It could take longer than I think, but if it's true that at OSU he had to wait for the WRs to choose which route they were going to run, that will be removed. I've seen him look off safeties, make his progressions smoothly and quickly, and if he's drafted by a team that uses Shanhan's system where reads are made easier, the difference between Wilson and he may be negligible. I think the only system where Wilson and Fields would struggle is one that is more complex like Gase's system that doesn't use pre-snap motion and where the QB has to see the whole field immediately. I could certainly be mistaken, but if I'm correct, then the team that drafts him incorporates some RPOs, his adjustment and transition to the NFL shouldn't be that tough.
I'm not assuming anything or skipping over anything. That (player development and mental traits) varies from player to player and from team/system to team/system. Some teams have better coaching, some teams use systems that are easier for QBs and some use ones that are more difficult for QBs, and some have both better coaching and systems that are easier for QBs. I don't know how easy Nagy's system is, but Nagy doesn't seem to be a very good coach, and I don't think that Trubisky was/is that good a QB, so I'm not really surprised that Trubisky hasn't improved that much. That's not to say that Fields might not struggle or fail too, only that I'd be willing to take the risk with all his other talents. Lance or Wilson could fail to develop too. In fact, any QB a team takes short of a "can't miss prospect" is subject to failing, and even some of the "can't miss" types miss.
So if it's a crap shoot I still want to improve my odds of hitting by figuring out what QBs will be better positioned to succeed than others. I don't just throw up my hands and give up. Figure out what the QB can and can't do and go from there.
I think these colleges do these kids more disservice than people think. I think they could care less if these kids are prepared for the NFL as long as they make money off their skills. I also think people (not you, im talking ADs and coaches in college) minimize the skill of nfl and college athletes. It's a big difference. The game is more complex and faster and i think on order for fields to successful, he needs to sit and learn and watch. Only then does he have a shot. He cannot come here and start, thats why i keep saying hes Darnold 3.0. Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
Of course one wants to figure out which QBs will be better positioned to succeed than others. That goes without saying. No one said anything about "throwing up their hands and giving up." That's all you and your strawman. It's subjective opinion as to which QB is better positioned to succeed.
I agree with you regarding colleges and the disservice they do to their players. That goes for high school as well, and probably all levels of football. When a kid is the best QB a HC has and will give him the best chance to win games, very few coaches would go with with a lesser player instead and sit the better kid so he can focus on fixing his flaws and have a better chance to succeed in college and the NFL. They're concerned about their own careers over those of their players. Some of them don't know proper techniques or aren't good teachers, but most of them aren't going to do anything that lessens their chances of winning. I think sitting would help any of the QBs in this draft, even Lawrence. I don't think that's a knock on any of them. It used to be routine for rookies to sit, then somewhere along the line, teams lost patience, wanted to maximize value, or maybe didn't have a decent veteran and felt they had no choice but to start the rookie, but I think that's caused more QBs to fail than normally would have failed.
Great, we are the same page again then. I think mental traits are important in this process. Physical tools also matter but I have never seen a QB with bad or limited field vision gain that ability after college.
Yes, I think we are basically in agreement, except for Fields. At this point, I don't believe that he has bad or limited field vision or limited mental traits. He may have, and I am mistaken, but that hasn't been definitively demonstrated or proven to me yet. Colorado Contrails, I and others have spoken about how important mental traits and field vision are in one of these QB threads. I'm a big time believer in how critical mental traits and field vision are. I did read something recently that spoke about one NFL QB who struggled with seeing the field when he came to the NFL. I can't remember who it is, however. He played in a system like Shanahan's where the reads were simplified and at first he didn't have to see the whole field, only part of it. After 2-3 years he did improve and was able to see the whole field. I agree that it's not at all common, but don't think it's impossible, either. It seems to me that with excellent coaching and an insightful, step-by-step method of helping the QB improve/grow, that is something that should be able to be improved, if not fixed completely.
While I agree that it's possible for players to improve in the area of mental processing, I think that there are those who were born with "quick thinking", and who are just naturally better at it, while those not gifted in that way might improve, they won't ever be good at it. In Fields' case I think he does possess quick thinking ability, but the OSU offense restricts it. I've seen film of him under duress and making the right read and play so I know he possesses the ability, but to what degree, and can he go to a team that will further develop it will determine whether he succeeds.
It's not only college coaches that mess QBs (and all players) up. Witness what Gase did to Darnold by continuing to try and force him to play in a system that was actually the opposite of what Darnold is good at. What if you were a coach hired to coach a HS golf team and the team's best golfer was left handed, and you wanted him to change to be right handed because you believed that golf courses were built to favor right handed golfers? No matter how much you worked with him and tried to change his swing, it would never become natural, and eventually he'd lose self-confidence and even get to the point where you had to drop him from the team. That's close to what Gase did to Darnold.
And to be clear, Fields is a tricky evaluation. There are some plays that he makes that definitely say "top prospect". There are also times when you pause and rewind 3 to 4 times wondering how he missed or didn't see something. I also admit that on super stacked teams like Clemson and Ohio State I grade certain games more. Both Lawrence and Wilson have plenty of games where the other team is just so outmatched that I discount much of it.
Im not saying gase is the best or even a good coach, but i think hes getting too much blame for Darnolds poor play. I can watch games and see guys open a lot of plays and Darnold just not see em. I think hes a young kid who was overhyped and failed to live up to expectations. I think the play calling was because of darnolds poor play at times. The game is just too fast for him right now. Sent from my SM-N986U using Tapatalk
Yes, Darnold has a part in his own problem, it's not all on Gase. That said, Gase continued to try and force Darnold to play in a system he wasn't suited for, and that had a downward spiral effect on him. Instead of giving him an environment where he could learn and build on things, it was like trying to build on quicksand. At this point he needs a total overhaul, and IDK if the Jets can - or want to - do that.
Makes a ton of sense to be honest.. he takes a while and needs good protection to pull off that offence.. my feelings tell me Fields will be a good pro. I raged on him a lot for those 2 stinkers he had this year but the more and more I go back and watch I feel he’s got IT
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing! I don't agree with everything that I read there, but he raises some good question, and makes some good point. IMO there's no doubt that Lawrence and Lance have the highest ceilings. Lance also has the lowest floor. IMO Lawrence and Wilson, followed closely by Fields have the highest floors. Wilson and Fields are the most accurate. All can hurt opposing teams with their legs, but Lance is the most dangerous running the ball, followed by Field. I think Lawrence and Wilson are the most pro-ready, but Fields isn't far behind. They all have strong arms and can make all the throws. Wilson's placement and accuracy is the best. Lance's the worst. I think all are legit top 5 picks and excellent QB prospects. They each have things to work on, as do all QBs. I think we would be very happy and lucky with any of them, although Lance scares me. The other three don't scare me. They're all intelligent, coachable, and I think not only can, but will make the necessary adjustments in the NFL. Aside from Jacksonville and probably Lawrence, I think scheme fit, what teams value most, and what risks they are willing to take will determine who goes where and when.
TJ O'Sullivan came up with latest Fields review: Indiana game. Very mixed review. Keep in mind, Fields had two bad games this year, and this was one of them, but still, pretty interesting analysis.
I would, but currently preference is WiIson. However, if JD sees medical results that are worrisome for example, I would go with Fields at #2. To me Fields most likely would have to sit for some time as Ohio state offense, as has been pointed out by multiple people, does not have a lot of West Coast or NFL concepts in general, so there may be a very steep learning curve. But the athleticism, ability, and accuracy may be too much to pass up high in the draft, assuming Wilson fails medical or measures very poorly. Perhaps in this case I would keep Sam as a starter and rookie as a back-up to start with and then evaluate as progress is being made.
