PDA

View Full Version : Scout talk on 50 prospects


ArlingtonTexan
03-02-2012, 04:20 PM
from a Wisconson (packer) source...Love the fact that in some cases the scout speaks far from the public line.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/draft-outlook-es4aae2-140451293.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Lucky
03-03-2012, 10:27 AM
Talk about divergent opinions on a player, look at this write up on Robert Griffin (from link above):

Robert Griffin*, QB, Baylor: 6-2, 223. "He's phenomenal," one scout said. "He's going to need technique work and fundamentals. I have no problem about that. But you cannot lose the fact that he's got feet, touch downfield with accuracy, a strong arm. He's charismatic and smart as (expletive)." Played and started all four years, but had his '09 season cut short by a knee injury requiring reconstructive surgery. Finished with an NFL passer rating of 110.1. "He cannot play quarterback," another scout said. "He's just running around winging it. He has no idea how to play quarterback. He's got no vision. He's got no accuracy. No touch. Anything you look for in an NFL quarterback, he doesn't have it. You want him to run around and throw the ball and just keep running, he can do that. He's (Michael) Vick, but not as good a thrower."
From "phenomenal" to "cannot play quarterback". The truth is likely somewhere in between, though I think Griffin is a better passer than Vick coming out of college #faintpraise.

mussop
03-03-2012, 01:21 PM
Talk about divergent opinions on a player, look at this write up on Robert Griffin (from link above):


From "phenomenal" to "cannot play quarterback". The truth is likely somewhere in between, though I think Griffin is a better passer than Vick coming out of college #faintpraise.

Wow that second scout gets paid for his opinion?

Texan4Ever
03-03-2012, 01:52 PM
I think one of the most important traits a quarterback can have is the ability to throw while on the run (when the pocket collapses). IMO, Robert Griffin III is probably better at it than Andrew Luck from what I have seen. What say you?

76Texan
03-03-2012, 10:02 PM
At least I know I'm not crazy when I put both Luck and RG III below Keenum in term of QB prowess.

Both of these guys need to learn how to play the postition better.

I kid you not, Yates played the position better than Luck (but one was a Sr. and one was a Jr) their last year in college (in pretty much the same WCO).

The way RG III ran around in college, he will get hurt in the NFL.
The NFL coaches should be smart about it (one hopes).

They need to learn to read coverage better; they need to locate the open receiver sooner (1/8 of a second makes a big difference in the NFL.)

Let's say, for example, if RG III (who ran a very similar system that Keenum did) was able to do the things Keenum did; he would have blown away all the passing records just the same and still managed to make all those plays with his legs.

Both of these guys are much much better athletes than Keenum, but they aren't on the same level of QBacking - at least not yet.

And as I've said, they both seem to be pretty smart.
It's just a matter of whether they can put it all together or not.

badboy
03-03-2012, 10:13 PM
At least I know I'm not crazy when I put both Luck and RG III below Keenum in term of QB prowess.

Both of these guys need to learn how to play the postition better.

I kid you not, Yates played the position better than Luck (but one was a Sr. and one was a Jr) their last year in college (in pretty much the same WCO).

The way RG III ran around in college, he will get hurt in the NFL.
The NFL coaches should be smart about it (one hopes).

They need to learn to read coverage better; they need to locate the open receiver sooner (1/8 of a second makes a big difference in the NFL.)

Let's say, for example, if RG III (who ran a very similar system that Keenum did) was able to do the things Keenum did; he would have blown away all the passing records just the same and still managed to make all those plays with his legs.

Both of these guys are much much better athletes than Keenum, but they aren't on the same level of QBacking - at least not yet.

And as I've said, they both seem to be pretty smart.
It's just a matter of whether they can put it all together or not.what do you think about the negative criticism Keenum is getting for his combine performance?

76Texan
03-03-2012, 11:36 PM
what do you think about the negative criticism Keenum is getting for his combine performance?

At the combine, as I understand, the press is able to watch televised portions of the drill.

If that's the case, then it would be totally different than watching him in person, on the field.

Now, on some drills, as I watched it, they were supposed to be for the receivers, not for the QBs.

They might want to see how the receiver adjust to the ball and tell the QB to throw the ball short, or whatever.

There might also be the case where some of the press mistook Keenum with another QB who wore #7 (Keenum wore a different number at the combine- the other was just a "thrower").

Now if you hear it from a real NFL scout, it would have been different.

Take for example, a piece in the Sporting News, when they preclude their article with "One of the big knocks on Keenum is his lack of arm strength", you can ditch the article right there as I've said I've seen Keenum throw farther than Schaub.

Just let the process play out with the QB camp with Gruden and his pro-day news.

panamamyers
03-04-2012, 02:40 PM
Andrew Luck knows more about offenses and playing the qb position in his pinky finger than Keenum and TJ Yates combined.

