PDA

View Full Version : Colt Brennan and James Hardy


frisby213
12-08-2007, 07:23 PM
Are these guys both projected for the first round? I'm a HUGE fan of both, but I've been kind of out of the loop this year in who's being deemed "good enough" or "ready" for the NFL. For instance, I've always thought Colt was the best QB this season by FAR, but apparently he's the 5th best QB prospect?

And as far as Hardy goes, I go to IU so obviously I love the dude. How's he being projected? First? Second?

Basically, any kind of fill-in on these two guys would be great.

Matthew Jones
12-08-2007, 07:28 PM
I have both in my top-32, but most people probably don't have Brennan in there. He's the #4 QB for me, but could be #2 or 3 by the end of the workouts and all that (in my opinion), although I don't think he climbs above #4 for anyone else. People just think he's a system quarterback, so that's that. As far as Hardy, it really depends on his forty-yard dash time (whether fairly or not.) He'll be a first rounder if he runs a 4.6 or so, and second round pick if he runs lower than that, I think. He would probably benefit from staying in school if Bennett/Jackson/Kelly all declare.

frisby213
12-08-2007, 07:30 PM
Thanks for the input!

Why do you - and for that matter, pretty much everyone - consider CB to be the 4th or 5th best prospect? I don't see why people like Matt Ryan or Brian Brohm over him...

cardsalltheway
12-08-2007, 07:38 PM
James Hardy is God. That is all.

frisby213
12-08-2007, 07:40 PM
James Hardy is God. That is all.

F*** ya, man. It'd be sweet if the Colts got him somehow...>_>

BroadwayJoe10
12-08-2007, 07:41 PM
Thanks for the input!

Why do you - and for that matter, pretty much everyone - consider CB to be the 4th or 5th best prospect? I don't see why people like Matt Ryan or Chase Daniel over him...

Man, that question right there has given way to countless of threads and debates haha. The biggest knock on colt right now is the fact that he plays in june jones' offense, which by spreading the ball out to numerous recievers makes the reads that colt will have to make that much easier. So, one thing is tough to evaluate him on is how he'd handle running a conventional NFL offense and making reads on the fly. He won't have the option of have 4 or 5 recievers to spread the defense and help make his quick reads. That and there havn't been many success stories of QBs coming out of that system and playing particularly well in the NFL. He definately can make all the throws, and he has showed some good poise. I personally just like the guy and hope that he will succeed.


As far as James Hardy, I think it all depends on his forty and who else declares. If a lot of the juniors declare, he could find himself in the middle of round 2. He has great size, excellent at running routes, good body control and good hands. He won't be someone who is going to get a ton of seperation becuase of quickness (because as being 6'7 he isn't going to have the quick strides like a steve smith) but he makes up for that in crisp routes. I hope he performs well at the combine, becuase if he can stay healthy he'll have the ability to be quite productive in the NFL. Basically, anyone whos that tall, can jump that high and has hands like he does...well, i think most people would want him on their team.

underscore
12-09-2007, 06:15 AM
James Hardy is a stud.

DiG
12-09-2007, 10:37 AM
ive got hardy at #2 for wrs

1. Malcom Kelly
2. James Hardy

With that being said he could drop a couple slots after the combine or stay there depending on how he does in his agility runs.

Babylon
12-09-2007, 11:26 AM
I dont think either are 1sts but could both be good players, to me there are usually about 15-20 consensus players and then about 30 that could go anywhere after that, these two may fall into that latter category.

TACKLE
12-09-2007, 12:34 PM
Hardy is a physical freak at 6'7 who has had a great year. If he can run a sub 4.6 he could be the first WR off the board.

nobodyinparticular
12-10-2007, 02:14 PM
Seriously, if a couple of the underclassmen declare (namely Kelly and Hardy), the top of the draft will be full of massive WRs because on top of them you will have Sweed and Bowman. There are some seriously tall guys eligible for the draft this year.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 03:05 PM
Colt Brennan = Tony Romo

Tampa 2 4 life
12-10-2007, 03:07 PM
Colt Brennan = Slightly Poor Man's Tony Romo

Fixed that for ya...

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 03:17 PM
Fixed that for ya...
Who are you?

Tampa 2 4 life
12-10-2007, 03:19 PM
Who are you?

It's WAY too early to say Brennan is on par with Romo, they're similar style guys, but Brennan has a ways to go before he's up to Romo's level.

Travis 24
12-10-2007, 03:20 PM
Colt Brennan = David Carr

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 03:20 PM
It's WAY too early to say Brennan is on par with Romo, they're similar style guys, but Brennan has a ways to go before he's up to Romo's level.
Why? How can you tell? What's Colt done to prove otherwise?

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 03:22 PM
Colt Brennan = David Carr
Now that's just bad. Carr has no vision, no accuracy, no mobility and can't pass worth a darn.

cardsalltheway
12-10-2007, 03:22 PM
Who are you?

Classic D-Unit

Tampa 2 4 life
12-10-2007, 03:27 PM
Why? How can you tell? What's Colt done to prove otherwise?

For Starters, there's a pretty big gap between the WAC and the NFL...Colt hasn't shown me the same ability to improvise that Romo has, that ability to just turn nothing into something. He certainly has the tools to be a Romo-like player, but its a little early to say he will be Romo.

Also, Brennan will be a WAY better QB than Carr.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 03:40 PM
For Starters, there's a pretty big gap between the WAC and the NFL...Colt hasn't shown me the same ability to improvise that Romo has, that ability to just turn nothing into something. He certainly has the tools to be a Romo-like player, but its a little early to say he will be Romo.

Also, Brennan will be a WAY better QB than Carr.
I don't know what you're talking about, but one of Colt's strengths is to make things happen after the play has broken down. You just need to watch 1 game to realize that.

Small school guy
Gun Slinger Mentality
Confident/Brash
Low release
Undersized
Accurate
Good Escape abiltiy
Good Mobility
Will lead the team from behind
Winner
Never gives up on a play
Accurate while throwing on the run

We're talking about the same guy here. One thing Romo has to prove that Colt does is "Coming up big in big games".

Tampa 2 4 life
12-10-2007, 03:51 PM
I don't know what you're talking about, but one of Colt's strengths is to make things happen after the play has broken down. You just need to watch 1 game to realize that.

I've watched 3 Hawaii games this year, Colt's not even close to Romo on that department. I don't think you can annoint a guy as a Top QB when he hasn't even had an NFL workout yet, Brennan will be a good pro but to say he's going to be Tony Romo is foolish.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 03:58 PM
I've watched 3 Hawaii games this year, Colt's not even close to Romo on that department. I don't think you can annoint a guy as a Top QB when he hasn't even had an NFL workout yet, Brennan will be a good pro but to say he's going to be Tony Romo is foolish.
Then I severely question your eye for judgement in watching a football game.

I didn't say he is going to be Tony Romo. But Romo is the closest comparison I can think of.

cardsalltheway
12-10-2007, 04:00 PM
I've watched 3 Hawaii games this year, Colt's not even close to Romo on that department. I don't think you can annoint a guy as a Top QB when he hasn't even had an NFL workout yet, Brennan will be a good pro but to say he's going to be Tony Romo is foolish.

He's not saying he'll necesarily be as good as Romo, just that their styles of play are similar.

Tampa 2 4 life
12-10-2007, 04:02 PM
Then I severely question your eye for judgement in watching a football game.

I didn't say he is going to be Tony Romo. But Romo is the closest comparison I can think of.

Er...Didn't I say that Brennan would a slightly less version of Romo?

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 04:08 PM
Er...Didn't I say that Brennan would a slightly less version of Romo?
Well you said Brennan doesn't make things happen nearly as well as Romo... to me, if you make ANYTHING positive happen after the play breaks down, then that's doing well. Brennan is constantly making things happen when his protection breaks down.

Tampa 2 4 life
12-10-2007, 04:10 PM
Well you said Brennan doesn't make things happen nearly as well as Romo... to me, if you make ANYTHING positive happen after the play breaks down, then that's doing well. Brennan is constantly making things happen when his protection breaks down.

Well he feels the pressure very well, but I haven't seen anything like the Romo "Oh **** That ball went 10 feet over my head time to retrieve it and get the first down lol".

Babylon
12-10-2007, 04:24 PM
I think if you're going to compare a college senior to a Pro that's been around for a few years you have to compare them at similar stages, i would give Brennan the nod in that dept.

PACKmanN
12-10-2007, 04:26 PM
Now that's just bad. Carr has no vision, no accuracy, no mobility and can't pass worth a darn.

He a mixer of Rich Gannon and Jeff Garcia.

Travis 24
12-10-2007, 04:59 PM
Small school guy - So was Carr..same conference too.
Gun Slinger Mentality - Same with Carr...
Confident/Brash - Basically the same as Carr..
Low release - Carr had the side arm, awkward release as well.
Undersized - Carr had about 20 lbs on him
Accurate - Well, Carr was accurate too..thats why he went 1st.
Good Escape abiltiy - Said the same thing about Carr
Good Mobility - Carr had good mobility as well
Will lead the team from behind - Didn't follow Fresno in 02, soo..
Winner - Carr was a winner too?
Never gives up on a play - Same with Carr..
Accurate while throwing on the run - Probably one of the rare differences between the 2


I don't see the Brennan and Romo comparison at all..

Travis 24
12-10-2007, 05:01 PM
Plus, Brennan makes some horrible, horrible decisions...If anything, thats his biggest flaw..I've only seen a handful of Hawaii games, and I saw him throwing into double coverages far too often..

Travis 24
12-10-2007, 05:02 PM
Now that's just bad. Carr has no vision, no accuracy, no mobility and can't pass worth a darn.

Did anyone say that when Carr was coming out of Fresno State?...Nope.

Michigan
12-10-2007, 05:19 PM
We still don't know if Colt can consistently make reads. 3rd round or later until proven otherwise.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 06:01 PM
We still don't know if Colt can consistently make reads. 3rd round or later until proven otherwise.
This makes absolutely no sense at all. The Run N Shoot is all about making reads.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 06:02 PM
Did anyone say that when Carr was coming out of Fresno State?...Nope.
Did Carr do what Colt did in college? Nope.

derza222
12-10-2007, 06:21 PM
I think Colt Brennan is one of the more difficult prospects to get a feel of how he'll play in the NFL.

Does the system affect his statistics, sure? But I don't think it's as big of a deal as a Meyer offense or something like that. The June Jones offense, if I'm correct, has had success in the NFL, and the only reason he's at Hawaii is because he loves it there and no NFL team has any chance to convince him he's leaving. Even though it's not run in the NFL, I think Colt's ability to make reads will help him long-term although he'll have to adjust to a different style of offense.

Level of competition is a question mark, but lots of guys in this draft have those questions and you can only hold that against him so much. Plus, he hasn't lost to anybody this year. I also hate to say that he's a winner because of level of competition issues, so we can call that a wash.

Lots of people view the gunslinger mentality as a positive for other quarterbacks, so you can't really say it's a negative for him.

