Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

I mean is he really that much better? Quinn has more experience, NFL style offense in ND, incredible stats, and smarts. Is the whole "big game" thing holding him back?

Any experts here want to explain this to me?

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

I'm by far no expert but just my opinion and observation .Well compare the game where their teams played against each other who performed better there. Last Sugar Bowl if I remember correctly LSU 41 ND 14. Russell looked like an all pro, superbowl winning mvp compared to Quinn if you ask me.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

I'm not an expert, but i can see Russell being an NFL bust. i really think Quinn will be a pretty good pro. thank god we aren't the team making that choice

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

I think Edwards and Stanton might even be as good as Russell on the pro level. Russell is really hit or miss right now. I think his ceiling is probably higher than Quinn's (or the other two aforementioned guys) but so is his floor.

If the Raiders draft him it will be interesting to see how his cannon arm style meshes with Kiffin's west coast philosophy.

Even more interesting is the notion that Russell is a great athlete. Perhaps he is, but Quinn had a faster 40 and higher vertical leap.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=hooskins;300910]I mean is he really that much better? Quinn has more experience, NFL style offense in ND, incredible stats, and smarts. Is the whole "big game" thing holding him back?

Any experts here want to explain this to me?[/quote]Ya know, Hooskins--you'd think the year Peyton Manning of all people won the super bowl, the big game arguement would get pissed down the drain as the worthless piece of garbage it is.

Luckily for the teams picking 11-20, the draft idiots are still advising the teams 1-10 who to take. This means the actual quality draft prospects will be falling once again this year.

I maintain that if everybody knew what they will in 5 years, Quinn should be the No. 1 overall pick in this draft. He will not be the best player from this draft, but he's a QB and therefore has a positional advantage over ever other position, and the team that drafts him will be really happy with him in the long run.

For more analysis on the subject, read any of my posts in [URL="http://www.thewarpath.net/redskins-nfl-draft-central/17504-how-good-will-jamarcus-russell.html"]this thread[/URL], primarily the initial post. I'm not going to debate this one any more because its silly to debate the merits of past history vs. anecdotal evidence.

The team that drafts Russell is going to use him improperly based on a miscalculation of his value. That's all there is to it.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;300915]I think Edwards and Stanton might even be as good as Russell on the pro level. Russell is really hit or miss right now. I think his ceiling is probably higher than Quinn's (or the other two aforementioned guys) but so is his floor.

If the Raiders draft him it will be interesting to see how his cannon arm style meshes with Kiffin's west coast philosophy.

Even more interesting is the notion that Russell is a great athlete. Perhaps he is, but Quinn had a faster 40 and higher vertical leap.[/quote]Quinn also had a better bench press.

I don't know why so many scouts think difference between having the arm to make every NFL throw (Quinn), and having the arm to throw 60 yards from your butt (Russell) makes a difference, much less one that outweighs all of Quinn's other advantages. In any other line of work, doing your job this poorly would be immediate grounds for dismissal. IMO, the profession of scouting has become a joke. [SIZE=4][B]These people are unwilling to learn from their mistakes[/B][/SIZE].

I'm being very careful to not blame Russell for a mess he didn't create. If he didn't have a bunch of 70 year old scouts watching his every move, he could be drafted at a spot more adventageous to his experience level low 1 or early 2, and he would be allowed more time to develop on a better team. It wouldn't make Russell any better of a prospect, but it would give him reasonable expectations and allow him, if he worked hard enough and earned his way onto the field, to achieve a reasonable amount of success relative to his skill level

Russell is going to get screwed because a bunch of guys can't do their job. I'm not anti-JaMarcus Russell. I just think any process that would rate him over Quinn is a joke. In my mind, its no longer even an issue.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;300917]Ya know, Hooskins--you'd think the year Peyton Manning of all people won the super bowl, the big game arguement would get pissed down the drain as the worthless piece of garbage it is.


[/quote]

That is what I was thinking, why do college championships really matter that much? I mean it is a great addition, but I feel the draft experts are underplaying everything else Quinn has going for him.

I really think the Raiders should take him, but that is just my opinion.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;300920]Quinn also had a better bench press.

