Quote:
Originally Posted by EARTHQUAKE2689
I liked Freeman's intangibles and decision making a hell of a lot more than Locker's. That "bad" supporting cast thing isn't a very good argument IMO either.
|
The bad supporting cast isn't an 'argument' its either a true statement or its not.
And although you might not agree it is in fact something scouts consider when assessing a player case in point Josh Freeman.
If you follow the draft process at all you should know who Gil Brandt is and the weight his opinions carry:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gil Brandt:
I probably differ with the questioner a little bit. I think Josh Freeman from Kansas State has a chance to be a very good quarterback in the NFL, just as Daunte Culpepper was with the Vikings when he was healthy. Freeman played on a poor team in 2008, and if you look at what he did in 2007, you’d be pretty excited about what he could do for your team in 2010. Freeman has tremendous upside. As a point of reference, look at Kansas State’s game against Texas in 2007, when he led the Wildcats to a 41-21 victory in Austin, Tex.
|
Draft Q. & A. With Gil Brandt - NYTimes.com
Nothing against Freeman's intangibles but if there is one area where Locker is at the top its intangibles.
Locker is about as clean a prospect from an intangibles view point as Tim Tebow.
We get that you don't like Jake Locker as a prospect but you don't need to invent spurious reasons to support your view.
Jake Locker wether you agree or not is one of the top rated QBs in this draft class for a reason.