PDA

View Full Version : The worst QB class in years


illmatic74
09-02-2008, 01:36 PM
The senior QB class is incredibly weak. I don't think there is a first rounder in the bunch. Stafford, Tebow and maybe Freeman will be to this draft what Rodgers and Smith were to 05. Unless one of these prospects has a Jason Cambell like senio season don't expect any of these senior QBs in the First round.
Painter- Interception prone
Cantwell- First year as starter
Boeckman and Harper- There game logs show that most of their great passing stats occur against weaker teams.
Carpenter, Hoyer- Inconsistent
Bomar, Brown- Div 1A
Should be worse than the 05 bunch Frye, Walter, Orton, etc

bored of education
09-02-2008, 01:38 PM
Stafford not a 1st rounder? Is this season already over?

Turtlepower
09-02-2008, 01:40 PM
Better QB class than last year.

Also, I never understood where Carpenter is labeled as inconsistent. He has been pretty damn consistent except for a small sophomore slump, which really wasn't that much of a drop in production.

BBIB
09-02-2008, 01:40 PM
The senior QB class is incredibly weak. I don't think there is a first rounder in the bunch. Stafford, Tebow and maybe Freeman will be to this draft what Rodgers and Smith were to 05. Unless one of these prospects has a Jason Cambell like senio season don't expect any of these senior QBs in the First round.
Painter- Interception prone
Cantwell- First year as starter
Boeckman and Harper- There game logs show that most of their great passing stats occur against weaker teams.
Carpenter, Hoyer- Inconsistent
Bomar, Brown- Div 1A
Should be worse than the 05 bunch Frye, Walter, Orton, etc

We don't even know which QBs will and will not emerge. We don't know who's staying and who's going pro and you're making this thread?

You must not follow football.

Colt McCoy was a top 5 pick after one season, not so great the next. There are also opposite things that occur. There are guys who rise that you do not expect.

You can't even gauge a QB class until 3+ years after they are drafted and you are trying to do so before we have any idea who's going to be even in the draft.

duckseason
09-02-2008, 01:43 PM
This senior QB class hasn't even been established yet. A full season is an eternity in college football. Much will change between now and January. For all we know, 3 of the first 5 picks will be QB's and 2 of them will be HOF. Way too early.

illmatic74
09-02-2008, 01:51 PM
Stafford not a 1st rounder? Is this season already over?
I said Stafford was a potential first rounder.

619
09-02-2008, 01:57 PM
I agree that this class without question is missing the stud QB and as a result guys like Stafford, Tebow, Cantwell will be overvalued. Just wait until next year though when Sanchez is in the mix . ;)

Bruce Banner
09-02-2008, 02:01 PM
Boeckman is trash.

Watching him every Saturday is hell.

d34ng3l021
09-02-2008, 02:26 PM
I dont agree with this at all. I think Harper, Cantwell, and Painter could all be solid guys. The guy who will stand above them all is Matthew Stafford though. I see a breakout season for him, and even if he doesnt have one, he has the tools to make a name for himself during the draft process (big arm. mobility. tough conference). If he has that breakout season and lights up the combine, everyone is going to be on his nuts.

P-L
09-02-2008, 02:38 PM
I think it's really hard to be as bad as that 2005 class has been. Not counting Aaron Rodgers, who is still a large unknown, then Jason Campbell is the best quarterback in the class and he hasn't been much more than average so far. This 2009 class looks bad right now, but there are some really good underclassmen who could turn it around should they declare.

duckseason
09-02-2008, 02:42 PM
One guy to keep an eye on is Tom Brandstater from Fresno State. He's got the size and arm to play in the NFL. If he continues the pace of development he's been on since arriving at Fresno, he could be a legit 1st rounder.

Another guy who is flying under the radar right now but will rise as the season progresses is Willie Tuitama. His stats will be inflated, but he has the tools to develop into a legit NFL QB. With what he's about to do this year in that Arizona offense, there will be a bit of hype building around him as the year progresses.

Not particularly big on either of those guys yet, but I could see both of them climbing pretty high on boards.

Oh, and I think Mark Sanchez will be a top 10 pick if he comes out.

bigbluedefense
09-02-2008, 02:43 PM
I like Sam Bradford a lot. I think he's going to be a very good qb in the NFL.

JT Jag
09-02-2008, 02:47 PM
Tebow's not going to come out.

bearsfan_51
09-02-2008, 02:49 PM
I made a thread similar to this which was closed because some people are five years old. I think Painter and Brandstater are the guys with the most potential personally. Painter may take a hit due system-bias.

Crickett
09-02-2008, 02:56 PM
So how long 'til we see "Sam Bradford a bust?" threads? Two months?

Scotty D
09-02-2008, 02:59 PM
I like Central Michigan's Dan Lefevour.

BBIB
09-02-2008, 03:02 PM
Even when guys emerge to the top of the class it's way too early to call people booms/busts before they play a down.

Look at the hype around Bush,Young, and Leinart. Now look at them.

SMoore
09-02-2008, 08:29 PM
One guy to keep an eye on is Tom Brandstater from Fresno State. He's got the size and arm to play in the NFL. If he continues the pace of development he's been on since arriving at Fresno, he could be a legit 1st rounder.

Another guy who is flying under the radar right now but will rise as the season progresses is Willie Tuitama. His stats will be inflated, but he has the tools to develop into a legit NFL QB. With what he's about to do this year in that Arizona offense, there will be a bit of hype building around him as the year progresses.

Not particularly big on either of those guys yet, but I could see both of them climbing pretty high on boards.

Oh, and I think Mark Sanchez will be a top 10 pick if he comes out.

I really like Tuitama, but I think the biggest thing with him is staying healthy another year. I know he's a year past those concussions but they still worry me.

Ozzy
09-02-2008, 09:01 PM
This is pretty bad but just look at last years class, it was so deep and so talented with guys like Ryan, Booty, Brohm, Henne, Flacco, Woodson, Ainge, Dixon and Brennan. Heck if a guy like Woodson gets cut, then most of these guys just will not hack it.

All of this Painter talk I hate, the guy is not that good, not that athletic and really is a questionable leader on the field. I would be really surprised if he is a star in the NFL. I do not see that, at least at this point.

Ozzy
09-02-2008, 09:05 PM
What about guys like Daniel, Carpenter and Parker Wilson? Those are all very solid QB's and Daniel is a SR as far as I know right?

Sleepers are Pinkney, Brian Johnson who just beat Michigan and as people said before Tuitama.

But yeah it is not a great class, but they have some decent players in it.


And we all know Freeman, Tebow, Stafford, Williams, Lewis and Sanchez...one if not two of those guys will come out as JR's I am sure.

kwilk103
09-02-2008, 09:29 PM
isnt daniel like 5'10 though

Ozzy
09-02-2008, 10:02 PM
Isnt daniel like 5'10 thoughYes that is true, still the guy has talent and puts the ball where it needs to be. Sure he might not be a 1st round guy but I think he has more star potential than most in this years class. Chase Daniel is more than just average I feel, and throws such an accurate pass and is such a calm leader on the field.

princefielder28
09-02-2008, 10:17 PM
I like Central Michigan's Dan Lefevour.

join the club ;)

Sniper
09-02-2008, 10:27 PM
Brian Johnson who just beat Michigan

You make it sound like that's impressive this year.

SuperKevin
09-02-2008, 11:39 PM
One guy to keep an eye on is Tom Brandstater from Fresno State. He's got the size and arm to play in the NFL. If he continues the pace of development he's been on since arriving at Fresno, he could be a legit 1st rounder.

Another guy who is flying under the radar right now but will rise as the season progresses is Willie Tuitama. His stats will be inflated, but he has the tools to develop into a legit NFL QB. With what he's about to do this year in that Arizona offense, there will be a bit of hype building around him as the year progresses.

Not particularly big on either of those guys yet, but I could see both of them climbing pretty high on boards.

Oh, and I think Mark Sanchez will be a top 10 pick if he comes out.

I'm high on Brandstater. The Rutgers game was a poor viewing of his talent. He had no time to throw and his WRs dropped a lot of catchable balls. He did show great touch on the deep ball though

BaLLiN
09-03-2008, 07:46 AM
join the club ;)

yea heard they made a huge poster board of him like 60 ft by 30 ft costing 50,000 dollars

jballa838
09-03-2008, 08:11 AM
Even when guys emerge to the top of the class it's way too early to call people booms/busts before they play a down.

Look at the hype around Bush,Young, and Leinart. Now look at them.
people were labeling those 3 busts the entire time. Still not sold on Young and Cutler > Leinart for life!

DeathbyStat
09-03-2008, 11:17 AM
I'd take this years class over last years, this year has more upside

wicket
09-03-2008, 02:58 PM
TBH i dont get why Harrel is getting this little love. I know he will not be one of the top 3 qbs taken. however his stats are insane, he plays in a tough conference against tough opponents and he has a sufficiently large frame. To be honoust he is at least as good a prospect as Brennan was before the game against georgia. And of all the qbs brennan has been one of the most impressive in preseason. I'm saying mid-rounder and at least a proper backup.

MitchRobStew
09-03-2008, 03:36 PM
Your forgetting about Josh Freeman who with his size, arm strength, and a solid season could be the top QB of the class. If Freeman, and Stafford declare they could both be top ten picks. The senior class may be weak but, if a majority of the juniors come out it could be a great class. Add Sanchez, and Bradford in the following season, and you have a solid top 2 QBs in each draft. Add in Junior QBs with big question marks with huge upside in Juice Williams, and Tebow coming out in either class could add more. Also, LeFevour and Davis have good upside. Their will definitely be some QBs worth taking in '09 and '10 classes.

Geo
09-03-2008, 04:12 PM
TBH i dont get why Harrel is getting this little love.
I was going to say, almost thirty posts and no one even mentions Graham Harrell? Granted he may be a system QB, sure, but I might consider him with a mid/late round pick if he can work in my offense and has the smarts (I don't know if he does or doesn't). My hunch is probably not.

Race for the Heisman
09-03-2008, 09:42 PM
Dan LeFevour is the truth. He came into college as someone who was primarily a running quarterback and instantly adjusted to be a pass-first player. His freshmen numbers were pretty good and he improved on those last year. He's shown enough that he may actually not really need the last year in college, although it probably couldn't hurt (his development, not his stock). Physically, he's not huge but he's not tiny, and his athleticism will be looked at as a plus. His competition might be a question mark but I'm pretty sure he's been more than adequate against better opposition (like against Purdue last year). He's a guy who the Senior Bowl would be huge for (think Jay Cutler), but that obviously can't happen this year.

DragonFireKai
09-04-2008, 02:20 AM
Dan LeFevour is the truth. He came into college as someone who was primarily a running quarterback and instantly adjusted to be a pass-first player. His freshmen numbers were pretty good and he improved on those last year. He's shown enough that he may actually not really need the last year in college, although it probably couldn't hurt (his development, not his stock). Physically, he's not huge but he's not tiny, and his athleticism will be looked at as a plus. His competition might be a question mark but I'm pretty sure he's been more than adequate against better opposition (like against Purdue last year). He's a guy who the Senior Bowl would be huge for (think Jay Cutler), but that obviously can't happen this year.

Quarterbacks always need as many seasons as they can get. QBs who come out early are rarely succesful in the league. Typically, they come out early because their draft stock has peaked based on incomplete scouting. I wouldn't draft any QB who declared early on the first day.

Race for the Heisman
09-04-2008, 11:49 AM
Quarterbacks always need as many seasons as they can get. QBs who come out early are rarely succesful in the league. Typically, they come out early because their draft stock has peaked based on incomplete scouting. I wouldn't draft any QB who declared early on the first day.

I don't know about always need, but I would generally agree that staying for the last year is beneficial. My point is only that he started as as a redshirt freshmen and is now a redshirt junior with three years starting experience (after this year, of course). He'll have played as much as most quarterbacks who get drafted so if he came out this year, it wouldn't be like he had one year as the starter, broke out the next, and then bolted. He'll have three years of starting experience with progressive improvement, which is enough for me.

BBIB
09-04-2008, 12:07 PM
Quarterbacks always need as many seasons as they can get. QBs who come out early are rarely succesful in the league. Typically, they come out early because their draft stock has peaked based on incomplete scouting. I wouldn't draft any QB who declared early on the first day.

One of the biggest reasons why I thought the Hunter Cantwell bandwagon was one of the biggest jokes ever. How could a one year starter (even before he started that mere one year) be considered a top 2 QB of a draft class?

That's unheard of. There was a site that showed the pattern of QBs over the last decade and the most successful were the guys who started 30-40 games (and had high completion percentages). How the hell could a guy who was going to start a dozen games be taken that seriously?

DragonFireKai
09-04-2008, 03:53 PM
I don't know about always need, but I would generally agree that staying for the last year is beneficial. My point is only that he started as as a redshirt freshmen and is now a redshirt junior with three years starting experience (after this year, of course). He'll have played as much as most quarterbacks who get drafted so if he came out this year, it wouldn't be like he had one year as the starter, broke out the next, and then bolted. He'll have three years of starting experience with progressive improvement, which is enough for me.

They ALWAYS need that last season. JaMarcus Russell, Vince Young, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Rex Grossman, Mick Vick, and Tim Couch. Those are the first round QBs in the past ten years that declared early. They are players who would have been exposed if they had remained for their senoir year. It was a smart move for the player, financially, but it comes at the cost of the team dumb enough to draft them.

wicket
09-05-2008, 05:30 AM
They ALWAYS need that last season. JaMarcus Russell, Vince Young, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Rex Grossman, Mick Vick, and Tim Couch. Those are the first round QBs in the past ten years that declared early. They are players who would have been exposed if they had remained for their senoir year. It was a smart move for the player, financially, but it comes at the cost of the team dumb enough to draft them.

You can't really say that Vick was on course to have a bad carreer and Young has also carried his team to the play offs a couple of times already. Rodgers was sitting behind favre so didnt play yet. Grossman played a super bowl and Russel hasnt played enough to make a definate case about him. So all and all given a early pick succes rate at qb, drafting guys leaving early on the basis of this list of names aint that bad.

Sniper
09-05-2008, 06:36 AM
You can't really say that Vick was on course to have a bad carreer and Young has also carried his team to the play offs a couple of times already. Rodgers was sitting behind favre so didnt play yet. Grossman played a super bowl and Russel hasnt played enough to make a definate case about him. So all and all given a early pick succes rate at qb, drafting guys leaving early on the basis of this list of names aint that bad.

Vick sucked. The only reason people thought he was good was because he was able to run the ball at a position which rarely has fleet-footed QBs. He never had a completion % above 56.4, he fumbled way too much, a low ypa, never cracked 3,000 yards passing, and had poor decision making ability besides the "**** it, I'm running it".

DragonFireKai
09-05-2008, 10:49 AM
You can't really say that Vick was on course to have a bad carreer and Young has also carried his team to the play offs a couple of times already. Rodgers was sitting behind favre so didnt play yet. Grossman played a super bowl and Russel hasnt played enough to make a definate case about him. So all and all given a early pick succes rate at qb, drafting guys leaving early on the basis of this list of names aint that bad.

