I don't believe in reaching ....for any position , including QB . That's how you end up with the Christian Ponder , Blaine Gabberts , and EJ Manuel's of the world.
I don't believe in reaching ....for any position , including QB . That's how you end up with the Christian Ponder , Blaine Gabberts , and EJ Manuel's of the world.
Again, the problem wasn't the reach, it was the player. Drafting them at #39 wasn't gonna make them any better. If they were players would you have any issue with taking them in the top 10? No.
Same type of player - talented but with major flaws . I'd have that guy at #39 because he has holes in his game that make him a much higher bust risk. ....point is when you are desperate you can convince yourself to fall in love with a player who is not worthy of the draft position you are slotted in . Usually a bad idea.
I don't believe in reaching ....for any position , including QB . That's how you end up with the Christian Ponder , Blaine Gabberts , and EJ Manuel's of the world.
EJ will be a solid pro so I wouldn't put him in that mix but there aren't any EJ's in this years draft. All of them are ragarm reaches. Focus on other things as our messiah is not in this draft.
In all honesty though I am just trolling the idiotic comrade.Carr is a decent late 1st round-early 2nd round prospect in my eyes , I just hate him in the top 10 . It's a reach and a gamble . Believe that.
I mean this seriously either your scouting tells you he is a QB is a possible starter, then you take him anywhere in the draft because there is nothing you can draft that is more important than a quality starter or you don't think he is a starter and you don't draft him until day 3 because you are drafting a backup. Not saying you can't maneuver a bit but really...why? If you hit on him no one is gonna gripe about "taking him too high" and if you miss on him it doesn't matter if you got good "value" (see Freeman).
Nailed it
Reaches aren't always bad either. Keep that in mind guys.Teams have skipped past the bucs to get "the guy they want" and in some instances, it undeniably worked.
Reaches aren't always bad either.
I disagree. Reaching is always bad. I'm not saying to go by what the general consensus is....but you have to stick to your own board. Maybe when a team like Seattle takes Bruce Irving at 15, media and fans see it as a reach....but that is just them sticking to their board. Only time a team is really reaching is if they don't follow thier board on draft day and make a compulsive decision. And that is bad.
Can reaching work ? Sure....so can putting your life-savings on black at the roulette table. Not a smart thing to do , however.
Can reaching work ? Sure....so can putting your life-savings on black at the roulette table. Not a smart thing to do , however.
You miss the point, if you grade a player as a starting NFL QB you literally can't reach for him. There are only two grades for QBs, starter and not starter. One gets drafted in R1 and the others can safely wait until kingdom come. Unlike other spots where you can have a good but not great CB or pass rusher QB is pretty binary you either have a guy you like or a guy you want to replace.
if you grade a player as a starting NFL QB you literally can't reach for him.
This I agree with.
So Freeman , who stared 5 years in this league , wouldn't be a reach as a 1st overall pick ?What kind of idiotic philosophy is this ?? lol...Most the starting QBS in this league aren't that great and easily replaced.
So Freeman , who stared 5 years in this league , wouldn't be a reach as a 1st overall pick ?What kind of idiotic philosophy is test ?? lol...
Don't go trying to make up an argument. No taking a bad player is always bad. Was Adams a reach? Really using that logic any bad player was a reach in retrospect. The thing is the staff thought Freeman was a starting QB so they did what they rightly should have done and drafted him. I'm saying you don't parse things this closely. If you think Carr or Bortles or Manziel is a NFL starter then any of all of them should be in play at 7 if you think we need one. I don't care where they are "rated".
I'm making up nothing . You simply said talking a starting caliber QB can never be a reach. That's stupid. Most NFL starters are average at best.
In all honesty though I am just trolling the idiotic comrade.Carr is a decent late 1st round-early 2nd round prospect in my eyes , I just hate him in the top 10 . It's a reach and a gamble . Believe that.
I mean this seriously either your scouting tells you he is a QB is a possible starter, then you take him anywhere in the draft because there is nothing you can draft that is more important than a quality starter or you don't think he is a starter and you don't draft him until day 3 because you are drafting a backup. Not saying you can't maneuver a bit but really...why? If you hit on him no one is gonna gripe about "taking him too high" and if you miss on him it doesn't matter if you got good "value" (see Freeman).
Nailed it
Disagree Completely. Quality Starter at QB ? Superbowl Contender. It takes something special at the position, or something special everywhere else, and nowadays more of a combination of the 2. If you think a guy has a chance to be special, that's when you take him, but unless a guy is like Luck, I'm starting to believe you have just a good a chance to find him outside of the top 10 as you do inside the top 10.
I'm making up nothing . You simply said talking a starting caliber QB can never be a reach. That's stupid. Most NFL starters are average at best.
Ok so you are trying to be stupid and pretend that guys like Campbell and Keenum are starters because they happened to start. I should have said quality starter to distinguish the even Roth, Romo, and Smith level QBs from the Campbell, Henne and Keenum levels guys who did start but everyone wants to replace. If you are drafting a guy you aren't targeting him to be a Chad Heene level producer now are you?
