PDA

View Full Version : The Rogue Scout


BigCatDaddy
04-25-2011, 04:37 PM
http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ms-silver_rogue_scout_enjoys_label_042511

ROSEVILLE, Calif. – The Rogue Scout sits in a small office near the front door of his suburban Sacramento home, remote control in hand. He’s staring at a TV set that’s at least a decade old, examining game tape of one of the 2011 NFL draft’s top prospects, a quarterback who’ll likely be snatched up with one of the first five selections.

The scout has seen this movie before, and he doesn’t like it.

“What does this guy do that anybody likes?” Dave Razzano asks, pressing the rewind button. “Every pass is an underneath curl route! It’s third-and-10 in the red zone – throw a [expletive] touchdown pass. But look at this: A three-yard dump-off. That’s all he does. He threw the ball just about every play, and he had 16 touchdown passes last season.

More From Michael SilverUltimate Mock Draft VII: QB heavy at the top Apr 20, 2011 Palmer, lockout put Bengals in a tough bind Apr 14, 2011 “This is the guy somebody’s gonna take in the top 10? Based on what? Trust me, they’re guessing.”

Razzano, a respected talent evaluator during a two-decade-plus career with the San Francisco 49ers, St. Louis Rams and Arizona Cardinals, is talking about former Missouri quarterback Blaine Gabbert, and he’s not holding back. He has always given unvarnished and sometimes unpopular opinions – Razzano believes his dismissal from the Rams following the 2005 season was triggered by a heated pre-draft argument with then-general manager Charley Armey in which he denigrated future No. 1 overall selection Alex Smith as a backup-caliber quarterback – and since being fired by the Cardinals following the 2009 draft in an apparent cost-cutting move, he’s been completely unencumbered by discretion.

A blogger named Danny Kelly recently referred to Razzano as a “rogue-opinion enthusiast,” and the son of the late, renowned 49ers scouting director Tony Razzano embraced the label and ran with it.

“When I thought about it, a rogue scout is a pretty good description,” says Razzano, who’s currently blogging in his own right (for Playmaker Mobile). “It’s someone who’s away from the horde, who doesn’t have any ties, who doesn’t give a [expletive]. I like it.”

Two Fridays ago at his home not far from the 49ers’ former Sierra College training-camp site where we first met in the late-’80s, Razzano and I watched film on Gabbert and other top prospects, dredged up some of his old reports and talked about the pitfalls of an imperfect process.

Razzano doesn’t claim to be perfect in his assessments; for example, the same year he denigrated Smith’s stock he graded Aaron Rodgers(notes) as having “mid-round value,” and we all know how that turned out. “That’s one report I’d like to burn,” Razzano said. However, he has shared enough prescient opinions over the years to convince me that his completion percentage is far higher than most of the men in his profession, beginning with the days before the 1991 draft, when he tipped me off to a lowly regarded Iowa defensive back named Merton Hanks. I talked up Hanks on the radio, the Niners took him in the fifth round,\ and he went on to become an All-Pro – nothing wrong with that equation.

Since then I’ve come to value Razzano’s evaluations and, more importantly, the conviction behind his opinions. Many men in his profession play it safe by offering assessments consistent with the general consensus among others in their organization, rival teams’ talent evaluators, or even media analysis. Razzano watches film and rates what he sees – and then he watches more film. There are many nuances that impact his grades, but in the end, he tries to keep it simple.

“I talk about the ‘excitement meter,’ ” he explained. “That’s the basic thing about scouting: Whenever you’re watching a player, when you turn on that tape, how friggin’ excited are you? I remember walking into the University of New Mexico [in 2000] and seeing tape of Brian Urlacher(notes) for the first time. I said, ‘Oh my God.’ I’d never seen anything like it. I got up and started pacing around the room. I couldn’t believe it.”



Gabbert’s yards per attempt were 6.71 in 2010, down from ’09 (8.07).

(US Presswire)

Suffice it to say that Razzano’s ‘excitement meter’ barely registered for Gabbert. Nor is he wowed by the draft’s other marquee quarterback, Heisman Trophy winner Cam Newton, who, in his mind, “has multiple red flags. You can’t take a chance on a guy like that on the No. 1 overall pick.”

Similarly, Razzano was down on former Washington quarterback Jake Locker – until he watched more tape.

“Everybody says he’s inaccurate,” Razzano said as Locker completed an intermediate pass against USC on the TV behind him. “He’s not – he throws a great ball! It’s a low-percentage offense. There’s never anybody open underneath, and he’s got no protection. You can see it if you look closely enough. People are stupid.

“[Brett] Favre went in the second round, right? If you look at their college stats, Favre and Locker are practically identical. Now look at this play: Tell me this guy doesn’t move like Favre, scramble like Favre, throw like Favre. Pretend he has the number four on his jersey. His release is a lot like Favre, too.”

Razzano paused the tape and, from a stack in the corner of the room, pulled out an old, handwritten 49ers draft board to review his and other decision-makers’ grades on Favre. No one in the organization foresaw greatness, but the offensive coordinator at the time was the Southern Mississippi quarterback’s biggest proponent. “[Mike] Holmgren liked him the most,” Razzano said, smiling at the revelation. If this were a movie, that would be classified as foreshadowing.

I asked Razzano if most coaches, scouts and general managers’ grades were so easily retrievable. “Not really,” he said. “And I disagree with that. You’ve got to go back and look – how else do you have a report card? How else do you know who to listen to?

“If you had a big Wall Street company and told six people to invest $20 million each, wouldn’t you keep track of who invested well and promote those employees accordingly?”



“I talk about the ‘excitement meter.’ That’s the basic thing about scouting: Whenever you’re watching a player, when you turn on that tape, how friggin’ excited are you?”

– Dave Razzano
Razzano has some definite ideas about how and why teams make so many mistakes on draft day. He’s not a big fan of the increasing tendency of talent evaluators to rely on measurables. Said Razzano: “Height, weight, speed, strength – guys fall in love with the numbers, and then coaches justify the lack of [collegiate] production by saying, ‘It was the scheme,’ or ‘He wasn’t coached right.’ The bottom line is, you have to trust the tape.”

Another trap cited by Razzano: Teams often reach for a perceived need, rather than selecting the player they’ve rated the highest. First-round picks, in particular, can be impacted by an owner and/or general manager’s desire to fall into line with media projections (and to therefore receive high marks from reporters who offer instant draft grades).

“If you look at the drafts from 2000 to 2007, 44 top-15 picks have busted out,” Razzano says. “Why is that? Well, for one thing, everybody wants to hit a home run. My attitude is this: Stay away from red flags; just take a solid player. The same goes for later in the draft. You know what guys look for in late rounds? Projects, guys with potential. Again, just pick solid guys. They’ll be productive.”

Razzano’s refusal to fall in line with the widespread belief that Smith was a big-time quarterback prospect led to a heated confrontation with Armey in a meeting at Rams headquarters a couple of weeks before the ’05 draft. Razzano’s report on the former Utah quarterback opined that Smith was “not as good as our backup, Jeff Smoker. Backup only for the Rams.”

Armey, who declined to discuss the incident after it was initially reported by Santa Rosa Press Democrat’s Matt Maiocco, solicited the input of other scouts and coaches who’d studied far less tape (if any) of Smith, who ended up being picked No. 1 overall by the 49ers.

“There were 12 guys around the table, and Charley had them rate him on every attribute – arm strength; accuracy short; accuracy long; judgment; game management; ad-lib ability under pressure. And he put a highlight tape on the projector. I mean, obviously, he’s gonna be 30 out of 30, and every throw’s a great pass … it’s a highlight tape!

“He said, ‘Are you gonna sit there and be stubborn? Why can’t you see what we see?’ I got heated. I said, ‘I’ve watched seven tapes, and I’m not changing my grade.’ He told one of our assistants, ‘Go get all seven tapes.’ I started screaming, ‘You’re gonna look at highlight tapes? That’s how Akili Smith got drafted!’ [Scout] Tom Marino had me in a bear hug. I just lost my mind.”

As another example of the evils of groupthink, Razzano cited Cardinals GM Rod Graves’ mandate that scouts grade each player “for the league,” rather than merely assessing his value for their specific needs.



Razzano sports his Super Bowl rings with the Niners and Rams.

(Courtesy Dave Razzano)

“Everyone else makes you grade for the team,” Razzano said. “But in Arizona, you’re told to assign a value for the whole league, and it can come back to bite you. That’s how we got [underachieving defensive tackle] Alan Branch(notes) in ’07. He was projected as a first-round pick, and we’re sitting there in our draft room saying, ‘Oh [expletive], he’s gonna slip,’ and now he’s up at the top of our board, and Rod trades up to get him [with the first pick] in the second round. And none of us [scouts] liked the guy.”

Blocking out the prevailing noise and forming his own opinions has always been a strength of Razzano’s. When I asked him to name an off-the-radar player in this year’s draft that he regards as a potential Pro Bowl performer, his eyes lit up excitedly.

“There’s a defensive tackle at USC named Jurrell Casey, and he’s the protypical nose [tackle],” Razzano said. “He’s like another Michael Carter, who we got in the fifth round in San Francisco – one of the all-time steals. I see he’s rated as the ninth-best defensive tackle. If they do a [mock] re-draft in a few years, he’ll be a top-seven pick.”

Razzano showed me some tape of Casey from last year’s game against Cal, and the visual evidence was impressive.

“Watch him split the double-team here,” Razzano said as Casey burst between the Bears’ center and left guard. “Look at that nasty explosiveness. I’m telling you, it’s [like the Pittsburgh Steelers’] Casey Hampton(notes). He has short-area quickness and enough of a motor to satisfy me. You have to realize, defensive linemen don’t all have great work ethic. That’s why they’re big. But [Jurrell Casey’s] a naturally explosive guy, and they’re hard to find.”

The rest of my afternoon with Razzano was similarly illuminating. He talked up a pair of potential sleepers at wide receiver: Hawaii’s Greg Salas and San Diego State’s Vincent Brown. I listened intently, given that Razzano tipped me off to undrafted free agents Wes Welker(notes) and Davone Bess(notes) when each future NFL standout was coming out of college.

Razzano was especially excited by tape of Nevada’s Colin Kaepernick, highlighting a downfield throw the quarterback made against Cal last September. “Watch this play,” Razzano said. “It’s a real NFL play. There’s pressure … he slides up and keeps his eyes downfield … then whoop, he throws it back across his body. That’s a tough throw.

“He’s so effortless. People say he’s got a slow release, but I’ve seen him get rid of it. He’s a good decision-maker – he’s smart and tough, and if he has to pull it down and run it, he can. And he’s as good a passer on the deep and intermediate throws as I’ve seen [from this year’s crop]. I’d love to see the Raiders take him; I think he’d fit there perfectly.”



Locker was steadily under pressure last season.

(US Presswire)

Before I departed, Razzano wanted to give me one, final look at his favorite quarterback in this year’s draft. “Let’s watch Favre,” he said before catching himself. “I mean Locker. Man … I’m calling the guy ‘Favre.’ ”

Watching Locker roll to his right and release the ball just before an oncoming pass rusher arrived, Razzano exclaimed, “Look, he puts his shoulder into it. Look! It’s just like Favre. If people can’t see that …”

I could almost feel the Excitement Meter shaking with seismic abandon. Razzano paused the tape and continued: “My first exposure to Locker, watching a game on TV, I did not like what I saw. He threw errant passes and wasn’t very accurate. But then I saw the tape and realized it’s not him. He had more drops [by receivers] than anyone in the Pac-10, and he was running for his life – his line was probably the worst in the conference. And he still made plays with the game on the line. The guy’s a winner.”

Razzano hit play on the remote and paced around the room as Locker faked a handoff, rolled to his left and threw a touchdown pass to a receiver in the middle of the end zone.

“Look at him here,” Razzano said, “throwing against the grain …”

On a metaphorical level, this was something to which the Rogue Scout could absolutely relate.

aturnis
04-25-2011, 07:27 PM
Good read. I like the info and he makes very good points.

Saul Good
04-25-2011, 07:55 PM
I would LOVE to see us grab Jake Locker in the first and Jurrell Casey in the second.

Hog Farmer
04-25-2011, 07:59 PM
Damn , that's waay too much reading .

tyton75
04-26-2011, 07:00 AM
Good read.. grab Locker in the 2nd, should probably still be there

Count Alex's Wins
04-26-2011, 07:05 AM
This guy can't play NT or 3-4 DE. Too bad, he's a beast.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zcyqOyompFg?hd=1" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

kepp
04-26-2011, 07:32 AM
“What does this guy do that anybody likes?” Dave Razzano asks, pressing the rewind button. “Every pass is an underneath curl route! It’s third-and-10 in the red zone – throw a [expletive] touchdown pass. But look at this: A three-yard dump-off. That’s all he does. He threw the ball just about every play, and he had 16 touchdown passes last season.

1. Missouri's offense last season was very balanced. To say "he threw the ball just about every play" is ridiculous. ref: http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2010/Internet/ranking_summary/2010000000434teamoff.html (439 rushing attempts, 490 passing attempts)
2. 3 yard dump-offs is all Missouri does in the red zone. Ask any MU football fan what upsets them the most and that's the answer you'll get. He's going to say the QB sucks because of the awful play calling?

The guy evidently knows little about Missouri or it's offense. Then he gives Locker a pass because he's convinced he's in a low percentage offense?

Von Dumbass
04-26-2011, 07:38 AM
Good read.. grab Locker in the 2nd, should probably still be there

He will get picked between 10-15.

milkman
04-26-2011, 08:04 AM
1. Missouri's offense last season was very balanced. To say "he threw the ball just about every play" is ridiculous. ref: http://web1.ncaa.org/mfb/2010/Internet/ranking_summary/2010000000434teamoff.html (439 rushing attempts, 490 passing attempts)

I believe that is what is called embellishing to make a point.

2. 3 yard dump-offs is all Missouri does in the red zone. Ask any MU football fan what upsets them the most and that's the answer you'll get. He's going to say the QB sucks because of the awful play calling?

The play calling may be the problem, but when I'm watching a QB, I want to see one that has the ability to adjust on the fly as the play develops.

I didn't watch Missouri, so I can only speculate, and I would guess that's what this guy was looking for also.

The guy evidently knows little about Missouri or it's offense. Then he gives Locker a pass because he's convinced he's in a low percentage offense?

What he's saying from his study is that Locker adjusted and made plays in spite of a lack of talent around him, while Gabbert did not.

Again, to be clear, I didn't watch either.
I am only commenting on what I believe this guy is pointing out.

kepp
04-26-2011, 08:15 AM
I believe that is what is called embellishing to make a point.
That's beyond embellishing...it's making stuff up to create a point that doesn't exist.

The play calling may be the problem, but when I'm watching a QB, I want to see one that has the ability to adjust on the fly as the play develops.

I didn't watch Missouri, so I can only speculate, and I would guess that's what this guy was looking for also.
I can see that point of view, but those "3 yard dump-offs" he's seeing are what the MU coaches call "an extension of the running game", and given that all the receivers are downfield blocking on those plays, TD passes are pretty unlikely. The only on-the-fly adjustments he could do is run a totally different play. Again, he didn't take the time to understand MU's offense before bagging on one player.

Chiefnj2
04-26-2011, 08:17 AM
This guy can't play NT or 3-4 DE. Too bad, he's a beast.

<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/zcyqOyompFg?hd=1" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Did you read the article?

milkman
04-26-2011, 08:22 AM
That's beyond embellishing...it's making stuff up to create a point that doesn't exist.


I can see that point of view, but those "3 yard dump-offs" he's seeing are what the MU coaches call "an extension of the running game", and given that all the receivers are downfield blocking on those plays, TD passes are pretty unlikely. The only on-the-fly adjustments he could do is run a totally different play. Again, he didn't take the time to understand MU's offense before bagging on one player.

If the receivers are downfield blocking on a pass play before a pass is thrown, that's OPI.

Count Alex's Wins
04-26-2011, 08:24 AM
Did you read the article?

Sure did. He is not coming to KC to play NT, though. Doesn't fit the prototype.

kepp
04-26-2011, 08:25 AM
If the receivers are downfield blocking on a pass play before a pass is thrown, that's OPI.

Not if its behind the LOS...in college. I guarantee those are the plays he's talking about.

milkman
04-26-2011, 08:28 AM
Not if its behind the LOS...in college. I guarantee those are the plays he's talking about.

If they are behind the LOS, then they aren't downfield.

kepp
04-26-2011, 08:42 AM
If they are behind the LOS, then they aren't downfield.

Didn't you say you don't watch Missouri? I do, and I know the plays he's talking about. The targeted receiver is behind the LOS or just out of the backfield and the other receivers immediately go 3 or 4 yards down field to block.

We have a few different versions of this play. One is the traditional WR screen where the receiver is lined up all the way outside and the blockers (other WRs) try to create an outside running lane. The other version they run a lot in the red zone has the pass going to the TE behind the LOS, who then curls up inside.

Beyond that we use the bubble screen a lot, but usually not that much in the red zone...at least not closer in.

What this guy is insinuating is that "almost all" (his words, not mine) of Missouri's red zone plays are passes designed to have a receiver in the end zone and that Gabbert is simply not getting the ball to them. That is patently false.

milkman
04-26-2011, 08:44 AM
Didn't you say you don't watch Missouri? I do, and I know the plays he's talking about. The targeted receiver is behind the LOS or just out of the backfield and the other receivers immediately go 3 or 4 yards down field to block.

We have a few different versions of this play. One is the traditional WR screen where the receiver is lined up all the way outside and the blockers (other WRs) try to create an outside running lane. The other version they run a lot in the red zone has the pass going to the TE behind the LOS, who then curls up inside.

Beyond that we use the bubble screen a lot, but usually not that much in the red zone...at least not closer in.

What this guy is insinuating is that "almost all" (his words, not mine) of Missouri's red zone plays are passes designed to have a receiver in the end zone and that Gabbert is simply not getting the ball to them. That is patently false.

Just pointing out your inconsistency.

If the receivers are downfield, they aren't behind the LOS.
If they are behind the LOS, they aren't downfield.

kepp
04-26-2011, 08:46 AM
Just pointing out your inconsistency.

If the receivers are downfield, they aren't behind the LOS.
If they are behind the LOS, they aren't downfield.

The blocking receivers are downfield. The intended receiver is not.

milkman
04-26-2011, 08:53 AM
The blocking receivers are downfield. The intended receiver is not.

Which brings us back to the original point.

If there are receivers downfield, then Gabbert should have the ability to make in play adjustments.

Reaper16
04-26-2011, 09:08 AM
What he's saying from his study is that Locker adjusted and made plays in spite of a lack of talent around him, while Gabbert did not.


He didn't really say that. He said that Locker "made plays with the game on the line" (though with only six regular season wins, he couldn't have made many). Did Gabbert NOT make plays with the game on the line?

milkman
04-26-2011, 09:19 AM
He didn't really say that. He said that Locker "made plays with the game on the line" (though with only six regular season wins, he couldn't have made many). Did Gabbert NOT make plays with the game on the line?

I think he's saying that he made plays, but the players around him let him down.

Everybody says he’s inaccurate,” Razzano said as Locker completed an intermediate pass against USC on the TV behind him. “He’s not – he throws a great ball! It’s a low-percentage offense. There’s never anybody open underneath, and he’s got no protection. You can see it if you look closely enough. People are stupid.





“I talk about the ‘excitement meter.’ That’s the basic thing about scouting: Whenever you’re watching a player, when you turn on that tape, how friggin’ excited are you?”

– Dave Razzano
Razzano has some definite ideas about how and why teams make so many mistakes on draft day. He’s not a big fan of the increasing tendency of talent evaluators to rely on measurables. Said Razzano: “Height, weight, speed, strength – guys fall in love with the numbers, and then coaches justify the lack of [collegiate] production by saying, ‘It was the scheme,’ or ‘He wasn’t coached right.’ The bottom line is, you have to trust the tape.”

Another trap cited by Razzano: Teams often reach for a perceived need, rather than selecting the player they’ve rated the highest. First-round picks, in particular, can be impacted by an owner and/or general manager’s desire to fall into line with media projections (and to therefore receive high marks from reporters who offer instant draft grades).

“If you look at the drafts from 2000 to 2007, 44 top-15 picks have busted out,” Razzano says. “Why is that? Well, for one thing, everybody wants to hit a home run. My attitude is this: Stay away from red flags; just take a solid player. The same goes for later in the draft. You know what guys look for in late rounds? Projects, guys with potential. Again, just pick solid guys. They’ll be productive.”

Razzano’s refusal to fall in line with the widespread belief that Smith was a big-time quarterback prospect led to a heated confrontation with Armey in a meeting at Rams headquarters a couple of weeks before the ’05 draft. Razzano’s report on the former Utah quarterback opined that Smith was “not as good as our backup, Jeff Smoker. Backup only for the Rams.”

Armey, who declined to discuss the incident after it was initially reported by Santa Rosa Press Democrat’s Matt Maiocco, solicited the input of other scouts and coaches who’d studied far less tape (if any) of Smith, who ended up being picked No. 1 overall by the 49ers.

“There were 12 guys around the table, and Charley had them rate him on every attribute – arm strength; accuracy short; accuracy long; judgment; game management; ad-lib ability under pressure. And he put a highlight tape on the projector. I mean, obviously, he’s gonna be 30 out of 30, and every throw’s a great pass … it’s a highlight tape!

“He said, ‘Are you gonna sit there and be stubborn? Why can’t you see what we see?’ I got heated. I said, ‘I’ve watched seven tapes, and I’m not changing my grade.’ He told one of our assistants, ‘Go get all seven tapes.’ I started screaming, ‘You’re gonna look at highlight tapes? That’s how Akili Smith got drafted!’ [Scout] Tom Marino had me in a bear hug. I just lost my mind.”

As another example of the evils of groupthink, Razzano cited Cardinals GM Rod Graves’ mandate that scouts grade each player “for the league,” rather than merely assessing his value for their specific needs.



Razzano sports his Super Bowl rings with the Niners and Rams.

(Courtesy Dave Razzano)

“Everyone else makes you grade for the team,” Razzano said. “But in Arizona, you’re told to assign a value for the whole league, and it can come back to bite you. That’s how we got [underachieving defensive tackle] Alan Branch(notes) in ’07. He was projected as a first-round pick, and we’re sitting there in our draft room saying, ‘Oh [expletive], he’s gonna slip,’ and now he’s up at the top of our board, and Rod trades up to get him [with the first pick] in the second round. And none of us [scouts] liked the guy.”

Blocking out the prevailing noise and forming his own opinions has always been a strength of Razzano’s. When I asked him to name an off-the-radar player in this year’s draft that he regards as a potential Pro Bowl performer, his eyes lit up excitedly.

“There’s a defensive tackle at USC named Jurrell Casey, and he’s the protypical nose [tackle],” Razzano said. “He’s like another Michael Carter, who we got in the fifth round in San Francisco – one of the all-time steals. I see he’s rated as the ninth-best defensive tackle. If they do a [mock] re-draft in a few years, he’ll be a top-seven pick.”

Razzano showed me some tape of Casey from last year’s game against Cal, and the visual evidence was impressive.

“Watch him split the double-team here,” Razzano said as Casey burst between the Bears’ center and left guard. “Look at that nasty explosiveness. I’m telling you, it’s [like the Pittsburgh Steelers’] Casey Hampton(notes). He has short-area quickness and enough of a motor to satisfy me. You have to realize, defensive linemen don’t all have great work ethic. That’s why they’re big. But [Jurrell Casey’s] a naturally explosive guy, and they’re hard to find.”

The rest of my afternoon with Razzano was similarly illuminating. He talked up a pair of potential sleepers at wide receiver: Hawaii’s Greg Salas and San Diego State’s Vincent Brown. I listened intently, given that Razzano tipped me off to undrafted free agents Wes Welker(notes) and Davone Bess(notes) when each future NFL standout was coming out of college.

Razzano was especially excited by tape of Nevada’s Colin Kaepernick, highlighting a downfield throw the quarterback made against Cal last September. “Watch this play,” Razzano said. “It’s a real NFL play. There’s pressure … he slides up and keeps his eyes downfield … then whoop, he throws it back across his body. That’s a tough throw.

“He’s so effortless. People say he’s got a slow release, but I’ve seen him get rid of it. He’s a good decision-maker – he’s smart and tough, and if he has to pull it down and run it, he can. And he’s as good a passer on the deep and intermediate throws as I’ve seen [from this year’s crop]. I’d love to see the Raiders take him; I think he’d fit there perfectly.”



Locker was steadily under pressure last season.



Watching Locker roll to his right and release the ball just before an oncoming pass rusher arrived, Razzano exclaimed, “Look, he puts his shoulder into it. Look! It’s just like Favre. If people can’t see that …”



I could almost feel the Excitement Meter shaking with seismic abandon. Razzano paused the tape and continued: “My first exposure to Locker, watching a game on TV, I did not like what I saw. He threw errant passes and wasn’t very accurate. But then I saw the tape and realized it’s not him. He had more drops [by receivers] than anyone in the Pac-10, and he was running for his life – his line was probably the worst in the conference. And he still made plays with the game on the line. The guy’s a winner.”

Razzano hit play on the remote and paced around the room as Locker faked a handoff, rolled to his left and threw a touchdown pass to a receiver in the middle of the end zone.

“Look at him here,” Razzano said, “throwing against the grain …”

On a metaphorical level, this was something to which the Rogue Scout could absolutely relate.

What I take from that is that he got the ball where it needed to be, but he can't throw it, and catch it too.

And again, I didn't watch either Gabbert or Locker.

I am only commenting on how I intrepert what he's trying to say.

kepp
04-26-2011, 10:10 AM
Which brings us back to the original point.

If there are receivers downfield, then Gabbert should have the ability to make in play adjustments.

No, the BLOCKING receivers are downfield...3 or 4 yards...and they're blocking.

milkman
04-26-2011, 10:16 AM
No, the BLOCKING receivers are downfield...3 or 4 yards...and they're blocking.

Was Chase Daniel limited by the same playcalling?

kepp
04-26-2011, 10:20 AM
Was Chase Daniel limited by the same playcalling?

No, he had Dave Christiansen as the OC. And while we're comparing the Daniel & Gabbert eras, Daniel also had a much better stable or receivers.

Chiefshrink
04-26-2011, 10:23 AM
He missed on Aaron Rodgers. Nuff said, case closed and article irrelevant.

milkman
04-26-2011, 10:27 AM
He missed on Aaron Rodgers. Nuff said, case closed and article irrelevant.

You're a dumbass.

Everyone misses.

kcbubb
04-26-2011, 10:43 AM
I didn't watch Missouri, so I can only speculate.....

.......
Again, to be clear, I didn't watch either.......



In other words, you don't know what you are talking about. So, shut up you idiot. Don't make points when you don't know what you are talking about. You tard.

Kyle DeLexus
04-26-2011, 10:46 AM
Didn't you say you don't watch Missouri? I do, and I know the plays he's talking about. The targeted receiver is behind the LOS or just out of the backfield and the other receivers immediately go 3 or 4 yards down field to block.

We have a few different versions of this play. One is the traditional WR screen where the receiver is lined up all the way outside and the blockers (other WRs) try to create an outside running lane. The other version they run a lot in the red zone has the pass going to the TE behind the LOS, who then curls up inside.

Beyond that we use the bubble screen a lot, but usually not that much in the red zone...at least not closer in.

What this guy is insinuating is that "almost all" (his words, not mine) of Missouri's red zone plays are passes designed to have a receiver in the end zone and that Gabbert is simply not getting the ball to them. That is patently false.

That doesn't sound like a "3 yard dump off" to me. From your discription and his, it sounds like you are refering to different plays.

Every pass is an underneath curl route! It’s third-and-10 in the red zone – throw a [expletive] touchdown pass. But look at this: A three-yard dump-off.

I'd like to think, if it's what you are saying he'd say WR screen. From his discription it sounds like Gabbert is indecisive and dumps it off to a checkdown option.

And if your OC was cosistently calling a WR screen on 3-10's he should be gone.

kcbubb
04-26-2011, 10:48 AM
And again, I didn't watch either Gabbert or Locker.

I am only commenting on how I intrepert what he's trying to say.

So, you don't know anything, but you are interpreting? What are you an interpreter? You suck.

You noncommital, sand bagging, chicken.

Grow some nuts. You have watched these guys enough. Just come out and say that you like Locker and that is why you are defending this guy.

DaKCMan AP
04-26-2011, 10:50 AM
In other words, you don't know what you are talking about. So, shut up you idiot. Don't make points when you don't know what you are talking about. You tard.

Douchetastic!

kepp
04-26-2011, 10:53 AM
That doesn't sound like a "3 yard dump off" to me. From your discription and his, it sounds like you are refering to different plays.

I'd like to think, if it's what you are saying he'd say WR screen. From his discription it sounds like Gabbert is indecisive and dumps it off to a checkdown option.

And if your OC was cosistently calling a WR screen on 3-10's he should be gone.

Whether it's the WR screen he's talking about or the bubble screen (next most likely), he's making incorrect assumptions. And, yes, our OC consistently calls WR screens on 3-10's...and most other downs for that matter.

Chiefshrink
04-26-2011, 10:56 AM
You're a dumbass.

Everyone misses.

You are a "walking tampon":thumb:

milkman
04-26-2011, 11:38 AM
In other words, you don't know what you are talking about. So, shut up you idiot. Don't make points when you don't know what you are talking about. You tard.

First, you dumbass, I said I haven't watched these guys, so in essence, I admit that I know absolutely nothing about these guys.

I am only trying to discover what this guy is trying to tell us about them.

Second, you dumbass, that has nothing to do with the fact, and this is fact, that everyone misevaluates players.
It is the nature of the job.

The fact that he made a bad evaluation does nothing to discredit him as a scout.

Could he be wrong on these evaluations?
Absolutely.

But he has been a scout for teams in the, so I, unlike your dumb ass, am not going to dismiss his opinion out of hand simply because he has missed.

So, you don't know anything, but you are interpreting? What are you an interpreter? You suck.

You noncommital, sand bagging, chicken.

Grow some nuts. You have watched these guys enough. Just come out and say that you like Locker and that is why you are defending this guy.

Fuck you, you worthless pile of moronacy.

I have never watched Gabbert, and I have only seen Locker once in his career.

So shut the fuck up, and if you must talk, talk about something you know about, which I assume is absolutely nothing, which brings us back to just shut the fuck up.

milkman
04-26-2011, 11:41 AM
In other words, you don't know what you are talking about. So, shut up you idiot. Don't make points when you don't know what you are talking about. You tard.

Do you have even a hint of a clue?

I have made the point, that you clearly are too stupid to understand, that I am only commenting on this scout's points, and have not made any attempt to voice any opinion about the players.

milkman
04-26-2011, 11:43 AM
And, ftr, shit for brains, the moment the scout made a comparison to Brett Favre when talking about Locker, that in and of itself would make me cringe at the idea of drafting him.

Reaper16
04-26-2011, 02:50 PM
I think he's saying that he made plays, but the players around him let him down.



