Jake Locker's Inaccuracy (1 Viewer)

[Mr. Retukes]

Fair enough. You haven't seen it. If you were to put some time into studying his past you'll find an impressive array of endorsements when it comes to his character. If you don't want to put in the time, what's the point of stating you haven't seen it?

Character <> heart. Being an Eagle Scout might mean that you have character, but it doesn't mean that you have heart.But I guess you're right -- I haven't seen it. So feel free to enlighten me. Give me some examples of Jake Locker's Heart and Leadership.

 

[EBF]

All of the heart and character in the world won't magically gift you the ability to read defenses, anticipate open receivers, react instinctively, sense the pass rush, and deliver accurate passes. I don't care if he's a Boy Scout. Locker didn't do those things in college. He was very pedestrian. Never cracked 60% completions. Never cracked 7.09 yards per attempt. Had a modest TD to INT ratio by college standards. If he couldn't dominate against amateurs, I don't see any reason to believe that he'll dominate against pros.

I have heard all the excuses about injuries and bad coaching. They mean nothing to me. If you're a great QB, you're supposed to dominate in college. You should be talented enough to thrive even with a poor supporting cast and weak coaching because you're a man playing against boys. Andrew Luck, Sam Bradford, and Aaron Rodgers were doing things in their first season that Locker still can't do after four years of practice. Maybe he just doesn't have it.

 

[Hooper31]

Fair enough. You haven't seen it. If you were to put some time into studying his past you'll find an impressive array of endorsements when it comes to his character. If you don't want to put in the time, what's the point of stating you haven't seen it?

Character <> heart. Being an Eagle Scout might mean that you have character, but it doesn't mean that you have heart.But I guess you're right -- I haven't seen it. So feel free to enlighten me. Give me some examples of Jake Locker's Heart and Leadership.

LINK

 

[Hooper31]

All of the heart and character in the world won't magically gift you the ability to read defenses, anticipate open receivers, react instinctively, sense the pass rush, and deliver accurate passes. I don't care if he's a Boy Scout. Locker didn't do those things in college. He was very pedestrian. Never cracked 60% completions. Never cracked 7.09 yards per attempt. Had a modest TD to INT ratio by college standards. If he couldn't dominate against amateurs, I don't see any reason to believe that he'll dominate against pros. I have heard all the excuses about injuries and bad coaching. They mean nothing to me. If you're a great QB, you're supposed to dominate in college. You should be talented enough to thrive even with a poor supporting cast and weak coaching because you're a man playing against boys. Andrew Luck, Sam Bradford, and Aaron Rodgers were doing things in their first season that Locker still can't do after four years of practice. Maybe he just doesn't have it.

Really? He's not Luck, Rodgers, or Bradford. Therefore... what? He has no chance? In other news he's not Manning, Manning, Brees, or Brady. He's likely not even Hasselbeck, Delhomme, or Vince Young. Perhaps a Seneca Wallace. If you don't want to look at the environment that the player was immersed in...well, what kind of analysis is that? He's not your normal prospect. His circumstances aren't exactly average. His team went 0-fer two years ago. They didn't win a game. Zip. Nada. He has a skill set that's worth an investment. He may bloom. Likely not, but the value of potential at the quarterback spot in the NFL is golden. They aren't growing on trees. Teams will do what they have to in order to take a chance on a quarterback. I wonder, who are you debating with? Yourself? Some invisible anonymous antagonist? I don't see anyone making a great case for Locker's success. I only see people discussing some potential. That's all it takes for a player to get drafted high enough. Top-flight NFL quarterbacks are a rare thing. Teams will invest in the position because they are a rare thing. Perhaps that's the discussion you really want to have? If you were a GM in the NFL...

 

[Mr. Retukes]

Fair enough. You haven't seen it. If you were to put some time into studying his past you'll find an impressive array of endorsements when it comes to his character. If you don't want to put in the time, what's the point of stating you haven't seen it?

Character <> heart. Being an Eagle Scout might mean that you have character, but it doesn't mean that you have heart.But I guess you're right -- I haven't seen it. So feel free to enlighten me. Give me some examples of Jake Locker's Heart and Leadership.

LINK

Visit My Website

 

[Jason Wood]

All of the heart and character in the world won't magically gift you the ability to read defenses, anticipate open receivers, react instinctively, sense the pass rush, and deliver accurate passes. I don't care if he's a Boy Scout. Locker didn't do those things in college. He was very pedestrian. Never cracked 60% completions. Never cracked 7.09 yards per attempt. Had a modest TD to INT ratio by college standards. If he couldn't dominate against amateurs, I don't see any reason to believe that he'll dominate against pros.

I have heard all the excuses about injuries and bad coaching. They mean nothing to me. If you're a great QB, you're supposed to dominate in college. You should be talented enough to thrive even with a poor supporting cast and weak coaching because you're a man playing against boys. Andrew Luck, Sam Bradford, and Aaron Rodgers were doing things in their first season that Locker still can't do after four years of practice. Maybe he just doesn't have it.

Really? He's not Luck, Rodgers, or Bradford. Therefore... what? He has no chance? In other news he's not Manning, Manning, Brees, or Brady. He's likely not even Hasselbeck, Delhomme, or Vince Young. Perhaps a Seneca Wallace. If you don't want to look at the environment that the player was immersed in...well, what kind of analysis is that? He's not your normal prospect. His circumstances aren't exactly average. His team went 0-fer two years ago. They didn't win a game. Zip. Nada. He has a skill set that's worth an investment. He may bloom. Likely not, but the value of potential at the quarterback spot in the NFL is golden. They aren't growing on trees. Teams will do what they have to in order to take a chance on a quarterback.

I wonder, who are you debating with? Yourself? Some invisible anonymous antagonist? I don't see anyone making a great case for Locker's success. I only see people discussing some potential. That's all it takes for a player to get drafted high enough. Top-flight NFL quarterbacks are a rare thing. Teams will invest in the position because they are a rare thing. Perhaps that's the discussion you really want to have? If you were a GM in the NFL...

Dave, in THIS thread people are discussing potential. But there have been many others that sung his praises as though he was another guy that would revolutionize the game with just a bit of good coaching. I think you're seeing in this thread a lot of collective frustration of what looks to be another example of internet overhype. The world is so set on discovering greatness before anyone else these days that we glom onto what, by all accounts, are long shots until they've run out of ways to excuse the mediocrity in front of our eyes. Locker is, to my mind, the latest and most egregious example of that. You don't have to go far back, even partway into this season, to see a LOT of talking heads say the kid would be a 1st round pick on "potential."

 

[cobalt_27]

Fair enough. You haven't seen it. If you were to put some time into studying his past you'll find an impressive array of endorsements when it comes to his character. If you don't want to put in the time, what's the point of stating you haven't seen it?

Character <> heart. Being an Eagle Scout might mean that you have character, but it doesn't mean that you have heart.But I guess you're right -- I haven't seen it. So feel free to enlighten me. Give me some examples of Jake Locker's Heart and Leadership.

LINK

Just another NW hippy sports fan hoping something redeemable can come from the state of Washington. Good luck with that.

 

[TommyGilmore]

Hooper, take a step back, buddy. Breathe deeply a few times.

Anyway, I may have been one of the original disbelievers in the Locker hype train, but I still think the guy has major potential. I just don't think that his potential should translate into 1st round (or even 1st day) draft status. If he was unable to make great strides with Steve Sarkisian as his coach -- even if Sark was only working with him part-time -- then it could be years before he's able to develop into a quality NFL quarterback.

If anything, you should hope that Locker gets drafted in the 4th round or later. Any earlier, and there might be too much pressure to play him within the first 2 years, which has disaster written all over it. Locker needs to sit on the bench and learn from top-level QBs and coaches for several years.

 

[Hooper31]

Hooper, take a step back, buddy. Breathe deeply a few times.

Ever notice that people will project whatever emotion onto another person that makes them somehow look worse, or perhaps makes them look irrational? If you picture me as being overly emotional does that somehow strengthen your position?

 

[Hooper31]

Dave, in THIS thread people are discussing potential. But there have been many others that sung his praises as though he was another guy that would revolutionize the game with just a bit of good coaching. I think you're seeing in this thread a lot of collective frustration of what looks to be another example of internet overhype. The world is so set on discovering greatness before anyone else these days that we glom onto what, by all accounts, are long shots until they've run out of ways to excuse the mediocrity in front of our eyes. Locker is, to my mind, the latest and most egregious example of that. You don't have to go far back, even partway into this season, to see a LOT of talking heads say the kid would be a 1st round pick on "potential."

Do you not see that this door swings both ways? There are also people writing him off. The same people that admittedly have seen him play a single game? Or perhaps even never seen him play a game at all?I don't disagree that he may be a 1st round pick based solely on potential. I think the better discussion may be about the system in which early round QBs are taken based solely on potential. Would you do it? What would your plan for a QB be if you were the Arizona Cardinals? What if you were Carolina? Miami? Etc. Again, there aren't enough for every team to have one.

 

[cobalt_27]

Dave, in THIS thread people are discussing potential. But there have been many others that sung his praises as though he was another guy that would revolutionize the game with just a bit of good coaching. I think you're seeing in this thread a lot of collective frustration of what looks to be another example of internet overhype. The world is so set on discovering greatness before anyone else these days that we glom onto what, by all accounts, are long shots until they've run out of ways to excuse the mediocrity in front of our eyes. Locker is, to my mind, the latest and most egregious example of that. You don't have to go far back, even partway into this season, to see a LOT of talking heads say the kid would be a 1st round pick on "potential."

Do you not see that this door swings both ways? There are also people writing him off. The same people that admittedly have seen him play a single game? Or perhaps even never seen him play a game at all?I don't disagree that he may be a 1st round pick based solely on potential. I think the better discussion may be about the system in which early round QBs are taken based solely on potential. Would you do it? What would your plan for a QB be if you were the Arizona Cardinals? What if you were Carolina? Miami? Etc. Again, there aren't enough for every team to have one.

The plan would be to do something other than invest a high draft pick on a kid that clearly does not show the necessary tools to make it in the NFL.

 

[TommyGilmore]

I think the better discussion may be about the system in which early round QBs are taken based solely on potential.

I can't think of very many early round QBs that were drafted solely on potential who eventually lived up to that potential. Michael Vick is the first guy that comes to my mind, but Vick had eye-popping rushing stats and was a top-10 Heisman vote getter two straight years. Locker doesn't have that pedigree.

 

[Hooper31]

Dave, in THIS thread people are discussing potential. But there have been many others that sung his praises as though he was another guy that would revolutionize the game with just a bit of good coaching. I think you're seeing in this thread a lot of collective frustration of what looks to be another example of internet overhype. The world is so set on discovering greatness before anyone else these days that we glom onto what, by all accounts, are long shots until they've run out of ways to excuse the mediocrity in front of our eyes. Locker is, to my mind, the latest and most egregious example of that. You don't have to go far back, even partway into this season, to see a LOT of talking heads say the kid would be a 1st round pick on "potential."

Do you not see that this door swings both ways? There are also people writing him off. The same people that admittedly have seen him play a single game? Or perhaps even never seen him play a game at all?I don't disagree that he may be a 1st round pick based solely on potential. I think the better discussion may be about the system in which early round QBs are taken based solely on potential. Would you do it? What would your plan for a QB be if you were the Arizona Cardinals? What if you were Carolina? Miami? Etc. Again, there aren't enough for every team to have one.

The plan would be to do something other than invest a high draft pick on a kid that clearly does not show the necessary tools to make it in the NFL.

Because they are so readily available?

 

[Hooper31]

Dave, in THIS thread people are discussing potential. But there have been many others that sung his praises as though he was another guy that would revolutionize the game with just a bit of good coaching.

When you say others, are you referring to other threads? If so, I disagree. There have been two other threads. I posted in both several times.LINK

Sung his praises? Revolutionize the game? That's just inaccurate. Yes, there were a small handful of people that were on the bandwagon and I've never seen anyone refer to Locker as a guy that would "revolutionize" anything. If anything, those few voices were an overwhelming minority. I wouldn't disagree that there have been talking heads on TV that have praised his potential, but nothing more. I feel like I've been objectively critical of him as a quarterback, and continue to do the same still.

 

[Jason Wood]

Dave, in THIS thread people are discussing potential. But there have been many others that sung his praises as though he was another guy that would revolutionize the game with just a bit of good coaching.

When you say others, are you referring to other threads? If so, I disagree. There have been two other threads. I posted in both several times.LINK

Sung his praises? Revolutionize the game? That's just inaccurate. Yes, there were a small handful of people that were on the bandwagon and I've never seen anyone refer to Locker as a guy that would "revolutionize" anything. If anything, those few voices were an overwhelming minority. I wouldn't disagree that there have been talking heads on TV that have praised his potential, but nothing more. I feel like I've been objectively critical of him as a quarterback, and continue to do the same still.

You've been objectively critical, I would agree. But I think Locker has been, consistently, one of those guys who people have kept projecting his best case scenario for, for some odd reason. And as he's continued to fail to hint at whatever run that may be, people have ratcheted expectations down, but still far ahead of where most would project a guy that's done (or not done as the case may be) what we've seen Locker do.