QB thread

[DABEARSDABOMB]

On 12/5/2023 at 8:39 PM, adam said:

I was joking. I didn't include him in the numbers.

Lol 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I stick with - hire Harbaugh and get let’s start building a program. I would trust what he wants to do. 

[BearFan PHX]

35 minutes ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I stick with - hire Harbaugh and get let’s start building a program. I would trust what he wants to do. 

me too. If Harbaugh wants a ham sandwich at QB, I'll be like "what kind of bread do you need?"

[DABEARSDABOMB]

12 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

me too. If Harbaugh wants a ham sandwich at QB, I'll be like "what kind of bread do you need?"

Lol 

[Stinger226]

14 hours ago, adam said:

Regardless if we keep Fields and he becomes the franchise QB, or we draft one, I don't care where we draft him, as long as he becomes our franchise QB. Maybe we go the Washington route and draft one in the 2nd (after a trade back) and another in the 5th or 6th. Use the 1st rounders on WR, Edge, or DT, then use the 3rd and 4th on a Center or Safety. 

When we talk about drafting a QB high in the first round, isnt that where we drafted Fields? Doesnt the argument favor taking another year to see his development since that is where elite QBs come from? Or on the other hand does that prove drafting a QB high in the first round that they can bust in the same argument? I'm fine leaving that up to Poles to figure it out and what ever he decides I wont complain because it isnt what i wanted him to do.

[adam]

26 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

When we talk about drafting a QB high in the first round, isnt that where we drafted Fields? Doesnt the argument favor taking another year to see his development since that is where elite QBs come from? Or on the other hand does that prove drafting a QB high in the first round that they can bust in the same argument? I'm fine leaving that up to Poles to figure it out and what ever he decides I wont complain because it isnt what i wanted him to do.

I totally agree about letting Fields play out his rookie deal. However, I think the rationale is this team is too good to ever get the 1st overall pick again and if Poles trades it in back to back years without taking "his" QB and Fields does the same thing next year, Poles is gone. 

At the end of the day, they need their scouts and all other inputs (analytics, etc) to determine if the projected development of a rookie QB will be higher than the projected career trajectory of Fields. The difference is Fields has a huge data set while the rookie only has a projection. You can only have one starting QB, so Poles has to decide where he puts his chips. 

Just like this year, Poles did not think Stroud or Young would be better than Fields. He is 1/2 in that assessment so far.  For the 2024 draft, if they get the #1 pick, he has to think Fields will be better than Williams/Maye. 

Also, one other factor, salary. If you did extend Fields, what do you give him annually? Then once you have that number, what other positions will lose their high paid starter? So is Fields -Jaylon Johnson better than Williams + Jaylon Johnson. Which way is the team better?

[ASHKUM BEAR]

52 minutes ago, adam said:

I totally agree about letting Fields play out his rookie deal. However, I think the rationale is this team is too good to ever get the 1st overall pick again and if Poles trades it in back to back years without taking "his" QB and Fields does the same thing next year, Poles is gone. 

At the end of the day, they need their scouts and all other inputs (analytics, etc) to determine if the projected development of a rookie QB will be higher than the projected career trajectory of Fields. The difference is Fields has a huge data set while the rookie only has a projection. You can only have one starting QB, so Poles has to decide where he puts his chips. 

Just like this year, Poles did not think Stroud or Young would be better than Fields. He is 1/2 in that assessment so far.  For the 2024 draft, if they get the #1 pick, he has to think Fields will be better than Williams/Maye. 

Also, one other factor, salary. If you did extend Fields, what do you give him annually? Then once you have that number, what other positions will lose their high paid starter? So is Fields -Jaylon Johnson better than Williams + Jaylon Johnson. Which way is the team better?

There are many things to consider and even going with the 5th year option should not be a dagger if Poles sees other prospects in the draft pipeline since he can trade for future 1sts. 

Fields has 5 more games to show progress.  That can either be showing the team can win or him putting up 300 yd games and the team loses.  I almost feel the first 2 years can be trashed since they decided to tank and rebuild with this being year one.   

Whatever route they decide, I will back it.  The biggest factor I see for a QB is having the right coach and system in place for anything to work.  Did the Bagent tape show enough that we have good coaches and a system? If not, then they either need more pieces to the puzzle or a new puzzle.

[adam]

So I looked all the way back to 2010 and there have been 165 QBs drafted. Out of all of those, only 22 were deemed as franchise QBs, guys that got 2nd contracts from their original team, and started 6+ years (if drafted before 2017), otherwise I made an objective call for more recent QBs (Murray is, Daniel/Mac Jones is not).

With those parameters, of the 22 "Franchise" QBs, 15 were from the 1st round pick. That is 68.8% of the franchise QBs coming from the 1st round, with 31.2% coming from all other rounds combined. 

But how many 1st rounders work out? Of the 39 drafted in the first round, 15 were franchise QBs. If you use a first round pick on a QB, there is a 38.5% chance you will get a franchise QB. 

The odds of you getting a franchise QB between the 2nd and 7th round is 5.93%. So you are 6 times more likely to get a franchise QB in the 1st, or it would take you 6 picks in the 2nd-7th rounds to have the same 38.5% chance at drafting a franchise QB. 

Note - There were a few QBs I put TBD on and didn't include them in the numbers (Young, Richardson, Pickett, Levis, Love, Willis, Howell, and Ridder). If someone wants to make a determination on them, let me know, either franchise QB or bust.

Here is a list of franchise QBs, most defined with their performance on their drafting team. So guys like Dalton and Carr qualify based on their numbers with the Bengals and Raiders respectively. Did I miss someone? Should someone be dropped from this list:

C.J. Stroud	Texans
Trevor Lawrence	Jaguars
Joe Burrow	Bengals
Ryan Tannehill	Dolphins
Tua Tagovailoa	Dolphins
Justin Herbert	Chargers
Kyler Murray	Cardinals
Josh Allen	Bills
Derek Carr	Raiders
Lamar Jackson	Ravens
Patrick Mahomes	Chiefs
Deshaun Watson	Texans
Jared Goff	Rams
Andrew Luck	Colts
Robert Griffin	Redskins
Cam Newton	Panthers
Jalen Hurts	Eagles
Andy Dalton	Bengals
Russell Wilson	Seahawks
Dak Prescott	Cowboys
Kirk Cousins	Redskins
Brock Purdy	49ers

Of all the QBs drafted, the hit rate is about 14% with all draft picks considered. I am sure it is lower if you count UDFAs who have made the 53-man roster. 

Thoughts? 

[adam]

I almost believe that the hit rate for a QB in the first is similar to all other positions, meaning the entire draft is a crapshoot and it is not solely tied to the QB position. The higher you draft anyone, the higher the probability that they will turn out to be good/great than a later pick. 

[BearFan PHX]

25 minutes ago, adam said:

I almost believe that the hit rate for a QB in the first is similar to all other positions, meaning the entire draft is a crapshoot and it is not solely tied to the QB position. The higher you draft anyone, the higher the probability that they will turn out to be good/great than a later pick. 

right! Of course the players who have better odds of success are drafted earlier. That should be obvious to most people.

[Stinger226]

35 minutes ago, adam said:

So I looked all the way back to 2010 and there have been 165 QBs drafted. Out of all of those, only 22 were deemed as franchise QBs, guys that got 2nd contracts from their original team, and started 6+ years (if drafted before 2017), otherwise I made an objective call for more recent QBs (Murray is, Daniel/Mac Jones is not).

With those parameters, of the 22 "Franchise" QBs, 15 were from the 1st round pick. That is 68.8% of the franchise QBs coming from the 1st round, with 31.2% coming from all other rounds combined. 

But how many 1st rounders work out? Of the 39 drafted in the first round, 15 were franchise QBs. If you use a first round pick on a QB, there is a 38.5% chance you will get a franchise QB. 

The odds of you getting a franchise QB between the 2nd and 7th round is 5.93%. So you are 6 times more likely to get a franchise QB in the 1st, or it would take you 6 picks in the 2nd-7th rounds to have the same 38.5% chance at drafting a franchise QB. 

