Long-term question: Would you take a QB in the first round?

[RainMan]

Bored here, and this whole QB philosophy has been on my mind a while. So I'm curious ...

Think ahead three or four years -- OK, if we're lucky, 10 -- to when we need to start thinking about grooming a replacement for Romo. Given the way today's NFL is, with the pressure to play guys immediately and the huge bucks handed out, would you want a quarterback in the first round?

It seems like you can count the success stories on one hand. Manning, McNabb, Palmer....the list gets pretty thin afterward.

You just see so many guys thrown out there right away, only to fail. When do you think front offices start to view 1st-round QBs differently, almost like a stock, since they are a long-term investment, instead of some quick fix, thus sitting them for a while? Or not drafting them high altogether?

I think the only way I'd want a guy in the first round at this stage is if we could get an Aaron Rodgers situation while Romo is still here. Get a first-round talent, stuff him on the bench for three years, and let him get out there when Romo's done. And if we went the lower-round route, I think my approach would be similar -- stuff a guy with potential on the bench, let him learn one system for a few years, and then give him a shot.

Granted, every situation is different, but by and large, it seems like starting young QBs right away is high-risk, low-reward these days.

 

[dre1614]

maybe in 4 or 5 years

 

[BigDFan5]

IMO you do not use a first on a QB unless you can use him by the 3rd year. Since romo will still be here and going strong (knock on wood) It would be a bad road to go.

I am not however opposed to spending a 3rd or later on a QB to groom

 

[Maikeru-sama]

IMO you do not use a first on a QB unless you can use him by the 3rd year. Since romo will still be here and going strong (knock on wood) It would be a bad road to go.

I am not however opposed to spending a 3rd or later on a QB to groom

+1

However, I am not sure what I would do if one fell to us, but that is very unlikely given the fact that we should be very good for the next 2-4 years.

 

[Biggems]

why do that when we can get Colt in the 3rd or 4th....

 

[JackMagist]

+1

However, I am not sure what I would do if one fell to us, but that is very unlikely given the fact that we should be very good for the next 2-4 years.

I think we would do like we did when Brady Quinn fell to us and trade the pick to someone looking for a QB. At this point I don't think you go looking for a 1st round QB but I'd go for one in the mid rounds (3, 4 or 5) if a good prospect with some upside came along. And I'd keep bringing in UDFA's each year and maybe find another Matt Moore to groom (and not cut his butt this time).

 

[landryscorner]

It used to be popular to pick qb's in the first round, heck even in the first pick of the first round, but as we've seen thats not always so smart, I think its a dying trend, hell most of the best qb's in the league now, and it's a short list, weren't even drafted in the first round at all, more than ever Qb's are like diamonds in the rough, you gotta have a good eye for talent and be lucky, payton made an incredible choice on ROMO we are truly lucky

 

[Nors]

I have a better idea - draft a QB every year rounds 3-7 and see what sticks. Especially with Romo in his prime and UDFA.

Pioli jokes about being called a genius for taking Brady in 6 but retorts, but I passed on him 5 times - LOL

 

[CF74]

Bored here, and this whole QB philosophy has been on my mind a while. So I'm curious ...

Think ahead three or four years -- OK, if we're lucky, 10 -- to when we need to start thinking about grooming a replacement for Romo. Given the way today's NFL is, with the pressure to play guys immediately and the huge bucks handed out, would you want a quarterback in the first round?

It seems like you can count the success stories on one hand. Manning, McNabb, Palmer....the list gets pretty thin afterward.

You just see so many guys thrown out there right away, only to fail. When do you think front offices start to view 1st-round QBs differently, almost like a stock, since they are a long-term investment, instead of some quick fix, thus sitting them for a while? Or not drafting them high altogether?

I think the only way I'd want a guy in the first round at this stage is if we could get an Aaron Rodgers situation while Romo is still here. Get a first-round talent, stuff him on the bench for three years, and let him get out there when Romo's done. And if we went the lower-round route, I think my approach would be similar -- stuff a guy with potential on the bench, let him learn one system for a few years, and then give him a shot.

Granted, every situation is different, but by and large, it seems like starting young QBs right away is high-risk, low-reward these days.

Aikman was a 1st rounder..

I'd say 3-4 years from now you draft a QB, then he sits 2-3 years before he starts. Doesn't have to be a 1st rounder but if it's there you take it..

 

[BuckyG]

Bored here, and this whole QB philosophy has been on my mind a while. So I'm curious ...

Think ahead three or four years -- OK, if we're lucky, 10 -- to when we need to start thinking about grooming a replacement for Romo. Given the way today's NFL is, with the pressure to play guys immediately and the huge bucks handed out, would you want a quarterback in the first round?

It seems like you can count the success stories on one hand. Manning, McNabb, Palmer....the list gets pretty thin afterward.

You just see so many guys thrown out there right away, only to fail. When do you think front offices start to view 1st-round QBs differently, almost like a stock, since they are a long-term investment, instead of some quick fix, thus sitting them for a while? Or not drafting them high altogether?

I think the only way I'd want a guy in the first round at this stage is if we could get an Aaron Rodgers situation while Romo is still here. Get a first-round talent, stuff him on the bench for three years, and let him get out there when Romo's done. And if we went the lower-round route, I think my approach would be similar -- stuff a guy with potential on the bench, let him learn one system for a few years, and then give him a shot.

Granted, every situation is different, but by and large, it seems like starting young QBs right away is high-risk, low-reward these days.

Romo's a young 28 and just coming into his prime. Barring major injury or his productivity falling off the table, I don't the Cowboys need to think about his replacement for five or six years.

 

[The30YardSlant]

why do that when we can get Colt in the 3rd or 4th....

Colt McCoy won't last 5 minutes in the NFL. He is frail

 

[RainMan]

Romo's a young 28 and just coming into his prime. Barring major injury or his productivity falling off the table, I don't the Cowboys need to think about his replacement for five or six years.

Yeah, I don't think I was clear enough in my initial post.

My question was basically that in three or four years, when we're probably going to be in the market to start grooming a guy (so he'd be ready two or three years later), what route would you go?

Or heck, if you were in charge of some craptastic franchise right now, would you want to go the high 1st-round-pick route?

 

[Meat-O-Rama]

As GM of the Cowboys with a late first round pick I would not hesitate to take a QB if he was BPA. I think Rodgers in Green Bay has shown that having a QB sit and learn from one of the greatest is a sound way to develop a QB. Heck Romo sat and learned from some of the not so greatest, and he turned out to be pretty OK.

 

[Aikbach]

My alma mater Baylor has this freshmen kid named Robert Griffin that has made them competitive the same way Young used to be a one man show at Texas.

I'm not saying Baylor's a threat to go after a BCS bowl but with this quarterback they could make Big 12 games interesting.

Wouldn't be surprised to hear his name in Heisman chatter in a year or two.

 

[Idgit]

I'd take one in round 1 or 2 and sit him at least two years. I'd back fill the second year with a lower round prospect with intangibles to keep the pressure on, and I'd be comfortable giving that young QB a second contract after only a year or two of starting if he developed properly. It's too valuable a position to mess with, and I think where people get in trouble is in starting players who aren't ready. It's a rare college player who's ready or can get ready during his rookie season.

 

[ZeroClub]

Since Aikman, how many 1st round QBs have the Cowboys had on their roster?

Bledsoe and Ryan Leaf make two.

In what rounds were Bolinger and Johnson drafted?

Just curious.

 

[stealth]

Tony isn't all that young. He has 5 years left on amazing. That's being generous. If a guy like cutler is around then sure, I would take him, otherwise just sign JAGs and hope they pan out to be something better.

 

[ajk23az]

Since Aikman, how many 1st round QBs have the Cowboys had on their roster?

Bledsoe and Ryan Leaf make two.

In what rounds were Bolinger and Johnson drafted?

Just curious.

Brad Johnson 9th

Brooks Bollinger 6th

 

[McCordsville Cowboy]

Tony isn't all that young. He has 5 years left on amazing. That's being generous. If a guy like cutler is around then sure, I would take him, otherwise just sign JAGs and hope they pan out to be something better.

Agreed....

Id take a first or trade up in second to get a QB in the 2010/2011 draft..

Romo isnt young and a suitable replacement should be sought then.

When McFlubb is ready to retire/traded/released, the Eagles will have Kolb ready and we should follow suit.

 

[Aikbach]

Tony isn't all that young. He has 5 years left on amazing. That's being generous. If a guy like cutler is around then sure, I would take him, otherwise just sign JAGs and hope they pan out to be something better.

He's 28 for pete's sake, Favre is still at it at 39 and playing like he pretty much always has.

Montana led a mediocre team to the AFC Championship at 38 and won his last SB at 34.

Warren Moon was a pro bowler until he was 40.

Roger Staubach played until he was 38 and played in his last SB at 37.

John Elway retired after back to back SBs at age 38.

A part from concussions Steve Young was still formidable at 37.

Each QB is a case by case study and though I don't disagree with preparing for the future there is good reason to believe that Tony will steward two generations of Dallas Cowboys.