I didn't say elite QBs are always taken in the first five picks. What I said was that there isn't any single pick at which they can be reliably located.
I don't think people get this really basic concept. Rest of the post isnt really aimed at you, just reinforcing the logic of picking earlier. Let's say the draft has 100 players and 100 possible picks all by different teams for simplicity . If you pick first, you have all 100 players to choose from and you can take anyone you want. If you pick 45th, you now gave 44 less options to choose from. It's not guaranteed the 44 best players are off the board but logic dictates that players with a higher chance of success at a high level will be taken first off the board. You have less options, and it's likely there may only be 1 decent QB in the draft long term, if you're lucky. The QB position is already one teams covet so much that players go full rounds earlier than they should. Noone is saying it's impossible to find a QB later. How many of you all will be complaining if we hedge our bets on a 7th rounder and he, predictably, fails miserably? I'd guess mostly everyone.
So true, you can point to a good-great QB being selected all over the draft. So, what about picking TWO QBs in 2020? It almost worked out for Washington, right? Grab one with the highest first rounder, then another one with one of the other first rounders, probably the late rounder from the Texans. Burrow and Hurts? Tua and Hurts (that would be an interesting dynamic, given their history)? I think Hurts could be taken in the second, but you get that extra year on the rookie contract with the first round selection and there won't be that much difference between the Texan's first and Miami's second rounder. Or sub in Jacob Eason for Hurts as the second QB taken? Or Jordan Love? Unconventional thinking? I guess. Why not give yourself TWO chances to find that franchise QB though? One at a 50% chance of success, another at 25%. We can build the OL with the second and third round picks and grab the best DE or CB with the other first rounder.
The only downside I really have in taking two QB is it invites a debate very early on where one isnt needed. Every bad throw, every boneheaded rookie play people start asking "What about player X we drafted, let's see him" and it can cause some outside drama as well as internal if not handled properly. That said, on paper its a strategy I like. I often waiver between whether it's a good idea or not.
Not exactly what I mean. It's not just a move that invites debate here, its as move that can cause locker room division as well as a media circus. Different from just regular fan bs.
