big2033 Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 I don't know who liked Clausen or not but he's the perfect example of how a QB can just fall by the wayside. He was drafted in 2010, when the team was decimated by injuries & John Fox was a lame duck coach who threw in the towel & actually started Brian St. Pierre a few games because he was being a passive aggressive dick & wanted to piss ownership off. Nobody had a chance on that team. Then the next year they get a good OC in Chudzinksi, the OL & Steve Smith get healthy, and they have a dominant running game & WR. Cam comes in & lights it up. Now, I give Cam all the credit in the world, especially coming from the system he had in college. But what if they decided to draft Von Miller? Maybe Clausen comes in & looks great in that offense, he looked good in his one start this year & I read the Bears are pretty high on him. Mid to late round QB's have almost zero room for error, Nick Foles was absolutely awesome in 2013 than has some ho hum games behind a decimated OL the next year & the Eagles wrote him off. Kirk Cousins was lighting it up, than he pressed & had a bad 2 games of picks & that was it. Mett looked very good for a rookie for 5 games than gets killed behind a horrific OL & the teams moving on, meanwhile Locker got 3 1/2 years of getting injured & sucking before they cast him aside. I think your missing something and coaches have seen it. QBs putting up stats is superfluous in today's NFL. So many QBs that people on this board are freaking over are being tossed around the league. Mark Sanchez is having great games statistically. It's all about efficiency, turnovers, and wins for the QBs today, these inflated numbers tell us nothing. I feel like in a way the rules have been shifted enough to make every drop back QB look like Tom Brady statistically ... but coaches watching know what's going on ... that's why Nick Cousins had a short leash. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
big2033 Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 Oh...but it's entirely possible he is. People said the same thing about Locker -- "at least he won't be a bust like VY." Fool me twice, as they say... So we should stay away from scrambling QBs forever? That is a loser's mentality. Years ago we had arguments after arguments that scrambling QBs couldn't even make it to the Super Bowl. Now one has a Super Bowl and went back a year later. And PLEASE don't give me the crap that he's wasn't a contributor. Colin K. is on the downward swing now ... but the kid helped the Niners to the Super Bowl and if anyone watched the playoffs it was largely due to his play. The dumbest thing you can do is start getting caught up in previous QBs or measurables or what other teams are doing to win. That's what has put us at the bottom of the barrel in the NFL. Teams like Seattle draft unconventional corners, and start a 3rd round QB that was supposed to be too short to truly be successful and invested in a running back. Something that in today's NFL is sacrilege. A sixth round pick statistically has NO success in the NFL. It's a huge anomaly if one succeeds. But some people on here are looking at Zach Mettenberger as our QB of the future. I don't see it after watching him this year, but I'm not going completely dismiss the notion because of where he was picked. You do what you think is best ... and draft someone who you think grades high. Who cares if they run like some previous failures. He's not the same person. Once you get caught up in measurables and easily definable success you end up with JaMarcus Russell. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cenj Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 So we should stay away from scrambling QBs forever? That is a loser's mentality. Funny side-story about that line... A couple weeks ago, Since then, I've had a lot of posters, all critical of Mett and pro-Mariota, parrot the line back to me in some way. Apparently I struck a chord. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cenj Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 So we should stay away from scrambling QBs forever? I never said anything like that, and if you read my post I linked above from a couple weeks ago, you'll see I've argued the same point about drafting the guy you believe in. My comment is directed at this unfounded idea that MM can't possible be a bust. It's ridiculous how often posters throw this around. He could be a horrendous bust. Mett could be terrible next year and out of the NFL. I remember the hype machine for Reggie Bush and how he was the 2nd coming of Gale Sayers. Remember how Leinart's ceiling was supposedly very high? It's telling that you even refer to him as a "scrambling QB," because if that's what he is, then he will absolutely bust. The argument for MM has been that he has positive passing traits and could develop into an accurate passer from the pocket. R. Wilson was short, not inaccurate. His passing ability was excellent coming into the NFL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Face Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 I think your missing something and coaches have seen it. QBs putting up stats is superfluous in today's NFL. So many QBs that people on this board are freaking over are being tossed around the league. Mark Sanchez is having great games statistically. It's all about efficiency, turnovers, and wins for the QBs today, these inflated numbers tell us nothing. I feel like in a way the rules have been shifted enough to make every drop back QB look like Tom Brady statistically ... but coaches watching know what's going on ... that's why Nick Cousins had a short leash. What I'm talking about is the xtra lives 1st rounders get Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freakingeek Posted April 10, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 A scrambling QB will not have long term success in the league. There are guys that are successful for a while until DCs figure out how to defend them. Then they make you beat them from the pocket. A guy like Brady or Rodgers can beat you from the pocket no matter what you throw at them. Russell Wilson comes closest to being a combination of the two but he has an offense