Myles Jack...

[Enlightened32]

The number one is mistake in building a team is having 21 Myles Jacks surrounded by bad QB play. Dont count on "one read" Bob or hungover Johnny to save you. At some point in time you have bite the bullet and draft and develop a QB. No time like the present.

There will be QBs in the 2nd round. What is your obsession with taking a QB at 4? There is NO QB with the talent to warrant that selection. If you draft a QB in the top 5 he better be a franchise QB. There is no sure fire QB in this draft. None. Why waste a top 5 pick gambling on a 2nd round talent?

 

[bodi]

There will be QBs in the 2nd round. What is your obsession with taking a QB at 4? There is NO QB with the talent to warrant that selection. If you draft a QB in the top 5 he better be a franchise QB. There is no sure fire QB in this draft. None. Why waste a top 5 pick gambling on a 2nd round talent?

well please enlighten us as to when we should draft a QB ?

what year ?

and Troy was a sure thing yea right ?

oh when Romo gets hurt again an we have another 4 - 12 season

great logic

 

[bodi]

Hackenberg ? or lower

so we wait another 20 years with 8-8 seasons - great

an draft only 2 round pickis at QB

what is your definition of a QB worthy of a top pick ?

 

[AzorAhai]

There will be QBs in the 2nd round. What is your obsession with taking a QB at 4? There is NO QB with the talent to warrant that selection. If you draft a QB in the top 5 he better be a franchise QB. There is no sure fire QB in this draft. None. Why waste a top 5 pick gambling on a 2nd round talent?

You keep saying that, but scouts and draftniks alike all disagree with you. These QBs aren't some 2nd Rd prospect being elevated because they are QBs. People are grading them as top 5-10 talents most places because thats what they are, not because they're QBs.

If your answer to the QB of the future is waiting on a surefire QB you better be prepared to wait years for that player and pray you're fortunate enough to have a 2-14 team that year or you aren't getting him. All of these can't miss QBs are nearly as rare as unicorns. True once a decade type players. If your answer is to draft one later and develop them, you should be equally prepared to wait years and probably longer. Maybe you luck into the next Brady, but the history is heavily stacked on the draft one early side.

 

[Wood]

Is the only name I want to hear with the 4th pick.

I am souring on Miles Jack #4. I have major injury concerns for him. I don't see projection at MLB so we have to see him purely at OLB. If you watch tape on him he just throws his body around. I think your looking at Sean Lee type situation. When they play you dream of possibilities but being slightly under-sized and have wrecking ball approach their bodies just don't hold up. Lets Giants take risk on him at #10.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Name one person that would be a better pick.

No matter who someone would name it will make no difference to you as your mind is already set at Jack and nobody else...so why would someone try to waste the time to give their point of view if your mind is already set in stone?

With that point out of the way...I like Myles and think he will be an excellent player but I am not going into the draft with the mindset that it has to be my guy or the highway. I think there are a number of good players we could take at the 4 spot that can help this team in the now and or the future.

 

[cds99]

Backup qb's need to be put in a position to win. Ours weren't last year. We went through 3 with the same results, and at least 1 of them had proven to be at least a competent NFL QB before he got here.

And I'm not condoning what the guy you quoted said. Unlike most people here I know my YouTube scouting isn't enough to determine if any of these guys are franchise qb's or not. If the coaches and scouts agree that there is a franchise QB available when we pick at 4 we have to take him. But otherwise there is no need to panic about a backup QB...ever.

I agree not to push the issue on a certain position. However to say we should draft a lb, a lb, that is just nuts. Especially when your qb is not going to make it the years he says or thinks. You hope to be picking this high one every ten years and it's proven you need a qb desperately. I would rather to have a bosa or ramsey or a wr but for the future, it is a no brainer you take a qb to groom. Just my opinion though, everybody has them you know.

 

[stilltheguru88]

I still think he should be a SS lol. Ends all of the injury/1 tech stuff.

 

[BAT]

I dont honestly see this coaching staff developing anyone, particularly two guys with tons of baggage. Any developing would have to be mostly done by Romo, and I see a rookie more receptive to that than the two washouts.

That's kind of a cop out answer. If coaching staff can not develop BETTER talent than how do you expect them to develop lesser talent with even less NFL experience? And both RG3 and Manziel have praised Romo. Let's not underestimate Romo.

 

[texbumthelife]

Hence my entire point!

Never let the real argument get in the way of a more fun one!

 

[tm1119]

I agree not to push the issue on a certain position. However to say we should draft a lb, a lb, that is just nuts. Especially when your qb is not going to make it the years he says or thinks. You hope to be picking this high one every ten years and it's proven you need a qb desperately. I would rather to have a bosa or ramsey or a wr but for the future, it is a no brainer you take a qb to groom. Just my opinion though, everybody has them you know.

So if the are the GM and your scouting department is telling you that the only QB in this draft that was worth a high pick went #2 to the Browns you are still taking 1 of the other QB's anyway?

 

[Enlightened32]

I think you all are missing my point.

Dallas could take a QB in the first round. However, in order to get true value out of that pick they should trade down.

In any scenario where Dallas stays put QB can not be the pick. It would be a wasted top 5 pick.

There is only 1 QB (possibly 2) being mocked in the top 5 as of now. So how are there QBs in this draft grading out in the top 5? Literally the only QBs I would be happy with at #4 would be Lynch or Wentz and both are projects.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Value is where team has the players ranked.

If they believe one, two or all three QBs are good value at the four spot...they can take them.

They do not grade the players due to who has mock drafts or big boards on espn, waltersfootball or fanspeak or other sites that cover draft prospects.

 

[Enlightened32]

Value is where team has the players ranked.

If they believe one, two or all three QBs are good value at the four spot...they can take them.

They do not grade the players due to who has mock drafts or big boards on espn, waltersfootball or fanspeak or other sites that cover draft prospects.

Wentz has the highest ceiling of any QB in this draft. If Dallas takes him at #4 Ill have faith seeing as they are coaching him in the Senior Bowl.

Now, let me ask you something, if you needed a QB for the future, you were picking early in the draft, but your choices were Mark Sanchez and a defensive gem, who do you take?

 

[cds99]

So if the are the GM and your scouting department is telling you that the only QB in this draft that was worth a high pick went #2 to the Browns you are still taking 1 of the other QB's anyway?

Good question. However I find it hard to to evaluate the qb position as does everyone else. Look at rodgers, brady ,wilson. I think goff will be gone with the 2. I think we need wentz or lynch but I don't know if I push the issue if my dept thinks they will be busts. If me and my scouting dept is so certain that one of those has a real chance about being a franchise guy, I trade to the number one no questions asked. However these guys aren't andrew luck so I'm glad I am a spectator. I want a guy to sit for a couple years. Surely to God this team can groom a good qb, look at romo he was an udfa. Surely we can turn a 1st round pick into a good one. Who knows though

 

[stilltheguru88]

Is Wentz really that much better than Hackenberg? Im not a qb expert.

 

[texbumthelife]

You keep saying that, but scouts and draftniks alike all disagree with you. These QBs aren't some 2nd Rd prospect being elevated because they are QBs. People are grading them as top 5-10 talents most places because thats what they are, not because they're QBs.

If your answer to the QB of the future is waiting on a surefire QB you better be prepared to wait years for that player and pray you're fortunate enough to have a 2-14 team that year or you aren't getting him. All of these can't miss QBs are nearly as rare as unicorns. True once a decade type players. If your answer is to draft one later and develop them, you should be equally prepared to wait years and probably longer. Maybe you luck into the next Brady, but the history is heavily stacked on the draft one early side.

I have actually read several places where scouts have bluntly said that the QB's in this draft will go higher than they should because it's such a weak QB class. I don't think there is a top-5 guy in the bunch. They all have very significant question marks and none of them are anywhere near NFL ready. I get the argument to select one and let him sit and learn, don't get me wrong.

 

[AzorAhai]

I have actually read several places where scouts have bluntly said that the QB's in this draft will go higher than they should because it's such a weak QB class. I don't think there is a top-5 guy in the bunch. They all have very significant question marks and none of them are anywhere near NFL ready. I get the argument to select one and let him sit and learn, don't get me wrong.

Its all based on the individual scout/draftniks grades. I've heard more rank Goff and Lynch top 10 than those that don't though. Those are boards I'm referencing, not mocks btw. I don't think this class of QBs are the Ponder/Locker types who were legitimate 2nd Rd grades who ended up going early 1st. Cook would probably be a good comparison to what that poster was referring to. If he was the best QB in this class, maybe he would be way over drafted and I would want no part of him. To me Goff, Lynch and maybe Wentz are slightly lesser prospects than Winston and Mariotta were last year, but worth a high pick. All personal preference I suppose.

 

[AzorAhai]

So if the are the GM and your scouting department is telling you that the only QB in this draft that was worth a high pick went #2 to the Browns you are still taking 1 of the other QB's anyway?

You have to trust your scouts. If they tell you the other QBs aren't that good, you pass. If you can't/wont trust your scouts then theres no need in having them.

 

[texbumthelife]

Its all based on the individual scout/draftniks grades. I've heard more rank Goff and Lynch top 10 than those that don't though. Those are boards I'm referencing, not mocks btw. I don't think this class of QBs are the Ponder/Locker types who were legitimate 2nd Rd grades who ended up going early 1st. Cook would probably be a good comparison to what that poster was referring to. If he was the best QB in this class, maybe he would be way over drafted and I would want no part of him. To me Goff, Lynch and maybe Wentz are slightly lesser prospects than Winston and Mariotta were last year, but worth a high pick. All personal preference I suppose.

Goff is the only QB I see worthy of a first round grade, honestly.

Lynch and Wentz are only slightly lesser prospects than Winston and Mariotta? You've got to be kidding me? That serious hyperbole. They had significantly stronger tape against significantly stronger talent than either Wentz or Lynch has faced.

What I see is, when I am trying to project a QB based largely on his physical tools, as opposed to his actual play and film, they aren't worth a high pick. The only one who has the stats, tape and close proximity to physical tools, is Goff. Wentz is a physical beast but he played seriously inferior talent and has only played a season and a half at the college level. Lynch played better competition than Wentz, but we're still talking about a lot of middling defenses. Even at that, he was erratic and often didn't play his best in big games.

The way I look at it is this: Anytime you have the chance to grab a QB you think can be a future franchise player you do it. No matter the state of your team. However, I don't think if Romo hadn't gotten hurt this year, and we still managed a top-5 pick, anyone would even be humoring the idea of selecting Wentz or Lynch this high. It's still a knee-jerk reaction to Romo's situation. It's not proper talent evaluation.

If the talent evaluators think they have a shot at a guy at four who is truly a franchise QB, then I trust them to pull the trigger. I just hope they're not locked in on it simply because of what happened this year.