Everyone: Playing first year quarterbacks is a disservice to the player and teams should give them time to develop on the bench for a year to two without rushing them into games.
Also everyone: What is Atlanta doing drafting a quarterback who they plan on sitting for a few years?
Count me among those who don't hate the process. There were people that were critical of the Chiefs in 2017 when they gave up assets to move up and take their quarterback of the future when they already had a Pro Bowl quarterback on their roster. People were saying they should have improved the defense instead. How did that work out?
Unfortunately, there is really only one way to build a winning team in today's NFL and that's hitting on a superstar quarterback. Every QB that a team drafts is basically like a lottery ticket and you need to hit on one of these tickets if you want to be competitive year after year with a shot at winning Super Bowls. While the addition of Cousins means the Falcons should be a playoff team over the next few years, I don't think anyone sees him as a superstar quarterback.
So if a team really believes they have found their future superstar quarterback, then I don't think there is anything wrong with taking him in that spot, even if you already just signed another guy (who happens to be 36 years old coming off a torn Achilles) for the next few years. Whether Penix is that guy is another question altogether.
Quote:
SI.com: Grade B+. "The Chiefs paid a huge price for a developmental quarterback, choosing Mahomes over Deshaun Watson. This is the type of move that can make or break a front office."
SB Nation: Grade D. "The Chiefs gave up pick Nos. 27, 91 and a 2018 first-round pick to take a backup quarterback. At least for a season, that’s what this pick is in reality. While this move helps Kansas City in the future, what does it do immediately in 2017 and 2018? It doesn’t give them a top cornerback opposite Marcus Peters. It doesn’t give them a linebacker they need. It gives them a developmental player. Look, I like Mahomes as a person and prospect. I just don’t like the value at all."
Bleacher Report: Grade C. "My issue is that the Chiefs have been in playoff also-ran mode for years. They could have traded up and upgraded their defense to get over the top in 2017. Reid's Eagles tended to get stuck in 10- 11-win ruts. They could swap out quarterbacks and remain in the same rut, because they still have too many needs in other areas."
ESPN: Grade C+ (for the full draft). "...Giving up a third-round pick and next year's first to move up 17 spots was a ton for a team with immediate needs elsewhere and some defenders getting up there in age."
Chatsports: Grade C-. "Chiefs had to move up to get Mahomes, but is he truly worth it? They gave up a future first, which could come back to bite them. The upside is there with Mahomes and it might pay off. If it does, it's an easy A. If not, it's an F. I'll split the difference for the time being."
USA Today: Grade C-. "Calling Mahomes a project is a major understatement. He’s nowhere near ready to play in the NFL. And, honestly, he may never be. Between his inconsistent accuracy due to poor mechanics, his tendency to bail from clean pockets and his lack of field vision, he’s going to leave as many big plays on the field as he creates. This was a risky pick."
|