So most things here, outside of the ability to adjust to a more pro-style offense (most QB's have to sit for awhile anyways) are a wash. This leaves me with seeing Colt as a QB that's tall, has moxie, and has good arm strength and accuracy. Everything else can really either be seen as a positive or a negative depending on how you interpret it, which is why I think people's views of him are all over the place. I think he's a good prospect and personally I like him a good amount. Georgia game will be huge for him, as will whatever he does in the postseason.



Also, I love James Hardy. A big deal is going to be made about his 40 time, but I think whoever gets him, if he comes out, is getting quite the player. Great size and a good route runner, I think he's going to be a good one.

Babylon
12-10-2007, 06:30 PM
I think Brennan would be a steal late in the second round, from what i've seen i actually like Flacco better but Brennan could be a good one down the road.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 06:32 PM
I think Colt Brennan is one of the more difficult prospects to get a feel of how he'll play in the NFL.

Does the system affect his statistics, sure? But I don't think it's as big of a deal as a Meyer offense or something like that. The June Jones offense, if I'm correct, has had success in the NFL, and the only reason he's at Hawaii is because he loves it there and no NFL team has any chance to convince him he's leaving. Even though it's not run in the NFL, I think Colt's ability to make reads will help him long-term although he'll have to adjust to a different style of offense.

Level of competition is a question mark, but lots of guys in this draft have those questions and you can only hold that against him so much. Plus, he hasn't lost to anybody this year. I also hate to say that he's a winner because of level of competition issues, so we can call that a wash.

Lots of people view the gunslinger mentality as a positive for other quarterbacks, so you can't really say it's a negative for him.

So most things here, outside of the ability to adjust to a more pro-style offense (most QB's have to sit for awhile anyways) are a wash. This leaves me with seeing Colt as a QB that's tall, has moxie, and has good arm strength and accuracy. Everything else can really either be seen as a positive or a negative depending on how you interpret it, which is why I think people's views of him are all over the place. I think he's a good prospect and personally I like him a good amount. Georgia game will be huge for him, as will whatever he does in the postseason.



Also, I love James Hardy. A big deal is going to be made about his 40 time, but I think whoever gets him, if he comes out, is getting quite the player. Great size and a good route runner, I think he's going to be a good one.
That's a good fair post. I agree that he is difficult to project.

Level of competition is hard to gauge, but people also need to remember, who Hawaii is at the same time. It's not like they are some power house team picking on scrubs. They are playing teams that traditionally are on the same playing level. Colt has taken this team and made them into a winner. Would we be in this position with Timmy Chang? I think not. Colt is undeniably the reason why Hawaii is who they are today. Hawaii has won 22 of their last 23 games. He's a winner.

So when people say this Georgia game will be a big game for him, while I agree, we also need to remember that Georgia has a $60M football budget and Hawaii has a $7M budget. Georgia should SMASH Hawaii based off their superior resources, budget, players, tradition, recruiting, coaching, etc. Put Colt behind the line of an LSU team going against Georgia and then judge him on equal ground. Otherwise, I think it's unfair to expect miraculous results.

...and about the system being run in the NFL. Look no further than the New England Patriots offense.

Bengals1690
12-10-2007, 06:38 PM
That's a good fair post. I agree that he is difficult to project.

Level of competition is hard to gauge, but people also need to remember, who Hawaii is at the same time. It's not like they are some power house team picking on scrubs. They are playing teams that traditionally are on the same playing level. Colt has taken this team and made them into a winner. Would we be in this position with Timmy Chang? I think not. Colt is undeniably the reason why Hawaii is who they are today. Hawaii has won 22 of their last 23 games. He's a winner.

So when people say this Georgia game will be a big game for him, while I agree, we also need to remember that Georgia has a $60M football budget and Hawaii has a $7M budget. Georgia should SMASH Hawaii based off their superior resources, budget, players, tradition, recruiting, coaching, etc. Put Colt behind the line of an LSU team going against Georgia and then judge him on equal ground. Otherwise, I think it's unfair to expect miraculous results.

...and about the system being run in the NFL. Look no further than the New England Patriots offense.

exactly. I don't see how someone can hop on Brady's rod for getting great stats and say brennan is a system quarterback. They basically run the same offense.

Travis 24
12-10-2007, 07:49 PM
Did Carr do what Colt did in college? Nope.

David Klinger did..

Sniper
12-10-2007, 08:00 PM
exactly. I don't see how someone can hop on Brady's rod for getting great stats and say brennan is a system quarterback. They basically run the same offense.

Because Brady's proven he can work in a conventional offense as well.

derza222
12-10-2007, 08:07 PM
That's a good fair post. I agree that he is difficult to project.

Level of competition is hard to gauge, but people also need to remember, who Hawaii is at the same time. It's not like they are some power house team picking on scrubs. They are playing teams that traditionally are on the same playing level. Colt has taken this team and made them into a winner. Would we be in this position with Timmy Chang? I think not. Colt is undeniably the reason why Hawaii is who they are today. Hawaii has won 22 of their last 23 games. He's a winner.

So when people say this Georgia game will be a big game for him, while I agree, we also need to remember that Georgia has a $60M football budget and Hawaii has a $7M budget. Georgia should SMASH Hawaii based off their superior resources, budget, players, tradition, recruiting, coaching, etc. Put Colt behind the line of an LSU team going against Georgia and then judge him on equal ground. Otherwise, I think it's unfair to expect miraculous results.

...and about the system being run in the NFL. Look no further than the New England Patriots offense.


