Qb Prospects On Display This Week In College

[chad72]

Kirk Cousins is not elusive enough in the pocket and runs into traffic too much for my liking but his decision making and throwing was improved from last week and that hail mary, oh well, the Spartans had lady luck on their side today (Cousins fumbles but recovered by Spartans O-lineman). Trent Edwards, Drew Stanton, Brian Hoyer are all MSU QBs out of which Edwards and Stanton had a chance to show a few things but they do not have the consistency at the pro level. Russell Wilson reminds me of Brad Smith kind of QB that can be used for ST and wildcat offense but the Big Ten is way overrated, IMO and no wonder Wisconsin got beat today.

Nick Foles had a great week. Landry Jones, he seems like he is ruffled since for the first time the Sooners are facing an offense with the Texas Tech Red Raiders who can get ahead and play fast. Seth Doege of Texas Tech, I am watching him throw vs Oklahoma on the road and he is showing me a lot of things. He has arm strength to throw an out route from the right hash all the way to the left sidelines. Then, he throws a ball from the 30 yard line right to the back of the end zone where only his wideout can catch. Then, on a route where the man corner is going stride for stride, he makes sure to slightly underthrow it to the outside shoulder of his wideout.

He is probably a 2013 QB prospect but I am impressed with what I have seen so far.

Edited October 23, 2011 by chad72

[doogansquest]

Jones didn't exactly do awful. He threw for 416 yards and 5 TD's. He also lead a monumental comeback that almost ended in victory. Considering his defense gave up 572 yards, I'd say he had a pretty good day.

[KirkCousins#8]

You see?My man is a balla'.KKKKKKKKKKKIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRKKKKKKKKKK CCCCCCCCOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[pacolts56]

You see?My man is a balla'.KKKKKKKKKKKIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRKKKKKKKKKK CCCCCCCCOOOOOOOOOOUUUUUUUUSSSSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Curtis.... I gotta give your boy Cousins his due credit.

No matter what anyone thinks of him as an NFL prospect.... he led his team to one of the more exciting wins of the college season yesterday.

As a fan who has a strong dislike for Wissscaaaaansin.... i enjoyed watching him hand them their first loss.

Edited October 23, 2011 by pacolts56

[KirkCousins#8]

Curtis.... I gotta give your boy Cousins his due credit.

No matter what anyone thinks of him as an NFL prospect.... he led his team to one of the more exciting wins of the college season yesterday.

As a fan who has a strong dislike for Wissscaaaaansin.... i enjoyed watching him hand them their first loss.

Please just don't look at the stat line when evaluating kirk;he's in a running system and doesn't get much of a chance to showcase his ability.But if he was in a pass happy offense like 'luck'...then he would be considered first round talent.He's a mirror image of tom brady IMO.

[pacolts56]

Please just don't look at the stat line when evaluating kirk;he's in a running system and doesn't get much of a chance to showcase his ability.But if he was in a pass happy offense like 'luck'...then he would be considered first round talent.He's a mirror image of tom brady IMO.

Uh oh.... check Stanford's box score yesterday, that wasn't exactly something we can call "pass-happy".

Cousins will probably be drafted as a 2nd rounder, and he seems to have that "he's just a winner" intangible that is a factor ALL teams want in their QB.

But here..... just read this and note Stanford Coach David Shaw's comments at the end of the column.

http://espn.go.com/b...bout-stanford-2

There are stats.... and then when we peel back a few layers there is the way a QB commands the offensive game, where Andrew Luck has no peer at the college level. In addition to his set of physical skills.... that is what sets him apart.

[doogansquest]

Please just don't look at the stat line when evaluating kirk;he's in a running system and doesn't get much of a chance to showcase his ability.But if he was in a pass happy offense like 'luck'...then he would be considered first round talent.He's a mirror image of tom brady IMO.

Stanford rushed for over 400 yards yesterday...

They are just a sick offense right now. They have two, top 15 NFL O-linemen playing for them, and a stable of HB's. Luck's job is pretty easy there, and he's going to be discouraged taking his lumps at the much more difficult level that is the NFL.

[pacolts56]

Stanford rushed for over 400 yards yesterday...

They are just a sick offense right now. They have two, top 15 NFL O-linemen playing for them, and a stable of HB's. Luck's job is pretty easy there, and he's going to be discouraged taking his lumps at the much more difficult level that is the NFL.

He'll go through some rough days.... as all rookie QBs do.

Bit his ability to utilize the strengths of his offense.... which this year are predominantly HBs/TEs and the run game, but last year were more so WRs and the run game.... plus make the right calls at the line of scrimmage as he did impeccably in yesterday's game.... are why he has such high praise surrounding him.

Regardless of whether we wind up with him or another team does.... I feel like he brings a skill set and style similar to Steve Young.... if I had to make an NFL comparison.

It'll be on the GM of whatever team he's drafted by to equip him with a well-balanced set of offensive weapons. Yes.....that is where any QBs abilities are maximized the greatest.... but I think that eventually he'd lead a dominant offense.

What his pro team shouldn't do.... is commit their roster strategy too heavily toward a pass-first approach. As Colts fans... we know what the pitfalls of that can be.

[KirkCousins#8]

Stanford rushed for over 400 yards yesterday...

They are just a sick offense right now. They have two, top 15 NFL O-linemen playing for them, and a stable of HB's. Luck's job is pretty easy there, and he's going to be discouraged taking his lumps at the much more difficult level that is the NFL.

I like luck,and he's certainly a safe pick for us or anybody.But i just don't think we need him now with all of our glaring holes as a team collectively.That pick(assuming we even get it)just has to be traded for multiple picks/or players to stop our defensive blood letting.We currently have too many holes that andrew just can't fill(can he play corner?hahaha).That's why i would be happy with cousins falling to us in the third or forth rounds.

[Jason_]

Please just don't look at the stat line when evaluating kirk;he's in a running system and doesn't get much of a chance to showcase his ability.But if he was in a pass happy offense like 'luck'...then he would be considered first round talent.He's a mirror image of tom brady IMO.

Ok now don't go twisting facts like some are doing in attempt to make their argument for Luck Stanford is not a pass happy offense. They are a power run first, pass second after the run has been established type of offense. That has been the primary reason that, from the get-go, I have been questioning whether Luck is the best fit for the Colts. What happens if you put him on an offense that doesn't rush for 200+ yards per game? What happens when he has pressure in his face constantly due to not having one of the best OL in his league? There are other QB's who face these situations week in and week out and are individually just as successfull, if not more so, than Luck.

[Balzer40]

Ok now don't go twisting facts like some are doing in attempt to make their argument for Luck Stanford is not a pass happy offense. They are a power run first, pass second after the run has been established type of offense. That has been the primary reason that, from the get-go, I have been questioning whether Luck is the best fit for the Colts. What happens if you put him on an offense that doesn't rush for 200+ yards per game? What happens when he has pressure in his face constantly due to not having one of the best OL in his league? There are other QB's who face these situations week in and week out and are individually just as successfull, if not more so, than Luck.

I have seen just as many twisting facts for their reasons for not drafting Luck.

[Jason_]

I have seen just as many twisting facts for their reasons for not drafting Luck.

Or that's simply what you want to see. I'm referring to people who try to claim that Luck plays with no talent around him...Luck will extend Manning's career, Peyton isn't a good passer etc etc. I haven't seen anyone twisting anything in regards to reasons not to draft Luck. If you're referring to my comparisons between Luck and Alex Smith...I wasn't twisting anything..I was posing the comparison for the sake of consideration.

[Balzer40]

Or that's simply what you want to see. I'm referring to people who try to claim that Luck plays with no talent around him...Luck will extend Manning's career, Peyton isn't a good passer etc etc. I haven't seen anyone twisting anything in regards to reasons not to draft Luck. If you're referring to my comparisons between Luck and Alex Smith...I wasn't twisting anything..I was posing the comparison for the sake of consideration.

No I wasn't refering to you. More so the (and im paraphrasing) Pac 10 don't produce good QB's and Luck hasn't ever been tested against good opponents, both of which is complete and total utter nonsense. There have been some dumb things said in favor for drafting Luck, but there has been a lot of dumb things said for reasons to not draft him too.

Edited October 23, 2011 by Balzer40

[Jason_]

No I wasn't refering to you. More so the (and im paraphrasing) Pac 10 don't produce good QB's and Luck hasn't ever been tested against good opponents, both of which is complete and total utter nonsense. There have been some dumb things said in favor for drafting Luck, but there has been a lot of dumb things said for reasons to not draft him too.

Ah, gotcha...was just covering my behind because that was the only thing I could think of that I said that might have been misinterpreted as me trying to twist facts so simply wanted to clarify.

[pacolts56]

Ok now don't go twisting facts like some are doing in attempt to make their argument for Luck Stanford is not a pass happy offense. They are a power run first, pass second after the run has been established type of offense. That has been the primary reason that, from the get-go, I have been questioning whether Luck is the best fit for the Colts. What happens if you put him on an offense that doesn't rush for 200+ yards per game? What happens when he has pressure in his face constantly due to not having one of the best OL in his league? There are other QB's who face these situations week in and week out and are individually just as successfull, if not more so, than Luck.

That's the part of your opinion I don't agree with at all, Jason. You seem to imply that Luck's own ability plays no role in the success of Stanford's rushing attack.

And what exactly does it mean to "fit" the Colts as a QB prospect anyway?

Once Peyton passes from the scene, the Colts will most likely have to do a fairly substantial refocusing of their offensive philosophy.... basically a much more balanced attack.... because trying to accomplish the same thing with another QB is just not gonna happen.

What's gonna happen when the QB prospects you champion realize the speed of the NFL easily outmatches what limited ability they have to read and adjust to an NFL defense?

It works both ways.

I'm just more enthusiastic about a QB who has shown his ability to use every manner in which to defeat his opponents....TEs this season, WRs last season plus his rushing attack..... and is now calling plays and audibles his offense into very successful drives.... including a perfect 38 for 38 red zone scoring clip so far this season. Who cares HOW they score and who's stats get pumped? They score..... and they score under the direction of Andrew Luck... they don't just score and he gets to tag along.

Individual QB stats are great.... but we need to guard against getting caught up in them.

[Jason_]

That's the part of your opinion I don't agree with at all, Jason. You seem to imply that Luck's own ability plays no role in the success of Stanford's rushing attack.

Some teams run to setup the pass and other teams pass to setup the run. Stanford lines up in a lot of 2 or 3TE and 2RB formations and run the ball down the other team's throats. They run first to setup play action. That's why I don't think that Luck's abilities play into the success of the running game. If they came out in more spread-wide type formations, passed first to setup the run then yes, I would attribute the running success on Luck. I'm not saying he can't do both, merely that he doesn't have to so we have no idea if he can do both.

And what exactly does it mean to "fit" the Colts as a QB prospect anyway?

Preferably a QB that plays for a more pass-first offense (which is what the Colts are) and can be successful in throwing a lot of timing routes with a high degree of accuracy and great timing. A guy who throws a receiver open instead of simply throwing to an open receiver. I also look at the amount of pressure they typically receive from the opposing defense and how well they handle the pressure.

Once Peyton passes from the scene, the Colts will most likely have to do a fairly substantial refocusing of their offensive philosophy.... basically a much more balanced attack.... because trying to accomplish the same thing with another QB is just not gonna happen.

I agree that this is what they should do but with our current coaching staff I don't know how much the offense will actually change. I thought the offense would be much different this year without Peyton but it hasn't, they've continued to try to run pretty much the same offense with a much higher pass to run ratio than I thought they would or should.

What's gonna happen when the QB prospects you champion realize the speed of the NFL easily outmatches what limited ability they have to read and adjust to an NFL defense?

It works both ways.

The exact same thing could be said of Luck...especially when you consider the QB I've been "championing" the most is Nick Foles. Foles plays for Arizona who is also in the Pac12 therefore he's playing the same defenses that Luck is playing with the same or greater individual success that Luck has but with less talent around him.

I'm just more enthusiastic about a QB who has shown his ability to use every manner in which to defeat his opponents....TEs this season, WRs last season plus his rushing attack..... and is now calling plays and audibles his offense into very successful drives.... including a perfect 38 for 38 red zone scoring clip so far this season. Who cares HOW they score and who's stats get pumped? They score..... and they score under the direction of Andrew Luck... they don't just score and he gets to tag along.

Individual QB stats are great.... but we need to guard against getting caught up in them.

I can totally understand that. In the same manner though, I'm excited about a guy who can have a high level of overall offensive success but with much less overall talent around him. A guy who also reads the defense and has proven the ability to call his own plays and be successful. I also agree that we can't get caught up in stats, but I'm not looking merely at stats when I compare the different QBs. I'm looking at the type of offense they play in, the level of talent around him, the types of throws he makes and how accurately he makes them, and how much overall success of the offense I think can be accurately attributed solely to the QB.

[doogansquest]

He'll go through some rough days.... as all rookie QBs do.

Bit his ability to utilize the strengths of his offense.... which this year are predominantly HBs/TEs and the run game, but last year were more so WRs and the run game.... plus make the right calls at the line of scrimmage as he did impeccably in yesterday's game.... are why he has such high praise surrounding him.

Regardless of whether we wind up with him or another team does.... I feel like he brings a skill set and style similar to Steve Young.... if I had to make an NFL comparison.

It'll be on the GM of whatever team he's drafted by to equip him with a well-balanced set of offensive weapons. Yes.....that is where any QBs abilities are maximized the greatest.... but I think that eventually he'd lead a dominant offense.

What his pro team shouldn't do.... is commit their roster strategy too heavily toward a pass-first approach. As Colts fans... we know what the pitfalls of that can be.

He has those abilities at the collegiate level. He's proven none of those things at the NFL level. Year 2 is usually worse for QB's than year one. Cam Newton will have a very rough go of it next year, for example, despite the success he's had this year. Teams will have film on him, coordinators will take away strengths; the NFL is a different monster.

I'm not saying that Luck won't work out in the NFL; he probably will. But his best bet to lead a "dominant" offense will be in starting year 1 and learning his way in a trial by fire scenario. Not sitting on a bench for several years (which #1 overall picks NEVER do anyway).

[pacolts56]

Some teams run to setup the pass and other teams pass to setup the run. Stanford lines up in a lot of 2 or 3TE and 2RB formations and run the ball down the other team's throats. They run first to setup play action. That's why I don't think that Luck's abilities play into the success of the running game. If they came out in more spread-wide type formations, passed first to setup the run then yes, I would attribute the running success on Luck. I'm not saying he can't do both, merely that he doesn't have to so we have no idea if he can do both.

Not last season they didn't....3 of Luck's top 5 targets and reception leaders were WRs and 1 was a RB. WRs Baldwin and Whalen graduated and Owusu remains this year with their excellent TEs. Plus, his pass production was heavier in the first half of games than it was the second half. This year's personnel dictate a different approach, but he can and has done both.

Preferably a QB that plays for a more pass-first offense (which is what the Colts are) and can be successful in throwing a lot of timing routes with a high degree of accuracy and great timing. A guy who throws a receiver open instead of simply throwing to an open receiver. I also look at the amount of pressure they typically receive from the opposing defense and how well they handle the pressure.

Do you think maybe Luck's recognition of the defense results in his guys being open?

And check his rushing yardage....that is testimony to his escapability.... and factors into his low sack totals as well.

I agree that this is what they should do but with our current coaching staff I don't know how much the offense will actually change. I thought the offense would be much different this year without Peyton but it hasn't, they've continued to try to run pretty much the same offense with a much higher pass to run ratio than I thought they would or should.

Absolutely....we HAVE to balance out the offense more in the future. It's one thing to tilt ourselves toward a pass-first philosophy....its another thing to have a perennially lousy rushing attack that ranks at or near the bottom of the NFL. Even with Manning at the controls.

The exact same thing could be said of Luck...especially when you consider the QB I've been "championing" the most is Nick Foles. Foles plays for Arizona who is also in the Pac12 therefore he's playing the same defenses that Luck is playing with the same or greater individual success that Luck has but with less talent around him.

Alot of Arizona's scoring has come in the second half of their 5 losses.... when they were already considerably behind.

I can totally understand that. In the same manner though, I'm excited about a guy who can have a high level of overall offensive success but with much less overall talent around him. A guy who also reads the defense and has proven the ability to call his own plays and be successful. I also agree that we can't get caught up in stats, but I'm not looking merely at stats when I compare the different QBs. I'm looking at the type of offense they play in, the level of talent around him, the types of throws he makes and how accurately he makes them, and how much overall success of the offense I think can be accurately attributed solely to the QB.

Reading the defense out of a spread formation is easier than out of a more conventional NFL set. And when did Foles start calling Arizona's offensive plays?

I'm not saying this stuff because I don't think Foles can develop over time.... I just think Luck will be a better NFL QB.

And Manning's pending medical outcome and projected career length should dictate whether we select Luck or trade down, IMO.

I know we continue to agree to disagree about this, I just believe that Luck's body of work as a college QB makes him an exceptional prospect.

[Jason_]

Reading the defense out of a spread formation is easier than out of a more conventional NFL set. And when did Foles start calling Arizona's offensive plays?

Agreed, however Arizona doesn't really run a spread offense, at least not in what I consider a spread offense. When I think of spread I think of mostly 1 RB sets with 3-4 WRs or even 5 WR...basically bringing in as many WRs as you can to "spread" the defense. Arizona uses primarily standard personnel with 2WR, TE and 2RB, they just do it from a shotgun or pistol formation. Oh and he started calling his own plays after the previous HC Mike Stoops was fired and Tim Kish was named interim HC.

To a couple other points you made: Could Luck be responsible for players being open? Sure he could and in some cases I'm sure he has a lot to do with it by manipulating the defense, but at the same time I see a lot of times where the player is open because the defense sold out completely on the play action fake.

You also said Arizona gets a lot of yardage in the 2nd half when they're down, which is very true and the fact they have trouble moving the ball early is a worry but I think has more to do with their lack of effectiveness running the ball. Early on, they're still trying to get the running game going...but once they get down by X amount of points they simply have to pretty much get away from it and start throwing the ball..this is when Foles really has a chance to shine, imo, because he's moving the ball down the field even though the defense knows he has to throw it.

I'm not saying this stuff because I don't think Foles can develop over time.... I just think Luck will be a better NFL QB.

And I think Foles and Luck are much closer talent-wise than most people would think.

And Manning's pending medical outcome and projected career length should dictate whether we select Luck or trade down, IMO.

I know we continue to agree to disagree about this, I just believe that Luck's body of work as a college QB makes him an exceptional prospect.

I completely agree about Manning's health and have said that from the beginning. If we have even 1 year with Peyton then imo we can pass on Luck and develop a guy like Foles. If we need someone to start day 1 then yes, Luck definitely becomes a much more attractive option.

Like I said, I think both Luck and Foles are incredibly talented QB's and I think both will be very successful. I just don't think Foles gets near the recognition he deserves because Arizona as a whole is a very below-average team with a horrible record but that just happens to have a great QB.

Edited October 24, 2011 by Jason

[pacolts56]

Agreed, however Arizona doesn't really run a spread offense, at least not in what I consider a spread offense. When I think of spread I think of mostly 1 RB sets with 3-4 WRs or even 5 WR...basically bringing in as many WRs as you can to "spread" the defense. Arizona uses primarily standard personnel with 2WR, TE and 2RB, they just do it from a shotgun or pistol formation. Oh and he started calling his own plays after the previous HC Mike Stoops was fired and Tim Kish was named interim HC.

