2012 Comprehensive NFL Draft Database

[Chump Bailey]

McPhee is going to be very good for them. Did good things while in limited time so he should do better with more opportunities

I agree. I can't believe teams that run a 43 aren't inquiring about him, that we've heard about anyway. The Jaguars front 7 would be excellent with McPhee.

---------- Post added May-4th-2012 at 05:15 PM ----------

Well, IIRC Shanny's like of Dalton is what informed his love of RG3.

Really? They seem pretty far apart in ways from my novice understanding.

---------- Post added May-4th-2012 at 05:16 PM ----------

Can't wait for the 2012 Fantasy Football thread

[Darth Tater]

Anyone else feel like the lowering bust rates among first round QBs since 2008 has been a result of teams getting smarter and more targeted with their development of young QBs?

There aren't many out and out busts since 2008. Teams are at least getting guys to perform to a certain level of expectation--get them performing to the point where they can win games with them as starters.

Passing has really opened up league wide too, inclusion of shotgun spread passing. I think that's helped young QBs become more comfortable as passers early in their careers, making their true talent for throwing shine through even in situations that are difficult.

I also feel like there's been a very recent QB renaissance. 2011 and 2012 could go down as the strongest pair of back to back QB classes in league history IMO. Crazy amount of output in NFL talent from the SEC, Pac-10/12, and especially the Big 12.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if the best teams in five years drafted QBs from the 2011 and 2012 classes.

Maybe better targeting plays a part but finding quality QBs seems to follow more of a cluster pattern (that is about 3-6 good years followed by 3-6 bad years). I don't see a trend but an expected cluster. It seems that good periods as far as finding QBs comes when the bad teams aren't really that bad (or the good teams are at the end of their runs) or a team that already has most things in place but don't have a distributor gets the opportunity to get one.

[Darth Tater]

Really? They seem pretty far apart in ways from my novice understanding.

Nope, in college they ran almost the exact same offensive systems. While RG3 went nuts with the long ball last year and he's much more athletic, most of RG3's college performance is very similar to Dalton's.

[darrelgreenie]

I think his protection was worse than just OK though. I think it was bad. He got sacked 40 times despite only starting 14 games. I'll grant that some of those sacks were probably Gabbert's fault for moving incorrectly in the pocket or being too slow with his reads, or making a conscious decision to eat it. But 40 sacks in 14 games strikes me as about as bad as Campbell was getting beaten up here. Their OL was unsettled last season and needs some stability and it couldn't hurt to upgrade the talent.

I meant it more as an expression then an evaluation, I agree the Jags pass protection was bad. Will Rackley got one of the worst rating i've seen on pff (-35.7).

[KCClybun]

Good post. And I think you're right.

I'll also add that my take was that Gabbert wasn't just spooked and uncomfortable, he was slow to process the game which undid his whole process. He was inaccurate on throws in the short/intermediate game that he could throw in his sleep in college. You're right that he wasn't ready to play.

I think his protection was worse than just OK though. I think it was bad. He got sacked 40 times despite only starting 14 games. I'll grant that some of those sacks were probably Gabbert's fault for moving incorrectly in the pocket or being too slow with his reads, or making a conscious decision to eat it. But 40 sacks in 14 games strikes me as about as bad as Campbell was getting beaten up here. Their OL was unsettled last season and needs some stability and it couldn't hurt to upgrade the talent.

I think it also hurt the Jags playing for a lame duck staff with a cookie cutter offense being run by a coach and coordinator who had ceased playing to win the game (punts in the the fourth quarter when down by multiple scores, running the ball on third and long when down by multiple scores, etc.).

I'm with you; I think Jack Del Rio and that staff had no desire to develop the guy. I mean, just watching him on tape, there's so much little stuff that he was doing wrong that was really obvious that they just never seemed to coach out of him until Del Rio was gone and the offensive coordinator got demoted.

A lot was made about how Dalton and Cam developed, and how Jay Gruden and Rod Chudzinky really started small with the things Dalton and Cam were good at, and the more comfortable they got with those things, then the offense slowly expanded throughout the course of the season, allowing them to do more and more as time went by. Gabbert was thrown into the worst possible situation in the NFL; lame duck coaching staff that's not offensively minded to start with. The guy who was supposed to be starting gets cut like, two days before the game. And then McCown sucked and the Jags panicked and they forced him out there before he was ready.

