Oakland Raiders Have 99 Problems, But Quarterback Isn’t (the Biggest) One

Kirby Lee-USA TODAY Sports

Following yet another terribly disappointing season, the Oakland Raiders headed into the offseason with more questions than answers. As we get nearer to the draft, most of the attention is focusing on the perceived need at the quarterback position. With Louisville‘s Teddy Bridgewater, UCF‘s Blake Bortles, and of course, Texas A&M‘s Johnny Manziel widely expected to be top-10 picks, Raiders GM Reggie McKenzie is feeling the pressure to take one of those three big name quarterbacks. Most believe that of the three, Bridgewater is the closest to being NFL-ready. But with other quarterback starved teams picking ahead of them, he likely won’t be on the board with the No. 5 overall pick. Ditto that with Bortles. Which leaves the possibility that Johnny Football will be the only one of the three “big ticket” QBs still on the board when the Raiders are on the clock. Before making that pick, though, McKenzie need only look to the Raiders’ dubious history to know that he absolutely shouldn’t make it.

Over the life of the franchise, the Raiders have drafted a lot of quarterbacks. But you have to go all the way back to 1968 to find a quarterback drafted by the Raiders who was worth a darn. That was, of course, Kenny Stabler. Since then, though, the Raiders have burned first-round picks on quarterbacks named Marc Wilson, Rusty Hilger, Todd Marinovich, and the infamous JaMarcus Russell. Just last year, McKenzie himself drafted Tyler Wilson, and he couldn’t even make the roster. Simply put, when it comes to drafting quarterbacks, the Raiders are about as inept as the Cleveland Browns. Which is all the more reason for McKenzie to avoid burning yet another first-round pick on a quarterback like Manziel who may or may not ever develop into an actual NFL talent.

The quarterback situation isn’t nearly as bleak or as desperate as some would have you believe. The team already has an NFL-ready prospect in Matt McGloin who if given the time and tools to develop can and will be a very solid quarterback in the league. If the Raiders really wanted a quarterback who runs first and passes second, they don’t need to draft Manziel because they already have that guy on the roster and his name is Terrelle Pryor. Running and gunning is all well and good if your goal is to make the ESPN highlight reel. But if you want to win, you need steady, solid quarterback play.

The point is that the quarterback situation can be addressed through free agency and by perhaps taking a prospect like Derek Carr, David Fales, Aaron Murray or even AJ McCarron in a later round. The Raiders have a capable quarterback already in McGloin, and having a veteran presence picked up through free agency to help push and groom him can only benefit the team as a whole. If a veteran like Josh Freeman or Matt Schaub wins the job coming out of camp, the team has a proven NFL starter under center. If McGloin wins the battle for the starting spot, the team has a proven NFL starter under center. It’s a win-win situation and the team doesn’t have to burn a first-round pick on a QB.

Despite what the Raider faithful say, the quarterback situation is not that dire. It’s certainly not dire enough to warrant burning a first-round pick on a player who may not ever develop into an NFL caliber quarterback. The organization has had much more success in picking quarterbacks who are considered “damaged goods” off the scrap heap and letting them revitalize the team and their career.

The Raiders have more pressing concerns at the moment. Drafting a playmaker like Clemson‘s Sammy Watkins can give a real spark to an offense that needs one. Drafting an offensive lineman like A&M’s Jake Matthews or Auburn‘s Greg Robinson can help shore up a severely leaky offensive line. McKenzie must realize that the Raiders’ biggest question mark is not at the quarterback position. Unless Andrew Luck somehow leaves the Indianapolis Colts, re-enters the draft and then falls to the No. 5 spot, the Raiders absolutely, positively should not use that pick on a QB when there are far more pressing concerns.

 Kevin Saito is a fiction writer, sports junkie, history nerd, and NFL Contributor. He’s just a “clown with an opinion” and you can follow him on Twitter, Facebook or on Google

Around the Web

  • friendship220

    Pryor was 3-3 with wins over a playoff team and a 500 team. He only lost to playoff teams before he hurt his MCL.

    In those first 6 games, the Raiders had far from their starting oline in there. And the starting oline should be improved.

    What I’d to see the Raiders management do is simply say “Pryor’s the guy, he has the best speed in the QB position, he sets records, gets us wins with his running. He’s proven he can pass, just look at the San Diego win. We’re just going to redo last season, with the team built around Pryor. ”

    Spend money and picks on vastly improving the defense, especially the dline and the secondary, because that’s where our free agents are. We’ll bring back the guys who were best last year, replace the worst ones with an expensive free agent, a top draft pick, or multiple draft picks if we trade down. Without worrying about specifics, a defense with a new pro bowl DE or DT or CB will be better than one without. Add a number of players who are better than the best Raiders on defense last year. Defense is improved. If Pryor is the same as last year, and the defense is better, the team is improved, more wins possible. The losses to the bad teams were all McGloin, and one game when Pryor was hurt. With no other changes except letting the worst free agents go on defense and replacing them with one all pro somewhere and additional upgrades, the Raiders would be substantially improved.

    There are also a lot of free agents on the offensive line and running backs. McFadden, Jennings, Stewart, Olawale – all free agents who could be replaced. There is clearly the possibility of upgrade there. I think that the advantages of Jennings last year (can gain a couple yards where there’s no hole in the line) would be minimized when the oline is opening holes. Dmac had a problem getting yards when there were no holes, but I think he’s the best running back on the Raiders when there are holes to run through.

    And on the oline – well, “Auburn‘s Greg Robinson can help shore up a severely leaky offensive line. ” Robinson is most noted for being a dominant run blocker. And dominant run blockers are what the Raiders need. Pryor, a mobile QB does not need the absolute best pass protection. But Pryor’s running would be made easier if the oline could open holes for the backs to gain solid yards through. With Greg Robinson at Tackle and Cyril Richardson or Gabe Jackson at Guard next to him, there will be holes opened in the line. These guys might not be the absolute best pass protectors available, but they do run block extremely well, and we needed that last year and didn’t get it. If we can change the oline personnel to include dominant run blockers, those holes in the line are the kind of improvement that will help Pryor win games.

    Same as last year. Pryor healthy all year (maybe, if other QBs are brought in, they’re guys with similar skills as Pryor. Vick, Logan Thomas). Defense improved with 1 or 2 all pros, one at dline one in secondary, plus other tweaks, draft. Offensive line improved with Greg Robinson, and a big run blocking guard, plus other tweaks, free agent, draft. The Raiders could make the playoffs next year. Pryor won games.

    All the games he wasn’t hurt, he only lost to playoff teams. And some people want to get rid of him? A QB that only loses to playoff teams is going to go 500, typically. McGloin just barely beat the worst team. And lost to everybody else. It’s not really a big secret why Pryor wins and McGloin loses. Those big gains Pryor makes on the ground are not matched at all by McGloin. Those big gains are first downs and touchdowns.

    Passing-wise, Pryor and McGloin are roughly equal. One side can point to Pryor’s higher completion %, and Pryor’s 135.7 passer rating in the San Diego game. And the other side can point to McGloin’s higher overall passer rating and some other stats.

    But running is important and useful, and Pryor is the best in the NFL at that. His jersey is in the hall of fame for that record TD run. And Pryor is MUCH MUCH MUCH better than McGloin, and most QBs in the NFL. Some are almost as good. Russell Wilson just won the Super Bowl. He’s almost as good a runner as Pryor. Pryor was 2nd in the league in QB running yards. Wilson was 3rd. The Seahawks ran more than they threw last year.

    • saito8204

      There are certainly some things we agree on. Making vast improvements to the defense is one of them. Without a solid defense, it doesn’t matter who the QB is. They can put up 50 points a game but if the defense gives up 51, you still lose. So yes, upgrading the defense is a priority. Or at least it should be.

      That’s about where are agreements end though. Pryor is a fantastic runner and a fantastic athlete. He’s not a good quarterback. And the Raiders would be making a huge mistake in giving him the starting spot again. They tried that last year and he bombed miserably. He was 3-7 last year overall. Not a whole lot better than the 1-5 mark McGloin gets bashed for. In most every important passing category, McGloin was better. The team moved, scored points and looked like a real NFL offense. WIth Pryor under center, the barely scored 18 points a game, which if I’m not mistaken was about dead last in the league. He can’t read defenses and is a run first, pass second quarterback. Yeah, he broke that record TD, which is all well and good. But he also threw 11 picks and once teams figured out how to contain him, he wasn’t effective as a QB at all. Also, for all of the speed and mobility you’re praising him for, he took 31 sacks last season. 31. McGloin took 6. So you bash McGloin for not being mobile and yet Pryor took 5 times more sacks than he did– that’s because he runs around back there, has no idea what to do, can’t read the defenses or his progressions and holds on to the ball way too long. McGloin got rid of the ball quickly, showed that he can read his progressions and defenses and was, in every way that matters, the superior quarterback of the two.

      To say that Pryor is “MUCH MUCH MUCH better than McGloin” as a QB is actually laughable. And the stats bear that out. Pryor is a tremendous athlete but he’s a terrible quarterback. If the Raiders give him the keys again next season, be ready for another 4-12 year.

      • friendship220

        There’s a lot here. I’ll respond to some.

        “If the Raiders give him the keys again next season, be ready for another 4-12 year.”

        Why? Don’t you realize that Pryor was 3-3 in his first 6 games?

        Flynn lost his game. McGloin lost 5 out of 6 games.

        When he wasn’t hurt, Pryor only lost to Playoff teams.

        If Pryor stayed healthy all season, and continued to beat the types of teams he beat and lost to the teams he lost to, the additional wins the Raiders would’ve gotten would’ve been Redskins, Giants, Titans, Jets, Cowboys, Chargers. The Raiders would’ve gone 10-6 and made the playoffs.

        Losing to losing teams and 500 teams when healthy was something that McGloin and Flynn did, but Pryor never did.

        No reason to think that Pryor won’t get better, that the Raiders won’t add pieces to make Pryor’s task easier, no reason to think the Raiders won’t have at least a 500 record if Pryor stays healthy.

        “To say that Pryor is “MUCH MUCH MUCH better than McGloin” as a QB is actually laughable.”

        I was talking about as a runner. Here’s the quote.

        “But running is important and useful, and Pryor is the best in the NFL at that. His jersey is in the hall of fame for that record TD run. And Pryor is MUCH MUCH MUCH better than McGloin, and most QBs in the NFL. Some are almost as good. Russell Wilson just won the Super Bowl. He’s almost as good a runner as Pryor. Pryor was 2nd in the league in QB running yards. Wilson was 3rd. The Seahawks ran more than they threw last year.”

        The whole paragraph is about running. And Pryor IS MUCH MUCH MUCH better than McGloin and most QBs in the NFL at running.

        “he runs around back there,” . Yup. Sometimes he runs around back there and runs out of bounds behind the line of scrimmage. That’s a sack. Sometimes he runs around back there and runs out of bounds ahead of the line of scrimmage. Sometimes those are big gains. I haven’t used the word “mobile”. I use the word fast. As in, because Pryor is so fking fast, he can just run around behind the line of scrimmage and then make 20+ yard gains, rushing. Scrambles either turn into losses (sacks) or gains. He runs a lot. You point to sacks, but you won’t point to all those great runs. He had a 20+ yard gain in 6 different games. Total of 8 and the league leader had 10. That’s not QBs, that’s all runners.

        McGloin doesn’t run around, he doesn’t get sacked as much, and doesn’t gain big yards as much. Incompletions aren’t as great as you seem to think they are. McGloin lost. He was able to barely beat the worst team in the NFL. Lost to everyone else.

        Pryor’s games can be broken down into categories.

        1) Losses to Playoff teams. 5. You think Pryor should be beating Playoff teams regularly? Last year? Well, he had 5 losses to playoff teams. I would think that that just would be expected.

