Hello! Yes, I'm the FNG starting a thread. Posting in some of the various threads and being involved in some good QB discussion sparked a thought.
Since the Browns are likely in the market to draft a QB somewhere in this draft it would be interesting to take a closer look at some of the prospects. This closer look goes beyond just the stats and rhetoric. But an actual breakdown of gametape/cut-ups, albeit from our layman, armchair, office chair vantage points.
Right off the bat there are going to be many flaws inherent to this process. Lack of all-22, different grading methods, different levels of knowledge etc... But, I've done something like this in another forum and it was quite successful.
The first subject is Connor Cook vs Oregon. This game was chosen by request from Grimm. I don't know if this series will end here or continue to the other QB prospects. But, my hope, for those that are interested is to post, and support your views based on assessment of actual plays.
I will start if off by posting the game and my barebones chart of the game.
Hopefully discussion will ensue.
Anyone is welcome to chart the game as well, or participate in any fashion, albeit with specific game references. In an ideal world we are looking for comments with more depth than 'hes great' or 'he sucks' - let us know what you think and also why you think it.
Alright...enough preamble:
Play Count Snap Play Type Pocket On Time On Target Location Dropback Route Coverage ProgRead Decision Notes/Extras 0s (1st & 10) U Center Playaction Clean Y Y Y 5 STEP CORNER TIGHT N G 29s (1st &10) SHOTGUN Playaction Clean Y Y Y ROCKER BUBBLE \ N G 38s ( U Center DROP Clean Y N WR fell \ 3 STEP 5 YD STOP TIGHT N G 50s SHOTGUN DROP Clean Y Y Y ROCKER 5 YD STOP TIGHT \ G 58s SHOTGUN Playaction Clean Y Y Y Dash 12 YD CURL \ Y G Flood concept 1:18 U Center \ ? Y Y N (HIGH) 5 STEP 12 IN TIGHT Y ? 50/50 Ballsy 1:29 SHOTGUN DROP \ Y Y Y \ \ \ \ \ 1:38 SHOTGUN DROP PRESSURE Y Y Y 3 STEP DRAG OPEN Y ? Steps up 2:02 U Center Playaction \ Y Y Y 5 STEP SLANT OPEN \ Y 2:39 (3rd & 9) Shotgun Dropback Clean Y Y Y 3 step 10yd Out Tight Y (L to R) G 2:59 (3rd & 5) Shotgun Dropback Pressure Late Y N (High) 3 step 4 yd Stop Tight Y (M to R) G 3:10 (1st & 10) U Center Playaction Clean Y Y Y 5 step 5 yd Stop Open N G 3:18 (1st & 10) - - Clean Y Y Y \ Slant Tight N G 3:22 (2nd & 8) Shotgun Sprintout Clean Late Y Y 3 step S-Out Tight N ? squeezed in there 3:35 (1st & 10) U Center Playaction Pressure Y Y Y 7 step Deep Double \ Bad almosted picked 3:44 (2nd & 10) Shotgun DROP CLEAN Y Y N (HIGH) ROCKER CURL/IN Zone half field G Ballsy bad ball tho 4:29 (2nd & 10) SHOTGUN DROP Clean Lil late Y Okay ROCKER 5 YD STOP TIGHT half field ? Flat was open 4:36 (3rd & 10) SHOTGUN drop clean y y y 3 STEP 8 yd curl tight half field G needed more yards 4:50 (2nd & 9) U Center drop Clean y y y 5 step flat open half field g 4:57 (3rd & 5) SHOTGUN DROP Clean Y Y Y ROCKER SLANT TIGHT N G 5:04 (2nd & 6) U Center DROP Clean Y Y Y 3 STEP 7 YD STOP OPEN Y (R to L) g right to left 5:15 (1st & 10) U Center drop Clean y y y lil high 7 step 12 yd out tight y ? ballsy into small window 5:41 (2nd & 9) SHOTGUN drop clean y y y 2-step 4 yd Stop open half field g 5:50 (3rd & 6) SHOTGUN drop clean y y N (Low) 3 STEP DRAG TIGHT y y worst throw on tape, behind a receiver that had room to run 6:15 (4th & 6) SHOTGUN drop Clean y y y rocker sluggo TIGHT half field y comes back with a hole shot off pump fake, on 4th & 6 coaches must trust him 6:36 (1st & 10) U Center quick pa Clean y y y 7 step comeback TIGHT half field 6:46 (2nd & 10) SHOTGUN drop Clean y \ \ ROCKER slant \ n bad didn't read the dropping DE easily could have been intercepted-shoulda been 7:06 (3rd &10) SHOTGUN drop PRESSURE y y y 3 STEP 10 IN TIGHT y g Steps up to avoid pressure 7:23 (1st & 10) SHOTGUN R-O PA Clean y y y ROCKER seam OPEN n g 7:45 (3rd & 10) SHOTGUN PRESSURE y y n-behind 3 STEP seam/post TIGHT y y stepped up, if he has better ball placement could be TD-instead pbu 8:00 (3rd & 4) SHOTGUN Sprintout Clean n y n Dash stop TIGHT half field ? late, thrown to wrong shoulder, also looked like the flat route was open 8:09 (2nd & 15) U Center pa-roll PRESSURE \ \ \ Dash throw away \ \ y throw away 8:18 (3rd & 15) SHOTGUN drop PRESSURE y n n (hIGH) 3 STEP 13 in TIGHT y y needed to drive that ball in more on line
Gotta run will finish later, the excel looks crazy on here. Wanted to get this out there before the draft sneaks up on us. Will post some screen caps later.
Hello! Yes, I'm the FNG starting a thread. Posting in some of the various threads and being involved in some good QB discussion sparked a thought.
Since the Browns are likely in the market to draft a QB somewhere in this draft it would be interesting to take a closer look at some of the prospects. This closer look goes beyond just the stats and rhetoric. But an actual breakdown of gametape/cut-ups, albeit from our layman, armchair, office chair vantage points.
Right off the bat there are going to be many flaws inherent to this process. Lack of all-22, different grading methods, different levels of knowledge etc... But, I've done something like this in another forum and it was quite successful.
The first subject is Connor Cook vs Oregon. This game was chosen by request from Grimm. I don't know if this series will end here or continue to the other QB prospects. But, my hope, for those that are interested is to post, and support your views based on assessment of actual plays.
I will start if off by posting the game and my barebones chart of the game.
Hopefully discussion will ensue.
Anyone is welcome to chart the game as well, or participate in any fashion, albeit with specific game references. In an ideal world we are looking for comments with more depth than 'hes great' or 'he sucks' - let us know what you think and also why you think it.
Alright...enough preamble:
Play Count Snap Play Type Pocket On Time On Target Location Dropback Route Coverage ProgRead Decision Notes/Extras 0s (1st & 10) U Center Playaction Clean Y Y Y 5 STEP CORNER TIGHT N G 29s (1st &10) SHOTGUN Playaction Clean Y Y Y ROCKER BUBBLE \ N G 38s ( U Center DROP Clean Y N WR fell \ 3 STEP 5 YD STOP TIGHT N G 50s SHOTGUN DROP Clean Y Y Y ROCKER 5 YD STOP TIGHT \ G 58s SHOTGUN Playaction Clean Y Y Y Dash 12 YD CURL \ Y G Flood concept 1:18 U Center \ ? Y Y N (HIGH) 5 STEP 12 IN TIGHT Y ? 