Could Matt Scott be the First QB Taken?

princefielder28 · 03-08-2013, 10:12 PM

It’s been widely discussed about which quarterback tops teams’ boards, and for the most part results come back with Geno Smith being the popular choice. In connection with that, there’s usually the comment that he’s a borderline first talent and not worthy of a high, top 10 selection.

Matt Barkley has received criticism throughout the year with his performance, and his saving grace might be the intangibles he brings along with very good junior tape. Still the majority viewpoint seems to be that he doesn’t possess the physical skills to warrant a first round selection.

EJ Manuel, Ryan Nassib and Landry Jones are all quarterbacks who had their high points throughout their lengthy starting careers in college, and they’ve continued the ups and downs during the off-season evaluation cycle.

Mike Glennon and Tyler Bray have starting experience, not as much as Manuel, Nassib or Jones, but they can share in the ups and downs, and when it comes to their evaluations the common theme is “live arm” which translates to a strong arm but erratic and inconsistent to say the least. All five have tools to work with but can a team justify spending a first round pick on them? Probably not.

So if we come to draft night and get through the top 10 without any quarterbacks being selected (Oakland, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Buffalo and New York all passing on the massive reach of taking a quarterback), is it possible that we see a trade up in the late part of round one and see Matt Scott as the first quarterback off the board?

Philadelphia has often been connected to EJ Manuel as their second round target, but Matt Scott possesses the best combination of athleticism and arm strength of any of the quarterbacks in this draft and he fits the Kelly offense better than anyone as well. Scott doesn’t have the starting experience of other signal callers, but that lends itself to the possibility that he has more potential than any quarterback available and if Philadelphia is the fit, he’d have the chance to develop for a season instead of being thrown into the fire immediately.

Cigaro · 03-08-2013, 10:35 PM

raphael · 03-08-2013, 10:41 PM

Anything is possible, but I don't accept that Scott "has the best combination of athleticism and arm strength". Smith and Manuel beat him in most combine events, they are both bigger than he is, (Manuel considerably), and I think they both have better arms than he does. If that's your basis for having him go off the board first, it's not a valid one.

SAGA45 · 03-08-2013, 10:46 PM

http://chiefconcerns.com/matt-scott-...of-the-future/

phlysac · 03-08-2013, 11:11 PM

This reminds me of Corey Chavous (DraftNasty) saying that Reggie McNeal was the #1 QB and best overall player in the 2006 Draft.

He was drafted as a WR in the 6th round. He had 1 career rush for 8 yards and has been out of the League for 6 seasons.

norcalgsr · 03-09-2013, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by raphael

Anything is possible, but I don't accept that Scott "has the best combination of athleticism and arm strength". Smith and Manuel beat him in most combine events, they are both bigger than he is, (Manuel considerably), and I think they both have better arms than he does. If that's your basis for having him go off the board first, it's not a valid one.

Scott had the best 3-cone and short shuttle among QB's. Only 2 CBs had better 3-cone and/or short shuttle times.

At any rate, Scott reminds me mostly of Andy Dalton. Whoever is comparing him to Russell Wilson and Colin Kaepernick are crazy. He'd be a great fit with Chip Kelly.

BallerT1215 · 03-09-2013, 12:39 AM

Win some, you lose some.....I'll just leave it at that.

Seriously though, No chance.

vidae · 03-09-2013, 01:18 AM

In a word: no.

JT Jag · 03-09-2013, 01:26 AM

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

Caulibflower · 03-09-2013, 02:46 AM

Not an avid reader. Pats the ball. Good athleticism. Scattershot accuracy. Mark Sanchez with wheels.

Matthew Jones · 03-09-2013, 03:30 AM

Not a chance. I do like him to some extent, but his arm strength is adequate at best, and he's only slightly above-average in terms of athleticism. I can appreciate his touch, and that his tools are at least decent across the board, but there's no way a team should draft him ahead of the top guys in the class.

BallerT1215 · 03-09-2013, 04:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caulibflower

Pats the ball.

Peyton Manning : )

princefielder28 · 03-09-2013, 06:44 AM

I'm guessing most the people that have commented in this thread looked at the title and didn't actually read through my original post. I'm not trying to make a case that he should be the first quarterback off the board. I just asked if it's possible, especially if Philadelphia is the first team to select a quarterback, that Matt Scott would be their choice over any of the others.

bucfan12 · 03-09-2013, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew Jones

Not a chance. I do like him to some extent, but his arm strength is adequate at best, and he's only slightly above-average in terms of athleticism. I can appreciate his touch, and that his tools are at least decent across the board, but there's no way a team should draft him ahead of the top guys in the class.

I don;t think there is a question about his arm strength. It's comparable to Russell Wilsons, perhaps maybe stronger.

Like most coaches and Scouts, as what Seattle did with Wilson, they love his intangibles and how quickly he adapted to the Arizona offense last year when it changed.

Is Matt Scott Russell Wilson? No probably not. But he;'s shown he can do the same thing. QUickly adapt to an offense. He's got a good build, live arm, accurate, athletic and mobility, and has intangibles. Poise is very important as well. Will stand tall and deliver knowingly when he';ll take a hit. Quick release.

I'm not worried about the ball pat too much with a quick release. He doesn't double clutch it. Heck Peyton Manning pats the ball, as do several other QBs. The key: Don't stare down your WR. :)

BallerT1215 · 03-09-2013, 01:27 PM

oh crap...

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/cfb/123651/matt-scott

Monomach · 03-09-2013, 01:39 PM

srsly thought this was draftmaster69 before reading it.

Robcards · 03-09-2013, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by princefielder28

I'm guessing most the people that have commented in this thread looked at the title and didn't actually read through my original post. I'm not trying to make a case that he should be the first quarterback off the board. I just asked if it's possible, especially if Philadelphia is the first team to select a quarterback, that Matt Scott would be their choice over any of the others.

Even though Geno Smith is the better athlete? That'd be a tough sell.

princefielder28 · 03-09-2013, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robcards

Even though Geno Smith is the better athlete? That'd be a tough sell.

It's arguable whether or not Geno is the better athlete and Geno wants to operate from within the pocket, he's not a fit for Kelly's offense or any offense incorporating the zone read.

Robcards · 03-09-2013, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by princefielder28

It's arguable whether or not Geno is the better athlete and Geno wants to operate from within the pocket, he's not a fit for Kelly's offense or any offense incorporating the zone read.

Even if the Eagles were gung-ho about getting a QB who has experience with the zone read, I don't think they'd reach for Matt Scott when they know he'll likely be there later in the draft.

princefielder28 · 03-09-2013, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robcards

Even if the Eagles were gung-ho about getting a QB who has experience with the zone read, I don't think they'd reach for Matt Scott when they know he'll likely be there later in the draft.

Scott could very well be a Top 50 selection, and I don't know how antsy a team like Philadelphia would get if they identify him as a fit and like what he potentially offers long term.

Cigaro · 03-09-2013, 02:20 PM

FUNBUNCHER · 03-09-2013, 02:47 PM

It's not a question so much whether or not Scott can be an NFL QB. He has no value selecting him in the first round. None at all.

Maybe someone reaches for him in the 2nd, but IMO he should be there in the 3rd to 5th round range.

Why waste a first round pick on a guy who should still be on the board at least 100 picks later??

princefielder28 · 03-09-2013, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUNBUNCHER

It's not a question so much whether or not Scott can be an NFL QB. He has no value selecting him in the first round. None at all.

Maybe someone reaches for him in the 2nd, but IMO he should be there in the 3rd to 5th round range.

Why waste a first round pick on a guy who should still be on the board at least 100 picks later??

The quarterback crop that the Eagles, under Chip Kelly, have to choose from is so much smaller than most other teams whose offenses operate from within the pocket. Subsequently they'll grade out quarterbacks differently from most teams as well, and I wouldn't eliminate the possibility that they could have a high grade on him.

Armchair Scout · 03-09-2013, 03:43 PM

Matt Scott couldn't beat out Nick Foles for playing time in Arizona; I doubt he will beat Foles out for a roster spot in the NFL. You don't use the 4th overall pick in the draft on a guy who may not even make the team and if he does, it will be by beating out a newly signed QB (Dennis Dixon). Scott has some potential as a developmental prospect, but the 4th round is the absolute highest he should go.

FUNBUNCHER · 03-09-2013, 03:49 PM

You have to slot your draft prospects/picks based on how they're potentially viewed around the league in terms of value. Otherwise you overdraft guys who have much greater value for your team in lower rounds.

There are going to be guys available in the 6th/7th/UDFAs like Robert Marve and Jordan Rodgers who are mobile with streaky accuracy and good arms who can run Chip Kelly's offense effectively that don't require way overdrafting someone like Matt Scott.