Good football business to acquire a young quarterback every year or every other year?

[Prime Time]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.co...good-football-business-to-acquire-a-young-qb/

Bob Quinn: “Good football business” to acquire a young QB
Posted by Josh Alper on April 3, 2016

The Lions haven’t drafted a quarterback since they took Matthew Stafford with the first overall pick of the 2009 draft, but their new General Manager hinted at the end of that streak recently.

Bob Quinn worked for the Patriots before being hired in Detroit, so he was on hand when the Patriots used relatively early picks on Kevin O’Connell, Ryan Mallett and Jimmy Garoppolo to back up Tom Brady. He was also hired in 2000, which was the same year that the Patriots drafted Brady in the sixth round and a year before Brady took over for an injured Drew Bledsoe in a franchise-shifting move.

Quinn suggested the same might be in store for the Lions in this year’s draft.

“I think it’s really good football business to acquire a young quarterback every year or every other year,” Quinn said, via Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press. “There’s such a value in the position and nowadays in college football there’s a lot of spread offenses, which means it’s a lot different than pro football. So it takes these young quarterbacks time to develop. So if you can add a young quarterback every year or every other year to your roster, it’s good football business in my mind. So you have time to develop them, either on the practice squad or as a backup, before eventually them having to play in a game.”

The Lions appear to be looking at late-round prospects as opposed to making a second-day splash a la Garoppolo and Dan Orlovsky is back to serve as the No. 2 behind Stafford. Birkett reports Jake Rudock of Michigan (as mentioned, having a late-rounder from Ann Arbor on hand to step in for an injured first overall pick worked out for the Patriots), Kevin Hogan of Stanford and Blake Frohnapfel of UMass have popped up on the radar as possible additions to the depth chart.

 

[-X-]

A case can be made that it's good football business to take a RB every draft (like the Saints used to do), or a receiver in every draft, or a defensive end, etc. Every position that can yield a huge net return if that guy turns out to be very good.

 

[LesBaker]

I'm trying to think of a team with an incumbent starter who is good to excellent that has drafted anything that developed. I can't think of a single one.

I chuckle at posters and sportswriters who come off with thoughts about the QB position as if it's just so fucking easy to get one that is a star.

It's the most difficult position in all of pro sports.

And I have come to the conclusion that landing a star out of college is pure luck and getting one in free agency is pure luck and expensive. Those are the ONLY two things I know for sure about getting a star QB.

 

[fearsomefour]

I am taking one every year....might be a 7th rounder or an undrafted FA but I am taking one. Even if you had an established starter I am taking one every year. IF they develop and you don't need them you can always trade them.

 

[Akrasian]

I am taking one every year....might be a 7th rounder or an undrafted FA but I am taking one. Even if you had an established starter I am taking one every year. IF they develop and you don't need them you can always trade them.

If they don't get on the field, how will they build up any trade value?

 

[tempests]

Ron Wolf used to think so.

Drafted Ty Detmer, Aaron Brooks, Matt Hasselbeck and Mark Brunell even when he had Favre.

 

[ramfan46]

With the Ram's history at QB the last 30 years, yeah they should be taking a QB every year of every other year. You need to end up with 2 decent QBs. It's becoming rare for most starters to play 16 games year after year. Bradford is the prime example of that. Don't put all of your eggs in one guy's basket. Always have someone ready on deck. Preferably better than a Clemens or Hill.

 

[BonifayRam]

I agree with you here & where you are going with this.I posted something like this last month. Or they could also add one additional player to the 53 master player roster making the number being 54 so that four QB's can be held on the master roster. Same for the game day active lists where the extra player can be added to actives must be a QB. The NFL game would be helped with this mightily.

Most of us like to watch youthful upcoming QB get in some game worth of experience play but find it very boring trying to stay awake with Ram QB's like Shaun Hill, Nick Foles, Clemens & Quinn.

 

[DaveFan'51]

The Patriots are an example of were to send a QB, fresh out of College, and kill his career! Not one back-up to Brady has gone on to success in the NFL!

 

[Merlin]

Right now the Jets are realizing they need to move up if they want Lynch.

 

[fearsomefour]

If they don't get on the field, how will they build up any trade value?

Ask Matt Cassel and the Patriots.
They have to show something of course....

 

[kurtfaulk]

Ask Matt Cassel and the Patriots.
They have to show something of course....

But he got a full season on the field and they went 11 and 5. Any qb will look good in that system. Then they raped the chiefs offloading the stiff.

.

 

[kurtfaulk]

I'm trying to think of a team with an incumbent starter who is good to excellent that has drafted anything that developed. I can't think of a single one.

I chuckle at posters and sportswriters who come off with thoughts about the QB position as if it's just so freaking easy to get one that is a star.

It's the most difficult position in all of pro sports.

And I have come to the conclusion that landing a star out of college is pure luck and getting one in free agency is pure luck and expensive. Those are the ONLY two things I know for sure about getting a star QB.

I think that's the point. Draft as many as you can and hope you get lucky.

.

 

[Akrasian]

I think that's the point. Draft as many as you can and hope you get lucky.

.

But they need to be developed. It's not just drafting them, but giving them experience and reps in camp, in OTAs, at some point in the season. Teams can't just draft somebody and make them #2, especially not with late picks. You're almost guaranteeing a disaster if the starter goes down then. Basically, there is not enough practice time if you're drafting every year. Even every other year is pushing it, if you actually have an incumbent starter and want to stick with a decent backup behind him.

 

[kurtfaulk]

But they need to be developed. It's not just drafting them, but giving them experience and reps in camp, in OTAs, at some point in the season. Teams can't just draft somebody and make them #2, especially not with late picks. You're almost guaranteeing a disaster if the starter goes down then. Basically, there is not enough practice time if you're drafting every year. Even every other year is pushing it, if you actually have an incumbent starter and want to stick with a decent backup behind him.

I think everyone in the building knows pretty quickly if they have something there. The seagulls learnt very quickly that Wilson was special. Not saying to draft one every year. If the team likes a qb they should draft him and see what he's got. They have nothing to lose.

.

 

[fearsomefour]

But he got a full season on the field and they went 11 and 5. Any qb will look good in that system. Then they raped the chiefs offloading the stiff.

.

I know.
Just saying....worth trying to find guys or you end up where the Rams are now.

 

[LesBaker]

I think that's the point. Draft as many as you can and hope you get lucky.

.

But as @Ramsey 's post showed us it's essentially a wasted draft pick after a certain point in the first round.

 

[Ramrasta]

Drafting a QB every year is a sure way to have roster turnover and wasted draft picks. You take the best player available unless you are in a position where your hands are tied.