CalhounLambeau Posted December 7, 2017 Share Posted December 7, 2017 1 hour ago, Speedyg said: Yep. Exactly my point. Evaluators "fear" the risk of taking guys like Wilson Watson Jackson because they don't have the measurable of the "prototype". Yet we've seen many of these prototype guys fail. At the end, the only difference is when you get it wrong with these prototype QBs is that you got it wrong just like the many that were afraid to go against the grain. The "prototype" QB prospects get pushed through the system in large numbers. They have more success because there is simply more of them. They also fail more often because there are so many of them. So because of that the "non-prototype" get labeled as failures, etc. To me it's a pile of bull and there is no evidence to suggest they are any less successful as a whole. Same thing with saying "Spread QB's rarely have success in the NFL." That's because historically the best pocket QB recruits have always gone to Pro-Style colleges to prepare for the NFL. Spread systems have normally gotten "leftover" recruits. Scheme has little to do with anything. The best pocket QB recruits in the country have typically avoided spread schemes. If the best pocket QB recruits started going to spread offenses we should see a clear shift. It has to do with talent, not scheme in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich7sena Posted December 8, 2017 Share Posted December 8, 2017 20 hours ago, CalhounLambeau said: The "prototype" QB prospects get pushed through the system in large numbers. They have more success because there is simply more of them. They also fail more often because there are so many of them. So because of that the "non-prototype" get labeled as failures, etc. To me it's a pile of bull and there is no evidence to suggest they are any less successful as a whole. There is logic in what "the prototype" is. Height, size, and arm strength all have practical advantages in the NFL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lod01 Posted December 9, 2017 Share Posted December 9, 2017 On 12/7/2017 at 11:10 AM, MOSteelers56 said: I hope people draft the "prototype" qb's and let Jackson slide to the back of the first. Then the Steelers can draft him after winning the Super Bowl. Ben comes back, wins another, retires after next season and gives the reigns to Jackson. Then the Steelers rattle off 8 consecutive SB wins and go down as the best team ever... losing seasons. ....I took it too far. Fixed for accuracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted December 9, 2017 Share Posted December 9, 2017 On 12/7/2017 at 2:04 PM, Bullet Club said: Wasn't Gabbert super toolsy and risky? I mean, I wouldn't really call Gabbert toolsy. Athletic, maybe. But I wouldn't call him toolsy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted December 9, 2017 Share Posted December 9, 2017 On 12/6/2017 at 9:07 PM, MD4L said: I'd put Jackson over any QB not named Sam Darnold. Him and Darnold are pretty even in terms of franchise QBs. When Jackson is on, the dual threat ability and deep accuracy make him a legitimate starter early in his career. His flaws would be durability with his play style (zero injuries in college), and the occasional inaccuracy issue. I'll go as far to say his decision making will be easier to process immediate success because his dual threat capabilites. Before all off-season activities I really think he's a top ten talent. I vehemently disagree. There's a TON that Lamar Jackson can do that no other QB in this year's class can match. He's one of the best pure athletes in the draft, but in terms of being a passer he's way behind the curve. And I think that's where being a huge dual-threat really comes back to haunt him. He's a big enough threat with his legs that if his first or second read isn't there, he can escape and go for a big play. He's improved significantly in this regard, but he's still a big work in progress. There's going to be an adjustment period because NFL defenses tend to be a bit more sturdy in terms of maintaining lane integrity. But as for a passer, he's still rather raw. I noted it a couple of times when I went through some of his games, and he throws form a narrow base. And I think that is part of his accuracy issues. You see some absolute gorgeous throws, but he also has those WTF throws where he misses the receiver by a chunk of yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iamcanadian Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 On 12/7/2017 at 5:17 PM, CalhounLambeau said: The "prototype" QB prospects get pushed through the system in large numbers. They have more success because there is simply more of them. They also fail more often because there are so many of them. So because of that the "non-prototype" get labeled as failures, etc. To me it's a pile of bull and there is no evidence to suggest they are any less successful as a whole. Same thing with saying "Spread QB's rarely have success in the NFL." That's because historically the best pocket QB recruits have always gone to Pro-Style colleges to prepare for the NFL. Spread systems have normally gotten "leftover" recruits. Scheme has little to do with anything. The best pocket QB recruits in the country have typically avoided spread schemes. If the best pocket QB recruits started going to spread offenses we should see a clear shift. It has to do with talent, not scheme in my opinion. I agree with a lot of this especially about spread system QB's becoming more successful as more better teams, use this offense and put better quality QB's to run it. Talent is what counts, not the system!!! However, it is a bit of an exaggeration to say there is no evidence that short QB's have a difficult time succeeding in the NFL, , they have a high failure rate over the years and very few are successful. There is always a reason why GM's are reluctant to draft short QB's??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iamcanadian Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 For what it is worth, he is likely a top 5 pick, top 10 for sure, he is the second coming of Michael Vick, with more accuracy and more touch. The only knock on him is his lower body which could possibly mean a shorter career due to injuries. In most draft years, he would be the #1 overall pick, which says a lot about how good Darnold and Rosen are!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khaosoy Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 If Jackson has a good pre-draft showing and can prove that he can be consistent enough with his accuracy he could easily end up going # 1. If he gets the buzz train going he could be a much bigger draw than any of the other QB prospects due to his play style. I think it will take a perfect combine/workout from Darnold or Rosen to lock out Jackson if he looks good in his workouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BleedTheClock Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 On 12/7/2017 at 11:10 AM, MOSteelers56 said: I hope people draft the "prototype" qb's and let Jackson slide to the back of the first. Then the Steelers can draft him after winning the Super Bowl. Ben comes back, wins another, retires after next season and gives the reigns to Jackson. Then the Steelers rattle off 8 consecutive SB wins and go down as the best team ever.... ....I took it too far. So what is your plan for assassinating Tom Brady? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CalhounLambeau Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 6 hours ago, Iamcanadian said: They have a high failure rate over the years and very few are successful. Which can be said for small, medium, or large sized quarterbacks. You're being tricked by the small sample size. Large: 6'5"-6'7" Medium: 6'2"-6'4" Small: 5'11"-6'1" The number of small quarterbacks that enter the league every year is for the lack of a better term very small. But they still normally comprise a small number of the starting spots, a small number of the backup spots and a similar number of players who fall out of the league. I haven't done a full-fledged study on the subject but I've spent a good deal of time going through my old manuals and I couldn't find that smaller quarterbacks were any different than any other group of quarterbacks or any other position for that matter. Yet I keep hearing all the time "small quarterbacks fail more often." Two things, nobody has ever given me a convincing rebuttal based on anything other than feeling and it also makes little sense since nobody says the same thing about any other position on the field. Being big is great and people love size but like you said in post "Talent is what counts!" and it comes in every body type equally from what I can tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gopherwrestler Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 Love Jackson. Don't care if it didn't happen in college, but for some reason looking at his frame I still fear injury. Not because he is a running quarterback, but I always look at certain body figures, and he has "that body figure" below the waist. Feared it with Teddy, and feared it with Dalvin Cook and many more players, obviously not all have torn much, but Jackson fits that mold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
48 1/2ers Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 I'm curious who you guys think is more prone to injury...Any 35+ year old NFL QB or Lamar Jackson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forge Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 2 hours ago, 48 1/2ers said: I'm curious who you guys think is more prone to injury...Any 35+ year old NFL QB or Lamar Jackson? Depends on the quarterback. I mean, some guys just don't really get hurt, you know? So in some instances, it would be the 35 year old, and in some it could be Jackson. I hate projecting injuries on a prospect though unless they have a history of it. Do I think that Jackson is a little "skinny legged" and thin from the waist down? Yes. Do I think it'll lead to issues being healthy at the next level? I have no idea. It would be something that I would have worry over, but not something that I would ding him for, if that makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbrou190 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 I'f I'm the Browns he's my 1st overall pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSURacerDT55 Posted December 13, 2017 Share Posted December 13, 2017 5 hours ago, cbrou190 said: I'f I'm the Browns he's my 1st overall pick I absolutely love Jackson but I can't take him over Darnold or Rosen, maybe last year but not this year. But conversely, his bowl game and combine are going to be must see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.