News: Ranking every NFL quarterback drafted in first round since 2000

[Sydla]

Yeah, not exactly. It's hard AND the team doesn't need one right now, so the added value, especially at the salary you have to pay the #4 pick is ZERO. Future value, which is weighted far less than current value is risky.

Yes they do.

So we've gone from kick the can down the road syndrome to bury your head in the sand syndrome.

 

[Zimmy Lives]

Well obviously you don't pick any player that you don't like or think can develop into a good player for you.

But not drafting a QB at 4 because they bust too much even if you think Wentz and/or Goff have franchise potential would be moronic.

Beyond moronic. It would be incomprehensible, irresponsible, unimaginable, shortsighted, ignorant, and just plain stupid.

 

[Doomsday101]

One thing I see is many of these young QB come out a year too early when they should have stayed in college, they are then drafted by teams that are very poor and void of much talent then the QB is thrown out there expected to carry the load. To me this is a setup for failure. This is also why I feel the time is now for Dallas, we would not be in a situation where we would ask a rookie to carry the team, he would have time to get a better understanding of the NFL game. He would be able to fully grasp the offense, having a better understanding of complex defense and of course the overall speed of the game.

 

[Stash]

One thing I see is many of these young QB come out a year too early when they should have stayed in college, they are then drafted by teams that are very poor and void of much talent then the QB is thrown out there expected to carry the load. To me this is a setup for failure. This is also why I feel the time is now for Dallas, we would not be in a situation where we would ask a rookie to carry the team, he would have time to get a better understanding of the NFL game. He would be able to fully grasp the offense, having a better understanding of complex defense and of course the overall speed of the game.

While we have often disagreed on some subjects, I am in complete agreement with you here. I see things exactly the same way that you do. We are in the perfect position to set this team up for the future at quarterback and would be foolish to pass up the opportunity.

 

[Doomsday101]

While we have often disagreed on some subjects, I am in complete agreement with you here. I see things exactly the same way that you do. We are in the perfect position to set this team up for the future at quarterback and would be foolish to pass up the opportunity.

I know it is still no guarantee but I think the odds would be a lot greater for success by taking this approach. I know some look at this as giving up on the here and now as well as giving up on Romo. For me that is not the case, I think we can compete and win with Romo in the lineup now but clock is ticking and the franchise must be prepared for life after Romo

 

[Stash]

I know it is still no guarantee but I think the odds would be a lot greater for success by taking this approach.

And extensive research and numbers show that to be true. Quarterback scan and do bust, but your odds of getting one are significantly better the earlier you draft one. So you give yourself the very best chance to fill the most difficult, most coveted position in sports rather than leaving things to chance.

I know some look at this as giving up on the here and now as well as giving up on Romo. For me that is not the case, I think we can compete and win with Romo in the lineup now but clock is ticking and the franchise must be prepared for life after Romo

If that's the case, they should be mad at what the team didn't do in free agency, not what they do in the draft. To do little in free agency and then expect instant impact and 'win now' from the draft is foolish and anyone who thinks that way deserves the bad results they'll get. This team added three 1st round talents in last year's draft, how'd the 'instant impact' and 'win now' look from three of them? Asking that question usually shuts the less-informed right up.

 

[DogFace]

Well obviously you don't pick any player that you don't like or think can develop into a good player for you.

But not drafting a QB at 4 because they bust too much even if you think Wentz and/or Goff have franchise potential would be moronic.

I don't think they have franchise potential. It's not just their bust potential. It's the amount of money and time invested in a player who would possibly, or likely, not contribute for a few years combined with the bust factor and the lack of a consensus on how good they really are. This ls part of how I've come to my opinion on these players.

I'm sure many believe because Tony was hurt last year it means it's likely he'll get hurt this year. If that's true would either of these players lead us very far this year? Rookie QBs don't often do that well.

Ill take Ramsey or Elliot. I think they're the smart pick for this team. In 3 years if Wentz is all pro I'll admit I was wrong. If Romo goes down again we'll likely get another high pick and maybe a more consensus top QB will be there. These guys all have too many flaws.

 

[FaSho]

Newman was decent.

He got so much crap from our fans, but this dude went like 2 years without allowing a touchdown (iirc)

He was nearly a shutdown CB who was excellent for us. I used to love watching him battle with (and lock down) Steve Smith.

