I'm not talking about stats, I'm talking about decision making. Look at the game that Freeman played against Louisville, or the one he played against Tech.

Well, you could look up the fact that Stafford has played against far more defenses that actually have NFL caliber players (4 of the top 25 so far, FWIW) and his talent level is shit. He's also missing his LT and has three freshman on his line.

So your argument is supported purely by opinion. Gotcha.

Did you happen to see Stafford against Vandy or UT? Very spotty.

I'm in SEC country, I know all about the situation at UGA. He has young wideouts, but they were all highly-touted players coming in. AJ Green and Massaquoi are hardly shit, and far surpass anything Freeman has to work with. Plus Georgia has a defense that can keep them in games, and prevents Stafford from having to go batshit crazy in the passing game to try to keep his team in it.

I'm pretty sure there has never been a perfect QB prospect...

By the way, I'm a huge Stafford fan, and have supported him many times on here for the last few months. But I also think Freeman is getting ignored way too much. That's really my only point.

Of course my argument is supported by opinion All Draft concepts are supported by opinion.

There is a skill to evaluating prospects, but nothing, nothing that could be quantified as anything even remotely approaching fact.

What I can tell you is that if you switched out Josh Freeman with say Jevan Snead, we are having the same conversation about the latter and don't know WTF Freeman even is.

Agree, so why the hell are you even arguing that Freeman should be in the conversation? It's ridiculous, and just makes you look like you have nothing to do but argue for the sake of arguing. Freeman is on every NFL Draft analyst's radar, and the regular names have talked about him quite a bit (Kiper, McShay, Scott Wright, etc).

On pure physical tools, he's up there with Jamarcus Russell, who was a freak and ended up as the #1 overall pick, even though he had the "inconsistent" label throughout his college career. He hasn't done great yet, but I still think he'll end up being a very good QB in this league if he gets more protection. But obviously, this shows that tools and athleticism win out in the eyes of scouts.

I know that most scouts are going to go with tools, but I think there is a clear difference in the ability that Stafford has shown to play the position opposed to Freeman. Other than 2 inches of height, there isn't anything you look for in a QB that Freeman does better than Stafford. Stafford is more than mobile enough, so that's a non-issue.

Explain.

That would be Oher. :(

Oh well. There are a lot of good tackles in the draft this year.

Are you deliberately ignoring my posts? :grr:

I really think given good coaching he is potentially better than Russell.

This is a 37 page thread, posts go unnoticed every now and then, especially when Bradford vs. Stafford bitchfests take up half of it.

That's what I've been saying too.

Oh!

So is anybody else seeing a QB that will likely declare this year that you can build a franchise around? There seems to be guys with potential, but almost no one worth a top 5.

Matt Stafford has decision making problems that seem to plague his play.

Tim Tebow's never looked like an NFL QB.

Sanchez looks good but we just haven't seen a lot from him.

Colt McCoy looks like the only QB I'd want to risk building my team around, and he needs to add weight. I don't know if he's a Top 10 QB anyway.

I haven't been impressed with the top DEs either.

At this rate, I think this team should invest in either Crabtree or one of those three elite OTs, to move Albert back inside -- or over to the right side.

Michael Oher, Andre Smith, and Eugene Monroe. All three are probably better than Jake Long was last year, and one of them will be available for us. If we're going BPA, it's hard not to see one of these guys falling in our lap.

LT: Oher
LG: Waters
C: Niswanger
RG: Albert
RT: Taylor

???