Consistently missing on first round QB's has been proven to have far worse consequences. I'll take the Texans two playoff years, and other winning seasons (along with first round players that still contribute) over all of the crap that the Jaguars, Browns, Titans, Dolphins, Bills, Bucs, Redskins and Rams have had to endure when they were whiffing early (Rams have since wised up a little... See the RG3 trade)
Not really, especially in the post-rookie-cap era. The Browns, Jags, Dolphins, Bucs, etc are in no worse shape than the Texans at this point. If anything, several of them have something to try to build around for the future, while a team like the Texans has no real direction at all. The Titans made the playoffs with VY too. They went 30-17 with him and likely make the playoffs multiple times if they started him from the beginning of a couple of their seasons. Obviously, he had plenty of issues that ultimately led to his downfall, but his time with Tennessee was not a failure on the field. He improved in each of his years, won a lot of games, and provided a lot of hope and excitement for that franchise. But yes, if you ignore all the success stories and only look at the failures, you're certainly right that taking a QB has terrible consequences. If you're not willing to take the Blaine Gabberts or VYs or RG3s, you'll never find the Big Bens or Joe Flaccos or Matt Ryans and you'll just flounder in mediocrity. None of these guys are guarantees. Besides, the Texans playoff years were specifically the result of taking a chance and investing resources in a QB.
I'm all for investing resources on a QB when you have key components in place already... And actually do prefer guys with some experience or more mature college players coming from a proven college system. And all those teams you and I mentioned are largely talent devoid at all the important positions on both sides of the ball... Again, you've narrowed it down to the LCD view of that only a QB matters, when it's been proven over and over and over again that truly great winning teams have the full package (with some even winning with a mediocre QB of all things). But your concept of doing nothing but picking a QB till you find the right one really would have got you fired faster than Whisenhunt did (and no matter what your bias is, VY was not a successful NFL starting QB... And any success they had was predicated from a coach and regime that was built without having to reach to take a QB just to take one). Again, it's not s big surprise the Titans are where they are, and having highly drafted QB failures is the biggest culprit.
The article didn't make it clear as to whether Whisenhunt was fired or relieved of his post? I've seen reports of both, so a bit confusing.
Which is odd because the spent a high draft picks on Lewan and Warmack and spent a bunch of money on Levitre before trading him. The tried to address the line it just didn't work.
