Then a few things happened:
1. I saw Mike Mayock say that you have a less than 10% chance of getting a starting QB after the 1st round.
2. The bust rate for 1st round QB's was over that last 20 years is about 45%.
3. To be a dominant team you MUST have a dominant 1st round QB's.
If the above is true, it leads to a very uncomfortable paradox. You cannot be dominant without a 1st round QB (Brady is an exception and Brees was the 1st pick in the 2nd round) yet you risk close to 50% failure in trying to do so and a mistake will set back your team.
I think that the selection of Todd Blackledge 29 years may still effect how we view quarterbacks. It seems like every few years we try to sign somebody else's Steve Bono and have continuously been stuck in that vicious cycle.
I am not asking who you like in this years draft. I'm asking as meaningful and uncomfortable question as there is on any football team. Many GM's lose their jobs over this. Hell, I read that Pioli could lose his job if he takes Tannehill and he busts. I think Pioli is more secure than that, but that's not the question here. To succeed, you HAVE(?) to take this chance at some point. Is this what you have to do to advance in the playoffs? It probably would take a few years before your 45% failure is even ready to prove that he isn't one.
So I bring the question to you. Are you willing to take a chance on a potential franchise QB knowing that the risk is 45% chance of failure? When would you take that chance?