Finding a Franchise QB

[JoeKing]

I love when people contradict themselves, but think they won an argument.

So you love yourself... congratulations. Now get back to that drawing board Junior, and come up with a point that makes sense. AND MAKE ME A SANDWICH!!

 

[Galian Beast]

Don't you dare accuse anyone else of that when it is you who either ignores or fails to understands the facts that directly refute the weak case you're faking to make. Pot meet kettle.



And as the facts clearly show, the bust percentages are significantly higher after the first round.



If the chance for success is highest, the risk is lower, not higher. But you'll somehow try to spin this fact? Yeah, clear as mud...

Wow, I'm really starting to think you have an issue.


Let's say you have two tickets to win a new car.


Ticket A has a 50 percent chance of winning a new car. This ticket cost 10,000 dollars.

Ticket B has a 5 percent chance of winning a new car. This ticket cost 100 dollars.

Ticket A has a much larger chance right? But if you don't hit, you're out of 10,000 dollars...

Ticket B only had a 5 percent change, but the 100 dollars isn't going to break you.

Hopefully that helped you to understand some pretty common sense stuff.

 

[Stash]

Wow, I'm really starting to think you have an issue.


Let's say you have two tickets to win a new car.


Ticket A has a 50 percent chance of winning a new car. This ticket cost 10,000 dollars.

Ticket B has a 5 percent chance of winning a new car. This ticket cost 100 dollars.

Ticket A has a much larger chance right? But if you don't hit, you're out of 10,000 dollars...

Ticket B only had a 5 percent change, but the 100 dollars isn't going to break you.

Hopefully that helped you to understand some pretty common sense stuff.

If that's the way you're trying to spin this thing, it's clear that it is you that has the issue.

And why nobody here is buying what you're trying to sell.

 

[jnday]

What is so funny is that I'm not against taking the QB IF THE GRADE IS THERE. But I'm not of the WE MUST TAKE A QB NO MATTER WHAT CAMP.

I don't think there are many fans that wants to reach for a QB. It would be stupid to pass on a QB if the scouts have him rated as a top five prospect though . This draft has little elite talent at the top and I can see a situation where a couple of these QBs are rated in the top five. If true, they need to draft one.

 

[Galian Beast]

If that's the way you're trying to spin this thing, it's clear that it is you that has the issue.

And why nobody here is buying what you're trying to sell.

Yup, sounds like you can't acknowledge the difference between risk and probability. Just because something is more probable doesn't mean it isn't riskier. Stunned that you can't grasp the difference.

 

[Stash]

Yup, sounds like you can't acknowledge the difference between risk and probability. Just because something is more probable doesn't mean it isn't riskier. Stunned that you can't grasp the difference.

Stunned that you simply won't admit you're wrong and don't know hat you're talking about. Despite everybody telling you.

Ignorance truly is bliss I guess...

 

[starfrombirth]

The past is the best predictor of the future.

No one thinks that Goff or Wentz is a Luck caliber quarterback. The NFL is littered with overrated QBs who were drafted in the first round, simply because teams value the QB position. Happens consistently.

Blake Bortles


That's just the list since Romo came into the league...

Not sure what you're trying to say with this one. Bortles has been pretty damn good with a really bad team.

 

[Stash]

Not sure what you're trying to say with this one. Bortles has been pretty damn good with a really bad team.

Every single thing he's grasped at in this entire thread has been wrong. And rather than realize that and admit defeat, he'll continue to try in vain to move the goal posts to continue to argue a failed point.

 

[Stash]

I don't think there are many fans that wants to reach for a QB. It would be stupid to pass on a QB if the scouts have him rated as a top five prospect though . This draft has little elite talent at the top and I can see a situation where a couple of these QBs are rated in the top five. If true, they need to draft one.

Every quarterback has some level of question marks about them coming out of college, even great ones like Brady, Peyton Manning, and Aaron Rodgers. One need only go back and look to see that.

There are two consensus top 10 quarterbacks. If Dallas can get one, they should get one. Unless people want to make the case that the Dallas decision makers are right and everyone else is wrong, but history certainly doesn't bear that out.

 

[starfrombirth]

14. Brad Johnson - 9th round draft pick Just No - Johnson not reason they won anything.

Actually... yes he was. If you believe this little fantasy then you weren't watching Tampa that year. Yes they had a great defense but they also had a top 5 offense which they didn't have under Dungy.

 

[Galian Beast]

Stunned that you simply won't admit you're wrong and don't know hat you're talking about. Despite everybody telling you.

Ignorance truly is bliss I guess...

Ignorance must be bliss if you think probability alone equals risk.

 

[Stash]

Ignorance must be bliss if you think probability alone equals risk.

 

[KJJ]

A lot of luck involved in finding a franchise QB just look at Romo an undrafted free agent who became a franchise QB. A majority of the top rated college QBs never become franchise QBs and many go bust. Drafting a QB is the ultimate crapshoot in the NFL because it's so difficult to gage how a college QBs game will translate to the NFL. This is why you don't take a QB in the top 10 unless you're desperate for a QB. If you don't have a solid QB it's worth the shot but for a team like the Cowboys who have a franchise QB who may have 4 years left it's not worth the gamble to use a top 5 pick on a QB. There could be a QB in this upcoming draft taken later the first round or in the second who might become a great QB. Some of the greatest QBs to ever play the game were drafted after the top 10. Go back and review previous drafts over the years and see where some of the great QBs like Dan Fouts, Joe Montana and Dan Marino were taken.

Many QBs were taken ahead of some of the great NFL QBs because it's so difficult to evaluate QBs coming out of college. Tom Brady going in the 6th round points to how difficult it is to evaluate a college QB. Unless you have a Troy Aikman, John Elway, Peyton Manning or an Andrew Luck that everyone appears sold on I'm not taking a QB in the top 10 unless I'm DESPERATE for a QB. Look at all the first round picks Cleveland has wasted on QBs over the years. They took Tim Couch with the #1 overall pick....BUST! They took Brandon Weeden and Manziel in the first round in just the past 5 seasons and both flamed out. Washington gave up the farm for RG3 at #2 overall in 2012 and may have found their franchise QB in the 4th round of that same draft. That shows just how difficult it is to evaluate college QBs. It's far too big a gamble to take a QB in the top 10 unless you have no choice. The list of top 10 QB casualties is a LONG one.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

Yup, sounds like you can't acknowledge the difference between risk and probability. Just because something is more probable doesn't mean it isn't riskier. Stunned that you can't grasp the difference.

The risk is the same no matter what, because no matter what we have the 4th pick (unless we trade down), so yes, taking a QB at #4 and missing will hurt more than if we take a QB in the 4th round and miss, but if we miss on a CB, DE or RB at #4, it's going to hurt just as much.

 

[Nightman]

The risk is the same no matter what, because no matter what we have the 4th pick (unless we trade down), so yes, taking a QB at #4 and missing will hurt more than if we take a QB in the 4th round and miss, but if we miss on a CB, DE or RB at #4, it's going to hurt just as much.

The difference is we can sign those positions in FA. Good QBs rarely hit the market.

 

[Galian Beast]

The risk is the same no matter what, because no matter what we have the 4th pick (unless we trade down), so yes, taking a QB at #4 and missing will hurt more than if we take a QB in the 4th round and miss, but if we miss on a CB, DE or RB at #4, it's going to hurt just as much.

Another poster who does not know what risk means.

The risk is the same if you draft a quarterback at 4 than taking them in the 4th round.

I'm actually starting to get pissed.

Does logic not work for you?

Two Scenarios again, please try telling me that they are equally risky.


Scenario 1 - You press a button. There is a 50 percent chance that you die after pressing the button, but also a 50 percent chance of winning 10 billion dollars.

Scenario 2 - You press a button. There is a 1 percent chance that you die pressing the button, and there is 5 percent chance of winning 10 billion dollars.

Which scenario is riskier? Are they equally risky? If you think that, you should go back to school.

 

[Galian Beast]

http://www.differencebetween.info/difference-between-risk-and-probability

To help you guys out here.

 

[jnday]

How many years did it set this franchise back not having the quarterback when Aikman retired?

I have forgot the exact number of years, but they are about to do an instant replay of those years and I will do a better job of keeping up with it.

 

[jnday]

Another poster who does not know what risk means.

The risk is the same if you draft a quarterback at 4 than taking them in the 4th round.

I'm actually starting to get pissed.

Does logic not work for you?

Two Scenarios again, please try telling me that they are equally risky.


Scenario 1 - You press a button. There is a 50 percent chance that you die after pressing the button, but also a 50 percent chance of winning 10 billion dollars.

Scenario 2 - You press a button. There is a 1 percent chance that you die pressing the button, and there is 5 percent chance of winning 10 billion dollars.

Which scenario is riskier? Are they equally risky? If you think that, you should go back to school.

Will the risk of picking the wrong QB be any worse than the when Mo turned out to be a bust?

 

[Galian Beast]

Will the risk of picking the wrong QB be any worse than the when Mo turned out to be a bust?

I'm finding that more and more people do not understand the difference between probability and risk. I guess it is the same problem when people don't know the difference between correlation and causality, but I digress.

Yes. The risk is inherently different. There are a lot more factors at stake when draft almost any position other than quarterback, which is primarily why failed QBs get coaches fired.

You spend a significant amount of time building a team around a QB, whereas you do not do the same around a cornerback.

The scenario is even worse when you have said qb sitting on the bench for a time.