Mocking The Draft: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Around SBN: Headlines: BC Beats BU 4-3 in 58th Beanpot Championship

2008 NFL Post-Draft Yin and Yang: AFC and NFC North

Well, after spending the day smacking down some silly Cowboys fans who didn't like the draft evaluation I gave their owner and GM, Mr. Jerry Jones, I now need another spiritual cleansing in the form of the 2008 Post Draft Yin and Yang. Today, we focus on the AFC and NFC South teams and how they improved themselves within their division in this draft.

Star-divide

Ommmmmmmmmmmm...


AFC North

Yin:

Steel_curtain_s  Pittsburgh Steelers

Though Pittsburgh did very little to improve their bad offensive line, they did manage to have RB Rashard Mendenhall and WR Limas Sweed fall into their laps. Instead of bypassing them and taking any old lineman, they were smart and took some genuine playmakers.

Yang:

Dawgsbynature_s  Cleveland Browns

No, I'm not criticizing Cleveland because they didn't have any picks until round 4. Well, ok, yeah I am. You build through the draft, not free agency. It is a tried and true rule of the NFL. Some of Cleveland's trades made sense (Corey Williams), but they simply traded away too many picks and have too many needs unanswered at RB, CB, S, and LB. 

Yinyang_medium

Yin:

Cincyjungle_s  Cincinnati Bengals

The Bengals are preparing themselves for a very hard off-season, dealing with the childish antics of their star WR Chad Johnson. You cannot ignore this when evaluating their draft. That said, getting LB Keith Rivers and DT Pat Sims will go a long way to repairing their porous defense. I also like WR Jerome Simpson, a possible insurance policy should the Bengals deactivate Chad Johnson.

Yang:

Baltimorebeatdown_s  Baltimore Ravens

I very much like the trade to get QB Joe Flacco, but what did Baltimore do to address their aging and highly over-rated defense? By taking Flacco, Baltimore is admitting to a re-building year. RB Ray Rice was a nice pick as well, but in the first 5 rounds they drafted only one defensive player. Baltimore's LBers and secondary are old and needed an infusion of youth.


NFC North

Yin:

Dailynorseman_s  Minnesota Vikings

Trading for DE Jared Allen just before the draft was huge. The Vikes now have a pass rush, or at least should have one. They addressed their weak safety play by taking Tyrell Johnson. Drafting QB John David Booty is interesting because Vikings fans seem to think this is a Super Bowl team with QB Tavaris Jackson as the QB. I'm not convinced, and I don't think the Vikes are either. Thus, the smart play was to take some Booty (sorry, couldn't resist).

Yang:

Acmepackingco_s  Green Bay Packers

If I'm Aaron Rodgers, I'm livid. Rodgers could start on several NFL team starved for a QB, but instead spent his first 3 seasons holding a clipboard behind Brett Favre. With Favre gone, Rogers now has QB Brian Brohm to contend with. GB did some nice things, like picking up TE Jermichael Finley, but the Packers need some youth in that secondary big time, but opted to take a second round QB. Dumb.

Yinyang_medium

Yin:

Prideofdetroit_s  Detroit Lions

I like them getting RB Kevin Smith in round 2 and DE Cliff Avril in round 3. Detroit must generate some pass rush this year to survive in the AFC North, and getting Avril and DT Andre Fluellen will help them with that. OT Gosder Cherilus might have been a reach, but Detroit needed o-line help big time.

Yang:

Windycity_s  Chicago Bears

I don't care what GM Jerry Angelo's excuse is, but Chicago had to take either Brohm or QB Chad Henne in round 2, but instead opted for a running back, Matt Forte'. And don't give me this "Chad Henne isn't any good" crap. Bill Parcells drafted Henne, and he's got a helluva lot better draft track record than Angelo. This move confirmed two things: RB Cedric Benson (drafted #4 overall by Angelo in 2005) is a complete bust, and Chicago is not interested in winning right now. Rex Grossman is still the team's QB, which means 6 or 7 wins in 2008, tops. I agree with them taking OT Chris Williams, WR Earl Bennett, and I am a big Matt Forte' fan. But, you win in this league with great QB play. Since Chicago has no effective QBs on their roster, 2008 will be a long season for Bears fans.


Next up: Yin and Yang, AFC and NFC South style!

0 recs  |  Comment 30 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

the only thing that got smacked around BBS

were your idiotic and moronic comments about a Cowboys team that is far superior to your overrated Colts.

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 1, 2008 3:03 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Terry

Where u been? We miss you over at Stampede Blue. You lovin’ the BTB new features?

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on May 1, 2008 5:08 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

absolutely

In Romo we Trust

by Terry on May 1, 2008 9:34 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Okay, okay

Try to keep it in the other thread, guys.

Thanks.

www.newerascouting.com www.mockingthedraft.com

by MattMiller on May 1, 2008 3:04 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Mr. Big, at least get your analysis factually correct
I very much like the trade to get QB Joe Flacco, but what did Baltimore do to address their aging and highly over-rated defense? By taking Flacco, Baltimore is admitting to a re-building year. RB Ray Rice was a nice pick as well, but in the first 5 rounds they drafted only one defensive player. Baltimore’s LBers and secondary are old and needed an infusion of youth.

I am sorry to tell safety Tom Zbikowski and linebacker Tavares Gooden that they are the same player. That is sure to be uncomfortable. To make this statement, you also have to assume that Fabian Washington, who we traded a fourth round pick for, doesn’t count, despite the fact that we’ve got a fairly good chance at grooming him into a starter, he’s only 25, and he’ll at least play nickelback for us.

I agree our secondary needed an infusion of youth, which is why the Ravens drafted Zbikowski, Nakamura, traded for Fabian Washington, and signed Frank Walker. If the complaint is that we didn’t draft an elite cornerback, I understand, but we can hardly be blamed for only having one first round pick, and quarterback was arguably the bigger need. Incidentally, Ozzie Newsome and Rex Ryan seemed to blame our secondary coach, who was one of very few defensive coaches that did not return this season, instead bringing in Pagano, who coached the Raiders DBs from 2005-2006.

Our Linebackers are old??? I assume you mean Ray Lewis. Our other three starters, JJ , Suggs, and Scott are 26, 25, and 27 respectively. Ray Lewis is getting up there, but he’s far too good for us to get rid of, and played extremely well this past season. We also drafted Tavares Gooden, and drafted Antwaan Barnes and Prescott Burgess last year. We only have 3 linebackers who are 30 or older, and two of them (Ayanbedeyjo, and Gary Stills), are on the team as elite special teamers. Ray Lewis is one of the best linebackers ever to play the game, but he’s not the only linebacker on our team. The ironic thing, is that after calling our defense overrated, I would guess that you think Ray Lewis is overrated as well. And yet, you made an assumption about the age of our linebackers that can only be represented by that one player. Sheesh.

Now, as for our defense being overrated, I suppose it depends on how people rate us. I would suspect, however, that most teams, upon losing three defensive starters to injury for almost all the season, would not be able to perform at a top 10 level. We had the sixth rated defense in the NFL last season, and that was without Trevor Pryce (13 sacks in 2006), Chris McCallister, and Samari Rolle. Losing both starting corners in a man-cover defense is just brutal. Unlike a cover-two defense, our corners are more important than our safeties. Not to mention, Steve McNair and Kyle Boller turning over the ball every other play didn’t help much either. We couldn’t keep our offense on the field.

In short, your analysis of our team is extremely uninformed.

by math_geek on May 1, 2008 10:09 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Analysis

I actually realized the 5th round mistake, but I can’t go back an edit stories. So, yeah. But of a F up on my part. Gooden seems more of a project at LBer, and I still think they need some more youth back there. Lewis is ancient, and Suggs is chirping about him wanting to be designated a DE, not a LB. Zbikowski is a hard-nosed safety, but can’t cover anyone. Nakamura has speed, but seems raw and more of a KR. Trading for Fabian Washington is sort of “meh.”

Again, I understand the Ravens made moves, but I’m not so sure these moves improve them to the point where they can compete in the division. And yes, the Baltimore defense is highly over-rated. Your #6 ranked defense means absolutely nothing. From Nov. 1 to the end of the season, the defense surrendered over 30 ppg, most notably 44 to the Colts, 33 to Cleveland, and 32 to SD, all loses. I understand the offense was horrible, but even in 2006 (when the Ravens had a great team) the supposedly “greaT” defense choked in the 4th quarter, allowing the Colts to hold the ball for over 7 minutes and ice the game. Indy did much of the damage running the football right at Baltimore, and scoring first downs.

So yes, your defense is over-rated. Sorry for the F up. We’re working with a new platform, and sometimes I accidentally click “Submit” and not “Save” when I’m fact checking. And since I can’t go back and edit something already submitted, it is sort of stuck there.

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on May 2, 2008 7:44 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Wow, you know nothing about our team at all

Ray Lewis is 32… plenty of Linebackers have played until they are 35. He actually had a great season last year. He’s not getting replaced. Tavares Gooden, project though he might be, is probably a perfect fit, as he is versatile, and no inside linebacker was going to crack our starting lineup this year anyway barring injury.

Fabian Washington played extremely well in 2006 (of course, no-one was passing the ball against Oakland), but really struggled in 2007. He’s going to be getting the same secondary coach in 2008 as he had in 2006. He was a raw prospect when Oakland drafted him, and he is still developing. However, he is undoubtedly part of the picture when you talk about the Raiders draft.

Suggs wants to be designated as a DE because it means a $800,000 difference on his franchise tag, he is a 3-4 Outside linebacker. Even if he gets paid differently, he’ll still be doing the same stuff in our defense. Still, calling our LBs ancient when 3 of our starters are 25, 26, and 27 is just silly.

As for our defense being overrated. Peyton’s line from that 2006 game
Comp 15 Att 30 Pct 50.0 Yds 170 Avg 5.7 TD 0 Int 2 Sck 1 QB Rat 39.6 Rush 3 Rush yards 5 Yrd/att 1.7 TD 0

I suppose he’s overrated too. Of course, we both know the Baltimore offense lost us that game. Steve McNair was just terrible, and that game, in retrospect, was the beginning of the end of his career.

As for our defense over the past year, there was a reason I used yardage defense instead of scoring defense. Turning the ball over hurts your scoring defense, and we were giving it up like Paris Hilton all year. Against Cleveland, we coughed it up 4 times, one was an interception returned for a touchdown. Against Indianapolis, we coughed it up 5 times, and you blocked a punt. Due to turnovers, two Indy drives started on our own 12, and 13 respectively. The defense didn’t have that excuse against SD, as the offense only turned the ball over twice.
However, the point remains, scoring defense is highly innaccurate as to the quality of a defense if the team in question turns the ball over regularly. Furthermore, our defense struggled like hell because they were missing three key starters (Pryce, Rolle, and McCallister) for all 3 of the games you mentioned. Rolle and C-Mac did play against NE in between the SD and Indy games. Our defense seemed to perform a lot better in that game, against the best offense in NFL history (or at least since the Superbowl era).

Consider that most units in the NFL can’t afford to lose 3 starters. The introduction of 3 WRs turned a good/OK offense in NE into the statistical juggernauts they were last year. Similarily, when the Indianapolis offense lost Marvin Harrison, Tony Ugoh, and Dallas Clark, Peyton throws 6 picks against the Chargers. Six! And by constructing an argument based on anecdotal evidence, ignoring the injury-induced circumstances, I’ve just shown you that Peyton Manning is highly overrated. Something tells me you aren’t inclined to agree.

Drafting a QB in the first round, we’re obviously not primed to take over the AFC north. Of course, at this point, neither are the Bengals, who also drafted players at positions of need, but are coming apart at the seams.

by math_geek on May 2, 2008 9:02 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ray Lewis

He’s done, math_geek. Everyone knows it. The LBers are ancient not necessarily from an age POV, but from a wear-and-tear POV. Lewis is indeed finished and Suggs is a pass rusher who can’t cover anyone. I don’t think they got enough help in this draft to effectively fix those problems. This team will not be competitive in the AFC North in 2008 because Kyle Boller is still the starting QB and Joe Flacco is a rookie. They are certainly not “primed” to take over the AFC North next season, and you are living in a fantasy world to even consider it. Baltimore is a good two or three years away from competing for the AFC North, and that’s on the fast track.

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on May 2, 2008 1:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I Respectfully Disagree

With Baltimore having no chance of competing for the AFC North.

Pittsburgh will be the class of the division, if all of their players are healthy, and that’s a big IF, considering Ben Roethlisberger’s seemingly random mishaps. Their offensive line is terrible, and they drafted NO ONE to fix it.

Cleveland? Cleveland is on the receiving end of the media’s infatuation with all things offense. Remember the 2006 Jets? That’s your 2007 Browns. There’s a reason Derek Anderson could not beat out Charlie Fry, and Brady Quinn’s not the answer, considering he’s a product of the Notre Dame Hype Machine.

Cincinnati is not as bad as they were last year, I would think, but they still have a terrible defense.

The schedules for the AFC North will be brutal next season, meaning the standings will be clumped together more than they usually would be. I don’t see any reason Baltimore can’t finish second.

Insert clever and witty remark slash pun here!

by ES46NE10 on May 2, 2008 1:56 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Agreed

Agree with you on Cleveland im tried of hearing about them. Yes they look good on paper but honestly everyone looks good on paper, even Oakland looks good on paper (to an extend). I do agree that the AFC north will be one of the hardest schedules so i expect more competitiveness within the North. However, being a Steeler fan that line will improve only if two things happen. Big ben starts checking down some balls to the RB and if the whole OL players play in their position that they are comfortable with; last year way to many injurys which caused a bunch of shuffling around on that OL. Again agree with your statement the steelers season depends on people not getting hurt.

* till next time wave those towels proud

by LiveinDCbutsteelerfanbyheart on May 5, 2008 11:51 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ray Lewis

I’m probably not going to convince you on Ray Lewis. However, I might as well try. “Everyone knows it” is a bit of a stretch. Check out the coldhardfootballfacts.com article on the Ravens after the past season.

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_2214_32_teams_in_32_days:_Baltimore.html

The relevant paragraph

Most underrated player: LB Ray Lewis. No question about it. Simply the fact that a good chunk of NFL Nation thinks he’s "overrated" makes him underrated. Anyone who wants to suggest that Lewis is no longer a great player should simper at the feet of the Cold, Hard Football Facts. Lewis is the heart of the most consistently excellent run defense in the NFL. The names around Lewis have changed, but the Ravens have throttled the run for a solid decade with him in the middle.

In Baltimore’s defense, Ray Lewis’ primary job is to shut down the running back. And boy does he do it. He put together another great season last year, with 120 tackles, and that’s after missing two games at the end of the season with a broken rib. Ribs heal, and Ray Lewis has plenty more football in him. He may not be as good in coverage as he once was, but seriously, he’s still a better MLB than the starting MLBs of 85% of the league. He deflected 12 passes last year and intercepted 2 more. Hell, he may have been the best MLB in the AFC last year.

Suggs is a pass rusher who can’t cover anyone.
I’m not sure you understand the role of the 3-4 left outside linebacker. Suggs is a pass-rusher. That is what he does. He had an off season last year (especially with the loss of Trevor Pryce), but he still rushes the passer quite well. He’s also quite good against the run. Suggs usually doesn’t cover anyone because that is not what he is supposed to do. It’s not his job. As such, he’s not a great cover linebacker. I know, Adalius Thomas did everything, but he, unlike Suggs, actually was getting older.
The LBers are ancient not necessarily from an age POV, but from a wear-and-tear POV.
This doesn’t say anything. How can you possibly say our linebackers have taken more wear and tear than other linebackers. Ray has started for 12 seasons, fine. Suggs has only started for 5, Scott for 2.5, and JJ for only one. That’s not wear and tear. How many Indy players are ancient by that metric? It’s just asinine.

Finally, what I said about our chances at AFC North -

Drafting a QB in the first round, we’re obviously not primed to take over the AFC north.

Your comment on that statement –

This team will not be competitive in the AFC North in 2008 because Kyle Boller is still the starting QB and Joe Flacco is a rookie. They are certainly not "primed" to take over the AFC North next season, and you are living in a fantasy world to even consider it. Baltimore is a good two or three years away from competing for the AFC North, and that’s on the fast track.

I’m in a fantasy world to even consider it? How could you possibly… possibly take my statement to imply that I was “considering” Baltimore to be at all ready to take the division? It doesn’t make any sense. Every team has some chance to compete for the division (who among us saw the Bucs taking their division last year?), but I hardly think it’s likely for us this year. My statement said quite the opposite. I do think it’s absurd that we label teams as 2-3 years away from competing. Would you have said the same thing about the Browns, Bucs, Vikings, and Redskins last year? They all finished worse in 2006 than the Ravens did in 2007.

by math_geek on May 2, 2008 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm Leaning Towards

BBS’s position on Ray Lewis – he still has the intensity, but there’s a habit of the official scorer giving him tackles that he didn’t primarily make, so that number is somewhat inflated. I don’t see him being in the top half of MLBs this season.

Suggs had a down year. Yes, I know everyone on the Ravens had a down year, but Suggs especially. I still see the Ravens having a better shot at 8 – 8 than Cleveland.

Insert clever and witty remark slash pun here!

by ES46NE10 on May 2, 2008 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm higher on Cleveland than you are

I also have to scale my expectations. Our schedule is ridiculous. 9-7 or 8-8 could win the division. I’m not kidding.

I’ve heard about scorers “giving” Ray tackles that aren’t his. I watch a lot of Ravens games, but it’s still hard for me to tell whether that’s true. I used the tackles and the passes defensed to give some statistical evidence to my argument, but I realize their are flaws to those metrics. If you watched a bunch of Ravens games last year, I think you would see why I’m arguing that he’s not finished. He’s not the physical juggernaut he once was, but he’s still in shape with one of the most extreme offseason workouts of anyone in the NFL. He’s almost always in the area of play, and he’s a much smarter player than he was back in 2000. Opposing rushers gained 2.8 yards a carry last season. And our worst game, rush-defense wise, was when Ray was injured. In our scheme, Ray Lewis is the primary person on the RB, and he deserves a significant amount of credit for our rush defense. A huge piece of the credit also goes to Kelly Gregg and Haloti Ngata, who are the kind of elite DTs that Ray needs to extend his career. But Ray can still run sideline to sideline, find his way into the backfield, cover most running backs and TEs (but he can no longer the elite receivers at either position), and do just about everything a 3-4 MLB is supposed to do, which obviously, is a very different package than what a Tampa 2 linebacker like BBS’ Brackett, or your very own Urlacher, are asked to do. Patrick Willis is the only LB I can think of that is better able to play 3-4 MLB than Ray. I may be a Ravens fan, but I can admit when players are done. Jon Ogden was done as soon as that turf toe struck. Ray Lewis just isn’t there yet.

No question Suggs had a down year, even he admitted to the Baltimore Sun that he had a bad year last year.

by math_geek on May 2, 2008 3:22 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

New one

Posted a new Yin and Yang here.

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on May 2, 2008 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

You've got you yin confused with your yang

From the intro paragraph:

“Today, we focus on the AFC and NFC South teams and…”

If by South, you mean North....

So you're saying that now I have to think of some witty Sig that will be applicable across all the SBN sites? Go TexanHornStros!

by Shake on May 2, 2008 9:56 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

Yep

Again, new format we’re working with. I clicked “Submit,” which puts it on the front page and not “Save” which saves the draft. And since I’m not the editor of the site, and can’t undo or correct. I didn’t even know it was up until I saw math-geek’s first comment, which pointed out my factual F Ups..

Please make an account and post a diary, add some comments, and make some noise. Accounts are free, and only require an email address.

by BigBlueShoe on May 2, 2008 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Rex Grossman is still the team's QB, which means 6 or 7 wins in 2008

Okay, not only did 2006 never happen, but the Giants just went 10 – 6 without a competent quarterback. What did he throw, 23 TDs and 20 INTs before the playoffs started?

“And don’t give me this “Chad Henne isn’t any good” crap”

Alright, you go with Bill Parcells reaching to draft him, and I’ll go with watching every game he played in college.

Usually your analysis is very good, but your analysis of the Bears’ problems are not. They were tied for 3rd in games missed by starters, with 63. That certainly doesn’t mean anything though.

Insert clever and witty remark slash pun here!

by ES46NE10 on May 2, 2008 10:38 AM EDT reply actions   0 recs

it does seem more like insulting teams/players he doesn't like

than more sophisticated analysis.

I have to agree with the criticism of the Bears not drafting a QB. Rex Grossman is probably not the answer, and you only had two QBs on your roster. Even if you didn’t like Brohm or Henne, even taking a developmental guy with a late round pick (or John David Booty in the fifth) would have been a good idea.

by math_geek on May 2, 2008 11:50 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I concede that

Not drafting a quarterback was somewhat (okay, nigh-completely) inexplicable – the Bears only had two QBs on their roster going into the draft, everyone else had at least 3, and I think Tampa Bay had 83. The only quarterback in this draft I really liked was Brohm, and perhaps Angelo thought he would slip to round 3 – and then said “Screw it, the rest of these QBs are terrible”

But again, assume 2006 was the best-case scenario, and 2007 was the worst (again, 63 games missed to injury was 3rd in the league, that’s not even counting the quarterback benching situation) – then the Bears would in theory be halfway between 13 – 3 and 7 – 9, which is 10 – 6.

Remember that the NFC was so bad that Chicago (with 3 quarterbacks) and Carolina (with 4) were both one win away from reaching the playoffs. I don’t see Chicago being worse than last year with the group they had.

Insert clever and witty remark slash pun here!

by ES46NE10 on May 2, 2008 12:10 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I remember how high people were on Chicago last year

It’s amazing how everyone defines a team by what happened last year. 2006 has to have some say in where the team stands. My Ravens are currently getting the same treatment. 13-3 to 5-11 is not a fun fall.

I hope for your sake Angelo didn’t think he could get Brohm or Henne in the third. On draft day they were both projected to go in the top of the second round. My friends and I all thought Chicago was lucky to have their pick of the two.

Chicago and Carolina were 2 wins away last year, as the Redskins were 9-7. That’s not uncommon. Chicago has a long way to go though. Not rehiring Ron Rivera might have been a mistake. I liked the Chris Williams and Matt Forte picks, but it’s going to be a lot harder for Rex to right his ship without Berrian, and I think Devin Hester might miss Brendan Ayanbadeyjo (but I’m absolutely thrilled to have him). Injuries hurt you last year, but you lost two of your best players to free agency. I honestly don’t know if Chicago is trying to rebuild or if they think they can make another title run, but Rivera, Berrian, and Ayanbedejo seem like important parts of the 2006 season.

by math_geek on May 2, 2008 1:02 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Big Blue Shoes

You are writing emotional words about the Bears. You don’t know the team, the issues, who is on bench, etc. Do you know that we have 4 high round draft picks from 06 and 07 that haven’t even played yet? You don’t have the knowledge to comment on teams you don’t study. I know a lot about the Colts, but I couldn’t name you 2nd string defensive tackle. I can’t tell you how many bench players were put on IR last year.

The only thing you ever say we did bad was not draft a QB. Was there anything else or is that the only thing you care about. I’m sorry our team has never sucked bad enough to get the number 1 pick when a no brainer QB pick was sittting there. Everyone knew that pick would be great. More than any player I ever remember they knew Peyton would be amazing. If we get that opportunity, I will be humble than you. What other QB have you drafted in Indy??????????? Oh yeah, it has been 20 years since there was a good QB pick.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 3, 2008 8:19 PM EDT reply actions   0 recs

I understand your passion for your team

but you’re indulging in a healthy dose of historical revisionism here. Sure Peyton was a very highly rated QB coming into the draft. But “more than any player I ever remember they knew Peyton would be amazing” shows that you don’t remember correctly. In fact, at the time Ryan Leaf was considered to be equal to (in some analyses better than) Peyton. Leaf was actually considered the more NFL-ready QB, while Peyton was more of a project, who many projected would eventually be better than Leaf. Well, we all know how it turned out. Thank god the Colts’ personnel people are among the best in the league. They also got us Edgerrin James when the “hot” pick was Ricky Williams. Again, you see how that turned out.

As for drafting QBs in general, you certainly don’t have to use a #1 pick - or even a first-rounder - to get a good QB. If you wait to draft a QB until there is only the most lead-pipe cinch to be a superstar available, you’re going to miss out on a lot of excellent QBs. Ever hear of Joe Montana (3rd round) or Tom Brady (6th round)? Conversely, even the highest-rated prospects don’t always pan out (Jeff George, for example—picked before Bill Polian came on board, incidentally). Therefore, it’s a good idea to try to build at least a little depth at the position, even if it’s lower round picks who a team can develop over the course of a couple of years. The fact is that the Bears did nothing to address a glaring weakness, even when they had good options available (Brohm, Henne, Booty, Dixon, etc.) Most of these guys would need some seasoning, but you’ve at least got to get the process going. Now, unless you sign a free agent (i.e. someone another team has given up on) you’ll be another year behind in your search for a QB. I’m sorry, Rex Grossman is not the answer. Two years ago the Bears won in spite of Grossman, not because of him.

And I’m not sure what you mean by your last sentence, but Peyton was picked less than 20 years ago.

by ctnyc on May 5, 2008 11:10 AM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

What I was saying with the last statement was

you have only picked on good QB in 20 years. And he was Peyton Manning. Pollian is a great GM, I’m not knocking him, but picking Manning was not a hard pick. I do remember people talking about Leaf, but I don’t think there was much doubt on who to take. I think that is also partly my point though. People thought Leaf was better than Manning and we’re talking about the number 1 pick in the draft. That is how hard it is to draft QB. Very hard. I think more people get lucky at that position than really know how to draft one. Of course there are good indicators, but they bust more than they pan out and you waste a lot of years figuring it out. Asked the Browns. They lucked out on Anderson and didn’t even know they had it. Luck.

I feel better about drafting safer positions and signing free agents who are solid at risky positions like WR and QB. If you are setup like the Colts, then take a flyer on a draft pick, but the Bears are not as stable of a winner. When we are, we should definitely take more chances. What we drafted this year was meant to make our whole team more stable. Taking a risky QB would not have done that.

Your point Montana and Brady later in the draft are not very good to me because it very rare.

From 1992, which was the last time the Packers were looking for a quarterback, to 2007, 80 quarterbacks were drafted in the sixth round or later. Of those 80, an amazing 10% made the Pro Bowl. Six actually were elected to the Pro Bowl: Brad Johnson (No. 227), Jeff Blake (166), Trent Green (222), Matt Hasselbeck (187), Marc Bulger (168) and Brady (199). Two others went to the Pro Bowl as injury replacements: Elvis Grbac (219) and Gus Frerotte (197). During the Brett Favre era, two free agents were elected to the Pro Bowl: Jeff Garcia and Tony Romo. —Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

I have a 10% chance of hitting and then if I do hit I may end up with Garcia, Grbac, Blake, or Frerotte. Those are horrible odds. Bet like that in Vegas and you will be broke fast.

Thanks for being repsectful. I understand your points. They are mostly good, but the odds say it is a waste. I’m for picking a QB to develop, but I’m more for stabilizing a team that is very close to being an every year winner. I would rather put my team in positions to make the playoffs ever year, than take a chance and end up missing the playoffs for the next 3-4 years and start over because we developing QB’s.

Rex and Kyle aren’t great, but both are still showing improvement. If you look at them in 3 game stretches you will see their development is still happening. When they both stop moving forward in their growth then I will write the final report card on them. Our OL made last year a waste, but there were signs of progress for those who have watched all of the games closely.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 5, 2008 12:28 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sorry

I meant for the link to go on the Milwaukee Journal quote.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 5, 2008 1:31 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Thank you

for being respectful as well.

I see what you’re saying but I think you’re making two mistakes by listing the Pro Bowl percentages.:

1) Pro Bowl selection can be very subjective, and the best players aren’t necessarily chosen. Players are often selected (by players and fans alike) based on their reputations and past successes rather than on the given year’s production. BigBlueShoe (the author of this post) has rightfully complained several times on Stampede Blue about Jonathan Ogden being selected year after year even when he was clearly past his prime and had been surpassed by others.

So while being selected to the Pro Bowl is a nice honor, I’m not sure it’s always the best measure of a player’s value.

2) Regardless of point #1, I don’t think that a QB has to make a Pro Bowl to be a success (and such a QB certainly can still be better than the Bears’ current options). There’s usually 3 QBs per conference on Pro Bowl rosters, so in any given year about 82% of the league’s starters are not gonna make it. This does not necessarily mean they are not productive, successful players. Basically, I think you’ve set the bar too high by implying that a QB who never makes a Pro Bowl is a bad draft pick.

On a side note, Anderson was undrafted and made the Pro Bowl last year. I’m not convinced that he’s their answer though, after all he couldn’t beat out Charlie Frye in the last training camp. One good season does not make a productive QB (see Majkowski, Don).

Out of curiosity, I went back and looked at the draft positions of the QBs who started last year. For teams where there were multiple starters, I used the one who started the most games for the team. Here’s where last year’s QBs were drafted:

1st: 15 QBs
2nd: 3 QBs
3rd: 3 QBs
4th: 1 QB
5th: 0 QBs
6th: 4 QBs
Undrafted: 6 QBs

So while almost half were 1st-rounders, slightly more than half were not. In fact, about 44% were 3rd round or later. Even more specifically, almost a third of the QBs were 6th round or undrafted. This last category includes some very productive QBs (Brady, M Hasselbeck, Bulger, Romo, Anderson, Kitna, Warner, Garcia).

So the comparison is 15 first-rounders to 10 sixth-round or undrafteds. And the first-rounders include the likes of Alex Smith, Joey Harrington, Grossman, and - yes - Vinny Testaverde, which I think closes the gap even further.

Ultimately, my point is this: yes, drafting is an inexact science. Some sure things will end up as busts, and some “who the hell is that’s” will thrive. But with good scouting and good coaching, diamonds in the rough can be very valuable. I think the Bears need to change their QB situation. I think they should have done so in this draft. They didn’t, so there will be at least one more year of not starting the process of developing the next Chicago QB. If I were a Bears fan, I’d be pissed.

by ctnyc on May 5, 2008 6:39 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

One more thing

I meant to add that I know the Bears have signed a couple of undrafteds of their own, but I’m skeptical. I disagree that Grossman is progressing. If the talent evaluators/coaches for the Bears have been unable to turn this first round pick into a quality QB, I doubt they’ll have much better luck with an undrafted.

by ctnyc on May 5, 2008 6:47 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Excellent Research!!!

Something else that you may find interesting to add to that research is what percentage of pics from each round are successful. Succesful would be maybe 48 NFL starts. That would represent three full years as a starter and would eliminate guys who start only because of injury or were a high draft pick that was given a few years to develop. I realize that David Carr would be considered succesful, but that would be one of the few cases. I would venture to say the percentage is extremely low for rounds 2-undrafted.

As far as the guys that they are currently undrafted QB’s for the Bears. I’m not sure you can solely blame our staff but they may be the problem who knows. Rex is his own monster. He has a way of thinking (pride) that hurts him. I’m not sure if it is the staffs fault. Maybe these young guys are more coachable.

I don’t know how many Bears games you watch, but I watch every play. In the first three games of the year Rex was Tee-d off on by defenses. There was no blocking, there was no running game, there was just defenders blitzing all day long, with lots of guys back in coverage. He got hit more than a rag doll. Peyton Manning makes lots of errors when he gets hit and believe me in those first three games Rex got it worst than any Pittsburgh or San Diego game the Colts have played. Also, our WR dropped an unforgivable amount of passes. Moose didn’t play hard at all and Berrian had pan hands. He didn’t have a chance in weeks 1-3.

After getting benched Grossman played much differently. He looked very relaxed, as opposed to his jittery look. He was much more decisive in his reads. He started checking down and making the for sure throw. That was huge for him and I think it was something he saw Griese doing. He had a very strong and accurate throw to the flats which are the hardest throw to make. He fumbled only one snap. I know that sounds funny, but every QB on our team fumbled Kruetz snaps. I really think Kruetz is doing something. I heard an interview with Jim Miller who said he had the same problem with Kruetz. Even though his protection was terrible, his receivers were terrible, and his run was terrible, he was on pace for 6 less picks for the year. He was drilled numerous times that I thought for sure he would fumble and held on to the ball much better than the previous year. All of those were improvements. Areas he still has to work on includes: not running backwards when rushed, stepping up into the pocket when there is pressure, and not throwing off his back foot. He will also make better reads the longer you are in the league. His upside is trememndous and I feel as a third year starter and with some better protection, you will see some more improvement. If you didn’t watch all the plays last year with a critical eye you would just say the guy was a loser, who had poor stats. I’m breaking down each of his throws, looking at accuracy, looking at how he handled pressure, how often he fumbled and why, how many times he pulled the ball back down instead of throwing it up, how many times he checked down, how many interceptions were from bad throws (he had 2 that were tipped that hit his receiver in the hands and 2 where his receiver either quit on the route or ran the wrong route), etc.

How are you basing your evaluation of his progress?

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 6, 2008 12:59 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Methodology

I didn’t see the Bears nearly as much as you did, so I can’t make the same kind of subjective observations as you have. I’m basing my evaluation pretty much on stats. Grossman’s completion percentage, yards per attempt, and passer rating all went down last year. In general, this is not good for a second year starter. Hell, even Vince Young got his completion percentage above 60 in his 2nd year.

I certainly understand that a QB’s performance can be sabotaged by a crappy O-Line. But that doesn’t mean that a QB would thrive if the line was better. He still has to make the reads, make the throws, and avoid turnovers. Maybe Grossman would have done that last year with a better line, maybe he wouldn’t. I lean towards the latter, because I haven’t seen enough consistency from him (even in the Super Bowl year) to think he’s capable of it. At best, last season was a wasted year in terms of evaluating his potential. Not necessarily a wasted year for Grossman, but I don’t think we saw enough from him to expect a good career.

Also, you say: “He started checking down and making the for sure throw. That was huge for him and I think it was something he saw Griese doing.” That’s well and good, but even this makes me question him. I know it was only his second year of starting, but he’s been in the league for five years, watching how the game is played at this level. And before that, he played three collegiate years in one of the best football conferences at a school known for QBs. If he’s only now figuring out the value of the dump-off pass, then I question his football intelligence and his decision-making.

I don’t hate Grossman - he is a native-born Hoosier after all - but I don’t think he’s shown anything as yet that would make think he’ll ever be a viable NFL QB. If he steps it up, I’ll eat my words. But again, if I were a Bears fan, I’d be pissed that they didn’t begin the process of replacing him.

by ctnyc on May 6, 2008 11:58 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I see it as a wasted year

He was in his third year, the year of the Superbowl and looked like a genius for about 6 weeks. Eli played all 3 years and looked like garbage until like week 14. You like many are not looking at the whole picture. Aaron Rodgers is going to be in the same situation as Rex in 2006. Third year player with little playing time. He will have a good line, really good receivers, and a good running back and you are going to see an inconsistent guy. I think he will do better than Rex at consistency, but I doubt he well excel as high as Rex did. He will probably have a couple horrible games.

Rex was starting last year in his second year as a full time starter. The reason he didn’t learn to check down in college is because he didn’t have too. He team had so much talent, that it didn’t get him into too much trouble. It was risk verses reward like Brett Farve. In college he did more good than harm and felt like he would make the next throw and just kept forcing it. In 2006, he saw so much success early that it built up his pride/confidence. He didn’t listen because he believed in himself. It took losing the Superbowl and possibly his job to realize maybe he wasn’t as good as he thought. I know he should have seen it sooner, but that is Rex. Yeah he should of learned the check down sooner, but no matter when you learn it shows you are growing. The guy has a ton of talent, but too much pride. It completely reminds me of Brett Farve. He never changed, he just learned defenses better through experience and made a career of it. He still made the same bad decisions up until retirement. His last pass was very Rex like. These type players are risk verse reward guys. If the reward is high enough, you let it go and let the guy play. Don’t give up on a guy with that much upside. He throws the deep ball very well. He throws pretty accurately when he has some time. He is still learning his reads which will help him eliminate interceptions. He decision making looks like it is getting faster. He is improving. When he stops improving on his skills, give up on him and write his final report card. If he plays to his potential he can be an amazing QB. Look at the points in several games in 2006. People thought he was on pace to be the MVP. If you can harness that you don’t dump it. Honestly, he has received more criticism than any QB I’ve ever seen. Eli doesn’t get that, Philip last year didn’t get that, and many others don’t get it. Both of those guys and more have struggled and no one gives them crap. Eli and and Phillip have huge talent around them and still play like garbage half the time. Yes they hear a little, but Rex hears a lot. Go check out how good Eli’s career has been and then tell me they should dump him. He has more starts and better talent by far. Rex has one season with a quality line, and one with one of the worst lines I have ever seen and that is all the evaluation people want on him. I’m willing to give it more time.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 7, 2008 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think pro bowl is important

I think that quality QBs will eventually make a Pro-Bowl. I can’t think of one quality guy that hasn’t been there. I’m sure there is someone, but a high percentage of quality guys last long enough to have one really good year. Maybe only 3 go per league per year but think about how many from each league have been in the Pro-Bowl. I’m disappointed, but I’m starting to think the Kyle Orton strategy wasn’t so bad. The only problem with it was Kyle was so far from ready to play it wasn’t even funny. We did run, run, 3 yard pass, punt. The entire game. Kyle is much better now and I believe he is also still growing. He couldn’t throw a pass or make a read his rookie year. How we won 13 games when we rarely scored 14 offensive points is beyond me.

I’m not mad about our QB situation because I’m excited about our depth and talent added to our D. I don’t think they can loose that many starters next year and have added some very good talent there. Our defense is the key to our team. We also added lots of good competition at WR (not great players but with enough good prospects competing one great may emerge and we’ll still have good players to compliment), I like our new RB, and I’m hopeful the OL has improved. This should help to really evaluate the progress of Kyle and Rex both. Neither one of them had a fair shake to show their improvement with the huge deterioration of the play from every single guy around them last year.

Kick it to me... I'm open!

by #23 on May 6, 2008 1:13 PM EDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Mocking the Draft provides detailed information, scouting reports, mock drafts and rumors surrounding the 2010 NFL Draft and beyond
Start posting on Mocking The Draft »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Latest NFL Headlines from SB Nation

LATEST MOCK DRAFT

Mocking Dan:

OCT. 9


Dove::

JAN. 28

OVERALL RANKINGS


Director of Scouting and Head Writer

Stampedeblue_small BigBlueShoe

Mockingthedraft_small Mocking Dan

Writers

Bob-sanders-081107_small shake n bake

Small tjdove123

Moderators

Milehighreport_small John Bena