On Why I Didn't Select Brady Quinn

by Gonzo on Apr 15, 2007 12:35 PM CDT in 2007 SBN Mock Draft Comment 3 comments

As you all know, since you've been keeping track of the 2007 SBNation Mock NFL Draft (hosted by Field Gulls), with the Vikings' first-round selection, I took Adrian Peterson, the running back out of Oklahoma (where the wind does, indeed, go rolling down the plain). I made this pick despite the fact that Notre Dame quarterback Brady Quinn was still on the board.

This apparently caught the eye of the folks over at SBNation's fine Notre Dame site, Rakes of Mallow (linked above there). In fact, in their analysis of the first round of the SBNation Mock Draft, they were so kind as to address this pick explicitly.

Dear Daily Norseman,

I'm sure you're all pleasant fellas, but let me explain to you the two main reasons that you might not want to go with Adrian Peterson here, if Quinn is available or not. I say this as a friend and a guy who enjoyed the Mike Tice Era, but wants you to get out of it.

1) Adrian Peterson gets hurt every year. Yes, it's very sad, but this isn't a thing like Reggie Bush, where it was "Well, can he handle a NFL beating, despite the fact he's never been down for an extended period of time through college?", but instead, this is literally "Adrian Peterson gets hurt. A lot" and I don't want you investing the number seven pick into a guy and beleft with a backfield of Tavaris Jackson and Chester Taylor.

2) Going back to the 2001 Super Bowl, only two teams (the 2001 Rams and the 2004 Patriots) had feature running backs (Faulk and Dillon). The pre-2004 incarnations of the Patriots did not, the Bears did not, the Eagles did not, the Panthers did not (they had two), the Raiders surely did not, the Buccaneers did not, the Steelers did not and while you might claim Shaun Alexander was a feature back for Seattle, I'll claim it was a feature left side of the line that allowed him to score a plethora of touchdowns against shitty teams untouched.

(I wrote half a thesis on why Shaun Alexander shouldn't have won the 2005 MVP, so don't challenge me on that.)

Anyway, in the best interest of the Vikings, don't take Adrian Peterson.

Your friend,

Chris

Now. . .while I've never been what you'd call a Notre Dame fan or anything, I do respect Notre Dame football, Chris runs a pretty fine site over at Rakes of Mallow, and I like hearing Beano Cook say "NO. . .dramatic pause. . .traDAME."

So, with that in mind, here's my rebuttal.

1) Have you seen our skill position players?

-Yes, Chester Taylor is a nice back. . .Chester Taylor also wore down in a big way towards the end of last year. I don't know if he was just tired of being the only competent player on the offensive side of the ball or what, but over the last 3 games of 2006, Taylor had 38 carries for 118 yards, averaging just a shade over 3 yards per carry.

-Our next best running back, Mewelde Moore, has two ankles that are apparently held together with chicken wire and scotch tape. Talk about Peterson's injury troubles, Moore is hurt all the damn time.

Peterson would immediately be used in tandem with Taylor, much like the other pairs of great NFL RBs are (Rhodes/Addai, Bush/McAlister, etc.)

2) Have you seen our skill position players?

-Our #1 and #2 guys in terms of receptions last season were Travis Taylor (51) and Jermaine Wiggins (46). They're both gone.

-Taylor was #1 in terms of yardage, too.

-Our #1 guy in terms of TD catches was Marcus Robinson (4). He's gone.

We've got a whole lot of nothing at the skill positions right now, outside of Chester Taylor. Hence, we have the most predictable offense in the league. Run on first down, run on second down, throw a pass 3 yards short of the sticks on third down, punt.

Peterson could potentially change this. Brady Quinn would not. If we draft Peterson, we have another potential weapon for Jackson to utilize. If we draft Quinn, then instead of Tarvaris Jackson behind center with nobody to throw the football to, we'd have. . .Brady Quinn behind center with nobody to throw the football to.

3) Seriously, have you seen our skill position players?

4) There wasn't a WR worth going with at #7.

5) I went with the voice of the people. The people wanted Adrian Peterson. The second choice of the people wasn't Brady Quinn, either. . .it was LaRon Landry. He would have been my second choice as well.

So, yeah. . .there you go. That's why I did what I did.

0 recs | Comment 3 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Quinn

Would also mean that we totally fucked up in selecting TJ last year. We selected the guy in the second round so we must have some faith in him. I suppose if he is on the board though it makes for an interesting position however having said that I still think that if he is available that we will be able to trade down.

by FSUViking on Apr 15, 2007 1:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Peterson is the better choice

Peterson is a great back. Sure he may get injured but like you have said Moore gets injured very frequently. Chester Taylor wont be able to carry the team all by himself so Adrian Peterson was a good choice to draft.

by Tommy on Apr 15, 2007 2:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Quinn or T. Jack

Lets look at this a little:

Quinn-- 6-3 226 4.7 40 time

Jackson--6-1 232 4.69 40 time

Advantage----PUSH

Arm Strength: Anybody who has seen Quinn play knows he doesn't have a rocket arm. In fact his one highlight film I've seen shown a penchant for floating the ball with no tight spiral. Jackson in his limited time has shown a tremendous arm. He throws a laser like spiral as well.

Advantage-----JACKSON

Accuracy: I've already heard two scouts call Quinn a NON-franchise QB based on his mediocre accuracy. His average deep ball would also lend to an inaccurate passer impression. Jackson as well, is mediocre in the accuarcy dept. IMO. He had a 58% completion percentage in his limited play last season.

ADVANTAGE---------PUSH

Pocket Presence: Obviously, playing under Charlie Weis in that system has given Quinn a huge leg up in this department. While there is some questions about his big game performances, QUinn HAS played in big games at Notre Dame and that can only help you prepare for the next level. Jackson on the other hand played at unknown Alabama St. and in his limited action last year looked to have happy feet and liked to telegraph his passes.

ADVANTAGE---------Quinn

Athleticism: Quinn will never be mistaken for Michael Vick when he out of the pocket. Quinn gets points for being fairly athletic, and while one wouldn't necessarily call him a mobile QB he can do just enough to get by. Jackson though, is much more of an athlete then Quinn. Jackson played at less then 100% and still was impressive at times in his mobility. I don't see an issue with Jackson as far as throwing on the run. Quinn I'm not as sure.

ADVANTAGE------Jackson

Conclusion:

If they were both draft eligible this year the choice between the two might not be so close as to who the better prospect is. However, Jackson is already on the roster, has a MUCH better contract situation then what Quinn would command. We've seen a glimpse of what Jackson can do at the next level and most signs are positive. Quinn is still an unknown with just as many question marks. So with that being said it makes little (zero IMO) sense to draft Quinn at #7 especially when you take into consideration the current issues this team has at other positions.

by Unclebillybonz44 on Apr 16, 2007 10:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs