Lawrence vs Fields? College fans opinion please.

[Jetster]

So I have to admit I don't follow college football until recently moving south, it's a prerequisite here & its awkward hanging with the neighbors while they're talking football (college), and I can't participate in the conversation ?.

I don't need to tell you looks of disgust I get when I tell them I'm a Jet fan. It's like admitting your alcoholic in an AA meeting. 

Trevor Lawrence & Justin Field seem to be the cream of the QBs rising to the top of the NFL draft. I may have missed some threads on these guys here but for you college watchers, can you tell me about the offenses these 2 guys run? Are they RPO? Do you think one guy is in more of a pro offense than the other? Who's the better runner? Deep thrower? 

It seems every year QBs get ranked & someone who is ignored becomes better than the guy all of the media says is #1. We took Darnold & so far he's looked slightly better than Rosen, and Buffalo & the Ravens waiting for the draft to come to them got the better QB. The Colts just beat a team that was in the AFCCG last year riding the draft picks they got from the Jets & old man River at the controls. 

I'd love to just be able to believe that it really doesn't matter if we get #1 as long as we have #2. Could Fields actually be better? Looking forward to hearing from the College experts here. 

[rbstern]

In my opinion, both will be successful NFL QBs.   Slight edge to Lawrence, but I believe you can build a successful team around either.

The requisites for the Jets to make either of those guys an NFL winner is:  1) Good o-line (currently a work in progress), 2) Receiving talent (on the upswing), and 3) solid coaching (not at all there yet).

[peebag]

Lawrence, all the live long day.

[KRL]

The only differences I see are:

- Lawrence is 3 inches taller
- Lawrence has played in more games.  He was a starter in his freshman
year while Fields was a situational fill in at Georgia

If Lawrence is a "generational talent" then Fields is right there with him

[Jetsfan80]

Not to be a joewilly12 or anything, but do people not visit the Draft forum, ever?  There's good stuff in there folks, including a lengthy thread discussing the QB's from the perspective of avid college fans/JN NFL draft gurus.  Check it out.  

[kdels62]

5 minutes ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Not to be a joewilly12 or anything, but do people not visit the Draft forum, ever?  There's good stuff in there folks, including a lengthy thread discussing the QB's from the perspective of avid college fans/JN NFL draft gurus.  Check it out.  

Don’t bring the masses to my safe place.

[Jetster]

1 hour ago, kdels62 said:

Don’t bring the masses to my safe place.

I’ll check it out. 

[Patriot Killa]

Note: They could both be generational talents.

[greenwichjetfan]

1 hour ago, kdels62 said:

Don’t bring the masses to my safe place.

This. 

I'm not a much of a draft guy, but I love reading that part of JN. One of the only places to find true football discussion anymore. 

[greenwichjetfan]

1 minute ago, Patriot Killa said:

Note: They could both be generational talents.

In reality, they're both just great prospects, and neither are generational. 

[RoadFan]

Burrow

[jgb]

Just now, greenwichjetfan said:

In reality, they're both just great prospects, and neither are generational. 

If Trevor isn't generational -- and I agree the term is overused -- than no one is.

[Wonderboy]

1 hour ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Not to be a joewilly12 or anything, but do people not visit the Draft forum, ever?  There's good stuff in there folks, including a lengthy thread discussing the QB's from the perspective of avid college fans/JN NFL draft gurus.  Check it out.  

Yea don't be a joewilly12. One is more than enough.

[Patriot Killa]

Just now, greenwichjetfan said:

In reality, they're both just great prospects, and neither are generational. 

Depends how you assess players when using the word generational. Fields was a 5 star prospect and has all the athletic ability in the world to go along with a good understanding of how to fit the ball into tight windows. Lawrence sees the field better than any QB we’ve seen since Luck. Lawrence also was born to play QB with the extensive amount of time he’s put into it, coming from the Elite 8 and making winning look effortless from high school to Clemson. 
 

I think they’re both generational talents.

[greenwichjetfan]

Just now, jgb said:

If Trevor isn't generational -- and I agree the term is overused -- than no one is.

 

TLDR version of my longer post above: the only prospects I've ever studied to truly earn that moniker are Elway, Peyton, and Luck. Not taking anything away from Lawrence or Fields, but every "expert" and layman agrees that both the 2020 guys need to be in good circumstances to succeed. The three I've noted previously are the only ones who were, for all intents and purposes, "system-proof" prospects. That's why they're generational.

[HawkeyeJet]

They are different QBs with different strengths.  I think both are incredible prospects.  I've long said I believe Fields is just as good.

I'm a big "comp" guy because it's just the easiest way for my brain to process what I see.  That doesn't mean when I use a comp I think that player will be as good (or bad) as the comp, just when I watch them they remind me of them.

When I watch Lawrence play, I see the best version of what Josh Allen can be. Big, strong, huge arm.  Makes eye popping throws, but accuracy and ball placement are not "elite" 

When I watch Fields I am reminded of Aaron Rodgers.  Mobile and elusive, but not going to design runs for him.  Accuracy from the pocket and on the run is incredible. His wow throws are different type of wow than Lawrence.

The big unknown is how each if them will be able to process info.  I don't think anyone can answer that.

 

[Jet Nut]

They’re both really good prospects but Fields is not Lawrence

[FidelioJet]

8 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

They are different QBs with different strengths.  I think both have are incredible prosoects.  I've long said I believe Fields is just as good.

I'm a big "comp" guy because it's just he easiest way for my brain to process what I see.  That doesn't mean when I use a comp that doesn't mean I think that player will be as good (or bad) as the comp, just when I watch them they remind me of them.

When I watch Lawrence play, I see the best version of what Josh Allen can be. Bug, strong, huge arm.  Makes eye popping throws, but accuracy and ball placement are not "elite" 

When I watch Fields I am reminded of Aaron Rodgers.  Mobile and elusive, but not going to design runs for him.  Accuracy from the pocket and on the run is incredible. His wow throws are different type of wow than Lawrence.

The big unknown is how each if them will be able to process info.  I don't think anyone can answer that.

 

Reading this makes me think Fields is far and away the better prospect. 

Would you compare Lawrence to Big Ben?

 

[jgb]

28 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said:

 

TLDR version of my longer post above: the only prospects I've ever studied to truly earn that moniker are Elway, Peyton, and Luck. Not taking anything away from Lawrence or Fields, but every "expert" and layman agrees that both the 2020 guys need to be in good circumstances to succeed. The three I've noted previously are the only ones who were, for all intents and purposes, "system-proof" prospects. That's why they're generational.

20 some odd GMs were surveyed prior to the 1998 draft. More than half said they preferred Leaf -- the biggest bust in NFL history -- to Manning. Manning is generational in hindsight, but at the time it wasn't so clear. Lawrence is a better prospect than Peyton Manning. There I've said it.

[FidelioJet]

This video I just saw isn't that flattering of TL.  Def. worries me a lot.  

I want Fields.

 

[HawkeyeJet]

30 minutes ago, FidelioJet said:

Reading this makes me think Fields is far and away the better prospect. 

Would you compare Lawrence to Big Ben?

 

I can't believe anyone can follow what I post with all my typos haha.  Any way, no I don't necessarily see Big Ben.  Big Ben is huge and hard to bring down in a statue type of way. Lawrence is mobile.

I actually have a very hard time finding a comp for Lawrence.  Allen is the closest I think as a skill set, but I think Lawrence is a better prospect.  

As a thrower, simply the ball in flight etc, Lawrence reminds me most of Matthew Stafford actually.  Super huge arm, fits balls into windows, and everything just looks like it's firm coming out of his hand.  And when he's locked in you just wonder how he ever misses.  But he hits spurts of erratic accuracy.

As a runner, Clemson uses him like Josh Allen some, but he's not a huge physical runner like Allen or Cam Newton.  He's more like Watson when it comes to running.

I think the thing that separates Lawrence in most people's eyes is they presume he has the intangibles Watson has shown he does. 

What it likely all boils down too is who will be able to handle the mental capacity for the position in the NFL.  That's very hard to predict.  If Lawrence comes in and starts making reads and decisions like Mitch Trubisky, his skills won't be enough to carry him alone.

Same with Fields, if he can't make the reads and decisions, he won't look anything like Rodgers, more like Sam Darnold currently does.

[greenwichjetfan]

15 minutes ago, jgb said:

20 some odd GMs were surveyed prior to the 1998 draft. More than half said they preferred Leaf -- the biggest bust in NFL history -- to Manning. Manning is generational in hindsight, but at the time it wasn't so clear. Lawrence is a better prospect than Peyton Manning. There I've said it.

The only way 20 some odd GMs being wrong diminishes Peyton or elevates Lawrence is if, you also believe, Mitchell Trubisky and Jamal Adams are better than Patrick Mahomes because of Ryan Pace and Mike Maccagnan.  

[jgb]

1 minute ago, greenwichjetfan said:

The only way 20 some odd GMs being wrong diminishes Peyton or elevates Lawrence is if, you also believe, Mitchell Trubisky and Jamal Adams are better than Patrick Mahomes because of Ryan Pace and Mike Maccagnan.  

Wut?

[CTM]

Fields

[greenwichjetfan]

17 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

As a thrower, simply the ball in flight etc, Lawrence reminds me most of Matthew Stafford actually.  Super huge arm, fits balls into windows, and everything just looks like it's firm coming out of his hand.  And when he's locked in you just wonder how he ever misses.  But he hits spurts of erratic accuracy.

I like this. His throws are aesthetically beautiful. However, accuracy is a concern, especially when you dig further and realize that in 2019, he had more passing yards than almost all of the top 10 QB candidates, but less air yards than every single one of them. He's throwing shorter, allowing his stellar teammates to make plays to get him yards and TDs, but even then he's erratic. Also, his completion % was higher than his on target % which tells me that his teammates deserve more credit than other teammates would for passes completed. Don't have this same data for 2020 yet.

Meanwhile, in 2019, Fields had almost as many passing yards but had significantly more air yards/attempt, and a higher target %. So far this year, it looks to be more of the same from both. 

23 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

What it likely all boils down too is who will be able to handle the mental capacity for the position in the NFL.  That's very hard to predict.  If Lawrence comes in and starts making reads and decisions like Mitch Trubisky, his skills won't be enough to carry him alone.

Agreed, but I also believe that coaching will play a big factor in both of their abilities to succeed at the next level. 

[Jetster]

I’m starting to believe 2020 was the perfect tank year & whether it’s Lawrence or Fields JD has the ammunition to put together a great Oline & weapons all around whichever one we end up with. 

[Losmeister]

havent seen Fields enough, really...

my question is what does Zach Wislon become in the NFL.

he looks like he has the goods, if you ask me....

[32EBoozer]

2 hours ago, Jetsfan80 said:

Not to be a joewilly12 or anything, but do people not visit the Draft forum, ever?  There's good stuff in there folks, including a lengthy thread discussing the QB's from the perspective of avid college fans/JN NFL draft gurus.  Check it out.  

Yeah you pretty much just got in bed with joewilly12. Virtue signaling extraordinaire. ?

Im with you but folks come to the main board because there are more eyes here. 
 

Max should be like Gov. Whitmer and Cuomo and force the folks that don’t listen  to the draft board only while the connected and obedient ones can move freely around. 
 

 

[HawkeyeJet]

1 minute ago, greenwichjetfan said:

I like this. His throws are aesthetically beautiful. However, accuracy is a concern, especially when you dig further and realize that in 2019, he had more passing yards than almost all of the top 10 QB candidates, but less air yards than every single one of them. He's throwing shorter, allowing his stellar teammates to make plays to get him yards and TDs, but even then he's erratic. Also, his completion % was higher than his on target % which tells me that his teammates deserve more credit than other teammates would for passes completed. Don't have this same data for 2020 yet.

Meanwhile, in 2019, Fields had almost as many passing yards but had significantly more air yards/attempt, and a higher target %. So far this year, it looks to be more of the same from both. 

Agreed, but I also believe that coaching will play a big factor in both of their abilities to succeed at the next level. 

Good post.  Very informative.  I didn't know that about the air yards or target percentage for Lawrence.  Some people don't think those things matter, I'm not one of them.  That's not to say it is the end all be all factor either(and I don't think you are implying that).  But it certainly makes me go hmmm.

I truly believe if Fields had stayed at Georgia (or just went to OSU directly) there would be little or no gap in most people's minds.  Some might firmly believe Fields is better.  But Lawrence has proven it for longer now, so I think it's hard to catapult Fields past him.  

All that said, if the Jets get #1, I think they will and should take Lawrence.  And if they get #2 I think they will and should take Fields.  I think fans should be happy either way.

[Beerfish]

Lawrence over Fields but neither one of them is generational talents.  They fit in with some of the good young QBs from the last few years but they are certainly not a level higher than them at all.

[flgreen]

If given the choice of both I'll take Lawrence, but the gap isn't near as wide as some folks make it out to be.

Think they are both going to be great as Pros

[JetPotato]

Question for you QB gurus as I read this stuff (much of which is excellent, btw) - doesn't a receiver's YAC rely heavily not only on their own ability, but also the ability of the QB to deliver the ball to them in stride consistently? I remember so often in Sanchez's time here that even when he hit a receiver, the ball was always a little behind him and they would get dropped immediately. One of Brady's biggest strengths is to hit his guys in the hands as the were still sprinting, so they would just keep going... not sure I buy entirely that a lower "in air yards as a percentage of total" is always a negative.

[greenwichjetfan]

1 minute ago, HawkeyeJet said:

Good post.  Very informative.  I didn't know that about the air yards or target percentage for Lawrence.  Some people don't think those things matter, I'm not one of them.  That's not to say it is the end all be all factor either(and I don't think you are implying that).  But it certainly makes me go hmmm.

I truly believe if Fields had stayed at Georgia (or just went to OSU directly) there would be little or no gap in most people's minds.  Some might firmly believe Fields is better.  But Lawrence has proven it for longer now, so I think it's hard to catapult Fields past him.  

All that said, if the Jets get #1, I think they will and should take Lawrence.  And if they get #2 I think they will and should take Fields.  I think fans should be happy either way.

Completely agree. 

In terms of Fields vs Lawrence, I want the guy with the higher floor. Lawrence has been the #1 guy for longer. Aside from the title game last year, he's generally lived up to it. He's probably already surpassed the "10,000 hours" milestone in terms of QB1 reps in practices and live action. For me, all of that is tangible, and it significantly raises his floor.

My viewpoint has always been that aside from the few truly elite talents in NFL history, NFL coaching and roster talent will be larger determinants of how a young QB fares than his own talent alone. Since I'm banking on JD getting the roster in shape and picking the right coaching staff (what other choice do I have?), I want Lawrence at 1.1 as the safer pick to be a top 10 QB, even if he never materializes as a top 2 or 3 QB. Fields could be ARod 5 years from now, but if not put in the right circumstances, could also be a backup after his rookie deal.

All that said, if we **** around and win a game or two, I'm perfectly happy with Fields at 1.2. 

[Losmeister]

1 hour ago, HawkeyeJet said:

I can't believe anyone can follow what I post with all my typos haha.

i respectfully submit that you are not in my league....

 

[greenwichjetfan]

13 minutes ago, JetPotato said:

Question for you QB gurus as I read this stuff (much of which is excellent, btw) - doesn't a receiver's YAC rely heavily not only on their own ability, but also the ability of the QB to deliver the ball to them in stride consistently? I remember so often in Sanchez's time here that even when he hit a receiver, the ball was always a little behind him and they would get dropped immediately. One of Brady's biggest strengths is to hit his guys in the hands as the were still sprinting, so they would just keep going... not sure I buy entirely that a lower "in air yards as a percentage of total" is always a negative.

Definitely agree. That's why I look at the below in conjunction with air yards as a % of total. Lawrence's on-target % (admittedly, I haven't verified each throw they charted to see if I agree with what they categorize as 'on target') being low while his completion % is high tells me his teammates are catching more off target throws than the average receiver and are still turning them into YAC and catch+run TDs.  

51 minutes ago, greenwichjetfan said:

his completion % was higher than his on target %