College Football Week 8 Discussion

[Logan]

I don't know much about Locker, but Pryor can't run a pro-style offense.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

With the whole Locker debate, plus discussion about Terrelle Pryor, thought I'd throw this out.

QB A: 56.2% Completion Percentage 7.00 YPA 12/8 TD/INT 123.46 rating 207 rush yds

QB B: 55.4% Completion Percentage 7.65 YPA 12/9 TD/INT 131.45 rating 471 rush yds

Yet people are claiming Pryor (B) can't run a pro-style offense and touting Locker as a 1st round pick.

Neither one puts up numbers that would make me draft them in the first round. If you can't throw for better than 56.2% completion percentage in college, then you certainly aren't doing it in the pros. A college QB to me would have to throw for over 60% before I would consider them a 1st round pick and that's just looking at that attribute and not the whole package where I think Pryor is also lacking until proven otherwise.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

I disagree - you can look at how close their games have been against the teams they've played. I think we can all agree that a very good team should beat a very bad team handily. Obviously things can happen - Stanford over USC in 2007 for example - but there's a difference between Boise going undefeated and waxing just about all of their WAC opponents vs. Boise going undefeated and having multiple very close games against those teams.

FWIW, the only really close game they have had (besides Oregon) was against Tulsa, and that was a road game in the rain (Tulsa is not a terrible team either).

They have "waxed" the rest of their opponents by a combined score of 236-94. I think if they go undefeated a BCS game is not out of the question, but a title game is probably not deserved at this point.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

With the whole Locker debate, plus discussion about Terrelle Pryor, thought I'd throw this out.

QB A: 56.2% Completion Percentage 7.00 YPA 12/8 TD/INT 123.46 rating 207 rush yds

QB B: 55.4% Completion Percentage 7.65 YPA 12/9 TD/INT 131.45 rating 471 rush yds

Yet people are claiming Pryor (B) can't run a pro-style offense and touting Locker as a 1st round pick.

Well, for one thing Locker is running a pro-style offense this season and Pryor isn't, and for another thing Pryor has a lot more talent surrounding him than Locker does. Put Locker behind a decent offensive line where he has adequate time to throw and with WR's that don't drop so many passes and his numbers would look a lot better.

[Lathum]

Ohio state would be playing for the BCS title with Locker at QB.

[digamma]

Lathum,

Your post is tongue in cheek, right?

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by digamma

Lathum,

Your post is tongue in cheek, right?

Why should it be? Locker is a tremendous talent. Surround him with very good talent like Ohio State has, and don't you think their offense is quite a bit better with Locker at the helm than Pryor?

That's not to say that Pryor is less of a raw talent than Locker, but Locker is more polished than Pryor. Have them swap teams, and that would become crystal clear.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by Lathum

Ohio state would be playing for the BCS title with Locker at QB.

Or if they had a certain New York Giants runningback on their team.

[Karlifornia]

I don't think Ohio State would be playing for a BCS title game with Jake Locker. Is Locker better than Pryor? Yeah. Great teams can be still be great with a middling quarterback. Remember when they had Krenzel? He wasn't all that great.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by Karlifornia

I don't think Ohio State would be playing for a BCS title game with Jake Locker. Is Locker better than Pryor? Yeah. Great teams can be still be great with a middling quarterback. Remember when they had Krenzel? He wasn't all that great.

True, but if you put Krenzel on this team he would be better than Pryor as well. From what I have seen so far, Pryor does not have the mental/emotional aspect of the game down yet. He reminds me of JaMarcus Russell in that way.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Why should it be? Locker is a tremendous talent. Surround him with very good talent like Ohio State has, and don't you think their offense is quite a bit better with Locker at the helm than Pryor?

That's not to say that Pryor is less of a raw talent than Locker, but Locker is more polished than Pryor. Have them swap teams, and that would become crystal clear.

