Because of all the interest in this thread, I've place all of the video content of Patrick Mahomes II's college career, and draft day goodness into a single post that can be found here. Enjoy! [Reply]
Wishkins will come back to Earth. Before long, he'll start believing his own PR (again) and we'll see the Hail Godseys thrown up once again ... in the prayerful hope that his guy will come down with the pig.
It's typical of the nogs to start hyping a guy after a good (or great) game rather than take into account the entirety of a player's professional resume.
Originally Posted by Halfcan:
Am I a Homer for believing I would still want Mahomes over any of those guys? Even Manning because he was such a dickhead. Mahomes has more Total Talent than any of them.
Originally Posted by Chris Meck:
and I think Mayfield will be a fine NFL QB as well. However, the 'winner' label is being mis-applied I think; it's not how many games their team won in college, but how the player performed in the clutch. Lots of guys win just because their team is able to recruit better. How did they perform when the game was on the line, and they needed to score?
I think Watson's okay. I wouldn't trade Mahomes, or Wentz, or Goff, or even Mayfield for him as I think all of them have higher upside.
My theory is that at any point in time, there are 5 guys on the planet who can play QB in the NFL at an elite level. Some guys fall off the list due to age or injury, and some rise due to gaining experience and thus efficiency. Everybody else is just not there. I think Watson's ceiling is a solid second tier guy. I just don't see the physical talent (arm strength) to put him in the top 5. Doesn't mean you can't win with him, but you won't win multiple Super Bowls BECAUSE of him.
Watson showed me some genuine savvy thursday night, some of the same point guard-shortstop playmaker ability as Mahomes in smaller doses... the jury is still out on who wins that 3 man second tier competition [Reply]
Originally Posted by Marcellus:
Not really, I am not doubting he is smart and I like the guy a lot, but he doesn't ooze intelligence.
He constantly uses the wrong words and overall bad grammar when speaking, sounds like he is trying to talk smart rather than be himself.
You're definitely entitled to your opinion, man.
You may have watched him more than I have, IDK.
Whenever I listen to him speak, I hear effortlessness when articulating his points. That's a clear sign of intellect to me. His arguments are routinely good and he doesn't fall back on cliches. Oftentimes, I have heard him utilize less common words appropriately to make succinct and nuanced points.
Saying that he constantly uses the wrong words and "overall bad grammar" seems like taking it a little too far. [Reply]
I'm rewatching the Cincy game. 2-minute drive to end the first half - Mahomes completes to Ware at the 8, play ends at :43, KC has one timeout with clock ticking.
Does he:
a) Call TO, possibly screwing with our FG timeout?
b) Clock it - wasting a down when there is plenty of time?
c) Calmy rush his team down the field to run a REAL PLAY, that they are about to snap at :27 seconds?
Answer? c) and the kicker is it shocked the Bengals so much - that THEY had to call a TO. Which of course now gives the team time to think of a good play - when their no-huddle plays were probably much more limited.
Do you know how many veteran QBs screw that up? [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
I'm rewatching the Cincy game. 2-minute drive to end the first half - Mahomes completes to Ware at the 8, play ends at :43, KC has one timeout with clock ticking.
Does he:
a) Call TO, possibly screwing with our FG timeout?
b) Clock it - wasting a down when there is plenty of time?
c) Calmy rush his team down the field to run a REAL PLAY, that they are about to snap at :27 seconds?
Answer? c) and the kicker is it shocked the Bengals so much - that THEY had to call a TO. Which of course now gives the team time to think of a good play - when their no-huddle plays were probably much more limited.
