DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2017 NFL Season 2017 NFL Draft The quarterback draft class of 2017

Woah. Explain this one...... cause i disagree

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/5/16/11682314/russell-wilson-nc-state-wisconsin-speech

I believe Watson will be a Matt Lineart who just peaked in college. I just never liked QBs who struggle with mid range accuracy. I really cant remember one that ever improved much from college to pro in that area.

Kizer, I had a lot of questions and the combine gave me my answers. Might take a shot on him in the 4th in noone else i really wanted was out there.

Trubisky, Webb, Mahomes are my top 3 at this point. Peterman and the kid from Miami I am warming up to also. I hope Watson goes #2 overall to the 49ers and Kizer to Chicago. dont even allow the temptation for this FO.

Never said anything about how good he was. I think he was good at protecting the ball if I remember right.

I don't know what misinformation I said now. I believe I said MOST, if not all(probably should have left that part off
), QBs struggle coming from the spread. And while Dak played well this season, I'm pretty sure he had help, from a scheme POV and from the rest of his teammates. Like most rookies do.

So..... Even if this is true and the falling out wasn't over baseball, just because Tom Obrien says so, Russell Wilson wasn't as good a QB as Mike Glennon?

Seriously?

Come on man. Glennon got picked earlier than Wilson based on perceived potential ::Edit: They were different years, but yes both 3rd rounders::. But I watched Glennon at NC State, I watched Wilson at Wisconsin and at NC State. Now I can't remember much, but I always liked Wilson. And the guys I work with from NC talk about Russell Wilson much more than i've ever heard them mention Glennon.

Wilson's senior year at Wisconsin was great. So this guy, who was NC State starter from 08-2010. And then a start in 2011. Much better than Glennon in 2011 or 2012, wasn't a better college QB?

I don't see where that says Glennon was better, just that the coach wanted to make a change cause in his opinion he thought Glennon would be better. I don't know if he actually was better.

"Spread" is catchall term that the media sometimes uses (arbitrarily) as generic and lazy way to knock some prospects without having to get specific.

First of all there are several types of spread and they are not the same.

Also, the 'failure' rate for "spread" QBs is overblown.

QBs by and large fail, you're always gonna be on the safe side if you say a QB is gonna fail regardless of the reason you give.

But, you never hear any say this QB failed because they came form a "pro-style" system yet pro-style QBs fail all the time also.

Anyhow there are big differences between air-raid spread like Cal, Texas Tech, Baylor vs the Clemson (Auburn variant) vs UNC spread.

I'm not disagreeing with you.

But how many college teams actually run a "pro style" offense.

Hell.. how many NFL teams run it now a days?

Off the top of my head the 'bigger' programs? Miami, Michigan, Michigan State, Pitt, Wisc, Stanford, Penn State, USC, UCLA (kinda) there are more but that's from memory

And I agree that NFL offenses are using shotgun aka "spread" concepts more then ever.

The base NFL "shotgun" formations w/ 3 wide + 1 TE or 4 wide are the standard of some of the college "spread" offenses like Clemson and UNC

For the Chad Kelly fans:



What we know is that he was kicked off the Clemson football team, he got into a fight at a club in Buffalo, and he rushed the field at his brother's high school game looking for a fight. He is also coming off a torn ACL and meniscus.

That is not quite accurate.



I don't want the Browns to draft Kelly either, but let's play fair.

OK I understand it being used as a catchall term, but my question would be which of those "spread" offenses are the ones where the kids seem to have trouble with the reads when they get to the NFL? It seems like more so then not the ones in that style of offense struggle more so then the kids coming from a pro style attack. Are there colleges running spreads where they make pre, and post snap reads? It just seems tome that with these "new" offenses being run in college it's gotten incredibly hard to evaluate the QB(and other) position. And not just for the fan but for NFL scouts also.

I'm not discounting anything your saying just don't understand how NO-ONE not even scouting departments can figure out how to evaluate these kids. You'd think someone could.

I guess what I really want to know is just how do you evaluate these kids.

Spread offenses that have their roots in air-raid. But, seem to have trouble is the key word.

Off the top of my head I know that Trent Dilfer and Aaron Rodgers both came from Jeff Tedford spread offenses. But then you have other QBs from that system that "failed" like David Carr, Joey Harrington etc.

Then you have (modern) Cal, Frenso State, Oregon, Baylor, Texas Tech etc....Derek Carr, Marcus Mariota, Griffin,

Then you have the 2-3 wide spread offenses that keep a RB in the backfield and add 'zone read' elements into the offense. Gus Malzhan Auburn, Clemson, UNC, Nevada, Urban etc. Cam Newton, Alex Smith, Kaepernick...

But all the while during that same time frame "pro-style" QBs were getting drafted and failing also.

I don't know if I agree. Because no one every faults the system when a "pro-style" QBs fails and by the nature of the position "pro-style" QBs have been failing for years.


Yes. Clemson, UNC etc. But the question is more complex then that because who is making the pre-snap reads? The sideline or the QB?

Then you have to ask how many college QBs regardless of system are getting past their 1st and 2nd reads? How do they look when they do? Happy feet? Panic? Smooth? Decisive etc....How many college QBs are reading full field? Then you have to ask how many NFL offenses have full field reads? How many use a pre-snap read to pick a side of the field to work? How many have a half-field read (hi-lo etc) w/ something tagged on the backside?

QB evaluation has always been hard. QB is a complex position with many variables. I don't know that QBs are failing at higher rate then before, I would actually lean the other direction. But Bill Walsh used to say ~very few people know how to evaluate the QB position and fewer still know how to coach it. I think part of the problem is a lot of the impressions of QBs are controlled by the media opinion. Most are neither interested or know how to watch film. They give opinions. Their opinions often come from organizations that are hell bent on keeping their draft evaluation as organizational secrets they don't peddle to media talking heads. That is why this season is known as lying season because most every team official willing to speak to the media is doing so with an agenda. I think teams scouts have a better handle on the evaluation aspect then it seems but at the same time they aren't gonna talk about it. Someone was right on Russell Wilson, Kirk Cousins, Dak Prescott etc. And when a QB fails its not always because of the evaluation. A QB can fail and their evaluation was spot on. It could be the team, the coaching the locker room etc or the on the field evaluation could be right and the outside factors personal/emotional situations hit etc.

Anyhow if you are really interested their is good info out there all about all variants of "spread" offenses. Smartfootball, Brophy etc.

Here is an example from Auburn playbook awhile back:

http://smartfootball.com/tag/gus-malzahn#sthash.ZJutPl1Z.dpbs

btw-Clemson's playbook is largely based off of Malzahns

Cheers!

What I'd really like is some reading material on scouting and what to look for on the field, I've read a couple(Football scouting methods by Steve Belichick{Bill Belichick's father} and Take Your Eye Of The Ball by Pat Kirwan), but if you know of any other good books on that or football in general,let me know.

Anybody, please, Let me know.

My daughter takes up a lot of my time now, which I truly cherish, so I don't get the time to myself I used to for reading, football, hunting, fishing, ect. but I try to take some time to myself

the thing is, Myles Garret is not a sure thing either.

If our FO even thinks there is a "chance" any of these QB can be their guy you take him period.

YOU CANT WIN IN THE NFL WITHOUT A QB

Your telling me Garret is a better pick then say Tom Brady? Your nuts...Brady wins Super Bowl, Garret may get some sacks.

I personally hope they pick the best Qb available that they think is the best with their #1 overall. And then stick with the guy for a few years and actually give him a chance instead of playing musical QB

After that, if Allen is available at #11 (He just may be) then you take him. The Browns would be justified in taking Trubisky, Watson, Kizer, whomever they feel is the best Qb at #1

I think Trubisky is an incredible talent. The Arm Strength is there, the accuracy is there there, the physical talent is there, all Trubisky lacks is experience.

In many ways this good, because Mitch hasn't developed the bad habits that hurt many Qb coming out. Mitch will need 2-3 years to devlop,and this team needs 2-3 years to fill out its roaster.

Mitch Trubisky makes the most sense for the Browns at #1 overall. He will be groomed and ready after 3 years to take use to the post season....as long as we address our OL, and get a RB in the 2nd rds, and add another WR....i think we can win some games while Mitch learns the ropes under a very good QB friendly coach in Jackson. Most importantly, Mitch actually WANTS to be here...he is from this area, but he is "All in" he wants to be here and turn things around...and in this state of this franchise it matters alot.

Garret just wants a check, Trubisky will bleed for this team to get things turned around...no way i could say no to the kinda guy Mitch is with his heart and passion for the Browns and this entire area of Ohio.

You want to win? you take Trubisky...he is a winner, and many will never see him coming.

A good general football book that has a chapter on evaluation each position is Bill Walsh:Finding the Winning Edge. Its hard to find in bookstores and pricey when/if you do. But some libraries have it and the book itself is on the web if you look hard. I've stumbled upon it a few times but didn't save the link.

On youtube their is a lot on in depth vids from Bill Walsh on QBing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVYYPlSGUoU
Its a 7 part series I believe

Matt Waldman does a good primer on scouting.

I believe Greg Gabriel offered/offers a scouting course.

There are tons of good info on smartfootball and brophyfootball and site like that

-btw going back to the previous convo I forgot to mention TCU/Fuente as another spread offense with pro-style concepts in their passing offenses:

http://brophyfootball.blogspot.com/2011/01/justin-fuente-tcu-offense-key-concepts.html

Hear that?

More upside then Wentz whom every one was so upset we passed on.

Trubisky is the BPA at #1 overall. Yes he is BPA over Garrett. Trubisky is Franchise QB type of talent. The guy has the arm, the size, the accuracy, the mobility. He just needs expereince.

Trubisky is a guy you can build your team around. Garret isn't a guy you can build your team around. If you ever want the Browns to ever turn things around, you take Mitch.

Mitch will be to us what Big Ben Rothlisberger was to the Steelers...if you pick Garret over Mitch your a fool

We have been blessed to have a bonafide FRANCHISE QB fall right into our laps....taking a DE over that should be a crime...

I'm curious.... are you a fan of the, sorry, any of the "spread" offenses being run?

I'm not sure yet, I kinda liked them when they were new and not many teams where running them. I like new styles, not the same cookie cutter stuff a lot of teams copy from each other. The NFL is getting really bad with this. Most teams are so similar in what they run it's almost boring. The college game has become more interesting to me, with it's disparity. I really like what Pitt does, and Kinda like that wacky offense Georgia Tech runs. But I'm really not much of an offensive guy, my passion lies on defense.

This should probably be in another thread, but it's really the kind of football talk I was looking for when I rejoined this site.

Hmmmnnn. Never really thought about it that way. I guess I'm a fan of efficiency and creativity. I like what some of the air-raid offenses do on the college level to put and keep defenses in a bind. But at the same time I know they're not really helping their offensive players get ready for the next level. If I had a college age son that was good enough to play at the next level I would want him to go to a 'pro-style' school.

But, if I really had to pick I prefer the spread offenses that have passing concepts that I can recognize. I like Clemson, UNC and Fuente's offenses.

This article was posted by Matt Miller today. I've copied the part pertinent to the Browns below.

"Cleveland Browns: What will the Browns do at quarterback? Don't count on Brock Osweiler being the guy. I reported earlier this week that head coach Hue Jackson loves Mitchell Trubisky, but he won't be on the board at pick No. 12. According to one coaching source, the Browns may wait until 2018 to get the franchise quarterback they crave."

I don't think any of these QB's are worthwhile as a Franchise QB.
If you accept that, then it seems to me that the only prudent move is to just roll with what we have, let our record be whatever it will be, and position ourselves to make a run at getting up to the #1 pick next year to grab whomever it is we want.

The thing I think some forget is that if we're good this year, we won't have the opportunity to pick who we want next year. Sometime addition by subtraction works.

I don't think the Browns are going to be very good next year if they don't address the qb position in the off-season.

Also, the Browns have a ton of picks and can do package deals to move up if they need to.

Me? I prefer that we somehow can make the Jimmy G trade and the QB position is resolved once and for....at least ten years.

As long as we keep #1 and get Garrett. I almost don't care what we give up for Jimmy.

Because I think we could compete THIS year with those two additions.

I don't know how much this means, but it is always interesting:



https://twitter.com/dpbrugler/status/840334987958329346

Here's the thing...

People are saying that all of these quarterbacks are going to go super early...

Manziel was picked near the end of round 1. Bridgewater went after that (last pick of the 1st round?). Derek Carr went after that.

QBs rise like crazy in the pre-draft hype, but the day of the draft things tend to smooth out.

So Cody will be the starter?

I don't know if it means anything for the guys 55 and above, but considering only 1 out of the 30 guys they showed drafted with 50 or below mph became a long term starter.....I'd say it means take Watson off your board if he wasn't already.


Think of it this way Kessler had a 53 and he has a noodle.....Watson has starched spaghetti at 49 then lol

Kessler threw 55, actually.

There you go...lol. So Watson has a wet mop in comparison.

I argued before that DW didn't make a ton of NFL throws. He through short or jump balls long on a ton of plays. He didn't go over the middle in traffic much at all, and when he did bad things happened a good percentage of the time.

Great kid who is a great leader, but the chances of him being a long term solution at QB....well the numbers bear it out. It would be a statistical anomaly. He isn't accurate enough to be that anomaly imo

I don't know how much stock I put into that velocity thing. They said Kessler threw at 55. LOL........no way!

55 is the average nfl ball velocity. If you can't even do that chances are you have no shot at being an NFL QB. Webb and mahomes probably upped their draft stock with those velocities.

I don't know why ball velocity wouldn't have meaning. It does in baseball.

It might even mean more in football as it is a pure measurment and equal for all QB's. In baseball a pitcher who doesn't have ideal velocity can still have a killer specialty pitch to rely on.

There are no specialty throws in football. If 55 is the number that is felt needed to be able to throw through windows, then we probably don't want to buck that number.

I think velocity is important. I just question the accuracy of how they measure it. Some of the numbers I've seen seem way off.

Does anyone know how they measure the velocity?
I know its measured by radar gun but how?

Is it measured while they are throwing during the drills? Or are they taken somewhere and asked hey throw this ball as hard as you can for measurement?

The numbers mean very different things based on how they're measured.

The numbers come out every year and I never know what to think of them because some of the numbers simply don't match up with the film.

I don't know how they measure velocity. I agree w/you that some of the numbers don't match-up w/what we see during games.

The baseball guns seem to work fine.

I don't know what to think about the football numbers.

There r franchise QBs to be had n this draft but is there anyone in our front office that can identify one, hue had his qbcard taken for rg3 n Goff lol

Personally I would've happy with trubisky, Webb or mahomes just need a supreme run game to protect your rookie.

If we draft a guy at 12. He better start.