Here's the thing, though:

You keep knocking Watson's production, and I get it. But the context of the situation is thus:

Over the past 10 seasons:

NDSU has run the ball 6,499 times for 39,968 yards. They have thrown the ball 3,068 times for 25,629 yards.

That's a 68 percent run rate. They average almost 6 yards a pop over that span, so you see why they stick with it.

Looking back, starting in 2014, you start seeing a slight decrease in the number of times they throw the ball. From 36% in 2012-13 to 27% this past year. They WERE a run-heavy scheme to start and have skewed even more strongly in that direction.

This isn't about Watson not dominating or the coaches not trusting him. It's about an absolute powerhouse with a clear, long-standing, and absolutely successful system sticking with that system regardless of personnel.

If the Bison had thrown the ball at the same rate in 2021 as they did at the start of this period (36%) and succeeded at the same rate, you'd roughly expect Watson's numbers to be in the 1200 yard, 11-12 TD range.

And shoot, running the same exercise and using, say, the run-pass balance of Ohio State against it... that's 54 percent passes. You're looking at 1600 yards and 14 TDs.

I think Watson's production is a red herring when it comes to evaluating him. Lot of words for me to get to that thesis, but there it is.
[Reply]

I think both of you have fair points.
[Reply]

I’m with Idaho. Watson is a rare talent and this draft is deep with productive wrs but it’s not deep with legit wr1 studs and that’s what Watson has the potential to be.
[Reply]

A guy like Watson definitely presents a conundrum.

He has an athletic profile that absolutely screams at you "#1 WR," and I have little doubt about that. What you can't gauge is how well he's going to adapt to the NFL and how he will enhance his rudimentary route running. He's a definitive "boom or bust" prospect.

In the other corner, I look at a guy like Jalen Tolbert who doesn't have an elite athletic profile. He has a good profile, but not like Watson. What Tolbert does have is elite production and elite route-running skills (for college). His floor is incredibly higher, probably "productive #2 WR." When I do look at Tolbert's athletic profile though, I can't help but see a guy I really liked several years ago that turned out to be a draft steal and certified stud in Stefon Diggs.

So you can take a guy like Watson and hope he reaches his potential, which very well could be in the stratosphere of Justin Jefferson and Jamaar Chase, or he could easily bust. You could otherwise take a guy like Tolbert who looks to be at least a Marvin Jones caliber #2 that could be Stefon Diggs if he gets even better. When it comes to WRs, I've tried to evaluate more on that athletic profile and haven't had much luck with it in recent times. At this point, I'm taking Tolbert 100 out of 100 times early. I'll save my hopes for guys like Gray or Melton to bust out as a 4th/5th round pick.
[Reply]

I don't assume a guy that isn't doing WR things is going to start in the NFL.

Watson is big and fast. But he doesn't do much else for me.

Like you, I prefer other guys not getting hype.

Give me Khalil Shakir. 6 feet, ran a 4.4 and is an animal on the field.
[Reply]

Tolbert Gang!
[Reply]

via GIPHY

[Reply]

Yeah, Watson/Tolbert is usually the exact discussion I have with myself as well.

And then right there in between the two you have Alec Pierce who is a weird hybrid of the two. More athletic than Tolbert, more polished than Watson.

But I think THAT'S the tier these guys are all in. Late 2nd, early 3rd considerations. And at that point it's just a question of choosing what flavor of ice cream you're after there.

What I've taken exception to is the willingness to hand-waive the floor, move straight to the ceiling and say "well because Watson is so athletic his ceiling is higher and as such he's an obviously better prospect than those guys..."

I just don't think ceiling is the only thing that you should be considering here. There's a real possibility the guy goes Matt Jones on you and never does anything worthwhile in this league. And when taking that into consideration, he's more of a late 2nd into the 3rd round caliber pick for me who, for the Chiefs anyway, would be behind someone like Tolbert and Pierce.

I'm fine letting our generational QB take good players and make them great.
[Reply]

I think this explanation is the best rationale for our differences in approaching the draft. I want the boom guy. If he busts, so be it. I feel like we can find the Pringle types anytime in Fa or elsewhere. Burks might be the best compromise but his route running is a concern. I’m not as concerned about his speed even with the combine bc of his tape and the 22.6 mph on the field. I heard on nfl network that burks weight ballooned up to 240 lbs! That’s a concern also. We don’t need him having weight issues like kelvin benjamin.
[Reply]

I would rather have the guy who could be solid at minimum. Watson could be fantastic but he could be Jon Baldwin.
[Reply]

Why? And I’d say that Watson should be an mvs type at a minimum. But let’s stay on point, why the need to find a solid wr at a minimum? Can’t we find solid wrs in free agency cheap considering our oline and qb? This is a good time to take a risk and go for the high ceiling wr. Can’t fountain be solid? And what if we hit on a stud wr like jefferson? With these extra picks and cap savings, we should be Super Bowl bound if we happen to draft a jefferson type player in the draft. Come on guys. Let’s go for a stud wr and take some risk. Let fountain be your hope for solid contributor. Why the push to play it safe? Sounds like the old argument for not drafting a qb in the 1st? It’s safer!

Daurice Fountain

Measurable Measurement %tile
Height 6' 1½"* 60
Weight 206 lbs* 61
10 Yard Split 1.65s* 4
20 Yard Split 2.6s* 49
40 Yard Dash 4.51s* 52
Vertical Jump 42½"* 98
Broad Jump 134"* 97
3-Cone Drill 7.02s* 39
20 Yard Shuttle 4.29s* 33
Bench Press 14 reps* 46
[Reply]

Having a QB like Mahomes under center and Andy running the show, give me the definite #2 guy. I think that combined with what Tolbert brings to the table coudl easily be elevated to "#1" production.
[Reply]

Think of Patrick Mahomes as similar to Coors Field.

There's a saying in baseball circles - "Coors Field doesn't turn bad hitters into good hitters. It turns good hitters into great ones..."

I think that's what an elite quarterback does. He can't turn Demarcus Robinson into Deandre Hopkins. You can't give him guys who just aren't NFL players and have him make them into 1,000 yard guys.

But if you give him 6-700 yard guys, he MIGHT be able to turn them into 1,100 yard guys.

I think the odds of Tolbert or Pierce being merely good NFL players are significantly higher than the odds of Watson being one. And so I'm willing to leave some ceiling on the table for the floor and then let my QB do the rest.

If I had someone like Jimmy Garappolo under center, someone who needs his WRs to carry his water for him, I'm more likely to focus on the ceiling of a player than his floor.

But again - for THIS team - that's just not how I'd operate.
[Reply]

The prognosticators and analysts seem to believe that Juju is one of these guys. Just putting that out there.
[Reply]

There's a non-zero chance he is.

I'm less opposed to JJSS now that we're likely changing our offensive approach pretty substantially.

I simply didn't think he was the complement to Hill/Kelce that most others did. And frankly I still think he's mist-cast out of the slot and should be used as a more conventional X.

But we'll see. He was cheap and he might be exactly the sort of guy I'm talking about.
[Reply]