It's an interesting argument and one that Bradford dealt with leading up to the draft.

How much of it is 'locking on' to his WR and how much of it is him having his first read open? I mean hell, the kid completed 70% of his passes and is going to be the guy throwing passes to 2 guys that will be drafted in the first 2 rounds.

It's clear that he wasn't getting passes knocked down every time he let them go.

So sure, oftentimes he threw to his first read - because his first read was there to throw to. Should he have gone onto #2 when #1 was open? And you can try to argue that he was forcing balls into the #1 read if you want but that means 1 of 2 things A) You're wrong - at a 72% completion clip, he very likely had open guys or B) You're right...and he's incredibly accurate at squeezing balls into tight spaces to that #1 read.

There's not really room for anything else when the guy had a the completion rate that he had. Either his guy was open, in which case throwing to the #1 read is both expected and desired, or he's capable of hitting a flea off a dogs ass and was squeezing passes into covered #1 reads at a 70% rate.

We have this weird "have to have a rolex!" attitude for linemen, but "timex is ohhh-kay!" at QB.

It's like people think we get some kind of bonus points for finding a QB in the 3rd round, or the 5th round, or the 6th round. Regardless of the fact that not a single one of them has ever turned into anything for us.

It's too much of a risk to draft one in the first round! But it's not too much of a risk to gamble the future of the franchise on Brodie Croyle or Ricky Cassel or Tyler Pigpen or any of the rest of that long line of broke-dick nobody's that the fanbase has fallen in love with.

To me, it comes down to this: there's no guarantee that a QB picked at #1 will be a franchise player. The only guarantee is that you won't ever draft a franchise QB if you don't actually, you know, ever try to draft one.

Exactly.

And I would add that, in addition to his completion percentage, he only threw 6 INTs in 13 games.

:clap:

I love you. No homo.

It's more of a "can only take a Rolex" if it's the QB at draft time.

Nobody's willing to use 1.1 on a guy that may only end up the 15 best QB in the league. But here's the thing - on this team, the 15th best QB in the league would mean more than just about any other draft pick available. And it would at least come with some upside.

It's bizarre to me how gunshy some people are at the QB position.

first, it isn't even true...watching 3 minutes of spliced together clips on youtube doesn't provide a basis for making such a claim

second, it is impossible that someone as terrible as they portray Geno, who LITERALLY stares at one and only one wr EVERY play could produce the numbers he did....6 ints in 518 attempts...4,200 yards...71% completion...not...****ing...possible

i'm tired of having to take youtube opinions seriously

To me it comes down to this:

A guy picked at #1 carries a high overall grade, even if he's a reach. NOBODY is going to draft a guy with a 2nd or 3rd round grade 1st overall.

And 1st round QBs have an EXPONENTIALLY higher success rate in the NFL vs. QBs drafted anywhere else.

It's all about rolling the dice. Are you betting on snake eyes or are you betting on every number 3 through 11.

i heart you

Good post. It's one of the things that makes predicting all the results of college QB's so difficult. If a guy isn't getting punished for taking his first read all the time, does it mean he is Matt Cassel or that he just was able to make that work. If something is working you can't blame a guy for doing it. He is trying to help his team win the game. Can't go out there and rip through your reads just to make yourself look like a pro. There are plenty of times you see Geno go through his reads quickly only to make the right choice.

One of the tough decisions about drafting somebody is that you have future pros going against boys in college. If Geno was able to get his first read to work as often as he did, you can't just assume he loves to lock on to his first read. Not at the rate that it worked for him.

Let's throw out some career numbers just for shits and giggles: he's over 65% on his career, he threw 98 TDs against 21 INTs, and in three years as a starter he threw more than 2 picks in a game exactly once. That's one time in 39 games. In those same 39 games, he throw more picks than TDs exactly 3 times.

Career: 988-1465 (67.4%) for 11662 yards, 98 TD, 21 INT

This is exactly what I tell ANYONE who talks crap about there not being a QB worth taking #1 overall this year.

If he so obviously forced balls into guys, you'd go into something like a man-over coverage and have a safety spy Bailey or Austin. Those interception figures would be significantly higher.

I just don't buy the 'lock on' argument.

A fair argument would be "We don't know that he can cycle through his progressions quickly" because he really doesn't have to that often; his #1 is often open. It's a fair question, but not a fair criticism.

But the progression of that argument - "We know he can't cycle through his progressions because he doesn't do it" doesn't fly.

Call it an unknown and I'll listen. Then I'll point out the strengths that he has clearly demonstrated and say that those are good enough for me to take the risk. Call it something he can't do and I'll just say you're full of shit because there's nothing in time at WV to suggest that he cannot and does not go through progressions well when needed.

As I've typed this post I've decided that this is the biggest problem with the anti-Geno crowd: They do not recognize the clear distinction between a question and a criticism.

You can question whether or not he's able to do something without saying that he can't. The former is fair, the latter is absurd, at least in this instance.

People are talking about Alex Smith and Matt Flynn as the starter. We haven't learned anything from the last 20 years. It's battered fan syndrome. Drafting is too much of a risk, let's go back to the well one more time, maybe it'll work, why would we want to gamble on a Geno Smith or a Tyler Wilson when going with Grbac's and Cassel's and Huard's and Quinn's have gotten us so many playoff wins in the last 20 years.

It would be nice to get a veteran like Flynn to tutor a Barkley or Smith.

It's amazing how they don't understand that guys like Alex Smith or Flynn hold as much risk and time invested as any of these rookies. Not to mention the massive risk of trying to the first time in a while to win a SB with a game manager.