Why should we draft Leftwich

Lots of teams with strong offensive lines and running backs have made an average QB look pretty good:

Trent Dilfer
Mark Rypien
Phil Sims
Joe Thiesman
Jay Schroeder
Stan Humphries
Doug Williams
Brad Johnson
Steve Deberg
Jeff Hostetler
Jim McMahon
Danny White

None of those guys were great but they all had a lot of success. I think our system needs a good OL and running game more than a great QB and WR. We will not use a great passing tandem as much as we would a great running game. It would handcuff them too much. Meshawn is less productive in Tampa and would not do as well here as in a wide open attack.

 

Keyshawn's average in two years with the Bucs:

91 catches, 1177 yards. Pretty good. Better than any year with the Jets.


And who the hell are you calling a strong offensive line or running back supplementing Brad Johnson? Unless you are referring to his time in Minnesota. The Bucs have very average tackles and Pittman.

Please use facts that are true.

 

Agree on height. Remember that Barber's physical at 5'8 too. I see Davis as that type player, strong and more quick than fast. But some have said that Davis has trouble anticipating in zone, so maybe I have him too high...but if so, so do most that I read because he's very rarely below Weathersby from what I see.

I'm well on record for saying so, but I just don't get a good feeling of Wolfork and Weathersby. Weathersby's a lot like Rumph - I'm in the camp that says he's not actually that physical. We've already got Rashard.

But jammer didn't even come close last year. I know you're talking pre-rankings, though, and remember that Buchanon could have easily gone top 12. How he got that low is beyond me, and I was quietly hoping we'd be the ones trading up for him. But I don't think I'm saying that any of them are worth 17 - not Wolfork, Davis, or Wilson. I'd put all in the late 30s to 50. That doesn't make it a weak corner year, necessarily - just one in which teams have to regroup their rankings because Wolfork and Weathersby can't hold their end of the bargain together.

 

Yep. Exactly. The funny thing is, cap hell or not, the Ravens could have kept it going with one long term QB. Being cheap at QB requires accepting long term QB turnover and basically risking your season on the hopes and prayers of "good enough." Maybe I'm just getting pretty fucking tired of doing that, but that alone would seem to tell the story well enough to deem it necessary.

I guess we could play little ball like Thelt wants, just continue to pile on strengths and ignore weaknesses by attempting to keep other teams from putting us in positions of weakness - but I just can't see a modern playoff team doing that consistently. The NFL isn't like what it was in the 80s where you didn't have to have a driving force - you could simply have a ton more talent and overpower people. Notice how no one does that anymore? it's because it's not possible. You can have a top 5 defense, the rushing champion, and still be home come new year's.

This is neither National League baseball nor 80s football, we've gotta outplay teams every snap. Not just the first two every series.

 

Well, I guess that's how I'm judging the talent. Nobody wows me. No corner is in my top 25 past Trufant. 9 defensive lineman are in my top 25. That's strength.

You've got about 5 other corners and 3 or 4 safties who are all in the next 50 or so. And none of them really stand out as an impact type, more of a nickle or second starter.

Welcome to Miami.

 

I do not see how I am piling onto strengths. Our OL is our greatest weakness. We have two decent QBs in Peete and Delhomme. We are building a team that wins with defense and running the ball. You can still win with that. We need to add a very good offensive lineman to our offense and a good corner to our defense to make that work. Ignoring these needs to get a QB who is going to sit on the bench for a year or two and maybe contribute in year three does not advance the plan. Drafting a wide receiver when we have decent quality and depth does not advance the plan. If we had a good OL and some good corners then maybe we would be right to look for a "spark" player. Until we get the base built that will not help us very much.

The Bucs may not have a great OL but they do have a pretty conservative offense. They do try to run the ball alot. Brad Johnson is not a great QB. They still won the superbowl.

The Ravens did not drop because they did not have a franchise QB. They dropped because they lost their running back, Lewis. Grbac was good enough but with out the running game they were not the same team. Of course last year's team was dismantled and can not be compared to the two year's prior teams.

 

:applause:

 

First of all imo, the OL was not our greastest weakness last year. WRs and QB were much weaker and then when we lost Smith, our RBs were too. In the beginning of last year I'd say our DBs were also. Not knowing how our FA's will play out, it is tuff for me to say what is the case now.

I don't see how you can be so convinced that Delhomme is going to be a good QB ... since the guy has barely played. Backup QBs tend to be one of the most overrated animals on the planet. And Fox has been known to overflaterize his players in the press.

I also don't see how you think our WR situation can be good. Since you have already stated that Peete is a decent QB, then our passing woes last year (we ranked next to last) must have been the problem of the WRs -- Moose and Smith. To that we have added a 35 year old that looked to me like he had lost a lot 2 years ago. At best he is stop gap. Dyson has injury concerns. Add that to Moose's injury woes and i don't feel comfortable that our depth is decent. Even if you are a Moose lover, if he goes down what you have left on the field would seem suspect with no depth behind them. Plus we lost the only TE that could catch on the team and i seriously doubt a 4th or 5th rounder is gonna come in and be an immediate improvement over Walls in the receiving dept.

>> The Bucs may not have a great [good] OL but they do have a pretty conservative offense. They do try to run the ball alot. Brad Johnson is not a great QB. They still won the superbowl.

Well, then it seems like you agree with those that think that a strong OL is not paramount to winning. How is it that Tampa won with a poor OL and an average running back? That question alone would seem to defeat your suppositon.

Also, the Ravens were, when Brad was in the game, a much better passing team than they were a running team. Stats would prove that out. Gruden didn't have his two top picks but still managed to improve his offense in FA enough to win the SB. I'm thinking his signings were a more physical back than what he had in Dunn and a couple of much better WRs and a TE (?). How much did he address the line that was considered the weak link of the team? If he could win by improving his WR position rather than his line, why wouldn't it be a good move for us?

Of the last 6 teams to play in SB, only the Ravens were a better running team statistically than they were a passing team. Wouldn't that indicate that the passing game is important? And even the Ravens, outside of Ogden, did not have an OL that was picked higher than the 4th round (a bunch of no-name scrappers). Wouldn't that too indicate that you are over emphasing the OL.

And what of the problem of the other teams bringing the 8th man up into the box because they don't respect our ability to pass the ball? Tuten may not be good but wouldn't you rather have him going 1 v 1 than Gross going 1 v 2?

Brad Johnson may not be great but he is a damn good one (he was the 3rd rated passer in the NFL last year). He certainly is leagues ahead of Peete (who by the way the 22nd rated QB and is barely marginal). Tampa's offense was awful without Brad. Hell, we would have beat them without Brad if it wasn't for one of the receivers, that you're so fond of, giving them the game.

If I knew for sure that Delhomme could be as good as Brad and I don't have any hope in that, I wouldn't pick Lefty. If Lefty didn't look so damn good to me, I'd be fine taking a chance on Jake and that he would be a big improvement over Peete.

 

Here I am pimping Leftwich again. Maybe it's because I've seen Leftwich play a few times and haven't seen Gross at all, but I still don't see how the two are even close in value. Do we need a RT? Yes. Will a RT (One man out of five) ever impact a game the way a QB can? I can't see it.

I think Leftwich will turn out to be one of those QBs who can take a game over by himself. Think about all those close games we tend to lose - Wouldn't it be sweet to have a guy on the field who can bring us from behind? It would be great if Delhomme turns into that, but why take the chance?

Magnus is right, let's stop all the turnover year after year and let's get a guy who can be the man for 10 years. I haven't heard this opinion much, but I'd trade up for Lefty if it wouldn't cost a 2nd rounder. If we could swing a 3rd and a 4th to trade with Dallas and he's still there, do it. Leftwich in the 1st, RT 2nd. Don't neglect the offensive line, but do it in the right order.

 

We have two decent QBs in Peete and Delhomme


Thelt, your definition of decent and my definition of decent must be totally different.