Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

2021 Comprehensive Draft Thread


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, philibusters said:

 

 

I feel like the gap between Power 5 football and Group of 5 football is much much smaller than the gap between Power 5 football and the NFL, so I wouldn't worry too much about level of competition.  And even for the Power 5 guys like Lawrence and Fields, there is really only 3 or4 games they play per year against a defense that can somewhat match the offenses talent.   If a guy like Wilson is surrounded by talent on par with the defense, you probably actually get more meaningful tape from him in a season than Lawrence or Fields despite the fact that Lawrence and Fields are technically playing better competition.

The gap in talent between Bama/Clemson/OSU and everyone else makes the gap between P5 and everyone else look smaller than it actually is imo. Not that smaller school QBs can't make it in the NFL, but there is quite a difference between the athletes Trey Lance plays against and the athletes even Pac12 or ACC qbs play against. If you watched OSU vs Nebraska, that type of talent gap would actually concern me more in terms of transition to the NFL than QBs from smaller schools. It looked like a 7on7 drill with the guys waiting for their rep standing in front of the QB instead of behind him. 

Edited by Berggy9598
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN 74 said:

Any ‘expert’ opinions on LB Jack Sanborn?

Not that I’m an expert but I’ve been meaning to watch him if I can find sometime outside of a freelance thing I’m doing. I’m still not sure where the time for that will come from either so an actual expert might beat me to it. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OVCChairman said:

 

 

 

Makes a lot of sense.... but I think there is something intangible about a QB playing with lesser talent, that is able to be effective.  When the windows are tighter because the WRs don't create separation like Higgins, McLaurin, Chase, or Jeudy.  When they don't have JK Dobbins or Travis Ettienne to check it down to.  

 

Agree. But lets take a dude like Burrow.  He was loaded with weapons.  it made it easier for him -- no doubt.    But the dude's ball placement was excellent for the most part all around the field.    Haskins on the other hand feeded off a certain part of the field and his accuracy was sketchy IMO outside of that range.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Agree. But lets take a dude like Burrow.  He was loaded with weapons.  it made it easier for him -- no doubt.    But the dude's ball placement was excellent for the most part all around the field.    Haskins on the other hand feeded off a certain part of the field and his accuracy was sketchy IMO outside of that range.

I think the issue with OSU is more who they’re playing against, compounded by the fact that they’re essentially a national high school all-star team. Even Michigan and Penn State who can get some kids from around the country don’t come close. Inexplicable really that OSU loses conference games almost every season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

I think the talent in the Big 10 is the most of any conference, but I think that talent is far more evenly spread out so it’s not as top heavy as the SEC or Big 12.

The B10 might have better teams (also debatable) but their recruiting bases are for the most part in the Midwest, so the SEC athlete for athlete is going to be better, and by far and away better when you’re talking about defensive talent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Dallas could realistically go #1

Won't happen. Everyone in the NFC East will rack up wins against each other to some extent. The Jets could legit go 0-16.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Malapropismic Depository said:

 

Dallas could realistically go #1

 

Jets remaining schedule:

@ KC

NE

@ LAC

Mia

LV

@ Sea

@ LAR

CLE

@NE

 

I don't see any wins there. MAYBE against NE if their QBs just continue to suck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mhd24 said:

 

MAYBE against NE if their QBs just continue to suck.

 

 

That's what I was thinking. So it could be 2 wins against NE.

And Miami is a question mark, because noone knows yet, how Tua is going to adapt to the Pros. Tua could throw 4 picks against the Jets.

And then one of the other middle of the road teams could lose to them, simply by taking them lightly - or if it's near the end of the season, and they have already clinched a playoff berth, a team could rest players against them.

 

Edited by Malapropismic Depository
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, PartyPosse said:

I think the talent in the Big 10 is the most of any conference, but I think that talent is far more evenly spread out so it’s not as top heavy as the SEC or Big 12.

 

I am a Big 10 fan, but I would give the edge to the SEC.  The numbers back that... https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/sec-leads-all-conferences-in-players-on-nfl-active-rosters-and-its-not-even-close/

1 hour ago, JoggingGod said:

Dallas isn’t finishing worse than the Jets. The Jets have virtually zero talent outside of their LT.

 

i would go that far.  They have some good players on Defense, but no stars.  

 

On defense guys like CJ Mosley, Marcus Maye, Avery Williamson, Brian Pool, Quinnen Williams, Pierre Desir are all average to above average players.  I know they lost Jamal Adams, but that defense lead them to 7 wins last year.

 

There are a little bit like us in that they have a lot more on defense than they do on offense.  On offense Jamison Crowder or the rookie Mekhi Becton might be their best player.

Edited by philibusters
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, philibusters said:

 

I am a Big 10 fan, but I would give the edge to the SEC.  The numbers back that... https://www.saturdaydownsouth.com/sec-football/sec-leads-all-conferences-in-players-on-nfl-active-rosters-and-its-not-even-close/

 

i would go that far.  They have some good players on Defense, but no stars.  

 

On defense guys like CJ Mosley, Marcus Maye, Avery Williamson, Brian Pool, Quinnen Williams, Pierre Desir are all average to above average players.  I know they lost Jamal Adams, but that defense lead them to 7 wins last year.