I don't know why so many scouts think difference between having the arm to make every NFL throw (Quinn), and having the arm to throw 60 yards from your butt (Russell) makes a difference, much less one that outweighs all of Quinn's other advantages. In any other line of work, doing your job this poorly would be immediate grounds for dismissal. IMO, the profession of scouting has become a joke. These people are unwilling to learn from their mistakes.

I'm being very careful to not blame Russell for a mess he didn't create. If he didn't have a bunch of 70 year old scouts watching his every move, he could be drafted at a spot more adventageous to his experience level low 1 or early 2, and he would be allowed more time to develop on a better team. It wouldn't make Russell any better of a prospect, but it would give him reasonable expectations and allow him, if he worked hard enough and earned his way onto the field, to achieve a reasonable amount of success relative to his skill level

Russell is going to get screwed because a bunch of guys can't do their job. I'm not anti-JaMarcus Russell. I just think any process that would rate him over Quinn is a joke. In my mind, its no longer even an issue.[/quote]

Do you think Russell is not good, or just overrated? I think he is pretty good but just overrated this draft because of his arm strength and size.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=hooskins;300921]That is what I was thinking, why do college championships really matter that much? I mean it is a great addition, but I feel the draft experts are underplaying everything else Quinn has going for him.

I really think the Raiders should take him, but that is just my opinion.[/quote]Well, I like the Raiders. Always have to a degree. And if they don't take Quinn, I'd consider it a draft error.

But I've given up on their ability to make intelligent decisions as a franchise. The Skins front office may be 50 times more gung ho, but they aren't anywhere near as inept.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;300925]Well, I like the Raiders. Always have to a degree. And if they don't take Quinn, I'd consider it a draft error.

But I've given up on their ability to make intelligent decisions as a franchise. The Skins front office may be 50 times more gung ho, but they aren't anywhere near as inept.[/quote]

If you are looking for front offices worst than the Skins, I would also contend Detroit is up there to with Oakland.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=hooskins;300924]Do you think Russell is not good, or just overrated? I think he is pretty good but just overrated this draft because of his arm strength and size.[/quote]Well, I think the designation of good depends on expectation, and I don't think you can seperate one from another.

I think, based on his college production, that Russell will have a very similar career path to Rex Grossman.

And Grossman is a much better player than the media would have you think. He also lost two years due to injury to set his career back, so Russell will probably be better than that.

But I don't know too many teams who would spend a first rounder if they knew that this was what they were getting.

It's good value for the bottom of the round, and taking Russell to be your QB is better than trying to stick an unknown in there instead (That's to say the Ravens would be smarter to take Russell at 29 to fill a need as opposed to trying to get the QB of the future in the 4th round--because thats just a crapshoot). But he's not going to improve a bad franchise with his early career play.

Russell can have success if you give him a running game and a defense. He's not going to be completely inept. But hes simply not a good prospect, and making him the No. 1 pick (or even a top 10 pick) means he will be wearing the bust label by 2010.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=hooskins;300926]If you are looking for front offices worst than the Skins, I would also contend Detroit is up there to with Oakland.[/quote]Yeah, well, taking one top 10 receiver is questionable the way WRs are being graded by scouts. Taking more than one is inexcusable. I could not support a team that took 3 in consecutive years, espically with all the red flags around Mike Williams.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;300928][B]Yeah, well, taking one top 10 receiver is questionable the way WRs are being graded by scouts. [/B]Taking more than one is inexcusable. I could not support a team that took 3 in consecutive years, espically with all the red flags around Mike Williams.[/quote]

Well you know my feelings about CJ this draft, although I agree that drafting WRs in a row is very bad.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=hooskins;300931]Well you know my feelings about CJ this draft, although I agree that drafting WRs in a row is very bad.[/quote]Hey, if he redefines the position and changes the way defenses play for good, I'll eat crow every day for 5 years.

I'm just wondering what all this hype is being based on.

It's just that WR grading has become so piss poor, that you are better off taking the last remaining receiver of a certain group (like Robert Meachem as opposed to CJ) than to take the most hyped guy. History argues that they have an equal chance at success, and one costs you way less.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

If we were drafting a QB, I would only hope we would take Quinn over Russell. IMO there is a good chance Russell will be the next Leaf.