50/50 Ballsy 1:29 SHOTGUN DROP \ Y Y Y \ \ \ \ \ 1:38 SHOTGUN DROP PRESSURE Y Y Y 3 STEP DRAG OPEN Y ? Steps up 2:02 U Center Playaction \ Y Y Y 5 STEP SLANT OPEN \ Y 2:39 (3rd & 9) Shotgun Dropback Clean Y Y Y 3 step 10yd Out Tight Y (L to R) G 2:59 (3rd & 5) Shotgun Dropback Pressure Late Y N (High) 3 step 4 yd Stop Tight Y (M to R) G 3:10 (1st & 10) U Center Playaction Clean Y Y Y 5 step 5 yd Stop Open N G 3:18 (1st & 10) - - Clean Y Y Y \ Slant Tight N G 3:22 (2nd & 8) Shotgun Sprintout Clean Late Y Y 3 step S-Out Tight N ? squeezed in there 3:35 (1st & 10) U Center Playaction Pressure Y Y Y 7 step Deep Double \ Bad almosted picked 3:44 (2nd & 10) Shotgun DROP CLEAN Y Y N (HIGH) ROCKER CURL/IN Zone half field G Ballsy bad ball tho 4:29 (2nd & 10) SHOTGUN DROP Clean Lil late Y Okay ROCKER 5 YD STOP TIGHT half field ? Flat was open 4:36 (3rd & 10) SHOTGUN drop clean y y y 3 STEP 8 yd curl tight half field G needed more yards 4:50 (2nd & 9) U Center drop Clean y y y 5 step flat open half field g 4:57 (3rd & 5) SHOTGUN DROP Clean Y Y Y ROCKER SLANT TIGHT N G 5:04 (2nd & 6) U Center DROP Clean Y Y Y 3 STEP 7 YD STOP OPEN Y (R to L) g right to left 5:15 (1st & 10) U Center drop Clean y y y lil high 7 step 12 yd out tight y ? ballsy into small window 5:41 (2nd & 9) SHOTGUN drop clean y y y 2-step 4 yd Stop open half field g 5:50 (3rd & 6) SHOTGUN drop clean y y N (Low) 3 STEP DRAG TIGHT y y worst throw on tape, behind a receiver that had room to run 6:15 (4th & 6) SHOTGUN drop Clean y y y rocker sluggo TIGHT half field y comes back with a hole shot off pump fake, on 4th & 6 coaches must trust him 6:36 (1st & 10) U Center quick pa Clean y y y 7 step comeback TIGHT half field 6:46 (2nd & 10) SHOTGUN drop Clean y \ \ ROCKER slant \ n bad didn't read the dropping DE easily could have been intercepted-shoulda been 7:06 (3rd &10) SHOTGUN drop PRESSURE y y y 3 STEP 10 IN TIGHT y g Steps up to avoid pressure 7:23 (1st & 10) SHOTGUN R-O PA Clean y y y ROCKER seam OPEN n g 7:45 (3rd & 10) SHOTGUN PRESSURE y y n-behind 3 STEP seam/post TIGHT y y stepped up, if he has better ball placement could be TD-instead pbu 8:00 (3rd & 4) SHOTGUN Sprintout Clean n y n Dash stop TIGHT half field ? late, thrown to wrong shoulder, also looked like the flat route was open 8:09 (2nd & 15) U Center pa-roll PRESSURE \ \ \ Dash throw away \ \ y throw away 8:18 (3rd & 15) SHOTGUN drop PRESSURE y n n (hIGH) 3 STEP 13 in TIGHT y y needed to drive that ball in more on line
Gotta run will finish later, the excel looks crazy on here. Wanted to get this out there before the draft sneaks up on us. Will post some screen caps later.
Import it to google sheets and link. It should look better.
^^Too high, thrown into a very tight window. I actually like the throw, he diagnosed the defense correctly and found an open receiver, even though in a very small/tight window. Shows understanding of the defense and the play concept. But ball placement was too high, could this be an arm strength issue? inability to drive the ball into tight windows? But then again, many other QBs in this draft class don't even attempt that throw in the first place.
If you have a chance to watch the cut-up ~9 minutes and read the charting would be interested in your thoughts/input or suggestions on how to streamline this endeavor.
If you have a chance to watch the cut-up ~9 minutes and read the charting would be interested in your thoughts/input or suggestions on how to streamline this endeavor.
Thx
Originally Posted By: edromeo
Originally Posted By: DeputyDawg
You got it. i can see it now.
If you have a chance to watch the cut-up ~9 minutes and read the charting would be interested in your thoughts/input or suggestions on how to streamline this endeavor.
Thx
Will do, but it will probably be later this evening.
Again I want to look at this this evening, but 2 suggestions that I have...
I'd like to see a column for footwork and a column for mechanics. A simple good or bad is fine for those columns and other stuff can be put in the comments.
When I have tried to do this in the past, I always saved the comments for the 2nd or 3rd time I watched the play. The first time I just went through and graded. I usually found stuff on the second or 3rd time that I missed the first time and every now and then it would change the way I graded something.
Okay, I checked it out. My takes. Aaron Burbridge is better than I thought! Cook locks on to his 1st read way too often and lucky for him that's usually Aaron. Cook starts off with really good footwork and then wastes it by not stepping into his throws.
He is really good at selling the play fake. Very compact throwing motion. He rushes his throws too often and could use that extra split second to step into his throws.
He tries to thread the needle when he isn't under pressure and if he would just move on to his next read there would usually be someone open.
Lots of stuff I like. (Especially the throwing motion) But lots of things that will drive a coach crazy.
His accuracy and touch need a little work, but he's throwing flat footed a lot so that could be it.
None of the plays were really deep, so I can't comment on his deep arm.
His biggest goal seems to be just to get the ball out of his hands as quick as possible and he'll try to squeeze it in when he doesn't have to so he can do just that.
I wanted to save my commentary for later in case other people jump in.
But, when dealing with grades/charting I try to be really careful with statements like player X does mistake X too often without at least charting game tapes of the other prospects. I've found that many of the common flaws are universal amoungst prospects, so counting how often the mistakes happen, when they happen and how the happen makes all the difference in the world.
So, when you say locks on to 1st read too often, I would disagree. I've watched some QBs rarely get beyond their 1st read. I watched a tape of Brandon Allen (who I like a lot btw) where his 1st read was open virtually every play, so he took it.(Miss St iirc). I saw Cook going through more progression in this game from most other prospects I've looked at.
Footwork, I don't want to get bogged down into that fine of detail for this charting. I wanted to stick to 8, but it grew. But as far as footwork goes you have to keep in mind most of the other QB prospects aren't even going through 3-5-7 steps drops so judging footwork for me comes down to what type of drop/how often.
Agree with everything you said. And in Cooks defense, there were a lot of designed quick passes and I already mentioned about Burbridge being his 1st read a lot.
As far as trimming down what you have, there really isn't much you can eliminate. You could maybe combine 'on target' with 'location'.
When I grade QB's, I am much less forgiving with being on target. Barely catch-able gets a no grade in my book and would be high or low, left or right. I like how you split timing off though. I usually don't chart something like that.
You also chart routes and I usually just break it up into short, medium, long or behind the line of scrimmage.
I know that isn't much help, but it's the best I can add.
My impression from watching him and your charting seem to match up pretty well. He seems to miss high fairly frequently. Even when there's a catch, the high balls leave a lot of yards on the field.
Also, if he gets moved off his mark he can struggle to adjust.
He does make some nice throws and does have a nice motion. I'd like to see him improve his placement, but I'm not sure it is something he will improve at.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
...As far as trimming down what you have, there really isn't much you can eliminate. You could maybe combine 'on target' with 'location'.
I was talking to a friend of mine about Cook/Lynch and it got me thinking I might add 2 new categories: NFL/Wow throws and Improvisation/Scramble plays. The chart gives some information but doesn't highlight/quantify "special" plays that demonstrate a specific trait/skillset.
Target/Loction I been trying to figure out what to do there. Maybe your right, but there are some throws that on target(catchable) but with poor location.
Quote:
When I grade QB's, I am much less forgiving with being on target. Barely catch-able gets a no grade in my book and would be high or low, left or right. I like how you split timing off though. I usually don't chart something like that.
