What's on tap The QB risk March 28, 2003 Print it Archived Sports Bahr We recently devoted a Voice of the Fan column to what the Bengals should do with the No. 1 pick in the draft. Personally, I think they should trade down, get a couple of extra picks and address other needs. But this raises an interesting question: When is it OK to draft a QB in the early/middle portion of the first round? A few years ago, my opinion would have been much different. Back then, I would have encouraged teams to take the gamble and try to land a franchise QB who just might develop into a guy who will lead the franchise to a Super Bowl or two. However, watching Kurt Warner, Trent Dilfer, Tom Brady and Brad Johnson win a Super Bowl really forced me to re-evaluate things. Sure, there are some excellent examples of top-notch QBs who were drafted early in the first round (Peyton Manning, Donovan McNabb, Michael Vick), but the list of recent busts stands out much more (Ryan Leaf and Akili Smith, just to name a couple). The fact that so many successful QBs have been late-round picks or went undrafted (Warner, Brady, Jeff Garcia) really makes you think twice. There are two big problems with drafting a QB very early. First, the teams doing the drafting usually are in very poor shape and obviously need more than a QB. Second, the young QB's development often is slowed because he is thrown into game action too soon. What is the idea situation? I think the Jets really had the right idea with Chad Pennington. They were lucky to get him at No. 18 and then were wise to park him on the bench for two seasons. But that kind of situation is rare. Let's assume I have a top five pick. Unless the top-rated QB in the draft is clearly the best player available (Manning in 1998 is an example), I wouldn't draft him. My philosophy would be to take the best player on the board, or trade down and collect more picks. It has been proven that the QB position isn't as vital as it once was. Instead, having a well-rounded team is much more important. Each situation must be handled on a case-by-case basis, but I would have serious doubts about drafting a QB who has had one or two quality years or whom I have I have even the slightest doubt about. It just makes more sense to pursue a non-spectacular, free-agent QB in most cases. But I wonder if the majority of fans now feel this way. Let me know. What do you think? When it is worth the risk to draft a QB early in the first round? Send your thoughts to fans@sportingnews.com, and look for them in my next column. Thanks for reading. Chris Bahr The Sporting News

Still Brewin' The final two Here are some of your responses to my previous column, which asked which matchup game you most want to see in the NCAA hoops title game, and which matchup you think we will see. Note: All of these letters are from before Thursday night's Sweet 16 games. What do I want to see? Marquette vs. Butler, or Wisconsin vs. Auburn. But, alas, there is that pesky thing called reality. What do I think we'll see? A Kentucky-Syracuse rematch, or possibly an Oklahoma-Kentucky game. What will I settle for? Anyone but Kansas. The Jayhawks are more annoying than Duke. Has anyone had as much talent as Roy Williams and never won anything (besides Mack Brown's Texas football teams)? Of course, as an ACC fan, I wouldn't mind Duke-Maryland for the title. Brant Guillory It would be great to see a title game between two teams like Marquette and Butler. Despite all of the talk of how wild and crazy March Madness is, the truth is it almost always culminates in a finals matchup between two well-known national powers. Cinderella shows up in the first round quite a bit, but we rarely see her show up for the Final Four. Can you imagine Butler winning the title? That would prove that anything really can happen in this tournament. The matchup we're likely to see is red-hot Kentucky against Hollis Price and the tough and rugged Oklahoma Sooners. The Wildcats seem to be on a mission this year and have a far easier road to New Orleans than Arizona (or whoever comes out of the West, because that team will be beaten and battered). Oklahoma is hungry after reaching the Final Four last year and choking against an Indiana squad it should have routed. This matchup might not be the most entertaining in terms of fast-paced action, but it should be a nail-biter since both teams are so physical on defense. I'll take Kentucky in overtime. Zach Chouteau El Cerrito, Calif. I'm just cocky enough to believe that the matchup I'd like to see is the one I will see: Kentucky over Oklahoma. I think that Kentucky is in a "zone" right now, and I have seldom in recent years seen a team stay this healthy and this hot for this long. If Oklahoma can make it through this weekend and get into the Final Four healthier than it is at present, I think the Sooners have the potential and the motivation to beat Texas and get into the championship game. Mark Coeur d'Alene, Idaho I really would like to see an Oklahoma-Kentucky matchup. That game would be a battle in the paint -- definitely not for the faint of heart. I would like to see Hollis Price at 100 percent against Kentucky's perimeter pressure. The thought of Quannas White vs. Keith Bogans makes me drool! What matchup do I think we'll get? Kentucky vs. Maryland. Clifford I picked Arizona meeting Oklahoma for the championship, with Arizona paying back the Sooners for their loss in last year's Sweet 16 and claiming the title. Even though Hollis Price isn't 100 percent, Oklahoma still has the moxie to beat Syracuse and Texas to get to the title game. Arizona will play another thriller against Kentucky in the Final Four, and that is where Kentucky's win streak will end. Arizona's edge in experience and depth will carry it to the title game and the championship. David R. Knudson