[Bram Raider]

First lets look at Bill Parcells rules for drafting a QB.

1. He must be a senior, because you need time and maturity to develop into a good professional quarterback.
2. He must be a graduate, because you want someone who takes his responsibilities seriously.
3. He must be a three-year starter, because you need to make sure his success wasn’t ephemeral and that he has lived as “the guy” for some period of time.
4. He must have at least 23 wins, because the big passing numbers must come in the context of winning games.

Bill Parcells’ four rules for drafting a quarterback | Smart Football

Second lets look at the stats for QBs in 2009.

There are many ways to skin a cat – or find a franchise quarterback.

Your best chance at finding a long term solution at the position would appear to be taking a blue-chipper in the first round. But, the risk is very high. A team has to pay top dollar for a player who has never stepped on an N.F.L. field. Further, a team must dedicate the next 3-4 years to the quarterback’s development. A first round failure can set a team back several years.

The second round has not proven to be an effective way to find a quarterback.

Later rounds (and undrafted free agents) can provide a return, but, success is a function of volume. Finding late round gems requires a strategy of lining up several options and hoping one turns into Tom Brady.

NFLStatAnalysis: STATISTICAL JUGGERNAUT: Finding the Perfect Quarterback

Thirdly, we have the Lewin method that is now being discredited in light of the expansion of the spread offense in college.

It stated that in order to be a success in the NFL a QB needed to have played 30 starts in college minimum + had a completion percentage that increased year on year AND was overall above 60%. The issue became that weak-armed QBs started to complete large numbers of passes using the spread offense due to the fact that many passes were in the 5-10 yard range. Thus it was hard to determine statistically whether college QBs had sufficient arm strength purely from the statistics generated.

I'll add at this stage a few more interesting articles about drafting QBs, including one about our own issues back in 2007 (last one).

Football-a-Go-Go: Jay Cutler?s gonna stink -- How NCAA accuracy translates to NFL ability.
College stats don't lie - NFL - ESPN
2010 NFL Draft: Malcolm Gladwell, Steven Pinker and Predicting Quarterback Success - The Daily Fix - WSJ
QB quandary: No. 1 pick doesn't guarantee success - USATODAY.com



Statistically speaking you are more likely to find a successful Quarterback if you draft them in the first round. And equally, that success is not dependent upon the Quarterback being the first drafted in any year - for a while it appeared thus: Bledsoe (success) Mirer (bust) & Manning (success) Leaf (bust).

Equally, there is no guarantee of success in bringing in either a free agent or selecting a Quarterback via a trade. For every Brees (free agent) or Favre (trade) that can be pointed out, we have many more failures.


IMHO it comes down to how much of a gambler you are and how much you desire success. Multiple Superbowl winning Quarterbacks (Plunkett aside) have all been drafted by there respective clubs. At the same time, other teams have had success finding Quarterbacks via other means.

[r8erray]

We need to get a QB this year because we dont have a 1st rounder next year & im not ready to put all our hopes on Bruce & Frye for the next two years. Hopefully we get Clausen in the 1st & trade our 2nd for Gaither that would be a real good off-season

[fatjack]

Maybe in the 4th round but no sooner, look at Jonathan Crompton, John Skelton, or Dan Lefevre. We may get lucky. Check out the link.

NFL Draft - 2010_QB Draft Prospects - CBSSports.com - NFLDraftScout.com

[Okie]

Originally Posted by Bram Raider

First lets look at Bill Parcells rules for drafting a QB.



Bill Parcells’ four rules for drafting a quarterback | Smart Football

Second lets look at the stats for QBs in 2009.



NFLStatAnalysis: STATISTICAL JUGGERNAUT: Finding the Perfect Quarterback

Thirdly, we have the Lewin method that is now being discredited in light of the expansion of the spread offense in college.

It stated that in order to be a success in the NFL a QB needed to have played 30 starts in college minimum + had a completion percentage that increased year on year AND was overall above 60%. The issue became that weak-armed QBs started to complete large numbers of passes using the spread offense due to the fact that many passes were in the 5-10 yard range. Thus it was hard to determine statistically whether college QBs had sufficient arm strength purely from the statistics generated.

I'll add at this stage a few more interesting articles about drafting QBs, including one about our own issues back in 2007 (last one).

Football-a-Go-Go: Jay Cutler?s gonna stink -- How NCAA accuracy translates to NFL ability.
College stats don't lie - NFL - ESPN
2010 NFL Draft: Malcolm Gladwell, Steven Pinker and Predicting Quarterback Success - The Daily Fix - WSJ
QB quandary: No. 1 pick doesn't guarantee success - USATODAY.com



Statistically speaking you are more likely to find a successful Quarterback if you draft them in the first round. And equally, that success is not dependent upon the Quarterback being the first drafted in any year - for a while it appeared thus: Bledsoe (success) Mirer (bust) & Manning (success) Leaf (bust).

Equally, there is no guarantee of success in bringing in either a free agent or selecting a Quarterback via a trade. For every Brees (free agent) or Favre (trade) that can be pointed out, we have many more failures.


IMHO it comes down to how much of a gambler you are and how much you desire success. Multiple Superbowl winning Quarterbacks (Plunkett aside) have all been drafted by there respective clubs. At the same time, other teams have had success finding Quarterbacks via other means.

I think its much more complicated then that. We typically classify a guy as bust or success based on his performance ability to produce wins. If the QB or "pick" succeeds or fails 9 times out of 10 we as fans, the media and even the "experts" immediately conclude that the player just "didnt have it" and was a poor pick.

Thats my problem with the league, us as fans and the so called experts. We tend put the majority of the blame or credit on their shoulders. Success depends on much more than just drafting the best QB. The best QB by league standards may not be the best QB for any particular team. The league history is littered with "cant miss" prospects who never amounted to much, late round "nobodies" that turn into Pro Bowl players and veteran "has beens" or "never weres" who suddenly become all star QBs.

I know its obvious, but you can stick the same QB in different organizations and get two completely different results. Peyton Manning is one of the, and may become the greatest QB of all time. Do you think he would have had the same success here? I highly doubt it. Would he have been above average, would we have been slightly better, yes, but i dont think hes the Manning we all know. Gannon is a good example, did he suddenly "get it"? I dont think so, it was that winning combination of coach, QB, timing and players. All of which equally contributes to success or failure. And thats a veteran QB, all of the above "ingredients" become even more critical when your are talking about a young QB.

Thats my problem with Oakland. Not just Russell, but we have had some good high potential guys in here over the years. The problem was not only the QB we had here, but the players, coaches, schemes, lack of consistency and mostly the lack of proper development. I think Andrew Walter is a good example of this. I was never much of a fan, but i saw the potential. Had he been drafted by, lets say the Patriots, developed in consistent system under good coaching and veteran players he may have very well become a very good starting QB. But we put him in a position where he had 4 different head coaches in 4 years, behind a horrible offensive line, quite possibly one of the worst developmental systems in the league. But yet, the majority of us here still think that Walter was a horrible draft pick and QB.

Very few players in this league immediately "get it". The majority, even first rounders need the proper development and need to be put in situations conducive to success. We have done neither for a long time here in Oakland.

For all we know, for all the "experts" know, Bradford, McCoy, Tebow and Claussen could all bust and we are looking at Jevon Sneed as the Superbowl MVP in 5 years. Situation and circumstances have nearly as much to do with the majority of QBs success as does the players talent.

[Slump]

Originally Posted by Bram Raider

First lets look at Bill Parcells rules for drafting a QB.



Bill Parcells’ four rules for drafting a quarterback | Smart Football

.

Sounds like Tony Pike. My favorite QB in this years draft who will probably be available in the 3rd or 4th round (maybe even later).

[Raiders Own You]

John Skelton , Fordham, 43 games play 21 or 22 wins I think.

Big QB 6'5, 240, left handed

Mike Mayock compares him to Joe Flacco.

His stock is going up.. Probably a 4th round pick

[MexHemi]

I'll answer the question in the topic title.

No, I want to start Bruce and draft another QB after JaFatAss is cut. If this happens this preseason great, I'll take another prospect to SIT and watch Bruce lead.

Other then that I really am tired of all this QB speculation. Lately it was all McNabb, now that that issue is done and gone with all these other QB's are popping up. F that!

You can't draft another QB and put him on the bench if JaF'nut is still on the roster. At most you have 4 QB's on the roster which means 2 somewhat seasoned QB's (Bruce and Frye) and then the 2 rookies in JaRipoff and whoever kiper and the other typewriter tappers predict Al will draft.


Bruce can manage this team on the field the only question is can he stay healthy? I don't want another rookie QB on this team giving JaLameAss any possible avenue to infect him with his "commitment to excrement" influence.

I think for the upcoming season Bruce can do the job and do it well. I think we should be focusing on every area on the team except QB but wtf do I know I'm drunk and pissed off.

edit: (Losman has not proved anything to me yet but I would switch him and frye) still drunk but glad I vented now I'm not pissed :p

[XZ.]

Originally Posted by Raiders Own You

John Skelton , Fordham, 43 games play 21 or 22 wins I think.

Big QB 6'5, 240, left handed

Mike Mayock compares him to Joe Flacco.

His stock is going up.. Probably a 4th round pick

Stock went wayy up. He's probably tied with Lefervour for 4th best QB..so easy third-round guy.

No chance he stays in the 4th.

[throwback420]

whats a QB ?

[Panda Bear]

What about that Sean Canfield cat they brought in to workout? Looks like the Raiders like hime and he'll be available late.

[Panda Bear]

Originally Posted by throwback420

whats a QB ?

A left tackle that fumbles :/

[Raidermofojeff]

When a car is built you start with a chassis, and you add an engine-transmission.suspension.Electrical system ,seats, interior and the very last detail is the Driver....I liken the Offensive line to the suspension........With no suspension the car is just lying on the ground and Steve McQueen can't even drive it. The Raiders need to build their suspension, before adding the driver.

You add Peyton Manning to this team and you end up no better than 8-8,with Manning injured.

Somebody here mentioned drafting Clausen and having him ride the bench while sending in Grads to be the tackling dummy until the O-line is fixed...It kinda makes sense! Why waste a Franchise QB behind these scrubs!
Not that I favor getting Clausen, but I read worse ideas here on a near daily basis. Yeah and I know QBs don't have the luxury of learning from the bench anymore...too bad though...

We are desperate for an offensive line, and no QB will win behind these bums! The best player on our whole O-line only qualifies as average...

Wake up people! The Raiders are not a QB away from legitimacy!

[R20_SLY]

Buy a QB next year!!! Do not use a draft pick on one this year!!!

[cheapshotartist]

Originally Posted by Raidermofojeff

When a car is built you start with a chassis, and you add an engine-transmission.suspension.Electrical system ,seats, interior and the very last detail is the Driver....I liken the Offensive line to the suspension........With no suspension the car is just lying on the ground and Steve McQueen can't even drive it. The Raiders need to build their suspension, before adding the driver.

You add Peyton Manning to this team and you end up no better than 8-8,with Manning injured.

Somebody here mentioned drafting Clausen and having him ride the bench while sending in Grads to be the tackling dummy until the O-line is fixed...It kinda makes sense! Why waste a Franchise QB behind these scrubs!
Not that I favor getting Clausen, but I read worse ideas here on a near daily basis. Yeah and I know QBs don't have the luxury of learning from the bench anymore...too bad though...

We are desperate for an offensive line, and no QB will win behind these bums! The best player on our whole O-line only qualifies as average...

Wake up people! The Raiders are not a QB away from legitimacy!

^^^This^^^. Until we fix our weak azz OL our offense will continue to suck. No running game, no passing game, nothing!

[HITMAN]

As much as the Raiders need a qualified QB, they need a solid offensive line first. Without that the rest is a moot point. What made the Raiders successful back in the day was because they had one of if not the best offensive line in the game during that era...