Jake Locker (1 Viewer)

[MarcO]

Seattle resident and UW alum here. I watched pretty much every game Locker ever played at the UW and I was glad to see him leave. I am not a scout and have no idea how the NFL grades out prospects but based on what I saw I thought he was a draft pick that will definitely get you fired. I predicted that either Price or Montana would put up better numbers than Locker ever did and so far I've been proven correct. On paper, he's amazing. Huge arm, great mobility, intangibles and everything else you could possibly want out of your QB1. But it just never really translated onto the field. He would make just enough mistakes to lose the game. Everyone points to his inferior teammates as why he didn't do better but I think if he's so supremely talented he ought to be able to lift the team to the next level and he never did that. His number one problem then and likely now is his accuracy. He can absolutely make every throw on the field but not twice in a row. He doesn't seem to be able to put much touch on the ball, he throws with the same velocity if it's going 10 yards or 60 yards and that would lead to wildly inaccurate throws. His first two years under Willingham were kind of a wash but there were a lot of people thinking he would have been better off switching to another position. He improved his junior season when Sark came on the scene but wildly regressed his senior season and the only reason the UW made a bowl game is that the coaches took the ball out of his hands the last 4 games of the season and went run-heavy because he was just making way too many mistakes via interceptions, terrible throws, taking inopportune sacks and weird fumbles.But despite all the film of him making all these mistakes, everyone, and I mean EVERYONE, loves the kid. There were miles of film of him making bad plays and the stats speak for themselves but at no point did anyone ever dare say he might not be anything less than the second coming. It got to the point where I couldn't really watch games with the sound on because all the announcers would just slobber all over the kid about how awesome he was while he was lighting it up for 12-30, 1td and 2 ints. The night of the draft Jim Mora Jr was on the NFL Network saying, "He might make a lot of mistakes but he's the type of kid I'd like my daughter to marry." He basically got a free pass from the media because everyone in Seattle loved the kid. Looking at the composition of Tennessee's front office, there's a lot of guys there with Seattle ties and I think that might be why they ended up drafting him.

fair, but you are looking back at his college career based on what the expectations were for him coming in. he was supposed to revive the Husky program and be a Heisman contender by his junior season. Viewed in that light, he fell short - but his overall college numbers were way above average for a PAC10 starting QB. Not that it really matters because there are lots of guys that have had good NFL careers with less numbers in college. He will benefit greatly from having guys around him that can make plays and I think will have success in the NFL. Full disclosure - also a Seattle resident but WSU grad.

 

[BallparkFrank]

So, a ceiling of Brett Favre and a floor of a more mobile Rex Grossman with agonizing moments of "Good Rex", "Bad Rex" popping up at any time?

 

[drater]

Another opinion...

 

[MarcO]

wondering if anyone is reconsidering their opinion of Locker's future in the NFL based on what they've seen from him so far this year...

 

[Andy Dufresne]

He's going to be an adequate to very good NFL QB.

Looking good so far.

 

[squistion]

wondering if anyone is reconsidering their opinion of Locker's future in the NFL based on what they've seen from him so far this year...

EBF said in a preseason thread that there was a 95% chance that Locker would be a bust - perhaps now that has been revised to only 92%.

 

[QB Bills]

I really need Locker to start this week. My QB situation is a mess.

Anyone have an update on the Hasselbeck situation?

 

[raidersfan]

I really need Locker to start this week. My QB situation is a mess.Anyone have an update on the Hasselbeck situation?

Shefter said on ESPN today the Titans were hoping Hasselback would start this sunday. I realize they have a playoff shot, but why not give the rookie the chance to develop, he has looked great so far in limited action.Disclaimer:I'm a Nate Washington owner who's hopeful Locker gets the nod again.

 

[QB Bills]

I really need Locker to start this week. My QB situation is a mess.Anyone have an update on the Hasselbeck situation?

Shefter said on ESPN today the Titans were hoping Hasselback would start this sunday. I realize they have a playoff shot, but why not give the rookie the chance to develop, he has looked great so far in limited action.Disclaimer:I'm a Nate Washington owner who's hopeful Locker gets the nod again.

I guess we'll have to wait to see the practice report. <fingers crossed>

 

[QB Bills]

Update: Hasselbeck was limited today; Locker practiced in full.

If Hasselbeck can't get a full practice in tomorrow, they will likely roll with Locker.

