|
joe football posted:Not that much of a draft/scouting nerd but I'm surprised to see Mariota as the #2 QB, visually his mechanics look pretty ugly/stiff to me. I guess someone is going to need to draft a QB early though and I root for every athletic QB to do well in the NFL, gently caress pocket passers I dunno, he's gonna have problems with drops but everyone out of the gun only systems does, but other than that he's pretty fluid and athletic throwing the ball, and his instincts appear very strong for a player at his experience level (though he's running a fairly simplistic offense).
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 03:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:17 |
|
|
wandler20 posted:Do you guys think Mariota, Hundley, and Manziel will all come out this year? They are all RS-Soph. I can't even think of the last top QB prospect that was a RS-Soph to come out. Manziel has certainly indicated in both behavior and words that he will, but things can change and you're right in that it's unusual that all of the talked about underclassman actually do declare in any given. Probably worth noting that Bridgewater as a true junior is no more of a lock than these three to declare either.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Props Department posted:Bridgewater is getting his Sports Management degree after this semester and has evinced no intention of using his last year of eligibilty. Anything can happen but he's as good as gone I think the perception of Bridgewater has been fairly steadily slipping as the season went along to where a lot of people are now considering him just in a group of good but not great top quarterbacks and not the top quarterback. That was probably inevitable because he's never been a real elite prospect, but it does mean that he might be better off waiting the year. It's still early in the process even for stay/go talks, which is the entire point, especially after a series of better prospects like Luck, Bradford, and even Locker returned "unexpectedly."
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 17:33
|
|
|
Declan MacManus posted:Which is silly because the way that the way that draft slotting works is you're not going to miss much from going from the #1 pick to the #4 pick (assuming a team doesn't just panic and trade up to #2). It's not necessarily the 1 to 4 drop that's the problem. Geno Smith looked like a pretty strong bet to go 1st overall in 2013 really up through February, and even until draft day people thought he'd go top ten, and he ended up going 39th. And one of his top rivals in the early and middle parts of the draft process in Barkley ended up as a third day pick. The motto of the draft process should be "poo poo happens" if you can't plausibly have "generational prospect" at something or another attached to you.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 18:05
|
|
|
Quest For Glory II posted:Perception is not really that important and the post-season cycle will really determine where his value is. Everyone scouting Bridgewater knew that Louisville was not going to face top competition this year. He's had only one middling game this year against Rutgers and that'll get broken down and zaprudered plenty I'm sure. Perception of Bridgewater's place within the draft class is absolutely important if we're talking about whether he's a lock to come out.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 20:07
|
|
|
Quest For Glory II posted:Mmm I have bad news for every QB prospect to ever declare then; that poo poo doesn't end until your name is called on draft day. Remember the debate of whether Indy should take RG3 instead of Luck? Even with the generational talent, there's intentional clouding. There was no significant debate between Luck and Griffin. Indy wasn't even pretending that it was a discussion, to the point that Griffin wouldn't even work out for them because they had tipped their hand months earlier that the pick was Luck.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 20:39
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:Weren't people souring on Barkley before he actually declared, or is that my imagination? Opposite way; Barkley and Landry Jones both didn't declare for 2012 because it was viewed as a top-heavy draft for quarterbacks and they had no chance to get past Luck and little chance to get past Griffin. Then their stock went plummeting in their senior seasons.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
Quest For Glory II posted:Yeah but I don't know where this change in perception is coming from, if the scouts knew what the level of competition was gonna be. For him to drop low enough that it would be a better move to stay another year, he'd have to be showing a couple of pretty serious cracks in the armor, which hasn't happened yet. Maybe those will form as the season goes along, I dunno. The Rutgers game will give scouts some stuff to mull over, because he made a couple of mistakes in that game. But if he's given a 1st round grade then he's got to get paid. Sometimes guys just rise and fall because perceptions shift, without an overriding narrative. In this case we're starting with the perpetual obsession with the idea that there always has to be a 1-1 candidate quarterback in each class, and coming into the season Bridgewater was not only the best candidate but really the only one. Now there is at least one other identifiable top pick quarterback prospect - one who frankly Bridgewater doesn't physically compare to all that well - and several more that could emerge, the bloom's off Bridgewater a bit; this was the inevitability that his stock would dip that I was originally referring to.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
Kaepernick with a clean throwing motion is probably the first overall pick in that draft, and certainly 20+ picks higher than he actually went. Mariota compares fairly well to Kaepernick in terms of tools and skills - he's probably a little more accurate, doesn't have the level of competition concerns (plus you've got three more years indicating this type of quarterback is a good thing), and is a comparable runner, though he has a little worse raw arm strength - and has a clean, fluid, quick throwing motion. Ergo...
