Draft Two QBs?

[LondonBrown]

It's not hard to pass on Chubb because there's a better pure rusher in the draft in Harold Landry.

[The Gipper]

@londonbrown said:

It's not hard to pass on Chubb because there's a better pure rusher in the draft in Harold Landry.

Well....that certainly remains to be seen.

But I see you are joining the contrarian club that thinks that a lower drafted player will turn out to be as good or better than the higher drafted players.  See my Prudent Solutions thread.

[LondonBrown]

@the-gipper said:

But I see you are joining the contrarian club that thinks that a lower drafted player will turn out to be as good or better than the higher drafted players.  

Because that's never happened before

[The Gipper]

@londonbrown said:

Because that's never happened before

Yea, just think.....Browns could have had Tom Brady at #1....instead of Courtney Brown.   But then....we took ALL these guys that same year over TB:

1	1	CLE	Courtney Brown	DE	22	2005	0	0	4	28	21	61	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	155		19.0	Penn St.	College Stats
2	32	CLE	Dennis Northcutt	WR	22	2009	0	0	2	41	28	144	0	1	0	0	0	52	366	1	399	4941	18	18			Arizona	College Stats
3	79	CLE	JaJuan Dawson	WR	22	2002	0	0	0	5	3	30	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	52	664	2	3			Tulane	College Stats
3	63	CLE	Travis Prentice	RB	23	2001	0	0	1	4	4	30	0	0	0	0	0	187	525	9	38	201	1	3			Miami (OH)	College Stats
4	110	CLE	Aaron Shea	TE	23	2005	0	0	1	6	6	65	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	97	851	7	14			Michigan	College Stats
4	95	CLE	Lewis Sanders	DB	22	2008	0	0	0	14	7	97	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	196	5	1.0	Maryland
5	146	CLE	Lamar Chapman	DB	23	2001	0	0	0	1	1	8	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	13	1		Kansas St.	College Stats
5	130	CLE	Anthony Malbrough 6 183 CLE Spergon Wynn QB 22 2	DB	23	2000	0	0	0

[Tour2ma]

@boo-fagley said:

Also, 2 - 1st round QBs means 2 big QB contracts. I dont see 2 QBs happening and after all this time Dorsey will make the right choice. He can draft that is for sure.

Sure, QBs at 1 and 4 is not a likely scenario, but contracts aren't a factor.

Rookie contracts are set by where they are taken in the draft, not the position they play. So for up to five years the impact is known regardless of the positions picked.

By year three at the latest you are going to know who your winner is. Hopefully the decision took some thought, which means your runner-up QB has trade value.

[Tour2ma]

@mjp28 said:

• WILL ANY OF THE TOP 5 PICKS BE TRADED ON DRAFT DAY?

  Odds as of April 23 at Bovada

• Yes +225
• No -250  <----- a pretty fair chance NO DRAFT DAY TOP 5 TRADES!

Betting on a trade down looks to be the best bet on the board.

[mjp28]

@texasag1969 said:

My crystal ball says we go with Darnold, Giants take Barkey, Jets take a QB and we take Chubb. Broncos have a ton of choices including trade down.

Now wasn't that easy. 

[boo fagley]

@tour2ma said:

Sure, QBs at 1 and 4 is not a likely scenario, but contracts aren't a factor.

Rookie contracts are set by where they are taken in the draft, not the position they play. So for up to five years the impact is known regardless of the positions picked.

By year three at the latest you are going to know who your winner is. Hopefully the decision took some thought, which means your runner-up QB has trade value.

NE tore Bradys contract up his 2nd season. The potential for a QB controversy is there if both QBs play good.

See Jimmy Garrapolo and Brady.

[hoorta]

@the-gipper said:

Yea, just think.....Browns could have had Tom Brady at #1....instead of Courtney Brown.   But then....we took ALL these guys that same year over TB:

1	1	CLE	Courtney Brown	DE	22	2005	0	0	4	28	21	61	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	155		19.0	Penn St.	College Stats
2	32	CLE	Dennis Northcutt	WR	22	2009	0	0	2	41	28	144	0	1	0	0	0	52	366	1	399	4941	18	18			Arizona	College Stats
3	79	CLE	JaJuan Dawson	WR	22	2002	0	0	0	5	3	30	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	52	664	2	3			Tulane	College Stats
3	63	CLE	Travis Prentice	RB	23	2001	0	0	1	4	4	30	0	0	0	0	0	187	525	9	38	201	1	3			Miami (OH)	College Stats
4	110	CLE	Aaron Shea	TE	23	2005	0	0	1	6	6	65	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	97	851	7	14			Michigan	College Stats
4	95	CLE	Lewis Sanders	DB	22	2008	0	0	0	14	7	97	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	196	5	1.0	Maryland
5	146	CLE	Lamar Chapman	DB	23	2001	0	0	0	1	1	8	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	13	1		Kansas St.	College Stats
5	130	CLE	Anthony Malbrough 6 183 CLE Spergon Wynn QB 22 2	DB	23	2000	0	0	0

But- we already had what we thought was going to be our franchise QB in Tim Couch...  Now Brady instead of Spergon? I wouldn't feel too bad- the Steelers took Tee Martin, and the 49ers Geno Carmazzi....   

[Tour2ma]

@boo-fagley said:

See Jimmy Garrapolo and Brady.

First, nice pivot... I accept your surrender on the contract cost issue. How long was Brady's original contract? Three years? There wasn't a CBA back in 2000.

There's a meaningful percentage of Pat fans that would rather have kept Jimmy G?

[The Gipper]

@hoorta said:

But- we already had what we thought was going to be our franchise QB in Tim Couch...  Now Brady instead of Spergon? I wouldn't feel too bad- the Steelers took Tee Martin, and the 49ers Geno Carmazzi....   

We did.   And Couch may in fact have been a lot better than most people think he was.   But he was injured and that killed his career. 

I am just saying, in hindsight......any team would have likely given up  3 Top 5 draft picks to get the Brady that we know him to have become....More maybe.

[The Gipper]

@tour2ma said:

First, nice pivot... I accept your surrender on the contract cost issue. How long was Brady's original contract? Three years? There wasn't a CBA back in 2000.

There's a meaningful percentage of Pat fans that would rather have kept Jimmy G?

We shall see how good Garagiola is now that he will be starting a full season.   Yes, the evidence is promising.....but then....it also was when Scott Mitchell took over.

[boo fagley]

@tour2ma said:

First, nice pivot... I accept your surrender on the contract cost issue. How long was Brady's original contract? Three years? There wasn't a CBA back in 2000.

There's a meaningful percentage of Pat fans that would rather have kept Jimmy G?

Youre hilarious.

 In return, the NFLPA agreed to a salary cap based upon an agreed percentage of revenues.^[4] The agreement had an immediate impact on player salaries, increasing wages for the 1993 season by 38 percent.^[4]

The CBA agreed to in 1993 was extended by the agreement of players and owners in 1998. This lasted until the 2002 season, when the CBA was extended through the 2006 season.^[4]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Collective_Bargaining_Agreement}

Furthermore, even if there was not a CBA when Brady signed his contract there is today. Youre too easy.

The whole premise of my point was not rookie contracts despite your heading down the wrong way. Drafting 2 top 10 QBs is a bad idea and creates a QB controversy from day 1.

[Bigalow80]

@tour2ma said:

Sure, QBs at 1 and 4 is not a likely scenario, but contracts aren't a factor.

Rookie contracts are set by where they are taken in the draft, not the position they play. So for up to five years the impact is known regardless of the positions picked.

By year three at the latest you are going to know who your winner is. Hopefully the decision took some thought, which means your runner-up QB has trade value.

But compare the salaries to other nfl players. Those salaries in years 3-5, are in that range. RB's as a whole, aren't making that kind of money. Here is a rough chart of the nfl rookie salary scale (2017). This doesn't include the fifth year option either, which is  where the top 10 draft selections receive salaries that are equal to the average of the 10 highest salaries at their given position. The rest of the first-round picks receive an average of the third through 25th highest salaries at their position.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexkay/2017/04/27/2017-nfl-draft-rookie-salary-projections-for-first-round-picks/#32fa5caf534c

So if the browns take a qb at #1 and #4, they could potentially be investing over $60 million in two players, one of whom is never going to see the field and you will never get #4 value for in a trade.

[mjp28]

@londonbrown said:

The only bet I’ve placed is Mike Gesicki to be the first TE taken at 5/1 or +600 in your world 

I’m looking at you Belichik sitting there at 23 

Or do the Patriots go with a future quarterback? 

[Tour2ma]

@boo-fagley said:

Youre hilarious.

 In return, the NFLPA agreed to a salary cap based upon an agreed percentage of revenues.^[4] The agreement had an immediate impact on player salaries, increasing wages for the 1993 season by 38 percent.^[4]

The CBA agreed to in 1993 was extended by the agreement of players and owners in 1998. This lasted until the 2002 season, when the CBA was extended through the 2006 season.^[4]

^{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NFL_Collective_Bargaining_Agreement}

Furthermore, even if there was not a CBA when Brady signed his contract there is today. Youre too easy.

The whole premise of my point was not rookie contracts despite your heading down the wrong way. Drafting 2 top 10 QBs is a bad idea and creates a QB controversy from day 1.

Thanks... I am here to entertain. Wish I could return the compliment.

 I "misspoke" when I generalized that there wasn't a CBA... what I was referring to was that there was no structured rookie contract language in the CBA. You can dismiss this statement if you like, but in the context of the first part of my reply I think my intent was clear.... a lot clearer than your original comment that appears to have morphed again under pressure.

So now your whole premise was not rookie contracts, but controversy? Where is that clear in this?

@boo-fagley said:

It would be hard to pass on Barkley or Chubb at 4.

Also, 2 - 1st round QBs means 2 big QB contracts. I dont see 2 QBs happening and after all this time Dorsey will make the right choice. He can draft that is for sure.

Either you were talking about contracts or the underlined was the world's worst misspelling of "controversy".

[domcucch1994]

if we do draft 2 QBs,

one has to be a late round pick like Mike White. 

He looks like he could be a hidden gem