I’ve come to conclusion there is only two reasons to draft a 1st round QB in the modern era of NFL football. You 1000% believe they are prototypical pocket passer, no red flags on leadership traits and with the ability to run an NFL offense day ONE. i.e. Luck, Manning, etc… If not above, Can quickly be adapted into a dual-threat QB i.e. Lamar, Josh Allen, Cam Newton, etc.. Anything else really is fool’s gold almost likely to be a big miss 99.9% of the time as a 1st rounder.
The “Legends” hit about 75% of the time with some drag in the process and the usual this is the NFL issues around durability. (John Elway, Peyton Manning, Eli Manning, Andrew Luck) 3 of the 4 in the HoF most likely and one retired early due to injuries. Note that all of the “Legends” are from football families, meaning they got a lot of training and help on how to be a “Legend”. Lawrence joins the group at this point and we’ll see how that works out. To be a “Legend” you have to have NFL buzz around you from your first year in college and you need to start as a freshman and you need to be drafted #1 overall.
This is way too restrictive. A team that needs a FQB-level QB should consider taking whoever they think fits that criteria in any round they can get him - often this will be the first round, but not always. The real key is having a GM and scouting staff that can accurately identify such a player, and a CS that can reliably develop him. Far too many teams lack one or both of these requirements, the Jets being Exhibit A for lacking both for years. Very few college QBs are pure pocket QBs these days so making that a requirement would severely limit your choices. And your second variety has proven to result in QBs who don't last very long. As for Br4d's comment, yes, the best bet is to draft a QB with a strong family QB pedigree who has lived up to it from H.S. all the way through several years (if not 4) of college. The problem with that is you almost certainly need to own the #1 pick either by "earning" - which is really hard to do as we found out 2 years ago - or trade for it which is hideously costly and may cripple your team to the point where even your "can't miss" QB can't help you. Personally I think most teams don't put enough time and resources into finding and developing good QBs. It's really hard to do, expensive, and there's no guarantee you'll succeed. So most teams try to get by with half measures, and hope they catch lightning in a bottle, or they hope they sign a FA that will be serviceable and focus more on "D" and surrounding Mr. Mediocre with top weapons which are usually easier to identify.
You can find a good QB almost anywhere in the draft. However they have to be a fit for your system and they have to get a good look at the NFL before you put them on the field. The current fad around mobile QB's is just that - a fad. Sooner or later we'll see a move away from that, likely durability related.
I don’t think so. The league will certainly stop giving second and third massive contracts to running quarterbacks but the pace of the league and the overall decline of offensive line skill and health requires that quarterbacks be mobile. The name of the game with quarterbacks has really morphed into needing to have played lots of college football. Gardner Minshew and Brock Purdy finding decent early success proves this. Kirk Cousins is the golden study of this point. If you understand how to read a blitz, defenders leverage and get comfortable in an offense, you can probably get a team to the playoffs.