Vick was the best of the bunch, Young still hasn't learned how to pass, Grossman just got benched for Kyle Orton, Rodgers and Russell haven't done anything, and Tim Couch was garbage.

So either you're arguing that the upside to drafting a QB who declared early is that you might get an injury prone QB who completes 53% of his passes, and get sacked 1 out of every ten drop backs. Or you're arguing that you'll get a QB who you can sit on the bench behind your current starter. None of them have done anything significant in terms of individual performance, save Vick's rushing for 1,000 yards in his last season. Nor have any of them won a super bowl, which is the gold standard of QB performance for the idiots of the world.

Race for the Heisman
09-05-2008, 09:04 PM
Vick was the best of the bunch, Young still hasn't learned how to pass, Grossman just got benched for Kyle Orton, Rodgers and Russell haven't done anything, and Tim Couch was garbage.

So either you're arguing that the upside to drafting a QB who declared early is that you might get an injury prone QB who completes 53% of his passes, and get sacked 1 out of every ten drop backs. Or you're arguing that you'll get a QB who you can sit on the bench behind your current starter. None of them have done anything significant in terms of individual performance, save Vick's rushing for 1,000 yards in his last season. Nor have any of them won a super bowl, which is the gold standard of QB performance for the idiots of the world.

Ben Roethlisberger. Redshirt + 3 years starting + gone to the NFL + ring. MAC quarterback, just like LeFevour. I'm not saying its the best decision, I'm just saying its doable. I could also argue that the general ratio of quarterback successes vs quarterback failures means that even with my one example for your seven the numbers aren't that far removed from general QB success/fail rate. Combine that with the fact that JaMarcus and Rodgers could still do something, and a few of the others you mentioned have/had extenuating circumstances. I won't argue them but I will note one could argue them.

SMoore
09-05-2008, 09:21 PM
Vick was the best of the bunch, Young still hasn't learned how to pass, Grossman just got benched for Kyle Orton, Rodgers and Russell haven't done anything, and Tim Couch was garbage.

So either you're arguing that the upside to drafting a QB who declared early is that you might get an injury prone QB who completes 53% of his passes, and get sacked 1 out of every ten drop backs. Or you're arguing that you'll get a QB who you can sit on the bench behind your current starter. None of them have done anything significant in terms of individual performance, save Vick's rushing for 1,000 yards in his last season. Nor have any of them won a super bowl, which is the gold standard of QB performance for the idiots of the world.

Couch wasn't great, but i think a lot of it had to do with his situation. He did lead a bad Brown's team to the playoffs one year. I think if he could have stayed healthy and would have fallen to the right team, he could have been a decent pro.

But getting back on topic, I think it's always better for a QB to go all for years because the development is needed.

RCAChainGang
09-06-2008, 04:41 PM
Boeckman is trash.

Watching him every Saturday is hell.

Yeah, he isn't too great.
Like that true freshman though.

yourfavestoner
09-06-2008, 05:28 PM
Vick sucked. The only reason people thought he was good was because he was able to run the ball at a position which rarely has fleet-footed QBs. He never had a completion % above 56.4, he fumbled way too much, a low ypa, never cracked 3,000 yards passing, and had poor decision making ability besides the "**** it, I'm running it".

I disagree. Remember his first year starting, when he took a terrible Atlanta team on his back and beat the Packers in Green Bay in the playoffs? He got hurt the next season and they went 5-11 or something ridiculous like that. And look at how bad they were last year without him.

Vick wasn't a good passer, but he was an absolute gamer.

Addict
09-06-2008, 05:56 PM
Vick essentially proved that

decent RB + sub-par QB = pro bowl QB

RCAChainGang
09-06-2008, 06:38 PM
You will look at the QB class as a better class at the end of the season.

Give 'um a chance to prove themselves.

