Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: College QB completion % by distance
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
mcnabbulous
Interesting breakdown of all the passers in college football. It goes without saying that I'm a fan of Geno Smith. I think this proves that he's more than capable across the board.

He was good or above from every distance other than the 20-29 range. I think with improvement to footwork and working with a pro like Shurmer, that could improve.

He was surprisingly good down the field.

Link
Dreagon
A.J. McCarron suddenly looks a lot more interesting.
mcnabbulous
McCarron is a good QB. He's underrated because Bama's defense is so good. I think he can be a solid pro in a pro-style offense.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 28 2013, 01:02 PM) *
Interesting breakdown of all the passers in college football. It goes without saying that I'm a fan of Geno Smith. I think this proves that he's more than capable across the board.

He was good or above from every distance other than the 20-29 range. I think with improvement to footwork and working with a pro like Shurmer, that could improve.

He was surprisingly good down the field.

Link



I heard Brian Balidinger the other night with a lot of praise for Smith. Baldy normally is pretty good with evals. so that could be a good sign. FWIW, he said the best player on the board was Warmack, the OG from alabama. He's not the only one to say that. I've only heard Warmack and Joeckel being touted as the "best" in this draft. He was saying get Warmack and chip can have a bunch of road graders and be the most physical punishing offense in the NFL. He was open to picking Smith if Warmack was gone. However, the OG may be too slow for our fast pace. He said that Smith could run the offense, and he might be better than the 4th QB option in next years draft, which may be where we draft if we have any success this year. (ie we pick after the top three are off the board.)

So maybe, you never know.............................
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Feb 28 2013, 07:46 PM) *
I heard Brian Balidinger the other night with a lot of praise for Smith. Baldy normally is pretty good with evals. so that could be a good sign. FWIW, he said the best player on the board was Warmack, the OG from alabama. He's not the only one to say that. I've only heard Warmack and Joeckel being touted as the "best" in this draft. He was saying get Warmack and chip can have a bunch of road graders and be the most physical punishing offense in the NFL.

Honestly, calling a guard the "best player in the draft" is the most NFL thing imaginable. The league is full of conservative, cover-my-ass, non-risk takers.

Everything out of Mayock's mouth is geared to allow him wiggle room to be right about every single evaluation. He's like a psychic.

All the other guys are the same. And it's a big circle jerk of guys that agree with one another in some capacity. Always covering their own asses. Especially the talking heads with no actual accountability.

Warmack is the "best" player, because he has virtually no chance of being a bust. And these guys know that. Guard is probably the easiest position in the NFL. If the Eagles spend their 4 on a guard, I'll be pissed. That's where I'm at with it at this point.

QUOTE
He said that Smith could run the offense, and he might be better than the 4th QB option in next years draft, which may be where we draft if we have any success this year. (ie we pick after the top three are off the board.)

This is my point. First, I don't think he would be the 4th or 5th best QB next year. But in addition to that, even if there is a guy who is better next year (and the dude from Louisville seems like the most viable in that regard) than it's no guarantee we'd even be in position to draft him.

I keep hearing that Smith is "inconsistent." How is he any more inconsistent than a Cam Newton or Donovan McNabb, who were both sure fire top-5 picks?


D Rock
This is what I've been saying all along. 60-70% of Smith's passes went to receivers less than 10 yards down the field. 33% went behind the LOS. His yards, and TDs are largely attributable to the talents of his skill position team mates.

His numbers go WAAAY down for the mere 30% of passes he attempted 10 yards out. The guy has shown exactly ZERO ability to read a defense. He's checkdown charlie personified.

No Thanks.

I'll ask you again (because you don't seem to want to answer me)....

Have you actually seen the guy play? His biggest play was the bubble screen.

rolleyes.gif

There is no way in hell this guy is worth the #4 pick.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 28 2013, 08:13 PM) *
This is what I've been saying all along. 60-70% of Smith's passes went to receivers less than 10 yards down the field. 33% went behind the LOS. His yards, and TDs are largely attributable to the talents of his skill position team mates.

How many QB's do all the work? The whole purpose of the position is to get the ball to your skill position teammates.

QUOTE
His numbers go WAAAY down for the mere 30% of passes he attempted 10 yards out. The guy has shown exactly ZERO ability to read a defense. He's checkdown charlie personified.

Define "WAAAY down." As the chart indicates, he was better than most at every distance other than 20-29 yards. He was quite good way down the field.

QUOTE
I'll ask you again (because you don't seem to want to answer me)....

Have you actually seen the guy play? His biggest play was the bubble screen.

rolleyes.gif

There is no way in hell this guy is worth the #4 pick.

