Trey Lance Wants to Follow Ran Carthon to Tennessee? Or IGSpeak Mistranslation?

[tgo]

1 minute ago, SleepingTitan said:

Lol don't add Scam Newton to this mix. And IDGAF what reports said. I don't have a problem with "mobile" QBs per se. I'm more concerned about "dual threat"

 

If a guy is a dual threat, he can't be trusted in the NFL. LJ has elite athleticism. He would excel at literally any position on the field except OL/DL. 

I’m sorry, but this is simply an outdated mindset.

 

Let’s not forget that it was Ozzie Newsome, a HoF level GM, who drafted Lamar Jackson. And Kevin Colbert who drafted Kenny Pickett, another highly mobile QB with a littany of passing cocnerns.
 

I used to have the exact same view that you do though, and I definitely can understand the trepidation on mobile QBs after being burned by Mariota and Locker. 
 

But there just isn’t a such thing anymore as good pocket passing QB prospects in the same sense that there used to be. You mainly want guys who are intelligent and coachable and who keep their eyes down field when scrambling and who can make the throws. Beyond that, hell if I know - I’ll just trust the NFL evaluators instead of just writing guys off as if I know anything about modern NFL QB play. 

[titansfan]

1 hour ago, SleepingTitan said:

I just don't want a mobile QB. I don't want RPO's. I'm cool with a scrambler, but jfc we need to stretch the field. 

 

You're unlikely to find a non-mobile QB that's good. And honestly why wouldn't you want a mobile QB. It adds more problems for a defense. What's with people thinking that athleticism takes away from ability to throw???

[BudsOilers]

Just now, tgo said:

 

Are you talking about some kind of bias toward mobile QBs or am I missing the point?

 

There aren't any good QBs coming out anymore who aren't mobile with questions on accuracy, ball placement, decision making, etc. That's not really my bias, that's just the reality of the situation.

 

I'm definitely not pretending to be some QB evaluator by any means, I used to pretend to know things about QB play and listen to every Greg Cosell bit about QBs and all that - but I'm not going to take a closed minded approach to QB prospects going forward given the success of a lot of guys I thought would abjectly fail in the NFL.

 

I'll just trust the evaluators and just root for the team to pick a good QB when it is time to do so, and if they pass over a prospect, I'll assume it's for good reason.

You are missing the point.  It goes beyond your want to trade up to take a project QB because they are mobile.....but one big one is thinking that a guy with limited college production who has major issues with decision making/accuracy is easily fixable compared to other prospects that have multiple years of production and lesser issues with accuracy/decision making.  You want to put guys like Mahomes and Lawrence in the same bucket as Love and Lance and Richardson.  

 

Another big bias is this idea that Vrabel values the running/mobility aspect of a QB over the ability to pass the ball accurately and efficiently within the framework of the offense.

[SleepingTitan]

1 minute ago, tgo said:

I’m sorry, but this is simply an outdated mindset.

 

Let’s not forget that it was Ozzie Newsome, a HoF level GM, who drafted Lamar Jackson. And Kevin Colbert who drafted Kenny Pickett, another highly mobile QB with a littany of passing cocnerns.
 

I used to have the exact same view that you do though, and I definitely can understand the trepidation on mobile QBs after being burned by Mariota and Locker. 
 

But there just isn’t a such thing anymore as good pocket passing QB prospects in the same sense that there used to be. You mainly want guys who are intelligent and coachable and who keep their eyes down field when scrambling and who can make the throws. Beyond that, hell if I know - I’ll just trust the NFL evaluators instead of just writing guys off as if I know anything about modern NFL QB play. 

The entire NFL is getting burned by these dual threat QBs. 

[tgo]

10 minutes ago, BudsOilers said:

You are missing the point.  It goes beyond your want to trade up to take a project QB because they are mobile.....but one big one is thinking that a guy with limited college production who has major issues with decision making/accuracy is easily fixable compared to other prospects that have multiple years of production and lesser issues with accuracy/decision making.  You want to put guys like Mahomes and Lawrence in the same bucket as Love and Lance and Richardson.  

