Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

2014 QB's vs 2015 Qb's
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 135
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


If Luck would've thrown anything like that, of course he wouldn't have. I don't see the point of even bringing that up. You took an extreme case that barely even applies to this conversation.



Because stats obviously do matter...they are a big part of evaluating a player. And I see you still haven't given me reasons why Luck is so called the better prospect, and you can't!!


First of all, you never asked why Luck was a better prospect. How am I supposed to know that's what you're looking for w/o you telling me? I'm a simple guy from Ohio posting in a forum. I don't know what you expect me to be but if you want something, I suggest promoting it.

Stats matter to an extent but not how you're portraying them. You totally took it out of context. I hope you can understand that b/c it's so easy to see. Now, Luck was better for these reasons: arm strength, accuracy, smarts, poise, mechanics, and other variables. I would feel fine letting you know these things but my keystrokes will be wasted b/c I have a feeling you're not going to be convinced. That's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine.



Laughing at Luck being the better prospect because of arm strength...that's one of his weaknesses. Accuracy? Did you even watch Jameis Winston play? You've got to be kidding. That kid is one of the most accurate QBs I have ever seen. Poise? A freshman winning the national championship and going undefeated while doing so is the definition of poise. Kid is lauded for his poise. He was one of the best in the country against the blitz and on 3rd down as a freshman. Smarts? How did you even measure that? That's just a code word. You don't know a damn thing about football, and you damn sure don't watch it. We'll end this discussion here because I don't argue with idiots.



Only thing that even had any substance in your post is mechanics, and as a redshirt freshman, Andrew Luck's mechanics were not flawless.


JTagg7754 wrote:
I would feel fine letting you know these things but my keystrokes will be wasted b/c I have a feeling you're not going to be convinced. That's fine. You're wrong, but that's fine.


Not like I didn't call that one. Feel free to call me an idiot more often though, you're showing great class. I believe bias was brought up before. Do you have any mirrors where you live?

The funny thing is, you say "how do you even measure smarts" then call me an idiot. The irony of that is simply amazing. Thank you for the laughs. You can go back to whatever forum you belong to now.


please tell me how you measured that if you don't use on the field production...it's a code word, nothing more.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 135
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
You have never seen a redshirt freshman step in, go undefeated, win the Heisman and national championship. It has never been done before.


And, again, for the billionth time, collegiate achievements mean squat.

To call someone bias b/c they believe he's not on the same level of Luck (when he's not) is just nonsense. Will he get there? We'll see.



No, it's because they won't be able to tell me why he's not on the same level as Luck. He outperformed Luck's last season in college as a redshirt freshman and on less pass attempts...in a pro style offense without him being an even marginal threat to run the ball. College numbers do mean something, when you consider them in context. Luck wouldn't have been the first overall pick if he had thrown 20 interceptions and only 25 td passes.


It's so pointless to compare stats. Especially in college. Difference conference, competition, etc.

Winston had a good season. Let's see if he peaked or if he's builds on it.

Plenty of QBs have had great seasons only to fizzle when things change. Wilson, Barkely, Landry Jones, Locker, etc recently. Hero's to zero's over the course of 1 season.

If I've learned anything, it's not to buy college hype after 1 season. Let's see what Winston does say w/out Kelvin Benjamin to throw to next year for example.


who was Kelvin Benjamin before Jameis Winston came to Tally? Answer that for me. I never heard his name even being spoken, now he turned Jameis Winston from a scrub to a Heisman Laughing



I like how nobody mentions how successful Stanford has been without Luck though....beating Oregon the past two years, a team they couldn't beat and that Luck had a lot of trouble with...with Kevin Hogan playing QB Laughing


I didn't say Benjamin made Winston. I just suggested things will look different next year in "Tally" without him.

Winston still plays in the pathetic ACC and IMO wasn't' the best QB in the country last year. Putting up stats in the ACC isn't impressive to me.

Who'd he play last year? Auburn was the toughest opponent and he looked pedestrian against a poor Auburn defense. Yeah, yeah…. the come back drive. Again…. Auburn's defense was a sieve, so not really impressed.

