....it's a quarterback driven league.
Also, points come out of the passing game.

Of course the quarterback needs help. Nobody is saying draft a QB and you can win with the Brian Quicks and Isaiah Peads of the world. But on the other hand, even with plenty of help, average to bad quarterbacks don't take their teams very far with rare exception (a killer defense). The point is, if there's a quarterback that looks the part, and his play in college answers all the questions, and you need a quarterback....you pull the trigger. Like the Rams did with Goff. And like the Bears did with Trubisky. It wouldn't surprise me if both players justify those moves in the near future, though Trubisky has just one full year on his NCAA resume.

But different strokes for different folks. I'm glad the Rams did what they did. But I'm even happier they hired McVay (or anybody with a solid offensive approach) very soon after drafting Goff. Hey, it's over. We have all our picks for next years draft. Best scenario: Goff is lights out with who we have now. Acceptable scenario: Goff develops this year (along with a couple of the young offensive guys) and we solidify more positions in next years free agency period and draft.

To answer your question:
"So, again, which would you rather have? Goff, all alone? Or Wentz, plus Elliott, plus Donald, plus Martin, or some other combo of first round guys? Me? There is just no way on earth I sell the farm for one player. I take another QB, who may even be better down the road, plus those three other guys, who should make my team better still. And, again, it's a team sport. It's not golf or tennis, etc."

I'd rather have the QB. What good is Elliott, Donald, Martin or some other combo of first round guys with a bad QB? And why do you put Wentz in there? The Eagles gave up some picks to get him.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/01/2017 04:54PM by PARAM.