Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=TheSmurfs22;779021]Trade down and focus on our offensive line.[/quote]

You didn't read the thread title did you?

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=30gut;779040]One would think that this late in the argument you wouldn't attempt a strawman i.e claiming that i think your methodology is stupid.
If i thought it was stupid i would say so.
My point is that evaluation [B]isn't done by[/B] looking at stats.
And stats alone don't paint the picture of a prospects ability especially a QB, the position that many consider the most dependent position on the field.
No.
I responded to your post where you used a statistical model to pan a prospect without any mention of the prospect abilities.
My position is that if you've seen Locker play you wouldn't have the opinions you have about him especially about him being a 'wild thrower'.[/quote]You're toeing a line that doesn't exist. There's no room to tell someone that something isn't done by people without implying that a methodology is wrongheaded. Your position that anyone, specifically talking about me, that has seen Locker play wouldn't be of the opinion that he is a wild thrower is wrong. Wild is my word, but that's the scouting report on him.

[quote=Mike Mayock]He's got all the tools to be a top-level quarterback, all the physical tools. The size and the arm strength. I just question his pocket awareness. And that's where his accuracy issues come into play. When he moves outside the pocket, either right or left, and not just scrambling, [U]because they did a good job with plays that moved him outside the pocket and had him throw on the run, he has good vision and is as accurate as any quarterback you'll see. But he gets into some trouble in the pocket, seeing the field, and that's where his accuracy breaks down.[/U] I'm really excited to see him at the Senior Bowl (in two weeks) and see him working with other receivers. To me he's got first-round ability. But I just need to get more comfortable with him, and his pocket awareness.[/quote]

Mayock, for the record, supports Locker as a first rounder. I do not.

[quote]I was asking you about which games you've watched to hopefully spur a discussion based on what we actually see from the game.
To see if Locker's wild throwing or accuracy was evident from watching some commonly available games on the internet like the USC game i posted in my OP.

The difference is that i wanted to discuss actual plays from actual games, but you didn't want to budge from your scouting via stats.[/quote]Well, I don't know exactly what you wanted to discuss. I thought you made your position very clear that you didn't think Locker was a particularly wild thrower. I thought you had a minority position, but I was willing to -- and still do -- respect your position. If what you really wanted to do was go play by play through a film cutup and debate pros and cons, then I'm just confused by the way you went about it.

You have made it equally clear that you don't respect my position because you don't believe I should be allowed to defend a player's ability to complete passes with stats. I have concluded that your criticism is ridiculous and cannot be taken seriously. Next issue.

[quote]I don't see what the point would be.
[B]You've already demonstrated your posting style and its tedious and needlessly contentious.[/B]
Also, i actually like talk about the prospects play in games and you thus far have only mentioned stats and an only a statistically supported claim of Locker's 'wild throwing'.
And you already showed to grade prospects w/ a double standard in the case of Newton/Gabbert.
Oh, and you've also shown that you ignore any question you don't like e.g. about Gabbert vs Locker's efficiency rating.[/quote]For someone who is offended by the word bitching, you sure are adept at getting your hands dirty and slinging the mud around.

I'm not bothered by a little bit of jabbing, though you probably already know that by now. I give as good as I get. Just be careful to keep composure, or you get paragraphs like this. If you have anything insightful on Gabbert or Newton, I hope you do post it as I do value your opinion. I just have a tendency to be more receptive to opinions that make sense in the context of everything I already read/see/use.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

In the words of the great Ryan Leaf " knock it off alright"!!!

Seriously some folks need to chill on this site

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Well this thread has more than run its course it seems

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

You VT fans need to take those glasses off, tyrod taylor isn't a NFL QB, he's a very avg passer at best and honestly isn't that good even in college.. Good athlete but not a QB.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;779079]Well this thread has more than run its course it seems[/quote]

Kind of like that Tony Romo thread had run it's course after the initial post..

