Good to know.

What exactly is the point here? Oh... that's right.

 

Name one QB that Miami drafted before the 5th round between Scott Mitchell and Chad Henne. I can't think of one. Through numerous orginizations, the team simply hasn't chosen to EVER spend a valuable pick on a QB other than very recently.

 

I've said this before, I really admired the way the Seahawks continued addressing the QB situation until they got it right. They had spent picks on Charlie Whitehurst, spent $$$ on Matt Flynn, but draft Russell Wilson, as you stated. You make a decent point. The good teams aren't afraid to quickly move on from mistakes and continue spending resources on the position until they find their guy.

The problem in Miami is Ryan Tannehill showed a lot of promise last season. He wasn't enough of a failure to indicate Miami should have spend more resources on the position. Could they have drafted a mid round guy to push Tannehill? I don't think it would have been a terrible idea, but I don't think you can fault them for not doing that.

 

not really a fair comparison with New England. When you are a periennial superbowl contender, you can afford to keep spending picks on a QB, we have been deficient on so many fronts for awhile (20 years).

Having said that, I don't disagree. doubling up on the most important position in the NFL can't hurt.

 

Inability to see the game slowly, can't create..very true,

 

um, miami did double up on the position moore is here. many people feel moore is better than RT17 so... what is the point of this thread?

 

Especially now with the cap limitations on high draft picks; we should be failing forward fast come draft day.

 

Pat White and John Beck were both 2nd rounders...

 

Seahawks pretty much did the real world of banking on the lottery. They just won. If Wilson didn't turn out they would be a team with scrub quarterbacks still.

 

That is kind of true.

however you have to believe if Pat White ran a highly efficient offense, that he would have been made the starter.

 

What's long term these days? Because if it's 35 games or more, then that's how much long-term we've wasted with the Ryan Tannehill experiment.

 

Well, thats true. I think that I'm blocking the memory of Beck out of my mind. Still, thats only one year before Henne. Something like 17 years between taking a QB to develop.

 

I dont think so... lots of people around here were very high on Wilson. I remember people saying Kuechly 1 Wilson 2. Imagine if we had done that?

Wait...dont bother. We'd be in approximately the same position now. Part of Wilsons success is the team and system and coaches around him.

I'm not sure that the "right" quarterback sees much success with the way things are right now anyway...Wilson, Luck, Cousins, Foles, etc. Short of Manning running the show anyway. Sure someone like Luck or MAYBE Wilson could still maybe drag our *** to the playoffs every year, but after the last 5 games and a simple 2 good quarters of football, I'm starting to fall into the "sky is falling" court. We have bigger problems than just QB play. Granted, QB play might not be HELPING, but its far from the biggest thing hurting us.

 

They were so high on Wilson that he fell to the third round.

Also, that seems like a freak year. When else has their been a quarterback draft where a bunch of quarterbacks who are taken passed the first round plays well?

I agree, the problem is much bigger than QB play. The problem is coaching. Philbin is not head coaching material.

 

If they were high on Wilson they would have drafted him in the first round. You don't mess with quarterback.