You might can go there in a typical year with the typical first qb to be selected. Maybe go there with Blaine Gabbert or Jake Locker, somebody like that.

You are completely incorrect with Luck.

Lucky
03-04-2012, 03:38 PM
Andrew Luck knows more about offenses and playing the qb position in his pinky finger than Keenum and TJ Yates combined.
What was so sophisticated about Stanford's offense? Keenum was basically doing all of the play calls the last couple of years at UH. TJ Yates has actually played in a NFL offense.

Luck is an outstanding prospect. Worthy of the #1 pick, for sure. But don't kid yourself, he's got a learning curve ahead of him, just like any other rookie QB.

mussop
03-04-2012, 04:46 PM
What was so sophisticated about Stanford's offense? Keenum was basically doing all of the play calls the last couple of years at UH. TJ Yates has actually played in a NFL offense.

Luck is an outstanding prospect. Worthy of the #1 pick, for sure. But don't kid yourself, he's got a learning curve ahead of him, just like any other rookie QB.

Yes he does and he was playing behind a great OL with a very good running game. Lets see how well he preforms with alot of pressure.

76Texan
03-04-2012, 10:52 PM
Yes he does and he was playing behind a great OL with a very good running game. Lets see how well he preforms with alot of pressure.

Luck had everything going for him: From the running game, the O line, the TEs, the WRs, a defense that ranked 26 overall.

He routinely played against pass defenses that ranked in the 80s and 90s even 100s.

He faced just two pass defenses that ranked in the top 40 (Cal at 37 and ND at 39).

He saw pressure that was minuscule as compared with Keenum.
And he still throw an INT every 40 attempts.
That did not include a couple of sure drops by the DBs and several close ones.

If he plays at the same level, he will average at least 1.25 INTs per game in the NFL (20 over 16 games), probably even more considering he will face better defenses and pressures. One could be looking at some 24-30 INTs over the course of a full year.

More likely than not, his coaches will bring him along the way the Texans protected Yates for a while there.

Yates played better his Sr. year than Luck played last year.
Google it and read up on how different people had talked about him throughout last year.

He was ahead of RG III by a huge margin earlier in the year in the Heismann poil, only to lose it game by game as he started to face better defenses.

Right now, Luck is mostly, if not all POTENTIAL.
He isn't quite ready to be a full-time starter in the NFL yet.

If I was to chose between Luck and Newton in the same draft, it will be a no brainer vote to Newton.

Luck still has a lot to learn to become a good NFL QB.

WolverineFan
03-05-2012, 08:46 AM
What was so sophisticated about Stanford's offense? Keenum was basically doing all of the play calls the last couple of years at UH. TJ Yates has actually played in a NFL offense.

Luck is an outstanding prospect. Worthy of the #1 pick, for sure. But don't kid yourself, he's got a learning curve ahead of him, just like any other rookie QB.

Luck made play calls and called his own audibles last year while playing in a pro style offense. His coach, David Shaw, came out and said last year that he's never seen a college QB have such command of an offense and that offense was pretty good.

Keenum made the play calls in a spread offense and has a big learning curve coming when he gets an NFL playbook.

Yates played in a pro style offense just like Luck, but I don't recall him calling plays or anything like that.

Rey
03-05-2012, 09:00 AM
To me, Luck looked better last year than he looked this year.

I think if Luck is not put in a good situation he has busty potential.

That said, there is no way I'd take Keenum over him.

steelbtexan
03-05-2012, 09:18 AM
Luck had everything going for him: From the running game, the O line, the TEs, the WRs, a defense that ranked 26 overall.

He routinely played against pass defenses that ranked in the 80s and 90s even 100s.

He faced just two pass defenses that ranked in the top 40 (Cal at 37 and ND at 39).

He saw pressure that was minuscule as compared with Keenum.
And he still throw an INT every 40 attempts.
That did not include a couple of sure drops by the DBs and several close ones.

If he plays at the same level, he will average at least 1.25 INTs per game in the NFL (20 over 16 games), probably even more considering he will face better defenses and pressures. One could be looking at some 24-30 INTs over the course of a full year.

More likely than not, his coaches will bring him along the way the Texans protected Yates for a while there.

Yates played better his Sr. year than Luck played last year.
Google it and read up on how different people had talked about him throughout last year.

He was ahead of RG III by a huge margin earlier in the year in the Heismann poil, only to lose it game by game as he started to face better defenses.

Right now, Luck is mostly, if not all POTENTIAL.
He isn't quite ready to be a full-time starter in the NFL yet.

If I was to chose between Luck and Newton in the same draft, it will be a no brainer vote to Newton.

Luck still has a lot to learn to become a good NFL QB.

Agreed

Luck is going to go thru growing pains like every other rookie QB. However I do believe that Luck will end up being a great QB. His WR's were not very good last yr. Other than Owusu they had no WR with speed to stretch the field, making the windows tight for Luck to throw into. Luck did have one of the best OL's protecting him that I've seen in along time.

