List of 2018 Pro Days

[Bangarang]

31 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Did you read the post and understand the point?

 

A 51% passer in college, McCown completed 67% of his passes last season 

 

I read it and understood the point. I thought it was funny that you’re using McCown as a point of reference. 

[thebandit27]

3 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

I read it and understood the point. I thought it was funny that you’re using McCown as a point of reference. 

 

Why? He's a great example that the "accuracy doesn't improve from college to the NFL" talking point isn't really salient

[26CornerBlitz]

http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-texas-tech

[Bangarang]

1 minute ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Why? He's a great example that the "accuracy doesn't improve from college to the NFL" talking point isn't really salient

 

Conpletion percentage by itself isn’t a complete indicator of accuracy. I’ll let you have it though. In general, the point of accuracy not improving a lot from college to the NFL is reasonable if you don’t want to take it so literal.

[mannc]

1 minute ago, Bangarang said:

 

 the point of accuracy not improving a lot from college to the NFL is reasonable if you don’t want to take it so literal.

You mean, if you don’t have to back it up with any facts?

[Bangarang]

5 minutes ago, mannc said:

You mean, if you don’t have to back it up with any facts?

 

The amount of players whose accuracy did not improve from college is far greater than those who did. So sure, if you want to use a career backup as an example to prove your point then go ahead.

[thebandit27]

38 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

Conpletion percentage by itself isn’t a complete indicator of accuracy. I’ll let you have it though. In general, the point of accuracy not improving a lot from college to the NFL is reasonable if you don’t want to take it so literal.

 

We can't use a metric to knock a kid and then say that the very same metric isn't an indicator when someone presents it in a way that doesn't condemn him to failure 

 

29 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

The amount of players whose accuracy did not improve from college is far greater than those who did. So sure, if you want to use a career backup as an example to prove your point then go ahead.

 

Yeah, you're missing the point.

 

I included far more than career backups on many occasions; you chose, like many before you, to dismiss the data that don't support the assertion that Allen is doomed to failure and focus instead on the one name that I threw in as part of my off-the-top-of-my-head listing that can conveniently be categorized (in your opinion) as a detriment to the point.

[Bangarang]

16 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

We can't use a metric to knock a kid and then say that the very same metric isn't an indicator when someone presents it in a way that doesn't condemn him to failure

 

What’s with this “we” stuff?

 

Quote

 

 

Yeah, you're missing the point.

 

I included far more than career backups on many occasions; you chose, like many before you, to dismiss the data that don't support the assertion that Allen is doomed to failure and focus instead on the one name that I threw in as part of my off-the-top-of-my-head listing that can conveniently be categorized (in your opinion) as a detriment to the point.

 

I’m not dismissing anything and I’m not focusing on anything. I made a one off comment that one of those names is not like the others. You’re acting as though I have a dog in this fight.

Edited March 25, 2018 by Bangarang

[D. L. Hot-Flamethrower]

13 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

We can't use a metric to knock a kid and then say that the very same metric isn't an indicator when someone presents it in a way that doesn't condemn him to failure 

 

 

Yeah, you're missing the point.

 

I included far more than career backups on many occasions; you chose, like many before you, to dismiss the data that don't support the assertion that Allen is doomed to failure and focus instead on the one name that I threw in as part of my off-the-top-of-my-head listing that can conveniently be categorized (in your opinion) as a detriment to the point.

I have a simple question, If you were the Browns GM would you take Allen with the number one pick? Yes or No

[thebandit27]

15 minutes ago, horned dogs said:

I have a simple question, If you were the Browns GM would you take Allen with the number one pick? Yes or No

 

No, I'd probably take Rosen since I think he's safer 

 

Alleb is my QB4, but I have no problem if a team thinks he's potentially a franchise guy 

[MrEpsYtown]

Anyone have a guess on what type of 40 Jackson is expected to run? I mean if he runs like a 4.3 and throws the ball well, then what? 

[thebandit27]

22 minutes ago, Bangarang said:

 

What’s with this “we” stuff?

 

 

I’m not dismissing anything and I’m not focusing on anything. I made a one off comment that one of those names is not like the others. You’re acting as though I have a dog in this fight.

 

I'm really only trying to put McCown's inclusion in context 

 

Hopefully it doesn't come off as being argumentative 

[26CornerBlitz]

http://draftanalyst.com/draft-news-notes-sharing-their-top-15

[jrober38]

10 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Except for all of the exceptional plays he's made that nobody else seems to be able to make

 

Meaning no offense: you seem to have this tendency to ignore anything that runs counter to your established position on Allen and state absolutes about him, which is really weird.

 

For example, he's put a great number of outstanding throws on tape that show just how good he can be, but you go on to state that "nothing" shows him to be a good football player. That's hyperbole at best.

 

I also see that you continue to state that QBs don't improve their accuracy in the NFL, which is patently false--and you've been given many examples including Stafford, Matt Ryan, Josh McCown, Carson Palmer Drew Brees, etc.

 

You've got your opinions about the kid and that's fine. Justifiable even. Let's all have a bit of intellectual honesty and acknowledge that it's hardly a position that is supported by all of the relevant data.

 

None of those guys were ever considered inaccurate passers. 

 

You seem to keep confusing completion percentage with accuracy. 

 

[thebandit27]

Just now, jrober38 said:

 

None of those guys were ever considered inaccurate passers. 

 

You seem to keep confusing completion percentage with accuracy. 

 

 

Nope.

 

I know the difference quite readily.

 

It does make a convenient crutch to lean on so that folks don't have to let the "you can't improve accuracy" argument go.

 

[JohnC]

6 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

I'm really only trying to put McCown's inclusion in context 

 

Hopefully it doesn't come off as being argumentative

You are not only argumentative but you are also pugnacious. I mean it in a good way. 

[DFT]

7 hours ago, MrEpsYtown said:

Anyone have a guess on what type of 40 Jackson is expected to run? I mean if he runs like a 4.3 and throws the ball well, then what? 

 mid 4.3s, but he says he’s run in the 4.2s.   

Edited March 26, 2018 by DFT

[MrEpsYtown]

22 minutes ago, DFT said:

 mid 4.3s, but he says he’s run in the 4.2s.   

 

Thank you. That is just ridiculous. Intriguing in that second tier based on that alone. 

[jrober38]

12 hours ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Nope.

 

I know the difference quite readily.

 

It does make a convenient crutch to lean on so that folks don't have to let the "you can't improve accuracy" argument go.

 

 

When has a QB who was describe as having real accuracy problems coming out of college, ever corrected them and become a franchise QB in the NFL?

 

It doesn't happen. 

 

Accuracy can be refined and tweaked. It can't be taught from the ground up. 

[BillsFan2313]

4 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

When has a QB who was describe as having real accuracy problems coming out of college, ever corrected them and become a franchise QB in the NFL?

 

It doesn't happen. 

 

Accuracy can be refined and tweaked. It can't be taught from the ground up. 

 

Brett Favre 

Don't tell me that was long ago, he threw the ball a lot

If accuracy is a problem due to foot work, then yes, it can be taught from the ground up.

[thebandit27]

13 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

When has a QB who was describe as having real accuracy problems coming out of college, ever corrected them and become a franchise QB in the NFL?

 

It doesn't happen. 

 

Accuracy can be refined and tweaked. It can't be taught from the ground up. 

 

Once again you're using the nebulous factor of "described" to cushion an unsupported argument.  Allen doesn't need accuracy taught from the ground up; he needs refinement on his shorter throws--they lack touch and timing (the latter, of course, could easily be ascribed to lack of experience with the guys he played with in his final year at Wyoming, but let's stay on point here).

 

As for "descriptions", let me go ahead and throw these out there:

 

QB1 - "Sloppy footwork. ... Will get lazy and throw off his back foot, which could lead to turnovers in the NFL... Not great accuracy on crossing routes. ... Too often leads his receivers too far or forces them to reach back, slowing their momentum and limiting their ability to generate yardage after the catch."

Matthew Stafford

 

QB2 - "Accuracy on intermediate and deep throws dropped sharply. "

Dak Prescott

 

QB3 - "Can still be a streaky and erratic passer. Needs work on his drop-back techniques. Still must improve timing, touch and anticipation of receiver. "

Donovan McNabb

 

QB4 - "Inconsistent accuracy due to poor footwork and falling away to avoid a big hit."

Cam Newton

 

Now go ahead with the "yeah buts".

15 minutes ago, BillsFan2313 said:

 

Brett Favre 

Don't tell me that was long ago, he threw the ball a lot

If accuracy is a problem due to foot work, then yes, it can be taught from the ground up.

 

I like @jrober38; good poster who does the homework on guys.  I also think that he's dug in on this one and will simply keep coming up with new ways to knock Allen's chances at becoming a good pro.  Hey, sometimes we're simply dug in on guys; it happens.

[BillsFan2313]

24 minutes ago, thebandit27 said:

 

Once again you're using the nebulous factor of "described" to cushion an unsupported argument.  Allen doesn't need accuracy taught from the ground up; he needs refinement on his shorter throws--they lack touch and timing (the latter, of course, could easily be ascribed to lack of experience with the guys he played with in his final year at Wyoming, but let's stay on point here).

 

As for "descriptions", let me go ahead and throw these out there:

 

QB1 - "Sloppy footwork. ... Will get lazy and throw off his back foot, which could lead to turnovers in the NFL... Not great accuracy on crossing routes. ... Too often leads his receivers too far or forces them to reach back, slowing their momentum and limiting their ability to generate yardage after the catch."

 

  Hide contents

 

Matthew Stafford
 

 

 

QB2 - "Accuracy on intermediate and deep throws dropped sharply. "

 

  Hide contents

 

Dak Prescott
 

 

 

QB3 - "Can still be a streaky and erratic passer. Needs work on his drop-back techniques. Still must improve timing, touch and anticipation of receiver. "

 

  Hide contents

 

Donovan McNabb
 

 

 

QB4 - "Inconsistent accuracy due to poor footwork and falling away to avoid a big hit."

 

  Hide contents

 

Cam Newton
 

 

 

Now go ahead with the "yeah buts".

 

I like @jrober38; good poster who does the homework on guys.  I also think that he's dug in on this one and will simply keep coming up with new ways to knock Allen's chances at becoming a good pro.  Hey, sometimes we're simply dug in on guys; it happens.

 

 

 

 

Seems like many on this board are 100% convinced Allen has no chance to be good

[DCOrange]

19 hours ago, MrEpsYtown said:

Anyone have a guess on what type of 40 Jackson is expected to run? I mean if he runs like a 4.3 and throws the ball well, then what? 

 

I'm guessing he's around a 4.4-4.45 but we'll see.

 

He's my #1 QB in the draft regardless of what he runs.

[jrober38]

1 hour ago, BillsFan2313 said:

 

Brett Favre 

Don't tell me that was long ago, he threw the ball a lot

If accuracy is a problem due to foot work, then yes, it can be taught from the ground up.

 

So you've got one example of a guy with accuracy problems from the past 25 years who meaningfully improved his accuracy in the NFL. 

 

Don't you think that kind of discredits your second statement? Wouldn't there be more guys to look at if it were true? 

[BillsFan2313]

26 minutes ago, jrober38 said:

 

So you've got one example of a guy with accuracy problems from the past 25 years who meaningfully improved his accuracy in the NFL. 

 

Don't you think that kind of discredits your second statement? Wouldn't there be more guys to look at if it were true? 

 

This is what I don't get when someone is proven wrong. You ask a question, not saying it has to be in this time frame, or more than 1 example. Instead of saying, oh yeah, Brett Favre did have terrible accuracy in college, and is now in the HOF, I guess it can happen. It is, "oh so 1 player in the last 25 years". I don't have the time to go full on research for you. I gave an example of someone off the top of my head. You clearly have an agenda, and won't budge off of it. 

[jrober38]

36 minutes ago, BillsFan2313 said:

 

This is what I don't get when someone is proven wrong. You ask a question, not saying it has to be in this time frame, or more than 1 example. Instead of saying, oh yeah, Brett Favre did have terrible accuracy in college, and is now in the HOF, I guess it can happen. It is, "oh so 1 player in the last 25 years". I don't have the time to go full on research for you. I gave an example of someone off the top of my head. You clearly have an agenda, and won't budge off of it. 

 

Hey, if you think one QB in 25 years is some sort of trend, they go ahead. 

 

I think most people would conclude that players with accuracy issues rarely if ever correct them. I'm not okay investing a top 10 pick into a guy who history clearly says is nothing more than a long shot to ever become a quality player. His upside is very high, but the odds of achieving that upside I don't think are anymore than 5%, with it more likely than not he's a complete bust. 

Boom or bust prospects like Allen should get drafted in the 3rd or 4th round because they're clearly way more likely going to bust than boom. Picking guys like that in the first round is always a recipe for disaster that gets coaches and GMs fired. 

[Solomon Grundy]

5 hours ago, DCOrange said:

 

I'm guessing he's around a 4.4-4.45 but we'll see.

 

He's my #1 QB in the draft regardless of what he runs.

Mine too!! Don't be surprised if Cleveland pick him at 4

Edited March 26, 2018 by the skycap

[26CornerBlitz]

http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-south-florida

[Blokestradamus]

Pardon my French but !@#$ a duck.

 

 

[26CornerBlitz]

http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-iowa

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[Solomon Grundy]

30 minutes ago, 26CornerBlitz said:

 

All we need is LOVE!!

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[26CornerBlitz]

 

[26CornerBlitz]

http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-march-27-appalachian-state-texas-am-mississippi

[26CornerBlitz]

http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-miami-ohio

[26CornerBlitz]

http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-–-wagner-southern-utah

[26CornerBlitz]

http://draftanalyst.com/pro-day-–-florida-atlantic

[26CornerBlitz]

Traits > Box scores.  

[26CornerBlitz]