A STUDY IN QB DRAFT POSITIONS

[CanadaSteve]

Here is some interesting QB statistics I thought could open some lively debate about where to draft a franchise QB.

Since (and including) the New York Jets drafting Joe Namath with the #2 pick in the AFL draft, here is the information about 1^st round Quarterbacks:

There have been 128 Quarterbacks taken in the first round.

BY DECADE

1965 – 1969: 11

1979 – 1979: 14

1980 – 1989: 18

1990 – 1999: 20

Since 2000: 65

Almost half of the first-round QB’s taken in the first round have occurred since the year 2000.

BY POSITION IN 1^st ROUND

1^st overall:  26

Between picks 2 – 5: 32

Between picks 6-10: 19

Between picks 11-20: 27

Between picks 21-32: 24

LAST TIME A QB WAS NOT TAKEN IN ROUND ONE

1996 – Tony Banks (2^nd round: 42^nd pick)

LOWEST ROUND UNTIL A QB WAS TAKEN

3^rd round on two occasions

1974 – 53^rd pick (Danny White)

1988 – 68^th pick (Tom Tupa)

SUPERBOWL STATISTICS

Only 6 of the 65 QB’s drafted in the first round (since 2000) have won a Super Bowl

Of those 6, only two have multiple Super Bowls (Eli Manning and Ben Roethlisberger.  Both were drafted in 2004)

 

BY POSITION IN 1^st ROUND (# of Super Bowl victories in parenthesis)

BETWEEN 21 – 32:

Aaron Rodgers (1)

BETWEEN 11 – 20:

Doug Williams (1)

Ben Roethlisberger (2)

Joe Flacco (1)

BETWEEN 6 – 10:

Phil Simms (1)

Trent Dilfer (1)

Patrick Mahomes (1)

BETWEEN 2 – 5: 

** Bob Griese (2) – Drafted Pre-1965

** Len Dawson (1) – Drafted Pre-1965

Joe Namath (1)

Jim McMahon (1)

FIRST OVERALL

**Drew Bledsoe (DID NOT START)

** Steve Young (Taken 1^st overall in the supplemental draft 1984)

Terry Bradshaw (4)

Jim Plunkett (2)

John Elway (2)

Troy Aikman (2)

Peyton Manning (2)

Eli Manning (2)

Mathew Stafford (1)

The number of QB’s taken 1^st overall who have won Super Bowls are about equal to ones that COULD be considered busts

 

OTHER DRAFT POSITIONS FOR WINNING SUPER BOWL QB’S

Undrafted

Kurt Warner (1)

17^th Round

Bart Starr (2)

10^th Round

Roger Staubach (2)

9^th Round

Johnny Unitas (1)

Brad Johnson (1)

6^th Round

Tom Brady (7)

Mark Rypien (1)

4^th Round

Joe Theismann (1)

3^rd Round

Joe Montana (3)

Jeff Hostettler (1)

Russell Wilson (1)

Nick Foles (1)

2^nd Round

Brett Favre (1)

Drew Brees (1)

Kenny Stabler (1)

[CanadaSteve]

THE JETS IN THE 1st ROUND

1965: Joe Namath (Our only Super Bowl)

1976: Richard Todd (26th pick with a 2-2 record in playoffs)

1983: Ken O'Brien (24th pick with an 0-3 record in the playoffs) 

2000: Chad Pennington (18th pick with a 2-4 record in the playoffs)

2009: Mark Sanchez (5th pick with a 4-2 record in the playoffs)

2018: Sam Darnold (3rd overall and didn't make the playoffs)

2021: Zach Wilson (2nd overall and didn't make the playoffs)

Every Jet QB taken in the first round made the playoffs until the last two. 

[Lith]

15 minutes ago, CanadaSteve said:

SUPERBOWL STATISTICS

Only 6 of the 65 QB’s drafted in the first round (since 2000) have won a Super Bowl

Of those 6, only two have multiple Super Bowls (Eli Manning and Ben Roethlisberger.  Both were drafted in 2004)

A lot of these numbers were skewed by a certain 6th rounder who won 7 rings.   

Since Brady won his first in 2004, 10 of 13 non-Brady SBs were won by first rounders (Peyton 2, Eli 2, Ben 2, Stafford, Mahomes, Flacco, Rodgers), Brees, Wilson and Foles being the only exceptions.

[derp]

31 minutes ago, Lith said:

A lot of these numbers were skewed by a certain 6th rounder who won 7 rings.   

Since Brady won his first in 2004, 10 of 13 non-Brady SBs were won by first rounders (Peyton 2, Eli 2, Ben 2, Stafford, Mahomes, Flacco, Rodgers), Brees, Wilson and Foles being the only exceptions.

First round winners: special guys who went first overall and guys who went a little later to good teams that developed them. Nobody 2-5 overall range. That’s been almost entirely a dead zone. Idea that’s where you draft QB’s when you’re picking there has been how bad teams stay bad.

[Hex]

First rounders are going to be better on average. Scouts aren't terrible at their jobs. It's just that the success rate of QBs in general is so low most 1st round QBs end up sucking anyways.

[Zachtomims47]

21 minutes ago, derp said:

First round winners: special guys who went first overall and guys who went a little later to good teams that developed them. Nobody 2-5 overall range. That’s been almost entirely a dead zone. Idea that’s where you draft QB’s when you’re picking there has been how bad teams stay bad.

It's either you get the best of the best in that draft - who doesn't need a whole lot of help and goes 1 overall. Just flat out good.

Or you get the 2nd or 3rd guy, who needs a little help but team is usually bad and just ends up flopping. Justin Herbert seems to be the outlier. 

[Darnold Schwarzenegger]

28 minutes ago, Zachtomims47 said:

It's either you get the best of the best in that draft - who doesn't need a whole lot of help and goes 1 overall. Just flat out good.

Or you get the 2nd or 3rd guy, who needs a little help but team is usually bad and just ends up flopping. Justin Herbert seems to be the outlier. 

Mahomes and Watson were 2nd and 3rd guy also Josh allen was 3rd qb taken in his draft.

[freestater]

Wasn't Namath the first overall pick?

[TheClashFan]

I'd rather see a list of QBs who simply got to the SB rather than won.  SBs are generally a coin flip for QBs.  And take out the crazy outlier Tom Brady and the New England Cheaters.

Mark Sanchez is at 4-2 b/c he got to play behind an elite OL for his first two seasons. Oh yeah, and a pretty good defense.  Starting with his 3rd, it all fell apart b/c of a horrible situation at RT, and LG wasn't much better.

I've never been a fan of taking a QB in the first few picks.  Once the top guy is gone, just trade back and see who falls into the mid to late first round.

 

[FactsOnly]

Flawed chart at its core too many  variables to hold any credence to these high level numbers 

Quarterback is the most important position on the football field

draft accordingly 

[rex-n-effect]

This kind of data can be used to reach any conclusion you want.

Are the successful late round picks evidence that front offices are awful at evaluating QBs? Do later picks get to spend time developing on the bench which results in more success? Are later round picks drafted by better teams who generally succeed at developing players and surround them with a solid roster? Is this all dumb luck?

You can make a convincing argument that any of those are generally true from that data set. 

[GreenFish]

19 minutes ago, Darnold Schwarzenegger said:

Mahomes and Watson were 2nd and 3rd guy also Josh allen was 3rd qb taken in his draft.

In the case of KC and Buffalo, they were good teams who traded way up to get their guy.

Watson and Herbert seem to be outliers though. They were not the highest pick and didnt go to a team that was good already.

[Zachtomims47]

26 minutes ago, Darnold Schwarzenegger said:

Mahomes and Watson were 2nd and 3rd guy also Josh allen was 3rd qb taken in his draft.

Sorry, I meant 2nd or 3rd pick. The 2-5 range. Which usually means those teams were pretty bad and not a great situation. Which is why Herbert at 6 is a bit of an outlier. 

[derp]

1 hour ago, Zachtomims47 said:

It's either you get the best of the best in that draft - who doesn't need a whole lot of help and goes 1 overall. Just flat out good.

Or you get the 2nd or 3rd guy, who needs a little help but team is usually bad and just ends up flopping. Justin Herbert seems to be the outlier. 

Herbert probably got overanalyzed but also that Chargers team wasn’t THAT bad. Keenan Allen, Mike Williams, Ekeler…dude’s played with some talent since he got there.

Or you’ve got Allen and Mahomes who went to teams that traded up to get them, I believe both were playoff teams. Jackson as well. And I think they all sat a little. Rodgers too. I don’t know what drives the narrative that there’s only a chance to get a guy when you’re drafting high but even when you look at superstars it’s not necessarily true.

Some superstars do go first and can just overcome whatever but those guys come around so infrequently odds of there being two or more in a given year are just so slim.

[rangerous]

interesting list.  but what about the qb's of the superbowl losers?  getting to the show is a hard thing to achieve and those guys deserve some attention too.  elllway lost 3 before winning.  kelllly lost 4.  tarkenton lost 4.

[Jet Nut]

1 hour ago, freestater said:

Wasn't Namath the first overall pick?

Yes

He was confusing Joe Namath with Zach Wilson.  Lol

[Biggs]

Staubach would have likely been the 1st player taken if it wasn't for his commitment to the Naval Academy.

[JoeNamathsFurCoat]

Except for McNabb and Archie Manning, #2 overall pick QBs have been dogwater

Kapono

RG3

Wentz

Mariota

RicK Mirer

Ryan Leaf

 

[CanadaSteve]

5 hours ago, freestater said:

Wasn't Namath the first overall pick?

So....Namath was the second pick overall, but was the second 1st overall pick that year.  That was the AFL.  Then he was drafted about 12th in the NFL. 

[CanadaSteve]

5 hours ago, FactsOnly said:

Flawed chart at its core too many  variables to hold any credence to these high level numbers 

Quarterback is the most important position on the football field

draft accordingly 

What in THE **** are you talking about?

All I gave you was information about QB's.  Where they were drafted in the first round, and Super Bowl winners who didn't get drafted in the first.  That is ALL this was for. 

[CanadaSteve]

5 hours ago, rex-n-effect said:

This kind of data can be used to reach any conclusion you want.

Are the successful late round picks evidence that front offices are awful at evaluating QBs? Do later picks get to spend time developing on the bench which results in more success? Are later round picks drafted by better teams who generally succeed at developing players and surround them with a solid roster? Is this all dumb luck?

You can make a convincing argument that any of those are generally true from that data set. 

There are NO conclusions to be reached.  It was just to show you who has won Super Bowls, and where they are drafted.  That's it.  If someone wants to make assumptions, feel free.  

[CanadaSteve]

4 hours ago, rangerous said:

interesting list.  but what about the qb's of the superbowl losers?  getting to the show is a hard thing to achieve and those guys deserve some attention too.  elllway lost 3 before winning.  kelllly lost 4.  tarkenton lost 4.

I was going to run those numbers eventually as well.  But it was just a fun thing to do on spare time.  When I have more spare time, I will run the comparison!

 

[Larz]

Let’s be honest in a 32 team league with dominant programs making repeat visits I’m totally cool with “consistent winning” and exciting games. 

[bla bla bla]

7 hours ago, Lith said:

A lot of these numbers were skewed by a certain 6th rounder who won 7 rings.   

Since Brady won his first in 2004, 10 of 13 non-Brady SBs were won by first rounders (Peyton 2, Eli 2, Ben 2, Stafford, Mahomes, Flacco, Rodgers), Brees, Wilson and Foles being the only exceptions.

Fun fact, Brees was a 2nd round pick but was #32 overall

[BCJet]

1 hour ago, CanadaSteve said:

I was going to run those numbers eventually as well.  But it was just a fun thing to do on spare time.  When I have more spare time, I will run the comparison!

 

First off, really appreciate the work.  Secondly,  I do think the SB losers would really add to what you are putting out here (even though it is a lot of work).

I also happen to disagree that there are no conclusions to draw here.  I think the biggest takeaway is that aside from picking #1 in a year with a legit no doubt #1 guy (for example I believe Stafford and Lawerence are "legit #1 guys" while someone like Goff or Kyler is not) you are better off not trading up, using your first rounders to build your roster and continually draft QBs in rounds 2-5 to develop.  

This past weekend had 2 #1 QBs in Burrow and Lawerence, 3 mid firsts in Allen, Dimes, Mahomes and then a 2nd rounder (hurts) , 4th (dak) rounder and of course a 7th rounder in Purdy.

While those numbers at first glance seem to skew towards "you need a first rounder to compete" I think you need to take out the #1 overall as the bust rate is so much lower for those guys.  Basically outside of #1 overall, there are 3 later round QBs and 3 first rounders that made the final 8.

In addition, I dont think the chances of finding a QB a pick is that much higher then picking one at 45 or 60 and given that most teams go for first round QBs, your odds of hitting on an elite OT, DE, or LB are that much higher allowing you to build your team so that if you do find a Hurts or russel wilson, your team around that player is that much better.

[OilfieldJet]

Mark Twain.

 

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

[HighPitch]

4 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

What in THE **** are you talking about?

All I gave you was information about QB's.  Where they were drafted in the first round, and Super Bowl winners who didn't get drafted in the first.  That is ALL this was for. 

Lol

[HighPitch]

The only big takeaway for me is that qbs taken with the first overall pick generally are good

[OilfieldJet]

Just now, HighPitch said:

The only big takeaway for me is that qbs taken with the first overall pick generally are good

Give me the 17th rounder.

