PDA

View Full Version : Explain to Me Why Blaine Gabbert is a Consensus Top 10 Pick?


PatrickWillis
01-27-2011, 09:06 AM
1) Played in a spread offense. Minimal reads and progressions. Doesn't know how to read a defense.

2) Surprisingly quite inaccurate on short and deep patterns. His skill is in the intermediate game where he can just rear back and sling it, but throws that require more touch he struggles with.

3) Flawed release. Somewhat quick but looks like a windup. I think this leads to his spotty accuracy.

4) Does indeed have a plus, plus arm. Unfortunately, pure arm strength is STILL the most overrated attribute of a quarterback.

5) The hype machine was started by Todd McShay. Anyone remember him proclaiming Jevan Snead a top 5 quarterback?


I've watched 6 games of this guy all his junior year and I see a 4th round quarterback with some tools that MIGHT develop. There are a plethora of QB's I grade higher than him(Stanzi, Dalton, Devlin, Mallett, Locker) yet this guy has everyone hanging on his jockstrap. Why is this?

Umoro
01-27-2011, 09:08 AM
I think that part of it is that he's one of the few QBs in this draft class with elite intangibles and work ethic, and he has that in addition to copious raw talent.

All he's missing as a top tier QB prospect is polish and experience.

PatrickWillis
01-27-2011, 09:11 AM
I think that part of it is that he's one of the few QBs in this draft class with elite intangibles and work ethic, and he has that in addition to copious raw talent.

All he's missing as a top tier QB prospect is polish and experience.

When was the last time a QB that only had the arm strength skill, while missing the pocket presence, release, accuracy, and decision making attributes made for a successful quarterback?

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 09:33 AM
No, I really don't think anyone can to be honest. A lot of people are really perplexed by this one too.

descendency
01-27-2011, 09:38 AM
Rumor has it some top 5 team claims to love him which is why McShay is so high on him. (and then everyone basically copied McShay)

Just a rumor that is being spread though.

When was the last time a QB that only had the arm strength skill, while missing the pocket presence, release, accuracy, and decision making attributes made for a successful quarterback?

Derek Anderson, 2007.

edit: I'm just shocked that he's considered top 10 after such a bad year (16 TDs, <7 ypa, and <65% comp in a spread offense is pathetic). I know he has tools. He just doesn't seem to have some of the important ones.

Poz51
01-27-2011, 09:40 AM
No, I really don't think anyone can to be honest. A lot of people are really perplexed by this one too.

Count me in that group, I really do not understand it, and find it perplexing myself.

FUNBUNCHER
01-27-2011, 10:03 AM
Never saw an elite QB prospect in Gabbert on game days for Mizzou. He wasn't a JAG in college but he's not a top 10 prospect IMO either.

With the hard salary cap for rookies coming to the NFL, I imagine more teams reaching on guys they like, even if being picked in the top 20 isn't their real value because the financial hit is less burdensome.

raynman
01-27-2011, 12:21 PM
the guy looks about as bad under pressure as clausen did as a panther. it's not going to get any easier.

count me in among those who have no idea why people would have him ranked so highly.

people go on and on about newton not being worth an early first round pick because he is a 3 year project or whatever, but i can honestly say the same thing about yo gabba gabbert. he has a lot to learn. he isn't like the guys of recent years who have been able to come in as a rookie and play respectably.

i would like to see more in depth analysis from scott wright about this guy and see why he thinks he is so good.

at best he is the turd that floats to the top in this weak QB class.

D-Unit
01-27-2011, 12:24 PM
The team that drafts him will face a future of agony.... especially when they look back at all the other players they passed on.

brat316
01-27-2011, 12:24 PM
Does he have an amazing work ethic or something?

I think its just hype he ends up going in the 15-30 range.

raynman
01-27-2011, 12:29 PM
Does he have an amazing work ethic or something?

I think its just hype he ends up going in the 15-30 range.clausen has an amazing work ethic as well. doesn't mean he'll amount to much.

brasho
01-27-2011, 12:48 PM
Rumor has it some top 5 team claims to love him which is why McShay is so high on him. (and then everyone basically copied McShay)

Just a rumor that is being spread though.



Derek Anderson, 2007.

edit: I'm just shocked that he's considered top 10 after such a bad year (16 TDs, <7 ypa, and <65% comp in a spread offense is pathetic). I know he has tools. He just doesn't seem to have some of the important ones.

I don't know if it was on this forum or another but I was saying back in October/November that Gabbert was a guy to keep an eye on and that he could get into the 1st round.

I doubt McShay copied me... but it probably wouldn't hurt him if he did.

brasho
01-27-2011, 12:50 PM
Of course I did say that he could be a 1st rounder... not exactly saying he was top 5 worthy.

ChiFan24
01-27-2011, 12:50 PM
He's just benefiting from the lack of attention he's gotten this year compared to all the attention the other QBs have gotten. It amazes me how stupid NFL scouts can be; it's such a simple pattern to recognize, and it's how JaMarcus Russells and Kyler Bollers happen. I don't hate Gabbert or anything but he is absolutely not better than Newton or Locker.

brasho
01-27-2011, 12:53 PM
I don't know about anybody being definitely better than anybody. I think we have four definite 1st rounders in this draft and I think like in 1999, I don't know how you would separate them. I wouldn't necssarily put a project like Newton ahead of Gabbert, nor a guy with accuracy issues ahead of him, or a guy with lead feet like Mallett, but on the other hand there are flaws on Gabbert as well that the other QBs don't have.

PhinsRock
01-27-2011, 01:01 PM
Because he's the only QB in the entire class with even a sliver of hope of being starting caliber in the NFL.

Babylon
01-27-2011, 01:06 PM
He's just benefiting from the lack of attention he's gotten this year compared to all the attention the other QBs have gotten. It amazes me how stupid NFL scouts can be; it's such a simple pattern to recognize, and it's how JaMarcus Russells and Kyler Bollers happen. I don't hate Gabbert or anything but he is absolutely not better than Newton or Locker.


I agree although i wouldnt throw scouts under the bus yet because it isnt them that is hyping Gabbert up. Let's see how he does at the combine because i think he has some real skills, just not sure if they translate to being the top guy yet.

Unbiased
01-27-2011, 01:11 PM
His footwork makes me want to choke someone.

49erNation85
01-27-2011, 01:31 PM
I just hope SF do NOT take him at all . The game I saw of him against Iowa he wasn't bad.But still not top ten talent by any means . Had a good arm but was way off on accuracy way down field .

gpngc
01-27-2011, 01:36 PM
Because he's the only QB in the entire class with even a sliver of hope of being starting caliber in the NFL.

LOL

This is extremely funny because it may be true.

Not the sliver of hope part, but I just think Gabbert's hype is due to the fact that every other quarterback has HUGE question marks.

And when you combine that with the fact that this class as a whole is pretty weak - this happens.

RealityCheck
01-27-2011, 01:36 PM
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_0bxL05nPVAc/TNhRPDgdI4I/AAAAAAAAAVI/_Rkz3CeDxq8/s1600/480_10_Colin_Kaepernick.jpg

Colin Kaepernick smiles at this thread.

papageorgio
01-27-2011, 01:45 PM
This guy threw only 16tds in a spread offence no thank you.

Halsey
01-27-2011, 02:55 PM
Every year there are people raising the same questions about the top QBs in the Draft. Many people on these boards questioned Aaron Rodgers and Ben Roethlisberger. When you find the perfect QB prospect, let us know.

will99890
01-27-2011, 02:59 PM
My biggest problem is that he crumbles under pressure. He either throws off his back foot or rolls way out to the right if he gets DT pressure up the middle.

armageddon
01-27-2011, 03:49 PM
I hope he goes top 13. It just means somebody else dropped to the Rams. Hopefully future HOF'er Julio Jones.

SchizophrenicBatman
01-27-2011, 03:55 PM
When was the last time a QB that only had the arm strength skill, while missing the pocket presence, release, accuracy, and decision making attributes made for a successful quarterback?

Jake Locker

edit: nvm I thought you were asking for the last prospect like this

Iamcanadian
01-27-2011, 04:21 PM
I agree although i wouldnt throw scouts under the bus yet because it isnt them that is hyping Gabbert up. Let's see how he does at the combine because i think he has some real skills, just not sure if they translate to being the top guy yet.

This is all the scouts are really saying at this time. Juniors get their chance at the combine or their pro days, until then, none of the real scouts will guarantee anything except to say Gabbert has a huge upside, better than the rest of the QB prospects at this point in time and that is why he is getting some hype.

BuddyCHRIST
01-27-2011, 05:02 PM
Because he's tall, I saw this guy as a 2-4th round player who someone who didn't want to take a QB high would get to develop. But when you watch him play, he is just not very impressive.

PatrickWillis
01-27-2011, 06:45 PM
Because he's the only QB in the entire class with even a sliver of hope of being starting caliber in the NFL.

I'd say Devlin, Stanzi, and Dalton, and Mallett will all be better starters in the NFL than Gabbert. Gabbert is basically Alex Smith Jr with a better arm.

the natural
01-27-2011, 08:58 PM
What do you mean top 10? Gabbert is top 1. I'll bet money on that. He didn't just fall off the back of the turnip truck. He has been the highest rated QB of his age group since he was 16. With the possible exception of Luck this year. But I still think if Luck was in the draft Gabbert might have passed him.

PatrickWillis
01-27-2011, 09:05 PM
What do you mean top 10? Gabbert is top 1. I'll bet money on that. He didn't just fall off the back of the turnip truck. He has been the highest rated QB of his age group since he was 16. With the possible exception of Luck this year. But I still think if Luck was in the draft Gabbert might have passed him.

You would bet money on that? I'd advise you to re-think that. He needs some serious work on his footwork, release, accuracy, and reads. He's a 4th round grade right now to me.

nepg
01-27-2011, 09:05 PM
People are putting Gabbert high because they haven't had two years to overanalyze everything about him. People like him because he's new and they don't know about any of his potential flaws. He's the #4 QB for me.

bucfan12
01-27-2011, 09:21 PM
Honestly, the same reason Stafford went number one. Stafford wasn't highly productive his entire College Career (until AJ Green came along). He had the physical tools to play in the NFL.

Gabbert has all the tools you look for. Strong Arm, big frame and can elude defenders. Kind of a poor man's Roethlisbuerger/Freeman when it comes to extending the plays. People will say he had talent around him, but honestly, he didn't have much to work with. People compare him to Chase Daniels, but Daniels had guys like Chase Coffman, Jeremy Maclin, and Denario Alexander to throw to. I really can't name a WR Gabbert had to throw too this year and think he carried the offense.

PatrickWillis
01-27-2011, 09:26 PM
Honestly, the same reason Stafford went number one. Stafford wasn't highly productive his entire College Career (until AJ Green came along). He had the physical tools to play in the NFL.

Gabbert has all the tools you look for. Strong Arm, big frame and can elude defenders. Kind of a poor man's Roethlisbuerger/Freeman when it comes to extending the plays. People will say he had talent around him, but honestly, he didn't have much to work with. People compare him to Chase Daniels, but Daniels had guys like Chase Coffman, Jeremy Maclin, and Denario Alexander to throw to. I really can't name a WR Gabbert had to throw too this year and think he carried the offense.

When are people going to realize that pure arm strength is one of the least important skills of a quarterback?

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 09:32 PM
Honestly, the same reason Stafford went number one. Stafford wasn't highly productive his entire College Career (until AJ Green came along). He had the physical tools to play in the NFL.

Gabbert has all the tools you look for. Strong Arm, big frame and can elude defenders. Kind of a poor man's Roethlisbuerger/Freeman when it comes to extending the plays. People will say he had talent around him, but honestly, he didn't have much to work with. People compare him to Chase Daniels, but Daniels had guys like Chase Coffman, Jeremy Maclin, and Denario Alexander to throw to. I really can't name a WR Gabbert had to throw too this year and think he carried the offense.

Nobody compares him to Daniel. Everyone knows the physical talent is on another level.

Gabbert had Danario Alexander in the only year he was productive. Daniels never really threw to Alexander.

Can't name TJ Moe who was one of the better receivers in the Big XII this year and looks to be an NFL caliber slot receiver?

Talent at runningback and a decent offensive line too.

Can't make that argument. The tape on Gabbert is straight up ugly at times, especially this year. He's a good physical talent, but he's not absolutely special as some people claim.

Purely a case of shiny new toy syndrome.

Halsey
01-27-2011, 09:35 PM
When are people going to realize that pure arm strength is one of the least important skills of a quarterback?

Nonsense. The annual "armstrength is overrated" claims have led to it becoming underrated in the minds of less knowledgeable fans. A QB with a strong arm can throw the ball farther and faster than a QB with a lesser arm. When a ball travels slower, guess what happens? DBs have more time to react. When a QB can't make long throws, it limits the offense. Look at the QBs in this year's Super Bowl. They both have strong arms.

bucfan12
01-27-2011, 09:37 PM
Also reports are that he's a hard worker and film junky, so I think his character is there. I don't know if he will be an elite QB in the NFL, but could be a very good QB. If he gets into a situation, say Minnesota, I think he'd be very successful.

There is no way I'd put someone like Mallett, Locker or Newton in front of them. Those 3 I think aren't even ahead of Colin Kaepernick, who I think is the most underrated QB in this draft.

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 09:39 PM
Also reports are that he's a hard worker and film junky, so I think his character is there.
There's some issues with that. Some arrests and some chatter from Mizzou that he wasn't well liked around campus or within the team. Ego issues supposedly.

metafour
01-27-2011, 09:45 PM
Honestly, the same reason Stafford went number one. Stafford wasn't highly productive his entire College Career (until AJ Green came along). He had the physical tools to play in the NFL.

********.

Stafford made jaw-dropping throws week-in, week-out against the best defenses in the country by the time he was declaring for the draft. Gabbert? 16 touchdowns 9 interceptions in the Big 12? Yawn. The inconsistency was still there for Stafford; but at least you saw elite NFL talent in every game he played. Gabbert has to be the least spectacular "ultra-tools" QB of all time. Everything about him seems overhyped.

iowatreat54
01-27-2011, 09:49 PM
Honestly, it's probably because of this

sOG_LVHivEQ

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 09:50 PM
Honestly, it's probably because of this

sOG_LVHivEQ

Said it then, will say it now. Worst throw in a big situation in college football this year. Horrible read, horrible throw.

iowatreat54
01-27-2011, 09:51 PM
Said it then, will say it now. Worst throw in a big situation in college football this year. Horrible read, horrible throw.

Are you saying that QBs that lock on to one side of the field right after the snap, then run for it and don't know what to do after deciding to run aren't top 10 prospects?

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 09:53 PM
Are you saying that QBs that lock on to one side of the field right after the snap, then run for it and don't know what to do after deciding to run aren't top 10 prospects?

I am humbly implying that.

Halsey
01-27-2011, 09:57 PM
A QBs last college game = what he'll be in the pros

Aaron Rodgers last college game was a humiliating loss in the Holiday Bowl to Texas Tech in which Rodgers didn't play particularly well at all.

metafour
01-27-2011, 10:00 PM
A QBs last college game = what he'll be in the pros

Aaron Rodgers last college game was a humiliating loss in the Holiday Bowl to Texas Tech in which Rodgers didn't play particularly well at all.

Gabbert has looked completely average all year long.

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 10:01 PM
A QBs last college game = what he'll be in the pros

Aaron Rodgers last college game was a humiliating loss in the Holiday Bowl to Texas Tech in which Rodgers didn't play particularly well at all.

That's all well and good if he did not do that on a consistent basis this year, but that's Gabbert's season this year in a nutshell. The tape on him last year is a whole lot better than this one. He was terrible a whole lot this year.

nepg
01-27-2011, 10:06 PM
Gabbert has potential. I have him below Locker, Mallett, and Newton though.

The guy is just terrible when the play breaks down or doesn't go exactly as it was drawn up. He's athletic, but uses his athleticism and mobility poorly. He makes terrible decisions in big moments.

I like Gabbert, but he doesn't have the tools, experience, or moxy that the other guys have. He has the weakest arm of the 4, hasn't been in the eyes of the national public, doesn't have the mobility that Locker and Newton have, and hasn't shown the resolve that the other three have shown.

Am I saying I wouldn't draft him in the Top 10? No. He's just on the bottom of the list behind the other 3 guys. The things he struggles with could definitely be fixed at the next level. The precedent is Josh Freeman. Freeman was horrible at times in college, but always had obvious ability and potential. Gabbert isn't close to Freeman's potential...or, rather, his potential is just different.

If I'm Buffalo, Cincy, and Arizona, I'm drafting those other 3 QBs.

bucfan12
01-27-2011, 10:08 PM
Gabbert has potential. I have him below Locker, Mallett, and Newton though.

The guy is just terrible when the play breaks down or doesn't go exactly as it was drawn up. He's athletic, but uses his athleticism and mobility poorly. He makes terrible decisions in big moments.

I like Gabbert, but he doesn't have the tools, experience, or moxy that the other guys have. He has the weakest arm of the 4, hasn't been in the eyes of the national public, doesn't have the mobility that Locker and Newton have, and hasn't shown the resolve that the other three have shown.

Am I saying I wouldn't draft him in the Top 10? No. He's just on the bottom of the list behind the other 3 guys. The things he struggles with could definitely be fixed at the next level. The precedent is Josh Freeman. Freeman was horrible at times in college, but always had obvious ability and potential. Gabbert isn't close to Freeman's potential...or, rather, his potential is just different.

If I'm Buffalo, Cincy, and Arizona, I'm drafting those other 3 QBs.

I don't think he has elite potential either, but I think he'd be a better pick than the other 3. Honestly, I like Kaepernick the most out of all QBs. But Gabbert does have the tools to become a starter in this league.

Halsey
01-27-2011, 10:09 PM
That's all well and good if he did not do that on a consistent basis this year, but that's Gabbert's season this year in a nutshell. The tape on him last year is a whole lot better than this one. He was terrible a whole lot this year.

A QBs year does not come down to one pass. Evaluating QBs is not that simplistic. The bottom line for QBs is that NFL teams are trying to project what they will become in the NFL, not what they were in college. Nobody is saying Gabbert is a finished product.

hockey619
01-27-2011, 10:11 PM
Every year there are people raising the same questions about the top QBs in the Draft. Many people on these boards questioned Aaron Rodgers and Ben Roethlisberger. When you find the perfect QB prospect, let us know.

People were also raising questions about Akili Smith and Tim Couch. See how a brought up a few examples that only supported my argument while ignoring everything else?

And i hope hes not a finished product, because hes very mediocre right now.

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 10:13 PM
A QBs year does not come down to one pass. Evaluating QBs is not that simplistic. The bottom line for QBs is that NFL teams are trying to project what they will become in the NFL, not what they were in college. Nobody is saying Gabbert is a finished product.

Where did I say that it comes down to one pass? In fact, that post you're quoting is me agreeing with you that it's not about that one pass. It's about the worst lower body mechanics and pocket presence out any top tier quarterback in recent years. Zero comfort level as a pocket passer this year with him.

There's raw, unfinished products like Locker and Newton. Then there's guys who aren't ready to come to market like Gabbert.

nepg
01-27-2011, 10:17 PM
Every year there are people raising the same questions about the top QBs in the Draft. Many people on these boards questioned Aaron Rodgers and Ben Roethlisberger. When you find the perfect QB prospect, let us know.
Carson Palmer.

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 10:19 PM
Carson Palmer.

One year of productivity.

Halsey
01-27-2011, 10:19 PM
People were also raising questions about Akili Smith and Tim Couch. See how a brought up a few examples that only supported my argument while ignoring everything else?

And i hope hes not a finished product, because hes very mediocre right now.

I remember many of the things you were saying about Bradford. Want to talk about that?

The easiest thing to be is the guy who hates on every top rated QB prospect, because you know there's at least a 50-50 chance they won't live up to what the team wants them to be. Actually evaluating individual QB prospects takes more than that.

nepg
01-27-2011, 10:21 PM
One year of productivity.
Vinny Testeverde (as prospects, Testies and Palmer are virtually identical, btw)

hockey619
01-27-2011, 10:26 PM
I remember many of the things you were saying about Bradford. Want to talk about that?

The easiest thing to be is the guy who hates on every top rated QB prospect, because you know there's at least a 50-50 chance they won't live up to what the team wants them to be. Actually evaluating individual QB prospects takes more than that.

How bout how much you hated sanchez, which is just as relevant to this as how i felt about bradford?

and the people who hated akili smith and couch were right. So maybe not liking some prospects is....normal?

Yeah i was kinda nuetral to bradford, i liked him mostly but was nervous about the system. Overall in the end i liked him alright. I also loved jimmy clausen much more, loved his composure and poise under pressure. i was wrong so far. wanted me to cry or something? I loved sanchez. I was ok with ryan, thought he looked like eli or a tom brady light. Ive been wrong before for loving guys and for hating them, its a two way road.

wanna continue to put words in my mouth and create scarecrows (like bringing up bradford)? or do you want to actually defend the point I made that all you do is ignore the points that dont help you (see my post you quoted)

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 10:27 PM
I remember many of the things you were saying about Bradford. Want to talk about that?

Sam Bradford and Gabbert couldn't be much further apart as prospect. Bradford was cerebral, accurate, but not the best physical talent. Understood film and the way the game worked better than most other guys. Spread offense was his biggest concern.

Gabbert is a guy with a big arm who can run around to limited success. Completely lacks the polish Bradford has and has an even greater spread concern.

Halsey
01-27-2011, 10:29 PM
How bout how much you hated sanchez?



I'll stop you right there, because I didn't hate Sanchez.

Anyone who wants the Lions to draft anyone other than Sanchez or Stafford with the #1 pick is scared and clueless. First of all, good teams don't let past QB busts scare them from taking another QB years later. It's a chance worth taking. The Ravens didn't let Boller scare them away from drafting Flacco, the Colts didn't let Jeff George scare them away from drafting Manning, etc. The QB crop looks weak as heck after Stafford and Sanchez, and the O-line crop looks fairly deep. Unless they can get some kind of great trade down offer, the Lions will be drafting Stafford or Sanchez #1. The rest of their picks and FA will be used for the defense, O-line and other needs. The Lions will be the same ole Lions if they pass on a potential franchise QB for yet another first round OT.

http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1431806&highlight=Sanchez#post1431806

asdf1223
01-27-2011, 10:32 PM
Said it then, will say it now. Worst throw in a big situation in college football this year. Horrible read, horrible throw.

And here they nitpick about Locker's decision making and inaccuracy ;)

hockey619
01-27-2011, 10:32 PM
I also remember you coming into the sanchez thread and posting a picture of joey harrington as another guy who had great "charisma." Not manning or someone good, harrington. But we'll just ignore that right, just like you ignored the rest of my points?

Halsey
01-27-2011, 10:35 PM
Sam Bradford and Gabbert couldn't be much further apart as prospect. Bradford was cerebral, accurate, but not the best physical talent. Understood film and the way the game worked better than most other guys. Spread offense was his biggest concern.


Spare me the nonsense about how cerebral you know Gabbert to be or how much film he understands. What the hell do you know about how much film he understands? I'm not going to debate that kind of adolescent bs.

hockey619
01-27-2011, 10:38 PM
Gabbert just isnt very good, he didnt take over or make any wow throws or really just do a whole lot of anything. Hes got tools to work with, but he hasnt shown any times really where he put them together, even for a play or series or something.

Halsey
01-27-2011, 10:38 PM
I also remember you coming into the sanchez thread and posting a picture of joey harrington as another guy who had great "charisma." Not manning or someone good, harrington. But we'll just ignore that right, just like you ignored the rest of my points?

I remember making that post. I was being a little defensive of Stafford as the Stafford vs Sanchez debates got going. I grew to like Sanchez more as time went on, however. I always believed Stafford was the better prospect, however. And he was.

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 10:38 PM
Spare me the nonsense about how cerebral you know Gabbert to be or how much film he understands. What the hell do you know about how much film he understands? I'm not going to debate that kind of adolescent bs.

Did I say Gabbert wasn't? Where did I say that? Nice staw man attempt though. I said that Bradford is special in that regard and we KNOW that, so yeah, if anything is to be spared it should be your arrogance and being the guy who "ADOLESCENT BS!" when someone doesn't agree with you.

You really like putting words in peoples mouth guy.

Pat Sims 90
01-27-2011, 10:39 PM
I think if a team bulids around his strenghts ala like the Steelers did with Roethisberger then i think he could be best QB in the class.

Halsey
01-27-2011, 10:44 PM
Did I say Gabbert wasn't? Where did I say that? Nice staw man attempt though. I said that Bradford is special in that regard and we KNOW that, so yeah, if anything is to be spared it should be your arrogance and being the guy who "ADOLESCENT BS!" when someone doesn't agree with you.

You really like putting words in peoples mouth guy.

You said "Bradford and Gabbert couldn't be much further apart as prospect. Bradford was cerebral, accurate, but not the best physical talent. Understood film and the way the game worked better than most other guys."

Is that not implying that Gabbert is far apart from being cerebral and understanding the game. Seems like that's what you were saying.

nepg
01-27-2011, 10:44 PM
I don't see where the argument is. What Gabbert is is pretty obvious. He's your average first round QB - that's his strength (size, arm, mobility, production). The weaknesses are that he doesn't use his physical tools properly and he is terrible under pressure and in situations where the game is entirely on his shoulders.

Compare him to the other prospects, and I don't see why you'd take him before the others. The others are more proven in bigger spots, have better arms, and two of them are far more athletic and mobile. He's a guy who could become a franchise QB over time - he has no obvious franchise QB traits. The others do.

nepg
01-27-2011, 10:47 PM
You said "Bradford and Gabbert couldn't be much further apart as prospect. Bradford was cerebral, accurate, but not the best physical talent. Understood film and the way the game worked better than most other guys."

Is that not implying that Gabbert is far apart from being cerebral and understanding the game. Seems like that's what you were saying.
Have you ever seen Gabbert standing in the pocket after he's felt some pressure in a game? It's not pretty. He's easily rattled. He can study all he wants, but he didn't show the mettle to execute when times weren't so easy.

brasho
01-27-2011, 10:48 PM
When are people going to realize that pure arm strength is one of the least important skills of a quarterback?

When they start regularly drafting weak-armed QBs in round 1 and stop drafting big armed guys with far less credentials so high (JaMarcus Russell immediately comes to mind along with 67% of every QB drafted in round 1 that flamed out... except weak-armed QBs like Alex Smith, TIm Couch, Cade McNown, Matt Leinart, Todd Marinovich and Joey Harrington who flamed out partly because they had weak arms and partly because they weren't good enough in other areas to make up for it.

They draft for potential in the NFL. Scouts and coaches want to see size, arm, feet... and if you have that they think they can teach you the rest. If you played well in college, then even better.

You think Jeff George was drafted #1 overall because he had great hair? He had the worst footwork, worst attitude, and worst mechanics of any long-time NFL starter I've ever seen... but the man had a golden arm and that's why he lasted as long as he did.

If arm strength weren't important, the Detmer bros would be heading to the hallo fame, Chad Pennington would have 5 Super Bowl wins, Brian Griese would still be in the NFL, Jeff Garcia would be best buds with TO, and Ken Dorsey would be the prototype NFL QB. But arm strength IS important... it's not the most important thing but having a weak-armed QB seriously cuts down on the size of a team's playbook... and coaches like to be able to run the whole thing.

brasho
01-27-2011, 10:50 PM
Vinny Testeverde (as prospects, Testies and Palmer are virtually identical, btw)

I was 12 years old when I wrote a letter to the Bucs begging them to NOT draft Testaverde and to keep Steve Young. Even at 12 I knew more about evaluating QBs than the Bucs did back then.

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 10:51 PM
You said "Bradford and Gabbert couldn't be much further apart as prospect. Bradford was cerebral, accurate, but not the best physical talent. Understood film and the way the game worked better than most other guys."

Is that not implying that Gabbert is far apart from being cerebral and understanding the game. Seems like that's what you were saying.

Do I know how much film Gabbert watches? No, I don't. I'm not going to imply I do either. He could prepare like Tom Brady or Peyton Manning for all I know. But it's glaringly obvious watching him that he has nowhere near the same control and feel for the game that Bradford did and even his most ardent supporters would attest to such. That's his weakness and if you don't like it you're just going to have to deal with something that is accepted as a fact within the rest of the scouting community. He reads half the field and takes off. Literally. You can see it on every single game if you turn on the tape. Maybe that's the nature of the offense in Mizzou, but Daniel in the same offense looked like a different guy even though he did run some.

So yeah, continue to put words in peoples mouths and throw out insults because it's really going a whole way to proving whatever kind of point you're trying to make because you have not done a whole lot of discussing Gabbert. Tons of disingenuous crap, repeating doesn't matter even after people backed off that and agreed with you and moved the discussion towards other things, tons of name calling, tons of putting things in other peoples mouths, ect.

nepg
01-27-2011, 10:51 PM
I was 12 years old when I wrote a letter to the Bucs begging them to NOT draft Testaverde and to keep Steve Young. Even at 12 I knew more about evaluating QBs than the Bucs did back then.
Vinny was pretty ******* good, dude... Steve Young wouldn't have turned it around like he did when he went to SF.

brasho
01-27-2011, 10:52 PM
I don't see where the argument is. What Gabbert is is pretty obvious. He's your average first round QB - that's his strength (size, arm, mobility, production). The weaknesses are that he doesn't use his physical tools properly and he is terrible under pressure and in situations where the game is entirely on his shoulders.

Compare him to the other prospects, and I don't see why you'd take him before the others. The others are more proven in bigger spots, have better arms, and two of them are far more athletic and mobile. He's a guy who could become a franchise QB over time - he has no obvious franchise QB traits. The others do.

HIs arm strength is good, not great, but still good is good and good will get better. I think he has pretty good mobility and he is definitely more mobile than Ryan Mallett. It is true that he suffers from Jeff Garcia-itis and bolts the pocket when he imagines pressure... but still I see more Josh Freeman than Jim Everett in him.

brasho
01-27-2011, 10:56 PM
Vinny was pretty ******* good, dude... Steve Young wouldn't have turned it around like he did when he went to SF.

5 INTs against a decently complex Penn St. defense.... the guy was lost in that game despite leading a far more talented team against the more cerebral but much more limited athletically Penn St. team. It was a sign of bad things to come...and also one reason why I always caution not to overrate QBs that played with great talent around them (Leinart among others) and not to discount players that were THE TEAM and had to carry the inferior offensive talent with them. I wouldn't consider TJ Moe a great WR but that was pretty much all Gabbert had to throw to that has ANY kind of possible NFL future.

And no, Steve Young wouldn't have likely done squat with the Bucs either... but Testarverde proved to be a moron that couldn't read a defense no matter which team he played for (except one season with the Jets and one more with the Ravens).

nepg
01-27-2011, 10:57 PM
HIs arm strength is good, not great, but still good is good and good will get better. I think he has pretty good mobility and he is definitely more mobile than Ryan Mallett. It is true that he suffers from Jeff Garcia-itis and bolts the pocket when he imagines pressure... but still I see more Josh Freeman than Jim Everett in him.
Yeah, he's good in those areas, that's why I said he's the average first round QB.

My biggest problem with him bolting is that he's not as good as he should be at it. It's like he knows he shouldn't be bolting, and doesn't commit to it completely. He also picks bad spots to bolt, then ends up making a bad decision. Gabbert plays QB scared, and that's not good. I do like him, though, and I think there's potential to work through that. But I'll take the other 3 QBs first.

ElectricEye
01-27-2011, 11:00 PM
My biggest problem with him bolting is that he's not as good as he should be at it. It's like he knows he shouldn't be bolting, and doesn't commit to it completely. He also picks bad spots to bolt, then ends up making a bad decision. Gabbert plays QB scared, and that's not good. I do like him, though, and I think there's potential to work through that. But I'll take the other 3 QBs first.
He's really not as good as he thinks at it either. If I were a coach I would tell him to give it up entirely for awhile until he learns to stand in the pocket and deliver the ball. It's a real great thing if he can do that in addition to maintaining a comfort level in the pocket, but if he's going to give up on plays before they start as consistently as he does he might as well just throw it out.

brasho
01-27-2011, 11:01 PM
Yeah, he's good in those areas, that's why I said he's the average first round QB.

My biggest problem with him bolting is that he's not as good as he should be at it. It's like he knows he shouldn't be bolting, and doesn't commit to it completely. He also picks bad spots to bolt, then ends up making a bad decision. Gabbert plays QB scared, and that's not good. I do like him, though, and I think there's potential to work through that. But I'll take the other 3 QBs first.

Here's the thing, something an old football coach told me, and when I coached a tad I said the same thing... if you're going to make a mistake, make it at full speed. Even as a QB they have to play with a sense of urgency... but at the same time remain poised. In a normal draft I see Gabbert as a 15-20 pick... with all the teams desperately needing QBs (and possibly having no free agency until way after the draft to stop the bleeding), top 10 would not surprise me at all.

the natural
01-28-2011, 01:00 AM
Gabbert just turned 21 not that long ago. He is 2 years younger than Kaepernick and a few of the others. A year and a half younger than Bradford was when he came out. Two and a half years younger than Colt McCoy was on draft day. You have to consider that. The teams who are drafting certainly will.

It doesn't matter much what we think of him. The guy is almost a lock for number one overall pick. He certainly won't last to the fifth pick of the draft. Gabbert has the shine. None of the others do, really.

whatadai
01-28-2011, 01:08 AM
Gabbert just turned 21 not that long ago. He is 2 years younger than Kaepernick and a few of the others. A year and a half younger than Bradford was when he came out. Two and a half years younger than Colt McCoy was on draft day. You have to consider that. The teams who are drafting certainly will.

It doesn't matter much what we think of him. The guy is almost a lock for number one overall pick. He certainly won't last to the fifth pick of the draft. Gabbert has the shine. None of the others do, really.

So he's almost a lock for the number 1 pick because he is 21 years old? Oh okay...nice analysis, McShay.

FUNBUNCHER
01-28-2011, 06:00 AM
Age isn't really a factor in drafting one prospect over another, all things being equal, unless there's a huge discrepancy.

2 years is nada.

And Gabbert does look like he's playing scared, I mean he scrambles out of the pocket at the slightest hint of pressure.

If Gabbert is more worried about the pass rush than keeping his eyes down the field, he's going to have major problems at the next level.

That was one of the biggest criticisms in D.C. when the Skins drafted Heath Shuler out of Tennessee, that he was terrified of the pass rush and being hit which stunted his development.

One of the most important traits for a potential NFL starting QB is C-O-U-R-A-G-E in the pocket.

That ain't Gabbert.

YoJoeBucsFan
01-29-2011, 08:37 AM
Watched him every game all game. The spread numbers weren't very good because he doesn't fit that offense all that well AND he had no weapons around him. The biggest question I have about him is his footwork when there is perceived or actual pressure. I saw some comparisons to Josh Freeman on another board, those are a possibility. I still think he is above the other guys in the 1st round.

RealityCheck
01-29-2011, 08:46 AM
Gabbert just turned 21 not that long ago. He is 2 years younger than Kaepernick and a few of the others. A year and a half younger than Bradford was when he came out. Two and a half years younger than Colt McCoy was on draft day. You have to consider that. The teams who are drafting certainly will.

It doesn't matter much what we think of him. The guy is almost a lock for number one overall pick. He certainly won't last to the fifth pick of the draft. Gabbert has the shine. None of the others do, really.
My cousin is 7 years old, so by your logic, he's a Hall of Famer.

JaxJag_1
01-29-2011, 08:51 AM
Gabbert is the suck

SimonRath
01-29-2011, 09:16 AM
Gabbert just turned 21 not that long ago. He is 2 years younger than Kaepernick and a few of the others. A year and a half younger than Bradford was when he came out. Two and a half years younger than Colt McCoy was on draft day. You have to consider that. The teams who are drafting certainly will.

It doesn't matter much what we think of him. The guy is almost a lock for number one overall pick. He certainly won't last to the fifth pick of the draft. Gabbert has the shine. None of the others do, really.

wasn't Amobi Okoye like one of the youngest players ever drafted? bet you thought he was the best player ever ever that year..

raynman
01-29-2011, 09:45 AM
Gabbert has all the tools you look for. Strong Arm, big frame and can elude defenders.sorry, but these aren't even close to being all the things you look for and teams that have used this as the standard have wound up with russell and leaf as their QBs.

it's a weak and crappy way to pick a QB and people put way too much emphasis on this. the dumb thing is, people never seem to figure that out.

raynman
01-29-2011, 09:47 AM
Age isn't really a factor in drafting one prospect over another, all things being equal, unless there's a huge discrepancy.

2 years is nada.

And Gabbert does look like he's playing scared, I mean he scrambles out of the pocket at the slightest hint of pressure.

If Gabbert is more worried about the pass rush than keeping his eyes down the field, he's going to have major problems at the next level.

That was one of the biggest criticisms in D.C. when the Skins drafted Heath Shuler out of Tennessee, that he was terrified of the pass rush and being hit which stunted his development.

One of the most important traits for a potential NFL starting QB is C-O-U-R-A-G-E in the pocket.

That ain't Gabbert.fwiw, you just described clausen as a rookie. sorry, but i don't want someone who can't even handle the pressures of college. clausen had it much worse as far as an oline in college and still looked better and more confident than gabbert under pressure.

ThePudge
01-29-2011, 10:56 AM
Watched him every game all game. The spread numbers weren't very good because he doesn't fit that offense all that well AND he had no weapons around him. The biggest question I have about him is his footwork when there is perceived or actual pressure. I saw some comparisons to Josh Freeman on another board, those are a possibility. I still think he is above the other guys in the 1st round.

No weapons? He had an All-American at his disposal this year in TE Michael Egnew. WR T.J. Moe might not be a great pro prospect but he's a more than serviceable college receiver. Josh Freeman was still a dramatically more effective Quarterback in college than Gabbert.

YoJoeBucsFan
01-29-2011, 11:40 AM
Freeman played in more of a pro style offense IIRC. Gabbert is IMHO either the best QB or 2nd best QB in this draft.

MidwayMonster31
01-29-2011, 12:05 PM
After watching some highlights, I was unimpressed with Gabbert. He did a good job moving in the pocket, but if the first read wasn't there, it was just run and find someone open. His blitz recognition isn't that good, and he can't read a defense one bit. Accuracy is also spotty at times. Whoever drafts him will be very disappointed. I was pretty impressed with Egnew though. I could see him being a first rounder next year.
Edit: I'm going to go out on a limb with sig editing.

SchizophrenicBatman
01-29-2011, 12:26 PM
yea but freeman had jordyzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Babylon
01-29-2011, 12:42 PM
yea but freeman had jordyzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

And he went from 63% to 58% accuracy when Jordy left. Same with Matt Stafford, his accuracy was junk till A.J. Green got there. A point i've tried to stress over and over again.

Flyboy
01-29-2011, 12:47 PM
He reminds me of Anne from Arrested Development.

".... him?"

metafour
01-29-2011, 01:14 PM
He reminds me of Anne from Arrested Development.

".... him?"

LOOOOL +1000 for the awesome reference.

"What, is he funny or something?"

Iamcanadian
01-29-2011, 01:32 PM
And how many people complained about Matt Ryan's accuracy his senior year and the fact that they wouldn't touch Sanchez because he hadn't played enough. Gabbert is a junior QB which means he is far from a finished product, but his upside is off the charts if he continues to develop.
The Panther's GM has already said that they will find a starting QB either in FA or in the draft and I won't be at all shocked if Gabbert has a solid pro day(I'm assuming he won't attend the Combine), that the Panthers take him #1 overall in the draft.
The simple facts are that Gabbert will sell tickets for 3 years as their fans watch to see how he develops, and the fact that there is little chance in the current NFL, for a team to compete without a solid starting QB. Their GM has already reached the conclusion that Clausen isn't the answer.

Umoro
01-29-2011, 01:45 PM
And how many people complained about Matt Ryan's accuracy his senior year and the fact that they wouldn't touch Sanchez because he hadn't played enough. Gabbert is a junior QB which means he is far from a finished product, but his upside is off the charts if he continues to develop.


The jury is still out with regard to Ryan and Sanchez, *especially* Sanchez. He still hasn't shown to me that he can be anything more than a mediocre NFL QB at this point. Most of those wins on his record come courtesy of Rex Ryan and the the Jets defense. Ryan has definitely shown he can be at least an above-average QB, but he can't really take over a game himself like other elite QBs can. I think that concerns about not having started enough games and concerns about accuracy are definitely warranted about Gabbert, because they still haven't been answered by Sanchez and Ryan.



The Panther's GM has already said that they will find a starting QB either in FA or in the draft and I won't be at all shocked if Gabbert has a solid pro day(I'm assuming he won't attend the Combine), that the Panthers take him #1 overall in the draft.
The simple facts are that Gabbert will sell tickets for 3 years as their fans watch to see how he develops, and the fact that there is little chance in the current NFL, for a team to compete without a solid starting QB. Their GM has already reached the conclusion that Clausen isn't the answer.

You have to realize that Clausen can still show something in his sophomore year. Almost all rookie QBs struggle. Granted, Clausen struggled more than most, but a dramatic improvement in his second year isn't entirely impossible. I think they give Clausen one more year to prove himself, and bring in a FA QB to compete with him in training camp.

Babylon
01-29-2011, 01:53 PM
The jury is still out with regard to Ryan and Sanchez, *especially* Sanchez. He still hasn't shown to me that he can be anything more than a mediocre NFL QB at this point. Most of those wins on his record come courtesy of Rex Ryan and the the Jets defense. Ryan has definitely shown he can be at least an above-average QB, but he can't really take over a game himself like other elite QBs can. I think that concerns about not having started enough games and concerns about accuracy are definitely warranted about Gabbert, because they still haven't been answered by Sanchez and Ryan.




You have to realize that Clausen can still show something in his sophomore year. Almost all rookie QBs struggle. Granted, Clausen struggled more than most, but a dramatic improvement in his second year isn't entirely impossible. I think they give Clausen one more year to prove himself, and bring in a FA QB to compete with him in training camp.

I agree with your last part, the Panthers would have taken Luck but i dont think they go with any of the others and give up on Clausen after one year.

Iamcanadian
01-29-2011, 03:09 PM
The jury is still out with regard to Ryan and Sanchez, *especially* Sanchez. He still hasn't shown to me that he can be anything more than a mediocre NFL QB at this point. Most of those wins on his record come courtesy of Rex Ryan and the the Jets defense. Ryan has definitely shown he can be at least an above-average QB, but he can't really take over a game himself like other elite QBs can. I think that concerns about not having started enough games and concerns about accuracy are definitely warranted about Gabbert, because they still haven't been answered by Sanchez and Ryan.

I don't think most teams consider the jury is still out on Ryan and Sanchez, they would be too glad to take them off their teams hands if offered.



You have to realize that Clausen can still show something in his sophomore year. Almost all rookie QBs struggle. Granted, Clausen struggled more than most, but a dramatic improvement in his second year isn't entirely impossible. I think they give Clausen one more year to prove himself, and bring in a FA QB to compete with him in training camp.

You do realize that only about 6% of 2nd round QB's make much of an impact in the NFL. I don't think the Panthers expect a whole lot out of Clausen and will look seriously to find a new starting QB for next season.

raynman
01-31-2011, 11:28 AM
You do realize that only about 6% of 2nd round QB's make much of an impact in the NFL. I don't think the Panthers expect a whole lot out of Clausen and will look seriously to find a new starting QB for next season.
they might, but there aren't any QBs in this draft that are any better than clausen, and that isn't a clausen compliment either.

Halsey
01-31-2011, 01:02 PM
It dosnt matter how old a prospect iz! if hes not ready to be an NFL QB at 18 he never be ready! AMOBI OKOYE!

the natural
01-31-2011, 02:44 PM
Age and experience make more of a difference at the QB position than any other. Most players on the field only have to master a few skills. Running backs usually peak before the age of 25, while most QBs don't hit their prime until they are 30. Gabbert had hardly any high school experience to draw on. He played in a run first offense then was injured his senior year. He is a lot rawer than any of the other prospects at the position. He is the youngest, by a couple years over many others, and has by far the least background as a QB. But he still was the top rated recruit as a pro style QB, and outperformed Luck and othes in all the elite camps. The team that drafts him won't expect immediate results, but long term gain.

SimonRath
01-31-2011, 03:53 PM
Age and experience make more of a difference at the QB position than any other. Most players on the field only have to master a few skills. Running backs usually peak before the age of 25, while most QBs don't hit their prime until they are 30. Gabbert had hardly any high school experience to draw on. He played in a run first offense then was injured his senior year. He is a lot rawer than any of the other prospects at the position. He is the youngest, by a couple years over many others, and has by far the least background as a QB. But he still was the top rated recruit as a pro style QB, and outperformed Luck and othes in all the elite camps. The team that drafts him won't expect immediate results, but long term gain.

"most QB's dont hit their prime until they are 30". really?
Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Phillip Rivers and TONS more would disagree.

snowplow
01-31-2011, 04:16 PM
"most QB's dont hit their prime until they are 30". really?
Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco, Phillip Rivers and TONS more would disagree.



Rodgers--first SB at 27-- close to 30
Manning--first mvp at 27 first sb at 30
Matt ryan--no mvps no sbs playoff record?
Jo flacco--age 26. Has he peaked?
Rivers?--age 29. Hello!!!! he hit his prime? when? In HS
Tom Brady--mvp at 30. SB at 24? He hit his prime this year.


So, I think all of your examples hit or will hit theisr prime close to 30. Hit their prime! do you know what that might mean?


ignore my neg rep. I think Rivers is a crybaby and all those who said he would not be traded were wrong! lol

And Big Ben is a rapist. Steelers fans need to distance themselves from him.

prock
01-31-2011, 04:44 PM
Rodgers--first SB at 27-- close to 30
Manning--first mvp at 27 first sb at 30
Matt ryan--no mvps no sbs playoff record?
Jo flacco--age 26. Has he peaked?
Rivers?--age 29. Hello!!!! he hit his prime? when? In HS
Tom Brady--mvp at 30. SB at 24? He hit his prime this year.


So, I think all of your examples hit or will hit theisr prime close to 30. Hit their prime! do you know what that might mean?


ignore my neg rep. I think Rivers is a crybaby and all those who said he would not be traded were wrong! lol

And Big Ben is a rapist. Steelers fans need to distance themselves from him.

Tom Brady didn't hit his prime when he threw for 50 TDs? Hmm... Rivers has been in his prime for awhile. 27 is not close to 30 in football years.

And Big Ben was accused of sexual assault. He didn't rape anyone, and if he did, nobody knows that except him and the girl. I don't like him either, but to call him a rapist and telling his fans to distance themselves from him is dumb.

snowplow
01-31-2011, 04:47 PM
big ben is a dirtbag.

SimonRath
01-31-2011, 05:18 PM
Rodgers--first SB at 27-- close to 30
Manning--first mvp at 27 first sb at 30
Matt ryan--no mvps no sbs playoff record?
Jo flacco--age 26. Has he peaked?
Rivers?--age 29. Hello!!!! he hit his prime? when? In HS
Tom Brady--mvp at 30. SB at 24? He hit his prime this year.


So, I think all of your examples hit or will hit theisr prime close to 30. Hit their prime! do you know what that might mean?


ignore my neg rep. I think Rivers is a crybaby and all those who said he would not be traded were wrong! lol

And Big Ben is a rapist. Steelers fans need to distance themselves from him.

27 is close to 30? haha
isnt there a saying that RB's basically die out after turning 30, so a RB turning 27 is basically turning 30, so hes done after 27.. dude..

And a QB hitting his peak only counts if he wins a MVP or super bowl? come on man, stop.

