PDA

View Full Version : Prospect of the Day: Matt Barkley, QB, USC


Mr. Goosemahn
05-02-2012, 12:03 AM
All right, I'm bringing these threads back! Same premise as before, one prospect thread every day. We should be able to cover almost all of the prospects that are drafted in the high-mid rounds.

I'll start off with the top seniors, and then I'll move forward from there. I think Scott is putting out the list of his top seniors on Wednesday, so I'll use that to start off.

Discuss away!

QB Matt Barkley, USC

#7 - 6'2 – 230 lbs. – 21 years old

http://espn.go.com/photo/2011/1222/ncf_u_barkley_ps_400.jpg

CvZjvjqcMdE

7g3r3wYz_6I

yn8hqpPL_SA

3-Dg_kDQfbI

rzaAkdFavnA

The front-runner to be the #1 overall pick, I think he's a good QB but is not quite on the "elite" tier as Andrew Luck and Matthew Stafford were. Anybody think Pete Carroll tries to trade up to get him?

-------------------------

Previous Prospects of the Day

QB Matt Barkley, USC (http://draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52765)

vidae
05-02-2012, 12:16 AM
Am I the only person who thinks Barkley is a tad overrated? Maybe it's my hatred for most USC prospects that is blinding me from what makes him so special, and I'm fully willing to admit that is the case, but I just don't see #1 overall material here.

ElectricEye
05-02-2012, 12:22 AM
Am I the only person who thinks Barkley is a tad overrated? Maybe it's my hatred for most USC prospects that is blinding me from what makes him so special, and I'm fully willing to admit that is the case, but I just don't see #1 overall material here.

You definitely aren't alone there. There's a fairly well established sentiment that he may not be quite the prospect that the media billing and statistic leads you to believe. The case is somewhat compelling when you look at the track record of USC quarterbacks as well(although you clearly can't use that as the basis of the argument in my opinion). It still early, but I really believe that Bray and Wilson could perhaps challenge Barkley a little bit for the top quarterback spot. Especially Bray, should he come into the season bigger and he puts together the type of season he's shown the capability of having in spurts.

FUNBUNCHER
05-02-2012, 12:26 AM
He's a shorter Matt Ryan.
Very good QB with not elite tools.
If you need a starting QB, IMO Matt Barkley will be an upgrade. And IMO he's a 5x better QB than Mark Sanchez.

Safe pick.

Hellisan
05-02-2012, 12:45 AM
The case is somewhat compelling when you look at the track record of USC quarterbacks as well(although you clearly can't use that as the basis of the argument in my opinion).

I agree, sometimes it's hard not to. In explaining to people why I am not that high on Blackmon, I find it hard not to bring up everybody from Hart-Lee Dykes to Rashaun Woods...

Anyway, on to Barkley. I will say that if it was my pick and Barkley had been in this draft, I would have had a hard time not picking him first. I love Barkley, absolutely love the guy. If I'm in the position to have every one of his tapes and scouts at my disposal who knows what I would come up with...

I watch him play and see a lot of NFL throws. One-on-one fades, hitches, back shoulder throws and plenty of well-placed balls outside the hashes...I have a request... Somebody find me a highlight of Andrew Luck DRIVING a 15-30 yard NFL throw. Like a 12-yard curl or a post route... Seems like everything Stanford runs is play action lobs or quick stuff to the TE or FB. He loves to finesse everything, you can't always do that in the NFL. edit: I will say about Luck that he does have the ability to make a throw look easy but still have good zip sometimes... Clearly has a great arm, but I don't see him producing NFL throws with conviction and ease like Barkley.

My primary concern about Barkley is, what if we learn he's six feet, or six feet and half an inch? Doesn't seem like it to me, but seems like a possibility. I feel confident he will have a great senior season,

I love Barkley, and although I like both Luck and RGIII, I don't think either of their offenses translates as well as Barkley's does. The Colts drafted a couple TE and if they expect to run the same type of plays that Luck built his draft stock around, they will have a tough time. They will need to use them like the Pats do, to stretch the field, and I haven't seen Luck make those types of throws very often.

Check out the throw at 8:34 of the Oregon Ducks video... That is Patriots / NFL type of TE throw. I haven't seen Luck use Fleener in that way. This is a STANDARD throw for Barkley.

SickwithIt1010
05-02-2012, 12:55 AM
Bark doesnt have the elite tools like you see from guys like Stafford, but I do think he is on par or better than Luck in most of their physical tools. Luck is a tad more athletic but Bark is no slouch in that regard. He can make all the throws and is very good mechanically.

With that being said he is listed at 6'2" but like many people have mentioned it seems as though that is pretty generous. I've seen him play in person and while he most definitely doesnt look small, I have seen bigger Quarterbacks. Right now as far as being a Quarterback and how they play the position I rank him number 1 right now, no questions asked. His height is the only thing that may hold him back.

I think you see Wilson's productivity fall this year without his receivers and without Petrino runnin the show. Bray I feel will give him a run for his money, though.

kalbears13
05-02-2012, 01:01 AM
Oregon at ~2:05.

His play action boot and throws on the run are so money.

JHL6719
05-02-2012, 01:07 AM
I've made it a point to study Matt Barkley's height in any instance and every angle/avenue possible for a long time. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that if he isn't 6'2", it's so close that it won't matter.

FUNBUNCHER
05-02-2012, 01:37 AM
As a recruit Barkley was listed as 6'3, so I'm confident Barkley is almost exactly 6 feet two inches.

USC's official heights have been for the most part very accurate.

Dangermouse
05-02-2012, 01:51 AM
I have this guy tabbed as the number 1 and unless he regresses he will keep that. I don't concur with the view he has a weak arm.

359 days till the draft, so we can cover that many prospects.

tjsunstein
05-02-2012, 12:20 PM
Watching the Oregon highlight posted up there, I don't see how he isn't the #1 QB coming out. I also don't see how anyone can not take notice of Marqise Lee (WR, #9), true freshmen in that reel.

kwilk103
05-02-2012, 12:33 PM
Am I the only person who thinks Barkley is a tad overrated? Maybe it's my hatred for most USC prospects that is blinding me from what makes him so special, and I'm fully willing to admit that is the case, but I just don't see #1 overall material here.

could also be that hes been hyped up as the next big qb since his junior year of high school, so you've been hearing about him for 5-6 years

D-Unit
05-02-2012, 12:45 PM
Top 3 pick, but I don't think he'll go #1 overall despite USC winning the National Championship.

Saints-Tigers
05-02-2012, 12:48 PM
I don't see anything "special" when I watch Barkley. Closer to Mark Sanchez than he is to someone like Stafford.

jrdrylie
05-02-2012, 12:52 PM
Watching USC play Stanford last year, I was actually more impressed with Barkley than I was with Luck. I'm not saying Barkley is better than Luck, but in that game I thought he was. I love his accuracy and I think his arm is just as strong as Luck's.

killxswitch
05-02-2012, 01:00 PM
As a prospect I'd put him somewhere between Sam Bradford and Andrew Luck.

I also think it's funny when people don't like a well-known QB, they say "He's a <insert slightly unique characteristic> Matt Ryan".

Iamcanadian
05-02-2012, 01:01 PM
I'd rate Barkley as a top 5 talent but no where near the prospect that Luck and RG111 were. These 2 were the best in at least a decade and Barkley just isn't rated anywhere near as high.
When a QB is rated as a top 5 talent, there is an excellent chance he goes #1 overall considering how important QB's are in the NFL, even if he isn't quite a Luck or a RG111.

Babylon
05-02-2012, 01:16 PM
I'd rate Barkley as a top 5 talent but no where near the prospect that Luck and RG111 were. These 2 were the best in at least a decade and Barkley just isn't rated anywhere near as high.
When a QB is rated as a top 5 talent, there is an excellent chance he goes #1 overall considering how important QB's are in the NFL, even if he isn't quite a Luck or a RG111.

Griffin one of two best in the decade?, that's news to me.

Barkley to me is somewhere between Carson Palmer and Matthew Stafford. His arm is much stronger than most people in here give him credit for.

Iamcanadian
05-02-2012, 01:28 PM
Griffin one of two best in the decade?, that's news to me.

Barkley to me is somewhere between Carson Palmer and Matthew Stafford. His arm is much stronger than most people in here give him credit for.

Matter of opinion I guess on RG111, time will tell.

As for Barkley, I don't see the Palmer/Stafford ranking. They are taller and while I like Barkley's arm, it just isn't in their league, of course, few are.

Hellisan
05-02-2012, 03:58 PM
Matter of opinion I guess on RG111, time will tell.

As for Barkley, I don't see the Palmer/Stafford ranking. They are taller and while I like Barkley's arm, it just isn't in their league, of course, few are.

I find Luck and RGIII to be such an interesting couple of QB's. I am not sold on either one but I would use a rating system similar to how Baseball HQ rates prospects... First the ceiling in a numerical fashion, and then a letter grade (A being the highest)

RGIII is a 10D - Hall of Fame Potential and about a 25% chance or so in my book of reaching it. Due to injuries, the differences from his offense to the NFL style game, and the fact that let's face it despite his speed he is not an instinctive runner hurt him... however if he pans out I can see him leading the league in passing yards and TDs etc. if he stays healthy, being a multiple MVP.

Luck is an 8A for me. Potential Pro Bowler that can win titles with a strong D. I can't see him ever being anywhere near the top of the league in passing or winning an MVP. However he will be the ultimate game manager type QB that inspires his team, keeps the chains moving with strong runs when need be, and has the ability to make a big pass when necessary. Not much chance of him completely flaming out.

Barkley in Comparison is a 9A for me. All Pro caliber. I see him eventually being in the top 10 in passing year after year, and depending upon the quality of his weapons can be a championship-level signal caller.

SenorGato
05-02-2012, 05:39 PM
He's a shorter Matt Ryan.
Very good QB with not elite tools.
If you need a starting QB, IMO Matt Barkley will be an upgrade. And IMO he's a 5x better QB than Mark Sanchez.

Safe pick.

Sanchez is a better athlete but the difference is college experience. Barkley has way more game experience going into the draft.

I'd say he's safe as QBs go...Good prospect.

Iamcanadian
05-02-2012, 07:05 PM
I find Luck and RGIII to be such an interesting couple of QB's. I am not sold on either one but I would use a rating system similar to how Baseball HQ rates prospects... First the ceiling in a numerical fashion, and then a letter grade (A being the highest)

RGIII is a 10D - Hall of Fame Potential and about a 25% chance or so in my book of reaching it. Due to injuries, the differences from his offense to the NFL style game, and the fact that let's face it despite his speed he is not an instinctive runner hurt him... however if he pans out I can see him leading the league in passing yards and TDs etc. if he stays healthy, being a multiple MVP.

Luck is an 8A for me. Potential Pro Bowler that can win titles with a strong D. I can't see him ever being anywhere near the top of the league in passing or winning an MVP. However he will be the ultimate game manager type QB that inspires his team, keeps the chains moving with strong runs when need be, and has the ability to make a big pass when necessary. Not much chance of him completely flaming out.

Barkley in Comparison is a 9A for me. All Pro caliber. I see him eventually being in the top 10 in passing year after year, and depending upon the quality of his weapons can be a championship-level signal caller.

I have to disagree, if Barkley comes out this year, he is the #3 QB in the draft and returning to school isn't going to change that.
Luck, IMO, is a 10A all the way and once Indy gets up to snuff, he will be a sure fire HoF QB quite capable of leading the NFL in passing. Everything about him shouts out Peyton with maybe a true winner thrown in.

RG111 has it all, a great arm, a perfect temperament, no fear, high football IQ and quick feet even if they aren't Vick like. Of course, there are no guarantees but outside of injuries, he should do quite well.

Barkley has some limitations, not a perfect height, solid but not a great arm, comes from a school where he had 2 future All Pro OT's defending him and has superior talent at WR. It is far more difficult to judge how good he will be when he gets to the pros and hasn't all that superior talent around After all, even with all that talent, Oregon has dominated the Pac 12.

tjsunstein
05-02-2012, 07:18 PM
Throw around HOF again when discussing a prospect and I'll double sack whack you.

Raiderz4Life
05-02-2012, 07:34 PM
You know its IIIs not 111s for RGIII?? I will join tj too.

I know its a total pipe dream but I sometimes wish everything would fall into place and Barkley falls and lands on the Raiders haha

I really do think he'll establish himself as #1 this season.

SickwithIt1010
05-02-2012, 07:46 PM
I have to disagree, if Barkley comes out this year, he is the #3 QB in the draft and returning to school isn't going to change that.
Luck, IMO, is a 10A all the way and once Indy gets up to snuff, he will be a sure fire HoF QB quite capable of leading the NFL in passing. Everything about him shouts out Peyton with maybe a true winner thrown in.

RG111 has it all, a great arm, a perfect temperament, no fear, high football IQ and quick feet even if they aren't Vick like. Of course, there are no guarantees but outside of injuries, he should do quite well.

Barkley has some limitations, not a perfect height, solid but not a great arm, comes from a school where he had 2 future All Pro OT's defending him and has superior talent at WR. It is far more difficult to judge how good he will be when he gets to the pros and hasn't all that superior talent around After all, even with all that talent, Oregon has dominated the Pac 12.

Oregon had more talent his freshman and sophomore year, plain and simple. Thats why they won. USC didnt have the type of teams that youve seen USC field his 1st 2 years there. Ive watched every game that he has played while hes been there and he is what makes that offense go. With your comments you make it seem as though when he came out guys like Aaron Corp and Mitch Mustain (who were both 5* recruits) shouldnt have skipped a beat.

Bark is the real deal. He has a better arm than Luck so for people to keep saying that it is on par and what not need to get rid of that. His accuracy isnt as good, but the arm is better. Luck is a better athlete and completes a ton of passes on the run while Bark stays in the pocket a little bit more. With the whole offense being a year older this year his numbers SHOULD improve, or so I hope.

Many do fail to realize that he is doing the same thing guys like Luck and Peyton did in college and he is starting to be the general of that offense and Kiffen is letting him call plays at the line. Hes not missing much, other than that other inch people want.

D-Unit
05-02-2012, 08:14 PM
There might be QBs with more upside, but I think Barkley is the safest and will have a good NFL career if he has at least a halfway decent supporting cast.

Master Exploder
05-02-2012, 08:27 PM
As of right now, I think there's a big defining line between Barkley and the rest of the QB's in this draft class. That may change, but he's got everything you want. Had he came out this year, I find it hard to believe he wouldn't be a Cleveland Brown or maybe even a Washington Redskin right now. I don't really expect him to regress, but we'll see how this season pans out.

Mr. Goosemahn
05-02-2012, 08:30 PM
I think the Browns are really gonna regret taking Weeden by next year. They'll be in a position to draft Barkley, but they'll pass because they have their now-30 sophomore first round QB.

FUNBUNCHER
05-02-2012, 08:47 PM
I think the Browns are really gonna regret taking Weeden by next year. They'll be in a position to draft Barkley, but they'll pass because they have their now-30 sophomore first round QB.


No they won't.
They'll do exactly what Carolina did. If there's a QB available next draft whom the Browns FO feels is a better prospect than Weeden, they'll take him.
Holmgren has never been someone who only has one QB on the roster with starter upside.

D-Unit
05-02-2012, 08:58 PM
I think the Browns are really gonna regret taking Weeden by next year. They'll be in a position to draft Barkley, but they'll pass because they have their now-30 sophomore first round QB.
I really don't think the Browns will be bad enough to be in position to draft Barkley (unless he falls from grace).

Which begs to question... which teams will be looking for new QBs? Seems like most already have the covered with young developing QBs that they invested highly in... Ponder, Locker, Newton, Gabbert, Dalton, Kaepernick all went in 2011, Luck, Griffin, Tannehill, Weeden, Osweiler in 2012... I wonder... which teams will be interested in Barkley, Wilson, Bray, Jones, Manuel...Aaron Murray? There could be GREAT value in the latter part of Round 1. Crazy good value.

Mr. Goosemahn
05-02-2012, 09:19 PM
No they won't.
They'll do exactly what Carolina did. If there's a QB available next draft whom the Browns FO feels is a better prospect than Weeden, they'll take him.
Holmgren has never been someone who only has one QB on the roster with starter upside.

I'm not so sure. Clausen was a mid second round pick, Weeden was mid-late first. He went over 20 picks earlier. And since they know that Weeden will be a project, I think they give him more than one year. And in all honesty, they should. I know Clausen didn't work out and the Panthers look like geniuses for it, but not all rookie QBs explode onto the scene like Cam did.

And not every team does what Carolina did. Jacksonville didn't take Tannehill this year even though Gabbert was downright awful last year. If teams only gave rookies one year to develop, they would be drafting QBs in the first year in and year out. Cleveland should have been drafting QBs every year in the first for the past five years, but they didn't. They gave Quinn his chance, then they gave McCoy his, and now they will give Weeden his.

Mr. Goosemahn
05-02-2012, 09:24 PM
I really don't think the Browns will be bad enough to be in position to draft Barkley (unless he falls from grace).

I meant having an early pick, and possibly trading up like they did for Richardson. I think they would have been far better off staying with McCoy this year and drafting another player in the first (DeCastro, Hightower, Mercilus, Perry, Zeitler) and then do what they needed to do to draft Barkley.

D-Unit
05-02-2012, 09:37 PM
I meant having an early pick, and possibly trading up like they did for Richardson. I think they would have been far better off staying with McCoy this year and drafting another player in the first (DeCastro, Hightower, Mercilus, Perry, Zeitler) and then do what they needed to do to draft Barkley.
I don't think Weeden will fail as badly as you think. He could turn out to be their QB for the next 10 years. His issue isn't age. If he pans out, he pans out. If he fails, he fails. But his age won't make him fail. ...and that's the reason why people are down on him more than anything, which I disagree with.

Talent wise, he deserved a late 1st round grade. It's too early to call it a mistake. But I agree with you about the Browns and the unlikelihood that they will draft a QB in Round 1 next year.

keylime_5
05-02-2012, 10:03 PM
yeah, Weeden isn't short on talent. He's short on years. lol. He will probably be a fine starting QB in the NFL, but his career will be roughly 5 or 6 years shorter than normal because he's so old. I would think the Browns have to have the top pick next year, Weeden will have to be Clausen bad or worse and the Browns will have to really love Barkley (who is short on physical tools and a bit overrated in the media) to take a QB next year IMO.

kalbears13
05-02-2012, 10:16 PM
OMGZ!!!

2007 Cleveland Browns Draft:
#3 Overall: Joe Thomas
#22 Overall: Brady Quinn

2012 Cleveland Browns Draft:
#3 Overall: Trent Richardson
#22 Overall: Brandon Weeden

But honestly I don't completely hate the Weeden pick but I really really like Barkley and it's hard to see him going to Cleveland next year. But then again, Brady Quinn had less than a year as a starting quarterback and Colt McCoy had little over a year and look what happened. I see Weeden starting Week 1. He's 28, he should be ready, right?!?!

Mr. Goosemahn
05-02-2012, 10:24 PM
OMGZ!!!

2007 Cleveland Browns Draft:
#3 Overall: Joe Thomas
#22 Overall: Brady Quinn

2012 Cleveland Browns Draft:
#3 Overall: Trent Richardson
#22 Overall: Brandon Weeden

But honestly I don't completely hate the Weeden pick but I really really like Barkley and it's hard to see him going to Cleveland next year. But then again, Brady Quinn had less than a year as a starting quarterback and Colt McCoy had little over a year and look what happened. I see Weeden starting Week 1. He's 28, he should be ready, right?!?!

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lvmav1L1ey1r3ovdbo1_500.gif

Iamcanadian
05-03-2012, 12:23 PM
I really don't think the Browns will be bad enough to be in position to draft Barkley (unless he falls from grace).

Which begs to question... which teams will be looking for new QBs? Seems like most already have the covered with young developing QBs that they invested highly in... Ponder, Locker, Newton, Gabbert, Dalton, Kaepernick all went in 2011, Luck, Griffin, Tannehill, Weeden, Osweiler in 2012... I wonder... which teams will be interested in Barkley, Wilson, Bray, Jones, Manuel...Aaron Murray? There could be GREAT value in the latter part of Round 1. Crazy good value.

I won't put Cleveland much better than 4 wins, they could even be worse.
On paper I would tend to agree but GM's and HC's will have made up their minds on a lot of these QB's and a few older QB's will open up drafting one as well.
I still can easily see a scenario where at least 3 top QB's get drafted early so I wouldn't count on great value latter in round 1.

Iamcanadian
05-03-2012, 12:32 PM
OMGZ!!!

2007 Cleveland Browns Draft:
#3 Overall: Joe Thomas
#22 Overall: Brady Quinn

2012 Cleveland Browns Draft:
#3 Overall: Trent Richardson
#22 Overall: Brandon Weeden

But honestly I don't completely hate the Weeden pick but I really really like Barkley and it's hard to see him going to Cleveland next year. But then again, Brady Quinn had less than a year as a starting quarterback and Colt McCoy had little over a year and look what happened. I see Weeden starting Week 1. He's 28, he should be ready, right?!?!

Romeo Crennel refused to play Quinn because he could see in practice that he was just not a NFL starting QB and that got Savage fired eventually which suggests Holmgren/Heckert need Weeden to be successful, anything else and they are likely fired as well.
I like Weeden a lot but at 28, he has at most a 6 year window for real success so he will definitely start week 1.

Iamcanadian
05-03-2012, 12:38 PM
No they won't.
They'll do exactly what Carolina did. If there's a QB available next draft whom the Browns FO feels is a better prospect than Weeden, they'll take him.
Holmgren has never been someone who only has one QB on the roster with starter upside.

Not a chance. Lerner fired Savage for Quinn's total failure so Holmgren/Heckert will live or die by Weeden's success. There is no way they can justify drafting another QB in round 1 next draft.
Carolina drafted Claussen in round 2 and round 2 QB's don't make or break a GM, however round 1 QB's do.

D-Unit
05-03-2012, 12:55 PM
I won't put Cleveland much better than 4 wins, they could even be worse.
On paper I would tend to agree but GM's and HC's will have made up their minds on a lot of these QB's and a few older QB's will open up drafting one as well.
I still can easily see a scenario where at least 3 top QB's get drafted early so I wouldn't count on great value latter in round 1.
I wouldn't say count on there being great value in the latter part of Round 1, but I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possibility either. This draft is loaded with non-QB talent. It's not the year you want to be taking a QB unless you really need one.

SenorGato
05-03-2012, 01:45 PM
I'm not so sure. Clausen was a mid second round pick, Weeden was mid-late first. He went over 20 picks earlier. And since they know that Weeden will be a project, I think they give him more than one year. And in all honesty, they should. I know Clausen didn't work out and the Panthers look like geniuses for it, but not all rookie QBs explode onto the scene like Cam did.

And not every team does what Carolina did. Jacksonville didn't take Tannehill this year even though Gabbert was downright awful last year. If teams only gave rookies one year to develop, they would be drafting QBs in the first year in and year out. Cleveland should have been drafting QBs every year in the first for the past five years, but they didn't. They gave Quinn his chance, then they gave McCoy his, and now they will give Weeden his.

Barkley >>>>>>>>>>> Tannehill

K Train
05-03-2012, 02:31 PM
Sanchez is a better athlete but the difference is college experience. Barkley has way more game experience going into the draft.

I'd say he's safe as QBs go...Good prospect.

you think sanchez is a better athlete?

I think barkley is A LOT like drew brees in mechanics and pocket presence and i dont think hes super athletic but ive never considered sanchez to be a good QB athlete

Hurricanes25
05-03-2012, 02:56 PM
you think sanchez is a better athlete?


Better athlete? Yes. Better prospect and QB? No.

dunagan15
05-03-2012, 03:32 PM
He's a shorter Matt Ryan.
Very good QB with not elite tools.
If you need a starting QB, IMO Matt Barkley will be an upgrade. And IMO he's a 5x better QB than Mark Sanchez.

Safe pick.

I hate you. Only because this is so true.

SenorGato
05-03-2012, 04:09 PM
Better athlete? Yes. Better prospect and QB? No.

Exactly this. Sanchez is really a good athlete at QB, and more loose/flexible than Barkley from what I've seen.

Barkley is a better prospect because in a QB prospect experience is pretty damn key. Barkley will have what...over 3 full seasons worth of starts?

K Train
05-04-2012, 08:49 AM
ive just always looked at sanchez as being slow and looking dumb when he runs...never really considered him an athletic QB

dannyz
05-04-2012, 10:32 AM
I think the Browns are really gonna regret taking Weeden by next year. They'll be in a position to draft Barkley, but they'll pass because they have their now-30 sophomore first round QB.

I just think if they have a Chance at Barkley and pass on it to build around a guy like Weeden they better hope Weeden becomes Great and Barkley sucks because if it's the other way around and Weeden is gone within Three Years and Barkley is one of the Best Young QB's in the NFL then everyone associated with the Cleveland Browns right now will be Fired.

SolidGold
05-04-2012, 11:24 AM
Exactly this. Sanchez is really a good athlete at QB, and more loose/flexible than Barkley from what I've seen.

Barkley is a better prospect because in a QB prospect experience is pretty damn key. Barkley will have what...over 3 full seasons worth of starts?

Barkley will be a four year starter once this season is done.

I just hope he measures in at 6'2".

SenorGato
05-04-2012, 07:07 PM
Btw literally the only unlike able quality about Brandon Weeden is that he's the ancient age of 28. I think he can be a fine player. Not exactly a non-athlete here...He's got the physical tools/ability despite having to use a walker.

Not to mention that Thomas - Mack - Schwartz is a pretty nice group of OL talent, and that will open something up for Richardson. Sure it's not a 21st century offense but not exactly new in the NFL...

Hellisan
05-05-2012, 07:59 PM
Btw literally the only unlike able quality about Brandon Weeden is that he's the ancient age of 28. I think he can be a fine player. Not exactly a non-athlete here...He's got the physical tools/ability despite having to use a walker.

Not to mention that Thomas - Mack - Schwartz is a pretty nice group of OL talent, and that will open something up for Richardson. Sure it's not a 21st century offense but not exactly new in the NFL...

Well that... And he ran a Ryan Leaf offense at Ok. State. BTW I always read your posts, because I married into a latino family and your username is my actual real-life nickname they gave me... lol

Leon Sandcastle
05-06-2012, 01:09 PM
He'll have a huge year but I still don't think he'll be the first QB taken. Height, arm questions, level of talent around him, room to grow all don't go in his favor, fairly or unfairly.

He'll be a really good QB at the next level. Someone is going to get lucky next year.

SickwithIt1010
05-07-2012, 12:43 AM
He'll have a huge year but I still don't think he'll be the first QB taken. Height, arm questions, level of talent around him, room to grow all don't go in his favor, fairly or unfairly.

He'll be a really good QB at the next level. Someone is going to get lucky next year.

That didnt go against Luck, and Barks arm is better.

SolidGold
05-07-2012, 06:12 AM
As long as he measures in at 6'2" or better he will be the first QB drafted.

Leon Sandcastle
05-07-2012, 06:08 PM
That didnt go against Luck, and Barks arm is better.

Luck is 6'4 240 and is in a different stratosphere athletically compared to Barkley.

Barkley is going to get picked apart kind of unfairly next year. People will bring up things he can't control to knock him like his height, horrible Pac-10 Defenses, and the quality talent around him.

SolidGold
05-07-2012, 06:54 PM
Luck is 6'4 240 and is in a different stratosphere athletically compared to Barkley.

Barkley is going to get picked apart kind of unfairly next year. People will bring up things he can't control to knock him like his height, horrible Pac-10 Defenses, and the quality talent around him.

As long as he measures at 6'2" at the combine he will be fine. The Big 12 is just as bad if not worse than the Pac-12 defensively yet they have had Freeman, Griffin, Weeden and Bradford all drafted in round 1 in the past few years. I can't really argue the the talent around him but I can point to his huge jump in development from year 1 to year 2 to year 3 as an indicator that he is getting better and learning/understanding the game at a high level.

Sportsfan486
05-07-2012, 09:55 PM
I actually like Barkley a bit. He shows good use of progression passing, which is rare for a college QB. I think his arm is more than adequate and I like a lot of his throws.

His height will be a question as will how he performs under pressure and overall decision making.

These USC QBs are always tough, though, as they're surrounded by such talented teams that it's really hard to get a good gauge. I also think that's true about Andrew Luck, who I'm not nearly as high on as most; those Stanford teams, offensively, were a gold mine of draftable talent.

Saints-Tigers
05-07-2012, 10:23 PM
Barkley's arm isn't better than Luck's.

Halsey
05-07-2012, 10:37 PM
Barkley will likely be a divisive prospect if he continues to get top 10 talk. His fans will point to his production, polish, experience, maturity, etc. His critics will point to his lack of elite physical talent and the fact he's been surrounded by a lot of talent. There's going to be many a Matt Barkley debate on this board over the next year.

SickwithIt1010
05-07-2012, 10:37 PM
Barkley's arm isn't better than Luck's.

Yes it is.

Big Bird
05-11-2012, 02:25 PM
I hope Brian Brohm 2.0 turns out well for all you fan boys...

ATLDirtyBirds
05-11-2012, 02:32 PM
Yes it is.

But really, it isn't.

Saints-Tigers
05-11-2012, 03:08 PM
But really, it isn't.


Maybe to a USC fan. Not throwing a lot of fast balls=/= inability.

70 yard rope into the wind, hitting a receiver perfect in stride.... MAtt Barkley won't be doing.

Raiderz4Life
05-11-2012, 03:15 PM
Maybe to a USC fan. Not throwing a lot of fast balls=/= inability.

70 yard rope into the wind, hitting a receiver perfect in stride.... MAtt Barkley won't be doing.

Really now? How many QBs can throw a 70 yard strike??

Its OK I'll wait.

Throwing with your shorts on isn't anything special.

K Train
05-11-2012, 03:15 PM
i think barkley is a lot like drew brees, a little taller but the way he handles himself in the pocket and his overall throwing motion is very brees like

Saints-Tigers
05-11-2012, 04:02 PM
Really now? How many QBs can throw a 70 yard strike??

Its OK I'll wait.

Throwing with your shorts on isn't anything special.

Not many can make that throw like that, Barkley being one that can't. Are you arguing for me, or against me? lol

SickwithIt1010
05-11-2012, 04:11 PM
But really, it isn't.

Well you really havent watched the 2 play enough then.

It isnt me being a USC homer, its just watching the 2 play that I can see that Barkley has a stronger arm than Luck. Is that a big deal? No not really because Luck's accuracy is almost 2nd to none, and Bark tends to struggle a little bit with that sometimes.

SickwithIt1010
05-11-2012, 04:12 PM
Not many can make that throw like that, Barkley being one that can't. Are you arguing for me, or against me? lol

Hes making your statement sound dumb...which it is. Because you say "he wont throw a 70 yard strike" like there are a hand full of guys that can, but there really isnt.

Saints-Tigers
05-11-2012, 04:37 PM
I still don't understand how it's stupid. Regardless of how many people can make the throw, I think Barkley can't. I don't know how Barkley can have a stronger arm if there are throws luck can make that Barkley can't.

Barkley's arm isn't really a huge positive or a negative IMO. It's more than good enough. I think he puts more heat on it than Matt Ryan for instance.

He's a lot like Sanchez to me, but on the positive side, I think he deals with adversity a lot better on the field, and hopefully he takes criticism better.

ATLDirtyBirds
05-11-2012, 06:32 PM
Well you really havent watched the 2 play enough then.

It isnt me being a USC homer, its just watching the 2 play that I can see that Barkley has a stronger arm than Luck. Is that a big deal? No not really because Luck's accuracy is almost 2nd to none, and Bark tends to struggle a little bit with that sometimes.


Or, you haven't watched enough of them play without those USC homer goggles. And yes, it is you being a homer.

FUNBUNCHER
05-11-2012, 07:30 PM
Matt Barkley is a more physically talented Drew Brees.

Maybe. I don't know if Barkley processes the game like Brees does from a mental standpoint, and Barkley definitely doesn't have his accuracy outside the hashes. Everything else I tilt in Barkley's favor, with a slight edge in arm strength for the Trojan.

I still think Barkley has enough right going for him to develop into a pro bowl QB. I like his development every year at USC and I still believe he was the Trojan's MVP on offense last season.

Barkley just doesn't blow you away when you start looking at his physical tools.

SickwithIt1010
05-11-2012, 07:46 PM
Or, you haven't watched enough of them play without those USC homer goggles. And yes, it is you being a homer.

But it really isnt, so...you can throw that opinion out the window.

ATLDirtyBirds
05-11-2012, 08:19 PM
But it really isnt, so...you can throw that opinion out the window.

Would it be more accurate to say you just aren't a great evaluator of arm talent then?

SickwithIt1010
05-11-2012, 08:34 PM
Would it be more accurate to say you just aren't a great evaluator of arm talent then?

I just think it'd be more accurate to say you havent watched Matt Barkley play enough.

Big Bird
05-11-2012, 08:42 PM
I just think it'd be more accurate to say you havent watched Matt Barkley play enough.
I think this is the most accurate:
http://cdn.bleacherreport.com/images_root/image_pictures/0175/6148/usc_homer_crop_340x234.jpg

onejayhawk
05-12-2012, 12:40 AM
The USC system disguises a QB's arm deficiencies. We see that in Leinart and Sanchez. Luck and Barkley have played side by side, and head to head, more than enough to make the comparisons clear. Barkley has enough arm to play in the NFL, but not much more. Luck's is a notch better. Neither will be confused with Matt Stafford, or even Ryan Tannehill.

Arm is not everything, provided you can make the major routes. Barkley has enough arm that it is not a problem. The real comparison to Luck is in the rest of the game, and this is where Luck really excels. Barkley would not have been the first pick this year, and I am unconvinced he would have been #2. This does not mean he will not be the first pick in 2013, but it would not surprise me if he was not.

J

Matthew Jones
05-12-2012, 12:52 AM
The USC system disguises a QB's arm deficiencies. We see that in Leinart and Sanchez. Luck and Barkley have played side by side, and head to head, more than enough to make the comparisons clear. Barkley has enough arm to play in the NFL, but not much more. Luck's is a notch better. Neither will be confused with Matt Stafford, or even Ryan Tannehill.

Arm is not everything, provided you can make the major routes. Barkley has enough arm that it is not a problem. The real comparison to Luck is in the rest of the game, and this is where Luck really excels. Barkley would not have been the first pick this year, and I am unconvinced he would have been #2. This does not mean he will not be the first pick in 2013, but it would not surprise me if he was not.

J

Matt Leinart certainly didn't have a very strong arm but Mark Sanchez's is well above average; maybe not in Joe Flacco territory but certainly more than strong enough to make all the throws. I would rank Barkley's arm strength in between Leinart and Sanchez; the Matt Ryan comparison makes so much sense for Matt Barkley.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 01:07 AM
Matt Leinart certainly didn't have a very strong arm but Mark Sanchez's is well above average; maybe not in Joe Flacco territory but certainly more than strong enough to make all the throws. I would rank Barkley's arm strength in between Leinart and Sanchez; the Matt Ryan comparison makes so much sense for Matt Barkley.
How so? I see close to zero similarities between the two.

Barkley is a Brian Brohm clone. They both look so squeaky clean in terms of mechanics, both massively hyped coming out of high school, both win games, but both have below average physical tools, Barkley is even shorter than Brohm, and both struggle with pressure. Barkley is better on the boot, I'll give him him that. But Barkley's deep ball accuracy is wild and all over the place. He constantly misses receivers down field. Barkley takes false steps as well and doesn't throw with conviction. He isn't Blaine Gabbert, but you can tell he lacks poise in the pocket (something Matt Ryan displayed a ton of at BC).

Barkley benefits from having two incredible wide receivers who make plays for him after the catch or manage to pull in balls that have average accuracy (at best) down field. Heck, the guy was even outperformed this past camp by all accounts, as Barkley threw a staggering number of interceptions (no surprise, Woods has missed time in camp due to injury. Missing one of the players that saves his butt).

The sooner people realize he isn't a franchise quarterback, the easier it's going to be on everybody's feelings when he isn't doing anything in the NFL.

Matthew Jones
05-12-2012, 01:17 AM
How so? I see close to zero similarities between the two.

Barkley is a Brian Brohm clone. They both look so squeaky clean in terms of mechanics, both massively hyped coming out of high school, both win games, but both have below average physical tools, Barkley is even shorter than Brohm, and both struggle with pressure. Barkley is better on the boot, I'll give him him that. But Barkley's deep ball accuracy is wild and all over the place. He constantly misses receivers down field. Barkley takes false steps as well and doesn't throw with conviction. He isn't Blaine Gabbert, but you can tell he lacks poise in the pocket (something Matt Ryan displayed a ton of at BC).

Barkley benefits from having two incredible wide receivers who make plays for him after the catch or manage to pull in balls that have average accuracy (at best) down field. Heck, the guy was even outperformed this past camp by all accounts, as Barkley threw a staggering number of interceptions (no surprise, Woods has missed time in camp due to injury. Missing one of the players that saves his butt).

The sooner people realize he isn't a franchise quarterback, the easier it's going to be on everybody's feelings when he isn't doing anything in the NFL.
I'm not sure he'll ever be one of the best quarterbacks in the NFL but I'll be very surprised if he's not a long-term starter for the team that drafts him (barring mismanagement by the drafting team.) He would be an excellent fit in a west coast offense. I think he's actually pretty composed in the pocket but a lot of Southern California's offense is based around using QB movement in order to set up screens etc.

Saints-Tigers
05-12-2012, 01:56 AM
The problem with ranking Brees Vs. a lot of guys is that Brees arm has improved immensely since he came into the league. Brees has legit power behind his throws now. He might not have had Barkley's arm coming in, but it's definitely better now, and it's hard to project that much improvement going forward.

FUNBUNCHER
05-12-2012, 06:55 AM
Both Barkley and Brohm are 6'2. I think it's damning praise to suggest Barkley handles pocket pressure slightly better than Blaine Gabbert. Barkley can identify the pass rush and adjust his throws without looking lost or panicked.

Brohm so utterly fell on his face as a pro that it's a difficult comparison IMO to make. At Lousville Brohm had one really productive season, his senior year.

If things go as planned this season for USC, Barkley is going to be tested against one of the nation's best defenses in a BCS game. We'll all have a very clear idea of what his true skillset is before the 2013 April draft.

Yes Barkley was overhyped by USC fans coming out of HS, but IMO he's still an elite pro prospect, he just doesn't have a freak arm.

Iamcanadian
05-12-2012, 11:54 AM
How so? I see close to zero similarities between the two.

Barkley is a Brian Brohm clone. They both look so squeaky clean in terms of mechanics, both massively hyped coming out of high school, both win games, but both have below average physical tools, Barkley is even shorter than Brohm, and both struggle with pressure. Barkley is better on the boot, I'll give him him that. But Barkley's deep ball accuracy is wild and all over the place. He constantly misses receivers down field. Barkley takes false steps as well and doesn't throw with conviction. He isn't Blaine Gabbert, but you can tell he lacks poise in the pocket (something Matt Ryan displayed a ton of at BC).

Barkley benefits from having two incredible wide receivers who make plays for him after the catch or manage to pull in balls that have average accuracy (at best) down field. Heck, the guy was even outperformed this past camp by all accounts, as Barkley threw a staggering number of interceptions (no surprise, Woods has missed time in camp due to injury. Missing one of the players that saves his butt).

The sooner people realize he isn't a franchise quarterback, the easier it's going to be on everybody's feelings when he isn't doing anything in the NFL.

This time of the year, it is always popular to attack QB's because nobody can prove anybody wrong. Barkley is clearly the top prospect for next year's draft but he still needs a great season to justify his ranking, the same for all prospects. I don't think he is in the Luck or RG111 category of prospects but he is still very likely to go #1 overall unless he has a miserable senior season.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 12:50 PM
This time of the year, it is always popular to attack QB's because nobody can prove anybody wrong. Barkley is clearly the top prospect for next year's draft but he still needs a great season to justify his ranking, the same for all prospects. I don't think he is in the Luck or RG111 category of prospects but he is still very likely to go #1 overall unless he has a miserable senior season.
It's popular to attack quarterbacks in the preseason? What are you talking about? This is generally the time everybody sits on their hands and doesn't watch a thing and just goes with the flow.

I've been watching a ton of tape lately. I've worked as an analyst for many years on the internet and I'm taking over as the television color commentator for a program this year. There is plenty out there that you could attempt to "prove me wrong" with, it's called tape. I've been watching it constantly, and I see a quarterback who will never be a franchise guy. I called this with Jimmy Clausen as well a couple years ago. It's the same exact situation to Brohm and Clausen. Everybody is overrating Barkley because he was a top recruit, at a top program, and puts up good numbers with ridiculous surrounding talent in a system that disguises their weaknesses.

The tape never lies. If anybody really wanted to argue with me about Barkley, my suggestion would be to turn on the tape and gain some actual knowledge.

ATLDirtyBirds
05-12-2012, 02:08 PM
This time of the year, it is always popular to attack QB's because nobody can prove anybody wrong. Barkley is clearly the top prospect for next year's draft but he still needs a great season to justify his ranking, the same for all prospects. I don't think he is in the Luck or RG111 category of prospects but he is still very likely to go #1 overall unless he has a miserable senior season.