 

[hxperson]

I didn't catch the game yesterday. Any thoughts out there on how Locker looked? Were all his stats in garbage time? Is he as clearly better than Hassleback as the numbers over the last few weeks say? TIA for any feedback.

 

[Joe Summer]

I didn't catch the game yesterday. Any thoughts out there on how Locker looked? Were all his stats in garbage time? Is he as clearly better than Hassleback as the numbers over the last few weeks say? TIA for any feedback.

Locker wasn't great, but he wasn't a deer in the headlights, either. On the one hand, he's probably ready to start an NFL game. On the other hand, do you really want a rookie QB starting for you in the playoffs?

 

[hxperson]

I didn't catch the game yesterday. Any thoughts out there on how Locker looked? Were all his stats in garbage time? Is he as clearly better than Hassleback as the numbers over the last few weeks say? TIA for any feedback.

Locker wasn't great, but he wasn't a deer in the headlights, either. On the one hand, he's probably ready to start an NFL game. On the other hand, do you really want a rookie QB starting for you in the playoffs?

Thanks for this. My only feedback is, having watched a significant chunk of the first half, do you want hassleback starting for you in the playoffs either?

 

[Joe Summer]

I didn't catch the game yesterday. Any thoughts out there on how Locker looked? Were all his stats in garbage time? Is he as clearly better than Hassleback as the numbers over the last few weeks say? TIA for any feedback.

Locker wasn't great, but he wasn't a deer in the headlights, either. On the one hand, he's probably ready to start an NFL game. On the other hand, do you really want a rookie QB starting for you in the playoffs?

Thanks for this. My only feedback is, having watched a significant chunk of the first half, do you want hassleback starting for you in the playoffs either?

Tennessee is in a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't situation. Hasselbeck is the right QB if the running game is going well. But that's just not going to happen.

 

[flapgreen]

Start the guy already. It was obvious they needed to start Locker after the last game, but they didn't, and now they are most likely out of the playoffs.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I know this thread is a little old (well last December) but I'm kind of surprised that there isn't a thread devoted to Locker's prospects for 2012.

I saw him play against the Saints, whole game, and the guy nearly pulled an upset, fell just short. I saw some of his performance against teh Falcons, same thing. I only saw highlights of the Indy game but he sure as heck looked to be lighting a fire under a defeated Titans team.

Not great completion percentages but in those three games, none of which he played the full 60, he went:

Date Opp Result GS Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Int Rate Y/A AY/A Att Yds Y/A TD

10 2011-11-20 @ ATL L 17-23 9 19 47.4% 140 2 0 107.3 7.37 9.47 1 11 11.00 0

13 2011-12-11 NOR L 17-22 13 29 44.8% 282 1 0 91.5 9.72 10.41 6 36 6.00 1

14 2011-12-18 @ IND L 13-27 11 16 68.8% 108 1 0 108.3 6.75 8.00 1 9 9.00 0

The guy plays somewhere around 5-6 quarters and puts up 5 TD's and his QBR goes 107, 91.5, 108.

Add in Wright and maybe finally an expanded role for Cook... am I wrong in thinking if the Titans do let him start this season he's a heck of a sleeper pick in redraft?

 

[MAC_32]

Add in Wright and maybe finally an expanded role for Cook... am I wrong in thinking if the Titans do let him start this season he's a heck of a sleeper pick in redraft?

No you are not and the Titans absolutely need to give him the ball to see what he can do.That said, there are flaws in his game that I just don't think can be masked. It's exceedingly difficult to consistently win with poor accuracy and that's what Locker has, and given the reason for those flaws I don't see it being fixed. However, due to his legs and weapons around him he may be a strong fantasy asset while he has a starting job. Quality QB2 target in redrafts, no opinion on him in dyno because I wouldn't take him unless he were just being given away.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I think there's some similiarities between the two. Locker isn't as power of a runner as Tebow, but probably almost as athletic. I think Locker's a far better passes - he has far inferior skill support at Washington than Tebow did at Florida and still managed to put up numbers. Like Tebwo, he does need to improve his accuracy but has a better throwing motion to work with than Tebow does.

Locker's numbers at Washington were garbage.

You forgot to mention his teams were garbage too? No talent, which makes putting up numbers difficult.

 

[Sabertooth]

Locker was right there with Luck before his final season at Washington as far as rating. He had a rough season and slipped all the way to 7th in the draft.

