PDA

View Full Version : Matthew Stafford, Qb Georgia


Pages : [1] 2

LarryJohnson27
05-08-2008, 05:18 AM
How good of a prospect is this guy? Is he just a canidate for the top QB spot in next years draft just because the senior class is so weak at the position, or is he legit? I know he was considered the best player in the country comming out of high school by some.

Yatta!
05-08-2008, 06:22 AM
Atm I would say that a lot of the hype is due to a very poor senior class but he has all the tools you look for. If he performs as expected this year he'll be the top QB, he'll get drafted in the top 3 imo.

Thunder&Lightning
05-08-2008, 07:32 AM
Has all the physical tools you look for in a QB... The question is can he perform to his full potential... The sky is the limit for this kid in my opinion.

toonsterwu
05-08-2008, 07:45 AM
If Stafford comes out, he has a chance at being at the top of the QB board. Certainly, as of now, this is based partially on the combination of potential, position, and a weak class, because despite all the accolades, the kid is still raw. That said, if he takes big leaps forward this year in terms of consistency, then we might be talking a year later about a very deserving top of the draft QB talent.

I will say this - at this point in time, I think Stafford is a better QB talent than Tim Tebow. To what degree, well, that's hard for me to say, but I think it's by a recognizable amount in my head right now (put it this way, on a random scale of 100(this is just to demonstrate the difference in my mind), I would put Stafford at, say, an 80, and Tebow at say, a 70 in terms of Qb'ing ability). Now, Tebow is an awesome physical talent, something that will definitely intrigue, and if he takes strides forward, as past QB's in Urban's system have with additional time, then he could very well end up ahead.

regoob2
05-08-2008, 07:57 AM
Stafford has bad fundimentals. He throws with all arm and off his back foot a lot. If he corrects that he could be scary. Bad mechanics like that will lead to a lot of arrent throws.

P-L
05-08-2008, 08:25 AM
Stafford has all the tools to be a great one, he just needs to put it all together for one full season. If he can't do it this year, I could see a Carson Palmer-like season his senior year.

Byrd430
05-08-2008, 08:40 AM
Is this such a weak QB class because there's not much early 1st round talent? Because I can see 7 quarterbacks going in the first three rounds...

Yatta!
05-08-2008, 10:23 AM
Is this such a weak QB class because there's not much early 1st round talent? Because I can see 7 quarterbacks going in the first three rounds...

Interesting point, I can't see a first round senior QB atm but I think Painter/Harper/Cantwell could sneak in if they have good seasons. Which seven are you thinking of?

Shane P. Hallam
05-08-2008, 10:28 AM
I think Painter could definitely go in the first and possibly be the first QB off the board. So much changes from now until April. I'm not so sure if Stafford will be on top.

Babylon
05-08-2008, 10:54 AM
Stafford has bad fundimentals. He throws with all arm and off his back foot a lot. If he corrects that he could be scary. Bad mechanics like that will lead to a lot of arrent throws.

I would say the best natural ability at that position since Peyton Manning. He hasnt exactly had the best receiving corp down there and i think he has a little too much confidence in that arm at times but i think Mel Kiper was right when he said the kid will be the top player in the draft when he comes out. Especially to a team that needs a QB.

Iamcanadian
05-08-2008, 11:01 AM
He has a legit shot at going #1 overall in next year's draft but he will have to have an excellent senior season to do it, it's not a given. He simply hasn't been an accurrate passer so far in his college career and he must improve that or he'll slide. He has the most natural ability since Palmer but he's nowhere near as accurate so far. However, it isn't at all unusual for a senior QB to put it all together his last year in college and we'll just have to wait to see if he can do it.

draftguru151
05-08-2008, 11:20 AM
He has a legit shot at going #1 overall in next year's draft but he will have to have an excellent senior season to do it, it's not a given. He simply hasn't been an accurrate passer so far in his college career and he must improve that or he'll slide. He has the most natural ability since Palmer but he's nowhere near as accurate so far. However, it isn't at all unusual for a senior QB to put it all together his last year in college and we'll just have to wait to see if he can do it.

He's going to be a junior.

themaninblack
05-08-2008, 11:26 AM
im rly hoping he ends up staying for his senior year but it seems unlikely IMO.

Race for the Heisman
05-08-2008, 11:44 AM
im rly hoping he ends up staying for his senior year but it seems unlikely IMO.

I don't know, I know the class is perceived as weak but I can see both him and Tebow coming back for their senior seasons.

CashmoneyDrew
05-08-2008, 11:46 AM
If Sam Bradford has a good season again and comes out, I could see him semi-challenging Matt Stafford.

SchizophrenicBatman
05-08-2008, 11:52 AM
The thing that bothers me about Stafford is that he's been the beneficiary of having three NFL quality RBs on his team, and yet his play has still been mediocre at best. I could deal with it if he wasn't surrounded by the talent he has, or if he was doing decently with that talent (Bradford to a lesser degree) but he really isn't

But yea, as for physical ability...it's all there. He still has a ways to go when it comes to the rest of the game. Unless he takes a huge step forward, I really think he's screwed in the NFL if he doesn't stay for his senior year

draftguru151
05-08-2008, 12:05 PM
The thing that bothers me about Stafford is that he's been the beneficiary of having three NFL quality RBs on his team, and yet his play has still been mediocre at best. I could deal with it if he wasn't surrounded by the talent he has, or if he was doing decently with that talent (Bradford to a lesser degree) but he really isn't

But yea, as for physical ability...it's all there. He still has a ways to go when it comes to the rest of the game. Unless he takes a huge step forward, I really think he's screwed in the NFL if he doesn't stay for his senior year

And no NFL caliber receivers. RBs are nice but they're not the one's he needs to really succeed.

no love
05-08-2008, 12:52 PM
Chad Henne plus two inches. And that is not a knock on him because I think Chad was a great prospect, but it seems these days that unless you are coming from a stupid spread offense your value is lower. I think everyone will talk about what a great prospect he is up until about two months before the draft when these spread qb's start getting all the love for the numbers they put up and then he will fall on draft day.

Example of spread guys who were rose:
Alex Smith, Jamarcus Russell, Matt Ryan, Vince Young, Kevin Kolb

Pro Style QBs who fell:
Aaron Rogers, Brady Quinn, Chad Henne, Matt Leinart, JD Booty, Trent Edwards (i liste him because he got picked after Kolb and Beck).

Babylon
05-08-2008, 01:31 PM
The thing that bothers me about Stafford is that he's been the beneficiary of having three NFL quality RBs on his team, and yet his play has still been mediocre at best. I could deal with it if he wasn't surrounded by the talent he has, or if he was doing decently with that talent (Bradford to a lesser degree) but he really isn't

But yea, as for physical ability...it's all there. He still has a ways to go when it comes to the rest of the game. Unless he takes a huge step forward, I really think he's screwed in the NFL if he doesn't stay for his senior year


Mediocre play? 55.7% average per attempt, 13 yds per comp.,19 tds and 10 ints(that number needs to come down) with average receivers and going against some of the better secondaries in the country. Add to that the fact that they should have played USC in the Rose Bowl for a chance at a top 2 ranking in the country. I'd say way above average all things considered.

nobodyinparticular
05-08-2008, 03:41 PM
Stafford has all the tools to be a great one, he just needs to put it all together for one full season. If he can't do it this year, I could see a Carson Palmer-like season his senior year.

It's funny you said that, because I was thinking the exact same thing. I don't know if many people remember, but a lot of people were even down on Palmer because he had only put together one good season as QB for USC.

d34ng3l021
05-08-2008, 03:50 PM
http://espn-ak.starwave.com/photo/2007/0221/ncf_g_stafford_412.jpg

Definitely one of my favorite prospects this year. He has some great physical ability and has the chance to put it all together this year with UGA. I see him breaking out this year with his WR corps getting better and moreno doing well as usual.

Even if he doesnt put up some great stats this year, I can see him rising before draft time because of his physical ability and great arm. He is going to be good, trust me on that.

BeerBaron
05-08-2008, 03:56 PM
im going to sound really stupid when i say this but for a while now, ive had stafford mixed up with sean glennon....why? i have no idea.....

good to get that out of my head now, lol

princefielder28
05-08-2008, 04:01 PM
im going to sound really stupid when i say this but for a while now, ive had stafford mixed up with sean glennon....why? i have no idea.....

good to get that out of my head now, lol

yeah, good idea to get that straightened before you make yourself look stupid

BeerBaron
05-08-2008, 04:05 PM
yeah, good idea to get that straightened before you make yourself look stupid

lol, and people wonder why im so awful at predicting players as prospects. i stand by the fact that i was no fan of chad henne watching him last season though...

sodar21
05-08-2008, 04:30 PM
Is he a better prospect than Chad Henne was heading into his junior season?

DoWnThEfiElD
05-08-2008, 05:32 PM
When I watch him, i see a brett favre type gun-slinger. I don't ever see him being mechanically sound as Manning, but I see him being about to make plays like Favre. With that obviously being a best case senario for him.

He is probably one of my favorite prospects in a while, because given the right system and people around him, I think the sky is the limit for how good he can be.

regoob2
05-08-2008, 07:01 PM
Is he a better prospect than Chad Henne was heading into his junior season?yes, Henne was never a #1 overall type prospect.

neko4
05-08-2008, 07:25 PM
Atm I would say that a lot of the hype is due to a very poor senior class but he has all the tools you look for. If he performs as expected this year he'll be the top QB, he'll get drafted in the top 3 imo.
Same thing with Matt Ryan, IMO.
And downthefield, are you talking bout henne or stafford?

SenorGato
05-08-2008, 10:58 PM
If Stafford comes out, he has a chance at being at the top of the QB board. Certainly, as of now, this is based partially on the combination of potential, position, and a weak class, because despite all the accolades, the kid is still raw. That said, if he takes big leaps forward this year in terms of consistency, then we might be talking a year later about a very deserving top of the draft QB talent.

I will say this - at this point in time, I think Stafford is a better QB talent than Tim Tebow. To what degree, well, that's hard for me to say, but I think it's by a recognizable amount in my head right now (put it this way, on a random scale of 100(this is just to demonstrate the difference in my mind), I would put Stafford at, say, an 80, and Tebow at say, a 70 in terms of Qb'ing ability). Now, Tebow is an awesome physical talent, something that will definitely intrigue, and if he takes strides forward, as past QB's in Urban's system have with additional time, then he could very well end up ahead.

You stole my post.

Staubach12
05-08-2008, 11:16 PM
He's a very good prospect, and he has the tools. I have two problems with him from what I've seen of him; both have to do with his footwork. Firstly, he sets up too slow at times. He needs to get quicker dropping back. The second is that his footwork often breaks down under pressure. He tends to throw off his back foot a lot. There are other issues that you'd expect from a Sophomore QB: decision making, etc. That will settle itself in time, I believe. He'll be a fantastic prospect.

dpl85
05-09-2008, 10:05 AM
Honestly the only thing I really know about him is that he went to Highland Park HS which is relatively close to my hometown about 30-40 mins probably. I know he had a great HS career but HP is an extremely wealthly and affluent community. I know it's unfair but I have to question any kids toughness that comes from that kind of environment. I just wonder if he'd have that burning desire to succeed in the NFL as opposed to a relatively poor kid from the ghetto. Having said that though I realize that that's really an unfair stereotype and he could in fact be incredibly tough and I hope he succeeds in the NFL.

Brent
05-09-2008, 11:21 AM
Having said that though I realize that that's really an unfair stereotype and he could in fact be incredibly tough and I hope he succeeds in the NFL.
Then why bother saying it?

dpl85
05-09-2008, 11:45 AM
Then why bother saying it?

I don't know it's just a stupid theory I have that's got no real evidence lol. I'm sorry if you're from that area and offended that was certainly not my intent.

Byrd430
05-09-2008, 12:56 PM
Interesting point, I can't see a first round senior QB atm but I think Painter/Harper/Cantwell could sneak in if they have good seasons. Which seven are you thinking of?

Tim Tebow, Matthew Stafford, Curtis Painter, Hunter Cantwell, Cullen Harper and possibly Chase Daniel and Graham Harrell.

vidae
05-09-2008, 01:50 PM
Honestly the only thing I really know about him is that he went to Highland Park HS which is relatively close to my hometown about 30-40 mins probably. I know he had a great HS career but HP is an extremely wealthly and affluent community. I know it's unfair but I have to question any kids toughness that comes from that kind of environment. I just wonder if he'd have that burning desire to succeed in the NFL as opposed to a relatively poor kid from the ghetto. Having said that though I realize that that's really an unfair stereotype and he could in fact be incredibly tough and I hope he succeeds in the NFL.

Chris Long was from a wealthy family (obviously) but everyone who knows him swears up and down that he has the desire and works about as hard as anyone and harder than most when it comes to football. Scouts must have thought so too because he was taken #2 overall last month.

Race for the Heisman
05-09-2008, 01:58 PM
Tim Tebow, Matthew Stafford, Curtis Painter, Hunter Cantwell, Cullen Harper and possibly Chase Daniel and Graham Harrell.

Deep down I know it won't happen but if Beockman developed just an ounce of real pocket presence and chose intelligently when to tuck it and run he could be in that conversation. Physically he's everything you'd want, although he is a tad old.

DragonFireKai
05-09-2008, 03:51 PM
Mediocre play? 55.7% average per attempt, 13 yds per comp.,19 tds and 10 ints(that number needs to come down) with average receivers and going against some of the better secondaries in the country. Add to that the fact that they should have played USC in the Rose Bowl for a chance at a top 2 ranking in the country. I'd say way above average all things considered.

That completion percentage is pretty weak, and very important. And that 13 ypc translates into 7.24 yards per attempt. His QB rating was 56th in the nation, his completion percentage was 94th, his ypa was 39th. The completion percentage is the most troubling. If you look at the David Lewin Projection system, for QBs who start 4 years and are early rounders, like Stafford will be, completion percentage is the single most valuable stat for projecting success at the NFL level. Anything below 60% should raise eyebrows.

sodar21
05-09-2008, 05:05 PM
Chris Long was from a wealthy family (obviously) but everyone who knows him swears up and down that he has the desire and works about as hard as anyone and harder than most when it comes to football. Scouts must have thought so too because he was taken #2 overall last month.

Although I agree with your general premise that a person's socio-economic background may not be that valuable in assessing their football abilities, Chris Long is a bit of an exception since his father was a football player and one has to imagine that Howie was extremely tough with his sons.

nobodyinparticular
05-09-2008, 05:07 PM
That completion percentage is pretty weak, and very important. And that 13 ypc translates into 7.24 yards per attempt. His QB rating was 56th in the nation, his completion percentage was 94th, his ypa was 39th. The completion percentage is the most troubling. If you look at the David Lewin Projection system, for QBs who start 4 years and are early rounders, like Stafford will be, completion percentage is the single most valuable stat for projecting success at the NFL level. Anything below 60% should raise eyebrows.

Jay Cutler was at the fringe of 60 both of his years as a starter at Vanderbilt--61% in '04 and 59.1% in '05. Peyton Manning also barely made a 60% completion percentage his senior year at 60.37%. McNabb was at 60.9% his senior year, Eli Manning was at 58%, Palmer was at 58% in 2001 and 54.9% in 2000.

All of these guys have been good to great QBs in the NFL.

The point with college statistics is that you really can't look just at the stats, but also at the system that is run. Spread and spread option offenses are really easy to rack up the completions without actually having to have great accuracy or vision. In a pro style offense, however, you're going to have a tough time getting better than a 60 or 62% completion percentage as we see with Cutler, both Mannings and Palmer.

Brent
05-09-2008, 05:53 PM
I don't know it's just a stupid theory I have that's got no real evidence lol. I'm sorry if you're from that area and offended that was certainly not my intent.
No, I wasn't offended. My parents live in DFW but not the Park Cities. I just think that when you discount all that you just wrote it seems pointless.

DragonFireKai
05-09-2008, 06:34 PM
Jay Cutler was at the fringe of 60 both of his years as a starter at Vanderbilt--61% in '04 and 59.1% in '05. Peyton Manning also barely made a 60% completion percentage his senior year at 60.37%. McNabb was at 60.9% his senior year, Eli Manning was at 58%, Palmer was at 58% in 2001 and 54.9% in 2000.

All of these guys have been good to great QBs in the NFL.

The point with college statistics is that you really can't look just at the stats, but also at the system that is run. Spread and spread option offenses are really easy to rack up the completions without actually having to have great accuracy or vision. In a pro style offense, however, you're going to have a tough time getting better than a 60 or 62% completion percentage as we see with Cutler, both Mannings and Palmer.

Have you actually read the Lewin Projection System? The idea is hinged on the assumption that with sufficient game film, scouts can accurately determine weather or not a player has the capacity to be an early round pick. So games started becomes a big factor. Players who start relatively few games tend to have their stock skewed upwards because the scouts haven't seen as much on them, so they get sold on "Upside". This along with completion percentage goes into the projection.

The result is a system that accurately predicted that Peyton Manning would be great, and that Ryan Leaf would be a failure. It's been pretty accurate for the most part.

Those players that you mentioned still had decent career completion percentages in college. Manning completed 62.5%, Palmer 59.1%, Eli Manning was at 60.8%, McNabb at 58.7%, and Cutler was at 57.2% despite being in the whipping boy of the SEC.

Right now, if Stafford weren't to have some sort of breakout year, and came out as a junior, he'd be sitting at a career percentage in the neighborhood of 54%, and only 35 games started. That would put him in the neighborhood of Jake Plummer or Shaun King. He needs to drastically improve his accuracy.

nobodyinparticular
05-09-2008, 07:19 PM
Have you actually read the Lewin Projection System? The idea is hinged on the assumption that with sufficient game film, scouts can accurately determine weather or not a player has the capacity to be an early round pick. So games started becomes a big factor. Players who start relatively few games tend to have their stock skewed upwards because the scouts haven't seen as much on them, so they get sold on "Upside". This along with completion percentage goes into the projection.

The result is a system that accurately predicted that Peyton Manning would be great, and that Ryan Leaf would be a failure. It's been pretty accurate for the most part.

Those players that you mentioned still had decent career completion percentages in college. Manning completed 62.5%, Palmer 59.1%, Eli Manning was at 60.8%, McNabb at 58.7%, and Cutler was at 57.2% despite being in the whipping boy of the SEC.

Right now, if Stafford weren't to have some sort of breakout year, and came out as a junior, he'd be sitting at a career percentage in the neighborhood of 54%, and only 35 games started. That would put him in the neighborhood of Jake Plummer or Shaun King. He needs to drastically improve his accuracy.

I don't think anyone has said that Stafford, as he is, should be a top draft selection. The idea is that he has the tools, the potential to get it done in the same way that Carson Palmer really stepped up in his final seasons.

By the way, Stafford is also in the SEC playing at Georgia, the conference that is notoriously hard on passers as you mention with Cutler. And comparing Stafford's stats to Cutler's stats at the same time in their careers, they are eerily similar. Cutler's completion percentage through 2 seasons was a stellar 53.8%. He barely hit 7.0 in yards per attempt, and he had a 28:22 TD:INT ratio. Compared to Stafford who has a career completion percentage of 54.5%, 7.0 ypa, 26:23 TD:INT ratio. Palmer, through 2 full seasons, (using the same line) was 55.1/7.18/23:24.

Like I already said, no one is saying that Stafford would be the #1 pick with that kind of production, but he has the tools to overcome and it's not very uncommon for QBs to struggle their first two years--starting as true freshmen--and then finally realize their potential. To quote deangelo21:

He has some great physical ability and has the chance to put it all together this year with UGA. I see him breaking out this year with his WR corps getting better and moreno doing well as usual.

If he performs as expected this year he'll be the top QB, he'll get drafted in the top 3 imo.

It all depends on where he's at. He's progressing fine. It's normally in a QB's junior year that it finally starts to come together. He needs to make a jump, but it's not like his career is dead with his last 2 years. He's on track just fine.

DragonFireKai
05-09-2008, 07:38 PM
I don't think anyone has said that Stafford, as he is, should be a top draft selection. The idea is that he has the tools, the potential to get it done in the same way that Carson Palmer really stepped up in his final seasons.

By the way, Stafford is also in the SEC playing at Georgia, the conference that is notoriously hard on passers as you mention with Cutler. And comparing Stafford's stats to Cutler's stats at the same time in their careers, they are eerily similar. Cutler's completion percentage through 2 seasons was a stellar 53.8%. He barely hit 7.0 in yards per attempt, and he had a 28:22 TD:INT ratio. Compared to Stafford who has a career completion percentage of 54.5%, 7.0 ypa, 26:23 TD:INT ratio. Palmer, through 2 full seasons, (using the same line) was 55.1/7.18/23:24.

Like I already said, no one is saying that Stafford would be the #1 pick with that kind of production, but he has the tools to overcome and it's not very uncommon for QBs to struggle their first two years--starting as true freshmen--and then finally realize their potential. To quote deangelo21:

It all depends on where he's at. He's progressing fine. It's normally in a QB's junior year that it finally starts to come together. He needs to make a jump, but it's not like his career is dead with his last 2 years. He's on track just fine.

He's on track if he stays, if he jumps early, then it'll be the same situation with most QBs who don't have a lot of game film, they'll get their stock inflated by their potential, but never learn how to play properly. If he stays, and becomes more comfortable in the system, he could be fine. But if he stays, he also runs the risk of scuttling his draft stock by giving scouts a better idea of what he's capable of. I don't trust any QB who comes out early, because they so rarely pan out comparative to those who stayed.

And Cutler and Palmer's initial years are very bad comparisons, Southern Cal in 2000 and 2001 won 11 games total, and Vanderbilt won 11 games total in all four years of the Cutler regime. Georgia on the other hand, has averaged nearly 11 wins a season for the past 6 years. When you factor in the level of talent, Palmer and Cutler were substantially better than Stafford.

It's too early to tell anything about Stafford, aside from that he'll bear watching. But if he leaves after his junior year, he more likely than not, fail in the NFL.

Self Rider
05-09-2008, 09:05 PM
He still hasn't had a 300 yard game yet.

That being said I think he will do well in the NFL.

BNad
05-09-2008, 09:21 PM
He still hasn't had a 300 yard game yet.

That being said I think he will do well in the NFL.

That tends to happen when you run the ball as much as Georgia does. I wouldn't expect that to change much with Knowshon and Caleb King next season.

BamaFalcon59
05-09-2008, 10:12 PM
Not a Stafford fan at all. Doesn't seem to have that inate feel for the game, even though he has all of the physical tools to succeed. Not to mention spotty mechanics and very average productivity. Not just productivity as in huge statistics, but averages as well, considering completion percentages, yards per attempt, and touchdown to interception ratios.

I'll take Matt Ryan over him, I'll say that.

Chad Henne plus two inches. And that is not a knock on him because I think Chad was a great prospect, but it seems these days that unless you are coming from a stupid spread offense your value is lower. I think everyone will talk about what a great prospect he is up until about two months before the draft when these spread qb's start getting all the love for the numbers they put up and then he will fall on draft day.

Example of spread guys who were rose:
Alex Smith, Jamarcus Russell, Matt Ryan, Vince Young, Kevin Kolb

Pro Style QBs who fell:
Aaron Rogers, Brady Quinn, Chad Henne, Matt Leinart, JD Booty, Trent Edwards (i liste him because he got picked after Kolb and Beck).

Matt Ryan did not play in a spread offense. It was a very pro style offense, it just so happened that he threw the ball close to fifty times a game.

Mediocre play? 55.7% average per attempt, 13 yds per comp.,19 tds and 10 ints(that number needs to come down) with average receivers and going against some of the better secondaries in the country. Add to that the fact that they should have played USC in the Rose Bowl for a chance at a top 2 ranking in the country. I'd say way above average all things considered.

Those stats sound mediocre to me.

Bengals78
05-09-2008, 11:27 PM
I think he could be the best QB prospect in since Manning and Rivers and that class came out. He is better than Alex Smith and imo Matt Ryan this year.

I also think he is a better QB (When it comes to certain intangibles) than Big Ben.

If he is put into the right system with a decent team around him (existent running game) he can flourish in the NFL

Zyro_1014
05-10-2008, 12:21 PM
I think he could be the best QB prospect in since Manning and Rivers and that class came out. He is better than Alex Smith and imo Matt Ryan this year.

I also think he is a better QB (When it comes to certain intangibles) than Big Ben.

If he is put into the right system with a decent team around him (existent running game) he can flourish in the NFL

Kansas City maybe?

Bengals78
05-10-2008, 12:36 PM
If he went to KC, he would be a starter from day one IMO. Bowe would be an amazing target for him and the run game, he should thrive in a place like KC

adschofield
05-10-2008, 12:57 PM
I would welcome him with open arms in KC

georgiafan
05-10-2008, 09:40 PM
As stated by many people on here he has all the potential but isn't a finished product. The completion % isn't a big deal for me, I've watched every one of his passes his career and the WR get no seperation at all from the DB. He also didn't pad his stats agianst weak teams or in OT like several SEC QB's last year. I thought his interceptions would hurt his stock, but with Matt Ryan going so high it might not. He started to grow as a QB last year with stuff like changing playsand leading game winning drives.

BamaFalcon59
05-10-2008, 09:52 PM
As stated by many people on here he has all the potential but isn't a finished product. The completion % isn't a big deal for me, I've watched every one of his passes his career and the WR get no seperation at all from the DB. He also didn't pad his stats agianst weak teams or in OT like several SEC QB's last year. I thought his interceptions would hurt his stock, but with Matt Ryan going so high it might not. He started to grow as a QB last year with stuff like changing playsand leading game winning drives.

Ryan got the benefit of the doubt due to lack of receiving talent, and throwing fifty times a game. Not to mention the intangibles.

I need to see some actual productivity from Stafford. Like I said, I just do not see the 'feel for the game' from him.

He could be an outstanding prospect though, if he produces that is.

sodar21
05-11-2008, 03:17 PM
Anthony Morelli and Kyle Wright would have been outstanding prospects if they produced.

Hwoarang
05-11-2008, 03:37 PM
I can see Stafford developing into a franchise QB. He has what you look for, intangibles, leadership, etc. Can make all the throws. He just needs to mature a bit more but he will be a decent if not successful NFL QB.

tEk
05-11-2008, 04:59 PM
I can see Stafford developing into a franchise QB. He has what you look for, intangibles, leadership, etc. Can make all the throws. He just needs to mature a bit more but he will be a decent if not successful NFL QB.i have faced you once before Hwoarang! This time i will defeat you! TEKKEN!

scottyboy
05-11-2008, 06:38 PM
http://assets.espn.go.com/photo/2006/1107/ncf_a_teel_195.jpg

number 1 overall, kthxbye

Dam8610
05-12-2008, 05:45 AM
I think Painter could definitely go in the first and possibly be the first QB off the board. So much changes from now until April. I'm not so sure if Stafford will be on top.

Wait, what? You've had to have seen him play against Ohio State. What would make you think that? He has accuracy issues and always struggles against the best competition. IMO Brees and Orton were both better, both would've KILLED for Painter's running game, not to mention a Dustin Keller or Selwyn Lymon (who he had for 1 1/2 years).

sodar21
05-12-2008, 12:01 PM
He has accuracy issues and always struggles against the best competition.

Are we talking about Stafford or Painter here?

Byrd430
05-12-2008, 03:40 PM
Are we talking about Stafford or Painter here?

Dam8610 was talking about Painter.

But I actually like Painter. Yes, it's true that he hasn't produced on the same level against teams like Ohio State and Michigan. But these teams are way better than Purdue, so I don't completely hold Painter accountable.

If your comparing him to Drew Brees, don't forget that Painter broke Brees' record by passing for almost 4,000 yards. That may be the Big Ten record too.

Also, Painter has that size at 6'4 and 224 pounds, does have some accuracy although it can improve, and has some good arm strength. I think most scouts love his quick release too. Some have compared it to Tony Romo. So Painter obviously has a lot going for him, and with such a "weak" qb draft, Painter is definitely one of the top ones as of now.

WCH
05-12-2008, 03:56 PM
I like Stafford, but he'll definately need to stay for his senior year, IMO. I have some serious question marks, and it really is true that if his completion percentage stays in the 55% range then he has virtually no chance of playing in the modern NFL.

D-Unit
05-12-2008, 04:01 PM
As stated by many people on here he has all the potential but isn't a finished product. The completion % isn't a big deal for me, I've watched every one of his passes his career and the WR get no seperation at all from the DB. He also didn't pad his stats agianst weak teams or in OT like several SEC QB's last year. I thought his interceptions would hurt his stock, but with Matt Ryan going so high it might not. He started to grow as a QB last year with stuff like changing playsand leading game winning drives.
Did you like his performance in the Sugar Bowl? Quite honestly, as a Hawaii fan, I hoped Georgia kept passing instead of running because Stafford wasn't a threat.

ATLDirtyBirds
05-12-2008, 05:37 PM
He obviously needs to refine his tools some, but I like the kid. I think he will go top 3.

sodar21
05-12-2008, 07:28 PM
Dam8610 was talking about Painter.

But I actually like Painter. Yes, it's true that he hasn't produced on the same level against teams like Ohio State and Michigan. But these teams are way better than Purdue, so I don't completely hold Painter accountable.

If your comparing him to Drew Brees, don't forget that Painter broke Brees' record by passing for almost 4,000 yards. That may be the Big Ten record too.

Also, Painter has that size at 6'4 and 224 pounds, does have some accuracy although it can improve, and has some good arm strength. I think most scouts love his quick release too. Some have compared it to Tony Romo. So Painter obviously has a lot going for him, and with such a "weak" qb draft, Painter is definitely one of the top ones as of now.
It was a rhetorical question.

SKim172
05-14-2008, 08:37 PM
Some people might think I'm biased when it comes to QBs. I'm a Rutgers fan who didn't like Matt Ryan, a BC QB, big surprise. I didn't like Brady Quinn, an ND QB, either.

But this, I plain don't like Stafford. And I'm actually kind of a Georgia fan. I'd rather have UGA win the SEC than any other team. And you know what - Stafford gave his team the best chance to lose any game. Simply put, he lost a lot of games for UGA, including games when all he had to do was hang in there. He makes bad decisions, has poor mechanics, bad accuracy, mediocre statistics (55% completion?) and he plays on a very good team.

And don't give me crap about playing in a tough conference. If he can't complete 55% in the SEC, how do you expect him to complete 60% in the NFL? There have been a lot of QBs who have gone ahead of Stafford that competed and played very well in the SEC, or at least played better.

Stafford will be 2009's anointed golden boy. Every scout in the country will fall in love with him and he may very well be the 1st overall pick. But there's at least 20 draft-eligible QBs I'd take over him.

Graham Harrell, Chase Daniel and Curtis Painter should be the top QBs of next year's draft. They won't be.

I'm just hoping my boy Mike Teel plays his way into a draft pick. Hell, first four rounds of the draft, he'll have done well - think he's projected as a UDFA at the moment.

draftguru151
05-14-2008, 09:00 PM
All of that stuff happened last season, I don't think any Stafford fan would say he would have been a first rounder last year. It's a projection of him improving, since you know, he's a sophomore. If Stafford struggles with decision making and accuracy he won't be the first overall pick, but people are expecting him to improve in that area. He has amazing physical skill and with refinement (again, go figure a sophomore QB being erratic) he can be the #1 overall pick.

d34ng3l021
05-14-2008, 09:03 PM
Man. I am really excited to see Stafford in the Pros. I love his skillset and I see alot of improvement from his this season.

georgiafan
05-15-2008, 11:47 AM
All of that stuff happened last season, I don't think any Stafford fan would say he would have been a first rounder last year. It's a projection of him improving, since you know, he's a sophomore. If Stafford struggles with decision making and accuracy he won't be the first overall pick, but people are expecting him to improve in that area. He has amazing physical skill and with refinement (again, go figure a sophomore QB being erratic) he can be the #1 overall pick.

Yeah your nailed it if he improves as much this year as he did last year he will be a top 10 pick. Everyone knows he isn't a finished product and has some work to do. But they are a lot less questions this year then last and most predict that will continue.

Here is a good article about Stafford vs Tebow http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8139904/Tebow,-Stafford-continuing-their-QB-rivalry

d34ng3l021
05-15-2008, 12:06 PM
Yeah your nailed it if he improves as much this year as he did last year he will be a top 10 pick. Everyone knows he isn't a finished product and has some work to do. But they are a lot less questions this year then last and most predict that will continue.

Here is a good article about Stafford vs Tebow http://msn.foxsports.com/cfb/story/8139904/Tebow,-Stafford-continuing-their-QB-rivalry

great article. i look forward to seeing Stafford play this season and their rivalry continue. I think I might become the biggest Stafford fan on this site soon enough.

And what if Stafford and Tebow both came out at the same time, and got drafted to teams in the same division? That would just be amazing.

BBIB
05-18-2008, 04:54 PM
Stafford is very overrated right now.

How his stock is higher than Tebow's is a joke.


His mechanics are very poor at this point.

princefielder28
05-18-2008, 05:01 PM
Stafford is very overrated right now.

How his stock is higher than Tebow's is a joke.


His mechanics are very poor at this point.

Tim Tebow's game doesn't translate to the next level like Stafford's game does. Tebow has a wind up delivery and his abilitiy to make NFL type passes isn't there. Stafford has to tune his mechanics, but his ability to make NFL type throws, overall pocket presence, and upside make him a much more appealing prospect

BBIB
05-18-2008, 05:23 PM
How good of a prospect is this guy? Is he just a canidate for the top QB spot in next years draft just because the senior class is so weak at the position, or is he legit? I know he was considered the best player in the country comming out of high school by some.

As much as I've stated Matt Ryan is unprecedently overrated by the media, well just on the heels of hyping Ryan out of nowhere here comes the hype for Stafford.

IN Stafford's defense he was highly regarded out of HS and has better physical tools.

But that does not justify the hype he has right now.

His mechanics are terrible at this point and although his decision making has improved last year, he is far from a guy who should be getting top 5 overall hype.


2006
135/256
1749 yards (81st in nation)
52.7 comp percentage (97th in nation)
6.8 YPA (63rd in nation)

7 TDs (104th in nation)
13 INTs

108.99 passer rating (91st in natiscon)

2007
194/348
2523 yards (53rd in nation)
55.7 comp percentage (94th in nation)
7.3 YPA (39th in nation)

19 TDs (43rd in nation)
10 INT

128.92 passer rating (56th in nation)

BBIB
05-18-2008, 05:29 PM
Tim Tebow's game doesn't translate to the next level like Stafford's game does. Tebow has a wind up delivery and his abilitiy to make NFL type passes isn't there. Stafford has to tune his mechanics, but his ability to make NFL type throws, overall pocket presence, and upside make him a much more appealing prospect

Matthew Stafford may have more arm strength but to say Tebow can't make NFL throws is absurd.

Exactly what route on the football field do you think Tebow can't complete?

The notion that his game doesn't translate is never backed up with any legit reason why he can't play there.

His delivery doesn't take any longer than someone like a Philip Rivers

keylime_5
05-18-2008, 05:35 PM
As stated by many people on here he has all the potential but isn't a finished product. The completion % isn't a big deal for me, I've watched every one of his passes his career and the WR get no seperation at all from the DB. He also didn't pad his stats agianst weak teams or in OT like several SEC QB's last year. I thought his interceptions would hurt his stock, but with Matt Ryan going so high it might not. He started to grow as a QB last year with stuff like changing playsand leading game winning drives.

Ryan's interceptions weren't due to bad accuracy necessarily. He threw so many attempts that of course his INTs were high, but he has very good passing accuracy. Stafford is a different story, he has a great arm but has very inconsistent accuracy.

keylime_5
05-18-2008, 05:38 PM
Matthew Stafford may have more arm strength but to say Tebow can't make NFL throws is absurd.

Exactly what route on the football field do you think Tebow can't complete?

The notion that his game doesn't translate is never backed up with any legit reason why he can't play there.

His delivery doesn't take any longer than someone like a Philip Rivers

Tebow can make the throws but has funny mechanics and has a really lengthy delivery which will hurt his draft stock a lot, and the fact that he looks great in the same offense that Alex Smith looked great in doesn't help either considering how "terrific" Smith has been. Tebow's problem is not his arm strength or his leadership, but rather his mechanics and accuracy and the question of whether or not he can be a pocket passer in the NFL taking snaps from under center and only running to make throws or when he has to like Steve Young did.

BeerBaron
05-18-2008, 05:42 PM
i don't think the tebow/smith comparison is a fair one. tebows just bigger and more athletic all the way around.

and id rather have a great athlete who can win titles and run when things break down but has poor mechanics than the other way around. you can always reteach a throwing motion.....

and for the record, with all of my dislike of matt ryan, i like stafford more at this point

SenorGato
05-18-2008, 06:09 PM
i don't think the tebow/smith comparison is a fair one. tebows just bigger and more athletic all the way around.

and id rather have a great athlete who can win titles and run when things break down but has poor mechanics than the other way around. you can always reteach a throwing motion.....

and for the record, with all of my dislike of matt ryan, i like stafford more at this point

No you can't...thats why its such a big problem.

Changing a guys natural throwing motion is usually extremely hard because he's spent years throwing a certain way.

Iunno, Tebow's got alot of things to come over. Just not playing in a pro style offense will hurt him in teams eyes...playing in a pro style offense at the college level is vital to a young QB's development IMO.

BeerBaron
05-18-2008, 06:11 PM
No you can't...thats why its such a big problem.

Changing a guys natural throwing motion is usually extremely hard because he's spent years throwing a certain way.

Iunno, Tebow's got alot of things to come over. Just not playing in a pro style offense will hurt him in teams eyes...playing in a pro style offense at the college level is vital to a young QB's development IMO.

ok well then ill rephrase. i'll take a great athlete who is a good leader and can win championships but has a bad throwing motion over a guy who has visa versa

keylime_5
05-18-2008, 07:43 PM
ok well then ill rephrase. i'll take a great athlete who is a good leader and can win championships but has a bad throwing motion over a guy who has visa versa

Troy Smith is another guy who had a bad motion but was athletic and a great leader. Of course he's not as big as Tebow (6-0 not 6-3) but they share reasons why they are not elite pro prospects. When comparing Smith and Tebow the only thing that there is comparing them is that they are both from Urban Meyer's spread that is not a good system to prepare you for the pros. Everyone loves a guy with good intangeables, but if you have a bad throwing motion then your chance of success in the NFL is not good at all.

BeerBaron
05-18-2008, 07:46 PM
Troy Smith is another guy who had a bad motion but was athletic and a great leader. Of course he's not as big as Tebow (6-0 not 6-3) but they share reasons why they are not elite pro prospects. When comparing Smith and Tebow the only thing that there is comparing them is that they are both from Urban Meyer's spread that is not a good system to prepare you for the pros. Everyone loves a guy with good intangeables, but if you have a bad throwing motion then your chance of success in the NFL is not good at all.

hasn't seemed to hurt phillip rivers or vince young too badly and i recall that they were both guys that had throwing motion question marks about them

there are worse things about a QB that a bad throwing motion (see: grossman, rex - everything about him)

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
05-18-2008, 07:59 PM
Tebow's throwing motion isn't even that bad. It's nowhere near as low as VY's or Phil Rivers. He's got a decent release but his accuracy is very good, especially deep ball accuracy. He hits recievers in stride all the time with a beautiful deep ball.

d34ng3l021
05-18-2008, 08:03 PM
ok well then ill rephrase. i'll take a great athlete who is a good leader and can win championships but has a bad throwing motion over a guy who has visa versa

So you are saying Stafford is not a great athlete (...okay? he is pretty damn mobile for his size and has a great arm). He doesnt have leadership abilities (I cant really tell as of now). Hasnt won a championship game (So...no Peyton Manning?)

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
05-18-2008, 08:05 PM
So you are saying Stafford is not a great athlete (...okay? he is pretty damn mobile for his size and has a great arm). He doesnt have leadership abilities (I cant really tell as of now). Hasnt won a championship game (So...no Peyton Manning?)

Yea, Stafford is really athletic, people forget that he can run the football too. His 40 time will be around 4.6-4.7. Just because he doesn't run much doesn't mean he can't.

BeerBaron
05-18-2008, 08:07 PM
So you are saying Stafford is not a great athlete (...okay? he is pretty damn mobile for his size and has a great arm). He doesnt have leadership abilities (I cant really tell as of now). Hasnt won a championship game (So...no Peyton Manning?)

no no no, not what i was saying at all. that had nothing to do with stafford.

i was just saying that if the throwing motion was the only know against a guy who had all that other stuff, id take him in a heartbeat if i needed a QB

d34ng3l021
05-18-2008, 08:10 PM
Throwing motion is one of the most important things in a QB. It makes all the difference. A long wind up not only allows DE's to get to the QB quicker and strip the ball, but it also gives the DBs a seconds heads up on where the QB is throwing it. Sure it doesnt seem that bad, but you add up all the pass attempts, and that bad windup can cause alot of mistakes.

Look at Byron Leftwich. Look at Andre Woodson.

BeerBaron
05-18-2008, 08:14 PM
Throwing motion is one of the most important things in a QB. It makes all the difference. A long wind up not only allows DE's to get to the QB quicker and strip the ball, but it also gives the DBs a seconds heads up on where the QB is throwing it. Sure it doesnt seem that bad, but you add up all the pass attempts, and that bad windup can cause alot of mistakes.

Look at Byron Leftwich. Look at Andre Woodson.

look at phillip rivers. look at vince young.

its not a be all end all, there are far worse things id worry about a QB having wrong with them (see: Grossman, Rex - everything about him)

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
05-18-2008, 08:32 PM
Tebow's throwing motion isn't even bad why are you guys bringing it up?

draftguru151
05-18-2008, 08:49 PM
look at phillip rivers. look at vince young.

its not a be all end all, there are far worse things id worry about a QB having wrong with them (see: Grossman, Rex - everything about him)

Rivers and Young have very quick side arm releases. Tebow has an awkward slow release.

SenorGato
05-18-2008, 08:54 PM
hasn't seemed to hurt phillip rivers or vince young too badly and i recall that they were both guys that had throwing motion question marks about them

there are worse things about a QB that a bad throwing motion (see: grossman, rex - everything about him)

Both Rivers and Young don't have slow releases, just unconventinal ones.

Tebow's is just long...similar to Leftwich or Andre Woodson...not to their level and obviously things might change this year...but it's still a very legit knock on him as a pro QB prospect.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
05-18-2008, 08:58 PM
Rivers and Young have very quick side arm releases. Tebow has an awkward slow release.

Tebow's release is a bit awkward but it isn't slow by any means. It's not the fastest but it's decent

TheGreatEscape
05-18-2008, 09:11 PM
Tebow's release is on the slow side, but he has room to cut time off his release without throwing off his general motion. I'm really high on the guy but he isn't going to take over right away as a passer as he learns the scheme.

Cigaro
05-18-2008, 09:17 PM
Tim Tebow will have to quicken his release, adapt from his unconventional spread to a pro-style attack(something rarely done), and learn that he can't play-action to himself or just bulldoze opponents to be a good NFL quarterback.

He has potential, but it is obvious that he is at least somewhat a product of the system.

d34ng3l021
05-18-2008, 09:43 PM
Tebow's release is ridiculously slow in my opinion. The first thing when I saw him play was his release and how long it took. He winds up forever before he delivers the ball. And even when the ball is delivered, its not a rocket like Vick's or Leftwich's.

Not only does his release concern me, but also the style of offense he runs. Its basically a 1 maybe 2 read system. If those guys arent open, then he just runs. You really have to go through your progressions in the NFL because running is not always an option.

keylime_5
05-18-2008, 10:08 PM
Tebow's wind up before his release is longer than usual and it certainly is one thing working against him. His mechanics are fuzzy too which definitely contribute to his accuracy problems. In the NFL teams want a guy with a quick release who can make all the throws and not have to worry about accuracy problems. Tom Brady and Peyton Manning and most great QBs have lightning quick releases and that's a huge reason why they never get sacked even if their protection is not that good.

georgiafan
05-18-2008, 10:13 PM
I think Tebow would benefit from coming out after this year, because if he stays for his senior year he will get picked apart by scouts. But two of the teams that could potential draft him (bears,49ers) have got burned by players he has ties to. I just hope him and Stafford are both in the same draft class so this debate will continue.

Stafford isn't fast by no means, but is a better runner then he is given credit for. He had some nice TD runs this year agianst GT and KY. I think his TD runs from over 10 yards out are about the same as tebow. (without looking up the stats)

keylime_5
05-18-2008, 10:23 PM
Either way if Tebow enters the draft in 2009 or 2010, I think he would definitely be best suited to get drafted in the mid to late part of the first round rather than near the top by a team who will want to throw him into the fire immediately like bad teams always do with top pick QBs. He is a guy like Alex Smith who will need a lot of pro coaching before he should see an NFL defense in live action. Not just in terms of learning to pass exclusively from the pocket, but also in terms of refining his techinque and making all the reads and the other things that are way different from his shotgun spread at Florida. He's not gonna be a guy who can just put his team on his back and win a game like Vince Young did at Texas or during his rookie year in Tennessee.

d34ng3l021
05-18-2008, 10:24 PM
By alot of pro coaching, I hope you mean like sitting on the bench for at least a year maybe two.

jnew76
05-18-2008, 11:01 PM
My thoughts on the 4 Quarterbacks mentioned recently in this thread...

Phillip Rivers - The only knock on Rivers coming out was the awkward delivery. His arm strength is above average. His accuracy is excellent on short to intermediate routes and average on the deep routes. He is a coaches son, gym rat, and played in a Pro-Style offense for 4 Years in College as a starter. Prototypical size. He was way ahead of most QBs that come out due to his footwork and ability to throw with great accuracy on Pro-Style timing routes. He was the unquestioned leader of the NC St. team for 4 years and everyone knew it. He was also the MVP of all 4 bowl games he played in in college going 4-0. People really forget how good he was in college.

Vince Young - There was so much to like and to dislike about VY coming out. You cannot like the awkward delivery. You cannot like the Spread offense he came out of in College. I also did not like the fact that around 70% of the balls he threw were less than 7 Yards down the field because he looked to check down to soon. When he did go down field he tended to underthrow the deep ball and let his extremely gifted WR's adjust. However, with all that said, there was so much to like about VY coming out. He has great size and athletic ability. He played his best on the biggest stage in College football and led an inferior talented team to a victory. VY had good accuracy on short routes and decent accuracy on the move. He has a really strong arm, yet can throw with touch. But the MAIN reason I thought VY was and is an excellent prospect is that he makes the 2.5 seconds you normally have to throw the ball into almost 5 seconds consistently. He is so big and strong with great feet that he routinely enables WR's to create seperation long after they should be done with routes. He simply has the ability to make positive plays out of what should be negative plays. And finally, I think he just has the "it" factor.

Tim Tebow - He has a bit of a windup in his delivery. When his footwork breaks down he is not accurate down the field and has trouble throwing a spiral. When he has good footwork he is very accurate but still struggles to throw a spiral at times. (I mention this because he never really plays up north in the wind where the lack of a spiral will affect the ball more). He plays in a gimmicky offense and makes limited reads. He would need a ton of work on his footwork but like VY I think that his athletic ability might enable him to get by with it more than other prospects. He is not as accurate as VY throwing on the run and usually has to almost come to a stop to throw because of the wind up. He might be the strongest QB to ever come out pound for pound and he has needed that strength to run in the SEC. However he will need to find the sidelines like VY or learn how to slide really quickly. He has top leadership ability and by all accounts tremendous character. Right now I would give Tim a 2nd-3rd round grade, but knowing how hard he works and how gifted he is, I would not rule out him impoving enough this year to warrant a 1rst round grade.

Matthew Stafford - He has the best throwing mechanics by far in this group. Natural, effortless release that is quick and compact. He can easily make all the throws in the NFL. Like any sophomore QB I have ever seen, his footwork is what leads to most of his problems when he is innacurate. That said, the third year as a starter in college seems to be where the greatest improvement is made IMO. Last year Stafford looked a little mechanical, especially the first half of the year. He looked so much better the 2nd half of the season. Stafford has the most prototypical QB make-up of this group by far. He is in an offense that runs from under center and works out of 3-5-7 step drops. He has good footwork for a Junior-to-be but it is not on the same level as Rivers when he came out. Above average athleticism and good size. Should have a huge year with defenses focusing on stopping the Georgia running game. My only question on Stafford is that his leadership and personality have not come out yet IMO. With Rivers, Tebow and VY, you knew who the unquestioned leader of the team was. I don't get the same impression with Stafford, but I could have said the same thing about Eli Manning coming out. I think he projects as the #1 QB barring injury and a top 5 pick if he declares.

SKim172
05-19-2008, 05:50 PM
All this talk of throwing motions and mechanics and delivery - all good.

But let's get two things straight.

Some QBs have succeeded in the NFL despite an awkward delivery. It can be corrected or at least compensated.

A lot more QBs with prototypical bodies and perfect mechanics with amazing throwing strength have never made it.

Stafford has the size, the arm strength, the mechanics and decent athleticism. He's got everything you want in a QB.

Except for the numbers.

Are stats the only thing you should look at in judging a QB? No, of course not. You gotta watch them play.

And the first thing that jumps out at you about Stafford - makes bad decisions. Inconsistent. Inaccurate. Seems to lose focus. Bailed out by strong defense and excellent running game.

You're telling me that I should consider him a top five pick, based on the potential that he might work out all these problems eventually? When? How long will it last?

Sure, he's got the physical tools. But just like the statistics, it's only one part of the game.

(edit)
Also, if Stafford wasn't the QB for a SEC power and national title contender, would we even be having this conversation? How much of our views are colored by the team he plays for?

What if he was putting up 55% completion, 19/10 TD/int, 56th in passer efficiency at Vanderbilt? Would he be even considered a first rounder? He'd be playing the same SEC defenses, the only difference would be that Vandy is horrible, which would actually excuse such poor play.

Mackenzi Adams did complete 55% last season for Vandy. No one's saying he'll be drafted, even.

I see the potential in Stafford and think he might make big strides this season. And he better. Because if he doesn't start playing up to that potential now, in UGA's projected championship year, then I'd reckon there's very little chance he'll ever get it in the NFL, no matter how high he gets drafted.

Race for the Heisman
05-19-2008, 06:23 PM
All this talk of throwing motions and mechanics and delivery - all good.

But let's get two things straight.

Some QBs have succeeded in the NFL despite an awkward delivery. It can be corrected or at least compensated.

A lot more QBs with prototypical bodies and perfect mechanics with amazing throwing strength have never made it.

Stafford has the size, the arm strength, the mechanics and decent athleticism. He's got everything you want in a QB.

Except for the numbers.

Are stats the only thing you should look at in judging a QB? No, of course not. You gotta watch them play.

And the first thing that jumps out at you about Stafford - makes bad decisions. Inconsistent. Inaccurate. Seems to lose focus. Bailed out by strong defense and excellent running game.

You're telling me that I should consider him a top five pick, based on the potential that he might work out all these problems eventually? When? How long will it last?

Sure, he's got the physical tools. But just like the statistics, it's only one part of the game.

(edit)
Also, if Stafford wasn't the QB for a SEC power and national title contender, would we even be having this conversation? How much of our views are colored by the team he plays for?

What if he was putting up 55% completion, 19/10 TD/int, 56th in passer efficiency at Vanderbilt? Would he be even considered a first rounder? He'd be playing the same SEC defenses, the only difference would be that Vandy is horrible, which would actually excuse such poor play.

Mackenzi Adams did complete 55% last season for Vandy. No one's saying he'll be drafted, even.

I see the potential in Stafford and think he might make big strides this season. And he better. Because if he doesn't start playing up to that potential now, in UGA's projected championship year, then I'd reckon there's very little chance he'll ever get it in the NFL, no matter how high he gets drafted.

I find it interesting that you chose Vanderbilt when I was just thinking about comparing him to Jay Cutler. As for your hypothetical, if he had those numbers at Vanderbilt I think it would be much like Cutler's situation; passed off as a product of the conference and the lack of surrounding talent. You might even make that same argument of Georgia, considering Cutler had Chris Williams and Earl Bennett.

One other way to make a comparison would be to look at past quarterbacks. D.J. Shockley was a bit different, but his career completion percentage was 53.7 and his senior completion percentage was 55.2. Before that, David Green had a 58.5 percentage as a senior. So as a collegiate passer, to this point Stafford has shown nothing worthy of meriting his hype. He isn't the athlete Shockley is/was, although he is not that dissimilar to Greene at this point. If Greene was a third rounder and Stafford was a second based on better measurables, I would say that is fair, but to deserving of a first round ground he has to produce.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
05-19-2008, 06:44 PM
People forget that Georgia had some god awful WR's last year and the year before. Numerous drops and incorrect routes also attribute to Stafford's low completion %.

georgiafan
05-20-2008, 07:18 AM
People forget that Georgia had some god awful WR's last year and the year before. Numerous drops and incorrect routes also attribute to Stafford's low completion %.

Yeah this is very true alot of people just look at the low % and don't take this into account. Even when he did complete a pass it wasn't a easy since the DB was right on the WR every play.

SenorGato
05-20-2008, 11:34 AM
Cutler doesn't sound like a bad comparison for Stafford at all...

They've got alot of similarities, but Stafford will have to improve exponentially to end up the QB prospect Cutler was.

princefielder28
05-20-2008, 12:36 PM
Matthew Stafford may have more arm strength but to say Tebow can't make NFL throws is absurd.

Exactly what route on the football field do you think Tebow can't complete?

The notion that his game doesn't translate is never backed up with any legit reason why he can't play there.

His delivery doesn't take any longer than someone like a Philip Rivers

Ryan's interceptions weren't due to bad accuracy necessarily. He threw so many attempts that of course his INTs were high, but he has very good passing accuracy. Stafford is a different story, he has a great arm but has very inconsistent accuracy.

There's your answer....thank you keylime

SKim172
05-20-2008, 07:09 PM
Yeah this is very true alot of people just look at the low % and don't take this into account. Even when he did complete a pass it wasn't a easy since the DB was right on the WR every play.

This is true. Having poor receivers does affect QB play. Same with a poor team.

But on the flip side, there have been plenty of quarterbacks with worse receivers on worse teams that have played at the same level or higher than Stafford.

And looking to the future, there are plenty of NFL teams that are pretty bad too. Yes, pro offenses are better than college, but pro defenses are better too. What's to say that a QB would improve any? If he can't complete 60% with bad college receivers, will he complete 60% with bad pro receivers?

How much of that 55% completion is the fault of the receivers? More importantly, how much of it is the fault of the quarterback? Since we're talking a projected top 5-10 pick, how safe is it to take him that high? With very little exception, all the greats of the NFL were great college players, with great college numbers. It's not often that an underachiever in college becomes a star in the pros.

Casey Dick from Arkansas played against the SEC defenses too. Except he didn't benefit from especially great defense or offensive line. His receivers weren't all too special. He had a great trio of running backs, same as Stafford. But, Dick still had 57% completion, 18 TDs, 10 picks, albeit with a lot less yardage. But then again, he played in a predominantly run-based offense that didn't give him a lot of attempts and mostly asked him to make short passes, not long ones.

See, it's easy to make excuses. But can we honestly say that we would have no qualms about taking Casey Dick in the first 5 picks and that if he had a better team to play with, he'd be a better quarterback?

Hence, my suspicions about Stafford.

I do wish him well. He'll need a great season to get my vote. Though I'm sure he'll be drafted high anyways - the scouts have fallen in love with him. He's a prototypical quarterback with all the physical tools, he's from the SEC, he's a starter for a national title candidate and he's very white. Little yapping dogs like me spouting out numbers and statistics will not stop this massive bandwagon.

BBIB
05-20-2008, 08:33 PM
Tebow can make the throws but has funny mechanics and has a really lengthy delivery which will hurt his draft stock a lot, and the fact that he looks great in the same offense that Alex Smith looked great in doesn't help either considering how "terrific" Smith has been. Tebow's problem is not his arm strength or his leadership, but rather his mechanics and accuracy and the question of whether or not he can be a pocket passer in the NFL taking snaps from under center and only running to make throws or when he has to like Steve Young did.

Tebow's throwing motion is fine. The idea that his throwing motion is something fallacious just repeated over and over again until it's blindly accepted as fact.

Kind of like the stock of Matt Ryan and Matt Stafford.

d34ng3l021
05-20-2008, 08:34 PM
How can you say its fine? (http://cdn-media.channelme.tv/media/images/000000/72/06/NzI~NTA2_large.jpg)

He takes so long to wind up.

DragonFireKai
05-20-2008, 09:58 PM
How can you say its fine? (http://cdn-media.channelme.tv/media/images/000000/72/06/NzI~NTA2_large.jpg)

He takes so long to wind up.

Is there a reason why you posted a pic of JaMarcus Russell fondling himself in a topic about Matt Stafford?

Staubach12
05-20-2008, 10:06 PM
Tebow's throwing motion is fine. The idea that his throwing motion is something fallacious just repeated over and over again until it's blindly accepted as fact.

Kind of like the stock of Matt Ryan and Matt Stafford.

The intelligence of this thread just dropped. Sharply. It's time for a lesson.

The best QBs in the NFL usually have nice tight natural throwing motions. It lets him get the ball away quickly. Why would he want to do that? Under pressure, he needs to be able to deliver the ball. It's often the difference between a TD and a sack. Next, it doesn't allow the linemen to get those paws up and bat down the ball. Third, if the defense is playing zone, they're going to be watching the QB. A sudden release doesn't allow ballhawks to get to the ball fast enough to make the play.

Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, etc. They release the ball suddenly. Then there's Byron Leftwich. Two things have killed his career: that throwing motion, and injuries. However, Leftwich can gun it. He may be able to get away with that motion from time to time because of the velocity he puts on the ball. Tebow, on the other hand, doesn't get near as much zip on the ball even with that motion. Granted, Tebow's motion is not as bad as that of Leftwich, but it's still quite ugly.

Besides the motion, there are clearly other knocks on this guy. The fact that he plays in an Urban system alone scares the living crap out of me, and tons of scouts across the country. Also, there's his dependence on his running ability, his use of power when running the ball, his inability to throw on the run, his spotty accuracy, his ugly ball, and his questionable footwork.

d34ng3l021
05-20-2008, 10:13 PM
Is there a reason why you posted a pic of JaMarcus Russell fondling himself in a topic about Matt Stafford?

Haha my bad. That was for a topic about Matt Ryan actually. It was supposed to be Tim Tebow throwing, but Staubach covered it nicely.

keylime_5
05-22-2008, 05:39 PM
Tebow's throwing motion is fine. The idea that his throwing motion is something fallacious just repeated over and over again until it's blindly accepted as fact.

Kind of like the stock of Matt Ryan and Matt Stafford.

His release is way too slow. Hardly fine.

da boss
05-29-2008, 07:18 PM
staff is da boss

hes going to be a man next year and I hope he goes to a team where he'll start right away

adschofield
05-29-2008, 07:20 PM
staff is da boss

hes going to be a man next year and I hope he goes to a team where he'll start right away

By the reflexive property, can we assume that you are in fact Matthew Stafford?

SenorGato
05-29-2008, 08:14 PM
This is true. Having poor receivers does affect QB play. Same with a poor team.

But on the flip side, there have been plenty of quarterbacks with worse receivers on worse teams that have played at the same level or higher than Stafford.

And looking to the future, there are plenty of NFL teams that are pretty bad too. Yes, pro offenses are better than college, but pro defenses are better too. What's to say that a QB would improve any? If he can't complete 60% with bad college receivers, will he complete 60% with bad pro receivers?

How much of that 55% completion is the fault of the receivers? More importantly, how much of it is the fault of the quarterback? Since we're talking a projected top 5-10 pick, how safe is it to take him that high? With very little exception, all the greats of the NFL were great college players, with great college numbers. It's not often that an underachiever in college becomes a star in the pros.

Casey Dick from Arkansas played against the SEC defenses too. Except he didn't benefit from especially great defense or offensive line. His receivers weren't all too special. He had a great trio of running backs, same as Stafford. But, Dick still had 57% completion, 18 TDs, 10 picks, albeit with a lot less yardage. But then again, he played in a predominantly run-based offense that didn't give him a lot of attempts and mostly asked him to make short passes, not long ones.

See, it's easy to make excuses. But can we honestly say that we would have no qualms about taking Casey Dick in the first 5 picks and that if he had a better team to play with, he'd be a better quarterback?

Hence, my suspicions about Stafford.

I do wish him well. He'll need a great season to get my vote. Though I'm sure he'll be drafted high anyways - the scouts have fallen in love with him. He's a prototypical quarterback with all the physical tools, he's from the SEC, he's a starter for a national title candidate and he's very white. Little yapping dogs like me spouting out numbers and statistics will not stop this massive bandwagon.

A pro offense can hide a guy like Stafford's faults.

His completion percentage sucks when his receivers suck? Get him good receivers. Theres a quality NFL receiver on almost every team.

da boss
05-30-2008, 06:26 PM
By the reflexive property, can we assume that you are in fact Matthew Stafford?



I'm not Stafford nor am I a Georgia fan. I like this guy and think he has the tools to be an NFL QB. Im a big Gator fan and Tebow but if it was my NFL team deciding between the two I'd go with Stafford.

adschofield
05-31-2008, 12:25 AM
I'm not Stafford nor am I a Georgia fan. I like this guy and think he has the tools to be an NFL QB. Im a big Gator fan and Tebow but if it was my NFL team deciding between the two I'd go with Stafford.

Lies.

Let's examine the facts, shall we?

"Stafford is da boss"

By the Reflexive Property, Da Boss is Stafford...Don't try to weasel your way out of this one, Mr. Stafford.

da boss
05-31-2008, 01:21 AM
Lies.

Let's examine the facts, shall we?

"Stafford is da boss"

By the Reflexive Property, Da Boss is Stafford...Don't try to weasel your way out of this one, Mr. Stafford.

Im caught

signed

- Matt "Da Boss" Stafford

Byrd430
06-01-2008, 12:22 AM
Matthew Stafford is a Gator fan?


As for the bad completion percentage, let's not base it totally on the fact that he's got bad receivers.

He still throws off his back foot at times which is almost no-no number one with quarterbacks. Furthermore, I think he still has to refine some of the throws that he makes on certain routes, namely the 15-20 yard crossing routes his receivers run. I also don't think he's been able to really understand what defenses are being thrown at him and seems to struggle when calling audibles.

However, all these are quite fixable, and his upside is very attractive. He has the physical tools, he just has to refine how he uses them.

I'm also waiting on him to have that one spotlight game. I haven't seen one yet.

georgiafan
06-01-2008, 09:41 PM
Matthew Stafford is a Gator fan?


As for the bad completion percentage, let's not base it totally on the fact that he's got bad receivers.

He still throws off his back foot at times which is almost no-no number one with quarterbacks. Furthermore, I think he still has to refine some of the throws that he makes on certain routes, namely the 15-20 yard crossing routes his receivers run. I also don't think he's been able to really understand what defenses are being thrown at him and seems to struggle when calling audibles.

However, all these are quite fixable, and his upside is very attractive. He has the physical tools, he just has to refine how he uses them.

I'm also waiting on him to have that one spotlight game. I haven't seen one yet.

You are accurate, the only thing I see diffrently is calling audibles. He didn't have the freedom to do it until the middle of the year and seemed to do a good job espically late in the year.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
06-01-2008, 10:24 PM
Matt Stafford reminds me of Tony Romo with maybe a little bigger arm.

d34ng3l021
06-01-2008, 11:46 PM
His mobility may be a little less than Romo's but I dont think he has the pocket presence of Romo. Stafford's arm and deep ball are alot better. Stafford also has good mechanics while Romo's may be unorthodox. Romo also has better accuracy I would say.

Stafford reminds me of Palmer.

Byrd430
06-02-2008, 02:55 PM
I think Stafford has pretty good pocket presence, and I'll also praise him on ball security while he's in the pocket.

Some players can get away with bad pocket presence as long as he can hold on to the football and not turn it over. Stafford's presence is good and he doesn't turn the ball over so that's another double plus on Stafford's part.

d34ng3l021
06-03-2008, 03:19 AM
That doesnt make sense. How can you get away from bad pocket presence if you hold onto the football and not turn it over? Does that mean just taking sacks all the time? It would make sense if you said you can get away with bad pocket presence if you get rid of the ball quickly...but you didnt.

And Stafford does turn the ball over alot. He throws a pick ever 34.8 passes...about the same as Matt 'Turnover' Ryan. And he has had some fumbling issues if I remember correctly?

Race for the Heisman
06-03-2008, 07:23 PM
That doesnt make sense. How can you get away from bad pocket presence if you hold onto the football and not turn it over? Does that mean just taking sacks all the time? It would make sense if you said you can get away with bad pocket presence if you get rid of the ball quickly...but you didnt.

And Stafford does turn the ball over alot. He throws a pick ever 34.8 passes...about the same as Matt 'Turnover' Ryan. And he has had some fumbling issues if I remember correctly?

I think it has been established the Ryan's turnover ratio is about equivalent to any of the other top college quarterbacks, so that point is moot.

d34ng3l021
06-03-2008, 08:32 PM
People still knock on him for forcing the ball too much and turning it over.


Weaknesses:
Arm strength is only average...Still throws too many interceptions...Accuracy can be streaky...Struggles with the deep ball...A bit of a gunslinger who will play too recklessly at times...Not very mobile and won't beat you with his feet...May have some minor durability issues...Isn't a great athlete...May not have a huge upside.

But if people do think that Ryan doesnt throw too many picks, then I have to give myself and others a pat on the back.

Byrd430
06-04-2008, 11:05 AM
That doesnt make sense. How can you get away from bad pocket presence if you hold onto the football and not turn it over? Does that mean just taking sacks all the time? It would make sense if you said you can get away with bad pocket presence if you get rid of the ball quickly...but you didnt.

And Stafford does turn the ball over alot. He throws a pick ever 34.8 passes...about the same as Matt 'Turnover' Ryan. And he has had some fumbling issues if I remember correctly?

Not what I meant, but I see how you drew that conclusion from what I said.

Perhaps I should've said it was less damaging if you don't turn the ball over. But would you rather your QB take a sack as opposed to turning the ball over? Now to get to my real point, I think it's easier to teach a guy how to avoid the sack rather than how not to throw interceptions.


As for the interception point, I completely agree, but it doesn't have anything to do with the pocket presence he has. It's more to do with his accuracy, his throws on certain pass routes, and throwing off his back foot from time to time. And yes, you can also attribute it to receivers who don't get much separation from the DB.

Race for the Heisman
06-05-2008, 02:26 PM
And Stafford does turn the ball over alot. He throws a pick ever 34.8 passes...about the same as Matt 'Turnover' Ryan. And he has had some fumbling issues if I remember correctly?

Matt Ryan averaged an interception about every 34 passes.
Brain Brohm averaged an interception about every 39 passes.
Joe Flacco averaged an interception about every 104 passes.
Chad Henne averaged an interception about every 30 passes.
Andre Woodson averaged an interception about every 47 passes.
John David Booty averaged an interception about every 34 passes.
Colt Brennan averaged an interception about every 30 passes.

you can see that most of them are about the same.

all stats from the 2007 season.

Here's the actual stats to back it up, I was too lazy to find it earlier. I'm not necessarily saying Stafford is good as gold I'm justing making a point that up to this point he's on par with the collegiate level's better quarterbacks.

d34ng3l021
06-05-2008, 04:48 PM
Well I am not going to argue that Matt Ryan throws alot of interception, because I have previously argued that his attempts per interception is a bad ratio, but with Stafford it can still be worked on.

I know he is young, but with Ryan, his senior season with a pick for every 34 attempts was his worst (sans freshmen year). The season before, he threw a pick every 42 passes. The season before that, he threw a pick ever 39 attempts. The season before that, in his freshmen year, he threw a pick every 23 attempts.

For Stafford its different. We really have to see more of his play, because he got thrown into the fire real early.

Wait what the hell. I am one of Stafford's biggest supporters and one of Ryan's biggest homers.

dbro
06-05-2008, 05:24 PM
Stafford is nearly on the same level as Mark Sanchez.
Can both be good top 10 picks prolly, but not this year, because they are still young and still need to work on things an get experience

SKim172
06-05-2008, 07:59 PM
I'm also waiting on him to have that one spotlight game. I haven't seen one yet.

I agree with everything this guy says.

And yes, I'm also looking for Stafford's one big game, the game where he personally leads the team to victory.

Come to think of it, I'm hoping for the same from my boy, Mike Teel from Rutgers.

BTW, just completely off-topic here, but does it seem like every QB lately has a monosyllabic first name of four characters or less?

Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Chad Henne, John Booty, Colt Brennan...

Now, it's Matt Stafford, Tim Tebow, Mark Sanchez, Sam Bradford, Mike Teel, Todd Reesing...

ViperVisor
09-07-2008, 06:51 PM
Alex Smith never threw picks in coll.

Just tell me he is greatness so I can have hope when we draft him #1. When we got Smith it was 50/50 from day 1.

Race for the Heisman
09-07-2008, 07:05 PM
Alex Smith never threw picks in coll.

Just tell me he is greatness so I can have hope when we draft him #1. When we got Smith it was 50/50 from day 1.

You'd be better of with journeymen until you get some key pieces into place. I don't know how the team feels about Staley as a left tackle, but say Oher this year, plus someone like Robiskie at the top of the second to prepare for the QB class of 2010.

Bearsfan123
09-07-2008, 11:57 PM
Its still early in the season, we will see how it goes for him. From the VERY little I saw, he has high above average arm strength, solid placement, and decent decision making.

georgiafan
09-08-2008, 09:11 AM
He has got a lot better in changing plays at the line of scrimmage. This week he said he changed plays more then he ever has. It's still very early, but it appears like he has improved on his 2 biggest weakness with 0 interceptions and 63 % comp.

Larry
09-10-2008, 10:48 PM
I would stay away from Tim Tebow in the first round. An Urban Meyer offense just doesn't produce a quality starting NFL quarterback.

SenorGato
09-11-2008, 12:04 AM
If Stafford stays for his senior year, he's the next Jay Cutler.

I really hope he doesn't come out actually. He's really improved, but why would he wanna give up his last year of freedom where he could improve and mature even more?

I hope none of the junior QBs declare. It'd suck for this years draft, but I really think QB's should stay all 4 years.

d34ng3l021
09-11-2008, 12:09 AM
If Stafford stays for his senior year, he's the next Jay Cutler.

I really hope he doesn't come out actually. He's really improved, but why would he wanna give up his last year of freedom where he could improve and mature even more?

I hope none of the junior QBs declare. It'd suck for this years draft, but I really think QB's should stay all 4 years.

Though this might be better for the teams that draft them and their NFL success, but its hard to argue against the signing bonuses they could receive. Especially with the a possible rookie salary limit, they are going to come out early.

SenorGato
09-11-2008, 12:14 AM
Though this might be better for the teams that draft them and their NFL success, but its hard to argue against the signing bonuses they could receive. Especially with the a possible rookie salary limit, they are going to come out early.

The limit might affect him, but I'd think a guy like Stafford would be smart enough to know that his family (probably) isn't poor and theres no need to rush into getting millions. Yes, the paycheck is big, but once you're a first round pick QB in the NFL, your life has to be dedicated to the game.

If Stafford's there as a player and a person already, then he should be smart enough to stay for his senior year.

At least I hope so...same for Sanchez.

The NFL is still a job. And being a first round pick at the QB position is a whooooole different monster as far as pressure and expectation. Junior QB's should really take that into account, because if they're just seeing dollar signs they're screwed.

Babylon
09-11-2008, 01:16 PM
When you're projected to go that high you're nuts to not come out.

Turtlepower
09-11-2008, 01:30 PM
When you're projected to go that high you're nuts to not come out.

Colt Brennan is your example.

Babylon
09-11-2008, 02:43 PM
Colt Brennan is your example.

I was thinking more of the injury factor but you make a good point.

Staubach12
09-11-2008, 10:25 PM
Colt Brennan is your example.

And Brian Brohm...
And Brady Quinn...
And Matt Leinart...

Bearsfan123
09-11-2008, 10:58 PM
If he stays and falls, the Bears might get him, WOOH!

MarioPalmer
09-12-2008, 12:36 AM
No, he's definitly legit. He has prototype size, a little on the 6'2 side, sort of like Brian Brohm size. But his arm strength is very very good. His accuracy is good, but certainly could be worked on, but its definitly better than most if not all the senior QB prospects. His intangibles are what teams are gonna salivate over. Just like Matt Ryan or Philip Rivers, Matt Stafford is a leader who takes command of the huddle and takes the offense by the reigns and is looked up to by his team mates. He also has been starting scince his freshman year which in it of it self is a major accomplishment considering he plays for a major program in one of the toughest conferences the SEC. He also has very good athleticism considering that he is a pure pocket passer. He has the ability to make every throw, along with making tough throws on the move. So its not like he is a stationary target for opposing defenses.

I think he more than deserves to be the top QB prospect as of now. Of coarse things can change if someone like Josh Freeman or Mark Sanchez declare because of the talent and much higher ceiling. The potential for those two, Sanchez and Freeman, is off the charts. Freeman looks to be the next Duante Culpepper/ JaMarcus Russell and Sanchez looks to be the next Steve Young/ Jay Cutler. It really doesn't get much better than that. Stafford reminds me of a little less athletic Donovan McNabb. They both have the same builds and both have the same characteristics in the passing game. Sort of the shorter stockier build but with a tremendous arm along with very good accuracy. They also are team guys that command respect from their team mates and coaches.

Overall, the 2009 class is weak considering just the seniors, but the 2010 class looks off the charts. We could see 3 QBs taken in the top 10 and maybe even 4 in the top 15.

georgiafan
09-12-2008, 08:19 AM
Something people might now realize is Stafford has a 19-4 record as a starter in college. He has also lost 10 pounds.

Race for the Heisman
09-12-2008, 10:20 AM
Something people might now realize is Stafford has a 19-4 record as a starter in college. He has also lost 10 pounds.

As a Georgia fan, you should be able to appreciate it when I rephrase it as 'Georgia is 19-4 in the last three years' or whatever the time duration. Much like Ohio State or the Chicago Bears, sometimes the team wins not necessarily in spite of the quarterback, but by the virtue of everyone else's hard work. That's not to say Stafford is awful, just that I wouldn't attribute most of the credit for that record to him.

georgiafan
09-12-2008, 02:31 PM
As a Georgia fan, you should be able to appreciate it when I rephrase it as 'Georgia is 19-4 in the last three years' or whatever the time duration. Much like Ohio State or the Chicago Bears, sometimes the team wins not necessarily in spite of the quarterback, but by the virtue of everyone else's hard work. That's not to say Stafford is awful, just that I wouldn't attribute most of the credit for that record to him.

I understand I didn't mean to make it sound like the only reason for the record is because of him.

BBIB
09-12-2008, 03:12 PM
I understand I didn't mean to make it sound like the only reason for the record is because of him.

I hope not considering obviously Moreno has been a much more valuable player than Stafford to that team. UGA is actually undefeated since Moreno became a starter.

But I admit Stafford does look improved this year. But still not #1 QB in an entire draft class right now. No way. That is all based on his hype out of HS.

d34ng3l021
09-12-2008, 03:13 PM
Whats even better than his 19-4 record, is his 25 starts going into the start of his junior season. Add another 10 starts, and you have a good 35 starts in college. Thats a ton of experience in the SEC.

Babylon
09-12-2008, 06:13 PM
No, he's definitly legit. He has prototype size, a little on the 6'2 side, sort of like Brian Brohm size. But his arm strength is very very good. His accuracy is good, but certainly could be worked on, but its definitly better than most if not all the senior QB prospects. His intangibles are what teams are gonna salivate over. Just like Matt Ryan or Philip Rivers, Matt Stafford is a leader who takes command of the huddle and takes the offense by the reigns and is looked up to by his team mates. He also has been starting scince his freshman year which in it of it self is a major accomplishment considering he plays for a major program in one of the toughest conferences the SEC. He also has very good athleticism considering that he is a pure pocket passer. He has the ability to make every throw, along with making tough throws on the move. So its not like he is a stationary target for opposing defenses.

I think he more than deserves to be the top QB prospect as of now. Of coarse things can change if someone like Josh Freeman or Mark Sanchez declare because of the talent and much higher ceiling. The potential for those two, Sanchez and Freeman, is off the charts. Freeman looks to be the next Duante Culpepper/ JaMarcus Russell and Sanchez looks to be the next Steve Young/ Jay Cutler. It really doesn't get much better than that. Stafford reminds me of a little less athletic Donovan McNabb. They both have the same builds and both have the same characteristics in the passing game. Sort of the shorter stockier build but with a tremendous arm along with very good accuracy. They also are team guys that command respect from their team mates and coaches.

Overall, the 2009 class is weak considering just the seniors, but the 2010 class looks off the charts. We could see 3 QBs taken in the top 10 and maybe even 4 in the top 15.

Dont see Freeman and Sanchez anywhere near the level of Stafford. Freeman was terrible last year in throwing down the field and decision making. Sanchez certainly can see his stock blowup with a big game against OSU but i still think Stafford is the clear favorite. Tebow would get some votes for the top signal caller but i think this site has it right in their mock having him going around the 10-12 range.

STARHEATHER
09-12-2008, 11:23 PM
tebow also needs also to learn that in the nfl you have to stand in the pocket and make throws. hes uncomfortable and inneffective in the pocket. he has happy feet and looks to tuck and run at every chance. vs miami, there were some awful throws. he doesnt handle the pressure well. and i hope no one thinks on sundays hat hell be bulldozing any nfl lbs or running past them. just not much as far as nfl qb skills go. stafford has a little more but not much. i think there are some half truths with regards to his throwing arm strength. much better than tebow for the nfl though.

STARHEATHER
09-12-2008, 11:27 PM
im going to have to disagree on freeman. he threw more oin target lasers in tight spots than anyone not even close. he definitely has the best throwing arm. has the best body. just as athletic as tebow as far as throwing on the move and far better at it. plays in an nfl offense under center and can throw from under center. if i was to name a #1 overall pick right now i think hed be it. sanchez and stafford are kind of the same player. overrated arm, undersize, just happen to play on a good team. but better nfl wise than tebow

adamprez2003
09-13-2008, 05:41 PM
Stafford is so inconsistent at this point that I personally wouldnt touch him till the 2nd round but I'm sure teams will fall in love with his "potential" and draft him top 10.

CashmoneyDrew
09-13-2008, 06:24 PM
How are Mark Sanchez and Stafford undersized? They're both 6'3 225ish.

BamaFalcon59
09-13-2008, 06:31 PM
How are Mark Sanchez and Stafford undersized? They're both 6'3 225ish.

I'd say 6'2", which IMO is undersized.

Race for the Heisman
09-13-2008, 06:34 PM
I'd say 6'2", which IMO is undersized.

I wouldn't say undersized, but both are very average. We've just been spoiled by Russell, Ryan, Flacco, and all these other 'big' guys.

CashmoneyDrew
09-13-2008, 06:39 PM
They're both listed as 6'3 and IMO that's just fine. Hell, there's a lot of good 6'2 QB's in the league as well.

Matthew Jones
09-13-2008, 06:57 PM
Matt Stafford is incredibly overrated. He hasn't been able to do anything to suggest to me that he has more than just tools. Late first round value at this point.

2006 vs. SEC

South Carolina - 8/19, 171 yards, 3 INT
Mississippi - 7/18, 91 yards
Tennessee - 2/5, 11 yards, INT
Vanderbilt - 9/13, 86 yards
Miss. St. - 20/32, 267 yards, 2 TD, 3 INT
Florida - 13/33, 151 yards, 2 INT
Kentucky - 16/28, 230 yards, TD, 3 INT
Auburn - 14/20, 219 yards, TD

Bowl (not included): Virginia Tech - 9/21, 129 yards, TD, INT

Yards per game: 152.7
TD: 6
INT: 12

2007 vs. SEC

South Carolina - 19/44, 213 yards, INT
Alabama - 19/35, 224 yards, 2 TD, 2 INT
Mississippi - 13/21, 144 yards, TD
Tennessee - 16/33, 174 yards, 2 TD, INT
Vanderbilt - 16/31, 201 yards, TD
Florida - 11/18, 217 yards, 3 TD, INT
Auburn - 11/19, 237 yards, 2 TD, INT
Kentucky - 12/22, 99 yards, 2 INT

Bowl (not included): Hawaii - 14/23, 175 yards, TD, INT

Yards per game: 188.6
TD: 11
INT: 8

So that's a total of 17 TDs and 20 INTs over two seasons vs. SEC opponents. Additionally, he averages less than 200 yards per game. Keep in mind this guy plays for one of the best teams in the league. I don't see the production there to suggest he would play well against NFL defenses.

georgiafan
09-13-2008, 10:25 PM
You can't view a players NFL stock based just on stats espically when you look at his overall stats when he was true freshman starting in the SEC. What you will not see on those stats are him padding it agianst weak teams. He is a much better QB now then he was his freshman and sophmore year. Today he had 10 incomplete passes and atleast 4 of those was drops by the WR and another one was basically thrown away. Even though he plays with a top ranked team his WR have been one of the worst groups in the SEC. Also the OL has been anything special. I'm not saying he is a finished product, but he still has 2 years to meet the expections

Matthew Jones
09-14-2008, 10:52 AM
You can't view a players NFL stock based just on stats espically when you look at his overall stats when he was true freshman starting in the SEC. What you will not see on those stats are him padding it agianst weak teams.

True, stats aren't the only measure. But if you're an NFL team that's going to be drafting a player in the first round and paying them (if Stafford is drafted where expected) $50-70 million, you want them to at least have been a top college player as well. Matt Stafford wouldn't even make my top 10 list of college quarterbacks at this point. Could he be a great pro? Sure he could. But I doubt it happens unless he shows marked improvement. At this stage, he's a potential first round pick, but I don't take unproductive players in the first round.

About the weak teams...you're right, he wasn't that good against those, either.

D-Unit
09-14-2008, 12:10 PM
I still don't get the hype Stafford gets. He's so overrated it's pathetic.

Babylon
09-14-2008, 12:37 PM
I still don't get the hype Stafford gets. He's so overrated it's pathetic.

No offense but you obviously cant judge talent at the QB position.

D-Unit
09-14-2008, 01:20 PM
No offense but you obviously cant judge talent at the QB position.
No offense taken, since I think you're the one you obviously can't judge talent at the QB position.

Now I didn't say he's a bad QB. But I did say he's grossly overrated.

This is why he gets hyped:

1. He has prototypical size that scouts love.
2. He has an over the top throwing motion.
3. He's on a good team.
4. He's young and scouts think he's moldable.
5. He plays against top competition.

This is what people overlook that make him overhyped.

1. He has mediocre vision/QB instincts.
2. His TD/INT ratio is horrendous.
3. Georgia has(and has had) a great running game that takes a lot of pressure of Stafford.
4. When teams scheme to stop Georgia, they think about stopping the run.
5. Stafford has proven to be nothing but a bus driver QB so far.


He still has time to show more, but as of right now, he's overrated. Tell me why he's not.

619
09-14-2008, 01:25 PM
It's alright D, the majority of us know Sanchez is the better QB prospect by now anyways .. :rolleyes:

bspen4
09-14-2008, 01:26 PM
No offense taken, since I think you're the one you obviously can't judge talent at the QB position.

Now I didn't say he's a bad QB. But I did say he's grossly overrated.

This is why he gets hyped:

1. He has prototypical size that scouts love.
2. He has an over the top throwing motion.
3. He's on a good team.
4. He's young and scouts think he's moldable.
5. He plays against top competition.

This is what people overlook that make him overhyped.

1. He has mediocre vision/QB instincts.
2. His TD/INT ratio is horrendous.
3. Georgia has(and has had) a great running game that takes a lot of pressure of Stafford.
4. When teams scheme to stop Georgia, they think about stopping the run.
5. Stafford has proven to be nothing but a bus driver QB so far.


He still has time to show more, but as of right now, he's overrated. Tell me why he's not.

And I agree with everything you just said

Babylon
09-14-2008, 01:41 PM
No offense taken, since I think you're the one you obviously can't judge talent at the QB position.

Now I didn't say he's a bad QB. But I did say he's grossly overrated.