Then they stick him in a run based offense that's all about getting the ball to MJD, with no receivers, and a tight end in Mercedes Lewis that can drop some baffling easy passes. He can't audible out of bad plays, and he has an offensive line that bleeds like a stuck pig. It was just a bad, bad situation all around. I wasn't a huge Gabbert fan, but those guys screwed that kid so bad. He's got a lot of issues, but that team did NOT help him.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

You realize Gabbert ran a 4.6 right? Gabbert's 40 time was pretty much the same as Cam Newton's. When I said he had sneaky athleticism, that was an understatement. Gabbert is one of the most athletic QBs in the league.

His athleticism never really blew me away, even though he did run a fast 40. I thought Locker was a way more dynamic athlete at the QB position. Hell, I think Dalton was as dynamic on the field as Gabbert if not more so.

think you're off base in your assessment of Gabbert and I think you're off base in your assessment of Alex Smith and Ryan Tannehill. I can tell we're not going to see eye to eye on this. Gabbert can make plays, particularly on the move. When he gets into a rhythm and starts airing it out, he can be a spectacular thrower that can make plays into coverage & make spectacular throws outside the pocket. It'll be some time before he reaches that kind of comfort level regularly--if ever. But he's not a mediocre prospect nor mediocre talent if for no other reason than the guy has abundant natural arm talent, size, and speed.

I think the poor ability to deal with pressure is what really keeps him from getting comfortable, which is why you had to protect him in the passing game in college to keep the defenses off balance and let him get in a rhythm throwing the ball. Yes, when Gabbert got in rhythm he looked very very good, but once his WRs declined (losing Alexander) and started dropping passes, he couldn't quite get in the rhythm he did in previous years. And that's a key thing with both Gabbert and Tannehill - look at RGIII or Cam or Dalton, great when it came to dealing with the rush and showing poise, and for Dalton it carried over to the pros, albeit supported with a great OL/good run game/good stable coaching/quality #1 WR(and I'm not sold on Dalton, he's another meh deep ball guy, and he's not the raw physical talent some of these other QBs are, but he's definitely a solid long-term starter).

My main point is this - I'm always leery of "tools" guys. Lots of QBs have tools. But there are tools guys who have big chinks in their armor - sometimes it's release, sometimes it's poise under pressure, sometimes it's pure throwing touch especially deep, that ultimately doom them, or at least prevent them from being more than average, or force the team to scale down its attack in order to support them. That's why I put more stock in things like, say, the quality of a prospects supporting cast, the kind of production they had in college, the kind of offense they ran. The thing I look for is "Is the coaching trying to cover for the limitations of the prospect" as opposed to "Is this QB the primary playmaker for the offense"? I also like to see a QB that is dominant against college competition - if he isn't, then it is fair to ask "why"? Cam Newton walked on the field and completely massacred SEC competition out of JUCO with a pretty average supporting cast. RGIII massacred competition that was on net better than anything Luck faced with one of the worst supporting casts in FBS. Tannehill? 19-14 TD:Int against everyone that wasn't Idaho or Baylor. Gabbert? He threw all the time yet could only throw 16 TDs, and was horrible against man defenses, horrible on 3rd downs, etc. Dalton dominated too, though he didn't have an amazing supporting cast.

I used Jason Campbell a lot as one of my comparisons for both, because both Tannehill and Gabbert have a lot in common with JC coming out - great arms, great size, athletic (Campbell was a pretty athletic QB if you remember), and all of them had games where they get in a rhythm and look accurate and productive - but they all had issues dealing with pressure, all had issues throwing deep with touch, and all of them were not dominant in college, while playing in offenses that took a lot of the pressure of offensive playmaking off them. I think, as time goes on, we'll likely not see any of them flat out "bust" - but we'll also see both of them not be all that good, certainly not good enough to justify the high investment on them.

[Laron Burgundy]

I think that's a fair assessment between Tannehill, Gabbert, and JC. If they are in a great situation, like the Ravens or Steelers, I think any of those 3 could have one day at least gotten to the super bowl. It's another reason why I believe Roethlisberger is a tad overrated. Steelers franchise is the epitome of a perfect situation for a qb, I guarantee even Jamarcus Russell wouldn't have looked like such a colossal bust had he been with the Steelers.

Tannehill did a bit more than just manage games for his team, but his production against any team besides the absolute bottom of the barrel has got to leave some serious question marks. Successful qb's in the pros often have a record of huge games against great competition while in college. In fact I can't think of a single one who had such a serious shortcoming against top competition as Tannehill does. That would scare the hell out of me if he were on my team. If you can't deal with top college defenses, how are you supposed to handle the Jets?

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Another thing to consider is again, were they the playmakers for their teams? Look at a guy like Cutler. He sure wasn't truly dominant in college, in fact his stats sucked until senior year. But he was clearly THE guy and he was the one who made the plays. No protection there. Cutler's been in a lot of bad situations yet he's a fringe franchise QB despite never being in that perfect schematic fit that was the Mike Shanahan WCO. Now he's back in it with Bates, and reunited with B-Marsh, with weapons and Matt Forte. And a defense backing him up.

Drew Brees, Phillip Rivers, all of them were THE guy in terms of playmaking.

[Chump Bailey]

I'm thinking Brian McNally pushes out White or Jackson and makes the team. I need to see him play certainly, but he seems like a good football player. I have to wonder why he was not drafted and given a chance at OLB.

[Going Commando]

I'm with you; I think Jack Del Rio and that staff had no desire to develop the guy. I mean, just watching him on tape, there's so much little stuff that he was doing wrong that was really obvious that they just never seemed to coach out of him until Del Rio was gone and the offensive coordinator got demoted.

A lot was made about how Dalton and Cam developed, and how Jay Gruden and Rod Chudzinky really started small with the things Dalton and Cam were good at, and the more comfortable they got with those things, then the offense slowly expanded throughout the course of the season, allowing them to do more and more as time went by. Gabbert was thrown into the worst possible situation in the NFL; lame duck coaching staff that's not offensively minded to start with. The guy who was supposed to be starting gets cut like, two days before the game. And then McCown sucked and the Jags panicked and they forced him out there before he was ready.

Then they stick him in a run based offense that's all about getting the ball to MJD, with no receivers, and a tight end in Mercedes Lewis that can drop some baffling easy passes. He can't audible out of bad plays, and he has an offensive line that bleeds like a stuck pig. It was just a bad, bad situation all around. I wasn't a huge Gabbert fan, but those guys screwed that kid so bad. He's got a lot of issues, but that team did NOT help him.

It all starts with the ownership change. It's almost an impossible situation for a young QB to thrive in because it causes total organizational instability. I think Sam Bradford's regression last year was a delayed effect of the organizational instability happening during the offseason he was drafted.

In Jacksonville's case, Del Rio should have been fired the offseason they drafted Gabbert. He was entering his 9th season as HC, the FO told him "playoffs or you're fired," and then traded up to draft Gabbert. Obviously, they were planning on firing him all along, you don't give a coach you plan on keeping and supporting an ultimatum, and you certainly don't give him an ultimatum and then draft him a first round QB. Gabbert is the GM's guy, not Del Rio's.

Under normal circumstances, the situation could have been OK. Del Rio would have been fired, and a brand new HC would have gotten to come in year one of his new regime, with a little carte blanch, and would get to work with Gabbert as his guy in Gabbert's rookie season. That's the situation most of the good QBs today got. Almost to a man, they were all drafted in the first year of the regime that successfully developed them and thus became that regime's "guy," not in the 9th year of a lameduck regime...

Anyway, the reason Del Rio wasn't fired that offseason was because of the pending ownership change IMO. The new ownership was still a season away from buying the team so the FO had to wait a season to make coaching changes for the new ownership to sign off on the new HC. No use in hiring a new HC that the new owner might fire and replace the next year, or the year after (kind of a Spagnuolo situation).

But the results on the field last season for Jacksonville were disastrous. Like you said, cutting Garrard right before the season was moronic. They had no design within the offense for Gabbert. The team was as unready for him to become the starter as he was IMO. How else can you explain running an offense that seemed calculated to make him as uncomfortable as possible? It's like they didn't know his strengths/couldn't produce large scale offensive changes on the go, or simply didn't care to.

And in lame duck situations at the top, failure on the field becomes amplified because coaching instability destroys team chemistry. Good players play bad in such situations. Injuries become more of an issue because the depth is generally lacking and the next man up mentality of successful organizations is lost.

Jacksonville's defense fell apart. The passing defense in particular suffered huge attrition, they had lost something like five defensive ends to IR by midseason. With an ultra-conservative offense and no passing defense, teams would often run the score up by the third quarter and put Jacksonville in an impossible hole that made the offense utterly predictable and made Gabbert look poor. Their team was built to run the ball and stop the run, and by and large, I thought pork chop and MJD were individually brilliant. But they were the only two guys on the entire team thriving.

Anyway, the situation will hopefully be different this year. The new HC should be able to figure out Gabbert pretty quickly given the affinity Gabbert displays towards Matt Ryan. He should be able to build an offense that makes sense for him. Having Blackmon should eventually be a big time boon for Gabbert because Blackmon is a tremendous talent. Pushing Mike Thomas or Laurent Robinson into a slot role makes sense, and as a top 3, Blackmon, Robinson, Thomas doesn't seem so horrible, plus I like Jarrett Boykin and Cecil Shorts. I'm not overly optimistic because the GM is still the same guy, and his years of poor drafting has been a big cause of a lot of Jacksonville's problems. But I think things will get better for Gabbert this season.

---------- Post added May-5th-2012 at 09:16 AM ----------

Another thing to consider is again, were they the playmakers for their teams? Look at a guy like Cutler. He sure wasn't truly dominant in college, in fact his stats sucked until senior year. But he was clearly THE guy and he was the one who made the plays. No protection there. Cutler's been in a lot of bad situations yet he's a fringe franchise QB despite never being in that perfect schematic fit that was the Mike Shanahan WCO. Now he's back in it with Bates, and reunited with B-Marsh, with weapons and Matt Forte. And a defense backing him up.

Drew Brees, Phillip Rivers, all of them were THE guy in terms of playmaking.

I think you're misremembering the college careers of Gabbert and Tannehill. They were certainly each THE guys on their teams. Neither Missouri nor A&M are particularly flush in talent. Cyrus Gray and Ryan Swope and Michael Egnew are good players I suppose, but they aren't anywhere close to the talent level and presence that Gabbert and Tannehill were for their teams. They were, unquestionably, the straw that stirred the drink. Using TD stats is not a good indicator of offensive impact/playmaking and is not a good indicator of NFL success. I get the sense that's what you're argument is based on.

Jay Cutler is also certainly a franchise caliber QB.

Re: Tannehill's ability to handle and manipulate pressure from the pocket, I think he's markedly more advanced at doing this than RGIII is, for example. Tannehill handles pressure, stays in the pocket, avoids the rush, and makes his reads and his throw as well as any QB in this class IMO. One of RGIII's big knocks is that he doesn't go through his progression reads well presnap, identifying the blitz, making adjustments to the pressure within the pocket or go through his progression reads before deciding to scramble.

[Darth Tater]

Re: Tannehill's ability to handle and manipulate pressure from the pocket, I think he's markedly more advanced at doing this than RGIII is, for example. Tannehill handles pressure, stays in the pocket, avoids the rush, and makes his reads and his throw as well as any QB in this class IMO. One of RGIII's big knocks is that he doesn't go through his progression reads well presnap, identifying the blitz, making adjustments to the pressure within the pocket or go through his progression reads before deciding to scramble.

Then those knocks on RG3 are dead wrong. The shotgun spread, especially the one run by Briles, REQUIRES the QB to be good at pre snap reads. Can't do that and you can't run it. It is post snap reads where a spread QB can get away with being weak.

[cphil006]

I assume you are talking Gettis? Arms isn't the end all be all with OL, his technique is up there the only problem with Gettis was he really had one year of high production and he's only at the 293 range which isn't great for some teams.

