View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Wed Oct 18, 2017 10:29 pm



Reply to topic  [ 268 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 Master 2013-14 College QB thread 
Author Message
Backup
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 26, 2013 11:22 pm
Posts: 75
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
HardcoreVikesFan wrote:
I just don't get how one pro day can just erase three years of great QB play in the case of Teddy Bridgewater. This guy's stock is dropping quick. If we pass on him at eight (unless a guy like Sammy Watkins or Khalil Mack is present) we will regret it. I am sorry, but there is nothing that convinces me that Teddy Bridgewater is NOT the best QB in this draft.


let me try- played very subpar competition. only has one definitive game (UF). lost to blake bortles (who i think isn't a top ten pick either). his bowl game against miami wasn't that impressive (if it was against old miami then sure).
there needs to be stock in his pro day. that shows scouts your mechanics and I dont know if you actually watched it, but he was awful, so many of his passes would've been picked.
none of this tells me a qb is deserving to be a top 10 pick. we wont regret drafting the best D available (mosely, dix, gilbert) and draft a just as good (or better) qb later. no love for SEC qbs? how in the world is Murray not in the "Top QB"


Thu Apr 03, 2014 12:14 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 9:55 pm
Posts: 3565
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
big deli Vike wrote:
HardcoreVikesFan wrote:
I just don't get how one pro day can just erase three years of great QB play in the case of Teddy Bridgewater. This guy's stock is dropping quick. If we pass on him at eight (unless a guy like Sammy Watkins or Khalil Mack is present) we will regret it. I am sorry, but there is nothing that convinces me that Teddy Bridgewater is NOT the best QB in this draft.


let me try- played very subpar competition. only has one definitive game (UF). lost to blake bortles (who i think isn't a top ten pick either). his bowl game against miami wasn't that impressive (if it was against old miami then sure).
there needs to be stock in his pro day. that shows scouts your mechanics and I dont know if you actually watched it, but he was awful, so many of his passes would've been picked.
none of this tells me a qb is deserving to be a top 10 pick. we wont regret drafting the best D available (mosely, dix, gilbert) and draft a just as good (or better) qb later. no love for SEC qbs? how in the world is Murray not in the "Top QB"


He is comming off of a bad injury but I like him a lot.

_________________
Do not mistake KINDNESS for WEAKNESS!


Best to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool rather than open it and remove all doubt.


Thu Apr 03, 2014 2:25 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am
Posts: 3432
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
HardcoreVikesFan wrote:
I just don't get how one pro day can just erase three years of great QB play in the case of Teddy Bridgewater. This guy's stock is dropping quick. If we pass on him at eight (unless a guy like Sammy Watkins or Khalil Mack is present) we will regret it. I am sorry, but there is nothing that convinces me that Teddy Bridgewater is NOT the best QB in this draft.



I need to admit that I did not watch too much Louisville FB these past couple of years, but I just don't like the way he throws the ball. It seems to float to me. I watch his videos and I see a lot of passes to guys that aren't covered at all. His release looks awkward to my eye. He just doesn't convince me. Again, I haven't watched enough of him to put too much stock in my opinion of him, but these are the impressions I have on the limited exposure to his tape that I have.


Thu Apr 03, 2014 6:16 pm
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Posts: 23075
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
@NU_Gap: Interesting way to compare QBs, nine different categories highlighted by color compared to others

Image

By this chart, Bridgewater and Manziel are the clear winners.

_________________
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly


Fri Apr 04, 2014 10:02 am
Profile
Commissioner

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
Posts: 23761
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Quote:
By this chart, Bridgewater and Manziel are the clear winners.


By the "after they stopped playing actual games" measurement, Bortles is the clear winner. :lol:


Sat Apr 05, 2014 12:37 am
Profile
Commissioner

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
Posts: 23761
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/04/05/aaron-murray-will-throw-at-georgias-pro-day/
Quote:
Aaron Murray will throw at Georgia’s Pro Day


Quote:
Murray’s agent, Pat Dye Jr., told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution that Murray has recovered sufficiently that he can drop back, roll out, plant his feet and throw. He’ll do all of that for NFL scouts.

“He looks great,” said his Atlanta-based agent, Pat Dye Jr. “I mean his body composition looks great, his knee looks great, he’s moving around really well, he’s not favoring it at all. His strength and conditioning coaches and his movement coaches down there say they’ve very rarely had anybody come through there with the kind work ethic, drive and passion that he has. He not only will he be able to give them a representative workout at Pro Day, but he’ll be able to do all his drops and roll-outs. He’s not going to run the 40 or do any of the timed drills. There’s no point in that. But he’s throwing the ball great.”


But...he's a cripple who may never walk again is what some people made it sound like. :lol:

Go Aaron Murray! Someone will get a steal no matter where they take you.


Sat Apr 05, 2014 4:57 pm
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Posts: 23075
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Brooks: Savage 'nowhere near ready' for NFL

NFL.com's Bucky Brooks writes that Pittsburgh QB Tom Savage is "nowhere near ready to compete for a starting job in the NFL."

As the hype around Savage grows, and his draft stock soars as a result, it's easy to lose track of the fact that he's a long, long way away from a pro field, and much has to break right in his development to become a long-term NFL starter. "He is erratic with his accuracy and ball placement," wrote Brooks. "He needs to work on controlling the velocity on his ball to make it easier for receivers to catch his passes. Additionally, Savage must develop better footwork and mechanics in the pocket to make up for his lack of athleticism and mobility." Some believe the Panthers' product is headed for the second round, but Brooks cautions against that level of investment. "Given the work Savage needs to do to become a potential starter, he will earn developmental grades (Rounds 4-7) on most boards and enter the league viewed as a probable No. 3 quarterback as a rookie," he wrote.
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... eeper-buzz

---

Mayock: Murray most accurate QB in 2014 class

NFL Network analyst Mike Mayock says Georgia QB Aaron Murray is the most accurate QB in the draft class.

"This kid gets it," Mayock said. "He's as accurate as any quarterback in the draft is. ... I really like the kid. I've got to do some more homework on him, because he's kind of changing my perception right now." The analyst said that the more tape he watched of Murray, the more that he liked him. Murray, of course, is the all-time SEC record holder in passing yards (13,166) and TD passes (121). Murray's agent Pat Dye, Jr. said last month that the signal caller has garnered interest from Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Arizona, Minnesota, New Orleans, St. Louis, Cleveland, Houston, Dallas, Oakland, Tennessee and Kansas City. Over the weekend, Dye said "dozens" of NFL teams have contacted him about his client.
Source: Houston SportsTalk 790

_________________
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly


Tue Apr 08, 2014 7:55 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
dead_poet wrote:
Mayock: Murray most accurate QB in 2014 class

NFL Network analyst Mike Mayock says Georgia QB Aaron Murray is the most accurate QB in the draft class.

"This kid gets it," Mayock said. "He's as accurate as any quarterback in the draft is. ... I really like the kid. I've got to do some more homework on him, because he's kind of changing my perception right now." The analyst said that the more tape he watched of Murray, the more that he liked him. Murray, of course, is the all-time SEC record holder in passing yards (13,166) and TD passes (121). Murray's agent Pat Dye, Jr. said last month that the signal caller has garnered interest from Cincinnati, Jacksonville, Arizona, Minnesota, New Orleans, St. Louis, Cleveland, Houston, Dallas, Oakland, Tennessee and Kansas City. Over the weekend, Dye said "dozens" of NFL teams have contacted him about his client.
Source: Houston SportsTalk 790



Thanks for the info. I'm not surprised that Mayock likes Murray or that teams are showing a lot of interest in him. He's a very good player and he's one of the QBs in this draft I find most intriguing. I've seen him projected to go as low as the 4th or 5th round but if teams feel comfortable with the progress he's made in rehabbing his knee injury, I think he's likely to go much higher than that. He has as much potential to succeed as some of the more talked about names in this draft. If his pro day goes well, I'll bet mock drafters will be falling over themselves to move him up their boards.


Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:27 am
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Posts: 23075
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
This is valid criticism and worrisome because I've seen this show up on film too.

Quote:
Pointed out to me..."How many times does Manziel have what looks to be his first read available BUT still won't deliver the ball, and why?"

@LRiddickESPN on Twitter

_________________
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly


Tue Apr 08, 2014 10:04 pm
Profile
Commissioner

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
Posts: 23761
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
dead_poet wrote:
This is valid criticism and worrisome because I've seen this show up on film too.

Quote:
Pointed out to me..."How many times does Manziel have what looks to be his first read available BUT still won't deliver the ball, and why?"

@LRiddickESPN on Twitter


Because a three yard gain doesn't win a game. A 70 yard TD bomb might.
After watching check down charlie for three years...

If Wilson threw to his first read every time they were open, they wouldn't have a super bowl. :confused:


Wed Apr 09, 2014 12:18 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:26 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Northeast, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Demi wrote:

Because a three yard gain doesn't win a game. A 70 yard TD bomb might.
After watching check down charlie for three years...

If Wilson threw to his first read every time they were open, they wouldn't have a super bowl. :confused:


Did you come up with all that by yourself?! :-)

It matters because the NFL is on another level. Wanting the opposite of Ponder or just plain wanting bombs thrown all the time won't get it done either. Situational football matters. Connecting on those first reads and check downs, sometimes, maybe even oftentimes, is the difference between winning and losing.

I just want players and coaches who understand situational football and freakin' execute. I don't care if it's pretty or not. A win is a win.

_________________
Image


Wed Apr 09, 2014 12:59 am
Profile WWW
Commissioner

Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 4:24 pm
Posts: 23761
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Quote:
Connecting on those first reads and check downs, sometimes, maybe even oftentimes, is the difference between winning and losing.


As long as you're capable, and willing, to try and make a play when it's there. Which plenty of QBs aren't. Whether it's physical, or confidence..."oftentimes" is "game managing", it doesn't win games. It "doesn't lose" them. Look at Favre in the 49ers game. I'll take JFB trying that over Ponder checking down on third and long...or throwing a 40~ yard hail mary that doesn't even make it into the end zone on the final play of a game...


Wed Apr 09, 2014 1:39 am
Profile
Hall of Famer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2004 5:52 pm
Posts: 7946
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
It doesn't work like that in the NFL in 2014. This isn't college or the NFL of the 1960s. Quarterbacks don't break plays off, run around like a chicken and heave the ball 40 yards downfield to a receiver who's been running in circles for five or six seconds waiving his hand and yelling "I'm open!"

Manziel's questionable pocket presence and his inability to deliver the ball to open primary receivers are so eerily similar to what we've seen out of the Vikings' former 1st round draft pick from FSU, that they have to be giant, glaring, honking red flags for everyone in the organization.


Wed Apr 09, 2014 7:00 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Eli wrote:
It doesn't work like that in the NFL in 2014. This isn't college or the NFL of the 1960s. Quarterbacks don't break plays off, run around like a chicken and heave the ball 40 yards downfield to a receiver who's been running in circles for five or six seconds waiving his hand and yelling "I'm open!"

Manziel's questionable pocket presence and his inability to deliver the ball to open primary receivers are so eerily similar to what we've seen out of the Vikings' former 1st round draft pick from FSU, that they have to be giant, glaring, honking red flags for everyone in the organization.


You would think so...


Wed Apr 09, 2014 7:19 am
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:26 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Northeast, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
ESPN - Pro Football Hall of Famer Roger Staubach: I'd draft Johnny Manziel over Jadeveon Clowney

_________________
Image


Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:36 am
Profile WWW
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Funkytown wrote:
ESPN - Pro Football Hall of Famer Roger Staubach: I'd draft Johnny Manziel over Jadeveon Clowney


Staubach has too much of a Texas bias... :)

I was listening to Mike and Mike this morning and they were talking about Zach Mettenberger's pro day. They were also talking about how much actual separation there might be between the supposed top 3 QBs in this draft and that next tier of QBs. They made a great point that's been made before: if teams don't believe Manziel, Bortles and Bridgewater offer an upside substantial enough to justify selecting them early in the first round instead of waiting to select a QB like Carr, Mettenberger, Garoppalo, McCarron, Murray, etc. a round or two later, the "big 3" could easily drop. I have no idea how the draft will play out and we all know it only takes one team to believe a player is worth drafting high and that player can be selected. However, I've certainly reached the point where I have a hard time seeing why any of the top 3 QBs would make better pros than some of the "next tier" QBs ranked behind them. I doubt I'm alone and it makes me wonder what NFL teams are thinking. Will any QBs actually be taken in the top 10 this year?


Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:45 am
Profile
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Posts: 23075
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Mothman wrote:
Will any QBs actually be taken in the top 10 this year?