GaMeTiMe
01-31-2011, 05:40 PM
To answer the question of the thread without bringing up Amobi Okoye, Blaine Gabbert is a consensus top-10 pick right now because of the teams drafting there. He's a QB. Every single team in the top-10 excluding Dallas could arguably use a QB. When people mock, they usually simply match top team need to players available and give them the best available player at one of those positions, usually disregarding the way the actual franchise could be evaluating these prospects. Gabbert, in the mind of "draftniks", isn't a top-5 elite prospect at the position, but is the least-spottiest prospect at the top of the class and can respectfully be mocked somewhere within the top 10-12 picks. That's where draft-day surprises come from.

the natural
01-31-2011, 07:17 PM
To answer the question of the thread without bringing up Amobi Okoye, Blaine Gabbert is a consensus top-10 pick right now because of the teams drafting there. He's a QB. Every single team in the top-10 excluding Dallas could arguably use a QB. When people mock, they usually simply match top team need to players available and give them the best available player at one of those positions, usually disregarding the way the actual franchise could be evaluating these prospects. Gabbert, in the mind of "draftniks", isn't a top-5 elite prospect at the position, but is the least-spottiest prospect at the top of the class and can respectfully be mocked somewhere within the top 10-12 picks. That's where draft-day surprises come from.

All of that is true. But the next step is to ask why most of the teams drafting high (or having lousy seasons) need quarterbacks. Part of the answer is that it is the most important position on the field by a wide margin. Another part is that it is extremely difficult to find a player who combines all of the necessary attributes to play the position. Another is that players at the position are vulnerable to injury. I think only about half the QBs starting at the end of the season were starters at the beginning. Gabbert is a quarterback. He has all the tools to excel at the position. I think he will be the first player taken in the draft.

MI_Buckeye
01-31-2011, 07:18 PM
Gabbert has potential. I have him below Locker, Mallett, and Newton though.

The guy is just terrible when the play breaks down or doesn't go exactly as it was drawn up. He's athletic, but uses his athleticism and mobility poorly. He makes terrible decisions in big moments.



Absolutely absurd! I am not Gabberts biggest supporter, but his ability to extend plays and complete big passes on the run is definitely one of his strong points.

iowatreat54
01-31-2011, 07:21 PM
Absolutely absurd! I am not Gabberts biggest supporter, but his ability to extend plays and complete big passes on the run is definitely one of his strong points.

I agree. It's not that he has trouble when a play breaks down, because he doesn't usually, it's the fact that he usually is the one breaking down the play. He makes his one read to one side of the field, and if it isn't there, he looks like he panics, gets happy feet, and starts running. Then, he frantically searches for someone to throw to and usually isn't decisive if he wants to run or pass.

TT Gator
02-05-2011, 04:48 PM
Cuz Andrew Luck went back to school and the other 1st round level QB's in this draft are under-developed with huge question marks. It's pretty much one of those well he's not as bad as the other guys things instead of a wow that kid has talent thing. To me all the QBs destined for the first round this year should be going in the 2nd and 3rd rounds cuz none of them are ready to win right now IMO. I'm far more interested in the 2nd tier QBs in this Draft (Ponder, Dalton, Stanzi, Colin K.) and i'm shocked that they haven't made a jump in people's rankings yet. Chase Daniel did 3 times as much at Missouri then this kid and he went undrafted! Sure he's got a bigger arm then Chase but are we still at the point where just cuz a guy has a big arm he's automatically a 1st round pick?! From what I see Gabbert is overweight, underproduced in a SPREAD system (only 16 TDs? McElroy who's known as a "game manager" had 20 for crying out loud!), has an inflated accuracy percentage, BUT he's got a big arm! If i'm a team needing a QB this year I wait use my first round pick on one of the many impressive defencive players this year then get a QB in the 2nd. Historicly 2nd round QBs don't have a high success rate but I think this year is the exception.

Babylon
02-05-2011, 05:32 PM
Cuz Andrew Luck went back to school and the other 1st round level QB's in this draft are under-developed with huge question marks. It's pretty much one of those well he's not as bad as the other guys things instead of a wow that kid has talent thing. To me all the QBs destined for the first round this year should be going in the 2nd and 3rd rounds cuz none of them are ready to win right now IMO. I'm far more interested in the 2nd tier QBs in this Draft (Ponder, Dalton, Stanzi, Colin K.) and i'm shocked that they haven't made a jump in people's rankings yet. Chase Daniel did 3 times as much at Missouri then this kid and he went undrafted! Sure he's got a bigger arm then Chase but are we still at the point where just cuz a guy has a big arm he's automatically a 1st round pick?! From what I see Gabbert is overweight, underproduced in a SPREAD system (only 16 TDs? McElroy who's known as a "game manager" had 20 for crying out loud!), has an inflated accuracy percentage, BUT he's got a big arm! If i'm a team needing a QB this year I wait use my first round pick on one of the many impressive defencive players this year then get a QB in the 2nd. Historicly 2nd round QBs don't have a high success rate but I think this year is the exception.

Him too. At some point he will have to put it all out there and it will be interesting to see if he's the first QB off the board, not sure he will be.

the natural
02-05-2011, 07:29 PM
Gabbert is not overweight by any means. He was in Dallas this week doing some promotions for Gatorade. There are pictures of him with Eli Manning, and Gabbert looks far more like an NFL quarterback than Manning does.

iowatreat54
02-05-2011, 07:38 PM
So just for fun, I looked up some stats...

QB 1
301-475 63.4% 3186 yards 6.71 YPA 16 TD 9 INT 127.03 Rating

QB 2
150-254 59.1% 1956 yards 7.70 YPA 14 TD 9 INT 134.85 Rating

Production isn't everything, and I think Gabbert has a lot of tools to be a successful QB. But his junior year was incredibly unproductive, especially when you consider he was a part of a spread pass heavy offense.

As for the stats, QB 1 is Gabbert in 2010, his 2nd year starting in a pass heavy offense.

QB 2 is Ricky Stanzi in 2008, his 1st year where he became starter about 5 games in on a run heavy conservative offense.

Again, stats don't even come close to meaning everything, and I'm not comparing them as prospects, but I didn't realize how mediocre Gabbert's season was. It's even more baffling that he chose to come out after it.

Dam8610
02-05-2011, 08:52 PM
Gabbert is not overweight by any means. He was in Dallas this week doing some promotions for Gatorade. There are pictures of him with Eli Manning, and Gabbert looks far more like an NFL quarterback than Manning does.

I'm sure Ryan Leaf looked far more like an NFL QB than Drew Brees, but who worked out better for the Chargers?

the natural
02-05-2011, 09:25 PM
I'm sure Ryan Leaf looked far more like an NFL QB than Drew Brees, but who worked out better for the Chargers?

?

I have no idea what you're trying to say there. Blaine Gabbert is not fat is the only point I was trying to make. Whether he becomes a better NFL QB than Eli Manning or not remains to be seen.

the natural
02-05-2011, 09:31 PM
So just for fun, I looked up some stats...

QB 1
301-475 63.4% 3186 yards 6.71 YPA 16 TD 9 INT 127.03 Rating

QB 2
150-254 59.1% 1956 yards 7.70 YPA 14 TD 9 INT 134.85 Rating

Production isn't everything, and I think Gabbert has a lot of tools to be a successful QB. But his junior year was incredibly unproductive, especially when you consider he was a part of a spread pass heavy offense.

As for the stats, QB 1 is Gabbert in 2010, his 2nd year starting in a pass heavy offense.

QB 2 is Ricky Stanzi in 2008, his 1st year where he became starter about 5 games in on a run heavy conservative offense.

Again, stats don't even come close to meaning everything, and I'm not comparing them as prospects, but I didn't realize how mediocre Gabbert's season was. It's even more baffling that he chose to come out after it.

Gabbert's stats aren't much different than Stafford, Sanchez, and Freeman coming out in 2009. Those guys were all drafted for their tools and are all doing pretty well at the NFL level. Stafford and Freeman are still the youngest QBs in the league, and younger than half the QBs coming out this year.

nepg
02-05-2011, 09:32 PM
He was saying your point made no sense and doesn't hold any weight...and it still doesn't.

the natural
02-05-2011, 09:37 PM
He was saying your point made no sense and doesn't hold any weight...and it still doesn't.

"You talkin' to me!" :) Gabbert is not overweight. Look at the bleeping pictures from 2 days ago. I don't think they bothered to doctor them for Facebook. He looks like he will rip it up at the Combine.

iowatreat54
02-05-2011, 09:43 PM
Gabbert's stats aren't much different than Stafford, Sanchez, and Freeman coming out in 2009. Those guys were all drafted for their tools and are all doing pretty well at the NFL level. Stafford and Freeman are still the youngest QBs in the league, and younger than half the QBs coming out this year.

Yea, I don't think it takes away from the tools he has, I just didn't realize until now how disappointing (for lack of a better word) his numbers were this season, especially in a pass happy offense.

Also, Stafford's last year he was 235-383 61.4% 3459 yards 9.03 YPA 25 TD 10 INT 153.54 Rating in a non spread attack that was extremely pass heavy.

Bradford in his soph year (junior year doesn't count), he was 328-483 67.9% 4720 9.77 YPA 50 TDs 8 INT 180.84 Rating in a spread offense that was pass heavy, albeit with a slightly more relied on run game.

Those aren't really similar to Gabbert in 2010.

the natural
02-06-2011, 03:13 PM
Yea, I don't think it takes away from the tools he has, I just didn't realize until now how disappointing (for lack of a better word) his numbers were this season, especially in a pass happy offense.

Also, Stafford's last year he was 235-383 61.4% 3459 yards 9.03 YPA 25 TD 10 INT 153.54 Rating in a non spread attack that was extremely pass heavy.

Bradford in his soph year (junior year doesn't count), he was 328-483 67.9% 4720 9.77 YPA 50 TDs 8 INT 180.84 Rating in a spread offense that was pass heavy, albeit with a slightly more relied on run game.

Those aren't really similar to Gabbert in 2010.

Gabbert's soph season was very similar, stat wise, to Stafford's junior season. Bradford's numbers were great, no doubt, but he had a bunch of NFL caliber receivers to throw to. Also he is accurate dink and dunk, but has little capability of stretching the field. Most of his completions were behind the LOS this past season. He had the lowest YPC average of any starter in the league, I think. Tim Tebow had a higher passer rating even though his completion percentage was 10 points lower than Bradford. Tebow was the more effective QB, and always will be, I think.

ElectricEye
02-06-2011, 03:15 PM
Gabbert's soph season was very similar, stat wise, to Stafford's junior season. Bradford's numbers were great, no doubt, but he had a bunch of NFL caliber receivers to throw to. Also he is accurate dink and dunk, but has little capability of stretching the field.

Gabbert threw down the field even less than Bradford did at Oklahoma and still managed to stink.

iowatreat54
02-06-2011, 03:28 PM
Gabbert threw down the field even less than Bradford did at Oklahoma and still managed to stink.

This.

Point being, I'm not saying anything in terms of being prospects. All I'm saying is that Gabbert was in a much heavier passing offense than Stafford and they had almost identical stats, and a similar offense in terms of passing ration to Bradford and Bradford's stats blew him out of the water.

Nothing about Gabbert's 2010 season was impressive. He had an extremely low number of TDs in a pass happy offense, had a very low YPA, and his completion % is pretty mediocre given his low YPA and relative emphasis on short, simple passes in said offense.

If you want to compare, look at Dan Persa this past year. Similar offense and probably much less talent, yet he threw at a higher percentage with higher YPA, similar TD/INT numbers, and only 1000 less yards in like 150 less attempts. He also did it not against the Big 12, and specifically, the Big 12 North. No one is touting Persa as a first round QB, let alone top 10 or THE top QB, and the only thing Gabbert really has on Persa is a couple inches and a strong arm.

jnew76
02-06-2011, 05:33 PM
This.

Point being, I'm not saying anything in terms of being prospects. All I'm saying is that Gabbert was in a much heavier passing offense than Stafford and they had almost identical stats, and a similar offense in terms of passing ration to Bradford and Bradford's stats blew him out of the water.

Nothing about Gabbert's 2010 season was impressive. He had an extremely low number of TDs in a pass happy offense, had a very low YPA, and his completion % is pretty mediocre given his low YPA and relative emphasis on short, simple passes in said offense.

If you want to compare, look at Dan Persa this past year. Similar offense and probably much less talent, yet he threw at a higher percentage with higher YPA, similar TD/INT numbers, and only 1000 less yards in like 150 less attempts. He also did it not against the Big 12, and specifically, the Big 12 North. No one is touting Persa as a first round QB, let alone top 10 or THE top QB, and the only thing Gabbert really has on Persa is a couple inches and a strong arm.

And you found the answer in the last scentence. 2 inches and a strong arm is worth Millions of Dollars to NFL Front offices. They have proven that fact for going on 30 years now. Jamarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf, David Carr... All of them had one year of excellent productivity like Gabbert in 2009, and were taken more for their potential and measureables than what they accomplished as a college player. However, Aaron Rodgers and Carson Palmer had only one year of solid production before they were regarded as top prospects as well. NFL GM's are willing to gamble on potential.

I am a Gabbert fan, but I understand where you are coming from. Gabbert's numbers were skewed this year because of his lack of deep speed and experience on the outside... WR TJ Moe (Soph) and TE Michael Egnew (RS FRESH) were his primary targets. Neither can stretch the field. Losing Danario Alexander and Jared Perry, both 5th year seniors, was huge... Not to mention losing Derrick Washington, the #1 RB and best receiver out of the backfield, after he got kicked off the team right before the season.

All that said, at times Gabbert was incredible, and helped Missouri to only its 4th 10 win season in 120 years of football... The bowl game was a snapshot of his season. Stretches of shear brilliance and incredible talent, followed by an unforced error or bonehead play.

Gabbert has flaws, but every one of them is fixable with coaching and experience... He is 100X the prospect that Jimmy Clausen was last year, who people all around this board thought was the best QB in the draft.

In the end, Gabbert needs to go to the right team, the right QB coach, and offensive coordinator. He has a long way to go to become a day one starter and I don't think that would be the right way to handle his development.

the natural
02-06-2011, 06:34 PM
And you found the answer in the last scentence. 2 inches and a strong arm is worth Millions of Dollars to NFL Front offices. They have proven that fact for going on 30 years now. Jamarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf, David Carr... All of them had one year of excellent productivity like Gabbert in 2009, and were taken more for their potential and measureables than what they accomplished as a college player. However, Aaron Rodgers and Carson Palmer had only one year of solid production before they were regarded as top prospects as well. NFL GM's are willing to gamble on potential.

I am a Gabbert fan, but I understand where you are coming from. Gabbert's numbers were skewed this year because of his lack of deep speed and experience on the outside... WR TJ Moe (Soph) and TE Michael Egnew (RS FRESH) were his primary targets. Neither can stretch the field. Losing Danario Alexander and Jared Perry, both 5th year seniors, was huge... Not to mention losing Derrick Washington, the #1 RB and best receiver out of the backfield, after he got kicked off the team right before the season.

All that said, at times Gabbert was incredible, and helped Missouri to only its 4th 10 win season in 120 years of football... The bowl game was a snapshot of his season. Stretches of shear brilliance and incredible talent, followed by an unforced error or bonehead play.

Gabbert has flaws, but every one of them is fixable with coaching and experience... He is 100X the prospect that Jimmy Clausen was last year, who people all around this board thought was the best QB in the draft.

In the end, Gabbert needs to go to the right team, the right QB coach, and offensive coordinator. He has a long way to go to become a day one starter and I don't think that would be the right way to handle his development.

My sentiments to the word. Gabbert has comparatively little experience as a QB. He is the youngest in the draft, didn't throw a lot of passes in HS, and has just two seasons as a starter in the NCAA. But his tools, not just the arm and the athletic ability, but the head on his shoulders as well, are the best of anyone in the draft and as good as anyone at the position in the past decade. That is why he is consensus top 10, and possible first overall pick.

Babylon
02-06-2011, 10:15 PM
My sentiments to the word. Gabbert has comparatively little experience as a QB. He is the youngest in the draft, didn't throw a lot of passes in HS, and has just two seasons as a starter in the NCAA. But his tools, not just the arm and the athletic ability, but the head on his shoulders as well, are the best of anyone in the draft and as good as anyone at the position in the past decade. That is why he is consensus top 10, and possible first overall pick.

Please stop slinging that garbage because nobody is buying it.

the natural
02-06-2011, 11:08 PM
Please stop slinging that garbage because nobody is buying it.

"one man's garbage.....", as they say. But most credible draft sources (Gil Brandt, Mike Mayock, NFL Draft Scout, GBN Report), including this site, have Gabbert as the top QB and top 10 overall. I think those people all dig a little deeper than you or I are able. Not to mention that Gabbert is being run through the same machinery by CSS down in Phoenix as Bradford, Stafford, and most of the first overall picks of the last decade were. Those guys don't pick nags at the racetrack.

ElectricEye
02-07-2011, 12:06 AM
Mike Mayock hasn't ranked quarterbacks yet, he has a preliminary list of names he likes, but he hasn't decided which order he likes them in. He even goes out of his way to rank Locker, Mallet, Gabbert, and Newton as "first round potential" with no number assigned to them. So yeah. I didn't check the rest of it, but I know you're making that up so it doesn't really make much of a difference.

Halsey
02-07-2011, 12:07 AM
As we see every year, QBs are what separate teams. If a team has to take a risk on a QB, it might as well be a QB with great upside, because having an average starting QB means not winning Super Bowls. Gabbert's upside seems too high for many teams to pass on.

the natural
02-07-2011, 12:42 AM
Mike Mayock hasn't ranked quarterbacks yet, he has a preliminary list of names he likes, but he hasn't decided which order he likes them in. He even goes out of his way to rank Locker, Mallet, Gabbert, and Newton as "first round potential" with no number assigned to them. So yeah. I didn't check the rest of it, but I know you're making that up so it doesn't really make much of a difference.

Mayock has stated in a couple different interviews that at this point Gabbert is his #1 QB. That could change, but he has Blaine listed first among the "top four", and at every other position the top rated guy is listed first. Gil Brandt stated in one of his nfl.com Q&A sessions that he had Gabbert slightly ahead of Newton for the top spot. It's easy enough to check the others because they print their rankings. Which you've probably already done, but find it more convenient to look for a technicality so you can discredit the whole statement.

Babylon
02-07-2011, 01:17 AM
As we see every year, QBs are what separate teams. If a team has to take a risk on a QB, it might as well be a QB with great upside, because having an average starting QB means not winning Super Bowls. Gabbert's upside seems too high for many teams to pass on.

If i'm going to take a risk on a QB this year it's probably going to be guys with bigger arms and mobility like Locker and Newton. Gabbert is probably #1 on some peoples boards strictly by default, there really isnt enough there to warrant it. Having said that if he goes to the combine, aces the interviews and the drills then i'm on board.

FUNBUNCHER
02-07-2011, 01:47 AM
My sentiments to the word. Gabbert has comparatively little experience as a QB. He is the youngest in the draft, didn't throw a lot of passes in HS, and has just two seasons as a starter in the NCAA. But his tools, not just the arm and the athletic ability, but the head on his shoulders as well, are the best of anyone in the draft and as good as anyone at the position in the past decade. That is why he is consensus top 10, and possible first overall pick.

I do the exact same thing too, but this is blatant prospect homerism.
How do you have insight into Gabbert's 'head'; innate intelligence and football IQ??

It's fine to make inferences on a player's grey matter based on his on the field play, but if you did that for Gabbert you'd have a hard time assuming he's this brilliant field general under center.

Gabbert is being given a huge pass on his 2010 season and has been given way more credit for his performance in 2009.
I don't have a problem with Gabbert being a 1st round pick, even top 15, but to overrate him to the point he could be taken in the top 3 is crazy IMO.
Gabbert's bust potential is as high as any QB in the draft.

If it does work out for Gabbert and he becomes a franchise QB for the next 10+ years, it will reflect a radical change IMO in the way analysts and NFL teams scout college QBs, 'cause I just don't see this incredibly elite QB prospect.

Nice tools, but his actual game??
Not so much.

I still believe Newton/Mallett/Locker are flat out better football players than Gabbert, which should still matter in the NFL.

the natural
02-07-2011, 12:23 PM
I was saying the "head on the shoulders" tool, more in reference to his overall personality, which seems solid and well grounded. If you look at glaring busts in past drafts, a majority of them ended up that way because of personal issues. Listening to the Gabbert speak and looking at his academic record he doesn't seem high risk to flake out. All of the prospects have to learn new systems once they turn pro, so I don't think the schemes he played in college handicap him more than any of the others. Just means he uses what would have been his senior college season adapting to the pro game.

Babylon
02-07-2011, 01:11 PM
He's just benefiting from the lack of attention he's gotten this year compared to all the attention the other QBs have gotten. It amazes me how stupid NFL scouts can be; it's such a simple pattern to recognize, and it's how JaMarcus Russells and Kyler Bollers happen. I don't hate Gabbert or anything but he is absolutely not better than Newton or Locker.

I think this sums it up pretty nicely.

My take is let him go first in the draft, just means better players available for the home team.

jnew76
02-07-2011, 04:29 PM
History is on Gabbert's side IF teams and scouts determine he is the #1 QB in the draft.

9 of the last 10 years a QB has been taken in the top 3... Exception was 2006 when Leinart went 11.

8 of the last 10 years a QB has been taken 1rst overall...

The success of Bradford this year helps him as a QB from a spread system.

The overall success of young QB's in recent drafts has been high.

You can all think what you want, but right now there is an excellent chance Gabbert will be a top 5 pick.

Babylon
02-07-2011, 04:50 PM
History is on Gabbert's side IF teams and scouts determine he is the #1 QB in the draft.

9 of the last 10 years a QB has been taken in the top 3... Exception was 2006 when Leinart went 11.

8 of the last 10 years a QB has been taken 1rst overall...

The success of Bradford this year helps him as a QB from a spread system.

The overall success of young QB's in recent drafts has been high.

You can all think what you want, but right now there is an excellent chance Gabbert will be a top 5 pick.

What exactly does he do that seperates him from the other guys out there? It doesnt seem to be character, arm strength, pocket presence, accuracy. Someone please sell me on Blaine Gabbert.

FUNBUNCHER
02-07-2011, 05:03 PM
Gabbert fails in nearly every comparison to Bradford, except maybe pure arm strength.
There is no advantage for Gabbert at all that he and Bradford played in similar offensive schemes in college, and in fact makes Gabbert appear to be an even worse prospect.

But hey, if you like guy, you can have him.
I get the love for guys like Newton/Mallett/Locker, but Gabbert played with more offensive talent than Locker, he doesn't have the arm strength of Mallett and he's not the total physical prospect that Newton is.

And as Babylon stated previously, Gabbert's pocket presence and accuracy rank near the bottom of the top 3 QB prospects.

When you finish with Babylon, sell me a big slice of Gabbert too.

ElectricEye
02-07-2011, 05:16 PM
What exactly does he do that seperates him from the other guys out there? It doesnt seem to be character, arm strength, pocket presence, accuracy. Someone please sell me on Blaine Gabbert.

Lack of film equals upside apparently.

Saints-Tigers
02-07-2011, 05:18 PM
Hard for me to get on board with a guy that I don't believe has elite tools(good, but not elite to me) nor does he have an impressive resume. Hell, I like my QB to have both, but you have to have at least one.

Now that's way oversimplifying things, but it's hard to sell me on a guy that is a project that doesn't have through the roof potential.

the natural
02-07-2011, 05:30 PM
What exactly does he do that seperates him from the other guys out there? It doesnt seem to be character, arm strength, pocket presence, accuracy. Someone please sell me on Blaine Gabbert.

He is a year and a half younger than Locker and Mallett, and I think his career accuracy numbers are as good or better. Newton only had one year as a starter at Auburn and brought a truckload of baggage when he arrived. Those issues are still out there percolating, as well. Gabbert may not be the "best" in any single category of available prospects, but he likely has the best overall package and the least pitfalls.

Nike has been holding their elite camps for high school prospects for a decade or so, and Gabbert I think had the second best ever performance in their eyes, behind Matt Stafford. At the time ESPN ranked him as the best prospect at the position in "at least 3 years". So the tools are there.

FUNBUNCHER
02-07-2011, 05:41 PM
So the big 'pitch' for Gabbert being a top 5 pick boils down to that he's a youngin', and looked AWESOME in a Nike passing camp for high schoolers.

That works for me.

Next.

the natural
02-07-2011, 05:52 PM
So the big 'pitch' for Gabbert being a top 5 pick boils down to that he's a youngin', and looked AWESOME in a Nike passing camp for high schoolers.

That works for me.

Next.

LOL, every single detail have to be "the big pitch"? It doesn't hurt to be the top ranked QB of your class coming out of HS, and have your choice of any college in the country. It doesn't hurt that he played as a true freshman behind the best college QB in the country, while Andrew Luck sat on the bench at Stanford. It doesn't hurt that he threw for twice as many yards and TDs the following season as Luck did. It's not like he sat on the bench for 5 years in college the way Matt Cassell did.

The details add up for Gabbert. The size, the arm, the release, the mobility, the academic achievements, the laid back, down to earth, persona. The big pitch is the whole package.

ElectricEye
02-07-2011, 05:56 PM
LOL, every single detail have to be "the big pitch"? It doesn't hurt to be the top ranked QB of your class coming out of HS, and have your choice of any college in the country. It doesn't hurt that he played as a true freshman behind the best college QB in the country, while Andrew Luck sat on the bench at Stanford. It doesn't hurt that he threw for twice as many yards and TDs the following season as Luck did. It's not like he sat on the bench for 5 years in college the way Matt Cassell did.

The details add up for Gabbert. The size, the arm, the release, the mobility, the academic achievements, the laid back, down to earth, persona. The big pitch is the whole package.

You just described Dan Orlovsky to a literal tee except Orlovsky was actually relatively productive.

Not saying Gabbert isn't a better prospect coming out, but high school hype and early playing time mean absolutely nothing...just like age(provided it's not extreme).

niel89
02-07-2011, 06:12 PM
LOL, every single detail have to be "the big pitch"? It doesn't hurt to be the top ranked QB of your class coming out of HS, and have your choice of any college in the country. It doesn't hurt that he played as a true freshman behind the best college QB in the country, while Andrew Luck sat on the bench at Stanford. It doesn't hurt that he threw for twice as many yards and TDs the following season as Luck did. It's not like he sat on the bench for 5 years in college the way Matt Cassell did.

The details add up for Gabbert. The size, the arm, the release, the mobility, the academic achievements, the laid back, down to earth, persona. The big pitch is the whole package.

I don't understand. How does him playing earlier than Luck have any bearing on him as a pro prospect.

Its nice that he threw for 11 more TD's and 1018 more yards but he also had an extra 157 attempts and he plays in a spread offense. And then the next year Luck blew his doors off.

All these high school accolades don't have any weight in terms of evaluating a guy for the NFL. Gabbert is arguably the top qb in a very weak top end qb draft. Put these guys in a bunch of the past drafts and they are easy second rounders.

the natural
02-07-2011, 06:14 PM
You just described Dan Orlovsky to a literal tee except Orlovsky was actually relatively productive.

Not saying Gabbert isn't a better prospect coming out, but high school hype and early playing time mean absolutely nothing...just like age(provided it's not extreme).

None of the specifics in itself is all decisive. But each one increases the likelyhood of success in the future in some way. You either go on these quantifiable measurements, or you accept some amateur's assessment of "He doesn't look good TO ME on film.".

jnew76
02-07-2011, 06:53 PM
What exactly does he do that seperates him from the other guys out there? It doesnt seem to be character, arm strength, pocket presence, accuracy. Someone please sell me on Blaine Gabbert.

First, I would draft Bradford or Luck 100 times out of 100 over Gabbert... But there is no Bradford or Luck in this draft.

This is a weak draft both overall and at the QB position. Gabbert made a ton of money when Luck went back to school. IMO, he is in a great position to capitalize on all these factors.

Furthermore, the rest of the draft process sets up very well for Gabbert. He is the complete package in shorts and a t-shirt. People have legitimate concerns over Gabbert's pocket presence and happy feet during games. But, in a controlled environment, with scripted throws, Gabbert will excel. I also believe that Gabbert's skill set transfers to an NFL Pro-Style offense better than any spread QB to come out.

Newton has the wow factor, Locker has the career achievments. But IMO, neither has the pro potential that Gabbert has.

Potential is a blessing and a curse... I am not even saying I believe Gabbert will be a great QB in the NFL. I am saying that think he projects better to the NFL than any other QB in this class. Is he ready to step in and play right away? NO.

If I had to draft the QB that would win the most games next year, I would draft Newton. He can create something from nothing and keep plays going when everything else breaks down.

Long term I would take Gabbert... when his footwork and balance are good, he is the best QB in this draft by far. People around here are saying he does not have elite tools... I seriously wonder what they are looking at. He looks terrible at times, makes some bad decisions, no question... However, I also see the times when Gabbert makes Elite NFL throws into tiny windows. Gabbert throws the best deep out and square in ball in this class. He makes throws from the far hash across the field at an elite level. His release is lighting quick, and he has a few extra MPH on the fastball whenever he needs it.

Missouri's offensive talent this year outside of Gabbert was not on the same level as it was in previous years, yet Gabbert won 10 games and beat Oklahoma. Without Gabbert, the team might not have been bowl eligible.

I am close to the MU program and have friends in and around it. People say they have heard Gabbert is a D-Bag... And this was in fact true to a point. Gabbert came in as an arrogant, cocky, 5* recruit that did nothing to endear himself to the rest of the team. He did not work hard and make the commitment to his teammates and coaches he neaded to. He needed to be humbled and from what I hear, he was. Specifically by Shawn Weatherspoon and Danario Alexander. Gradually, through the 2009 season he became a leader on the team, and after playing through the high ankle sprain he suffered in the Nebraska game he gained the teams respect. Gabbert's work preparing for the 2010 season was incredible by all accounts, no question he was the leader of the team throughout. He lacks the Brett Favre charm, but his intangibles and work ethic have become excellent. In short, he grew up and matured.

In the end, Gabbert is not an "elite" NFL QB prospect, but he is the best of a weak QB class as well as a weak overall class. It all adds up to him being a top 5 pick. I hate agreeing with Todd McShay, but it happens from time to time.

Babylon
02-07-2011, 07:02 PM
^
Personally i'd put Gabbert in the same class as a Sam Bradford, system guys that can move a little and should be pretty accurate when surrounded by a good cast but not able to carry a poor team. Newton i think translates more to a Josh Freeman or a poor mans Ben Rothliesberger. Locker i think will take care of his accuracy problems which arent as bad as some think and i see him as another Aaron Rodgers. Mallet scares me a little from a personality standpoint, he of the best arm in the draft. That is how i see this years top 4 QBs.

iowatreat54
02-07-2011, 07:12 PM
I have no qualms about Gabbert physically. He's got size, a great arm, and mobility. I just am unconvinced that he mentally will be able to handle the next level. That's not to say he isn't a bright kid, I'm sure he is, but most plays he makes one read or only reads one side of the field, or he panics and runs out of the pocket and then either forces something or doesn't know what to do.

I'll admit I haven't seen all that I could have on Gabbert, or even most of it. But I have seen some, and most notably against bigger competition, and he shows those same flaws usually. I'd just be very wary of taking a chance on a kid that hasn't shown the ability to go through all his reads, read an entire defense on a play, or stay poised when necessary.

the natural
02-07-2011, 07:19 PM
I don't know that any year is perceived as a "great" year for QBs. Last year you had Bradford coming off serious injuries to his throwing shoulder and having missed an entire season, Clausen described as a cocky little jerk who didn't accomplish anything in college, Tebow with his passing mechanics, McCoy looking like he was a 12 year old. Before that Stafford, who is very similar in background to Gabbert, Sanchez as a one year starter with questionable leadership ability, Freeman as a raw athlete from a funky system. Matt Ryan had lots of criticisms directed his way. I think his career college completion rate was under 60% and he was as stiff as a board. So on and so forth.

niel89
02-07-2011, 07:37 PM
Of the past 3 or 4 drafts, where would you rank Gabbert as a prospect compared to past 1st round QBs?

the natural
02-07-2011, 07:52 PM
Of the past 3 or 4 drafts, where would you rank Gabbert as a prospect compared to past 1st round QBs?
I liked Tebow more than Bradford from last year's draft. Although I was about the only person on the planet who did. I still wonder about Bradford's durability and ability to throw deep when necessary. So, I'd rate Gabbert and Tebow about equal. Matt Stafford has more raw talent than both but he has to stay healthy. Sanchez, I don't like. Josh Freeman, very similar to Gabbert, so I'd lump him in there with Tebow and Blaine, just behind Stafford. Matt Ryan is maxed out. He is just as likely to get worse, as better, I think. Ryan with Bradford on the third tier.

FUNBUNCHER
02-07-2011, 07:52 PM
Why is Texas Tech's Taylor Potts getting no buzz??

Is his arm that awful?? He's 6'5, not a stiff and actually put up the numbers one would expect out of a spread scheme with WRs who won't sniff the NFL.

If I'm comparing Gabbert to Potts, tell me why anyone Gabbert is the superior prospect??
Not attempting to cast shade on Gabbert, just wondering if Potts is being underrated.

ThePudge
02-07-2011, 08:01 PM
Of the past 3 or 4 drafts, where would you rank Gabbert as a prospect compared to past 1st round QBs?

I like him more than Tim Tebow. That's all.

jnew76
02-07-2011, 08:15 PM
^
Personally i'd put Gabbert in the same class as a Sam Bradford, system guys that can move a little and should be pretty accurate when surrounded by a good cast but not able to carry a poor team. Newton i think translates more to a Josh Freeman or a poor mans Ben Rothliesberger. Locker i think will take care of his accuracy problems which arent as bad as some think and i see him as another Aaron Rodgers. Mallet scares me a little from a personality standpoint, he of the best arm in the draft. That is how i see this years top 4 QBs.

Well, while I don't see that happening with Locker, I did not Aaron Rodgers becoming the player he is either. Locker has the personality and leadership ability everyone looks for in a QB and face of a franchise. What concerns me is his 4 year progression at Washington. Specifically with accuracy. The times he carried the Washington team on his back, he did it more with his legs than his arm. He throws a better deep ball than Gabbert, I will say that. I root for Locker... he is a top notch individual who has my utmost respect. I just see him as a backup NFL QB that may start for 2-3 years at some point similar to a John Kitna career.

I am not saying I would draft Gabbert if I had a top 5 pick in this draft and needed a QB... I am just predicting he will be drafted in the top 5. As a Missouri fan, I hope he goes to a situation where he can sit and learn... He could easily go down in flames if he is thrown into the fire before he is ready.

Mallett is the QB prospect most capable of making a monster move in the first round. I have no doubt that some coach or GM may very well fall in love with his arm and ability. One off the charts workout combined with one team falling in love can get Mallet into the top 5-10. He could go the Joe Flacco route and throw at the combine while the rest of the top QB's don't. If I was him, I would put that arm on display as much as possible. If I was his agent I would advise him to do just that.

jnew76
02-07-2011, 08:26 PM
Why is Texas Tech's Taylor Potts getting no buzz??

Is his arm that awful?? He's 6'5, not a stiff and actually put up the numbers one would expect out of a spread scheme with WRs who won't sniff the NFL.

If I'm comparing Gabbert to Potts, tell me why anyone Gabbert is the superior prospect??
Not attempting to cast shade on Gabbert, just wondering if Potts is being underrated.

At this point there is no doubt in my mind that Potts is underrated.

2 things hold him back IMO.

1. He cannot drive the ball into tight windows. He does not have the extra zip that separates average arms from NFL arms.

2. He suffers from the Texas Tech stigma... Be it wrong or right, the failures of Harrell, Cumbie, and the rest have caused him to be an afterthought.

I believe the shrewd talent evaluators are looking at him closer than most.

jnew76
02-07-2011, 08:58 PM
I like him more than Tim Tebow. That's all.

Agreed... The last 3 drafts have had some great talent at QB. For me, he would be right there with Flacco and Freeman as a prospect. Both were raw and you had to evaluate them how their tools transferred to the NFL, like Gabbert.

the natural
02-07-2011, 09:09 PM
Agreed... The last 3 drafts have had some great talent at QB. For me, he would be right there with Flacco and Freeman as a prospect. Both were raw and you had to evaluate them how their tools transferred to the NFL, like Gabbert.

There's the rub. Flacco and Freeman are arguably the two hottest young quarterbacks in the NFL at the moment. That is the wave Blaine Gabbert is riding. With considerable help from the boys at CSS. The draft is just a snapshot. Players stock goes up and down and up and down from high school to retirement. Gabbert is making all the right moves to become the shiniest face in the snapshot come the end of April. Not to say he will be the best pro, or the best pro quarterback, but that isn't even the point now. The point is getting the big money on draft day. Then work on becoming a great pro.

OaklandRaider56
02-07-2011, 09:20 PM
At this point there is no doubt in my mind that Potts is underrated.

2 things hold him back IMO.

1. He cannot drive the ball into tight windows. He does not have the extra zip that separates average arms from NFL arms.

2. He suffers from the Texas Tech stigma... Be it wrong or right, the failures of Harrell, Cumbie, and the rest have caused him to be an afterthought.

I believe the shrewd talent evaluators are looking at him closer than most.

Have you actually seen him throw the football? Taylor Potts has a damn good arm, and can put plenty of zip on the ball. Just because he doesn't do it often doesn't mean he can't. Spread offense's don't typically require the QB to rocket the ball into tight spaces, look at Harrell, he doesn't have a great arm; but he holds the record for TD passes in a college career because he could read the field better than anyone and put the ball wherever he wanted. Taylor Potts couldn't play in a spread offense as effectively (as Harrell) but he has prototypical size and a much better arm. Potts didn't exactly have Michael Crabtree and Danny Amendola to throw to either. I think he'll get drafted (5th-6th) and some team will be pleased to have a solid backup in the least.

OaklandRaider56
02-07-2011, 09:25 PM
Why is Texas Tech's Taylor Potts getting no buzz??

Is his arm that awful?? He's 6'5, not a stiff and actually put up the numbers one would expect out of a spread scheme with WRs who won't sniff the NFL.

If I'm comparing Gabbert to Potts, tell me why anyone Gabbert is the superior prospect??
Not attempting to cast shade on Gabbert, just wondering if Potts is being underrated.

I agree with you. Watch the Texas Tech vs. Missouri game without any preconceived notions about who's the superior QB and Potts looks like the much better QB, hands down. It was Gabbert's worst game, but Tech's pass defense was ranked 118th in the nation so he doesn't have any excuses.

jnew76
02-07-2011, 09:51 PM
I agree with you. Watch the Texas Tech vs. Missouri game without any preconceived notions about who's the superior QB and Potts looks like the much better QB, hands down. It was Gabbert's worst game, but Tech's pass defense was ranked 118th in the nation so he doesn't have any excuses.

No doubt Potts out played Gabbert in that game... and as I said before, Potts is very underrated IMO. Potts has a good arm, just not an elite one. Better than any QB prospect to come out of Tech. He had a great year in spite of a coaching transition. There is a lot to like about Taylor Potts. He is someone to watch as the draft process moves along.

the natural
02-08-2011, 12:23 PM
Gil Brandt's nfl.com chat today -
Question: "Who do you think will be first pick in the draft by Panthers?". Gil:"If there is a starting QB there, and that would be Gabbert or Newton, you can't pass on him.".

Q: Who are you looking forward to seeing at the Combine?
Gil: Blaine Gabbert, and Cam Newton if he shows up.

FUNBUNCHER
02-08-2011, 01:18 PM
Gil Brandt's nfl.com chat today -
Question: "Who do you think will be first pick in the draft by Panthers?". Gil:"If there is a starting QB there, and that would be Gabbert or Newton, you can't pass on him.".

Q: Who are you looking forward to seeing at the Combine?
Gil: Blaine Gabbert, and Cam Newton if he shows up.

I respect the hell out of Gil Brandt, but Gabbert potentially going #1 is nutty IMO.

And Cam has to attend the combine, which doesn't mean he'll work out.
I think he does everything except throw,

the natural
02-08-2011, 01:52 PM
I respect the hell out of Gil Brandt, but Gabbert potentially going #1 is nutty IMO.

And Cam has to attend the combine, which doesn't mean he'll work out.
I think he does everything except throw,

Gabbert has said he'll do all the tests but not throw at the Combine. Newton said he isn't sure (as of Friday) if he would do any of the tests other than the mandatory ones. I think the "invitation only" event this week will replace Combine testing for Cam.

Babylon
02-08-2011, 02:03 PM
Gabbert has said he'll do all the tests but not throw at the Combine. Newton said he isn't sure (as of Friday) if he would do any of the tests other than the mandatory ones. I think the "invitation only" event this week will replace Combine testing for Cam.

You mean the one that scouts wont be attending? that is going to go over like a lead baloon.

I'm not going to be too harsh on Newton here because we dont know what he'll do or not do at the combine but this is smelling of the NBA the way he's handling things.

FUNBUNCHER
02-08-2011, 02:14 PM
Cam has to work out for scouts, whether privately, at Auburn or at Indy.

I don't think Clausen or Bradford did anything at the combine last year except get weighed, do interviews and take the Wonderlic.

It's not unprecedented, but blowing up on the agility/speed/strength should only help Newton.

Some prospects still don't understand how they conduct themselves from the end of the season until the draft comes can inform teams more about their 'character' than how they actually perform on any specific tests.

Scouts IMO want to see how hard a prospect works out preparing for the biggest job interview of their lives, and see them act like 'professionals'.

I don't fault Cam for holding a private workout, but there's no reason at all for a physical specimen like him to dodge the tests at Indy.

Whatever.

the natural
02-08-2011, 02:20 PM
I'm assuming that Newton's advisors set up the media event so he could skip Combine testing. Unless they thought the labor negotiations might disrupt the Combine and personal workouts. As it sits they can take the high road and say Newton did his workout, it's on tape, and he chooses to skip the Combine to support his future fellow employees. With his reputation as an athlete it probably isn't in his best interest to be precisely measured in any case. Particularly if Gabbert were to outperform him in some of the athletic events.

I think Brandt called it when he said that he was looking forward to seeing Newton/Gabbert at the Combine. That would probably be the buzz story of the event. Along with the annual freak performance or two.

ThePudge
02-08-2011, 07:29 PM
I'm assuming that Newton's advisors set up the media event so he could skip Combine testing. Unless they thought the labor negotiations might disrupt the Combine and personal workouts. As it sits they can take the high road and say Newton did his workout, it's on tape, and he chooses to skip the Combine to support his future fellow employees. With his reputation as an athlete it probably isn't in his best interest to be precisely measured in any case. Particularly if Gabbert were to outperform him in some of the athletic events.

I think Brandt called it when he said that he was looking forward to seeing Newton/Gabbert at the Combine. That would probably be the buzz story of the event. Along with the annual freak performance or two.

Anyone can skip Combine testing if they want. A "media day" like this is truly unprecedented. I would predict he won't work out at the Combine but will conduct a Pro Day in Late March. Get the media buzzing about raw tools now, then when it's time to throw for NFL scouts/coaches, show marked improvement from the prior media day. The media buzzes about how far he's come in only a couple months of formal QB training and scouts/NFL personnel leave with the best possible impression. It's really a strange strategy if that's the angle... but it's one that makes some degree of sense I suppose.

I don't think Gabbert is anywhere close to the physical specimen Newton is on the field. I really don't think he'll test as well either, though it wouldn't really change my mind on that previous statement. You can turn on the highlight film for this one. Newton made big plays with his feet, as evidenced by 13 runs over 20 yards this past season. Gabbert can move, but only 5 runs of 20+ the last two years tells you he's not nearly the raw athlete than Newton is.

the natural
02-08-2011, 08:02 PM
I think Cam Newton caught a severe case of Tebow envy when he was at Florida. He seems to be trying the same draft path and using the same catch phrases. Not on the football field, but in terms of his image. But Tebow always seemed genuine, regardless of how hokey he was being. Cam seems forced and insincere. I don't think it helps him at all. Perhaps with the media, but not with the football people. Which may be why he feels better working out for the media than the scouts.

the natural
02-08-2011, 08:10 PM
I don't think Gabbert is anywhere close to the physical specimen Newton is on the field. I really don't think he'll test as well either, though it wouldn't really change my mind on that previous statement. You can turn on the highlight film for this one. Newton made big plays with his feet, as evidenced by 13 runs over 20 yards this past season. Gabbert can move, but only 5 runs of 20+ the last two years tells you he's not nearly the raw athlete than Newton is.

That's the thing, as it stands Newton has little to gain and lots to lose by testing at the Combine. When you're considered the top guy in some aspect there is nowhere to go but down. You can probably say the same about Gabbert throwing. At this point it is considered his strength so there is no reason to jeopardize it. Not until the last possible moment, which would be a pro day and individual workouts. That gives him longer to work with Terry Shea who handled Bradford and Stafford the last couple drafts. Those two were money on their pro days throwing the ball. In both cases it cemented their #1 pick status, I believe, along with the time they spent with the team that would draft them.

Babylon
02-08-2011, 08:24 PM
That's the thing, as it stands Newton has little to gain and lots to lose by testing at the Combine. When you're considered the top guy in some aspect there is nowhere to go but down. You can probably say the same about Gabbert throwing. At this point it is considered his strength so there is no reason to jeopardize it. Not until the last possible moment, which would be a pro day and individual workouts. That gives him longer to work with Terry Shea who handled Bradford and Stafford the last couple drafts. Those two were money on their pro days throwing the ball. In both cases it cemented their #1 pick status, I believe, along with the time they spent with the team that would draft them.

Or the 4th depending on who you listen to.

Unbiased
02-08-2011, 09:28 PM
I don't know if this was a possibility, but I wish Gabbert had gone to Georgia instead of Missouri. He still would have had his true sophomore and junior years as the starter, but would have been in a pro style offense. On paper, he seems like a weird fit in a spread offense.

the natural
02-08-2011, 09:32 PM
I don't know if this was a possibility, but I wish Gabbert had gone to Georgia instead of Missouri. He still would have had his true sophomore and junior years as the starter, but would have been in a pro style offense. On paper, he seems like a weird fit in a spread offense.

Blaine originally committed to Nebraska after developing a strong relationship with Bill Callaghan and his OC. Then Callaghan and the OC got fired so he decommitted. Then he was pretty much committed to Mizzou, even though he took a lot of crap from the local fans for choosing Nebraska in the first place. At the time Nebraska was running a pro style offense which is what Gabbert was built for. At Missouri he tried to keep his pro style dropback skills alive on his own after practice. I think Gabbert knew it wasn't the best situation for him long term, but liked the fact that he could stay close to his friends and family.

IrishBrowns
02-08-2011, 11:05 PM
He's not. He won't be. People like the buzz. People always think there are gonna be like 3-4 QB's in the first round, or in the top 15..I just don't see it

Unbiased
02-08-2011, 11:08 PM
He's not. He won't be. People like the buzz. People always think there are gonna be like 3-4 QB's in the first round, or in the top 15..I just don't see it

Does anyone really think 4 QBs will go in the first round? There aren;t 4 that are projected to go in the first round at the moment.

FUNBUNCHER
02-08-2011, 11:12 PM
We'll see. But I think it's not a reach to say that Gabbert/Locker/Mallett/Newton collectively have a high probability to all be taken somewhere in the top 32 picks.

the natural
02-08-2011, 11:29 PM
He's not. He won't be. People like the buzz. People always think there are gonna be like 3-4 QB's in the first round, or in the top 15..I just don't see it

But wasn't Jake Locker 1-2 with Sam Bradford if he had come out last year? Locker didn't get worse over the past year. He may not have gotten better but he didn't get hit by a car or have a massive stroke or anything that would make him worse than he was a year ago. Now he is considered the third or fourth best option at the position. If he was a first or second rounder a year ago, he should still be that.

ThePudge
02-08-2011, 11:39 PM
If he was a first or second rounder a year ago, he should still be that.

That's not true for any player. The most recent tape will hold the most importance. Guys like Jake Locker and Adrian Clayborn are no longer Top 10-15 prospects.