Less of a reflection on Locker (who I do have some feelings about) and more on tOSU. I think their offense has more problems than Pryor. However, you feel about Locker, he doesn't come in and fix a rushing game that had a whopping 66 yards against Purdue and 80 against USC.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by digamma

Less of a reflection on Locker (who I do have some feelings about) and more on tOSU. I think their offense has more problems than Pryor. However, you feel about Locker, he doesn't come in and fix a rushing game that had a whopping 66 yards against Purdue and 80 against USC.

I disagree. With a QB who could throw a consistent ball, the running game would open up because their opponents can't stack the line consistently.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

I disagree. With a QB who could throw a consistent ball, the running game would open up because their opponents can't stack the line consistently.

So could a quarterback you can put in the spread and let run on his own.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by digamma

So could a quarterback you can put in the spread and let run on his own.

Last time I checked, Ohio State doesn't run the spread.

[digamma]

That's part of my point.

[digamma]

I'll expand a bit. I think Ohio State has more issues than at quarterback, and part of them are schematic. Tressel shows an unwillingness to adjust to his personnel.

I don't think Locker would be a cure all for that.

Aside from that, I think Locker is a bit of a tease. I don't think he is as polished as Mel Kiper's hair, and I'm not sure he has a great feel for the game. Part of that may be that he's still coming back from his injury and getting his feet under him.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Well, for one thing Locker is running a pro-style offense this season and Pryor isn't, and for another thing Pryor has a lot more talent surrounding him than Locker does. Put Locker behind a decent offensive line where he has adequate time to throw and with WR's that don't drop so many passes and his numbers would look a lot better.

I think you're overestimating the talent at OSU. The line is average to bad, no RB has emerged as the go to guy and the WRs can't get separation.

As the young guys, Posey and Carter, play more at WR things are opening up a bit, but OSU didn't have much besides Wells last year and now they can't fall back on that.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I think you're overestimating the talent at OSU. The line is average to bad, no RB has emerged as the go to guy and the WRs can't get separation.

Hard to imagine that Ohio State's offensive line isn't better than Washington's. Maybe the skill talent is more equivalent - UW does have a good young RB and some talented young WR's.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by digamma

Aside from that, I think Locker is a bit of a tease. I don't think he is as polished as Mel Kiper's hair, and I'm not sure he has a great feel for the game. Part of that may be that he's still coming back from his injury and getting his feet under him.

He's probably getting over-hyped at this point. No question he has tremendous physical tools and a great attitude. But this is the first time in his career he's been in a passing oriented offense rather than a spread option or the wing-T he ran in H.S. He still has a ways to go in terms of his decision-making, and his weak offensive line has resulted in his throwing mechanics slipping (too much throwing off his back foot in recent games).

He's made great strides this season under the guidance of Sarkisian and Nussmeier, but he's got a lot of room for improvement too. His NFL career would be brighter if he returned for his Senior year at the UW, but the money will likely compel him to declare for the draft.

[digamma]

dawgfan, I think that's probably a fair assessment.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by digamma

I'll expand a bit. I think Ohio State has more issues than at quarterback, and part of them are schematic. Tressel shows an unwillingness to adjust to his personnel.

I don't think Locker would be a cure all for that.

Aside from that, I think Locker is a bit of a tease. I don't think he is as polished as Mel Kiper's hair, and I'm not sure he has a great feel for the game. Part of that may be that he's still coming back from his injury and getting his feet under him.

See now you are just talking crazy. Nobody has hair as polished as Mel Kiper. Except for maybe Jimmie Johnson.

[cartman]

I'm still waiting for Ron Powlus to claim his multiple Heismans.

[RomaGoth]

Originally Posted by cartman

I'm still waiting for Ron Powlus to claim his multiple Heismans.

Wasn't he the next Joe Montana or something?

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Hard to imagine that Ohio State's offensive line isn't better than Washington's. Maybe the skill talent is more equivalent - UW does have a good young RB and some talented young WR's.

I can't really compare as I've only seen Washington against USC where they looked decent.

I know at one point this season OSU had three or four freshman on the two deep for the offensive line. The starters aren't great and there's no depth behind them.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

I can't really compare as I've only seen Washington against USC where they looked decent.

I know at one point this season OSU had three or four freshman on the two deep for the offensive line. The starters aren't great and there's no depth behind them.

Among the starters this year for the UW have been a career walk-on, a true Sophomore who was switched from DT in the Spring and a RS-Sophomore who was switched from DT three weeks ago.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

True, but if you put Krenzel on this team he would be better than Pryor as well. From what I have seen so far, Pryor does not have the mental/emotional aspect of the game down yet. He reminds me of JaMarcus Russell in that way.

JaMarcus Russell completed like 70% of his passes and won a national championship. The best comparison might be Vince Young, a similar package who took a season and a half to come into his own, but at least there Texas was playing to his strengths on offense.

Originally Posted by dawgfan

He's probably getting over-hyped at this point. No question he has tremendous physical tools and a great attitude. But this is the first time in his career he's been in a passing oriented offense rather than a spread option or the wing-T he ran in H.S. He still has a ways to go in terms of his decision-making, and his weak offensive line has resulted in his throwing mechanics slipping (too much throwing off his back foot in recent games).

He's made great strides this season under the guidance of Sarkisian and Nussmeier, but he's got a lot of room for improvement too. His NFL career would be brighter if he returned for his Senior year at the UW, but the money will likely compel him to declare for the draft.

I think this is pretty much where I am except for the last line. "The money compelling him" implies he'll be a guaranteed 1st round pick and I don't see it at this point. No matter how much the NFL changes the salary structure it will still be better to be a top 5 pick in 2011 than a 2nd/3rd round pick in 2010, which I think Locker could do.

As for Lathum, at least he consistently overhypes his teams QB's.

Originally Posted by RomaGoth

Wasn't he the next Joe Montana or something?

Powlus broke every ND passing record with 1 decent receiver (Derrick Mayes) and a running offense. Don't blame him for Beano Cook being an old idiot (and that was 15 years ago - is Beano still on ESPNEWS occasionally rambling incoherently?)

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

"The money compelling him" implies he'll be a guaranteed 1st round pick and I don't see it at this point. No matter how much the NFL changes the salary structure it will still be better to be a top 5 pick in 2011 than a 2nd/3rd round pick in 2010, which I think Locker could do.

As for Lathum, at least he consistently overhypes his teams QB's. Powlus broke every ND passing record with 1 decent receiver (Derrick Mayes) and a running offense. Don't blame him for Beano Cook being an old idiot (and that was 15 years ago - is Beano still on ESPNEWS occasionally rambling incoherently?)

Almost every scouting report lists Locker as a lock for the 1st round and a likely top 10 pick. Of course, things could change between now and the draft but it isn't just Lathum who is hyping up Locker

Scouts grades him out at a 96 and thinks he is potentially the 4th best player in the draft and the top QB. Here is another recent analysis that is available publicly:

10/20/2009 - It's been a big year for Jake Locker, both on the field and in the NFL prospect rankings. And as the final stretch of his junior season begins, one has to ask the question that is in the back of minds everywhere. Will Locker be back? The consensus agreement seems to be that Locker would be the number one or number two quarterback taken in the 2010 NFL draft. Even if Locker dropped to number three or four on that list, he'd likely be looking at first-round money. Locker, for his part, is playing the role of a guy more concerned with this season than where he suits up next season. "It's not something I'm thinking about right now," Locker said of his professional prospects. But the case of Sam Bradford has to be somewhere in Locker's mind. The Oklahoma quarterback was projected as the number one overall pick in last year's draft, but decided to return to the Sooners for his senior season. Bradford just re-injured his throwing shoulder and Oklahoma has plummeted in the rankings seemingly along with Bradford's chances at being the number-one overall pick. Of course, Locker has options. Locker is not in dire need of money like some players who make the leap early and he also has a contract with the Los Angeles Angels as a nice little back-up plan. Locker also has the prospect of returning to a team that will lose very few key players and will feayure several potential stars with a year of experience under their belts. Locker has never played on a winning UW team and may want to before his career is over. There is likely to be no response from Locker on whether or not he will be back next year, but the questions will keep coming until he decides one way or another. - Mike Baldwin, Seattle Post Intelligencer

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by BishopMVP

I think this is pretty much where I am except for the last line. "The money compelling him" implies he'll be a guaranteed 1st round pick and I don't see it at this point. No matter how much the NFL changes the salary structure it will still be better to be a top 5 pick in 2011 than a 2nd/3rd round pick in 2010, which I think Locker could do.

Well, I was assuming the talk of him being a potential 1st rounder and possibly the top QB picked continues through the end of the season. If that turns out to be an accurate read of his potential draft status, he very likely enters the draft. If he's hearing more doubt about his status as a 1st rounder, then yes - he should return to the UW and try to play himself into a possible top-5 pick the following year.

[Balldog]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Hard to imagine that Ohio State's offensive line isn't better than Washington's. Maybe the skill talent is more equivalent - UW does have a good young RB and some talented young WR's.

Herbstreit said the other day over the last ten years in college no offensive line in America has underachieved as much as this bunch. (referring to Ohio State o-line). They are very young, with exception of Cordle and Browning, even then those two are playing different positions than they were a year ago.

[Butter]

Are we seriously arguing who has the WORSE offensive line, Washington or Ohio State?

How about we just agree that they both suck. Ohio State hasn't been able to run the ball except with a back named "Wells" in 7 years.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

Almost every scouting report lists Locker as a lock for the 1st round and a likely top 10 pick. Of course, things could change between now and the draft but it isn't just Lathum who is hyping up Locker

Scouts grades him out at a 96 and thinks he is potentially the 4th best player in the draft and the top QB.

I disagree with these reports being an accurate indicator of where NFL teams project him. It's like when Jevan Snead was getting the hype all off season because people were getting sucked in by measurables and weren't actually watching him play. While Locker is a fantastic prospect, he's a bigger project than Snead and I guarantee he won't be going top 5 in the draft. (Well, I would if the Raiders had traded their 2010 1st round pick.) You can always find a scout to say he's the #1 QB prospect, but GM's will hesitate to pull the trigger and lock their franchise's near-term future (and their job) into a QB with 55% completion percentage his best year in college.

[dawgfan]

Originally Posted by Balldog

Herbstreit said the other day over the last ten years in college no offensive line in America has underachieved as much as this bunch. (referring to Ohio State o-line). They are very young, with exception of Cordle and Browning, even then those two are playing different positions than they were a year ago.

Underachieving but talented players > not talented, not overachieving players

[Swaggs]

WVU looks terrible tonight. They just don't have the depth on defense to play well with their injury troubles and USF's defense is flat-out outphysicalling them.

[Balldog]

Originally Posted by dawgfan

Underachieving but talented players > not talented, not overachieving players

Problem is I do not know if they are all that talented, nor have they been for the last 5 years or so. Outside of Nick Mangold I can't think of the last time we've had a good offensive linemen.

The line has been getting dominated for the better part of 3 seasons now, as some point you have to question this so called "talent".

[DeToxRox]

Originally Posted by Balldog

Problem is I do not know if they are all that talented, nor have they been for the last 5 years or so. Outside of Nick Mangold I can't think of the last time we've had a good offensive linemen.

The line has been getting dominated for the better part of 3 seasons now, as some point you have to question this so called "talent".

Sounds like safeties at Michigan. Countless 4* and 5* guys who have not panned out at all. It's just amazing to see how bad it's gotten.