Jump to content

Sam Darnold


Aztec Hammer

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, MWil23 said:

Screen%20Shot%202016-03-25%20at%2010.01.

Yeah, look at Hogan's too. We're really onto something here. Goff is some clown with small 9" hands. I wouldn't want him.

So 2/3 of the QBs to have moderate or better success so far have 10" hands or larger. The two (Brissett/Kessler) who have shown flashes at least so far are at 9.75 and 10.88". So 1 out of 7 QBs with smaller than 9.75 hands have shown at least something so far. 4 out of 11 with hands 9.75" or larger have shown some sort of something so far. That proves it, smaller hands are better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Aztec Hammer said:

I hope Mayfield succeeds. I want most guys to do well. It's rare that I can't stand someone when casting football aside (Winston is the last instance I can think of). Mayfield's off the field stuff is a concern, the police thing especially, and the other stuff is immature but it doesn't make me dislike him.

 

Among the pro-Mayfield things I have read is that he is more experienced than Darnold and Rosen.

He is older, too.

Kind of ironic that he also appears to be the least mature.

I do not hate him for that.

I just do not want him to be a Brown in part because of that.

This, too, for all who say scheme and competition do not matter: https://247sports.com/college/texas-tech/Board/102951/Contents/Has-the-Big-12-ever-produced-a-great-NFL-QB-71336279

Funny read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that I've learned over the past few years especially is that the best predictor of success is "Poise under duress," "Accuracy under duress," "Clutch Factor in big moments,"  "Availability," and "Intangible need to work to be the best." .... traditional scouting analysis points to Darnold being the best of the bunch in all those critical predictive categories of success.

I've made my points constantly about the flawed nature of the widely disseminated infographics PFF has circulated about QBs under pressure (i.e., they include RPOs and read options as pressure, don't include throws made after evading pressure to a clean throwing platform outside or within the pocket, and most importantly they don't control for sample size of plays in their analysis).

It's fascinating to me that we have one of the best QB prospects fall into our lap and when we blow it by not selecting Darnold...it will be to the applause and cheers of a pro-Rosen/Mayfield crowd quoting their lord and savior PFF.

I thought after rewatching all their games...I'd finally be more pro-Baker...,but it's Darnold again by a wide margin....

I'm going to need all the Baker over Darnold guys to come with their best arguments on draft day to help me not get banned

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Mind Character said:

The thing that I've learned over the past few years especially is that the best predictor of success is "Poise under duress," "Accuracy under duress," "Clutch Factor in big moments,"  "Availability," and "Intangible need to work to be the best." .... traditional scouting analysis points to Darnold being the best of the bunch in all those critical predictive categories of success.

I've made my points constantly about the flawed nature of the widely disseminated infographics PFF has circulated about QBs under pressure (i.e., they include RPOs and read options as pressure, don't include throws made after evading pressure to a clean throwing platform outside or within the pocket, and most importantly they don't control for sample size of plays in their analysis).

It's fascinating to me that we have one of the best QB prospects fall into our lap and when we blow it by not selecting Darnold...it will be to the applause and cheers of a pro-Rosen/Mayfield crowd quoting their lord and savior PFF.

I thought after rewatching all their games...I'd finally be more pro-Baker...,but it's Darnold again by a wide margin....

I am all in on Darnold.

The stuff I read from the pundits and some posters leaves me scratching my head.

I wish I could get paid like the pundits for publishing the puke they spew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Thomas5737 said:

So 2/3 of the QBs to have moderate or better success so far have 10" hands or larger. The two (Brissett/Kessler) who have shown flashes at least so far are at 9.75 and 10.88". So 1 out of 7 QBs with smaller than 9.75 hands have shown at least something so far. 4 out of 11 with hands 9.75" or larger have shown some sort of something so far. That proves it, smaller hands are better.

Or maybe only 1 guy with small hands was even considered a good prospect anyway.

Correlation does not equal causation, which was my original point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MWil23 said:

Or maybe only 1 guy with small hands was even considered a good prospect anyway.

Correlation does not equal causation, which was my original point.

Only 1 guy was considered a good prospect with large hands. Another was an okay prospect. That one isn't looking good but Dak who wasn't a good prospect has had success. Either way yeah, hand size doesn't make or remove a good prospect and no one said it does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, bruceb said:

Imho, one would have to be an idiot not to take Darnold at #1.

At least he is not a punk or an entitled.

Entitled meaning a two time walk on? He may be a punk, I dunno but I'll give you that. He walked on to Texas Tech, then walked on to his favorite college team. That is the opposite of feeling entitled (that you don't have to go out and earn your way but like it should be given to you). You are stuck on Johnny Manziel who did have an entitled attitude because of where he came from and how he was treated along his way. Also, because he is/was of the personality to act entitled, not everyone who has an easy ride has that attitude

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...