If anyone wants to see a perfect example of a straw man argument, check out this post. You more or less argue against drafting a QB because of the risk associated with the position and the risk with the top two players at that position. I provide evidence that shows the risk is at least similar among other positions, and instead of responding to that, you decide to change your argument to something that has nothing to do with what I said.
As far as your new argument goes, we should not out weigh immediate production versus long term production. Shawne Merriman out produced DWare as a rookie and I'm pretty sure, most of us are fine with how their careers turned out. Aarron Rogers sat for 3 years, and I'm pretty sure the Packers do not wish they took someone else.
Neither of us know how any of these prospects will turn out in the long term, Goff/Wentz could be the next Ryan Leaf, just like Ramsey could be the next Morris Claiborne and Bosa could be the next Dion Jordon. And no one is claiming a QB should be picked no matter what, just it would be foolish to pass on a guy who the scouts say has franchise potential due to the silly reasoning that Romo will play 4-5 more years. If the scouts say Wentz and Goff are JAG prospects and Bosa will be a 10+ sack guy, obviously we take him. But there is literally no scenario where you pass on Goff/Wentz if your scouts are telling you they have franchise QB potential, without regretting it later.
