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 The Meat Dragon

not from center!

meh

maybe he was a victim of circumstance (bad supporting cast)

but, and this is just from my stupid little eye test, all I see is bust

I could be wrong, I don't know...I'm not basing it off of anything other than first impression and his stupid hair (and a less than impressive college career which resulted in many MU fans turning on the guy even)...

that's it

I'm no expert...just watched the combine and watched the strut in some steps...

I liked Ponder...I went from liking Newton to stating today that "I guess I still wouldn't take a black QB after all"...Stanzi looked terrible...no interest in Kaepernick...

so yeah

if we go QB I want Ponder or that red head Dalton...but Ponder reminds me most of a Pioli guy and his media session had me thinking he conducts himself like Brady and Rodgers kind of do

Please tell me how Stanzi looked terrible.

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Gabbert isn't #1 by default, he's #1 because he has a tremendous set of physical tools and elite intangibles.

Meh, in any of the last 2 drafts he doesn't sniff #1 talk. He may have gotten picked ahead of Clausen, but b/c people didn't like Clausen, many b/c of personality/attitude/character type things.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Gabbert isn't #1 by default, he's #1 because he has a tremendous set of physical tools and elite intangibles.

I agree that his upside is fantastic... but he is still "default" due to things beyond his control... like a lack of talent around him ... he hasn't really been given a chance to showcase his talents like other clear cut #1 QBs have...

I am a Gabbert fan, but let's not get carried away.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by aturnis

Meh, in any of the last 2 drafts he doesn't sniff #1 talk. He may have gotten picked ahead of Clausen, but b/c people didn't like Clausen, many b/c of personality/attitude/character type things.

Compare him to Sam Bradford:

Bradford was more accurate.

Gabbert gets the edge in height, weight, durability, and arm strength. The system is a wash.

From an intangibles standpoint, it would be a wash, and Bradford would get the edge for winning more (although having vastly superior talent) at the college level.

Gabbert is a much better prospect than Sanchez was, and he went (deservedly) in the top 5.

You also have to consider that a lot of this is driven by the needs of the teams at the top:

This isn't like 2009 or 2010:

Carolina just spent a 2nd on a QB
Denver just spent a 1st on a QB
Buffalo claims they like their QB
Cincy has millions invest in Palmer
Whisenhunt is coaching for his job and can't afford to develop a QB


If these teams were saying that they needed a QB at the top, the QBs themselves would be viewed quite a bit differently. Perception helps create the reality of the prospect.

Also, the ridiculous Luck hype, like claiming he was the best QB prospect EVAR, helped to downplay the ability of the other QBs.

This isn't as simple as you postulate.

[aturnis]

If Gabbert has better arm strength than Bradford, why can't he throw the deep ball?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by aturnis

If Gabbert has better arm strength than Bradford, why can't he throw the deep ball?

Some people have good arm strength they just aren't accurate with passes down the field. A lot of it is a function of footwork and mechanics. Watch his throwing motion, there is a slight rocking hitch before he throws. Even then he has a lightning quick release.

And you have to be some kind of dumbass to think that Sam Bradford's arm is in the same league as Gabbert's.

[veist]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Cam Newton on NFL Network talking about frustration of throwing to new receivers and Gabbert is the stupid one for not throwing at the combine. @ you guys.

If you can't look good throwing to a receiver in shorts, its a mechanics problem not your receivers being scrubs. Case and point, Newton looked bad because his release point was all over the goddamn place and he would just put his plant foot wherever.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Compare him to Sam Bradford:

Bradford was more accurate.

Gabbert gets the edge in height, weight, durability, and arm strength. The system is a wash.

From an intangibles standpoint, it would be a wash, and Bradford would get the edge for winning more (although having vastly superior talent) at the college level.

Gabbert is a much better prospect than Sanchez was, and he went (deservedly) in the top 5.

You also have to consider that a lot of this is driven by the needs of the teams at the top:

This isn't like 2009 or 2010:

Carolina just spent a 2nd on a QB
Denver just spent a 1st on a QB
Buffalo claims they like their QB
Cincy has millions invest in Palmer
Whisenhunt is coaching for his job and can't afford to develop a QB


If these teams were saying that they needed a QB at the top, the QBs themselves would be viewed quite a bit differently. Perception helps create the reality of the prospect.

Also, the ridiculous Luck hype, like claiming he was the best QB prospect EVAR, helped to downplay the ability of the other QBs.

This isn't as simple as you postulate.

Nothing you say here is wrong... but admit that Gabbert's stock has benefited by a lack of comparable talent AND his stock has been hurt by the lack of talent and wins in college...

The people who actually WATCHED him play know better, but that doesn't change public perception.

I think we agree here, I am just stating the obvious perception biases he has going against him... hell, I had a bar argument with a guy that said no WAY Gabbert was a 1st round QB... and then he came back 3 days later and apologized after he had a chance to actually do some research.

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by bowener

I hope everybody thinks they look like shit and the Chiefs can take Gabbert at 21.

Let him sit for 2 or 3 years behind Cassel.

3 yrs? How about just one?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Originally Posted by AustinChief

Nothing you say here is wrong... but admit that Gabbert's stock has benefited by a lack of comparable talent AND his stock has been hurt by the lack of talent and wins in college...

The people who actually WATCHED him play know better, but that doesn't change public perception.

I think we agree here, I am just stating the obvious perception biases he has going against him... hell, I had a bar argument with a guy that said no WAY Gabbert was a 1st round QB... and then he came back 3 days later and apologized after he had a chance to actually do some research.

I don't doubt any of that. Kornheiser said on PTI that Gabbert is "The best QB in the history of the world that no one has ever seen throw."

That's true for most. But a lot of people here HAVE seen him play, and that's why some of the objections tossed out, like claiming his arm isn't that good, are completely specious. And I know aturnis has seen him play because he's an Iowa fan.

[AustinChief]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Some people have good arm strength they just aren't accurate with passes down the field. A lot of it is a function of footwork and mechanics. Watch his throwing motion, there is a slight rocking hitch before he throws. Even then he has a lightning quick release.

And you have to be some kind of dumbass to think that Sam Bradford's arm is in the same league as Gabbert's.

Kinda hard for Gabbert to prove he can throw the deep ball when there isn't an open WR deep to throw to.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Let's also remember that Gabbert won 18 games in two years with mediocre DI offensive talent.

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Start at about :35, watch the next three throws, and say that Gabbert can't throw a deep ball. He completes a bomb and two post corner routes that require both tremendous arm strength and touch

[aturnis]

Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins

Some people have good arm strength they just aren't accurate with passes down the field. A lot of it is a function of footwork and mechanics. Watch his throwing motion, there is a slight rocking hitch before he throws. Even then he has a lightning quick release.

And you have to be some kind of dumbass to think that Sam Bradford's arm is in the same league as Gabbert's.

Actually just getting a feel for your barometer of arm strength. I keep hearing a lot of guys on here knock on my boy Stanzi for his arm strength. I don't see it. The only route he has trouble throwing is the same one Gabbert has trouble with, and thats the seam pattern. IMO it's more of a combo of strength, and touch than anything and shouldn't be a barometer of arm strength.

Outside of that, I like a guy with a good mix of arm strength and accuracy more than anything. Newton can throw it a mile, but he won't be as accurate as you are looking for, at least not until his dropback becomes second nature.

I think Stanzi can throw the ball on a rope, and was more consistently accurate than most of the QB's in his group yesterday, save Mallet. I don't understand why people don't want to see that?

['Hamas' Jenkins]

Gabbert can fit the ball into windows that very few QBs in the NFL can.

Your guys with top tier arm strength are:

Cutler
Stafford
Rodgers
Roethlisberger
Vick
Flacco


He's got an arm like those guys. His arm strength is actually being underrated because of the freakish nature of this QB class.

When was the last time a QB class had guys with arms like Mallet, Kaepernick, Gabbert, and Newton? Ever? I don't think so. In almost any year, any one of those guys would have the top arm in their class or for a few years. What this class lacks in polish it more than makes up for in physical traits. You won't see another QB class with such raw physical talent, albeit largely unharnessed, for a long, long time.