        2) Losses with Sprained MCL. 1. It was a mistake of Pryor to play that game. He could’ve communicated better to the coach that the MCL he hurt in the Eagles game got worse.

        3) Wins. 3.

        The only things Pryor could’ve done better, in terms of Wins and Losses, was tell the coach he was hurt and not play hurt, and beat Playoff teams. All the talk about reads and whatnot, is hooey, when Pryor is beating, healthy, everyone but playoff teams.

        “He was 3-7 last year overall. Not a whole lot better than the 1-5 mark McGloin gets bashed for.”

        You don’t even know Pryor record last year. It was 3-6. The 3-7 includes the San Diego game in 2012.

        And yes, 3-6 is a whole lot better than 1-5. It’s exactly twice as good.

        1-5 = .167
        3-6 = .333
        .167 x 2 = .333

        How many of Pryor’s games were against Playoff teams?
        6 of 9. = .666

        How many “Winnable” games did Pryor have? (Winnable means non-playoff teams).


        How many Wins?


        What % of Winnable games did Pryor win? 100%

        How many “Winnable” games did McGloin have? (Winnable means non-playoff teams).


        How many Wins?


        What % of Winnable games did McGloin win? 25%

        How many of McGloin’s games were against Playoff teams?
        2 of 6. .333

        • saito8204

          We’re obviously not going to agree here. As a QB, Pryor is terrible. The stats that matter bear that out. He’s inaccurate, would rather run first and throw second, and can’t manage an offense effectively. With McGloin under center, he led the league in pass plays of 20+ yards. He got rid of the ball quickly, which is why he didn’t take nearly as many sacks and unlike Pryor, had the ability to read defenses. When teams started to key on him as a runner, Pryor’s effectiveness plummeted. And his sacks are a big issue when it puts the team in a 3rd and long position. Sometimes you need to throw the ball away and avoid the sack to prevent turning a 3rd and 3 into a 3rd and 10. That tends to limit your options offensively. Pryor is fast, sure. He can break good runs every now and then. But as a quarterback, he’s terrible.

          Russell Wilson had a good Super Bowl, no question. But he didn’t win it for the Seahawks. Marshawn Lynch and a defense that throttled Peyton Manning did.

          • friendship220

            There certainly are some good stats in McGloins 1-5 record with the only win over the worst team in the NFL. You have a link to that?

            Pryor had a QB passer rating of 135.7, the best since Gannon, that is not terrible. It’s actually the best.

            If you want to use an argument that can withstand any scrutiny at all, you might want to use the “consistency” argument, because a QB who was the best Raider QB in 10 years passing wise, is simply not terrible.

          • saito8204

            Well I’m certainly not seeing what you’re seeing. The stats don’t seem to back your conclusions. But hey, this it the Internet and you’re totally free to believe whatever you’d like.

        • netraider

          Pryor is inaccurate, especially down the field. He also has a difficult time sticking with his reads. Once other teams planned for his scrambling he ceased being productive. Force his scrambling to his left and he has nothing.

          Accuracy, intelligence and poise are needed at QB. Pryor is lacking in all three.

    • Pridenpoise

      You neglect to address the fact, that Pryor sucks throwing the ball, he’s inaccurate and actually regressed as the season went on.

      • friendship220

        135.7 passer rating against the Chargers, who went to the playoffs. The Raiders won that game. That is not “sucks throwing the ball”. That was the best Raider passer rating in a game since Gannon.

        Regressed? Are you talking about the game against the Giants where he played with a sprained MCL? That was a bad game, no doubt. Pryor should have told the coach that the knee had gotten worse since he hurt it in the Eagles game. I wouldn’t call it “regressed”, I’d call it a hurt knee. We learned something in that game, Pryor does not play as well with a hurt knee. The game before that was the Eagles game. He passed for 288 and ran for 94. That doesn’t look like regressed to me. In the last game of the season, against Denver, Pryor had a passer rating of 88.4. 2 tds, 0 ints. McGloin had 6 starts. In only 2 of those games did McGloin have a better passer rating than Pryor did in the Denver game, the last game of the season. If he “regressed” to anywhere it was the Denver game, where, again, he was better than McGloin and he had his 3rd highest Passer rating and his 2nd highest number of completions.

