Tracking the Draft Prospects: Quarterback

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,837
RedOctober3829 said:
 
 
 
Guess they REALLY want due dilligence on this QB class.
 
 
He's looking for more info on the Rutgers kids they want to draft.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
I think it's legal tampering. TB is going to retire about the time Johnny enters free agency. So BB is setting him up to enter free agency when his rookies contract expires.

You want to retire a Patriot or a Brown?
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Reading Waldman's RSP. He talks about how he looks whether QB prospects "drive off the front foot." Is that a thing they coach? What does it mean? I never played football, but based on my primitive understanding of biomechanics I don't understand how you'd generate power in a forward direction driving off the front foot.
 

mascho

Kane is Able
SoSH Member
Nov 30, 2007
14,952
Silver Spring, Maryland
"Driving off the front foot" is a simpler way of illustrating how a QB generates power in a throw. Arm strength is about 30% the strength of the throwing arm, and the rest mechanics.

The first mechanism that power is generated through is through the torquing of the hips. In college our QB specific lifting program included many exercises and lifts focused on hip explosiveness, which was great on the field (and had benefits off the field as well). But the very first movement a QB makes when starting a throw is opening up the front hip. The more compact and explosive that movement is, the more arm speed can be generated.

Next is the lead arm. This is often neglected, but is essential to a throw. As, say, a right-handed QB makes a throw, he can use that left arm to "pull through" the throw. This also generates power. As the left arm pulls the body forward, this also generates torque/power.

Driving through the front foot is simply the completion of the movement. If a QB can really step into the throw, it is a four point process: hip turn, lead arm pull, throw, and follow-through including the back foot finishing through and in front of the front foot, and the QB generating the last bit of power when it is the front foot, and not the back foot, pushing off the ground. Think about it, at the moment of release it is the front foot solidly on the ground, not the back foot. Mechanically sound QBs are still generating power at that moment by pushing forward off the balls of their front foot.
 

Otto

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
1,736
Anytime, USA
Just a note on the pre-draft visits: teams are not allowed to do any workout stuff on a team visit at the team facility, just meet and stuff like that.
BTW, I'm at the S. Carolina pro day and this is a circus. Media and scouts like its the combine.
 

( . ) ( . ) and (_!_)

T&A
SoSH Member
Feb 9, 2010
5,302
Providence, RI
Otto, does the 30 in house visit rule actually matter?  It seems that teams can have a lot of touch points with players between the combine, pro days, the 30 visits, etc..  But how much are teams meeting with players before the draft that we never hear about?   Is there a real difference between bringing a player into Foxboro to meet (but not work out) and meeting with that player out on the road somewhere?  Does the NFL really care about this or could teams meet with many of the players pre draft if they had the time and resources to do so?
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
6,095
RedOctober3829 said:

 

 
Guess they REALLY want due dilligence on this QB class.
Could also be a long term play on college QBs in general. Reiss mentions how Belichick didn't do much, if any, work on Andrew Luck because there was no chance the Pats were gonna draft him. It's likely been that way for some time now with the top QB prospects.

As we get closer to the end of Brady's career, it becomes more likely the Pats will take an interest in the top college QBs. They seem unlikely to be spending a high pick on a QB this year, but maybe in the not too distant future they will want to do so. If they haven't been paying much attention to those guys, then it makes sense to start doing so now. When judging prospects you not only want to judge them against that year's crop but against the larger talent pool in general. How do these guys rate versus the players who were drafted last year? Against the players who will be in the draft next year? These are pertinent questions to ask as talent is never evenly distributed amongst individual drafts.

This is a long winded way of saying that spending time evaluating players like Manziel and Bridgewater could help the Patriots efforts when evaluating top QB prospects in future years, when the Pats have a legitimate interest in the position.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN  5m
Before the Patriots drafted Ryan Mallett, they had pre-draft meetings with Colin Kaepernick, Andy Dalton and Jake Locker.
 
If one of Bridgewater, Manziel, or Bortles fell to 29, would you take him? I'd have a hard time passing, even though he probably wouldn't start until 2017.
 

mascho

Kane is Able
SoSH Member
Nov 30, 2007
14,952
Silver Spring, Maryland
Super Nomario said:
Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN[/size]  5m
Before the Patriots drafted Ryan Mallett, they had pre-draft meetings with Colin Kaepernick, Andy Dalton and Jake Locker.
 
If one of Bridgewater, Manziel, or Bortles fell to 29, would you take him? I'd have a hard time passing, even though he probably wouldn't start until 2017.
If one of those guys is there at 29 someone would be willing to give up some picks to trade back into the first to draft that QB. I would be very surprised to see the Pats actually pull the trigger on a QB, even one of those guys, in the first. Too many ways to maximize value would present themselves. I mean, 29 is worth Houston's second and fourth according to the pick chart. I'd rather they drop back to 33 and get yet another fourth than draft one of those guys, especially if they are in free-fall, but that is just me.
 

Dogman

Yukon Cornelius
Moderator
SoSH Member
Mar 19, 2004
15,177
Missoula, MT
Super Nomario said:
 
Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyedNESN  5m
Before the Patriots drafted Ryan Mallett, they had pre-draft meetings with Colin Kaepernick, Andy Dalton and Jake Locker.
 
If one of Bridgewater, Manziel, or Bortles fell to 29, would you take him? I'd have a hard time passing, even though he probably wouldn't start until 2017.
 
 
Yep.  Mallett for a 3rd would work just fine if the Pats were able to select one of the 3 listed above.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
mascho said:
If one of those guys is there at 29 someone would be willing to give up some picks to trade back into the first to draft that QB. I would be very surprised to see the Pats actually pull the trigger on a QB, even one of those guys, in the first. Too many ways to maximize value would present themselves. I mean, 29 is worth Houston's second and fourth according to the pick chart. I'd rather they drop back to 33 and get yet another fourth than draft one of those guys, especially if they are in free-fall, but that is just me.
It depends on the individual evaluation, obviously, but assuming there's a real chance for a franchise-type QB it would be crazy to me to pass that up for just a 4th. How many chances do the Pats get at a top signal-caller prospect?
 

mascho

Kane is Able
SoSH Member
Nov 30, 2007
14,952
Silver Spring, Maryland
Super Nomario said:
It depends on the individual evaluation, obviously, but assuming there's a real chance for a franchise-type QB it would be crazy to me to pass that up for just a 4th. How many chances do the Pats get at a top signal-caller prospect?
A second and a fourth, not just a fourth. Giving them three fourth round picks, in an area of the draft where TE/WR depth shows up. But as you say that person isn't starting for three seasons or so. So why burn a first round pick on someone who likely isn't starting soon when there are other areas of need that can be addressed with that pick?

I won't rule it out, but I don't think it would be in line with this organization's philosophy.

EDIT: Also, the "second/fourth" is just a rough idea of what 29 is worth, according to the pick trade chart. If a team is really desperate for a top flight QB (yet passed on him earlier) New England could likely secure more for 29 via trade.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
Super Nomario said:
It depends on the individual evaluation, obviously, but assuming there's a real chance for a franchise-type QB it would be crazy to me to pass that up for just a 4th. How many chances do the Pats get at a top signal-caller prospect?
I absolutely see what you mean SN.  It could be a Favre-Rodgers scenario, but would you get a franchise-type QB who might not start for 3-4 years at least over addressing current needs?
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
mascho said:
A second and a fourth, not just a fourth. Giving them three fourth round picks, in an area of the draft where TE/WR depth shows up. But as you say that person isn't starting for three seasons or so. So why burn a first round pick on someone who likely isn't starting soon when there are other areas of need that can be addressed with that pick?

I won't rule it out, but I don't think it would be in line with this organization's philosophy.

EDIT: Also, the "second/fourth" is just a rough idea of what 29 is worth, according to the pick trade chart. If a team is really desperate for a top flight QB (yet passed on him earlier) New England could likely secure more for 29 via trade.
You don't really pick up a second, though; you're just moving back from 29 to 33 in exchange for a 4th. So the only net new is the 4th. If you can actually pick up an additional second, that's a much different value proposition.
 
RedOctober3829 said:
I absolutely see what you mean SN.  It could be a Favre-Rodgers scenario, but would you get a franchise-type QB who might not start for 3-4 years at least over addressing current needs?
Obviously if I knew it was a Favre-Rodgers scenario, I'd do it in a heartbeat. The question is how to evaluate a decision like this in a world of uncertainty. If Bridgewater or Manziel has a 10% chance of becoming another Rodgers, is it worth it? 5%? Keep in mind that at 29, you have historically a roughly 20% chance of picking a star and a chance 20% of a bust at most positions. Also, it's worth noting that at 37, Brady is hardly a lock to play 16 games.
 
There's opportunity cost either way. To me, it would suck to miss out on Hageman or Su'a-Filo or Amaro or whoever, but there are other opportunities to get guys like that. Chances to acquire a franchise quarterback are rare.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,274
“@Nick_Underhill: If scouting is the thing here, have to wonder why the Pats didn’t meet with Geno, Manuel, Luck, etc. in previous years.”

twitter.com/Nick_Underhill/status/451396807164440576
 

mascho

Kane is Able
SoSH Member
Nov 30, 2007
14,952
Silver Spring, Maryland
Super Nomario said:
You don't really pick up a second, though; you're just moving back from 29 to 33 in exchange for a 4th. So the only net new is the 4th. If you can actually pick up an additional second, that's a much different value proposition.
 

Obviously if I knew it was a Favre-Rodgers scenario, I'd do it in a heartbeat. The question is how to evaluate a decision like this in a world of uncertainty. If Bridgewater or Manziel has a 10% chance of becoming another Rodgers, is it worth it? 5%? Keep in mind that at 29, you have historically a roughly 20% chance of picking a star and a chance 20% of a bust at most positions. Also, it's worth noting that at 37, Brady is hardly a lock to play 16 games.
 
There's opportunity cost either way. To me, it would suck to miss out on Hageman or Su'a-Filo or Amaro or whoever, but there are other opportunities to get guys like that. Chances to acquire a franchise quarterback are rare.
Since Brady isn't a lock to play 16, does it make more sense to draft a replacement QB at 29 or to draft someone who increases the odds he plays 16? That could take the form of an OL to protect him or an offensive weapon who can get open, speeding up his release? If Brady does go down, would Bortles/Bridgewater/Manziel plus later picks be better offensively than say Amaro plus an extra pick or two plus Aaron Murray?

All I do know is that having these options at 29 would be a good thing. Other than that there is no way of knowing what the better course of action is.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
mascho said:
Since Brady isn't a lock to play 16, does it make more sense to draft a replacement QB at 29 or to draft someone who increases the odds he plays 16? That could take the form of an OL to protect him or an offensive weapon who can get open, speeding up his release? If Brady does go down, would Bortles/Bridgewater/Manziel plus later picks be better offensively than say Amaro plus an extra pick or two plus Aaron Murray?
Probably B/B/M plus later picks would be better, unless you think Murray is Brees 2.0 or something, but of course Amaro (or whoever) helps you in the games Brady does play while a QB doesn't. If you're only concerned about the next two seasons, say, QB doesn't make much sense. My point is that a) adding a top QB gives you the potential to be competitive beyond the Brady / Belichick window, and b) a QB has some short-term value to the team due to Brady's age.
 
mascho said:
All I do know is that having these options at 29 would be a good thing. Other than that there is no way of knowing what the better course of action is.
Agreed.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
All I know is that the only way QB is picked at 29 is a combination of a number of things that have to play out.
 
a) 1 of Bridgewater/Bortles/Manziel have to be available
b) no one left on their board has enough value to them to pick at 29
c) no other team tries to trade up to get them.
 
How likely are all three going to happen?  Not likely at all.  But, if they don't like anyone at 29 and nobody else tries to trade up then I guess it's a no-brainer.  I just feel there is a better way to use that 29th pick than getting a QB at the present time. 
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
mascho said:
"Driving off the front foot" is a simpler way of illustrating how a QB generates power in a throw. Arm strength is about 30% the strength of the throwing arm, and the rest mechanics.

The first mechanism that power is generated through is through the torquing of the hips. In college our QB specific lifting program included many exercises and lifts focused on hip explosiveness, which was great on the field (and had benefits off the field as well). But the very first movement a QB makes when starting a throw is opening up the front hip. The more compact and explosive that movement is, the more arm speed can be generated.

Next is the lead arm. This is often neglected, but is essential to a throw. As, say, a right-handed QB makes a throw, he can use that left arm to "pull through" the throw. This also generates power. As the left arm pulls the body forward, this also generates torque/power.

Driving through the front foot is simply the completion of the movement. If a QB can really step into the throw, it is a four point process: hip turn, lead arm pull, throw, and follow-through including the back foot finishing through and in front of the front foot, and the QB generating the last bit of power when it is the front foot, and not the back foot, pushing off the ground. Think about it, at the moment of release it is the front foot solidly on the ground, not the back foot. Mechanically sound QBs are still generating power at that moment by pushing forward off the balls of their front foot.
 
Awesome explanation, mascho. No wonder I can't throw for crap (LaCrosse player in high school). I wonder if this is why outfielders with great arms sometimes throw themselves right off of their feet.
 
 
RedOctober3829 said:
I absolutely see what you mean SN.  It could be a Favre-Rodgers scenario, but would you get a franchise-type QB who might not start for 3-4 years at least over addressing current needs?
 
Right down to their birthdays being four days apart. I don't know what the optimal development strategy is for bringing a QB along, but we've definitely seen some busts that might be in part due to guys starting too early due to pressure from the need to show the team is trying to win. I'm trying to remember the old details--would the new contracts for rookies complicate this or no (i.e. with respect to contract length and the possibility of losing a player)? Seems like it might make it easier because you're not paying the high pick as much to sit on the bench.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Super Nomario said:
They do this every year. Last year they met with Ziggy Ansah, Tavon Austin, and Dion Jordan, among others. Nothing to see here.
To add to the idea "pre-draft visit does not equal interest in drafting" (or lack thereof implies lack of interest):
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4761080/nate-solder-ol-will-miss-coach-scarnecchia
 
Solder relayed how he had a pre-draft visit scheduled with the Patriots that was canceled the night before. Thus, he had little idea the team would ultimately select him 17th overall in the 2011 draft. 
 
Last year, the Patriots did not meet with Collins, Dobson, Ryan, Harmon, Beauharnais, or Buchanan, at least per what is publicly known. They did meet with Boyce.
 
EDIT: and of the 20 or so UDFAs they brought on, they only met with Cory Grissom.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
Super Nomario said:
To add to the idea "pre-draft visit does not equal interest in drafting" (or lack thereof implies lack of interest):
http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-england-patriots/post/_/id/4761080/nate-solder-ol-will-miss-coach-scarnecchia
 
Last year, the Patriots did not meet with Collins, Dobson, Ryan, Harmon, Beauharnais, or Buchanan, at least per what is publicly known. They did meet with Boyce.
So does this mean they'll draft Clowney if they don't meet?  :rolling:
 

Otto

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2001
1,736
Anytime, USA
( . ) ( . ) and (_!_) said:
Otto, does the 30 in house visit rule actually matter?  It seems that teams can have a lot of touch points with players between the combine, pro days, the 30 visits, etc..  But how much are teams meeting with players before the draft that we never hear about?   Is there a real difference between bringing a player into Foxboro to meet (but not work out) and meeting with that player out on the road somewhere?  Does the NFL really care about this or could teams meet with many of the players pre draft if they had the time and resources to do so?
 
They definitely matter.  But here's the thing: teams use the 30 in-house visits for different reasons, so analyzing them in a vacuum is not helpful.  
 
For example, when he was GM of the Bears, Jerry Angelo used the visits to bring in players the Bears thought would go undrafted, and they'd use the visit to start the recruiting process.  They would actually bring the guys into a room and tell them: "you're probably not getting drafted, but we like you and here's why you should choose us if it gets to that point."  
 
Other teams will use a certain number of visits for medical rechecks, a certain number of visits for non-combine guys (i.e., no medicals exists, so they get them done on the visit) who they might like, and a certain number for smoke screen purposes.  Some believe that teams use visits - maybe a few each year - just to get info from players about other visits.  
 
Bottom line, they matter, but figuring out the reason for every visit is nearly impossible.
 
As for the difference between meeting on the road and meeting in-house: its a lot about logistics.  With a month of pro days and all the evaluation going on, teams just can't spend the time sending the top decision makers everywhere they'd need to go.  
 
Yes, there are a TON of workouts that fans never hear about.  I scheduled two workouts at South Carolina in the days leading up to yesterday's pro day (which was quite the scene), and both teams delivered very serious messages about keeping the workout confidential.  And that's just me this week - think about what that means overall.
 

ElcaballitoMVP

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 19, 2008
3,932
Otto said:
 
They definitely matter.  But here's the thing: teams use the 30 in-house visits for different reasons, so analyzing them in a vacuum is not helpful.  
 
For example, when he was GM of the Bears, Jerry Angelo used the visits to bring in players the Bears thought would go undrafted, and they'd use the visit to start the recruiting process.  They would actually bring the guys into a room and tell them: "you're probably not getting drafted, but we like you and here's why you should choose us if it gets to that point."  
 
Other teams will use a certain number of visits for medical rechecks, a certain number of visits for non-combine guys (i.e., no medicals exists, so they get them done on the visit) who they might like, and a certain number for smoke screen purposes.  Some believe that teams use visits - maybe a few each year - just to get info from players about other visits.  
 
Bottom line, they matter, but figuring out the reason for every visit is nearly impossible.
 
As for the difference between meeting on the road and meeting in-house: its a lot about logistics.  With a month of pro days and all the evaluation going on, teams just can't spend the time sending the top decision makers everywhere they'd need to go.  
 
Yes, there are a TON of workouts that fans never hear about.  I scheduled two workouts at South Carolina in the days leading up to yesterday's pro day (which was quite the scene), and both teams delivered very serious messages about keeping the workout confidential.  And that's just me this week - think about what that means overall.
 
First off, thanks for all of the behind the scenes info you're providing us about these situations. Your insight is awesome and much appreciated. 

Second, the part I bolded really jumped out at me. Why? Ryan Mallett. If we've got him on the block, presumably HOU and teams like CLE, OAK and anyone else without a QB is trying to figure out if they should go with a rookie or go with a guy that's been in the Pats system a few years and should be more NFL ready. The Pats may want to find out who's been talking to these guys to get a better idea of the trade market and who's really interested in these rookies. If the Pats get the impression that HOU isn't really impressed with any of these guys, the asking price could go up a little bit. Definitely makes more sense that the Pats are bringing these guys in when you look at it from this perspective (right up until Brady get traded for 12 draft picks and we get to start the Johnny Football era in NE). 
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Look for plummet-and-trade. If A. Rodgers fell as he did, any one of these guys easily could.

A pretty solid consensus has emerged that the leading QBs in this class are overrated, present potential fatal flaws (size in the cases of Bridgewater and Maziel) and easily could be surpassed career wise by guys who will be taken well after them.

So it's quite conceivable that a guy falls and the Pats trade out to a team that really wants that guy. The apparent interest also may be smokescreen to engender fear that the Pats may actually take one with a first round pick.
 

PaulinMyrBch

Don't touch his dog food
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 10, 2003
8,316
MYRTLE BEACH!!!!
It's not uncharted water for Bill. Signed Ocho after a few reality stints. Didn't cut Spikes in spite of a chatroulet bj.

I doubt wedding planning reality stands in the way if he likes AJ.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
Super Nomario said:
The New England Patriots continue to expend resources on scouting quarterbacks.
After already speaking with many of the draft's top quarterbacks, including Johnny Manziel and Teddy Bridgewater, the Patriots spent Wednesday meeting with Alabama's A.J. McCarron, according to NFL.com's Gil Brandt.
 
http://blog.masslive.com/patriots/2014/04/new_england_patriots_meet_with_1.html
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
It sounds like that "reality show" thing was bunk anyway: it's not a done deal, it would be just one episode, and McCarron figures to play only a small role.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,837
Reports tonight that Manziel had the highest Wonderlic score for the QBs.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
The New England Patriots continued to host top quarterback prospects on pre-draft visits this week. Eastern Illinois’ Jimmy Garoppolo came to Foxboro to meet with the Patriots earlier in the week, ESPN.com’s Mike Reiss reported Wednesday. The FCS product is projected as a second- or third-round pick in the 2014 NFL draft by The Sports Xchange, though some analysts have him pegged for the first round. The Patriots hold the 29th overall pick in the draft.
 
http://nesn.com/2014/04/report-patriots-hosting-qb-jimmy-garoppolo-on-pre-draft-visit/
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
- With the media focused on the higher rated quarterbacks, Keith Wenning of Ball State is drawing a good amount of interest from teams.  He’s had 8 visits and an additional 8 workouts.  Those who’ve worked Wenning out or brought him in for a visit include the Minnesota Vikings, Green Bay Packers, Baltimore Ravens, St Louis Rams and New England Patriots.  The braintrust for the Cleveland Browns privately worked out Wenning.
 
http://www.draftinsider.net/blog/?p=9631
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Bridgewater falling into the second round now in several of the mock drafts. All it takes is one team, but even at that would not be surprised if everyone is now on the the warts of the so-called top tier of this draft at this position. Manziel seems destined to be a first rounder. Beyond that vey little is clear, including round and order of the QBs.
 

axx

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
8,126
dcmissle said:
Bridgewater falling into the second round now in several of the mock drafts. All it takes is one team, but even at that would not be surprised if everyone is now on the the warts of the so-called top tier of this draft at this position. Manziel seems destined to be a first rounder. Beyond that vey little is clear, including round and order of the QBs.
 
It sure looks like the Texans are going to take Clowney, and it would make sense for them to draft a QB with their second round pick. Could be an opportunity for the Pats to trade down with a team who wants Bridgewater or any of the other QBs who might be available.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
The chances of trading out of 1 appear to the pretty good as things are shaping up now. Ideally, I guess, you'd want team to stay away from QBs early, them a run to start just before the Pats are set to pick.
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,274
RT @TonyPauline: Patriots very high on Tom Savage/QB/Pittsburgh with some referring to him as "Tom #2"... http://t.co/iXNeunQRtd

“@NEPD_Loyko: Sounds like Belichick knows Houston wants Savage at #33.. now the Patriots really like him.”
 

AlNipper49

Huge Member
Dope
SoSH Member
Apr 3, 2001
44,851
Mtigawi
soxhop411 said:
RT @TonyPauline: Patriots very high on Tom Savage/QB/Pittsburgh with some referring to him as "Tom #2"... http://t.co/iXNeunQRtd

“@NEPD_Loyko: Sounds like Belichick knows Houston wants Savage at #33.. now the Patriots really like him.”
Which given the Pat's non-leaks and the fact that anyone there down to the janitor would ever refer to any potential as Tom #2 basically means at best smoke and mirrors
 

ShaneTrot

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2002
6,401
Overland Park, KS
soxhop411 said:
RT @TonyPauline: Patriots very high on Tom Savage/QB/Pittsburgh with some referring to him as "Tom #2"... http://t.co/iXNeunQRtd

“@NEPD_Loyko: Sounds like Belichick knows Houston wants Savage at #33.. now the Patriots really like him.”
Ross Tucker said on his podcast that he has been hearing about the potential of this kid since he was in 9th grade in PA. As Butch from the Cape would say, 'he is tall and has a strong arm'.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Nice post on college QB sack rate, which is not an easy stat to find:
http://www.footballperspective.com/college-quarterback-passing-stats-from-2013/
 
Who looks good by this? Carr (1.7%), Wenning (3.1%), Manziel (4%), Murray (3.6%). Savage's sack rate (10.7%) is horrible. That can cut both ways - maybe Savage played behind a horrible offensive line and that's part of the reason for his pedestrian numbers - but I think QBs influence sack rate much more than is conventionally thought and this is an indication he has handled pressure poorly.
 
Some other notables: McCarron (5%), Bortles (5.5%), Fales (4.2%), Thomas (7.7%), Bridgewater (6%), Boyd (6.8%).
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Mayock:

"If I were a GM, would not take Bridgewater in first round."

Now, of course, he isn't. But there appears to be a consensus forming around this.

While there undoubtedly were other factors at work, this is a pretty vivid example of the consequences of fucking up your pro day.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,298
deep inside Guido territory
dcmissle said:
Mayock:

"If I were a GM, would not take Bridgewater in first round."

Now, of course, he isn't. But there appears to be a consensus forming around this.

While there undoubtedly were other factors at work, this is a pretty vivid example of the consequences of fucking up your pro day.
Maybe the Pats can auction off 29 for Bridgewater if it comes to this.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Moderator
SoSH Member
Super Nomario said:
Nice post on college QB sack rate, which is not an easy stat to find:
http://www.footballperspective.com/college-quarterback-passing-stats-from-2013/
 
Who looks good by this? Carr (1.7%), Wenning (3.1%), Manziel (4%), Murray (3.6%). Savage's sack rate (10.7%) is horrible. That can cut both ways - maybe Savage played behind a horrible offensive line and that's part of the reason for his pedestrian numbers - but I think QBs influence sack rate much more than is conventionally thought and this is an indication he has handled pressure poorly.
 
Some other notables: McCarron (5%), Bortles (5.5%), Fales (4.2%), Thomas (7.7%), Bridgewater (6%), Boyd (6.8%).
The QB-dependent nature of sacks at the pro level is well established. Is the same true in college, where there's less parity in terms of O-line play and caliber of competition?

McCarron's relatively high rate supports the hypothesis that sack rates are heavily dependent on the QB in college as well -- has any college signal-caller ever played behind a better line than McCarron did?

As another data point, Tim Tebow was sacked 53 times in college, compared to 985 pass attempts (and significantly more drop backs than that, I presume, as I recall he scrambled more than occasionally at the college level). Obviously, his propensity for taking sacks was one of the things that scuttled his NFL career, and I guess there were signs of that in college -- though if the rates of the current crop of QB prospects are typical, Tebow didn't take an inordinate number of sacks for a college QB.