Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

When looking to make a QB comparison for Gabbert look nor farther than...

38 posts in this topic

Posted

If anything Losman is closer to Clausen than Gabbert. I am not saying that because of I like Gabbert more than both of the others, I am just saying that losman and clausen have similar height and weight as well as arm strength.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If anything Losman is closer to Clausen than Gabbert. I am not saying that because of I like Gabbert more than both of the others, I am just saying that losman and clausen have similar height and weight as well as arm strength.

while kinda true, I thought that at the combine Losman struggled with intermediate accuracy but had a really nice deep ball. May be wrong, it's been years...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

while kinda true, I thought that at the combine Losman struggled with intermediate accuracy but had a really nice deep ball. May be wrong, it's been years...

I dont know what Losman did at the combine. I was just trying to remember what he did with the Bills early in his career. lots of interceptions on deep ball attempts to Lee Evans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

If anything Losman is closer to Clausen than Gabbert. I am not saying that because of I like Gabbert more than both of the others, I am just saying that losman and clausen have similar height and weight as well as arm strength.

Interestingly they both struggled under pressure as well in college. In 2009 Clausen was 66% overall in completions but he dropped to 52% on third down. Likewise Gabbert was at 63% for the year and 44% on third down. Clausen continued to do so in the pros. Frankly I think Gabbert might struggle in the pros as well. One of the biggest positive for Newton was that under pressure his completion percentage went up not down. Overall on third down he was at 58% versus 66% overall which was not a big drop off. When blitzed by 5 guys or more it went up to 76%.

Maybe it is me but I saw enough 3rd down blitzes which turned into sacks or throw aways to last several years. Unfortunately picking Gabbert might very well end up being more of the same. More of a feeling than anything I can prove one way or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Interestingly they both struggled under pressure as well in college. In 2009 Clausen was 66% overall in completions but he dropped to 52% on third down. Likewise Gabbert was at 63% for the year and 44% on third down. Clausen continued to do so in the pros. Frankly I think Gabbert might struggle in the pros as well. One of the biggest positive for Newton was that under pressure his completion percentage went up not down. Overall on third down he was at 58% versus 66% overall which was not a big drop off. When blitzed by 5 guys or more it went up to 76%.

Maybe it is me but I saw enough 3rd down blitzes which turned into sacks or throw aways to last several years. Unfortunately picking Gabbert might very well end up being more of the same. More of a feeling than anything I can prove one way or the other.

This is a very hard thing to compare though. Gabbert was in an offense in which they threw 99% of the time and were in the shotgun 100% of the time. As a result two incompletions on first and second and they were at 3rd and 10. However when they did get first downs it was on other downs. so its like Gabbert was making 3rd down throws on 2nd and 1st down.

meanwhile in Cams offense they were moving the ball with a more balanced offense( it could even be said a very run first offense) so people werent sure when we was going to throw. Because of the running game it wasnt feast or famine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

This is a very hard thing to compare though. Gabbert was in an offense in which they threw 99% of the time and were in the shotgun 100% of the time. As a result two incompletions on first and second and they were at 3rd and 10. However when they did get first downs it was on other downs. so its like Gabbert was making 3rd down throws on 2nd and 1st down.

meanwhile in Cams offense they were moving the ball with a more balanced offense( it could even be said a very run first offense) so people werent sure when we was going to throw. Because of the running game it wasnt feast or famine.

they passed 53% of the time if you look at the stats

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

they passed 53% of the time if you look at the stats

edit: nevermind, misread the previous post!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

they passed 53% of the time if you look at the stats

There you go introducing facts into the discussion. Totally ruined the fairy tale he was weaving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There you go introducing facts into the discussion. Totally ruined the fairy tale he was weaving.

Oh come on. While the previous poster was incorrect, Mizzou had to pass on a ton of 3rd and very longs, many, many more than Auburn. So sure, they ran it a ton, and they were moderately effective (4.6 YPA on the year which was 'only' 1.5 YPA below Auburns)...

but the problem with a lot of these statistical comparisons showing "poise under pressure" when you look at down and distance is that you ignore game factors... for instance, who is winning? who is losing? what's the score? what needs to be done?

ultimately, I can tell you this: Gabbert has lead his team to victory when behind with his arm primarily. He makes plays when he needs to any way he can - his legs arguably won them the game against Oklahoma - and he's a great field general. He has things to work on, because if he didn't, he'd go #1... but the same is true of Cam Newton. Neither are perfect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to mav1234 again."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Losman: 6'2, 217, never hit over 60% when he started a full season, strong arm, low accuracy, in his best year had a 7.3 yards per throw. Threw 33 td passes and never had great intangibles.

Gabbert: 6'4, 234, hit 63.4% in his final year, strong arm, great accuracy, in his best year threw 8.07 yards per throw, has all the intangibles.

No comparison what so ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Oh come on. While the previous poster was incorrect, Mizzou had to pass on a ton of 3rd and very longs, many, many more than Auburn. So sure, they ran it a ton, and they were moderately effective (4.6 YPA on the year which was 'only' 1.5 YPA below Auburns)...

but the problem with a lot of these statistical comparisons showing "poise under pressure" when you look at down and distance is that you ignore game factors... for instance, who is winning? who is losing? what's the score? what needs to be done?

ultimately, I can tell you this: Gabbert has lead his team to victory when behind with his arm primarily. He makes plays when he needs to any way he can - his legs arguably won them the game against Oklahoma - and he's a great field general. He has things to work on, because if he didn't, he'd go #1... but the same is true of Cam Newton. Neither are perfect.

First of all they threw 475 times, 190 on first down, 164 times on second down and 115 on third down. Of third and more than 7 he was 27 of 66 for 40% with 2 TDs and 3 Ints. So your ton of times is actually about 15% of the time.

When they were ahead 15 points he threw 5 TDs and 3 Picks, when the game was close- winning by 7 or less points he had 1 Td and 2 picks. When they were behind by less than 7 he had 4 TDS and 3 picks.

When the game is on the line he is average or below at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites