Jump to content

Jake Locker

Billshank Redemption
 Share

Recommended Posts

Billshank Redemption RFA

Billshank Redemption

Posted
Posted

Alright Ive been watching Locker, Luck, Mallett, and at first I was all on the Luck bandwagon. After watching locker get wrecked by Nebraska I turned him off but still have been watching him these past couple of weeks. Lets face it Luck isnt coming out, our team isnt going anywhere for atleast 2 years. Locker is our future. His o line sucks and look at the way he steps up in the pocket, How his playaction is so effective because not only can he throw, but he has a sub 4.40 40. We take locker, develop a year under fitz and really show that this franchise can be something. If we get Mallett we will have a solid qb for a decade. If we get locker we could have a hall of famer who CAN play in cold weather. Especially after looking at how hes tearing up an excellent oregon state secondary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stan da Man Practice Squad

Stan da Man

Posted
Posted (edited)

I agree. This kid is a gamer. His play action is great and never seems out of control or panicked under pressure. He had thrown 3-4 ACCURATE darts for completions 20-25 yds down field while on a dead run rolling to the outside in the this game already. I'm impressed.

Edited by Stan da Man
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hplarrm RFA

Hplarrm

Posted
Posted

Locker or quite frankly any rookie QB would likely have little future playing with this Bills team. I think the facts are:

 

1. The Bills OL is so disrupted and is a couple of players who are not currently on the team away from being an acceptable OL that a premium if gonna have to be placed on having a vet QB who can recognize as best he can where zone blitzes are coming from and help the C make line calls for blocking schemes. A rookie even if very talented will not be able to do this.

 

2. A Peyton Manning like quick release is gonna be essential with this OL and even the rookie Manning developed this skill and did not have it as a rookie. The greater likelihood among rookie QB is to find even if he is a gamer like a Clausen he will need a ton of work to develop a pro release.

 

3. Gailey has demonstrated the ability to get playoff level production out of some pretty average to bad QBs like Fiedler and I think that Mr. Ralph will do all he can to avoid guaranteeing 10s of millions to a QB who even if he proves to be skilled enough to be a winner in the 50/50 boom or bust world of franchise QB picks he is gonna go cheap if he can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John from Riverside Hall of Famer

John from Riverside

Posted
Posted

Locker or quite frankly any rookie QB would likely have little future playing with this Bills team. I think the facts are:

 

1. The Bills OL is so disrupted and is a couple of players who are not currently on the team away from being an acceptable OL that a premium if gonna have to be placed on having a vet QB who can recognize as best he can where zone blitzes are coming from and help the C make line calls for blocking schemes. A rookie even if very talented will not be able to do this.

 

2. A Peyton Manning like quick release is gonna be essential with this OL and even the rookie Manning developed this skill and did not have it as a rookie. The greater likelihood among rookie QB is to find even if he is a gamer like a Clausen he will need a ton of work to develop a pro release.

 

3. Gailey has demonstrated the ability to get playoff level production out of some pretty average to bad QBs like Fiedler and I think that Mr. Ralph will do all he can to avoid guaranteeing 10s of millions to a QB who even if he proves to be skilled enough to be a winner in the 50/50 boom or bust world of franchise QB picks he is gonna go cheap if he can.

 

Oh great another "The Bills OL sucks" post......

 

The Bills OL as a whole do NOT SUCK

 

- LT is set

- We have several candidates for C

- We also have several players capable of playing guard

- WE NEED A RIGHT TACKLE

 

That does NOT mean that this OL sucks.....I wish people would stop saying this

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hplarrm RFA

Hplarrm

Posted
Posted

Oh great another "The Bills OL sucks" post......

 

The Bills OL as a whole do NOT SUCK

 

- LT is set

- We have several candidates for C

- We also have several players capable of playing guard

- WE NEED A RIGHT TACKLE

 

That does NOT mean that this OL sucks.....I wish people would stop saying this

Sorry John (since I respect and share a number of your opinions) but the OL does suck in a significant number of ways. This does not mean that it blows entirely as there are a number of prospects for solid play to work with.

 

However, it does demonstrably in terms of objective evidence suck in a number of ways that MUST be improved for the OL play to be reasonably considered adequate (much less a positive force which other teams must prepare and adjust for so they do not get run over rather than adjust for to take advantage of the myriad problems with the unit.

 

Specifically:

 

1. Looking at things positively number of players currently on the roster can be reasonably expected to develop so that there are 4 current players on the roster who can be expected to give us the 5 OL starters we need at a minimum.

 

This is possible but a rose-colored glasses view at best though as this assumes that POTENTIAL future prospects like Bell and Wang do in fact develop adequately, that Hamgartner is neither injured or hangs on, and that these positives not only happen but no negatives happen (as actually a solid OL really needs 6 players with the last one being flexible in position play so with a shift all positions are covered with one back-up- this back-up need not be able to spell Gs, Ts, and C but offer enough flexibility that by plugging him in at his best position it allows you to move the player he replaces who also is flexible into the slot missing.

 

Right now in my humble opinion the situation is this:

 

LT- Bell- a potential prospect but really a raw talent who draws a few too minute false start and ocaissional holding calls which are drive killers at bad times. Is a prospect as he actually does quite well at one of the most critical LT functions which is playing on an island against the opponents best rusher. However, in addition to sometimes bad penalties the blocking scheme tends to need to shift his way to help out on run blocks to his side. Can he develop into an adequate LT? Maybe, but this spot is a big candidate for getting a player who can improve this position on his own and add value to this team.

 

G- Wood- A player any Bills fan should be proud of as he not only demonstrates the grit which makes one love an OL player but he has the ability to play and start at C with only a little more experience and his comeback from a horrendous injury which ended his rookie campaign was simply phenomenal. We are hoping for and demanding a lot from him but it is possible he might do it and is a player whom even if he fails to meet all of our goals for great play (it is reasonably hoped the injury was just a one-off piece of bad luck and it would take another serious injury to worry much about him being injury prone as objectively he is not) and he is a great guy to root for even if he does not achieve our great hopes.

 

C- Hamgartner- the most important player on our OL right now as his experience and good line calls because he understands the roles of solid play at each position and also seems to have a good knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of his fellow OL players, QB, and blitz pick-up guys allows this OL to function at times at a higher level than the raw talent or experience of the young players would predict. However. make no mistake that he is a good enough player that he is more than a very good stop gap at C and we all hope that Wood not only learns from Hamgartner but becomes the more talented player we need at C. If all things work out well then Hamgartner and Wood will just flip roles giving us great knowledge at the less demanding guard role but giving us equal knowledge but a better player with Wood at C.

 

G- Levitre- Solid young player who MIGHT develop into the positive force we want in an OL which is a weapon (as it was in the Kent Hull K-Gun days (rather than needing top performance from every OL player to merely be adequate. He is not there yet as he still will sometimes make young talented player mistakes and Hamgartner needs to cover for him a bit as the blocking must shift his way due to poor or inconsistent tackle play (which causes Levitre to have to do more than just his job at G). However, while it would be rose-colored glasses to expect more from this youngster it is reasonably possible.

 

T- Green- The case that losing him might actually improve performance of this unit (even without his heir apparent identified on the depth chart speaks volumes to his inadequacy and that even if Bell develops we need another starting tackle on this team speaks volumes.

 

This unit does suck which is actually demonstrated by how much better it performs with an inadequate QB (Fitzy has smarts but simply is not physically gifted enough be more of a threat than a weakness as starting QB. His knowledge and feel for the game really helps a lot as he seems to sense where the blitz is coming from and which OL player is going to have a brain fart this time so that the worse outcomes are often avoided and good things might even happen when he bails out and turns a sack into a gain of a few yards. The Os far more productive play with a smarter and tougher QB (despite Fitzy being less athletically gifted than Edwards- Gailey admitted being fooled by the Edwards bait and switch by cutting him) is actually an objective demonstration of the problems and unltimate suckitude if this OL.

 

 

Overall, this unit not only needs two players (a T and a swing guy) to be reasonably considered adequate, but it MUST have an experienced and confident QB in order to be even considered adequately effective on O (the improvement in production shifting from the talented but gun shy in terms of positive play calling and execution of Edwards to the smarter but less gifted Fitzy demonstrates this.

 

In order for the OL to not only achieve the needed adequacy but become the weapon we need, this unit not only needs at least a player and a half but also needs the time to achieve consistency.

 

This sucks in my book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seq004 Veteran

seq004

Posted
Posted

Alright Ive been watching Locker, Luck, Mallett, and at first I was all on the Luck bandwagon. After watching locker get wrecked by Nebraska I turned him off but still have been watching him these past couple of weeks. Lets face it Luck isnt coming out, our team isnt going anywhere for atleast 2 years. Locker is our future. His o line sucks and look at the way he steps up in the pocket, How his playaction is so effective because not only can he throw, but he has a sub 4.40 40. We take locker, develop a year under fitz and really show that this franchise can be something. If we get Mallett we will have a solid qb for a decade. If we get locker we could have a hall of famer who CAN play in cold weather. Especially after looking at how hes tearing up an excellent oregon state secondary.

He looked good last night despite 1 bad throw.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hplarrm RFA

Hplarrm

Posted
Posted

I love how even when a QB sucks we rationalize that the kid is still worth our #1 pick overall. Infatuations die hard. Here's a bold concept: if there are no obvious QB's to pick...don't pick one.

 

PTR

No QB is going to be a helpful choice for team building with our #1 pick as:

 

1. Our OL and nascent Gailey offense needs a QB with some NFL experience to read the pro defenses and games we are likely to face next year. Any rookie is going to need to spend their time learning to become a vet without this development being complicated by us needing a vet QB merely to operate adequately. Having a rookie as our QB almost without regard to their talent level will be a step back for this O to an Edwards level of production by this O.

 

2. Not only will a rookie be a step back for this O but also it will be a horrible situation for developing this rookie. In order to not get killed next year the QB will not only need to be able to do vet level reads but also have a vet level quick release. Even the quickest releases in the pros were simply not as this level of speed as a rookie.

 

3. The local media (which will be happy to make their nickels savaging a new QB brought in with high expectations) and a small but vocal part of the fan base desperately looking for immediate production from their new savior will not give a new QB the time to develop and learn from making mistakes to become a quality vet.

 

It might make sense to try to get a late round QB who will not have expectations of immediate production and also will not devastate our salary cap when he proves to be mortal. However, as small as the chances of finding a Tom Brady are they actually are better than the chances of getting immediate production out of a 1st round QB choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Wilson from Gamehendge Veteran

Wilson from Gamehendge

Posted
Posted (edited)

Alright Ive been watching Locker, Luck, Mallett, and at first I was all on the Luck bandwagon. After watching locker get wrecked by Nebraska I turned him off but still have been watching him these past couple of weeks. Lets face it Luck isnt coming out, our team isnt going anywhere for atleast 2 years. Locker is our future. His o line sucks and look at the way he steps up in the pocket, How his playaction is so effective because not only can he throw, but he has a sub 4.40 40. We take locker, develop a year under fitz and really show that this franchise can be something. If we get Mallett we will have a solid qb for a decade. If we get locker we could have a hall of famer who CAN play in cold weather. Especially after looking at how hes tearing up an excellent oregon state secondary.

Hall of Famer? LOL!

 

 

Will he be inducted the same year as JP Losman's beard or Trent Edwards' hair? :wallbash:

Edited by Wilson from Gamehendge
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sisyphean Bills All Pro

Sisyphean Bills

Posted
Posted

Oh great another "The Bills OL sucks" post......

 

The Bills OL as a whole do NOT SUCK

 

- LT is set

- We have several candidates for C

- We also have several players capable of playing guard

- WE NEED A RIGHT TACKLE

 

That does NOT mean that this OL sucks.....I wish people would stop saying this

The Bills OL sucks. :devil:

 

This guy is not the first rounder idiot McShay claims he is. Please just stop.

Remind me. Didn't McShay have a football woody for Aaron Maybin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
C.Biscuit97 Hall of Famer

C.Biscuit97

Posted
Posted

This guy is not the first rounder idiot McShay claims he is. Please just stop.

 

McShay also said Clausen won't be drafted in the first round. He wasn't and he looks terrible so far.

 

And of any of the top QBs in the draft the past 5 years or so, not one has played with a weaker supporting cast than Locker. If Luck comes out, he's the #1 pick without a doubt. But Locker has all the ability and toughness to become a very good QB if he lands in a decent situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stony Veteran

stony

Posted
Posted (edited)

Locker > Mallet but the sum of both does not equal Luck, and since he isn't coming out, the next 7 months will be a time when everyone (hopefully not our FO) tries to talk themselves into which one is worthy of a top pick. I miss the good old days of clear-cut #1s like Manning and Leaf... :unsure:

 

Also, if the Arkansas game showed anything about Mallet, is was he's probably the QB rated near the top that is most reliant upon the system he's in. His back-up (Wilson, I believe) was absolutely lights out in relief of him. I've bought in to the "scouting thing" regarding trying to watch Mallet, Luck, Locker as much as possible, and this was the best game an Arkansas QB played this year.

Edited by stony
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stan da Man Practice Squad

Stan da Man

Posted
Posted

Locker > Mallet but the sum of both does not equal Luck, and since he isn't coming out, the next 7 months will be a time when everyone (hopefully not our FO) tries to talk themselves into which one is worthy of a top pick. I miss the good old days of clear-cut #1s like Manning and Leaf... :unsure:

 

Also, if the Arkansas game showed anything about Mallet, is was he's probably the QB rated near the top that is most reliant upon the system he's in. His back-up (Wilson, I believe) was absolutely lights out in relief of him. I've bought in to the "scouting thing" regarding trying to watch Mallet, Luck, Locker as much as possible, and this was the best game an Arkansas QB played this year.

 

Great point. Mallet's back-up did have an excellent game. Not sure if that's exposing Mallet or just showing the depth on their roster....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nostradamus Rookie

Nostradamus

Posted
Posted

Great point. Mallet's back-up did have an excellent game. Not sure if that's exposing Mallet or just showing the depth on their roster....

 

Very difficult to say... one thing that it exposed to me was Mallett's lack of precision in the short passing game. The kid Wilson was putting balls right on the money and their receivers, particularly Childs, was catching the ball in stride and just shredding the Auburn secondary. Mallett definitely has some problems with touch passes and timing. There are times when a receiver will turn around at the same time Mallett's pass is going 80 mph through his hands or over his head.

That being said, Mallett still intrigues me. He has an absolute cannon, and can make all the passes. Unlike Losman, who threw an excellent bomb and not much else, Mallett is capable of throwing every type of NFL throw on a rope, including deep outs and post routes in between defenders. I can't remember the last NFL quarterback that had the same kind of golden arm that Mallett possesses. (Maybe Cutler?) Mallett seems to have improved every season, and is a lock to throw for 300 yards in every game that he starts and finishes at the college level.

It is worth remembering that even Manning initially struggled at the short passing game coming out of school, but through coaching, extreme dedication, and high football IQ, he has since perfected that aspect of his game. It's highly unlikely Mallet will make those kind of strides, but the short passing game is something that can be coached up at the NFL level. With the thinking that Mallet can improve his all around accuracy, I think he is a legitimate 1st overall prospect and potential franchise QB. That's not to say I think the Bills should draft him at no.1... I'm still not sure. But his skill set should make him worthy of consideration at that spot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...