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!

     

Poll of NFL sources finds gulf of opinion on QBs


pantherfan81

Recommended Posts

Since the Combine ended Tuesday, I've been polling league sources on their rankings of the quarterbacks. I spoken or texted with seven sources (ranging from area scouts to front office executives) as of Saturday morning and have some interesting results.

In six of the seven cases, Cam Newton and Blaine Gabbert were the top two rated quarterbacks. Four teams had Auburn's Newton as the top passer. Three had Gabbert. All three of the Gabbert fans noted, however, that his March 17 Pro Day would significantly impact their grade on him.

Interestingly enough, the same four teams that rated Newton No. 1 had Arkansas' Ryan Mallett ranked as the third QB -- with one exception. One of these clubs had the rankings had Mallett as the No. 2 passer behind Netwon. This source is obviously less concerned about the so-called character questions of these two SEC stars than other teams.

The wildcard of the QB rankings was Washington's Jake Locker. Three teams had Locker as the 3rd rated quarterback. The other four teams rated Locker 4th (two teams), 6th and 7th, respectively in this year's QB class.

The other QBs jumping ahead of Locker for these clubs were Florida State's Christian Ponder, TCU's Andy Dalton and Nevada's Colin Kaepernick.

Read More

Goes to show how variable this QB class is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The combine is such a joke. Going into it, Cam was seen as the top dog. He had a bad day with WRs he wasn't used to and Gabbert didn't even throw. Then all the sudden Gabbert is the top dog! And Mallett, who has "character issues", actually threw fairly well but no one cared because of the kid's issues. The combine is NOT a means to defining anything. Looking at a QBs college career is the only real way to do it. Why people care so much about the combine is beyond me. The only guys it DOES work for are guys like Chris Johnson, small school nobodies who catch someones eye on a prime time stage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not a true #1 among them. IMO Gabbert hurt his stock immensely when he did not throw at the combine. All he had to do is beat a poor performance by Newton and he would have been #1. Now if he has a bad Pro day it could seen him down to at least #4 or #5 QB taken. Its a neck and neck race with all QBs this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why having receivers he "wasn't familiar with" hurt Cam Newton so much but didn't seem to affect anybody else.

It doesn't matter when you hurl the ball into the third row.

I think people believe Cam did worse than he actually did at the combine. He had three really bad throws in the deep outs. I concede that point. He had one other not so great throw in another drill.

Other than that his throws were good.

Even though he completed 11-21 throws he only truly had about 4 bad throws.

Also people need to realize that in some drills he threw better than guys who were credited with completions. Even on the deep outs several of the other QBs were throwing it low and inside. The receivers were catching them but they were awful throws.

So people shouldn't get so caught up in the 11-21 stuff.

I can tell you this. He had 11 completions. He had 3 really good go route throws that were not complete. That is 14. He had a corner route that was a really good throw that wasn't complete. That is 15 good throws. And one of the deep out was actually a good throw that the receiver fell down on. That is 16 good throws. On one of the deep outs to left side he hit a guy in the hands that dropped the ball. That is 17.

Now all of the sudden that is 17-21. Not too bad.

It would have been better if three of the misses he did have didn't end up in the press booth. :p :p :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why having receivers he "wasn't familiar with" hurt Cam Newton so much but didn't seem to affect anybody else.

Easy. If his Auburn WRs were out there, he would have "looked better" to the critical eyes that burned him for "throwing horribly" at the combine. It's sort of like how Pro Bowl QBs aren't on the same page with their star WRs like they are with their own WRs, or how NBA players look odd during the All-Star game. I'm not saying Cam is a top talent, but he would've looked better had he been in rhythm with the WRs. That's why the combine is a joke. Julio Jones had a GREAT combine and all the sudden people want him over A.J. Green when A.J. Green's body of work is better? Fairley was a BEAST this season but he does poorly on one training day and his stock plummets? Give me a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why having receivers he "wasn't familiar with" hurt Cam Newton so much but didn't seem to affect anybody else.

It would have been a lot easier to compare if we had another Spread guy throwing. His timing with his WRs was off because he is still getting use to dropping back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you are just throwing in shorts with no pass rush... you shouldn't only go 11 for 21.

That's if you want to play in the NFL as a QB.

I mostly agree, but by the same token, you can't judge a player by his performance in one event. Not that I think we should take Newton, but I certainly wouldn't judge him by that one performance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you are just throwing in shorts with no pass rush... you shouldn't only go 11 for 21.

That's if you want to play in the NFL as a QB.

You mean like Drew Brees did when he went 11-20 at his combine. You better hurry up and tell the Saints that so they can give their Lombardi trophy back!!! :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • okay I found this and it sounds like my hopes for the first surgery being not such a great job seems like it could be actual reality.  I only hoped because that would give a better chance for recovery and ia a possible scenario so I just thought it could be possible. Had no real evidence of it. But I’ll be damned.    This is a detailed report of Brooks’ surgery and the condition of his knee after the failed repair.     https://x.com/jmthrivept/status/2055743129408704806?s= Sparked by some very good questions by @CoachspeakIndex, here’s some info on Jonathon Brooks: 1. Speculation that the first graft/ACLR by Dr. Cooper didn’t “take” or at least was too lax, leading to failure and re-tear. Brooks dealt with issues cutting, progressing in his rehab into the early stages of 2024 and then re-tore it late 2024, requiring a second ACLR in January 2025 (essentially revision). Notably, CAR prolonged Brooks’ rehab process through Sept-Oct due to issues progressing into the next stages of rehab. 2. Second surgery performed by Dr. Neal ElAttrache, who has extensive experience with revisions. He did a double bundle technique, harvesting graft from Brooks’ left patellar tendon and a strip of his right IT Band (his right patellar tendon had been utilized for the prior graft in 2023. The double bundle technique significantly increases rotational stability of the knee, leading to a stronger and more secure graft/reconstruction. Also to note, Brooks’ surgery wasn’t significantly delayed, meaning that the tunnels from his prior ACLR were in good shape and they didn’t need to perform bone grafts to fill in (would have delayed 2nd surgery by 5-6 months). Essentially, reading the tea leaves tells me that everything else except for the graft itself was still in good quality within his knee. Good sign for future.  3. Typically, you see a performance increase anywhere from 16-20 months post-revision. Brooks will be ~21 months out from his second surgery by the time Week 1 hits. His knee should be more stable and stronger this time around, with adequate time for healing and return to all movement patterns. I’m not viewing this situation as a typical “Player __ had TWO ACL tears, he’s cooked” situation. Rather, I’m viewing it as the first procedure failed, but the second procedure is significantly stronger and should allow him to return to form this time around. I don’t know why it posted as a link but there it is.  
    • Jackie, any more reps tomorrow, or is that it for this session?  thanks for the work
    • How can you say they aren’t trying to win now with all the moves made in free agency? Or is trading first round picks the only way to be win now? I’d be fine never trading another first round pick again, win now be damned.
×
×
  • Create New...