What I take from that is that he got the ball where it needed to be, but he can't throw it, and catch it too.

And again, I didn't watch either Gabbert or Locker.

I am only commenting on how I intrepert what he's trying to say.
If that is his point, then it is a faulty one. It makes no distinction between the two players because Gabbert was certainly let down by his paltry squad of skill position players.

kcbubb
04-26-2011, 03:03 PM
I admit that I know absolutely nothing....

At least you admit that you are absolutely ignorant and have nothing to offer.

What a great translator you are though. Just kidding. You suck. ROFL

DJ's left nut
04-26-2011, 03:42 PM
Was Chase Daniel limited by the same playcalling?

If you have to ask this question, your opinion is void.

As to the article itself - I don't necessarily disagree with him, but what he calls 'guessing' is really called 'projecting.'

The tape of Gabbert isn't going to be full of NFL throws because he simply wasn't asked to make them. Nor were his WRs sent on routes along those lines. He ran the bastard son of the Run and Shoot and West Coast offense. It was a true piece of shit that Dave Yost foisted upon him.

That said, his arm strength is unquestionably there. And his accuracy on intermediate routes is good when his footwork is sound (though he will unload high on a fair occasion when he starts dancing in the pocket, which is certainly something that needs to be worked on). His leadership has been superlative and he's a football rat. To say that an NFL team is 'guessing' because they're drafting him based on his talent is like saying that the Chargers and Cowboys were 'guessing' when they took Merriman or Ware. It's not guessing, it's looking at a skill-set and making an educated decision as to whether or not that skill-set will translate to the NFL.

As to Locker - I still love the kid. I know a lot of people hate him, but I'd wet myself if we took him with a 2nd and wouldn't be angry if we took him with our 1st. I still think Locker's going to be a very good QB in this league. And as unfair as it is, Rodgers is the QB who plays a game most similar to his.

Chiefnj2
04-26-2011, 03:51 PM
The tape of Gabbert isn't going to be full of NFL throws because he simply wasn't asked to make them. Nor were his WRs sent on routes along those lines.

When they were in 4 and 5 receiver sets, his WR's weren't sent on NFL-like routes downfield?

DJ's left nut
04-26-2011, 04:04 PM
When they were in 4 and 5 receiver sets, his WR's weren't sent on NFL-like routes downfield?

Honestly? Very few. When they were, they were often later in the progression.

Jerrell Jackson has been marginalized in the offense because his hands aren't reliable enough. Moe doesn't have downfield speed; he's quick but he doesn't have great raw speed. He can also be knocked off his route fairly easily. Wes Kemp can't run routes for shit and still hasn't learned to catch a ball over his shoulder with any consistency. Michael Egnew is a TE; his downfield routes tend to be simple seam routes that aren't going to jump off the tape. Rolandis Woodland sucks. Etc... etc...

Jackson's probably the only guy on the squad that has the size, speed and agility to run legitimate downfield routes and actually get separation on the DB. Again, however, due to his erratic performance, the offense isn't geared to find a way to get him the ball down there like it was with Maclin or even Franklin before him. Moe runs them but he doesn't separate (he just never drops anything) so when Gabbert throws one downfield to him, he's throwing into very tight coverage and hoping Moe takes the ball away.

It's a combination of Yost simply not effectively running an offense and the Tigers WR corps being somewhere between flawed and horrible.

And lets also not pretend like he never threw more than 5 yards downfield. The guy didn't throw for 3,000+ yards in consecutive seasons exclusively through dump routes. He went downfield on occasion, but his offense and surrounding talent certainly were not geared to it. Consequently, if you're looking at a standard game tape, you're going to see a whole lot more short passing and you're going to walk away thinking primarily of that.

I don't think that guy understands the MU offense (or lack thereof) and I think he's entirely too convinced of his own omnipotence.

ChiefMojo
04-26-2011, 04:41 PM
Right or wrong the Mizzou offense doesn't lend itself to a NFL system. The passing tree the Tigers run is nothing like a NFL Pro-Style offense.

DJ's left nut
04-26-2011, 04:49 PM
Right or wrong the Mizzou offense doesn't lend itself to a NFL system. The passing tree the Tigers run is nothing like a NFL Pro-Style offense.

Absolutely right.

That's why it would've been foolish for Gabbert to stay another season. Next year the QB class could've been stacked (who knows anymore?) and he wasn't going to be more 'NFL-ready' after another year in his gimmick offense. If nothing else, he might have even more bad habits.

Gabbert needs to get to an NFL roster and get taught NFL-style quarterbacking. The learning curve will be steep, but I believe he has the physical and mental attributes necessary to succeed.

But hey, the 'rogue scout' says that such a statement is merely guessing. Seriously - that guy sounds like a complete douchebag.

ChiefMojo
04-26-2011, 04:54 PM
I think the 'rogue scout' is actually pretty darn good at his job, but the reason he is unemployed is because he IS a douchebag in general. I'm sure another team will pick him up in the near future, but he will still be a douchebag no matter if he is right or wrong.

milkman
04-26-2011, 06:57 PM
If you have to ask this question, your opinion is void.

I've stated over and over again that I am not offering an opinion on the players.

I am only trying to discern why this guy has reached the conclusions that he has.

Why is that so hard to understand?

milkman
04-26-2011, 07:01 PM
At least you admit that you are absolutely ignorant and have nothing to offer.

