Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

Michael Vick completed 54% of his passes in 2000, then came out and made multiple pro bowls. I think that may be the answer. But what if we exclude Vick as part of the past generation?

(Mark Brunell, after all completed about what Jake Locker did at Washington, but in a different era. Anyway, I don't want players who played college ball in the 90s).

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=GTripp0012;794730]Does anyone know who the last quarterback who started fewer than 27 games and completed fewer than 60% of his passes AND had considerable NFL success was? I'd say there's some guys you just don't take.

Let's simplify this: I want to find the quarterback with the LOWEST college completion percentage to be drafted in the last ten years and achieve some reasonable degree of success. I am guessing that we're going to be dealing with a 58% or better passer.[/quote]

Brett Favre's college completion percentage was 52.4% according to this:

[url=http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/39516/when-are-qb-accuracy-rates-important]When are QB accuracy rates important? - NFL Nation Blog - ESPN[/url]

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=Mattyk;794719]I doubt Minnesota is serious about taking a QB at #12. They're built to win now and will likely look to add a veteran QB like McNabb to make another run. And they already have a young QB to develop in Webb. Plus it's not as if Locker is our only QB target, or even our top option.[/quote]

Matty is correct. I would add that Locker does not fit Minny's system the way he fits ours.

It seems unlikely that Minny would take Locker at #12.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=GreekSkin;794735]Brett Favre's college completion percentage was 52.4% according to this:

[URL="http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/39516/when-are-qb-accuracy-rates-important"]When are QB accuracy rates important? - NFL Nation Blog - ESPN[/URL][/quote]

That's why he is the all-time leader in INTERCEPTIONS. :D

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;794709]Jake Locker: Mayock, Gruden say Locker fits Redskins
Jake Locker - QB - CLG - Apr. 21 - 9:38 am et
NFL Network's Mike Mayock and ESPN's Jon Gruden agree that Washington QB Jake Locker is a good fit for the Redskins' offense.
NFLN's Mike Lombardi is in this same boat as the idea of Locker going 10th gains steam a week before the draft. [B]"Locker likes getting out on the edge and he’s mostly accurate off play-action rolling out," Mayock said.[/B] "That’s what Mike Shanahan’s scheme is. ... If (Locker) has a chance to play early and play effectively, I think that’s the kind of system he’s set up for." Apr. 21 - 9:38 am et
Source: Washington Post[/quote]

Locker's is very accurate when throwing on the run. That is probably the first thing that I noticed about him that I really liked. Remember how deadly Joe Theismann was in the Red Zone when he rolled out? I think that's what I was seeing in Locker. And Jake is an even better runner than Joe was.

Another thing that I liked about Locker when I saw him play was that when he was forced out of the pocket he kept his eyes downfield and made a number of big passing plays down the field. He can really keep a play alive.

I know that he needs some work on a few things, but I believe that this guy can play well in the NFL. Now I read that Mike Mayock and Jon Gruden think that Locker is a good fit for the offense we run and I think that I'm finally convinced that he should be our pick at #10.

BTW, there has been a lot said in the media about how Mike Shanahan would have taken Locker at #4 last year. If that's true, then why wouldn't Mike take Locker at #10 this year?

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

David Garrard: 54.5% in final two college seasons.
Brooks Bollinger: 52%
Sage Rosenfels: 51% in 2000
Derek Anderson: 51%

I'll finish this research later, but I'm seeing mostly NFL backups with a David Garrard sighting. I would make a point that Locker could possibly be the next Garrard, but if he gets drafted in the first two rounds, he's on a different career path from the get go.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=GTripp0012;794740]David Garrard: 54.5% in final two college seasons.
Brooks Bollinger: 52%
Sage Rosenfels: 51% in 2000
Derek Anderson: 51%

I'll finish this research later, but I'm seeing mostly NFL backups with a David Garrard sighting. I would make a point that Locker could possibly be the next Garrard, but if he gets drafted in the first two rounds, he's on a different career path from the get go.[/quote]

Shouldn't you add the qualifiers of "while running for his life behind a poor offensive line, being asked to carry the ball as much as a starting RB, and playing with bad receivers"? That would make any comparisons more fair.

BTW, of the players you listed, only Garrard could be considered to be anywhere near as mobile as Locker and he is currently the only NFL starter among them. Mobility is an aspect of Locker's game that is discounted in your analysis.

Disclaimer: I am a Locker supporter.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

It's going to be interesting on who they draft to say the least, but I keep hearing how the Skins house is divided on which QB is better. It had been said that some of the Skins scouts thought Locker was a younger version of McNabb, which makes you wonder why you would draft a guy just like the one you just benched.


What makes me nervous about this whole thing is that there obviously is a difference of opinions on QBs, between the head coach and the offensive coordinator. Normally that probably wouldn't mean much, but this duo happens to be father and son. Also, it's obvious Mike chose to go the McNabb route while it was rumored that Kyle didn't want him to begin with.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall in the Skins war room on draft day.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=NC_Skins;794744]It's going to be interesting on who they draft to say the least, but I keep hearing how the Skins house is divided on which QB is better. [B]It had been said that some of the Skins scouts thought Locker was a younger version of McNabb, which makes you wonder why you would draft a guy just like the one you just benched.[/B]
What makes me nervous about this whole thing is that there obviously is a difference of opinions on QBs, between the head coach and the offensive coordinator. Normally that probably wouldn't mean much, but this duo happens to be father and son. Also, it's obvious Mike chose to go the McNabb route while it was rumored that Kyle didn't want him to begin with.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall in the Skins war room on draft day.[/quote]

That's an easy question to answer: it's because the younger version of McNabb was a much better player than the current version.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=SmootSmack;794724]Just for clarity me saying maybe they'll take Locker at 14 is just my own speculation[/quote]

I think the Shanny will take Locker at 14 if the move back happens. I dont see it at 10. I think Minnesota will give Locker very strong consideration at 12as well, I bet they have Locker in their top 3 at 12.

My personal opinion is Quinn or Locker are not very good choices at either for us.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=NC_Skins;794744]It's going to be interesting on who they draft to say the least, but I keep hearing how the Skins house is divided on which QB is better. It had been said that some of the Skins scouts thought Locker was a younger version of McNabb, whi[COLOR="Red"]ch makes you wonder why you would draft a guy just like the one you just benched[/COLOR].


What makes me nervous about this whole thing is that there obviously is a difference of opinions on QBs, between the head coach and the offensive coordinator. Normally that probably wouldn't mean much, but this duo happens to be father and son. Also, it's obvious Mike chose to go the McNabb route while it was rumored that Kyle didn't want him to begin with.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall in the Skins war room on draft day.[/quote]

If it was the much younger McNabb version I'd be very glad to have him.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=NC_Skins;794744]It's going to be interesting on who they draft to say the least, but I keep hearing how the Skins house is divided on which QB is better. It had been said that some of the Skins scouts thought Locker was a younger version of McNabb, [B]which makes you wonder why you would draft a guy just like the one you just benched[/B].


What makes me nervous about this whole thing is that there obviously is a difference of opinions on QBs, between the head coach and the offensive coordinator. Normally that probably wouldn't mean much, but this duo happens to be father and son. Also, it's obvious Mike chose to go the McNabb route while it was rumored that Kyle didn't want him to begin with.

I'd like to be a fly on the wall in the Skins war room on draft day.[/quote]

Because you have the chance to mold him and coach him up in your scheme.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

If Shanny believes JL is his franchise QB of the future , he would take him at 5, so I wouldn't be shocked at all if he's our guy at 10.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=Lotus;794737]Matty is correct. I would add that Locker does not fit Minny's system the way he fits ours.

It seems unlikely that Minny would take Locker at #12.[/quote]

Well all this talk about which QB fits our system seems to hinge around which coach you are talking about. Everything I am reading lately makes it sound like Kyle likes Dalton who is more of a pocket Qb like Schaub and Mike is the one who likes the mobil type like Locker. I hope this is not true becasue I would like to think they are all 100% invested in whatever QB they end up taking.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=Chico23231;794747]I think the Shanny will take Locker at 14 if the move back happens. I dont see it at 10. I think Minnesota will give Locker very strong consideration at 12as well, I bet they have Locker in their top 3 at 12.

My personal opinion is Quinn or Locker are not very good choices at either for us.[/quote]

I don't see why they wouldn't take Locker at 10 but would be willing to take him 4 spots later at 14. If you think a guys your franchise QB you try moving back if you feel confident you can get him after the trade, but you don't pass him up when you can't find the trade you're looking for.


