Then answer why everyone who succeeded in today's NFL threw over 56% - and nearly all by quite a bit? If as you said it was proven irrelevant, then how do you explain this phenomena? By ignoring it?
because most colleges have moved towards making life easier on QBs due to the lack of talent and no longer run as many "Pro" style offenses. even the NFL itself has changed a lot. it's much more QB driven and high completion % then in previous years. rule changes to the passing game and coordinators getting smarter to help negate pass rushes. QBs now put up much better numbers then before. 4k yards used to be a rare feat in the NFL. now it's basically the minimum you expect for a QB. WRs have also gotten bigger, faster, and stronger.
most college QBs run easy offenses made to make up for their lack of talent. Offenses that are simple and easy to run. The few schools that do run pro style offenses usually have big football programs and stacked talent to steamroll most college teams which results in better numbers as well. There isn't really any fair comparison to allen in modern day football. What 1st round worthy QB in the last 20 years came from college running a pro offense with literal shit talent around him?
brett favre is modern history. unless you want to define the term in such a way that it fits your point. then this is a waste of time. and his college numbers translated to his pro career which ended in 2010. this is like arguing about chicken or egg.
Ok, let's say that Mac takes Barkley at 3. When is the QB pick coming and are we gonna have to settle on a tier 2 or 3 QB, hoping that he becomes our FQB?
How many of those short QBs w some success went first round? Not one of them I don’t find stats irrelevant..but I give my priority to what my eyes see & compare that to the stats. Because stats are simply the final COLLEGE product which is a totally different game than that of the NFL.Do college teams recruit HS players based off the stats? Extremely rarely.why is college to the pros any different?When I watch Mayfiekd im not surprised to see the stats..but they don’t equate to what I see physically or in a projection as it pertains to being a top 3 pick.When I see Allen I’m not surprised to see his stats either..and in my opinion there’s enough tangible evidence to suggest that he DOES project as a top 3 pick even in SPITE of the stats.Is it a unique scenario?Of course.Do I expect some criticism or for the analytics crowd to like it?Nope. Doesn’t change my projection. Legler is the resident QB expert..not stealing his thunder by any means.But I watch these QBs every year..quite often I go against popular opinion.Am I wrong now & again?Of course but I’m right a lot more often than not.Rodgers,BREES,Stafford, & Bridgewater all come to mind. I stick to what works for me..stats..while part of the process are way down my priority list. IDK what else to say
Who knows. But selecting Barkley who's the most dominant and explosive offensive threat of this draft class sure beats wasting a top 3 pick on a Mayfield or Allen (sloppy seconds after Darnold & Rosen). When's the last time NY even spent a 1st round draft pick on an impact offensive weapon? Barkley is worth it (and then some).
Is Barkely even here in 5 years?Feature backs are an outdated proposition.Maybe Gurley & Fournette prove me wrong but I doubt it.These guys wear down,get injured,wear out their welcome or get figured out by defenses almost w.o fail. To pass on a QB for that position no matter how great Barkely may seem could be a fatal misjudgement. As down as I am on Mayfield I’d rather take a shot on him than an RB top 3
And the Jets will be mired in mediocrity until they have a FQB. And I agree, the Jets should've used a few 1st round picks on offense like last year when Mahomes was available.
Barkley at 3 is hogwash ... history always says theres another RB to be had in the later rounds that will produce just as much if not more than the first round RB.
You're killing us, Borat. College stats are useless for the reasons everyone else pointed out (i.e.: College QBs with poor stats can become NFL winners), but even more so because College QBs with incredible stats can become...well, nothing, in the NFL. Guys like Ryan Dinwiddie, Colt Brennan, Danny Wurffel, Timmy Chang, Landry Jones, Graham Harrell, Johnny Manziel, and Pat White have incredible college QB stats--but it meant diddly in the NFL.
Allen Vs Mayfield at the 3 pick - what the film shows Post by: legler82, Mar 26, 2018 in forum: New York Jets
Thanks legler82. I don't know how Borat missed pointing out that Baker was almost as accurate as Seth Doege!!!!!
yeah i can't see any reason to take barkley. If it's allen or mayfield, ideally for me i'd rather just trade back, get back a bunch of picks and take lamaar jackson later on in the 1st and maybe even a guy like furgeson in the 4th or 5th round as well. 2 rookie QBs, teddy and mccown. cut hack and petty. then for 2019 we'll have the 2 young QBs, mccown will retire and we'll have a better idea if jackson is ready or if teddy is up to the task. It'll never happen though and mac is taking a QB at 3
I already posted earlier in this thread that there are MANY good QBs in NFL today who had good QBR in College, including Rivers, Big Ben, and others. So, we cannot rule out a guy with good stats. Does it guarantee success - no. Heck 70% of all QBs drafted this century with good stats failed. But there are many successful examples. There are 0 examples however of a QB drafted this century with 56% completion in sr year to succeed.
To me, if the Jets brass saw potential with Jackson the best bet was to stay at six. Could they actually go Jackson at three? Highly doubt it. They must either like Allen or Baker enough to pull the plug.
Stop with this strawman argument. No one is saying that great % means you will be top QB in NFL. Just that 56% means you won't. Are you able to show examples that indicate otherwise or you want to continue arguing against a statement that was never made?
which means that they have no meaning. good college stats can be linked to good Qbs and busts. there is no direct correlation between good college stats and good NFL stats. If you can't made a direct correlation, then it's meaningless. It's really not a difficult concept to grasp, you just don't' accept it because it goes against your belief.
maybe they have a good feeling rosen or darnold will be there at 3? maybe when they called the giants to trade up to 2 they said we are taking barkley if cleveland doens't and looks like cleveland is taking a QB so no dice. The giants clearly have someone in mind to not want to trade down to 6. we offered them alot. maybe they are willing to trade back to 3 during the draft with us if cleveland takes "their player" we really don't know what is in mac's mind, but i'm sure he has a plan A and plan B and plan C just in case.
Folks already said Brett Favre..which you’ve said is too far back..fine how about Matthew Stafford 2/3 years at UGA?And yet despite all of this he was a consensus top 10 pick for his draft class even during those 2 years where he was below it. What does that say??Soubd Familiar to MR Allen??Hes been a consensus top 10 prospect mentioned in the same breath as Rosen/Darnold.Scouts/experts have/had every reason to drop the guy given how deep the class is & the stat line.That hasn’t happened.You can’t tell me that’s just his arm strength And by the way,these type of analytic “mantras”are made to be broken.If someone is gonna vastly outperform completion % from college to the pros it’s going to be someone like Josh Allen who had legit reasons for not reaching 60%,has top end physical skills & is on an upward trajectory
