Chris Simms QB Rankings

[Murdock2420]

(03-06-2021, 05:13 PM)CoachGeorge Wrote: I absolutely hate takes like this.  This is a lazy, lazy view. Justin Herbert has nothing in common with Harrington or Marriot. Joe Burrow has nothing to do with all the failed QB’s since Bert Jones at LSU.  Mac Jones is several levels above A.J. McCarron.  He will be a fine starting QB in the NFL.

Based on?

He had 1 year of success, in a weird Covid like environment that makes it really difficult to evaluate anything, and all the while he was surrounded by the most talented team from top to bottom in college footballl.


Najee Harris averaged nearly 6 yards a carry.

Devonta Smith was uncoverable.

Jaylen Waddle - yes he missed some games due to injury but what other college QB can you think of that had the luxury of two 1st round picks at WR to toss to? Burrow had 2 guys like that that were spread across two drafts, not two guys who may both be top 10 picks in the same draft.

 John Metchie III - All he did was fill in for Smith and end up with over 900 yards....

There is what, 3 or 4 Alabama linemen expected to be taken in the top 3 rounds of the draft?

Meanwhile... Jones shows up for one season, he has one actual season of QB play and people think he is worth a first rounder??

Burrow atleast had two full seasons of play, but Jones with one season is worthy of a 1st? That is the take you should actually hate.

He has a better chance of being McCarron then being successful.

1 season, with perfect protection, and weapon after weapon that was wide open and this makes a good NFL QB??

I hope the steelers believe the hype and draft him. Be nice to see them struggle at QB for awhile.

If he was really so amazing and impressive, he would have unseated Tua who has shown that he isn't exactly all he was supposed to be at the NFL level.

[Murdock2420]

(03-06-2021, 05:13 PM)CoachGeorge Wrote: I absolutely hate takes like this.  This is a lazy, lazy view. Justin Herbert has nothing in common with Harrington or Marriot. Joe Burrow has nothing to do with all the failed QB’s since Bert Jones at LSU.  Mac Jones is several levels above A.J. McCarron.  He will be a fine starting QB in the NFL.

Also, here is a not lazy view for those of you that can't take the time to look past flashy numbers in college.

Look at the top QBs in the NFL and you'll notice an amazing trend.

Rodgers - Cal
Brady - Michigan
Mahomes - Texas Tech
Josh Allen - Wyoming
Russell Wilson - Wisconsin
Lamar Jackson - Louisville

Then some of the top guys that are aging like
Matt Ryan - Boston College
Piggy - Miami of Ohio
Brees - Purdue
Rivers - NC State

Outside of Deshaun Watson (who hasn't won anything of substance but has the stats) all the big time talents at QB, are from non-powerhouse schools. Sure, people may argue Michigan, but really when was the last time Michigan won anything? Brady did manage to win the Orange bowl his senior year, but still wasn't a loaded team nor were they a National Championship team. They actually finished 5th in rankings that year and only had 6 players drafted.. not a loaded team at all.

Guys who succeed the most in the NFL, are used to fighting against tough competition with less around them. That mental toughness, that ability to create and make guys around you better than they actually are, that is what makes a guy a great NFL QB. A guy going off when he is surrounded by talent isn't real life in the NFL.

[KillerGoose]

(03-06-2021, 06:16 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: Also, here is a not lazy view for those of you that can't take the time to look past flashy numbers in college.

Look at the top QBs in the NFL and you'll notice an amazing trend.

Rodgers - Cal
Brady - Michigan
Mahomes - Texas Tech
Josh Allen - Wyoming
Russell Wilson - Wisconsin
Lamar Jackson - Louisville

Then some of the top guys that are aging like
Matt Ryan - Boston College
Piggy - Miami of Ohio
Brees - Purdue
Rivers - NC State

Outside of Deshaun Watson (who hasn't won anything of substance but has the stats) all the big time talents at QB, are from non-powerhouse schools. Sure, people may argue Michigan, but really when was the last time Michigan won anything? Brady did manage to win the Orange bowl his senior year, but still wasn't a loaded team nor were they a National Championship team. They actually finished 5th in rankings that year and only had 6 players drafted.. not a loaded team at all.

Guys who succeed the most in the NFL, are used to fighting against tough competition with less around them. That mental toughness, that ability to create and make guys around you better than they actually are, that is what makes a guy a great NFL QB. A guy going off when he is surrounded by talent isn't real life in the NFL.

The school of choice has very little indication of whether or not a QB is going to be successful in the NFL. What matters is the coaching they have. A point like this has more validity to it when coaching staffs have more or less remained consistent for years, which isn’t common. For instance Sarkisian coached Tua and Mac. That’s it. The jury is out on Tua, he could bust. The jury is out on Mac, he hasn’t taken a snap yet. The lazy part of the take is saying “Well, Alabama hasn’t had a successful QB recently, so Mac won’t be any good”. It doesn’t do anything to look at the player himself.

A decent argument is the amount of talent they are surrounded by and how that influences their play, which is a point you bring up. That’s a reason I didn’t like Haskins. The talent he had around him and the offense he was quarterbacking didn’t make me optimistic about his future. That argument could be made for Mac, I haven’t watched much tape on him.

Point being, schools are a lazy way to dismiss (or hype) a player. You’re right, until you aren’t. That’s why evaluations need to happen.

[CoachGeorge]

(03-06-2021, 05:55 PM)Murdock2420 Wrote: Based on?

The things that make a good quarterback a good quarterback. Outstanding footwork, outstanding mechanics, he can make all the throws required of a NFL QB (he can hit Waddle on a post route and drop one in a covered RB with touch), superb accuracy and the ability to make incredibly quick decisions (very Burrow-like).

And yes, this was a COVID year, which meant he didn’t have 4 games against directional schools to pad his stats. It was all-SEC competition. And yes, he had a great line but that line to a man all excel at run blocking more so than pass blocking. He took a lot of hits.

McCarron was a 5th round pick (9th QB taken) in a bad QB class. I seriously doubt he gets to Pitt at 24.

He is not a development pick- he is NFL ready.

[Bengalstripes9]

Can't argue with his track record.

Jordan Love over Tua is the only one that is kinda surprising. Hard to judge that as Love hasn't played.

This definitely bodes well for 2 QBs being picked before 5. I'm still doubtful we have a shot at Sewell; I guess we'll see. I tend to believe the best players get picked first, and Sewell is definitely a top 4 player. I would argue Chase is too.

[Murdock2420]

(03-06-2021, 08:00 PM)KillerGoose Wrote: A decent argument is the amount of talent they are surrounded by and how that influences their play, which is a point you bring up. That’s a reason I didn’t like Haskins. The talent he had around him and the offense he was quarterbacking didn’t make me optimistic about his future. That argument could be made for Mac, I haven’t watched much tape on him.

The amount of talent around them was why I mentioned the schools. A guy playing for Purdue has less talent around him then a guy playing for Ohio State. And then has to play against those loaded teams in his Conference. The guy who competes with the lesser amount of talent and can elevate the play of those guys has the "it" factor that is needed in the NFL. So many QBs have talent coming out of college but to succeed in the NFL is more then physical tools, there has to be that other level of mentality to succeed. 

[KillerGoose]

(03-07-2021, 03:43 AM)Murdock2420 Wrote: The amount of talent around them was why I mentioned the schools. A guy playing for Purdue has less talent around him then a guy playing for Ohio State. And then has to play against those loaded teams in his Conference. The guy who competes with the lesser amount of talent and can elevate the play of those guys has the "it" factor that is needed in the NFL. So many QBs have talent coming out of college but to succeed in the NFL is more then physical tools, there has to be that other level of mentality to succeed. 

And that is a fair argument, but some of those guys listed don't fit the bill. The obvious one is Brady. Michigan was a really good program. They won a National Title in 1997 (co-championship, so you can argue that if you want but they went 12-0, winning the Rose Bowl). They finished in the Top 25 every single season in the 90s, including five Top-10 finishes. Also, Brady went in the 6th round for a reason. He is an anomaly and shouldn't be used as an example for much of anything. Going from a guy who was fighting to make a roster spot to the unchallenged GOAT of football is an outlier.

Wisconsin is also a really good program. They currently have a streak of 19 straight seasons making a bowl game. Of those 19 seasons, 10 of those seasons ended with double digit wins. There are four Top 10 finishes in there, including the season that Wilson was there. Honestly, that Wisconsin roster was stacked, too. They had Russ at QB, their RB group was Melvin Gordon, James White, Montee Ball. The offensive line was Travis Frederick, Kevin Zeitler, Rob Havenstein, Peter Konz. They had Nick Toon and Abbrederis at WR. On that roster, there were six guys who would get drafted in the first two rounds of the NFL draft, and a total of 14 guys who played in the NFL. 

Patrick Mahomes is a great example, possibly the best, of the point I am making. Tech has been seen as system school for years now. The idea was that you should never draft a Tech QB, because they won't be successful. It doesn't matter how many yards they throw for, it doesn't mean anything. Then, Mahomes breaks that trend. Now, this doesn't mean that there should be a run on Tech QBs, nor does any of this mean you should look at Purdue QBs, or Cal QBs. It means that the school does not matter. What does matter, is the coaching, to a certain extent. Scouting the players ability is what will tell you the tale, and dismissing a player because of their school never producing successful QBs is lazy.

Oklahoma had never produced a successful QB, until they did (Mayfield and Murray. I think Bradford would have been great if he could stay healthy).

LSU had never produced a successful QB, and still haven't. (Jury is still out on Burrow, but he looked great. Fingers crossed here.)

USC had never produced a successful QB until our boy Palmer was drafted. He is still the best USC QB, NFL-wise. 

Tennessee had never produced a successful QB until Manning. 

Auburn had never produced a successful QB, until Newton. 

Clemson had never produced a successful QB, until Watson.

All of this to say, you still bring up a point of consideration when it comes to talent on the teams. It is why some people are high on Zach, but for every Zach Wilson/Drew Brees, there are hundreds on no-name-Nelsons. 

[Essex Johnson]

Can't buy Lawrence 2nd.. he is probably the most pro ready QB in past decade