Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Talk about the latest College games and players and discuss the NFL Draft here. Get reports on players, prospects, Draft Links, the latest Mock Drafts and other indepth analysis, plus the latest on the NCAA College games.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37423
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Mothman » Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:45 am

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?
0 x

User avatar
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24616
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by dead_poet » Thu Apr 10, 2014 10:57 am

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

mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by mondry » Thu Apr 10, 2014 11:53 am

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.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37423
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Mothman » Thu Apr 10, 2014 1:14 pm

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.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37423
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Mothman » Thu Apr 10, 2014 1:58 pm

dead_poet wrote:I thought this was a relevant article:

Inside Slant: Projections based on college
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.
0 x

mondry
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8455
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2007 12:53 pm

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by mondry » Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:09 pm

Mothman 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. 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.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37423
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Mothman » Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:19 pm

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.
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37423
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Mothman » Thu Apr 10, 2014 2:43 pm

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:
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"?
0 x

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37423
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Mothman » Thu Apr 10, 2014 3:55 pm

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.
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
0 x

User avatar
Texas Vike
Hall of Fame Candidate
Posts: 3684
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 9:52 am

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Texas Vike » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:47 pm

Mothman wrote: 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.
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.
0 x

User avatar
Funkytown
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4044
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:26 pm
Location: Northeast, Iowa

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Funkytown » Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:26 pm

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
0 x
Image

User avatar
Funkytown
Hall of Fame Inductee
Posts: 4044
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:26 pm
Location: Northeast, Iowa

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Funkytown » Thu Apr 10, 2014 8:47 pm

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.
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.
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.
0 x
Image

User avatar
dead_poet
Commissioner
Posts: 24616
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:30 pm
Location: Des Moines, Iowa

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by dead_poet » Fri Apr 11, 2014 8:58 am

Not that it's indicative of future success but....
@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.
0 x
“Some people think football is a matter of life and death. I assure you, it's much more serious than that.” --- Bill Shankly

User avatar
Mothman
Defensive Tackle
Posts: 37423
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 11:48 am
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by Mothman » Fri Apr 11, 2014 9:16 am

dead_poet wrote:Not that it's indicative of future success but....

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

User avatar
KSViking
Veteran
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2014 11:10 am
Location: Olathe, KS

Re: Master 2013-14 College QB thread

Post by KSViking » Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:03 am

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.
0 x