Camp Wentz- Starts here.
-
We Bark, & somewhat disagree but that's ok..
The only instances I think competition level truly matters is when a guy's ONLY claim to fame is the gaudy numbers he put up against inferior talent - which isn't the case with Wentz, nor was it with Flacco or Ben, for that matter. Similarly, the argument of "how good can the guy be if no schools offered him" is a fallacy (though it's not an argument you were making, it was just a train of though thing).
The only instances I think competition level truly matters is when a guy's ONLY claim to fame is the gaudy numbers he put up against inferior talent -
Agree it's not a make or break, all or nothing factor, but competition level makes it harder to evaluate any position on the field. You just can't gauge performance as well... greater extrapolation.
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
The only instances I think competition level truly matters is when a guy's ONLY claim to fame is the gaudy numbers he put up against inferior talent -
Agree it's not a make or break, all or nothing factor, but competition level makes it harder to evaluate any position on the field. You just can't gauge performance as well... greater extrapolation.
I don't think "performance" in the traditional sense is what should be gauged anyway. A guy throws for a hundred TD's an no INT's? Cool...doesn't change the way mustard tastes. I'd take a prospect who never threw a touchdown pass in his life if he checked the right boxes.Agree it's not a make or break, all or nothing factor, but competition level makes it harder to evaluate any position on the field. You just can't gauge performance as well... greater extrapolation.
Personally, I couldn't care less the outcome of a play when it comes to QB. Once the ball is thrown, I go to the next play anyway. In some cases, lack of playmakers can be a benefit - less chance of reliance on a "crutch".
Competition level only matters to me for one reason:
1) Why is the guy there? Why isn't he at another, bigger program? Was he a four-year QB who went unscouted? Was he a transition from another position? Did he have a bunch of injuries? Was he too small/too slow?
If there are legitimate reasons a guy is at a small school, it shouldn't be a knock on him whatsoever.
I'm awesome, and I fuck dolphins. Ghoolie 12/2/2012: I have absolutely no skills, training or pride -
I don't think "performance" in the traditional sense is what should be gauged anyway. A guy throws for a hundred TD's an no INT's? Cool...doesn't change the way mustard tastes. I'd take a prospect who never threw a touchdown pass in his life if he checked the right boxes.Agree it's not a make or break, all or nothing factor, but competition level makes it harder to evaluate any position on the field. You just can't gauge performance as well... greater extrapolation.
Personally, I couldn't care less the outcome of a play when it comes to QB. Once the ball is thrown, I go to the next play anyway. In some cases, lack of playmakers can be a benefit - less chance of reliance on a "crutch".
Competition level only matters to me for one reason:
1) Why is the guy there? Why isn't he at another, bigger program? Was he a four-year QB who went unscouted? Was he a transition from another position? Did he have a bunch of injuries? Was he too small/too slow?
If there are legitimate reasons a guy is at a small school, it shouldn't be a knock on him whatsoever.
Exactly. This is how I see it - If you rated the different levels of football on a scale of 100, with 1 being public high school and 100 being the NFL, division 1-AA would rank around 25 while division 1 would come in at around 35. Every single one of these players have HUGE leaps in level of competition coming. The major benefits of division 1 preparing guys for the pros doesnt really do it for the QBs - Training facilities and coaching. Division 1 colleges do little to no better at training QBs for the NFL than ND state. Level of competition does help but like I said, all these guys have huge jumps ahead.I don't think "performance" in the traditional sense is what should be gauged anyway. A guy throws for a hundred TD's an no INT's? Cool...doesn't change the way mustard tastes. I'd take a prospect who never threw a touchdown pass in his life if he checked the right boxes.
Personally, I couldn't care less the outcome of a play when it comes to QB. Once the ball is thrown, I go to the next play anyway. In some cases, lack of playmakers can be a benefit - less chance of reliance on a "crutch".
Competition level only matters to me for one reason:
1) Why is the guy there? Why isn't he at another, bigger program? Was he a four-year QB who went unscouted? Was he a transition from another position? Did he have a bunch of injuries? Was he too small/too slow?
If there are legitimate reasons a guy is at a small school, it shouldn't be a knock on him whatsoever.
-
I don't think "performance" in the traditional sense is what should be gauged anyway. A guy throws for a hundred TD's an no INT's? Cool...doesn't change the way mustard tastes. I'd take a prospect who never threw a touchdown pass in his life if he checked the right boxes.Agree it's not a make or break, all or nothing factor, but competition level makes it harder to evaluate any position on the field. You just can't gauge performance as well... greater extrapolation.
Personally, I couldn't care less the outcome of a play when it comes to QB. Once the ball is thrown, I go to the next play anyway. In some cases, lack of playmakers can be a benefit - less chance of reliance on a "crutch".
Competition level only matters to me for one reason:
1) Why is the guy there? Why isn't he at another, bigger program? Was he a four-year QB who went unscouted? Was he a transition from another position? Did he have a bunch of injuries? Was he too small/too slow?
If there are legitimate reasons a guy is at a small school, it shouldn't be a knock on him whatsoever.
I don't think "performance" in the traditional sense is what should be gauged anyway. A guy throws for a hundred TD's an no INT's? Cool...doesn't change the way mustard tastes. I'd take a prospect who never threw a touchdown pass in his life if he checked the right boxes.
Personally, I couldn't care less the outcome of a play when it comes to QB. Once the ball is thrown, I go to the next play anyway. In some cases, lack of playmakers can be a benefit - less chance of reliance on a "crutch".
Competition level only matters to me for one reason:
1) Why is the guy there? Why isn't he at another, bigger program? Was he a four-year QB who went unscouted? Was he a transition from another position? Did he have a bunch of injuries? Was he too small/too slow?
If there are legitimate reasons a guy is at a small school, it shouldn't be a knock on him whatsoever.
Cumulative stats are not even close to what I meant by "performance". I am talking about game speed. I am talking about seeing more zones because less talented DBs lack cover skills... having more time because less athletic bigs don't have rush skills. You have to extrapolate further to get to the NFL level.
And the above is a factor not simply because of the fall off in quality of the FCS. It is a factor because clearly NDSU has a recipe that has allowed them to outclass the division.
Goff's ball placement and accuracy dip when he speeds it up. Wentz has the better arm without question
By "speeds up" do you mean throws harder?
-
Did not see that at all, Mike...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
Did not see that at all, Mike...
Me either. I heard someone else questioned his arm strength when the female commentator reported what some front offices/teams/coaches were saying. I haven't seen any evidence of that either.
Goff has an ideal starting point for an NFL team to tap.
I welcome the only Defensive Coordinator to earn a Superbowl Ring in New Orleans while understanding Revenge of the Nerds is a sequel. "Come get some!" -
I heard that Goff eased questions of his arm strength by having good velocity, I didn't see anything really wrong with it - though people aren't gushing over it as much as they are wentz's arm.
-
I thought both of them looked good. I wouldn't be upset with getting either guy but my preference is always going with the bigger QB if all things are equal.
-
-
LOL! Nothing that several of us haven't said over the last few years throughout every change of staff. I mean he must have seen the T-shirt.
-
Wentz looked really good out there and showed he is worth a look. I would not be upset if we go with him at number 2.
-
after watching the combine.....right now i'd take either one of them (goff OR wentz) @2. i was leaning goff and still like his throwing motion more than wentz BUT wentz just owned the field with his confidence.
-
I have questioned, and graded his arm accordingly. It isn't bad, at all, and plenty of QBs have succeeded with sub-elite arm strength.Me either. I heard someone else questioned his arm strength when the female commentator reported what some front offices/teams/coaches were saying. I haven't seen any evidence of that either.
Goff has an ideal starting point for an NFL team to tap.
It's hard for the Browns to mess this up: pick either one.
-
"Sub-elite" is a fair description for Goff, but personally I don't see elite arm strength in this draft.
Wentz may be closest, but he does not seem to have the kind of zip that makes the air "sizzle".
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196 -
"Sub-elite" is a fair description for Goff, but personally I don't see elite arm strength in this draft.
Wentz may be closest, but he does not seem to have the kind of zip that makes the air "sizzle".
"Sub-elite" is a fair description for Goff, but personally I don't see elite arm strength in this draft.
Wentz may be closest, but he does not seem to have the kind of zip that makes the air "sizzle".
You mean combined with other desired QB attributes? Because plenty of guys have big arms.
-
"Sub-elite" is a fair description for Goff, but personally I don't see elite arm strength in this draft.
Wentz may be closest, but he does not seem to have the kind of zip that makes the air "sizzle".
-
"Sub-elite" is a fair description for Goff, but personally I don't see elite arm strength in this draft.
Wentz may be closest, but he does not seem to have the kind of zip that makes the air "sizzle".
You mean combined with other desired QB attributes? Because plenty of guys have big arms.
You mean combined with other desired QB attributes? Because plenty of guys have big arms.
Strictly an arm-strength comment. I don't disagree with "big", but big < elite...
"When you have a shared vision it is a lot easier to make unpopular decisions." - Paul DePodesta "When you win, say nothing. When you lose, say less." - Paul Brown Complete 2017 Browns Board Mock: http://thebrownsboard.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=46196
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login