We've only drafted 3 QB's since 1991?

[Echo9]

I'll criticize the drafting as much as anyone, and yes, they should take more QBs, but I will offer a bit of defense for the team here.

First off, they had Aikman through most of the 90s. Second, both Chad Hutchinson and Drew Henson would have likely been highly drafted quarterbacks, so they should count in some regard.

But the Quincy Carter pick was just stupid, as was the Stephen McGee pick. McGee stunk in college and lost his job, and yet Jerry drafted him anyway.

The Packers have been brilliant at this. They draft good quarterbacks, then turn them into trades for high picks later.

Just during the Farve era, the Packers drafted Mark Brunell, Aaron Brooks, Matt Hasselback, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Flynn, Ty Detmer....and turned them into high draft picks, except for Rodgers obviously.

Right. So the Packers are one of maybe 2 teams out of 32 that have done this well.

Brunell: 5th rounder turned into a 3rd round and 5th round . Net 3rd rounder minus the cost of development and 2 years time.

Brooks: Initially a 4th rounder the Packers traded Aaron Brooks and TE Lamont Hall to Saints for 2001 third-round pick and LB K.D. Williams. Taking the other players out of it. It was a 4th for a 3rd two years later. Shouldn't that whole draft value chart where a 1st this year equals a 2nd in the following draft (and so on) be a factor at this point?

Hasslebeck: Initially a 6th rounder. Packers traded Matt Hasselbeck plus 2001 17th overall pick and seventh-round pick to Seahawks for 2001 10th overall pick and third-round pick. So that's a success there. They moved from the 7th to the 3rd and also moved up 7 spots in the 1st. Only 3 years of development put into him.

If I remember correctly, Both Ty Detmer and Matt Flynn were Free Agents, so they were a TOTAL waste for the Packers. They got nothing for them.


And THIS is the best case for this plan of action? Overall, fairly meager returns for all that work. Draft a QB when it seems like we'll need one in the next 2-3 years or when a high prospect drops significantly. Otherwise, its a failed plan (as shown by the majority of the teams that try this and fail)

 

[Doomsday101]

Not all of the QBs that the Packers have drafted were good in college. Flynn and Brooks had very similar college careers and production to McGee's.

Stephen McGee didn't lose his starting job in college. He got injured and had to be replaced. Big difference. The McGee pick wasn't stupid. The 4th round was a good spot to get a QB and McGee was the best available at that spot in that particular draft. Look at the other QBs drafted that year. Not a lot to choose from especially after the 1st round. It is a crap shoot.

Matthew Stafford
Mark Sanchez
Josh Freeman
Pat White
Stephen McGee
Rhett Bomar
Nate Davis
Tom Brandstater
Mike Teel
Keith Null
Curtis Painter

The Packers ability to turn average at best QBs into draft picks is more about their system and reputation rather than the player himself. If the Packers drafted McGee, they could have probably flipped him for a pick as well.

They look at 1 of 32 teams. You would think GB is setting the league on fire? NY Giants have won 2 SB compared to what GB has done and yet their last QB taken was the same year Dallas took McGee and that was Brett Bomar and ended up cutting him. They had Sage Rosenfield and then David Carr they brought in as FA same thing Dallas did when we picked up guys like Brad Johnson, Jon Kitna and just recently Kyle Orton. Most of the late rd QB do not pan out so taking a QB just to claim you did is about as ridicules as some of this whining going on.

Nothing wrong with taking a QB you feel that can develop taking one to make the claim you took one is foolish

 

[Echo9]

You do have a good point but i don't think you can wait for that point in time. Thinking your gonna hit that yr is a bad strategy what happens if hes a bust then you panic the next year and reach or dish out money to a free agent. Look at the Pats they had Bledsoe but picked Brady in latter rounds they didn't plan that or need a Qb for a while. Yes they got lucky with Brady but if they didn't Draft a QB until they needed one they would have missed out.

The key is to properly forecast out when you think your going to need your next QB. We CAN wait, but we can't wait TOO LONG. That's what we did with Aikman, although to be fair his career was cut a bit short with injury/concussions. We most certainly are risking the same thing right now with Romo. We NEED him to be around for at least 3 more years. With that in mind, we don't want to draft a QB too early because we'd lose him to FA before it's time to put him in. Personally, I'm not against the idea of drafting 2 QBs in one draft. As long as it's in 2015

 

[erod]

Right. So the Packers are one of maybe 2 teams out of 32 that have done this well.

