2018 Draft Eligible QB Thread

[Tugboat]

42 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Fans are reactionary, and unfortunately, many teams don't have the courage to do what's right. You know my opinion, but I think if teams were willing to follow through, it would work. It would allow them to develop QBs, but few teams have the courage to do it. KC is a great example of a team with the courage to do what's needed.

They have the courage insofar as Alex Smith can continue to manage that team to a playoff berth and serious championship aspirations.  Few teams have a situation like that where they afford to spend a high 1st round pick on a QB and essentially get zilch out of that expenditure for an entire year or more, while still maintaining a team good enough to sustain those championship hopes.  And part of that is because sitting a guy for a year is burning at least a year off your potential "window" to win with a QB before they need to be the highest paid player in history.  You'd better be getting some incredible "development" out of that year, for the 10s of millions it's probably going to cost you to bump their "starter learning curve" a year down the road, if they even work out anyway.

[CalhounLambeau]

Sam Darnold's QB coach followed me on Twitter last night. Thinking he might read here since I brought up his coaching here yesterday.

[Zed Rational]

I think that Luke Falk has a good chance to be one of those quarterback prospects who will be a better pro quarterback than some of the prospects drafted ahead of him. So much of what it takes to succeed in the pros is what's going on between the ears and in the heart. What impresses me about Falk is that he was a walk-on who forced his way into the starting lineup and has improved steadily ever since. I like the way he rebounds after setbacks. He makes mistakes, learns from them, and gets better.

[Aztec Hammer]

@LETSGOBROWNIES

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

59 minutes ago, Aztec Hammer said:

@LETSGOBROWNIES

<3

[MWil23]

LOL, I just spit out my water.

#cleanupisle5

[DraftHobbyist]

10 hours ago, jrry32 said:

Fans are reactionary, and unfortunately, many teams don't have the courage to do what's right. You know my opinion, but I think if teams were willing to follow through, it would work. It would allow them to develop QBs, but few teams have the courage to do it. KC is a great example of a team with the courage to do what's needed.

Except the KC GM got fired.

[Forge]

12 minutes ago, DraftHobbyist said:

Except the KC GM got fired.

For reasons rumored to be completely unrelated, so I'm not sure how that's applicable. 

[DraftHobbyist]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

For reasons rumored to be completely unrelated, so I'm not sure how that's applicable. 

Well, rumors are rumors. It's related because if the excitement was in the air with their QB maybe Dorsey doesn't get fired. I usually try not to use situations where GM's got fired from right after said move as a good example to set a standard.

[Forge]

Just now, DraftHobbyist said:

Well, rumors are rumors. It's related because if the excitement was in the air with their QB maybe Dorsey doesn't get fired. I usually try not to use situations where GM's got fired from right after said move as a good example to set a standard.

Not sure how that helps. Multiple reports stated that it was due to his communication and management style and the fact that he was butting heads with Hunt. No amount of "excitement" is going to help if the employer / employee are not getting on together or feel like they can't work together (see York + Baalke + Harbaugh). If his firing had nothing to do with the drafting of Mahomes, it's definitely not relevant. If you find me something that states that it did, then I would take back what I said, but you're making an assumption that the move had anything to do with the drafting of Mahomes. It was like 2 months later. His firing was immediately after the Jeremy Maclin debacle. So let's say he was fired for the latter...how does that have any impact on how we should feel about the move that was made for Mahomes?

[DraftHobbyist]

11 minutes ago, Forge said:

Not sure how that helps. Multiple reports stated that it was due to his communication and management style and the fact that he was butting heads with Hunt. No amount of "excitement" is going to help if the employer / employee are not getting on together or feel like they can't work together (see York + Baalke + Harbaugh). If his firing had nothing to do with the drafting of Mahomes, it's definitely not relevant. If you find me something that states that it did, then I would take back what I said, but you're making an assumption that the move had anything to do with the drafting of Mahomes. It was like 2 months later. His firing was immediately after the Jeremy Maclin debacle. So let's say he was fired for the latter...how does that have any impact on how we should feel about the move that was made for Mahomes?

What you're doing here is taking an admitted rumor and then making claims about that rumor that may or may not be true. I think we need to step back from that line of thinking. A better example would be where a GM didn't get fired right after. Like using Aaron Rodgers, for instance.

[Forge]

3 minutes ago, DraftHobbyist said:

What you're doing here is taking an admitted rumor and then making claims about that rumor that may or may not be true. I think we need to step back from that line of thinking. A better example would be where a GM didn't get fired right after. Like using Aaron Rodgers, for instance.

You are the one who was insinuating that because he was fired it made the decision to go get Mahomes somehow less, even though there is no indication or support that suggests it had anything to do with his firing. I mean, that's what I'm getting when you comment "but the chief's gm was fired" when Jrry was suggesting that making that type of move was the right thing to do. If it's not, then it's just miscommunication on my part, but that's what I'm gathering. 

[DraftHobbyist]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

You are the one who was insinuating that because he was fired it made the decision to go get Mahomes somehow less, even though there is no indication or support that suggests it had anything to do with his firing. 

Can we go off of what I said instead of what you perceive me to be insinuating?

[Forge]

1 minute ago, DraftHobbyist said:

Can we go off of what I said instead of what you perceive me to be insinuating?

Heh, check my edit. Just acknowledged that it could be a miscommunication. You got back to me too quickly lol

[DraftHobbyist]

1 minute ago, Forge said:

Heh, check my edit. Just acknowledged that it could be a miscommunication. You got back to me too quickly lol

Basically, I just don't think it's a good example to use Kansas City's situation because what the other side would expect is that a team that drafts a QB highly and then sits them would have people get fired. Even if Dorsey didn't get fired for that reason (although I'm still not willing to concede that playing Mahomes could've changed something), it certainly doesn't look good. I would say that for Mahomes and for the Chiefs as a team, it was best to sit him, but I understand the argument that most coaches don't have the time to sit QB's. I think that almost any new coach/GM does have the time to sit the starting QB, though. But look at John Fox for the Bears. He tried to sit Trubisky, but the hot seat was just getting too hot.