Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Speaking of quarterbacks...
Eagles Forum > Philadelphia Eagles Message Board > Philadelphia Eagles or Football Related Discussion
Dreagon
With the success of Wentze, Prescott, Siemian, and then Lynch...I wonder if the market value for "veteran backups" might be about to take a hit. At least for those of borderline ability. Since those backups are basically players not good enough to start, why pay a ten year vet the veteran minimum when you can draft a midround QB and coach him up every four years for a whole lot less?

Now throw Bradford in that mix because it applies to the next part.

It's also interesting how these offenses that are simplified for QB's new to the team are getting wins, and a lot less turnovers. Wentze is the closest to using the full offense, but it's still simpler than the norm. Maybe it's just a statistical glitch, but I would think that there would have to be at least one or two GM's looking at what's going on right now and saying "hmmmmm"
D Rock
Where are you getting the idea that the offense Wentz is running is "simpler than the norm?"

He isn't dak. He's a real quarterback, and he's working with the complete offense. In fact, it's been reported that the playbook "grew bigger" when Sam was sent off to minny.

Not to worry, your boy Tony "pick 6" Romo will be back to restore order to the universe in just a few more weeks.

(I love me some tony)
Dreagon
QUOTE (D Rock @ Oct 4 2016, 10:24 AM) *
Where are you getting the idea that the offense Wentz is running is "simpler than the norm?"

He isn't dak. He's a real quarterback, and he's working with the complete offense. In fact, it's been reported that the playbook "grew bigger" when Sam was sent off to minny.


You have a point. You guys have a new offense so I have no way of telling it's been simplified for him.

QUOTE (D Rock @ Oct 4 2016, 10:24 AM) *
Not to worry, your boy Tony "pick 6" Romo will be back to restore order to the universe in just a few more weeks.

(I love me some tony)


Ironically enough, it just became "official". The head office has said they have Romo projected to make his first start against you guys after our bye.

I have no idea what we're going to get. Rested Tony? Rusty Tony? Threatened Tony with something to prove? Or "Some Re-assembly Required" Tony getting carted back off the field yet again.
D Rock
As an Eagles fan, it will break my heart when Tony leaves americas team.
Eyrie
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Oct 4 2016, 11:39 PM) *
Ironically enough, it just became "official". The head office has said they have Romo projected to make his first start against you guys after our bye.

I have no idea what we're going to get. Rested Tony? Rusty Tony? Threatened Tony with something to prove? Or "Some Re-assembly Required" Tony getting carted back off the field yet again.

It'll be the "reassembly required" version given how our defence has started the season.
Cowboyhater
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Oct 4 2016, 10:39 PM) *
You have a point. You guys have a new offense so I have no way of telling it's been simplified for him.



Ironically enough, it just became "official". The head office has said they have Romo projected to make his first start against you guys after our bye.

I have no idea what we're going to get. Rested Tony? Rusty Tony? Threatened Tony with something to prove? Or "Some Re-assembly Required" Tony getting carted back off the field yet again.


Since the cowboys o-line is banged up, I would think that they will be doing their best to hit Romo. He has a proven history of having issues after getting hit a few times. Boys would be smart to start Dak and let Romo start the next week. Since jerry runs the show, Romo will start.
Cowboyhater
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Oct 4 2016, 02:41 PM) *
With the success of Wentze, Prescott, Siemian, and then Lynch...I wonder if the market value for "veteran backups" might be about to take a hit. At least for those of borderline ability. Since those backups are basically players not good enough to start, why pay a ten year vet the veteran minimum when you can draft a midround QB and coach him up every four years for a whole lot less?

Now throw Bradford in that mix because it applies to the next part.

It's also interesting how these offenses that are simplified for QB's new to the team are getting wins, and a lot less turnovers. Wentze is the closest to using the full offense, but it's still simpler than the norm. Maybe it's just a statistical glitch, but I would think that there would have to be at least one or two GM's looking at what's going on right now and saying "hmmmmm"


This year is the exception to the rule. How many years have we heard during the draft that this year is going to be the best qb class since 1984. Yet it fails to meet expectations. Then you hear the same story the following year.

Vet backups will always have their place. Look at all the nfl stars that won their ring with a different team than the one they were drafted by. Players mature differently or work better in a different system.
Cowboyhater
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Oct 4 2016, 02:41 PM) *
With the success of Wentze, Prescott, Siemian, and then Lynch...I wonder if the market value for "veteran backups" might be about to take a hit. At least for those of borderline ability. Since those backups are basically players not good enough to start, why pay a ten year vet the veteran minimum when you can draft a midround QB and coach him up every four years for a whole lot less?

Now throw Bradford in that mix because it applies to the next part.

It's also interesting how these offenses that are simplified for QB's new to the team are getting wins, and a lot less turnovers. Wentze is the closest to using the full offense, but it's still simpler than the norm. Maybe it's just a statistical glitch, but I would think that there would have to be at least one or two GM's looking at what's going on right now and saying "hmmmmm"


This year is the exception to the rule. How many years have we heard during the draft that this year is going to be the best qb class since 1984. Yet it fails to meet expectations. Then you hear the same story the following year.

Vet backups will always have their place. Look at all the nfl stars that won their ring with a different team than the one they were drafted by. Players mature differently or work better in a different system.
Dreagon
QUOTE (Cowboyhater @ Oct 5 2016, 04:15 PM) *
This year is the exception to the rule. How many years have we heard during the draft that this year is going to be the best qb class since 1984. Yet it fails to meet expectations. Then you hear the same story the following year.


So you're saying this year's crop of QB's was actually underrated? I guess that makes sense. I seem to remember people saying there were no Andrew Lucks in this draft. Personally, from what I've seen, there were no Andrew Lucks in Andrew Luck's draft either.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Oct 6 2016, 09:07 AM) *
So you're saying this year's crop of QB's was actually underrated? I guess that makes sense. I seem to remember people saying there were no Andrew Lucks in this draft. Personally, from what I've seen, there were no Andrew Lucks in Andrew Luck's draft either.

Russell Wilson.

Mayock banged the drum that Carson was every bit as good as Luck. We all reserved judgement because of the perceived lack of competition, but there is something to be said about how well adjusted he already is. It further proves that the best indicator of early pro success is playing in a pro style offense in college.

I'm hugely impressed with Dak's progress, given how much new stuff he is having to do. As I've said, they are protecting him, but his composure has been really impressive in the face of having to learn all these new pro concepts.
Cowboyhater
QUOTE (Dreagon @ Oct 6 2016, 02:07 PM) *
So you're saying this year's crop of QB's was actually underrated? I guess that makes sense. I seem to remember people saying there were no Andrew Lucks in this draft. Personally, from what I've seen, there were no Andrew Lucks in Andrew Luck's draft either.


You head that goff was the most nfl prepared qb in this year's class ut there were concerns about arm strength and cals record. Knock on wentz was he was really only a one year starter and lower compitition level. On dak it was his interceptions and average combine performance.

Shows how wrong the experts are. Look at hackenburg was a star at psu with first person picked in the draft talk till there was a coaching change. Seems to be a really strong corrolation with having a coach and coordinator that were qbs. Well at least this year so far.
Reality Fan
Hack was projected to be one of the first picks before last season...it was not the coaching change that hurt his projection, it was his play. Now you can say it was his line(and it was pretty bad) but at the end of the day his play hurt him.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 6 2016, 03:10 PM) *
Hack was projected to be one of the first picks before last season...it was not the coaching change that hurt his projection, it was his play. Now you can say it was his line(and it was pretty bad) but at the end of the day his play hurt him.

Not after his sophomore season he wasn't. That was worse than his junior year. It was absolutely the coaching/scheme change. He went from a pro style multiple system to a one read, college system.
nephillymike
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 6 2016, 03:37 PM) *
Not after his sophomore season he wasn't. That was worse than his junior year. It was absolutely the coaching/scheme change. He went from a pro style multiple system to a one read, college system.

My football preview magazine for the 2015 NFL season had Hack the projected 1st pick of the draft this last draft, FWIW.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 6 2016, 04:37 PM) *
Not after his sophomore season he wasn't. That was worse than his junior year. It was absolutely the coaching/scheme change. He went from a pro style multiple system to a one read, college system.


Before his last season he was projected to be one of the top picks. I will have to look for the preseason ESPN program I watched that had him as being in the front of the pack. (mostly for his size and arm I guess.) I have no idea what he was before his sophomore year because he was not coming out....everyone was sure he was coming out after his junior year which is what we are discussing so what he was before his sophomore year is irrelevant. Beyond that, a one read offensive system should have been even easier because, as you remind everyone here on a daily basis, all these successful college QBs come from a one read offense and are not prepared for the pros.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 6 2016, 07:03 PM) *
Before his last season he was projected to be one of the top picks.

Amongst QBs maybe (which he ultimately was) but the consensus was after his awful Sophomore season he needed a solid junior year to solidify his status. He was better his junior year, but it wasn't good enough.

QUOTE
I will have to look for the preseason ESPN program I watched that had him as being in the front of the pack. (mostly for his size and arm I guess.)

Those are largely the reasons he was drafted where he was.


QUOTE
I have no idea what he was before his sophomore year because he was not coming out....everyone was sure he was coming out after his junior year which is what we are discussing so what he was before his sophomore year is irrelevant.

Well, what he was before his junior year was irrelevant too by that logic. But after his freshman year, he was universally considered a prospect for #1 overall. After his sophomore year, there was a lot of doubt.

QUOTE
Beyond that, a one read offensive system should have been even easier because, as you remind everyone here on a daily basis, all these successful college QBs come from a one read offense and are not prepared for the pros.

"Easier" is relative. That offense didn't cater to his strengths and actually accentuated his weaknesses.
Reality Fan
QUOTE
Well, what he was before his junior year was irrelevant too by that logic. But after his freshman year, he was universally considered a prospect for #1 overall. After his sophomore year, there was a lot of doubt.


Really? How a player plays in the year before he enters the draft is irrelevant? Wow...who knew...add that one to the list.

QUOTE
"Easier" is relative. That offense didn't cater to his strengths and actually accentuated his weaknesses.


and yet another....you say one read offense QBs are not ready for the NFL because they run an offense that is easier for them where they don't have to read defenses and then struggle in the NFL when they have to but then a QB who struggles in the one read who you like struggles in the easy to run offense and it is because he has "weaknesses" that prohibit him from running the easy offense but can run a pro style offense in the NFL? Really? Strange indeed.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 7 2016, 09:54 AM) *
Really? How a player plays in the year before he enters the draft is irrelevant? Wow...who knew...add that one to the list.

I'm not sure I'm following. Are you saying that his sophomore season, is significantly more relevant than his freshman season? Because I'm saying either the full body of work is important or only his final year (in this case, junior) matters.

His freshman and sophomore seasons would hold generally similar value. And no, he was not a consensus top pick after his sophomore year. He threw 12 TDs and 15 INTs that year. There were lots of questions/concerns.

QUOTE
and yet another....you say one read offense QBs are not ready for the NFL because they run an offense that is easier for them where they don't have to read defenses and then struggle in the NFL when they have to but then a QB who struggles in the one read who you like struggles in the easy to run offense and it is because he has "weaknesses" that prohibit him from running the easy offense but can run a pro style offense in the NFL? Really? Strange indeed.

Well because the things he struggled with largely weren't the reads. His problems were largely accuracy related because he's not a naturally super accurate passer, so his mechanics and fundamentals were more important.

In Franklin/Donovan's, he was often asked to catch the ball and throw immediately. He's not good at that. In O'Brien's offense, he was more regularly dropping back from under center, scanning the field, setting and throwing. He proved to be pretty adept at that.

In his sit down with Gruden, they discussed some of the changes to his mechanics from O'Brien to Franklin and he basically just said, "I was doing what the coaches told me."
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 7 2016, 11:24 AM) *
I'm not sure I'm following. Are you saying that his sophomore season, is significantly more relevant than his freshman season? Because I'm saying either the full body of work is important or only his final year (in this case, junior) matters.

His freshman and sophomore seasons would hold generally similar value. And no, he was not a consensus top pick after his sophomore year. He threw 12 TDs and 15 INTs that year. There were lots of questions/concerns.


Not sure where you confusion lies because I have been very clear.....his performance his junior year is significantly more important that any other year. I never mentioned his freshman year and you mentioned his sophomore year...you do realize he played 3 years. correct? His size and reputation made him a projected top pick going into the junior season and it was assumed he would make that next step in his junior year. He did not and his size and rep were the only thing that kept him from tumbling even lower.(that and the dearth of QBs in the NFL)

and as far as your assertion that he was not a top pick after his sophomore year?

http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/...ackenbe_25.html

Surprised you missed it.....hmmmm...I am pretty sure that is between his sophomore and junior year
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 7 2016, 11:54 AM) *
Not sure where you confusion lies because I have been very clear.....his performance his junior year is significantly more important that any other year. I never mentioned his freshman year and you mentioned his sophomore year...you do realize he played 3 years. correct?

QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 6 2016, 03:10 PM) *

Hack was projected to be one of the first picks before last season



That would have been after his sophomore season.

QUOTE
His size and reputation made him a projected top pick going into the junior season and it was assumed he would make that next step in his junior year. He did not and his size and rep were the only thing that kept him from tumbling even lower.(that and the dearth of QBs in the NFL)

It was definitely not assumed. That was a big question mark by a lot of people.

QUOTE
and as far as your assertion that he was not a top pick after his sophomore year?

http://www.pennlive.com/pennstatefootball/...ackenbe_25.html

Surprised you missed it.....hmmmm...I am pretty sure that is between his sophomore and junior year

That's literally one opinion. It was based on the idea that he would improve in year 2 under Franklin. He did, but only marginally.

He ultimately was the 4th QB drafted. No one really had the other three guys even on the radar going into his junior year.

I'm not sure why early mock drafts are even a discussion here. Everyone knows they are a joke.

With all that said, I would highly recommend you take a look at Carson Palmer's college career as a reference point for Hack's potential. Through his 4th year (his junior year) his career was certainly no more impressive than Hack through three seasons. It wasn't until his RS senior season (with a pro caliber head coach) when he solidified himself as a top prospect. Much like Hack, he was a size and skill intriguing prospect until that time.

I'm quite confident the conversations around Hack would have been much different had he played in a pro style offense for two more years. The article you referenced from the esteemed Harrisburg Patriot News even take note of his pro style experience.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 7 2016, 01:38 PM) *
That's literally one opinion. It was based on the idea that he would improve in year 2 under Franklin. He did, but only marginally.



Somehow I knew you would speak before reading...

This one, compiled by Scouts Inc's Todd McShay, builds on early projections from the likes of SB Nation, Bleacher Report and the Sporting News and projects Hackenberg as the No. 1 pick in the draft

What's next? ""that is literally just one compilation"? lol
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 7 2016, 01:24 PM) *
Somehow I knew you would speak before reading...

This one, compiled by Scouts Inc's Todd McShay, builds on early projections from the likes of SB Nation, Bleacher Report and the Sporting News and projects Hackenberg as the No. 1 pick in the draft

What's next? ""that is literally just one compilation"? lol

My point was that it was one source. There were wide ranging opinions of Hackenberg prior to his junior year. Those were based on his successes and struggles from his freshman and sophomore years and his physical gifts.

Here is a comprehensive breakdown of those varying opinions. He was considered anywhere from a #1 pick option to undraftable. There was clearly no consensus.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2526588...rrated-prospect

But it seems as though our disagreement is whether the scheme change negatively impacted his draft prospects. I can't imagine how anyone could argue that it didn't.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 7 2016, 03:01 PM) *
My point was that it was one source. There were wide ranging opinions of Hackenberg prior to his junior year. Those were based on his successes and struggles from his freshman and sophomore years and his physical gifts.

Here is a comprehensive breakdown of those varying opinions. He was considered anywhere from a #1 pick option to undraftable. There was clearly no consensus.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2526588...rrated-prospect

But it seems as though our disagreement is whether the scheme change negatively impacted his draft prospects. I can't imagine how anyone could argue that it didn't.


One source? It clearly states it is a compilation of several sources....you know what that means, right? As in it is not one source....lol

Answer the question I asked....I love how you skip over your hypocrisy.

Our disagreement is about his inability to adjust to a new coach...you try to make it sound like Franklin came in and is the reason Hack could not run an easier offense (as you have stated a million times as the reason why a QB is bad in the pros). If you read the article you posted with the negatives sources you would have read that the guy who found him undraftable thought he was poiseless, visionless and panicky....that isn't the coach or the offense.(thanks for not reading the articles you use to make your points.

My point is simple, while Hack suffered from a shaky line and he did not love Franklin's choice of offense he did nothing himself to overcome that in 2 years and that is why he was top of the 1st round and if he was an inch or 2 shorter he might not have been drafted at all. I am a big State fan, I have watched most of his games......he was a huge unfulfilled promise.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 7 2016, 04:30 PM) *
One source? It clearly states it is a compilation of several sources....you know what that means, right? As in it is not one source....lol

Answer the question I asked....I love how you skip over your hypocrisy.

Our disagreement is about his inability to adjust to a new coach...you try to make it sound like Franklin came in and is the reason Hack could not run an easier offense (as you have stated a million times as the reason why a QB is bad in the pros). If you read the article you posted with the negatives sources you would have read that the guy who found him undraftable thought he was poiseless, visionless and panicky....that isn't the coach or the offense.(thanks for not reading the articles you use to make your points.

Those statements were made after his sophomore season.
QUOTE
My point is simple, while Hack suffered from a shaky line and he did not love Franklin's choice of offense he did nothing himself to overcome that in 2 years and that is why he was top of the 1st round and if he was an inch or 2 shorter he might not have been drafted at all. I am a big State fan, I have watched most of his games......he was a huge unfulfilled promise.

So you believe it is the fault of a young player to not "overcome" a coach completely changing all of the things that worked well and not playing to a player's strengths?

If there is one thing coaches should be doing at the collegiate level, it's that. If you watch what Franklin wants to do, it's clear that Hack wasn't his preferred QB style. Instead of catering his offense to that style, they implemented the system Franklin prefers. The general consensus is that good coaches cater to the strengths of their players.

So, we had a QB who struggles with accuracy when his mechanics are off playing behind a historically bad offensive line in a system that wasn't suited to his strengths. What could go wrong?
nephillymike
RF and Nabby, you guys crack me up.

You can't agree on anything.

Tomayto, tomotto
Potayto, pototto

Discuss, show your work!
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Oct 7 2016, 06:58 PM) *
RF and Nabby, you guys crack me up.

You can't agree on anything.

Tomayto, tomotto
Potayto, pototto

Discuss, show your work!

Yeah. He's literally wrong about everything! It's unbelievable. smile.gif
Reality Fan
QUOTE (nephillymike @ Oct 7 2016, 07:58 PM) *
RF and Nabby, you guys crack me up.

You can't agree on anything.

Tomayto, tomotto
Potayto, pototto

Discuss, show your work!


You are right....it is hopeless...I showed my work and he literally said that a compilation of several scouting sites was "one source" after he said no one projected him as a top pick....

Like they said...you can't fix...you know....I am going to be nice from now on...
Zero
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 7 2016, 11:43 PM) *
I am going to be nice from now on...
Barmaid alert. biggrin.gif
Cowboyhater
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 7 2016, 09:45 PM) *
Those statements were made after his sophomore season.

So you believe it is the fault of a young player to not "overcome" a coach completely changing all of the things that worked well and not playing to a player's strengths?

If there is one thing coaches should be doing at the collegiate level, it's that. If you watch what Franklin wants to do, it's clear that Hack wasn't his preferred QB style. Instead of catering his offense to that style, they implemented the system Franklin prefers. The general consensus is that good coaches cater to the strengths of their players.

So, we had a QB who struggles with accuracy when his mechanics are off playing behind a historically bad offensive line in a system that wasn't suited to his strengths. What could go wrong?



Not trying to get into any pissing match, but obrien would be a college qb dream coach. He was the pats wr and qb coach before becoming the o coordinator. He knew how to adjust an offense to a qb and teams strength.
Franklins offense is like chips, predictable. How many plays in a row was their formation identical. Add that to a green o line and a turnover at wr and it's hard to excel. Hack took 2 steps back. Between temple and rutger game, I thought his line was going to get him killed.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 7 2016, 10:43 PM) *
after he said no one projected him as a top pick....

You truly live in a fantasy world. I didn't say "no one projected him as a top pick"

I said he was awful his sophomore year and the general consensus was that he needed marked improvement his junior year to be the top pick. And he was not universally considered the top pick going into his junior year.

After his freshman year, playing in a pro style offense, nearly everyone thought he would be the eventual #1 pick.

But that's really not the crux of this conversation. You believe the change in offense didn't impact his success and draft stock. That is where the real disagreement stands. Who gives a shit what a bunch of mock drafts from 2015 said?

Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 8 2016, 09:10 AM) *
You truly live in a fantasy world. I didn't say "no one projected him as a top pick"

I said he was awful his sophomore year and the general consensus was that he needed marked improvement his junior year to be the top pick. And he was not universally considered the top pick going into his junior year.

After his freshman year, playing in a pro style offense, nearly everyone thought he would be the eventual #1 pick.

But that's really not the crux of this conversation. You believe the change in offense didn't impact his success and draft stock. That is where the real disagreement stands. Who gives a shit what a bunch of mock drafts from 2015 said?


Please explain how Todd McShay and his compilation of several draft sites qualifies as "no one'? Your own article sites NFL sources.

The crux of the conversation is that it was not one year that killed his draft stock as purported originally (not by you) and that was reinforced when several draft sites had him as a top pick prior to his junior year. His performance in his junior year killed any chance that he would be a top pick. Now you can blame the system but it was his accuracy and poise and tendency to throw into coverage that hurt him. I have not said it was the ideal system for him to run, I simply said it was his actual performance in that system. Do you recall the controversy from his answers in he draft interviews?
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 8 2016, 11:03 AM) *
Please explain how Todd McShay and his compilation of several draft sites qualifies as "no one'? Your own article sites NFL sources.

Like I said, I didn't say "no one." I don't live in the black and white fantasy land that occupies your brain.
QUOTE
The crux of the conversation is that it was not one year that killed his draft stock as purported originally (not by you) and that was reinforced when several draft sites had him as a top pick prior to his junior year.

I never said it was one year. I said it was the change in offense. He played in the shitty offense for two years. In fact, I said his fall was the product of the doubt raised in his sophomore year and reiterated his junior year.

QUOTE
His performance in his junior year killed any chance that he would be a top pick. Now you can blame the system but it was his accuracy and poise and tendency to throw into coverage that hurt him. I have not said it was the ideal system for him to run, I simply said it was his actual performance in that system.

Yes, I don't think we disagree on it being his performance. I'm not sure where you got that. I said it was the system change that caused the regression in performance. You disagreed.

I believe the accuracy problems were emphasized by the scheme and OL. The poise issues were OL related. After his freshman year, there were literally no concerns about his poise. In fact, it was arguably his most impressive quality as a freshman.

QUOTE
Do you recall the controversy from his answers in he draft interviews?

Yes. And I remember they were refuted. But the controversy itself was stupid. If he blamed the scheme, he was right to do so. It was a terrible scheme for his skill set.
Reality Fan

QUOTE
Like I said, I didn't say "no one." I don't live in the black and white fantasy land that occupies your brain.

My apologies....I was in a hurry....and I was still in shock how you found Todd McShay's compilation as one source....when you clearly stated "it was one source" still scratching my head on that one.

QUOTE
I never said it was one year. I said it was the change in offense. He played in the shitty offense for two years. In fact, I said his fall was the product of the doubt raised in his sophomore year and reiterated his junior year.


So a QB is a victim of his environment? Funny how you ignored that in regards to Bradford and his stint in the hell that is/was St. Louis...love how you adapt...lol


QUOTE
Yes, I don't think we disagree on it being his performance. I'm not sure where you got that. I said it was the system change that caused the regression in performance. You disagreed.


I think that Hack kind of gave up or at least resigned himself to just surviving his junior year. I don't really blame him....he was getting killed every game. Some of that is on him and some on Franklin. McSorley seems to function much better in it.

QUOTE
I believe the accuracy problems were emphasized by the scheme and OL. The poise issues were OL related. After his freshman year, there were literally no concerns about his poise. In fact, it was arguably his most impressive quality as a freshman.

No question his line shook his confidence but that is partially on him.....not likely that he would go to a team with a great line in the NFL as a top pick.....ask Mariota.

QUOTE
Yes. And I remember they were refuted. But the controversy itself was stupid. If he blamed the scheme, he was right to do so. It was a terrible scheme for his skill set.

and every QB in the NFL who struggles will undermine his coach by saying the same thing....it is someone else's fault...not something a franchise looking for a leader wants to hear. It is not what leaders do.

mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 8 2016, 01:51 PM) *
So a QB is a victim of his environment? Funny how you ignored that in regards to Bradford and his stint in the hell that is/was St. Louis...love how you adapt...lol

Do you need me to go back and pull all the excuses I made for Bradford when we acquired him?

QUOTE
I think that Hack kind of gave up or at least resigned himself to just surviving his junior year. I don't really blame him....he was getting killed every game. Some of that is on him and some on Franklin. McSorley seems to function much better in it.

The difference is that Franklin recruited McSorely. He's the type of QB he wanted. Hackenberg was misfit for what Franklin wanted to do. The problem is that it's on the coach to make it work.

QUOTE
No question his line shook his confidence but that is partially on him.....not likely that he would go to a team with a great line in the NFL as a top pick.....ask Mariota

It's not on him. Some QBs have skills suitable for that environment. Not Hackenberg

QUOTE
and every QB in the NFL who struggles will undermine his coach by saying the same thing....it is someone else's fault...not something a franchise looking for a leader wants to hear. It is not what leaders do.

Like I said, those rumors were proven to be unfounded. Regardless, he was a second round pick. If he's given the time and resources to succeed, he has everything you need to make that happen. O'Brien still should have taken him. Osweiler blows.
Reality Fan
QUOTE (mcnabbulous @ Oct 8 2016, 03:46 PM) *
O'Brien still should have taken him. Osweiler blows.


Now that I agree with.....not that Hack is a savior but clearly Osweiler is not the elite QB he is being paid as.
mcnabbulous
QUOTE (Reality Fan @ Oct 8 2016, 02:49 PM) *
Now that I agree with.....not that Hack is a savior but clearly Osweiler is not the elite QB he is being paid as.

He's being paid like an average starter smile.gif
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.