Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room > NFL Draft Central


Would you be ok with...

NFL Draft Central


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-26-2011, 01:33 AM   #61
Registered User
 
Landry44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 299
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirtbag59 View Post
It could go either way. On one hand you could say that he played in a pro style system and has an NFL ready arm.

On the other hand you could say that his pro style system has failed to prepare any QB for the NFL level, his decision making is suspect, and he doesn't have the mobility to escape the rush.

He'll have to sit for a year or two if for no other reason then to know where everyone is so his inability to avoid the rush doesn't become a liability.

QB's that are NFL ready usually have some sort of mobility or pocket presence that allows them to buy extra time as they learn to read NFL defenses. Matt Ryan, Big Ben, Flacco, Marino, and Freeman all had at the very least decent mobility. And yes Flacco and Ryan both have decent mobility. Mallet has minimal. Short of being protected by the Jets line he'll be a major liability his first year.

In my mind he's a project.




Personally, for better or worse, I feel that Mike Vick is a better comparison.
Ryan Mallett has a world class arm. He's extremely accurate with the football. He's proven that he can go through his progressions and make a good decision on a consistent basis. It's obvious that you haven't seen Mallett play because if you did you would know that he's pretty good at avoiding pressure and making big throws. He's play against the best competition and put up big numbers against them. How is this guy a project? Is it because he's not mobile? If so, that's probably one of the most idiotic statements that I've read on here so far. The qbs you named aren't elite qbs even though Big Ben got two rings. However, Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, Rivers, and Matt Shaub are all very successful and neither one of them are mobile qbs.
Landry44 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 04-26-2011, 03:18 AM   #62
Living Legend
 
skinsfaninok's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oklahoma City (Originally from Biloxi, Ms)
Age: 27
Posts: 16,093
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lotus View Post
I would argue that Shuler also was a great athlete and had a great arm. Those two qualities alone do not make for NFL success, as Shuler sadly showed.
True but I just don't see shuler as the same level of athlete but again that doesn't make a good QB. I like jakes toughness and will to win, Heath didn't have that on the football field IMO .
__________________
THUNDER UP

"if you're good at something, never do it for free"- The Joker

skinsfaninok is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2011, 03:55 AM   #63
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 28
Posts: 14,422
Re: Would you be ok with...

Ironically I never labled Flacco, Ryan, and Ben as elite QB's. What I did say was that they were QB's that were able to contribute right away. They weren't projects. However it's certainly not difficult to make a case for them considering the fact that all three posted 90+ ratings this past year.

Anyway the link between Ryan, Ben, Marino and Flacco was good enough mobility that allowed them to buy an extra second or two in the pocket. Thereby creating a push against their inexperience in reading NFL defensive coverage. I can't think of any pure pocket passer that experienced anywhere near the level of success achieved by the four I mentioned during their rookie season.

Here's more detail on why Mallet qualifies as a project:

- His pro style system has failed to produce one even mediocre QB at the NFL level. In fact the most promising prospect to come through the NFL ranks was cut during training camp (see Brian Brohm, Chris Redman, Stefen LeFors, Dave Ragone).

- Fine he played in an elite conference. It was suppose to help good old Eli take the NFL by storm (that storm took 4 regular seasons to develop) as well as our very own Campbell. Stafford is promising but he certainly didn't post great numbers right away.

- Also if we take away the 3 games where he got to play with a vaunted SEC team against the children of the poor (Tenn Tech, Lou-Monroe, UTEP) his numbers go down from 32 TD passes and 12 Ints to 21 TD passes and 10 ints.

His completion percentage also drops to 62%. Which while accurate doesn't qualify him as extremely accurate. Especially when compared to the 55% and 43% (yes 43%) he posted the previous two years.

- He doesn't have nearly enough mobility to compensate for his lack of knowledge in regards to NFL speed and coverage schemes. So unless he gets the line that protects Brady or the one that protects Sanchez he will see the same level of pressure that he saw against Ohio State.

And the saddest thing about all this is I don't even hate Mallet. In fact I'm intrigued by him as a QB prospect. I don't know if he's right for our system but if our team drafts him I'll surely know the answer. However the only chance he has to develop ahead of the curve is a great O-line. And very few teams have that.

PS - I'll have you know I watched him against UGA, Auburn, Alabama, and Ohio State from start to finish. So please don't play the "you've never watched him play" card.
__________________
"Hey baby, wake up from your a sleep." -Zlad

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2011, 07:34 AM   #64
Franchise Player
 
skinsfan69's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA.
Posts: 9,341
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by KI Skins Fan View Post
I assume that our new cheer would go something like "Suck Skins Suck!". I dunno, it just doesn't feel right to me. I'm hoping that there's some other way to build a winner.
It doesn't feel right to me either but I just feel in todays NFL you have to have a top tier QB.
skinsfan69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2011, 08:00 AM   #65
Playmaker
 
irish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,569
Re: Would you be ok with...

I have no problem with the Skins not taking a QB in this draft.
irish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2011, 08:31 AM   #66
Mann Up HOF!
 
