Weeden in 1st Round?

[Babylon]

Originally Posted by njx9

are you ******* serious? based on what, exactly?

to be fair: i expect nothing, given that i already asked and was given utterly no answer until you threw out utter garbage like 'more pro ready' with absolutely nothing whatsoever to back that up. weeden is like every single other worthless third round quarterback with no upside. he does absolutely nothing well.

Exactly. And in a strange twist his age is probably an advantage. If he were 23 people would just focus on the fact he isnt very good.

[Rosebud]

Originally Posted by Babylon

Exactly. And in a strange twist his age is probably an advantage. If he were 23 people would just focus on the fact he isnt very good.

I love it. People hear he's getting talked up about going in the first two rounds even though he's old, so people assume he must be super awesome, to make up for how old he is. It's kinda beautiful watching nonsense become fact.

[FUNBUNCHER]

I think Weeden is the solid #4 QB in this draft if he were 23 years old.

2nd/3rd rounder.

He doesn't excite me, but I can't really say he was a bad college QB.

He's got the arm, the size, decent decision-making.

[onejayhawk]

Originally Posted by njx9

are you ******* serious? based on what, exactly?

to be fair: i expect nothing, given that i already asked and was given utterly no answer until you threw out utter garbage like 'more pro ready' with absolutely nothing whatsoever to back that up. weeden is like every single other worthless third round quarterback with no upside. he does absolutely nothing well.

Which? The easy one is that he is 5 years older than the average senior QB. Since he has had fewer hits, resulting in fewer concussions, bone spurs and other accumulative injuries, it is reasonable to make 5 years the outside of his expected potential career.

As to why he is a potential starting QB, what do you need that is not readily available? He is routinely placed as the 4th QB, with his age cited as the reason. That alone is sufficient. Then there is the numbers at OSU and the Combine. His reputation for elite intangibles. This is all a public record. What more do you want?

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

I think Weeden is the solid #4 QB in this draft if he were 23 years old.

That is not very generous, since he is the solid 4th QB as it is.

J

[onejayhawk]

Originally Posted by Iamcanadian

QB's generally take 3 or 4 years before they can become a quality starter, in Weedon's case let's say 3 years because of his maturity, that makes him 32 before he can be truly productive in a playoff manner for his team and he is likely washed up at 35 as he already has shoulder problems. How many teams will invest a high pick for a 3 or 4 year productive career especially since there are zero guarantees he succeeds.
I just cannot see him as a 1st rounder but some team might bit out of desperation in round 2.

You make a small error and a couple of large assumptions. The small error is that three years from now he will be 31. He will not turn 32 til the midway point of the season. Your first large assumption is that he will be washed up at 35. What is your basis for that? Your second large assumption is that it would matter if true. If a team thinks he will be a quality starter in three years, why would they not invest a late 1st round pick? We have a long line of examples where teams paid a 1st round pick for 1-2 years of good QB play.

J

[Mufasa]

Originally Posted by bornnraisedwhodat

I just dont see the big deal with his age. QB's start hitting thier prime between 28-32. Eli just really started hitting his prime and he is 31.

Yeah, and it took 8 years of NFL experience to get him there. That's the problem. Age doesn't equal NFL experience. If Weeden takes 8 years to hit his stride his career will be over.

[Rosebud]

He's not a troll, but I love him, kinda like a troll.

[Matthew Jones]

Originally Posted by Babylon

Exactly. And in a strange twist his age is probably an advantage. If he were 23 people would just focus on the fact he isnt very good.

Very good point; Weeden's age has become the focal point of any evaluations regarding his NFL prospects and the concerns about how old he is have overshadowed his lack of experience in a pro-style offense. People just assume that because Weeden is old he can operate an NFL passing attack. This could lead to Weeden being overdrafted, similar to other overaged QBs from pass-happy systems such as Kevin Kolb and John Beck who went in the second round.

[AntoinCD]

I am clearly in the minority and like Weeden a lot more than most on this board.

Here's a list of positives and negatives I see from two prospects (different years). One is Weeden and I won't say who the other one is

Player A:

Good, not great arm but can make all the NFL throws
Put up huge numbers in college
Almost prototypical size
Good at avoiding pressure
Leader, great intangibles
Very accurate
Good touch
Keeps his eyes down the field even on the move
Good understanding of coverages

Let's the ball get away from him on some intermediate throws
Trusts his arm too much
Isn't a threat to run
Injury concerns
Awkward throwing motion
Played in a spread system which inflates his numbers
Upside???

Player B:

Arm strength is acceptible but certainly not great
Good size but could add some muscle
Very good accuracy
Put up huge stats in college
Very good decision maker
Anticipates WRs making their cuts
Leader, great intangibles
Excellent touch, especially on short to intermediate routes
Nice release point

Won't be able to make all the throws against NFL coverages
Major injury concerns
Static in the pocket
No threat to run
May not fit all systems
Played in a spread system which inflates his numbers
Upside???


Now this is just based on what I have seen and read, and I am not going to even try and say I have any more skill at looking at prospects than anyone else, but I think Weeden is a first round QB if he is 22. Hell if Ponder can go at 12 why can't Weeden go at the end of the first even if he is 28????

[njx9]

Originally Posted by AntoinCD

I am clearly in the minority and like Weeden a lot more than most on this board.

Here's a list of positives and negatives I see from two prospects (different years). One is Weeden and I won't say who the other one is

i love this game. i mean, aside from the utter irrelevancy.

Originally Posted by onejayhawk

Which? The easy one is that he is 5 years older than the average senior QB. Since he has had fewer hits, resulting in fewer concussions, bone spurs and other accumulative injuries, it is reasonable to make 5 years the outside of his expected potential career.

especially if you ignore the arm injuries. but i'm sure those are irrelevant.

As to why he is a potential starting QB, what do you need that is not readily available? He is routinely placed as the 4th QB, with his age cited as the reason. That alone is sufficient. Then there is the numbers at OSU and the Combine. His reputation for elite intangibles. This is all a public record. What more do you want?

so you have no thoughts of your own and are solely relying on the fact that other people think he's good. cool.

[Nalej]

Weeden > Luck

[onejayhawk]

Originally Posted by njx9

especially if you ignore the arm injuries. but i'm sure those are irrelevant.

No. Injuries a QB's throwing arm are very relevant. However, they appear to have less impact on throwing a football at 40-50 MPH than a baseball at 90 mph, and we have had a fairly long period to track the situation. It is cause for caution more than a red flag.

Originally Posted by njx9

so you have no thoughts of your own and are solely relying on the fact that other people think he's good. cool.

J

[jojo]

I have been saying since the Senior Bowl that Weeden would go top 50. I am now inclined to think that is a round late: Cleveland at #22 or some other team trading back or up to the #18-#21 range. I would not put it past the Eagles to take him at #15.

Can't dismiss later-rd. QBs who find their way into starting NFL jobs, like Andy Dalton in the 3rd rd., 2nd overall pick a yr. ago in Cincy who got that starting gig as a rookie. He was the beneficiary of their moronic owner's vendetta vs. Carson Palmer, true, but it was big plus for the Bengals. And they got him cheaper than a 1str rounder too.

Is Weeden the next one? Even with all that mileage on his 28-yr-old arm he's better than Colt McCoy (who's younger by 4-5 yrs) in Cleveland

[descendency]

Originally Posted by AntoinCD

why can't Weeden go at the end of the first even if he is 28????

Because by the time he learns an NFL offense competently enough to run one, he'll be physically declining. It's that simple. He has zero upside. His development is over. Kellen Moore, whom I don't even think should be drafted, has more upside than Weeden.

This is Chris Weinke again. He flashed in college because he was a man among boys. It's also why I am 100% against the NCAA rule that lets guys like Weeden play ball after they are in their mid 20s (I'd put the cutoff at 24, maybe 23).

I also believe you guys are over-evaluating Christian Ponder. Ponder's best weapon is a RB playing WR that has excessively paralyzing headaches. His primary RB can't even catch or block, and has a fumbling problem. His OL is below average.

He didn't play out of a spread at FSU, either.

[njx9]

Originally Posted by onejayhawk

No. Injuries a QB's throwing arm are very relevant. However, they appear to have less impact on throwing a football at 40-50 MPH than a baseball at 90 mph, and we have had a fairly long period to track the situation. It is cause for caution more than a red flag.

yup, it's not like things like that deteriorate quickly as you age.

J

i love non-responsive garbage like this. it's like, so totally clever, and stuff.

[fear the elf]

Originally Posted by jojo

Even with all that mileage on his 28-yr-old arm he's better than Colt McCoy (who's younger by 4-5 yrs) in Cleveland

I couldn't disagree more. Colt McCoy has more upside and NFL experience than Weeden.

Besides moderately better arm strength, 3 inches, and 5 pounds, what does Weeden have on McCoy?

[Bengalsrocket]

Originally Posted by jojo

Can't dismiss later-rd. QBs who find their way into starting NFL jobs, like Andy Dalton in the 3rd rd., 2nd overall pick a yr. ago in Cincy who got that starting gig as a rookie. He was the beneficiary of their moronic owner's vendetta vs. Carson Palmer, true, but it was big plus for the Bengals. And they got him cheaper than a 1str rounder too.

Is Weeden the next one? Even with all that mileage on his 28-yr-old arm he's better than Colt McCoy (who's younger by 4-5 yrs) in Cleveland

Andy was a 2nd round pick. Also, Carson Palmer was the one with a moronic vendetta. Mike Brown would GLADLY have let Carson play here if he wanted.

I guess you tried to type something factual and coherent, but you failed.

[AntoinCD]

Originally Posted by njx9

i love this game. i mean, aside from the utter irrelevancy.

I fail to see how it is irrelevant.

Numerous people within this thread have gone as far as to say that Weeden "isn't very good", is "garbage", "career backup" etc. And that's before you even look at some of the stuff about his age.

I compared him to a former first overall draft pick, who admittedly was a much better prospect than Weeden, but it's not like I was comparing Dan Marino and Kellen Moore.

I have already stated I like Weeden more than most obviously. I don't think much of his age either way.

But...you obviously have the two arguments

1. He's older, thus more mature blah, blah, more pro ready blah, blah etc etc
2. He's older than Jesus and will probably be dead by the time his rookie deal is up

If you draft a QB in the first round, or even the second round you do so with the expectation he will play for how many years? 10? 15?

What if Weeden plays until he's 39, that isn't unheard of or even out of the ordinary. That gives a team 11 years. What GM, head coach, team owner etc is thinking more than 11 years in advance at this point in terms of player acquisition and roster turnover??? Probably none if they have any sense.

Obviously the guy isn't on the same level as Luck or Griffin III, however what is the difference between him and Tannehill as prospects? Tannehill has a ton of upside but are you going to put all your eggs in his basket based on upside? That's a huge risk that more times than not gets guys fired.

Then the questions comes as to where do you take Weeden, or any QB you don't think highly enough of to take in the first round. If you don't think he can be your franchise QB then what are you drafting? A back up? A fringe starter? A bridge guy until you get that elusive franchise QB?

Too many teams draft guys like Colt McCoy, Kevin Kolb, Ryan Fitzpatrick, John Beck, Chad Henne etc. If you don't think highly enough of a guy to take him in the first then he probably shouldn't be a starting QB. Andy Dalton is the exception to this rule. Look at the success rate of second and third round QBs...not great.

I am of the opinion that if you are drafting a QB you are either drafting a guy you are giving the keys of your franchise to, or you are drafting the guy who will hold the clipboard. I am not of the opinion that backups should be drafted when starters at other positions are available.

Which brings the question of QB value. Can Weeden take a team to the superbowl? That's the end goal isn't it? If Weeden can make a team win then he can be a franchise QB and therefore IMO is worth a first round pick. If you think he can't then he shouldn't be and should be drafted as a back up player.

[AntoinCD]

Originally Posted by descendency

Because by the time he learns an NFL offense competently enough to run one, he'll be physically declining. It's that simple. He has zero upside. His development is over. Kellen Moore, whom I don't even think should be drafted, has more upside than Weeden.

More and more NFL offenses have spread concepts in them and are closer to the college game than ever before. That's why Cam Newton, Sam Bradford, Andy Dalton etc can come in from day one and be successful. It isn't the same as it used to be where QBs would come in a learn and only hit their stride in 4 years. Offenses are tailored to QBs now. It's a passing league.

Look at Blaine Gabbert for example. Awful QB last year and people are calling for him to be benched already. This was a rookie QB!!! But you aren't given the luxury of sitting for multiple years to hone your craft. Pretty much every QB is thrown in at the deep end nowadays.

It isn't the case where Weeden won't see the field until he's in his thirties. If he's drafted to be a starting QB you can all but guarantee he will see the field before he turns 29

[njx9]

Originally Posted by AntoinCD

I fail to see how it is irrelevant.

the other things you just posted? not irrelevant. comparing your scouting report of weeden to some unnamed qb? completely irrelevant. either name the qb and make the comparison, or just talk about weeden. keeping the other guy 'hidden' just reeks of manipulation.

What if Weeden plays until he's 39, that isn't unheard of or even out of the ordinary. That gives a team 11 years. What GM, head coach, team owner etc is thinking more than 11 years in advance at this point in terms of player acquisition and roster turnover??? Probably none if they have any sense.

this is a major issue though. now you're not only adding the 'if he's a good player', but also 'if he can play for more than three years before his arm falls off'. but again, why would you possibly think, or even suggest, he could play to 39? 16 qbs in *nfl history* have played a day past 40. i'm not sure that number gets substantially higher at 39. why is weeden, with demonstrable arm issues already, special?

Obviously the guy isn't on the same level as Luck or Griffin III, however what is the difference between him and Tannehill as prospects? Tannehill has a ton of upside but are you going to put all your eggs in his basket based on upside? That's a huge risk that more times than not gets guys fired.

should we start with arm strength and mobility?


leaving out the rest because i generally agree.

[onejayhawk]

Originally Posted by AntoinCD

I am of the opinion that if you are drafting a QB you are either drafting a guy you are giving the keys of your franchise to, or you are drafting the guy who will hold the clipboard. I am not of the opinion that backups should be drafted when starters at other positions are available.

Which brings the question of QB value. Can Weeden take a team to the superbowl? That's the end goal isn't it? If Weeden can make a team win then he can be a franchise QB and therefore IMO is worth a first round pick. If you think he can't then he shouldn't be and should be drafted as a back up player.

Well said.

Originally Posted by njx9

yup, it's not like things like that deteriorate quickly as you age. i love non-responsive garbage like this. it's like, so totally clever, and stuff.

Feel better? It is a standard response to abusive comments, which lack content. I am surprised you are not more familiar.

Things do deteriorate with age, but the hits are more significant.

J

[njx9]

Originally Posted by onejayhawk

Feel better? It is a standard response to abusive comments, which lack content. I am surprised you are not more familiar.

Things do deteriorate with age, but the hits are more significant.

J

yes, they're certainly more significant than a throwing arm injury and the wear and tear on that throwing arm. but let's ignore that and just keep putting up a spam emoticon, in case it's still actually distracting anyone from the fact that you haven't, once, in this thread explained anything weeden does well and have instead pawned it off on the rest of the internet to sort out for you.

why would i feel better? because the only thing you can actually respond with is an emoticon you don't actually understand? because, rather than actually trying to talk positively about weeden, you'd rather just repeatedly call my posts (and, probably the posts of anyone who disgarees with you) spam? why would that possibly make me feel better? do you have anything of your own to contribute?

[onejayhawk]

Originally Posted by njx9

yes, they're certainly more significant than a throwing arm injury and the wear and tear on that throwing arm. but let's ignore that and just keep putting up a spam emoticon, in case it's still actually distracting anyone from the fact that you haven't, once, in this thread explained anything weeden does well and have instead pawned it off on the rest of the internet to sort out for you.

why would i feel better? because the only thing you can actually respond with is an emoticon you don't actually understand? because, rather than actually trying to talk positively about weeden, you'd rather just repeatedly call my posts (and, probably the posts of anyone who disgarees with you) spam? why would that possibly make me feel better? do you have anything of your own to contribute?

Take out the spam, and what is left of this diatribe? Is there a question, which can be answered with facts?

Fact: He has all the physical tools needed to succeed in the NFL.
Fact: His college resume is very solid.
Fact: His Senior Bowl performance was outstanding
Fact: The biggest mark against him is his age
Fact: Brandon Weeden is widely regarded as the #4 QB prospect. In a compilation, that would be his position

I have yet to see bring anything to compare with this list of facts already under consideration. Leave the spam in the can, and focus on the subject rather than those posting comments.

J

[Rosebud]

What physical tools does he have that would actually be anything more than mediocre for an NFL starter? The mark against him is how absolutely unspectacular everything about him is. If you're drafting Kyle Orton why would you want to spend a premium pick to draft him at 28 years old with serious wear and tear on his arm? Your referencing his senior bowl is the first thing you've mentioned that would lead anyone to believe he'll be a good QB.

[scottyboy]

you don't use a 1st rounder on a guy who's going to be productive for like 7 years max