Jack Locker can't hit the broadside of a barn

[DreReed83]

Washington is "elite"?

 

They're not. This kid doesn't know what he's talking about. Any team that loses 6 games in a season is NOT considered "elite." In college football I wouldn't even consider a team that loses 3 or 4 games "elite."

[CosmicBills]

1) There are so many things wrong with this post its not even funny. Drops ball aren;t an excuse for completion percentage? If a QB were to throw every pass to a receiver and hit him between the numbers and his receivers drop 60% of the passes, then it would be the QBs fault? I guess that's no excuse. BS

 

2) I just have 2 words for you. Michael Vick. A career 45 and 55% completion percentage and his first year back under Reid's tutelage, and improved footwork, his percentage goes up to 62% in 2010. I thought accuracy was innate?

 

3) Washington is NOT an elite program. Just because they play D1 doesn't mean they're elite. Oregon, Florida, Alabama, Boise State, are "ELITE" teams. You comparing Washington to these teams? Elite teams dont lost 6 games in a season. Sorry.

 

4) So its clear that you're misunderstood on this whole accuracy thing. You've coached football? Obviously never a good one at that. Let those kids learn from a real coach.

Okay, logical reasoning and rational though are not your strong suits. So I'll type slow. Just remember to sound out the big words, don't be afraid to raise your hands with questions. An abacus can be found under your desk, don't be shy ... I promise thinking won't hurt as much as you think it might.

 

As for your points:

 

1. Dropped balls are not an excuse for a poor completion percentage. If they were a legitimate excuse, then the stat heads would factor them into their equations for QB ratings and completion percentages much the same way a fielder's error is factored into a pitcher's ERA. But there are a number of additional reasons why you can't point to dropped balls as a (realistic) excuse for a QB's poor completion percentage.

 

First, they happen all the time. Every QB who's ever played the game had balls dropped many times throughout the season. Even the most accurate passers in the game. So if you're saying Fitz's numbers would be higher if you factor in drops, you'd have to go back through and say the same for every other QB in the league which would adjust EVERYONE'S numbers and the league average, making it pretty much irrelevant. But since this was specifically in regards to Fitz, let's take a closer look -- stay with me now, I know it's tough. Your post stated that Fitz's poor completion percentage was blamed on Johnson dropping balls -- yet the Bills were in the middle of the pack when it comes to dropped balls. Other QBs with higher completion % had more dropped balls than Fitz. Which means if you factor in those drops for those QBs, then Fitz is still far less accurate in comparison to the top half of the league.

 

Second, for the sake of argument let's say you can factor in dropped balls. Well then you'd have to also factor in the number of balls that are thrown that are off target yet caught anyway thanks to the skills of the receivers. These throws happen as frequently (if not more) than dropped passes. But how to you quantify those? It's a very slippery slope and, when all is said and done, a worthless exercise to pursue in order to justify someone's poor completion percentage.

 

Again, think it through.

 

Statistics, especially something like completion percentages, are about the big picture, not blips. Looking at percentages for one game and ignoring the entirety of a season doesn't get you much. Nor does looking at one season in relation to an entire career. Everyone can have a great day. Everyone can have a bad one. What counts is consistency. And that's really what we're talking about here. Since no QB in the history of the game has had WRs NOT drop passes, you can't just say "if they didn't happen his completion percentage would be X" ... it's just not intellectually honest. But then again, that's not your strong suit.

 

2. Again, you can look at Vick's numbers in one of two ways. Your way is to dismiss 7 years in the league where he was a sub 55%er and focusing just on one year. He certainly had a great year, no one can argue otherwise. But let's see him do it again. Remember the point above: statistics are about the big picture. And in the big picture, his career numbers are still 55.3%. Statistical blips happen -- in everything. Over an 8 year career he's been over 60% once (this past year), it also happened to be a contract year. That could mean nothing, it could mean everything. Thing is, no one will know until he does it again. And again. Even if he has another year with 62%, he's still a sub 60% career average ... that's why it's silly to take one year, one game, one drive and try to hold it up as anything more than a slice of a larger pie.

 

Vick doesn't provide an answer to the question I posed in relation to Locker which was, name one QB that was sub 60% in college who made a 5%+ jump once he made it to the NFL. Vick doesn't count because his career stats are still 55%. He did it once. And it took him 7 years. Can Locker have one season in the NFL where he's above 60%? Sure. But according to the law of averages, my blind Uncle Joe could too if he played enough seasons.

 

3. We clearly are talking about two very different things here. Which, I fully admit is my fault. So let's clear it up: Washington is not an elite school in terms of wins and losses.

 

However, Washington is an elite school in so far as they have excellent coaches and get high caliber players into their program. They also produce their fair share of NFL players each year. Are they the best team in the country? No. My reference to them being elite was to demonstrate that Locker has had the benefit of playing for some top coaches (specifically elite QB coaches with track records). The point of me saying that was not to debate the merits of Washington's championship pedigree but to point out that IF accuracy is as easy to teach as you claim (it's all just balance, footwork and mechanics, right?) then it would be fair to assume that a coach as accomplished as Sark would know how to teach it. After all, the man played the position professionally and has mentored his share of great college QBs. Yet, despite working with Sark, Locker's numbers didn't improve. Which means what? Well, it could mean that it's not as easy to teach as you claim. It could also mean that Locker doesn't have the work ethic or desire to learn it (which seems unlikely). In either case, what it does mean is that if he didn't bother to learn it or work on it in college, he probably won't be prone to suddenly decide to do it in the pros. Which, going waaaaaaay back to the original point, is why I said you're dreaming if you believe Locker is suddenly going to turn into a 60+%er once he turns pro.

 

It just doesn't work that way.

 

4. Actually, I haven't misunderstood the accuracy thing. You haven't really addressed it. In fact, instead of engaging in an honest discussion about it, you resort to name calling and spastic bouts of drivel that are neither entertaining nor informative. As I said at the beginning, plenty of very smart people believe that accuracy cannot be taught (Steve Young, Jaws, Gruden, Bradshaw ...). And let's be honest, they know more about the game than both of us combined. And again, if it were so easy to teach or so easy to learn, why isn't the history of the league littered with stories of QBs suddenly "flipping a switch" and becoming more accurate overnight? You can't just ignore that fact.

 

But it's not a definite. Like I said, there's no scientific study I can point to that shows you I'm right and your wrong. It's a matter of opinion. Yet, my opinion comes with a wealth of history and statistics to back it up. Yours comes with name calling. Which, come on, you can do better than the insults you've been spouting. Crack open a thesaurus, steal some punchlines from whatever CBS sitcom you're watching right now ... something, anything to make your posts more interesting.

Edited February 15, 2011 by tgreg99

[Thoner7]

They're not. This kid doesn't know what he's talking about. Any team that loses 6 games in a season is NOT considered "elite." In college football I wouldn't even consider a team that loses 3 or 4 games "elite."

 

 

Okay, logical reasoning and rational though are not your strong suits. So I'll type slow. Just remember to sound out the big words, don't be afraid to raise your hands with questions. An abacus can be found under your desk, don't be shy ... I promise thinking won't hurt as much as you think it might.

 

 

 

Because I am tired of reading an naïve poster attack a very well informed poster I will intervene and hopefully be able to settle this for you two love birds.

 

Tgreg is one of, if not the most intelligent poster on the board when it comes to prospects and/or football schemes. Its clearly evident to anyone who has read his posts and understands the game. I was not surprised at all when he posted earlier in this thread that he played and coached the game.

 

DreReed reminds me of Skooby and Darth Ice combined. A cross between Skoobys intelligence and Darth Ices ranting skills. Almost every post I read and think WTF is this guy talking about I look up and its one of his. I fell like you are still in middle school and have to pause your xBox to reply to threads. Keep up the good work dude.

