What to do at QB?

[BroncoBruin]

Acquiring Rodgers is by far the most realistic path to competing for championships (why we all watch) for the next decade. On the other hand, every single fanbase talks themselves into of a slow rebuilding process resulting in future SB runs. It's blind hope. Give me the scenario where I know the team has a shot over the mystery Door #2 scenario that involves finding the QB + getting everything right at the perfect time. They have that window right now with the young core they've assembled + strong veteran group on defense. All they need is the QB. I cannot understand for the life of me why anyone would think it's better to be patient, lose players like Von Miller and Kyle Fuller, lose the rookie contract value of guys like Chubb, Sutton and Fant, keep rolling the dice at QB and hope you sustain the same success they've had in the draft for another 4-5 year window. That's pretty absurd. 

Edited May 16, 2021 by BroncoBruin

[ClockWorkOrange]

Just now, BroncoBruin said:

You're assuming the worst possible outcome in one situation and the best possible outcome in the other. Basically, you're implying that three first round picks would be the difference between a long playoff drought and competing for championships over the next decade. That's very unrealistic. 

I do not think that it is the worst case scenario that a 38 year old QB will last two years.  I think that is a best case scenario... I mean statistically, how many QB make until they are 40 years old.  Less than 1%... I think I am being very optimistic.   Of the three firsts and a player... If half of them are contributors than that is two starters and I think that is reasonable as the player is likely already a starter for us... So we are giving two starters for a guy that at best will last two years... Also we have to lose two to three starters to pay for Rodgers which will likely cost 40 mil.  I know you say 25 Mill but Rodgers he will want an extension at the top tier QB rate which GB will offer him to try and keep him setting the number...  Are you really going to argue that Rodgers, a me first guy is going to take less?   

 

So that is four to five starters (at worst given picks (3) + starting player (1) + cap cost (3 to 4) for a QB that will at best last two years.   

 

Then there is a worst case scenario... After spending all of this, Rodgers gets hurt.  I think that this is a very real posibility.

I think my original assessment was rather optimistic... I would also like to think about the player that we lose... We are talking about an estimate at 4 - 8 possible starters that we are losing.  4 being the worst case and 8 being the best case (if all the fist rounders are hits and the cap signings are valid)...   All for a two year SB rental...  Again Paton wont do this no way... But Elway might to save his job and control over the Broncos...  I am very worried.  

[BroncoBruin]

31 minutes ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

I do not think that it is the worst case scenario that a 38 year old QB will last two years.  I think that is a best case scenario... I mean statistically, how many QB make until they are 40 years old.  Less than 1%... I think I am being very optimistic.   Of the three firsts and a player... If half of them are contributors than that is two starters and I think that is reasonable as the player is likely already a starter for us... So we are giving two starters for a guy that at best will last two years... Also we have to lose two to three starters to pay for Rodgers which will likely cost 40 mil.  I know you say 25 Mill but Rodgers he will want an extension at the top tier QB rate which GB will offer him to try and keep him setting the number...  Are you really going to argue that Rodgers, a me first guy is going to take less?   

 

So that is four to five starters (at worst given picks (3) + starting player (1) + cap cost (3 to 4) for a QB that will at best last two years.   

 

Then there is a worst case scenario... After spending all of this, Rodgers gets hurt.  I think that this is a very real posibility.

I think my original assessment was rather optimistic... I would also like to think about the player that we lose... We are talking about an estimate at 4 - 8 possible starters that we are losing.  4 being the worst case and 8 being the best case (if all the fist rounders are hits and the cap signings are valid)...   All for a two year SB rental...  Again Paton wont do this no way... But Elway might to save his job and control over the Broncos...  I am very worried.  

The Rodgers stuff has been talked about enough. Let's focus on the other side of this, the option you prefer and think will be better for the Broncos and don't seem to treat with any skepticism whatsoever: the draft and develop plan all 32 fanbases think will result in an eventual title run.

What makes you confident that the roster will be better in a few years than it is right now? We have some really good defensive veterans on the last years of their deals. We've had a three year run of good drafting from 2018-2020, so the team is loaded with cheap high level contributors. Do you realize how rare it is to draft at a high level for a sustained period of time? Take a look at the Seahawks' first few drafts under Carroll and what's happened since. I don't care how great you think Paton is at this, at some point they're going to have a bad draft. Maybe two in a row. Maybe three in a row. They've been beating the odds here, it could very well swing the other way. And the 2018-2020 guys will start getting expensive over the next few years when the team is dependent on continuing this stretch of good drafts. And there's still no sign of an answer at QB, something that is so difficult some franchises never find one. Most teams address this by trading up in the draft, which entails...giving up future draft capital, something you've argued against even though it maximizes our opportunity to win in the next two years.

So, with all this in mind, sell me on the path to wining championships in the 2020s that isn't just "we're going to draft and develop better than everyone", the thing 32 fanbases tell themselves. What's the edge the Broncos have here that is going to make it worth not trying to win right now while we still have Von and 2018-2020 picks at cheap prices? 

Edited May 16, 2021 by BroncoBruin

[BroncoBruin]

The late first round picks of the Elway era (the picks they'd be losing with Rodgers): Sylvester Williams, Bradley Roby, Shane Ray and Paxton Lynch. That's three busts and a corner who was fine, but not worth paying. Yeah...give me Rodgers. 

[ClockWorkOrange]

52 minutes ago, BroncoBruin said:

The Rodgers stuff has been talked about enough. Let's focus on the other side of this, the option you prefer and think will be better for the Broncos: the draft and develop plan all 32 fanbases thinks will result in an eventual title run.

What makes you confident that the roster will be better in a few years than it is right now? We have some really good defensive veterans on the last years of their deals. We've had a three year run of good drafting from 2018-2020, so the team is loaded with cheap high level contributors. Do you realize how rare it is to draft at a high level for a sustained period of time? Take a look at the Seahawks' first few drafts under Carroll and what's happened since. I don't care how great you think Paton is at this, at some point they're going to have a bad draft. Maybe two in a row. Maybe three in a row. They've been beating the odds here, it could very well swing the other way. And the 2018-2020 guys will start getting expensive over the next few years when the team is dependent on continuing this stretch of good drafts. And there's still no sign of an answer at QB, something that is so difficult some franchises never find one. Most teams address this by trading up in the draft, which entails...giving up future draft capital, something you've argued against even though it maximizes our opportunity to win in the next two years. So, with all this in mind, sell me on the path to wining championships in the 2020s that isn't just "we're going to draft and develop better than everyone", the thing 32 fanbases tell themselves. What's the edge the Broncos have here that is going to make it worth not trying to win right now while we still have Von and 2018-2020 picks at cheap prices. 

Oh that is easy... Paton.  I love his commitment to the philosophy that you fill holes with short term contracts in FA and you draft BPA and trade back BPA in the draft.  The idea here is that you elevate the overall team ability by surrounding each player with talent and creating true competition at each position grouping.  This result is in layers of good players competing with each other for the starting position.  You spend less draft capitol on stars as you have a next man up which also makes you resilient to injury...  With this philosophy you win with 4 star talent that plays like 5 star talent due to over all team depth...   You give up paying big money on splash FAs like James to fill holes... and keep overloading position groups until they are layered with depth.  

Do's:

• Get more draft picks... More darts as Paton would put it.  
  • Historically, about half of his picks contribute in some fashion for his system
• Draft BPA and trade back BPA based on team evaluations and scheme fit... never position need
• Fill holes in FA when you need to, but keep contracts short so you can allow BPA in draft to fill positions as it presents
• Prioritize resigning your own players who carry team values and culture... gets more out of your players in effort and retains team chemistry as apposed to onboarding new FA and needing to rebuild relationships and team concepts
• Draft team first players that are looking for a long term home
• Prioritize intelligence in player evaluations
• Allow 5 star players to test the market.  Some will stay for less
• Create competition at each group.  Let the comp determine starters 

Do nots:

• Do not pay big money in FA.  James is the ultimate example...  
• No long term contracts in FA unless its a resigning of your own guys.  
• Do not overvalue talent.  Talent, intelligence, team first = football player.  No me fist guys
• Do not assign starters due to contract size or draft status

 

Advantages:

• Players cost less against the cap due being a draft built team and letting 5 start players go else where
• 5 star talent will sometimes stay for less or cap friendly contracts and with often restructure for team success
• Allows for more sophisticated concepts to be used due to prioritizing own players in FA and the prioritization of team intelligence in acquisition of players
• Resistance to injury as it you invest in more players rather than flash pan acquisitions or 5 star recruits
• Tends to attract aging vets for less who want to win with team that has layered depth in the trenches and strong team culture

Disadvantages

• Takes longer to build due to growth vs purchase philosophy
• You have to be willing to let 5 star players walk to get over all team depth high
  • Can keep a few 5 star players if they play for less and contribute to team more dynamically
• Needs a fan base that knows football and understands team values and the cyclical nature off team sports

 

I have to go, but there is more to this that I need to share, but I have played and coached football and believe in this philosophy completely.  Also, Elway was horrible about this so do not use any of his philosophy or picks against Paton... Elway is not a trained GM.  He is a player moonlighting as GM due to popularity.  Think NE for an NFL comparison... 

 

Edited May 16, 2021 by ClockWorkOrange

[CWood21]

On 5/14/2021 at 9:27 AM, ClockWorkOrange said:

Has all world QB Talent, but has not lead his team to a SB appearance in the last decade... Why?

Because of the team around him.  How many of those games would you actually blame on Rodgers?  Let's go through his playoff losses since he became the starter.

2009 (45-51 vs Cardinals): I'm not sure how giving up 51 points against Arizona is anything but the defense's fault. Rodgers had 4 TDs.
2012 (20-37 vs Giants): Again, coughing up 37 points in any game is likely going to end up with that team losing.
2013 (31-45 vs 49ers): 49ers ran for 323 rushing yards.  'Nuff said.
2014 (20-23 vs 49ers): This one you can probably blame the offense for, although defense deserves blame too.
2015 (22-28 vs Seahawks): Offense definitely deserves the blame on this one.  You force 5 turnovers, you should win.
2016 (20-26 vs Cardinals): Stupid OT rules.  Not sure anyone really deserves the blame here.
2017 (21-44 vs Falcons): ROFL defense.  What's that?
2020 (20-37 vs 49ers): Jimmy G threw the ball 8 times.  8 times.
2021 (26-31 vs Buccaneers) : Green Bay couldn't get a 3rd down stop if they needed it. 

So by my count, you can definitively blame the loss on Aaron Rodgers in 2015.  The offense led by Rodgers laid an egg in that game.  You can probably flip a coin to lay blame for 2014's loss to Arizona.  But you can definitively blame 2009, 2012, 2013, 2017, 2020, and 2021 on the defense.  Green Bay's defense let them down more often then Rodgers did.  And by a pretty hefty margin.

On 5/14/2021 at 9:27 AM, ClockWorkOrange said:

Would cost the Broncos something in the range of 3 firsts essentially setting the team back years in draft capitol

If you legitimately thought the Broncos were going to hand out to 10 picks to Green Bay, you'd agree.  But the odds of that happening are slim as long as Rodgers stays healthy.  When you look at the success of draft picks, you're significantly more likely to pick a bust in the bottom third of the draft than you are of finding a franchise cornerstone.  Obviously, it's not saying you can't find a franchise cornerstone late in the draft or pick a bust in the top 10, but you're far more likely to have success the earlier you're picking.

On 5/14/2021 at 9:27 AM, ClockWorkOrange said:

Likely only has two years left in the tank if everything goes right and he does not take a hit or slow down.

Not sure what you're basing this off considering Rodgers has said MULTIPLE times that he wants to play into his 40s, and we're currently seeing Brady play at a high level in his age 43 season.  And we just saw Rodgers come off an MVP season, there's literally no justification for this.  And before people start citing Peyton Manning and Drew Brees, let's look at what those two had in common that caused their downfall: significant injuries.  So unless we're in the business of predicting injury, this "prediction" is baseless.

On 5/14/2021 at 9:27 AM, ClockWorkOrange said:

Would cost 40mil against the salary cap costing us 3-4 starters in opportunity signings

That's probably the only downside I can see, and that's assuming that Rodgers forces the issue and ask for a pay increase something I'm not sure he's really going to be pushing.  IF he gets dealt, I think he's going to want to try and "stick it" to Gute and win more championships.

On 5/14/2021 at 9:27 AM, ClockWorkOrange said:

Has a history of character issues.  Family issues, teammate reports, and likely leaked all these trade rumors on draft night for personal gain or to get back at the GM causing chaos for his team.   I certainly do not see him as a Team First guy...

He really doesn't.  His family issues have been well-documented, but his teammates (James Jones, Jordy Nelson, John Kuhn, etc.) have all raved about him.  And his generosity with his wealth has also been documented.  Again, the notion that he's a "me first" guy seems wildly off-base at best.  This isn't Brett Favre.  Brett Favre was a "me first" player.

On 5/14/2021 at 9:27 AM, ClockWorkOrange said:

Just a reminder.... Lock struggled his freshman and sophomore years.... He then got comfortable and threw for 99 TDs to 38 Ints in the SEC, had the second most yards in SEC history, and dominated against the best competition in college... and the stats go on and on... 4th best passer rating in SEC history.... 138.8 QB rating over 4 years and was in the 150s his junior and senior years ... He has one of the best QB stats line in college history and he did it in the SEC. If he can get comfortable he can dominate ... Here is a clip from his college scouting report. " His field vision is advanced, too, as he moves his eyes to work through progressions and does not lock onto his primary target.". He will be fine making his reads when he gets comfortable....

If you want to place your Super Bowl hopes on Drew Lock turning into Josh Allen 2.0, go right ahead.  But there's literally NOTHING to suggest that he's going to go from being a bottom 5 starting QB in the NFL to becoming a legitimate MVP-candidate (and probably would have been had Rodgers not had the year he had).  Rodgers makes Denver a legitimate Super Bowl threat.  Maybe even co-favorites in the AFC along with Patrick Mahomes and the Chiefs.  Right now, they're at best a Wild Card team.  Realistically, I don't see them being more than 8-8 with Drew Lock as their starting QB.

[CWood21]

2 hours ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

I have to go, but there is more to this that I need to share, but I have played and coached football and believe in this philosophy completely.  Also, Elway was horrible about this so do not use any of his philosophy or picks against Paton... Elway is not a trained GM.  He is a player moonlighting as GM due to popularity.  Think NE for an NFL comparison... 

And we've seen how New England did last year without Tom Brady.  Not to mention, if New England is your emulator then you're finding a system that has NEVER been repeated and likely will never be repeated.  Green Bay fans had the EXACT same argument being made early during TT's career.  And it only works as long as the draft and develop continues to supply cheap, effective talent.  Paton was promoted to AGM in 2012, so going back from 2012 to when he was hired by the Broncos.  The guys I'd argue are franchise cornerstones were: Harrison Smith (2012), Xavier Rhodes (2013), Danielle Hunter (2015), Dalvin Cook (2017), and Justin Jefferson (2020).  That's 3 of the 5 Vikings' franchise cornerstones being FRPs.  That's not really all that impressive when you're talking about 11 FRPs over that same period of time.

2 hours ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

Get more draft picks... More darts as Paton would put it.  

Historically, about half of his picks contribute in some fashion for his system

Ironically, this applies to more Day 3 picks moreso than Day 1 picks.  Under Spielman, the Vikings have put a priority on the number of Day 3 picks they've had.  In the last 3 drafts, they've either had the most (or tied for the most) draft picks in the NFL draft.  They've averaged 8.7 Day 3 picks compared to just 4 Day 1 or Day 2 picks per draft.  Everyone would love to have multiple FRPs whether it be draftniks, fans, talent evaluators, etc.

[ClockWorkOrange]

Cwood21

I am on my phone so I can not quote all of the stuff I would like to, but The last point is exactly why I would not want Rodgers.  This also relates to the first quote of yours above.  That is... I do not want to pin my hopes on any one player.  Not Drew Lock on a 3 rookie deal and certainly not a 38 year old vet that has not won a SB in over a decade (likely due to his cap space), that is going to cost me 4-8 viable starters due to acquisition costs and cap space, and has a high risk of getting injury.  This is what desperate teams do.  Good teams build their team from the ground up.  

The point is, as I was discussing with BroncoBruin above, there is a better way... a better way.  You build a team through the draft.  This is they way great franchises have been doing it for ever.  The teams that try and buy their way into the SB, like the Jets, have had poor success.  If Rodgers way coming to us as a FA and it did not have such a high trade cost, I could see it.  Much like we did with Manning, but this trade away our future to get him is nonsense.  

The fact is, if we keep building the foundation through the solid evaluations and philosophy that Paton is doing and Lock does not work out.  There will be a Watson, a Russel, or maybe even a Rodgers in a year, that will come available for no cost but the cap space...  Then we can have some agreement.... This is what TB did with 4 great drafts and then a free Tom Brady rolled into town... Why are we acting so desperate?

[ClockWorkOrange]

No we did not see how NE did without Brady... We saw what happened to Brady after they let their team depth fade...  They had well over a decade of success, nearly two, with building through the draft and Brady finally left when the team could not support his winning.  I think you have your cart before your horse on why Brady left NE.  Like with all teams, the lack of high picks and some bad decisions caught up to them and they lost team depth.  They will rebuild and get back to winning because they have the right philosophy...  What they did this last year was an attempt at a quick reset.  I mean they are not going after some high priced trade to get their hero QB back...  That is because they know that the way you find your QB is to put competition in the QB room until one of them immerges as your starter...  It looks to me that they have two young QBs and a serviceable vet that will make that room grow as a group... Looks a hell of a lot like what the Broncos have right now if you include Rypien which I really like...   My money is on teams like NE and the Broncos with Paton doing better than the teams that try and buy their starters like the Jets...  

I think it will workout without Brady as they have competition in the QB room.  They will be just fine... And so will we if we do not turn into the Jets and mortgage or future on some high priced acquisition...  If Paton runs this team we will not acquire Rodgers... If Elway calls the shots we will likely give up the farm... Who do you trust?

Edited May 17, 2021 by ClockWorkOrange

[ClockWorkOrange]

Day 1 picks are traded for day 2 and day 3 picks.. BPA and trade back BPA values day one picks because they are very tradable...  Why are you making issues of the issues that are really non issues?

[CWood21]

56 minutes ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

I am on my phone so I can not quote all of the stuff I would like to, but The last point is exactly why I would not want Rodgers.  This also relates to the first quote of yours above.  That is... I do not want to pin my hopes on any one player.  Not Drew Lock on a 3 rookie deal and certainly not a 38 year old vet that has not won a SB in over a decade (likely due to his cap space), that is going to cost me 4-8 viable starters due to acquisition costs and cap space, and has a high risk of getting injury.  This is what desperate teams do.  Good teams build their team from the ground up.  

Intentionally (or unintentionally), you're effectively doing this by pinning your hopes that Drew Lock has a Y3 jump even close to the jump that Josh Allen did.  Right now, you're going into the 2021 season with Drew Lock or Teddy Bridgewater as the Broncos' starting QB.  The last "journeyman" QB to win a Super Bowl (outside of Nick Foles who I've stated for a number of reasons is a bad comp) was Brad Johnson back in 2002.  That's almost 2 decades.  QB is arguably the most valuable position in all of professional sports, and you're counting on a guy who has been a career journeyman QB and someone who was a bottom 5 QB last year.  IF that's your hopes, you're going to be disappointed IMO.

59 minutes ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

The point is, as I was discussing with BroncoBruin above, there is a better way... a better way.  You build a team through the draft.  This is they way great franchises have been doing it for ever.  The teams that try and buy their way into the SB, like the Jets, have had poor success.  If Rodgers way coming to us as a FA and it did not have such a high trade cost, I could see it.  Much like we did with Manning, but this trade away our future to get him is nonsense.  

So what you're telling me is that you're hoping that you can luck into a franchise QB?  Even with bottom 5 QB production this past season, the Broncos picked 9th.  If you're hoping for a Manning-like FA becoming available, you might as well prepare for at least another FO to be in play before that's happening.

[CWood21]

56 minutes ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

Day 1 picks are traded for day 2 and day 3 picks.. BPA and trade back BPA values day one picks because they are very tradable...  Why are you making issues of the issues that are really non issues?

Which ironically isn't what the Vikings have done (or the Broncos this past draft) have done.

[ClockWorkOrange]

1 hour ago, CWood21 said:

Which ironically isn't what the Vikings have done (or the Broncos this past draft) have done.

Minnesota has more draft picks than any other franchise in the last 12 years and the next team isn't even close.  Broncos started the day with 7 picks and ended up with 10... Paton said he wanted to get at least 10 picks before the draft was over... They gathered picks up as they went.  The reason they did not trade back with the 9th pick is because that was their top defensive player and they had him as a top 5 pick on their board... Not sure what you are referring to... 

[ClockWorkOrange]

45 minutes ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

 

 

2 hours ago, CWood21 said:

 

So what you're telling me is that you're hoping that you can luck into a franchise QB?  Even with bottom 5 QB production this past season, the Broncos picked 9th.  If you're hoping for a Manning-like FA becoming available, you might as well prepare for at least another FO to be in play before that's happening.

No I am telling you that the way you develop a starting QB is to put competition in the QB room just like Paton said and NE is doing.  You do not do it by selling out your franchise by spending the opportunity cost of 4-8 starters (rating the trade and cap cost from best case to worst)...  There is a chance Lock works out, There is a chance that TB works out, and there is a chance that it will take another year to develop the QB room until it is healthy.... But in this methodology there is a 100% chance that your team will get better every year.  There is also a chance that as you build depth and layer your team with Talent that a Vet like Manning comes along, or perhaps a Watson, Russel, or even a Rodgers if he finds his way out of his contract... will come along and want to play for your teams because you are so deep... This is how good teams do it... Tampa did it this way and won a SB just last year Over a team with arguable the best current QB in the league.  Team depth gets it done but it may take a little longer.  Teams like the Jets do it the desperate way and try to buy their players with cap space and draft capitol.  I do not want to be that desperate franchise that mortgages the future to win for two years and even that is assuming that a 38 year old QB actually will play that long and does not get injured. 

 

Edited May 17, 2021 by ClockWorkOrange

[Broncofan]

2 hours ago, ClockWorkOrange said:

 

No I am telling you that the way you develop a starting QB is to put competition in the QB room just like Paton said and NE is doing.  You do not do it by selling out your franchise by spending the opportunity cost of 4-8 starters (rating the trade and cap cost from best case to worst)...  There is a chance Lock works out, There is a chance that TB works out, and there is a chance that it will take another year to develop the QB room until it is healthy.... But in this methodology there is a 100% chance that your team will get better every year.  There is also a chance that as you build depth and layer your team with Talent that a Vet like Manning comes along, or perhaps a Watson, Russel, or even a Rodgers if he finds his way out of his contract... will come along and want to play for your teams because you are so deep... This is how good teams do it... Tampa did it this way and won a SB just last year Over a team with arguable the best current QB in the league.  Team depth gets it done but it may take a little longer.  Teams like the Jets do it the desperate way and try to buy their players with cap space and draft capitol.  I do not want to be that desperate franchise that mortgages the future to win for two years and even that is assuming that a 38 year old QB actually will play that long and does not get injured. 

 

The odds that Lock or TB are our long-term answer and can compete in the AFCW are pretty long.   Not just because of where they are (Teddy B has no ceiling, he is what he is) - but also keeping in mind the bar for QB play as good enough is a lot higher in the AFCW with Mahomes/Herbert.  