Fair point about the level of competition being around the same level as the teams around them, but I think although Hawaii isn't an elite programs they do have some good ballplayers there. I think it's fair enough to say that generally Hawaii has better players, on average, than the teams they're playing. Not by much, but the players are better. Point taken though. He certainly has helped that program by a significant margin.

My point was more for all-star games (has he accepted an invite anywhere?) than the Georgia game, but I did mention it, so...I think it's a big game for his stock, but not quite make or break. It's actually a pretty solid game for him IMO. If he does well in the game it should really give his stock a nice boost and if he doesn't, as you said, it would be unfair to expect it. If he has a terrible game it'll probably drop him a little, but not as much as it would rise him if he has a great game. At least that's how I see it. And if he's somewhere in the below average to above average range, he probably stays put in the eyes of unbiased observers (as opposed to people that, if he has a bad game, will go: "He sucked against Georgia!! System QB!!!!!!). I still think the postseason all-star game (if he elects to go to any, again has he accepted an invite?) will be huge as the playing field will be relatively neutral and the offense will be more pro-style. If he does well, with his physical tools I think he shoots up.

As far as the Pats running the offense, odds are Colt doesn't end up in New England and he will have to adjust to a different offense. If he ends up in a similar system, great. But I'm not sure how likely that is.

All in all, I think drafting Brennan is like drafting a guy with nearly all the tools and saying lets develop him, but he's a winner as well. I tend to think the "system QB" talk is less significant because it isn't like he doesn't have tools, and I think in the right situation he will have success. I think he's a very appealing prospect and obviously the next few months will be huge for him. He's certainly going to be a very interesting guy to follow.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 08:13 PM
David Klinger did..
Uhh.... no he didn't.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 08:14 PM
Because Brady's proven he can work in a conventional offense as well.
Do you think a conventional offense is harder to grasp than the Run N Shoot?

Or do you think that taking the ball from Center is really some hard feat to accomplish?

Bengals1690
12-10-2007, 08:16 PM
Because Brady's proven he can work in a conventional offense as well.

true. But his stats didnt inflate until he started running the spread he used to run, (pre corey dillon) and until he got great recivers. Not takin away from brady, of course. He is great. I just dont see how we can love Brady's accomplishments and push away Brennan when both are in the same system.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 08:17 PM
Fair point about the level of competition being around the same level as the teams around them, but I think although Hawaii isn't an elite programs they do have some good ballplayers there. I think it's fair enough to say that generally Hawaii has better players, on average, than the teams they're playing. Not by much, but the players are better. Point taken though. He certainly has helped that program by a significant margin.

My point was more for all-star games (has he accepted an invite anywhere?) than the Georgia game, but I did mention it, so...I think it's a big game for his stock, but not quite make or break. It's actually a pretty solid game for him IMO. If he does well in the game it should really give his stock a nice boost and if he doesn't, as you said, it would be unfair to expect it. If he has a terrible game it'll probably drop him a little, but not as much as it would rise him if he has a great game. At least that's how I see it. And if he's somewhere in the below average to above average range, he probably stays put in the eyes of unbiased observers (as opposed to people that, if he has a bad game, will go: "He sucked against Georgia!! System QB!!!!!!). I still think the postseason all-star game (if he elects to go to any, again has he accepted an invite?) will be huge as the playing field will be relatively neutral and the offense will be more pro-style. If he does well, with his physical tools I think he shoots up.

As far as the Pats running the offense, odds are Colt doesn't end up in New England and he will have to adjust to a different offense. If he ends up in a similar system, great. But I'm not sure how likely that is.

All in all, I think drafting Brennan is like drafting a guy with nearly all the tools and saying lets develop him, but he's a winner as well. I tend to think the "system QB" talk is less significant because it isn't like he doesn't have tools, and I think in the right situation he will have success. I think he's a very appealing prospect and obviously the next few months will be huge for him. He's certainly going to be a very interesting guy to follow.
He was one of the first QBs to accept his invitation to the Senior Bowl.

He'll be dissected then.

Bengals1690
12-10-2007, 08:18 PM
Do you think a conventional offense is harder to grasp than the Run N Shoot?

Or do you think that taking the ball from Center is really some hard feat to accomplish?

only if your rex grossman :0

Sniper
12-10-2007, 08:20 PM
Do you think a conventional offense is harder to grasp than the Run N Shoot?

Or do you think that taking the ball from Center is really some hard feat to accomplish?

You don't get the saeme pre-snap reads from under center than you do out of the gun though. I'm not really saying anything bad about Brennan, just responding to the Brady question.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 08:20 PM
true. But his stats didnt inflate until he started running the spread he used to run, (pre corey dillon) and until he got great recivers. Not takin away from brady, of course. He is great. I just dont see how we can love Brady's accomplishments and push away Brennan when both are in the same system.
People will misjudge QBs til kingdom come. There is no if he does this, then he'll be that. If he has this, then he'll do that. If he's this tall, then he'll succeed/fail. But if there is one underlying trait that the great ones have in common... It's that thing called "Moxie". ...and Colt has plenty of it.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 08:26 PM
You don't get the saeme pre-snap reads from under center than you do out of the gun though. I'm not really saying anything bad about Brennan, just responding to the Brady question.
I'm not sure how you're trying to generalize that. I have some guesses, but why don't you explain a little further.

Travis 24
12-10-2007, 08:41 PM
...who's record did Brennan break last year for TD's in a season...???...Oh..?

draftguru151
12-10-2007, 08:48 PM
Just because a team uses multiple WRs and throw a lot doesn't mean it's the same offense.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 09:08 PM
Just because a team uses multiple WRs and throw a lot doesn't mean it's the same offense.
Well, June Jones is claiming the same thing.. but what does he know about what he sees on the field, eh? Obviously, the word "same" doesn't really mean exactly same plays, routes, assignments... but the shell is the same.

draftguru151
12-10-2007, 09:09 PM
Yea I'm sure he isn't trying to say anything to make his own players look better. :/

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 09:10 PM
...who's record did Brennan break last year for TD's in a season...???...Oh..?
Who's the All-time NCAA Career Touchdown Leader? One clue. It ain't Ty Detmer.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 09:11 PM
Yea I'm sure he isn't trying to say anything to make his own players look better. :/
Maybe... but he ain't lying.

draftguru151
12-10-2007, 09:14 PM
The NE Patriots do not run the run and shoot offense, and if you or Jones really believe that you haven't watched NE play.

D-Unit
12-10-2007, 10:06 PM
The NE Patriots do not run the run and shoot offense, and if you or Jones really believe that you haven't watched NE play.
They are not the same thing. Are there similar elements? Of course! If you don't believe that, then you haven't watched NE play.

draftguru151
12-10-2007, 10:15 PM
So because they do some of the same things it means Brennan's offense is ok? Do the Patriots throw a lot of quick passes like in the run and shoot? Yes, but so does every offense. Does that have any relevance to Brennan's game/offense translating to the NFL? You've said more than once that it's no big deal that Brennan plays in Hawaii's offense because the Patriots run the same thing, when really they just throw the ball alot.

Wootylicous
12-10-2007, 11:50 PM
Colt Brennan scouting report is in.

neko4
12-11-2007, 07:47 AM
Hardy and Brennan are both my favorite prospects at their respective positions, James Hardy is my numero uno WR, brennan i'd say is the 3rd best QB

neko4
12-11-2007, 07:47 AM
So because they do some of the same things it means Brennan's offense is ok? Do the Patriots throw a lot of quick passes like in the run and shoot? Yes, but so does every offense. Does that have any relevance to Brennan's game/offense translating to the NFL? You've said more than once that it's no big deal that Brennan plays in Hawaii's offense because the Patriots run the same thing, when really they just throw the ball alot.
The packers do

Babylon
12-11-2007, 12:18 PM
Hardy and Brennan are both my favorite prospects at their respective positions, James Hardy is my numero uno WR, brennan i'd say is the 3rd best QB

Dont see Brennan cracking the top 3, will probably be in there with Flacco late round 2 or round 3, not sure about the Johnson kid so i dont want to include him(or exclude).

frisby213
12-11-2007, 08:35 PM
OK I'll separate this into two parts, Brennan and Hardy:

COLT BRENNAN

So basically it seems like Colt is either going to be amazing or a total bust.....

Personally, I don't see why people think it matters so much if a QB has experience running a "standard offense." If Brennan were to go to a pass-happy team with multiple deep threats, such as the Lions, maybe even the Rams, and gets to start behind an average or better O-Line (something David Carr never had) then I personally don't see how he could fail. This dude had 58 touchdowns in a single season, with over 70% of his passes completed.

And for all the talk of how untalented his conference is, doesn't that include the rest of his team? Throwing to less talented receivers on a "less talented" team and getting those numbers seems to outweigh not playing "great" defenses, IMO.

I started this topic, so I'm still genuinely curious about these guys' potential in the pros, but the only negatives I've heard so far are that he hasn't proven [something] or he played in a weak conference. Honestly, all I can say to that is....SO WHAT? NO QB prospect has proved himself yet. Nor do they ever, until they step on the field. Otherwise Rex Grossman, Jason White, etc would all be All-Pros in the NFL today. Troy Smith would have gone top 5 and be leading the Ravens to a winning record...etc, etc...

But anyway...moving on:

JAMES HARDY

This is more of a question in general about WRs, but honestly, why do people care about 40 times so much? When has a correlation between speed (or, at least, a 40 time) and talent/success ever been shown? Jerry Rice wasn't fast. Marvin Harrison wasn't significantly fast. Reggie Wayne wasn't fast.

The way I see it - although I admit maybe I'm just biased, as with Colt - when a guy is 6'7" with what looks to me like great hands and good route-running ability, he won't have to be insanely fast...

I don't know though, I'm not some kind of expert on any of this, obviously. I enjoy this discussion though; this is all quite interesting to me.

Sniper
12-11-2007, 11:44 PM
Marvin Harrison runs a 4.38

RyanLeaf#1
12-12-2007, 01:44 AM
Marvin Harrison runs a 4.38

When Marvin Harrison was at Roman Catholic High School ( My high school ). The fastest track person in Philadelphia who went to a different school up the street said he would beat Marvin in a foot race. They closed down Broad street for like a 100 yard run, and Marvin smoked him. Marvin is extremely fast.

frisby213
12-12-2007, 09:00 PM
These rebuttles on Marv still don't address my point....(s).

frisby213
12-15-2007, 11:21 PM
OK I'll separate this into two parts, Brennan and Hardy:

COLT BRENNAN

So basically it seems like Colt is either going to be amazing or a total bust.....

Personally, I don't see why people think it matters so much if a QB has experience running a "standard offense." If Brennan were to go to a pass-happy team with multiple deep threats, such as the Lions, maybe even the Rams, and gets to start behind an average or better O-Line (something David Carr never had) then I personally don't see how he could fail. This dude had 58 touchdowns in a single season, with over 70% of his passes completed.

And for all the talk of how untalented his conference is, doesn't that include the rest of his team? Throwing to less talented receivers on a "less talented" team and getting those numbers seems to outweigh not playing "great" defenses, IMO.

I started this topic, so I'm still genuinely curious about these guys' potential in the pros, but the only negatives I've heard so far are that he hasn't proven [something] or he played in a weak conference. Honestly, all I can say to that is....SO WHAT? NO QB prospect has proved himself yet. Nor do they ever, until they step on the field. Otherwise Rex Grossman, Jason White, etc would all be All-Pros in the NFL today. Troy Smith would have gone top 5 and be leading the Ravens to a winning record...etc, etc...

But anyway...moving on:

JAMES HARDY

This is more of a question in general about WRs, but honestly, why do people care about 40 times so much? When has a correlation between speed (or, at least, a 40 time) and talent/success ever been shown? Jerry Rice wasn't fast. Marvin Harrison wasn't significantly fast. Reggie Wayne wasn't fast.

The way I see it - although I admit maybe I'm just biased, as with Colt - when a guy is 6'7" with what looks to me like great hands and good route-running ability, he won't have to be insanely fast...

I don't know though, I'm not some kind of expert on any of this, obviously. I enjoy this discussion though; this is all quite interesting to me.


So I take it no one has a response to this?

frisby213
12-17-2007, 09:42 PM
Sigh......

gdamac
12-18-2007, 07:19 AM
Seriously, if a couple of the underclassmen declare (namely Kelly and Hardy), the top of the draft will be full of massive WRs because on top of them you will have Sweed and Bowman. There are some seriously tall guys eligible for the draft this year.

I hope the Raiders get one, I am starting to like Bowman.

gdamac
12-18-2007, 07:26 AM
OK I'll separate this into two parts, Brennan and Hardy:
JAMES HARDY

This is more of a question in general about WRs, but honestly, why do people care about 40 times so much? When has a correlation between speed (or, at least, a 40 time) and talent/success ever been shown? Jerry Rice wasn't fast. Marvin Harrison wasn't significantly fast. Reggie Wayne wasn't fast.

The way I see it - although I admit maybe I'm just biased, as with Colt - when a guy is 6'7" with what looks to me like great hands and good route-running ability, he won't have to be insanely fast...

I don't know though, I'm not some kind of expert on any of this, obviously. I enjoy this discussion though; this is all quite interesting to me.

I am no expert, but my thoughts are that A) there is a pretty good list of successful guys with the fast 40 times and B) If a guy busts, a GM/Coach can point to his measurables and say "...it wasn't my fault mr. owner, you saw his 40 time!?!?"

I agree with you, I was watching a piece about Jerry Rice in college, he said he never timed well, but when he was on the football field he just knew he was faster than everybody, he was usually right. I read both Hardy and Bowman are guys who will likely clock 4.5 but play much, much faster.

MaxV
12-18-2007, 08:41 AM
I agree that 40 time is a bit overrated for a WR.

NFL CBs have great speed also and you need to be a good route runner to beat them.

James Hardy is a very good route runner and he might be the best red-zone weapon in college football.

Hardy should be a 1st round pick.

Now as for Brennan, I like him, but not enough to view him as a 1st rounder. I have him as #4 QB in the draft (behind Brohm, Ryan, Woodson and Henne).

frisby213
12-20-2007, 10:22 PM
Honestly, I hate to sound like a broken record, but I still don't see why Brohm, Woodson, Ryan, etc are better prospects than Colt.....

Just because he plays in an "un-respected division" or doesn't run an NFL offense? Plus, didn't the Hawaii coach refute that, saying it's as much of an NFL offense as any other, just in different ways?

If we're going to judge players purely on meaningless 40 times and prior experience, we're going to end up like half of the teams in the league: picking the wrong guy.

I'm genuinely sorry if I offend anyone but the more I think about the reasoning people use around here the sillier it becomes. I'll take the QB with 70%+ passes completed and the all-time record for TDs thrown over some random other interchangeable guy.

Whatever...

apisallday
12-20-2007, 11:40 PM
Why? How can you tell? What's Colt done to prove otherwise?

Usually the College Senior has to do something to prove he is the equal of an NFL All Pro QB with 4 years of experience.

But I am new here so not sure how this fora works.

apisallday
12-20-2007, 11:42 PM
Honestly, I hate to sound like a broken record, but I still don't see why Brohm, Woodson, Ryan, etc are better prospects than Colt.....

Just because he plays in an "un-respected division" or doesn't run an NFL offense? Plus, didn't the Hawaii coach refute that, saying it's as much of an NFL offense as any other, just in different ways?

If we're going to judge players purely on meaningless 40 times and prior experience, we're going to end up like half of the teams in the league: picking the wrong guy.

I'm genuinely sorry if I offend anyone but the more I think about the reasoning people use around here the sillier it becomes. I'll take the QB with 70%+ passes completed and the all-time record for TDs thrown over some random other interchangeable guy.

Whatever...

Personally, I think the best QB in this draft is Kyle Wright.

I will take his measureables over all the others.

That kid needs coaching and some confidence building but frankly the other guys look like "system QBs."

You put Wright on the field with no helmet, number or name and just watch him throw and watch him go through his reads ..... can make every throw.

Iamcanadian
12-21-2007, 07:09 AM
I have both in my top-32, but most people probably don't have Brennan in there. He's the #4 QB for me, but could be #2 or 3 by the end of the workouts and all that (in my opinion), although I don't think he climbs above #4 for anyone else. People just think he's a system quarterback, so that's that. As far as Hardy, it really depends on his forty-yard dash time (whether fairly or not.) He'll be a first rounder if he runs a 4.6 or so, and second round pick if he runs lower than that, I think. He would probably benefit from staying in school if Bennett/Jackson/Kelly all declare.

Well, I agree with you on Brennan, he could easily move up the QB chart before the post season is complete. His workout along with the workouts of Woodson and Brohm and even Ryan will set the final positions. I think he has more to gain in workouts because his system won't be used and he'll have to workout in a pro set. Besides, with Brady throwing from the shotgun position all the time, you could see many more HC's having their QB's take a deep snap.
As for Hardy, he'll have to run faster than 4.6 to get into round 1. 4.50 is perferred as the top end for WR's but 4.55 is probably OK. 4.6 will send him to round 2 and if he is slower than that, round 4-7 is more likely.

neko4
12-21-2007, 07:13 AM
Personally, I think the best QB in this draft is Kyle Wright.

I will take his measureables over all the others.

That kid needs coaching and some confidence building but frankly the other guys look like "system QBs."

You put Wright on the field with no helmet, number or name and just watch him throw and watch him go through his reads ..... can make every throw.
I like him better more than used to, but he's not the best

frisby213
12-21-2007, 04:20 PM
As for Hardy, he'll have to run faster than 4.6 to get into round 1. 4.50 is perferred as the top end for WR's but 4.55 is probably OK. 4.6 will send him to round 2 and if he is slower than that, round 4-7 is more likely.

This is the kind of stuff I don't get. Why does .05 seconds matter? Or even .1? Who's going to not pick someone just because of .1 seconds?

Iamcanadian
12-22-2007, 10:00 AM
This is the kind of stuff I don't get. Why does .05 seconds matter? Or even .1? Who's going to not pick someone just because of .1 seconds?

.1 second equates to about 2 or 3 feet in seperation. At the college level where WR's play against 4.65 CB's, it hardly matters but in the pros where CB's usually run in the 4.4 range, slower WR's are going to have a very difficult time getting any seperation and those who run slower than a 4.5 just aren't going to be able to seperate in coverage at all. Hardy is very tall and might get by at 4.55 but once you get into the 4.6 range, the guy is never going to be open to receive a pass. That is why speed is so important.
The NFL is full of guys(around 97%) who run at an above average speed for the position they play. For a WR, you fall into the 97% of players if you run between 4.30 and 4.50. Above that and you fall into the 3% catagory of players who make the NFL. Those are not odds the NFL teams are looking for in the draft and that is going to carry you out of day 1 nevermind round 1.
Can a 4.60 WR make the NFL, of course, but the odds are stacked against him.

frisby213
12-23-2007, 12:25 AM
.1 second equates to about 2 or 3 feet in seperation. At the college level where WR's play against 4.65 CB's, it hardly matters but in the pros where CB's usually run in the 4.4 range, slower WR's are going to have a very difficult time getting any seperation and those who run slower than a 4.5 just aren't going to be able to seperate in coverage at all. Hardy is very tall and might get by at 4.55 but once you get into the 4.6 range, the guy is never going to be open to receive a pass. That is why speed is so important.
The NFL is full of guys(around 97%) who run at an above average speed for the position they play. For a WR, you fall into the 97% of players if you run between 4.30 and 4.50. Above that and you fall into the 3% catagory of players who make the NFL. Those are not odds the NFL teams are looking for in the draft and that is going to carry you out of day 1 nevermind round 1.
Can a 4.60 WR make the NFL, of course, but the odds are stacked against him.

Except running in the middle of a football game, trying to get past a cornerback while covered in pads, isn't nearly the same thing as someone blowing a whistle, then running in a straight line as fast as you can.

Not to mention that until we use some sort of "pass a laser boundary to stop the clock," there will always be - if only .0001 seconds - human error to account for.

It's completely silly to determine someone's future pro career on a 40 time.

DanteXavier
12-23-2007, 03:07 AM
It's completely silly to determine someone's future pro career on a 40 time.

I agree. If someone had done that with Jerry Rice, they'd have concluded that he wouldn't have been very good(he only ran about a 4.6).

DanteXavier
12-23-2007, 03:13 AM
The NFL is full of guys(around 97%) who run at an above average speed for the position they play. For a WR, you fall into the 97% of players if you run between 4.30 and 4.50. Above that and you fall into the 3% catagory of players who make the NFL.

I think this is exaggerated a bit. There are plenty, and I mean plenty of NFL wideouts that run in the 4.50-4.59 range, and a few more who run in the 4.6s. There are a lot more than just 3%, I'm sure of that. Any look at the WR classes in any given draft will tell you that.

Caddy
12-23-2007, 05:02 AM
.1 second equates to about 2 or 3 feet in seperation. At the college level where WR's play against 4.65 CB's, it hardly matters but in the pros where CB's usually run in the 4.4 range, slower WR's are going to have a very difficult time getting any seperation and those who run slower than a 4.5 just aren't going to be able to seperate in coverage at all. Hardy is very tall and might get by at 4.55 but once you get into the 4.6 range, the guy is never going to be open to receive a pass. That is why speed is so important.
The NFL is full of guys(around 97%) who run at an above average speed for the position they play. For a WR, you fall into the 97% of players if you run between 4.30 and 4.50. Above that and you fall into the 3% catagory of players who make the NFL. Those are not odds the NFL teams are looking for in the draft and that is going to carry you out of day 1 nevermind round 1.
Can a 4.60 WR make the NFL, of course, but the odds are stacked against him.

