PDA

View Full Version : QB Derby Coming Down to Newton and Gabbert?


Pages : [1] 2

the natural
02-08-2011, 10:30 PM
After the Senior Bowl Jake Locker seems to be in a bit of a freefall among the prognosticators. Looks like he hooked Ryan Mallett on the way by as well. The "top four" has split by all appearances into two distinct levels. Maybe due to the fact that Newton and Gabbert are younger, fresher, and shinier, and haven't been subject to the same relentless scrutiny.

RaiderNation
02-08-2011, 11:00 PM
Right now I think Newton and Gabbert by far have the most potential out of the QB's, and that will be the reason they are the first 2 QB's taken. I still think Locker is the safest QB to pick(which is sad)

Abaddon
02-08-2011, 11:44 PM
FoxSports.com's Adam Caplan believes Arkansas QB Ryan Mallett is "almost certain" to drop out of the first round of this year's draft.

"Wouldn't shock me to see Mallett fall to the third," added Caplan, alluding to the Razorback's "baggage." Quarterbacks with Mallett's arm strength and pedigree rarely free-fall at draft time, but he's already drawing comparisons to Jimmy Clausen and Ryan Leaf for his attitude and personality. Scouts have also called into question his decision-making and ability to read coverages.

49erNation85
02-09-2011, 12:07 AM
It should Locker and Newton be taken off first but that is just me.Gabbert's over hype around here doesn't impress me where his stats don't compare to others coming out of a spread offense.A bad year or not.Mallet would be a steal in the second IMO as well.ONly people worry about is his mobility.We won't know until April we won't know.

A Perfect Score
02-09-2011, 12:08 AM
FoxSports.com's Adam Caplan believes Arkansas QB Ryan Mallett is "almost certain" to drop out of the first round of this year's draft.

"Wouldn't shock me to see Mallett fall to the third," added Caplan, alluding to the Razorback's "baggage." Quarterbacks with Mallett's arm strength and pedigree rarely free-fall at draft time, but he's already drawing comparisons to Jimmy Clausen and Ryan Leaf for his attitude and personality. Scouts have also called into question his decision-making and ability to read coverages.

Ive been calling that for two months. Ive said over and over that Ryan Mallett won't get drafted any higher then where Jimmy Clausen went last year.

the natural
02-09-2011, 12:42 AM
It should Locker and Newton be taken off first but that is just me.Gabbert's over hype around here doesn't impress me where his stats don't compare to others coming out of a spread offense.A bad year or not.Mallet would be a steal in the second IMO as well.ONly people worry about is his mobility.We won't know until April we won't know.

Thing is Gabbert is getting all the hype before working out for the scouts. Combine type situations figure to be a strength based on his athletic ability. He certainly owned them as a recruit out of highschool competing against other top QBs of his class. Also, the interview process. You can argue areas like arm strength, accuracy, speed, etc. among the top four guys and beyond. But if you listen to Gabbert interview, he is easily the best in that area. It seems like the worst is behind in terms of the draft process, as far as he is concerned. If anything he should rise from here.

Day One Pick
02-09-2011, 05:46 AM
I believe if the draft was today Cam Newton and Blain Gabbert would likely be the only two quarterbacks selected in the first round. I also believe teams would be split on who was number one and who was number two. I think the same could be said about who is number three and who is number four. I think there could be a small chance that either Locker or Mallett could be taken in the late 20's, likely by a team trading back into the first round. I could see a domino effect happen with the quarterback prospects once the third quarterback comes off the board. I could see the fourth quarterback (Locker or Mallett) being taken near the top of the 2nd round and then Christian Ponder, Andy Dalton, Ricky Stanzi, and Pat Devlin being taken within the next 16 picks followed by Kaepernik being taken around the end of the 2nd or early in the 3rd.

jrdrylie
02-09-2011, 08:23 AM
Locker will very likely wow teams in the interviews and individual workouts. I think he could go top-10 (Washington). If he doesn't go there, I don't see him falling past Jacksonville.

SolidGold
02-09-2011, 09:09 AM
Anyone think Newton might suffer the Todd Marinovich effect...ie having an over involved/over bearing father interfere in his life?

jth1331
02-09-2011, 09:16 AM
I believe if the draft was today Cam Newton and Blain Gabbert would likely be the only two quarterbacks selected in the first round. I also believe teams would be split on who was number one and who was number two. I think the same could be said about who is number three and who is number four. I think there could be a small chance that either Locker or Mallett could be taken in the late 20's, likely by a team trading back into the first round. I could see a domino effect happen with the quarterback prospects once the third quarterback comes off the board. I could see the fourth quarterback (Locker or Mallett) being taken near the top of the 2nd round and then Christian Ponder, Andy Dalton, Ricky Stanzi, and Pat Devlin being taken within the next 16 picks followed by Kaepernik being taken around the end of the 2nd or early in the 3rd.

Too many people are predicting all these QB's to be taken within the 1st 2 rounds.
I honestly view it like this:
Newton - top 10 pick, someone will jump on that train
Gabbert - 10-20 top pick
Locker - late 1st/early 2nd
Mallett - late 2nd/early 3rd
Ponder - 3rd
Stanzi/Dalton/Devlin - one in the 3rd
Rest of the pack - 4th-5th round

I remember just a few months ago people were asking if 5 QB's would go in the 1st. Not sure if that included Luck or not, but people here, no offense, always miss on the QB's. Last year at least half the board was proclaiming Clausen for the 1st pick or top 10, and how close he was to Bradford.

Babylon
02-09-2011, 10:59 AM
Locker will very likely wow teams in the interviews and individual workouts. I think he could go top-10 (Washington). If he doesn't go there, I don't see him falling past Jacksonville.

I do see him starting to move up even now, i know it was an All Star challenge over the weekend but he came across as very mature and was also very good with his accuracy too. The interviews as you say is where he will have an advantage, he just comes off as this mature, blue caller guy that you'd probably want to sit down and have a pint with.

to rank them now is probably a bit early because i think all 4 could see their stock change quite a bit in the next couple of months.

Black Bolt
02-09-2011, 01:18 PM
I do see him starting to move up even now, i know it was an All Star challenge over the weekend but he came across as very mature and was also very good with his accuracy too. The interviews as you say is where he will have an advantage, he just comes off as this mature, blue caller guy that you'd probably want to sit down and have a pint with.

to rank them now is probably a bit early because i think all 4 could see their stock change quite a bit in the next couple of months.

Very good with accuracy? Didn't see that. When he missed he missed BAD, IE missed the entire board or put the ball in the dirt. He made excuses for his bad throws to the other QBs. Also, his interviews didn't come across well to me. He appeared to be a rush. Dudes been faking it for some time now.

the natural
02-09-2011, 01:20 PM
I believe if the draft was today Cam Newton and Blain Gabbert would likely be the only two quarterbacks selected in the first round. I also believe teams would be split on who was number one and who was number two.

I agree with this and think it will be the dynamic that shapes the top end of the draft. If the two stay close in terms of perceived value, teams will start to shift position once one of them is off the board. If one pulls ahead as the clear cut choice then either Carolina takes him or another team trades up for the top pick to take him.

descendency
02-09-2011, 01:33 PM
The latest a QB will come off the board is to Cincy. Carson Palmer genuinely seems like he's sick of being the QB there and is willing to hang it up if that's how he has to get out.

Sooo... with that in mind Cam Newton or Ryan Mallett seems perfect to be the #1 QB.

Babylon
02-09-2011, 01:34 PM
Very good with accuracy? Didn't see that. When he missed he missed BAD, IE missed the entire board or put the ball in the dirt. He made excuses for his bad throws to the other QBs. Also, his interviews didn't come across well to me. He appeared to be a rush. Dudes been faking it for some time now.

His accuracy after the 1st round of throws was better than the others, he also had his throws right on the money to Pettis, who i really like. the whole event was an exhibition so take it for what it's worth for sure.

As for the interviews i think he always comes off confident and a gentelman, praising others around him and using the word "we" when talking about his accomplishments.

I understand if people dont like/want the guy due to his senior year and accuracy issues, i get that. To say he comes across as a guy who is faking something is borderline idiotic.

Hollywood
02-09-2011, 01:43 PM
Absolutely ridiculous that Mallett is falling and if the Dolphins pass on him it will be them passing on Brees and Rodgers over again.

Babylon
02-09-2011, 02:20 PM
Absolutely ridiculous that Mallett is falling and if the Dolphins pass on him it will be them passing on Brees and Rodgers over again.

They can hope he is the next coming of Dan Marino who as you know slid because of smoking weed rumors.

bucfan12
02-09-2011, 02:27 PM
Honestly, I can see Gabbert going anywhere from #5 to Arizona to number 12 Minnesota. He is going to be a sure fire top 12 pick.

Newton is the biggest question right now. Will teams fall all over the athleticism and take him earlier than he should be taken? I can see Buffalo taking him, but he doesn't get past Miami.

Locker will be a 1st rounder. Shanahan did his homework on him last offseason, but Locker did not declare. Locker will definately be there at 10, so I wouldnt be surprised if he's Washington's pick. However, if they decide to pass, I see him dropping to the Seahawks, who I think they would immediately select him there at 24 (I believe? )

Mallett will be a 2nd rounder. Attitude and character will drop him. Also lack of conistency and chokes under pressure (see Alabama and Ohio State), especially when his team needs him the most. He won't get past Oakland in Round 2.

the natural
02-09-2011, 04:58 PM
Steve Muench, ScoutsInc. draft analyst assessing Buffalo Bill's draft needs..."Ryan Fitzpatrick is a backup or stopgap starter at best. If Blaine Gabbert of Missouri is there at #3 overall, I think they pull the trigger.".

niel89
02-09-2011, 05:00 PM
If Gabbert goes #3, there should be a lot a triggers pulled in that organization.

Babylon
02-09-2011, 05:45 PM
If Gabbert goes #3, there should be a lot a triggers pulled in that organization.

The organization that drafted Aaron Maybin wouldnt repeat that mistake would they? Hope they're handing out flak jackets there.

bitonti
02-09-2011, 06:09 PM
just my opinion

Gabbert and Newton are competing to be the #1 pick.

Newton sells more tickets in Carolina than Gabbert does... but Gabbert is a better passer. Both elite picks.

the natural
02-09-2011, 08:49 PM
Tony Pauline is saying that at least half a dozen teams have Cam Newton as the number one overall pick. Holy cow.

SimonRath
02-09-2011, 09:28 PM
Q5nGYHLeB2g

maybe its jus me, but Gabbert just doesnt look like a special player. he looks average..

Pat Sims 90
02-09-2011, 09:56 PM
Missouri just did not have the talent that Auburn had. Gabbert gets a bad rep because his OL was horriable and they just did not have the WRs. That is y Gabbert did not put of big numbers in the spread offense. Put Gabbert on that Auburn team and he puts up big numbers.

FUNBUNCHER
02-09-2011, 10:27 PM
Missouri just did not have the talent that Auburn had. Gabbert gets a bad rep because his OL was horriable and they just did not have the WRs. That is y Gabbert did not put of big numbers in the spread offense. Put Gabbert on that Auburn team and he puts up big numbers.

Please you did not just imply the only difference between Newton and Gabbert is that Newton played on a more talented football team??

Newsflash!!! Auburn was not the best or most talented team in the SEC. What they had was the best offensive football player in the country, Cam Newton.

Matter of fact, I'd argue that Missouri and Auburn had similar offensive talent, and except for Fairley, had comparable talent on defense.

No one's saying Gabbert should have thrown for 40 TDs last season, but there's no explanation for why he only threw 16 TDs in a QB friendly offense that typically makes average quarterbacks look like supermen.

The only thing an adequate QB needs in a spread offense is for his WRs to run the correct routes; timing and accuracy by the QB is what generates completions and TDs, not stud WR talent.

Those 16 TDs are on Gabbert, no one else.


If you believe Gabbert should be a consensus top 3 pick, don't start making excuses for his poor performance now.

If their teams and records were flipped, and Gabbert was the one who threw for 28 TDs, ran for 20 more, went undefeated, won the Heisman and NC and then I came out and said, 'well dang, Newton could have put up the same numbers as Gabbert if he played for Auburn,' you'd call me a crazy blind homer.

Gabbert is being hyped strictly on tools and potential, so don't bother comparing their actual game performance because Gabbert isn't even in the same solar system as a college QB.

Take a look at Mizzou's wins last season, see how many times Gabbert threw for 1 TD and still won near blowouts and ask yourself, did Mizzou win last season because of Gabbert, or in spite of him??

Gabbert is potentially(!) a talented pro QB prospect, but he's the definition of an overrated college player.

FUNBUNCHER
02-09-2011, 10:31 PM
.............

the natural
02-09-2011, 10:41 PM
Well, you can pick your stats. Gabbert is 6 months younger than Newton and threw for over twice as many yards and 40% more TDs in his college career.

Pat Sims 90
02-09-2011, 10:47 PM
Please you did not just imply the only difference between Newton and Gabbert is that Newton played on a more talented football team??

Newsflash!!! Auburn was not the best or most talented team in the SEC. What they had was the best offensive football player in the country, Cam Newton.

Matter of fact, I'd argue that Missouri and Auburn had similar offensive talent, and except for Fairley, had comparable talent on defense.

No one's saying Gabbert should have thrown for 40 TDs last season, but there's no explanation for why he only threw 16 TDs in a QB friendly offense that typically makes average quarterbacks look like supermen.

The only thing an adequate QB needs in a spread offense is for his WRs to run the correct routes; timing and accuracy by the QB is what generates completions and TDs, not stud WR talent.

Those 16 TDs are on Gabbert, no one else.


If you believe Gabbert should be a consensus top 3 pick, don't start making excuses for his poor performance now.

If their teams and records were flipped, and Gabbert was the one who threw for 28 TDs, ran for 20 more, went undefeated, won the Heisman and NC and then I came out and said, 'well dang, Newton could have put up the same numbers as Gabbert if he played for Auburn,' you'd call me a crazy blind homer.

Gabbert is being hyped strictly on tools and potential, so don't bother comparing their actual game performance because Gabbert isn't even in the same solar system as a college QB.

Take a look at Mizzou's wins last season, see how many times Gabbert threw for 1 TD and still won near blowouts and ask yourself, did Mizzou win last season because of Gabbert, or in spite of him??

Gabbert is potentially(!) a talented pro QB prospect, but he's the definition of an overrated college player.

I am not discreading what Newton did at Auburn. I am just saying if u put Gabbert on a team that has a OL that can block for more then a sec and some weapons in Passing Game Gabbert would actually prolly throw 20+ TDs in a year.

Both QBs are going to have to be put on Offenses that build around their strenghts to be successful in the NFL ala what the steelers did with Roethisberger. But i think Newton has more character issues then Gabbert at this point that is y i have Gabbert higher on my list then Newton.

iowatreat54
02-09-2011, 10:50 PM
Well, you can pick your stats. Gabbert is 6 months younger than Newton and threw for over twice as many yards and 40% more TDs in his college career.

29 games to 15 games.

I would hope Gabbert threw for more yards and TDs than Newton...

Gabbert averaged 235 ypg and 1.37 TD/game!!!! He didn't even average 1.5 TD/game in his career.

Newton averaged 193 ypg and 2 TD/game.

Plus, Gabbert averaged 15 ypg on the ground, and .27 TDs on the ground.

Newton averaged 105.73 ypg on the ground and 1.6 TDs on the ground.

Cam Newton averaged more rushing TDs in his career than Gabbert did passing TDs.

Newton averaged almost 300 ypg and 3.6 TDs per game in fewer games, compared to Gabberts 250 ypg and 1.64 TDs per game.

Oh, and Newton played in a conference that played defense.

Do you seriously want to argue stats in Newton vs. Gabbert?

SolidGold
02-10-2011, 12:06 PM
Anyone have any updates on Newton's pre combine, pre proday scripted work out?

Babylon
02-10-2011, 01:08 PM
Anyone have any updates on Newton's pre combine, pre proday scripted work out?

Supposedly it was going off at 10 oclock west coast time. Sounds like scouts arent going to be there so not sure what the point is. I dont know who's advising this kid (can probably guess) but to me he is doing things the wrong way. If he blows off doing anything at the combine i think he runs the risk of really seeing his stock suffer. In the NBA you can pretty much #### on the whole draft process and someone will take you on supposed upside but i think the NFL is differant.

TACKLE
02-10-2011, 01:22 PM
edit: moved to other thread.

http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?p=2516390&#post2516390

the natural
02-10-2011, 02:17 PM
29 games to 15 games.

I would hope Gabbert threw for more yards and TDs than Newton...

Gabbert averaged 235 ypg and 1.37 TD/game!!!! He didn't even average 1.5 TD/game in his career.

Newton averaged 193 ypg and 2 TD/game.

Plus, Gabbert averaged 15 ypg on the ground, and .27 TDs on the ground.

Newton averaged 105.73 ypg on the ground and 1.6 TDs on the ground.

Cam Newton averaged more rushing TDs in his career than Gabbert did passing TDs.

Newton averaged almost 300 ypg and 3.6 TDs per game in fewer games, compared to Gabberts 250 ypg and 1.64 TDs per game.

Oh, and Newton played in a conference that played defense.

Do you seriously want to argue stats in Newton vs. Gabbert?

In 2009 Gabbert had better numbers with Missouri than Newton did a freaking Blinn College. Wherever that is. If you pick your stats you can make things look any way you want. Obviously Newton had a huge 2010 season or no one would be talking about him at all. But scouts look at the body of work along with a lot of other factors more important than the players stats in the past season. Matt Leinart and Matt Cassel are the classic example of that. Leinart put up Heisman candidate numbers a few years at USC and Cassel never got off the bench. I don't think anyone would take Leinart over Cassel as a pro.

iowatreat54
02-10-2011, 02:29 PM
In 2009 Gabbert had better numbers with Missouri than Newton did a freaking Blinn College. Wherever that is. If you pick your stats you can make things look any way you want. Obviously Newton had a huge 2010 season or no one would be talking about him at all. But scouts look at the body of work along with a lot of other factors more important than the players stats in the past season. Matt Leinart and Matt Cassel are the classic example of that. Leinart put up Heisman candidate numbers a few years at USC and Cassel never got off the bench. I don't think anyone would take Leinart over Cassel as a pro.

Yes, except I'm not cherry picking stats. You are. I'm looking at the career whole, and career average. You are comparing specific seasons to other unrelated specific seasons.

Gabbert had a more productive season in 09 than Newton did at a JC in 09? Great! The fact remains, Gabbert played almost twice as many games as Newton, of course he's going to have higher numbers in yards and TDs like you said. But when you take into account what they do on a game average, and then extrapolate that to reflect an equal amount of experience, Newton would likely have been more productive.

Obviously you can't just accept that as 100% going to happen, but at least it is a fairly accurate barometer more often than not. I'd be willing to bet if Newton had 14 more games to equal Gabbert, he would surpass him in most all statistical categories.

For the record, I'm not saying Newton will be better. I'm just saying if you want to argue statistics, argue correctly and not just pick and choose certain seasons or total production when the two players haven't played even close to the same length of time in college.

ThePudge
02-10-2011, 02:30 PM
In 2009 Gabbert had better numbers with Missouri than Newton did a freaking Blinn College. Wherever that is. If you pick your stats you can make things look any way you want. Obviously Newton had a huge 2010 season or no one would be talking about him at all. But scouts look at the body of work along with a lot of other factors more important than the players stats in the past season. Matt Leinart and Matt Cassel are the classic example of that. Leinart put up Heisman candidate numbers a few years at USC and Cassel never got off the bench. I don't think anyone would take Leinart over Cassel as a pro.

There is 0 football knowledge behind your posts and you choose to ignore the posts in which people usual factual arguments against Gabbert as an effective (let alone special) college Quarterback. You just dodge the facts and find your own way to spin Gabbert as the better player, often going back to High School to support your arguments. Everything you've brought to the table in your posts is weak. It's like this is your first time paying attention to an NFL Draft or the process prior to the Draft.

the natural
02-10-2011, 02:35 PM
For the record, I'm not saying Newton will be better. I'm just saying if you want to argue statistics, argue correctly and not just pick and choose certain seasons or total production when the two players haven't played even close to the same length of time in college.

LOL, I make a point about "picking stats" and you respond by telling me not to "pick stats". I guess we agree. But if you throw in Newton's 2009 season while he was at Blinn College, there is no real difference. Matter of fact it brings Gabbert closer by comparison.

the natural
02-10-2011, 02:38 PM
Well, Pudge, it's obviously not just me that thinks Gabbert can be an effective (and possibly special) player. All of the presumed experts from Gil Brandt to Mike Mayock to our own Scott Wright seem to share that view.

SimonRath
02-10-2011, 02:52 PM
Well, Pudge, it's obviously not just me that thinks Gabbert can be an effective (and possibly special) player. All of the presumed experts from Gil Brandt to Mike Mayock to our own Scott Wright seem to share that view.

no one said he has no shot at being an effective player. your argument just makes zero sense!

the natural
02-10-2011, 03:01 PM
no one said he has no shot at being an effective player. your argument just makes zero sense!
Read the threads. Lots of posters don't seem to think he can be an effective player. My argument is no different from anyone else's. He has the physical attributes, he has the mental attributes, and he has the background to succeed as an NFL starting QB. If mine doesn't "make sense" then no other argument for Gabbert's worth in the draft does.

MI_Buckeye
02-10-2011, 03:48 PM
Anyone think Newton might suffer the Todd Marinovich effect...ie having an over involved/over bearing father interfere in his life?

That is a good question, but I think the two players' situations are very different. In Marinovich's case, he simply wasn't allowed to grow up as a human being. His dad overtrained him, overregimented him, and, although his issues did not come to the surface until he was playing for the Raiders, the damage was done in the twenty or so years since baby Todd's dad tied his son's right arm to his body.

Cecil Newton is clearly heavily involved in his son's life, but there is no reason to believe just yet that he did anything to incure significant psycholigical damage.

Dam8610
02-10-2011, 03:49 PM
Q5nGYHLeB2g

maybe its jus me, but Gabbert just doesnt look like a special player. he looks average..

Based on that film alone, my assessment:

Arm Strength - showed the arm necessary to make every throw at the next level, even made a couple on target sideline throws on the run
Accuracy - Not Mike Vick, not Peyton Manning. He's going to need some work on his accuracy, but most throws were to the numbers, including both of the running throws he made. With a little refinement, could be very accurate.
Mobility - This is what really impressed me. He had several moments where it looked like he would be sacked, escaped, and either made a play or at the very least got the ball away.
Pocket Presence - In several instances, stood in and made good throws against a free rushing blitzer. Very Roethlisberger-esque in the pocket.
Playmaking Ability - reminded me a lot of Matt Ryan at BC in this sense. Took some gambles that you would never coach a QB to take with his throws, but almost all of them ended in positive plays. Not a world beater with his legs, and always looks to pass first, but seems to be able to get out of the pocket and scramble if necessary, and certainly isn't a statue in the pocket.

All in all, from that tape, it looked like if someone can coach him and get him to be a more accurate passer, they could very well have a QB to build an offense around. That said, I don't know if that's his best game of the year or his worst game of the year, but based on that, he looked pretty good. Definitely someone I would want to sit and learn for at least a year though, if for nothing else than to refine his mechanics to get his accuracy better.

the natural
02-10-2011, 08:06 PM
Mike Mayock has definitive top 5 QB rankings out. AFTER Newton's workout. Although Mike didn't bother to attend it.

1. Blaine Gabbert Missouri
2. Jake Locker Washington
3. Cam Newton Auburn

the natural
02-10-2011, 10:38 PM
The prospects at API Phoenix (A.J. Green, Aaron Williams, J.J. Watt, Prince Amukamaru, Blaine Gabbert, Chris Ponder, etc.) do their first combine tests tomorrow. According to Sporting News article, Gabbert's coachs expect him to run 40 in the 4.5s by the end of the month.

nepg
02-10-2011, 10:43 PM
I think Gabbert can be a good NFL QB, and probably a better pro than college player. But he's the 4th-best QB in this draft class. He doesn't have the special qualities the other guys have.

the natural
02-10-2011, 10:47 PM
I think Gabbert can be a good NFL QB, and probably a better pro than college player. But he's the 4th-best QB in this draft class. He doesn't have the special qualities the other guys have.

Well if he runs his 40 in 4.5 he has at least one of the "special qualities" the other guys have. :)

FUNBUNCHER
02-10-2011, 10:48 PM
Natch, put the pom-poms down.

I only came at you because you suggested that Gabbert could have had equal success if he'd been Auburn's QB in 2010, as if Newton was only along for the ride.
Gabbert simply has not been a dominant college player throughout his career at Mizzou, which doesn't mean he can't develop into a star in the NFL.

However, strictly at the NCAA level, Newton and Gabbert are different life forms.

nepg
02-10-2011, 10:49 PM
Well if he runs his 40 in 4.5 he has at least one of the "special qualities" the other guys have. :)
Still worse than Locker and Newton as a runner. And both of those players have better arms and dealt with pressure better.

SimonRath
02-10-2011, 10:49 PM
Read the threads. Lots of posters don't seem to think he can be an effective player. My argument is no different from anyone else's. He has the physical attributes, he has the mental attributes, and he has the background to succeed as an NFL starting QB. If mine doesn't "make sense" then no other argument for Gabbert's worth in the draft does.

what background does he have to succeed in the NFL?

Saints-Tigers
02-10-2011, 10:50 PM
People think Gabbert is going to run a better 40 than Vince Young or Tim Tebow?

the natural
02-10-2011, 10:50 PM
Natch, put the pom-poms down.

I only came at you because you suggested that Gabbert could have had equal success if he'd been Auburn's QB in 2010, as if Newton was only along for the ride.
I didn't say that, someone else did. I'm all for a tight race between the two right up the the wire. Stimulates fan interest and discussion.

nepg
02-10-2011, 10:52 PM
what background does he have to succeed in the NFL?
He's the biggets gamble out of all 4 of the QB prospects, but he hasn't been over-analyzed yet, so all of a sudden, he's #1.

It's like the Jason Smith v. Michael Oher deal. Smith was new, and Oher had had a couple years for people to get bored of how great he is, and started questioning him. Gabbert is Smith.

the natural
02-10-2011, 10:54 PM
what background does he have to succeed in the NFL?

5 star college recruit. Played as a true freshman. Two year starter in elite conference with over 3,000 yards passing each season, before he turned 21. That is a pretty good background.

SimonRath
02-10-2011, 10:58 PM
5 star college recruit. Played as a true freshman. Two year starter in elite conference with over 3,000 yards passing each season, before he turned 21. That is a pretty good background.

please tell me this guy didnt just bring up what star recruit he was.. please..

the natural
02-10-2011, 11:17 PM
please tell me this guy didnt just bring up what star recruit he was.. please..

What he was at 18 is certainly part of his "background".

SimonRath
02-10-2011, 11:18 PM
What he was at 18 is certainly part of his "background".

being a 5 star recruit has absolutly nothing, ZERO, ZIP, ANYTHING to do with what kind of pro prospect you are.

the natural
02-10-2011, 11:40 PM
being a 5 star recruit has absolutly nothing, ZERO, ZIP, ANYTHING to do with what kind of pro prospect you are.

In most pro sports the prospects are drafted at 18. In soccer they start with pro teams when they are about 12. You can't say that what a player is before he enters college has nothing to do with his potential.

SimonRath
02-10-2011, 11:48 PM
In most pro sports the prospects are drafted at 18. In soccer they start with pro teams when they are about 12. You can't say that what a player is before he enters college has nothing to do with his potential.

were not talking about soccer where kids can be "signed/drafted" right when they pop out of their moms womb. we're also not talking about baseball where players can be drafted right out of high school, or basketball where players can be drafted after 1 year of college.

the natural
02-10-2011, 11:55 PM
were not talking about soccer where kids can be "signed/drafted" right when they pop out of their moms womb. we're also not talking about baseball where players can be drafted right out of high school, or basketball where players can be drafted after 1 year of college.

But in most of those sports the top picks turn out to be the best players. Hockey included. It might be easier for the pro teams to draft them at 21 or 22, but they still manage to get it right most of the time. It's not perfect, obviously, but it's still a strong indicator.

the natural
02-11-2011, 02:32 PM
Watching the tape of Newton throwing, I didn't see anything remarkable. Can't understand what Dilfer was creaming his jeans over. Other than the fact that Whitfield was allowing Dilfer and Glazer to run the workout. Cam missed 7 of 33 passes which is a lot for a scripted workout. Mostly the guys are hitting 45-50 out of 50. A lot of the passes across the middle the guys were having to reach back to get.

FUNBUNCHER
02-11-2011, 02:36 PM
Watching the tape of Newton throwing, I didn't see anything remarkable. Can't understand what Dilfer was creaming his jeans over. Other than the fact that Whitfield was allowing Dilfer and Glazer to run the workout. Cam missed 7 of 33 passes which is a lot for a scripted workout. Mostly the guys are hitting 45-50 out of 50. A lot of the passes across the middle the guys were having to reach back to get.

What's your point??

the natural
02-11-2011, 02:48 PM
What's your point??

Point is "I can't understand why Dilfer was creaming his jeans". I think the media is doing what they have to to keep the race tight between Newton and Gabbert. If one is perceived to be moving ahead to much they take appropriate action. Which is fine, there is still 2 1/2 months to draft day.

FUNBUNCHER
02-11-2011, 02:57 PM
I really haven't heard anyone in the media hyping Gabbert, other than to say he's highly regarded by many pro scouts.

Let Newton have the accolades from his workout, or at least be prepared to ask 'what's the big deal' when Gabbert, Locker, Mallett, etc. have stellar performances too throwing the football in a controlled setting.

the natural
02-11-2011, 05:30 PM
Russ Lande the SN guy mentioned in his profile that Newton threw behind his receivers a lot. That is what I saw in the workout.

MidwayMonster31
02-11-2011, 05:44 PM
Personally, I didn't learn anything new about Cam from that workout. Everybody knows what kind of athlete he is, how strong his arm is, and everybody knows that he played in a system that was exclusively shotgun with very few NFL reads. I still have Newton as my top quarterback, pretty much by default (the two sweetest words in the English language). His flaws aren't as glaring as the other quarterbacks in this draft.

D-Unit
02-11-2011, 05:52 PM
My biggest concern about Newton is his accuracy.

the natural
02-11-2011, 06:35 PM
My biggest concern about Newton is his accuracy.

That is a legit concern. Even in a scripted workout he missed quite a few passes and made the receivers reach back a lot. A pass that is late and behind the receiver is an interception waiting to happen with the defensive backs usually right behind the target.

FUNBUNCHER
02-12-2011, 03:39 AM
It's beyond odd to me Natch that you spend so much time knocking Newton but bring very little to the table that explains why Gabbert should be considered the 1st/2nd best QB in this draft.

I'm going over and over it again in my head, and I'm thinking 'screw all the alleged negatives about Mallett, he's the best pure passer in this draft.'

Mallett's mobility is adequate, he can move his feet, has a quick release and can flat out stick throws.

Be prepared to hear pundits drool over Mallett's private workout too.

Every team picking in the top 10 I have a sneaking suspicion will regret passing over Mallett.
Partying IMO isn't Mallett's primary motivator, it's being a dominant QB.

I feel like a blind man telling everyone to open their eyes.
How are people simply dismissing Mallett over a guy like Gabbert, or my fave prospect Cam Newton??

2nd round prospect?? Not even.

Mallett is soooo much better than Gabbert it's not even a comparison.

ThePudge
02-12-2011, 12:14 PM
Mike Mayock has definitive top 5 QB rankings out. AFTER Newton's workout. Although Mike didn't bother to attend it.

1. Blaine Gabbert Missouri
2. Jake Locker Washington
3. Cam Newton Auburn

It is too soon to evaluate the quarterback position based on rankings, so they are separated into groups of four.

That was literally one of only two sentences at the top of Mayock's rankings.

In addition, I never said Gabbert couldn't be an effective pro with some coaching & time, but his college effectiveness wasn't comparable to almost any 1st Round QB of the past five years and it certainly was not any better than the other three players people like to talk about. He's my #4 rated QB right now and on film that's all he looks to be.

king2am
02-12-2011, 12:20 PM
My biggest concern about every quarterback in this class is their accuracy.

Fixed it for you. None of these guys are money in the bank. But Newton has the the higher ceiling.

the natural
02-12-2011, 12:39 PM
It is too soon to evaluate the quarterback position based on rankings, so they are separated into groups of four.

That was literally one of only two sentences at the top of Mayock's rankings.

In addition, I never said Gabbert couldn't be an effective pro with some coaching & time, but his college effectiveness wasn't comparable to almost any 1st Round QB of the past five years and it certainly was not any better than the other three players people like to talk about. He's my #4 rated QB right now and on film that's all he looks to be.

That was his preliminary rankings a couple of weeks back. Mike ranked them without any qualifications on the day Newton did his workout. 1. Gabbert 2. Locker 3. Newton 4. Mallett 5. Dalton.

the natural
02-12-2011, 12:45 PM
It's beyond odd to me Natch that you spend so much time knocking Newton but bring very little to the table that explains why Gabbert should be considered the 1st/2nd best QB in this draft.

I just see the same things a lot of others seem to see. Gabbert has the prototypical size, a beautiful release, good arm strength, above average mobility, is smart and well grounded. There is no glaring reason that he can't develop into a top pro.

Oh, and fun, while you're tapping along with that cane, I should let you know they moved the steep staircase 10' to the left since yesterday, so keep that in mind when you're heading down. :)

Babylon
02-12-2011, 12:57 PM
That was his preliminary rankings a couple of weeks back. Mike ranked them without any qualifications on the day Newton did his workout. 1. Gabbert 2. Locker 3. Newton 4. Mallett 5. Dalton.

Why would Mayock change his rankings of the QBs, he didnt go to the Newton circus and wrote it off as being irrelevant. Mike Mayock is probably one of the few that doesnt sway with the wind.

A Perfect Score
02-12-2011, 12:58 PM
Fixed it for you. None of these guys are money in the bank. But Newton has the the higher ceiling.

I really wish people would stop spitting out this gibberish. Newton doesn't have a higher ceiling then anyone. Ryan Mallett's ceiling is every bit as high as Newton, he has fantastic physical tools. Gabbert is 6'5 230 with a big arm and is very mobile, his "ceiling" is as high as any QB we've seen. Kaepernick has the exact same ceiling Newton has. Stop justifying a higher grade of some kind based on whatever "potential" you see in Newton. Every single QB in first round discussion has a wealth of potential and if developed properly, they all have fantastic ceilings. Stop putting Newton on a pedestal because he ran for some yards in college. Dear god it's annoying.

ThePudge
02-12-2011, 01:06 PM
That was his preliminary rankings a couple of weeks back. Mike ranked them without any qualifications on the day Newton did his workout. 1. Gabbert 2. Locker 3. Newton 4. Mallett 5. Dalton.

Just read the article yourself. Second sentence.

brat316
02-12-2011, 01:12 PM
higher ceiling, cause he is can throw deep and is very mobile. But after the Mick Vick ear where most teams tried for the new breed of qbs mobile ones. It hasn't worked out very well.

Like APS mentioned most of these guys have the same ceiling, cause they have big arms and can move. But what it really comes down to is where are they starting, whats their floor. Are they in the basement, first floor, second? That is mostly dependent on their accuracy and ability to read a defense.

ThePudge
02-12-2011, 01:16 PM
I really wish people would stop spitting out this gibberish. Newton doesn't have a higher ceiling then anyone. Ryan Mallett's ceiling is every bit as high as Newton, he has fantastic physical tools. Gabbert is 6'5 230 with a big arm and is very mobile, his "ceiling" is as high as any QB we've seen. Kaepernick has the exact same ceiling Newton has. Stop justifying a higher grade of some kind based on whatever "potential" you see in Newton. Every single QB in first round discussion has a wealth of potential and if developed properly, they all have fantastic ceilings. Stop putting Newton on a pedestal because he ran for some yards in college. Dear god it's annoying.

Your posts have become every bit as ridiculous as the ones you choose to dispute. There are a lot of people that believe Newton could wind up among the top few QBs in the league if he reaches his potential... I wouldn't say the same about any other QB prospect in this class. This is why Cam will more than likely be the first QB drafted, in the Top 5 Overall. At the same time, it'll be an on-going debate whether any of the guys you listed above fit into the First Round.

Now you think people are overrating him because he ran for some yards in college? Absolutely ridiculous. Most people that are enamored with Newton don't think it's likely that he'll ever touch 500 yards rushing in a season. Maybe it's because he won every game a year ago, won the NC & Heisman, & is a once in a decade physical specimen at the position. Not because he "ran for some yards."

the natural
02-12-2011, 01:50 PM
Just read the article yourself. Second sentence.
Pretty sure that is from a couple weeks back, Pudge. Mayock has new top five positional listings out as of Thursday of this week.

A Perfect Score
02-12-2011, 02:00 PM
Your posts have become every bit as ridiculous as the ones you choose to dispute. There are a lot of people that believe Newton could wind up among the top few QBs in the league if he reaches his potential... I wouldn't say the same about any other QB prospect in this class. This is why Cam will more than likely be the first QB drafted, in the Top 5 Overall. At the same time, it'll be an on-going debate whether any of the guys you listed above fit into the First Round.

Now you think people are overrating him because he ran for some yards in college? Absolutely ridiculous. Most people that are enamored with Newton don't think it's likely that he'll ever touch 500 yards rushing in a season. Maybe it's because he won every game a year ago, won the NC & Heisman, & is a once in a decade physical specimen at the position. Not because he "ran for some yards."

People ARE overrating him because he ran for some yards in college. I know what Newton accomplished in college, and it was wonderful. Bravo for the Heisman and NC, good on him. Undefeated season? Awesome. He isn't a once in a decade athlete at his position...Kaepernick is every bit the athlete Newton is, and I'd venture to say Locker is pretty damn close as well. I know he's going to be the first QB off the board, and rightfully so. He's big, fast, and can throw. That will get you drafted highly, yes. What I'm sick of hearing is that Newton has this godly level of potential that no other QB has. Assuming all the QBs in this class pan out exactly like they should, Newton wouldn't be head and shoulders above anyone else. Hell, Locker could be Steve Young. Mallett could be Marino. Kaepernick could be Randall Cunningham. Im tired of listening to people talk about Newton as if he's some sort of revolutionary prospect with otherworldly potential because, yes...People are enthralled with running QBs. Maybe not you Pudge, because I do give you the benefit of the doubt, but the casual fan or the average person is most definitely going to be awed by Newton's ability to run at the college level. Suggesting otherwise is naive.

metafour
02-12-2011, 02:47 PM
He isn't a once in a decade athlete at his position...Kaepernick is every bit the athlete Newton is, and I'd venture to say Locker is pretty damn close as well.

LOL. Cant be serious.

Babylon
02-12-2011, 03:12 PM
LOL. Cant be serious.

Kaepernick and Locker are probably both faster and probably have stronger arms, not sure why that is so shocking. Fact is those 3 are great athletes for the position but none of them corner the market in that department.

A Perfect Score
02-12-2011, 03:14 PM
I don't know if they have stronger arms, but they certainly aren't overly outclassed by Newton. Yes he's big and fast but people really need to stop making him out to be this once in a decade type of prospect. He isn't the same class of prospect that Bradford was last year or Stafford was the year before.

Babylon
02-12-2011, 03:17 PM
I don't know if they have stronger arms, but they certainly aren't overly outclassed by Newton. Yes he's big and fast but people really need to stop making him out to be this once in a decade type of prospect. He isn't the same class of prospect that Bradford was last year or Stafford was the year before.

I think some look at him as a once in a decade athlete. If that is all it took Matt Jones would probably be all-pro by now.

BigBanger
02-12-2011, 03:26 PM
After the Senior Bowl Jake Locker seems to be in a bit of a freefall among the prognosticators. Looks like he hooked Ryan Mallett on the way by as well. The "top four" has split by all appearances into two distinct levels. Maybe due to the fact that Newton and Gabbert are younger, fresher, and shinier, and haven't been subject to the same relentless scrutiny.
Jake Locker's scrutiny has nothing to do with him being a senior or "having too much tape," as people have said about other players that stayed "a year too long." It has everything to do with being a poor passer with HUGE accuracy issues (just like every other top QB prospect in this class). Locker has been anything but the player that ill-informed talking heads have hyped him up to be (I remember some John Elway talk with this guy). He has potential, but thats it. He had that as a junior and he still has that as a senior. Where you start to downgrade that potential is when you don't see him making any improvements while he's in college from a year-to-year standpoint, and continues to make poor decisions while not improving on his accuracy issues. I would also argue that he looked worse as senior than as a junior. Prospect rankings at the beginning of the year are terrible. Prospects who do nothing maintain hype from High School. Its absurd. Locker is a prime example. Did he show signs of having #1 potential? Yes. Did he show that over the course of his junior year? No. Over the course of his senior year? Absolutely not. Basically, you have a guy with tons of potential that we're all waiting on, and then fails to live up to it time and time again, one stage after another. Locker is a second round QB, mostly due to his athletic ability, solid arm, character and work ethic. If he didn't have any of that, then we're not talking about it at all.

Ryan Mallet and Cam Newton have awful backgrounds and atrocious character concerns. Newton was in a college system predicated on gimmicks and option reads. He's also a one year wonder that did a great amount of his damage with his legs (something that wont be nearly as effective in the NFL) and not with his arm. Basically, 75% of the **** he did in college, ain't going to work in the pros. Mallet was in a system that produced a major bust in Brian Brohm, has bad accuracy and will probably bomb the interviews. He's also a clumsy statute that will need to be behind a great offensive line or his poor decision making will be exposed more than normal. He's a guy I simply wouldn't touch because of his makeup. He's not a leader. He's a scumbag that you can't trust after forking over millions of dollars.

This is Blaine Gabberts oyster. Cannon arm. Great size. Tons of potential and a relatively clean background (which is really all it takes to be the #1 guy in this class since every QB is getting vastly overrated, including Gabbert). Sounds good in interviews and all that jazz. However, like every other QB, he has some major question marks. He's wild and he's coming off a down season. Checks DOWN A LOT, but I'll have to watch more to see if that's on him or the system, which is a garbage system that has one WR screen pass after another. I've never seen him take a snap from under center that wasn't on a non-running play. He does get the ball out VERY quickly, but I've seen him lay out his WRs and expose them to some big hits on a routine basis (ball placement is yucky at times). His decision making doesn't seem bad (unless he is checking down too early, then it is poor and he'll be just another Brady Quinn (minus the weak arm) / Kyle Boller). I also don't think he slides up and into the pocket very well (if at all). I need to see more from him though. With such uncertainty on whether or not there will even be football this year, I thought he should have stayed. He has a lot of holes in his game that need to be corrected at the college level.

All 4 of these guys could be busts and it wouldn't surprise me one bit. They are all lucky to still be getting first round hype, especially with such great depth at other valuable positions.

metafour
02-12-2011, 03:28 PM
Kaepernick and Locker are probably both faster and probably have stronger arms, not sure why that is so shocking. Fact is those 3 are great athletes for the position but none of them corner the market in that department.

Link me to Locker catching a 20-yard touchdown over a defender in the back of the endzone while also getting both feet in bounds.

There is more to athleticism than just running fast. If you cant see the difference between Newton and Locker than you just dont get it. Newton is a top-level athlete at numerous positions whereas I really cant say the same about Locker. For instance; do you honestly want to tell me that Locker possesses coordination that is even close to Newton's?

I'm not even going to talk about Kaepernick. Let me see him do it against SEC defenses and then we'll talk. Yeah, he's a great athlete, but from that standpoint he hasn't shown anything as close to being as impressive as Newton in the sense of physically overpowering top-level athletes week in and week out.

49erNation85
02-12-2011, 03:42 PM
Link me to Locker catching a 20-yard touchdown over a defender in the back of the endzone while also getting both feet in bounds.

There is more to athleticism than just running fast. If you cant see the difference between Newton and Locker than you just dont get it. Newton is a top-level athlete at numerous positions whereas I really cant say the same about Locker. For instance; do you honestly want to tell me that Locker possesses coordination that is even close to Newton's?

I'm not even going to talk about Kaepernick. Let me see him do it against SEC defenses and then we'll talk. Yeah, he's a great athlete, but from that standpoint he hasn't shown anything as close to being as impressive as Newton in the sense of physically overpowering top-level athletes week in and week out.

That is all a gimmick play that was.And that is not a QB play he was just up as a WR.I still think it should be between Locker and Gabbert be taken off the board first.I mean a draft prospect can't be all perfect though no one is.They just expect him way to darn much.The only upside Newton has over Locker is his ability to run and is a little more accurate on the ball.Both QB 's have the speed to be mobile.So it all comes down to accuracy and arm strength .

metafour
02-12-2011, 03:48 PM
That is all a gimmick play that was

Gimmick play in which a 6'6 250lb QB made a NFL-level grab in a one on one matchup. Call it whatever you want it shows a ridiculous amount of NATURAL athleticism which is the big difference between a Newton and a Locker. Newton possesses underlying levels of athleticism like coordination, balance, etc. which is what make him such a scary athlete at his size.

A Perfect Score
02-12-2011, 04:07 PM
Gimmick play in which a 6'6 250lb QB made a NFL-level grab in a one on one matchup. Call it whatever you want it shows a ridiculous amount of NATURAL athleticism which is the big difference between a Newton and a Locker. Newton possesses underlying levels of athleticism like coordination, balance, etc. which is what make him such a scary athlete at his size.

I'm pretty sure Locker, who was also drafted into the MLB and will most likely be a first round pick in the NFL come April, has coordination and balance. Come on dude.

the natural
02-12-2011, 04:15 PM
Without a doubt Newton is the more fluid short area athlete, but I think Gabbert may have a bit of an edge as a long area athlete. By that I mean David Beckham being able to drop a free kick on his teammates forehead from 60 yards away, even though he can't run or dribble the ball. Beckham sees the field and processes the flow of play from a distance better than anyone else. From watching Newton's workout, that is definitely not his strength.

Babylon
02-12-2011, 04:22 PM
I'm pretty sure Locker, who was also drafted into the MLB and will most likely be a first round pick in the NFL come April, has coordination and balance. Come on dude.

I always chuckle when i hear people implying that Jake Locker is an inferior athlete to somebody. He has things to work on, athletecism isnt one of them.

FUNBUNCHER
02-12-2011, 05:58 PM
Three words: LEVEL OF COMPETITION.

Both Kaepernick and Locker are 4 year starters, Newton just one.
But look what Newton did in that one year at Auburn. A big part of his hype IMO is due in no small part to his scorched earth campaign throughout the SEC.

Kaepernick in his own right had a stellar season in the WAC, player of the
year, etc., but it wasn't in his first and only year as a starter, and it wasn't in the SEC.
Locker led U Dub to a bowl game and helped them upset Nebraska in a rematch of an earlier season blowout, kudos to him.
However, neither Kaepernick or Locker's seasons combined equal what Newton did at Auburn this past season.

Having a similar skillset to Cam Newton IMO doesn't make either of those guys his equal on a football field, thus the hype.

Unless your last name is Gabbert, hype begins with dominant play on Saturdays, not elite measurables.

I really like Kaepernick as a prospect, and as a pure athlete, I think he and Cam have more in common than most football fans realize. But still, Cam is roughly 25# bigger than Kaepernick.

As an athlete, Cam, Locker and Kaepernick are very similar.

As football players, Cam is on his own level.

P-L
02-12-2011, 06:11 PM
Newton is never going to be asked to catch a touchdown pass in the NFL. His athleticism as a wide receiver is totally irrelevant to his draft stock.

etk
02-12-2011, 06:13 PM
Every time I see the thread title I think of AJ Derby.

thanks a lot Told...smh.

the natural
02-12-2011, 06:18 PM
Three words: LEVEL OF COMPETITION.

Unless your last name is Gabbert, hype begins with dominant play on Saturdays, not elite measurables.



Come on, the previous season Gabbert put up better numbers for Mizzou than Newton did with freaking Blinn College. Over his college career Blaine has like double the yardage of Camera, and he is younger.

FUNBUNCHER
02-12-2011, 06:28 PM
Come on, the previous season Gabbert put up better numbers for Mizzou than Newton did with freaking Blinn College. Over his college career Blaine has like double the yardage of Camera, and he is younger.

Why are you including Newtons' stats from Blinn Junior College?? IMO that's not much better than breaking out HS numbers.

Compare D1 numbers. Gabbert threw for decent yardage in '09, but that's the only stat where he outperformed Newton.
Gabbert's completion percentage, TDs and INTs were all worse than Cam's.

Dice it, splice it, stretch and paste it however you want, Natch.
When it's time to put on the pads, Cam is a flat out better football player than Gabbert.

BigBanger
02-12-2011, 06:29 PM
I really like Kaepernick as a prospect, and as a pure athlete, I think he and Cam have more in common than most football fans realize. But still, Cam is roughly 25# bigger than Kaepernick.
And he has a stronger arm, his dominance was much more impressive (Newton carried a team and actually dominated against the SECs best) and he's 10x more physically impressive. So really, there is no comparison... at all. Kaepernick type players are in every other draft. Newton is the QB that makes scouts think, "Is this the athletic specimen that will break the conventions of football?" Mike Vick was last, and only, QB that did that.

Vince Young didn't do it, Tebow didn't do anything to show us that he was going to do it and I'm going to venture to guess that Newton ain't going to do it either.

49erNation85
02-12-2011, 08:37 PM
BigBang don't even start on Tebow man.He only played in three games last season and did well for the most part.I'm sure he starts next season over Orton.Hes gonna big in 2 years or 3.WIth more time and practice.

the natural
02-12-2011, 08:44 PM
Yeah, Tebow's passing numbers over the last three games of the season were the best of all the rookie QBs, and there were about half a dozen of them starting at that point.

brat316
02-12-2011, 09:44 PM
It seems like every 1 or 2 year we have a qb prospect that is once in a decade. How is that possible?

brat316
02-12-2011, 09:49 PM
And he has a stronger arm, his dominance was much more impressive (Newton carried a team and actually dominated against the SECs best) and he's 10x more physically impressive. So really, there is no comparison... at all. Kaepernick type players are in every other draft. Newton is the QB that makes scouts think, "Is this the athletic specimen that will break the conventions of football?" Mike Vick was last, and only, QB that did that.

Vince Young didn't do it, Tebow didn't do anything to show us that he was going to do it and I'm going to venture to guess that Newton ain't going to do it either.

Well 1 that didn't turn out to well, everyone tried to find the next Mike Vick to reinvent the position. 2, ugh Vince Young had a big arm and was mobile, Tebow big arm mobile, Ben. Few other guys I'm blanking on names right now. Locker this year is very comparable to him, athletics wise. Ohh pre eat disorder, JaMarcus Russell. Once in a decade athlete. Throws the ball 65 yards on his butt.

the natural
02-13-2011, 12:27 AM
There is a site that specializes in measurements for combine related tests. They have the top verifiable score for each athlete including partial results for 2011 draft prospects. On that site Cam Newton's best measured 40 time was 4.75, when he was 17 or 18 and weighed 225 pounds. Gabbert was down for 4.51 at about the same age and weight. The times for most other athletes I checked looked quite accurate. That may be the reason that Newton doesn't want to work out at the Combine.

SimonRath
02-13-2011, 03:20 AM
There is a site that specializes in measurements for combine related tests. They have the top verifiable score for each athlete including partial results for 2011 draft prospects. On that site Cam Newton's best measured 40 time was 4.75, when he was 17 or 18 and weighed 225 pounds. Gabbert was down for 4.51 at about the same age and weight. The times for most other athletes I checked looked quite accurate. That may be the reason that Newton doesn't want to work out at the Combine.

look at the tape, Newton looks way faster and way more dynamic then Gabbert. I dont think scouts will want Gabbert any more over Newton if he runs a better 40. But thats my personal opinion.

FUNBUNCHER
02-13-2011, 07:07 AM
There is a site that specializes in measurements for combine related tests. They have the top verifiable score for each athlete including partial results for 2011 draft prospects. On that site Cam Newton's best measured 40 time was 4.75, when he was 17 or 18 and weighed 225 pounds. Gabbert was down for 4.51 at about the same age and weight. The times for most other athletes I checked looked quite accurate. That may be the reason that Newton doesn't want to work out at the Combine.

When's the last time Gabbert had a 60 yard TD run in college??

40 times are RELATIVE.

Trust your eyes, not the stopwatch.

In pads on a football field, Newton dusts Gabbert 10 times out of 10.

Be a fan of Gabbert by all means, Natch, but try at least to be a little objective about what his strengths/weaknesses are as a prospect.

Gabbert has mobility, but he's not the pure running threat that Newton is, and neither one will be expected or encouraged to run for more than 25-30 yards on a scramble in the pros anyway.

Rarely do QB prospects projected to go in the top 5 do the full workout at the combine. Even an elite athlete like Mike Vick skipped the combine workouts.

brat316
02-13-2011, 10:51 AM
When's the last time Gabbert had a 60 yard TD run in college??

40 times are RELATIVE.

Trust your eyes, not the stopwatch.

In pads on a football field, Newton dusts Gabbert 10 times out of 10.

Be a fan of Gabbert by all means, Natch, but try at least to be a little objective about what his strengths/weaknesses are as a prospect.

Gabbert has mobility, but he's not the pure running threat that Newton is, and neither one will be expected or encouraged to run for more than 25-30 yards on a scramble in the pros anyway.

Rarely do QB prospects projected to go in the top 5 do the full workout at the combine. Even an elite athlete like Mike Vick skipped the combine workouts.

Cause they all $i$$y$.

A Perfect Score
02-13-2011, 11:49 AM
When's the last time Gabbert had a 60 yard TD run in college??

40 times are RELATIVE.

Trust your eyes, not the stopwatch.

In pads on a football field, Newton dusts Gabbert 10 times out of 10.

Be a fan of Gabbert by all means, Natch, but try at least to be a little objective about what his strengths/weaknesses are as a prospect.

Gabbert has mobility, but he's not the pure running threat that Newton is, and neither one will be expected or encouraged to run for more than 25-30 yards on a scramble in the pros anyway.

Rarely do QB prospects projected to go in the top 5 do the full workout at the combine. Even an elite athlete like Mike Vick skipped the combine workouts.

That isn't exactly true. Plenty of top prospects go through full workouts if they feel like they don't have anything to lose. Guys like Peterson, Calvin, McFadden, etc. were all Top 10 picks and all worked out at the combine. The issue with Newton is that if he doesn't run the 40 everyone expects, then that could negatively impact his stock. He's a long strider and I'd expect his 40 to be somewhere around 4.65 which would be far from bad...point is, we can talk about all this stuff until the cows come home, but each and every one of us knows that Newton's draft stock from here on out relies almost exclusively on what happens in those interview rooms.

Chucky
02-13-2011, 12:02 PM
That isn't exactly true. Plenty of top prospects go through full workouts if they feel like they don't have anything to lose. Guys like Peterson, Calvin, McFadden, etc. were all Top 10 picks and all worked out at the combine. The issue with Newton is that if he doesn't run the 40 everyone expects, then that could negatively impact his stock. He's a long strider and I'd expect his 40 to be somewhere around 4.65 which would be far from bad...point is, we can talk about all this stuff until the cows come home, but each and every one of us knows that Newton's draft stock from here on out relies almost exclusively on what happens in those interview rooms.

Those guys aren't QBs though. That is the big difference. Top QBs just don't work out at the combine anymore.

Babylon
02-13-2011, 12:17 PM
Link me to Locker catching a 20-yard touchdown over a defender in the back of the endzone while also getting both feet in bounds.

There is more to athleticism than just running fast. If you cant see the difference between Newton and Locker than you just dont get it. Newton is a top-level athlete at numerous positions whereas I really cant say the same about Locker. For instance; do you honestly want to tell me that Locker possesses coordination that is even close to Newton's?

I'm not even going to talk about Kaepernick. Let me see him do it against SEC defenses and then we'll talk. Yeah, he's a great athlete, but from that standpoint he hasn't shown anything as close to being as impressive as Newton in the sense of physically overpowering top-level athletes week in and week out.

Like i've said before Locker may have some issues, athletecism isnt one of them. Of course i've had the luxury of following him since his sophomore year in high school so maybe i'm in a better position to analyze him as an athlete. The guy was a good enough baseball player to get a no strings 350k from the Angels, has benched 330lbs squatted 475, has ran a 4.4

I'm not going to say Cam Newton isnt a fluid athlete nor am i going to say Blaine Gabbert doesnt move well enough to avoid a rush but to say Jake Locker isnt one of the better athletes to play that position ever is pshco talk.

the natural
02-13-2011, 01:25 PM
When's the last time Gabbert had a 60 yard TD run in college??

40 times are RELATIVE.

Trust your eyes, not the stopwatch.

In pads on a football field, Newton dusts Gabbert 10 times out of 10.

Be a fan of Gabbert by all means, Natch, but try at least to be a little objective about what his strengths/weaknesses are as a prospect.

Gabbert has mobility, but he's not the pure running threat that Newton is, and neither one will be expected or encouraged to run for more than 25-30 yards on a scramble in the pros anyway.

Rarely do QB prospects projected to go in the top 5 do the full workout at the combine. Even an elite athlete like Mike Vick skipped the combine workouts.

I agree completely that Newton is a much more fluid and elusive athlete. But everyone gets hung up on 40 times, and if Cam goes to the Combine and finishes 5th or 6th among QBs in the test he is going to get killed for it. Tebow ran 4.71 under the same test conditions as Newton, and Josh Freeman ran 4.68.

ThePudge
02-13-2011, 01:30 PM
Cause they all smart

Fixed it fir you. No projected 1st Round QBs throw at the Combine because they are advised strongly against that. If you can choose to have control over your setting and still draw heavy attention from scouts/coaches then why wouldn't you choose to do that? The goal is to show the player at his very best. Quarterbacks that do workout at the Combine do so, in part, because that's because it's the largest scale they'll have to showcase your skills. Not many of those players are drawing 20-32 teams at their Pro Day.

the natural
02-13-2011, 01:32 PM
Kaepernick was timed at 5.0 in the same test conditions as Newton, Tebow, Freeman, etc. I think if these guys do run the test there could be a lot of surprises.

the natural
02-13-2011, 01:36 PM
Fixed it fir you. No projected 1st Round QBs throw at the Combine because they are advised strongly against that. If you can choose to have control over your setting and still draw heavy attention from scouts/coaches then why wouldn't you choose to do that? The goal is to show the player at his very best. Quarterbacks that do workout at the Combine do so, in part, because that's because it's the largest scale they'll have to showcase your skills. Not many of those players are drawing 20-32 teams at their Pro Day.

Last word we have is that Kaepernick will do all tests and throw. Gabbert will do all tests except throw. Locker as well, I believe. Mallett will probably do as little as he can, and Newton is waiting to see how things go in training to decide what he will do.

FUNBUNCHER
02-13-2011, 01:37 PM
Kaepernick was timed at 5.0 in the same test conditions as Newton, Tebow, Freeman, etc. I think if these guys do run the test there could be a lot of surprises.

LINK??? Source??

I'm not sure I know what you mean, 'the same test conditions'.

the natural
02-13-2011, 01:40 PM
LINK??? Source??

I'm not sure I know what you mean, 'the same test conditions'.

The recruiting camp scout combines. But it was a few years back, so things can change. Although pure speed seems fairly constant, unless the guy puts on 50 pounds or something.

superman
02-13-2011, 01:44 PM
I have a feeling Newton is about as fast as Tebow. Probably will run the same time but a little slower on the 3 cone.

Keep it real
02-13-2011, 10:05 PM
Kaepernick was timed at 5.0 in the same test conditions as Newton, Tebow, Freeman, etc. I think if these guys do run the test there could be a lot of surprises.

Kaepernick was timed at 4.43 by scouts at Nevadas senior pro day las year.

FUNBUNCHER
02-13-2011, 10:14 PM
Kaepernick was timed at 4.43 by scouts at Nevadas senior pro day las year.
Thanks.

That's why I asked 'Natch to post a link so it wouldn't sound like he's making junk up.
Kaepernick ran a 5 flat as a HS senior??

Stop lying, Natural, or prove it.

the natural
02-14-2011, 01:23 AM
Thanks.

That's why I asked 'Natch to post a link so it wouldn't sound like he's making junk up.
Kaepernick ran a 5 flat as a HS senior??

Stop lying, Natural, or prove it.

It's on the stanford.scout.com site. He was listed at 6-4.5, 177 pounds, but the official timed were 4.84 and 5.0. At the top they listed 4.9. He may have gotten faster as he added weight. Or maybe he is juiced now. He does have the bad complexion and thin hair.

FUNBUNCHER
02-14-2011, 05:14 AM
It's on the stanford.scout.com site. He was listed at 6-4.5, 177 pounds, but the official timed were 4.84 and 5.0. At the top they listed 4.9. He may have gotten faster as he added weight. Or maybe he is juiced now. He does have the bad complexion and thin hair.

LOL!!! You're silly, dude.

the natural
02-14-2011, 12:13 PM
LOL!!! You're silly, dude.

Gabbert was 226 pounds when he tested. Newton was 225. Locker was 216. Those three have gained from 10 to 25 pounds. Kaepernick has added 50 pounds. So there is some room for suspicion, I think.

SolidGold
02-15-2011, 09:46 AM
I was just looking at Locker vs Freeman's college careers (statistics wise). They seem to have alot more similarities than differences. The both played for about three seasons (Lockers Sophomore season was cut short by injury) and they put up pretty similar numbers. Both played in conferences that play mostly questionable defense (PAC 10 and Big 12). They both experienced huge jumps in completion % in successive years and than a decline in their final year of college football. Both played in pro style offenses. Josh Freeman also had a fair share of doubters during the 09 draft but still managed to go in the first round.

I know stats don't tell the whole picture but I just found this to be an interesting comparison.

Freeman
Pass
cmp att cmp% yds td int
680 1151 59 8078 44 34

Rush
att yds ypc td
214 343 1.6 20


Locker
Pass
cmp att yds cmp% td int
619 1148 7639 54 53 35

Rush
att yds ypc td
454 1939 4.27 29


To sum up I still think Locker has a horse in this race to be one of the top QBs taken. Like I stated earlier that stats don't provide a full picture of a prospect but I also think its a pretty interesting comparison.

A Perfect Score
02-15-2011, 09:53 AM
Personally I can't see Locker getting past Washington at 10. Word is they love him and were prepared to take him at 4 last year...Unless Newton somehow slips to 10 or they decide they like Gabbert more, I'd have to imagine Locker will be a Redskin come April.

Babylon
02-15-2011, 10:18 AM
I was just looking at Locker vs Freeman's college careers (statistics wise). They seem to have alot more similarities than differences. The both played for about three seasons (Lockers Sophomore season was cut short by injury) and they put up pretty similar numbers. Both played in conferences that play mostly questionable defense (PAC 10 and Big 12). They both experienced huge jumps in completion % in successive years and than a decline in their final year of college football. Both played in pro style offenses. Josh Freeman also had a fair share of doubters during the 09 draft but still managed to go in the first round.

I know stats don't tell the whole picture but I just found this to be an interesting comparison.

Freeman
Pass
cmp att cmp% yds td int
680 1151 59 8078 44 34

Rush
att yds ypc td
214 343 1.6 20


Locker
Pass
cmp att yds cmp% td int
619 1148 7639 54 53 35

Rush
att yds ypc td
454 1939 4.27 29


To sum up I still think Locker has a horse in this race to be one of the top QBs taken. Like I stated earlier that stats don't provide a full picture of a prospect but I also think its a pretty interesting comparison.


McShay and Mayock seem to think he's in the race too as they have him as their second rated QB, so much for the title of this thread i guess.

As much as there are similarities to Freeman there were also some similar numbers to Matthew Stafford. One thing i noticed was when Jordy Nelson was a senior at KSU Freeman was up around 63% then it dropped to around 58 when he left, also Stafford was around 55% the year before his jumped when A.J. Green arrived. Locker never had that great college receiver to make him look good so to speak. Taking nothing away from Jermaine Kearse and his 62 catches this year he's nowhere near the two i mentioned.

Locker didnt have a great senior year no sense trying to sugarcoat it. Whether it was a broken rib, injuries to receivers or just his poor play will all get sorted out.

brat316
02-15-2011, 12:10 PM
I still can't see Locker slipping out of the 1st round. If Washington doesn't take him. Shanny loves his mobile qbs, roll out all day. Then Seattle shouldn't let him go buy.

SolidGold
02-15-2011, 02:27 PM
Locker is going to do all the workouts at the combine as well. It will be entertaining to see Locker and Kapernick compete there.

the natural
02-15-2011, 02:45 PM
Locker is going to do all the workouts at the combine as well. It will be entertaining to see Locker and Kapernick compete there.

I don't think that Kaepernick will do anything spectacular at the Combine. Locker should.

batman15
02-15-2011, 03:12 PM
Not a fan of either, but I'm hopping Gabbert does better than $Cam Newton. He gave the NCAA a black eye and they did nothing about it.

Babylon
02-15-2011, 04:12 PM
I don't think that Kaepernick will do anything spectacular at the Combine. Locker should.

Any word on whether Gabbert will be doing all the drills at the combine? As of now Locker and Kapernick are the ones at the top who will do everything and i assume Mallett too.

the natural
02-15-2011, 04:31 PM
Any word on whether Gabbert will be doing all the drills at the combine? As of now Locker and Kapernick are the ones at the top who will do everything and i assume Mallett too.

Gabbert said he would do everything at the Combine except throw. That was when he was in Dallas during SB for a Gatorade event.

scpanther22
02-18-2011, 10:20 AM
From Mayock on Gabbert.

"I like Gabbert a lot," Mayock said. "He can make every throw, he's a big kid and he's more athletic than people think.

"I've probably seen at least seven of his games and purely on tape, he reminds me of the guys who have done well in the last couple years. He reminds me of (the Rams' Sam) Bradford. He reminds me of (the Falcons') Matt Ryan.

"If you look at the last three years, NFL teams have done a really good job with their first-round quarterbacks. There's been like six hits in a row with no busts, which probably means we're due for a couple of busts."Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/sports/cardinals/articles/2011/02/17/20110217arizona-cardinals-draft-mike-mayock.html#ixzz1EL8PsF8t

the natural
02-18-2011, 01:05 PM
At this point, I think first overall pick is Gabbert's to lose. Cam Newton's strength was his tape from last season. Along with the bit from his media workout, I suppose. Blaine Gabbert's strength will be his Combine tests and personal interviews. The fact that Blaine is still right there with Newton and the other top end players at this point means he should be able to move ahead of them over the next two months.

Babylon
02-18-2011, 01:09 PM
At this point, I think first overall pick is Gabbert's to lose. Cam Newton's strength was his tape from last season. Along with the bit from his media workout, I suppose. Blaine Gabbert's strength will be his Combine tests and personal interviews. The fact that Blaine is still right there with Newton and the other top end players at this point means he should be able to move ahead of them over the next two months.

I think he benefits if Newton doesnt throw at the combine. Gabbert probably doesnt have the arm of Locker and certainly Mallett but i can see where people think he is probably the safer pick. Personally i think if you're rolling the dice Locker and Newton have more upside but ####ty teams have to be a little more conservative i think.

FUNBUNCHER
02-18-2011, 01:27 PM
I'm through debating the pros/cons on Gabbert. I just don't get the love for him as a top 3 pick.

Gabbert reminds Mayock of Matt Ryan and Sam Bradford?? WTF??

bitonti
02-18-2011, 01:32 PM
At this point, I think first overall pick is Gabbert's to lose. Cam Newton's strength was his tape from last season. Along with the bit from his media workout, I suppose. Blaine Gabbert's strength will be his Combine tests and personal interviews. The fact that Blaine is still right there with Newton and the other top end players at this point means he should be able to move ahead of them over the next two months.

I won't go that far but I do think Gabbert and Newton are the 2 guys in serious contention for that 1 overall pick. I think mocks that have any other player going #1 are not as accurate.

San Diego Chicken
02-18-2011, 02:36 PM
I see Gabbert as a poorer man's Stafford. Good combination of accuracy, arm strength and athleticism, but the QB instincts need work.

SolidGold
02-18-2011, 02:43 PM
I like the Freeman - Gabbert comparisons a lot. I think they are the same type of player.

the natural
02-18-2011, 04:09 PM
I like the Freeman - Gabbert comparisons a lot. I think they are the same type of player.

They're both Missouri kids, and their backgrounds are quite similar. It certainly doesn't hurt Gabbert that Josh has become so successful so fast. I think it may be the single biggest factor going for Blaine at the moment. If anything he comes in with better raw tools than Freeman did, and the same amount of experience. Joe Flacco would be another example of a "tools" guy who stepped right in and was successful.

FUNBUNCHER
02-18-2011, 04:17 PM
They're both Missouri kids, and their backgrounds are quite similar. It certainly doesn't hurt Gabbert that Josh has become so successful so fast. I think it may be the single biggest factor going for Blaine at the moment. If anything he comes in with better raw tools than Freeman did, and the same amount of experience. Joe Flacco would be another example of a "tools" guy who stepped right in and was successful.

The only thing I can imagine off the top of my head that Gabbert has over Freeman as an NFL prospect is maybe straight line speed.

Arm strength is roughly equal. Freeman is bigger and played in a more traditional offense at K-State.

It's beyond frustrating to repeatedly hear that one of Gabbert's biggest assets as a prospect are his 'tools'.

Tall+arm+mobile= top 3 pick??

A Perfect Score
02-18-2011, 04:30 PM
The only thing I can imagine off the top of my head that Gabbert has over Freeman as an NFL prospect is maybe straight line speed.

Arm strength is roughly equal. Freeman is bigger and played in a more traditional offense at K-State.

It's beyond frustrating to repeatedly hear that one of Gabbert's biggest assets as a prospect are his 'tools'.

Tall+arm+mobile= top 3 pick??

Yet we are repeatedly inundated with comment after comment about Newton's "tools" and his "potential". Tall + arm + mobile = Top 3 pick???? Apparently.

the natural
02-18-2011, 04:46 PM
Well, it has to start with the tools. To some extent at least. Chase Daniel put up silly numbers at Missouri before Gabbert came along and no one ever considered him a top draft prospect. You can coach mechanics and you can develop experience, but you can't make a prospect taller, faster, or increase his arm strength to any degree. Not when they're in their 20s.

DenverFan1974
02-18-2011, 04:50 PM
Sad. I don't think there is a top 15 pick (maybe 20) in this QB class. Gabbert has not shown me anything to be excited about in college and it seems everyone is in love with what he can become and Newton is just too big of a risk and hasn't had to QB yet (he athleted, but not QBd).

FUNBUNCHER
02-18-2011, 05:07 PM
Yet we are repeatedly inundated with comment after comment about Newton's "tools" and his "potential". Tall + arm + mobile = Top 3 pick???? Apparently.


If Gabbert had the season last year that Newton did, I'd be on board with the program.

But if I remember correctly, Gabbert did not QB Mizzou to a NC, he didn't lead them to an undefeated season, he wasn't an AA, he didn't win the Heisman trophy.
After you get past Gabbert's 'tools', where does the conversation go??

People talk about Newton's tools in correlation to his ripping a new asshole in the SEC, not tools and....what else??

On top of that, they both came out of similar spread systems, Gabbert didn't do half of what Newton produced on the field in 2010, yet Gabbert is seen as a future pro bowler.

It gives me a headache.

San Diego Chicken
02-18-2011, 05:32 PM
If Gabbert had the season last year that Newton did, I'd be on board with the program.

But if I remember correctly, Gabbert did not QB Mizzou to a NC, he didn't lead them to an undefeated season, he wasn't an AA, he didn't win the Heisman trophy.
After you get past Gabbert's 'tools', where does the conversation go??

People talk about Newton's tools in correlation to his ripping a new asshole in the SEC, not tools and....what else??

On top of that, they both came out of similar spread systems, Gabbert didn't do half of what Newton produced on the field in 2010, yet Gabbert is seen as a future pro bowler.

It gives me a headache.

Let's be fair though, Gabbert lead his team to a very good 10-3 season, and he was not playing behind Newton's OL, with Newton's skill players. Auburn has better OL, RB's and WR's. The perception out there that it was all Newton, all the time is false. Michael Dyer was the game-changer in the National Championship game, not so much Newton. Gabbert didn't really have much offensive talent around him at all. Good defense, but mediocre offensive talent. I'm not a fan of Gabbert's either, but put Newton in Gabbert's situation and the numbers and results might not be the same.

FUNBUNCHER
02-18-2011, 05:41 PM
Let's be fair though, Gabbert lead his team to a very good 10-3 season, and he was not playing behind Newton's OL, with Newton's skill players. Auburn has better OL, RB's and WR's. The perception out there that it was all Newton, all the time is false. Michael Dyer was the game-changer in the National Championship game, not so much Newton. Gabbert didn't really have much offensive talent around him at all. Good defense, but mediocre offensive talent. I'm not a fan of Gabbert's either, but put Newton in Gabbert's situation and the numbers and results might not be the same.


But did he??

Gabbert barely averaged a TD a game last year and had less to do with his team's wins than any of the top QB prospects in this draft.
Check out Gabbert's game log in 2010. It's pathetic.

And please don't imply that Gabbert would have led that same Auburn team to a NC season. He just isn't that caliber of a college QB.

Nevada doesn't win without CK. Auburn doesn't win 8 games without Newton.
U Dub doesn't scrap its way to a winning season IMO without Locker.
Take Mallett off Arkansas' squad and there's no way they win 10 games.

I swear figuring out what it is about Gabbert that makes him 'special', besides his OMG 'tool's is like investigating a damn X-File.


The truth is out there......

FUNBUNCHER
02-18-2011, 05:51 PM
Sad. I don't think there is a top 15 pick (maybe 20) in this QB class. Gabbert has not shown me anything to be excited about in college and it seems everyone is in love with what he can become and Newton is just too big of a risk and hasn't had to QB yet (he athleted, but not QBd).

Why don't you just admit you maybe watched Auburn play 3 games last season, if that??

Did CK 'quarterback' for Nevada??

Cam led that bipolar Auburn team to EIGHT clutch come from behind wins last year, the biggest one against a formidable Alabama squad AT Tuscaloosa.

I watched every game Auburn played after the Kentucky win, expecting them to eventually lose once they played the meat of their schedule.

It didn't happen.

bored of education
02-18-2011, 05:52 PM
Gabbert is on the same level as a prospect as I had Matt Ryan. Matt Ryan's final year in college, stats wise, was not that good. 19 INTs against some ****** D's, the film was very up and down. He didn't have much around him, but he had some innate abilities that you could tell projected for the NFL. Is Gabbert as polished as Matt Ryan, no. I still view him overall as a Qb prospect in the last ten years in that realm; may not be an elite prospect, but well deserving of a top 12 pick in accordance to the class they represented. Don't misconstrue that as deserving of a top 12 pick every year though.

A Perfect Score
02-18-2011, 05:56 PM
Why don't you just admit you maybe watched Auburn play 3 games last season, if that??

Did CK 'quarterback' for Nevada??

Cam led that bipolar Auburn team to EIGHT clutch come from behind wins last year, the biggest one against a formidable Alabama squad AT Tuscaloosa.

I watched every game Auburn played after the Kentucky win, expecting them to eventually lose once they played the meat of their schedule.

It didn't happen.

I watched 10 or 11 Auburn games and Id feel confident in saying that Newton is more athlete then QB at this particular point in time.

DenverFan1974
02-18-2011, 06:04 PM
Why don't you just admit you maybe watched Auburn play 3 games last season, if that??

Did CK 'quarterback' for Nevada??

Cam led that bipolar Auburn team to EIGHT clutch come from behind wins last year, the biggest one against a formidable Alabama squad AT Tuscaloosa.

I watched every game Auburn played after the Kentucky win, expecting them to eventually lose once they played the meat of their schedule.

It didn't happen.

I was mesmerized by Newton last year, in fact I defended him when things initially got hairy for him because he charmed me through the TV. The great thing about SEC football is that you can watch every game every weekend no matter where you live in the country. Looking back at the schedule I saw 6 of their games.

I have to admit, Newton won games by himself but not because he made his reads but because he didn't read defenses, and didn't look off his first receiver but rather tucked and ran. Do I blame him? No. He was the best athlete on the field and I'm sure that is what the coaches told him to do.

I didn't sour on Newton till mid-November. That's when I really thought he was not telling the truth about his father and the rest of the info started to flow. I was pulling for Alabama because I honestly was starting to really resent the fact I supported the guy early on. Fully admit that.

As for CK QBing at NEVADA his first two years he was more like Newton taking over a game. His last two years he was QBing, making reads, keeping his eyes down field and running on designed plays or after his third option was covered.

FUNBUNCHER
02-18-2011, 06:12 PM
I watched 10 or 11 Auburn games and Id feel confident in saying that Newton is more athlete then QB at this particular point in time.


Just saying, the definition of a 'quarterback' playing in the NCAA is vastly different than what it means in the NFL.

To say that Cam was more 'athlete' than 'QB' last year in my mind assumes either he wasn't executing the called plays, or was riffing half the time when the ball was snapped.

Is he an NFL quarterback?? None of these guys are, yet.
If you're calling Cam more athlete because he ran too much, I personally can't criticize Newton for being able in college to run the football for almost 1500 yards AND throw for nearly 3000 yards.

the natural
02-18-2011, 06:30 PM
Last year, Gabbert threw more passes with more completions for more yards, with a lower interception ratio, than Newton. In an off year for him, playing the last half of the season with a hip pointer and high ankle sprain. The previous year Blaine outstripped Cam in every passing category even though Newton was in DIII or something like that. The difference isn't that clear cut, stat wise.

the natural
02-18-2011, 06:38 PM
I was looking at some Scout Combine times for the various prospects. Gabbert ran a faster 40 at 18 than any of his main receivers of last season, and he was as big or bigger than any of them at the time. That probably has a lot to do with his TDs and YPC being down.

FUNBUNCHER
02-18-2011, 06:57 PM
I was looking at some Scout Combine times for the various prospects. Gabbert ran a faster 40 at 18 than any of his main receivers of last season, and he was as big or bigger than any of them at the time. That probably has a lot to do with his TDs and YPC being down.


IMO Gabbert underperformed last season for Mizzou, if he was injured I can respect that more than arguing that his skill position talent wasn't up to Big 12 standards.

That's thing with Gabbert that a team needs to know before picking him; how many plays did he leave out on the field last season for Mizzou??

Only a super-fan believes that Gabbert's 16 TDs last year maxed the output of Mizzou's offense.

Gabbert's golden arm and Mizzou's WRs weren't better than one TD per against McNeese State, Miami Ohio and San Diego State???

Something is off.

Babylon
02-18-2011, 06:57 PM
I was looking at some Scout Combine times for the various prospects. Gabbert ran a faster 40 at 18 than any of his main receivers of last season, and he was as big or bigger than any of them at the time. That probably has a lot to do with his TDs and YPC being down.

As far as supporting casts go Jake Locker wants to have a word with you.

ElectricEye
02-18-2011, 07:09 PM
Who cares about long speed in a college spread offense? You can get by with a bunch of guys running 4.7 out there like Texas Tech has for years and years. Gabbert had two really good targets to throw to in Michael Egnew and TJ Moe.

the natural
02-18-2011, 07:31 PM
Who cares about long speed in a college spread offense? You can get by with a bunch of guys running 4.7 out there like Texas Tech has for years and years. Gabbert had two really good targets to throw to in Michael Egnew and TJ Moe.

Not dissing Egnew, Moe, and Kemp. Just saying they were short area possession guys. The gripe seems to be over Gabbert's TD numbers and YPC ratio. He had more yards and close to the same completion percentage as Newton.

Tom Melton of Tom Melton Scouting thinks that the reason Gabbert overthrew a lot of deep routes is that he was accustomed to faster receivers. Tom thinks a lot of those passes would go to the house with 4.4 wideouts.

FUNBUNCHER
02-18-2011, 08:59 PM
Not dissing Egnew, Moe, and Kemp. Just saying they were short area possession guys. The gripe seems to be over Gabbert's TD numbers and YPC ratio. He had more yards and close to the same completion percentage as Newton.

Tom Melton of Tom Melton Scouting thinks that the reason Gabbert overthrew a lot of deep routes is that he was accustomed to faster receivers. Tom thinks a lot of those passes would go to the house with 4.4 wideouts.

LOLOL!!

I'm sorry but this has to be one of the most ridiculous excuses ever for a QB not connecting on deep balls.
Did Gabbert skip practices during camp and the regular season?? You know, when he's supposed to get reps with his 'slow' WRs to time up those deeper throws??

Man, if D Mac had a pair of 6'8 WRs in Washington, he would have been the OPOTY!!!

the natural
02-18-2011, 09:49 PM
One of the standards for QB success at the NFL level is the "26 60 26" rule. QB has to have 26 college starts, 60% career completion rate, and 26 or better on the Wonderlic. Gabbert is the only one of the top four rated QBs who has a chance to reach those benchmarks. From his academic record, I don't think he has to sweat getting a 26 on the test next week.

the natural
02-18-2011, 09:53 PM
I think the first QB to go will depend on what type of offense the team taking him uses. Newton came out of high school as the number one ranked dual threat QB, I believe. Or at least out of J.C. he was. Gabbert came out a year later as the top ranked pro style QB. I don't think a lot has changed since then. Newton is still the best dual option threat, and Gabbert is still the best pro style prospect. It comes down to what the selecting team wants to do scheme wise.

the natural
02-18-2011, 10:04 PM
LOLOL!!

I'm sorry but this has to be one of the most ridiculous excuses ever for a QB not connecting on deep balls.
Did Gabbert skip practices during camp and the regular season?? You know, when he's supposed to get reps with his 'slow' WRs to time up those deeper throws??

Man, if D Mac had a pair of 6'8 WRs in Washington, he would have been the OPOTY!!!

Well, obviously if the receiver can get a couple yards further downfield in the same amount of time the overthrows are going to be catchable. Or at least have a greater likelyhood of being catchable. You can't afford to throw a deep pass a couple yards short. That is where the DBs are.

DcmRulz
02-19-2011, 12:27 AM
One of the standards for QB success at the NFL level is the "26 60 26" rule. QB has to have 26 college starts, 60% career completion rate, and 26 or better on the Wonderlic. Gabbert is the only one of the top four rated QBs who has a chance to reach those benchmarks. From his academic record, I don't think he has to sweat getting a 26 on the test next week.

I'm pretty sure it's the 26-27-60 rule, of which gabbert missed by a start. Nitpicking aside, It does look like it's down to two QBs, and to be honest, I hate them both now.

FUNBUNCHER
02-19-2011, 09:31 AM
Mizzou against Illinois.

The good, the bad, the mostly ugly.
This is not a top 5 QB.

Bradford would have put up 45 points on the Illini that game. Why is Gabbert locked onto the right side of the field when he has WRs running free opposite field??


Q5nGYHLeB2g

MidwayMonster31
02-19-2011, 10:40 AM
I love how most of the comments on that video sound something like 'How is this guy a first round pick?'
Anyway, I should be thanking you two for helping me figure out why Gabbert irks me so much prospect-wise, and almost all of it is the mental part of playing quarterback.
This year, the main thing everyone complimented Bradford on was how well he was in control of the offense, how he understood the internal clock to get rid of the ball, how he went through his progressions in the pocket and sensing the blitz. It just doesn't look like Gabbert has those mental things down when it comes to playing quarterback, the only time he sees the field well is when the first read isn't open and he improvises. It was also mentioned earlier that even though he's good when the play breaks down, often he's the one causing the playing the play to break down, not the defense.
Some of those things might be fixable, I'm not sure how much though.

nepg
02-19-2011, 11:05 AM
As far as supporting casts go Jake Locker wants to have a word with you.

Seriously... Out of all 4 of the QBs, Gabbert might have had the best supporting cast, especially when you look at level of competition.

diabsoule
02-19-2011, 11:08 AM
Seriously... Out of all 4 of the QBs, Gabbert might have had the best supporting cast, especially when you look at level of competition.

I think Newton had the best supporting cast especially when you look at the level of competition. Gabbert might have had second best but it's almost a toss-up between him and Mallet. Everyone can agree that Locker's supporting cast sucked.

TACKLE
02-19-2011, 01:46 PM
I think Newton had the best supporting cast especially when you look at the level of competition. Gabbert might have had second best but it's almost a toss-up between him and Mallet. Everyone can agree that Locker's supporting cast sucked.

I have to disagree. I think Mallett pretty decisively had the best supporting caste. Greg Childs, Joe Adams, Jarius Wright, Cobi Hamilton and throw DJ Williams in there and Arkansas might of had the top WR core in college football. Not to mention a RB Kniles Davis who ran over 1300 yards. Talent wise and production wise, I don't see how Mizzou or Auburn had a better supporting cast.

Complex
02-21-2011, 03:22 PM
Matt Millian likes Gabbert the most out of all the QBs in this draft.

the natural
02-21-2011, 04:24 PM
Matt Millian likes Gabbert the most out of all the QBs in this draft.

Gil Brandt thinks that Carolina should draft Newton first overall. This is going to turn into a Ginger or Mary-Ann debate. :)

nikkayeah
02-21-2011, 06:48 PM
cam newton will throw at the combine. gabbert has decided against it.

gpngc
02-21-2011, 07:03 PM
cam newton will throw at the combine. gabbert has decided against it.

Updating a previous item, Auburn QB Cam Newton will participate fully in the NFL Combine this week.
Newton wants to be "transparent" throughout the pre-draft process, and doing everything he can is the best way to do it. It's also a smart decision because NFL scouts were worried Team Newton would try to pass off Cam's "Media Day" as an excuse to skip throwing drills in Indianapolis. With Blaine Gabbert not expected to throw, Newton could grab the clear upper hand in the race to be the first quarterback drafted this April.

SeanTaylorRIP
02-21-2011, 07:22 PM
Matt Millian likes Gabbert the most out of all the QBs in this draft.

Not a title I'd want to hold.

Brent
02-21-2011, 07:23 PM
I respect Cam's decision. That's a good call, and I hope he impresses.

gpngc
02-21-2011, 07:25 PM
He's going to end up #1 overall... I can just see it. It makes too much sense for a million reasons...

the natural
02-21-2011, 08:21 PM
Good that Newton will do the Combine. What was that farce about a couple weeks back? I guess they realized it wasn't going to fly. It's a strange outfit. Brett Favre pops by as a favor to his buddy Bus Cook and all of a sudden he is "mentoring" the Camera. Warren Moon drags his tired old ass out once every couple of weeks for publicity sake and all of a sudden he is "training" the boy. If Newton is drafted high it will be despite his advisors, not because of them.

FUNBUNCHER
02-21-2011, 08:46 PM
Post NC game, IMO Cam hasn't made any disastrous false steps. Just trying to elevate his profile among NFL teams and use this brief window before the draft to prove he's the the #1 talent available.

That Warren Moon or Brett Favre are 'mentoring' Newton, is a non issue.

the natural
02-21-2011, 08:51 PM
Post NC game, IMO Cam hasn't made any disastrous false steps. Just trying to elevate his profile among NFL teams and use this brief window before the draft to prove he's the the #1 talent available.

That Warren Moon or Brett Favre are 'mentoring' Newton, is a non issue.

The media event and the coyness about the Combine can't help his cause. A lot of the crap they throw out is an insult to the intelligence of the pro evaluators. They aren't completely stupid, and I doubt they enjoy being treated as if they were.

nikkayeah
02-21-2011, 09:38 PM
The media event and the coyness about the Combine can't help his cause. A lot of the crap they throw out is an insult to the intelligence of the pro evaluators. They aren't completely stupid, and I doubt they enjoy being treated as if they were.

he was just trying to get support and hype from the media, and it actually worked out for him. it definitely did not hurt his stock one bit.

CaneBang
02-21-2011, 09:42 PM
I can definitely see Cam going at least Top 5, these past 6 months for him have ridden him this far for sure. #1 overall? I don't see it just yet, but I said the same thing about Tebow being selected in the 1st round around this time last year too...

Teams in the NFL today are so amazingly quarterback desparate it's not even cute.

the natural
02-21-2011, 10:08 PM
he was just trying to get support and hype from the media, and it actually worked out for him. it definitely did not hurt his stock one bit.

I think support and hype from the media and support from the NFL evaluators are two different things. The teams have to wonder where Newton's enthusiasm lies. If it's all about the glitz and the glamor for him, that doesn't bode well for his team and his employers.

nikkayeah
02-21-2011, 10:15 PM
I think support and hype from the media and support from the NFL evaluators are two different things. The teams have to wonder where Newton's enthusiasm lies. If it's all about the glitz and the glamor for him, that doesn't bode well for his team and his employers.

yes they are two different things, but it never hurts to have the media behind your back

Roddoliver
02-21-2011, 10:34 PM
Cam Newton will be the 1st QB taken, obviously, and depending on the impact of the reports about drug abuse, Ryan Mallet should go ahead of Gabbert. Mallet is a better quarterback, but has these issues dropping his stock. Gabbert simply is not a very good quarterback.

the natural
02-21-2011, 10:56 PM
*************

the natural
02-22-2011, 12:47 AM
yes they are two different things, but it never hurts to have the media behind your back

Not for your marketing potential for sure. Newton spent a couple of years with Tebow in Florida so I think he knows the benefits of high profile. But he is definitely bucking the norm in a lot of ways. Working out on his own at a prep school, hiring some non entity as his QB coach, hiring two agents and a marketing firm, signing big endorsment deals before the draft, having a posse of different advisors and mentors. If I was an NFL exec, I think I would see it as huge mess already, and the guy has only been out of school for a little over a month. But then again, I'm not an exec and never will be.

jnew76
02-22-2011, 09:02 AM
Cam Newton will be the 1st QB taken, obviously, and depending on the impact of the reports about drug abuse, Ryan Mallet should go ahead of Gabbert. Mallet is a better quarterback, but has these issues dropping his stock. Gabbert simply is not a very good quarterback.

I would like to see you break down your opinions further. Especially the statement "Gabbert simply is not a very good quarterback" - It is interesting that almost every draft evaluator out there has him as one of the top 2 available quarterbacks, yet you dismiss him as not very good.

49erNation85
02-22-2011, 09:03 AM
Cam Newton now throwing and fully doing all work outs at the combine now!Not sure if any one saw this on NFL N .

jnew76
02-22-2011, 09:48 AM
Cam Newton now throwing and fully doing all work outs at the combine now!Not sure if any one saw this on NFL N .

I just saw this reported on ESPN First Take... Interesting decision. I hope he follows through with it.

diabsoule
02-22-2011, 10:04 AM
Gil Brandt says that Cam Newton should go #1 overall
http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/02/21/2865475/auburns-newton-should-be-first.html#ixzz1EhfcZdb5

Roddoliver
02-22-2011, 10:42 AM
I would like to see you break down your opinions further. Especially the statement "Gabbert simply is not a very good quarterback" - It is interesting that almost every draft evaluator out there has him as one of the top 2 available quarterbacks, yet you dismiss him as not very good.

It's very simple. "Draft evaluators" are saying that Gabbert is a top QB prospect, because of his size and arm. That's it. Even Mike Mayock, who did a bad job in the last 2 drafts, has Gabbert as his #1 QB, and he said "but I haven't watched much tape of him". WTH?? It looks like no one thinks outside the box anymore. 1 guy puts Gabbert way up there, and the next guy follows.

I have no doubt in my mind that NFL scouts and GMs don't have Gabbert as high as the media draftniks. First of all, Gabbert is very inconsistent. He has serious problems with accuracy, some of his throws are really ugly. He struggles with a fade route in the endzone. He has ridiculously low yards per attempt for a college spread offense. And he only had to make 1 read.

His footwork is bad, many times you don't see him dropping back like a quarterback should. That's probably one of the reasons why his throw quality is so random. I want a draftnik to tell me which game was impressive, where can I see Gabbert as a top QB. Because I don't see it. I won't buy this hype that says "Gabbert is really good, top QB, just believe me".

Gabbert is a small ball QB, dinking and dunking in college, with very low yards per attempt. Innacurate. Can't read a defense, he stares at 1 guy and throws. Things just get much harder in the NFL.

Babylon
02-22-2011, 11:32 AM
^

I dont think anyone is predicting Gabbert as some big star at the next level, at least they shouldnt be. The problem with this years crop is although talented they come with some real question marks. Having said that i think there will be some guys that come out of this group that have real success if they can get beyond an issue or two they're dealing with.

If it were me doing the selecting, the first QB would probably come off the board at #10, Washington.

TACKLE
02-22-2011, 12:10 PM
Gil Brandt says that Cam Newton should go #1 overall
http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/02/21/2865475/auburns-newton-should-be-first.html#ixzz1EhfcZdb5

When it all shakes out and April 28th rolls around, I'd be surprised if that didn't happen.

Chucky
02-22-2011, 12:12 PM
If Newton goes number 1 to the Panthers I would be absolutely devastated

J-Mike88
02-22-2011, 12:14 PM
Gil Brandt says that Cam Newton should go #1 overall
http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/02/21/2865475/auburns-newton-should-be-first.html#ixzz1EhfcZdb5
I think he will.
The love for Gabbert is just amazing.....

the natural
02-22-2011, 01:30 PM
I think he will.
The love for Gabbert is just amazing.....

Well, Brandt, who you seem to believe, had the Newton and Gabbert in a dead heat as of a week ago on his chat. Make up your mind. Is he full of crap for rating the two even, or full of crap for saying he thinks Carolina will take Newton first overall? His colleague Mike Mayock, who is money QBs as a rule, (Jay Cutler, JaMarcus Russell, Joe Flacco, Josh Freeman, Jimmy Clausen, he was outside the norm but DEAD ON on all of those picks) has The Camera as his third ranked QB, behind Gabbert and Locker.

Why on earth would anyone care what some guy named Roddo liver thinks?

Babylon
02-22-2011, 01:32 PM
When it all shakes out and April 28th rolls around, I'd be surprised if that didn't happen.

First of all Brandt has about zero credibility anymore when giving coherant evaluations of players, second it seems to me that all the character talk about Newton, which i think is minor, sort of masks the issues he has with inexperience, footwork, accuracy etc.

History shows us that any of this stuff regarding QBs is entirely possible. When you look at the 99 draft and see guys like Akili Smith, Tim Couch and Daunte Culpepper going in the top 10 then anything goes really. I wouldnt want to be a team picking in the top 10 that needs a QB.

TACKLE
02-22-2011, 01:40 PM
First of all Brandt has about zero credibility anymore when giving coherant evaluations of players, second it seems to me that all the character talk about Newton, which i think is minor, sort of masks the issues he has with inexperience, footwork, accuracy etc.

History shows us that any of this stuff regarding QBs is entirely possible. When you look at the 99 draft and see guys like Akili Smith, Tim Couch and Daunte Culpepper going in the top 10 then anything goes really. I wouldnt want to be a team picking in the top 10 that needs a QB.

That may be. Regardless, I've held that opinion long before I read that article.

A Perfect Score
02-22-2011, 01:43 PM
First of all Brandt has about zero credibility anymore when giving coherant evaluations of players, second it seems to me that all the character talk about Newton, which i think is minor, sort of masks the issues he has with inexperience, footwork, accuracy etc.

History shows us that any of this stuff regarding QBs is entirely possible. When you look at the 99 draft and see guys like Akili Smith, Tim Couch and Daunte Culpepper going in the top 10 then anything goes really. I wouldnt want to be a team picking in the top 10 that needs a QB.

Ill take Ponder in the second over Gabbert in the Top 10 all day. This is a brutal year to need a QB.

Babylon
02-22-2011, 01:49 PM
Ill take Ponder in the second over Gabbert in the Top 10 all day. This is a brutal year to need a QB.

That is always a good question for teams to ask themselves. This year you'd probably have to add, would it be wise to trade back into the 1st for guys like Locker and Mallett, who could very easily have better careers than the supposed top 2. (at least by this thread title)

the natural
02-22-2011, 01:53 PM
I think there is every chance that Newton and Gabbert go 1-2 overall. Denver is starting to float Tebow now. If Newton goes 1 to Carolina as Brandt says, then I think there is a good chance that Denver grabs Gabbert with the next pick, trades Tebow, and develops Blaine behind Orton and Quinn. I said this before on this forum, I think. Also it is a very good year for QBs. A lot of you guys have it completely backwards. Mallett seems to be fading due to drug use rumors, but Newton, Gabbert, Locker, Ponder, and a couple of others are top drawer prospects at the postion in any year.

FUNBUNCHER
02-22-2011, 02:05 PM
No way Denver dumps Tebow after the flashes he showed last season. Two first round picks in consecutive years on a QB??? Not happening. IF Elway does this, he's entering Matt Millen territory as a GM.

Forget tools, as a pure QB, Tebow is better than Gabbert IMO.

Once Mallett tests clean at Indy, if there isn't concrete evidence that he's a regular user of 'something', he's still going high in the draft.

the natural
02-22-2011, 02:19 PM
I like Tebow a lot. I think he could be the best QB out of last year's draft. But I don't think Elway does. Once he got involved in Denver they sacked Josh McDaniels and tried to tank the last games of the season for a shot at Andrew Luck. Now I think that John is seeing a lot of himself at the same age in Gabbert. The big arm, the athletic ability, the throwing style. Their stats through 3 college seasons were very similar.

Grizzlegom
02-22-2011, 02:30 PM
Cam Newton: "I see myself not only as a football player, but an entertainer and icon.''

the natural
02-22-2011, 02:35 PM
Cam Newton: "I see myself not only as a football player, but an entertainer and icon.''

That is the crux of the deal with Newton. If a team wants an entertainer and an icon first and foremost, then Cam is their guy. He marches to his own drummer and always will. The rest of the team, and the league, are merely supporting cast. The choir.

Saints-Tigers
02-22-2011, 02:39 PM
I like Tebow a lot. I think he could be the best QB out of last year's draft. But I don't think Elway does. Once he got involved in Denver they sacked Josh McDaniels and tried to tank the last games of the season for a shot at Andrew Luck. Now I think that John is seeing a lot of himself at the same age in Gabbert. The big arm, the athletic ability, the throwing style. Their stats through 3 college seasons were very similar.

John told you this personally?

the natural
02-22-2011, 02:44 PM
John told you this personally?

No, he sent me an email. I live quite far from Denver and he had the flu so he didn't want to make the trip.

Babylon
02-22-2011, 02:46 PM
I like Tebow a lot. I think he could be the best QB out of last year's draft. But I don't think Elway does. Once he got involved in Denver they sacked Josh McDaniels and tried to tank the last games of the season for a shot at Andrew Luck. Now I think that John is seeing a lot of himself at the same age in Gabbert. The big arm, the athletic ability, the throwing style. Their stats through 3 college seasons were very similar.

This is probably the most rediculous thing i've read in here in quite some time.

the natural
02-22-2011, 03:11 PM
This is probably the most rediculous thing i've read in here in quite some time.

The first thing that Gary Pinkel said when Gabbert arrived at Mizzou is that he threw the ball like a young John Elway. Gabbert is bigger, John was around 6-3, 215 when he was drafted, but that was 30 years ago or so. Blaine will really open some eyes as a pure athlete at the Combine. Their team records and stats through their first 3 college seasons are similar. About the same yardage and completion percentage. Elway had more TDs and Ints.

Babylon
02-22-2011, 03:23 PM
The first thing that Gary Pinkel said when Gabbert arrived at Mizzou is that he threw the ball like a young John Elway. Gabbert is bigger, John was around 6-3, 215 when he was drafted, but that was 30 years ago or so. Blaine will really open some eyes as a pure athlete at the Combine. Their team records and stats through their first 3 college seasons are similar. About the same yardage and completion percentage. Elway had more TDs and Ints.

I have to give you credit man, you'll go the extra mile to pump up your boy Gabbert and i dont have a problem with that. Somehow comparing him to the greatest QB prospect ever seems totally insane but have at it.

BigBanger
02-22-2011, 03:26 PM
Are you ******* kidding me? More John Elway comparisons?

It really is amazing how many Steve Young's, John Elway's, Ben Roethlisberg's and Tom Brady's there are in every ******* draft.

FUNBUNCHER
02-22-2011, 05:10 PM
Please quit comparing Gabbert to Elway, natch.
Both as college QBs, playing style, the ability to lead their teams to scores when down late to a superior opponent at Stanford, pure arm strength, leadership......this whole conversation is getting into stupid territory.

No way Elway looks at Gabbert and sees himself; being a gifted QB is about more than having elite tools.
Gabbert plays almost scared from what I've seen of him and can't find his WRs even when he has 4-5 guys running out in a pattern.

If Gabbert can't 'show off' in Mizzou's spread offense, he's going to have a really tough time transitioning to a pro scheme.

Gabbert reminds me of someone who was picked to play QB as a kid because he was tall and could throw the football hard, and he still reminds me of that guy.
Great tools, but I question if he's a natural QB.
Gabbert doesn't appear to have a innate feel for the game from inside the pocket, or when he scrambles. His downfield accuracy is awful and he struggles to see or anticipate WRs running open in soft coverage.

The more I watch Gabbert, the more I think his bust potential is higher than any of the top rated QBs in this draft.

Bottom line, he simply isn't a very good QB and even Gabbert's elite tools can't overcome his lack of feel for the game.

Babylon
02-22-2011, 05:18 PM
^

And you could argue the elite tools arent all that elite. Of the top 4 QBs i'm searching for what he does better than all the others, physically or as far as intangibles go.

MidwayMonster31
02-22-2011, 05:40 PM
For best at each skill, this is the way I see it with the quarterbacks, not just the top 4.
Physical tools:
Size: Mallett (Newton too)
Speed: Newton
Athletic ability: Newton or Locker
Arm strength: Mallett
Accuracy: Ponder?
Mechanics: Ponder

Intangibles:
Leadership: Stanzi
Work ethic: Locker (or Kaepernick)
Will to win: Newton
Command of the offense: Kaepernick
Pocket presence: Dalton
Intelligence: Ponder
Football IQ: McElroy

the natural
02-22-2011, 05:42 PM
Elway was a year and a half older than Gabbert is coming out. He had more time to look good at the college level. Even then John's first season made Jimmy Clausen look like Dan Marino by comparison. It's not like Elway popped out of his Mom as fully developed HOF QB. I think Gabbert's tools are every bit as good. He just hasn't been stage managed by a parent like so many other top QB prospects. Which will be for the best in the long run, but puts him behind a bit in the short term.

Caulibflower
02-22-2011, 05:45 PM
Please quit comparing Gabbert to Elway, natch.
Both as college QBs, playing style, the ability to lead their teams to scores when down late to a superior opponent at Stanford, pure arm strength, leadership......this whole conversation is getting into stupid territory.

No way Elway looks at Gabbert and sees himself; being a gifted QB is about more than having elite tools.
Gabbert plays almost scared from what I've seen of him and can't find his WRs even when he has 4-5 guys running out in a pattern.

If Gabbert can't 'show off' in Mizzou's spread offense, he's going to have a really tough time transitioning to a pro scheme.

Gabbert reminds me of someone who was picked to play QB as a kid because he was tall and could throw the football hard, and he still reminds me of that guy.
Great tools, but I question if he's a natural QB.
Gabbert doesn't appear to have a innate feel for the game from inside the pocket, or when he scrambles. His downfield accuracy is awful and he struggles to see or anticipate WRs running open in soft coverage.

The more I watch Gabbert, the more I think his bust potential is higher than any of the top rated QBs in this draft.

Bottom line, he simply isn't a very good QB and even Gabbert's elite tools can't overcome his lack of feel for the game.

I'm totally with you on this post. I said it in another thread, I think, but as you're saying about him playing scared; he often leaves his receivers out to dry because his placement of the ball is poor. He gets it to them, but it's like instead of having the composure to get the ball low, or really in any place where they're not going to take a shot, he just chucks the ball towards them as hard as he can, which leads to his receivers having to make a lot of leaping catches, which exposes them and forces them to take big hits. That's the biggest thing that stood out to me as I've watched some of his tape. Spotty accuracy on the short routes, and he frequently leaves his receivers out to dry. The size, strong arm and above-average athleticism aren't selling me. He just isn't that good. I have more confidence that Alex Smith can still be a capable NFL starter, even having been already labeled a bust, than I do for Gabbert.

Babylon
02-22-2011, 05:47 PM
For best at each skill, this is the way I see it with the quarterbacks, not just the top 4.
Physical tools:
Size: Mallett
Speed: Newton
Athletic ability: Newton or Locker
Arm strength: Mallett
Accuracy: Ponder?
Mechanics: Ponder

Intangibles:
Leadership: Stanzi
Work ethic: Locker (or Kaepernick)
Will to win: Newton
Command of the offense: Kaepernick
Pocket presence: Dalton

Dont agree with all your choices but glad you listed them. I guess it proves my point that Gabbert's tools arent all that elite. Having said that Guys like Tom Brady and Peyton wouldnt be at the top of a lot of individual categories but their work ethic, leadership.....certainly would be.

the natural
02-22-2011, 06:07 PM
Blaine Gabbert on Twitter today.

jnew76
02-22-2011, 08:25 PM
Am I the only one that thinks Gabbert's skills are better suited to a Pro-Style offense than the college spread he played in? I think he made a good decision to go pro rather than stay in a style that he could not progress in. I am not saying he is an elite prospect at this point, but I do think he made the right decision.

RealityCheck
02-22-2011, 08:32 PM
Cam Newton: "I see myself not only as a football player, but an entertainer and icon.''
If he keeps this mentality, he'll fail. Hard.

And there's no way in hell Denver takes a QB, lol you guys are crazy.

TACKLE
02-22-2011, 08:35 PM
Am I the only one that thinks Gabbert's skills are better suited to a Pro-Style offense than the college spread he played in? I think he made a good decision to go pro rather than stay in a style that he could not progress in. I am not saying he is an elite prospect at this point, but I do think he made the right decision.

No, no your not. The offense he played in was a horrendous fit for him.

metafour
02-22-2011, 08:37 PM
No, no your not. The offense he played in was a horrendous fit for him.

A big guy who can move playing in a spread offense is a horrible fit? Might be the first I've heard that one...

PACKmanN
02-22-2011, 08:44 PM
No, no your not. The offense he played in was a horrendous fit for him.

wait, i thought a spread offense in college was built to take an average qb and make him look better than what he really was.

the natural
02-22-2011, 08:47 PM
All the rookies have to learn new offensive systems. I don't think it matters much what they played in college. If they are reasonably smart and reasonably athletic they can pick it up in the months prior to the season. Last year Clausen was supposed to have an advantage because of the system he played in college, but he ended up as probably the most ineffective rookie QB of all.

FUNBUNCHER
02-22-2011, 09:16 PM
All the rookies have to learn new offensive systems. I don't think it matters much what they played in college. If they are reasonably smart and reasonably athletic they can pick it up in the months prior to the season. Last year Clausen was supposed to have an advantage because of the system he played in college, but he ended up as probably the most ineffective rookie QB of all.


Quit while you're ahead.

A rookie can memorize plays, but he can't learn how to EXECUTE an NFL offense proficiently in a couple months of TC.

Rookies who are thrown into the fire from the first game of the season are under intense on-the-job-training.

Some guys, like Rodgers, are better off sitting a few years before being named the starter.

Gabbert is a looooonnnnnnggg way from being able to master an NFL offense.
Honestly, he couldn't really figure out how to run Missouri's offense.

the natural
02-22-2011, 09:24 PM
Well, if a team expects a rookie to start at the position they dumb down the offense for him to start and add a little bit more each week. NFL teams probably have about as many non playing personel as players on hand during the games. The guys who don't play are expected to help the guys who do. Gabbert has been compared to Bradford and Ryan of recent vintage for his smarts. Both those players managed to get by as rookie starters, although neither was outstanding. There are ways if the necessity presents itself. Roethlisberger is about as smart as a house plant and he managed to get by very well as a rookie starter in the NFL. Cowher and Whisenhunt redesigned the offense for him.

FUNBUNCHER
02-22-2011, 09:29 PM
Natch, do you see the difference between Gabbert and Matt Ryan/Sam Bradford as NFL prospects?? I mean besides their ages???

Roethlisberger is no dummy either. If you heard Big Ben in team and film sessions break down a gameplan or a defensive opponent, I think you'd be shocked.

bucfan12
02-22-2011, 09:41 PM
I am starting to believe Newton is going to be a top 5 pick and first QB taken. Although I do not like him as a prospect and think he will be just a bigger version of Vince Young, some team is going to fall in love with his athleticism and potential. He is still raw as a passer and is coming from a spread offense where he wasn't under center. Ran gimmick plays, but he has tremendous arm strength and guiding an Auburn team to a Nat'l Title in 1 year is something teams will like.

Many media and football analysts raved about that workout a few weeks back. But remember, Mike Mayock warned us that Jamarcus Russell also had one of the most tremendous workouts prior to the draft as well. Not comparing them, but don't read much into it.

I honestly think Gabbert and Koepernick are the best QBs in this draft and only guys I think that have starting potential down the road. Newton? Possibly, but I see too much Vince Young and immaturity in him.

TACKLE
02-22-2011, 10:25 PM
A big guy who can move playing in a spread offense is a horrible fit? Might be the first I've heard that one...

wait, i thought a spread offense in college was built to take an average qb and make him look better than what he really was.

Yes, because generalizations about all quarterbacks in all spread offenses must hold true about Blaine Gabbert in Missouri's offense.

*sigh*

metafour
02-22-2011, 10:53 PM
Yes, because generalizations about all quarterbacks in all spread offenses must hold true about Blaine Gabbert in Missouri's offense.

*sigh*

Are you kidding me? I'd argue that Gabbert's two biggest FAULTS would be even more heavily exposed in any "pro style" offense:

1) Absolute inconsistency. Missouri's offense is very "prototypical spread" in the sense that its all about getting 4+ receivers to open the field up for easy quick-developing passes. Gabbert STRUGGLED to consistently throw catchable balls in what was essentially a dink-and-dunk offense; and when he did throw down field he routine threw way off mark. How would this issue be alleviated in a more complex offense where the QB needs to fit balls into tighter windows? The spread offense has flourished because the passing is easier for your average quarterback, I have a hard time believing that Gabbert's inconsistency would somehow get better in an offense that demands more pin-point throwing ability.

2) Erratic pocket presence. His movement in the pocket straight up looks horrible a lot of the time. Again; his spread offense is heavily shotgun oriented which flat out makes it easier for the QB to receive the ball, establish themselves, and get rid of the ball with sound mechanics. It is harder to do these things in an under-center offense which is why everyone always worries about the transition. Once again; Gabbert's poor pocket presence would be magnified even more if he was consistently asked to receive the ball from under center because it straight up adds another level of things to be "nervous" about. He looks "nervous" moving around in pre-made shotgun pockets; why would he look any more fluent in any offense that is asking him to drop back while having guys coming from every angle?

the natural
02-22-2011, 11:15 PM
Natch, do you see the difference between Gabbert and Matt Ryan/Sam Bradford as NFL prospects?? I mean besides their ages???

Roethlisberger is no dummy either. If you heard Big Ben in team and film sessions break down a gameplan or a defensive opponent, I think you'd be shocked.

Pretty sure Gabbert will go one or two overall, Fun. Then we can start to debate the wisdom of the decision. He has the "it" factor. Moreso than Bradford or Ryan. Gabbert reminds me a bit of David Beckham.

TACKLE
02-22-2011, 11:27 PM
Are you kidding me? I'd argue that Gabbert's two biggest FAULTS would be even more heavily exposed in any "pro style" offense:

1) Absolute inconsistency. Missouri's offense is very "prototypical spread" in the sense that its all about getting 4+ receivers to open the field up for easy quick-developing passes. Gabbert STRUGGLED to consistently throw catchable balls in what was essentially a dink-and-dunk offense; and when he did throw down field he routine threw way off mark. How would this issue be alleviated in a more complex offense where the QB needs to fit balls into tighter windows? The spread offense has flourished because the passing is easier for your average quarterback, I have a hard time believing that Gabbert's inconsistency would somehow get better in an offense that demands more pin-point throwing ability.

2) Erratic pocket presence. His movement in the pocket straight up looks horrible a lot of the time. Again; his spread offense is heavily shotgun oriented which flat out makes it easier for the QB to receive the ball, establish themselves, and get rid of the ball with sound mechanics. It is harder to do these things in an under-center offense which is why everyone always worries about the transition. Once again; Gabbert's poor pocket presence would be magnified even more if he was consistently asked to receive the ball from under center because it straight up adds another level of things to be "nervous" about. He looks "nervous" moving around in pre-made shotgun pockets; why would he look any more fluent in any offense that is asking him to drop back while having guys coming from every angle?

I dislike Gabbert as much or more than the next guy but playing in that offense definitely hampered him in ways and limited his ability to be successful. His erratic, frantic pocket presence drove me crazy when I watched him and he seems to be creating more pass rush than he's avoiding at times. But Missouri's offense ran a ton of five wide, with extra wide splits from the offensive line (a very weak O-Line at that) so rarely was there actually a definitive pocket for him to operate out of. Although his pocket presence is weak, rarely did he actually have a true pocket to maneuver within.He wasn't able to get into a natural drop-back and use his height to survey downfield. Sure he has some mobility but make no mistake about it, he's a pocket passer (albeit with poor presence).

As far as struggling with dink-and-dunk passes, that's not really his game as a quarterback at all. Sure he was forced to make a high percentage of those throws because of the offense he operated in, but in reality, he's at his best when he's able to stand tall and use his arm strength to deliver the ball down field. His deep ball needs work and I've been highly critical of Gabbert, but I will say he's above average when it comes to throwing the ball down the field. I just fail to see why a 6'5 240, strong armed QB who's at his best when's he's throwing the ball down field, is in any way a good fit at all in an offense that required him to play small ball in a 5-wide base set. System wise, its was just a very poor fit to ask a player with his skill set to go and play like Graham Harrell.

Roddoliver
02-22-2011, 11:29 PM
I think there is every chance that Newton and Gabbert go 1-2 overall. Denver is starting to float Tebow now. If Newton goes 1 to Carolina as Brandt says, then I think there is a good chance that Denver grabs Gabbert with the next pick, trades Tebow, and develops Blaine behind Orton and Quinn.

LMAO. You are hilarious! LOL. Good stuff.

Caulibflower
02-22-2011, 11:48 PM
Pretty sure Gabbert will go one or two overall, Fun. Then we can start to debate the wisdom of the decision. He has the "it" factor. Moreso than Bradford or Ryan. Gabbert reminds me a bit of David Beckham.

ROFL ...what?!


...what?!

metafour
02-23-2011, 12:00 AM
He has the "it" factor.

This has to be the greatest troll-job of all time. Nothing screams "it factor" like a 16 TD/9 INT season and one of the worst game-losing throws in recent Bowl history.

Roddoliver
02-23-2011, 12:02 AM
This has to be the greatest troll-job of all time. Nothing screams "it factor" like a 16 TD/9 INT season and one of the worst game-losing throws in recent Bowl history.

He just forgot to put the s and the h before the it

the natural
02-23-2011, 12:11 AM
Charisma and charm factor into the equation when you're using a top of the draft pick on a quarterback. He automatically becomes the face of the franchise. Bradford and Ryan are pretty bland. Tebow probably got more press than Bradford last year, even though he was taken 24 picks later and only started a few games at the end of the year.

jnew76
02-23-2011, 01:22 AM
Charisma and charm factor into the equation when you're using a top of the draft pick on a quarterback. He automatically becomes the face of the franchise. Bradford and Ryan are pretty bland. Tebow probably got more press than Bradford last year, even though he was taken 24 picks later and only started a few games at the end of the year.

Yup, the Matty "ice" nickname and countless 4th quarter comebacks in college with inferior talent around him came from the completely bland Matt Ryan... While Bradford started and led one of the most talented teams in the country as a RS Freshman with no charisma or charm. I am one of the few around here that agree with you that Gabbert is under-rated on this board... but your arguments are so poor they do nothing to further your cause.

the natural
02-23-2011, 02:12 AM
I don't get what you guys are trying to say. Having "charisma" is not a huge asset on the field, Peyton Manning is about as interesting as a boiled potato, but he will likely be the highest paid player in the game soon. Bradford is nearly as bland, and makes 4 or 5 times as much as Tebow who sells 10 times as many jerseys. Tebow sells more jerseys than Manning for that matter. Favre was the king while he played. Being charismatic and likeable didn't make Favre a better player, but it certainly made him a more interesting player. That is what Gabbert has, potentially. The likeability factor that makes casual fans follow him. That is what Beckham has.

Caulibflower
02-23-2011, 03:38 AM
So... draft Gabbert high to sell jerseys.

Stop it.

Caulibflower
02-23-2011, 03:46 AM
I don't get what you guys are trying to say.
David Beckham plays the other kind of football. He's not the kind of football player who's going to be drafted this April.

Having "charisma" is not a huge asset on the field, Peyton Manning is about as interesting as a boiled potato, but he will likely be the highest paid player in the game soon.

So without having charisma, which is the quality in Gabbert you say should make him a high pick, Peyton Manning has become the most valued player in the league. This is what you're saying.

Bradford is nearly as bland,

Which should make him less expensive...?

and makes 4 or 5 times as much as Tebow who sells 10 times as many jerseys.

...oh. Wait... What? Where are you going with this?

Tebow sells more jerseys than Manning for that matter. Favre was the king while he played.

See, this is called a "non sequitur."

Being charismatic and likeable didn't make Favre a better player, but it certainly made him a more interesting player.

So draft Gabbert in the first round! He might not be good, but he's got that "Interesting IT!"

That is what Gabbert has, potentially. The likeability factor that makes casual fans follow him. That is what Beckham has.

Mike Munchak: "You know what? That Gabbert kid's pretty cool. He's a cool dude, just one of the guys, you know? I'd like to hang out with him while I watch film. Let's just take him in the first. Whaddaya guys think?"

FUNBUNCHER
02-23-2011, 04:57 AM
I don't get what you guys are trying to say. Having "charisma" is not a huge asset on the field, Peyton Manning is about as interesting as a boiled potato, but he will likely be the highest paid player in the game soon. Bradford is nearly as bland, and makes 4 or 5 times as much as Tebow who sells 10 times as many jerseys. Tebow sells more jerseys than Manning for that matter. Favre was the king while he played. Being charismatic and likeable didn't make Favre a better player, but it certainly made him a more interesting player. That is what Gabbert has, potentially. The likeability factor that makes casual fans follow him. That is what Beckham has.

Peyton is a grind, but I wouldn't say he has a 'bland' personality. If he did, he wouldn't be so funny in those commercials.

Charisma, charm, etc, only matter if you're a GOOD football player. Who cares if the 4th string center is a social butterfly???

Natch, I've noticed you've played up every aspect of Gabbert's pro upside except what he's actually done on the football field.

Think about it.
Tools, personality, age(!!??), ranking as a HS player, intelligence.......everything you hype about him except his play on Saturdays.

The eyes don't lie.

SimonRath
02-23-2011, 09:11 AM
I dont want Matt Ryan as my starting QB because he doesn't sell enough jerseys. He's just not a funny guy, he isn't one of those guys who will have entertaining interviews and wear costumes, like Clinton Portis. I don't care that he is a good leader on and off the field. I don't care that he has amazing character and will never get in trouble with the law, that stuff is over rated...

I was laughing the entire time i wrote that...

JoeJoeBrown
02-23-2011, 10:21 AM
Gabbert will charm the ball into his receivers' hands.

Babylon
02-23-2011, 11:21 AM
And do we just accept that he is some charismatic guy because i havent seen it yet.

Mark Sanchez i thought charmed his way up the charts leading up to the draft but as of yet Gabbert seems to be in hiding. I expect we'll see and hear more of him in the coming days and that might not be the best thing for him.

the natural
02-23-2011, 02:11 PM
Everyone focuses on Gabbert's physical tools (or lack thereof, depending on their pov) but the thing that can make him a great NFL player is the head on his shoulders. I think his persona is tailor made for the career he is entering. It is at least as "prototypical" for the position as a 6' 5" frame.

Babylon
02-23-2011, 02:17 PM
Everyone focuses on Gabbert's physical tools (or lack thereof, depending on their pov) but the thing that can make him a great NFL player is the head on his shoulders. I think his persona is tailor made for the career he is entering. It is at least as "prototypical" for the position as a 6' 5" frame.

Rather than talk about his persona give us some examples and i dont mean a couple of bar fights.

For example, after beating USC back in Oct. Jake Locker got into seattle at 2am and kept a committment he had made at 0900 hrs to run in a fund raiser for a cancer patient. that sort of stuff, not B.S. like you think he's the next David Beckham.

the natural
02-23-2011, 02:23 PM
All I said was that his personality reminded me of Beckham. They are both low-key, down home, open and hopeful athletes. What you see is exactly what you get. Favre was like that as well. You have to use well known names when making comparisons or no one knows who you're talking about. But that doesn't suggest that Gabbert will be a record setting HOF QB, or become the world's most recognizable athlete and a world ambassador by the age of 35.

Dark Knight01
02-23-2011, 02:34 PM
Yeah. Bother these guys are overrated.

The only reason there stock has been going up, is because people are REACHING for a player to be THE alleged top QB of the draft.

Gabbert will not be anything special in the NFL and neither will Cam "Vince Young" Newton.

Gabbert comes from the Chase Daniels spread offense and whenever I saw Gabbert throw from the pocket....his accuracy was bad and he got rattled way to easy. He always seemed uncomfortable when throwing from under center and remaining in the pocket.

nikkayeah
02-23-2011, 02:46 PM
Yeah. Bother these guys are overrated.

The only reason there stock has been going up, is because people are REACHING for a player to be THE alleged top QB of the draft.

Gabbert will not be anything special in the NFL and neither will Cam "Vince Young" Newton.

Gabbert comes from the Chase Daniels spread offense and whenever I saw Gabbert throw from the pocket....his accuracy was bad and he got rattled way to easy. He always seemed uncomfortable when throwing from under center and remaining in the pocket.

again with the vy comparison? smh

ElectricEye
02-23-2011, 03:23 PM
NFL Live just had a feature with Gabbert on. He came across pretty well in a very small sample status. I've been a bit critical of some of the stuff I've heard about him as a locker room guy and such, but for what it's worth he doesn't come across that way. Seemed like a nice kid.

Babylon
02-23-2011, 03:36 PM
NFL Live just had a feature with Gabbert on. He came across pretty well in a very small sample status. I've been a bit critical of some of the stuff I've heard about him as a locker room guy and such, but for what it's worth he doesn't come across that way. Seemed like a nice kid.

That's good to hear, let's see how he throws the ball now.

Babylon
02-23-2011, 05:08 PM
Watched a clip or two of Gabbert, comes across pretty well. Has the ideal size and his arm looks good. Somehow watching him i get a bit of a Tom Brady feel but probably too early to tell.Looks like he'll be able to stand in the pocket well, as opposed to being good throwing on the run.

Gabbert didnt have the best numbers at Missouri but he didnt have the best receivers there either, not like when they had Maclin and Coffman. I'm a lot more comfortable with him than Newton to be honest although the latter has a lot of upside. Still not sure about the title of this thread as there is still a ways to go.

FUNBUNCHER
02-23-2011, 05:22 PM
Watched a clip or two of Gabbert, comes across pretty well. Has the ideal size and his arm looks good. Somehow watching him i get a bit of a Tom Brady feel but probably too early to tell.Looks like he'll be able to stand in the pocket well, as opposed to being good throwing on the run.

Gabbert didnt have the best numbers at Missouri but he didnt have the best receivers there either, not like when they had Maclin and Coffman. I'm a lot more comfortable with him than Newton to be honest although the latter has a lot of upside. Still not sure about the title of this thread as there is still a ways to go.

The point behind running a spread offense is that it doesn't require elite skill position talent.

Gabbert had bad passing numbers at Mizzou because his game IMO is lacking.
Someone with his arm should have been able to 'throw open' WRs even if they ran a 4.8.

He may be a 1st round talent, but Gabbert is NOT a top 5 pick.

Babylon
02-23-2011, 05:39 PM
The point behind running a spread offense is that it doesn't require elite skill position talent.

Gabbert had bad passing numbers at Mizzou because his game IMO is lacking.
Someone with his arm should have been able to 'throw open' WRs even if they ran a 4.8.

He may be a 1st round talent, but Gabbert is NOT a top 5 pick.

Didnt say he was. Probably makes some sense to Tennessee with a low of Minnesota at #12. Put a gun to my head i'd say the 3 top QBs will be gone by #16.