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/

[DJ's left nut]

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.

Yes and no.

There was a missed TD pass that was simply dropped by McClain. Another that Baldwin probably should have had and another that was just a timing issue between a QB and brand new receivers on a back-shoulder throw.

Those are 2 TDs that weren't his fault and another that was more a product of short prep time. There's reason to believe that a lot of that will either firm up or iron out over time.

The problem has never been 'Good Orton'. Everyone agrees that when Orton is right, he can be a very good quarterback. The problem is 'Bad Orton'. When Orton's not right, he's a turnover machine that can kill any team he's leading.

The key for Orton will be to cut back on the number of 'Bad Orton' games while also lessening just how bad he is when that guy emerges.

I don't see that as an impossible task, to be honest. He's definitely a viable option as a 2-3 year stop-gap while we take a stab or two at a 10-year option. Overpay the man if need be, but get a damn quarterback in here.

[Titty Meat]

Barkley is a dumbass.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

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.

That's definately possible, but we also marched up and down the field on them at will even when we had the lead. We just could not punch it in, except for a late TD. I have heard playcalling and dropped passes as the reasons for it, but it was the same playcalling and recievers that allowed for us to march up and down the field. So to blame playcalling and the recievers for the 1 TD then one must also say that it was GB's weak defense that allowed for us to move the ball so effortlessly and not the players or play calling.

[tredadda]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Yes and no.

There was a missed TD pass that was simply dropped by McClain. Another that Baldwin probably should have had and another that was just a timing issue between a QB and brand new receivers on a back-shoulder throw.

Those are 2 TDs that weren't his fault and another that was more a product of short prep time. There's reason to believe that a lot of that will either firm up or iron out over time.

The problem has never been 'Good Orton'. Everyone agrees that when Orton is right, he can be a very good quarterback. The problem is 'Bad Orton'. When Orton's not right, he's a turnover machine that can kill any team he's leading.

The key for Orton will be to cut back on the number of 'Bad Orton' games while also lessening just how bad he is when that guy emerges.

I don't see that as an impossible task, to be honest. He's definitely a viable option as a 2-3 year stop-gap while we take a stab or two at a 10-year option. Overpay the man if need be, but get a damn quarterback in here.

We might have to go that route although it makes me sick to think about. I highly doubt Pioli will trade up enough to get Luck or RGIII which are the only two QBs worth trading up for. No one else is in my opinion worth a first round selection. I don't want us to draft a second round caliber or later talent at QB in the first just for the sake of drafting a first round QB. That would be counter productive. For what it's worth, if I was in Pioli's position I would give up as many picks as needed to draft either Luck or RGIII.

[Caseyguyrr]

well that sucks he wont have a chance to get him this year

[Hootie]

Originally Posted by whosyou

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

If we could get Manning for reasonable compensation we'd immediately be a super bowl contender...

so why wouldn't we get Manning?

[Buckweath]

Originally Posted by tredadda

We might have to go that route although it makes me sick to think about. I highly doubt Pioli will trade up enough to get Luck or RGIII which are the only two QBs worth trading up for. No one else is in my opinion worth a first round selection. I don't want us to draft a second round caliber or later talent at QB in the first just for the sake of drafting a first round QB. That would be counter productive. For what it's worth, if I was in Pioli's position I would give up as many picks as needed to draft either Luck or RGIII.

This but forget about Luck, I`m thinking if ever the 1st overall pick is available, it could cost a lot more than some fans around here think.

We definitly have to trade up for Griffin if possible.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Short Leash Hootie

If we could get Manning for reasonable compensation we'd immediately be a super bowl contender...

so why wouldn't we get Manning?

Especially since it seems pretty likely that the Colts can't really trade him due to a poison pill in his deal.

More likely that they'd simply have to cut him. At that point, all he costs is money. Well shit - money's just money and I agree that this team is absolutely SB caliber with a healthy Manning.

The only question is whether or not he's actually healthy. We simply don't know the answer to that question.

If Manning checks out physically, throw a bunch of money at him for 3 years, get him a new RT (sorry, gonna go true-fan there; RT is easily our biggest need position on this team right now) and go after Tannehill, Foles or another toolsy quarterback in the 2nd round that you can develop behind him for 2 or 3 years.

Luck's a pipe dream; he's just not happening. And RGIII, while talented as all hell, is going to cost an entire draft and I just don't think he's worth that. Bringing Manning in to take advantage of the prime years of these guys while developing a young QB behind him to extend the prime of others is really a pretty good route.

[Micjones]

Jones/Foles/Tannehill here we come.

[The Bad Guy]

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.

I get this franchise QB or bust argument. However, saying that any wins are pointless because it takes us out of discussion for (player A) right now is absurd.

The QB is stocked with 2 franchise QBs now. There are too many variables that can happen in the draft where even if we lost both those weeks that those players wouldn't be available due to either someone in the top 3 taking Griffin after Luck, or a team trading up and giving a king's ransom to do so.

I just can't buy any argument that says wins are damaging to a franchise.

[Titty Meat]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Especially since it seems pretty likely that the Colts can't really trade him due to a poison pill in his deal.

More likely that they'd simply have to cut him. At that point, all he costs is money. Well shit - money's just money and I agree that this team is absolutely SB caliber with a healthy Manning.

The only question is whether or not he's actually healthy. We simply don't know the answer to that question.

If Manning checks out physically, throw a bunch of money at him for 3 years, get him a new RT (sorry, gonna go true-fan there; RT is easily our biggest need position on this team right now) and go after Tannehill, Foles or another toolsy quarterback in the 2nd round that you can develop behind him for 2 or 3 years.

Luck's a pipe dream; he's just not happening. And RGIII, while talented as all hell, is going to cost an entire draft and I just don't think he's worth that. Bringing Manning in to take advantage of the prime years of these guys while developing a young QB behind him to extend the prime of others is really a pretty good route.

I agree with this take. At this point Manning/Tannehill > Orton/Cassel

[The Bad Guy]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Especially since it seems pretty likely that the Colts can't really trade him due to a poison pill in his deal.

More likely that they'd simply have to cut him. At that point, all he costs is money. Well shit - money's just money and I agree that this team is absolutely SB caliber with a healthy Manning.

The only question is whether or not he's actually healthy. We simply don't know the answer to that question.

If Manning checks out physically, throw a bunch of money at him for 3 years, get him a new RT (sorry, gonna go true-fan there; RT is easily our biggest need position on this team right now) and go after Tannehill, Foles or another toolsy quarterback in the 2nd round that you can develop behind him for 2 or 3 years.

Luck's a pipe dream; he's just not happening. And RGIII, while talented as all hell, is going to cost an entire draft and I just don't think he's worth that. Bringing Manning in to take advantage of the prime years of these guys while developing a young QB behind him to extend the prime of others is really a pretty good route.

Really spot on.

I'm pissed as anyone that this draft sucks for qbs, but it's not a death blow.

If Manning is out there, pay him for 2 years and grab a guy the following year. We just can't sit idle though if he is with the potential to waste the prime years of the true superstars we have on this team.

[Old Dog]

Originally Posted by Rain Man

Plus he'll make almost double the money in the pros that he makes in college.

Coming from USC with the new NFL CBA, he would likely be taking a pay cut.

[boogblaster]

yes to luck .. no to rg3 .. yes to manning .. maybe to a 3rd rounder .. but still need sumone to lead a youngster .. ok with lookin to see what our youngster can do ......

[BigMeatballDave]

Originally Posted by Bo's Pelini

Barkley is a dumbass.

Why? He knows he's got a very good shot at being drafted #1 overall.

Smart move, IMO