Jump to content

  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

In This Thread I Talk Rationally About Drafting A QB #1 Overall.

SmootsDaddy89

By SmootsDaddy89,
in Carolina Panthers

Recommended Posts

mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

Bradford took a lot of snaps from center at OU, was used to 3-5-7 step drops, reading D's pre-snap and then going through his progressions. He was an accurate, polished passer who biggest question was his rehab and subsequent durability.

No other QB in this draft can say this. Rams knew there was a chance he would start.

We drafted a QB last year, we won't do it again this year.

Your read on Bradford was not quite what I got. Mind you, I think he was a great prospect and I agree his injury concerns were the greatest issue, but they were not the sole issue.

He also had low pocket awareness, a tendency to roll out too quickly, didn't consistently step up in the pocket. The Rams knew this, and they did a ton of work with bringing his mental clock up to speed by forcing him to make quick reads and throws in practice on a strict timer.

As far as I was aware, Bradford's pre-snap reads came from the sideline, as they tend to do in a spread offense, and his working through his progressions is no different than other pass-first spread options. And yes, you're right, he took some snaps from under center at Oklahoma but the vast majority were from the shotgun, just as in any other spread.

Right, half of the posters on this board fell in love with Luck before they ever knew anything about him other than a couple of highlight clips and what analysts were saying.

I've got news for y'all...those analysts are wrong about players every single year, and that includes some of these "can't miss" QB's who they all agreed on. Just the fact that some of them had Jake Locker as a #1 pick last year should be your first clue. Cam Newton is a better passer right now than Locker will ever be.

Not many had Locker as the #1 pick. Locker was given a second round grade by the draft advisory dudes, that's why he went back to school. He didn't care what Kiper said about him, because the people that mattered didn't think he'd go near as high. This is a complete opposite of the situation with Gabbert. I have no idea what they thought of Newton, I haven't heard. But I have read that some pro scouts love what he brings to the table and think he's further along than VY was at this point in his career, throwing-wise. I don't exactly know what that means for us though =P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted · Hidden
Hidden

Right, half of the posters on this board fell in love with Luck before they ever knew anything about him other than a couple of highlight clips and what analysts were saying.

I've got news for y'all...those analysts are wrong about players every single year, and that includes some of these "can't miss" QB's who they all agreed on. Just the fact that some of them had Jake Locker as a #1 pick last year should be your first clue. Cam Newton is a better passer right now than Locker will ever be.

Not many had Locker as the #1 pick. Locker was given a second round grade by the draft advisory dudes, that's why he went back to school. He didn't care what Kiper said about him, because the people that mattered didn't think he'd go near as high. This is a complete opposite of the situation with Gabbert. I have no idea what they thought of Newton, I haven't heard. But I have read that some pro scouts love what he brings to the table and think he's further along than VY was at this point in his career, throwing-wise. I don't exactly know what that means though =P

Link to comment
Jackofalltrades Rising Star

Jackofalltrades

Posted
Posted

Your read on Bradford was not quite what I got. Mind you, I think he was a great prospect and I agree his injury concerns were the greatest issue, but they were not the sole issue.

He also had low pocket awareness, a tendency to roll out too quickly, didn't consistently step up in the pocket. The Rams knew this, and they did a ton of work with bringing his mental clock up to speed by forcing him to make quick reads and throws in practice on a strict timer.

As far as I was aware, Bradford's pre-snap reads came from the sideline, as they tend to do in a spread offense, and his working through his progressions is no different than other pass-first spread options. And yes, you're right, he took some snaps from under center at Oklahoma but the vast majority were from the shotgun, just as in any other spread.

As a long time OU fan I can assure you Bradford showed he was NFL ready early on. He made checks at the line and played a lot of pro style offense once they lost Gresham and Kelly. DeMarco Murray became the focal point of the O with Broyles.

If you watched as much of Bradford as I did then it was pretty easy to see he'd successfully make the transition to the NFL.

I just don't see it with any of these 2 QB's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
monstercat Newbie

monstercat

Posted
Posted

The point is that if Locker had left school last year and some team would have taken him with a top 5 pick, none of these fans or analysts would be going on and on about how it was a big reach, even though he has never proven that he is a good passer. 09 was his best season and he only had a completion % of 58, which is not great in any offensive system...especially when he wasn't facing SEC calibre defenses every week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sloth Apprentice

Sloth

Posted
Posted

Panther fans have been saying for years that there is no QB worth taking with their 1st round pick and that there were more important needs to take care of first, yet some of the QB's this team has passed on have been pretty damn good and we we still don't have that franchise player to lead this team.

