Every GM makes mistakes even the very best. Wilson is going into his eighth season and some people are still complaining about this? That seems like a waste of energy to me. Btw, I think Denver had just signed a guy by the name of Peyton Manning. If you're base your hopes for the future off one event that happened nearly a decade ago I don't what to say to you. I know I won't spend the time doing that.
Btw I did make a misake, Wilson was taken in the 3rd not the 4th.
Well said. I do base my hopes on Elway, as do we all. One decade(ish) or much closer to the present, as painful as it gets. Hopefully, we get another draft year like he brought us last year. He's done pretty f'ing great in free agency, IMO. QB is an issue to be debated in long form but it has to happen in the next two years. Heres to hopes!
Obviously, nobody knew that Russell Wilson would become a multiple Super Bowl QB. If the Seahawks had some magic insight about how good this guy really was they wouldn't have just signed Matt Flynn to a monster contract before the draft. And they wouldn't have waited till the third round.Quote Originally Posted by TXBRONC View Post
Yeah every team in league passed on Wilson for three rounds which includes the team that eventually took him in 4th round.
If you were thinking a guy could be as good as Russell Wilson is today, you would draft him in the first round. You would be afraid that some other team would be waiting in the weeds, just like you are, to grab this guy.
It's like a great pair of shoes or pants, or whatever you need just sitting there in the bargain bin. It's day 2 of the sale, and items are marked down to half price there it is. Are you going to wait a day and see if they lower the price even more so you can get them then?
No. You're afraid someone else will see what you see and grab them ahead of you. They'd have taken him.
So, nobody gets the credit for Russell Wilson being so good. But, everybody in the NFL knew he was worth a draft pick somewhere in the first few rounds. He was a reasonable QB prospect and the Broncos needed a QB.
Elway just took Osweiler because he has an Ent fetish. His QBs have to be giraffes for some reason.
He picked Osweiler because he was TALL. Period. He had arm talent, he was athletic, he could move around. But, his brains weren't as good as Wilson's. Wilson was too short!
The Broncos under Elway would never have drafted Drew Brees.
You totally missed the point. Drafting Russell Wilson is like having a blind date and it turns out to be a super model. That can only be unexpected. But, the Broncos drafted a QB in the second round, #56. They could have drafted Wilson, simply thinking that he was a better prospect than Osweiler. But, Osweiler was taller.
Elway still today thinks that Kyler Murray won't be any good because apparently its some kind of big problem for a shorter QB to see over the line when he's under center, but it's perfectly fine if they are in shotgun, so Murray would be OK if they put him in shootgun all the time. I think that sums up Elway's argument at his recent presser.
He doesn't like short QBs. It skews his views of guys so that he values a guy like Osweiler or Lynch too high.
Just read a bunch of RW pre-draft evaluations to be sure I was on point with this: Wilson was pretty much exactly evaluated as BM and KM have been. The ultimate point being that it's not ok to draft people simply because they are tall, when superior skill is a factor.
Like the only factor that should matter.
I don't think it's a matter of who gets the credit for Wilson being so good as much as it's a matter of most folks seeing how Wilson was so good. In my own argument, I only meant to point out a failure of Elway. Expand that to every joe schmoe GM that blindly lusts after measurables over talent and we come back to you point. Elway would have never drafted Drew Brees. Just like most every schmoe GM cannot look past 1+1 must equal 2. Elway isn't a 'schmoe' in any other aspect, IMO. But he definitely a fool at picking QBs and is lost in pre-conceptions.
It's not like the 'new QB' is Murray, Mayfield, or the like. That's always been an option. Only fools ignore viable options.
OK, so I've just started to wonder about this: How is it silly to have short QBs again? I know the mantra but aren't the most Arian of QBs 6'5"? And isn't the Oline the tallest of the position groups in the NFL, averaging 6'5"?
So how is a 6'5" guy supposed to be able to see over another 6'5" guy (or, a group of them)? I'm a short 5'11". I can't see over someone that is also 5'11". Am I missing something? If a 5'10" guy and a 6'5" guy both cannot see over the people in front of them, how is the 5'10" guy of lesser value? For both, it's a matter of seeing between the heads of the people in front of them, right?
Trajectory has something to do with it also, but that is not often mentioned by GMs and 'pundits'. Either way, trajectory can be trained and 6'5" guys are also failures at this important aspect, so...?
Azimuth, body size linked to durability issues, hand size, socialization in the game at other positions through childhood
I kind of agree with your point, but there are more reasons that your average small guy doesn't get considered a top nfl QB prospect than just seeing over linemen
Huge points for the reference of the term azimuth, good sir! But I don't know it it applies, since we're talking about a vertical angle. And I still say that plenty of tall QBs f' that up too. Maybe more so than short QBs, since they have lived their entire life dealing with the issue and tall QBs take crap for granted? Maybe not.
The body size is real though: At least using common sense. But check out this interesting article that went deep into the size/ injury debate:
https://www.footballoutsiders.com/st...t-and-injuries
I don't pretend to completely get their nuance but the main point is that bigger people get hurt more, for various reasons. Heavier players put more strain on their body parts and put themselves in more dangerous positions...maybe? That's just my interpretation but the article is pretty clear that larger QBs get injured more often. Worth considering, at least. IMO, just because a radio host or TV sorts caster says something, it doesn't mean it's true.
I have no idea how hand size works and don't want to even research it. It's kind of weird to me but I won't say it doesn't matter. Because, I'm clueless. As for socialization, that's a great point that I haven't thought of...and is why I asked. It's a good point that if every tall, good looking fellow that plays QB gets treated like a winner, the majority of QBs will be tall, good looking fellows. But I don't know if that makes them better QBs. It definitely makes them the majority of QBs that make it to the NFL, but that is the essence of my position. Culture does not make a good QB. Good QBs make good QBs. And a smaller guy that has to fight for every inch, in opposition to the stereotypes he's battling, might just be better by competition than QBs that are bigger. Not that all smaller QBs are going to be better than larger QBs but pecentage-wise, I've seen that 5'10"-6'1" QBs have higher passer ratings than all other QBs except those that are 6'2". Interestingly, 6'6" and higher have horrible QB passer ratings.
Otherwise, here is a decent article on another point: Shorter QBs have to make slower passes than larger QBs to get over the heads and arms of other players. This is real and make allot of sense...
https://nationalfootballpost.com/put...all-short-qbs/
What'cha think? Thanks for the points and making me dive deeper. It is definitely more than seeing over lineman, as you state...but it's also more than heavy=tough. Cool stuff, take care!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)