1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Week 4 NFL thread

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Steak Snabler, Sep 25, 2013.

  1. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    There are a few exceptions (Saints, Packers, Chiefs...) but the majority of the teams in the NFL have reached for a QB sometime recently, some more recent than others...
     
  2. Machine Head

    Machine Head Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  3. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    And this is what you get as a result.

    I would do what Kansas City did this past off-season. They needed a QB badly, but didn't think any of the rookies were going to be a superstar. So they go out and trade for a serviceable veteran who can steady the ship during a rebuilding process. Depending on how long that process turns out to be, Alex Smith may or may not be around when they are ready to be a real contender, but they can address that when the time comes. For now, he's serviceable and they can concentrate on rebuilding other areas of the roster.
     
  4. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    As a Viking fan, I am not ready to give up on Ponder just yet. Yes, there are areas where he needs to improve, but I'm going to throw in the towel.

    Besides, are there other options out there right now that are better? Even if you tank the season and get a top five draft pick next spring, is there anyone out there better? I'd be in favor of going the veteran journeyman (say, Matt Hasselbeck) option and waiting till the right young guy is available.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  5. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Yeah, almost everybody thought the Chiefs overpaid to get Alex Smith, and while it's early, it looks like a pretty good trade right now... I think part of the reason the Niners were able to get as much as they did for Smith was because very few teams were sold on the QBs in the draft.

    Part of the problem is it's pretty difficult to get a "franchise QB" in free agency. That's why the bidding got so crazy for Manning a couple years ago. Brees' situation was a little different since he was coming off the injury.

    If you're going to get a franchise QB, in most cases you're going to have to draft them.
     
  6. Michael_ Gee

    Michael_ Gee Well-Known Member

    Trading for veterans or signing veteran free agent QBs works about as well for losing teams as drafting rookies does -- sometimes it does, more often it doesn't. Finding good quarterbacks is hard. For every Alex Smith (so far), there's a, well, come to think of it, Matt Cassel.
     
  7. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    I agree that getting franchise QBs in free agency is hard because supply is far less than demand.

    But is anyone expecting the Christian Ponders, Blaine Gabberts or Tim Tebows of the world to become franchise quarterbacks? No, I suspect teams are expecting them to be serviceable journeymen and keep a team competitive until the next big thing comes along.

    Before drafting Brett Favre and Ponder, the Vikings were playing Tarvaris Jackson and some other stiffs. Adrian Peterson was, is and always will be (health permitting) the focus of the offense. If we're throwing it 35 times a game, something is wrong. So I'm thinking "get a respectable quarterback who can make a few clutch throws on third down, not throw interceptions and manage the clock. Peterson will still be the focus of the offense." That's all I am hoping for from Ponder. He's not going to be John Elway or Joe Montana. I understand that. He doesn't have to win games himself. But, please, try not to lose them all by yourself.
     
  8. Steak Snabler

    Steak Snabler Well-Known Member

    Then why use first-round picks on them?
     
  9. amraeder

    amraeder Well-Known Member

    I've never interviewed any NFL GMs, so maybe someone who has can answer, but my guess would be that this is wrong. My guess is the appeal of the rookie QB, compared to signing the vet, is you know what the vet's ceiling is, but you don't know what the rookie's ceiling is. So you look at the rookies and talk yourself into what they COULD be. You look at Jake Locker and say "He's got a cannon for an arm. He'll be one of the top athletes on any field he steps on. Sure he couldn't hit a barn if it was 20 yards down field, but we can change his motion a little bit. And if he starts hitting that throw consistently...wow...we could have one of the best QBs in the NFL."
     
  10. Mark2010

    Mark2010 Active Member

    Exactly. That's my point. The Jets got Geno Smith in the second round, the Eagles got Matt Barkley later on. The Bills could have gotten EJ Manuel much later.

    Teams do tend to reach for players and turn a blind eye to their flaws.

    I mean, seriously, did someone in Denver actually think Tim Tebow was going to become the next John Elway?
     
  11. Machine Head

    Machine Head Well-Known Member

    http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/positions/_/year/2011/quarterbacks

    Ponder, 12.

    Journeyman?
     
  12. amraeder

    amraeder Well-Known Member

    Man, the CBS early games kind of suck.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page