I hear you, I guess I'm using target as a combination of catchable-decision making. Is he throwing a catchable ball to the right receiver?
Quote:
I know that isn't much help, but it's the best I can add.
No, it was certainly a help.
I plan to go back and give a summary of the chart with %. e.g. player X faced pressure this % of time read progression this % etc...
I have a couple of questions for you/whomever chooses to respond...
Where do you rank Cook specifically in terms of "pro-readiness"? And how important is it to yeah in ranking/grading QBs?
Does he raise the level of play of those around him? That's what I think I'm missing from Cook. Just don't really see much of that from him. I'm not sure how you quantify that. I think that is what makes me like Wentz the most. I'm not sure how much that plays into me liking the rest about him.
Have you seen Lynch vs. Navy, ed? Was added to draftbreakdown recently and from what I took away after one quick go thru wasn't very pretty. I'm curious how the play by play breakdown looks for that one.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
I might have to actually look closer at the second part, but that's the way it seems.
Intangibles are pretty clearly better to me.
I agree that Wentz has a better arm, and is more athletic and has a more stout frame however the question becomes how important are those traits compared to some other traits?
I think QB assessment comes down large degree to personal/schematic preference of the coaching staff.
Even though both Wentz/Cook played in a pro-style offense I think Cook is clearly superior in his ability to execute a pro-style passing offense. Then you have the level of competition difference, which for me is a clear and important advantage over Wentz. And you twice as many attempts/experience.
I am getting the feeling that Cook could wind up being our guy. (for good, or for bad)
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Pros: B+ Arm Moderately athletic 6’4 Has played in big games against top competition. Can throw pretty well on the run. His arm might actually be better than it looks given how often his mechanics breakdown (Pro?) His offensive line was not very good. Throws a pretty nice fade.
Cons:
Loves to duck out of throws, bails off back foot way too often leading to so many incompletions. His mechanics are awful, narrow base, doesn’t drive off back foot almost ever. I can see now why he was not a captain…..dude is afraid to get hit, plain and simple. Operated mostly from the Shotgun
What else can I say, this guy has a whole slew of problems. Even in his “best” game against Indiana I see all sorts of issues with his footwork and basic fundamentals.
These are ALL from the same game, against Indiana in which he threw for 400 yards and 4TD’s 0 INT. Five count them FIVE different times it was GLARING that he ducks out of throws, doesn't step into them and they were awful passes.
Wow, interesting take on Cook. Can't say I agree much with your views but interesting none the less.
I appreciate the vines posted. But, from my view there seems to be a reason why he threw off his back foot in 3 of the 5 vines of the vines.
1st vine is from the 4th qtr, after 3 qtrs of pressure. I'm not surprised when/if a QB is throwing off their back foot after facing pressure and taking hits. And throwing off the backfoot didn't seem to effect the throw. The WR wasn't open the CB was in trail and the S was closing from over top.
2nd vine he can't step up because he has a free rusher in his face AND the RDE turns the corner on his LT.
3rd vine his LT #74 is being walked into his lap.
4th vine I agree here he could step up, would like to point out though that as soon as he releases the ball his RB is blocked into his leg, you can see it on the second angle in your vine.
5th vine blitzer flashes in the hole gets picked up by the RB directly in front Cook. Where could he step up to? He would've have been stepping up into them.
Other thoughts/questions-
You seem to think his mechanics are bad, are you referring to his throwing motion, footwork or something else?
Is your take on Cook from the IU game or on him as a whole? Did you watch the Oregon game? I would be curious about your take if you did.
I don't think I ever seen a game w/ 4 TDs and close to 400 yards be relayed in such a negative manner.
Does he raise the level of play of those around him? That's what I think I'm missing from Cook.
That's all you bro, too speculative/subjective for me.
Wentz team played just fine without him (re: raising the play etc)
Quote:
Have you seen Lynch vs. Navy, ed? Was added to draftbreakdown recently and from what I took away after one quick go thru wasn't very pretty. I'm curious how the play by play breakdown looks for that one.
I'm not going to chart it, but i'll take a second look.
Speaking about Michigan State QB Connor Cook, an anonymous scout said "the person kills him."
"Selfish," the scout said. "He goes out too much. It's a tell-tale sign when your teammates don't like you, and I know they don't." Questions about Cook's demeanor have persisted for some time now. It's unideal for a prospect who will never draw raves for his passing efficiency. Another scout said "the owner needs to fire the GM right after they pick him if someone takes him in the first (round)." It's not outside the realm of possibility that Cook falls to day three.
There is nothing, literally nothing I hate more then character assasinationanonymous reports.
Also, this time of year is openly referred to in the NFL as lying season.
All of sudden teams that have kept their opinions of prospects buttoned up are suddenly eager to go on the record (anon of course) to tell how they really feel, almost always negative, about a prospect.
Watch that same team where the anon report came from sprint up the podium when the player they bad mouthed or in the actual case of Dan Marino (hid his clean drug test) to draft them.
I believe you posted some similar anon negative report about Mackenzie Alexander, my guess? It came from a team picking late in the first hoping he falls to them.
While NDSU didn't have him on the field, they still had Wentz in the meetings and on the sideline. Guys gravitate to him, and feed off his energy.
How do you know? I mean you can perceive it, speculate, think, guess that guys gravitate to him. Truth is from our vantage we have no idea. You're basically giving a QB whose team won without him a bump because of some hidden unquantifiable you think he possesses that aided in their victory...that to me is weird from a scouting standpoint.
While NDSU didn't have him on the field, they still had Wentz in the meetings and on the sideline. Guys gravitate to him, and feed off his energy.
How do you know? I mean you can perceive it, speculate, think, guess that guys gravitate to him. Truth is from our vantage we have no idea. You're basically giving a QB whose team won without him a bump because of some hidden unquantifiable you think he possesses that aided in their victory...that to me is weird from a scouting standpoint.
What can I say? I'm a weird dude.
In my opinion, scouting is as much art as science. With the internet all kind of data is available, not all of it is reliable, but things that catch your attention you can look for signs of in other arenas.
Is Tom Brady good because of his measurables and college statistics, or is he good because he demands excellence from himself and his teammates and constantly is trying to perfect his craft?
Numbers can mislead, film can mislead (2 people can see almost completely opposite things from the same play), there are so many variables that it comes down to the evaluator's ability to interpret the information he has available, and make extrapolations based on that.
If you want to limit the information you plug into your evaluations to be as "pure" as possible, that is fine. There is value in that.
I think things are infinitely complex and the more things you take into account the more accurate your overall picture can be. I hear a rumor, I investigate it. I read a guys body language, and watch the way he interacts with his teammates and they interact with him. A bunch of measurables and statistics don't get plugged into a formula to see who wins every week. There's emotion, momentum, grit, all kinds of near impossible to quantify human elements that play into a game's results.
You can't ignore the numbers, but some things you have to see and feel, intuit maybe.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
You say numbers can mislead and film can mislead. I would say that people who know what they're looking at see the same thing. How they value the traits they see is a matter of preference but the traits they see are close to the same.
Paradoxical to say objective measures can be misleading but also maintain that 2nd/3rd hand non-certified reports or 10,000 mile away intuition from TV feed observation should factor.
And don't get me wrong. I've stated and maintained that mental/personal factors "intangibles" play as important a role as does film and numbers. BUT from our vantage point it's not something we can reliably assess/know. If NFL teams with personal contact with the player, his coaches, friends and team psychologists and investigators get this aspect wrong. For me this is something I know I can't know, especially relying on what amounts to hearsay. Plus there is so much objective data to evaluate.
Who knows what they are seeing? NFL scouts don't agree on players. NFL franchises draft busts. Combine numbers are probably the most objective numbers we have (even playing field, fewest variables), but I'm not sure how truly valuable they are as football isn't played alone in shorts.
Are the stats we use "objective"? Or maybe a better question is should they be?
Is a bone rattling hit that knocks the runner back the same as an ankle tackle where the guy gains 4 more yards after contact?
Is a TD on a blown coverage the same as a TD in traffic on a jumpball?
Is QB accuracy solely the result of the QB or does the receiver's route play a factor?
Yes, certain sites try to account for these, but there is still a lot of subjectivity and/or factors not taken into account.
The 2nd/3rd hand reports are just a prompt pointing at something for me to look into. Broadcasts often show the sidelines and you can see how players act there. QBs are the "face of the franchise" in college, too, and do the lion's share of post game interviews. I feel like with them (QBs) at least you can get a somewhat valid feel as they are always in the spotlight. How much more contact do you think scouts have with players? I think they see them in person maybe a dozen times and most likely less.
Do you really think talking to a players' friends is reliable? And by the time a player gets to an NFL team's psychologist they are pretty well coached. If you were referring to college team psychologists, they aren't allowed to share personal information with teams. Coaches try to paint their players in the best possible light.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
Yeah, I watched the Oregon game. His same bad habits were showing up in that game, the difference is, Oregon's defense sucks and maybe got pressure on his 5 times in that entire game.
Yes, I am referring to his footwork. His base is narrow, he doesn't drive off his back foot. As I mentioned, I definitely think he bails on throws way more than he should be.
Basically Cook is an arm thrower IMO. Which leads to his low completion percentage, IMO of course. IT causes balls to float instead of being driven, it's purely mechanical and could be corrected with the right coaching, but bad habits are hard to break.
Look at this and then watch Cooks feet. Now, I'm not saying every QB has to have Brady's stance, but there is a stark contrast.
Now look at this footwork. This throw wan an interception and a floater that sailed on him.
Cook does NFL things and seeks to improve on those other NFL things. Accuracy. Footwork. He’ll head to San Diego in May to work with quarterback guru George Whitfield.
Accuracy just doesn’t improve in the NFL. What determines accuracy encompasses many aspects of the throwing motion, including footwork, how the ball is released and mental processing. The area where Cook is clearly lacking is in his footwork.
Who knows what they are seeing? NFL scouts don't agree on players. NFL franchises draft busts. Combine numbers are probably the most objective numbers we have (even playing field, fewest variables), but I'm not sure how truly valuable they are as football isn't played alone in shorts.
People that know how to accurately assess/grade/evaluate film know what they are seeing. And the difference in their grades on film is probably very small its their preference/priority and level of importance for those grades/traits seen on film that causes the variances. Eg. a 34 2-gap vs 34 1-gap could grade the same run stopping gap clogging DL that doesn't get upfield and penetrate equally on film yet RANK him differently because of scheme fit.
There is a huge difference between evaluation and projection=prognostication. Players are human, imagine if there were 2 twin prospects, whether they succeed or fail could come down mental/personality factors that are unknowable. Could be money, women, drugs, guys whatever. That failure doesn't mean the evaluation of their physical traits and film was wrong.
Combine numbers are objective measure of physical skillset not actual ability to play football.
Quote:
Is a bone rattling hit that knocks the runner back the same as an ankle tackle where the guy gains 4 more yards after contact?Is a TD on a blown coverage the same as a TD in traffic on a jumpball?Is QB accuracy solely the result of the QB or does the receiver's route play a factor?
Obviously not and are all graded differently, by those that know what they're looking at.
Quote:
The 2nd/3rd hand reports are just a prompt pointing at something for me to look into. Broadcasts often show the sidelines and you can see how players act there. QBs are the "face of the franchise" in college, too, and do the lion's share of post game interviews. I feel like with them (QBs) at least you can get a somewhat valid feel as they are always in the spotlight.
My point is the veracity of those reports are unverifiable from the outset. And again, looking at someone on TV is not for me anywhere close to a reliable means of assess a players intangibles. We can agree to disagree on this one.
