QB Class Starting to Look Like S&@*

[BigCatDaddy]

Anyone else disappointed with the way this QB class is starting to pan out after looking very promising?

Newton has gone Hollywood
Gabbert is scared to throw at the combine
Locker went to hell as a Senior
Mallett being the 2nd coming of Ryan Leaf

Ponder is starting to look like the prize QB in this draft to me at this point.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by Bewbies

I'd take any of the QB's thought to be 1st or 2nd round prospects, except Locker, over Cassel.

You sir, are a gambler.

You should just learn to play the odds a little better. None of the other guys has enough upside to offset their risk for me. Newton not included obviously.

If you like Mallet, you are MUCH better off going with Kaepernick later. Good arm, size, athletic, can make plays with his feet. Not as flashy as the bigger school guys. Not working with nearly the talent either.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by aturnis

That is just silly.

5 WR's against a base 4-3 defense for almost all of the first 3 quarters. At least two of the WR's were covered by white Iowa linebackers. Yeah, Gabbert tore up those 5-10 yd. routes against linebackers. Whooo-ee! Not impressed. He didn't get a hell of a lot done, sure his yds. were higher than Stanzi's in the game, but his yds/completion and yds/attempt were much lower.

Iowa defense is kind of like the Chiefs in that they don't mind you gaining yards, they just don't want you to score TD's. They play sound, technical football and hope that if they play their assignments correctly, you will make drive killing mistakes, or mistakes that lead to a turnover. If you play sound football, they have no choice but to try to stop you outright.

There were multiple seeds he threw into tight coverage on third and long, and even his first pick, the pass to Jackson, was a good pass that the dumbass WR tipped up for an easy interception.

Stanzi's garbage stats were grossly inflated by that 3rd down catch and run at the end of the game, and a reeruned blown coverage by Carl Gettis. There was no comparison between the two, even for the purposes of undermining Gabbert.

[Bewbies]

Originally Posted by aturnis

You sir, are a gambler.

You should just learn to play the odds a little better. None of the other guys has enough upside to offset their risk for me. Newton not included obviously.

If you like Mallet, you are MUCH better off going with Kaepernick later. Good arm, size, athletic, can make plays with his feet. Not as flashy as the bigger school guys. Not working with nearly the talent either.

The 2 guys I liked most stayed put, Foles and Luck. No college prospect ever looks perfect, guys like Matt Ryan, Sanchez, Stafford, Freeman, Rodgers, Philip Rivers etc all had warts and flaws. Eli Manning was the only guy I can remember in recent years where people were convinced he was IT. I'd take most of the guys I listed above him OVER Eli at this point.....

The reason we never sniff shit in the playoffs is because we refuse to gamble.

When you look at the # of QB's taken in the first round that win Super Bowls, at some point you have to come to the conclusion that they are a good risk to take. It's not like taking an OT in the first is any safer, or has anywhere near the upside. We had the best LT of all time and never won a playoff game....

Newton, Gabbert, Mallett and perhaps Ponder aren't perfect, but all look to have a huge upside. That's something I do not see from our current QB, who is almost 30 now.

[Bewbies]

I'll add if trading into the 2nd round and netted us another 1st next year, and could land Foles, I'd probably take that option...

But since there are no guarantees, if I had a shot at a QB close to my 21 slot I'd probably take it this year.

[aturnis]

This is why I don't like Mallett.

"Tony Softli of ESPN 101 St. Louis reports that Arkansas QB Ryan Mallett did not declare for the 2010 NFL draft due to "heavy rumors" that he was addicted to drugs.
Per Softli, "A lot of people are comparing Mallett to Ryan Leaf." We've heard the rumors and Leaf comparisons plenty, but they're now being confirmed by an ESPN employee who used to work as Rams director of player personnel and was the Panthers' scouting director. Softli suggests that Mallett will be given a hair follicle test at the Combine to determine if he's used recently. Mallett heads to Indy with more red flags than any draft-eligible prospect."

"NFL Draft Monsters has a policy of not publishing a story without two independent confirmations. We were approached this week, by a source inside the Arkansas program who told us the he has personally witnessed Mallett use both marijuana, and cocaine. This corroborates an account given to us a few months back, that we had been unable to substantiate.

Both sources spoke on the condition of anonymity, and NFL Draft Monsters has a policy of not compensating sources in any way for stories."

An NFL QB doesn't have time for coke and pot. He's shown he can be a hell of a player, then he has a 3 INT day against Bama. I would be all over him if it weren't for the drugs. I won't mind if we pick him, just need to find a way to keep him out of trouble.

[aturnis]

If all off field issues were moot, I'd definitely rank Newton and Mallett ahead of Gabbert. I'm actually glad he'll get taken early, let someone else over spend for him.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

There were multiple seeds he threw into tight coverage on third and long, and even his first pick, the pass to Jackson, was a good pass that the dumbass WR tipped up for an easy interception.

Stanzi's garbage stats were grossly inflated by that 3rd down catch and run at the end of the game, and a reeruned blown coverage by Carl Gettis. There was no comparison between the two, even for the purposes of undermining Gabbert.

Gabbert went 5-4 on 3rd downs plus an interception. So really, throwing, he converted 50%, which is a pretty good number, especially for some of the situations he was put in. My point though is, the Iowa defense didn't bring the house, they played base in those situations and he had plenty of time. When you have that much time, and five wideouts, some being covered by linebackers, you are going to have a pretty good chance of finding an open receiver. A better chance than a typical pro style QB would have against a nickel D. That is why Iowa did so badly against spread and air raid teams all season. They rarely ever left their base set.


Also on the Stanzi comment. That is what he has done since day one. He developed such good timing with his receivers, that he was able to hit them in stride and allow them to run after the catch, led to a lot of big plays. Rarely hangs a guy out to dry.

[Bewbies]

Originally Posted by aturnis

Gabbert went 5-4 on 3rd downs plus an interception. So really, throwing, he converted 50%, which is a pretty good number, especially for some of the situations he was put in. My point though is, the Iowa defense didn't bring the house, they played base in those situations and he had plenty of time. When you have that much time, and five wideouts, some being covered by linebackers, you are going to have a pretty good chance of finding an open receiver. A better chance than a typical pro style QB would have against a nickel D. That is why Iowa did so badly against spread and air raid teams all season. They rarely ever left their base set.


Also on the Stanzi comment. That is what he has done since day one. He developed such good timing with his receivers, that he was able to hit them in stride and allow them to run after the catch, led to a lot of big plays. Rarely hangs a guy out to dry.

Please tell me you want us to draft Stanzi.

[aturnis]

Later, sure. Haven't I said that many a time already? Look up dumb ****.

[BossChief]

Stanzi in the third would be a good pick.

I cant wait for the total and complete meltdown here when we trade up in the third or trade back into the third after making our selection to take him.

It will be epic.

I also think its interesting how almost everyone would love to draft Gabbert (myself included) and ignore his boneheaded throws in pressure situations, but uuse the same thing against Stanzi as a damning trait.

[aturnis]

I believe Mayock said yesterday that he though Stanzi would go in the second. About where Kiper had him a couple months back. We'll see, there are a lot of players out there.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by BossChief

boneheaded throws in pressure situations.

Iowa, and....

[suds79]

Originally Posted by aturnis

I believe Mayock said yesterday that he though Stanzi would go in the second. About where Kiper had him a couple months back. We'll see, there are a lot of players out there.

I was listening to ESPN's First Draft podcast the other day. Kiper likes Stanzi. Thinks with his size, completion percentage, etc that he'll go in the 2nd.

McShay wasn't as high on him.

[aturnis]

I just think it's funny how the two most respected draft analysts think he's a 2nd round talent, but the Missou homers wouldn't touch him with a ten foot stick. They want to act as though Iowa's not a respected program and Missou's on another level. Whatever though...

[BossChief]

Originally Posted by aturnis

I believe Mayock said yesterday that he though Stanzi would go in the second. About where Kiper had him a couple months back. We'll see, there are a lot of players out there.

Seems that they agree with my assessment of him...just like last year with Tony Mo.

That's ok though, Kiper and Mayock are obviously Iowa homers too