2022 Comprehensive Draft Thread

[Skinsinparadise]

 

49 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

Possibly, but if you think there are fundamental flaws in him that take you away or something like his lack of experience that you don't want to deal with, I understand.

 

I was all in the Haskins bandwagon because I thought that, although he was before Mac Jones, I saw a lot of the potential that people saw in Jones in Haskins. Given, @Skinsinparadise put me on to certain fundamental flaws in his game, but I was confident in his upside and that he could grow out of it and that he had the highest upside Between Daniel Jones, Haskins and Lock. But he doesn't have the work ethic to overcome that rawness. 

 

I value the experience in Ridder. That said though, Mond had similar experience and the rumors are that he's lost in Minnesota, not sure if there is more to that though. 

 

Mac Jones and Haskins?  They are about apples and oranges stylstically as it gets.

 

Jones though is probably a perfect contrast to Haskins to set up the main reasons why I was turned off to Haskins.

 

A.  Accuracy at all three levels on the field

 

B.  Readjusting footwork when you are flushed out of the pocket

 

C.  Intangibles

 

Personally I thought Lock had the higher upside among Haskins and Jones.  His arm just as strong and he consistently showcased the strong arm more than Haskins did because he'd stop into his throws more.  Was better with off platform throws.  He was more mobile than Haskins but not as much with Jones.  I vacillated with Lock, same reason why I am vacillate about Ridder -- he was/is a talented dude but he was wildy inconsistent. 

 

And like Ridder, Lock could struggle with some really easy throws.  As could Haskins.  Mac Jones was lights out with quick outs for example in the flat -- a throw as I mentioned that Haskins struggled with.    Haskins was at his best IMO with mesh routes-short crossers-slants in between the numbers -- 5-10 yards right in front of his line of vision.  Mac doesn't have Haskins arm talent but Mac could make all the throws, on all three levels.  Haskins accuracy was sketchy IMO outside of hie wheelhouse.

Edited January 11, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Ball Security]

3 hours ago, DWinzit said:

Exactly! And possibly the teams second biggest need. 

I take it his size is why they were saying his play would not translate to MLB?

 

Speaking of LB prospects in last nights game, how did Christian Harris?

Harris was quite impressive last night. I’ve seen him mocked in the 2nd. He’s a talent.  They had him move all over the field, so not sure if he’s viewed as a potential mlb.

[Going Commando]

If we don't use our first on a QB, then we have to go BPA or trade down.  At 11, BPA would be Lloyd if he's there, but I could see reasonable arguments for Dean, Jordan Davis, Kyle Hamilton, and Ahmad Gardner too.  These kids were superstar players in CFB, and that's the kind of no-brainer talent we need to be adding to our team because you get better by getting great players.

 

One thing I absolutely would not do is let the mistake of drafting Jamin Davis in the first round influence my decision in this year's draft in any way.  I hoped for the best with him, but he was a really bad draft pick and he's got to either find a way to fit in to a new plan for building the defense or get replaced by better players.

[mhd24]

5 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

If we don't use our first on a QB, then we have to go BPA or trade down.  At 11, BPA would be Lloyd if he's there, but I could see reasonable arguments for Dean, Jordan Davis, Kyle Hamilton, and Ahmad Gardner too.  These kids were superstar players in CFB, and that's the kind of no-brainer talent we need to be adding to our team because you get better by getting great players.

 

One thing I absolutely would not do is let the mistake of drafting Jamin Davis in the first round influence my decision in this year's draft in any way.  I hoped for the best with him, but he was a really bad draft pick and he's got to either find a way to fit in to a new plan for building the defense or get replaced by better players.

I know you're high on Drake London.  Do you feel he's on that tier as well?

[Thinking Skins]

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

For example when watching Rosen and Darnold, neither had a ton of picks.  Darnold had his share but nothing crazy.   Their stats were good enough.  Their highlights were tantalizing. 

