Will the Vikings ever draft and develop a quarterback?

[Wolvesfan21]

Trent Dilfer Brad Johnson Nick Foles Eli Manning and Joe Flacco are all guys that are not superstar QBs that won a Super Bowl in the past 20 years. Seems very possible to me.

Yeah I know. Your odds go way down. How many superstar QB's win compared to randos (figure superstar QB's are top 10 but for sure top 5)? The point is to get the best odds to win the superbowl. The betting odds have the Chiefs and Eagles at about 20%. Both have great QB's (top 10 and number one). Meanwhile the Vikings are at 1% 100/1. Count in some juice for the books and they are under 1 percent.

I want a 20% chance not 1%.

Did the chiefs and Eagles draft a QB every year to accomplish that chance you are wanting? No.

The reality is is that there are 2 things a franchise can do in terms of finding that guy at QB.

1. Have an actual eye for talent. This is something the Vikings haven’t had in terms of selecting a QB for many years. It doesn’t have to be the GM or even the head coach but usually it’s one of those people.

2. Able to develop those players. Sure some guys probably would have been HOF regardless but who do you feel like is more likely to develop a QB the team that has Andy Reid coaching or any head coach after Denny Green up to the current staff?

It’s not just about taking a bunch of shots at QB. You need to know what you are looking for, have people to develop those players. While I believe NFL is a ton about systems for players and so I get that teams draft based on systems they have in place…how many teams passed on Lamar Jackson because they didn’t want to change what they were doing already? Maybe it was only a couple but I’m still puzzled how he dropped that far. Meanwhile during the Denny Green era the Vikings had a number of good or worthwhile QBs brought to their roster.

I’ll go a little deeper in the weeds on NFL QBs. It occurred to me one reason why the position has less than 30 good starters is…there is nowhere for QBs to develop except in college and practices. You aren’t sending your top development backup to play in some offseason league to get them experience. It’s the fringe guys that are just hoping to get a shot that are playing in those leagues. QB is so much more complex than say a RB. RB is more than just knowing a play seeing a hole and running fast through it or making a cut etc but still. QB is the guy every plays goes through. I think the NFL would have a better product if they found more ways to help teams develop QBs. Maybe every team should get some sort of developmental QB spot on their roster. The NBA keeps having more and more talent infused into the league. Of course a significant piece of that is the worldwide growth of the spot. Another huge piece is the the g-league being a true developmental league plus so many other international leagues players can play in. The new rule the NFL implemented this year after the 49ers didn’t have a healthy QB in a playoff game rewards teams to some extent for having another QB on the roster. The other issue with teams developing QBs is that most teams want to have a vet backup. They don’t want to go into their offseason program praying that their rookie is going to be good enough if they have to play. Plenty of vet backups are worthy of their position especially depending on the roster makeup and the system fit. Vet backups take away opportunities away from younger guys development which makes sense but also it reduces practice reps etc etc. I think the NFL needs to figure out how to develop more QBs.

Actually they are good cases of having a good QB and still drafting one high. Carson Wentz was a very good player for Philly. Yet they still drafted Hurts high in the second round. The Chiefs were an 11 win team with Alex Smith, they still spent an 10th overall pick on Mahomes. It didn't matter they had a good QB already, they wanted a great one.

Sure they didn't every single year draft one high. But they did have good QB's and they still took shots and won because of it. They Vikings don't even take shots. You will never hit a home run if you don't swing. I say the more swings the better. And it's not like you can't trade your backups for picks later on either. QB's are always in demand and teams will take shots on backups even. So even if you draft one and you have a good one already it doesn't make it a sunk cost. Let them ball out in preseason and trade them if need be. I think filling the QB room with the most talent makes real sense though.

Sure you could draft a bust too, but that is true for any position. Backup QB's seem to hold value, especially on the rookie contracts too. The Patriots would draft QB's even though they had Tom freakin Brady. They ended up trading many as well and still getting a fair return. Cassel, Jimmy G. etc.

It's actually idiotic and pathetic to not draft QB's. (see zero SB Vikings who rarely do)

[Monster]

Yeah I know. Your odds go way down. How many superstar QB's win compared to randos (figure superstar QB's are top 10 but for sure top 5)? The point is to get the best odds to win the superbowl. The betting odds have the Chiefs and Eagles at about 20%. Both have great QB's (top 10 and number one). Meanwhile the Vikings are at 1% 100/1. Count in some juice for the books and they are under 1 percent.

I want a 20% chance not 1%.

Did the chiefs and Eagles draft a QB every year to accomplish that chance you are wanting? No.

The reality is is that there are 2 things a franchise can do in terms of finding that guy at QB.

1. Have an actual eye for talent. This is something the Vikings haven’t had in terms of selecting a QB for many years. It doesn’t have to be the GM or even the head coach but usually it’s one of those people.

2. Able to develop those players. Sure some guys probably would have been HOF regardless but who do you feel like is more likely to develop a QB the team that has Andy Reid coaching or any head coach after Denny Green up to the current staff?

