NFL teams ready to bail on their young QBs faster than ever....

Sounds like the gist of the article is that they probably WON'T pursue a QB to replace Pickett.

Either way, NFL teams always seem to do the opposite of what they tried last time. I would bet a mortgage payment that the last thing the Steelers will do is sit at 20 and take a QB there....to replace the QB they took at 20 two years ago. 

Steelers seem like a QB away. But this might be the last year for that regime.

I get the internal swirl in Pitt over Pickett...I thought the Giants were in the same boat with Danny Dimes, but they made the plunge and invested in his mediocrity. 

Not an easy place to be for a NFL team. 

Vikings would know. 

There isn't much value in sticking with a guy whose ceiling is mediocre.  At least moving off quickly is recognizing the mistake of taking the guy in the first place.  Some teams just stick it out LaQuon Treadwell style despite all the evidence that they fucked up.  Saving face is more important than getting it right in those cases.

They either bail on them, or end up throwing them $50Million+ per season, in the cases of Herbert, Burrow, etc. Hell, Josh Allen may as well change his last name to "Almost" at this point.

Given the spastic overreactions of much of our fan base-which have been noted in the sports media-I figure even a blue chip, 1st round QB would have calls for his replacement by his 2nd rough game. Welcome to the NFL of the Information Age.

I'm fully on board with idea that you should always be bringing in your next QB candidate.  It's super dumb for teams to lock in on only one candidate at a time.  In order to find the next Mahomes you need to draft more QBs faster until you find them.  I also don't see it as "bailing" on Pickett as much as just starting the best guy in the rotation and Pickett still has time to develop into the guy.  But spending 4-5 years on a mediocre guy and then having to either pay them big bucks or startover at unknown because no one is in the pipeline is the worst thing you can do.  If you draft the next possibility now and they're both mediocre, you aren't going to be pressured to pay the $45M for that guy who is only so-so.  Look at the stupid arguments we're having to deal with now.  The drama is through the roof, because we never brought in a legitimate second option so we're stuck with the hyperbole of well if Kirk leaves, JJ is going to leave and we all need to stop being fans so we should just pay everyone all the money.

@"medaille" said: I'm fully on board with idea that you should always be bringing in your next QB candidate.  It's super dumb for teams to lock in on only one candidate at a time.  In order to find the next Mahomes you need to draft more QBs faster until you find them.  I also don't see it as "bailing" on Pickett as much as just starting the best guy in the rotation and Pickett still has time to develop into the guy.  But spending 4-5 years on a mediocre guy and then having to either pay them big bucks or startover at unknown because no one is in the pipeline is the worst thing you can do.  If you draft the next possibility now and they're both mediocre, you aren't going to be pressured to pay the $45M for that guy who is only so-so.  Look at the stupid arguments we're having to deal with now.  The drama is through the roof, because we never brought in a legitimate second option so we're stuck with the hyperbole of well if Kirk leaves, JJ is going to leave and we all need to stop being fans so we should just pay everyone all the money.

Draft a QB high, possibly move up, and find a much cheaper bridge QB.