 

Another big bias is this idea that Vrabel values the running/mobility aspect of a QB over the ability to pass the ball accurately and efficiently within the framework of the offense.

 

Oh I'm not putting them in the exact same bucket by any means, Lawrence was the number 1 overall pick.

 

I have no clue if Richardson will eventually be a good QB in the NFL. I definitely don't think he's ready to come in and play right away and he needs additional development. And obviously no one thinks it's easy to "fix" QB prospects - if that were the case you could draft them at any point and just coach them into starting roles which just almost never works out.

 

As far as Vrabel - I'm just going by what he's said on the subject during the last two offseasons - basically that QBs that are coming out of college now are mobile, dual threat guys who use their legs as a weapon, and that mobility is a good thing. And also the fact that Josh Dobbs, Logan Woodside, and Malik Willis are all very mobile QBs.

 

I mean, actually, Tannehill was a mobile QB coming out too, a former WR! And mobility has been a staple for him for a long while but he's now old and that factor, while still present, has diminished.

[tgo]

2 minutes ago, SleepingTitan said:

The entire NFL is getting burned by these dual threat QBs. 

 

The entire NFL gets burned by QBs in general, it's hard to find one.

 

But the only QBs available coming out of college who are high level talents are mobile QBs - I'm not sure what the exact definition of "dual threat" is in your mind - but to me Josh Allen would fit that bill. Lamar Jackson and Michael Vick were really "run first" QBs, and those are the guys that it is very hard to build an offense around and have any kind of sustained postseason success.

[Mythos27]

4 minutes ago, tgo said:

People seem to also dislike the other 3 mobile QB prospects which are higher ranked than Richardson - or at least really doubt them as prospects. I understand the critiques on individual prospects for sure. Maybe that’s a misperception on my part though and people do like the other 3 higher ranked prospects that we don’t have as much of a chance at. 
 

But also fierce opposition to trading for a Jordan Love or Trey Lance. 
 

Pretty much all the QBs that come out now and are any good are highly mobile prospects with questionable accuracy and decision making. Mahomes, Josh Allen, Trevor Lawrence even 

Yeah, I think it might be a situation where it seems to you that people are bagging on the mobile QBs given that this has been the trend in the past. I don't think this is the case here because using myself as an example, I'm very wary of Richardson but do like Bryce Young and would draft Stroud in a heartbeat. Not speaking for everyone but where I'm at is trying to consider guys like Richardson while also not completing letting go of the requirement that he be a proficient passer. 

[tgo]

2 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

Yeah, I think it might be a situation where it seems to you that people are bagging on the mobile QBs given that this has been the trend in the past. I don't think this is the case here because using myself as an example, I'm very wary of Richardson but do like Bryce Young and would draft Stroud in a heartbeat. Not speaking for everyone but where I'm at is trying to consider guys like Richardson while also not completing letting go of the requirement that he be a proficient passer. 

 

Gotcha - yeah Young and Stroud are much better prospects of course, which is why they are in consideration to go much higher - we just don't have a shot at them without a massive trade up (which goes without saying).

 

I just think we have to at least evaluate and consider guys who need additional development like Richardson with the idea of sitting them awhile. McNair was quite the project himself coming out, although he did have great production.

[TerryBoats]

52 minutes ago, japan said:

Lol.  Come on...

What have you seen to suggest that he is?  Better at this point, sure.  But he still looks quite raw and no more a #3 pick than Zack Wilson looks a #2 pick.

[ctm]

The #1 criteria for any QB is being able to execute in the passing game.  If he can't do that then he is an automatic failure regardless of how well he runs the ball.

 

So, start there.

 

[Mythos27]

17 minutes ago, SleepingTitan said:

The entire NFL is getting burned by these dual threat QBs. 

Yes, but the other side of the coin that often goes undiscussed is that it's also getting burned by the "pro ready" pocket passer types too (Darnold, Rosen, Mac Jones, etc). I have no data in front of me but to me it seems that the bigger shift is that the "dual-threat" guys are panning out more than they used to and a few have shown improvement in areas that seemed immutable before. The plus with the hyper athletic mobile guys is that even though it has a shelf life that athleticism can help you win while he either develops or proves to you it's time to move on. The less mobile guys give you absolutely nothing. 