Are you the only Mod not on vacation or what Tafkas?

jk (:

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;779080]You VT fans need to take those glasses off, tyrod taylor isn't a NFL QB, he's a very avg passer at best and honestly isn't that good even in college.. Good athlete but not a QB.[/quote]

Had a better year this season I'll give him that but still not a QB IMO.. Who knows kid may prove the doubters wrong

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;779079]Well this thread has more than run its course it seems[/quote]Everytime I try to make a concluding post I write too much.

I do feel the thread has reached the level of ridiculous, but can't promise there won't be another more-ridiculous response if left open. I support this going right to thread hell.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;779079]Well this thread has more than run its course it seems[/quote]

More like slightly off track. Way to early to kill off this thread. I mean come on we still have the senior bowl, combine, and all the other draft festivities. My mind alone is going to change about 500 times between now and April in regards to this pick alone.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;779079]Well this thread has more than run its course it seems[/quote]

Gotta be entertained somewhere right?

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;779080]You VT fans need to take those glasses off, tyrod taylor isn't a NFL QB, he's a very avg passer at best and honestly isn't that good even in college.. Good athlete but not a QB.[/quote]Who said that?

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

I'm actually wishing we would make a move for Flynn from GB

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;779076]You're toeing a line that doesn't exist. There's no room to tell someone that something isn't done by people without implying that a methodology is wrongheaded. Your position that anyone, specifically talking about me, that has seen Locker play wouldn't be of the opinion that he is a wild thrower is wrong. Wild is my word, but that's the scouting report on him.[/quote]
You're always assuming your conclusion.
I think that there is value in forecasting based on retrospective analysis.
Like the Lewin and other formula's.
But, i think there is a distinction between scouting the prospects and forecasting a prospects success based on stats.

I haven't seen many if any scouting reports that call Locker a wild thrower if wild implies inaccurate.
I've seen reports that mention inconsistent but not inaccurate.

[quote=Mike Mayock]He's got all the tools to be a top-level quarterback, all the physical tools. The size and the arm strength. I just question his pocket awareness. And that's where his accuracy issues come into play. [B][I][U]When he moves outside the pocket, either right or left, and not just scrambling, because they did a good job with plays that moved him outside the pocket and had him throw on the run, he has good vision and is as accurate as any quarterback you'll see.[/U][/I][/B] But he gets into some trouble in the pocket, seeing the field, and that's where his accuracy breaks down. I'm really excited to see him at the Senior Bowl (in two weeks) and see him working with other receivers. To me he's got first-round ability. But I just need to get more comfortable with him, and his pocket awareness.[/quote]
Its funny you posted this quote b/c it speaks to my point.
Mayock specifically mentions his accuracy as a positive and states that Locker gets into some trouble in the pocket where he doesn't see the field well and that is where Locker's accuracy breaks down and that he [Mayock] needs to take a closer look at Locker's pocket awareness.

Would you agree that its more difficult to throw on the run then from a clean pocket?

When i watched Washington it was clear that their OL lack of pass protection was the reason they moved Locker outside the pocket and the reason why the bulk of their passing game was quick game and short drops 1-3 steps.
And imo this why Locker at time doesn't appear comfortable in the pocket b/c his OL gets beat regularly.


[quote]Well, I don't know exactly what you wanted to discuss. I thought you made your position very clear that you didn't think Locker was a particularly wild thrower. I thought you had a minority position, but I was willing to -- and still do -- respect your position. If what you really wanted to do was go play by play through a film cutup and debate pros and cons, then I'm just confused by the way you went about it.[/quote]
Funny b/c this is from my OP:
[quote=30gut;778161][YT]SXw6qJlFqXQ[/YT]
Question:
Would you or the people in this forum be interested in a thread on the top QB prospects?
A thread that invite people to take a closer look (past the stats) at the commonly available game cut-ups (youtube) and discuss the particular plays from the same game so all have the same frame of reference and can discuss the specific plays that lead to the stats in context.[/quote]
Seems pretty straight forward to me and i asked the question b/c i'm in another Redskins forum where we actually do the above suggestion.(watch and discuss game cut-ups of the top prospects)

[quote]You have made it equally clear that you don't respect my position because you don't believe I should be allowed to defend a player's ability to complete passes with stats. I have concluded that your criticism is ridiculous and cannot be taken seriously. Next issue.[/quote]
Nope.
I think you cannot [I]evaluate[/I] from stats and therefore cannot judge a QBs ability to complete passes by look at comp% alone.
Comp% doesn't equal a QBs ability to complete passes it indicates the team's ability to complete passes.

