The Pro Days Thread

[Shadowbyte]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Luck's attractiveness is a step below RGIII's.

Tell me about it, my GF's friends were over when I was watching the NFL network coverage on the 2. And they collectively said those are the 2 ugliest QB's they've ever seen lol.

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by 44Deezel

Underthrowing a lot of deep balls. Guess that's because of the wind. Colts are definitely taking him, but wouldn't be depressed if he dropped to us. He's got that big dufus look that seems to work well in the NFL - Eli, Peyton, Big Ben, Rivers, Cutler, etc.

El oh el! Peyton's little brother does it the best though

[Gtothearry]

Originally Posted by mbedner3420

For those that have seen both, what is your sense? Is there a clear and immediate winner? Given yesterdays performance, do you think the colts will select RG3 over Luck?

I think the pro days were pretty even so I think Luck will stay at 1 and Rg at 2.

[MTK]

Originally Posted by mbedner3420

For those that have seen both, what is your sense? Is there a clear and immediate winner? Given yesterdays performance, do you think the colts will select RG3 over Luck?

Luck #1
RG3 #2

Pro days aren't a big factor at all in the overall decision making of teams. It's like a cherry on top, a very small one at that. I think both teams made up their minds long ago.

[Bubba305-ST21-]

eli always has that damn i just pooped my pants look

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis

Luck's attractiveness is a step below RGIII's.

Excellent! That had me a bit concerned. We don't want to have to look at the ugly guy for the next 15 years...

[Gtothearry]

Originally Posted by Shadowbyte

Tell me about it, my GF's friends were over when I was watching the NFL network coverage on the 2. And they collectively said those are the 2 ugliest QB's they've ever seen lol.

They're quite ugly but pretty doesn't matter unless ya want a supermodel wife.

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Luck #1
RG3 #2

Pro days aren't a big factor at all in the overall decision making of teams. It's like a cherry on top, a very small one at that. I think both teams made up their minds long ago.

I agree, but the hype-meter has gone through the roof since Griffin's pro day yesterday. I always wonder if something like that may sway a GM on the fence.

[Duffman003]

The only reason Cam Newton was so good last year was because he is good looking.

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by Duffman003

The only reason Cam Newton was so good last year was because he is good looking.

Amen!

[Bubba305-ST21-]

RG3 will look good throwing bombs and in the endzone for us. thats all i care about. F cam and his GQ ass

[30gut]

Originally Posted by Duffman003

The only reason Cam Newton was so good last year was because he is good looking.

..........

[mbedner3420]

Originally Posted by 30gut

..........

Hahaha perhaps it is time to steer the conversation back to pro day talk and specifically who we think can help out the redskins more.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

I've been thinking this for a while but haven't had the balls to say it honestly. In essence, RGIII is nothing like Vick except for speed. The comparisons to Steve Young are more accurate because he's not so shifty as he is fast. And just like Young he uses his feet to move the pocket versus using his feet to run for the first down.

I think it's a natural reaction to compare black quarterbacks with one another. For instance, last season I would hear commentators compare RGIII to Cam Newton frequently instead of, say, Matt Barkley who was/is still in college.

What's funny is that the reverse never happens. Football analysts don't compare white QBs to, say, Donovan McNabb or even Vince Young. It's usually Vince Young, McNabb, David Gerrard, Cam Newton -- they lump them together. Not always, but more often than not. But if you look at the top all-time leading rushing quarterbacks, off the top of my head, I would say it's Michael Vick, Randall Cunningham, Steve McNair, Steve Young in there somewhere, and Fran Tarkenton. John Elway has to be in the top ten, too. So it's actually pretty even once you remove race and look at statistics.

I guess my point is, in all of my rambling, there's a tendency to attribute athletic prowess first when analyzing black quarterbacks over football acumen and mechanics, which are typically attributed to white quarterbacks. When a white QB scrambles well we hear words like, "he's mobile". When a black guy moves well outside the pocket, we here "he's athletic". Not that any of this is racist or people are willfully ignorant, I think we've sub-consciously absorbed a lot of "old thinking" when comparing certain positions.

Rant over. I hope you guys didn't take any of this the wrong way.

[12thMan]

*hear