Well, again Salguero is stating the obvious, but he makes a very good point. Pinpointing a QB is what has ailed this team since Danny retired. And I have to agree with him that I'll feel much better about a 2-14 team that has identified their QB than an 8-8 one that still can't decide on one of the three guys we have or worse than that would be an 8-8 team with a "will he retire or will he not" Brett Favre....
I really agree with that 100%. Thats the main reason I say NO to Favre coming here. We have Mccown who is still fairly young, and has some experience, and of course Beck and Henne, two young QB's loaded with potential. We need to find out who, or IF the QB of the future is on this roster right now, and if he is then we can start worrying about winning.
Finding a QB is more important than victories? If that's the case should a bad, QB starved team tank games to improve their draft position so they can draft a franchise QB? I would say no on that one. Their job is to win. If the season is already shot, well that's a different story (in terms of playing young QB's, not tanking games)- case in point the Fins last year- I was all for playing Beck over Lemon when we had lost so many games we were beyond hope. But to sacrifice games at the start of the season in the name of finding QB stability? I disagree with that.
Getting a high draft pick is no guarantee to get a franchise QB, so I don't see that even as a consideration. If drafting a specific player is that important, there is always the option of trading up to get that person and giving up whatever is necessary to do so. I also have a problem with a QB leading a team to a 1-15 or 2-14 record, and that team being able to say it has found it's answer for a franchise QB. My definition of a successful QB would include the ability to pull out clutch wins... and just winning in general. The number of wins a QB is able to get should be one of the more important criteria I would think. How can you honestly say, "well we only won one game this year, but we finally have a franchise quarterback!"
The implication in my drafting scenario was that there was a QB in the draft considered franchise QB material- Peyton Manning, Carson Palmer, etc. There are always going to be flops like Ryan Leaf and Tim Couch- of course there are no guarantees. Like the saying goes, the only guarantees are death and taxes. But you still try to win games, especially at the start of a season when hope lives. Teams could always just throw promising rookies into the fire- we could have started Beck over Trent Green at the beginning last year. There's no guarantee that Beck will be ready this year- as much as I like his potential he didn't do so hot. I really do have high hopes for Beck- but if he isn't the guy I still think that Favre with Henne being groomed behind him sounds pretty good.
Of course there are no guarantees, there will always be highly regarded prospects who flop like Tim Couch and Ryan Leaf. But do you seriously think that when John Elway, Carson Palmer, and Peyton Manning were drafted people didn't think the same thing, that those teams finally got their franchise qurterbacks? Forget about guarantees, they don't exist.
Thanks Armando for stating the blatantly obvious. And to think this guy gets PAID to write this stuff.
I don't want Farve. Why would we for the sake of wins loose much needed time building a contender. Not to mention lets say for sake of argument Brett was worth 7 to 9 wins. After he is gone we still have the same problem but have moved our selves out of a much more advantageous draft position for the sake of a winning season. By then beck will be 29-30 and we still wont know if he is the guy. Hene will have wasted valuable evaluation time. We won't be any closer to the goal. We have spent way to much time not concentrating on the future for the sake of today. No one likes a losing season. While the Qb position is the most important we also need to find other skill positions as well. The qb needs to develop chemistry with his WR, TE and RB not to mention trust in his oline and their trust in him. Every bit of that will be postponed if Farve played here for a few years.
He didn't say "at the expense of" victories, but may be more important than. No you don't tank games to improve draft position. You suck because your drafts suck anyway. There's no guarantee you draft a good QB. Indy threw Peyton Manning out there, knowing he was going to suck and lose games. And I hate you for making me defend Armando
IMO victories are more important. I'd rather have 15 W's then a potential all-pro QB prospect in the draft.
It's an interesting point, but the Colts knew that Manning was going to be the man, and the man for a long time at that. Here it could be Beck, Henne or McCown, and who knows for how long. So investing time/starts in any one of them is potentially wasted time, whereas with Manning, for better or worse he was the present and future guy. That changes things. I don't have strong feelings either way about the Favre thing. It just wouldn't shock me if it happened.
They did, about as much as San Diego knew Leaf was going to be theirs. It's still an experiment really. I mean if he sucked and continued to suck, it would be a multi-year failed experiment. In some cases, sacrificing one season may be better in the long run, in hindsight. I think it's Beck. Cuz if it's McCown, judging on his multi-year career, we're no good. And Henne's a rookie. Beck looked like crap last year, but look at his circumstances. Hard to start in the NFl with only two weeks of getting any type of offensive snaps.
The two go hand in hand. We find our QB we'll find some wins as well. If we go 1-15 again I guarantee we aren't any closer to knowing who our QB is.
Exactly, in hindsight it might be better. Might not, too. In the meantime there's a QB on the market who last year had stats something like 4,000 yds passing, 28 TDs and a 95 passer rating. And he lead his team to I think a 13-3 season. Plus he's probably good for 2, maybe 3 more seasons. And he can probably be had on the cheap. Signing Favre might be a great move and might be a disaster, who knows. I just disagree with the notion that it woudl definitively be a bad move. It probably isn't even worth discussing until something happens.
