For all the Bills fans who want to draft Jake Locker...

[Mr. WEO]

He's never thrown for 3000 yards. He wasn't event the best QB in the PAC 10 last year.

[H2o]

Luck or Mallett. Don't want Locker. Never understood all of the hype around the guy.

[SlamnSam]

He looks evil...Besides that and the Losman call (yikes), I would still draft him. Tons of potential and a small town guy. He doesn;t seem to be a friggin primadonna and has the tools for NFL success. I wouldn't mind him or Mallett but that would mean that we had a losing season. Catch-22

 

"It's a barometer," ...It's pronounced thermometer

 

You're kidding? We have plenty of losing seasons on us now.

[tonyd19]

I really did not like his answer about staying in college another year for "the experience of being in college". It reminds me a lot of what Matt Leinart said when he went back to USC. If he had said, I wanted to stay in college because I still have a lot to work on, my accuracy, etc, that would be a differrent story.

 

I think it shows a lack of maturity that he is not ready to emotionally move on from college, even though he seems to think he is physically ready to begin his professional career. (IE, I may have been the first player selected). Seem like he still has some growing up to do and that is not what you want out of a leader.

 

Based on his accuracy, his record, and my perception of his emotional frame of mind, I would take a much longer look at Mallet and other QB prospects.

[Bflojohn]

I don't normally do this because I believe that Ourlad's Scouting Report has their own intellectual property, but here goes....the newsletter I recieved speaks glowingly about Jake Locker! The terms dynamic playmaker, good accuracy, decision making skills and poise stand out. Additionally they think his leadership qualities are solid. Take that for what it's worth, but remember, this is a team of former scouts. Questioning IF they are always right is fruitless, the answer would obviously be NO!!

Note: They only rate seniors, but they love Christian Ponder too. The comment that stands out about him is Kurt Warner type accuracy. Again take it for what it's worth in regards to the "argument"!

Edited September 17, 2010 by Bflojohn

[transient]

I really did not like his answer about staying in college another year for "the experience of being in college". It reminds me a lot of what Matt Leinart said when he went back to USC. If he had said, I wanted to stay in college because I still have a lot to work on, my accuracy, etc, that would be a differrent story.

 

I think it shows a lack of maturity that he is not ready to emotionally move on from college, even though he seems to think he is physically ready to begin his professional career. (IE, I may have been the first player selected). Seem like he still has some growing up to do and that is not what you want out of a leader.

 

Based on his accuracy, his record, and my perception of his emotional frame of mind, I would take a much longer look at Mallet and other QB prospects.

 

I don't have an opinion of Locker as a player. I've never seen him play. But, I think the fact that he actually went back to college because he would never be able to do it again and he might regret it later on if he didn't shows the ability to think long term and not just look at what is staring him in the face right now, and is more emotionally mature than most college students (who don't have the additional lure of millions of dollars) are capable of. You also ignore his reference to his teammates and coaching staff as a motivating factor for returning. Comparing him to Leinart, who was soaking up the LA celebrity limelight, is a bit off base IMO.

 

As for people hanging on every word that comes out of an athlete's mouth as somehow indicative of a character flaw, this trend is getting really annoying. I defy anyone on this board to say they've never had words come out of their mouth that didn't convey exactly what they meant, let alone under pressure in their twenties with a reporter with a microphone or a notepad in their face and the fallout from the editorial process to deal with. I'm sure the 3-4 quoted sentences that made that article are but a fraction of what was actually said.

Edited September 17, 2010 by transient

[Mr. WEO]

I don't normally do this because I believe that Ourlad's Scouting Report has their own intellectual property, but here goes....the newsletter I recieved speaks glowingly about Jake Locker! The terms dynamic playmaker, good accuracy, decision making skills and poise stand out. Additionally they think his leadership qualities are solid. Take that for what it's worth, but remember, this is a team of former scouts. Questioning IF they are always right is fruitless, the answer would obviously be NO!!

Note: They only rate seniors, but they love Christian Ponder too. The comment that stands out about him is Kurt Warner type accuracy. Again take it for what it's worth in regards to the "argument"!

Accuracy???

 

Warner was a career 66%! Locker, in his best season, was 58%. 2800 yards. Only 21 TDs on 11 ints. He took 28 sacks.

 

He doesn't elevate his team. Great QBs should do that--even with mediocre teams.

[Wayne Cubed]

FWIW, i was watching Stanford last week play UCLA. Luck, looks more ready to come in and start. The announcers commented and said something like that as well. I'd take Luck or Mallett. Im not sold on Locker.

