QB Checklist

Stats, stats, stats.......as if evaluating a college QB prospect is about looking at stats (smh)
I remember reading an article by Bill Walsh on evaluating college QBs and not once, literally not once did he mention college stats

But just for reference Jake's comp percentage in Sarks WCO (excluding his time in Ty Willingham's pathetic joke of an option offense): 56.8%
would put him just a hair ahead of:

Matt Stafford: 56.6%

it puts him a hair behind
Josh Freeman: 57.9%

and not that far off from
Matt Ryan: 59.3%
Jay Cutler: 60%

 

Ok, so Bill Walsh doesn't mention stats in an article. You can't conclude from that omission that Bill Walsh doesn't consider stats (especially completion percentage) when evaluating QBs in the draft.

Anyway, you're skewing the numbers.

You bring up Stafford, but you neglect to mention that Stafford completed 61.4% in his last year at Georgia. Look at his game log - he had strong numbers against good competition. Locker didn't have that in his last year.

Josh Freeman? Who cares? Freeman had a good 2010 but a terrible 2011. I doubt he'll ever be an all-pro qb going forward. And he had better completion numbers than Locker.

Matt Ryan was at 59% to 62% in his last 3 years at Boston College. He ended his career as a 60% passer. Again, much more accurate.

lol... Jay Cutler? Cutler sucks.

Look... if you hit 50% as a freshman or sophomore, that's kinda acceptable. But if you have accuracy issues as a junior and senior, then you'll likely have accuracy issues as a pro.

 

Completion % does not = accuracy.

A quality that easy to identify doesn't even need stats to back it up. Just post the video proof that Locker is inaccurate.

 

Well the article is Bill Walsh:How I Evaluate Each Position.
If stats were a factor he would have mentioned them.
Also, its fairly common knowledge that scouts/evaluators don't use stats they evaluate based on physical skillset because when you draft a player you don't get their circumstances or stats you get their physical skillset.

Yes, I'm a technically 'skewing' the numbers.
Which I clearly spell out in my previous post, its not like I'm hiding it.
But, unlike your selective and arbitrary exclusions I focusing the discussion of Locker's completion % to the years where Sark was the HC because those years are what got him drafted and not his first 2 seasons running the option under Ty Wllingham. (in an offense for a team that pretty much everyone that watches college focused acknowledges as a joke).

I'm using the same logic that explains how Tannehill was drafted based on his time as QB (part of his Jr. year and all of his Sr.) and not his time as a WR, savvy?

Did any of the QBs you mention run an option offense then swicth to a pro-style or some other reasonable explanation for the the years or games you want to exclude?

Arbitrarily selective.

Who cares? Great argument.

Arbitrarily selective.

This alone should be enough to disqualify you from any serious QB discussion.

Good thing for you then, because Locker doesn't have an accuracy issues.
Just had lower college stats then you like.

 

False. NFL scouts, GMs, and coaches all use stats when evaluating players. YPA, YPC, TD/Interception Ratio, Completion %, TDs per attempts... all these stats matter. Stats pertain to ability and help predict future success (though it isn't an exact science, of course).

Lol... cool, go look at Locker's numbers with Sarkisian. They weren't that good when he played good competition.

Nah, you're not using any logic.

So what if they did. Why are you making these excuses for Locker? All I ever hear around here is: (1) Locker's passes were dropped; (2) His O-Line was bad; (3) He was playing hurt; and (4) He changed coaches.

You're making excuses for Locker's performance because you know that in some games it was really bad. Maybe, just maybe, Jake Locker is responsible for the bad games. A crazy assertion, I know.

Eh, I said Jay Cutler sucks. He does suck. He's an interception machine. If you don't think he sucks then you have issues.

Yeah, Jake Locker didn't have accuracy issues in college.

See, for example, his great games in his senior year:

Nebraska (1): 4/20; 71 yds; 1 TD; 2 Ints
Stanford: 7/14; 64 yds; 2 Ints
UCLA: 10/21; 68 yds; 0 TDs; 1 Int
Nebraska (2): 5/16; 56 yds; 0 TDs; 0 Ints

Looks like a future elite quarterback to me! Seriously, the level of myopia when it comes to Jake Locker is ridiculous.

Just look... the dude had 4 games where he didn't pass for 100 yards in his senior year of college. In an offense run by a really good offensive mind. Think about how truly bad that is.

 

I think most scouts will assert that prediction is a myth and proper evaluation is the goal.
And since the goal of evaluation is to isolate the player's skillset independent of the team around them looking at team stats like the ones you mention only skews the evaluation.
Team stats are clearly and obviously effected by factors outside the players control.

You lack the understanding of this key concept, therefore Locker being rated and drafted as high as he was will always remain a mystery to you (and the people who think like you).

Also you lack the basic understanding of the difference between accuracy=ball placement or ball location which is an individual trait vs. completion percentage which is a team stat.

Right.
The fact that you think I have issues when it comes to QB evaluation gives me comfort. lol rah, rah Jay Cutler sucks...

lol, even when you try to knock the guy ugly things like I don't know, actually winning the game kinda pop up ruin your lil stats....

UCLA: 10/21; 68 yds; 0 TDs; 1 Int (W)
Nebraska (2): 5/16; 56 yds; 0 TDs; 0 Ints (W)

 

MaxFischer and Rolltide must be alter egos or something

 

Ok, I've been reading over and over again how some of you arm chair QB scouts seem to think Locker is a sure bust, or at least that's the way it sounds to me. I'm sure you guys are much more efficient than the people who actually make a living and get paid a lot of money to make those decisions but what the hell do those guys know?

So, since you guys are so convinced that Locker was a bad pick and sure to fail, I say instead of just ridiculing the QB that we do have by enlightening us with your genius-ness by telling us who "you would have taken" as our future franchise QB? Gabbart? Ponder?

And tell us why that pick in your "expert" opinion would have been a better pick than Locker. Take your time and be covincing, who knows, maybe one of the 32 NFL teams will Read this post and realize your hidden talents at scouting football players at the NFL level and offer you a job heading up their scouting dept...lol!!

 

Umm... what topic are you reading? The largest majority of the regular posters in this forum are Jake Locker supporters. Outside of MaxFischer I don't think that anyone here wants or thinks he will not be a good NFL QB at some point.

 

No, the difference is that some people want to give him the starting job and some people want him to earn it.