PDA

View Full Version : Top QB poll


Scotty D
09-18-2010, 02:38 PM
Jake Locker - Washington - Senior
http://imgur.com/BXjoq.png
Pro - Mobility, runs pro style offense
Cons - Injuries, accuracy, losing record at Washington

Andrew Luck - Stanford - RS Sophmore
http://imgur.com/a8XzC.png
Pro - Smart, has the physical tools, Dad played QB, pro style offense
Cons - Experience, hasn't been focus of defenses

Ryan Mallett - Arkansas - Junior
http://imgur.com/EXY9M.png
Pro - Physical tools
Cons - Often lacks touch on throws,





Please share you opinion of these three QB prospects and vote in the poll, thanks.

*Stats from www.espn.com

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 02:51 PM
I don't think he'll come out but give me Luck. All 3 would go in the top 10 if they came out this year though. All have franchise potential and excellent tools to succeed. Add to that how many teams could use a new QB and we could see another 2004 type of year with several good QBs going early.

ElectricEye
09-18-2010, 02:53 PM
Right now, I have to say Locker. He has the best combination of tools and intangibles out of any of them. Luck looks like he was born to play quarterback in the NFL, but he still has a lot more to prove than people realize. All of these guys do, really, despite the talent level.

Scotty D
09-18-2010, 03:03 PM
I voted Mallett because he has the physical potential and still puts up great production. Even though his stats are great, while you watch him play you notice how much better his stats could be. You can coach him to take something off those short passes but you can't teach his arm strength. Mallett and McGuffie should have never left Michigan!

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 03:05 PM
I voted Mallett because he has the physical potential and still puts up great production. Even though his stats are great, while you watch him play you notice how much better his stats could be. You can coach him to take something off those short passes but you can't teach his arm strength. Mallett and McGuffie should have never left Michigan!

Would you give up Denardzzz for Mallett now? Really??

Maybe if Mallett could play some linebacker....and safety.....and defensive tackle....then maybe. Right?

Scotty D
09-18-2010, 03:06 PM
Would you give up Denardzzz for Mallett now? Really??

Maybe if Mallett could play some linebacker....and safety.....and defensive tackle....then maybe. Right?

I'd rather have Les Miles + Mallett and never had RichRod in Ann Arbor. :(

RaiderNation
09-18-2010, 03:23 PM
Still got Locker as my #1 guy, but I can see all these guys at "potential" #1 draft picks. Interesting to see how Mallett and Luck handle the draft process and maybe wait to see what the other does if they enter the draft. Gut feeling has be saying Mallett will enter the draft and Luck will stay for 1 year like Bradford

P-L
09-18-2010, 03:25 PM
I keep going back-and-forth between Locker and Luck. For this poll, I voted Luck.

KCJ58
09-18-2010, 04:13 PM
Case Keenum

SchizophrenicBatman
09-18-2010, 04:42 PM
Luck's ahead of both, and depending on how this year goes Mallett might be #2

That's saying something, because I actually like Locker

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 04:43 PM
Luck's ahead of both, and depending on how this year goes Mallett might be #2

That's saying something, because I actually like Locker

I know how you feel. As long as none of these guys really crash and burn this season, I wouldn't be upset to have any as my QB in the NFL. There are things to like about them all and a lot of potential too.

Morton
09-18-2010, 05:01 PM
I'm sorry but I'm just not understanding the "Jake Locker is a top 10 pick" hype. He makes poor decisions, throws inaccurate passes, and his mobility is overrated.

Ryan Mallett, in my mind, is the top QB prospect in this draft class and it's not even close.

Halsey
09-18-2010, 05:02 PM
I try not to be a prisoner of the moment, and I haven't watched Locker much at all, but it's hard not to question all the praise for him when he has a game like today. And it's not like today is the only reason to question him. Could people be falling for his combination of physical talent and character, while not paying attention to flaws in his game?

And yes, I voted Locker in this poll, because so many people I respect seem to like him a lot, but I honestly don't know from personal observation.

dregolll
09-18-2010, 05:07 PM
Halsey,
So what you are basically saying is that you only like prospects on the basis of another persons perspective. You voted for Locker on the because Scott and Shane like him. WOW!!!!

Halsey
09-18-2010, 05:12 PM
Halsey,
So what you are basically saying is that you only like prospects on the basis of another persons perspective. You voted for Locker on the because Scott and Shane like him. WOW!!!!

Nope, I didn't say that. It's not just Scott and Shane that like Locker, and I can only go with the information I have. I'm not a fan who pretends to watch every play of every game, like many people here.

I'm sure you've watched every play of every game and broken down film of every prospect, right?

Ballbright
09-18-2010, 05:25 PM
Nope, I didn't say that. It's not just Scott and Shane that like Locker, and I can only go with the information I have. I'm not a fan who pretends to watch every play of every game, like many people here.

I'm sure you've watched every play of every game and broken down film of every prospect, right?

I have.... Mallett is a top ten lock. Locker has the potential to be first round material, but games like today go to show how much room he has to go.

That said Mallett will have as tough, it not a tougher test, next week against Alabama...

dregolll
09-18-2010, 05:26 PM
Well Halsey,
I won't sit here and lie and say that I've broken down film of every prospect because I haven't. But let me put things in perspective. I have probably got over 2,000 football games dating all the way back to 1994, so I know a little about watching games and breaking down prospects. I'm not saying I'm the best or some scout, but I do have actual games of the prospects and not some espn or youtube highlights. I have games of Peyton Manning, Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch, Micheal Vick, David Carr, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning and much more. I bet you won't find to many people on this board with that much knowledge dating back that far. I'm not trying to sound arrogant, but I'm pretty sure I know a lot more about football scouting and football overall than most of the people on this board.

Babylon
09-18-2010, 06:16 PM
Well Halsey,
I won't sit here and lie and say that I've broken down film of every prospect because I haven't. But let me put things in perspective. I have probably got over 2,000 football games dating all the way back to 1994, so I know a little about watching games and breaking down prospects. I'm not saying I'm the best or some scout, but I do have actual games of the prospects and not some espn or youtube highlights. I have games of Peyton Manning, Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch, Micheal Vick, David Carr, Carson Palmer, Eli Manning and much more. I bet you won't find to many people on this board with that much knowledge dating back that far. I'm not trying to sound arrogant, but I'm pretty sure I know a lot more about football scouting and football overall than most of the people on this board.

Just give your opinions and dont give us some timeline on how long you've been watching football. Some people in here go back a lot longer than you do.

Addict
09-18-2010, 06:25 PM
if I need to save a franchise, I take Locker.

now if I had time to groom and bring along I'd probably go Luck.

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 06:26 PM
if I need to save a franchise, I take Locker.

now if I had time to groom and bring along I'd probably go Luck.

I think Locker and Mallett are the ones who may need to be brought along slow. Luck has the more polished skills imo, like the touch and short-intermediate accuracy that the others lack.

Addict
09-18-2010, 06:30 PM
I think Locker and Mallett are the ones who may need to be brought along slow. Luck has the more polished skills imo, like the touch and short-intermediate accuracy that the others lack.

could be, I don't see these college kids play, just the highlights and they all look good in highlights.

Frankly from what I've read, I think Locker is the one with the best floor, and if I'm picking first, I want a guy who I at least know has a good foundation. I don't like Luck coming out after his RS year (don't think he will, either).

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 06:33 PM
could be, I don't see these college kids play, just the highlights and they all look good in highlights.

Frankly from what I've read, I think Locker is the one with the best floor, and if I'm picking first, I want a guy who I at least know has a good foundation. I don't like Luck coming out after his RS year (don't think he will, either).

Neither do I, and I usually preface my thoughts on him with that. But if he did, I agree that he is the least likely to be an outright bust, though the others have wildly higher ceilings I feel.

And if you want to see them play, find a place online that rebroadcasts the games. I've gotten to see both of Mallett and Locker already today. Now I'm checking out Cam Newton.

ElectricEye
09-18-2010, 07:14 PM
Honestly, I think there's things every single one of them has a whole lot to prove.

Luck has all of one years of starting experience under his belt. If he comes out this year, and he probably will not contrary to popular belief, there's not going to be a whole lot of tape on him. He looked REALLY good at times last year, but he also looked like a freshmen. People seem to think he set all kinds of passing records and was the focus of the team last year...but he was not. He had wide receivers single covered almost constantly. Everyone was in the box trying to stop Gerhart. He did an excellent job of keeping people honest, but he still has a lot to prove. He really struggled last week against UCLA. UCLA is not Nebraska by any means either.

Locker, I think we all know the issues. He's going to be a four year starter, but he's really only been coached right for two and played for three. He has issues with his feet and at times gives up on plays too easily and takes off. He's improved greatly in those areas the past few, but he's still very much a work in progress. He could benefit going into a situation where the pressure to start isn't there right away. His accuracy is spotty at times, but a whole lot of that has to do with his offensive line having a death wish for him and the general lack of talent. He couldn't get into a rhythm today for a whole lot of reasons. I hate to make excuses for any prospect, but because of Washington he's the type of guy who gets a few.

Mallet scared me the most out of all of them. Out of the top three quarterbacks, he probably has the least intangibly. He doesn't have the feel for the game the other too do, especially compared to Luck. He also has some serious issues getting the ball where he wants to at times. Bobby Petrino is not a guy who traditionally puts guys into the NFL either. His offense is sort of similar to LSU's a few years ago during the Jamarcus Russell era. It's not a spread, but there's a lot of high percentage passes as well. Combine that with his complete lack of mobility(he's better than you would initially expect, but he'll be a big target in the NFL) and he really scares me. Still, the talent is there and he has been productive thus far. I would argue that he is just as raw as Locker overall though.

Addict
09-18-2010, 07:29 PM
Neither do I, and I usually preface my thoughts on him with that. But if he did, I agree that he is the least likely to be an outright bust, though the others have wildly higher ceilings I feel.

And if you want to see them play, find a place online that rebroadcasts the games. I've gotten to see both of Mallett and Locker already today. Now I'm checking out Cam Newton.

with an IP adress from continental europe that's fairly difficult.

not to mention the internet connection around here isn't too quick.

SchizophrenicBatman
09-18-2010, 07:52 PM
Locker absolutely does not have the highest floor. He could very easily be a tools bust

56crash
09-18-2010, 08:01 PM
NFL lock out...

ElectricEye
09-18-2010, 08:03 PM
Locker absolutely does not have the highest floor. He could very easily be a tools bust

Yeah, Locker has the highest ceiling. Luck has the highest floor, even though we can't even really be sure of that. Thank you Mark Sanchez for making evaluating quarterbacks that much more complicated.

Scotty D
09-18-2010, 08:23 PM
I said this in the gameday thread but Ryan Mallett reminds me of Derek Anderson in both size and how he throws the ball. Anybody else have comparisons for the big three?

Morton
09-18-2010, 08:29 PM
Question: Does Jake Locker's terrible game today have anything to do with Prince Nakamakura (sp) covering his top WR?

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 08:37 PM
I said this in the gameday thread but Ryan Mallett reminds me of Derek Anderson in both size and how he throws the ball. Anybody else have comparisons for the big three?

With more polish I think Mallett can be made to look better. As has been pointed out in a few places, a lot of his problems do seem like they can be fixed. I'd say DA is comparison for Mallett's floor...as for a ceiling....I don't know if anyone's had as elite of tools as he has.

Question: Does Jake Locker's terrible game today have anything to do with Prince Nakamakura (sp) covering his top WR?

No, Nebraska's defense as a whole really blanketed Washington's receivers. Washington was just totally outmatched, though they did have spurts where they ran the ball pretty well.

Saints-Tigers
09-18-2010, 08:54 PM
I think I like Mallett as of now as the best blend of top end potential, and how developed he is now.

Locker for top end potential, because he has some serious wheels and a big arm of his own.


I personally like all 3 better than guys like Bradford, Sanchez, Freeman etc.

619
09-18-2010, 09:00 PM
I'd argue that Jake Locker's floor is Jake Plummer. Agreed?

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 09:01 PM
I'd argue that Jake Locker's floor is Jake Plummer. Agree?

Well, Plummer had some quality years, especially his early time in Denver. If you mean type of player, yeah, along those lines. But if you really want to talk floor.....Locker could turn out really badly. If things don't click for him and he ends up in a bad position, he's the type where I think things could go real ugly for real fast.

Scotty D
09-18-2010, 09:03 PM
With more polish I think Mallett can be made to look better. As has been pointed out in a few places, a lot of his problems do seem like they can be fixed. I'd say DA is comparison for Mallett's floor...as for a ceiling....I don't know if anyone's had as elite of tools as he has.


I agree.

I think the mid round QBs are also interesting. Case Keenum, Colin Kaepernick, Tyrod Taylor (only saw the Boise game), Jerrod Johnson, Stanzi, Enderle.

Much better year to draft a QB compared to last year. I did think Levi Brown would stick on a roster though.

Babylon
09-18-2010, 09:04 PM
I said this in the gameday thread but Ryan Mallett reminds me of Derek Anderson in both size and how he throws the ball. Anybody else have comparisons for the big three?

Not sure if these are too optimistic:

Jake Locker-Donovan McNabb
Ryan Mallett-Tom Brady
Andrew Luck-Matt Ryan

ElectricEye
09-18-2010, 09:05 PM
Not sure if these are too optimistic:

Jake Locker-Donovan McNabb
Ryan Mallett-Tom Brady
Andrew Luck-Matt Ryan

The rest of them I can get behind, but the only thing Mallet has in common with Brady is a strong arm. Bledsoe maybe. That's not an insult either.

Babylon
09-18-2010, 09:07 PM
Question: Does Jake Locker's terrible game today have anything to do with Prince Nakamakura (sp) covering his top WR?

That and more specifically the Nebraska secondary, i was there and saw little if any seperation most of the day. When Locker did get Kearse open he dropped it downfield into his lap for an easy score.

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 09:07 PM
Not sure if these are too optimistic:

Jake Locker-Donovan McNabb
Ryan Mallett-Tom Brady
Andrew Luck-Matt Ryan

I don't think Brady has even close to the physical capabilities that Mallett does. If he puts things together, he could easily be the best since Elway. That's my ceiling comparison for him. Derrick Anderson for a floor.