This is why he gets hyped:

1. He has prototypical size that scouts love.
2. He has an over the top throwing motion.
3. He's on a good team.
4. He's young and scouts think he's moldable.
5. He plays against top competition.

This is what people overlook that make him overhyped.

1. He has mediocre vision/QB instincts.
2. His TD/INT ratio is horrendous.
3. Georgia has(and has had) a great running game that takes a lot of pressure of Stafford.
4. When teams scheme to stop Georgia, they think about stopping the run.
5. Stafford has proven to be nothing but a bus driver QB so far.


He still has time to show more, but as of right now, he's overrated. Tell me why he's not.

I like your reply, well thought out. Regardless of our dissagreement he will be the top QB taken this year and if it's a team like KC, Tampa Bay or Miami then he probably goes #1, time will tell.

BamaFalcon59
09-14-2008, 02:29 PM
I have never been a fan of his. When he is back there, he just doesn't look natural.

Matthew Jones
09-14-2008, 03:07 PM
John Parker Wilson ftw.

P-L
09-14-2008, 03:19 PM
I think this year is a big year for Stafford. It's still really early. I'm not sure it's exactly fair to judge his NFL future based off the stats of his Freshman season. Not many true freshman are going to succeed in the SEC. What is more important is his improvement. So what if he did struggle as a freshman? How many freshman QB's do you know that light it up in the premiere defensive conference?

Like I said, his improvement is a lot more telling than his career TD:INT ratio. In his sophomore season he threw 12 more TD's and 3 less INT's than he did in his freshman season. So far this year he is off to a pretty good start. He didn't light up a tough South Carolina defense, but he was fairly efficient and mistake free. So far on this season he's completed 62% of his passes and has yet to throw an interception. Against a great South Carolina secondary he completed 60% of his passes and three or four of his incompletions were dropped passes.

Race for the Heisman
09-14-2008, 03:25 PM
This is my little scouting report on Stafford:

Stafford, Matthew (Ben Roethlisberger) – 4.65-4.70 – Stafford is more athletic than given credit for. His release is good but not great: it would not something that would be listed as one of his strengths, but it is not a weakness either (high but not particularly quick). He always keeps his head up and his eyes downfield, but his overall field vision is rather lacking (doesn’t see the whole field). His arm strength is fantastic and good enough to thread the needle or make throws when off-balance, in the air, or when his feet aren’t set. He is a slipstream scrambler with pretty good pocket presence, but his speed is more straight-line than anything else (not very shifty). He is very effective with pump fakes, which improves his ball security on throws where linebackers and safeties are playing in reactionary zones (Cover 2). His drops are a little bit short and choppy which may need work when he transitions to the NFL. When faced with a pass rush he is usually quite composed and doesn’t panic easily. As evidenced by his completion percentage, his accuracy and decision-making, two of the more important attributes for any quarterback, are not at an elite level. As of now (beginning of junior season) everything physically about Stafford is on an NFL level and he has an adequate TD:INT ratio (considering his freshman year a wash and observing the improvement in his sophomore season), but his completion percentage marks the biggest question about him. If he can complete over 60% of his passes this year he’ll have gone a little ways settled one of the biggest concerns critics have about him. His specific accuracy on short throws is not great, which is a concern. Furthermore, Stafford shows little touch on shorter throws, preferring to launch bullets at his receivers (at being the choice word because of his aforementioned accuracy on shorter throws). Those two issues are certainly reasons for his poor completion percentage, but in his defense his receivers drop an inordinate amount of passes, both short and long). He has a tendency to predetermine his throws, which is a problem. He does throw a great deep ball in terms of both power and accuracy.

Value: Overall, the upper extent of Stafford's value as a mid-to-late first round pick. As long is the investment in him is not exorbitant, the potential he has is worth gambling on.

This is of course right now, and it could certainly change.

Babylon
09-14-2008, 04:00 PM
I would say he's at the same level as Troy Aikman at a similar stage. Remember when talking completion % keep in mind the talent level of his receivers.

Matthew Jones
09-14-2008, 04:36 PM
This is my little scouting report on Stafford:

Stafford, Matthew (Ben Roethlisberger) – 4.65-4.70 – Stafford is more athletic than given credit for. His release is good but not great: it would not something that would be listed as one of his strengths, but it is not a weakness either (high but not particularly quick). He always keeps his head up and his eyes downfield, but his overall field vision is rather lacking (doesn’t see the whole field). His arm strength is fantastic and good enough to thread the needle or make throws when off-balance, in the air, or when his feet aren’t set. He is a slipstream scrambler with pretty good pocket presence, but his speed is more straight-line than anything else (not very shifty). He is very effective with pump fakes, which improves his ball security on throws where linebackers and safeties are playing in reactionary zones (Cover 2). His drops are a little bit short and choppy which may need work when he transitions to the NFL. When faced with a pass rush he is usually quite composed and doesn’t panic easily. As evidenced by his completion percentage, his accuracy and decision-making, two of the more important attributes for any quarterback, are not at an elite level. As of now (beginning of junior season) everything physically about Stafford is on an NFL level and he has an adequate TD:INT ratio (considering his freshman year a wash and observing the improvement in his sophomore season), but his completion percentage marks the biggest question about him. If he can complete over 60% of his passes this year he’ll have gone a little ways settled one of the biggest concerns critics have about him. His specific accuracy on short throws is not great, which is a concern. Furthermore, Stafford shows little touch on shorter throws, preferring to launch bullets at his receivers (at being the choice word because of his aforementioned accuracy on shorter throws). Those two issues are certainly reasons for his poor completion percentage, but in his defense his receivers drop an inordinate amount of passes, both short and long). He has a tendency to predetermine his throws, which is a problem. He does throw a great deep ball in terms of both power and accuracy.

Value: Overall, the upper extent of Stafford's value as a mid-to-late first round pick. As long is the investment in him is not exorbitant, the potential he has is worth gambling on.

This is of course right now, and it could certainly change.

Good scouting report! +rep.

georgiafan
09-14-2008, 04:52 PM
Against a great South Carolina secondary he completed 60% of his passes and three or four of his incompletions were dropped passes.

It was auctally worse then that 5 of the 10 incomplete were drops. TE Tripp Chandler droped 3, WR Kris Durham droped one, and WR Tavares King droped one. Two of Chandlers dropes would have been first down. Durham's pass would have been a TD. The two others would have prevented 3rd and long that we ended up punting on. Another thing thats hurt is the WR by committe that UGA does. Even though Massaquoi and A.J Green are the 2 best WR's on the field they don't see the field enough.

Babylon
09-14-2008, 05:01 PM
It was auctally worse then that 5 of the 10 incomplete were drops. TE Tripp Chandler droped 3, WR Kris Durham droped one, and WR Tavares King droped one. Two of Chandlers dropes would have been first down. Durham's pass would have been a TD. The two others would have prevented 3rd and long that we ended up punting on. Another thing thats hurt is the WR by committe that UGA does. Even though Massaquoi and A.J Green are the 2 best WR's on the field they don't see the field enough.


All of what you said is accurate which makes it hard for the average fan to evaluate, scouts seem to take those things into consideration.

georgiafan
09-14-2008, 08:19 PM
All of what you said is accurate which makes it hard for the average fan to evaluate, scouts seem to take those things into consideration.

Staffords stock is starting to remind me of of Matt Ryan's last year. Where the scouts are much higher on him then fans.

Ozzy
09-14-2008, 10:01 PM
Ok Stafford is a flat out stud! Reminds me exactly of Eli Manning as a JR at Mississippi in terms of his stock. People loved his potential but as a JR were not ready to say just how good he was. Stafford can make ALL the throws, what a ******* arm on that kid, wow! And now he can run the football and shows he has some athletic ability!

What is there not to like about him, and show me a better QB prospect with a better arm than him in college right now. Because there is no one!

BamaFalcon59
09-14-2008, 10:02 PM
Ok Stafford is a flat out stud! Reminds me exactly of Eli Manning as a JR at Mississippi in terms of his stock. People loved his potential but as a JR were not ready to say just how good he was. Stafford can make ALL the throws, what a ******* arm on that kid, wow! And now he can run the football and shows he has some athletic ability!

What is there not to like about him, and show me a better QB prospect with a better arm than him in college right now. Because there is no one!

Andrew Walter has a great arm too, and is tall.

Kyle Boller probably has a top five, top ten at worst, arm in football.

georgiafan
09-14-2008, 10:14 PM
Incase anyone missed here are his highlights from Central Michigan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msZGZwdksYU

Also South Carolina has a excellent pass defense they finished 4th in the country last year and are off to another good start this year.

illmatic74
09-14-2008, 10:18 PM
Andrew Walter has a great arm too, and is tall.

Kyle Boller probably has a top five, top ten at worst, arm in football.

So does Cutler, Palmer and Rothelisberger.

BamaFalcon59
09-14-2008, 10:18 PM
The point is that a good arm doesn't make a QB.

Babylon
09-14-2008, 10:38 PM
The point is that a good arm doesn't make a QB.

It's kind of like there are guys with 95 mph fastballs that are great pitchers and some stink.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
09-14-2008, 10:39 PM
Incase anyone missed here are his highlights from Central Michigan http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msZGZwdksYU

Also South Carolina has a excellent pass defense they finished 4th in the country last year and are off to another good start this year.

Good start as in losing to Vandy?

georgiafan
09-14-2008, 10:53 PM
Good start as in losing to Vandy?

Vandy threw for 90 yards agianst them it wasn't there pass defense's fault they got beat.

jnew76
09-15-2008, 05:03 AM
Stafford is a great prospect, but IMO, if you have Knowshon Moreno behind you for teams to key on, you should have better #'s as a college QB through three games. He has been efficient 4/0 TD/Int ratio, but I think he needs to be closer to 70% in college. He is currently at 62%.

He has all the tools.. There is no question, but If I had to choose between him and Sam Bradford, I would take Bradford... He has completely mastered that offense as a RS Soph. He does not have quite the arm of Stafford, and might not be as mobile(But it is close). In every other category, accuracy, leadership, mentality, production, I will take Bradford. You can have Stafford.

Babylon
09-15-2008, 01:19 PM
Stafford is a great prospect, but IMO, if you have Knowshon Moreno behind you for teams to key on, you should have better #'s as a college QB through three games. He has been efficient 4/0 TD/Int ratio, but I think he needs to be closer to 70% in college. He is currently at 62%.

He has all the tools.. There is no question, but If I had to choose between him and Sam Bradford, I would take Bradford... He has completely mastered that offense as a RS Soph. He does not have quite the arm of Stafford, and might not be as mobile(But it is close). In every other category, accuracy, leadership, mentality, production, I will take Bradford. You can have Stafford.

The flip side is Gerogia runs a ton because they have Moreno and the Bulldog receivers are below average in my opinion. I like Bradford, his numbers are really good because of the pass happy Big-12 or as in the case of playing stiffs like the Washington Huskies. To me Stafford has Jay Cutler ability and if in the ideal situation could be a Troy Aikman. I think Bradford's upside is probably that of a Trent Edwards and maybe Jake Delhomme or a Matt Hasselbeck. My take.

vidae
09-15-2008, 01:28 PM
At the beginning of the year, I firmly believed I wanted Stafford here in KC. It looked like we'd have a top 5 pick again anyway, and QB is a major need, but I'm not so sure now. I would hate for Stafford to turn out like David Carr - drafted to a team with questions along the oline and offense in general - so I'm not sure what we'll do now. It's a weird situation here and not one that a rookie QB should be excited to be entering.

If I were forced to make a decision right now, I would take Stafford, as I think he has more upside than Bradford.

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 01:55 PM
Andrew Walter has a great arm too, and is tall.

Kyle Boller probably has a top five, top ten at worst, arm in football.Walter did not have that good of an arm, and really Stafford does not have ideal height. Neither Boller or Walter can throw the ball like Stafford can and I think those are horrible comparisons if they were indeed that.

Stafford looks just like Jay Cutler to me, kind of stocky, can move around in the pocket and has a rocket for an arm.

Anyone that does not think Stafford is a standout QB prospect really needs to look at their evaluation ability.




As for the Sam Bradford stuff....ok those two are not even comparable. Sure Bradford is putting up good numbers and runs the team really well but come on let us look at the QB's Oklahoma has produced in the past few years. Jason White, Josh Heupel anyone? Now granted Bradford should be a much better pro than both of those college QB's, but seriously Bradford is not even in the same league as Stafford. And yes it is because of his arm strength and how well he can throw a football. Again I like Bradford too, but what QB could not be some what successful behind the best offensive line in the nation and have two of the best TE's anywhere plus a stable of WR's and RB's. That must be rough....

Babylon
09-15-2008, 02:02 PM
Walter did not have that good of an arm, and really Stafford does not have ideal height. Neither Boller or Walter can throw the ball like Stafford can and I think those are horrible comparisons if they were indeed that.

Stafford looks just like Jay Cutler to me, kind of stocky, can move around in the pocket and has a rocket for an arm.

Anyone that does not think Stafford is a standout QB prospect really needs to look at their evaluation ability.




As for the Sam Bradford stuff....ok those two are not even comparable. Sure Bradford is putting up good numbers and runs the team really well but come on let us look at the QB's Oklahoma has produced in the past few years. Jason White, Josh Heupel anyone? Now granted Bradford should be a much better pro than both of those college QB's, but seriously Bradford is not even in the same league as Stafford. And yes it is because of his arm strength and how well he can throw a football. Again I like Bradford too, but what QB could not be some what successful behind the best offensive line in the nation and have two of the best TE's anywhere plus a stable of WR's and RB's. That must be rough....


Not into the rep points things but had to give you some for that post.

D-Unit
09-15-2008, 02:14 PM
Walter did not have that good of an arm, and really Stafford does not have ideal height. Neither Boller or Walter can throw the ball like Stafford can and I think those are horrible comparisons if they were indeed that.

Stafford looks just like Jay Cutler to me, kind of stocky, can move around in the pocket and has a rocket for an arm.

Anyone that does not think Stafford is a standout QB prospect really needs to look at their evaluation ability.




As for the Sam Bradford stuff....ok those two are not even comparable. Sure Bradford is putting up good numbers and runs the team really well but come on let us look at the QB's Oklahoma has produced in the past few years. Jason White, Josh Heupel anyone? Now granted Bradford should be a much better pro than both of those college QB's, but seriously Bradford is not even in the same league as Stafford. And yes it is because of his arm strength and how well he can throw a football. Again I like Bradford too, but what QB could not be some what successful behind the best offensive line in the nation and have two of the best TE's anywhere plus a stable of WR's and RB's. That must be rough....
Stafford is NOTHING like Jay Cutler while he was at Vanderbilt. Let's get that out of the way.

And I've said this for a while now, but Bradford has been the best NFL QB prospect in college football (in my eyes) since he played his first game at OU. To blame the school's history at QB for him is incredibly silly. Let's not forget the QBs that Georgia has put out.. DJ Shockley, David Greene, Quincy "Crack Head" Carter... so does that mean Stafford's legitimacy is the same as theirs???

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 02:22 PM
Stafford is NOTHING like Jay Cutler while he was at Vanderbilt. Let's get that out of the way.

And I've said this for a while now, but Bradford has been the best NFL QB prospect in college football (in my eyes) since he played his first game at OU. To blame the school's history at QB for him is incredibly silly. Let's not forget the QBs that Georgia has put out.. DJ Shockley, David Greene, Quincy "Crack Head" Carter... so does that mean Stafford's legitimacy is the same as theirs?I would argue this all day long man, Stafford and Cutler are a LOT a like and they both throw screen passes identically. Both have absolute guns and throw a perfect spiral every single time.

As for Georgia, good point they have crappy history of QB's. But all of those QB's I do not or did not hate, White and Heupel I hated because everyone loved them so much. And for what, they both threw a weak pass and basically were the product of a great bunch of skill players around them. Again I think Bradford is much better than both of those lack luster prospects. However Bradford is still a quarterback that does not have a great arm, is accurate but again how could one not be amazing at QB with what he has around him?

I would be flat out shocked if, like you say, Bradford becomes the best QB in all of the available college football QB's currently. I would be shocked because I just do not see that happening. Again I like him but he is not even in the same league as Stafford, not even close. You put Stafford on Oklahoma they would be one of the best college teams ever possibly. You put Bradford on Georgia and they would without question be worse I feel.

Might be wrong though, and we will just have to wait and see.

D-Unit
09-15-2008, 02:41 PM
I would argue this all day long man, Stafford and Cutler are a LOT a like and they both throw screen passes identically. Both have absolute guns and throw a perfect spiral every single time.

As for Georgia, good point they have crappy history of QB's. But all of those QB's I do not or did not hate, White and Heupel I hated because everyone loved them so much. And for what, they both threw a weak pass and basically were the product of a great bunch of skill players around them. Again I think Bradford is much better than both of those lack luster prospects. However Bradford is still a quarterback that does not have a great arm, is accurate but again how could one not be amazing at QB with what he has around him?

