"I'd Pick Matt Barkley Over Andrew Luck"

[deepthoughtlife]

As a big fan of USC, I always have to be careful rating prospects from there; it would be easy to gloss over their flaws if I wasn't careful. That said, there is very little wrong with Barkley's game. His footwork is excellent. He has a nice, tight throwing motion. He hits his target almost every time, though a bit less so on the deep balls. He is careful with the ball, but still makes the big plays. He sees just about every eligible receiver. There is almost never a reason to scratch your head, and wonder why he did something.

He does have two amazing talents at receiver in Robert Woods and Marquise Lee, but they are just a Sophmore, and a Freshman, which showed in their play at times. Many times, Barkley would throw them a perfect pass, and they would drop it. Neither is amazingly fast, nor amazingly strong. They would consistently beat their guys, but rarely were they wide open.

Sometimes, a QB will come out of a big time school having seen almost no pressure, but that isn't the case with Barkley. The offensive line did not do a good job protecting Barkley most of the time, and he had to get the ball out in short order.

In his mock, Scott Wright claims Barkley isn't elite, but I completely disagree. Barkley is a better prospect than any QB in the last several drafts. He is just unlucky enough to have Luck in the same draft.

There are legitimate reasons an individual could decide they would take Barkley before Luck. Luck's footwork is not that good, though it isn't horrible. Luck hasn't quite lit the world on fire like you might expect. Barkley has often been more spectacular. He has done more with less, and a year less in the program, than Luck has. At this point, I'm probably 60-40 on taking Luck before Barkley, but it isn't crazy to go the other way. Luck is a legitimate first overall prospect, but so is Barkley. My opinion of Barkley actually went up after scouting him, as opposed to just watching.

Barkley is by far the best QB USC has had since I started watching them (admittedly, that only goes back to the Leinart days). The size of that gap is as large as the difference between a Peyton Manning, and a Jon Kitna (who, don't forget, could put up big numbers, but is a long time journeyman for a reason.) He is what made USC great this season. Obviously, I don't want Barkley to go pro, since he won't end up on one of my teams (that would require an epic fall)(go niners!), but he should. There is nothing left for Barkley to prove at the college level.

[TheFinisher]

Bump

Interesting to see the general opinion on Barkley last year as opposed to this year.

[raphael]

I don't know that the pro scouts opinion of Matt has changed all that much over the year. If his shoulder tests out O.K. he'll be at the same spot on their lists. I think they base their opinion on about five years worth of research on each player, going right back to their high school days. It's only on media boards and mocks that players rise and fall dramatically.

[cajuncorey]

barkley is the american dream, and will fail as such.

[WCH]

I'm not convinced that Barkley was ever as highly regarded by pro scouts as he was by the national media and fans.

[descendency]

Originally Posted by TheFinisher

Bump

Interesting to see the general opinion on Barkley last year as opposed to this year.

Honestly, Barkley has regressed. I usually am a firm believer that players that aren't ready should return to college so I thought it was a good move for Barkley, but it seems he didn't learn anything from it.

[Brothgar]

I'm also not sold on Barkley does it have to do with not trusting USC prospects? Slightly but I'm unsure on his skill set namely arm strength for starters..

[fatso]

Do you guys think the deflated ball fiasco is hurting his stock at all?

[JRTPlaya21]

Lmao no not really. He just isn't that great.

[Roddoliver]

What a difference. It used to be: "arm strengths are about equal with Luck having the slight advantage" and "if you think Luck has even slightly more arm strength than Barkley, you obviously haven't been paying attention" and "I like the zip Barkley puts on his short and intermediate throws. He's got a slight, but clear advantage over Luck in that department"... And one year later, Barkley suddenly does not have an arm and can't play in the NFL. I don't see much difference between Luck and Barkley in terms of arm strength and as you can see his arm was not an issue until people had to create something negative about Barkley.

[TheFinisher]

Originally Posted by Roddoliver

What a difference. It used to be: "arm strengths are about equal with Luck having the slight advantage" and "if you think Luck has even slightly more arm strength than Barkley, you obviously haven't been paying attention" and "I like the zip Barkley puts on his short and intermediate throws. He's got a slight, but clear advantage over Luck in that department"... And one year later, Barkley suddenly does not have an arm and can't play in the NFL. I don't see much difference between Luck and Barkley in terms of arm strength and as you can see his arm was not an issue until people had to create something negative about Barkley.

+rep

that's what I'm seeing too.

[killxswitch]

Originally Posted by killxswitch

I've been hesitant to say this because Luck hype is beyond out of control but I actually think Barkley will end up a roughly similar pro in terms of success when compared to Luck. People have seriously lost their minds over Luck IMO. That isn't Luck's fault, he's a great prospect and I don't agree that his arm strength is a valid concern. But people are expecting him to be some sort of alien defense-destroying robot QB and it's just not realistic.

Hrm. This doesn't seem like such a good take right now. I hope it's not, anyway.

[JT Jag]

The biggest negative with Barkley is that he had a statistical regression in his senior year, where you want to see improvement from year to year. You also have to be concerned about how much of his production can really be attributed to him, considering the elite talent he had around him at the skill positions.

Beyond that, he has an NFL-calibur set of physical tools. I don't think his arm is necessarily elite, but I don't think Tom Brady's arm is elite either, and he certainly gets by.

[Iamcanadian]

I cannot believe some of the comments posted here.

Matt Barkley has below average arm strength and is nowhere near Luck in that aspect. His deep ball tends to float and that is why he is only considered a late round 1 possibility. He really only has round 2 talent.
He might and I stress, might, possibly be a decent WCO QB where the deep pass isn't a high priority but he could never play in the Colt's system.

[raphael]

Originally Posted by Iamcanadian

I cannot believe some of the comments posted here.

Matt Barkley has below average arm strength and is nowhere near Luck in that aspect. His deep ball tends to float and that is why he is only considered a late round 1 possibility. He really only has round 2 talent.
He might and I stress, might, possibly be a decent WCO QB where the deep pass isn't a high priority but he could never play in the Colt's system.

Luck doesn't have a great arm. He throws floating ducks up all the time.

[Iamcanadian]

Originally Posted by raphael

Luck doesn't have a great arm. He throws floating ducks up all the time.

His arm may only be average but it makes Barkley's arm strength look pitiful.

[hockey619]

Originally Posted by Iamcanadian

He might and I stress, might, possibly be a decent WCO QB where the deep pass isn't a high priority but he could never play in the Colt's system.

WCO does not equal rarely throws deep. Its embarrassing to see someone post that while posing as though they know what they are talking about...

WCO is an offense where the run game is supplemented by a short passing game to get the ball out of the box to playmakers. They still run deep routes, often, and still attack downfield, its just that they throw short/horizontally to spread the defense to open holes for big runs/passes.



Im more concerned that barkley started forcing throws a lot this year than with his arm. Not having a great arm doesnt help his pro future, but throwing the ball into tight windows like you have a gun when you DONT is a bigger issue to me. If hes seeing these tiny windows and thinking 'oh i can hit that' but cant in college then hes going to be a train wreck going forward.

[Iamcanadian]

Originally Posted by hockey619

WCO does not equal rarely throws deep. Its embarrassing to see someone post that while posing as though they know what they are talking about...

WCO is an offense where the run game is supplemented by a short passing game to get the ball out of the box to playmakers. They still run deep routes, often, and still attack downfield, its just that they throw short/horizontally to spread the defense to open holes for big runs/passes.

WCO teams do not attempt a lot of deep patterns, it is mostly a short passing game where the receivers pick up a lot of yardage after the catch, of course, they will occasionally throw a deep pattern relying on surprise to fool CB's and Safeties but it is not a main ingredient of the offense and that is why weak armed QB's are always mentioned as possible WCO QB's.

[raphael]

Arm strength is more important throwing across the field than down the field. Most quarterbacks can get it deep enough if they wind up. It's getting those sideline balls out on time and to the right spot that brings arm strength into play.

[Iamcanadian]

Originally Posted by raphael

Arm strength is more important throwing across the field than down the field. Most quarterbacks can get it deep enough if they wind up. It's getting those sideline balls out on time and to the right spot that brings arm strength into play.

This is quite true but Barkley's deep balls also tend to float which is why NFL.com is saying he is a 2nd round talent who likely gets drafted in round 1 because of the huge need at the position but I doubt any team not employing a WCO offense will draft him.

[BallerT1215]

Originally Posted by raphael

Arm strength is more important throwing across the field than down the field. Most quarterbacks can get it deep enough if they wind up. It's getting those sideline balls out on time and to the right spot that brings arm strength into play.

Exactly.

The out patterns and comeback throws are just as important for arm strength as the deep ball.

[BigBanger]

I like Barkley, but he reminds me of the Jimmy Clausen types. Guys who seem to peak when they're 18 years old and never really show any improvement in college. Barkley looks like the same player that he did three years ago. Some players (Tom Brady) physically mature when they're in their mid 20s. Others seem to max out in their late teens / early twenties. It's hard / impossible to predict the Tom Brady types.

[deepthoughtlife]

Barkley had a rough year, but now he is seriously underrated. He still throws an excellent ball. His arm strength is still better than average. He is still accurate. The amount of pressure he had to deal with this year was insane, and the game plans sucked. His decision making wasn't great, but I believe that is due to the severe lack of time to make those decisions.

When I watched him play live, I was very disappointed by the results. Then I rewatched the passing plays more carefully to evaluate him, and I was shocked by how horrible the situations he was in were. Rarely have I ever seen a person produce at all under such conditions. Barkley did as well in them as anyone I have ever seen, excepting a few legendary quarterbacks already several years into their NFL careers.

As to BigBanger's belief that Barkley didn't improve in college, that is completely inaccurate. He was far better as a sophomore than as a freshman, and as a junior than as a sophomore. The only time he didn't was going from a junior to a senior, and I've reluctantly concluded that it wasn't really his fault at all. Reluctantly because whoever wins the job this year is going to be massively worse, even though I expect them to be in a far better situation.

At this point, it is far more likely that Barkley will be a steal than a bust, even if he is picked far more highly than most people rate him. You can never know that for sure, but he is an excellent college player with all of the abilities necessary for a good transition to the pros. His upside isn't nearly as low as some people think either.

So I guess this is a long winded post to say I'm doubling down. If I was in the QB market, I'd take Barkley in a heartbeat. I'd take him top five. I'd expect him to be my Franchise QB for the next decade. Even after Griffin had such a successful season, I'd still take Barkley over him. I understand why many wouldn't take him early, since I was prepared to massively downgrade him myself, but I was persuaded by what I saw on closer examination.

[Roddoliver]

After Barkley's throwing session, people will say they were impressed and he had great interviews, shows leadership skills, USC had problems at the OL, defense allowed a lot of points, Barkley was pressured to do too much, junior tape is really good, etc. Barkley will be a top 10 pick, might go before Geno Smith.

[deepthoughtlife]

Originally Posted by Roddoliver

After Barkley's throwing session, people will say they were impressed and he had great interviews, shows leadership skills, USC had problems at the OL, defense allowed a lot of points, Barkley was pressured to do too much, junior tape is really good, etc. Barkley will be a top 10 pick, might go before Geno Smith.

This seems very likely to me as well. Almost every year people are very down on the quarterbacks well before the draft, but they always move up in the consensus. A good example was Griffin last year.

Barkley is far better than players like Glennon, Manuel, or Nassib, and people will realize that, they just need an excuse for changing their minds again, and it is almost certain that Barkley will give them just that.