legler82

I was a different game way back then...LOL.

The best college QB is NOT always the best QB in the draft; they are mutually inclusive items.

The thumbnail has Mason Rudolph rated higher than Rosen and Darnold. There's nothing "fact"[ual] about that; it kinds of delegitimizes everything else. I'll pass.

IMO the approach GMs/scouts should take towards the draft is to, first and foremost, apply a grade strictly based on talent, as that should hold the most weight. Next start adding and deducting points based on intangibles, or lack there of. Once all that is done, FINALLY, you factor in production. Is it reconcilable, underwhelming, inflated...etc considering ALL factors, (i.e., surrounding talent, scheme, coaching...etc.). Using the criteria I've outline, Allen should be the top pick. If one prefers the collegiate lifetime achievement model, then Mayfield is your pick. You should NEVER start with production. The intention should be to find the best future NFL players not reward the best college football players. It's NOT the Heisman trophy nomination process.

Now Daniel Jeremiah who's been slating Darnold to Cleveland all along is saying that he heard over the weekend from his sources that Cleveland might go with Josh Allen. Mel Kiper is turning into the Pied Piper.

Gentlemen head to your corners and come out fighting (Orlovsky vs Simms). http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2018/04/09/with-17-days-until-the-draft-its-nit-picking-time/

Staring down WRs, predetermining where you are going to throw based on pre-snap looks and inconsistent footwork are not a traits exclusive to Allen.

Once these guys take the field, there's usually 2 approaches a CS can take. They can either hand them the keys letting them take their lumps or manage them slowly adding more and more to their plate so that they don't lose confidence. With Rosen I think you can only go with the first option which is fine since I don't think he is capable of losing confidence anyway. Because he is the most pro-ready and the least mobile of the bunch, he likely will struggle the most early on. Like Peyton Manning he has the aptitude to take on more of a NFL playbook right away, but lacks the athleticism to fall back on as he adjust to the speed of the NFL. But just like Manning, once he makes that adjustment, watch out! That said, let's not forget Manning set a NFL INT record in route to winning just 3 games his rookie season. Rosen fans must be prepared for the potential early pain that will come with drafting him. With the Spread guys, Darnold and Mayfield, as well as Allen you can elect to do either approach, throw them in the deep end immediately or slowly bring them across from the shallow end. Darnold and Mayfield can find some early success if they have an OC that can incorporating a lot of the principles from their college offenses not unlike what O'brien did with Watson and McVay with Goff. They are also mobile, Danold a bit more so than Mayfield, so when sh*t break down and it will they can make plays with their legs. Then you get to Allen. The dirty little secret is that he is next most "pro-ready" to these top guys after Rosen, in terms of having familiarity with pro concepts. While he can't take on as much as Rosen, he does have mobility. So if an OC can put him is a system that has him on the move a lot with roll outs and bootlegs shrinking the field in half reducing his reads to just 1-2, he can be managed too. No matter what though if ANY of them, even Rosen, are asked to run a pro-system on Day 1 without any training wheels they will struggle.

You are right it was a pump and go now that I've gone back to look at it. It was 3:00 in the morning; I was going off memory. Like you said the defensive play call was designed to have the safety bail to the deep center of the. And Allen pre-determined he was going to the "pump and go" seam route, the only deep route near the center of the field. You telling me the safety would not have been there anyway? Also, who are you looking off when you think there is no safety in the middle of the field. By "not stepping in" I thought you were implying he should have tried to drill the ball in. From what I can see he did try to step into the throw but had a guy a split second from hitting him in the chest just as he threw it. Off memory I said loft because I remember it had some arc to it rather than his usual ropes. "So far ahead" I guess is subjective; the ball landed close enough to the TE that he ran into the safety intercepting the ball. Considering there was a man bearing down on him it was an OK throw on a rainy night. I agree pre-determining what you are going to do based on what you see pre-snap is not very good but it's also NOT "terrible"; most Spread QBs do that almost every play. You said it was a "terrible INT". If that is terrible then we need a new adjective to describe some of his other INTs. The guy has some real ugly INTs on tape go back and watch his 2016 games. Darnold and Rosen has some beauts too; this INT is of the mundane variety. Like I said in my original post, the key there is did he learn something from it? Does he habitually get fooled into picks based on what he sees pre-snap? While it's certainly not elite NFL level QB play it's certainly not bad. Bad would be not recognizing the pre-snap look to begin with. I know what good NFL QB play requires but I'm rational enough to not expect to see it consistently from a college prospect. Most young QBs are guilty of too often staring down WRs and are susceptible to be fooled occasionally by a pre-snap look. It's something the good ones get better at through time.

I don't think anything; for the moment I was just properly breaking down the play for the record.

Except for the pressure part (Boise St showed blitz pre-snap but only rushed 4 yet still got pressure on Allen), almost everything else you wrote about the INT is incorrect. Let's break it down. -"...but Allen stared down the deep ball on his right" He pump faked to the right first then threw the ball to the seam route. You can't stare down a receiver if you are first pump faking to someone else. -"...bringing over the S" The safety in question was lined up over the slot WR on Allen's left pre-snap. Immediately, after the ball was snapped he bailed to the middle of the field and the weak side LB dropped to cover his man. This means this was a designed defensive call. -"...short-arms the throw to an open WR who had beaten his CB. If he's going to throw that ball, he has to step into the throw and pay the price for it" It was the TE (#81 Austin Fort) NOT WR who had beaten the other S NOT a CB. Allen was thinking TD on that play that is why he did not step into the throw but instead lofted it trying to "lead" the WR. That was actually an example of him throwing with some "anticipation", a trait many say he lacks. He "anticipated" zero coverage (no safety in the middle of the field) because that was the look he got pre-snap. -"...he also had an open WR short that he passed up (or never saw)" Are you talking about the WR to the far right that he pump faked to first? Not trying to be a d*ck, but if you are going analyze film you have to know what you are looking at. It was more a perfect storm of a brilliant defensive play call/disguise combined with Allen predetermining what he was going to do post-snap based on what he saw pre-snap. If Boise St stayed in that look that would have been the perfect read, right throw and a TD. They fooled and ultimately baited Allen into that INT. I've seen the best NFL QBs get caught on a great defensive call. The question is did he learn from it. Note this was the same INT Mayock pop quizzed him on at his pro-day to test his play recall and describe what he saw pre and post snap. Scouts see all the little nuances; fans just see "terrible INT".

It wasn't an endorsement just a fact. That's what the man said. Thought it was relevant in a thread about another NFL insider from a different network saying the same thing.