 

[EBF]

Locker was right there with Luck before his final season at Washington

In hype maybe, but not in production. Luck 2010

70.7% completions

8.97 yards per attempt

4.00 TD per INT

Locker 2010

58.4% completions

7.09 yards per attempt

1.91 TD per INT

Locker was a mediocre passer at Washington and that's why I have a tough time getting excited about his pro potential. His draft position was based on physical ability and character. He has those things in droves, but up to this point in his career hasn't demonstrated the actual passing skills you'd want to see in a franchise QB.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Locker was right there with Luck before his final season at Washington

In hype maybe, but not in production. Luck 2010

70.7% completions

8.97 yards per attempt

4.00 TD per INT

Locker 2010

58.4% completions

7.09 yards per attempt

1.91 TD per INT

Luck also had a WAYYYY better team. Locker is not Luck, but numbers in College do not translate to NFL success. Talent does. If you feel Locker doesn't have talent then thats one thing but pointing to their numbers when Locker had a HORRIBLE team isn't really the best comparison marker.Look at this guys college stats:

http://www.totalfootballstats.com/PlayerQB.asp?id=2790

 

[JPeso]

No, he is not.

 

[EBF]

Locker was right there with Luck before his final season at Washington

In hype maybe, but not in production. Luck 2010

70.7% completions

8.97 yards per attempt

4.00 TD per INT

Locker 2010

58.4% completions

7.09 yards per attempt

1.91 TD per INT

Luck also had a WAYYYY better team. Locker is not Luck, but numbers in College do not translate to NFL success. Talent does. If you feel Locker doesn't have talent then thats one thing but pointing to their numbers when Locker had a HORRIBLE team isn't really the best comparison marker.Look at this guys college stats:

http://www.totalfootballstats.com/PlayerQB.asp?id=2790

Keith Price stepped into the same situation and played a lot better with basically the same supporting cast.I know that college production is only one part of the equation, but I expect first round NFL talents to dominate in college and Locker didn't do that. He was a fairly ordinary player at Washington who was hyped up because of his high school reputation and his arm/speed. People look at athletes like this and think they can teach them how to be quarterbacks. It rarely seems to work out.

If you have four years as a college starter and you still struggle with basic accuracy and decision making, I think it's hard to imagine why you'll be effective in the NFL where things are so much more difficult.

 

[MAC_32]

There really isn't any good argument for Locker. Upstairs he's there. In shorts and a t shirt he's there. On the field? Never been there, and it's had nothing to do with his supporting cast. I'd like for him to pan out because the NFL doesn't have enough of types like him, at least what I know from following him the last 5 years. JUst don't think he will. When you have good mechanics and your accuracy is garbage there really isn't much you can do to fix it.

 

[squistion]

People, did you actually see any of the three games he played last year in relief of Hasselbeck? He looked pretty good and although it was a small sample size his YPA was a respectable 8.2 (which someone who posts around here usually points to as an indicator of future success).

I read an interview with Dan Reeves last year (who has coached a few decent QBs in his day) and he was saying not to worry about Locker's accuracy - that is something that can be coached. I think too much is being made of this and he is accurate throwing when he is moving, rather than stationary in the pocket, so one would think that an offense could be modified to fit his strengths (like more roll outs).

Those who are cavalierly dismissing Locker are probably going to regret it down the line. I don't know when the break out will come for him, but it is going to happen. At this point there is still an opportunity to pick him up fairly cheaply in dynasty leagues - one should take advantage of that while they can.

 

[sspunisher]

I definitely can't confirm or deny the above post, as I never watched Locker in college but that's some interesting analysis. All I can say is that Locker was very impressive to me in the limited amount of snaps I saw him play in the NFL. I wouldn't compare him to Tebow at all as I think Locker is much closer to being a "successful NFL QB" than Tim Tebow is. I've always heard his consistency was a problem but remember this is a young guy, he's still learning and can continue to get better if he's given the opportunity and makes the most of it.

 

[MAC_32]

People, did you actually see any of the three games he played last year in relief of Hasselbeck? He looked pretty good and although it was a small sample size his YPA was a respectable 8.2 (which someone who posts around here usually points to as an indicator of future success). I read an interview with Dan Reeves last year (who has coached a few decent QBs in his day) and he was saying not to worry about Locker's accuracy - that is something that can be coached. I think too much is being made of this and he is accurate throwing when he is moving, rather than stationary in the pocket, so one would think that an offense could be modified to fit his strengths (like more roll outs).Those who are cavalierly dismissing Locker will be eating crow somewhere down the line. I don't know when the break out will come for him, but it is going to happen. At this point there is still an opportunity to pick him up fairly cheaply in dynasty leagues and those who don't I think will regret it.

Watched one them, looked alright. After how many times I watched him and he didn't in school I'm still hesitant. I'll buy in redraft after he proves it and I don't feel like I need to take the chance in my dynos with Rivers + RG3 in one and Romo + Bradford + Luck in the other. If I were looking for a wildcard, yea, why not, if he's cheap enough. But his types rarely seem to pan out. If you can't do it in college you usually can't do it in the pros and given the specific nature of his issues it'd take some rose colored glasses to think they can magically be fixed. Good article I read about it predraft too, talking about how you can teach accuracy but not when all the mechanics are right in the first place. Maybe someone's got the link...

 

[cstu]

People, did you actually see any of the three games he played last year in relief of Hasselbeck? He looked pretty good and although it was a small sample size his YPA was a respectable 8.2 (which someone who posts around here usually points to as an indicator of future success).

I read an interview with Dan Reeves last year (who has coached a few decent QBs in his day) and he was saying not to worry about Locker's accuracy - that is something that can be coached. I think too much is being made of this and he is accurate throwing when he is moving, rather than stationary in the pocket, so one would think that an offense could be modified to fit his strengths (like more roll outs).

Those who are cavalierly dismissing Locker are probably going to regret it down the line. I don't know when the break out will come for him, but it is going to happen. At this point there is still an opportunity to pick him up fairly cheaply in dynasty leagues - one should take advantage of that while they can.

The Kendall Wright pick makes a lot of sense then.

 

[JPeso]

People, did you actually see any of the three games he played last year in relief of Hasselbeck? He looked pretty good and although it was a small sample size his YPA was a respectable 8.2 (which someone who posts around here usually points to as an indicator of future success).

I read an interview with Dan Reeves last year (who has coached a few decent QBs in his day) and he was saying not to worry about Locker's accuracy - that is something that can be coached. I think too much is being made of this and he is accurate throwing when he is moving, rather than stationary in the pocket, so one would think that an offense could be modified to fit his strengths (like more roll outs).

Those who are cavalierly dismissing Locker are probably going to regret it down the line. I don't know when the break out will come for him, but it is going to happen. At this point there is still an opportunity to pick him up fairly cheaply in dynasty leagues - one should take advantage of that while they can.

The Kendall Wright pick makes a lot of sense then.

Not to mention "Broken Play" Britt. This could be fun.

 

[Sabertooth]

People, did you actually see any of the three games he played last year in relief of Hasselbeck? He looked pretty good and although it was a small sample size his YPA was a respectable 8.2 (which someone who posts around here usually points to as an indicator of future success). I read an interview with Dan Reeves last year (who has coached a few decent QBs in his day) and he was saying not to worry about Locker's accuracy - that is something that can be coached. I think too much is being made of this and he is accurate throwing when he is moving, rather than stationary in the pocket, so one would think that an offense could be modified to fit his strengths (like more roll outs).Those who are cavalierly dismissing Locker will be eating crow somewhere down the line. I don't know when the break out will come for him, but it is going to happen. At this point there is still an opportunity to pick him up fairly cheaply in dynasty leagues and those who don't I think will regret it.

Watched one them, looked alright. After how many times I watched him and he didn't in school I'm still hesitant. I'll buy in redraft after he proves it and I don't feel like I need to take the chance in my dynos with Rivers + RG3 in one and Romo + Bradford + Luck in the other. If I were looking for a wildcard, yea, why not, if he's cheap enough. But his types rarely seem to pan out. If you can't do it in college you usually can't do it in the pros and given the specific nature of his issues it'd take some rose colored glasses to think they can magically be fixed. Good article I read about it predraft too, talking about how you can teach accuracy but not when all the mechanics are right in the first place. Maybe someone's got the link...

Meh, he looked fine last year.

 

[Two Deep]

Right now I would not want a fantasy WR with this guy at QB.

Jake Locker will be the next Brett Favre only better.

 

[Ray_T]

I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. This kid is still just a kid and it's tough to predict what you have.

I will say some of the posts I have found to be informative and helpful.

I do have some points to make with regard to his evaluation and comparison to certain others:

1) His speed in the 40 is not necessarily an indicator of his elusiveness as a QB. The 40 tests straightline speed under ideal conditions. a QB's elusiveness depends largely on acceleration, ability to juke, fake defenders, and in some cases the will of the player not to be tackled. Teebow is a prime example of a player showing the will not to be tackled. I dont have a ton of good things to say about the throwing ability I have seen of Teebow, but I do not question this part of his game.

2) To some extent Locker was at a disadvantage with respect to the fact the offensive system he played in was changed partway through his college career. You could also make an argument based on the talent surrounding him. That's fine. I would expect the scouts to adjust for that prior to drafting him.

3) given the statement that he is a product of the system, the job of the team drafting him is to sit him down, coach him and hope the game slows down for him. I definitely agree that this is a player whose career would benefit if he was the backup for a time. Whether the coaching staff was able to work with him in this time as a backup remains to be seen.

Given the above, I come to a couple of conclusions:

1) I cannot comment on his heart as I did not see much of Locker in college. I havnt heard much of people raving about this, and this concerns me somewhat if I am going to draft him for my fantasy team.

2)The scouting reports I have read indicate that his mechanics are good and he just needed to refine the technique a bit to improve the accuracy and get him to a point where his focus is better so he does not make so many unforced errors. To me, this is where the coaching comes in and the decision not to rush him into starting as a rookie may have been a good one.

3) given what I see in Teebow, and comparing him to Locker, I would prefer to take my chances with Locker Due to the better arm. Teebow's staying power right now seems to depend on his feet. In the NFL, a good arm will take a QB farther than good feet. While I feel Teebow may have needed another year to refine his throwing technique, Teebow's feet have bought him an extra year or two, but if his arm doesnt come around in that time, he will be out of work.

I do agree, Teebow is fun and exciting to watch, but his arm needs to develop at least to a point where teams wont key on the run against him.

either way, I look forward to more good info being posted on this debate, as I suspect there is still more to learn here. Keep the good comments coming.

 

[squistion]

Right now I would not want a fantasy WR with this guy at QB.

Jake Locker will be the next Brett Favre only better.

I think the better analogy is Donovan McNabb, who had accuracy issues throughout his career, but was a fairly good real world and fantasty QB (never won a Super Bowl, but his teams in Philidelphia were always in contention).

 

[JamboTaylor]

The Titans have just named Jake Locker their starting quarterback.

 

[Shutout]

The Titans have just named Jake Locker their starting quarterback.

Big news. Glad they made a decision. They had said previosuly that it was important to make a decision and get everyone ont he same pages as him (somethign I wish the Seahwaks would do also). Then they said after the game the other night that they were going to push the decision back. I'm glad to see that they realized time was critical and went ahead and made the decision.It will be fun to watch what he can do.

 

[Sabertooth]

Right now I would not want a fantasy WR with this guy at QB.

Jake Locker will be the next Brett Favre only better.

I think the better analogy is Donovan McNabb, who had accuracy issues throughout his career, but was a fairly good real world and fantasty QB (never won a Super Bowl, but his teams in Philidelphia were always in contention).

Yeah, the hyperbole is getting out of hand. Favre is the best quarterback to ever play the game, perhaps the best player to ever play the game. Locker won't come close in all likelihood to be the GOAT.

 

[finito]

Right now I would not want a fantasy WR with this guy at QB.

Jake Locker will be the next Brett Favre only better.

I think the better analogy is Donovan McNabb, who had accuracy issues throughout his career, but was a fairly good real world and fantasty QB (never won a Super Bowl, but his teams in Philidelphia were always in contention).

Yeah, the hyperbole is getting out of hand. Favre is the best quarterback to ever play the game, perhaps the best player to ever play the game. Locker won't come close in all likelihood to be the GOAT.

lol that is awesome.

 

[B-Deep]

This thread is BLASPHEMY

say three hail Tims and 6 our quarterbacks and meditate on your sins

 

[Area51Inhabitant]

I'm targeting Locker as my 2nd QB in redraft. I don't personally care if he ever throws over 65 percent completion or not. He can make plays down the field outside the pocket and he can make plays with his legs. I'm hoping he'll show improvement over the course of the year in the pocket and if Britt comes back mid season, he has the potential to be a top 10 fantasy qb this season.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Yeah, the hyperbole is getting out of hand. Favre is the best quarterback to ever play the game, perhaps the best player to ever play the game.

I hope you were going for irony here.

 

[msommer]

Yeah, the hyperbole is getting out of hand. Favre is the best quarterback to ever play the game, perhaps the best player to ever play the game.

I hope you were going for irony here.

Unlikely.

 

[LawFitz]

Locker reminds me of Jay Cutler more than Tim Tebow. Stockier and still developing version of Jay. I like his potential. QB2 upside if he can limit bad decisions. QB1 athleticism and arm. Gonna make rookie mistakes this year.

 

[solorca]

I like him a lot as a high upside guy this year, especially now that he has the starting job locked up. I just traded Fitzpatrick for him in one of my leagues.

Granted, this is a league where I have Vick and Ryan, and I only had Fitzpatrick because the two QB's share a bye week, so I doubt I'll ever start him otherwise.

I'm interested in why the FBG's projections show such low numbers in rushing attempts/yards. I think he'll likely be in the top 4-5 for QB rushes.

 

[EBF]

Locker reminds me of Jay Cutler more than Tim Tebow. Stockier and still developing version of Jay. I like his potential. QB2 upside if he can limit bad decisions. QB1 athleticism and arm. Gonna make rookie mistakes this year.

Locker has always had the physical tools. For pretty much his entire post-high school career people have always been saying that he could be a great QB if...he could only learn how to play QB. And so far it hasn't really happened yet. He wasn't a terrible player at Washington, but he never really lived up to expectations. People expected a breakout year after he returned for his senior season, but what they got was the same old Jake Locker. Wildly inconsistent.I am definitely a skeptic. His physical tools got him drafted high, but there's not much evidence that he has the mental talent to thrive at QB. I would say he's more like Kyle Boller than Tebow or Cutler. A more aggressive, slightly more athletic Kyle Boller. I think a best case scenario for his NFL career is something like Jake Plummer. I could see him reaching that level, but I'll be stunned if he reaches the Favre/McNabb level. Poise, accuracy, and anticipation can't necessarily be taught, and I don't think he's strong in those departments.

 

[wingm@n]

Locker reminds me of Jay Cutler more than Tim Tebow. Stockier and still developing version of Jay. I like his potential. QB2 upside if he can limit bad decisions. QB1 athleticism and arm. Gonna make rookie mistakes this year.

Locker has always had the physical tools. For pretty much his entire post-high school career people have always been saying that he could be a great QB if...he could only learn how to play QB. And so far it hasn't really happened yet. He wasn't a terrible player at Washington, but he never really lived up to expectations. People expected a breakout year after he returned for his senior season, but what they got was the same old Jake Locker. Wildly inconsistent.I am definitely a skeptic. His physical tools got him drafted high, but there's not much evidence that he has the mental talent to thrive at QB. I would say he's more like Kyle Boller than Tebow or Cutler. A more aggressive, slightly more athletic Kyle Boller. I think a best case scenario for his NFL career is something like Jake Plummer. I could see him reaching that level, but I'll be stunned if he reaches the Favre/McNabb level. Poise, accuracy, and anticipation can't necessarily be taught, and I don't think he's strong in those departments.

From what I remember, he was pretty streaky in college. When he was on and hitting 60%+ of his passes, he was pretty much unbeatable. He should hopefully benefit quite a bit from teams focusing on stopping Chris Johnson.

 

[Titan]

The Titans have just named Jake Locker their starting quarterback.

The real winner here is Chris Johnson. He had his best year when he had very athletic qb that was not very accurate on the short and intermediate throws but had nice touch on long balls. If defenses are forced to shadow Locker and he can stretch the field vertically (2 of Hasselback's/Collin's weaknesses), that should open up the running game for Johnson. He is like Vince Young, in a good way. I see allot of bootlegs, fake bootlegs, moving pockets, rollouts, screens, etc. With Johnson, Britt (if he can get healthy and his head on straight), Cook (if he can continue to develop) and Washington there are some dynamic plays to be made.

 

[squistion]

Locker reminds me of Jay Cutler more than Tim Tebow. Stockier and still developing version of Jay. I like his potential. QB2 upside if he can limit bad decisions. QB1 athleticism and arm. Gonna make rookie mistakes this year.

Locker has always had the physical tools. For pretty much his entire post-high school career people have always been saying that he could be a great QB if...he could only learn how to play QB. And so far it hasn't really happened yet. He wasn't a terrible player at Washington, but he never really lived up to expectations. People expected a breakout year after he returned for his senior season, but what they got was the same old Jake Locker. Wildly inconsistent.I am definitely a skeptic. His physical tools got him drafted high, but there's not much evidence that he has the mental talent to thrive at QB. I would say he's more like Kyle Boller than Tebow or Cutler. A more aggressive, slightly more athletic Kyle Boller. I think a best case scenario for his NFL career is something like Jake Plummer. I could see him reaching that level, but I'll be stunned if he reaches the Favre/McNabb level.

Poise, accuracy, and anticipation can't necessarily be taught, and I don't think he's strong in those departments.

I suppose that is an improvement over your opinion of him in 2011 where you well beyond being just a skeptic:

Shocking reaches in this draft. Then again, this talent pool is shallow.

I'd say it's about 95% that Locker will be a huge flop. Disastrous pick this high.

I am guessing you are still not holding at the 95% "huge flop" prediction. Perhaps now, after being named the Titans' starter, the EBF bust prediction for Locker has dropped down to about 80%.

 

[EBF]

Named the starter by default. When a team spends a top 10 pick on a QB, they are going to get him into the lineup sooner rather than later.

He couldn't have played worse in his audition on Saturday.

95% was hyperbole, but I've always felt that he was a very bad pick by the Titans that high and nothing has changed.

A lot of people are new to Joke Locker, but as a Pac-12 homer I have been hearing the "if he could only learn how to play quarterback, he would be great" stuff for about four years now. And in that time he has never shown meaningful signs of improvement. I value results at QB and Locker hasn't ever been a great results guy. Guys like Luck, Barkley, and Foles were far better in the conference the last couple years, and even his former backup Keith Price stepped into the same situation and greatly outproduced him.

It is Kyle Boller all over again.

 

[meyerj31]

Named the starter by default. When a team spends a top 10 pick on a QB, they are going to get him into the lineup sooner rather than later.

He couldn't have played worse in his audition on Saturday.

95% was hyperbole, but I've always felt that he was a very bad pick by the Titans that high and nothing has changed.

A lot of people are new to Joke Locker, but as a Pac-12 homer I have been hearing the "if he could only learn how to play quarterback, he would be great" stuff for about four years now. And in that time he has never shown meaningful signs of improvement. I value results at QB and Locker hasn't ever been a great results guy. Guys like Luck, Barkley, and Foles were far better in the conference the last couple years, and even his former backup Keith Price stepped into the same situation and greatly outproduced him.

It is Kyle Boller all over again.

Not really. Just because a team spends a first round pick on a QB doesn't mean he has to start for a few years.All the way back in 2005 the last thing the Packers needed was a QB, yet Rodgers, who was in the discussion for #1 overall, went on a free-fall to 24th. Being a value team, the Packers took him. I would say Rodgers 4 years on the bench did him some good, wouldn't you? All these top picks like Tannehill coming out starting right away - I don't think it's good for them. The old adage was that it took 5 years to develop a QB. So let 'em develop. People are shocked when rookie QBs like Gabbert look like a deer in headlights... why? Guys like him are much closer to the norm than guys like Cam.

 

[EBF]

Named the starter by default. When a team spends a top 10 pick on a QB, they are going to get him into the lineup sooner rather than later.

Not really. Just because a team spends a first round pick on a QB doesn't mean he has to start for a few years.

Rodgers wasn't a top 10 pick, so I'm not sure why he belongs in this discussion. Look at the QBs drafted in the top 10 in the past 10 years:Cam Newton

Jake Locker

Blaine Gabbert

Sam Bradford

Matthew Stafford

Mark Sanchez

Matt Ryan

JaMarcus Russell

Vince Young

Matt Leinart

Alex Smith

Eli Manning

Philip Rivers

Ben Roethlisberger

Carson Palmer

Byron Leftwich

David Carr

Joey Harrington

Of the 18 guys on this list, Leinart and Rivers are the only ones who weren't starting by their second season in the NFL. And FWIW, Leinart played a lot as a rookie and Rivers was starting in his third season once the Chargers got rid of Brees. Had he not been stuck behind a veteran playing at an elite level, he likely would've seen the field a lot sooner.

All in all, the numbers definitely support my point. If a team spends a top 10 pick on a QB, they will get him in the lineup regardless of whether he's the next Roethlisberger/Ryan/Stafford or the next Carr/Russell/Young. So the fact that Locker has "won" the QB job means very little at this point.

He has a great opportunity, but based on his track record, I doubt that he can capitalize on it.