For those worried about certain QB's college stats coming out...

[DarthICE]

I give you the college stats for one of the NFL all time greats.

 

http://www.dolphinsinfo.com/marinop.htm#college

[The Senator]

One? Now that's certainly a statistically significant sample

[DC Billin']

Coke head Dan!

[Beebe's Kid]

Wow...you know how much we all love Dan Marino...so maybe what we should do is draft a QB with ****ty stats, banking, on the off-chance that they are the next Marino.

 

s.....l.....o.....w.....n....e....w....s....d....a....y

 

It would have, almost, been better to read another shocking letter blaming Ralph for the teams struggles.

[Captain Caveman]

Wait, are you saying we should draft Dan Marino? Or just pick a QB with lousy #s? In either case, nice thinking.

[buffaloaggie]

I give you the college stats for one of the NFL all time greats.

 

http://www.dolphinsinfo.com/marinop.htm#college

Here's a stat to consider about Marino at Pitt:

 

42-6

 

Much better record than either J.P. Losman and Trent Edwards had in college. The Bills might want to also consider whether the QB they're drafting can lead his team to wins.

[Cannon]

College statistics

Year Comp Att Comp % Passing TD INT

1976 81 175 46.3 1,106 6 8

1977 125 222 56.3 1,772 12 9

[webtoe]

College statistics

Year Comp Att Comp % Passing TD INT

1976 81 175 46.3 1,106 6 8

1977 125 222 56.3 1,772 12 9

 

Who is Joe Montana?

Edited October 13, 2010 by webtoe

[DarthICE]

I keep hearing how so and so's college numbers aren't that great so I posted that link to show they dont' mean **** really. Plenty of heisman winning QB's with Winning records or gaudy stats in college come into the NFL and suck. So just because Locker or whomever played on a bad team it doesn't mean he won't be good in the NFL.

[RuntheDamnBall]

I keep hearing how so and so's college numbers aren't that great so I posted that link to show they dont' mean **** really. Plenty of heisman winning QB's with Winning records or gaudy stats in college come into the NFL and suck. So just because Locker or whomever played on a bad team it doesn't mean he won't be good in the NFL.

Even better example might be to post Matt Cassel's stats. I'm not sure if I'm buying him as a starter long-term, but here's a guy who had nothing to show for himself and still found a believer in one of the smarter talent evaulators in the NFL.

[buffaloaggie]

I keep hearing how so and so's college numbers aren't that great so I posted that link to show they dont' mean **** really. Plenty of heisman winning QB's with Winning records or gaudy stats in college come into the NFL and suck. So just because Locker or whomever played on a bad team it doesn't mean he won't be good in the NFL.

Brett Favre played for Southern Miss., but he was able to almost single handedly pull off an upset over Florida State, despite not having the best record. He took a small school and made them competitive against bigger and better teams. Jim Kelly did not have the greatest record, but he led Miami from obscurity to being a national power. Yes, natural ability has much to do with success in the NFL, but you have to show you can win in college too. Can you honestly think of a QB with a losing record in college that did well in the NFL?

 

Steve Sarkisian is Locker's head coach at UW. I equate having him as head coach to Brady Quinn and Clausen having Charlie Weis. Locker has been trained by an NFL coach so he should be NFL ready, but his college numbers are above average at best. Locker is pure hype if you call him the top QB prospect. Cassell, he didn't even play in college, so he was a complete unknown. No real basis there, agreed. At least Locker has had a chance to prove himself.

[TDawg1313]

Can you honestly think of a QB with a losing record in college that did well in the NFL?

 

John Elway

[C.Biscuit97]

Brett Favre played for Southern Miss., but he was able to almost single handedly pull off an upset over Florida State, despite not having the best record. He took a small school and made them competitive against bigger and better teams. Jim Kelly did not have the greatest record, but he led Miami from obscurity to being a national power. Yes, natural ability has much to do with success in the NFL, but you have to show you can win in college too. Can you honestly think of a QB with a losing record in college that did well in the NFL?

 

Steve Sarkisian is Locker's head coach at UW. I equate having him as head coach to Brady Quinn and Clausen having Charlie Weis. Locker has been trained by an NFL coach so he should be NFL ready, but his college numbers are above average at best. Locker is pure hype if you call him the top QB prospect. Cassell, he didn't even play in college, so he was a complete unknown. No real basis there, agreed. At least Locker has had a chance to prove himself.

 

 

I think you are completely overrating Sarkisian. UW's recruiting classes have been some of the worst of any major D1 school. Also, he was only a co-coordinator with Lane Kiffin at one of the most loaded college teams ever. Who knows how much input he really even had at USC?

 

Bottomline, Locker is the most physically talented QB in this draft. But he is also the most risky. I think if he gets in a situation with a good OC and a vet QB to learn from, he could be very good in time. However, I'm not sure if Buffalo can afford that risk right now. It would be a tough call for sure.

[dave mcbride]

DarthIce is of course right here. Off the top of my head, Joe Flacco -- who is really, really good -- couldn't hack it at Pitt, took a year off, and went to a bargain basement football program (Delaware). His first year, they went 5-6; his second, they went 8-3. Christ, Tom Brady lost his job to another guy in college.

 

Football: it's the ultimate team game. Too many people forget this essential fact. If QBs had wins and losses like pitchers, Colt McCoy would be good. He isn't.

 

Here's a stat to consider about Marino at Pitt:

 

42-6

 

Much better record than either J.P. Losman and Trent Edwards had in college. The Bills might want to also consider whether the QB they're drafting can lead his team to wins.

Last I checked, football is a team game. QBs aren't credited with wins and losses, nor should they be.

[buffaloaggie]

I think you are completely overrating Sarkisian. UW's recruiting classes have been some of the worst of any major D1 school. Also, he was only a co-coordinator with Lane Kiffin at one of the most loaded college teams ever. Who knows how much input he really even had at USC?

 

Bottomline, Locker is the most physically talented QB in this draft. But he is also the most risky. I think if he gets in a situation with a good OC and a vet QB to learn from, he could be very good in time. However, I'm not sure if Buffalo can afford that risk right now. It would be a tough call for sure.

I'm talking about Sarkisian coaching/training QBs. He probably has a big hand in training Locker as a QB, but OC Nussmeier was also QB coach for the Rams, so he has NFL coaching experience too. UW has had some lean years in recruiting, especially Sarkisian's first year, but they were #28 in recruiting last year. The Pac 10 is a tough conference and UW has a tough schedule, but the Pac 10 is more like a track meet, similar to the Big 12. It should be offense friendly.

 

You're right, the Bills are beyond risky picks. Is there a sure thing, no, but they can't afford to reach for a QB that has all the tools but is raw. I still don't believe Locker is raw though. He'll have better training than almost all D-1 QBs. I'm praying Luck declares for the draft. May be too much to hope for considering he's a redshirt Sophomore.

[DarthICE]

DarthIce is of course right here. Off the top of my head, Joe Flacco -- who is really, really good -- couldn't hack it at Pitt, took a year off, and went to a bargain basement football program (Delaware). His first year, they went 5-6; his second, they went 8-3. Christ, Tom Brady lost his job to another guy in college.

 

Football: it's the ultimate team game. Too many people forget this essential fact. If QBs had wins and losses like pitchers, Colt McCoy would be good. He isn't.

 

 

Last I checked, football is a team game. QBs aren't credited with wins and losses, nor should they be.

 

 

Exactly. My point is we can't go off just pure college stats or there would be tons of heisman winning QB's running around. And the best example I can give is Eric Crouch. Go look up his stats, the kid was a freak in College.

[buffaloaggie]

Christ, Tom Brady lost his job to another guy in college.

 

Football: it's the ultimate team game. Too many people forget this essential fact. If QBs had wins and losses like pitchers, Colt McCoy would be good. He isn't.

 

 

Last I checked, football is a team game. QBs aren't credited with wins and losses, nor should they be.

Brady backed up Brian Griese his first two years and then beat out Drew Henson to start his final two seasons at Michigan.

 

J.P. Losman lost his job to Trent Edwards because they won with Edwards. Tom Brady displaced Bledsoe because New England was winning with Brady. Hmmm, winning. QB did not have anything to do with it? OK, sorry we're talking college vs. NFL.

 

You are absolutely right about McCoy, but Stevie Wonder knew he sucked. Bradford was a winner in college and had pro talent. Leinart was a winner in college and had a pathetic arm. People missed out on Cutler as a losing QB in college, but he took a very poor Vandy team (0 for the SEC) and led them to big upsets his Senior year and he put up huge numbers against the best conference in the nation. He had a cannon of an arm at Vandy and he made a difference by stepping up against tough competition. You look for difference makers and if it leads to wins, fine. College is different from the NFL. It is more than winning you're right, but when you see a QB with exceptional talent and he wins or makes a big difference, I think you'll do well picking him. It also takes a good head on his shoulders. That's where Cutler will probably fall short, and Leinart definitely did. Many variables go into making a good NFL QB.

 

Locker's skills do not stand out, so for people to say the is the most gifted QB in college is a stretch. Why not Ponder? He's rated right there with Locker. I sure hope Luck or Mallett come out, then we won't have to worry about Locker. In the grand scheme of things, I'd rather see a QB that can step up in big games rather than a QB that goes 4-20 against a good team in his home stadium. At least he should make a game of it. He should make a difference in the game if he's that good.