[quote]For someone who is offended by the word bitching, you sure are adept at getting your hands dirty and slinging the mud around.[/quote]
To borrow from you: [quote]I give as good as I get[/quote]
I try to post in converstaional manner the way i would holding a conversation at a sports bar.

[quote]I just have a tendency to be more receptive to opinions that make sense in the context of everything I already read/see/use.[/quote]
Maybe you need to be expand the context of things you read/see/use to allow yourself to be more receptive to different opinions.
That way you would be more receptive to people like Mayock and Gil Brandt both of whom don't share your view about Jake Locker since both have him as 1st rounder.

BTW- Do you have any comment about the fact that Locker and Gabbert have similar efficiency numbers?

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;779016]This isn't rocket science. Players 5-15 on Mel Kiper's Big Board are:

5. Marcell Dareus, DE, Alabama
6. Prince Amukamara, CB, Nebraska
7. Robert Quinn, DE/OLB, North Carolina
8. Blaine Gabbert, QB, Missouri
9. Von Miller, OLB, Texas A&M
10. Julio Jones, WR, Alabama
11. Nate Solder, OT, Colorado
12. Akeem Ayers, OLB, UCLA
13. Ryan Kerrigan, DE, Purdue
14. Aldon Smith, OLB, Missouri
15. Cam Newton, QB, Auburn

And there you have it. 11 players will can realistically be available at no. 10, but wouldn't be a reach at the same spot. The internet can do this![/quote]

However I didn't ask what players would be realistically available at no. 10. :) I asked what positions should be looked at being taken at no. 10. That way I could make a generalized decision as to what player I'd take there instead of a QB, since I'd rather have Dalton in a later round.

Someone before you did a better job of what I asked for by adding the "Studs and Duds" link, which showed at the bottom which positions have been taken previously with the no. 10 pick. and as someone else said a Center is usually not picked. Fine change it out with a NT, but I'd rather we pick BPA at a needed position vs. simply taking BPA.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=Shadowbyte;779036]This has probably been mentioned but Mel Kiper has Newton going to skins. Charles Davis of the NFL Network has Newton going to the skins too. I believe Shannahan see's Cam as a challenge, something that will reap great benefits if he reaches his full potential.[/quote]

Gotta love the pundits. Which one said we'd take Trent Williams last yr?

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SBXVII;779133]Gotta love the pundits. Which one said we'd take Trent Williams last yr?[/quote]

Actually most said we would take Trent because of his athleticism at LT, and how he would fit the system more than Okung.

Either way Locker or Newton, Rex Grossman will be the starter next season and I actually think he will have a really solid year.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Most of us havn't even thought about VY? What if he comes in? It could happen

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;779080]You VT fans need to take those glasses off, tyrod taylor isn't a NFL QB, he's a very avg passer at best and honestly isn't that good even in college.. Good athlete but not a QB.[/quote]


Not that I'm agreeing with you but I could have sworn the announcers during the game said something to the effect that Taylor might want to or need to switch to WR if he's picked up by an NFL team. My first thought was he looked like Randel Cunningham running around on the field and it would be nice to see the team use Grossman next yr the whole while developing Taylor to be a QB/WR or WR/QB and use him in Wild Cat formations.

Then I woke up and thought.... would the Skins even think in that direction or even use the Wild Cat enough in the coming yrs to make it worth their while to draft him? I'm figuring not but I can see some team who does use it picking him up.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SBXVII;779140]Not that I'm agreeing with you but I could have sworn the announcers during the game said something to the effect that Taylor might want to or need to switch to WR if he's picked up by an NFL team. My first thought was he looked like Randel Cunningham running around on the field and it would be nice to see the team use Grossman next yr the whole while developing Taylor to be a QB/WR or WR/QB and use him in Wild Cat formations.