I live in Big 12 country, so I watched quite a bit this year. Especially because I was interested in him for the Eagles. You do your best with the plays that are called. And he did better than almost any other player in the country.

There is virtually nothing about his game that indicates he's not worthy of the 4th pick. Just because Mike Mayock says it, doesn't make it true. He has everything that you need to be successful at the position. Adequate size, arm strength, athleticism, keeps his eyes down the field, is sufficiently accurate.

The one complaint Mayock has is that he's "inconsistent." And that his footwork needs work. That's just about the most fixable quality you can have coming out of college.

But yeah, take a guard at #4. The safest, most uninspired pick possible. The easiest position in football.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 1 2013, 01:33 AM) *
But yeah, take a guard at #4. The safest, most uninspired pick possible. The easiest position in football.

You take Warmack because he's the best player on your board when you pick.

You don't spend a #4 pick on a quarterback most have as questionable for the first round, with a 23-37 grade on him.

His numbers are a result of Tavon whatshisname. Anybody can throw at a 67% completion rate when all you throw is screens, slants and to the backs (or Tavon) in the flat.

I get the feeling you like the guy.

You may have figured out I don't.

wink.gif

I think the evidence supports my side.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 28 2013, 08:43 PM) *
You take Warmack because he's the best player on your board when you pick.

I would disagree if it's a guard. Like I said, it's the easiest position in football.

QUOTE
wink.gif

I think the evidence supports my side.

The best part is how there is absolutely no evidence that actually supports your side. In fact, quite the contrary.

Your "evidence" is talking heads that have no real criticisms of his game...other than "inconsistency." Which is about as generic as it gets.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 1 2013, 01:47 AM) *
I would disagree if it's a guard. Like I said, it's the easiest position in football.

That settles it. It's so easy, let's just sign guys off the street, or better yet . . . don't bother sending any onto the field.

It doesn't matter what position, or side of the ball. In the top 10 you go best player on the board or you're gonna get burned.
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 1 2013, 01:47 AM) *
The best part is how there is absolutely no evidence that actually supports your side. In fact, quite the contrary.

Your "evidence" is talking heads that have no real criticisms of his game...other than "inconsistency." Which is about as generic as it gets.

Blah blah blah....

You wanna talk "generic?" Talk about refusing to recognize a player's greatness becuase you're blinded by the fact he plays guard.

Guards don't go in the top 10?

Yup, that pretty much defines "generic commentary" on the nfl draft.

The "evidence" on Smith is in the numbers. He threw the majority of his passes around the LOS. He threw a plurality of them BEHIND the LOS. Those two realities essentially make his passing yardage numbers meaningless as the receivers did 98% of the work.

The guy runs a 4.5? On track he does, but it doesn't show up on the field.

Look at the numbers.

He throws the ball well? Perhaps, behind and at the LOS. But down the field? We don't know he almost never tried.

Zero
This is not a statement but a question: How does Smith compare to Foles? I realize Smith is probably faster, but is he, in your opinion, sufficiently better to use a premium pick on him rather than on defense?

Is he smarter? Does he read defenses better? Is he more accurate? Does he have a stronger arm? Is he a better leader?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Feb 28 2013, 09:01 PM) *
He throws the ball well? Perhaps, behind and at the LOS. But down the field? We don't know he almost never tried.


His adjusted numbers, which that article provide, are more than sufficient to gauge him against his peers.

Regardless of percentages, he's probably attempted more passes in those ranges discussed than countless other guys, simply because of his huge number of throws.

For comparisons sake, Donovan, in 4 years as a starter, attempted 968 passes. Geno, in 3 years, attempted 1465.

His mid to deep passes can't be written off as "small sample size."

He had 150 attempts beyond 10 yards down the field. And his completion percentage in most of those ranges was more than sufficient.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Feb 28 2013, 09:09 PM) *
This is not a statement but a question: How does Smith compare to Foles? I realize Smith is probably faster, but is he, in your opinion, sufficiently better to use a premium pick on him rather than on defense?

Is he smarter? Does he read defenses better? Is he more accurate? Does he have a stronger arm? Is he a better leader?

I believe so across the board. Leadership is impossible to speak to from where I sit, but he is a much better prospect than Foles, in my opinion.

Then again, I'm not nearly as high on Foles as most on this board. I hate his delivery and I have major concerns about his decision making.

As for defense, there aren't necessarily any prospects I'm completely in love with. I'd be happy with Milliner or Jordan, but I think the value in a QB far outweighs either of those positions.

In my opinion, Smith is an upgrade to anything we have at the QB position.
TGryn
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 28 2013, 05:15 PM) *
In my opinion, Smith is an upgrade to anything we have at the QB position.

Upgrade, sure. But is he a guaranteed Pro Bowler? Because unless Kelly is sure he is, passing on guys like Jordan or Fisher is sacrificing an opportunity to make another part of the team instantly better with an immediate starter.

A big concern for me is that he put up gaudy numbers, but so did Case Keenum in the same offense at Houston when the WVa coach was there, and Keenum hasn't done anything of note in the pros. Same deal for his QBs at Texas Tech when Holgorsen was there, and whether Brandon Weeden will be a good pro is open to debate, as well. It reminds me of the old Houston offenses under Ware and Klingler, both of whom were 1st round picks with eye-shattering numbers who didn't turn out well in the pros.

With that history, you do have to wonder whether its the system rather than the QB that's the source of success.
D Rock
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 1 2013, 02:09 AM) *
This is not a statement but a question: How does Smith compare to Foles? I realize Smith is probably faster, but is he, in your opinion, sufficiently better to use a premium pick on him rather than on defense?

Is he smarter? Does he read defenses better? Is he more accurate? Does he have a stronger arm? Is he a better leader?

Smarter? No. Not according to wonderlic.

Reading defenses is Foles' greatest strength. He's leaps and bounds beyond Vick in presnap reads.

Accuracy is Foles' 2nd greatest strength.

Foles has the "bigger NFL arm."

The issue with Foles from a pre-draft point of view was that he was the only player on a lousy offense.
Zero
QUOTE (TGryn @ Feb 28 2013, 08:34 PM) *
It reminds me of the old Houston offenses under Ware and Klingler, both of whom were 1st round picks with eye-shattering numbers who didn't turn out well in the pros.

Wasn't Kolb also a product of that offense?
TGryn
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 1 2013, 01:45 AM) *
Wasn't Kolb also a product of that offense?

They were both spread offenses, but Houston had a complete coaching changeover between when Kolb was there (2003-2006) and Keenum/Holgorsen (2008-2009). It'd take someone who actually follows their program to tell the specifics of what the differences were between the two offenses.
mcnabbulous
The whole coaching/system stuff is nonsense, in my opinion. Kolb's head coach was Art Briles, who is the current coach at Baylor. That "system" just produced RG3.

The same criticisms were made of Aaron Rodgers when he came out of Jeff Tedford's system.

Geno is a workaholic who has all the physical skills and proven results. There is nothing about his overall resume that indicates he's not a viable top-5 pick.

Fwiw, I think this all may be moot because Oakland may very well take him.
Keenan24
I think i would love to go out for beers with mcnabbulous and Drock just to watch them argue all night.
I think that would be entertaining.

smile.gif

What's the odds on if they disagree on what bar to go to? tongue.gif
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Keenan24 @ Mar 1 2013, 09:44 AM) *
I think i would love to go out for beers with mcnabbulous and Drock just to watch them argue all night.
I think that would be entertaining.

smile.gif

What's the odds on if they disagree on what bar to go to? tongue.gif


Hell, he's one of the few I typically agree with around here. He just has his head up his ass regarding this whole drafting a guard #4 thing smile.gif
D Rock
QUOTE (Keenan24 @ Mar 1 2013, 03:44 PM) *
I think i would love to go out for beers with mcnabbulous and Drock just to watch them argue all night.
I think that would be entertaining.

smile.gif

What's the odds on if they disagree on what bar to go to? tongue.gif

Actually, mcnabulous and I agree much more often than not. I'm certain our drinking preferences are in a similar realm.

I'm just very thankful that he's not in a position to affect our draft board.

tongue.gif
HobbEs
QUOTE
But yeah, take a guard at #4. The safest, most uninspired pick possible. The easiest position in football.


In retrospect I'd certainly take Will Shields with the fourth overall. Maybe even Pouncey if you want a more recent example? I'd rather see what we've got in Foles (with a good line) and wait until next year which is supposed to be a better QB class.
TGryn
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 1 2013, 06:16 AM) *
The same criticisms were made of Aaron Rodgers when he came out of Jeff Tedford's system.

That's because until Rodgers, Tedford had a long streak of QBs come out of his system and fail in the pros, and he hasn't had a QB make it in the NFL since Rodgers. That history of system-QBs does constitute a risk, just like Holgorsen's system-QBs' streak of not making it once they get to the NFL does.
D Rock
QUOTE (HobbEs @ Mar 1 2013, 05:06 PM) *
In retrospect I'd certainly take Will Shields with the fourth overall. Maybe even Pouncey if you want a more recent example? I'd rather see what we've got in Foles (with a good line) and wait until next year which is supposed to be a better QB class.

Totally. It's like I been sayin.

If you could have a Larry Allen or steve Hutchinson in their early twenties at a reasonable contract, and it'll only cost you the 4 th pick in the draft. . . You'd be a fool to take a shot at a concensous(sp?) middle o the road qb, and a chance at upside instead.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 1 2013, 11:01 AM) *
I'm just very thankful that he's not in a position to affect our draft board.

tongue.gif

Good point. If I did, we never would have been blessed with Fredex, McDougle, Danny Watkins, and countless other studs we've drafted over the years. wink.gif

Stud guards are regularly found late in the draft. It's an easy position, relatively, and doesn't warrant premium draft picks. It's that simple.
And if Chip is really an offensive genius, the last thing we need is spending our premium picks on that position. Especially when guys like Evan Mathis can be picked up off the street and turned into all-pros.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 1 2013, 05:33 PM) *
Stud guards are regularly found late in the draft.

And Tom Brady was a 6th rounder. rolleyes.gif

Trent Cole went in the 5th.

None of it changes the fact that the wise take the best player available at their pick. Especially in the top 5. You reach for need and go against the board, you get burned.

There was a story this week about Jerruh Jones falling in love with Quincy Carter. He took Carter one pick ahead of Pittsburgh taking Kendrell Bell. Dallas had a first round grade on Bell, and a 3rd/4th round grade on QC, but Jones got all woozy for Carter and shit the bed with his 2nd round pick.

We earned the #4 pick. We were THAT bad. How many times do we have to relearn the Jaiquan Jarret lesson?
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Feb 28 2013, 07:47 PM) *
I would disagree if it's a guard. Like I said, it's the easiest position in football.


The best part is how there is absolutely no evidence that actually supports your side. In fact, quite the contrary.

Your "evidence" is talking heads that have no real criticisms of his game...other than "inconsistency." Which is about as generic as it gets.



Give me an All Pro Guard at the easiest position in football as opposed to a reach at the most difficult position in all of sports.

Now, if I believed that Smith was a legit #4 pick, I take the QB.

Is he a Locker, Ponder etc.?

We'll see. I just want the best player on the board when we pick. If there is a few with the same future, give me the one at a position of need. I just think Smith is a grade below. I'd probably feel differently if we were picking in the late teens early twenties.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 1 2013, 03:05 PM) *
And Tom Brady was a 6th rounder. rolleyes.gif

Ahhh, what a convenient example. Keep in mind, Brady (in 2004) is the last QB not drafted in the first round to win a SB.

Joe Flacco, drafted 18th, is the lowest since then.

QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 1 2013, 05:13 PM) *
Give me an All Pro Guard at the easiest position in football as opposed to a reach at the most difficult position in all of sports.

Now, if I believed that Smith was a legit #4 pick, I take the QB.

Is he a Locker, Ponder etc.?

We'll see. I just want the best player on the board when we pick. If there is a few with the same future, give me the one at a position of need. I just think Smith is a grade below. I'd probably feel differently if we were picking in the late teens early twenties.


Mikey, I know you're a numbers guy, so I highly advise you look at Geno Smith's college production vs. the guys you mentioned. Smith was better as a Sophomore, not yet in the system you guys all disregard him for, than either of those other guys as Seniors.

There is zero chance that Smith lasts until the late teens. He may not even make it to #4.
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 2 2013, 12:22 AM) *
Ahhh, what a convenient example. Keep in mind, Brady (in 2004) is the last QB not drafted in the first round to win a SB.

Joe Flacco, drafted 18th, is the lowest since then.

Talk about a convenient example. So you're suggesting that reaching for a QB who has a 2nd round grade in the top 5 is going to correlate to a superbowl? Can I have a hit a that?

QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 2 2013, 12:22 AM) *
Mikey, I know you're a numbers guy, so I highly advise you look at Geno Smith's college production vs. the guys you mentioned. Smith was better as a Sophomore, not yet in the system you guys all disregard him for, than either of those other guys as Seniors.

There is zero chance that Smith lasts until the late teens. He may not even make it to #4.

His numbers are meaningless as has been pointed out ad nauseum. The guy rarely threw the ball beyond the LOS. You toss a bubble screen that goes for a 60 yard TD, don't expect to heap praise on the QB. That's on Tavon and his fellow skill position players.
D Rock
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Mar 1 2013, 11:13 PM) *
Give me an All Pro Guard at the easiest position in football as opposed to a reach at the most difficult position in all of sports.

Now, if I believed that Smith was a legit #4 pick, I take the QB.

