|
Post by purplevein on Feb 26, 2024 12:25:03 GMT -6
I worry that Nix will be a backup in the NFL or disappointing starter. He has had 5 years of starting college football and yet one of the big negatives on him is he plays in a college RPO system that allows for a ton of easy first reads and short run after the catch passes. All scouting reports indicate he needs to improve at progressing through multiple reads and that red flag means he could struggle big time in a pro offense. The red flag of 'lack of leadership' also follows Nix. Not sure if that is deserved but it is mentioned time and time again. Strong arm, good NFL body and good athlete are his strengths. But at 23 with those red flags I don't see Nix as being a viable option at 11. I don't think that KOC and Kwesi will go that way. I could be wrong, scouting QBs is difficult. Nix turned 24 yesterday.
|
|
taz24
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,699
|
Post by taz24 on Feb 26, 2024 12:36:31 GMT -6
I stand corrected.
That means Nix is about 1 year younger than Justin Fields.
|
|
tavike
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,097
|
Post by tavike on Feb 26, 2024 12:38:01 GMT -6
The Ponder pick has traumatized many a Viking fan. We all need to get over it. At this point, I'm 62, watched the Vikes since I was 7 and I'm willing to see them do something they have never done before and see what happens. At this point what is there left to do different. The Vikings have drafted QB's high, mid and low went after the free agents, built stout running games with monster defense, built high flying offense with mid level defense, built highly rated pass control offense with monster defense and yet have not held the Lombardi. McCarthy and Nix are best fits for KOC's offense...period does that mean they are the best option to draft, only if you are willing to sit at 11. Moving up for any of the others also means changes to the team that will require the draft capita that you gave up to move. The vikings have never drafted a QB in the top 10 picks in their history. That would be something different.
|
|
tavike
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,097
|
Post by tavike on Feb 26, 2024 12:42:52 GMT -6
Youβre not. Itβs already been proven with the numbers time and again on this board. You just like amateur players and refuse to accept truth. It doesnβt take a first round qb to win the sb. It's been proven the other way. I have no idea what numbers you are looking at. Look at all current starting QB's in the league and the number of them that are first rounders compared to every other round. Than look at the number of QB's drafted in the first round for the last 5 years vs the number of all Qb's taken in other rounds and the percentage rate of starters drafted in the first round is higher than all the other rounds combined.
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Feb 26, 2024 12:54:11 GMT -6
I worry that Nix will be a backup in the NFL or disappointing starter. He has had 5 years of starting college football and yet one of the big negatives on him is he plays in a college RPO system that allows for a ton of easy first reads and short run after the catch passes. All scouting reports indicate he needs to improve at progressing through multiple reads and that red flag means he could struggle big time in a pro offense. The red flag of 'lack of leadership' also follows Nix. Not sure if that is deserved but it is mentioned time and time again. Strong arm, good NFL body and good athlete are his strengths. But at 23 with those red flags I don't see Nix as being a viable option at 11. I don't think that KOC and Kwesi will go that way. I could be wrong, scouting QBs is difficult. I tend to agree. I don't think there is any questioning his arm talent and accuracy and his ball placement is superb even when on the run. He does a lot of things well. But, his lower half mechanics even working out of shotgun are big concern, let alone from under center. Mix in there are real questions about his ability to read a defense, go through progressions and stay in the pocket and he doesn't appear on paper to be a great fit. I said a few months ago, I thought Kwesi and KOC were on different pages when it came to signing Dobbs (not meaning they were in disagreement, but simply there was a breakdown in Kwesi's understanding of what KOC wanted from his QB and/or there was a misunderstanding of what Kwesi thought KOC would do with a dual threat QB.) I hope as they make the biggest decision of both these guys careers they are 100% on the same page of who fits and who doesn't. Again, unless KOC is going to revamp everything he does (which I don't expect) a Dual Threat QB that struggles to throw accurately from the pocket and on time isn't going to ideal. Daniels to me is a slimmer version of Fields.
|
|
mjollnir
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 2,186
|
Post by mjollnir on Feb 26, 2024 13:22:37 GMT -6
At this point what is there left to do different. The Vikings have drafted QB's high, mid and low went after the free agents, built stout running games with monster defense, built high flying offense with mid level defense, built highly rated pass control offense with monster defense and yet have not held the Lombardi. McCarthy and Nix are best fits for KOC's offense...period does that mean they are the best option to draft, only if you are willing to sit at 11. Moving up for any of the others also means changes to the team that will require the draft capita that you gave up to move. The vikings have never drafted a QB in the top 10 picks in their history. That would be something different. No but we have with the 11th, 12th, 27th, 29th (wasn't the first round at the time) and 32nd. I will admit our top ten guys have some pretty big names in there and at the time of being drafted were probably the best fit for the position of draft, but I also know names like Nelson, Snow, Barr, Jones and Mason are also in that group.
|
|
smoot4208
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 353
Member is Online
|
Post by smoot4208 on Feb 26, 2024 13:27:28 GMT -6
|
|
tavike
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,097
|
Post by tavike on Feb 26, 2024 13:34:19 GMT -6
The vikings have never drafted a QB in the top 10 picks in their history. That would be something different. No but we have with the 11th, 12th, 27th, 29th (wasn't the first round at the time) and 32nd. I will admit our top ten guys have some pretty big names in there and at the time of being drafted were probably the best fit for the position of draft, but I also know names like Nelson, Snow, Barr, Jones and Mason are also in that group. So trading up into the top 5 or 10 to get a QB would be something they have never done before. Thus different than what they have done every year since their inception. I'll take that.
|
|
purpleberserker
β ββ ββ ββ
From the fury of the Northmen deliver us, O Lord.
(A furore Normannorum libera nos, Domine.)
Posts: 549
Member is Online
|
Post by purpleberserker on Feb 26, 2024 13:38:55 GMT -6
My belief for a long time now when it comes to drafting QBs is that the #1 most important criteria is to find a guy who can stand in the pocket and beat teams with core QB skills (arm, knowledge, quick decision-making, durability, etc.). After satisfying that criteria, if a prospect also has great athleticism, dual-threat capabilities, etc., then those skills are icing on the cake. But the first priority should always be a guy who does the actual core QB things extremely well. (Caveat: This philosophy includes the requirement that any QB under consideration has NFL-level physical/mental attributes.)
|
|
drhoades
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 1,221
|
Post by drhoades on Feb 26, 2024 13:38:58 GMT -6
Youβre not. Itβs already been proven with the numbers time and again on this board. You just like amateur players and refuse to accept truth. It doesnβt take a first round qb to win the sb. It's been proven the other way. I have no idea what numbers you are looking at. Look at all current starting QB's in the league and the number of them that are first rounders compared to every other round. Than look at the number of QB's drafted in the first round for the last 5 years vs the number of all Qb's taken in other rounds and the percentage rate of starters drafted in the first round is higher than all the other rounds combined. 58 super bowls- 33 winners were taken in the first round but 8 of those by a different team than they won with making 25 teams who won with thier first round QB and 33 who won with a QB that they didnt draft or drafted lower than round one. another fact for you - of the 34 first round QBs drafted since 2010, there are 3 with a Super Bowl ring: Patrick Mahomes, Carson Wentz, Blaine Gabbert Wentz and Gabbert werent even playing in the game in which the got a ring, Gabbert not even with the team who drafted him. It doesnt take a first round QB to win the SB.
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Feb 26, 2024 14:23:11 GMT -6
My belief for a long time now when it comes to drafting QBs is that the #1 most important criteria is to find a guy who can stand in the pocket and beat teams with core QB skills (arm, knowledge, quick decision-making, durability, etc.). After satisfying that criteria, if a prospect also has great athleticism, dual-threat capabilities, etc., then those skills are icing on the cake. But the first priority should always be a guy who does the actual core QB things extremely well. (Caveat: This philosophy includes the requirement that any QB under consideration has NFL-level physical/mental attributes.) 1000% THIS!