What a great translator you are though. Just kidding. You suck. ROFL

Once again, I'm sorry that you got butthurt when you offered up a horribly stupid trade scenario, with out having a clue on anything, and were lambasted for it.

But quit being a little bitch that acts like your boyfriend was stolen.

aturnis
04-26-2011, 07:10 PM
If you have to ask this question, your opinion is void.

As to the article itself - I don't necessarily disagree with him, but what he calls 'guessing' is really called 'projecting.'

The tape of Gabbert isn't going to be full of NFL throws because he simply wasn't asked to make them. Nor were his WRs sent on routes along those lines. He ran the bastard son of the Run and Shoot and West Coast offense. It was a true piece of shit that Dave Yost foisted upon him.

That said, his arm strength is unquestionably there. And his accuracy on intermediate routes is good when his footwork is sound (though he will unload high on a fair occasion when he starts dancing in the pocket, which is certainly something that needs to be worked on). His leadership has been superlative and he's a football rat. To say that an NFL team is 'guessing' because they're drafting him based on his talent is like saying that the Chargers and Cowboys were 'guessing' when they took Merriman or Ware. It's not guessing, it's looking at a skill-set and making an educated decision as to whether or not that skill-set will translate to the NFL.

As to Locker - I still love the kid. I know a lot of people hate him, but I'd wet myself if we took him with a 2nd and wouldn't be angry if we took him with our 1st. I still think Locker's going to be a very good QB in this league. And as unfair as it is, Rodgers is the QB who plays a game most similar to his.

Your boy Gabbert sounds exactly like my boy Ricky Stanzi, except Stanzi didn't play at MU.

MahiMike
04-26-2011, 07:25 PM
I'd like to hear more from these crusty old guys. They probably get very pissed when the GM ignores their 12 months work and pick some other hot prospect instead.

kepp
04-27-2011, 07:58 AM
I've stated over and over again that I am not offering an opinion on the players.

I am only trying to discern why this guy has reached the conclusions that he has.

Why is that so hard to understand?

The main problem I have with the guy's conclusions is that, in Locker's case, he says he can see he's a good QB in spite of his numbers because he played in a bad offense with below avg talent around him. But he doesn't bother to learn anything about Mizzou's offense, which suffered from similar attributes, before making up his mind about Gabbert. His bias, where ever it comes from, is obvious.

Chiefnj2
04-27-2011, 08:01 AM
The main problem I have with the guy's conclusions is that, in Locker's case, he says he can see he's a good QB in spite of his numbers because he played in a bad offense with below avg talent around him. But he doesn't bother to learn anything about Mizzou's offense, which suffered from similar attributes, before making up his mind about Gabbert. His bias, where ever it comes from, is obvious.

I think part of the argument is that Locker was asked to make low % throws downfield to really poor talent. Gabbert had 4-5 receiver sets and always seemed to checkdown immediately and get happy feet. He'd rather go with the more ballsy Favre-like try to make throws down field than the nervous safe thrower. He wanted to see Gabbert take a chance or two in the red zone and not throw the 1 yard pass.

DaKCMan AP
04-27-2011, 08:01 AM
His bias, where ever it comes from, is obvious.

As is yours. :thumb:

kepp
04-27-2011, 08:08 AM
As is yours. :thumb:

I'm absolutely biased, but I haven't been saying that Gabbert is better than Locker or vice-versa. I'm pointing out that the guy's conclusions are possibly flawed because he didn't bother to learn more about Mizzou's offense, and the state of Washington's offense was 75% of his argument that Locker was a good QB.

kepp
04-27-2011, 08:10 AM
I think part of the argument is that Locker was asked to make low % throws downfield to really poor talent. Gabbert had 4-5 receiver sets and always seemed to checkdown immediately and get happy feet. He'd rather go with the more ballsy Favre-like try to make throws down field than the nervous safe thrower. He wanted to see Gabbert take a chance or two in the red zone and not throw the 1 yard pass.

I understand and agree with that...in fact, "nervous" is a good description of Gabbert in the pocket. What the writer doesn't seem to understand is that most of Mizzou's red zone offense is 1-to-5 yard passes.

Chiefnj2
04-27-2011, 08:17 AM
I understand and agree with that...in fact, "nervous" is a good description of Gabbert in the pocket. What the writer doesn't seem to understand is that most of Mizzou's red zone offense is 1-to-5 yard passes.

IMO, Gabbert might have the worst pocket presence of the "top" 5-6 QB's in this years draft.

DJ's left nut
04-27-2011, 10:39 AM
IMO, Gabbert might have the worst pocket presence of the "top" 5-6 QB's in this years draft.

He and Newton are neck and neck in that category.

Yeah, Gabbert's pocket presence is pretty awful. Fortunately I do believe it can be taught. Just as nervousness in the pocket can be learned, it can be 'un-learned'. Look at Kurt Warner when he went to STL - he was perfect in the pocket. Then when Martz took over and left him out there to get pummeled, he suddenly looked like hell back there. When he got to NY, he started to improve and by the time he got to AZ he was right back to where he was in the early STL years.

A quarterback's pocket presense is really just a fancy way of saying his comfort level. Gabbert, if given time to adjust to the speed of the NFL game and a solid O-line, will absolutely be able to improve his pocket presense. His learning curve is going to be a steep one, but he has all the tools.