I like taking Young there.

 

There are several problems with that analysis.
1) you need a larger pool of data than what they’re using. That data is available, so drawing arbitrary cutoffs (since 2000) seems to be an attempt to skew the data to fit the prejudices of the author.
For a more complete reference:
- there have been 35 QBs selected at number 1 overall going back to 1936. Of those 35 six have won a combined 15 Superbowls.
- there are 26 modern era QBs in the HoF, 5 of which were selected at number 1 overall.

2) Just because the odds of any particular QB selected #1 overall turning out to be a HoF caliber player is relatively small (roughly 1 in 7 by my estimate) it is still substantially higher than any othe pick.

3) The historical data shows that the number 1 overall pick overall, on average, substantially outperforms the number 2 pick overall regardless of position.

4) The historical re of of situations where there has been a consensus 1a and 1b has been that the 1b generally underperforms the 1a
2016 Goff - Wentz : so far both are equally good.
2015 Winston - Mariato : both busts
2012 Luck - RG3 : both got crushed by injuries but Luck was productive for far longer.
1999 Couch - McNabb : clear win for McNabb
1998 P. Manning - Leaf : no need for comment
1993 Bledsoe - Mirer : clear win for Bledsoe
1971 Plunkett - A. Manning : Plunkett gets the nod after having his career resurrected by the Raiders and winning 2 Superbowls. In head to head match ups the 1 overall beats the #2 four times, loses once, and pushes twice.

5) No QB selected at #2 overall has ever won a superbowl.

 

1) I also want Chase Young if we have the chance to draft him. He is clearly the draft's best player, and I am not sold on this year's QB class the way many are.

2) Judging QBs based on Super Bowl wins is incredibly short sighted and a poor way to go about it.

3) One of the best Quarterbacks to ever play was drafted number one just before the start of that list - Peyton Manning in 1998. His presence obviously heavily influenced a lot of what happened in the NFL through 2015 while he was playing.

4) Two of the QBs drafted #1 were on expansion teams - Couch and Carr. They were nearly doomed from the start. I would argue that in the entire 20 years, the only bad pick was Russell.

Either way, the main point is that you can't force the draft pick. If there is a clear, top of the draft QB available, then its always a good choice to take him. It might work, it might not. Though as I said, its not the only choice.

 

So the logic is that QB's picked #1 overall haven't won a SB in the last 20 years with the exception of Eli Manning well using that logic no DE or pass rushing LB picked in the top 5 has won a SB with the team that drafted him except for Von Miller.

Hell we had a HOF DE in Jason Taylor and didn't win jack so I guess Chase Young would be a bad pick. Any player drafted in any position can be wasted if you don't put a good roster around them. If Dan Marino got picked #1 overall and didn't win a SB it wasn't because he was picked #1 overall and it wasn't because he wasn't good enough.

How many of those QB's listed had a legitimate SB caliber roster with the exception of Eli Manning?

 

I think it's absolutely criminal that Kyler Murray hasn't won a super bowl for Arizona after all the hype... :001_rolleyes:

 

Correlation doesn't equal causation.

I remember a few years back someone tried to use a list to justify not taking a QB in the first round, and it was just as ridiculous as this.

 

Same with Baker Mayfield! Browns should have already been to a Super Bowl and should easily win this years trophy.

 

I agree, this is beyond pushing an agenda. We need a franchise Quarterback first and foremost above everything else. I'm sure Chase Young is great, but we're drafting Tua with our first pick in April.

 

Chase Young is the pick to make.

 

2000: Courtney Brown - No Super Bowl
2006: Mario Williams - No Super Bowl
2008: Jake Long - No Super Bowl
2013: Eric Fisher - No Super Bowl
2014: Jadeveon Clowney - No Super Bowl
2017: Myles Garret - No Super Bowl

I see a trend

 

You can't take two different facts, put them together, then claim they also make a fact. For example-

- I have a cat. I've never been attacked by a rhino. That proves rhinos are scared of house cats.
- My IQ is 146. I've always worn white socks. You can't be a genius without wearing white socks.
- I like eating steak. I've never had polio. That proves steak cures polio.

 

Thank God I love steak

 

The problem with this is that it basically says the #1 is magically cursed. I mean if Jamarcus Russell was picked anywhere else in the draft, would he have performed better? If Russell Wilson was picked at the 1st pick would he have performed worse?

The problem with any #1 pick failing is the evaluation behind the pick not where they were picked. It is perfectly fine if you don't trust this FO to make the right eval, but all picking first does is guarantee you get the guy you evaluated to be best.

All this article does is highlight either Armando's flagrant ignorance or flagrant **** stirring. I waffle on that often.

 

The only reason it wouldn’t behoove a team to have the first overall pick in the draft is if there is some single pick later in the draft that has been associated with significantly greater drafting success, and there isn’t.

 

Not even then.

 

The fact that the #1 pick regularly outperforms the #2 shows that NFL teams are pretty good ar choosing who the best player is given a choice of the 2 best projected players in the draft.

The fact that #1 and #2 over time statistically outperform all other picks shows that NFL teams are pretty good at identifying the 2 best players in the draft.

The fact that the performance of draftees statistically over time follows an exponential curve shows that NFL teams are good at correctly identifying talent.

The fact that any one draft is noisy with lots of random variation shows that while teams are good at identifying talent that other factors affect individual performance, not just athletic ability and college production.

Random distribution is not even distribution. Just because you flip a coin 5 times in a row and it lands on heads 5 times in a row is not proof that the coin has two heads.