Brunell: 5th rounder turned into a 3rd round and 5th round . Net 3rd rounder minus the cost of development and 2 years time.

Brooks: Initially a 4th rounder the Packers traded Aaron Brooks and TE Lamont Hall to Saints for 2001 third-round pick and LB K.D. Williams. Taking the other players out of it. It was a 4th for a 3rd two years later. Shouldn't that whole draft value chart where a 1st this year equals a 2nd in the following draft (and so on) be a factor at this point?

Hasslebeck: Initially a 6th rounder. Packers traded Matt Hasselbeck plus 2001 17th overall pick and seventh-round pick to Seahawks for 2001 10th overall pick and third-round pick. So that's a success there. They moved from the 7th to the 3rd and also moved up 7 spots in the 1st. Only 3 years of development put into him.

If I remember correctly, Both Ty Detmer and Matt Flynn were Free Agents, so they were a TOTAL waste for the Packers. They got nothing for them.


And THIS is the best case for this plan of action? Overall, fairly meager returns for all that work. Draft a QB when it seems like we'll need one in the next 2-3 years or when a high prospect drops significantly. Otherwise, its a failed plan (as shown by the majority of the teams that try this and fail)

You're not taking into account that each of these guys were quality backup quarterbacks during that time span and didn't require the salary cap hits that Dallas has spent on veterans. Flynn won important games. Of course, Farve never got hurt.

 

[Doomsay]

The mistake made by the Cowboys was failing to properly forecast when Aikman's tenure would end and preparing for that properly. That led to some very ugly years.

Well, Aikman was great for 9 years then started to break down from the beatings that he sustained. They didn't try in earnest to find a replacement for Troy until 3 years later..... after he retired. I don't think that it was any mystery that the team would eventually have to replace a QB in his 10th 11th or 12th season. Same holds true for Tony, it will be risky to wait until he's clearly done to even attempt to replace him, unless they have the foresight to brilliantly ride the thing into the ground (a la Indy) and snatch a top pick in the subsequent year. I'd be all for that, but there is no way in hell Jerry would ever have the courage and patience for such a tactic.

I agree with you that a team would probably favor retaining a compete vet over burning high value picks at certain points of their development (young franchise QB in hand, one or 2 players away from a SB run), but this seems to have been Jerry's philosophy in perpetuity, regardless of the team's future needs, because, just like the Giants, we are close to a being a 9-7 team capable of running the table in the playoffs every season.

 

[Doomsday101]

Well, Aikman was great for 9 years then started to break down from the beatings that he sustained. They didn't try in earnest to find a replacement for Troy until 3 years later..... after he retired. I don't think that it was any mystery that the team would eventually have to replace a QB in his 10th 11th or 12th season. Same holds true for Tony, it will be risky to wait until he's clearly done to even attempt to replace him, unless they have the foresight to brilliantly ride the thing into the ground (a la Indy) and snatch a top pick in the subsequent year. I'd be all for that, but there is no way in hell Jerry would ever have the courage and patience for such a tactic.

I agree with you that a team would probably favor retaining a compete vet over burning high value picks at certain points of their development (young franchise QB in hand, one or 2 players away from a SB run), but this seems to have been Jerry's philosophy in perpetuity, regardless of the team's future needs, because, just like the Giants, we are close to a being a 9-7 team capable of running the table in the playoffs every season.

That is true but at the time there was not rookie cap teams where paying big money for rookie QB many of them were bust yet the team was hammered by the selection. At that time Dallas was in cap hell that is why they took low risk low pay QB like Henson and Hutchinson because they came at little cost while others were paying big contracts on unproven rookies.

 

[respectdatstar]

You would think that with this approach we would have massive amounts of depth at every other position, then, right?

 

[Echo9]

You're not taking into account that each of these guys were quality backup quarterbacks during that time span and didn't require the salary cap hits that Dallas has spent on veterans. Flynn won important games. Of course, Farve never got hurt.

OK, that's a fair enough point in Flynn's case. But I still don't think it's necessarily a good plan all the time when you consider other factors.

