For jrry32: QBs

[Elmgrovegnome]

It's seemed like the last 2 years teams haven't forced the issue at QB. Hope this year is no different and at minimum we get to choose between Wentz and Cook.

Oh I hope you are right. My point is they haven't forced the issue and missed out on two good QBs. Will that change some of the QB needy teams thoughts about drafting a QB. There are at least 5 teams ahead of the Rams in the draft that could use a QB. They may have to move up even for Wentz or Cook. I hope not for either.

 

[Merlin]

It is quite possible that the Rams could have to trade up just to get Wentz.

The Gabbert, Ponder, Locker year has cooled everyone off on risking high picks on QBs that aren't really top prospects. So they back off and then Carr and Bridgewater recently go around the second/third round threshold and a lot of teams are kicking themselves. Ill bet that they will be back to not wanting to risk passing them up this time around.

I think you will prove to be correct. No matter how you slice it the draft is supply and demand. QBs are the most important ingredient in the recipe for winning, so even if teams shy away in certain drafts they're going to go back to taking these guys early simply due to supply and demand. And, sadly, IF you are a team that does not have a QB you are going to have to sweat it out waiting for the guy you covet to get to your estimated pick not to mention have other teams knowing your slot is the one they have to move ahead of to get him.

One other thing to consider is that some drafts have a top group with more questions surrounding them. That year you mentioned was pretty bad in terms of quality at the top. This year is much better from that perspective with 3-4 guys who can be taken in round 1 without everyone thinking you're insane. Lynch, for example, is raw but he's still more pro ready in my estimation than Bortles was, and Blake was a 3 overall pick. He's also taller and a better athlete, which will give him a higher grade on boards. And tbh I don't think Lynch is the best QB in this draft, which really puts this group in perspective.

 

[Athos]

This doesn't have Luck level talent maybe. Or Newton level.

But it's deep with many potential long term starters. Each offers a bit of a different flavor and skill set.

Tell you what tho. I'll give up if we don't take a chance at getting a serious QB talent to compete for the starter job.

Just can't take having the most embarrassing passing attack again.

 

[FRO]

Oh I hope you are right. My point is they haven't forced the issue and missed out on two good QBs. Will that change some of the QB needy teams thoughts about drafting a QB. There are at least 5 teams ahead of the Rams in the draft that could use a QB. They may have to move up even for Wentz or Cook. I hope not for either.

Yeah it would suck to play the waiting game and miss totally out. We have to address the QB position this offseason.

 

[jrry32]

Oh Yes he was. I read/saw all media hype. He was being called the future first overall pick.

Oh no, he wasn't.
Jameis Winston:
257/384
66.9%
4057 yards
10.6 YPA
40 TDs
10 Ints
184.8 QB Rating (college)
4 rushing TDs

Christian Hackenberg:
231/392
58.9%
2955 yards
7.5 YPA
20 TDs
10 Ints
134.0 QB Rating (college)
4 rushing TDs

Hackenberg and Winston attempted almost the same number of passes yet Winston had double the passing TDs, the same number of Ints, and 1100 more yards. Hackenberg was nowhere near as good as Winston. The only thing you can really say is that Hackenberg was a true freshman while Winston was a RS Freshman.(you could also say Winston had a better overall supporting cast but that doesn't account for that big of a difference in production) But then again, you said they were in the same conversation. They weren't. Hackenberg wasn't close to as good as Winston. People were hyping Hackenberg as a potential #1 pick down the road because they assumed he would continue to progress.

I am so sure that media were duped by him being the top recruited QB. It is funny how that never happens in any other year. And he wasn' the highest rated QB coming out of high school, that year. He was the second ranked QB. Sure he just was a notch below Winston but was still a true freshman playing at a high level. It is just your opinion Jrry. How many of his games did you actually watch that year? With all of your busy busy draft evaluations I can't imagine it was many.

My apologies. I was wrong. He was the #2 QB behind Max Browne. I saw 6 Penn State games because I evaluated Allen Robinson.

He was a true freshman who played at a decent level. People got hyped because he was in a pro style system, was a top ranked high school prospect, and had all the tools (6'4" 230 with a big arm and solid mobility). They thought he would continue to progress and develop into a #1 overall level prospect. He didn't. Not the first time it happened. Won't be the last.

The media never overhype highly rated high school QBs? How about Matt Barkley and Jimmy Clausen?

I recall you saying Alan Robinson was not a first round talent a few years ago too and here he is a record setting NFL receiver. Maybe you don't watch all that much Big Ten football you were of on that one too.

You're right. I had him as a second rounder. I had Sammy Watkins, Mike Evans, and Odell Beckham Jr. rated as the only first round locks in that class. Had Brandin Cooks and Jordan Matthews rated as borderline first rounders. My apologies. In a strong WR class, I didn't rate Allen Robinson as a first round pick. Not losing sleep over it. I don't pretend to be perfect. Whiffing badly on Eric Thomas and Jared Abbrederis bothers me far more than having Allen Robinson, who was drafted in the 2nd round, not rated as a first round talent. In fact, here's what I said about him:

Allen Robinson WR Penn State - Polished route runner with fluidity and good hands but lacks top tier athleticism and strength...2nd round pick

But claiming I don't put in the work? Fuck off.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

But claiming I don't put in the work? freak off.

I changed my reply so as not to upset the mods but it always seems that in some situations you are way off and proclaim to be right on. I get it. You have told me before that scouts have to be adamant about their evals. I get that but this is not a draft room. Your all knowing schtick gets a bit abrasive. But you already know that.

And Hackenberg was being called the future first overall. Even last summer after a terrible year he was still being talked about as a first round pick. You should get out more.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

Bill O'Brien is a genius - talk about winning regardless, the Texans win regardless - he took that team over when they were at the bottom! and they are making it to the playoffs. Talk about a team that's gonna be really good once they get a real QB

I would make him the highest paid coach for our Rams in 2017!!!

I never thought he would make a good head coach in the NFL because while at PSU he had poor clock management and his game planning could be quite head scratching at times. He would run against the teams would a good run defense and a poor pass defense and vice versa. He would have great success in the first half passing and then switch to running the ball in the second half even though he was not comfortably ahead. I think he gave at least two games away and made others closer than needed. I was not alone in that sentiment. But he got McSorley into the NFL. That was quite the feat. McSorley was about as bad as it got before O'Brien got there. Plus there are currently weapons that flourished on the team, like TEs and they are near invisible with Franklin. Even Geno Lewis has suffered from OBrien's departure.

 

[CGI_Ram]

But claiming I don't put in the work? freak off.

I changed my reply so as not to upset the mods but it always seems that in some situations you are way off and proclaim to be right on. I get it. You have told me before that scouts have to be adamant about their evals. I get that but this is not a draft room. Your all knowing schtick gets a bit abrasive. But you already know that.

And Hackenberg was being called the future first overall. Even last summer after a terrible year he was still being talked about as a first round pick. You should get out more.

Come on, guys.

Thanks.

CGI

 

[jrry32]

I changed my reply so as not to upset the mods but it always seems that in some situations you are way off and proclaim to be right on. I get it. You have told me before that scouts have to be adamant about their evals. I get that but this is not a draft room. Your all knowing schtick gets a bit abrasive. But you already know that.

And Hackenberg was being called the future first overall. Even last summer after a terrible year he was still being talked about as a first round pick. You should get out more.

I don't have an "all knowing shtick". I have an opinion. An opinion that I stand behind even when people disagree. Even when people are convinced they are right and I am wrong. I admit I'm not perfect. I constantly use words that make it clear what I'm stating isn't fact, it's an opinion.

But I'm not way off here. Sorry. This is a situation where I don't think what I'm saying is even remotely inaccurate. Hackenberg did not play like a #1 overall pick as a true freshman. He played like a kid WITH THE POTENTIAL TO BE A #1 OVERALL PICK. There's a difference. He wasn't in Winston's class that year. No matter how many shots you take at me, that won't change my opinion.

Yep, I do know that standing behind my opinion and challenging others opinions can make me come off as abrasive. I'm blunt. But I don't take it personally when someone challenges my opinion and I hope people don't take it personally when I challenge theirs. What I do take personally is someone telling me that I don't put the work in.

People thought Hackenberg could be the #1 overall pick in the future after his freshman year because he was a true freshman that showed polish, all the physical traits and more, and was playing for a former NFL coach in a pro style system. They thought he'd continue to progress and develop into an elite talent. He didn't. But I saw freshman Hackenberg, that wasn't a #1 overall kid. That was a kid with the potential to be that good if he continued his progression as a player.

As for me getting out more, I get out plenty. Don't worry about me.

 

[Elmgrovegnome]

So, we agree after all. Glad that's over.

 

[Fatbot]

I've written off both Lynch and Goff up until the Rams make a move up, which I realize is very unlikely.

SI latest mock: http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/01/06/2016-nfl-mock-draft-laremy-tunsil-jared-goff

Browns pick Goff at #2. Next QB taken is Rams pick Lynch at #15.

 

[Merlin]

SI latest mock: http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/01/06/2016-nfl-mock-draft-laremy-tunsil-jared-goff

Browns pick Goff at #2. Next QB taken is Rams pick Lynch at #15.

I'd be very happy with that, but think it is very, very unlikely the Rams get the 2nd QB off the board at 15. Also unlikely Lynch gets to 15 in any way shape or form in my estimation.

 

[den-the-coach]

As long as we come away with something at QB...something that isn't Sackenberg.

Yeah, Kerry Collins Part Deux!

 

[jjab360]

Sackenberg Hahahahahahah

 

[DCH]

SI latest mock: http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/01/06/2016-nfl-mock-draft-laremy-tunsil-jared-goff

Browns pick Goff at #2. Next QB taken is Rams pick Lynch at #15.

Wow... I wonder who they think the '9ers and Eagles will have under center in 2016. Gabbert and Bradford? Bradford and Kaepernick? Tebow and Montana?

Actually, Bradford in SF and Kaepernick in Philly might be interesting, although with Kelly gone, who knows what Philly's offense will look like.

 

[Fatbot]

something that isn't Sackenberg

v. common opponent San Diego St.:
Goff 17-24 321 yards 3 TD 1 INT Sacked twice
Sackenberg 21-35 296 yards 3 TD 0 INT Sacked twice

 

[jrry32]

v. common opponent San Diego St.:
Goff 17-24 321 yards 3 TD 1 INT Sacked twice
Sackenberg 21-35 296 yards 3 TD 0 INT Sacked twice

Vs. all other opponents:
Goff - 40 TDs to 12 Ints
Sackenberg - 13 TDs to 6 Ints

So you got a ho hum performance from Goff vs. Sackenberg's best game...and Sackenberg still doesn't have better numbers.

The film speaks volumes. Sackenberg isn't in Goff's class.

 

[Fatbot]

Sackenberg still doesn't have better numbers.

vs. all other opponents besides SDSU:
Goff- avg. rank of pass defense faced: 82 (not including Grambling)
Sackenberg- avg. rank of pass defense faced: 54

Best QB seasons under Sonny Dykes as OC/Head coach:
Cody Hodges 31 TD, 12 INT
Willie Tuitama 28 TD, 12 INT
Willie Tuitama 23 TD, 8 INT
Colby Cameron 31 TD, 5 INT
Graham Harrell 38 TD, 11 INT
Goff 43 TDs, 13 INTs

Best QB seasons under James Franklin as OC/Head coach:
Josh Freeman 18 TD, 11 INT
Chris Turner 13 TD, 11 INT
Jordan Rodgers 15 TD, 5 INT
Austyn Carta-Samuels 11 TD, 9 INT
Danny O'Brien 22 TD, 8 INT
Sackenberg 16 TD, 6 INT

The film speaks volumes. Sackenberg isn't in Goff's class

Yes agree as long as the film is normalized against opposition and system.

On one hand you have Goff who looks amazing, looks like he has the feet, the accuracy, everything to be great. But then have to remember he played a seriously pathetic schedule, never once beat any of the legit teams in conference, and comes from a system that let Harrell break 8 NCAA records. On the other hand there's boring Sackenberg who played tougher competition but has boring stats coming from a boring system.

Of course it's obvious that Goff should be a better NFL QB than Hackenberg based on any criteria and any eye test, but really the only thing I know for a fact is Goff is better than Nick Foles was under Dykes. But it would be really scary if he wasn't so that's not saying much.

