2019 NFL QB Draft Prospects

[thebestever6]

Just now, AnAngryAmerican said:

It’s also important to remember that Paxton didn’t fail here because he was big, athletic and had a strong arm. Paxton didn’t work out because football wasn’t important enough to him. That doesn’t seem to be an issue with Drew Lock and from what I have read, the flaws in his game seem to be those that can be corrected. 

History is littered with QBs who check every box but don’t pan out just like it is littered with guys with lots of supposed flaws who go on to have very good careers. 

I'm still a firm believer in nurture versus nature regarding qbs. I don't think Brady is the GOAT without being in NE. I don't think Mahomes is the same thing in Houston with BB and less weapons. 

Manning is the only qb and Luck that I've seen. That would of literally had success anywhere they gotcdrafted. Imo 

[7DnBrnc53]

1 hour ago, thebestever6 said:

I'm still a firm believer in nurture versus nature regarding qbs. I don't think Brady is the GOAT without being in NE. I don't think Mahomes is the same thing in Houston with BB and less weapons. 

Manning is the only qb and Luck that I've seen. That would of literally had success anywhere they gotcdrafted. Imo 

Elway is also in that discussion. He took three teams to the SB in the 80's in spite of Dan Reeves.

[thebestever6]

29 minutes ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

Elway is also in that discussion. He took three teams to the SB in the 80's in spite of Dan Reeves.

Not old enough to remember that era I was born in 90. But yes Elway does fit that category no question about it. But that's a known.  I mean that 30 for 30 from Elway to Marino shows how coveted elway was. 

And he definitely lived up to that.

[DiehardBronxFan]

3 hours ago, AnAngryAmerican said:

It’s also important to remember that Paxton didn’t fail here because he was big, athletic and had a strong arm. Paxton didn’t work out because football wasn’t important enough to him. That doesn’t seem to be an issue with Drew Lock and from what I have read, the flaws in his game seem to be those that can be corrected. 

History is littered with QBs who check every box but don’t pan out just like it is littered with guys with lots of supposed flaws who go on to have very good careers. 

Spot on.  And the vast majority of the difference between the 2 outcomes is "want to".  And unfortunately, that is probably the hardest thing for us, as total outsiders, to judge.  Having said that, the year over year improvement of Lock, and the feedback from the Sr. Bowl, certainly are positive signs in that regard.

[germ-x]

3 hours ago, DiehardBronxFan said:

Spot on.  And the vast majority of the difference between the 2 outcomes is "want to".  And unfortunately, that is probably the hardest thing for us, as total outsiders, to judge.  Having said that, the year over year improvement of Lock, and the feedback from the Sr. Bowl, certainly are positive signs in that regard.

Yeah.  I am not opposed to Lock, but prefer Haskins and Jones over him.  I don’t think Stidham goes #10, but I like him as well.

I don’t doubt for a second that the Broncos have honed in on Lock.  He’s an Elway type prospect.  I really think Denver wants to get the vertical passing game going.  Elway complained about it with Keenum, Scangarello came in and wants a QB that can drive the ball.  Lock happens to be statistically one of the best deep ball throwing QBs in a few years, I believe he’s ranked in the top 10 in that category for 2 to 3 years now.

I think there will be a push this offseason to not only secure the OL for the next 3 or so years, but also bring in a WR that can take the top off a defense.

Elway, while not admitting whiffing on Lynch, I think knows he has to put a young QB in a better position to be successful.  Which leads me to believe there will be a bigger emphasis on offense this offseason.

[germ-x]

^^* to go with that I think we see Denver make some tough cuts to free up money to allow them to be bigger spenders in FA.  

[AKRNA]

1 hour ago, germ-x said:

Yeah.  I am not opposed to Lock, but prefer Haskins and Jones over him.  I don’t think Stidham goes #10, but I like him as well.

I don’t doubt for a second that the Broncos have honed in on Lock.  He’s an Elway type prospect.  I really think Denver wants to get the vertical passing game going.  Elway complained about it with Keenum, Scangarello came in and wants a QB that can drive the ball.  Lock happens to be statistically one of the best deep ball throwing QBs in a few years, I believe he’s ranked in the top 10 in that category for 2 to 3 years now.

I think there will be a push this offseason to not only secure the OL for the next 3 or so years, but also bring in a WR that can take the top off a defense.

Elway, while not admitting whiffing on Lynch, I think knows he has to put a young QB in a better position to be successful.  Which leads me to believe there will be a bigger emphasis on offense this offseason.

Thats why I love this forum. I didn't know that about Lock. Good info!

[AnAngryAmerican]

15 hours ago, germ-x said:

^^* to go with that I think we see Denver make some tough cuts to free up money to allow them to be bigger spenders in FA.  

Klis reported that it’s supposed to be an “aggressive” offseason so that’s what I expect too. As I’ve outlined an innumerable number of times, this franchise is in “win now” mode because of the legal/financial issues surrounding the team that have cropped up under the rank incompetence of Joe Ellis. 

I also expect, if they like Lock enough, to do what they have to trade up for him. KC moves way up to get Malholmes I wouldn’t be surprised to see a similarly aggressive move if they want Lock.

Edited February 1, 2019 by AnAngryAmerican

[thebestever6]

15 hours ago, germ-x said:

^^* to go with that I think we see Denver make some tough cuts to free up money to allow them to be bigger spenders in FA.  

This offseason is gonna be a disaster.  The Rams model of win now isn't sustainable. They're gonna suck once Goff leaves. 

Couple that with the talks of a trade up and we're in trouble.  Even if Lock were too hit . I prefer player development of a team more then the free agent approach.  

Lets be real the draft last year was impactful partially to Elway Sucking at free agent moves . I'm talking Trumaine Brock he sucked and was injured so a guy like Yiadom can develop.  Brandon Marshall sucked wasn't worth a contract he got. He gets injured and jewell can step in and develop.  The more free agents we aquire the less ability to develop our own talent.

There has to be a balance just a dumb approach. 

[dll2000]

21 hours ago, 7DnBrnc53 said:

Elway is also in that discussion. He took three teams to the SB in the 80's in spite of Dan Reeves.

 

23 hours ago, thebestever6 said:

I'm still a firm believer in nurture versus nature regarding qbs. I don't think Brady is the GOAT without being in NE. I don't think Mahomes is the same thing in Houston with BB and less weapons. 

Manning is the only qb and Luck that I've seen. That would of literally had success anywhere they gotcdrafted. Imo 

Brady gets buried somewhere else and never gets opportunity to become Brady outside of NE.  Belichick is one of few coaches willing to make move on from an all pro no. 1 overall pick like Bledsoe (who was at the time a stud who later regressed a bit) and go with a guy like Brady.

Manning would have succeeded anywhere.  Elway same.  Mahomes I think has benefited greatly from Reid, but he still has so much natural talent that he probably would have succeeded anywhere.

--------

Are you guys rolling with Keenum this year you think?  You going QB no. 1 this year?  

I am still really shocked Denver didn't make a move on a QB in last years draft and went the Keenum route instead.  From afar it seems Elway got gun shy after P. Lynch bust.  I'm not sure what he envisioned Keenum was going to do for this team.  

I think Giants and Broncos screwed up not making QB move when having the high pick to work with.  I know a lot of people didn't like Allen's accuracy in college, but the dude is a heck of a piece of clay to work with a lot like Mahomes.  He can make any throw with minimal effort and he is hard to bring down.  

Mayfield was probably never on table, but they could have traded up for Darnold.  I was never high on Rosen, but who knows what he will be.  I know Elway would never consider Jackson.  Allen and Rosen were there.  I guess he didn't like them.   

You could have had your bad season with a rookie starter and had another top pick this year to add to team talent pool or have trade power for multiple picks.

You got a good player in Chubb, but who cares if you are still looking for a QB.

You guys have probably discussed all this to death and then some.  Sorry.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[AKRNA]

20 hours ago, DiehardBronxFan said:

Spot on.  And the vast majority of the difference between the 2 outcomes is "want to".  And unfortunately, that is probably the hardest thing for us, as total outsiders, to judge.  Having said that, the year over year improvement of Lock, and the feedback from the Sr. Bowl, certainly are positive signs in that regard.

So, I'm not much of a QB evaluator but there are some things I always look for, none of which can be taught. 

1) Accuracy, you have it or you don't. It can not be taught, honed yes but not taught.

2) "Want to" seems to be the phrase. Basically I want a guy that lives, eats and breathes football and his dream has always been becoming an NFL QB. . When asked about interests outside of football if he responds with much more than "my girlfriend" I'm pretty leery.

3) Competitiveness/leadership. Pretty much self explanatory.

4) Body Type. Has to be able to take a beating and get right back up.

5) Intelligence. 

Outside of those, everything else can be taught and developed. 

[thebestever6]

30 minutes ago, AKRNA said:

So, I'm not much of a QB evaluator but there are some things I always look for, none of which can be taught. 

1) Accuracy, you have it or you don't. It can not be taught, honed yes but not taught.

2) "Want to" seems to be the phrase. Basically I want a guy that lives, eats and breathes football and his dream has always been becoming an NFL QB. . When asked about interests outside of football if he responds with much more than "my girlfriend" I'm pretty leery.

3) Competitiveness/leadership. Pretty much self explanatory.

4) Body Type. Has to be able to take a beating and get right back up.

5) Intelligence. 

Outside of those, everything else can be taught and developed. 

Accuracy is tough to judge sometimes because if the lower part of the body is messed up its gonna hinder accuracy.  

So basically its a lot of projecting.

[thebestever6]

1 hour ago, dll2000 said:

I am still really shocked Denver didn't make a move on a QB in last years draft and went the Keenum route instead.  From afar it seems Elway got gun shy after P. Lynch bust.  I'm not sure what he envisioned Keenum was going to do for this team.  

I think Giants and Broncos screwed up not making QB move when having the high pick to work with.  I know a lot of people didn't like Allen's accuracy in college, but the dude is a heck of a piece of clay to work with a lot like Mahomes.  He can make any throw with minimal effort and he is hard to bring down.  

Elway wanted to trade up for Darnold the Jets just had more to give the Colts. Even after that trade went down Elway was still talking to New York Giants trying to work something out. I think every gm needs to have a limit or else you're not gonna be around long.

The evaluation of Keenum was just brutal. I literally think he was just brought in so that they didn't have to pigeon hole themselves at qb last year.

This year I feel Elway may be getting a little more desperate so he probably will pull the trigger on Lock. And I hope he has a limit on a trade up because this team still has a bunch of holes and lacks depth. And part of the reason they may have to trade up is Elway leading the hype train for Lock.

[AKRNA]

2 hours ago, thebestever6 said:

Accuracy is tough to judge sometimes because if the lower part of the body is messed up its gonna hinder accuracy.  

So basically its a lot of projecting.

I think you’re missing my point so I’ll tell ya a little story to explain, please bear with me, this’ll be a little long winded.

So, growing up in the 50’s and 60’s almost every recreational activity for guys involved a ball, throwing, running, catching. Basically, there wasn’t much else to do. Snowball fights, dodge ball, baseball, football…… You get my drift. You’re dad comes home from work and you bug him to play catch.

We were all pretty good at it to some extent because that’s really all we did. One guy though, Art, was freakish. He didn’t practice, just played like the rest of us. His accuracy though was uncanny. He’d be falling to his right, you were running to your left and he’d put a snowball in your ear from 60’. It hurt! He had some zip.

He was always the first guy chosen for any game involving throwing a ball and for good reason. Coaches didn’t think he was big enough to be a QB, about 5’ 9”/160lbs,  but in a sandlot game he was incredible. In short, he was a “natural”.

So, leaving out a bunch of the story he eventually went to ASU, (I think, maybe another baseball powerhouse) playing shortstop on a full ride.

Bottom line, accuracy for him was second nature. He didn’t work at it, he just had it.

Maybe it’s an “accuracy gene”, I don’t know. Somehow though, in a tiny fraction of a second his brain could adjust to his bodies position, speed and direction, his receivers speed and direction, and deliver a 20-30 yard dart on the money every time. Only thing affected by his body position was speed and zip on the ball, never accuracy.

Trust me, accuracy is not an acquired ability. It’s a truly amazing athletic gift. You have it or you don’t, that simple.

Edited February 1, 2019 by AKRNA

[AKRNA]

Just curious, has anyone seen Kyler Murray play much?