Save us Savage!!!!!!!

[infantrycak]

Is there no statistic revealing higher picks bust less?

There have been articles with results varying on how you define success centered around about 33% success for 1st round down. And then there is the 0% of QBs drafted after the 3rd round since Brady.

The dead lock certainty is if you don't swing you don't hit.

DocBar has a serious aversion to rookie QBs.

 

[Mr teX]

The dead lock certainty is if you don't swing you don't hit.

But you as the batter swing at the pitches you like, not what the pitcher, ump or fans think is a strike.

 

[Mollywhopper]

But you as the batter swing at the pitches you like, not what the pitcher, ump or fans think is a strike.

And if after the first round of this draft concludes and this 'hitter' will have still not found a pitch to swing at aggressively in three years then I'm gonna go ahead and say that he may just be blind in one eye or he's trying to take small ball to a whole other level. Either way I'm questioning how we're trying to reach home.

 

[infantrycak]

But you as the batter swing at the pitches you like, not what the pitcher, ump or fans think is a strike.

Never played baseball?

If you don't swing at ones the ump thinks are strikes, you're out. Which is exactly where OB will be if he doesn't get a QB pronto.

 

[thunderkyss]

DocBar has a serious aversion to rookie QBs.

I don't know. Sounds like he's as in love with Savage as some guys are with Goff/Wentz.

I wonder how many people would be fine with trading Clowney for Jimmy Garropolo & skipping QB in the draft. Heck we've got people wanting to trade for Aj McCarron.

 

[PapaL]

I don't know. Sounds like he's as in love with Savage as some guys are with Goff/Wentz.

I wonder how many people would be fine with trading Clowney for Jimmy Garropolo & skipping QB in the draft. Heck we've got people wanting to trade for Aj McCarron.

Aren't you the one wanting McCarron? Hahaha

 

[thunderkyss]

Aren't you the one wanting McCarron? Hahaha

No.

I think he played well in his first 4 games as a starter... 66% completion, 7.1 ypa, 6 TDs, 2 Ints, 64.4 QBR, 97.1 passer rating. 2 wins, 2 losses...

But I'm hoping O'b felt Savage could be better. But I'd still take a QB in this draft.

 

[Mr teX]

And if after the first round of this draft concludes and this 'hitter' will have still not found a pitch to swing at aggressively in three years then I'm gonna go ahead and say that he may just be blind in one eye or he's trying to take small ball to a whole other level. Either way I'm questioning how we're trying to reach home.

Still, a different approach at the plate doesn't necessarily mean that that approach is wrong.

Bottom line, there's a multitude of ways to get to home plate and you don't necessarily have to hit a HR.

 

[thunderkyss]

So... if Tom Savage was O'bs #2 QB on his board, should we have taken him in the 2nd? 3rd? Are we going to penalize Tom Savage, or say that he can't be successful in this league just because our front office worked the draft & got him in the 4th?

I remember there was rumor that we'd take him with our 2nd round pick. Of course, most said they'd be upset if we did that. We didn't.

Is it too hard to believe? What if Colin Kaepernick was Jim Harbaugh's #2 QB. If he had passed on him, would New England have picked him up (I say New England because they took the next QB)? There were 5 QBs taken before Kaepernick. Only six before Tom Savage. That may have had more to do with how QB needy teams were than the actual difference in talent level.

Billichick said Mallett was their top rated QB..... believe him? He was the 7th QB taken in that draft.

So what if Carson Wentz is the guy the Texans fall in love with. Would you like him less if we managed to get him in the 4th round?

 

[Mr teX]

Never played baseball?

If you don't swing at ones the ump thinks are strikes, you're out. Which is exactly where OB will be if he doesn't get a QB pronto.

Lol, the ump's call doesn't come until after you've made your decision on whether or not you'll swing. And to keep with your baseball analogy, none of these young qbs OB has had a chance to draft has shown that they're difinitively a strike that we missed on. All, including my favorite Teddy B, could just as easily be considered balls with what they've done thus far.

And given the average time a coach stays with one team, OB might be outta here anyway...why hasten that process by hitching your wagon to a guy you don't care for?

 

[Speedy]

Just to stir the pot a little for you folks. When asked today want he wants out of his qb OB went on to say he wants a great communicator, someone who is bright, hard working and earns the respect of his teammates.

Later when asked about tom savage he started off by saying he is good with communication, then called him smart, said he was a hard worker and noted he was currently working out in Arizona with some teammates, and finally said all his hard work has earned the respect of the guys in the locker room.

That's 4 for 4 to me...

It'd be nice if he wanted a QB that played good.

 

[Mr teX]

So... if Tom Savage was O'bs #2 QB on his board, should we have taken him in the 2nd? 3rd? Are we going to penalize Tom Savage, or say that he can't be successful in this league just because our front office worked the draft & got him in the 4th?

I remember there was rumor that we'd take him with our 2nd round pick. Of course, most said they'd be upset if we did that. We didn't.

Is it too hard to believe? What if Colin Kaepernick was Jim Harbaugh's #2 QB. If he had passed on him, would New England have picked him up (I say New England because they took the next QB)? There were 5 QBs taken before Kaepernick. Only six before Tom Savage. That may have had more to do with how QB needy teams were than the actual difference in talent level.

Billichick said Mallett was their top rated QB..... believe him? He was the 7th QB taken in that draft.

So what if Carson Wentz is the guy the Texans fall in love with. Would you like him less if we managed to get him in the 4th round?

Let's some in here tell it, yes Savage's chance for success is less just b/c he was drafted in the 4th. But that's also no different than saying a guy like Wentz's chance for success is lower b/c he played at North Dakota State as opposed to USC or some other power 5 school. It really just boils down to how you look at the prospect and how much you wanna penalize a guy for that.

 

[PapaL]

No.

I think he played well in his first 4 games as a starter... 66% completion, 7.1 ypa, 6 TDs, 2 Ints, 64.4 QBR, 97.1 passer rating. 2 wins, 2 losses...

But I'm hoping O'b felt Savage could be better. But I'd still take a QB in this draft.

My fault. I guess I misremembered. Thought you were really high on him draft time. I apologize.

 

[DocBar]

There have been articles with results varying on how you define success centered around about 33% success for 1st round down. And then there is the 0% of QBs drafted after the 3rd round since Brady.

The dead lock certainty is if you don't swing you don't hit.

DocBar has a serious aversion to rookie QBs.

No, I have a serious aversion to overpaying for a rookie QB. Are any of the QB's in this draft head and shoulders above all of the QB's OB passed on in 2014 when he had the pick of the litter? Do you have any evidence, other than opinion?

 

[TexansSeminole]

No, I have a serious aversion to overpaying for a rookie QB. Are any of the QB's in this draft head and shoulders above all of the QB's OB passed on in 2014 when he had the pick of the litter? Do you have any evidence, other than opinion?

What evidence would be sufficient for you? What exactly are you looking for on that end? Are you looking for stats, scout's opinions, what?

How about you show how all the QBs taken in the first two rounds in that draft, that OB passed on, are better than the top QBs in this draft?

More busy work.

 

[DocBar]

I don't know. Sounds like he's as in love with Savage as some guys are with Goff/Wentz.

I wonder how many people would be fine with trading Clowney for Jimmy Garropolo & skipping QB in the draft. Heck we've got people wanting to trade for Aj McCarron.

No, I'm not in love with him. I like his chances of winning games in 2016 more so than any rookie QB. My rational is that a developmental player who has had two full years to develop should get the opportunity to show it, not have the team trade away the future on a completely unproven draft pick when there are holes all over the team that need to be filled with those traded draft picks.

Savage had his warts, for sure, coming out of college. I've seen steady improvement in what I've seen from him. I think that two years of wart removal has probably done him a lot of good. He didn't have major flaws that good coaching, player dedication and patience couldn't solve.

To carry on the baseball analogies, maybe OB stole home in the 4th inning of the 2014 draft and we're just now realizing it. HA!
Hey, it could've happened. lol

 

[DocBar]

My fault. I guess I misremembered. Thought you were really high on him draft time. I apologize.

I'm sure he was. LOL
FWIW, I thought he was a good looking QB, and that sort of proved itself out this season.

 

[TexansSeminole]

No, I'm not in love with him. I like his chances of winning games in 2016 more so than any rookie QB. My rational is that a developmental player who has had two full years to develop should get the opportunity to show it, not have the team trade away the future on a completely unproven draft pick when there are holes all over the team that need to be filled with those traded draft picks.

Savage had his warts, for sure, coming out of college. I've seen steady improvement in what I've seen from him. I think that two years of wart removal has probably done him a lot of good. He didn't have major flaws that good coaching, player dedication and patience couldn't solve.

To carry on the baseball analogies, maybe OB stole home in the 4th inning of the 2014 draft and we're just now realizing it. HA!
Hey, it could've happened. lol

I agree that Savage should have a shot and the time is now to be looking for him to assert himself as the starter. But, you need to add competition and depth at the position. I think we all have seen how important that is over the years. If we were to even trade 3 first round draft picks for a rookie in this draft, and Savage stepped up to be a good starting quarterback this year, then we aren't trading away the future. We should still be able to acquire the necessary talent to be in contention, even without those 3 first rounders.

 

[DocBar]

I agree that Savage should have a shot and the time is now to be looking for him to assert himself as the starter. But, you need to add competition and depth at the position. I think we all have seen how important that is over the years. If we were to even trade 3 first round draft picks for a rookie in this draft, and Savage stepped up to be a good starting quarterback this year, then we aren't trading away the future. We should still be able to acquire the necessary talent to be in contention, even without those 3 first rounders.

That is a ridiculous statement. How can trading away three 1st round picks for a back up QB be considered a good thing?
By all means, draft the best QB on the board, if you consider him worth the 22nd pick overall. Hell, trade up to say 15, if your guy is still there.

History shows the fallacy of trading up high in the 1st round and picking a QB. There is flat out nothing that says any QB in this draft is going to be a franchise QB. No metrics, no analytics, nothing has proven itself capable of picking a guaranteed franchise QB. If there were such a thing, the 1st round would take about 10 minutes. It's nothing but your best guess.

 

[infantrycak]

My fault. I guess I misremembered. Thought you were really high on him draft time. I apologize.

He may not have brought it up this time but yes TK thought AJ was one of the best QBs in that draft.

 

[CloakNNNdagger]

Savage had his warts, for sure, coming out of college. I've seen steady improvement in what I've seen from him. I think that two years of wart removal has probably done him a lot of good. He didn't have major flaws that good coaching, player dedication and patience couldn't solve.

No worries. Since I've been treating Savage's condition, I guarantee that all of his impediments will be gone by the start of the season and he'll do fantastic as our new starter!

 

[DocBar]

No worries. Since I've been treating Savage's condition, I guarantee that all of his impediments will be gone by the start of the season and he'll do fantastic as our new starter!

HAHA!! So when Savage is the Super Bowl 51 MVP, the Texans will hire you as there team physician? Talk about win-win!!!

on the bolded. I don't want anyone going apoplectic on here. LOL

 

[Mollywhopper]

That is a ridiculous statement. How can trading away three 1st round picks for a back up QB be considered a good thing?

It wouldn't be a good thing, it would just be the result of an attempt. A similar kind of attempt to what the Redskins made a few years ago and lo and behold they're hardly a ruined franchise for it. No, in fact they were just a playoff team not much different from where we sit now all attempt-less.

History shows the fallacy of trading up high in the 1st round and picking a QB.

No, history shows the fallacy of trading up and picking a bad QB.

There is flat out nothing that says any QB in this draft is going to be a franchise QB. No metrics, no analytics, nothing has proven itself capable of picking a guaranteed franchise QB. If there were such a thing, the 1st round would take about 10 minutes. It's nothing but your best guess.

Then why even have a draft? Why not just assign kids out of college randomly to teams and just go from there? The answer is because there is a method to identifying and picking the best players available, even if it isn't perfect 100% of the time.

 

[DocBar]

It wouldn't be a good thing, it would just be the result of an attempt. A similar kind of attempt to what the Redskins made a few years ago and lo and behold they're hardly a ruined franchise for it. No, in fact they were just a playoff team not much different from where we sit now all attempt-less.

Only because the QB they drafted later in that same draft proved to be better in a particular system and had time to sit and study the game from the sidelines. Let that sink in for a moment.



No, history shows the fallacy of trading up and picking a bad QB.

History shows that picking a QB is iffy at best and that more end up being bad than good. And y'all say I want a mediocre QB. Sheesh!!



Then why even have a draft? Why not just assign kids out of college randomly to teams and just go from there? The answer is because there is a method to identifying and picking the best players available, even if it isn't perfect 100% of the time.

Because it's all guess work and some people are better at multiple guess questions than others.

 

[Mollywhopper]

Only because the QB they drafted later in that same draft proved to be better in a particular system and had time to sit and study the game from the sidelines. Let that sink in for a moment.

History shows that picking a QB is iffy at best and that more end up being bad than good. And y'all say I want a mediocre QB. Sheesh!!

Because it's all guess work and some people are better at multiple guess questions than others.

- The point was they recovered just fine. It's not a franchise killer to swing and miss like it used to be due to rookie wage scales.

- Looking at last years playoffs and seeing the final eight teams with six former first rounders, including four former number 1 overall picks, should give a good idea of the value of ID'ing a legit QB early.

- There's a big difference between an educated guess and wild ass one.

 

[DocBar]

Big knock on Savage, pre draft, was foot work (wide stance, happy feet) and staring down receivers. I don't see those issues showing up. His decisions appear to be quick and decisive, foot work is compact and functional.

 

[DocBar]

- The point was they recovered just fine. It's not a franchise killer to swing and miss like it used to be due to rookie wage scales

- Looking at last years playoffs and seeing the final eight teams with six former first rounders, including four former number 1 overall picks, should give a good idea of the value of ID'ing a legit QB early.

- There's a big difference between an educated guess and wild ass one.

We can do this for forever. We disagree. You can't provide facts that definitely point in your favor, neither can I. Let it go. I'm tired of the circular arguments from both of us.

 

[Mollywhopper]

We can do this for forever. We disagree. You can't provide facts that definitely point in your favor, neither can I. Let it go. I'm tired of the circular arguments from both of us.

I did provide facts about early round QB's in the playoffs. You just didn't want to acknowledge it.

And don't respond to me if you don't want to, but if I see something I'd like to make a point of I will, thanks.

 

[DocBar]

I did provide facts about early round QB's in the playoffs. You just didn't want to acknowledge it.

And don't respond to me if you don't want to, but if I see something I'd like to make a point of I will, thanks.

By all means, make your point. The facts you provided ignore the number of QB busts during the same time period,You just chose to ignore those, so I couldn't care less. All you're seeing is boom. All I'm seeing is bust.

 

[Mollywhopper]

By all means, make your point. The facts you provided ignore the number of QB busts during the same time period,You just chose to ignore those, so I couldn't care less. All you're seeing is boom. All I'm seeing is bust.

No, I readily accept that some picks don't work out. Here I am acknowledging it, again.

I just don't think that's a good reason for a team not to do one's homework, ID a talent, and take a swing every once in a while.

I do agree that all your seeing is bust though, which I just don't get when the facts prove otherwise. But ok.

 

[DocBar]

No, I readily accept that some picks don't work out. Here I am acknowledging it, again.

I just don't think that's a good reason for a team not to do one's homework, ID a talent, and take a swing every once in a while.

I do agree that all your seeing is bust though, which I just don't get when the facts prove otherwise. But ok.

Good for you. Let it go. Neither one is convincing the other. I'll tel ya what, if one us proves more correct than the other, the loser takes the winner to dinner. We'll let Seegara, or a similar poster (being nice), choose the winner. Via poll. HAHA

No, I readily accept that some picks don't work out. Here I am acknowledging it, again.

I just don't think that's a good reason for a team not to do one's homework, ID a talent, and take a swing every once in a while.

I do agree that all your seeing is bust though, which I just don't get when the facts prove otherwise. But ok.

Again, we agree to disagree. Have a nice life. I'm done with you.

 

[Mollywhopper]

Again, we agree to disagree. Have a nice life. I'm done with you.

Be done, great, go enjoy your highlights. I'll continue looking at QB's that we'd be wise to move on so as not to fall flat on our faces should Savage play out like a 4th rounder invariably does.

Take care.

 

[DocBar]

Be done, great, go enjoy your highlights. I'll continue looking at QB's that we'd be wise to move on so as not to fall flat on our faces should Savage play out like a 4th rounder invariably does.

Take care.

Enjoy the highlights of your QB of choice. Just quit bugging me with your asinine opinion. I'll do the same.

 

[Mollywhopper]

Enjoy the highlights of your QB of choice. Just quit bugging me with your asinine opinion. I'll do the same.

I don't watch just highlights, but thanks. And again, I'll make my point whenever I see fit to tell someone they're sideways, ignore me all you like.

 

[DocBar]

I don't watch just highlights, but thanks. And again, I'll make my point whenever I see fit to tell someone they're sideways, ignore me all you like.

Only if you promise to ignore me.

 

[thunderkyss]

My fault. I guess I misremembered. Thought you were really high on him draft time. I apologize.

No, you're right. He was my guy in that draft. I still think he was the most ready to start & I think his ceiling is higher than most think.

But what's done is done. O'b thinks Savage is a better prospect. I'd love for him to be right if that means Savage becomes a franchise QB.

However after McCarron started 4 games, won 2 out of 4 & did not look out of place... some have suggested we trade for him. I've never been on board that wagon.

 

[Mollywhopper]

Only if you promise to ignore me.

Uhh, no. I'm not telling you to be done with anything. Post if you'd like, ignore me if you like, I don't care. I'll post when and what I want in the mean time.

 

[Mollywhopper]

No, you're right. He was my guy in that draft. I still think he was the most ready to start & I think his ceiling is higher than most think.

But what's done is done. O'b thinks Savage is a better prospect. I'd love for him to be right if that means Savage becomes a franchise QB.

However after McCarron started 4 games, won 2 out of 4 & did not look out of place... some have suggested we trade for him. I've never been on board that wagon.

Would you trade Savage for McCarron straight up?

 

[thunderkyss]

No, I have a serious aversion to overpaying for a rookie QB. Are any of the QB's in this draft head and shoulders above all of the QB's OB passed on in 2014 when he had the pick of the litter? Do you have any evidence, other than opinion?

I think Goff & Cook have the pedigree the 2014 first round QBS did not have... except Manziel. Traditional football programs, strong football conferences, great production against great competition. & in Cook's case, like McCarron, he played well against the best of the best at the end of the season three years in a row. Connor Cook was also voted MVP of his divisional championship game.

I think Lynch & Prescott are on par with the 2014 first rounders... Wentz as well.

 

[DocBar]

Would you trade Savage for McCarron straight up?

No.

 

[Mollywhopper]

No.

I'd prefer to see Savage succeed, believe it or not. But I was higher on McCarron coming out. Tough call.

 

[DocBar]

I think Goff & Cook have the pedigree the 2014 first round QBS did not have... except Manziel. Traditional football programs, strong football conferences, great production against great competition. & in Cook's case, like McCarron, he played well against the best of the best at the end of the season three years in a row. Connor Cook was also voted MVP of his divisional championship game.

I think Lynch & Prescott are on par with the 2014 first rounders... Wentz as well.

So no, you don't think the current crop of QB's are head and shoulders above. So why trade up in 2016 for what you wouldn't have drafted there in 2014?\

 

[DocBar]

I think Goff & Cook have the pedigree the 2014 first round QBS did not have... except Manziel. Traditional football programs, strong football conferences, great production against great competition. & in Cook's case, like McCarron, he played well against the best of the best at the end of the season three years in a row. Connor Cook was also voted MVP of his divisional championship game.

I think Lynch & Prescott are on par with the 2014 first rounders... Wentz as well.

So no, you don't think the current crop of QB's are head and shoulders above. So why trade up in 2016 for what you wouldn't have drafted there in 2014?\

 

[thunderkyss]

- The point was they recovered just fine. It's not a franchise killer to swing and miss like it used to be due to rookie wage scales.

- Looking at last years playoffs and seeing the final eight teams with six former first rounders, including four former number 1 overall picks, should give a good idea of the value of ID'ing a legit QB early.

- There's a big difference between an educated guess and wild ass one.

The big difference I see is that if a guy like Case Keenum put up stats like Andrew Luck's rookie season, the team would move on. But since he was a first round pick, they stick with Luck & come up with all kinds of excuses for the less than stellar stats.

Look at Kirk Cousins. After the season he had, the Redskins don't want to pay him. After the season Luck had, everybody is saying the Colts should back up the brinks truck.

With David Carr, we went through a dozen offensive linemen. Some good prospects from the draft, some good journey men. But those prospects didn't pan out, or those journeymen had lost a step... when in reality, the QB sucked. But we needed to be sure.

Case Keenum, Tj Yates... nothing special, but they've played better than Ej Manuel, Geno Smith, & Mark Sanchez. But Case & Keenum were sitting at home during the season contemplating life after football while Smith, Manuel, & Sanchez were on NFL rosters....

I think I'm just rambling now.

 

[thunderkyss]

Would you trade Savage for McCarron straight up?

Like I said, I've never been in that group. O'b picked Savage. To me, it's like Hoyer & Mallett... my opinion, but O'b wasn't going to help Mallett succeed. He did everything he could to make Hoyer a starter.

If O'b is my coach... no. Let him do the best he can with Savage. If Hue Jackson was my coach, or if I had a coach who appreciates McCarron, yes.

If I were the coach, yes. Heck, I'd throw Hoyer in the deal for good measure.

 

[thunderkyss]

So no, you don't think the current crop of QB's are head and shoulders above. So why trade up in 2016 for what you wouldn't have drafted there in 2014?\

I think Goff & Cook are worthy of a top ten pick. I never thought Bortles or Bridgewater were.

If we were picking at 22 in the 2014 draft, I'd have been banging the table for a QB. If we had the #1 overall this draft, I'd be banging the table for a QB.

& yes, I like Cook better than I liked McCarron. & I loved McCarron.

& I'm not in the trade up crowd. I'm in the take Cook at 22 club of 1

 

[infantrycak]

The big difference I see is that if a guy like Case Keenum put up stats like Andrew Luck's rookie season, the team would move on. But since he was a first round pick, they stick with Luck & come up with all kinds of excuses for the less than stellar stats.

You'd be better off using Mark Sanchez for your example. Luck had a probowl level 67.4 QBR as a rookie with a bunch of comebacks and game winning drives.

 

[Mollywhopper]

The big difference I see is that if a guy like Case Keenum put up stats like Andrew Luck's rookie season, the team would move on. But since he was a first round pick, they stick with Luck & come up with all kinds of excuses for the less than stellar stats.

Look at Kirk Cousins. After the season he had, the Redskins don't want to pay him. After the season Luck had, everybody is saying the Colts should back up the brinks truck.

With David Carr, we went through a dozen offensive linemen. Some good prospects from the draft, some good journey men. But those prospects didn't pan out, or those journey had lost a step... when in reality, the QB sucked. But we needed to be sure.

Case Keenum, Tj Yates... nothing special, but they've played better than Ej Manuel, Geno Smith, & Mark Sanchez. But Case & Keenum were sitting at home during the season contemplating life after football while Smith, Manuel, & Sanchez were on NFL rosters....

I think I'm just rambling now.

I agree 100% that later round guys don't get the same opportunities that early round guys do. It isn't always fair, but it isn't out of the clear blue sky either, guys are graded out of school and usually given time to fall to that mean more or less. And those guys are far more often than not drafted where they are for a good reason, barring organizational incompetence (lookin at you Browns).

 

[thunderkyss]

It isn't always fair, but it isn't out of the clear blue sky either, guys are graded out of school and usually given time to fall to that mean more or less. And those guys are far more often than not drafted where they are for a good reason, barring organizational incompetence (lookin at you Browns).

Well... I didn't understand the Broncos trading up for Jay Cutler. He's Tj Yates if you ask me.

But there was a time when I understood how QBS were ranked & graded & evaluated. Troy Aikman, Steve Young, Peyton Manning, Philip Rivers, Matt Stafford, Sam Bradford, Matt Ryan... I can see why those guys were considered #1 overall picks. Heck, I even understand why a team would use that same pick on Michael Vick, or Cam Newton.

I don't understand the burning desire for us to draft Teddy Bridgewater with the #1 overall pick. Or Bortles. Would our QB position be better off?

Not if we'd have traded up to 23 & took Bridgewater there. Or if they took McCarron instead of Savahe. Rick & O'b decided to take a chance on Hoyer & Mallett.

 

[infantrycak]

I agree 100% that later round guys don't get the same opportunities that early round guys do. It isn't always fair, but it isn't out of the clear blue sky either, guys are graded out of school and usually given time to fall to that mean more or less. And those guys are far more often than not drafted where they are for a good reason, barring organizational incompetence (lookin at you Browns).

What TK is saying makes some sense if both were starting as rookies. But later round guys have gotten looks when starters have been injured or not panned out and generally after having the 'developmental time' some think should transform them into as good as the 1st rounders. Hasn't worked very often.

David Garrard
Fitzy
Matt Cassell
Derek Anderson
Dan Orlovsky
Bruce Gradkowski
Matt Flynn
John Skelton

That's the best of them.

I don't understand the burning desire for us to draft Teddy Bridgewater with the #1 overall pick. Or Bortles. Would our QB position be better off?

Yes

Not if we'd have traded up to 23 & took Bridgewater there.

Not sure where 23 came from but again yes we would be better off with TB than now.