Goldfish's Way Too Early Draft Rankings 2022 (All Up)

[Packerraymond]

3 minutes ago, ET80 said:

But… they had a QB up until last season. Matt Stafford started from 2009 to 2020. So you’re in essence saying they should have given up on Stafford sooner?

Bluntly, what you’re saying isn’t making sense. What QB should they have taken from 2010 to current that would improve their situation? Don’t give me theoretical situations, tell me the actual QBs they could have drafted from 2010 onwards that would have turned the Lions around - because you’re the one advocating that the Lions should have still drafted a QB, even in the midst of Matt Stafford putting up exceptional performances every season.

I think the Lions should've pulled the plug on Stafford after 2019, and they've been in position to take a QB in 2020, 2021 and 2022. I don't think their drafts deserve high praise for ignoring their biggest flaw. They better hope to stink it up this year, cause it's going to cost a lot to move up in a year with Stroud and Young.

[Jameson_Neat]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

I think the Lions should've pulled the plug on Stafford after 2019, and they've been in position to take a QB in 2020, 2021 and 2022. I don't think their drafts deserve high praise for ignoring their biggest flaw. They better hope to stink it up this year, cause it's going to cost a lot to move up in a year with Stroud and Young.

Ah, I see.  You're just a little miffed that a majority people think the Lions have drafted better than the Packers the last two years.

I mean, you just advocated for them to jump all over the 3rd rated QB a few years ago, downplayed who they did draft because of it and now they better hope to land one of the top two prospects next year? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Packerraymond]

5 minutes ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

Ah, I see.  You're just a little miffed that a majority people think the Lions have drafted better than the Packers the last two years.

I mean, you just advocated for them to jump all over the 3rd rated QB a few years ago, downplayed who they did draft because of it and now they better hope to land one of the top two prospects next year? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah super miffed. I'd trade those 39 wins for 11 if it meant a better draft grade. What an asinine statement lol.

I actually don't have a hatred for the Lions like I do Bears and Vikings. Wouldn't mind seeing them get good and have a bit of a rivalry, but without a QB, they'll be cellar dwellers in the division.

[ET80]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

I think the Lions should've pulled the plug on Stafford after 2019

I flat out disagree with this in its entirety. Stafford was playing at a very high level in 2018 …and it is easier to build around Stafford instead of finding someone who is as good as Stafford.

There is zero guarantee that you’ll find another QB on that tier - I mean, how long was the gap for Buffalo for Jim Kelly to Josh Allen, and how many EJ Manuel/JP Losman/Tyrod Taylor types to get there? How long has Miami been searching for the successor to Dan Marino? As a Packer fan, I think you lack the understanding that finding a QB is HARD, you traditionally don’t get two elite guys back to back, so trading a guy doesn’t guarantee you’ll find one that’s even remotely as good.

You only move a QB when they request it - such as when Stafford asked to be traded.

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

they've been in position to take a QB in 2020, 2021 and 2022

Specifics please - what QB could they have taken that would present a better situation than where they are now? Herbert has just as good a team in LAC than Stafford has in LAR, which one won the SB and which one missed the playoffs? If Herbert can’t take THAT team to the playoffs, what chances does he have in Detroit?

Tua is quickly proving he’s not good, Jalen Hurts is still a question mark and Jordan Love has proven nothing at this level. 2021? Yeah, that’s a hard no on anyone outside of Trevor Lawrence. 2022 we’ve already covered as the worst QB class in several decades.

So, which guy represents a better situation than what Stafford at that time? Hell, starting from the ‘21 class… who represents a better option than Jared Goff?

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

They better hope to stink it up this year, cause it's going to cost a lot to move up in a year with Stroud and Young.

You’re really showing us your lack of understanding on the future of the position with your posting, if I’m being blunt. You understand there are roughly six guys with 1st round grades coming into the class of ‘23, right?

Stroud, Young are the names that are hyped up… but Will Levis out of Kentucky, Tyler Van Dyke out of UM, Tanner McKee out of Stanford, Anthony Richardson out of Florida, Hendon Hooker out of Tennessee, Spencer Rattler out of South Carolina, DJ Uiagalelei out of Clemson, Phil Jurkovec out of Boston College… each of these guys are currently considered first round guys. (This isn’t considering a college QB having a Joe Burrow like jump, either).

That’s one of the reasons nobody is giving a damn on passing on a QB this draft - because there are about eight guys who are considerably better than everyone in this class (Rattler and DJ might be the only question marks for this group).

It’s not just about how bad this class was - it’s also about how the next class is incredibly special. Detroit will be in position to get one unless they make a deep playoff run (which sort of negates the need, if we’re being honest).

[ET80]

22 minutes ago, BofaDeez54927 said:

Ah, I see.  You're just a little miffed that a majority people think the Lions have drafted better than the Packers the last two years.

This is about as transparent as Saran Wrap, so I’m counterpointing his argument to better illustrate how bad his argument is. 

(His argument is about as flimsy as Saran Wrap, too).

[Packerraymond]

1 minute ago, ET80 said:

I flat out disagree with this in its entirety. Stafford was playing at a very high level in 2018 …and it is easier to build around Stafford instead of finding someone who is as good as Stafford.

There is zero guarantee that you’ll find another QB on that tier - I mean, how long was the gap for Buffalo for Jim Kelly to Josh Allen, and how many EJ Manuel/JP Losman/Tyrod Taylor types to get there? How long has Miami been searching for the successor to Dan Marino? As a Packer fan, I think you lack the understanding that finding a QB is HARD, you traditionally don’t get two elite guys back to back, so trading a guy doesn’t guarantee you’ll find one that’s even remotely as good.

You only move a QB when they request it - such as when Stafford asked to be traded.

Specifics please - what QB could they have taken that would present a better situation than where they are now? Herbert has just as good a team in LAC than Stafford has in LAR, which one won the SB and which one missed the playoffs? If Herbert can’t take THAT team to the playoffs, what chances does he have in Detroit?

Tua is quickly proving he’s not good, neither Jalen Hurts or Jordan Love has proven anything at this level. 2021? Yeah, that’s a hard no on anyone outside of Trevor Lawrence. 2022 we’ve already covered as the worst QB class in several decades.

So, which guy represents a better situation than what Stafford at that time? Hell, starting from the 21 class, who represents a better option than Jared Goff?

You’re really showing us your lack of understanding on the future of the position with your posting, if I’m being blunt. You understand there are roughly six guys with 1st round grades coming into the class of ‘23, right?

Stroud, Young are the names that are hyped up, but Will Levis out of Kentucky, Tyler Van Dyke out of UM, Tanner McKee out of Stanford, Anthony Richardson out of Florida, Hendon Hooker out of Tennessee, Spencer Rattler out of South Carolina, DJ Uiagalelei out of Clemson, Phil Jurkovec out of Boston College… each of these guys are currently considered first round grades.

That’s one of the reasons nobody is giving a damn on passing on a QB this draft - because there are about eight guys who are considerably better than everyone in this class (Rattler and DJ might be the only question marks for this group).

It’s not just about how bad this class was - it’s also about how the next class is incredibly special. Detroit will be in position to get one unless they make a deep playoff run (which sort of negates the need, if we’re being honest).

Man you really think highly of yourself, bold is absolutely rich. I'm so grateful you would choose to debate me, a mere football peasant. Im not going to waste my time trying to prove some sort of knowledge to you, do my a favor and stop replying if that's the kind of pompous attitude you have. There's going to be 3-4 QBs next year that go round 1, that's how all the strong QB years end up. Right now the gap between those two and Levi's (who I have at 3) is pretty large.

I see the Lions all the time, probably more than you. Stafford was breaking down there, he was always hurt in December and the Lions had committed financial resources to him that deteriorated the rest of the roster. No different than the juggernaut Falcons and Ryan. Man it really paid off holding on to him the last few years didn't it? Could've gotten at least 2 firsts three years ago but held on for those memorable 7-9 years and got a 3rd. 

If your QB is 32-34 year old range, holds a high trade value, is paid top 12 for the position and you're a bottom 12 team in the league, trade him and start over. 

You know the QBs the Lions could have drafted, why the  do I need to name them? We'll never know how Herbert, Tua, Love, Mac Jones, Justin Fields, etc... would look there because they didn't go there. 

