The Official QB Thread- JD5 taken #2. Randall 2.0 or Bayou Bob? Mariotta and Hartman forever. Fromm cut

[Est.1974]

23 minutes ago, Conn said:

You aren’t listening, you simply want to make the point you want to make. You’ve been doing that more frequently lately. Read what I said again. I’m arguing you don’t take that into consideration (or don’t weight it heavily, at least) because there’s actually no way to know until you get them in the building permanently. You’ve already committed at that point. 
 

None of the top prospects this year “need” to sit for a year btw. Anyone saying that is a dummy. They all have different flaws that will take time to fix, and will need to be hidden by the playcalling in the meantime. But they can all play right away, it’s just a matter of what the staff thinks is best for them reaching their ceiling. 

The original post I replied to, the poster stated they would be ok if Maye sat for a year. That’s what I responded to. That’s not on the agenda is it. And if it happened, we’ve picked the wrong guy IMO.

 

in terms of weighting the selection, I think you would be able to gauge how ready they are pre draft. Peters was part of the Lance debacle. We are going with a raw project at #2. Not saying these prospects are. But at #2 we’re going for the most polished guy IMO. 
 

Once they are in the building, yeah you unearth more about them. That could go either way. 

 

And yes, as I get older I listen less and less…..

11 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

I mean, the list of QBs he listed who sat is a baller list and we'd be lucky if our guy turned into any of them.

 

Is that really a strategy in the league now ? Top #2 draft pick to sit out ?

31 minutes ago, Conn said:

None of the top prospects this year “need” to sit for a year btw. Anyone saying that is a dummy.

Just in case any dummies missed this 

[Llevron]

20 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

It sthe same tape we have already all watched. If he gets touched in the pocket he is going down. Gonna need an OLine for him. But that is true with any QB. 

 

Oh I didnt know we already watched it. Yea he is gonna need an oline, no surprise there. 

[Going Commando]

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

As a passer, I agree Maye is much more advanced as for making NFL throws:  tight windows, throws with anticipation, off platform, 2nd level, etc.  

 

The one thing I'll give Daniels on that front that as a run threat that's a crutch he can use from the jump.  

 

Both seem like hard workers and I'd bet on both of them being successful.  But I am with you on the idea that Maye is ready to start now.

 

 

I think Jayden's running ability will be a source of occasional big play generation for him on drives that would otherwise be a failure (and I think the same is true for Maye), but I don't think it can be the kind of crutch for him that it is for someone like Justin Fields.  I just don't think Jayden has the body or awareness/vision to run like that in the NFL.

 

IMO Jayden needs a air-tight cradle in which to develop.  He is going to need good pass protection to make plays, and he's definitely going to need stud receivers winning on the outside like he had at LSU.  He's never played well with mediocrity on the outside, much less unreliable crap guys like Maye.  He's going to need a stud or two that wins early and makes his reads easy for him.

 

One take I am confident in is that Jayden will never be CJ Stroud and that his path to success in the NFL will necessarily be different.  He is like the opposite of Stroud as a pocket passer.  Stroud was super precocious (like Maye), is all urgency and quick trigger and just flies through his reads.  Jayden has zero urgency in him as a player, and his instinct is to string everything out as long as possible to avoid the mistake.  He is ultra cautious and unaggressive as a passer, and then he flips to the other side of the spectrum when he takes off and runs.  It's not a great combo.

[Llevron]

47 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

Not only that, but his issues are mostly innate and not really fixable. 

 

Help me get to this conclusion as I do not agree with it and im not sure why you say it so much. 

[cakmoney61]

1 minute ago, Conn said:

Why is the base assumption that you shouldn’t have doubts about a prospect even if they’re good? Every player has a chance to bust. QB’s all have a high chance to bust.

 

There is no such thing as a “sure thing”, especially at QB. If that’s what you’re looking for you’re just gonna stress yourself out. 

You're putting words in my mouth.  Nobody's looking for a "sure thing."  OTOH, anyone who has read the thread today will come away believing that Daniels is not that guy.  And you know what?  They may be right.  Minus the hyperbole, they are making a lot of sense.  So I don't want Washington to draft him.  

[mistertim]

33 minutes ago, skinsarethebest said:

Daniels has nearly five years of experience and over 50 games played under his belt.  Maye has only two seasons and less than 20 games.  That itself already points to Daniels being more ready to play and less likely to need to sit than Maye.

 

but I’m sure you’ll find a way to discount this pretty objective piece of evidence which favors Daniels and perhaps somehow spin it in Maye’s favor.  

 

Daniels has more experience but he still has issues that are potentially concerning. They both do.

 

With regards to Daniels he definitely has cleaner and more consistent footwork/mechanics (which makes sense after starting 5 seasons instead of 2) but he also has pretty limited tape of the sort of tight window 2nd level and anticipation throws that are absolutely essential in the NFL. That doesn't mean he can't make them, but that we just don't have much evidence for it.

 

Add to that the fact that he has a very low percentage of times that he throws after getting pressured and breaking the pocket (he much more often pulls his eyes down and runs, even if guys are open downfield) and you have legit concerns about how he'll fare if thrown into the fire without really good protection.

 

Again, I think both of them could start immediately, but I could see potential concerns with that for both of them as well.

Edited April 5 by mistertim

[Llevron]

20 minutes ago, Conn said:

Why is the base assumption that you shouldn’t have doubts about a prospect even if they’re good? Every player has a chance to bust. QB’s all have a high chance to bust.

 

There is no such thing as a “sure thing”, especially at QB. If that’s what you’re looking for you’re just gonna stress yourself out. 

 

We do have a pretty negative view here on Daniels in general. Its almost crazy to even consider him at 2. Most of the reporters are touting him for clicks, all talking heads are lying or being lied to (and probably paid off) and all his stats and accomplishments belong to his aggressively over talented teammates. If he didn't have legs he wouldn't even be drafted in the first round. Its very easy to read the last few pages and come away feeling like that. 

 

I think he stressed at the idea that the FO is even considering Daniels. It should be a no brainer. 

[DogofWar1]

23 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

Is that really a strategy in the league now ? Top #2 draft pick to sit out ?

 

You play to win the game.

 

You do whatever you have to to develop QBs.  If they need to sit they sit if they don't they don't.

[WashingtonRedWolves]

32 minutes ago, Est.1974 said:

The original post I replied to, the poster stated they would be ok if Maye sat for a year. That’s what I responded to. That’s not on the agenda is it. And if it happened, we’ve picked the wrong guy IMO.

 

in terms of weighting the selection, I think you would be able to gauge how ready they are pre draft. Peters was part of the Lance debacle. We are going with a raw project at #2. Not saying these prospects are. But at #2 we’re going for the most polished guy IMO. 
 

Once they are in the building, yeah you unearth more about them. That could go either way. 

 

And yes, as I get older I listen less and less…..

Is that really a strategy in the league now ? Top #2 draft pick to sit out ?

Just in case any dummies missed this 

It's not a strategy anymore and most of those studs that sat for a year did so because there were future HOFers or high level established starters playing in front of them, not marcus mariota

[Skinsinparadise]

49 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Daniels has more experience but he still has issues that are potentially concerning. They both do.

 

With regards to Daniels he definitely has cleaner and more consistent footwork/mechanics (which makes sense after starting 5 seasons instead of 2) but he also has pretty limited tape of the sort of tight window 2nd level and anticipation throws that are absolutely essential in the NFL. That doesn't mean he can't make them, but that we just don't have much evidence for it.

 

 

This point here is central IMO for the whole discussion.  As I mentioned yesterday, I thought O'Sullivan from the QB school was excellent explaining what QBs he likes and why but also explaining why he could be wrong.  And he goes this centers on this point for all of these QBs that they have things that they need to do in the pros that they haven't in college.  And its a guess as to whether they do it or not at the next level.

 

Kurt Warner made a variation of the same point recently which is college QBs have to take a step up in the pros and its tough to guess who makes those steps and who doesn't. 

 

And yes I'll quote Arians again just for @wit33  where he goes he doesn't know with utmost confidence how good the college QBs will be in the pros because its impossible to tell from a distance how good they are at visual processing. Once he has them in the building he knows.

 

Shanny talked (Gibbs too) that he doesn't know about the college QBs with any certainty until they are in the building where they can see their work habits.

 

O'Sullivan referenced the same point saying sometings QBs can fix but they need to have uber committment to do it and plenty of QBs do not.  Arians referred to that, too.

 

That's my long winded way of saying I am not going to be angry about any of the QBs they take.  We here of course don't know for sure how these guys can pan out.  And the FO will have more info than we do to make the decision.

 

I am not saying its not good to have takes.  This board is all about having takes.  I would define my take here as very pro Maye.  And perhaps more pro Daniels than the typical pro Maye person here.   And I've explained why too many times.  But I don't see how any one could have total certainty that their opinion is absolutely on the money.  These guys are wildcards for a reason because there are variables that are hard to predict to a tee in advance.

Edited April 5 by Skinsinparadise

[redskinss]

27 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

Stroud was super precocious (like Maye)

This is the number one thing that has me leaning Maye.

 

Like every other stat or indicator it's not 100 percent but the guys who shine bright immediately usually have the best chance for success.

We also see it once they reach the nfl, last year gonzales was playing lights out while Forbes was sucking, that doesn't necessarily define their careers but it probably means Gonzales will be a better pro unless injuries derail him.

 

The same goes for Bryce Young and cj stroud and there are so many other examples if you look closely, like terry mclaurin.

 

Early success is a big time indicator of future success.I 

[actorguy1]

I prefer Maye, but I have to remind myself that I highly admire this FO and it's analytics focus. And if they use all those analytics and still believe Daniels is better then I have to trust them.

[SkinsFTW]

12 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

If he didn't have legs he wouldn't even be drafted in the first round.

 

I agree.

 

[Conn]

28 minutes ago, cakmoney61 said:

You're putting words in my mouth.  Nobody's looking for a "sure thing."  OTOH, anyone who has read the thread today will come away believing that Daniels is not that guy.  And you know what?  They may be right.  Minus the hyperbole, they are making a lot of sense.  So I don't want Washington to draft him.  

 

19 minutes ago, Llevron said:

 

We do have a pretty negative view here on Daniels in general. Its almost crazy to even consider him at 2. Most of the reporters are touting him for clicks, all talking heads are lying or being lied to (and probably paid off) and all his stats and accomplishments belong to his aggressively over talented teammates. If he didn't have legs he wouldn't even be drafted in the first round. Its very easy to read the last few pages and come away feeling like that. 

 

I think he stressed at the idea that the FO is even considering Daniels. It should be a no brainer. 

I get what you guys are saying. I’m personally not a Daniels guy (in that I prefer Maye, but see Daniels as the next realistic option). I see a lot of the negatives as being risks that are real. But I also try not to internalize things too much in here because many of us are wrong about many things every single year, no matter how measured or well-researched or intellectually honest the posts are. The problem is that 80% of the posts are not measured (or if they are they’ll still turn out to be incorrect) or are not well-researched (or if they are the results of the research itself don’t actually matter to NFL success) or are not intellectually honest (or if they are it doesn’t matter because scouting is really hard and there’s lots of factors we can’t account for), or are not any of the three.
 

The NFL gets it wrong at a high clip, we aren’t going to do better (except when it came to Snyder’s organizations unique incompetency, ES could do a better job in those days. And we’ll be right when the team is wrong in the future as well, I don’t want to discount that. It’s natural to worry about it. But in general this stuff is very very hard and people should be less confident in their takes). 

Edited April 5 by Conn

[@DCGoldPants]

Been coming around to the mindset of doing what was done in 2012 with taking two QBs. Maybe not as early as Kirk in the 4th round. But day 3 if a Joe Milton or Michael Pratt are guys the scouts think are undervalued. Would absolutely prefer to have a rookie as your 3rd string instead of Jeff Driskel. ****, I might have a 4th QB on the PS. 

[mistertim]

8 minutes ago, @DCGoldPants said:

Been coming around to the mindset of doing what was done in 2012 with taking two QBs. Maybe not as early as Kirk in the 4th round. But day 3 if a Joe Milton or Michael Pratt are guys the scouts think are undervalued. Would absolutely prefer to have a rookie as your 3rd string instead of Jeff Driskel. ****, I might have a 4th QB on the PS. 

 

Could be, but IMO the lower end of this QB class is pretty meh. I'd be more inclined to go with a UDFA.

[Going Commando]

3 minutes ago, redskinss said:

The same goes for Bryce Young and cj stroud and there are so many other examples if you look closely, like terry mclaurin.

 

Early success is a big time indicator of future success.I 

 

I was talking about being precocious in college.  In that respect, Terry wasn't, and Bryce Young was.  Bryce Young was absolutely peer to Stroud in college.  They both sat their first years in college and then were dominant in their first years as starters in 2021.  Both played on stacked college rosters, but Stroud's receivers were vastly better than Young's in 2022.  Hence the dropoff in production in '22 from Young that didn't occur for Stroud.

 

People are searching for answers to explain the vastly different NFL career trajectories between Stroud and Young, despite there being so little separation between them as prospects.  They are the same age, both grew up in the same Southern California elite young QB circuit where they've been tutored in quarterbacking by the finest teachers in the sport since they were little kids.  They both went to blue blood college programs and were almost immediately dominant players.  They were the first pioneers of the NIL system and were the first big earners in the sport.  Then they get to the NFL and completely diverge in progression.  Other than height, what really separates them?  The answer is their NFL destinations.  There won't be a more definitive case to prove that franchise QBs are made as much as found as this one.  Bryce Young ended up in a dysfunctional franchise with toxic ownership, a quicksand front office and coaching staff, and no surrounding talent, and struggled to play even minimally competent offense.  CJ Stroud ended up in a secure situation with outstanding leadership and coaching and surprisingly solid surrounding talent and a really good defense, and he hit the ground running and immediately secure his place as a franchise QB.

 

I'm curious to see what happens with Young next year, because I think Carolina has actually made a good faith effort at salvaging his development.  They hired a QB guru head coach who is seemingly married to him.  They spent a fortune on upgrading the interior of their OL and brought in Diontae Johnson to give Young at least one fairly reliable target.  And they tried to upgrade their defense, and should at least be pretty decent at stopping the run now.  I wouldn't call that a good situation, but it's much better than last year's disaster on paper.  If Young shows serious strides, then that'd actually be an encouraging example of how to fix a terrible QB development cradle on the fly.

[@DCGoldPants]

4 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Could be, but IMO the lower end of this QB class is pretty meh. I'd be more inclined to go with a UDFA.

 

Maybe. I listed two guys I think won't make it to UDFA. After that, I don't know who else I'd think about who should be a 3rd Stringer.

[SkinsFTW]

1 minute ago, @DCGoldPants said:

Been coming around to the mindset of doing what was done in 2012 with taking two QBs. Maybe not as early as Kirk in the 4th round. But day 3 if a Joe Milton or Michael Pratt are guys the scouts think are undervalued. Would absolutely prefer to have a rookie as your 3rd string instead of Jeff Driskel. ****, I might have a 4th QB on the PS. 

 

Trade for pick 199 and take a QB. That pick clearly has the lead in SB wins!

 

BTW, Brady ran a 5.25 40. GOAT. Also he sat a year too.

[redskinss]

4 minutes ago, Going Commando said:

 

I was talking about being precocious in college.  

 

I guess I did kind of contradict myself there a little bit didn't I.

 

 

[cakmoney61]

7 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

Trade for pick 199 and take a QB. That pick clearly has the lead in SB wins!

 

BTW, Brady ran a 5.25 40. GOAT. Also he sat a year too.

"Hindsight is 20/20" may be the greatest quote in human history.

Edited April 5 by cakmoney61

[Number 44]

Daniels was sacked 22 times in 2023.  Maye was sacked 29 times in 2023.  It seems bizarre to me to pretend that sacks are a major worry when considering Daniels.  22 sacks in 12 games in the SEC ain't bad.  It seems to me that he clearly was able to avoid both sacks and pressure.  If the number of times he is pressured seems low - that is a good thing.  Seems more like statistical manipulation by PFF to me than something to truly worry about.  Just my take.  Sacks don't worry me with either of these QBs, or McCarthy, for that matter.  Like DQ says "Keep the main thing the main thing."  I'm happy with whichever QB Peters and company decide on.  

[Going Commando]

15 minutes ago, @DCGoldPants said:

Been coming around to the mindset of doing what was done in 2012 with taking two QBs. Maybe not as early as Kirk in the 4th round. But day 3 if a Joe Milton or Michael Pratt are guys the scouts think are undervalued. Would absolutely prefer to have a rookie as your 3rd string instead of Jeff Driskel. ****, I might have a 4th QB on the PS. 

 

I think it would be a big unforced error to do that.  When you want a franchise QB, you pick one guy and you commit to developing him and making it work.  When you have two QB prospects, you have zero.

 

Can you think of a single example of a franchise QB who was drafted by his team with a hedge pick in the same class?  To cut to the chase, Andrew Luck is the only time a franchise QB was drafted in a 2 QB class in the seven round era, and Chandler Harnish was Mr Irrelevant and cut a month into his first season.  We don't need to reinvent the wheel to get a franchise QB, we need to follow the same formula that almost every franchise who successfully develops a QB from high draft pick to star player follows.  Pick one prospect, marry your front office and coaching staff to him, and then focus on developing him to the best of your ability.  Trying to do things differently at QB is what this franchise has always done, and it's why we always fail.

 

Adam Peters doesn't seem incompetent to me, I don't think he'd make such a basic mistake as trying to take two QBs in the same draft.  If he was foolish enough to saddle himself with a potential QB controversy in year one by sitting the fence with two prospects, he wouldn't have traded Sam Howell.

[Skinsinparadise]

This point here from Quinn captures Arian's take to a tee.    Fast visual processing.  Am curious to see if teams have more advanced ways of testing this predraft day.  

 

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/39874845/what-dan-quinn-wants-quarterback

Like any coach, Quinn wants to see mental and physical toughness, accuracy and arm strength. But he also knows how he likes to mess with quarterbacks as a defensive coordinator -- and, as a result, what he wants to see from them.

"How quickly can they process something? 'OK, it looks like zone but it's really man-to-man. It's two-high [safeties], it's one high,'" Quinn said. "All the triggers you want to get to, can you do it after the ball gets in his hand? Can we disguise [defenses] to make them really have to figure it out after the snap? The best of the best? 'I can process as I'm taking the ball, as I'm going through the play.'

"That's what I look for. How do they respond when the unblocked blitzer comes?"

 

Peters hiring?

 

"You learn more and more every time you do it," Peters said, "and most of them are mistakes. It's really hard to evaluate quarterbacks, but you just try to get better and try to understand what you did the last time that was really good and what you did last time that was really bad. Different processes, hopefully there's not a whole lot of bad things that you did, but you always learn. And so it's constantly evolving and I don't think anybody has the magic pill to understand that one. If they do let me know, I'll hire them."

Edited April 5 by Skinsinparadise

[Warhead36]

There’s a Twitter report about out saying Peters made multiple in person visits to UNC, even sitting on their private practices, last season. Idk if its legit or not.