The opportunity cost of top-25 to top-30 picks is a fraction of the Rd1 draft capital we've been given the past 4 years.    You keep saying you don't want to give that up - but at the range we pick in with a playoff team, we wouldn't regret losing them.   There's no draft where you're giving up surefire top-tier talent at premium positions.   That's a huge part (along with the salary cap) of why the NFL enjoys so much parity.

As for QB's - take a hard look back at see what QB's have developed into even top 10 guys by going after reclamation projects:

1.  Ryan Tannehill 

2.  Kirk Cousins in FA

And if you want to get to top 5-6.....there's only been 2 ways - signing/trading for an established guy (Manning/Favre), or finding the young FA who has room to grow (Brees)....or drafting them.   And here's the thing about drafted players - the breakout to elite top 5-6 status.....nowadays, that's pretty apparent by year 2.   Herbert's not there yet, but his breakout in year 1 shows the ceiling.   

The amount of struggles Lock's shown, and the fact his flaws haven't really improved, and he had 4 years as a college starter in a pro system - make his ceiling as lot lower than we'd hoped after his 5-game stint at end of 2019.    

And if you want to draft a QB as your guy - the odds are just more heavily weighed in getting the Rd1 guy.    Russell Wilson in Rd3 because of the bias against size, and Dak in Rd4, are the only 2 exceptions to finding a top 5-6 ceiling guy. 

You can try to convince yourself & other fans that Drew Lock & Teddy B *might* work out - but here's the thing - their ceiling isn't good enough to compete in the AFCW, barring a perfect unit.  And anything less - it's not good enough.  It's why going to the Final 4, is basically only possible for teams to do consistently - if they have great QB play.  

It's still true that there are lots of ways to get to the Final 4 - but again, as I posted in January - the last 10 years shows only great QB play keeps teams coming back.    Every now and then, the odd guy makes it in (Blake Bortles with JAX with a 4th place schedule and a great D that got dismantled right away, Case Keenum with MIN and that 32nd-hardest schedule and amazing D).   But those franchises are usually one-and-done, because the league's become the QB league.

Honestly, I understand the argument for trying to keep 1st round picks, if we're not good enough to contend.  I've been pounding the table to not spend on win-now guys in the past because our team wasn't good enough to legitimately contend.  And I've railed against the Keenum/Flacco acquisitions for the same reason - they didn't move the needle.   But the team is actually that good now - especially with the 4th place schedule, and the roster we have.  But it's also a roster that will get more expensive after 2022 - so in fact, going for it in 2021-2 with an A-Rod absolutely makes sense.    If Watson didn't have his legal issues, even moreso - since you're buying the 8+ years of peak production.     But as that situation is far from resolved, if it's 2 1sts and 1 young guy, knowing how devalued a late 1st in terms of opportunity cost, it's a no-brainer.

And let's be clear - A-Rod's current contract is a total bargain.    Please stop throwing 40M cap numbers when the 2021-23 numbers for teams acquiring him are 24M, 25.5M & 25.5M - or 3/75M.    When you start throwing out wild statements like 40M per year, it only suggests you're just dead set against A-Rod or any other QB acquisition, and trying to fit the argument to your belief. 

If you are passing on A-Rod, then you are putting your chips in with Drew Lock & Teddy B.   Guys who keep saying "they might be the solution" - you're passing up on getting the immediate upgrade.   It's much like saying "Tim Tebow might work out, let's pass on Peyton Manning"...in 2011.    Elway didn't make that call.     I'm not saying simply this out of hindsight - it's just that it's not a "might work out" argument.   Either the team believes in Lock, or they don't.   They already made an offer for Stafford with 1.9, they were in on the Watson sweepstakes pre-lawsuits, and obviously they're interested in A-Rod.     That speaks volumes.    Maybe Green Bay's price goes insane....maybe he has a change of heart.   But if fans are going to say "I don't want A-Rod" - don't hedge with Lock/Teddy B "might" be the guy.  You're saying they will be the guy and it's going to work out, and you'll take the picks.  The fact fans want to hedge on this though.....kinda speaks for itself.   

Edited May 17, 2021 by Broncofan