 

There are a little bit like us in that they have a lot more on defense than they do on offense.  On offense Jamison Crowder or the rookie Mekhi Becton might be their best player.

Mosley isn’t even playing and the rest haven’t been more than average to somewhat underachieving. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Saw on another message board, Trevor Lawrence tested positive for covid 19.   My guess is Clemson continues to cruise.   Lawrence is a difference maker against good teams.  Against most teams, they can win with any of their scholarship QB's most likely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, philibusters said:

There are a little bit like us in that they have a lot more on defense than they do on offense.  On offense Jamison Crowder or the rookie Mekhi Becton might be their best player.

I think you’re forgetting Denzel Mims who just made his debut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Agree. But lets take a dude like Burrow.  He was loaded with weapons.  it made it easier for him -- no doubt.    But the dude's ball placement was excellent for the most part all around the field.    Haskins on the other hand feeded off a certain part of the field and his accuracy was sketchy IMO outside of that range.

 

Burrow may be at one end of the spectrum, but prospects almost are never finished products who look good at all aspects of the game. Ignoring the Haskins comparison and look at somebody like Josh Allen (no I'm not comparing Haskins to Allen), but what I would to question is0

whether the areas where he is lacking can be improved on 

and will he improve on those things and 

what can he do well while he is not improving,

and how long will it take him to improve in these areas,

and can we still build a competitive team around him while he's trying to improve in these areas? 

 

RG3 had a beautiful deep ball and could run. There was a lot missing from his game but that was enough for him to shine as a rookie. When we took the running away from his game, suddenly he looked pedestrian in 2013 and below pedestrian since then. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Burrow may be at one end of the spectrum, but prospects almost are never finished products who look good at all aspects of the game. Ignoring the Haskins comparison and look at somebody like Josh Allen (no I'm not comparing Haskins to Allen), but what I would to question is0

whether the areas where he is lacking can be improved on 

and will he improve on those things and 

what can he do well while he is not improving,

and how long will it take him to improve in these areas,

and can we still build a competitive team around him while he's trying to improve in these areas? 

 

RG3 had a beautiful deep ball and could run. There was a lot missing from his game but that was enough for him to shine as a rookie. When we took the running away from his game, suddenly he looked pedestrian in 2013 and below pedestrian since then. 

 

 

Recalling some of our other exchanges.  We are reallty close on one point typically and far apart on another.

 

We agree on build the team via youth, draft picks, draft picks, draft picks.  Although I am not as anti FA as you sometimes are.  I think you play with both. 

 

Where we sometimes disagree is you have an optimistic view of just about every young player we got, whether its a high pick or low pick or undrafted free agent.  For me, its all about context.  I try not to rationalize how every player is going to work out if you just give them enough patience.

 

For example, yes there are 6th round players that work out.  But there are stats that show most of them do not.    To build a team IMO you can't be anti-analytics so to speak and depend on emotion primarily and bank on the outliers working out versus playing the odds.  So you take every situation as it comes.  We can't assume our 3rd round QB is the next Russell Wilson unless he looked like Wilson, for example.   If he looks like the run of the mill bust third round QB then you cut bait because otherwise you will be a bad team waiting out players who unlikely will ever pan out. 

 

Will Compton for example is a nice story, an UDFA, and relatively speaking a bargain for that reason but he's not a good player.   London Fletcher on the other hand, an UDFA, stud.  Both players are not the same.  You don't want to rationalize to yourself why we need to keep riding Compton and give him time when you can upgrade that spot. 

 

My point is if the scouts and GM feel like they drafted a project and said project isn't developing then move on at some point.  Players who work out (even QB) tend to flash early, lets take K. Curl, he's not a star but he's already productive.  So some players deserve patience some don't.

 

A dude like RG3 and Josh Allen are blessed with rocket arms and unbelievable mobility.  Apples to oranges to someone like Haskins IMO.  But to your point about Haskins or a player like that, you want to see improvement and if you don't see it and then couple that with a heavily rumored poor work ethic -- you move on.  If Haskins was an RG3 (pre injury)-Allen talent some other team would likely give something decent up for them because their talent is special and they'd be excited to try to mold them -- I don't think its an accident that teams aren't that hot on Haskins right now and we would likely would get a ham sandwhich in a trade for him -- IMO its because the talent isn't that tantalizing.

 

As PFF among others have stated, fixing poor accuracy isn't easy.   That's not just a run of the mill fix with coaches saying hey the dude has  poor ball placement -- no biggie, we can tweak that in a heartbeat.  I am no QB expert obviously.  The most I know is via reading Arian's book on the position. And as i've mentioned here and other places, Haskins would check a lot of boxes in his book for being a bust.  A dude like RG3 and Allen IMO he'd have more patience with.

 

So when I am looking for a QB in this draft, yeah no my desire isn't QB without great mobility and who has sketchy ball placement.  I don't want a project.  and if we go for one, I want one with super intangibles not sketchy ones.  But yeah I've learned to really value accuracy -- ball placement.  When you watch camp and watch the QBs throw ball after ball you can see why Colt Mccoy and Keenum and especially Haskins aren't good NFL Qbs.   Their accuracy issues were on display.  I don't want another QB like that.  I want a dude with the potential to develop into a franchise QB and ball placement is high on my list.   I haven't studied him yet but maybe a dude like Trey Lance I'd have more patience for on that front because of his rocket arm and mobility. 

 

 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Burrow may be at one end of the spectrum, but prospects almost are never finished products who look good at all aspects of the game. Ignoring the Haskins comparison and look at somebody like Josh Allen (no I'm not comparing Haskins to Allen), but what I would to question is0

whether the areas where he is lacking can be improved on 

and will he improve on those things and 

what can he do well while he is not improving,

and how long will it take him to improve in these areas,

and can we still build a competitive team around him while he's trying to improve in these areas? 

 

RG3 had a beautiful deep ball and could run. There was a lot missing from his game but that was enough for him to shine as a rookie. When we took the running away from his game, suddenly he looked pedestrian in 2013 and below pedestrian since then. 

 

RG3 not running was in large part due to what he wanted. He thought he was a pocket passer.

 

He wasn't.

 

The red flags on him were there, too. Parental involvement and egocentric attitude. But he was a nice guy, smart, hard worker. So he was a harder one to sniff that out on. 

 

There are always tells. It comes down to determining if those things will limit the player or not. And THAT is the kind of thing that is hard to figure out.

 

Work ethic, leadership and accountability are all big things to look at when drafting a QB. I'd honestly look at their grades. If they are able to play high level football and still have good grades you can probably rely on them to be accountable to their teammates. Now, you have to separate things a little even that way: What classes are they taking? Rocket science? Awesome. Improv Theater? Not as telling. 

 

You have to augment that with interviews, of course. I'd talk to everyone I could before drafting a quarterback. From football staff to school faculty to high school coaches...

 

I'd sit down with them and have a real conversation with them.

 

Watch their body language. Being nervous is okay... but being shaken by the interview process may be okay for another position, but not a QB. Their words may say they are confident, but their body language will often say otherwise.

 

Get full games on film for them. Watch the broadcast with volume off. Watch every time the camera pans to them... What are they doing? If they just came off the field and the QB is sitting by himself and not with his coaches and talking to his guys, why might that be?

 

This is all stuff that is so important to a QB.

 

In my opinion, you can have an average talent QB but if the team believes in him and wants to help him succeed because he wants to help them succeed you'll have far more success than having a stud QB who is all about himself and has a poor attitude and doesn't put the time in. Every single time.

 

This is my Trent Dilfer theory. Dude was average... But he was smart and worked hard and the Ravens won games because even though he was pedestrian, the team didn't lose hope in him at QB and that kept everyone fired up. 

 

It's my Peyton Manning on the Broncos theory. People say the Broncos won in spite of Manning and I wholeheartedly disagree. They won in spite of his play, that's for sure. But I don't think they win the Super Bowl if they didn't have Manning. Why? Leadership. Work ethic. Intangibles. The team probably believed that even though he was not playing well, he was capable of doing enough to win games just by how prepared he was.

 

Honestly, that would be my first criteria in judging a QB if I were a scout that had access to all of that stuff.

 

I don't. So things shift to ball placement, improvement over time, mechanics, ability to create off-schedule, pocket presence, desire to climb the ladder, decision making, read progressions, etc. 

 

But that stuff would be secondary to the kind of man the QB is.

 

I would go through my list of guys who stand out on first watch and figure out what kind of leaders they are in college (yes, you can still get bit in the ass, but probably less so). If they have some red flags about leadership and attitude specifically, they are off my radar. 

 

Once I narrow my list to top notch leadership guys, or guys with a couple of red flags but nothing major (your definition will likely vary on that) NOW I break down their film in excruciating detail. 

 

This is why I like Zach Wilson as one of my top 4 dudes. He has everyone saying what kind of leader of men he is.

 

I'd be interested to hear about Lawrence and Fields and Lance and Trask... among others. 

 

That's the juice. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So what do you mean by smart? Because for so long it was all about the wonderlic, you mention grades and college major, there are things like AGG and his being able to solve rubiks cubes and stuff. 

 

But as we always talk, it should be more about ability to read defenses, knowing when to check down, knowing how to slide (never knew how important this was), knowing when to get out of bounds or how to take a hit. 

 

A PhD in microchemistry isn't going to make me any more confident that a QB going against one of Gregg Williams's confusing looks. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thinking Skins said:

So what do you mean by smart? Because for so long it was all about the wonderlic, you mention grades and college major, there are things like AGG and his being able to solve rubiks cubes and stuff. 

 

But as we always talk, it should be more about ability to read defenses, knowing when to check down, knowing how to slide (never knew how important this was), knowing when to get out of bounds or how to take a hit. 

 

A PhD in microchemistry isn't going to make me any more confident that a QB going against one of Gregg Williams's confusing looks. 

 

Their grades don't show football prowess. Their film does.

 

Their grades show accountability, discipline and leadership.

 

I don't even think I said anything about them being "smart". That's kind of a generalist term and not specific enough to the conversation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...