It’s not just about taking a bunch of shots at QB. You need to know what you are looking for, have people to develop those players. While I believe NFL is a ton about systems for players and so I get that teams draft based on systems they have in place…how many teams passed on Lamar Jackson because they didn’t want to change what they were doing already? Maybe it was only a couple but I’m still puzzled how he dropped that far. Meanwhile during the Denny Green era the Vikings had a number of good or worthwhile QBs brought to their roster.

I’ll go a little deeper in the weeds on NFL QBs. It occurred to me one reason why the position has less than 30 good starters is…there is nowhere for QBs to develop except in college and practices. You aren’t sending your top development backup to play in some offseason league to get them experience. It’s the fringe guys that are just hoping to get a shot that are playing in those leagues. QB is so much more complex than say a RB. RB is more than just knowing a play seeing a hole and running fast through it or making a cut etc but still. QB is the guy every plays goes through. I think the NFL would have a better product if they found more ways to help teams develop QBs. Maybe every team should get some sort of developmental QB spot on their roster. The NBA keeps having more and more talent infused into the league. Of course a significant piece of that is the worldwide growth of the spot. Another huge piece is the the g-league being a true developmental league plus so many other international leagues players can play in. The new rule the NFL implemented this year after the 49ers didn’t have a healthy QB in a playoff game rewards teams to some extent for having another QB on the roster. The other issue with teams developing QBs is that most teams want to have a vet backup. They don’t want to go into their offseason program praying that their rookie is going to be good enough if they have to play. Plenty of vet backups are worthy of their position especially depending on the roster makeup and the system fit. Vet backups take away opportunities away from younger guys development which makes sense but also it reduces practice reps etc etc. I think the NFL needs to figure out how to develop more QBs.

Actually they are good cases of having a good QB and still drafting one high. Carson Wentz was a very good player for Philly. Yet they still drafted Hurts high in the second round. The Chiefs were an 11 win team with Alex Smith, they still spent an 10th overall pick on Mahomes. It didn't matter they had a good QB already, they wanted a great one.

Sure they didn't every single year draft one high. But they did have good QB's and they still took shots and won because of it. They Vikings don't even take shots. You will never hit a home run if you don't swing. I say the more swings the better. And it's not like you can't trade your backups for picks later on either. QB's are always in demand and teams will take shots on backups even. So even if you draft one and you have a good one already it doesn't make it a sunk cost. Let them ball out in preseason and trade them if need be. I think filling the QB room with the most talent makes real sense though.

Sure you could draft a bust too, but that is true for any position. Backup QB's seem to hold value, especially on the rookie contracts too. The Patriots would draft QB's even though they had Tom freakin Brady. They ended up trading many as well and still getting a fair return. Cassel, Jimmy G. etc.

It's actually idiotic and pathetic to not draft QB's. (see zero SB Vikings who rarely do)

Even the patriots didn’t draft a QB every year. I agree with you it makes sense to invest in the position but drafting a guy every year is not a smart plan.

Yes the Eagles and Chiefs are examples of still adding to the team even if you have someone already.

Alex Smith was a good player but I think most people thought he wasn’t a SB winning QB at the time. Again if Andy Reid says draft a QB I’m gonna be in on that.

I remember thinking Wentz was a questionable starter that couldn’t stay healthy when the Eagles drafted Hurts. Hurts was a guy I liked and thought was undervalued in that draft. I thought the eagles were very very wise to select another QB at the time. Sure there was a chance wentz recaptured his form but I was skeptical of that at the time. I was not alone.

Hurts was a guy I would have liked to take a shot on in that draft. What’s really tough is that after Justin Jefferson the next few picks in that draft we’re pretty meh. Ezra Cleveland wasn’t terrible and it’s hard to fault that pick in some ways because they finally actually put some real draft value into the oline which they hadn’t done enough of. Other than Jefferson what saved that draft was getting KJ Osborn and Josh Metellus later. Heck Blake Brandel May end up being more valuable than a number of guys picked higher than him and…the bar isn’t very high.

Look both of us think the Vikings should have invested more in that position the last few years. Let’s just not get crazy and draft a guy every year. for one thing there is value in taking some guy late in the draft or making them a priority UDFA type. Finding a cheap backup like Heinicke has value too. Of course there is always FA or minor trades too. I remember when people crapped on signing Keenum for dirt cheap and that ended up being an excellent move. Of course there is that fun nugget that the Vikings had some people that were actually pretty interested in Russell Wilson in that draft… sigh. Another god QB that was undervalued in a draft and we didn’t get them.

I’ll say that while Teddy probably wasn’t going to be a franchise QB I do think he had enough going for him if he would have stayed healthy I think he might have been a guy who did enough and didn’t screw up enough to be a winner. We had gotten a guy that was undervalued in a draft and he was actually having success and then…

[Wolvesfan21]

Heck you can even draft two QB's in a year. Washington drafted Cousins and RG3 (same year) and both played significant time. Now it didn't work out, maybe they should have been drafting two every year! Again I think if you don't have a Superstar, then you should be taking a shot every year to find one. A great QB on a rookie contract will give you the best chance to win it all. Once you get that guy then stop. Maybe even every so often look for a backup even (3rd round or later). You may just need him to step in for a few weeks or the entire year. Look at all the teams right now relying on backups!

[Wolvesfan21]

These talking heads are really fucking stupid (mockers and podcasters). Kirk has close to a zero percent chance of coming back. How often does a franchise QB go into FA? Answer is rare and really never. Kirk isn't a franchise QB which is why the Vikings wouldn't extend him last year (finally a smart move).

Kirk at this point in his career does nothing to help you win a SB. Forget the idiot and move on.

[Wolvesfan21]

Oh and the Wilfs are clowns.

[60WinTim]

The Vikes have never spent a blue chip (top 10) draft pick on a quarterback. Its insane. Ive never seen such a blatant violation of logic.

A year and a half later and I think your gonna get your wish!

[thedoper]

The Vikes have never spent a blue chip (top 10) draft pick on a quarterback. Its insane. Ive never seen such a blatant violation of logic.

A year and a half later and I think your gonna get your wish!

I might actually start watching the games again. I checked out in the Cousins years, Id like to just get back to a rough and tumble D and some homegrown talent on the offensive side. Mark me back on the wagon.

[Wolvesfan21]

The Vikes have never spent a blue chip (top 10) draft pick on a quarterback. Its insane. Ive never seen such a blatant violation of logic.

A year and a half later and I think your gonna get your wish!

I might actually start watching the games again. I checked out in the Cousins years, Id like to just get back to a rough and tumble D and some homegrown talent on the offensive side. Mark me back on the wagon.

I was checked out pretty much last year also. I just didn't care because really, they had no real chance to win it all.

From what I've seen and I've watched a bit of most the QB's getting drafted. I really like JJ Mccarthy and Daniels. It sucks because others caught on too and it seems like both are top picks (could go top 3). I don't really like Drake, just seeing him make so many poor decisions like against the Gophers. I think he had 3 picks. He probably needs a year to study and develop. He has talent and skill though. Not the mental make up yet. He will likely get shredded if asked to play right away.

I watched a lot of Nix and never thought he was NFL caliber. Probably 6-7 games I've seen. IDK he doesn't do anything really well. Seems destined to probably end up as a backup type. I honestly never thought, man that dude has skills. Never once thought I wanted him as a Vike. Reminds my of the Mond pick I didn't like. Could be wrong sure. Second rounder at best.

Pennix has the arm but man. His offense was stacked last season. Top offensive line and great WR's. Reminds me of Mac Jones who had everything perfect for him at Bama and I was super sketch if he could play when things are not great. Hard to say if he can be a good pro. I wouldn't mind him in the second round if they like him. He has upside but well see.

[Q-is-here]

It's an unfortunate situation when you have Jefferson, Hock, and Addison entering their prime years. Not saying we had to keep Cousins around, but at least he was a very capable vet QB that could get those guys the ball. Now we may be looking at 2-3 years of developing a young QB and that works out about 20% of the time (just ask Chicago). If I were Jefferson, I'd want out.

[Wolvesfan21]

It's an unfortunate situation when you have Jefferson, Hock, and Addison entering their prime years. Not saying we had to keep Cousins around, but at least he was a very capable vet QB that could get those guys the ball. Now we may be looking at 2-3 years of developing a young QB and that works out about 20% of the time (just ask Chicago). If I were Jefferson, I'd want out.

Even Nick Mullens put up 400 yards in a game last season (he might have had 3 picks though too). I wouldn't be too surprised if Darnold starts and does pretty well. He's had 5 or 6 years already now to learn and develop into something. I didn't like him coming out. But he has a real chance to succeed now. WR's can make up for avg QB play. Hock had that bad leg injury so I'm not sure he'll be ready either though to start the year. Think Randy Moss and Gus Frerotte. It almost didn't matter who was plugged into the offense they put up numbers back then. I think this helps the team get better in the long run.

As far as Jefferson. What was the team doing successfully with Kirk? One playoff win in 6 years???? It's a salary capped league. So OVERPAYING someone (Kirk) is always going to take away from the overall team success. You win by having guys outperform their pay. That was my issue after the first contract with Kirk. They had a defense in 17 and 18 and their shot. It didn't work. I wanted to cut bait 3 years ago. The other issue is they have been mostly drafting poorly. A few homeruns like JJ. But too many stikeouts (Cine and numerous others).

JJ will be fine no matter who is back there honestly. It's up to the rest of the team to step up though.

I am concerned about the third WR spot though too. Nobody seems to be talking about it at all. I wouldn't mind seeing them going QB then WR in the first two draft picks (even if they trade up to draft a QB). You need to make teams pay for doubling/tripling JJ. Osborn was just OK. I think we could do even be better then KJ and have a real prolific offense without Kirk.