You're sitting here arguing that a team that's 11-37 over the last 3 years is doing the right thing. Like where is the logic in that???

[ET80]

11 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

Man you really think highly of yourself, bold is absolutely rich. I'm so grateful you would choose to debate me, a mere football peasant. 

I already explain why I left my ivory tower to discuss this with you:

22 minutes ago, ET80 said:

This is about as transparent as Saran Wrap, so I’m counterpointing his argument to better illustrate how bad his argument is. 

(His argument is about as flimsy as Saran Wrap, too).

Your arguments are contradictory at times, and are rooted in this notion that teams find elite QBs in every draft. That is flat out not true - teams go years, decades even without finding a QB, so just assuming a team can start over is ignoring how it actually works for the other 31 teams.

It’s getting frustrating bringing this point up repeatedly and simply being told “well, just draft another QB”. I’m providing historical content, you’re providing your own personal theory backed by absolutely nothing.

12 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

There's going to be 3-4 QBs next year that go round 1, that's how all the strong QB years end up. Right now the gap between those two and Levi's (who I have at 3) is pretty large.

Pretty sure need combined with the lack of QBs in this draft will put that to 5-7; Levis is at three right now, but we have yet to see Richardson as an unquestioned starter (6’ 5” 240lb QBs with 4.4 speed and above average arm talent and mechanics tend to rise pretty quickly - see Josh Allen out of Wyoming back in ‘18) and everyone is seemingly looking past Jurkovic as a borderline elite arm talent. Hooker gets another year in an offense that fits him perfectly, so he’s certainly going to raise.

I’m going to be as bold to say that Stroud/Young aren’t even the first two off the board (specifically Young, who is smaller than Kyler Murray - without the explosive running ability).

23 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I see the Lions all the time, probably more than you. Stafford was breaking down there, he was always hurt in December and the Lions had committed financial resources to him that deteriorated the rest of the roster.

So your solution is to… put a rookie into this deteriorated roster? We saw how that worked out for Trevor Lawrence last season (remember, the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning?) So - we see rookie QB go into bad situation, look bad in process, then team has to overspend on guys like Christian Kirk and Evan Engram in a desperate attempt to not ruin the guy. See, while you watch the Lions more than me, I watch the Jaguars more than you - and what you described is what the Jaguars did on multiple occasions (not just Trevor, but Blake Bortles, Blaine Gabbert and even Byron Leftwich, too). 

Give me the Falcons over that nonsense, every single time.

28 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

If your QB is 32-34 year old range, holds a high trade value, is paid top 12 for the position and you're a bottom 12 team in the league, trade him and start over. 

But if you don’t ever find a QB that can play at a comparable level, you’ll fall from bottom 12 to bottom three really quickly. That’s the issue - finding that QB is never a guarantee. Then you spend the next half decade to decade looking for that next QB. That’s a quick and definitive way to find yourself irrelevant for a very long time.

31 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

You're sitting here arguing that a team that's 11-37 over the last 3 years is doing the right thing. Like where is the logic in that???

Tell me what their record is in the next three years. You can’t. What happened yesterday means nothing, building to tomorrow is what matters.

[Packerraymond]

42 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Your arguments are contradictory at times, and are rooted in this notion that teams find elite QBs in every draft. That is flat out not true - teams go years, decades even without finding a QB, so just assuming a team can start over is ignoring how it actually works for the other 31 teams.

It’s getting frustrating bringing this point up repeatedly and simply being told “well, just draft another QB”. I’m providing historical content, you’re providing your own personal theory backed by absolutely nothing.

Pretty sure need combined with the lack of QBs in this draft will put that to 5-7; Levis is at three right now, but we have yet to see Richardson as an unquestioned starter (6’ 5” 240lb QBs with 4.4 speed and above average arm talent and mechanics tend to rise pretty quickly - see Josh Allen out of Wyoming back in ‘18) and everyone is seemingly looking past Jurkovic as a borderline elite arm talent. Hooker gets another year in an offense that fits him perfectly, so he’s certainly going to raise.

I’m going to be as bold to say that Stroud/Young aren’t even the first two off the board (specifically Young, who is smaller than Kyler Murray - without the explosive running ability).

So your solution is to… put a rookie into this deteriorated roster? We saw how that worked out for Trevor Lawrence last season (remember, the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning?) So - we see rookie QB go into bad situation, look bad in process, then team has to overspend on guys like Christian Kirk and Evan Engram in a desperate attempt to not ruin the guy. See, while you watch the Lions more than me, I watch the Jaguars more than you - and what you described is what the Jaguars did on multiple occasions (not just Trevor, but Blake Bortles, Blaine Gabbert and even Byron Leftwich, too). 

Give me the Falcons over that nonsense, every single time.

But if you don’t ever find a QB that can play at a comparable level, you’ll fall from bottom 12 to bottom three really quickly. That’s the issue - finding that QB is never a guarantee. Then you spend the next half decade to decade looking for that next QB. That’s a quick and definitive way to find yourself irrelevant for a very long time.

I've never said you find elite QBs in every draft a single time in this thread. No idea where you came up with that.

My stance is that you cannot have a championship football team without an elite QB (or one that is playing elite during the stretch run, i.e. Eli Manning or Joe Flacco). The only recent (since the DPI rule changes) outlier to that is Peyton Manning with the Broncos, a team so overloaded on cap dedicated to the defensive side of the ball, they took years to recover.

Your stance seems to be the fear of the unknown is too much to outweigh the comfort of mediocrity. Stafford and Ryan were good enough in their prime to win SBs, but not so much in the last 5 years, they were good enough to keep their teams in purgatory though. I'll take 4-12 over that any day (so long as I have a component F.O. which in Jax is up for debate). 

The Packers, 49ers, Titans and Eagles have all drafted QBs relatively high in recent years with a decent QB on their roster. This is what smart teams do. The Packers to have a succession plan, The Eagles, 49ers and Titans because they're in the very purgatory that the Lions and Falcons found themselves in years ago. Jury is still out on all 4 QBs ever being franchise guys, but their logic was sound and none of them have been hurt by the pick they made. All 4 GMs will survive if that QB busts, and guess what they'll all do soon if so? Pick another QB.

 

[Norm]

2 hours ago, ET80 said:

I already explain why I left my ivory tower to discuss this with you:

Your arguments are contradictory at times, and are rooted in this notion that teams find elite QBs in every draft. That is flat out not true - teams go years, decades even without finding a QB, so just assuming a team can start over is ignoring how it actually works for the other 31 teams.

It’s getting frustrating bringing this point up repeatedly and simply being told “well, just draft another QB”. I’m providing historical content, you’re providing your own personal theory backed by absolutely nothing.

Pretty sure need combined with the lack of QBs in this draft will put that to 5-7; Levis is at three right now, but we have yet to see Richardson as an unquestioned starter (6’ 5” 240lb QBs with 4.4 speed and above average arm talent and mechanics tend to rise pretty quickly - see Josh Allen out of Wyoming back in ‘18) and everyone is seemingly looking past Jurkovic as a borderline elite arm talent. Hooker gets another year in an offense that fits him perfectly, so he’s certainly going to raise.

I’m going to be as bold to say that Stroud/Young aren’t even the first two off the board (specifically Young, who is smaller than Kyler Murray - without the explosive running ability).

So your solution is to… put a rookie into this deteriorated roster? We saw how that worked out for Trevor Lawrence last season (remember, the best QB prospect since Peyton Manning?) So - we see rookie QB go into bad situation, look bad in process, then team has to overspend on guys like Christian Kirk and Evan Engram in a desperate attempt to not ruin the guy. See, while you watch the Lions more than me, I watch the Jaguars more than you - and what you described is what the Jaguars did on multiple occasions (not just Trevor, but Blake Bortles, Blaine Gabbert and even Byron Leftwich, too). 

Give me the Falcons over that nonsense, every single time.

But if you don’t ever find a QB that can play at a comparable level, you’ll fall from bottom 12 to bottom three really quickly. That’s the issue - finding that QB is never a guarantee. Then you spend the next half decade to decade looking for that next QB. That’s a quick and definitive way to find yourself irrelevant for a very long time.

Tell me what their record is in the next three years. You can’t. What happened yesterday means nothing, building to tomorrow is what matters.

Attaboy. Ray sucks. Get em!!

[ET80]

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

I've never said you find elite QBs in every draft a single time in this thread. No idea where you came up with that.

Then why are you downgrading the Lions for their draft? Are you advocating they spend a top 64 guy on someone who isn’t elite? That’s a waste of resources, your top 64 guys need to provide something more than carrying a clipboard.

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

My stance is that you cannot have a championship football team without an elite QB (or one that is playing elite during the stretch run, i.e. Eli Manning or Joe Flacco). The only recent (since the DPI rule changes) outlier to that is Peyton Manning with the Broncos, a team so overloaded on cap dedicated to the defensive side of the ball, they took years to recover.

This isn’t some new insight - elite QBs win football games. But in the cases of Flacco and Eli (and even Peyton in his last SB) bad QBs can win IF they’re surrounded by great teams (because those defenses that took em there were great on all levels).

Your biggest criticism on Detroit is they didn’t draft a QB, so either you’re assuming that one of these QB will achieve elite status or that the team around him is great enough to mask their flaws. (Or you’re just looking to rain on a division rivals’ parade after a really nice draft - perfectly acceptable answer, if you must know).

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

Your stance seems to be the fear of the unknown is too much to outweigh the comfort of mediocrity.

Sort of - because that unknown could lead to decades of cellar dwelling, because finding QBs is not guaranteed. Whereas the “comfort of mediocrity” could lead to runs akin to the Ravens with Flacco, the Giants with Eli twice and the Broncos with Manning (and let’s be serious, we don’t paint Matt Ryan as mediocre if his defense holds a 28-3 lead vs Tom Brady). 

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

The Packers, 49ers, Titans and Eagles have all drafted QBs relatively high in recent years with a decent QB on their roster.

I’d argue the Titans didn’t - there is a different expectation between 2nd and 3rd round QBs.

1 hour ago, Packerraymond said:

The Eagles, 49ers and Titans because they're in the very purgatory that the Lions and Falcons found themselves in years ago. Jury is still out on all 4 QBs ever being franchise guys, but their logic was sound and none of them have been hurt by the pick they made. All 4 GMs will survive if that QB busts, and guess what they'll all do soon if so? Pick another QB.

You really think the Eagles aren’t hurting? They’re a SB caliber team abs it’s all going to depend on if Hurts can improve - if he can’t, that’s another year lost. The 49ers are nearly in a make or break year, if that move for Trey Lance doesn’t work, that entire staff/FO is fired. Titans aren’t hurting, but because they’re a run centric team that will start hurting once Derrick Henry slows down (I watch the Titans more than you). 

All of these teams have various issues and it isn’t a stretch to think there are some warm seats if this doesn’t work out (Lynch and Shanahan are all but done if Lance doesn’t work out).

[ET80]

1 minute ago, Norm said:

Attaboy. Ray sucks. Get em!!

That might be a bit harsh…

[Norm]

6 minutes ago, ET80 said:

That might be a bit harsh…

Lol it's all in fun. It's a huge running joke in the GB section to tease both the mods endlessly. He knows

[ET80]

15 minutes ago, Norm said:

Lol it's all in fun. It's a huge running joke in the GB section to tease both the mods endlessly. He knows

It’s a huge running joke in the Gen section to tease both the mods endlessly too - ask @Forge.

[Norm]

2 minutes ago, ET80 said:

It’s a huge running joke in the Gen section to tease both the mods endlessly too - ask @Forge.

Sweet. I want in on this as well

[Soko]

5 hours ago, Packerraymond said:

I think the Lions should've pulled the plug on Stafford after 2019, and they've been in position to take a QB in 2020, 2021 and 2022. I don't think their drafts deserve high praise for ignoring their biggest flaw. They better hope to stink it up this year, cause it's going to cost a lot to move up in a year with Stroud and Young.

Doesn’t it make more sense to build the roster, and then add the potential franchise QB on a rookie deal? If you do it the other way around, you’re wasting that window. Assuming you even find a franchise guy in the first place. 

I like what the Lions are doing.