Actually, that's not clear at all.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 03:01 PM
Actually, that's not clear at all.
Barkley isn't even clearly the best quarterback prospect, yet alone the best prospect overall.

ATLDirtyBirds
05-12-2012, 03:07 PM
Barkley isn't even clearly the best quarterback prospect, yet alone the best prospect overall.


I actually think it's "pretty clear" Barkley's the 3rd best QB prospect.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 03:19 PM
I actually think it's "pretty clear" Barkley's the 3rd best QB prospect.
I haven't evaluated the entire group at the top like I plan on doing before the year starts, but I would put Barkley at least behind Landry Jones right now.

Raiderz4Life
05-12-2012, 03:27 PM
I haven't evaluated the entire group at the top like I plan on doing before the year starts, but I would put Barkley at least behind Landry Jones right now.

He is not behind Jones. If anything I'd put him behind Wilson and possibly Bray.

ATLDirtyBirds
05-12-2012, 03:32 PM
I haven't evaluated the entire group at the top like I plan on doing before the year starts, but I would put Barkley at least behind Landry Jones right now.


I'd say Logan Thomas has a better chance of being ahead of him than Jones. But then again, I don't like Jones.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 03:35 PM
He is not behind Jones. If anything I'd put him behind Wilson and possibly Bray.
We will see come next April. All I know is Landry Jones will be the superior NFL player. People keep blasting Landry for next to no reason, yet praise Barkley and his below average tools.

Raiderz4Life
05-12-2012, 03:38 PM
He doesn't have below average tools. He has more than adequate physical tools and will be just fine in the NFL.

Jones? I'm not so sure, but I already know where this one is headed.

SickwithIt1010
05-12-2012, 04:35 PM
Jones gets blasted because you are sucking his dick for the same reason you knock Bark. They both play with superior talent, and Bark outplayed him. Jones went to **** as soon as Broyles got hurt, he throws picks left and right, and plays in a system that is even more QB friendly than USC's.

Jones isnt even the best QB on OU's roster.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 04:58 PM
Jones gets blasted because you are sucking his dick for the same reason you knock Bark. They both play with superior talent, and Bark outplayed him. Jones went to **** as soon as Broyles got hurt, he throws picks left and right, and plays in a system that is even more QB friendly than USC's.

Jones isnt even the best QB on OU's roster.
Seems like somebody is getting upset I'm knocking his precious quarterback. How cute.

Landry struggled at the end of last season, yes. The guy still has far superior tools and has made far more NFL throws on tape.

It's also quite laughable that you're going to attempt to argue Oklahoma has a better quarterback on the roster when the other quarterbacks on the roster have 20 attempts combined last year. Putting a little too much stock in a spring game performance?

SickwithIt1010
05-12-2012, 05:34 PM
Seems like somebody is getting upset I'm knocking his precious quarterback. How cute.

Landry struggled at the end of last season, yes. The guy still has far superior tools and has made far more NFL throws on tape.

It's also quite laughable that you're going to attempt to argue Oklahoma has a better quarterback on the roster when the other quarterbacks on the roster have 20 attempts combined last year. Putting a little too much stock in a spring game performance?


I just find it comical that you are all over Jones' nuts when he is in serious danger of losing his job to Bell. Sure, he has a better arm...but it dont mean dick if you cant keep from throwing it to the other team.

FUNBUNCHER
05-12-2012, 06:16 PM
If there were a June NFL draft, Barkley would be the first QB taken and it's not just about tools. His mental game right now is ahead of most of the QBs in the class. He's polished and there aren't many holes in his game from a technical or execution standpoint. Barkley is a smart QB who knows when he should attack a secondary and when to take what the coverage gives him.

There's that USC QB stigma, but Barkley simply isn't Sanchez or Leinart.

Dangermouse
05-12-2012, 06:23 PM
I don't understand people saying Barkley doesn't have a big arm.



If you put on the tape you'll see him regularly zipping 60 yarders and keeping them accurate.


I think his arm is actually a strength.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 06:24 PM
I don't understand people saying Barkley doesn't have a big arm.



If you put on the tape you'll see him regularly zipping 60 yarders and keeping them accurate.


I think his arm is actually a strength.
This guy just compared Landry Jones to Kellen Moore and said Matt Barkley has a big arm.

Can people be banned for stupidity? If so, put this guy at the top of the list.

Dangermouse
05-12-2012, 06:27 PM
This guy just compared Landry Jones to Kellen Moore and said Matt Barkley has a big arm.

Can people be banned for stupidity? If so, put this guy at the top of the list.

Oh grow up. I'm allowed my opinion. Even if the Landry Jones judgement was premature, Barkley definitely has a strong arm. Like I say 60 yarders on the tape.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 06:34 PM
Oh grow up. I'm allowed my opinion. Even if the Landry Jones judgement was premature, Barkley definitely has a strong arm. Like I say 60 yarders on the tape.
I've seen Barkley throw 50+, but I have yet to see them thrown accurately. The guy misses all over the place down field.

TACKLE
05-12-2012, 07:59 PM
He doesn't have below average tools. He has more than adequate physical tools and will be just fine in the NFL.

meh, his tools are simply adequate and are probably below average relative to other starting QB's in the league.

descendency
05-12-2012, 08:04 PM
Landry struggled all season, yes.

Fixed that for you.

Big Bird
05-12-2012, 08:12 PM
Fixed that for you.
If all season counts as the last four games (and I really don't think he was bad against Baylor, just not great), then sure, the entire season...

TuckNole
05-13-2012, 01:47 AM
Without going through to read the whole thread, Barkley to me at this point is my top pick. But it's so early I wouldn't even consider myself to have a real ranking at this point.

J-Mike88
04-23-2013, 05:21 PM
Barkley reminds me a bit of Eli Manning coming out of Ole Miss.
I think Barkley makes it in the NFL and could become a good-great one.
I hope he goes to a good situation, in the AFC preferably.