What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Why do so many embrace the "other" QB prospect? (1 Viewer)

Is it just that people want to be able to say "I told you so" or think they're actually smarter than NFL GMs? :confused:

Every year, particularly around here, we get tons of people (if not the majority) who love the OTHER QB. Sometimes it works out (Big Ben), most of the time it doesn't.

2006 -- Jay Cutler over Matt Leinart and Vince Young
2005 -- Charlie Frye over Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers and Jason Campbell
2004 -- Big Ben over Eli and Rivers
2003 -- Kyle Boller over Carson Palmer and Byron Leftwich
2002 -- Patrick Ramsey over David Carr and Joey Harrington
2001 -- DNP (everyone loved Vick)
2000 -- Chris Redman over Chad Pennington (don't remember people pimping Carmazzi) :confused: :shrug: :confused:
IF Cutler does do well in the NFL, it would lend some credence to the theory. Part of the "other qb" theory is caused by the lack of success related to qb's drafted early. Year by year...2005 = Smith, Rodgers and Campbell haven't done anything yet (tie)

2004 = Theory is correct (bingo)

2003 = Boller is developing; though over Palmer is just plain crazy (wrong)

2002 = Carr and Harrington have not panned out (same w/ Ramsey) = (tie)

2001 = no application

2000 = Pennington has been a big disappointment = (tie)

I would argue that "other qb" was right one year, wrong one year; and then you have four years of drafting "the consensus qb" not really working out = the "other qb offered similar or even better value. I think the only thing this shows is that QB's are a crap shoot.

 
Also, you do realize that Austin was considered a slow track, right? That's why nobody who ran at the combine ran at the Texas pro day.
Yes. That's why I specifically said Austin's track.
:lmao: Let's just hope he n e v e r is chased by an NFL player who can run faster than a 4.57 40 on the Austin track...
J
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Is it just that people want to be able to say "I told you so" or think they're actually smarter than NFL GMs? :confused:

Every year, particularly around here, we get tons of people (if not the majority) who love the OTHER QB. Sometimes it works out (Big Ben), most of the time it doesn't.

2006 -- Jay Cutler over Matt Leinart and Vince Young
2005 -- Charlie Frye over Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers and Jason Campbell
2004 -- Big Ben over Eli and Rivers
2003 -- Kyle Boller over Carson Palmer and Byron Leftwich
2002 -- Patrick Ramsey over David Carr and Joey Harrington
2001 -- DNP (everyone loved Vick)
2000 -- Chris Redman over Chad Pennington (don't remember people pimping Carmazzi) :confused: :shrug: :confused:
IF Cutler does do well in the NFL, it would lend some credence to the theory. Part of the "other qb" theory is caused by the lack of success related to qb's drafted early. Year by year...2005 = Smith, Rodgers and Campbell haven't done anything yet (tie)

2004 = Theory is correct (bingo)

2003 = Boller is developing; though over Palmer is just plain crazy (wrong)

2002 = Carr and Harrington have not panned out (same w/ Ramsey) = (tie)

2001 = no application

2000 = Pennington has been a big disappointment = (tie)

I would argue that "other qb" was right one year, wrong one year; and then you have four years of drafting "the consensus qb" not really working out = the "other qb offered similar or even better value. I think the only thing this shows is that QB's are a crap shoot.
Of course, the team makes a huge difference. Usually, the top QB doesn't go to a team with adequate support.2005 = nothing yet except a little from Frye, way too early to tell

2004 = Ben's great, but the team obviously helps. Eli has looked promising too, on a worse team. Close.

2003 = Bengals or Jags vs Ravens, the exception applies here. The "other QB" went to the worse team.

2002 = Both top teams went to horrible situations, Ramsey just couldn't get it done.

2001 = no application

2000 = Pennington looked very good until he got injured.

 
Oops, almost forgot...Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J

 
Is it just that people want to be able to say "I told you so" or think they're actually smarter than NFL GMs? :confused:

Every year, particularly around here, we get tons of people (if not the majority) who love the OTHER QB. Sometimes it works out (Big Ben), most of the time it doesn't.

2001 -- DNP (everyone loved Vick)
I guess everyone was wrong here or were they just desireous :rolleyes:
 
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J
Agreed, I think the shotgun, in and of itself, isn't a big deal. At least not to NFL GMs.Alex Smith was taken 1st overall last year...and he rarely took a snap from center.

Byron Leftwich was a shotgun QB, as were Daunte Culpepper and Chad Pennington.

All things being equal, I think GMs would rather know a guy can play from a pro set, but they'll look past it if other factors are good enough.

 
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J
Agreed, I think the shotgun, in and of itself, isn't a big deal. At least not to NFL GMs.Alex Smith was taken 1st overall last year...and he rarely took a snap from center.

Byron Leftwich was a shotgun QB, as were Daunte Culpepper and Chad Pennington.

All things being equal, I think GMs would rather know a guy can play from a pro set, but they'll look past it if other factors are good enough.
That's why it IS a factor, IMO. Smith is a rocket scientist compared to Young, and last year was a disaster for him as he apparently wasn't able to turn his back to the defense and then set up and read it. I think Smith's problems underscored the importance of a college QB's experience working under center. :shrug:

 
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J
Agreed, I think the shotgun, in and of itself, isn't a big deal. At least not to NFL GMs.Alex Smith was taken 1st overall last year...and he rarely took a snap from center.

Byron Leftwich was a shotgun QB, as were Daunte Culpepper and Chad Pennington.

All things being equal, I think GMs would rather know a guy can play from a pro set, but they'll look past it if other factors are good enough.
That's why it IS a factor, IMO. Smith is a rocket scientist compared to Young, and last year was a disaster for him as he apparently wasn't able to turn his back to the defense and then set up and read it. I think Smith's problems underscored the importance of a college QB's experience working under center. :shrug:
:goodposting: I think sometimes when you say "trouble adjustingto being under center", people think that means taking the snap from between the center's legs. That's the easy part. Turning your back as you drop back and then re-reading the movement since the snap is what is so hard to get used to. When you're in the shotgun you can look at the defense for every second and basically just keep your periphery image on the football floating back to you from center.

 
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J
Agreed, I think the shotgun, in and of itself, isn't a big deal. At least not to NFL GMs.Alex Smith was taken 1st overall last year...and he rarely took a snap from center.

Byron Leftwich was a shotgun QB, as were Daunte Culpepper and Chad Pennington.

All things being equal, I think GMs would rather know a guy can play from a pro set, but they'll look past it if other factors are good enough.
That's why it IS a factor, IMO. Smith is a rocket scientist compared to Young, and last year was a disaster for him as he apparently wasn't able to turn his back to the defense and then set up and read it. I think Smith's problems underscored the importance of a college QB's experience working under center. :shrug:
:goodposting: I think sometimes when you say "trouble adjustingto being under center", people think that means taking the snap from between the center's legs. That's the easy part. Turning your back as you drop back and then re-reading the movement since the snap is what is so hard to get used to. When you're in the shotgun you can look at the defense for every second and basically just keep your periphery image on the football floating back to you from center.
Errr...show me a qb who turns his back as he drops back and I'll show you a qb with some f'ed up footwork.
 
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J
Agreed, I think the shotgun, in and of itself, isn't a big deal. At least not to NFL GMs.Alex Smith was taken 1st overall last year...and he rarely took a snap from center.

Byron Leftwich was a shotgun QB, as were Daunte Culpepper and Chad Pennington.

All things being equal, I think GMs would rather know a guy can play from a pro set, but they'll look past it if other factors are good enough.
That's why it IS a factor, IMO. Smith is a rocket scientist compared to Young, and last year was a disaster for him as he apparently wasn't able to turn his back to the defense and then set up and read it. I think Smith's problems underscored the importance of a college QB's experience working under center. :shrug:
:goodposting: I think sometimes when you say "trouble adjustingto being under center", people think that means taking the snap from between the center's legs. That's the easy part. Turning your back as you drop back and then re-reading the movement since the snap is what is so hard to get used to. When you're in the shotgun you can look at the defense for every second and basically just keep your periphery image on the football floating back to you from center.
Errr...show me a qb who turns his back as he drops back and I'll show you a qb with some f'ed up footwork.
:confused: On play action, every QB I've ever seen turns his back. And even on regular drop backs, you often see the QB facing one side of the field, with their back to the other side. Not many QBs do the Dan Fouts straight backpedal thing anymore.
 
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J
Agreed, I think the shotgun, in and of itself, isn't a big deal. At least not to NFL GMs.Alex Smith was taken 1st overall last year...and he rarely took a snap from center.

Byron Leftwich was a shotgun QB, as were Daunte Culpepper and Chad Pennington.

All things being equal, I think GMs would rather know a guy can play from a pro set, but they'll look past it if other factors are good enough.
That's why it IS a factor, IMO. Smith is a rocket scientist compared to Young, and last year was a disaster for him as he apparently wasn't able to turn his back to the defense and then set up and read it. I think Smith's problems underscored the importance of a college QB's experience working under center. :shrug:
:goodposting: I think sometimes when you say "trouble adjustingto being under center", people think that means taking the snap from between the center's legs. That's the easy part. Turning your back as you drop back and then re-reading the movement since the snap is what is so hard to get used to. When you're in the shotgun you can look at the defense for every second and basically just keep your periphery image on the football floating back to you from center.
Errr...show me a qb who turns his back as he drops back and I'll show you a qb with some f'ed up footwork.
:confused: On play action, every QB I've ever seen turns his back. And even on regular drop backs, you often see the QB facing one side of the field, with their back to the other side. Not many QBs do the Dan Fouts straight backpedal thing anymore.
I'm talking about regular drops, as it seemed you were. Not many qbs are dropping completely blind to a whole side of the field. There's flexibility. You turn your hips, waist, and neck. Hell, I just got my 40 y.o. arrse up and did it 3 times. I could see left right and center every time, with ease. If I can do it I know those 20-somethings can do it.

As far as play-action goes, Young has done all that.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OK, I'm convinced..... Young is the best QB to come out of college since Johnny Unitas. Heck, he's better than Unitas. He's gonna re-write the record book. Lowest wondrlic score by a QB to ever throw an INT in the NFL. :popcorn:

 
Errr...show me a qb who turns his back as he drops back and I'll show you a qb with some f'ed up footwork.
Jake Plummer doesn't have terrible footwork yet he turns his back on the defense often. Steve DeBerg used to have people rave about his footwork and he also turned his back to the defense often.
 
Big Ben hasnt really distinquished himself the best of the 3. Sure, he won a superbowl but that's because he has a great team around him. Eli IMO looks better and we really havent seen Rivers yet. Ben was actually the number two guy of most experts that year only San Diego loved Rivers. You had 3 big names at QB that year and IMO the right guy went number 1.

Nothing wrong with likeing the other guy. Yet I almost always give more credit to NFL scouts than to myself when it comes to picking the rookies. Most of the time I make an exception, its because some guy jumped way up or fell far down the draft after a one time incident or workout. This year, I think the Rose Bowl has had too big of an influence on people's minds so far. That doesnt necessarily go for the NFL scouts. They arent thinking the same things as the fans are. We'll see.

 
Is it just that people want to be able to say "I told you so" or think they're actually smarter than NFL GMs? :confused:

Every year, particularly around here, we get tons of people (if not the majority) who love the OTHER QB. Sometimes it works out (Big Ben), most of the time it doesn't.

2006 -- Jay Cutler over Matt Leinart and Vince Young
2005 -- Charlie Frye over Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers and Jason Campbell
2004 -- Big Ben over Eli and Rivers
2003 -- Kyle Boller over Carson Palmer and Byron Leftwich
2002 -- Patrick Ramsey over David Carr and Joey Harrington
2001 -- DNP (everyone loved Vick)
2000 -- Chris Redman over Chad Pennington (don't remember people pimping Carmazzi) :confused: :shrug: :confused:
Well, to get back to the original question, it doesn't seem like the premise is true. There is disagreement here but if this poll is to be believed, then nowhere near the majority of folks here have embraced the other guy. A significant minority, yes, but it seems as if there is significant disagreement everywhere on which one of these guys is the best prospect. Perhaps the Culter backers are just the most vociferous.
Leinart, Young, Cutler [ 18 ] ** [15.65%]

Leinart, Cutler, Young [ 25 ] ** [21.74%]

Young, Leinart, Cutler [ 15 ] ** [13.04%]

Young, Cutler, Leinart [ 15 ] ** [13.04%]

Cutler, Leinart, Young [ 21 ] ** [18.26%]

Cutler, Young, Leinart [ 8 ] ** [6.96%]

Depends on the team that drafts them [ 13 ] ** [11.30%]
That's 53 Leinart (~38%), 30 Young (~26%), and 29 Cutler (~25%).or

46 Young last (~50%), 33 Cutler last (~28%), and only 23 Leinart last(~20%).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
When you look at what Leinart and Young did, it's truly remarkable...putting their teams on their backs and just willing them to victory.
Willing? :rolleyes: Football is the ultimate team sport and the QB is no more than 12% of the entire team. For as much as a QB could will a team, maybe, but the players around the QB have far more impact on the outcome. If you like I could explain how I come to the 12%.
 
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
 
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
This is a great point rabidfire...and one that I think is the real overarching reason people profess to love the other guy, Cutler included. How many people really saw one of Cutler's games much less the majority? Even casual college fans saw Leinart and Young play quite a bit I'm betting. When Mike Mayock sings Cutler's praises...I can buy that. But when 30%+ of this message board says they think Jay Cutler is going to be the best of the trio in the NFL, I can't help but :lmao:
 
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
This is a great point rabidfire...and one that I think is the real overarching reason people profess to love the other guy, Cutler included. How many people really saw one of Cutler's games much less the majority? Even casual college fans saw Leinart and Young play quite a bit I'm betting. When Mike Mayock sings Cutler's praises...I can buy that. But when 30%+ of this message board says they think Jay Cutler is going to be the best of the trio in the NFL, I can't help but :lmao:
Hardly anyone knows what they are talking bout when it comes to scouting QBs. It's one of the hardest positions to project into the NFL if not THE hardest. The bust rate is high and second only to that of Dline I'm guessing. It really is a roll of the dice and Payton Mannings/John Elways don't just come along every year. Why does it continue to surprise people year in and year out that a lot of folks don't just go with the general concensous in regard to QBs? They probaly just go with personal preference more than anything. Another thing to consider is this. While it is more than likely true that most have seen more of Leinert and Young than Cutler. Maybe it's not so much the fact that they have seen so much in Cutler that they like, but have seen weaknesses in the other 2 that stand out to them and they don't like.

Just some food for thought.....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J
Agreed, I think the shotgun, in and of itself, isn't a big deal. At least not to NFL GMs.Alex Smith was taken 1st overall last year...and he rarely took a snap from center.

Byron Leftwich was a shotgun QB, as were Daunte Culpepper and Chad Pennington.

All things being equal, I think GMs would rather know a guy can play from a pro set, but they'll look past it if other factors are good enough.
That's why it IS a factor, IMO. Smith is a rocket scientist compared to Young, and last year was a disaster for him as he apparently wasn't able to turn his back to the defense and then set up and read it. I think Smith's problems underscored the importance of a college QB's experience working under center. :shrug:
:goodposting: I think sometimes when you say "trouble adjustingto being under center", people think that means taking the snap from between the center's legs. That's the easy part. Turning your back as you drop back and then re-reading the movement since the snap is what is so hard to get used to. When you're in the shotgun you can look at the defense for every second and basically just keep your periphery image on the football floating back to you from center.
Errr...show me a qb who turns his back as he drops back and I'll show you a qb with some f'ed up footwork.
:confused: On play action, every QB I've ever seen turns his back. And even on regular drop backs, you often see the QB facing one side of the field, with their back to the other side. Not many QBs do the Dan Fouts straight backpedal thing anymore.
I'm talking about regular drops, as it seemed you were. Not many qbs are dropping completely blind to a whole side of the field. There's flexibility. You turn your hips, waist, and neck. Hell, I just got my 40 y.o. arrse up and did it 3 times. I could see left right and center every time, with ease. If I can do it I know those 20-somethings can do it.

As far as play-action goes, Young has done all that.
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
 
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
This is a great point rabidfire...and one that I think is the real overarching reason people profess to love the other guy, Cutler included. How many people really saw one of Cutler's games much less the majority? Even casual college fans saw Leinart and Young play quite a bit I'm betting. When Mike Mayock sings Cutler's praises...I can buy that. But when 30%+ of this message board says they think Jay Cutler is going to be the best of the trio in the NFL, I can't help but :lmao:
Hardly anyone knows what they are talking bout when it comes to scouting QBs. It's one of the hardest positions to project into the NFL if not THE hardest. The bust rate is high and second only to that of Dline I'm guessing. It really is a roll of the dice and Payton Mannings/John Elways don't just come along every year. Why does it continue to surprise people year in and year out that a lot of folks don't just go with the general concensous in regard to QBs? They probaly just go with personal preference more than anything. Another thing to consider is this. While it is more than likely true that most have seen more of Leinert and Young than Cutler. Maybe it's not so much the fact that they have seen so much in Cutler that they like, but have seen weaknesses in the other 2 that stand out to them and they don't like.

Just some food for thought.....
That's how I see it. My experience with Cutler are the highlights and the pre-draft events, but he has impressed me more than Leinart or Young who I have seen a lot more. Now it could be since I haven't watched full games of Cutler I'm not seeing his complete game with his mistakes so maybe he's not as good as he looks. What I do know is that he's a natural passer and is confident in the pocket making difficult throws. I don't see that out of Leinart even though he does get the job done and from Young I see a guy that is good at hitting open guys but isn't great at making tough throws.
 
Oops, almost forgot...

Rovers, re: Young:

Can he run a pro offense? I have my doubts
Much of the Texas offense is modelled after the very potent attack of an NFL team. Know which one?Also, people are always knocking on Young's lack of time "under center", so a Texas grad I know went back and looked at the scoring database to find out some things for himself. He was able to get info on 11 games from '05. The Kansas and USC games were unavailable. Still, the result was very interesting...

In those 11 games Young was at QB for 63 TD scoring plays. Of those 63 TD scoring plays, 30 of them were run with Vince working under center. That's 48% of all TD scoring plays.

While I don't believe 48% of every play Vince ran in 2005 started with him under center, I do think the number is higher than most expect. To hear some tell it, Young was just never under center. I would venture to say upwards of 30% of all his 850 or so plays started under center. So we're looking at 250 or more plays under center in '05. Not earth-shattering, but a lot more than zero. Hell, just his 30 TD plays from under center would probably shock the hell out of a lot of people.

If you look at the '03 and '04 seasons, you will find that Vince was under center even more back then. A vast majority of those plays in '03 & '04 were run out of a pro style offense including a lot of I formation (2 WR, FB, RB & TE) and 2 TE sets.

Now, I'm not trying to say that Young is expert at working under center and directing a pro style offense, but I do think it indicates that the ideas are not foreign to him. In fact, I would say that he's more experienced than many other highly touted qbs were when they came out of college.

Besides, as Jaws said, the literally thousands of reps Young is about to get from under center will make it second nature.
Yes, I don't think the lack of working under center is a factor for people. You hear rumblings of that he couldn't work under center and that's why they moved last year. The other rumbling was the stuff on ESPN radio (either Kuselias or Cowherd) with the talk that he played better the less the coaches tried to coach him stuff which leads to the "just let him go from the shotgun and be an athlete and make things happen".

But bottom line is the shotgun issue isn't a big deal.

J
Agreed, I think the shotgun, in and of itself, isn't a big deal. At least not to NFL GMs.Alex Smith was taken 1st overall last year...and he rarely took a snap from center.

Byron Leftwich was a shotgun QB, as were Daunte Culpepper and Chad Pennington.

All things being equal, I think GMs would rather know a guy can play from a pro set, but they'll look past it if other factors are good enough.
That's why it IS a factor, IMO. Smith is a rocket scientist compared to Young, and last year was a disaster for him as he apparently wasn't able to turn his back to the defense and then set up and read it. I think Smith's problems underscored the importance of a college QB's experience working under center. :shrug:
:goodposting: I think sometimes when you say "trouble adjustingto being under center", people think that means taking the snap from between the center's legs. That's the easy part. Turning your back as you drop back and then re-reading the movement since the snap is what is so hard to get used to. When you're in the shotgun you can look at the defense for every second and basically just keep your periphery image on the football floating back to you from center.
Errr...show me a qb who turns his back as he drops back and I'll show you a qb with some f'ed up footwork.
:confused: On play action, every QB I've ever seen turns his back. And even on regular drop backs, you often see the QB facing one side of the field, with their back to the other side. Not many QBs do the Dan Fouts straight backpedal thing anymore.
I'm talking about regular drops, as it seemed you were. Not many qbs are dropping completely blind to a whole side of the field. There's flexibility. You turn your hips, waist, and neck. Hell, I just got my 40 y.o. arrse up and did it 3 times. I could see left right and center every time, with ease. If I can do it I know those 20-somethings can do it.

As far as play-action goes, Young has done all that.
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
You can say that now after Palmer's great 2005 season, but before 2005 they were both about equal. I'm not ready to proclaim Palmer the best since he had the advantage of a much better offense. Also Leftwich was on his way to a fantastic season before he got hurt. His injuries are the biggest negative against him since he hasn't stayed healthy any season.
 
Is it just that people want to be able to say "I told you so" or think they're actually smarter than NFL GMs? :confused:

Every year, particularly around here, we get tons of people (if not the majority) who love the OTHER QB. Sometimes it works out (Big Ben), most of the time it doesn't.

2006 -- Jay Cutler over Matt Leinart and Vince Young
2005 -- Charlie Frye over Alex Smith, Aaron Rodgers and Jason Campbell
2004 -- Big Ben over Eli and Rivers
2003 -- Kyle Boller over Carson Palmer and Byron Leftwich
2002 -- Patrick Ramsey over David Carr and Joey Harrington
2001 -- DNP (everyone loved Vick)
2000 -- Chris Redman over Chad Pennington (don't remember people pimping Carmazzi) :confused: :shrug: :confused:
some of us are sheep and just like to run in a pack...some of us have our own opinions on these guys. I think that covers it.
 
When Mike Mayock sings Cutler's praises...I can buy that. But when 30%+ of this message board says they think Jay Cutler is going to be the best of the trio in the NFL, I can't help but :lmao:
Can you unpack that a little more Jason?First off, I'd guess it's more like 25% of the board prefers Cutler. But it's hard to tell. Huge difference from hearing a lot of noise about Cutler on this board vs what is reality. You know how it is for IDP, if we went by the posts on the board, it'd be easy to assume 85% played IDP. Polls are tough too as the underdog always grabs more people who want to vote.

So bottom line, I don't really know.

But among the experts out there, do you really think guys like Mayock and Jaworski and the others who are high on him are really that far from 20-25%?

I guess why is it that you're fine with Mayock or Jaworski loving Cutler, but when a guy on the board likes him, you want to :lmao: ? That's what I didn't understand.

J

 
When Mike Mayock sings Cutler's praises...I can buy that. But when 30%+ of this message board says they think Jay Cutler is going to be the best of the trio in the NFL, I can't help but :lmao:
Can you unpack that a little more Jason?First off, I'd guess it's more like 25% of the board prefers Cutler. But it's hard to tell. Huge difference from hearing a lot of noise about Cutler on this board vs what is reality. You know how it is for IDP, if we went by the posts on the board, it'd be easy to assume 85% played IDP. Polls are tough too as the underdog always grabs more people who want to vote.

So bottom line, I don't really know.

But among the experts out there, do you really think guys like Mayock and Jaworski and the others who are high on him are really that far from 20-25%?

I guess why is it that you're fine with Mayock or Jaworski loving Cutler, but when a guy on the board likes him, you want to :lmao: ? That's what I didn't understand.

J
Joe,I don't mind when someone like Chaos Commish, or yourself, praise Cutler. Why? Because in both cases you've got regional connections to the kid and, in Chaos Commish's case, he's clearly seen a lot of the kid play and been consistent in why he prefers him to the other prospects.

But you and I both know that given the demographic trends of this board, a very big chunk of the people who are choosing Cutler haven't seen much of him, if at all. They've certainly heard and read a lot about him in the last few months, but prior to that? Not buying it.

As somone else alluded, a lot of the "Cutler will be better" votes are as much about people knowing Young and Leinart a lot more and thus, feeling more comfortable with their flaws. It's the highlights versus reality effect. Most people have seen highlight reels of Cutler, they haven't seen his subpar performances. With guys like Leinart and Young, their presence has been so overwhelming, that people remember the times they didn't excel, and hold that against them.

Happens every year, but for some reason I'm a lot more bothered by it this season than in years past.

 
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?
I do not believe that very many QBs if any can take a 7 step drop and see 100% of the field the entire time. I think you're being silly even suggesting it. Can you, just for one second, admit that maybe Young isn't perfect?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
When Mike Mayock sings Cutler's praises...I can buy that. But when 30%+ of this message board says they think Jay Cutler is going to be the best of the trio in the NFL, I can't help but :lmao:
Can you unpack that a little more Jason?First off, I'd guess it's more like 25% of the board prefers Cutler. But it's hard to tell. Huge difference from hearing a lot of noise about Cutler on this board vs what is reality. You know how it is for IDP, if we went by the posts on the board, it'd be easy to assume 85% played IDP. Polls are tough too as the underdog always grabs more people who want to vote.

So bottom line, I don't really know.

But among the experts out there, do you really think guys like Mayock and Jaworski and the others who are high on him are really that far from 20-25%?

I guess why is it that you're fine with Mayock or Jaworski loving Cutler, but when a guy on the board likes him, you want to :lmao: ? That's what I didn't understand.

J
Joe,I don't mind when someone like Chaos Commish, or yourself, praise Cutler. Why? Because in both cases you've got regional connections to the kid and, in Chaos Commish's case, he's clearly seen a lot of the kid play and been consistent in why he prefers him to the other prospects.

But you and I both know that given the demographic trends of this board, a very big chunk of the people who are choosing Cutler haven't seen much of him, if at all. They've certainly heard and read a lot about him in the last few months, but prior to that? Not buying it.

As somone else alluded, a lot of the "Cutler will be better" votes are as much about people knowing Young and Leinart a lot more and thus, feeling more comfortable with their flaws. It's the highlights versus reality effect. Most people have seen highlight reels of Cutler, they haven't seen his subpar performances. With guys like Leinart and Young, their presence has been so overwhelming, that people remember the times they didn't excel, and hold that against them.

Happens every year, but for some reason I'm a lot more bothered by it this season than in years past.
:confused: So you're saying that the Southern US is woefully underrepresented here? That seems crazy. Not to mention that I would guess that there are more SEC fans here than any other college conference.

 
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?
I do not believe that very many QBs if any can take a 7 step drop and see 100% of the field the entire time. I think you're being silly even suggesting it. Can you, just for one second, admit that maybe Young isn't perfect?
Wow. You managed to put words into my mouth twice in one post.Of course that would be silly to suggest. That's why never suggested it. Nobody can see 100% of the field the entire time. I said I could look left, right, or middle, while performing the drop. It's not even difficult. It's worth noting here, however, that a qb receiving the snap out of the shotgun cannot see 100% of the field the entire time either. You can't look at the entire field at once even if you're just standing there.

Of course Vince Young isn't perfect. I never said he was and have gone out of my way to stress on this board that there is no such thing as a "lock" in the draft. Nobody in the draft is perfect. To say otherwise would be foolish.

 
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?
I do not believe that very many QBs if any can take a 7 step drop and see 100% of the field the entire time. I think you're being silly even suggesting it. Can you, just for one second, admit that maybe Young isn't perfect?
Wow. You managed to put words into my mouth twice in one post.Of course that would be silly to suggest. That's why never suggested it. Nobody can see 100% of the field the entire time. I said I could look left, right, or middle, while performing the drop. It's not even difficult. It's worth noting here, however, that a qb receiving the snap out of the shotgun cannot see 100% of the field the entire time either. You can't look at the entire field at once even if you're just standing there.

Of course Vince Young isn't perfect. I never said he was and have gone out of my way to stress on this board that there is no such thing as a "lock" in the draft. Nobody in the draft is perfect. To say otherwise would be foolish.
I thought you said you could see the whole left sideline when dropping back in a prior post? It was a post I deleted for length from above. Here is what you said:

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can.

Did I misinterpret that?

 
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?
I do not believe that very many QBs if any can take a 7 step drop and see 100% of the field the entire time. I think you're being silly even suggesting it. Can you, just for one second, admit that maybe Young isn't perfect?
Wow. You managed to put words into my mouth twice in one post.Of course that would be silly to suggest. That's why never suggested it. Nobody can see 100% of the field the entire time. I said I could look left, right, or middle, while performing the drop. It's not even difficult. It's worth noting here, however, that a qb receiving the snap out of the shotgun cannot see 100% of the field the entire time either. You can't look at the entire field at once even if you're just standing there.

Of course Vince Young isn't perfect. I never said he was and have gone out of my way to stress on this board that there is no such thing as a "lock" in the draft. Nobody in the draft is perfect. To say otherwise would be foolish.
I thought you said you could see the whole left sideline when dropping back in a prior post? It was a post I deleted for length from above. Here is what you said:

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can.

Did I misinterpret that?
OK...I'll go thru this for you one more time.I did say that and I stand by it. If I want to lock in on the left sideline for the entire drop (not that I'd want to), I can do that. I can look left. I can look right. I can look middle. I don't have to turn around at any point in my 3, 5, or 7-step drops. I can keep my eyes on the defense from the time I walk up to the center to the time I've dropped all the way back.

Your confusion seems to stem from the '"seeing the whole field" concept. I'm saying noone can see it all at once...but I can see any part of it that I want to. You have to scan it in portions, but I'm able to do that. Others here are saying you can't even do that while taking these drops from under center. I say that's ridiculous.

Another guy here in the firehouse just asked what I was posting. When I told him, he just laughed and said of course you can keep your eye on the d the whole time. Furthermore, he said, you damn sure better or you're gonna get killed. He's a former defensive player.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?
I do not believe that very many QBs if any can take a 7 step drop and see 100% of the field the entire time. I think you're being silly even suggesting it. Can you, just for one second, admit that maybe Young isn't perfect?
Wow. You managed to put words into my mouth twice in one post.Of course that would be silly to suggest. That's why never suggested it. Nobody can see 100% of the field the entire time. I said I could look left, right, or middle, while performing the drop. It's not even difficult. It's worth noting here, however, that a qb receiving the snap out of the shotgun cannot see 100% of the field the entire time either. You can't look at the entire field at once even if you're just standing there.

Of course Vince Young isn't perfect. I never said he was and have gone out of my way to stress on this board that there is no such thing as a "lock" in the draft. Nobody in the draft is perfect. To say otherwise would be foolish.
I thought you said you could see the whole left sideline when dropping back in a prior post? It was a post I deleted for length from above. Here is what you said:

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can.

Did I misinterpret that?
OK...I'll go thru this for you one more time.I did say that and I stand by it. If I want to lock in on the left sideline for the entire drop (not that I'd want to), I can do that. I can look left. I can look right. I can look middle. I don't have to turn around at any point in my 3, 5, or 7-step drops. I can keep my eyes on the defense from the time I walk up to the center to the time I've dropped all the way back.

Your confusion seems to stem from the '"seeing the whole field" concept. I'm saying noone can see it all at once...but I can see any part of it that I want to. You have to scan it in portions, but I'm able to do that. Others here are saying you can't even do that while taking these drops from under center. I say that's ridiculous.

Another guy here in the firehouse just asked what I was posting. When I told him, he just laughed and said of course you can keep your eye on the d the whole time. Furthermore, he said, you damn sure better or you're gonna get killed. He's a former defensive player.
So are you and your pal saying that you can see as much of the field in a drop back as you can when you are in shotgun?
 
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?
I do not believe that very many QBs if any can take a 7 step drop and see 100% of the field the entire time. I think you're being silly even suggesting it. Can you, just for one second, admit that maybe Young isn't perfect?
Wow. You managed to put words into my mouth twice in one post.Of course that would be silly to suggest. That's why never suggested it. Nobody can see 100% of the field the entire time. I said I could look left, right, or middle, while performing the drop. It's not even difficult. It's worth noting here, however, that a qb receiving the snap out of the shotgun cannot see 100% of the field the entire time either. You can't look at the entire field at once even if you're just standing there.

Of course Vince Young isn't perfect. I never said he was and have gone out of my way to stress on this board that there is no such thing as a "lock" in the draft. Nobody in the draft is perfect. To say otherwise would be foolish.
I thought you said you could see the whole left sideline when dropping back in a prior post? It was a post I deleted for length from above. Here is what you said:

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can.

Did I misinterpret that?
OK...I'll go thru this for you one more time.I did say that and I stand by it. If I want to lock in on the left sideline for the entire drop (not that I'd want to), I can do that. I can look left. I can look right. I can look middle. I don't have to turn around at any point in my 3, 5, or 7-step drops. I can keep my eyes on the defense from the time I walk up to the center to the time I've dropped all the way back.

Your confusion seems to stem from the '"seeing the whole field" concept. I'm saying noone can see it all at once...but I can see any part of it that I want to. You have to scan it in portions, but I'm able to do that. Others here are saying you can't even do that while taking these drops from under center. I say that's ridiculous.

Another guy here in the firehouse just asked what I was posting. When I told him, he just laughed and said of course you can keep your eye on the d the whole time. Furthermore, he said, you damn sure better or you're gonna get killed. He's a former defensive player.
So are you and your pal saying that you can see as much of the field in a drop back as you can when you are in shotgun?
It is what it is.I'm saying you don't have to turn your head and you can keep your eyes on the d the from the time you address the center until you complete your drop, which is how this started.

In the shotgun, you have the advantage of being able to stay mostly stationary, not jostling, etc, but the disadvantage of having to look for the ball when it's coming to you.

It's probably not clearcut, but more a matter of preference that varies from qb to qb.

 
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
You can say that now after Palmer's great 2005 season, but before 2005 they were both about equal. I'm not ready to proclaim Palmer the best since he had the advantage of a much better offense. Also Leftwich was on his way to a fantastic season before he got hurt. His injuries are the biggest negative against him since he hasn't stayed healthy any season.
I have preferred Palmer all along. I have been vocal about it. His combination of accuracy (67+% completion percentage), vertical throwing (7.5 yards per attempt) and production (32 TD's) a great rarity. Part of why his offense is better is because he is part of it. You are in total denial. Palmer is seen as a definitive franchise QB. Leftwich is simply a nice player. There is debate as to whether Leftwich even gives his team the besgt chance to win.
 
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?
I do not believe that very many QBs if any can take a 7 step drop and see 100% of the field the entire time. I think you're being silly even suggesting it. Can you, just for one second, admit that maybe Young isn't perfect?
Wow. You managed to put words into my mouth twice in one post.Of course that would be silly to suggest. That's why never suggested it. Nobody can see 100% of the field the entire time. I said I could look left, right, or middle, while performing the drop. It's not even difficult. It's worth noting here, however, that a qb receiving the snap out of the shotgun cannot see 100% of the field the entire time either. You can't look at the entire field at once even if you're just standing there.

Of course Vince Young isn't perfect. I never said he was and have gone out of my way to stress on this board that there is no such thing as a "lock" in the draft. Nobody in the draft is perfect. To say otherwise would be foolish.
I thought you said you could see the whole left sideline when dropping back in a prior post? It was a post I deleted for length from above. Here is what you said:

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can.

Did I misinterpret that?
OK...I'll go thru this for you one more time.I did say that and I stand by it. If I want to lock in on the left sideline for the entire drop (not that I'd want to), I can do that. I can look left. I can look right. I can look middle. I don't have to turn around at any point in my 3, 5, or 7-step drops. I can keep my eyes on the defense from the time I walk up to the center to the time I've dropped all the way back.

Your confusion seems to stem from the '"seeing the whole field" concept. I'm saying noone can see it all at once...but I can see any part of it that I want to. You have to scan it in portions, but I'm able to do that. Others here are saying you can't even do that while taking these drops from under center. I say that's ridiculous.

Another guy here in the firehouse just asked what I was posting. When I told him, he just laughed and said of course you can keep your eye on the d the whole time. Furthermore, he said, you damn sure better or you're gonna get killed. He's a former defensive player.
So are you and your pal saying that you can see as much of the field in a drop back as you can when you are in shotgun?
It is what it is.I'm saying you don't have to turn your head and you can keep your eyes on the d the from the time you address the center until you complete your drop, which is how this started.

In the shotgun, you have the advantage of being able to stay mostly stationary, not jostling, etc, but the disadvantage of having to look for the ball when it's coming to you.

It's probably not clearcut, but more a matter of preference that varies from qb to qb.
OK, maybe we just misunderstood each other. I believe that there are almost no NFL QBs who would say that they can see the field as well in a drop back as well as in a shotgun. Isn't that the second most important reason to even use the shotgun (behind protection issues)? Not only do you have the drop back, but you have to crouch down at the snap from center and I would bet that it could take away some of your vision when you crouch down. Maybe not a ton, but some. So I think that any QB that uses the shotgun alot in college is going to have an "extra" issue to adjust to when they get to the NFL (assuming they don't go to a team that is going to run the shotgun alot), compared to a QB who played in alot of dropback situations.

I haven't seen VY alot, but I thought that he played from the shotgun alot. I know that he did the entire winning drive of the Rose Bowl. Guess we'll see.

 
Your man love for Young makes it useless to discuss football with you. :thumbdown:
I see you're bringing a lot to the discussion, though, right?What, exactly, in the text that you quoted do you take issue with?

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can. If an NFL qb chooses not to look there, that's one thing, but if they can't...well...that would be hard to believe, to say the least.

Do you not believe that in over two years of running a balanced pass offense set up by the run, that Young didn't run plenty of play-action?
I do not believe that very many QBs if any can take a 7 step drop and see 100% of the field the entire time. I think you're being silly even suggesting it. Can you, just for one second, admit that maybe Young isn't perfect?
Wow. You managed to put words into my mouth twice in one post.Of course that would be silly to suggest. That's why never suggested it. Nobody can see 100% of the field the entire time. I said I could look left, right, or middle, while performing the drop. It's not even difficult. It's worth noting here, however, that a qb receiving the snap out of the shotgun cannot see 100% of the field the entire time either. You can't look at the entire field at once even if you're just standing there.

Of course Vince Young isn't perfect. I never said he was and have gone out of my way to stress on this board that there is no such thing as a "lock" in the draft. Nobody in the draft is perfect. To say otherwise would be foolish.
I thought you said you could see the whole left sideline when dropping back in a prior post? It was a post I deleted for length from above. Here is what you said:

Do you not believe that I can do those drops w/o taking my eyes off the left sideline (I'm righthanded) if I want? I can.

Did I misinterpret that?
OK...I'll go thru this for you one more time.I did say that and I stand by it. If I want to lock in on the left sideline for the entire drop (not that I'd want to), I can do that. I can look left. I can look right. I can look middle. I don't have to turn around at any point in my 3, 5, or 7-step drops. I can keep my eyes on the defense from the time I walk up to the center to the time I've dropped all the way back.

Your confusion seems to stem from the '"seeing the whole field" concept. I'm saying noone can see it all at once...but I can see any part of it that I want to. You have to scan it in portions, but I'm able to do that. Others here are saying you can't even do that while taking these drops from under center. I say that's ridiculous.

Another guy here in the firehouse just asked what I was posting. When I told him, he just laughed and said of course you can keep your eye on the d the whole time. Furthermore, he said, you damn sure better or you're gonna get killed. He's a former defensive player.
So are you and your pal saying that you can see as much of the field in a drop back as you can when you are in shotgun?
It is what it is.I'm saying you don't have to turn your head and you can keep your eyes on the d the from the time you address the center until you complete your drop, which is how this started.

In the shotgun, you have the advantage of being able to stay mostly stationary, not jostling, etc, but the disadvantage of having to look for the ball when it's coming to you.

It's probably not clearcut, but more a matter of preference that varies from qb to qb.
OK, maybe we just misunderstood each other. I believe that there are almost no NFL QBs who would say that they can see the field as well in a drop back as well as in a shotgun. Isn't that the second most important reason to even use the shotgun (behind protection issues)? Not only do you have the drop back, but you have to crouch down at the snap from center and I would bet that it could take away some of your vision when you crouch down. Maybe not a ton, but some. So I think that any QB that uses the shotgun alot in college is going to have an "extra" issue to adjust to when they get to the NFL (assuming they don't go to a team that is going to run the shotgun alot), compared to a QB who played in alot of dropback situations.

I haven't seen VY alot, but I thought that he played from the shotgun alot. I know that he did the entire winning drive of the Rose Bowl. Guess we'll see.
You're right, he did play from the shotgun a lot...but not as much as most people think. Look here for my not-so-in-depth research on this topic. Actually, it was done by a friend.
 
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
You can say that now after Palmer's great 2005 season, but before 2005 they were both about equal. I'm not ready to proclaim Palmer the best since he had the advantage of a much better offense. Also Leftwich was on his way to a fantastic season before he got hurt. His injuries are the biggest negative against him since he hasn't stayed healthy any season.
I have preferred Palmer all along. I have been vocal about it. His combination of accuracy (67+% completion percentage), vertical throwing (7.5 yards per attempt) and production (32 TD's) a great rarity. Part of why his offense is better is because he is part of it. You are in total denial. Palmer is seen as a definitive franchise QB. Leftwich is simply a nice player. There is debate as to whether Leftwich even gives his team the besgt chance to win.
I've never taken anything away from Palmer always thought he'd be a good NFL QB. However, don't discount the talent on the Bengals vs. what Leftwich has had with the Jags in what a season Palmer had last year. Leftwich was on pace for 3400 yards, 24 TD and 8 INT, good enough for the Pro Bowl, and was doing it without any Pro Bowl players on offense. You're welcome to your opinion but I feel that Leftwich hasn't yet reached his potential and if he can stay healthy should be a perennial Pro Bowl QB.
 
One comment on the seeing the entire field piece. Some QB's like taking the under center approach compared to the shotgun becaus eyou don't ever take your eyes off the field to catch the ball. In teh shotgun you see how the play develops and then you ever so briefly must take your eye off the field to make sure you catch teh ball and then refocus on a portion of the field. When you are under center you have the negative of moving back, but you never have to take your eye off the field at what can be a critical time. I am not saying it is easire under center to throw, but when you take into account the better threat of a play action (or threat of a run under center) and some of the advantage of not having to catch the ball in the middle of the play, the seeing the field debate isn't as big an issue.

For the record, you scan segments of the field and you do have peripheral vision that allows you to see most of the field. if you are looking towards the center, you can see a lot to the left and right, however, when you are looking right, you will miss what is happening on the left. This is why the looking a brief glimpse at the side you want to throw to before looking off the safety (the other way) gives you a gauge of when to come back to the side you really want to throw to. Of course, if you do that every time, any team worth its weight in scouting will know this and will jump your routes accordingly. :bye:

 
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
You can say that now after Palmer's great 2005 season, but before 2005 they were both about equal. I'm not ready to proclaim Palmer the best since he had the advantage of a much better offense. Also Leftwich was on his way to a fantastic season before he got hurt. His injuries are the biggest negative against him since he hasn't stayed healthy any season.
I have preferred Palmer all along. I have been vocal about it. His combination of accuracy (67+% completion percentage), vertical throwing (7.5 yards per attempt) and production (32 TD's) a great rarity. Part of why his offense is better is because he is part of it. You are in total denial. Palmer is seen as a definitive franchise QB. Leftwich is simply a nice player. There is debate as to whether Leftwich even gives his team the besgt chance to win.
I've never taken anything away from Palmer always thought he'd be a good NFL QB. However, don't discount the talent on the Bengals vs. what Leftwich has had with the Jags in what a season Palmer had last year. Leftwich was on pace for 3400 yards, 24 TD and 8 INT, good enough for the Pro Bowl, and was doing it without any Pro Bowl players on offense. You're welcome to your opinion but I feel that Leftwich hasn't yet reached his potential and if he can stay healthy should be a perennial Pro Bowl QB.
Most people said that Leftwich had a better supporting cast when he came in. The Bengals were the worst team when they drafted Palmer, that is why they got him first. People were pointing to the fact that they had Smith and Taylor. They have drafted wr's in the first round the last two years to surround him with more talent. Wilford looks good. I like Leftwich as well. I think he is a nice plaayer. Perennial pro-bowler? I can't see it unless he goes to the NFC. He plays in the same conference as Manning, Brady, Palmer, Culpepper and Big Ben.

 
One comment on the seeing the entire field piece.  Some QB's like taking the under center approach compared to the shotgun becaus eyou don't ever take your eyes off the field to catch the ball.  In teh shotgun you see how the play develops and then you ever so briefly must take your eye off the field to make sure you catch teh ball and then refocus on a portion of the field.  When you are under center you have the negative of moving back, but you never have to take your eye off the field at what can be a critical time.  I am not saying it is easire under center to throw, but when you take into account the better threat of a play action (or threat of a run under center) and some of the advantage of not having to catch the ball in the middle of the play, the seeing the field debate isn't as big an issue. 

For the record, you scan segments of the field and you do have peripheral vision that allows you to see most of the field.  if you are looking towards the center, you can see a lot to the left and right, however, when you are looking right, you will miss what is happening on the left.  This is why the looking a brief glimpse at the side you want to throw to before looking off the safety (the other way) gives you a gauge of when to come back to the side you really want to throw to.  Of course, if you do that every time, any team worth its weight in scouting will know this and will jump your routes accordingly.    :bye:
:goodposting:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lienart: least likely to bust, but: I just don't like west coast guys.... Losman is a surfer dude type too. Rumblings about firing his agent for the explicit reason of getting set up with a big time Hollywood promotional talent agency..... red flag. Smart, ran an NFL offense, but is a pure pocket passer with limited mobility and arm strength that might be lacking for a NE NFL team. Talked about being the next Joe Namath, star on and off the field. I'll pass.
Not sure it has been proven that Chow's system is indeed an NFL offense. If we judge on current performance of said system we would have to give the same prestige to Spurrier's system that most people will say bombed.
 
Most people want to look like a genius. It is FF equivalent of Fancy Play Syndrome (a Mike Caro term) in poker. IT was crazy how many people here had Leftwich ahead of Palmer, although few will admit it now. I remember being crushed praising him, hearing he was a one year wonder. It only got worse when Brunell got benched. Now, it is clear he was a superstar in waiting.
What's wrong with Leftwich over Palmer? I still think he could end up the best in the long-run. I also don't remember people buying into the Boller hype enough to rank him as the #1 QB.
Most people on this board preferred Leftwich to Palmer - despite only seeing 4 or less of Leftwich's games. That is the problem. If a few people had, that would be one thing. However, most people here want to show how insightful they are, and they often do this by being vocal about picks/players that they think run contrary to the consensus. Most NFL people preferred Palmer. Palmer could make all the throws, had more athleticism, less durability isues, played in a pro style offense, set a number of Pac 10 records and played against better competition. He simply was a better prospect. That is why he was the consensus #1 pick. As a pro, most would said at year 3 in development, Palmer is significantly better.
You can say that now after Palmer's great 2005 season, but before 2005 they were both about equal. I'm not ready to proclaim Palmer the best since he had the advantage of a much better offense. Also Leftwich was on his way to a fantastic season before he got hurt. His injuries are the biggest negative against him since he hasn't stayed healthy any season.
I have preferred Palmer all along. I have been vocal about it. His combination of accuracy (67+% completion percentage), vertical throwing (7.5 yards per attempt) and production (32 TD's) a great rarity. Part of why his offense is better is because he is part of it. You are in total denial. Palmer is seen as a definitive franchise QB. Leftwich is simply a nice player. There is debate as to whether Leftwich even gives his team the besgt chance to win.
I've never taken anything away from Palmer always thought he'd be a good NFL QB. However, don't discount the talent on the Bengals vs. what Leftwich has had with the Jags in what a season Palmer had last year. Leftwich was on pace for 3400 yards, 24 TD and 8 INT, good enough for the Pro Bowl, and was doing it without any Pro Bowl players on offense. You're welcome to your opinion but I feel that Leftwich hasn't yet reached his potential and if he can stay healthy should be a perennial Pro Bowl QB.
Most people said that Leftwich had a better supporting cast when he came in. The Bengals were the worst team when they drafted Palmer, that is why they got him first. People were pointing to the fact that they had Smith and Taylor. They have drafted wr's in the first round the last two years to surround him with more talent. Wilford looks good. I like Leftwich as well. I think he is a nice plaayer. Perennial pro-bowler? I can't see it unless he goes to the NFC. He plays in the same conference as Manning, Brady, Palmer, Culpepper and Big Ben.
That's true about the supporting cast since hardly anyone saw Rudi becoming the back he did after his rookie year, CJ had just had his first 1000 yard season in 2002, and Houshmandzadeh wasn't even on the team. However they added a lot of talent in 2003 while Palmer was on the bench so when he started in 2004 they were a completely rebuilt team. I see the Jags making the same transformation and they are a RB to replace Taylor away from doing so. Maybe I'm higher on Leftwich than some, but I like what I see when I watch him play.