To a couple other points you made: Could Luck be responsible for players being open? Sure he could and in some cases I'm sure he has a lot to do with it by manipulating the defense, but at the same time I see a lot of times where the player is open because the defense sold out completely on the play action fake.

You also said Arizona gets a lot of yardage in the 2nd half when they're down, which is very true and the fact they have trouble moving the ball early is a worry but I think has more to do with their lack of effectiveness running the ball. Early on, they're still trying to get the running game going...but once they get down by X amount of points they simply have to pretty much get away from it and start throwing the ball..this is when Foles really has a chance to shine, imo, because he's moving the ball down the field even though the defense knows he has to throw it.

And I think Foles and Luck are much closer talent-wise than most people would think.

I completely agree about Manning's health and have said that from the beginning. If we have even 1 year with Peyton then imo we can pass on Luck and develop a guy like Foles. If we need someone to start day 1 then yes, Luck definitely becomes a much more attractive option.

Like I said, I think both Luck and Foles are incredibly talented QB's and I think both will be very successful. I just don't think Foles gets near the recognition he deserves because Arizona as a whole is a very below-average team with a horrible record but that just happens to have a great QB.

Well.... we'll see the way these guys work out. I hope they both do well.

I must admit.... watching us get totally dismantled on national television, in every aspect of the game.... makes me wonder if we shouldn't just take the nuclear option and blow up the roster.

The Colts are just not a good football team.

[chad72]

Well.... we'll see the way these guys work out. I hope they both do well.

I must admit.... watching us get totally dismantled on national television, in every aspect of the game.... makes me wonder if we shouldn't just take the nuclear option and blow up the roster.

The Colts are just not a good football team.

Draft 2 CBs, 1 WR, 1 NT, 1 OG, 1 safety and 1 more blocking TE, we can turn around our offense and defense, IMO if we get those right to complement the few good pieces we have.

[jskinnz]

Please just don't look at the stat line when evaluating kirk;he's in a running system and doesn't get much of a chance to showcase his ability.But if he was in a pass happy offense like 'luck'...then he would be considered first round talent.He's a mirror image of tom brady IMO.

That is simply not true. If he has first round talent, NFL scouts will know and he will be drafted accordingly. Demarious Thomas was a WR at Georgia Tech where they run the option. He was still picked in round 1 because his talent dictated it even though the offense he played in was anything but a passing offense.

[chad72]

That is simply not true. If he has first round talent, NFL scouts will know and he will be drafted accordingly. Demarious Thomas was a WR at Georgia Tech where they run the option. He was still picked in round 1 because his talent dictated it even though the offense he played in was anything but a passing offense.

Calvin Johnson was from Georgia Tech. as well

[jskinnz]

Calvin Johnson was from Georgia Tech. as well

Yeah but I think he was there before they started running the option consistently.

[doogansquest]

Draft 2 CBs, 1 WR, 1 NT, 1 OG, 1 safety and 1 more blocking TE, we can turn around our offense and defense, IMO if we get those right to complement the few good pieces we have.

Well, one has to be able to draft impact players at those positions, and you're talking about hitting perfectly over all 7 rounds.

While I believe this last draft was close to perfect, which round do we take which player? How do we ensure the talent/need intersection is appropriate? What players taken at each respective position, especially in the later rounds, would be an automatic upgrade for us?

I'm not dissecting what you've said, I'm just skeptical that it's as simple as "Draft X, Y, and Z, and we're set." If it were that easy, no teams would every have problems after a draft.

[Ramblinwreck7]

Please just don't look at the stat line when evaluating kirk;he's in a running system and doesn't get much of a chance to showcase his ability.But if he was in a pass happy offense like 'luck'...then he would be considered first round talent.He's a mirror image of tom brady IMO.

If he is a mirror image of Tom Brady then I don't want him...

[Ramblinwreck7]

Yeah but I think he was there before they started running the option consistently.

, Chan Gailey was Georgia Tech's head coach when Calvin Johnson was there and they run a pro style offense. Demarius Thomas may have played in an option offense but he still had over a 1000 yards receiving his junior year when he came out.

