Jump to content

2021 Broncos Forum College Prospects Thread


broncosfan_101

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, broncosfan_101 said:

It’s unlikely, but we could see an exodus of vet QB’s this offseason, especially if the salary cap drops as expected. Ben, Brees, and Rivers are all not playing anywhere close to where they expect to. They’ll be 39, 42, and 39 years old next season. Rivers doesn’t have a contract, Brees ($13.5M) and Ben ($19M) both have sizeable salaries that could be cut. 

Yeah - keep in mind Ben has 42M dead money.   So he’s have to be a post June 1 cut to make it work.   Brees IMO is done.    The Saints are in mega cap hell though.   But the point holds that the glut of vet QB with some upside left might disappear quickly.  When the falloff happens with QB it’s so damn fast.   Ben’s fall is ridiculous but so obvious.    

Edited by Broncofan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Broncofan said:

Yeah - keep in mind Ben has 42M dead money.   So he’s have to be a post June 1 cut to make it work.   Brees IMO is done.    The Saints are in mega cap hell though.   But the point holds that the glut of vet QB with some upside left might disappear quickly.  When the falloff happens with QB it’s so damn fast.   Ben’s fall is ridiculous but so obvious.    

That was before this year. For 2021, he’s got $22.25M guaranteed, but another $19M can be saved if he’s cut before June 1st. I’d bet on the team telling him they’re gonna cut him, and him just retiring. But my point was to agree with you, and to expand the amount of potential demand for vet QB’s. Like, if Brees retires (he will), Payton won’t give the keys to Taysom alone. The Colts won’t go back to Brissett. 
 

Guys like Fitz, Winston, Dalton (who we haven’t talked about, but I think is a real good option), and even Trubisky are gonna have a real market. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, broncosfan_101 said:

That was before this year. For 2021, he’s got $22.25M guaranteed, but another $19M can be saved if he’s cut before June 1st. I’d bet on the team telling him they’re gonna cut him, and him just retiring. But my point was to agree with you, and to expand the amount of potential demand for vet QB’s. Like, if Brees retires (he will), Payton won’t give the keys to Taysom alone. The Colts won’t go back to Brissett. 
 

Guys like Fitz, Winston, Dalton (who we haven’t talked about, but I think is a real good option), and even Trubisky are gonna have a real market. 

Ah right - long week.   Don’t think Dalton fits what we are looking for - he’s a better caretaker for a rookie than a challenge / mento to Lock.   For a rookie an ideal guy.  Figure that’s where he ends up.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Started watching some of these prospects tonight.  I usually got off CBS Sports big board, and doing the same this time. 

Only made it through 2 prospects.  Lawrence is the real deal.  Hands down not even close best player in the draft and that’s just after 2 guys.

Penei Sewell was the other player I watched.  He flashed a bunch for me last year just with random blocks while I watched Herbert.  He’s not a clean prospect, however.  His size/athleticism/power/tenacity are special traits.  His technique is not.  He’s a scrapper far more than a technician and it’s part of what makes him an elite project and part of what hurts him.  I think the best way I can describe his Auburn tape from last year is controlled chaos, with a small percentage of the time taking out the controlled.

Jedrick Wills was my top OT last year and I would have Wills over Sewell.  Wills pass sets in college were so clean and effortless and he’d just shoot his hands and neutralize a defender and it wasn’t even fair.  Sewell gets it done, but as I said, he’s a scrapper that appears reckless and relying purely on talent as opposed to technique. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, broncosfan_101 said:

Hot take: Zach Wilson as QB2 is closer to Trevor Lawrence’s level than Justin Fields’. The Jets should take him. 

I don't think that's a hot take at this point. Zach Wilson looked really good against a good/underrated SDSU defense with some pro prospects on it and absolutely murdered UCF last night. I know it's been mentioned time and time again but his ability to throw off platform is phenomenal. The throw last night, running to his right, throwing across his body to the back on the wheel route was *chef's kiss*.

Fields has all pro potential as well and showed some warts against two really good defenses this year, but I still view them as 2a and 2b.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, rcpbawler said:

I don't think that's a hot take at this point. Zach Wilson looked really good against a good/underrated SDSU defense with some pro prospects on it and absolutely murdered UCF last night. I know it's been mentioned time and time again but his ability to throw off platform is phenomenal. The throw last night, running to his right, throwing across his body to the back on the wheel route was *chef's kiss*.

Fields has all pro potential as well and showed some warts against two really good defenses this year, but I still view them as 2a and 2b.

The hot take is that I’m closer to viewing Lawrence and Wilson as 1a and 1b than Wilson and Fields 2a and 2b. Wilson continues to look great, Fields has been struggs to func over the last month when playing real teams. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, germ-x said:

Penei Sewell was the other player I watched.  He flashed a bunch for me last year just with random blocks while I watched Herbert.  He’s not a clean prospect, however.  His size/athleticism/power/tenacity are special traits.  His technique is not.  He’s a scrapper far more than a technician and it’s part of what makes him an elite project and part of what hurts him.  I think the best way I can describe his Auburn tape from last year is controlled chaos, with a small percentage of the time taking out the controlled.

Jedrick Wills was my top OT last year and I would have Wills over Sewell.  Wills pass sets in college were so clean and effortless and he’d just shoot his hands and neutralize a defender and it wasn’t even fair.  Sewell gets it done, but as I said, he’s a scrapper that appears reckless and relying purely on talent as opposed to technique. 

I’m on the record as well saying Sewell’s not the generational guy he’s being touted as, and that I’d give him a grade somewhere amongst the top 4 from last year (maybe the highest! But not by a significant margin at all.) Something I’m trying to keep in mind though, is that some of his tape from last year (where he was unanimous All-American and the Outland winner, over the top 4) is him at 18 years old. Dude just turned 20 like two months ago, he’s incredible for his age. 
 

I don’t think he comes to the NFL and dominates, as the technicians on the edge will give him grief. But he’ll get there. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, broncosfan_101 said:

The hot take is that I’m closer to viewing Lawrence and Wilson as 1a and 1b than Wilson and Fields 2a and 2b. Wilson continues to look great, Fields has been struggs to func over the last month when playing real teams. 

Welp, yeah, that's definitely more of a hot take. He's definitely struggled since the Indiana game, but I can't forget everything he did last year, even looking better than Lawrence in that playoff game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, rcpbawler said:

Welp, yeah, that's definitely more of a hot take. He's definitely struggled since the Indiana game, but I can't forget everything he did last year, even looking better than Lawrence in that playoff game.

Watching Drew Lock this year, a thing that I’ve really grown to appreciate in QB’s is the ability to process reads quickly. Lock can’t. I don’t see it from Fields much, although if I’m stretching to be fair, it’s because his first read is always an open WR. I’ve seen Wilson move his eyes very well when option one isn’t there. His feel for pocket pressure is better, too. 
 

I’ve still got Fields as a top 6 prospect in this draft, and I think he’s a real franchise QB. But I think Zach Wilson is a spitting image of Russell Wilson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, broncosfan_101 said:

Watching Drew Lock this year, a thing that I’ve really grown to appreciate in QB’s is the ability to process reads quickly. Lock can’t. I don’t see it from Fields much, although if I’m stretching to be fair, it’s because his first read is always an open WR. I’ve seen Wilson move his eyes very well when option one isn’t there. His feel for pocket pressure is better, too. 
 

I’ve still got Fields as a top 6 prospect in this draft, and I think he’s a real franchise QB. But I think Zach Wilson is a spitting image of Russell Wilson. 

Two key differences and 1 unanswered Q that makes Russell Wilson truly elite - first, Russell's arm is a cannon.   It's meaningless if you don't have the intangibles, but he's got those huge mitts, the cannon (both deceiving for his size), AND the intangible skills.   Zach, I can see the intangibles - but the physical tools aren't nearly as impressive.  The other difference is Russell's agility is truly elite - 4.53 40, but more importantly, sub-7 3-cone, and 4.1 shuttle.  That's NFL RB/WR territory.   Add in #3's intangible pocket awareness for pressure, it's why he's magician like.    I don't think Zach Wilson even comes close in those areas.  

The accuracy & between-the-ears ability is a huge plus with Zach Wilson, don't get me wrong.   And Deshaun Watson shows you don't need a cannon to be elite, if the intangibles stand out (Watson's pocket awareness, and read progression and ability to extend plays more than overcome his average arm, and non-elite speed).    Now, Watson's physical elusiveness is still well-above average (but becomes elite when you add his pocket awareness & feel for presssure).    But you do need a minimum threshold of tools to play in the NFL - and the more lack of tools is an issue, the more the other intangibles need to be elite to overcome those physical limitations.    Watson ironically was dinged for his lack of tools - so I'm not going to dismiss Zach Wilson without more info.  But I'd like to see if Wilson has a similar profile to Watson's arm / wheels to know how much of an issue this is.   

The other unanswered Q is the competition - Wilson did his work vs. Big10 competition, on a team that wasn't as good as the big dogs there.   Wilson's competition is far, far less talented - BYU has by and large been the far superior team talent-wise overall.    It just bears recognition that's a very real difference in context.

None of the above prevents Zach Wilson from being successful - and if you mean from an intangibles perspective, I see the Russ-Zach comp.   The whole package, though, is pretty different.

Last comment - age of breakout vs. elite competition is IMO the most reliable indicator of NFL success.    For that reason, I don't ever see Trevor Lawrence in the same tier as Wilson.    Lawrence belongs in his own tier - after that,  there aren't perfect (or near-perfect) QB prospects, albeit Fields is the one with the most visibility for the longest time.   I can see why there's an argument for Wilson over Fields.    We all see flaws in Fields, mostly that basically translate to needing more time in developing those areas.     Now, a later age of breakout isn't a death sentence, either (I mean, ironically, Russ Wilson could be argued as a counter to the age, although QB's often aren't given the opportunity to succeed early in college, especially unconventional types - and I think that's what happened in NC State).   But elite age 18-19 seasons against top competition puts you in special company, and that's Lawrence.

Edited by Broncofan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Broncofan said:

Last comment - age of breakout vs. elite competition is IMO the most reliable indicator of NFL success.    For that reason, I don't ever see Trevor Lawrence in the same tier as Wilson.    Lawrence belongs in his own tier - after that,  there aren't perfect (or near-perfect) QB prospects, albeit Fields is the one with the most visibility for the longest time.   I can see why there's an argument for Wilson over Fields.    We all see flaws in Fields, mostly that basically translate to needing more time in developing those areas.     Now, a later age of breakout isn't a death sentence, either (I mean, ironically, Russ Wilson could be argued as a counter to the age, although QB's often aren't given the opportunity to succeed early in college, especially unconventional types - and I think that's what happened in NC State).   But elite age 18-19 seasons against top competition puts you in special company, and that's Lawrence.

This is interesting, I had not heard this theory before.  I wonder if guys like Hackenburg, Matt Barkley, Russell Wilson, or Burrow are exceptions that prove the rule?  I know each also had extenuating circumstances that could've served as a catalyst (OC/HC change, transfer, etc.)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, bMiller031 said:

This is interesting, I had not heard this theory before.  I wonder if guys like Hackenburg, Matt Barkley, Russell Wilson, or Burrow are exceptions that prove the rule?  I know each also had extenuating circumstances that could've served as a catalyst (OC/HC change, transfer, etc.)  

Wilson gets a pass because of his breaking the mold.   Burrow was a victim of circumstance.    Very dumb transfer rules (but also fair to say his NFL ceiling may never be super elite just really good to sometimes great - pre-injury anyways). 

Hack had a great freshman year.   But he was horrid year 2-3.  I should preface that the said player should remain at a high level in college.   Hack was overdrafted on tools.    
 

Barkley was ok year 1-2.   His junior year is what planted him in the spotlight.   Not declaring was such a mistake.   
 

FWIW the principle isn’t just for QB.   It’s why guys like George Pickens are IMO absolute monster prospects.   Nothing is foolproof but it’s one of the most reliable tools - esp against great competition.   PAC-12 guys will get questioned far more than Big 10 / SEC unless they get to face top opponents in their schedule (or make playoffs / Bowls vs. elite teams).   

Edited by Broncofan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Broncofan said:

Two key differences and 1 unanswered Q that makes Russell Wilson truly elite - first, Russell's arm is a cannon.   It's meaningless if you don't have the intangibles, but he's got those huge mitts, the cannon (both deceiving for his size), AND the intangible skills.   Zach, I can see the intangibles - but the physical tools aren't nearly as impressive.  The other difference is Russell's agility is truly elite - 4.53 40, but more importantly, sub-7 3-cone, and 4.1 shuttle.  That's NFL RB/WR territory.   Add in #3's intangible pocket awareness for pressure, it's why he's magician like.    I don't think Zach Wilson even comes close in those areas.  

The accuracy & between-the-ears ability is a huge plus with Zach Wilson, don't get me wrong.   And Deshaun Watson shows you don't need a cannon to be elite, if the intangibles stand out (Watson's pocket awareness, and read progression and ability to extend plays more than overcome his average arm, and non-elite speed).    Now, Watson's physical elusiveness is still well-above average (but becomes elite when you add his pocket awareness & feel for presssure).    But you do need a minimum threshold of tools to play in the NFL - and the more lack of tools is an issue, the more the other intangibles need to be elite to overcome those physical limitations.    Watson ironically was dinged for his lack of tools - so I'm not going to dismiss Zach Wilson without more info.  But I'd like to see if Wilson has a similar profile to Watson's arm / wheels to know how much of an issue this is.   

The other unanswered Q is the competition - Wilson did his work vs. Big10 competition, on a team that wasn't as good as the big dogs there.   Wilson's competition is far, far less talented - BYU has by and large been the far superior team talent-wise overall.    It just bears recognition that's a very real difference in context.

None of the above prevents Zach Wilson from being successful - and if you mean from an intangibles perspective, I see the Russ-Zach comp.   The whole package, though, is pretty different.

Last comment - age of breakout vs. elite competition is IMO the most reliable indicator of NFL success.    For that reason, I don't ever see Trevor Lawrence in the same tier as Wilson.    Lawrence belongs in his own tier - after that,  there aren't perfect (or near-perfect) QB prospects, albeit Fields is the one with the most visibility for the longest time.   I can see why there's an argument for Wilson over Fields.    We all see flaws in Fields, mostly that basically translate to needing more time in developing those areas.     Now, a later age of breakout isn't a death sentence, either (I mean, ironically, Russ Wilson could be argued as a counter to the age, although QB's often aren't given the opportunity to succeed early in college, especially unconventional types - and I think that's what happened in NC State).   But elite age 18-19 seasons against top competition puts you in special company, and that's Lawrence.

You’re right, Deshaun Watson (with a better deep ball) is more accurate for Zach Wilson. I really like Zach’s touch down the field. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...