Note - There were a few QBs I put TBD on and didn't include them in the numbers (Young, Richardson, Pickett, Levis, Love, Willis, Howell, and Ridder). If someone wants to make a determination on them, let me know, either franchise QB or bust.

Here is a list of franchise QBs, most defined with their performance on their drafting team. So guys like Dalton and Carr qualify based on their numbers with the Bengals and Raiders respectively. Did I miss someone? Should someone be dropped from this list:

C.J. Stroud	Texans
Trevor Lawrence	Jaguars
Joe Burrow	Bengals
Ryan Tannehill	Dolphins
Tua Tagovailoa	Dolphins
Justin Herbert	Chargers
Kyler Murray	Cardinals
Josh Allen	Bills
Derek Carr	Raiders
Lamar Jackson	Ravens
Patrick Mahomes	Chiefs
Deshaun Watson	Texans
Jared Goff	Rams
Andrew Luck	Colts
Robert Griffin	Redskins
Cam Newton	Panthers
Jalen Hurts	Eagles
Andy Dalton	Bengals
Russell Wilson	Seahawks
Dak Prescott	Cowboys
Kirk Cousins	Redskins
Brock Purdy	49ers

Of all the QBs drafted, the hit rate is about 14% with all draft picks considered. I am sure it is lower if you count UDFAs who have made the 53-man roster. 

Thoughts? 

I think we are talking about elite QBs, the list you showed may have 10 in that group. Others are good but more 2nd tier. At least  6 were not earlier first round picks. The truth is it's hard to find an elite QB, better odds if you go early. We still have go back to who is the elite QB? Do we have the coaching and built roster to accommodate a high level prospect. Chances are we have 2 first round picks next year, also 2 2nd round picks. If Poles wants another year of continuity, we can still have a  high first round even in if we have to trade. Nothing is set in stone. 

[Alaskan Grizzly]

1 hour ago, adam said:

With those parameters, of the 22 "Franchise" QBs, 15 were from the 1st round pick. That is 68.8% of the franchise QBs coming from the 1st round, with 31.2% coming from all other rounds combined. 

Perhaps getting into the weeds a bit, but what is the definition of a "franchise QB"?  And who are these 22 guys? 

My understanding of a "Franchise QB" is one that can 'carry the team on his back' and 'get them to the Super Bowl and win it'.  Would Marino be considered a Franchise QB?  He never won a Super Bowl.  How about Jim Kelly?  He played in four in a row and lost all four.  

Conversely what about Nick Foles or Joe Flacco?  They both not only won a Super Bowl but were deemed their respective Super Bowl MVPs.  Foles was able to relieve Wentz late in the season to lead the Eagles to the Super Bowl and many would  say the reason the Ravens made it to and won the Super Bowl was because of their defense.  

[BearFan PHX]

adam, thank you for doing all that research - it surely helps these debates when there are facts to educate the participants.

The simple fact is that in the best area to pick a QB, the first pick overall, you still have a decent bust %. It's always a risk to take a QB. But it's also obvious that waiting until after the top ten picks makes it many times more difficult to pick a QB that wont bust.

These arguments of anecdotal evidence (Tom Brady, Brock Purdy) don't negate my point. And neither do the legions of other QBs taken after the first round that went nowhere. It is not impossible to find a QB in the 6th round, but it is incredibly unlikely.

The thing is, you know what you have in Fields now. He's an athletic and heroic player who cant execute the offense as designed and only has success freelancing. Even Fields himself said it earlier this year. He feels like executing the offense makes him robotic. Too much "coaching"

I remember the narratives at the beginning of the year. That he needed a better OL and open receivers to throw to. That was a fair argument at the time. But now we've seen this season. We've seen that with better protection and open guys he is still holding on to the ball, and only making plays after the play has broken.

SO for me, that makes it easy to move on from him, because while I dont know what the rookie QB will end up to be, I know what Fields' NFL ceiling is now. And it isn't good enough.

Flus and Fields have to go if we want to be a team that is a real contender.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

39 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

Flus and Fields have to go if we want to be a team that is a real contender.

If they both have to go, that says the problem is rooted to coaching.  The right move would be to establish the right coaches before thinking about getting a new QB.  Starting over with both and you are looking at 2 years to even know if that will work.  Out of the best QBs in the last 10-15 years, I would sat 80% had an established team with coaches in place and decent rosters to grow that player.  

We can continue to draft QBs, fire/hire head coaches, new GMs but nothing will work until you get the GM right and then the HC and coordinators.  It will be a vicious cycle that will go on and on. 

 

[BearFan PHX]

20 minutes ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

If they both have to go, that says the problem is rooted to coaching.  The right move would be to establish the right coaches before thinking about getting a new QB.  Starting over with both and you are looking at 2 years to even know if that will work.  Out of the best QBs in the last 10-15 years, I would sat 80% had an established team with coaches in place and decent rosters to grow that player.  

We can continue to draft QBs, fire/hire head coaches, new GMs but nothing will work until you get the GM right and then the HC and coordinators.  It will be a vicious cycle that will go on and on. 

 

I agree with this, at least in so far as I think drafting a rookie QB and keeping the coaching staff is a huge mistake.

I do think we now have a decent roster to grow the QB.

I also agree that it takes sometime to develop a rookie into a real winner. The thing is, I don't think Fields will ever read a defense or run a play the way it is drawn up, so to my way of thinking youre gonna have to start that 2 year clock some time, and there's no point in waiting

I think you hire coaches that you believe in, and get them a rookie QB to develop. i think you trade Fields and start Bagent or a Free Agent until the rookie is ready, unless Bagent or the Free Agent are killing it.

[Mongo3451]

3 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

Flus and Fields have to go if we want to be a team that is a real contender.

That's a strong opinion.  One I flip flop on.  On one hand, adding a new QB on an already built nest is a really good environment for a young QB. We truly don't know how good or bad Flus and Getsy are.  Yes, they anger is.  Yes, they make mistakes.  They are both first timers on a huge rebuild.  Pace knows what's up and he'll have his hand full.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

38 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

We truly don't know how good or bad Flus and Getsy are.

Totally agree and part of the lynchpin for me.  With Flus we have some confidence he can at least organize a defense, it’s been improving ever since he’s taken over. And for what it’s worth, it doesn’t appear (the “eye test”) that he’s lost the team. That speaks to his HC ability…if only a little.  
 

The offense side is more questionable. Is it Getsy or is it Fields? 

[Stinger226]

32 minutes ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

Totally agree and part of the lynchpin for me.  With Flus we have some confidence he can at least organize a defense, it’s been improving ever since he’s taken over. And for what it’s worth, it doesn’t appear (the “eye test”) that he’s lost the team. That speaks to his HC ability…if only a little.  
 

The offense side is more questionable. Is it Getsy or is it Fields? 

I think some of the better organizations didnt keep flip flopping  every 2 or 3 years looking for the light at the end of the tunnel. NE and Pitt comes to mine . they put the time in to build a roster and develop players .We have never did a complete rebuild since I have been a fan. Poles states he wants to build thru the draft, its not even been 2 years and some people want to burn everything down.  I think 3-4 years is fair to see what his vision is. If he brings everyone back  I would understand why he does that. The next 5 games will shine more light into his decision. No matter what you think of Fields , if Poles thinks there is an elite QB in this draft he will take him. If he doesnt then Justin will be around for another year. He can still build the roster and evaluate the coaching staff, Not sure his vision was fire the coach in 2 years. Poles, Flus, Getsy are all new in their jobs, it seems like they always just get compare to the dream scenario and not typical growth it takes to establish anything. 

Him and Cunningham came from good organizations, they will pull insight from how those teams were built. 

[BearFan PHX]

When you build through the draft, that means the roster.

Poles didnt draft Fields, and the coaches arent the roster, so wanting to replace Fields and Eberflus isnt burning everything down, especially from the point of view of the roster being built through the draft, since that suggestion says nothing about getting rid of anyone poles drafted.

Also, I am not calling for Poles' head at all.

[Mongo3451]

2 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

Poles didnt draft Fields, and the coaches arent the roster, so wanting to replace Fields and Eberflus isnt burning everything down, especially from the point of view of the roster being built through the draft, since that suggestion says nothing about getting rid of anyone poles drafted.

Firing a head coach during a rebuild is burning quite a bit.  Two years of building a culture would be down the drain.  Most people love a solid structure and change brings a funny dynamic.  Rats, ass kissers and back stabbers spring forward with a new boss.  Eventually the leaders and the cream rise to the top, but not without scars and collateral damage.  If Flus keeps showing growth and maintains the locker room, it will speak volumes for stability and growth.

[BearFan PHX]

6 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

Firing a head coach during a rebuild is burning quite a bit.  Two years of building a culture would be down the drain.  Most people love a solid structure and change brings a funny dynamic.  Rats, ass kissers and back stabbers spring forward with a new boss.  Eventually the leaders and the cream rise to the top, but not without scars and collateral damage.  If Flus keeps showing growth and maintains the locker room, it will speak volumes for stability and growth.

yeah but keeping the wrong guy just delays the issue and puts the roster and whatever window youre trying to make back a year.

And if you do draft a QB, and leave the staff intact then youre just making the same mistake we made with Trubisky and Fields both. Having their first year be the last year of an old system, and then trying to overcome that with a new scheme.

It's probably best to finally align the coach and QB contracts together.

[Mongo3451]

25 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

And if you do draft a QB, and leave the staff intact then youre just making the same mistake we made with Trubisky and Fields both. Having their first year be the last year of an old system, and then trying to overcome that with a new scheme.

If Flus stays and they draft a QB, that guarantees Flus is here another two years. (Unless Poles is an idiot or a McCaskey gets involved). Anyway, I'm sure Poles will do his due diligence to determine what is the best situation for a new QB to thrive.

[BearFan PHX]

4 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

If Flus stays and they draft a QB, that guarantees Flus is here another two years. (Unless Poles is an idiot or a McCaskey gets involved). Anyway, I'm sure Poles will do his due diligence to determine what is the best situation for a new QB to thrive.

Yeah. I think it's more likely that Eberflus and Fields both stay. If theyre gonna get a new QB, theyre gonna want a new OC at the least, and what OC would come here with Flus' job hanging by a thread?

So I think the most likely scenarios are that Flus and Fields are both gone, but I think both stay is more likely than Fields is gone but Flus stays?

[Stinger226]

I think if Poles gets rid of Flus the new coach will influence who they want as QB. Odds are a drafted QB but if someone like Harbaugh gets the job , he made Kappernick a star , dont sit on him not wanting Fields to stay here. The game he played against Justin they lost 56-27. He wont forget that.  He may want to hedge that bet with also drafting McCarthy to.

[Bears4Ever_34]

None of the scenarios involving Eberflus coming back are good:

Scenario 1- Bring everybody back

You'd be passing on Williams for the hope that this coach/qb/oc combination will magically work the 3rd time around. This is what we call insanity. 

Scenario 2- Bring everybody back but the OC

You get rid of Getsy, but you've now severely limited the quality of OC's who'd be interested in coming to work for a lame duck head coach and a veteran QB about to learn his 3rd offense in 4 years.

Scenario 3- Keep Eberflus, trade Fields, draft a quarterback

Probably the worst of all the scenarios. You'd be pairing up a rookie quarterback with a defensive minded head coach on the hot seat, leaving yourself open to the (high) possibility of setting the kid down the path of learning 2 offenses in 2 years while being coached by someone who didn't draft him, aka the Chicago Bears specialty.

None of these scenarios would make me feel good about the direction of the franchise, which is why Matt Eberflus has to go, and it's also a reminder why hiring defensive minded head coaches is an absolutely moronic decision for any team that doesn't have an established quarterback.

It's time to start fresh. Get rid of the coach, draft a new quarterback, and bring in an offensive mind who's on the same timeline as everyone else.