Originally Posted by SNR
70% seems pretty high. I guess depends on what "bust" means. To me, respectability as a team's primary QB makes the guy a "not bust". And let's be honest-- the Chiefs with one of the "not bust" QBs I list below would be FAR better.
Since 2002, QBs taken in the 1st round:
2012: Luck, Griffin, Tannehill, Weeden
2011: Newton, Gabbert, Ponder, Locker
2010: Bradford, Tebow
2009: Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman
2008: Ryan, Flacco
2007: Russell, Quinn
2006: Young, Leinart, Cutler
2005: Smith, Rodgers, Campbell
2004: Manning, Rivers, Losman, Roethlisberger
2003: Palmer, Leftwich, Boller, Grossman
2002: Carr, Harrington, Ramsey
Not busts (18):
Luck, Griffin, Tannehill, Newton, Ponder, Bradford, Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman, Ryan, Flacco, Cutler, Smith, Rodgers, Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger, Palmer
Busts (16): Weeden, Gabbert, Locker, Tebow, Russell, Quinn, Young, Leinart, Campbell, Losman, Leftwich, Boller, Grossman, Carr, Harrington, Ramsey
You can quibble about certain guys here and there. I took a guess on the guys in 2012 and 2011 since they're still so fresh. Some not busts will actually be busts (like Sanchez perhaps) and some busts may one day become not busts (like those first four names). The point is, it's about a 50% hit rate for getting a good QB.
To get a TRUE franchise QB, the rate is probably closer to your 70% probability of failure. If you remove all the 2011 and 2012 QBs from both lists and then tally it up I get this:
Franchise QBs (9): Stafford, Ryan, Flacco, Cutler, Smith, Rodgers, Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger
Busts/game managers (15): The rest
9/24 hit rate, or a 64% chance of not drafting a true franchise QB likely capable of winning a Super Bowl
I'm not going to do the DT analysis, but I'll bet it's no better than the QB odds.
Realistically, SOMETHING has to be drafted. I'll take the QB odds any day.
|