I think so. Or QB-needy teams will be scrambling at the bottom of the first round/top of the second. It's SUCH an important position and there franchises out there that, at this point, are starved for a QB. It isn't like a "devalued" position these days (running back). It's a premiere position and those teams that need QBs (especially with new front offices/coaching staffs) will be hard-pressed to bypass one. I suppose it will all come down to how each team grades each player and if they have the ammo to move around to get a guy they want.

I thought this was a relevant article:

Inside Slant: Projections based on college

Quote:
Recently, a group of college professors worked to inject some hard numbers into the discussion via a study of 640 drafted prospects over a three-year period from 2002-04.

Their results were instructive. College production, averaged per game and scaled based on competition level, was at least twice and in some cases three times more indicative of NFL success than athletic ability. In fact, said Georgia professor Brian J. Hoffman, combine numbers added nothing to the accuracy of projections that college production hadn't already accounted for.

"If it were up to me," Hoffman said, "I would certainly [tell general managers] to ignore the combine. Completely ignore the combine. My concern is that, if anything, it leads you astray more often than helps bring you a good player. There are some exceptions, particularly with a player like [New Orleans Saints tight end] Jimmy Graham, who played only one season and so you have less data. But focusing on college performance seems a much more reliable approach. In general, college performance will tell you what you need to know."


Quote:
In any event, there are some important thoughts to be gleaned here. First, if the data compiled via the combine's athletic measurements has proved statistically worthless, it seems time to reconsider the nature and substance of the drills. The results, as Hoffman said, are more likely to cause a draft mistake than contribute to a successful choice.


Full story: http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/ ... on-college

_________________
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly


Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:57 am
Profile
Hall of Famer

Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm
Posts: 8438
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Mothman wrote:


I was listening to Mike and Mike this morning and they were talking about Zach Mettenberger's pro day. They were also talking about how much actual separation there might be between the supposed top 3 QBs in this draft and that next tier of QBs. They made a great point that's been made before: if teams don't believe Manziel, Bortles and Bridgewater offer an upside substantial enough to justify selecting them early in the first round instead of waiting to select a QB like Carr, Mettenberger, Garoppalo, McCarron, Murray, etc. a round or two later, the "big 3" could easily drop. I have no idea how the draft will play out and we all know it only takes one team to believe a player is worth drafting high and that player can be selected. However, I've certainly reached the point where I have a hard time seeing why any of the top 3 QBs would make better pros than some of the "next tier" QBs ranked behind them. I doubt I'm alone and it makes me wonder what NFL teams are thinking. Will any QBs actually be taken in the top 10 this year?


That's something I've talked about a little bit somewhere on this board. More so why I wanted a top prospect likely on the defense side of the ball in round 1 but it's the same kind of logic. Basically using madden ratings, if bridgewater, manziel, bortles are only 85's (out of 100 of course) and you can get defensive players at 92's, it's a no brainer really if that's how you rate the players. Meanwhile, if you have Carr, Mettenberger, Murray, Garappalo, etc at like 84, 83, 82's etc but you can pick some of them up in the 3rd or even 4th round then that's also almost a no brainer. Of course there is more to rating players than just putting a rating to them but for examples sake.

As for my guess, I think only 1 QB goes in the top 10 and 2 QB's in the first round total, without trades accounted for. If a QB needy team close to the top in round 2 gets anxious for the guy they want and trade up to the end of the first then I see 3 QB's going. At that point though, I think that's where it ends, and there will be a QB run from the top of the 2nd to the mid of it. Then it'll die down a bit as the most QB needy teams have gotten their guys, and the rest of the QB's will go late 3rd, early 4th.

I get that the position is super overvalued and teams are super desperate for the answer at QB but they also aren't idiots and this class just isn't top heavy enough. I think a lot of teams learned from the Gabbert, Ponder, Locker draft that sometimes the top rated QB's, even though they're the top rated QB's just aren't that impressive. Meanwhile there are also a lot of Andy Daltons in here that you can get in the 2nd or 3rd that have a decent chance at the better careers.


Thu Apr 10, 2014 11:53 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
mondry wrote:
That's something I've talked about a little bit somewhere on this board. More so why I wanted a top prospect likely on the defense side of the ball in round 1 but it's the same kind of logic. Basically using madden ratings, if bridgewater, manziel, bortles are only 85's (out of 100 of course) and you can get defensive players at 92's, it's a no brainer really if that's how you rate the players. Meanwhile, if you have Carr, Mettenberger, Murray, Garappalo, etc at like 84, 83, 82's etc but you can pick some of them up in the 3rd or even 4th round then that's also almost a no brainer. Of course there is more to rating players than just putting a rating to them but for examples sake.

As for my guess, I think only 1 QB goes in the top 10 and 2 QB's in the first round total, without trades accounted for. If a QB needy team close to the top in round 2 gets anxious for the guy they want and trade up to the end of the first then I see 3 QB's going. At that point though, I think that's where it ends, and there will be a QB run from the top of the 2nd to the mid of it. Then it'll die down a bit as the most QB needy teams have gotten their guys, and the rest of the QB's will go late 3rd, early 4th.

I get that the position is super overvalued and teams are super desperate for the answer at QB but they also aren't idiots and this class just isn't top heavy enough. I think a lot of teams learned from the Gabbert, Ponder, Locker draft that sometimes the top rated QB's, even though they're the top rated QB's just aren't that impressive. Meanwhile there are also a lot of Andy Daltons in here that you can get in the 2nd or 3rd that have a decent chance at the better careers.


Add in that a former 3rd round pick at QB just won the Super Bowl and that the 49ers got to the Super Bowl with a former second round pick at QB a year earlier, and maybe teams will re-think their approach a little. Then again, maybe not. :) I won't be surprised if things play out very much like you suggested above. I do think you and dead_poet are probably right and at least 1 QB will be drafted in the top 10, mainly because so many teams need one. I'm hoping the Vikes can get one of those highly-rated "92" defensive players you're talking about in the first round and grab a QB in R2. I actually find several of the so-called second-tier options at QB more appealing than Bortles, Manziel and Bridgewater.


Thu Apr 10, 2014 1:14 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
dead_poet wrote:
I thought this was a relevant article:

Inside Slant: Projections based on college

Quote:
Recently, a group of college professors worked to inject some hard numbers into the discussion via a study of 640 drafted prospects over a three-year period from 2002-04.

Their results were instructive. College production, averaged per game and scaled based on competition level, was at least twice and in some cases three times more indicative of NFL success than athletic ability. In fact, said Georgia professor Brian J. Hoffman, combine numbers added nothing to the accuracy of projections that college production hadn't already accounted for.

"If it were up to me," Hoffman said, "I would certainly [tell general managers] to ignore the combine. Completely ignore the combine. My concern is that, if anything, it leads you astray more often than helps bring you a good player. There are some exceptions, particularly with a player like [New Orleans Saints tight end] Jimmy Graham, who played only one season and so you have less data. But focusing on college performance seems a much more reliable approach. In general, college performance will tell you what you need to know."


Quote:
In any event, there are some important thoughts to be gleaned here. First, if the data compiled via the combine's athletic measurements has proved statistically worthless, it seems time to reconsider the nature and substance of the drills. The results, as Hoffman said, are more likely to cause a draft mistake than contribute to a successful choice.


Full story: http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/ ... on-college


Thanks for that link. It's a good read. I've always felt that on-field performance and production were far and away the most important tool for evaluating players and determining how their game will translate to the pros. When it comes to Murray in particular, we'll know soon enough where he's going to be drafted but I think the idea that he could last until the 5th round is ludicrous. I expect him to be taken in the second, the third at the latest and I honestly think a team would be perfectly justified if they selected him in the latter part of the first round. He's been downgraded because of his size and his injury but it's increasingly clear that the latter won't be much of an issue and he's as tall or taller than some of the QBs ranked ahead of him. I think he has a great chance to succeed in the NFL.

Siefert mentions that it seems time to reconsider the nature and substance of the combine drills and he may be right, but I wonder how much stock teams are really putting into them in the first place. It gives them a chance to look at the agility, mechanics, straight line speed, etc. of players but I've been under the impression for years now that what teams value most about the combine is the chance to meet with players face to face.


Thu Apr 10, 2014 1:58 pm
Profile
Hall of Famer

Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm
Posts: 8438
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Mothman wrote:
mondry wrote:
That's something I've talked about a little bit somewhere on this board. More so why I wanted a top prospect likely on the defense side of the ball in round 1 but it's the same kind of logic. Basically using madden ratings, if bridgewater, manziel, bortles are only 85's (out of 100 of course) and you can get defensive players at 92's, it's a no brainer really if that's how you rate the players. Meanwhile, if you have Carr, Mettenberger, Murray, Garappalo, etc at like 84, 83, 82's etc but you can pick some of them up in the 3rd or even 4th round then that's also almost a no brainer. Of course there is more to rating players than just putting a rating to them but for examples sake.

As for my guess, I think only 1 QB goes in the top 10 and 2 QB's in the first round total, without trades accounted for. If a QB needy team close to the top in round 2 gets anxious for the guy they want and trade up to the end of the first then I see 3 QB's going. At that point though, I think that's where it ends, and there will be a QB run from the top of the 2nd to the mid of it. Then it'll die down a bit as the most QB needy teams have gotten their guys, and the rest of the QB's will go late 3rd, early 4th.

I get that the position is super overvalued and teams are super desperate for the answer at QB but they also aren't idiots and this class just isn't top heavy enough. I think a lot of teams learned from the Gabbert, Ponder, Locker draft that sometimes the top rated QB's, even though they're the top rated QB's just aren't that impressive. Meanwhile there are also a lot of Andy Daltons in here that you can get in the 2nd or 3rd that have a decent chance at the better careers.


Add in that a former 3rd round pick at QB just won the Super Bowl and that the 49ers got to the Super Bowl with a former second round pick at QB a year earlier, and maybe teams will re-think their approach a little. Then again, maybe not. :) I won't be surprised if things play out very much like you suggested above. I do think you and dead_poet are probably right and at least 1 QB will be drafted in the top 10, mainly because so many teams need one. I'm hoping the Vikes can get one of those highly-rated "92" defensive players you're talking about in the first round and grab a QB in R2. I actually find several of the so-called second-tier options at QB more appealing than Bortles, Manziel and Bridgewater.


I think 2010 is a good example of how a draft can play out when the QB class is fairly suspect. Sure you have Bradford at #1 but then you go all the way to #25 before someone took a chance on Tebow. This draft class is better than 2010's I'd say so maybe more QB's will go in the first but the thing that makes me hesitant is that this draft is much much deeper with those "2nd tier" guys you mention. There just isn't a lot of upside to taking one of the big 3 at #8 when the best QB might be in the 2nd or even 3rd round depending on how much of a slide actually takes place. Most of the QB needy teams aren't in the back end of the draft so that's why I mention trading up (hard to account for) on it's own.

Again I go back to Locker, Gabbert, and Dalton. There isn't much difference there but one of those three let's you do whatever you want with your first round pick and this year I think there's like 6 Dalton level guys around and I'm not sure the top 3 are all that much better than Locker and Gabbert as far as prospects go. That's just me though, and like you said it depends on how wise the GM's will be hehe.


Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:09 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
mondry wrote:
Add in that a former 3rd round pick at QB just won the Super Bowl and that the 49ers got to the Super Bowl with a former second round pick at QB a year earlier, and maybe teams will re-think their approach a little. Then again, maybe not. :) I won't be surprised if things play out very much like you suggested above. I do think you and dead_poet are probably right and at least 1 QB will be drafted in the top 10, mainly because so many teams need one. I'm hoping the Vikes can get one of those highly-rated "92" defensive players you're talking about in the first round and grab a QB in R2. I actually find several of the so-called second-tier options at QB more appealing than Bortles, Manziel and Bridgewater.


I think 2010 is a good example of how a draft can play out when the QB class is fairly suspect. Sure you have Bradford at #1 but then you go all the way to #25 before someone took a chance on Tebow. This draft class is better than 2010's I'd say so maybe more QB's will go in the first but the thing that makes me hesitant is that this draft is much much deeper with those "2nd tier" guys you mention. There just isn't a lot of upside to taking one of the big 3 at #8 when the best QB might be in the 2nd or even 3rd round depending on how much of a slide actually takes place.

Again I go back to Locker, Gabbert, and Dalton. There isn't much difference there but one of those three let's you do whatever you want with your first round pick and this year I think there's like 6 Dalton level guys around and I'm not sure the top 3 are all that much better than Locker and Gabbert as far as prospects go.[/quote]

Agreed. I'm not sure they should even be the top 3. What really makes Bortles a significantly better pro prospect at the position than Mettenberger or makes Manziel a significantly better pro prospect than Murray? McCarron won 2 national championships playing on one of the most talented teams in the country but he was still the QB on those teams and his performances could have dragged them down instead of helping them to win. Put him in the kind of situations Kaepernick and Wilson landed in (ie: on two of the more talented teams in the league) and maybe he can do what he did in college again. Maybe not ... but is there much more reason to believe Bridgewater would be a better QB?

All of these guys have their good and bad points but to me, not one of them stands out as clearly being a cut above the rest. The only reason to spend a top 10 pick on one of them is if a team is convinced that player IS a cut above the rest (at least as a fit for them) and equally convinced that they won't get another shot at him.


Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:19 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
fiestavike wrote:
Maybe its just me but it seems like there are an awful lot of QBs expected to go in the 2nd round this year. I've heard it about Murray, Carr, Garrapollo, Metenberger, McCarron...any others?


I think that covers it unless someone falls out of the first.

I doubt we'll see all 8 go in the first two rounds but it could happen since quite a few teams need QBs. Someone will likely slip into at least the third. I just don't think teams are going to sit on Murray. He's a smart player, he was a 4 year starter and an extremely prolific passer in a pro style offense in what is generally acknowledged to be the best conference in the country. the only real knocks on him are questions about his size and durability but considering the rest of his resume, and the number of teams that need a QB, I just can't believe he's going to be a Day 3 pick. If he falls that far, I hope the Vikings take him even if they've already selected a QB.

By the way, I love this comment from rob Rang in his draft profile of Murray:

Quote:
Only an inch shorter than the 6-2, 220-pound Dalton and possessing at least as much arm talent, Murray could emerge as a quality starter in the NFL but might need talent around him to take his team to the promised land.


:lol: Has there ever been a QB who didn't need talent around him "to take his team to the promised land"?


Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:43 pm
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
fiestavike wrote:
coming off his injury I would be suprised to see him go before the 3rd, but he is a qb, and so different rules apply.


Agreed. The injury could definitely be a factor but if teams are convinced he's healthy and well on his way to a complete recovery, how much of a factor? I'm never sure how much weight to give that sort of thing.

Quote:
Funny thing is at least Garropolo and McCarron have also been mentioned as late 1st rd prospects and 3-4th round prospects. the big question is, will a team who doesn't need a qb see enough value in one of these guys to pull the trigger, if so its possible all 8 go in the first two rounds.


It's definitely possible because beyond teams like Jacksonville, Cleveland, Oakland and our Vikes who really need to find a young starter, there are teams like that want to improve their backup situation or begin grooming a QB for the future. For example, I've heard the Patriots might be looking for a QB in this draft.

Jim


Thu Apr 10, 2014 3:55 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Candidate
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am
Posts: 3432
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Mothman wrote:
fiestavike wrote:
coming off his injury I would be suprised to see him go before the 3rd, but he is a qb, and so different rules apply.


Agreed. The injury could definitely be a factor but if teams are convinced he's healthy and well on his way to a complete recovery, how much of a factor? I'm never sure how much weight to give that sort of thing.

Quote:
Funny thing is at least Garropolo and McCarron have also been mentioned as late 1st rd prospects and 3-4th round prospects. the big question is, will a team who doesn't need a qb see enough value in one of these guys to pull the trigger, if so its possible all 8 go in the first two rounds.


It's definitely possible because beyond teams like Jacksonville, Cleveland, Oakland and our Vikes who really need to find a young starter, there are teams like that want to improve their backup situation or begin grooming a QB for the future. For example, I've heard the Patriots might be looking for a QB in this draft.

Jim



Which should indicate very clearly what they think of Mallet. I know lots of posters pine for him still… but I suspect the Pats don't think much of him.


Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:47 pm
Profile
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:26 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Northeast, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Mothman wrote:
When it comes to Murray in particular, we'll know soon enough where he's going to be drafted but I think the idea that he could last until the 5th round is ludicrous. I expect him to be taken in the second, the third at the latest and I honestly think a team would be perfectly justified if they selected him in the latter part of the first round. He's been downgraded because of his size and his injury but it's increasingly clear that the latter won't be much of an issue and he's as tall or taller than some of the QBs ranked ahead of him. I think he has a great chance to succeed in the NFL.


Wasn't Demi making similar points/arguments weeks ago? Ruh roh. :P

_________________
Image


Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:26 pm
Profile WWW
Hall of Fame Inductee
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:26 pm
Posts: 4011
Location: Northeast, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Demi wrote:
As long as you're capable, and willing, to try and make a play when it's there.