|
|
|
Post by redbird87 on Feb 26, 2024 14:38:22 GMT -6
Youβre not. Itβs already been proven with the numbers time and again on this board. You just like amateur players and refuse to accept truth. It doesnβt take a first round qb to win the sb. It's been proven the other way. I have no idea what numbers you are looking at. Look at all current starting QB's in the league and the number of them that are first rounders compared to every other round. Than look at the number of QB's drafted in the first round for the last 5 years vs the number of all Qb's taken in other rounds and the percentage rate of starters drafted in the first round is higher than all the other rounds combined. I'm not sure what your point is with the "look at last 5 years part"? I'm not sure in what world QB's taken in Rd 1 wouldn't be starting more than other rounds combined in the first 5 years. 1) Teams taking a QB in round 1 are looking for change at the QB position. Most teams taking QB's in Rd's 3-7 aren't looking for immediate starters and typically already have an entrenched starter ( See Mond and Cousins). Furthermore, just because a Rd 1 QB is getting playing time doesn't mean that was a successful pick. Most 1st Rd QB's are given every opportunity to prove they aren't the guy where as 3rd-th Rounders typically have to earn it or have injury or bad play force their hand. I think the point people are trying to make is that moving up in the draft to pick a QB in the top 5 doesn't necessarily increase the odds of success. If you are sitting there like the Bears and it doesn't cost you anything to take one....by all means do. But if it is going to cost you multiple 1st and maybe a 2nd rd pick to do so, the cost is simply too high because it's still a low probability and the best help you can provide a young talent is to surround them with better players. If you give up multiple high picks that is less talent to surround them with. It's hard to get to a SB without good QB play, but it takes more than a great QB to get there. Those picks you are giving up....those are likely the extra pieces you need to get it done.
|
|
|
Post by blackmagic7 on Feb 26, 2024 14:41:20 GMT -6
It's been proven the other way. I have no idea what numbers you are looking at. Look at all current starting QB's in the league and the number of them that are first rounders compared to every other round. Than look at the number of QB's drafted in the first round for the last 5 years vs the number of all Qb's taken in other rounds and the percentage rate of starters drafted in the first round is higher than all the other rounds combined. I'm not sure what your point is with the "look at last 5 years part"? I'm not sure in what world QB's taken in Rd 1 wouldn't be starting more than other rounds combined in the first 5 years. 1) Teams taking a QB in round 1 are looking for change at the QB position. Most teams taking a QB's in Rd's 3-7 aren't looking for immediate starters and typically already have an entrenched starter. Furthermore, just because a Rd 1 QB is getting playing time doesn't mean that was a successful pick. Most 1st Rd QB's are given every opportunity to prove they aren't the guy where as 3rd-4th Rounders typically have to earn it. ...i'd be curious what their contracts looked like as well... While you guys are playing that game, what kind of contract extension should we give the guy we haven't even drafted yet?
|
|
tavike
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,097
|
Post by tavike on Feb 26, 2024 14:46:50 GMT -6
It's been proven the other way. I have no idea what numbers you are looking at. Look at all current starting QB's in the league and the number of them that are first rounders compared to every other round. Than look at the number of QB's drafted in the first round for the last 5 years vs the number of all Qb's taken in other rounds and the percentage rate of starters drafted in the first round is higher than all the other rounds combined. 58 super bowls- 33 winners were taken in the first round but 8 of those by a different team than they won with making 25 teams who won with thier first round QB and 33 who won with a QB that they didnt draft or drafted lower than round one. another fact for you - of the 34 first round QBs drafted since 2010, there are 3 with a Super Bowl ring: Patrick Mahomes, Carson Wentz, Blaine Gabbert Wentz and Gabbert werent even playing in the game in which the got a ring, Gabbert not even with the team who drafted him. It doesnt take a first round QB to win the SB. Thank you for proving my point. First round QB's have a success rate that is higher than all other rounds combined. As during that time over 700 qb's have been taken in all the non first rounds and 180 QB's have been taken in the first round. Now do the math.
|
|
tavike
β ββ ββ ββ
Posts: 4,097
|
Post by tavike on Feb 26, 2024 14:49:43 GMT -6
It's been proven the other way. I have no idea what numbers you are looking at. Look at all current starting QB's in the league and the number of them that are first rounders compared to every other round. Than look at the number of QB's drafted in the first round for the last 5 years vs the number of all Qb's taken in other rounds and the percentage rate of starters drafted in the first round is higher than all the other rounds combined. I'm not sure what your point is with the "look at last 5 years part"? I'm not sure in what world QB's taken in Rd 1 wouldn't be starting more than other rounds combined in the first 5 years. 1) Teams taking a QB in round 1 are looking for change at the QB position. Most teams taking a QB's in Rd's 3-7 aren't looking for immediate starters and typically already have an entrenched starter. Furthermore, just because a Rd 1 QB is getting playing time doesn't mean that was a successful pick. Most 1st Rd QB's are given every opportunity to prove they aren't the guy where as 3rd-4th Rounders typically have to earn it. Set your parimeters of what you consider is a successful QB and tell me how many years you want to go back and I will still be right. The fact is, no matter what you may think, 1st round QB's have a higher success rate percentage wise than all other rounds combined.
|
|