Matt Barkley To Announce 2012 NFL Draft Decision At 4 P.M. Press Conference

[DaKCMan AP]

USC’s Matt Barkley To Announce NFL Intentions Today
MATT BARKLEY, NCAA, USC | COMMENTS

USC quarterback Matt Barkley will announce his decision on whether or not he will return to school or enter the NFL Draft today at a press conference, ESPN’s Colin Cowherd said on his radio show this morning.

If the 21-year-old quarterback leaves school he is expected to be a top-10 pick in the draft, however some believe that if he were to stay in school for his senior season he would be a lock for the No. 1 overall pick next season.

This year Barkley led the USC Trojans to a 10-2 record, including a 7-2 mark in the Pac-12. As a result of NCAA sanctions, the Trojans were not eligible for postseason play, which means despite defeating UCLA 50-0 in their final game of the season, they were forced to watch as the Bruins represented the Pac-12 South in the conference title game.

This season Barkley threw for 3,528 yards and 39 touchdowns while only tossing seven interceptions.

http://tracking.si.com/2011/12/22/us...entions-today/

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

If we were drafting at 6 or 8 it was a hell of a lot more likely than at 16.

tanking doesn't exist bro

teams don't tank in the NFL

head coaches are paid to win games, not care about draft position

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Which assumes the impossibility of a trade up if our draft spot were top ten. The precise reason why the SD and Chicago wins were pointless is because of where it puts us right now. Barkley's decision doesn't validate those wins, it shows how damaging they were.

every win is pointless if you don't win the Super Bowl

so for the drafturbators it's 0-16 or Super Bowl...those are the only two acceptable outcomes

teams don't play to lose...Herm got that right

people need to get over that

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Short Leash Hootie

tanking doesn't exist bro

teams don't tank in the NFL

head coaches are paid to win games, not care about draft position

I have never once asked the Chiefs players or coaches to tank. No one has. Hoping the team loses in a lost season does not equal wanting the team to tank. They are completely discrete entities.

I'd actually like the Chiefs to play very well and lose in absolutely flukish fashion, precisely the opposite of what happened in Chicago and SD.

[suds79]

Originally Posted by tredadda

I wonder what people on here want to do now. Trade up and give up alot more for Luck or RGIII? Draft a second tier QB in the first round? Stick with what we currently have and have Cassel, Orton, and Stanzi battle it out for the starting job?

To trade up for Luck is impossible. Indy is making that pick. He's dead to me.

The trade up to RG3 is even more unlikely now. I'm all for making that move to get him but realistically, I don't see it happening. We're too far away.

Unless the Chiefs get in the Manning Sweepstakes, I suppose our only option now is to roll with Orton. If you can sign him to a 2 year deal? Fine. But he'll want more. I'd franchise him for 1 year (yes it's overpaying) and draft a QB next year high if there's not a guy they like in this year's draft.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by Short Leash Hootie

every win is pointless if you don't win the Super Bowl

so for the drafturbators it's 0-16 or Super Bowl...those are the only two acceptable outcomes

teams don't play to lose...Herm got that right

people need to get over that

This is also false.

Teams have to learn how to compete, there is no doubt, but without a QB you aren't going to be able to compete. If we were fortunate enough to start a rookie QB, I'd fight tooth and nail for every win in a 4-12 or 5-11 season, no matter its impact on draft position. But until we get that QB, we're stuck in neutral.

[Hootie]

well if Orton plays like he did against Green Bay I see no reason why he can't be a winning QB...and I see no reason why he can't start next year and still draft a QB in an early round.

Looking forward to seeing what he does against Oakland.

[tk13]

I get the idea... but I guess I just didn't think anybody was going to trade out of RG III. He's too dynamic of a player. I still think there's a chance he would've jumped Barkley. There are personnel people who like RG III over Luck. That might have something to do with this decision today.

And the flipside is, if you want to trade up that badly, you'll get it done. When the Jets wanted Sanchez or the Falcons wanted Julio Jones, they got it done. Of course there's no guarantee, but this whole thing is us playing around in fantasy land anyway.

[Hootie]

I'm just happy I have something to watch for...

Those Palko weeks were the least watchable Chiefs games in the history of me being a fan.

[Buckweath]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

This is also false.

Teams have to learn how to compete, there is no doubt, but without a QB you aren't going to be able to compete. If we were fortunate enough to start a rookie QB, I'd fight tooth and nail for every win in a 4-12 or 5-11 season, no matter its impact on draft position. But until we get that QB, we're stuck in neutral.

My thoughts exactly.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Jim Jones

Its hard to pass up the money, but if I were Barkley? No way in hell I'd leave. Who would pass up the opportunity to be the BMOC at USC for one whole year? I'm certain there are quite a few perks to that. Helps make the missed out millions a little easier.

Additionally - if he continues to progress at USC next season like he did this season, he'll be next year's Andrew Luck.

Barkley has serious momentum right now.

Or he could end up Leinerting himself.

I'd have gone, but he's evidently willing to gamble on himself and there's something to be said for that. The good news is that this really did appear to be a shallow QB class at the top anyway. Maybe his addition to next year's draft pool will help us more than being in this year's pool would have.

[suds79]

Originally Posted by Short Leash Hootie

well if Orton plays like he did against Green Bay I see no reason why he can't be a winning QB.

If he could play like he did last week, we'd have our franchise QB. He had over a 100 rating.

But we know that's not who he is. Kyle is a hot/cold guy. He's good for a 3 Int day sooner or later.

He's okay for now. And better than Cassel for sure. But not the answer.

[DaWolf]

All I know is that looking at the remaining QB's on the board to draft, and the free agent class available, when some of your top options to probably hit the market are going to be Kyle Orton and David Garrard and Jason Campbell, the GM's who have Matt Flynn and Ryan Mallet on their roster probably became a lot more attractive to QB needy teams...

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Short Leash Hootie

well if Orton plays like he did against Green Bay I see no reason why he can't be a winning QB...and I see no reason why he can't start next year and still draft a QB in an early round.

Looking forward to seeing what he does against Oakland.

19 points against the worst defense in football is hardly something to write home about. If he gets credit for all his yards and the win, then he needs to the one that you pin the lack of effective scoring on.

[whosyou]

Why would anyone want Manning? Old, hurt, and same old same old.

[Rain Man]

Originally Posted by tredadda

19 points against the worst defense in football is hardly something to write home about. If he gets credit for all his yards and the win, then he needs to the one that you pin the lack of effective scoring on.

My suspicion is that they aren't really the worst defense in football. When your offense is always giving you an enormous lead, I suspect you're giving up lots of yards due to catchup football and due to playing a "let them take 10 plays to get downfield when you're ahead by 28" type of prevent.