I also still question Matt Ryan's ceiling. I did when he was a prospect, but he could become a quality player. I think Luck's ceiling is higher than Ryan's. I'm thinking maybe Eli Manning for Luck? At worst, a Kyle Orton type.

Babylon
09-18-2010, 09:09 PM
The rest of them I can get behind, but the only thing Mallet has in common with Brady is a strong arm.

Gotta remember where Brady was at a similar stage, not very mobile but saw the field well and both i think have plus arms.

For a minute there i thought you were going to say the only thing they had in common was the women, not that there's anything wrong with that.

ElectricEye
09-18-2010, 09:10 PM
I don't think Brady has even close to the physical capabilities that Mallett does. If he puts things together, he could easily be the best since Elway. That's my ceiling comparison for him. Derrick Anderson for a floor.

Does he even have a higher ceiling than Locker? Locker's arm isn't that much further behind Mallet's. Mallet wins by a bit, but Locker has an arm comparable to Stafford at least. If you factor Locker's mobility, honestly don't see anyone with better tools. I remember a few years ago when Locker was more of an unfinished project, most people said it was impossible to have better tools than him. He was a "if he ever put it together a little bit....WOW!" guy.


Gotta remember where Brady was at a similar stage, not very mobile but saw the field well and both i think have plus arms.

For a minute there i thought you were going to say the only thing they had in common was the women, not that there's anything wrong with that.
But you gotta remember accuracy. That was Brady's calling card at the start of his career, and it will be Mallet's biggest weakness starting his.

zachsaints52
09-18-2010, 09:11 PM
Don't you guys think that the competition each player goes up against also should play in effect? I mean, Pac 10 is all day passing and higher scores, while being a good passer in the SEC is pretty difficult. Add on top of that he isn't on a premier team in the SEC, I would say that should talk highly about him.

Forenci
09-18-2010, 09:12 PM
I think I like Mallett as of now as the best blend of top end potential, and how developed he is now.

Locker for top end potential, because he has some serious wheels and a big arm of his own.


I personally like all 3 better than guys like Bradford, Sanchez, Freeman etc.

I don't know why Bradford gets so much hate. Bradford is such a better passer than Locker. Locker has better tools and upside but as a passer I'd take Bradford 10 times out of 10 over Locker. And Mallet too.

I love Luck though, so it remains to be seen.

Scotty D
09-18-2010, 09:15 PM
Don't you guys think that the competition each player goes up against also should play in effect? I mean, Pac 10 is all day passing and higher scores, while being a good passer in the SEC is pretty difficult. Add on top of that he isn't on a premier team in the SEC, I would say that should talk highly about him.

This is a good point, but when breaking down a prospect I think it should be looked at as one piece of a big puzzle.

Ballbright
09-18-2010, 09:17 PM
Whoever said Locker's floor is Plummer is kidding themsleves, Locker's floor is Kyle Boller

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 09:19 PM
I don't know why Bradford gets so much hate. Bradford is such a better passer than Locker. Locker has better tools and upside but as a passer I'd take Bradford 10 times out of 10 over Locker. And Mallet too.


Bradford doesn't have a great arm, the play he got injured on at OU wasn't anything freak imo so it led me to believe he could be fragile, a lot of his throws were short range, high percentage ones that boosted his stats, he played in the Big-12 where defense is optional and that padded his stats....

A lot not to like about him imo. Can he be successful? Of course, but guys with tools the caliber of Locker and Mallett are going to be drafted ahead of guys like him in today's NFL 10 out of 10 times. He got pushed up boards due to the lack of another legitimate QB last year, but if he were in this class, barring meltdowns to the guys we're discussing here, he'd be 4th.

zachsaints52
09-18-2010, 09:22 PM
This is a good point, but when breaking down a prospect I think it should be looked at as one piece of a big puzzle.

Well no offense to Pac 10, but for the overall part is they aren't as strong of a Defensive Conference as the SEC. (Not trying to create another debate, trying to give reason)

Mallet has to go against 5-7 difficult opponents a year, and who does Luck and Locker have? USC? Not anymore. You go to think Defensive teams you think LSU, Florida, Georgia, etc. and Mallet has to face them every week. He has 16 records at Arkansas, while only being there one year! (well two but one redshirt)

If I have to put the biggest knock, its the Rivers syndrome. He trash talks a little too much for my liking, but QB's gotta have some swagger on the field. (He has too much haha)

Giantsfan1080
09-18-2010, 09:23 PM
BeerBaron I was thinking the exact thing with Luck. I definitely see an Eli Manning type player especially if he stays at Stanford and develops the experience that will help him out big time. Eli was at Ole Miss for 5 years which helped him transition to the NFL better.

Babylon
09-18-2010, 09:26 PM
Well no offense to Pac 10, but for the overall part is they aren't as strong of a Defensive Conference as the SEC. (Not trying to create another debate, trying to give reason)

Mallet has to go against 5-7 difficult opponents a year, and who does Luck and Locker have? USC? Not anymore. You go to think Defensive teams you think LSU, Florida, Georgia, etc. and Mallet has to face them every week. He has 16 records at Arkansas, while only being there one year! (well two but one redshirt)

If I have to put the biggest knock, its the Rivers syndrome. He trash talks a little too much for my liking, but QB's gotta have some swagger on the field. (He has too much haha)

To be fair the Georgia defense isnt what it used to be and i'm not sure that Florida and LSU is either. One big differance when you're talking about comparing QBs is how much time they have to throw the ball, Locker has little or none.

619
09-18-2010, 09:28 PM
The Eli Manning comparison for Luck is right on. Perfect!

I'm not debating that one.

Giantsfan1080
09-18-2010, 09:28 PM
Eli Manning had nothing around him at Ole Miss and still put up a pretty good record in a tough SEC. Everyone makes all these excuses for Locker but he still needs to do better than he has.

619
09-18-2010, 09:35 PM
Eli Manning had nothing around him at Ole Miss and still put up a pretty good record in a tough SEC. Everyone makes all these excuses for Locker but he still needs to do better than he has.

That's what I'm saying. I'm still waiting for that Jay Cutler type of superhuman effort from Locker, and that's not really expecting much in the Pac-10. I was patient with the guy as a junior; this year my patience is wearing thin and I'm no longer giving the guy a break. He's in Josh Freeman territory for me (mid-late first) based on his ceiling potential, just the way I saw Freeman. It could get worse, though I'm sure talent evaluators will continue to give him the benefit of the doubt, somehow.

Scotty D
09-18-2010, 09:39 PM
Matt Ryan's supporting cast was pretty terrible. I don't think I can remember a single WR or TE on that Boston College team.

ElectricEye
09-18-2010, 09:47 PM
Matt Ryan's supporting cast was pretty terrible. I don't think I can remember a single WR or TE on that Boston College team.

Rich Gunell, lol. Ozzy here had a thing for him for some reason. The BC offensive line was actually pretty decent though, as it always is. A young Anthony Castonzo started and played at an extremely high level right away. Gosder Cherilus was a first round pick as a tackle as well.

Forenci
09-18-2010, 10:37 PM
Bradford doesn't have a great arm, the play he got injured on at OU wasn't anything freak imo so it led me to believe he could be fragile, a lot of his throws were short range, high percentage ones that boosted his stats, he played in the Big-12 where defense is optional and that padded his stats....

A lot not to like about him imo. Can he be successful? Of course, but guys with tools the caliber of Locker and Mallett are going to be drafted ahead of guys like him in today's NFL 10 out of 10 times. He got pushed up boards due to the lack of another legitimate QB last year, but if he were in this class, barring meltdowns to the guys we're discussing here, he'd be 4th.

Fair enough. I disagree personally, but you made a lot of valid points. Bradford doesn't have a great arm, in comparison to guys like Locker or Mallet, but he still has a well above average arm. He can make all the throws, and that's really all you need.

I just think people overrate Locker because of his arm and intangibles. His decision making and accuracy leave a lot to be desired.

steelersfan43
09-18-2010, 10:40 PM
The ryan mallet offense at michigan was like sandpaper on my eyes.

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 10:55 PM
Fair enough. I disagree personally, but you made a lot of valid points. Bradford doesn't have a great arm, in comparison to guys like Locker or Mallet, but he still has a well above average arm. He can make all the throws, and that's really all you need.

I just think people overrate Locker because of his arm and intangibles. His decision making and accuracy leave a lot to be desired.

Well, here's the thing I've learned about arm strength since the Bears have had Jay Cutler. Before him, we had Kyle Orton and he wasn't a bad player. He won 2/3 of his starts as a Bear and I would have defended him to the death as a decent NFL QB. Then, we trade for Cutler, and seeing what a guy with his arm strength in the exact same offense with the exact same players around him can do has flipped my old opinion that arm strength doesn't mean much. I used to believe it mattered for deep bombs and that alone...but man was I wrong.

Some of the throws he can make are just ridiculous. He'll complete passes that Kyle Orton wouldn't even consider attempting because he can just put so much zip on the ball. It just opens up the playbook soooo much more when you can rifle those short-intermediate passes to receivers who are well covered.

You get what I mean? I think that's the reason that the NFL will gamble on the big arms and hope that some touch and accuracy can be coached into them rather than take the guys with touch and accuracy just because their ceiling is so much lower.

That's why I think that, barring a complete meltdown by either guy, Locker and Mallett will both be going in the top 10, if not top 5. The order they go in (especially if you add in Luck,) can probably be debated right up until one of their names is called on draft day.

Ballbright
09-18-2010, 11:08 PM
To be fair the Georgia defense isnt what it used to be and i'm not sure that Florida and LSU is either. One big differance when you're talking about comparing QBs is how much time they have to throw the ball, Locker has little or none.

To put Locker's performance in perspective though, Nathan Enderle did more against Nebraska, with less "athleticism" and even less talent around him than Locker...

ElectricEye
09-18-2010, 11:09 PM
To put Locker's performance in perspective though, Nathan Enderle did more against Nebraska, with less "athleticism" and even less talent around him than Locker...

I would take Locker's day over five INT's, personally.

Ballbright
09-18-2010, 11:11 PM
I would take Locker's day over five INT's, personally.

Enderle may have the worst O-line in the FBS, and at least completed more than 50% of his passes for over double the yardage Locker did...5 ints looks bad, but when you look at the game film and hold them up to Locker's two, Enderle really had the superior performance....

SRK85
09-18-2010, 11:16 PM
I like Luck the best. I think he will be best QB from those candidates. Locker might end up being a bust kind of like Alex Smith, or David Carr. But then again its all on how a NFL coach develops them. Mallet could be good, but I need to see more from him

Forenci
09-18-2010, 11:31 PM
Well, here's the thing I've learned about arm strength since the Bears have had Jay Cutler. Before him, we had Kyle Orton and he wasn't a bad player. He won 2/3 of his starts as a Bear and I would have defended him to the death as a decent NFL QB. Then, we trade for Cutler, and seeing what a guy with his arm strength in the exact same offense with the exact same players around him can do has flipped my old opinion that arm strength doesn't mean much. I used to believe it mattered for deep bombs and that alone...but man was I wrong.

Some of the throws he can make are just ridiculous. He'll complete passes that Kyle Orton wouldn't even consider attempting because he can just put so much zip on the ball. It just opens up the playbook soooo much more when you can rifle those short-intermediate passes to receivers who are well covered.

You get what I mean? I think that's the reason that the NFL will gamble on the big arms and hope that some touch and accuracy can be coached into them rather than take the guys with touch and accuracy just because their ceiling is so much lower.

That's why I think that, barring a complete meltdown by either guy, Locker and Mallett will both be going in the top 10, if not top 5. The order they go in (especially if you add in Luck,) can probably be debated right up until one of their names is called on draft day.

I completely understand. I don't mean to say I don't value arm strength, because there is nothing I love more than watching a quarterback with a cannon, but I think it's overplayed from an evaluation stand point.

And while I know there were other factors in Cutlers situation last year, I think we all saw that it doesn't matter how big your arm is if you can't make good decisions with the ball. Not that all the interceptions were Cutlers fault, of course.

Matt Ryan doesn't have a big arm but he was still a highly considered QB. I look at Bradford in a similar way. An intelligent player who makes good reads and decisions and has plenty of arm strength to get the ball where it needs to go. Honestly, I think if Bradford played in a pro style system at Oklahoma he'd have been just as good.

BeerBaron
09-18-2010, 11:35 PM
Matt Ryan doesn't have a big arm but he was still a highly considered QB. I look at Bradford in a similar way. An intelligent player who makes good reads and decisions and has plenty of arm strength to get the ball where it needs to go. Honestly, I think if Bradford played in a pro style system at Oklahoma he'd have been just as good.

Cutler's problem is that he tries to do too much....but that aside from the point.

I said it with Ryan too when he was coming out, and I feel similarly about he and Bradford in that their ceiling in limited. Both are accurate and smart, for sure, and that can make them into quality NFL QBs.

But so many coaches value that high ceiling and the hope that they can make their QB elite. So when available, they're going to take the Malletts and Lockers with their big arms. That's why I think if Bradford or Ryan were in a class like this, they'd be drafted after those guys.

Btw, Andrew Luck is looking hella good tonight. Might not be too far behind Locker as an athlete if you just saw his run, and he's looking great throwing it too.

SchizophrenicBatman
09-18-2010, 11:49 PM
Yea Luck is a sneaky good runner. Probably runs like a 4.7 but he'll pick up 30 or so yards for you every game (and ripped off a killer 52 yarder today). Wake's defense is turrrrrible this year but Luck is amazing. I'm not typically a fan of a QB coming out this early but I'm not sure if it would be fair for the NCAA and Pac10 if he came back for his RS Jr year

Babylon
09-18-2010, 11:53 PM
Matt Ryan's supporting cast was pretty terrible. I don't think I can remember a single WR or TE on that Boston College team.

They always had the decent O-line though and serviceable receivers and TEs.
Ryan had his off games, evidenced by 29 ints in his jr and sr years.

soybean
09-19-2010, 12:00 AM
Luck is the best qb in the nation.

This guy looks almost peyton like.

It sucks too because I hate to see Harbaugh have success.

BuddyCHRIST
09-19-2010, 12:02 AM
I'll go with Mallett right now, though I really don't know why. I think him and Luck are elite prospects and will probably prefer Luck when he comes out, but man Mallet is hitting on all cylinders right now.

ninerfan
09-19-2010, 01:59 AM
I like both Locker & Mallett but don't really love either of them. Now Andrew Luck on the other hand mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

abaddon41_80
09-19-2010, 08:50 AM
Mallet no question. I like Locker a lot more than some do at this point but I am not a big fan of Luck.

RealityCheck
09-19-2010, 09:14 AM
http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2009/1231/ncf_g_enderle_576.jpg

And I don't care about the Nebraska game.

nepg
09-19-2010, 09:24 AM
I'll stick with Locker for now. If he can come back strong from such a bad game, that will say far more about him than that game.

Michigan
09-19-2010, 09:27 AM
Mallett. Big-play potential matched by no other QB in the nation (besides Denard).

FUNBUNCHER
09-19-2010, 10:27 AM
Mallet will be the closest approximation to Dan Marino the NFL has seen. Except that Mallet IMO has an even stronger arm.

I was really impressed by how Mallet performed against Georgia, being able to win that game with less than a minute left.

Accurate, confident, good decisions.

Locker is Jay Cutler. He still trusts his arms too much and his performance against Nebraska was beyond sub-par for a player of his talent level. Just several poor decisions and off target throws.

Luck seems solid, he doesn't excite me though.
Mallet, that dude is the FUTURE. He will be the #1 overall.

BeerBaron
09-19-2010, 10:51 AM
I was really impressed by how Mallet performed against Georgia, being able to win that game with less than a minute left.

Accurate, confident, good decisions.

If you only watched that last drive, then you'd get a skewed view of his performance in that game. He looked great there, but several times earlier in the game, he had some struggles with accuracy and touch, and made some poor decisions that could have cost him vs. a better defense that what Georgia had out there.


Locker is Jay Cutler. He still trusts his arms too much and his performance against Nebraska was beyond sub-par for a player of his talent level. Just several poor decisions and off target throws.

See, Cutler played out of his mind at times at Vandy, and carried that team on his back to the success they had vs. the toughest conference in the country, especially defensively.

Locker didn't seem to do that vs. Nebraska. He threw one bad pick early, and didn't "create" like good QBs are expected to do. Nebraska's defense really shut down his offense and covered his receivers well, but a great QB should still find ways to make plays and keep his team alive. Especially one like Locker who can also make plays with his feet with the best of them. I was disappointed in his performance.

Luck seems solid, he doesn't excite me though.
Mallet, that dude is the FUTURE. He will be the #1 overall.

I LOVED what I saw from Luck last night. Yeah, he was beating up on Wake Forest, but he was doing exactly what you want to see out of him there. He didn't play down to his competition and really just smacked them around the whole game. He made some excellent throws, made few mistakes and really just dominated. He scored some major points with me.

As for who will go #1....I think both Mallett and Luck helped themselves yesterday while Locker stagnated a bit. I think the general consensus was that he had a nice lead over the other two, and if he rebounds in Pac-10 play, he could still stay on top easily.

Like I said before, I think which of these guys finally ends up being selected first might not be apparent until one of their names is called on draft day.

Brent
09-19-2010, 10:56 AM
the more I watch of Luck, the more I am absolutely enamored with him

JoeJoeBrown
09-19-2010, 10:57 AM
Locker is just not that good. He looks like he should be, but he's not. People are constantly making excuses for him. Hype hype hype.

None of this crop of QB's excites me. Maybe Luck. Maybe Mallet. But there is no OMG have to have QB.

Reminds me of the year Alex Smith got drafted. Whole bunch of "meh". Rodgers has actually turned out to be great, but not many thought he would end up being this good.

BeerBaron
09-19-2010, 10:59 AM
Reminds me of the year Alex Smith got drafted. Whole bunch of "meh". Rodgers has actually turned out to be great, but not many thought he would end up being this good.

Really? I think this is closer to 2004 when there were 3 legit franchise QB options available than to years like when Bradford, Ryan and Smith were the top QBs.

They each got pushed up imo from lack of real competition, and none of the 3 have the tools and potential that the the 3 we're discussing here have.

nepg
09-19-2010, 11:10 AM
I think it's where the 2008 draft was at at this point in the year. Brohm, Henne, and Ryan were all looking like early first round picks. Plus you had guys like Ainge and Booty who looked like they had good potential.

ElectricEye
09-19-2010, 11:19 AM
Reminds me of the year Alex Smith got drafted. Whole bunch of "meh". Rodgers has actually turned out to be great, but not many thought he would end up being this good.

That's not really true about the Smith/Rodgers draft. Both of them were thought of extremely highly. If not for Smith turning in "the best workout since Troy Aikmen"(google it), Rodgers would have went number one. He was in many peoples eyes up to that point.

etk
09-19-2010, 04:11 PM
I went with Mallett because he looks a lot more accurate and comfortable this year. I haven't seen enough of Luck to be definitive though.

Locker is not even in consideration. He's prime for a Jevan Snead year.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-19-2010, 04:42 PM
Luck, so far, has taken that step forward I wanted to see. Take a look at the game he had against Wake Forest last year compared to the show he put on Saturday. At his best last year I liked him more than Locker and Mallett, but his best moments were much rarer than with the other two. If he continues to be consistently excellent this year, I see no way that he isn't the best passing prospect in college football. Still not sure he comes out this early.

Mallett is someone I still can't get entirely on board with. I recognize the talent he represents with his size and arm, but I don't see the other stuff right now. It's nice to see him doing a better job of making catchable throws in the short and intermediate games, but I need to dive into his tape.

I'll stand by Locker right now. Washington is ****. It's the shittiest supporting cast we've seen around a potential top pick in a long time (worse than Cutler had with Vandy). I'm waiting and watching with Locker, because I think that even if he continues to struggle, he'd be a great 2nd round pick.

SchizophrenicBatman
09-19-2010, 04:44 PM
this is closest to the Leinart/Young/Cutler year, I dont know how you can say otherwise

Three guys and everyone really likes at least 2 of them. No one really fits the Leinart mold but I can see Locker compared to either Young or Cutler and Mallett also compared to Cutler. Interestingly, none of those guys has really made the leap to becoming an elite QB in the NFL but they all went in the top 11

Werowance
09-20-2010, 03:38 AM
Andrew Luck is the best QB in the nation IMO, but I don't see him coming out. Luck is smart, very committed to his academics and his father is a college athletic director who you know will be pressuring his son to graduate.

descendency
09-20-2010, 10:42 AM
How is accuracy an issue with Locker but not Mallett?

I like Mallett more, but the kid guns it over people's heads all the time. (well, often enough)

BigBanger
09-20-2010, 10:46 AM
That's not really true about the Smith/Rodgers draft. Both of them were thought of extremely highly. If not for Smith turning in "the best workout since Troy Aikmen"(google it), Rodgers would have went number one. He was in many peoples eyes up to that point.
Well, apparently people forgot because they also said that about Sam Bradford last year. A lot of people said that JaMarcus Russell had the greatest QB workout ever. Workouts are workouts. I remember everyone on the ESPN asking, "Is Alex Smith a franchise QB?" That was like a week before the draft. No one said yes. And he wasn't. His arm alone kept him for being a franchise QB. His size was below average. Nothing about him was elite, or even close to it. It was one of the biggest reaches I have ever seen on draft day. I said it then, and I say it now. It was a terrible pick. He was never that good.

