Originally Posted by infantrycak
In most drafts there are only 1-2 QBs who will turn out to be solid starters. If a team thinks they have identified one then draftniks be damned you do what is necessary to get that guy rather than settling for a different QB "in the same talent group" because they would be a "better value."
Nice job leaving off 95% of the reason.
In a draft like this, I think it would be foolish for any team to believe they have successfully identified the one or two QBs that will become a solid starter. I believe like OB said, there isn't a whole lot of separation between them. We've got guys who've consistently produced in big conferences, played well in big games, demonstrated the ability to make good decisions, manage a football game from the LOS, showed remarkable poise, have prototypical height, played for three years or more, made plays off schedule, rallied their teams from behind, been that rock the team can rely on..... but not all in the same guy.
They've all got a good mix of those qualities, some really strong in certain areas, weak in others, but an overall solid mix. Aaron Murray, who many people believe will be available in the 3rd round, some think 4th, has every bit as good a chance to be a solid starting QB in this league as Blake Bortles, or Derek Carr, both projected to be 1st round picks.
Now I do believe there is one guy who is head & shoulders above the rest, but nobody wants to talk about that, but I think we can all agree it would be awkward if we selected him with the #1 overall pick.
It's possible that OB feels the same way about Tom Savage, or Connor Shaw.
And you're leaving off the part about taking a player with the early pick who there is no comparison for in the later rounds, like Clowney, Robinson, Mack, or Watkins. Good players of better "value" maybe (for a RT per se)... but not the same caliber athlete. Not even close.