Then I woke up and thought.... would the Skins even think in that direction or even use the Wild Cat enough in the coming yrs to make it worth their while to draft him? I'm figuring not but I can see some team who does use it picking him up.[/quote]


I could see him in a Brad Smith role for the skins, with him and Banks in the wildcat could be scary.. But MS is old school and I doubt he would do anything like that. Taylor reminds me of ARE just a good athlete that has a decent Arm, but even Warren Noon was over looked so anything is possible.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;779084]Everytime I try to make a concluding post I write too much.

I do feel the thread has reached the level of ridiculous, but can't promise there won't be another more-ridiculous response if left open. I support this going right to thread hell.[/quote]

Honestly I think you both are correct but stubborn enough not to admit to either that your both right.

I think you have to look at the stats in order to get an idea of how accurate the QB was under pressure, get to see where he was most accurate in his passes like short, medium, or long. but I think you also have to actually see the player and watch film to see his mechanic's, ie; footwork, arm motion, release of the ball, pocket awarness, and over all control of the offense.

I for one give little opinion to which would be better QB from a big school vs. a little school. True the competition is different but if he has few flaws and little for the QB Coach to change when the player makes the change to the pro's then what does it matter.

I'll be happy with whoever our coaching staff decides is best for it's scheme/system and I doubt the coaching staff would go out and play pin the tail on the donkey to get the next franchise QB so I presume they will do their due dilligence and look at all aspects of the QB's on the board and have a list of who they could work with.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SBXVII;779142]Honestly I think you both are correct but stubborn enough not to admit to either that your both right.

I think you have to look at the stats in order to get an idea of how accurate the QB was under pressure, get to see where he was most accurate in his passes like short, medium, or long. but I think you also have to actually see the player and watch film to see his mechanic's, ie; footwork, arm motion, release of the ball, pocket awarness, and over all control of the offense.

I for one give little opinion to which would be better QB from a big school vs. a little school. True the competition is different but if he has few flaws and little for the QB Coach to change when the player makes the change to the pro's then what does it matter.

I'll be happy with whoever our coaching staff decides is best for it's scheme/system and I doubt the coaching staff would go out and play pin the tail on the donkey to get the next franchise QB so I presume they will do their due dilligence and look at all aspects of the QB's on the board and have a list of who they could work with.[/quote]


So Gtripp wants Newton and 30 wants Locker? Or the other way around? Sorry but I didn't want to read their 8 page essays on the matter LOL.. Either way I hope the guy sits for a season.. Sexy Rexy is good enough for next year IMO

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SBXVII;779142]I think you have to look at the stats in order to get an idea of how accurate the QB was under pressure, get to see where he was most accurate in his passes like short, medium, or long. but I think you also have to actually see the player and watch film to see his mechanic's, ie; footwork, arm motion, release of the ball, pocket awarness, and over all control of the offense............I'll be happy with whoever our coaching staff decides is best for it's scheme/system and I doubt the coaching staff would go out and play pin the tail on the donkey to get the next franchise QB so I presume they will do their due dilligence and look at all aspects of the QB's on the board and have a list of who they could work with.[/quote]

I agree with you here.
Except i think there should be distinction made between comp% and accuracy.
Imo you have to watch a QB too assess their acuracy.
But, i agee with you about everything else.

HTTR

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;779134]Actually most said we would take Trent because of his athleticism at LT, and how he would fit the system more than Okung.

Either way Locker or Newton,[B] Rex Grossman will be the starter next season and I actually think he will have a really solid year[/B].[/quote]

Thank You.

Someone who views the same situation as I do. It really doesn't matter who we pick, cause I doubt they will start next yr. The team went out and picked up a HOF QB brought him in and even he didn't have the full grasp of the offensive scheme. Only Grossman showed that he had the full understanding. Not that I'm in love with him cause I hate his 1 interception per game ratio but he knows the system. Whoever we bring in will take time to get up to speed as it did with McNabb and more then likely won't know the offense fully.

