McKee - 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: McKee (/thread-23852.html)
+- 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: McKee (/thread-23852.html)
RE: McKee - 82lsju - 12-09-2022
(12-09-2022, 04:44 PM)Phogge Wrote: I've known Bobbbbbbbb for decades. I used to be the crap out of him in the bleachers in Seals Stadium. I was younger too but big for my age.
So here's what I know. Bobbbbb has extra large thumbs making it difficult for him to manipulate the keys on his phone. Wasn't there a movie about a hooker with big thumbs?
Even Cowgirls get the Blues
![[Image: 1000w]](https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d784b72ae253f55fa90d83c/t/5dff8f3b55289431bf1b331a/1577029435385/1000w/)
RE: McKee - BostonCard - 02-11-2023
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/08/nfl-draft-quarterbacks-2023/
This article has him amongst the “second tier” after 1A Shroud and Young, then 1B Lewis and Richardson. they expect him to go on Day 2, in the second or third round.
BC
RE: McKee - Mick - 02-12-2023
(02-11-2023, 06:35 PM)BostonCard Wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/08/nfl-draft-quarterbacks-2023/
This article has him amongst the “second tier” after 1A Shroud and Young, then 1B Lewis and Richardson. they expect him to go on Day 2, in the second or third round.
BC
I read that he was projecting as the 7th best QB in the draft, maybe a 2nd or 3rd round pick, but I wouldn't be surprised if he lasted to the fifth or sixth round pick. Most of his core metrics were worse this past season than the prior season (yes, I know he played behind one of the worst Power 5 OLs in history), and the NFL doesn't like players who seem to regress (see Purdy, Brock). His combine numbers were just okay, a 4.94 40 versus the 4.75 he ran as a high schooler.
RE: McKee - SamuelMcF - 02-12-2023
(02-12-2023, 10:32 AM)Mick Wrote:(02-11-2023, 06:35 PM)BostonCard Wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/08/nfl-draft-quarterbacks-2023/
This article has him amongst the “second tier” after 1A Shroud and Young, then 1B Lewis and Richardson. they expect him to go on Day 2, in the second or third round.
BC
I read that he was projecting as the 7th best QB in the draft, maybe a 2nd or 3rd round pick, but I wouldn't be surprised if he lasted to the fifth or sixth round pick. Most of his core metrics were worse this past season than the prior season (yes, I know he played behind one of the worst Power 5 OLs in history), and the NFL doesn't like players who seem to regress (see Purdy, Brock). His combine numbers were just okay, a 4.94 40 versus the 4.75 he ran as a high schooler.
How would you know McKee's combine numbers when the combine hasn't happened yet? Surely if you're psychic you already know when he gets drafted, so why not just tell us?
RE: McKee - Mick - 02-12-2023
(02-12-2023, 02:25 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(02-12-2023, 10:32 AM)Mick Wrote:(02-11-2023, 06:35 PM)BostonCard Wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/08/nfl-draft-quarterbacks-2023/
This article has him amongst the “second tier” after 1A Shroud and Young, then 1B Lewis and Richardson. they expect him to go on Day 2, in the second or third round.
BC
I read that he was projecting as the 7th best QB in the draft, maybe a 2nd or 3rd round pick, but I wouldn't be surprised if he lasted to the fifth or sixth round pick. Most of his core metrics were worse this past season than the prior season (yes, I know he played behind one of the worst Power 5 OLs in history), and the NFL doesn't like players who seem to regress (see Purdy, Brock). His combine numbers were just okay, a 4.94 40 versus the 4.75 he ran as a high schooler.
How would you know McKee's combine numbers when the combine hasn't happened yet? Surely if you're psychic you already know when he gets drafted, so why not just tell us?
You're right, Sam. My mistake. And I posited 5th to 7th round.
How about you?
Tanner McKee Quarterback Stanford - Combine Numbers and Stats (nfldraftbuzz.com)
RE: McKee - SamuelMcF - 02-13-2023
(02-12-2023, 02:57 PM)Mick Wrote:(02-12-2023, 02:25 PM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(02-12-2023, 10:32 AM)Mick Wrote:(02-11-2023, 06:35 PM)BostonCard Wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/08/nfl-draft-quarterbacks-2023/
This article has him amongst the “second tier” after 1A Shroud and Young, then 1B Lewis and Richardson. they expect him to go on Day 2, in the second or third round.
BC
I read that he was projecting as the 7th best QB in the draft, maybe a 2nd or 3rd round pick, but I wouldn't be surprised if he lasted to the fifth or sixth round pick. Most of his core metrics were worse this past season than the prior season (yes, I know he played behind one of the worst Power 5 OLs in history), and the NFL doesn't like players who seem to regress (see Purdy, Brock). His combine numbers were just okay, a 4.94 40 versus the 4.75 he ran as a high schooler.
How would you know McKee's combine numbers when the combine hasn't happened yet? Surely if you're psychic you already know when he gets drafted, so why not just tell us?
You're right, Sam. My mistake. And I posited 5th to 7th round.
How about you?
Tanner McKee Quarterback Stanford - Combine Numbers and Stats (nfldraftbuzz.com)
Mid round pick.
He played in Shawfense, a needlessly insanely complex offense that makes it way too hard on the QB (this year with a terrible OL to boot) AND incorporating a slow mesh system that didn't fit him at all.
Scouts are basically saying just to look at his tools because the offense itself was dreadful and never schemed players open (hence a lot of good "tight window" throws out of pure necessity). Similar situation to Daniel Jones, who had a horrible OL and receivers who couldn't even catch the ball at Duke.
RE: McKee - OutsiderFan - 02-13-2023
As a rule, I prefer college QBs who didn't have great OLs but still put up good numbers and won games.
McKee got worse the more time he played for Stanford. I don't know what to think of him as a prospect, TBH.
RE: McKee - SamuelMcF - 02-13-2023
(02-13-2023, 10:34 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: As a rule, I prefer college QBs who didn't have great OLs but still put up good numbers and won games.
That seems like a good rule of thumb. Do you have any examples? (And before you say Brock Purdy, his Iowa State OL was a top-25 pass blocking line and he had NFL weapons at WR, TE, and RB.)
RE: McKee - StanfordMatt - 02-13-2023
(02-13-2023, 10:34 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: As a rule, I prefer college QBs who didn't have great OLs but still put up good numbers and won games.
McKee got worse the more time he played for Stanford. I don't know what to think of him as a prospect, TBH.
McKee may have had a bad OL but I'd argue that it was nowhere near as bad as the one Trent Edwards endured. Now Trent was a difficult QB to evaluate! I admit not expecting Trent to do much in the NFL but that was mainly because he spent most of his college career on his back or in the hospital, literally. Crazy to think that he was a 3rd round pick and lasted eight seasons in the NFL despite how few games he won in college.
RE: McKee - OutsiderFan - 02-13-2023
(02-13-2023, 11:04 AM)SamuelMcF Wrote:(02-13-2023, 10:34 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: As a rule, I prefer college QBs who didn't have great OLs but still put up good numbers and won games.
That seems like a good rule of thumb. Do you have any examples? (And before you say Brock Purdy, his Iowa State OL was a top-25 pass blocking line and he had NFL weapons at WR, TE, and RB.)
I actually have more examples of college QBs who led championship level teams with great OL play in front of them, who sucked at the NFL level. The U of Miami QBs, all the USC QBs stand out. For a while productive Oklahoma QBs never translated to NFL too. You can say Alabama, but until Hurts, Alabama had a pure pocket passing system with guys who handed off most of the time, and weren't highly touted QBs.
Patrick Mahomes and Jared Goff are the types I prefer. Obviously Mahomes is physically on another level from Goff, but neither one played behind a great OL in college and still produced. Neither one was a ballyhooed national QB prospect either. And even though Purdy had some good talent around him in college, he was just a 3 star prospect. Give me the under the radar guys who find ways to produce at a high level against challenging circumstances, over the 5 star prospects ON OFFENSE, all day long. I'll take the 5 stars on Defense!
RE: McKee - Mick - 02-13-2023
(02-13-2023, 11:28 AM)StanfordMatt Wrote:(02-13-2023, 10:34 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: As a rule, I prefer college QBs who didn't have great OLs but still put up good numbers and won games.
McKee got worse the more time he played for Stanford. I don't know what to think of him as a prospect, TBH.
McKee may have had a bad OL but I'd argue that it was nowhere near as bad as the one Trent Edwards endured. Now Trent was a difficult QB to evaluate! I admit not expecting Trent to do much in the NFL but that was mainly because he spent most of his college career on his back or in the hospital, literally. Crazy to think that he was a 3rd round pick and lasted eight seasons in the NFL despite how few games he won in college.
