OT: Kizer ND QB...

[Melancer46]

I think you can pretty much guarantee that barring injury, Trubisky and Kizer go in the first round. I would probably lean towards Watson going in the 1st as well, but he's probably more of a 2nd-3rd round prospect that could get taken in the 1st due to need.

Beyond that, I think a guy like Luke Falk, Kaaya, or Mason Rudolph could rise during the draft process and end up being considered for a potential late 1st. They definitely won't ALL go in the first, but I'd probably set the over/under at 3.5.

 

[RF2044]

Whether certain QB prospects belong in the 1st round is beside the point. Every year, hope triumphs over experience, and QB's are drafted much higher than one would think they should be. And many turn out to be career backups at best. I think there will probably be at least 4 QB's taken in the first round, and it's likely that all 4 will be drafted higher than their grades warrant.

Call it the 'greater fool' theory. The combination of hope and desperation. And bad judgment, which goes hand in hand with desperation.

There is no doubt that QBs often get overdrafted. That doesn't alter the fact that this is a down year for QBs, and that there are no top of the draft caliber signal callers in this upcoming crop.

The notion of having 2 or 3 go in the top 5 is inaccurate, putting it mildly. I say that despite agreeing with the trend both you and Stern allude to.

 

[RF2044]

I think you can pretty much guarantee that barring injury, Trubisky and Kizer go in the first round. I would probably lean towards Watson going in the 1st as well, but he's probably more of a 2nd-3rd round prospect that could get taken in the 1st due to need.

Beyond that, I think a guy like Luke Falk, Kaaya, or Mason Rudolph could rise during the draft process and end up being considered for a potential late 1st. They definitely won't ALL go in the first, but I'd probably set the over/under at 3.5.

Could that happen? Sure. But I don't think it is anywhere close to a guarantee that Kizer goes in the first round. Or Watson. Let alone any of the others you list.

Most mock drafts today, pre-combine, aren't worth the paper they are printed on. Both of the ones I like to review [in terms of quality] have only 1 QB going in the first round--one has Trubisky, one has Kizer. They each have the other guy going in the second round. Both have Watson going in the second round. One has Kaaya going in the third.

Will be interesting to see how it unfolds.

 

[Newhouser]

I think the polar opposite performance of Goff and Prescott change the mindset this year. GM's will be more willing to wait and risk getting a guy they like later.

 

[RF2044]

I think the polar opposite performance of Goff and Prescott change the mindset this year. GM's will be more willing to wait and risk getting a guy they like later.

Not that this is the definitive end all / be all, or that this guy's prognostications are always right -- but Todd McShay from ESPN released his first 2017 mock draft today. He only had one QB forecasted to get drafted in the first round [Trubisky], selected 30th by the Kansas City Chiefs.

 

[Stern]

Whether certain QB prospects belong in the 1st round is beside the point. Every year, hope triumphs over experience, and QB's are drafted much higher than one would think they should be. And many turn out to be career backups at best. I think there will probably be at least 4 QB's taken in the first round, and it's likely that all 4 will be drafted higher than their grades warrant.

Call it the 'greater fool' theory. The combination of hope and desperation. And bad judgment, which goes hand in hand with desperation.

Exactly!!

 

[Ish88888]

Not that this is the definitive end all / be all, or that this guy's prognostications are always right -- but Todd McShay from ESPN released his first 2017 mock draft today. He only had one QB forecasted to get drafted in the first round [Trubisky], selected 30th by the Kansas City Chiefs.

I like McShay, but thats bs, the top 2 qbs in EVERY draft go top 10 bc there are way too many desperate NFL teams looking for a savior. Thus , qbs are over drafted . Look at Wentz and Goff last year . No way they are top 10 picks , never mind top 3.

 

[RF2044]

I like McShay, but thats bs, the top 2 qbs in EVERY draft go top 10 bc there are way too many desperate NFL teams looking for a savior. Thus , qbs are over drafted . Look at Wentz and Goff last year . No way they are top 10 picks , never mind top 3.

Not true--not every year.

And not BS, because it is his projection. An educated / professional projection, unlike some of the unsubstantiated opinions being thrown around on the subject here.

Nobody disputes that QBs often get overdrafted, or that teams don't take chances on guys that have no business being drafted as high as they get selected. But several posts above suggested that there would be 2-3 in the top 5. I said that wasn't likely, given the weak crop of passers this year. And it looks like someone who gets paid to study the draft agrees with that perspective. :noidea:

 

[Ish88888]

Not true--not every year.

And not BS, because it is his projection. An educated / professional projection, unlike some of the unsubstantiated opinions being thrown around on the subject here.

Ok, educate me, name a year where there wasnt a qb taken in the top 10 and/or 3 qbs taken in the first round?

 

[RF2044]

Ok, educate me, name a year where there wasnt a qb taken in the top 10 and/or 3 qbs taken in the first round?

You said two in the top 10. That didn't happen in 2014, which was a mere three drafts ago.

 

[Stern]

You said two in the top 10. That didn't happen in 2014, which was a mere three drafts ago.

We aren't disagreeing on this topic as much as you think. You have some valid points. Yes, you will find a year or 2 here and there like you are describing, but that is the exception and not the norm. 2012, Luck, Griffin, Tannehill Top 10. Weeden also went in Rd 1.

2011 you had Newton, Locker, Ponder, Gabbert all in the Top 12

2014 you had 3 in Rd 1

2015 and 2016 Winston and Mariotta...then Goff and Wentz go Top 2 back to back years in a row

If you are picking near the top of the draft it's a 99% chance it's because you don't have a QB. Sure, a team like the Browns could ride Kessler for 1 more year who they took last year in Rd 3 or 4 and played decent at times and not take a QB with their two high picks this year in round 1. But odds are they take a QB with one of those picks. Odds are QB's go flying early in Rd 1. Unless a team is in love with Jay Cutler or wants to trade for Romo, you can't find a QB on the open market in the NFL. So SF, Cleveland, Jets, Chicago...they gotta address the position somehow and hoping someone falls to Rd 2 is very risky to say the least.

Plus, odds are teams like Buffalo and Arizona who won't have starting QB's after this year are dying to trade up to get one. You have Kizer, Watson, Trubisky in whatever order are all going in Rd 1. And at least two are going very high probably Top 10 if not higher. Maybe I'm wrong and if so I will be here in April so you can rub it in my face. But, you have these owners who have losing teams and empty stadiums...they need a QB to move forward. They are going to draft them early. Chicago can't roll out Matt Barkly Week 1 next year. SF can't roll out Kaepernick or Gabbert week 1 next year. The Jets can't roll out Geno or Petty week 1 next year. OK, maybe one team signs Cutler, maybe one signs Tyrod Taylor...but aside from that the rest need QB's. And if you do sign Cutler he isn't a long-term answer. These teams need to draft QB's high to have any sort of future, sell tickets, excite your fan base and build towards the future. That's why QB's go so high in Rd 1. This is a business and you have to sell your product. The QB is the product in the NFL!

And on a side note...the QB I like the best out of them all is Mason Rudolph from Oklahoma St. I think his game translates the best to the NFL and he will be the best of this 2017 QB bunch (assuming he comes out) but that is a different debate for a different day.

 

[sabach]

Kizer>Prescott. I've seen every game Kizer played.

 

[Ish88888]

You said two in the top 10. That didn't happen in 2014, which was a mere three drafts ago.

Thats 2 in the top 10.

Kizer>Prescott. I've seen every game Kizer played.

Lol, thats comical .

 

[sabach]

Thats 2 in the top 10.


Lol, thats comical .

I love Dak Prescott. But Kizer has a stronger arm and better mobility. I think Dak has a better feel for the game at this point but give Kizer the Dallas OL and Zeke as a running back and I think Kizer would be a very good NFL QB. If it was comical, he would not be so high on the NFL draft boards.

 

[CanadianSU]

He is soooo over rated. Makes awful decisions.

. The pick he threw against Syracuse was typical Kaizer

 

[RF2044]

We aren't disagreeing on this topic as much as you think. You have some valid points. Yes, you will find a year or 2 here and there like you are describing, but that is the exception and not the norm. 2012, Luck, Griffin, Tannehill Top 10. Weeden also went in Rd 1.

2011 you had Newton, Locker, Ponder, Gabbert all in the Top 12

2014 you had 3 in Rd 1

2015 and 2016 Winston and Mariotta...then Goff and Wentz go Top 2 back to back years in a row

If you are picking near the top of the draft it's a 99% chance it's because you don't have a QB. Sure, a team like the Browns could ride Kessler for 1 more year who they took last year in Rd 3 or 4 and played decent at times and not take a QB with their two high picks this year in round 1. But odds are they take a QB with one of those picks. Odds are QB's go flying early in Rd 1. Unless a team is in love with Jay Cutler or wants to trade for Romo, you can't find a QB on the open market in the NFL. So SF, Cleveland, Jets, Chicago...they gotta address the position somehow and hoping someone falls to Rd 2 is very risky to say the least.

Plus, odds are teams like Buffalo and Arizona who won't have starting QB's after this year are dying to trade up to get one. You have Kizer, Watson, Trubisky in whatever order are all going in Rd 1. And at least two are going very high probably Top 10 if not higher. Maybe I'm wrong and if so I will be here in April so you can rub it in my face. But, you have these owners who have losing teams and empty stadiums...they need a QB to move forward. They are going to draft them early. Chicago can't roll out Matt Barkly Week 1 next year. SF can't roll out Kaepernick or Gabbert week 1 next year. The Jets can't roll out Geno or Petty week 1 next year. OK, maybe one team signs Cutler, maybe one signs Tyrod Taylor...but aside from that the rest need QB's. And if you do sign Cutler he isn't a long-term answer. These teams need to draft QB's high to have any sort of future, sell tickets, excite your fan base and build towards the future. That's why QB's go so high in Rd 1. This is a business and you have to sell your product. The QB is the product in the NFL!

And on a side note...the QB I like the best out of them all is Mason Rudolph from Oklahoma St. I think his game translates the best to the NFL and he will be the best of this 2017 QB bunch (assuming he comes out) but that is a different debate for a different day.

Two other things to consider: first, not all QBs are franchise caliber. Some years, you get Andrew Luck or the Manning's at the top, who are no-brainer #1 picks. Other years you get JaMarcus Russell, or even worse--the top QBs in the class are EJ Manuel / Geno Davis like in 2013, who don't belong anywhere near the top. Teams often select unworthy QBs far higher than they should go, but it doesn't happen every year if the QBs available to be picked aren't good enough.

Think about last year's crop. Carson Wentz [#2 pick overall] started out last year strongly, but faded significantly after teams got film on him. Jared Goff [#1 overall pick] looks shaky as hell, and every bit the reach that he was. Meanwhile, I'd be willing to bet that if the draft could get a do-over, that both the Rams and Eagles would take Dak Prescott--who went in the fourth round--over those QBs that they were so eager to mortgage their future in draft picks away to obtain.

Second, the reason that Cleveland, the Jets, etc. are lousy teams is not just due to not having a QB--it's because they've spent years drafting LOUSY QB prospects who bust. And squandering high draft picks hoping to catch lightning in a bottle can set a franchise back years. Cleveland alone has invested 4 first round picks on QBs since the franchise returned in 1999 -- not one of them has connected [including #1 overall pick Tim Couch, widely considered the biggest bust in NFL history]. The Jets have taken a different approach, selecting every 2nd and 3rd round guy who falls to them, to no avail. The lesson from both examples: trying to fix your QB problem with sh-t doesn't work; it only works if the QB you're drafting is good enough to stabilize the position for you.

The reason that a team like the Raiders--who sucked for nearly two straight decades--is no longer included in the list above is that they were smart, and got their QB at the top of the 2nd round, and he panned out. Ditto a team like Cincinnati. And ditto New Orleans [via San Diego] with Drew Brees.

For the record, I am not disagreeing with the tendency for teams to overdraft QBs higher in the first round, or the importance of having a franchise QB. Problem is, most of these guys aren't franchise QBs, and yet they go in the first round. And this is one of those years where there are no stand outs who automatically will move to the top of the draft. You'll see that shake out as we get into the off-season / combine results start shifting draft boards around. McShay is annoying, but he correctly pegged how this will unfold, IMO, due to the draft class of 2017's QBs being generally subpar.

 

[RMH44]

Two other things to consider: first, not all QBs are franchise caliber. Some years, you get Andrew Luck or the Manning's at the top, who are no-brainer #1 picks. Other years you get JaMarcus Russell, or even worse--the top QBs in the class are EJ Manuel / Geno Davis like in 2013, who don't belong anywhere near the top. Teams often select unworthy QBs far higher than they should go, but it doesn't happen every year if the QBs available to be picked aren't good enough.