I think Luck is the best QB out there right now. Followed by Matt Barkley. Neither will be in this draft though. With Luck, you can see just how much he has improved since last year and when he has Chris Owusu, his only good WR, the offense opens up. Luck is one of those guys that consistently makes positive plays. Even when there's nothing there, he quickly tucks it down and picks up five yards or so. He is one of the smartest and best decision makers I have ever seen. He just keeps the chains moving and engineers these long, sustained drives.

Mallet might be JaMarcus Russell dumb. Has a great scheme that creates a lot of easy reads / easy throws. And misses a lot of easy throws. Accuracy is very suspect. I think he still has a lot to prove.

hockey619
09-20-2010, 11:07 AM
Luck to me is the best and its not really all that close. Ive been riding Locker hard since he was a freshman but im less impressed with im now, he looks akward and uncomfortable throwing the ball just a wierd motion.

I think him and Mallett are on the same plane right now as far as prospects with Luck a few steps above. Locker needs some work on looking guys off and not forcing throws among other things like consistency with his accuracy. Mallett has looked pretty good but has missed some really easy throws and needs to iron out his accuracy plus the system questions.

I think its
Luck



Mallett
Locker

LizardState
09-20-2010, 11:31 AM
I keep going back-and-forth between Locker and Luck. For this poll, I voted Luck.

Me too.

Locker has the tools & the arm, while Luck throws the most accurate, most receiver-friendly ball in college FB today so I voted Luck, his NFL pedigree with a father who played QB at the pro level doesn't hurt either. Mallett has a field presence that's noticeable, seems to be a real team leader in the huddle & has superior game mgmt. skills that can only come with experience.

Here's how it will play out:


Locker - #1 overall pick next April to Buffalo.
Mallett - #2 overall pick next April to Cleveland.
Luck - #1 overall pick in 2012 to SF 49ers (they love to stay local).

umphrey
09-20-2010, 12:01 PM
Mallett is extremely elite IMO.
Locker had questions about him going into the 2010 draft, and he isn't doing anything to answer them. He might be falling into the project QB, developmental QB folder. We'll see how he rebounds. Still a lot of games to be played this year.

BeerBaron
09-20-2010, 12:35 PM
Locker - #1 overall pick next April to Buffalo.
Mallett - #2 overall pick next April to Cleveland.
Luck - #1 overall pick in 2012 to SF 49ers (they love to stay local).


If Cleveland is picking #2, I can all but guarantee you that Mangini will be out, and Holmgren will get his guy at HC. And odds are, it's going to be a former coaching pupil of Holmgren's, which probably means WCO.

And if you think Vick was a terrible fit in the WCO under Mora in Atlanta, just imagine how terrible Mallett will be in it with his questionable accuracy.

RaiderNation
09-20-2010, 01:33 PM
Still got Locker as my #1 guy, even though Luck is pusing more and more every week. Mallett has improved himself this season but I still wouldnt draft him #1 overall compared to the other 2. I still think Locker and Mallett are going into this draft and Luck will wait another year like Bradford

Babylon
09-20-2010, 01:47 PM
I think for the sake of the conversation we are going to have to assume Luck will come out this year. I find it hard to believe that Buffalo wont see the next Jim Kelley and take Andrew Luck with what looks like the top pick. If i hazard a guess i'd say Mallett goes to Cleveland and Locker goes to Seattle.

tjsunstein
09-20-2010, 01:49 PM
Mallett for me right now.

SchizophrenicBatman
09-20-2010, 01:51 PM
if Buffalo/Toronto gets the #1 pick and I'm Andrew Luck I'm staying in school

BeerBaron
09-20-2010, 01:55 PM
if Buffalo/Toronto gets the #1 pick and I'm Andrew Luck I'm staying in school

So you can wait a year, risking injury or a bout of Snead-itis, just to be taken the next year by the next bad team?

If your a great college QB and a top pro prospect, your almost certainly going into a bad situation. I don't think he'll take that into consideration in choosing whether to stay or go.

ThePudge
09-20-2010, 01:57 PM
I just typed up a pretty long post explaining why I went with Andrew Luck over Ryan Mallett right now. But now it's lost and I'm depressed.. and I have to go to class. But, let it be known I went with Luck in this poll. I came away extremely impressed this past week.

Scotty D
09-20-2010, 01:59 PM
I just typed up a pretty long post explaining why I went with Andrew Luck over Ryan Mallett right now. But now it's lost and I'm depressed.. and I have to go to class. But, let it be known I went with Luck in this poll. I came away extremely impressed this past week.

Yeah, I remember you being a big Mallett guy.

San Diego Chicken
09-20-2010, 02:05 PM
It's hard to ignore what Luck is doing right now. At first I wasn't sold, but really, what does the guy do wrong? Notice you rarely hear the name "Toby Gerhart" anymore.

zachsaints52
09-20-2010, 02:23 PM
So you can wait a year, risking injury or a bout of Snead-itis, just to be taken the next year by the next bad team?

If your a great college QB and a top pro prospect, your almost certainly going into a bad situation. I don't think he'll take that into consideration in choosing whether to stay or go.

I think its also known as the Leinhart syndrome.

ElectricEye
09-20-2010, 02:26 PM
Well, apparently people forgot because they also said that about Sam Bradford last year. A lot of people said that JaMarcus Russell had the greatest QB workout ever. Workouts are workouts. I remember everyone on the ESPN asking, "Is Alex Smith a franchise QB?" That was like a week before the draft. No one said yes. And he wasn't. His arm alone kept him for being a franchise QB. His size was below average. Nothing about him was elite, or even close to it. It was one of the biggest reaches I have ever seen on draft day. I said it then, and I say it now. It was a terrible pick. He was never that good.


Again, not really true. There were LOADS of people who liked Smith. He was regarded to have a very strong arm after the workout. Before it, it was a knock, but not even that big of one. He did have good size at 6'3 220(if that's below average, Stafford had an even bigger issue and nobody said he had poor size). People also forget just how mobile he is/was coming out. That was a major thing. That combined with his brain was enough. It hasn't worked out and probably never will, but you're writing a lot of revisionist history there.

BeerBaron
09-20-2010, 02:34 PM
Again, not really true. There were LOADS of people who liked Smith. He was regarded to have a very strong arm after the workout. Before it, it was a knock, but not even that big of one. He did have good size at 6'3 220(if that's below average, Stafford had an even bigger issue and nobody said he had poor size). People also forget just how mobile he is/was coming out. That was a major thing. That combined with his brain was enough. It hasn't worked out and probably never will, but you're writing a lot of revisionist history there.

I think Smith was thinner than 230 in college and coming out. He always looked on the frail side, plus he had the dreaded small hands. His arm was and is still a question too. He wasn't franchise QB material, but he was the best QB available that year.