[tgo]

6 minutes ago, ctm said:

The #1 criteria for any QB is being able to execute in the passing game.  If he can't do that then he is an automatic failure regardless of how well he runs the ball.

 

So, start there.

 

 

I'm not a Lamar Jackson fan - but would you say that he's been a total failure? His passing skills were as rudimentary as it comes.

[Titans279]

4 minutes ago, tgo said:

 

Gotcha - yeah Young and Stroud are much better prospects of course, which is why they are in consideration to go much higher - we just don't have a shot at them without a massive trade up (which goes without saying).

 

I just think we have to at least evaluate and consider guys who need additional development like Richardson with the idea of sitting them awhile. McNair was quite the project himself coming out, although he did have great production.

 

I can't speak for everyone, but I would love a "mobile" QB. As you said, there aren't even any quarterbacks who are like the 90's pocket passing statues of old anymore. They'd get killed in the modern NFL (and college). They're all "mobile" QBs to some extent now.

 

It's still all about the drop back game at some point though. Someone like Richardson whose comp is Cam Newton is probably still below my line for passing proficiency, but Newton was a still much better prospect than Richardson.  He was a better runner and passer. He was more productive, won a Heisman and national championship.

 

Richardson completed 54% of his passes this season. That's terrible. I want him to at least be projected as developing into a good passer.

 

It seems to me that you're lumping in Mahomes with Jackson which is basically nonsensical. Saying they're both mobile is silly because like you said, everyone is mobile now. There are still a vast spectrum of where people are or project to be as passers. I do not want someone projected to be in the bottom half of that spectrum as a passer, no matter how good of a runner they are.

[BudsOilers]

21 minutes ago, tgo said:

 

Oh I'm not putting them in the exact same bucket by any means, Lawrence was the number 1 overall pick.

 

I have no clue if Richardson will eventually be a good QB in the NFL. I definitely don't think he's ready to come in and play right away and he needs additional development. And obviously no one thinks it's easy to "fix" QB prospects - if that were the case you could draft them at any point and just coach them into starting roles which just almost never works out.

 

As far as Vrabel - I'm just going by what he's said on the subject during the last two offseasons - basically that QBs that are coming out of college now are mobile, dual threat guys who use their legs as a weapon, and that mobility is a good thing. And also the fact that Josh Dobbs, Logan Woodside, and Malik Willis are all very mobile QBs.

 

I mean, actually, Tannehill was a mobile QB coming out too, a former WR! And mobility has been a staple for him for a long while but he's now old and that factor, while still present, has diminished.

 

To warrant a significant investment, the QB has to first and foremast be able to pass the ball accurately and efficiently from the framework of the scheme.  And while most QB's in this era have some level of mobility. the mobility has to be functional mobility - using Willis as an example illustrates the difference between useful running or buying time versus simply running around without purpose.  

 

This idea you can sit guys for a couple of years is also wrong in this era and I've already explained why multiple times.  

 

As for Tannehill, this narrative that he's old and not mobile is just not correct.  Was it impacted by his high ankle sprains that he played on this year?  Sure.  If healthy, his mobility is enough and if the team can actually pass protect at a reasonable level, he'll be perfectly fine for the next couple of seasons.  

[Mythos27]

9 minutes ago, tgo said:

 

Gotcha - yeah Young and Stroud are much better prospects of course, which is why they are in consideration to go much higher - we just don't have a shot at them without a massive trade up (which goes without saying).

 

I just think we have to at least evaluate and consider guys who need additional development like Richardson with the idea of sitting them awhile. McNair was quite the project himself coming out, although he did have great production.

I see your McNair point but here's the thing; a lot of these QBs even the raw ones have been getting tons of reps and development at camps, 7 on 7's etc since they were like 12. That wasn't the case for guys like McNair. I've also soured on the idea of guys having to sit their first year. That said, I will grant you that it worked out for Mahomes. Mahomes wasn't a case where the scouts got it wrong necessarily. They saw a guys with incredible tools that had no idea what to do with the football and they were right. Sitting with Reid surely helped him but I also think playing his first year would not have hindered his learning.