Draft General (News, Media Mocks, Big Boards, Rumors)

[minutemancl]

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

But yeah, I don't see how you can possibly say he's a better prospect than Fields, unless NFL teams are even more about measurables and ceiling than we thought.

They are. More and more every year, these guys are betting on traits, especially at QB. You hit on a stud QB and you are in business for years; it doesn't matter what other moves you make.

[Rich7sena]

3 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Better than Lance is an easy one.  Even though Liberty is low level competition, it's not FCS level competition.

Lance, and other super small school prospects, are tough for us average joes to evaluate at all because you generally can't find tape that isn't a highlight reel.  At least with Willis, there was tape.

But yeah, I don't see how you can possibly say he's a better prospect than Fields, unless NFL teams are even more about measurables and ceiling than we thought.

I think Allen and Herbert's success has teams looking past certain flaws they deem products of situation. I was lower in Fields than most, so I can see how a team might prefer Willis. Fields methodical, almost slow, way of playing seemed to turn off certain teams which is why he fell. Willis is the opposite of that.

[KingOfNewYork]

27 minutes ago, Rich7sena said:

I didn't see this posted yet. Some nice gems from personnel people and coaches. Some glowing praise for Willis, including statements that he is a better prospect than Lance or Fields were. 

Better than Lance idk about that. Fields I can see, one of the more overrated QB r prospects in years.

[Rich7sena]

2 minutes ago, KingOfNewYork said:

Better than Lance idk about that. Fields I can see, one of the more overrated QB r prospects in years.

You'll notice from the posts before yours, that opinions on players--especially QBs--are extremely varied.

[Daniel]

23 minutes ago, minutemancl said:

They are. More and more every year, these guys are betting on traits, especially at QB. You hit on a stud QB and you are in business for years; it doesn't matter what other moves you make.

The pick that really made me think that was Jayson Oweh last year.  I remember saying I'll eat my hat if a guy with no sacks goes in the first round based on just athletics.  And lo and behold.  Not only was he a first rounder, but he got five sacks as a rookie.

21 minutes ago, Rich7sena said:

I think Allen and Herbert's success has teams looking past certain flaws they deem products of situation.

Allen did kind of rewrite the book on QB evals.  Before him, I can't think of a single prospect who had accuracy issues, but worked out, in the modern era.  I thought he was so obviously and easily a bust before he played a snap.

[CWood21]

20 hours ago, eh3034 said:

I definitely agree on Atlanta/Willis, and I agree on Ridder's value as well.  I currently have Ridder going 47 in my personal mock as I just think the rumors of him having top 15 buzz are too far-fetched, I was just pointing out that it is out there.  I've had Ridder bouncing between 32 and 47 for the most part.

I mean, most had EJ Manuel as a Day 2 prospect, and he went 16th overall because it only takes one team to believe that you're their QBOTF for them to take you high.

[CWood21]

18 hours ago, .Buzz said:

Listened to Brugler and Zierlein on their podcast today and both seem to think it’s a strong possibility it’ll be a corner at 3 (Sauce/Stingley).

It's been discussed for a few weeks now.

[eh3034]

Just now, CWood21 said:

I mean, most had EJ Manuel as a Day 2 prospect, and he went 16th overall because it only takes one team to believe that you're their QBOTF for them to take you high.

For sure.  If Pickett goes 6 and Willis goes 8, we need to be prepared for Ridder and/or Corral to go much higher than expected.  While I don't think it is likely, it is at least in the realm of possibility that Ridder could go 11 and Corral 20 in that edge scenario, which could possibly even push Howell to 32.  

It is just wild this year that there are truly believable possibilities that could result in 5 first round QBs, and equally believable possibilities that result in as few at 1.

[eh3034]

18 hours ago, Texansfan713 said:

Yeah I heard the same from @LORK88as well.  He knows a source that basically said the same thing. 

I have actually thought Sauce was the favorite to be #3 for quite some time.  The signing of Nelson cast a slight shadow of doubt, but in my opinion I would be totally shocked if the pick wasn't Sauce.  It is just too perfect a fit, and he brings something they don't have and would actually give Houston a very "sneaky good" secondary next year.  Then, while WR would be tempting, if they could take Hamilton or Johnson at #13, the defense would really surprise a lot of people next year.

[.Buzz]

23 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

It's been discussed for a few weeks now.

I mean I know it’s been in the conversation, but can’t say I’ve heard/seen it as “pretty certain to be a lock” until now.

Sounds as if Walker is there things could get interesting but they apparently don’t think he will be.

[Forge]

1 hour ago, minutemancl said:

They are. More and more every year, these guys are betting on traits, especially at QB. You hit on a stud QB and you are in business for years; it doesn't matter what other moves you make.

Agreed

 

[CWood21]

17 minutes ago, eh3034 said:

I have actually thought Sauce was the favorite to be #3 for quite some time.  The signing of Nelson cast a slight shadow of doubt, but in my opinion I would be totally shocked if the pick wasn't Sauce.  It is just too perfect a fit, and he brings something they don't have and would actually give Houston a very "sneaky good" secondary next year.  Then, while WR would be tempting, if they could take Hamilton or Johnson at #13, the defense would really surprise a lot of people next year.

Sauce (or Stingley)/Hamilton you would think would have to be a dream situation for Houston.

[Ray Reed]

1 hour ago, Daniel said:

The pick that really made me think that was Jayson Oweh last year.  I remember saying I'll eat my hat if a guy with no sacks goes in the first round based on just athletics.  And lo and behold.  Not only was he a first rounder, but he got five sacks as a rookie.

Allen did kind of rewrite the book on QB evals.  Before him, I can't think of a single prospect who had accuracy issues, but worked out, in the modern era.  I thought he was so obviously and easily a bust before he played a snap.

[Daniel]

1 hour ago, eh3034 said:

For sure.  If Pickett goes 6 and Willis goes 8, we need to be prepared for Ridder and/or Corral to go much higher than expected.  While I don't think it is likely, it is at least in the realm of possibility that Ridder could go 11 and Corral 20 in that edge scenario, which could possibly even push Howell to 32.  

It is just wild this year that there are truly believable possibilities that could result in 5 first round QBs, and equally believable possibilities that result in as few at 1.

Honestly, I don't think Willis and Pickett going super high actually pushes up the other QBs that much, unless they were already potentially first rounders.

There's been more buzz of late about Corrall and Ridder being possible first round picks, so I don't think the fact of Pickett going at 8 instead of 15 makes the team at 20 do anything different based on who's on the board.

[CWood21]

9 minutes ago, Daniel said:

Honestly, I don't think Willis and Pickett going super high actually pushes up the other QBs that much, unless they were already potentially first rounders.

There's been more buzz of late about Corrall and Ridder being possible first round picks, so I don't think the fact of Pickett going at 8 instead of 15 makes the team at 20 do anything different based on who's on the board.

Agreed.  I don't think Pickett or Willis going high really affects the board.  I think it only affects the board if they start to drop.