Official 2021 QB Thread

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, Forge said:

I think Miami has very specific needs and moving down potentially means giving up their preference for one of those needs (WR). If they like a guy at the receiver position considerably more than the other receivers, I think they will want market value for that pick to move down and I think that they are going to find that market shallow. 

Miami is pretty clear a small move down candidate.  That's if they don't want Sewell.  I think they should take him, but Miami might not want to take an OT that high.  And I think Cincinnati would be a logical trade candidate to move up for him, but again I think Mike Brown is too stubborn to do what's right.  Even something like a 3rd round pick this year and a 4th round pick next year should get it done.  But let's say they can strike a deal with the Bengals to move down, unless QB3 goes off the board at 4 I think they could afford to move down another 2-3 spots and still grab either Devonta Smith or JaMarr Chase.  I don't think they'd risk losing out on both of them.

4 minutes ago, Forge said:

Atlanta has needs that fit better further down the draft board, and have more needs. They can move down below market just to accrue assets (assuming that they are not taking a QB themselves, of course, which I don't believe that they are going to do). I could see them moving down from 4 to like 8-12 just for next years first, for example, or a couple of seconds and some sweeteners. 

You're still gonna have to talk me out of Fields-to-the-Falcons.  I think there's just too much draw for the Falcons not to take him so long as their player evaluation matches that.  Plus, if you're looking at their team needs aside from TE, the draft doesn't really match up with their needs.  So it's either take a QB or trade down, which I think we'd both agree is probably the best path forward.

34 minutes ago, Forge said:

Not really worried about Cincy moving given it happens once in a blue moon, don't think the eagles take a QB. Don't think Detroit is doing it. Carolina definitely will, and I think Denver is more likely to add a vet to fight with Lock. I'd expect them to go with someone like Farley. 

FA is barren for QBs, unless you believe Dak is leaving.  Wouldn't rule out Detroit or Philadelphia for taking a QB.  They think they roll with Goff and Hurts this year, but they're both possibilities.

[CWood21]

25 minutes ago, Forge said:

Now, if I were the niners I may make a small trade up if he starts to fall just to make sure I got my guy, but I definitely don't think it's impossible that he's there. 

Philadelphia at 6 or Detroit at 7 seems like a reasonable trade-down candidates.

[Ozzy]

58 minutes ago, Forge said:

Don't discount the change in offense. 

I thought he had the exact same offensive coordinator in 2019 as he did in 2020.  Wasn't it Jeff Grimes the OC for BYU 2018-2020? Same HC as well obviously.  Then again he did not have Bushman but Rex took over for that TE production, still Romney I believe had injury issues 2019 and did not in 2020 and obviously the RB success was massive for him and that offense in general.  

 

[Forge]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

You're still gonna have to talk me out of Fields-to-the-Falcons.  I think there's just too much draw for the Falcons not to take him so long as their player evaluation matches that.  Plus, if you're looking at their team needs aside from TE, the draft doesn't really match up with their needs.  So it's either take a QB or trade down, which I think we'd both agree is probably the best path forward.

Oh, it makes total sense if they draft a QB (especially given they are unlikely to be drafting this high again). I wouldn't be shocked if they did select Fields, of course. I just don't think it's going to happen. I think that they are going to run it one more time with Matty and Julio. I won't hate either decision. Weird spot for them. 

 

 

 

[Forge]

2 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

I thought he had the exact same offensive coordinator in 2019 as he did in 2020.  Wasn't it Jeff Grimes the OC for BYU 2018-2020? Same HC as well obviously.  Then again he did not have Bushman but Rex took over for that TE production, still Romney I believe had injury issues 2019 and did not in 2020 and obviously the RB success was massive for him and that offense in general.  

 

Went waaaaaaaaay more wide zone this year and significantly higher wide zone play action. 

[Forge]

5 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Philadelphia at 6 or Detroit at 7 seems like a reasonable trade-down candidates.

This is kind of the sweet spot I want the niners to jump in on as well. Give next years one & #12, go get your guy, call it a day. 

[jrry32]

3 hours ago, NYRaider said:

Another interesting thing to note if you look at recent draft history, QB's that have went #1 have had mixed results. 

Since 2000

2001: Michael Vick - Good career but never appeared in a Super Bowl 

2002: David Carr - Meh career and never appeared in a Super Bowl 

2003: Carson Palmer - Good career but never appeared in a Super Bowl 

2004: Eli Manning - Good career and won 2 Super Bowls

2005: Alex Smith - Good career but never appeared in a Super Bowl

2007: JaMarcus Russell - One of the biggest busts in NFL history 

2009: Matt Stafford - Good career but hasn't appeared in a Super Bowl yet

2010: Sam Bradford - Mediocre career and never appeared in a Super Bowl

2011: Cam Newton - Good career and led the Panthers to 1 Super Bowl loss

2012: Andrew Luck - Very good career but never appeared in a Super Bowl 

2015: Jameis Winston - Mediocre career and hasn't appeared in a Super Bowl yet

2016: Jared Goff - Solid career and led the Rams to 1 Super Bowl loss

2018: Baker Mayfield - Solid career but hasn't appeared in a Super Bowl yet

2019: Kyler Murray - Good career thus far but hasn't appeared in a Super Bowl yet

2020: Joe Burrow - Looks like the real deal but we'll have to see how he bounces back from the injury

So of the 15 QB's taken #1 overall they've had a combined 4 Super Bowl appearances (Manning x2, Newton, Goff), 2 Super Bowl victories (Manning x2), 2 All-Pro seasons (Palmer x1, Newton x1), and 1 MVP (Newton). So it's pretty rare that a QB goes #1 and finds a ton of success with the team that drafts him. 

I don't think that's actually problematic. Keep in mind that if you look at the success at any draft spot over 20 years and a large sample size, it's probably not going to be good. While I know that Pro Bowls aren't the best metric, I expect that 12 of the 15 QBs on that list will end up with at least one Pro Bowl appearance (Baker and Burrow will eventually get at least one imo). And if you consider becoming at least a solid starter as being a successful pick, it looks like at least 11 should be that (projecting with Baker and Burrow). It still remains to be seen with Winston. 

And hell, even a bust like Bradford had some solid years and might have become a solid starter had he not landed in such a bad situation and had the injuries he did. All things considered, while your odds of getting an elite QB aren't good (they're not good at any draft spot), your odds of landing at least a solid starter are quite good.

[jrry32]

19 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

FA is barren for QBs, unless you believe Dak is leaving.  Wouldn't rule out Detroit or Philadelphia for taking a QB.  They think they roll with Goff and Hurts this year, but they're both possibilities.

If Fields is available when Detroit picks, I'd strongly consider picking him if I were them. They have a good situation for him. They can sit him behind Goff to allow his mental game to develop, and Anthony Lynn has shown the ability to design an offense around a mobile QB.

[Ozzy]

1 hour ago, Forge said:

Went waaaaaaaaay more wide zone this year and significantly higher wide zone play action. 

Here is a write up saying the opposite actually, but does say that yes they did play more wide zone which basically was just copying what many in the NFL are doing.  I did not read all of it it but seems to explain it with examples quite well, might have to go back and re read this when I have time

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/zach-wilson-wide-zone-2021-nfl-draft

[Forge]

14 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

Here is a write up saying the opposite actually, but does say that yes they did play more wide zone which basically was just copying what many in the NFL are doing.  I did not read all of it it but seems to explain it with examples quite well, might have to go back and re read this when I have time

https://thedraftnetwork.com/articles/zach-wilson-wide-zone-2021-nfl-draft

Not sure what you're seeing or talking about. This article is saying exactly what I was saying. The article is referencing seth Galina's piece about the increase in outside zone play action and how byu cut their inside zone by half. Outside zone jumped to 51% this year for byu

He went from 12 outside zone play action attempts to around 90 this year which is what I was talking about

[Ozzy]

20 minutes ago, Forge said:

Not sure what you're seeing or talking about. This article is saying exactly what I was saying. The article is referencing seth Galina's piece about the increase in outside zone play action and how byu cut their inside zone by half. Outside zone jumped to 51% this year for byu

He went from 12 outside zone play action attempts to around 90 this year which is what I was talking about

Depends on what side of this you are on, the side that believes Zach Wilson is a little overrated or the side that thinks he can contend with Lawrence as the #1 overall selection.  

 

"But we should view with caution the meteoric rise of a player now cast as the clear-cut QB2 and challenger to Trevor Lawrence for QB1, in that he executed an offense that has told us many lies over its recent surge in the NFL.

Wilson is a good prospect—but with one season of explosive play in a tremendous context, his evaluation deserves more doubt than it’s currently receiving."

[Forge]

10 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

Depends on what side of this you are on, the side that believes Zach Wilson is a little overrated or the side that thinks he can contend with Lawrence as the #1 overall selection.  

 

"But we should view with caution the meteoric rise of a player now cast as the clear-cut QB2 and challenger to Trevor Lawrence for QB1, in that he executed an offense that has told us many lies over its recent surge in the NFL.

Wilson is a good prospect—but with one season of explosive play in a tremendous context, his evaluation deserves more doubt than it’s currently receiving."

I mean, none of that has anything to do with what I said, nor does what I said have anything to do with how good or bad anyone perceives him to be. 

I was talking about possible reasons for his improvement from one year to the next because that was the topic of conversation (you were referencing easier competition in the portion I quoted).  I was saying don't discount the change in offense as a reason for the improvement as well is all

 

[jrry32]

55 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

Depends on what side of this you are on, the side that believes Zach Wilson is a little overrated or the side that thinks he can contend with Lawrence as the #1 overall selection.  

 

"But we should view with caution the meteoric rise of a player now cast as the clear-cut QB2 and challenger to Trevor Lawrence for QB1, in that he executed an offense that has told us many lies over its recent surge in the NFL.

Wilson is a good prospect—but with one season of explosive play in a tremendous context, his evaluation deserves more doubt than it’s currently receiving."

We should doubt Wilson because when put in an offense that plays to his strengths and matches the evolution going on in the pros, he excels? That's very questionable logic. 

[NYRaider]

16 hours ago, jrry32 said:

I don't think that's actually problematic. Keep in mind that if you look at the success at any draft spot over 20 years and a large sample size, it's probably not going to be good. While I know that Pro Bowls aren't the best metric, I expect that 12 of the 15 QBs on that list will end up with at least one Pro Bowl appearance (Baker and Burrow will eventually get at least one imo). And if you consider becoming at least a solid starter as being a successful pick, it looks like at least 11 should be that (projecting with Baker and Burrow). It still remains to be seen with Winston. 

And hell, even a bust like Bradford had some solid years and might have become a solid starter had he not landed in such a bad situation and had the injuries he did. All things considered, while your odds of getting an elite QB aren't good (they're not good at any draft spot), your odds of landing at least a solid starter are quite good.

The chances that a QB taken #1 ever wins an MVP, is an All-Pro, or wins a Super Bowl with the team that drafted him are slim to none. 

[NYRaider]

14 hours ago, jrry32 said:

We should doubt Wilson because when put in an offense that plays to his strengths and matches the evolution going on in the pros, he excels? That's very questionable logic. 

Wasn't he dealing with a shoulder injury in 2019?