![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#35 | |||||
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,323
|
Re: The Mike Shanaplan
Quote:
For every so called 'flawless' prospect there is the evil twin Leaf and now it easy to say that Manning was the better prospect but lets not kid ourselves they were basically a coin flip. Btw-Elway was a better prospect then Manning, Elway, in fact, is actually considered one of the best QB prospects ever. Quote:
I know you don't agree but Locker is very good prospect himself, he has a better arm, he's more athletic, more of a playmaker and has a cleaner throwing motion. And imo the main difference is that Locker chose to go to one of the worst DI programs in the nation devoid of many NFL prospects other then Locker. Luck plays/played for one of the best coaching staffs in college football on team filled with pro-talent and a great OL(NFL talents). Quote:
Greg McElroy 70.9 comp % also had a higher ypa then Luck. Like I was saying in my last post scheme and overall team talent matters. Power running games with a great OL are conducive to a well protected QB, a well protected QB that can play action off a power running game is gonna have a high comp %. Tolzien and McElroy illistrate that production is not a main factor in QB evaluation for the NFL. (Tolzien undrafted, McElroy late round draft pick) Quote:
If you can't concede that Stanford has a great OL, one of the best in college football then what can we agree upon? Quote:
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|