PDA

View Full Version : Graham Harrell


Race for the Heisman
11-08-2008, 10:21 PM
So let's be honest here. Aside from the system, why is Harrell not one of the top quarterbacks?

First, let me preface this by saying I am relatively new to this whole draftnik thing, and thus Harrell is the first system quarterback I've been infatuated with. But, with as good as he has played, I would argue he transcends the system. He does not play in a spread option where it's the much-derided 'one read and run.' I won't use statistics to argue my point because we all know the numbers are skewed by the system.

Despite that, just by watching him play, I would argue he is a first day pick. He has good arm strength. He's obviously no Stafford or Cutler but he can do the far-side out or a dig from the far hash. His accuracy is impeccable, not just his overall completion percentage, but the way he hits his receiver in stride or puts it on the back shoulder. Granted his offensive line has been excellent, but he moves well in and out of the pocket in response to pressure. His release is prototypical. He has good size at 6'3" (I don't think it would matter if he checked in a 6'2" - 6'1" might be a different story). He obviously has the tactical mental part down as evidenced by his ability to go through all his progressions down to the checkdown (and he has extensive experience doing this since he comes from a much vilified passing spread) and the way he beats blitzes by throwing to that side. He routinely identifies the best match-up on the field. He has great field vision and when he scrambles he always looks to extend the play until the last second possible.
Finally, he's willing to throw the ball away when nothing is on.

So is it just the system? I just don't get it, what does everyone else see that I do not?

Brent
11-08-2008, 10:30 PM
So is it just the system?
Having Crabtree doesnt hurt. That Tech team is stacked at WR and O-line. Keep in mind that he was almost benched for a backup before Crabtree broke out last year.

Race for the Heisman
11-08-2008, 10:33 PM
Having Crabtree doesnt hurt. That Tech team is stacked at WR and O-line. Keep in mind that he was almost benched for a backup before Crabtree broke out last year.

To me it just seems that the system hurts the stock of all of the players involved and as a whole they are given up on too quickly. Also, by the same token, I don't think every quarterback could make Crabtree look as good as he does.

Monomach
11-08-2008, 10:33 PM
Well, I just watched a game in which he consistently had 5-7 seconds to throw to the best WR in college football.

That says a lot.

SuperKevin
11-08-2008, 10:38 PM
I think Taylor Potts will be a much bigger pro prospect than Graham Harrell

Pokeys
11-08-2008, 10:39 PM
Lets enjoy watching him play now, because he won't be putting up these kind of numbers in the NFL. I don't know what to make of him as an NFL QB. hes almost never under center.

Race for the Heisman
11-08-2008, 10:49 PM
Lets enjoy watching him play now, because he won't be putting up these kind of numbers in the NFL. I don't know what to make of him as an NFL QB. hes almost never under center.

I forgot about that. It certainly is an issue, but not big enough to make up the gulf between my perception of him compared to the consensus.

MetSox17
11-08-2008, 11:10 PM
I forgot about that. It certainly is an issue, but not big enough to make up the gulf between my perception of him compared to the consensus.

It certainly will deter teams from drafting him early. He makes no NFL throws, his arm is a little suspect, and he doesn't really need to read defenses a ton.

BigBanger
11-09-2008, 12:39 AM
I forgot about that. It certainly is an issue, but not big enough to make up the gulf between my perception of him compared to the consensus.
Actually, its easier said than done.

I wouldn't put much stock in him having any kind of success at the next level. Colt Brennan was the closest I seen that I thought could have a future, but he was a **** up in life, fragile, and awkward delivery going against him. I thought he was a 6th rounder. Harrell? 6th rounder.

He obviously has the tactical mental part down as evidenced by his ability to go through all his progressions down to the checkdown (and he has extensive experience doing this since he comes from a much vilified passing spread) and the way he beats blitzes by throwing to that side.
We obviously see two different things. When I see him go to a check down its usually by design. He'll look deep down one hash. The RB leaks out, and keep in mind, when you already have 5 WRs out there, it's going to create a lot of open room for the RB. As he's looking deep down one side, he's looking for a WR to get wide open, if one receiver doesn't get open he throws it out to the flank. He's not looking at 4 different targets, then saying, "Okay, they're all covered, guess I better go to my check down."

He's really waiting for the WRs to get far enough down field so he can create room for the RB to make something happen after the catch. Usually the back is completely uncovered or matched up on a LB who can't stay with him. Its as simple a read they run, and he makes simple reads all game long. The NFL will be a wake up call. He'll see defenses he's never seen before. Coverages like he's never seen coverages. Pressures like he's never seen pressures.

STARHEATHER
11-09-2008, 01:50 AM
they throw bubble screens and intermediate routes only. hes only 6'. they play exclusively from the shotgun. now in the nfl you can win running every play from he shotgun. you cant win throwing short intermediate routes all day. youre not going to be able to stand back there unfettered and throw crossing routes. youre going to get pressured. youre going to have to stand in there with casey hampton and james harrison breathing down your neck every play and deliver accurate strikes with zip against dbs who all run sub 4.5 40s under siad duress. if he ev er gets a chance to step on an nfl field hes going to get creamed. hes going to get hurt, hes going to get picked, hes going toput the ball on the ground.hes going to get balls batted, tipped. you cant win throwing the type patterns he throws al day at the nfl level. he has 0 nfl qb traits. so unless hes the guy changing the nature of the qb position at the nfl level, not really much of a shot. i dont see many teams looking to pick up small weak armed qbs. he may be the greatest qb mind in history.may have great leadership and be destined for canonization. it makes no difference. he doesnt have the gifts.

Iamcanadian
11-09-2008, 01:52 AM
I think Harrell is definitely on the rise. No Texas Tech QB has ever beaten top 10 teams consistently if at all. It is one thing to put up those gaudy stats against a soft schedule but when you start beating top 10 teams and move up to perhaps the #1 ranking in the nation, your draft stock rises substantially no matter what system you play in.
Qualities such as leadership, mental toughness, football intellrgence, poise and intangibles all start to rise on his checklist. People way overestimate the importance of system.
Now it will all come down to how high thet rate his arm strength.
He'll need a lot of work on his delivery and release point and of course taking a ball from under center but he may still go on day 1 especially if no junior QB's declare.

STARHEATHER
11-09-2008, 02:06 AM
say youre team was playing the steelers this week. you know youre running game is probably going to be minimally effective. now add to that the fact that you bring bring 8 in the box because you dont have to worry about getting beat vertically becuase harrel cant do it. now the steelers have 8 in the box against you with no threat of you running the ball or beating them vertically. you know whats going to happen. theyre going to bring the house. every single play. polumalu and harrison and timmoms and woodley flying at you from all angles. and youre going to put graham harrel under there and believe that anything even remotely close to resembling a positive offensive situation is going to happen. just think about putting him out there gainst the giants with all the blitzes and those freaks they have. why draft a guy who you know is not going to be able to get you to the top. it makes absolutely no sense. its a waste pick. there will be pro bowl caliber players available and youre going to draft harrel with a first day pick. i guess theres a reason why the same teams are drafting at the top eveyr year

Race for the Heisman
11-09-2008, 02:22 AM
Actually, its easier said than done.

I wouldn't put much stock in him having any kind of success at the next level. Colt Brennan was the closest I seen that I thought could have a future, but he was a **** up in life, fragile, and awkward delivery going against him. I thought he was a 6th rounder. Harrell? 6th rounder.


We obviously see two different things. When I see him go to a check down its usually by design. He'll look deep down one hash. The RB leaks out, and keep in mind, when you already have 5 WRs out there, it's going to create a lot of open room for the RB. As he's looking deep down one side, he's looking for a WR to get wide open, if one receiver doesn't get open he throws it out to the flank. He's not looking at 4 different targets, then saying, "Okay, they're all covered, guess I better go to my check down."

Obviously I asked for honest feedback and I appreciate it, so I hope you understand when I say I'm not disagreeing with you just to disagree with you. I think that in some instances, yes, what you just described is correct. However I think there are other situations where he honestly goes: okay, one isn't open, two's not there, three- then runs out of time a takes the checkdown. What you seem to be saying is that instead of 'one read and run' its 'one read and checkdown,' but I'm not so sure I agree.

He's really waiting for the WRs to get far enough down field so he can create room for the RB to make something happen after the catch. Usually the back is completely uncovered or matched up on a LB who can't stay with him. Its as simple a read they run, and he makes simple reads all game long. The NFL will be a wake up call. He'll see defenses he's never seen before. Coverages like he's never seen coverages. Pressures like he's never seen pressures.

Anyway, I appreciate knowing the other side. I'd rep you but apparently I haven't given any rep since I gave it to you last, so that's that for now.

Race for the Heisman
11-09-2008, 02:28 AM
say youre team was playing the steelers this week. you know youre running game is probably going to be minimally effective. now add to that the fact that you bring bring 8 in the box because you dont have to worry about getting beat vertically becuase harrel cant do it. now the steelers have 8 in the box against you with no threat of you running the ball or beating them vertically. you know whats going to happen. theyre going to bring the house. every single play. polumalu and harrison and timmoms and woodley flying at you from all angles. and youre going to put graham harrel under there and believe that anything even remotely close to resembling a positive offensive situation is going to happen. just think about putting him out there gainst the giants with all the blitzes and those freaks they have. why draft a guy who you know is not going to be able to get you to the top. it makes absolutely no sense. its a waste pick. there will be pro bowl caliber players available and youre going to draft harrel with a first day pick. i guess theres a reason why the same teams are drafting at the top eveyr year

First, I don't see what would stop Harrell from stretching the field vertically. He's no John Elway, but he's no Chad Pennington, either (and he gets too much stick as it is).

As for the blitzes, that's where recognition comes in. Harrell does a good job using all of the play clock and getting the front to expose itself. Then he usually makes the right hot read, shovel pass, or checkdown to beat that blitz. Problem solved. I suppose I understand the situation you're trying to describe, I just think in revolves around an assumption that is fictitious, which would make your example inherently flawed.

Iamcanadian
11-09-2008, 02:30 AM
say youre team was playing the steelers this week. you know youre running game is probably going to be minimally effective. now add to that the fact that you bring bring 8 in the box because you dont have to worry about getting beat vertically becuase harrel cant do it. now the steelers have 8 in the box against you with no threat of you running the ball or beating them vertically. you know whats going to happen. theyre going to bring the house. every single play. polumalu and harrison and timmoms and woodley flying at you from all angles. and youre going to put graham harrel under there and believe that anything even remotely close to resembling a positive offensive situation is going to happen. just think about putting him out there gainst the giants with all the blitzes and those freaks they have. why draft a guy who you know is not going to be able to get you to the top. it makes absolutely no sense. its a waste pick. there will be pro bowl caliber players available and youre going to draft harrel with a first day pick. i guess theres a reason why the same teams are drafting at the top eveyr year

Again, it is going to depend on how the scouts grade Harrell arm strength, is it at least average, below average or above average. It's is very hard to gage on TV. Then there is his ability to read defenses. Nobody knows whether he can successfully do it or not?
Your rational is flawed. Nobody is saying he can just step in from a college offensive system and immediately be productive but if his arm strength is at least average and he gets to learn for a year or 2, he could develop into a starting QB if he is mentally tough, has good football intelligence improves his release and delivery etc. You can bet that pro scouts are impressed by his ability to lead Texas Tech to a #1 ranking out of nowhere.
No body thought Ryan would just step in and be the player he is either but he proved them all wrong.
Break down Harrell's weaknesses for me and show me how they will limit his development and potential. Saying he won't be able to handle this or that situation means little since we don't know his qualities. You could say that about most rookie QB's. Go back and look at Peyton's rookie year or Eli's. They are nothing to write home about , but with time and experience they got a lot better.

STARHEATHER
11-09-2008, 02:36 AM
just think about that scenario. then think about how many pro bowl players get picked rd 2 or later. if you can tell me youd feel comfortable coming into heinz field with graham harrell under centerin january 20 degrees 30 mph winds believing that you have a chance of winning then by all meansdraft him. i myself think you would lose horribly. so why bother drafting him. hes never going to win that game

Race for the Heisman
11-09-2008, 02:42 AM
just think about that scenario. then think about how many pro bowl players get picked rd 2 or later. if you can tell me youd feel comfortable coming into heinz field with graham harrell under centerin january 20 degrees 30 mph winds believing that you have a chance of winning then by all meansdraft him. i myself think you would lose horribly. so why bother drafting him. hes never going to win that game

You could go into a situation like that with Drew Brees and not expect to win that game. So I suppose he never should have been drafted either?

JLaw45
11-09-2008, 02:57 AM
just think about that scenario. then think about how many pro bowl players get picked rd 2 or later.

I don't understand this argument. You're saying that a later pick used on Harrel is a waste because there will be pro-bowl caliber players available. True, but how the hell are teams supposed to figure out precisely which unknown late-day pick will become the next pro-bowler?

Do you know something they don't? Is there a formula for identifying these guys that you know?

At that point in the draft, you're taking chances on guys that have potential. You're looking for a diamond in the rough that can be polished. There isn't any reason to believe that Graham Harrel doesn't fit that bill. He's worth a late round pick.

if you can tell me youd feel comfortable coming into heinz field with graham harrell under centerin january 20 degrees 30 mph winds believing that you have a chance of winning then by all meansdraft him. i myself think you would lose horribly. so why bother drafting him. hes never going to win that game

This whole scenario is flawed. How are you so absolutely certain that given a couple years learning as a backup and time to develope in a system that graham harrel couldn't manage that game?
It isn't like he's going to play that game THIS January. He'll have time to develope. What is your reasoning for saying that he could never do it?

PossumBoy9
11-09-2008, 03:04 AM
I think Taylor Potts will be a much bigger pro prospect than Graham Harrell

Yeah, I've been posting that on Rams forums the past couple weeks.

Good size. Strong arm.

I'm excited to see him start next year.

Habibi
11-09-2008, 03:24 AM
He's simply not a prospect. He doesn't have prototypical size, doesn't have the strongest or most accurate arm, and isn't exactly the most mobile. He plays in a gimmicky offense where he rarely lines up under center, which means he'll have to dramatically improve his footwork on the next level. Moreover, his offense only requires him to make a single read, so there are question marks about how capable he is of quickly going through multiple progressions. His stats are extremely inflated, due to the same system and the stacked talent surrounding him.

Iamcanadian
11-09-2008, 05:47 AM
Like I previously said, he is on the rise but it will still come down to how many junior QB's declare. Outside of Rett Bomar, there just isn't much to look at in the senior QB's so if all the junior QB's return to school fearing they will miss out on being a top 5 selection because of how poorly the other junior QB's who declared have fared, then Harrell will go higherthan expected based on supply and demand.
Once a player is drafted, it is up to him to show he can adjust to the pro game and improve upon his weaknesses and strengths. Some make it, some don't.

keylime_5
11-09-2008, 08:53 AM
well when you are in texas tech's offense for one where every QB they've had since 2002 has put up the same kind of monster numbers, and then factor in that they run pretty much exclusively from a shotgun spread where you never drop back to pass from center, and also the fact that Harrell's measurables are pretty average, you can't expect him to be anything more than a midround project pick and rightfully so. His accuracy is not as good as the system makes it seem and his arm - while adequate - is nothing special, especially once he gets to the NFL in a real offensive system that doesn't have the gimmicks of TTU's offense. Enjoy him while you can in college, but I expect Tyler Potts won't be any drop off next year as a QB for Tech, or at least not much of one.

Staubach12
11-09-2008, 08:55 AM
Harrell is a better prospect than Brennan, first of all. Harrell doesn't have the concerns about size or that strange release. They both played in funky system. However, Harrell has a much better cast around him.

Overall, he's got good size, arm strength, intelligence, etc. But he has all day to throw to fantastic receivers. I want to see them play an SEC team in their bowl to see how he handles some more pressure.

jballa838
11-09-2008, 09:50 AM
He has ridiculous touch on his passes. watch that next time you watch him.

fenikz
11-09-2008, 01:27 PM
Kurt Warner Jr.

Race for the Heisman
11-09-2008, 01:57 PM
I hope you're all happy, you've brought me down to earth a bit. :( I still think he's a better prospect than everyone is making him out to be, though.

