2018 Draft Eligible QB Thread

[Forge]

4 minutes ago, Iamcanadian said:

Its certainly possible, but if San Fran is drafting top 3, with Rosen, Darnold and Allen available, plus Jackson , I don't think Mayfield would be the likely pick, but you never know.

Oh, no, I definitely agree with that. But if we aren't drafting in the top 3, or miss out on Rosen and Darnold (not sure how Shanny would feel about Allen, and I think that Jackson will definitely not be as high on his board as others), then I could definitely see him liking Mayfield later on in the draft. 

[RandomCampBody]

9 hours ago, Forge said:

It's relevant if that's the type of guy your hc is looking for. I don't know that he discounts guys who play exclusively out of the shotgun or not, that's what 48 1/2 was asking. I don't know why he would do that...far too limiting 

My point what would you even call a pro style offense anymore when look at the schemes people are running in the NFL right now.

 

I don't think you can rule any college QB out as not being pro style anymore unless they are running the triple option.

[tyler735]

18 hours ago, DraftHobbyist said:

The jury is still out for me on Lamar Jackson, yet. He's an extremely streaky QB. When he's hot, he's spot on. When's he rattled, everything is way off. I worry about his poise in the pocket because he's always watching the pass rush, and if he ever sees a chance to run or even the slightest pass rush he's taking off. What's going to happen in the NFL is he's going to take a lot of shots (he has the ability to avoid a lot of shots, but also likes to take guys on), and DL's are going to push their OL into him, knocking him to the ground. He's also around 6'3 210 lbs or so they say, and I worry about his size. His actual limbs are tiny, which means he likely can't put on a whole lot of good weight.

I mean, Louisville almost lost to Purdue. It was 13-21 with around 6:00 to go at half. It was 3rd down and Jackson ran out of bounds 1 yard short of the 1st Down. The refs made a terrible spot, and gave it to him. The review claimed they couldn't overturn it. That resulted in a TD drive, then IIRC Purdue came out and threw a pick 6. Suddenly Louisville was up, Purdue was reeling, and things got a little out of hand. But it was really started by a bad call from the ref, and a terrible play by Jackson getting out early when he could've easily had the first. And it's not like the Offense was putting up a lot of points with 13 with 6:00 to go in the 3rd Quarter.

If you want to box score scout, which I think is good for context, Jackson hasn't had very good completion %'s with 56.2% in 2016 and 54.7% in 2015. I really wonder how well he'd pass if he couldn't constantly bring the Defense up with his running ability to open up the pass. His game in college is really dependent on him running the ball, and that's not something we've seen translate well to the NFL long-term. I think Lamar Jackson is high-risk, high-reward, but the chance of him busting is very high, much like Johnny Manziel (although Manziel had the off-the-field problems). So right now, I have to give the edge to QB's like Sam Darnold. If other QB's don't get it together or a bunch of guys go back, though, then maybe I become a little more comfortable taking the risk. It's a long season, but I think Jackson's value has a lot more to do with other QB's failing than his own ability.

Can't say I agree with some of this. In regards to him being streaky. I suppose that could be said about him last season. However at least through 2 games this season that is certainly not the case. He has been Louisville's offense. Without him they likely are 1-1, or 0-2 to start this season. He's been much better keeping his eyes down field this season and has had several plays evading the rush and finding an open WR for huge gains. He might take a lot of shots in the NFL, and he may get injured as he isn't the biggest guy. However he might also go the route of Russell Wilson and simply play it smart and avoid several unnecessary shots. He is too big of a talent to not take a chance on early in the 1st round.

This example you give against Purdue is really flawed to me. You state that he made a mistake going out of bounds before getting the 1st down. Yet the ruling on the field was that he got the 1st down...And after the play was reviewed..He was still given the 1st down. What you didn't mention regarding the close score of the Louisville/Purdue game is that Louisville fumbled twice in the redzone early in the game which allowed Purdue to stay in the game longer than they should've been. You also failed to mention that Lamar Jackson accounted for an astonishing 93% of Louisville's offense against Purdue. I simply don't get the point of this example. Every QB makes an error from time to time, but in this case the ruling was he got the 1st down anyway, so it wasn't even an error. 

If we wanna box score scout. He has a 64.7 completion percentage this season. He was just a Sophomore in 2016. So far through 2 games as a Junior he has clearly showed improvement as a passer. So far in 2 games he has 771 passing yards...Nearly 400 yards passing per game. This doesn't even factor in he's also got 239 rushing yards as well so far. Really let this sink in for a second. He has over 1,000 yards of offense in 2 games...Plus 8 touchdowns and 0 interceptions. 

Sure the threat of his legs caused defenses to play him differently, and opens some things up for him, but his legs aren't going away. He's going to cause defenses to scheme him differently in the NFL as well because of this. As I mentioned before he looks much improved as a passer, and has shown better composure making plays throwing the ball instead of just taking off and running. I find the comparison to Manziel to be laughable. Manziel didn't have anywhere near the athleticism or arm talent that Jackson has, and last I checked Jackson isn't a drug addict/known partier like Manziel was even in college. I don't think Jackson makes this play below last season, and instead takes off for a run rather than being able to keep his eyes down field and quickly locate an open WR for the big touchdown pass.

I fully expect people to be split on Lamar Jackson as a pro QB, but I'm of the belief that he has too much talent to pass on, and could develop into an absolute weapon in the NFL given his athleticism and arm talent. 

[DraftHobbyist]

12 hours ago, Iamcanadian said:

Mayfield rates right up there as a short field passer with high leadership character and off the charts intangibles, however, his arm strength is a question mark and the throw I remember most from last night's game was a deep pattern where the ball came up real short to a wide open receiver which luckily caused a pass interference call. That throw exposed Mayfield's question marks and took him out of any round 1 discussion for me. He will need to play in a WCO in the NFL which won't ask him to throw the ball down field too often. Andy Reid would be the perfect HC for him.

I think this is going a bit far: 

 

[DraftHobbyist]

3 hours ago, tyler735 said:

Can't say I agree with some of this. In regards to him being streaky. I suppose that could be said about him last season. However at least through 2 games this season that is certainly not the case. He has been Louisville's offense. Without him they likely are 1-1, or 0-2 to start this season. He's been much better keeping his eyes down field this season and has had several plays evading the rush and finding an open WR for huge gains. He might take a lot of shots in the NFL, and he may get injured as he isn't the biggest guy. However he might also go the route of Russell Wilson and simply play it smart and avoid several unnecessary shots. He is too big of a talent to not take a chance on early in the 1st round.

This example you give against Purdue is really flawed to me. You state that he made a mistake going out of bounds before getting the 1st down. Yet the ruling on the field was that he got the 1st down...And after the play was reviewed..He was still given the 1st down. What you didn't mention regarding the close score of the Louisville/Purdue game is that Louisville fumbled twice in the redzone early in the game which allowed Purdue to stay in the game longer than they should've been. You also failed to mention that Lamar Jackson accounted for an astonishing 93% of Louisville's offense against Purdue. I simply don't get the point of this example. Every QB makes an error from time to time, but in this case the ruling was he got the 1st down anyway, so it wasn't even an error. 

If we wanna box score scout. He has a 64.7 completion percentage this season. He was just a Sophomore in 2016. So far through 2 games as a Junior he has clearly showed improvement as a passer. So far in 2 games he has 771 passing yards...Nearly 400 yards passing per game. This doesn't even factor in he's also got 239 rushing yards as well so far. Really let this sink in for a second. He has over 1,000 yards of offense in 2 games...Plus 8 touchdowns and 0 interceptions. 

Sure the threat of his legs caused defenses to play him differently, and opens some things up for him, but his legs aren't going away. He's going to cause defenses to scheme him differently in the NFL as well because of this. As I mentioned before he looks much improved as a passer, and has shown better composure making plays throwing the ball instead of just taking off and running. I find the comparison to Manziel to be laughable. Manziel didn't have anywhere near the athleticism or arm talent that Jackson has, and last I checked Jackson isn't a drug addict/known partier like Manziel was even in college. I don't think Jackson makes this play below last season, and instead takes off for a run rather than being able to keep his eyes down field and quickly locate an open WR for the big touchdown pass.

I fully expect people to be split on Lamar Jackson as a pro QB, but I'm of the belief that he has too much talent to pass on, and could develop into an absolute weapon in the NFL given his athleticism and arm talent. 

1) The ruling is irrelevant. It was clear that Lamar Jackson came up short, so it was a bad play. It doesn't matter that the refs made a mistake to give him the 1st. If you were judging a WR and he dropped the ball but was given credit for the catch, would you say, "Well, it was called a catch so it's a catch." No, you'd say it was a mistake on the part of the refs. And the booth almost never overturns the spot of a ball. They didn't agree with the call, they said they couldn't determine with a "call stands".

2) Ah crap, I have to go. But basically, Lamar Jackson has shown streakiness IMO, and they haven't been playing the toughest of teams. He's 1-4 (or 1-5 depending how you count it) in his career against Top 25 teams. I don't see the growth yet, when they are struggling to beat a team like Purdue.

[tyler735]

11 minutes ago, DraftHobbyist said:

1) The ruling is irrelevant. It was clear that Lamar Jackson came up short, so it was a bad play. It doesn't matter that the refs made a mistake to give him the 1st. If you were judging a WR and he dropped the ball but was given credit for the catch, would you say, "Well, it was called a catch so it's a catch." No, you'd say it was a mistake on the part of the refs. And the booth almost never overturns the spot of a ball. They didn't agree with the call, they said they couldn't determine with a "call stands".

2) Ah crap, I have to go. But basically, Lamar Jackson has shown streakiness IMO, and they haven't been playing the toughest of teams. He's 1-4 (or 1-5 depending how you count it) in his career against Top 25 teams. I don't see the growth yet, when they are struggling to beat a team like Purdue.

Again it was called differently on the field and he got the 1st on that play after review. Even if it was overturned in the grand scheme of this it's pretty irrelevant when scouting Jackson as a prospect as it's a pretty miniscule complaint when considering everthing and all the positives with Jackson. 

The 2nd point is false as I stated before Jackson hasn't shown "streakiness" THIS season. HE has been phenomenal as evidenced by him putting up over 1,000 yards of offense in 2 games, 8 touchdowns and 0 interceptions. His TEAM has struggled a bit, but Jackson has essentially put the team on his back and got them to 2-0 despite the lackluster performance by most of the team. Again being streaky as a sophomore isn't all that unheard of even for great prospects. However there is literally no streaky play so far in his Junior season he has been the best player in college football so far this season.

[Groink]

I like Mayfield.  He can play in the league.  I'm not sure about the whole planting the flag on their field thing lol but yea...

[Danger]

Lamar Jackson reminds me of RGIII

[DraftHobbyist]

3 hours ago, tyler735 said:

Again it was called differently on the field and he got the 1st on that play after review. Even if it was overturned in the grand scheme of this it's pretty irrelevant when scouting Jackson as a prospect as it's a pretty miniscule complaint when considering everthing and all the positives with Jackson. 

The 2nd point is false as I stated before Jackson hasn't shown "streakiness" THIS season. HE has been phenomenal as evidenced by him putting up over 1,000 yards of offense in 2 games, 8 touchdowns and 0 interceptions. His TEAM has struggled a bit, but Jackson has essentially put the team on his back and got them to 2-0 despite the lackluster performance by most of the team. Again being streaky as a sophomore isn't all that unheard of even for great prospects. However there is literally no streaky play so far in his Junior season he has been the best player in college football so far this season.

I really feel like you're going out of your way to hide Lamar Jackson's obvious faults. You say that Louisville has struggled, but it's not Lamar Jackson that has been streaky, but Louisville runs their entire Offense through Lamar Jackson. Everything literally starts with him. When the team struggles, a lot of it has to do with him. So then you said that I failed to mention Louisville fumbled twice. Well, who fumbled? Lamar Jackson fumbled on 3rd and Goal from the Purdue 2 after an 8 play drive. But you're using this as a case to defend Lamar Jackson because "Louisville fumbled". Then Louisville goes 3 and out and punts. Then it's another 10 play drive where Louisville stalls out and settles for a FG while 2/3 final plays were Lamar Jackson runs. Purdue fumbles the kickoff and Louisville recovers. Next drive was a 6 play drive for 14 yards and Jackson's teammate fumbles. Then Purdue gets a FG blocked. Then Louisville throws 4 passes (first one for a 1st down, and 2 incompletions and 1 completion for less than 10 yards), so they have to punt. Purdue gets a TD, Louisville comes out with 51 seconds to go, gets a bunch of garbage yards, and fails to score. Louisville had a ton of opportunities in the first half and ended up with 10 points. Sure, 2 turnovers in the 1st half around the goal line, but one on Jackson.

So then coming out of half, Louisville has a great opportunity with Purdue going 3 and out for -3 yards and a 44 yard punt with a 33 yard return. What happens? Louisville gets a FG out of it in 3 plays with Lamar Jackson run, Lamar Jackson run, and Lamar Jackson incomplete pass. This is not putting your team on your back. This is being the source of failure. Purdue comes out, 3 plays for 9 yards and a punt. This puts a lot of stress on Purdue's Defense with all of these 3 and outs. Then there was a fumble by Lousiville's WR 2 plays in and Purdue recovers. It turns into a TD. So up to this point, sure, Jackson's teammates have had some miscues, but Jackson was not sharp himself, and had miscues himself.

But then came what I call "the call" that changed the game. The one we've been debating. On this drive, Jackson gets the phantom 1st Down, which would've gotten Purdue off the field otherwise. Jackson still only threw 5/10 on the series, but there was a penalty on one that got a Purdue player ejected. So now you have a phantom 1st down, a Purdue player that got ejected, it turns into a TD for Louisville, and everything starts unraveling for Purdue. They come out, throw a pick-6, then come out and throw another Interception, then they do get a TD, but then back to a punt, then come out and throw another Interception, and finally downs. If you think that call was "minor" then you didn't watch the game. And it all happened because Jackson failed to make the smart play and make sure he got a 1st Down.

Overall, Purdue turned the ball over 4 times to Louisville's 3, so Louisville was actually the beneficiary of turnovers. Purdue did a ton to help Jackson out, and yet he could only lead his team to putting up 35 points, most which came in the last 1.5 quarters, after only 10 points in the first 2.5 quarters. I honestly don't know how you can say this isn't streaky, just like I don't know how you can say this call was minor. It was a huge call and the refs were obviously wrong. The commentators were dumbfounded at how the call could be so wrong and then not have it overturned, with the only logic being that yardage is rarely changed. And watching the game with the eye test, Jackson had a lot of throws way over guys heads, way wide, etc. But then once he got in the zone everything was right on the money. That's my definition of streaky. It really feels to me like you like Jackson, predicted he would be a great player, and now you are doing what is called protecting your prediction, which is a sort of bias. I say that because some of this is so obvious, especially where Jackson himself was a person that fumbled the ball, but you fail to mention that in your criticism of me not mentioning fumbles. So I think I've done a good job showing streakiness, showing that your objection claiming my claim was false holds no real water, that the call was actually a huge deal and should be considered in the scouting, and that you possible have a pretty big bias on this particular player.

[tyler735]

5 minutes ago, DraftHobbyist said:

I really feel like you're going out of your way to hide Lamar Jackson's obvious faults. You say that Louisville has struggled, but it's not Lamar Jackson that has been streaky, but Louisville runs their entire Offense through Lamar Jackson. Everything literally starts with him. When the team struggles, a lot of it has to do with him. So then you said that I failed to mention Louisville fumbled twice. Well, who fumbled? Lamar Jackson fumbled on 3rd and Goal from the Purdue 2 after an 8 play drive. But you're using this as a case to defend Lamar Jackson because "Louisville fumbled". Then Louisville goes 3 and out and punts. Then it's another 10 play drive where Louisville stalls out and settles for a FG while 2/3 final plays were Lamar Jackson runs. Purdue fumbles the kickoff and Louisville recovers. Next drive was a 6 play drive for 14 yards and Jackson's teammate fumbles. Then Purdue gets a FG blocked. Then Louisville throws 4 passes (first one for a 1st down, and 2 incompletions and 1 completion for less than 10 yards), so they have to punt. Purdue gets a TD, Louisville comes out with 51 seconds to go, gets a bunch of garbage yards, and fails to score. Louisville had a ton of opportunities in the first half and ended up with 10 points. Sure, 2 turnovers in the 1st half around the goal line, but one on Jackson.

So then coming out of half, Louisville has a great opportunity with Purdue going 3 and out for -3 yards and a 44 yard punt with a 33 yard return. What happens? Louisville gets a FG out of it in 3 plays with Lamar Jackson run, Lamar Jackson run, and Lamar Jackson incomplete pass. This is not putting your team on your back. This is being the source of failure. Purdue comes out, 3 plays for 9 yards and a punt. This puts a lot of stress on Purdue's Defense with all of these 3 and outs. Then there was a fumble by Lousiville's WR 2 plays in and Purdue recovers. It turns into a TD. So up to this point, sure, Jackson's teammates have had some miscues, but Jackson was not sharp himself, and had miscues himself.

But then came what I call "the call" that changed the game. The one we've been debating. On this drive, Jackson gets the phantom 1st Down, which would've gotten Purdue off the field otherwise. Jackson still only threw 5/10 on the series, but there was a penalty on one that got a Purdue player ejected. So now you have a phantom 1st down, a Purdue player that got ejected, it turns into a TD for Louisville, and everything starts unraveling for Purdue. They come out, throw a pick-6, then come out and throw another Interception, then they do get a TD, but then back to a punt, then come out and throw another Interception, and finally downs. If you think that call was "minor" then you didn't watch the game. And it all happened because Jackson failed to make the smart play and make sure he got a 1st Down.

Overall, Purdue turned the ball over 4 times to Louisville's 3, so Louisville was actually the beneficiary of turnovers. Purdue did a ton to help Jackson out, and yet he could only lead his team to putting up 35 points, most which came in the last 1.5 quarters, after only 10 points in the first 2.5 quarters. I honestly don't know how you can say this isn't streaky, just like I don't know how you can say this call was minor. It was a huge call and the refs were obviously wrong. The commentators were dumbfounded at how the call could be so wrong and then not have it overturned, with the only logic being that yardage is rarely changed. And watching the game with the eye test, Jackson had a lot of throws way over guys heads, way wide, etc. But then once he got in the zone everything was right on the money. That's my definition of streaky. It really feels to me like you like Jackson, predicted he would be a great player, and now you are doing what is called protecting your prediction, which is a sort of bias. I say that because some of this is so obvious, especially where Jackson himself was a person that fumbled the ball, but you fail to mention that in your criticism of me not mentioning fumbles. So I think I've done a good job showing streakiness, showing that your objection claiming my claim was false holds no real water, that the call was actually a huge deal and should be considered in the scouting, and that you possible have a pretty big bias on this particular player.

Again this is a flawed argument. So in a nutshell you are saying Jackson is streaky because sometimes he has drives where he doesn't score, and some of his passes were a bit off. However you continue to ignore the sheer impressiveness of what he's done in a couple games and fixate on these little things. You can call it a phantom call all you want, but video review didn't agree with your idea of the call. Regardless as I've stated several times. This call has VERY LITTLE to do with Lamar Jackson as a prospect. Anyway I just as easily could say a guy like Sam Darnold is terribly streaky with this flawed logic of what streaky is. Literally every player is streaky going by what you explained. For example, Sam Darnold already has 4 interceptions through 2 games. I could very easily copy paste the drives like you did and state "then Darnold ended the drive with another untimely interception". I'm also going to guess that USC has had drives stall and come away with no points through 2 games. Also you state Jackson fumbled, and while it reflects that on the stat sheet. This is like blaming a QB for an Interception that deflects off a WR's hands. On the fumble you clearly see the Fullback get in the way and knock the ball out of Jackson's hand as he is attempting to hand the ball off to the RB, so yeah to redzone turnovers explain the lack of points out of the gate for Louisville in the first half against Purdue. The stats don't lie in Jackson's case. He has been a one man show and accounted for an astonishing 93% of his teams offense against Purdue. It's easy to see through 2 games he has made significant strides as a passer this year.

As for me "protecting my prediction" I have nothing to "protect" right now as Jackson has displayed his electrifying talent the past 2 weeks and has been the best player in college football. Over 1,000 yards and 8 touchdowns in 2 weeks speaks for itself. However I can also make these same claims on your motives here. It appears you may be deflecting criticisms that are unrealistic and ultimately minor to protect your prior notions that Jackson wasn't on the same level as a guy like Darnold, and are grasping at straws that simply aren't there in order to "protect your prediction". If Jackson were struggling right now and I was making claims about him being an elite prospect then you might have some weight to this claim, but we both know that isn't the case right now. Does Jackson have flaws as a prospect..Absolutely! Is "Streakiness" one of them right now...Not even close in my eyes right now. I'd be more concerned with how he will adapt to NFL reads, a more diverse playbook, protecting himself, etc. 

[Iamcanadian]

12 hours ago, tyler735 said:

Can't say I agree with some of this. In regards to him being streaky. I suppose that could be said about him last season. However at least through 2 games this season that is certainly not the case. He has been Louisville's offense. Without him they likely are 1-1, or 0-2 to start this season. He's been much better keeping his eyes down field this season and has had several plays evading the rush and finding an open WR for huge gains. He might take a lot of shots in the NFL, and he may get injured as he isn't the biggest guy. However he might also go the route of Russell Wilson and simply play it smart and avoid several unnecessary shots. He is too big of a talent to not take a chance on early in the 1st round.

This example you give against Purdue is really flawed to me. You state that he made a mistake going out of bounds before getting the 1st down. Yet the ruling on the field was that he got the 1st down...And after the play was reviewed..He was still given the 1st down. What you didn't mention regarding the close score of the Louisville/Purdue game is that Louisville fumbled twice in the redzone early in the game which allowed Purdue to stay in the game longer than they should've been. You also failed to mention that Lamar Jackson accounted for an astonishing 93% of Louisville's offense against Purdue. I simply don't get the point of this example. Every QB makes an error from time to time, but in this case the ruling was he got the 1st down anyway, so it wasn't even an error. 

If we wanna box score scout. He has a 64.7 completion percentage this season. He was just a Sophomore in 2016. So far through 2 games as a Junior he has clearly showed improvement as a passer. So far in 2 games he has 771 passing yards...Nearly 400 yards passing per game. This doesn't even factor in he's also got 239 rushing yards as well so far. Really let this sink in for a second. He has over 1,000 yards of offense in 2 games...Plus 8 touchdowns and 0 interceptions. 

Sure the threat of his legs caused defenses to play him differently, and opens some things up for him, but his legs aren't going away. He's going to cause defenses to scheme him differently in the NFL as well because of this. As I mentioned before he looks much improved as a passer, and has shown better composure making plays throwing the ball instead of just taking off and running. I find the comparison to Manziel to be laughable. Manziel didn't have anywhere near the athleticism or arm talent that Jackson has, and last I checked Jackson isn't a drug addict/known partier like Manziel was even in college. I don't think Jackson makes this play below last season, and instead takes off for a run rather than being able to keep his eyes down field and quickly locate an open WR for the big touchdown pass.

I fully expect people to be split on Lamar Jackson as a pro QB, but I'm of the belief that he has too much talent to pass on, and could develop into an absolute weapon in the NFL given his athleticism and arm talent. 

I agree, I have seen him rated to go top 10 in some very respectable sites and worst case scenario, he will sell tickets, but I wouldn't want to be the GM that drafts him. He is definitely a boom or bust prospect. He could be a better QB than Mike Vick or he may be too inconsistent as a passer. Because of his running ability, his receivers in college are likely wide open on every passing play, but he will not have that luxury in the Pros.

[Forge]

6 hours ago, Groink said:

I like Mayfield.  He can play in the league.  I'm not sure about the whole planting the flag on their field thing lol but yea...

I'm an OSU fan and I didn't mind it. Last year when the Buckeyes won in Norman, they went out and sang their fight song on the field. Baker and Oklahoma players obviously didn't like that (nor should they), and this was their statement back. I like the fire and for the most part, I find this pretty harmless. 

[DraftHobbyist]

7 hours ago, tyler735 said:

Again this is a flawed argument. So in a nutshell you are saying Jackson is streaky because sometimes he has drives where he doesn't score, and some of his passes were a bit off. However you continue to ignore the sheer impressiveness of what he's done in a couple games and fixate on these little things. You can call it a phantom call all you want, but video review didn't agree with your idea of the call. Regardless as I've stated several times. This call has VERY LITTLE to do with Lamar Jackson as a prospect. Anyway I just as easily could say a guy like Sam Darnold is terribly streaky with this flawed logic of what streaky is. Literally every player is streaky going by what you explained. For example, Sam Darnold already has 4 interceptions through 2 games. I could very easily copy paste the drives like you did and state "then Darnold ended the drive with another untimely interception". I'm also going to guess that USC has had drives stall and come away with no points through 2 games. Also you state Jackson fumbled, and while it reflects that on the stat sheet. This is like blaming a QB for an Interception that deflects off a WR's hands. On the fumble you clearly see the Fullback get in the way and knock the ball out of Jackson's hand as he is attempting to hand the ball off to the RB, so yeah to redzone turnovers explain the lack of points out of the gate for Louisville in the first half against Purdue. The stats don't lie in Jackson's case. He has been a one man show and accounted for an astonishing 93% of his teams offense against Purdue. It's easy to see through 2 games he has made significant strides as a passer this year.

As for me "protecting my prediction" I have nothing to "protect" right now as Jackson has displayed his electrifying talent the past 2 weeks and has been the best player in college football. Over 1,000 yards and 8 touchdowns in 2 weeks speaks for itself. However I can also make these same claims on your motives here. It appears you may be deflecting criticisms that are unrealistic and ultimately minor to protect your prior notions that Jackson wasn't on the same level as a guy like Darnold, and are grasping at straws that simply aren't there in order to "protect your prediction". If Jackson were struggling right now and I was making claims about him being an elite prospect then you might have some weight to this claim, but we both know that isn't the case right now. Does Jackson have flaws as a prospect..Absolutely! Is "Streakiness" one of them right now...Not even close in my eyes right now. I'd be more concerned with how he will adapt to NFL reads, a more diverse playbook, protecting himself, etc. 

I feel like I've addressed most of these points, but you accuse me of deflecting and then repeat your points. You also accuse me of protecting my prediction, but I don't have a prediction that Lamar Jackson will be bad. I think the jury is out yet. I give him far more respect than I give most other dual threat QB's. Dual threat QB after dual threat QB has failed in the NFL, and very few have had sustained success. Also, if you don't blame Lamar Jackson for the fumble where he took the ball and hit the FB's butt with it, who do you blame? I'm not sure how you can blame the FB for that. And even if it was the FB's fault, Jackson has to hang onto it or at least recover it. He failed in all aspects of that miscue IMO. But lets go over some of his negative plays to show that they are there. Btw, you won't convince me that Jackson isn't streaky by listing his stats, because a lot of it is the system. It's like how spread QB's will have crazy stats but then go and fail in the NFL. I'm not interested in what his chances are of winning the Heisman, I'm interested in what kind of NFL QB Lamar Jackson will be.

I made 3 slides of plays: 1 with inaccuracy in the pocket, 1 with Jackson sticking the ball in the FB's butt for a fumble, and another of Jackson scrambling and fading out of the pocket unnecessarily. This all adds up to be a guy that doesn't look very comfortable in the pocket to me: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1215ujJ7xrWNndfEREn4iXpHvzkfTCjhGakkcDcxutQk/edit?usp=sharing

[tyler735]

3 hours ago, DraftHobbyist said:

I feel like I've addressed most of these points, but you accuse me of deflecting and then repeat your points. You also accuse me of protecting my prediction, but I don't have a prediction that Lamar Jackson will be bad. I think the jury is out yet. I give him far more respect than I give most other dual threat QB's. Dual threat QB after dual threat QB has failed in the NFL, and very few have had sustained success. Also, if you don't blame Lamar Jackson for the fumble where he took the ball and hit the FB's butt with it, who do you blame? I'm not sure how you can blame the FB for that. And even if it was the FB's fault, Jackson has to hang onto it or at least recover it. He failed in all aspects of that miscue IMO. But lets go over some of his negative plays to show that they are there. Btw, you won't convince me that Jackson isn't streaky by listing his stats, because a lot of it is the system. It's like how spread QB's will have crazy stats but then go and fail in the NFL. I'm not interested in what his chances are of winning the Heisman, I'm interested in what kind of NFL QB Lamar Jackson will be.

I made 3 slides of plays: 1 with inaccuracy in the pocket, 1 with Jackson sticking the ball in the FB's butt for a fumble, and another of Jackson scrambling and fading out of the pocket unnecessarily. This all adds up to be a guy that doesn't look very comfortable in the pocket to me: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1215ujJ7xrWNndfEREn4iXpHvzkfTCjhGakkcDcxutQk/edit?usp=sharing

The fullbacks right arm knocked out the ball on the fumble as he was running by Jackson that is different than Jackson hitting him in the butt with the ball. You can see as the Fullback is running his right arm is going forward and knocks the ball out. That isn't on Jackson, that is on the Fullback who has to be aware that he can't impede his QB who is attempting a handoff. The Fullback should hit the hole further to the left on that play to not mess up the handoff. I won't convince you that Jackson isn't streaky with stats, I won't convince you he isn't streaky since he doesn't score every drive, etc. You are stuck in your ways with no basis on why he is streaky. Like I addressed in the last post. What you explained as far as Jackson being streaky could be said about EVERY single QB prospect to ever come out. As my previous example, I could simply copy/paste any of Darnolds 4 drives that ended with him throwing an interception and say "and he threw another inaccurate drive killing ball to the other team". This "streakiness" seems to be one of two things. It's either an idea you have in your head from his Sophomore season, and are clinging onto despite his play showing differently this season, or just an extremely flawed idea of what being streaky is. Either way it isn't accurate SO FAR this season. Maybe that will change, but the evidence just isn't there yet this season.

I'm also interested in what kind of QB Jackson will be. However your initial comparison last page to him having the same chances as Manziel to be successful are not accurate, so we definitely see them in different levels of prospects. Jackson is the closest QB I've seen to Michael Vick from a pure talent standpoint combining Elite Athleticism/Arm Talent.

As for the slides. One the first one. Sure he has had some incompletions from the pocket. I could show Darnold missing from the pocket as well. Incompletions happen. What we did touch upon earlier though is his completion percentage has continued to jump up substantially each season, so it appears he is throwing more accurate catchable balls this season. On the second slide the Fullback hits the ball out with his right arm causing a fumble. On the 3rd slide you state he fades out of the pocket unnecessarily...However that makes Jackson very dangerous when he is out in open space, and I noticed you didn't show the outcome of some of those plays in the 3rd example. I know you're trying to make a point that he should stay in the pocket longer, but he isn't a traditional pocket passer. He has shown he can make plays from the pocket just fine. However a guy with 4.3 speed outside of the pocket that has shown he can either tuck it and run for a huge play or keep his eyes down field in that situation and find a WR for a big play is fine by me. Russell Wilson has shown this improvisation has a place in the NFL. You could even go as far as Aaron Rodgers doing similar things where he's almost playing backyard football at times scrambling/getting outside the pocket and finding his WR's downfield for big plays on a regular basis.

[DraftHobbyist]

Tyler: 54.7% to 56.2% is not a substantial increase. Michael Vick ran a 4.25 40 and reports are that Lamar Jackson runs a 4.34 40. If he runs a 4.25 40 then your comparison to Vick will be more legitimate. I still can't believe you blame the FB for Lamar Jackson's fumble. He has to go where he has to go. He can't afford to run out of his way to avoid the QB. The QB needs to avoid the FB. And sure, it hits his arm, but it also hits his butt, so I think it's funny that it's a butt fumble, so that's how I'm going to portray it.

And yes, I purposefully cut off some of the outcomes of the play, because I didn't want you to concentrate on the outcome, which I guess couldn't be avoided. You were claiming that Jackson is doing a better job in the pocket and isn't just looking to run, but there were completely clean pockets and he's either fading out of it or scrambling. This isn't someone who is comfortable in the pocket, and he might get away with this in college, but it's going to hurt him big time in the NFL if he can't get more comfortable in the pocket. You seem to be fine with him doing this, but what player has had sustained long-term success by being a scrambler in the NFL? Don't you realize that when he fades or scrambles unnecessarily he's cutting off half the field? You also really forced Aaron Rodgers into this conversation. As a Packers fan, I find that laughable. Allow me to remind you who and what Aaron Rodgers is: