I get a Cutlerian vibe from this guy. Seems to be built like a franchise QB. Powerful arm, some beautiful passes, perfect bodytype. But he is lacking an "it" factor, is he not? He's not a world-beating, overcome-the-odds, particularly spiriting QB. Looks like he could have an okay career in the NFL in which he wins nothing of consequence.
Well if there was one Andy Reid QB in this entire draft, it's Trubisky, isn't it? Super accurate, doesn't take too many risks with the ball, is very mentally tough and very athletic. He's a slam dunk for the Chiefs to trade up for, if he lasts to the 20s, but in a QB-starved NFL with at least 6 new head coaches looking for their QB, there's no chance he lasts to us. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Coogs:
I posted this in Walter's Mock Draft thread, but am going to put it here too.
I'd actually be pretty happy with Watson. It was pretty interesting to hear Gruden go through Watson's interceptions with him on Gruden's football camp. Showed him, and told him, how he could have easily cleaned up 6 or 7 of them. It was really interesting. If you don't want to watch it, communication between Watson and his O-line and Watson and his receivers was the key to most of the interceptions.
In fact, Gruden said once Watson and his professional teammates could communicate on the same page (getting the play and the audible play called and remembering it), he has all the tools to make be successful. BTW, Watson majored in communication in college. Completed his degree in 3 years.
Watson is my #1 choice at this point.
My gut feeling is that Watson is Andy Reid's number 1 choice at the QB position as well.
Smart,mobile,tough and more of a short/middle range thrower.
Maybe Andy Reid is just adapting to his current QB or maybe Reid is changing with age. I get the feeling that Andy just doesn't want more hassles in his life. He wants a more conservative type QB now.
If the Chiefs could pick any QB in the draft, I think it would be Watson.
More gut feelings on my part, but I think that Watson is the only guy that would get the Chiefs to pick a QB in the 1st round this year. [Reply]
But For Trubisky, Mahomes, Kizer and even Webb, the first skills you list will have something to do with him actually throwing a football.
Watson, OTOH, you'd rave about intangibles and athleticism and accomplishments in college. He has a backwards skill-set.
Not a guy that I'd want to use a 1st on.
In the NFL, it seems to me that intangibles actually turn out to be THE key attribute.
Of course, you need a certain level of physical skills but the mental aspect is what is most important in the long run. Work ethic,football IQ,Mental toughness,Ability to process quickly etc
look around at all the studs at QB who fail [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Laz:
In the NFL, it seems to me that intangibles actually turn out to be THE key attribute.
Of course, you need a certain level of physical skills but the mental aspect is what is most important in the long run. Work ethic,football IQ,Mental toughness,Ability to process quickly etc
look around at all the studs at QB who fail
They can't be the first thing people talk about.
That gets you Chad Pennington after his shoulder injury. Shit, that gets you Alex Smith.
There are 1,000 Ken Dorsey's out there and for some reason people want to talk about the big-armed passers as though THOSE are the guys that fail all the time. No - those are the guys we expected to succeed that didn't. The noodle-armed 'intangibles' guys just vanished into nothingness and nobody noticed because nobody ever expected them to accomplish anything at this level.
For every Kyle Boller there's a Charlie Ward. just because we remember the 'sexier' prospects better when they fail doesn't mean they weren't better prospects to begin with. In fact, it's the opposite - we remember them because we didn't expect them to suck. But when some weak-armed 'winner' in college goes nowhere in the pros, nobody remembers and nobody cares because we knew that guy was a bad prospect anyway. [Reply]
I put the failing more on the plate of the team vs. the rookie QB. Say for instance....if the Browns decided they want Mahomes at 12 and end up starting him 6 games into the season and he fails horribly. That's on the Browns but you'll hear people scream about how Mahomes was a horrible QB and anyone who wanted the Chiefs to draft him was an idiot. They'll neglect to mention that everyone here wanted to draft Mahomes and then sit him for a year. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
They can't be the first thing people talk about.
That gets you Chad Pennington after his shoulder injury. Shit, that gets you Alex Smith.
There are 1,000 Ken Dorsey's out there and for some reason people want to talk about the big-armed passers as though THOSE are the guys that fail all the time. No - those are the guys we expected to succeed that didn't. The noodle-armed 'intangibles' guys just vanished into nothingness and nobody noticed because nobody ever expected them to accomplish anything at this level.
For every Kyle Boller there's a Charlie Ward. just because we remember the 'sexier' prospects better when they fail doesn't mean they weren't better prospects to begin with. In fact, it's the opposite - we remember them because we didn't expect them to suck. But when some weak-armed 'winner' in college goes nowhere in the pros, nobody remembers and nobody cares because we knew that guy was a bad prospect anyway.
The first thing that people talk about is arm talent, but you look at the list of the greatest QBs all time, and only one or two of them had/have strong arms.
Tom Brady isn't winning because of his strong arm, he's winning because of intangibles.
Same could be said of Montana and Manning. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
They can't be the first thing people talk about.
That gets you Chad Pennington after his shoulder injury. Shit, that gets you Alex Smith.
There are 1,000 Ken Dorsey's out there and for some reason people want to talk about the big-armed passers as though THOSE are the guys that fail all the time. No - those are the guys we expected to succeed that didn't. The noodle-armed 'intangibles' guys just vanished into nothingness and nobody noticed because nobody ever expected them to accomplish anything at this level.
For every Kyle Boller there's a Charlie Ward. just because we remember the 'sexier' prospects better when they fail doesn't mean they weren't better prospects to begin with. In fact, it's the opposite - we remember them because we didn't expect them to suck. But when some weak-armed 'winner' in college goes nowhere in the pros, nobody remembers and nobody cares because we knew that guy was a bad prospect anyway.
What? Smith is another example of physical tools not being enough.
His arm strength and other physical tools are what got him drafted with the 1st overall pick in 2005. His physical tools are all quite good.
Smith's problems aren't physical, they are mental. Mike Singletary and the 49ers organization destroyed him. They ripped out his spine and cut off his nuts.
Smith is just foot-shuffling porter now, trying to do whatever he can to avoid mistakes so that his head coach doesn't get mad at him. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mr. Laz:
What? Smith is another example of physical tools not being enough.
His arm strength and other physical tools are what got him drafted with the 1st overall pick in 2005. His physical tools are all quite good.
Smith's problems aren't physical, they are mental. Mike Singletary and the 49ers organization destroyed him. They ripped out his spine and cut off his nuts.
Smith is just foot-shuffling porter now, trying to do whatever he can to avoid mistakes so that his head coach doesn't get mad at him.
His physical tools aren't anywhere near what they were when he got drafted because of his shoulder injuries. He's now at a point where they're exactly adequate and his processing has to be immaculate to succeed.
So we get to the old Greg Maddux stuff where people call everyone that throw 90s with good command Greg Maddux while forgetting that his mental skills were simply preturnatural and anybody that's merely 'good' between the ears with the same physical tools ended up as a mopup man.
If you draft DeShaun Watson with the belief that he's going to be Joe Montana between the ears, you're setting yourself up to fail because expecting that kind of acuity is leaving zero margin for error. Most folks with Joe Montana's physical tools simply ended up backups for a few years and disappeared. [Reply]
Originally Posted by milkman:
The first thing that people talk about is arm talent, but you look at the list of the greatest QBs all time, and only one or two of them had/have strong arms.
Tom Brady isn't winning because of his strong arm, he's winning because of intangibles.
Same could be said of Montana and Manning.
I didn't say arm strength. I said how they throw the football. That could be precision accuracy, it could be touch. It could be a slew of things that aren't simply throwing the ball hard.
Take away Tom Brady's ability to put it where he aims it every time and all you get is Matt Moore. Take that away from Manning and you get Drew Bledsoe. Take it away from Brees and you get Chase Daniel.
I would never argue that being a successful QB is just about arm strength. I wouldn't even say that 'arm talent' is simply having a big arm. It's a whole spectrum of things and in Watson I just don't see much of it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by DJ's left nut:
I didn't say arm strength. I said how they throw the football. That could be precision accuracy, it could be touch. It could be a slew of things that aren't simply throwing the ball hard.
Take away Tom Brady's ability to put it where he aims it every time and all you get is Matt Moore. Take that away from Manning and you get Drew Bledsoe. Take it away from Brees and you get Chase Daniel.
I would never argue that being a successful QB is just about arm strength. I wouldn't even say that 'arm talent' is simply having a big arm. It's a whole spectrum of things and in Watson I just don't see much of it.
I can't agree.
The thing that separates the greats from the rest of the pack is their ability to process the information they see on the field much more quickly, and the the confidence in what they see. [Reply]
I think that's about the truth in football at the QB position. You have to have the given ability to throw the required routes, but after that it's mental processing. Pre-snap recognition of coverage, blitz, reading through progressions, etc. They also have to have that other part, the ability to forget. They have to forget the bad throw last drive, the interception, the pressure that came the play before, etc. If they can't, they won't succeed. [Reply]
The thing that separates the greats from the rest of the pack is their ability to process the information they see on the field much more quickly, and the the confidence in what they see.
Yep
A certain amount of passing velocity and accuracy is needed for any NFL quarterback. Also it makes it harder when a QB can't throw the ball to every part of the field.
It's still the mental aspect that makes the biggest difference. [Reply]