Would have loved to see him play Alabama or Missouri. Hardest opponent was probably Clemson, who boasts a pathetic defense as well. He took advantage of a week ACC schedule, period.

Stanford has been successful because of their defense. And Hogan is a stud in his own right. In fact (and please spare me the "stats") I'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL, he will be a better pro.



who was the best QB in college last year? I'm dying to know your answer. And if your criteria for being a great prospect is that you can never struggle, you're even dumber than I thought.



Dude said he'd take Hogan over Winston in the NFL Laughing. As I said, people that say these things clearly have a biased agenda


What's 'dumb' is crowning a college QB after one year starting in general. But factor in the sad level of competition faced and the talent around the QB in this case, you'd think patience should be exercised before going all in.

Best QB in college last year was Manziel (here comes the backlash). He was better in 2013 than in 2012 when he won the Heisman. He was more valuable to his team playing against SEC defenses on an A&M team with a poor defense.

I'm not a Bridgewater guy, but I'd argue Teddy had a better season considering the lack of talent around him.

As for Hogan, that chip will fall in time. He's got all the tools of an NFL QB. He plays in a run heavy, ball control offense so his stats don't "wow" the casual viewer. Also, put Hackenburg in that conversation, he will prove better than Winston come time to play NFL ball.



I knew you would say Manziel, the dude with one of the best offensive lines in college history with the likes of Mike Evans catching passes from him, but nope, you didn't hold that against him...


Not to mention, he lost against Auburn, when it was time to make a game winning drive, he folded. Jameis didn't! LSU made him look like an amateur. Dude completed like 39% of his passes . The only supposedly great SEC defense he beat was Alabama, and as I said before, they were exposed by a redshirt freshman. He didn't play Florida, and he didn't do anything against them the previous year. He didn't do anything spectacular against Missouri, and the guy is really interception prone. So what great SEC team did Manziel abuse? Ole Miss? They haven't been relevant for years? Mississippi State? You're a complete clown!


I didn't crown anyone, all I stated was that based on his play, there is no reason he shouldn't be considered a prospect on the same level as Luck. And you have no problem crowing players, you just crowned Hackenburg and Hogan as better than Jameis....You have a biased agenda and you inserting Teddy Bridgewater as one of your top QBs doesn't fool me at all. Laughing


I see right through you little boy!


Not sure what that means. Kind of creepy and I don't know why you are getting so confrontational about varying opinions.

But get back to me when Winston plays a defense like LSU's. Also should point out, Manziel injured his shoulder against Auburn up 31-24 at them time. Came back in the 4th and tried to gut out a win.

As for the Winston, Luck side of this. Get back to us when Winston PROVES it more than one season. Luck showed a consistent level of play for 3 seasons and put Stanford back on the map.

That's all were saying. Slow your roll. Let's see Winston repeat.



the same LSU defense that Aaron Murray carved up? Really? THis was a down year for LSU's defense. They got ran over by Ole Miss. You don't watch football dude




You excuse Manziel's performance against Auburn but you fail to mention that Auburn's Damayaune Craig was stealing FSU's signals and knew all their plays...yet they still managed to win.



Hackenburg didn't show more than 1 year of play, but you're already projecting him to be better than Jameis and an NFL stud Laughing. You're a clown dude. I have nothing more to say to you.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
NickButera


Moderator
Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Posts: 6416
Location: Nevada
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 10:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:



the same LSU defense that Aaron Murray carved up? Really? THis was a down year for LSU's defense. They got ran over by Ole Miss. You don't watch football dude




You excuse Manziel's performance against Auburn but you fail to mention that Auburn's Damayaune Craig was stealing FSU's signals and knew all their plays...yet they still managed to win.



Hackenburg didn't show more than 1 year of play, but you're already projecting him to be better than Jameis and an NFL stud Laughing. You're a clown dude. I have nothing more to say to you.