[Dunnie]

THE JETS IN THE 1st ROUND
1965: Joe Namath (Our only Super Bowl)
1976: Richard Todd (26th pick with a 2-2 record in playoffs)
1983: Ken O'Brien (24th pick with an 0-3 record in the playoffs) 
2000: Chad Pennington (18th pick with a 2-4 record in the playoffs)
2009: Mark Sanchez (5th pick with a 4-2 record in the playoffs)
2018: Sam Darnold (3rd overall and didn't make the playoffs)
2021: Zach Wilson (2nd overall and didn't make the playoffs)
Every Jet QB taken in the first round made the playoffs until the last two. 

This illustrated you need a team ... Not just a QB. The Jets haven't had a solid OL since Brick and Mangold retired. And the receiving cores .... C'mon man.

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

[rangerous]

13 hours ago, CanadaSteve said:

I was going to run those numbers eventually as well.  But it was just a fun thing to do on spare time.  When I have more spare time, I will run the comparison!

 

i'm looking forward to it.  it's great that some people here do things like this.  it keeps the discussion moving.

[rangerous]

11 hours ago, BCJet said:

First off, really appreciate the work.  Secondly,  I do think the SB losers would really add to what you are putting out here (even though it is a lot of work).

I also happen to disagree that there are no conclusions to draw here.  I think the biggest takeaway is that aside from picking #1 in a year with a legit no doubt #1 guy (for example I believe Stafford and Lawerence are "legit #1 guys" while someone like Goff or Kyler is not) you are better off not trading up, using your first rounders to build your roster and continually draft QBs in rounds 2-5 to develop.  

This past weekend had 2 #1 QBs in Burrow and Lawerence, 3 mid firsts in Allen, Dimes, Mahomes and then a 2nd rounder (hurts) , 4th (dak) rounder and of course a 7th rounder in Purdy.

While those numbers at first glance seem to skew towards "you need a first rounder to compete" I think you need to take out the #1 overall as the bust rate is so much lower for those guys.  Basically outside of #1 overall, there are 3 later round QBs and 3 first rounders that made the final 8.

In addition, I dont think the chances of finding a QB a pick is that much higher then picking one at 45 or 60 and given that most teams go for first round QBs, your odds of hitting on an elite OT, DE, or LB are that much higher allowing you to build your team so that if you do find a Hurts or russel wilson, your team around that player is that much better.

there are so many ways to this even further.  just thinking about it quickly, how many of these qb's started the full four years in their programs?  how many qb's did each team have to draft before they got their guy?  and so on.  i read where one of the things about purdy is that he was a four year starter and the niners felt he already knew how to play the game.  now we see a lot of guys getting drafted as underclassmen or with only a season as starter.  add to them the guys that move around trying to find the college program that will start them.

[BCJet]

14 hours ago, rangerous said:

there are so many ways to this even further.  just thinking about it quickly, how many of these qb's started the full four years in their programs?  how many qb's did each team have to draft before they got their guy?  and so on.  i read where one of the things about purdy is that he was a four year starter and the niners felt he already knew how to play the game.  now we see a lot of guys getting drafted as underclassmen or with only a season as starter.  add to them the guys that move around trying to find the college program that will start them.

I do think there is a lot to the "Parcells formula" that includes years starting, wins, over projected talent.   Personally I am very interested to see how Stetson Bennett turns out as he fits every non-physical profile you could possibly have and even at his size has decent arm strength.  For him its just height/weight which i do understand but at the same time if he is a 4th/5th rounder due to his size, how is Bryce Young going to be #1 overall?

[jNYC1]

Stating the obvious…

It’s extremely hard to draft an elite or Top 10 caliber QB.
(I guess it does help to have a #1 pick when a consensus generational talent exists but Rodgers, Brady, Mahomes, Wilson, Allen, (you could throw in Watson, Herbert, Jackson, Hurts, Dak) in the last 15 years illustrates #1 pick is not the only way)

It’s hard to win a Super Bowl.

The majority of franchises fail to land an elite QB.

There are usually only 5-7 elite (or 5-10 near elite or better) QBs in the NFL at any given point in time.

[jNYC1]

29 minutes ago, BCJet said:

I do think there is a lot to the "Parcells formula" that includes years starting, wins, over projected talent.   Personally I am very interested to see how Stetson Bennett turns out as he fits every non-physical profile you could possibly have and even at his size has decent arm strength.  For him its just height/weight which i do understand but at the same time if he is a 4th/5th rounder due to his size, how is Bryce Young going to be #1 overall?

Parcels formula sounds good but is empirically not a great predictor of success on its own.  

It feels like if there was an effective formula for de-risking the “QB draft pick” teams would follow it… in practice, drafting QBs is maddeningly unpredictable…