TACKLE
11-09-2008, 02:07 PM
Kurt Warner Jr.

Great Comparison. That's exactly what I see him as when I watch him play.

Geason Noceur
11-09-2008, 02:19 PM
I've watched Harrell since he's high school days at Ennis. He's a good QB but nothing special. Undersized, average arm and average mobility. He has been in the same shotgun, pass-happy system since HS. He doesn't know anything else. It's going to be difficult to transition to the pro game where he'll have to be undercenter, read the D, not have wide open WRs and not have all day to throw. His offensive line is bigger (and probably better) than some pro lines for goodness sake!

Larry121283
11-09-2008, 07:16 PM
Same exact prospect as Colt Brennan.

Yes, he is the best pro prospect of the Mike Leach QBs, much like Colt Brennan was of best of the June Jones prospects...but that isn't saying much considering the former players didn't have much of a pro prospectus to begin with.

5th to 7th rounder. He'll get a legit shot like Brennan is currently with Washington with whatever team drafts him, and yes he has some things you like, but he isn't an NFL caliber prospect.

The Leach offense is dummy proof and has proved to be so since Byron Hanspard left campus. Kliff Kingsbury, Sonny Cumbie, BJ Symons, Cody Hodges...all put up great numbers and they lasted at best 2 seasons in the NFL as practice throwers before finding other jobs.

I expect Harrell to be better, but he has a long way to go as a pro. As bad as the senior signal callers are this year, there are several that I like better.

etk
11-09-2008, 08:25 PM
He's difficult to evaluate because of the system. You can say the system inflates his numbers, but you can also easily say the system affects his skills. Has he been coached to throw with little zip and lob passes with that weird motion, or is that his natural playing style? If it's the former, he is very much draftable but will still be a project. If it's the latter, I wouldn't touch him.

Either way, it's difficult not to give him credit and the benefit of the doubt. Whatever he's doing...he's doing it well. You can't say the same about Hunter Cantwell, Curtis Painter, Cullen Harper, and maybe even Matt Stafford.

Al I hope is that he gets his chance to show if he can make all the throws at the Senior Bowl. Maybe he'll take the bull by it's horns, or maybe he'll pull an Andre Woodson/Colt Brennan.

LonghornsLegend
11-09-2008, 09:41 PM
Everyone getting excited on his stats should look up the past few Tech QB's and put that into perspective, it's not like he's putting up numbers that have never been seen for them, it's expected in this offense.

jballa838
11-09-2008, 10:49 PM
Everyone getting excited on his stats should look up the past few Tech QB's and put that into perspective, it's not like he's putting up numbers that have never been seen for them, it's expected in this offense.
when was the last time Tech beat the Horns before this year? That is why.

LonghornsLegend
11-09-2008, 10:50 PM
when was the last time Tech beat the Horns before this year? That is why.

The last time was 2002, but what exactly does any of that have to do with being a good NFL QB?

jballa838
11-09-2008, 10:53 PM
The last time was 2002, but what exactly does any of that have to do with being a good NFL QB?
wow, did not know that. Poise is what comes to mind. Heart and Leadership also. More intangibles than tangibles.

LonghornsLegend
11-09-2008, 11:00 PM
wow, did not know that. Poise is what comes to mind. Heart and Leadership also. More intangibles than tangibles.

He looks like a solid QB, my original point was to some people to not fall in love with his stats, we have seen this from all of their QB's, 300 yard passing games are bad games and 400 yard games are average, but I won't hold that against him either, just to note that he's just falling in line with the next QB who is putting up crazy numbers.


I don't think he has alot that those previous QB's didn't have, and they don't have a good track record to show for with NFL success, I can't believe he will make a good QB just because Tech is getting exposure for once.

619
11-09-2008, 11:03 PM
Kurt Warner Jr.

Great I wasn't the only one thinking so .. :)

Habibi
11-09-2008, 11:05 PM
Harrall shouldn't even win the Heisman. Can anyone honestly say that he's been the best player in college football? I know I can't.

Iamcanadian
11-09-2008, 11:13 PM
Harrall shouldn't even win the Heisman. Can anyone honestly say that he's been the best player in college football? I know I can't.

Right now he'd get my vote for the Heisman. I don't think anybody will even be close to him if he wins out.

Geason Noceur
11-10-2008, 01:03 AM
when was the last time Tech beat the Horns before this year? That is why.

Tech hadn't beaten Texas before because their defense was horrid, and not because of QB play. It was the defense that had stunk up the place every year until this season. Harrell would throw for a bunch of yards and TDs, and they would still lose. For example, last year against Oklahoma State, Harrell was 46 of 67 for 646 yards and five TDs, and the Raiders still lost because they allowed 718 yards of total offense. They have a new defensive coordinator this season, and they have improved. That's why they defeated the Horns this season.

gator3guy
11-10-2008, 01:38 AM
Well the awful senior QB class can only help his stock. I wanna see what he can do against Oklahoma though. He handled Texas well and destroyed Oklahoma St. Many times system Qb's become average Qb's against top 10 teams. So far this has not been the case with Harrell. I think having an extra week to prepare for Oklahoma can help (or you can look at it the other way). Lets not forget unlike most system QB's Harrell was a highly touted QB coming out of HS (4 star). Don't get me wrong the guy probably won't be a starter in the NFL and he probably wont be any more than a 4th round pick, but he's no scrub. I think the Sr. Bowl, Combine, and workouts will ultimately determine his fate.

underscore
11-10-2008, 07:17 AM
Harrell is another TT excellent college QB with no real place in the NFL

Staubach12
11-10-2008, 07:31 AM
Same exact prospect as Colt Brennan.

Yes, he is the best pro prospect of the Mike Leach QBs, much like Colt Brennan was of best of the June Jones prospects...but that isn't saying much considering the former players didn't have much of a pro prospectus to begin with.

5th to 7th rounder. He'll get a legit shot like Brennan is currently with Washington with whatever team drafts him, and yes he has some things you like, but he isn't an NFL caliber prospect.

He is not Colt Brennan. Brennan had size concerns and strange mechanics. He also had the character questions. Harrell has none of those.

Larry121283
11-10-2008, 07:42 AM
He is not Colt Brennan. Brennan had size concerns and strange mechanics. He also had the character questions. Harrell has none of those.

I don't think you get the point that I am trying to make. Positives and Negatives that you'd see on a scouting report aside, they are the same type of prospect that come from a system that doesn't produce NFL material.

Every year, every prospect from these systems get the same excuses thrown at them..."they are better than their predecessors"..."they are different because x, y, and z"..."the system is overrated"..."he is the best player to come out of the system"..."yada yada yada"...

And the result is the same, players that aren't NFL talents.

It is what worries me about Michael Crabtree, not to get off topic. When I watch him, he looks like a fantastic football player. A top of the line wide out that makes plays AND does the little things and is good fundamentally. Then, I think of all of the other wide outs that came through TTech...remember Jarrett Hicks...he was highly rated too prior to his senior season. Then I think to Ashlie Lelie who was a freakish monster at Hawaii.

I love watching these offenses in college, but they don't exactly produce top flight NFL material, and that is what worries me when evaluating them.

Harrell really, is doing nothing that I haven't seen dozen's of QBs do before him in a Hal Mumme or Run n Shoot offense. He might be doing it at a higher level then most, but let's be honest, we've seen too many of these types of QBs end up as basically camp arms to just scoff at each one thinking the latest is better than the rest.

illmatic74
11-10-2008, 09:59 AM
I don't think you get the point that I am trying to make. Positives and Negatives that you'd see on a scouting report aside, they are the same type of prospect that come from a system that doesn't produce NFL material.

Every year, every prospect from these systems get the same excuses thrown at them..."they are better than their predecessors"..."they are different because x, y, and z"..."the system is overrated"..."he is the best player to come out of the system"..."yada yada yada"...

And the result is the same, players that aren't NFL talents.

It is what worries me about Michael Crabtree, not to get off topic. When I watch him, he looks like a fantastic football player. A top of the line wide out that makes plays AND does the little things and is good fundamentally. Then, I think of all of the other wide outs that came through TTech...remember Jarrett Hicks...he was highly rated too prior to his senior season. Then I think to Ashlie Lelie who was a freakish monster at Hawaii.

I love watching these offenses in college, but they don't exactly produce top flight NFL material, and that is what worries me when evaluating them.

Harrell really, is doing nothing that I haven't seen dozen's of QBs do before him in a Hal Mumme or Run n Shoot offense. He might be doing it at a higher level then most, but let's be honest, we've seen too many of these types of QBs end up as basically camp arms to just scoff at each one thinking the latest is better than the rest.Those NFL dissapointments like Wes Welker. Don't worry about Crabtree.

P-L
11-10-2008, 11:08 AM
Can anyone honestly say that he's been the best player in college football?
That honor goes to his teammate Michael Crabtree, but receivers rarely win the award. When you are a quarterback of an undefeated team and are on pace to throw for 4900 yards and 43 TD, you're going to be the favorite.

Larry121283
11-10-2008, 12:15 PM
Those NFL dissapointments like Wes Welker. Don't worry about Crabtree.

You named ONE out of nearly 10 years worth of wide receivers.

Welker was also an undrafted free agent as a KICK RETURNER, not a Top 5 NFL draft pick wide receiver.

Welker is more a product of being coached up in the NFL over being primed for a top flight NFL prospect.

Staubach12
11-10-2008, 06:28 PM
I don't think you get the point that I am trying to make. Positives and Negatives that you'd see on a scouting report aside, they are the same type of prospect that come from a system that doesn't produce NFL material.

Every year, every prospect from these systems get the same excuses thrown at them..."they are better than their predecessors"..."they are different because x, y, and z"..."the system is overrated"..."he is the best player to come out of the system"..."yada yada yada"...

And the result is the same, players that aren't NFL talents.

Not exactly. Those things weren't said about Timmy Chang. Colt Brennan is too early to call and Harrell has the tools to be a good pro-QB so of course you're not going to write him off (as you are), what you have to do is take a very close and objective look at the tape.

PossumBoy9
11-10-2008, 06:40 PM
Harrall shouldn't even win the Heisman. Can anyone honestly say that he's been the best player in college football? I know I can't.

Honestly....yeah.

If the question is about who has performed the best, then he certainly has to be mentioned at the top.

Michael Crabtree is the better player, but the Heisman is generally a QB award. If Texas Tech beats Oklahoma, no QB can claim to have been better, IMO.

Menardo75
11-10-2008, 06:51 PM
The game winning drive against Texas showed me that he could make it in the NFL.

etk
11-11-2008, 09:26 PM
when was the last time Tech beat the Horns before this year? That is why.

Any of those Texas Tech QBs could have won that game. The difference for TT this year is their defense...even those *expletive* ESPN commentators know this.

"Harrell doesn't have mechanics problems"....have you seen his release? It's almost side-arm.

LonghornsLegend
11-11-2008, 10:06 PM
absolutely no one has gotten excited "on his stats". you should try reading in the future before responding to what you assume people are saying. the only mention of stats has come from people trying to tell everyone that they're not a big deal. i think that's fairly bloody obvious.


I was speaking in general, not directly to anything that had been posted, but in general I hear on alot of sports talk shows talking about his numbers and how impressive they are when this is very typical of previous Tech QB's...More spotlight is on the team now though so to some people that is a big deal.


I didn't quote anyone because I wasn't directing my quote towards anyone in particuliar, if you were someone who was excited over his stats then my post was directed towards you...You should try not scouring the boards to find ways to be an asshole, if you weren't going to contribute anything towards the reason the thread is here in the first place then seems to be trolling, try staying on topic next time.

LonghornsLegend
11-12-2008, 12:27 AM
Getting back on topic(since some people think winning an argument is more important).


Not sure if many people knew but Graham's father was on ESPN earlier in the week talking about their HS, and he said Graham played out of the shotgun more then 90% of the time so he had a comfort level coming to Tech and playing...That said, rarely having any time under center is going to be worrisome to a few teams, but if he can go to a stable situation with a nice QB coach I think he can make it in the NFL, just don't see him being a starter.