You've officially been warned aburre21. We do not condone personal attacks or name calling, and it's against our webmasters rules. Keep the conversation cordial and agree to disagree respectfully. There's no need to be that rude and abrasive just because someone disagrees with you or you think they are selectively supporting certain players. It's a football forum, everyone has opinions and biases towards players we support for various reasons, silly or not.
_________________
Bah-Weep-Granah-Weep-Nini-Bong

My short-term memory is not as sharp as it used to be.
Also, my short-term memory is not as sharp as it used to be.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
OakleyCap


Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 5364
Location: CA
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JTagg7754 wrote:
Teddy Bridgewater is for many reasons. He has great football intelligence, good arm strength, a good enough arm, he uses the pocket well among other things. Nothing to do w/ who he played. Bortles is a project that is taking advantage of a weak QB class. I don't know why he's a first round prospect.

When determining a prospects' draft position, you look for intelligence, experience, accuracy, arm strength among many other things. When people possess these traits, they are going to put up good numbers. Why? B/c that's what people who possess those traits do; SUCCEED. Now, what you are seemingly getting confused is that people who put up those numbers are good prospects which is entirely false. There are collegiate systems that tailor to a specific QB and take advantage of their best traits. You can get away w/ this in college but more times than not, not in the NFL. Kellen Moore, Colt Brennan, Timmy Chang, Chase Coffman, and countless others tore it up in college but sucked in the NFL if they ever even got a shot. Why? B/c their game (or those traits I listed above) did not translate into the NFL.

Make sense?? Do you see the difference?


Your only argument for Winston not being a top flight quarterback prospect is "he put up good numbers against poor defenses." Completely ignoring the fact that two quarterbacks have been taken in the top sixteen playing in the exact same offense, against similar defenses, surrounded by similar teammates despite putting up worse numbers in the past four years.

I'm also not sure why you're comparing the Florida State offense to an air-raid spread attack when it's clearly a pro-style balanced attack. I'm honestly starting to wonder if you've ever even seen Winston or Florida State play. Because like I said their system has produced quarterback prospects good enough to be selected very early and neither guy put up as good of numbers as Winston in the same offense...
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22503
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:

the same LSU defense that Aaron Murray carved up? Really? THis was a down year for LSU's defense. They got ran over by Ole Miss. You don't watch football dude


LSU was playing different football in Sept. then in Nov. defensively when the settled in. And Aaron Murray was regarded as one of the nations best. Every team has it's day. You can't compare one to the other. LSU had Manziel's number twice. It happens.


aburre21 wrote:
You excuse Manziel's performance against Auburn but you fail to mention that Auburn's Damayaune Craig was stealing FSU's signals and knew all their plays...yet they still managed to win.


Excuse his performance? He tore up Auburn like most QBs did. It just ended in a shoulder injury that he tried to play through in the 4 quarter.

As for the latter part of your post. I have no idea what 'conspiracy theory' you're referencing. Is it 'stealing' when you used to coach for the other team and know their signals/tendencies? Argument for another time.

aburre21 wrote:
Hackenburg didn't show more than 1 year of play, but you're already projecting him to be better than Jameis and an NFL stud Laughing. You're a clown dude. I have nothing more to say to you.


I'm saying I like Hackenburg's upside more. I didn't say he'd be an NFL stud, so don't put words in my mouth. I just said he will prove a better pro than Winston in the end.

And please. Say nothing more to me. Because you haven't made a valid point except to point out meaningless stats for a QB playing with a stud roster, in a terrible conference and crown him as a "once in a decade" Andrew Luck type prospect, when he's anything but.

And all you show is stats which are skewed and an inaccurate way to measure success against another player.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
GJT1347


Joined: 20 Jan 2007
Posts: 1679
Location: Omaha
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This thread has been hijacked and it is now completely pointless to try and argue any more points. Is it really that hard to acknowledge points made by other posters? We need to stop being so stubborn here and absorb other people's information without attacking them, but that's probly too much to ask...on to the next topic.
_________________


Props to Palooka ^


Last edited by GJT1347 on Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:59 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 135
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 12:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:

the same LSU defense that Aaron Murray carved up? Really? THis was a down year for LSU's defense. They got ran over by Ole Miss. You don't watch football dude


LSU was playing different football in Sept. then in Nov. defensively when the settled in. And Aaron Murray was regarded as one of the nations best. Every team has it's day. You can't compare one to the other. LSU had Manziel's number twice. It happens.


aburre21 wrote:
You excuse Manziel's performance against Auburn but you fail to mention that Auburn's Damayaune Craig was stealing FSU's signals and knew all their plays...yet they still managed to win.


Excuse his performance? He tore up Auburn like most QBs did. It just ended in a shoulder injury that he tried to play through in the 4 quarter.

As for the latter part of your post. I have no idea what 'conspiracy theory' you're referencing. Is it 'stealing' when you used to coach for the other team and know their signals/tendencies? Argument for another time.

aburre21 wrote:
Hackenburg didn't show more than 1 year of play, but you're already projecting him to be better than Jameis and an NFL stud Laughing. You're a clown dude. I have nothing more to say to you.


I'm saying I like Hackenburg's upside more. I didn't say he'd be an NFL stud, so don't put words in my mouth. I just said he will prove a better pro than Winston in the end.

And please. Say nothing more to me. Because you haven't made a valid point except to point out meaningless stats for a QB playing with a stud roster, in a terrible conference and crown him as a "once in a decade" Andrew Luck type prospect, when he's anything but.

And all you show is stats which are skewed and an inaccurate way to measure success against another player.



Excuses excuses. Manziel didn't do anything against Florida, he stunk 2 years in a row against LSU. He choked against Auburn. Lost to Missouri. I mean, can you show me where he so called did all this damage against SEC defenses? He put all them numbers up against bottom feeders with the exception of Alabama


Jameis Winston plays in a terrible conference but you think the Big Ten is so great? A terrible conference doesn't stop you from blowing Hackenberg Laughing




Here we go with this team full of studs. FSU lost like 13 players to the NFL draft before Jameis even became a starter. How come they didn't win a NC before. How come his predecessors didn't put up those numbers? You can't answer that question. Never mind the fact that Manziel has studs on his team, don't see you using that against him. You're a hater with a clear agenda. Meanwhile Stanford is an even better team since Luck left and he didn't have talent around him Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DOCLEW 28


Joined: 10 Nov 2006
Posts: 10890
Location: East Oakland
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sniiiiifffff...

I can just smell the estrogen in this place right now. LOL!!! Laughing
_________________

Raider X hooked me with the sig
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Baggabonez


Joined: 29 Apr 2010
Posts: 5809
Location: RaiderNation
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 9:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are very few college teams that consistently use a pro-style offense (some will run a true pro-style offense if they get a QB that can run it) those schools consistently attract prototypical pocket passers. As an example, USC is one of those schools that has the additional pressure of wanting to win a certain way. It would be hard to envision USC running the option for example. (Nebraska & Michigan had similar problems when the fan base turned on the style of football they were playing, spread vs ground and pound)

What made Luck so special was that by the time he was a Senior he was calling his own plays and making sight read audibles without assistance which is ultra-rare. When you are talking about making the transition from being a college QB to the pros who cares who won what first or how many championships they acquired? What's important is the type of offense and the complexity. I see very few pro-style offenses in college these days with multiple progressions. I think people get pro-style and power I confused. Just because a QB takes snaps under center in an I formation doesn't make it a NFL level offense. But those are rare and even more rare to find a QB that can excel in it.

Compare Pryor to McGloin. Pryor ran a simplified Pro-set I offense where he often took snaps under center but he didn't have to make progressions, look off defenders, or throw WRs open. Pryor admitted that he just recently learned "how to throw" this season, an indication of very poor coaching. Pryor has a very hard time trusting what he sees. He doesn't throw WRs open, he throws to open Wrs, a distinct difference. Conversely, McGloin, who is very physically limited, was groomed by O'Brien and it's very apparent he has a strong command of the game. That is not to suggest that one should be starting over the other to open up that debate again, however, I think the staff might have been frustrated by having to teach basic fundamentals of the game that McGloin had mastered due to proper coaching.