tailored to him. Put him behind center at Green Bay or New Orleans and see how he fares. Technically, you should be able to substitute any one pocket passer for another as long as they know the offense. Of course it has to be executed by everyone but it's not a gimmick or a trick offense. It's the QB reading the defense an exploiting the weakest one on one matchups. Because we had 2 scrambling QBs that weren't successful, has nothing to do with my belief that it won't work in the long term in the NFL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudsOilers Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 There is no question that the higher the pick and investment (money, wanting the pick to pan out), the longer the rope. Granted, the new CBA has helped minimize that to an extent over what it was before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scine09 Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 I think your missing something and coaches have seen it. QBs putting up stats is superfluous in today's NFL. So many QBs that people on this board are freaking over are being tossed around the league. Mark Sanchez is having great games statistically. It's all about efficiency, turnovers, and wins for the QBs today, these inflated numbers tell us nothing. I feel like in a way the rules have been shifted enough to make every drop back QB look like Tom Brady statistically ... but coaches watching know what's going on ... that's why Nick Cousins had a short leash. Nick Cousins had as much success in the league as Kirk Foles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mythos27 Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 What I'm talking about is the xtra lives 1st rounders get When the defense for such an approach is "that's just the way things are" you know it's a failing mentality. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MamlngEnvy Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 Nick cousins also had a recent #2 pick who won a division title sitting behind him... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scine09 Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 Nick cousins also had a recent #2 pick who won a division title sitting behind him... How about Kirk Foles? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MamlngEnvy Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 How about Kirk Foles? Dudes a beast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudsOilers Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 As to Wilson, cenj is absolutely correct. Wilson actually had a great passing resume in two different pro style offenses in college (NC State ran a west coast scheme and Wisconsin ran a one back pro set offense). There was one sole reason that Wilson slid in the draft and that was height. I don't know how many people watch a lot of Seahawks games but they do not run the read option very much. They vary from 2 back, 1-back, 2 TE, and 3 WR sets. There's no question that Seattle does incorporate some runs in there for Wilson but most of his mobility is used to buy time or make plays when the called one breaks down for one reason or another. It's not terribly different than how Heimerdinger used McNair from 2000-2003. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
big2033 Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 I never said anything like that, and if you read my post I linked above from a couple weeks ago, you'll see I've argued the same point about drafting the guy you believe in. My comment is directed at this unfounded idea that MM can't possible be a bust. It's ridiculous how often posters throw this around. He could be a horrendous bust. Mett could be terrible next year and out of the NFL. I remember the hype machine for Reggie Bush and how he was the 2nd coming of Gale Sayers. Remember how Leinart's ceiling was supposedly very high? It's telling that you even refer to him as a "scrambling QB," because if that's what he is, then he will absolutely bust. The argument for MM has been that he has positive passing traits and could develop into an accurate passer from the pocket. R. Wilson was short, not inaccurate. His passing ability was excellent coming into the NFL. Fair enough. MM can absolutely bust just as bad. Oh please don't run to a distinction of "scrambling QB." I see every QB as different from the other. That was my whole point. You yourself categorized Mariota when you said "fool me once." My argument is that never fall into completely trying to define what equates success. For all I know a QB who plays the wildcat might win a Super Bowl. Bill Belichick keeps winning Super Bowls because 1. he has Brady 2. He's always going against conventional wisdom and doing what works for him and what HE thinks is right. When the league was ground and pound, he went 3 to 4 wide receivers ... when the league went 3 wide receivers he went two TEs ... when the league went pass heavy he brought a running game. That's what I'm saying. Never get caught thinking you can't do things differently because a bunch of old timers tell you it has to be done a certain way. I always rail against conventional wisdom, because time and time again sports goes against it. The conventional wisdom says Mariota isn't a fit for Whiz? I say says who? People tell me Williams will have a huge impact on our defense? I ask how? Conventional wisdom is really what gets teams in trouble. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BudsOilers Posted April 10, 2015 Report Share Posted April 10, 2015 With MM, I think his running ability is a minimal factor in whether he's picked here or not. It's all about projecting whether he can play well from the pocket. If he can, and you have the mobility on top of it, you could get a heck of a QB. All of the mobile guys who turned out to be very good or great all could throw from the pocket - either from the get go or soon after. McNair probably took the longest of these to develop but he arguably had the biggest challenge based on the jump up in levels and learning a pro style offense. The ones who didn't or haven't panned out? Inaccurate from the pocket or lacking the skill to stay in the pocket beyond read one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.