Thread: Does Elway Plan to Draft a QB in 2012?

I'd like to see Elway use the Broncos 2nd-3rd pick on one of these guys:

Brock Osweiler, QB, Arizona State
Kirk Cousins, Michigan State
Nick Foles, Arizona
Ryan Tannehill, QB, Texas A&M

Either of these four QB's could sit and learn from Manning for 3 years and be ready to take over once Manning retires.

Originally Posted by Npba900

I'd like to see Elway use the Broncos 2nd-3rd pick on one of these guys:

Brock Osweiler, QB, Arizona State
Kirk Cousins, Michigan State
Nick Foles, Arizona
Ryan Tannehill, QB, Texas A&M

Either of these four QB's could sit and learn from Manning for 3 years and be ready to take over once Manning retires.

Osweiler in the 2nd-3rd round. He's the ideal prospect to groom behind Manning. Raw, but has a ton of upside.

Too many holes to bother with players that "might" have an impact in 3 or 4 years

I hope not. To hell with the future, we need to win now.

Originally Posted by CoachChaz

Too many holes to bother with players that "might" have an impact in 3 or 4 years

True. The draft is a risk. However, had the Packers believed the same scenario they would have never drafted Rodgers to sit and learn and grow under Farve. With Manning here as the Broncos QB for the next 2-4 years, now would be a great time to copy cat what the Packers did.

Originally Posted by Slick

I hope not. To hell with the future, we need to win now.

You can't have a future if you have no long term vision. Why not win now with Manning and have the vision for winning in the future.

depends on the players that fall. But I agree that now is the time to build for NOW. Taking a high round pick on a QB at this point doesn't make sense. However, if you see a kid that has all the tools, the size, and some potential to be a long-term project, then I think we should take them in the 6th or 7th. Plan on them having the time to sit behind a true master of the NFL without using up high round resources.

Originally Posted by Npba900

You can't have a future if you have no long term vision. Why not win now with Manning and have the vision for winning in the future.

I don't think we can do both. I think we forced ourselves to sell out for the time that Manning is here. I'm fine with that, but I can't see drafting project players or guys who simply won't play, at least not for the first 3 or 4 rounds. If anything, I'd be packaging picks to move up and get the 2,3, or possibly 4 best players we can get.

Edit: Posted the same thing twice.

Interesting outlook. Can you really wait until the 6th or 7th rounds to find the next Terrell Davis or Tom Brady. Taking a QB between the 2-3rd rounds who has loads of potential and talents and allowing them to sit and learn from a future HOFer is a win-win situation....its not only visionary; its common since as well.

I don't like the idea of drafting a prospect QB this year.

We have too many holes to fill in the draft. Peyton will need 99.9% of the reps to get back in game shape. We expect Manning to be here for 3-4 years at the minimum. We still don't have the playbook 100% nailed down, so it'll probably be a work in progress for much of this first season.

It just doesn't make a ton of sense to me. That said, I hate the idea of Caleb Hanie as our backup, so I wouldn't hate a TJ Yates type of late rounder just to get another arm in camp.

Originally Posted by Npba900

Interesting outlook. Can you really wait until the 6th or 7th rounds to find the next Terrell Davis or Tom Brady. Taking a QB between the 2-3rd rounds who has loads of potential and talents and allowing them to sit and learn from a future HOFer is a win-win situation....its not only visionary; its common since as well.

I see what you are saying. CAN you find one late, the odds are highly against it, for sure. But can you afford to use high round draft picks on a player that is PLANNED to sit for 3 years at this point? No. The Packers didn't plan on Rodgers sitting for 3 years, they literally thought Favre was retiring the next year. So he was supposed to sit for ONE year. It was a happy accident on that part, because I would bet a lot of money that if they knew Brett was planning to stay in the NFL for another 5 years, they wouldn't have drafted Rodgers at all.

So Aaron isn't exactly a good example, imo.

If Manning was only to be around for another year, then we absolutely look for the team's future QB. But I just think its a BAD use of picks to take high round players with the INTENTION of sitting them on the bench for the next 3-4 years. Hell, their rookie contract is up by the time you plan to start them.

Originally Posted by Ravage!!!

I see what you are saying. CAN you find one late, the odds are highly against it, for sure. But can you afford to use high round draft picks on a player that is PLANNED to sit for 3 years at this point? No. The Packers didn't plan on Rodgers sitting for 3 years, they literally thought Favre was retiring the next year. So he was supposed to sit for ONE year. It was a happy accident on that part, because I would bet a lot of money that if they knew Brett was planning to stay in the NFL for another 5 years, they wouldn't have drafted Rodgers at all.

So Aaron isn't exactly a good example, imo.

If Manning was only to be around for another year, then we absolutely look for the team's future QB. But I just think its a BAD use of picks to take high round players with the INTENTION of sitting them on the bench for the next 3-4 years. Hell, their rookie contract is up by the time you plan to start them.

Point well taken. However, the players we draft between rounds 2-4 may take 2-3 years to develop/start as well; same is the scenario if you pick a QB between rounds 2-3 who may take 2-3 years to step into the starting job. Either way you are taking risks. But then again, that's what the draft is all about---risk.

Originally Posted by Npba900

Point well taken. However, the players we draft between rounds 2-4 may take 2-3 years to develop/start as well;

The difference is where in one scenario you you PLAN on them sitting, while in another you PLAN on them playing as they develop. I wouldn't complain about a good QB prospect being drafted, but at this point I think its wasteful. 2 years down the road, then I think would be the time to use the strategy you are talking.

I just don't think a QB needs 3-4 years to sit. I think 1 season to sit is plenty.

Originally Posted by Ravage!!!

The difference is where in one scenario you you PLAN on them sitting, while in another you PLAN on them playing as they develop. I wouldn't complain about a good QB prospect being drafted, but at this point I think its wasteful. 2 years down the road, then I think would be the time to use the strategy you are talking.

I just don't think a QB needs 3-4 years to sit. I think 1 season to sit is plenty.

Here's what I think we need to guard against. It will be difficult to draft a high caliber QB if for the next 2-4 years we are winning and averaging 11-13 wins a seasons; which means you draft lower in the pecking order. Its going to be difficult to find a QB in the draft who will be ready to be a full time starter the 2nd year.

That's why if you can, you draft a QB that has high end potential now and allow them to learn to play at an NFL QB level without being thrust into the starting lineup too soon; while having the luxury of learning behind your current starting QB who won't be starting in 3-4 years.