How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?

[GMScud]

Tripp, that is so funny that you brought up the Kyle Boller analogy with Jamarcus. I was about to bring that up, but I figured I'd go check some of your posts just in case. Sure enough, there it was. LOL!! When I heard Todd McShay bring up the whole 60 yd "Butt Throw" by Russell, I laughed my ass off (forgive the pun). Who friggin cares if he can throw it behind his back with his eyes closed, off the rafters, into the endzone??? How on earth does meaningless crap like that translate to the football field??

The comparison of Leinart to Quinn is very valid:
Leinart: played 4 years (3 of which he started) in a pro-style offense with a NFL caliber talent all around him and a pro-style coach. His leadership and smarts coupled with all that experience = success.
Quinn: also played 4 seasons, starting 3, and played in a pro-style offense with an NFL coach, and also played in some huge games.

I also like Quinn over Russell. He's got size and athleticism, plus Weis absolutely raves about him. Sure he's kind of obligated too, but Weis developed a guy named Tom Brady. Last I checked he's done okay. Hearing Weis wholeheartedly compare Brady with Quinn has got to make some FO's drool.

But I don't think we can say Russell has less of a chance of success. Vince Young only played 3 seasons. Cutler only played 3 seasons. They both did well and look to be developing nicely. I guess it's the decision making that may take a little longer to come around with QBs that leave school early. Like you said, at some point you just have to hope you pick the right guy.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Tripp, that is so funny that you brought up the Kyle Boller analogy with Jamarcus. I was about to bring that up, but I figured I'd go check some of your posts just in case. Sure enough, there it was. LOL!! When I heard Todd McShay bring up the whole 60 yd "Butt Throw" by Russell, I laughed my ass off (forgive the pun). Who friggin cares if he can throw it behind his back with his eyes closed, off the rafters, into the endzone??? How on earth does meaningless crap like that translate to the football field??

The comparison of Leinart to Quinn is very valid:
Leinart: played 4 years (3 of which he started) in a pro-style offense with a NFL caliber talent all around him and a pro-style coach. His leadership and smarts coupled with all that experience = success.
Quinn: also played 4 seasons, starting 3, and played in a pro-style offense with an NFL coach, and also played in some huge games.

I also like Quinn over Russell. He's got size and athleticism, plus Weis absolutely raves about him. Sure he's kind of obligated too, but Weis developed a guy named Tom Brady. Last I checked he's done okay. Hearing Weis wholeheartedly compare Brady with Quinn has got to make some FO's drool.

But I don't think we can say Russell has less of a chance of success. Vince Young only played 3 seasons. Cutler only played 3 seasons. They both did well and look to be developing nicely. I guess it's the decision making that may take a little longer to come around with QBs that leave school early. Like you said, at some point you just have to hope you pick the right guy.

Cutler started 45 games though (4 seasons). Young is a differerent case. He started 3 more games than Russell, which is a sizable difference. But Young also has an option with his legs that Russell simply doesn't have. VY will be a slightly above league average passer in his prime, but will be so much more valuable than that as a player because of his running skills.

As far as Russell's running skills are, I mean, Brady Quinn is the better runner of the two.

I say that the difference between the two guys will be epicly displayed by year 2 of their NFL careers. Russell is never going to get a chance to hit his prime unless he ends up in a situation like Grossman did. You think if Grossman was on the Raiders, he would have held his starting position? Russell simply will get the bust label before he has an adequate chance to learn the game. And it sucks for him. But he should have stayed in school. He needed the experience.

Let me be clear on one thing. Even if Russell is handeled properly in a good situation, the gap between him and Quinn will never be closed as some mediots think it will. The mythical upside surrounding Russell is not a reality. He's just not the prospect Quinn is. Doesn't mean he can't defy the odds to solidify himself as an NFL level passer in a good situation. It just means that Quinn will be better.

