Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Read Serby before going overboard on a QB at #2

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Read Serby before going overboard on a QB at #2

    ....here is the link to the NY Post article by Steve Serby today on the historical performance of high QB picks. Many here seem to think that there are four franchise quarterbacks in this draft and using the #2 on any of them is the right move. Read on...

    https://nypost.com/2018/04/13/nfl-dr...bs-who-missed/
    No one remembers who came in second.

  • #2
    Originally posted by jomo View Post
    Many here seem to think that there are four franchise quarterbacks in this draft and using the #2 on any of them is the right move.

    Here comes Morehead to refute this article:




    "Sir, I was wondering: did you happen to catch the professional football contest on television last night?"
    "No...I didn't."
    "Oh it was most exhilarating: the Giants of NY took on the Packers of Green Bay and in the end the Giants triumphed by kicking an oblong ball made of pigskin through a big H. It was a most ripping victory."

    Comment


    • #3
      Of course there is a risk in taking a QB...or any position at that. That does not mean when you have the chance to grab a QB without having to use any assets to do so you should not because other QBs have failed in the past. If the Giants really like a QB, he should be the pick over any other position.

      Comment


      • #4
        chances are at least 2 of them will not work out, perhaps 3. A lot depends on where they go. The trick is to pick the one right guy...

        Comment


        • #5
          I don't understand this line of thinking at all. Because there have been QB misses in the first round, we should be afraid to take one if we think he is the right guy?

          The risk factor is not limited to QB's by the way ... as evidenced by the fact that we have whiffed on two top 10 picks in the last 3 drafts.

          Maybe we should just forfeit out first round pick because we are ascared?

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JoeBigBlue View Post


            Here comes Morehead to refute this article:



            I can almost hear "Rebel Rouser" being cued up. Or Benny Hill.

            Comment


            • #7
              I really think this subject has been beaten to death. Not all of us are going to agree. I personally want them to stick with Webb, move down in the draft, and acquire more picks. By doing so, they can address the needs that this team has in one draft, as opposed to 2 draft cycles. Just my opinion, which really doesn't matter since I'm not the GM.

              Gong into this season, OL, LB were top priority, but since DRC and Cockrell are gone, CB is now a serious need and you need more than one solid CB. There are more reason to move down in this draft, then not. We shall see what happens in two weeks and half of this board will melt down no matter what.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TCHOF View Post
                I don't understand this line of thinking at all. Because there have been QB misses in the first round, we should be afraid to take one if we think he is the right guy?

                The risk factor is not limited to QB's by the way ... as evidenced by the fact that we have whiffed on two top 10 picks in the last 3 drafts.

                Maybe we should just forfeit out first round pick because we are ascared?
                Thank you! Top 10 picks bust at all positions...not just QB. Like you said, we should all be well aware of that. Because Mark Sanchez flopped doesnt mean we should pass on Darnold. In that case why take Quenton Nelson...he might be Chance Warmack. All players are unique!

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jimmie ray View Post

                  I can almost hear "Rebel Rouser" being cued up. Or Benny Hill.
                  Where's Jackie Wright when you need him?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    wow...there is a substantial risk in taking a QB in the top 10?? Man I thought it was sure thing!! What is Serby telling us that we dont already know?

                    Maybe he should mention the odds of s top 10 becoming a successful NFL QB compared to that of a later round pick. Its not even close.

                    So its a huge crap shoot. No **** Steve. Thanks for the info
                    "it won't matter who we pick at #2 because whoever it is we need him..."

                    ​​​​​​ -Jesse James

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by yatitle View Post

                      Where's Jackie Wright when you need him?
                      That little fella was a pissah!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Just read that article on the bus.......as one can cherry pick stats to support whatever argument they're making they can do the same with a historical draft pick analysis......with that being said I'm not a fan of drafting a QB at #2 so I somewhat agree with the basis of the article......with that also being said Serby is garbage.....sadly pretty much every beat hack is these days......though I don't mind Schwartz too much.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by JoeBigBlue View Post


                          Here comes Morehead to refute this article:



                          No no...I love the article.
                          if Josh Rosen is taken at #2 he's going to suck because Ryan Leaf sucked. But id he goes #1 or #3 he'll be great.

                          It's a fine mathematical analysis.
                          Deny everything. Admit nothing. Make counter accusations.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by tdawg1413 View Post
                            Of course there is a risk in taking a QB...or any position at that. That does not mean when you have the chance to grab a QB without having to use any assets to do so you should not because other QBs have failed in the past. If the Giants really like a QB, he should be the pick over any other position.
                            I agree with that totally. However just because we need a QB and own the #2 it doesn't follow automatically that we must take one.....which is supported by the data in this article. Land mines abound.
                            No one remembers who came in second.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              i think the argument of taking a QB at 2 and only taking a QB at 2 if you like them is getting annoying and redundant.

                              everyone agrees you dont take a QB just to take a QB.
                              everyone agrees you take a QB if you like the QB.

                              No matter what our personal thoughts are on the QBs, we alll know and agree that if the Giants feel Rosen or Darnold or whoever are franchise QBs, they should take them.

                              it's literally the same argument over and over.

                              "Giants should take QB"
                              "No they shouldnt these QBs suck"
                              "If the Giants like a QB they're going to take a QB"
                              "But i think they suck"

                              there's less than 2 weeks to the draft, can we stop this on going debate finally?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X