Justin Fields 2nd Pro Day - April 14th

[derp]

11 minutes ago, Irish Jet said:

You need to take a break from this my man. I seen you complaining in another thread that posters were trying to silence any talk of taking Fields and now you’re telling anyone who doesn’t rate him to “take this trash outside”. Pretty hypocritical, but not surprising.

I know you know your stuff on college football but your intolerance of any opinion thay goes against your own is just absolutely  embarrassing. 

Literally everything I’ve posted about Fields can be backed up with stats. He is statistically worse than the others under pressure, I am not making that up no matter how much you yell it out. He does hold the ball half a second longer than Wilson on average, despite the fact that people claim the latter only succeeded because of his protection. He does hold onto the ball longer when blitzed. A fact. All verifiable. I‘ll link you to them if you persist with these nonsensical dismissals.

If you want to put your fingers in your ears to any criticism while laughably maintaining you don’t especially care then go ahead, you be you. It’s pretty sad to be honest. 

For what it’s worth, Wilson did have the largest percentage of throws over 4 seconds by a fairly wide margin - pointed out in an ESPN article today. He was at 14%, next closest was 7%. His line was outstanding. Supporting cast overall was really good, they’ll have receivers drafted and the freshman tight end can play. Helps when your teammates are older than the competition.

Doesn’t mean he’ll be bad but it muddies the evaluation.

[JoJoTownsell1]

5 minutes ago, derp said:

For what it’s worth, Wilson did have the largest percentage of throws over 4 seconds by a fairly wide margin - pointed out in an ESPN article today. He was at 14%, next closest was 7%. His line was outstanding. Supporting cast overall was really good, they’ll have receivers drafted and the freshman tight end can play. Helps when your teammates are older than the competition.

Doesn’t mean he’ll be bad but it muddies the evaluation.

And Fields, Lawrence and Mac Jones were stuck playing with whatever garbage Ohio St., Clemson and Bama throws together on offense. 

[Irish Jet]

27 minutes ago, derp said:

For what it’s worth, Wilson did have the largest percentage of throws over 4 seconds by a fairly wide margin - pointed out in an ESPN article today. He was at 14%, next closest was 7%. His line was outstanding. Supporting cast overall was really good, they’ll have receivers drafted and the freshman tight end can play. Helps when your teammates are older than the competition.

Doesn’t mean he’ll be bad but it muddies the evaluation.

Wilson was 2.79 by comparison. And there are a lot of factors in this. The type of plays called and the ability to extend the play with your feet especially. But the major red flag is him taking longer to process blitzing teams, that is a problem and shows that he isn’t making the pre-snap recognitions to counteract them. This was a problem for Darnold too and exacerbated the issues we had on the line. Fields is just not ready for the type of blitzes the NFL will throw at him IMO. 

But yes it’s definitely a legit concern that even by college standards Wilson didn’t face much pressure. He dealt with it very well when he was but it’s tough to know how he’ll cope when it’s coming more consistently at a higher speed.

[shuler82]

1 hour ago, QB1 said:

You think the Jets are just going to give Wilson to the 49ers? We are copying the 49ers offense, why wouldn’t we want the same QB they crave?

Seems like a big jump for them to target their backup QB option, that’s all. As everyone else, I think we’re taking Wilson at the end of the day

[legler82]

1 hour ago, QB1 said:

You think the Jets are just going to give Wilson to the 49ers? We are copying the 49ers offense, why wouldn’t we want the same QB they crave?

I can see the Niners preferring the more polished Wilson over Fields as they are built and under pressure to win now.  We’re a rebuilding team; we don’t necessarily need the guy most ready to start week 1. 

[legler82]

1 hour ago, FidelioJet said:

GM's around the league.  I'm not going to pull up links for you - you can do that yourself but it's not very hard to find.  Just go to Google.

Look, if you want to believe Fields is the better prospect I'm not going to even attempt to change your mind.

But it's not hard to find that the overwhelming professionals in the space have Zach Wilson as the #1 or #2 QB in the draft.  

But just for starters I'll give you this one..

 

 

 

#TheExperts

[Embrace the Suck]

57 minutes ago, derp said:

For what it’s worth, Wilson did have the largest percentage of throws over 4 seconds by a fairly wide margin - pointed out in an ESPN article today. He was at 14%, next closest was 7%. His line was outstanding. Supporting cast overall was really good, they’ll have receivers drafted and the freshman tight end can play. Helps when your teammates are older than the competition.

Doesn’t mean he’ll be bad but it muddies the evaluation.

I've heard people mention his oline being good and I've watched him sit in a clean pocket. However, I've never heard anyone refer to his receivers as good in fact it's generally the opposite, and I've watched them drop more than a couple of perfectly placed balls.

[JohnnyLV]

2 hours ago, football guy said:

FAR exceeds. I would argue that Wilson's ceiling far exceeds any QB in this class, including Lawrence. I believe Greg Cosell and Gil Brandt are the latest to publicize the exact same sentiment as well. 

The three best evaluators at evaluating QB (especially looking back through the lens of 2018) are Greg Cossell, Simms, Gil Brandt. All had reservations about Darnold. All love Wilson. Gives me a lot of confidence in Wilson,

[derp]

1 hour ago, JoJoTownsell1 said:

And Fields, Lawrence and Mac Jones were stuck playing with whatever garbage Ohio St., Clemson and Bama throws together on offense. 

...and they played against real teams, too. Those who have compared supporting casts to competition have only Jones having a better supporting cast relative to competition than Wilson. It’s a fair question to ask about Jones and a fair one to ask about Wilson too.

And you didn’t address the 4 second thing which very much lines up with Wilson having a great OL.

[Morrissey]

Not sure if this has been mentioned but NFL teams will be running this pro day. This won't be a scripted throwing session for Fields.

Is there any word yet if the Jets are attending?

[derp]

29 minutes ago, Embrace the Suck said:

I've heard people mention his oline being good and I've watched him sit in a clean pocket. However, I've never heard anyone refer to his receivers as good in fact it's generally the opposite, and I've watched them drop more than a couple of perfectly placed balls.

I thought it was two guys this year but Milne should be getting drafted and I bet Rex gets drafted eventually too. Looks like their second and third receivers have another year.

[derp]

1 hour ago, Irish Jet said:

Wilson was 2.79 by comparison. And there are a lot of factors in this. The type of plays called and the ability to extend the play with your feet especially. But the major red flag is him taking longer to process blitzing teams, that is a problem and shows that he isn’t making the pre-snap recognitions to counteract them. This was a problem for Darnold too and exacerbated the issues we had on the line. Fields is just not ready for the type of blitzes the NFL will throw at him IMO. 

But yes it’s definitely a legit concern that even by college standards Wilson didn’t face much pressure. He dealt with it very well when he was but it’s tough to know how he’ll cope when it’s coming more consistently at a higher speed.

Yeah I’m aware of the Fields stat, it’s concerning as well, I was talking about Wilson. And I think the bold is an exaggeration. He wasn’t always a disaster but it was far more mixed against better teams and I think the attempted fair threads on this board and the draft board about his pressure show that pretty clearly.

[derp]

22 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

The three best evaluators at evaluating QB (especially looking back through the lens of 2018) are Greg Cossell, Simms, Gil Brandt. All had reservations about Darnold. All love Wilson. Gives me a lot of confidence in Wilson,

You’re going to have to explain the Gil Brandt take to me.

[QB1]

51 minutes ago, legler82 said:

I can see the Niners preferring the more polished Wilson over Fields as they are built and under pressure to win now.  We’re a rebuilding team; we don’t necessarily need the guy most ready to start week 1. 

Lol

[JohnnyLV]

4 minutes ago, derp said:

You’re going to have to explain the Gil Brandt take to me.

Gil Brandt has consistently picked around 26 of the 32 players selected in the first round correctly. He is the person responsible for inviting players to the NFL draft. He is known as one of the best evaluators of talent ever and is in the HOF. He is probably the most connected person to football teams in the world even today.

I remember him being so/so on Darnold but he had Rosen ahead of him (doh!) and Sam above baker and Allen so his 2018 draft rankings were not that great but overall he is usually one of the best at ranking talent.

[Wit]

Aaron Rodgers is considered one of the best to throw the football of all time, mahomes too. Chances are neither of these guys will be that good. If they are above average and can get us a super bowl I don’t give a crap about anything else. 
 

manning, Big Ben and rivers were all drafted the same year, and they were all good QBs. Rivers never win a super bowl but that doesn’t mean he was worse. The other two guys were drafted by better and smarter organizations. It’s impossible to compare these guys, because if one goes to us and the other to NE history tells us that unless Wilson can literally transcend the sport fields will have a career with more “winning”. The Jets can turn things around, but so far they haven’t proven it. 

[derp]

51 minutes ago, johnnysd said:

Gil Brandt has consistently picked around 26 of the 32 players selected in the first round correctly. He is the person responsible for inviting players to the NFL draft. He is known as one of the best evaluators of talent ever and is in the HOF. He is probably the most connected person to football teams in the world even today.

I remember him being so/so on Darnold but he had Rosen ahead of him (doh!) and Sam above baker and Allen so his 2018 draft rankings were not that great but overall he is usually one of the best at ranking talent.

Being connected to who gets picked high and accurately projecting quarterback careers are very different, no? His quarterback rankings have been not so good as you basically just pointed out. Other years aren’t much better.

[TheMo]

10 hours ago, football guy said:

It's one thing to say "I don't know who will be better because I don't know where they'll end up", but let's stop acting like Fields is a better prospect. He's not. I'm a big "Process > Results" guy. Maybe he goes to the Patriots and performs at a higher level/has a better career, but that's not to say he'd have the same production if the Jets drafted him. 

I'm extremely confident that if the Jets drafted Fields, he would bust. Epically. We do not run an offense that fits his style day 1, nor do we have the luxury of sitting him and allowing him to be taught the position and QB responsibilities appropriately... it would be a disaster. I'm also extremely confident that he would be a good player in New England. He'd be an elite player in Baltimore. I don't think that's tribalism, rather, its a rational, logical evaluation

And I’m pretty confident that Wilson has a higher chance of busting. Why exactly is your interpretation more logical than mine? This is where you lose me. @kdels62 and I have debated Wilson before and at no point did I feel he was being illogical. The feeling was mutual I hope. Just because you feel your analysis is gospel doesn’t mean it is. You’re a person on a forum, not some expert getting inducted into the football HOF. This is why you get such aggressive push back. 

[football guy]

6 minutes ago, TheMo said:

And I’m pretty confident that Wilson has a higher chance of busting. Why exactly is your interpretation more logical than mine? This is where you lose me. @kdels62 and I have debated Wilson before and at no point did I feel he was being illogical. The feeling was mutual I hope. Just because you feel your analysis is gospel doesn’t mean it is. You’re a person on a forum, not some expert getting inducted into the football HOF. This is why you get such aggressive push back. 

I wholeheartedly refute that people are "tribalists" for preferring one prospect to another - specifically preferring Wilson to Fields. That's what is illogical. Claiming people are tribalists because they correctly interpret Wilson to be the superior prospect entering the NFL is ******* ludicrous. I don't care what my credentials are, I believe in what I believe and I know what I know. You want to believe that Fields is a better prospect at this moment that's on you go ahead, you're wrong, but the beautiful thing is you're entitled to be... for all I care you can prefer a player because he looks better in uniform, do you. Shouldn't label people as tribalists because they conform with reality; the tribalists are people who ignore reality and fact in favor of their own emotional agenda... hence people who are blindly trashing Wilson/favoring Fields for reasons unknown.

[football guy]

6 hours ago, adobolo2 said:

I have a genuine question about this, I presume Zack will have to pass protocols every year to be allowed to take his medication, what happens if at some stage he does not pass in the future or protocol rules are changed? Zack has stated that his medication has helped him concentrate and again this is not ment to be a slight against Zack it's a genuine concern and question.

Yeah he's prescribed and I'm pretty sure players who were prescribed at a young age/establish a pattern get some sort of waiver for it. Not exactly sure how it works but shouldn't be a problem. Plenty of players take it, becomes an issue when they don't tell the league about it and then test positive. 

Fun fact that should surprise no one: Gase used to take 120mg A DAY when he was in Miami. Like wut lol. 

[Tranquilo]

3 minutes ago, football guy said:

I wholeheartedly refute that people are "tribalists" for preferring one prospect to another - specifically preferring Wilson to Fields. That's what is illogical. Claiming people are tribalists because they correctly interpret Wilson to be the superior prospect entering the NFL is ******* ludicrous. I don't care what my credentials are, I believe in what I believe and I know what I know. You want to believe that Fields is a better prospect at this moment that's on you go ahead, you're wrong, but the beautiful thing is you're entitled to be... for all I care you can prefer a player because he looks better in uniform, do you. Shouldn't label people as tribalists because they conform with reality; the tribalists are people who ignore reality and fact in favor of their own emotional agenda... hence people who are blindly trashing Wilson/favoring Fields for reasons unknown.

Uhhh I wouldn’t go as far as saying people who think Fields is a better prospect are wrong. That’s like, not quantifiable.

[football guy]

1 minute ago, Tranquilo said:

Uhhh I wouldn’t go as far as saying people who think Fields is a better prospect are wrong. That’s like, not quantifiable.

If you want to phrase it as "I think Fields will be a better player in the NFL because xyz", then go right ahead, you may get lucky and end up being correct based on where the player lands, how he progresses/develops, etc. But you will not find a single professional talent evaluator who would agree that Fields is a better player today because he's not a better player today. And yes, that much is quantifiable. Wilson is more advanced in every single metric used by every single NFL team and every single professional evaluator of QBs. It's like not even worth arguing because it's such a ludicrous argument to try and suggest otherwise lol. 

[TheMo]

5 minutes ago, football guy said:

I wholeheartedly refute that people are "tribalists" for preferring one prospect to another - specifically preferring Wilson to Fields. That's what is illogical. Claiming people are tribalists because they correctly interpret Wilson to be the superior prospect entering the NFL is ******* ludicrous. I don't care what my credentials are, I believe in what I believe and I know what I know. You want to believe that Fields is a better prospect at this moment that's on you go ahead, you're wrong, but the beautiful thing is you're entitled to be... for all I care you can prefer a player because he looks better in uniform, do you. Shouldn't label people as tribalists because they conform with reality; the tribalists are people who ignore reality and fact in favor of their own emotional agenda... hence people who are blindly trashing Wilson/favoring Fields for reasons unknown.

So there is no way you could be wrong? From what I see you are the one being extreme in your thought process, not me. I definitely see a situation where Fields is a bust. I tend to think there is a higher chance of that happening with Wilson. I place a high premium on the competition level. I just don’t run around definitively saying posters are illogical and wrong. Cause that’s dogmatic and no longer a reasonable line of thinking. 

[TheMo]

6 minutes ago, Tranquilo said:

Uhhh I wouldn’t go as far as saying people who think Fields is a better prospect are wrong. That’s like, not quantifiable.

Damn... this is tldr version of the last half of my post... ?

[Tranquilo]

2 minutes ago, football guy said:

If you want to phrase it as "I think Fields will be a better player in the NFL because xyz", then go right ahead, you may get lucky and end up being correct based on where the player lands, how he progresses/develops, etc. But you will not find a single professional talent evaluator who would agree that Fields is a better player today because he's not a better player today. And yes, that much is quantifiable. Wilson is more advanced in every single metric used by every single NFL team and every single professional evaluator of QBs. It's like not even worth arguing because it's such a ludicrous argument to try and suggest otherwise lol. 

It’s semantics. If you think one guy is going to be a better player, then he’s a better prospect. Was Tracy McGrady a better player than Keith Van Horn when they both got drafted? No, but he was a better prospect. You can’t take away from a player because he ends up in a better situation or develops better. Foresight counts when trying to evaluate a prospect. 

[TheMo]

3 minutes ago, football guy said:

If you want to phrase it as "I think Fields will be a better player in the NFL because xyz", then go right ahead, you may get lucky and end up being correct based on where the player lands, how he progresses/develops, etc. But you will not find a single professional talent evaluator who would agree that Fields is a better player today because he's not a better player today. And yes, that much is quantifiable. Wilson is more advanced in every single metric used by every single NFL team and every single professional evaluator of QBs. It's like not even worth arguing because it's such a ludicrous argument to try and suggest otherwise lol. 

So with this argument you’ll always have an out right? If fields is better it’s not cause he was better than Wilson it’s cause of the situation. There is no accountability in that. The goal posts will be ever moving. 

[jvill 51]

8 minutes ago, Tranquilo said:

Uhhh I wouldn’t go as far as saying people who think Fields is a better prospect are wrong. That’s like, not quantifiable.

No, you’re wrong. Wilson is better at everything and anyone who thinks otherwise didn’t watch the film, doesn’t know as much about football, or is just trying to be woke. Football Guy says so and his name is literally football guy so I think he would know.

[football guy]

Just now, TheMo said:

So there is no way you could be wrong? From what I see you are the one being extreme in your thought process, not me. I definitely see a situation where Fields is a bust. I tend to think there is a higher chance of that happening with Wilson. I place a high premium on the competition level. I just don’t run around definitively saying posters are illogical and wrong. Cause that’s dogmatic and no longer a reasonable line of thinking. 

Insinuating someone is a tribalist because they prefer Wilson over Fields is wholeheartedly illogical.

No, I'm not wrong about him as a prospect. Could Wilson bust? Absolutely. Could Fields have a more productive career? Absolutely. I've acknowledged such. That said, Fields is not a better prospect today. It's not even close. That doesn't mean people aren't entitled to their own opinions/preferences/beliefs. That isn't what makes someone illogical, insinuating anyone who doesn't believe that - or doesn't like a specific prospect for very identifiable reasons - is a tribalist is what's idiotic and illogical. 

I also wholeheartedly disagree with your statement that Wilson has a higher chance of busting. Based on what? You can have that opinion but I wouldn't call it an informed one... still, I'm not saying your illogical for believing that, but if you were to say "you're just being a tribalist in support of Wilson", then I'd say you're an idiot. That's basically what it comes down to... preferring one prospect over another for identifiable reasons isn't tribalism, it's a preference. No need to trash the other player in the process or discredit people's perspective as "just being tribalists" regardless which prospect you support. 

[football guy]

11 minutes ago, Tranquilo said:

It’s semantics. If you think one guy is going to be a better player, then he’s a better prospect. Was Tracy McGrady a better player than Keith Van Horn when they both got drafted? No, but he was a better prospect. You can’t take away from a player because he ends up in a better situation or develops better. Foresight counts when trying to evaluate a prospect. 

Zach Wilson is a better player and a better prospect right now. He projects to be a far better in virtually every category. What are you getting at? 

[TheMo]

1 minute ago, football guy said:

Insinuating someone is a tribalist because they prefer Wilson over Fields is wholeheartedly illogical.

No, I'm not wrong about him as a prospect. Could Wilson bust? Absolutely. Could Fields have a more productive career? Absolutely. I've acknowledged such. That said, Fields is not a better prospect today. It's not even close. That doesn't mean people aren't entitled to their own opinions/preferences/beliefs. That isn't what makes someone illogical, insinuating anyone who doesn't believe that - or doesn't like a specific prospect for very identifiable reasons - is a tribalist is what's idiotic and illogical. 

I also wholeheartedly disagree with your statement that Wilson has a higher chance of busting. Based on what? You can have that opinion but I wouldn't call it an informed one... still, I'm not saying your illogical for believing that, but if you were to say "you're just being a tribalist in support of Wilson", then I'd say you're an idiot. That's basically what it comes down to... preferring one prospect over another for identifiable reasons isn't tribalism, it's a preference. No need to trash the other player in the process or discredit people's perspective as "just being tribalists" regardless which prospect you support. 

You’re stating that your belief is fact. And that my belief is a belief. This lends itself to accusations of tribalism. 

[football guy]

13 minutes ago, jvill 51 said:

No, you’re wrong. Wilson is better at everything and anyone who thinks otherwise didn’t watch the film, doesn’t know as much about football, or is just trying to be woke. Football Guy says so and his name is literally football guy so I think he would know.

  

[football guy]

Just now, TheMo said:

You’re stating that your belief is fact. And that my belief is a belief. This lends itself to accusations of tribalism. 

A beautiful quote. One to live by 

[TheMo]

1 minute ago, football guy said:

Zach Wilson is a better player and a better prospect right now. He projects to be a far better in virtually every category. What are you getting at? 

I think his point is you can’t blame environment for everything. Sometimes you just have to accept that the assessment was wrong as opposed to blaming the situation. To accept no possibility of ones own error is a boundless level of egotism. 

[Tranquilo]

4 minutes ago, football guy said:

Zach Wilson is a better player and a better prospect right now. He projects to be a far better in virtually every category. What are you getting at? 

That’s your opinion. Projections are literally just projections. If you’re wrong then you’re wrong. And I’m speaking as someone who likes Zach Wilson. 

[football guy]

Just now, TheMo said:

I think his point is you can’t blame environment for everything. Sometimes you just have to accept that the assessment was wrong as opposed to blaming the situation. To accept no possibility of ones own error is a boundless level of egotism. 

Again, what are you getting at...? I don't think anyone has ever refuted this.