[quote=Mattyk;794752]Because you have the chance to mold him and coach him up in your scheme.[/quote]

That seems to be the company line, or at least the whispers coming out of Redskin park. Basically McNabb had a track record of success and wasn't really looking to come in and retool his game. He might be willing to accept more coaching with his next team, but just as easily he might just ask the coaching staff to let him improvise.

Shanahan's system is suppose to be QB friendly. It's suppose to let guys get away with 58%-60% completion rates in exchange for selling play action and getting the ball down the field. For whatever reason McNabb seemed to insist on working outside the system and the mechanics the Shanahans wanted to employ and it resulted in him being benched for the last 3 games.

The theory with Locker is that he has a very similar skill set to McNabb but at the same time doesn't know the NFL and has experienced a recent fall from grace. Making him twice as likely to soak up everything the Shanahan's teach him in hopes that it will help him prove that he belongs in this league.

Hopefully that theory, if true will work out for the Skins if they decide to draft him.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=NC_Skins;794744]It's going to be interesting on who they draft to say the least, but I keep hearing how the Skins house is divided on which QB is better. It had been said that some of the Skins scouts thought [B]Locker was a younger version of McNabb[/B], which makes you wonder why you would draft a guy just like the one you just benched.
[/quote]

I would say....GREAT!!! I would also add that Locker seems to have more of a competitive fire than Donovan. Get this kid!!!

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

As long as the draft nets us Jake Locker, I am comfortable with whatever they do in the first round.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=Dirtbag59;794756]I don't see why they wouldn't take Locker at 10 but would be willing to take him 4 spots later at 14. If you think a guys your franchise QB you try moving back if you feel confident you can get him after the trade, but you don't pass him up when you can't find the trade you're looking for.




That seems to be the company line, or at least the whispers coming out of Redskin park. Basically McNabb had a track record of success and wasn't really looking to come in and retool his game. He might be willing to accept more coaching with his next team, but just as easily he might just ask the coaching staff to let him improvise.

Shanahan's system is suppose to be QB friendly. It's suppose to let guys get away with 58%-60% completion rates in exchange for selling play action and getting the ball down the field. For whatever reason McNabb seemed to insist on working outside the system and the mechanics the Shanahans wanted to employ and it resulted in him being benched for the last 3 games.

The theory with Locker is that he has a very similar skill set to McNabb but at the same time doesn't know the NFL and has experienced a recent fall from grace. Making him twice as likely to soak up everything the Shanahan's teach him in hopes that it will help him prove that he belongs in this league.

Hopefully that theory, if true will work out for the Skins if they decide to draft him.[/quote]

If any team is lucky enough to have a player that they think can be their Franchise QB available for them to draft at #10, then they would be very foolish not to pick him then and there. It would be utterly ridiculous, if not unthinkable, to move down four positions to pick up a third rounder and risk missing out on the player who could man the most important position on the team for the next ten years.

As for any debate between Mike vs. Kyle on which QB to pick, I feel confident that the pick will be Mike's alone since he is the boss and it's his job on the line. Kyle works for Mike, not vice versa. Their opinions are not equal. Mike will take the QB he wants whenever he picks one.

"Kyle, [U]I'll[/U] decide which quarterback we pick! Be quiet or I'll send you to your room! I mean it!" - Mike Shanahan

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=KI Skins Fan;794761]If any team is lucky enough to have a player that they think can be their Franchise QB available for them to draft at #10, then they would be very foolish not to pick him then and there. It would be utterly ridiculous, if not unthinkable, to move down four positions to pick up a third rounder and risk missing out on the player who could man the most important position on the team for the next ten years.

As for any debate between Mike vs. Kyle on which QB to pick, I feel confident that the pick will be Mike's alone since he is the boss and it's his job on the line. Kyle works for Mike, not vice versa. Their opinions are not equal. Mike will take the QB he wants whenever he picks one.

"Kyle, [U]I'll[/U] decide which quarterback we pick! Be quiet or I'll send you to your room! I mean it!" - Mike Shanahan[/quote]

I completely agree with your first paragraph. I made that point last week on here about not trading down if the guy you envision as your franchise QB is on the board and one person after another disagreed with me. It just makes no sense to me how you can think a guy could be your franchise QB for the next 10 years yet you roll the dice on losing him to pick up an extra draft pick.

As for Mike being the boss...that's true and no one is suggesting that he does not have the final decision but after that decision is made Kyle as OC and Mike need to be 100% behind whoever is selected. If it's Locker I don't want to hear leaks about how Kyle never wanted Locker the way we did when the McNabb trade went south during the season.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=celts32;794768]I completely agree with your first paragraph. I made that point last week on here about not trading down if the guy you envision as your franchise QB is on the board and one person after another disagreed with me. It just makes no sense to me how you can think a guy could be your franchise QB for the next 10 years yet you roll the dice on losing him to pick up an extra draft pick.[/quote]

Makes sense to me, look at the teams and their QB needs behind us:

11. Houston - no need
12. Vikings - possible need, but it's more likely they are bluffing
13. Detroit - no need
14. St. Louis - no need
15. Miami - possible need

So let's say Julio Jones is on the board at #10 and the Rams want him bad enough, trade back, pick up an extra pick, and still grab Locker at #14. That's just smart drafting.

All of this may be moot anyway, who's to say Locker is even our top QB option as SS has alluded to. Maybe Locker and someone else like Dalton are 1 and 1a on our board, and there isn't a big enough difference between them to matter.

Or maybe another higher rated player on our board slides down.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=Mattyk;794771]Makes sense to me, look at the teams and their QB needs behind us:

11. Houston - no need
12. Vikings - possible need, but it's more likely they are bluffing
13. Detroit - no need
14. St. Louis - no need
15. Miami - possible need

So let's say Julio Jones is on the board at #10 and the Rams want him bad enough, trade back, pick up an extra pick, and still grab Locker at #14. That's just smart drafting.

All of this may be moot anyway, who's to say Locker is even our top QB option as SS has alluded to. Maybe Locker and someone else like Dalton are 1 and 1a on our board, and there isn't a big enough difference between them to matter.

Or maybe another higher rated player on our board slides down.[/quote]

The Vikings are the reason that you can't trade down to 14 if Locker is the player you want. You think they will pass but your not sure. But if it's 1 and 1A or they are looking at another position entirely then of course the trade down is the smart play. The only way the trade down is not smart is if Locker is their clear choice, but the way it sounds that is not the case anyway.

Also the whole league knows the skins need a QB so keep in mind that every spot the Redskins trade down to...the spot right in front of that becomes a trade up spot the other teams in the QB market are going to consider jumping to.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=celts32;794777]The Vikings are the reason that you can't trade down to 14 if Locker is the player you want. You think they will pass but your not sure. But if it's 1 and 1A or they are looking at another position entirely then of course the trade down is the smart play. The only way the trade down is not smart is if Locker is their clear choice, but the way it sounds that is not the case anyway.

Also the whole league knows the skins need a QB so keep in mind that every spot the Redskins trade down to...the spot right in front of that becomes a trade up spot the other teams in the QB market are going to consider jumping to.[/quote]

Yeah, but McNabb is paying us to release him and we all know where future hall of fame QB's that fall victim to misguided trades go right?

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[url=http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/04/20/2011-nfl-mock-draft/index.html?eref=sihp]2011 NFL Mock Draft with Cam Newton, Marcell Dareus, more - Peter King - SI.com[/url]

Peter Kings got some good stuff here

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=celts32;794777]The Vikings are the reason that you can't trade down to 14 if Locker is the player you want. You think they will pass but your not sure. But if it's 1 and 1A or they are looking at another position entirely then of course the trade down is the smart play. The only way the trade down is not smart is if Locker is their clear choice, but the way it sounds that is not the case anyway.

[B]Also the whole league knows the skins need a QB so keep in mind that every spot the Redskins trade down to...the spot right in front of that becomes a trade up spot the other teams in the QB market are going to consider jumping to[/B][B].[/B][/quote]

Good point. Of course it is. That's just another reason not to trade down to 14 and hope to get your QB. And I don't believe for a second that the Skins or any other team actually have in mind a pair of first round QB's they like equally well. They do far too much research on them for that to be the case.

As much as I like Locker, I have no problem with the Skins trading down. But, if they do, they should trade down farther, if possible, with the idea of getting more picks to fortify positions other than QB. If they were to trade with San Diego, they could get #18 plus a mid-second round pick. If they were to trade with NE, they could get #17 plus a late second round pick and a late fourth round pick. That's much better than risking getting the QB they want in the first round, if that's what they want, for a just a third round pick.

Then they could lose all of their games and draft Andrew Luck #1 in next year's draft! :laughing2

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

And in the well DUH! section of todays forum
[QUOTE]Former Dolphins V.P. of football operations Bill Parcells recently conceded to Armando Salguero of the Miami Herald that the team “maybe” should have taken quarterback Matt Ryan instead of tackle Jake Long with the first pick in the 2008 draft.[/QUOTE]

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

I think this may be a smokescreen or just flat out BS, but heard today Skins might actually take a chance on Bowers. Like I said, I dint believe it just letting you guys know

My most reliable sources say Quinn is still choice #1 (he wouldn't be mine), but there's no clear cut 2nd choice if they stay at 10.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=SmootSmack;794798]I think this may be a smokescreen or just flat out BS, but heard today Skins might actually take a chance on Bowers. Like I said, I dint believe it just letting you guys know

My most reliable sources say Quinn is still choice #1 (he wouldn't be mine), but there's no clear cut 2nd choice if they stay at 10.[/quote]

Your days are near an end Rain Man. I will overthrow you with my brilliant Locker prediction and function as the sites true insider.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

Well you did call Laron Landry didn't you?

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

My prediction as of today is Mallett , I'd rather have locker though.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=SmootSmack;794804]Well you did call Laron Landry didn't you?[/quote]

Well not so much call...as suggest that we take a look at him. Still this time there will be no doubt! Locker at 10. Set your watch by it Warpath readers.


[quote=skinsfaninok;794805]My prediction as of today is Mallett , I'd rather have locker though.[/quote]

Just what DC needs. Another statue.....man that joke would have killed in New York. Still why not Dalton at 10? How does a Mallet to the Skins at 10 rumor get through yet Dalton is stuck at 25?

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=GTripp0012;794730]Does anyone know who the last quarterback who started fewer than 27 games and completed fewer than 60% of his passes AND had considerable NFL success was? I'd say there's some guys you just don't take.

Let's simplify this: I want to find the quarterback with the LOWEST college completion percentage to be drafted in the last ten years and achieve some reasonable degree of success. I am guessing that we're going to be dealing with a 58% or better passer.[/quote]

How about the reverse?

Can anyone name the litany of above 60% college QBs that have failed in the NFL?

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

I guess I'll keep my prediction as I had in my latest mock, trade down and get Kerrigan and Ponder

So to recap: rumor is Quinn, I'd like Locker, predicting trade down and Kerrigan and Ponder (which I'd be totally happy with)

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

Jay Cutler's career completion % in college was 57.2%, his win/loss 11-33. He may not be an All-Pro, but he's pretty good and was in a similar situation at Vandy as Locker in Washington talent wise.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=Terpfan76;794809]Jay Cutler's career completion % in college was 57.2%, his win/loss 11-33. He may not be an All-Pro, but he's pretty good and was in a similar situation at Vandy as Locker in Washington talent wise.[/quote]

Shanny drafted Cutler. Watch out for Locker at #10!

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=SmootSmack;794808]I guess I'll keep my prediction as I had in my latest mock, trade down and get Kerrigan and Ponder

So to recap: rumor is Quinn, I'd like Locker, predicting trade down and Kerrigan and Ponder (which I'd be totally happy with)[/quote]

I'm all for drafting defensive players and offensive linemen, but is Quinn really all that?

I'd be happy with the tradedown scenario, but without Ponder. Just give me another lineman instead in round two and a QB in round four.

I'd like the Redskins management to acknowledge that they are building a team and to start with the foundation.

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

I think ponder will go before we Pick again

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

I'm told ESPN mentioned today that the Skins are looking to drop back in the draft, which I think we all have heard, in order to pick up a 3rd round draft pick. Then their rumor was the Skins would take a DL in the 1st, QB Nevada Colin Kaepernick in the 2nd, and a OL in the 3rd.

Did anyone else hear this?

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

I think its absolutely amazing what im reading online that 4-5 QBs could be taking first round vs. the talent pool of QBs. wow

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

I guess Kaep would learn from VY :)

Re: 2011 NFL Draft
 

[quote=SBXVII;794851]I'm told ESPN mentioned today that the Skins are looking to drop back in the draft, which I think we all have heard, in order to pick up a 3rd round draft pick. Then their rumor was the Skins would take a DL in the 1st, QB Nevada Colin Kaepernick in the 2nd, and a OL in the 3rd.

Did anyone else hear this?[/quote]

What haven't we heard at this point?