ESPN Insider (McShay) 2012 Mock Draft - Skins #3 pick - Matt Barkley QB

[mmzznnxx]

I think we'll definitely get a young QB next year. There could be quite a few good ones coming out. In addition to the three already mentioned, I think Kirk Cousins (MSU) could be a good pro, I really like what I've seen from Ryan Lindley (SDSU, especially on deep throws) and Robert Griffin III from Baylor may be a little project, but has a ton of talent. I'd personally rather have him over, say, Terrelle Pryor.

[SkinsTillIDie]

5 games, 4 starts, 1 TD/3 INTs. As a rookie. Not much of a chance there. He's gotten to sit now for 3 years, and spent a year learning Shanahan's offense. There might be something here, we'll have to see.

4 starts... on a team that went 0-14, 1-15. One of the worst teams in the 'modern' era.

[Conn]

let see beck played three games that year

looked bad in all three

If memory serves me correct the Dolphins signed josh mccown..lol as a free agent and he could not beat him out

Josh Mccown okay my Confidence in beck runneth over when since he cannot beat out josh mcown

And the tuna released him should reveal something of beck..

But I could be wrong

But I Bloody Douby it

Yes, 3 starts on a 1-15 team 4-5 years ago, right out of college as a rookie. On one of the worst teams in the modern era, with no direction. That's enough of a sample size.

And I'd like to remind you that Parcells is not perfect. He passed on Matt Ryan, yet drafted Pat White and Chad Henne...and they still don't have an answer at QB. He ditched Beck for "his guys", without really giving him a shot, and "his guys" have sucked, and continue to suck.

[pollaxt]

Agreed. With a rookie wage scale in place we should be able to move into the top 5-10 of the draft and grab Luck or Barkley. Hopefully the top three drafting teams next year will be teams with young QB's in place so we will be able to trade up.

---------- Post added May-5th-2011 at 05:09 PM ----------

SI.com has us drafting 10th overall with the top 3 QB's already gone.

I would think a rookie wage scale would make it more difficult to trade up as there is less fiduciary incentive to move out of the pick.

[Chicken Fried]

1. Cleveland is definitely not going to be the worst team. They will actually be pretty tough in my opinion.

2. I'm willing to bet Luck is not a consensus #1 pick this time next year. I bet things change.

[War Paint]

Wow, it seems like the consensus among the league is we are going to be one of the worst teams in the league next year. It is the first time in many years that we are finally rebuilding, but I don't see us being that bad.

[jflow78]

I'm probably in the minority but I don't think we're going to be that bad.

Definitely not "3rd pick in the draft" bad.

I completely agree. I don't think we're going to be in the playoffs or winning the division or anything, but I think we'll be more competitive this season than we were last. I just don't get why draft analysts say stuff like "they addressed needs at nearly every position and picked several players that can help immediately" yet they put the team at the bottom of the league.

Maybe if we had the same schedule as last season (brutal) I would agree, but this season our schedule is a TON weaker. I really don't think we're going to get worse because we had a solid draft and a weak schedule. I'm still saying 8-8, but after the draft I'm bordering on changing that to 9-7. Last year we made the big splash trading for McNabb, this year we make no big splashes (I guess OJ is a little big splash) and we're going to be improved and younger, with a very promising future and foundation for our D.

---------- Post added May-5th-2011 at 04:46 PM ----------

1. Cleveland is definitely not going to be the worst team. They will actually be pretty tough in my opinion.

2. I'm willing to bet Luck is not a consensus #1 pick this time next year. I bet things change.

Seems like these guys think these teams will not have improved at all. I think Cleveland will surprise a lot of people this year. McCoy is a solid player and will improve this season.

I also think Luck will drop from being #1, he lost his coach and there's only one way to go from the top. Locker was supposed to be THE guy if he came out his junior year, same as Leinart was when he was a junior. It's less typical that a guy retains his draft status at #1 two seasons in a row than it is that he loses ground after returning to college. At least it seems that way for QBs, though I know some guys do, like Bradford.

