How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?

rvd420 · 03-19-2007, 05:42 PM

i agree.i didnt say smith was great i just said he wasnt THAT bad last year.

GTripp0012 · 03-19-2007, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rvd420

i agree.i didnt say smith was great i just said he wasnt THAT bad last year.

I guess, yeah.

He may have been the weakest of the starting 32 QBs again last year, but he at least showed the potential to be a starter.

And he played some really strong games down the stretch.

rvd420 · 03-19-2007, 05:49 PM

exactly.thats all i was sayin.

GTripp0012 · 03-19-2007, 05:51 PM

I forgot about Walter, Gradkowski, and Frye. Smith outpassed these guys.

He also outpassed Vick, who probably has more total value due to his legs.

rvd420 · 03-19-2007, 05:55 PM

vick sucks and is overrated.hes also a ball hog.thats why the falcons recievers could catch passes last season,no chemestry between them and vick.vick wanted to run the ball all the time.granted he did give it to warrick dunn,but thats probably cause he knew dunn would whoop his ass if he didnt.

FRPLG · 03-20-2007, 12:29 AM

No I agree but it is easy to take potshots at Oakland right now. Their overall ineptitude over the last several decades is what weighs my mind mostly. A few fleeting moments of success sandwhiched by total mediocrity. Plus Davis is just clearly out of it. I can't say who their last good draftee was.

GTripp0012 · 03-20-2007, 12:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRPLG

No I agree but it is easy to take potshots at Oakland right now. Their overall ineptitude over the last several decades is what weighs my mind mostly. A few fleeting moments of success sandwhiched by total mediocrity. Plus Davis is just clearly out of it. I can't say who their last good draftee was.

I agree. They have a weak scouting department. Both Pro and College.

To their credit they have built one of the league's strongest secondaries through the draft. Nnamdi Asomugha is the best CB in the league that no one talks about. He will take your No. 1 receiving option completely out of the game.

But honestly, this would be some sort of impressive streak of ineptitude if they hadn't happened to trip and fall on Rich Gannon. Jerry Rice would have become completely irrelivant.

*Shudder*

FRPLG · 03-20-2007, 12:40 AM

Gannon has to be one of the oddest players in recent memory. Here's a guy who was at best a journeyman. I mean a guy you can't even compare to say Tim Ratay who just suddnely become a pretty darn good QB. I mean if he puts together 4 more seasons like he did toward the end we're talking about a potential HOFer. Out of total nothingness comes greatness. Weird.

GTripp0012 · 03-20-2007, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FRPLG

Gannon has to be one of the oddest players in recent memory. Here's a guy who was at best a journeyman. I mean a guy you can't even compare to say Tim Ratay who just suddnely become a pretty darn good QB. I mean if he puts together 4 more seasons like he did toward the end we're talking about a potential HOFer. Out of total nothingness comes greatness. Weird.

That would have been a real dead era for QBs if it wasn't for him. I mean you had the retirement of Marino, Elway, and Young, and Favre went into a relative lull in his career for a few years. It would still be 3-4 years until McNair, Pennington, and Manning would emerge, and Brady's skills would actually develop to match the rep he had been handed. Kerry Collins was consistently among the league's top QBs!

It's got nothing to do with Russell or Quinn whatsoever, but since we are talking Raiders for some crazy reason, I thought I'd point this out.

Had Gannon not got hurt in 2004, Football Outsiders estimates that the Raiders offense would have put up 71! more points than they did with the exact same roster and Kerry Collins at QB. This is as much due to Collins ineptitude as it is to Gannon's greatness though.

In effect, if this is to be believed, that means Norv Turner was an injury away from taking the Raiders to the playoffs in his first season there.

Crazy.

