FOR ALL THOSE WHO INSIST THAT WE DRAFT A QB FIRST

[madbadger]

For all the Eli Mannings, Joe Burrows, JD Strouds , Peyton Mannings, John Elways, first picks in the NFL Draft who have succeeded, the following are either 1st or second picks in the draft who have not:

Jamarous Russell
Sam Darnold
Zach Wilson
David Carr
Sam Bradford
Rick Mirrer
Mitch Trubitsky
Jameis Winston
Tim Couch
Vince Young
Robert Griffin
Ryan Leaf

WE have so many needs , the most glaring being the OL , that maybe drafting a so called ," franchise QB " with our first pick might not be the smartest move.

Jones is being paid $40 million next year and any QB we draft will sit behind him unless he gets hurt, so our first round pick if it is a QB will noit improve our team at all, while an OL if he is the right one , and edge rusher or a legitimate ACE receiver would . As respects the latter only Marvin Harrison JR or Keon Coleman would fit that requirement .

You act like you don't have busts when you draft other positions. Outside of Thomas every offensive lineman we've drafted the past five years has been a bust. We have two second round picks and cap space to deal with the line.

[Brooklyn Dave]

You act like you don't have busts when you draft other positions. Outside of Thomas every offensive lineman we've drafted the past five years has been a bust. We have two second round picks and cap space to deal with the line.

The only offensive lineman that I remember drafted number 1 were Jake Long, Eric Fisher and Orlando Pace, so it is not a fair comparison

[AZGiantFan]

The 2 positions I don't want them to draft in the first round, assuming no trade down to a lower position, are QB and OL. 

I don't want a QB because I think that would be wasting one or more low-cost years because they aren't ready to put enough around him. 

And I don't want an OL because I simply think that personnel is not the OL's problem, it is coaching.  And they already invested to much in the way of prime resources with very little to show for it.  They have a good LT who they almost coached into being a bust, they have a RT that they are coaching into a bust, and they have a "10-year plug and play" center who has been coached up to pretty mediocre (pff is not the be-all of grading, but they a sub-50 grade tells me he has a long way to go to match the hype).   

[madbadger]

The only offensive lineman that I remember drafted number 1 were Jake Long, Eric Fisher and Orlando Pace, so it is not a fair comparison

We aren't going to be drafting first overall so I don't get your point.

[DaveBrown74]

The argument that "we shouldn't draft a QB because so many of them bust" is one I really just don't understand. First off, every position busts. Look at Evan Neal. We took him 7th overall. People said he was a plug-and-play, stone cold lock to be at least a quality starter if not an all pro. He's been an unmitigated disaster so far that insulted the fans. The idea that only QBs bust is just simply false. Secondly, if you don't want to draft a QB in a good QB year when you're picking in the top 10, when exactly DO you want to draft a QB? And, in our case, who exactly will be our QB while we wait for you to want to draft one? Please don't say Daniel Jones.

I also don't like the argument of "let's not draft a QB because we're going to waste a couple years of his rookie deal because we don't have enough other good players." I get the point being made, but a QB is a very long term investment. These guys are still good at 35 and sometimes still good at 40. For me, worrying about trying to thread the needle by bulking up at all other positions and then deciding to try to get a QB when you're picking 19th or something just isn't the way to go about it. Sure, it would be great to already have a good team and then somehow be able to draft Joe Burrow and have him for four years on the rookie contract plus the fifth year option, but that's not really something you can plan for. I think if you don't have a good QB, and you're in a position where you can get one you truly rate as a top talent, you don't pass on that. If you get it wrong you get it wrong. Obviously that's a risk, just the way it was a risk when we drafted Evan Neal 7th overall, Ereck Flowers 9th, and Eli Apple 10th.

Clearly if our scouts and front office don't think that highly of the QBs available to us in this draft, then I 100% think we should not take one. I am in no way advocating forcing the pick. But to pass on a QB you think is going to be a great NFL player because you think your guards or tight ends aren't quite good enough at that moment in time makes very little sense to me.

[Bob In PA]

The 2 positions I don't want them to draft in the first round, assuming no trade down to a lower position, are QB and OL. 

I don't want a QB because I think that would be wasting one or more low-cost years because they aren't ready to put enough around him. 

And I don't want an OL because I simply think that personnel is not the OL's problem, it is coaching.  And they already invested to much in the way of prime resources with very little to show for it.  They have a good LT who they almost coached into being a bust, they have a RT that they are coaching into a bust, and they have a "10-year plug and play" center who has been coached up to pretty mediocre (pff is not the be-all of grading, but they a sub-50 grade tells me he has a long way to go to match the hype).   

AZR: One more... guards are not worth spending a high 1st-rounder. Exceptions are extremely rare. Bob

[kingm56]

The 2 positions I don't want them to draft in the first round, assuming no trade down to a lower position, are QB and OL. 

I don't want a QB because I think that would be wasting one or more low-cost years because they aren't ready to put enough around him.