Think about last year's crop. Carson Wentz [#2 pick overall] started out last year strongly, but faded significantly after teams got film on him. Jared Goff [#1 overall pick] looks shaky as hell, and every bit the reach that he was. Meanwhile, I'd be willing to bet that if the draft could get a do-over, that both the Rams and Eagles would take Dak Prescott--who went in the fourth round--over those QBs that they were so eager to mortgage their future in draft picks away to obtain.

Second, the reason that Cleveland, the Jets, etc. are lousy teams is not just due to not having a QB--it's because they've spent years drafting LOUSY QB prospects who bust. And squandering high draft picks hoping to catch lightning in a bottle can set a franchise back years. Cleveland alone has invested 4 first round picks on QBs since the franchise returned in 1999 -- not one of them has connected [including #1 overall pick Tim Couch, widely considered the biggest bust in NFL history]. The Jets have taken a different approach, selecting every 2nd and 3rd round guy who falls to them, to no avail. The lesson from both examples: trying to fix your QB problem with sh-t doesn't work; it only works if the QB you're drafting is good enough to stabilize the position for you.

The reason that a team like the Raiders--who sucked for nearly two straight decades--is no longer included in the list above is that they were smart, and got their QB at the top of the 2nd round, and he panned out. Ditto a team like Cincinnati. And ditto New Orleans [via San Diego] with Drew Brees.

For the record, I am not disagreeing with the tendency for teams to overdraft QBs higher in the first round, or the importance of having a franchise QB. Problem is, most of these guys aren't franchise QBs, and yet they go in the first round. And this is one of those years where there are no stand outs who automatically will move to the top of the draft. You'll see that shake out as we get into the off-season / combine results start shaking out. McShay is annoying, but he correctly pegged how this will unfold, IMO, due to the draft class of 2017's QBs being generally subpar.

Well said. With no franchise level QB in this draft the Browns should use their 1st round picks to shore-up other vital areas by selecting the best players available.

They can always pick-up a QB prospect in the later rounds...I really like Petermen from Pitt. There is just something about his feel for the game that I really like. Remember, Tom Brady wasn't selected until the 6th round.

 

[orangecuse]

Two other things to consider: first, not all QBs are franchise caliber. Some years, you get Andrew Luck or the Manning's at the top, who are no-brainer #1 picks. Other years you get JaMarcus Russell, or even worse--the top QBs in the class are EJ Manuel / Geno Davis like in 2013, who don't belong anywhere near the top. Teams often select unworthy QBs far higher than they should go, but it doesn't happen every year if the QBs available to be picked aren't good enough.

Think about last year's crop. Carson Wentz [#2 pick overall] started out last year strongly, but faded significantly after teams got film on him. Jared Goff [#1 overall pick] looks shaky as hell, and every bit the reach that he was. Meanwhile, I'd be willing to bet that if the draft could get a do-over, that both the Rams and Eagles would take Dak Prescott--who went in the fourth round--over those QBs that they were so eager to mortgage their future in draft picks away to obtain.

Second, the reason that Cleveland, the Jets, etc. are lousy teams is not just due to not having a QB--it's because they've spent years drafting LOUSY QB prospects who bust. And squandering high draft picks hoping to catch lightning in a bottle can set a franchise back years. Cleveland alone has invested 4 first round picks on QBs since the franchise returned in 1999 -- not one of them has connected [including #1 overall pick Tim Couch, widely considered the biggest bust in NFL history]. The Jets have taken a different approach, selecting every 2nd and 3rd round guy who falls to them, to no avail. The lesson from both examples: trying to fix your QB problem with sh-t doesn't work; it only works if the QB you're drafting is good enough to stabilize the position for you.

The reason that a team like the Raiders--who sucked for nearly two straight decades--is no longer included in the list above is that they were smart, and got their QB at the top of the 2nd round, and he panned out. Ditto a team like Cincinnati. And ditto New Orleans [via San Diego] with Drew Brees.