That Guy · 03-20-2007, 09:55 AM

btw, daunte went from pro-bowler/possible MVP in minnesota to total joke in miami (possibly all due to injury), garcia went from good in SF, to terrible in cleveland AND detriot, to good in philly. plummer went to denver and had a couple good years. brunell, hasslebeck, and favre were all traded from their original franchises before they got to start and ended up doing pretty well.

archie manning was a good QB that could have been better if on a different team.

but the real reason you don't see a lot for average QBs turn into studs 6 years in after switching teams is cause at that point they've either had a stable environment to learn and work in over a good number of years, or they're considered a backup and brought in to learn a totally new system that they may or may not be used to with new players, possibly an entrenched starter, etc. It's just a hard transition. I mean, peyton's only known ONE system. same for brady, and mcnabb, and... that's gotta be part of it.

I mean, the teams that keep churning through 1st round busts are the same ones that keep changing coaches, systems, and players for the most part. detroit, oakland, cleveland, etc. of course, that doesn't mean all those QB picks were good ideas in the first place (who EVER thought boller would be any good? continuity DID help him, but only marginally).

I do agree that, at least for most QBs, they tend to how you what they got within a few years, unless they're backing up favre or named mark rypien.

EARTHQUAKE2689 · 04-15-2007, 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by That Guy

btw, daunte went from pro-bowler/possible MVP in minnesota to total joke in miami (possibly all due to injury), garcia went from good in SF, to terrible in cleveland AND detriot, to good in philly. plummer went to denver and had a couple good years. brunell, hasslebeck, and favre were all traded from their original franchises before they got to start and ended up doing pretty well.

archie manning was a good QB that could have been better if on a different team.

but the real reason you don't see a lot for average QBs turn into studs 6 years in after switching teams is cause at that point they've either had a stable environment to learn and work in over a good number of years, or they're considered a backup and brought in to learn a totally new system that they may or may not be used to with new players, possibly an entrenched starter, etc. It's just a hard transition. I mean, peyton's only known ONE system. same for brady, and mcnabb, and... that's gotta be part of it.

I mean, the teams that keep churning through 1st round busts are the same ones that keep changing coaches, systems, and players for the most part. detroit, oakland, cleveland, etc. of course, that doesn't mean all those QB picks were good ideas in the first place (who EVER thought boller would be any good? continuity DID help him, but only marginally).

I do agree that, at least for most QBs, they tend to how you what they got within a few years, unless they're backing up favre or named mark rypien.

man where have you been

GTripp0012 · 04-13-2007, 07:46 PM

This is a really well written article from David Fleming that investigates a few of the flaws in the way QBs are scouted today.

ESPN.com - NFL/DRAFT07 - Magazine: The edge of reason

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Fleming

And Russell? He started just 29 games. Yet by leaving school early, Russell -- whose start numbers are comparable to those of Rex Grossman (31), Joey Harrington (28), Jim Druckenmiller (24) and Akili Smith (19) -- has kept the scouts from piling up the dossier needed to overanalyze him. He also benefits from a backlash against the old-time NFL evaluators who bad-mouthed Young last year, only to watch him become an NFL phenom. Those scouts are far less inclined to rip Russell, leaving a power vacuum in most war rooms this spring that favors the "potential" believers over the "pedigree" crowd.

It's a good read.

skinsfan_nn · 04-14-2007, 11:20 PM

Who knows, he hasen't played at this level yet?

redskins159 · 04-17-2007, 01:32 PM

Picking a QB with the 1st pick is like playing russian roulette. I wouldnt pick him.

skinsfan69 · 04-17-2007, 05:41 PM

If you look at all the QB's drafted in the first round the last 20 years I bet less than 50% turned out to be good NFL qb's. A guy with Russell's passing ability comes along once every 10 years or so. Guys with Quinn's ability come along every year.

But if Russell goes to Oak. he doesn't have a chance for a few years. But Quinn could go to Det. and play well right away.

03-19-2007, 05:42 PM	#1
rvd420 Special Teams Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 227	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? i agree.i didnt say smith was great i just said he wasnt THAT bad last year.

03-19-2007, 05:49 PM	#3
rvd420 Special Teams Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 227	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? exactly.thats all i was sayin.

03-19-2007, 05:51 PM	#4
GTripp0012 Living Legend Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Evanston, IL Age: 38 Posts: 15,994	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? I forgot about Walter, Gradkowski, and Frye. Smith outpassed these guys. He also outpassed Vick, who probably has more total value due to his legs. __________________ according to a source with knowledge of the situation.

03-19-2007, 05:55 PM	#5
rvd420 Special Teams Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 227	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? vick sucks and is overrated.hes also a ball hog.thats why the falcons recievers could catch passes last season,no chemestry between them and vick.vick wanted to run the ball all the time.granted he did give it to warrick dunn,but thats probably cause he knew dunn would whoop his ass if he didnt.

03-20-2007, 12:29 AM	#6
FRPLG MVP Join Date: May 2004 Age: 47 Posts: 10,164	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? No I agree but it is easy to take potshots at Oakland right now. Their overall ineptitude over the last several decades is what weighs my mind mostly. A few fleeting moments of success sandwhiched by total mediocrity. Plus Davis is just clearly out of it. I can't say who their last good draftee was.

03-20-2007, 12:40 AM	#8
FRPLG MVP Join Date: May 2004 Age: 47 Posts: 10,164	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? Gannon has to be one of the oddest players in recent memory. Here's a guy who was at best a journeyman. I mean a guy you can't even compare to say Tim Ratay who just suddnely become a pretty darn good QB. I mean if he puts together 4 more seasons like he did toward the end we're talking about a potential HOFer. Out of total nothingness comes greatness. Weird.

03-20-2007, 09:55 AM	#10
That Guy Living Legend Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: VA Age: 43 Posts: 17,620	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? btw, daunte went from pro-bowler/possible MVP in minnesota to total joke in miami (possibly all due to injury), garcia went from good in SF, to terrible in cleveland AND detriot, to good in philly. plummer went to denver and had a couple good years. brunell, hasslebeck, and favre were all traded from their original franchises before they got to start and ended up doing pretty well. archie manning was a good QB that could have been better if on a different team. but the real reason you don't see a lot for average QBs turn into studs 6 years in after switching teams is cause at that point they've either had a stable environment to learn and work in over a good number of years, or they're considered a backup and brought in to learn a totally new system that they may or may not be used to with new players, possibly an entrenched starter, etc. It's just a hard transition. I mean, peyton's only known ONE system. same for brady, and mcnabb, and... that's gotta be part of it. I mean, the teams that keep churning through 1st round busts are the same ones that keep changing coaches, systems, and players for the most part. detroit, oakland, cleveland, etc. of course, that doesn't mean all those QB picks were good ideas in the first place (who EVER thought boller would be any good? continuity DID help him, but only marginally). I do agree that, at least for most QBs, they tend to how you what they got within a few years, unless they're backing up favre or named mark rypien.

04-14-2007, 11:20 PM	#13
skinsfan_nn Playmaker Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Newport News,Virginia Age: 61 Posts: 4,495	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? Who knows, he hasen't played at this level yet? __________________ "There's no greater feeling than moving a man from Point A to Point B, against his will." #68 THANKS COACH GIBBS FOR EVERYTHING! YOUR THE MAN AND ALWAYS WILL BE!

04-17-2007, 01:32 PM	#14
redskins159 Camp Scrub Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Rockton Il. Posts: 36	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? Picking a QB with the 1st pick is like playing russian roulette. I wouldnt pick him.

04-17-2007, 05:41 PM	#15
skinsfan69 Living Legend Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Arlington, VA Posts: 17,591	Re: How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level? If you look at all the QB's drafted in the first round the last 20 years I bet less than 50% turned out to be good NFL qb's. A guy with Russell's passing ability comes along once every 10 years or so. Guys with Quinn's ability come along every year. But if Russell goes to Oak. he doesn't have a chance for a few years. But Quinn could go to Det. and play well right away.

How good will JaMarcus Russell be at the Pro Level?

Locker Room Main Forum