PDA

View Full Version : NFL Draft Matthew Stafford Or Mark Sanchez?: The Debate


Toad
02-05-2009, 10:42 PM
Sorry in advance if this is a re-post, but some interesting stuff...

1/24/2009
Now that the inauguration is over, we can move on to more important things like who is the best quarterback prospect in the upcoming NFL Draft. For most draft followers, the debate is really only between two guys, Matthew Stafford, a true junior out of Georgia, and Mark Sanchez, a redshirt junior from the University of Southern California.

I could leave you hanging and make you wait to find out who I think the better quarterback is, but I'd rather tell you and then defend my selection. Without further ado, the better quarterback is Mark Sanchez, and frankly I don't think it's even close.

Now before you start assuming I have an SC bias effecting my pick because I'm from Southern California, you should know I am actually as big an 'SC hater as there is.

Second, I want to remind and warn you that my opinions about Stafford have absolutely nothing to do with him as a person. I've never heard anything bad about the guy, I just don't think at this time he's as good as Sanchez.

Third, even though I'm going to kill Stafford (not literally), I still think he is immensely talented and has a great chance to become a good, if not great, NFL QB. I just think he should've returned to school for his senior season.

I was fortunate enough to grade both players off of some TV games I recorded this season. Unfortunately, I don't have as many throws from Mark Sanchez, but I do not see this as a huge problem, because I did watch a lot of USC games this season and I saw the exact same things in those games that I saw in the games I did grade him on.

To help you understand the method I used to "grade" these two players, let me quickly explain. I literally took out a piece of paper and pen and charted each and every throw in the games which I watched of the two. I drew out a football field and marked a check mark for good throws and an "X" for bad ones.

Things such as good throw aways, pressure, and on-the-run throws were also charted. As well as late throws, and end-of-half throws.

A good throw is anywhere the receiver is given the opportunity to catch the football in stride and make a run after the catch, or a good throw where the QB threads the needle into a tight window for a difficult completion, since that is what you get in the NFL.

Whether the receiver actually caught the ball is irrelevant to me, unless that receiver is a prospect himself, but I haven't graded Patrick Turner or Mohammed Massaquoi yet (the only two receivers from those teams eligible, unless you count Knowshon Moreno, who actually is a great receiver out of the backfield).

Hopefully that helps you understand the method I used. Let me tell you specifically what I saw from the film.

It may seem that athleticism would not be an incredibly important factor for evaluating a quarterback, but the truth is, it is actually crucial. He needs flexibility in order to bend his knees and stride fully into a throw. He needs to have quick feet so he can get out from under center and time up with the routes being run.

He also should have quick hands and coordination in order to quickly get a good grip on the football and get the ball in position to throw on quick hitting routes, such as three-step slants, hitches, or hot routes.

And of course, the ability to move within the pocket and scramble in order to keep plays alive is crucial and something QB's like Brady, Manning, and Brees all do very well.

My point in explaining all of this is that Sanchez has the necessary athleticism to play in the NFL right now. He is very well developed in this area. I really did not find a weakness in Mark's game. I think he has room to improve, but all good quarterbacks do.

Stafford on the other hand struggled in a few of these areas. His flexibility is not great and you can see this really in two ways.

First, in the pocket, he often does not step into his throws, mainly because he does not bend his knees very well. Outside the pocket when he is scrambling he does not do a good job of squaring his shoulders and it looks like he has a tough time doing so.

Also, he takes too many sacks because he does not have the foot quickness or strength in the lower body to get away from defenders. Plus, his slow feet often lead him to be late in his drop and as a result he throws later than he should on a given route, which allows defenders to jump on his throws.

I will say that Matthew is a good enough athlete that he doesn't always need to stride into his throws to throw a strike, but he often loses accuracy when just flinging it.

Mental awareness, instincts, and decision-making is another area I am very concerned about Stafford and think Sanchez has a definite upper hand.

Sanchez is a fourth-year junior so he has an extra year in a college program over Stafford, even though he's played fewer game snaps. Don't forget though that Sanchez was competing with John David Booty in 2006 for the starting QB job so he was afforded a lot of quality snaps in practice that year and also started three games in 2007.

Plus, he played in basically an NFL system w/ NFL terminology. Sanchez also rarely, if ever throws the ball up for grabs and generally throws to the most open receiver or just throws the ball away.

He is a good ball-handler in that he sells play-action well and has pretty good technique in keeping the ball tight while in the pocket. He does get a little lazy when outside the pocket and lost a few fumbles this season.

Stafford, on the other hand, struggled in many of these same areas.

First off, he is only three years out of high school, and although he's seen many more college snaps, it has been in a much simpler offense. Many say it is an NFL offense, but really only in the sense that many of the snaps are taken from under center, and the fact they line up in the I-Formation a lot. They do not do a lot from a formation standpoint and their routes are pretty simple.

That said, Stafford does display the ability to make all the NFL throws. However, his technique is not great, from the feet up. He winds up a bit, almost like McNabb or Leftwich, which is okay when you have a cannon like all three do.

But what are the knacks on those guys? Well, it's the same as with Stafford; they are not accurate passers. Even on short throws, Stafford is very inaccurate.

If you count short throws as anything within 15 yards, as I did, has was only accurate on 59 percent of his passes. If you make it 10 yards, as many evaluators do, his accuracy actually drops down to 55 percent. The deep ball in my opinion needs to be counted at least at 15 yards.

When you grade these, he is accurate on exactly 50 percent of these passes.

Now compare these numbers, which are raw and do not take any other scenario into account, to Sanchez. Once again, counting throws intended to be within 15 yards or shorter, Sanchez was accurate 76 percent of the time. If you make the criteria 10 yards or shorter, he is accurate 78 percent of the time. On deep throws he was 66 percent.

I will say there have been quarterbacks in the past who were much more accurate even than Sanchez, but they were four-year starters and/or played against weaker competition, which is definitely relevant.

Now let's compare scenario passing. Sanchez hits throws with 70 percent accuracy when he is throwing on the run. Stafford is literally half the quarterback of Sanchez in this department as he only hits on 35 percent when on the run.

But perhaps the most important stat, especially if you consider the likely winner of this debate ends up playing for a team with an offensive line that is less than desirable, is the ability to throw accurately under pressure.

Granted, Sanchez was pressured less by game and obviously by number since I have less tape on Sanchez. That being said, Sanchez is accurate on two-thirds, or 66.7 percent of his passes when being pressured. Stafford, on the other hand, was accurate on only 38 percent of his passes.

Other than the factors mentioned above, I see the two as pretty equal. Both have good size, appear to be good leaders, although Stafford does tend to look a little lost or scared sometimes, and have very naturally strong arms and bodies.

Both are guys who have the ability to push the ball down the field and make big-time throws, although Sanchez right now is much more consistent in doing so.

I have a feeling both will interview fairly well with coaches and GMs. They will probably take a page out of the Matt Ryan playbook and wear a suit and tie to his interviews at the Combine (by the way, when I heard that about him last year, it immediately changed my opinion of the guy from decent potential to franchise QB, and I just had a feeling he was going to be special).

The pair seem to be that kind of person. But I think film never lies. Even if Stafford improves his footwork and flexibility by the time he throws in front of scouts and coaches some time in March, there will still be a question about decision-making.

For me, this all leads me to think Sanchez is the better of the two. It remains to be seen if there are any other quarterbacks worth mentioning in this discussion. I've heard Josh Freeman is good (haven't graded him though b/c I don't have any game film for him), but most still say this a two QB race.

If you ask me, there is no race. Sanchez is in the clubhouse and Stafford has two holes to play to make up two shots.

Next time (hopefully tomorrow, although I start school), I will introduce the prospects at the running back position and find out who is the top guy at that position. At this time, I really do not have as good a method for evaluating these guys, but I will watch the film of five guys, instead of two, to find out.

I will look at Knowshon, "Beanie", LeSean McCoy, Percy Harvin, and Shonn Green of Iowa. I think all five can potentially stake claim, although I think it will likely come down to the first two.

Toad
02-05-2009, 10:43 PM
and link...

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/113741-matthew-stafford-or-mark-sanchez-the-debate/show_full

Mecca
02-05-2009, 10:49 PM
This is going to make someone mad, most of the anti QB people consistently say "Stafford is fine but he's gonna be gone and I don't want Sanchez"

Chiefshrink
02-05-2009, 10:50 PM
neither, trade down and get more picks:clap:

Buehler445
02-05-2009, 10:53 PM
I didn't read the article, but from the limited exposure I have seen with both of these guys, I want Sanchez.

Flame away.

Reaper16
02-05-2009, 10:54 PM
Answer: whichever one is left at #3.

Mecca
02-05-2009, 10:54 PM
neither, trade down and get more picks:clap:

I want to put your head between that smileys hands and have him squeeze it until it pops like a zit.

Toad
02-05-2009, 11:00 PM
This is going to make someone mad, most of the anti QB people consistently say "Stafford is fine but he's gonna be gone and I don't want Sanchez"

It's okay for people to get a little hot. Here, I'll throw a log on the fire:

"We have got to get a QB this off-season!" - Toad

Deberg_1990
02-05-2009, 11:00 PM
neither, trade down and get more picks:clap:

of course. Quality QB's can be found in the 6th and 7th rounds. See Tyler Thigpen.

Ebolapox
02-05-2009, 11:08 PM
honestly? neither would hurt my feelings.

1) stafford started for three years in the sec. they didn't always have the best offensive talent, he had pressure on him, and looked good under pressure for the most part. cannon for an arm. I mean, literally a fucking howitzer (arm strength isn't the most important thing, but it's important). he showed the ability to improvise, call the correct audible, and put his team in the right position. he'd be my pick by a VERY slight edge.

2) sanchez... possibly has a higher ceiling than stafford. only problem? one year starter (fuck you, jd booty) [heh, I said fuck you booty]. showed great poise under pressure. played with more talent on offense (shit, do they even have a RB who isn't a five star recruit?) than stafford... he's a guy you probably sit for a year on the bench while he gets used to the speed of the nfl. I'd sit stafford for at least half a year, but he's more nfl ready because of the three years started in the sec (which just churns out nfl talent on a yearly basis).

honestly? sanchez may be better within five years. stafford is more ready now. I'd be stoked if we got either (as long as our coaching staff knows how to develop a QB).

Reerun_KC
02-05-2009, 11:11 PM
neither, trade down and get more picks:clap:

ROFL

True Fan....

Frosty
02-05-2009, 11:21 PM
I would be happy with either but I would prefer Sanchez. I think he has that extra swagger and leadership that a franchise QB needs (along with the physical skills).

Reerun_KC
02-05-2009, 11:27 PM
I would be happy with either but I would prefer Sanchez. I think he has that extra swagger and leadership that a franchise QB needs (along with the physical skills).

I will go with this!

ChiefRon
02-05-2009, 11:45 PM
I'd prefer Sanchez only because I've read that his work ethic is second to none, and I haven't heard that about Stafford. But I'd be cool with either one, given they both have the talent to succeed.

beach tribe
02-05-2009, 11:59 PM
After all that has happened this off-season landing Sanchez will be the icing on the cake. I think he has the potential to be a perennial PBler. If the rams select him, I will hate them for all eternity. C'MON Pioli!! Make me JIMP.

Plus I would look great in my new #6 Jersey.

Pasta Giant Meatball
02-06-2009, 12:14 AM
Definately Sanchez. The more I see and read about him, the more I like him over Stafford and everyone else at 3 overall.

Gravedigger
02-06-2009, 12:15 AM
IMHO if Stafford is there then we take him, if Sanchez is there we will trade down so other teams can bid big to get him and get Maluaga. I'm callin it!

ChiefsCountry
02-06-2009, 01:48 AM
Either one will make me happy.

Mecca
02-06-2009, 01:56 AM
Either one will make me happy.

I'm going to now head over to the coalition where they will tell me Thigpen is a better player than Sanchez and Stafford combined and we should draft Crabtree...

Then I will want to kill them through the computer, so just a moment.

ChiefsCountry
02-06-2009, 02:00 AM
I didnt like Ryan at all, I will admit that I was wrong. Stafford and Sanchez are both alot better prospect than Matt Ryan. They are what you want as a QB.

Mecca
02-06-2009, 02:01 AM
I didnt like Ryan at all, I will admit that I was wrong. Stafford and Sanchez are both alot better prospect than Matt Ryan. They are what you want as a QB.

They have stronger arms...

I don't think Stafford has quite the same head for the game Ryan or Sanchez does but he's the one with the supreme arm.

ChiefRon
02-06-2009, 02:04 AM
They have stronger arms...

I don't think Stafford has quite the same head for the game Ryan or Sanchez does but he's the one with the supreme arm.

This is why I prefer Sanchez, maybe not as experienced, but everything I hear about him is his passion for and knowledge of the game and strong work ethic, would that be an accurate assessment?

Mecca
02-06-2009, 02:06 AM
Sanchez is one of those "It" guys, there's just something about him.

warrior
02-06-2009, 07:53 AM
Ive watched Stafford more around 10 games Sanchez only 3 but liked his leadership and decision making ability,s more. Sanchez would be my choice.

BigMeatballDave
02-06-2009, 08:05 AM
Sanchez is one of those "It" guys, there's just something about him.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwk_yU6P0oY&feature=related :D

bevis369
02-06-2009, 08:28 AM
:popcorn:
:fart::Bartee:

CoMoChief
02-06-2009, 08:37 AM
neither, trade down and get more picks:clap:

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Bravo Mr Shrink,.....Bravo

CoMoChief
02-06-2009, 08:38 AM
Sanchez is one of those "It" guys, there's just something about him.

That something is that he plays for U$C, which means you're in love with him.

jojomontana
02-06-2009, 08:43 AM
I think it's ridiculous to think that we don't need a quarterback. There are very few successful teams that don't have a consistant, intellegent, accurate QB with leadership abilities. As it stands currently, the Chiefs don't have the personnel to make it without an outstanding field general.

Look at the Falcons' turnaround. I know that Matt Ryan isn't in every draft, but there're fewer Thigpens under center winning playoff games.

That being said, personally, I'm good with Stafford OR Sanchez if we draft a QB. (And I mean that, I'd actually have to flip a coin to decide.) But if that's not the plan, we certainly need to find a good 'un SOMEWHERE.

Tchoupitoulas
02-06-2009, 08:50 AM
Ok, long term lurker chiming in here. Although not a huge Georgia fan, I have lived in Atlanta the past 5 years and have watched a lot of Georgia football with Georgia alums. Stafford is soft physically and soft in the head. He is a doughy primadonna. If there is an "it" factor he has the opposite of that. And the amazing thing is that every Georgia fan I know, agrees with this. He is not a winner, he is not a team guy, he does not inspire fellow players or fans, he feels that he is entitled to greatness, he is not tough, and he is not very smart. Can he throw a deep ball - yes, but that's it. How this guy is percieved as a top pick is way beyond me. Any person who touts this guy as special either has not watched him play more than just casually or has no idea what the hell they are talking about. That includes all the so called draft gurus at the major media outlets. This guy will set back any team that drafts him with a top pick for years. Do not want.

beach tribe
02-06-2009, 08:52 AM
:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

Bravo Mr Shrink,.....Bravo

You.

MahiMike
02-06-2009, 09:59 AM
That was a great article. Obviously someone has a lot of time on their hands to break down that much film. There are a lot of traits that make a great QB. Arm strength is just one of them. One thing that definitely worries me about Stafford (that I didn't know before) is his "windup" delivery. Having lived thru the Leftwich experience in Jax, I can say you want to stay clear of a guy without a quick delivery. A QB's most important pass is the short one that keeps the chains moving. Not saying Stafford is as bad as Leftwich but it doesn't bode well.

duncan_idaho
02-06-2009, 10:22 AM
pretty impressive breakdown from the Bleacher Report guy, and spot-on, at least on Stafford.

I haven't seen nearly as much of Sanchez, so I don't know how accurate that breakdown is, but I have been impressed with what I have seen of Sanchez (unfortunately didn't DVR and save but one USC game this year).

I'm really glad Sanchez came out. He's a QB I definitely think is worth taking at No. 3. I still see Stafford as a guy you'd rather take in the 10-20 range.

And I don't think an extra year of full-time starting duty (Stafford 2006 and Sanchez's 2007 play time aren't that far apart) makes Stafford more NFL ready. Sanchez played in a better system, for longer and under a better development team, and he is far more polished in terms of accuracy and decision making than Stafford at this point.

Inspector
02-06-2009, 11:13 AM
The other day I heard that Sanchez was dirty.

MahiMike
02-06-2009, 11:36 AM
Ok, long term lurker chiming in here. Although not a huge Georgia fan, I have lived in Atlanta the past 5 years and have watched a lot of Georgia football with Georgia alums. Stafford is soft physically and soft in the head. He is a doughy primadonna. If there is an "it" factor he has the opposite of that. And the amazing thing is that every Georgia fan I know, agrees with this. He is not a winner, he is not a team guy, he does not inspire fellow players or fans, he feels that he is entitled to greatness, he is not tough, and he is not very smart. Can he throw a deep ball - yes, but that's it. How this guy is percieved as a top pick is way beyond me. Any person who touts this guy as special either has not watched him play more than just casually or has no idea what the hell they are talking about. That includes all the so called draft gurus at the major media outlets. This guy will set back any team that drafts him with a top pick for years. Do not want.

Wow.