Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Which QB to draft?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • It is easy to get excited about Qbs. Listening to Steve Atwater and Stokes talk about Qbs got me excited about them.

    Problem I have is imo we need a solid vet back up QB on the team to help a new guy. If we had A+ Qb coach maybe I would say we do not need the vet QB. IMO our current QB coaching is C+ at best.

    Would hate to invest in a trade like SF just did and not have the support system in place for a young guy to develop to what he NEEDS to be in the NFL.
    Time to build on the win and grow the team from some solid play higher level of play

    Comment


    • Excitement, 25 days and counting till all our expectations and disappointments are revealed.

      As much as I would like them to draft a QB as there is no guarantee, It may be best to bring in a Vet. Thinking after thy announce the 2nd pick, call the jets give them a 3rd for Darnold. At least attempt this.

      I like how our new GM is building this team so far, He has what it takes to make the Broncos a better team.

      Use the Draft picks wisely. Thank you.

      Comment


      • Our current QB coach Mike Shula oversaw the development of David Garrard (JAX), Cam Newton (CAR), and Daniel Jones (NYG). I think he’s solid, and whether it’s Lock or a rookie 1st rounder— I trust him.
        2020 Adopt-A-Bronco: #10 JERRY JEUDY
        Previous Adoptees: #25 CHRIS HARRIS, #38 QUINTON CARTER, #43 TJ WARD

        Comment


        • Originally posted by HDbroncos02 View Post
          Our current QB coach Mike Shula oversaw the development of David Garrard (JAX), Cam Newton (CAR), and Daniel Jones (NYG). I think he’s solid, and whether it’s Lock or a rookie 1st rounder— I trust him.
          I've seen Jamie Newman compared to David Garrard a few times. I wonder if he's on the Broncos' radar for the mid rounds?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by samparnell View Post

            It may seem obvious to some, but until it happens, can't be sure. If Trevor Lawrence goes #1 to the Jags and Zach Wilson goes #2 to the Jets, we'll see on Draft Day who the Niners take. If they do take Mac Jones, that could open the way for an offer to Atlanta in order to pick Justin Fields. It would be expensive in terms of draft capital and many here think it would be worth it.

            Don't think it would be a very good idea to move up to pick Mac Jones or Trey Lance, though. So far, pro football draft history hasn't had more than three QBs drafted in the first round go on to have successful careers with the team that picked them. This draft could be different but, if it turns out to be, it will be the first time since the common draft of 1967.

            IMO Denver should not assume that San Francisco will take Mac Jones and trade up with Atlanta before it actually happens expecting that Justin Fields will be available at #4. If they do move up, think it would be best to wait and pull the trigger on such a deal on draft day.
            Yep the screaming he heard is mac Jones crying because the 9ers traded up for fields.

            Which also passes me right off because fields is the qb I want!
            So far:
            FA- Melvin Gordon. Brandon Scherff
            1. Kenneth Murray LB; 2. Shenault WR; 2B. Biadazz Center, 3. OT

            Comment


            • Want to understand. Assuming the Broncos draft one of Fields, Jones or Lance.

              Are they starting Day 1? Do you trade Lock for whatever you can get?

              Trying to understand how this plan works. QB room needs a vet to help mentor either Lock or new QB. I’m kind of surprised it hasn’t happened yet but can understand waiting until after draft day that see who might be available. Except most of the vet situations make sense to keep them until the newly drafted rookie is “ready”. Will they be available? IMO the Broncos don’t have that luxury with Lock.

              Broncos have a decent game manager QB3 in Rypien. I don’t see a successful scenario of developing Lock and new 1st rd QB. Just too volatile a QB controversy IMO. If the decision is to draft QB at #9, are any of those expected QBs ready to play Day 1? Or is it just assumed the Broncos live with the results of starting a rookie QB?

              Just curious how this is supposed to look like with by drafting a QB at #9.


              Comment


              • Originally posted by FR Tim View Post
                Broncos have a decent game manager QB3 in Rypien. I don’t see a successful scenario of developing Lock and new 1st rd QB. Just too volatile a QB controversy IMO. If the decision is to draft QB at #9, are any of those expected QBs ready to play Day 1? Or is it just assumed the Broncos live with the results of starting a rookie QB?

                Just curious how this is supposed to look like with by drafting a QB at #9.
                It's not a controversy unless Lock fails to do his job. If the pressure of a QB-in-waiting for Lock is too much, then he wasn't the right guy for the job anyway. I'm hoping we can get Jones at #9, bring him in and develop as a solid backup with him being able to take over or start next season if Lock falls on his face. Hopefully Lock makes massive strides this year. If not, then he loses his job. Totally in his control.

                With all that being said... I've not seen a single mock draft where a QB falls to the Broncos at #9. Trading with the Falcons at 4 has been the only draft I've seen us getting a QB and unless they are in love with a guy, trading up to #4 doesn't seem worth it.

                Comment


                • Not thinking about the “pressure”. Thinking of the reps, system and QB room.

                  And the concept of using #9 for a backup QB seems like a waste of resources.

                  A QB is a unique position that you have to be all in about. To give them the practice time. To develop the plays that work best for him. And the Broncos are not replacing an established QB. This is not finding the successor to Ryan or Rodgers. It is not going with a rookie to replace a Minshew or even Donald.

                  It just seems like a really bad plan to draft a QB #9 and have an open competition between two developing QBs. That is why I am confused on this plan. I can support going with Lock or a rookie. Just want FO to make a decision. Not ride the fence of indecision.

                  IMO it is either/ or, not both and let them battle it out. Most of the time that does not work well in college. With the resources, intense media and fan scrutiny and limited time it seems even less likely to succeed.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by FR Tim View Post
                    Want to understand. Assuming the Broncos draft one of Fields, Jones or Lance.

                    Are they starting Day 1? Do you trade Lock for whatever you can get?

                    Trying to understand how this plan works. QB room needs a vet to help mentor either Lock or new QB. I’m kind of surprised it hasn’t happened yet but can understand waiting until after draft day that see who might be available. Except most of the vet situations make sense to keep them until the newly drafted rookie is “ready”. Will they be available? IMO the Broncos don’t have that luxury with Lock.

                    Broncos have a decent game manager QB3 in Rypien. I don’t see a successful scenario of developing Lock and new 1st rd QB. Just too volatile a QB controversy IMO. If the decision is to draft QB at #9, are any of those expected QBs ready to play Day 1? Or is it just assumed the Broncos live with the results of starting a rookie QB?

                    Just curious how this is supposed to look like with by drafting a QB at #9.

                    I do not see either of the 3 QBs you mention starting day one. I can see Lawrence starting, and maybe Wilson....though he may have to wait a handful of games to get the nod. Maybe even more.

                    So if The Broncos select one of those QBs, and though they will not start immediately (in my opinion), I do not think it wise to keep Lock. I don't see the logic of selecting a QB with your #1 pick, a high pick at that, and then making it a competition to see who wins the job. Why spend that type of draft coin on someone as a security measure? Not to mention, it would be a rather uncomfortable environment, two young men fighting for the starter job, and The Broncos probably leaning towards the new guy, given the draft statement they made. I don't think I've ever heard of a high draft pick used to find a good backup, no matter the position.

                    So yes, if we are seriously drafting a QB, I expected a vet to come in, and Lock to be traded. Not sure we have the proper "vets" in the stable today.

                    I suppose The Broncos can keep folks guessing, make their selection, and try to move on from there. Will there be decent vets available? I don't know. But in the end, if we draft someone named Fields, Jones or Lance, I imagine someone else will start, til that rookie is ready.

                    And I still believe that, if we don't draft a QB, Darnold may be in the mix. Maybe. Because just as we should not expect a rookie to start for us, we should not expect Lock to be our franchise guy. He needs growth, and he needs competition.

                    Comment


                    • If you draft a QB in the 1st round, they are starting Day 1 unless you bring in a vet— then there’s reason to bring the rookie along more “slowly”.

                      Anyone that thinks that bringing in a 1st round rookie to compete with Lock, Darnold, Minshew, etc. is living in a fantasy world akin to Madden. Compared to a wily, old vet— the aforementioned QBs are still young, have “starting” upside and will be hungry to keep their place and make it in the NFL that way. There’s no way they will willingly concede nor help out a rookie 1st round pick. You don’t draft a rookie QB top 10 to “battle” it out with a 24-25 year old incumbent starter, just to “see” who would win. A backup QB is supposed to be the pseudo-OC and QB coach all in one. The extra set of eyes and ears for the starter. The dynamic of the QB room won’t be a healthy, productive one in this scenario. It’s just the way of the business.

                      Simply put, if a QB is taken in the 1st round (especially in the top 10) then Lock is as good as gone from Denver. Paton would then be wise to bring in an experienced, older vet instead of leaning on a Jeff Driskel or Brett Rypien (although I feel like Rypien would be just fine as a backup).
                      2020 Adopt-A-Bronco: #10 JERRY JEUDY
                      Previous Adoptees: #25 CHRIS HARRIS, #38 QUINTON CARTER, #43 TJ WARD

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by HDbroncos02 View Post
                        If you draft a QB in the 1st round, they are starting Day 1 unless you bring in a vet— then there’s reason to bring the rookie along more “slowly”.

                        Anyone that thinks that bringing in a 1st round rookie to compete with Lock, Darnold, Minshew, etc. is living in a fantasy world akin to Madden. Compared to a wily, old vet— the aforementioned QBs are still young, have “starting” upside and will be hungry to keep their place and make it in the NFL that way. There’s no way they will willingly concede nor help out a rookie 1st round pick. You don’t draft a rookie QB top 10 to “battle” it out with a 24-25 year old incumbent starter, just to “see” who would win. A backup QB is supposed to be the pseudo-OC and QB coach all in one. The extra set of eyes and ears for the starter. The dynamic of the QB room won’t be a healthy, productive one in this scenario. It’s just the way of the business.

                        Simply put, if a QB is taken in the 1st round (especially in the top 10) then Lock is as good as gone from Denver. Paton would then be wise to bring in an experienced, older vet instead of leaning on a Jeff Driskel or Brett Rypien (although I feel like Rypien would be just fine as a backup).
                        Since 1967, more than three QBs have been drafted in the first round nine times (1983, 1987, 1999, 2003, 2004, 2011, 2012, 2018, 2020) During that time three QBs drafted in the first round have gone on to have careers that could reasonably be defined as successful on the teams that drafted them only four times (although counting 2020 is premature, but done for sake of discussion) Some expect that five QBs could be drafted this year by #9 and maybe even a sixth one before the first round ends. If more than three first round QBs this year become good starting players for their team, it would be unprecedented.

                        The first three picks are expected to be Lawrence, Wilson and one of the other three. Jordan Love went #26 last year and, like Rodgers, we'll need to wait until he becomes a starter to know. Baker Mayfield was #1, Sam Darnold was #3, Josh Allen was #7, Josh Rosen was #10 and and Lamar Jackson was #32 in 2018. Andrew Luck, RGIII, Ryan Tannehill and Brandon Weeden were the four first round QBs in 2012. Cam Newton, Jake Locker, Blaine Gabbert and Christian Ponder were the four first round QBs in 2011. Eli Manning, Philip Rivers and Ben Roethlisberger from 2004 did well, J.P.Losman not so much. Carson Palmer, Byron Leftwich, Kyle Boller and Rex Grossman were the first round QBs from 2003. Tim Couch, Donovan McNabb, Akili Smith, Daunte Culpepper and Cade McNown were the first round QBs from 1999. Vinny Testaverde, Kelly Stouffer, Chris Miller and Jim Harbaugh were the first round QBs in 1987. The only time since 1967 six QBs have been drafted in the first round was 1983 when John Elway, Todd Blackledge, Jim Kelly, Tony Eason, Ken O'Brien and Dan Marino went in that order.

                        Based on past history, it doesn't seem likely that trading up for a QB is worth the sacrifice for such a risk, because it seems QBs will go #1, #2, #3 and maybe #4 and #5, too.. If Denver stays at #9, and one of the top five QBs this year is still available, it might be better to trade back in the first and acquire some extra picks. If that is what will happen, think the Broncos should sign a veteran QB for the room. IMO best one left today is Alex Smith, but don't know if he's interested. Josh McCown?

                        Denver's defense seems as if it will be ready to go this year. O-Line looks like it could jell and be be well above average. Skill position players look good. A rookie first round QB would entail a certain amount of square one back to the drawing board if he's one of the exceptions to the historical trend of first round QBs. If not, then well ... What Denver does in the first round will tell us what they think of Drew Lock.
                        "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by colowoz01 View Post
                          call the jets give them a 3rd for Darnold. At least attempt this.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Bootleg View Post

                            Scoop!
                            "Stultum est timere quod vitare non potes." ~ Publilius Syrus

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Bootleg View Post

                              Wonder if those 2nd and 4th picks next year are conditional on performance thresholds?

                              Another option off the table. Smith is looking better and better. Guessing he is still hoping for a starting opportunity and a bigger payday.

                              Using Fitzpatrick as an example of the opportunity and $10m a year contract.

                              Comment


                              • If the 49er rumors are true and they want Jones/Lance, Fields is becoming a more and more viable selection. Although I can’t imagine the Panthers made this deal without having some insight as to who the 49ers are planning to take.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X