Sniper
09-06-2008, 07:58 PM
I disagree. Remember his first year starting, when he took a terrible Atlanta team on his back and beat the Packers in Green Bay in the playoffs? He got hurt the next season and they went 5-11 or something ridiculous like that. And look at how bad they were last year without him.

Vick wasn't a good passer, but he was an absolute gamer.

They also had a great rushing attack though, and not just because of Vick.

DragonFireKai
09-06-2008, 09:21 PM
They also had a great rushing attack though, and not just because of Vick.

Not exactly true. Take the 2006 season, where Atlanta rushed for damn near 3,000 yards. If you take Vick out, and replace him is another running QB, say, Vince Young's performance that season, and the Falcons will slip to 3rd in the league. Replace him with a mobile QB like say, Tony Romo, and they slip to 10th. If you replace him with a QB who's immobile, like Byron "The Monolith" Leftwich, and they drop to 15th.

Outside of Vick, the Falcons usually rushed for around 1,900 yards a season. Not God awful, but mediocre. The advantage to Mike Vick was that you essentially got two players value out of him. However, because rushing yards from a QB aren't as effective as rushing yards from a running back, those players were Kyle Boller and Cedric Benson.

The argument that people used the first three seasons Vick played was the same one that was brought forth earlier.

I disagree. Remember his first year starting, when he took a terrible Atlanta team on his back and beat the Packers in Green Bay in the playoffs? He got hurt the next season and they went 5-11 or something ridiculous like that. And look at how bad they were last year without him.

Vick wasn't a good passer, but he was an absolute gamer.

However, the Falcons slipped and slipped in 05 and 06. Vick's regression as a player was almost comical. They probably wouldn't have been much better in 07 even if they had Vick. Warrick Dunn went from old to REALLY OLD almost overnight. The defense collapsed when they decided to swap Patrick Kearney for Jamaal Anderson. The coaching situation was fragged. Vick might have turned the 4 win team into a 5 win team. But he wasn't going to leap on his unicorn steed and magically lead the Falcons to the promised land.

BBIB
09-08-2008, 04:41 PM
Vick sucked. The only reason people thought he was good was because he was able to run the ball at a position which rarely has fleet-footed QBs. He never had a completion % above 56.4, he fumbled way too much, a low ypa, never cracked 3,000 yards passing, and had poor decision making ability besides the "**** it, I'm running it".

Vick was always top 10 in the league in yardage and his last year in the league was top 10 in passing TDs.

He was the only reason why the Falcons ever came close to accomplishing anything. Without him they were one of the worst if not the worst team in the league.

To say that he wouldn't have been that good without his legs is like saying Shaq wouldn't be that good if he wasn't so big. You can't take away a player's physical abilities.

BBIB
09-08-2008, 04:44 PM
They ALWAYS need that last season. JaMarcus Russell, Vince Young, Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers, Rex Grossman, Mick Vick, and Tim Couch. Those are the first round QBs in the past ten years that declared early. They are players who would have been exposed if they had remained for their senoir year. It was a smart move for the player, financially, but it comes at the cost of the team dumb enough to draft them.

First of all Vick left his Redshirt-Sophmore year. He left school with something like only 300 passing attempts or something absurdly low like that.

Had he stayed in school he could have become even more polished as a passer and potentially lived up to his potential.

The idea that he would have been exposed is ridiculous just like it is to say that for any QB. Most QBs PROGRESS when they go their final year.

All the running QBs that many people like to mention usually have their best numbers in their final year. Guys who may have as many interceptions as touchdowns their first couple of years, get more polished and put up more respectable numbers their final year.

Staying one more year in school may have been the best thing that could have ever happened to Vick.

He wouldn't have landed on such a cursed Franchise like my Falcons.

DragonFireKai
09-08-2008, 06:47 PM
The idea that he would have been exposed is ridiculous just like it is to say that for any QB. Most QBs PROGRESS when they go their final year.

Vick was already in the process of being exposed.The reason he left after the 2000 season was that teams were already figuring out how to stop him, and his draft stock was going to plummett if he stayed. His passer rating droped 60 points in 2000. His yards per attempt dropped by five. His completion percentage dropped by 5. His passing yardage dropped by 600. His TDs went down by 4, and his INTs up by 1.

QBs get exposed for what they are the more they play. Matt Leinart, Brady Quinn, and Brian Brohm went from sure fire 1st overalls to 10th, 22nd, and 56th overall.

NFL scouts are good at their job. Give them enough footage of a college QB, and they can peg them pretty well. However, the fewer starts a QB has when he declares, the less footage the scouts get, and the less accurate their projection gets. It's a matter of regression to mean. If you look at most of the highly drafted QBs who have performed poorly, few of them were 4 year starters. By jumping early, the scouts have less film to see, and make an incomplete judgement, with "Potential" filling in the gaps.

neko4
09-08-2008, 06:49 PM
Wow you really did the math there.

Unbiased
09-08-2008, 08:45 PM
I don't think Nate Davis has been mentioned. He's on pace to have another really good year, and he gets a bit overshadowed with LeFevour in the MAC.

jayceheathman
09-11-2008, 10:28 PM
Once Chase Holbrook throws for 700 yards against Nebraska, Scott will move him up to the #1 pick in his mock draft. :)

MarioPalmer
09-12-2008, 12:24 AM
This could be a very very good QB class if the big 4 juniors declare.

If Mark Sanchez, Mat Stafford, Tim Tebow and Josh Freeman all declare we could be looking at a 2004 type draft. But the odds of them all declaring are slim to none. USC QBs always stay for their senior year, Tebow isn't ready for the NFL so the more time he has to refine his ability the better, Stafford only leaves if his team wins a National Championship or plays in the game. He may declare if he sees that Sanchez and Tebow don't. Freeman on the other hand is as good as gone. There is nothing for him at Kansas St. They will never surround him with elite talent so if his stock is high look for him to jump ship.

The senior QB class is incrediably weak. If someone like Painter and Harper are being considered the two top seniors then there is a problem, look for at least one of these juniors to declare, most likely Josh Freeman and maybe Matt Stafford. I also think that Stafford will look at the Brohm fiasco that was his senior year. Had Brohm left after his junior year he would have most likely been a 1rst rounder, but the more NFL scouts could break him the worse it was for him stoxk wise. I think Stafford will definitly look at that situation before making his decision to stay or to leave.

But if they all would leave, say for argument sake, this is how the rankings would stand.

1. Mark Sanchez* (6'4 220lbs.)
2. Josh Freeman* (6'5 240lbs.)
3. Matt Stafford* (6'2 230lbs.)
4. Tim Tebow* (6'3 235lbs.)
5. Curtis Painter (6'3 220lbs.)

adamprez2003
09-13-2008, 05:29 PM
Yeah I agree. If you needed a QB this past draft was the one to grab one. Ryan, Flacco, maybe Henne. That was a draft class. This one looks horrendous. Stafford has the physical tools but is so inconsistent that I wouldnt waste a first rounder on him. He'll be overdrafted by someone like Kansas City though in the first. I wouldnt be surprised if three QBs go in the first but I dont think any of them deserve it. The Alex Smith comparison is great. Hopefully an Aaron Rodgers emerges out of that bunch

adamprez2003
09-13-2008, 05:33 PM
One of the biggest reasons why I thought the Hunter Cantwell bandwagon was one of the biggest jokes ever. How could a one year starter (even before he started that mere one year) be considered a top 2 QB of a draft class?

That's unheard of. There was a site that showed the pattern of QBs over the last decade and the most successful were the guys who started 30-40 games (and had high completion percentages). How the hell could a guy who was going to start a dozen games be taken that seriously? I can understand it somewhat. On about 20% of his passes you get really excited by his potential. Unfortunately then you have to watch the other 80%