[Bflojohn]

Mr. WEO, you are doing the wrong comparison, the comment about "Kurt Warner" accuracy was attributed to Ponder NOT Locker. It was in the note I wrote below the Locker scouting report. By the way, Locker went back to Washington to keep working with Steve Sarkisian and that helps his status in my eyes. Also, let's see what his completion percentages are THIS YEAR because the bulk of his resume for being the number one pick WILL BE based heavily on his senior year.

[H2o]

Accuracy???

 

Warner was a career 66%! Locker, in his best season, was 58%. 2800 yards. Only 21 TDs on 11 ints. He took 28 sacks.

 

He doesn't elevate his team. Great QBs should do that--even with mediocre teams.

He has been on some pretty crappy squads, but his accuracy should be better. To his defense though, I have seen alot of drops by his WR's. I remember in the USC game last season, that they still ended up winning, his WR's and RB's dropped atleast 5 passes and a couple would've been for big gains. I still don't buy into the hype or think he's worthy of a first.

[Thoner7]

accuracy accuracy accuracy. Lockers is not where it needs to be. First round pass, 2nd round risk that should be taken.

[Malazan]

Why would you want or not want any individual QB? Seems like an agenda other than being a fan of the Bills.

[KOKBILLS]

Accuracy???

 

Warner was a career 66%! Locker, in his best season, was 58%. 2800 yards. Only 21 TDs on 11 ints. He took 28 sacks.

 

He doesn't elevate his team. Great QBs should do that--even with mediocre teams.

 

I think the accuracy quote was referring to Ponder (completed 68.8% of his Passes in 2009) not Locker...

[tonyd19]

I don't have an opinion of Locker as a player. I've never seen him play. But, I think the fact that he actually went back to college because he would never be able to do it again and he might regret it later on if he didn't shows the ability to think long term and not just look at what is staring him in the face right now, and is more emotionally mature than most college students (who don't have the additional lure of millions of dollars) are capable of. You also ignore his reference to his teammates and coaching staff as a motivating factor for returning. Comparing him to Leinart, who was soaking up the LA celebrity limelight, is a bit off base IMO.

 

As for people hanging on every word that comes out of an athlete's mouth as somehow indicative of a character flaw, this trend is getting really annoying. I defy anyone on this board to say they've never had words come out of their mouth that didn't convey exactly what they meant, let alone under pressure in their twenties with a reporter with a microphone or a notepad in their face and the fallout from the editorial process to deal with. I'm sure the 3-4 quoted sentences that made that article are but a fraction of what was actually said.

 

 

I am certainly not an expert or a scout, just giving my opinion on what I got out of the comments. I am basing my opinion on being a former college athlete and knowing the typical frame of mind those guys are in. It seemed a little off putting to me, but I could be wrong.

 

Now, regarding the idea that it is more noble to stay in school, I must take issue with you on that. Any person who goes back to school risking injury and potentially losing out on upwards of $50 million dollars (If he realisitcally though he would be a top 3 pick) is clearly not emotionally ready to be a professional. Personally, I think he made the right decision last year by going back to school, because I do not believe he would have been a top 3 pick last year, so this is more of a theoretical arguement. Any rational person, including kids in their early 20's, can certainly deduce that if they get hurt or cannot cut it in the pros, that they can take $20 grand of their millions and go back to finish senior year. Or, he could go to school during the off-season while still playing.

 

The "athlete's have to finish college arguement" is a fallacy for first round picks who are risking a great deal by doing for free what they could be paid millions for - and also risking not being able to cash in on that lottery ticket if they are injured. Those top 30 or so guys will make more on their first contracts than 95% of college grads will make in their lifetimes. You can always go back to school, an athlete's career is finite.

[Original Byrd Man]

I don't normally do this because I believe that Ourlad's Scouting Report has their own intellectual property, but here goes....the newsletter I recieved speaks glowingly about Jake Locker! The terms dynamic playmaker, good accuracy, decision making skills and poise stand out. Additionally they think his leadership qualities are solid. Take that for what it's worth, but remember, this is a team of former scouts. Questioning IF they are always right is fruitless, the answer would obviously be NO!!

Note: They only rate seniors, but they love Christian Ponder too. The comment that stands out about him is Kurt Warner type accuracy. Again take it for what it's worth in regards to the "argument"!

Wonder where they get their info? Everything I've read said he has great measurables(height, size mobility and great arm), but lacks accuracy. I watched him against SU and wasn't that impressed. Great QB's elevate the talent around them. So far Locker hasn't been able to do that.

[Solomon Grundy]

I really did not like his answer about staying in college another year for "the experience of being in college". It reminds me a lot of what Matt Leinart said when he went back to USC. If he had said, I wanted to stay in college because I still have a lot to work on, my accuracy, etc, that would be a differrent story.

 

I think it shows a lack of maturity that he is not ready to emotionally move on from college, even though he seems to think he is physically ready to begin his professional career. (IE, I may have been the first player selected). Seem like he still has some growing up to do and that is not what you want out of a leader.

 

Based on his accuracy, his record, and my perception of his emotional frame of mind, I would take a much longer look at Mallet and other QB prospects.

 

I thought the same thing when I read it, and if you want another Matt Leinart/JP Losman then you take Locker.

[mob16151]

I'll take Foles as far as Pac-10 QB's go.

[transient]

I am certainly not an expert or a scout, just giving my opinion on what I got out of the comments. I am basing my opinion on being a former college athlete and knowing the typical frame of mind those guys are in. It seemed a little off putting to me, but I could be wrong.

 

Now, regarding the idea that it is more noble to stay in school, I must take issue with you on that. Any person who goes back to school risking injury and potentially losing out on upwards of $50 million dollars (If he realisitcally though he would be a top 3 pick) is clearly not emotionally ready to be a professional. Personally, I think he made the right decision last year by going back to school, because I do not believe he would have been a top 3 pick last year, so this is more of a theoretical arguement. Any rational person, including kids in their early 20's, can certainly deduce that if they get hurt or cannot cut it in the pros, that they can take $20 grand of their millions and go back to finish senior year. Or, he could go to school during the off-season while still playing.

 

The "athlete's have to finish college arguement" is a fallacy for first round picks who are risking a great deal by doing for free what they could be paid millions for - and also risking not being able to cash in on that lottery ticket if they are injured. Those top 30 or so guys will make more on their first contracts than 95% of college grads will make in their lifetimes. You can always go back to school, an athlete's career is finite.

 

Nowhere in my post did I allude to Locker doing this to get his degree. My point was that he took his father's advice to heart and thought about whether or not he would regret not playing college ball for one more year, which is a sign of maturity. The article suggests that his decision was in part based on his relationship with his teammates and coaches. Beyond that, he says very little definitive about why he made this decision, and instead talks about his hometown and his view of football as a sport. The point I was making was that you said you were put off by what he didn't say despite the fact that the article uses very little in the way of direct quotes about this decision. I am basing this opinion on the fact that I am currently an English speaking individual who realizes that explaining your reasoning for a decision such as this probably takes more than 3-4 sentences, and that when the 3-4 sentences that are included aren't even left to the discretion of the person whom the article is being written about, then the likelihood that they are representative of what HE wanted to say is diminished. For all we know they conveniently left out the part about having something to prove, or wanting to go out on a winning season, or wanting to get the most out of this coaching staff. My point is judging people based on what they didn't say when you weren't directly a part of the conversation is an exercise in futility that will leave you making judgements on incomplete information.

Edited September 18, 2010 by transient

[kenneuf]

Read article and tell me if you still want to draft him? http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/pac10/2010-09-15-jake-locker-washington-nfl_N.htm

Absolutely. I'll take my chances.

[Wilson from Gamehendge]

Read article and tell me if you still want to draft him? http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/pac10/2010-09-15-jake-locker-washington-nfl_N.htm

I can't stand writers who cannot write...

 

The comparisons Locker has heard since high school are with John Elway. They embarrasses him — "I don't think I can gain anything from it," he says — but note this about the two-time Super Bowl winner and pro Hall of Famer: Elway barely had one winning season at Stanford, at 6-5 in 1980, and left with a four-year record of 20-23.

 

"He said, 'Make a decision that, when you're my age (45), you're not going to regret. You want look back and go: What if I had done this? What might I have been able to do?' " Locker says.

 

You still won't find him ranked among the nation's 30 most efficient passers or even among the top five in the Pacific 10 Conference (he's 28th overall and sixth in the Pac-10, due in part to a still-modest completion rate). But every additional day with Sarkisian, himself a former standout quarterback and Brigham Young, and offensive coordinator Doug Nussmeier is a valuable one. Locker is taking on polish and precision.

 

Do these people NOT have editors?

 

If a high school or college kid makes those mistakes, he gets a bad grade and has to repeat the assignment...

 

...If a USA Today writer makes those mistakes, his story gets published and he gets paid?!

 

Doesn't make ANY sense to me!