important. 

-A possible reason that a lot of QBs did not work out from 2009-2016 is that the college game was undergoing so a major shift at that time with spread offenses and many NFL teams did not respond by trying to incorporate what made the QBs really good.  They tried to force square pegs into round holes.  In the past few years, teams have embraced these concepts a lot more and you are seeing more successes.

-Because of the low cost now to pick a first-round QB and the outsize advantage that you can gain from having a good one, teams are starting to get a little more open to moving on more quickly.  This adaptability will also be important going forward.  Josh Rosen/Kyler Murray is the biggest example.

Long Ball Larry said:

-A possible reason that a lot of QBs did not work out from 2009-2016 is that the college game was undergoing so a major shift at that time with spread offenses and many NFL teams did not respond by trying to incorporate what made the QBs really good.  They tried to force square pegs into round holes.  In the past few years, teams have embraced these concepts a lot more and you are seeing more successes.

Click to expand...

further to this point, from 2017-2020, you had 15 QBs drafted in the first-round.

Of those, you have 4 that already look like franchise guys: Lamar, Mahomes, Allen, Watson

Then you have 3 where I think that you can see the definite possibility of that: Murray, Burrow, Herbert

You have at least one cromulent QB in Mayfield and another who probably at least has that chance in Tua.

I think that the jury is still out on Daniel Jones, but trending in the wrong direction.

Then there are the busts in Haskins, Rosen, Mitch and Darnold.  Haskins seems to just lack the character/maturity.  Mitch lacks the game awareness.  Rosen, I really have no clue.  Darnold there is probably still a case to be made that he is a victim of circumstance, but I think that's less likely.

Among the first 10 I listed, all but Herbert and Watson and maybe Tua had organizations and schemers who really really really got in synch with the QBs talents and tried to do everything they could to make them succeed on the field.  I feel like Jones may be a victim of bad circumstance, but also does have some Trubisky vibes to him.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

From 2009-2016, you had 17 selected.

Newton, Stafford and Luck had franchise-level seasons at different times.

Bortles and Griffin ended up being busts for different reasons, but both showed some pretty good play when they were really put in the right situation.  Tannehill looked like a bust until Arthur Smith figured out how to unlock him.  Wentz and Goff have been up and down, but they were good when at their best and when their teams were really in synch with them.

Bridgewater and Sanchez have been serviceable for decent stretches of time.

Manziel was a little bit like Haskins and maybe if he had the right attitude and played with Stefanski, he could have at least done something like that.

Locker retired early and it is unclear to me whether he actually could have thrived or not without the injuries.

Josh Freeman had his moments, but generally seemed without the maturity.

Lynch, Weedon, Ponder, and Gabbert were all pretty much busts (though Gabbert is modeling his life after Charlie Whitehurst and Chase Daniel, so not too shabby)

Ministry of Pain said:

Baker Mayfield

Click to expand...

 

I feel this class will be very good for fantasy.  In particular superflex leagues.

What the heck happened between 1987 and 1999?

zed2283 said:

What the heck happened between 1987 and 1999?

Click to expand...

88-No QBs taken until the 3rd Round I beleive

89-Troy Aikman-Hall of Fame

90-Jeff George-great arm and nothing else

91-Brett Favre went early 2nd Rd, Hall of Fame but a couple other duds were taken prior in the 1st

And Draft History yo can just keep going thru it. Interesting period you picked. 

All the QBs this year jumped out to me and passed the eyeball test immediately. I was a pretty big proponent of Mayfield when he came out (I didn't think he'd be #1 overall though) but to me Lawrence, Lance, Wilson, and Fields all look like better prospects than him... And that 2018 class has been one of the better ones.

chinawildman said:

I was a pretty big proponent of Mayfield when he came out (I didn't think he'd be #1 overall though) but to me Lawrence, Lance, Wilson, and Fields all look like better prospects than him... 

Click to expand...

Not one of them, imo, looks better than him coming out of college, in any regard. 

Honestly, I dont dislike Lawrence, but I think he might be one of the most overrated college "god given #1s" in quite a while. But he's the ONLY one of that group Id give a chance at proving your point.

The other's aren't remotely close.

I absolutely think this years QB crop in the draft is showing signs of a classic bubble. I did the same analysis just using first round picks in the last decade and it looks like about a coinflip as to whether you end up with a viable longterm starter (granted jury is still out on several of them). Not an elite starter, mind you, just a guy that can viably start.

I think what happened is a long draught of young QBs that looked like potential successors to the Brady/Brees/Rodgers hierarchy. There was a ton of talk about how replacements werent developing for those HOFers as they aged. Then we had the Mahomes-Watson revelation and teams got fired up to get one of those caliber guys. Now they are overpaying for a lottery ticket. Which is not entirely irrationality given how profoundly a guy like that can change your franchise.

That being said it seems to me the odds of the 5th or 6th QB in a draft class being a franchise QB are long. Those were 2nd round picks even two or three years ago, to burn a top 15 seems crazy to me. The trade value of that draft pick is like an additional (late) first round pick plus. IE- at least another starting caliber player. So are you willing to sacrifice two starters for a coin flip at QB?  Too rich for my blood.

I think top 4 QB's in this class would be viewed as potential 1.1's in other drafts and all deserve to be viewed as such.

menobrown said:

I think top 4 QB's in this class would be viewed as potential 1.1's in other drafts and all deserve to be viewed as such.

Click to expand...

You might be right, but if so this draft is off the charts unprecedented. Like,  statistically almost impossible. 

To open things up beyond just the first round, it has been difficult to find more than two decent QB in any draft. In the past 50 drafts, only 9 of them had 3 drafted quarterbacks that went on to throw for 20,000 career passing yards. One would think that given that passing is more prevalent now more than ever, there should be several guys from recent drafts to get up to that mark in a few years. Here is the road map on how many QB went on to hit 10,000 and 20,000 career passing yards from the same draft class.

10,000 20,000
2018 1 0
2017 3 0
2016 3 0
2015 2 0
2014 3 1 Derek Carr
2013 0 0
2012 5 4 Russell Wilson Kirk Cousins Ryan Tannehill Andrew Luck
2011 3 2 Andy Dalton Cam Newton
2010 1 0
2009 3 1 Matthew Stafford
2008 3 2 Matt Ryan Joe Flacco
2007 0 0
2006 1 1 Jay Cutler
2005 7 3 Aaron Rodgers Alex Smith Ryan Fitzpatrick
2004 4 4 Philip Rivers Ben Roethlisberger Eli Manning Matt Schaub
2003 3 1 Carson Palmer
2002 4 0
2001 2 2 Drew Brees Michael Vick
2000 3 2 Tom Brady Marc Bulger
1999 4 3 Donovan McNabb Daunte Culpepper Aaron Brooks
1998 4 2 Peyton Manning Matt Hasselbeck
1997 1 1 Jake Plummer
1996 1 0
1995 3 2 Kerry Collins Steve McNair
1994 2 2 Gus Frerotte Trent Dilfer
1993 5 3 Drew Bledsoe Mark Brunell Trent Green
1992 2 2 Brad Johnson Jeff Blake
1991 1 1 Brett Favre
1990 3 2 Jeff George Neil O'Donnell
1989 3 1 Troy Aikman
1988 2 1 Chris Chandler
1987 6 4 Vinny Testaverde Rich Gannon Jim Harbaugh Steve Beuerlein
1986 4 1 Jim Everett
1985 3 1 Randall Cunningham
1984 3 2 Boomer Esiason Jay Schroeder
1983 5 4 Dan Marino John Elway Jim Kelly Ken O'Brien
1982 1 0
1981 2 1 Neil Lomax
1980 3 0
1979 2 2 Joe Montana Phil Simms
1978 2 0
1977 3 2 Steve DeBerg Tommy Kramer
1976 1 1 Richard Todd
1975 2 2 Steve Grogan Steve Bartkowski
1974 1 1 Danny White
1973 4 3 Dan Fouts Joe Ferguson Ron Jaworski
1972 1 1 Brain Sipe
1971 6 5 Ken Anderson Jim Plunkett Joe Theismann Archie Manning Lynn Dickey
1970 2 1 Terry Bradshaw


 That won't change the prospect ratings and expectations from this year's draft crop of rookie QBs. Maybe they will be a generational draft class and maybe there are multiple guys that would be the #1 overall pick in most drafts. We won't know for probably 5 years.

The other thing to is, how many of these young QBs go to organizations that are ready to make the step up to well-run, professional club that puts a team around him, gives him some coaching consistency, puts a line in front of him, etc.  

Deciding on a dynasty pick for these QBs, I think it might pay off to really look at the front office.  I don't care who the Jets take, I'm not taking that guy before whoever the 49ers take.  Drafting a rookie QB, you are also drafting the club brain trust, and that's an easy call.  

BoltBacker said:

This, and I also don't ever remember as much talk about the pressure to get a team to a SB while the QB is on his rookie contract like you hear now so often. Overall I just don't think QB's are given time to develop before they are expected to be quality starters. If you can't lead us deep into the playoffs on your rookie deal... we'll just spin the wheel again.

Click to expand...

Agreed.  Teams have to make a call after a QB’s rookie contract expires, and even mediocre QBs can get pretty sizable 2nd (or more) contracts given where the market is. If a team doesn’t want to pony up for that next contract because the QB hasn’t lived up to expectations, they may just go the rookie route to see if they can find their long-term guy. And if they don’t in the next 3-4 years, it’s rinse and repeat. That has a big effect in how teams value QBs early in the draft.

Fields and Lance go #1 in no draft ever. 

Even Wilson a bit unlikely, but perhaps. 

Some simple statistics: if it's just a random draw, then you'd expect there to be 3+ "once per year" caliber QB prospects in the same class once every 12 years.
37% of the time you get zero
37% of the time you get one
18% of the time you get two
6% of the time you get three
2% of the time you get four or more

You'd expect there to be 5+ "two per year" caliber QB prospects in the same class once every 19 years.
13.5% of the time you get zero
27.1% of the time you get one
27.1% of the time you get two
18.1% of the time you get three
9.0% of the time you get four
3.6% of the time you get five
1.6% of the time you get six or more

You'd expect there to be 5+ "three per year" caliber QB prospects in the same class once every 5 years.

Combination of a couple factors.Strong QB class that fits the traits of modern football. Also a dip in available QBs as legends like Brees, Rivers, Cam, Ben age out and the stars pegged to replace them have faltered (Wentz, Goff, Winston, Mariota, Trubisky, Haskins). Also teams realize the value of hitting that QB. Yes there is chance you get Josh Rosen but getting a Watson, Herbert, Kyler, Stafford, Luck type completely changes the entire outlook of a franchise for a decade. All players are risks and there is no such thing as a sure thing at any position so if you are going to miss, you should miss looking for the home run, not a ground ball. 

The top three are going to be stellar, in my humble opinion. Lawrence, Wilson and Lance. 
 

Debate after that. I’m thinking Fields and Jones are fifty fifty. I also like Mills. But his percentages live on his left knee. But, if you watch him... you’d see a lot of Manning in his game. 

Blackbear said:

The top three are going to be stellar, in my humble opinion. Lawrence, Wilson and Lance. 
 

Debate after that. I’m thinking Fields and Jones are fifty fifty. I also like Mills. But his percentages live on his left knee. But, if you watch him... you’d see a lot of Manning in his game. 

Click to expand...

I am always leery of one year wonders. Wilson was good for one season after being pretty average for two. Lance was good for a year against lesser competition, is very young, and sat for a year (mostly). Jones played with an NFL caliber team for a season against under matched college kids and was rarely pressured. So IMO, Lawrence and Fields are the ones most likely to succeed, but admittedly that is not scientific. COVID made for a ton of challenges this year (which probably hurt defenses in terms of scheming and practicing).

Add into the mix what others have been saying (potentially going to poor teams with potentially not stellar or proven coaches) and these guys may have to play early and often (and may not win much). Things don't always turn out that way but they do frequently enough that we have to worry about it. For example, the NFL will be a whole new experience for Urban Meyer, and recent direct to NFL without any prior NFL experience hires haven't fared great in the past 20 or so years. IIRC, Jim Harbaugh was the only one that did well. The Jets are the Jets (sorry New York fans), so you have to wonder if they can make huge improvements quickly. IMO, the guy Shanahan gets probably has a leg up on getting developed properly (and we don't know who the other teams will be to take a QB just yet).

Anarchy99 said:

I am always leery of one year wonders. Wilson was good for one season after being pretty average for two. Lance was good for a year against lesser competition, is very young, and sat for a year (mostly). Jones played with an NFL caliber team for a season against under matched college kids and was rarely pressured. So IMO, Lawrence and Fields are the ones most likely to succeed, but admittedly that is not scientific. COVID made for a ton of challenges this year (which probably hurt defenses in terms of scheming and practicing).

Add into the mix what others have been saying (potentially going to poor teams with potentially not stellar or proven coaches) and these guys may have to play early and often (and may not win much). Things don't always turn out that way but they do frequently enough that we have to worry about it. For example, the NFL will be a whole new experience for Urban Meyer, and recent direct to NFL without any prior NFL experience hires haven't fared great in the past 20 or so years. IIRC, Jim Harbaugh was the only one that did well. The Jets are the Jets (sorry New York fans), so you have to wonder if they can make huge improvements quickly. IMO, the guy Shanahan gets probably has a leg up on getting developed properly (and we don't know who the other teams will be to take a QB just yet).

