« Reply #204 on: April 05, 2024, 08:04:34 PM »
If Brissett is as good as Maye or Daniels, even on day 1, then the Patriots made a terrible pick.
I agree in terms of talent. I also think there could be merit to have Brissett eat up starts with out terrible offensive line and receiving weapons while the young QB learns.
I flip flop back and forth on the matter to be honest. If they are better, should they start?
They should start from day 1 even if they aren't. Any player you take in the top 3 should be a day 1 starter or you've wasted the pick.
I agree that you'd want the QB taken to get game experience in Year 1. Not sure it has to be Game 1, but eventually. It isn't true that the pick is a bust if Brissett is a better all-around QB on Day 1. Drew Bledsoe was better than Brady in Brady's Year 1.
I got a chuckle from the hyperbole there.
Yeah little silly. Both of the top qbs of the past 20 years didn’t start day one in mahomes and Brady. It’s not some crazy indictment on whoever we draft if they don’t start first game of season with a terrible offensive line with poor weapons. Also it is not like mahomes was some third round pick he was drafted 10th.
Mahomes and Brady weren't top 3 picks. There is a big difference between even 10 where Mahomes went and 3 (though you would expect almost every top 10 pick to start immediately).
I'm fairly certain the only recent top 3 pick that hasn't started day 1 has been Trey Lance and years later he is still terrible. I think if you expanded that to top 5 the same thing holds true.
You've wasted a top 3 pick if the guy isn't starting immediately.
I'm not sure that I agree, but the NFL seems to be trending in that direction. Young and Stroud started immediately. It's great for Stroud, but might Young have been better with more seasoning? Hard to say.
It seems like both the Bears and Redskins will start their rookie QBs immediately. To Chicago's credit, they're giving Williams two good WRs (and maybe one at #9), a veteran center and a good running game.
There is a reason I said recent, it is the way the league is going especially with QB's. I mean look at the SB QB's aside from the all time greats i.e Brady and Mahomes there have either been journeyman like Jimmy G or rookie contract guys (Stafford isnt a journeyman, but he also isnt an all time great). The dollars just get so big in year 6, you are wasting a window if they don't start immediately. Now maybe that changes some as guys like Allen, Jackson, etc. are in 2nd contracts, but as of now the trend the last 10+ years have either one of the 5 best QB's in the history of the sport (that in my view also covers Peyton) or have a guy that isn't paid anywhere close to top dollar with Stafford as basically the only exception. That goes back to the Giants last win in 2012 and includes both the winner and loser. And most of those non all time great QB teams, the QB was on a rookie contract still (including the last 4 losers). You need to get that 1st year out of the way to maximize that year 2 jump and get that clock ticking while the guy isn't paid huge dollars because we see a lot what happens when teams start paying their QB massive money. The talent just isn't as great and it is really hard to sustain multiple seasons of contention (unless you have Mahomes, Brady, or Peyton). I mean even Rodgers hasn't been back to the SB after that initial one. The Seahawks went to 2 straight and didn't come all that close after they paid Russ.
« Last Edit: April 05, 2024, 08:43:41 PM by Moranis »
Logged
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick
Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip