If I was the Detroit GM and...

[Skkorpion]

a) the #1 draft pick was still mine on draft day and the clock just started;
b) my owner did not allow me to do what I want which is pass on picking until jumping back in at about pick 6;
c) I could choose any player regardless of contract ramifications...

I'd choose QB Mark Sanchez, USC with the #1 pick of the NFL draft.

For reference, I'm positive you can check back and see I advocated Miami selecting QB Matt Ryan, BC last year. I did the same picking QB Philip Rivers, NC St. as well in 2004.

Other than those picks, I don't think I've ever identified my #1 pick, never really having any preference nor confidence in any player. The rest of my prognasticating other positions sucks as badly or worse than anybody else.

The reasoning is simple. QB is the most important position on an NFL team. If I must be burdened with the #1 pick, let it be in a year where there is a QB worthy of taking at #1. 2009 is such a year.

1998 was a slam dunk Peyton Manning or Ryan Leaf #1. I liked Ryan Leaf. Since then, in 11 years of drafts, only Philip Rivers, Matt Ryan and Mark Sanchez have impressed me that way.

 

[az jam]

I'm afraid that the Lions will take Stafford and the Seahawks with the 4th pick may take Sanchez. If you are right in your prediction that would be bad news for the Cards.
I'm certainly not a judge on picking qbs. I thought Terry Baker would be all pro and felt the Cowboys were nuts to take a qb in the Navy that seemed to be a better runner than passer named Staubach.

 

[overseascardfan]

If I was in DET's war room I would trade the #1 for Cutler and use the other pick on Andre Smith to protect him.

DEN could select Stafford or Sanchez @ #1 and a WR like Maclin at #12.

 

[Lorenzo]

I am kind of surprised that stafford jumped as high as he has. I would not risk a #1 pick with him, but that's just me. I watched him and harrell play against each other in high school at texas stadium...I've seen plenty of stafford. He is a good athlete and has a strong arm. It is hard to believe that he has risen that high now.

If I were the Detroit GM I'd call fox or fax them my resume.

 

[CardinalChris]

If I was in DET's war room I would trade the #1 for Cutler and use the other pick on Andre Smith to protect him.

DEN could select Stafford or Sanchez @ #1 and a WR like Maclin at #12.

I'd give up my second first rounder and an additional third rounder to get Cutler and use the #1 pick on Curry. that defense is miserable.

I do wonder if Denver wants a QB in return (Cleveland?) or just settle on starting over with a rookie QB and head coach.

 

[Stout]

I have to majorly disagree with you, Skkorp. I think Sanchez is going to bust and bust large. I'm not sure about Stafford. I also don't have a ton of evidence to back up my hunch, just the idea that he was surrounded with talent at USC. What have the great USC QB's done lately? Palmer had a run of success, but that fell off. Cassell? Still don't believe in him, because he was in a perfect situation. Sadly, I have to say that Leinart is still an unproven. I'm not saying any or all of those guys will fall flat on their faces, but my gut just tells me Sanchez will suck.

And, with that in mind, I'd be thrilled if Seattle took Sanchez. Not only would he not play right away, but it would keep a top-level player from stepping on the field for them--a guy they would have gotten with the pick. And I think it will set them back 4-5 years, having a QBOF that isn't going to be any good.

 

[Crazy Canuck]

If I was in DET's war room I would trade the #1 for Cutler and use the other pick on Andre Smith to protect him.

DEN could select Stafford or Sanchez @ #1 and a WR like Maclin at #12.

No one is going to take the no. 1 pick off of Detroit unless they pay a hefty price.

 

[az jam]

No one is going to take the no. 1 pick off of Detroit unless they pay a hefty price.

There doesn't seem anyone in this draft that is worth what you will have to pay for the number one pick.

 

[chickenhead]

I'm no expert scout either, but I think both Palmer and Leinart were better than Booty and Sanchez. I also think Sanchez is coming out because he's afraid his stock might drop next year, not because he's proven all that he needs to.

He may be the next [insert legend here], but if I were a Niners fan, I'd some reservations about him at #10, whereas I thought the Cards got a steal when Leinart fell to #10. The jury is still out on Leinart, obviously, but a lot of higher picks have busted in less time.

 

[Shogun]

I'm no expert scout either, but I think both Palmer and Leinart were better than Booty and Sanchez. I also think Sanchez is coming out because he's afraid his stock might drop next year, not because he's proven all that he needs to.

He may be the next [insert legend here], but if I were a Niners fan, I'd some reservations about him at #10, whereas I thought the Cards got a steal when Leinart fell to #10. The jury is still out on Leinart, obviously, but a lot of higher picks have busted in less time.

If you were an underclassman QB who capped off a great season and this was the worst group of senior QBs in recent memory you're telling me that you wouldn't capitalize on a chance for lottery money? Sometimes, it's about striking while the iron is hot instead of proving all you need to. Your same issue can easily be applied to Stafford and especially Freeman. This year are only 3 first day worthy QBs and they're all the aforementioned underclassmen. After that, you're scraping at the bottom of the barrel.

I agree that he hasn't had careers like Palmer, Booty and Leinart but his status next year probably would be similar to what it is now - the second best QB in his class. Sanchez showed great potential in his 16 career starts. The issue is that those flashes of brilliance also came along the plays that showed his inexperience and lack of polish at the position. That is commonplace in ALL underclassmen QBs. If NFL teams would let these guys actually develop for an actual year instead of the typical "he'll sit the bench until the midway point of the season because the team needs a spark" nonsense, they'll be fine.

 

[Shogun]

I have to majorly disagree with you, Skkorp. I think Sanchez is going to bust and bust large. I'm not sure about Stafford. I also don't have a ton of evidence to back up my hunch, just the idea that he was surrounded with talent at USC. What have the great USC QB's done lately? Palmer had a run of success, but that fell off. Cassell? Still don't believe in him, because he was in a perfect situation. Sadly, I have to say that Leinart is still an unproven. I'm not saying any or all of those guys will fall flat on their faces, but my gut just tells me Sanchez will suck. .

Carson Palmer's success fell off because of the wooden shanty those people in Ohio call a football team. And he was injured in 2008. You can't really put it on him. It's a Raider-esque situation. I agree with Cassell and Leinart to a degree, but Booty didn't have the upside of the other guys. He was undersized and athletically limited. He might be a starter down the road, but was never the prospect Palmer, Leinart and Sanchez were.

It's not totally fair to say that [insert name] was surrounded by so much talent because that is the norm in BCS schools. USC QBs aren't put in a Ken Dorsey spot where they just have to manage the offense and not screw up, they are given the reigns to go make something happen.

I just disagree with your hunch. I also like Mark Sanchez.