PDA

View Full Version : Gabbert Scores 42 on Wonderlic


the natural
03-10-2011, 12:25 PM
According to Rich Eisen podcast. That sure won't hurt his stock.

MetSox17
03-10-2011, 12:26 PM
http://i160.photobucket.com/albums/t165/Feola365/o-rly001.jpg
http://i660.photobucket.com/albums/uu330/cthulhu19887/forum/YARLY.jpg

killxswitch
03-10-2011, 12:41 PM
He is still way overhyped for some reason.

RealityCheck
03-10-2011, 12:45 PM
Good. That means he's got the most important thing for a QB: intelligence.

Unlike Scam Newton.

SimonRath
03-10-2011, 12:46 PM
Good. That means he's got the most important thing for a QB: intelligence.

Unlike Scam Newton.

Scam hahahahahaha you are so clever!!

Babylon
03-10-2011, 12:52 PM
When someone can tell me how the Wonderlic relates to reading defenses i'll pay attention.

brasho
03-10-2011, 12:53 PM
Good. That means he's got the most important thing for a QB: intelligence.

Unlike Scam Newton.

This is true, but I recall seeing a big list of top Wonderlic scores and some big-time flops at QB were on it. I recall Rob Johnson as well as some other gifted thinkers on it.

I don't think having a great Wonderlic will help you nearly as much as having a bad one will hurt you.

I think intelligence is a must... but work ethic is the MOST important thing.

shylo3716
03-10-2011, 12:56 PM
Can someone post a link for all Wonderlic test.

SickwithIt1010
03-10-2011, 12:56 PM
When someone can tell me how the Wonderlic relates to reading defenses i'll pay attention.

This, this, and......this.

TACKLE
03-10-2011, 01:03 PM
At least this shows he doesn't get nervous and panic on tests like he does on the field.

Caulibflower
03-10-2011, 01:03 PM
According to Rich Eisen podcast. That sure won't hurt his stock.

Do you like Blaine Gabbert?

J-Mike88
03-10-2011, 01:06 PM
At least this shows he doesn't get nervous and panic on tests like he does on the field.
Good point.

brasho
03-10-2011, 01:06 PM
When someone can tell me how the Wonderlic relates to reading defenses i'll pay attention.

a) Making a throw...if QB1 throws a ball at 58 mph to a WR 12 yards down the field (but don't forget to factor the 7 yard drop) and has 8 yards of separation from a FS that is making a break on the ball at 20 mph, what are the chances that that ball is going to be caught by the WR and should that ball be thrown?

b) Presnap... if the offense is in an ace formation and the defense has 8 defenders in the box and appears to be sending at least 6 with the CBs playing press coverage, do you have enough protection and time to run the post-corner route AWAY from the FS or should you play it safe and audible to a screen?

c) During the play...if QB1 has the ball in a crowded pocket and is already wrapped up by the legs of LB2 and LB1 jumps over the pile pulling QB1's upperbody down while trapping his tibia/fibula under him, how many lbs of downward force will be necessary to be applied by LB1 (if he weighs 245 lbs) to break two bones that at max can withstand only 400 lbs of pressure before they snap?

The answers?

a) If your WR doesn't suck and tip the ball up in the air, he should catch it, the ball is arriving 3X faster than the player and the distance to travel is only 2.3X as far the player trying to make the play. So, throw the ball.

b) If Ed Reed is not the FS then make the throw or you're not playing against lockdown CBs, max protect with a 5 step drop and the ball should be away shortly after the 5th step.

c) I don't know, but Joe Theismann and Lawrence Taylor surely do.

TNPatsFan
03-10-2011, 02:07 PM
Having a good Wonderlic score has nothing to do with how well you will perform on the field. On the other hand it is very important for teams to know whether the guy they are drafting in the first round is a big doofus or not.

the natural
03-10-2011, 02:11 PM
Having a good Wonderlic score has nothing to do with how well you will perform on the field. On the other hand it is very important for teams to know whether the guy they are drafting in the first round is a big doofus or not.

Yeah, the benefit to Gabbert (assuming it's legit) will lie in the comparison to the other guys. Particularly if one or more of his "competitors" at the position score poorly. Kaepernick and Ponder should score highly, but I don't have a lot of confidence in Mallett, Newton, or Locker.

Halsey
03-10-2011, 02:29 PM
There's a large bandwagon of people who don't like Gabbert on these forums, but that was true of Sam Bradford, Matt Ryan, Aaron Rodgers, etc. Gabbert shows one positive sign after another to me, but people are just brushing those signs off like they mean nothing.

wonderbredd24
03-10-2011, 02:32 PM
Cue a discussion as to whether or not he's too smart like with Greg McElroy, Myron Rolle, etc etc etc

theMadStork
03-10-2011, 02:33 PM
that actually wasn't his wunderlic score. He said that he took a practice test prior and that was what he scored on it. When he took the test at the combine, he felt like he would get a similar score.

Iamcanadian
03-10-2011, 02:43 PM
There's a large bandwagon of people who don't like Gabbert on these forums, but that was true of Sam Bradford, Matt Ryan, Aaron Rodgers, etc. Gabbert shows one positive sign after another to me, but people are just brushing those signs off like they mean nothing.

As you say, it is typical every year and you left out Sanchez, Freeman and Flacco. People really don't have much ability to assess QB's, even the pro scouts make some mistakes although they appear to be getting a lot better at it, while draftniks for the most part haven't improved at all.

Babylon
03-10-2011, 02:45 PM
that actually wasn't his wunderlic score. He said that he took a practice test prior and that was what he scored on it. When he took the test at the combine, he felt like he would get a similar score.

Now your going to spoil a totally useless thread.

the natural
03-10-2011, 03:21 PM
Well, I'm pretty sure he knows his actual score and wouldn't mention the number if it wasn't in the vicinity.

SeanTaylorRIP
03-10-2011, 03:25 PM
Yup impressive score, helps him in the character department, but again I could care less about a wonderlic score unless someone scores extremely low. I mean Ryan Fitzpatrick has the highest score ever with a 48 yet he plays the QB position like Rex Grossman. There is no correlation between wonderlic and ability to read defenses, or in Gabbert's case accuracy beyond 5 yards. Again though it definitely helps the perception of him but this won't push him over in any way.

Saints-Tigers
03-10-2011, 03:26 PM
No matter what people want to believe, Matt Ryan and Bradford aren't elite QBs, IDK why they are brought up as a defense everytime. Bradford is just like Ryan, had a nice rookie year, but if he doesn't improve a lot from here, he's not a great number 1 pick.

Stop saying "omg, they said that bout Ryan and look at him!" like he's a dominating QB.

the natural
03-10-2011, 03:28 PM
Fitzpatrick was the last player (or next to last) taken in his draft year. 2004 or 2005. He has sure outperformed most of the Qbs taken ahead of him, and he seems to be still improving.

edit - Fitzpatrick taken next to last in 2005 draft. Currently outplaying all others except Aaron Rodgers from that draft. Including Alex Smith (#1 overall) and Jason Campbell another first rounder.

Saints-Tigers
03-10-2011, 03:31 PM
And yea, fast reactions are much more important than intelligent. Processing things pre-snap is good, but really has nothing in common with test taking abilities.

Intelligence is always good though, but Alex Smith fooled everyone because he was so smart, but he is a tard on the field.

Halsey
03-10-2011, 03:34 PM
The Wonderlic matters to people who matter. Nobody is saying it's the most important thing in the world, but it's a small piece of the puzzle. NFL teams don't have players take it for fun. It doesn't matter if people on message boards see the value.

Saints-Tigers
03-10-2011, 03:35 PM
Nothing here matters... why are you here to tell us whatever we say doesn't matter? haha.

billybeejr
03-10-2011, 03:38 PM
I'm really starting to warm up to Gabbert, if Carolina wants a qb I think they have to take him. Newton is too much of a risk.

However, the wonderlic matters even less on the field than a 40 yard dash. The difference between the two is a 4.3 will shoot up your stock while scoring well on the wonderlic probably won't even move you a spot up most teams boards. Yet just like running a 4.7 at wr, scoring a low score can make a prospect(QB only really for the wonderlic) look like an idiot and the last thing a qb wants to be labeled is questionable intelligence.

the natural
03-10-2011, 03:39 PM
And yea, fast reactions are much more important than intelligent. Processing things pre-snap is good, but really has nothing in common with test taking abilities.

Intelligence is always good though, but Alex Smith fooled everyone because he was so smart, but he is a tard on the field.

Harbaugh seems to think that Smith is still his starting QB. I think that Alex is only 26 or so. If Smith comes through, the three highest Wonderlic scores will be the three best QBs from the 2005 draft. Rodgers, Fitzpatrick, and Smith.

FUNBUNCHER
03-10-2011, 03:48 PM
Does the wonderlic even matter for any other position besides QB??

I wonder what Polamalu or Ed Reed scored on it,(IMO two of the smartest, most intuitive defensive players in the NFL.)

A toast to the nerd from Mizzou.

A round trip ticket to Honolulu no doubt awaits for you, Gabby.

the natural
03-10-2011, 04:44 PM
Heath Shuler scored a 16 and he is in Congress. Dilfer had a 22 which explains a lot. Football evaluators may not hate high scores, but it looks like most of the general public does.

Halsey
03-10-2011, 04:58 PM
Heath Shuler scored a 16 and he is in Congress.

That's probably pretty high for a congressman.

Hey! No political talk! This is a Draft forum, people!

nikkayeah
03-10-2011, 05:07 PM
Does the wonderlic even matter for any other position besides QB??

I wonder what Polamalu or Ed Reed scored on it,(IMO two of the smartest, most intuitive defensive players in the NFL.)

A toast to the nerd from Mizzou.

A round trip ticket to Honolulu no doubt awaits for you, Gabby.

lmao gabby

DenverFan1974
03-10-2011, 05:10 PM
I agree with those that think the Wonderlic is good to identify potential problems rather than success. Much like the rest of the combine it is a snapshot of the prospect not a complete indictment or vindication of the player's ability.

If I were a GM, scout, coach and a QB I was interested in scored under 24 I would make and extra effort to look into the player's study habits, chalk-talk and possibly give him another, non-Wonderlic, intelligence test.

All things being equal (and they usually aren't) I'd rather have a QB or any player with a decent Wonderlic than one that does not.

Iamcanadian
03-10-2011, 05:15 PM
I agree with those that think the Wonderlic is good to identify potential problems rather than success. Much like the rest of the combine it is a snapshot of the prospect not a complete indictment or vindication of the player's ability.

If I were a GM, scout, coach and a QB I was interested in scored under 24 I would make and extra effort to look into the player's study habits, chalk-talk and possibly give him another, non-Wonderlic, intelligence test.

All things being equal (and they usually aren't) I'd rather have a QB or any player with a decent Wonderlic than one that does not.

Very sound reasoning.

the natural
03-10-2011, 07:16 PM
The Wonderlic is intended to measure logic, information processing, and decision making under the pressure of time constraint. Which pretty much describes what a QB has to do on every snap of the ball. If you look at the top QBs in the league, the average Wonderlic score is over 30. The bottom end is 25 (Roethlisberger, no surprise). People will dig out old scores from Marino or Favre or whomever to claim it is irrelevant, but I don't think anyone took the test seriously back in the day. Now they do, and no one, especially QBs, sluff it off. Offenses are becoming more and more complex as well. So between testing the capacity of a player to absorb information, process it into an orderly fashion, then reach a logical conclusion quickly, it fairly duplicates the job demands. Obviously there is a difference between solving a problem on paper in 15 seconds or whatever, and solving a defense on the field in 5 seconds, but the skills used are similar.

bored of education
03-10-2011, 07:29 PM
THis may now mean much but I heard some people inside the interviews at the Combine said Gabbert was the best they ever saw on the white board.

Babylon
03-10-2011, 07:35 PM
THis may now mean much but I heard some people inside the interviews at the Combine said Gabbert was the best they ever saw on the white board.

The Espn and Nfln guys were on Gabbert before the combine, i think it was nothing more than some of these guys saying i'm not totally sold on the other top guys. As for the wonderlic it's a waste of time if you ask me. Who cares how many sheets of 10c paper you can buy with 60c.

the natural
03-10-2011, 07:47 PM
Who cares how many sheets of 10c paper you can buy with 60c.
Someone going to the store to buy sheets of paper.

Along with the crooked third world shopkeeper. :)

jnew76
03-11-2011, 11:36 AM
I am just imagining how different all the responses in this thread would be if its title were "Newton scores 42 on Wonderlic"

descendency
03-11-2011, 11:38 AM
At least this shows he doesn't get nervous and panic on tests like he does on the field.

if the NFL ever needs someone to pass a paper test, the team that drafts him will have an upper hand advantage!!!! That's what I call scheme versatility.

I am just imagining how different all the responses in this thread would be if its title were "Newton scores 42 on Wonderlic"

"Did they curve it?"

yourfavestoner
03-11-2011, 12:00 PM
At least this shows he doesn't get nervous and panic on tests like he does on the field.

Exactly my sentiments.

Shane P. Hallam
03-11-2011, 12:04 PM
Does the wonderlic even matter for any other position besides QB??

I wonder what Polamalu or Ed Reed scored on it,(IMO two of the smartest, most intuitive defensive players in the NFL.)

A toast to the nerd from Mizzou.

A round trip ticket to Honolulu no doubt awaits for you, Gabby.

Polamalu got a 24. Not sure on Reed, think it was between 10-15

the natural
03-12-2011, 05:49 PM
Looks like Gabbert will be throwing to DIII receivers on his pro day. Lockout prevents him using pros, although Maclin and Alexander both wanted to help, and there are no senior wideouts at Mizzou.

Could be a chance to one up the Large Newt, who was whining about where his receivers were from at the Combine. If Gabbert does well and gives the DIII guys lots of credit in the process, he will bury Newton.

D-Unit
03-13-2011, 01:43 AM
I'm pretty sure any halfway decent agent has a copy of the wonderlic. In this technological day and age, these things can be found online. I'm impressed that Gabbert was well prepared, but I'm not about to crown him.

This test is not very relevant to help differentiate between the average and the smart. But it's pretty damn good at pointing out the idiots. lol.

Wrathman
03-13-2011, 03:52 AM
I'm pretty sure any halfway decent agent has a copy of the wonderlic. In this technological day and age, these things can be found online. I'm impressed that Gabbert was well prepared, but I'm not about to crown him.

This test is not very relevant to help differentiate between the average and the smart. But it's pretty damn good at pointing out the idiots. lol.

I agree that there is no reason to crown Gabbert on the basis of an excellent Wonderlic but since it's not that hard to get a copy of this test (I have such a copy myself), why aren't more kids scoring very well?

I'd say it's a combination of a couple of factors. The primary one is likely that prospects are told by their agents that it's not that big of a deal and that it's not something they should spend a lot of time on. Tell college kids they don't need to hit the books, especially when so many of them have had special "assistance" getting through school as it is, and you don't have to say that twice.

Still, it's something that these kids are getting graded on and because of that, it should get their competitive juices flowing to some degree. Left tackles have historically scored the best on this test among the football positions, but quarterbacks are high as well. I would love to write off the Wonderlic as an intelligence test that doesn't apply well to football intelligence but when Vince Young posts an "8" and still can't run a pro offense at this point in his career, I just can't do that.

Get me a quarterback that scores in the mid-20s or so and I'm comfortable enough with that aspect of his game. That said, more is always better for me.

the natural
03-13-2011, 04:20 PM
There isn't just one Wonderlic test. There are hundreds of different ones.

TACKLE
03-13-2011, 04:38 PM
There isn't just one Wonderlic test. There are hundreds of different ones.

This is true my man. It's like the SAT. All the tests ask you very similar type questions, but there are many different versions every year.

D-Unit
03-13-2011, 06:27 PM
There isn't just one Wonderlic test. There are hundreds of different ones.
I doubt there are literally hundreds, but I hope I didn't give the impression that there was just one. The point remains... it's easier now days to prepare for it considering the data accessibility of today's technological world. It's hard for me to be impressed, especially if you're comparing them to what players have scored in the past. I'm not saying NFL folks do that, but I often hear discussions like that on a forum.

Rabscuttle
03-13-2011, 06:51 PM
It's like the LSAT or any other test. You can do practice tests and improve your ability to take the test. However, every prospect has the ability to do so. This means a prospect who is still scoring in the realm of a mall security guard, 16-17ish despite having every opportunity to do better should raise some eyebrows more than the prospect who scores a 42.

A difference in two prospects of 25 points this year means pretty much the same as the same spread did between two prospects in the same class five years ago.

The big difference was back when guys like Mamula started prepping for tests that others hadn't even considered putting time into.

the natural
03-13-2011, 08:17 PM
The Wonderlic scores are a bit murky because they are so difficult to verify for the public. Some get leaked, but you never know for sure if they're accurate. No one with access to information is willing to identify themselves and attach their name to the leak. I bet there are as many wrong scores floating around out there from the past as correct ones. I imagine the security procedures have tightened up a lot over the years as well. Probably at some point in the past you could get a copy of the test you were going to be given or bribe the tester. Certainly agents would be inclined to do that with so much money at stake for their clients. Didn't Akili Smith go from 12 to the high 30s on a second test? Hard to do no matter how much you practice.

SchizophrenicBatman
03-14-2011, 12:04 AM
People like to hate on the Wonderlic but honestly if you look back on it in recent history it has a pretty high correlation to success. All the counter-examples like Marino and Bradshaw were a LONG time ago. The current NFL is different. The offenses are different and the scrutiny on prospects are different (like someone said, all these guys are taking a ton of practice tests or they at least SHOULD be - it's like the combine drug test)

Of/c you can't say it's ALL that matters. Alex Smith is proof of that. But it's a check box imo. You need 25+ (25 was Ben's score. The only other current era QBs with success who scored under that are Vick and McNabb)

I have other checkboxes and Gabbert doesnt pass those but some of that may be Jimmy Clausen battered wife syndrome (I can't deal with anyone who isn't smooth in the pocket after watching the abortion that is Clausen)

TACKLE
03-17-2011, 11:58 AM
QB Wonderlic Scores. Never can be totally sure on how official these are. McElroy is listed as a 43 but other reports had him at 48. Anyway, no troubling low scores so no one will be will really be effected. Everyone did well enough for it not to be a concern.

Greg McElroy 43
Blaine Gabbert 42
Colin Kaepernick 37
Christian Ponder 35
Ricky Stanzi 30
Andy Dalton 29
Ryan Mallett 26
Cam Newton 21
Jake Locker 20

J-Mike88
03-17-2011, 12:21 PM
QB Wonderlic Scores. Never can be totally sure on how official these are. McElroy is listed as a 43 but other reports had him at 48. Anyway, no troubling low scores so no one will be will really be effected. Everyone did well enough for it not to be a concern.

Greg McElroy 43
Blaine Gabbert 42
Christian Ponder 35
Ricky Stanzi 30
Andy Dalton 29
Ryan Mallett 26
Cam Newton 21
Jake Locker 20
Wow, if true, that's pretty crappy for Jake Locker to be that low, below Cam Newton and Mallett. They're as bad as his game statistics were. Almost.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 12:34 PM
QB Wonderlic Scores. Never can be totally sure on how official these are. McElroy is listed as a 43 but other reports had him at 48. Anyway, no troubling low scores so no one will be will really be effected. Everyone did well enough for it not to be a concern.

Greg McElroy 43
Blaine Gabbert 42
Christian Ponder 35
Ricky Stanzi 30
Andy Dalton 29
Ryan Mallett 26
Cam Newton 21
Jake Locker 20

I actually disagree slightly... 20 is considered average according to WIKI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_Test

However, most people that take the Wonderlic do not have the preparation time and coaching that these guys are exposed to. I have no idea what impact the preparation and coaching have on the results, but I believe these results would not have been as high overall if the players had not been exposed to that coaching.

With that said, I would be concerned with the Newton and Locker scores... I would ask them to submit to another type of standardized intelligence test prior to the draft. I would also do my best to measure their Football IQ and whether or not they are just poor test takers.

Further, someone with character and maturity concerns combined with questionable intelligence like Newton would have a hard time convincing me that he is worth a first round pick, regardless of how physically gifted he is.

I am not saying it is a deal breaker, but it is something that would cause me to do more homework.

Halsey
03-17-2011, 01:00 PM
I know it's cool to act like Wonderlic scores mean nothing, but the scores of Mallett, Newton and Locker bother me a little. Everything seems to be working out for Gabbert, because he's showing one good sign after another, while the other 'Big 4' are not.

Of course, I'm assuming those scores are accurate.

Wrathman
03-17-2011, 01:08 PM
I actually disagree slightly... 20 is considered average according to WIKI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_Test



20 is the overall average, but 24 is the historical average for the quarterback position.

The position that traditionally scores the highest on this test is left tackle.

Diehard
03-17-2011, 01:16 PM
I know it's cool to act like Wonderlic scores mean nothing, but the scores of Mallett, Newton and Locker bother me a little. Everything seems to be working out for Gabbert, because he's showing on good sign after another, while the other 'Big 4' are not.

I'm not as worried about Mallet as a) 26 isn't particularly bad and b) there seemed to be plenty of feedback coming out of the Combine that he showed good insight about the X's and O's of football - which is a more applied assessment of his mental ability.

I knew Newton would be close to the bottom of the pile, but Locker was a bit of a surprise. I hope he did well in interviews.

Babylon
03-17-2011, 01:18 PM
Jim Kelly, Terry Bradshaw and Dan Marino all scored 15. When one of these guys cant count to 11 i'll be concerned.

TACKLE
03-17-2011, 01:28 PM
Jim Kelly, Terry Bradshaw and Dan Marino all scored 15. When one of these guys cant count to 11 i'll be concerned.

Yeah I didn't think average scores would cause such concern over mental aptitude. None of these scores are poor. People are overreacting to these worse than they do with bench reps.

SchizophrenicBatman
03-17-2011, 01:28 PM
LOL Locker is the dumbest QB. The funniest part is I'm not surprised. I figured Newton would get like a 23ish, so I wasn't far off

^way to reach back to the 1970s and 80s there, bro. Today's game is a whole different deal and everyone goes into the combine knowing they need to score well on it. The only QB to score under a 25 and not suck in the last 10 years is Vick

Halsey
03-17-2011, 01:39 PM
Jim Kelly, Terry Bradshaw and Dan Marino all scored 15. When one of these guys cant count to 11 i'll be concerned.

You had to go back to guys who played in the 70s and 80s to find exceptions. There's got to be more recent exceptions. Maybe even some from this century.

the natural
03-17-2011, 02:01 PM
Guys in the past just blew it off. These days they can't afford to. Some of those old scores would probably double with the effort that is put in today. Well, maybe not Bradshaw....:(

Babylon
03-17-2011, 02:13 PM
You had to go back to guys who played in the 70s and 80s to find exceptions. There's got to be more recent exceptions. Maybe even some from this century.

Tim Tebow had a 22 and Jimmy Clausen a 24, neither earth shattering. That is in this century i believe.

Somehow i have to think Newton's 21 will be acceptable and Locker's 20 wont be. Just a hunch.

Halsey
03-17-2011, 02:25 PM
Tim Tebow had a 22 and Jimmy Clausen a 24, neither earth shattering. That is in this century i believe.

Somehow i have to think Newton's 21 will be acceptable and Locker's 20 wont be. Just a hunch.

Both are acceptable, but it seems like most franchise QBs these days are 30+ guys on the Wonderlic.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 02:31 PM
Guys in the past just blew it off. These days they can't afford to. Some of those old scores would probably double with the effort that is put in today. Well, maybe not Bradshaw....:(

Not entirely true... These tests contributed to both Kelly and Marino being the 4th and 6th QB's taken respectively in the 83 draft. Not the only reasons, especially in Marino's case... I believe the success of Marino and Kelly actually caused the Wonderlic to be overlooked to much in the late 80's and 90's drafts.

It is like Mayock says, All of these tests are done to try and confirm what scouts see on tape. Is his football IQ off the charts? Does he process information quickly and make good decisions using that information. Watching enough coaches tape on a QB helps determine how advanced their football intelligence is. Spread offenses make it a more difficult evaluation, but scouts and GM's are slowly gaining a better understanding of the offenses and becoming better at evaluating QB's coming from them.

Kelly and Marino are the exceptions, not the rules... The fact remains that it is statistically very unlikely for a QB scoring under 25 to succeed in the modern NFL.

In Newton's case, I am afraid that the off the field issues combined with a Wonderlic score that makes it a statistical improbability that he will succeed in the NFL would make it impossible for me to draft him in the first round, if at all. I think the team that ends up giving this kid millions of dollars and makes him the face of the franchise is making a colossal mistake.

Locker - While I did not have a first round grade on him to begin with, I would refer to my previous post and say that I would want to dig deeper into his football intelligence and test taking ability before using a premium pick (1rst-2nd) on him.

Babylon
03-17-2011, 04:29 PM
Both are acceptable, but it seems like most franchise QBs these days are 30+ guys on the Wonderlic.

Brett Favre 22
Donovan McNabb 14
Steve McNair 15
Jake Locker 20

Not worried in the least.

BeerBaron
03-17-2011, 04:32 PM
Not worried in the least.

Exactly. It's one of those things where you'd like to see them do well, but if not, it doesn't really matter.

Babylon
03-17-2011, 04:57 PM
Exactly. It's one of those things where you'd like to see them do well, but if not, it doesn't really matter.

He is a college grad after all so how dumb could he be.....nevermind.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 04:58 PM
Brett Favre 22
Donovan McNabb 14
Steve McNair 15
Jake Locker 20

Not worried in the least.

Why would you be worried? You aren't in the draft are you?

But seriously, Locker has no other off the field issues and by all reports has high character and excellent leadership qualities. In his case I don't see the test as a deal breaker... Locker just needs to have an incredible day on the 30th... He needs to show that this years regression was temporary, and that he will put in the work to fix his problems... I was impressed with his admission to mechanical flaws when he talked to Mayock... I like it because Locker has given himself no room to make excuses on March 30th... He is addressing his problems, and we will see the results.

Newton never admits he has flaws... He only said he underestimated the importance of the timing on the routes at the combine... WHAT? Did the people around him not make it clear that every detail is important when you are at the biggest job interview of your life. Is he not smart enough to figure this out on his own? I fear that he is being enabled big time by the people around him and that he does not have the structure required to succeed at a high level. He wasn't ready at that stupid look at "me" spectacle of a workout before the combine... He wasn't prepared at the combine, and he still wasn't great at his pro-day... This test says he has average intelligence... I think it significantly over-estimates it.

TACKLE
03-17-2011, 04:59 PM
Exactly. It's one of those things where you'd like to see them do well, but if not, it doesn't really matter.

In a lot of ways, its like the bench. With lineman for example, its doesn't really matter if a guy gets 24 or 34 reps. It's not like well this guy did X amount more reps so he's X amount stronger on the field and is a harder worker. There is just a certain mark they'd like them to hit or be close to. If they hit that mark, then its more so a check mark in the "does this player have enough upper body strength to play in the NFL box". If its exceptionally high or low, than it starts to weigh in as more of a factor. Same kind of deal with the Wonderlic.

Babylon
03-17-2011, 05:10 PM
Why would you be worried? You aren't in the draft are you?

But seriously, Locker has no other off the field issues and by all reports has high character and excellent leadership qualities. In his case I don't see the test as a deal breaker... Locker just needs to have an incredible day on the 30th... He needs to show that this years regression was temporary, and that he will put in the work to fix his problems... I was impressed with his admission to mechanical flaws when he talked to Mayock... I like it because Locker has given himself no room to make excuses on March 30th... He is addressing his problems, and we will see the results.

Newton never admits he has flaws... He only said he underestimated the importance of the timing on the routes at the combine... WHAT? Did the people around him not make it clear that every detail is important when you are at the biggest job interview of your life. Is he not smart enough to figure this out on his own? I fear that he is being enabled big time by the people around him and that he does not have the structure required to succeed at a high level. He wasn't ready at that stupid look at "me" spectacle of a workout before the combine... He wasn't prepared at the combine, and he still wasn't great at his pro-day... This test says he has average intelligence... I think it significantly over-estimates it.

I say i'm not worried from a franchise looking for a QB standpoint, obviously i personally am not concerned about anything unless the checks stop coming in and the liquor store runs out of Crown Royal.

I will give props to Blaine Gabbert, i thought he came out a year too early but he has done well at every step in the process. Ideally he would have thrown at the combine but he has done well in the film room, athletically and it seems at his pro day.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 05:34 PM
I wanted to share one more thing I found on this topic from an article posted after the combine last year and the correlation of Wonderlic scores and NFL success... It was specifically referencing Tim Tebow as a prospect but it is very relevant to this discussion. Last year the average NFL starting QB's Wonderlic was 28... 24 is the all time average but trending upwards.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/sports/wonderlic-scores-of-2010-nfl-starting-quarterbacks-and-339905.html

An NFL source told the Post Wednesday that former Florida Gators quarterback Tim Tebow scored a 22 out of 50 on the Wonderlic test, a 12-minute, 50-question exam given at the NFL Combine that assesses a person's learning and problem-solving abilities.

The score falls slightly below the average score for an NFL quarterback, which is 24.

The average for 30 quarterbacks slated to start in 2010 is even higher, at 28.5. And the average score among the past seven Super Bowl winners is a 30.1.

Wonderlic scores for the NFL's projected starting quarterbacks:

1. Ryan Fitzpatrick 48
2. Alex Smith 40
3. Eli Manning 39
4. Matt Stafford 38
5. Tony Romo 37
6. Aaron Rodgers 35
6. Matt Leinart 35
8. Tom Brady 33
9. Matt Ryan 32
10. Matt Schaub 31
11. Philip Rivers 30
12. Matt Hasselbeck 29
12. Marc Bulger 29
12. Brady Quinn 29
15. Mark Sanchez 28
15. Peyton Manning 28
15. Drew Brees 28
18. Josh Freeman 27
18. Joe Flacco 27
20. Carson Palmer 26
20. Jay Cutler 26
20. Kyle Orton 26
23. Ben Roethlisberger 25
24. Jason Campbell 23
25. Brett Favre 22
25. Tim Tebow 22
25. Chad Henne 22
28. Bruce Gradkowski 19
29. Vince Young 15
30. Donovan McNabb 14
30. David Garrard 14

Unknown: Matt Cassel, Matt Moore

Top quarterback prospects in 2010 NFL draft

Sam Bradford, Oklahoma 36
Colt McCoy, Texas 25
Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame 23
Tebow 22

Other Wonderlic scores of note:

Brian Griese 39
Drew Bledsoe 36
Steve Young 33
John Elway 29
Chad Pennington 25
JaMarcus Russell 24
Mark Brunell 22
Trent Dilfer 22
Michael Vick 20
Daunte Culpepper 18
Dan Marino 15
Randall Cunningham 15
Jim Kelly 15
Terry Bradshaw 15
Chris Leak 8

Caulibflower
03-17-2011, 06:07 PM
I wonder if Eli gives Peyton **** about his Wonderlic score.

the natural
03-17-2011, 06:48 PM
I wanted to share one more thing I found on this topic from an article posted after the combine last year and the correlation of Wonderlic scores and NFL success... It was specifically referencing Tim Tebow as a prospect but it is very relevant to this discussion. Last year the average NFL starting QB's Wonderlic was 28... 24 is the all time average but trending upwards.

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/sports/wonderlic-scores-of-2010-nfl-starting-quarterbacks-and-339905.html

An NFL source told the Post Wednesday that former Florida Gators quarterback Tim Tebow scored a 22 out of 50 on the Wonderlic test, a 12-minute, 50-question exam given at the NFL Combine that assesses a person's learning and problem-solving abilities.

The score falls slightly below the average score for an NFL quarterback, which is 24.

The average for 30 quarterbacks slated to start in 2010 is even higher, at 28.5. And the average score among the past seven Super Bowl winners is a 30.1.

Wonderlic scores for the NFL's projected starting quarterbacks:

1. Ryan Fitzpatrick 48
2. Alex Smith 40
3. Eli Manning 39
4. Matt Stafford 38
5. Tony Romo 37
6. Aaron Rodgers 35
6. Matt Leinart 35
8. Tom Brady 33
9. Matt Ryan 32
10. Matt Schaub 31
11. Philip Rivers 30
12. Matt Hasselbeck 29
12. Marc Bulger 29
12. Brady Quinn 29
15. Mark Sanchez 28
15. Peyton Manning 28
15. Drew Brees 28
18. Josh Freeman 27
18. Joe Flacco 27
20. Carson Palmer 26
20. Jay Cutler 26
20. Kyle Orton 26
23. Ben Roethlisberger 25
24. Jason Campbell 23
25. Brett Favre 22
25. Tim Tebow 22
25. Chad Henne 22
28. Bruce Gradkowski 19
29. Vince Young 15
30. Donovan McNabb 14
30. David Garrard 14

Unknown: Matt Cassel, Matt Moore

Top quarterback prospects in 2010 NFL draft

Sam Bradford, Oklahoma 36
Colt McCoy, Texas 25
Jimmy Clausen, Notre Dame 23
Tebow 22

Other Wonderlic scores of note:

Brian Griese 39
Drew Bledsoe 36
Steve Young 33
John Elway 29
Chad Pennington 25
JaMarcus Russell 24
Mark Brunell 22
Trent Dilfer 22
Michael Vick 20
Daunte Culpepper 18
Dan Marino 15
Randall Cunningham 15
Jim Kelly 15
Terry Bradshaw 15
Chris Leak 8

Tebow was home schooled all his life. That is definitely one case where the Wonderlic is deceptive. I can't imagine he and his only teacher (Mom) spent a lot of time solving obscure problems. Probably most of his education was rudimentary and faith based. If you watch and listen to Tebow he seems smarter than Bradford who had a 36.

619
03-17-2011, 06:59 PM
He scored better than Ponder? Daamn.

FUNBUNCHER
03-17-2011, 07:28 PM
Again, I think some people are anticipating Newton having off the field problems in the NFL, and not assessing his cheating scandals and buying a stolen laptop as an aberration instead of a trending pattern of behavior.

Newton's been at two schools since UF. To only judge his off the field transgressions as a Gator, and not look into what kind of person he was at Blinn JC or Auburn is short-sighted.

Newton never admits to flaws??? He always references his time at Florida being a result of mistakes HE made, no one else.

At the combine what I heard Newton say was that he didn't have great timing down with his WRs, and dropping back and automatically expecting to hit guys you've never thrown to before isn't the same as developing genuine timing with a WR corps.

IMO it's great to hear a young QB acknowledge that pass completions at the next level are a byproduct of countless practice repetitions between QB and WR and not God given simply talent.

What other reason was Cam supposed to give for not hitting WRs at the combine?; stand up and say, 'guess I must suck kinda, huh??'

Cam was stellar at his made-for-the-media workout, far more impressive than he was at his pro day or the combine.

I don't get where this tripe comes from that Cam is basically 'unprepared' in all facets of the game of football to be successful.

Extrapolate negative opinions about Cam based on his game, don't embellish a narrative about a prospect because you personally don't like him.

Geez.

In Newton's case, I am afraid that the off the field issues combined with a Wonderlic score that makes it a statistical improbability that he will succeed in the NFL would make it impossible for me to draft him in the first round, if at all.

'Statistical improbability?' Are you serious, jnew??

The Wonderlic is neither a predictor of a prospect's success OR failure in the NFL.

It's a data point that some draft analysts like to ascribe mystical prophetic powers.

Sorry, but no such test exists, just as no such test could have predicted the season Newton would have last year for Auburn.

Back to the test. If you hear Locker speak about the game of football for five minutes, it's quite apparent that his positional IQ is very high.

It should be obvious to everyone that if Peyton Manning couldn't crack 30 on the Wonderlic, that should tell you the test essentially is meaningless because it can't measure the the four most important traits for any starting NFL QB; accuracy, the ability to decipher an opposing defense, an innate knack for playing the position and.....WORK ETHIC.

Newton has two of the 4 right now IMO, he's a hard worker and he obviously has QB DNA. He needs to improve his accuracy, and his work ethic will determine how skilled he becomes at finding open WRs in the NFL.

But this introspective, analytical hand-wringing about whether or Newton is a legit first round QB prospect, or even worth drafting at all, is crazy talk.

Wrathman
03-17-2011, 10:18 PM
As I did the math on the Wonderlic scores from last year's projected starters, I came up with an average of 29.5 myself. The mean, however, was indeed 28.

Chris
03-17-2011, 10:43 PM
Apparently Patrick Peterson and A.J. Green scored in the single digits. (http://draftcountdown.com/forum/PFW has had a lot of [B][URL=)They are still going to go awfully high, but some scouts are concerned they have gone full out ********.

Wrathman
03-17-2011, 10:48 PM
Apparently Patrick Peterson and A.J. Green scored in the single digits. (http://draftcountdown.com/forum/PFW has had a lot of [B][URL=)They are still going to go awfully high, but some scouts are concerned they have gone full out ********.

Could you select a word that doesn't get filtered so I can understand where you are going with this?

Chris
03-17-2011, 10:50 PM
It was the "R" word. The word used famously in The Hangover.

Personally, I don't care if Peterson would have pulled down his briefs and left a big slimy steamer on the test. He is still going to ball out like Kid Rock back in 1997.

Wrathman
03-17-2011, 10:58 PM
Thanks for making me Google that to understand what you were saying. Nonetheless, your point is valid for the most part. Certainly landing in a complex scheme for either of them could be an issue.

yourfavestoner
03-17-2011, 11:03 PM
It was the "R" word. The word used famously in The Hangover.

Personally, I don't care if Peterson would have pulled down his briefs and left a big slimy steamer on the test. He is still going to ball out like Kid Rock back in 1997.

Bring. Back. Keak.

J-Mike88
03-17-2011, 11:38 PM
Stafford testing that high really shocks me from what I've heard about the guy.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 11:54 PM
FUNBUNCHER, we are gonna have to just agree to disagree on Mr. Newton... In no way do I think Newton will not be picked early in this draft, I only say that I would not want to be the fan of the team that does. Newton has incredible physical skills and is a unique athlete. He has all the physical tools you would want in an NFL prospect.

I just think think he is a nuclear meltdown in the making... I might be dead wrong, but I do see a pattern of poor decision making and immature actions off the field.

Newton did not do well in dealing with the media after the icon/entertainer comments. The media scrutiny is going to be worse in the NFL. The media has far more access to the players, while Auburn shielded him at all costs after the Pay for Play story broke. There is no program to hide behind in the NFL.

Controversy and scandal have followed him throughout his college career. I believe there is too much risk in drafting him, giving him a large signing bonus, and pinning the hopes of the franchise on his back.

I am not rooting for him to fail, I would never do that to a 22 year old prospect. In fact, I hope he proves me wrong... I would like to come on these forums in the future and say that I was completely wrong about Cam Newton.

You may not believe this, but I don't think Gabbert is a top 10 player in this draft either. Every QB prospect has huge question marks.

Your dismissal of Newton's off the field issues is easy if you are not the one writing the signing bonus checks.

I can't remember a QB as highly ranked with as many off the field issues as Newton has. I would not want to be the owner or GM that took the chance on drafting him in the first round. It should be interesting to see how things turn out for him over the next few years... Everyone has such contrasting opinions on what they think he will become.

Brent
03-17-2011, 11:59 PM
Stafford testing that high really shocks me from what I've heard about the guy.
What? He went to the best school district in the DFW area, attended a great university, and plays the most mentally demanding position in football. What would lead you to think he was not intelligent?

Babylon
03-18-2011, 12:13 AM
What? He went to the best school district in the DFW area, attended a great university, and plays the most mentally demanding position in football. What would lead you to think he was not intelligent?

A.J. Green proved the university doesnt mean much as far as the wonderlic is concerned.

SchizophrenicBatman
03-18-2011, 12:36 AM
Tebow was home schooled all his life. That is definitely one case where the Wonderlic is deceptive. I can't imagine he and his only teacher (Mom) spent a lot of time solving obscure problems. Probably most of his education was rudimentary and faith based. If you watch and listen to Tebow he seems smarter than Bradford who had a 36.

i'd love to know where you're getting this from. bradford interviews very well imo. he looks goofy and has a blank stare but that's not really part of the evaluation. guessing from interviews I would put bradford at about a 30 and tebow around a 24. that's closer than the actually numbers spat out but still a difference

TACKLE
03-18-2011, 02:06 PM
@ProFootballWkly

PFW EXCLUSIVE! QB Wonderlic scores: Despite previous reports, Blaine Gabbert scored 31.


http://www.tweetdeck.com/twitter/ProFootballWkly/~TuYQI

FUNBUNCHER
03-18-2011, 02:56 PM
@ProFootballWkly

PFW EXCLUSIVE! QB Wonderlic scores: Despite previous reports, Blaine Gabbert scored 31.


http://www.tweetdeck.com/twitter/ProFootballWkly/~TuYQI


Man I wanna punch somebody for the BS they keep promoting about this kid.

42 is NOT 31.

+ rep TACKLE.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 03:11 PM
Color me surprised.

619
03-18-2011, 04:23 PM
Please change the thread title. It irks me everytime I see it.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 04:29 PM
that actually wasn't his wunderlic score. He said that he took a practice test prior and that was what he scored on it. When he took the test at the combine, he felt like he would get a similar score.

This guy wins. So he scored ten points lower under pressure than he did on the practice test. ;)

Again, color me surprised.

619
03-18-2011, 04:40 PM
This guy wins. So he scored ten points lower under pressure than he did on the practice test. ;)

Again, color me surprised.


I see a common theme occurring here.....

hmmmmmm

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 04:42 PM
Red Flaaagggzzzzzzzz

niel89
03-18-2011, 04:46 PM
This recent development makes me very happy. Hit the breaks on the hype train!

619
03-18-2011, 04:46 PM
I just want to shake my head over and over. I normally see most so-called top draft eligible QBs as really good, with a whole bunch of potential, but I can't seem to wrap my head around that same thought with this guy in particular this year.

If he was drafted over "can't-miss" talents such as Peterson and Dareus, it would be a travesty.

BeerBaron
03-18-2011, 04:46 PM
Red Flaaagggzzzzzzzz

The biggest one of those for me is that he didn't dominate in college. 40 TDs in his last 2 years...even in the "defense optional" Big-12.

For example, Chase Daniel had 72...

619
03-18-2011, 04:53 PM
The biggest one of those for me is that he didn't dominate in college. 40 TDs in his last 2 years...even in the "defense optional" Big-12.

For example, Chase Daniel had 72...

He plays down to his competition. Not good.

Halsey
03-18-2011, 06:09 PM
It's not like every NFL QB 'dominated' in college.

18-8
6,800 passing yards
50 TDs
18 ints
436 rushing yards

That's not exactly poor performance for only two years of starting.

BeerBaron
03-18-2011, 06:14 PM
It's not like every NFL QB 'dominated' in college.

18-8
6,800 passing yards
50 TDs
18 ints
436 rushing yards

That's not exactly poor performance for only two years of starting.

In a spread offense in the wide-open Big 12 where defense is optional, that isn't real good. That would be a good half season maybe...

Furthermore, he got worse from 2009 to 2010. Same amount of picks, 6 fewer TDs, took more sacks, YPA down by nearly 1.5, and all on 30 more attempts for the year.

I know you can't criticize a prospect around here without being labeled a "hater" of said prospect, but Gabbert has a ton of red flags to me.

Halsey
03-18-2011, 06:34 PM
None of his red flags suggest he can't develop into a quality NFL starter. There's more to a QB prospect than what he was in college. Throwing for less yards and TDs in 2010 doesn't necessarily mean he can't be a good NFL QB in 2011 and beyond.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 06:37 PM
None of his red flags suggest he can't develop into a quality NFL starter. There's more to a QB prospect than what he was in college. Throwing for less yards and TDs in 2010 doesn't necessarily mean he can't be a good NFL QB in 2011 and beyond.

Running from ghost rushers and sailing passes over the middle don't concern you?

BeerBaron
03-18-2011, 06:38 PM
None of his red flags suggest he can't develop into a quality NFL starter. There's more to a QB prospect than what he was in college. Throwing for less yards and TDs in 2010 doesn't necessarily mean he can't be a good NFL QB in 2011 and beyond.

And there's nothing suggesting that he'll have a better career than Ryan Leaf either. Two can play the extreme projection game.

If it doesn't raise a red flag to you that he failed to put up dominant statistics in a defensively weak conference while playing in an offense designed to inflate QB statistics, you might need to re-evaluate your own evaluating procedures.

Halsey
03-18-2011, 06:44 PM
Running from ghost rushers and sailing passes over the middle don't concern you?

Lots of things Gabbert does concern me. I had lots of concerns about Sam Bradford too. Lots. The more I learn about the Draft, the more I believe it's safer to gamble on a QB with Gabbert's talent than pass on him. There's lots of good players in this Draft, but not having a franchise QB means being irrelevant.

Halsey
03-18-2011, 06:48 PM
And there's nothing suggesting that he'll have a better career than Ryan Leaf either. Two can play the extreme projection game.

If it doesn't raise a red flag to you that he failed to put up dominant statistics in a defensively weak conference while playing in an offense designed to inflate QB statistics, you might need to re-evaluate your own evaluating procedures.

The Bucs took a chance on a QB from the Big 12 with 'not dominant' stats a coupl of years ago. That's working out pretty well for them.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 06:59 PM
Lots of things Gabbert does concern me. I had lots of concerns about Sam Bradford too. Lots. The more I learn about the Draft, the more I believe it's safer to gamble on a QB with Gabbert's talent than pass on him. There's lots of good players in this Draft, but not having a franchise QB means being irrelevant.

I had questions about Bradford, too, in the beginning of the process. As I began to break him down, I came to the conclusion the concerns about his injuries and his offense were completely baseless.

I literally had no opinion on Gabbert either way until about two weeks ago, as I had never seen a down of football that he's played. I'm not just making up the stuff that I claim I'm seeing. And I know everyone on the internet is a god damned expert at everything, but I usually know what the hell I'm talking about when it comes to QBs. I've made posts on here detailing explicitly what people need to be looking for when scouting a quarterback - the same stuff that I guarantee you scouts are looking at. I've made countless posts debunking the myth of that "pro style offense" QBs come in much better prepared than their counterparts - something that Toonster also went into great detail about in this thread.

Like I've been saying, his flaws aren't mechanical. They seem to be an inherent part of his playing style and psyche, which makes me fear that they aren't correctable flaws. And I haven't heard a single Gabbert supporter even acknowledge these flaws that I and others are pointing out. Our assertions have largely been ignored, and the only response we HAVE gotten is the condescending "well the scouts, GMs, and TV guys say so, so you're obviously wrong" retort.

Wrathman
03-18-2011, 08:17 PM
The Bucs took a chance on a QB from the Big 12 with 'not dominant' stats a coupl of years ago. That's working out pretty well for them.

When will people stop finding the few exceptions to the rule and offering them as evidence that the rule does not exist?

hockey619
03-18-2011, 08:33 PM
When will people stop finding the few exceptions to the rule and offering them as evidence that the rule does not exist?

And its not even a legit exception, Freeman wasnt in a wide open spread offense like Gabbert was, so his less than amazing numbers made a little more sense.

Halsey
03-18-2011, 09:56 PM
When will people stop finding the few exceptions to the rule and offering them as evidence that the rule does not exist?

The exception to what rule? There's no rule that states not having 'dominant stats' in 2 years as a starter means not being a good NFL QB. That's just something that people on a message board might try to make up as a rule.

FUNBUNCHER
03-18-2011, 11:26 PM
The Bucs took a chance on a QB from the Big 12 with 'not dominant' stats a coupl of years ago. That's working out pretty well for them.

Bucs HC Raheem Morris was on staff at K-State when Freeman was playing there and that first hand, intimate knowledge of him as a player was the primary reason the Bucs drafted him in the first round.

They gambled on the recommendation of the HC and it paid off.

That's not Gabbert's situation at all.

Compare Gabbert to other spread QBs and their production, like say, Taylor Potts for instance who dominated running a nearly identical scheme at TTech.

Potts will be lucky to be drafted late and still threw for 35 TDs in 2010.

the natural
03-19-2011, 12:34 PM
Terry Shea, who has coached for over 40 years in the NFL and the NCAA, has PERSONALLY coached Freeman, Bradford, Stafford, Ryan, Flacco, and Gabbert in the past few years. Spending over two months with them 6 days a week. He says that Gabbert is right there with any of them. Same/same for Mike Mayock and Gil Brandt, a couple of guys who have spent a little time in their life studying and ranking draft prospects. The people WHO ARE PROFESSIONALS in the field all seem to agree that Gabbert is a first round, possible first overall, pick. I think their assessments take precedence. All the internet yapping about Gabbert's "glaring deficiencies" are just noise. No one takes it seriously except the guys providing it.

batsandgats
03-19-2011, 02:05 PM
Bucs HC Raheem Morris was on staff at K-State when Freeman was playing there and that first hand, intimate knowledge of him as a player was the primary reason the Bucs drafted him in the first round.

They gambled on the recommendation of the HC and it paid off.

That's not Gabbert's situation at all.

Compare Gabbert to other spread QBs and their production, like say, Taylor Potts for instance who dominated running a nearly identical scheme at TTech.

Potts will be lucky to be drafted late and still threw for 35 TDs in 2010.Yes but compare coaching/schemes between Missouri last year and other teams. Not all spread teams are created equal. Just like there are bad pro style teams, there are bad spread teams, from a coaching point. The spread is evolving as college teams are recruiting better for players to stop it, and scheming better on defense. Maybe, Missouri's coaching staff was unable to adjust. I don't know because I haven't really watched any of their games recently but I mean Texas was awful last year, and that qb showed promise in the national championship the other year, the game was close until the 4th.

PACKmanN
03-19-2011, 07:23 PM
Alex Smith 2.0

FUNBUNCHER
03-19-2011, 09:07 PM
Yes but compare coaching/schemes between Missouri last year and other teams. Not all spread teams are created equal. Just like there are bad pro style teams, there are bad spread teams, from a coaching point. The spread is evolving as college teams are recruiting better for players to stop it, and scheming better on defense. Maybe, Missouri's coaching staff was unable to adjust. I don't know because I haven't really watched any of their games recently but I mean Texas was awful last year, and that qb showed promise in the national championship the other year, the game was close until the 4th.

Not talking about you specifically, batsandgats, but when you read all the explanations about why Gabbert didn't look like a 1/1 during the season at Mizzou, they sound like an endless litany of excuses that a genuinely special talent and player shouldn't need.

IMO either Gabbert develops into a 15 year starter and a pro-bowler, or he's riding the bench for some team in five years.

I don't really see a middle ground with him, like just being an average NFL QB.

I think he's going to be really good in the NFL, or a scrub.

Too many dots just don't connect with Gabbert, which either means I'm too dense to see the linkages between Gabbert the college football player and Gabbert the future NFL QB, or that those 'connections' simply aren't there.

DBNYDP
03-19-2011, 10:09 PM
Not talking about you specifically, batsandgats, but when you read all the explanations about why Gabbert didn't look like a 1/1 during the season at Mizzou, they sound like an endless litany of excuses that a genuinely special talent and player shouldn't need.

IMO either Gabbert develops into a 15 year starter and a pro-bowler, or he's riding the bench for some team in five years.

I don't really see a middle ground with him, like just being an average NFL QB.

I think he's going to be really good in the NFL, or a scrub.

Too many dots just don't connect with Gabbert, which either means I'm too dense to see the linkages between Gabbert the college football player and Gabbert the future NFL QB, or that those 'connections' simply aren't there.
Funny I said the same thing about Jake Locker.

the natural
03-20-2011, 12:11 AM
He said that even though he isn't directly involved in Cleveland's scouting he thinks there are "a number of very fine quarterbacks in the draft". Isn't Holmgren supposed to be something of a QB guru?

gpngc
03-20-2011, 12:31 AM
He said that even though he isn't directly involved in Cleveland's scouting he thinks there are "a number of very fine quarterbacks in the draft". Isn't Holmgren supposed to be something of a QB guru?

Holmgren's proven to be an excellent quarterbacks coach. He's developed some all-time greats and turned a former 6th-rounder (Hasselbeck) into a pro bowler and Seneca Wallace into a capable backup (which is an accomplishment).

But in terms of drafting QBs as a GM, he hasn't really proven anything either way. I'm sure he feels he can develop almost any QB into a good NFL player so that may have something to do with his comments.

As a GM he wasn't very good for Seattle, and the team began to consistently make the playoffs when he lost his GM power and focused on only coaching.

In other words, Mike Holmgren's opinion on a QB prospect probably shouldn't change any opinion on that QB, but if for some reason he came back to coach that QB, it would likely be extremely beneficial for the player.

the natural
03-20-2011, 12:35 AM
Still he must have had some input into drafting the QBs he developed. They may have been taken in later rounds but obviously they were better than advertised.

Brothgar
03-20-2011, 01:21 AM
He said that even though he isn't directly involved in Cleveland's scouting he thinks there are "a number of very fine quarterbacks in the draft". Isn't Holmgren supposed to be something of a QB guru?

Well he is very good at developing QBs. Steve Young, Brett Favre, Matt Hasselbeck. But is it the training or the player? Or maybe a little bit of both?

FUNBUNCHER
03-20-2011, 10:08 AM
Well he is very good at developing QBs. Steve Young, Brett Favre, Matt Hasselbeck. But is it the training or the player? Or maybe a little bit of both?

Who really 'developed' Steve Young, Mike Shanahan or Mike Holmgren??

Both guys are routinely given credit for coaching up Young into a HOfer.
(Sick coaching staff the 49ers used to have, BTW.)

the natural
03-20-2011, 10:40 AM
In an interview with the Columbia Tribune, Terry Shea raves about Gabbert's personality and natural leadership skill. Says they are the best of any QB he has coached. Gabbert quickly emerged as the leader of all the top prospects training in Phoenix, and Shea thinks he will do the same in the NFL.

Babylon
03-20-2011, 10:46 AM
He said that even though he isn't directly involved in Cleveland's scouting he thinks there are "a number of very fine quarterbacks in the draft". Isn't Holmgren supposed to be something of a QB guru?

On a somewhat related topic Holmgren has been pretty adamant about not drafting underclassmen at the QB position, which would mean Gabbert and certainly Newton.

FUNBUNCHER
03-20-2011, 11:17 AM
In an interview with the Columbia Tribune, Terry Shea raves about Gabbert's personality and natural leadership skill. Says they are the best of any QB he has coached. Gabbert quickly emerged as the leader of all the top prospects training in Phoenix, and Shea thinks he will do the same in the NFL.


Joey Harrington says stop copying my notes, dude!!
David Carr if I remember correctly could charm the stink off a skunk.

SO WHAT!!????

Play on the field is what makes a player a LEADER, not how popular he is in the lockerroom.


Still discussing every attribute about Gabbert except his ability to play the QB position at an elite level.

You're losing your juice, 'Natch.

jnew76
03-20-2011, 12:34 PM
On a somewhat related topic Holmgren has been pretty adamant about not drafting underclassmen at the QB position, which would mean Gabbert and certainly Newton.

I agree with Holmgren somewhat. My general rule in the past has been to not draft them with premium picks with the crippling signing bonuses (basically 1-10) Recent underclassmen success has caused me to re-evaluate my thoughts. I now believe a QB with 3 years of starting experience at the major college level is qualified for the NFL and potentially worthy of a top 10 pick. Major college football teams routinely play 14 games a year. Offseason conditioning, camps, and film study is the norm for many QB's in today's college game.

Newton has 14 starts, while Gabbert has only 26. Gabbert played in garbage time his Freshman year, but took no meaningful snaps. Newton did play a year at JUCO. Neither Newton or Gabbert fit the criteria, and both scare the heck out of me. I would not draft either prospect in the top 10. In fact, I don't think I would draft Newton at all.

One point, however - Both Gabbert and Newton had good reason to come out. Going back to school would do very little to help them progress any more towards playing in the NFL. Neither would have taken the snap from center, worked on their drops, play action, or thrown the full route tree.

You end up with two prospects that are not ready for the NFL... Newton and Gabbert are projects. Newton's ability to keep plays alive with his feet and elude people in the open field gives him a better chance to win games early as a pro... similar to the way Big Ben and VY did as rookies. But in the end, I believe the team that drafts either of them as day 1 starters is looking for trouble.

the natural
03-20-2011, 04:10 PM
Joey Harrington says stop copying my notes, dude!!
David Carr if I remember correctly could charm the stink off a skunk.

SO WHAT!!????

Play on the field is what makes a player a LEADER, not how popular he is in the lockerroom.


Still discussing every attribute about Gabbert except his ability to play the QB position at an elite level.

You're losing your juice, 'Natch.

Uuuuhh...fun, I think leadership is a pretty crucial part of being able to play the position "at an elite level". Along with intelligence, dedication, athletic ablility, a strong arm, and accuracy. All of which Gabbert has displayed. There really isn't much else to the equation other than experience at "the elite level". As I said before, Gabbert had better numbers in college than high school, and will have better numbers in the NFL than he did in college. He is going first overall in this draft, and that is what matters in the short term.

Caulibflower
03-20-2011, 05:14 PM
Uuuuhh...fun, I think leadership is a pretty crucial part of being able to play the position "at an elite level". Along with intelligence, dedication, athletic ablility, a strong arm, and accuracy. All of which Gabbert has displayed. There really isn't much else to the equation other than experience at "the elite level". As I said before, Gabbert had better numbers in college than high school, and will have better numbers in the NFL than he did in college. He is going first overall in this draft, and that is what matters in the short term.

*facepalms*