Is he a Locker, Ponder etc.?

We'll see. I just want the best player on the board when we pick. If there is a few with the same future, give me the one at a position of need. I just think Smith is a grade below. I'd probably feel differently if we were picking in the late teens early twenties.

YES !!!

cheers.gif

This aint the 21st pick. We're talking #4. That's gotta bring a perennial all pro, regardless of position or side of the ball.

By virtue of having a top 5 pick, you pretty much know your roster requires an infusion of top shelf, blue chip talent.

Reach or go for "potential upside" in the top 5 and your doomed to pick there again.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (D Rock @ Mar 1 2013, 06:30 PM) *
Talk about a convenient example. So you're suggesting that reaching for a QB who has a 2nd round grade in the top 5 is going to correlate to a superbowl? Can I have a hit a that?


You don't think it's a convenient sample to use the time period since the new illegal contact rules have been put into place? I think 8 years is fairly reasonable.

Even your boy Mayock doesn't think he's a second rounder. Hyperbole serves no purpose here.

QUOTE
His numbers are meaningless as has been pointed out ad nauseum. The guy rarely threw the ball beyond the LOS. You toss a bubble screen that goes for a 60 yard TD, don't expect to heap praise on the QB. That's on Tavon and his fellow skill position players.

If Chip Kelly's offense resembles anything he did at Oregon, I'd get used to quick, short passes to our wideouts.

It's also why I had you look at his 2010 stats, when Holgorsen wasn't his coach.
SLOiggles
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 1 2013, 04:07 PM) *
If Chip Kelly's offense resembles anything he did at Oregon, I'd get used to quick, short passes to our wideouts.

It's also why I had you look at his 2010 stats, when Holgorsen wasn't his coach.



With this I agree with you McNabbulous. While I'm not sure that DeSean or Maclin can burn people anymore, I think that they, along with McCoy can make plays in space and pick up good chunks of yards. And all it takes is one or two home run plays a game which we are more than capable of achieving.

Having said that, I still don't believe that Geno Smith will be a long term starter in the NFL. Additionally, if Geno Smith gets drafted, he's starting week one. There is no way you take a quarterback in the top 5 and not have them be the face of the franchise.

In the past ten years, Alex Smith, Jay Cutler, Jamarcus Russell, Brady Quinn, Josh Freeman J.P. Losman (injury), Aaron Rodgers (Favre), Byron Leftwich (Brunell), Rex Grossman, and Matt Leinart (holdout/Warner) were selected ANYWHERE in the first round and didn't start week one.

So you have just over half of the 20 players selected in the first round that didn't start week one. Narrowing it down to the top ten however? You got Leftwich, Russell, Smith, and Leinart. Two of which held out into the start of the regular season (which would more than likely be a non issue with the current pay structure). So in essence, only two players taken in the top five that attended camp didn't start week one.

When I look at it further, the list of rookie quarterbacks taken in the first round that couldn't lock down the job that season all blow with the exception of Rodgers. Maybe a case could be made for Smith or Cutler, but even them...what have they really accomplished? The only player that even played in a Super Bowl is Rodgers.

If you're going to take Geno Smith, he has to be a LOCK. Because if he isn't, you get a LOT of bad years afterwards. See Washington, Cleveland, Buffalo, and Oakland.
mcnabbulous
I think the risk in missing out on a talent like Smith (who I do believe can be a top-5 to 10 QB in football is greater than the value achieved in hitting on a guy like Warmack.

I can understand arguments for a defensive player, although there are no definite guarantees in this draft, but not a guard.

Almost any other position can make a solid argument, but not guard. I'm confident Chip will feel the same.
Zero
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 1 2013, 11:50 PM) *
I think the risk in missing out on a talent like Smith (who I do believe can be a top-5 to 10 QB in football is greater than the value achieved in hitting on a guy like Warmack.

I can understand arguments for a defensive player, although there are no definite guarantees in this draft, but not a guard.

Almost any other position can make a solid argument, but not guard. I'm confident Chip will feel the same.

Unfortunately, there are no guarantees ... ever. From my perspective I just hope that the scouts, Howie, Gamble and Kelly make the right decision regardless of if you or I agree with it. This pick, this draft is one the team can't affort to screw up.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Zero @ Mar 2 2013, 07:08 AM) *
I just hope that the scouts, Howie, Gamble and Kelly make the right decision regardless of if you or I agree with it.


Nah, I'd prefer to be right tongue.gif
D Rock
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Mar 2 2013, 04:35 PM) *
Nah, I'd prefer to be right tongue.gif

Don't hold your breath on this one.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2017 Invision Power Services, Inc.