Positional In-Depth

[AddisonStSox]

A Thread Designed To Take An In-Depth Look At One Position: Feel Free To Not Only Add To This Thread, But, Create One For Other Positions

 

I'm just going to take a look at the six quarterbacks I've watched the closest over the course of the year. In no particular order:

 

 

 

Brodie Croyle

Despite what certain NFL scouts will tell you--actually, it isn't the NFL scouts so much as it is the collegiate draft analyzers--he projects to be nothing more than a middle-of-the-road backup...and it has nothing to do with his injury concerns. With him, we've seen a guy that can look outstanding at times, but, will just as soon make some real poor decisions and will force a whole lot that isn't there. I do like his arm, and I think he is patient enough both on and off the field to be considered a leader of sort, but, in the end, I think his inability to read NFL defensive coverages and blitz packages will be the end of him. His passes are both strong and fairly accurate, but, he is a pure pocket passer and I just can't see this guy starting for prolonged periods of time.

 

Comparison: Mike McMahon

Brett Basanez

 

Having watched him since his days at St. Viator, I can tell you he's not your average quarterback. He is extremely poised both on and off the field and his game has really grown on me throughout his time at Northwestern. He is pretty durable, can scramble, and has an incredible work-ethic. He's also a four-year starter that re-wrote the NU record books. His arm strength is above average, but, I worry about his accuracy. I don't know if he'll ever lead a team Sunday after Sunday, but, his game should translate very well and I expect to see him as a backup for many years to come. He could be an excellent sleeper type--like, dare I say--Tom Brady.

 

Comparison: A Vertically Challenged Matt Schaub

 

Bruce Gradkowski

 

One of the most--in fact, he may be the most--accurate passers in the history of college football. He's a leader, has great intangibles, and is all-day tough. Surround this guy some talent and I think you have an NFL quarterback on your hands. Obviously, the knock on him is his height--and rightfully so, it's a major concern. For some reason, this guy screams New England Patriot at me.

 

Comparison: Without doubt, Jon Kitna

 

Jay Cutler

 

I just don't think I'm as in-love with Cutler as the rest of the nation. Obviously, Cutler has excellent size, a very strong, accurate arm, hangs tough in the pocket and has all the intangibles in the world. I think my concern comes in when you start talking about making a top-ten selection of a guy who can have very spotty mechanics--although that can be changed--makes late-Favre fearless passing decisions, and is just all-around raw. A lot of teams see a ton of upside in him and consider him NFL-ready; they may be right. If groomed for a year, he may become a league-regular...just don't expect him to be a household name.

 

Comparison: At best, Drew Bledsoe

 

Vince Young

 

Yikes. In my estimation, Vince stands just as good a chance of bombing as he does revolutionizing the sport. Much like Michael Vick, I think teams see Vince as a guy that will change the landscape of football, and, without doubt, the quarterback position. His athleticism is unparalleled, he runs like a halfback, has ideal height and weight, and lead his team to a national championship. The question is: are you willing to be the team to revolutionize the sport? Do you like what they have going in Atlanta? I know it's not fair to label this kid Michael Vick--because, he just isn't Michael Vick, I feel he is a much better signal-caller--but, he still has the funky release, he appears raw by NFL standards, and he may be too quick to drop his reads and scramble. Your guess is as good as mine.

 

Comparison: A young, fast Steve McNair

 

Matt Leinart

 

Say what you will, I buy into the hype. Leinart is for real, gang. You can't say enough from a PR standpoint, his collegiate success is the stuff of legend, he has a picture-perfect delievery complete with A+ accuracy, and he can throw the deep ball. Oh, by the way, he has played, and succeeded on, the biggest stages college football has to offer. If I'm the Saints, I'm drafting Leinart. If anyone can help turn that franchise around, it's him. Arm strength? Durability? I don't care. Draft him.

 

Comparison: World Champion Tom Brady

[Felix]

Matt Leinart

[...]

Comparison: World Champion Tom Brady

You're going to hear a lot from people complaining about this, but I think its a pretty good comparison. Nice job with the other reports as well, should be interesting to read about the other positions as well.

[Dam8610]

Cutler = Leinart + arm strength

 

Leinart may have had as much success as humanly possible in college, but he had 3 OL that will be starting in the NFL next year (Justice, Lutui, Matua), 2 RBs that will be start in the NFL next year (Bush, White), a TE who will be at least 2nd on some team's depth chart next year (Byrd) and 2 WRs who will probably be starting in the NFL in 2007 (Jarrett, Smith). Who did Cutler have at Vanderbilt? A bunch of borderline D-I players, yet he led those players to 5 wins in the SEC, which was arguably the toughest conference in the country. He has the arm strength that Leinart doesn't, and all the intangibles Leinart has. That's why the nation is "in-love" with Cutler.

[witesoxfan]

Cutler = Leinart + arm strength

 

Leinart may have had as much success as humanly possible in college, but he had 3 OL that will be starting in the NFL next year (Justice, Lutui, Matua), 2 RBs that will be start in the NFL next year (Bush, White), a TE who will be at least 2nd on some team's depth chart next year (Byrd) and 2 WRs who will probably be starting in the NFL in 2007 (Jarrett, Smith). Who did Cutler have at Vanderbilt? A bunch of borderline D-I players, yet he led those players to 5 wins in the SEC, which was arguably the toughest conference in the country. He has the arm strength that Leinart doesn't, and all the intangibles Leinart has. That's why the nation is "in-love" with Cutler.

 

A little deceptive...Vanderbilt was 3-5 in conference play, and 5-6 on the season.

 

W @Wake, 24-20

W @ Arkansas, 28-24

W vs Mississippi, 31-23

W vs Richmond, 37-13

L vs Middle Tennessee, 17-15

L vs LSU, 34-6

L vs Georgia, 34-17

L @ SCarolina, 35-28

L @ Florida, 49-42

L vs Kentucky, 48-43

W @ Tenn, 28-24

 

They didn't beat a winning team, and they lost to two very bad teams. Middle Tennessee was 4-7 on the year and 3-4 in conference, finishing 4th in the Sun Belt. Kentucky was 3-8 on the year and 2-6 in the SEC, again proving how poor they are.

 

Matt Leinart lost 2 games in college.

 

 

 

I do not like Jay Cutler a lot. Someone made a comparison on here of him to Tim Couch...while you can't label him a bust before he's had a snap in the NFL, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him go the route of Tim Couch.

 

Leinart may have had as much success as humanly possible in college, but he had 3 OL that will be starting in the NFL next year (Justice, Lutui, Matua), 2 RBs that will be start in the NFL next year (Bush, White), a TE who will be at least 2nd on some team's depth chart next year (Byrd) and 2 WRs who will probably be starting in the NFL in 2007 (Jarrett, Smith)

 

Oh, BTW...Leinart will have 5 O-Lineman starting in the NFL next year, 1 HB that will be starting, a decent starting TE, and 2 starting wide receivers. He was playing in an NFL offensive system at USC, so he knows some of the basics of the NFL playbooks, and will just have to learn how to read NFL defenses. I personally think it's just a bit silly to say that Cutler is the same player as Leinart, only with better arm strength to go along with it...either Cutler is the god of college QBs, or Leinart blows ass is kinda what it comes off as.

 

 

Addy...love the Leinart comparison, I have thought that quite a bit. The last college QB to be this NFL ready was Peyton Manning, and while he is a weeeeeee-bit more talented than Leinart, I still love Leinart for everything he brings...quick short passes, accuracy, soft long ball, some mobilitiy, and his intangibles...I see no huge glaring weakness with him, aside from perhaps his arm strength, and the occasional period where he will lose a bit of accuracy.

[Dam8610]

Oh, BTW...Leinart will have 5 O-Lineman starting in the NFL next year, 1 HB that will be starting, a decent starting TE, and 2 starting wide receivers.  He was playing in an NFL offensive system at USC, so he knows some of the basics of the NFL playbooks, and will just have to learn how to read NFL defenses.

 

The point of my argument there was that the talent around him had a GREAT DEAL to do with his success at USC, and it did. Not many college QBs have 3 NFL starting quality OL, 2 NFL starting quality RBs, 2 NFL starting quality WRs, and an NFL quality TE to work with while they're in college. The fact that the talent around him was much better than the talent the opposition could possibly throw out there might end up being a bad thing for his pro career (see: Kerry Collins).

 

I personally think it's just a bit silly to say that Cutler is the same player as Leinart, only with better arm strength to go along with it...either Cutler is the god of college QBs, or Leinart blows ass is kinda what it comes off as.

 

Actually, my point was that Leinart is a very good QB prospect, but Cutler is a better QB prospect IMO, because he has the arm strength Leinart lacks, and he's pretty much on an equal level when it comes to "intangibles".

[witesoxfan]

The point of my argument there was that the talent around him had a GREAT DEAL to do with his success at USC, and it did. Not many college QBs have 3 NFL starting quality OL, 2 NFL starting quality RBs, 2 NFL starting quality WRs, and an NFL quality TE to work with while they're in college. The fact that the talent around him was much better than the talent the opposition could possibly throw out there might end up being a bad thing for his pro career (see: Kerry Collins).

 

Kerry Collins has been an above average QB and also QB'ed a team to the Super Bowl...the Giants were friggin destroyed by the Ravens, but that's besides the point.

 

I just think it's wrong that you discredit Leinart because he played on a talented team...I don't think anyone is suggesting he'll be the best QB in the league, but becoming a top 10 QB in the league is not out of the question, and leading his team and winning a lot of games is something I could easily see him doing.

 

I also see a little Steve Young in Matt Leinart, and I don't think it's just because they were both left-handed(though that helps )

 

Actually, my point was that Leinart is a very good QB prospect, but Cutler is a better QB prospect IMO, because he has the arm strength Leinart lacks, and he's pretty much on an equal level when it comes to "intangibles".

 

How, exactly, is he on an equal level when it comes to intangibles? Perhaps Cutler has better tools...better arm, same accuracy, same mobility...but he didn't win s*** in college. Leinart lost twice.

 

I just don't see how it would even be possible for Cutler to have better intangibles, and I don't view him as nearly the QB prospect Leinart is. Cutler probably has more upside than Leinart, but there's no guarantee whatsoever with Cutler being a productive QB. Leinart almost assuredly will be a solid NFL QB in the future.

[AddisonStSox]

I also see a little Steve Young in Matt Leinart, and I don't think it's just because they were both left-handed(though that helps  )

 

...and I know you don't think that because Leinart's ability to scramble emulates that of Young, right?

 

I just don't see how it would even be possible for Cutler to have better intangibles, and I don't view him as nearly the QB prospect Leinart is.  Cutler probably has more upside than Leinart, but there's no guarantee whatsoever with Cutler being a productive QB.  Leinart almost assuredly will be a solid NFL QB in the future.

 

I agree with nearly everything said there, and, I'll even take it one step further...I can't see how anyone can say at this juncture that Cutler has more upside.

Edited February 16, 2006 by AddisonStSox

[Dam8610]

Kerry Collins has been an above average QB and also QB'ed a team to the Super Bowl...the Giants were friggin destroyed by the Ravens, but that's besides the point. 

 

I just think it's wrong that you discredit Leinart because he played on a talented team...I don't think anyone is suggesting he'll be the best QB in the league, but becoming a top 10 QB in the league is not out of the question, and leading his team and winning a lot of games is something I could easily see him doing. 

 

I also see a little Steve Young in Matt Leinart, and I don't think it's just because they were both left-handed(though that helps  )

How, exactly, is he on an equal level when it comes to intangibles?  Perhaps Cutler has better tools...better arm, same accuracy, same mobility...but he didn't win s*** in college.  Leinart lost twice. 

 

I just don't see how it would even be possible for Cutler to have better intangibles, and I don't view him as nearly the QB prospect Leinart is.  Cutler probably has more upside than Leinart, but there's no guarantee whatsoever with Cutler being a productive QB.  Leinart almost assuredly will be a solid NFL QB in the future.

 

How can you say it's wrong to discredit Leinart because he was on a talented team, then turn around and discredit Cutler for not being on a talented team? Yes, Leinart only lost 2 games in college, but he was on one of the most talented teams in college football history. Put just about any Divison I-A QB talent in that situation and they're going to succeed (maybe not to the extent that Leinart did, but they'd do well). Cutler was at Vanderbilt, aka one of the worst Division I-A teams that also happens to play in the best collegiate football conference. Cutler had almost nothing to work with on his team and was facing far more talented teams every week, but still managed to pull out 5 wins, including 3 in the SEC. This is a program that considers 2 wins a good season. Put Leinart on Vanderbilt and Cutler on USC, and you're probably talking about how Cutler is guaranteed to be a solid NFL QB, while Leinart is a risk.

 

I can't see how anyone can say at this juncture that Cutler has more upside.

 

It's a little thing called supporting cast. The discrepancy in talent between Leinart's supporting cast and Cutler's supporting cast are about the same as the discrepancy in talent on the Chicago White Sox compared to the talent on the Winston-Salem Warthogs.

Edited February 17, 2006 by Dam8610

[AddisonStSox]

Let's hold it against a guy for winning.

[Dam8610]

Let's hold it against a guy for winning.

 

Not at all, but certianly don't hold it against a guy for being surrounded by crappy talent and thus losing more often. If you like Leinart more than Cutler, that's fine, but to say that Cutler isn't even in Leinart's class is just stupid. Cutler is extremely talented, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he turns out to be a better QB than Leinart.

[AddisonStSox]

Not at all, but certianly don't hold it against a guy for being surrounded by crappy talent and thus losing more often. If you like Leinart more than Cutler, that's fine, but to say that Cutler isn't even in Leinart's class is just stupid. Cutler is extremely talented, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if he turns out to be a better QB than Leinart.

 

Now you're just putting words in other peoples' mouths. That was never said. That was never even implied.

 

Amazing.

[Dam8610]

Now you're just putting words in other peoples' mouths.  That was never said.  That was never even implied.

 

Amazing.

 

Really?

 

I just don't see how it would even be possible for Cutler to have better intangibles, and I don't view him as nearly the QB prospect Leinart is.  Cutler probably has more upside than Leinart, but there's no guarantee whatsoever with Cutler being a productive QB.  Leinart almost assuredly will be a solid NFL QB in the future.

 

I agree with nearly everything said there, and, I'll even take it one step further...I can't see how anyone can say at this juncture that Cutler has more upside.

 

How do you explain that then? Are you saying I'm "putting words into your mouth" because my wording was a bit different than yours?

Edited February 18, 2006 by Dam8610

[rangercal]

A little deceptive...Vanderbilt was 3-5 in conference play, and 5-6 on the season. 

 

W @Wake, 24-20

W @ Arkansas, 28-24

W vs Mississippi, 31-23

W vs Richmond, 37-13

L vs Middle Tennessee, 17-15

L vs LSU, 34-6

L vs Georgia, 34-17

L @ SCarolina, 35-28

L @ Florida, 49-42

L vs Kentucky, 48-43

W @ Tenn, 28-24

 

They didn't beat a winning team, and they lost to two very bad teams.  Middle Tennessee was 4-7 on the year and 3-4 in conference, finishing 4th in the Sun Belt.  Kentucky was 3-8 on the year and 2-6 in the SEC, again proving how poor they are.

 

Matt Leinart lost 2 games in college.

I do not like Jay Cutler a lot.  Someone made a comparison on here of him to Tim Couch...while you can't label him a bust before he's had a snap in the NFL, I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him go the route of Tim Couch.

Oh, BTW...Leinart will have 5 O-Lineman starting in the NFL next year, 1 HB that will be starting, a decent starting TE, and 2 starting wide receivers.  He was playing in an NFL offensive system at USC, so he knows some of the basics of the NFL playbooks, and will just have to learn how to read NFL defenses.  I personally think it's just a bit silly to say that Cutler is the same player as Leinart, only with better arm strength to go along with it...either Cutler is the god of college QBs, or Leinart blows ass is kinda what it comes off as.

Addy...love the Leinart comparison, I have thought that quite a bit.  The last college QB to be this NFL ready was Peyton Manning, and while he is a weeeeeee-bit more talented than Leinart, I still love Leinart for everything he brings...quick short passes, accuracy, soft long ball, some mobilitiy, and his intangibles...I see no huge glaring weakness with him, aside from perhaps his arm strength, and the occasional period where he will lose a bit of accuracy.

How is it the qb's fault if he loses 43-48?