If now is not the time to stop with this conservative attitude and start gambling and swinging for the fences, then when will be the time? As excited as everybody is about the new coach, he will never get us to the promised land by signing some decent veteran QB and hoping for the best with JC. That's not to say that I've given up on JC or that he will never be any good, but does anybody really believe that he will ever be a star that can lead us to the Super Bowl? I sure as hell don't.

It's like this every draft. Every year, the QB crop is crappy but next year's will be all universe. Then next draft comes, some QBs don't declare, some underperform, etc.. all the QBs are crappy, wait till next year.

Another part of it is disappointment over Luck. If we can't get Luck why bother!

Last, Rivera is on a short contract and is going to want to start winning soonish. Tanking seasons while we wait for Clausen to elevate his game to merely bad and signing 36 year old journeymen backups in the hope that they have something, ANYTHING left in the tank isn't going to get us over the hump. Say we wait until next year to draft a guy. Now year two is wasted while we start Bob McCareerBackup to guide us to a 6 win season to give our rookie time. Now Rivera's contract is running short, fans are pissed off, we're still in the basement of the NFC South hoping one year on the bench was enough and that our rookie pans out.

Anyway, not saying Newton or Gabbert are worth the #1 overall, but neither are Fairley, Green or Peterson. We have big holes at DT, QB and probably CB. Two of those can be filled or helped in FA. One really can't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mav1234 Grand Master

mav1234

Posted
Posted

As a long time OU fan I can assure you Bradford showed he was NFL ready early on. He made checks at the line and played a lot of pro style offense once they lost Gresham and Kelly. DeMarco Murray became the focal point of the O with Broyles.

If you watched as much of Bradford as I did then it was pretty easy to see he'd successfully make the transition to the NFL.

I just don't see it with any of these 2 QB's.

Did most of his work under center come in 2009 then for the little time he played? I didn't see him at all in 2009 so I dunno about then. In 2008 they seemed like a pretty regular shotgun spread, though I know they ran it from under center sometimes. Obviously I didn't watch nearly as much as you did, but I don't recall them being much of a prostyle in 2008. However, my memory isn't what it used to be. I had thought Gresham was still the TE in 2008, heh.

Have you watched as much of Gabbert/Newton as you did of Bradford? I guess you couldn't possibly have watched as much Newton since he's only been at Auburn for a year but you know what I mean. I like what I've seen from Gabbert quite a bit, but I have to admit that I am a bit bias there. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RHCPanther Newbie

RHCPanther

Posted
Posted

------------------------------------

Matt Moore is not coming back. The only two QB's on our roster is Clausen and Pike.

I also doubt we sign a veteran QB we will likely give Clausen next year to prove he can be a starter in the NFL. Clausen deserves that chance also.

So don't worry we are not going to have five QB's on our team next year.

If we do sign a Vet we will cut Pike or send him to practice squad and have three QB's on opening day.

A rookie, a vet and Clausen would be fine with me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
raleigh-panther Grand Master

raleigh-panther

Posted
Posted

Again, the combine will tell alot.

Flacco was incredibly under the radar until his combine.

I suspect there will be another.

I, too, am fine with a veteran free agent, clausen, and if someone at the combine shines, take him, why not.

Truthfully, I have not watched Gabbert, what I have read suggests a bigger version of Clausen, but, who knows. I did watch some of Newton's games; but, I don't enough to evaluate him.

My only concern is hopefully, we have better judges of QB then we had with the previous staff.

At the end of the day, unlike any other position, the QB is the face of the franchise and I suspect that will weigh heavily in the choice. Cam Newton, Ryan Mallet, all have questions around them off the field, I do not know, after what JR went through with Colllins, that he would be willing to take a chance on anyone at that level, as face of the franchise, that is not squeaky clean.

The risk of course, is that other than a very very few exceptions, 'faces of the franchise' are found in the draft. It would be interesting to go back and read what was written about Brady and Montana that had them drop so low in draft position; but, both of those players found systems that suited them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Peppers90 NC Community Regular

Peppers90 NC

Posted
Posted

The thing you have to ask yourself is, "If I would take a QB at #5 or #10 then what is stopping me from taking him #1?" IMO because of the importance of the QB, he doesn't have to be the best player in order to be the top pick. If he has the tools to be a franchise player for the team drafting 10th then he has the tools to be a franchise player for the team drafting 1st. Its not like a team is going to just take a flyer on a QB at the #10 spot anymore than a team would do that at the #1 spot. So, because of the importance of that position....it doesn't matter if he is the best player. All you have to ask yourself is "can he be the future for us?" If the answer is yes then IDC if he's ranked 1st or 30th...you take him.

Failing #1 qb's set your franchise so very far. Raiders and Niners are good recent examples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
teeray Rookie

teeray

Posted
Posted

Failing #1 qb's set your franchise so very far. Raiders and Niners are good recent examples.

That is true but what also sets a franchise back is not having a true #1 QB on your roster.

Sometimes when I read some of these posts I feel like people are saying, "I am so scared of failing that there is no reason to even take a shot."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
frash.exe Apprentice

frash.exe

Posted
Posted

Failing #1 qb's set your franchise so very far. Raiders and Niners are good recent examples.

That is true but what also sets a franchise back is not having a true #1 QB on your roster.

Sometimes when I read some of these posts I feel like people are saying, "I am so scared of failing that there is no reason to even take a shot."

some people think it's a good strategy to just go FA for late 20s/early 30s QBs every 2-3 years

all it really gets you is mediocrity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Proudiddy
      We joke about how the NFL has a script for the season. But maybe it's not a joke?

      By Proudiddy · Posted

      I had started typing my post hours ago and didn’t finish it and just came back to finish it, posted it, then saw yours and saw we were pretty much saying the same thing - even the games that stick out to us most.  I don’t think a lot of people remember that SF playoff game, but I felt like I had just got mugged in broad daylight.  I remember them calling Mitchell for unnecessary roughness, and then I remember watching Boldin take a super late cheap shot, dead in front of the ref and then showing him watching the whole thing in replay…  the refs let them have a fuging field day and didn’t do jack poo, but if we so much as breathed the wrong way it was fuging 15 yards.  Each team playing under two completely different sets of rules.  poo hurt.  I was enraged.  I’ve never went back to watch either that game or SB50 and never will.  fuging robbery.
    • Proudiddy
      We joke about how the NFL has a script for the season. But maybe it's not a joke?

      By Proudiddy · Posted

      I’ve said it a million times since, but it’s impossible to keep them from affecting the game.  In SB50, they literally took the game from us, and they did it early.  Cotchery’s no-catch?  The miraculous amount of times we converted for a first down only to have it suddenly called back make it a 3rd down and 15+ against the best defense in the league that specialized in rushing the passer and man coverage on the back end?  And you do that enough times, you kill the morale and confidence of the team you’re doing it against.  It’s telling the one team “you can do whatever with impunity” and the other “you can’t do whatever they’re allowed to do.”  It changes the aggression level.  It essentially neuters one team and allows the other to do whatever the fug they want.  Imagine you call the police for help and they get there and tell you to sit still while the other party beats the poo out of you and you can’t defend yourself.  That’s what the officials do.  There is no way to avoid them affecting the game.  And more often than not, it’s the most subjective calls they use to do so.  Even in SB50…  you saw the Broncos commit more egregious penalties than anything we did, and barely any of it was called.  Their OL was holding all fuging game and the refs did nothing.  We already had our work cut out for us against two future HOF edge rushers and the refs played to their advantage with that.  From what I remember, both Oher and Remmers were called for holding at various times and their hands were in the INSIDE of the defender.  It was garbage, but all by design. Also, if there is any video of it anywhere, go look at what the refs did against us back in 2013 against SF.  The fix was in there too.  They stepped in early and often and ensured we knew we were not allowed to play with the same aggression or intensity SF was.  It was disgusting as well. at this point, I hope Vince McMahon, errr, I mean Goodell just finally scripts us to win it, because this poo is not won via competition or off merit.
    • DaveThePanther2008
      We joke about how the NFL has a script for the season. But maybe it's not a joke?

      By DaveThePanther2008 · Posted

      You can go back to the New York Knicks somehow getting Patrick Ewing.  I saw a story where they place the New York Knick card in the freezer right before the drawing.  It was simple.  Show everyone the cards are undetectable to the human eye.  All they had to do was grab the coldest card. IMO ever since Goodell took over the NFL it has been fishy.  Patriots winning the SB after 9/11, New Orleans after Katrina and Peyton Manning's going away gift against us. The terrible calls during that game were blatantly one sided.  New England should have been stripped of their first 3 SB when they were caught spying on the other team in their SB wins.  I think the evidence against the Patriots was so damning Goodell felt it could ruin football and they brushed it under the table.   In the 2004 SB, How did we go from practically no yards in the first Quarter to setting a record in the 3rd Qtr.  Dan Henning changes the game plan.  IMO probably the greatest half time adjustment of all time.  
×
×
  • Create New...