So, I foresee Grossman standing in for a year till said drafted QB learns for a year. On a side note what if it turns out to be Beck? It was reported that the Shanahan's coveted Beck when he was in the draft. Now they have him. We might all be supprised in the coming yrs.

Re:
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;779144]So Gtripp wants Newton and 30 wants Locker? Or the other way around? Sorry but I didn't want to read their 8 page essays on the matter LOL.. Either way I hope the guy sits for a season.. Sexy Rexy is good enough for next year IMO[/quote]

LoL,
in re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
Jake Locker

But, I would hope we're in position to select a top defensive prospect that miraculously falls (Orakpo) like Marcel Dareus.
If the above situation doesn't occur then i would hope we're in position to trade down and still acquire a QB we like.

I like all this years QBs.
I think the top 4 prospects all have above average arm talent and generally sound fundamentals.
The top of my list would be Jake Locker.
Followed by Newton and Gabbert; althogh i have a hard time thinking Kyle would want a QB like Cam Newton.
Lastly there's Mallett i like his arm but not his feet, i prefer QBs that can move and make plays but there are plenty of successful QBs that don't move well.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=30gut;779147]I agree with you here.
Except i think there should be distinction made between comp% and accuracy.
Imo you have to watch a QB too assess their acuracy.
But, i agee with you about everything else.

HTTR[/quote]

The only reason I think you have to look at the stats is because you might find a QB whose team ran the ball more then passed. Is it fair to look at him and say another QB threw for 3,000 yrds when this one only threw for 1,000? no but to see out those passes how many were caught might give you an idea of his accuracy, but you are also correct in saying that if the team has a horrid OL and it constantly breaks down and the QB is always throwing under heavy pressure should he be evaluated the same as a QB who has OL who gives him all day to find an open receiver and get them the ball? no.

Which is why I said both of you are correct. Ya have to look at all the facts not just one side and even then it's a crap shoot as to how well they will do in the NFL.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;778969]As long as we're talking about players who vastly underacheived expectations in 2010, I like Texas A&M's Jerrod Johnson as a 6th or 7th round project. I think he has a lot of Tyrod Taylor's skill set, but with way less of the steep curve that's ahead of teams who look at Taylor as a future NFL starter.

Taylor is a lot like Troy Smith coming out of college. 4 years later, Smith really still plays like a successful college QB instead of a long-term pro prospect. There's nothing inherent to suggest that Taylor is doomed to the same fate: I could see him being a great pro player. But having the complete skill set isn't a guarantee of NFL success.[/quote]

So do we.. and apparently our scouts all have walkers with tennis balls on the legs

[url=http://www.hogshaven.com/2011/1/20/1945915/redskins-show-interest-in-qb-jerrod-johnson-at-east-west-shrine-game]Redskins Show Interest in QB Jerrod Johnson at East/West Shrine Game Practices - Hogs Haven[/url]

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

id take another QB just not at #10 : Ponder would fit very well with Shanahan ,accurate and mobile,not the strongest of arms but accuracy is way more important

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=tryfuhl;779156]So do we.. and apparently our scouts all have walkers with tennis balls on the legs

[url=http://www.hogshaven.com/2011/1/20/1945915/redskins-show-interest-in-qb-jerrod-johnson-at-east-west-shrine-game]Redskins Show Interest in QB Jerrod Johnson at East/West Shrine Game Practices - Hogs Haven[/url][/quote]

I'm sure that's typical no news

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=skinsfaninok;779178]I'm sure that's typical no news[/quote]

Preach

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Ok so I went and Youtubed Jake Locker Highlights...

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZchE4x7zlE]YouTube - Jake Locker Career Highlights[/url]

He seems like a decent QB, with an ability to escape trouble with his Harry Whodini routines, but I quickly got bored with the first part of the video showing nothing but him either running a designed QB run play or running around like a rat who's had too much energy drink trying to avoid a sack. I will say that with our OL it might not be a bad idea to get him.... he might be able to do something with the ball considering he had so many broken plays he turned into gains.

So I moved forward to the passing and he seems to have a good arm, fast release, and seems to be able to throw on the run.

I was simply going back to see the QB's mentioned here. My only concern is I'm not sure if the video is of any games from this yr or simply highlights of all his yrs in college.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Blain Gabbert looks awkward to me. When he scrambles he looks slow, there is something about his throwing motion that I can't identify, although he seems to have a pretty strong arm to throw down field.

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XW69HWngSdk]YouTube - Missouri QB #11 Blaine Gabbert Highlights[/url]

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Cam Newton seemed to be a decent QB as well, however watching the first part of the video left me feeling like here's another QB running around like a chicken with his head cut off. He's definitly mobile, seems to have a strong arm, maybe a big wind up, and perhaps calls his number or is not patient in the pocket.

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DElYMENB2c4]YouTube - Cameron Newton highlights 2010 *Preview[/url]

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Yet another QB Jerrod Johnson with Whodini ability, does have a strong arm..... again doesn't seem patient or wants to simply run it himself....

[URL="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfBtEr9oEfM"]YouTube - Texas A&M Football '10[/URL]

on a side note I wonder if the RB will be available to us late in the draft.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Mallett seems like a decent QB as well. Patient in the pocket, rolls out smooth, passes on the run well, good arm....

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdagmnnKUx0]YouTube - Ryan Mallett[/url]

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Shameless Plug: You can watch more than just the highlights by going to ESPN3.com Click "Watch Now" Search "Missouri" (for example), Choose "NCAAF" then pick your game and "Watch Replay"

It'll give you a more complete idea than the YT highlights. Over 150 games to choose from

(Note: Fixing the Auburn issue)

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Christian Ponder seems to be a good choice also. Strong arm, accurate, places the ball so the receiver can continue their run, can run with the ball....

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCuu6UyO3B0]YouTube - Christian Ponder Highlights[/url]

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Andy Dalton, I don't know, I watch him and I'm left impressed still with his play. Poise, arm strength, accuracy, run ability, .....

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rgEw2tT00Q]YouTube - Wisconsin vs. TCU Rose Bowl Highlights[/url]

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=30gut;779123]BTW- Do you have any comment about the fact that Locker and Gabbert have similar efficiency numbers?[/quote]Actually, yes. I assume you meant "in 2010", because they're not close for their careers.

The biggest differences between them were:

-Completion percentage much higher for Gabbert
-Sack rate a little bit lower for Gabbert (not a passing efficiency component)
-Rushing Efficiency decisively in the favor of Locker (not a passing efficiency component)
-Gabbert had more attempts, mostly, because Locker missed a game and parts of two others.

I think if you wanted to say that Locker and Gabbert had more similar seasons than they were different, that would make some sense. I also think that it would be reasonable to say that Gabbert as a junior was not a significantly better college player than Locker as a fourth or fifth year senior.

I think that's as far as that argument would take you though. Gabbert probably wouldn't be a top pick this if he wasn't exceptional as a first year starter in 2009, but it seems reasonable to argue that he would have been better in 2011 with more receiver experience than he was in 2010 had he come back for his senior year. I am NOT saying he should automatically get credit for leaving that last year on the table. I am saying that Gabbert looks the part of a top ten pick (and I would take him at no. 10 if he's there), but still carries some concern, namely that the questions we would all have about him as a Senior in 2011 will be left unanswered.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

Mel Kiper, as of 2011.01.20, has another Auburn QB going to D.C.

Re: IF We Take A QB At #10...Who Do You Want?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;779219]Shameless Plug: You can watch more than just the highlights by going to ESPN3.com Click "Watch Now" Search "Missouri" (for example), Choose "NCAAF" then pick your game and "Watch Replay"
It'll give you a more complete idea than the YT highlights. Over 150 games to choose from
(Note: Fixing the Auburn issue)[/quote]

You mentioned it before and i checked it out thanks.
Also, there are complete game cut-ups of Locker and Gabbert on youtube.
All of Newton's Auburn game cut-ups are available at:
[url=http://whosright.com/poll/cameron-cam-newton-heisman-highlights]Cameron (Cam) Newton Heisman Highlights[/url]