3 more contests are up for this season: Mock Draft Challenge Draft Projection Challenge Smash the Mock!
I'm good with any version that ends with the Browns not taking a QB with their first two picks. That being said, if there is a team that Sanders does fit the scheme, it's probably the Browns. I just don't see him being any better than a number of back up guys like Flacco or Pickett. Could be, like I said, my memory is mush. I don't recall being very high on him, but without having the info in front of me and possibly doing another complete evaluation, I couldn't give an honest answer to a Sanders/Young ranking. Because dammit, I am just that good. No seriously, they look at every nook and cranny of game film. GMs have a huge responsibility and I would be willing to be the majority of them read the cliff notes and watch highlight reels during their 15 hour days. Part of being a good GM is surrounding yourself with a better group of scouts than you will ever be. Based on that theory, I expect the scouts to be more inline with me than not... If I didn't believe in my own eyes, I wouldn't waste so much time pounding the table for or against QBs. I feel like I am more right than wrong over the past 15-20 years I've been doing this. Though, that isn't hard to do with as many QBs that fail, if I err on the side of failure it raises the curve in my favor. Same will be said for the guy who picks the wrong QB.. Pretty easy to say, if you can't get the most important position right, we need to move on. If the team is competing at a high level year in and year out, despite having journeymen or 3rd round draft pick QBs, well, you could look more like a genius. Yes, it's absolutely based on my personal board for all prospects, not just Sanders. I don't disagree on teams having different grades, but that's based on your premise of "if we don't find a QB, we can't win football games and we lose our jobs". EVERYONE admits that the position gets extra points for importance. That isn't a valid evaluation, it's based on a curve. As for Hunter or Carter, that's another question in and of itself. I believe too much time is spent on who is the savior of our franchise, which is why there is a 3 year window to win for most franchises. There are no saviors, that's an illusion. There are generational talent guys, at QB they are few and far between. I do believe that both Hunter and Carter exhibit generational skill sets. I am not fully comfortable that a coaching staff will understand or even be willing to utilize Hunter because he is an anomaly. I do think Carter will immediately elevate that side of the ball, which will allow a team a higher percentage to win. That is why he is my choice for the top of this draft. I like Ward enough to elevate him, but he is the only QB that has enough brownie points to outweigh Carter. If the Browns could trade up for Ward, I would be OK with that... I don't think the Titans will even entertain a fair offer, so I am moving on from that scenario. The problem lies in your statement... "getting it right with a passer that can become a top 16 player at his position". That is NOT the bar any team is trying to get over. This league, the bar is top ten, and a consistent top ten at that. If you have the top 10-12 passer every single year and he is never top ten, they are looking for his replacement. "The idea that you need to hit a homerun at the position is flawed. You just need to get a guy that can put you in a position to win games more often than not, or else you will continue to be a bottom tier team with no guarantee of ever answering the question at the position if you are unwilling to take shots at it." This is a telling argument, it is the one I use for evaluating my draft board. What players can help put you in a position to win more games... That is my thinking directly when it comes to round 1 grade or round 2 grade or so on and so on. In my opinion, is the guy's skill set that of which will cause the opposing team to spend extra time on the game plan based on his college tape and hopefully subsequent pro tape? Round 1 grade. Is the player a type that, if he fits well within the scheme can upset the apple cart on any given Sunday, more than 25% of the season or show something that can be coached or possibly improved? Second round grade. Is he the type of player that has certain skills that show he is at either level 1 or 2, but has another set of tape that shows he can go backwards instead of forward? Third round grade and hope coaching fixes the flaws. Does this player have a single set of skills that he can rotate in based on situation and have an opportunity to have an impact on a number of plays? Fourth round grade. Does this player have an average set of skills that we can have him sitting in the wings in hopes that if a player falls due to injury, can step in and not cost us games, but will most likely never positively impact it? Rounds 5th-7th based on team needs. Every now and again, you can get a 3rd or 4th round grade fall into the next tier of rounds and you take him regardless of team need in the hopes that coaching can improve the outcome, but for the most part I am looking for cheap, young back up players that can help the starters get ready for that weeks opponents as well as being prepared to step in when needed, but you hope they aren't relied on weekly. That is what I base my evaluations on. This should be position unbiased. Now, round grades and ranking prospects are two things entirely also. Once you get your groupings though, it gets a little easier.
What do you win more games in the NFL with: Top tier edge rusher on a solid team with no quarterback? Top 16 to top 11 quarterback with a solid team around him?
You win more games with a mid tier QB but your never really a super bowl contender unless you have a historically good defense -- which requires that top tier edge. Is there enough of a difference between being top 11 - 16 and having a journeymen at QB? (Just throwing this out there not really giving it any thought) Cousins has always been a really good QB -- but he's never been a guy I expect to take his team to a super bowl. What is actually better for a franchise Cousins or Prescott two guys habitually in the "just outside" group at their salaries... or a true journeymen on an actually good roster because it isn't dedicating massive cap space to a non-difference making QB? I know which one keeps a GM/HC employed longer but I suspect it's not actually better for the long term interests of the franchise.
I don't mean anything personal, but that's single minded. When it comes to positions, It has to be based on the ability to close a hole in a position of the field. Does a single player close a hole? First round grade.. Does he close the hole with the help of someone on either side of him? second round grade, can he fill a hole based on certain skills but open a hole based on another skillset? 3rd round down... Example, I don't put as much value in the guard position, why? Because he has a player on either side of him. That doesn't mean that there aren't the exception to the rule at guard that will push a guy into a first round grade... same with Interior D-linemen. All other non-special teams positions can easily fit into a first round grade based on their skill set, and excluded based on other sets of flaws. Above you are basing it on extremes.. Top tier edge rusher on a team with a bottom tier QB.. well, it's going to be tough to overcome losses, if the team can't score ANY points. Top 16 to 11 QB with a solid team around them? Well, you've moved the needle, you went from a solid team around one player to a team that doesn't have a chance because the QB is going to cost them games. Why can't it be both? If a team has a 11-16 QB, which I will argue is much easier to find than a top tier edge rusher, then that edge rusher can and will help the teams win more games. Healthy Baker Mayfield was a 10-16 guy, if they had kept their draft picks and added 3 more first round grade guys to what they had, which was already a playoff caliber roster, then could they have gotten to the point of being a contender? Now, take away that Baker Mayfield, plug in all of Watson's backups because he hasn't been available over the past 3 seasons... You have a bunch of 20 and below guys, arguably 25 and below, then you had 2023 Joe Flacco who was in that mid teens range of QB and they thrived. This roster hasn't changed a lot over the past 6 years. Baker won a playoff game with similar talent to what they have right now, everyone but Flacco struggled after Baker left. That being said, I think Chubb had an enormous impact to the offense as well. Healthy vs hurt Chubb made this offense swing about 5 points per game. So, to answer your question... Yes and/or No
That's my point, if he is on a bad team, he isn't going to win. That's why the question was biased. I disagree, look at Cousins career.. He is in the top ten more times than people realize. Never in the top 5, but he was consistently in that second tier, which is why he was so coveted. The NFL is a fickle group, they want that guy that is top 3 year in and year out... That's maybe 3-4 guys in any given time period.
I know the Super Bowl framing is what everyone wants, but there also has to be a level of realistic expectations. That middle tier passer is going to position you to win more games than that top tier EDR, all things being equal. In order for a franchise to have stability, it needs to put a winning product on the field. It keeps the people that built the roster intact, it keeps it a desired destination for potential free agents, and it keeps ownership happy with the direction of the franchise, which is ultimately more important than the fanbase, even though it holds considerable sway over some owners. The position should never be ignored for reasons other than you already have your answer.
