How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?

i did and i replied i think hell be a good pro qb duh.Are you disagreeing with the arguement or just ignoring it?

he was not that bad.he damn was sure better than his rookie year,plus san fran had no offensive line either.

put it this way i think hell be a future pro bowler.

he was not that bad.he damn was sure better than his rookie year,plus san fran had no offensive line either.Well, Smith certainly had no help from his team in 2005. He had the emergence of Gore last year. But he's still not a great prospect.

Best case scenario for Russell would be Alex Smith. There's no way that Russell's rookie year would be as bad though. That year for Smith was all about Murphy's law; everything that could have gone wrong did!

i agree.i didnt say smith was great i just said he wasnt THAT bad last year.

i agree.i didnt say smith was great i just said he wasnt THAT bad last year.I guess, yeah.

He may have been the weakest of the starting 32 QBs again last year, but he at least showed the potential to be a starter.

And he played some really strong games down the stretch.

exactly.thats all i was sayin.

I forgot about Walter, Gradkowski, and Frye. Smith outpassed these guys.

He also outpassed Vick, who probably has more total value due to his legs.

vick sucks and is overrated.hes also a ball hog.thats why the falcons recievers could catch passes last season,no chemestry between them and vick.vick wanted to run the ball all the time.granted he did give it to warrick dunn,but thats probably cause he knew dunn would whoop his ass if he didnt.

Actually, this brings up the big idea here:

Quarterbacks do so much more and we have so much more collegiate data on them than any other position--possibly all other positions combined.

Why haven't scouts been able by this point to seperate busts from great prospects? Trial and Error was to be expected for a few years, but shouldn't the best scouts have been able to do the exact same research I just did and see that one prospect can not have more "upside" without being the best prospect in the present.

because they can't account well for the NFL suck factor. if anyone plays QB in oakland, they're going to suck. even peyton would look fairly average behind that line and with that running attack. when you're picked #1, you might get a stable team willing to build the right way (colts, eagles, chargers), or you might get al davis and a parade of coaches that shouldn't be in the NFL and have little authority within the organization. if you come into the NFL and all your team mates are malcontents and half-arsers, chance are you'll stop caring or have a hard time getting others to work harder on film study and passing drills, etc.