Click to expand...

Love this post. But now we are combining fantasy vs real football. This is a fantasy sort of post. Right? 

A real football post means you take your shot at getting the guy you want. If not works out after three years(Darnold for example) then you make new plans. 

Trey Lance will be a hall of famer. 

As will o line Sewell. 

Lance #1. Wilson #2. 
 

Drop off after that. 

Soulfly3 said:

Not one of them, imo, looks better than him coming out of college, in any regard. 

Honestly, I dont dislike Lawrence, but I think he might be one of the most overrated college "god given #1s" in quite a while. But he's the ONLY one of that group Id give a chance at proving your point.

The other's aren't remotely close.

Click to expand...

My problem with Lawrence, actually I have a couple.  

- He's been on a loaded team for four years that has overmatched 90% of its rivals.  This also applies to Bama and Ohio St QBs.  He's made a lot of plays, but its easier vs worn down defenses up three scores.

- He's got very high expectations to succeed with a first-time NFL coach, very dicey.

Personally if I'm drafting a QB, its Wilson.  

I did some more research on drafting QBs (at least back to 2000). Ignoring actual round and draft position, here were how things shaped up based on the order QBs were drafted. In English, if the second QB came off the board at pick #2 or #102, that player was still the second QB taken in that draft class. I picked a random data point of a CareerAV score of 50 as a basis for comparison (which really is not that high a threshold). Here were the results.

QB1
- 10 of 21 had a CareerAV of 50+.
- 5 of those scored 100+ (Newton, Stafford, Ryan, Eli, Palmer).
- 3 of 21 had a CareerAV of <25 (one was from 2020 and has not played enough to score higher).
- The average CareerAV was 61.

QB2
- 5 of 21 had a CareerAV of 50+.
- 3 of those scored 100+ (Rodgers, Rivers, Brees).
- 10 of 21 had a CareerAV of <25 (the last three drafted second haven't played enough to score higher).
- The average CareerAV was 45.

QB3
- 4 of 21 had a CareerAV of 50+.
- 1 of those scored 100+ (Roethlisberger).
- 13 of 21 had a CareerAV of <25 (the past two have not played enough to score higher).
- The average CareerAV was 30.

QB4
- 1 of 21 had a CareerAV of 50+.
- None scored 100+
- 18 of 21 had a CareerAV of <25.
- The average CareerAV was 13.

QB5
- 4 of 21 had a CareerAV of 50+.
- None scored 100+.
- 15 of 21 had a CareerAV of <25.
- The average CareerAV was 21.

QB 6
- 1 of 21 had a CareerAV of 50+
- 1 scored 100+ (Wilson)
- 19 of 21 had a CareerAV of <25.
- The average CareerAV was 12. 

QB7 or later
- 4 of 134 had a CareerAV of 50+.
- 1 scored 100+ (Brady)
- The average CareerAV was 6.
- 126 of 134 had a CareerAV of <25.
- 77 of 134 had a CareerAV of 0.
- The average Career AV for players not named Tom Brady was 4.

Other tidbits . . .

- The most QBs taken in a single draft in that time was 17 in 2004 and the fewest was 7 in 2015.
- The drafts with the highest total combined CareerAV from QB were 2004 (500), 2005 (498), and 2012 (432).
- Ignoring the last 5 drafts, the drafts with the lowest CareerAV from QB were 2013 (47), 2007 (67), and 2010 (78).
- Drafts with 3 QB with CareerAV of 50+: 2012 (4), 2004 (4), 2005 (3), 2000 (3).

None of that wowed me about the prospects of the 2021 QB Draft Class. Maybe this is the draft class to end all draft classes for QBs . . . or maybe there are just a bunch of desperate teams in need of a QB that they collectively will go way earlier than they would in other years.

Soulfly3 said:

Not one of them, imo, looks better than him coming out of college, in any regard. 

Honestly, I dont dislike Lawrence, but I think he might be one of the most overrated college "god given #1s" in quite a while. But he's the ONLY one of that group Id give a chance at proving your point.

The other's aren't remotely close.

Click to expand...

I like Mayfield... and I think his is delusional. Can you detail what exactly it is you think makes Mayfield a better prospect coming out of college compared to Lawrence or Lance? Or are you just a Browns fan...

chinawildman said:

I like Mayfield... and I think his is delusional. Can you detail what exactly it is you think makes Mayfield a better prospect coming out of college compared to Lawrence or Lance? Or are you just a Browns fan...