 

[jrry32]

vs. all other opponents besides SDSU:
Goff- avg. rank of pass defense faced: 82 (not including Grambling)
Sackenberg- avg. rank of pass defense faced: 54

Best QB seasons under Sonny Dykes as OC/Head coach:
Cody Hodges 31 TD, 12 INT
Willie Tuitama 28 TD, 12 INT
Willie Tuitama 23 TD, 8 INT
Colby Cameron 31 TD, 5 INT
Graham Harrell 38 TD, 11 INT
Goff 43 TDs, 13 INTs

Best QB seasons under James Franklin as OC/Head coach:
Josh Freeman 18 TD, 11 INT
Chris Turner 13 TD, 11 INT
Jordan Rodgers 15 TD, 5 INT
Austyn Carta-Samuels 11 TD, 9 INT
Danny O'Brien 22 TD, 8 INT
Sackenberg 16 TD, 6 INT

So just to get this straight...Sackenberg's failures are on his supporting cast, system/coach, and the schedule he faced...but not him. Sorry, but it's kind of bad when you're having to blame everybody around the QB BEFORE he gets to the NFL.

But let's talk pass defenses...Sackenberg played teams like Buffalo, Army, Indiana, and Rutgers. Teams with dreadful pass defenses. Why did he put up such terrible numbers in those games?(since numbers are the focus) How can we draft a QB who can't produce against some of the worst defenses in college football?

P.S. Gotta give you credit, great job making an argument here. Very creative way to try and even the numbers. I like it.

Yes agree as long as the film is normalized against opposition and system.

That's the great thing about film. You don't have to. You get to see everything while watching it. It's already inherent in what you're doing.

On one hand you have Goff who looks amazing, looks like he has the feet, the accuracy, everything to be great. But then have to remember he played a seriously pathetic schedule, never once beat any of the legit teams in conference, and comes from a system that let Harrell break 8 NCAA records. On the other hand there's boring Sackenberg who played tougher competition but has boring stats coming from a boring system.

Except Goff didn't play a pathetic schedule. He played in the Pac-12. Most people would consider the Pac-12 just as good as the Big 10 this year...if not better.

Of course it's obvious that Goff should be a better NFL QB than Hackenberg based on any criteria and any eye test, but really the only thing I know for a fact is Goff is better than Nick Foles was under Dykes. But it would be really scary if he wasn't so that's not saying much.

So...what does it say about Sackenberg that he was not better than guys like Danny O'Brien and Jordan Rodgers?

 

[Fatbot]

So just to get this straight...Sackenberg's failures are on his supporting cast, system/coach, and the schedule he faced...but not him.

No that's not straight, sorry the point wasn't clear. The point is that a QB's numbers must take into account their system. No QB under James Franklin has had more than 22 TD. Sonny Dykes' QBs often throw over 30 TDs in a season. The baselines are a tad different.

Why did he put up such terrible numbers in those games? ... How can we draft a QB who can't produce against some of the worst defenses in college football?

I don't think his numbers were terrible, Hackenberg was 4-0 with 4 TD, 1 INT against the crappy defenses. If you mean he didn't put up video game numbers like 6 TDs per game or something, that's not Penn State's style. Here's some quotes from those game recaps that might help:

• Buffalo: "Penn State stuck to a conservative game plan ... Dropped passes, runs that went nowhere and questionable play-calling defined PSU’s first three quarters"
• Army: "Penn State, for some reason, decided to play it relatively conservative and didn’t really try to stretch the field ..."
• Against Indiana, Hackenberg put up more shiny stats. A "newer, flashier offense while the older model, clunky and conservative, remained in the garage". He threw for 2 TD and ran for 2 more TD.
• Against Illinois he was on his way to gaudy stats, but they subbed him out after the 3rd quarter.

I'm guessing James Franklin teams have never scored 50 points in a game, or if they did it was all rushing and less than 300 yards passing. Meanwhile Dykes teams score over 50 at least 3 times a year, or probably went over 50 points almost every game at LA Tech -- somehow without Goff.

So...what does it say about Sackenberg that he was not better than guys like Danny O'Brien and Jordan Rodgers?

Probably says about as much as Goff being a little better than Cody Hodges and Willie Tuitama, etc.

Ultimately, these guys will be judged on how they will be in the NFL, free of any misconceptions of their college systems and circumstances.