Comments on: Locker didn't get a first-round grade from Advisory Committee

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 16:38:56 +0000

edgy said “Again, his formula has NOTHING TO DO with a guy getting drafted. ”
Thank you Edhy for finally agreeing with me that the formula was a bunch of crap. That was my whole argument from the beginning. I gues we can agree on something. I think we are done with this subject – like beating a dead horse.
By the way I hear that they are selling Vince Young blow up dolls on the internet – thought you might be interested.

By: edgy

edgy — Tue, 22 Dec 2009 00:50:21 +0000

crescentbay99, I’m NOT a fan of Young BUT I know which QB that I’d rather have.
Again, his formula has NOTHING TO DO with a guy getting drafted. Since you think that you need to insult me then RETARD – he clearly writes: Jake Locker doesn’t fit the modern day success formula for drafting college quarterbacks:
He doesn’t say that he won’t be drafted, YOU MORON; he says that he doesn’t fit the modern day success formula. He says that while he could be drafted, AT THIS MOMENT, he won’t necessarily be successful.
The argument ISN’T that Locker wouldn’t be a high draft choice this year OR next but whether he would be successful if he went this year. You’re so focused on any kind of negative word associated with Locker that you simply can’t see what people are really saying about him. If you think that he’s better going to the NFL this year than next then you’re just plain stupid. He needs work and if you can’t see that then it’s really easy to see why you’d rather insult me than actually try to have a real dialog.
FYI, douche bag, Vince Young doesn’t meet 3 of the 5 criteria: He wasn’t a senior (redshirt Junior) and he didn’t start for all 3 years (he was the starter for 2 full years and the last 7 games as a freshman. I suppose in your mind that’s 3 full years because you keep saying that Cutler is a 4 year starter when he clearly isn’t), he didn’t graduate and he didn’t have a 2-1 TD to Int ratio. Even if I concede the first point, he doesn’t meet 2 of 5 so he wouldn’t have been on the list.

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 23:21:33 +0000

Edgy – I imagine you have a poster of Vince Young wearing jockey underwear in your bedroom.
As I have said over and over you village idiot, none of those 3 QB’s will amount to much in the NFL. My whole point was that Jake Locker will be a high draft choice even though he doesn’t meet asswipe’s formula, just as Jay Cutler was also a 1st round pick and also didn’t meet asswipe’s formula. Whereas Young and Leinart met his formula but both been busts for the most part. Now go to your bedroom and have an orgasm over Young’s poster like you do every night.

By: scoot266

scoot266 — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:43:18 +0000

Asswipe Johnson
Jake Locker is one of the most talented QBs I’ve ever watched at the college level. I don’t care who you throw in the mix. None of the players anyone have mentioned have had to go from a spread/run offense to a pro style and addapted as well. Sure the Huskies wound up 5-7 but there were 3 games they should have won. (the officials gave notre dame the win) and they almost upset #7 LSU week 1. if they have 2 of those games they’re in a bowl and Jake is an underclass allamerican. He’ll Notre dumbass got a bowl invite with 1 more win tha UW. Wait until next year and the whole Huskies program has a full year in their new o and d systems. Then cast your judgment. Until then realize that Jake has more potential than Clausen, Tebow, McCoy or Bradford. That’s why everyone was so up on him

By: edgy

edgy — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 18:08:29 +0000

crescentbay99, you’re wrong. The thing is that you’ve set the bar for Cutler as being more successful than the other 2 QBs taken in the first round and the bar is set by the fact that he’s started for 4 years. Well, a lot of UNSUCCESSFUL QBs have been give that much time by their teams and no one in their right mind would ever say that they were successful based on that fact.
You really don’t know a thing because Young NEVER lost his job because of his QB rating and if you want to continue to show your ignorance here to everyone, you’ll continue to use that stupid remark. Oh and just because Shanahan wouldn’t bench him and Lovie has no choice, that doesn’t mean that he’s more successful. My God, most coaches wouldn’t have risked a playoff berth by giving the keys to the car to a rookie when they’re 7-4 and in the hunt but Shanahan did. That little move cost him his job in 3 years and now, the trade could cost Smith his job and frankly, with them out of the playoffs, just what point would there be for them to bench him? Management paid way too much to get him and they’re more likely to get rid of the coach than admit that they didn’t take his track record into account when they went after him. BTW, since he really only started 5 games at the end of his rookie season, I’d call him a 3 1/4 year starter.
As for QB rating — IT’S A JOKE. Passer Rating: Brian Griese (82.7); Bob Griese (77.1). Just who do you think that anyone in their right mind would take as a QB and your first two guess don’t count…
What roll in Cutler’s second year? He’s NEVER had a winning record — PERIOD. In his second season, the team started 2-0 and that was the high water mark as they were never over .500 again. In his third season, they started out 4-1 and then finished up 4-7 and they lost a 3 game lead with 3 games to play. In the 4 years that he’s been in the league, Young now has a winning record in 3 of them.

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 14:48:06 +0000

Edgy – sounds like you have a man crush on Young.
I wouldn’t want to build a franchise with Young, Cutler or Leinart. Sounds like if you were a GM, you would all over Young as your QB. I’d rather take a chance on Bradford or Locker. It seems you are also dense as I have mentioned numerous times that I am basing my comparison on the most widely used (by far) QB rating – you cannot argue that Cutler has a higher career rating, that is why Young lost his starting job which he has now gained back. The fact that Cutler has been a starter his entire 4 year career while Young and Leinart were benched is a secondary factor, as how can you say a QB is more sucessful when they are on the bench. And Young must really be an amazing player as he is responsible for the Titans defense as you consider a win-loss record as the all mighty gauge for rating a QB. So that means whoever wins the super bowl is the QB for that year?? Whatever I am done arguing about 3 struggling QB’s. Young is on a little bit of a roll but you know if won’t last just like Cutler’s roll in his 2nd year didn’t last. Young is definitely riding the coat tails of their defense.

By: edgy

edgy — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 00:22:40 +0000

“Jake Locker doesn’t fit the modern day success formula for drafting college quarterbacks”. I ask you how you can interpret it any other way. He’s NOT saying that he won’t be drafted but that he doesn’t fit the mold for a successful QB that IS drafted. I understand what the ARTICLE says but I also understand what asswipe said.
As for how this turned into a dissertation on Cutler, that’s YOUR fault: “Jay Cutler never had a winning record at Vanderbilt and had almost identical stats his senior season as Locker’s junior season. Vince Young and Matt Leinart exceeded your criteria – now tell me who is the most sucessful of those three.”
My retort is what criteria you can possibly use as a means of considering him more successful. It seems that your ONLY criteria is that he’s a 4-year starter (Joey Harrington was a 6-year starter, I guess he was a success story, wasn’t he? David Carr was a 5-year starter — another success story, right?) and his W-L record be damn.
Oh and Young is NOW 25-12. I would rather have Orton OR Young and I feel that both are more successful than Cutler.

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 23:29:45 +0000

I don’t agree with yur interpretation. This whole article states that according to a source Locker was a 3rd round pick. I interpreted asswipe as saying either Locker wouldn’t get drafted or he agreed with a 3rd round draft or worse – that was my whole point of bringing in Cutler. I don’t care about Cutler and I am not defending Cutler, I was just saying that Cutler didn’t meet any of asswipe’s formula except that he did graduate and fours years later he is a 4 year starter. This whole article is about draft status and had nothing to do with success in the NFL. Cutler is by no means a success at this point but neitehr is Young and Leinart. Cutler does have more starts and a higher rating at this point, yet he came from a losing school with inferior college stats than Young & Leinart. The only QB I could care less about is Jake Locker & as a husly fan I am looking forward to having him for one more season cuz without him the husky would not have a chance at a winning season.

By: edgy

edgy — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:41:48 +0000

No, it doesn’t. His formula has nothing to do whether he’s drafted or not. He said that he didn’t meet the modern day “success” formula for being drafted. In other words, he could get drafted but he wouldn’t necessarily be successful.
As for Cutler, he got promoted to starter because one day Mike Shanahan had a stroke. His team was on its way to the playoffs and he decided to roll the dice with Cutler and boom, the Broncos went to hell in a hand basket. He was a 17-20 starter for the Broncos and now, he’s a 5-9 starter for the Bears. Just because he’s been starting for 4 years, that doesn’t mean that it was the right thing for them to do. Denver was lucky that he whined his way out of town because no matter what happens this year, it’s still a lot better than what would have happened if that snot-nosed whiny bitch was still the starter.

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 22:07:22 +0000

Edgy – this whole conversation wasn’t about if he was ready or not, my response was to asswipe saying Locker din’t fit the profile of getting drafted in the NFL as a QB. I called BS cuz Locker was a lock to get drafted in the first round whereas asswipe said his college win-loss record alone would have prevented him from getting drafted. I am glad Locker is staying and he will no doubt benefit and improve his chances of success when he does get drafted next year.
You have taken off in another from my point which again says that Cutler also did not meet asswipe’s formula and yet he is now a 4 year starter in the NFL whereas asswipe formula says he would never get drafted..

By: edgy

edgy — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 17:05:34 +0000

Just because someone has accepted it, that doesn’t mean that it’s the end all. There are several QBs on the list of all time rating whose rating is 5-15 points lower than Cutler and I can guarantee you that most people would take a lot of them LONG BEFORE they take Cutler. Because the rating system FAVORS those with high completion percentages and throw a lot of TD passes, a lot of old timers are well off the list from Cutler but you wouldn’t find one of their coaches who would take him over them.
Oh and if you want to play that game: Cutler’s QB ratings is 83.8 but inside the 20, it’s 82.7 — a drop. Young’s rating is 73.0 but inside the 20, it’s 91.1 – a rise.
I don’t give a rat’s ass how many 3, 4 or 5 star players that Locker is surrounded by, he still needs the work. Now, I’m not some 19 year old punk who’s been watching this game for 5 years, I’m 50+ (and the + is for me to know). This isn’t my first season watching players and I can tell you that Locker has great potential but he needs work on his mechanics and more time in the system. If you think that throwing him to the wolves and letting him work his kinks out in the NFL is the right thing to do then you really don’t have a clue.
Also, I didn’t use their COLLEGE W-L record to evaluate them; that’s their PRO record. Oh and I’m tired of Marino apologizers and their bull *hit. He had several HOF CALIBER players surrounding him but because he AND the media have been throwing them under the bus to elevate him, most, if not all, of those people will never see the HOF. I’m not saying that I’d take Bradshaw over Marino but the line to get DOWN to Marino for a big game starts with Joe Montana and it’s a long, long, long time before you get to Marino (Up to and including the BEST DOLPHIN QB EVER, Bob Griese).

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 15:14:20 +0000

edgy – the QB rating takes all significant factors into place so that a QB’s performance can be rated. This is the most accepted rating for QB’s. Bottom line Cutler = 84 vs. Young = 73. You can argue this all day long but this what everybody else uses except of course you and asswipe.
Win-loss record can mean very little as there are bad teams, good teams and great teams and a QB has nothing to do with the rest of his team’s roster. Terry Bradshaw won several super bowls and Dan Marino won zero super bowls – your philosophy says Bradshaw is better than Marino which we all know is absolutely not true.
Believe me I am not a fan of Cutler’s – my point is win-loss record is really meaningless in evaluating a college QB’s NFL potential. Locker is surrounded by 2 and 3 star players. Bradford and McCoy are surrounded by 4 and 5 star players. You put McCoy on the huskies and he couldn’t even get out of the pocket without getting sacked on half the plays. I bet you have never even seen Locker play more than one entire game if any?

By: edgy

edgy — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:21:21 +0000

crescentbay99 — I retort:
Aikman: 81.6 (Hall Of Fame – Cutler ain’t making this)
George: 80.4 (Hall Of Shame – Cutler will be joining him there)

By: edgy

edgy — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 14:09:10 +0000

crescentbay99, you can talk superior stats until the cows come home and it still won’t take away from the fact that he makes his teams worse. Understand that FROM THE MOMENT that he took over the job in Denver, the defense went to hell. They were forced into covering a lot more short fields with his stupid turnovers and it wore on the team. FYI, last year Denver threw the ball 61.6% of the time while Chicago threw it 54.9%. and this year, it’s reversed with Chicago throwing the ball 63.6% of the time and Denver is throwing it 54.9% and – gasp – the teams are going in opposite directions. Cutler has been intercepted in 74.0% of his games and has a lifetime winning percentage of 44.0 while Orton has been intercepted in 47.8% of his games and has a lifetime winning percentage of 64.4. FYI, Young’s been intercepted in 54.8% of his games and has a winning percentage of 66.7.
BTW, if you can’t understand how a QB can impact his defense positively or negatively then you don’t know a damn thing about football and you’ve just shown everyone here that fact. CASE CLOSED.
The problem with Young is that he’s in a system similar to Aikman in that when they get inside the red zone, they tend to run, run and run (You might note that during last year’s 13- 3 season, Collins only threw 12 TD vs 7 INT). The only time that he really has had a bad TD/INT number was his second season and much of that is due to the fact that he had no opportunity to make up for a pick because of the limited offense that they ran. Leinart’s stats don’t look nearly as bad when you consider that after his rookie season, he’s been basically a backup and that’s not conducive to getting a lot of stats one way or the other.
Oh and Jeff George has SUPERIOR STATS to many QBs out there and he was 46-78- 0 as a starter. He was so enamored with his stats that he wouldn’t throw the ball away and he ended up taking a sack and putting his team in further jeopardy than hurt his completion percentage. He used to gripe about his OL all the time but if you watched the games, you’d see him holding on for dear life rather than hurt his percentage.

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 13:45:07 +0000

edgy – I forgot the career QB ratings
Young = 73
Leinart = 72
Cutler = 83

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 01:47:01 +0000

edgy – since when does a win loss record mean more than stats when comparing QB’s? Cutler has far superior stats than both Young and Leinart, and he has played on inferior teams – both offensively and defensively. How does a QB impact his own team’s defense????
Young has thrown 35 interceptions to 29 TD passes & 6,300 yds.
Leinart has 18 interception to 14 TD’s & 3,800 yards.
Cutler has thrown 59 interceptions to 73 TD’s & 12,000 yards.
Case closed!!!!!

By: edgy

edgy — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 20:35:49 +0000

crescentbay99, just what criteria for success are you using because there’s none that I see that works in Cutler’s favor unless it’s “Getting a team to incredibly overpay for your services.” Cutler has a
22-28- 0 record as a starter while Vince Young is 24-12- 0 and Leinart is 7-10-0 (Ironically, his last start was a close loss to Young’s Titans).

By: crescentbay99

crescentbay99 — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 20:10:26 +0000

Hey asswipe johnson – your formula sure worked for the 2006 draft didn’t it? Jay Cutler never had a winning record at Vanderbilt and had almost identical stats his senior season as Locker’s junior season. Vince Young and Matt Leinart exceeded your criteria – now tell me who is the most sucessful of those three.
You have genius NFL IQ – better watch out McShay and Kiper, asswipe has a magic formula – only problem is it doesn’t work. Better stick to day job!! Locker’s potential is superior to any other QB prospect this year with the possible exception of Bradford.

By: SeaColt213

SeaColt213 — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 15:04:57 +0000

Hey autumn wind- read the posts. You are still the idiot. Your insults do nothing but strengthen ny argument of your idiocy. I could punk you all day with your half-thoughts but the fact is The dawgs were 0-12 a year ago and when sark put jake in a pro qb position, they were literally one point from a bowl game (ucla loss)… I refuse to keep explaining bc people like you dont accept logic, you are just right no matter what.
Locker is a stud, we agree on that. But he’s not ready.

By: Asswipe Johnson (Pronounced Az-Wee-Pay)

Asswipe Johnson (Pronounced Az-Wee-Pay) — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 13:42:57 +0000

Jake Locker doesn’t fit the modern day success formula for drafting college quarterbacks:
1) Senior with 3 years or more of starting experience
2) 23 or more wins
3) College graduate
4) 60% or better completion percentage
5) 2 to 1 touchdown to interception ratio

By: nesnej

nesnej — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 11:38:04 +0000

Locker would be drafted in the first round because his talent is so great some team would take a risk on him. This is a guy that Dennis Erickson said was the best high school QB he had seen since Jon Elway. You havent heard of him because he has been playing for suck a crappy team. Thanks Tyrone Willingham!

By: bigtrav425

bigtrav425 — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 10:18:47 +0000

Im a college football fan and i never even heard of Locker up until 3 weeks ago or so.Granted i do not have cable but how can someone iv never really heard of be such a lock in the top 10? i think the advisory committee was right on this one no one would take him before McCoy or Bradford this year. i also read somewhere were some people think Claussen is the best QB and a top 3 pick this year. Thats just absolutely Absurd for anyone to think that of Claussen!

By: mashoaf

mashoaf — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 09:15:53 +0000

McShay and Kiper would make the big bucks scouting for a team if their opionion mattered. Because we all know that ESPN saves their big contracts for former NFL players; just ask Sean Salisbury.

By: max

max — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:29:11 +0000

NationsCapital:
Chris Russo wants to know why you’re stealing his schtick.

By: bearsrule

bearsrule — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:28:48 +0000

AutumnWind999 says: December 18, 2009 8:36 PM
I think the advisory committee is way, way, way off the mark on this one. Locker would’ve been one of the top two QBs off the board and an absolute LOCK to go in the top-10. In my mind he was easily the best QB prospect in this draft. Whoever advised Locker, if that is indeed what happened, is the one who’s clueless.
From now on, I’ll seek your opinion, rather than anyone who actually, you know, works in pro football for a living. I’m sure you have a better angle from your living room.

By: TheDPR

TheDPR — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:22:27 +0000

I don’t know whether the Advisory Committee is any better or any worse than the Kiper/McShay’s of the world, but I can say this with confidence: the draft is a crap shoot and ANYone who talks about it as if he is some sort of expert is wrong A LOT. It’s more annoying coming from smug media types, though, because they project a lot more confidence than their statements deserve.
The “douche bag” description by nationscapital10 above seems to apply, though I wouldn’t have Florio ranked so high.

By: KingJoe!

KingJoe! — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:18:50 +0000

realitypolice, thanks for showing all of us you dont read very well. You pot/kettle comment makes little whatsoever, since Florio was simply summarizing the opinion of the advisory committe source.
As for this scenario, no one really knows what to expect, but there is an outside chance of going in the 1st round, no less near the top, well then the player should roll the dice. Bradford is the obvious example as to someone making a poor choice. On top of that, anyone in the top 50 who has a shot THIS YEAR to come out should. After the 2010 draft, there is a very good chance the contracts for first round picks will be controlled much like the NBA does it. (BTW – the second round picks getting gauranteed jack will be the compromise by the owners to get it done).

By: brasho

brasho — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:51:43 +0000

I’m sure Locker is a great prospect and all, but I have to agree with the NFL Advisory Committee.
Physically (where only 10% maximum of all plays come into play) is a superior athlete. Great speed, good arm and size. Perhaps mentally, Locker is even a sharp kid. But looking at his experience, Locker was a pretty good college QB, nothing fantastic. Dig a little deeper beyond this season and you’ll see that this season was Locker’s 1st in a pro-style, or even passing QB-friendly offense.
Locker has very little experience as an NFL-style QB and in his short experience he did not consistently show accuracy and quick-decision making to warrant sure-fire downfield NFL passer status.
If I had to compare Locker to any one past draft prospect I would compare him both physically and from an experience standpoint to Akili Smith. Smith was very gifted athletically but as a player, like Locker, he had only one season of success (he was a JUCO transfer) in Jeff Tedford’s offense. If I’m not mistaken, Smith was also a minor-league baseball player before being drafted by the Bengals.
When Akili Smith came into the NFL, he was clearly in over his head. He lacked the fundamentals, experience, and poise needed to become an NFL starter despite having excellent physical tools.
I think that Locker’s chance of success will definitely be improved if he returns to college. Of course if he were to have been chosen in the top 10 of the NFL draft this season, his chance of getting paid were better this season as going back to school he could get injured or exposed as a fraud.
For the record, I had Andre Woodson rated as a 3rd round prospect. I likened his size, athletic ability, and arm strength to Jason Campbell of the Redskins but his loopy release was more reminescent of Tebow (whom I have a 2nd round grade on) as well as having poor footwork in the pocket.

By: GoBrowns19

GoBrowns19 — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:38:30 +0000

I think the dumbest person in this whole story is Locker. It is not admirable to stay in college for your senior season. It’s just stupid. You work your whole life to get a good paying career. Locker is set to be a millionaire. Yet he’s risking injury or a bad season to stay at Washington and play in the furniture bowl next season. Even if he’s a 2nd rounder, big deal.

By: Chad Pennington's Noodle Arm

Chad Pennington's Noodle Arm — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 07:20:45 +0000

If Locker went into the draft this year, he would be a poor man’s JP Losman. He just hasn’t had enough work in the college game yet.