I remember Trent being recruited, and I went to watch his Los Gatos high team play Palo Alto. In the first half, Edwards was 6 for 10. Three of his incompletions literally hit his receivers in the hands in between the numbers. The fourth went sixty yards in the air, and he overthrew the receiver by half a stride. Simply amazing accuracy for a HS QB. My other memory is that PA's DE and LB knocked him out after a tackle. I remember thinking "what's going to happen to Edwards when the DE and LB are 50 pounds heavier and several steps faster?"
RE: McKee - msqueri - 02-13-2023
I think many are way too quick to dismiss big-time college QBs on the logic they were pampered by their supporting cast. It's bad logic to think that a QB won't be good because he had a good supporting cast in college. Andrew Luck, Jalen Hurts, Joe Burrow, Tua Tagavailoa, among others show the silliness of this logic. If I'm an NFL GM I'd really want somebody who had been good in college. Sometimes players pan out despite not being good in college, but it's a bet that would make me nervous.
RE: McKee - Spiny_Norman - 02-13-2023
(02-13-2023, 11:55 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You can say Alabama, but until Hurts, Alabama had a pure pocket passing system with guys who handed off most of the time, and weren't highly touted QBs.
I know that you are mostly commenting about more recent QBs at Alabama. But since we just wrapped up Super Bowl weekend, I am reminded that Bart Starr, Joe Namath and Ken Stabler all played at Alabama and had pretty good pro careers.
RE: McKee - msqueri - 02-13-2023
Alabama had three starting QBs in the NFL this year, including two of the top four in the sport this season.
RE: McKee - OutsiderFan - 02-13-2023
(02-13-2023, 02:36 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(02-13-2023, 11:55 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You can say Alabama, but until Hurts, Alabama had a pure pocket passing system with guys who handed off most of the time, and weren't highly touted QBs.
I know that you are mostly commenting about more recent QBs at Alabama. But since we just wrapped up Super Bowl weekend, I am reminded that Bart Starr, Joe Namath and Ken Stabler all played at Alabama and had pretty good pro careers.
Yes, Alabama has produced some incredible NFL QB talent over the years, but man did they have a long dry spell...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Alabama_Crimson_Tide_starting_quarterbacks
Too bad there is no such wikipedia page for Stanford QBs, but there is this...
https://www.ranker.com/list/best-stanford-cardinals-quarterbacks/ranker-college-football
RE: McKee - cardcrimson - 02-13-2023
(02-13-2023, 02:36 PM)Spiny_Norman Wrote:(02-13-2023, 11:55 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: You can say Alabama, but until Hurts, Alabama had a pure pocket passing system with guys who handed off most of the time, and weren't highly touted QBs.
I know that you are mostly commenting about more recent QBs at Alabama. But since we just wrapped up Super Bowl weekend, I am reminded that Bart Starr, Joe Namath and Ken Stabler all played at Alabama and had pretty good pro careers.
Richard Todd and Jeff Rutledge had long NFL careers as well. The Tide did go without a standout QB for a while, partly because Stallings focused so much on defense, QBs and a passing attack were afterthoughts.
RE: McKee - yvonne - 02-13-2023
(02-11-2023, 06:35 PM)BostonCard Wrote: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2023/02/08/nfl-draft-quarterbacks-2023/
This article has him amongst the “second tier” after 1A Shroud and Young, then 1B Lewis and Richardson. they expect him to go on Day 2, in the second or third round.
BC
so not good enough to go in the 7th round, then
RE: McKee - Mick - 02-14-2023
(02-13-2023, 02:50 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Too bad there is no such wikipedia page for Stanford QBs, but there is this...
https://www.ranker.com/list/best-stanford-cardinals-quarterbacks/ranker-college-football
I upvoted Brian Johnson solely because of the HR he hit against the Dodgers...and for scouting the Tigers with Pat the Bat in advance of the 2012 World Series...
RE: McKee - BostonCard - 02-14-2023
Todd Husak is criminally under-ranked.
BC
RE: McKee - vataha - 02-14-2023
All respect to "Angry Doug", a great pro but I recall him only having one real good season at Stanford, whereas I would suggest DeRonnie Pitts had possibly a greater Stanford career than Doug Baldwin.