And whenever that happens, the guy is going to be pushed up. If Smith, or Bradford or Matt Ryan for that matter, were in this years draft, they'd be the 4th QB taken for the reason I've argued elsewhere within the thread.

ElectricEye
09-20-2010, 02:40 PM
He was a polarizing guy. A lot of people though he was going to be Steve Young. Seriously. There were those that thought it would turn out the way it has so far too. He was the first Post-Andre Ware educational experience about spread quarterbacks, and the first about the spread option.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-20-2010, 02:46 PM
I think Smith was thinner than 230 in college and coming out. He always looked on the frail side, plus he had the dreaded small hands. His arm was and is still a question too. He wasn't franchise QB material, but he was the best QB available that year.

And whenever that happens, the guy is going to be pushed up. If Smith, or Bradford or Matt Ryan for that matter, were in this years draft, they'd be the 4th QB taken for the reason I've argued elsewhere within the thread.

Teams liked Smith. I know it's easy to trash that in retrospect, but basically the entire league liked Smith more than Rodgers. Everything we heard indicated that Miami would have taken him if SF hadn't. He wasn't huge (6-4, about 215), but he was pretty far from small and he had taken his fair number of shots as a running QB at Utah. He was very smart and very well spoken.

And for all that was made about his small hands, keep in mind that the previous quarterback that the small hand argument was made against, Daunte Culpepper, had just compiled one of the best statistical years in NFL history in the season prior.

BeerBaron
09-20-2010, 02:53 PM
Teams liked Smith. I know it's easy to trash that in retrospect, but basically the entire league liked Smith more than Rodgers. Everything we heard indicated that Miami would have taken him if SF hadn't. He wasn't huge (6-4, about 215), but he was pretty far from small and he had taken his fair number of shots as a running QB at Utah. He was very smart and very well spoken.

And for all that was made about his small hands, keep in mind that the previous quarterback that the small hand argument was made against, Daunte Culpepper, had just compiled one of the best statistical years in NFL history in the season prior.

See, I wasn't arguing Rodgers > Smith....I wasn't a big fan of either guy. Neither struck me as a franchise QB type of guy. Had Leinart declared that year, he would have been the top QB easily, and even he lacked many of the things you like to see in a franchise QB. (And you see now where he is at....)

And Culpepper did have a hell of year, but he's always been a fumble machine too. Totals of 16, 23, 16 in 3 straight years, and he still had 9 in his great year. Small hands are scary for that reason.

Also, prior to Leinart deciding to stay, I saw Smith all throughout the first round in a lot of mock drafts. Even leading up to draft day, there was still some debate between he and Rodgers...and if the 49ers had preferred Rodgers, Smith very likely may have been the guy slipping 20 spots. Guys with elite tools like the 3 we're talking about in this thread wouldn't fall like that I don't believe. Even if one team passes on one of them, someone else will shoot up and take him in the top 10.

Paranoidmoonduck
09-20-2010, 02:59 PM
Everything I heard in the run-up to that draft was that if SF had taken Rodgers, Smith would still have gone top 6.

As for the small hands thing, JaMarcus Russell had massive hands and fumbled like a 6-year old girl. It has way more to do with how you carry the ball than how big your hands are.

Babylon
09-20-2010, 03:00 PM
I just typed up a pretty long post explaining why I went with Andrew Luck over Ryan Mallett right now. But now it's lost and I'm depressed.. and I have to go to class. But, let it be known I went with Luck in this poll. I came away extremely impressed this past week.

A little surprised that you jumped ship in a week where Mallett did well at Georgia and Luck likewise did well against a suspect Wake Forest defense at home.

BeerBaron
09-20-2010, 03:05 PM
As for the small hands thing, JaMarcus Russell had massive hands and fumbled like a 6-year old girl. It has way more to do with how you carry the ball than how big your hands are.

If you have big hands and carry the ball well, then your going to fumble less than if you have small hands and carry the ball well. If you have a choice in the matter, all else being equal, I'd still take the big hands guy.

Regardless, it's a minor thing....but it was definitely one of the knocks against Smith pre-draft.

ThePudge
09-20-2010, 03:52 PM
A little surprised that you jumped ship in a week where Mallett did well at Georgia and Luck likewise did well against a suspect Wake Forest defense at home.

Well, to be perfectly honest I never put Luck under my microscope as closely as I did this past week. His mental capacity & feel for the game are beyond impressive for such a talented player. I still think Mallett is a top pick, but I'm more sold that Luck is an NFL star. These two are rare, potentially the two best QB prospects I've seen. I'll continue to stress that it's very, very early. I do like Locker too but I see a realistic scenario in which he's the third QB drafted, perhaps in the top 5-10.

Babylon
09-20-2010, 04:05 PM
Well, to be perfectly honest I never put Luck under my microscope as closely as I did this past week. His mental capacity & feel for the game are beyond impressive for such a talented player. I still think Mallett is a top pick, but I'm more sold that Luck is an NFL star. These two are rare, potentially the two best QB prospects I've seen. I'll continue to stress that it's very, very early. I do like Locker too but I see a realistic scenario in which he's the third QB drafted, perhaps in the top 5-10.

It seemed like he had all day to throw against Wake and had his pick of targets who were open. Playing defensese like Wake Forest's and Sacramento st. really make it hard to get a true evaluation of someone, although i think he the most accurate of the top 3.

BigBanger
09-21-2010, 02:57 AM
Again, not really true. There were LOADS of people who liked Smith. He was regarded to have a very strong arm after the workout. Before it, it was a knock, but not even that big of one. He did have good size at 6'3 220(if that's below average, Stafford had an even bigger issue and nobody said he had poor size). People also forget just how mobile he is/was coming out. That was a major thing. That combined with his brain was enough. It hasn't worked out and probably never will, but you're writing a lot of revisionist history there.
Stafford had average size. I went from scrutinizing him as a sophomore (all hype for having a cannon arm), then after I saw one game as a junior, I became one of his biggest supporters. One of his weaknesses... average size.

Again, I'm not bashing Alex Smith (I had him ranked as a late first rounder). When you say a top rated QB is a mid to late first rounder, then I think most people think that means you're bashing him, but I'm not. He was simply overrated. And people weren't even convinced on him. You said it yourself, he was a polarizing player. Every single time I heard someone talk about him they would speak with trepidation. Even his supporters. He's good, but... He's good, but...

I didn't forget he was mobile. He played under Urban Meyer. His system drew a lot of speculation. He never threw the ball vertically. His arm was average. He had good zip. You would hear that. Yes, he had a nice release and good zip... for short to intermediate throws. Deep ball? A big concern... for me anyway (and I wasn't the only one). He was good at just about everything, but nothing about him was great or anywhere close to elite. The 49ers even overpaid him (to make matters worse) to try to prove to their fans that they "were committed to winning." They drafted him because he was a QB. Simple as that.

I bashed the living hell out of Brady Quinn. If I bashed him right now would that mean I'm using my 20/20 hindsight vision? I said Joe Thomas should have been taken #1 overall by Oakland. Is that revisionist history since Russell has turned into a bigger bust than Ryan Leaf?

He was a polarizing guy. A lot of people though he was going to be Steve Young. Seriously. There were those that thought it would turn out the way it has so far too. He was the first Post-Andre Ware educational experience about spread quarterbacks, and the first about the spread option.
The next Steve Young is in the 2011 Draft as well... coincidently. Oh, wait, apparently people have been calling him the next John Elway too. That Jake Locker is just two Hall of Famers bunched into one, that sun of a gun. Tebow was the next Steve Young. And guess what? The next Steve Young is a freshman in college right now. The next Steve Young after that is currently 17-years-old. There's another 16-year-old right on his heels though. Hopefully they don't enter in the same draft. I think there is, at least, an unwritten rule that says you can't compare two players to the same Hall of Fame player.

It's the draft!!!! People call prospects by Hall of Fame names all the time. Every single year it happens. How many Warren Sapps have there been since Warren Sapp was a dominating player? Saying that someone called Alex Smith the next Steve Young proves nothing other than showing how many naive people there are when it comes to the draft. Unfortunately, there aren't Randy Moss's entering the draft every year. Warren Sapp isn't in every draft class even though his name is brought every single year. These are once a decade type players, but they're in every draft. The sad truth is: they aren't.

I'm gonna break the news right now... Marvin Austin is not going to be Warren Sapp. Marvin Austin sucks. That's his first problem. Not being drafted in the first 4 rounds will be his second problem. But, maybe I'm just crazy.

Cameron Heyward can play two positions on the defensive line... sounds like Justin Tuck to me!! No.

Actually I'm not crazy. He's not ******* Justin ******* Tuck. He's actually nothing like Justin ******* Tuck. He's not nearly as athletic or nearly as quick, not nearly the pass rusher. But because he can play DT in college, then that must be similar to an All-Pro, so people call him that. It's just stupid.

baronzeus
09-21-2010, 03:10 AM
Andrew Luck is the best college QB I've ever seen at running a pro-style offense. Watch him live next time you get a chance (against ND this weekend). Watch his drop back. Watch his mechanics. Watch his follow through. Watch him step up in the pocket. Watch him nail receivers in the stride.

His game against UCLA was one of the worst I've ever seen him play, and even then he wasn't that bad.

BrabbitMcRabbit
09-21-2010, 04:07 AM
Anyone not voting Luck hasn't watched him play an entire game.

He smokes these guys. Not even close. His mental intangibles are on another plane.

yourfavestoner
09-21-2010, 10:14 AM
Stafford had average size. I went from scrutinizing him as a sophomore (all hype for having a cannon arm), then after I saw one game as a junior, I became one of his biggest supporters. One of his weaknesses... average size.

Again, I'm not bashing Alex Smith (I had him ranked as a late first rounder). When you say a top rated QB is a mid to late first rounder, then I think most people think that means you're bashing him, but I'm not. He was simply overrated. And people weren't even convinced on him. You said it yourself, he was a polarizing player. Every single time I heard someone talk about him they would speak with trepidation. Even his supporters. He's good, but... He's good, but...

I didn't forget he was mobile. He played under Urban Meyer. His system drew a lot of speculation. He never threw the ball vertically. His arm was average. He had good zip. You would hear that. Yes, he had a nice release and good zip... for short to intermediate throws. Deep ball? A big concern... for me anyway (and I wasn't the only one). He was good at just about everything, but nothing about him was great or anywhere close to elite. The 49ers even overpaid him (to make matters worse) to try to prove to their fans that they "were committed to winning." They drafted him because he was a QB. Simple as that.

I bashed the living hell out of Brady Quinn. If I bashed him right now would that mean I'm using my 20/20 hindsight vision? I said Joe Thomas should have been taken #1 overall by Oakland. Is that revisionist history since Russell has turned into a bigger bust than Ryan Leaf?


The next Steve Young is in the 2011 Draft as well... coincidently. Oh, wait, apparently people have been calling him the next John Elway too. That Jake Locker is just two Hall of Famers bunched into one, that sun of a gun. Tebow was the next Steve Young. And guess what? The next Steve Young is a freshman in college right now. The next Steve Young after that is currently 17-years-old. There's another 16-year-old right on his heels though. Hopefully they don't enter in the same draft. I think there is, at least, an unwritten rule that says you can't compare two players to the same Hall of Fame player.

It's the draft!!!! People call prospects by Hall of Fame names all the time. Every single year it happens. How many Warren Sapps have there been since Warren Sapp was a dominating player? Saying that someone called Alex Smith the next Steve Young proves nothing other than showing how many naive people there are when it comes to the draft. Unfortunately, there aren't Randy Moss's entering the draft every year. Warren Sapp isn't in every draft class even though his name is brought every single year. These are once a decade type players, but they're in every draft. The sad truth is: they aren't.

I'm gonna break the news right now... Marvin Austin is not going to be Warren Sapp. Marvin Austin sucks. That's his first problem. Not being drafted in the first 4 rounds will be his second problem. But, maybe I'm just crazy.

Cameron Heyward can play two positions on the defensive line... sounds like Justin Tuck to me!! No.

Actually I'm not crazy. He's not ******* Justin ******* Tuck. He's actually nothing like Justin ******* Tuck. He's not nearly as athletic or nearly as quick, not nearly the pass rusher. But because he can play DT in college, then that must be similar to an All-Pro, so people call him that. It's just stupid.

I approve of this post.

ATLDirtyBirds
09-21-2010, 07:11 PM
Luck a bit above Locker, and Mallet pretty far behind.

703SKINS202
09-21-2010, 07:52 PM
Luck will have the best NFL career. Locker will be special, would expect a decent career from Mallet as well in the right system. Good class but I think Luck stays.

Morton
09-21-2010, 10:40 PM
I'll be watching the Stanford - Notre Dame game very closely.

If Luck has a monster game, I'm definitely going to consider him the best QB prospect in this draft class.

BeerBaron
09-21-2010, 10:44 PM
I'll be watching the Stanford - Notre Dame game very closely.

If Luck has a monster game, I'm definitely going to consider him the best QB prospect in this draft class.

I'm really looking forward to that one too. Also interested in seeing Mallett vs. Alabama. Locker got beat up by a great defense last week in Nebraska, so I want to see how Mallett does against a great on in Bama. Going to be another good week to the top QBs.

dabears10
09-21-2010, 10:47 PM
I'll be watching the Stanford - Notre Dame game very closely.

If Luck has a monster game, I'm definitely going to consider him the best QB prospect in this draft class.

I am unsure why, Notre Dame doesn't really have a shut down defense.

ElectricEye
09-21-2010, 10:50 PM
BigBanger, that's all well and good, but we're not talking about what you thought. We're talking about the consensus opinion. Have no problem with anything you said, but not everybody felt the same way about Smith.

Morton
09-21-2010, 10:56 PM
I am unsure why, Notre Dame doesn't really have a shut down defense.

Exactly. I'm just saying, that if Luck wants to be considered a top QB prospect, he has to take care of business and just completely shred average defenses like Notre Dame's.

ElectricEye
09-21-2010, 10:58 PM
That's not really a good barometer.


Anyway, Scott and Shane did a real nice job covering all this tonight. Props to them. Nice to see my views are in line with theirs at at the moment.