PDA

View Full Version : Locker vs. Gabbert


Babylon
03-11-2011, 02:54 PM
Depending on what happens with Cam Newton these two guys may be an option for several teams needing a QB. Both guys seem to be smart, leader types who probably developed a few bad habits that will need to be corrected at the next level, such as pulling the ball down and running a little prematurely at times. Some numbers:

Jake Locker, 6-2 1/2 231 lbs. combine numbers: 4.52 40 (twice), 35" vertical, 10' broad jump, 4.12 short shuttel, 6.77 3cone.

Blaine Gabbert, 6-4 1/2 234 lbs. combine numbers: 4.62 & 4.64 40, 33.5" vertical, 10 ft broad jump, 4.26 short shuttle, 6.84 3 cone.

Jake Locker stats;

2009, 58.2% 21 to 11 tds/int
2010 55.4% 17 to 9 tds/int

Blaine Gabbert stats:

2009, 58.9% 24 to 9 tds/int
2010, 63.4% 16 to 9 tds/int

SeanTaylorRIP
03-11-2011, 03:11 PM
Personally I'd rather have Locker but I'm guessing almost every team has Gabbert above him on their boards. Really in terms of public perception the biggest thing seperating them is the fact that Locker was a consensus top 3 pick last year but failed to improve this year, where as Gabbert has risen fromn hype out of nowhere and has a buzz around him. If Gabbert was touted as a top pick prior to last season and performed as mediocre as he did this season no one would be even mentioning his name as a possible top pick.

yourfavestoner
03-11-2011, 03:20 PM
Personally I'd rather have Locker but I'm guessing almost every team has Gabbert above him on their boards. Really in terms of public perception the biggest thing seperating them is the fact that Locker was a consensus top 3 pick last year but failed to improve this year, where as Gabbert has risen fromn hype out of nowhere and has a buzz around him. If Gabbert was touted as a top pick prior to last season and performed as mediocre as he did this season no one would be even mentioning his name as a possible top pick.

Pretty much. They have similar flaws, but Gabbert's aren't correctable in my opinion. He's downright terrified of getting hit, and that problem is only going to be exacerbated in the NFL.

Babylon
03-11-2011, 03:23 PM
Personally I'd rather have Locker but I'm guessing almost every team has Gabbert above him on their boards. Really in terms of public perception the biggest thing seperating them is the fact that Locker was a consensus top 3 pick last year but failed to improve this year, where as Gabbert has risen fromn hype out of nowhere and has a buzz around him. If Gabbert was touted as a top pick prior to last season and performed as mediocre as he did this season no one would be even mentioning his name as a possible top pick.

I didnt get how Gabbert was all of a sudden pushed to the top of the list by analysts, it was probably more of a protest vote against the others. i'm a Locker guy but Gabbert so far as acquitted himself well in the whole process.

SeanTaylorRIP
03-11-2011, 03:28 PM
I didnt get how Gabbert was all of a sudden pushed to the top of the list by analysts, it was probably more of a protest vote against the others. i'm a Locker guy but Gabbert so far as acquitted himself well in the whole process.

Gabbert basically has risen by laying low. Locker in the spotlight failed to be consistent, and Cam has had a slurry of problems. Basically by not throwing at the combine and doing well in interviews Gabbert has been able to seduce scouts from actually breaking down his game film and seeing his horrendous passing beyond 5 yards. When you consider he's from a spread I wouldn't want him for the Skins at #10. He is big and mobile with good short accuracy but I don't think he's worth the risk. IMO Newton and Locker are worth the risk for different reasons one common reason being they are out of this world athletes, Gabbert I just don't like.

Trogdor
03-11-2011, 03:36 PM
Ugh more Locker threads. Care to recap the last ten?

- Regressed majorly in a single year
- Went 4/20 not even sleeping with your sister compares
- Plays poorly against higher competition
- Extremely inconsistent
- Indecision
- Questionable field vision

Not all of those are my personal opinion although I do have him below both Mallett and Gabbert.

cajuncorey
03-11-2011, 03:39 PM
they both take a lot of flack for their play but IMO the are the 1 and 2 QBs in the draft. Id put locker ahead of gabbert since he did play in a pro style offense but gabbert isnt fair behind

ElectricEye
03-11-2011, 03:40 PM
Gabbert still scares the living crap out of me. The tape on him this year is downright ugly.

Babylon
03-11-2011, 03:55 PM
Ugh more Locker threads. Care to recap the last ten?

- Regressed majorly in a single year
- Went 4/20 not even sleeping with your sister compares
- Plays poorly against higher competition
- Extremely inconsistent
- Indecision
- Questionable field vision

Not all of those are my personal opinion although I do have him below both Mallett and Gabbert.

1659 replies on the Cam Newton thread so humor us here if we talk about something else for a change.

no bare feet
03-11-2011, 03:56 PM
bLAINE gABBERT.

the natural
03-11-2011, 04:39 PM
Andrew Luck opted out of the draft after Gabbert opted in. That tells you all you need to know.

TACKLE
03-11-2011, 04:41 PM
Andrew Luck opted out of the draft after Gabbert opted in. That tells you all you need to know.

lmao

I might have to take you off ignore if you're going to be dropping gems like this.

RealityCheck
03-11-2011, 05:11 PM
Jake Locker stats;

2009, 58.2% 21 to 11 tds/int
2010 55.4% 17 to 9 tds/int

It's all you need to know.

D-Unit
03-11-2011, 05:11 PM
Depending on what happens with Cam Newton these two guys may be an option for several teams needing a QB. Both guys seem to be smart, leader types who probably developed a few bad habits that will need to be corrected at the next level, such as pulling the ball down and running a little prematurely at times. Some numbers:

Jake Locker, 6-2 1/2 231 lbs. combine numbers: 4.52 40 (twice), 35" vertical, 10' broad jump, 4.12 short shuttel, 6.77 3cone.

Blaine Gabbert, 6-4 1/2 234 lbs. combine numbers: 4.62 & 4.64 40, 33.5" vertical, 10 ft broad jump, 4.26 short shuttle, 6.84 3 cone.

Jake Locker stats;

2009, 58.2% 21 to 11 tds/int
2010 55.4% 17 to 9 tds/int

Blaine Gabbert stats:

2009, 58.9% 24 to 9 tds/int
2010, 63.4% 16 to 9 tds/int
Neither are great... but I have to crack up at the "stats" comparison. You know better than that Bab. ;)

descendency
03-11-2011, 05:15 PM
Pro-Style offense compared to a gimmick spread checkdown system... come bro.

DoughBoy
03-11-2011, 05:18 PM
Andrew Luck opted out of the draft after Gabbert opted in. That tells you all you need to know.

This argument has zero holes. You win 10 internetz.

ViperVisor
03-11-2011, 05:27 PM
Gabbert is younger and you would think more room to develop but reading about his quest he been on this well greased track to be a QB for about a decade.

By greased I mean lots of time and money.

Locker is a talent but can he put it together.

Sniper
03-11-2011, 05:37 PM
Andrew Luck opted out of the draft after Gabbert opted in. That tells you all you need to know.

http://lolpics.se/pics/4217.jpg

wonderbredd24
03-11-2011, 05:37 PM
Some of the 'hype' around Gabbert is because of his ridiculous physical tools and the fact that people believe he can play pretty much any NFL offense, whereas Newton is most likely going to need an offense tailored around him while Locker, Mallett, and Ponder are more system specific (Locker and Mallett to a Coryell-type offense while Ponder is a pure WCO quarterback).

So if you're going with a general who is the best player overall in the draft at quarterback, the ability for Gabbert to play in any offense could be giving him a bump in draft rankings where teams running various offenses will have a different set of rankings entirely based on how these guys fit into their offense. Gabbert, as a result, could be on every team's board in terms of fit, while it is unlikely that all 4 of the other quarterbacks mentioned will all be on any single board for a team.

Personally, I really like Locker. He has everything you want upstairs in a quarterback and has great physical tools. He is also very accurate outside of the pocket, which suggests that his footwork in the pocket is what is hurting his accuracy there, which is certainly correctable. Once he stops pitching in the pocket, he could make a big jump with his accuracy. Beyond that, he just needs to improve his decision making and continue learning the position.

Sniper
03-11-2011, 05:41 PM
Neither will be a successful NFL QB, but if I had to pick one, I'd go with Locker. Gabbert is donkey ****.

Those who know me know how much it hurt me to pick Locker.

Babylon
03-11-2011, 05:43 PM
Neither are great... but I have to crack up at the "stats" comparison. You know better than that Bab. ;)

Not trying to spin any numbers just threw them out there for consumption.

SchizophrenicBatman
03-11-2011, 05:53 PM
Pro-Style offense compared to a gimmick spread checkdown system... come bro.

pro style? lol washingtons offense was more like high school style this season

but I did say a while ago that gabbert reminds me a lot of locker if he was two inches taller and played in the missouri offense

the natural
03-11-2011, 06:06 PM
Just thought i'd do the tale of the tape and let people weigh in. I'm actually a little surprised how people in here are so anti-Gabbert when the media seems to unanimously have him as the top QB. Shows me people in here arent just drinking the Kool Aid all the time. natural excluded of course.
Hey Baby, I was on the Gabbert train before "the media" were. He has the capability of being special at the position. But it won't happen right away. Gabbert put up better numbers in college than high school, and iwill put up better numbers as a pro than in college.

niel89
03-11-2011, 06:11 PM
Andrew Luck opted out of the draft after Gabbert opted in. That tells you all you need to know.

32 out of 32 teams take Luck over Gabbert everytime. If you're serious, you need to find another sport to follow because you clearly don't get football.

yourfavestoner
03-11-2011, 06:20 PM
Hey Baby, I was on the Gabbert train before "the media" were. He has the capability of being special at the position. But it won't happen right away. Gabbert put up better numbers in college than high school, and iwill put up better numbers as a pro than in college.

I wasn't aware that its possible to overcome being a complete p#ssy in just a couple of seasons.

descendency
03-11-2011, 06:23 PM
Andrew Luck opted out of the draft after Gabbert opted in. That tells you all you need to know.

Because Andrew Luck didn't want to be part of the worst nfl QB draft class ever?

Blaine Gabbert is a mid-round QB in any decent draft class. If he were in 2009's, he would be a mid round pick.

He is a crappy Josh Freeman, minus the year of great production.

TACKLE
03-12-2011, 02:08 AM
"His (Gabbert's) ability to slide and move in the pocket is exceptional."

- Mike Mayock


I quite literally let out a small burst of laughter when I heard that. I love Mayock but c'mon man. I'm not on board with a lot of what he's selling this year. It seems as his popularity has grown, his boldness and independence has started to fade away as he seems much more comfortable following the herd than he used to be.

DecisiveLeaf
03-12-2011, 02:27 AM
"His (Gabbert's) ability to slide and move in the pocket is exceptional."

- Mike Mayock


I quite literally let out a small burst of laughter when I heard that. I love Mayock but c'mon man. I'm not on board with a lot of what he's selling this year. It seems as his popularity has grown, his boldness and independence has started to fade away as he seems much more comfortable following the herd than he used to be.

Really? I felt the opposite, I felt he was more bold this year. He was the first person to put Dareus higher than Fairley, first to put Quinn higher than Bowers, first to really hype up J.J. Watt. Andy Dalton was one his personal favorites, no one was talking about Dalton before Mayock. He has Dareus #1, Von Miller #2 overall, and he's also one of the few who doesn't have Newton in the top 20. I'm willing to bet the herd is following Mayock.

holt_bruce81
03-12-2011, 02:50 AM
I think one thing most people like about Gabbert is even when he's out of the pocket he still keeps his eyes down field.

But, when watching him play you'll see that even when there's no one around him he starts to get happy feet, I think he counts to three and then freaks out.

I disagree with some of you calling him a *****. Just watch the Nebraska game lol, he took a beating.

His deep ball is beyond bad.

I've heard Mr. Bidwell is actually attending the Missouri Pro Day, and I don't think he usually attends those things unless he's very interested.

ElectricEye
03-12-2011, 09:55 AM
"His (Gabbert's) ability to slide and move in the pocket is exceptional."

- Mike Mayock


I quite literally let out a small burst of laughter when I heard that. I love Mayock but c'mon man. I'm not on board with a lot of what he's selling this year. It seems as his popularity has grown, his boldness and independence has started to fade away as he seems much more comfortable following the herd than he used to be.
I thought that was really funny too. His ability to give up on the play if his first read isn't open and scramble around without purpose is fantastic. His footwork and lower body mechanics are horrible.

Iamcanadian
03-12-2011, 11:32 AM
Really? I felt the opposite, I felt he was more bold this year. He was the first person to put Dareus higher than Fairley, first to put Quinn higher than Bowers, first to really hype up J.J. Watt. Andy Dalton was one his personal favorites, no one was talking about Dalton before Mayock. He has Dareus #1, Von Miller #2 overall, and he's also one of the few who doesn't have Newton in the top 20. I'm willing to bet the herd is following Mayock.

I completely agree and would add that Mayock has a pretty impressive resume when projecting QB's.
He stood up to Charley Casserly(Sp.), the ex GM of the Houston Texans, who absolutely hates Newton.

the natural
03-12-2011, 11:40 AM
I think the first thing I read about Gabbert from scouts is that he had "a huge arm. The best in the draft with the possible exception of Mallett.". Now we have someone here saying he has a weak arm?

Halsey
03-12-2011, 11:47 AM
"His (Gabbert's) ability to slide and move in the pocket is exceptional."

- Mike Mayock


I quite literally let out a small burst of laughter when I heard that. I love Mayock but c'mon man. I'm not on board with a lot of what he's selling this year. It seems as his popularity has grown, his boldness and independence has started to fade away as he seems much more comfortable following the herd than he used to be.

Yes, when someone has a different opinion from you, it must be because they're losing 'boldness' and independence. It couldn't possibly just be that he has a different opinion and doesn't overreact to the last play of one game.

the natural
03-12-2011, 12:07 PM
The most unique skill Gabbert has is his personality. If you listen to the Rich Eisen interview, he absolutely owns Rich. I saw the same thing with a conversation he had with Eli Manning at Dallas during the Super Bowl. These guys are a fair bit older than Gabbert and have significant status in their field, but it's clear in the one on one situation that Blaine is absolutely in charge. I've never seen the like of it. You put him in room with Obama and Gabbert would take over in about three minutes.

Babylon
03-12-2011, 12:37 PM
The most unique skill Gabbert has is his personality. If you listen to the Rich Eisen interview, he absolutely owns Rich. I saw the same thing with a conversation he had with Eli Manning at Dallas during the Super Bowl. These guys are a fair bit older than Gabbert and have significant status in their field, but it's clear in the one on one situation that Blaine is absolutely in charge. I've never seen the like of it. You put him in room with Obama and Gabbert would take over in about three minutes.

You're the gift that keeps on giving.

draftguru151
03-12-2011, 12:42 PM
Yes, when someone has a different opinion from you, it must be because they're losing 'boldness' and independence. It couldn't possibly just be that he has a different opinion and doesn't overreact to the last play of one game.

It's every play of every game.

the natural
03-12-2011, 12:52 PM
You're the gift that keeps on giving.
O.K., maybe Obama is a bad example, since he would probably score about 12 on the Wonderlic. But still, Gabbert is smooth and impressive. If there is such a thing as a "natural leader", he is it. Charley Davis of the NFL Network remarked on it recently. He said that when Gabbert was in the room with a bunch of others he was one of the quietest ones there, but "something about him drew your attention". Charley said that Gabbert took over the room without trying, and he's been around a bit.

rockio42
03-12-2011, 01:36 PM
I think one thing most people like about Gabbert is even when he's out of the pocket he still keeps his eyes down field.

But, when watching him play you'll see that even when there's no one around him he starts to get happy feet, I think he counts to three and then freaks out.

I disagree with some of you calling him a *****. Just watch the Nebraska game lol, he took a beating.

His deep ball is beyond bad.

I've heard Mr. Bidwell is actually attending the Missouri Pro Day, and I don't think he usually attends those things unless he's very interested.

Good thing I'll be on campus to shank his money-grubbing ***** ass.

keylime_5
03-12-2011, 01:41 PM
I like Gabbert best of this year's QB crop. Newton can be another McNabb or another Vince Young type without the drama (well, maybe without the drama) and better leadership skills. I think Newton will be good but Gabbert is more likely to be the Aaron Rodgers, Ben Roethlisberger type QB than anyone else in this class. Locker looks like another Brady Quinn type with his accuracy IMO.

Sniper
03-12-2011, 01:41 PM
O.K., maybe Obama is a bad example, since he would probably score about 12 on the Wonderlic.

The guy who attended Occidental College, Columbia and Harvard? If he's registering a 12 on the Wonderlic, no one is ever cracking more than 10.

Halsey
03-12-2011, 01:43 PM
It's every play of every game.

Yeah, he really played poorly vs #1 Oklahoma last season. He was bad every play.

Draft gurus shoudn't oversimplify QB scouting. ;)

Babylon
03-12-2011, 01:46 PM
The guy who attended Occidental College, Columbia and Harvard? If he's registering a 12 on the Wonderlic, no one is ever cracking more than 10.

I didnt think his idiotic comment needed a response but yours was right to the point.

the natural
03-12-2011, 03:18 PM
I didnt think his idiotic comment needed a response but yours was right to the point.

Well, I don't want to take this into politics, but Obama was the ultimate affirmative action beneficiary. His high school grades were mediocre, and when he finally quit milking the college system (at 34, I think) he was worse than mediocre as a lawyer.

Titansfan123
03-12-2011, 03:41 PM
The only reason that Gabbert came out of no where was because no one was expecting him to come out..He made ths smart move to come out in this weak QB year. Neither one of them have good footwork neither of them throw a good deep ball. Gabbert is more accurate then Locker. I think Locker is a bit of a head case if he makes bad throws then he just folds...The only thing Locker has on gabbert is that he is a better athlete. I think playing in a pro style offense didnt really help locker because he sucked the dick in it..Gabbert will forsure come off the board first i dnt see locker coming off the board in the top 15...my favorite QB is Mallet i am in love with his arm if you get him in the right offense with some good receivers the sky is the limit for him.

FuzzyGopher
03-12-2011, 04:08 PM
Gabbert seems to be the ideal franchise quarterback on paper, great size, great combine numbers, high Wonderlic, no off the field baggage. In any other year he may not be the top guy but in a year with no clear cut low floor QB, he's the man. Every other guy seems to have at least one serious question mark hovering over their head and Gabbert hasn't been around long enough for teams to find a fatal flaw it seems.

I love all of Locker's potential and I would be happy if Minnesota took him, but man does he have some ugly film. I know Washington was lacking in talent but his accuracy and decision making were scary at times. Mayock, who I trust a lot, seems to think that all of his weaknesses can be corrected within a year with good coaching. The scouts he talked to said his footwork in the pocket needs to be cleaned up and his accuracy will improve if he can fix it.

TACKLE
03-12-2011, 04:09 PM
Yes, when someone has a different opinion from you, it must be because they're losing 'boldness' and independence. It couldn't possibly just be that he has a different opinion and doesn't overreact to the last play of one game.

Another horribly failed inference from Halsey. To start off, Mayock having a different opinion than my own has NOTHING to do with the statement I made. This is the might be the most generic big board Mayock has put out. Mike Mayock used to be notorious for taking strong, unique stances on certain players. This is the guy who had Robert Ayers and Knowshon Moreno in his top 5 overall. This is the guy who had Chris Houston as his #11 overall player. This is also the guy who didn't have Darren McFadden in his top 20 of his initial rankings and also said he wouldn't take Jamarcus Russell in the first round.

As for the second part, overreacting to the last play of one game? WTF are you talking about? I never said anything about his decision making. I have seen several Missouri games in there entirety and am not basing this of a Youtube video or a 4th quarter of one game. Without a doubt, the most consistent issue thing in Gabbert's game is his inability to slide and move within the pocket as he posses some of the worst pocket presence seen in a top QB prospect. It's the most glaring flaw every time myself and many others watch him play.

But go ahead, blindly defend every single QB prospect like you always do. Don't bother actually forming personal opinions. You've barely seen him play but you might as well come to his defense because the folks in the media have him highly ranked. But you know what's up. I mean you were totally right about Jimmy Clausen being worth the #2 pick last year.

Babylon
03-12-2011, 04:29 PM
The only reason that Gabbert came out of no where was because no one was expecting him to come out..He made ths smart move to come out in this weak QB year. Neither one of them have good footwork neither of them throw a good deep ball. Gabbert is more accurate then Locker. I think Locker is a bit of a head case if he makes bad throws then he just folds...The only thing Locker has on gabbert is that he is a better athlete. I think playing in a pro style offense didnt really help locker because he sucked the dick in it..Gabbert will forsure come off the board first i dnt see locker coming off the board in the top 15...my favorite QB is Mallet i am in love with his arm if you get him in the right offense with some good receivers the sky is the limit for him.

If that were the case he would have been 0-12 this year, when in fact he was 7-1 when leading or within 7 pts heading into the 4th quarter. Also he has no problem with deep passes.

SimonRath
03-12-2011, 04:32 PM
Well, I don't want to take this into politics, but Obama was the ultimate affirmative action beneficiary. His high school grades were mediocre, and when he finally quit milking the college system (at 34, I think) he was worse than mediocre as a lawyer.

yeah his grades were mediocre, and yet he got into all those colleges..
you may not be a fan of obama but keep that politic **** out of here and stop saying Gabbert is better then every man in the world. I'd like to see Gabbert run for president. Youd probably suck his dick after every speech he gave to comfort him.

FuzzyGopher
03-12-2011, 04:34 PM
If that were the case he would have been 0-12 this year, when in fact he was 7-1 when leading or within 7 pts heading into the 4th quarter. Also he has no problem with deep passes.

EirImYJjGIs

the natural
03-12-2011, 04:43 PM
yeah his grades were mediocre, and yet he got into all those colleges..
you may not be a fan of obama but keep that politic **** out of here and stop saying Gabbert is better then every man in the world. I'd like to see Gabbert run for president. Youd probably suck his dick after every speech he gave to comfort him.

Newt scored a 17. Allegedly. Which is still one point higher than Congressman Heath Shuler.

TACKLE
03-12-2011, 05:33 PM
Dear the natural,

Your undying love of Blaine Gabbert never ceases to amaze me. I thought claiming that you're not biased towards Gabbert and that you simply just preferred him as a prospect to Cam Newton was good. You managed to top that by using George Whitfield's college completion percentage as a way to knock Cam and subsequently build up Gabbert. I thought that was going to be as good as it gets. Suggesting that Andrew Luck stayed in school in fear of Blaine came close to topping it. But degrading Obama's credentials on an NFL Draft forum in an attempt to garner support for Blaine Gabbert in a thread titled "Locker vs. Gabbert", may have just take the cake. Keep fighting the good fight. You have taught me the true meaning of love.



- Your Secret Admirer

the natural
03-12-2011, 05:42 PM
Well, Tackle, since you seem to take everything I say without a hint of humor or sarcasm, I suppose I have to do the same with you.

So, stop stalking me creep. This forum is about football, it's not a *** dating site. There are lots of those available for you.

SimonRath
03-12-2011, 06:40 PM
who da hell gave this kid +rep?!

SchizophrenicBatman
03-12-2011, 06:51 PM
"His (Gabbert's) ability to slide and move in the pocket is exceptional."

- Mike Mayock


I quite literally let out a small burst of laughter when I heard that. I love Mayock but c'mon man. I'm not on board with a lot of what he's selling this year. It seems as his popularity has grown, his boldness and independence has started to fade away as he seems much more comfortable following the herd than he used to be.

Wait, he's following the herd by having a QB #1 that literally every INTERNET GENIUS hates?

descendency
03-12-2011, 06:53 PM
who da hell gave this kid +rep?!

Blaine Gabbert must use this forum.

nepg
03-12-2011, 07:16 PM
I was wondering how he got out of negative...still am...

Halsey
03-12-2011, 07:19 PM
Another horribly failed inference from Halsey. To start off, Mayock having a different opinion than my own has NOTHING to do with the statement I made. This is the might be the most generic big board Mayock has put out. Mike Mayock used to be notorious for taking strong, unique stances on certain players. This is the guy who had Robert Ayers and Knowshon Moreno in his top 5 overall.

Yeah, blah blah. Spare me the essay. Anyone can point out players in the past that Kiper and Mayock overrated. You're not special. It's the Draft. Nobody gets it even close to 100% right. You're just another guy on a message board who thinks he does.

TACKLE
03-12-2011, 07:31 PM
Yeah, blah blah. Spare me the essay. Anyone can point out players in the past that Kiper and Mayock overrated. You're not special. It's the Draft. Nobody gets it even close to 100% right. You're just another guy on a message board who thinks he does.

You're missing the point *ad hom*. I was applauding him for at least then having the balls to go out on a limb. Now with his increased popularity, it seems just like every other major media "analyst", he's more concerned with not being overtly wrong on a player than he is about trying to be right. I still respect Mayock a lot, but not quite as much as I used to.

fenikz
03-12-2011, 07:57 PM
who da hell gave this kid +rep?!

IT WAS ME!

87Canes
03-12-2011, 08:13 PM
If Jake Locker can fix his wide base when dropping back to throw, he'll be a way better pro QB than Blaine. That's a big if because it's a baseball habit of his. His mobility helps him A LOT as well.

As of this day, Blaine is the better QB because he has the arm, the accuracy and he reminds me of a Phillip Rivers. The question with Blaine is can he adapt to being under the center?

The winner at the moment is Gabbert. This is a deep weak QB class. No one really stands out as a TRUE secure Franchise QB like some have in previous years.

Draft King
03-12-2011, 08:32 PM
You're missing the point *ad hom*. I was applauding him for at least then having the balls to go out on a limb. Now with his increased popularity, it seems just like every other major media "analyst", he's more concerned with not being overtly wrong on a player than he is about trying to be right. I still respect Mayock a lot, but not quite as much as I used to.

Mayock is still my boy. The guy is draft genius, could be a GM right now if he really wanted to. I don't fault him too much for having Gabbert #1 in a class without any real standout QBs, although I personally have Locker as my first guy. Mayock did start the Dareus bandwagon this season that everybody has jumped on, and he was high on guys like Leonard Hankerson and JJ Watt first. Mayock is the best in the business IMO.

Draft King
03-12-2011, 08:33 PM
IT WAS ME!

I think he is hilarious also. + rep for him. People here take the great trolls too seriously.

Babylon
03-12-2011, 09:22 PM
I think he is hilarious also. + rep for him. People here take the great trolls too seriously.

He is a legend in troll circles.

Titansfan123
03-12-2011, 10:14 PM
If that were the case he would have been 0-12 this year, when in fact he was 7-1 when leading or within 7 pts heading into the 4th quarter. Also he has no problem with deep passes.
and 4 of those teams had a combined record of 16-32 so he beats ****** teams cool...take a look at his numbers against the top schools he played against...Also look when his team was losing and he wasnt playing well thats what i was looking at..from what i saw he was not very accurate on the deep balls has a good arm...he also made a lot of bad decisions when it came to throwing the deep ball or checking down...regarding that video he made a good throw against the worst team in the pac-10 cool...if he doesnt get on a team with a great QB coach then he is going to struggle. We saw what he did his first year with sarkisian but then in his second year he didnt improve much...as some1 else stated its his long stride that kills him this is something that has been known for a while and he never fixed it..its hard to break bad habits especially when the habit comes from baseball which he is better at then football...They both played nebraska and they both played poorly against then however locker played them 2 times and played like **** twice...If I had to choose a QB to come in and play right away id take Gabbert if i was to take a QB as a project and let him start in 3 years id take Locker but how do we know locker wont quit and turn to baseball in 4-5 years if he isnt playing well or even playing at all

gpngc
03-12-2011, 10:56 PM
I like Locker now.

Sarcastro
03-13-2011, 12:18 AM
If Jake Locker can fix his wide base when dropping back to throw, he'll be a way better pro QB than Blaine. That's a big if because it's a baseball habit of his. His mobility helps him A LOT as well.

As of this day, Blaine is the better QB because he has the arm, the accuracy and he reminds me of a Phillip Rivers. The question with Blaine is can he adapt to being under the center?

The winner at the moment is Gabbert. This is a deep weak QB class. No one really stands out as a TRUE secure Franchise QB like some have in previous years.

Mayock has Gabbert as the #5 overall prospect. Locker is #20 and Newton is #21. Mayock is usually good with this type of stuff. This QB class isn't quite as weak as the internet believes.

87Canes
03-13-2011, 01:33 AM
Mayock has Gabbert as the #5 overall prospect. Locker is #20 and Newton is #21. Mayock is usually good with this type of stuff. This QB class isn't quite as weak as the internet believes.

I hate Mike Mayock so I don't listen to him. He's a great analyzer of football players but he makes his predictions to general so he could either be right or wrong and not miss.

Gabbert is NOWHERE near the 5th best player in this draft but Locker and Newton are ranked accurately.

Mallett to me is still the best QB in this draft. If he didn't have the off field issues, he would be the 1st pick in the draft. Yes he's not very mobile but neither was Peyton so anyone who feels like bringing that up can lay that to rest.

toonsterwu
03-13-2011, 01:58 AM
As I've said on irc before, in an ideal situation, I wouldn't take any QB in the top half of first, but the draft isn't an ideal situation, and ideal is relative in many ways. I don't love Gabbert, but it's become easy to bash Gabbert, which seems to be the majority of this thread, so I'll make a defense of Gabbert here.

Gabbert has two major flaws. Yfs has loosely brought up one huge concern, and I'll get back to that one at the end. Let's touch on the other major concern - that Gabbert isn't "pro-ready" due to coming out of a "gimmick" offense.

One of the most frustrating things in following the draft is hearing about "pro-ready" QB's, which typically refers to guys that have come out of "pro" systems. Without going through my long spiel on this issue, I'll go the Cliff Notes route. There simply isn't a collegiate system that is a "pro" system. Even the Charlie Weis offense at ND wasn't a "pro" system (compare it to what Weis did at NE and KC in regards to route patterns, read responsibilities, and so forth).

It's noticeable that some of the more noticeable QB fallers/busts in recent years have been viewed as guys that were pro-ready, due partly to the system they came from (the two ND QB's in Quinn and Clausen, and to a lesser extent, Brohm). I'd make the argument that in each case, the perception that these guys were pro-ready weren't always justified by the tape of what they actually ran in college, but that'd be a far longer conversation that is now a part of the past, and not something I'm going to spend much time on here.

What do I define as a pro-ready QB? Well, a pro-ready QB is a kid with a strong aptitude for the game, has a strong work ethic, good character, solid mechanics, and has the physical attributes to succeed. At the end of the day, no QB from college can accurately prepare for the different beast that is the NFL, from the simplest things (the hectic schedules and so forth) to the speed of the game. If a kid is willing to work, though, provided he has the physical tools, his chances of success, and being ready, increase dramatically.

I am not privy to private information, and neither are most of us, but the general perspective on Gabbert is that he is a guy who is a hard worker and showcases good character and leadership skills. If those aspects are true, he is as safe as any QB in the draft (which doesn't diminish the fact that all prospects carry risk), and a guy whose upside hasn't been tapped yet. Yes, you wish that the release point was higher, but taller QB's have gotten away with the type of angle that Gabbert throws from (Rivers comes to mind). The arm strength and release are fine. The aptitude is largely perceived to be fine (the major reason why Gabbert is ahead of Newton for many folks lies in the fact that Gabbert is viewed as a guy who has better vision of the field and a better understanding of reads).

Now, in saying all that, the other major concern is what yfs touched on, and that's the main reason why I note that, in an ideal situation, I wouldn't touch any of the QB's in the top half of the first. Is Gabbert's ... shakiness, for lack of a better word, ... in the pocket due to the system he's from, or does it speak to something that he's lacking internally? I don't have an answer for that, and that makes him a gamble.

I've argued on irc before that I don't think the gap between Gabbert and Newton should be that big, but after debating it for awhile, I do believe that Gabbert is a deserving number 1 QB in this draft. If I was a team that had a year or two to break down Jake Locker and work with him, I might consider ranking him ahead of Newton, but overall, I'd have Newton 2nd as Locker needs a lot of work in the pocket. As good as he is outside of the pocket, well, in the NFL, you've got to be able to succeed in the pocket.

I like a lot of the 2nd tier QB's (there's something about Kaepernick I really love, but like Locker, I wouldn't draft him unless I knew I had time to work with him).

Overall, it's not a very clean QB year, but I think the case for Gabbert being the top QB is there. As of now, I'll be surprised if he's not the top QB off the board, and probably top 5 (I remember when I went on irc several months ago and had a chat with JBond about how I was hearing Gabbert could go top 3, I didn't believe it then, and it still stuns me to say all this), but it's become easy to bash Gabbert without noting the fact that he has some strong positives that strengthen his value.

Black Bolt
03-13-2011, 09:38 AM
1659 replies on the Cam Newton thread so humor us here if we talk about something else for a change.

are like parasites infecting all unsuspecting posts with Locker polyps until you take over.

Babylon
03-13-2011, 11:01 AM
are like parasites infecting all unsuspecting posts with Locker polyps until you take over.

The ignore function is always an option.

Black Bolt
03-13-2011, 11:05 AM
The ignore function is always an option.

well that is a possibility. But the point I am making is that this isn't supposed to be a Locker fan site and apparently you think it is. You are constantly starting new post about him in and effort to promote him. Please don't deny this.

Babylon
03-13-2011, 11:26 AM
well that is a possibility. But the point I am making is that this isn't supposed to be a Locker fan site and apparently you think it is. You are constantly starting new post about him in and effort to promote him. Please don't deny this.

Not sure when the last thread was started about Locker except for the one with the negative connotation about him not being an NFL caliber starter, which wasnt started by me.

I did start this thread because i honestly think that him and Gabbert are fairly similar in what they bring to the table. I also have tried to be neutral about the two here and havent commented on every little thing said either way.

Now i am sure you will go read up on every comment by Cam Newton supporters and correct them for trying to be so called promoters.

hockey619
03-13-2011, 11:57 AM
Not sure when the last thread was started about Locker except for the one with the negative connotation about him not being an NFL caliber starter, which wasnt started by me.

I did start this thread because i honestly think that him and Gabbert are fairly similar in what they bring to the table. I also have tried to be neutral about the two here and havent commented on every little thing said either way.

Now i am sure you will go read up on every comment by Cam Newton supporters and correct them for trying to be so called promoters.

So are you saying youre not a huge locker fanboy, and that we should take your word as though you were a nuetral observer? Because its pretty obvious from regularly (obsessively) reading these boards that that couldnt be farther from the truth.

And im just standing up for Bolt, cause really i have nothing against locker, i think hes got some issues but ill take him 10 out of 10 times over Gabbert.

Gabbert had some awful games this year, so everyone who rips Locker for his dissappointing season needs to go back and watch a few of Gabbert's toward the end of the year. He looked like he regressed, it was atrocious.

Gabbert imo is a 4th-5th round pick. He looks terrified on the field, leaving the pocket and running from a phantom rush way too often. and his accuracy is just not very good, and very inconsistent at best. he just doesnt put the ball where it belongs, struggles down the field, and if his first read isnt open he panics and starts running around.

Babylon
03-13-2011, 12:23 PM
So are you saying youre not a huge locker fanboy, and that we should take your word as though you were a nuetral observer? Because its pretty obvious from regularly (obsessively) reading these boards that that couldnt be farther from the truth.

And im just standing up for Bolt, cause really i have nothing against locker, i think hes got some issues but ill take him 10 out of 10 times over Gabbert.

Gabbert had some awful games this year, so everyone who rips Locker for his dissappointing season needs to go back and watch a few of Gabbert's toward the end of the year. He looked like he regressed, it was atrocious.

Gabbert imo is a 4th-5th round pick. He looks terrified on the field, leaving the pocket and running from a phantom rush way too often. and his accuracy is just not very good, and very inconsistent at best. he just doesnt put the ball where it belongs, struggles down the field, and if his first read isnt open he panics and starts running around.

I'm definitely a homer having watched the kid play in person since his sophomore year in HS. What i am saying is i started this tread to get reactions to how people felt about the two head to head. The media seems unanimous in picking Gabbert over Locker but as we have seen from the posts in here it is hardly that. I'll have to go back and read my responses in this thread, i dont think they've been overly homerish.

Black Bolt
03-13-2011, 12:36 PM
Not sure when the last thread was started about Locker except for the one with the negative connotation about him not being an NFL caliber starter, which wasnt started by me.

I did start this thread because i honestly think that him and Gabbert are fairly similar in what they bring to the table. I also have tried to be neutral about the two here and havent commented on every little thing said either way.

Now i am sure you will go read up on every comment by Cam Newton supporters and correct them for trying to be so called promoters.

Cam Newton supports don't come close to being the zealots Locker supporters are. Unlike them, you guys would have us believe that NOTHING is his fault and that he has no deficiencies as a career under 60% passer.

Babylon
03-13-2011, 12:48 PM
Cam Newton supports don't come close to being the zealots Locker supporters are. Unlike them, you guys would have us believe that NOTHING is his fault and that he has no deficiencies as a career under 60% passer.

1. Locker could benefit from being a couple of inches taller, he doesnt stand as tall in the pocket as you would like

2. He needs to feel the rush around him better and know when to tuck it and move.

3. Has had accuracy problems throwing short out passes and has had issues with footwork.

4. Needs to be not so recless taking on contact as injuries will only be magnified at the next level.

5. Needs to better switch the field and find his 3rd and 4th option better.

I've said all this stuff before so it isn't like i never point out deficiences. I will say however when i say he's an above 60% passer out of the pocket, has mediocre (if that) WRs and had to deal with new offensive line sets each week that isnt me making stuff up, it's pretty much public record.

the natural
03-13-2011, 02:58 PM
Gabbert was abused in the Nebraska game. He came into it with a hip pointer and left it with a high ankle sprain and a concussion as well. But it would have been writing off the season to pull him out at that point. The team was still 7-1 with a faint hope of a BCS spot. So they kept it under wraps but his season was really affected from that point on. Mizzou started 7-0 then lost to Nebraska due to poor protection and to Texas Tech due to a bunch of dropped passes. From that point on Gabbert was just trying to make it to the end of the season in one piece to declare for the draft. I think he did all he could with what was given to him.

armageddon
03-13-2011, 03:32 PM
Chase Daniel was 100X better than Gabbert at running the Mizzou O. Gabbert really does suck. This is coming from a Mizzou homer too.

the natural
03-13-2011, 04:18 PM
Chase Daniel was 100X better than Gabbert at running the Mizzou O. Gabbert really does suck. This is coming from a Mizzou homer too.

Daniel is 3 years older. If you go back 3 years his Mizzou numbers are not better than Gabbert's. Chase was at Missouri for 5 years, Blaine just 3. Makes a big difference.

Rabscuttle
03-13-2011, 04:31 PM
Something toonsterwu touched on that people should take note of is the prospects that are supposedly pro ready that drop and bust. Some of these guys are as good as they are going to get. Period. They've been coached up and that is all we are going to see from them. There really isn't anything more upstairs, the vision isn't there and you've basically got a guy that is going to kick around the league until a couple of teams realize that the potential that was seen in college was the guy's peak.

Is that what we've got with Sarkisian having to dumb down his system to try to make the mental aspect easier on Locker? He seems like a nice kid, great athlete and all that jazz. Is he an elite NFL quarterback? Or will he be back in Ferndale selling cars to Canadians avoiding unfair markups five years down the road?

Locker fans will be upset to have that question posed, but my team is in need of a quarterback. Do I want a guy that's already peaked? (and at a pretty modest level) Of course not, I need to know that the kid has a lot more room to grow before I can get behind my team selecting him.

That's why I am not overly concerned about a guy not taking snaps under center. I want to know if he can process multiple reads. Gooing back and watching the games that are available Gabbert was fine at reading the defence. He sshould be more than smart enough to keep his head up while dropping back. What I don't know is what the deal is with Gabbert's longer throws and how he will take to getting hit if his line struggles on a weekly basis. Even in a wco, you have to complete a deep out and the post. His system demands a lot more of him mentally than a lot of guys. That's one big test he passed that Locker failed this year. Will Locker prove he has more to offer mentally when looking at film in one on one interviews?

FYI, when your favourite prospect is questioned it is not an indictment on you as a person. Do you think successful scouts take criticisms of prospects they put forth to their gm the way people do here? Some people act like their lover is being attacked.

Halsey
03-13-2011, 04:51 PM
Daniel is 3 years older. If you go back 3 years his Mizzou numbers are not better than Gabbert's. Chase was at Missouri for 5 years, Blaine just 3. Makes a big difference.

Yep, those are the kind of details that you should notice if you're gonna talk QBs. Daniels was at Missou 5 years. You need to be able to look beyond 16 tds and an INT in a Bowl game. It didn't hurt that Daniels had guys like Maclin, Coffman and Alexander when he played.

Babylon
03-13-2011, 04:54 PM
Chase Daniel was 100X better than Gabbert at running the Mizzou O. Gabbert really does suck. This is coming from a Mizzou homer too.

Chase had Maclin and Coffman too keep in mind, Gabbert's receivers this year were ok (liked the TE) but nothing like guys like Tebow, Bradford, Sanchez and even Stafford had in their draft year.

FUNBUNCHER
03-13-2011, 05:33 PM
Gabbert was abused in the Nebraska game. He came into it with a hip pointer and left it with a high ankle sprain and a concussion as well. But it would have been writing off the season to pull him out at that point. The team was still 7-1 with a faint hope of a BCS spot. So they kept it under wraps but his season was really affected from that point on. Mizzou started 7-0 then lost to Nebraska due to poor protection and to Texas Tech due to a bunch of dropped passes. From that point on Gabbert was just trying to make it to the end of the season in one piece to declare for the draft. I think he did all he could with what was given to him.

Too many 'explanations' (excuses!) for Gabbert's poor play last season.
That's always a red flag to me.

Throwing 12 for 30 in a huge conference game is not the fault of 'dropped passes'.

His supporters should at least be consistent; Gabbert had a bad game against TT and was outplayed by Taylor Potts.

Age, lack of talent around him, injuries, etc. don't make you the 1/1 pick in the NFL draft.


There have been so many great college QBs who have excelled despite the talent playing around them.

How much pro skill position talent did Colt McCoy play with at UT??

This is my preferred comparison to Gabbert, Colt McCoy. Very similar systems and the same reads, yet Gabbert is nowhere near McCoy as a college QB.
Not in the same zipcode.

Moxie is another word I haven't seen used to describe Gabbert, that 'it' which allows him to find a way to get it done regardless of the circumstances surrounding him.

Gabbert threw for a lot of yards against McNeese State, Miami(Ohio) and San Diego State, but only managed 3 TDs and 3 INTs.

Makes no sense, he couldn't muster more than one TD passing in any of those games.

I'll make this easy for Gabbert supporters, identify his 5 best games from last season, show the stats, then do the same for Mallett, Newton, Locker and Ponder.

Even Locker had two games last season where he threw for more than 4 TDs, with the worst supporting cast among the top prospects.

Gabbert had one 3 TD, three games with 2 TD passes, and the rest were 1 TD games or less.

Stats aren't everything, but stats do mean something.

First round talent, his tools make him worth that. But I haven't heard one legitimate argument about why he should be rated a top 5 talent or deserves to be the first QB taken.

hockey619
03-13-2011, 05:43 PM
Too many 'explanations' (excuses!) for Gabbert's poor play last season.
That's always a red flag to me.

Throwing 12 for 30 in a huge conference game is not the fault of 'dropped passes'.

His supporters should at least be consistent; Gabbert had a bad game against TT and was outplayed by Taylor Potts.

Age, lack of talent around him, injuries, etc. don't make you the 1/1 pick in the NFL draft.


There have been so many great college QBs who have excelled despite the talent playing around them.

How much pro skill position talent did Colt McCoy play with at UT??

This is my preferred comparison to Gabbert, Colt McCoy. Very similar systems and the same reads, yet Gabbert is nowhere near McCoy as a college QB.
Not in the same zipcode.

Moxie is another word I haven't seen used to describe Gabbert, that 'it' which allows him to find a way to get it done regardless of the circumstances surrounding him.

Gabbert threw for a lot of yards against McNeese State, Miami(Ohio) and San Diego State, but only managed 3 TDs and 3 INTs.

Makes no sense, he couldn't muster more than one TD passing in any of those game.

I'll make this easy for Gabbert supporters, identify his 5 best games from last season, show the stats, then do the same for Mallett, Newton, Locker and Ponder.

Even Locker had two games last season where he threw for more than 4 TDs, with the worst supporting cast among the top prospects.

Gabbert had one 3 TD, three games with 2 TD passes, and the rest were 1 TD games or less.

Stats aren't everything, but stats do mean something.

First round talent, his tools make him worth that. But I haven't heard one legitimate argument about why he should be rated a top 5 talent or deserves to be the first QB taken.

2nd bolded:
Eh im not a big stats guy, they can be skewed and are rather useless in such a team sport, id rather the Gabbert supporters gave us his 5 best games from last year so we could go back and watch them again to try and see what they see.

1st bolded:
Gabbert has no moxie. when i watched mallett, newton, and to a lesser degree locker (never saw ponder play) take snaps, they had a sort of it that they knew what was going on and knew what they were doing. They just seemed very in control of the game. I dont see that control from gabbert.

ive been on record all over the place saying i think gabbert is garbage, id love for someone to give me games where they thought he did well so i can watch to at least make a case for him. right now i really dont see where the hype is coming from, hes pretty bad.

the natural
03-13-2011, 05:46 PM
Fun, Jackson had 4 drops alone, along with two offensive pass interference calls in the TT game. He wasn't even a first string receiver. There were at least two dropped passes in the end zone that would have changed the outcome. No "excuses" needed since Gabbert's stats were not "poor" on the year. He completed 64% of his passes for over 3,000 yards with the lowest interception ratio of any of the top rated QBs in this draft. Any quarterback in the NCAA would take those stats at the age of 20.

the natural
03-13-2011, 05:48 PM
2nd bolded:


ive been on record all over the place saying i think gabbert is garbage, id love for someone to give me games where they thought he did well so i can watch to at least make a case for him. right now i really dont see where the hype is coming from, hes pretty bad.

Can't be bothered, go back to watching a deformed Bohunk like Chara try to kill some kid by ramming his head into a stanchion at 40 mph.

hockey619
03-14-2011, 11:38 AM
Can't be bothered, go back to watching a deformed Bohunk like Chara try to kill some kid by ramming his head into a stanchion at 40 mph.

Not sure what chara has to do with anything that you quoted and i asked.

What game of his did you see and say 'this guys is great, hes a franchise qb.' id like to see if i can find that game because what i have seen of gabbert leads me to believe he is anything but a great qb.

the natural
03-14-2011, 12:45 PM
Well, I think Gabbert had about 30 better games in college than Matt Cassell ever did. About 15 better games than Mark Sanchez managed. Just to name a couple.

the natural
03-14-2011, 12:51 PM
There are two separate issues at work here. The first goal is to get drafted as high as possible to make the most money off the top. That is what the guys are working on now. Then they worry about becoming the best NFL player they can, to justify the first salary and put themselves in line for the next one. I don't think Gabbert would necessarily be the best NFL QB or player at the moment, but he should be in the long run. Therefore he should be the first player drafted. The mere fact that he can put himself in the position to be the first player taken goes a long way towards justifying the decision. They can't make a misstep in the process. Gabbert seems to have made fewer than anyone else so far.

jnew76
03-14-2011, 06:15 PM
Too many 'explanations' (excuses!) for Gabbert's poor play last season.
That's always a red flag to me.

Throwing 12 for 30 in a huge conference game is not the fault of 'dropped passes'.

His supporters should at least be consistent; Gabbert had a bad game against TT and was outplayed by Taylor Potts.

Age, lack of talent around him, injuries, etc. don't make you the 1/1 pick in the NFL draft.


There have been so many great college QBs who have excelled despite the talent playing around them.

How much pro skill position talent did Colt McCoy play with at UT??

This is my preferred comparison to Gabbert, Colt McCoy. Very similar systems and the same reads, yet Gabbert is nowhere near McCoy as a college QB.
Not in the same zipcode.

Moxie is another word I haven't seen used to describe Gabbert, that 'it' which allows him to find a way to get it done regardless of the circumstances surrounding him.

Gabbert threw for a lot of yards against McNeese State, Miami(Ohio) and San Diego State, but only managed 3 TDs and 3 INTs.

Makes no sense, he couldn't muster more than one TD passing in any of those games.

I'll make this easy for Gabbert supporters, identify his 5 best games from last season, show the stats, then do the same for Mallett, Newton, Locker and Ponder.

Even Locker had two games last season where he threw for more than 4 TDs, with the worst supporting cast among the top prospects.

Gabbert had one 3 TD, three games with 2 TD passes, and the rest were 1 TD games or less.

Stats aren't everything, but stats do mean something.

First round talent, his tools make him worth that. But I haven't heard one legitimate argument about why he should be rated a top 5 talent or deserves to be the first QB taken.

I am not going to deny that Gabbert was inconsistent at times and had two "stinker" games this last year.

I will point out that Gabbert led the Tigers to a 10-3 season and a win over #1 at the time, Oklahoma. Furthermore, Gabbert's personal TD totals were not what we would expect, but he did lead an offense that scored 30 Points per game. And he was the best player on that offense by far.

I am not going to say that I believe Gabbert is the #1 prospect, or even a top 5 prospect in this draft, but I do believe he is the best QB prospect in this draft, and that in itself makes him in play at the #1 pick. Albeit, a risky one.

FUNBUNCHER - I am curious as to what your thoughts were on Sam Bradford last year as a prospect?

The_Dude
03-14-2011, 07:51 PM
There are two separate issues at work here. The first goal is to get drafted as high as possible to make the most money off the top. That is what the guys are working on now. Then they worry about becoming the best NFL player they can, to justify the first salary and put themselves in line for the next one. I don't think Gabbert would necessarily be the best NFL QB or player at the moment, but he should be in the long run. Therefore he should be the first player drafted. The mere fact that he can put himself in the position to be the first player taken goes a long way towards justifying the decision. They can't make a misstep in the process. Gabbert seems to have made fewer than anyone else so far.

This sounds pretty familiar to any of the older Vikings posters......

Quinn is a great college QB and I predict will be a Pro Bowl QB within 3 years.
So if we draft him I'd be very happy. But I'm not quite understanding the logic in trading away a Qb that we gave up 2 really good picks for.
I'd much prefer Jackson / Bollinger starting next year without putting the pressure on him to start from day 1 (basically exactly how the 3 #1's did this year...wait 6 weeks or so before determining if he should start).
It didn't hurt Daunte to wait a year.

FUNBUNCHER
03-14-2011, 09:09 PM
I am not going to deny that Gabbert was inconsistent at times and had two "stinker" games this last year.

I will point out that Gabbert led the Tigers to a 10-3 season and a win over #1 at the time, Oklahoma. Furthermore, Gabbert's personal TD totals were not what we would expect, but he did lead an offense that scored 30 Points per game. And he was the best player on that offense by far.

I am not going to say that I believe Gabbert is the #1 prospect, or even a top 5 prospect in this draft, but I do believe he is the best QB prospect in this draft, and that in itself makes him in play at the #1 pick. Albeit, a risky one.

FUNBUNCHER - I am curious as to what your thoughts were on Sam Bradford last year as a prospect?

I thought Bradford looked great at OU, I hoped he would become a great pro, but I didn't have a 'can't miss' vibe about him or thought that his potential upside was nearly unlimited.

(Colt McCoy BTW was my favorite QB last year, I thought he should have been drafted late first.)

I've always liked how Bradford played the game from under center and I still keep waiting for a spread QB to light the league on fire. Maybe he's the guy.

I'll give you that Gabbert is a first round prospect for more reasons than his play on Saturdays, but when you say Gabbert played a key role in leading Mizzou to 10 wins, check the game log.

How many times did Gabbert throw for 2 TDs or less and Mizzou win in a blowout??
Of all the top prospects, his play alone IMO had the least to do with his team's success than any other top QB.

Mallett doesn't play well, Arkansas loses. Same for Newton, still true for Locker.
Without Dalton performing at an AA level all season, TCU doesn't go undefeated.

Even McElroy on a loaded Alabama squad played a bigger role in key Alabama wins than Gabbert did for Mizzou.

jnew76
03-15-2011, 10:10 AM
I'll give you that Gabbert is a first round prospect for more reasons than his play on Saturdays, but when you say Gabbert played a key role in leading Mizzou to 10 wins, check the game log.

How many times did Gabbert throw for 2 TDs or less and Mizzou win in a blowout??
Of all the top prospects, his play alone IMO had the least to do with his team's success than any other top QB.


I have to disagree with this... As for the game logs, I have seen or listened to nearly every Missouri Tiger game since the age of 7 so I can assure you that I have a grasp of the importance of Gabbert to the success of the team, and more specifically the offense.

Gabbert's two worst games (Nebraska and Texas Tech) were both Tiger loses. Missouri's two highest profile wins (Oklahoma at home and Texas A&M on the road) were two of his very best. Gabbert's play had a clear and direct correlation to the teams success.

The Missouri offense lacked big play WR's and a consistent running game. Not to mention, absolutely zero threats to catch the ball out of the backfield. Gabbert played in an offense that was very predictable and lacked big play potential. Where this hurt him the most was in the Red Zone... None of his WR's were able to create separation as the field compressed. the Missouri offense scored 28 rushing TD's on the season (5 were Gabbert's)... Of those 28, twenty of them were from 10 yards or less. Of the 8 rushing TD's over 10 yards, Gabbert had two of them. Missouri chose to (correctly) run the ball most of the time inside the 10, as defenses keyed on the pass almost every down against them.

Over the course of the season Gabbert had 4 sure TD passes and 2 potential TD passes dropped by my estimation.

Losing Danario Alsexander is a huge factor in his drop in production IMO. 1781 yards, 14 TDs, on 113 catches was impossible for Missouri to replace. Further, losing Derrick Washington (26 catches out of the backfield in 2009) prior to the season (kicked off team) was a huge blow. All the 2010 RB's had 14 catches combined!

When you look closely, I think you are underestimating Gabbert's importance to Missouri's success. I am still not saying that Gabbert is on the same level of prospect as Bradford, Stafford, or Ryan. I do not think his play to this point justifies a top 5 pick, but with good NFL coaching, and some talent around him I believe he has what it takes to be a very good NFL QB... Unfortunately he also has a high risk of busting. Gabbert is the #1 QB in this draft IMO. I currently have him rated as the #12 prospect overall in this draft, but I think he could easily be picked #1.

I admit to being a Missouri homer as well, but I try very hard not to let it influence my player evaluations. I know as well as anyone that Gabbert has a number of flaws... They frustrated me almost every game last year... Blaine gets happy feet and lacks patience in the pocket... he has a tendency to throw off his back foot, and his deep ball lacks touch and proper level. All of these flaws I see as fixable with hard work and proper coaching.

Sarcastro
03-15-2011, 05:03 PM
Some of Gabbert's stats like YPA and total passing TDs were much more impressive his sophomore year when he had Danario Alexander as his big play threat. Despite not having many TDs, just 21 total, he did have some very good games this season:

360 yards, 3 TDs, 0 INTs in a 30-9 victory at College Station. Could have padded his stats, but MU was up 30-3 going into the fourth and Pinkel shut MU's offense down.

300 yards, 1 TD, 0 INT in a victory over OU. Gabbert led two 70+ yard TD drives in the 4th quarter while Landry got shut down and eventually turned the ball over. That was the difference.

280 yards and 2 TDs in a come back victory against Illinois. This was the first game of the season, and Missouri's offense looked lost in the first half. MU was down 13-3 going into the third quarter, and Gabbert led them to 20 unanswered points and the victory.

Gabbert didn't throw a bunch of TDs in blowouts. Would it make it a difference if he had thrown 15 TDs in blowout victories over Miami(OH), McNeese State, and KU instead of MU rushing for 15 TDs in those games?

FUNBUNCHER
03-15-2011, 05:54 PM
I feel like I'm beating up on Gabbert with baseball bat.

I really don't hate him and in December I thought if he declared, he was a bigtime sleeper at QB.

But to see him catapult to the top of the draft as the number 1 QB prospect and possibly the 1/1, bothers me.

Don't hate the player per se, but do hate the hype.

Gabbert just doesn't have enough chips on the table IMO to be rated so highly.
The problem is, it seems many analysts feel that none of the other top QB prospects do either.

the natural
03-15-2011, 06:09 PM
I don't know that any player is ever considered "worthy" of being the #1 overall pick. Especially when they get 50 million guaranteed without ever having played a down in the league. I can't remember a first overall draft pick who wasn't considered a huge risk by the team that picked him, for one reason or another.

Halsey
03-15-2011, 06:36 PM
Don't we hear every year from many fans that there are no great Qbs in the next Draft. You're just afraid of QBs. You see that they're risky and you get scared. That's fine, but it's a myth that QBs are so risky and other positions are always safe. Every top QB prospect gets compared to Russel, Leaf, Quin etc by scared fans, but you don't see Courtney Brown, Gaines Adams, Jamaal Anderson being mentioned whenever someone talks about a DE. There are busts at every position. At least a QB can be a big part of turning an organization around. The Texans hit on Mario Williams with the #1 pick a few years ago. How many playoff appearances have they had? Jake Long was a solid #1 pick for the Dolphins, yet they're irrelevant without a franchise QB. At least a QB is high risk, high reward. Other position are high risk, low reward in comparison. NFL teams have to have some balls, because no franchise QB means being irrelevant. They can't be like fans and cower away from every top QB prospect. 'Safe' QBs like Andrew Luck rarely come along, and only one team will get him.

prock
03-15-2011, 06:43 PM
I normally don't agree with you, Halsey, but that was quite a logical post you made, and I happen to agree with the entire thing. I have felt the same way for awhile, but have struggled to put that into words, and you did well.

Brothgar
03-15-2011, 06:48 PM
Don't we hear every year from many fans that there are no great Qbs in the next Draft. You're just afraid of QBs. You see that they're risky and you get scared. That's fine, but it's a myth that QBs are so risky and other positions are always safe. Every top QB prospect gets compared to Russel, Leaf, Quin etc by scared fans, but you don't see Courtney Brown, Gaines Adams, Jamaal Anderson being mentioned whenever someone talks about a DE. There are busts at every position. At least a QB can be a big part of turning an organization around. The Texans hit on Mario Williams with the #1 pick a few years ago. How many playoff appearances have they had? Jake Long was a solid #1 pick for the Dolphins, yet they're irrelevant without a franchise QB. At least a QB is high risk, high reward. Other position are high risk, low reward in comparison. NFL teams have to have some balls, because no franchise QB means being irrelevant. They can't be like fans and cower away from every top QB prospect. 'Safe' QBs like Andrew Luck rarely come along, and only one team will get him.

Wasn't Locker suppose to be the Safe QB last year?

Halsey
03-15-2011, 06:51 PM
Wasn't Locker suppose to be the Safe QB last year?

Yep, there's a good chance the same fans will be saying "I don't like the QBs in this Draft" again next year....and the next, and the next...

Iamcanadian
03-15-2011, 07:54 PM
Don't we hear every year from many fans that there are no great Qbs in the next Draft. You're just afraid of QBs. You see that they're risky and you get scared. That's fine, but it's a myth that QBs are so risky and other positions are always safe. Every top QB prospect gets compared to Russel, Leaf, Quin etc by scared fans, but you don't see Courtney Brown, Gaines Adams, Jamaal Anderson being mentioned whenever someone talks about a DE. There are busts at every position. At least a QB can be a big part of turning an organization around. The Texans hit on Mario Williams with the #1 pick a few years ago. How many playoff appearances have they had? Jake Long was a solid #1 pick for the Dolphins, yet they're irrelevant without a franchise QB. At least a QB is high risk, high reward. Other position are high risk, low reward in comparison. NFL teams have to have some balls, because no franchise QB means being irrelevant. They can't be like fans and cower away from every top QB prospect. 'Safe' QBs like Andrew Luck rarely come along, and only one team will get him.

150% dead on. Every year we hear the same junk about the QB's, believe me if Luck was in the draft, he would be cut to pieces by many posters looking for their moment of glory.
Gabbert is on practically every team's top 5 on their draft board, that means that every scout has him going quite high and every GM agrees. But what do they know??? The posters above obviously are better scouts than the pros and should be believed. I'd bet money if you examined the track record of the complainers you'd find they doubted Ryan, Flacco, Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman and Bradford but hit it right on Smith so they consider themselves able to breakdown Gabbert's ability.
Now, Gabbert hasn't had his pro day yet so he could still fall flat on his face and prove the doubters right but I don't think it is going to happen, but don't worry, the doubters won't give up, they'll argue it just happened in shorts and that isn't worth anything.
What a tiresome habit, attacking the top QB prospect every year.

FUNBUNCHER
03-15-2011, 09:23 PM
What impresses people about Gabbert being a top five pick, forget 1/1??

I understand his being overdrafted because of the nature of the position, but if a stud at OU like Bradford was knocked, who played in that Sooners passing spread offense like he invented it, what makes someone think automatically not only is Gabbert the number one QB prospect, but one of the top pro prospects in this draft??

There's a lot of future projection and benefit of the doubt being given to Gabbert IMO that hasn't been for other prospects.

Say what you want about Matt Ryan, but in his biggest college football games, he was clutch.

Sanchez was nearly flawless in his one year as a starter at USC.

Flacco was beastly at a lower level of competition and had the elite tools to back up his play.

Raheem Morris was on the coaching staff at K-State when Freeman was there and had a comfort level with selecting him in the first.

Matt Stafford had an elite arm, was a three year starter who improved every year and put up impressive stats his final year in a pro style offense playing in the best football conference in the nation.

It's a false argument IMO to suggest because someone has a problem with Blaine Gabbert's grade in this draft that a fan is afraid of drafting QBs because of their bust potential.

Personally I would take Newton 1/1 overall, Mallett top 10, Locker top 15, and Gabbert top 20.

When there's overwhelming silence about why a QB prospect is worthy of being taken top 5 or higher that doesn't involve arguing he's the best of a flawed group, it tells me that particular prospect is being hyped and not really that good.

Name one thing Gabbert does better or has more of than any other QB prospect in this draft??
Accuracy??
Release??
Velocity??
Mobility??
TDs??
Touch on deeper routes??
Mental toughness??
Physical tools??

Did he play against better competition?? Does he play the game at a higher level than most QBs???

Every QB is an unknown until he arrives in an NFL TC, but I don't see Gabbert becoming the best QB out of this class.
IMO Gabbert tangentially reminds scouts of other former top prospects, which explains the projection that's going on for him.

Brothgar
03-15-2011, 10:01 PM
I am not a fan of Gabbert IMO. But I can see where people do. I like the zip and velocity that comes off of his arm even on the deeper routs. I like how he keeps his eyes down field. But he is NOT going to come in day 1 and be a top tier QB and then you have to wonder if he is going to fail under the fire. As Scott and Shane said on the radio show today. He needs to go somewhere he can sit for a year or two. Carolina already has three young QBs no reason to add another IMO where there are considerable needs elsewhere. To be honest I think any of the top 7 QBs in this draft can be the best QB in 3 years. Newton has the highest ceiling. Mallett has the highest floor. So this kind of thing is difficult. But if you are a first year head coach and you pick a QB round 1 let alone 1 overall your destinies are tied to that QB. If that QB fails you aren't going to be back after 3 years. Is Gabbert or Newton worth the risk. I think Newton is.

hockey619
03-15-2011, 10:08 PM
150% dead on. Every year we hear the same junk about the QB's, believe me if Luck was in the draft, he would be cut to pieces by many posters looking for their moment of glory.
Gabbert is on practically every team's top 5 on their draft board, that means that every scout has him going quite high and every GM agrees. But what do they know??? The posters above obviously are better scouts than the pros and should be believed. said this before when you suggested this, ill say it again: because i see it differently im wrong? they dont always get it right. i dont see it with gabbert. if im wrong, then im wrong. maybe they think he'll be very coachable and they could fix his many flaws, but im not privy to that kind of info. I'd bet money if you examined the track record of the complainers you'd find they doubted Ryan, Flacco, Stafford, Sanchez, Freeman and Bradford but hit it right on Smith so they consider themselves able to breakdown Gabbert's ability.
Now, Gabbert hasn't had his pro day yet so he could still fall flat on his face and prove the doubters right but I don't think it is going to happen, but don't worry, the doubters won't give up, they'll argue it just happened in shorts and that isn't worth anything.
What a tiresome habit, attacking the top QB prospect every year.

Halsey makes a similar post in almost every qb thread every year about everyone hating the top qb, it gets really old really fast. As for the underlined, Im one of Gabbert's biggest haters but....

I really liked Ryan.
I never saw Flacco play, so i had no opinion on him. Same for Freeman.
I liked Stafford (not at first) but probably the least of the guys listed.
I liked Bradford.
I really liked Clausen.
I LOVED LOVED Sanchez.


and from when i was still very new to the process, and long before i started posting....
Hated passionately Leinart
Liked vince quite a bit
Never saw cutler

as a matter of fact, idk if ive ever disliked a top QB prospect since ive been following the draft except Leinart and Stafford for a while. so their goes that incredibly lazy theory, im not just some doubter who always hates the top qb. my opinion is just different. Ive like the top qb most of the time since following the draft.

But i still hate Gabbert. yet everytime i bring up why, no one bothers to read it, they just say the stupid crap that halsey spewed before. YFS saw what i saw. njx too. idk why no one else sees how awful he looks. hes brady quinn 2.0 . everything looks great off the field, but he just doesnt get it done on the field.

+ hes got a very good arm, he can move and keep plays a live, hes smart and has the off the field part down it seems.

- 0 pocket presence at all, looks terrified of the rush when its there and runs from phantom pressure. panics if his first read isnt open. accuracy is very inconsistent. will miss easy reads on plays (the one i pointed out where he had 4 recievers vs 3 dbs and didnt notice)

Halsey
03-15-2011, 10:12 PM
Halsey makes a similar post in almost every qb thread every year about everyone hating the top qb, it gets really old really fast.

Boo hoo :(

I don't post the same thing in every thread, but I will admit I enjoy debatng QBs more than offensive guards and safeties, being that the league revolves around QBs. ;)

hockey619
03-15-2011, 10:15 PM
Boo hoo :(

I don't post the same thing in every thread, but I will admit I enjoy debatng QBs more than offensive guards and safeties, being that the league revolves around QBs. ;)

haha fine, its a similar sentiment in your posts in the other qb threads. fair enough? you did make a good point about qb's being high risk/high reward vs other positions being almost as high risk/not nearly as much reward, ill give you that, that was a good point.

anything else to say about my post? im having trouble figuring out if you are or arent a fan of Gabbert, you kinda defend him but dont really say you like him so idk....

Brothgar
03-15-2011, 10:41 PM
haha fine, its a similar sentiment in your posts in the other qb threads. fair enough? you did make a good point about qb's being high risk/high reward vs other positions being almost as high risk/not nearly as much reward, ill give you that, that was a good point.

anything else to say about my post? im having trouble figuring out if you are or arent a fan of Gabbert, you kinda defend him but dont really say you like him so idk....

In theory his point makes sense but if we were only drafting position that would be fine but we are drafting Player and fact is regardless of position some players just have higher risk than others.

the natural
03-16-2011, 01:00 AM
Well, what's the sin of Gabbert sitting for a year? He is a year younger than Bradford was coming in, so if he sat a season and started his second year he would be at the same point in his career as Sam was at the beginning of this year. None of the rooks had great years. Bradford dinked and dunked all year long in a dumbed down offense and still only ended up with a passer rating in the 70s. Lowest YPA in the league. Lost more than he won. Missed the playoffs. The other rookies for the most part did even less. Freeman was awful as a rookie. Sanchez and Stafford not much better.

jnew76
03-16-2011, 06:24 AM
Well, what's the sin of Gabbert sitting for a year? He is a year younger than Bradford was coming in, so if he sat a season and started his second year he would be at the same point in his career as Sam was at the beginning of this year. None of the rooks had great years. Bradford dinked and dunked all year long in a dumbed down offense and still only ended up with a passer rating in the 70s. Lowest YPA in the league. Lost more than he won. Missed the playoffs. The other rookies for the most part did even less. Freeman was awful as a rookie. Sanchez and Stafford not much better.

What Bradford did on that team was nothing short of remarkable...He lost Donnie Avery before the season for the year. The group of WR's he had was beyond dreadful by NFL standards... One of the worst in the NFL. Very young offensive line that did not protect at a high level, yet Bradford only threw 15 interceptions while at the same time attempting (590) and completing (354) more passes than any rookie QB in NFL history. Bradford showed great understanding of the offense and got the ball out of his hands quickly. He limited the negative plays and kept St. Louis in many games with a chance to win late. In fact, I would argue that taking that Rams team with that talent level and those injuries to a 7-9 season was on par with any rookie season since Peyton Manning.

Brandon Gibson, Laurent Robinson, Danny Amendola, Danario Alexander (undrafted rookie), and Mardy Gilyard (rookie)... None of those names exactly strike fear in the hearts of opposing defenses yet Bradford threw for 3512 yards (2nd most ever by a rookie) and 18 TDs with 15 INTs.

Most impressive IMO is how he stepped in and took control of the offense and made the Rams his team almost immediately. He is not vocal in the media or demonstrative on the field, but he is always in control while being unassuming and down to earth. He is never rattled or flustered. He made mistakes throughout the year, but he never repeated them. He processes information on the field as well as any rookie since Manning.

I honestly believe Bradford is a future HOFer barring injury... I also predict a huge improvement in year 2 as I understand he has the work ethic and drive that few others in the league get close to.

As for Gabbert, there is no question in my mind that he will need to ride the bench until at least the bye week his rookie year, In no area from a mental standpoint is he entering the league on par with where Bradford did as a rookie. Gabbert will be a Sanchez like Interception machine as he learns the NFL game... especially if he is thrown into the fire on day one.

the natural
03-16-2011, 10:43 AM
It would be great to pick the mind of Terry Shea, who gets assigned one QB each year to prepare for the draft. This year it is Gabbert, last year Bradford, two years ago I think he did Stafford and Freeman. Mike Ryan and Joe Flacco as well.
He did say that Bradford was the most accurate QB he had worked with when Sam was drafted. That is about the only comparison I've heard him make. Ben Drogba did say that Blaine was as football smart as Bradford and Ryan coming out. But Shea has a world of information if he chose to share it.

the natural
03-16-2011, 02:05 PM
Few quotes from Shea in Don Banks S.I. article today. Says Gabbert is as good as the other guys he coached recently, Bradford, Stafford, Freeman. His only concern is that having to work with unfamiliar receivers due to lockout may affect his accuracy. Praises his footwork, throwing motion, and ball speed.

Babylon
03-16-2011, 02:36 PM
Few quotes from Shea in Don Banks S.I. article today. Says Gabbert is as good as the other guys he coached recently, Bradford, Stafford, Freeman. His only concern is that having to work with unfamiliar receivers due to lockout may affect his accuracy. Praises his footwork, throwing motion, and ball speed.

Looking forward to Blaine's pro day so we can get away from this he said she said talk.

FUNBUNCHER
03-16-2011, 02:53 PM
Few quotes from Shea in Don Banks S.I. article today. Says Gabbert is as good as the other guys he coached recently, Bradford, Stafford, Freeman. His only concern is that having to work with unfamiliar receivers due to lockout may affect his accuracy. Praises his footwork, throwing motion, and ball speed.

This makes no sense. It's Gabbert's pro day, why not use the WRs he threw to during the season, like most the other QBs did??

Gabbert was expecting to throw to NFL WRs during his pro day???

Brothgar
03-16-2011, 02:56 PM
It would be great to pick the mind of Terry Shea, who gets assigned one QB each year to prepare for the draft. This year it is Gabbert, last year Bradford, two years ago I think he did Stafford and Freeman. Mike Ryan and Joe Flacco as well.
He did say that Bradford was the most accurate QB he had worked with when Sam was drafted. That is about the only comparison I've heard him make. Ben Drogba did say that Blaine was as football smart as Bradford and Ryan coming out. But Shea has a world of information if he chose to share it.

Who is this Mike Ryan you speak of?

Well, what's the sin of Gabbert sitting for a year? He is a year younger than Bradford was coming in, so if he sat a season and started his second year he would be at the same point in his career as Sam was at the beginning of this year. None of the rooks had great years. Bradford dinked and dunked all year long in a dumbed down offense and still only ended up with a passer rating in the 70s. Lowest YPA in the league. Lost more than he won. Missed the playoffs. The other rookies for the most part did even less. Freeman was awful as a rookie. Sanchez and Stafford not much better.

The sin of having your #1 overall QB sitting is that he would be sitting behind Matt Moore, Jimmy Claussen, or Tony Pike. If he isn't good enough to start in front of those three year one he just isn't worth the #1 overall pick.

jnew76
03-16-2011, 09:12 PM
Looking forward to Blaine's pro day so we can get away from this he said she said talk.

+1 Babylon... He needs to have come a long way in a relatively short period of time if he wants to keep the status he currently has in the media and among the big draftniks.

I remember watching Bradford's pro day last year and thinking it was the best one I had ever seen from a QB. He looked bigger, stronger, and had more zip on his throws than he had in his 3 years of playing in college. He also made the 3, 5, and 7 step drops like he had been doing them since he was a kid. Not to mention his ball placement was virtually flawless. I am hoping that Gabbert has put that kind of work into this that Bradford did.

He has the physical tools and intelligence to to be a really good one.. His preparation and attention to detail will be displayed tomorrow. I will be watching ball placement, feet, balance, and shoulder level.

I don't expect the same accuracy from Gabbert that Bradford showed last year. Bradford's accuracy was and is, uncanny... I hope to see the correct mechanics and precision from the ground up. Newton's footwork looked lazy and he lacked precision at his pro day, IMO. It was much better than at the combine, but it just lacked the polish you would expect after working that long on it.

I expect Gabbert to do well... No rush in his face, or imaginary pass rush closing in around him. The situation effectively eliminates two of his major concerns.

holt_bruce81
03-16-2011, 09:40 PM
I expect Gabbert to do well... No rush in his face, or imaginary pass rush closing in around him. The situation effectively eliminates two of his major concerns.

I expect him to do well too. One thing I'd be interested in seeing is his accuracy, his passes during the season beyond 15 yards was around 35%.

He's most accurate deffinetly in the 10-15 yard range, even more accurate in those passes than he is on little short 0-5 yard passes.

I think people will come away amazed with his Arm Strength, I think he's right up there with Ryan Mallett in that category.

Gabbert has his head on straight though, he's got a lot of things you should like about him but has some flaws, but with good coaching he could be a very solid starter in the NFL.

Caulibflower
03-17-2011, 12:07 AM
How much do you want to bet that Gabbert takes off running if he feels the wind ruffle his hair?

the natural
03-17-2011, 01:00 AM
This makes no sense. It's Gabbert's pro day, why not use the WRs he threw to during the season, like most the other QBs did??

Gabbert was expecting to throw to NFL WRs during his pro day???

He isn't allowed to use the Mizzou receivers. No seniors among the group. Not allowed to use former receivers either, so he is using guys from DII and DIII. But not whining about it.

Roddoliver
03-17-2011, 11:19 AM
Darin Gantt of the Charlotte Observer has heard that Missouri QB Blaine Gabbert's arm strength is "ordinary," and there is concern in the league that he was just "not all that productive" in college.

Gabbert's 16:9 touchdown-to-interception ratio is one of the least impressive among this year's signal callers, and his yards-per-attempt average of 6.71 as a junior also ranks dead last in the class. "Bottom line on Blaine Gabbert," wrote Gantt on Twitter late Wednesday, "(I) haven't had one scout, coach, or personnel type I know tell me, 'Love him. Will be a star.'

yourfavestoner
03-17-2011, 11:21 AM
Darin Gantt of the Charlotte Observer has heard that Missouri QB Blaine Gabbert's arm strength is "ordinary," and there is concern in the league that he was just "not all that productive" in college.

Gabbert's 16:9 touchdown-to-interception ratio is one of the least impressive among this year's signal callers, and his yards-per-attempt average of 6.71 as a junior also ranks dead last in the class. "Bottom line on Blaine Gabbert," wrote Gantt on Twitter late Wednesday, "(I) haven't had one scout, coach, or personnel type I know tell me, 'Love him. Will be a star.'

That's funny, because people on here keep telling me that he is the consensus #1 quarterback amongst every league GM, scout, and draft analyst, and that I obviously don't know anything for disagreeing with that infallible consensus.

Babylon
03-17-2011, 11:25 AM
Darin Gantt of the Charlotte Observer has heard that Missouri QB Blaine Gabbert's arm strength is "ordinary," and there is concern in the league that he was just "not all that productive" in college.

Gabbert's 16:9 touchdown-to-interception ratio is one of the least impressive among this year's signal callers, and his yards-per-attempt average of 6.71 as a junior also ranks dead last in the class. "Bottom line on Blaine Gabbert," wrote Gantt on Twitter late Wednesday, "(I) haven't had one scout, coach, or personnel type I know tell me, 'Love him. Will be a star.'

I havent seen a lot of the arm strength either but that doesnt mean it isnt there, hopefully he'll show everthing he has in his tool bag at his pro day.

I havent bought into the hype for him at #1 but i guess you could make the argument if he's a franchise QB then you just take him and then you arent back there every year addressing the same situation. Trading down a little would probably be an option and they could recoup that second they traded.

descendency
03-17-2011, 11:26 AM
That's funny, because people on here keep telling me that he is the consensus #1 quarterback amongst every league GM, scout, and draft analyst, and that I obviously don't know anything for disagreeing with that infallible consensus.

There were 7 lead scouts/GMs that had a split between Gabbert and Newton. (3 gabbert, 4 Newton). But of the 4 that had Newton #1, only 2 had Gabbert #2. One had Gabbert 3rd, the other 4th.

Babylon
03-17-2011, 11:35 AM
That's funny, because people on here keep telling me that he is the consensus #1 quarterback amongst every league GM, scout, and draft analyst, and that I obviously don't know anything for disagreeing with that infallible consensus.

My favorite comment was by an NFLN guy who said he had Gabbert as the #1 QB but admitted to having not really seen him play. The hype machine is a wonderful thing.

hockey619
03-17-2011, 01:31 PM
That's funny, because people on here keep telling me that he is the consensus #1 quarterback amongst every league GM, scout, and draft analyst, and that I obviously don't know anything for disagreeing with that infallible consensus.

gee this keeps happening to me too. but when i post my assessment of him, not only does no one respond and say why my assessment is wrong, no one says anything at all. well, except 'their pro scouts, so they know more than you' and 'everyone always hates the top qb prospect.' im fairly convinced that most of the people backing him havent watched him play very much if at all.

holt_bruce81
03-17-2011, 02:29 PM
I heard gabbert completed 44 of 49 passes and according to Tony softli "looked like a more athletic drew bledsoe"

Brent
03-17-2011, 02:34 PM
that makes no sense. drew bledsoe was as athletic as a tree.

does that make him a vine?

jnew76
03-17-2011, 02:46 PM
I heard gabbert completed 44 of 49 passes and according to Tony softli "looked like a more athletic drew bledsoe"

If this report is accurate -

I am disappointed he was not able to attempt more passes. I am curious to see if he missed on the deep balls like normal. I would call 44/49 a good, not great performance as an initial reaction. Maybe a little better than good considering he was not very familiar with the receivers.

Can't wait to see the tape on this... His footwork needed so much work leading into today...

TACKLE
03-17-2011, 02:49 PM
"Panthers coach Ron Rivera and G.M. Marty Hurney were not seen."

I found this odd. I know they are having a private workout with him this weekend but its strange that they wouldn't even make an appearance at the pro day. I'm not looking into it at all, just surprised me is all.

Brent
03-17-2011, 02:51 PM
"Panthers coach Ron Rivera and G.M. Marty Hurney were not seen."

I found this odd. I know they are having a private workout with him this weekend but its strange that they wouldn't even make an appearance at the pro day. I'm not looking into it at all, just surprised me is all.
why bother to go when you're going to have a private workout? seems like a waste of time.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 02:55 PM
There were 7 lead scouts/GMs that had a split between Gabbert and Newton. (3 gabbert, 4 Newton). But of the 4 that had Newton #1, only 2 had Gabbert #2. One had Gabbert 3rd, the other 4th.

What was the date of this evaluation, and do you have a link? This sounds about right if it was before the combine or even before Newton's pro-day. I am just curious because the media's hype of Gabbert was way too high before the combine IMO, and at the same time the scouts have been slow to admit that Newton is not as much of a sure thing as they thought.

For me, Gabbert's stock has not fallen, I have had him around the 12-15 range since he declared. Newton is the one that has fallen for me... I just don't like anything he has done leading up to the draft. He was not prepared for the combine like he should have been. His pro-day was only above average and was not in line with where he should be in the development process.

TACKLE
03-17-2011, 02:57 PM
why bother to go when you're going to have a private workout? seems like a waste of time.

I guess. It just seems like you would want to have a presence there if this was going to be the guy you take #1 overall. Though I guess its not necessary if it's a logistical inconvenience.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 03:13 PM
I guess. It just seems like you would want to have a presence there regardless if this was going to be your #1 pick. Though I guess its not necessary if it's a logistical inconvenience.

I don't think it makes any sense. If Carolina was seriously considering him at #1 why would they not be there and see Gabbert perform with the pressure of the large number of coaches, GMs, and scouts around him. It makes me think it is unlikely Gabbert is in play at the #1 overall pick.

Brent
03-17-2011, 03:18 PM
I don't think it makes any sense. If Carolina was seriously considering him at #1 why would they not be there and see Gabbert perform with the pressure of the large number of coaches, GMs, and scouts around him. It makes me think it is unlikely Gabbert is in play at the #1 overall pick.
To offer up a counter point, though I can't say I agree with it, how many NFL people are going to think that what they put a prospect through is enough for their evaluation?

Sportsfan486
03-17-2011, 03:41 PM
To offer up a counter point, though I can't say I agree with it, how many NFL people are going to think that what they put a prospect through is enough for their evaluation?

Green Bay hasn't attended the Pro Day workouts of several of our 1st rounders since TT took over. At some point I think teams value the tape, senior bowl, and combine over Pro Days which are really very controlled environments where rarely does anything go wrong. Then again, if I was drafting #1 overall and potentially the face of my franchise I'd be checking him out every chance I had.

Maybe they just are higher on Newton at this point and didn't see the point since they'd take him before Gab?

Sarcastro
03-17-2011, 04:07 PM
Why would Carolina have a private workout with Gabbert scheduled for Saturday if they weren't interested. Would that make any sense?

bucfan12
03-17-2011, 04:09 PM
"Panthers coach Ron Rivera and G.M. Marty Hurney were not seen."

I found this odd. I know they are having a private workout with him this weekend but its strange that they wouldn't even make an appearance at the pro day. I'm not looking into it at all, just surprised me is all.

It is odd as they attended Cam Newtons pro day and scheduled a visit with him. Honestly, this makes more sense and I believe they are leaning towards Newton for number 1 overall.

Minnesota's staff was there and are scheduling a workout/meeting with him for tomorrow, so they seem to have interest if he is to fall.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 04:11 PM
Here is a report from a Carolina Panthers site that has a variety of commentary from different people on how Gabbert performed.

http://www.catscratchreader.com/2011/3/17/2056751/gabbert-impresses-at-pro-day

By James Dator

According to the media there and scouts they have talked to (all but one) Blaine Gabbert turned in a very solid performance at Missouri's pro day today. Due to the unique problem of not having either Missouri receivers, or NFL receivers to assist he ultimately would up passing to players from North West Missouri State and Central Missouri universities with his own receivers unable to take part as they did not declare for the draft, and NFL players locked out of the pro days.

Despite this, Gabbert overcame this issue finishing 44/49 with three drops (which were all called 'catchable passes' by scouts). Perhaps most impressive was that Gabbert took all snaps under center which prompted SI.com's Don Banks to say:

"Concensus of NFL scouts here on Gabbert: He looked like a franchise QB. Answered the issues about footwork, being under center and accuracy."

ESPN and Scouts Inc. reported Todd McShay said of the Pro Day

"Gabbert has enough arm strength. Nowhere near Newton or Mallett but enough to make all the throws"


Carolina Panthers representatives in attendance included QB coach Mike Shula, WR and offensive assistant Ricky Proehl as well as the full compliment of team scouts. The Panthers will now privately workout Gabbert to continue their evaluation, and give head coach Ron Rivera a chance to see the QB.

ESPN's Chris Mortensen talked a lot about the Missouri QB on Twitter this afternoon saying that:

"Just in from one QB market team re: Gabbert: "Solid but not elite, certainly not Bradford or Stafford." 2 other teams much more impressed"

But he quickly qualified those statements saying that there has only been one unanimous QB in the last 30 years, John Elway and went on to compare statements about Blaine Gabbert to those said about Peyton Manning over a decade ago:

"Peyton Manning's NFL detractors in ‘98: arm strength barely above average, didn't spin it, just an average Pro Day workout."

No, this doesn't mean Mort thinks that Blaine Gabbert is the next Peyton Manning, but more justification that not everyone said the same thing.

In the end perhaps the most glowing review came from ESPN's NFL Insider and former NFL executive Tony Softli who said of Gabbert:

"Carolina Panthers will have a difficult decision after the Gabbert workout!! Wow!! A more athletic Drew Bledsoe!"

I'm not sure if that's what Gabbert will end up like, if true it sounds good to me, but Softli is right about one thing: The Panthers do have a difficult decision.

__________________________________________________ _____________________

Here is what Gil Brandt had to say about Gabbert's workout -

http://blogs.nfl.com/category/pro-days/

Gabbert answers questions about accuracy

Posted: March 17th, 2011 | Gil Brandt | Tags: Missouri pro day, Blaine Gabbert, Cam Newton

COLUMBIA, Mo. — Six NFL head coaches, including four whose teams have picks among the top eight in next month’s draft, showed up here at Missouri’s pro day seeking answers to a few questions concerning quarterback Blaine Gabbert, most notably his deep-pass accuracy.

Gabbert couldn’t have done better had he borrowed Drew Brees‘ right arm. All the questions about his accuracy should start to go away after his workout in front of approximately 125 scouts, coaches and GMs.

He threw 50 passes, only one of which was uncatchable — a “go” route he overthrew to the left on his 36th attempt. He had one other pass, a deep post, that probably would have been intercepted in an NFL game. Other than those two passes, he showed remarkable accuracy at all points on the field. He also showed how athletic he is, good velocity on his passes, and an ability to get the ball out of his hand quickly.

His workout was outstanding — much better than Cam Newton’s at Auburn’s pro day on April 8. Newton had six passes that were uncatchable at his workout, although it was outdoors in windy conditions. I wrote after Newton’s workout that he should go No. 1 to the Panthers. I’m not so sure now.

Personally, I don’t think you could go wrong with either one of the quarterbacks. As Bucky Brooks explained in his War Room Debate comparing the two, it’s going to come down to the scheme each QB-needy team runs and which quarterback is the better fit.

The head coaches who were in attendance included Denver’s John Fox, Cincinnati’s Marvin Lewis, Tennessee’s Mike Munchak, San Francisco’s Jim Harbaugh, Minnesota’s Leslie Frazier, and the Jets’ Rex Ryan. It was the largest contingent of head coaches to show up at a pro day this year.

Other notables in attendance included Buffalo GM Buddy Nix, Tennessee GM Mike Reinfeldt and offensive coordinator Chris Palmer, and Lions GM Martin Mayhew.

SchizophrenicBatman
03-17-2011, 04:14 PM
Where is this Gabbert doesn't have good arm strength thing coming from? Do people even watch QBs these days or is media scouting like twitter now where one idiot says something and everyone runs with it?

Gabbert has problems, his arm isn't one of them. It's not as good as Mallett's, no one's is

hockey619
03-17-2011, 04:22 PM
Where is this Gabbert doesn't have good arm strength thing coming from? Do people even watch QBs these days or is media scouting like twitter now where one idiot says something and everyone runs with it?

Gabbert has problems, his arm isn't one of them. It's not as good as Mallett's, no one's is

yeah i dont get it. i dont like him as a prospect, but his arm is definitely not on the list of concerns for me. i cant believe even on guy brought it up as a possible issue. if you watch him its clear his arm is more than good enough to get the job done.

yourfavestoner
03-17-2011, 04:25 PM
Where is this Gabbert doesn't have good arm strength thing coming from? Do people even watch QBs these days or is media scouting like twitter now where one idiot says something and everyone runs with it?

Gabbert has problems, his arm isn't one of them. It's not as good as Mallett's, no one's is

Yeah, I don't get that either. From what I've seen, his velocity on throws to the wide side of the field (true indicator of arm strength) had plenty of zip on them. No floating at all.

I do find this part amusing, though:
He looked like a franchise QB. Answered the issues about footwork, being under center and accuracy

I remember everyone (here and in the media) saying how none of that mattered for Tebow last year, because the second NFL bullets started flying, he'd go right back to his poor fundamentals and bad habits. Considering that Gabbert's main flaw is the worst you can have in a QB (constant panic) and it can only be measured when bullets are actually flying, I'll be interested to hear peoples' reaction to this.

Roddoliver
03-17-2011, 04:35 PM
Pro Day, in my opinion can't answer many questions about a QB. There are no pads, no pass rush. WRs are not fighting against DBs, no adjustments.

EDIT: All I need to remember is Mike Mayock saying that JaMarcus Russell had the best Pro Day he has ever seen.

nepg
03-17-2011, 04:46 PM
Pro Day, in my opinion can't answer many questions about a QB. There are no pads, no pass rush. WRs are not fighting against DBs, no adjustments.

EDIT: All I need to remember is Mike Mayock saying that JaMarcus Russell had the best Pro Day he has ever seen.
False. You can see what he's been working on and how far along he is in his progress towards fixing whatever flaws were pointed out to him. Footwork is an issue with all of the QBs in this draft. That is definitely something you can see at a Pro Day.

descendency
03-17-2011, 05:01 PM
What was the date of this evaluation, and do you have a link? This sounds about right if it was before the combine or even before Newton's pro-day. I am just curious because the media's hype of Gabbert was way too high before the combine IMO, and at the same time the scouts have been slow to admit that Newton is not as much of a sure thing as they thought.

It was at the combine. I can't find the link, but it was posted here numerous times.

Brent
03-17-2011, 05:04 PM
Gabbert's main flaw is the worst you can have in a QB (constant panic) and it can only be measured when bullets are actually flying, I'll be interested to hear peoples' reaction to this.
Alex Smith ring a bell?

Roddoliver
03-17-2011, 05:04 PM
False. You can see what he's been working on and how far along he is in his progress towards fixing whatever flaws were pointed out to him. Footwork is an issue with all of the QBs in this draft. That is definitely something you can see at a Pro Day.

You can see the 5 and 7-step drops... Without pressure. I think even the footwork changes under pressure during a game with defensive players coming after the QB. The Pro Day can answer a few questions, but like I mentioned before, it does not answer many questions, in my opinion. And for guys like Newton and Gabbert, one of the most important things will be reading a defense, making multiple reads under pressure and deliver an accurate pass. The Pro Day does not show that.

descendency
03-17-2011, 05:06 PM
I would call 44/49 a good, not great performance as an initial reaction.

I wouldn't say it helped him (or hurt him). Scripted throws with less than 60 attempts with familiar WRs and no pass rush = should be almost perfect.

Sarcastro
03-17-2011, 05:10 PM
I wouldn't say it helped him (or hurt him). Scripted throws with less than 60 attempts with familiar WRs and no pass rush = should be almost perfect.

He wasn't all that familiar with the WRs. Due to the lockout, he could only use draft eligible receivers for his pro day. There were no draft eligible receivers out of Missouri this year, so he used WRs from smaller Missouri schools. He has been practicing with them for three or so days.

bucfan12
03-17-2011, 05:17 PM
I wouldn't say it helped him (or hurt him). Scripted throws with less than 60 attempts with familiar WRs and no pass rush = should be almost perfect.

The thing is, he wasn't throwing to familiar WRs. If you watched ESPN today, he was throwing to guys from local community colleges and some D2 WRs. Not 100% sure the reason he didn't have his Missouri WRs on hand for the pro day, but this speaks volumes that he has to adjust and get to know new WRs.

descendency
03-17-2011, 05:22 PM
Due to the lockout, he could only use draft eligible receivers for his pro day.

What does the lockout have to do with it?

He's the first QB I've ever seen with a pro day with unfamiliar WRs.

Halsey
03-17-2011, 05:28 PM
You don't understand the Draft if you don't think the Panthers should be looking at Gabbert. Even if they don't want him, they should try to make other teams think they might.

jnew76
03-17-2011, 05:40 PM
What does the lockout have to do with it?

He's the first QB I've ever seen with a pro day with unfamiliar WRs.

It means that he would have had Danario Alexander and Jeremy Maclin there catching passes (both said they were scheduled to participate). Two guys who have both caught countless balls from him before, are NFL WR's with NFL hands, and who he is intimately familiar with on the field.

Other than that there would have been no difference.

BTW - Gil Brandt reports that three of the incompletions were drops that should have been caught. I wonder if DA and JMac would have changed the number?

Caulibflower
03-17-2011, 06:09 PM
Darin Gantt of the Charlotte Observer has heard that Missouri QB Blaine Gabbert's arm strength is "ordinary," and there is concern in the league that he was just "not all that productive" in college.

Gabbert's 16:9 touchdown-to-interception ratio is one of the least impressive among this year's signal callers, and his yards-per-attempt average of 6.71 as a junior also ranks dead last in the class. "Bottom line on Blaine Gabbert," wrote Gantt on Twitter late Wednesday, "(I) haven't had one scout, coach, or personnel type I know tell me, 'Love him. Will be a star.'

Good point about what the scouts are saying. He's totally defaulting to "top QB" by not being considered a scrambler. Even though that's because he's really just a bad scrambler.

the natural
03-17-2011, 06:41 PM
You don't understand the Draft if you don't think the Panthers should be looking at Gabbert. Even if they don't want him, they should try to make other teams think they might.

They do want Gabbert. Or at least more than Newton. They are just hoping the team that Newton is considered "ideal" for, Buffalo, will trade up with them. So they plant stuff with the local reporters to make it seem they are hot on Newt. Going from #3 to #1 on the draft value chart cost the equivalent of a late first round pick. They could get #3 plus Buffalo's first next year for the exchange. Denver is unlikely to go QB (although they might trade as well), so Gabbert would almost certainly be there at #3.

hockey619
03-17-2011, 06:56 PM
Alex Smith ring a bell?

i was thinking quinn but smith is a pretty good example too. he can do everything off the field and tell you every read hes supposed to make. but when hes on the field hes too jittery.

They do want Gabbert. Or at least more than Newton. They are just hoping the team that Newton is considered "ideal" for, Buffalo, will trade up with them. So they plant stuff with the local reporters to make it seem they are hot on Newt. Going from #3 to #1 on the draft value chart cost the equivalent of a late first round pick. They could get #3 plus Buffalo's first next year for the exchange. Denver is unlikely to go QB (although they might trade as well), so Gabbert would almost certainly be there at #3.

bolded:
Link? or is this pure speculation (ill answer for you, yes it is) based on the fact that you like gabbert more than newton and think carolina should too?

nepg
03-17-2011, 09:32 PM
You can see the 5 and 7-step drops... Without pressure. I think even the footwork changes under pressure during a game with defensive players coming after the QB. The Pro Day can answer a few questions, but like I mentioned before, it does not answer many questions, in my opinion. And for guys like Newton and Gabbert, one of the most important things will be reading a defense, making multiple reads under pressure and deliver an accurate pass. The Pro Day does not show that.

Nothing shows that a QB will be able to do that in the NFL. The Pro Days (for QBs) are to see what the guy has been working on, how much he's improved in those areas since the team last saw him, and to get more interviews in.

Babylon
03-17-2011, 09:37 PM
i was thinking quinn but smith is a pretty good example too. he can do everything off the field and tell you every read hes supposed to make. but when hes on the field hes too jittery.



bolded:
Link? or is this pure speculation (ill answer for you, yes it is) based on the fact that you like gabbert more than newton and think carolina should too?

the natural does tend to speculate, not someone that dabbles in facts very much.

bored of education
03-17-2011, 09:38 PM
very good pro day with some guys he has never thrown to

Caulibflower
03-17-2011, 10:00 PM
OMGZZZZ HE HAD SUCH A GOOD PRO DAY HE IS WORTHY TO BE DRAFTED NO. 1!

Seriously. His gametape ******* sucks.

Also, I am not going to post about Blaine Gabbert anymore. He's overrated. I have nothing else to add.

Iamcanadian
03-17-2011, 10:00 PM
They do want Gabbert. Or at least more than Newton. They are just hoping the team that Newton is considered "ideal" for, Buffalo, will trade up with them. So they plant stuff with the local reporters to make it seem they are hot on Newt. Going from #3 to #1 on the draft value chart cost the equivalent of a late first round pick. They could get #3 plus Buffalo's first next year for the exchange. Denver is unlikely to go QB (although they might trade as well), so Gabbert would almost certainly be there at #3.

Actually, if they want to trade down, they are far more likely to say they aren't interested in one, that would bring the teams interested in one to come forth and trade for their pick.
If it appears to other teams that they are interested in taking a QB then Denver is the team that would be receiving trade interest not Carolina.

PiedmontPanther
03-17-2011, 10:22 PM
Darin Gantt of the Charlotte Observer has heard that Missouri QB Blaine Gabbert's arm strength is "ordinary," and there is concern in the league that he was just "not all that productive" in college.

Gabbert's 16:9 touchdown-to-interception ratio is one of the least impressive among this year's signal callers, and his yards-per-attempt average of 6.71 as a junior also ranks dead last in the class. "Bottom line on Blaine Gabbert," wrote Gantt on Twitter late Wednesday, "(I) haven't had one scout, coach, or personnel type I know tell me, 'Love him. Will be a star.'

Gantt is nothing but an uninformed beatwriter.Same guy that hammered Newton telling everyone no way no how for months.

Those stats don't mean much to me anyway,I saw a guy(Clausen)who threw 28 TD's in college throw 3 in 13 games he got into and 0 to a WR.What happened there?We have zero talent at QB believe me when I tell you this they need serious help.

Babylon
03-17-2011, 10:41 PM
Gantt is nothing but an uninformed beatwriter.Same guy that hammered Newton telling everyone no way no how for months.

Those stats don't mean much to me anyway,I saw a guy(Clausen)who threw 28 TD's in college throw 3 in 13 games he got into and 0 to a WR.What happened there?We have zero talent at QB believe me when I tell you this they need serious help.

So do you take a QB at #1 who may be overrated or trade down ten spots or so and recoup that second rounder. At #10 you could arguably still get as good a QB.

Chris
03-17-2011, 10:48 PM
Also, I am not going to post about Blaine Gabbert anymore. He's overrated. I have nothing else to add.

As you usually never do.

PiedmontPanther
03-17-2011, 10:52 PM
So do you take a QB at #1 who may be overrated or trade down ten spots or so and recoup that second rounder. At #10 you could arguably still get as good a QB.

I would prefer a tradedown to 3-5 maybe a little lower and still grab a QB with that pick.Then we rebuild the D-line(DT's)with the 2nd rounder.DT is as bad as QB they are the weakest spots on the team.

Wrathman
03-17-2011, 11:01 PM
Today, Mayock called Gabbert's arm "good enough" for the NFL. That is certainly far from saying he has a cannon or saying his arm is comparable to Mallett...which I've read a lot here. Can we officially let go of that myth?

Who's with me on this? :p

Halsey
03-17-2011, 11:21 PM
There are QBs whose arms get stronger in the NFL. Mel Kiper talked about this recently. Go watch Peyton Manning in college and his passes certainly suggest he's developed his arm strength. Gabbert won't be 22 until October. Not only does his arm seem strong enough, but it's possible it could get stronger.

Wrathman
03-17-2011, 11:28 PM
There are QBs whose arms get stronger in the NFL. Mel Kiper talked about this recently. Go watch Peyton Manning in college and his passes certainly suggest he's developed his arm strength. Gabbert won't be 22 until October. Not only does his arm seem strong enough, but it's possible it could get stronger.

That's a good point as well and it is far more accurate than some of what has been put forth here in the past.

Iamcanadian
03-17-2011, 11:54 PM
So do you take a QB at #1 who may be overrated or trade down ten spots or so and recoup that second rounder. At #10 you could arguably still get as good a QB.

You could also find that quite a few GM's lied or disguised their intentions and find yourself without a QB at #10. How does a GM explain to his owner why he failed to get a QB after the owner made it clear he wanted one?
Carolina was terrible on offense, do you think their fans will stand for having Moore or Clausen as their starters next year and how do you explain to your owner why his stadium is around 25% empty for each game. You have to give your fan base hope or it is only reasonable that many of them won't buy tickets. A rookie QB can keep a stadium filled for 3 years even if he flops in the end, because for 3 years, fans can hope that their young QB will finally develop.
Of course, the GM has to believe the QB taken #1 overall has a real shot or I'm sure he can tell his owner that there just isn't a top talent available, however if he uses that excuse, he better be 100% sure because if somebody like Ryan develops, he probably never gets hired as a GM again.

Babylon
03-18-2011, 12:09 AM
Today, Mayock called Gabbert's arm "good enough" for the NFL. That is certainly far from saying he has a cannon or saying his arm is comparable to Mallett...which I've read a lot here. Can we officially let go of that myth?

Who's with me on this? :p

I think Mayock probably sees Matt Ryan type potential in Gabbert, from that standpoint he doesnt need to have a cannon for an arm. As for Mallett i dont remember anyone in here saying Blaine or anyone else had as good an arm.

SchizophrenicBatman
03-18-2011, 12:42 AM
I don't think the Panthers are seriously considering Gabbert at 1. They (ie, their drafting under Marty Hurney) place a heavier emphasis on college production than pro potential. They would've never taken the risk on Freeman, for instance

With that said, I'll restate that Darin Gantt is the "lead beat writer" almost by default and has little actual knowledge or access to the team

FWIW, Peyton's arm still isn't that strong

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 02:36 AM
Just saw clips from Gabbert's pro day on NFLN. From what they showed, his ball placement on inside throws was off, just like it was in games. One of the drops he had was behind the receiver and another pass over the middle was high and the receiver had to come off the ground for it. More evidence to my point that he really struggles throwing on inside routes.

Spread passing offenses are predicated on stretching the defense horizontally and allowing WRs to get YAC in space. Maybe the reason his numbers were so underwhelming is because his receivers don't get the opportunity to catch the ball in stride and make plays after the catch.

His throws on the run and to the outside quadrants of the field looked good. But we've known that all along.

Brothgar
03-18-2011, 02:48 AM
OK let us forget for a moment all of our personal feelings and lets re-evaluate these prospects.

Q5nGYHLeB2g

Blane Gabbert

vmOdPJej0NE
0CVHKNAyLuo

Cam Newton

I would like something closer to what I have for Gabbert for cam. More of a Highlight/Lowlight thing going on Cam but I couldn't find one. If anyone can find one + Rep for them. And I will replace it in the post.




Stats vs top competition.
Cam
DATE OPP RESULT C A YDS C% LN T I RAT A Y A L TD
10/23 LSU W 24-17 10 16 86 62.5 17 0 0 107.65 28 217 7.8 49 2
@Oregon W 22-19 20 34 265 58.8 39 2 1 137.82 22 64 2.9 18 0
10/16 Ark W 65-43 10 14 140 71.4 28 1 0 179.00 25 188 7.5 40 3
9/25 SC W 35-27 16 21 158 76.2 20 2 0 170.82 25 176 7.0 54 3
9@MissSt W 17-14 11 19 136 57.9 39 2 1 142.23 18 70 3.9 17 0
@Alab W 28-27 13 20 216 65.0 70 3 0 205.22 22 39 1.8 12 1
12/4 @SC W 56-17 17 28 335 60.7 62 4 0 208.35 14 73 5.2 25 2

Gabbert
10 @Neb L 31-17 18 42 199 42.9 29 1 1 85.75 22 74 3.4 29 0
IB @Iowa L 27-24 41 57 434 71.9 32 1 2 134.66 13 -7 -0.5 10 1



I used the BCS top 25 as an arbatrary Top competition standard. But Gabbert only played one game against a BCS top 25 team so I added the game against Iowa who has several pro caliber defenders and play a D similar to the ones seen in the NFL.

We could look at common opponents if there were any but there are not.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 02:54 AM
I'm switching back and forth between the NC Game and Ark/OSU to watch some Mallett and Newton. I'm going to get around to watching a few games of all these guys, I swear.

No personal attachments feelings here, though. I have no attachments to any of these prospects, I've just started breaking them down.

Brothgar
03-18-2011, 03:02 AM
I'm switching back and forth between the NC Game and Ark/OSU to watch some Mallett and Newton. I'm going to get around to watching a few games of all these guys, I swear.

No personal attachments feelings here, though. I have no attachments to any of these prospects, I've just started breaking them down.

My comment was more towards the natural and a few others.

hockey619
03-18-2011, 08:17 AM
I'm switching back and forth between the NC Game and Ark/OSU to watch some Mallett and Newton. I'm going to get around to watching a few games of all these guys, I swear.

No personal attachments feelings here, though. I have no attachments to any of these prospects, I've just started breaking them down.

I like Mallett best. obviously i dont have inside info on him as a person and ive never met him and i dont think its fair to drop him based on things no one really knows for sure about.

Also, why is no one liking ricky stanzi? i really like what ive seen from him, i wonder why some people have him as a mid round guy. i think hes easily a second round worthy.

Id rank em
Mallett 1
Stanzi early 2
Newton 2
Locker (keep flippin back and forth on him and newton) 2
Gabbert 4-5

though i havent seen a number of guys (ponder, kap, enderle) play

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
03-18-2011, 08:19 AM
Stolen from Dr. Saturday over at yahoo...

"He generated no Heisman buzz, didn't get a sniff from the postseason All-America teams, doesn't own a single school passing record. Big 12 coaches thought he was no better than the third-best quarterback in the conference last year, behind at least Oklahoma State's Brandon Weeden and Baylor's Robert Griffin. He didn't stretch defenses downfield to any notable degree. Statistically, he ranked seventh among regular Big 12 starters in completion percentage, eighth in yards per attempt, eighth in touchdown:interception ratio and eighth in pass efficiency rating, the most important number in the game aside from the scoreboard. (Gabbert's efficiency rating was 64th nationally. Compare that to the other certain top-10 quarterback in this draft class, Cam Newton, who finished second nationally with one of the most efficient seasons in college history, besides emerging as one of the nation's most unstoppable runners and best fourth-quarter rally-maker.) ighth in the conference in scoring offense last year after ranking sixth with Gabbert pulling the trigger in 2009, and made it to 10 wins largely by virtue of the league's No. 1 scoring defense. The Tigers were basically out of contention for a Big 12 title or BCS bid by early November, and out of the top 15 in the final polls after an Insight Bowl loss to Iowa a game they led until the Hawkeyes took an awful Gabbert interception to the house for the game-winning touchdown with five minutes to play. Mizzou fans will follow his pro career with pride, but it's hard to imagine them ever revering Gabbert's memory as a Tiger the way they do either of his predecessors, Chase Daniel and Brad Smith two far more exciting, productive players, and in Daniel's case, the face of the greatest season in school history in 2007. (And it was later still, in his less celebrated senior campaign in 2008, that Daniel actually set all of Missouri's single-season passing records.)"

Throwing the late pick against iowa in the bowl game i won't forget.

no bare feet
03-18-2011, 08:58 AM
..because what you do in college is the sole indicator of how your game will project in the NFL. What a long waste of words from that guy.

Halsey
03-18-2011, 09:44 AM
Gotta love the post talking about games vs top competition, but not including Missouri vs #1 Oklahoma. Way to break it down...

brat316
03-18-2011, 09:58 AM
I really haven't taken a side to any of the qbs this year. I'm pulling for Locker, but not really picking him apart and saying if he will make it or bust.

hockey619
03-18-2011, 09:58 AM
Gotta love the post talking about games vs top competition, but not including Missouri vs #1 Oklahoma. Way to break it down...

So are you on the gabbert bandwagon? because so far youve come in and dropped a bunch of comments without offering any personal evaluation of gabbert or saying you think he'll be good or fail miserably.

no bare feet
03-18-2011, 10:02 AM
I have made my case:
http://draftcountdown.com/forum/search.php

Sarcastro
03-18-2011, 10:11 AM
Gotta love the post talking about games vs top competition, but not including Missouri vs #1 Oklahoma. Way to break it down...

Or Texas A&M.

619
03-18-2011, 10:17 AM
Gabbert's pro day wasn't even that good. Personally, he's grouped in the same category as Locker, except he's got better size and arguably better intangibles. I can't believe scouts, and respected pundits like Mayock, are actually praising this guy for the top overall selection.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 10:25 AM
NFLN had Jon Jansen (former Redskins OT) on and were asking him about who he'd prefer between Newton and Gabbert. And he said Gabbert because he doesn't "like a guy who will just take off and run - as an offensive lineman you like a guy who will be cool in the pocket and you can know where he is."

That made me laugh.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 10:26 AM
Gabbert's pro day wasn't even that good. Personally, he's grouped in the same category as Locker, except he's got better size and arguably better intangibles. I can't believe scouts, and respected pundits like Mayock, are actually praising this guy for the top overall selection.

Agreed. On the last page I noted that he struggled throwing over the middle, which is consistent with what you see on the field. His NFL WRs are going to get drilled and struggle getting YAC, or they're going to end up in the hospital with the way Gabbert tends to sail his balls over the middle.

hockey619
03-18-2011, 10:27 AM
NFLN had Jon Jansen (former Redskins OT) on and were asking him about who he'd prefer between Newton and Gabbert. And he said Gabbert because he doesn't "like a guy who will just take off and run - as an offensive lineman you like a guy who will be cool in the pocket and you can know where he is."

That made me laugh.

hahaha i was watching that and thought of this thread when he said that, i looked over at my brother and was like thats bs gabbert takes off at the first sign of football being played.

619
03-18-2011, 10:28 AM
NFLN had Jon Jansen (former Redskins OT) on and were asking him about who he'd prefer between Newton and Gabbert. And he said Gabbert because he doesn't "like a guy who will just take off and run - as an offensive lineman you like a guy who will be cool in the pocket and you can know where he is."

That made me laugh.

His opinion doesn't matter. You want the best football player, period. And that's Cam Newton here.

I have faith that the league scouts won't **** up this evaluation. This would almost be as bad as when Chad Pennington was the top QB selected in his draft year, except he was nowhere near the top selection.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 10:29 AM
hahaha i was watching that and thought of this thread when he said that, i looked over at my brother and was like thats bs gabbert takes off at the first sign of football being played.

It honestly makes me wonder if anybody on TV has even watched a single ******* game that he's played in. I've only seen two (one from 2009 and the Illinois game this past season) and saw a chicken running around with its head cut off for four quarters.

Halsey
03-18-2011, 10:30 AM
So are you on the gabbert bandwagon? because so far youve come in and dropped a bunch of comments without offering any personal evaluation of gabbert or saying you think he'll be good or fail miserably.

I think he's a talented QB prospect who has a lot of the qualities needed to be an effective starting QB in today's NFL. I don't view him as 'can't miss' or anything, but NFL teams can't wait to find a can't miss QB. Other than Andrew Luck, I don't see any QB in this Draft or college that strike me a significantly better prospect than Gabbert. Assuming he stays healthy, I believe he'll be a good starting QB.

619
03-18-2011, 10:34 AM
It honestly makes me wonder if anybody on TV has even watched a single ******* game that he's played in. I've only seen two (one from 2009 and the Illinois game this past season) and saw a chicken running around with its head cut off for four quarters.

Haha, that's a great analogy! That's really what it seemed like during most of the game action that I saw the last two years. I don't know what Jon Jansen is talking about, because this guy isn't the 'cool, calm and collected' type of QB when in the pocket; he panics a lot of the time when pressure is applied. In fact, as noted in this thread before, his better throws are made outside of the pocket.

hockey619
03-18-2011, 10:37 AM
It honestly makes me wonder if anybody on TV has even watched a single ******* game that he's played in. I've only seen two (one from 2009 and the Illinois game this past season) and saw a chicken running around with its head cut off for four quarters.

im rather convinced they havent seen much. Hes got some tools to work with, but you cant teach a guy to have balls.

ive asked people for what games they thought he looked like a legit qb in and havent really gotten an anwser. i wonder if im just seeing the wrong games, because theirs just no way that me and mayock are watching the same games, hes seeing what im seeing, and hes still endorsing Gabbert. as noted in many places im also surprised by the lack of stanzi love, hes slowly becoming my favorite qb in this class, the more i see the more i like him.

I think he's a talented QB prospect who has a lot of the qualities needed to be an effective starting QB in today's NFL. I don't view him as 'can't miss' or anything, but NFL teams can't wait to find a can't miss QB. Other than Andrew Luck, I don't see any QB in this Draft or college that strike me a significantly better prospect than Gabbert. Assuming he stays healthy, I believe he'll be a good starting QB.

fair enough, was just curious cause you kept defending taking a qb but didnt necessarily say you thought hed work out or should be the pick. i disagree (obviously) but to each his own i guess, i just dont see it with the guy.

Halsey
03-18-2011, 10:37 AM
It honestly makes me wonder if anybody on TV has even watched a single ******* game that he's played in. I've only seen two (one from 2009 and the Illinois game this past season) and saw a chicken running around with its head cut off for four quarters.

So you're taking two games that a QB played in before he even turned 21 and concluding he'll never be a quality starter in the NFL?

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 10:43 AM
So you're taking two games that a QB played in before he even turned 21 and concluding he'll never be a quality starter in the NFL?

Yup. And it's not like I just went looking for bad film on him. Judging by box scores, the Illinois game was his second best game of the year. These aren't mechanical issues or anything that can really be improved upon with practice or repetition. He has happy feet, is afraid to get hit, and is prone to panic. He takes off running (and not up the field mind you - he starts running around in and out of the pocket behind the LOS) when his first read isn't open, whether he has pressure or not. I really don't give a damn how well Tom Condon prepares him for the path to the draft, I really don't see how he'll overcome those issues once he actually has NFL linemen breathing down his neck instead of Big-12 Ghost Rushers.

Brent made an Alex Smith comparison a few pages back, and I think that's spot on (with better physical tools, obviously). He's smart, (reportedly) has a good football IQ, says all the right things, looks the part, etc. etc. If you're afraid of getting hit, though, none of that **** really matters.

hockey619
03-18-2011, 10:47 AM
So you're taking two games that a QB played in before he even turned 21 and concluding he'll never be a quality starter in the NFL?

What games should we be basing it on then? Which games have people seen where he looked so good they thought "this guy can be a real player at the next level" ?

Bob Sanders Dreadlock
03-18-2011, 10:50 AM
..because what you do in college is the sole indicator of how your game will project in the NFL. What a long waste of words from that guy.

The late pick against Iowa was one of the worst throws i've ever seen. Amazing how much hype he has gotten after such a ****** throw. On a big stage he totally blew it.

Sarcastro
03-18-2011, 10:54 AM
im rather convinced they havent seen much. Hes got some tools to work with, but you cant teach a guy to have balls.

ive asked people for what games they thought he looked like a legit qb in and havent really gotten an anwser. i wonder if im just seeing the wrong games, because theirs just no way that me and mayock are watching the same games, hes seeing what im seeing, and hes still endorsing Gabbert. as noted in many places im also surprised by the lack of stanzi love, hes slowly becoming my favorite qb in this class, the more i see the more i like him.



fair enough, was just curious cause you kept defending taking a qb but didnt necessarily say you thought hed work out or should be the pick. i disagree (obviously) but to each his own i guess, i just dont see it with the guy.

I'd say the games Gabbert looked the best were the Oklahoma, Texas A&M, and Iowa games. He threw lots of shorter stuff early in the season, but as the competition got better, he threw more intermediate passes and often much smaller windows to hit. I want to say he looked very good in the K-State too, but my memory of that game is vague.

His worst game was against Texas Tech. He looked awful. Many of the comments I see about Gabbert make me roll my eyes, but if he played every game like he did against Tech, all the negative hyperbole would be true.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 10:56 AM
Well since everyone keeps raving about the Oklahoma game, I'm going to watch it on ESPN3 today if I get free time at work.

Roddoliver
03-18-2011, 11:02 AM
I still think Mallett is the best QB in this class. As far as throwing the ball in the pocket. How he is off the field, I don't know. There are no official reports about his drug abuse, no failed tests. I've read he would score really low in the Wonderlic, but he had an okay test.

yourfavestoner
03-18-2011, 11:04 AM
I still think Mallett is the best QB in this class. As far as throwing the ball in the pocket. How he is off the field, I don't know. There are no official reports about his drug abuse, no failed tests. I've read he would score really low in the Wonderlic, but he had an okay test.

I started watching Arkansas' bowl game last night and was absolutely floored by his ball placement.

hockey619
03-18-2011, 11:06 AM
I'd say the games Gabbert looked the best were the Oklahoma, Texas A&M, and Iowa games. He threw lots of shorter stuff early in the season, but as the competition got better, he threw more intermediate passes and often much smaller windows to hit. I want to say he looked very good in the K-State too, but my memory of that game is vague.

His worst game was against Texas Tech. He looked awful. Many of the comments I see about Gabbert make me roll my eyes, but if he played every game like he did against Tech, all the negative hyperbole would be true.

i saw that game, i hope he was much better in the first two you mentioned. he wasnt necessarily bad, but he was his usual inconsistent self, throwing behind recievers at times, getting rattled easily, and throwing that god awful pick that was returned really nicely.

i will give him his credit though, he did help them back into the game when they were behind, still didnt think it was a great performance, just one where he showed flashes. certainly wasnt a game where he put it all together. ill have to see if i can go watch the others sometime, didnt see either of those. thanks for actually giving us some examples though, about time someone did.

EDIT:
mallett's the best passer in the class straight up, he really looks like a pro qb throwing the ball out there. its all the off the field stuff none of us really know about that could make or break his career. the only other guy who puts the ball where it belongs even close to mallett is stanzi imo. im not an iowa fan btw, just realized i kinda sound like one with the stanzi love and saying i saw that iowa game.

Brent
03-18-2011, 11:35 AM
I'd say the games Gabbert looked the best were the Oklahoma, Texas A&M, and Iowa games.
they killed us with the screen/dump-off throws. Also, it didn't help that Jerrod Johnson was benched because of that game. They just couldn't get anything going on offense and keep Mizzou off the field.

/Aggie perspective

Babylon
03-18-2011, 11:43 AM
i saw that game, i hope he was much better in the first two you mentioned. he wasnt necessarily bad, but he was his usual inconsistent self, throwing behind recievers at times, getting rattled easily, and throwing that god awful pick that was returned really nicely.

i will give him his credit though, he did help them back into the game when they were behind, still didnt think it was a great performance, just one where he showed flashes. certainly wasnt a game where he put it all together. ill have to see if i can go watch the others sometime, didnt see either of those. thanks for actually giving us some examples though, about time someone did.

EDIT:
mallett's the best passer in the class straight up, he really looks like a pro qb throwing the ball out there. its all the off the field stuff none of us really know about that could make or break his career. the only other guy who puts the ball where it belongs even close to mallett is stanzi imo. im not an iowa fan btw, just realized i kinda sound like one with the stanzi love and saying i saw that iowa game.

Mallett is the best passer as you say but he comes across as a Ryan Leaf type to me and he has no movement in the pocket from what i've seen. The others have questions but the upside is very good.

If i'm drafting in the top 5 or so i'm passing on a QB and at the least thinking of taking one in the early second or trading back into the first round.

FUNBUNCHER
03-18-2011, 12:02 PM
I've liked Stanzi for a while now and think he'll develop into a starter sooner than later, ( kind of hope Harbaugh drafts him!!).
Honestly, can someone make the argument that Gabbert is a better pro prospect than Stanzi?? IMO Stanzi is a playmaker, he's a baller. Yeah he'll make mistakes, but he can carry his entire offense on his back too.

It wouldn't surprise me if NFL GMs, scouts and HCs feel there isn't a 'can't miss' QB prospect in this draft, but still believe there's great depth at the position with several guys who possess significant upside and the potential to eventually become starters.

You know, if draft experts rated Gabbert a solid 1st round prospect and no better than the 3rd or 4th player at his position, I think he'd be receiving almost universal love among draft fans, or at least a mere fraction of the criticism he seems to attract.

It's blowing him up as THE top QB prospect in the 2011 draft and potentially a consensus #1 that's causing people to chop him down, deservedly so.

Babylon
03-29-2011, 03:40 PM
Rob Rang has heard that Locker has serious interest from the Titans, Skins, Vikings, Jags, Dolphins and Niners (the latter would no doubt trade down to the 10-20 range if they were going to take Jake.

I sort of take Rang with a grain of salt but the guy is pretty well thought of. It may be nothing more than teams having interest in a lot of people.

DiG
03-29-2011, 03:50 PM
not sure why the "latter" would trade down if teams at 8 and 10 are interested. ive got him going to sf at 7 in my most current mock. well see as it gets closer.

Babylon
03-29-2011, 04:13 PM
not sure why the "latter" would trade down if teams at 8 and 10 are interested. ive got him going to sf at 7 in my most current mock. well see as it gets closer.

7 might be a spot where a lot of teams in need of a QB might want to trade up to (for any of the top guys). With Harbaugh i think he has that Mike Holmgren type ego that could take someone later and mold him to his liking.

49erNation85
03-29-2011, 08:41 PM
MM Locker to SF is just per awesomeness I mean really what better team to land him a spot there.Only bad thing is he might to start unless we pick up a vet for two years.