|
|
#
¿
Oct 26, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
Ouroboros posted:Regarding that year's draft; I only recently started following the NFL, but how on earth did Alex Smith end up going 1st overall that year? From everything I've seen NFL scouts seem to hugely favour QBs with the prototypical physical skills (big arm, quick release etc) that give them a high ceiling. How did someone like Smith who is regarded as a relatively weak armed game manager go above Aaron Rodgers, who has one of the best arms and best throwing mechanics of anyone in the league? I know Rodgers got to sit for a few years and Smith had a procession of offensive coordinators, but surely Rodgers had to be considered as someone with a higher ceiling? Smith doesn't have a weak arm and he really isn't a "game manager" in the sense that people describe him. As a prospect he was an athletic tools guy with a good arm and what are now considered the usual questions coming out of a spread option offense like whether he could take drops and what kind of accuracy he really had (at the time those questions were new since there wasn't a great college spread option QB prospect prior to Smith).
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
xeria posted:I'm going to be so mad* when an 0-16 season doesn't net the #1 pick for what's shaping up to be historically the worst team of all time. Dammit, Bucs, why can't you win one stupid game! The Bucs on talent still rate to be something around a .500 team or a little below and they've already had some ridiculous clownshoe losses, it's pretty hard to imagine them actually losing out even as poorly coached as they are.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2013 21:28
|
|
|
Throwing picks away on a quarterback just because that's what you're "supposed" to do is how you get in Jacksonville's talent paucity scenario to begin with.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 01:52
|
|
|
Disillusionist posted:Clowney may be the best defensive player in the league three years from now, but that alone is not enough to win consistently. The dirty little secret is that neither is a high pick quarterback even if the pick works out. Newton is below .500 for his career, and so is Stafford, and those are some of the relative success stories. It's an important position, no doubt, but its importance is highly overrated because of how visible it is. oldfan fucked around with this message at 04:39 on Oct 31, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 04:35
|
|
|
Disillusionist posted:And as a Vikings fan I don't get why you'd take lesser talent at QB over any position. Sure Adrian Peterson is awesome and all but he won't win poo poo unless they get a quarterback. Same for Jared Allen or any other great player they've had recently. The Vikings made the playoffs just last year with bottom 5 quarterback play.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2013 05:48
|
|
|
Basically draft picks have an expected value (which is somewhat close to the public chart but probably not quite right), and outside of very strange situations like "Andrew Luck" or guys like Aaron Hernandez or Alfonzo Dennard that are falling purely for high risk of being a violent felon, there is rarely a significant enough deviation from that expected value at the actual time of the pick, and thus it's "correct" to trade out when you get better than expected value and "incorrect" to do it just because.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 1, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
chilihead posted:This is what i mean, i am not even talking about the mental aspect or character issues. The guy couldn't make NFL throws, i'm not talking about arm strength. All i saw were simple reads and wide open passes at LSU. Do gms watch different college games then the fans? If a player has the confidence, intelligence and arm strength to make timing passes to well covered receivers his coach will call a few plays a game suited to that kind of play. I never saw any of that. I think you can draft guys in the nfl based on good physical attributes, but not quarterbacks. To use a current example i never thought Jake locker could make NFL throws, he is just not an accurate passer. A significant chunk of NFL offenses don't even have these kind of throws intentionally anymore (and I'd expect the number will be close to zero by the time current college quarterbacks hit their NFL prime) because they're inherently counterproductive, high risk/low reward plays. The trend in football is to scheme and use read progressions to get receivers the ball in space and secondarily to throw the ball down the field, the hard timing throws are disappearing because the range of possibilities is usually something like 5 yard gain/incomplete/pick 6.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
Doctor Candiru posted:So, in my estimation, that leaves the top quarterbacks in the draft as, in rough order of quality, Bridgewater, Manziel (unless he doesn't stay), Carr, Boyd, Mettenberger, Murray, McCarron, and from there, a lot of long-term prospects that'll be drafted too early. McCarron is starting to pick up a lot of support not just as a first round prospect but as a potential guy above even Bridgewater. I don't really get it either, but I haven't gotten a lot of these lately!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
swickles posted:So who is going to be this year's "measurables" QB? As in some QB that is like 6'5" or taller and 250+ lbs that wasn't terrible in college, but wasn't that great either that GM's all think they can coach into an amazing QB. I guess what I am asking, is who is this years Josh Freeman? Logan Thomas could be anything from a first round quarterback to a late round tight end depending on how he works out.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2013 01:40
|
|
|
Kirios posted:Every report that I can find online has Teddy Bridgewater as either the #1 or #2 overall prospect. It's not we're settling for Geno Smith at #1 here...he's an elite prospect in his own right. Most rankings through around or a little before this time last year had Geno Smith at similar heights, and Bridgewater's stock is taking the same late season dip that Smith's did last year (just pulling from one random place, he's dipped to 8 on ESPN's consensus Scouts Inc. board and 4th on Kiper's), even showing guys like Bortles and Carr and even Manziel ranking ahead of him in some circles. It's starting to look like that while this is a very deep QB class, perhaps comparable to 2011 in that respect, Bridgewater very well may not be The Guy depending on how the postseason process shakes out, and it may ultimately shake out that none of them are worthy of consideration ahead of Clowney, Matthews, Barr, etc. eta: Oh I mentally blocked out the McCarron boomlet too. A lot of competition up there at the top QB spots! oldfan fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Dec 7, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2013 19:25
|
|
|
I don't know if we're replacing Stafford with Shaun Hill or a generic replacement in this scenario, but the gap between Stafford and Hill is a lot less than you'd think assuming Hill hasn't deteriorated significantly since his last significant time in 2010.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
Brian Fellows posted:I hate it when people make this claim. Hill is exactly what you want from your backup; someone that can come in and not-lose the game for you, and even make some plays to win if necessary, while the starter is down. But as much as people play the "Well all Stafford does is throw it to Calvin Johnson, he's not that good card," that is EXACTLY what Shaun Hill does- come in and chuck it to Calvin every single time. Stafford makes multiple reads now (didn't used to) and is capable of taking what the defense gives him instead of just defaulting to Big Play CJ, which Hill never really did when he got PT. Stafford's a good quarterback and he's better than Shaun Hill, but that's not the discussion. Shaun Hill is also putting up really pretty counting stats in that Lions offense, not quite as pretty for various reasons that are the basic reasons why Stafford is better than Hill to begin with, but he's a capable passer who probably should have been an eight or ten year starter had he gotten cleaner breaks instead of getting stuck in that dreaded "you're about the 20th or 25th best quarterback in the league and no longer a prospect so nobody actually wants to play you" area. Case in point: Shaun Hill's 2010 prorated to a full season is about 4200 yards and 25 touchdowns. That isn't quite what Stafford does over a full season and it doesn't mean that Shaun Hill's a better player than Stafford - he's not, Stafford is able to maintain similar to a bit better rates at higher usage because he's a more gifted passer - but the concept that every team that doesn't have a Designated Franchise Quarterback is consigned to running out Geno Smith and Blaine Gabbert type atrocities is silly. Some teams choose to run out really bad, sub-replacement level quarterbacks because of poor team design or sunk draft costs that the GM or coach won't admit or whatever. Shaun Hill is just fine and he won't cripple your offense and those sorts of things. So yes if all else was equal, I'd at least think about taking Suh and Shaun Hill over Stafford and Andre Fluellen, and if I was convinced about Suh's consistency in the run game and makeup it would probably be a stronger lean in that direction. I don't think it's an obvious answer to take Stafford just because he's the quarterback and you just always take the quarterback, all of this is about asset allocation and relative importance and replacement quality and all of those stupid things.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2013 22:46
|
|
|
The rookie contract option for first rounders is the fifth year, not the fourth year, and for top ten picks it's a fully guaranteed salary at the top ten player average of the position that has to be executed in the May before the fourth year. I don't think the Titans guaranteeing Jake Locker ~$13m for 2015 based on his career to date would be any kind of a good idea, and if he somehow turns into a guy that's worth that figure they can just franchise tag him after the 2014 season for only a million or two more anyways.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2013 06:46
|
|
|
Kalli posted:Do I even want to know? It's his cousin, though pronounced differently.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2013 23:29
|
|
|
Bridgewater doesn't have anywhere near Rodgers's arm strength, and Rodgers's issues were upper body mechanics which is probably Bridgewater's greatest positive.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
Grozz Nuy posted:Jeff do you even still keep up with Rutgers football at this point? How do you feel about Coleman's pro prospects? KJI obviously does a lot more closely than I do and Daltos might too, but sure, I try to. I'm not sure Coleman's going to run all that well, although his speed plays up a bit in game situations, I don't love how he catches the ball, not even just hands but his body positioning can get weird especially in traffic, and he's had a down 2013 which I think in fairness is to some extent due to some rather severe overall offensive and passing game issues more than Coleman specifically. On the positive side, you can't teach that type of frame and athleticism, and he has good football instincts and blocks well and runs nice clean routes and those sorts of things. I'd probably tag a mid-late second round type grade on him now but he has a fairly wide range depending on how he works out, he's kind of a cool prospect and one of those guys where you can see abilities that would make him a better pro than a college player.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2013 21:26
|
|
|
Intruder posted:Also is there any reason to take this seriously? The blind scouty and front office type quotes have never been as high on Bridgewater as you'd think, there are a lot of quotes out there calling other guys the top QB prospect and worrying about this trait of Bridgewater or that trait of Bridgewater's and so forth. Bridgewater is an imperfect prospect (in comparison to someone like Luck or even Bradford once he passed his physicals that were basically impossible to nitpick at) and there are quite a lot of dudes in the top quarterback mix, so sure, he has a pretty wide range of ultimate outcomes. It's crazy early in the process and the non-elite quarterback prospect rises and falls can be pretty dramatic even right up to draft day.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2013 07:47
|
|
|
Sataere posted:It seems to me if there was a prospect I targeted, it would be in my best interest to leak information showing why he is a terrible prospect. In April, sure, but that's not happening in November and December. Everything's way, way too fluid, nobody smokescreens six months out.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2013 08:07
|
|
|
Ozu posted:This is something the NYPost did today. I agree with that cover. Johnny Jet for future Super Bowl MVP.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Doltos posted:Right now the top ten looks like it'll be 5 or so QBs taken considering the situations in Minnesota, Jacksonville, Oakland, Tampa, St. Louis, and Houston. Also, the new rookie contracts makes it easy for teams like the Jets to abandon Geno Smith after a year. I don't think the rookie contracts are a big deal there, second round pick salaries didn't actually deflate much at all. What it should do is make it easier for first rounders to get demoted but Gabbert and Ponder got three seasons each so it looks like that's not actually happening.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2014 20:15
|
|
|
Bridgewater does not have the kind of arm to make the throws Luck did in that second half. Almost nobody does.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2014 18:48
|
|
|
bhsman posted:Mettenberger? Maybe JFF. Maybe.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
amaranthine posted:Happened last year to dudes like Jonathan Cyprien and DJ Hayden, no reason why it won't happen this year. IIRC Cyprien was more of a Senior Bowl riser than a Combine riser.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2014 21:13
|
|
|
A Pale Horse posted:So any of you draftniks who know Tedford, which QB would fit his system the best? Probably Derek Carr of the top guys.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2014 23:16
|
|
|
Manziel had probably the best bowl performance of any player in the entire bowl season, coming off an injury riddled end to the regular season that pushed him down a little, so sure, his stock should probably have risen. It probably should have been this high to begin with, honestly.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 05:17
|
|
|
For a team to be plausible to trade into 1-1 they either already have to be drafting really high or have a ton of extra picks, and unfortunately the Jets fit neither bill.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Goetta posted:The answer is no, the Jets don't abandon their second round QB after a single 8-8 season. I'd put Geno Smith's chances of starting week 1 next season at probably 25-30 percent. And I feel that might be generous because that's mostly nightmare scenarios where they whiff on everyone in free agency and the draft. They're looking at the very least for a caretaker/competition player and they've given plenty of quotes reflecting as such. Geno Smith was probably the worst starting quarterback in the league outside of the guys that only start a couple of games and even the Jets appear to recognize this.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2014 19:05
|
|
|
Professor Funk posted:Wasn't the guy that did that mock draft basically immediately disregarded as a professional troll who had a reputation for that kind of poo poo? That's hardly the kind of ingrained racism people here seem to project with regard to black QB prospects. That was actually the first Nolan Nawrocki black quarterback hit piece, he's since run similar hits on RG3 and Geno Smith. Kiper generally does not fall into that particular trap but his Bridgewater blurb is generic garbage to begin with. His ranking of Bridgewater third is starting to look consensusish, though consensus four months out means little.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
Kiper's skills aren't in talent evaluation, they're that he's been doing this forever and has the contacts of a guy who has been around forever, so he can give you a pretty solid industry consensus. If you want the best in depth talent evaluations, that's probably Dane Brugler at this point.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
Bridgewater has some real knocks on him at this point in the process, and his workouts and medicals are going to be pretty important. It's reasonable to be skeptical this early.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 07:17 |
|
|
The Shrine Game is American and Canadian players that have exhausted their college eligibility. The Senior Bowl is American players that have either exhausted their eligibility or are early entry players that are redshirt juniors that have already graduated. Both of them have a staff and committee for player selection. The Shrine Game brings in name coaches that don't have current jobs (this is actually why Romeo Crennel has not technically accepted the Texans DC job yet) pretty early in the process to make selections and assemble a roster for their team, whereas the Senior Bowl usually has a big time former NFL personnel person running it and that's the person who makes the calls for roster selection (it's currently Phil Savage), then turns it over to a selected NFL staff that wasn't in the playoffs but didn't have significant staff turnover for the week (this year it's Atlanta and Jacksonville). They do serve slightly different purposes. The Shrine Game is technically a college all-star benefit game so it tends to get more college stars that don't have an obvious NFL future and small college stars, while the Senior Bowl is an out and out combine game trying to bring in the best eligible NFL prospects.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2014 22:34
|
|