Haha, I misread his post and thought it said that the knocks on Rodgers were the same as on Jones, then after I posted I realized he said they are NOT the same, so my post was uselessThat's a good point, Cellar-Door.
Haha, I misread his post and thought it said that the knocks on Rodgers were the same as on Jones, then after I posted I realized he said they are NOT the same, so my post was uselessThat's a good point, Cellar-Door.
Well, it's definitely a point, for sure.That's a good point, Cellar-Door.
I'm just joking with you -- couldn't resist the urge to comment on your "point".Haha, I misread his post and thought it said that the knocks on Rodgers were the same as on Jones, then after I posted I realized he said they are NOT the same, so my post was useless
Yes, that was the point!Well, it's definitely a point, for sure.
I agree with Nagy here. We're used to thinking of physical talent as defining the ceiling at most positions but a) that's probably overblown generally and b) it's definitely overblown at QB. Did Jay Cutler have a higher ceiling than Tom Brady? Guys like Brady, Manning, Brees, Montana are some of the best ever, each with physical talent that would be considered marginal in some area. It does not look to me like the best players are the ones with the biggest arms or the most athleticism.Jim Nagy (Senior Bowl director, ex NE/NFL scout) was on Phil Perry's podcast after the Senior Bowl, and he gave some great insight into Mac. Perry asked him about Mac's athletic limitations and the other QBs having higher ceilings because of it. Nagy gave a fascinating answer which sort of stopped me in my tracks and made me reevaluate some of my preconceived opinions. Paraphrasing, Nagy mentioned media/fans/Draft Twitter correlate upside and ceiling to their physical ability but the NFL doesn't. think that way. He said Mac is relatively inexperienced, with 17 starts. He's already this good and the game is already pretty slow for him; how good is he going to be with more experience the way he studies and learns? He pointed out how Mac just kept getting exponentially better the more he played, capped off with a great CFB playoff run; why just assume he's leveled out? There's a ceiling and upside component to the mental part of the game as well. Just like every player has different physical ability, every player also has different processing abilities. (He also mentioned Mac is definitely a better athlete with a better arm than a lot of people give him credit for).
Which came first ... Brady or the template? Now it seems they're one and the sameSeems to describe Brady’s mentality exactly.
Pedro?Brady might be the greatest athlete ever in terms of mastering all the mental aspects of his sport. Russell? I don’t know who else is on this list but it’s a short list.
I agree with this, and would suggest a further, subtler point.I agree with Nagy here.
Larry Bird. Prior to Brady, he was the poster child for a guy with OK athletic ability, who then hones both his physical and mental abilities to a HOF level.Brady might be the greatest athlete ever in terms of mastering all the mental aspects of his sport. Russell? I don’t know who else is on this list but it’s a short list.
I think that is inevitable--physical traits can be directly assessed, while abilities such as timely decision-making and in-time adjustments in the context of the NFL game cannot. You rely on what you can gauge and take your best guess at the rest.Is there a cognitive bias in overestimating the importance of measurables relative to the unmeasurables?
There are some things that athletes have to be able to do. Even at my highest level (decent club teams with regional, not national aspirations) there were guys who could athletically get away from me, knowing what they were going to do and being right only helps so much. There is some value in measuring those things because they are a piece of the puzzle. They may well be overrated because they are so easy to compare and quantify relative to the unmeasurables.I agree with this, and would suggest a further, subtler point.
Foot speed/running/arm strength are easily seen and measured. At least a relative matter, we can't as reliably/easily measure a quarterback's processing speed. When you draft, maybe you do and should select a player based on easily measured factors because you can't reliably know whether the lesser athlete really has the superior processing skill given how hard that is to measure.
What I wonder is whether we overestimate the importance of things we CAN see/measure relative to those we cannot with regard to NFL quarterbacking success. Is there a cognitive bias in overestimating the importance of measurables relative to the unmeasurables? There certainly is such a bias in other fields of research. I cannot imagine QB scouting is any different.
im going to extend this even further out, in a way that might (?) also explain what @BusRaker noted about the ‘quadruple A’ player.I agree with Nagy here. We're used to thinking of physical talent as defining the ceiling at most positions but a) that's probably overblown generally and b) it's definitely overblown at QB. Did Jay Cutler have a higher ceiling than Tom Brady? Guys like Brady, Manning, Brees, Montana are some of the best ever, each with physical talent that would be considered marginal in some area. It does not look to me like the best players are the ones with the biggest arms or the most athleticism.
Some smart people have argued that it's easier for a young QB with athleticism to survive while he learns the mental side of the NFL game, giving him more of a floor in his early years and letting him develop what he needs to and become more of a pocket guy. My galaxy brain counter is: what if Brady (and others like him), knowing he's never going to have physical ability to fall back on, is forced to hone the subtle skills of quarterbacking to a razor sharp point: his presnap reads, diagnosing shifts post-snap, his drop footwork, his pocket movement, consistent throwing mechanics over and over, timing and anticipation throws, etc., in a way that he might not have if he'd just been able to scramble out of danger for 10 yards when shit hits the fan?