Agreed, if that's the smartest thing to do at the time. Risk vs. reward, of course. Situational football.

Quote:
Which plenty of QBs aren't. Whether it's physical, or confidence..."oftentimes" is "game managing", it doesn't win games. It "doesn't lose" them.


I'm fine with "not losing" sometimes...and winning at other times. ;) Situational football.

Quote:
Look at Favre in the 49ers game.


Let's not kid ourselves. That was miraculous--and not entirely "skill, baby." I was there. I almost died. lol. Besides, that was a "nothing-to-lose play," anyway. However, it was nice he could actually make the throw. Of course, a QB who can make all the throws--and has the confidence to do so--is VERY necessary, but so is being smart and not trying to do too much. Being a "game manager" is not all bad, especially when times call for it.

But look at Favre in the Saints game. A "game-managing, check-down, first-read, tuck-it-and-run-and-take-what-you-can-get, let's-not-make-a-stupid-mistake-to-cost-your-team, sissy-ball play would have been NICE!!! Situational football.

Again, I just want good, smart players who understand situational football, who are also able to execute what is needed at the time. Is that too much to ask for? I hope not.

To be honest, I think we want most of the same things regarding this particular topic. I just think I'm not as quick to label people--and then be scared of those labels. :D I just want a QB who can do it all, but also knows when to do what. Make sense? :D But, yes, regarding this discussion, I want a little more Favre--a little less Ponder...or something like that.

_________________
Image


Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:47 pm
Profile WWW
Commissioner
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Posts: 23075
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Not that it's indicative of future success but....

Quote:
@AlbertBreer At the combine, Texas A&M QB Johnny Manziel rang up an impressive score of 32 on the Wonderlic, I'm told. Should help his cause.

_________________
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly


Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:58 am
Profile
Defensive Tackle
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Posts: 37200
Location: Chicago, IL
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
dead_poet wrote:
Not that it's indicative of future success but....

Quote:
@AlbertBreer At the combine, Texas A&M QB Johnny Manziel rang up an impressive score of 32 on the Wonderlic, I'm told. Should help his cause.



... but it doesn't hurt and his intelligence is probably one of the reasons he's been successful so far.


Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:16 am
Profile
Veteran
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 11:10 am
Posts: 272
Location: Olathe, KS
Post Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread
Mothman wrote:

Agreed. I'm not sure they should even be the top 3. What really makes Bortles a significantly better pro prospect at the position than Mettenberger or makes Manziel a significantly better pro prospect than Murray? McCarron won 2 national championships playing on one of the most talented teams in the country but he was still the QB on those teams and his performances could have dragged them down instead of helping them to win. Put him in the kind of situations Kaepernick and Wilson landed in (ie: on two of the more talented teams in the league) and maybe he can do what he did in college again. Maybe not ... but is there much more reason to believe Bridgewater would be a better QB?

All of these guys have their good and bad points but to me, not one of them stands out as clearly being a cut above the rest. The only reason to spend a top 10 pick on one of them is if a team is convinced that player IS a cut above the rest (at least as a fit for them) and equally convinced that they won't get another shot at him.


I do believe some QBs will go in the top 10 of this draft. Coaches and GMs buckle under the presssure because their jobs seem to be tied to having a good QB to lead the team to playoffs routinely. So, if a GM has fallen in love with one of the QBs, and they feel comfortable that this kid could keep them employed for next 10 years, they will pull that trigger. And the more GMs that start pulling triggers, causes this chain reaction. Even though we see a group of 8 guys or so that could be good fits, or lead the team. I believe the GMs have it narrowed down to 3-4 guys they are comfortable with, so if 2 of those guys go, they are going to do anything in their power to get one of the remaining ones.. Its why there always seems to be reaches on QBs. When a GM drafts a bad O-Lineman, or DB, or LB. Everyone says it sucks, but they don't generally lose their job over it, unless its an every year occurance. If you are on a QB needy team, and you draft a few bad QBs, you are out of the playoffs, and out of a job. Sort of like in basketball, the game winning/losing shot with no time left on the clock. You may have missed 5 earlier, but make this one, and your a hero. Miss it, and no matter how well you played earlier, your a bum.


Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:03 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 268 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.