PDA

View Full Version : Why Stafford In - Bradford Out?


TheDirtyWord
10-23-2008, 08:54 PM
It seems like the assumption has been all along that Stafford would most probably come out for the draft. Whether it be due to his prodigious physical talents and NFL made size - he's been plugged into the Top 5 from the moment the 2008 draft ended.

But Bradford has come on quite well IMO this year and even though he's an RS Sophomore still has the same eligibility to declare that Stafford does.

Considering:

1) The weakness of the senior QB class in 2009.

2) Cases like Matt Leinart & Brian Brohm fresh in annals of QB draft stock plummets

and

3) Rumblings that 2009 might be the last great NFL Draft money grab that some writers have started to chirp about

...shouldn't Bradford at least be projected?

I can even see leaving Mark Sanchez out if only because this is his first year starting and quite frankly at face value Bradford has been more impressive, but Bradford seems selectively omitted.

Thoughts? Is there inside info Scott has that indicates Bradford is more likely to stay? Has he made an announcement of some sort I am not aware of?

STARHEATHER
10-23-2008, 08:57 PM
staffords stock will probably rise when he works out as he has outstanding pysical skills. bradford has below average physical skills so his stock will fall. if i had a gun to my head and had to pick one it would be stafford and i think thats the way it will go. becuase when you line them up side by side and watch them throw the football theres going to be a wide gulf in favor of stafford

Smokey Joe
10-23-2008, 09:04 PM
Because Bradford as the chance to become the no. 1 overall pick with another year of development. Right now Bardford is too raw, IMO.

TheDirtyWord
10-23-2008, 09:05 PM
staffords stock will probably rise when he works out as he has outstanding pysical skills. bradford has below average physical skills so his stock will fall. if i had a gun to my head and had to pick one it would be stafford and i think thats the way it will go. becuase when you line them up side by side and watch them throw the football theres going to be a wide gulf in favor of stafford

Scott's quote was this...

Unless Sam Bradford or Matt Sanchez unexpectedly come out early Matthew Stafford will be the only stud quarterback prospect in the 2009 NFL Draft but to have a shot at him they may need to "earn" the #1 overall pick.

Whether or not Stafford winds up being the better prospect isn't really the question. Scott seems to infer that Bradford will be an elite QB prospect along the same lines. So why isn't he 'projected'? The reasoning that he is a RS Sophomore seems a little flimsy. Albeit at another position, he's got Knowshon Moreno 'projected'.

And there is the compelling event of the 2009 Draft being a big underclassman declaration draft due to the impending labor struggle.

TheDirtyWord
10-23-2008, 09:08 PM
Because Bradford as the chance to become the no. 1 overall pick with another year of development. Right now Bardford is too raw, IMO.

But if the #10 pick in the 2009 NFL Draft is going to make more money than the #1 pick in the 2010 NFL Draft, isn't it reasonable to assume that some timetables might be accelerated? And if so, a big development is the decision and fate of Bradford?

STARHEATHER
10-23-2008, 09:10 PM
i disagree strongly with those sentiments. i think theres a stud qb and its not stafford or bradford. i think stafford has nfl level physical skills. so i think hell be a rd 1 pick but hes not a great prospect at the position. mark sanchez is imjury prone and just not any good. as far as the thread goes id say when the workouts come it will be stafford. i think bradofrd shouldprobably come out because once that ol goes hes going to be under duress and not nearly as succesful. someone will waste a rd 1. hes less physcially talented than brady quinn and not as good athlete. i think bradofrds becoming this years big myth. hes going to be the big flop at the top. i much prefer stafford even though i smell some bust there too.

tjsunstein
10-23-2008, 09:13 PM
I think Bradford is a better pro than Stafford, I've been saying this for a while. He's better than Stafford right now. You can say intangibles but they translate into stats. Bradford has completed nearly 10 percent more passes to this point.

tjsunstein
10-23-2008, 09:16 PM
i disagree strongly with those sentiments. i think theres a stud qb and its not stafford or bradford. i think stafford has nfl level physical skills. so i think hell be a rd 1 pick but hes not a great prospect at the position. mark sanchez is imjury prone and just not any good. as far as the thread goes id say when the workouts come it will be stafford. i think bradofrd shouldprobably come out because once that ol goes hes going to be under duress and not nearly as succesful. someone will waste a rd 1. hes less physcially talented than brady quinn and not as good athlete. i think bradofrds becoming this years big myth. hes going to be the big flop at the top. i much prefer stafford even though i smell some bust there too.

Who....? Never expected you to go against the general consensus ...rolls eyes...

Geo
10-23-2008, 09:19 PM
Stafford's completion percentage worries me, but I can see him as a Top 10 pick (first overall, well ...).

And I can buy Bradford declaring, he's probably better off staying but the financial improvement could be minimal if not potentially negative (didn't expect Brady Quinn to fall). He is looking good in his second year as a starter and could capitalize as a hot prospect, with no other quarterback worth considering in the first if not maybe second round as well. See Joe Flacco.

Sanchez needs to start another year at Southern Cal, declaring early shouldn't even be in consideration.

Also re: Tebow, I love his character and his desire, but I don't know if I can buy him as a first round pick. He's been too exposed this year for my tastes, I'm kind of disappointed with what I've seen. Whereever he is drafted, he needs to be taken care of right, not like the Alex Smith fiasco in San Fran.

Zyro_1014
10-23-2008, 10:00 PM
i disagree strongly with those sentiments. i think theres a stud qb and its not stafford or bradford. i think stafford has nfl level physical skills. so i think hell be a rd 1 pick but hes not a great prospect at the position. mark sanchez is imjury prone and just not any good. as far as the thread goes id say when the workouts come it will be stafford. i think bradofrd shouldprobably come out because once that ol goes hes going to be under duress and not nearly as succesful. someone will waste a rd 1. hes less physcially talented than brady quinn and not as good athlete. i think bradofrds becoming this years big myth. hes going to be the big flop at the top. i much prefer stafford even though i smell some bust there too.

you honestly just said Sanchez is not any good? and hes injury prone? hes had one injury and played every game this year. get a ******* clue dude. get out of here with your BS cuz no one is buyin it man. Ive seen many good QB's struggle against that Ohio State defense and Sanchez made them look like a pop warner team. figure it out man.

Babylon
10-23-2008, 10:17 PM
I think Bradford is a better pro than Stafford, I've been saying this for a while. He's better than Stafford right now. You can say intangibles but they translate into stats. Bradford has completed nearly 10 percent more passes to this point.


The fact that the OU line gives Bradford all the time in the world to throw the ball and the fact that the Big-12 is basically a league of quick underneath routes i would hope his passing % would be better than Staffords'.

I think a better comparison for Stafford would be Matt Ryan, Ryan was in the high 50s (Stafford low 60s) as far as passing % goes and had a pretty high number of ints. The common thread between the two was fairly average receivers. Ryan's O-line was pretty decent whereas Stafford's is inexperienced (being charitable).

STARHEATHER
10-23-2008, 10:29 PM
yes sanchez has a new injury every week and he really doesnt get hit much. and hes just not that physically gifted. not nearly the physical skills of a matt stafford. i dont think hes comingh out i think hes a brian brohm type. just overrated everything. stafford may be worth a rd 1. bradford is this years alex smith, tim couch etc. hes similar to them in many ways. loits of yards but not lots of traits. hes going to be the 50 mil mistake.

tjsunstein
10-23-2008, 10:35 PM
The fact that the OU line gives Bradford all the time in the world to throw the ball and the fact that the Big-12 is basically a league of quick underneath routes i would hope his passing % would be better than Staffords'.

I think a better comparison for Stafford would be Matt Ryan, Ryan was in the high 50s (Stafford low 60s) as far as passing % goes and had a pretty high number of ints. The common thread between the two was fairly average receivers. Ryan's O-line was pretty decent whereas Stafford's is inexperienced (being charitable).

Im sorry, but nothing bothers me more than when people use team's strengths as a counter argument. A more feasible one would be that the NFL isnt buying Big 12 quarterbacks because like you mentioned the system they run. Exceling at a the system you are put in shouldnt be a knock against you either.

Babylon
10-23-2008, 10:48 PM
Im sorry, but nothing bothers me more than when people use team's strengths as a counter argument. A more feasible one would be that the NFL isnt buying Big 12 quarterbacks because like you mentioned the system they run. Exceling at a the system you are put in shouldnt be a knock against you either.

Not knocking Bradford at all just trying to explain the reason for a differance in passing % of the two players. I think both players are going to be special at the next level but they're probably differant types. Bradford will probably be more comfortable in a west coast offense whereas Stafford will be the type that goes downfield more, sort of a Troy Aikman type.

tjsunstein
10-23-2008, 10:51 PM
Not knocking Bradford at all just trying to explain the reason for a differance in passing % of the two players. I think both players are going to be special at the next level but they're probably differant types. Bradford will probably be more comfortable in a west coast offense whereas Stafford will be the type that goes downfield more, sort of a Troy Aikman type.

I completely agree then.

illmatic74
10-23-2008, 11:19 PM
Bradford would be my overall top prospect if he was more experienced.

Babylon
10-23-2008, 11:22 PM
Bradford would be my overall top prospect if he was more experienced.

My guess is in the end he stays and probably is that pick in 2010.

Zyro_1014
10-23-2008, 11:33 PM
yes sanchez has a new injury every week and he really doesnt get hit much. and hes just not that physically gifted. not nearly the physical skills of a matt stafford. i dont think hes comingh out i think hes a brian brohm type. just overrated everything. stafford may be worth a rd 1. bradford is this years alex smith, tim couch etc. hes similar to them in many ways. loits of yards but not lots of traits. hes going to be the 50 mil mistake.

Well hes not injury prone if hes not missing games, hes obviously got the tougness to play through the LITTLE injuries that most NFL players get every week. When he starts missing games and his performance starts dropping then talk.

And not to burst your bubble but there are alot of QB's that dont have the physical skills of Stafford so to single out Sanchez is ridiculous.

Solomon
10-24-2008, 12:25 AM
Here's the thing though, at least as far as I see it. Bradford has 2 very good seasons as a starter in the college ranks. As a college QB he proably can't get that much better at least from a performance and accolades standpoint. His O-Line right now is the best in the country but it's going to be gutted by next year and his performance may suffer as a result. I feel that he might as well declare early especially if he gets a good grade from the evaluation commitee. Lets face it, his arm strength isn't going to improve by coming back for another year of college.

Now, here's the thing with Stafford. Yes, right now he's considered a top 5 pick and if he winds up being projected as the #1 QB prospect by the time the draft actually rolls around he should declare early. That being said he's in the opposite boat of Stafford. His line is made up of freshmen and sophomores and is just starting to jell (still missing Trinton Sturdivant greatly), his best WR is just a freshmen and he has a stable of young backs to hand the ball off to. He still has room to grow as a college QB and things he can work on at the college level. Next season he should be in perfect position to have a Heisman campaign and if he adds great production to go with his physical tools he could be the best QB prospect since Carson Palmer.

BBIB
10-24-2008, 02:04 PM
Bradford has been amazing his 1st two years as a QB. He ALREADY has a record for total TDs in Freshman and Sophmore season.

But despite how great he has looked history shows the guys with the most starts have the most success at the next level. I think he needs to stay one more year.

And Im thinking he will especially if OY is not in the NC game this year.

giantsfan
10-24-2008, 02:15 PM
Also re: Tebow, I love his character and his desire, but I don't know if I can buy him as a first round pick. He's been too exposed this year for my tastes, I'm kind of disappointed with what I've seen. Whereever he is drafted, he needs to be taken care of right, not like the Alex Smith fiasco in San Fran.

Tebow is going to be a major project and I'm sure every team in the NFL knows it. So I don't really see how he helps himself spending another year learning the urban meyer system which he is going to have to unlearn once he hits the NFL, unless Meyer suddenly starts implementing more NFL caliber reads and some under the center plays.

I think the best move for Tim would be to come out this year and be a mid first round pick, I'm thinking 15-20 area, and then take a few years being developed behind a veteran and ultimately hit the field in 2011. The bears could actually be a pretty good fit with Orton already there. In the second they add a WR and then improve their oline depth and defensive depth with the rest of their picks.

Babylon
10-24-2008, 02:36 PM
Tebow is going to be a major project and I'm sure every team in the NFL knows it. So I don't really see how he helps himself spending another year learning the urban meyer system which he is going to have to unlearn once he hits the NFL, unless Meyer suddenly starts implementing more NFL caliber reads and some under the center plays.

I think the best move for Tim would be to come out this year and be a mid first round pick, I'm thinking 15-20 area, and then take a few years being developed behind a veteran and ultimately hit the field in 2011. The bears could actually be a pretty good fit with Orton already there. In the second they add a WR and then improve their oline depth and defensive depth with the rest of their picks.

Good post, i think whatever we think of Tebow, and i actually think he's pretty good, someone probably would jump on him in the mid to late round 1 as you mentioned. To me systems are a bit overrated when evaluating players, it's not like these guys are running the wishbone out there. As much love as Big-12 QBs get they are somewhat the result of a run and shoot system. Not fair to punish a Florida QB and not a Texas or Okalhoma QB in my opinion.

Habibi
10-24-2008, 02:54 PM
Sam Bradford coming out is up in the air. On one side if he stays he'll get better and be the surefire top QB heading into the '10 draft. But he's also gonna be losing Phil Loadholt, Duke Robinson, and Jermaine Gresham.

The top QBs that I do think are gonna declare are Matthew Stafford and Josh Freeman.

Halsey
10-24-2008, 03:34 PM
People nitpicking a couple of Stafford's stats that don't look pretty enough for them were doing the same thing last year with Matt Ryan. Stafford's completion% is higher right now than Ryan's was last year and Stafford is on track to throw only single digit INT's this year. Add to that Stafford is only in his 3rd year of college and Ryan was in college for 5 years. Stafford is more than a guy with a big arm. He's smart, a good leader, experienced in big games against tough competition, is a decent athlete, has no health question, etc. If you want to focus on a couple of select stats, fine, but you'll end up looking foolish like the guys who did just that with Matt Ryan.

giantsfan
10-24-2008, 03:57 PM
Good post, i think whatever we think of Tebow, and i actually think he's pretty good, someone probably would jump on him in the mid to late round 1 as you mentioned. To me systems are a bit overrated when evaluating players, it's not like these guys are running the wishbone out there. As much love as Big-12 QBs get they are somewhat the result of a run and shoot system. Not fair to punish a Florida QB and not a Texas or Okalhoma QB in my opinion.

Systems really only reflect how far someone is from being a successful QB. Just because you're in a system doesn't mean you're doomed to be a failure, it just means it'll take more time and work to develop the QB into an NFL starter. Tebow sounds stupid when he speaks, grades not withstanding, but he works hard and is a tough kid. If he gets a good coach and time I think he could be a hall of famer in the right situation. That's his ceiling in my eyes and if you're in a situation where you can be patient and develop him behind a veteran while you amass young talent to surround him with once he's ready you should take a shot at him. If you want a player who can hit the field as a rookie or sophomore hope that stafford and Sanchez come out.

P-L
10-24-2008, 04:27 PM
Systems really only reflect how far someone is from being a successful QB. Just because you're in a system doesn't mean you're doomed to be a failure, it just means it'll take more time and work to develop the QB into an NFL starter.
This is true, but if you are a 1st Round pick you aren't given a lot of time to develop. An Aaron Rodgers scenario is really rare. If you are a quarterback drafted in the 1st Round, you better be ready to start by your second year. Teams simply aren't going to invest a large amount of money in a system quarterback and then give him two or three years on the bench to adjust. In most cases teams want you to play in your first season and in almost all cases, they want you to be their guy in your second year.

Babylon
10-24-2008, 04:36 PM
This is true, but if you are a 1st Round pick you aren't given a lot of time to develop. An Aaron Rodgers scenario is really rare. If you are a quarterback drafted in the 1st Round, you better be ready to start by your second year. Teams simply aren't going to invest a large amount of money in a system quarterback and then give him two or three years on the bench to adjust. In most cases teams want you to play in your first season and in almost all cases, they want you to be their guy in your second year.

I think what would drop Tebow is probably the talent level. You would be looking at the same developement issue with Bradford and i think teams would pick him very high although they probably wouldnt like it, for the reasons you mentioned. I dread they'd ever get to a situation like the NBA where kids force teams to take them when they know most arent anywhere near ready.

giantsfan
10-24-2008, 04:54 PM
This is true, but if you are a 1st Round pick you aren't given a lot of time to develop. An Aaron Rodgers scenario is really rare. If you are a quarterback drafted in the 1st Round, you better be ready to start by your second year. Teams simply aren't going to invest a large amount of money in a system quarterback and then give him two or three years on the bench to adjust. In most cases teams want you to play in your first season and in almost all cases, they want you to be their guy in your second year.

That's why I mention the bears as a destination for the Tebow. At the moment they look like they'll be picking in the 15-25 area and with Orton there to hold the reigns for 2 years I could see a Rodgers situation and that eventually working out great for the bears and giving them they're best QB in team history.

I think what would drop Tebow is probably the talent level. You would be looking at the same developement issue with Bradford and i think teams would pick him very high although they probably wouldnt like it, for the reasons you mentioned. I dread they'd ever get to a situation like the NBA where kids force teams to take them when they know most arent anywhere near ready.

Bradford has tougher reads and better mechanics at the moment. So his development wouldn't be as long as Tebow's.

jtcharger24
10-24-2008, 08:28 PM
Bradford is not leaving. He wants to graduate, which he will after next year.

princefielder28
10-24-2008, 10:03 PM
If I were an advisor to Bradford I would tell him to get another year of experience and stay in school. As great as he's been and as great as I think he can be, NFL scouts would drool over a 3rd year of starting with similar success. He would be a lock for the Top 5 instead of being a fringe Top 10 selection right now.

I also believe that Stafford should stay in school and show more consistency, but due to his superior skills at the position, the Combine has a chance to be very kind to him and teams will be more willing to go after his rare talent.

giantsfan
10-25-2008, 06:13 AM
If I were an advisor to Bradford I would tell him to get another year of experience and stay in school. As great as he's been and as great as I think he can be, NFL scouts would drool over a 3rd year of starting with similar success. He would be a lock for the Top 5 instead of being a fringe Top 10 selection right now.

I also believe that Stafford should stay in school and show more consistency, but due to his superior skills at the position, the Combine has a chance to be very kind to him and teams will be more willing to go after his rare talent.

Except Bradford's surrounding cast will be significantly weaker next season with the new olineman. So I doubt he is able to replicate his success and see his stock actually falling if he comes out next year.

princefielder28
10-25-2008, 09:49 AM
Except Bradford's surrounding cast will be significantly weaker next season with the new olineman. So I doubt he is able to replicate his success and see his stock actually falling if he comes out next year.

With a school like Oklahoma they find ways to replace those who are gone; while those replacements may not be quite as exceptional at their position, they will provide Bradford the opportunity to make plays.

PACKmanN
10-25-2008, 10:42 AM
Or we see what happened with Young, Cutler, and Leinart. I could see KC and Detroit taking a franchise qb, and we could see an unknown team take a qb.

Babylon
10-25-2008, 11:41 AM
The thing with Bradford is he's relatively new to stardom whereas Stafford, Sanchez and Tebow have been marquee players since highschool. The prospect of probably having to sit for a couple of years at the next level will probably suggest he stays another year.

princefielder28
10-25-2008, 11:50 AM
Or we see what happened with Young, Cutler, and Leinart. I could see KC and Detroit taking a franchise qb, and we could see an unknown team take a qb.

San Francsico will be looking, possibly Minnesota too.

STARHEATHER
10-25-2008, 06:35 PM
sure looks like stafford-freeman combo today. im not sure who chaged my name. i guess thats permitted. oh well call me what you will. freeman was unbelievable. and no 250 on the ground to cover or take the pressure off. stafford looked his best game ive seen

Babylon
10-25-2008, 06:49 PM
There was no comparison today, Bradford played pretty well in a Sooner blowout but i thought he struggled to throw well on the move or when under pressure. Looked like one of those games you might right off as being a mid season yawner but nonetheless.

Stafford showed, against a pretty decent LSU defense, why i think he will be the #1 pick in the draft. Made all the throws; fades, screens, a few underneath routes and several vertical passes down the field. Maybe along with the Arizona State game his best performance. My favorite play while being dragged down by an LSU defender throws about a 25 yard out to one of his WRs.

STARHEATHER
10-25-2008, 06:55 PM
freeman played much better than bradford. he was throwing darts out there. stafford looked very solid as well. watch those guys throw then see bradford throw theres no real comparison

renegade
10-25-2008, 07:01 PM
I have to say that I don't like Stafford, I really can't pinpoint my reason just yet but he just gives off a Kyle Boller esque feeling. He just doesn't seem to make the best decisions whenever I watch him.

I've never watched Josh Freeman but from what I've gathered about him he seems like a poorman's Jamarcus Russell.

*Here we go, Penn St. v.s. Ohio St. this is going to be good.

Babylon
10-25-2008, 07:06 PM
I have to say that I don't like Stafford, I really can't pinpoint my reason just yet but he just gives off a Kyle Boller esque feeling. He just doesn't seem to make the best decisions whenever I watch him.

I've never watched Josh Freeman but from what I've gathered about him he seems like a poorman's Jamarcus Russell.

*Here we go, Penn St. v.s. Ohio St. this is going to be good.

I'm not going to talk down to anyone but if you watched Stafford today and say you dont like him i have to question if you know anything about football.He was a beast out there, making some throws that probably only a handfull of pros can make.

Freeman is sort of an inigma, one play he looks all world and then the next he's fumbling or throwing it right to the other team. Good size and fairly athletic but not in the conversation right now with Bradford, Sanchez and Stafford in my opinion.

renegade
10-25-2008, 07:33 PM
I'm not going to talk down to anyone but if you watched Stafford today and say you dont like him i have to question if you know anything about football.He was a beast out there, making some throws that probably only a handfull of pros can make.

Freeman is sort of an inigma, one play he looks all world and then the next he's fumbling or throwing it right to the other team. Good size and fairly athletic but not in the conversation right now with Bradford, Sanchez and Stafford in my opinion.

I didn't see the game today. One game in particular the I watched was the Georgia v.s. Alabama game, Stafford looked really bad in the first half of that one and above average during the second half. I'll have to watch the LSU game, I guess to get an idea of what his true talent level is.

princefielder28
10-25-2008, 07:42 PM
sure looks like stafford-freeman combo today. im not sure who chaged my name. i guess thats permitted. oh well call me what you will. freeman was unbelievable. and no 250 on the ground to cover or take the pressure off. stafford looked his best game ive seen

Freeman showed some nice things today but his decision making is shaky at times and takes too many unnecessary chances.

Iamcanadian
10-25-2008, 08:06 PM
NFL GM's often have their jobs on the line when they are drafting top 5 or even top 10. There is a lot of money involved and few have owners as stupid as William Clay Ford.
So far, the 2 QB's who declared as juniors, Alex Smith and Russell either flopped or haven't yet shown a lot. GM's want to see real success or they soon grow weary of risking their careers on drafting junior QB's.
If any of the junior QB's declare, they had better have a National Championship on their resume and a real consensus that they will be franchise QB's, or they will suffer significantly on draft day. If the NFL Advisory Committee tells these QB prospects that they have a middle to late round 1 rating or even a round 2 rating, I think few will declare.
I, for one won't be at all surprised if only one or even none declare since the difference in contracts between a 15 to 20 drafted player to that of a top 5 drafted player is quite substantial, could range between 15 to 30 million dollars. I believe that reality will stop a lot of junior QB's in their tracks and most if not all will return to school. A junior QB in general will require a 4 year maturing process before you can expect real production out of him, heck Eli took 4 years and he came out as a senior. How many GM's drafting high in the draft can expect to keep their jobs for 4 or 5 years while their QB develops, not too many and I believe the results on draft day will be a shock for any junior QB who declares.

Babylon
10-25-2008, 08:30 PM
NFL GM's often have their jobs on the line when they are drafting top 5 or even top 10. There is a lot of money involved and few have owners as stupid as William Clay Ford.
So far, the 2 QB's who declared as juniors, Alex Smith and Russell either flopped or haven't yet shown a lot. GM's want to see real success or they soon grow weary of risking their careers on drafting junior QB's.
If any of the junior QB's declare, they had better have a National Championship on their resume and a real consensus that they will be franchise QB's, or they will suffer significantly on draft day. If the NFL Advisory Committee tells these QB prospects that they have a middle to late round 1 rating or even a round 2 rating, I think few will declare.
I, for one won't be at all surprised if only one or even none declare since the difference in contracts between a 15 to 20 drafted player to that of a top 5 drafted player is quite substantial, could range between 15 to 30 million dollars. I believe that reality will stop a lot of junior QB's in their tracks and most if not all will return to school. A junior QB in general will require a 4 year maturing process before you can expect real production out of him, heck Eli took 4 years and he came out as a senior. How many GM's drafting high in the draft can expect to keep their jobs for 4 or 5 years while their QB develops, not too many and I believe the results on draft day will be a shock for any junior QB who declares.


Does the fact that Stafford will have more starts at the end of this year than Matt Ryan change your opinion?

LonghornsLegend
11-01-2008, 04:03 AM
Interesting article I stumbled across, scouts gives his opinion of Tebow and Bradford, and I saw the position FB thrown in as to what he might translate to:

Tebow has rushed for 1,591 yards and a school-record 36 touchdowns (tied with Emmitt Smith) and Rang said he had several NFL scouts tell him that Tebow's NFL future is at fullback.

The AFC scout said he's concerned that Tebow has grown too big physically, which has sacrificed some flexibility, and that Tebow has taken too much punishment from running the football an average of 14.6 times per game as UF's starting quarterback.

The AFC scout also said Tebow's fundamentals need work. Tebow won't be able to get away with throws off his back foot or some of the improvised underhand tosses that he's used.

"I remember coach [Tom] Landry saying in a meeting, 'You can coach a whole lot of things about a quarterback but it's really hard to coach accuracy,'" the scout said. "You can work with their feet and work with their drops, but when they let it go, where does it end up?

"He hits some balls, there's no question, but when you're looking to take a guy and say he can be a pro quarterback, you're looking at the balls he throws, the system he's in, and how accurate he is."

Rang, the AFC scout, Pete Prisco of CBSSports.com, and ESPN.com's Todd McShay do not list Tebow as a first-round draft pick should he decide to leave school early, but there is agreement that Tebow would be a first-day selection.


And alot of praise for Stafford of course:

They are unanimous that Stafford would be a first-round pick, and Prisco lists him as the first overall pick. He, like the others, are impressed with Stafford's arm strength and in-pocket mobility and like the fact that Stafford is playing in a pro-style offense under coach Mark Richt.

"When you watch Stafford, his arm stands out more than anybody's in the country," Prisco said. "The ball gets from point A to point B faster than anybody in the country."

Rang said Stafford (6-3, 237) must improve his accuracy. Stafford has completed 56.4 percent of his passes in his career and thrown for 6,218 yards, 38 touchdowns and 28 interceptions.

"He has exactly what you're looking for in terms of arm strength," Rang said. "He's a little more inconsistent with overall accuracy than you'd like but certainly has the tools to be a franchise quarterback in the NFL."

Stafford isn't as good a runner as Tebow, but he has good mobility in the pocket, the AFC scout said, and plays for a coach who helped send six quarterbacks to the NFL from 1987-2000 when he was Florida State's offensive coordinator/quarterbacks coach.

Rang believes Stafford is more ready for the NFL game and would be able to make a difference in an NFL club quicker than Tebow.
http://www.jacksonville.com/tu-online/stories/103108/col_350176118.shtml


I do really like Bradford though, he has his flaws but he can easily develop into one of the best QB's from his class even if he enters with Stafford...I think another year could do wonders for Bradford though.

Iamcanadian
11-01-2008, 07:08 AM
I still think it is a long shot that any of them declare. GM's can be heavily influenced by trends they see and the failure of Alex Smith and Russell's slow development could send any junior QB declaring to the middle of round 1 or even round 2. That's about a 30 million dollar loss in guaranteed money if they declare so I seriously doubt too many will take the plunge.
Take Stafford, he's got all the physical tools you could want but his production is still sketchy and he is far from a finished product. I don't see GM's taking the risk and drafting him in the top 10 and when the NFL Advisory Committee starts telling these junior QB prospects that they are at best a middle 1st round prospect or even a round 2 prospect, I think most of them return and try for the big money next season.
It is my opinion that which ever junior QB wins the NC game, will be the only one who might declare.

Babylon
11-01-2008, 11:46 AM
I still think it is a long shot that any of them declare. GM's can be heavily influenced by trends they see and the failure of Alex Smith and Russell's slow development could send any junior QB declaring to the middle of round 1 or even round 2. That's about a 30 million dollar loss in guaranteed money if they declare so I seriously doubt too many will take the plunge.
Take Stafford, he's got all the physical tools you could want but his production is still sketchy and he is far from a finished product. I don't see GM's taking the risk and drafting him in the top 10 and when the NFL Advisory Committee starts telling these junior QB prospects that they are at best a middle 1st round prospect or even a round 2 prospect, I think most of them return and try for the big money next season.
It is my opinion that which ever junior QB wins the NC game, will be the only one who might declare.

GMs take a risk on all players, if Bradford and Stafford cant get top 10 projections from some advisory board then no QB ever will. The best example for Stafford coming out early is Matt Ryan, whether it's team need at the next level, passing % in college, TD/Int ratio, number of starts..... they are very similar. Stafford actually is a physically better player than Ryan.

CashmoneyDrew
11-01-2008, 12:14 PM
I don't think them being underclassmen would hurt them at all. Sure a lot of underclassmen QB's bust compared to the ones that make it, but that's relative to the position they play. A lot more senior QB's bust than make it as well. I think it comes down to need and talent and the depth of the class. Bradford and Stafford definitely have the talent. There's going to be many teams in the top 10 that need a QB. And the senior QB class is abysmal. I think at least 2 of the top underclassmen QB's will come out.

AkiliSmith
11-01-2008, 12:41 PM
I don't think them being underclassmen would hurt them at all. Sure a lot of underclassmen QB's bust compared to the ones that make it, but that's relative to the position they play. A lot more senior QB's bust than make it as well. I think it comes down to need and talent and the depth of the class. Bradford and Stafford definitely have the talent. There's going to be many teams in the top 10 that need a QB. And the senior QB class is abysmal. I think at least 2 of the top underclassmen QB's will come out.
I just noticed that Stafford and Bradford's last name both end with ford. Detroit needs a quarterback, and their owner's last name is Ford. Whichever "ford" declares will be a Lion, it has been prophesied.

Halsey
11-01-2008, 02:33 PM
Archie Manning is a guest on CBS's college football show today. He just clearly stated that "Stafford is the best pro-style QB in college football today".

illmatic74
11-01-2008, 06:24 PM
Archie Manning is a guest on CBS's college football show today. He just clearly stated that "Stafford is the best pro-style QB in college football today". Thats nice

ElectricEye
11-01-2008, 08:38 PM
He also looked terrible today. Completely decimated. The Gators denied Moreno and put the game on Stafford's back...and he turned it over three times. He's just really, really bad at reading the field. I don't think he's anywhere near ready for the NFL at this point. He may be productive eventually, but he has a large gap to overcome between he and Bradford/Sanchez.

Babylon
11-01-2008, 09:14 PM
He also looked terrible today. Completely decimated. The Gators denied Moreno and put the game on Stafford's back...and he turned it over three times. He's just really, really bad at reading the field. I don't think he's anywhere near ready for the NFL at this point. He may be productive eventually, but he has a large gap to overcome between he and Bradford/Sanchez.


He didnt play all that great today but to say there is a gap between him and those other guys is pretty comical. Mark Sanchez plays Wash st one week where they're leading 41-0 at the half and this week they're leading Wash. 42-0 at the half. Bradford throws the ball 10 yards to receivers that take it 50. I like those guys but they arent facing SEC defenses and getting put on their backs on every play.

ElectricEye
11-01-2008, 09:21 PM
Yeah, but Stafford is...and he plays mediocre every week. I don't know if I'm lost in all of this, but generally, I kind of like equate success throwing the ball in college to be indicative of successfully throwing it the NFL... especially if they guys who are throwing it still have tools. I haven't seen Stafford do anything special on a game to game basis. Stafford might face stiffer competition, but Bradford(Sanchez I can't really say this about) has looked brilliant against the challenges he's had to face and risen to the occasion every time. You can't REALLY pin the Texas loss on him. Stafford hasn't done either of those things, and while I don't like pinning losses on one player...a lot of Florida's points came off of Stafford turnover. He did not have any moxie out there today.

Babylon
11-01-2008, 09:41 PM
Yeah, but Stafford is...and he plays mediocre every week. I don't know if I'm lost in all of this, but generally, I kind of like equate success throwing the ball in college to be indicative of successfully throwing it the NFL... especially if they guys who are throwing it still have tools. I haven't seen Stafford do anything special on a game to game basis. Stafford might face stiffer competition, but Bradford(Sanchez I can't really say this about) has looked brilliant against the challenges he's had to face and risen to the occasion every time. You can't REALLY pin the Texas loss on him. Stafford hasn't done either of those things, and while I don't like pinning losses on one player...a lot of Florida's points came off of Stafford turnover. He did not have any moxie out there today.

Hey your opinion is probably as good as anyone, all i know is Stafford can make throws that only a few players can make and that includes the pro level, he's going to have interceptions just like Matt Ryan did at BC because their receiving corp isnt that great. When he gets to the pros they'll coach him not to force things but his ability to stretch defenses is really going to be special. I would be shocked if he's not a top 5 pick and if that's the case i'll be the first to come on here and admit i was wrong.

ElectricEye
11-01-2008, 10:15 PM
I'll agree to the point that he can make throws that few others can. That's indisputable. That's not something you can just hang your hat on all the time though. He's very poor at reading the defense. He doesn't always find the open man, isn't the most accurate guy in the world when he does find a guy, and has a track record with turnovers.

You could say that he had a poor supporting cast up until this year, but I don't think you can compare his guys to the people Matt Ryan was playing with. Two words can sum this up; Rich Gunnell. He's 5'11, 196 pounds...and probably has 4.65 speed. He was the leading receiver that year. I watched that run as intently as someone could watch it, everyone in the area did. Matt Ryan was playing with high school athletes on that offense. With Stafford, that's not the case. AJ Green is pretty much predestined to battle with Julio Jones over being the top receiver in the SEC over the next few years. Mohamed Massaquoi is extremely underrated as well, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him come off the board in the first day. Ryan was throwing to guys that won't be and weren't drafted; Stafford has is throwing to two first day picks right now...one of which will probably be a high first rounder in a few years. That's not even taking the backs into account. Ryan didn't have much of anything resembling a consistent run game last year. Stafford has Moreno. The difference in talent is completely incomparable, IMO.