In the NFL game mental acumen is equally if not more important than physical abilities. Look at the teams who are consistently going deep in the playoffs. Are they physical specimens?

I am personally high on Hackenberg because Bill O'Brien's offense is extremely complex and requires sight read audibles, as a true freshman that is tremendous. However, I am concerned now that O'Brien has moved on. I am not nearly as high on Hogan as he appears more of a game manager more McCarron-esque. I am not as high on Winston as most, despite being a physical specimen, because I'm not high on FSU's simplified offense it reminds me of Louisville's offense. The complexity of the offense doesn't "wow" me. FSU and others like them have an offense designed to quickly get QBs up to speed to compete. Ponder is an example of an FSU product who played in an offense meant to accentuate his strengths but not challenge him to build skills.
_________________
Nodisrespect on building inside out wrote:
teams without highly draft DT's make the playoffs and win the superbowl regularly.

Bonez wrote:
Teams that win Superbowls and make the playoffs aren't picking in the Top 5, clearly
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11990
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 9:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
The funny thing is, you say "how do you even measure smarts" then call me an idiot. The irony of that is simply amazing. Thank you for the laughs. You can go back to whatever forum you belong to now.


please tell me how you measured that if you don't use on the field production...it's a code word, nothing more.


aburre21 wrote:
We'll end this discussion here because I don't argue with idiots.


Seems like you've had a change of heart, eh, Champ?? Your ship has sailed. There's no logical conversation w/ you especially since I'm an "idiot". Should've ended the discussion when you said b/c I did. You can chalk this up to your victory but I know better..... probably b/c I'm an "idiot".... or b/c I have common sense, you choose.

Have a blessed day.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11990
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 9:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

OakleyCap wrote:
JTagg7754 wrote:
Teddy Bridgewater is for many reasons. He has great football intelligence, good arm strength, a good enough arm, he uses the pocket well among other things. Nothing to do w/ who he played. Bortles is a project that is taking advantage of a weak QB class. I don't know why he's a first round prospect.

When determining a prospects' draft position, you look for intelligence, experience, accuracy, arm strength among many other things. When people possess these traits, they are going to put up good numbers. Why? B/c that's what people who possess those traits do; SUCCEED. Now, what you are seemingly getting confused is that people who put up those numbers are good prospects which is entirely false. There are collegiate systems that tailor to a specific QB and take advantage of their best traits. You can get away w/ this in college but more times than not, not in the NFL. Kellen Moore, Colt Brennan, Timmy Chang, Chase Coffman, and countless others tore it up in college but sucked in the NFL if they ever even got a shot. Why? B/c their game (or those traits I listed above) did not translate into the NFL.

Make sense?? Do you see the difference?


Quote:
Your only argument for Winston not being a top flight quarterback prospect is "he put up good numbers against poor defenses."


You seem to be struggling here. Where have I said he's not a "top flight QB prospect"? I think Winston's a great prospect but he's not pro ready yet. If you're going to put words into my mouth, please do a better job of it.

Quote:
Completely ignoring the fact that two quarterbacks have been taken in the top sixteen playing in the exact same offense, against similar defenses, surrounded by similar teammates despite putting up worse numbers in the past four years.


And Ponder is terrible and Manuel more than likely won't amount to much. Are you trying to make a point b/c it seems you're doing the opposite.

Quote:
I'm also not sure why you're comparing the Florida State offense to an air-raid spread attack


I did that?? Where?

Quote:
when it's clearly a pro-style balanced attack.


That can be argued.

Quote:
I'm honestly starting to wonder if you've ever even seen Winston or Florida State play.


I'm honestly wondering if you're even reading my words. So far, you've accused me of two things I haven't done. Trust me, I saw probably about 7 FSU games this season. They were a favorite for my parlays every week before everyone got on their bandwagon. Aside from OSU and Baylor, I probably watched FSU football the second most. I can show you my parlay picks if it will help you ease your mind.

