Saban speaks up

[rafael]

Its a good point that only 30% of Qb's actually make it from the 1st round. Personally I would have liked to see Miami pick Smith or trade down. it would be interesting to see what the percentage was for a RB in the 1st rnd was, or indeed the success rate for any position in the 1st round come to think of it

whoever nick picks I will support his decision

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php

That link has an article showing the top 10 picks at QB and RB since 1967. As I went through the lists I had 22/42 successful QBs (I excluded 2004, too soon) and 26/56 successful RBs. I don't know where Saban got his stats (I know he said 1st rd, but past analysis also puts that figure at about 50%). Obviously, this is subjective (who was successful), but IMO anybody's non-bias list will find that QBs and RBs have roughly quivalent success rates.

 

[fish fan 4 life]

I would agree, but it is possible we might get a QB for the future in say the 3rd round-D greene maybe

I would be cool with that also.

 

[SkapePhin]

http://www.drafthistory.com/index.php

That link has an article showing the top 10 picks at QB and RB since 1967. As I went through the lists I had 22/42 successful QBs (I excluded 2004, too soon) and 26/56 successful RBs. I don't know where Saban got his stats (I know he said 1st rd, but past analysis also puts that figure at about 50%). Obviously, this is subjective (who was successful), but IMO anybody's non-bias list will find that QBs and RBs have roughly quivalent success rates.

The thing is, a bust RB taken that high wont sink your franchise like a bust QB taken that high.

 

[fish fan 4 life]

The thing is, a bust RB taken that high wont sink your franchise like a bust QB taken that high.

What?A bust is a bust and hurts the franchise the same way no matter what position.A wasted 1st round pick sinks a franchise no matter what position u draft.

 

[rafael]

The thing is, a bust RB taken that high wont sink your franchise like a bust QB taken that high.

Picks that high all get paid. You might have a slightly higher signing bonus for the QB but not much. What may kill your team though is having that much money tied up at the RB position. The salary cap will simply prevent you from spending enough to get quality players at more important (and expensive) positions.

 

[SkapePhin]

What?A bust is a bust and hurts the franchise the same way no matter what position.

Incorrect. Why you ask? Because the QB is the most crucial position on the field, and when you invest such a high pick on a QB, you tend to stick with him longer than you should hoping and praying that your investment will finally pay off.. Whereas with an RB, if it doesnt work in the first 3 years or so, you can already start stocking up with some decent backs with later picks..

Look at the Browns for instance. Tim Couch. 1st pick overall, during his tenure, they only made the playoffs once, thanks in large part to his backup. Now they later drafted William Green high, but they effectively made up for his "bust" by snagging Lee Suggs who turned out better, for less.

 

[SkapePhin]

Picks that high all get paid. You might have a slightly higher signing bonus for the QB but not much. What may kill your team though is having that much money tied up at the RB position. The salary cap will simply prevent you from spending enough to get quality players at more important (and expensive) positions.

QBs take longer to develop than RBs, that why they sink your team.. You are basically stuck with a QB you draft that high for 5 years. With rbs, you can pretty much tell if they are a bust after their 1st or 2nd year.

 

[rafael]

QBs take longer to develop than RBs, that why they sink your team.. You are basically stuck with a QB you draft that high for 5 years. With rbs, you can pretty much tell if they are a bust after their 1st or 2nd year.

Not necessarily. Couch was gone before 5 yrs. Also not having a QB is what sinks your team and since they are so hard to find you might as well use the option that gives you the best odds of finding one. Denver has proven that with a good system you could plug in almost anyone at RB and get a 1000 yds out of him (incl. our rejects). But how close has that gotten them to a SB since Elway left?

And the development time is another reason to get the QB first. Ideally you want your teams components to peak at about the same time.

 

[fish fan 4 life]

Not necessarily. Couch was gone before 5 yrs. Also not having a QB is what sinks your team and since they are so hard to find you might as well use the option that gives you the best odds of finding one. Denver has proven that with a good system you could plug in almost anyone at RB and get a 1000 yds out of him (incl. our rejects). But how close has that gotten them to a SB since Elway left?

And the development time is another reason to get the QB first. Ideally you want your teams components to peak at about the same time.

:rocker: Couldnt agree more.:drinkers:

 

[SkapePhin]

Not necessarily. Couch was gone before 5 yrs. Also not having a QB is what sinks your team and since they are so hard to find you might as well use the option that gives you the best odds of finding one. Denver has proven that with a good system you could plug in almost anyone at RB and get a 1000 yds out of him (incl. our rejects). But how close has that gotten them to a SB since Elway left?

And the development time is another reason to get the QB first. Ideally you want your teams components to peak at about the same time.

But thats why Im saying you better believe the guy you are picking at Top 5 is about as surefire as you can get. This years crop of QBs, just do not appear to be that.. One could even say that from Saban's latest comment, he doesnt feel that these QB prospects are surefire either, but again, Saban is UNREADABLE. I love how he puts all these statements out there.. Its enough to make an opposing GM's head spin. Noone has any clue what he is going to do come draft day.

 

[Awsi Dooger]

That's not accurate about crank it up Timmy Couch

Not necessarily. Couch was gone before 5 yrs. Also not having a QB is what sinks your team and since they are so hard to find you might as well use the option that gives you the best odds of finding one. Denver has proven that with a good system you could plug in almost anyone at RB and get a 1000 yds out of him (incl. our rejects). But how close has that gotten them to a SB since Elway left?

And the development time is another reason to get the QB first. Ideally you want your teams components to peak at about the same time.

He plagued the Browns for a full 5 years, just as the posters have suggested, in terms of the normal investment in a highly drafted QB. Couch was somehow the 1st overall pick in '99. In 2003, Couch's 5th season, he was defeated by Kelly Holcomb for Cleveland's starting QB position. Only after his 5th season was Couch released and he tried to catch on with Green Bay.

The Rodgers/Smith or pass dilemma cannot be overstated. If we take one of the two, it will likely determine the course of Saban's career as an NFL head coach. Every free agent signing, every other draftee is directly impacted, due to the likely 5 year investment. And I think Nick Saban fully understands that.