[Truant]

1. Cleveland is definitely not going to be the worst team. They will actually be pretty tough in my opinion.

2. I'm willing to bet Luck is not a consensus #1 pick this time next year. I bet things change.

I will take that bet.

---------- Post added May-5th-2011 at 09:56 PM ----------

I completely agree. I don't think we're going to be in the playoffs or winning the division or anything, but I think we'll be more competitive this season than we were last. I just don't get why draft analysts say stuff like "they addressed needs at nearly every position and picked several players that can help immediately" yet they put the team at the bottom of the league.

Maybe if we had the same schedule as last season (brutal) I would agree, but this season our schedule is a TON weaker. I really don't think we're going to get worse because we had a solid draft and a weak schedule. I'm still saying 8-8, but after the draft I'm bordering on changing that to 9-7. Last year we made the big splash trading for McNabb, this year we make no big splashes (I guess OJ is a little big splash) and we're going to be improved and younger, with a very promising future and foundation for our D.

---------- Post added May-5th-2011 at 04:46 PM ----------

Seems like these guys think these teams will not have improved at all. I think Cleveland will surprise a lot of people this year. McCoy is a solid player and will improve this season.

I also think Luck will drop from being #1, he lost his coach and there's only one way to go from the top. Locker was supposed to be THE guy if he came out his junior year, same as Leinart was when he was a junior. It's less typical that a guy retains his draft status at #1 two seasons in a row than it is that he loses ground after returning to college. At least it seems that way for QBs, though I know some guys do, like Bradford.

That doesn't make sense. Bradford and Locker couldn't both be THE guy last year. The Locker drivel about him being the #1 pick last year is iffy at best:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/27/espn-still-pushing-jake-locker-as-2010-first-overall-pick/

The reality is that it’s impossible for anyone to know what would have happened if Locker had entered last year’s draft, and it’s ridiculous for ESPN to assert that Locker left $50 million on the table. As NFL Network draft analyst Mike Mayock pointed out in discussing Locker this week, teams don’t start doing full work-ups on juniors unless those players have declared for the draft, so it’s wrong to suggest that any team had put Locker at the top of its draft board — or put him on its draft board at all.

In fact, not only would Locker not have been a likely No. 1 overall pick in 2010, he might not have even been a first-round pick. As we reported at the end of the 2009 season, the NFL’s draft advisory board didn’t even give Locker a first-round grade when he inquired about where he might have gone in the 2010 draft.

[SKIN4WAHOOZ]

seriously? these mooks cant get it right the day after the draft let alone a year prior.

[DCchillin89]

I completely agree. I don't think we're going to be in the playoffs or winning the division or anything, but I think we'll be more competitive this season than we were last. I just don't get why draft analysts say stuff like "they addressed needs at nearly every position and picked several players that can help immediately" yet they put the team at the bottom of the league.

Maybe if we had the same schedule as last season (brutal) I would agree, but this season our schedule is a TON weaker. I really don't think we're going to get worse because we had a solid draft and a weak schedule. I'm still saying 8-8, but after the draft I'm bordering on changing that to 9-7. Last year we made the big splash trading for McNabb, this year we make no big splashes (I guess OJ is a little big splash) and we're going to be improved and younger, with a very promising future and foundation for our D.

---------- Post added May-5th-2011 at 04:46 PM ----------

I disagree. Ask yourself: How many times have you thought we were gonna go in the 8-8 - 10-6 range? How many times have they fallen short of that prediction? We're gonna be worse next year, we don't have a QB and a line and our defense is still figuring things out. I still love the direction of this team. This is a team starting a transition. Last year's aborted fetus of a team wasn't the first year in true rebuilding mode, this one is. If you look at the schedule, I see two maybe three games that I feel comfortable chalking up as W's: Carolina and Buffalo and both of those are on the road. The rest of our schedule is BRUTAL. Just look at the end of season stretch: Jets, Patriots, Giants, Minnesota, Philly. All of those teams will be in contention. It all starts with a franchise QB, and with all the losing we've put up with, I'm willing to have one more bad season to get LUCK.

[skinzwiz]

I dont like Barkley right now as a QB. He shows good leadership, but he's just not that good. Besides, McShay almost never knows what he is talking about.

[darrelgreenie]

In fact, not only would Locker not have been a likely No. 1 overall pick in 2010, he might not have even been a first-round pick. As we reported at the end of the 2009 season, the NFL’s draft advisory board didn’t even give Locker a first-round grade when he inquired about where he might have gone in the 2010 draft.

Lets think about this for a second.

If Locker went 8th this year after having as bad a statistical season as possible you think he would have went lower the year prior with better stats?

BTW-Locker said he was coming back before the advisory board even does the grades.

[Truant]

BTW-Locker said he was coming back before the advisory board even does the grades.

You quoted my quote of an article. Why don't you go ask the author? :doh:

BTW, what does him deciding to come back have to do with anything? He wasn't given a first-round grade by the committee.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/12/18/locker-didnt-get-a-first-round-grade-from-advisory-committee/

The point is Locker was NOT the uniformly agreed upon #1 prospect in last year's draft. And absolutely not in the same magnitude that Luck is being heralded.

Next you're going to FYI me that he likes puppies.

[skinsfan190]

I really like Barkley but he still has work to do. I think he's gonna have a great Jr year tho. Next year will be the year of the QB. Luck, Barkley, Jones

[jivelikenice]

Every Snap John Beck takes makes the redskins

a contender for Luck or Barkley

All down for Luck, but I would not be mad with Barkley

My pecking order is Luck, Jones, then Barkley. No knock on Barkley, but I think Jones will challenge Luck for the #1 spot this season.

[ArmchairRedskin]

I've seen criticisms of Barkely that he's more of a game manager type. Not really a dynamic guy. Don't really know much about him as I didn't really watch any USC games last year. Every time I've seen Landry he's made plays that impressed me. He throws a nice ball for sure.

[darrelgreenie]

You quoted my quote of an article. Why don't you go ask the author? :doh:

BTW, what does him deciding to come back have to do with anything? He wasn't given a first-round grade by the committee.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/12/18/locker-didnt-get-a-first-round-grade-from-advisory-committee/

The point is Locker was NOT the uniformly agreed upon #1 prospect in last year's draft. And absolutely not in the same magnitude that Luck is being heralded.

It has to do with the article you quoted which suggesting that Locker decided to go back because he didn't receive a first round grade,

For those of you who admire the dedication and/or question the sanity of Washington quarterback Jake Locker for deciding not to enter the NFL draft in what could be the last year of the big-money windfalls at the top of the pecking order, the decision to stay in school isn’t as honorable and/or stupid as previously believed.

when in fact he decided to come back before he received the grade.

No, worries its just a pet peeve to read things that I know are incorrect.

BTW-Your article's unnamed source even admits that despite the advisory boards grade Locker could have gone 1st round:

The source concedes that Locker might have still be drafted in round one given the value of the position,

I agree with your overall point that Luck's stock isn't gonna drop much regardless of what happens.

He could have a terrible season and still go top 5 top 10.

If you didn't have a bias against Locker you would actually see that his case supports your point.

---------- Post added May-5th-2011 at 10:06 PM ----------

Barkley and Jones both benefit from their systems but USC is much more pro-style then OU.

Neither has big time arm talent, neither is much of playmaker.

Having only watched about 2 game for each prospect I would have Barkely ahead of Landry.

[dfbovey]

I also think Luck will drop from being #1, he lost his coach and there's only one way to go from the top. Locker was supposed to be THE guy if he came out his junior year, same as Leinart was when he was a junior. It's less typical that a guy retains his draft status at #1 two seasons in a row than it is that he loses ground after returning to college. At least it seems that way for QBs, though I know some guys do, like Bradford.

Only way Luck isn't the #1 overall pick is if a cement truck rolls over his legs between now and draft day.

He's not just the consensus #1 overall pick, he's considered the best QB prospect in quite some time.

[CPORTISFAN999]

1. Cleveland is definitely not going to be the worst team. They will actually be pretty tough in my opinion.

2. I'm willing to bet Luck is not a consensus #1 pick this time next year. I bet things change.

you are right about him not being a #1 pick this time next year. wanna know why? because the 2012 draft will be over by THIS TIME next year

[jflow78]

That doesn't make sense. Bradford and Locker couldn't both be THE guy last year. The Locker drivel about him being the #1 pick last year is iffy at best:

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/04/27/espn-still-pushing-jake-locker-as-2010-first-overall-pick/

Either way, Locker WAS looked at by several professionals as the number one guy, until he stayed in school. Bradford was the #1 guy until he went back to school for his senior season, and then he retained his #1 status when Locker went back to school for HIS senior season. Now, not to say that things wouldn't have changed (as they often do) during the draft process, but since Locker didn't go through that process the same year Bradford did, we'll never really know. Either way, they would have been the first and second QBs taken.

And, according to many reports, Shanahan would have taken Locker at #4 last season, if he had been there. This draft Locker was a reach at #8. So that's what I'm saying, his value went down.

The reality is that it’s impossible for anyone to know what would have happened if Locker had entered last year’s draft, and it’s ridiculous for ESPN to assert that Locker left $50 million on the table. As NFL Network draft analyst Mike Mayock pointed out in discussing Locker this week, teams don’t start doing full work-ups on juniors unless those players have declared for the draft, so it’s wrong to suggest that any team had put Locker at the top of its draft board — or put him on its draft board at all.

I agree with you that it's ridiculous for anyone to say what WOULD have happened, but that is on both sides of the argument, not just the side that says Locker would have been the #1 QB taken. So, in your own words, "teams don't start doing full work-ups on juniors unless those players have declared for the draft, so it's wrong to suggest that any team had put [Luck] at the top of it's draft board - or put him on it's draft board at all".

I'm not quite sure which scouts are working for the NFL's advisory board, but apparently they aren't the same ones that work for NFL teams, otherwise Locker wouldn't have been picked in the first round this year either, since he looked much worse this season than he did last. So, whether the NFL advisory board wants to speculate as to where Locker would have been taken, that's fine, but that is as legitimate as ANY source on the internet, since they can't tell the future either.

Also, the NFL Advisory board is there to protect underclassmen, I'm sure they err on the side of caution frequently. It keeps their accuracy up (on those they predict getting drafted vs those that don't) and it keeps kids in school if they might not make it.

---------- Post added May-5th-2011 at 11:04 PM ----------

Only way Luck isn't the #1 overall pick is if a cement truck rolls over his legs between now and draft day.

He's not just the consensus #1 overall pick, he's considered the best QB prospect in quite some time.

Or if he just sucks this season and his team looks like ****. It happens, no one will know until the season's over. I'm not saying I know for sure that he WON'T be the first pick taken next year, I'm saying that the likelihood that he remains the first overall pick isn't as good as that he drops. What if Carolina is #1 in the draft next season, I seriously doubt they'd take a QB for the 3rd year in a row, and all of a sudden Luck has lost $10 million. It's more likely that he will lose his #1 ranking than that he won't.

Those are just the odds. Like them or not.

[Skins199021]

really can't go wrong with luck or barkley

Barkley reminds me of a matt ryan/matt hasselback type, either way he is gonna be good

[jflow78]

I disagree. Ask yourself: How many times have you thought we were gonna go in the 8-8 - 10-6 range? How many times have they fallen short of that prediction? We're gonna be worse next year, we don't have a QB and a line and our defense is still figuring things out. I still love the direction of this team. This is a team starting a transition. Last year's aborted fetus of a team wasn't the first year in true rebuilding mode, this one is. If you look at the schedule, I see two maybe three games that I feel comfortable chalking up as W's: Carolina and Buffalo and both of those are on the road. The rest of our schedule is BRUTAL. Just look at the end of season stretch: Jets, Patriots, Giants, Minnesota, Philly. All of those teams will be in contention. It all starts with a franchise QB, and with all the losing we've put up with, I'm willing to have one more bad season to get LUCK.

So you believe we're going to get WORSE with a FAR easier schedule and improvements at several spots on the team? As you said, last year's team wasn't good either, and where are we losing talent that can't be replaced? Compare our schedule with last seasons. We play TWO teams outside the division that were winners last season. TWO. And both of those games are at FedEx. And I love how everyone brings out the "can't win without a franchise QB", which is completely ****. You can't win a SB without a franchise QB (8/10 times) but you CAN have a winning record without one.

There's no definition for what a "franchise QB" even is. Everyone loves to use that phrase, but a franchise QB is really a QB on a team that wins. That's it. No one thought Rogers was a "franchise QB" until the Packers began winning, same with any of the "franchise QBs" out there today. Just ask Garrard, everyone thought he was the Jags' franchise guy until they started stinking.

Is Mark Sanchez a franchise QB? If not then the Jets should suck every year, but if he is then why is he ranked 27th in the league in rating, 29th in completion percentage, 16th in yards, 19th in TDs, and has the 13th most INTs? The truth is it's NOT about having a "franchise QB" it's about putting together a complete team, and the way I look at it, we've got more of a complete team now than we did last season. (or at least we will assuming we sign Brown back at RT or someone else).

[PeterKingsIllegitimateKid]

Not sure if it's already been mentioned, but the knock on Barkley since he was in high school at Mater Dei was that he threw way to many INTs. While his TD to INT ratio has improved in college, he continues to throw some really terrible picks. Check out the Stanford, Oregon and Washington games from 2010.

Barkley really needs a great year in 2011 to be worthy of a top 10 selection in 2012.

[JoeSkins]

Matt Barkley is remarkably similar to Jimmy Clausen in ability and character of play. If you rememeber, Clausen was rated top-5 a year before his draft as well.

I'm just saying that things will need to play out. I'm sure everyone here realizes that perceptions and ratings of college prospects can change drastically over the course of a year.

---------- Post added May-6th-2011 at 10:41 AM ----------

There's no definition for what a "franchise QB" even is. Everyone loves to use that phrase, but a franchise QB is really a QB on a team that wins. That's it. No one thought Rogers was a "franchise QB" until the Packers began winning, same with any of the "franchise QBs" out there today. Just ask Garrard, everyone thought he was the Jags' franchise guy until they started stinking.

In some respects you are absolutely correct. I suppose the only way we could tell if someone was a franchise quarterback is if we tossed the guy from team to team and watched the results.

[Chicken Fried]

I completely agree. I don't think we're going to be in the playoffs or winning the division or anything, but I think we'll be more competitive this season than we were last. I just don't get why draft analysts say stuff like "they addressed needs at nearly every position and picked several players that can help immediately" yet they put the team at the bottom of the league.

Maybe if we had the same schedule as last season (brutal) I would agree, but this season our schedule is a TON weaker. I really don't think we're going to get worse because we had a solid draft and a weak schedule. I'm still saying 8-8, but after the draft I'm bordering on changing that to 9-7. Last year we made the big splash trading for McNabb, this year we make no big splashes (I guess OJ is a little big splash) and we're going to be improved and younger, with a very promising future and foundation for our D.

---------- Post added May-5th-2011 at 04:46 PM ----------

Seems like these guys think these teams will not have improved at all. I think Cleveland will surprise a lot of people this year. McCoy is a solid player and will improve this season.

I also think Luck will drop from being #1, he lost his coach and there's only one way to go from the top. Locker was supposed to be THE guy if he came out his junior year, same as Leinart was when he was a junior. It's less typical that a guy retains his draft status at #1 two seasons in a row than it is that he loses ground after returning to college. At least it seems that way for QBs, though I know some guys do, like Bradford.

I think losing Harbaugh will really hurt him.