For the record, I am not disagreeing with the tendency for teams to overdraft QBs higher in the first round, or the importance of having a franchise QB. Problem is, most of these guys aren't franchise QBs, and yet they go in the first round. And this is one of those years where there are no stand outs who automatically will move to the top of the draft. You'll see that shake out as we get into the off-season / combine results start shaking out. McShay is annoying, but he correctly pegged how this will unfold, IMO, due to the draft class of 2017's QBs being generally subpar.

I've been a lifelong Brown's fan and it has just been a nightmare ever since getting a team back in '99. The Brown's have struck out immensely over the past decade with pretty much all of their top picks, not just at QB. You mention Couch possibly being the biggest bust in NFL history, but I recall all the so-called gurus saying how he was by far the best pick in the draft for the Browns.

These alleged gurus also have had many of the Brown's top draft choices highly rated as well. It's not like these guys are saying immediately afterwards, 'what were the Brown's thinking?' However, as with so many other of the Brown's high picks, they're either no longer on the team or out of the league altogether after just a short time. The ones that are still playing on some other team, are not high producers, certainly not at the level that their respective draft slot would've projected them to be. It's truly astounding and so very frustrating and heartbreaking.

The draft is in a lot of instances, a crap shoot, where hindsight is always 20-20. Similar to how some employers use extensive testing, etc. as a tool, in addition to interviewing, only to find out that many top "scorers" don't produce at levels they think based on the specifically structured and believed relatively "objective" material, whereas lower "scorers" often out shine them.

 

[RF2044]

I've been a lifelong Brown's fan and it has just been a nightmare ever since getting a team back in '99. The Brown's have struck out immensely over the past decade with pretty much all of their top picks, not just at QB. You mention Couch possibly being the biggest bust in NFL history, but I recall all the so-called gurus saying how he was by far the best pick in the draft for the Browns.

These alleged gurus also have had many of the Brown's top draft choices highly rated as well. It's not like these guys are saying immediately afterwards, 'what were the Brown's thinking?' However, as with so many other of the Brown's high picks, they're either no longer on the team or out of the league altogether after just a short time. The ones that are still playing on some other team, are not high producers, certainly not at the level that their respective draft slot would've projected them to be. It's truly astounding and so very frustrating and heartbreaking.

The draft is in a lot of instances, a crap shoot, where hindsight is always 20-20. Similar to how some employers use extensive testing, etc. as a tool, in addition to interviewing, only to find out that many top "scorers" don't produce at levels they think based on the specifically structured and believed relatively "objective" material, whereas lower "scorers" often out shine them.

It really is unbelievable. You'd almost have to be trying to have their "miss" rate on high draft picks.

I think I saw a stat during a Browns game this year that suggested that they only have a handful of players on their team left from all of the drafts dating back to 2010. Talk about futility.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Kizer>Prescott. I've seen every game Kizer played.

No way.

 

[orangecuse]

It really is unbelievable. You'd almost have to be trying to have their "miss" rate on high draft picks.

I think I saw a stat during a Browns game this year that suggested that they only have a handful of players on their team left from all of the drafts dating back to 2010. Talk about futility.

Just brutal.

 

[Stern]

Doubtful. Two tops in the first round, possibly none by pick #5. And if one DOES go in the top 5, it will be a reach by a desperate team, likely for Tribisky.

Most teams don't have Watson anywhere near the first round. So from a value perspective, that would be the furthest thing from a home run. Especially if they could grab Watson with their second round pick.

The Browns have made a history out of reaching for marginal talent QBs in the first round -- Tim Couch, Brady Quinn, Brandon Weeden, Johnny Manziel. The last thing they need is to do the same thing again and squander the value of that second first rounder.

AS I WAS SAYING!!! Two QB's go Top 10. Three in Top 12!! One in the Top 2 of this draft. And still lots of time to go in Round for Webb and Kizer!!! (mic drop)

 

[RF2044]

AS I WAS SAYING!!! Two QB's go Top 10. Three in Top 12!! One in the Top 2 of this draft. And still lots of time to go in Round for Webb and Kizer!!! (mic drop)

You said 2 in the top 5.

I said 1 in the top 5, which was the correct guess.

Probably not something you should have bothered digging up moths later--let alone attempt a weak mic drop--given how off target your prediction was. Especially given your prediction about Brad Kaaya sneaking into round 1.

 

[Briancuse]

Kizer>Prescott. I've seen every game Kizer played.

:crazy:

Please tell me you put the wrong sign in.