I find the statistics in your argument a little hard to believe. You act like pure, unpadded straight line speed is what dictates the level of separation a wide receiver will get in the NFL. These times don't take into account pads, body positioning or the ability a wide receiver has to run crisp routes. Players like Anquan Boldin, Larry Fitzgerald, Terrell Owens and Marques Colston all ran 4.5+ 40's and are great NFL receivers thanks to the aforementioned factors. To say only 3% of all NFL receivers run sub 4.5 40's is not accurate at all and is still not an indication of success or level of separation a wide receiver can get in the pros.

BroadwayJoe10
12-23-2007, 10:10 AM
His stats and numbers about reciever could possibly be inaccurate, which i don't know if they are or not so i really can't say, but i agree with his assesment. The question he was answering was why does .1 seconds make such a difference, not what other variables are there that can overcome slow timed speed. Obviously there are players who have better game speed than straight line speed, as well as those who can use their hands at the line of scrimmage to get off of jams and then players who can run fantastic routes, which helps with seperation as well. It is pretty safe to say that those recievers who run in the 4.6s+ are going to have a much tougher time at getting that seperation than those who run low 4.4s. BUT, that doesn't mean those recievers cannot succeed in this league. Alot of those recievers who aren't as fast will make up for it with the aformentioned abilities; Colston is a physical reciever who catches the ball with his hands and has tremendous size, TO- i'm not sure of his timed speed but his game speed is pretty darn fast and he is also a great route runner who goes across the middle and has great athleticism and great size for a reciever...the same thing goes for fitzgerald and boldin.

I may not agree with all of the percentages and stuff, but that is only because i havn't done the research. I definately agree that 40 times are overrated, but high stock is put into them for a good reason. I always hated the scouts who try to turn track stars into football players; i say give me a football player everytime and i'll teach him to get open. Thus, i think 40 times are important, but they are just as important as catching the ball with your hands, do you get the ball at the highest point in the air, route running ability etc.

cardsalltheway
12-24-2007, 07:43 PM
I find the statistics in your argument a little hard to believe. You act like pure, unpadded straight line speed is what dictates the level of separation a wide receiver will get in the NFL. These times don't take into account pads, body positioning or the ability a wide receiver has to run crisp routes. Players like Anquan Boldin, Larry Fitzgerald, Terrell Owens and Marques Colston all ran 4.5+ 40's and are great NFL receivers thanks to the aforementioned factors. To say only 3% of all NFL receivers run sub 4.5 40's is not accurate at all and is still not an indication of success or level of separation a wide receiver can get in the pros.

I think both Boldin and Fitz were battling injuries when they ran their 40's, but I do agree with most of what you said.

I think it's funny that the guy said that 97% of WR's run above-average times. What? Is there some guy who can ran his 40 in like 20 seconds whose dragging down the average?

Iamcanadian
12-25-2007, 01:57 PM
Except running in the middle of a football game, trying to get past a cornerback while covered in pads, isn't nearly the same thing as someone blowing a whistle, then running in a straight line as fast as you can.

Not to mention that until we use some sort of "pass a laser boundary to stop the clock," there will always be - if only .0001 seconds - human error to account for.

It's completely silly to determine someone's future pro career on a 40 time.

Of course 40 times are only one test, a WR may show real quickness in another test but when you are discussing round 1 of the draft, a WR's 40 time is going to stand out like a sore thumb and recently, the slower ones have had real trouble amounting too much.
Pro scouts and GM's know that only 3% of slower players make the NFL and have to ask themselves if they are willing to take that risk in round 1 when so much money is riding on their decision. Not too many are.
These types of players tend to get drafted later in the draft and can have solid pro careers but round 1 is based a lot on ceiling because of the money involved and slower players usually are given a much lower ceiling.

Iamcanadian
12-25-2007, 02:16 PM
I find the statistics in your argument a little hard to believe. You act like pure, unpadded straight line speed is what dictates the level of separation a wide receiver will get in the NFL. These times don't take into account pads, body positioning or the ability a wide receiver has to run crisp routes. Players like Anquan Boldin, Larry Fitzgerald, Terrell Owens and Marques Colston all ran 4.5+ 40's and are great NFL receivers thanks to the aforementioned factors. To say only 3% of all NFL receivers run sub 4.5 40's is not accurate at all and is still not an indication of success or level of separation a wide receiver can get in the pros.

Bolden was a sub 4.50 runner who ran at the combine with a noticable limp. He was coming off a serious injury and just wanted to show the scouts he was healing nicely. Fitzgerald ran in the 4.4 range.
Terrell Owens and Charles Johnson ran poorly at the combine but have since shown marked improvement probably through better training and committment and are now considered to be very fast. Colston really proves my point perfectly. He was a 7th rounder probably because he was way too slow but has since proved to be one of those unique few ho can get it done without burner speed. I never said a slower WR cannot succeed, I just said the odds were particularly against them and that their chances to be a 1st rounder were very small. Only Fitzgerald went in round 1 and he did run fast at his workout.
I can only think of 2 WR's drafted recently who ran slow 40 times at the combine or at personal workouts and still went round 1, Michael Clayton and Mike Williams. Both of these players have made no real impact in the NFL. Clayton had a nice rookie year but has never come close to duplicating it and Mike Williams was a complete flop. So draw your own conclusions.

Caddy
12-25-2007, 06:52 PM
Fitzgerald ran a 4.53....

Iamcanadian
12-26-2007, 12:10 AM
Fitzgerald ran a 4.53....

Espn draft tracker lists his time as 4.47 which is what I remember as well. What is your source.

Caddy
12-26-2007, 12:13 AM
Espn draft tracker lists his time as 4.47 which is what I remember as well. What is your source.

SI.com is where I got it from.

Solution: Add them together. Divide by two. There you have 4.5. :)