Long time follower of the board here. I don't post much but will at different times of the year cause my life will allow it lol.


The reason I asked this question is because I see way too much importance on the qb position on this tread. I want to start a healthy debate with quality answers as to why one way is better than the other


Obviously we've seen both succeed but some seem to push one more than the other. I want to know what is it that makes one more prolific than the other


I intend to play devil advocate and play both side but just want to get an idea on what everyone thinks.

---

It doesn't work until you get the QB

---

Getting a Quarterback is important because obviously, it's the most important position on the field. In terms of getting the so-called 'prototypical' Quarterback, it's not AS important. 

 

Over these last few years, Super Bowl winning QB's haven't followed the trend of being the ideal height and weight. Russel Wilson and Drew Brees are both short guys but they have devotion and will to succeed that most don't have. Everyone's looking for the next Peyton Manning or Tom Brady when in all actuality, it's not as pressing as it is made out to be. 

 

I believe that in order to when, the QB has to be more than just a passer. Inspirational, active, strong willed, and determined. 

 

If you ask me, the QB is no make or break of an NFL roster as a whole, though the QB is what puts the team over the top. There are historical greats like Manning who are known for making teams better than what they are, but in the end, is that really what we want? To have one guy who carries a team? No, I would much rather a team be all around strong than that.

---

I think the answer is obvious.  Get the QB when the right one is available.

 

The 2013 QB class was terrible.   This is where the GM makes his money.  If they think there's a viable QB this year, get him.  If not, wait another year.  IF you do wait another year, you'd better hope none of the 2013 QB class turns out to be an elite QB.

---

Get the QB or Build the Roster?   ...both.  

 

There are very few examples of a Super Bowl victory without a good QB, and very few examples of a Super Bowl victory without a decent roster besides the QB.  With 11 draft picks (and Caldwell ultimately wanting 12-14) this year, there are enough picks to enable the Jags to do both. 

---

You take what's available, not what's convenient.  If there's no franchise QB in a given draft class, then you're not going to find him regardless of whether or not you need one.

 

You build the entire roster, not just QB.  It's not an either/or proposition.

 

We won't be using eleven picks on the QB position alone.  If you spend too much energy trying to address a single position, the rest will suffer.  We can't afford that with so many holes in addition to QB.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

I am a big advocate of taking the best talent possible as often as you can.  You do not select a QB because you are "QB desperate" so to speak.  That, more often than not, doesn't work and as a GM you'll be looking for a new job sooner than later.

 

You build the roster as much as you can and when you see a guy at QB you think is 1) a franchise guy or 2) capable of being a franchise guy you select him.  If you're going to take him in the 1st you better be very confident he can be a winner at the next level.  

 

Until you have the chance at that QB you build the roster.  I am also an advocate of taking a QB every year.  This doesn't need to be high in the draft but at least one QB a year to see if you can catch lightning in a bottle.   I hope a guy like Brett Smith lasts until later in the draft and we can pick him up, regardless of who we pick at the top.  

 

This roster is void of talent at darn near every spot and Caldwell can't go wrong with picking up talented football players at those spots.  If a QB comes around you take him but unless that guy is a TRUE elite level franchise guy...you need at least a good roster for long term success.  There aren't that many QBs in my opinion that are capable of elevating a roster and making talent look better.  Guys like Manning, Brady, Rodgers but those are elite talents at QB.

 

If Caldwell doesn't think that Johnny, Teddy, or Blake Bortles are good candidates at QB I hope he either trades back or passes on them.  When you have a top 3 draft pick you have to pick up high level talent. 

---

It's interesting to see the status of Bridgewater fall so much on this board and elsewhere. During the season he was worth tanking for.


I wasn't really sold on him before and I'm not sure there is a QB worth the 3rd pick this year. With that as our reality, I see is building our team at other positions early in the draft.


But we do need to also bring in a QB. Basically it's both things that need to happen. But in terms of QB, you don't want to cram a square peg at this point.

---

I think the answer is obvious.  Get the QB when the right one is available.

 

...

 

This.

 

 

You take what's available, not what's convenient.  If there's no franchise QB in a given draft class, then you're not going to find him regardless of whether or not you need one.

 

You build the entire roster, not just QB.  It's not an either/or proposition.

 

We won't be using eleven picks on the QB position alone.  If you spend too much energy trying to address a single position, the rest will suffer.  We can't afford that with so many holes in addition to QB.

 

Yup!

 

I am a big advocate of taking the best talent possible as often as you can.  You do not select a QB because you are "QB desperate" so to speak.  That, more often than not, doesn't work and as a GM you'll be looking for a new job sooner than later.

 

...

 

This too.

 

While QB is the most important position on the field, that doesn't mean that it's the only important position. Build the roster by acquiring talent that fits. If that happens to be a QB, so be it. But don't go around chasing a Quarterback just because you think that he'll solve everything. Smith did that with Gabbert.

---

I'm trying to make myself more informed and less opinionated.

Stop saying whatever stupid thing you're talking about and pay attention to all the interesting things I have to say!

This is tricky, because the obvious answer is get the QB. But what if Dave and Gus are not in love with any of the top QB's in this draft. You draft defense with a Kalil Mack or Clowney to place whoever we pick later on in a much better situation. A great defense will help a young QB. (KAP/DALTON/WILSON/CAM) It's all on who they like. Personally, I wouldn't mind picking Manziel, then choosing Ryan Shazier in the second. Interior lineman in the third/fourth, then WR/TE/CB and so on.

---

<b>We Believe In Victory..</b>

It doesn't work until you get the QB

 

I would argue that unless you find a Peyton Manning level guy, it doesn't work until you have a talented roster.  

 

You need both.

---

As many of the above have said, in one way or another, both.  Don't reach but pull the trigger when you believe you have that guy.  Even when you get that guy, keep improving your depth at the position when available.  It really is a BAP league, but the order you put the pieces together will determine how successful you CAN be.

---

!!!

---

It doesn't work until you get the QB

I would argue that it doesn't work without an offensive line. I can't recall any qb besides Big Ben to truly thrive without one. How often would one come across a qb of his stature and ability?

---

Getting a Quarterback is important because obviously, it's the most important position on the field. In terms of getting the so-called 'prototypical' Quarterback, it's not AS important.


Over these last few years, Super Bowl winning QB's haven't followed the trend of being the ideal height and weight. Russel Wilson and Drew Brees are both short guys but they have devotion and will to succeed that most don't have. Everyone's looking for the next Peyton Manning or Tom Brady when in all actuality, it's not as pressing as it is made out to be.


I believe that in order to when, the QB has to be more than just a passer. Inspirational, active, strong willed, and determined.


If you ask me, the QB is no make or break of an NFL roster as a whole, though the QB is what puts the team over the top. There are historical greats like Manning who are known for making teams better than what they are, but in the end, is that really what we want? To have one guy who carries a team? No, I would much rather a team be all around strong than that.

Well said. Would you rather a Russell Wilson with a complete roster or Aaron Rodgers with many holes all over? I tend to think The former is the way to go.


But when do you decide to swing for the fence for one qb?

---

So wait...what about a punter in the third round? Hiyo!

---

BORTLES ISN'T A FRANCHISE QB. FOURNETTE WILL BE A BUST.

I would argue that it doesn't work without an offensive line. I can't recall any qb besides Big Ben to truly thrive without one. How often would one come across a qb of his stature and ability?

Warner in Arizona. Manning had some bad ones in Indy.

---

;

;

OP, all you have to worry about is that the Jags will be getting a QB prospect. Thats it! 

---

In a Nut Shell...


Get your QB while you continue to build upon your roster... QB, the one player that touches the ball 98% of the time on offense must be acclimated to the system. If you can acquire the QB and build around him it'll be an Much Better Build...


There's not a more important player than the QB for the most parts... It can be done w/o an elite QB but that's Far and In Between...


NH3...

---

"AZANE"

Is Joe Montana or Reggie White available when I make my draft choice? This may change my answer.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.