FAREWELL to the NFL Dwayne Haskins QB Ohio State

[KDawg]

16 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Cooley's take more or less is that Haskins thrived on mostly short stuff especially shallow crossers -- rub routes and his receivers were often wide open.  His take is he doesn't slide in the pocket well and really runs away from pressure more so than using quick footwork to dodge it.  When on the move his accuracy dips because his feet aren't aligned to where he wants to throw it.   He thinks he's really raw.  The irony though is in spite of that he would play him right away.  His take is his lack of experience is part of the issue so give him that experience.  His most positive take is you can see in the mix of his games he can make some really nice throws and he has a strong arm so give him the opportunity to work through what he needs to work through.

 

 

So, more or less, he's in line with what a lot of us, who were in favor of Haskins, have been saying.

 

Doesn't sound like he's all that down on him to me. I guess it depends on your slant on things. Unless he's said he thinks he's going to bust. I saw you say in a different post that Cooley says he has "bust potential". I mean... yeah. Agreed. But I think he's got a better chance not to bust. I'm on record saying I was indifferent to the pick on draft day and I'm for it now. If I gave a "bust %", I'd say he's like a 35/65 bust/hit ratio. Daniel Jones is probably 55/45. And I'd say Murray is more like 25/75.

 

Cooley doesn't think Jay's offense is a good set up for Haskins to succeed.  He thinks Jay should change it some and go with the quick game-short passes to get Haskins comfortable and mirror some of the Ohio State game.   Cooley loves making the point that Jay left to his own devices isn't a pure WCO guy and he wants his QB to go down the field much more so than the traditional WCO.

 

I think Jay tailors things to his QBs more than we give him credit for. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him work more mesh concept/short stuff in to set up the long ball. Jay is going to be Jay. His premise will be his premise. But play action flashes, full PAs, boots, half-field reads, etc. are all in his offense. It's just calling it.

[Skinsinparadise]

14 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

So, more or less, he's in line with what a lot of us, who were in favor of Haskins, have been saying.

 

Doesn't sound like he's all that down on him to me. I guess it depends on your slant on things. Unless he's said he thinks he's going to bust. I saw you say in a different post that Cooley says he has "bust potential". I mean... yeah. Agreed. But I think he's got a better chance not to bust. I

 

His film review before the draft was summed up by him that he flat out didn't want Haskins at 15, he saw it as a reach and he thinks he has high bust potential.  It was actually rough. 

 

If I recall he said he saw him as a third round talent (I might be wrong on that I have to re-listen to his draft grade on it but pretty sure he said 3rd).  Now that they took him he backed off some, said he sees him as a 2nd round talent.  He said he has seen him make some really nice throws in key situations but also saw almost an equal amount of poor throws in said situations.  He doubled down on footwork concerns, movement in the pocket, accuracy on the move issues.  But said hopefully they can figure things out with him because he has obvious arm talent.

 

14 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I think Jay tailors things to his QBs more than we give him credit for. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised to see him work more mesh concept/short stuff in to set up the long ball. Jay is going to be Jay. His premise will be his premise. But play action flashes, full PAs, boots, half-field reads, etc. are all in his offense. It's just calling it.

 

I am more pro Jay here than most.    I got some issues with play calling.  But otherwise I trust his evaluation skills and one of my biggest items of optimism about this is Jay's ability to work with a QB.  I got plenty of doubts that Haskins was Jay's guy -- too many reporters in my view converge on that point for them to all be wrong especially with conservative reporters like Keim being in that mix.   But who knows?   But I do believe what some of those same reporters have said which is that now that Haskins is in the fold -- Jay is excited to see what he can do with him.  I excited on that front, too.  Will see. 

[volsmet]

 

[KDawg]

13 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

If I recall he said he saw him as a third round talent (I might be wrong on that I have to re-listen to his draft grade on it but pretty sure he said 3rd).  Now that they took him he backed off some, said he sees him as a 2nd round talent.  He said he has seen him make some really nice throws in key situations but also saw almost an equal amount of poor throws in said situations.  He doubled down on footwork concerns, movement in the pocket, accuracy on the move issues.  But said hopefully they can figure things out with him because he has obvious arm talent.

 

 

I share his concerns. I also share his take that Haskins was a second round talent out of college. I also believe Murray was roughly, on football value, Murray was more of a mid 20s talent. But they are quarterbacks. Their value is inflated. 

 

But I don't understand the logic that a second (or even third) round talent level is a bad thing. It means you're one of the top 64-96 players in the draft coming out of college and/or many quarterbacks taken even later have thrived at the professional level. 

 

At the end of the day, we got one of the two best quarterbacks in the draft. Does that make him worth anything to this point? No. It doesn't. I just don't see how Cooley's current take is really all that negative towards Haskins. Even Haskins biggest supporters around here would likely agree with Cooley's evaluation (as you stated it).

 

For the record, I've worked Cooley's football camps in the past. I've had more than a few conversations with the guy. He recognized me by face once or twice when I did games for ES (he doesn't know my name, I'm not that cool). I think he's got a damn good football IQ. Dude is smart. 

 

But my take here is that Cooley's view is being tinted as negative because it's not all sunshine and rainbows when most people paying attention should know Haskins has work to do with his footwork. The accuracy and pocket movement will improve with improvements to footwork. Really, it's one glaring problem that compounds itself.

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Just for fun, just to make a point about Haskins' high variance of opinion.  And like I said, no doubt in my mind if Haskins was a slam dunk prospect where anyone with concerns have to be off their rocker -- there would be no shot that he'd be there at 15.  So my point is to have a lottery ticket at QB I think oddly if anything we should embrace the idea that there were concerns.   He wasn't my guy so to speak,  But got issue with the pick now that they took him.

 

The variance though about him, Jones, Lock and everyone else sans Murray was obvious throughout the process.  And at least according to some reporters that variance was shared by personnel people.  I was frankly confused about Haskins for some time -- more positive though negative based on what i was reading and what I recall watching during the college season.  Then I dove in watched 5 games in a row and landed on my own hard opinion.  but like I said i am no expert obviously.  QBs are really hard to figure out.  This organization knows that more than most -- alas its been mostly a painful lesson.  Hopefully it ends here with a find. 😀 

 

 

“It’s Dwayne Haskins or bust” if the New York Giants want a quarterback at No. 6 overall in the 2019 NFL Draft. That’s what highly-respected draft analyst Tony Pauline [draftanalyst.com] said during a visit to the ‘Valentine’s Views’ podcast.

“There’s no other quarterback that ranks with Haskins right now,” Pauline said. “

 

https://www.bigblueview.com/big-blue-view-radio/2019/2/1/18206783/tony-pauline-dwayne-haskins-or-bust-if-giants-want-a-quarterback-at-no-6-2019-nfl-draft

 

 

https://247sports.com/college/ohio-state/Article/Ohio-State-Buckeyes-football-Bleacher-Report-Dwayne-Haskins-overrated-draft-prospect-129184831/

NFL scouts rate Dwayne Haskins as 'overrated draft prospect'

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/2019/05/06/mike-mayock-clelin-ferrell-raiders-2019-draft-kyler-murray-daniel-jones-dwayne-haskins?xid=socialflow_twitter_si&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sinow

With that established, I sent out texts late Friday asking scouts and coaches who’d evaluated quarterbacks each of those years to rank their top five QBs over the last three drafts, based on where they had them graded coming out of college. I then took each of those lists and awarded points: five for a first-place vote, four for a second-place vote, and so on.

We got 11 ballots back, from 11 different teams. The results:

1T: Baker Mayfield, Browns 2017, 35 points (4 first-place votes)
1T: Sam Darnold, Jets 2017, 35 points (4 first-place votes)
3: Deshaun Watson, Texans 2016, 33 points (1 first-place vote)
4: Patrick Mahomes, Chiefs 2016, 26.5 points (1 first-place vote)
5: Kyler Murray, Cardinals 2019, 18 points (1 first-place vote)
6: Josh Rosen, Cardinals 2018, 8.5 points
7: Mitch Trubisky, Bears 2017, 6 points
8: Daniel Jones, Giants 2019, 2 points
9: Dwayne Haskins, Redskins 2019, 1 point

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meanwhile the other consensus first-round talent, Ohio State’s Dwayne Haskins, is viewed as much less of a sure thing by the model. While his CPOE is identical to Murray’s and his QBR is similar, the model rates his yards per attempt and low average depth of target as red flags that drag down his probability of success. Nickel is the base defense in the NFL, so a quarterback’s performance against it is important, and Haskins faced five or more defensive backs far less often than Murray, dropping back against nickel or dime on just 63 percent of his pass attempts. And when Haskins was blitzed out of those looks, he was not as adept at delivering on-target passes, with 76.4 percent charted as catchable despite only 6.6 percent traveling 20 yards or more in the air.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-nfl-is-drafting-quarterbacks-all-wrong/

[Llevron]

We should make Cooley GM. Cant be worse than what we have 

[KDawg]

I still don't see the love for Darnold. Even after his rookie season. I just don't see a guy that should be rated that highly.

 

But, to be fair to him, I think he's got a high ceiling. And a low floor. And he has the ability to develop.

 

I think Haskins is similar, except I think he has a higher floor and a similar ceiling.

[volsmet]

The issues for Haskins are all things you can work on, but they’re not insignificant. He has little composure with pressure up the middle, he drops his arm without much feel for any sort of improvisation & the arm will lag on some deep/touch/outside throws because of it, & then he rushes his arm through entirely too quickly on short stuff when things require him to move. These things aren’t particularly easy to work on in the nfl because they require seeing/processing the game more slowly & he’s about to see a game that’s infinitely faster. 

 

He’s a fine prospect overall, I would prefer to see him sit for a year & just observe the speed & take in the life adjustments as a millionaire back where he went to HS. He has elite traits & he may come out & kill it as a rookie, but I’d have him sit & lock up one of the elite OL in next years class if we struggle at guard again. Now that he’s here, my priority would be protecting him, he’s only 15 starts into his career & his lack of mobility makes the middle of the pocket more dangerous for him because of it... & you see him feel that when he plays. 

 

My my primary gripe with the pick is, imo, Rosen is better & could have been had for less. I prefer Lock as well, but give me the guy on a rookie contract, who survived a year with the most pathetic franchise in the league (rarely do we get a guy coming from something worse than what’s in Washington), & has proven he can make elite plays v elite defenses on the worst roster in the game. That’s too good to pass on... and if Rosen busts for a 2nd rounder, just draft another guy... lesser bust risk, lesser price, more upside, easier to part ways with if necessary. 

 

Oh, and nobody really likes Bullis. 

[volsmet]

This is where the Tua surrounding talent comparisons fall apart, the two guys make entirely different throws.

 

 

from SIP:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JSSkinz]

I listened to the Cooley podcast, I didn't see the podcast as being negative, Cooley mentioned he saw more good than bad, I think he said he watched 150 great throws compared to 100 not so great.  He basically said he didn't know what kind of player Haskins will or could be because of the lack of experience.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mistertim]

18 minutes ago, JSSkinz said:

I listened to the Cooley podcast, I didn't see the podcast as being negative, Cooley mentioned he saw more good than bad, I think he said he watched 150 great throws compared to 100 not so great.  He basically said he didn't know what kind of player Haskins will or could be because of the lack of experience.

 

 

As others have mentioned, Cooley backed off a little after they drafted Haskins. Before the draft he was much harsher and basically flat out said he didn't like him as a prospect. He's still a bit critical but I guess he's trying to be more neutral now that he's a Redskin. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, JSSkinz said:

I listened to the Cooley podcast, I didn't see the podcast as being negative, Cooley mentioned he saw more good than bad, I think he said he watched 150 great throws compared to 100 not so great.  He basically said he didn't know what kind of player Haskins will or could be because of the lack of experience.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am assuming then you didn't listen to his film review of Haskins which was a different podcast.  Because no way I think anyone can come up with the view that hey Cooley isn't that negative on him if they heard that one. 

 

Heck Keim among others addressed it in some of his podcasts when he talked about differing opinions on Haskins saying yeah Cooley doesn't like him as a prospect.  Cooley was pretty clear.  As for the last podcast after they took him, like I said he backed off a little and flat out said "he hopes he's wrong about him".  Then played up some of the things he liked which he hopes will bear out.  And played some of the things he didn't like but purposely didn't ham that part up the way he did in his initial film review.

 

I get the people who want to challenge Cooley and said what does he know, he could be wrong.  That's fair.  But no way I was left with an impression that Cooley likes the pick. 

 

 

1 hour ago, KDawg said:

I still don't see the love for Darnold. Even after his rookie season. I just don't see a guy that should be rated that highly.

 

But, to be fair to him, I think he's got a high ceiling. And a low floor. And he has the ability to develop.

 

I think Haskins is similar, except I think he has a higher floor and a similar ceiling.

 

Darnold to me is a different type of QB than Haskins.   As to who ends up better?  Who knows.  I liked Darnold last year.  Darnold especially for his size has good mobility in the pocket.   Heck even Doug more or less said in one of his interviews this year that was their top guy in the last draft and implied that this draft its not as cut and dry. 

 

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

But I don't understand the logic that a second (or even third) round talent level is a bad thing. It means you're one of the top 64-96 players in the draft coming out of college and/or many quarterbacks taken even later have thrived at the professional level. 

 

At the end of the day, we got one of the two best quarterbacks in the draft. Does that make him worth anything to this point? No. It doesn't. I just don't see how Cooley's current take is really all that negative towards Haskins. Even Haskins biggest supporters around here would likely agree with Cooley's evaluation (as you stated it).

 

 

The 2nd best Qb as to the media draft guys and heck not even all of them agreed on that.    If I recall Gabbert or Locker was the 2nd favorite QB depending on the draft geek in 2011.  I don't know if that has any value.  I know he wasn't Cooley's 2nd favorite QB.  According to guys like Peter Schrager he wasn't many GM's 2nd favorite QB.  Heck he wasn't even the 2nd QB picked in the draft.   So the 2nd stuff I think has limited value.

 

Though it feels like am killing Haskins here.  Like I said there is plenty to like.  I am just disagreeing on some of the angles here and playing some devil's advocate. 😀

 

 

If people want to think Cooley is OK with Haskins, OK but I think there is some projecting going on.   He is OK with him because he's a Redskin now but he didn't like him as a prospect that much.  I don't know how specific Cooley has to get beyond he wouldn't draft him, he thinks he has a high potential to be a bust.  And he even panned the pick when it happened.  Other than that Cooley dug it?    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JSSkinz]

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I am assuming then you didn't listen to his film review of Haskins which was a different podcast. 

 

You're correct, I only listened to the recent one where he had VD on in the 2nd part of the podcast.

[KDawg]

37 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

The 2nd best Qb as to the media draft guys and heck not even all of them agreed on that.    If I recall Gabbert or Locker was the 2nd favorite QB depending on the draft geek in 2011.  I don't know if that has any value.  I know he wasn't Cooley's 2nd favorite QB.  According to guys like Peter Schrager he wasn't many GM's 2nd favorite QB.  Heck he wasn't even the 2nd QB picked in the draft.   So the 2nd stuff I think has limited value.

 

 

I mean, I'm speaking on my opinion. Not anyone else's. I don't particularly care what the media says. The only thing that I rely them on for for a concrete opinion is prospects I hadn't seen or even heard of. And then I just use them for the name so I can pull up some highlights.

 

If people want to think Cooley is OK with Haskins, OK but I think there is some projecting going on.   He is OK with him because he's a Redskin now but he didn't like him as a prospect that much.  I don't know how specific Cooley has to get beyond he wouldn't draft him, he thinks he has a high potential to be a bust.  And he even panned the pick when it happened.  Other than that Cooley dug it? 

 

I'm not pretending to speak for Cooley. I just don't understand how any of the critiques/statements he made are seen as negatives that pan a pick other than "Don't love it. Don't even really like it. I have to come around though. Hopefully Haskins comes in and proves me wrong."

 

His commentary may be centered around him not liking it, but his analysis doesn't paint the same picture as his commentary.  He's right on a lot of what he says about Haskins. If not all of it. Footwork is the key to Haskins success in the NFL. And all of the problems he described go hand in hand with his feet. Accuracy, passing on the move, breaking the "bubble", etc. 

 

That's stuff all of us have been saying.

 

The second/third round grade stuff... Again, I think a lot of us would agree that he, from an overall talent/potential perspective, probably wasn't the 15th best player in the draft coming out of college. But he's a QB. Their value is dramatically inflated. He went about where he should have all of that considered... But that doesn't change that he was probably closer to a second rounder.

 

I just don't see negatives to Haskins potential in his actual analysis. It's really just in his commentary. *shrug*

 

As a prospect, I like Haskins better than Darnold. He protects the ball a hell of a lot better. Darnold, however, was much more experienced and pro ready. 

[Skinsinparadise]

51 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

 

I'm not pretending to speak for Cooley. I just don't understand how any of the critiques/statements he made are seen as negatives that pan a pick other than "Don't love it. Don't even really like it. I have to come around though. Hopefully Haskins comes in and proves me wrong."

 

His commentary may be centered around him not liking it, but his analysis doesn't paint the same picture as his commentary.  He's right on a lot of what he says about Haskins. If not all of it. Footwork is the key to Haskins success in the NFL. And all of the problems he described go hand in hand with his feet. Accuracy, passing on the move, breaking the "bubble", etc. 

 

 

Other than he didn't like the pick and hopes that he is wrong -- what else do we have that Cooley is truly negative on the player...

 

Ok, this got me to re-listen to it.  It made my remember that some of what I recall Cooley said about Haskins on a more macro level was on Sheehan's podcast weeks back so I should try to dig that up.  As for Cooley's own podcast.  I just re-listened.   He was softer on it than on Sheehan but not that soft. 

 

I just did my best below to transcribe.  Just about every statment below is what he said verbatim if am off its by a word here and there.

 

He's not athletic at all.  He's lethargic and slow.  He struggled big time with pressure in his face.   He gets confused on looks pre-snap.   He doesn't have quick feet.  Struggles to move with pressure.  Too slow to climb the pocket.  He fumbles a lot of snaps.    His anticipation is just average.   He needs to see the receiver open typically to make the throw.  He gets stuck on his #1 receiver too often.  He predetermines reads too much.  He is poor and late getting to the check down.   He can't throw a swing route.  He needs to work on his touch.  His throws to the middle sail and go high.  He misses a boatload of throws.  He misses open receivers too often.  His balls are behind on outbreaking routes way too often.  When you get pressure on him he gets rattled. 

 

...He got away with a lot of throws.  Overall he's a project.  I don't feel comfortable starting Dwayne Haskins next year.  i wouldn't take him in the first round.  I have seen him in games not recovering from being rattled.  (then talked about he didn't think it would go well if he started and things didn't go well)  If he starts next season, he will lead the league in sacks and will probably throw more picks than you'd expect.   If I am the Redskins i wouldn't pull the trigger at 15.  

 

He got into the Ohio State offense too but it seems like that discussion gets the debate here off track as if he liked him but just has concerns about the offense.  His point was the offense is very repetitive and simple (ton of slants and short crossers) and if he wasn't in love with the dude in that context -- he wonders about him running a more complex NFL offense.  

 

His positives were strong arm and can make all of the throws.  He sees strong potential in him but again he thinks he's raw and if he makes it -- it will take time and the right coaching staff to help him.  In his last podcast, he backed off of sitting him this year and thinks they should play him.  He goes he can prove him completely wrong.  

 

I'd have to listen to it again but the impression I got as to the rationale was that Haskins' lack of experience could be part of the issue so give him the experience to work things out. 

[volsmet]

44 minutes ago, KDawg said:

I just don't see negatives to Haskins potential in his actual analysis. It's really just in his commentary. *shrug*

 

 

Everyone agrees that Haskins has enormous potential, the discrepancies are found in the likelihood it’s realized. Talent & production are there, objectively he has the arm & the big numbers. The translation of his game to the NFL is more muddled, translations of talent... are never a certainty, or Will Grier would not have been drafted. 

[KDawg]

10 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

Everyone agrees that Haskins has enormous potential, the discrepancies are found in the likelihood it’s realized. Talent & production are there, objectively he has the arm & the big numbers. The translation of his game to the NFL is more muddled, translations of talent... are never a certainty, or Will Grier would not have been drafted. 

 

Agreed.

 

But I keep hearing how down Cooley is on the player, but Cooley isn't saying anything different than most of us have. 

 

I just don't think Cooley's commentary matches his analysis... What Cooley *currently* described as problems ARE. But they are fixable. Will they? Who knows.

 

Although, with SIP's last post, I disagree with a lot more of what Cooley said. Unathletic is the tip of the iceberg. Undersold Haskins big time there. If he said, "Not Kyler Murray athletically" I'd agree completely.

 

Reality is most QBs have dramatic issues coming out of college. It's rare they don't. Cooley's *current* knocks on Haskins aren't overly negative. *shrug*

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

12 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

 

Reality is most QBs have dramatic issues coming out of college. It's rare they don't. Cooley's *current* knocks on Haskins aren't overly negative. *shrug*

 

 

 

Feels like i am Cooley's PR person here.  😀   He for example loved Murray and Lock and didn't have that many concerns about them.   He would have taken either player.  He said he would not have taken Haskins.  That's blunt.   He loved Wentz like I said in a previous draft.  He's done plenty of QB appraisals -- its not like he kills them all with a litany of concerns.    Granted that doesn't mean he is right. 

 

I don't think the average person here touting Haskins is saying he misses a boatload of throws, crumbles under pressure, doesn't throw with good anticipation, doesn't move well in the pocket, sticks on his first read, is slow and sluggish, will lead the league in sacks -- but otherwise we are excited about him.    Cooley from what I've observed is tougher on him on the aggregate. 

 

Cooley said today he will find a way to like Haskins.  I am doing the same.  The potential is there.   

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Feels like i am Cooley's PR person here.  😀   He for example loved Murray and Lock and didn't have that many concerns about them.   He would have taken either player.  He said he would not have taken Haskins.  That's blunt.   He loved Wentz like I said in previous drafts.  He's done plenty of QB appraisals -- its not like he kills them all with a litany of concerns.    Granted that doesn't mean he is right. 

 

I don't think the average person here touting Haskins is saying he misses a boatload of throws, crumbles under pressure, doesn't throw with good anticipation, sticks on his first read, is slow and sluggish, will lead the league and sacks -- but otherwise we are excited about him.    Cooley from what I've observed is tougher on him. 

 

 

 

I feel like you're not connecting what I'm saying. Which probably means I'm not conveying it.

 

Cooley's current schtick about footwork can't be argued. His original schtick is way too negative.

 

Him liking Lock better than Haskins is... certainly interesting.

 

My overall point: Cooley's current analysis (footwork issues) is dead nuts accurate. His commentary doesn't match his current analysis.

[volsmet]

1 minute ago, KDawg said:

 

 

Reality is most QBs have dramatic issues coming out of college. It's rare they don't. Cooley's *current* knocks on Haskins aren't overly negative. *shrug*

 

 

 

There never has been & never will be a QB that isn’t knocked for the following:

He needs to see the receiver open typically to make the throw.  He gets stuck on his #1 receiver too often.  He predetermines reads too much.

 

That’s every QB, at every level, nearly every game, per the majority of that teams own fans. JimmyG v Stafford in SF was nearly impossible for me to watch because both highly respected QB’s did those things throughout the game v defenses that weren’t exactly intimidating.

 

I think Haskins upper body moves well around edge pressure, but the feet get his mechanics off & he hasn’t shown the ability to recreate his base after moving because he has such limited experience & he’s got the talent to get the ball anywhere without doing things perfectly; he likes to show the arm off & he loses the integrity of his motion too often. He can fix it, it’s just difficult to change some of that in a much faster environment. That’s it ... if he can break those awful habits, I don’t question that he can be very good. That’s why I’d have prioritized a guard & I’d max protect him all day — he can’t work on those things if he’s unable to get comfortable first; as soon as the speed impacts him, he’s very likely to revert to the bad habits, all young QBs do, & they get harder to break every day that passes without seeing their benefit & feeling comfortable in his protection. 

 

Few argue that Haskins doesn’t struggle mightily when something impacts his feet up the middle, so I’d do all I could to remove the threat of the one thing that creates the moments that unravel his strengths.

 

[Burgold]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

 

I don't think the average person here touting Haskins is saying he misses a boatload of throws, crumbles under pressure, doesn't throw with good anticipation, sticks on his first read, is slow and sluggish, will lead the league in sacks -- but otherwise we are excited about him.    Cooley from what I've observed is tougher on him. 

 

 

How can someone who completed 70% of their passes miss "a boatload of passes?" I guess if the boat is a kayak it's possible. Still, if the boat is a canoe or larger it just doesn't seem possible.

[JSSkinz]

I think Cooley's idea of playing Haskins immediately makes some sense for all the reasons he pointed out, if we see enough in Haskins to make us comfortable for the future then great and if not we are probably picking top 5 and that gives us options similar to what Arizona did this year.

[Skinsinparadise]

18 minutes ago, Burgold said:

How can someone who completed 70% of their passes miss "a boatload of passes?" I guess if the boat is a kayak it's possible. Still, if the boat is a canoe or larger it just doesn't seem possible.

 

Cooley would say that Haskins throwing all the short slants and shallow crossers is his wheel house it's about the other throws.  So yeah you can miss a boatload of passes considering context.  Many play up Rosen's accuracy albeit with a low 60% completion percentage but he was playing mostly with crap receivers and he had gun slinger tendencies so its about context.   Kellen Moore had almost a 75% completion percentage in his last year in college -- he was just a guy at best in the NFL.  

 

20 minutes ago, volsmet said:

 

Few argue that Haskins doesn’t struggle mightily when something impacts his feet up the middle, so I’d do all I could to remove the threat of the one thing that creates the moments that unravel his strengths.

 

 

The game that raised concerns for me wasn't even the Purdue one as much as Penn State, at some point they just starting bringing the house including pressure up the middle and you can see his game drop.  If he's going to step in the pocket and throw -- you need good protection. 

 

20 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

My overall point: Cooley's current analysis (footwork issues) is dead nuts accurate. His commentary doesn't match his current analysis.

 

I think I get you but tell me if I am wrong.  Your point is the litany of negatives that he listed on Haskins isn't that long or bad -- its run of the mill concerns for the typical QB so  he may think he doesn't like Haskins but maybe he really does like him and just doesn't realize it.

 

If so my only thing is don't cherry pick just the most common criticisms that has been echoed but hit all of them.  If you go through them all, he's tougher-rougher on Haskins than the typical analyst.   If we just pick the common denominators of his criticism then I agree with your point -- but he went beyond just hitting the common denominators.   For example he flat out challenged his accuracy.  Some of the pro Haskins people think he's deadly accurate.    

[COWBOY-KILLA-]

 

Oh boy here come the proud contrarians. Cooley the be all end on draft prospects? HahahahahahahahaHahaha, who knew?! He gets paid to stir the pot.

But but Drew Lock will be the 2nd qb taken in the top ten, book it!! Smh. LOL.... People need to just let this play out, instead of scurrying to justify their guesses, I mean takes, on how these players will pan out. Sit back and enjoy the ride instead of having your write up ready on “you see this wasn’t my guy” just to make yourselves feel like you are the best GM on a message board.

The internet is awesome gotta love it. You mean there are disparate opinions on how good Haskins will be? Shocker! He’s ours now, get on board, cuz god forbid the kid actually makes it. I promise if he does to remind you forever on the fact you didn’t want him. And if he doesn’t make it I’m sure you’ll be first in line waving a finger at yourself.. but until then, support the kid who is 21yrs old and Enjoy the ride please. Look to build him up instead of tear him down. Save us from the countless reasons he sucks and all the ways we made a mistake, that you saw coming.

Its like going to see a movie with a friend and he’s like “this movie is gonna suck, ebert only gave it 2 stars, and roper says he won’t even see it till it’s out on video, I’m telling you it’s gonna suck.” Thanks bud, can we just watch the movie please. ✌🏽

[KDawg]

1 minute ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I think I get you but tell me if I am wrong.  Your point is the litany of negatives that he listed on Haskins isn't that long or bad -- its run of the mill concerns for the typical QB so  he may think he doesn't like Haskins but maybe he really does and just doesn't realize it.

 

Yup.

 

If so my only thing is don't cherry pick just the most common criticisms that has been echoed but hit all of them.  If you go through them all, he's tougher-rougher on Haskins than the typical analysts.   If we just pick the common denominators of his criticism then I agree with your point -- but he went beyond just hitting the common denominators For example he flat out challenged his accuracy.  Some of the pro Haskins people think he's deadly accurate.   

 

I think he's tougher on Haskins than he is other prospects. Forget his peers on Haskins. 

 

I think his accuracy point is big time over stated by him in his original analysis. I think he didn't like Haskins as a prospect from the start, and he let that creep into his original analysis. In short, I think he's dead ****ing wrong with his original criticism. 

 

I also think people saying he's deadly accurate is wrong. Very wrong.

 

He is inaccurate on the move or when he has to reset his feet. This is a big footwork issue. And it is an issue. But saying a 70% passer isn't accurate at all is slanted with bias. I don't care how else you spin it.