 

PS accuracy can be improved, but only slightly, with mechanics. Its a natural gift proved by some QBs with whacky mechanics still possessing great accuracy and vica versa. Locker is a thrower, not a passer. There is a difference.

Edited February 15, 2011 by Thoner7

[NoSaint]

Okay, logical reasoning and rational though are not your strong suits. So I'll type slow. Just remember to sound out the big words, don't be afraid to raise your hands with questions. An abacus can be found under your desk, don't be shy ... I promise thinking won't hurt as much as you think it might.

 

As for your points:

 

1. Dropped balls are not an excuse for a poor completion percentage. If they were a legitimate excuse, then the stat heads would factor them into their equations for QB ratings and completion percentages much the same way a fielder's error is factored into a pitcher's ERA. But there are a number of additional reasons why you can't point to dropped balls as a (realistic) excuse for a QB's poor completion percentage.

 

First, they happen all the time. Every QB who's ever played the game had balls dropped many times throughout the season. Even the most accurate passers in the game. So if you're saying Fitz's numbers would be higher if you factor in drops, you'd have to go back through and say the same for every other QB in the league which would adjust EVERYONE'S numbers and the league average, making it pretty much irrelevant. But since this was specifically in regards to Fitz, let's take a closer look -- stay with me now, I know it's tough. Your post stated that Fitz's poor completion percentage was blamed on Johnson dropping balls -- yet the Bills were in the middle of the pack when it comes to dropped balls. Other QBs with higher completion % had more dropped balls than Fitz. Which means if you factor in those drops for those QBs, then Fitz is still far less accurate in comparison to the top half of the league.

 

Second, for the sake of argument let's say you can factor in dropped balls. Well then you'd have to also factor in the number of balls that are thrown that are off target yet caught anyway thanks to the skills of the receivers. These throws happen as frequently (if not more) than dropped passes. But how to you quantify those? It's a very slippery slope and, when all is said and done, a worthless exercise to pursue in order to justify someone's poor completion percentage.

 

Again, think it through.

 

Statistics, especially something like completion percentages, are about the big picture, not blips. Looking at percentages for one game and ignoring the entirety of a season doesn't get you much. Nor does looking at one season in relation to an entire career. Everyone can have a great day. Everyone can have a bad one. What counts is consistency. And that's really what we're talking about here. Since no QB in the history of the game has had WRs NOT drop passes, you can't just say "if they didn't happen his completion percentage would be X" ... it's just not intellectually honest. But then again, that's not your strong suit.

 

2. Again, you can look at Vick's numbers in one of two ways. Your way is to dismiss 7 years in the league where he was a sub 55%er and focusing just on one year. He certainly had a great year, no one can argue otherwise. But let's see him do it again. Remember the point above: statistics are about the big picture. And in the big picture, his career numbers are still 55.3%. Statistical blips happen -- in everything. Over an 8 year career he's been over 60% once (this past year), it also happened to be a contract year. That could mean nothing, it could mean everything. Thing is, no one will know until he does it again. And again. Even if he has another year with 62%, he's still a sub 60% career average ... that's why it's silly to take one year, one game, one drive and try to hold it up as anything more than a slice of a larger pie.

 

Vick doesn't provide an answer to the question I posed in relation to Locker which was, name one QB that was sub 60% in college who made a 5%+ jump once he made it to the NFL. Vick doesn't count because his career stats are still 55%. He did it once. And it took him 7 years. Can Locker have one season in the NFL where he's above 60%? Sure. But according to the law of averages, my blind Uncle Joe could too if he played enough seasons.

 

3. We clearly are talking about two very different things here. Which, I fully admit is my fault. So let's clear it up: Washington is not an elite school in terms of wins and losses.

 

However, Washington is an elite school in so far as they have excellent coaches and get high caliber players into their program. They also produce their fair share of NFL players each year. Are they the best team in the country? No. My reference to them being elite was to demonstrate that Locker has had the benefit of playing for some top coaches (specifically elite QB coaches with track records). The point of me saying that was not to debate the merits of Washington's championship pedigree but to point out that IF accuracy is as easy to teach as you claim (it's all just balance, footwork and mechanics, right?) then it would be fair to assume that a coach as accomplished as Sark would know how to teach it. After all, the man played the position professionally and has mentored his share of great college QBs. Yet, despite working with Sark, Locker's numbers didn't improve. Which means what? Well, it could mean that it's not as easy to teach as you claim. It could also mean that Locker doesn't have the work ethic or desire to learn it (which seems unlikely). In either case, what it does mean is that if he didn't bother to learn it or work on it in college, he probably won't be prone to suddenly decide to do it in the pros. Which, going waaaaaaay back to the original point, is why I said you're dreaming if you believe Locker is suddenly going to turn into a 60+%er once he turns pro.

 

It just doesn't work that way.

 

4. Actually, I haven't misunderstood the accuracy thing. You haven't really addressed it. In fact, instead of engaging in an honest discussion about it, you resort to name calling and spastic bouts of drivel that are neither entertaining nor informative. As I said at the beginning, plenty of very smart people believe that accuracy cannot be taught (Steve Young, Jaws, Gruden, Bradshaw ...). And let's be honest, they know more about the game than both of us combined. And again, if it were so easy to teach or so easy to learn, why isn't the history of the league littered with stories of QBs suddenly "flipping a switch" and becoming more accurate overnight? You can't just ignore that fact.

 

But it's not a definite. Like I said, there's no scientific study I can point to that shows you I'm right and your wrong. It's a matter of opinion. Yet, my opinion comes with a wealth of history and statistics to back it up. Yours comes with name calling. Which, come on, you can do better than the insults you've been spouting. Crack open a thesaurus, steal some punchlines from whatever CBS sitcom you're watching right now ... something, anything to make your posts more interesting.

 

but if stevie didnt drop that td he wouldve had 24 tds and that ties him with jim kelly in 1990!

 

 

no but seriously... bravo on this one. for some reason people act like you are making fun of their special needs sibling if you so much as suggest that fitz has warts with accuracy, and i think in this case you see dre doing it for locker for much the same critique.

 

locker might be a little more athletic, fitz a little brighter, but on the field the results have been much the same, and accuracy is a huge part of that. not winning. they point to drops, and stats from 20 years ago. how about this - peyton manning had two receivers that each dropped more passes then stevie johnson. tom brady, drew brees, and peyton manning all had 10% higher completion percentages, while dealing with more drops. if we factor in drops the gap widens, not closes.

 

you cant win consistently when you are sub 60%. the elite qbs are over 65% year in and year out, and quite frankly are starting to flirt with 70% on a more regular basis. accuracy can be improved with decision making, drills, etc.... but you cant count on that. especially for 10% improvement for guys that havent really shown an uptick after years in college, and in fitzs case in the pros.

 

Because I am tired of reading an naïve poster attack a very well informed poster I will intervene and hopefully be able to settle this for you two love birds.

 

Tgreg is one of, if not the most intelligent poster on the board when it comes to prospects and/or football schemes. Its clearly evident to anyone who has read his posts and understands the game. I was not surprised at all when he posted earlier in this thread that he played and coached the game.

 

DreReed reminds me of Skooby and Darth Ice combined. A cross between Skoobys intelligence and Darth Ice’s ranting skills. Almost every post I read and think “WTF is this guy talking about” I look up and its one of his. I fell like you are still in middle school and have to pause your xBox to reply to threads. Keep up the good work dude.

 

PS accuracy can be improved, but only slightly, with mechanics. It’s a natural gift – proved by some QBs with whacky mechanics still possessing great accuracy and vica versa. Locker is a thrower, not a passer. There is a difference.

