- Joined
- Aug 3, 2013
- Messages
- 4,351
Lots of talk since the Rams traded up to the #1 slot. Lots of information about the #1 slot and QBs. About how important it is to pick the right guy, what a huge risk is undertaken, how it could be a Ryan Leaf as easily as it could be an Andrew Luck. I've read it all, tried to take it all in and tried to process it all. Then I went back and looked at the recent history of the draft and #1 QBs. What I found was kind of strange. Every team who picked a QB at #1 since the expansion Browns took Tim Couch in 1999 and the expansion Houston Texans took David Carr in 2002, has had a better record than the previous season. Certainly, a lot has to do with 'if you're picking #1, it's because your record allowed you to pick #1'. But some actually experienced a huge lift.
Indianapolis was 2-14 the year before Andrew Luck as chosen. They finished 11-5 in his rookie year. The Giants were drafting #4 and took Phillip Rivers but traded him for Eli Manning, the #1 pick. They went 6-10 after finishing 4-12 the previous season. The Chargers who actually picked #1, ended up with Rivers and went from 4-12 to 12-4. Of course a guy named Brees was starting for them. Cincinnati was 2-14 the year before they chose Carson Palmer and finished a respectable 8-8. Hell our own Rams were 1-15 and finished 7-9 after taking Bradford. All those teams had something in common. They picked #1, they sucked enough the previous year to be picking #1 and they all picked QBs.
It didn't fair so well for Oakland in 07 (Russell), Houston with Carr in 02 or Cleveland with Couch in 1999. But the rest, Tampa with Winston (2-14 to 6-10 and possibly headed for greener pastures), Indianapolis with Luck, Carolina with Newton, Detroit has been to the postseason twice since getting Stafford, SF missed with Alex Smith, then he finally got them winning only to get injured and have Kaepernick get them to the SB. Of course Smith has moved on to KC and they are better because of him. San Diego has been to the postseason 6 times, the Giants have won 2 Superbowls since drafting Rivers/Manning. Cincinnati, though without Palmer has had an upswing (and so has Arizona with Palmer).
I guess my point is the Rams at 7-9 aren't nearly as bad as any of those teams who drafted a QB #1. And if the routine holds as it has for every one of those non-expansion teams taking a QB #1 since 1999 (regardless of getting the right guy like Luck as opposed to Russell), we should have a better record in 2016. But for the long run, that axiom 'get the right guy' still holds true. Karma owes us the right guy after taking Bradford the last year before a rookie cap was implemented and seeing him miss 31 games in a 5 year Ram career. Karma might owe Fisher too after having Vince Young shoved down his throat.
Indianapolis was 2-14 the year before Andrew Luck as chosen. They finished 11-5 in his rookie year. The Giants were drafting #4 and took Phillip Rivers but traded him for Eli Manning, the #1 pick. They went 6-10 after finishing 4-12 the previous season. The Chargers who actually picked #1, ended up with Rivers and went from 4-12 to 12-4. Of course a guy named Brees was starting for them. Cincinnati was 2-14 the year before they chose Carson Palmer and finished a respectable 8-8. Hell our own Rams were 1-15 and finished 7-9 after taking Bradford. All those teams had something in common. They picked #1, they sucked enough the previous year to be picking #1 and they all picked QBs.
It didn't fair so well for Oakland in 07 (Russell), Houston with Carr in 02 or Cleveland with Couch in 1999. But the rest, Tampa with Winston (2-14 to 6-10 and possibly headed for greener pastures), Indianapolis with Luck, Carolina with Newton, Detroit has been to the postseason twice since getting Stafford, SF missed with Alex Smith, then he finally got them winning only to get injured and have Kaepernick get them to the SB. Of course Smith has moved on to KC and they are better because of him. San Diego has been to the postseason 6 times, the Giants have won 2 Superbowls since drafting Rivers/Manning. Cincinnati, though without Palmer has had an upswing (and so has Arizona with Palmer).
I guess my point is the Rams at 7-9 aren't nearly as bad as any of those teams who drafted a QB #1. And if the routine holds as it has for every one of those non-expansion teams taking a QB #1 since 1999 (regardless of getting the right guy like Luck as opposed to Russell), we should have a better record in 2016. But for the long run, that axiom 'get the right guy' still holds true. Karma owes us the right guy after taking Bradford the last year before a rookie cap was implemented and seeing him miss 31 games in a 5 year Ram career. Karma might owe Fisher too after having Vince Young shoved down his throat.
