Is Russell really better than Quinn?

[SmootSmack]

I think Edwards and Stanton might even be as good as Russell on the pro level. Russell is really hit or miss right now. I think his ceiling is probably higher than Quinn's (or the other two aforementioned guys) but so is his floor.

If the Raiders draft him it will be interesting to see how his cannon arm style meshes with Kiffin's west coast philosophy.

Even more interesting is the notion that Russell is a great athlete. Perhaps he is, but Quinn had a faster 40 and higher vertical leap.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by SmootSmack

I think Edwards and Stanton might even be as good as Russell on the pro level. Russell is really hit or miss right now. I think his ceiling is probably higher than Quinn's (or the other two aforementioned guys) but so is his floor.

If the Raiders draft him it will be interesting to see how his cannon arm style meshes with Kiffin's west coast philosophy.

Even more interesting is the notion that Russell is a great athlete. Perhaps he is, but Quinn had a faster 40 and higher vertical leap.

Quinn also had a better bench press.

I don't know why so many scouts think difference between having the arm to make every NFL throw (Quinn), and having the arm to throw 60 yards from your butt (Russell) makes a difference, much less one that outweighs all of Quinn's other advantages. In any other line of work, doing your job this poorly would be immediate grounds for dismissal. IMO, the profession of scouting has become a joke. These people are unwilling to learn from their mistakes.

I'm being very careful to not blame Russell for a mess he didn't create. If he didn't have a bunch of 70 year old scouts watching his every move, he could be drafted at a spot more adventageous to his experience level low 1 or early 2, and he would be allowed more time to develop on a better team. It wouldn't make Russell any better of a prospect, but it would give him reasonable expectations and allow him, if he worked hard enough and earned his way onto the field, to achieve a reasonable amount of success relative to his skill level

Russell is going to get screwed because a bunch of guys can't do their job. I'm not anti-JaMarcus Russell. I just think any process that would rate him over Quinn is a joke. In my mind, its no longer even an issue.

[hooskins]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Quinn also had a better bench press.

I don't know why so many scouts think difference between having the arm to make every NFL throw (Quinn), and having the arm to throw 60 yards from your butt (Russell) makes a difference, much less one that outweighs all of Quinn's other advantages. In any other line of work, doing your job this poorly would be immediate grounds for dismissal. IMO, the profession of scouting has become a joke. These people are unwilling to learn from their mistakes.

I'm being very careful to not blame Russell for a mess he didn't create. If he didn't have a bunch of 70 year old scouts watching his every move, he could be drafted at a spot more adventageous to his experience level low 1 or early 2, and he would be allowed more time to develop on a better team. It wouldn't make Russell any better of a prospect, but it would give him reasonable expectations and allow him, if he worked hard enough and earned his way onto the field, to achieve a reasonable amount of success relative to his skill level

Russell is going to get screwed because a bunch of guys can't do their job. I'm not anti-JaMarcus Russell. I just think any process that would rate him over Quinn is a joke. In my mind, its no longer even an issue.

Do you think Russell is not good, or just overrated? I think he is pretty good but just overrated this draft because of his arm strength and size.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by hooskins

Do you think Russell is not good, or just overrated? I think he is pretty good but just overrated this draft because of his arm strength and size.

Well, I think the designation of good depends on expectation, and I don't think you can seperate one from another.

I think, based on his college production, that Russell will have a very similar career path to Rex Grossman.

And Grossman is a much better player than the media would have you think. He also lost two years due to injury to set his career back, so Russell will probably be better than that.

But I don't know too many teams who would spend a first rounder if they knew that this was what they were getting.

It's good value for the bottom of the round, and taking Russell to be your QB is better than trying to stick an unknown in there instead (That's to say the Ravens would be smarter to take Russell at 29 to fill a need as opposed to trying to get the QB of the future in the 4th round--because thats just a crapshoot). But he's not going to improve a bad franchise with his early career play.

Russell can have success if you give him a running game and a defense. He's not going to be completely inept. But hes simply not a good prospect, and making him the No. 1 pick (or even a top 10 pick) means he will be wearing the bust label by 2010.