2018 Draft Eligible QB Thread

[tyler735]

19 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

6'2 215 is the same as a guy like Steve Young on paper which is all well and good. But it isn't "similar size" to really ANY of the guys you mentioned. He isn't built like Steve Young, Brett Favre, Aaron Rodgers. He's built like Teddy Bridgewater and Robert Griffin III, both of whom have had their careers derailed by injury. You can't cite "dimensions" and then refer to a guy like Steve Young who carried his 215 lbs in a more bulky way than Jackson. If Jackson wanted to be "similar" in size to a Favre, Young, etc., he would probably need to bulk up to 230 lbs because he carries his weight on a much smaller frame. 

Yes look at those "bulky" legs and arms from Steve Young. He had bulkier pads and rib protectors but that's about it.

Aaron Rodgers also looks small in college look at his arms and legs.

As for Teddy Bridgewater he has yet to be injured because of his frame. He was injured on a noncontact play where his knee buckled. That is a big difference..

Alex Smith 6'4" 212lbs

Andy Dalton 6'2" 215lbs

[ronjon1990]

25 minutes ago, tyler735 said:

Yes look at those "bulky" legs and arms from Steve Young. He had bulkier pads and rib protectors but that's about it.

Aaron Rodgers also looks small in college look at his arms and legs.

As for Teddy Bridgewater he has yet to be injured because of his frame. He was injured on a noncontact play where his knee buckled. That is a big difference..

Alex Smith 6'4" 212lbs

Andy Dalton 6'2" 215lbs

Robert Griffin 6'2 223

Teddy Bridgewater 6'3 215

I'm glad you can search simple parameters such as height/weight. Griffin was listed as "heavier" than Smith and Dalton, in fact, only 2 lbs smaller than Aaron Rodgers. And yet nobody is arguing that Griffin was "larger" than any of those guys. Why? Because his frame was smaller. That's biology amigo. 

Here's a good one for you:

Maurice Jones-Drew 5'7 205

Shane Vereen 5'10 205

And yet Maurice Jones-Drew always looked significantly stockier than Vereen.

Larry Fitzgerald 6'3 218

Derek Carr 6'3 218

And yet nobody in their right mind would say that Fitz is built like Carr. It would be asinine to even argue otherwise. 

[tyler735]

Again we can go in circles all day. As for RG3 as you state it would be dumb to argue he's bigger than those guys as he's right around the same size as them as his weight was in between Dalton and Rodgers. So yeah he's the same size as them. He was injury prone. Who cares? Andrew Luck and Ben Roethlisberger are way bigger than Brett Favre. Who's more injury prone? I've provided more than enough evidence to my stance on this including some pics that show minimal difference in size between Jackson, Rodgers (in college), and Steve Young early in his career. So again there have been plenty of QB's in the NFL  (both runners and pocket passers) that have gone on to have successful careers without injury concerns due to being around Jackson's size. Jackson I will reiterate once again is just 20 years old and will likely put on more muscle as he ages anyway. We will have to agree to disagree on this. 

[ronjon1990]

17 minutes ago, tyler735 said:

Again we can go in circles all day. As for RG3 as you state it would be dumb to argue he's bigger than those guys as he's right around the same size as them as his weight was in between Dalton and Rodgers. So yeah he's the same size as them. He was injury prone. Who cares? Andrew Luck and Ben Roethlisberger are way bigger than Brett Favre. Who's more injury prone? I've provided more than enough evidence to my stance on this including some pics that show minimal difference in size between Jackson, Rodgers (in college), and Steve Young early in his career. So again there have been plenty of QB's in the NFL  (both runners and pocket passers) that have gone on to have successful careers without injury concerns due to being around Jackson's size. Jackson I will reiterate once again is just 20 years old and will likely put on more muscle as he ages anyway. We will have to agree to disagree on this. 

A. Griffin was of similar weight, true. Dalton and Rodgers are both bigger and more filled out than RG3 ever was. 

B. Nobody is saying that bigger QB's are guaranteed to be less injury prone. 

C. Rodgers was considered smallish coming out. He's still small. And he's a bit injury prone. 

D. Steve Young carried his 215 lbs in a much more filled out way than Jackson.

E. Jackson's frame is smaller than those of all of the QB's you've listed. He MIGHT be able to put 10 lbs of muscle on. His frame may only carry so much weight before it becomes too detrimental to keep. You can't fix that. Griffin and Bridgewater could have both put on more muscle. Anyone can do that. But can their frame hold it? Probably not. Jackson isn't going to get a whole lot bigger. There is a reason that pro scouts often talk about "maxed out frames". Johnny Manziel could have bulked up to 250 lbs of pure rock solid muscle if he wanted to, but his body would caved. Why? Because his frame is too small for that. Jackson is in the same boat. He will wind up drafted at maybe 220 lbs and still he's going to be scrawny. That is going to turn some teams away. 

[tyler735]

8 minutes ago, ronjon1990 said:

A. Griffin was of similar weight, true. Dalton and Rodgers are both bigger and more filled out than RG3 ever was. 

B. Nobody is saying that bigger QB's are guaranteed to be less injury prone. 

C. Rodgers was considered smallish coming out. He's still small. And he's a bit injury prone. 

D. Steve Young carried his 215 lbs in a much more filled out way than Jackson.

E. Jackson's frame is smaller than those of all of the QB's you've listed. He MIGHT be able to put 10 lbs of muscle on. His frame may only carry so much weight before it becomes too detrimental to keep. You can't fix that. Griffin and Bridgewater could have both put on more muscle. Anyone can do that. But can their frame hold it? Probably not. Jackson isn't going to get a whole lot bigger. There is a reason that pro scouts often talk about "maxed out frames". Johnny Manziel could have bulked up to 250 lbs of pure rock solid muscle if he wanted to, but his body would caved. Why? Because his frame is too small for that. Jackson is in the same boat. He will wind up drafted at maybe 220 lbs and still he's going to be scrawny. That is going to turn some teams away. 

A. False

B. True statement

C. One of the best ever. He's done fine from a health standpoint.

D. False

E. False

[ronjon1990]

11 hours ago, tyler735 said:

A. False

B. True statement

C. One of the best ever. He's done fine from a health standpoint.

D. False

E. False

A. Not false. Griffin was always and remains very thin, despite his 223 lb weight.

C. Rodgers has a trip to IR (2006) and missed 7 games (2013). While that isn't cause for much concern, those who have tracked Rodgers' career will remember a time where his size/ability to hold up physically was in fact, brought into question while Favre was still around. In fact, there were several write ups on his slimmer than ideal frame, ranging from online reports to Lindy's, Athlon, etc.

D. Based on what? Your opinion on Young's legs? Laughable. 

 

E. Not only which part, but please, elaborate. Inform us of how you know more than the combined research of many a doctor and personal trainer that would agree that someone's frame is often an indicator of how much weight they can carry before it becomes detrimental. 

[tyler735]

1 hour ago, ronjon1990 said:

A. Not false. Griffin was always and remains very thin, despite his 223 lb weight.

C. Rodgers has a trip to IR (2006) and missed 7 games (2013). While that isn't cause for much concern, those who have tracked Rodgers' career will remember a time where his size/ability to hold up physically was in fact, brought into question while Favre was still around. In fact, there were several write ups on his slimmer than ideal frame, ranging from online reports to Lindy's, Athlon, etc.

D. Based on what? Your opinion on Young's legs? Laughable. 

 

E. Not only which part, but please, elaborate. Inform us of how you know more than the combined research of many a doctor and personal trainer that would agree that someone's frame is often an indicator of how much weight they can carry before it becomes detrimental. 

A. Still false 

C. Still false. The main point is that he has with said frame gone on to have a HOF career..In other words his frame had no impact on his career. There is no evidence to say a bigger frame prevents the injury's that Rodgers has suffered in his career either.

D. Still false. The only thing laughable is you take a picture from Steve Young well into his NFL career that shows very little difference. He has a baggy jersey on you can' even see his frame. The picture I show is a more accurate representation as it is from right when Young entered the NFL. Either way you in no way provide anything that is convincing in this.

E. Still false. If Lamar Jackson is listed at around 212 lbs right now. He undoubtedly can get to around 215lbs-220lbs with no issue, there is no point to this. There have been ZERO doctor's/personal trainers that have gone on record saying Jackson can't put anymore weight on, and I would imagine they wouldn't do so as he is 20 years old. Doesn't take an expert to know that the human male typically grows in their 20's. 

Again agree to disagree. Jackson could get hurt in the NFL, but I don't think his "frame" is much cause for concern. His biggest obstacle as far as injuries will be taking care of himself and avoiding reckless hits like Russell Wilson has done so well, and unlike a guy like RG3 has done.  

[ronjon1990]

14 minutes ago, tyler735 said:

A. Still false 

C. Still false. The main point is that he has with said frame gone on to have a HOF career..In other words his frame had no impact on his career. There is no evidence to say a bigger frame prevents the injury's that Rodgers has suffered in his career either.

D. Still false. The only thing laughable is you take a picture from Steve Young well into his NFL career that shows very little difference. He has a baggy jersey on you can' even see his frame. The picture I show is a more accurate representation as it is from right when Young entered the NFL. Either way you in no way provide anything that is convincing in this.

E. Still false. If Lamar Jackson is listed at around 212 lbs right now. He undoubtedly can get to around 215lbs-220lbs with no issue, there is no point to this. There have been ZERO doctor's/personal trainers that have gone on record saying Jackson can't put anymore weight on, and I would imagine they wouldn't do so as he is 20 years old. Doesn't take an expert to know that the human male typically grows in their 20's. 

Again agree to disagree. Jackson could get hurt in the NFL, but I don't think his "frame" is much cause for concern. His biggest obstacle as far as injuries will be taking care of himself and avoiding reckless hits like Russell Wilson has done so well, and unlike a guy like RG3 has done.  

So in other words, you're pulling the "I'm entitled to my opinion" card. True, you are. Still doesn't mean you are right about any of it. 

A. Is correct.

C. Lamar Jackson isn't Aaron Rodgers, or even close. So Rodgers' career trajectory is irrelevant as this is a draft prospect conversation.

D. You showed a picture of Steve Young's legs. His legs. Ok Rex.

E. Again, still correct. Not an opinion. His frame is smallish. Even at 215-220, he will still be scrawny. And doctors don't have a reason to say it blatantly about Jackson yet. He isn't in the pre-draft process. But many athletes like Jackson have had the same said about them. And while males grow into their 20's, not all men are built in the same manner. 

But, here's Steve earlier in his career. Still not built like Lamar Jackson. Check out those calves! 

[tyler735]

I sure am pulling that card as I'm the only one providing facts regarding these players sizes. I've provided the actual dimensions that these players are listed at. Outside of that the rest of this is all PURE opinion. Which would mean my statement is correct that we are both entitled to our own opinions on how each player is built. As there is no known factual measurements for any of these types of opinions on these guys beyond height/weight.  

A. That's still a negative there chief.

C. We don't know what Lamar Jackson will be. What we do know is that as a prospect, he is right on par with Rodgers and possibly even ahead. You act like Rodgers is the only guys I've listed with a similar frame, but I've listed several past and present. Next..

D. No I showed a full picture of Steve Young with the Bucs...You know...When he was somewhat near Jackson's age, but yes Young's legs/arms were definitely an indicator that this whole "bulk" rant you're on is false as he looks similar in stature to Jackson at that point. 

E. Nope. At 215-220 he will still be 215-220. Or in other words the same size as several other QB's in the NFL..

[CalhounLambeau]

Robert Griffin had inverted knees which were largely to blame for his lower body injuries. Very rare for an NFL to have that issue. 

[BroncosFan2010]

 

Quote

What we do know is that as a prospect, he is right on par with Rodgers and possibly even ahead.

I understand that Rogers the prospect isn't the same as rogers the NFL QB, but at this point to clear some air in this thread I am going to have to ask A) Where do you think Lamar Jackson ranks in this draft class (IE: #1, #50, #100) and B) Where does he rank in your mind among the top QB's coming out in, say, the past 15 years.

Understanding those questions will make the argument, and whether the argument should continue, a lot more clear IMO.

[Scout]

If you draft Lamar Jackson as a quarterback you might as well draft another one because he'll always be in the shop

[tyler735]

1 hour ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

 

I understand that Rogers the prospect isn't the same as rogers the NFL QB, but at this point to clear some air in this thread I am going to have to ask A) Where do you think Lamar Jackson ranks in this draft class (IE: #1, #50, #100) and B) Where does he rank in your mind among the top QB's coming out in, say, the past 15 years.

Understanding those questions will make the argument, and whether the argument should continue, a lot more clear IMO.

Rodgers as an NFL player without doubt is a very high expectation. I won't say it's impossible for Jackson, but also not very likely to ever hit that level of greatness as Rodgers could be a top 5 guy ever at QB by the time he retires. However as a prospect Rodgers went late in the 1st round and wasn't the 1st QB selected in that draft even. 

As for your question on Jackson, the remainder of this season will be a major factor in determining where I have him ranked. If he continues to show that he's progressed as a passer, he has the talent to be my top QB prospect in the past 15 years. However that is a big "IF" and I'm not sure that is going to be the case yet. With Lamar Jackson his physical traits (Arm Strength/Athleticism/etc.) obviously are very rare. From that standpoint, I think only Mike Vick, Cam Newton, and RG3 are on that level of pure natural talent as a prospect. The biggest thing will be seeing how he matures with the mental aspect of his game as this is obviously crucial in NFL success. I think there has been a noticeable leap forward in that regard so far this season, and will be interesting to see how it progresses in the coming weeks.  

[BroncosFan2010]

Quote

As for your question on Jackson, the remainder of this season will be a major factor in determining where I have him ranked. If he continues to show that he's progressed as a passer, he has the talent to be my top QB prospect in the past 15 years.

Ya, I was sorta baiting you on that one. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and even I think Lamar is a R1 prospect, but the idea that he is better than Luck, Winston, Stafford, Eli, Rivers, Ben and even Carson as a projectable NFL franchise QB is a huge, huge stretch. Those guys were all miles and miles ahead of Lamar as a passer and field reader coming out of college.

I think Lamar is the most exciting prospect, and his physical traits are unreal, but there is so, so much more to the game at the QB level in the NFL. Running and mobility are, IMO, the most overrated traits a QB can possess. They hypnotize you and make you salivate at 60+ yard, Madden type plays but that just doesn't really happen in this league with the speed of defenses.

He is a special physical talent, but he has miles and miles to go before he can be considered a special Quarterback, and therein lies the difference.

[tyler735]

1 hour ago, BroncosFan2010 said:

Ya, I was sorta baiting you on that one. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and even I think Lamar is a R1 prospect, but the idea that he is better than Luck, Winston, Stafford, Eli, Rivers, Ben and even Carson as a projectable NFL franchise QB is a huge, huge stretch. Those guys were all miles and miles ahead of Lamar as a passer and field reader coming out of college.

I think Lamar is the most exciting prospect, and his physical traits are unreal, but there is so, so much more to the game at the QB level in the NFL. Running and mobility are, IMO, the most overrated traits a QB can possess. They hypnotize you and make you salivate at 60+ yard, Madden type plays but that just doesn't really happen in this league with the speed of defenses.

He is a special physical talent, but he has miles and miles to go before he can be considered a special Quarterback, and therein lies the difference.

Yeah I noticed that with the wording on the previous post lol. I can't say I agree with all of that, but I can respect that opinion as there are obviously some unknowns with Jackson still. The next 10 games will be crucial in getting a more accurate gauge of how far Jackson has progressed as a passer.