I am a horrible, rotten excuse for a Redskins fan.

[SirClintonPortis]

Originally Posted by JoeRedskin

The problem is that it is not a 50% success rate v. a 4% success rate. Here are all the QB’s chosen in the first rounds since 2005 (I originally had the first 3 rounds but since the allegation is higher in the first round = higher success and consider it a given that we will be picking a QB in the first round, I only included these QB’s):

All this shows to me, as NC_Skins is saying, is that the draft is a crap shoot. Given the odds, you aren’t significantly improving your chances by tanking.

Do your best, build a culture of hard work and “never say die” attitudes and you give a rookie a chance. Create a culture of losing and you will be doomed to the culture you create.

It is my fault for tossing out a concrete number and not specifying a range. 33% to 45% is still pretty good.
Imo, 11th is still a high pick. Hence, I'd bunch Cutler with the group Leinart is in.

What if we add a few more drafted QBs to look at though...

In 2004
1st Eli
4th Rivers
11th Roethlisberger
22nd Losman

In 2003
1st Carson Palmer
7th Leftwich
19th Boller
22nd Grossman

In 2002
1st Carr
3rd Harrington
32nd Ramsey

In 2001
1st Vick

In 2000
18th Chad Pennington

There are 8 more "high" picks to add to the ten you have mentioned. 4 hits and 4 duds, assuming Vick is considered a dud. This would increase the percentage from 40% to ~44%

There are 5 "lower" picks to add to the seven you have mentioned. All of them not franchise material. Your percentages for lower round guys plummets to 50%, 42%, or 33% depending on whether Tebow and Campbell are considered studs or not.

And yes, if we included 1999, the success percentage for "high" QBs decreases big time. At the same time though, very few late 1st round QBs were taken in the 90s, and those that were taken did very little of consequence.