 

[Sydla]

I don't think they have franchise potential. It's not just their bust potential. It's the amount of money and time invested in a player who would possibly, or likely, not contribute for a few years combined with the bust factor.

I'm sure many believe because Tony was hurt last year it means it's likely he'll get hurt this year. If that's true would either of these players lead us very far this year? Rookie QBs don't often do that well.

Ill take Ramsey or Elliot. I think they're the smart pick for this team. In 3 years if Wentz is all pro I'll admit I was wrong. If Romo goes down again we'll likely get another high pick and maybe a more consensus top QB will be there. These guys all have too many flaws.

Taking Wentz at 4 really has nothing to do with next year. It has to do with the fact that 2 or 3 years from now, Romo could be done in the NFL and at that point, if they were smart and took a QB at 4 that they believed is a franchise QB, then they potentially have a relatively seamless transition to the next decade of their franchise.

Ignore the QB spot and then Romo gets hurt in 2-3 years, then you are drafting a QB in that following draft and then watching that kid spend 2-3 years figuring out how to play in the NFL.

I'd rather take the QB now, let him learn and go from there. Worst case scenario is if Wentz or Goff bust out and Romo gets hurt, you can then take another QB after he gets hurt, which is what you suggest doing anyway.

If the Cowboys scouts and front office think one of these guys is a potential franchise QB and he's sitting there at 4, it's a no brainer.

 

[Stash]

I don't think they have franchise potential. It's not just their bust potential. It's the amount of money and time invested in a player who would possibly, or likely, not contribute for a few years combined with the bust factor.

While all those involved in the draft process disagree with you. Both Goff and Wentz are consensus top 10 draft picks.

I'm sure many believe because Tony was hurt last year it means it's likely he'll get hurt this year. If that's true would either of these players lead us very far this year? Rookie QBs don't often do that well.

And it's all about "this year" is it? The lack of vision in that statement is apparent.

Ill take Ramsey or Elliot. I think they're the smart pick for this team. In 3 years if Wentz is all pro I'll admit I was wrong. If Romo goes down again we'll likely get another high pick and maybe a more consensus top QB will be there. These guys all have too many flaws.

And what if Romo doesn't "go down", or if he "goes down" for a few games rather than the entire season? What if it's just enough to get us to 8-8 again?

I don't mean to insult you if comes out that way, but your statements show me a clear short-sighted point of view.

 

[DogFace]

Taking Wentz at 4 really has nothing to do with next year. It has to do with the fact that 2 or 3 years from now, Romo could be done in the NFL and at that point, if they were smart and took a QB at 4 that they believed is a franchise QB, then they potentially have a relatively seamless transition to the next decade of their franchise.

Ignore the QB spot and then Romo gets hurt in 2-3 years, then you are drafting a QB in that following draft and then watching that kid spend 2-3 years figuring out how to play in the NFL.

I'd rather take the QB now, let him learn and go from there. Worst case scenario is if Wentz or Goff bust out and Romo gets hurt, you can then take another QB after he gets hurt, which is what you suggest doing anyway.

If they're not that good they can learn all they want and it won't help. I'm not sold on them and all things considered I like Ramsey or Elliot or Jack.

 

[erod]

I think Wentz, Goff, and Lynch are going to be nothing more than Gabbert, Ponder, and Locker.

 

[Sydla]

If they're not that good they can learn all they want and it won't help. I'm not sold on them and all things considered I like Ramsey or Elliot or Jack.

Doesn't matter what you think. It only matters what the front office thinks. And if they believe in these kids but choose to go another route like a TB at 4 because they believe Romo is good for the next 2-4 years, then they are fools.

I have no idea if these guys are going to be any good. But the fact remains, there is a need for a long term option at QB right now and if the scouts and front office like one or both of these kids (or even Lynch and think they can get him by trading down a bit) and they have an opportunity to take one, they'd be complete and utter morons for passing.

If they don't like any of the QBs, then fine.

 

[DogFace]

While all those involved in the draft process disagree with you. Both Goff and Wentz are consensus top 10 draft picks.



And it's all about "this year" is it? The lack of vision in that statement is apparent.



And what if Romo doesn't "go down", or if he "goes down" for a few games rather than the entire season? What if it's just enough to get us to 8-8 again?

I don't mean to insult you if comes out that way, but your statements show me a clear short-sighted point of view.

I dont think they're that good. At first I was ready to draft one and let them learn. I'm not conviced they are top 10. I don't think the experts have them both as top 4 overall. I want a top 4 talent that can help this team.

My opinion, as I've stated in other threads, is we are a very strong team one year removed from one bad call keeping us from the nfc championship game. Without losing two top 5 players we would've been right back in the same spot. An impact player can push us over the top. A backup rookie QB can't.

Guess we'll see who's right. One thing is for sure. I won't complain or whine if The Cowboys choice turns out right or wrong.

 

[Sydla]

I dont think they're that good. At first I was ready to draft one and let them learn. I'm not conviced they are top 10. I don't think the experts have them both as top 4 overall. I want a top 4 talent that can help this team.

My opinion, as I've stated in other threads, is we are a very strong team one year removed from one bad call keeping us from the nfc championship game. Without losing two top 5 players we would've been right back in the same spot. An impact player can push us over the top. A backup rookie QB can't.

Guess we'll see who's right. One thing is for sure. I won't complain or whine if The Cowboys choice turns out right or wrong.

Quick question.

Let's say the scouts and the front office and coaches really like Wentz and think he has great potential. He's sitting there at 4 and the only discussion now is do they want an immediate player like a Ramsey or should they try to fix their QB spot for the next 10 years.

What should the front office do?

 

[DogFace]

Doesn't matter what you think. It only matters what the front office thinks. And if they believe in these kids but choose to go another route like a TB at 4 because they believe Romo is good for the next 2-4 years, then they are dumber than I could have ever imagined.

So now we're pretending to be in their heads? I'm just stating my opinion about what I want them to do.


You already know the reasoning on why or why not they may or may not pick someone?

 

[Sydla]

So now we're pretending to be in their heads? I'm just stating my opinion about what I want them to do.


You already know the reasoning on why or why not they may or may not pick someone?

No, I have no idea what they are thinking.

I am just saying that passing on a QB at 4 would be stupid if the front office does indeed think Wentz or Goff could be franchise QBs and they are rated high on their boards.

 

[Sydla]

If you want to know what I think they'll do, I think they'll pass on a QB even if they like him or trade down (which would be my second choice behind taking a QB) because the Jones' are fully inveswted in this notion that Romo is their QB for the next 3-4 years into his 40s.

But they'll throw a random mid to late round pick at a QB in the hopes they might get lucky and the kid turn into the next Brady or Russell Wilson.

 

[DogFace]

No, I have no idea what they are thinking.

I am just saying that passing on a QB at 4 would be stupid if the front office does indeed think Wentz or Goff could be franchise QBs and they are rated high on their boards.

So you're upset about how they come to a conclusion about a player they might or might not draft?

Maybe they won't tell you and you'll be fine.

 

[Stash]

I dont think they're that good. At first I was ready to draft one and let them learn. I'm not conviced they are top 10. I don't think the experts have them both as top 4 overall. I want a top 4 talent that can help this team.

Neither has to be top 4 to be worth it. Not when Sam Bradford makes $18 million a year. Goff shattered virtually every one of Aaron Rodgers' records over his three years at Cal. The guy checks off every box you look for in a quarterback. If you don't think he's "that good", you'll simply not think that anyone is, and by the time you like one more, you're not in position to get him anyway.

My opinion, as I've stated in other threads, is we are a very strong team one year removed from one bad call keeping us from the nfc championship game. Without losing two top 5 players we would've been right back in the same spot. An impact player can push us over the top. A backup rookie QB can't.

That same 12-4 team you're touting added three 1st round talents last year. Where was the "impact player" then? Two of the three were widely considered to be the best at their position. Where was the impact? If you didn't get it by adding three of them, how do you expect to find it by adding just one?

And why is it that the only place you can get an "impact player" is with the #4 overall pick? The logic is flawed.

Guess we'll see who's right. One thing is for sure. I won't complain or whine if The Cowboys choice turns out right or wrong.

So you'll just mindlessly go with the flow no matter how things turn out?