Lets take a look at THIS year. We have Orton under contract. That decision has been made and it is written in stone. With that in mind, it would be a bad move to draft a backup this year because he'd be no higher that 3rd string. Orton is signed for 3 more years. If he stays for 2, then no one will see enough of our 3rd stringer to offer up anything in trade. If he shows enough to get a trade in year three, then there a small window before he becomes a FA in year 4. And thats ONLY if Orton leaves before his contract is up.

Now, what if we didn't sign Orton and instead drafted a QB last year. Looking at when QBs were taken around our picks, lets look at who we could have on our team. I don't think anyone would think we would have traded up in the 1st for tannehill, so leave that one out.

Brandon Weeden is the closest to our initial 1st rounder, but there's no way we'd do that. Brock Osweiler went to the Broncos. THere's no way we know how good he'll be while sitting behind Manning. We would have had to spend a 2nd or moved around to get Russell Wilson, but that DOES look to be a great pick by the Seahawks. Of course, Matt Flynn was certainly less accomplished than Romo. If the Hawks had Romo, who knows if the Hawks take Wilson. I'd bet on it being less likely.

The likely pick would have been Nick Foles or Kirk Cousins instead of Tyrone Crawford. The jury is still out on them. Both have potential to help their teams, but it's too early yet really. For Philly, it made sense with Vick nearing the end of his career. It was good year to take a mid-round QB. For Washington, well, who knows... it might just turn out to be a great move, but it sure was mocked by everyone at the time.

The next QB taken in last years draft was Ryan Lindley in the 6th, followed by Mr. Irrelevant - Chandler Harnish. Not too many QBs even get drafted.


I just believe that you need to take all factors into account when deciding to take a QB.
1) What's the status of the current QB. Ours is locked in for 3-5 years so it's too early to develop the next starter.
2) We have significant holes that could be filled in the 3rd/4th rounds instead.
3) We have our backup locked in for 2-3 years.

 

[Wood]

Stolen from the mother ship. I couldn't believe it when I read it. Just crazy!

1991- bill musgrave
2001- Quincy carter
2009- Stephen McGee.

its amazing really. I do believe Jerry somehow feels it will damage pysche of current QB if he takes too many QBs in draft. Once again...its Jerry taking different path and not working out.

 

[Echo9]

Well, Aikman was great for 9 years then started to break down from the beatings that he sustained. They didn't try in earnest to find a replacement for Troy until 3 years later..... after he retired. I don't think that it was any mystery that the team would eventually have to replace a QB in his 10th 11th or 12th season. Same holds true for Tony, it will be risky to wait until he's clearly done to even attempt to replace him, unless they have the foresight to brilliantly ride the thing into the ground (a la Indy) and snatch a top pick in the subsequent year. I'd be all for that, but there is no way in hell Jerry would ever have the courage and patience for such a tactic.

I agree with you that a team would probably favor retaining a compete vet over burning high value picks at certain points of their development (young franchise QB in hand, one or 2 players away from a SB run), but this seems to have been Jerry's philosophy in perpetuity, regardless of the team's future needs, because, just like the Giants, we are close to a being a 9-7 team capable of running the table in the playoffs every season.

Yes it will be risky to wait. But the fact that Tony didn't start for his first few years helps a little. The way his new contract is structured, he HAS to be our QB for 3-4 years if not more. I'm not saying wait 4 years then draft a QB. I'm saying to wait 2 years. This is not the year to go hunting for a new QB. And the fact that we haven't drafted QBs in the past is NO argument to go and draft one now.

As far as the Indy thing goes. I just shake my head at that. The luck involved (no pun intended) with the way that worked out was just wrong in a cosmic sense. If Manning hadn't suffered that injury, the Colts would not have been in postion to make that move.

 

[Doomsday101]

its amazing really. I do believe Jerry somehow feels it will damage pysche of current QB if he takes too many QBs in draft. Once again...its Jerry taking different path and not working out.

same path the Giants take where are all the QB they have drafted? Bomar? Andre Woodson? oh yeah both cut Giants did not get jack for them. I don't see where NY has been hurt after all they not only been to the SB 2 times they beat the Packers who got all those QB's. :laugh2:

Last time NY drafted a QB was in 09 same year the Cowboys drafted a QB.

 

[Wood]

Anybody can draft quarterbacks...Commanders prove that.

1990 Cary Conklin
1992 Chris Hakel
1994 Heath Shuler
1994 Gus Frerotte
2000 Todd Husak
2001 Sage Rosenfels
2003 Gibram Hamdan
2005 Jason Campbell
2007 Jordon Palmer
2008 Colt Brennan
2012 Robert Griffin III
2012 Kirk Cousins

It's drafting the RIGHT quarterback and having the coaching and players to help that QB develop that's important.

I think you prove the OP point. Kirk Cousins take last year probably already fetches the Commanders a good draft pick (higher than where he was taken).

 

[Wood]

same path the Giants take where are all the QB they have drafted? Bomar? Andre Woodson? oh yeah both cut Giants did not get jack for them. I don't see where NY has been hurt after all they not only been to the SB 2 times they beat the Packers who got all those QB's. :laugh2:

Last time NY drafted a QB was in 09 same year the Cowboys drafted a QB.

but their gamble worked by winning two Super Bowls. If Dallas did the same nobody would have a problem with the approach. There is big difference between sitting 'tight' with QB who is running the table at end of the year and QB who has things fall apart for him in elimination games. Two totally different players at QB but same front office approach.

 

[respectdatstar]

Living in DC, I hear people talking all the time about how Cousins is going to be moved for buku picks in the same way that Schaub and Kolb were.

 

[jterrell]

Stolen from the mother ship. I couldn't believe it when I read it. Just crazy!

1991- bill musgrave
2001- Quincy carter
2009- Stephen McGee.

This is one of those stats that is so blatantly pointless.

What about Tony Romo? Matt Moore? Drew Henson? Chad Hutchinson?
Dallas has acquired young QBs plenty of times.

 

[erod]

Living in DC, I hear people talking all the time about how Cousins is going to be moved for buku picks in the same way that Schaub and Kolb were.

Who knows, maybe it'll be Bob Griffin that gets moved in the end?

 

[jterrell]

I think you prove the OP point. Kirk Cousins take last year probably already fetches the Commanders a good draft pick (higher than where he was taken).

No, he disproves it to all but the logically oblivious.

Cousins may or may not bring a draft pick return. That list certainly did not result in a net gain in picks or performance. Anyone arguing that is certifiably insane.

Cousins may or may not be available and may or may not be of real value. We'll see once the season starts and if he has to start a month.

Ron Wolf made this method work because he could identify QBs. And they hired the proper staff to develop QBs. A string of future head coaches started out in B as a QB coach.

Washington has no such track record and in fact in an era of limited overall draft picks wasted many of QBs who couldn't play anywhere on the field. It proved a terrible strategy.

Cousins looks like a solid pick right now... but RG3 cost them a bevy of picks. And you can't play Cousins and RG3 at once. So they have to wait what 3 or 4 years to get a real return on that investment? Not exactly a windfall.

 

[Doomsday101]

but their gamble worked by winning two Super Bowls. If Dallas did the same nobody would have a problem with the approach. There is big difference between sitting 'tight' with QB who is running the table at end of the year and QB who has things fall apart for him in elimination games. Two totally different players at QB but same front office approach.

Grabbing 4th and 5 rd QB is not a solution to anything. Unless Dallas is willing to take a 1st or 2nd rd pick on a QB prospect then you are spinning your wheels in the mean time Dallas has areas that are must not for 3 or 4 years down the line but NOW. Getting a QB right now is the last thing they need to do. Many teams will use FA vets to come in and backup that is not just Dallas look around the fricken league. As for our QB failing in elimination games? The team has failed not Romo alone, my god you people really think this game comes down to 1 player? It doesn't, by the mid way of the skins game Dez was on the bench, Austin was out of the game yet it was all Romo and his no name targets?

 

[dallasfan4lizife]

Its amazing to think how clueless jerry jones is.

He is a complete and utter moron.

 

[TheCount]

Stolen from the mother ship. I couldn't believe it when I read it. Just crazy!

1991- bill musgrave
2001- Quincy carter
2009- Stephen McGee.

It's not surprising. It also goes a lot way towards explaining why it was so hard to find Romo. We trotted a lot of bums through here.

It also makes it possible to see how there might have been a future for the team even if we didn't resign Romo.