I would be flat out shocked if, like you say, Bradford becomes the best QB in all of the available college football QB's currently. I would be shocked because I just do not see that happening. Again I like him but he is not even in the same league as Stafford, not even close. You put Stafford on Oklahoma they would be one of the best college teams ever possibly. You put Bradford on Georgia and they would without question be worse I feel.

Might be wrong though, and we will just have to wait and see.
Cutler is a gamer. His style of game is completely different. He's always had that indescribable QB moxie that you either have or don't have. At Vanderbilt he also ran A LOT. He showed major toughness. He was just a different type of QB altogether. Stafford is a bus driver. I'm sorry, but throwing a screen passes that look alike and tight spirals hardly qualifies for a match in my judgements. If that were the case, you could say Stafford plays like Ryan Leaf.

Race for the Heisman
09-15-2008, 02:43 PM
Cutler had none of Stafford's deficiencies. Both look a bit soft or doughy physically and they both have great arms, but Cutler was on another level as a prospect. Cutler would have been a #1 overall lock if he had the same hype out of high school/right now that Stafford did. Obviously that is a bit of an exaggeration but Cutler rose pretty far to become the eleventh overall. If he rose from the same platform Stafford is on now, like I said, top spot lock.

georgiafan
09-15-2008, 02:46 PM
Cutler would have been a #1 overall lock if he had the same hype out of high school/right now that Stafford did.

I'm pretty sure NFL teams don't draft QB's based on recruiting sites and message boards.

As far Bradford I would be suprised if he came out since he is only a sophmore.

bored of education
09-15-2008, 02:57 PM
So who should Chiefs draft lol

D-Unit
09-15-2008, 03:01 PM
So who should Chiefs draft lol
No one. They should throw the boat at Unrestricted FA, Matt Cassell. There's no way the Patriots franchise him.

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 03:04 PM
Cutler is a gamer. His style of game is completely different. He's always had that indescribable QB moxie that you either have or don't have. At Vanderbilt he also ran A LOT. He showed major toughness. He was just a different type of QB altogether. Stafford is a bus driver. I'm sorry, but throwing a screen passes that look alike and tight spirals hardly qualifies for a match in my judgements. If that were the case, you could say Stafford plays like Ryan Leaf.I just disagree with that, how is Stafford not a gamer? The only difference is yes Georgia has a better team around Stafford but come on Georgia does not have that good of WR's to be honest with you. That running game sure does help though. I think both players can make any throw all over the football field, I just do not understand how anyone would not be insanely impressed with Stafford's arm. Tell me who has a better arm than he does in college football. And when I say throwing arm I mean how far one can throw it and how fast they can throw it.

D-Unit
09-15-2008, 03:16 PM
I just disagree with that, how is Stafford not a gamer? The only difference is yes Georgia has a better team around Stafford but come on Georgia does not have that good of WR's to be honest with you. That running game sure does help though. I think both players can make any throw all over the football field, I just do not understand how anyone would not be insanely impressed with Stafford's arm. Tell me who has a better arm than he does in college football. And when I say throwing arm I mean how far one can throw it and how fast they can throw it.
Well just because you have arm strength doesn't mean you're the best QB prospect. How far or how fast is irrelevant. How can you even prove that Stafford has the best arm in the first place? Plus, I think JaMarcus Russell has changed the way scouts think about judging arm strength alone when rating a prospect. Gosh, I tried to tell them... but noooo.. hahaha.

rockio42
09-15-2008, 03:17 PM
The only problem I have with the Cutler/Stafford comparison is that i think its abvious that Stafford takes care of the ball better than Cutler, Cutler is a a straight gunslinger and takes more chances

D-Unit
09-15-2008, 03:20 PM
The only problem I have with the Cutler/Stafford comparison is that i think its abvious that Stafford takes care of the ball better than Cutler, Cutler is a a straight gunslinger and takes more chances
Cutler does take more chances because he is more of a gun slinger. But Stafford's Interception numbers are way too high for someone who is NOT a gun slinger.

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 05:00 PM
This is insane honestly, all this Bradford love. The kid is good, manages them game and is accurate as can be. Over the past 8 NFL drafts here are a few QB's that remind me of him when I looked back.

Colt Brennan
Alex Brink
John Beck
Aaron Rodgers
Kyle Orton
Luke McCown
Craig Krenzel
Jeff Smoker
Ken Dorsey
Patrick Ramsey
Chad Pennington
Chris Redman
Tim Rattay

Some of these players are doing good, aka world beater Aaron Rodgers but he has only played two games. If you take him out, the rest are just all average at best and that is how I view Bradford. A QB with not the strongest arm in the world, played in a very productive college offense but in the NFL he does not have the ideal ball speed to complete the hard passes against tight defenses. Sure he can manage the game and maybe be great at it. But in terms of elite players I do not see him as one.

You even take the class he is in as a SOPH. All this crap of him coming out as a freaking SOPH for the NFL draft and being a 1st round pick. Heck one could argue he is not even the best SOPH QB in the nation. You have Mallett who is a prototype NFL QB with a great arm, then you have a very promising athlete in Kapernick who has potential. Then there is Locker who physically is so far ahead of Bradford it is ridiculous. He is a promising prospect and now you also have Jevan Snead a player that plays with less talent but can make all the throws.

I just question his arm and do not see what exactly makes him so much different than Jason White. Jason White in college I hated him because I thought his arm was just crap and he got all these yards by the talent around him. Now Bradford has a better arm than White but the talent is still there. So what again makes him different than White? Heck White was "supposedly" a better athlete than Bradford.

So someone please explain to me this obsession with Bradford?

Race for the Heisman
09-15-2008, 05:16 PM
So someone please explain to me this obsession with Bradford?

He's living up to the expectations of the surrounding talent, which is impressive considering how much of it there is. That said, I haven't seen enough of Bradford to make an assessment one way or the other.

yo123
09-15-2008, 05:24 PM
This is insane honestly, all this Bradford love. The kid is good, manages them game and is accurate as can be. Over the past 8 NFL drafts here are a few QB's that remind me of him when I looked back.

Colt Brennan
Alex Brink
John Beck
Aaron Rodgers
Kyle Orton
Luke McCown
Craig Krenzel
Jeff Smoker
Ken Dorsey
Patrick Ramsey
Chad Pennington
Chris Redman
Tim Rattay

Some of these players are doing good, aka world beater Aaron Rodgers but he has only played two games. If you take him out, the rest are just all average at best and that is how I view Bradford. A QB with not the strongest arm in the world, played in a very productive college offense but in the NFL he does not have the ideal ball speed to complete the hard passes against tight defenses. Sure he can manage the game and maybe be great at it. But in terms of elite players I do not see him as one.

You even take the class he is in as a SOPH. All this crap of him coming out as a freaking SOPH for the NFL draft and being a 1st round pick. Heck one could argue he is not even the best SOPH QB in the nation. You have Mallett who is a prototype NFL QB with a great arm, then you have a very promising athlete in Kapernick who has potential. Then there is Locker who physically is so far ahead of Bradford it is ridiculous. He is a promising prospect and now you also have Jevan Snead a player that plays with less talent but can make all the throws.

I just question his arm and do not see what exactly makes him so much different than Jason White. Jason White in college I hated him because I thought his arm was just crap and he got all these yards by the talent around him. Now Bradford has a better arm than White but the talent is still there. So what again makes him different than White? Heck White was "supposedly" a better athlete than Bradford.

So someone please explain to me this obsession with Bradford?

Bradford isn't a game manager, take a look at his YPA he makes his share of big plays.

Mallet was garbage last year and has shown nothing to even consider him being better than Bradford.

Kapernick and Locker are ridiculously raw and aren't on Bradford's level as a passer. Not even close.

Bradford's arm isn't great, but it's good enough, especially with how accurate he is, and he actually has produced unlike supposed great prospects like Matthew Stafford and Josh Freeman.

draftguru151
09-15-2008, 05:33 PM
I think you're knocking Bradford a bit too much for being an OU QB. No he doesn't have an amazing arm but he puts some good zip on the ball and can make the necessary throws. He throws a beautiful deep ball and is accurate all over the field. His stats are a bit inflated but he doesn't make a lot of mistakes mentally or throwing wise, and it's not like he is just dinking and dunking the ball all the time.

Definitely agree Stafford will be the better pro at this point though. There were a few plays against SCar that just left you speechless.

d34ng3l021
09-15-2008, 05:37 PM
I think you're knocking Bradford a bit too much for being an OU QB. No he doesn't have an amazing arm but he puts some good zip on the ball and can make the necessary throws. He throws a beautiful deep ball and is accurate all over the field. His stats are a bit inflated but he doesn't make a lot of mistakes mentally or throwing wise, and it's not like he is just dinking and dunking the ball all the time.

Definitely agree Stafford will be the better pro at this point though. There were a few plays against SCar that just left you speechless.

Like which ones?

draftguru151
09-15-2008, 05:41 PM
The dropped TD in the corner, one pass on the sideline deepish (to Green I think), short pass (in or comeback) to Green. Probably the only guy in college that could make those throws and there aren't many guys in the pros who could either.

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 06:08 PM
Definitely agree Stafford will be the better pro at this point though. There were a few plays against SCar that just left you speechless.Thank you! My goodness, at least someone else sees that. As for which passes, maybe the one that went 80 some yards with a flick, or a few of his screen passes under intense pass rush. Or the one across his body across the field rolling in the opposite direction.

When he plays it seems like the entire field just opens up and you can do anything basically.


Bradford isn't a game manager, take a look at his YPA he makes his share of big plays.

Mallet was garbage last year and has shown nothing to even consider him being better than Bradford.

Kapernick and Locker are ridiculously raw and aren't on Bradford's level as a passer. Not even close.

Bradford's arm isn't great, but it's good enough, especially with how accurate he is, and he actually has produced unlike supposed great prospects like Matthew Stafford and Josh Freeman.As for this production comment, production to me means absolutely nothing. It is all about his arm and what kind of throws he can make. Still, do not see how one says Stafford is not productive but whatever. As for Locker and Kapernick being raw, yes, but they are talented. Locker again is a much more promising physical prospect than Bradford. Bradford athletically is not much to write home about. As for Mallet being garbage, I totally disagree with that, he showed a lot last year and played well in my book.

I still say, what makes Bradford this amazing NFL QB prospect? What? Do not talk about his stats of completion percentage. The kid throws a really questionable deep ball. He is solid but this is flat out ridiculous to call this SOPH a potential 2009 NFL draft top pick. It seems to me some do not really realize what arm strength is, I remember back in the day once I was arguing with people about Brad Smith and how he had a weak arm. People swore he had a gun but yeah you all know how that turned out. Not saying Bradford cannot play QB, I am saying his arm is not where NEAR Stafford's and thus he will not come out as a SOPH and will not be a top 10 pick in the draft this year. Rarely will a QB with a so so arm be a top 10 draft pick.

I like Bradford but this over hype on him is almost making me think otherwise. And as for arm strength, since when does this not matter? Make the case of Jamarcus Russell, ok his career just started. How about people realize that oh does Brady have a rocket arm? Yes. Favre? Yes. Peyton Manning? Yes. Roethlisberger? Yes. Eli Manning? Yes.

These guys have talented throwing arms and it is almost proven that all are ridiculously successful in the NFL. Sure arm strength is not everything but in the NFL where it is all about how physically talented you are, it means a lot.

As for my comparisons, any arguments? How is Bradford not a lot like let us say John Beck, Kyle Orton, Luke McCown or Colt Brennan?

yo123
09-15-2008, 06:12 PM
As for this production comment, production to me means absolutely nothing.

This is where I stopped reading.

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 06:21 PM
This is where I stopped reading.Wrongly stated, how about....I believe that statistical success in college means very little in terms of quarterback evaluation because look at those who have put up great statistics in college....how did they turn out in the NFL?

Timmy Chang
BJ Symons
Kliff Kingsbury
Colt Brennan
Ty Detmer

Look at what type of passes the quarterback completes, not the box scores stats...


And sorry I do want to argue about this because I just do not see it, someone please convince me. The kid is good, I agree with that, but he is not All Pro future 1st pick in the NFL draft good.

yo123
09-15-2008, 06:23 PM
Wrongly stated, how about....I believe that statistical success in college means very little in terms of quarterback evaluation because look at those who have put up great statistics in college....how did they turn out in the NFL?

Timmy Chang
BJ Symons
Kliff Kingsbury
Colt Brennan
Ty Detmer

Look at what type of passes the quarterback completes, not the box scores stats...


That's better, but those are extreme examples, Bradford has more physical tools than all of those from what I have seen. I don't think his arm is as bad as your making it out to be.

Drew Brees and Phillip Rivers don't have great arms, but they are two of the better QB's in the league.

d34ng3l021
09-15-2008, 06:26 PM
The dropped TD in the corner, one pass on the sideline deepish (to Green I think), short pass (in or comeback) to Green. Probably the only guy in college that could make those throws and there aren't many guys in the pros who could either.

I don't doubt it. I wish I could see those throws. I love amazing throws by QBs.

D-Unit
09-15-2008, 06:29 PM
Wrongly stated, how about....I believe that statistical success in college means very little in terms of quarterback evaluation because look at those who have put up great statistics in college....how did they turn out in the NFL?

Timmy Chang
BJ Symons
Kliff Kingsbury
Colt Brennan
Ty Detmer

Look at what type of passes the quarterback completes, not the box scores stats...


And sorry I do want to argue about this because I just do not see it, someone please convince me. The kid is good, I agree with that, but he is not All Pro future 1st pick in the NFL draft good.
What good is that logic? There are bad QBs with good stats and bad QBs with bad stats. However, the success rate of QBs with good stats is a hell of a lot higher than QBs with bad stats. You act as if it's the opposite. That QBs with bad stats have a better chance to succeed than QB with good stats. Phillip Rivers (and his side arm release) wouldn't have been drafted as high as he was if he didn't have good stats. Stats alone wasn't what made him, but stats most definitely have meaning.

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 06:32 PM
Drew Brees and Phillip Rivers don't have great arms, but they are two of the better QB's in the league.I disagree with that, I think Rivers has a rocket arm, always could throw a great deep ball even in college. People think he cannot throw because his odd release. And Brees he is a gun slinger if you ever saw one in college. Threw a very fast and tight ball. It is all subjective though, what one person thinks is a fast throw another person would not even notice. What one person sees as a tough pass the other sees it as a weak throw.

So yeah all depends on who is looking.

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 06:36 PM
What good is that logic? There are bad QBs with good stats and bad QBs with bad stats. However, the success rate of good QBs with good stats is a hell of a lot higher than good QBs with bad stats. You act as if it's the opposite. That QBs with bad stats have a better chance to succeed than QB with good stats. Phillip Rivers (and his side arm release) wouldn't have been drafted as high as he was if he didn't have good stats. Stats alone wasn't what made him, but stats most definitely have meaning.I say it because as someone that likes to watch and evaluate college football players and predict their potential success in the NFL, I hate just looking at statistics and making an opinion off of it. As a QB sure statistics mean a little but should not be the focus. Other positions it is a little different, QB though one can really look a lot better than he actually is pretty easily.

D-Unit
09-15-2008, 07:14 PM
I say it because as someone that likes to watch and evaluate college football players and predict their potential success in the NFL, I hate just looking at statistics and making an opinion off of it. As a QB sure statistics mean a little but should not be the focus. Other positions it is a little different, QB though one can really look a lot better than he actually is pretty easily.
Yes, but there are certain stats like TD/INT ratio and Completion Percentage that can be telling. Even Wins can be telling. If a program is crap before the guy gets there and then all of a sudden becomes good, I do credit QBs with that. Or the opposite, if the school is good and then is crap, you blame the QB for not being that good. This is more telling for medium-small schools. Big power house schools that are supposed to be good every year, make it hard to judge a QB using Wins. Stats like Yardage and TDs.... they aren't really good indicators. But, it's not wise to just demean all QB stats.

I know you place a heavy emphasis on QB size and arm strength, but those 2 things are probably the 2 most overrated factors in determining how good a QB will be in the NFL.

I'll give you the honest to darn truth (in my eyes) to a successful QB prospect:

1. Instincts/Intelligence - the QB has to have a great feel for knowing how to move the ball and win the game without making mistakes. Part of having good instincts requires the ability to know your playbook, know your opponent and hard work. You don't have the capacity to do that without being intelligent.

2. Accuracy - Hand/eye coordination takes a long time to develop. It goes back to child development. Unlike arm strength and weight (2 highly overrated qualities) that can easily improve under a strict training regiment, you can't draft a QB and expect him to dramatically improve his accuracy.

3. Mobility - A good QB prospect will also be able to move around the pocket or scramble away because QBs with cement in their shoes simply fail.

4. Character - QBs have to be men of discipline. They have to be able to control their emotions, have to be able to command the respect of their teammates and they have to have that "leadership" quality or qualities that make a good leader. If the guy can't handle media criticism, chooses the wrong crowd, and consistently makes bad choices off the field, then he's not a good prospect.

