With many teams/conferences withdrawing from competition this year, it's going to be an interesting race to the top. My bold prediction? Army is the only team to play enough games to be eligible for a bowl and wins the National Championship by default.
Army shut out Middle Tennessee, Navy got destroyed by BYU, and Air Force is too scared to play anybody other than the other academies. Who'd you watch this weekend?
Generational implies he possesses traits that we haven’t seen in a quarterback in 15-20 years. I wouldn’t say anything he does would even be considered elite at the NFL level, let alone “generational”.
The only thing truly generational is the hype itself.
It’s not often that a Freshman prototypical QB comes out and beats a team like Bama to win the NC.
That created this “generational” hype and he really hasn’t progressed that much since. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Titty Meat:
Stick to NBA threads you have zero clue about football
Appears I have a bit more of a clue than you about football if you’re expecting Lawrence to be an elite player in the NFL with all of his flaws. [Reply]
Originally Posted by staylor26:
Because Sewell is the #2 prospect in this draft IMO and it’s not close.
You can have both and have the best bookend T’s in the NFL on rookie deals.
I guess that's not a terrible way to go. Just wonder if they wouldn't be better served trading back. They weren't one of the worst teams in the league because of poor RT play. That team needs a lot of things. [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
I think people are getting too caught up with the word generational. The term gets thrown at prospects. These are qbs with elite talent but also a really high certainty of nfl success. Josh allen and mahomes don't have that. They were huge risks. In Trevor you have an incredibly high floor but also a huge ceiling. That's why scouts are doing gaga. It has nothing to do with being the best qb of his generation.
Originally Posted by tredadda:
I guess that's not a terrible way to go. Just wonder if they wouldn't be better served trading back. They weren't one of the worst teams in the league because of poor RT play. That team needs a lot of things.
It’s not about filling needs.
It’s about building on your strengths if that’s BPA. They got a franchise LT. With another, they could have the best OL in the league when it was a huge weakness two years ago. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Appears I have a bit more of a clue than you about football if you’re expecting Lawrence to be an elite player in the NFL with all of his flaws.
All his flaws? GTFO I made a thread about him when he committed to Clemson he was great coming out of high school and lived up to all expectations. Again you have zero clue what you're talking about. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
It actually hurt him he had to play 2 years after that, like I said he's been on the map to long do people grow tired and nitpick.
But it doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been warranted.
He was overhyped after that and has been ever since.
Generational implies he possesses traits that we haven’t seen in a quarterback in 15-20 years. I wouldn’t say anything he does would even be considered elite at the NFL level, let alone “generational”.
How many qbs come out of college with a huge arm, athleticism, a proven winning record and experience, solid character, smarts and leadership. What college qb has come out of college with nearly the mix of certainty and upside in a long time? [Reply]
Originally Posted by Mecca:
I'm sorry that ludicrous lol.
Why exactly? What does Lawrence excel at that would make anyone think he’d be a top 5 QB in the NFL (which is nearly what Tannehill is this year)? [Reply]
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501:
How many qbs come out of college with a huge arm, athleticism, a proven winning record and experience, solid character, smarts and leadership. What college qb has come out of college with nearly the mix of certainty and upside in a long time?
I honestly believe Burrow was a better prospect in hindsight.
He only had that “1 year”, but his peak was higher than Lawrence’s. [Reply]
