QBs Drafted to be back ups?

[SCall13]

I think he meant if Miami had drafted a backup tey wouldn't have had to rely on Ray. Ray actually was an undrafted FA.

The Jets drafted Brooks Bolliner 2 years ago w/ the sole purpose of grooming him as Chad's long term backup. There is no question teams draft QBs to be backups. The Pats drafted QBs 3 of the last 4 years starting in '02, do you think they drafted them to take over for Brady?

Thank you. Another excellent point.

 

[MelbournePhin]

I think he meant if Miami had drafted a backup tey wouldn't have had to rely on Ray. Ray actually was an undrafted FA.

The Jets drafted Brooks Bolliner 2 years ago w/ the sole purpose of grooming him as Chad's long term backup. There is no question teams draft QBs to be backups. The Pats drafted QBs 3 of the last 4 years starting in '02, do you think they drafted them to take over for Brady?

funny, i was going to bring up brooks as well :)

 

[NJFINSFAN1]

QB drafted to be backups?

Look no further then Gus, Norv Turner while HC of the 'Skins drafted Gus to be Heath Shulars' backup.

He was drafted in case Heath failed, which he did, and Gus became the starter for 3 years.

 

[MelbournePhin]

i even heard kiper saying that so and so can eventually develop into a solid back up. i forgot who it was

 

[SCall13]

QB drafted to be backups?

Look no further then Gus, Norv Turner while HC of the 'Skins drafted Gus to be Heath Shulars' backup.

Another good example. Like I joked in the beginning of this thread: we have three backups on our roster now. (Actually 4 with Berlin-but he wasn't drafted)

 

[SCall13]

i even heard kiper saying that so and so can eventually develop into a solid back up. i forgot who it was

Yeah, you're right. He says it alot. It may have been Dave Ragone. maybe even Stefan Lefors. Though I think Lafors has more "starter potential" than Ragone, IMO.

 

[arsenal]

i even heard kiper saying that so and so can eventually develop into a solid back up. i forgot who it was

the analysis of a sportswriter on what he thinks will be the future of a player has nothing to do with what teams are drafting for...

again you guys arent talking about talent your talking about position, you should be talking about talent...

do teams draft playres who they know DO NOT have starting calibre talent? the answer is clearly no...

even as a backup who wants a player who doesn't have the skills to lead an NFL offense? are you guys crazy?!?!

if alex smith was drafted by the giants would he be a backup? obviously... but if he was drafted by the 49ers is he a backup? obviously not...

cause the points not about the depth chart, its does he have starting talent, and the answer would be yes regardless of which team he went too...

a team isn't going to draft a QB who they do not think has starting calibre talent, end of story....

 

[SCall13]

the analysis of a sportswriter on what he thinks will be the future of a player has nothing to do with what teams are drafting for...

again you guys arent talking about talent your talking about position, you should be talking about talent...

do teams draft playres who they know DO NOT have starting calibre talent? the answer is clearly no...

even as a backup who wants a player who doesn't have the skills to lead an NFL offense? are you guys crazy?!?!

if alex smith was drafted by the giants would he be a backup? obviously... but if he was drafted by the 49ers is he a backup? obviously not...

cause the points not about the depth chart, its does he have starting talent, and the answer would be yes regardless of which team he went too...

a team isn't going to draft a QB who they do not think has starting calibre talent, end of story....

I disagree. Teams would LIKE for the player to develop into a starter some day, but they know when it isn't likely to happen orhen it is LESS likely to happen. Uing Alex Smith as and example is taking away from what this debate is about. Alex Smith was a 1 overall pick. Of course he isn't intended to be a back up. The argument here is, do teams draft players in the later rounds for the sole purpoise of that QB being a backup. The answer to that question is a very obvious YES. Now, I do agree that teams HOPE that they get lcuky and will land a Tom Brady. But they know, for the most part, thatwhat they got is a backup QB. There are countless examples of QBs who were drafted to be backups.

 

[themole]

We drafted qb's while we had Marino... Enough said...

That's because coaches draft for "potential" and later value for the team. To draft a quarterback with intentions of keeping him exclusivley for backup would be Wanniesh.

