Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 46 of 46

Thread: Slimm's Position Rankings

  1. -41
    TedSlimmJr's Avatar
    Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jul 2008
    Posts:
    8,898
    vCash:
    2749
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Tunaphish429 View Post
    TedSlimmJr....I was recently having a conversation with a friend about RGIII and at the time it seemed very obvious that with the Skins trading up to number 2 that they would go after him...but now I am having some doubts..I thought that it was pretty interesting that you had Tannehil ahead of RGIII..can you give some insight on it? I have never been a fan of Griffin as a pro qb..and I like Ryan alot....I agreed with Ck about his funny release at times and he just does not pass the eye test with me as far as his build is concerned..Do you think there is any chance that Tannehil goes number 2 to the skins? They both ran some bootlegs in college and both throw the ball pretty good on the run but with Tannehil you get the pro level size...

    I don't know who the Redskins want to draft at #2, and don't care. All I know is that I think Tannehill projects better to the NFL than Griffin does... no matter where they're drafted.

    I pay close attention to footwork, that's where a quarterback is made. It is the source of accuracy.

    Your footwork dominates everything that you do in any sport at any position... none moreso than the quarterback position. I like to see a QB's footwork tied in to what his eyes are seeing. If you understand the concepts of READ, PURE, and KEY progressions within the structure of a particular offense, focusing on the footwork alone will tell you whether the decision (throw) was correct or not based on the coverage, leverage, and the defender the quarterback was keying.

    This becomes much more clouded when you're evaluating a QB who operates strictly from the shotgun, as footwork doesn't apply as much. It's not required in non-sophisticated passing offenses. College coaches are limited in the amount of practice time available to them (20 hours a week). They only coach what's essential to making their particular system work.

    Baylor's offense under Art Briles is a very non-sophisticated system. It's a simple MOFO/MOFC "Read" key off the 4-verticals Run-&-Shoot concept. Switch and Choice might occassionally be the sight adjustments by the WR and QB. That right there tells you that there are no pure progressions in the offense. I could go further, but the point is that Griffin is going to have to learn progressions, and the proper footwork. After he learns these two, he then has to marry them together.

    Everyone sees the highlights and thinks he's a franchise quarterback, but they don't understand what a project he is on a down-to-down basis. There's no question he's talented, and a supremely gifted athlete. But he gets sacked once every 14 dropbacks, which is by far the worst ratio of any of the top 10-15 QB's in this draft. It's because he runs himself into sacks trying to get outside the pocket. I don't like that.

    Tannehill has better pocket presence and footwork, combined with understanding how to tie his footwork in to what his eyes are seeing. It's a result of playing under center in a pro-style, West Coast Offense. He was required to make more "NFL throws" on a down to down basis than any QB in this class other than Andrew Luck. "NFL throws" meaning, progression followed by the result of the throw having to be traced back to his footwork. It has nothing to do with arm strength, which is what most people think that means.

    The bottom line for me is this... other than Andrew Luck, I don't see any "franchise" quarterbacks in this draft. People have become far too liberal with the terms "franchise" and "quarterback". It basically applies to any and every Big-12 quarterback that the media hypes up nowdays.

    Beyond Luck, I see a bunch of quarterbacks that can be lumped into a couple of different tiers together for various reasons. But I don't see any franchise changers. There's nobody that I'm absolutely sold on, or would put my job on the line for.

    I think a couple of these kids have a chance to end up decent starting quarterbacks if they're developed properly and are able to overcome their flaws through being students of the game and working at their craft.
    Quote Quote  

  2. -42
    Tunaphish429's Avatar
    1st Ballot Hall of Famer

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2009
    Posts:
    8,637
    vCash:
    1649
    Loc:
    CUSE
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by TedSlimmJr View Post
    I don't know who the Redskins want to draft at #2, and don't care. All I know is that I think Tannehill projects better to the NFL than Griffin does... no matter where they're drafted.

    I pay close attention to footwork, that's where a quarterback is made. It is the source of accuracy.

    Your footwork dominates everything that you do in any sport at any position... none moreso than the quarterback position. I like to see a QB's footwork tied in to what his eyes are seeing. If you understand the concepts of READ, PURE, and KEY progressions within the structure of a particular offense, focusing on the footwork alone will tell you whether the decision (throw) was correct or not based on the coverage, leverage, and the defender the quarterback was keying.

    This becomes much more clouded when you're evaluating a QB who operates strictly from the shotgun, as footwork doesn't apply as much. It's not required in non-sophisticated passing offenses. College coaches are limited in the amount of practice time available to them (20 hours a week). They only coach what's essential to making their particular system work.

    Baylor's offense under Art Briles is a very non-sophisticated system. It's a simple MOFO/MOFC "Read" key off the 4-verticals Run-&-Shoot concept. Switch and Choice might occassionally be the sight adjustments by the WR and QB. That right there tells you that there are no pure progressions in the offense. I could go further, but the point is that Griffin is going to have to learn progressions, and the proper footwork. After he learns these two, he then has to marry them together.

    Everyone sees the highlights and thinks he's a franchise quarterback, but they don't understand what a project he is on a down-to-down basis. There's no question he's talented, and a supremely gifted athlete. But he gets sacked once every 14 dropbacks, which is by far the worst ratio of any of the top 10-15 QB's in this draft. It's because he runs himself into sacks trying to get outside the pocket. I don't like that.

    Tannehill has better pocket presence and footwork, combined with understanding how to tie his footwork in to what his eyes are seeing. It's a result of playing under center in a pro-style, West Coast Offense. He was required to make more "NFL throws" on a down to down basis than any QB in this class other than Andrew Luck. "NFL throws" meaning, progression followed by the result of the throw having to be traced back to his footwork. It has nothing to do with arm strength, which is what most people think that means.

    The bottom line for me is this... other than Andrew Luck, I don't see any "franchise" quarterbacks in this draft. People have become far too liberal with the terms "franchise" and "quarterback". It basically applies to any and every Big-12 quarterback that the media hypes up nowdays.

    Beyond Luck, I see a bunch of quarterbacks that can be lumped into a couple of different tiers together for various reasons. But I don't see any franchise changers. There's nobody that I'm absolutely sold on, or would put my job on the line for.

    I think a couple of these kids have a chance to end up decent starting quarterbacks if they're developed properly and are able to overcome their flaws through being students of the game and working at their craft.
    Thanks alot, you basically reinforced what I was already thinking about Griffin..I watched Tannehill vs LSU and I agree with you about his pocket presance....I also see him making checks at the line and calling out the blitzes...He does need to work on his footwork...He fails to step up into the pocket on blitzes at times and can be pretty inaccuracte when the ball comes out hot..Alot of high throws at times..But I def agree that Tannehill is going to be a better qb than Griffin..
    Last edited by Tunaphish429; 04-02-2012 at 04:01 PM.
    Quote Quote  

  3. -43
    datruth55's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2004
    Posts:
    10,328
    vCash:
    4141
    Loc:
    Lexington, NC
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Slimm, this list is regardless of scheme correct? This is not the order specifically for what Miami is looking for in their scheme offensively or defensively, right?
    Quote Quote  

  4. -44
    TedSlimmJr's Avatar
    Hartselle Tigers (15-0) 5-A State Champ

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Jul 2008
    Posts:
    8,898
    vCash:
    2749
    Thanks / No Thanks
    That's correct. Mine are always irrespective of what Miami is or isn't looking for.

    Not only that, it's also usually irrespective of how their draft "stock" is perceived, or what order they supposed to come off the board.

    When you start getting into specific scheme fits, a little juggling would take place.

    For example, if a team runs a very aggressive system on defense with a lot of man coverage behind exotic blitzes, I might pass up my #4 ranked corner in favor of my #5 ranked corner simply because my #5 ranked corner is better at pure man coverage while my #4 corner is more suited for a zone scheme, etc.
    Quote Quote  

  5. -45
    datruth55's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2004
    Posts:
    10,328
    vCash:
    4141
    Loc:
    Lexington, NC
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by TedSlimmJr View Post
    That's correct. Mine are always irrespective of what Miami is or isn't looking for.

    Not only that, it's also usually irrespective of how their draft "stock" is perceived, or what order they supposed to come off the board.

    When you start getting into specific scheme fits, a little juggling would take place.

    For example, if a team runs a very aggressive system on defense with a lot of man coverage behind exotic blitzes, I might pass up my #4 ranked corner in favor of my #5 ranked corner simply because my #5 ranked corner is better at pure man coverage while my #4 corner is more suited for a zone scheme, etc.
    That's what I thought from the way you ordered them. I just wanted to confirm.

    I've been spending some time looking at OL that would fit the ZBS that might be there for us in round 3 and later, that's what made me ask the question.
    Quote Quote  

  6. -46
    SMadison29's Avatar
    What Sherman aspires to be

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Sep 2001
    Posts:
    8,479
    vCash:
    1922
    Loc:
    Maryland
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by TedSlimmJr View Post
    16. Elvis Fisher / Missouri (could kick inside)
    Fisher was granted a 6th year of eligibility back in February & is returning to Mizzou. He just sat out of spring practice with a knee injury.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Slimm's 2013 Position Rankings
    By TedSlimmJr in forum NFL Draft Forum
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 05-01-2013, 06:36 PM
  2. Slimm's November 2013 NFL Draft Position Rankings (Seniors)
    By TedSlimmJr in forum NFL Draft Forum
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 01-13-2013, 06:56 PM
  3. Position Rankings
    By RealDriscoll in forum NFL Draft Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-28-2007, 11:19 AM
  4. Mike Mayock's Position by Position Rankings
    By Fin Fan in Cali in forum NFL Draft Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-01-2007, 12:49 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •