Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

Anyway, my final thought is this: I have no idea how Russell will turn out as a pro but I understand the decision calculus and grading criteria that would have him chosen ahead of Quinn. For the record, I'm rooting for both guys.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=djnemo65;301348]There's no question that Quinn is the more NFL ready of the two, but by your own argument Gtripp rookies are developmental projects who shouldn't be expected to contribute immediately.[/quote]Exactly.

I just think that it's absured to expect that this experence edge that Quinn takes with him to the NFL to EVER be nullified, barring of course an injury to Quinn. JaMarcus is going to have to come in green as grass and not only learn the nuiances of the NFL but the developmental stuff he could have learned in college at the same time. The game is going to be really fast for him.

The game will be fast for Quinn as a rookie also, theres no denying that. But once Quinn gets a year of experience behind him, he should be ready to make the jump to a top half passer. Russell won't ever make this jump because he didn't learn everything he could have in college.

Any experience that Russell gets at the NFL level in practice is time that Quinn will also be improving his game. As long as they are both on the practice field every week, this large gap in experience isn't going away, ever.

There's stuff you learn in college that helps you in the NFL, and stuff you learn in the NFL to help you in the NFL. Russell cuts his college career short and he loses access to all that valueable experience.

He's never going to understand the game like Quinn does, and thats because Quinn got more exposure to the college game than Russell did.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;301353]Exactly.

I just think that it's absured to expect that this experence edge that Quinn takes with him to the NFL to EVER be nullified, barring of course an injury to Quinn. JaMarcus is going to have to come in green as grass and not only learn the nuiances of the NFL but the developmental stuff he could have learned in college at the same time. The game is going to be really fast for him.

The game will be fast for Quinn as a rookie also, theres no denying that. But once Quinn gets a year of experience behind him, he should be ready to make the jump to a top half passer. Russell won't ever make this jump because he didn't learn everything he could have in college.

Any experience that Russell gets at the NFL level in practice is time that Quinn will also be improving his game. As long as they are both on the practice field every week, this large gap in experience isn't going away, ever.

There's stuff you learn in college that helps you in the NFL, and stuff you learn in the NFL to help you in the NFL. Russell cuts his college career short and he loses access to all that valueable experience.

He's never going to understand the game like Quinn does, and thats because Quinn got more exposure to the college game than Russell did.[/QUOTE]

That's a fair point and you might be right. The other thing I worry about is Russell getting thrown into a terrible situation like Oakland and being expected to contribute immediately. These days the timeframe placed upon young quarterbacks is absurd. In many ways Quinn dropping might be the best thing for his career

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

Quinn could be another Carr or Harrington. Considerable experience in college, under a pro system. But basically plateaued. Which may not be a bad thing, if he's in the right situation.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

Lets face it , scouts do not have to be reasonable to find work . I would bet the ranch , if ND had played OSU for the championship , and Quinn and Smith had big time stats , they would be going 1-2 . It happens every year , a player has a big bowl game and overnight he is the next great hall of famer .I imagine that the QB taken by the best team will be the " better " qb .

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;301358]Quinn could be another Carr or Harrington. Considerable experience in college, under a pro system. But basically plateaued. Which may not be a bad thing, if he's in the right situation.[/quote]Brady Quinn: 46 starts

Joey Harrington: 28 starts
David Carr: 25 starts

Maybe not the best comparision.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

Fair enough. So what sort of career do you expect from Charlie "44 starts" Frye?

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;301365]Fair enough. So what sort of career do you expect from Charlie "44 starts" Frye?[/quote]

GET EM! How long did it take you to find that little tid bit?

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[QUOTE=angryssg;301366]GET EM! How long did it take you to find that little tid bit?[/QUOTE]

One phone call :)

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;301367]One phone call :)[/quote]

Tell Mel that I said whats up.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;301365]Fair enough. So what sort of career do you expect from Charlie "44 starts" Frye?[/quote]Well, his draft projection was as a 5th rounder, so like most QBs taken after round two, I wouldn't expect a whole lot from him.

I'd really be scared if Frye had come out early...he might not know which endzone is his. ;)

Generally if you completely suck as a prospect, no amount of experience is going to save you. I'm not sure any teams would have spend a 2nd round pick on Frye to keep him from the Browns.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

GTripp, I think you are making too big a deal out of these starts. Player's like Peyton Manning and Donovan McNabb aren't good because they started a bunch of games, they started a bunch of games because they were good. Several of the top quarterbacks in the league came from situations where they were good enough to secure the starting position at an early age. Fine, you would expect that with their kind of talent. But if you think that those starts are the reason they are succesful you are underestimating the importance of talent.

Let me put it this way. If Peyton Manning had been behind a superior upper classman for his first couple years at Tennessee would he be less of a pro today? I can guess your answer, and I strongly disagree.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

Didn't Tom Brady only start like 25 games in his Michigan career? He was backing up Griese the first couple of years wasn't he?

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;301442]Didn't Tom Brady only start like 25 games in his Michigan career? He was backing up Griese the first couple of years wasn't he?[/quote]
I thought it was Drew Henson.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[QUOTE=angryssg;301452]I thought it was Drew Henson.[/QUOTE]

Oh maybe. I thought it went Griese Brady Henson

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;301442]Didn't Tom Brady only start like 25 games in his Michigan career? He was backing up Griese the first couple of years wasn't he?[/quote]The system has a tough time explaining Tom Brady. Here's a guy that went to College playing sporadically for 4 years and had great success in the NFL. There are plenty of reasons why Brady is so good without traditional college starting experience, and one arguement would be that he IS experienced because the raw number of starts is not accurately reflective of the amount of experience he acquired playing off and on at Michigan.

No matter what the reasoning is, it seems that Brady is one oddball from a very strong trend. But he was also a late round crapshoot pick, so he is already a really rare case in the fact that he was a 6th rounder who made it. Even if he had 40 starts, Tom Brady being Tom Brady is still not something anyone could have predicted at this point in statistical analysis coming out.

It is really scary to think about Brady with 20 more starts though...really scary.

One thing it would be interesting to do is to college the college stats of the Brad Johnsons, Tom Bradys, Trent Greens, Matt Hasselbecks, and Mark Brunells (oh damn, I went there) of the world, and compare them to the stats of all the hundreds of day 2 guys who didnt make it and see if we can pull any trends outside of games started.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

How about Rick Mirer (37 starts)?

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[URL="http://www.michiganfansite.com/playerdetail.asp?playerid=205"]http://www.michiganfansite.com/playerdetail.asp?playerid=205[/URL]

Henson beat out Brady when he was only a Freshman.
Griese was before them both. Brady was there before Henson, but stayed there longer. Henson chose Baseball.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;301457]How about Rick Mirer (37 starts)?[/quote]I don't have the stats on Mirer, so I dont know what his completion % look like, but the study of college exp I'm refering to only goes back through 1997.

There are many reasons for this. The NFL was far less of a mental game back when Mirer busted. Physical advantages were more of a factor than they are now. QBs were not picked in the first round every year, and they were evaluated very differently than today.

I'm not saying we shouldn't investigate why Rick Mirer busted with 37 starts, but we shouldn't treat that information as identical to someone with 37 starts in a more recent decade, such as a Matt Schaub.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[QUOTE=angryssg;301458][URL="http://www.michiganfansite.com/playerdetail.asp?playerid=205"]http://www.michiganfansite.com/playerdetail.asp?playerid=205[/URL]

Henson beat out Brady when he was only a Freshman.
Griese was before them both. Brady was there before Henson, but stayed there longer. Henson chose Baseball.[/QUOTE]

Thanks

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=djnemo65;301438]GTripp, I think you are making too big a deal out of these starts. Player's like Peyton Manning and Donovan McNabb aren't good because they started a bunch of games, they started a bunch of games because they were good. Several of the top quarterbacks in the league came from situations where they were good enough to secure the starting position at an early age. Fine, you would expect that with their kind of talent. But if you think that those starts are the reason they are succesful you are underestimating the importance of talent.

Let me put it this way. If Peyton Manning had been behind a superior upper classman for his first couple years at Tennessee would he be less of a pro today? I can guess your answer, and I strongly disagree.[/quote]"Player's like Peyton Manning and Donovan McNabb aren't good because they started a bunch of games, they started a bunch of games because they were good." Well, yeah, of course. But the experience from college made them better pro prospects than they would have been.

I'm not underestimating the importance of talent at all. If anything, I'm being elitest about what it takes to be a successful QB in the NFL.

#1 it takes a special breed of player (nature theory)
#2 it takes an adequate amount of preparation (nurture theory)

I think you need to be both a #1 and a #2 to have a successful NFL career at QB.

If you aren't a #1 physically and mentally by the time you get to college, you will probably never be a #1. Only a few guys fit the bill. Most of these guys get noticed as first rounders, but the guys like Bulger, Hasselbeck, Brunell, and Brady fall into this category also.

To be the best you can be, you need to get all the experience you can in college. And I do believe you will be less of an NFL player if you skimp on the college experience. But all the experience in the world isn't going to help if you aren't the special breed of player that puts you in group #1.

And I believe Russell is a #1. But he will never be a #2 and mediocre may be the best he can hope for.

There are only a handful of college guys who are No. 1's and because of the propensity for guys to leave early, there ends up being even less successful NFL QBs.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;301455]
It is really scary to think about Brady with 20 more starts though...really scary.

[/QUOTE]

Oh come on!

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;301455]It is really scary to think about Brady with 20 more starts though...really scary.[/quote]

I had 60 plus starts if you count the sandlot. I am the next Dan Marino! Woooo Hooooooo!

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=djnemo65;301329]Are you kidding? Maybe my grandmother didnt know his name, but my grandfather did and he doesn't even like college football particularily. You must not watch a lot of college ball, because this guy has been a stud for two years now. I think it was his comeback against ASU in 06 that really put him on the map, right after Katrina had hit.[/quote]
Great game for LSU < Im a Sun Devils fan > , so the win was bitter sweet . The comeback was more special teams , they ran two blocked punts in for TDs . Maybe they are both all pro one day , one things for sure ,,, they will be very , very wealthy !

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=angryssg;301515]I had 60 plus starts if you count the sandlot. I am the next Dan Marino! Woooo Hooooooo![/quote]Show us what you got, brother!

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

[quote=SmootSmack;301442]Didn't Tom Brady only start like 25 games in his Michigan career? He was backing up Griese the first couple of years wasn't he?[/quote]

Other QB's have had similar college starts as Brady. This analogy goes both ways. What about Matt Hassleback? I would consider him a top ten QB. I don't know his college stats but I know his ass was a late round pick.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

From Profootballtalk:

QUINN IN THE MIX FOR NO. 1 PICK

A league source tells us that the Raiders aren't talking only to quarterback JaMarcus Russell and receiver Calvin Johnson about a contract at the No. 1 slot in the draft.

Per the source, discussions are also being conducted with the representatives of quarterback Brady Quinn.

It's still unclear whether the Raiders are presently leaning toward any one of the three guys. One league insider believes that Quinn is in the mix solely for negotiating leverage. But the source also says that he wouldn't be shocked if the Raiders take Quinn instead of Russell.

"They're taking a quarterback," predicted the source.

We still think Johnson is the safest bet. But what the hell do we know?

--------------------------------------------------------------------

And with 4 days to go, the first pick is as much of a coinflip as I thought it would be 4 months ago.

We just need some sort of three-sided coin.

Re: Is Russell really better than Quinn?
 

Since we are on a one year plan, neither one of these guys is worth a pick.