PDA

View Full Version : Josh Freeman > JaMarcus Russell


katnip
03-18-2009, 05:42 PM
Any1 else find the league/draft great?? Besides it's NFL related.. But Russell was the #1 overall pick his year.. Now a team could get a Russell type player in the second half of round 1 (Looking at it as a prospect scenario).. But, yea.. I'm a Canes fan, but.. Freeman has as much potential as a Culpepper or a McNabb to me.. Just give the kid around 8-10 games to 1 full year to learn In My Opinion.

regoob2
03-18-2009, 05:43 PM
Russell has a much stronger arm.

katnip
03-18-2009, 05:45 PM
Russell has a much stronger arm.

I know.. But Freeman has a pretty big arm from what I've seen.. If I was to play scout, on arm strength.. Freeman around a 9, with Russell obviously 10 +

BmoreBlackByrdz
03-18-2009, 05:49 PM
If Freeman is put into the right situtation (much like Flacco and Ryan) then I can see him having some success. A place like Minnesota with a fantastic run game, reliable WR's, and a top 10 defense. Best case scenario for a guy like him. If he ends ups in a situtation like Alex Smith (different cordinators every year, new offenses) he will be overwhelmed and probably be a bust.

katnip
03-18-2009, 05:50 PM
If Freeman is put into the right situtation (much like Flacco and Ryan) then I can see him having some success. A place like Minnesota with a fantastic run game, reliable WR's, and a top 10 defense. Best case scenario for a guy like him. If he ends ups in a situtation like Alex Smiht (different cordinators every year, new offenses) he will be overwhelmed and probably be a bust.

Yea.. I agree with you.. Freeman still has alot to learn.

TACKLE
03-18-2009, 05:53 PM
Freeman is a poor mans Jamarcus Russell in every aspect. People see the physical comparison but Russell was excellent in the SEC and I believe the most efficient QB in college football his junior year. People seem to be getting to wrapped up in physical abilities and forget about the quality of the player as a whole. It happens every year at this time; Over-analysis.

Saints-Tigers
03-18-2009, 05:56 PM
Russell is bigger, stronger, more mobile, a stronger arm, more accurate, better throwing on the run, better at breaking down defenses, and he was a ton more productive.

Josh Freeman is like Russell as a freshman or Sophomore lol.

jj45
03-18-2009, 06:00 PM
I like freeman why better the russell

Beside having a great arm and good size he is lazy and a me first player. Held out for weeks has serious weight issues. I think he was overrated coming out he beat up brady quinn and a terrible irish defense. You don't need to throw the ball 90 yards to be a good qb.
Freeman is just as big he arm is great but he isn't one the level of russell. Played in a pro style offense he reminds me of mcnabb or cutler in college. More culter because he was the best player on the team for 4 years and had to win the game with very little help beside jordy nelson.

Matthew Jones
03-18-2009, 06:01 PM
Russell is bigger, stronger, more mobile, a stronger arm, more accurate, better throwing on the run, better at breaking down defenses, and he was a ton more productive.

Josh Freeman is like Russell as a freshman or Sophomore lol.

Some of those accuracy statements are off...it also had to do with Russell having Dawyne Bowe, Buster Davis, and Early Doucet as wide receivers. Also, I'm not sure if Russell is bigger in a good way. :P

RaiderNation
03-18-2009, 06:10 PM
I love how alot of guys are writing off JaMarcus this early.

brat316
03-18-2009, 06:11 PM
I love how alot of guys are writing off JaMarcus this early.

not writing him off they are making a bold prediction

yourfavestoner
03-18-2009, 06:12 PM
I know.. But Freeman has a pretty big arm from what I've seen.. If I was to play scout, on arm strength.. Freeman around a 9, with Russell obviously 10 +

If Freeman has a 9 then Russell has a 13.

I KNOW IT ALL
03-18-2009, 06:19 PM
If Freeman is put into the right situtation (much like Flacco and Ryan) then I can see him having some success. A place like Minnesota with a fantastic run game, reliable WR's, and a top 10 defense. Best case scenario for a guy like him. If he ends ups in a situtation like Alex Smiht (different cordinators every year, new offenses) he will be overwhelmed and probably be a bust.

Minnesota's receivers are reliable? That's news to me.

San Diego Chicken
03-18-2009, 06:25 PM
If Freeman has a 9 then Russell has a 13.

Not really. Freeman doesn't take a backseat to anyone in the arm strength department.

Not that it matters though, because whether a player's arm is an 8 or a 9 or a 10 or a 20 is largely unimportant.

Here's what I do think in regards to Freeman/Russell - Russell didn't deserve to go #1 overall, and Freeman doesn't deserve to be projected as low as the 2nd round. They're both guys who I would personally rank in the middle of the first round, where alot of the real project QB's tend to go.

TACKLE
03-18-2009, 06:26 PM
Here are some thoughts on Freeman.

I remember watching Auburn play K-State. Quentin Groves was an absolute beast that game and sacked Freeman late in the game, forcing a fumble that was recovered for the game clinching TD. I remember Josh Freeman and thinking how big he looked. I researched him after the game and saw that he was 6'5 250 and had a big arm. I was thinking that if this guy can develop and rip it up his Jr. and Sr. year, he could be a the top pick in the draft. The thing is, he never really got that much better. He was alright but never really played up to his abilities. I know he didn't have much talent around him (with the exception of Jesus Nelson) but he was never a great QB. If you had to name the Top 15 QB's in CFB last season, he would be hard-pressed to make the list.He was a good QB who showed flashes but there was really no indication that he would be a top-flight QB. Now, with just over a month into the draft, people want to put him in the Top 10 ahead of Sanchez based just off size, arm strength and potential. I understand that just because you're a great college QB doesn't mean you'll be a great NFL QB. Now I'm not saying that I don't like Freeman. I actually do and I think it the right situation he can be a successful NFL QB. People on here preach, "there's more to being a successful NFL QB than having a strong arm. Just look at Kyle Boller/Jeff George/Ryan Leaf etc." yet when a big strong armed QB comes along everybody falls in love with him. I don't know, i just don't get it.

Sorry for the long, pointless rambling. Just felt like posting a few thoughts on Josh Freeman as it relates to evaluating NFL QB's. And for the record, I do like Josh Freeman.

Saints-Tigers
03-18-2009, 08:32 PM
Some of those accuracy statements are off...it also had to do with Russell having Dawyne Bowe, Buster Davis, and Early Doucet as wide receivers. Also, I'm not sure if Russell is bigger in a good way. :P


Doesn't matter if it is all fat, if he can move better covered in fat, more power to him.

I don't know where people get the idea that Russell isn't accurate, he needs to learn to make better decisions surely, he needs to work on going through his progressions, he needs to learn when to take a little heat off the ball, but he;s accurate as hell, he can hit guys 50-60 yards downfield on the run, with a flick of the wrist, perfectly on the numbers. You don't throw for 68% out of a pro-style offense in the SEC without great accuracy, I don't care what receivers you have(and they weren't THAT great for us)

He performed admirably with terrible protection and receivers, but he's a big time prospect and he'll do well when he's given a few weapons.

gpngc
03-18-2009, 08:35 PM
I'm definitely in the minority here, but I like them both.

WAREhouse
03-18-2009, 08:35 PM
Let's Compare Them as Prospects

Arm Strength- Jamarcus
Accuracy-Jamarcus
Athleticism-Jamarcus
Elusiveness-Jamarcus
Production-Jamarcus (though the two teams were worlds apart talent wise)
Intelligence-Jamarcus
Competition-Jamarcus

There's no prospective aspect, in which Josh Freeman has an edge over Jamarcus Russell

etk
03-18-2009, 09:32 PM
Aside from Russell's rare arm strength gifts, what separates the 2 the most is that Russell can drop back and remain comfortable in the pocket, keeping his eyes downfield and scanning for open receivers. Freeman is NOT comfortable in the pocket and struggles with pressure. Russell can throw 60 yard bombs stepping back with a guy in his face.

To me, that's what made Russell a top-10 talent and what keeps Freeman from being anything more than a late-1st guy in a weak QB class.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-18-2009, 10:13 PM
Freeman could well wind up better, especially if he lands in a better situation than Russell. He's also a better athlete overall.

But, as a passer, Russell was miles more advanced than Josh Freeman coming out of college.

WAREhouse
03-18-2009, 10:16 PM
Freeman could well wind up better, especially if he lands in a better situation than Russell. He's also a better athlete overall.

But, as a passer, Russell was miles more advanced than Josh Freeman coming out of college.

Freeman is not a better Athlete than Russell, at all.

Paranoidmoonduck
03-18-2009, 10:20 PM
Freeman is not a better Athlete than Russell, at all.

In terms of straight line speed, Russell is about even or might be a bit quicker and his smoothness in the pocket speaks to his footwork, but Freeman turned in a great combine workout. He's at the very least on par with a light Russell and definitely more explosive than Russell is at 270 lbs (which seems to be his realistic playing weight).

SenorGato
03-19-2009, 01:21 AM
I'm definitely in the minority here, but I like them both.

Yea, Russell is ridiculously underrated IMO. He wasn't even terrible last year, and that was his age 22 season in friggin...Oakland.

RaiderNation
03-19-2009, 01:26 AM
Id take Russell everyday of the week and twice on Tuesday's....... and I wasnt a fan of Russell when he was a prospect( I wanted Calvin)

batsandgats
03-19-2009, 02:54 AM
Freeman had terrible accuracy on passes above 20 yards, so that negates any of his Rocket arm strength.
and why do we have to compare black qbs to other black qbs
"Freeman has as much potential as a Culpepper or a McNabb "
and jamarcus
how about byron leftwich while were at it

russell is better than freeman and i dont see the comparison

Monomach
03-19-2009, 02:58 AM
http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/8223/facepalml.jpg

Mr.Regular
03-19-2009, 09:19 AM
JaMarcus was one of the best QB prospects in recent memory.
One of the, if not THE, strongest arms in the NFL. SEC Resume. Good accuracy. Huge frame. Decent mobility. Proven winner.

Freeman falls short in every category.

bored of education
03-19-2009, 09:23 AM
Is this thread a joke or did I actually miss something. I didn't read anything other than the thread title.

Black Bolt
03-19-2009, 10:11 AM
In terms of straight line speed, Russell is about even or might be a bit quicker and his smoothness in the pocket speaks to his footwork, but Freeman turned in a great combine workout. He's at the very least on par with a light Russell and definitely more explosive than Russell is at 270 lbs (which seems to be his realistic playing weight).


Who cares about that when you discussing QBs? This conversation is ridiculous. I like Freeman as well, but he is not Jamarcus.

Black Bolt
03-19-2009, 10:15 AM
except for the crap the media feeds you. He doesn't have "serious" weight issues, he is not lazy, (he's been in Oakland working out since the end of the season until a week ago), and he isn't a me first player unless you consider me first players to be players that restructure their salary to help the team as a whole. So keep making uniformed posts for your entertainment only.

I like freeman why better the russell

Beside having a great arm and good size he is lazy and a me first player. Held out for weeks has serious weight issues. I think he was overrated coming out he beat up brady quinn and a terrible irish defense. You don't need to throw the ball 90 yards to be a good qb.
Freeman is just as big he arm is great but he isn't one the level of russell. Played in a pro style offense he reminds me of mcnabb or cutler in college. More culter because he was the best player on the team for 4 years and had to win the game with very little help beside jordy nelson.

nepg
03-19-2009, 10:19 AM
Freeman might be better than Russell, but that's not saying much at all.
________
Laguna Bay Condos Prathumnak (http://pattayaluxurycondos.com)

WAREhouse
03-19-2009, 10:25 AM
Freeman might be better than Russell, but that's not saying much at all.

Freeman is nowhere near as good as Russell, and I like Freeman.

best QB prospects this decade

1.Mike Vick
2.Carson Palmer
3.Jamarcus Russell

nepg
03-19-2009, 10:52 AM
Freeman is nowhere near as good as Russell, and I like Freeman.

best QB prospects this decade

1.Mike Vick
2.Carson Palmer
3.Jamarcus Russell

No. Fail. You completely left out the mental part of the game and intangibles.

1. Carson Palmer
2. Eli Manning
3. Matt Ryan
4. Ben Roethlisberger
5. Brady Quinn
6. Byron Leftwich
7. Philip Rivers
8. David Carr
9. Matt Leinart
10. Jay Cutler
________
18SexyHot4U live (http://camslivesexy.com/cam/18SexyHot4U)

WAREhouse
03-19-2009, 10:56 AM
No. Fail. You completely left out the mental part of the game and intangibles.

1. Carson Palmer
2. Eli Manning
3. Matt Ryan
4. Ben Roethlisberger
5. Brady Quinn
6. Byron Leftwich
7. Philip Rivers
8. David Carr
9. Matt Leinart
10. Jay Cutler

you are a complete idiot.......for that list

Addict
03-19-2009, 11:00 AM
No. Fail. You completely left out the mental part of the game and intangibles.

1. Carson Palmer
2. Eli Manning
3. Matt Ryan
4. Ben Roethlisberger
5. Brady Quinn
6. Byron Leftwich
7. Philip Rivers
8. David Carr
9. Matt Leinart
10. Jay Cutler

I chuckled. A case could be made for your top two, but the rest of that list is laughable.

nepg
03-19-2009, 11:02 AM
Because I listed guys who actually had an inkling of being able to play the position coming out of college? You fail again. Anyone who ever thought Russell was a great prospect is a moron.
________
Find Headshop (http://headshop.net/)

nepg
03-19-2009, 11:05 AM
I chuckled. A case could be made for your top two, but the rest of that list is laughable.

I can explain why his list is ********, but neither of you can say anything intelligent as to why my list is not good. I'm talking without hindsight as well.
________
FIND HEADSHOP (http://headshop.net/)

bored of education
03-19-2009, 11:05 AM
Because I listed guys who actually had an inkling of being able to play the position coming out of college? You fail again. Anyone who ever thought Russell was a great prospect is a moron.

He was a better prospect than 75% of that list you made. Matt Ryan was not a top prospect QB wise comming out. he was a very solid one but not a top 5 over the last 10-15 years.

nepg
03-19-2009, 11:14 AM
He said "this decade", and I had Matt Ryan up there. There was little reason to believe (having seen every Matt Ryan throw of his career) that he wouldn't be a great NFL QB. He had the arm, intelligence, and intangibles. He did everything a successful QB in the NFL can do.

JaMarcus Russell was physically able, but not mentally. The game didn't come naturally to him, and the winning part was more due to the talent and coaching around him, than the QB position. I mean, freaking Matt Mauck won a championship with that team. He was a big dude with a big arm, but nothing else.
________
FIND HEADSHOP (http://headshop.net/)

hockey619
03-19-2009, 11:19 AM
He said "this decade", and I had Matt Ryan up there. There was little reason to believe (having seen every Matt Ryan throw of his career) that he wouldn't be a great NFL QB. He had the arm, intelligence, and intangibles. He did everything a successful QB in the NFL can do.

JaMarcus Russell was physically able, but not mentally. The game didn't come naturally to him, and the winning part was more due to the talent and coaching around him, than the QB position. I mean, freaking Matt Mauck won a championship with that team. He was a big dude with a big arm, but nothing else.



See but thats just the thing. You can teach a guy how to read a d and make progressions and stuff.

You cant teach 6'6'' or that kind of arm or athleticism/ability to throw on the run.

JR def had questions coming out but he was pretty damn good his Jr year before he came out and his upside is still immense.

WAREhouse
03-19-2009, 11:21 AM
He said "this decade", and I had Matt Ryan up there. There was little reason to believe (having seen every Matt Ryan throw of his career) that he wouldn't be a great NFL QB. He had the arm, intelligence, and intangibles. He did everything a successful QB in the NFL can do.

JaMarcus Russell was physically able, but not mentally. The game didn't come naturally to him, and the winning part was more due to the talent and coaching around him, than the QB position. I mean, freaking Matt Mauck won a championship with that team. He was a big dude with a big arm, but nothing else.
Matt Ryan, who was a good prospect, was not an elite prospect, in the realms of thje Russells and Palmers. That revisionist history is working wonders for you
hahahahahahaha, you cklearly did not watch Jamarcus. He was the heart and soul of that team..IF you wanna look at his intangibles, look at that Auburn game during his final season at LSU..That's the stuff great QBs are made out of...Not to mention, he beasted, and I mean absolutely beasted, in the best conference in the nation. QBs don't put up his type of stats in the SEC, ever.
Even in a terrible as situation in Oakland, Jamarcus has managed to put up similar numbers to the likes of Flacco and Ryan, and not been overwhelmed.

Jamarcus is a stud, and is one of the best QB prospects over the last decade.

P-L
03-19-2009, 11:22 AM
JaMarcus Russell has a much stronger arm and is much more accurate. He also faced far better competition than Josh Freeman. The Big XII defense are a joke and still, Freeman couldn't perform well on any sort of a consistent basis. In 2007 and 2008 against Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Missouri Freeman has a total of 8 TD and 10 INT in seven games.

LookItsAlDavis
03-19-2009, 02:01 PM
JaMarcus Russell has a much stronger arm and is much more accurate. He also faced far better competition than Josh Freeman. The Big XII defense are a joke and still, Freeman couldn't perform well on any sort of a consistent basis. In 2007 and 2008 against Oklahoma, Texas, Texas Tech, Kansas, and Missouri Freeman has a total of 8 TD and 10 INT in seven games.

I want to party with this guy!

NIN1984
03-19-2009, 02:06 PM
Since JaMarcus Russell is a big guy with a big arm he gets labeled a big dummy, it seems like when a QB with a rocket arm comes out they get bashed for it as if they can't actually play the position. Russell had good feet, good athleticism for his size, nice accuracy and Russell is a smart kid. I know a lot of people were hoping he would have an awful wonderlic score so they could call him stupid but it didn't happen. I'm not saying Russell was perfect because he did struggle with his touch passes and his work ethic was in question but overall Russell was an amazing prospect coming out of LSU. Did he deserve to go #1 overall? maybe, maybe not, but I don't think he would have fallen out of the top 10.

Burns336
03-19-2009, 02:57 PM
This is stupid...

As far as collegiate careers go, Jamarcus was head and shoulders above Freeman.

If you go back and look at Jamarcus numbers in big games, he always showed up. Especially in his last game of his career.

The dude had production and off the chart measurables.

Any comparison being made now is clouded by the fact that Russell has had a slow start in the pro's -- Which, isn't really his fault. He's had a ****** O-line and no receivers, not to mention terrible and inconsistent coaching.

I think Russell can still be a really good player. He doesn't seem like he's let the criticism of his play or the fact that he's on a bad team get to him.

Freeman is just an unknown at this point. He's never taken a snap in the NFL, not to mention he's only the 3rd best QB prospect in his class, whereas JaMarcus was the clear cut #1.

Black Bolt
03-19-2009, 03:45 PM
Since JaMarcus Russell is a big guy with a big arm he gets labeled a big dummy, it seems like when a QB with a rocket arm comes out they get bashed for it as if they can't actually play the position. Russell had good feet, good athleticism for his size, nice accuracy and Russell is a smart kid. I know a lot of people were hoping he would have an awful wonderlic score so they could call him stupid but it didn't happen. I'm not saying Russell was perfect because he did struggle with his touch passes and his work ethic was in question but overall Russell was an amazing prospect coming out of LSU. Did he deserve to go #1 overall? maybe, maybe not, but I don't think he would have fallen out of the top 10.

but it only takes the slightest bit of research to know that that's not the case. I guess if one doesn't have the work ethic to do that little bit of research, they have no right to question anyone else's.

RaiderNation
03-19-2009, 03:55 PM
That top 10 QB list is very bad. Matt Ryan wasn't thought of as a great prospect. Yes he turned out good so far but in no means was he considered worth a #1 pick.

batsandgats
03-19-2009, 05:35 PM
See but thats just the thing. You can teach a guy how to read a d and make progressions and stuff.

You cant teach 6'6'' or that kind of arm or athleticism/ability to throw on the run.

JR def had questions coming out but he was pretty damn good his Jr year before he came out and his upside is still immense.

usually players with tremendous "upside" never live up to it. You cant always teach a qb how to read d's and make progressions, its not at easy as you think. espescially under pressure when things break down. Freeman doesnt have that. Russell has shown some calmness under pressure which shows he can be taught. I dont think Freeman can, when things break down he will make mistakes at the slightest hint of pressure

Paranoidmoonduck
03-19-2009, 07:25 PM
Who cares about that when you discussing QBs?

Well, considering that our conversation was strictly about athleticism, I would imagine that how athletic each of them are would be fairly pertinent to that.

LookItsAlDavis
03-19-2009, 08:08 PM
usually players with tremendous "upside" never live up to it. You cant always teach a qb how to read d's and make progressions, its not at easy as you think. espescially under pressure when things break down. Freeman doesnt have that. Russell has shown some calmness under pressure which shows he can be taught. I dont think Freeman can, when things break down he will make mistakes at the slightest hint of pressure


Reading defenses and making progressions can be taught. Being able to do it under pressure isn't a god-given ability, it just becomes natural after serious work and many repetitions. Many quarterback busts that you see in the NFL are results of variables that are usually not the players fault. Alex Smith, Joey Harrington, and David Carr are good examples of this. They were drafted by organizations that failed to develop any kind of support system around them. Smith had a different coordinator every year, Harrington went to Detroit, and Carr never had a line or a running game. If you look at all the first round quarterbacks that have been successful, they have always had stability and quality talent around them. With this consistency, they are able to have the time it takes (2-4 years) to properly develop a comfort level in their situation to make the reads and decisions under pressure.

NotRickJames
03-19-2009, 08:13 PM
I chuckled. A case could be made for your top two, but the rest of that list is laughable.

Uh...no, it really couldn't be. Eli Manning is a mediocre quarterback playing for an excellent team, while Carson Palmer isn't that good.

Eh, I question how often the people laughing at the idea of Freeman as a better prospect than Russell have actually seen Freeman play. Freeman has superb mechanics, great footwork, great size, great arm, fairly accurate (his WR's suck, he's actually fairly accurate).

WAREhouse
03-19-2009, 08:20 PM
Uh...no, it really couldn't be. Eli Manning is a mediocre quarterback playing for an excellent team, while Carson Palmer isn't that good.

Eh, I question how often the people laughing at the idea of Freeman as a better prospect than Russell have actually seen Freeman play. Freeman has superb mechanics, great footwork, great size, great arm, fairly accurate (his WR's suck, he's actually fairly accurate).

I agree with the first part, but Carson Palmer is a damn good QB. The fact that he plays for one of the worst organizations in the league, and got his knee rolled into is not his fault, in the least bit. To say Carson Palmer isn't that good, is to not watch football.

People laugh at it, because in every aspect Russell is clearly better. Russell's mechanics coming out of college were top notch, and certainly better than Freeman's. I like Freeman but he doesn't have great footwork at all, he has good footwork, but Jamarcus had great footwork and great pocket presence shown by the fact that he consistently would deliver ropes with NFL caliber defenders in his face when the pocket broke down (see Auburn 2006)..Russel has better size, His arm strength is probably the second best in NFL history (Behind Mike Vick), and he sure as hell is more accurate than Josh Freeman.

RUssell>>>Josh Freeman

NotRickJames
03-19-2009, 08:25 PM
I agree with the first part, but Carson Palmer is a damn good QB. The fact that he plays for one of the worst organizations in the league, and got his knee rolled into is not his fault, in the least bit. To say Carson Palmer isn't that good, is to not watch football.

People laugh at it, because in every aspect Russell is clearly better. Russell's mechanics coming out of college were top notch, and certainly better than Freeman's. I like Freeman but he doesn't have great footwork at all, he has good footwork, but Jamarcus had great footwork and great pocket presence shown by the fact that he consistently would deliver ropes with NFL caliber defenders in his face when the pocket broke down (see Auburn 2006)..Russel has better size, His arm strength is probably the second best in NFL history (Behind Mike Vick), and he sure as hell is more accurate than Josh Freeman.

RUssell>>>Josh Freeman

I think Carson is a good quarterback but definitely nowhere near the first one. He's a fringe top five at best, in my opinion.

WAREhouse
03-19-2009, 08:31 PM
I think Carson is a good quarterback but definitely nowhere near the first one. He's a fringe top five at best, in my opinion.

As a prospect, Carson Palmer is second only to Vick over the past decade. And as a QB, when healthy, he is a beast

His first year starting, he put up solid numbers, then he had two beastly years, and got hurt, rehabed hard and made it back for 07, and wasn't himself but still had 26 TDs, and then he was hurt this past year..

Look at Palmer's stats
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=4459

Crickett
03-19-2009, 08:39 PM
Freeman had terrible accuracy on passes above 20 yards, so that negates any of his Rocket arm strength.
and why do we have to compare black qbs to other black qbs
"Freeman has as much potential as a Culpepper or a McNabb "
and jamarcus
how about byron leftwich while were at it

Because aside from his rocket arm, Freeman has mobility like McNabb and Culpepper did. Byron Leftwich has mobility like Drew Bledsoe did.

LookItsAlDavis
03-19-2009, 08:42 PM
Because aside from his rocket arm, Freeman has mobility like McNabb and Culpepper did. Byron Leftwich has mobility like Drew Bledsoe did.

Oh no. His mobility is incredibly over-rated. I'd say if anything he's closer to Cutler or Losman. He ran a 4.8. McNabb was a 4.6 guy, and I'm not sure what Culpepper was.

BigTron
03-19-2009, 08:49 PM
JaMarcus played well in the SEC. So enough talk of his talent only, he had production. He also led the Raiders to some late season wins vs Tampa Bay and the Texans who were both hot. He also had a +5 TD to INT ratio with revolving HC's,OC's,Playcallers, WR's and LT's. For an extremely young guy who came out as an underclassman, I think he is progressing nicely. Oakland needs to give him some help on the OL and WR and he should get even better next year? Isnt he younger than Flacco and Ryan?

Russell > Stafford is a better thread.

WAREhouse
03-19-2009, 08:52 PM
Oh no. His mobility is incredibly over-rated. I'd say if anything he's closer to Cutler or Losman. He ran a 4.8. McNabb was a 4.6 guy, and I'm not sure what Culpepper was.

Jay Cutler ran a 4.76, Josh freeman a 4.97

LookItsAlDavis
03-19-2009, 08:54 PM
Jay Cutler ran a 4.76, Josh freeman a 4.97


Haha thanks. But anyway, the guy is by no means a dual-threat like McNabb or Culpepper were coming out.

WAREhouse
03-19-2009, 08:57 PM
Haha thanks. But anyway, the guy is by no means a dual-threat like McNabb or Culpepper were coming out.

how can u thank me but don't rep me, that's messed up broskie

LookItsAlDavis
03-19-2009, 08:59 PM
how can u thank me but don't rep me, that's messed up broskie

I'm returning to the boards from a long break. I forgot that they added that to these. I gotcha though

batsandgats
03-19-2009, 09:03 PM
being cool under pressure is a god given ability, some people do not have it and never will. Some people will always crack under pressure, no matter how many times they repeat game time scenarios. What if the defense throws in a wrinkle? Being able to adjust to it and not cracking is something some qbs just naturally have. Its something that is very hard to teach. It is very hard to teach someone to be calm when there are defenders running after you, they either have it or they dont. They might improve their decision making under pressure slightly, but not by much

LookItsAlDavis
03-19-2009, 09:10 PM
being cool under pressure is a god given ability, some people do not have it and never will. Some people will always crack under pressure, no matter how many times they repeat game time scenarios. What if the defense throws in a wrinkle? Being able to adjust to it and not cracking is something some qbs just naturally have. Its something that is very hard to teach. It is very hard to teach someone to be calm when there are defenders running after you, they either have it or they dont. They might improve their decision making under pressure slightly, but not by much

Or if they have had the time to learn their offensive system inside and out, know what their personnel's tendencies are in situations, they would have no problem making the right decision most of the time. Don't forget, these guys have been playing Quarterback most of their life. They aren't some random guys who are big and can throw far. They are world-class athletes who are fully capable of performing. They need ten other guys and a coach who can help them out. It's a team game.

fear the elf
03-20-2009, 08:36 AM
Uh...no, it really couldn't be. Eli Manning is a mediocre quarterback playing for an excellent team, while Carson Palmer isn't that good.

Eh, I question how often the people laughing at the idea of Freeman as a better prospect than Russell have actually seen Freeman play. Freeman has superb mechanics, great footwork, great size, great arm, fairly accurate (his WR's suck, he's actually fairly accurate).

i can't seem to find it, but i'm pretty sure scott has said that eli and carson (i know eli was on there) were 2 of the 4 best qb prospects he's ever evaluated, the other 2 being peyton and brady quinn.

nepg
03-21-2009, 07:35 AM
Matt Ryan, who was a good prospect, was not an elite prospect, in the realms of thje Russells and Palmers. That revisionist history is working wonders for you
hahahahahahaha, you cklearly did not watch Jamarcus. He was the heart and soul of that team..IF you wanna look at his intangibles, look at that Auburn game during his final season at LSU..That's the stuff great QBs are made out of...Not to mention, he beasted, and I mean absolutely beasted, in the best conference in the nation. QBs don't put up his type of stats in the SEC, ever.
Even in a terrible as situation in Oakland, Jamarcus has managed to put up similar numbers to the likes of Flacco and Ryan, and not been overwhelmed.

Jamarcus is a stud, and is one of the best QB prospects over the last decade.

There's no "revisionist" about it on my end here. Those are how I had them when they entered the draft.

The only knocks on Palmer was that he won the Heisman and wasn't amazing until he was surrounded by good coaches and an improved supporting cast.

There weren't any knocks on Eli aside from haters who thought the only reason he was rated that high was because of his last name.

Matt Ryan had zero flaws.

Big Ben was one of the most physically gifted QBs ever coming out of Miami (OH), and was a great prospect (still can't figure out why Rivers went ahead of him).

Brady Quinn was about on-par with Palmer physically.

I'm sorry, but I don't rank how great a QB prospect is solely on his physical talents. Obviously, that's ******** to do. That's how you end up with Vince Young's, Tavaris Jackson's, Scott Mitchell's, and JaMarcus Russell's.

Using a first round pick with the idea of drafting a guy who can't read a defense or go through progressions with the idea that you can teach him to do so is one of the most ******** things you can do. Ranking a prospect who can't read a defense with the thought process that he might learn to is just as bad.
________
HERBAL VAPORIZER RECIPE (http://vaporshop.com/)

WAREhouse
03-21-2009, 12:59 PM
There's no "revisionist" about it on my end here. Those are how I had them when they entered the draft.

The only knocks on Palmer was that he won the Heisman and wasn't amazing until he was surrounded by good coaches and an improved supporting cast.

There weren't any knocks on Eli aside from haters who thought the only reason he was rated that high was because of his last name.

Matt Ryan had zero flaws.

Big Ben was one of the most physically gifted QBs ever coming out of Miami (OH), and was a great prospect (still can't figure out why Rivers went ahead of him).

Brady Quinn was about on-par with Palmer physically.

I'm sorry, but I don't rank how great a QB prospect is solely on his physical talents. Obviously, that's ******** to do. That's how you end up with Vince Young's, Tavaris Jackson's, Scott Mitchell's, and JaMarcus Russell's.

Using a first round pick with the idea of drafting a guy who can't read a defense or go through progressions with the idea that you can teach him to do so is one of the most ******** things you can do. Ranking a prospect who can't read a defense with the thought process that he might learn to is just as bad.
you are an idiot........Please stop posting


As soon as you wrote Matt Ryan has zero flaws is when I realized that you are probably the worst poster on ISH.

listen to some Gucci, and stop
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7sjYVVZVJk

etk
03-21-2009, 04:45 PM
Matt Ryan had zero flaws.

Brady Quinn was about on-par with Palmer physically.



Fail. The hole you dig yourself is getting deeper. 18 INTs as a Senior is not a flaw? Don't get me started on Quinn either.

Abaddon
03-22-2009, 07:44 AM
I don't know where people get the idea that Russell isn't accurate, he needs to learn to make better decisions surely, he needs to work on going through his progressions, he needs to learn when to take a little heat off the ball, but he;s accurate as hell, he can hit guys 50-60 yards downfield on the run, with a flick of the wrist, perfectly on the numbers. You don't throw for 68% out of a pro-style offense in the SEC without great accuracy, I don't care what receivers you have(and they weren't THAT great for us)

He performed admirably with terrible protection and receivers, but he's a big time prospect and he'll do well when he's given a few weapons.

Didn't catch a lot of Raider games, I take it.

Russell's accuracy is pretty much his greatest weakness...well, second to his lack of dedication to improving as a player.

He can't throw a fade pass to save his life.

Half the drops our WRs had last year came from bad passes.

When he had protection, he'd miss wide open receivers.

Accurate as hell? Surely you jest.

parrish_lemar24DBSkins
03-22-2009, 08:39 AM
Jamarcus is headed towards a bust, no doubt. He's an extremely raw prospect and I don't see the discipline in his game required to be a dominant passing QB. One thing you notice about Jamarcus is how late his making his reads.


He's a QB who got by with extraordinary physical tools at LSU, but unless he works his ass off to improve the QB between his ears, he'll forever be tease, a la Michael Vick.

And I love Mike Vick, but he was a unique prospect, because of his speed, but not necessarily a great QB prospect.

First of all, he's short for an elite QB, which affects his vision downfield.

Yes he had off the charts speed and arm strength, but Vick didn't avoid the pass rush as well as you'd think a 4.2 QB would, and he never mastered the ability to see the whole field and was often late with his reads.

When I see Jamarcus, I see Daunte Culpepper, the sequel. Unless Oakland gets him a big burner on the outside, he's never going to hit, IMO.

nepg
03-22-2009, 08:58 AM
Fail. The hole you dig yourself is getting deeper. 18 INTs as a Senior is not a flaw? Don't get me started on Quinn either.

Well, you have to understand why those INT's happened. Matt Ryan had to throw into bad coverage when he was at BC. Most of the time no one was open, and throwing it away was not an option.

His stats weren't flawless because the receiving talent at BC was really bad. I really don't think most people truly understand exactly how bad the receivers were. And the playcalling forced Matt Ryan to make plays with his arm.

But as a prospect, when you look at why he had those INT's and everything else he does, there really weren't any flaws. There was zero reason to believe he'd have an INT problem in the NFL.

Anyone who really broke down Matt Ryan, and understood how bad the receiving situation was had Matt Ryan rated as one of the better QB prospects to come out in a very long time - and had zero doubt about it.
________
Glass bubbler (http://glassgallery.tumblr.com)

Xonraider
03-22-2009, 10:32 AM
Id take Russell everyday of the week and twice on Tuesday's....... and I wasnt a fan of Russell when he was a prospect( I wanted Calvin)

I'd take him twice on sundays ;)

StorminNorman
03-22-2009, 04:30 PM
Well, you have to understand why those INT's happened. Matt Ryan had to throw into bad coverage when he was at BC. Most of the time no one was open, and throwing it away was not an option.

His stats weren't flawless because the receiving talent at BC was really bad. I really don't think most people truly understand exactly how bad the receivers were. And the playcalling forced Matt Ryan to make plays with his arm.

But as a prospect, when you look at why he had those INT's and everything else he does, there really weren't any flaws. There was zero reason to believe he'd have an INT problem in the NFL.

Anyone who really broke down Matt Ryan, and understood how bad the receiving situation was had Matt Ryan rated as one of the better QB prospects to come out in a very long time - and had zero doubt about it.

The lack of logic in this post is disturbing.

Staubach12
03-22-2009, 07:15 PM
Russell was smarter with the ball, had a bigger arm, was more accurate, took coaching better, and played in the SEC. Freeman is more mobile, but not by much. So, no. Russell was a much better prospect.

ChezPower4
03-22-2009, 08:20 PM
Russell was smarter with the ball, had a bigger arm, was more accurate, took coaching better, and played in the SEC. Freeman is more mobile, but not by much. So, no. Russell was a much better prospect.

Have to agree with that but I still think that when all is said and done that Freeman will be a better pro player than Russell.

Rjspartan
03-22-2009, 08:23 PM
arm strengh is soooooooooooooooooo overrated who cares how far you can throw what really is important is the velocity on the ball and the tight windows you need to put it in.

WAREhouse
03-22-2009, 08:26 PM
Have to agree with that but I still think that when all is said and done that Freeman will be a better pro player than Russell.

why?

He hasn't taken a single snap yet, and is the type of player that needs to be put in a perfect situation to succeed. Whereas Jamarcus is progressing despite being in OAKLAND with no WRs and no OL

BigTron
03-23-2009, 12:31 PM
arm strengh is soooooooooooooooooo overrated who cares how far you can throw what really is important is the velocity on the ball and the tight windows you need to put it in.

I agree somewhat. But if arm strength is not important why do scouts at the top of the draft worry so much about it? Why is that the 1st thing you hear about Jay Cutler, Matt Stafford, Russell, Quinn(lack of) etc. Its very important. If your ball floats it doesnt matter how accurrate you are. Ask Chad Pennington why he gets no love.

Having a strong arm is important but it doesnt matter if your not accurate or cant read D's. JaMarcus Russell has a great arm but he does alot of good things as a QB also. He is a work in progress anyway so anyone calling a 23 year old QB with less than 20 starts a bust is a fool.

bitonti
03-23-2009, 01:48 PM
Josh Freeman is like Jamarcus Russell without the wins... or the big time game experience... or the ability to be considered a 1 overall pick... but yeh other than all taht he's just like Jamarcus Russell.

The Legend
03-23-2009, 07:36 PM
Let's Compare Them as Prospects

Arm Strength- Jamarcus
Accuracy-Jamarcus
Athleticism-Jamarcus
Elusiveness-Jamarcus
Production-Jamarcus (though the two teams were worlds apart talent wise)
Intelligence-Jamarcus
Competition-Jamarcus

There's no prospective aspect, in which Josh Freeman has an edge over Jamarcus Russell

Elusiveness I'd give to Freeman.

San Diego Chicken
03-26-2009, 12:47 AM
Josh Freeman is like Jamarcus Russell without the wins... or the big time game experience... or the ability to be considered a 1 overall pick... but yeh other than all taht he's just like Jamarcus Russell.

I usually don't like the "help" argument, but in this case I think it's worth mentioning that Russell played alongside Bowe, Davis and Doucet in college, and had a stable of good runners, including Joseph Addai. Not to mention a great O-line and one of the best, most consistent defenses in college football behind him. Those teams were so talented that they lost 4 first rounders and won the national championship the next year.

Freeman had Jordy Nelson, and that was it as far as next level talent on his offense. (Clary may have been there his freshman year). Even still, he was able lead his team to victory against Texas twice. The only (final) top 10 team that I can confirm that LSU defeated when Russell started was Alabama in 2005. I remember then destroying a decent Miami team in the Peach Bowl, but that was with Flynn at QB.

Crickett
03-26-2009, 01:16 AM
I usually don't like the "help" argument, but in this case I think it's worth mentioning that Russell played alongside Bowe, Davis and Doucet in college, and had a stable of good runners, including Joseph Addai. Not to mention a great O-line and one of the best, most consistent defenses in college football behind him. Those teams were so talented that they lost 4 first rounders and won the national championship the next year.

Freeman had Jordy Nelson


:eek:

Freeman has the great JORDYZZZZZZZZZZ and you're bringing up the help argument for Jamarcus? For shame.

Menardo75
03-26-2009, 01:51 AM
This isn't even a comparison. I wish people would give Russell more credit.

vikes_28
03-26-2009, 08:35 AM
Russel hasn't hardly been given a chance yet. Give him a chance before you judge. I think Freeman will actually have a better career than Matt Stafford. Freeman will be drafted late enough to be on one of those "win now" teams. And Stafford will most likely go to Detroit where there is a lot of building to do. He will be old news by the time the Lions get good...if that happens.

JRTPlaya21
03-26-2009, 08:39 AM
Russell > Freeman. End of topic.

The Great Jonathan Vilma
03-26-2009, 10:01 AM
I agree somewhat. But if arm strength is not important why do scouts at the top of the draft worry so much about it? Why is that the 1st thing you hear about Jay Cutler, Matt Stafford, Russell, Quinn(lack of) etc. Its very important. If your ball floats it doesnt matter how accurrate you are. Ask Chad Pennington why he gets no love.

Having a strong arm is important but it doesnt matter if your not accurate or cant read D's. JaMarcus Russell has a great arm but he does alot of good things as a QB also. He is a work in progress anyway so anyone calling a 23 year old QB with less than 20 starts a bust is a fool.

Doesn't matter if he gets no love, if he's playing killer ball it just goes against your point that arm strength is a huge deal. Players with lower arm strength can succeed just fine. However, a QB comparison where they are equal in other categories, obviously the arm strength is preferred and is a huge benefit. However, if you have arm strength, you have it, i don't think having that extreme arm strength (say Russell's) makes him any better than a QB like Cutler. What i mean by that is, if you have both those 2 QBs arm strength, i don't think having Russell's over Cutler's makes any difference. At a certain point, arm strength becomes almost moot. Pennington is a well below arm strength comparison and should not be used as it is the basement of arm strength. Take a main level arm strength and your fine.

(i'm thinking the paragraph above will sound like jiberish)

I'm not a Russell guy and think that he is going to flop. Quote me on it, but its my opinion. People talk about the crap around him, but i just don't see much. He's got the physical makeup of a #1 overall pick, but that doesn't mean he will succeed, but that he will be given many opportunities to succeed because so much was invested in him. I'm not calling him a bust or anything, but that is more the route i see him going, versus the 'elite' QB route. I'm not going to compare Freeman because i haven't seen enough film on him to develop a worthwhile opinion.

ImightBeeTheGreatest
03-26-2009, 04:45 PM
I didnt know much about Freeman until a few months back. He seems to be a pretty legit athletic, he is no questions unproven.
I was watching some videos on him on YouTube because I wasnt that familiar with him. www.youtube.com/imatopprospect (www.imatopprospect.com) hes got a pretty nasty arm

OzTitan
03-26-2009, 05:47 PM
I didnt know much about Freeman until a few months back. He seems to be a pretty legit athletic, he is no questions unproven.
I was watching some videos on him on YouTube because I wasnt that familiar with him. www.youtube.com/imatopprospect (www.imatopprospect.com) hes got a pretty nasty arm

I'm no mod here, but I imagine spamming your site like you have in every post so far is probably going to get you banned.

ImightBeeTheGreatest
03-26-2009, 05:55 PM
Well Im new here and your wront. just wanted to share some cool stuff w/ you. you might want to get a life oz.

OzTitan
03-26-2009, 11:09 PM
Well Im new here and your wront. just wanted to share some cool stuff w/ you. you might want to get a life oz.

"Don't try to piggyback on Scott's success. If you have any confidence in your site, there are other ways to advertise."

That is one of the forum rules.

Hell, I don't care, a mod will deal with it. I just realized you were new here and maybe weren't aware posting for the obvious purpose of promoting a site you own isn't going to let you last long. I was trying to be helpful, because I don't think a mod is going to be fooled by a URL that looks like youtube but really directs to another site.

SimonRath
03-26-2009, 11:53 PM
you might want to get a life oz.

you might wanna get banned

RaiderNation
03-26-2009, 11:57 PM
Only 3 ways hes like JaMarcus

1 Hes big
2 Has great arm
3 Hes black

Why cant be be like Big Ben?

Crickett
03-26-2009, 11:58 PM
Well Im new here and your wront. just wanted to share some cool stuff w/ you. you might want to get a life oz.

Hey Vegeta, what does the scouter say about his power level?

hagy34
03-27-2009, 12:20 AM
Little early for a post like this. Freeman is a huge question mark and its not like Russell has be awful.

jaa1025
03-28-2009, 01:51 AM
Let's Compare Them as Prospects

Arm Strength- Jamarcus...but not by much. Still Freeman possesses one of the strongest arms in the league.
Accuracy-Jamarcus...disagree. Jamarcus had all day throwing behind LSU's line. Freeman was running for his life on nearly every play and I'm not exaggerating. So it's impossible to tell. I know when he did have time, he was very accurate and he showed tremendous accuracy during his pro day.
Athleticism-Jamarcus- not a chance. Big doesn't equal athleticism. Freeman is a physical freak...not as BIG as far as stature, but not far behind. He's definitely a workout freak, unlike Russell who's a McDonald's freak.
Elusiveness-Jamarcus-NO. Freeman has shown this many times in running for his life. I watched him breat 5 tackles against OU for a completion. It wasn't just CB's falling off...it was DLINE that we're wrapped around him.
Production-Jamarcus (though the two teams were worlds apart talent wise) can't really compare. JaMarcus had an NFL team in college. Freeman had the talent of a decent HIGHSCHOOL team.
Intelligence-Jamarcus Freeman Wonderlic score 27 Jamarcus 24
Competition-Jamarcus YES, SEC has much better defenses. BUT Again...LSU had more talent that anyone in the country. KState had the worst in the big XII. Can't draw anything from this because of that.

There's no prospective aspect, in which Josh Freeman has an edge over Jamarcus Russell

If Freeman played for USC, Florida, LSU, OU etc...there wouldn't be ANY doubt in my mind that he would be a lock for #1 overall. 1, he would receive MUCH better coaching. 2) He would actually have some talent around him.

AMERICAN MUSCLE
05-07-2011, 03:38 PM
Bump! This thread has epic fail.

Hurricanes25
05-07-2011, 03:43 PM
Bumping a thread over 2 years old- epic fail.

AMERICAN MUSCLE
05-07-2011, 03:49 PM
Bumping a thread over 2 years old- epic fail.


You are dismissing the utter stupidity in this thread. 2 years or 2 days... shouldn't hide the fact so many people didn't know what they were talking about.

Iamcanadian
05-07-2011, 03:49 PM
Russell had the potential to be one of the great QB's but he had a mind set of a total flop. Absolutely zero commitment to learning his trade and working hard at it.
Freeman on the other hand, doesn't come close to Russell's physical abilities but he has the mind set of a champion and is willing to do what it takes to be great.
In my mind at least I would compare him to Peyton or Brady in terms of potential.

nikkayeah
05-07-2011, 04:02 PM
lol @ the guy that said jamarcus is more intelligent than freeman

AMERICAN MUSCLE
05-07-2011, 04:08 PM
lol @ the guy that said jamarcus is more intelligent than freeman

Which one? lol

wicket
05-07-2011, 04:20 PM
Bumping a thread over 2 years old- epic fail.

with his very first post, just weird.

Also saying everyone who liked Russel as a propsect was stupid is ******** iyam. Pretty much every QB prospect has questionmarks and just citing those with hindsight is just lame.

Petition for mods to change bumpers username to American Muscle No Brain

Abaddon
05-07-2011, 11:45 PM
There's an obscene amount of stupid in this thread.

How anyone, even an LSU homer, expected Russell to succeed in the NFL without the benefit of any degree of work ethic is inexplicable.

Some busts are hard to predict. Some are painfully obvious to anyone who bothers paying attention. Russell was so clearly the latter that anyone who insisted he'd be a good player should be shunned and never taken seriously again.

ElectricEye
05-07-2011, 11:55 PM
I hate people who bump threads and laugh at people out of context. It's always people like this guy too. Always.

descendency
05-08-2011, 12:29 AM
I'm not going to laugh at anyone, but there are far too many people who are judging JaMarcus with hindsight.

JaMarcus was a freakishly good QB at LSU. Yes, there were problems on the field, but all prospects have those. It came out later that his work ethic was so-so.

edit: I lied. I'm going to laugh at everyone who said Josh Freeman had equal arm strength to JaMarcus Russell. Russell had a true cannon. Freeman has a good arm. It's not in the same ballpark as Russell.

DecisiveLeaf
05-08-2011, 01:00 AM
Bumping a thread over 2 years old- epic fail.

I hate people who bump threads and laugh at people out of context. It's always people like this guy too. Always.

Why? What's the point of spouting off "knowledge", making rankings, etc. if people aren't held accountable? How will we know who to trust? You should stick by what was said, no one is 100% right in this league.

bigbuc
05-08-2011, 01:12 AM
Why? What's the point of spouting off "knowledge", making rankings, etc. if people aren't held accountable? How will we know who to trust? You should stick by what was said, no one is 100% right in this league.

I with you! Most of you talk big game, but when something comes back that was so wrong you all get upset saying that its two years old? What's up with that? What happened to eating your words! Everyone likes to yell when there right I guess.

I was reading the first page... And saw some Bucs fans saying JaMarcus was way better. The best one was the " Let's Compare Them as Prospects " Fing great.

Opinions are like A Holes... everyone's got one. Just don't be upset when yours gets thrown back into your face.

bigbuc
05-08-2011, 01:22 AM
Russell had the potential to be one of the great QB's but he had a mind set of a total flop. Absolutely zero commitment to learning his trade and working hard at it.
Freeman on the other hand, doesn't come close to Russell's physical abilities but he has the mind set of a champion and is willing to do what it takes to be great.
In my mind at least I would compare him to Peyton or Brady in terms of potential.

Why is it that you all think that Russell had better "physical abilities " than Freeman? Was he bigger? Yes. But you can be tall and slow. The only thing I'll give you on the physical abilities thing is he could throw the ball harder than Freeman. That's it! that's all! and its not even close. Freeman has better physical abilities in all other areas.

Mr. Goosemahn
05-08-2011, 01:59 AM
Why is it that you all think that Russell had better "physical abilities " than Freeman? Was he bigger? Yes. But you can be tall and slow. The only thing I'll give you on the physical abilities thing is he could throw the ball harder than Freeman. That's it! that's all! and its not even close. Freeman has better physical abilities in all other areas.

Because he did. He is the same height as Freeman (6056 Freeman and 6054 Russell), but was faster (4.83 Russell and 4.9 Freeman) while being almost 40 lbs. heavier.

Freeman is the better QB, no doubt, but Russell is probably the best QB prospect in the last decade when it came to physical abilities. His arm strength would be up there with the best in the NFL, and had he not ballooned up to 300 lbs., he would be one of the best running QB's as well. Not elusive like Vick, but tough to bring down, like Roethlisberger.

Russell had all the physical ability in the world, he just had no work ethic, no sense of self-motivation, no hunger for self-improvement, and a gargantuan paycheck.

Just take a look at this play. He chucks the ball 50+ yards without properly setting his feet and completing the correct throwing motion. There are very, very, very few QB's who can do that.

JuHXGVudSGw

Evaluating JaMarcus Russell as a prospect after seeing him become one of, if not the, biggest bust in NFL history is useless, as virtually everyone's opinion of him is tainted. Was he a perfect prospect? No. But from a physical standpoint, he was very close. From a football standpoint, he wasn't a bad player either. His last year at LSU, he threw for 3129 yards, 28 TDs and 8 INTS, with a 67.8 completion percentage. The Raiders needed a QB, and Russell was a better physical specimen than Brady Quinn, which basically was all that mattered to Oakland at the time (and still :S). Quinn turned out to be a bust too.

Had JaMarcus Russell had a mediocre work ethic, he'd probably be more talented than half of the league's starters right now.

gpngc
05-08-2011, 02:21 PM
Russell busted because he was lazy and stupid.

Missing on Russell as a draftnik was simply because people who liked him thought he wasn't lazy as ****. In fact, he was. So we lost. But the logic that we had before the draft wasn't flawed or poor at all. The tangibles were all top-notch, there's no denying that.

He just didn't put the work in. That's a pretty difficult thing to predict when scouting - especially when millions are at stake so the kid is going to say and do everything in his power to make it look like he's not lazy.

I liked them both so I'll take .500. I still think if Russell gave anywhere close to a **** he'd be a fine QB.

ElectricEye
05-08-2011, 02:27 PM
Why? What's the point of spouting off "knowledge", making rankings, etc. if people aren't held accountable? How will we know who to trust? You should stick by what was said, no one is 100% right in this league.

...everyone knows that. If you're on this board for more than two seconds, we have entire threads about the guys we were most wrong on. We talk about it all the time. I didn't like Jamarcus Russell, but I have no quams admitting I thought Josh Freeman was a fringe second round pick based on what I saw out of him at Kansas. None.


No one is trying to cover anything they said up, it's just ridiculously stupid that some Bucs homer bumped this thread because of his massive Freesus boner. There's no "holding anyone accountable" here. It's just sheer stupidity.

If it was "Oh wow, a lot of people thought Jamarcus Russell was a good prospect, what can we learn from this"(we've had this thread before) it would be another story....but bumping a two year old thread and going HAHAHA RETARDS HOW THE HELL COULDNT U SEE FREEMEN WAS THE BETTER PROSPECT(despite the fact he looked LOST at Kansas State at time. His stats were downright awful against good defensive teams, even his senior year) is not what you're talking about. Learn the distinction. Nothing to glamorize here.

Hurricanes25
05-08-2011, 02:40 PM
....but bumping a two year old thread and going HAHAHA RETARDS HOW THE HELL COULDNT U SEE FREEMEN WAS THE BETTER PROSPECT(despite the fact he looked LOST at Kansas State at time. His stats were downright awful against good defensive teams, even his senior year) is not what you're talking about. Learn the distinction. Nothing to glamorize here.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

While we're at it, why don't we just bump every ******* thread and laugh at someody who made a wrong or bad prediction. [/sarcasm]

Rosebud
05-08-2011, 03:46 PM
Why is it that you all think that Russell had better "physical abilities " than Freeman? Was he bigger? Yes. But you can be tall and slow. The only thing I'll give you on the physical abilities thing is he could throw the ball harder than Freeman. That's it! that's all! and its not even close. Freeman has better physical abilities in all other areas.

Isn't being bigger, faster and stronger what makes one have better "physical abilities" or do I just not understand the way you're using that term?

Rosebud
05-08-2011, 03:51 PM
Because he did. He is the same height as Freeman (6056 Freeman and 6054 Russell), but was faster (4.83 Russell and 4.9 Freeman) while being almost 40 lbs. heavier.

Freeman is the better QB, no doubt, but Russell is probably the best QB prospect in the last decade when it came to physical abilities. His arm strength would be up there with the best in the NFL, and had he not ballooned up to 300 lbs., he would be one of the best running QB's as well. Not elusive like Vick, but tough to bring down, like Roethlisberger.

Russell had all the physical ability in the world, he just had no work ethic, no sense of self-motivation, no hunger for self-improvement, and a gargantuan paycheck.

Just take a look at this play. He chucks the ball 50+ yards without properly setting his feet and completing the correct throwing motion. There are very, very, very few QB's who can do that.

JuHXGVudSGw

Evaluating JaMarcus Russell as a prospect after seeing him become one of, if not the, biggest bust in NFL history is useless, as virtually everyone's opinion of him is tainted. Was he a perfect prospect? No. But from a physical standpoint, he was very close. From a football standpoint, he wasn't a bad player either. His last year at LSU, he threw for 3129 yards, 28 TDs and 8 INTS, with a 67.8 completion percentage. The Raiders needed a QB, and Russell was a better physical specimen than Brady Quinn, which basically was all that mattered to Oakland at the time (and still :S). Quinn turned out to be a bust too.

Had JaMarcus Russell had a mediocre work ethic, he'd probably be more talented than half of the league's starters right now.

His accuracy was really unimpressive in comparison to his numbers, and by that I mean he put up great stats but a lot of that was bolstered by a WR corps that did a great job making plays on deep balls that JR just put out of the defenders' reach he never just dropped it in the perfect spot for receivers to make the grab in stride, and there was a number of us who expressed concerns about his work ethic that lead to us disliking him as a prospect. His raw tools were unbelievable, but let's not make it seem like there weren't a lot of people who expressed a lot of concerns about him and at the time made fun of the Raiders for that pick.

prock
05-08-2011, 03:52 PM
I love how alot of guys are writing off JaMarcus this early.

Let's look back at this RN :)

J-Mike88
05-08-2011, 04:10 PM
You are dismissing the utter stupidity in this thread. 2 years or 2 days... shouldn't hide the fact so many people didn't know what they were talking about.
good points. i agree with this guy.

too many times, people like kiper mcshay mayock, and here, act like geniuses before a draft..... then later after 50%+ of them have busted, where are they to be held accountable?

a lot of fans weren't fooled by jamarcus russell's great size and his ability to launch a ball 80 yards in the air. throwing a ball 80 yards is worthless, unless he's also accurate.

that's jamarcus.

josh freeman has proven a lot of us wrong as he's headed for a great career it appears.

TBBucs621
05-09-2011, 07:18 PM
Russell got the money and he became lazy. He could have been a star if he would have had a good coach to motivate him. Josh Freeman is a star in the making.

Ozzy
05-10-2011, 06:59 AM
This is an impressive outcome. In college actually I thought Freeman underachieved big time and was a potential loaf in the NFL. But he clearly has a more successful pro career than he had a college career. And Russell who was very successful and productive in college took the other route and became the icon of being a loaf in the NFL.

Then again, think Freeman would be as successful if he would have went to such an unstable organization like the Raiders? I doubt it....who knows, but doubt Russell would turn out like he did if he went to one of the stable traditional powers in the NFL. Same could be said for a lot of quarterbacks hypothetically.

onejayhawk
05-10-2011, 07:21 AM
The key note to take from this is that college championships are overrated. What this has to do with Carolina's first pick, I leave to the student.

J

Watchman
05-10-2011, 01:27 PM
I also think that arm strength was way overblown in this thread. It is like comparing a temp of 102 degrees to 111 degrees. Who cares, it is hot, turn the A/C on.

Saints-Tigers
05-10-2011, 01:33 PM
Russell wasn't going to succeed anywhere, because he doesn't care really. He cared in college, and was a quality player with a ton of upside.

He's really not stupid like people are portraying it, he's lazy.

San Diego Chicken
05-10-2011, 02:29 PM
Russell wasn't going to succeed anywhere, because he doesn't care really. He cared in college, and was a quality player with a ton of upside.

He's really not stupid like people are portraying it, he's lazy.

I think the choices he's made for his life indicates that he's both.

nikkayeah
05-14-2011, 12:33 AM
Which one? lol

warehouse on page 1

JustDezIT
05-14-2011, 08:45 AM
Id take Russell everyday of the week and twice on Tuesday's....... and I wasnt a fan of Russell when he was a prospect( I wanted Calvin)

Hahahahahahahahaahahahah LOL. Ahhh, Raiders fans.