RG3 will have a greater rookie-year impact than Luck; mail
Just because I'm not an instant draft-grade guy doesn't mean I can't opine about what we've just seen, and what we're about to see in the next few months. Take the quarterback position. Let's rank the 11 quarterbacks who got picked in the draft in two categories: who will have the biggest rookie-year impact, and who landed in the best spot.
Keep in mind that history says more than half the players picked in any draft will wash out. Just three of the 11 passers picked three years ago -- Matthew Stafford, Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman -- have had any impact whatsoever.
This year, I think one of the low-round guys has a chance to makes waves, and maybe early. The order of the rookie impact players:
I met a fan Saturday at FinFest, the Dolphin annual fan event at Sun Life Stadium, who told me he hopes Miami sits him two years and develops him the way the Packers did with Aaron Rodgers. Amazing. A sane fan. The Dolphins won't wait that long, but I could see Tannehill sitting the first year ... unless he has such a big edge in the playbook -- he told me 75 percent of it is the same as his college playbook -- that he makes mental jumps over the incumbents.
Now for the best landing spots, in order: Griffin, Luck, Weeden, Tannehill, Lindley, Foles, Osweiler (for the long-term), Wilson, Cousins (because of coaching, not opportunity), Coleman (ditto) and Harnish.
Let's get to your email:
DRAFTING ON NEED, OR THE LANG HAUL.
Good point, Matt. And I thought Ryan Grigson, the new Colts GM, stated his case well in the column Monday. It could be that the second tight end will be a great choice, and the Colts should have ignored crying needs at cornerback and on the defensive line. I just thought, especially with the fact the Colts are going to a new defense and coming off such an awful defensive season, it was incumbent on them to do something to help. I understand the point people will make about the fact the Colts will struggle mightily this year, so they should just honor their board. They may be right. But that's going to be one bad defense unless Chuck Pagano has some surprises up his sleeve.
WE'LL DISAGREE ON THIS ONE.
First, no one has ever said the backup quarterback is the second-most-important position on a team. That's a ridiculous point, with all due respect. I just don't think it's a smart idea to draft a quarterback you hope will be your backup with your third pick in the draft -- with the knowledge that you're not going to have a first-round pick in either of the next two drafts.
ON THE PRO BOWL.
Problem is, who cares? Who wants to watch guys who are essentially Triple-A players who no one knows? The ratings would be awful. No one would watch. People are grasping at ideas how to fix or amend the game. It's not worth the effort or our thought. Thanks for the suggestion, though -- it's better than most I've gotten.
ANOTHER THOUGHT ON THE PRO BOWL.
I suppose some hardcore fans would watch. I just don't think it's important enough to keep alive.
THERE'S A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 102ND PICK AND THE 253RD.
Has nothing to do with the Redskins being an easy target. If the Colts used their third pick in the draft on a quarterback after taking Andrew Luck first, I'd have said it was a dumb move by them too. Harnish was a marginal prospect and was one pick away from being on the street and signing as an undrafted rookie somewhere. Kirk Cousins was picked where other players of good value were on the board. The Redskins aren't good enough to use such a luxury.
HE THINKS KELLEN MOORE STINKS.
You've got a lot of company in NFL front offices, Warren. Sorry. I refuse to believe a kid who beat Oregon twice, completed 82 percent on the road and beat Georgia and played a gutty game to beat Virginia Tech back East is valueless.
AND NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY ON THE KID THE FANS BOOED AT THE DRAFT.
Thanks for the advice, Mark. You've got one heck of a boy. I hope the louts who booed him read this.