        • Pridenpoise

          Big deal you throw out completion percentage numbers like it is the be all and end all, how many times did he throw the ball in the game, let’s talk about the other games, not one where he happened to have a good percentage, let’s talk about him constantly overthrowing his receivers, taking unnecessary sacks throwing picks, because I’ll tell you even a blind squirrel finds a but every now and then

          • friendship220

            The Blind Squirrel McGloin found fewer nuts.

            I want to emphasis that I’m looking at wins. And the level of competition.

            Pryor had 3 winnable games and 3 wins. He runs best in the NFL. That running makes his offense better. Better outcomes.

            McGloin had 4 winnable games and 1 win.

            You can’t ignore running when you compare QBs.

            And those aren’t completion numbers. That’s passer rating.

          • netraider

            McGloin scored. You neglect to consider what the defense allowed.

          • Pridenpoise

            I’m not sure McGloin is the answer either, but I’m certainly not naive enough to back Pryor after his dreadful play this season, you point to one game where he had a great *passer rating, what about the other games, the fact is the guy is terrible at throwing the ball, I wish he wasn’t but he is, there is nothing I would love to see more than a mobile QB that can also throw, Pryor is not that QB. You can quote numbers from games but at the end of the day it’s about wins and losses, and frankly we both know that Pryor will not be the starter in 2014, so get used to it.

  • John Bencomo

    Every game mcgloin lost it was defense problems and had a chance too win and the lead pryor had problems getting pass the 50 yard line

    • saito8204

      That’s the thing a lot of people overlook because they’re so focused on the QB situation… the defense was atrocious. Absolutely terrible. McGloin is a solid quarterback who, if he had the weapons, would be pretty terrific. He moved the team and scored points. But the defense was the biggest problem the Raiders had last season. They gave up a ton of points and couldn’t stop anybody when it mattered.

    • friendship220

      what games are you talking about? Pryor only lost to playoff teams when he wasn’t hurt. Even the games against the Chiefs and Colts were close. The only games that weren’t close were Broncos 2 and Eagles. For McGloin, the Jets, Chargers and Chiefs weren’t close.

      • netraider

        Once teams had a chance to analyze Pryor he was ineffective. Force him to the left and he is done.

  • netraider

    QB is not as bad as
    some are making out. McGloin has shown tremendous potential. He is cool in the
    pocket, goes through his reads and is accurate. He is a rookie who has never
    been through a proper camp. As a fourth string walk-on he did not receive much
    attention. His decision making will improve with good coaching. Play calling
    has put him in risky situations, especially deep at our own end. An upgraded OL
    will also help. He is ACCURATE which is essential. Even on deep throws he is
    better than “+ or – 10 yards” Palmer. He has completed more third-and-longs than
    any QB since Gannon. If fact, many of those conversions remind me of Stabler to
    Fast Freddie or Cliff. Exciting. With McGloin you have a reasonable expectation
    of a first down. With Pryor you wonder if we’ll still be in FG range for 4th
    down. And keep in mind that McGloin’s stats are as good in not better than
    Peyton’s his first year. And Peyton was groomed from the draft, through camp
    and the pre-season to be the starter. The kid has earned an opportunity to
    compete after a complete off-season.

    A risky first round
    pick is not worth it. QBs are risky picks, just look at the draft history. Take
    a CB or DE (or pass rushing OLB) instead. A value mid or late round QB pick
    perhaps. Give McGloin another year and use the off season to fill all the other
    needs, or at least as many as possible. To risk the pick and money on a QB and
    not upgrade around him would be a waste and mean another hard-to-watch season.

    To be competitive
    in the AFC West we must be able to pressure the QB and defend down the field. Even
    if we pick up a great QB and WR we might become a 20 to 30 ppg offense. This
    will not help when if we field a 30 to 40 ppg defense. A top defense is a must
    to win in this league.

    And what to do with
    Pryor. Serviceable backup with game breaking (and trade) potential. But he
    could be more than that. I would love to see him used situationally as a tail
    back and slot receiver (I assume he can catch). I bet he would be effective in
    sweeps and pitch outs. With his agility and eye for moving holes he should be
    able to take full advantage of the fluid line that these plays create. The
    improvements that he made are impressive. Can he be a back-up QB with an active
    role as a situational, impact player? Defenses will have to plan for him in a
    variety of roles. He could throw from anywhere, even if lined up as a RB or
    receiver. He could make the HB pass a threat on every play. If he resists this
    role change then he is trade bait. The QB swap with the Redskins may then be in

    • saito8204

      Very, very well said. I agree with you on all points here. You lay it out perfectly.

    • friendship220

      Mostly reasonable, but Pryor is better than McGloin. As is typical of people who don’t favor Pryor, Pryor’s running stats are not included in the Pryor vs McGloin analysis.

      I’m not going to argue that Pryor’s passing is currently better than McGloin’s passing, but I can point to the 135.7 win against Chargers.
      What I will argue is that QB does not = passer. QB = passer + runner.

      And because Pryor is the best runner in the NFL, he has the highest runner score. QB = passer + runner (Top Score in the NFL).

      In order to make up the huge advantage that Pryor has in running, McGloin would have to be much, much better than Pryor at passing, and he isn’t.

      Some people just like the way McGloin plays QB. They prefer a pocket passer. And certainly, McGloin is not Flynn. Flynn couldn’t throw long at all. McGloin isn’t bad at that.

      Some people just don’t like Pryor running around behind the line of scrimmage. If he runs out of bounds behind the line of scrimmage, that’s a sack, and some people really don’t like that. But sometime he runs for yards in that situation, getting first downs.

      McGloin throws the ball away. And some people think that’s great, he doesn’t take a sack. And yes, throwing the ball away is better than taking a sack.

      Look at it this way, Pryor has a good choice in there. McGloin only has 2 options.

      1) Throw the ball away
      2) Take a sack.

      2) is worse than 1), and McGloin does the better one typically. People see that McGloin usually makes the right choice, and they’re happy. Then they look at Pryor.

      Pryor has more options.

      1) Throw the ball away
      2) Take a sack
      3) Run for a first down

      Choices 1 and 2 are both bad. McGloin is being praised for making the less bad choice. But Pryor has choice 3, run for a first down, which is a good thing. Thing is, when you have option 3, it makes the risk of 2 greater. So, people say, oh Pryor got sacked more, he should’ve thrown it away, but they forget, or intentionally ignore the fact that some of those sacks were close to being gains, and on similar plays, Pryor gets big yards running. Some of his big gains were designed runs and others were scrambles. But he did have 8 20+ yard gains, at least 1 in 6 games. The league leader had 10. That was a running back. I look at that stat and I say, “I want that.” That is fantastic. That really really helps a football team. If a guy who can do that wants to be your QB, you let him.

      On a 3rd down, if you throw the ball away or if you get sacked, you punt. McGloin had a lot of 3 and outs.

      With Pryor, he can, and does, pick up the first down with running. The Raiders really don’t have excellent receivers. Not saying they’re bad, but they aren’t excellent, or they haven’t shown excellent. Both Pryor and McGloin would benefit from excellent receivers.

      What you do recognize is that Pryor has value. You prefer McGloin but you understand that there’s clearly something there with Pryor. You’re thinking through the possibilites with Pryor. I’ve been thinking about this for a while.

      2 offenses, similar to last year, sorta, for a couple games, where Pryor came in for a series.

      But I’d argue that Pryor’s offense is the primary offense, and McGloin’s is the backup offense.