 

i wasnt going to say as much, but i often feel the same way. there are posts that you read and just are baffled as to how someone could argue that point, and all of a sudden you realize who it is. it seems this is one of those posters for a lot of people. there are plenty of posters that i may not agree with assessment of an individual player, position, need, scheme etc.... but its obvious they have there reasons... i just cant even to begin with dre, and its pretty consistently regardless of topic that i am left scratching my head. if i try an ask him to explain i get massive freakouts about only an idiot wouldnt understand, but it seems either all of us are idiots, or maybe he could take pause and re-evaluate some of his communications.

Edited February 15, 2011 by NoSaint

[Turbosrrgood]

 

so can we please put the qb talk to rest?

 

 

Why? Isn't that what forums are for? The Bills obviously are at least considering a QB at some point in the draft. If the Bills do take one it would be big news that would excite some fans, and having others claim it was a bad decision. What's wrong with asking others opinions?

 

What would you rather talk about? Taxes? Curling?

 

BTW, I watched the competition and the headline of this post were the first thoughts that came to my mind...This guy can't hit the broadside of a barn...He couldn't do it all year during game play either. Maybe he would be worth the risk in the 3rd, just like Trent...

[NoSaint]

Why? Isn't that what forums are for? The Bills obviously are at least considering a QB at some point in the draft. If the Bills do take one it would be big news that would excite some fans, and having others claim it was a bad decision. What's wrong with asking others opinions?

 

What would you rather talk about? Taxes? Curling?

 

BTW, I watched the competition and the headline of this post were the first thoughts that came to my mind...This guy can't hit the broadside of a barn...He couldn't do it all year during game play either. Maybe he would be worth the risk in the 3rd, just like Trent...

 

 

its part of why i dont think he learns it as a pro. he cant do hit a target in shorts, how can we blame his WRs for the issue? hes just coming from so far behind at this point with his arm.

[Turbosrrgood]

its part of why i dont think he learns it as a pro. he cant do hit a target in shorts, how can we blame his WRs for the issue? hes just coming from so far behind at this point with his arm.

 

Make no mistake, I agree. I don't want locker, or Mallet for that matter (Statue QB's can't survive in the NFL, and he's a douche).

[John from Riverside]

By your posts, I can tell you've never played the game and clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

 

Accuracy can't be taught? WRONG. Accuracy is all mechanics. Balance, stance, footwork. If you fix that, then no problem. It's A LOT easier to fix accuracy problems than teaching a QB like Newton how to play the position. Ryan Fitzpatrick's completion percentage would be a lot better if Steve Johnson and his WR's actually caught the ball. I'm guessing you never saw a Bills game either. How many passes did Steve Johnson drop against the Steelers?

 

According to you, accuracy is a born ability? You're either born with accuracy or you're not? Retarded post number 1.

 

2) Washington University is an elite program? Best coaches in the nation? Steve Sarkisian is far from being the best coach in the nation.

 

Actually coming from someone who has played quite a bit of football.....I can tell you that Tgreg is correct.

 

- Mechanics CAN be improved

- However......the problem is that Locker comes from a decent school where they have probably already tried to fix all these things

- Also let me point out......when a QB goes under live fire what they tend to do is fall back on bad habits

 

Locker is not the guy for this team

[JohnC]

DreReed reminds me of Skooby and Darth Ice combined. A cross between Skoobys intelligence and Darth Ice’s ranting skills.

 

If you mated the two that would be an interesting offspring. Speaking of DarthIce, was he banned or did he just flame out? If he should return he obviously would be for the Bills to draft a qb with their first pick? Not too long ago I added a topic inquiring as to his whereabouts? The board supervisor quickly took that topic down. It must be a sore subject?????

[Thoner7]

Nevergiveup told me Darth Ice was one of those box headed dancers on stage during the SB half time show. I knew the guy on the left looked familiar.