Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GMScud;298884]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.[/quote]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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;298887]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.[/quote]


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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GMScud;298890]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.[/quote]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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;298892]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.[/quote]

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

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GMScud;298893]Just out of curiosity, what was your take on Cutler and Young a year ago at this time?[/quote]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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;298894]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.[/quote]

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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GMScud;298895]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.[/quote]I got into statistical projections and correlations, mainly.

I've come to realize that most of what scouts do for a living is a complete sham for job security to make their work seem like an art, when in reality all it really is would be lazy, shoddy work.

It's not hard at all to project a QB. They all do so much at the college level, I mean we have so much data on them that there should be no excuse for missing badly on a QB prospect. It should be twice as hard to pick at any other position than QB, and for whatever reason, scouts still make mistakes at QB.

I agree with you that Leinart will be the best of the 2006 class. Along with Rivers and Roethlisberger, they will emerge as three of the top QBs in the league. Campbell should be just a stride below that class, around Carson Palmer's level. Brady Quinn should also be an upper echilon QB, but I don't think he will crack the top 5 in the league at any point in his career.

Since 2004, a plethora of great QBs have come into the league, so the teams that are going to be perenial losers from here on out are the ones who don't pick up a great young QB. That's why passing on Quinn would be such a mistake, especially for the Raiders.

It continues to baffle me that at a position as make or break as Quarterback, teams won't do everything they can to make sure they aren't taking a future bust. But that's what seperates the men from the boys, I guess.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;298899]I got into statistical projections and correlations, mainly.

"I agree with you that Leinart will be the best of the 2006 class. Along with Rivers and Roethlisberger, they will emerge as three of the top QBs in the league. Campbell should be just a stride below that class, around Carson Palmer's level. Brady Quinn should also be an upper echilon QB, but I don't think he will crack the top 5 in the league at any point in his career."


I cant believe that you put any of those QB's above Palmer. Right now the only one comparable is Rothlisberger if anything they are on the same level.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=angryssg;298902][quote=GTripp0012;298899]I got into statistical projections and correlations, mainly.

"I agree with you that Leinart will be the best of the 2006 class. Along with Rivers and Roethlisberger, they will emerge as three of the top QBs in the league. Campbell should be just a stride below that class, around Carson Palmer's level. Brady Quinn should also be an upper echilon QB, but I don't think he will crack the top 5 in the league at any point in his career."


I cant believe that you put any of those QB's above Palmer. Right now the only one comparable is Rothlisberger if anything they are on the same level.[/quote]

Last year at this time I would have said Leinart would be the best qb based on his college career. I had doubts about Young because of the offense he played in at Texas and his throwing motion. But he proved me wrong. Young was the best rookie qb last year hands down. He could be the best out of last years class. One thing you can not judge is the intangibles. Young has the ability to take the team and carry it. He does things that don't show up in the stat sheet and that's what makes him so impressive. Plus who is the guy throwing to? He has no WR's at all.

Cutler reminds me of Farve. Gunslinger that throws in double coverage way too much. Jury is still out on him. But you can't deny he has the skills to be great.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=angryssg;298902]I cant believe that you put any of those QB's above Palmer. Right now the only one comparable is Rothlisberger if anything they are on the same level.[/quote]Remember, Palmer is a guy playing in his prime. I'm saying that when Leinart and Rivers and Roethlisberger get a few more years starting experience under their belt, they will be as good, maybe a little better than Palmer.

And that's not bashing Palmer in anyway, just saying there are better QBs than him. He's almost certainly a perennial pro bowler.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

Here's a mock draft buster for you guys:

Lane Kiffin, head coach of the Raiders, reportedly wants to make Brady Quinn the first pick.

Al Davis wants to acquire a veteran QB and draft Calvin Johnson with the first pick.

So isn't it more than possible that if the decision is between Johnson and Quinn, that Russell will be the one to fall to Cleveland?

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;298886]I'm wary of anyone who makes a name for himself with pinpoint accuracy at the college level, especially if he has a rep for making poor decisions. That doesn't fly in the NFL.

The John Elway comparison sounds pretty accurate...but historic greatness is not predictable before the draft. Elway did a lot of stuff at the college level that Russell doesn't do very well.

I want to hesitate from labeling Russell a bust candidate, but he's just not a good NFL prospect. No QB in recent memory could have used his senior year of college more than Russell. The most ideal situation for him would be 3+ years of riding the bench so that he could get pretty far into his development before having to be put under the microscope. This could allow him enough time to develop into an NFL worthy starter before he gets labeled a bust.

If he goes first overall, he's not going to have that luxury. No matter which team he ends up on, he's going to develop a rep for poor decision making and being INT prone, and probably get the bust label sometime before 2009.

No matter what, he's never going to live up to expectations. He just isn't a good decision maker, period. Most underclass QB's aren't. If he can get into a favorable situation where he doesn't have to play right away, he might earn the perception of a starting quality QB (even though he's really the exact same player--just farther along in his development). If he gets thrown to the Wolves immediately, he's going to have a very rough first three years, and in today's league, generally its three strikes and you're out.

Unfortuante but true.[/quote]

Also how in the world can you say he is not a good decision maker????? Perhaps earlier in his career this was the case, when he was young and inexperienced, but certainly not now. Since you are so into stats just look at his. 28tds and 8ints and 67% completion rate. Sorry but those are great stats. 8 ints in 342 attempts is really taking care of the football. Especially in the SEC where the talent level is the highest in the country. And if you looked at his last game he totally outplayed Brady Quinn and for that matter so did Troy Smith in the 06 game. Brady Quinn looked terrible against LSU. He was all over the place with the ball. Now would a smart scout grade Quinn on this performaces in bowl games? Hell no. The guy really proved himself, especially his last two years. Quinn is a great college qb. But Russell also got better every single year. All of his %'s went up in his three years. He had no regression in his three years at LSU. So I'm not sure where your getting your info from about Russell but it's completly 100% wrong.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GMScud;298884]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.[/quote]

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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

I havent read what all of you wrote, hopefully this hasnt been said, but there was an article today about the biggest busts to be drafted at the QB position, its on fox news.

They ranked Schuler in the top ten biggest busts, and said that everyone was impressed by Schuler because he could "sit on his knees and throw the ball through the cross bars, which sounds very similar to what people are saying about russel"

I found that kinda ironic. I think being a QB isnt all about arm strength. Vick has amazing arm strength too but no one catches his passes...

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;299121]Also how in the world can you say he is not a good decision maker????? Perhaps earlier in his career this was the case, when he was young and inexperienced, but certainly not now. Since you are so into stats just look at his. 28tds and 8ints and 67% completion rate. Sorry but those are great stats. 8 ints in 342 attempts is really taking care of the football. Especially in the SEC where the talent level is the highest in the country. And if you looked at his last game he totally outplayed Brady Quinn and for that matter so did Troy Smith in the 06 game. Brady Quinn looked terrible against LSU. He was all over the place with the ball. Now would a smart scout grade Quinn on this performaces in bowl games? Hell no. The guy really proved himself, especially his last two years. Quinn is a great college qb. But Russell also got better every single year. All of his %'s went up in his three years. He had no regression in his three years at LSU. So I'm not sure where your getting your info from about Russell but it's completly 100% wrong.[/quote]28 TDs, 8 INTs, and 67% are wonderful numbers. But it was only one year. He would have been a much better prospect if he came back another year and did it again. Quinn made a significant improvement every year through his Junior year, and then came back to improve his game for another season, and this difference will be reflected between Russell and Quinn at the pro level. I promise you.

There are a lot of college numbers that will be decieving. That's why I say its far more important that an NFL prospect take more from his college experience (games started), than he gives (everything else).

Do you disagree with the notion that Russell would have been a significantly better prospect if he stayed at LSU for his senior year season? I mean, it sounds like you are on board with this concept, but you continue to argue in spite of it.

Completion percentage is important. And Russell was certainly better at it than Quinn in college. There are a lot of experience related reasons to expect Quinn to be better than Russell at the next level. Completely aside from starting 17 more games (one and a half freakin seasons), Russell made a lot of boneheaded decisions at the college level. I mean, at times, it almost seemed like he lacked the ability to adjust to certain defensive coverages, and was easily confused. Many LSU fans were frusterated by this.

You can make a solid argument that Russell was a better college QB than Quinn because the college game allows for physical skill to overcome inconsistent mental play. Based on what we already know about what makes a guy successful at the pro level, Quinn>Russell (by a sizable margin) just seems like the gimme of the year. Stastical projections only improve my confidence in this.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;299130]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.[/quote]

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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;299130]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.[/quote]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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;299152]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.[/QUOTE]

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

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;299156]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.[/quote]

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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;299182]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.[/quote]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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;299150]28 TDs, 8 INTs, and 67% are wonderful numbers. But it was only one year. He would have been a much better prospect if he came back another year and did it again. Quinn made a significant improvement every year through his Junior year, and then came back to improve his game for another season, and this difference will be reflected between Russell and Quinn at the pro level. I promise you.

There are a lot of college numbers that will be decieving. That's why I say its far more important that an NFL prospect take more from his college experience (games started), than he gives (everything else).

Do you disagree with the notion that Russell would have been a significantly better prospect if he stayed at LSU for his senior year season? I mean, it sounds like you are on board with this concept, but you continue to argue in spite of it.

Completion percentage is important. And Russell was certainly better at it than Quinn in college. There are a lot of experience related reasons to expect Quinn to be better than Russell at the next level. Completely aside from starting 17 more games (one and a half freakin seasons), Russell made a lot of boneheaded decisions at the college level. I mean, at times, it almost seemed like he lacked the ability to adjust to certain defensive coverages, and was easily confused. Many LSU fans were frusterated by this.

You can make a solid argument that Russell was a better college QB than Quinn because the college game allows for physical skill to overcome inconsistent mental play. Based on what we already know about what makes a guy successful at the pro level, Quinn>Russell (by a sizable margin) just seems like the gimme of the year. Stastical projections only improve my confidence in this.[/quote]

Of couse he would benefit from playing his senior year. But Russell has nothing left to prove. His stock can only go down. If you were him would you stay? Hell no. He is mostly likely going to be the number one pick in the draft. That means a 50 million $ signing bonus. Why would you go back and risk getting hurt? Remember what happened to Leinart? If he had left his 3rd year he would be a 49er right now, and he would have went first in the 05 draft. Would that last year made difference? Sure. But he got outplayed by Vince Young on the big stage and cost himself millions of dollars. So keep that in mind. It's not just about getting more game time with most guys. Leinart being the exception.

Yes Russell made some bonehead plays. But so did Brady Quinn. So did Peyton Manning in the SB. All QB's make bad decisions in every game that they play in. But Russell made less mistakes every year he started. He grew and matured like every good QB does. You act like QB's are suppose to be like robots and not make mistakes. It happens to the best QB's in football every game.

I remember watching Brady Quinn throw into double coverage against LSU so many times it wasn't even funny. He played terrible. Does than mean he is a bad decision maker? No. He just had a bad game. Remember Tripp, QBs are not robots and stats don't always tell the whole story.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;299173]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[/quote]

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.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

I think he's a fine GM. But I mean the Redskins have gotten guys like Cooley, Taylor, Campbell, Golston, Washington, Springs, Thomas; yet we continue to bitch about stupid stuff like signing Bruce Smith seven years ago and overlook everything else.

I guess it was just my feeble attempt to say not all GM's are infallible Gods, as many here tend to believe.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;299052]Remember, Palmer is a guy playing in his prime. I'm saying that when Leinart and Rivers and Roethlisberger get a few more years starting experience under their belt, they will be as good, maybe a little better than Palmer.

And that's not bashing Palmer in anyway, just saying there are better QBs than him. He's almost certainly a perennial pro bowler.[/quote]


[B][I]Spoken like a true football genius very well put tripp could not have said it better myself[/I][/B]

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;299200]I think he's a fine GM. But I mean the Redskins have gotten guys like Cooley, Taylor, Campbell, Golston, Washington, Springs, Thomas; yet we continue to bitch about stupid stuff like signing Bruce Smith seven years ago and overlook everything else.

I guess it was just my feeble attempt to say not all GM's are infallible Gods, as many here tend to believe.[/quote]

Heck yeah, plus Moss, Griffin, Rabach, now Fletcher... I do like a lot of our moves, but I also think we need the stability and consistency that comes with having a knowledgeable personnel man running the FO. If we had a decent GM back when the Danny took over I doubt Bruce Smith and Deion Sanders would have ever donned the burgundy and gold.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;299191]Of couse he would benefit from playing his senior year. But Russell has nothing left to prove. His stock can only go down. If you were him would you stay? Hell no. He is mostly likely going to be the number one pick in the draft. That means a 50 million $ signing bonus. Why would you go back and risk getting hurt? Remember what happened to Leinart? If he had left his 3rd year he would be a 49er right now, and he would have went first in the 05 draft. Would that last year made difference? Sure. But he got outplayed by Vince Young on the big stage and cost himself millions of dollars. So keep that in mind. It's not just about getting more game time with most guys. Leinart being the exception.

Yes Russell made some bonehead plays. But so did Brady Quinn. So did Peyton Manning in the SB. All QB's make bad decisions in every game that they play in. But Russell made less mistakes every year he started. He grew and matured like every good QB does. You act like QB's are suppose to be like robots and not make mistakes. It happens to the best QB's in football every game.

I remember watching Brady Quinn throw into double coverage against LSU so many times it wasn't even funny. He played terrible. Does than mean he is a bad decision maker? No. He just had a bad game. Remember Tripp, QBs are not robots and stats don't always tell the whole story.[/quote]At think point, I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree.

I clearly don't believe that all first round projected QBs are created equal. I think we both agree on a lot of crucial points but are allowing some minor points we don't agree on to blow this argument out of proportion. We are both Skins fans, and Quinn having a better career than Russell won't affect us in any way since neither will land in our division.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;288970]
Which brings the original question back into focus: What is the significance of College playing experience?

Now seeing that a QB will enter the NFL on a very similar career path to the way he leaves it (barring of course a career ending injury), doesn't this change the value of NCAA QB experience? It now appears that starting more games would ALWAYS be beneficial to the QB. That would mean that leaving school early, while potentially a smart business decision, would ALWAYS hurt the quality of a guy's career.

Is this even plausible? Let's go to the numbers:

For first round QB's (of the last 10 years) only, it seems like we [U]could--in fact--predict their successes at the next level based ONLY on the number of games they started in college[/U]. So if the scouts unianimously like a guy (because hes a first rounder), and he has a lot of college experience, recent history shows that this guy is a [B]virtual lock for success[/B]. (This is really good news for J. Campbell, although there were exceptions--with very awful college stats).

Chad Pennington: 51 starts
Philip Rivers: 51 starts
Peyton Manning: 45 starts
Carson Palmer: 45 starts
Jay Cutler: 45 starts
Donovan McNabb: 45 starts
Daunte Culpepper: 44 starts
Matt Leinart: 39 starts
Jason Campbell: 39 starts
Drew Brees: 37 starts (he was the first pick in the 2nd round)
Eli Manning: 37 starts

Look at that company. More importantly, compare that company to guys who didn't start a lot of games in college.

Patrick Ramsey: 32 starts
Rex Grossman: 31 starts
Joey Harrington: 28 starts
JP Losman: 27 starts
David Carr: 26 starts
Tim Couch: 25 starts
Ryan Leaf: 24 starts
Aaron Rodgers: 22 starts
Alex Smith: 22 starts
Michael Vick: 19 starts
Akili Smith: 19 starts

So where does Russell fit in? Over his career at LSU, JaMarcus Russell started 29 games. Not only that, but his career 62% completion is not really any better than another SEC QB who left school early (and started 2 more games). I'm talking about the incomprable Rex Grossman.

For sake of comparision, Brady Quinn started 46 games at Notre Dame and ranks up there with McNabb and Palmer with his college stats.

This study argues that with another year of experience, JaMarcus Russell would be a great NFL QB prospect. But by coming out a year early, history as least suggests the guy will have a rather mediocre NFL career.[/QUOTE]

Those are VERY interesting stats. Good job digging that up. I am a stat head and that makes me scratch my head.
I have always felt that Quinn would make a better qb than Russell, but I thought Russell would be a good QB...maybe I am incorrect.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[quote=jsarno;299277]Those are VERY interesting stats. Good job digging that up. I am a stat head and that makes me scratch my head.
I have always felt that Quinn would make a better qb than Russell, but I thought Russell would be a good QB...maybe I am incorrect.[/quote]The most confusing part of the study is the realization that these horrible busts of players could have been very good QBs had they stayed in school another year. This study suggests that a majority of busts (with a decent amount of exceptions) only busted because they were underprepared for the next level, and not for any other reason.

Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;299280]The most confusing part of the study is the realization that these horrible busts of players could have been very good QBs had they stayed in school another year. This study suggests that a majority of busts (with a decent amount of exceptions) only busted because they were underprepared for the next level, and not for any other reason.[/QUOTE]

It might show something about their mental state..."give me money now", and less to do with actual talent.
I would have never thought of those starts as being a factor, but it's hard to ignore the correlation.