Lotus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 10,438
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfaninok View Post
True but I just don't see shuler as the same level of athlete but again that doesn't make a good QB. I like jakes toughness and will to win, Heath didn't have that on the football field IMO .
Shuler has toughness and the will to win at the ballot box. :cheeky-sm
__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.
Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2011, 08:56 AM   #67
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,427
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by skinsfan69 View Post
It doesn't feel right to me either but I just feel in todays NFL you have to have a top tier QB.
You also need a good all around team. We have many needs beyond QB.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2011, 11:01 AM   #68
Impact Rookie
 
IrMitchell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 636
Re: Would you be ok with...

Absolutely I'd be okay with it.

It's no secret, if you don't like a quarterback enough that you have to draft him past round 1, he's clearly not good enough.

If Shanahan likes Locker or Mallett or who the hell knows, they'll be taken at #10. Anything past that and there's obviously too much doubt or optimism.
__________________
One of Canada's two Redskins fans.
IrMitchell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2011, 04:01 PM   #69
The Starter
 
Swarley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Age: 25
Posts: 1,035
Re: Would you be ok with...

I agree for the most part but that doesn't mean you don't draft a QB late. Our team is starving for a young QB and the Shannys know that.

If I have it my way, we'll pick Pat Devlin late!
__________________
doing it all in the spirit of the salary cap!
Swarley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2011, 04:17 PM   #70
The Starter
 
drew54's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: IOWA
Age: 31
Posts: 1,290
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paintrain View Post
Current players for picks, no. Players you draft, no. Current and future picks, yes.
I was mis-informed, Thanks!

I still am tired of this short sighted team building. Reminds me of the rest of Washington.
__________________
No pressure, no diamonds.
drew54 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 12:23 PM   #71
Living Legend
 
Monkeydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 35
Posts: 16,275
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mattyk View Post
Research shows that 2nd round QBs have been mostly disappointments, so unless you get a top flight guy in the 1st round it's basically a waste to take a QB in later rounds.
I believe research would also show any QB with a horrible O-line is at a nearly insurmountable disadvantage.

Use that 1st-round pick on another O-lineman and a 2nd-round QB will have a better chance at success than a 1st-round QB without the line upgrade.
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster
Monkeydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 12:31 PM   #72
‎\m/
 
Mattyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 41
Posts: 80,427
Re: Would you be ok with...

There's always free agency to plug holes on the OL too.
__________________
Support The Warpath! | Warpath Shop
Mattyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 12:35 PM   #73
Living Legend
 
Monkeydad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: PA
Age: 35
Posts: 16,275
Re: Would you be ok with...

True, but I'd prefer a young player. We should follow the Jets model and use our first-round pick on a lineman until our whole line is 1st-round studs. Then, even with a horrible QB like Sanchez, we could contend for a decade.
__________________
Not sent from a Droid, iPhone, Blackberry or toaster
Monkeydad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 02:50 PM   #74
Naega jeil jal naga
 
Dirtbag59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Atlanta, Georgia From: Silver Spring, Maryland
Age: 28
Posts: 14,422
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeydad View Post
I believe research would also show any QB with a horrible O-line is at a nearly insurmountable disadvantage.

Use that 1st-round pick on another O-lineman and a 2nd-round QB will have a better chance at success than a 1st-round QB without the line upgrade.
If we keep that second round pick I would much rather use it on a front 7 defender.

And whats to say that our O-Line will be horrible this year? Just because of what happened last year? I saw the Falcons and Chief O-Lines change over the course of one offseason with little if any additions, and even though the Falcons drafted Sam Baker in 08 he still only played 5 games.

We have Trent Williams not to mention a chance to choose between a healthy Jammal Brown and Ryan Harris. Davin Joesph is also a huge favorite to come here. Kory L got a year of starting experience, Will Montgomery is improving, and I'm sure that between Cook and Capers one will develop into a solid starter. Heck even Heyer improved last year into a respectable swing man.

Bottom line we could easily be going into next year with 3 pro bowl level starters (Williams, Brown, Joesph) or at worst 2 pro bowlers and one very good young Right Tackle.

Also don't forget we have plenty of late round picks and Shanahan has made a living out of getting quality lineman in rounds 5-7.

Finally in light of the improved O-Lines I mentioned in KC and ATL we will easily have more raw talent then both of them. Only thing left to do is continue feeding the late round pipeline and getting two top notch guys signed out of Joesph, Brown, and Harris.
__________________
"Hey baby, wake up from your a sleep." -Zlad

"I feel like Dirtbag has been slowly and methodically trolling the board for a month or so now."
- FRPLG
Dirtbag59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2011, 03:15 PM   #75
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,993
Re: Would you be ok with...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkeydad View Post
I believe research would also show any QB with a horrible O-line is at a nearly insurmountable disadvantage.

Use that 1st-round pick on another O-lineman and a 2nd-round QB will have a better chance at success than a 1st-round QB without the line upgrade.
It depends on how you define horrible O-line. You could make the argument that the Colts and Chargers have awful lines, but those teams succeed because they don't exactly torpedo their offenses by sucking. Some would argue that, because they don't limit their offenses and can be schemed around, they can't be a horrible o-line, they are merely unremarkable.

But I'll also say that Peyton Manning and Philip Rivers didn't develop behind bad OLs. They benefitted from good line play in their developmental years. And the tried and true way to develop a QB is go allow him good line play in his developmental years.
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.29561 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25