I put Cousins consistently in T3 of my QB metrics. I see it this way... ELITE QB's there are what 3 *maybe* four guys in this category? Mahomes, Allen, Jackson. True Franchise QB's - I really don't think this group is particularly large either. I think in an average year the top 2 groups combined are less then 10 QB's. So I really think of it as the top 8 QB's are the difference makers and then there are varying degrees of "Everyone else" The Dak's and Cousins of the world are simply the highest tier of everyone else. Guys who are damn good football players but are simply not the difference maker you want. They are good enough that you stay married to them but not good enough that you are perpetually happy with the position. To me sneaking into the top 10 doesn't mean much unless you are a guy who can get your team over the hump. And so this is where I stand when it comes to QB's. Do I *think* this guy's ceiling can be in that top 8? And I think that's why I feel down on Sanders in a general sense. I can see the possibility with Ward. And could see it with Maye. I don't think I see it with Sanders. (Again minimal actual tape watching involved here.)
I actually advocate all the time for drafting mid round QB's you think can develop even if you have a FQB. I don't think you should ever ignore the position. I just think that to pass on a blue chip player -- you better believe in the ceiling on the player you take instead and not the floor.
Appreciate the lengthy response, but the point of my question was to address the basic difference between what you and I have for team building philosophies. I think you should always be looking to improve the quarterback room, and if you have an established starter, you should still look to bring in talent to that room. Meaning - Baker Mayfield is TB's answer for today, but if they have the opportunity to take someone in the draft that they believe can exceed him in the future or can improve the backup situation, they need to have an assessed value for the player and have him in consideration during the draft. In regard to the Browns - They have no current answer, so they need to be working towards it. If that means drafting a passer this year, next year and the year after, then they need to accept that process. That is the part you and I fundamentally disagree on. If the Browns draft a quarterback at #2 and find themselves drafting at the top of the class in 26' with another quarterback they think may be a better prospect, you draft him and let the process play out in camp, the preseason and the regular season. There is no scenario where they have complete control over who will be available to them, and when, in the future.
It's pretty crazy that before 2000 offense won championships but ever since then it's been more about defense. 2006 Colts, 2009 Saints and even the 2011 Giants are outliers for offense, But most Champs after the St Louis Rams have been defensive or at least had a better ranked defense than their already elite offense. The 3 or 4 biggest anomalies are were the very good but not really elite, but well rounded, 2012 Ravens, the 2007 Giants who everyone knows what happened, the aforementioned 2011 Giants who had a top 10 offense but it wasn't truly elite but their D sucked, and the 2021 Rams who were like the Giants but an average defense. EDIT: Forgot the 2022 Chiefs. The went from top 2 O and average D to Top 2D and average 0 the following year.
I think you can make the argument that balance has been the biggest factor, with the teams that can have either side step up when needed have tended to advance. And the obvious - Quarterback play. But the Eagles felt like a real throwback this past season. Just run the damn ball and kill up front on D.
I had an edit. But yes the Eagles running the ball felt like a throwback. Still they had the 2nd best D behind only the Chargers and all that running must have helped the D too. They were the only team to allow under 300 yard per game. 278.4 yards. The next best allowed 33 yards more per game and didn't make the playoffs. Heck it wasn't until the 5th best team that someone else made the playoffs and they allowed 315 yards per game. BTW on offense the Ravens killed it. They had lots of running too (helped by their QB) and also passed for more.
It's also going to make this draft so much more interesting. How many early backs? How many OL and DL/EDGE in the first 2 rounds? Heck, I'm seeing most mocks where there aren't any DLinemen left at 32 and the eagles take Tyler Booker or someone (BTW HE IS MY BIGGEST NO!)
I wonder if there will be a slight discount to trading up in picks 10-25ish because many teams seem to want to trade down.
I keep coming back to the idea that the Chiefs are going to want to get head of Houston, and Minnesota would be that spot.