Quote:
Because like I said their system has produced quarterback prospects good enough to be selected very early and neither guy put up as good of numbers as Winston in the same offense...


You also said that I said many things that I didn't in this very post. I'm starting to not take your words too seriously as a result. Not that your opinion doesn't matter b/c that's not the case. It's just that if you're going to accuse someone of something, please have a base for your accusation and just don't throw it out there for the hell of it.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JTagg7754


Joined: 09 Nov 2010
Posts: 11990
Location: Somewhere in Ohio
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:
There are very few college teams that consistently use a pro-style offense (some will run a true pro-style offense if they get a QB that can run it) those schools consistently attract prototypical pocket passers. As an example, USC is one of those schools that has the additional pressure of wanting to win a certain way. It would be hard to envision USC running the option for example. (Nebraska & Michigan had similar problems when the fan base turned on the style of football they were playing, spread vs ground and pound)

What made Luck so special was that by the time he was a Senior he was calling his own plays and making sight read audibles without assistance which is ultra-rare. When you are talking about making the transition from being a college QB to the pros who cares who won what first or how many championships they acquired? What's important is the type of offense and the complexity. I see very few pro-style offenses in college these days with multiple progressions. I think people get pro-style and power I confused. Just because a QB takes snaps under center in an I formation doesn't make it a NFL level offense. But those are rare and even more rare to find a QB that can excel in it.

Compare Pryor to McGloin. Pryor ran a simplified Pro-set I offense where he often took snaps under center but he didn't have to make progressions, look off defenders, or throw WRs open. Pryor admitted that he just recently learned "how to throw" this season, an indication of very poor coaching. Pryor has a very hard time trusting what he sees. He doesn't throw WRs open, he throws to open Wrs, a distinct difference. Conversely, McGloin, who is very physically limited, was groomed by O'Brien and it's very apparent he has a strong command of the game. That is not to suggest that one should be starting over the other to open up that debate again, however, I think the staff might have been frustrated by having to teach basic fundamentals of the game that McGloin had mastered due to proper coaching.

In the NFL game mental acumen is equally if not more important than physical abilities. Look at the teams who are consistently going deep in the playoffs. Are they physical specimens?

I am personally high on Hackenberg because Bill O'Brien's offense is extremely complex and requires sight read audibles, as a true freshman that is tremendous. However, I am concerned now that O'Brien has moved on. I am not nearly as high on Hogan as he appears more of a game manager more McCarron-esque. I am not as high on Winston as most, despite being a physical specimen, because I'm not high on FSU's simplified offense it reminds me of Louisville's offense. The complexity of the offense doesn't "wow" me. FSU and others like them have an offense designed to quickly get QBs up to speed to compete. Ponder is an example of an FSU product who played in an offense meant to accentuate his strengths but not challenge him to build skills.


Good post and good explanation. You're fighting a losing battle (to some) but you are absolutely correct. You and I are definitely the front runners for Hackenberg also assuming he progresses down the path he started. Sucks O'Brien is gone b/c he would've helped him even more.
_________________


PM sig requests.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
big_palooka


Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 22503
Location: ATL
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:

the same LSU defense that Aaron Murray carved up? Really? THis was a down year for LSU's defense. They got ran over by Ole Miss. You don't watch football dude


LSU was playing different football in Sept. then in Nov. defensively when the settled in. And Aaron Murray was regarded as one of the nations best. Every team has it's day. You can't compare one to the other. LSU had Manziel's number twice. It happens.


aburre21 wrote:
You excuse Manziel's performance against Auburn but you fail to mention that Auburn's Damayaune Craig was stealing FSU's signals and knew all their plays...yet they still managed to win.


Excuse his performance? He tore up Auburn like most QBs did. It just ended in a shoulder injury that he tried to play through in the 4 quarter.

As for the latter part of your post. I have no idea what 'conspiracy theory' you're referencing. Is it 'stealing' when you used to coach for the other team and know their signals/tendencies? Argument for another time.

aburre21 wrote:
Hackenburg didn't show more than 1 year of play, but you're already projecting him to be better than Jameis and an NFL stud Laughing. You're a clown dude. I have nothing more to say to you.


I'm saying I like Hackenburg's upside more. I didn't say he'd be an NFL stud, so don't put words in my mouth. I just said he will prove a better pro than Winston in the end.

And please. Say nothing more to me. Because you haven't made a valid point except to point out meaningless stats for a QB playing with a stud roster, in a terrible conference and crown him as a "once in a decade" Andrew Luck type prospect, when he's anything but.

And all you show is stats which are skewed and an inaccurate way to measure success against another player.



Excuses excuses. Manziel didn't do anything against Florida, he stunk 2 years in a row against LSU. He choked against Auburn. Lost to Missouri. I mean, can you show me where he so called did all this damage against SEC defenses? He put all them numbers up against bottom feeders with the exception of Alabama


Jameis Winston plays in a terrible conference but you think the Big Ten is so great? A terrible conference doesn't stop you from blowing Hackenberg Laughing




Here we go with this team full of studs. FSU lost like 13 players to the NFL draft before Jameis even became a starter. How come they didn't win a NC before. How come his predecessors didn't put up those numbers? You can't answer that question. Never mind the fact that Manziel has studs on his team, don't see you using that against him. You're a hater with a clear agenda. Meanwhile Stanford is an even better team since Luck left and he didn't have talent around him Laughing


I missed the part where football was not a team game. It's all on the QB if the team looses now. Good to know.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 135
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Baggabonez wrote:
There are very few college teams that consistently use a pro-style offense (some will run a true pro-style offense if they get a QB that can run it) those schools consistently attract prototypical pocket passers. As an example, USC is one of those schools that has the additional pressure of wanting to win a certain way. It would be hard to envision USC running the option for example. (Nebraska & Michigan had similar problems when the fan base turned on the style of football they were playing, spread vs ground and pound)

What made Luck so special was that by the time he was a Senior he was calling his own plays and making sight read audibles without assistance which is ultra-rare. When you are talking about making the transition from being a college QB to the pros who cares who won what first or how many championships they acquired? What's important is the type of offense and the complexity. I see very few pro-style offenses in college these days with multiple progressions. I think people get pro-style and power I confused. Just because a QB takes snaps under center in an I formation doesn't make it a NFL level offense. But those are rare and even more rare to find a QB that can excel in it.

Compare Pryor to McGloin. Pryor ran a simplified Pro-set I offense where he often took snaps under center but he didn't have to make progressions, look off defenders, or throw WRs open. Pryor admitted that he just recently learned "how to throw" this season, an indication of very poor coaching. Pryor has a very hard time trusting what he sees. He doesn't throw WRs open, he throws to open Wrs, a distinct difference. Conversely, McGloin, who is very physically limited, was groomed by O'Brien and it's very apparent he has a strong command of the game. That is not to suggest that one should be starting over the other to open up that debate again, however, I think the staff might have been frustrated by having to teach basic fundamentals of the game that McGloin had mastered due to proper coaching.

In the NFL game mental acumen is equally if not more important than physical abilities. Look at the teams who are consistently going deep in the playoffs. Are they physical specimens?

I am personally high on Hackenberg because Bill O'Brien's offense is extremely complex and requires sight read audibles, as a true freshman that is tremendous. However, I am concerned now that O'Brien has moved on. I am not nearly as high on Hogan as he appears more of a game manager more McCarron-esque. I am not as high on Winston as most, despite being a physical specimen, because I'm not high on FSU's simplified offense it reminds me of Louisville's offense. The complexity of the offense doesn't "wow" me. FSU and others like them have an offense designed to quickly get QBs up to speed to compete. Ponder is an example of an FSU product who played in an offense meant to accentuate his strengths but not challenge him to build skills.