As far as the Pro Bowl, Manning is lock, but Leftwich will be able to compete for a spot with Brady, Palmer and Roethlisberger. CPep is a possibility but I don't see him being the QB he used to be.

 
I see the Jags making the same transformation and they are a RB to replace Taylor away from doing so. Maybe I'm higher on Leftwich than some, but I like what I see when I watch him play.

As far as the Pro Bowl, Manning is lock, but Leftwich will be able to compete for a spot with Brady...
This speaks volumes. Leftwich is less than two and half years younger than Brady and hasn't touched his success on the field or in the stat column. Don't go the talent route either, as Leftwich has a similiar supporting cast. Fred Taylor was much better than Antowain Smith an is fairly similiar to Corey Dillion in the NFL, if not FF. Brady has had little wr help and little TE help. There hasn't been a 1000 wr (although Branch came real close) in NE since 2001. Look what happened to Patten when he left NE. I don't see them as even being viewed as in the same league going forward by anyone other than yourself. I don't think even most diehard Jags fans would put him there. So yes, I think you can safely say you view him higher than most.
 
I see the Jags making the same transformation and they are a RB to replace Taylor away from doing so. Maybe I'm higher on Leftwich than some, but I like what I see when I watch him play.

As far as the Pro Bowl, Manning is lock, but Leftwich will be able to compete for a spot with Brady...
This speaks volumes. Leftwich is less than two and half years younger than Brady and hasn't touched his success on the field or in the stat column. Don't go the talent route either, as Leftwich has a similiar supporting cast. Fred Taylor was much better than Antowain Smith an is fairly similiar to Corey Dillion in the NFL, if not FF. Brady has had little wr help and little TE help. There hasn't been a 1000 wr (although Branch came real close) in NE since 2001. Look what happened to Patten when he left NE. I don't see them as even being viewed as in the same league going forward by anyone other than yourself. I don't think even most diehard Jags fans would put him there. So yes, I think you can safely say you view him higher than most.
Are you telling me Brady is a lock for the Pro Bowl even though he missed it in 2002 and 2003? Brady has only made the Pro Bowl after winning the Super Bowl the previous year. His stats aren't spectacular so a little bit of a dip for him will allow other people to make it. I don't see the Patriots doing as well with the players they've lost and Dillon aging and Brady will miss the Pro Bowl if he doesn't get 11-12 wins.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lienart: least likely to bust, but: I just don't like west coast guys.... Losman is a surfer dude type too. Rumblings about firing his agent for the explicit reason of getting  set up with a big time Hollywood promotional talent agency..... red flag. Smart, ran an NFL offense, but is a pure pocket passer with limited mobility and arm strength that might be lacking for a NE NFL team. Talked about being the next Joe Namath, star on and off the field. I'll pass.
Not sure it has been proven that Chow's system is indeed an NFL offense. If we judge on current performance of said system we would have to give the same prestige to Spurrier's system that most people will say bombed.
:confused: Steve Young, Jim McMahon and Carson Palmer aren't proof enough? :confused:

 
Lienart: least likely to bust, but: I just don't like west coast guys.... Losman is a surfer dude type too. Rumblings about firing his agent for the explicit reason of getting set up with a big time Hollywood promotional talent agency..... red flag. Smart, ran an NFL offense, but is a pure pocket passer with limited mobility and arm strength that might be lacking for a NE NFL team. Talked about being the next Joe Namath, star on and off the field. I'll pass.
Not sure it has been proven that Chow's system is indeed an NFL offense. If we judge on current performance of said system we would have to give the same prestige to Spurrier's system that most people will say bombed.
:confused: Steve Young, Jim McMahon and Carson Palmer aren't proof enough? :confused:
Don't forget Philip Rivers.
 
I see the Jags making the same transformation and they are a RB to replace Taylor away from doing so.  Maybe I'm higher on Leftwich than some, but I like what I see when I watch him play. 

As far as the Pro Bowl, Manning is lock, but Leftwich will be able to compete for a spot with Brady...
This speaks volumes. Leftwich is less than two and half years younger than Brady and hasn't touched his success on the field or in the stat column. Don't go the talent route either, as Leftwich has a similiar supporting cast. Fred Taylor was much better than Antowain Smith an is fairly similiar to Corey Dillion in the NFL, if not FF. Brady has had little wr help and little TE help. There hasn't been a 1000 wr (although Branch came real close) in NE since 2001. Look what happened to Patten when he left NE. I don't see them as even being viewed as in the same league going forward by anyone other than yourself. I don't think even most diehard Jags fans would put him there. So yes, I think you can safely say you view him higher than most.
Are you telling me Brady is a lock for the Pro Bowl even though he missed it in 2002 and 2003? Brady has only made the Pro Bowl after winning the Super Bowl the previous year. His stats aren't spectacular so a little bit of a dip for him will allow other people to make it. I don't see the Patriots doing as well with the players they've lost and Dillon aging and Brady will miss the Pro Bowl if he doesn't get 11-12 wins.
I am telling you he is a lock ahead of Leftwich who has never thrown for 3000 yards or 16 tds in a season. As to Brady not having good stats, your are definitely wrong about some things and probably wrong about others. Brady went to pro bowl in 2001. He did not go to Superbowl in year before that- he was the fourth qb. Brady has been above 26 td's in 3 of the last 4 years and above 3600 yards each of those years. He has led the league in TD passes. He was third last year. He consistently maintains a near 2:1 td to int ratio while having excellent yards per attempt numbers. If you look, you will see he is still improving.Hey, if you like Leftwich better than Palmer or Brady, great. Although this kind of thinking, along with your bigtime pimping of Fason before his very pedestrian 40 time (after which you changed your tune a bit) makes it clear that you love to vocally, actively and often irrationally, pimp picks that run across the grain. Leftwich ahead of Palmer- off center and needs good reasoning to articulate. Leftwich ahead of Brady- borderline absurd but very amusing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top