      What would McGloin’s offense be? McGloin throwing passes to Reece out of the pocket? These olinemen would likely be pass protectors, so, like last year, no big holes in the line, and Jennings getting what he can. If the same WRs somehow get better at getting open, that’s great, there would be some improvement there. I don’t really care too much. I think the Pryor offense would be dominant. But there might be situations where the defense is stopping the Pryor offense, and in those cases, the McGloin offense might work.

      Pryor’s Offense. Run based. Like the Seahawks. More runs than passes. The Raiders spend some money, spend picks on getting in new run blocking, guys who can open holes in the line. People like Greg Robinson, Cyril Richardson, Gabe Jackson, Seantrel Henderson. Develop an endless supply of Pryor run plays. Keep on showing them new ones. Develop an unstoppable Pryor run play. He’s the best runner, fastest, wins foot races. Find a play that is basically a foot race, and do that over and over again. But, do you want to add additional dynamism? Add Vick. And that’s where you get this “an active role as a situational, impact player? Defenses will have to plan for him in a variety of roles. He could throw from anywhere, even if lined up as a RB or receiver” You have a truly dynamic offense. Pryor and Vick at the same time. One takes the snap, the other is the “situational, impact player”. Defenses will have to plan for both of them in a variety of roles. Getting a useless non-athlete QB off the field is key. Would you want to have Vick or Pryor blocking? Yes. They’re good athletes, fast and can block. McGloin, no, small and slow. There are plenty of web pages talking about the effectiveness of plays, and when the QB is a great athlete, instead of a bystander, plays can really work a lot better. An extra blocker.

      Here are some Pryor / Vick plays. Pryor at Left Wide Receiver. Vick takes the snap runs left. Pryor runs right, toward Vick, and Vick either keeps running or pitches to Pryor. Whoever gets the ball either runs or throws. Same play, but Pryor blocks. Same play, but Pryor runs downfield. Or block a little and then run downfield. Having phenominal athletes the biggest, fastest, and getting the ball in their hands so they can run is good football. Having blockers who are bigger and faster so they can more effectively block the guy who is trying to tackle the guy who is running is good football. Standard pocket passer football requires a lot of precise timing. And players with those specific skills are quite expensive. When so many teams want the same thing, the price goes up. There are often a lot of quality running QBs completely ignored, told to change positions. There’s a free supply of QBs who can run well and pass well. You don’t spend money, yet you fill those spots.

      I think it’s unwise to try to build a typical pocket passer offense because of the supply and demand problems. Too many teams want too few players. Great pass protectors cost more than great run blockers, and down the line. Dual threat QBs are available, in the draft, as ufdas, famous controversial ones, all for nothing. Greg Robinson is a dominant run blocker who might be available to us at 5. Menelik Watson was a Div I College Basketball Center at Marist. That means to me that he catch a ball. Adding Greg Robinson and other oliners might mean that Watson might not have a position. How about Tight End? He can catch. It’s a way to have bigger, faster blockers.

      WR Vick/Pryor
      LT Greg Robinson / Veldheer
      LG Cyril Richardson
      C Wiz
      RG Gabe Jackson
      RT Veldheer / Greg Robinson
      TE Watson
      TE Kasa
      WR Ausberry
      WR Murray
      QB Pryor/Vick
      Big blockers at WR and TE.

      • netraider

        When was the last time a scrambling, quick to run QB won a Superbowl. QBs need to manage the offense, pass the ball and convert first downs. Successful QBs are accurate, intelligent, patient, can progress threw their reads with poise, extend the play if necessary. Pryor does not excel in any of these areas.

        Running QBs never last and it is risky to base a long term strategy and invest a lot of money in someone who will eventually get hurt.

        Pryor takes too many negative plays. With a penalty we at least get the down back. And speaking of penalties, when the QB lack discipline in the pocket and is quick to scramble the incidence of holding penalties and interceptions go up. After opposing coaches got a look at him Pryor’s productivity and big plays were nearly eliminated. His lack of accuracy leads to the interceptions.

        Pryor’s inability to move the ball is due in part to negative plays leading to third and longs. This severely limits the offense and the occasional big scramble will not overcome this in the long run.

  • Pingback: canada goose trillium