To his credit; Stafford has done a better job with turnovers this year...but that has more to do with him not being asked to step up. His two worst games of the year have come when Moreno has been shut down. He's uncomfortable when the spotlight is on him. It's not even that he's been productive outside of those times either. I think he probably WILL be picked in the top end of the first round...but I kinda think that's sad. The guy has done virtually nothing his entire career but come in and light it up in practice and workouts. He has all the ingredients in place to breakout this year...but he looks exactly the same. People say that he's progressed year to year...but honestly, I don't see it at all. The only thing that has changed is his reputation. He's been asked to do more every year, so he gets to show a bit more...but he still looks as raw as he did when he starting playing as a true freshman. There's a few little things that have improved a long the way, but none of them have translated into making him a better player.

People are looking for him to be the type of guy who can be a first overall pick at quarterback because of his big arm, but he simply isn't that guy. At no point in his career has he been the best player on his own team. That kinda bring me back to the Ryan thing for a second. There's no question that Georgia has had subpar receivers the past few years(I would question that this year though) but ask yourself this; has he honestly done anything to make them look any better? All the type of quarterbacks in the NFL right now that are worth being picked as high as some people are projecting Stafford to be picked(and there's very, very few of those guys when it comes down to it) WORK their guys. Ryan did it in college. They make the guys around them better, like a great point guard in basketball. He simply does not do that.

STARHEATHER
11-01-2008, 11:34 PM
stafford still in. bradford still out. i watched him stand there again under no pressure and play catch. bradfords the 50 million dollar mistake. regardless of the outcome, stafford still threw several impressive balls. stafford has the traits. stats and bcs bowl berths do not an nfl qb make. bradford is a less athletic weaker armed brady quinn clone. hes the turd that smells like roses

CashmoneyDrew
11-01-2008, 11:37 PM
I'm a turd that smells like turd.

Fixed it for ya.

STARHEATHER
11-01-2008, 11:43 PM
as usual youre filled with information. shouldnt you be partying on a college saturday night? you must be a real loser. i know when i was in college i wouldnt have been on the web sat night getting my jollies off blogging about draftpicks. i remember those fall sat nights. they werent spent on the internet in my room

ElectricEye
11-01-2008, 11:49 PM
as usual youre filled with information. shouldnt you be partying on a college saturday night? you must be a real loser. i know when i was in college i wouldnt have been on the web sat night getting my jollies off blogging about draftpicks. i remember those fall sat nights. they werent spent on the internet in my room

Reported. Lol.

Besides, what traits does Stafford have? Arm strength? Because I seriously can't find much else to like about his game. The offense he plays in isn't as much of a college offense as Bradford's, but Bradford's is also TONS more complex, which actually translates better into handling a higher end, productive NFL offense. Show me something Stafford does better than Bradford besides throwing the ball harder. Show me one thing. Something HE does. Something that doesn't have to do with the offense, supporting cast, ect.

STARHEATHER
11-01-2008, 11:55 PM
im sure that just makes you super excited. bet you were that kid who told on everyone when you were a child

ElectricEye
11-01-2008, 11:58 PM
im sure that just makes you super excited. bet you were that kid who told on everyone when you were a child

And you were the one trying to convince the other kids on the playground about how your imaginary Pokemon were in the game if you did a particularly elaborate sequence of nonsensical things.

STARHEATHER
11-02-2008, 12:03 AM
im speechless

ElectricEye
11-02-2008, 12:04 AM
That's actually a measure of progress.

CashmoneyDrew
11-02-2008, 01:18 AM
Ha Starheather tried to burn on me. Usually the ones who say they lived an incredible college life and had so much fun over the Internet, are actually the ones that had little friends and didn't do ****. I party whenever I want to. Just because I'm watching a movie with my friends tonight doesn't make me a loser. Once again you rush to judgement over one example and turn it into an extreme.

SchizophrenicBatman
11-02-2008, 02:21 PM
Ryan is a terrible comparison for Stafford. The only thing that's similar between the two is that they both look like a prototype QB and had mediocre passing % in college. That's where it ends. Stafford plays on an excellent team with a good defense (meaning he isnt pressured to force the ball to score a ton of points), a good running game, and this year he has AJ Green so the crappy WR excuse doesnt fly either. 80% of college QBs would KILL to have Green+Massaquoi to work with.

Ryan worked with 2* high school recruits and runs around and guns it like Delhomme, Romo, etc. He's very much from the school of Brett Favre QBing which is why I found it weird that everyone loved him last year because that type of QB usually doesn't get drafted in the top 10. They fall under the radar then emerge later. Stafford is much more standard NFL prototype. Monster arm with ideal size and nothing else matters to these scouting gurus.

As for how he actually ends up, that's hard to guess. He's not going to be Kyle Boller. He's better than that. I'm thinking more along the lines of Kerry Collins. There will always be the chance that he blows up and actually fulfills his physical potential though. It's slim, much slimmer than many NFL GMs are going to think, but it's there and it's why he's going to get overdrafted.

btw lay off starheather guys. Yea he's a little out there but he does bring some nice ideas to the table and brings more to the discussion than random draft sheep #126. iirc he was one of the first people to start hyping Kevin OConnell last season

Babylon
11-02-2008, 03:18 PM
Ryan is a terrible comparison for Stafford. The only thing that's similar between the two is that they both look like a prototype QB and had mediocre passing % in college. That's where it ends. Stafford plays on an excellent team with a good defense (meaning he isnt pressured to force the ball to score a ton of points), a good running game, and this year he has AJ Green so the crappy WR excuse doesnt fly either. 80% of college QBs would KILL to have Green+Massaquoi to work with.

Ryan worked with 2* high school recruits and runs around and guns it like Delhomme, Romo, etc. He's very much from the school of Brett Favre QBing which is why I found it weird that everyone loved him last year because that type of QB usually doesn't get drafted in the top 10. They fall under the radar then emerge later. Stafford is much more standard NFL prototype. Monster arm with ideal size and nothing else matters to these scouting gurus.

As for how he actually ends up, that's hard to guess. He's not going to be Kyle Boller. He's better than that. I'm thinking more along the lines of Kerry Collins. There will always be the chance that he blows up and actually fulfills his physical potential though. It's slim, much slimmer than many NFL GMs are going to think, but it's there and it's why he's going to get overdrafted.

btw lay off starheather guys. Yea he's a little out there but he does bring some nice ideas to the table and brings more to the discussion than random draft sheep #126. iirc he was one of the first people to start hyping Kevin OConnell last season


We all have our own opinions but i wonder why guys like Troy Aikman, the Mannings and Gary Danielson all seem to rave about Stafford. I think he's limited there by average receivers and a real ordinary O-line but i would say he does force a few that he shouldnt when the game is put on his shoulders. If i were Georgia i would go with more of a 3 step drop and have him get rid of the ball quicker. They just cant block lock enough to get the ball down the field on some of those long routes they run. Surprises me that he hasnt been injured with the number of hits he takes.

As for the comparison to Kerry Collins that is pretty lame really, Stafford has more mobility, better touch on his medium routes and he throws the deep ball with much more authority although i will say that Collins has had a great year for the Titans.

Scott Wright
11-02-2008, 03:22 PM
Stafford's sub par performance didn't have anything to do with his team being down big all game and him having to force things, did it?

Personally I think Stafford's the real deal and a lot of people I respect have told me they feel the same way. If I added all the underclassmen to my rankings right now Stafford would be my #1 overall prospect.

Xiomera
11-02-2008, 03:23 PM
Stafford's sub par performance didn't have anything to do with his team being down big all game and him having to force things, did it?

Personally I think Stafford's the real deal and a lot of people I respect have told me they feel the same way. If I added all the underclassmen to my rankings right now Stafford would be my #1 overall prospect.

I'm curious then . . . will you still have the Lions taking him with the Culpepper signing? I view it as an indication that we won't draft a QB #1 (assuming we'll have that pick).

Babylon
11-02-2008, 03:27 PM
Stafford's sub par performance didn't have anything to do with his team being down big all game and him having to force things, did it?

Personally I think Stafford's the real deal and a lot of people I respect have told me they feel the same way. If I added all the underclassmen to my rankings right now Stafford would be my #1 overall prospect.


I think when they got behind there and it was obvious they couldn't run the ball they had to sort of play into Florida's hands. One of the picks his receiver ran a deeper route than Stafford thought and the receiver did get hooked a bit. I'm the biggest honk of Stafford you'll find so a few mistakes arent going to have any effect on my opinion. I'd like to see him play in the Big-12 where guys seem to have all day to throw and have a field day trying to find receivers to throw to.

Scott Wright
11-02-2008, 04:18 PM
I'm curious then . . . will you still have the Lions taking him with the Culpepper signing? I view it as an indication that we won't draft a QB #1 (assuming we'll have that pick).

Daunte Culpepper POTENTIALLY being on the roster next year will have absolutely no impact on whether or not the Lions draft a quarterback.

nrk
11-02-2008, 04:19 PM
stafford still in. bradford still out. i watched him stand there again under no pressure and play catch. bradfords the 50 million dollar mistake. regardless of the outcome, stafford still threw several impressive balls. stafford has the traits. stats and bcs bowl berths do not an nfl qb make. bradford is a less athletic weaker armed brady quinn clone. hes the turd that smells like roses

Didn't you say earlier Sanchez was the 50 million dollar mistake? So they both are?

It's kind of hard to take you serious when you can barely type logical sentences.

Xiomera
11-02-2008, 04:27 PM
Daunte Culpepper POTENTIALLY being on the roster next year will have absolutely no impact on whether or not the Lions draft a quarterback.

Scott, how closely do you have Stafford and Bradford ranked?

ElectricEye
11-02-2008, 08:00 PM
Stafford's sub par performance didn't have anything to do with his team being down big all game and him having to force things, did it?

Personally I think Stafford's the real deal and a lot of people I respect have told me they feel the same way. If I added all the underclassmen to my rankings right now Stafford would be my #1 overall prospect.

But the point is he did force things. He didn't find ways to make things happen. All the the interceptions he threw lead to Florida points. You take 21 of those points of the board and they're a score away from making it a game.

I just think people are being WAY to soft on the guy. He hasn't proved anything yet besides the fact he has a big arm. Don't get me wrong, I respect the opinions of you and the pro scouts you're talking with/know...but I just don't get it. He has excellent tools, but so did Kerry Collins....and he didn't end up panning out near as well you would hope a number one pick can do.

Xiomera
11-02-2008, 08:04 PM
But the point is he did force things. He didn't find ways to make things happen. All the the interceptions he threw lead to Florida points. You take 21 of those points of the board and they're a score away from making it a game.

I just think people are being WAY to soft on the guy. He hasn't proved anything yet besides the fact he has a big arm. Don't get me wrong, I respect the opinions of you and the pro scouts you're talking with/know...but I just don't get it. He has excellent tools, but so did Kerry Collins....and he didn't end up panning out near as well you would hope a number one pick can do.

Yeah. I have yet to watch a Georgia game where Stafford was the reason they won. Maybe I'm just watching the wrong games, but I think it's more indicative of the fact that he's not the stud many people think he is. People love him for his arm strength and size. But does he have the feel for the game necessary for a top pick?

bored of education
11-02-2008, 08:05 PM
I want Chiefs to lose out for Stafford. Stafford still made some amzing throws and still is number 1 overall imo if he declares.

ElectricEye
11-02-2008, 08:15 PM
Yeah. I have yet to watch a Georgia game where Stafford was the reason they won. Maybe I'm just watching the wrong games, but I think it's more indicative of the fact that he's not the stud many people think he is. People love him for his arm strength and size. But does he have the feel for the game necessary for a top pick?

I really don't think so. He isn't a very polished passer at all...and as a guy that's going to have to make a living on that that's not a good sign.

bored of education
11-02-2008, 08:17 PM
I love Stafford and I really think he has the 'it' intangibles that compliment his natural abilties which will in a few years make him an elite qb.

ElectricEye
11-02-2008, 08:21 PM
I love Stafford and I really think he has the 'it' intangibles that compliment his natural abilties which will in a few years make him an elite qb.

What makes you say that? Very curious.

bored of education
11-02-2008, 08:30 PM
Anticpation of throws is amazing, ( I am using the FLA game and the FLA game last year as well in my analysis) he puts the ball in some very good spots when he has the time in the pocket and even when he is throwing of his back foot. But that anticpation does lead to some innaccurate throws. But some mechanichal, balance improvements will make his "forced' throws just fine.

He nevers seems effected/affected by his bad hoices and goes out the next drive moving forward. It does hurt and help him though.

He is a gamer, competitor type. I like his swagger on the field.

So those are some intangibles I like.

Accuracy in the pocket is great. Just has to face more adversity in the pocket and work on those throws. He his average outside the pocket.

He has great tools(zip, arm strength, size etc) that with some balance/mechanical improvements will make him godly.

So as to the reason why he is number 1 is not only he talents at the college level but his potential to be a franchise signal caller for many years. One year in the system not forced into a starting role will make not cause his development towards that franchise signals caller reegress. If he is throw in right away, it will be a long long career ahead of him.

ElectricEye
11-02-2008, 08:43 PM
I really just don't see any of that stuff. In fact, I look at that, and besides the great tools part...I see Sam Bradford. I haven't seen Stafford do any of those things well. He has problems controlling where the ball will go from what I've seen. He isn't accurate....and he doesn't place balls in the right place on a consistent basis.

I don't really say many things wrong with him mechanically. Sure, he'll have to make some adjustments...but I'm more worried that those are shortcomings rather than things he can overcome. As far as the confidence thing goes...it's doing him a lot of good. Anyone can believe they're the guy. Being that is something else entirely. What in the world has he done on the field to get this kind of attention? He has ONE game in his entire career with more than two touchdown passes. That two hasn't always been a gimme either. I know Georgia's big thing is running the ball with Moreno, but if Stafford was really then he would find ways to be productive. If he's the type of player you can build a franchise around, he shouldn't have any problem putting a college football team on his back. Stafford really seems to be struggling with that. He doesn't shine in the background, and things get ugly when he's asked to actually make throws.

Xiomera
11-02-2008, 08:46 PM
Part of the reason Stafford disappoints me is because he has a good running game there and should be able to get away with more plays in the passing game as a result of the defense paying extra attention to Moreno.

ElectricEye
11-02-2008, 09:04 PM
I agree. Moreno gives just as many opportunities as he takes away.

Some of Stafford's worst games on the year have come when Moreno has been shut down. In games where Moreno averages four yards a carry or less, Stafford has twice as many interceptions as touchdowns. Passing does more harm than good when Moreno can't be effective.

Babylon
11-02-2008, 11:20 PM
If i were Georgia i would go to more of a 3 step drop, his offensive line at times has been pretty good (Arizona st, LSU) but for the most part they dont pass block very well and their pass patterns take so long to execute Stafford usually ends up on his back. I think it's pretty clear that Matt is going to be a high pick, probably to Detroit or KC so our little discussion here isnt going to change that dynamic. What he needs to be careful of at the next level is to not fall into the same sort of trap that Jay Cutler has and that is trying to rely too much on your arm and therefore force too much.

Whatever team gets any top Qb they need to put together a good run game and good outlet receivers so that these guys dont feel they have to throw it 50 yards on every play.

Scott Wright
11-02-2008, 11:39 PM
Anyone who follows this site knows how picky I am when it comes to handing out my "Elite" grade. In fact, only one prospect got it last year.

If I had to hand grades out today Stafford would get it. In my opinion he's that good.

As the announcer during the game said, Stafford is a pro quarterback playing college football.

ThEvIcTR
11-03-2008, 12:11 AM
That same pro quarterback threw 3 INTs and has looked suspect all year against elite teams.

Bruce Banner
11-03-2008, 12:40 AM
That same pro quarterback threw 3 INTs and has looked suspect all year against elite teams.

O shi-

What say you Scott?

d34ng3l021
11-03-2008, 12:55 AM
Stafford has all the tools you look for, but has only shown flashes. He really needs to be more consistent.

Scott Wright
11-03-2008, 12:57 AM
O shi-

What say you Scott?

You're right, college stats are everything. Graham Harrell should be the #1 overall pick, he has a 6-1 TD/INT ratio.

When Peyton Manning was a junior he threw 20 TD's and 12 INT's

Eli Manning threw 21 TD's and 15 INT's as a junior.

Even with that terrible statistical game against Florida Stafford is still on pace to throw for 20 TD's and 12 INT's at the same point in his career in the same conference.

illmatic74
11-03-2008, 01:22 AM
I might be crazy for saying this but I haven't seen Stafford make the improbable happen like I seen a lot of great QB prospects do. Whether it was Ryan leading his team to the #3 ranking and that throw against Virginia Tech or what Cutler did against Florida or Ben Rothelisberger leading his team to 13 straight wins.

ThEvIcTR
11-03-2008, 01:26 AM
It is completely irrelevant to bring the Manning's into this conversation.

All I have seen from Stafford is a big arm, he trusts too much in his arm which makes him force bad plays, and he isn't very accurate. Not to mention he has all the talent in the world around him he should be lighting people up if he were so great.


Sam Bradford is the QB who deserves the ELITE status. He is extremely poised in the pocket, extremely accurate, and rarely makes a bad decision.

SAM BRADFORD
2007 (FRESHMEN) 237 341 3121 69.5 9.15 65 36 8
2008 (SOPH) 202 297 3086 68.0 10.39 77 34 6


Matthew Stafford
2006 135 256 1749 52.7 6.83 53 7 13 12 108.99
2007 194 348 2523 55.7 7.25 84 19 10 15 128.92
2008 159 262 2211 60.7 8.44 61 12 8

I think it is obvious that Sam Bradford is ManBearPig and is just a complete beast.

Scott Wright
11-03-2008, 01:29 AM
It is completely irrelevant to bring the Manning's into this conversation.

Why is that irrelevant? Same conference, same point in their careers...

Bringing Sam Bradford's numbers into the equation is what's irrelevant. He plays in a spread offense where he's in the shotgun and running the no-huddle all the time. Stafford is working in a pro-style offense under center making NFL reads and throws. It's apples and oranges.

Paranoidmoonduck
11-03-2008, 02:21 AM
I definitely wouldn't thrust Stafford into a starting role his rookie year if he comes out after this season, but I would be eager to get him onto my team and learning my offense rather than spend another year at Georgia. He's got the tools and in my estimation is the most impressive quarterback in amateur ball in terms of projecting him to the NFL.

If Jay Cutler had come out after his junior year, would he have automatically been a worse quarterback in the NFL? Absolutely not. Now, he might have taken longer to come about, but in a year absolutely lacking in any other quarterback I consider worth a top 10 selection, teams are going to have to roll the dice on Stafford. In my opinion, he's worth it.

bored of education
11-03-2008, 08:04 AM
Staffords combination of natural abilities and intangible assets makes him an elite quarterback prospect. I could write a 5,000 word dissertation but I don't wanna steal Scott's thunder. ;)

LonghornsLegend
11-03-2008, 08:20 AM
That same pro quarterback threw 3 INTs and has looked suspect all year against elite teams.

P-L pointed it out first, but I'm guessing you didn't watch the game? I seem to remember Matt Ryan making quite a few mistakes trying to make plays with his arm or kinda like people saying "he trust his arm too much", how are his INT's right now? He's cut down, same with Cutler, he made alot of miscues at Vandy, still does, but he's still got the tools to be elite which Stafford also has.


Scott is right, the reads Bradford is having to make are completely different then the ones Stafford is making consistently...Alot of the Big XII offenses are set up for the QB to make high percentage throws and making their completion percentage high, hopefully Stafford goes somewhere that isn't eager to throw him out into the fire immediately.

Xiomera
11-03-2008, 01:22 PM
Scott, you obviously love Stafford, and I respect your opinion, despite my disagreement.

So I ask, where does he rank with the 1st round QB's of the past few years? Most specifically, how does he compare to Matt Ryan? How likely is it that Stafford could start and be effective from Day One as Ryan has done this season?

ThEvIcTR
11-03-2008, 01:43 PM
Ok then maybe i should bring up every college quarter back in the last 20 years that during there junior put up the same numbers as the mannings. Just because he plays in the SEC and has similar numbers to the mannings at that point in there careers doesnt make him a sure fire prospect.


Please tell me you guys watched the game this Saturday, you cant seriously think that he is ready to be a 1st overall pick. His accuracy was extremely shaky and he was making TERRIBLE decisions towards the end of the second quarter. No ELITE quarter back should have a TD/INT ratio of 12/8 when he has as much talent as he does around him.

Don't give me that B.S. that Bradford isn't making pro type reads, i have seen him make all the throws that the NFL quarter backs make.

Babylon
11-03-2008, 02:00 PM
Ok then maybe i should bring up every college quarter back in the last 20 years that during there junior put up the same numbers as the mannings. Just because he plays in the SEC and has similar numbers to the mannings at that point in there careers doesnt make him a sure fire prospect.


Please tell me you guys watched the game this Saturday, you cant seriously think that he is ready to be a 1st overall pick. His accuracy was extremely shaky and he was making TERRIBLE decisions towards the end of the second quarter. No ELITE quarter back should have a TD/INT ratio of 12/8 when he has as much talent as he does around him.

Don't give me that B.S. that Bradford isn't making pro type reads, i have seen him make all the throws that the NFL quarter backs make.

Forget Bradford for a minute and let's talk about Stafford against Florida. Matt made the usual great throws but had a few mistakes. 2 of his 3 ints were either the result of a bad route from a freshman receiver or a marginal receiver not making a play on the ball, if for no other reason to break up a pick. Knowshon Moreno had a TD in the endzone but had a Gator hanging on his arm and #86 the tightend tried to run through the endzone when it was his job to sit down when he found himself wide open.

The Georgia O-line was atrocius, i have tried to give them the benefit of the doubt and they did play well at LSU but they are either terribly young or terribly lousy. One more thing, give Florida some credit, they played great football. Stafford is still 25-5 in the SEC. I didnt see anyone ready to throw Tom Brady under the bus after he got his clock cleaned against the Giants.

P-L
11-03-2008, 02:10 PM
Matt Ryan threw 19 interceptions as a senior, one every 34 passes, and completed 59% of his passes. Matt Stafford has 8 interceptions as a junior, one every 33 passes, and has completed 61% of his passes. Ryan played in the ACC, arguably the worst (or second worst) BCS conference. Stafford plays in the SEC, the best conference in college football. Matt Stafford has shown significant improvement every single year as a passer. Matt Ryan actually regressed from his junior to senior year. Consider all of that and now consider that Stafford has a far superior arm and is superior athletically to Ryan. Matt Ryan went #3 overall in a strong draft, yet Matt Stafford isn't worth a pick that high in a weak draft?

People bashed Matt Ryan as a prospect, and now he's making them eat their words in the NFL. Now, I am not saying Stafford is going to find early success as Ryan. What I am saying is that looking at stat sheets should not make or break a prospect. What doesn't show up in the stat sheets is when Stafford throws a beautiful ball and puts it in the perfect spot. It makes you say "are you kidding me," in a good way. There have been plenty of examples of players in similar situations as Stafford, putting up similar or almost identical numbers, and finding success in the pros.

Stafford came into the season as the unquestioned #1 quarterback, so it's causing people to want to find an alternative choice. People are over-analyzing his flaws and ignoring or minimizing his strengths.

georgiafan
11-03-2008, 02:15 PM
Let's take a look at interceptions Stafford has thrown this year.

Alabama - Hail Mary pass at the end of the half with his team down 21

Tenn. - Fade route in the end zone with Moore ran the wrong route. The 2nd one a WR screen

Vandy - One on tiped pass and the other was his fault where he under threw a WR

UF - The first one A.J ran the wrong route and went above the CB per Richt. Another one a friend of mine (uf fan) said it wasn't Stafford fault the LB just made a great play. I didn't see the 3rd interception as I was unable to watch the game so it may have been Stafford's fault.

The TD/ interception ratio does look bad, but when you look closer the only real bad interception was agianst Vandy. When scouts took a look at the game tape the aren't going to punish him for alot of the interceptions he has threw this year. Stafford has improved this year it just may not show up in the box score.

nrk
11-03-2008, 02:22 PM
Matt Ryan threw 19 interceptions as a senior, one every 34 passes, and completed 59% of his passes. Matt Stafford has 8 interceptions as a junior, one every 33 passes, and has completed 61% of his passes. Ryan played in the ACC, arguably the worst (or second worst) BCS conference. Stafford plays in the SEC, the best conference in college football. Matt Stafford has shown significant improvement every single year as a passer. Matt Ryan actually regressed from his junior to senior year. Consider all of that and now consider that Stafford has a far superior arm and is superior athletically to Ryan. Matt Ryan went #3 overall in a strong draft, yet Matt Stafford isn't worth a pick that high in a weak draft?

Now compare the talent around Matt Ryan and the talent around Matt Stafford, if you're gonna compare do it all the way. No question Georgia is a more talented team.

bored of education
11-03-2008, 02:29 PM
Now compare the talent around Matt Ryan and the talent around Matt Stafford, if you're gonna compare do it all the way. No question Georgia is a more talented team.
then you can compare the competition each team played
who had better pass rushers
who had better secondary
etc
etc
etc

nrk
11-03-2008, 02:35 PM
then you can compare the competition each team played
who had better pass rushers
who had better secondary
etc
etc
etc

Exactly!!!

georgiafan
11-03-2008, 02:36 PM
Now compare the talent around Matt Ryan and the talent around Matt Stafford, if you're gonna compare do it all the way. No question Georgia is a more talented team.

UGA has better skill players, but BC has a much better OL and TE where ever starter this year is a freshman or sophmore. If you are viewing the WR as a whole under Stafford time they are still below average.

P-L
11-03-2008, 03:29 PM
Now compare the talent around Matt Ryan and the talent around Matt Stafford, if you're gonna compare do it all the way. No question Georgia is a more talented team.
Ryan had the better offensive line, Stafford has the better running back. You can give receivers to Georgia too, but it's probably closer than you think. A.J. Green started the season real slow and Massaquoi has been very inconsistent. Take the difference in Stafford's surrounding talent and subtract the difference in the conferences each play in and I don't think the end result is very significant.

Stafford has been victim of playing behind a poor offensive line that struggles to pass block and inconsistent receivers. You put him in the Big XII where they don't believe in defense and he can play out of the gun every snap, he'd be putting up all world numbers. He would also be far more successful if he played in the ACC (2007), in which 11 defenses gave up more than 205 yards per game through the air as opposed to the SEC (2008), which has seven teams that have given up 185 yards per game or less.

SchizophrenicBatman
11-03-2008, 04:21 PM
Stafford's sub par performance didn't have anything to do with his team being down big all game and him having to force things, did it?

Personally I think Stafford's the real deal and a lot of people I respect have told me they feel the same way. If I added all the underclassmen to my rankings right now Stafford would be my #1 overall prospect.

I find it funny that in my post I talk about how the Ryan comparison is terrible for Stafford because Ryan spent his entire career at BC forcing the hell out of the ball and having to win games on his own. Then Stafford has one game that he has to win on his own and not only did he not succeed, but it was ugly as all get up. This isn't necessarily directed at Scott, since he hasn't gone back to this afaik, but rather the rest of this board who feel that because they were wrong (or they were right and the board was wrong) on Ryan suddenly it's ok to appeal to authority on Stafford. Please tell me I don't need to list out all the players the NFL has been wrong on.

Look, if you want to use an example of a QB Stafford is similar to that has panned out, use Eli Manning. It's not a perfect comparison but it's a decent one. Please stop using Matt Ryan

619
11-03-2008, 04:24 PM
Look, if you want to use an example of a QB Stafford is similar to that has panned out, use Eli Manning. It's not a perfect comparison but it's a decent one. Please stop using Matt Ryan

Please stop using either. I just don't see it. Jay Cutler is probably his ceiling as a prospect. Floor ? Kyle Boller ?? Lol.

SchizophrenicBatman
11-03-2008, 04:34 PM
Cutler is fine, better than Eli even, but this entire thread has been about Matt Ryan

It just makes no sense to me. It'd be like if there was a RB prospect who missed all of the season with an injury and everyone compared him to AD because of it...except he's 5'10 200 pounds and tries to bust everything outside

ElectricEye
11-03-2008, 08:48 PM
I had written some very long winded reply this morning, but I had to leave for something before I had time to post it. This is going to be testing myself writing this again, and I doubt I get through it all..but here goes.

One thing I'll say is this; Scott is right on the Bradford stat comparison. Season statistics mean very little for a quarterback. Personally, I look at things more on a game to game basis, and even that's not the greatest indicator of success, especially with Sam Bradford and Oklahoma's spread offense. I won't get much into Bradford here, and the conversation has progressed more towards Stafford and Bradford and his massive numbers have virtually nothing to do with Stafford...and visa vera. I will say this; Oklahoma doesn't get the credit they deserve for their running game. One of the greatest defenses of Stafford's poor stats is that Moreno is the focus of the offense. That in itself is complete crap. Oklahoma has more rushing attempts on the year than Georgia. That might be because they've had a ton more plays...but still. It's not like Bradford is throwing the ball every down like Graham Harrell. But we've already established you can't evaluate Stafford based on Bradford's stats.

As far as the Manning thing goes, I respect Scott and the work he does above any other guy who does websites of this sort...and his insight is truly peerless on the web. But I don't think you can really compare Stafford to the Manning's. You brought up their junior years...but that's not taking into account that both of them had really, really down Junior years. Both Eli and Peyton had their worst years as starters those years. Tough and rough times for both of that. That's neglecting the fact that both of them had monster Sophomore years. Eli had 30+ touchdown passes as a Sophomore and almost 3000 yards passing as well. Peyton had a 22/4 TD INT line with almost 3000 yards passing as well. Stafford hasn't had any kind of tangible success thus far in his career; and if he were to depart this year he wouldn't. In addition to that, the Manning's, Peyton specially, showed the ability to dominate things on a game to game basis. Peyton had five games in which he threw for 350+ yards. Stafford hasn't accomplished that feat once. So comparing Stafford's junior year to Peyton and Eli Manning's is really kind of meaningless. Stafford hasn't demonstrated anything remotely close to the type of ability that the Manning's did. When he has, it hasn't lead to consistent success either.

I just really, really, really don't get it. I don't see anything special with any of those throws. He has the arm to make throws few others can make...but I don't see super anticipation. He doesn't read coverages well at all. He can know exactly when to make a throw, but if he throws it into coverage then he's still going to be picked off. People just keep making excuses for the fact he ISN'T that great of a passer at this point. He would NOT be making these mistakes as often as he makes them, even given the poor supporting cast and bad circumstances, if he really had the type of ability to be a number one overall draft pick. If he were really that talented and NFL ready, people wouldn't need to make these excuses for him. I really hope I'm not sounding like StarHeather here, but I mean come on? What has he done? What has he ever done on a football field consistently that would warrant him being drafted/regarded that high? Saying what he's capable of doing for a play is great. Important too. Single plays can win games sometimes. But it's not like he's bombing it out 70+ yards every single time. Those few times he has looked great are muddled in there with major bad play.

How many games has he gone out there and truly dominated to this point in his career? He's had plenty of time to show how brilliant he can be...but he hasn't done it. He doesn't have any signature games to this point. None where he was absolutely unstoppable. I don't care how bad his offensive line is. I don't care of inept his receivers are. Georgia is a bigtime football program and they have been for awhile. They have the talent. Even if they didn't, he still should do something. Someone in this thread or another said it best; what on earth has he done? He's gone out and shown he can throw the ball. At the next level, you have to be able to do that to make it. He can do that. He's capable of making it. No one is doubting that. But what has he done to show he will?

illmatic74
11-03-2008, 09:29 PM
I had written some very long winded reply this morning, but I had to leave for something before I had time to post it. This is going to be testing myself writing this again, and I doubt I get through it all..but here goes.

One thing I'll say is this; Scott is right on the Bradford stat comparison. Season statistics mean very little for a quarterback. Personally, I look at things more on a game to game basis, and even that's not the greatest indicator of success, especially with Sam Bradford and Oklahoma's spread offense. I won't get much into Bradford here, and the conversation has progressed more towards Stafford and Bradford and his massive numbers have virtually nothing to do with Stafford...and visa vera. I will say this; Oklahoma doesn't get the credit they deserve for their running game. One of the greatest defenses of Stafford's poor stats is that Moreno is the focus of the offense. That in itself is complete crap. Oklahoma has more rushing attempts on the year than Georgia. That might be because they've had a ton more plays...but still. It's not like Bradford is throwing the ball every down like Graham Harrell. But we've already established you can't evaluate Stafford based on Bradford's stats.

As far as the Manning thing goes, I respect Scott and the work he does above any other guy who does websites of this sort...and his insight is truly peerless on the web. But I don't think you can really compare Stafford to the Manning's. You brought up their junior years...but that's not taking into account that both of them had really, really down Junior years. Both Eli and Peyton had their worst years as starters those years. Tough and rough times for both of that. That's neglecting the fact that both of them had monster Sophomore years. Eli had 30+ touchdown passes as a Sophomore and almost 3000 yards passing as well. Peyton had a 22/4 TD INT line with almost 3000 yards passing as well. Stafford hasn't had any kind of tangible success thus far in his career; and if he were to depart this year he wouldn't. In addition to that, the Manning's, Peyton specially, showed the ability to dominate things on a game to game basis. Peyton had five games in which he threw for 350+ yards. Stafford hasn't accomplished that feat once. So comparing Stafford's junior year to Peyton and Eli Manning's is really kind of meaningless. Stafford hasn't demonstrated anything remotely close to the type of ability that the Manning's did. When he has, it hasn't lead to consistent success either.

I just really, really, really don't get it. I don't see anything special with any of those throws. He has the arm to make throws few others can make...but I don't see super anticipation. He doesn't read coverages well at all. He can know exactly when to make a throw, but if he throws it into coverage then he's still going to be picked off. People just keep making excuses for the fact he ISN'T that great of a passer at this point. He would NOT be making these mistakes as often as he makes them, even given the poor supporting cast and bad circumstances, if he really had the type of ability to be a number one overall draft pick. If he were really that talented and NFL ready, people wouldn't need to make these excuses for him. I really hope I'm not sounding like StarHeather here, but I mean come on? What has he done? What has he ever done on a football field consistently that would warrant him being drafted/regarded that high? Saying what he's capable of doing for a play is great. Important too. Single plays can win games sometimes. But it's not like he's bombing it out 70+ yards every single time. Those few times he has looked great are muddled in there with major bad play.

How many games has he gone out there and truly dominated to this point in his career? He's had plenty of time to show how brilliant he can be...but he hasn't done it. He doesn't have any signature games to this point. None where he was absolutely unstoppable. I don't care how bad his offensive line is. I don't care of inept his receivers are. Georgia is a bigtime football program and they have been for awhile. They have the talent. Even if they didn't, he still should do something. Someone in this thread or another said it best; what on earth has he done? He's gone out and shown he can throw the ball. At the next level, you have to be able to do that to make it. He can do that. He's capable of making it. No one is doubting that. But what has he done to show he will? That was a point I tried to make in one of these topics. He hasn't had the 12 touchdown to 2 ints run Cutler had in college against Kentucky, Tennesse and Florida. Or the 5 td game Ryan had against Wake Forest. Or the 13 straight wins Ben Rothelisberger led Miami OH to including beating Louisville. Or Eli Manning almost leading Ole Miss to a win over National Champion LSU. Great QBs in college carry their teams to outcomes that weren't probable. I haven't seen that in Stafford.

diabsoule
11-03-2008, 09:32 PM
That was a point I tried to make in one of these topics. He hasn't had the 12 touchdown to 2 ints run Cutler had in college against Kentucky, Tennesse and Florida. Or the 5 td game Ryan had against Wake Forest. Or the 13 straight wins Ben Rothelisberger led Miami OH to including beating Louisville. Or Eli Manning almost leading Ole Miss to a win over National Champion LSU. Great QBs in college carry their teams to outcomes that weren't probable. I haven't seen that in Stafford.

He did lead his team in a dominant performance over LSU. He couldn't beat Florida by himself.

illmatic74
11-03-2008, 09:41 PM
He did lead his team in a dominant performance over LSU. He couldn't beat Florida by himself.I know Stafford is a good QB prospect with a lot to like about him. But I have not seen him win the game that was improbable yet. Maybe an unfair critism but it is a critism.

ElectricEye
11-03-2008, 09:57 PM
He did lead his team in a dominant performance over LSU. He couldn't beat Florida by himself.

I think Moreno absolutely punishing that defense for to the tune of 160+ yards had more than a bit to do with that.

As far as Florida goes, not being able to beat them is one thing. Being completely shut down and dismantled when you're supposed to have that type of ability in a big game is another thing entirely.

bored of education
11-04-2008, 06:47 AM
Matt Ryan threw some eggs up against crappy teams his senior year DUHHHHH

ElectricEye
11-04-2008, 09:25 AM
Matt Ryan threw some eggs up against crappy teams his senior year DUHHHHH

Matt Ryan was also asked to do a ton of things Stafford isn't. Even if you take the competition into account, Ryan was still asked to be the entire team. He did as well as he could with it, taking into account the talent around him...which I think is a bigger deal for a quarterback than the competition they face. Stafford would do a lot more harm than good throwing the ball as many times as Matt Ryan did.

All and all, the Ryan thing is a horrible comparison. The situations are so different. If you can't compare Bradford to Stafford because of the offenses they play in, you can't compare Ryan to Stafford either. It's the same thing.

bored of education
11-04-2008, 09:28 AM
Matt Ryan was also asked to do a ton of things Stafford isn't. Even if you take the competition into account, Ryan was still asked to be the entire team. He did as well as he could with it, taking into account the talent around him...which I think is a bigger deal for a quarterback than the competition they face. Stafford would do a lot more harm than good throwing the ball as many times as Matt Ryan did.

All and all, the Ryan thing is a horrible comparison. The situations are so different. If you can't compare Bradford to Stafford because of the offenses they play in, you can't compare Ryan to Stafford either. It's the same thing.

you are validating my point

stafford must be viewed in his own box, smae with bradford and ryan

ElectricEye
11-04-2008, 09:30 AM
you are validating my point

stafford must be viewed in his own box, smae with bradford and ryan

From a statistical standpoint, I completely agree.

bored of education
11-04-2008, 09:31 AM
From a statistical standpoint, I completely agree.

and skillset and intangible aspect as well

ElectricEye
11-04-2008, 09:35 AM
For the most part, I agree there as well. Using a comparison to weigh a guys overall body of work I don't really have a problem with though. Still, it's mostly just watching what a guy does on the field.

nrk
11-04-2008, 09:38 AM
you are validating my point

stafford must be viewed in his own box, smae with bradford and ryan

He's not comparing them physically or anything, hes comparing accomplishments. -_-

bored of education
11-04-2008, 09:40 AM
He's not comparing them physically or anything, hes comparing accomplishments. -_-


accomplishments must be one small measuring stick in the overall process or Graham Harrell would be number one overall dude

nrk
11-04-2008, 09:42 AM
accomplishments must be one small measuring stick in the overall process or Graham Harrell would be number one overall dude

Did you even read his post? Stats != accomplishments

bored of education
11-04-2008, 09:45 AM
He's not comparing them physically or anything, hes comparing accomplishments. -_-

read it thanks

LonghornsLegend
11-04-2008, 09:55 AM
As far as Florida goes, not being able to beat them is one thing. Being completely shut down and dismantled when you're supposed to have that type of ability in a big game is another thing entirely.

What was he supposed to do once they got down early? It wasn't his fault they got down 20+ points that fast in the game, from that point on as a QB your not making the same decisions you would and naturally your forcing things trying to play catchup with a team that can score at will...All you have to do is watch Stafford, you can tell he's gonna be a good pro, you can't hold that Florida performance against him, Peyton Manning never beat Florida's defense and looked quite terrible each time, what did that have to do with anything?

ElectricEye
11-04-2008, 10:10 AM
What was he supposed to do once they got down early? It wasn't his fault they got down 20+ points that fast in the game, from that point on as a QB your not making the same decisions you would and naturally your forcing things trying to play catchup with a team that can score at will...All you have to do is watch Stafford, you can tell he's gonna be a good pro, you can't hold that Florida performance against him, Peyton Manning never beat Florida's defense and looked quite terrible each time, what did that have to do with anything?

I think you can hold the Florida performance against him. I would have held it against Manning back in the day as well. It would be absolutely ******** to say Manning isn't a great quarterback because of his struggles against Florida in college, but it's still part of the process in evaluating a guy coming out of college.

As far as playing from behind; that's a big thing. Not to be underestimated. He did try to force some throws. But it's not like he doesn't have a history of doing that in other big games either. He put his team in an even deeper hole by doing that, one that was impossible to crawl out of. He has a tendency to do that when you ask him to actually throw the ball with any kind of authority or consistency. Watching Stafford, I really think he can be a good quarterback. I just question if he'll ever get to that point.

nrk
11-04-2008, 10:11 AM
What was he supposed to do once they got down early? It wasn't his fault they got down 20+ points that fast in the game, from that point on as a QB your not making the same decisions you would and naturally your forcing things trying to play catchup with a team that can score at will...All you have to do is watch Stafford, you can tell he's gonna be a good pro, you can't hold that Florida performance against him, Peyton Manning never beat Florida's defense and looked quite terrible each time, what did that have to do with anything?

Yeah I have to agree with that. Also, I know a couple of ints I saw that game wasn't the fault of Stafford. You're down big, you have to pass and the defense knows that.

ElectricEye
11-04-2008, 10:17 AM
The problem is that Stafford hardly ever plays better than that. People make so many excuses for the guy. What does Matthew Stafford actually control? What can he be hit for? Poor play is poor play. There's always going to be circumstances around it...but there's still no excuse for it?

Babylon
11-04-2008, 11:24 AM
The problem is that Stafford hardly ever plays better than that. People make so many excuses for the guy. What does Matthew Stafford actually control? What can he be hit for? Poor play is poor play. There's always going to be circumstances around it...but there's still no excuse for it?


The guy is 25-5 in the SEC with before this year poor receivers and this year a porous O-line, give him some credit.

I will agree he needs to tighten his game up a bit, not trust his arm all the time and i also would like to see them go to some quicker routes because he's getting clocked on just about every play.

Halsey
11-04-2008, 01:10 PM
Stafford would be crazy not to declare after the season. As a UGA fan, I hope the Florida game motivates him to come back. Anyone who thinks Stafford played all that bad in that game falls into the 'doesn't get it' category. He's a superb NFL QB prospect. And I know I'm not a homer because I thought Seattle made a huge reach taking David Greene in the 3rd.

Habibi
11-04-2008, 06:29 PM
The problem is that Stafford hardly ever plays better than that. People make so many excuses for the guy. What does Matthew Stafford actually control? What can he be hit for? Poor play is poor play. There's always going to be circumstances around it...but there's still no excuse for it?

I seriously hope you're joking.

sweetd20
11-04-2008, 07:46 PM
UGA has better skill players, but BC has a much better OL and TE where ever starter this year is a freshman or sophmore. If you are viewing the WR as a whole under Stafford time they are still below average.

Also the competition Stafford goes up against is better than what Ryan was going against in the ACC. Let's not forget Miami and Florida State aren't teh teams they used to be. So any positive he has of having a better supporting cast gets nullified by playing against much better players on the defensive side of the ball. I'd also venture to say that Ryan's O-line was better as a whole than what Stafford is playing behind.

Mr. Offseason
11-06-2008, 11:41 AM
Here is my opinion on Matt Stafford. He is a good prospect. He has great size, arm strength and boatloads of potential. I just am not sure he will have much success in the NFL because I am not convinced he has the football IQ (namely the ability to consistently make good reads and good decisions) to be a productive NFL QB and I also do not think he plays with much consistency. The LSU game and the Florida game are ample examples of this. One week he played great and the next week, while I think 2 of his interceptions came after he had to throw his team back into the game, he did not play as well. I am not confident in his accuracy either, and he too often forces passes into coverage for my liking.

Now, many UGA fans are also Falcon fans (I know because I post on the AFMB all the time, same username) and therefore have grown fond of comparing him to Matt Ryan. I cannot emphasize enough how much I hate that comparison. First of all, comparing Matt Ryans INT:Pass attempt ratio to Stafford’s is not entirely accurate in my opinion. Ryan was throwing the ball 30-35+ times per GAME because he was not surrounded with much talent. So as a result Ryan had to throw his team into games each week, and forcing passes and trying to make plays comes with the territory. However, Ryan’s high football IQ and decision making has proven to be very good (remarkable for a rookie QB in fact) because now he has talent around him and a running game to help take the pressure off of him.

So, with talent around him and with the burden of winning games for his team week in and week out taken off of him Ryan has significantly reduced his interception total while still being a very productive QB. He is having a remarkable season for a rookie QB, and I don’t think any QB will ever have one quite like it because of the fiasco Atlanta went through last year. However, my main point is Ryan stopped making so many bad decisions/reads/interceptions when his passing attempts went down from over 30 a game to around 20 or so, and that was in a jump to the NFL!

Stafford already doesn’t pass for over 30 attempts per game in college, and still has the same INT:Attempt ratio that Ryan does. Ryan’s ratio has improved (or seems like it has) and if it hasn’t as far as the numbers go it will as he gains more experience, he is still a rookie after all. Now, Stafford has good talent around him. He may have had average WR’s for much of his career, but Matt Ryan’s were significantly worse. Stafford may have an injury-plagued offensive line this year, but Ryan never had one much better than this (I remember watching Cherilus get absolutely schooled against Tapp in the BC-VT game). Stafford has a fantastic running game supporting him, whereas Ryan had an inconsistent one at best, and oftentimes relied on his RB to catch the ball out of the backfield as often as he relied on him to gain yardage on the ground. Ryan WAS the team, and when he played well they won games. Stafford is not the team, and I’m not even sure he is the team leader for Georgia. He does not make players around him better like Matt Ryan does, I am not aware of many come-back victories that he has led (I could be very wrong about this, I am just saying that I am not aware of them if they exist) and he just looked dejected on the sidelines of the Florida game, like he had just quit. It reminded me of how Mike Vick looked on the sideline of a game versus the Chicago Bears, huddled in his giant coat with his hat on staring at the ground, not talking to anyone.

So, overall, I do not think he is a great leader, I don’t think he has a very high football IQ (which results in many forced throws, bad decisions and oftentimes INT’s despite a lower workload than Matt Ryan for instance) and I think he is inconsistent with his accuracy and therefore his overall performance game to game. I think he will get drafted in the top 5 if he declares because of his great size, arm strength and potential. Those attributes always cause guys to fly up draft boards (JaMarcus Russell and Joe Flacco are both examples of this from the past 2 drafts. I personally think that they were both overdrafted, and neither has been fantastic early in their careers. JaMarcus looks horrible but he really is just a rookie this year and Greg Knapp can kill any QB’s career, and Flacco has looked good at times but has a lot of INT’s, which I assumed would happen because he is a rookie QB and he tends to stare down his primary target. We will see if he grows out of that, but I was not a fan of him in the early 2nd, much less the top 20). So while I think he will get drafted high I am not convinced he will be a stud QB like Ryan is, and I think he will only have some success in the NFL if he isn’t a bust. That is my opinion on him if he declares. I had this post written out last night but I lost it when I posted it because it logged me out or something. I feel like it may have been more clear and easy to read, but I’m doing this in the middle of class so I think you can forgive me.

-Mr. Offseason

illmatic74
11-06-2008, 12:59 PM
Here is my opinion on Matt Stafford. He is a good prospect. He has great size, arm strength and boatloads of potential. I just am not sure he will have much success in the NFL because I am not convinced he has the football IQ (namely the ability to consistently make good reads and good decisions) to be a productive NFL QB and I also do not think he plays with much consistency. The LSU game and the Florida game are ample examples of this. One week he played great and the next week, while I think 2 of his interceptions came after he had to throw his team back into the game, he did not play as well. I am not confident in his accuracy either, and he too often forces passes into coverage for my liking. Now, many UGA fans are also Falcon fans (I know because I post on the AFMB all the time, same username) and therefore have grown fond of comparing him to Matt Ryan. I cannot emphasize enough how much I hate that comparison. First of all, comparing Matt Ryans INT:Pass attempt ratio to Staffordís is not entirely accurate in my opinion. Ryan was throwing the ball 30-35+ times per GAME because he was not surrounded with much talent. So as a result Ryan had to throw his team into games each week, and forcing passes and trying to make plays comes with the territory. However, Ryanís high football IQ and decision making has proven to be very good (remarkable for a rookie QB in fact) because now he has talent around him and a running game to help take the pressure off of him. So, with talent around him and with the burden of winning games for his team week in and week out taken off of him Ryan has significantly reduced his interception total while still being a very productive QB. He is having a remarkable season for a rookie QB, and I donít think any QB will ever have one quite like it because of the fiasco Atlanta went through last year. However, my main point is Ryan stopped making so many bad decisions/reads/interceptions when his passing attempts went down from over 30 a game to around 20 or so, and that was in a jump to the NFL! Stafford already doesnít pass for over 30 attempts per game in college, and still has the same INT:Attempt ratio that Ryan does. Ryanís ratio has improved (or seems like it has) and if it hasnít as far as the numbers go it will as he gains more experience, he is still a rookie after all. Now, Stafford has good talent around him. He may have had average WRís for much of his career, but Matt Ryanís were significantly worse. Stafford may have an injury-plagued offensive line this year, but Ryan never had one much better than this (I remember watching Cherilus get absolutely schooled against Tapp in the BC-VT game). Stafford has a fantastic running game supporting him, whereas Ryan had an inconsistent one at best, and oftentimes relied on his RB to catch the ball out of the backfield as often as he relied on him to gain yardage on the ground. Ryan WAS the team, and when he played well they won games. Stafford is not the team, and Iím not even sure he is the team leader for Georgia. He does not make players around him better like Matt Ryan does, I am not aware of many come-back victories that he has led (I could be very wrong about this, I am just saying that I am not aware of them if they exist) and he just looked dejected on the sidelines of the Florida game, like he had just quit. It reminded me of how Mike Vick looked on the sideline of a game versus the Chicago Bears, huddled in his giant coat with his hat on staring at the ground, not talking to anyone. So, overall, I do not think he is a great leader, I donít think he has a very high football IQ (which results in many forced throws, bad decisions and oftentimes INTís despite a lower workload than Matt Ryan for instance) and I think he is inconsistent with his accuracy and therefore his overall performance game to game. I think he will get drafted in the top 5 if he declares because of his great size, arm strength and potential. Those attributes always cause guys to fly up draft boards (JaMarcus Russell and Joe Flacco are both examples of this from the past 2 drafts. I personally think that they were both overdrafted, and neither has been fantastic early in their careers. JaMarcus looks horrible but he really is just a rookie this year and Greg Knapp can kill any QBís career, and Flacco has looked good at times but has a lot of INTís, which I assumed would happen because he is a rookie QB and he tends to stare down his primary target. We will see if he grows out of that, but I was not a fan of him in the early 2nd, much less the top 20). So while I think he will get drafted high I am not convinced he will be a stud QB like Ryan is, and I think he will only have some success in the NFL if he isnít a bust. That is my opinion on him if he declares. I had this post written out last night but I lost it when I posted it because it logged me out or something. I feel like it may have been more clear and easy to read, but Iím doing this in the middle of class so I think you can forgive me.

-Mr. Offseason
great point

giantsfan
11-06-2008, 04:15 PM
Mr Offseason tear down this wall. That wall of text is just painful, paragraphs are your friend.

Mr. Offseason
11-06-2008, 04:23 PM
Mr Offseason tear down this wall. That wall of text is just painful, paragraphs are your friend.

ha sorry about that. i kept coming back to it after taking a break, ill try and edit into paragraphs quick.

giantsfan
11-06-2008, 04:30 PM
So much easier to read and while your harps on the comparison are valid you have to remember that Stafford is playing in a far more defensively talented conference, which just exacerbates the problem of his piss poor oline. I think it's very hard for stafford to develop consistency behind that oline against that talent just like it was impossible for Jay Cutler to develop consistency behind his poor oline in the SEC.

illmatic74
11-06-2008, 04:58 PM
So much easier to read and while your harps on the comparison are valid you have to remember that Stafford is playing in a far more defensively talented conference, which just exacerbates the problem of his piss poor oline. I think it's very hard for stafford to develop consistency behind that oline against that talent just like it was impossible for Jay Cutler to develop consistency behind his poor oline in the SEC.No but Cutler still had some dominant games. In the last 3 games of his senior season he threw 12 tds and 2 ints against Florida, Tennesse and Kentucky.

Mr. Offseason
11-06-2008, 05:36 PM
No but Cutler still had some dominant games. In the last 3 games of his senior season he threw 12 tds and 2 ints against Florida, Tennesse and Kentucky.

exactly. i havent seen stafford dominate like that all year until the LSU game this year, and even then knowshon had 160 rushing yards. i havent seen him take over a game and will his team to victory like culer has and like ryan has. that is my qualm.

ill try to keep it in paragraph form from now on giantsfan. haha

holt_bruce81
12-02-2008, 07:48 PM
Sorry to bring this thread back up but since Bradford is only a Sophomore, if he enters the draft this year is he a 1st round pick?

I read somewhere (not sure if it was on here) where someone said Bradford doesn't really have the velocity on his throws you look for in a Quarterback.

STARHEATHER
12-02-2008, 08:01 PM
its true. he has a sub nfl level arm. maybe even sub drew brees level. hes a brian brohm/brady quinn type. overstated maesurables. weak armed. a PR creation is his draft status at this point. i ust think if you put stafford on a bad team out there to the wolves he could flop. i like him mid late rd 1. needs to sit or at least have a decent team if he plays. hes not talented enough and lacks too many traits to carry a team. i really think any team looking for a qb should look to move down and maybe try to accumulate picks and maybe get some other core players so when it comes time to pick a qb you can give them half a chance. the idea of detroit picking a rookie qb or kc and putting them out there on those bad football teams its going to be rocky and you get the boo birds going and that can shake t he confidence. and theyre not immenselytalented prospects to start. i wouldnt pick bradford any rd. stafford id look to try to get him at a later point if possible. but its not going to be too late or hell be gone. i like wht the ravens did to get flacco. id try a raven type move. how on gods green earth they got flacco ill never know. so clost to another decade of domination and they get flacco.

bored of education
12-02-2008, 08:07 PM
the zip on bradfords balls is ehhh. stafford has jRuss/Cutler type zip on his throws

STARHEATHER
12-02-2008, 08:15 PM
he has a gun no doubt. problem i see is he doesnt have much else at this point thats prototype. bradford is a pr creation by loadholt/robinson productions. i hope he comes out hope he gets picked high. if carl petersons there hed pull the trigger. then you just know its a miss

Babylon
12-02-2008, 08:29 PM
Sorry to bring this thread back up but since Bradford is only a Sophomore, if he enters the draft this year is he a 1st round pick?

I read somewhere (not sure if it was on here) where someone said Bradford doesn't really have the velocity on his throws you look for in a Quarterback.


He's doing what they ask of him to the tune of an almost certain NC game and a possible heisman. All that doesnt make you a pro QB but he's getting there. I think his arm is decent with great accuracy. No doubt he's a fairly high pick if he comes out but i think he'll stay for another year.

STARHEATHER
12-02-2008, 09:53 PM
decent compared to whom

illmatic74
12-02-2008, 09:58 PM
decent compared to whomOther NFL QBS

Bruce Banner
12-02-2008, 10:08 PM
if i had a gun to my head

then I hope the trigger is pulled.

Halsey
12-02-2008, 10:17 PM
People keep saying Stafford is nothing but a big arm. Not true. It's actually helpful to learn about a player beyond what you hear said on him on TV. Stafford has much more going for him than his arm.

CashmoneyDrew
12-02-2008, 10:23 PM
People keep saying Stafford is nothing but a big arm. Not true. It's actually helpful to learn about a player beyond what you hear said on him on TV. Stafford has much more going for him than his arm.

I agree, but you need to expand on this.

Halsey
12-02-2008, 10:29 PM
I agree, but you need to expand on this.

-Graduated high school early
-Won starting job as true freshman on an SEC team
-Never been in trouble off the field
-Teammates like and respect him
-On track to graduate UGA early
-More than mobile enough(see 80 rushing yards vs Auburn as a freshman)
-Never missed a game due to injury and has no health questions
-Good size with a solid frame
-Has a lot of experience passing while under pressure because O-line play wasn't always great at UGA

CashmoneyDrew
12-02-2008, 10:32 PM
-Graduated high school early
-Won starting job as true freshman on an SEC team
-Never been in trouble off the field
-Teammates like and respect him
-On track to graduate UGA early
-More than mobile enough(see 80 rushing yards vs Auburn as a freshman)
-Never missed a game due to injury and has no health questions
-Good size with a solid frame
-Has a lot of experience passing while under pressure because O-line play wasn't always great at UGA

Pro style offense.

georgiafan
12-03-2008, 07:56 AM
He also want turn 21 until a few more months and still has just as many if not more starts then every other top QB.

Habibi
12-03-2008, 11:41 AM
-Graduated high school early
-Won starting job as true freshman on an SEC team
-Never been in trouble off the field
-Teammates like and respect him
-On track to graduate UGA early
-More than mobile enough(see 80 rushing yards vs Auburn as a freshman)
-Never missed a game due to injury and has no health questions
-Good size with a solid frame
-Has a lot of experience passing while under pressure because O-line play wasn't always great at UGA

I'll add a couple of points

- Outstanding mechanics, from his footwork to his delivery.
- Has a good feel for the pocket, and absorbs hits well.
- Has uncanny touch and anticipation on intermediate and long routes.
- Displays complete control of his offense, and the coaching staff trust him with making several audibles at the LOS.
- Plays in a pro-style offense, which would reduce the transition period at the next level.

Anyone who says arm strength is his only positive clearly has not seen the guy play.

Geason Noceur
12-03-2008, 07:36 PM
I'll add a couple of points

- Outstanding mechanics, from his footwork to his delivery.
- Has a good feel for the pocket, and absorbs hits well.
- Has uncanny touch and anticipation on intermediate and long routes.
- Displays complete control of his offense, and the coaching staff trust him with making several audibles at the LOS.
- Plays in a pro-style offense, which would reduce the transition period at the next level.

Anyone who says arm strength is his only positive clearly has not seen the guy play.

I agree. There's a misconception that he has a million arm but a ten-cent head. From everything I've read about, the guy is actually very smart both book and football-wise. I remember reading a comment by the Georgia offensive co-ordinator in which he said that the offense had actually scored on plays drawn up by Stafford. Also, watching a UGA game it's refreshing to see a college quarterback that doesn't have to look to look to the sideline to change a play. That's becoming rare with so many colleges going to the spread.

STARHEATHER
12-03-2008, 07:39 PM
i dont htink anyone thinks he has a 10 cent head. his decision making, accuracy etc is a little off not quite the level youd like to see i think thats more what people are thinking. i would agree hes pretty much an arm only right now but at least he has the required arm which makes him one of the top guys. stafford in bradford out

Geason Noceur
12-03-2008, 08:14 PM
i dont htink anyone thinks he has a 10 cent head. his decision making, accuracy etc is a little off not quite the level youd like to see i think thats more what people are thinking. i would agree hes pretty much an arm only right now but at least he has the required arm which makes him one of the top guys. stafford in bradford out

I think playing behind a pitiful offensive line the whole time that he has been at Georgia has hinder him from developing better accuracy. From watching his game, he's always either running for his life or being pressured or getting hit while throwing. He also throws downfield a whole lot more than most QBs. Not to mention that with that arm that he has he tries to make some difficult throws that other QBs don't even dream of attempting. I think that has hurt his stats also.

Halsey
12-03-2008, 09:10 PM
Overthrowing a few passes a game does not mean he has accuracy problems. He completed 61% of his passes this year while averaging 9 yards per pass attempt. He's 7th in the country in yards per pass attempt. QB's who try to get the ball down field are going to miss a few. His completion% this year was better than Matt Ryan's last year. Ryan overthrows his fair share even today. He missed a wide open TD pass this past Sunday. Good QB's brush off missed passes and connect on the next one.

STARHEATHER
12-03-2008, 09:24 PM
those overthrows should be touchdowns thats kind of one of the issues. he certainly didnt have a worse ol than josh freeman. i dont think hes a great nfl qb. hes a jay cutler at best dave carr at worst. he has some obvious sub top level traits some he cant do anything about. but if you put a good team around and dont make him carry you hes a serviceable guy who can maybe do something. if i were detroit id be more inclned to try to move the pick get some players or if they cant move it take a tackle and try to accumulate some players. theyll be bad and there will be qbs next year high and theyll be there regardless of matt stafford. i like stafford enbough to use a rd 1 pick. but there has to be some parameters and one is he doesnt play until the teams at least decent. hes not even a flacco or ryan level talent. generally its do not pass on top shelf qbs, but i dont think hes a top shelf qb. he might be average to a little better than average nfl qb. and thats fine. but not on a bad team with the #1 pick. its going to end poorly

giantsfan
12-03-2008, 09:27 PM
those overthrows should be touchdowns thats kind of one of the issues. he certainly didnt have a worse ol than josh freeman. i dont think hes a great nfl qb. hes a jay cutler at best dave carr at worst. he has some obvious sub top level traits some he cant do anything about. but if you put a good team around and dont make him carry you hes a serviceable guy who can maybe do something. if i were detroit id be more inclned to try to move the pick get some players or if they cant move it take a tackle and try to accumulate some players. theyll be bad and there will be qbs next year high and theyll be there regardless of matt stafford. i like stafford enbough to use a rd 1 pick. but there has to be some parameters and one is he doesnt play until the teams at least decent. hes not even a flacco or ryan level talent. generally its do not pass on top shelf qbs, but i dont think hes a top shelf qb. he might be average to a little better than average nfl qb. and thats fine. but not on a bad team with the #1 pick. its going to end poorly

I'm sorry but did you just imply that JC is not the second coming? If so I've just lost all the respect I used to hold for you. That's not just trying to shock people into noticing you, that's just asinine.

Bruce Banner
12-03-2008, 09:27 PM
hes a jay cutler at best dave carr at worst.

do you find this to be a large range?

illmatic74
12-03-2008, 09:29 PM
those overthrows should be touchdowns thats kind of one of the issues. he certainly didnt have a worse ol than josh freeman. i dont think hes a great nfl qb. hes a jay cutler at best dave carr at worst. he has some obvious sub top level traits some he cant do anything about. but if you put a good team around and dont make him carry you hes a serviceable guy who can maybe do something. if i were detroit id be more inclned to try to move the pick get some players or if they cant move it take a tackle and try to accumulate some players. theyll be bad and there will be qbs next year high and theyll be there regardless of matt stafford. i like stafford enbough to use a rd 1 pick. but there has to be some parameters and one is he doesnt play until the teams at least decent. hes not even a flacco or ryan level talent. generally its do not pass on top shelf qbs, but i dont think hes a top shelf qb. he might be average to a little better than average nfl qb. and thats fine. but not on a bad team with the #1 pick. its going to end poorlyWho would they trade the pick to? Also who would that team pick?

STARHEATHER
12-03-2008, 09:35 PM
i dont know thats why i said if they cant move it. whos jc. and why is stafford better than jay cutler?

STARHEATHER
12-03-2008, 09:36 PM
jc jay cutler
i get it
career losing record=nfl superstar.
oh wait thats drew brees or is it cutler?

illmatic74
12-03-2008, 09:40 PM
jc jay cutler
i get it
career losing record=nfl superstar.
oh wait thats drew brees or is it cutler?
- He is only 25
- Their running back situation is so bad Arkansas FB is their starting tailback.
- Their run defense is pathectic
- Their best defensive player is injured

STARHEATHER
12-03-2008, 09:49 PM
when he does some serious winning ill maybe change my thought. ben roethlisberger had a sb ring at 23. i agree they are awful hes their best player and thats not enough at this point. winning a division where every other team goes 6-10 or worse doesnt excite me either. i dont think stafford is better. thats my problem with stafford. hes not better than a career sub 500 qb

giantsfan
12-03-2008, 09:59 PM
Jay Cutler's defense is on par with Detroits when Champ Bailey's injured and they're winning their division in his third season with a rookie fullback playing running back. And you know what, he's only going to improve and if he ever gets a defense the Denver Cutlers will be a superbowl contender.

STARHEATHER
12-03-2008, 10:01 PM
i hear the excuses loud and clear. hes the best qb ever if he only played for another team

giantsfan
12-03-2008, 10:09 PM
i hear the excuses loud and clear. hes the best qb ever if he only played for another team

How many times where you dropped on your head as a child? He's a very good young QB who's winning his division in his third season, with an atrocious defense and no running game how is that not an impressive achievement. He's clearly not the best QB in the NFL yet, but he's playing his way into that second tier at a young age with little help, he's going to the playoffs with that roster, that is considered winning.

As for Big Ben, he got a ring as a rookie but he did almost nothing for them all season long and had a great defense and running game. Sure he was there and he did somethings for them in the playoffs but how terrible he was in the SB showed you how good that team was around him. Give Cutler that team and the Broncos are undefeated right now. No player in the NFL plays in a bubble, everyone is affected by their surroundings and to ignore that is just simply ignorance of the fundamentals of the game of football, that's cool but please don't assume your opinion has any value when you're talking about something that you are completely clueless about, that is all. Please continue making with the funny and don't ever mention JC2 again.

Babylon
12-03-2008, 10:15 PM
those overthrows should be touchdowns thats kind of one of the issues. he certainly didnt have a worse ol than josh freeman. i dont think hes a great nfl qb. hes a jay cutler at best dave carr at worst. he has some obvious sub top level traits some he cant do anything about. but if you put a good team around and dont make him carry you hes a serviceable guy who can maybe do something. if i were detroit id be more inclned to try to move the pick get some players or if they cant move it take a tackle and try to accumulate some players. theyll be bad and there will be qbs next year high and theyll be there regardless of matt stafford. i like stafford enbough to use a rd 1 pick. but there has to be some parameters and one is he doesnt play until the teams at least decent. hes not even a flacco or ryan level talent. generally its do not pass on top shelf qbs, but i dont think hes a top shelf qb. he might be average to a little better than average nfl qb. and thats fine. but not on a bad team with the #1 pick. its going to end poorly


I actually think Detroit should move the pick too. They don't need to tie top pick money up for a 20 year old QB that might have to sit for a year. I think what is more likely to happen is a team that is a great QB away from being a legit superbowl team, like a Carolina or a Tampa, should make the investment.

RaiderNation
12-03-2008, 10:25 PM
Bradford>Stafford

I have a bad feeling about Stafford in the NFL , especially going to the Lions. Yes he has a strong arm but hes not very accurate. When he went against a NFL like defence in the Flordia game he was horrible ( 3 ints 0tds).

As for Bradford, he is going to be a good QB in the NFL IMO. He has a a pretty nice arm and is accuarate. When he played a NFL like defense against Texas he has 5 tds and 2 ints and 71% comp ( 1 int was in the 2nd but Im pretty sure the other was when they were down and he had to force the ball to try and score)

Geason Noceur
12-04-2008, 01:07 AM
Bradford>Stafford

I have a bad feeling about Stafford in the NFL , especially going to the Lions. Yes he has a strong arm but hes not very accurate. When he went against a NFL like defence in the Flordia game he was horrible ( 3 ints 0tds).

As for Bradford, he is going to be a good QB in the NFL IMO. He has a a pretty nice arm and is accuarate. When he played a NFL like defense against Texas he has 5 tds and 2 ints and 71% comp ( 1 int was in the 2nd but Im pretty sure the other was when they were down and he had to force the ball to try and score)

Bradford plays behind was probably the best offensive line in all of college football. I doubt that even in his worst day that he has been under the same pressure that Stafford is regularly under behind that tattered O-line made up of undersized freshmen and sophomores. When a pitiful defense like UGA's (check out the 400+ yards rushing they allowed their last game), gives up 30+ points in a half, that's when a QB has to force the ball to try and score. Exactly the situation that Stafford was put in. Everyone and their grandmothers in the stadium knew that the Bulldogs had to throw the ball to try and catch up. Besides, anyone who watched that game knows that two of the INTs where not him. One was a tipped pass, and the other bounced off one of his WR's hands.

Also, most people who follow college football would be willing to bet any team in the SEC sees a few more NFL-like defenses in a regular basis than a team in the Big 12 does.

Habibi
12-04-2008, 01:26 AM
do you find this to be a large range?

:D

He already garnered enough shock value with the rest of his post. A range of Peyton Manning and Ryan Leaf would have simply tipped the scales.

Habibi
12-04-2008, 01:29 AM
Bradford>Stafford

I have a bad feeling about Stafford in the NFL , especially going to the Lions. Yes he has a strong arm but hes not very accurate. When he went against a NFL like defence in the Flordia game he was horrible ( 3 ints 0tds).

As for Bradford, he is going to be a good QB in the NFL IMO. He has a a pretty nice arm and is accuarate. When he played a NFL like defense against Texas he has 5 tds and 2 ints and 71% comp ( 1 int was in the 2nd but Im pretty sure the other was when they were down and he had to force the ball to try and score)

Did you watch the game, or are you simply restating the stat-line? Those three interception came in the second half where his team was down by more than 30 points. They're the product of a defense knowing the offense is going to pass.

Zyro_1014
12-04-2008, 01:49 AM
How many times where you dropped on your head as a child? He's a very good young QB who's winning his division in his third season, with an atrocious defense and no running game how is that not an impressive achievement. He's clearly not the best QB in the NFL yet, but he's playing his way into that second tier at a young age with little help, he's going to the playoffs with that roster, that is considered winning.

As for Big Ben, he got a ring as a rookie but he did almost nothing for them all season long and had a great defense and running game. Sure he was there and he did somethings for them in the playoffs but how terrible he was in the SB showed you how good that team was around him. Give Cutler that team and the Broncos are undefeated right now. No player in the NFL plays in a bubble, everyone is affected by their surroundings and to ignore that is just simply ignorance of the fundamentals of the game of football, that's cool but please don't assume your opinion has any value when you're talking about something that you are completely clueless about, that is all. Please continue making with the funny and don't ever mention JC2 again.

thats not true, he went 15-1 as a rookie. didnt get his ring until his 3rd year? i think is what it was.

Menardo75
12-04-2008, 01:58 AM
thats not true, he went 15-1 as a rookie. didnt get his ring until his 3rd year? i think is what it was.

Nope second.

Habibi
12-04-2008, 02:12 AM
thats not true, he went 15-1 as a rookie. didnt get his ring until his 3rd year? i think is what it was.

Actually, Roethlisberger went 13-0 as a rookie. The first three games were started by Maddox.

Monomach
12-04-2008, 02:28 AM
when he does some serious winning ill maybe change my thought. ben roethlisberger had a sb ring at 23. i agree they are awful hes their best player and thats not enough at this point. winning a division where every other team goes 6-10 or worse doesnt excite me either. i dont think stafford is better. thats my problem with stafford. hes not better than a career sub 500 qb

I don't get it. Are you a second account that some normal member uses to have fun with everyone else?

Monomach
12-04-2008, 02:29 AM
I'll add a couple of points

- Outstanding mechanics, from his footwork to his delivery.
- Has a good feel for the pocket, and absorbs hits well.
- Has uncanny touch and anticipation on intermediate and long routes.
- Displays complete control of his offense, and the coaching staff trust him with making several audibles at the LOS.
- Plays in a pro-style offense, which would reduce the transition period at the next level.

Anyone who says arm strength is his only positive clearly has not seen the guy play.

One more: Does not need some years to forget a spread offense.

georgiafan
12-04-2008, 07:20 AM
I just don't get why people say Stafford has accuracy problems those people need to watch the game and do something other then look at stats. He did miss some guys last year, but he has been much better this year. I guess people think completing 70% of your passes to wide open targets makes a QB accurate.

giantsfan
12-04-2008, 12:59 PM
thats not true, he went 15-1 as a rookie. didnt get his ring until his 3rd year? i think is what it was.

My bad he got his ring his second season but that was still a very very strong team around him and as we saw in the Superbowl they didn't need ben to even play mediocre to win it.

STARHEATHER
12-04-2008, 07:25 PM
hes winning the division becuase every team in it, including them is awful. theyre the arizona cardinals of the afc. playoffs by default. ben roethlisberger had won 5 playoff games and a super bowl by the time of his 3rd year. i dont go by stats at the nfl level, especvially when it comes to QBs. i go by winning. drew brees will throw for 5k yards this year and theyre going to be a non playoff team again. it just isnt my measuring stick. it aonly shows for me a level of aptitude. i believe stafford has the ability to be an nfl starter. he ust isnt going to be great. and the yera before ben got there, they went 6-10.

Monomach
12-04-2008, 08:08 PM
hes winning the division becuase every team in it, including them is awful. theyre the arizona cardinals of the afc. playoffs by default. ben roethlisberger had won 5 playoff games and a super bowl by the time of his 3rd year. i dont go by stats at the nfl level, especvially when it comes to QBs. i go by winning. drew brees will throw for 5k yards this year and theyre going to be a non playoff team again. it just isnt my measuring stick. it aonly shows for me a level of aptitude. i believe stafford has the ability to be an nfl starter. he ust isnt going to be great. and the yera before ben got there, they went 6-10.

So you'd like to continue your argument by saying that Drew Brees is not a good quarterback?

Marino never won a super bowl. Did he suck, too?

Zyro_1014
12-04-2008, 08:48 PM
So you'd like to continue your argument by saying that Drew Brees is not a good quarterback?

Marino never won a super bowl. Did he suck, too?

Dont ask him that? lol

TheGM
12-08-2008, 03:25 PM
No offense but no one has said anything about either QB to make me a believer. I think both guys are talented but neither make me think they have "it" like Eli and Matt did. Bradford is growing on me, he reminds me of Tom Brady in terms of his style of play. He stays deep on the pocket (which aids pass protection), has a fast delivery, manipulates the secondary with his eyes and pump fakes, and throws a very catchable ball. I don't know about his competitiveness (since they score a ton and win big) or his intangibles. Stafford has the big arm, solid fundamental, and experience in a pro-style offense making pro reads, and his leadership. The film I've seen lacks the kind of performances where he puts the team on his back and dominates in a way that says I'm elite. If Bradford wins a national championship he will come out. If I had to choose one to start tomorrow I'd take Stafford but, Bradford seems to have more upside IMO.

TheGM
12-08-2008, 03:33 PM
Please someone give me a comparison that doesn't involve stats, conference, or co-stars. There is more to being a QB than arm strength (see Chad Pennington and the dolphins) What teams system/supporting cast would be ideal for either guy? For example Stafford seems like a better fit for Minnesota than Bradford on the flip side Bradford seems like he would do very well in Arizona. Help me out.

PossumBoy9
12-08-2008, 06:25 PM
The fact that the OU line gives Bradford all the time in the world to throw the ball and the fact that the Big-12 is basically a league of quick underneath routes i would hope his passing % would be better than Staffords'.

I think a better comparison for Stafford would be Matt Ryan, Ryan was in the high 50s (Stafford low 60s) as far as passing % goes and had a pretty high number of ints. The common thread between the two was fairly average receivers. Ryan's O-line was pretty decent whereas Stafford's is inexperienced (being charitable).

Good post.

illmatic74
12-08-2008, 06:44 PM
No offense but no one has said anything about either QB to make me a believer. I think both guys are talented but neither make me think they have "it" like Eli and Matt did. Bradford is growing on me, he reminds me of Tom Brady in terms of his style of play. He stays deep on the pocket (which aids pass protection), has a fast delivery, manipulates the secondary with his eyes and pump fakes, and throws a very catchable ball. I don't know about his competitiveness (since they score a ton and win big) or his intangibles. Stafford has the big arm, solid fundamental, and experience in a pro-style offense making pro reads, and his leadership. The film I've seen lacks the kind of performances where he puts the team on his back and dominates in a way that says I'm elite. If Bradford wins a national championship he will come out. If I had to choose one to start tomorrow I'd take Stafford but, Bradford seems to have more upside IMO.Stafford carried his team against Georgia Tech. It is not his fault that the defense gave up 400 yards rushing.

giantsfan
12-08-2008, 10:07 PM
hes winning the division becuase every team in it, including them is awful. theyre the arizona cardinals of the afc. playoffs by default. ben roethlisberger had won 5 playoff games and a super bowl by the time of his 3rd year. i dont go by stats at the nfl level, especvially when it comes to QBs. i go by winning. drew brees will throw for 5k yards this year and theyre going to be a non playoff team again. it just isnt my measuring stick. it aonly shows for me a level of aptitude. i believe stafford has the ability to be an nfl starter. he ust isnt going to be great. and the yera before ben got there, they went 6-10.

And the year before going 6-10 they were a playoff team with tommy freaking maddox as their QB, surely his awesome play was the only reason they made the playoffs that year.

as for cutler i'm going to ask you how many starters you can name on their defense without looking them up, since I'm certain you've seen enough youtube clips of cutler to form an opinion on him you'll also ahve seen enough clips of his defense being tossed around like rag dolls.

Please someone give me a comparison that doesn't involve stats, conference, or co-stars. There is more to being a QB than arm strength (see Chad Pennington and the dolphins) What teams system/supporting cast would be ideal for either guy? For example Stafford seems like a better fit for Minnesota than Bradford on the flip side Bradford seems like he would do very well in Arizona. Help me out.

I think Bradford would be great on a teama like arizona with wide receivers that are so good at make plays after the catch, that said as long as a team doesn't force him to go deep to often I think he'll be able to transition quickly to the NFL. A WCO would be great or a possession passing game like Brady and under weis would also help his transition. as for stafford I feel like he's a QB with the ability to do it all if your patient with him. You'll want some guys who can go deep simply because he can go deep and taking some shots will give him confidence and force defenses to back off. He'll struggle early really controlling the tempo and being able to command a shorter passing game, but he's also a guy who can succeed in a lot of systems, some longer drops with vertical shots will help him early but with time there's nothing he can't do from the position.

georgiafan
12-09-2008, 07:34 AM
The film I've seen lacks the kind of performances where he puts the team on his back and dominates in a way that says I'm elite.

Check out the GT, Kentucky and Auburn games. If it wasn't for Stafford GT wins by 30 and both Kentucky and Auburn are loses making UGA at best 7-5 for the year.

Can anyone else aleady tell that ESPN is going to have this same topic with Kiper and Mcshay arguing who who is the better QB. I also like how everyone says Stafford isn't as good as QB prospect as Ryan when most the people on here bashed Ryan last year.

herschel4heisman
12-09-2008, 11:47 AM
I'm a huge UGA fan and I understand the financial aspects of this decision but I really think if Stafford comes out this year he'll be a bust as opposed to next year, when he'll have an invaluable year of additional seasoning.

Taking a QB at the top of the draft is already risky but when you add in the component of drafting an underclassman, that makes it WAY too risky. Besides Michael Vick, and even he didn't improve that much, there hasn't been one underclassman QB drafted in the top 10 or even 1st round, in the last 30 years that amounted to anything.

As for Stafford, there are parts of his game that he definitely needs to work on, and it's best to work on it in college when you're better than most everyine else than in the pros when you're playing catch up in terms of learning playbook, adjusting to better athletes and more complex defenses. There'll be times in the game where Stafford will make a decision to throw a ball that leaves me, as UGA fan, scratching my head. But beyond the momentary lapses in decision making, the big thing he needs to work on is his accuracy on deep throws where the WR has to run under the ball and catch it. I seems like he hit 1 out of every 5 of those throws. All year, couple of times a game, AJ Green or Massaquoi would be behind the defense and Stafford would either ovethrow them or severely underthrow. Most of the time it was overthrow, but he hardly hit them in stride. That would frustrate me. I just think that if Stafford comes out next year, he'll have a much greater chance of realizing his massive potential as opposed to coming out this year where I think he'll be a bust. Same thing goes for Bradford. I don't believe in drafting underclassman QBs.

Halsey
12-09-2008, 01:52 PM
I'm a huge UGA fan and I understand the financial aspects of this decision but I really think if Stafford comes out this year he'll be a bust as opposed to next year, when he'll have an invaluable year of additional seasoning.

Taking a QB at the top of the draft is already risky but when you add in the component of drafting an underclassman, that makes it WAY too risky. Besides Michael Vick, and even he didn't improve that much, there hasn't been one underclassman QB drafted in the top 10 or even 1st round, in the last 30 years that amounted to anything.

As for Stafford, there are parts of his game that he definitely needs to work on, and it's best to work on it in college when you're better than most everyine else than in the pros when you're playing catch up in terms of learning playbook, adjusting to better athletes and more complex defenses. There'll be times in the game where Stafford will make a decision to throw a ball that leaves me, as UGA fan, scratching my head. But beyond the momentary lapses in decision making, the big thing he needs to work on is his accuracy on deep throws where the WR has to run under the ball and catch it. I seems like he hit 1 out of every 5 of those throws. All year, couple of times a game, AJ Green or Massaquoi would be behind the defense and Stafford would either ovethrow them or severely underthrow. Most of the time it was overthrow, but he hardly hit them in stride. That would frustrate me. I just think that if Stafford comes out next year, he'll have a much greater chance of realizing his massive potential as opposed to coming out this year where I think he'll be a bust. Same thing goes for Bradford. I don't believe in drafting underclassman QBs.

It doesn't seem like many underclassman QB's have come out in the first place. Players can work on their games as pros. I have a hard time imagining Vick, Vince Young, Tommy Maddox, JeMarcus Russell or Todd Marinovich being that much better because they went back to college. I think Stafford will be alright whether he stays or declares.

Habibi
12-09-2008, 02:06 PM
I'm a huge UGA fan and I understand the financial aspects of this decision but I really think if Stafford comes out this year he'll be a bust as opposed to next year, when he'll have an invaluable year of additional seasoning.

Nonsense. Matthew Stafford already has his three years, 35+ games started. He had the same amount of actual game experience as most of the senior QBs, if not more. A year or two sitting and learning an NFL offense under NFL coaches will do him more than playing another season in college.

georgiafan
12-09-2008, 02:15 PM
Nonsense. Matthew Stafford already has his three years, 35+ games started. He had the same amount of actual game experience as most of the senior QBs, if not more. A year or two sitting and learning an NFL offense under NFL coaches will do him more than playing another season in college.

Bingo, most QB's are forced to stay for there senior year since they don't start as a freshman. Stafford will have more starts then any top senior QB if he comes out this year. Sure a senior year could help him, but when your a lock for the top 10 it's hard to come back for your senior year. Espically when others at your position in recent years have droped and they could be a salarey cap. Also the weak senior class at QB and next year's could be much better.

CashmoneyDrew
12-09-2008, 02:46 PM
Taking a QB at the top of the draft is already risky but when you add in the component of drafting an underclassman, that makes it WAY too risky. Besides Michael Vick, and even he didn't improve that much, there hasn't been one underclassman QB drafted in the top 10 or even 1st round, in the last 30 years that amounted to anything.



Ever heard of Ben Roethlisberger? Aaron Rodgers isn't doing half bad either.

georgiafan
12-09-2008, 03:30 PM
Does anyone have a complete list of the underclassmen QB's who have came out in recent years?

herschel4heisman
12-09-2008, 03:58 PM
Ever heard of Ben Roethlisberger? Aaron Rodgers isn't doing half bad either.

Ooops. My bad. I completely forgot about Big Ben and I could have sworn that Aaron Rodgers was a senior. Well, my error seems to be my cue to keep quiet on this subject. Anyway here's the list of QBs who have been taken in the 1st round since 1990:

2008
3rd pick - Matt Ryan
18th pick - Joe Flacco

2007
1st pick - Jamarcus Russell
22nd pick - Brady Quinn

2006
3rd pick - Vince Young
10th pick - Matt Leinart
11th pick - Jay Cutler

2005
1st pick - Alex Smith
24th pick - Aaron Rodgers
25th pick - Jason Campbell

2004
1st pick - Eli Manning
4th pick - Phillip Rivers
11th pick - Ben Roethlisberger
22nd pick - JP Losman

2003
1st pick - Carson Palmer
7th pick - Byron Leftwich
19th pick - Kyle Boller
22nd pick - Rex Grossman

2002
1st pick - David Carr
3rd pick - Joey Harrington
32nd - Patrick Ramsey

2001
1st pick - Michael Vick

2000
18th pick - Chad Pennington

1999
1st pick Tim Couch
2nd pick Donovan McNabb
3rd pick Akili Smith
11th pick Daunte Culpepper
12th pick Cade McNown

1998
1st pick - Peyton Manning
2nd pick - Ryan Leaf

1997
26th pick - Jim Druckenmiller

1996
None

1995
3rd pick - Steve McNair
5th pick - Kerry Collins

1994
3rd pick - Heath Shuler
6th pick -Trent Dilfer

1993
1st pick - Drew Bledsoe
2nd pick - Rick Mirer

1992
6th pick - David Klingler
25th - Tommy Maddox

1991
16th pick - Dan McGwire
24th pick - Todd Marinovich

1990
1st pick - Jeff George
7th pick - Andre Ware

Geason Noceur
12-09-2008, 05:35 PM
It doesn't seem like many underclassman QB's have come out in the first place. Players can work on their games as pros. I have a hard time imagining Vick, Vince Young, Tommy Maddox, JeMarcus Russell or Todd Marinovich being that much better because they went back to college. I think Stafford will be alright whether he stays or declares.

I agree. Many of the underclassmen that left early and failed were either headcases (Vick, Leaf, Marinovich, etc) or came from offenses, such as the spread, that padded their stats and didn't prepare them well for the pro game (i.e. A. Smith, Young). No amount of extra college time would have helped those guys. Russell is a different case though. He was never considered the sharpest tool in the shed, he held out signing his rookie contract, didn't play the first year, and then he showed up overweight to camp. Not exactly a recipe for success.

Stafford doesn't have those problems. He's not a headcase, plays in a pro style offense and has played in over 35 games in the defense-oriented SEC. I think he has a better chance to succeed than his predecessors, but whatever team drafts him is going to have to be patient with him. He's the definintion of a gunslinger, and will make outstanding throws mixed in with some bad throws until he gets them out of his system, but the upside is tremendous if you know how to develop it.

illmatic74
12-09-2008, 05:44 PM
Ooops. My bad. I completely forgot about Big Ben and I could have sworn that Aaron Rodgers was a senior. Well, my error seems to be my cue to keep quiet on this subject. Anyway here's the list of QBs who have been taken in the 1st round since 1990:

2008
3rd pick - Matt Ryan
18th pick - Joe Flacco

2007
1st pick - Jamarcus Russell JR
22nd pick - Brady Quinn

2006
3rd pick - Vince Young
10th pick - Matt Leinart JR
11th pick - Jay Cutler

2005
1st pick - Alex Smith JR
24th pick - Aaron Rodgers JR
25th pick - Jason Campbell

2004
1st pick - Eli Manning
4th pick - Phillip Rivers
11th pick - Ben Roethlisberger JR
22nd pick - JP Losman

2003
1st pick - Carson Palmer
7th pick - Byron Leftwich
19th pick - Kyle Boller
22nd pick - Rex Grossman JR

2002
1st pick - David Carr
3rd pick - Joey Harrington
32nd - Patrick Ramsey

2001
1st pick - Michael Vick SO

2000
18th pick - Chad Pennington

1999
1st pick Tim Couch JR
2nd pick Donovan McNabb
3rd pick Akili Smith
11th pick Daunte Culpepper
12th pick Cade McNown

1998
1st pick - Peyton Manning
2nd pick - Ryan Leaf JR

1997
26th pick - Jim Druckenmiller

1996
None

1995
3rd pick - Steve McNair
5th pick - Kerry Collins

1994
3rd pick - Heath Shuler
6th pick -Trent Dilfer

1993
1st pick - Drew Bledsoe JR
2nd pick - Rick Mirer

1992
6th pick - David Klingler
25th - Tommy Maddox SO

1991
16th pick - Dan McGwire
24th pick - Todd Marinovich SO

1990
1st pick - Jeff George JR
7th pick - Andre Ware JRHow come Dan McGwire is never on these biggest bust lists.

Menardo75
12-09-2008, 07:38 PM
If Stafford is developed the right way I think he will be a star. QB's that are that young should be held out early for fear of having their confidence shaken (Alex Smith). If Stafford can sit for a year and have a chance to mature I think he will be a stud. There is no reason why he would'nt be, he has all the tools. He has been held back this year by very poor offensive line play. Yes QB is the most important position. Without a consistant o-line though none of that matters.

If you asked me a year ago I would say the same thing about Bradford as I do Stafford. After seeing Joe Flacco though come out of a similiar system and have this much of an istant impact, I don't know what to think anymore. He has all the tools not to mention be is surrounded by great talent. I think the real test for him will be if he can carry a pro team with less playmakers than his current team has.

Bottom line any QB is a crapshoot. All you can do is try to put them in the best situation you can and see what happens.

SenorGato
12-09-2008, 07:58 PM
Ever heard of Ben Roethlisberger? Aaron Rodgers isn't doing half bad either.

So 3 in 30 years?

It's still not a very good thing.

The maturity it takes to be an NFL QB is just ridiculous. The pressure from fans and media alone is worse for an NFL QB than any other position in any other sport in America, and you add "high first round pick" or even "first round pick" into the equation and it only gets worse.

Personally, I hate the idea of Jr. QB's coming out. Being an NFL QB is a career choice, and it's not an easy road to take. Guys like Stafford, Bradford, Sanchez, and Clausen (amongst others) should think long and hard about this.

I don't even know why Stafford has to come out...or why its a given that he will...isn't his family already rich anyway? Why would he want to give up such a good life (rich, college QB for an hardcore football school) for a job he can probably get next year when he's more prepped for it anyway? Even if he IS mature enough for the NFL now, I still don't see the fire. If he is mature enough for it, he knows exactly what he's getting into, and I'm sure that would make any 21 year old with a good head hesitate a little. It's not like he can't have a long career and make millions in the NFL if he stays one more year. Plus, the way Georgia fell this year has to bite at the guy a little bit.

Sanchez doesn't even have a reason to come out. That'd just be plain dumb on his part.

Clausen isn't going to anyway. Bradford...yea there's like 0 reason for him to come out either.

Sure that rookie cap is potentially coming up down the road...that should only be a factor not a decision maker for these guys. Most of them are pretty damn well off anyway, and can afford to finish school and grow a bit more.

illmatic74
12-09-2008, 08:06 PM
So 3 in 30 years?

It's still not a very good thing.

The maturity it takes to be an NFL QB is just ridiculous. The pressure from fans and media alone is worse for an NFL QB than any other position in any other sport in America, and you add "high first round pick" or even "first round pick" into the equation and it only gets worse.

Personally, I hate the idea of Jr. QB's coming out. Being an NFL QB is a career choice, and it's not an easy road to take. Guys like Stafford, Bradford, Sanchez, and Clausen (amongst others) should think long and hard about this.

I don't even know why Stafford has to come out...or why its a given that he will...isn't his family already rich anyway? Why would he want to give up such a good life (rich, college QB for an hardcore football school) for a job he can probably get next year when he's more prepped for it anyway? Even if he IS mature enough for the NFL now, I still don't see the fire. If he is mature enough for it, he knows exactly what he's getting into, and I'm sure that would make any 21 year old with a good head hesitate a little. It's not like he can't have a long career and make millions in the NFL if he stays one more year. Plus, the way Georgia fell this year has to bite at the guy a little bit.

Sanchez doesn't even have a reason to come out. That'd just be plain dumb on his part.

Clausen isn't going to anyway. Bradford...yea there's like 0 reason for him to come out either.

Sure that rookie cap is potentially coming up down the road...that should only be a factor not a decision maker for these guys. Most of them are pretty damn well off anyway, and can afford to finish school and grow a bit more.No matter what next year he is going to be playing football. One situation he gets paid more money than he dreams of the other he is not. Also does anyone think if Peyton Manning entered the NFL after his junior year does anyone think he wouldn't be succesful? It is all about the player and the situation they enter.

SenorGato
12-09-2008, 08:17 PM
No matter what next year he is going to be playing football. One situation he gets paid more money than he dreams of the other he is not. Also does anyone think if Peyton Manning entered the NFL after his junior year does anyone think he wouldn't be succesful? It is all about the player and the situation they enter.

True. But Manning wouldn't have landed in a bad situation...I do believe that would have been the Parcells' Jets...oh how things would be changed...:(

On the other hand, none of these guys are on the same level as Peyton Manning.

illmatic74
12-09-2008, 08:19 PM
True. But Manning wouldn't have landed in a bad situation...I do believe that would have been the Parcells' Jets...oh how things would be changed...:(How different my life as a Jets Fan would have been.

Habibi
12-09-2008, 08:33 PM
Bradford...yea there's like 0 reason for him to come out either.

He has every reason to leave. If he comes back he'll have to battle with Mark Sanchez, Nate Davis, Colt McCoy, and Tim Tebow for a 1st round grade. That's not a good business move on his part. Furthermore, he's losing his LT, LG, his best WR, and likely his TE.

SenorGato
12-09-2008, 08:41 PM
He has every reason to leave. If he comes back he'll have to battle with Mark Sanchez, Nate Davis, Colt McCoy, and Tim Tebow for a 1st round grade. That's not a good business move on his part. Furthermore, he's losing his LT, OG, his best WR, and likely his TE.

No offense to any of those guys, but he's a better prospect than all of those guys. Of them, I think only Sanchez has a legit shot to match or pass him.

Habibi
12-09-2008, 08:46 PM
No offense to any of those guys, but he's a better prospect than all of those guys. Of them, I think only Sanchez has a legit shot to match or pass him.

I don't know that he's a better prospect than Davis, Sanchez, or McCoy. He's better than Tebow, however. That's besides the point - the more legitimate QB prospects the lower his value is. Supply and demand.

JLaw45
12-09-2008, 08:51 PM
How come Dan McGwire is never on these biggest bust lists.

Everytime I mention him to somebody I get blank stares. They brighten up when I tell him that he was the tallest QB to play in the league and he was Mark's brother, but still.
I guess he's ok with that.

Menardo75
12-09-2008, 10:48 PM
He has every reason to leave. If he comes back he'll have to battle with Mark Sanchez, Nate Davis, Colt McCoy, and Tim Tebow for a 1st round grade. That's not a good business move on his part. Furthermore, he's losing his LT, LG, his best WR, and likely his TE.

Sanchez would challenge him for it, with Nate Davis third. Niether McCoy or Tebow will be first rounders.

Iamcanadian
12-09-2008, 11:14 PM
I'm a huge UGA fan and I understand the financial aspects of this decision but I really think if Stafford comes out this year he'll be a bust as opposed to next year, when he'll have an invaluable year of additional seasoning.

Taking a QB at the top of the draft is already risky but when you add in the component of drafting an underclassman, that makes it WAY too risky. Besides Michael Vick, and even he didn't improve that much, there hasn't been one underclassman QB drafted in the top 10 or even 1st round, in the last 30 years that amounted to anything.

As for Stafford, there are parts of his game that he definitely needs to work on, and it's best to work on it in college when you're better than most everyone else than in the pros when you're playing catch up in terms of learning playbook, adjusting to better athletes and more complex defenses. There'll be times in the game where Stafford will make a decision to throw a ball that leaves me, as UGA fan, scratching my head. But beyond the momentary lapses in decision making, the big thing he needs to work on is his accuracy on deep throws where the WR has to run under the ball and catch it. I seems like he hit 1 out of every 5 of those throws. All year, couple of times a game, AJ Green or Massaquoi would be behind the defense and Stafford would either ovethrow them or severely underthrow. Most of the time it was overthrow, but he hardly hit them in stride. That would frustrate me. I just think that if Stafford comes out next year, he'll have a much greater chance of realizing his massive potential as opposed to coming out this year where I think he'll be a bust. Same thing goes for Bradford. I don't believe in drafting underclassman QBs.

There have only been 3 underclassmen enter the draft previously as juniors. Vick, Alex Smith and Russell. Only 1 has completely flopped so far. Russell is just in his 1st year of starting and he's been put in a tough situation in Oakland but could still reach super stardom in time. Remember the light didn't go on for Eli until his 4th year.
Some junior QB's look like they will declare including Stafford and probably Bradshaw and Tebow. NFL GM's will have no choice but to draft them high and at least 2 of them will go top 5 no matter the risk. The rewards are just too great to pass on drafting a potential franchise QB.
Obviously, you are going to have to tack on a year more when determining when they are likely to succeed. Normally, it takes 3 sometimes 4 years for a QB to be truly effective. Of course some make it right away but they are rare when you examine the successful QB's from the last 15 to 20 years.
The junior QB's are going to sit a year for sure. They will likely start in year 2 but it may be year 4 before you see a finished product. I don't think it will effect their success rate one iota. They obviously have the physical ability or they wouldn't be 1st rounders so it is going to come down to their mental makeup. If they are very strong mentally, they WILL succeed, if they lack mental toughness, they will fail whether they come out as juniors or seniors. It won't matter when.
You must also remember that both Ryan and Flacco had breakout years in their senior seasons. Before that they were fringe 1st rounders if that, so judging junior QB's on production alone isn't going to tell you a whole lot. Yes, the risk may be greater but as I mentioned if junior QB's continue to declare, GM's are just going to have to get used to it but I don't think you'll see them passing on them because if they succeed at a high level, the embarrassment in having passed on them probably costs them their job.

MidwayMonster31
12-09-2008, 11:34 PM
One important thing is that Stafford has 3 years of starting experience. Even though the success rate for underclassmen quarterbacks is not very good (http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Article.php?Page=807), most of them only have 2 years of experience.
It also takes a lot of maturity to be able to handle playing in the NFL, being a top pick as well as living life on your own. There are far too many individual differences. I also agree with Menardo75, that you have to put them in the best situation that you can.

herschel4heisman
12-10-2008, 09:16 AM
Here's a list of the underclassmen QBs who have been drafted since 1990. Taking Russell And Young out of consideration since their careers are still very young, only 3 (Bledsoe, Roethlisberger and Rodgers), and perhaps Vick and Dilfer, justified being a 1st round pick. I'll look up how many career starts they had when I get some time

2007
Jamarcus Russell

2006
Vince Young

2005
Alex Smith
Aaron Rodgers

2004
Ben Roethlisberger

2003
Rex Grossman

2001
Michael Vick

1999
Tim Couch
Akili Smith

1998
Ryan Leaf

1994
Heath Shuler
Trent Dilfer

1993
Drew Bledsoe

1992
Tommy Maddox

1991
Todd Marinovich

1990
Jeff George
Andre Ware

JRTPlaya21
12-10-2008, 09:37 AM
Here's a list of the underclassmen QBs who have been drafted since 1990. Taking Russell And Young out of consideration since their careers are still very young, only 3 (Bledsoe, Roethlisberger and Rodgers), and perhaps Vick and Dilfer, justified being a 1st round pick. I'll look up how many career starts they had when I get some time

2007
Jamarcus Russell

2006
Vince Young

2005
Alex Smith
Aaron Rodgers

2004
Ben Roethlisberger

2003
Rex Grossman

2001
Michael Vick

1999
Tim Couch
Akili Smith

1998
Ryan Leaf

1994
Heath Shuler
Trent Dilfer

1993
Drew Bledsoe

1992
Tommy Maddox

1991
Todd Marinovich

1990
Jeff George
Andre Ware

Great picture of my third cousin back in his heyday. And no I've never met him lol. His parents are really nice though.

TheDirtyWord
12-10-2008, 02:51 PM
The one thing I'll say with regard to Bradford coming out is that it seems that QB's should strike while the iron is hot.

I look at Matt Leinart, Brian Brohm and even Andre Woodson and I think about how highly regarded they were in their junior years All had first round grades and Leinart for a long while appeared pegged for a #1 overall selection.

But staying in college seemed to 'spoil their milk'. What's interesting is that Leinart is a back-up completing his 3rd NFL year, Brohm is 3rd string behind Matt Flynn and Woodson is out of the NFL...so the scouts obviously got it right in terms of downgrading them.

But I've got to think that if Leinart comes out after his junior year when he was the toast of college football - he's a shoo-in to be selected first (over Alex Smith!).

For Bradford - he's losing alot of his great weapons and protection. Can he top this year? Heisman Trophy runner-up or winner (I hedge on the latter) and National Championship Game appearance. That's a tough act to follow up and if he doesn't, he'll also be downgraded.

Situation is different for Stafford. He's got physical tools scouts fantasize about and has shown himself to be a hard worker. So his stock I think would stay high regardless. But he's been pegged as a future Top 5 pick pretty much since he walked onto the UGA campus.

Bradford? I think not. People are talking about him in Top 5/10ville. I just don't think you pass that up because such grades can be fleeting.

Babylon
12-10-2008, 03:28 PM
The one thing I'll say with regard to Bradford coming out is that it seems that QB's should strike while the iron is hot.

I look at Matt Leinart, Brian Brohm and even Andre Woodson and I think about how highly regarded they were in their junior years All had first round grades and Leinart for a long while appeared pegged for a #1 overall selection.

But staying in college seemed to 'spoil their milk'. What's interesting is that Leinart is a back-up completing his 3rd NFL year, Brohm is 3rd string behind Matt Flynn and Woodson is out of the NFL...so the scouts obviously got it right in terms of downgrading them.

But I've got to think that if Leinart comes out after his junior year when he was the toast of college football - he's a shoo-in to be selected first (over Alex Smith!).

For Bradford - he's losing alot of his great weapons and protection. Can he top this year? Heisman Trophy runner-up or winner (I hedge on the latter) and National Championship Game appearance. That's a tough act to follow up and if he doesn't, he'll also be downgraded.

Situation is different for Stafford. He's got physical tools scouts fantasize about and has shown himself to be a hard worker. So his stock I think would stay high regardless. But he's been pegged as a future Top 5 pick pretty much since he walked onto the UGA campus.

Bradford? I think not. People are talking about him in Top 5/10ville. I just don't think you pass that up because such grades can be fleeting.

Good points all but i think you're talking about the NBA model where players come out early even when they aren't ready. I think if Bradford's in it for the money he comes out, if it's getting better he stays. Either way he'll go fairly early in the draft.

TheDirtyWord
12-10-2008, 08:28 PM
Good points all but i think you're talking about the NBA model where players come out early even when they aren't ready. I think if Bradford's in it for the money he comes out, if it's getting better he stays. Either way he'll go fairly early in the draft.

It's not just money, but organizational commitment. If you are a 2nd round draft choice as a QB, the level of expectation and investment you have from your team is significantly less than what a Top5/10 pick will receive.

Bradford is high now, but IMO, he's not a 'tools' QB like Stafford, he's a performance QB who has played at a high level. If the pundits and what not start picking away at him, I could see his stock falling.

While you can categorize that as a 'take the money and run' stance...it's a lot of money.

Habibi
12-10-2008, 11:37 PM
Good points all but i think you're talking about the NBA model where players come out early even when they aren't ready. I think if Bradford's in it for the money he comes out, if it's getting better he stays. Either way he'll go fairly early in the draft.

There really is not much he can improve on at the college level that he can't by declaring and sitting a couple of years. He needs to build his frame and get stronger - both can be done with top-notch NFL training. He's already spent three years at Oklahoma, two dominating the competition, another year in a gimmicky offense against sub-par defenses isn't gonna do him any good.

Habibi
12-10-2008, 11:41 PM
It's not just money, but organizational commitment. If you are a 2nd round draft choice as a QB, the level of expectation and investment you have from your team is significantly less than what a Top5/10 pick will receive.

Bradford is high now, but IMO, he's not a 'tools' QB like Stafford, he's a performance QB who has played at a high level. If the pundits and what not start picking away at him, I could see his stock falling.

While you can categorize that as a 'take the money and run' stance...it's a lot of money.

Great point. Sam Bradford isn't considered a top-5 pick because of his tools - he's considered a top-5 pick because of what he's done at the college level, and if his production takes a hit then so will his stock. Production is not fixed, physical tools are, and he's average in that department.

illmatic74
12-10-2008, 11:43 PM
Great point. Sam Bradford isn't considered a top-5 pick because of his tools - he's considered a top-5 pick because of what he's done at the college level, and if his production takes a hit then so will his stock. Production is not fixed, physical tools are, and he's average in that department.His physical tools aren't that bad. He has an above average arm, quick release and he is sneaky athlectic.

TheGM
12-11-2008, 08:34 AM
Bradford is considered a top five pick. Both the Lions and the Chiefs need a QB bad, or at lest something to show the fans that they are working on it. Add in the fact that Colt McCoy is staying in school and Sanchez probably stay at USC who is the "2nd best" QB behind Stafford (assuming he is the best, my jury is still out)

Habibi
12-11-2008, 09:27 AM
His physical tools aren't that bad. He has an above average arm, quick release and he is sneaky athlectic.

I didn't his physical tools are bad. I said his physical tools are average, and if you have average physical tools and you production takes a hit so will your stock.