 

Gunslingers though can have more picks just based on how they play.  Also WCO types might not throw a ton of picks because of the nature of the scheme.  So watching Rosen and Darnold I was stunned how many throws they had that made me think what the heck could they be thinking?  They didn't all result in picks but they came off really dumb.  Too many throws like that. 

The thing about Rosen that got me (both in college and in the pros) is his rushing numbers. He completed 60% in college and for a guy with his limited mobility I need more than that. And basically thats what you saw in the pros. He couldn't escape the trouble of a pass rush. He's been sacked 61 times in 24 games. Before this year he had exactly 0 games without a sack. Previously I'd put that on the OL, but some of that goes to Rosen and his inability to both throw it away, or make a quick pass/ quick decision, or just escape trouble (like Heinicke). 

 

Then with Darnold, I looked at some film and was interested but after seeing more I was seeing the same problems as Rosen. He had some potential where you could see him making the right decisions but he gets rattled and can't process quickly, can't run away, and can't do anything when he's under pressure. Again, in his career he has 2 games where he's not sacked. He has more mobility than Rosen and better accuracy but that's not saying much. Its funny that Darnold's best two games this year came when he had 8 rushing attempts each game. 

 

But I think Ridder is in a different ball park than these two. I have been watching more games, but I do have more fun writing analytics. Part of it is that its not as easy for me to just pull up a game of Ole Miss vs Liberty and start watching it (my kids are a lot younger than yours for one so I'm probably doing diapers or trying to take them to the park during the game), but on the other side, I can be watching something like Cincinnati vs Alabama and then I'll notice something and try to write an analytic to see if its true. 

 

It really is interesting looking at the correlation between some of these college stats and NFL success. There are exceptions (Tim Tebow is the biggest for so many of them - in most of my analytics he's almost all green except we know he was unsuccessful in the pros, ad we know why but my analytic doesn't know this). So I'm cautious, but at the same time its fun to see if my predictions come true or not. 

[Going Commando]

1 hour ago, clskinsfan said:

I actually like the Dak comp. Dak has a thicker body and threw the ball a little more than Ridder did. Ridder made more mistakes than Dak in college. But he also played more. I wouldnt hate Ridder in the 2/3rd round. But I want no part of him in the 1st.

 

I like the Dak comp for Ridder too.  And I'm with the group that likes him in the second round.

 

The first time I really watched Ridder was against Indiana and he played poorly and I found myself thinking, what's the difference between this guy and Kellen Mond?  Then I watched him against Notre Dame and was like OK, I get it.  There is something special about this guy.

 

Ridder is like Dak in that he is much more than the sum of his parts.  He's a project, but I'd bet anything that he's got the best leadership traits of the prospects in this year's class by far, and I think that is born out by his incredible record as a starter.  The way he talked **** to Notre Dame before that game and then came in and backed it up takes such a ridiculous level of swagger that I'm still impressed by it.  I think he's got an aura and must be incredible in a huddle, as I think he elevates his teammates on offense in a similar way to Dak.

 

I see the concerns with his accuracy and reading too, but I'm not as worried about those since I think they can improve with better coaching and better OL play.  The one big thing that was disappointing for me is all of the wobbly field side throws and underthrown deep balls.  I'm not sure how strong his arm is.  That puts a cap on his ceiling and makes me not want to pick him in the first round, unless it's following a trade down/trade up situation where we target him at the end of the round.

[Thinking Skins]

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

Mac Jones and Haskins?  They are about apples and oranges stylstically as it gets.

 

Jones though is probably a perfect contrast to Haskins to set up the main reasons why I was turned off to Haskins.

 

A.  Accuracy at all three levels on the field

 

B.  Readjusting footwork when you are flushed out of the pocket

 

C.  Intangibles

 

Personally I thought Lock had the higher upside among Haskins and Jones.  His arm just as strong and he consistently showcased the strong arm more than Haskins did because he'd stop into his throws more.  Was better with off platform throws.  He was more mobile than Haskins but not as much with Jones.  I vacillated with Lock, same reason why I am vacillate about Ridder -- he was/is a talented dude but he was wildy inconsistent. 

 

And like Ridder, Lock could struggle with some really easy throws.  As could Haskins.  Mac Jones was lights out with quick outs for example in the flat -- a throw as I mentioned that Haskins struggled with.    Haskins was at his best IMO with mesh routes-short crossers-slants in between the numbers -- 5-10 yards right in front of his line of vision.  Mac doesn't have Haskins arm talent but Mac could make all the throws, on all three levels.  Haskins accuracy was sketchy IMO outside of hie wheelhouse.

Yeah, stylistically. But not as far as the numbers. both had accuracy over 70%, over 50TDs, few interceptions, less than 600 attempts in all of college, similar rush numbers. Jones had an almost unprecidented 11 YPA compared to Haskins measly 9. Haskins was why I wasn't in love with Jones. But I have to remind myself that (aside from what you're saying about Haskins and his field vision), I think what set Haskins up for failure was his work ethic and Jones seems to be the opposite of that. And my metrics won't see that. 

 

I was never a real fan of any of these guys before the draft. Lock was a guy with a 56% completion in college. That just took him off my radar. I never thought he'd be good. I may have tried to talk myself into liking him but I look for completion percentage above 60 in college. Its one of the things that we've seen carry the best to the pros (not the same number but saying they have some accuracy). Even Haskins with his placement problems was getting completions. 

[Skinsinparadise]

 

9 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I like the Dak comp for Ridder too.  And I'm with the group that likes him in the second round.

 

The first time I really watched Ridder was against Indiana and he played poorly and I found myself thinking, what's the difference between this guy and Kellen Mond?  Then I watched him against Notre Dame and was like OK, I get it.  There is something special about this guy.

 

Ridder is like Dak in that he is much more than the sum of his parts.  He's a project, but I'd bet anything that he's got the best leadership traits of the prospects in this year's class by far, and I think that is born out by his incredible record as a starter.  The way he talked **** to Notre Dame before that game and then came in and backed it up takes such a ridiculous level of swagger that I'm still impressed by it.  I think he's got an aura and must be incredible in a huddle, as I think he elevates his teammates on offense in a similar way to Dak.

 

I see the concerns with his accuracy and reading too, but I'm not as worried about those since I think they can improve with better coaching and better OL play.  The one big thing that was disappointing for me is all of the wobbly field side throws and underthrown deep balls.  I'm not sure how strong his arm is.  That puts a cap on his ceiling and makes me not want to pick him in the first round, unless it's following a trade down/trade up situation where we target him at the end of the round.

 

I don't mind Ridder as a 2nd round guy but I'd hate him at 11. 

 

I actually like his arm better than you do.  From what i observed when he can step into his throws he can really zing it.  i do think some of the mock draft types are a bit oddly overhyped about his arm.  I don't think its special as some seem to allude to ala Kiper.  But I do think its good.

 

I've just become cynical over time that vision-decision making can be fixed.   To some extent accuracy too -- PFF charted that once somehow as for college QBs to the pros and found Josh Allen was one of the rare transformational anamolies on that front.

 

But yeah for me Ridder is puzziling.  Because on some metrics -- mobility-leadership-intangibles he fits my profile to a tee.  On others:  decision making-accuracy-consistency he's a deal breaker.

 

The thing that hits me really weird about Ridder is he seems like a totally different dude accuracy wise when he has receivers streaking down the field wide open.  When a dude is wide open, he almost never misses the receiver and hits them in stride.  

 

But the thing that bugs the heck out of me watching him is how he can struggle with what looks like some of the easiest throws in the flat.

Edited January 11, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[KDawg]

6 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said:

 

I like the Dak comp for Ridder too.  And I'm with the group that likes him in the second round.

 

The first time I really watched Ridder was against Indiana and he played poorly and I found myself thinking, what's the difference between this guy and Kellen Mond?  Then I watched him against Notre Dame and was like OK, I get it.  There is something special about this guy.

 

Ridder is like Dak in that he is much more than the sum of his parts.  He's a project, but I'd bet anything that he's got the best leadership traits of the prospects in this year's class by far, and I think that is born out by his incredible record as a starter.  The way he talked **** to Notre Dame before that game and then came in and backed it up takes such a ridiculous level of swagger that I'm still impressed by it.  I think he's got an aura and must be incredible in a huddle, as I think he elevates his teammates on offense in a similar way to Dak.

 

I see the concerns with his accuracy and reading too, but I'm not as worried about those since I think they can improve with better coaching and better OL play.  The one big thing that was disappointing for me is all of the wobbly field side throws and underthrown deep balls.  I'm not sure how strong his arm is.  That puts a cap on his ceiling and makes me not want to pick him in the first round, unless it's following a trade down/trade up situation where we target him at the end of the round.

 

I think the consensus here is just what you said. Ridder in the second is acceptable. He isn't a steal the show prospect and you aren't drafting him with the idea that there is a better than decent chance he turns into the guy. But there is some chance and he has enough flashes to bring him in and let him sit for a bit. 

 

He's DEFINITELY a long term developmental guy at this point. 

 

The issue I have with Ridder is getting him means we essentially sat on our hands in the offseason, didn't get a guy and then didn't draft one in the first. And then we still need to hope he falls to us. Same with Zappe.

 

Those guys are worst case scenarios. Not because they CAN'T pan out. But because if they do we got real lucky. 

[Going Commando]

7 minutes ago, mhd24 said:

I know you're high on Drake London.  Do you feel he's on that tier as well?

 

Unfortunately no.  I think he's one tier down from them.  To me, those elite defenders are kind of the cream of this draft class outside of the edge rushers, and they have easy to see All-Pro potential.  Not that others don't have that ultimate potential, it's that those players are already so good and on a natural progression path that they won't really have to make any unlikely leaps to eventually be the best guys at their positions in the NFL.  So I think they make up the right intersection of safety and ceiling to be BPA at 11, despite the fact that Gardner is the only one of them with good position value.

 

London is really good but he wasn't a house-hold name/All American type like them.  Maybe he would have been if he hadn't gotten hurt this year.  Working in his favor is that I think he'd bring something new to our offense that we could really use--a safety blanket jump ball winner who will keep our chains moving whether he gets open or not, and whether our QB has a clean pocket or not.  But I think he's also hurt by another well filled out WR group at the top of the class.  I think at least Jameson Williams will declare.  And I think Wilson, Burks, and Bell will all declare too, plus Dotson and Olave are seniors.  That's seven top 50 WR prospects, so there is every chance in the world that we can get someone special in the second round.  And I think there are some interesting flier-type guys with elite upside who are going to go mid-rounds because of injury histories like Justyn Ross and George Pickens.

 

That's enough depth to get me to wait on WR, especially when I don't think one will be BPA at 11.

 

I wouldn't totally rule out London deciding to go back for his Senior year either.  Najee Harris and DeVonta Smith set some precedent for this.  The QB whisperer as his head coach and the chance to win his conference and put in a fully healthy final season could be the kind of thing that puts him in the 2023 top ten.

[Going Commando]

10 minutes ago, KDawg said:

 

I think the consensus here is just what you said. Ridder in the second is acceptable. He isn't a steal the show prospect and you aren't drafting him with the idea that there is a better than decent chance he turns into the guy. But there is some chance and he has enough flashes to bring him in and let him sit for a bit. 

 

He's DEFINITELY a long term developmental guy at this point. 

 

The issue I have with Ridder is getting him means we essentially sat on our hands in the offseason, didn't get a guy and then didn't draft one in the first. And then we still need to hope he falls to us. Same with Zappe.

 

Those guys are worst case scenarios. Not because they CAN'T pan out. But because if they do we got real lucky. 

 

We need a plan at QB, but I don't know that we need the most aggressive plan at QB in order to satisfy the issue.  If we end up with Ridder in the second round, that's still an acceptable plan at QB for me.  I'd be kind of happy with that outcome truth be told, so long as our first rounder was well-spent.  I'm actually a believer in the team-centric model for building too.  I'd love to get an elite QB, but I think alternate paths where you get one who is good enough and surround him with great players can and do work.

 

If I were in charge, I'd probably be more aggressive than waiting on Ridder in the second.  TBH I would just pick Willis at 11.  But if we got Dean or Lloyd at 11 and Ridder with that 2nd rounder, that would feel like an impressive threading of needles.

 

And I don't think it's unrealistic either, because there are so many good but not great QB prospects in this class that some of them are definitely going to fall to the second round.  Probably more than one.  My biggest hope is that it's Willis, and you can kind of talk yourself into him dropping if you say he's a really big project and most teams will be shying away from this QB draft class.  Maybe he'll have a bad senior bowl week.  My absolute favorite scenario--ahead of Willis at 11 and Kenneth Walker in the second--is to get Lloyd at 11 and either move back into the late first for Willis or just sit tight and have him fall into our laps in the second.  That would be the stars aligning for us IMO.

[mistertim]

5 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

If it's Willis or Ridder I'm drafting Willis and not hesitating.

 

Yeah me too. I'm not very bullish on Willis but if it's between those two, I'd take Willis without question. IMO they both have some similar decision making and accuracy issues as passers, but the potential upside that Willis has would easily get the nod.

 

I'd be fine with Ridder in the 2nd.

[The Consigliere]

6 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

I really like Ridder and as things play out (Carr going to the playoffs, us unlikely to get Watson, Rodgers getting number 1, us winning and getting 10th pick, etc), I'm liking him as my top pick. I know I liked Mond last year but his completion percentage was low and I didn't like that and in his limited time as a rookie he looked to have placement issues. I don't like Ridder's yards per attempt and his interception percentage is low but much higher than I'd like. I wouldn't want him in the first though but i can see a situation where Pickett (who I'm not in love with), Corral and Howell are all gone in the top 10 and so we are left wondering do we draft Willis at 11 or wait and draft Ridder. 

 

Whats interesting to me is that Corral, Willis and Howell are all 6'1. Then there's Pickett, Strong and Ridder who are 6'3, 6'4 and 6'4. 

Kind of a funny thought on your last paragraph but that immediately filled my head w/the thought of like a character in a Godzilla film worrying over a laceration from falling when the real concern is that Godzilla just ripped its head off muto style. Yeah the batted balls are annoying but if you have a Kyler or Brees and have to worry about batted balls who cares, you got Kyler or Brees and if you have some run of the mill mediocrity or worse the battled balls are also secondary to the problem that the QB isn’t a difference maker. If he ain’t one, you’ve got to go back to the QB craps table and roll the dice again. Either guys like Corrall, Willis or Howell are franchise guys or they aren’t you know? There is a middle ground I grant but none of us want yet another 17th-26th rated QB right?
 

I can see a lot of talking ourselves into second tier guys but honestly other than tier 1 seasons we haven’t drafted and developed a legit stud franchise QB since Sammy Baugh. The closest we’ve got is Cousins. The Freaking Chargers have done it 3 times alone since 2001. I want mine lol and yeah I can even make do w/a guy in that 8th-12th zone but at this point I could care less about linebackers and find the detailed nuance some our bringing to that particular need interesting but also kind of funny. For me nothing matters but QB period for every draft going forward (along w/OL maintenance to help him) beyond somehow unloading Snyder. Those two issues are about 50,000,000x more important than a nice MLB, though I appreciate the need, I just find the interest a little puzzling, otoh, it’s one of the cheapest positions to go after in terms of draft capital snd free agent $$$ so at least that is good news.

Edited January 11, 2022 by The Consigliere

[Skinsinparadise]

4 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

The thing about Rosen that got me (both in college and in the pros) is his rushing numbers. He completed 60% in college and for a guy with his limited mobility I need more than that. And basically thats what you saw in the pros. He couldn't escape the trouble of a pass rush. He's been sacked 61 times in 24 games. Before this year he had exactly 0 games without a sack. Previously I'd put that on the OL, but some of that goes to Rosen and his inability to both throw it away, or make a quick pass/ quick decision, or just escape trouble (like Heinicke). 

 

Rosen had a lot of YOLO in him.  Threw a lot of risky passes and didn't have the accuracy to match.  His footwork was beautiful.  and he readjusted his feet well when throwing on the move.  But accuracy and decision making were lacking.  Mobility as your pointed out wasn't hot  Add to that questionable intangibles.  

 

4 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

Then with Darnold, I looked at some film and was interested but after seeing more I was seeing the same problems as Rosen. He had some potential where you could see him making the right decisions but he gets rattled and can't process quickly, can't run away, and can't do anything when he's under pressure. Again, in his career he has 2 games where he's not sacked. He has more mobility than Rosen and better accuracy but that's not saying much. Its funny that Darnold's best two games this year came when he had 8 rushing attempts each game. 

 

Darnold had something in common with Daniel Jones -- too many turnovers for a dude who at times played conservative -- for Darnold that was more of an issue in the pros.  In college and the pros, he made upon my observation a lot of dumb throws.    His accuracy inconsistent.  For a big dude though he could move -- his thing was roll outs.  Overall meh to me especialy considering his colllege flaws followed him to the pros to a tee.

 

4 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

But I think Ridder is in a different ball park than these two. I have been watching more games, but I do have more fun writing analytics. Part of it is that its not as easy for me to just pull up a game of Ole Miss vs Liberty and start watching it (my kids are a lot younger than yours for one so I'm probably doing diapers or trying to take them to the park during the game), but on the other side, I can be watching something like Cincinnati vs Alabama and then I'll notice something and try to write an analytic to see if its true. 

 

 

That's cool.   I don't have a ton of time to watch.  Because I've been watching so much of the Qbs I haven't really had much time to watch other positions.  Usually by now I am much deeper in the process as for studying other positions.   After the football season ends, I typically find the most time to watch.

 

Ridder is a different player I agree in that I like his intangibles and mobility more.  Arm talent is pretty similar IMO.  Rosen has better footwork.  What they have in common to my eyes are concerns about accuracy and decision making.

 

Edited January 11, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[Skinsinparadise]

4 hours ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

I was never a real fan of any of these guys before the draft. Lock was a guy with a 56% completion in college. That just took him off my radar. I never thought he'd be good. I may have tried to talk myself into liking him 

 

I was back and forth on Lock, couldn't make up my mind.  Could see him failing, succeeding.  Some praise in posts.  Some criticisms in others.  The ride I've had on Ridder is similar.  The main difference is I've spent much more time on Ridder than Lock yet I just can't really land on a strong positive or negative opinion on him.  But I've seen enough to know that I don't want him at #11.    I feel much more comfortable wiith the other top 4 QBs.  Heck if it weren't for Strong's injury history, I'd feel more comfortable with him too over Ridder so that would make 5 QBs over him if Strong's medicals checked out.

Edited January 11, 2022 by Skinsinparadise

[wilco_holland]

Drafting a WR also bit overkill? With Terry (getting a deal) and Samuels having a big deal? 

 

I feel like the BPA might be an oline. But I rather trade down instead of going a guard (other spots look to be filled). 

[Thinking Skins]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Always A Commander Never A Captain]

5 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This isn't an accurate portrayal of arm strength.  The question is can you throw a tight window ball?  Can you hit a 15 yard come backer on the sideline?  Can you be late on the read but have enough zip on the ball to still thread that closing needle?  Are timing routes possible or will everything just sail?

[Koolblue13]

I cant remember a nice long pass like those from someone in the B&G in a long time, without feeling very nervous. 

[KDawg]

 

What don't we like about this guy?

 

Tough, strong arm, athletic, good at evading pressure, smart.

 

He throws with anticipation as well and can make throws under duress. 

 

If I was picking something I didn't love it's his wind up at times on deep balls, but I don't think that will be a major factor for him. I love how if he sees a read open quicker than anticipated he forgets all the fluff and gets right to his throwing motion. He's also not a totally fluid athlete and at times can look clunky when running. 

 

This is a three year starter. Who can run and throw. 

 

4:1 TD to INT ratio.

 

His issues seems to come from protection issues.

 

The man lost his top two backs and top two receivers and he helped make another receiver (Downs) who had 1300+ yards this season and another who wound up with 600+. 

 

He transforms his game based on what the team needs.

 

This is our guy, in MY opinion.

 

Having said that, I can understand liking any of the "main" group as the top end guy. Willis, Pickett (assuming he has no issues throwing the ball) and Corral all have their strengths. Corral in particular is pretty clean aside from the fact I think he runs too hard at times and a TOUCH small, but that doesn't effect his ability. Willis is not as clean but he is elite traits wise. Pickett has proven he can do it.

 

Just want to understand what it is our hivemind doesn't like about Howell...

 

I'm kind of wondering if we should do a "QB" Deep Dive series this offseason. A post for each of the top 4 + Zappe + Ridder as Draft Profiles. I know this thread is for that but a lot of our posters don't engage in here.

[Thinking Skins]

I wish those videos had longest completion. Nice that they can throw it 60+ but does a hail Mary really count?

 

That said, I wonder if there's cut ups of them throwing different routes like slants or to the flats or deep outs. 

[Zim489]

Anyone can throw far. Its if you can get the tight window throw on the 15 yard out on the far sideline thats traveling 40 yards in the air before the CB picks it off. 

Does any of the QBs fit the antiquated Parcells checklist? 

 

• Be a three-year starter
• Be a senior in college
• Graduate from college
• Start 30 games
• Win 23 games
• Post a 2-1 touchdown-to-interception ratio
• Complete at least 60% of passes thrown

[wilco_holland]

18 minutes ago, Thinking Skins said:

I wish those videos had longest completion. Nice that they can throw it 60+ but does a hail Mary really count?

 

That said, I wonder if there's cut ups of them throwing different routes like slants or to the flats or deep outs. 

 

This was most silly analysis ever. Dude looked up all the passes inclusive all misses and marked distance. To find the biggest miss. Some of the guys where open and should be 6 if they catch it. 

[wilco_holland]

17 minutes ago, Zim489 said:

Anyone can throw far. Its if you can get the tight window throw on the 15 yard out on the far sideline thats traveling 40 yards in the air before the CB picks it off. 

Does any of the QBs fit the antiquated Parcells checklist?

 

I thought Dorian Thompson-Robinson but only 17 wins... Same goes for Zappe but I think Parcel could make an exception because it includes the short corona season. Most team played around 5 games

[Thinking Skins]

45 minutes ago, Alcoholic Zebra said:

 

This isn't an accurate portrayal of arm strength.  The question is can you throw a tight window ball?  Can you hit a 15 yard come backer on the sideline?  Can you be late on the read but have enough zip on the ball to still thread that closing needle?  Are timing routes possible or will everything just sail?

I think this is one metric. It shows that at minimum the guys could get it a certain distance. That was one thing we've counted against Heinicke. The farthest I've seen a ball from him go is in the 30s, maybe 40 yards. These guys, even Zeppe seem to be a tier above that. As far as decision making, accuracy, and spots on the field or windows, that's another question.