Yeah Bird immediately came to mind too.Larry Bird. Prior to Brady, he was the poster child for a guy with OK athletic ability, who then hones both his physical and mental abilities to a HOF level.
I'd put Tiger Woods on that list too.
Both Jordan and Tiger were physically quite gifted. Jordan was doing those crazy athletic dunks amd moves, and Tiger came into the scene with dramatic long drives. Not saying they weren’t smart...they’re the + players on both axes. But Bird really seemed like ++ on game IQ and ? physically. He had a quickness and a maneuverability that was special, but his vision is what made him one of the GOATS, I think.Jordan as well
Stanford is working on VR QB training.I do wonder if there is a way to build some program/game on a VR headset that would, as an example, flash for 1 second an image of a pre-snap defense and then maybe you ask the quarterback to make as many assessments of that defensive scheme as was possible, perhaps asking him about the likely read progressions, what kinds of defenses it likely wouldn't be, and so forth.
There has to be a way to at least make some attempt at measuring the visual processing of information.
Stanford developed a version of this for its QBs. No idea if it was effective (and judging by Stanford's performance the last couple of years some reasons to doubt the effectiveness).I do wonder if there is a way to build some program/game on a VR headset that would, as an example, flash for 1 second an image of a pre-snap defense and then maybe you ask the quarterback to make as many assessments of that defensive scheme as was possible, perhaps asking him about the likely read progressions, what kinds of defenses it likely wouldn't be, and so forth.
There has to be a way to at least make some attempt at measuring the visual processing of information.
It's been written that BB likes players who were chosen by their teammates to be captain. I suppose that could be an example of an unmeasurable, but tangible, indication of leadership.I recall an older video about the Pats and how they tried to quantify things that were intangible or immeasurable like leadership, mental toughness etc and trying to measure those as part of player evaluation. Those things are obviously harder to quantify, but at least they weren't saying "this guys has great intangibles", it was more "this guy is a good leader and mentally tough". Is the obsession with the wonderlic still a thing? That's another test that is easy to compare between players, but I don't think it necessarily tells you what you want to know. Still, it's got a number attached to it and so it gets used.
Yeah Jordan and Woods are definitely not cases of that. People love to play up the "oh he didn't make varisty at 14", but Jordan was a top 1% NBA athlete by the time he got there, and Woods basically changed golf because he treated it like an athletic endeavor that you prepared your body for with weights and cardio etc. instead of a skill you practiced between beers.Both Jordan and Tiger were physically quite gifted. Jordan was doing those crazy athletic dunks amd moves, and Tiger came into the scene with dramatic long drives. Not saying they weren’t smart...they’re the + players on both axes. But Bird really seemed like ++ on game IQ and ? physically. He had a quickness and a maneuverability that was special, but his vision is what made him one of the GOATS, I think.
If athleticism and game IQ are the X and Y axes maybe the drive/competitiveness is the Z axis.I think there's more than just football IQ in the QB ceiling conversation; the way they're wired is also such a large component of it all. Are they wired to put in the work, study film, lead, compete and grind? Are they wired to handle adversity? Are they wired for mental toughness? There's been no shortage of guys who've had the physical ability to be NFL QBs, who could learn a playbook and read a coverage, but it was that other stuff that they just weren't ever going to embrace. I don't think there's any way to decouple a player's wiring from their ceiling. Like, how could you project Haskin's ceiling without taking into account how he's wired? Or Manziel? Jamarcus Russell? Josh Rosen? Like, Josh Rosen is a really smart dude with physical ability. But he just doesn't seem wired to be an NFL QB (and that's okay, too).
In that Nagy podcast I mentioned, as an aside, he relayed a pretty cool Mac anecdote from the Senior Bowl. They'd run player/team interviews until about 11:30pm, and then shut the facility down at midnight. On the nights Mac didn't have interviews, the Senior Bowl staff found him in the QB room by himself going over the practice film. Nagy mentioned how it wasn't for show and the players had no idea staff would be doing room sweeps at midnight - it was just a genuine film junky trait that Mac has. That's wiring. Jeff Howe also has a cool piece out in the Athletic relaying how relentless Mac worked to get invited to the high school showcase camps, and how badly he wanted to prove he was better than the 5 star kids. It was definitely a cool read and sheds some insight into just how driven Mac is to compete and play football. I think that stuff plays just as much into a QB's ceiling as the physical and intellectual traits do.
Dartmouth does it as well.Stanford developed a version of this for its QBs. No idea if it was effective (and judging by Stanford's performance the last couple of years some reasons to doubt the effectiveness).
That thing could be the best software ever written and it's still not going to overcome a lack of talent across Stanford's roster.Stanford developed a version of this for its QBs. No idea if it was effective (and judging by Stanford's performance the last couple of years some reasons to doubt the effectiveness).
All the top golfers look more like body builders and not like John Daly these days... Even the women are jacked.Yeah Jordan and Woods are definitely not cases of that. People love to play up the "oh he didn't make varisty at 14", but Jordan was a top 1% NBA athlete by the time he got there, and Woods basically changed golf because he treated it like an athletic endeavor that you prepared your body for with weights and cardio etc. instead of a skill you practiced between beers.
yep, and Tiger was really the turning pointAll the top golfers look more like body builders and not like John Daly these days... Even the women are hacked.
Jones’ first pass of the day, however, remarkably scraped off the roof.
“The whole point was I’m a little tired of hearing ‘arm strength issues’ from people, so he’s like, ‘Let’s throw the heck out of it,'” Morris said. “I’m like, ‘Fine with me; let’s do it.’ The (first) ball hit the ceiling. I’ve never seen that happen. I’ve seen it happen on punts once or twice. He was throwing a go ball to the sideline from the middle of the field. He threw the crap out of it. It would have been a strike. That would have shaken certain people because it’s the first play, and you want a completion. He was like, ‘OK, let’s go; we’re about to nail this thing.'”
Loved this story. Everything I hear about him post-draft makes me like this kid more and more. I'm so excited for camp.
Interesting too that the Saints were ready to take him at 16 via trade up.Loved this story. Everything I hear about him post-draft makes me like this kid more and more. I'm so excited for camp.
Morris, the founder of QB Country in Mobile, Ala., was Eli Manning’s backup at Ole Miss and trained him during the latter half of his NFL career. Morris has prepared Daniel Jones, Gardner Minshew, Jake Fromm, Paxton Lynch, Nick Mullens, A.J. McCarron and Matt Barkley for previous drafts.
If Shanahan, Payton, and Belichick/McD all like Jones maybe he's just a good player.Interesting too that the Saints were ready to take him at 16 via trade up.
Alabama had 2 of the 3 best WRs in College probably the best RB in College and the best O-Line by a massive margin, the difference between his supporting cast and theirs was significant.How were Fields weapons? Or Lawrences?
(Serious question)
I assume quite good. And yet Jones gets dinged for "Well yea HE played with great weapons".
Actually, considering that they all got drafted and made a few bucks in the NFL despite apparently lacking first-rate NFL talent suggests that Morris is excellent at "getting guys drafted." The QB equivalent of an SAT tutor.Nice story- but here is a Who's Who ?
Morris, the founder of QB Country in Mobile, Ala., was Eli Manning’s backup at Ole Miss and trained him during the latter half of his NFL career. Morris has prepared Daniel Jones, Gardner Minshew, Jake Fromm, Paxton Lynch, Nick Mullens, A.J. McCarron and Matt Barkley for previous drafts.
Brady's biggest asset to me was always his drive. To this day he remains motivated and has a chip on his shoulder.Loved this story. Everything I hear about him post-draft makes me like this kid more and more. I'm so excited for camp.
But havent there been alot of evidence showing this to be untrue? (regarding Pocket stuff)Alabama had 2 of the 3 best WRs in College probably the best RB in College and the best O-Line by a massive margin, the difference between his supporting cast and theirs was significant.
And it's less he gets dinged for his weapons than that people note that his weapons and line meant he rarely had to face the type of adversity that tests a QB without elite physical tools (frequent quick pressure, tight windows, lack of separation, etc.). That matters because it can make it difficult to evaluate his tape, and means that his stats don't tell you much, so you have limited data points for analysis. Being good in a perfect situation is good, but it doesn't necessarily translate to a bad situation. So people wonder... can he deal with messy pockets, can he deal with edge pressure flushing him out, can he deal with taking a bunch of hits, can he make a throw to a guy who isn't entirely open, can he make adapt when his first 2 reads are covered, etc. which are more important in the NFL where you rarely have guys get wide open, or get a long time in a clean pocket.
As to the pocket stuff.. no not really, there is some tape of him navigating the pocket well and there is a good amount of tape of him flailing at moderate pressure, it is a legit concern for a guy who probably won't be able to break the pocket and run or force teams to rush less players to keep a spy. It's one he can learn to overcome through technique though.But havent there been alot of evidence showing this to be untrue? (regarding Pocket stuff)
And Are we sure his WRs werent simply Really good or great as opposed to him helping them be Awesome. (Chicken Egg.....somewhere in between).
Not arguing that Bama has great college players. just adding nuance to the idea.
Plus as I have said in previous posts. He isnt going to a "Bad Situation". He is in fact going to about as good a Situation as a Rookie QB can go to in the NFL (save for some A+ WR weapons).
They all had incredible weapons and supporting casts. Jones had a better cast around him. But he also played against MUCH better competition. People keep forgetting that.How were Fields weapons? Or Lawrences?
(Serious question)
I assume quite good. And yet Jones gets dinged for "Well yea HE played with great weapons".
That's definitely not at all true. Fields had the hardest schedule of defenses played by a pretty significant margin. In fact it graded out as the toughest schedule of any drafted QB in a decade.They all had incredible weapons and supporting casts. Jones had a better cast around him. But he also played against MUCH better competition. People keep forgetting that.