Quote:
How much more contact do you think scouts have with players? I think they see them in person maybe a dozen times and most likely less.
Wait, how can you in one sentence trump up watching someone a million miles away on TV and then turn around and downplay actual real life contact with a player?
Quote:
Do you really think talking to a players' friends is reliable? And by the time a player gets to an NFL team's psychologist they are pretty well coached. If you were referring to college team psychologists, they aren't allowed to share personal information with teams. Coaches try to paint their players in the best possible light.
You're selling short the level of investigation that goes into vetting some of these prospects. And yes, talking to a players friends, teachers etc is a more reliable piece of personality/intangibles assessment then lol, watching them on TV and hearing 2nd/3rd hand reports of dubious veracity. Coaches and scouts have a relationship and are more honest with them then with media because its a closed door, tight circle group. And, no I'm referring to NFL team shrinks and those guys are good.
Oh, I definitely agree Cook doesn't always step into his throws, iirc I mentioned it a couple time in the chart notes. Cook also has other flaws, all the prospects have flaws. I just don't agree with presenting a flaw as sum of player, especially in game where Cook exhibited several other traits, obviously some positive traits, that weren't even mentioned. I guess I don't agree that not stepping into throws is his fatal flaw, so to speak. It doesn't make sense to to watch ~45 throws then crush the guy for 5 incompletions. Every QB will have about 30-40% incompletions for various reasons. If you wanted to crush a QB for something you could easily sift through their incompletions and find ammo.
Interesting article, I don't read bleacher report b/c I think there are much better outlets. But the guys opinions are interesting.
I disagree with his accuracy concern with Cook though. And his ability to actually execute 3-5-7 step drop rhythm passing offense for me is huge plus in the footwork category compared to other QBs in this draft class. I have more concerns about arm strength then accuracy. Cook's offense doesn't give him a bunch of easy completions and Cook himself chooses to attempt more difficult throws then most QBs in this class. I don't think his comp% is indicative of his accuracy and through coaching, scheme I have no reason to expect his comp% to go up. I look at Cook and see a QB that could walk into the Redskins offense and put equal/if not better numbers then Cousins within a year.
QB's are always tough to project in the NFL. There is a lot of subjectivity on what is easily fixed and what is not and as you say, all these guys have something that needs fixed.
It's funny that you bring up Washington's offense because I think that offense would be a bad fit for him. I mentioned that he tries to force throws that he doesn't have to. That would kill him in Washington's offense which is based on taking what the defense gives you and not trying to create plays.
In my opinion, at least early on in his career, he would be best in an offense where he is mobile and doesn't have to make too many reads.
You can adjust it as he fixes his footwork and learns not to force the ball, but right now he is who he is.
I agree with a lot of what you are saying, but think your characterization of certain things as unknowable is questionable. Hard to know with any accuracy, most definitely, but not impossible. If there are similarly graded players, but I have a negative impression of intangibles on one, I'm going to go with the guy I don't have red flags for. Could they prove bad impressions? Possibly. But I'm pretty good at reading people.
The problem I have with face time between prospects and NFL employees is that a lot of the situations this interaction occurs in are highly artificial. I downplay it because I care about how they act when they're with the team and on the field, not in a private interview they've been inordinately coached for. I can see a pretty good amount of sideline interaction from full broadcast versions of games and body language on the field and during interviews.
For as good as NFL team shrinks may be, we did end up trading up and using a first round pick on Manziel. The Brown's shrink in particular doesn't seem to be on the ball. Gilbert, Gordon, Richardson, etc, we've had some pretty bad misses from the "professionals."
I know a fair amount about the level of investigations the NFL will have run. I'm not sure about the quality of the information they come up with or the effectiveness of the things they actually look at in translating to the NFL from a private investigation perspective. I'm sure the quantity is...impressive.
You mess with the "Bull," you get the horns. Fiercely Independent.
![[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]](https://i.ibb.co/fkjZc8B/Bull-Dawg-Sig-smaller.jpg)
