Yesterday, 03:27 PM
(Yesterday, 01:15 PM)StickierBuns Wrote: In theory, of course. In reality? Teams needs QBs every year.....because the Draft is an inexact science. Bad choices are made every year. Teams draft when 'available' and still that QB can turn out to be a bust. Then you waste 2-3 years and now its an extreme 'need'. And the beat goes on.
I don’t think this is really true. I think the unfortunate reality is that most teams are so short sighted that they aren’t making “luxury” picks on potentially improving their QB position until it becomes a desperate need or the previous regime was fired and the new regime wants to get their guy. Atlanta was widely criticized for taking Penix when they just had acquired Cousins, despite Cousins having a long history of being accused of being a midlevel QB. The Vikings, I think look pretty professional for targeting a group of QBs and ensuring that they ended up getting one of the ones they wanted, but they did wait until after they got rid of Cousins to try and solve that problem. But looking at the teams around us in the draft, several teams that don’t have a solid option at QB ignored that need despite having a QB available at their pick or within a reasonable trade up. The Giants and Raiders look particularly negligent to me, and will look worse if JJM starts to look good for us, while they reach to draft an underperformer in 2025.
I do agree that the draft is an inexact science at best, that’s why you have to draft a high volume of quality QB prospects, OL, and skill position players, because your chance for winning a SB doesn’t really start until you can get a quality QB prospect to turn into a quality NFL QB. You aren’t wasting years because you picked the wrong guy, you waste years by not getting the right guy and by hoping that the guy you have who’s never proven to be the right guy turns into the right guy.