thebandit27

Failure to read is no excuse. Matthew Stafford had a college completion rate of 57% - 62% in the pros (+5%) Matt Ryan was 59.9% - 65% in the pros (+5%) Carson Palmer was 59.1% - 62% in the pros (+3%) Drew Brees--the most accurate NFL passer of all time--was 61.1% - 67% in the pros (+6%) Russell Wilson was 60.1%, and that's only because he had an ultra-efficient senior season of 72% passing; in his first 3 seasons as a starter, he was 57% - 64% in the pros (+4%) Maybe you need to take a step back and consider what you're actually arguing here. I know you haven't actually considered what I've said, since you continue to insist on an arbitrary line in the sand.

Okay, now take the above statements, and go back to the list I provided, and you'll get the point. Or maybe you won't...I don't know...I do know that I've stated it pretty succinctly though

Come on man, read critically. There's no arbitrary line of XX% completion that determines ability to succeed in the NFL. The point is quite simple: accuracy can be improved in the NFL, and it often is...hence the list I provided. This isn't rocket surgery.

Except that when you said that poor completion percentage in college is an indicator of poor performance in the pros, you said you were 100% sure of that. That there are a number of current NFL starting QBs that buck that trend proves that it's more than a minute possibility, no?

No it doesn't...at all. As someone said above, you're talking about 1 incompletion per game different from those guys that were playing at big-time schools. And the point is that completion rate can indeed be improved in the NFL, and it happens quite regularly. As Kelly pointed out, Jim Kelly was a 55% passer in college. I think he did okay for himself.

Well then you missed a few key guys: Matthew Stafford had a college completion rate of 57% Matt Ryan was 59.9% Carson Palmer was 59.1% Drew Brees--the most accurate NFL passer of all time--was 61.1% Russell Wilson was 60.1%, and that's only because he had an ultra-efficient senior season of 72% passing; in his first 3 seasons as a starter, he was 57% Eli Manning was 60.8% There's other guys that have had huge improvements in the pros too. Josh McCown has been in the NFL for 15 seasons, and just had his most efficient season as a passer in 2017--he completed over 67% of his passes. He was a 51% passer in college.

You sure about that?

You were...happy...that they lost? I mean, I get that, so was I. Guess I'm just surprised...though it does make sense that, over a long enough time period, even a Pats***** fan would start to hate their own team.

Speaking of fumbles:

This one came in from a trainer early this year: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5825334/ ^it provides more context to the study I linked above, specifically: "The high prevalence of trauma-related UCL injury is also supported by a small series from Kenter and colleagues [27]. Nine of the ten UCL injuries in Dodson’s series [28] were managed non-operatively, including three athletes who had complete tears. Not surprisingly, athletes with a higher grade injury required a longer time to return to competition. Quarterbacks with a grade I–II injury returned around 7 days, whereas grade III injuries has a mean of 67 days to return to play [28]. There is a tremendous paucity of data on UCL reconstruction in the professional quarterback, with most case series consisting of only one–two athletes [28, 31, 32]." It makes sense that they'd call him week-to-week, since based on the above it could be anywhere from zero to 10 weeks depending upon severity.

Worth noting: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1058274610002466 "A total of 10 cases of UCL injuries in quarterbacks were identified starting in 1994. Nine cases were treated nonoperatively and the mean return to play was 26.4 days."

Nobody said Allen is, was, or will be Goff, and I'm amazed that somehow people are still thinking that that's the point. As for what Goff needed, he probably needed the game to slow down and McVay's guidance, but the fact that they added Robert Woods, Sammy Watkins, Cooper Kupp, Josh Reynolds, and Tyler Higbee in a single offseason might have made a difference as well. Then, of course, there's the fact that he actually had a full NFL offseason under his belt.

Well, I didn't call you an idiot, but if that's how you feel... What I am saying, and have repeatedly said, is that it's extremely common for rookies to struggle in certain areas, and that what Allen is showing is no different than what many rookies before him that were asked to play before they were ready showed. I've used examples like Goff, Trubisky, and yes, Beatherd fits the bill as well. All 4 of them have eerily similar stats through 6 NFL games. So I'll ask you: are you at all concerned about Mitchell Trubisky or Jared Goff since Beatherd's numbers are very similar to their rookie numbers? Conversely, is Beatherd destined to become Jared Goff because their rookie performances are nearly identical? Perhaps, when it's stated this way, the point will make more sense.

You should probably quit with this argument now...each post is making it look more foolish. For example, CJ Beatherd's "average level NFL accuracy" helped him complete a whopping 56.5% of his passes as a senior--nearly identical to Josh Allen's senior season. And as @HappyDays just pointed out, his rookie performance was nearly identical to Allen as well.

It'll be a conditional pick. Starts out as a 3rd, moves to a 2nd if he hits certain escalators.

Yeah, but what do you know?

Not you specifically, but it's been said on a routine basis on this board. I don't know that there's much to support that opinion. They were clearly focused on "get the QB first, worry about everything else later" last offseason, so I think we'll learn quite a bit about their offensive team-building philosophy come this offseason.

Allen was my QB4. My rankings were Rosen-Mayfield-Darnold-Allen-Jackson, but as I said back in March, I had all 5 as first-round picks. Here was my full evaluation: Of course, keep in mind that I would've taken Mahomes #1 overall in 2017.

I can't believe Mrs. Bandit hasn't delivered yet--that kid is practically in her toes.

No offense intended here: the bold sentence indicates that yes, unfortunately, you did miss the point. Remove emotion from the discussion; this has zero to do with how anyone feels about Allen. It's 100% an indication that rookies struggle, and quite often the nature of those struggles is quite similar in fashion. It doesn't portend anything for Allen, just as it didn't portend anything for Goff or Trubisky. The reality is that the ones that come into the league and don't struggle are few and far between. Career arcs very for sure, but acting like Allen's performance is some heretofore unseen brutality amongst rookie QBs is simply intellectually dishonest.

Actually, it wasn't silly then, nor is it silly now Nobody is saying that Allen is (or will become) Goff, just like nobody was saying that EJ was (or would become) Luck. The problem is that you've wildly missed the point in both cases: rookies struggle, and often with the same issues. Furthermore, the even greater point is that the Rams went and did what was necessary to give Goff a real shot; will the Bills do the same?

There is a world of difference. Talk to any NFL veteran, and they'll tell you that the offseason in which you learn the most is that between your 1st and 2nd year. Why? Because it's actually your first offseason. When you come into the league as a rookie, you've been practicing, training, and competing from August to December as a college player. When that ends, you immediately begin training for the draft, which is a 3-1/2 month run of constant workouts, interviews, visits, studying, etc. After the draft, you have about 2 weeks to get your bearings before you start rookie camp. After that, you've got a week before OTAs begin, and that's when the off-season basically ends for NFL veterans. By the time a rookie completes their first NFL season in December, they've been in-season for about 17 consecutive months (and that's if they don't make the playoffs). Are you going to seriously claim that there's not a big difference between having the opportunity to get a full 4 months away from the game to train in an NFL strength/conditioning program and reset yourself versus being on a 17-month go-go schedule? Let alone claim that spending a full season not having to play while getting tutored by one of the best offensive coaches in the league is the same as what Allen is getting now--having to learn on the fly from a guy that's been a statistically-poor OC in every NFL stop?

"What could be--and what should be--must be, if we are to be, who we were created to be." - Andy Stanley

Indeed, which is why I think the parallel is so important. LAR went out and added Woods, Watkins, Kupp, Cooper, Higbee, and Reynolds in a single offseason, and put them in the scheme of a young, creative, forward-thinking offensive play-caller. Chicago went out and added Robinson, Gabriel, Miller, and Burton in a single offseason, and put them in the scheme of a young, creative, forward-thinking offensive play-caller. What will we see this offseason? As for the landmark of "getting it", I've always liked @K-9's 1,000-attempts barrier.

As soon as you show me where I said anything remotely close to "Allen will become Goff", then I'll be happy to entertain this twisted line of logic. In the meantime, why don't you take my post for what it was: evidence that rookie QBs often experience problems with holding the ball too long, reading defenses, leaving clean pockets, spotty accuracy, poor decision making, and failure to protect themselves...all of which in turn lead to performances like Allen's (and Goff's and Trubisky's) in their first half-season.