Remember, Grossman went 23rd to Chicago in 2003. The expectations surrounding him are not even comparible to the hype around Russell. Unfortuantely for JaMarcus, there's a double standard here. Because he's going to be a top 3 pick, as soon as it becomes clear that he's going to dissapoint, they will look for his replacement (as opposed to letting him grow into the borderline starter he can be in his prime). Grossman survived in part because no one expected anything from him.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Cutler started 45 games though (4 seasons). Young is a differerent case. He started 3 more games than Russell, which is a sizable difference. But Young also has an option with his legs that Russell simply doesn't have. VY will be a slightly above league average passer in his prime, but will be so much more valuable than that as a player because of his running skills.

As far as Russell's running skills are, I mean, Brady Quinn is the better runner of the two.

I say that the difference between the two guys will be epicly displayed by year 2 of their NFL careers. Russell is never going to get a chance to hit his prime unless he ends up in a situation like Grossman did. You think if Grossman was on the Raiders, he would have held his starting position? Russell simply will get the bust label before he has an adequate chance to learn the game. And it sucks for him. But he should have stayed in school. He needed the experience.

Let me be clear on one thing. Even if Russell is handeled properly in a good situation, the gap between him and Quinn will never be closed as some mediots think it will. The mythical upside surrounding Russell is not a reality. He's just not the prospect Quinn is. Doesn't mean he can't defy the odds in a good situation. It just means that Quinn will be better.

I agree that Russell should have stayed in school. Not that going to the Oakland Raiders is a good situation, but they do have a very solid defense, a good RB in LaMont Jordan, and they still have Randy Moss and Jerry Porter (despite their issues). Granted that offense needs a lot of help, but as the Bears proved, a great defense can really help a below average offense. Russell in Oakland could work.

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that Quinn is going to be the better pro. But if Oakland drafts Russell I don't necessarily think it means he's doomed.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by GMScud

I agree that Russell should have stayed in school. Not that going to the Oakland Raiders is a good situation, but they do have a very solid defense, a good RB in LaMont Jordan, and they still have Randy Moss and Jerry Porter (despite their issues). Granted that offense needs a lot of help, but as the Bears proved, a great defense can really help a below average offense. Russell in Oakland could work.

Don't get me wrong, I totally agree that Quinn is going to be the better pro. But if Oakland drafts Russell I don't necessarily think it means he's doomed.

Well, Russell is only doomed if the team that drafts him gives up on him. Cade McNown got doomed because the Bears traded him after only 2 seasons on the team. McNown wasn't a good prospect either, but like Russell, probably would have been adequate for the situation if allowed to grow in the system.

I just don't see Al Davis and the Raiders being patient with this kid. I don't see any team waiting through 3-4 years of backup quality play so that then can get a QB who is a bottom half starter in the league. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, especially when you consider that at the back end of this deal (when the team that draft him would start to get some results), Russell is going to be getting 6-7 million a year to play.

JaMarcus Russell's best chance for success in this league will be on his 2nd go around maybe 4-5 years into the future (Much like David Carr). The team that drafts him is well on their way to a lengthy trial and error process that simply won't be worth the hassel.

Again, I don't hate Russell. I just have seen this story played out before.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Well, Russell is only doomed if the team that drafts him gives up on him. Cade McNown got doomed because the Bears traded him after only 2 seasons on the team. McNown wasn't a good prospect either, but like Russell, probably would have been adequate for the situation if allowed to grow in the system.

I just don't see Al Davis and the Raiders being patient with this kid. I don't see any team waiting through 3-4 years of backup quality play so that then can get a QB who is a bottom half starter in the league. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, especially when you consider that at the back end of this deal (when the team that draft him would start to get some results), Russell is going to be getting 6-7 million a year to play.

JaMarcus Russell's best chance for success in this league will be on his 2nd go around maybe 4-5 years into the future (Much like David Carr). The team that drafts him is well on their way to a lengthy trial and error process that simply won't be worth the hassel.

Again, I don't hate Russell. I just have seen this story played out before.

Just out of curiosity, what was your take on Cutler and Young heading into last years draft?

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Just out of curiosity, what was your take on Cutler and Young a year ago at this time?

I thought Young would be an average NFL QB, and that both Leinart and Cutler would be better than him.

Of course, I know a lot more about projecting rookie QBs than I did 365 days ago.

But my logic was this: we know something for certain about Young; he can run. We also know based on like even paying attention to college football that he's a better game manager and passer than Vick. So if Vick could even survive in this league, Young would at least be average.

I liked Cutler as an underrated prospect, but didn't feel that his "ceiling" was as high as Leinarts (back in a day when I believed in the concept of "floors" and "ceilings", I'm not that naive anymore). I thought he might be better than Leinart, but also if you thought one guy was going to bust (which I didn't) it was probably going to be Cutler.

I ended up being right that none would bust, that was pretty solid.

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I thought Young would be an average NFL QB, and that both Leinart and Cutler would be better than him.

Of course, I know a lot more about projecting rookie QBs than I did 365 days ago.

But my logic was this: we know something for certain about Young; he can run. We also know based on like even paying attention to college football that he's a better game manager and passer than Vick. So if Vick could even survive in this league, Young would at least be average.

I liked Cutler as an underrated prospect, but didn't feel that his "ceiling" was as high as Leinarts (back in a day when I believed in the concept of "floors" and "ceilings", I'm not that naive anymore). I thought he might be better than Leinart, but also if you thought one guy was going to bust (which I didn't) it was probably going to be Cutler.

I ended up being right that none would bust, that was pretty solid.

So I suppose my next question should be what in the past year has changed the way you evaluate a NFL QB prospect? Where did this knowledge come from?

I'm not asking b/c I question your evaluations, I'm asking b/c I like your posts and for the most part I agree with your assessments and opinions.

I for one thought Young would be the best of the 2006 QB draft picks. The jury is still out, but in the end I think it will be Leinart. That new stadium along with Wisenhunt and Grimm, I see Arizona emerging as a solid player in the NFC for years to come.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GMScud

Tripp, that is so funny that you brought up the Kyle Boller analogy with Jamarcus. I was about to bring that up, but I figured I'd go check some of your posts just in case. Sure enough, there it was. LOL!! When I heard Todd McShay bring up the whole 60 yd "Butt Throw" by Russell, I laughed my ass off (forgive the pun). Who friggin cares if he can throw it behind his back with his eyes closed, off the rafters, into the endzone??? How on earth does meaningless crap like that translate to the football field??

The comparison of Leinart to Quinn is very valid:
Leinart: played 4 years (3 of which he started) in a pro-style offense with a NFL caliber talent all around him and a pro-style coach. His leadership and smarts coupled with all that experience = success.
Quinn: also played 4 seasons, starting 3, and played in a pro-style offense with an NFL coach, and also played in some huge games.

I also like Quinn over Russell. He's got size and athleticism, plus Weis absolutely raves about him. Sure he's kind of obligated too, but Weis developed a guy named Tom Brady. Last I checked he's done okay. Hearing Weis wholeheartedly compare Brady with Quinn has got to make some FO's drool.

But I don't think we can say Russell has less of a chance of success. Vince Young only played 3 seasons. Cutler only played 3 seasons. They both did well and look to be developing nicely. I guess it's the decision making that may take a little longer to come around with QBs that leave school early. Like you said, at some point you just have to hope you pick the right guy.

I think the jury is still out on Boller. Did he get enough starts to prove himself? I don't think so. Did he have weapons around him to succeed? No. Now one thing Boller needs to do is make better decisions with the ball. And that is why McNair was brought in. Less TO's and let the defense win it. But I still think he can play. He just needs more time. The problem was Billick's ass was on the line and he didn't have anymore time to wait on Boller.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I think the jury is still out on Boller. Did he get enough starts to prove himself? I don't think so. Did he have weapons around him to succeed? No. Now one thing Boller needs to do is make better decisions with the ball. And that is why McNair was brought in. Less TO's and let the defense win it. But I still think he can play. He just needs more time. The problem was Billick's ass was on the line and he didn't have anymore time to wait on Boller.

Boller has 34 starts in this league, I think that's enough to get a good idea of what kind of player someone is.

Boller stinks in my opinion. I don't see him ever becoming a quality starter.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Boller has 34 starts in this league, I think that's enough to get a good idea of what kind of player someone is.

Boller stinks in my opinion. I don't see him ever becoming a quality starter.

It's funny how everyone heaps tons of praise on Ravens GM Ozzie Newsome, yet conveniently gloss over the trade he made to get Boller. A 2nd and a 1st for KB? Not worth it at all

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

It's funny how everyone heaps tons of praise on Ravens GM Ozzie Newsome, yet conveniently gloss over the trade he made to get Boller. A 2nd and a 1st for KB? Not worth it at all

He should probably get a little flack for the Boller move, but his other first round picks have made something like 27 combined pro-bowls. Some of his draft picks:
Johnathan Ogden, Ray Lewis, Ed Reed, Todd Heap, Terrel Suggs, Jamal Lewis, Chester Taylor, Casey Rabach, Chris McAllister, Brandon Stokely, Peter Boulware... that's just off the top of my head, and not mentioning his free agent acquisitions. Personally I'd like to have the guy in our front office. At least he is wise enough to emphasize the draft.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I think the jury is still out on Boller. Did he get enough starts to prove himself? I don't think so. Did he have weapons around him to succeed? No. Now one thing Boller needs to do is make better decisions with the ball. And that is why McNair was brought in. Less TO's and let the defense win it. But I still think he can play. He just needs more time. The problem was Billick's ass was on the line and he didn't have anymore time to wait on Boller.

I think that this is the inherent difference between you and me when it comes to QB. When I look at a QB, I start with college stats. Even with a good deal of starts, Boller's completion percentage at Cal was pathetic (below 50%). I mean, he absolutely sucked.

So when a guy doesn't project to the NFL well, I feel that its on him to prove to me that he can in fact get it done in this league. Boller has simply given me no reason to believe that his college stats were a total fluke. If anything, what he has done so far only confirmed what his college statistics told us would happen. I don't know how much farther we should wait on Boller to prove everybody wrong, including his past performance. 99.9% of the time if the light hasn't gone on by now, it ain't happening.

I mean, we can let every player in the league prove himself experimentally, but in today's league where as a coach you get about 3 years to prove yourself, more than half the coaches in the league would lose their careers if they did it this way. Not all QBs are created equal. You have to start with an expectation for a guy...coaches simply don't have 10-15 years to let each player on their team set their own expectations through trial and error.

Like every QB to ever play in the NFL, Boller will continue to improve over the next few years. But based on what he's done so far, a normal improvement due to age won't be enough to make him a quality starter.

[skinsfan69]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

I think that this is the inherent difference between you and me when it comes to QB. When I look at a QB, I start with college stats. Even with a good deal of starts, Boller's completion percentage at Cal was pathetic (below 50%). I mean, he absolutely sucked.

So when a guy doesn't project to the NFL well, I feel that its on him to prove to me that he can in fact get it done in this league. Boller has simply given me no reason to believe that his college stats were a total fluke. If anything, what he has done so far only confirmed what his college statistics told us would happen. I don't know how much farther we should wait on Boller to prove everybody wrong, including his past performance. 99.9% of the time if the light hasn't gone on by now, it ain't happening.

I mean, we can let every player in the league prove himself experimentally, but in today's league where as a coach you get about 3 years to prove yourself, more than half the coaches in the league would lose their careers if they did it this way. Not all QBs are created equal. You have to start with an expectation for a guy...coaches simply don't have 10-15 years to let each player on their team set their own expectations through trial and error.

Like every QB to ever play in the NFL, Boller will continue to improve over the next few years. But based on what he's done so far, a normal improvement due to age won't be enough to make him a quality starter.

I'm not disagreeing w/ you about Boller. He should not have been picked so high just becasue he threw the ball on his knees 60 yards. But I think he just needs more time. His last year starting he was starting to play well and had some really solid games. Some guys mature faster than others. But you are right. In today NFL guys need to play well ASAP.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

I'm not disagreeing w/ you about Boller. He should not have been picked so high just becasue he threw the ball on his knees 60 yards. But I think he just needs more time. His last year starting he was starting to play well and had some really solid games. Some guys mature faster than others. But you are right. In today NFL guys need to play well ASAP.

I think, like any other QB, Boller would improve given more time. But improve to the level where he should be starting in this league? I don't see it.