Page 1 of 5

Johnny Manziel

Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:16 pm
by yezzir
He's the guy for us. We've seen what happens when a QB can throw vertically. Jennnings, Simpson, and Patterson are perfect for him. Not to mention AD in the backfield.

He is a knucklehead at times, but he seems smart and well spoken. He is DEFINITELY a competitor. I'd love to see him go against Cutler, Rodgers, and Stafford next year.

He has the "IT" factor that really good NFL QB's have.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:26 pm
by im4mnvikes
yezzir wrote:He's the guy for us. We've seen what happens when a QB can throw vertically. Jennnings, Simpson, and Patterson are perfect for him. Not to mention AD in the backfield.

He is a knucklehead at times, but he seems smart and well spoken. He is DEFINITELY a competitor. I'd love to see him go against Cutler, Rodgers, and Stafford next year.

He has the "IT" factor that really good NFL QB's have.

I believe the it factor he has starts with Sh. oil

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:28 pm
by yezzir
im4mnvikes wrote:
I believe the it factor he has starts with Sh. oil
Haha. Any thing to back that up?

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:32 pm
by im4mnvikes
yezzir wrote:He's the guy for us. We've seen what happens when a QB can throw vertically. Jennnings, Simpson, and Patterson are perfect for him. Not to mention AD in the backfield.

He is a knucklehead at times, but he seems smart and well spoken. He is DEFINITELY a competitor. I'd love to see him go against Cutler, Rodgers, and Stafford next year.

He has the "IT" factor that really good NFL QB's have.

I believe the it factor he has starts with Sh. oil

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Sun Dec 15, 2013 11:40 pm
by yezzir
im4mnvikes wrote:
I believe the it factor he has starts with Sh. oil
I think I get the joke here, but, I don't wanna confuse myself if I'm wrong. He is "Sh.IT" Cute.

Manziel could put this franchise over the top for years in my opinion.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 12:25 am
by Purple Reign
You just never know how a college qb will do in the pros. To me, he reminds me too much of Ponder - if his primary receiver is covered his first reaction is to run. Works good in college but not so much in the pros.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:26 am
by mosscarter
he won't be around when we pick so i wouldn't worry about it. i'd take a chance on him his level of competitiveness is something that can't be taught.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 3:57 am
by Reignman
Boon wrote:
because he can't learn to study film? and whats wrong with his pocket presence? do you guys even watch a&m games?
I was just about to ask the Johnny Bust supporters the same thing. Have you guys actually watched his games or are you only watching Sports Center highlights and buying into the over hype? How anyone can actually watch him play a full game and still believe his back yard clown show is going to work vs NFL defenses have got to be kidding themselves. And no, I don't care if he's doing it vs SEC defenses because they're not even close to being as good or as fast as NFL defenses.

I watched a few of his games this year and I'm not impressed at all. He panics just as bad and as quick as Ponder even when the pocket is clean, then he runs around like Tarkenton before he finally heaves one up into double coverage, or up for grabs in the general direction of one of his big receivers, who more times than not win those jump balls. And that's when he's not taking off and running. And I wonder how durable he's going to be with all that scrambling vs NFL defenses. I mean how valuable is your mobile athletic QB when he's not 100%? Lets ask the 2013 Washington Redskins.

And as mentioned, he's a knucklehead, and already has off the field problems. Do you suppose those problems will get better or worse when you throw millions of NFL dollars on it? And when NFL defenses frustrate and confuse him, how do you suppose party boy is going to handle it? On the head case spectrum, I have him somewhere between Ryan Leaf and Jay Cutler. The guy has disaster waiting to happen written all over him.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 10:49 am
by thatguy
He's not as high-character as I would like, but if he's got the confidence to succeed, he's worth a shot. I just know you don't have to be a cocky dbag to be a great QB, so I hope he grows out of that - and yes, I've seen enough of him to know that that's what he's like. Either way, I hope the Vikings find a way to get him this draft and start him immediately. Winston will be available in the next draft, so if Johnny Football blows, at least we'll know that Winston is legit!

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:05 am
by dead_poet
Purplemania wrote:Too raw and lacks too much intangibles for me.
Please provide a list of the intangibles he's lacking.
Accuracy and arm strength checks out, but foot work, pocket presence, along with his delivery (especially for his height) will be his inevitable doom to be average in the NFL.
The only thing I agree with here is his footwork. He ran a lot out of the 'gun, so I'd like to see him progress more from under center. His pocket presence could be better but he's arguably at his best when he's out of the pocket and improvising, which is better than a guy that's already really good at that (Russel Wilson).

From one scout:
Manziel's extraordinary athleticism deserves top billing. He's very elusive; possessing excellent vision, balance, lateral agility and acceleration. When in the pocket, he shows good accuracy in short to intermediate routes that every NFL offense uses (stop-fade, crossers, posts), often leading his receivers into extra yardage. He has enough zip for these throws and possesses impressive touch. When on the move, Manziel's accuracy drops slightly, but remains very effective
His delivery is fine.
Most of all, Manziel lacks that attitude to be the best ever. He is getting by in college because of his athleticism, but it will definitely show up when he has to start studying film (AND I MEAN STUDY!!!) and really understanding the game.
What evidence do you have he studies film any less than any other player?

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 11:40 am
by NextQuestion
With the exception of a few people on MVB...nobody knows anything about Manziel. He likes to party with babes and is not your everyday QB. He for sure doesn't fit the family friendly terrible-to-average Viking player that we're accustomed to. He does have Mike Evans to bail him out of things at times, but that's a WRs job.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 2:05 pm
by mondry
My amateur take on him is that I'd probably want him more than a lot of the other QB's in this draft. With almost every one of those other guys, I just see Christian Ponder labeled all over them. Bad mechanics, poor foot work, average arms, low football IQ.

Manziel surely has his own slew of problems but outside of Bridgewater, and maybe one or two hidden gems, he just seems like he has the best chance to win a superbowl down the road while some of those guys have a better chance to be matt schaub or matt cassel. The upside with them just isn't there for me.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 7:05 pm
by Demi
he just seems like he has the best chance to win a superbowl down the road while some of those guys have a better chance to be matt schaub or matt cassel. The upside with them just isn't there for me.
When is the last time a player with Manziel's skillset won a super bowl? Closest is what, Favre? And then Young. Both of which were a lot closer to pocket passers than Manziel is...or likely will be.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Mon Dec 16, 2013 9:23 pm
by HardcoreVikesFan
If Manziel falls out of the top 5, and we are drafting outside of the top 5, I think you have to at least consider drafting him. Granted, I don't think extremely high of Manziel, but I feel as though you cannot pass up the potential/production outside of the top 5.

Re: Johnny Manziel

Posted: Tue Dec 24, 2013 3:53 pm
by VikingLord
HardcoreVikesFan wrote:If Manziel falls out of the top 5, and we are drafting outside of the top 5, I think you have to at least consider drafting him. Granted, I don't think extremely high of Manziel, but I feel as though you cannot pass up the potential/production outside of the top 5.
It's almost certain now that the Vikings will be out of the top 5 in the upcoming draft (as hard as that is to believe based on how this season has gone - it seems almost cruel). There are certainly good players available in the 6-10 range, but the only top-level QB who is likely to still be around that late will be Manziel, and even he might be gone. Many of the teams that will draft before the Vikings are just as hungry for a franchise-caliber QB as the Vikings, and some of the ones below them may be willing to trade up to snag a guy they really like. It didn't help matters that Mariota decided to return to school, which means there is one less top-level QB to go around in those first picks. If Manziel falls to the Vikings by some miracle, they simply have to pull the trigger on the guy. I know there are some here who are not sold on his skillset, but just watch his highlights and it's obvious he has that rare mental ability to play the game at a high level. He sees the field, senses pressure, and shows an ability to place the ball with great anticipation. If he was bigger and had fewer off-field issues he'd be as sought after as Luck was, if not more. The fact that he has those negatives is the only way a guy like that could ever drop to pick #8, and if the Vikings do wind up in a position to draft him they sure better not blow it. We're talking about a talent like AD, Harvin, or Moss dropping. The Vikes took chances on all of them and it paid off for the most part.

One wildcard in this situation is Spielman. Spielman has a horrific track record when it comes to evaluating QB's. I could easily see him doing something incredibly stupid like trading up to take Bortles. I sincerely hope that Spielman finds the people he needs to help him properly evaluate what each of these prospects demonstrates *on the field* and not just in private workouts, interviews, and pro days. Leave the guys who have the physical stats to teams that value "potential". Focus on the guys who produce and have shown consistent improvement, especially the ones who produce against tougher competition. That narrows the field at most positions considerably.