Quote:
Originally Posted by DeezNutz
See my beautiful dick-slamming post.
No one wants a sore dick. All QB's are not created equally. Time is not going to heal all the wounds of rounds 3-7.
Hope in one hand, shit in the other. See which fills up faster.
|
No, I read it, and I recognize that first round QBs will likely succeed at a higher rate. But why is it that QBs bust at such an astronomically higher rate than other positions, including left tackle and DE, which are also difficult to draft for? It's because DEs can still get a chance to play, even if they're not a starter. Many of them eventually prove themselves. Most lower round QBs leave the NFL without taking a single meaningful snap in their NFL careers. My point is, how can you claim that QB was a bust without ever seeing how he would perform in a real NFL game? You can't. All you can do is make the ASSUMPTION that because he was a lower round QB, he wouldn't have succeeded anyway. And yes, OTW brings up that there are some lower round QBs who do get opportunities, but those are the exception, not the rule. If we had 20 QBs in the lower round starting in the NFL, then we can make an apples to apples comparison.
The point is not to say that lower round picks have high success rates. Or it does not deny that they are riskier to support. But OTW would have you believe that first round picks are astronomically better bets to become franchise QBs because the numbers overwhelmingly support that assumption. My claim is that you simply do not KNOW what most lower round picks are capable of unless you put them out on the field and you give them a full season of work to prove themselves. I understand the reason why most teams won't do that. But I can guarantee you that the success rate of lower round picks would skyrocket if they were all given a chance to start for the 2-3 years that first round Qbs are typically given.