 

If you hire a Richard Petty, Dale Earnhardt, Jeff Gordon, et al to drive your race car and you show them they’re going to run a 1967 VW Beetle in the Daytona 500, don’t be shocked surprised or angry when you come in last.

Marino, Kelly, Brady, Manning, Roethlisberger, Rivers, Rodgers and many others all had the fortune of coming to a well established team in which the quarterback was this missing piece. The race car was already there...now it needed a driver.

I hope I’m wrong. I pray that I’m wrong but based on recent draft history over the last 10-15 years, we’re going to roll the dice and draft a QB, throw darts against the wall on other positions and fail yet again.

It breaks my heart to say it, but we’ve become the Detroit Lions.

 

I think those numbers reinforce why drafting BPA is the best strategy and not reaching for a QB because you need a franchise QB.

We’re seeing teams like the Saints and 49ers have great success because they built great teams around their QB’s. In the Saints case, they’re winning without their franchise QB.

The other thought is, will their be a good QB with Pittsburgh’s pick? Then you take the BPA- maybe Chase Young and get much better on D and still get a guy at QB that can be our guy.

 

Numbers in college don’t always translate to success in the NFL but with that being said, Young does look like a great pick to our anemic defense. We’ve lacked an effective pass rush and in this day and age of the pass happy NFL, you have to get consistent pressure on the QB.

On the flip side of that coin though, we need to find and keep the next Sam Madison and Patrick Surtain in the worst way.

 

I saw a mock this morning that had the Fins passing on Tagovolia twice in the top ten! Good to see I'm not the only one who isnt sold on his greatness yet.

 

With their current quarterback play, which is only mediocre, the 49ers will have to continue their strong pass defense to win in the playoffs the way they are now, when they're likely to face the strongest quarterbacks in the league.

The Saints don't stand much of a chance in the playoffs the way they're playing now. Their quarterback play has been mediocre and so has their pass defense.

It's awful tough to get through the playoffs without either 1) an elite QB, or 2) an elite pass defense that shuts down opposing QBs. Obviously the Dolphins have a strong chance this year of being in position to target only one of those. They can't assemble the elite pass defense in only one year.

Watch how these teams with average QBs (like the 49ers and Saints) play in the playoffs before you determine how important an elite QB is in comparison to other parts of a team.

 

The 49ers offense is inconsistent, but its not flat out bad. Garopolo has the tendency to throw some really stupid interceptions, but he's still only started 16 games in his whole career now. Their offense was amazing against Cleveland a few weeks ago, maybe the one I've liked the most all season long. The conditions in Washington this past game were just miserable, and few teams would have done well.

 

The 49ers pass defense has surrendered an opposing passer rating of 64.6, which is second in the league. They're undefeated precisely because their mediocre pass offense is overcome by their stellar pass defense. But that'll have to continue in the playoffs when they're likely to take on the elite QBs in the league, because they're unlikely to suddenly receive stellar quarterback play from their own QB.

 

Regardless of QB, you still need a great defense. Remember Marino’s last playoff game against Baltimore? Even having Marino didn’t keep it close...

 

It's completely a trade-off. The better your offensive passing game is in terms of passer rating, the worse your pass defense can be, and vice-versa. If you have an average offensive passing game, you'd better have one of the best pass defenses in the league. If your offensive passing game is stellar, you can get by with an average pass defense.

This is why I've said many times that you need either an elite QB with at least an average pass defense, or an elite pass defense with at least an average QB.

The single blowout that occurred in a Super Bowl in the past 15 years was, not coincidentally, the single time a team had both -- a stellar QB and a stellar pass defense: the 2013-2014 Seahawks. Their offensive passer rating was 102.4, more than 16 points above the league average that year, and their passer rating surrendered on defense was 63.4, more than 22 points below the league average that year.

 

You took one part of my post and took it completely out of context. My point was regarding BPA vs reaching for a QB just because you need a franchise QB.

No franchise QB is going to win it all without a good OL and a top tier defense. Marino is one of the best pure QB’s of all time and couldn’t overcome bad defenses and a non-existent run game.

This all comes down to building the best team possible and hopefully a franchise QB comes to you. Steelers got theirs in the middle for the first round, Packers in the last 1/3 of the first round, Saints via FA, NE in the 6th round. It doesn’t usually come from the first pick in the draft. If our FO believes that person is there, take them. If not, go Young or whoever is the BPA.

 

Seven of the past 15 Super Bowls -- roughly half of them -- have been won by teams with pass defenses not significantly different from average in terms of passer rating surrendered. It can be done without a top-tier defense.

Five of the past 15 Super Bowls -- a third of them -- have been won by teams with pass offenses not significantly different from average in terms of passer rating. It can also be done without a top-tier quarterback, but it's less likely.

But now consider the difficulty involved in compiling an elite pass defense and keeping them healthy and under contract, versus the difficulty in acquiring an elite quarterback and keeping him healthy and under contract, and consider that we're talking about only one draft pick. Obviously the elite pass defense can't be acquired with just one pick, but the elite QB can.

 

That was Jacksonville. The 62-7 massacre

 

I don’t necessarily agree. You need a QB that can play at an elite level, or a defense that has the ability to play at an elite level, not that they are playing at that level enough where they are called elite. Know what I mean?

 

The problem is that the QBs and defenses that can play at that elite level are also usually the ones that typically play at the level. The ones who don't typically play at that level are unlikely to play there.

If the guys who don't typically play at that level were in fact likely to play at that level, that's where they'd typically play.

So you can rest your hopes on having the stars align and being the exception to the rule, but obviously that doesn't do anything good for your probability of winning a Super Bowl.