Click to expand...

if you are legitimately putting lance in the same sentence and baker coming out of college, this debate will go absolutely nowhere. 

Soulfly3 said:

if you are legitimately putting lance in the same sentence and baker coming out of college, this debate will go absolutely nowhere. 

Click to expand...

Thanks for that detailed analysis. The "I can't even..." argument is an oldie but a goodie...

chinawildman said:

Thanks for that detailed analysis. The "I can't even..." argument is an oldie but a goodie...

Click to expand...

I'm at work. But I can tell you that even after work I wouldn't respond w ANY anaylsis thay compares Baker and Lance. 

Why don't YOU tell me how Lance compares to Heisman and #1 pick Baker Mayfield our of college?

Not that Mel Kiper is the end all of draft analysts, but in his coverage of drafts since 1979, here were his highest rated QBs in that time . . .

1. John Elway, Stanford (1983 - Pick #1)
2. Andrew Luck, Stanford (2012 - Pick #1)
3. Peyton Manning, Tennessee (1998 - Pick #1)
4. Trevor Lawrence, QB, Clemson (2021 - Presumptive Pick #1)
5. Jim Kelly, Miami (1983 - Pick #14)
6. Andre Ware, Houston (1990 - Pick #7)
7. Drew Bledsoe, Washington State (1993 - Pick #1)
8. Ryan Leaf, Washington State (1998 - Pick #2)
9. Troy Aikman, UCLA (1989 - Pick #1)
10. Josh Allen, Wyoming (2018 - Pick #7)

Honorable Mentions:
Vinny Testaverde, Miami (1987 - Pick #1)
Boomer Esiason, Maryland (1988 - Pick #38)
Steve Young, BYU (1984 - Pick #1 supplemental draft)
Bernie Kosar, Miami (1985 - Pick #1 supplemental draft)
Tim Couch, Kentucky (1999 - Pick #1)

Soulfly3 said:

I'm at work. But I can tell you that even after work I wouldn't respond w ANY anaylsis thay compares Baker and Lance. 

Why don't YOU tell me how Lance compares to Heisman and #1 pick Baker Mayfield our of college?

Click to expand...

Easy. Lance right now at 20yrs of age is bigger, faster, better homerun threat as a runner, has a stronger arm, is more mechanically polished than draftee Mayfield. Mayfield was undersized, had poor footwork, just an above average arm, abandoned the pocket early, and while scrappy, wasn't "feared" as a runner. From a pure physical traits perspective, it's not a good comp for Mayfield... but who knows maybe all that matters for you are intangibles.

I think a big part of the issue here is that the definition of a "hit" at QB is in many ways harder to accomplish then at other positions. For one, there's only ONE starter on a given team, and we (collectively) count as a miss anyone who can't consistently crack the top 20 at least....and that's only if you're on the more generous side of the "hit" definition. Contrast that to any other position: A WR that is consistently finishing among the top 40 producers would be considered a hit, even if they never really cracked the top 20 (in which case we'd say they were disappointing...but not a "miss".)

The reasons for this are obvious. The WR can still be a key contributor to a championship run. A QB playing as the 25th best precludes that run (most of the time, at least in today's NFL). 

I guess my point here is that a guy like say...Trubisky...it's probably not reasonable to call him a miss when you really think it through. He certainly doesn't look like a guy that's gonna lead any team to the promised land and the Bears certainly need an upgrade if they wanna win a championship....but he's better then almost every backup in the NFL. He's (arguably) among the top 35 or so period. Call that a miss if you want to, but understand that it then warps (in an unfair way) your perception of when/where/how often they should be drafted.

This topic had me revisiting what the Packers did last year. Everyone thought it was an awful move to trade up for Jordan Love when they had Rodgers and could have used that pick to boost the offense even more with skill position players (in particular wr). BUT, Rodgers is in his late 30s...and they must have really liked the potential that Love has. You see the importance of having a good quarterback...it is a necessity in today’s game. They saw an opportunity to get a a guy with upside at the leagues most important position. It cost them a 4th rounder and their first (30th) to move up to 26 to select Love. I now look at what teams are paying for a chance to grab a QB and think maybe GB made the right move. Now I am not saying Love will be great (who knows), but if GB thinks that highly of him and it only costs an extra 4th to move up and get him...maybe they are smarter than I thought.