Quote:
"The funny thing is it's easier to learn than the offense I had at Florida State," he told SiriusXM NFL Radio. "It's a true West Coast-type progression offense. That's really what I wanted when I was coming through the pre-draft process. I wanted something that I could just go in and say 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, check it down and run it. That's it, it's that simple. I love it."

He said he spent extensive time during the Bills' rookie minicamp and organized team activities working with offensive coordinator Nathaniel Hackett.

"I've done great. The learning curve for me is a lot shorter simply because of what I had at Florida State. [The Seminoles' offense is] more complex and a little bit harder to catch on and learn. This offense is very simple. I've done a great job with it," he said in the interview.



you dudes are pretend analysts and it's hilarious. Yes, i'll take your word over a guy who actually played there.



let me quote another person for you

Quote:
But you're right - what sets him apart from other physically gifted kids is his grasp of Jimbo Fisher's offense. It's been remarkable how well Winston has understood and commanded this system, one that some FSU fans have maligned as "too complex" over the years. Jameis is understands FSU's route combinations, has a great rapport with his receivers, is good in pre-snap recognition, and rifles through his progressions to get the ball to the correct guy. It's this mental acuity that has led to his success in Fisher's offense as a young quarterback. He also handles Fisher's tough coaching very well. In this and the quick movement through progressions, he does well what EJ Manuel struggled to do. Winston is quite mentally tough.



Laughing Laughing
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
aburre21


Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 135
Location: N.O
PostPosted: Tue Jan 28, 2014 2:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:
big_palooka wrote:
aburre21 wrote:

the same LSU defense that Aaron Murray carved up? Really? THis was a down year for LSU's defense. They got ran over by Ole Miss. You don't watch football dude


LSU was playing different football in Sept. then in Nov. defensively when the settled in. And Aaron Murray was regarded as one of the nations best. Every team has it's day. You can't compare one to the other. LSU had Manziel's number twice. It happens.


aburre21 wrote:
You excuse Manziel's performance against Auburn but you fail to mention that Auburn's Damayaune Craig was stealing FSU's signals and knew all their plays...yet they still managed to win.


Excuse his performance? He tore up Auburn like most QBs did. It just ended in a shoulder injury that he tried to play through in the 4 quarter.

As for the latter part of your post. I have no idea what 'conspiracy theory' you're referencing. Is it 'stealing' when you used to coach for the other team and know their signals/tendencies? Argument for another time.

aburre21 wrote:
Hackenburg didn't show more than 1 year of play, but you're already projecting him to be better than Jameis and an NFL stud Laughing. You're a clown dude. I have nothing more to say to you.


I'm saying I like Hackenburg's upside more. I didn't say he'd be an NFL stud, so don't put words in my mouth. I just said he will prove a better pro than Winston in the end.

And please. Say nothing more to me. Because you haven't made a valid point except to point out meaningless stats for a QB playing with a stud roster, in a terrible conference and crown him as a "once in a decade" Andrew Luck type prospect, when he's anything but.

And all you show is stats which are skewed and an inaccurate way to measure success against another player.



Excuses excuses. Manziel didn't do anything against Florida, he stunk 2 years in a row against LSU. He choked against Auburn. Lost to Missouri. I mean, can you show me where he so called did all this damage against SEC defenses? He put all them numbers up against bottom feeders with the exception of Alabama


Jameis Winston plays in a terrible conference but you think the Big Ten is so great? A terrible conference doesn't stop you from blowing Hackenberg Laughing




Here we go with this team full of studs. FSU lost like 13 players to the NFL draft before Jameis even became a starter. How come they didn't win a NC before. How come his predecessors didn't put up those numbers? You can't answer that question. Never mind the fact that Manziel has studs on his team, don't see you using that against him. You're a hater with a clear agenda. Meanwhile Stanford is an even better team since Luck left and he didn't have talent around him Laughing


I missed the part where football was not a team game. It's all on the QB if the team looses now. Good to know.



I'm missing the part where you provided evidence that Manziel abused elite defenses in the SEC...because he didn't.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Oakland Raiders All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 5 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group