 

[arsenal]

I disagree. Teams would LIKE for the player to develop into a starter some day, but they know when it isn't likely to happen orhen it is LESS likely to happen. Uing Alex Smith as and example is taking away from what this debate is about. Alex Smith was a 1 overall pick. Of course he isn't intended to be a back up. The argument here is, do teams draft players in the later rounds for the sole purpoise of that QB being a backup. The answer to that question is a very obvious YES. Now, I do agree that teams HOPE that they get lcuky and will land a Tom Brady. But they know, for the most part, thatwhat they got is a backup QB. There are countless examples of QBs who were drafted to be backups.

i think your just confusing the spot on the depth chart to their talent... if indy drafts ANY player regardless of round yes that player will be the backup, that doesn't mean that player does not have starter material...

but regardless of what round they are drafted the team is picking them in hopes that that player has starter material... again you are not gonna even want a backup who doesn't have starter material... your agruement shouldn't be about the depth chart but about the skill of the player.... if you draft a QB in the 7th round there is obviously something you saw in him that had you take him, your not gonna pick him up to say well he'll be on the practice squad... that would be wasting a pick, you take him in hopes hes a sleeper player that has starting calibre talent... most of the time that doesnt' happen, but i gaurantee that no team picks a QB like, well i know hes never good enough to start in the NFL but lets take him anyway... no way

 

[Joneal7]

tom brady was drafted to be a 3rd stringer or something

 

[themole]

tom brady was drafted to be a 3rd stringer or something

Well why didn't they keep him there, if he was drafted to be a third stringer? That would have been easy to do. He was drafted because of his POTENTIAL.

 

[SCall13]

i think your just confusing the spot on the depth chart to their talent... if indy drafts ANY player regardless of round yes that player will be the backup, that doesn't mean that player does not have starter material...

but regardless of what round they are drafted the team is picking them in hopes that that player has starter material... again you are not gonna even want a backup who doesn't have starter material... your agruement shouldn't be about the depth chart but about the skill of the player.... if you draft a QB in the 7th round there is obviously something you saw in him that had you take him, your not gonna pick him up to say well he'll be on the practice squad... that would be wasting a pick, you take him in hopes hes a sleeper player that has starting calibre talent... most of the time that doesnt' happen, but i gaurantee that no team picks a QB like, well i know hes never good enough to start in the NFL but lets take him anyway... no way

I agree that there are occasions when a backup has starter ability. Brett Favre was a backup. Tom Brady was a backup. The point is, most QBs drafted in the later rounds are not intended to be the QBs that teams think will lead them to the playoffs or further. They are the depth they need at that position. A stop gap player in case the starter is injured. Just like any position, you need depth at QB and teams do draft for depth. Teams: GMs, coaches, scouts- they know when a QB will more than likely be a career backup. But then, sometimes teams get very lucky. And when they do, they reap the benefits. But that doesn't mean they KNEW it was going to happen or drafted that player because they were sure it was going to happen. THEY just get lucky at times.

Defensive tackles, LBs, O-Lineman, Safeties, CBs, and yes, QBs are drafted for depth. Not all are intended to ever be starters.

 

[SCall13]

Well why didn't they keep him there, if he was drafted to be a third stringer? That would have been easy to do. He was drafted because of his POTENTIAL.

There were alot of knocks on Brady coming out of college. No way anyone knew that he would turn out like he did. He was said to have a weak arm and it was said he wasn't a good leader and lacked the intangibles to be a good QB. Well, he doesn't have the strongest arm, but he does have the intangibles and leadership skills. Noone knew it though. He was one of the few QBs that a team got lucky on in the later rounds -VERY lucky in this case.

 

[arsenal]

I agree that there are occasions when a backup has starter ability. Brett Favre was a backup. Tom Brady was a backup. The point is, most QBs drafted in the later rounds are not intended to be the QBs that teams think will lead them to the playoffs or further. They are the depth they need at that position. A stop gap player in case the starter is injured. Just like any position, you need depth at QB and teams do draft for depth. Teams: GMs, coaches, scouts- they know when a QB will more than likely be a career backup. But then, sometimes teams get very lucky. And when they do, they reap the benefits. But that doesn't mean they KNEW it was going to happen or drafted that player because they were sure it was going to happen. THEY just get lucky at times.

Defensive tackles, LBs, O-Lineman, Safeties, CBs, and yes, QBs are drafted for depth. Not all are intended to ever be starters.

ok forget the position on the depth chart for a second... would you as a GM draft a QB in the 7th round who you think couldn't be a starter in the NFL?