He didn't lose the Heisman. RG3 won it by having a season for the ages. The defenses didn't get that much tougher as the season went on. Cal and ND weren't vaunted defenses. OK ST. etc... Luck played very well still. It's just RG3 played out of is mind.

Depending on where RG3 is drafted I believe he has a good chance of being a better pro than Luck. Luck is going into his rookie yr with a rookie HC/GM. Who knows if they will be competent at their job?

Meanwhile if RG3 goes to KC,Sea,Mia or even Cleveland I expect him to put up Eli's rookie type numbers and because he's a hard worker have that type of career or better. Even though they are different type players.

With that said I would still take Luck over Cam. Keenum will probably und up being a Detmer type career backup for 10 yrs or so. He will make alot of $$$$.

76Texan
03-06-2012, 11:34 AM
Luck made play calls and called his own audibles last year while playing in a pro style offense. His coach, David Shaw, came out and said last year that he's never seen a college QB have such command of an offense and that offense was pretty good.

Keenum made the play calls in a spread offense and has a big learning curve coming when he gets an NFL playbook.

Yates played in a pro style offense just like Luck, but I don't recall him calling plays or anything like that.

I want to reiterate that even though I like Keenum a lot, Luck's size and athleticism (RG III, too - in a different way) are very rare, they have to the front runners - even in my book.

With that said...


Luck did not call play.
Each "play" is actually a set of plays that can be run out of the same formation.
(It could include both run and pass - and a reverse sometimes.)
On top of that, each play in that set can have different protection or blocking scheme depending upon the defensive line-up.

Luck received the call from the side line, checked the D, and made the call whether to pass, or run. This is what they mean by "Luck checking them into the correct play." - Aubidle.
(Checking into the correct play doesn't guarantee a good result; especially when the D changed up their disguise and fooled the signal caller.)

Also, Luck didn't called out the protection scheme except for certain case.

Keenum receiced calls from the side line as "suggestions".
He can call his own play if he "chooses" too.
That is he can go to a complete set of play as he sees how the D line-up.
For example, the call may be a run with the receivers blocking, but Keenum sees a one-on-one situation that he thinks the receiver can win, he will call a passing play instead.
And as the Coogs were in no huddle or hurry-up mode constantly, it's difficult for the defense to readjust.

Keenum also calls his own protection when he sees fit.

It wasn't until the 5th week against UCLA that Stanford put in some no-huddle plays and let Luck decides what to do on his own.
He actually has a wristband full of information to rely upon for his calling.
It's not something straight out of his head.

This is what Luck had to say about the whole deal:
"I think the whole calling plays thing has been overblown a little," he said. "... It's not that special. All of our quarterbacks could do it. All of our linemen could call what I'm calling."

The next week against Colorado, all went back to normalcy:
Shaw limited the no-huddle offense that gives Luck complete freedom to call plays, instead allowing his quarterback to take a few calls to the line of scrimmage for most of the game.

Stanford weren't in the no-huddle much, especially when compared to the Cougars.
There were times that Keenum wanted the officials to hurry up with their ball placement so he can continue with his offense; he didn't want the defense to get any additional signal from the side line.

...
Like I said, Luck remains a great pospect.
A team that runs a pro set or a WCO will look at him highly.
His plays from the shotgun where quick and good decisions need to be made are still lacking, and it will take some time for him to improve on that.
The Colts hired a new OC that is well-versed in the WCO.
All seem to point to their drafting Luck.

Keenum (although having had some experience in the pro set), operated out of the spread heavily for the last 3 years or so.
Stiil, his quick decision-making skills makes the spread a natural fit for him.
A spread team would be more inclined to draft Keenum than a team that runs the pro set.

When you draft a franchise QB, you want to protect your investment.
With Luck's size and athleticism, he has that buil-in protection where it's a very good-percentage play that he can last a long time in the league.

With Keenum, you have to hope that somehow he can manage to survive like Drew Brees, who was drafted with the #32 pick overall (there were 31 teams at the time.)

I don't quite know where I'm gonna rate Keenum in this QB draft; I still need to review Kirk Cousins, Brock Osweiler and Ryan Tannehill (I've watched them play, but I have yet to get down to the nuts and bolts.)

All I know is that Keenum has first round talent, but doesn't have the size/athleticism to vault past Luck or RG III.
Right now, I have Keenum as the third QB in the pecking order of the draft - pending results from what I see from the other two guys.

Some teams may see the injury that Keenum suffered in the season before last as a negative mark and that might add to the concern.
(I haven't read up on RG III's injury, but it doesn't seem to affect his draft status.)
Some might like the size of another QB so Keenum could be anywhere from the third to eighth slot (for QBs), I honestly don't know.