5. Good looks - Laugh... but I'm DEAD serious. It's significant enough because in our society, people with good looks have a better chance to succeed in life than people with bad looks. Not saying an ugly person can't succeed, but for every ugly QB who has been successful in the NFL, there are 20 good looking QBs who have been successful. My guess is that they have a type of confidence that others may not. That's why they are the Prom/Homecoming Kings, voted most popular, etc etc... They've been living a life of high expectations for a long time.

Ozzy
09-15-2008, 07:38 PM
Great post D-Unit....

As for the looks, what about good old Peyton, he is not Tom Brady but I would take him any day as a QB despite how he appears. However he is funny as hell, see him on SNL awhile back, wow! haha



All the things you mentioned I totally agree with. However I must say, I think it is quite important for a NFL QB to throw the ball anywhere on the field. I am speaking of rolling out to your left, throwing back to your right which might only be 30 yards on the field but is actually like 60-70 yards in the air.

A football field is more than 50 yards wide. Thus even a short out route you have to be able to throw it 30 yards with great speed and if not it will be picked off. That is what I talk about with arm strength.

To be able to shoot a ball in a tight spot and you cannot do that unless you have a rocket arm and can muscle it in there.

Also the ability to take a direct snap, under intense pressure, keep focus down field, fling it 70-80 yards just at the last second and be able to get back up and do it again.

Those type of QB's I would fear and those type of QB's I would want on my team.



However yes, based on what you look for in a QB then yes Bradford is your man probably. Nonetheless it is just a difference in what one considers the ideal QB. We are talking top QB prospects thus the personal ideal, my ideal I guess is not the same as some others. I want a rocket armed quarterback that can make all and any throw.

Thus Stafford is the man of the hour currently in college football in my world regarding his arm.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-15-2008, 07:55 PM
Drew Brees and Phillip Rivers don't have great arms, but they are two of the better QB's in the league.

Coming out of college, Rivers motion may have been unorthodox, but it was highly effective. The kid threw a great ball. As for Brees, accuracy was more his thing coming out of college, but he completely changed his throwing mechanics after the Chargers picked him up. That's why he throws as good a deep pass as anyone in the NFL.

As for Stafford, he honestly reminds me of what Jay Cutler looked like at Vandy in 2004. As Cutler starts to ascend into that current rarefied air of NFL quarterbacks that comparison carries more weight, but take it purely as a college play comparison. Stafford has the tools and has a nice approach, but he hasn't pulled everything together yet, and we may not see him do so if he exits college early. That said, the tools are there in enough excess that it isn't really all that hard of a thing to imagine him going top 5 even if his college production isn't quite up to par. There figure to be plenty of quarterback hungry teams and I don't even think there's a Matt Ryan-esque guy in the picture yet. Stafford still looks like the most likely #1 QB to me.

STARHEATHER
09-15-2008, 10:22 PM
i think its pretty clear on stafford. hes not going to have a big year. theyre not going to win the title. just not that great of a thrower. not accurate. how many 55% 150 yd games does he have to put up before its finally accepted that hes not coming out andhes just not that good. he plays on a good football team. that does not an nfl qb make. not a guaranteed rd 1 and i dont see his stock improving all that much because the defensive competition level is about to rise and hes going to throw picks and theyre going to lose some games. not meeting team expectaitions+ average stats most likely wont equal a rd 1 pick and thus i think he goes back.

draftguru151
09-15-2008, 10:36 PM
If you're going to complain about stats at least have it be somewhat relevant. 62% so far this year with no games under 60.

STARHEATHER
09-15-2008, 10:47 PM
im not sure what that means but hes was 15/25 150 0 tds and not m,any points in this last yawner. and this is against a team that lost to vandy. now they get fla auburn lsu etc. theyre going to lose some games. i think the hawaii game elevated the team and stafford a above their true level. its going to be difficult for him tomeet expectations and hes not going to have a huge year stat wise.

draftguru151
09-15-2008, 11:19 PM
SC gave up 90 yards passing against Vandy so I don't see why them losing that game is relevant to Stafford. It's already been mentioned a bunch but UGA dropped 4/5 passes in that game including a TD that was a perfect pass. He completed 60% of his passes against a great pass defense with mediocre receivers dropping a handful of passes with a pretty conservative gameplan from georgia. My point was you were knocking him for something he was doing last year when he has clearly progressed so far this season.

STARHEATHER
09-15-2008, 11:24 PM
i dont know if id call anything aboust sc "great". the talent level is only going to rise. if youre a jr qb and expect to be picked high you pretty much need a big stat year. i dont see how hes progressed. in their first real "test", he didnt shine. and the exams are only going to get harder

Paranoidmoonduck
09-15-2008, 11:26 PM
Georgia may not be heaping it all onto Stafford's back, but that's because it's the smart thing to let their great running back handle most of the work. Stafford may not get many chances to show that he's an elite prospect, but he hasn't shown me anything so far this year to suggest he can't be.

yourfavestoner
09-15-2008, 11:27 PM
I disagree with that, I think Rivers has a rocket arm, always could throw a great deep ball even in college. People think he cannot throw because his odd release. And Brees he is a gun slinger if you ever saw one in college. Threw a very fast and tight ball. It is all subjective though, what one person thinks is a fast throw another person would not even notice. What one person sees as a tough pass the other sees it as a weak throw.

So yeah all depends on who is looking.

Arm strength isn't dictated by how far you can throw. It's the velocity of the passes. Rivers' deep ball floats on him, and his outs (particular deep outs) take forever to reach their intended target. Until now, he's made his living in between the hash marks to Antonio Gates.

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 02:48 AM
In my opinion, Matt Stafford's hype is eerily similar to Andre Woodson's at this time last year.

Ozzy
09-16-2008, 07:05 AM
im not sure what that means but hes was 15/25 150 0 tds and not m,any points in this last yawner. and this is against a team that lost to vandy. now they get fla auburn lsu etc. theyre going to lose some games. i think the hawaii game elevated the team and stafford a above their true level. its going to be difficult for him tomeet expectations and hes not going to have a huge year stat wise.That is ridiculous, South Carolina has one of the most talented defensive units in the country without question. They have ball plays at each position. Cliff Matthews is a stud DE pass rusher, their DT's are as good as anyones. Then you have Norwood on the outside making plays and Brinkley one of the best run stopping ILB's around. At CB they are stacked with Munnerlyn, Woodson and Thomas then at safety they have fine players in Cook and Culliver. To say they are not talented on defense is ridiculous, they are not only talented they are one of the most talented groups around.

Ozzy
09-16-2008, 07:07 AM
In my opinion, Matt Stafford's hype is eerily similar to Andre Woodson's at this time last year.Possible, but Woodson's problem was that he did not let the ball go soon enough and his slow release became a problem. Stafford does not have that problem. Still quite surprised Woodson did not make a team but it is all about that release and how odd and slow it was. Just shows though, you can look great in college but not have any future in the NFL. Has to be more than Woodson than just his release though, not sure if he go injured or if he went mentally insane at some point and lost his mind...who knows...

georgiafan
09-16-2008, 08:12 AM
im not sure what that means but hes was 15/25 150 0 tds and not m,any points in this last yawner. and this is against a team that lost to vandy. now they get fla auburn lsu etc. theyre going to lose some games. i think the hawaii game elevated the team and stafford a above their true level. its going to be difficult for him tomeet expectations and hes not going to have a huge year stat wise.

You really need to watch the games and not just look at the box score. Like I mentioned a few days ago 5 of the 10 incomplete passes were droped. one would have been for a TD, two would have been first downs and two others would have prevented 3rd and long. If those pass are caught the game is alot diffrent. One of the other 5 incompete Richard Samuel had a pass go through his hands that would have been a TD. If Moreno or King is in the game thats a TD. On another incomplete he escaped a defender where he should have been sacked throw it downfield around 40 yards and Massaqoui couldn't get his feet down in bounds. He did make a bad read where he threw into double coverage to A.J instead of hitting Massaquoui on a crossing pattern. South Carolina did lose to Vandy, but they have a great DB which was 4th in the country and pass yards and are off to a good start agian this year with pretty much the same group back. UGA also lost the battle up front.


I was watching and saw a Okl. WR take a short pass and go about 70 yards for a TD. When is the last time you saw a UGA WR do that?

Race for the Heisman
09-16-2008, 12:07 PM
In my opinion, Matt Stafford's hype is eerily similar to Andre Woodson's at this time last year.

I think the biggest difference (aside from throwing motion) is that Woodson showed late last year he had very limited pocket presence/rush sense. I'm not surprised he ended up lasting as long as he did because most of the guys who did get taken before him were guys I would have taken before him.

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 12:48 PM
First off, I'm not comparing Woodson to Stafford. I said I was comparing their hype. ...and it's driven because of similar qualities.

georgiafan
09-16-2008, 01:06 PM
I think Woodson hype was started from him having good stats in the SEC. Where Staffords bigest knock is not having good enough stats.

P-L
09-16-2008, 01:17 PM
Remember that Woodson was a senior last year and Stafford is a junior this year. Unless Stafford gets a 1st Round, he'll come back for his senior year. As big of a fan of Stafford that I am, I think he'd be better off staying for his senior year anyway.

Race for the Heisman
09-16-2008, 01:25 PM
First off, I'm not comparing Woodson to Stafford. I said I was comparing their hype. ...and it's driven because of similar qualities.

I understand you were comparing their draft stock at similar points, I was justing pointing out the Woodson had a massive flaw that Stafford doesn't, so I don't see Stafford's value mirroring the dive that Woodson ended up having.

Babylon
09-16-2008, 01:36 PM
Remember that Woodson was a senior last year and Stafford is a junior this year. Unless Stafford gets a 1st Round, he'll come back for his senior year. As big of a fan of Stafford that I am, I think he'd be better off staying for his senior year anyway.


His receivers (except for Jones) arent going to get any better and he could get hurt. When you're an apparent lock to be a top 5 pick you come out.

P-L
09-16-2008, 01:40 PM
I think I worded that wrong. I think it's less risky to his draft stock to come out this year, but I think he'd be a better player if he stayed for another year.

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 01:46 PM
His receivers (except for Jones) arent going to get any better and he could get hurt. When you're an apparent lock to be a top 5 pick you come out.
I have major doubts that he'll be a sure fire Top 5 selection if he were to declare. But if he is, yeah, he should. I think P-L is coming from the standpoint where Stafford does see his stock fall. Which in that case, he should go back.

Babylon
09-16-2008, 01:48 PM
I think I worded that wrong. I think it's less risky to his draft stock to come out this year, but I think he'd be a better player if he stayed for another year.


There is the argument he can get better at the pro level with better coaching. I'm with you on players staying to get better but i would be shocked if he does. He isnt meeting with Troy Aikman and Tony Romo down in Dallas to talk about the weather.

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 02:01 PM
There is the argument he can get better at the pro level with better coaching. I'm with you on players staying to get better but i would be shocked if he does. He isnt meeting with Troy Aikman and Tony Romo down in Dallas to talk about the weather.
Well, naturally players are going to be better if they return and don't get injured. Anyone who digresses skill/experience wise is a nincompoop.

But the thing that CAN change is draft stock. See Brady Quinn/Colt Brennan.

d34ng3l021
09-16-2008, 02:06 PM
Question. How is Stafford's pocket presence?

BBIB
09-16-2008, 02:22 PM
I just disagree with that, how is Stafford not a gamer? The only difference is yes Georgia has a better team around Stafford but come on Georgia does not have that good of WR's to be honest with you. That running game sure does help though. I think both players can make any throw all over the football field, I just do not understand how anyone would not be insanely impressed with Stafford's arm. Tell me who has a better arm than he does in college football. And when I say throwing arm I mean how far one can throw it and how fast they can throw it.

Stafford's cast is a helluva lot better than what Cutler had at Vanderbilt.

What a joke to suggest anything close to otherwise.

Matthew Stafford is the most overrated prospect in the draft. He is living off of the hype he had out of high school.

His great arm strength is negated by his inconsistency and decision making.

P-L
09-16-2008, 02:30 PM
Can we let the guy play this year before we talk about bad decision making and inconsistency? It's not how you start your college career, it's how you end it. There have been tons of examples of this. Look at Stafford's numbers so far.

Georgia Southern: 62%, 2 TD, 0 INT
Central Michigan: 64%, 2 TD, 0 INT
South Carolina: 60%, 0 TD, 0 INT (4 dropped passes)

Through 3 games he's thrown consistently over 60% and has yet to make a bad decision. I don't know how he's going to finish the season, but through three games he's completed a very respectable number of his passes despite having a poor receiving corps and has yet to throw an INT.

Babylon
09-16-2008, 02:47 PM
Well, naturally players are going to be better if they return and don't get injured. Anyone who digresses skill/experience wise is a nincompoop.

But the thing that CAN change is draft stock. See Brady Quinn/Colt Brennan.

Good point about Quinn, Brennan was never thought of as a top 5 pick so i dont know where anyone is getting that. The thing with Quinn is he had Russell in front of him and teams werent willing to take a second QB that high. I think this year there is a pretty good chance KC, Miami and possibly Rams, Bucs, Bears and Jets may be looking for help with early picks.

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 03:12 PM
Good point about Quinn, Brennan was never thought of as a top 5 pick so i dont know where anyone is getting that. The thing with Quinn is he had Russell in front of him and teams werent willing to take a second QB that high. I think this year there is a pretty good chance KC, Miami and possibly Rams, Bucs, Bears and Jets may be looking for help with early picks.
Brennan might've been a 1st or 2nd round pick. He ended up going in the 6th. What I was referring to was the drop in stock. I didn't think that was so hard to grasp, but whatevers.

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 03:16 PM
Can we let the guy play this year before we talk about bad decision making and inconsistency? It's not how you start your college career, it's how you end it. There have been tons of examples of this. Look at Stafford's numbers so far.

Georgia Southern: 62%, 2 TD, 0 INT
Central Michigan: 64%, 2 TD, 0 INT
South Carolina: 60%, 0 TD, 0 INT (4 dropped passes)

Through 3 games he's thrown consistently over 60% and has yet to make a bad decision. I don't know how he's going to finish the season, but through three games he's completed a very respectable number of his passes despite having a poor receiving corps and has yet to throw an INT.
At the same token, can we let the guy play this year before crowing his ass? I'm fine with judging him along the way.... and with that... If I'm going to call someone the best QB prospect in the game, I need to see a better showing that what he did against S.Carolina.

Babylon
09-16-2008, 03:22 PM
Brennan might've been a 1st or 2nd round pick. He ended up going in the 6th. What I was referring to was the drop in stock. I didn't think that was so hard to grasp, but whatevers.

It wasnt hard to grasp at all i was just trying to compare apples to apples, I dont put Brennan in the same class as Stafford but maybe that's just me.

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 03:43 PM
It wasnt hard to grasp at all i was just trying to compare apples to apples, I dont put Brennan in the same class as Stafford but maybe that's just me.
Ha ha. You still don't get it. :D

Babylon
09-16-2008, 03:48 PM
Ha ha. You still don't get it. :D


I understand the guy's stock could drop, make you feel better?

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 04:06 PM
I understand the guy's stock could drop, make you feel better?
I was already feeling good. You put me in a laughy mood. :D

The minute I start to see something positive in his development that's different from what he's shown so far, trust me, I'll be there to give him any props he deserves. Right now, I just don't see the next great thing.

bored of education
09-16-2008, 04:09 PM
Well, naturally players are going to be better if they return and don't get injured. Anyone who digresses skill/experience wise is a nincompoop.

But the thing that CAN change is draft stock. See Brady Quinn/Colt Brennan.

Did you really type Nincompoop?

wow + rep!

Babylon
09-16-2008, 04:11 PM
I was already feeling good. You put me in a laughy mood. :D

The minute I start to see something positive in his development that's different from what he's shown so far, trust me, I'll be there to give him any props he deserves. Right now, I just don't see the next great thing.

Fair enough. He does seem a little stifled in that offense there. Guys that you mentioned like Quinn and Brennan and Jay Cutler(who others have brought up) have had the luxury of throwing a ton of passes each game. I think Stafford can make all the throws but with those receivers and Knowshown Moreno i dont think things will change that much. I'm not the only one that thinks he'll go early by the way.

D-Unit
09-16-2008, 04:16 PM
Fair enough. He does seem a little stifled in that offense there. Guys that you mentioned like Quinn and Brennan and Jay Cutler(who others have brought up) have had the luxury of throwing a ton of passes each game. I think Stafford can make all the throws but with those receivers and Knowshown Moreno i dont think things will change that much. I'm not the only one that thinks he'll go early by the way.
That's the thing I'm getting at. People "think" he can do this and that "if" da da da da da. Many excuses...

I'm saying "Show me" what you can do with the #1 ranked team coming into the college season. So far, not so good.

Babylon
09-16-2008, 04:25 PM
That's the thing I'm getting at. People "think" he can do this and that "if" da da da da da. Many excuses...

I'm saying "Show me" what you can do with the #1 ranked team coming into the college season. So far, not so good.


Should get some opportunities down in the desert this saturday night. I think sometimes 5 star guys get a reputation that they are automatically going to be great and that isnt always the case. Stafford has a great and accurate arm but you're right he needs to show more.