The Official(ish) 2012 Quarterback Prospect Thread

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

If you're an offensive coordinator, who are you more likely to adjust for? A bright eyed, fresh, young, talented rookie quarterback, or a thirteen year veteran who should have his fundamentals in order and have the ability to adjust as well?

I'm not gona' rehash the sorry McNabb episode, who was to blame, and the whys and wherefores of where it went wrong. (I agree with a heck of a lot you said above about McNabbs attitude, even if I think your cutting the OC more slack than he deserves FWIW.).

But the premiss of the quote above is totally ridiculous when it pertains to a coordinator, whom ever that man may be. If your pride won't allow you to work with what you have at your disposal and not adjust your scheme to the skill set of what you've been given through sheer arrogance that the vet. should be able to adjust to what you require; then your doing yourself, your team and organization a complete disservice and prehaps need to rethink your career path. You tweak and adjust your scheme to fit the skill set of what you have at your disposal; not expect them to do things beyond their capabilities because your scheme is the perfect be all and end all. (My words, not yours.).

I'm not debating whether Kyle was/is that man. Just taking that alone as to what a big part of the main remit of a coordinator should be, whichever side of the ball.

Hail.

[Floodzone004]

I think a lot of the stuff about Kyle "not being willing to adjust" is complete and utter bull.

If you're an offensive coordinator, who are you more likely to adjust for? A bright eyed, fresh, young, talented rookie quarterback, or a thirteen year veteran who should have his fundamentals in order and have the ability to adjust as well?

I think Kyle has shown that he is a creative playcaller who is more than willing to adjust. Beck's in the game, we run boot more. Rex is in the game, we work the middle of the field more. McNabb's in the game, we take more shots deep and throw more screens.

I don't think Kyle has an issue with adjusting. When it comes to McNabb, I think McNabb had an issue adjusting. I think it was sort of a "meet you halfway" deal, but McNabb never came and tried to meet him halfway. McNabb wanted a totally different system. He wanted to freelance. He wanted the read/progression order to be different. He wanted more things that they ran in Philly. And Kyle tried to incorporate some more of those ideas into the offense, but McNabb never came to the middle, and never made the commitment to really learning the playbook. And what it comes down to is, how can you adjust to what anyone is doing if that person can't operate the basics of your offense?

If we drafted RGIII, I have no doubt that Kyle would be more than willing to add some things he's more comfortable with. Have him operate out of shotgun more, maybe put some zone/read plays in there. But before we go crazy with the zone/read/option stuff because some other teams quarterbacks have had success doing it, keep this in mind; what makes Cam's play so awesome this year isn't that they run a ton of option. Cam's work under center and his ability to read defenses have been outstanding this year. They added things Cam's comfortable with, but they've also taught him a ton about the BASICS of a NFL pro-style offense.

The same can be said of Tebow. These last few weeks, yeah, they run zone/read, sometimes they run option, but I think the most refreshing thing is that they're letting him work under center, have drop back passes, and that he's becoming more comfortable making reads and throws from the pocket.

The zone/read stuff and spread-option or just plain spread...those concepts are fine. They're a nice wrinkle. But the most impressive thing to me when it comes to those two guys is that, slowly in Tebow's case but real quick in Cam's case, is that they seem to be nailing down the basics of an NFL offense as WELL as doing the other the stuff they're more comfortable, meaning they'll become more well-rounded quarterbacks in the future.

If we draft RGIII, Kyle's going to try like hell to make him a dynamic guy. But RGIII will also learn the basics and the core concepts of our offense, and will probably be more willing to as well.

You make good points on McNabb. I agree he was immature about the whole thing. When I talk about Kyle being rigid I'm more referring to him talking about Tebow. I can't remember the quote exactly but he talked about how you're not gonna be able to correct a prospect like Tebow's flaws and how you'd have to change the system a lot around that. Just how he said it made it seem like he wasn't very enthused at the prospect of working on a prospect like that.

Granted RG3 is no where near the project that Tebow is. I'd love RG3 here, I think he's a great prospect, I'm just worried of Kyle's flexibility in bringing on someone who won't immediately be able to work in his system. Again, I like RG3, but I think it's unrealistic to expect a Cam Newton-type impact for any rookie QB. I do think that Newton has probably changed how we look at prospects in terms of "NFL readiness", but there are definitely concerns for any prospect transitioning to the pros and that includes RG3.

Overall, I think this is a great QB class. I'd be okay with just about any of them to be honest, besides Kellen Moore.

[Darth Tater]

You make good points on McNabb. I agree he was immature about the whole thing. When I talk about Kyle being rigid I'm more referring to him talking about Tebow. I can't remember the quote exactly but he talked about how you're not gonna be able to correct a prospect like Tebow's flaws and how you'd have to change the system a lot around that. Just how he said it made it seem like he wasn't very enthused at the prospect of working on a prospect like that.

Granted RG3 is no where near the project that Tebow is. I'd love RG3 here, I think he's a great prospect, I'm just worried of Kyle's flexibility in bringing on someone who won't immediately be able to work in his system. Again, I like RG3, but I think it's unrealistic to expect a Cam Newton-type impact for any rookie QB. I do think that Newton has probably changed how we look at prospects in terms of "NFL readiness", but there are definitely concerns for any prospect transitioning to the pros and that includes RG3.

Overall, I think this is a great QB class. I'd be okay with just about any of them to be honest, besides Kellen Moore.

Thing to remember is that Briles changes how his offense runs inside a single game based on what he thinks he can best take advantage of (very OS in this). The only thing really consistent is his use of veer concepts which he relies on much more than zone concepts.

[KCClybun]

I'm not gona' rehash the sorry McNabb episode, who was to blame, and the whys and wherefores of where it went wrong. (I agree with a heck of a lot you said above about McNabbs attitude, even if I think your cutting the OC more slack than he deserves FWIW.).

But the premiss of the quote above is totally ridiculous when it pertains to a coordinator, whom ever that man may be. If your pride won't allow you to work with what you have at your disposal and not adjust your scheme to the skill set of what you've been given through sheer arrogance that the vet. should be able to adjust to what you require; then your doing yourself, your team and organization a complete disservice and prehaps need to rethink your career path. You tweak and adjust your scheme to fit the skill set of what you have at your disposal; not expect them to do things beyond their capabilities because your scheme is the perfect be all and end all. (My words, not yours.).

I'm not debating whether Kyle was/is that man. Just taking that alone as to what a big part of the main remit of a coordinator should be, whichever side of the ball.

Hail.

My point was, Kyle DID make adjustments for McNabb, but McNabb was unwilling to meet him halfway, and what McNabb wanted, in essense, was a complete shift away from that the core philosophies of what the offense was. McNabb wanted something that was more or less what he ran in Philly. He could barely get the basics of our offense down, and doing things like changing the read order and not relying on timing rotes and footwork and all that stuff is a lot harder to justify with a veteran quarterback than it is with a younger quarterback. You can do it, but if I were an offensive coordinator, I would be reluctant to fundamentally shift my entire offense, knowing that he can't even get the things I want him to run down pat, and that he's probably not the long term answer for my team.

You adjust, and you tweak, certainly, but completely changing your offense to suit one player, who is either unwilling or unable to learn anything about what you do regularly, would be a hard pill to swallow for an offensive coordinator. And if you're going to do it, you'd rather do it with a young guy you'll have for ten or fifteen years then a veteran you're only planning on having 3-4.

I'm probably wrong. Won't be the first time, won't be the last time.

[GaryGreenMonk]

I think McNabb went as far as not running the play that Kyle called and ran whatever he wanted.

I believe that is what got McNabb benched and was the reason for reading Kyles lips as saying "That mother blanker will never play a down for me again"

[amm0409]

I didnt have a huge issue with McNabb. At one point I believed McNabb was our only player last season on offense (at one point ok).

I remember watching the Detroit game when he got benched. He didnt have two seconds to throw. Detroit's DL was ridiculous that game. We had to throw to Galloway? It was so pitiful.

Imagine Redskins drafting Dez Bryant that year? What if's. We need OL though.

Im glad McNabb is gone, SEE YA.

[Conn]

I didnt have a huge issue with McNabb. At one point I believed McNabb was our only player last season on offense (at one point ok).

I remember watching the Detroit game when he got benched. He didnt have two seconds to throw. Detroit's DL was ridiculous that game. We had to throw to Galloway? It was so pitiful.

Imagine Redskins drafting Dez Bryant that year? What if's. We need OL though.

Im glad McNabb is gone, SEE YA.

We weren't in position to draft Bryant that year. And to get in position, we would have needed to NOT draft Trent Williams. No thanks.

[darrelgreenie]

If we draft RGIII, Kyle's going to try like hell to make him a dynamic guy. But RGIII will also learn the basics and the core concepts of our offense, and will probably be more willing to as well.

You do love your diatribes (which I sometimes enjoy) and you had to re-visit the McNabb issue (why?)

A lot of your post could go in the other thread about Kyle and the zone-read but anyway...

I don't think Kyle would try to make him dynamic, Griff's already dynamic.

Kyle would have to teach him the like you said 'basics and core concepts of our offense'.

And knowing Kyle's offense is vital and has proven to take time.

Its this process that for me puts Griff behind the learning curve compared to Luck, Barkley and Tannehill for this team.

[issapunk]

I don't think we can judge Kyle yet at all. He was given an offense with little to zero talent and a veteran QB who wouldn't do what was needed. Who are we complaining about that he didn't change his offense for? McNabb? He should have been more willing to learn the offense and play like the Redskins, not the Eagles. Rex or Beck? Two stop-gap QBs who aren't starting quality and won't be here long. Should he have completely switched up the offense for us to win a few more games with Rex and not let the young guys get a grasp on the REAL offense we run? Then none of our players would be comfortable when we bring in a rookie QB and have to go to what Kyle really wants to run. I think we will get a QB who fits, IMO any of the top 3 would, and Kyle will tweak it to their strengths and help them be the best they can be. Plus, Shanahan is a great mentor for young QBs and I trust both of their abilities to make him great.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

I

But the premiss of the quote above is totally ridiculous when it pertains to a coordinator, whom ever that man may be. If your pride won't allow you to work with what you have at your disposal and not adjust your scheme to the skill set of what you've been given through sheer arrogance that the vet. should be able to adjust to what you require; then your doing yourself, your team and organization a complete disservice and prehaps need to rethink your career path. You tweak and adjust your scheme to fit the skill set of what you have at your disposal; not expect them to do things beyond their capabilities because your scheme is the perfect be all and end all. (My words, not yours.).

Hail.

You're wrong.

Do you think designing an NFL offense is just a matter of drawing up a few plays in the playbook? You don't think there's a certain amount of development time that goes into it? Do you think that you should change your offense on a fundamental level every time a new player comes in? McNabb in the best case scenario was a 3-4 year deal - do you rip up everything you know from 2 years as an OC of one of the best offenses in the NFL? Just because your QB isn't comfortable in the system?

And the fact is, Kyle DID tweak it. The fact is, McNabb didn't want to learn it. He wanted Philly-style progressions. Philly-style reads, Philly-style everything. Not even getting into the fact that the player is subordinate to the coach, I think it does a greater disservice to cater to a QB who doesn't want to put in the effort than to kowtow to his whining because he expects everything to be handed to him.

And it's relevant because the agenda-driven bull**** about "Kyle being unwilling to adapt" is a product of the McNabb thing last year.

[MartinC]

You're wrong.

Do you think designing an NFL offense is just a matter of drawing up a few plays in the playbook? You don't think there's a certain amount of development time that goes into it? Do you think that you should change your offense on a fundamental level every time a new player comes in? McNabb in the best case scenario was a 3-4 year deal - do you rip up everything you know from 2 years as an OC of one of the best offenses in the NFL? Just because your QB isn't comfortable in the system?

And the fact is, Kyle DID tweak it. The fact is, McNabb didn't want to learn it. He wanted Philly-style progressions. Philly-style reads, Philly-style everything. Not even getting into the fact that the player is subordinate to the coach, I think it does a greater disservice to cater to a QB who doesn't want to put in the effort than to kowtow to his whining because he expects everything to be handed to him.

And it's relevant because the agenda-driven bull**** about "Kyle being unwilling to adapt" is a product of the McNabb thing last year.

at the risk of turning this thread into a McNabb thread I think its worth noting that the Vikes HC and OC went on record at the start of this year saying they were going to build their offense totally around McNabb - it would be HIS offense. McNabb was benched after about 8 games and released at his own request when he fell to #3 on their depth chart.

Based on how things unfolded with the Vikes I'm not clear what difference Kyle totally adjusting his scheme (or not) would have made to the way things turned out here with McNabb. The fact McNabb is still on the street while QBs like Kyle Orton are picked up the second they get cut speaks volumes as well.

For me McNabb was a very good QB who had some great years with the Eagles and he can look back on a very good career (but not great IMO). How much of that is a credit to Andy Reid for his ability to tailor his scheme to McNabbs strengths and provide a supporting cast to fit that scheme is a moot point. At this point though if McNabb wants to contimue his career next year he will need to accept the veteran backup role somehwere and a much reduced contract.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

You're wrong...... etc ad nauseam.

Thanks for that and what followed.

Interesting response as I'd made it pretty clear to NLC I wasn't either referencing or debating the sorry McNabb episode here; just taking what I quoted as a general point on coordinators, offensive or defense; but thanks all the same.

Hail.

[MartinC]

Tannehill was a QB who moved to WR because as a freshmen he lost the QB comp to Sr. QB McGee a future NFL draft pick and later Jerrod Johnson who ,prior to injury, was arguably the best QB in the Big 12 at the time (3,500+yards 30 TDs 8 INTs) and the WR corps needed help the help he provided over that timespan 112/1,500/10 TDs.

There is no dount that Tannehill lacks experience but he actually knows this offense because A&M runs it; this actually gives him a leg up in learning the offense over even Luck and Barkley.

Tannehill isn't as inexperienced as most think and will have more snaps then Cam Newton and Mark Sanchez both of whom were day 1 starters.

There's as much to suggest that he could be a day 1 or midseason as their is to suggest that he needs to sit for a season.

I guess you dont know if a QB is going to be ready to start until you have worked with him and seen how he picks things up in the classroom and then applies that on the field. There have been some QBs who I thought needed time but who have been great out of the box and some I thought would be able to step right in who have struggled.

I do think though that its a fair starting point to think that a QB who has had to change positions (for whatever reason) and therefore had his development as a QB interupted and is inexperienced is going to need more time to adjust when he gets to the NFL than a more experienced QB all things being equal. Of course all things are not equal and Tannehill having been in a similar system to ours helps - but from what I have seen I do think he looks raw and will need some development before he is handed the keys to the franchise.

I do like his physical talent though - he might have the best arm in this draft class and when you add that to his athletic ability with great size as well its a very interesting package. If Shanny decides he is the guy I would be fine with that and we could almost certainly trade back and still get him as well.

[The Robert Griffin Experience]

Thanks for that and what followed.

Interesting response as I'd made it pretty clear to NLC I wasn't either referencing or debating the sorry McNabb episode here; just taking what I quoted as a general point on coordinators, offensive or defense; but thanks all the same.

Hail.

That's where the whole meme about "inability" to adapt comes from, so no matter how many times you say the sky isn't blue, I can look up. The idea that a coach is obligated to not only "tweak" or "modify" his system but to change his system entirely for a single player is ridiculous. Should coaches, when they draft a rookie Qb, now have to hire the offensive coordinators of that QB as a means of "adapting to their skillset"?

Even the stuff Cam and Tebow doing were meant to ease them into more pro-style sets, not to build an entire offense on what they did in college. Both will be expected to become traditional drop-back passers to a significant extent.

[KCClybun]

Nick Foles tape. (Need to find more tape on the lower tier QBs in the next few weeks).

[darrelgreenie]

That's where the whole meme about "inability" to adapt comes from, so no matter how many times you say the sky isn't blue, I can look up. The idea that a coach is obligated to not only "tweak" or "modify" his system but to change his system entirely for a single player is ridiculous. Should coaches, when they draft a rookie Qb, now have to hire the offensive coordinators of that QB as a means of "adapting to their skillset"?

Even the stuff Cam and Tebow doing were meant to ease them into more pro-style sets, not to build an entire offense on what they did in college. Both will be expected to become traditional drop-back passers to a significant extent.

Its impossible to have a discussion when you ask rhetorical questions.

But, what you call 'ridiculous' is the very core of coaching.

Have you seen the offense that Cam and Tebow run?

They're using zone-read plays and concepts that have been added to the respective teams offenses specifically for them.

---------- Post added December-15th-2011 at 07:00 PM ----------

I do like his physical talent though - he might have the best arm in this draft class and when you add that to his athletic ability with great size as well its a very interesting package. If Shanny decides he is the guy I would be fine with that and we could almost certainly trade back and still get him as well.

I agree that he needs development, but whether or not that development precludes him from starting is something they won't know until he gets here.

I agree that the risk is there or that the question is there.

And maybe its a risk this staff can't afford?

If Tannehill needs the Carson Palmer treatment they might not last to see act II.

Trading back and hoping their guy will be there is a scary/risky proposition.

In fact I think that's what happened last year.

Getting cute with the draft when you need a QB can easily result in not drafting a QB.

I believe in a draft adage I heard somewhere, Parcells?, better 1 round too early then 1 pick to late.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

To save folks time on a laborious back and fourth, we'll just have to agree to disagree Imperium.

Let's just say your idea of the very staple of a coordinators job differs greatly from mine.

Hail.

[Tay]

Kalil is turning pro. Good news for those hoping Barkley turns pro

[Prototype]

I hope Barkley doesn't turn pro, so our only option is RG3. :evilg:

[Dukes and Skins]

You realize if he doesn't turn pro, then every other team who wants a QB will only have RG3 as an option as well.

We want Barkley to come out, even if some of us don't want us to draft him. The more QBs out there, the better our chances of getting one.

Very true, just think he was making it as a point of saying we couldnt take anyone else but RG3 there

[terpskins10]

I hope Barkley doesn't turn pro' date=' so our only option is RG3. :evilg:[/quote']

You realize if he doesn't turn pro, then every other team who wants a QB will only have RG3 as an option as well.

We want Barkley to come out, even if some of us don't want us to draft him. The more QBs out there, the better our chances of getting one.

[War Paint]

I hope Barkley doesn't turn pro' date=' so our only option is RG3. :evilg:[/quote']

If you want RG3, you also should want Barkley to go pro. If Barkley stays in school, it does nothing but add more competition between QB needy teams for RG3 and will make it harder for us to get him. The more QBs declaring the better.

[DogofWar1]

Kalil declaring is great news for us if we want to grab our QB at 4 without having to move up. Kalil is top 5 talent and will be taken as such, probably by the Vikings at 3. If the Rams jump on Blackmon at 2 (and you know Bradford is all for that), then they'll be no trade ups (save maybe for Luck). Those teams need help in the worst ways, and it'll take a lot to convince them to move back and take lesser talent. Furthermore, if they do indeed decide to trade down, I guarantee we'll be first in line for it if we're willing to deal (assuming we stay where we are), since they'll expect that they can still get their guy at 4, whereas moving back to the later 0s results in them missing them.

The real fight, if we're lucky enough to grab the #2 qb at 4, will be at the five spot. Everyone will want to get the #3 QB before the drop off. That'll be fun to watch, assuming we've gotten our guy.

[TheREALJBird]

Looks good right now for us, but we have to hold the #4 spot

[Prototype]

The only thing I'm afraid of is Minnesota trading their pick to Miami to jump ahead of us.

Its perfectly logical that they can trade down their pick and acquire they player they still need, IE Kalil, and have more picks to get more players.

We are in competition with Miami and Seattle for a franchise QB, and if we stay at 4, this is the worst case scenario:

#1. Colts - Luck

#2. St. Louis - Blackmon

#3. Miami (Minnesota) - Griffin or Barkley

#4. Washington - Whoever is not picked above

#5. Jacksonville - Kalil/Martin

#6. Carolina - Morris Claiborne

#7. Minnesota (Miami) - Kailil/Martin

etc etc.........

In this case, we are left sloppy seconds to whomever Miami fancies more. I prefer us having the option and go for RG3.