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

[JonJon]

Why isn't it acceptable? We see a few teams (two that I can think of) that had success in drafting back up QBs-- The Packers and Patriots. The funny thing is that success is counted as SPENDING a valuable draft pick, USING resources to develop that pick and then trade the player to get a better draft pick. That is a lot of work and time to HOPE to get a net gain in the draft.

How often has this happened across the league since 1991? Across all 32 teams? What is the actual success rate for doing this? It's pretty low, I can tell you that.

My thinking is that picking a QB when you have your QB locked in stone for over is a waste of time and resources. If a great talent has somehow dropped in the draft significantly, I can see the reasoning behind it (increased odds), but that doesn't happen too often. If it's not the case, then why WASTE a pick when we could get a player that could do well for us?

The people complaining that we don't draft enough QBs are the same complaining that we wasted a pick on McGee. Can't have it both ways and the truth is that MOST QBs taken in the later rounds fail. Some may argue that we need to do better at evaluating and then draft a QB who will be successful. How dense do you have to be to think that's an easy job? It's got to be some sort of blindness to think that only the Cowboys have trouble projecting QBs and the other teams have it down.

Here's a list of the Steeler's QB picks since 1991. They have picked more QBs than anyone over that time.

2008 (5) Dennis Dixon 2008 = Failed
2006 (5) Omar Jacobs = Failed
2004 (1) Ben Roethlisberger = Success
2003 (5) Brian St. Pierre = Failed
2000 (5) Tee Martin = Failed
1996 (6) Spence Fischer = Failed
1995 (2) Kordell Stewart = Success
1994 (6) Jim Miller = Failed
1993 (8) Alex Van Pelt = Failed
1992 (12) Cornelius Benton =Failed

That's 8 out of 10 wasted draft picks. Only Rothlisberger and Stewart can be considered successes for the Steelers. Aside from those two, only Jim MIller and Alex Van Pelt even played for a reasonable time in the NFL. Both were cut by the Steelers...they got NOTHING out of them.

We have needs on this team. This year, QB is not one of them.

I guess I should have been more specific, because I think you missed the boat on what I was saying. It isn't about just drafting QB's for the sake of drafting them. I am talking about drafting when there is a need and also drafting for the future when your franchise QB is approaching the end of his career.

When Aikman was approaching the end of his career, a QB should have been drafted then to be groomed as a replacement. Instead, the team waited until he was done and then had no choice but to find a replacement in the 2001 draft. Too bad the team didn't have a first round pick (traded away along with the 2000 first round pick to acquire Joey Galloway).

After missing out on Drew Brees to San Diego, the Cowboys traded down and then drafted Quincy Carter. I think we all know what happened after that... A long string of nobodies at QB and stop-gap free agent signings, before finally getting lucky with undrafted Tony Romo, who took over for an old and struggling Drew Bledsoe.

Now here we are with an aging Tony Romo, and the time is approaching where we will again need to look to secure a QB for the future. I agree with you that QB is not a need this year (especially with the poor QB class), but I will be disappointed in the franchise if the Cowboys fail to bring in a QB next year to groom as a replacement for Romo when he is ready to retire.

 

[cowboysooner]

The contract timing (4 more years of romo and rookie contracts at 4 years) makes drafting a qb questionable but I think there are 6 or 7 quarterbacks who are as good or better prospects than Nick Foles and certainly more accomplished than Steven McGee.

 

[joseephuss]

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.

Flynn is credited with 1 win in his career. It couldn't have been that important of a win considering the Packers were 15-1 that season.

 

[Doomsday101]

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.

Yes we did and in large part at that time there was no rookie cap, QB in the 1st rd at that time were getting contract of arond 60 million dollars and Dallas did not have that type of cash to throw around that is why we got guys like Carter, Henson and Hutchinson. Dallas did not have the money to go after top draft choices at a position that tends to come with a big contract. Today with rookie caps you are not seeing the contracts like JaMarcus Russell. However if Dallas grabbed a 1st or 2nd rd QB you guys would be screaming about the fricken Offensive line. Why did Dallas not get a OL player oh they are going after the glamor pick. You guys are so funny and hypocrites to top it off you get to complain when they don't take a OL player now you get to complain because no QB? At one point you guys complained because no CB were being taken at least that has some to an end. :laugh2:

 

[jterrell]

The contract timing (4 more years of romo and rookie contracts at 4 years) makes drafting a qb questionable but I think there are 6 or 7 quarterbacks who are as good or better prospects than Nick Foles and certainly more accomplished than Steven McGee.

wrong. not in this draft class.

this is a soft qb class.

foles and mcgee were both very solid prospects coming out of college.
mcgee was a stellar athlete with all the tools much like ryan tannehill.
he was a wildcard because he had run a terrible offensive system but was intriguing because he had all the tools.

foles was picked between russell wilson and kirk cousins in round 3 of a qb heavy draft class. he is a far superior prospect to all but the top few guys in this class.

the obvious point here is that dallas can't afford to use picks on a qb who will be 3rd string this year and next at best. if they waste picks they'll draft plenty high to go get a top notch qb in the near future.

and they'll need a rookie starter to get romo's money off the books in 3 or 4 years.

dallas needs to continue to target udfa qbs they feel can play. get them in and hopefully advance them to back up status to save money.

when it is time to replace romo they will use a very high pick on a qb. not hand over the reins to some unproven 4th round pick.

 

[JonJon]

wrong. not in this draft class.

this is a soft qb class.

foles and mcgee were both very solid prospects coming out of college.
mcgee was a stellar athlete with all the tools much like ryan tannehill.
he was a wildcard because he had run a terrible offensive system but was intriguing because he had all the tools.

foles was picked between russell wilson and kirk cousins in round 3 of a qb heavy draft class. he is a far superior prospect to all but the top few guys in this class.

the obvious point here is that dallas can't afford to use picks on a qb who will be 3rd string this year and next at best. if they waste picks they'll draft plenty high to go get a top notch qb in the near future.

and they'll need a rookie starter to get romo's money off the books in 3 or 4 years.

dallas needs to continue to target udfa qbs they feel can play. get them in and hopefully advance them to back up status to save money.

when it is time to replace romo they will use a very high pick on a qb. not hand over the reins to some unproven 4th round pick.

That's why I think next year is the year to get one. There should be some really solid QB's available in the 2nd round in the 2014 draft. Then the QB can sit for 2-3 years, learning the game and refining his skill like Rodgers did in Green Bay.

 

[Zimmy Lives]

That's why I think next year is the year to get one. There should be some really solid QB's available in the 2nd round in the 2014 draft. Then the QB can sit for 2-3 years, learning the game and refining his skill like Rodgers did in Green Bay.

This.

This draft is about continuing to build a team around Romo. The 2nd round of the 2104 draft will be a great place to find his eventual heir.

 

[jterrell]

I guess I should have been more specific, because I think you missed the boat on what I was saying. It isn't about just drafting QB's for the sake of drafting them. I am talking about drafting when there is a need and also drafting for the future when your franchise QB is approaching the end of his career.

When Aikman was approaching the end of his career, a QB should have been drafted then to be groomed as a replacement. Instead, the team waited until he was done and then had no choice but to find a replacement in the 2001 draft. Too bad the team didn't have a first round pick (traded away along with the 2000 first round pick to acquire Joey Galloway).

After missing out on Drew Brees to San Diego, the Cowboys traded down and then drafted Quincy Carter. I think we all know what happened after that... A long string of nobodies at QB and stop-gap free agent signings, before finally getting lucky with undrafted Tony Romo, who took over for an old and struggling Drew Bledsoe.

Now here we are with an aging Tony Romo, and the time is approaching where we will again need to look to secure a QB for the future. I agree with you that QB is not a need this year (especially with the poor QB class), but I will be disappointed in the franchise if the Cowboys fail to bring in a QB next year to groom as a replacement for Romo when he is ready to retire.

i think you make some sense here but there are also some points to consider.

aikman retired due to concussions not because he was ready to. the team didn't expect him to be gone as quickly as he was. i agree there was no plan behind aikman except there kind of was; to tank.

when we added drew henson and chad hutchinson they were considered high round prospects. henson was acquired for a 3rd round pick.

 

[cowboysooner]

wrong. not in this draft class.

this is a soft qb class.

foles and mcgee were both very solid prospects coming out of college.
mcgee was a stellar athlete with all the tools much like ryan tannehill.
he was a wildcard because he had run a terrible offensive system but was intriguing because he had all the tools.

foles was picked between russell wilson and kirk cousins in round 3 of a qb heavy draft class. he is a far superior prospect to all but the top few guys in this class.

the obvious point here is that dallas can't afford to use picks on a qb who will be 3rd string this year and next at best. if they waste picks they'll draft plenty high to go get a top notch qb in the near future.

and they'll need a rookie starter to get romo's money off the books in 3 or 4 years.

dallas needs to continue to target udfa qbs they feel can play. get them in and hopefully advance them to back up status to save money.

when it is time to replace romo they will use a very high pick on a qb. not hand over the reins to some unproven 4th round pick.

I don't disagree with the conclusion and timing one bit.

I don't disagree that McGee "looked like" a qb and had some tools, but he was not as good of a prospect as many in this class (Manuel, Nassib, Glennon) because he was even more raw. The guy was benched for Jerrod Johnson when they went to an NFL type offense.

There are some guys who can Andy Dalton it (Barkley and perhaps Wilson).

Foles is about like Landry Jones. Both are destined to hold a clipboard for a while. I think there are about 4 guys at the Foles level and 1 guy at the Tannehill-Josh Freeman level (Geno Smith). The problem is that there are zero at the Luck, Griffin, Newton, or Ryan level.

 

[DallasJ7]

In general, I'm definitely a believer in drafting QBs semi-regularly; there's a lot of value to be had. But if you're going to be taking QBs in the later rounds, then you need to have staff that can adequately develop them, and it's definitely in question whether we have that.

In the Cowboys current situation, given that they just re-signed Romo and have Orton to back him up, it is best they hold off one more year (this year isn't a good QB class any way). But I think it's a near must that they draft a QB in 2014 and not with a 3rd day pick.

 

[Doomsday101]

In general, I'm definitely a believer in drafting QBs semi-regularly; there's a lot of value to be had. But if you're going to be taking QBs in the later rounds, then you need to have staff that can adequately develop them, and it's definitely in question whether we have that.

In the Cowboys current situation, given that they just re-signed Romo and have Orton to back him up, it is best they hold off one more year (this year isn't a good QB class any way). But I think it's a near must that they draft a QB in 2014 and not with a 3rd day pick.

sometime no matter who is on the staff most late rd QB picks will not pan out. Heck 1st rd QB have a fairly high bust rate.

In the meantime Dallas starting QB is an UDFA I think he has developed pretty well. Not many QB will put up 90 or better rating every single year he has played.

 

[joseephuss]

I don't disagree with the conclusion and timing one bit.

I don't disagree that McGee "looked like" a qb and had some tools, but he was not as good of a prospect as many in this class (Manuel, Nassib, Glennon) because he was even more raw. The guy was benched for Jerrod Johnson when they went to an NFL type offense.

No, he suffered shoulder injuries and had to be replaced by Johnson.

 

[DallasJ7]

sometime no matter who is on the staff most late rd QB picks will not pan out. Heck 1st rd QB have a fairly high bust rate.

In the meantime Dallas starting QB is an UDFA I think he has developed pretty well. Not many QB will put up 90 or better rating every single year he has played.

True, of course you have to give credit to the Cowboys for developing Romo as an UDFA, but that's been the exception, and it happened under Parcells tenure. There seems to be little-to-no quality QB development before and after those 4 years, but there's also only been one draft pick in 12 years too.

 

[Doomsday101]

True, of course you have to give credit to the Cowboys for developing Romo as an UDFA, but that's been the exception, and it happened under Parcells tenure. There seems to be little-to-no quality QB development before and after those 4 years, but there's also only been one draft pick in 12 years too.

Yeah out of all of those non draft picks Romo developed the rest failed. If you go after late QB picks odds are they will not develop, heck many of the top QB picks will not develop into anything more than avg to below avg.

For Dallas they kept brining them in Carter, Hutchinson, Henson and Romo and out of the 4 one emerged 25% success rate. So odds are long when dealing with late or undrafted QB's

 

[FLcowboy]

I have listed the quarterbacks drafted in the spreadsheet linked, since 2003, or the last ten years. One heck of a lot of the QBs drafted never saw the light of day in the league.



https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AquxBfBV9P9xdEVNTTVpWUg3d05RVHhGUEZ4cFNwMmc&usp=sharing

 

[respectdatstar]

This.

This draft is about continuing to build a team around Romo. The 2nd round of the 2104 draft will be a great place to find his eventual heir.

We should probably look to draft his replacement within the next 90 years. He can't play until he is 122.

ray:

 

[Echo9]

Yeah out of all of those non draft picks Romo developed the rest failed. If you go after late QB picks odds are they will not develop, heck many of the top QB picks will not develop into anything more than avg to below avg.

For Dallas they kept brining them in Carter, Hutchinson, Henson and Romo and out of the 4 one emerged 25% success rate. So odds are long when dealing with late or undrafted QB's

Thats what so many people just don't see. The percentages on hitting on a QB are pretty low and it takes being in the right spot at the right time with a mix of a good eye and luck to land a difference maker at QB.

Romo is most certainly not perfect, but he's still a top 10 QB right now. Some just don't see how tough that is to get. We will have to look at addressing the future at QB soon, but this year isn't that time and the letting him go at the end of next year would have been a disaster.

 

[Doomsday101]

Thats what so many people just don't see. The percentages on hitting on a QB are pretty low and it takes being in the right spot at the right time with a mix of a good eye and luck to land a difference maker at QB.

Romo is most certainly not perfect, but he's still a top 10 QB right now. Some just don't see how tough that is to get. We will have to look at addressing the future at QB soon, but this year isn't that time and the letting him go at the end of next year would have been a disaster.

I agree. I do think with the rookie cap in place those misses on top QB will not be as costly as it has in the past but it is still hard to find a top QB. I'm in favor of finding a QB to put behind Romo in the next 2 years but Dallas has other areas they must address no matter who is playing QB

 

[Wood]

I agree next year is the year to draft a QB.

 

[Eddie]

I agree next year is the year to draft a QB.

But we won't do it.