The CardBoard
Today in NFL teams' requirements, weird - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Today in NFL teams' requirements, weird (/thread-7204.html)


Today in NFL teams' requirements, weird - washingtonismoney - 05-23-2014

So here's some NFL media dude who supposedly talks to NFL scouting departments highlighting QBs to watch for 2014: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000352401/article/jameis-winston-marcus-mariota-are-top-qbs-to-watch-in-2014?campaign=Twitter_nfl_cb

As you can guess, Mariota's #2, Hundley's #3. As you probably can't guess, Hogan is #7 and Goff, oddly, is #9. Ignore the 59er; focus on Hogan:

Quote:Head coach David Shaw has routinely touted Hogan as a new-school quarterback with the versatility to effectively run read-option or function as a traditional pocket passer in the game plan. Those skills make him an intriguing prospect for teams looking for an athletic playmaker to direct an offense at the next level. Of course, Hogan must show scouts that he is more than a game manager after posting eight games with fewer than 200 passing yards in 2013. He also needs to display better big-game moxie after failing to play well in each of the Cardinal's three losses (Utah, USC and Michigan State) a season ago. If Hogan can make significant steps in each of those aforementioned areas, he is an ideal candidate to make a rise up the charts when scouts dig into his game this fall.

Hogan is 10-1 against ranked teams. And! has two conference titles. Whut.

Re: Today in NFL teams' requirements, weird - CTcard - 05-23-2014

(05-23-2014, 01:47 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:As you can guess, Mariota's #2, Hundley's #3. As you probably can't guess, Hogan is #7 and Goff, oddly, is #9. Ignore the 59er; focus on Hogan:

Quote: ... He also needs to display better big-game moxie after failing to play well in each of the Cardinal's three losses (Utah, University of Spoiled Children  and Michigan State) a season ago.

... Whut.

You're right, that statement is roughly equivalent to criticizing Hogan for not playing well in games he didn't play well.

It's also not exactly true. Hogan was at his worst vs SC - not so terrible vs Utah (lots of other issues in that game), and mixed vs MSU - he ran pretty well and was victim of several drops (in only 18 pass attempts).

Other notable items in that article:

- Hundley at #3, " Hundley is a spectacular playmaker with outstanding passing skills, but he's a bit inconsistent with his deep-ball accuracy, which prevents him from vaulting to the top of this list."
I don't think deep-ball accuracy is his biggest issue. Pocket presence and awareness easily top the list from what I have seen.

- Sean Mannion at #5 seems ridiculous to me. brobdingnagian numbers against weak competition because your team cannot run aren't enough to make you a top QB.

- Connor Cook at #6. He was pretty good against us and in the Big Ten championship game vs OSU. Those seemed to come out of nowhere. Will be interesting to see if he keeps it up.

- Hackenberg at #8 will be an interesting test case on the "true frosh QBs should never play" tenet. He was very up and down last year, but did have a good game to finish off the year in a win vs Wisconsin. Also pretty atrocious in a loss vs Minnesota.

- Jared Goff at #9. Another true frosh who started.
Quote #1 "anyone who watched Goff progress over the 2013 season could see his extraordinary talent" 
Apparently by progress he means "regression as he got progressively more thoroughly pummeled".
Quote #2 "Given more chances to toss the ball around the yard to a talented set of pass-catchers, Goff could lead the nation in passing yards as a second-year starter."
Goff was 4th in the country in attempts per game - how many more chances is he going to get?

- Overall.
Isn't there anyone else out there better than some of these guys? 
Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

Re: Today in NFL teams' requirements, weird - washingtonismoney - 05-23-2014

Yeah, you did much closer reading than I did -- some of those other points you notice are really weird too. Goff will have more talented pass-catchers? Really? Because they just lost Rodgers and had Harper and Treggs last year. Hard to imagine pass-catching was what held the 59ers back last year.

Re: "true frosh should never play" -- my main point with that isn't that throwing a true freshman in won't produce a good QB eventually. That's easily refuted by, you know, history. (Hey John Elway and Peyton Manning!) (Or, in recent history: Teddy Bridgewater). But my point with that phrase is simple: the true freshman QB nearly always sucks as a true freshman. Hackenberg is a perfect example: 7.54 YPA isn't awful (Hackenberg was 5th in the Big Ten, which underscores what a poor conference that was last year), but you can't have a YPA that low with a sub 60 completion %age, which is what Hackenberg had. (He also offered nothing with his legs.) So it's no surprise that Hackenberg had a 133 NCAA passer rating, 60th in the country, and 53 adjusted QBR, 77th in the country. (Goff actually finished ahead of Hackenberg in that statistic -- Goff was 73rd.)

So Hackenberg was mediocre, and, as this statistical look shows -- http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2013/8/17/4630390/so-youre-starting-a-true-freshman-quarterback -- is rather good for a true freshman. That's why proposals to start Keller Chryst are so funny. If the ultimate fate of Robert Griffin III, Teddy Bridgewater, Terrelle Pryor, etc., is to be slightly above average at best, what makes you think Chryst is any different? And why would you want to replace Hogan's well above average production with that? It's crazy.

Re: Today in NFL teams' requirements, weird - CompSci87 - 05-23-2014

(05-23-2014, 02:25 PM)CTcard link Wrote:
Quote: ... He also needs to display better big-game moxie after failing to play well in each of the Cardinal's three losses (Utah, University of Spoiled Children  and Michigan State) a season ago.

You're right, that statement is roughly equivalent to criticizing Hogan for not playing well in games he didn't play well.

Or maybe what Hogan needs to do is play well in losses? I.e., losses need to definitely be someone else's fault.  ::)