And I don't want an OL because I simply think that personnel is not the OL's problem, it is coaching.  And they already invested to much in the way of prime resources with very little to show for it.  They have a good LT who they almost coached into being a bust, they have a RT that they are coaching into a bust, and they have a "10-year plug and play" center who has been coached up to pretty mediocre (pff is not the be-all of grading, but they a sub-50 grade tells me he has a long way to go to match the hype).   

Were the 2-14 Bengal's ready to put a team around Joe Burrow?  What about the 1-15 Jags?  4-13 Texans? 5-11 Dolphins? Conversely, the Pats and Jets both had/have superior supporting cast when they drafted thier QBs...doesn't appear to be working out for either team. If you have a shot at a franchise QB, you take it.

This entire thread baffles me; essentially, it states we shouldn't draft a QB because it's hard.  Instead, we should continue to draft OL and hope a QB who's started 60+ games becomes something he's never been.  In 30+ years, there's not a single example of this type of QB maturation; yet, here we are, pushing the notion....

[Doc16LT56]

AZR: One more... guards are not worth spending a high 1st-rounder. Exceptions are extremely rare. Bob

Sounds like he's making a two part argument:

1) don't draft a QB because the OL isn't good enough

2) don't draft OL because the OL is good enough with better coaching.

Do you see the problem with the logic listed above? If you bring in better coaching for the OL, why not draft a better QB and go to war with Barkley and Hyatt?

[coggs]

AZR: One more... guards are not worth spending a high 1st-rounder. Exceptions are extremely rare. Bob

The other issue is guards, like RB's, when drafted in first round are already being paid more than many vets at the position.  When you have the first round QB on a rookie contract, it is a HUGE benefit for the rest of the salary cap.  Not the case with a rookie guard making the same money.

[coggs]

Sounds like he's making a two part argument:

1) don't draft a QB because the OL isn't good enough

2) don't draft OL because the OL is good enough with better coaching.

Do you see the problem with the logic listed above? If you bring in better coaching for the OL, why not draft a better QB and go to war with Barkley and Hyatt?

Maybe we can draft an OL coach with the first pick??????

[kingm56]

Maybe we can draft an OL coach with the first pick??????

It's comforting to know the Giants are just an OL coach from being competitive.  There's not a single example of OL coach transforming a bottom 5 OL, without the infusion of significant talent.  The Giants have had very good OL coaches, and still fielded terrible units, most notably 2013 thru 2015. The Giants need talent at G and RT and hope thier OC gains strength.  Fundamentally, there's a shortage of OL talent as a byproduct of HS and colleges switching to spread offenses.  So, finding solid guards is difficult in the modern NFL...

[Doc16LT56]

It's comforting to know the Giants are just an OL coach from being competitive.  There's not a single example of OL coach transforming a bottom 5 OL, without the infusion of significant talent.  The Giants have had very good OL coaches, and still fielded terrible units, most notably 2013 thru 2015. The Giants need talent at G and RT and hope thier OC gains strength.  Fundamentally, there's a shortage of OL talent as a byproduct of HS and colleges switching to spread offenses.  So, finding solid guards is difficult in the modern NFL...

King, you probably know this as well as anyone here. For at least the last 10+ years, folks here have been scapegoating the coaching. Remember when it was Gilbride's fault, even though he was screaming about the OL being a problem? Then it was Caughlin's fault because he should've developed Jerry's players? A certain part of the fan base couldn't admit the problem was lack of talent. They still can't.

[kingm56]

King, you probably know this as well as anyone here. For at least the last 10+ years, folks here have been scapegoating the coaching. Remember when it was Gilbride's fault, even though he was screaming about the OL being a problem? Then it was Caughlin's fault because he should've developed Jerry's players? A certain part of the fan base couldn't admit the problem was lack of talent. They still can't.

Indeed, Doc; and, when said coaching fails, because thier talent ages or moves on, they simply say "the game has passed them by", which explains why the preferred coach failed.  Coaching isn't going to fix the Giants problems, which fundamentally, and most importantly, is a lack of talent. 

BTW, if coaching is the missing link, or an important cog, why not hire the best damn QB coach to fix Daniel Jones?  If a coach can fix the OL, why can't a top QB coach do the same to DJ?  That would be far more efficient, and cheaper than drafting a QB.

[T200]

Maybe we can draft an OL coach with the first pick??????

 

[Bob In PA]

Sounds like he's making a two part argument:

1) don't draft a QB because the OL isn't good enough

2) don't draft OL because the OL is good enough with better coaching.

Do you see the problem with the logic listed above? If you bring in better coaching for the OL, why not draft a better QB and go to war with Barkley and Hyatt?

Doc: That may be the stronger of the two possible arguments. You're probably on the right track, IMO.

I'm wait-and-see right now. Let's see what they can get in free-agency first to bolster the OL.

If the OL looks to have been improved before draft day, IMO that would further support your argument.

Bob