I've felt this way for a while now, but I think it applies to all positions. The combine is good for one thing: establishing empirical measurements. Getting past all the fudged heights and weights, and all the ridiculous 40 times reported by college HCs and even pro scouts sometimes. If you don't see the translation to the pros watching the player play, it's not there; the combine is only going to muddy the picture on guys with great measurables and poor translatable qualities. Best example in the last 5 years: Jason Allen.
No...I could point out 20 things that prove your wrong, but White had a terrible arm while Landry has a pretty good one.
Like seeing all the Brock Osweiler love. Lookn great for him and the ASU program next year with him returning. There is also word from Vontaze that he is contemplating returning for his senior year despite the high draft pick talk. Wants to return to play with his boy Magee who tore his achilles right before the season started. Some might not like it, but he needs another year to mature, and settle down in college. Guy still makes way toooo many boneheaded unnecessary roughness plays. Oz just has such a quick release, and even with his 6-8 frame is very very mobile. Creates a lot of plays with his feet. Guy was athletic enough to be offered a scholarship to play basketball at Gonzaga.
And I can point out 10 QBs that flamed out in the NFL with good arms. So what? Landry Jones looks good due to the skill players around him, much like Jason White did.
Because you putting the equal between the two made it seemed like you thought Jones=white. Which they don't. Jones is completely different and better player. Although I agree some what that he looks better then he does because of talent, which is why Iquestion him some.
I'm still trying to see what it is that people find about Barkley that stands out. I just don't see anything special about that kid.
Jason White is currently 31. NFL teams didn't take him because he blew both knees out in college. Here is a list of his acheivements
I like Barkley a lot. Consistently quick and near flawless mechanics, he's practically a bleached blond version of Tebow off the field and from a leadership standpoint, plenty of arm, pinpoint accuracy and ball placement, aggressive mentality...he will be playing on Sunays for many years. The only way he compares with Clausen is in his dedication to consistently perfect mechanics. In my opinion, Matt Barkley is another Drew Brees at the next level.
The numbers don't really interest me, honestly. The only one that truly does is the 10 yard split, and that's at certain positions. The bigger thing for me to see at the Combine is the drills. Sometimes you analyze a cornerback on film for instance, and you realize that he's in Cover 3, 2 Hard/Squat, Man-Free a lot. That concerns you because typically, if he's in Cover 3, that means he is probably not the best of athletes (IMO). It means the guy is better attacking downhill, so allowing him to have a cushion between himself and the wideout allows him to read and react, opposed to staying in the pocket of the receiver. If he's a 2 Hard/Squat corner, he's again attacking downhill and is a flat defender right? That concerns you. But then you see Man-Free, and you think, "maybe he can run too?". But then you realize that he's not playing press-bail in that coverage, he's playing loose. And you start asking more questions. The Combine ends up answering those questions. In my opinion, the key with the Combine is weeding out the stuff that's really not all that important to your scheme, philosophy or just play in general. People sometimes get caught up in that (I'm guilty of it), and it ends up biting you in the rear. Have to figure out what applies on Sunday's and what doesn't. Its like coaching. Coaches waste time practicing plays that don't show up enough (3rd and 13+ for example) or that often when they could have used that time on individuals, which should be repped a significant amount in my opinion.
I do - at this stage - have some fairly large question marks over him. He's not a comfortable watch. Sometimes he makes throws that make me sit up and cheer. Other times he makes me cringe.
I think that's very unfair on Clausen. Patently he wasn't a joke of a prospect as there was a lot of shock from many people when he fell out of round 1. Barkley has issues reading coverages. He puts a hell of a lot of effort into throws and I don't think he gets a lot of velocity on the ball. He holds onto the football too long and he makes some fairly dumb throws at times; pick 6 against ASU for example. Mechanically he looks excellent save for his "heave" technique at times. He gets antsy under pressure. Real antsy. But then so does Tom Brady. I appreciate there are issues with the supporting cast but let's not kid ourselves here; he has a top 5 pick at left tackle, he has a SuperPrep All American and PAC 10 Freshman of the Year to throw to in Robert Woods, another SuperPrep AA wideout in Brice Butler, another in Brandon Carswell and last time I checked, Marc Tyler could ball. Brandon Weeden wishes he had the "issues" that Barlkey has at the skill positions.
Landry Jones is so far from being Jason White that it's not true. He does however have Ryan Broyles who is as good as it gets. You want the next DeSean Jackson? Tannehill may have dreamy eyes, but he's consistently slow getting the ball to where it's supposed to be. Burfict better stay in school and work out whether he's going to consistently be able to play at the next level. Rarely does a guy so heavily touted take so many bad angles or get blocked out of plays with such alarming consistency. At the moment he's Taylor Mays hype wise with Taylor Mays' ability. Which is not nearly as much as people think. Travis Lewis will be a much better NFL LB than Burfict.
Very impressed with Osweiller. I like watching Arizona State's offense as well. I like their version of the zone read where they motion the slot guy into the backfield, fake/give the zone read, with the swing pass option being the guy you motioned into the backfield. I wish Miami's staff was innovative enough to try something like that in an attempt to get Bush the ball in space.
I agree with most everything here, except about Claussen, where he was slotted to go by most people, was the thing that wasn't fair to him..When most people were saying first round pick, I was shaking my head and laughing to myself, so to me, he was always a joke of a prospect, relative to the hype.
That expectation thing is what screws people up. If a player gets drafted too high or some other reason causes fan expectations to skyrocket, they forever hold it against the player. The want to dump him for nothing as some sort of punishment for disappointing them. A more rational approach would be to understand that the expectations were their own creation and to simply evaluate the player based on his current market relative to his worth to the team. Say Barkley comes out and ends up being a Schaub level talent, there will be some who will never forgive him for not being Luck (assuming he meets the expectations surrounding him, unlikely). In fact, I expect that if Luck doesn't come in and light it up ala Marino or win early like Big Ben that there will be a contingent that will forever say that Luck isn't that good regardless of how the rest of his career goes.
KB21, its funny how your avatar says you're "Never Wrong" in a thread where you attempt to evaluate QBs.
I think I was thinking of the FSU QB whos name is escaping me at the moment. I know his achievements but I'm not sure he was ever a top prospect.
Was wondering if some of you guys could equate the NFL Qb some of these QB's have the potential...or display the potential to be like. I have heard Andrew Luck = Peyton Manning quite a bit....but what about some of the others? Also...maybe, where would some of last years QB draft rank in with these guys? Are Cam Newton, Blaine Gabbert still amongst the top ?
Andrew Luck would rate above all of last year's QBs. Whether any of this year's crop would rate above Newton or not just depends on your appetite for risk. Fact of the matter is, Newton had one year of experience at the major FBS level. That gave him a riskier profile, but the reward at stake was (obviously) tremendous. I would rate Matt Barkley above all of last year's QBs not named Cam Newton. I am still relatively undecided on Landry Jones but I think he would rate ahead of Gabbert for me, right in the same area as Ryan Mallett. I would rate Ryan Tannehill and Ryan Lindley around where I had Christian Ponder and (by the end) Blaine Gabbert...which is to say, if the need is there, potential 1st rounders. Brandon Weeden...hell if I know how to treat the age, and I'm not a doctor nor do I have any scans of that shoulder to reference...so I'll sit that one out. Robert Griffin for me would be around a Colin Kaepernick whom I believe I had as like a 2nd/3rd rounder, with T.J. Yates ahead of him. I think that Andrew Luck does compare with Peyton Manning but he also compares with Aaron Rodgers because of his feet, and his willingness to use his athleticism to his advantage. I think I'm more comfortable with the Rodgers comparison than the Manning comparison, to be honest. Matt Barkley to me is another Drew Brees in the making. Landry Jones...again, I haven't decided yet. It took me a while to warm to Ryan Mallett and I think the same is true of Landry. Maybe like a slightly more awkward (young) version of Matt Schaub.
FWIW, I like Landry Jones a lot. Factor in the "between-the-ears" question with Luck, of voluntarily going back to school to play in a legal slave system instead of getting paid millions to play among the world's best, and Luck still comes out on top...but the gap between him and Landry lessens. Luck's decision wasn't quite as bad as Matt Leinart's frivolous decision to go back to USC, but it's similar enough to call into question Luck's motivation—and motivation is what separates the great QBs from the good ones at the pro level.
I still don't see how that decision to stay in school should in any way whatsoever "factor in" negatively for Andrew Luck. It would be like if I dinged Matt Barkley's grade because he's Pro-Life.
IMO Jones is a just behind Sam Bradford talent wise. I would put Luck, Barkley and a healthy Weedon above all of last year's QBs. I might have had Jones above Newton prior to the draft, but using hindsight, I would now place Newton above Jones. I would then put Gabbert above the rest of the prospects. I haven't watched the ASU QB. I agree with the Kaepernick/RGIII comparison in terms of where the prospects likely draft position is.
Luck's decision goes directly to his motivation with regard to the game. More than any other position, what's in a QB's head is vitally important; in Luck's head, it's more important to have an Architecture (or whatever) degree that he'll never use than to get on with his career and with the business of becoming the best QB in the NFL. Whatever level of importance you assign to it, that has to have some level of importance...not "none." and with a franchise-turning decision such as a QB with the first pick, you need to know that your QB is 100% committed to being a QB, not an Architect.
Which is a way of somehow convincing yourself that something that has been traditionally viewed as a positive (for good reason), a quarterback being a college grad and gaining further experience, is somehow a negative. The guy went to Stanford and he wanted his college degree. I guarantee, 100% guarantee that if ANY scouts or personnel people out there have any opinion on him returning to school, it is a positive opinion. That's 100% guaranteed.
Well, I liked his decision, he said from day one he wanted to get his degree and would (and he backed that up). said he wants to try and win a national championship with his teammates, and he is trying. I think he is proving to be a man of his word and a true team leader. I guess it just depends how you want to look at it.
Each case is different. Robert Griffin can benefit from another year in school; after last season, Andrew Luck couldn't possibly benefit any more from staying in school than by learning the position as a pro. He had nothing to gain by staying in college, and every risk of injury without reward...other than that degree that he'll never use. Picking #1 is no joke, although you wouldn't know it by teams like the Raiders; if I'm picking first, I want a guy who's 100% an NFL player, not 99% and another 1% Architect. And don't get me started on the experts, because these are the experts who had Matt Leinart and Reggie Bush going 1 and 2 overall, despite every indication that they would not be good enough pros to justify it.
You do realize that even "ancient" NFL veterans are in their 30's and they retire by the time they're 40 years old, right? I don't care how much money Andrew Luck has by then, he's not the type to live fat off his riches jetting around the world with three gold diggers on each arm and a drug habit that would match a small country's GDP. He's going to want to work after he gets done with the NFL and there's only so much room in broadcasting. He likes architectural engineering. He will probably go into that when he's done with football. Yet you say he will "never" use his degree? Life doesn't end at 40. Peyton Manning would have gone #1 overall in 1997 if he came out. Bill Parcells even told him so. He went back to school. That didn't work out so bad.
That's just it, Greg; there's a difference between how we, as fans, have the luxury of viewing it, and how the guy in charge of making that vitally important decision for an NFL team has to view it. If I'm picking first overall in the draft—arguably the most precious commodity in any pro sport—I have to know that a guy isn't going to be Robert Smith, walking away from the game in his prime to pursue other interests.
I don't see it as walking away from the game (I know your point is hypothetical) , I see it is sticking to a commitment that he stated he would do. To me that is a guy to draft.
Peyton Manning was being advised by his idiot hick of a father; he could have sustained a career-ending injury that final year in college and never have been a pro; how sad would that have been? It's okay if we don't agree. I don't think either of us will change the other's mind today. And I'm just putting this out for discussion because I believe it's a valid discussion to have, but, like I said from the beginning, I still think Luck is the best QB in this class.