Edited October 25, 2011 by Ramblinwreck7

[KirkCousins#8]

If he is a mirror image of Tom Brady then I don't want him...

C'mon man!We both know that very little seperates brady and manning.If we drafted a guy such as cousins and he turned into another brady,then you wouldn't be happy just because his skillset is more similiar to brady than manning?That's just crazy talk man.

I would be thrilled to have him(cousins)!

[KirkCousins#8]

That is simply not true. If he has first round talent, NFL scouts will know and he will be drafted accordingly. Demarious Thomas was a WR at Georgia Tech where they run the option. He was still picked in round 1 because his talent dictated it even though the offense he played in was anything but a passing offense.

As i've previously stated before,i think cousins is the best quarterback in this draft,and should go in round one.However i believe that most scouts will have him going in round 2 or 3.THe teams that pass on him will regret it.

[pacolts56]

Well, one has to be able to draft impact players at those positions, and you're talking about hitting perfectly over all 7 rounds.

While I believe this last draft was close to perfect, which round do we take which player? How do we ensure the talent/need intersection is appropriate? What players taken at each respective position, especially in the later rounds, would be an automatic upgrade for us?

I'm not dissecting what you've said, I'm just skeptical that it's as simple as "Draft X, Y, and Z, and we're set." If it were that easy, no teams would every have problems after a draft.

That's exactly what has many of us squabbling about drafting Andrew Luck or trading down....and it's a gamble either way.

It's a tough decision because the 3-4 other prospects we'd draft in a trade-down of the Luck pick had BETTER produce 2-3 very solid NFL starters.... if we go that route.

And of course, Luck could bust.... although that would surprise a large number of people.

But if we do trade down and wind up with Ugoh/Gonzo/Brown/Hughes 2.0, and one of them is a QB not named Andrew Luck, and then Luck fulfills the expectations around him with our trade down partner..... then the pitchforks and torches we saw here after the Saints murdered us will seem like child's play by comparison.

Not that the front office actually gives a rat's * what we think, but they do have tickets to sell.

[jskinnz]

As i've previously stated before,i think cousins is the best quarterback in this draft,and should go in round one.However i believe that most scouts will have him going in round 2 or 3.THe teams that pass on him will regret it.

Now you are backtracking. You said if played in a more pass happy offense he would be a first round selection. If he is talented enough he will be a first round selection regardless.

[KirkCousins#8]

Now you are backtracking. You said if played in a more pass happy offense he would be a first round selection. If he is talented enough he will be a first round selection regardless.

I just believe that the offensive system of 'MSU' will hurt the evaluating process of cousins.The majority of people just look at the statline when evaluating talent.But if he(cousins)keeps winning and 'MSU' gets the rosebowl bid,then i'm sure the first round possiblity is very real for him(cousins),especially if he performs well in big games.

[jskinnz]

I just believe that the offensive system of 'MSU' will hurt the evaluating process of cousins.The majority of people just look at the statline when evaluating talent.But if he(cousins)keeps winning and 'MSU' gets the rosebowl bid,then i'm sure the first round possiblity is very real for him(cousins),especially if he performs well in big games.

No. That is not accurate at all. Scouts & NFL teams don't care about that as much as other traits. Stat lines are just about the least important element in evaluating talent. If it were so important Tim Chang of Hawaii or the Detmers would have been first round picks. Matthew Stafford would not have been nor would Jake Locker.

[chad72]

No. That is not accurate at all. Scouts & NFL teams don't care about that as much as other traits. Stat lines are just about the least important element in evaluating talent. If it were so important Tim Chang of Hawaii or the Detmers would have been first round picks. Matthew Stafford would not have been nor would Jake Locker.

+1 for that

[KirkCousins#8]

No. That is not accurate at all. Scouts & NFL teams don't care about that as much as other traits. Stat lines are just about the least important element in evaluating talent. If it were so important Tim Chang of Hawaii or the Detmers would have been first round picks. Matthew Stafford would not have been nor would Jake Locker.

Kirk Cousins, Michigan State

Height: 6-3. Weight: 202.

Projected 40 Time: 4.85.

Projected Round (2012): 3-4.

10/21/11: Cousins displays good potential but is held back by an offense that aims to keep the ball on the ground, and he doesn't have a good supporting cast of receiving weapons. For the season, Cousins has completed 66 percent of his passes for 1,274 yards with eight touchdowns and four interceptions.

8/18/11: Kirk Cousins completed 66.9 percent of his passes for 2,825 yards with 20 touchdowns and 10 interceptions. Like Foles, Cousins� numbers were similar to his sophomore year production when he completed 60 percent of his passes for 2,680 yards and 19 touchdowns with nine picks.

Cousins has a big enough arm to be a starting NFL quarterback. He is a good game-manager who could be a good quarterback to install in a play-action-based passing attack with a strong running game. When given time to throw Cousins is very effective. He struggles and makes bad decisions when he gets defensive linemen in his face. Cousins will have to improve that to have a shot at sneaking into the first round. He has good leadership skills. The smart and efficient signal caller is the type of quarterback who should have a solid senior year and is a safe bet to be a second-round draft pick.

[jskinnz]

Kirk Cousins, Michigan State

Height: 6-3. Weight: 202.

Projected 40 Time: 4.85.

Projected Round (2012): 3-4.

10/21/11: Cousins displays good potential but is held back by an offense that aims to keep the ball on the ground, and he doesn't have a good supporting cast of receiving weapons. For the season, Cousins has completed 66 percent of his passes for 1,274 yards with eight touchdowns and four interceptions.

8/18/11: Kirk Cousins completed 66.9 percent of his passes for 2,825 yards with 20 touchdowns and 10 interceptions. Like Foles, Cousins� numbers were similar to his sophomore year production when he completed 60 percent of his passes for 2,680 yards and 19 touchdowns with nine picks.

Cousins has a big enough arm to be a starting NFL quarterback. He is a good game-manager who could be a good quarterback to install in a play-action-based passing attack with a strong running game. When given time to throw Cousins is very effective. He struggles and makes bad decisions when he gets defensive linemen in his face. Cousins will have to improve that to have a shot at sneaking into the first round. He has good leadership skills. The smart and efficient signal caller is the type of quarterback who should have a solid senior year and is a safe bet to be a second-round draft pick.

Waiting on the point you are making.

[Jason_]

Cousins will have his chance to improve his draft stock at the combine and in private team workouts.

[jskinnz]

Cousins will have his chance to improve his draft stock at the combine and in private team workouts.

Which is basically what I have been saying. His production at MSU matters little to where he will ultimately be drafted. He will every opportunity to prove his talents with the various things players / teams do in preparation for the draft.

[doogansquest]

C'mon man!We both know that very little seperates brady and manning.If we drafted a guy such as cousins and he turned into another brady,then you wouldn't be happy just because his skillset is more similiar to brady than manning?That's just crazy talk man.

I would be thrilled to have him(cousins)!

The difference is, Brady is great when running a great team.

Manning is great no matter how bad the team is.

Brady-types (see: Montana mold) need a ridiculous team around them. In that situation, they become almost unbeatable. We have seen what happens (like, the last 6 years) when Brady doesn't have a top 10 defense, a perfect offensive line, phenomenal special teams, and a top 5 ground game. He is a better QB now than he ever was during the 01-04 years, yet he won Super Bowls then. Proof that the Rings argument is a team discussion, not a QB discussion.

Manning-types (see:...only Manning) need only a football field to be successful. They see everything, they are prepared for every situation, and they can make things happen no matter what.

I'd be fine with a Brady type, but then we had better have a team around him or he will look like Joe Flacco instead of Tom Brady.

[Ramblinwreck7]

C'mon man!We both know that very little seperates brady and manning.If we drafted a guy such as cousins and he turned into another brady,then you wouldn't be happy just because his skillset is more similiar to brady than manning?That's just crazy talk man.

I would be thrilled to have him(cousins)!

When Brady is under pressure, he is not exactly very good as I'll put it nicely.