The fact that he has short arms and lacks weight is a problem in the NFL (regardless of technique). There are some decent players that have overcome that, but as a rookie he's going to have some major challenges to address... I just feel there might have been some players available with more of an upside.

[Chump Bailey]

The fact that he has short arms and lacks weight is a problem in the NFL (regardless of technique). There are some decent players that have overcome that, but as a rookie he's going to have some major challenges to address... I just feel there might have been some players available with more of an upside.

I'm surprised James Brown from Troy went undrafted.

[Dukes and Skins]

The fact that he has short arms and lacks weight is a problem in the NFL (regardless of technique). There are some decent players that have overcome that, but as a rookie he's going to have some major challenges to address... I just feel there might have been some players available with more of an upside.

Sure there could have been better players, but he was drafted by us which means that he was our highest rated player. Gettis is a carbon copy of a guy who can play in the ZBS easily. He's 293 which is fine, and he'll probably be up to 305 when he's finally into an NFL weight room. Knock the short arms, but there have been guys who have been successful with short arms in the NFL

[Conn]

Did you guys know that Clint Oldenburg got hired by EA and is now a big part of OL interaction/ratings/etc. for the Madden team? Pretty cool for him.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

I think you're misremembering the college careers of Gabbert and Tannehill. They were certainly each THE guys on their teams. Neither Missouri nor A&M are particularly flush in talent. Cyrus Gray and Ryan Swope and Michael Egnew are good players I suppose, but they aren't anywhere close to the talent level and presence that Gabbert and Tannehill were for their teams. They were, unquestionably, the straw that stirred the drink. Using TD stats is not a good indicator of offensive impact/playmaking and is not a good indicator of NFL success. I get the sense that's what you're argument is based on.

In the case of Tannehill, it's not so much one or two dominant players so much as just having a really solid team - strong OL, quality WRs, good run game, and again, really watch Tannehill's tape to see how safe what they were doing was. And while he does look technically sound, how much is that a product of a lot of offensive stability and good coaching? To contrast, look at a guy like Weeden and what his offense does(who I had above Tannehill), his offense was always attacking downfield, always allowing Weeden to use his talent to make big plays. You look at Tannehill, and most of his offense is screens, comebacks, a lot of stuff that doesn't really test his admittedly excellent ability to throw the ball. And you have to ask - why isn't Sherman really putting the offense in his hands? When Tannehill had to go off script, he struggled, and while he's going into an excellent situation in Miami, it tends to make me think that he's not going to transition smoothly, at least initially. I felt like he was a system QB in the sense that the system allows him to be more efficient than he would be otherwise.

This is even more glaring for Gabbert - look at his 42-57 game against Iowa. short outs and easy crossing patterns for the most part. Sure he can throw the football, but why is it that his coaches are making him run such a conservative offense? And in college, there were other things that Gabbert did that were concerning. Remember the cutup ASF did of Gabbert where he leaves his WR out to dry and while the WR makes the catch, he gets nailed? There's so many things wrong with Gabbert just looking at his tape, that it overshadows his clear talent in terms of throwing the football.

Again, these two prospects is purely a case of drafting a prospect's tools and hoping you can fix the flaws. and projecting their upside even when they didn't show it consistently in college. While there are some flaws you CAN fix, Gabbert's game, and to a lesser extent Tannehill's has a LOT of holes that may not be fixable. At best, you can cover them up Alex Smith style.

[Going Commando]

Then those knocks on RG3 are dead wrong. The shotgun spread, especially the one run by Briles, REQUIRES the QB to be good at pre snap reads. Can't do that and you can't run it. It is post snap reads where a spread QB can get away with being weak.

They aren't wrong. RGIII had some problems in presnap blitz and coverage recognition. It's actually a common problem among productive college shotgun spread offense QBs that run mostly half field reads.

Read any honest, trained media scout and, to a man, they mention RGIII's (common) problem with presnap recognition. It's the failure to identify the blitz presnap that typically led to the poor reads after the snap--breaking the play by scrambling immediately, scrambling into the blitzing linebacker for a loss or poor throw.

[Darth Tater]

They aren't wrong. RGIII had some problems in presnap blitz and coverage recognition. It's actually a common problem among productive college shotgun spread offense QBs that run mostly half field reads.

Read any honest, trained media scout and, to a man, they mention RGIII's (common) problem with presnap recognition. It's the failure to identify the blitz presnap that typically led to the poor reads after the snap--breaking the play by scrambling immediately, scrambling into the blitzing linebacker for a loss or poor throw.

Again, that is the exact opposite of FACT as making good pre snap reads are the primary REQUIREMENT in a shotgun spread. You can mess up anything else and may come up with a good play but if you mess up there, you might as well go home.

[Going Commando]

In the case of Tannehill, it's not so much one or two dominant players so much as just having a really solid team - strong OL, quality WRs, good run game, and again, really watch Tannehill's tape to see how safe what they were doing was. And while he does look technically sound, how much is that a product of a lot of offensive stability and good coaching? To contrast, look at a guy like Weeden and what his offense does(who I had above Tannehill), his offense was always attacking downfield, always allowing Weeden to use his talent to make big plays. You look at Tannehill, and most of his offense is screens, comebacks, a lot of stuff that doesn't really test his admittedly excellent ability to throw the ball. And you have to ask - why isn't Sherman really putting the offense in his hands? When Tannehill had to go off script, he struggled, and while he's going into an excellent situation in Miami, it tends to make me think that he's not going to transition smoothly, at least initially. I felt like he was a system QB in the sense that the system allows him to be more efficient than he would be otherwise.

I strongly disagree with just about everything here.

I'm a fan of Weeden and his talent. But if anything, he is far more of a system QB than Tannehill.

I would say Tannehill's supporting cast was fairly substandard this year and let him down far more often than they propped him up. The amount of crucial drops his WRs committed was simply staggering. His WRs dropped more crucial passes than for any other top QB prospect I can remember watching. It was marked.

Tannehill ran a true prostyle offense, just like Luck. He wasn't protected by his system like you're claiming. If anything, his system required a FAR higher degree of skill level in passing from the pocket than every other QB in the class save Luck--and Luck got to work within a heavily run first offense from behind a truly elite offensive line. If anything, I think Tannehill's offensive system laid him bare far beyond any other QB in the class.

Weeden unquestionably benefited from playing with superior talent in a system designed for him to succeed and put up big numbers in. You can't measure how valuable throwing from the shotgun in spread formations 40 times a game was for him. It allowed him to easily and quickly settle into deadly rhythms. And you simply can't measure how valuable it was for him to play with a bonafide stud talent at WR in Blackmon, one of the most dominant collegiate receivers of all time.

This is even more glaring for Gabbert - look at his 42-57 game against Iowa. short outs and easy crossing patterns for the most part. Sure he can throw the football, but why is it that his coaches are making him run such a conservative offense? And in college, there were other things that Gabbert did that were concerning. Remember the cutup ASF did of Gabbert where he leaves his WR out to dry and while the WR makes the catch, he gets nailed? There's so many things wrong with Gabbert just looking at his tape, that it overshadows his clear talent in terms of throwing the football.

Again, I think you're way off base here. That Iowa bowl game was a stunning demonstration of Gabbert's raw throwing ability. IIRC, taht game was the point where he got national recognition for his arm talent, when a lot of people stopped and said, "holy ****, this guy can throw." The whole game was Gabbert rolling out and rifling the ball to every part of the field under pressure all game long. It was an impressive exhibition of talent.

Missouri wasn't really a conservative offense, it was an effective offense over which he had near total control. He called his own adjustments at the line, the scheme asked him to throw 1,000 times in two seasons, and put an onus on his ability to read coverages presnap. He moved the ball down field. If anything, Gabbert demonstrated an overly aggressive streak and trusted his arm too much and threw into coverage more than he should have. Gabbert was absolutely a gunslinger in college. Of that, there is no doubt in my mind. It was actually one of the biggest problems I had with him at the time.

The offense Jacksonville ran last season had little to do with Gabbert's set of talents. If you actually watched it regularly, it was clear it was a slapdash vanilla offense a lameduck and interim coaching staff put together on the fly that was pretty much contra to any sort of system that would have protected him, much less accented Gabbert's skillset. It was pretty much the worst offense you could possibly design for him, not the ideal one you're making it out to be.

ASF, entertaining and brilliant as he was, was never really interested in arriving at the truth in football discussions, so much as he was in seeing how many arguments he could win and followers he could convince by tirelessly cherrypicking evidence and flooding the dialogue with his own (clever and original but frequently disingenuous) take. I don't think ASF truly believed most of what he wrote. And you can build an extensive portfolio for EVERY SINGLE QB to ever play missing reads, missing open receivers, throwing into coverage, getting their receivers lit up, etc.

Again, these two prospects is purely a case of drafting a prospect's tools and hoping you can fix the flaws. and projecting their upside even when they didn't show it consistently in college. While there are some flaws you CAN fix, Gabbert's game, and to a lesser extent Tannehill's has a LOT of holes that may not be fixable. At best, you can cover them up Alex Smith style.

I knew from the get go we weren't going to see eye to eye about these two particular QBs. Suffice to say, I think both Gabbert and Tannehill are markedly superior talents to Alex Smith. Smith never possessed close to the raw physical ability or upside of either of these QBs. If anything, the QBs that I think Gabbert and Tannehill most readily compare to are Sam Bradford and Matt Ryan, with perhaps a little John Freeman mixed in for Gabbert.

---------- Post added May-6th-2012 at 12:41 AM ----------

It's early yet, but it'd be cool to get someone like Robert Lester, TJ McDonald, Ray Ray Armstrong, Bacarri Rambo, or Kenny Vaccaro with our top pick in next year's draft. The senior safety class actually looks really talented at the top for a change.

[Going Commando]

The ILB class also looks strong once again. At least 8-10 draftable names heading into the season with more to come from breakout senior performances and underclassmen early entrants.

At least a couple of blue chippers too, Te'o and Skov if he comes back strong from injury.

And Tom Wort could be the first LB taken if he declares.

No one in this class is as good as Kuechly was, but Te'o isn't that far off and he's got a physical element to his game that Kuechly lacked. Dude hits hard.

The LSU defense is sure to pump out more elite talent, with guys like Montgomery and Mingo and Matthieu to enter the conversation (although I think Matthieu settles as a second or third round pick at best).

The CB class is underwhelming IMO. Jonathan Banks is good but he would have only been the fourth or fifth best CB in this class at most IMO. I liked him over Gilmore probably, but substantially less than Claiborne, Jenkins, and Kirkpatrick.

From the underclassmen, USC has some talented guys and Dee Milliner from Alabama has the look and the pedigree of a big time talent. But so far, I feel like David Amerson is the only guy who has really popped as a special talent.

My prediction is that Virginia Tech, Georgia Tech, and Clemson are the cream of the ACC. Florida St. will disappoint despite their humongous talent advantage once again. Miami's path towards becoming a second rate program will become even more pronounced. Alabama will be as good as ever. USC will be back in legit title contention. Stanford and OSU will each take a large step back, as will Baylor and Michigan State, but Stanford and OSU will show signs of promise for the future. LSU won't miss a beat defensively and their offense had a ton of room for improvement to begin with. Arkansas will plummet into turmoil despite having some elite talent. Georgia joins LSU and Alabama as the cream of the SEC, and they become legit title contenders. Michigan will put up ridiculous offensive totals and benefit from bull**** officiating as always but be exposed as frauds and title pretenders. Ohio State continues to not look like Ohio State. Oklahoma will bounce back and be legit championship contenders. West Virginia will settle in nicely to the Big 12 and be at home in their new conference. The Big East will be only a couple of years away from collapse as a football conference. Talk of Auburn being forced to vacate their recent championship is only two or three years away, but no one will care by then. Boise marches on in excellence and obscurity (basically the one constant in college football).

---------- Post added May-6th-2012 at 01:22 AM ----------

My Heisman front runners for next year are Barkley, Landry Jones, Montee Ball, Eddie Lacy, and either Aaron Murray or Isiah Crowell (unlikely as a true sophomore). I think South Carolina takes a step back and Marcus Lattimore (probably the most talented offensive backfield player in CFB) is still slow from his horrific injury for most of the year.

I think Barkley and Jones are the final two in consideration as the blue chip QBs for two of the best teams, and if one leads his team to an undefeated record he'll win it (although I think Landry clearly outproduces Barkley).

[Chump Bailey]

If the Colts wind up with the #1 overall again, they're going to make a killing with teams trying to get Barkley.

[RemoveSnyder]

I'm interested in Amerson, Borland, Wort, Glennon, Finch & Uzzi (Goons), Banks, McCalebb, Ellington, Patton, Swope, Flanders (fav), Hauptmann and Pugh - to name a few.

In fact there are four players from NC State that I'm excited to watch next year, Amerson, Glennon, Wallace and Bishop.

A couple of my personal favs are front runner Amerson. Then Uzzi and underclassman Finch - who are fit for the Skins. Farrell and Larsen seem like names to watch, typical guys selected by Skins. Then a dark horse, Tim Flanders, who I just thought was awesome during the 1-AA playoffs this last winter. I just smile thinking about what he does with such a diminutive body. And McCalebb, more well known, was constantly making me turn my head. Also to mention Swope and his fit for the Skins O and Quinton Patton.

For QB, outside of the normal chalk, watercooler names of Barkley, Jones - I guess Wilson and Bray are included in that too, I'm interested in Keith Price and Mike Glennon the most. I also want to see how Teddy Bridgewater continues/develops.

Just some names below of guys I've already seen, liked or both. I'm interested in following:

David Amerson

Johnthan Banks

Micah Hyde

Jason Pinkston

Rod Sweeting

Brandan Bishop

Bacarri Rambo

John Boyett

Kawann Short

Anthony Johnson

Margus Hunt

Kwame Geathers

Jarvis Jones

Chase Thomas

Sean Porter

Tom Wort

Chris Borland

Manti Te'o

Caleb Lavey

Jon Bostic

.

Khaled Holmes

Jay Finch

Tyler Larsen

Ben Habern

James Ferentz

Barrett Jones

Andrew Wallace

Blaize Foltz

Omoregie Uzzi

Jonathan Cooper

Dillon Farrell

John Miller

Brian Schwenke

Paul Santillan

Jake Matthews

Justin Pugh

Caylin Hauptmann

Xavier Nixon

Kaleb Hopson

Lane Johnson

Michael Schofield

Philip Lutzenkirchen

Tyler Eifert

Taimi Tutogi

Marqise Lee

Sammy Watkins

Ryan Swope

Robert Woods

Aaron Mellette

Markus Wheaton

Quinton Patton

Kenny Stills

Jarvis Landry

Marcus Lattimore

Andre Ellington

Onterio McCalebb

Michael Dyer

Ray Graham

Tim Flanders

Mike Glennon

Keith Price

Landry Jones

Matt Barkley

Tyler Wilson

Tyler Bray

Teddy Bridgewater

Tajh Boyd

[GWinSkins83]

People are really sleeping on Genome Smith. Now that I think about it Cousin not going to get us crap in a trade. To many QBs coming out.

[cphil006]

I'm surprised James Brown from Troy went undrafted.

Yea, there were a couple available that were rated higher according to other websites, but... Redskins own scouting department has their own assessments and probabaly understands our team needs better than Mel Kiper. Redskins also had Kirk Cousins as the #3 QB, so taking him in round 4 was a steal to the Redskins.

[B&GVol24]

*College football talk -- cue homer prediction

The Vols will win the SEC East this year. Write it down. And as I said I'm a homer, but I'm being serious.

Georgia is so overrated it's not even funny. Murray will make some plays but as a whole that offense is nothing special (#1 WR = Tavarres King? lol okay). Florida is still down and I can't see the South Carolina Lattimore's stopping us on offense. Tennessee will have one of the most explosive offenses in the SEC (West included) and IMHO any writer/analyst that doesn't see that simply isn't familiar with our personnel.

Talent-wise, we have probably one of the top 3 WR duos in the entire nation, and I don't think it's even close. For WR trios, I might even say #1 and think I could make a solid argument for it. And this whole line has nothing to do with being a homer (okay maybe a little). The only WR duos I would put ahead of us would probably be Woods/Lee and Watkins/Hopkins.

*end homer rant